1995 Georgia solid waste management report

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
1995
gEORGIA SOLID WASTE mANAGEMENT REPORT
DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS NOVEMBER 1996

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT

1995

Contents

georgia Solid Waste

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 1 I. The Status of Local and Regional Solid Waste Planning in Georgia ............................................... 2

Management II. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities in Georgia ...................................................................................... 3
Report

III. Remaining Permitted Capacity of Permitted Solid Waste Disposal Facilities................................. 3

IV. Solid Waste Grants and Loans Made to Local Governments .......................................................... 4

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
60 Executive Park South, N.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30329-2231 (404) 679-4950

V. Compilation & Analysis of City & County Solid Waste Management Survey ............................... 6 VI. Progress Achieved in Meeting the 25% Reduction Goal ............................................................... 12 VII. Progress Achieved in Solid Waste Management Education .......................................................... 16

VIII. Suggestions for Improving Solid Waste Management .................................................................... 19

Appendix A: 1995 Remaining Capacity Report ....................................................................................... 21

An Equal Opportunity Employer Appendix B: Solid Waste Loans & Grants ............................................................................................... 24

If you are disabled and would like to receive this publication in an alternative format, please contact the Georgia Department of Community Affairs at (404) 679-4915 (TDD) or
1 (800) 736-1155 (TDD).

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT
INTRODUCTION

W ith the passage of the Georgia Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Act in 1990, the state embarked on a solid waste management program {O.C.G.A. 12-8-21(c)}1 emphasizing solid waste planning; solid waste reduction through source reduction, reuse, composting, and recycling; and solid waste education. All of these activities are directed toward achieving solid waste reduction, while assuring adequate solid waste disposal capacity.
The Act requires that the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), with the cooperation of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources' Environmental Protection Division (EPD) and the Georgia Environmental Facilities Authority (GEFA), provide an annual report on the status of solid waste management in Georgia to the Governor and the General Assembly {O.C.G.A. 12-8-31 (d)}. This report covers solid waste management for the period July 1, 1994 to June 30, 1995. As specified in the Act, this annual report contains information on:
(1) The status of local and regional solid waste planning in Georgia; (2) The number and types of solid waste handling facilities in Georgia; (3) The remaining permitted capacity of each permitted solid waste
handling facility; (4) The number and types of solid waste grants made to local governments; (5) The number and types of solid waste loans made to local governments; (6) A compilation and analysis of solid waste management data provided
by cities and counties in their annual reports; (7) A statement of progress achieved in meeting the goal established in
subsection (c) of Code Section 12-8-21; (8) A statement of progress achieved in solid waste management education; (9) Any revisions in the state solid waste management plan which are
deemed necessary; and (10) Recommendations for improving the management of solid waste in
this state.

1 Municipal solid waste is defined in the Act as any solid waste "derived from households, including garbage, trash, and sanitary waste in septic tanks." Municipal solid waste also includes solid waste from multifamily residences, hotels, and motels. It includes yard trimmings and commercial solid waste but does not include waste from mining, agriculture, silviculture, and industrial processes or operations.
1

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS

I. The Status The Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Act, as amended, required

of Local and

all local governments in the state to have or be included in a solid waste management plan that meets the Minimum Planning Standards and

Regional

Procedures promulgated by DCA by July 1, 1993 in order to be eligible for

Solid Waste

grants, loans and permits. To meet these standards, a plan must demonstrate a 10-year solid waste handling capacity, identify areas geotechnically

Planning in unsuitable for solid waste handling facilities, and include a strategy for

Georgia

helping the state achieve its 25% waste reduction goal by July 1, 1996. Plans must be approved by DCA and then adopted by the local government.

As of December 31, 1995, 95% of Georgia's local governments (661 of

695) had met that requirement.

The Act also requires applicants for solid waste permits, grants, and loans to demonstrate that the proposed facility or activity is consistent with the host local government's approved solid waste management plan and that the host local government and all in-state jurisdictions generating waste destined for the site have a strategy for meeting the state's 1996 solid waste reduction goal. However, failure of a host local government to make a good faith planning effort, as determined by DCA, will not prevent a private solid waste facility from locating within the jurisdiction. Further, as the legislated deadline for planning passed three years ago, it is unlikely that DCA would find that any government currently without a solid waste management plan has thus far made a good faith effort to plan.

From the passage of the Act in 1990 through December 31, 1995, a total of 160 plans covering 693 local governments were submitted for review to the appropriate Regional Development Centers (RDCs). The solid waste planning status of Georgia's 695 cities and counties, as of December 31, 1995, is as follows:

Solid Waste Management Plans

Plans in
Review Process
3.5%

Plans Approved, Not Adopted 1%

No Plan .5%

Plans Approved and Adopted
95%
661 of 695 local governments (95%) have approved and adopted solid waste management plans and are eligible for solid waste grants, loans, and permits.
24 local governments (3.5%) have plans in the review process: 10 by RDCs and 14 by DCA. The plans under review by DCA require additional information or modification to comply with the Minimum Planning Standards.
7 local governments (1%) have approved, but not yet adopted, plans. 3 local governments (0.5%) have not submitted plans to an RDC to start the review
process.
2

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT

All governments in noncompliance have been notified of the need to complete the planning requirements. DCA, along with EPD, Association County Commissioners of Georgia (ACCG), Georgia Municipal Association (GMA), and the RDCs, continue to work toward 100% compliance.

II. Solid Waste The following are solid waste disposal facilities operating in Georgia as of 3/21/96:

Disposal

Facilities In

Waste-to-Energy

1

Georgia

Industrial Landfills

68

Municipal Solid Waste Landfills *

132

Lined

99

Subtitle D

28

Other

71

Unlined

23

Construction & Demolition Landfills

10

Permit By Rule Facilities

1,910

Inert Landfills

1,390

Other

520

* Note: The facilities listed under Municipal Solid Waste Landfills do not add up to 132 as might be expected because some facilities are counted in more than one category. For example, some landfills identified as "Lined" are also identified as "Subtitle D".

III. Remaining Permitted Capacity of Permitted Solid Waste Disposal Facilities

From 1994 to 1995, the remaining capacity for municipal solid waste landfills (MSWL) and construction and demolition landfills (C&D) in Georgia increased by 13% from 134,762,145 to 151,804,958 cubic yards. The increase in capacity for waste disposal was generated by newly constructed and opened facilities.
Although landfill capacity has expanded, the rate-of-fill has also grown. From 1994 to 1995, the rate-of-fill increased by 20% from 44,244 to 53,314 cubic yards per day. Hence, the increased space generated by new facilities was offset by the fast rate by which the landfills were filled. Based on current data, there are 9.13 years remaining to fill existing landfills.

Projections for the future indicate that the number of years it will take to exhaust existing MSWLs and C&D landfills will grow as a result of newly permitted and constructed public landfills opening within the next year. These new facilities will generate an additional 73,619,654 cubic yards of MSWL capacity and 1,050,000 cubic yards of C&D capacity. If the rate-of-fill does not exceed 1995 levels, there will be 14.88 remaining years in MSWL capacity and 5.08 remaining years in C&D capacity.

3

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
Remaining Capacity in Cubic Yards
250

200

150

Capacity In Millions

Rate-of-Fill In Thousands

100

50

0 1994 ACTUAL

1995 ACTUAL

1996 ESTIMATE

Appendix A shows the remaining permitted capacity and the estimated fill date of reporting sites as of July 1, 1995.
Operational Capacity of Municipal Solid Waste and Construction & Demolition Landfill 1995

Total Reported Capacity in Cubic Yards
Rate of Fill * in Cubic Yards Daily
Remaining Capacity

1993
145,785,662
60,898
7.67 years

* Rate-of-fill for 312 days per year

1994
134,762,145
44,244
9.77 years

1995
151,804,958
53,314
9.13 years

IV. Solid Waste Grants

Grants And Loans Made To Local Governments

Georgia Department of Community Affairs The Georgia Department of Community Affairs administers grants to fund a variety of local government projects including solid waste and litter related activities. Two such grants are the Local Development Fund (LDF) and the Local Government Efficiency Grant program (LGEG). The LDF has for several years provided funding for various local government initiatives. In fiscal year 1995, DCA awarded eight LDF grants amounting to $97,553 for solid waste projects and facilities. The Local Government Efficiency Act was established in 1993 by the Georgia General Assembly to encourage consolidation of local governments and/or local government services. In fiscal year 1995, six LGEG grants were awarded totaling $166,463 to assess, plan and/or implement consolidation activities of solid waste services and facilities.

Appendix B is a summary of solid waste grants and loans made to local governments by the Department of Community Affairs.

4

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT

Georgia Environmental Facilities Authority In 1995, the Georgia Environmental Facilities Authority (GEFA) provided municipal solid waste and recycling financial assistance to Georgia communities through two grant programs:

Regional Solid Waste Management Incentive Grants - These grants are
$ designed to assist local governments to develop cooperative agreements to manage solid waste. To meet this end, $400,000 was appropriated in FY 1995 to fund a matching grant program to help local governments solve their solid waste management challenges on a regional basis. These matching grants of $50,000 are available to help pay for recycling databases, feasibility studies, legal work, engineering, and other costs of forming regional authorities or recycling and solid waste management coalitions. In 1995, these Regional Solid Waste Management Incentive Grants aided six additional regions in making decisions about integrated municipal solid waste management.

Recycling and Source Reduction Grant Program - GEFA used moneys garnered from several sources to fund a matching grant program to assist local governments with recycling and solid waste reduction. The Recycling and Waste Reduction Grant Program awarded grants of up to $5,000 for a total of $107,530 to 23 cities and counties for recycling facilities, recycling and composting public information programs, recycling collection and processing equipment, wood chipping equipment and other similar projects.

Environmental Protection Division Scrap Tire Management Grant - The Environmental Protection Division provides awards from $25,000 to $50,000 to help local communities develop scrap tire enforcement programs and related education efforts such as scrap tire recycling, prevention of scrap tire piles, and clean up of scrap tire piles. Participating governments provide a 25% cash match to receive the grant.

Loans

Georgia Environmental Facilities Authority The Georgia Environmental Facilities Authority also makes low interest loans available to cities, counties, and local government authorities to fund many of their environmental infrastructure needs. These loans serve dual purposes -- they help position communities to attract economic development and help relieve part of the financial burden required to meet stringent state and federal environmental standards.

GEFA's loan program is funded primarily by state appropriations. As loans are repaid, the funds are used for new infrastructure loans, effectively creating a state-generated revolving loan fund. GEFA is authorized to use the proceeds of state-issued bonds as a source of funds to make low cost loans to Georgia local governments. This approach is used for water and waste-water treatment facility loans; however, recycling and solid waste management facility loans are currently funded from GEFA cash reserves.

5

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
Since its beginning in 1992, the Recycling and Solid Waste Management Facilities Loan Program has provided some 20 loans totaling approximately $10 million to Georgia local governments. These loans have been used for public solid waste management and recycling purposes, including transfer stations, recovered materials processing facilities, high and low technology composting systems, collection centers for solid waste and recyclables, paper recycling facilities and other similar projects. Of this amount, $2 million was loaned in 1995.

V. Compilation & Analysis of City & County Solid Waste Management Survey

Under the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Act, each local government must submit an annual report to DCA documenting the status of its solid waste services. That annual report is collected by DCA via the Solid Waste Management Survey and Full Cost Report. Within 30 days of the submission of its annual report to DCA, the local government must publish a public notice detailing the full cost of providing solid waste services to constituents within its jurisdiction. This section highlights the survey findings.
The 1995 Solid Waste Survey and Full Cost Report was disseminated to 159 counties and 536 cities in Georgia and covered the reporting period of July 1, 1994 through June 30, 1995. The survey consisted of 32 questions designed to measure the level of solid waste services provided and the cost of those services. Of the 159 Georgia counties, 158 (99%) responded to the survey. Of the 536 municipalities, 523 (98%) responded to the survey. The only governments failing to submit a survey during the time period covered by this report were Atkinson County with fewer than 10,000 in population; and the cities of Aragon, Buena Vista, Carl, Cobbtown, Cohutta, Damascus, Demorest, Fort Gains, Jasper, Mineral Bluff, Ranger, and Toomsboro with individual populations of 2,500 or less. The 1995 Solid Waste Survey and Full Cost Report received the highest level of response from local governments since it was first disseminated in 1992.

Counties Cities TOTAL

Survey Response Rate

1992

1993

1994

154

158

156

479

510

507

633 / 91% 668 / 96% 663 / 95%

1995 158 523 681 / 98%

Solid Waste Collection
The majority of local governments (87%) provide solid waste collection in their jurisdiction. While most local governments provide residential collection, there is a growing trend to provide commercial collection. Survey results indicate that in 1995, eighty-two percent of counties and 88% of municipalities provided residential waste collection, while 44% of counties and 58% of municipalities provided commercial collection. The number of
6

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT

governments providing commercial collection has grown since 1992. Commercial waste accounts for approximately 50% of the solid waste in landfills.
To collect solid waste in their jurisdiction, most local governments use private vendors and/or they provide the collection service themselves. Since 1992, local governments have increasingly relied on the services of private vendors. The table below illustrates the methods employed by counties and cities to provide solid waste collection. Note that these figures do not add up to 100% because many local governments use more than one method of collection.

Providers of Waste Collection Their Own Government Private Vendor Authority Another Government Other

County 66% 85% 1% 11% 11%

Municipality 51% 49% 1% 17% 2%

In 1995, the preferred method of collection for municipalities was curbside pick up (72%). In counties, waste was most often collected using green boxes (47%). Though utilized by a large number of counties, green boxes serve just 20% of the state's population and are generally used by counties with populations of 25,000 or less. Since 1994, eighteen fewer counties and 28 fewer municipalities report using green boxes. This is consistent with the trend over the past four years to minimize use of these problematic receptacles.
A growing number of governments charge users a collection fee to recover part of the cost of providing solid waste services. Twenty-three percent of counties and 65% of municipalities indicated that they collect a fee. To recover the cost of collection, 72% of counties and 64% of municipalities that collect a fee employ a flat-rate. The remainder of governments are part of a growing trend in Georgia using some sort of variable rate fee system. The use of variable rates employs the same method used to determine utility fees, which are based on consumption. The more waste users generate, the more they pay for the service. Thus, each user is made financially responsible for his or her consumption habits. In 1995, eleven counties and 12 cities in Georgia reported using this type of fee structure. Georgia has more local governments utilizing the variable rate fee structure than any other state in the Southeast.

7

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
Solid Waste Reduction
In the state's solid waste management plan, waste reduction (through recycling, reuse and composting) and proper waste disposal are identified as measures that can be used toward the 25% statewide solid waste reduction goal. Waste reduction includes the suppression of waste generated, and reuse and recycling of waste generated.
The number of local governments providing recycling services in Georgia has increased. In 1995, 71% of municipalities and 85% of counties reported that they provide recycling services in their community. At least 40% of the local governments that do not provide recycling services cite that cost is the greatest impediment.
Like waste collection, local governments most often provide their own recycling services or use private vendors. For governments providing recycling services, either directly or through the use of vendors, most use drop-off centers. Seventy-two percent of counties and 33% of municipalities use drop-off centers.
Most local governments accept a wide range of materials for recycling. However, counties accept a wider range of items for recycling than municipalities. At least 40% of counties accept tires, aluminum, newspaper, magazines, corrugated paper, other paper, glass, plastic, white goods, Christmas trees, and scrap metal. The same percentage of municipalities accept aluminum and newspaper for recycling. One explanation for the discrepancy between the number of materials collected by counties and cities is that many more cities collect recyclables via curbside pick-up which typically limits the number of materials accepted. Most counties on the other hand, use drop-off centers which can accommodate more recyclable materials. The table below illustrates the materials that local governments accept for recycling.

Recycling Materials Collected by Local Governments

Materials Collected Aerosol Cans Agricultural Chemicals Aluminum Batteries C&D Waste Corrugated Paper Glass Magazines Motor Oil Newspaper

Counties 6% 2% 61% 27%
14% 55% 46% 44% 25% 60%

Cities 2% 0% 36% 5% 2% 25%
33% 22%
5% 40%

Materials Collected Other Materials Other Paper Paperboard Phone Books Plastic Scrap Metal Steel Cans Tires White Goods Christmas Trees

Counties 12% 37% 19% 30% 42% 55% 31% 41% 65% 41%

Cities 5% 17% 7% 14% 30% 11% 16% 6% 16% 25%

8

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT

To ensure that solid waste facilities are not being inappropriately filled with yard trimmings which are best used as compost at home or disposed in inert facilities, the State Solid Waste Management Act requires that by September 1, 1996, users separate yard trimmings from garbage. Even before the effective date, 63% of municipalities and 59% of counties have already complied with this provision. These governments offer a wide range of services to encourage responsible yard trimmings disposal such as public education on home composting, grass recycling, and mulching.
Solid Waste Disposal

Seventy percent of counties and municipalities use public landfills to dispose of waste. Most of the remaining governments use private landfills, and a few use private incinerators or export waste to out-of-state facilities. Since 1992, the trend has been for governments to reduce their use of public landfills in favor of private landfills. Since 1992, there are 69 additional municipalities and 22 more counties that use private landfills. The rate and direction of this trend will depend on the number of public and private landfills that are permitted and constructed within the next few years.

Disposal Sites Used By Counties and Municipalities

Counties w

70% 41%
1% 1%

Public Landfill Private Landfill Public Incinerator Private Incinerator

4%

Out-of-State

2%

Unknown

Municipalities w

70% 23%

Public Landfill Private Landfill

1% Public Incinerator

0% Private Incinerator

1%

Out-of-State

10%

Unknown

% of Disposal Sites

9

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
The table below shows the number of solid waste facilities owned by local governments.

Facilities Owned by Local Governments

Construction and Demolition Landfills Incinerator Inert Waste Landfills Materials Recovery Facilities Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Transfer Stations

County
21 1 63 8 68 39

Municipality
4 0 48 4 18 20

TOTAL

200

94

Total 25 1 111 12 86 59
294

Many local governments operating their own disposal facilities charge a disposal fee. Forty-six percent of the counties and 3% of cities offset the costs of providing solid waste services by assessing a "tipping fee" for waste disposed in their own landfill. On average, counties charge $25.62 per ton and cities charge $24.83 per ton.
To optimize their disposal options around the state and to minimize costs, local governments are encouraged to participate in multi-county agreements to coordinate their solid waste efforts. In 1995, twenty-nine percent of counties and 15% of municipalities reported participating in multi-county or authority landfill agreements. The average remaining life span of these agreements is 10 years.

Solid Waste Public Education

State goals to reduce waste generation and encourage responsible waste disposal can best be achieved through effective public education programs directed towards producers of waste -- residents and businesses. In 1995, 54% of counties and 27% of cities reported having public education programs. To date, the Georgia Clean and Beautiful Program (GC&B), managed by DCA, is the most widely used education program in the state. Counties and cities with local Keep America Beautiful programs reported that they contributed an average of $23,200 and $14,700 respectively to these programs.

Number of Public Education Programs

Georgia Clean & Beautiful
The Georgia Department of Community Affairs

County Municipality TOTAL

1992 80 138 218

1993 92 175 267

1994 91 178 269

1995 86 143 229

Solid Waste Full-Cost

As mentioned in the beginning of this section, the Solid Waste Management Act requires each local government to calculate and publish the annual cost of providing solid waste management services for their community. In 1995, Georgia local governments reported spending $324 million for solid waste services, up from $259.6 million in 1992. On a per capita basis, spending for solid waste services equaled $45.03 in 1995, compared with $39.17 in 1992. The following table summarizes the per capita cost for different sized governments.

10

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT
COUNTY
MUNICIPAL

Population Group
100,000 and Above 50,000 - 99,999 25,000 - 49,999 15,000 - 24,999 10,000 - 14,999 Less Than 10,000
50,000 and Above 25,000 - 49,999 10,000 - 24,999 5,000 - 9,999 2,500 - 4,999 1,000 - 2,499 500 - 999 499 or less

Number Reporting
9 21 24 34 26 44 158
5 10 29 45 71 96 94 175 525

Average Expenditures
6,757,660 1,326,440 1,075,200 545,540 433,210 179,890 963,330
12,372,650 3,199,570 1,313,400 504,650 256,720 87,400 19,830 10,070 352,190

$ Per Capita 20.88 19.01 31.20 28.63 35.16 26.59 23.52
69.08 74.56 84.86 70.98 72.22 53.82 28.46 35.94 70.67

Thirty counties with populations of 50,000 or more accounted for 58% of the total cost of providing solid waste services by local governments. Similar sized counties collected 72% of all solid waste revenues received by local governments. One hundred fifty-eight cities with populations of 5,000 or more accounted for 93% of the total solid waste costs. The same sized cities collected 85% of the total revenues. Although an increasing number of local governments are attempting to recover the cost of providing solid waste services through collection and tipping fees, most governments still rely on general funds to support solid waste service.
Note that while the table above summarizes the per capita costs for counties and municipalities of various sizes, exact cost comparisons between each government is not possible because there is considerable variation in the method applied by survey respondents to calculate the full-cost of providing solid waste services. For example, some counties may provide solid waste services to a limited population within their jurisdiction to include a few cities and unincorporated areas; however, when calculating per capita costs, these same counties may use the population of the entire jurisdiction instead of the limited service area, thus deflating the per capita cost. Additionally, some governments provide a higher level of solid waste service such as the more costly curbside collection, or offer services more frequently than other governments; however, this information is not reflected in the per capita cost figure, thus giving the appearance that their per capita costs are relatively high.
11

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
The full cost disclosure section of the solid waste survey is perhaps the most challenging to survey respondents. Hopefully, the Department of Community Affairs can address many of the issues discussed here by providing additional training to local governments and making future revisions to the Solid Waste Full Cost Accounting Manual used by governments to calculate the per capita costs.

VI. Progress Since passage of the Solid Waste Management Act, tremendous efforts have

Achieved in

been made toward reducing solid waste in Georgia. Though funding remains limited, statewide education and training have improved. The state, however,

Meeting

continues to be challenged by efforts to secure reliable waste disposal data,

the 25%

minimize the influx out-of-state waste, and respond to circumstances impacting solid waste disposal such as rapid growth and acts of nature.

Reduction

Goal

WASTE DISPOSAL DATA

Among the most pressing issues in solid waste management today is the ability of agencies to secure reliable solid waste data. The Solid Waste Management Act, as amended in 1990, established fiscal year 1992 as the base year to measure the state's 25% reduction goal. When waste disposal reporting procedures were established in that same year, most local landfills did not have scales and trained personnel to measure in-coming waste. Hence, the reported data for that year is severely limited. In fact, as was mentioned in last year's solid waste report, 1994 was the first year in which the data was of high enough quality to reliably measure statewide waste disposal. Therefore, because good base data does not exist for 1992, no one can say with any real confidence how successful the state has been in reducing solid waste disposal. It is likely that waste disposal data for 1992 undercounted waste disposed because of the data collection limitations mentioned above. The following waste disposal figures should be reviewed with the limitations of the data in mind.

Currently, FY 1992 remains the base year against which progress toward the state's 25% reduction goal is measured. Waste reduction credits are included in the base year disposal figure. These credits represent tons of waste added to FY 1992's disposal amount to reflect waste reduction efforts (e.g., recycling and composting) undertaken by 39 local governments prior to the effective date of the Act. By adding the waste reduction credits into the base year figure, the state was not penalized for progress made in waste reduction prior to the establishment of the state goal. The base year disposal figure is 8,604,115 tons or 7.11 pounds per capita per day. Hence, to meet the 25% reduction by July 1, 1996 the state would have had to reduce waste disposed to 5.33 pounds per capita per day.

To add to the existing challenge concerning waste data, 1995 presented some unprecedented circumstances that further challenged waste management. Although the state experienced relative decreases in the amount of solid waste disposed between 1992 and 1994, the solid waste disposed during FY 1995 increased by about one million tons to 9,653,373 or 7.49 pounds per capita per day.
12

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT

Under the existing requirements of the Solid Waste Management Act, the state would have to cut the amount of waste disposed by 3 million tons or 2.01 pounds per capita per day by July 1, 1996. Needless to say, the challenges facing solid waste management are immense.
OUT-OF-STATE WASTE

The impact of out-of-state waste has also been a source of concern to the state. Because of interstate commerce laws and the profit-making orientation of private landfills, the state has limited ability to manage out-of-state waste. In the early years of the Solid Waste Management Act, out-of-state waste had an increasing effect on the state's waste stream. In 1995, the impact of out-of-state waste appears to have slowed down. Though 1992 figures are not recorded, from 1993 to 1994, out-of-state waste increased by 29% to 138,946 tons. However, from 1994 to 1995, out-of-state waste increased by just 7.6% to 149,481 tons. It is uncertain if the smaller increase for 1995 represents a trend, but a repeat of this kind in the years ahead would assist the state in achieving waste reduction. A change in the reverse would further challenge the state's solid waste efforts. The table below compares solid waste figures over the four reporting years.

SOLID WASTE DISPOSED

Waste Disposal from 1992 through 1995

FY

Population*

1992 6,628,029

Total Tons Disposed
8,604,115

TONS DISPOSED TONS DISPOSED LBS PER CAPITA PER DAY

In State

Out of State

Total State

In State

Out of State

NA

NA

7.11 NA NA

1993 6,773,364 8,468,692 8,361,036 107,656

6.85 6.76 0.09

1994 6,902,000 8,612,072 8,473,126 138,946

6.84 6.73 0.11

1995 7,057,510 9,653,373 9,503,892 149,481

7.49 7.38 0.11

* Population figures for 1992-1995 were provided by the US Census Bureau as of the beginning of the fiscal period.

FACTORS CONTRIBUTING
TO WASTE GENERATION

While the state has made progress in reducing solid waste from 1992 to 1994, the state experienced an increase between 1994 and 1995 according to information gathered from EPD landfill disposal reports. The total amount of waste disposed from July 1, 1994 to June 30, 1995 was 9,653,373 tons. This represents an actual increase of 1,030,766 tons from 1994. The state has identified several factors that likely contributed to the increase.

Economic Growth: Since emerging from the nationwide recession of the early 1990s, Georgia's economic growth rate has exceeded the national average. Increased economic activity leads to increased waste production in both the manufacturing and service segments of the economy. Both segments have boomed in Georgia in the recent past, and their growth is represented in the waste stream. Thus, economic growth can result in higher rates of per capita waste generation.

13

FACTORS CONTRIBUTING
TO WASTE GENERATION (continued)

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
Olympic Development: Part of the fuel for the engine of economic growth in Georgia over the last year has been the development associated with the 1996 Olympic Games. Numerous facilities throughout the state have either been constructed or undergone significant renovation in preparation for the games. Olympic-related development has impacted the production and disposal of all forms of municipal solid waste in addition to construction and demolition waste.

Population Increase: The economic boom and Olympic-related development has spurred population growth in the state in the early 1990s. From 1994 to 1995, the state's population increased by about 300,000. Rapid growth has propelled Georgia into the rank of the tenth most populous state. An annual growth rate of almost five percent has a significant impact on the amount of waste generated in the state. Because population figures lag disposal figures by six months to one year, per capita disposal amounts can be skewed as not yet counted individuals are contributing to the waste stream. Further exacerbating the population issue is the lag time that occurs from the day newcomers arrive in the state to the occasion in which they benefit from solid waste education and begin to participate in reduction efforts such as recycling and composting.

Natural Disaster: In addition to the positive economic development and population growth, Georgia experienced tremendous waste generation as a result of weather related activities in the second half of 1994. In July 1994, Georgia was declared a disaster area after a devastating flood inundated the west central and southwest portions of the state. For several days, some 88 counties were submerged under up to 20 feet of flood waters. Thousands of people were displaced, businesses closed temporarily or permanently, and damage to agriculture continues to affect food prices throughout the nation. Other coastal floods occurring in the summer of `94 also contributed to the amount of waste disposed in the state. These natural disasters present an unpredictable factor in the waste disposal equation since the amount generated cannot reliably be predicted and can contribute significantly to the waste generated.

Furthermore, as noted in the 1994 solid waste management annual report, "natural disasters" have underscored a difficulty with current state law. As the Act is currently written, when the materials produced by these natural phenomena are placed in C&D landfills, they are counted as waste disposal in the same manner as solid waste going into Subtitle D municipal solid waste landfills is counted. Because C&D landfills pose neither the same financial burden nor environmental risk as MSW landfills, it may be appropriate to separate that data recorded as part of the state's waste reduction goal. Hence, under current provisions of the law, the state must include in its solid waste disposal data waste produced by unpredictable natural forces which skew the impact of solid waste efforts.

In summary, factors such as a robust economy, Olympic activity, population growth and natural disasters contributed to an overall increase in the total tons disposed in Georgia solid waste facilities. Though activities related to

14

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT
Georgia Counties Impacted By 1994 Flooding

Dade

Catoosa
Whitfield

Fannin

Towns Union

Rabun

Walker Chattooga

Murray Gilmer Gordon Pickens

Lumpkin

White

Habersham

Stephens

Floyd

Dawson Bartow Cherokee Forsyth

Franklin

Hall Banks

Hart

Jackson Madison Elbert

Polk

Cobb

Paulding

Gwinnett Barrow Clarke Oglethorpe

Haralson

Doug-

DeKalb

Walton Oconee

Wilkes Lincoln

Carroll

las Fulton Clayton

Rockdale
Newton

Fayette

Henry

Morgan

Greene

Taliaferro

McDuf-

Columbia

Warren fie

Heard

Coweta

Jasper Putnam Spalding Butts

Hancock

Glascock

Richmond

Pike

Lamar

Troup Meriwether

Monroe

Baldwin Jones

Jefferson Washington

Burke

Upson

Harris

Talbot

Bibb

Wilkinson

Crawford

Twiggs

Johnson

Jenkins Screven

Muscogee

Taylor

Peach

Emanuel

Chat- Marion tahoochee

Macon

Laurens Houston Bleckley

Treutlen Mont-

Candler Bulloch Effingham

Schley

Stewart Webster

Sumter

Quit-

man

Terrell

Randolph

Lee

Dooly

Pulaski Dodge

Wheeler

gomery

Toombs

Evans

Bryan

Crisp

Wilcox

Telfair

Turner

Ben Hill

Jeff Davis

Tattnall Appling

Liberty Long

Chatham

Clay Calhoun Dougherty

Worth

Irwin Tift

Coffee

Early

Baker

Berrien Atkinson

Miller

Mitchell

Colquitt

Cook

Seminole
Decatur

Grady Thomas Brooks

Lanier

Clinch

Lowndes Echols

Bacon

Wayne

Pierce

Ware

Brantley

McIntosh Glynn

Charlton

Camden

15

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
growth are indicative of a healthy state, these activities have had a negative impact on solid waste. Perhaps the most critical fact that has come out of reviewing the 1995 solid waste data has been the apparent limitations of the best government efforts to control solid waste.

VII. Progress Achieved In Solid Waste Management Education

Public education is a key component of the state's solid waste reduction effort. The Act states that it is "the policy of the State of Georgia to educate and encourage generators and handlers of solid waste to reduce and minimize to the greatest extent possible the amount of solid waste which requires collection, treatment, or disposal" OCGA 12-8-21(b).
Local Government Public
Education Efforts

Since 1991, several agencies and organizations have worked together as an informal "training committee" providing structured technical assistance and information to local governments and other interested parties. The committee includes representatives from ACCG, DCA, DNR, GEFA, GMA, and the University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service. During FY 1995, the training committee delivered solid waste technical assistance through the following workshops:

Community Recycling Workshop: How to Start or Expand Your Recycling Program - Members of the 11 county Southeast Georgia Regional Keep America Beautiful program (KAB) met for the first time to discuss various issues, including regional recycling. Community Recycling: An Implementer's Guide, which describes decisions that must be made to implement a local recycling program, was updated with assistance from the Georgia Soft Drink Association for distribution at the workshop. Participants and facilitators discussed start-up programs, finances, markets, and case-studies.
Regional Recycling: Markets and Opportunities - This workshop provided an opportunity for local governments in the Two Rivers Resource Conservation and Development district to discuss recycling collection options, markets, and regional recycling possibilities. Copies of Community Recycling: An Implementer's Guide were distributed.
In addition to its work with the training committee, DCA has provided technical assistance in a variety of other areas:
DCA sponsored Enterprise Fund and Rate Workshops in Cartersville, Forsyth and Tifton. The workshops focused on establishing enterprise funds, setting rates, and identifying alternatives to owning and operating enterprise activities. Concurrent sessions focused on setting rates for water/ sewer systems and solid waste management. Approximately 25 local government officials attended the solid waste portion of the program.
16

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT

DCA recruited five sponsors to present 11 Waste In the Work Place Workshops explaining source reduction and recycling options to 316 business and industry leaders. The workshops demonstrated how to perform waste audits, identify recyclables, and minimize waste and disposal costs. The workshop agenda also included presentations on closing the recycling loop, recycling economics and waste exchange opportunities. Case studies enhanced the presentation.
DCA joined 17 other organizations to establish a "Buy Recycled Campaign." With the Governor's endorsement, letters were sent to the top 150 businesses in the state informing them of the National Recycling Coalition's (NRC) "Buy Recycled Business Alliance." The "Buy Recycled Business Alliance" Program was presented at the 11 Waste in the Workplace workshops. Green Guide, a book compiled by DCA and The Georgia Conservancy that discusses the importance of buying recycled products, was distributed at the workshops.
DCA's Home Composting Program received a Certificate of Environmental Achievement and appeared in the 1994 Renew America's Environmental Success Index, a list of outstanding environmental solutions. Home composting brochures were developed and distributed and a home composting exhibit with an assortment of bins and information on compost techniques was set up at various events including: Sunbelt Agriculture Expo; Two Rivers Recycling Workshop; 1995 Southeast Recycling Conference; Atlanta Garden & Patio Show; and the 1995 Earth Day Celebration. More than 250,000 people attended these events. DCA also distributed a media kit produced by Turner Broadcasting System (TBS) and the National Recycling Coalition (NRC) entitled "What Goes Around, Comes Around" to 231 newspapers, 45 television stations and Georgia Cable Association members. The Georgia public service announcement gained statewide exposure on all Turner Stations. DCA's goal is to increase markets for recyclable materials by making consumers aware of the types of products and packaging that are currently made from recycled items. As an advocate of KAB's Waste In Place and Waste: A Hidden Resource curricula, DCA publicizes, schedules, coordinates and funds teacher training workshops throughout the state. Between July 1994 and January 1995, DCA provided training and curriculum guides to 320 classroom teachers, educational specialists, curriculum directors and administrators who have in turn taught 7,347 students.
DCA staff coordinated a statewide yard trimmings survey which was mailed to municipal governments. Responses provided information to determine Georgia's progress in meeting the 1996 ban on yard trimmings. The information was also used to structure training for local officials. Training was held for the Georgia Municipal Association, Association County Commissioners of Georgia, Solid Waste Association of North America, and the Atlanta Regional Commission.
17

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
The Georgia Hospitality Environmental Partnership, comprised of the Department of Community Affairs, University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service, Georgia Hospitality and Travel Association, Environmental Protection Division, Environmental Protection Agency, Georgia Environmental Facilities Authority, Department of Industry Trade and Tourism, and the Atlanta Area Chamber of Commerce, was formed to implement a waste reduction and recycling program for metro Atlanta hotels, motels and restaurants. The Westin Peachtree Plaza in downtown Atlanta served as the program's pilot hotel. The scope of the program includes the development of educational materials and program delivery through seminars, workshops and demonstrations. This highly visible program has attracted much attention and its anticipated success will enable its implementation throughout the state.
Atlanta's Hartsfield International Airport is striving to help the state achieve its waste reduction goal. According to a 1990 Waste Management and Disposal Evaluation Report prepared for the Atlanta Airlines Terminal Corporation, the airport generates approximately 26,000 tons of solid waste per year. In response to the State Solid Waste Management Act, the airport hired a consulting firm to conduct a waste audit and develop a plan to address waste reduction. The airport received funding for the project from the Environmental Protection Agency - Region IV. The Department of Community Affairs provided technical assistance in locating markets for the collected materials and offering education in source reduction and recycling (i.e., Waste in the Workplace Workshop). The Department of Natural Resources provided assistance to assure compliance with state solid waste regulations.
Since 1991, the Spring/Fall Into Recycling program has brought news media, associations, businesses, industries and KAB affiliates together. Of special significance in 1995, Spring Into Recycling collected more than 410 tons of recyclables. Sponsors, including EPD, contributed cash and in-kind services to hold the extraordinary event. The overwhelming participation demonstrates the important role of this event in educating 2.5 million metro Atlantans about recycling. GC&B further encourages strong solid waste management practices by recognizing individuals and organizations for recycling, composting and integrated solid waste management programs at its Annual Awards Luncheon. In March, 41 organizations and four individuals were recognized for their outstanding efforts. Ongoing support to KAB systems included two Executive Directors Conferences. September's agenda included a solid waste solution panel, grant proposal writing techniques and legislative updates on new state laws and directives. The 48 attendees also participated in a round table discussion of their successes and concerns. The February conference, cosponsored with GC&B Executive Directors Association, offered a professional enhancement agenda to 35 executive directors. During this meeting, KAB's National Director of Education conducted a Risk Communication and Risk Assessment Workshop.
18

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT

The annual statewide Christmas Tree Recycling program educated Georgians on recycling and environmental preservation. Money and services donated by sponsors were valued at $100,000. In January, 330,000 Christmas trees were mulched for use at city parks, schools, industries or given back to residents for home use. The program's 85 communities coordinated 280 drop sites. Over 100,000 seedlings were exchanged for trees.

VIII. suggestions for Improving Solid Waste Management

Interagency Approach to Solid
Waste Management
Although solid waste management in Georgia has improved significantly, the state still faces substantial challenges. As a crucial first step in addressing new and ongoing solid waste management needs, DCA, the Department of Natural Resources' Environmental Protection and Pollution Prevention Assistance Divisions (EPD and P2AD), GEFA, ACCG and GMA have assembled an Intergovernmental Solid Waste Coordinating Council to serve as a forum to coordinate activities, share information, and mobilize state resources to achieve more effective solid waste management. This team of agencies has agreed upon respective roles and responsibilities and has established a mechanism for increased cooperation among all affected and interested parties in the solid waste arena.
As a basis for targeting their efforts, the team is undertaking a complete review and revision of the State Solid Waste Management Plan in cooperation with local governments, private businesses and the general public. Input received through research, focus groups and surveys will be used to form a new plan of action for state and local solid waste management efforts. As part of the update process, DCA, EPD and P2AD are conducting a joint survey of landfill operators to further assess waste stream composition, which will enable each agency to better focus their waste reduction efforts. The team is also examining alternative means of achieving waste reduction and improving the efficiency and effectiveness of local government solid waste management systems.
State agencies have also combined efforts to battle litter. Through the Georgia Peachy Clean Team, established earlier this year, DCA, EPD, GEFA, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Public Safety, and Keep America Beautiful Affiliates are coordinating a television, radio and print media campaign to promote litter awareness among Georgia's citizens. In addition to on-going public service announcements and cable television ads, the campaign also featured a successful, first-ever statewide cleanup week involving over 100 communities. The Peachy Clean Team is also working to leverage private funds to expand the campaign into the state's rural areas.
While coordination of these activities continues to improve, the individual agencies charged with solid waste management responsibilities are also expanding their own efforts. For example, DCA has appointed a broad-

19

suggestions for Improving
Solid Waste Management (Continued)

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
based Waste Reduction Advisory Council to help focus its efforts. The Council has established goals and a plan of action for the upcoming year to assist the department in developing better means of educating the public and assisting local governments with their efforts. Underway are the development of a performance-based incentive program for local governments, which would encourage the establishment of volume-based pricing systems and other effective waste reduction measures, and a waste reduction media campaign targeted to Georgia's citizens.

As its part in this effort, P2AD has broadened its activities to offer waste reduction technical assistance to business and industry. Specifically, P2AD engineers conduct on-site assessments to identify an industry's waste stream and the costs associated with waste processing, handling, disposal and management activities; determine cost-effective source and waste reduction alternatives; and provide training to enable plants to conduct their own assessments, if desired. P2AD also makes referrals and serves as a source of information in areas of waste reduction and environmental compliance that are beyond its staff's expertise.

EPD, in addition to regulating solid waste collection and disposal activities, is expanding its technical assistance efforts, especially in the area of alternative waste disposal technologies. To assist in implementing DCA's and P2AD's technical assistance and public education activities, EPD is making available a portion of the Solid Waste Trust Fund to these two agencies.

A substantial portion of the Trust Fund will also be transferred to GEFA to establish a financial assistance program for local government waste reduction efforts such as recycling, composting, volume-based rate programs and source reduction. In administering this program, GEFA will solicit input from DCA, EPD, and P2AD on applications for funding. GEFA is continuing its role as a conduit through which the state provides solid waste related financial assistance to local governments.

To facilitate local government requests for assistance from these various agencies, the Coordinating Council has developed a system that provides a single point of contact for such requests. This approach is designed to more efficiently and effectively respond to the needs of Georgia's local governments by facilitating assistance delivery in a timely manner.

The combined effect of these coordinated efforts will enhance the state's ability to identify new and improved techniques for managing and reducing solid waste, particularly in light of rapid growth throughout the state.

20

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT

APPENDIX A: SOLID WASTE REMAINING CAPACITY REPORT FOR FY '95

County

Facility Name

FY 1995 Total Tons Disposed

Rate of Fill Cubic Yards
Per Day

Remaining Capacity Cubic Yards Per Day

Estimated Fill Date

Appling

Appling Co.-Roaring Creek PH 1&2 (SL)

16,051.77

110

Baldwin

Central State Hospital- Freeman Bldg (L)

34,823.95

493

Baldwin Co-Union Hill CH Rd, PH 3 (MSWL)

NR

215

Banks

R & B Wastes CR 83 (SL)

23,464.16

NR

Barrow

Speedway-Sr 324 Site 1 (SL)

374,220.06

1,778

Bartow

Bartow Co-SR 294 Emerson MSWL PH 2 (SL)

84,303.58

540

Ben Hill

Fitzgerald, Kiochee Church Rd, PH. 2 (SL)

0.00

200

Bibb

Macon-Walker Rd PH 2 (SL)

171,661.02

590

Mullis-Davis/Griswold RDS (L)

NR

480

Bulloch

Statesboro-Lakeview Rd (SL)

53,463.92

365

Burke

Burke Co-Clarke Rd (SL)

17,216.00

114

Butts

Butts-Co-Brownlee Rd (SL)

41,704.02

470

Camden

Camden Co-SR110 (MSWL)

30,362.30

195

Candler

Candler Co-SR 121 Phase 2 C & D (L)

7,923.00

108

Carroll

Carrollton-SR166 (SL)

62,018.75

444

Catoosa

Catoosa Co-SR 151 W Exp (SL)

66,569.79

500

Charlton

Charlton Co-Chesser Island Rd SL)

5,980.91

70

Chatham

Chatham Co-Chevis Rd (L)

619,445.73

36

Chatham Co-Sharon Park (L)

NR

72

Chatham Co-Thomas Ave (L)

NR

96

Savannah-Dean Forest Rd (SL)

NR

261

Superior Sanitation-Little Neck Rd (SL)

NR

346

GA/DOT-Hutchinson Island (L)

NR

NR

Superior Sanitation, Little Neck Rd, PH 2 (MSWL)

NR

916

Clifton Equipment Rental Company, Inc. (L)

NR

832

Chattahoochee Department of Public Works (SL)

22,813.00

NR

Cherokee

Cherokee Co-Swims-SR 92 PH 4 (L)

171,244.84

NR

Cherokee Co-Sanifill/Pine Bluff Landfill, E. (SL)

NR

1286

Cherokee Dr MSWL (SL)

NR

NR

Clarke

Clarke Co-Dunlap Rd (SL), PH 1

122,920.05

750

Clarke Co-Dunlap Rd (SL) Ph 2, 3, &4

NR

750

Clayton

Clayton Co-SR 3 Lovejoy Site #3 (SL)

82,383.90

NR

Cobb

Cobb Co-Cheatham Rd PH 2 (SL)

140,213.14

202

Cobb County Farm Rd #2 PHS 1-2-3 (L)

NR

NR

Chambers-Oakdale Rd/I-285 (L)

NR

444

Coffee

Coffee Co-CO-CR 125/17 Mile River (SL)

65,469.26

340

Columbia

Columbia Co-Baker Place Rd (SL), PH 2

84,428.77

600

Cook

Cook Co-Taylor Rd Adel PH 1 (SL)

17,157.08

126

Cook Co-Taylor Rd Adel (L)

NR

11

Crawford

Crawford Co-SR 341/Ropsville Rd (SL)

6,852.56

NR

Crisp

Cordele-US 41 S PH 2 (SL)

72,848.00

550

Dawson

Dawson Co-Shoal Hole Rd (SL)

6,124.71

54

Decatur

Decatur Co-SR 309 BNBRDG PH 2 (SL)

26,600.00

190

DeKalb

APAC/GA-Donzi LN PH 5A (L)

2,683,535.00

NR

APAC/GA-Donzi LN PH 50 (L)

NR

2,790

Atlanta-Key Rd (SL)

NR

NR

DeKalb Co-Seminole Rd PH 2 (SL)

NR

1,672

Land Reclamation-Rogers Lake Rd (C&D) (L)

NR

728

WMI-Live Oak #1 (SL)

NR

4,573

Phillips-Scales Rd C&D (L)

NR

NR

BFI-Hickory Ridge (MSWL)

NR

1,451

Dodge

Dodge Co-CR 274 (Dodge Ave) Eastman (SL)

14,913.24

90

93,629 56,342 3,300,000
NR 453,900 542,379 1,440,017 1,288,666 1,745,137 210,074 141,350 573,493 153,750 30,375 116,659 566,266 219,195 69,000 33,525 157,275 148,566 49,867
NR 1,743,299
681,009 NR
140,000 8,485,085
NR 210,984 2,566,989 4,832,858 64,375
NR 452,533 171,889 965,113 168,750 200,775
NR 267,286 176,741
528 NR 3,979,822 NR 104,048 3,010,157 6,024,405 NR 6,343,032 238,875

10/01/1998
01/01/2045
03/01/1996 06/01/1999 07/01/2120 07/01/2002 04/12/2008 05/01/1997 07/01/2000 07/01/1998 02/01/1998 01/30/1997 07/15/1996 06/30/1998 02/01/2010 09/01/2001 04/01/1997 11/01/2000 04/17/1999 06/01/1995
05/01/2028
07/01/1998 08/01/2018
07/01/1996 07/01/2006
09/01/1996
06/01/1998 08/01/1996 07/01/2000 05/01/1998 01/01/2058
07/02/1996 08/01/2004 05/01/2003
12/01/2000
09/12/1995 01/01/2001 08/01/1998
11/01/2008 07/01/2004

21

County
Dooly Dougherty
Douglas Effingham Elbert Emanuel Evans Fayette Floyd
Franklin Fulton
Glynn
Gordon Grady Gwinnett
Habersham Hall
Haralson Houston Jasper Jeff Davis
Jefferson
Jenkins
Lamar Liberty
Lowndes
Lumpkin Macon McDuffie McIntosh Meriwether Mitchell Monroe Murray Muscogee Newton Paulding Polk
22

Facility Name
Dooly Co-CR 101 (SL) Dougherty Co-Fleming/Gaissertr Rd (SL) Oxford Solid Wste LF-Turner FLD Rd (L) Douglas Co-Cedar Mt/Worthan Rd PR 1 (SL) Effingham Co-SR 17 Guyton (SL) Elberton-Hull Chapel Rd PM 1 (SL) Emanuel Co-SR 297 Swainsboro (SL) Evans Co-Sikes Branch Claxton (L) Fayette Co-1st Manassas Mile Rd Nside (L) Floyd Co-Berry Hill Rd (SL) Rome-Walker Mtn Rd PH 1, 2, & 3 (SL) Franklin Co-Harrison Bridge Rd PH 1 (SL) Atlanta-Confederate Ave (L) Chadwick Rd Landfill, Inc. (L) Chambers-Bolton Rd (SL) Eller-Whitlock Avenue (L) Glynn Co-Cate Rd (SL) Glynn Co-Cate Rd (L) Gordon Co-Redbone Ridges Rd (SL) Cairo-6th Ave (SL) Button Gwinnett-Arnold Rd PH 3 (SL) WMI-B J Landfill PH 3 & 4 (SL) UHL Inc-Richland Creek Rd (SL) Habersham Co-SR13 MSWL (SL) Hall Co-Allen Creek PH A (SL) Reliable Tire Service, Monroe Dr. (C&D) Haralson Co-US 78 Bremen PH 2 (SL) Houston Co-SR 247 Klondike (SL) Jasper Co-SR 212 Monticello (SL) Jeff Davis Co-CR 20 (SL) Jeff Davis Co-CR 20 (L) Jefferson Co-US 1 (Avera Rd) (SL) Wrens-Industrial St (SL) Jenkins Co-CR 54 (SL) Jenkins Co-CR54 Phase 2 MSWL & C&D Site (SL) Lamar Co-Grve St Ext (Old MLNR Rd) (SL) Liberty Co-Limerick Rd (L) US Army-Ft Stewart Main Cantoment (SL) US Army-Ft Stewart Main Cantoment (L) Valdosta-Wetherlington Lane (SL) Pecan Row Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (MSWL) Lumpkin Co-Barlow Romes Rd PH 2 (SL) Macon Co-SR 49 N #3 (SL) James-SR 17 S (L) McIntosh C0-King Rd (SL) Meriwether C0-CR 98 Durand (SL) Mitchell Co-SR 3A (SL) Monroe Co-Strickland Loop Rd (SL) Murray Co-US 411 Westside (SL) Columbus-Schatulga Rd W Fill PH 2 (SL) Newton Co-Forest Tower/LMR RVR RDS (SL) Paulding Co.-Gulledge Rd N. Tract 1 (SL) Polk Co-Grady Rd (SL)

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS

FY 1995 Total Tons Disposed

Rate of Fill Cubic Yards
Per Day

Remaining Capacity Cubic Yards Per Day

Estimated Fill Date

9,256.54 239,524.01
NR 51,733.22 6,196.80 17,811.02 21,010.00 2,451.53 21,678.15 117,412.57
NR 15,270.93 191,234.17
NR NR 97,582.84 NR NR 70,400.80 19,750.48 934,822.31 NR NR 37,485.57 122,450.55 NR 53,554.93 120,174.09 6,759.12 10,838.63 NR 21,706.50 NR 14,972.45 NR 15,464.04 33,537.22 NR NR 274,290.73 NR 8,874.00 22,299.73 0.00 7,245.00 24,373.76 15,030.21 88,492.62 39,049.87 101,849.12 49,075.26 17,133.97 27,514.23

80

129,450

1,002

279,650

345

261,980

NR

1,448,054

40

98,700

114

238,349

174

106,724

20

68,889

64

2,700

1,585

1,170,433

102

4,566

99

547,800

NR

NR

NR

NR

534

962,479

126

164,889

446

352,616

87

117,467

313

9,131,916

160

288,300

909

209,900

352

177,799

2,971

15,899,325

224

924,879

372

169,475

NR

NR

402

206,387

667

6,680,955

33

60,375

80

72,750

28

122,100

117

57,850

45

117,008

52

54,373

90

37,100

96

341,033

72

31,658

148

1,625,865

NR

NR

220

230,255

1,221

2,239,644

70

21,705

110

306,471

NR

NR

70

899,019

176

8,435

116

14,411

57

2,509

264

129,597

686

151,687

62

112,130

100

109,850

NR

NR

04/01/2001 01/01/1997 03/31/1999
05/01/2003 08/30/1999 01/01/1998 07/01/2007 02/05/1996 07/01/1997 09/01/1995 08/01/2010
04/01/2001 07/01/1999 12/01/1997 07/01/2000 07/01/2090 09/01/2002 02/01/1996 10/01/1996 01/01/2011 02/01/2009 12/15/1996
12/01/1996 08/27/2030 05/01/2001 10/01/1998 01/01/2010 12/01/1997 01/01/2004 07/01/1998 02/01/1997 10/01/2006 01/01/1998 01/01/2032
07/01/1998 12/01/2001 02/01/1997 12/01/2009
09/01/2037 06/28/1996 07/15/1996 07/01/1996 02/01/1997 07/01/1996 08/01/2000 01/01/1998

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT

County
Putnam Richmond
Spalding Stephens Sumter Taylor Telfair Thomas Tift Toombs Troup
Twiggs Upson Walker
Ware Washington Wayne Wheeler White Whitfield
Wilkes Worth

Facility Name
Putnam Co-CR 29 (L) & (SL) US Army-Ft Gordon Gibson Rd PH 1-3 (SL) Richmond Co-Deans Bridge Rd PH 2B (SL) Spalding Co-Griffin/Shoal Creek Rd PH 2 (C&D) Stephens Co-SR 145 PH 2 & 3 (SL) Sumter Co-CR 195 PH 2 (SL) Southern States-SR 90/SR 127 Charing (SL) Telfair Co-S 2316 (SL) Thomasville-Sunset Dr PH 2 (SL) Tifton-Omega/Eldorado Rd PH 1 (SL) Toombs Co-S 1898 PH 2 Vert. Expansion (SL) LaGrange- I 85/SR 109 (SL) Troup Co-SR 109 Mountville PH 2 (SL) Twiggs Co-US 80 (SL) Kersey-Firetower Rd/Jeff Davis Rd (L) Walker Co-Marble Top Rd Areas 1-5 (SL) LaFayette-Coffman Springs Rd (L) Ware Co-US 82 Waresboro (SL) Washington Co-Kaolin Rd S #3 (SL) Wayne Co-SR23, Broadhurst (SL) Treutlen & Wheeler Cos-SR 46 PH 2&3 (SL) White Co-Dukes Creek (SL) Dalton-Old Dixie Hwy PH 2 (SL) Dalton-Old Dixie Hwy PH 4 (SL) Dalton-Old Dixie Hwy PH 5 (SL) Dalton-Rocky Face (WS) PH 2 (SL) Wilkes Co-CR 40 (SL) Worth Co-SR 112 Sylvester PH 1 (SL)

FY 1995 Total Tons Disposed
24,255.50 225,460.70
NR 1,396.09 10,462.51 56,777.93 506,903.36 10,764.72 95,105.96 34,407.62 37,451.00 88,050.91
NR 13,733.01 2,088.00 53,143.72
NR 90,379.00 13,260.24 62,040.48 8,470.00 15,244.23 153,104.62
NR NR NR 16,651.64 13,995.95

Rate of Fill Cubic Yards
Per Day
156 94 1,400 NR 12 350 3,422 70 NR 167 300 560 NR 88 29 187 NR 400 108 780 70 NR 1,226 1,250 1,226 226 134 120

Remaining Capacity Cubic Yards Per Day
561,243 120,650 1,983,130
NR 18,750 42,000 34,611,378 300,375 758,063 44,017 237,000 201,750
NR 4,937,634
498,876 158,476
NR 176,250 1,626,572 1,207,500 194,884
NR 270,776 27,851 125,052 93,022
2,831 99,353

Estimated Fill Date
12/01/2006 05/01/2000 01/01/2000
02/15/1996 12/15/1995 12/24/2027 07/01/2010 07/01/1998 04/01/1996 07/01/1997 03/01/1997
12/01/2072 07/01/2029 01/01/1997
07/01/1998 02/01/2053 12/01/2028 07/01/1998
11/01/1995 12/01/1995 04/01/1996 10/01/1996 08/01/1995 03/01/1998

Key: C&D = Construction & Demolition L = Landfill MSWL = Municipal Solid Waste Landfill NR = Information Not Reported SL = Sanitary Landfill

23

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
APPENDIX b: SOLID WASTE LOANS AND GRANTS

Lead Recipient
Bran County Breman Brooklet Bulloch County Bulloch County Bulloch County Candler County Candler County Carroll County Carroll County Catoosa County Chamblee Chatsworth Cherokee County City of Cairo City of Valdosta Clinch County Columbus Consolidated Gov. Comer City Crawford Co.-Robert Crisp County Decatur County Donalsonville City
Douglas County Dublin City Floyd County Folkston Gilmer County Gordon County Habersham County Haralson County Hart County Hart County Hazlehurst Heard Co/Franklin/Ephes Homeland City Irwin County Jasper Cty./Piedmont Reg.
Waste Mgmnt. Comm. Johnson County Kennesaw City Lincoln County Lowndes County Madison County Manchester McIntosh County Middle GA Reg. Solid Waste
Mgmnt. Authority Middle GA SW Authority Monroe County Montgomery County Montezuma City

Project Description
Enforcement/Education Establish recycling program Wood chipper Recycling public info Enforcement/Education Recycling improvements Landfill closure Subtitle D landfill Recycling collection bins Develop regional recycling database Recycling drop-off centers Recycling collection bins Wood chipper Recycling drop-off centers Enforcement/Education Enforcement/Education Landfill closure Enforcement/Education Expansion of recycling drop-off center Recycling public info Enforcement/Education Clean-up Implement construction & operation of solid
waste transfer facility Enforcement/Education Assess consolidation of recycling programs Implement construction of a consolidated landfill Trimmings collection trailer Landfill closure Recycling collection trailer Composting operation Establish recycling centers Recycling process equipment Clean-up Recycling collection bins Network of drop-off recycling centers Redevelopment of Homeland Community Park Recycling processing equipment Create SW Mgmnt. Authority, specific site study
Recycling collection center Assess consolidation of storm water & erosion control Enforcement/Education Enforcement/Education Landfill closure Enhance recycling center Construction of recycling and waste collection center Design/engineer a regional SW mgmnt. facility.
Plan for regional Subtitle D landfill Recycling collection center Public information project Assess consolidation of water & wastewater treatment

$ Amount
67,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 26,249 10,000 250,832 429,274 5,000 4,900 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 4,687 21,633 200,000 31,945 10,000 2,300 25,000 24,450 50,000
48,078 17,500 44,000 5,000 500,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 4,330 74,500 5,000 17,680 9,883 2,900 47,575
5,000 11,838 26,569 19,350 465,000 5,000 10,000 50,000
15,000 5,000 5,000 18,750

Granting Agency EPD GEFA GEFA GEFA EPD DCA GEFA GEFA GEFA GEFA GEFA GEFA GEFA GEFA EPD EPD GEFA EPD DCA GEFA EPD EPD DCA
EPD DCA DCA GEFA GEFA GEFA GEFA GEFA GEFA EPD GEFA DCA DCA GEFA GEFA
GEFA DCA EPD EPD GEFA GEFA DCA GEFA
DCA GEFA GEFA DCA

Support
STMP Grant RSR Grant RSR Grant RSR Grant STMP Grant LDF Grant SW Loan SW Loan RSR Grant SWMI Grant RSR Grant RSR Grant RSR Grant RSR Grant STMP Grant STMP Grant SW Loan STMP Grant LDF Grant RSR Grant STMP Grant STMP Grant LGE Grant
STMP Grant LGE Grant LGE Grant RSR Grant SW Loan RSR Grant RSR Grant RSR Grant RSR Grant STMP Grant RSR Grant LDF Grant LDF Grant RSR Grant SWMI Grant
RSR Grant LGE Grant STMP Grant STMP Grant SW Loan RSR Grant LDF Grant SWMI Grant
LGE Grant RSR Grant RSR Grant LGE Grant

24

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT

Lead Recipient

Project Description

$ Amount

North GA Solid Waste Management Authority
Oconee County Pike County Plains City Rome SW GA Reg. SW Mgmnt. Treutlen County/Soperton Vidalia Walker County W & S Walton County Whitfield County Wilkinson County (Twiggs)

Enhance regional program to collect and process paper at shared paper recycling plant
Enforcement/Education Clean-up Rehabilitation of Plains City Hall Composting project & info Develop, engineering & hydrological studies for SW facility Recycling facility expansion Establish recycling center Implement consolidation of water and sewer systems Purchase a baler for recycling center Enforcement/Education Design & engineering for shared MSW collection centers

50,000
17,500 88,320 9,990 3,000 20,000 5,000 5,000 28,125 10,000 49,950 40,000

Subtotal - Grants

1,108,002

Subtotal - Loans

1,845,106

TOTAL LOANS AND GRANTS

2,953,108

Granting Agency GEFA
EPD EPD DCA GEFA DCA GEFA GEFA DCA DCA EPD GEFA

Support
SWMI Grant
STMP Grant STMP Grant LDF Grant RSR Grant LDF Grant RSR Grant RSR Grant LGE Grant LDF Grant STMP Grant SWMI Grant

Key: LDF Grant = Local Development Fund Grant LGE Grant = Local Government Efficiency Grant RSR Grant = Recycling & Source Reduction Grant STMP Grant = Scrap Tire Management Program Grant SW Loan = Solid Waste Facilities Loan Program SWMI Grant = Solid Waste Management Incentive Grant

25

1995 SOLID WASTE ANNUAL REPORT
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
60 Executive Park South, N.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30329-2231
(404) 679-4950 Publication Number: 0262
Printed on recycled paper

Locations