infoCycling, Fall 2003

In This Issue...

• Year 2002 Electronic Annual Report for Jurisdictions
• Disposal Reporting system (DRS) Reports Available on Local Government Central
• Is Recycling Good for California's Economy?
• Eco-Landscaping: Profiting From  A Green Future
• Disaster Debris Management and Assistance Available
• Precautionary Principle--San Francisco's Environmentally Friendly Ordinance
• Burning Household Waste: New Rule Reduces Air Toxics
• Waste Inflow and Outflow Maps
• Editor's Note

Year 2002 Electronic Annual Report for Jurisdictions

Nearly all California's cities, counties, and regional solid waste management agencies used the CIWMB's Electronic Annual Report (EAR) for the 2000 and 2001 goal years. This advanced electronic filing system helps jurisdictions (cities, counties, and regional agencies) reduce the time, effort, and cost needed to complete their legally required annual self-evaluation of solid waste diversion performance.

Board staff developed this tool with local government users in mind. It enables jurisdictions to fill out—and submit—their annual reports from the convenience of their Internet-connected personal or workplace computer.

Year 2002 passwords

The 2002 EAR was released the first week of September 2003. New passwords were assigned to each jurisdiction; report-year 2001 passwords no longer work. Jurisdictions are able to access the EAR and the E-1066 (the CIWMB’s electronic filing system for jurisdictions with a Board-approved SB 1066 time extension or alternative diversion requirement) with their new passwords. If you have not received your 2002 password, please contact your Local assistance staff representative. This password ensures that each jurisdiction and its Local assistance staff representative are the only ones to see their draft annual report. All information sent over the Internet is protected using powerful encryption technology.

EAR and 1066 filing information

The CIWMB encourages jurisdictions to fill out all available portions of the EAR. The CIWMB has not released the online diversion rate calculator yet because the State Employment Development Department has not released industrial employment figures, another calculation factor. The CIWMB will officially notify jurisdictions when all the 2002 diversion rate calculation factors—and the online calculator itself—are available. Jurisdictions filing generation-based data can complete the entire report and file now, since they do not need the online diversion rate calculator. The CIWMB remains committed to helping jurisdictions reduce the time and expense of filing mandated reports, as well as providing jurisdictions with the guidance they need to reach their diversion goals. For more information on the EAR, go to the CIWMB’s Local Government Central Web site.  

For information on the 1066, go to the CIWMB’s Local Government Central Web site. If you have additional questions on either the EAR or 1066, please contact your CIWMB Local assistance staff county representative.  

Disposal Reporting System (DRS) Reports—Available on Local Government Central

CIWMB stakeholders have requested that more disposal tonnage information be published on the Local Government Central Web site. In response to these requests, a variety of new disposal reports are now available on our Web site.

These reports are useful for jurisdictions (cities, unincorporated counties, and regional agencies), facilities, haulers, and other interested parties.

What are the DRS Web reports?

The latest addition to the Local Government Central Web site is a series of interactive reports using the CIWMB’s DRS database to answer a myriad of questions about who disposes, how much, and where.

The DRS database contains thousands of records detailing the amount of solid waste each jurisdiction disposes quarterly at Board-permitted California landfills, and how much is exported out of state. The database also tracks alternative daily cover (ADC) usage.

What are some benefits of using the DRS Web reports?

• Cities can compare their disposal tonnages to those of other jurisdictions within the same county.
• Disposal trends over time can be viewed countywide, statewide, and by individual jurisdictions.
• Jurisdictions can search by county and find disposal and ADC numbers for every jurisdiction in a county. Or, they can find disposal and ADC for every landfill in a county.

In addition to countywide reporting, there is statewide disposal data—complete with colorful graphs—and a new report tracking waste exported out-of-state. In the future we hope to add more reports and graphs.

We would like your feedback on how these reports have assisted you. In addition, let us know if there are other DRS reports you would like added to the Local Government Central Web site.

Please direct any questions or comments regarding these reports to WasteLine by sending an e-mail or calling (916) 341-6675.

Is Recycling Good for California’s Economy?

The CIWMB created the brochure Is Recycling Good for California’s Economy? to encourage the Governor, the Legislature, and local decision-makers to maintain or enhance recycling and market development programs. The brochure provides answers to questions such as the following:

• Recycling is good for the environment, but is it really good for the economy too?
• Is recycling just for a few alternative or "green" businesses?
• Has California’s 50 percent waste diversion mandate been good for the State’s economy?
• Can recycling benefit local jurisdictions?
• Will less waste disposal and more recycling help or hurt California’s economy?
• How can waste diversion be increased?

The CIWMB sponsored two studies in an effort to better understand the effects of waste diversion and disposal on the State’s economy.

One study, The Economic Impact of Waste Disposal and Diversion in California, prepared by the University of California, Berkeley, is available. The other study, California Recycling Economic Information Study, prepared by the National Recycling Coalition for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in association with R.W. Beck, Inc. can be accessed. In addition, a CIWMB summary of these studies is available.  

Although the studies had somewhat different goals, both came up with similar conclusions:

Diversion creates twice as many jobs—Sending waste on a short, one-way trip through the economy to a landfill creates 2.5 jobs for every 1,000 tons, whereas recycling this material through the economy again and again creates almost 5 jobs.

Diversion doubles the income and produces twice the sales per ton—Recycling one additional ton of waste will pay $101 more in salaries and wages, produce $275 more in goods and services, and generate $135 more in sales than disposing of it in a landfill.

See the CIWMB’s Publications Clearinghouse to get copies of Is Recycling Good for California’s Economy?

If you would like additional information on the brochure or the two studies, call John Nuffer at (916) 341-6527 or e-mail John. Or, contact your CIWMB Local assistance staff contact person.  

Eco-Landscaping: Profiting From A Green Future

The Eco-Landscaping: Profiting From A Green Future conference will be held on January 10, 2004, at the Pannell Community Center, 2450 Meadowview Road in Sacramento, California, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

There will be speakers, workshops, and a mini-trade show. Topics to be addressed include:

• Construction and maintenance.
• Pesticide and fertilizer reduction.
• Resource conservation.
• Water conservation.
• Stormwater pollution.
• Sustainable landscape design.

For registration details and additional information, contact Ken Decio of the California Integrated Waste Management Board at (916) 341-6586.

Disaster Debris Management and Assistance Available

For guidance on managing disaster debris and for available assistance, go to the CIWMB’s Southern California Wildfire Recovery Web page. Make sure that landfills and transfer stations are tracking disaster debris by jurisdiction of origin so that jurisdictions can request disaster waste be subtracted from disposal tons.

Precautionary Principle—San Francisco’s Environmentally Friendly Ordinance

On July 31, 2003, San Francisco's new environment code and precautionary principle policy became law. San Francisco is the first city in the nation to adopt a "precautionary principle" approach, which will be used when developing new environmental policies.

What is this "precautionary principle"?

The precautionary principle is a way of thinking that seeks to protect the health of the public from environmental pollution. The precautionary principle shifts the burden of proof. Rather than asking, "How much harm is allowable?" it forces us to consider, "How little harm is possible?"

The precautionary principle maintains in essence, "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." It is the basis for several environmental policies.

If a practice poses a threat to human health or the possibility of serious environmental damage, the Precautionary Principle approach will use the best available science to identify cost-effective alternatives that present the least potential threat to human health and the city’s natural systems. Public participation and an open and transparent decision-making process are critical to finding and selecting alternatives.

When science cannot yet fully establish a cause-and-effect relationship, but can provide reasonable evidence of harm, this principle urges taking precautionary measures. As new scientific data become available, San Francisco will review its decisions and make adjustments when warranted.

The essential elements of the precautionary principle approach to decision-making include:

1. Anticipatory Action: There is a duty to take anticipatory action to prevent harm. Government, business, and community groups, as well as the general public, share this responsibility.
2. Right to Know: The community has a right to know complete and accurate information on potential human health and environmental impacts associated with the selection of products, services, operations, or plans. The burden to supply this information lies with the proponent, not with the general public.
3. Alternatives Assessment: An obligation exists to examine a full range of alternatives and select the alternative with the least potential impact on human health and the human environment, including the alternative of doing nothing.
4. Full Cost Accounting: When evaluating potential alternatives, there is a duty to consider all the reasonably foreseeable costs, including raw materials, manufacturing, transportation, use, cleanup, eventual disposal, and health costs even if such costs are not reflected in the initial price. Short-and long-term benefits and time thresholds should be considered when making decisions.
5. Participatory Decision Process: Decisions applying the precautionary Principle must be transparent, participatory, and informed by the best available information.

“San Francisco’s Precautionary Principle outlines a commonsense approach to reduce the risk of environmentally destructive practices. It acknowledges that our world will never be entirely risk-free—but a risk that is unnecessary, and not freely chosen, is never acceptable,” says San Francisco Department of the Environment director Jared Blumenfeld.

Precautionary principle programs

EP3

EP3 works to minimize the purchase of toxic products throughout the City of San Francisco. This pilot program allowed the city to identify toxic chemicals that may pose harm to human health and the environment. The city’s goal is to minimize the purchase and use of toxic chemical products used for janitorial building and fleet maintenance.

Out of 16 environmentally preferred products, 14 were selected and tested. These included various types of brake cleaners, contact cleaners, kitchen degreasers, penetrating lubricants, tile cleaners, carburetor cleaners, glass cleaners, machinery degreasers, restroom cleaners, toilet bowl cleaners, coil cleaners, graffiti removers, metal cleaners, and shop floor degreasers.

The results were astounding! They showed that the products were not only just as effective but cost the same as or less than the conventional products.

The Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Pilot Program’s February 2003 Final Report stated that the use of the 14 environmentally preferred products mentioned above could potentially minimize exposure to risky chemicals up to 98 percent in some fleet maintenance products, up to 31 percent in some building maintenance products, and up to 20 percent in some janitorial products.

The San Francisco Department of the Environment is also working on drafting an ordinance to implement the pilot program. This ordinance will be broader than the pilot program, which covered only the purchases of custodial products, building maintenance products, and fleet maintenance products.

Less Toxic

San Francisco’s successful Less-Toxic Pesticide Program has already reduced pesticide use by more than 50 percent in parks and open spaces, and it eliminated most toxic chemicals on city property.

Now, as part of the precautionary principle, the Less-Toxic Pesticide Program is implementing new techniques and less toxic products for controlling pests. The San Francisco Recreation and Park Department, the San Francisco International Airport, and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission each employed goats to control poison oak and other unwanted weeds instead of pesticide.

The staff at Laguna Honda Hospital went above and beyond by taking the time to pinpoint the source of their pigeon problem and discovered patients were feeding the pigeons. Today, signs are posted to discourage the patients from feeding the birds.

City staff also used many forms of biological approaches. One in particular was the use of beneficial insects to control other unwanted insects. According to the Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Pilot Program’s February 2003 final report, because of these initiatives, more than 80 percent of pest control applications were accomplished without the use of chemicals.

The San Francisco Department of the Environment is the lead agency on the Less-Toxic Pesticide Program and acts as the central source for providing technical information to City departments, residents, and businesses regarding the use and reduction of pesticides.

Summary

San Francisco included a three-year review in its precautionary principle policy statement. This statement says that no later than three years from the effective date of the ordinance, and after a public hearing, the Commission on the Environment shall submit a report to the Board of Supervisors on the effectiveness of the Precautionary Principle policy.

If you would like more information on the Precautionary Principle, please contact Gloria Chan, Public Information Officer, Department of the Environment, City and County of San Francisco at (415) 355-3733. You can also go to the San Francisco Environment Web site to access additional information regarding the precautionary principle.

Burning Household Waste: New Rule Reduces Air Toxics

Do you know the dangers from burning household waste and garbage at home or in a backyard? Today's trash contains plastics, metals, and synthetic materials that create dangerous chemicals when burned. These chemicals include dioxins, benzene, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), and other compounds known to cause respiratory ailments and stress human immune systems. They are also potentially carcinogenic (cancer-causing).

Throughout California, many local governments have already restricted the types of materials that can be burned at residences. However, even with these limitations the California Air Resources Board (ARB) estimated that until this year, more than 700,000 households were allowed to burn all or some of their household waste in their yards. When residential waste is burned at home, smoke and toxic emissions are released and stay close to the ground, potentially affecting the health of the burners and their neighbors.

The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment determined that children are generally more susceptible than adults to adverse health impacts from these air toxics. The toxics can be inhaled from the air or ingested through the fine particles deposited on plants, soil, and water. Ultimately, these chemicals accumulate in our bodies. We need to reduce or eliminate these health risks by no longer burning trash in or around our homes.

To provide more consistent public health protection, the ARB approved a statewide rule called the "Airborne Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) to Reduce Emissions of Toxic Air Contaminants from Outdoor Residential Waste Burning." For specific information, go to the ARB Web page for Residential Waste Burning.  

The rule minimizes dangerous emissions by prohibiting the burning of household wastes other than natural vegetation and banning burn barrels and backyard incinerators beginning January 1, 2004.

During 2003, 26 local air districts covering 35 counties have been revising their rules in preparation for implementing the statewide regulation to curtail this unhealthy practice. Given that some rural areas have limited alternatives for easy waste disposal, air districts can designate limited exemptions in very sparsely populated areas where community health risk from burning nonvegetative material can be minimized.

In these exemption areas, residents may still be allowed to use burn barrels and/or to burn paper and cardboard. Paper and cardboard do not produce as many dioxins as other mixed waste when burned. Although burning paper and cardboard will still produce some dangerous chemicals, the intent is to limit the number of people that will be put at risk and the types of pollutants released.

Contact your air district for more specific information about the restrictions in your local area. A list of local air districts can be found through the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association Web site.   

Air districts have been encouraged to work closely with their respective fire districts, waste management agencies, and public health officials for education and implementation purposes.

A key goal of the educational campaign is to help people understand that burning waste at home is dangerous for everyone's health. An important supporting message is the essential principle: Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle. This principle will be especially relevant to those who previously burned their waste without considering disposal alternatives or minimizing their generated waste.

The air districts are committed to public education and local outreach. As part of the public outreach and education program required by the regulation, ARB and the air districts have already begun to distribute brochures and flyers about health effects and alternatives to burning.

Fact sheets were sent to local elected officials, libraries, fire protection agencies, waste management agencies, and public health officials in late spring of 2003.

This fall, air districts will extend their public education campaign to the print media to target the general public. The air districts are directing those who will be prohibited from burning household waste to contact local waste management agencies or departments of public works for information on recycling and waste collection services offered. Some residents may choose to haul their waste to approved disposal facilities, while others will contract for waste collection services.

Residents who will no longer be able to burn their waste are encouraged to consider the following disposal alternative recommendations:

• In more remote areas, get together with neighbors to establish small community dumpsters to reduce hauling trips, distances, and costs. Your local waste management agency or public works department can give you a list of haulers who may provide this service.
• Combine trips to the recycling center or disposal facility with other errands.
• Even if you are still allowed to burn vegetation, consider mulching, chipping, or shredding it for compost or landscaping purposes instead. Smoke created from vegetation creates unhealthful emissions, too.

This new rule restricting residential waste burning was established to protect public health for individuals, families, and communities. Those who observe illegal waste burning are urged to report it to the local air district.

The educational materials also remind people that simply dumping waste on their own land or somewhere else is illegal, unsightly, and a public health hazard. People are encouraged to report illegal dumping to local enforcement authorities, even without knowing who dumped the waste.

For detailed information, go to the following Web sites:

• Statewide Residential Burning Rule
• Waste Disposal (Recycling) Options
• Can/Bottle Recycling Centers

You may also contact Karen Magliano, California Air Resources Board, at (916) 322-7137.

Waste Inflow and Outflow maps

The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) has updated the waste inflow and outflow maps to reflect year 2001 disposal data.

The waste inflow and outflow maps for 2001 can be retrieved on the CIWMB’s Local Government Central Web site by selecting Index, then Maps—California counties disposal destination data.

These maps illustrate California county waste inflow and outflow data for 2001 in an easy-to-view geographical format.

Each California county is featured on a waste inflow and outflow map. The legend on each map displays a county’s total disposal inflow or outflow amount by percent and tons in ranges (for example, less than 1 percent is equivalent to 1 to 750 tons; 1 to 25 percent is equivalent to 751 to 18,752 tons).

Waste inflow maps show where a county received its waste in 2001: from within the county, from other counties, and/or from out of state. One benefit for customers is the ability to use these maps to see the percentage and tons of waste moving from other counties to their county. Another benefit is the ability to view the approximate locations of permitted and active landfills.

Waste outflow maps present a picture of where a county disposed of its waste for 2001, including waste disposed within the county, in other counties, and/or exported out of state. These maps enable you to see disposal destination trends by county and view the data geographically as well as view the approximate locations for permitted and active landfills.

In the future, look for maps depicting disposal data for the year 2002 and beyond. In addition, you can access waste inflow and outflow maps for 1999 and 2000. If you have any questions, contact Peter Staklis at (916) 341-6230.  

Editor’s note

I hope you enjoyed this edition of infoCycling. In the Winter 2004 edition of infoCycling, look for an article on electronic waste and on grants available.

Please contact me with suggestions on articles you would like to see included in infoCycling and announcements of events in your jurisdiction or at your State agency. You can e-mail me or reach me at (916) 341-6240.  

Your comments and suggestions on infoCycling are always welcome!

Tracy