Agenda Packets - 2023/03/03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3.5.3 Collection Arrangement and End Facilities Municipalities and counties are oftentimes interested in where solid wastes are managed as part of their solid waste master plans. The municipal survey included a yes/no question asking if cities designated an end facility for either MSW disposal or recyclable material processing. Table 3-13 summarizes the responses to this question. Table 3-13 End Facilities Collection Designate a Do Not Designate a Collection Designate a Do Not Designate a System Facility for Facility for System Facility for Facility for MSW MSW Recyclable Recyclable Disposal Disposal* Processing Processing* Organized 10 7 Organized 6 22 MSW Recycling Open MSW 4 28 Open Recycling 2 19 Of the 17 cities that have an organized MSW collection system, 10 cities (59%) designate a facility for MSW disposal; seven cities (41%) do not designate a facility. Of the 32 cities with an open MSW collection system, four cities (12%) designate a facility for MSW disposal; 28 cities (88%) do not designate a facility. Of the 28 cities with an organized recyclable material collection system, six cities (21 %) designate a facility for recyclable processing; 22 cities (79%) do not designate a facility. Of the 21 cities with an open recyclable material collection system, two cities (10%) designate a facility for recyclable processing; 19 cities (90%) do not designate a facility. Cities with organized collection are more likely to designate where MSW is disposed. 3.5.4 Rebate/Revenue Sharing from the Sale of Recyclable Materials There has been increasing interest in recyclable material revenue sharing the last few years. The municipal survey included a yes/no question asking if cities received a rebate or revenue sharing from the sale of residential recyclable materials. Table 3-14 summarizes the responses to this question. R - Analysis of Waste Collection Service Arrangements.doc Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC • 69 June 2009