joint solid waste management district · christopher jacobs, p.e., executive director barbara...

CARROLL-COLUMBIANA-HARRISONJOINT SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

DRAFT

District Solid Waste Management Plan2011-2026

(Subject to revision every 5 years)

Printed on Recycled Paper

Plan Prepared by District Staff

Christopher Jacobs, P.E., Executive DirectorBarbara Walton, Administrative Assistant

Kelly Spath, Recycling Coordinator

With assistance from Eastman & Smith, Ltd.

District Address618 Canton Road, Suite B

Carrollton, OH 44615

(330) 627-7311 (phone/fax)

www.RecyclingMakesSense.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction.......................................................................................................................I-1

II. Executive Summary..........................................................................................................II-1

III. Inventories.......................................................................................................................III-1

IV. Reference Year Population, Waste Generation, and Waste Reduction .......................IV-1

V. Planning Period Projections and Strategies....................................................................V-1

VI. Methods of Management: Facilities and programs to be Used...................................VI-1

VII. Measurement of Progress Toward Waste Reduction Goals........................................VII-1

VIII. Measurement of Progress Toward Waste Reduction Goals.....................................VIII-1

IX. District Rules...................................................................................................................IX-1

Appendix A – Resolution of District Formation

Appendix B – Copies of Public Notices for Public Hearings and Public Comments

Appendix C – Copies of Resolutions and Certification Statements Documenting Ratification

Appendix D – Identification of Consultants Retained

Appendix E – District Maps

Appendix F – Industrial Survey Results

Appendix G – Documentation for Provision of Services and Capacity

Appendix H – List of Designated Facilities

Appendix I - Ohio Revised Code 343.08 Fixing reasonable rates or charges

Appendix J – List of the District's Drop-off Recycling Sites

Carroll-Columbiana-Harrison Joint Solid Waste Management District

I. Introduction

A. Plan Approval Date, Counties in District and Planning Period Length

1. Under current approved plan:Date of approval: May 26, 2005Counties within District: Carroll, Columbiana and HarrisonYears in planning period: 19

2. Plan to be implemented with approval of this documentCounties within District: Carroll, Columbiana and HarrisonYears in planning period: 16Year 1 of the planning period: 2011

B. Reasons for Plan Submittal

The District is currently operating under a 19-year plan. Therefore, this is the mandatory five-year plan update.

C. Process to Determine Material Change in Circumstances

In accordance with ORC 3734.56(D), the Plan must be revised if the District Board of Directors has determined that "circumstances materially changed from those addressed in the approved initial or amended plan of the district." A material change in circumstances shall be defined as a change that adversely affects the ability of the District Board of Directors to: (1) assure waste disposal capacity during the planning period; (2) maintain compliance with applicable waste reduction or access goals; or (3) adequately finance implementation of the Plan. The Ohio EPA’s Plan Format requires that the Plan Update must include a description of the process the District Board of Directors will use to determine when a material change in circumstances has occurred, and as a result, requires an amended Plan.

The District Board of Directors shall make the determination of whether a material change in circumstances has occurred as follows:

1. Assurance of Waste Disposal Capacity

a. Decrease in Waste Generation

A material change in circumstances may occur if the temporary or permanent closure of a designated facility reduces the available landfill disposal capacity below the projected disposal requirements for solid waste generated within the District. The District Board of Directors may conclude that a material change in circumstances has not occurred if the District Board of Directors is able to secure commitments to landfill the waste previously received at a temporarily or permanently closed facility.

The Chairman of the District Board of Directors will determine whether it is necessary to convene a special meeting of the District Board of Directors in the event a designated facility is temporarily or permanently closed to determine

Solid Waste Management Plan I-1 October 2010


whether disposal capacity is available to the District from other designated landfills or whether a material change in circumstances has occurred.

b. Increase in Waste Generation

Future capacity needs of the District as outlined in the Plan are based on waste generation estimates. A significant increase in solid waste generation within the District may affect the demand for solid waste disposal capacity at designated solid waste facilities. A material change in circumstances may occur if waste generation increases and the increase consumes more solid waste disposal capacity and reduces the available disposal capacity below the projected disposal requirements for solid waste generated within the District. The District Board of Directors may conclude that a material change in circumstances has not occurred if the District Board of Directors is able to secure commitments to landfill the increased waste volume.

District staff and management shall review waste generation figures quarterly and report to the District Board of Directors any significant increase or decrease in solid waste generation within the District. The District Board of Directors shall review the report and the availability of landfill disposal capacity for District solid waste and determine whether sufficient capacity is available to the District from designated landfills or whether a material change in circumstances has occurred.

2. Compliance with Applicable Waste Reduction or Access Goals

Delay in Program Implementation or Discontinuance of Essential WasteReduction or Recycling Activities

Pursuant to the Ohio Revised Code, the Ohio Administrative Code, and the State Plan, the District has established specific goals regarding waste reduction and recycling within the District. As established in the Plan, the access goal will be utilized by the District. However, the District Board of Directors will continue its efforts to achieve the alternate waste reduction goal. The District Director will prepare an annual report for review by the District Policy Committee and for the April District Board of Director’s meeting. The annual report will identify any significant delays in program implementation; changes to waste reduction strategies; recycling strategies; or changes to the implementation schedule of the District Plan for the preceding year. A significant delay in program implementation or the unanticipated termination of essential programs may result in the inability of the District to achieve either goal. If the District Board of Directors is able to implement new programs or modify existing programs to meet the access goal, the District Board of Directors may determine that a material change has not occurred.

3. Financing of Plan Implementation: Decrease in Waste Generation

The District relies on revenue from fees paid pursuant to agreements with designated solid waste facilities when the designated facilities receive solid waste generated within the District. A significant reduction in the generation of solid waste within the District could result in a significant decrease in revenue and adversely affect the ability of the District Board of Directors to finance implementation of the Plan. The District Director will monitor



revenues and will inform the District Board of Directors if a significant decrease in revenues has occurred. The District Board of Directors may request that the District Director prepare a financial assessment explaining the cause and effect of a significant decrease in revenues, within ninety (90) days of the date of notification to the District Board of Directors that a significant decrease in funds to finance implementation of the District Plan has occurred. The financial assessment report will identify programs and budgeted expenditures that may be adversely affected by the reduction in revenue. A material change in circumstances may have occurred if the reduction in revenue adversely affects the District Board of Director’s ability to finance or implement the District Plan in accordance with the approved Plan. The District Board of Directors may determine that no material change in circumstances has occurred if the District Board of Directors is able to maintain funding for District programs through re-allocation of District funds, or if the District Board of Directors approves an increase in the contract fees paid by the designated solid waste facilities in an amount sufficient to fund implementation of the District Plan.

4. Procedures where Material Change in Circumstances has Occurred

If at any time the District Board of Directors determines that a material change in circumstances has occurred and a revision to the Plan is necessary, the District Board of Directors shall direct the Policy Committee to prepare a Draft Amended Plan. The District Board of Directors shall proceed to adopt and obtain approval of the Amended Plan in accordance with divisions (A) to (C) of section 3734.55 of the Revised Code. The District Board of Directors shall notify the Ohio EPA of a material change in circumstance within thirty (30) days of making any such determination.

The District’s Director shall notify the President of the District Board of Directors within sixty (60) days of the:

a) receipt of notice from a designated landfill owner or operator that there is a decrease in solid waste disposal capacity at the solid waste landfill that reduces the solid waste disposal capacity below the capacity required for solid waste generated within the District;

b) the District Director’s determination that solid waste disposal capacity that provided a basis for the 3734.53(A) certification is no longer available;

c) there is a decrease in solid waste generation within the District that reduces the revenue to fund implementation of the District Plan; or

d) solid waste facilities with designation agreements with the District do not pay the required designation or contract fee in an amount sufficient to fund implementation of the District Plan.

Within sixty (60) days of the receipt of the District Director’s notice that a material change in circumstances may exist, the President of the District Board of Directors shall review the District Director’s notice with the District Board of Directors and request that the District Board of Directors determine whether a material change in circumstances has occurred. If the District Board of Directors determines that a material change in circumstances has occurred, the District Board of Directors will notify the Chair of the District Policy



Committee and request that the District Policy Committee prepare an amendment of the District Solid Waste Management Plan as required by 3734.56(D) of the Revised Code.

The District Board of Directors will determine whether there is sufficient solid waste disposal capacity at landfills within a reasonable distance of the District through a review of solid waste landfill disposal capacity records maintained by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, by the appropriate governmental agencies that maintain such information for designated landfills located outside the District or through solid waste disposal capacity assurance from the designated landfills. A material change in circumstances has not occurred if the District Board of Directors is able to secure solid waste landfill disposal capacity commitments from landfills within a reasonable distance of the District that replace the solid waste disposal capacity that is otherwise unavailable to the District.

No material change in circumstances exists if the District Board of Directors increases the amount of the designation or contract fee, as provided in the designation agreements by and between the District and solid waste facilities, in an amount sufficient to fund implementation of the District Plan.

D. District Formation and Certification Statement

In March 1989, the Boards of Commissioners in Carroll, Columbiana, and Harrison Counties passed resolutions establishing the Joint Solid Waste Management District as required by Ohio law.

Ohio law also requires that each District prepare and update a plan for the safe and sanitary management of solid waste generated within the District for a minimum planning period of 10 years. All required notices, approvals and certifications regarding District formation, Plan approval and certification of solid waste disposal capacity are included in Appendix C.

E. Policy Committee Members

CARROLL COUNTY COLUMBIANA COUNTY HARRISON COUNTYThomas WheatonCounty Commissioner

Penny TrainaCounty Commissioner

Mike VinkaCounty Commissioner

Dave FlanaryMayor, Village of Carrollton(Largest Municipality)

James SwogerMayor, City of E. Liverpool(Largest Municipality)

Ken ZitkoMayor, Village of Cadiz(Largest Municipality)

Phil PavickTrustee, Rose Township(Trustee Rep.)

James Sabatini, IITrustee, St. Clair Township(Trustee Rep.)

Paul TrushellTrustee, North Township(Trustee Rep.)

Melanie Campbell(Health Commissioner)

Wesley Vins(Health Commissioner)

Dr. I. TabbahJames Howell, Designee - Chair(Health Commissioner)

Rhonda Cogan(Industry Rep.) Ken Kibler (Industry Rep.) Steve Reese (Industry Rep.)Todd Davis (Citizen Rep.) Marilyn Montes(Citizen Rep.) Scott Blackburn (Citizen Rep.)Rose Seck (Public Rep.) Cindy DePillo (Public Rep.) Lester Nabb (Public Rep.)



F. Board of Directors

CARROLL COUNTY COLUMBIANA COUNTY HARRISON COUNTYCOMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONERS

Thomas Wheaton Penny Traina, Chair Mike VinkaLarry Garner Dan Bing William HostDoyle Hawk Jim Hoppel Barbara Pincola

G. District Address and Phone Number

Contact Person: Chris Jacobs, P.E., Executive DirectorAddress: 618 Canton Road, Suite B, Carrollton, Ohio 44615Phone: (330) 627- 7311; FAX: (330) 627-7311E-mail address: [email protected]: www.RecyclingMakesSense.org

H. Technical Advisory Committee and Other Subcommittees

The District does not have a Technical Advisory or any other Committees.



II. Executive Summary

A. Implementation of Currently Approved Plan

The District’s residential drop-off recycling program has increased to 46 drop-off sites throughout the District since the approval of the District Plan in 2005. All drop-off recycling sites throughout the District are full-time sites. Non-subscription curbside recycling is provided in Carrollton, Carroll County. One hauler, Lewis Refuse, began offering non-subscription curbside recycling services to its customers in Columbiana County.

This District continues to get excellent participation in its annual appliance, scrap metal, electronics and tire recycling collection events and activities. The volume of appliances, tires and electronics collected has increased throughout the planning period. The District has been sponsoring the Christmas tree recycling program since 1994. Residents are encouraged to bring live trees to local drop-off sites. The trees are chipped and given away as mulch.

The District implemented several Household Hazardous Waste Management programs. The District provides an HHW collection event each year, rotating the location of the collection event to a different county each year. The District also provides information regarding environmentally-friendly alternatives to common household hazardous materials and a list of locations that accept lead-acid batteries and used oil.

The District continues to encourage recycling, reduction and reuse programs for the commercial sector. Many commercial businesses throughout the District recycle cardboard. Educational programs like recycling technical assistance and waste analysis are available to the commercial sector which provide additional efforts and opportunities to explain the benefits of recycling and waste reduction to the commercial sector. The explanation of services and opportunities to reduce reliance on landfills remain a District education priority.

The District has an extensive Web site that covers a broad range of waste prevention, recycling, environmental and other pertinent information. This site includes links to such items as composting and yard waste information, how to recycle, and HHW alternatives to name a few. The website includes a list of the District's recycling sites, private recycling sites and alternate recycling locations (recycling opportunities) for non-traditional recyclable materials. The District website is listed in all District literature and advertising.

B. Current Inventories (Section III)

In 2008, District waste went to 11 landfills including two located out-of-state. Mahoning Landfill, Mahoning County received 38,182 tons, followed by Carbon Limestone, Mahoning County which accepted 29,403 tons (p. III-3). Arden Landfill, Washington

Solid Waste Management Plan II-1 October 2010


County, Pennsylvania, reported 28 tons of District waste and Seneca Landfill, Mars Pennsylvania, reported 64 tons. J & J Refuse Transfer Station in Carrollton received the majority of waste taken to transfer facilities and is the only in-District transfer station (Table III-3). It received 9,494 tons out of a total of 10,212 tons of District solid waste received by transfer stations in Ohio. Two other transfer stations located in counties outside the District did not receive a significant amount of District waste. All solid waste delivered to the transfer facilities are listed in Table III-3.

The District operated 46 full-time drop-off recycling sites in the three-county area. Only two communities, Carrollton and Salem had curbside programs in 2008. The Village of Carrollton has a volume-based refuse collection system with non-subscription weekly curbside collection of recyclable materials. Republic Waste Systems (BFI) offers curbside recycling for a fee. A small number of its customers received curbside recycling collection service in 2008. In addition, one hauler, Lewis Refuse offers non-subscription curbside recycling to all its residential customers. Table III-5 in the Plan lists all recycling facilities and activities operating within the District and all facilities where District recyclables were taken in 2008.

The District provided Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) collection to all residents in 2008 at a one-day collection event. Heritage WTI has been conducting a partial HHW annual collection event in the City of East Liverpool; this collection is restricted to residents of the City of East Liverpool and Liverpool Township.

There are three composting facilities in the District. Table III-6 lists all known information regarding the composting facilities located within the District. Table III-8 in the Plan lists 30 open dumps and seven waste tire dumps in the District. There are no known ash, foundry sand, or slag disposal sites located within the District.

C. Population and Waste Generation Projections (Section IV)

The reference year (2008) population of the District was 150,053. This population figure does not include the population of the villages of Adena in Harrison County, Magnolia and Minerva in Carroll County, but includes the Mahoning county portion of Washingtonville, Columbiana and Salem in Columbiana County. Reference year residential/commercial waste generation (based on a per capita generation rate of 0.84 tons per person per year) was 126,045 tons and industrial waste generation was 75,820 tons.

Residential/commercial waste reduction in 2008 was 15,402 tons while the industrial waste reduction in 2008 was 30,265 tons.

The 2008 waste generation of the District, based purely on historical data, is 155,950 tons compared to the calculated generation of 205,808 tons. This difference is based on several factors, the largest being incomplete recycling data; the District credits only verified recycling toward waste reduction. The District has decided that the historical residential/commercial generation data and industrial waste generation values are more



accurate than the per capita waste generation projections and will be used for the balance of the plan.

D. Planning Period Projections and Strategies (Section V)

A planning period from 2011 to 2026 has been established by the District. The population of the District is expected to increase from 150,053 in 2008 to 153,775 in 2026. Residential and Commercial waste generation is expected to increase from 108,391 TPY in 2008 to 111,026 TPY in 2026. Industrial waste generation will decrease from 75,820 TPY in 2008 to 61,967 TPY in 2026.

The District will continue its drop-off recycling program throughout the District. Additional programs, including for example, Appliance and Scrap Metal Recycling, Christmas Tree Recycling, and Recycling Awareness, will be implemented throughout the planning period. Residential and commercial recycling is expected to increase to 21,429 TPY in 2026. Certain commercial entities recycle cardboard and other materials. Currently there are no District-sponsored commercial recycling programs. However, the District offers assistance to commercial businesses that are interested in establishing recycling programs.

The District offers other waste reduction programs including: appliance and scrap metal recycling, electronics recycling, tire recycling, information about curbside recycling, composting and yard waste facilities, HHW collection and information and recycling education and awareness.

Industries recycle a larger quantity of waste than residential and commercial entities. Metal recycling accounts for the majority of industrial recycling. Continued industrial recycling coupled with waste reduction education will increase total industrial waste minimization to 33,108 tons in 2026.

E. Methods of Management (Section VI)

Projected capacity requirements are expected to decrease from 142,488 TPY in 2011 to 122,402 TPY in 2026. There is sufficient disposal, recycling and transfer capacity for the District over the 16-year planning period. Disposal capacity was verified based on the total projected available disposal capacity at the designated solid waste landfills. The solid waste and recyclable materials collected within the District are delivered to several solid waste, composting and recycling facilities.

F. Measurement of Progress Toward Waste Reduction Goals (Section VII)

The District chose to comply with Goal 1 for the Residential Sector. This means that the District has provided recycling access to 90 percent of the population in each of the three counties. This was achieved using the District drop-off program and curbside recycling. Although the District’s residential/commercial waste reduction rate (WRR) is less than



the 25 percent goal, the District has projected the WRR to increase from 14.15 percent in 2011 to 19.21 percent in 2026.

For the Industrial sector, the District chose to comply with Goal 1, providing access to recycling for at least four commonly recycled materials in each county. In 2011, the Industrial WRR is 39.92 percent and will increase to 53.43 percent in 2026. The projected increase is based on the continued effect of District programs and educational activities throughout the planning period.

G. Cost and Financing of Plan Implementation (Section VIII)

The District will continue its disposal fees of one dollar for in-District solid waste, two dollars for out-of-District solid waste, and one dollar for out-of-state solid waste in the event that an in-District landfill is opened. However, the District did not budget any revenue from disposal fees because there is no in-District operating landfill. If the Harrison County Landfill becomes operational, the District will use any increase from the tiered disposal fees to expand the curbside program, provide funds to assist environmental projects like closure and post-closure care at landfills owned or operated by any political subdivision within the District, litter law enforcement and expand commercial and industrial recycling.

The District has established solid waste facility designation. All designated facilities pay the District a $3.50 per ton contract fee. The projected contract fee revenue for 2011 is $350,000. Other revenue sources include $30,000 in recycling revenue and $3,000 in fees from the tire collection events.

The cost to operate the District and implement the District Plan in 2011 is projected to be $374,948. The costs for most programs, except for District employee wages and benefits, are expected to increase 2% each year throughout the planning period. Employee wages are projected to increase by two percent every year. Health insurance costs are projected to increase at a rate of nine percent annually.

The District will continue to fund the following current programs and activities such as Christmas Tree Recycling, Used Tire, Appliance and Scrap Metal Recycling and Electronics Recycling.

H. District Rules (Section IX)

The District does not have any rules in effect. The Board of Directors is authorized to develop rules including, but not limited to, prohibiting or limiting the receipt of solid waste generated outside a service area, governing the maintenance, protection and use of solid waste collection or other solid waste facilities, governing the development and implementation of a program for the inspection of solid waste generated outside the boundaries of Ohio and exempting the owner or operator of any existing or proposed solid waste facility provided for the Plan.



Table ES-1 General Information

District name: Carroll-Columbiana-Harrison Joint Solid Waste Management District

District ID#: Reference year: 2008 Planning period: 2011-2026

Plan status:D RD DR Approved (date) / / OI (date) / / DA

Abbreviations: D = draft, RD = ratified draft, DR = draft revised, OI = ordered to be implemented, DA = draft amended

Table ES-2 District Coordinator/Office

Chris Jacobs, P.E., Executive Director

Address: CCH Solid Waste Management District, 618 Canton Road, Suite B

City: Carrollton State: Ohio Zip: 44615

Phone: (330) 627-7311 FAX: (330) 627-7311

E-mail address: [email protected] Website: www.RecyclingMakesSense.org



Table ES-3 Plan Data SummaryPlan Data

2008 (Ref. Year) 2015 2020 20251Population 150,053 151,424 152,461 153,551

2Generation Industrial 75,820 70,444 66,591 62,738Res/Comm 108,391 109,328 110,077 110,864Exempt 3,944 3,944 3,944 3,944TOTAL 188,155 183,716 180,612 177,546

3Waste Reduction Ind. Source Red. 0 0 0 0Ind. Recycling 30,265 31,340 32,132 32,943Res./Comm. SR 0 0 0 0Res/Comm Recycling 15,402 18,003 19,462 21,083MSW compost 0 0 0 0Incineration 0 0 0 0Ash Disposal 0 0 0 0WR TOTAL 45,667 49,343 51,594 54,026

4Disposal (DL) LF in-District 0 0 0 0LF out-of-Dist 142,488 134,373 129,018 123,520TOTAL LF 142,488 134,373 129,018 123,520

5WRR (percent) 24.27 26.86 28.57 30.431Population data from Table V-12Generation data from Table V-43Waste Reduction

Industrial Source Reduction and Recycling data from Table V-6Residential and Commercial Recycling data from Table V-5MSW compost, Incineration and Ash Disposal data from Table VI-2

4Disposal (DL) data from Table VI-15WRR (percent) data from Table VII-5

Table ES-4 Existing Disposal FacilitiesExisting Disposal Facilities Used in the Reference Year (2008)

Name County District tons

Total tons Years left

Apex Landfill Jefferson 16,480.86 1,298,331 7Mahoning Landfill Mahoning 38,182.29 293,819 8

BFI Carbon Limestone LF Mahoning 29,402.90 1,302,418 25Central Waste Mahoning 6,088.58 21,550 13

American Landfill Stark 2,519.51 1,103,733 72Kimble Landfill Tuscarawas 6,206.44 408607 85Countywide LF Stark 1,070.69 869,934 25Pine Grove LF Fairfield 6.95 228,742 52Coshocton LF Coshocton 21.05 85,367 87Arden Landfill Washington, PA 27.74 368,170 unknownSeneca Landfill Butler, PA 63.80 398,156 unknown

The information for this table was obtained from the Ohio EPA 2008 Facility Data Report and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. These are the only disposal facilities known to the District.



III. Inventories

The purpose of this section is to contain information for all existing solid waste disposal, recycling and transfer facilities, which are used by the District in the reference year.

A. Reference Year

All data used in this document was collected for the calendar year 2008. Therefore, the calendar year 2008 will be considered the reference year for all projections indicated throughout the District Plan.

B. Existing Solid Waste Landfills

Tables III-1 and III-7 include designated landfills used by the District and the quantity of waste taken to those facilities in the 2008 calendar year. There are no known captive facilities within the District. Three landfills and two transfer facilities in Pennsylvania are the only out-of-state facilities that are designated. The majority of the information in Table III-1 was obtained from the District's monthly designation reports.

The District has designated several solid waste facilities as the only facilities that may accept solid waste generated within the District. Each designated solid waste facility is contractually required to provide monthly reports regarding the amount of solid waste received from generators and haulers from Carroll, Columbiana and Harrison counties. The District believes the data provided by these facilities is the most accurate data available, especially considering that there are five out-of-state facilities that accept District waste. With the exception of Apex landfill, the landfill disposal data provided by Ohio EPA for 2008 matches the District's data provided by the designated solid waste facilities. The facilities represented in Tables III-1 and III-7 are the only known facilities used by the District in 2008. Waste that was delivered to a transfer facility prior to being disposed at landfills is not included in this table, but is listed separately in Table III-3.

C. Existing Incinerators and Resource Recovery Facilities

There are no incinerators or resource recovery facilities either in- or out-of-state used for the disposal of District solid waste.

D. Existing Transfer Facilities

Table III-3 lists the transfer facilities used by the District in 2008. J & J Refuse in Carrollton is the largest recipient of the Carroll County waste and it is the only in-District solid waste transfer station. It received 9,594.3 tons out of the total of 10,210.37 tons of District solid waste received by all the designated transfer facilities in Ohio. District waste was delivered to the two other designated transfer facilities in 2008. All data for waste delivered to transfer facilities was obtained from District records supplanted by Ohio EPA data. As with the landfills, the District feels that the data provided in the monthly designation reports is the most accurate data available.

Solid Waste Management Plan III-1 October 2010


E. Existing Recycling Activities and HHW Collection Activities

Two communities had curbside programs in 2008 (Table III-4). The Village of Carrollton has a non-subscription curbside program for all residents in the Village. BFI Waste Systems (Allied Waste) provided curbside recycling for a small number of their customers who voluntarily paid for the service. Table III-5 lists all the known recycling facilities and activities operating within the District and all known facilities where District recyclables were taken in 2008. Some of these recycling facilities used by the District are outside the District boundaries. Information in this table was obtained from a recycling facility survey. The majority of the respondents listed the quantity of materials collected on a per week or per month basis. Therefore, the annual quantity of each material is simply the monthly or weekly quantity multiplied by the appropriate factor. Survey non-respondents listed in the table show the amount of recyclables processed as unknown.

In addition to the two communities that have curbside recycling, one hauler, Lewis Refuse in Columbiana County offers non-subscription curbside recycling to all their residential customers. This service is offered at no additional cost to the customers and is provided weekly.

The District has offered HHW collections annually on a rotating basis since 2005. Heritage WTI has been conducting annual HHW collection events for residents of the City of East Liverpool and Liverpool Township. In addition, WTI offered a HHW collection event for all the residents of Columbiana County in 2007 and 2008. Oil-based paint and automotive products represent the majority of the materials collected at the one-day events. HHW data was obtained from the District's contractors and from WTI.

The District surveyed scrap yards to determine the amount of ferrous and non-ferrous materials that were recycled by residents and commercial and industrial businesses in 2008. The District asked scrap yards to report all materials collected from within the District's boundaries and to exclude vehicles and construction and demolition material from these amounts. This information was included in the District's Annual District Report for the calendar year 2008. However, because the tonnages reported seem high, the accuracy of this data is unknown and therefore, the District will not be including data from scrap yards in Table III-4 or in other sections of the Plan. The District will work with scrap yards to improve the reliability of the recycling activity conducted at scrap yards.



Table III-1 Landfills Used by the District

Location

Waste Received from the CCHSWMD(TPY) Total

WasteFacility name Type of Residential Received

Landfill County State Commercial Industrial Exempt (TPY)Out-of-District

Apex Landfill Jefferson 15,616.96 609.4 254.5 16,480.86Mahoning Landfill Mahoning 29,849.98 8,302.63 29.68 38,182.29

BFI Carbon Limestone LF Mahoning 23,185.93 3,051.94 3,165.03 29,402.90Central Waste PA,PO Mahoning Ohio 6,007.65 0 80.93 6,088.58

American Landfill Stark 1,989.31 530.2 0 2,519.51Kimble Landfill Tuscarawas 5,889.12 4.63 312.69 6,206.44Countywide LF Stark 148.61 843.43 78.65 1,070.69Pine Grove LF Fairfield 0 6.95 0 6.95Coshocton LF Coshocton 0 0 21.05 21.05

Out-of-StateArden Landfill Washington PA 27.74 0 0 27.74Seneca Landfill Butler PA 63.80 0 0 63.80

Totals 82,779.10 13,349.18 3,942.53 100,070.81

Type of Landfill: PA = Publicly Available, PO = Privately OwnedSources of information: Disposal information was obtained from District records and Ohio EPA for 2008. Data regarding waste taken to transfer facilities before being landfill is not included in this table. The data for Apex landfill was taken from District designation reports (designation contract fee reports). Ohio EPA records only indicate that 6,485.2 tons of waste from the District was taken to Apex. The District feels that the monthly designation reports are the most accurate information available.

Table III-2 Solid Waste Incinerators and Waste-to-Energy Facilities Used by the District(District does not use any of these facilities)



Table III-3 Solid Waste Transfer Facilities Used by the DistrictWaste Received from the District (TPY) Recyclables Processed

Facility Location Residential/ Recovered FromFacility Name Type County State Commercial Industrial Exempt Total Waste Total

J & J Refuse PA Carroll OH 9,594.30 0 0 9,594.30 0 0Kimble TF & Rcy. PA Stark OH 256.98 0 1.39 258.37 0 0Cambridge TF PA Guernsey OH 359.09 0 0 359.09 0 0

Total 10,210.37 1.39 10,211.76Notes: PA = Publicly AvailableSource: District and Ohio EPA records for calendar year 2008. The waste listed in this table was ultimately taken to one of the solid waste landfills listed in Table III-1; this data is not included in Table III-1. A minimal amount of waste was taken to one non-designated transfer facility. Section 343 of the Ohio Revised Code prohibits haulers from taking District waste to non-designated facilities and therefore this waste is not included in the table above. The waste taken to this non-designated facility will be projected as being delivered to designated facilities during the balance of the planning period.

Table III-4 Residential Curbside Recycling Activities Used by the District

Curbside Recycling Name Type of # of HHs Average #of HHs Service Area

Types of Materials

Recyclables Processed from

Mailing AddressPhone Number

Curbside Served Participating County Townships/Cities

Accepted SWMD (TPY)

J & J Refuse, Inc. 2403 Chase RoadCarrollton, OH 44615(330) 627-2424

non-subscription

794 794 Carroll Village of Carrollton

Newspaper, metal cans, plastics and cardboard

162

Lewis Refuse and Hauling15022 Emerick Road, Kensington, Ohio(330) 223-1098

non-subscription

5,000 200 Columbiana Newspaper, metal cans, plastics and cardboard

42.6

BFI, Inc.1

1717 Pennsylvania AvSalem, OH 44460(330) 337-6156

subscription 20 Unknown Columbiana Salem Newspaper, metal cans, plastics and cardboard

Unknown

Assumptions:1. BFI, Inc. offers curbside program to all of their customers in Salem area who agree to pay for the service. Source of Information: District surveys conducted in 2009.



Table III-5 Drop-offs, Buybacks, Hauler Collection, Other Recycling Activities, and HHW Collection Used by the District

Facility/Type ofFacility

# of Households

Type of Materials

Service Area District Recyclables

Hours Available

% MaterialsResidential/

Processing Capacity(Tons)

Activity or Activity Served Accepted County Pop. Processed

(TPY)to Public

(per week)Commercial/

IndustrialDaily Annual

Drop-off Recycling FacilitiesCCH – Augusta (Augusta Twp) 168CCH – Carrollton (Center Twp) 168CCH – Dellroy (Monroe Twp) 168CCH - Harlem Springs (Lee Twp) 168CCH – Kilgore (Loudon Twp) 168CCH – Lake Mohawk (Brown Twp) 168CCH – Leesville (Orange Twp) 13, 073 Carroll Ohio 168CCH – Malvern (Brown Twp) 168CCH – Mechanicstown (Fox Twp) 168CCH - New Harrisburg (Harrison Twp) 168CCH – Perrysville (Perry Twp) 168CCH – Sherrodsville (Orange Twp) 168CCH – Bowerston (Monroe Twp) Glass 168CCH – Cadiz (Cadiz Twp) Plastic 1-5, 7 168CCH – Freeport (Freeport Twp) PADO 3,312 Aluminum/ Harrison Ohio 168 95 R/ 5 C N/A N/ACCH – Hopedale (Green Twp) Steel 168CCH – Jewett (Rumley Twp) Misc paper 2,413.2 168CCH – Scio (North Twp) 168CCH – Beaver Creek (Middleton Twp) 168CCH – Butler Twp. 168CCH – Calcutta (St. Clair Twp) 168CCH – Columbiana (Fairfield Twp) 168CCH – East Liverpool #1 (Liverpool Twp) 168CCH – East Liverpool #2 (Liverpool Twp) 46,901 168CCH – East Palestine (Unity Twp) Columbiana Ohio 168CCH – Elk Run Twp. 168CCH – Fairfield Twp. 168CCH – Guilford Lake (Hanover Twp) 168CCH – Hanoverton (Hanover Twp) 168CCH – Knox Twp. 168CCH – Leetonia (Salem Twp) 168



Table III-5 Drop-offs, Buybacks, Hauler Collection, Other Recycling Activities, and HHW Collection Used by the District (continued)


# of Households

Type of Materials

Service Area District Recyclables

Hours Available



Activity or Activity Served Accepted County Pop. Processed(TPY)

to Public(per week)

Commercial/Industrial

Daily Annual

C CCH– Liverpool Twp. 168CCH – Madison Twp. 168CCH – Middleton Twp. 168CCH – New Waterford (Unity Twp) 168CCH – Rogers (Middleton Twp) 168CCH – Salem Twp. 1 Glass 168CCH – Salem (Perry Twp) Plastic 1-5, 7 168CCH – Salineville (Washington Twp) Aluminum/ Columbiana OH (see above) 168 (see above)CCH – St. Clair Twp. Steel 168CCH – Summitville (Franklin Twp) Misc paper 168CCH – Unity Twp. 168CCH – Wayne Twp. 168CCH – Wellsville (Yellow Creek Twp) 168CCH – West Twp. 168Salem BFI 4,600 OCC 8.95 40 100% R N/A N/A1717 Pennsylvania PA,DO 4,600 Newspaper Columbiana Ohio 13.71 40 100% R N/A N/ASalem, Ohio 44460 4,600 Plastics 0.83 40 100% R N/A N/A(330) 337-5156 4,600 Aluminum 6.13 40 100% R N/A N/A

Lewis Recycling 5,000 OCC 568 4015022 Emerick Road PA, CS, DO 5,000 Newspaper 711 40Kensington, Ohio Paper Columbiana Ohio 37 40

Plastics 167 40 10 25,000Steel 2 40Glass 127

Aluminum 17 40

Note: The address of the each of the District's drop-off recycling sites is listed in Appendix J




Buyback Recycling FacilitiesKimble Recycling Cardboard 227.5 30R/50C/20I2295 Bolivar Rd Paper 288Canton, OH 44706 PA, DO 500,000 Aluminum Stark Ohio 5.5 56 500 156,000(330) 454-9400 Steel 26.6 95R /5C

Plastics 7.0Glass 66.7

Alliance Recycling Center OCC15969 River St PA,DO Unknown Paper Stark Ohio unknown 40 unknown unknown unknownAlliance, OH 44601 Aluminum(330) 821-8057 SteelSlesnick Recycling N/A OCC 54,233700 3rd St SE N/A Paper 4,018Canton Ohio PA, DO,

BBN/A Aluminum Stark Ohio 383 40 20R/40C/40I 300 75,000

(330) 454-5101 N/A Steel 2N/A Plastics 1,864N/A Newspaper 6,105

AutoZone PA,BB Unknown batteries* Carroll/Col Ohio 129.4 80 75R / 25CAdvance Auto Parts PA, BB Unknown batteries* Carroll/Col Ohio 47 80 75R / 25CCarsons Auto Parts PA, BB Unknown batteries* Carroll Ohio 30 65 75R / 25CMisc Auto Parts Stores PA, BB Unknown batteries* CCH Ohio 133.4 65 75R / 25CMisc LA battery recyclers PA,BB Unknown batteries* CCH Ohio 110.4 40-60 75R / 25CAssociated Paper PA,BB Unknown OCC Mahoning Ohio 425 48 85C/15I





# of Households

Type of Materials

Location District Recyclables

Hours Available



Activity or Activity Served Accepted County State Processed(TPY)

to Public(per week)

Commercial Daily Annual

Jasar Recycling OCC Columbiana Ohio 342 48278 West Taggart St Paper Columbiana Ohio 7 48East Palestine, Ohio PA,BB,DO unknown Newspaper Columbiana Ohio 100 48(330) 426-6243 Plastic Columbiana Ohio 24 48

Steel Columbiana Ohio 90 48Go Surplus429 East State Street PA, DO unknown Electronics Columbiana Ohio 43.6 40 50R/50R/0I unknown unknownSalem, Ohio 44460(330) 596-2613Liberty Tire Services14864 Lincoln Street SE PA, DO unknown Scrap Tires Stark Ohio 1,617 40 unknown unknownMinerva, Ohio 44657(330) 868-0097Valley Converting PA,BB unknown paper Jefferson Ohio unknown 40 unknownMiscellaneous ProgramsCommercial Survey N/A N/A N/A CCH 2,511 N/A 100C N/A N/AIndustrial Survey N/A N/A N/A CCH 30,265 N/A 100I N/A N/AScrap Tire Collection PA, DO Tires CCH 144 varies 100R N/A N/AAppliance Collection PA, DO Scrap metal CCH 13 3 days/year 100R N/A N/AElectronics Collection PA, DO Electronics CCH 24 3 days/year 100R N/A N/AHHW Collection ProgramsCCH - Harrison PA 16,800 HHW Cadiz Ohio 0.86 limited 100R N/A N/AWTI PA 42,000 HHW Columbiana Ohio 12.06 limited 100R N/A N/A

Notes: * Batteries means lead-acid batteries. 1 – The Salem Twp site replaces the Knox Twp #2 site identified in the District 2005 plan.Type of Facility: PA = Publicly Available, CS = Curbside, DO = Drop-off, BB = Buy Back, I = Industrial

Sample Calculations and Assumptions: The quantity of recyclable materials collected at the Lewis Refuse includes all the materials collected at the District’s recycling sites in Carroll and Harrison counties. The values for steel and ferrous in the above table include appliances, but do not include vehicles and structural steel from demolition. Companies provided information on all processed recyclables for the calendar year 2008. Processing capacity, where available, was calculated by multiplying daily capacity by the number of days the facility operates.



F. Existing Composting/Yard Waste Management Facilities

The three existing in-District composting facilities in 2008 were in Cadiz and Hopedale in Harrison County and Columbiana in Columbiana County. Table III-6 lists all known information regarding the composting facilities located within the District. These facilities are registered with Ohio EPA. No composting facilities have been identified in Carroll County. The District is not aware of any out-of-District yard waste composting facilities that are used by District haulers.

Several District municipalities collect leaves from their residents and transport them to various areas for land application. The District is not aware of all the locations where these leaves are applied. The District also sponsors an annual Christmas Tree Recycling Program, where residents take their live trees to 19 drop-off sites throughout the three-county area. Trees are chipped into mulch and made available to residents at no cost. The total amount of leaves and Christmas trees collected in the reference year are listed in Table III-6; these programs are described in Section IV.

G. Existing Open Dumps and Waste Tire Dumps

Table III-8 lists 30 open dumps and seven waste tire dumps in the District. All dump locations are shown on the District map. Because most of the dumps are not contiguous, dump sizes were estimated assuming the dump perimeter is rectangular. Location of scrap tire dumps was provided by Ohio EPA.

H. Ash, Foundry Sand, and Slag Disposal Sites

There are no known ash, foundry sand, or slag disposal sites located within the District used by the haulers.

I. Map of Facilities and Sites

Appendix E contains maps of the District showing locations of open dumps, landfills, transfer stations, recycling activities and composting facilities. The following symbols are used on the maps:

Symbol Description Symbol DescriptionT transfer station WT waste tire dumpX composting facility RDO Recycling, Drop-offO open dump RBB Recycling, Buy-Back

J. Existing Collection Systems - Haulers

Information regarding waste haulers was obtained from a survey conducted by the District (Table III-10). The District sent surveys to 38 haulers that operate within the three-county District; this list was compiled from the haulers licensed by each county health department. Of the 38 surveys mailed out, 17 were returned. A majority of the responding haulers did not indicate the total quantity of waste collected during 2008. Rather, they indicated the quantity of waste collected per week or per month. Therefore, the annual quantity of waste collected by a given hauler, as shown in Table III-10, is based on the quantity collected per unit time multiplied by the appropriate factor.

In 2008, the District designated 22 solid waste facilities; these facilities are the only facilities that haulers are authorized to use to dispose of waste generated within the District. These facilities generate monthly reports and submit them to the District, which the District uses for hauler tracking. The District used these reports to calculate the amount of waste that was collected by each hauler that did not respond to the survey.



Some municipalities have source separated yard waste collection, but no haulers offer this service. Because of the rural nature of the District, there are no plans for a District-sponsored yard waste collection program. In addition to haulers, several municipalities provide collection of yard waste, which are primarily leaves from their residents. These municipalities take this yard waste to the compost facilities or to local farmers for land application. Total leaf collection is estimated at 1997 tons. These programs will continue throughout the entire fifteen-year planning period and the quantity of leaves collected will remain approximately the same each year. The District is not aware of any other collection activities.

Table III-6 Composting/Yard Waste Management Facilities Used by the District

Facility/ProgramFacility Location

Waste Received from SWMD (TPY)

Processing Capacitytons

Non compostables

Landfilled

CompostProduced

Name Type County Address Type Amount Daily Annual (TPY) (TPY)JDS Landscape Supply PA Columbiana 46486 SR 14 yard waste 4,880 unknown unknown unknown 1,627

Class 4 Columbiana 44408

Cadiz WWTP PUO Harrison 316 W. Warren St yard waste 17 unknown unknownClass 4 Cadiz, 43907

Hopedale Village Landfill PUO Harrison TR 62 yard waste 63 unknown unknownClass 4 Hopedale

Leaf Collection coll. CCH land applied/composted yard waste 1,997 N/A N/A N/A N/ACCH Christmas Tree PA, DO CCH N/A yard waste 2 N/A N/A N/A N/ARecycling ProgramTotals 6,959 1,627

Facility type: PUO = Private Use Only, PA = Publicly Available, DO = Drop-off, coll = collected by municipalitiesSource of Information: Ohio EPA and District surveys conducted in 2009.

Table III-7 Facilities Used by the District, Which Are Located Outside Ohio: Additional Data

Facility Name/Type of Facility (e.g., landfill, transfer station, etc.)

Facility Mailing Address Facility Owner Facility Daily Waste Receipt Limit, if known (TPD)

Number of Days Facility is Open During Year,

If knownArden Landfill Solid Waste Landfill

Arden LandfillArden Station RoadP.O. Box BCWashington, Pa 15301(724) 222- 3272

Arden Landfill Inc. Waste Management Inc. Arden Station RoadWashington, PA 15301(724) 222-3272

Jim PostArden LandfillP.O. Box BC Washington, Pa 15301(724) 222-3272

2,800 300 days

Seneca LandfillSolid Waste Landfill

Seneca landfill421 Hartman RoadEvans City, PA 16033

Vogel Holdings121 Brickyard RdMars, PA 16046

Edward VogelVogel Holdings121 Brickyard RdMars, PA 16046

3,000 unknown

Source: Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.



Table III-8 Open Dumps and Waste Tire Dumps Located in the District

Site Location Latitude Longitude Land Owner Description of

Materials DumpedApproximate size of

site (in acres)

Approximate time period site has existed

CARROLL COUNTYHOPE ROAD N 40!36’55” 81!18’00” James Brothers Coal Household Trash,

This dump is 190 S Main Street Wood, Drywall,located on James Magnolia 44643 Cardboard, Car 0.1 16 yearsBrothers coal Parts, Paint andcompany land Oil Cansin Rose Township

FALLS ROAD 40!31’08” 81!15’08” Connotton Land Household Trash,Dump is in a valley Tires, Brush, C & Don the north side of the road Waste, Appliances, 1 20 years0.4 mi east of SR 542 Scrap Metal,

Furniture, Plastic Film

FARGO ROAD 40!34’58” 81!18’48” James Coal Co. Tires, Appliances, 5 25 yearsDump is 0.65 mile 190 S. Main St. Household Trash,west of Briar Road, on Magnolia 44643 Metals, C & D north side of the road.It is approximately 100 feet from the roadin an old strip minevalley.

LEOPARD ROAD 40!41’54” 81!07’52” Sandra Mong Tires, Appliances, 1 5 yearsThe dump is 0.1 mile 8072 Leopard Road Furniture, Trashfrom Lorric Road on Malvernthe west side of the road. The contentsof the dump belongto the property owner.

ORGANDY ROAD 40!35’45” 80!55’35” About 100 tires 5 25 yearsDump is located over furniture, trashthe bank on the westside of the road, for 0.1 milefrom the Avon Rd intersection.



Table III-8 Open Dumps and Waste Tire Dumps Located in the District (continued)

Site Location Latitude Longitude Land OwnerDescription of

Materials Dumped

Approx. size of site (in

acres)


COLUMBIANA COUNTYCLARKS MILL ROAD 40!36’35” 80!47’48” Charles Anderson Tires, Metal,

Dump is in a 25’ deep 14046 Atwater Rd. Household 6.5 15 yearsvalley on the western Alliance 44601 waste, cardboardside of the road,extending for 1/2 mi.

GRIMMS BRIDGE RD 40!41’25” 80!42’45” Tires, household 8 8 yearsDump extends on both garbage, buildingsides of the road for materials2-3 miles.

TEMME ROAD SOUTH 40!36’45” 80!48’45” Herman Dickson Household trash, 1.25 15 yearsDump is in a valley on 20150 Malone Road doors, mattresses,the eastern side of the Salineville 44945 furniture, appliances,road, 0.2 mile from tiresthe intersection of Temme and TR 879

TEMME ROAD SOUTH 40!36’44” 80! 48’49’ Kenneth Thomas Household trash, 0.5 15 yearsDump is in a valley on 20880 Temme Road doors, mattresses,the western side of the Salineville 43945 furniture, appliances,road, 0.3 mile from tiresthe intersection of Temme and TR 879

MCKAIG ROAD 40!43’35” 80!54’47” Thomas Althouse Construction & 0.25 12 yearsDump is on left side 1798 Cider Mill Rd Demolition, Wood,of road, 0.2 mile from Salem 44460 Tiles, WindowsSR 644





Materials DumpedApprox.

size of site (in acres)


McCORMICK ROAD 40!40’56” 80!44’24” Jeff Aldrich Household Trash, 4 20 yearsThe dump is located on land on 16687 St Clair Ave Metal, Tires, PoolThe east side of the road, one mile E. Liverpool 43920 Liners, Appliances,South of SR 518. Dump has easy Furniture, Drums,access; there are several large MattressesRavines adjacent to the road.

McCORMICK ROAD 40!41’04” 80!44’21” Ferris Coal Co. Tires, Appliances, 0.25 12 yearsThe dump is located in a ravine 371 S State St. Plastic, Metalon the west side of the road, 1.5 East Palestine 44413Miles south of SR 518.

McCORMICK ROAD 40!41’09” 80!44’15” Edith Gaylor Appliances, Plastics, 1 12 yearsThe dump is located in a valley 1748 Radcliffe Rd. Tires, Metal, 55 Galon the west side of the road, 0.8 Dayton 45406 Drums, Mattresses,Mile south of SR 518 Household Trash, Brush

FOUNDRY HILL ROAD N 40!38’20” 80!50’13” Conrail Corp Household Trash, 1 15 yearsDump is in a valley on the left P.O. Box 8499 Mattresses, Brush, clothesEdge of the road, 0.75 mile from Phila. PA 19101 Wood, Cardboard,Cemetery Hill Road Furniture, Tires, appliances

FOUNDRY HILL ROAD S 40!38’06” 80!50’04” William Foulkes Wood, Furniture, 0.25 15 yearDump is on right W. Carriage Rd. Brush, Household,edge of the road, just Chagrin Falls 44022 Trashbefore the RR tracks

GLASGOW ROAD 40!40’57” 80!45’22” Colan Alford Tires 0.25 10 yearsThe dump is on the 41027 Glasgow Rd.south side of the road, Lisbon 444320.9 mile west of the Glasgow/McCormickintersection.

GLASGOW ROAD 40!40’39” 80!44’53” Holmes Woodland Tires 10 yearsThe dump is on the (address unknown)south side of the road,0.3 mile west of the Glasgow/McCormickintersection. The dump is in a valley.

GLASGOW ROAD 40!40’29” 80!44’25” Holmes Woodland Appliances, General 0.25 12 yearsDump is on the north (address unknown) Trashside of the road, 0.1mile east of the Glasgow/McCormickintersection.

GLASGOW ROAD 40!40’28” 80!44’05” Crosie Vincenzo Tires 0.25 12 yearsDump is on the north 575 Westhill Dr.side of the road, 0.4 Sagamore Hills mile east of 44067Glasgow/McCormick





Materials DumpedApprox. size

of site (in acres)Approx. time period

site has existedCARMEL-ANCHOR RD 40!46’29” 80!31’32” Stateline Resources Furniture, Tires, 10 15 years

The dump is on the P.O. Box 419 Wood, Brush, C & D,north and south sides Negley 44441 Appliances, of the road, and Household, Trash,extends for 3/4 mile Mattressesfrom SR 154.

FAIRMONT ROAD 40!46’00” 80!41’17” David Williams Tires, Furniture, 1 15 yearsDump is on the south 43603 Fairmont Rd. Appliances,side of the road, down Lisbon 44432 Household Trash,in a valley. Mattresses

FAIRMONT ROAD 40!45’55” 80!41’19” Ferris Coal Co. Tires, Furniture, 4 15 yearsDump is on the south 371 S State St. Appliances,side of the road, down East Palestine 44413 Household Trash,in a valley. The Mattressescontents of the dumpare predominantlytires.

DOBSON ROAD 40!38’49” 80!51’24” Ted Mesmer Household Waste, 0.5 8 yearsDump is in a valley North Lima 44457 Tires, Brush, C & D,on the left edge of Appliances, Metal,the road, 0.75 miles Furniturefrom 644. There is easy access to dump.

McCORMICK ROAD 40!40’52” 80!44’31” Holmes Woodland 7 yearsDump is located on (address unknown)the west side of theroad, 0.3 mile northof the McCormick /Glasgow intersection.




Site Location Latitude Longitude Land Owner Description of

Materials DumpedApproximate size of site (in

acres)

Approximate time period site has

existedHARRISON COUNTYLOVERS LANE 40!17’00” 81!15’55” Tires, Appliances 0.5 15 yearsIn a valley by the int.TR 243 and Twp 291

JOCKEY HOLLOW RD 40!10’27” 81!06’43 Consolidated Coal CoHousehold Trash, 0.1 15 yearsOn south side, 1800 Washington Tires, Appliancesapproximately 2 miles Pittsburgh PA 15241 TVsfrom CR 42

JOCKEY HOLLOW RD 40!10’49” 81!06’31 Consolidated Coal CoHousehold Trash, 0.1 15 yearsOn south side, 1800 Washington Tires, Appliances,approximately 2.5 mi Pittsburgh PA 15241from CR 42

JEWETT SCHOOL FARM RD

40!22’18” 80!58’35” Harrison Hills Dist. Household Trash, 2 20 years

Dump is intermittent P.O. Box 356 Appliances, Tiresalong both sides Hopedale 43976of the road

HARRISON ROAD 40!25’19” 81!05’00” Robert H. Bower Appliances, Roofing 2 25 yearsThe dump is located P.O. Box 123 Shingles, Washingat the intersection Scio 43988 Machine Tubs, Tires,of Germantown and Furniture, HouseholdHarrison roads on the Trash, Plastic, Metalsoutheast side. Visiblebridge on Harrison Rd

SPROULL ROAD 40!20’34” 81!16’03” Lillian Sproull Appliances, Brush, 0.5 25 yearsDump is in the valley 9857 Sproull Road Household Trash,at int of TR 282 and Uhrichsville 44683 FurnitureTR 282A




The information regarding the following tire dumps was provided by Ohio EPA:

! Pearson Open Dump - street address: 7106 Arrow Road (Carroll) Parcel # 04-0000333 (142.50 ac) Land owner: Norman K. and Louise E. Pearson 117 Lilly Rd, Minerva OH 44657-9714 Estimate approximately 20,000 tires open dumped in various areas; difficult to get good estimate

! State Route 39, approximately 1 mile north of Wellsville (Columbiana) Scrap tires dumped into creek flowing north-south along the western side of SR 39; approximately 50 tires (owner unknown)

! Clarks Mill Road, Washington Twp Section 16. Scrap tires dumped over hill on west side of road. (Columbiana)

Land owner: Charles E. Anderson; 14046 Atwater Ave, Alliance, OH 44601 Estimate approximately 300 tires; tires on steep terrain, very spread out, so estimate was difficult

! Falls Road, Monroe Twp section 15. Scrap tires dumped into ravine on north/east side of road (Carroll) Parcel # 23-0000146000 (37.822 ac) Land owner: Ada Wagner, 1785 Haines Rd, Orwell, OH 44706 Estimate approximately 300-500 tires

! State Route 30, across from old elementary school in East Rochester (Columbiana) Scrap tires dumped into water in ditch adjacent to highway. Land owner: Steven R. and/or Christine M. Kohl, 24705 SR 30, East Rochester, OH 44625 Estimate approximately 500 tires, but some may be submerged - location and conditions will make difficult clean up

! Oak Ridge Rd, Yellowcreek Twp section 28. Scrap tires dumped into small lake (Columbiana) Land owner: John Price, 20497 Hammondsville Rd, Wellsville, Oh 43968 Estimate approximately 200 tires

! Southwest corner of SR 164 and Derry Rd (Carroll) Land owner: Mark Oboy, 2102 Amsterdam Rd, Bowerston, OH 44695 Estimate 100-200 tires previously dumped on propertyHave received signed consensual form from owner, but unsure it will be processed.

No further information regarding these tire dumps is available.

Table III-9 Ash, Foundry Sand and Slag Disposal Sites Used by the District(District does not use any of these facilities)

Table III-10 Solid Waste Haulers Operating in the District



Name of Hauling Company Mailing Address

Description of Collection Routes

Type of Material Collected

Tons Collected from the District (TPY)

Name of Facilities Used by Haulers

Allied Waste 548 Cherry Hill Road Harrison County MSW 198 Short Creek LFWheeling, WV 26003

Burgett Roll-Off LLC 2051 Burrow Road Carroll County MSW 197 J & J TransferCarrollton, OH 44615

Burwell Refuse 3223 Alliance Road Carroll County MSW 1,155 American LandfillMalvern, Ohio 44644

D & R Refuse P.O. Box 505 Loudon Township MSW 25 Apex LandfillBergholz, Ohio 43908 Carroll County

Do-More Refuse 9015 Cologne Rd., SW Carroll County SW MSW 64 American LandfillBowerston, OH 44695 Harrison County NW

Elkrun Roll-Off Service PO Box 271 Columbiana County MSW 392 Mahoning LandfillLisbon, OH 44432

G & B Refuse P.O. Box 3 Harrison County MSW 46 Apex LandfillDeersville, Ohio 44693

J&J Refuse 2403 Chase Road Carroll, Columbiana & MSW Kimble TF & LFsCarrollton, OH Harrison Counties J & J Transfer

Lewis Refuse 15022 Emerick Road Carroll County MSW 5,953 Apex, Central WasteKensington, OH 44427 Columbiana County & Mahoning Landfills

Metro Disposal 1800 9th St., NE Carroll County MSW 15 Central Waste LFCanton, OH 44705 American Landfill

R&R Sanitation 1447 Martin Road Salem – MSW 90 American LandfillMogadore, OH Columbiana County Central Waste LF

Sandy Valley Sanitation 7156 Knight Road Carroll County MSW 9 American LandfillWaynesburg, Ohio 44688 (Magnolia)

Tippy’s Hauling Service PO Box 616 Carroll County MSW 1,658 J & J TransferCarrollton, OH 44615 Harrison County Apex Landfill

Tom’s Roll Off 320 E. Main Street Carroll County MSW 173 Apex LandfillCarrollton, OH 44615

Waste Management 28 Johnsonville Road Carroll, Columbiana, MSW 19,974 Arden, Apex, andChester, WV 26034 and Harrison Counties Mahoning Landfills

Waste Management 116 N. Bauer Road Carroll County MSW 109 American LandfillWooster, OH 44691 Harrison County

Waste Management 12201 Council Drive Carroll County MSW 5,886 American LandfillNorth Jackson, OH 44451Columbiana County Mahoning Landfill

Zobenica Hauling 7040 Quarry Road Carroll County MSW 545 Apex landfillJewett, OH 43986 Harrison County J & J Transfer

Ace Roll-Off 7222 Waynesburg Road Carroll, Columbiana MSW 510 American LandfillWaynesberg, OH 44688 and Harrison Counties

Allied Waste 3870 Henricks Road Columbiana County MSW 5,630 Carbon Limestone LFAustintown, OH 44515 Central Waste LF

American Container R/O 196 Oneida Trail Carroll County MSW 11 Kimble - CantonMalvern, OH 44644

American Waste One American Way Carroll County MSW 292 American LandfillManagement Services Warren, OH 44484 Harrison County Mahoning Landfill



Table III-10 Solid Waste Haulers Operating in the District (continued)

Name of Hauling Company Mailing Address

Description of Collection Routes

Type of Material Collected

Tons Collected from the District (TPY)

Name of Facilities Used by Haulers

TA’s (Lynn Arnold) 81225 Fulton Road Harrison County MSW 277 Kimble LandfillTippecanoe, OH 44699

Arrow Disposal State Route 14 Columbiana County MSW 125 Mahoning LandfillSalem, OH 44460

BFI 3870 Henricks Road Columbiana County MSW 23,674 Carbon Limestone LF(bought by Allied 12/08) Austintown, OH 44515BMC Rolloff P.O. Box 130 Columbiana County MSW 130 Carbon Limestone

Columbiana, OH 44408Columbiana Sanitation 49928 Mcclure Rd Columbiana County MSW 1,114 Mahoning Landfill

East Palestine, OH 44413Dailey Refuse 43525 18th St Heights Columbiana County MSW 10,037 Apex Landfill

Wellsville, OH 43968 Mahoning LandfillDart Trucking 41738 Esterly Dr Columbiana County MSW 285 Apex Landfill

Columbiana, OH 44408 Carbon Limestone LFDave’s Refuse 89108 New Rumley Rd Harrison County MSW 22 Apex Landfill

Jewett, OH 43986Eagle Rolloffs 2246 N. Lincoln Columbiana County MSW 47 Mahoning Landfill

Salem, OH 44460Economy Sanitation 300 Old Steubenville Pike Harrison County MSW 1,940 Apex Landfill(bought by J&J 10/08) Cadiz, OH 43907Hunston Refuse 681 Alice St Columbiana County MSW 115 Mahoning Landfill

East Palestine, OH 44413Huth Rubbish 6 S Cleveland Ave Columbiana County MSW 10 Central Waste

Mogadore, OHMansfield Sanitation PO Box 24 Harrison County MSW 458 J & J Transfer

Cadiz, OH 43907Phoenix Disposal 1534 Mahoning Avenue Columbiana County MSW 14 Central Waste LF

Youngstown, OH 44509 Mahoning LandfillRepublic Waste Services 2800 S. Eric St. Columbiana County MSW 10 Central Waste

Massillon OH 44646Waste Tech Services 100 Debartolo Pl # 130 Columbiana County MSW 651 Mahoning Landfill

Youngstown, OH 44512Wolford’s Refuse 175 Ohio Ave Columbiana County MSW 44 Mahoning Landfill

Mc Donald, OH 44437

Sample Calculations and Assumptions: The companies listed above were surveyed and the information returned was checked against the District’s 2008 reports from designated landfills.

The companies highlighted in gray did not return surveys. The District has been collecting “hauler data” from the designated landfills for several years. This information in this portion of the table was taken from that 2008 hauler data.



IV. Reference Year Population, Waste Generation, and Waste Reduction (ORC Section 3734.53 (A)(5)-(6)

A. Reference Year Population and Residential/Commercial Generation

Table IV-1 tabulates the current population for Carroll, Columbiana and Harrison Counties. These population figures were derived from the Ohio Office of Statistical Research. Adena in Harrison County, and Magnolia and Minerva in Carroll County are the only villages where the majority of the population resides outside their respective counties. The populations of these villages that reside within Carroll and Harrison Counties have been removed from the total District population as indicated in Table IV-1. Additionally, a small percentage of Washingtonville, Columbiana and Salem residents live in Mahoning County; these residents were added to the Columbiana County population, as noted in Table IV-1

The District residential and commercial generation rate of 4.6 pounds per person per day (0.84 tons per person per year) was derived from the Municipal Solid Wastes in the United States, 2007 Facts and Figures (MSWUS) issued by the US EPA. These values are slightly higher than the residential/commercial waste generation calculated using landfill records. However, there is a small percentage of waste that is disposed in open dumps. Open burning also accounts for a small amount of waste.

Table IV-1 Reference Year Population and Residential/Commercial Generation

Population Total DistrictCounty Before adjustment After adjustment Generation rate -

TPYPPGeneration rate -

PPPPDResidential/Commercial Generation

Carroll 28,439 26,207 0.84 4.6 22,013.88Magnolia 317 xxMinerva 1,915 xx

Columbiana 107,873 108,593 0.84 4.6 91,218.12Washingtonville 334 xx

Columbiana 379 xxSalem 7 xx

Harrison 15,387 15,253 0.84 4.6 12,812.52Adena 134 xx

TOTAL 150,053 126,044.52

Generation rate: TPYPP = Tons per year per person PPPPD = Pounds per person per day

Sample Calculations:Carroll County population - Magnolia - Minerva = Adjusted Population

Carroll County: 0.84 TPY per person x 26,207 people = 22,013.88

Assumptions - the 2008 population figures were calculated based on the 2008 population estimates from the ODOD Office of Strategic Research.

Solid Waste Management Plan IV-1 October 2010


B. Industrial Waste Generation

The District conducted an industrial solid waste survey to prepare this Plan Update. Because the District has not obtained adequate reliable information from previous surveys, a different approach was implemented to obtain better industrial data for this Plan Update. The District prepared a survey form, and worked with the Chamber of Commerce in each county to send the surveys a majority of local industries, asking them to provide information regarding waste generation, composition and reduction in 2008. The survey was designed to gather information regarding waste generation, source reduction and employment. Over 90 percent of the businesses were contacted; roughly 25 percent of the industries in the District, representing approximately half of the total industrial employment, responded with usable waste reduction information.

The District has had an increasingly difficult time getting industrial waste generation and recycling data. Many businesses will not complete survey instruments or do not know exact weights and volumes of recyclable materials that are recycled. Moreover, many industries were not able to provide detailed information about the composition of the waste that they generate. Most of the disposal data provided was based on dumpster size of their containers and the frequency of collection. In addition, the majority of industries responding to the survey simply listed the waste that was disposed as “general waste”. The District will continue its efforts to obtain accurate data from its industrial generators within the time and resources available to collect that data.

The District did receive better data about the amount of 2008 recycling and waste reduction data from industries through the 2009 survey. In order to calculate industrial waste generation for 2008, the District calculated industrial waste generation for survey respondents using the data they provided for recycling and disposal. The industrial waste generation the survey respondents in each SIC category is simply the sum of the waste reduction and disposal information from the survey data. The District also used data from prior surveys conducted in 2008, 2006 and 2002. In order to determine the validity of previous data, the District verified that each industry that provided waste reduction data in previous surveys was in business in 2008. Ohio EPA has indicated that if a business that provided data in previous years was in operation in the reference year (2008), the previously-provided waste reduction may be included as waste reduction in the reference year.

In order to calculate the generation for industries that did not respond to the 2009 survey and for which the District does not have data from previous surveys, the District utilized Ohio EPA-provided SIC-specific generation rates as shown in Table JJ-2 of the Format. The District complied employment data from the 2008 Harris Ohio Industrial Guide for all industries that did not reply to District surveys. This data was then sorted by SIC code and a total number of employees representing survey non-respondents per SIC code was calculated. These SIC-specific non-respondent employment totals were multiplied by the generation rates from Table JJ-2 to determine the industrial waste generation values for industries that did not respond the District surveys.

Table IV-3 tabulates the generation data based on this methodology. A copy of the survey as well as SIC-grouped generation, reduction and employment data is presented in Appendix F of this Plan Update. Appendix F outlines the amount of waste generation and reduction by material for each SIC code for survey respondents and non-respondents. This generation rate is calculated based on the number of employees that represent the non-responding industries in each SIC code.

The District invested a significant amount of time and resources to gather the industrial data that was used in this Plan Update. During a six-month period, the District worked with each Chamber



of Commerce to send out the first round of surveys. These surveys were sent to the vast majority of the industries in the District. Some industries responded to the Chamber surveys and the District sent out a second round of surveys to all the industries that did not respond to the initial request in an effort to improve the response rate and data. The District had some success with the second round. The District staff followed up with phone calls and e-mails which provided additional data. Finally, the District mailed a third round of surveys to non-respondents. With the multiple survey requests and phone calls and e-mail follow-ups, the District received usable data from 25 percent of the District's industries. The District spent approximately 100 hours in its industrial data collection process. Data entry and analysis is not included in this 100-hour data collection effort.



Table IV-3 Industrial Waste GenerationSurvey Respondents vs. Non-Respondents

SICSurvey Respondents Survey Non-Respondents

Total WasteCategory # of

Industries# of

EmployeesTons of Waste

GeneratedGeneration Rate # of

Industries# of

EmployeesTons of Waste

GeneratedGeneration Rate Generated

20 1 700 1,062.68 1.52 7 111 1,545.12 13.92 2,607.822 2 3 29.97 9.99 29.9723 1 6 17 2.83 3 6 16.8 2.8 33.824 2 200 1,144 5.72 11 82 4,232.84 51.62 5,376.8425 1 28 8,4.16 3.01 6 141 252.39 1.79 336.5526 2 248 2,530.1 10.20 3 24 420 17.5 2950.127 6 292 758.9 2.60 27 338 2,264.6 6.7 3,023.528 2 81 119.83 1.48 10 62 770.66 12.43 890.4929 4 21 153.93 7.33 153.9330 7 286 3,255.94 11.38 8 171 1,246.59 7.29 4,502.5331 1 1 3.41 3.41 3.4132 8 394 6,846.05 17.38 19 357 3,766.35 10.55 10,612.433 6 201 3,308.06 16.46 7 108 3,988.44 36.93 7,296.534 10 852 4,408.09 5.17 38 1220 13,615.2 11.16 18,023.2935 21 863 11,463.05 13.28 48 1237 7,075.64 5.72 18,538.6936 6 40 119.2 2.98 119.237 7 274 879.54 3.21 879.5438 1 9 25 2.78 4 74 128.76 1.74 153.7639 3 72 134.75 1.87 10 33 152.46 4.62 287.21

Total 71 4,232 35,157.61 221 4,303 40,661.9 75,819.51Sample Calculations:

Because the majority of SIC categories in the District contain less than 20 industries, non-respondent generation is based on the rates listed in Appendix JJ of the Format.

GNR = NE x GRF, where GNR is the non-respondent Generation, NE is the number of employees, and GRF is the SIC generation rate from the Plan Format.

SIC 33: NE= 108, GRF = 36.93, therefore GNR = NE x GRF = 108 x 36.93 = 3,988.44 tons



C. Exempt Waste

According to the Ohio EPA Annual District Report for 2008, a total of 3,943.92 tons of exempt waste was disposed at Ohio Landfills and Transfer Facilities.

D. Total Waste Generation

Table IV-5 incorporates the residential, commercial and industrial solid waste generation throughout the District. This table was compiled from Tables IV-1 and IV-3.

Table IV-4 Exempt Waste Generated in the District and Disposed in Publicly-Available Landfills

Type of Waste Stream Generation Rate2 (lbs/person/day)

Total Exempt Waste Generation (TPY)

Exempt Waste1 0.14 3,943.92

1. Type of waste stream is unknown

Sample Calculation: (3,943.92 tons X 2,000 lbs) / (150,053 people X 365) = 0.14 lbs/person/day

Table IV-5 Reference Year Total Waste Generation for the District

Type of Waste Generation Rate – TPYPP

Generation Rate - PPPPD

Tons/Year

Residential/Commercial 0.84 4.6 126,044.52Industrial 0.505 2.77 75,819.51Exempt 0.03 0.14 3,943.92

Total Waste Generation xxx xxx 205,807.95Generation rate: TPYPP = Tons per year per person

PPPPD = Pounds per person per day

E. Reference Year Waste Reduction

1. Residential/Commercial Sector

Information on reference year recycling activities was obtained through formal and informal surveys and District recycling records. The District provides drop-off service through full-time collection sites throughout the District. Some of the larger commercial entities were contacted to determine the amount of cardboard recycled in 2008.

The majority of the information used in this section was received from the haulers (or generators) and therefore double-counting of recyclable materials does not arise. In an effort to eliminate double-counting, the District has compared all survey data to ascertain whether material from a business was taken to a recycling facility for which the District has accurate recycling data. The materials collected from the District-sponsored drop-off sites were taken to the Kimble Recycling and Transfer Facility



and Lewis Refuse Recycling Facility. Because the quantity of recyclables collected by the District drop-off sites is well known, the data shown in Table IV-6 is based solely on the District recycling tonnages listed in Table III-5. The recycling tonnages from the District programs have been subtracted from the total volume of materials that was processed at these facilities.

A) Recycling Drop OffThe recycling drop-off program was implemented in 1994. This program is currently operated and funded by the District. Recyclable materials collected include glass, paper, cans, #1 through # 7 plastic containers and bags (except for Styrofoam). By placing drop-off recycling containers at strategic locations, residents are encouraged to bring their recyclable materials to the sites. The District has strived to make recycling convenient for residents. Commercial entities are not as likely to use a drop-off facility because of the inconvenience of collecting and transporting materials to the site. Drop-off recycling sites are very cost-effective for rural Districts such as CCH. The sole disadvantage to the drop-off system is the fact that, while there are a multitude of sites available in the District, drop-off recycling is not as convenient for residents as a curbside program.

In 2008, there were 46 full-time drop-off sites in the District: 12 in Carroll County, 28 in Columbiana County, and six in Harrison County. This program serves all residents of the District, as well as small commercial businesses that are willing to transport their recyclables to a drop-off site. The overall average tonnage collected at each site is approximately 2,000 pounds per week. Each site is serviced by either a single 30-yard roll-off container or multiple six-yard front-load recycling containers. The roll-off containers have two compartments; one for all paper products such as newspaper, phone books, catalogs and magazines, and the other one for glass, #1 through #7 plastic containers and metal cans. Each site serviced by front-load containers has at least two containers: one for all paper products such as newspaper, phone books, catalogs and magazines, and the other one for glass, #1 through #7 plastic containers and metal cans.

District employees check all the recycling sites on a weekly basis and schedule the roll-off containers to be replaced with empty ones when they are full. The sites are serviced by an independent contractor. The front-load containers are serviced on a scheduled route, with all the containers emptied at least weekly. The District's contractor empties all the paper containers on one service day and all the commingled containers on the next service day. The recyclable materials are removed from the containers, processed and sorted. The materials are then weighed to determine the tonnage. The District receives data regarding the quantity of recyclable material received from the processing facility.

Responsibility for maintaining the program: The District has implemented and maintained this program since 1994 and will continue to do so in the future.

Service Area: The drop-off recycling program serves the population of the local communities where the sites are located as well as residents of adjacent communities. Residents using drop-off sites may take their recyclables to a site that is not in their community. For example, residents may use a drop-off site while they are out doing errands or on their way to or from work. Therefore, the drop-off recycling program serves residents from the entire District. Commercial



businesses may use the drop-off sites as well, although the number of commercial businesses that actually do use the sites is unknown.

Amount and Type of Material that is recycled: The District has aggregate weights for the entire District, not specific weights by site. This is partially due to the use of front-load containers. All these front-load containers are emptied into the same truck while the driver is out on the route, and therefore, there is no feasible or efficient way to determine the weight of recyclable materials collected at each drop-off site. The total amount of recyclables collected in 2008 at the District's drop-off sites was 2,413 tons. The materials collected at the sites include office and newspapers, junk mail, magazines, phonebooks, cardboard, paperboard, steel and aluminum cans, green brown and clear glass, and #1 through #7 plastic containers and bags.

Strengths of the program: ! Low cost to implement! Excellent coverage and service area! Ease of use! Well suited for rural areas

Weaknesses of the program:! Not as convenient as curbside recycling! Residents must travel to the site! One compartment of the roll-off fills up before the other

B) Appliance and Scrap Metal RecyclingThis program is a combination of one-day collections and information dissemination regarding scrap metal recycling facilities to residents.

The District conducts three, one-day appliance and scrap events annually, one in each county. The program is provided at no cost to all District residents, and while not every resident comes every year, there is significant participation. It is not uncommon for the collection site to have a steady stream of incoming vehicles; some residents will make more than one trip. The amount of materials collected at these events is large compared to the cost of the event itself. The District evacuates refrigerant from appliances collected at these events at no cost to the residents. Even when scrap metal prices are high, residents continue to participate in the collection events, especially in areas where there are no scrap metal recycling facilities.

If a resident has an old appliance or scrap metal during the year, the District provides the resident with the name of a scrap metal recycling facility that will take appliances and scrap metal year-round. Many residents take appliances and scrap metal to scrap metal recycling facilities throughout the year, especially if the scrap metal market is high. If the appliance contains refrigerant, it must be evacuated prior to being recycled at a scrap yard and many residents may not be willing to pay for evacuation. The District also lists scrap yard locations on informational brochures and on the District’s website.



Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: The District has implemented this program since its inception.

Service Area, which Benefits: Because the District holds one collection in each county each year, all the residents of the District benefit from the program. Additionally, the District provides information to all residents throughout the year on other recycling opportunities.

Amount and Type of Material Recycled: In 2008, the District collected 13 tons of appliances and scrap metal at the three collections. Appliances include refrigerators, freezers, microwaves, stoves, washers, dryers and other metal appliances. Residents also bring hot water tanks, fence post and most other scrap metal.

Strengths of the program:

! Low cost to implement ! High participation! Enables residents to recycle appliances with freon at no cost! Provides residents with information about scrap metal

recycling facilities

Weaknesses of the program:! Once-a-year collection! Some residents are not able to take scrap metal to scrap metal recycling facilities! Some areas do not have scrap metal recycling facilities

C) Electronics RecyclingThe District has been holding annual electronics collections since 2000; these events are combined with the Appliance and Scrap Metal Collections described above. Materials collected include televisions, VCRs, computers, and other assorted electronic items. With the ever-increasing volume of electronics generated and with the current trend of rapid electronics replacement, the District has been actively promoting electronics recycling to residents. The major disadvantage with these collection programs is they are a once-per-year event. Additionally, the District charges residents for televisions that are brought to the collection sites. While there are full-time outlets for certain electronics recycling (e.g., cell phones and computers), some outlets charge for recycling services, so many residents will hold on to their outdated electronics and bring these items to the District's collection events. There are residents, however, that do not want to store electronics for more than a few months and are willing to pay for electronics recycling. With the DTV conversion, the District expects to receive a significant number of televisions during the next few years.

These items were originally transported to the UNICOR facility at the Federal Prison in Elkton, Ohio. The District began contracting with other electronics recyclers to process materials collected during these one-day events. All contractors must certify to the District that the electronics are recycled.



In addition to the collection events, the District also provides information regarding local and national outlets that accept electronics for recycling. Unfortunately, there are very few local recycling facilities or businesses that will accept electronics for recycling. Several national businesses, such as Dell and Apple Computer will accept computers and other electronics for recycling, but often there is a charge for such services. The District electronics recycling locations are on informational brochures and on the District’s website.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: The District has implemented this program since its inception and will continue to do so.

Service Area which Benefits: Because the District holds one collection in each county each year, all the residents of the District benefit from the program. The residents of the District also benefit from the dissemination of information regarding the full-time outlets that accept outdated electronic items.

Amount and Type of Material Recycled: In 2008, the District collected 24 tons of electronics at the three collections. The materials collected in the program include, computers, monitors, televisions, fax machines, computer peripherals and other electronic equipment. In addition to the District's collection, one of the local electronics recycling companies reported that they collected 20 tons of electronics from District residents, business and schools.

Strengths of the program: ! Moderate cost to implement ! High participation! Enables residents to recycle electronics! Provides information about electronics recycling residents

Weaknesses of the program:! Once-a-year collection! The costs for television recycling is increasing! Residents must pay for television recycling! Limited number of full-time electronics recycling facilities

in the area

D) Scrap Tire RecyclingThe District also conducts annual scrap tire collection days for all residents, with one event in each county each year. The dates for this program coincide with the Appliance and Scrap Metal Recycling Program. The District contracts with a licensed scrap tire hauler, who does most of the required work. The licensed tire transporter is required to take all tires collected at the events to a scrap tire recovery facility.

As with the Appliance and Scrap Metal Recycling Program and Electronics Recycling Program, participation is exceptionally high in the Scrap Tire Recycling program. However, unlike the appliance program, this program is not free to the residents. To help offset the cost of this program, the District charges a minimal fee for tires that is brought to the collection event. However, this fee is usually less than the fees charged by tire shops or tire monofills. The District does not accept tires from any commercial businesses.



Municipal scrap tire program: The District realized that municipalities and townships have problems with scrap tires being illegally dumped along roadways within their jurisdiction. With the close proximity of several licensed scrap tire facilities to the District, the District decided to implement a program that would help these governmental entities curtail the growing problem of scrap tires along their roadways. For one month each year, usually during the spring, the District allows municipalities, townships and other governmental agencies, such as parks, to collect tires along the roadways and deliver them to a licensed scrap tire facility. The Ohio Administrative Code authorizes governmental entities to haul an unlimited number of tires without obtaining a scrap tire transportation license for the purpose of cleaning up scrap tires on public areas within their jurisdiction. Each governmental entity is responsible for all costs related to collecting and transporting these scrap tires to the facility, including employee time, fuel and truck expenses. In turn, the District pays the processing fee for these tires, up to a limit set by the District’s Board of Directors. This program has been very cost effective for the District and the municipalities and townships have succeeded in removing a significant amount of tires from area roadways.

The District also provides information about licensed scrap tire recovery facilities to residents and businesses alike. Oftentimes, residents will contact the District inquiring about locations where they can take tires. The District provides them with contact information for various local scrap tire recovery facilities. Residents using scrap tire recovery facilities are typically charged to deliver tires to the facility. However, residents also pay to bring tires to the District's scrap tire collections, so there is no additional financial burden for residents to use scrap tire recovery facilities throughout the year. This information is also on the District’s website.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: The District has implemented all the aspects of this program since its inception and will continue to do so during the planning period. Each municipality and township that wishes to participate in the municipal and township program is responsible for collecting and transporting the tires from their roadways and the District is responsible for paying the processing costs.

Service Area, which Benefits: Because the District holds one collection in each county each year, all the residents of the District benefit from the program. Additionally, all residents and businesses have access to the scrap tire recovery facility information provided by the District. Furthermore, all the townships and municipalities in the District are eligible to participate in the political subdivision scrap tire program. All townships and municipalities are allowed to participate in the municipal collection program and therefore the entire District benefits from that part of the program.

Amount and Type of Material Recycled: In 2008, the District collected 3,593 tires at the three collections. A total of 6,450 tires were collected by the townships and municipalities. The total tonnage collected during both these programs amounts to 144 tons. The District allows residents to bring passenger car, light truck, and tractor tires. Other scrap tire recovery facilities reported to Ohio EPA that an additional 1,473 tons of tires from the District were recycled in 2008; most of these tires came from tire businesses throughout the District.



Strengths of the program: ! Moderate cost to implement ! Many residents participate! Enables residents to recycle tires! Allows townships and municipalities to transport tires to

scrap tire recovery facilities, with the District paying for processing

Weaknesses of the program:! Once-a-year collection! Residents must pay for tires! District-sponsored township and municipal collection is

once-a-year

E) Composting, “Don’t Bag It”, Leaf Collection and Christmas Tree Recycling Through informal surveys, it has been determined that at least 11 municipalities collect leaves from their residents. In 2008, these 11 municipalities collected approximately 1,997 tons of dry leaves. 14,500 households; roughly 25 percent of all the households in the District have leaf collection service. The leaves are either being composted at licensed compost facilities or being used for land application. There may be additional municipalities that offer leaf collection to their residents; however, the District does not have data about the amount of material collected by other municipalities.

The District, as well as each county extension office, has been educating the public sector about composting, “Don't bag it,” yard waste minimization and the yard waste ban, particularly through presentations to local civic groups and displays at local fairs. In addition, information is available at the District office, on the District's website, as well as at libraries, extension offices and other public locations. The District also uses press releases to disseminate information to District residents and businesses. Public education is available to the entire population of the District. The District contacted the licensed compost facilities in the District. Based on the data received, District residents and businesses delivered 4,960 tons of yard waste, including brush, to the three licensed compost facilities within the District.

The District has urged all residents who do not have leaf pickup to use backyard composting and “Don’t Bag It” as the preferred method of disposal in unincorporated areas.

The District has been sponsoring a Christmas Tree Recycling Program since 1994. Every year, hundreds of Christmas trees are dropped off at specific drop-off sites throughout the District. The District coordinates this Program with the help of county highway departments that supply the manpower and chippers to mulch the trees. Townships and municipalities are responsible for the transportation of the trees to one main location within each county where the trees are mulched. The tree mulch is given away to the public on a first come first serve basis.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: The District has implemented Christmas tree recycling since 1993. The District also implements the “Don't bag it” program and provided home composting information, and the educational



outreach portion of this program. Leaf collection programs are implemented by individual municipalities and not every municipality in the District has a leaf collection program. Many communities offer the service as benefit to their residents. Private compost facilities will be operated by outside individuals.

Service Area which Benefits: Due to the drop-off locations for the Christmas tree recycling program, this part of the program benefits all the residents of the District. The District is primarily rural and residents living in rural areas may choose to manage their trees on their own property. The “don't bag it” and home composting portion of the program also benefits the entire District, because the District actively promotes these two items using the District's website and at county fairs and festivals. Additionally, the local Extension offices also promote these two subjects. The service area for the leaf collection portion of the program is only those municipalities that offer leaf collection service to their residents.

Amount and Type of Material Recycled: In 2008, a total of 1,997 tons of leaves were collected by 11 municipalities and composted/land applied and there were approximately two tons of Christmas trees recycled in 2008. An additional 4,960 tons of yard waste, which includes brush, was delivered to the three licensed compost facilities in the District. Two tons of Christmas trees were recycled in 2008. The amount of yard waste that is composted by residents as a result of the educational portion of this program is difficult to quantify, and, as a result, the District does not have any yard waste data for this segment of the population.

Strengths of the program: ! Low cost to implement ! Many residents can manage these materials on their own

property! Does not require a lot of additional equipment! Simple changes in habits can significantly reduce waste, e.g.,

“Don't bag it”

Weaknesses of the program:! Not every municipality offers leaf collection ! D ifficulty measuring yard waste recycling amounts by rural

residents! There are only a few licensed compost facilities throughout

the District

F) Source Reduction and Recycling AwarenessThe District has contracted with an environmental educator to promote recycling, source reduction and pre-cycling through presentations at area schools, civic and community groups and businesses. The topics of the presentations vary from one presentation to the next, depending on the audience. The goal is to educate participants, whether they are students, adults or business leaders, about the financial and environmental benefits of waste reduction. The District has always strived to encourage participants to be conscientious about their waste and understand the impact they have on the waste stream. Flyers and brochures are distributed among participants and demonstrations are made on how to reduce waste through purchasing merchandise with less packaging and buying in



volume. Additionally, the education program provides information about the District’s Recycling programs, such as dates, times and locations of District programs, preparing recyclables properly, materials accepted at the drop-off sites, etc.

The District maintains a list of locations where residents can recycle a large variety of materials, including paper, cans, rechargeable batteries, pallets, cardboard, electronics, oil and batteries. This information is available as a brochure and on the District's website.

The District also utilizes local newspapers and Chambers of Commerce newsletters for press releases and advertising that promotes and encourages waste reduction and recycling. These media outlets are a low-cost way to spread the message to a large number of people, since circulation is widespread. The District feels that promoting waste prevention through advertising is the most beneficial method. The District is concerned that if brochures and flyers are distributed to the public, they may simply be ignored and disposed of in the trash. This would contradict the primary goal of reducing the amount of waste that is landfilled. Conversely, placing advertisements in newspapers does not generate additional waste, because the newspaper will be produced regardless of whether the District runs an ad. Additionally, people already buy the newspaper for the news; the ad is secondary to the paper. When residents are finished with the paper, the District hopes they recycle not only the newspaper they were reading, but also other materials as well.

The District maintains a website that lists information about the District’s Recycling programs, such as dates, times and locations of District programs, preparing recyclables properly, materials accepted at the drop-off sites, etc. The website also lists locations where residents can recycle a large variety of materials, including cardboard scrap metal, rechargeable batteries, pallets, cardboard, electronics, oil and batteries. Information about precycling and business recycling is posted on the website.

In 2008, the District's educator conducted 194 presentations and promoted recycling and waste reduction to over 4,500 people throughout the District. The main audience for these programs was school-aged children and community service groups. Due to grant funding, the District was able to run 136 ads in local newspapers focusing on the District’s drop-off program, as well as encouraging residents and businesses to be proactive about waste reduction. The District provided information about drop-off recycling and other recycling opportunities on the District’s website and at county fairs and festivals. There were 1,270 hits in the website in 2008 and the District had booths at four fairs and festivals.

As part of the education program, the District contacted the larger commercial businesses that generate cardboard, such as grocery stores and department stores. These businesses provided the District with information regarding the amount of cardboard they recycled in 2008. The survey results show that these businesses recycle the majority of their cardboard. It was also observed that very few of the smaller stores (like auto parts stores and similar commercial establishments) recycle cardboard because of the minimal volume generated.



In the 2002 Plan, the District established a “contingent program” that would allow for a “Buy Recycled” program to be implemented, provided funding from the Harrison County Landfill was available. The Harrison County Landfill was not (and is not) in operation and therefore this program was not implemented in 2008.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: The District implements this program in all three counties.

Service Area which Benefits: The educator can effectively cover all three counties in the District. The primary goal of the program is to educate residents, businesses and school-age children.

Strengths of the program: ! Low cost to implement ! Direct interaction with residents – able to answer questions! Does not require a lot of additional equipment! Schools and civic groups continually ask for repeated

presentations; which reinforces the message

Weaknesses of the program:! There are still sectors that have not expressed an interest in

programming! Hard to measure the impact of the program on recycling and

waste reduction

G) Commercial RecyclingThe District conducted a survey for commercial entities such as department stores and grocery stores to obtain information about their recycling activities. The survey results show that these businesses recycle the majority of their cardboard. It was also observed that very few of the smaller stores (like auto parts stores and similar commercial establishments) recycle cardboard because of the minimal volume generated by them. Cardboard makes up a moderate percentage of the total waste generated, the District is expecting that many businesses have an incentive to recycle this valuable material. Many of these businesses also reuse or recycle pallets. Grocers, for example, traditionally send pallets back to the distribution warehouse and are charged if they do not return their pallets.

The District's Source Reduction and Recycling Awareness program also provides for educational activities for businesses. The District staff can meet with businesses to show them the benefits of recycling in general and specifically cardboard recycling (due to its abundance in the commercial waste stream and its recyclability). Waste prevention, reduction and recycling brochures are distributed to businesses, when requested, showing them how to set up a profitable recycling program. If necessary, follow-up phone calls will be made to help keep the businesses “on track”. This approach allows businesses to set up a recycling program that meets their needs.

In addition to cardboard, various other materials are recycled by commercial businesses. These materials include copper, ferrous metals, paper, and



aluminum. Because each recycling program varies from business to business, details will not be described here. However, the common thread these programs share is the economic impact that recycling has on their business. The cost saved on disposal provides an incentive to establish and maintain a recycling program.

Each individual business will be responsible for implementing its own recycling program. The District will assist businesses as part of the Source Reduction and Recycling Awareness program described above. The District maintains a list of locations where businesses can recycle a large variety of materials, from the traditional items such as paper and cardboard, to pallets, electronics and oil and batteries. This information is available as a brochure and on the District's website and will be made available to businesses as requested.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: Each commercial business is responsible for implementing their own waste reduction program.

Service Area, which Benefits: Businesses throughout the District benefit from establishing recycling and waste reduction programs. Although the District does not implement this program, the entire District benefits from commercial recycling.

Amount and Type of Material Recycled: In 2008, the District contacted the larger potential generators of cardboard; a total of 2,511 tons of cardboard was recycled by these businesses. The District is aware that commercial businesses are recycling other materials, and, although a survey was conducted, an insufficient amount of data was collected.

Strengths of the program: ! No implementation cost to the District ! Allows each business the flexibility to establish their own

program! Competition for high-value materials, such as cardboard,

allows businesses to get paid for these materials! Grocers and large retail stores generate a significant amount

of cardboard, which is a highly recyclable commodity

Weaknesses of the program:! There are limited companies offering recycling services in

the more rural areas of the District! Some recyclers charge for recycling services making it an

impediment to commercial recycling! Market volatility causes recyclers to change the type and

frequency of service! High-volume cardboard recycling requires purchasing

equipment, such as balers

H) Curbside RecyclingThree curbside recycling programs existed in the reference year: a non-subscription program in Carrollton (Carroll County), a non-subscription curbside program in Columbiana County and a subscription program in Salem (Columbiana County).



(1) Volume Based Garbage Collection with Curbside Recycling – Carrollton VillageCurbside recycling collection increases participation in recycling programs by making it more convenient for residents to recycle. Participation in a drop-off program can vary between 10 to 25 percent, whereas curbside recycling program can get between 30 to 80 percent of the households separating their recyclables for pickup. Curbside collection can also appeal to certain commercial entities that generate a minimal quantity of recyclable materials. The major disadvantage to curbside collection is the cost. For each household on a monthly basis the cost could be anywhere from $1.00 in a densely settled larger urban area to $2.50 in a rural area. Whether the curbside pick up is provided once every week, bi-weekly or monthly basis could also be a significant cost factor.

The Village of Carrollton in Carroll County established a volume-based garbage program for its residents that includes the curbside collection of recyclable materials. This program features a once-per-week curbside collection of recyclable materials that include cardboard, paper, magazines, phone books, glass, cans and plastics. Because residents are paying for the amount of garbage they dispose, this program provides a strong incentive to recycle.

This curbside program works in the following way: residents pay a monthly minimal base garbage fee and then pay “by the bag” for each bag of garbage they generate. The base fee covers the cost of operating the recycling program, plus all the other services that are included: free pickup of Christmas trees, bulky items, appliances and other scrap metal. The per-bag cost covers the disposal. For commercial and industrial businesses, the contract allows for two sets of prices: per pickup disposal and per pickup recycling. These contracts stipulate that containers provided for recycling have a per-pickup cost less than that of a comparable garbage container.

For example, if a business had to pay $10.00 per pickup for a four cubic yard garbage container but only paid $8.00 per pickup for a four cubic yard recycling container, there would be a financial incentive to recycle. Cardboard generation is a large part of many business’ waste generation. Therefore, if a business generates eight cubic yards of waste per week and half of that is cardboard, without recycling, the business would be paying to throw all that material away (using the value of $8.00 per four cubic yard pickup above, the business would be paying $20.00). However, if the business is in a municipality that has established one of these programs, it would be cheaper for the business to recycle that four cubic yards of cardboard than to throw it in with the garbage ($10.00 for disposal, $8.00 for recycling = $18.00).

Based on historical trends, this program collects an average of 27 tons of recyclables (residential and commercial/industrial) per month.



Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: Carrollton Village. The District has assisted the Village by developing bid specifications and educating residents about the benefits of this program.

Service Area, which Benefits: Carrollton Village

Amount and Type of Material Recycled: In 2008, Carrollton residents recycled 162 tons of recyclable materials, which include newspaper, office paper, magazines, steel and aluminum cans, green, brown and clear, glass and HDPE and PET plastic bottles. Commercial businesses in the Village recycled 131 tons of cardboard in 2008.

Strengths of the program: ! No implementation cost to the District ! Residents have the convenience of weekly

curbside recycling at no additional cost! Residents pay for the amount of garbage

they throw out, which encourages recycling! Competition for the contract keeps the prices

low! All businesses have the advantage of being

able to recycle materials at a lower cost than disposal

! Low volume commercial customers can participate in the residential “bag” program

Weaknesses of the program:! Residents that generate a significant amount

of refuse pay a higher price! Fewer types of plastics are collected in the

curbside program compared to the plastics that are collected at the District's drop-off sites

! Some commercial locations within the village do not have room for a refuse dumpster and a recycling container

(2) Non-subscription Curbside Recycling – Lewis Refuse and HaulingCurbside recycling collection increases participation in recycling programs by making it more convenient for residents to recycle. Participation in a drop-off program can vary between 10 to 25 percent, whereas curbside recycling program can achieve 30 to 80 percent of the households separating their recyclables for pickup. Curbside collection can also appeal to certain commercial entities that generate a minimal quantity of recyclable materials. The major disadvantage to curbside collection is the cost. For each household on a monthly basis the cost could be anywhere from $1.00 in a densely settled larger urban area to $2.50 in a rural area. Whether the curbside pick up is provided once every week, bi-weekly or monthly basis could also be a significant cost factor.



Lewis Refuse and Hauling has instituted a non-subscription curbside recycling program for its 5,000 residential customers. Lewis Refuse believes that recycling is a cost-effective method of reducing solid waste, which helps keep their disposal costs low.

This curbside program works in the following way: Lewis Refuse customers leave their recycling out on the same day as their trash. Lewis will collect their recycling and take it to their processing facility for further sorting. This makes the program convenient for residents.

Based on historical trends, this program collects an average of 3.5 tons of residential recyclables per month.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: Lewis Refuse. Program Benefits: Villages and townships in Columbiana County that are serviced by Lewis Refuse improves recycling participation without significant cost.

Amount and Type of Material Recycled: In 2008, Lewis Refuse's residential customers recycled 43 tons of recyclable materials, which include newspaper, office paper, magazines, steel and aluminum cans, green, brown and clear, glass and HDPE and PET plastic bottles.


curbside recycling at no additional cost

Weaknesses of the program:! Residents have to remember to set out their

recyclables in separate bags every week! Lewis Refuse has to remind customers about

the program on a regular basis! Actual program participation varies from

year to year

(3) Subscription CurbsideSalem has a subscription curbside program. A Salem City ordinance requires haulers to offer curbside pickup to its residential customers. The haulers do not openly promote curbside recycling and there is very little participation in the program as the services required are not mandatory and residents have to pay their haulers extra to get recycling services. Actual collection data is not available. Materials collected by this service include newspaper, office paper, magazines, steel cans, aluminum cans, and plastic. This is a once-per-week collection.



Republic Services (BFI) is expected to continue to implement this service throughout the planning period. Salem residents will be responsible for signing up with Republic Services and subscribing to this program. The disadvantage to subscription programs is that residents must pay for the service, which creates less incentive to participate. Although curbside recycling is more convenient, residents generally do not want to pay for an additional service.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: Salem and the individual haulers that operate within the City. The City ordinance has been in effect since 1993 and the Council has never expressed any indication that they intend to change it.

Service Area, which Benefits: Salem

Amount and Type of Material Recycled: The District does not have actual data from the individual haulers; the District is unsure of exactly how much material was collected in 2008. Because this is a subscription service, there are very few residents customers that participate.

Strengths of the program: ! No implementation cost to the District ! Residents have the convenience of curbside recycling

Weaknesses of the program: ! Residents must pay for the additional service

(4) Volume-Based Refuse Collection with Curbside RecyclingThe District has encouraged municipalities to bid out garbage collection in their political boundaries and require collection of recyclables as part of the contract. The District has conveyed this reduced-cost, increased-recycling concept to the municipalities in hopes that they seek combined contracts for collection of garbage and recyclables. The District encourages municipalities throughout the District to increase recycling; however, the District has not had much success with municipal refuse franchises throughout the District. There was a municipality in the District, Wellsville, that previously had an exclusive franchise for refuse collection and replaced that approach with the issuance of a minimal number of hauler licenses for haulers operating within its boundaries.

The District has proposed that materials accepted by any curbside programs should include, at a minimum, newspaper, PET and HDPE plastics, glass, aluminum cans, and bi-metal cans. All curbside programs implemented by municipalities should be non-subscription programs with a weekly collection of recyclables. Offering weekly collection of recyclables eliminates the issue of residents having to remember when they set out recyclables; they always set out recycling at the same time as they set out their trash.



Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: The District will implement this program for each year of the planning period. There is no guarantee that any municipality will choose to begin franchising refuse collection within their boundaries, nor that they will include volume-based refuse collection or curbside recycling.

Service Area, which Benefits: Volume-based collection with curbside recycling benefits the residents of all the municipalities in the District.

Amount and Type of Material Recycled: There are no other volume-based refuse collection or curbside recycling programs in the District, so there is no recycling data.


curbside recycling at no additional cost! Residents pay for the amount of garbage they

generate, which encourages recycling! Competition for the contract keeps the prices

low! Municipalities can collect a franchise fee

Weaknesses of the program:! Residents that generate a significant amount of

refuse pay a higher price! Difficult to overcome hurdles associated with

single-hauler collection

I) Management of Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)

Throughout the year, the District promotes the safe and efficient management of hazardous waste through the Recycling Awareness program and through brochures and the District's website. Information contained in the brochures and on the website includes safe alternatives to typical household hazardous products, locations where oil and lead-acid batteries can be recycled and how to properly dispose of latex paint.

For the past few years, the District contracts with hazardous waste companies to conduct one day HHW collections throughout the District. The District collects most of the hazardous materials generated by residents at these collection events, with the exception of lead-acid batteries, latex paint and used oil. Latex paint is not classified as a hazardous material, and once solidified, it can be safely placed into the trash. There are numerous full-time outlets throughout the District for lead-acid batteries and used oil and the District promotes these sites to residents throughout the year. Due to the cost of these programs, the District's Board of Directors decided to rotate the collection events so that each county would have an event every three years.

In 1999, WTI worked to start a program called CitySweep. CitySweep is an annual event, often held around Earth Day, and is a collaborative effort between



WTI, East Liverpool and several other partners to keep the City clean. Each partner offers a particular service, related to the environment, to the residents of the City, at no cost to the City. For their part of this program, WTI offers a HHW collection to the residents of East Liverpool. This annual collection is only open to the residents of the City. The materials that are collected at this annual event include the traditional hazardous materials and also include electronics.

In 2007, WTI offered an HHW collection to the residents of Columbiana County, at their own expense, as part of a resolution to a US EPA violation. During this collection, WTI not only accepted the typical HHW materials, they also accepted, computers and tires. The District worked with WTI to continue this program in 2008. As was the case in 2007, they collected HHW materials at no cost to the County or the District; WTI accepted traditional hazardous materials, but did not accept tires and electronics (they directed residents to District programs that collect these materials). East Liverpool City Hospital partnered with WTI during these events and collected mercury thermometers. For every mercury thermometer that was collected, ELCH gave residents one digital thermometer.

Used Oil: In an effort to encourage do-it-yourself oil changers to recycle used oil, the District provides informational brochures containing used motor oil collection sites to all residents. This information will be available at the District office, libraries, government buildings, auto parts stores and on the District's website. The District does not have information as to the total tonnage of oil recycled.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: The District is responsible for implementing two parts of the HHW program: information dissemination and HHW collection for Carroll and Harrison counties. WTI is responsible for implementing the CitySweep and the annual collection for Columbiana County residents.

Service Area which Benefits: Carroll, Columbiana and Harrison Counties. CitySweep covers East Liverpool area, while the WTI Columbiana County Collection is open to all residents of the County. The annual District collection is open all residents of the District. The District provides HHW handling information to all residents of the District throughout the year.

Amount and Type of Material Recycled: In 2008, six tons of HHW were collected at the CitySweep, six tons of HHW were collected at the Columbiana County Collection and one tone of HHW was collected at the District's event. Materials that are accepted at all these collections include paint and paint-related products, pesticides, automotive fluids, household cleaners, fluorescent lamps, household and rechargeable batteries and solvents.

Strengths of the program: ! Keeps hazardous materials out the landfill! Encourages residents to reduce the amount of

hazardous materials in their homes ! Provides residents with information regarding

outlets for recycling less-hazardous materials throughout the year



Weaknesses of the program:! The District's collections of offered on a rotating

basis; some residents may not choose to drive to the adjoining county

(1) Lead-Acid Battery RecyclingThe District's primary program for lead-acid battery recycling is to promote the locations that accept such batteries for recycling; this is done through brochures and the District's website.

The majority of auto parts stores have a trade-in procedure, whereby individuals purchasing a new battery are charged a core charge; the core charge is refunded when the residents bring in their old battery. Due to the core charge policy, almost all lead-acid batteries in the District are recycled.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: The District is responsible for implementing the informational component of the program.

Service Area which Benefits: Carroll, Columbiana and Harrison Counties. This information is available at several locations throughout the District and on the District's website. Additionally, every new lead-acid battery that is sold includes a “core charge”. Residents have a financial incentive to return old lead-acid batteries to receive a refund on their core charge

Amount and Type of Material Recycled: 451 tons of lead-acid batteries were recycled in 2008. The District contacted auto parts stores that sell lead-acid batteries and also contacted other entities that accept lead-acid batteries for recycling to determine the amount of batteries that were recycled.

Strengths of the program: ! Low cost to provide recycling

information! Core charges provide a financial

incentive for recycling ! Locations throughout the District for

recycling lead-acid batteries! Provides residents with information

regarding outlets for recycling lead acid batteries throughout the year

Weaknesses of the program:! None



J) Buy-back, Privately Owned and Other Recycling OpportunitiesThere are several buy-back and private recycling companies that are listed in Table III-5. Although these businesses are privately owned, the District promotes them in an effort to increase recycling. Some of these facilities provide a financial incentive to recycle; encouraging residents who benefit in some way, which encourages additional recycling. Additionally, many of the companies listed in Table III-5 are used by commercial and industrial businesses. The District, as part of its Recycling Awareness program, promotes the District-sponsored programs as well as these types of private recycling businesses as a means to increase recycling in both the residential/commercial and industrial sectors. The District includes information about buy-back programs in brochures and on the District's website.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: This is not a District program. The buy-back and private businesses will be identified by the District as long as they in operation.

Service Area, which Benefits: Carroll, Columbiana and Harrison Counties.

Amount and Type of Material Recycled: The District sent out surveys to all known recycling and buy-back businesses asking for 2008 recycling data. The District did not receive data from every known recycling facility; additionally, the District received data from several scrap yards in the region. Ohio EPA has indicated that some scrap yard data may not be entirely accurate, especially since District's are not allowed to receive credit for cars or construction and demolition debris. Both of these materials are typically collected at scrap yards. The District used the data provided by all these facilities and followed up with some of these facilities to attempt to “iron out” the non-acceptable materials to determine the correct amount of “creditable” materials; this data is shown in Table III-5. Based on surveys received from recycling facilities and other recycling opportunities, a total of 1,078 tons of materials was collected through these programs

Strengths of the program: ! Provides residents and businesses the opportunity to

recycle ! Financial incentive from the buy-back outlets increase

recycling

Weaknesses of the program:! Some recycling opportunities only accept certain

materials or required that they are prepared (e.g., baled)

Reference Year Residential/Commercial Waste Reduction

Table IV-6 includes information regarding Residential and Commercial source reduction and recycling in 2008. Some of these values will differ from the District’s 2008 Annual District Report because newer data is available. The District chose not include data provided by scrap yards. Due to potential discrepancies that arose form some of the recycling facility surveys (especially scrap yards), the District is



not comfortable with the data included in those surveys and will not include any of that data in the Table below.

Table IV-6 Reference Year Residential/Commercial Waste Reduction

Type of Waste TPYRecycled

glass 438plastics 298

ferrous, including appliances 150non-ferrous 85

paper 2,808cardboard 2,569electronics 27yard waste 6,959

tires 1,617lead-acid batteries 451Grand total (tons) 15,402

2. Industrial Sector

Information on reference year source reduction and recycling activities was obtained through industrial solid waste surveys. Existing source reduction programs as well as future programs were addressed in the surveys.

The District has offered waste prevention services to local businesses; however, it has been the experience of the District that many businesses do not have any incentive to set up waste prevention programs. The current cost of disposal is low compared to some of the costs that are incurred with recycling. Additionally, recycling markets have fluctuated over the past few years, causing recycling haulers to vary the price, further compounding the situation.

Table IV-7 shows current industrial recycling and source reduction information. Tabulated values include only that information obtained directly from the industrial solid waste survey. Therefore, the total tonnage reduced for each SIC category includes only those companies that have a recycling/source reduction program in place.

A) Industrial RecyclingMany businesses have established recycling programs. Because their specifics vary widely from one business to another, the details will not be presented. However, the common thread of the programs is the economic impact recycling has on their business. The cost saved on disposal alone can be the driving force behind the success of these programs. Materials collected include ferrous metals, cardboard, paper and sawdust. The District will continue to work with industrial businesses to promote waste reduction and recycling as a means to save money. The District will offer advice to industries, including identifying businesses that collect and process various materials.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: This is not a District program. Each industry is responsible for implementing and maintaining its own program.




Amount and Type of Material Recycled: The District sent out surveys to all industrial businesses asking for 2008 recycling data. The District did not receive data from every industry, although the District made a concerted effort to obtain recycling and waste reduction information from the largest industrial businesses in the District.

The District also looked at recycling data obtained from surveys representing 2002 and 2006 industrial waste reduction. If an industry reported waste reduction in 2002 or 2006, but did not respond to a 2009 survey, the District verified that the industry was in existence in 2008. If the business was in existence in 2008, the District added the quantity and type of material to the 2008 data set. If an industry reported waste reduction amounts but did not report waste generation or disposal amounts in an earlier survey, the District used the generation data from a 1999 survey to determine the waste generation for that industry. In summary, the District is utilizing the most recent recycling and waste generation data available; in some cases, waste reduction data will be more recent than generation data. The District believes that this data is accurate because the industrial base in the District, although small, is stable.

Based on this data, a total of 30,265 tons of material was recycled by industries throughout the District; due to the limited amount of survey data received, this value understated. Industrial waste reduction is most likely higher, and possibly significantly higher, than what was reported.

Strengths of the program: ! Provides businesses the opportunity to recycle process

waste and keep their disposal costs down! Financial incentives from the recycling outlets increase

recycling! Each businesses can tailor their program to meet their

needs

Weaknesses of the program:! Some recycling opportunities only accept certain

materials or required that they are prepared (e.g., baled), which is a disadvantage to low volume generators

! There is limited infrastructure for recycling in some rural areas of the District

B) Source ReductionAlthough source reduction by industries is not widespread throughout the District, several businesses have established such programs. Because the specifics of each program vary widely from business to business, the details of will not be presented here. Economic impact is still the common thread of these programs. However, in the case of source reduction the driving force is not the cost saved on disposal, but rather the costs avoided in not generating waste at all. The costs reduced or avoided occur from reduced labor, disposal, transportation and packaging.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: This is not a District program. Each industry is responsible for implementing and maintaining their own program.




Amount and Type of Material Recycled: The District does not have any source reduction data for 2008.

Strengths of the program: ! Provides businesses the ability to reduce not only disposal

costs, but also to reduce unnecessary waste and allow business to be more efficient

! Reduces the cost of acquiring and handling materials ! Each businesses can tailor their program to meet their needs

Weaknesses of the program:! Difficult to measure! Source reduction is often a one-time event; once material is

eliminated from the waste stream, those cost savings can not be continually reduced

C ) Source Reduction and Recycling Awareness The District has continually worked with businesses to establish or expand waste reduction and recycling programs at their request. As part of this program, the District provides businesses with information and material regarding the financial benefits associated with waste reduction, such as reduced disposal costs and greater plant efficiency. The District has developed a brochure that identifies simple steps that businesses can do to reduce waste. Most of this information is readily available on the District's website. The District's website also contains extensive information for industrial businesses, such as a resource guide and a list of recycling facilities that can process the majority of waste streams that are generated by industrial businesses. The website includes links to several Ohio EPA and US EPA programs such as WasteWise.

The District also occasionally develops stories and/or identifies various recycling facilities in local chamber of commerce newsletters; this is a very cost effective way to deliver the recycling message at a low cost to the District. The District also offers to meet with business leaders to help them through the process of establishing waste reduction programs, do plant walk-throughs of even assist them in conducting a detailed waste audit. In 2008, no waste audits were requested by District industries.

The District does not pressure businesses to implement recycling activities to maintain a good relationship. It has been the experience of the District that many businesses do not respond well to the “cold call” approach of sending out recycling information and then following up either by phone or in person. The District feels that it is not only a more efficient and cost effective use of the District's time to broadcast a broad message to District industries, it is also a more environmentally-friendly approach. It is counter productive to send out information to businesses, only to have them throw the material in the trash, unread.

As part of the education program, the District surveyed industrial businesses to gather 2008 waste reduction and recycling data. Using the Harris Ohio Industrial Directory and



local chamber of commerce data, the District contacted every known industrial business in throughout the three-county area. The District was able to gather usable data from approximately 25 percent of the industries throughout the District. The District used this data to determine which businesses have established recycling programs.

Entity Responsible for Maintaining the Program: The District implements and maintains this program.


Amount and Type of Material Recycled: The amount of material recycled and reduced as a result of this program is identified in the Industrial Recycling program above.

Strengths of the program: ! Provides businesses with information and documentation to help them establish waste reduction programs! Low cost to implement ! Shows them the cost savings that can be achieved with waste reduction and prevention

Weaknesses of the program:! Not every businesses wants to participate! It is difficult to “get in the door”

Table IV-7 Reference Year Industrial Waste Reduction

Type of Waste Source Reduced TPY Type of Waste Recycled TPYcardboard 2,146.53

non ferrous 57.86ferrous 16,137.54

paper 1,368.64wood/pallets 1,543.06

plastics 2,410.8glass 9.1

stone/clay/sand 6,591Sub total 0 sub total 30,264.53

Grand Total (tons) 30,264.53

Source: Industrial Solid Waste Survey - conducted by the District, March - September 2009. Some of these values differ from the District’s 2008 Annual District Report (ADR) because newer and more complete data is available. The ADR is due on June 1 of each year. When the District submitted the 2008 ADR in June 2009, the ADR included all the 2008 data that was submitted to the District prior to June 1, plus data from earlier surveys. The data contained in Table IV-7, while not 100 percent complete, includes updated recycling data received after June 1, 2009 which is not shown in the 2008 ADR.

F. Total Waste Generation: Historical Trends of Disposal Plus Waste Reduction

Table IV-8 lists the total District generation based on disposal plus waste reduction. These values were taken from the District’s currently approved plan, District designation fee reports and Ohio EPA records.



The large increase in generation from 1998 to 1999 is based on an increase in reported recycling activities. This increase may be due to the fact that the District conducted an extensive survey and follow-up program in the preparation of this Plan Update. However, it is important to note that recycling volumes have increased significantly in the five years since the current Plan was implemented.



Table IV-8 Processing Capacity Needs Based on Historical Trends

Management Method Used and Processing Capacity Required in TPY

YearSource

Reduction - Yard Waste YW Land Incineration MSW LandfillingTotal Waste

Recycling Composting Application Composting1989 Unknown unknown unavailable 0 0 unknown unknown1990 Unknown unknown unavailable 0 0 unknown unknown1991 11,362 18,019 unavailable 0 0 72,727 102,1081992 23,111 unknown unavailable 0 0 74,295 97,4061993 40,757 unknown unavailable 0 0 93,750 134,5071994 43,843 unknown 270 0 0 116,510 160,6231995 44,864.7 unknown 270 0 0 124,845 169,979.71996 46,491.7 unknown 270 0 0 102,831 149,592.71997 44,042.5 unknown 270 0 0 98,342 142,654.51998 53,832 unknown 300 0 0 107,953 162,0851999 65,824.7 unknown 400 0 0 120,921 187,145.72000 64,444 unknown 400 0 0 129,140 193,9842001 66,302 unknown 400 0 0 119,889 186,5912002 78,174 unknown 400 0 0 108,720 187,2942003 78,204 unknown 400 0 0 116,697 195,3012004 78,443 unknown 400 0 0 113,964 192,8072005 78,589 unknown 400 0 0 112,982 191,9712006 76,961 unknown 400 0 0 109,612 186,9732007 63,456 unknown 400 0 0 113,355 177,2112008 38,708 4,960 1,999 0 0 110,283 155,950

Disposal values were taken from District designation fee forms and Ohio EPA records (Facility Data Reports and other records). All waste that was delivered to a transfer facility was ultimately taken to a landfill for disposal. Disposal values listed in the table that are derived from District fee records are a sum of landfill receipts and transfer facility receipts. This is due to the fact that fees are only charged at the initial facility (transfer or landfill); waste that is delivered to a transfer facility is not “counted” again when it reaches the landfill, so as to avoid duplicate fees. Recycling values for years 1995 through 1999 were taken from the District's currently approved plan and data through 2008 was obtained from the District’s Annual District Report and Ohio EPA documentation. Yard Waste Land Application includes leaves collected by some municipalities, and the District’s Christmas tree recycling program. Disposal data includes exempt waste.



G. Reconciliation of Waste Generation

There is a discrepancy in the values listed in Table IV-5 (205,807.95 TPY) and Table IV-8 (155,950 TPY based on disposal plus recycling). This discrepancy is partially due to the fact that the District did not receive 100 percent response to recycling facility and industrial surveys. Additionally, the District contacted only known recycling facilities and therefore, there may be additional facilities that received recyclables from the District. As was mentioned in Section III, the District did receive recycling data from scrap yards regarding the amount of material that was received in 2008, however the District chose not to use any of that data due to its potential inaccuracy.

The District has implemented facility designation, which means that all waste collected from within the District must be taken to designated facilities. It is illegal for haulers to take waste to undesignated facilities for disposal. With this in mind, the disposal records from the District's designation reports and data from Ohio EPA will be used to calculate the District’s disposal tonnage. Although open dumping does occur throughout the District, the quantity of materials, when compared to the Ohio EPA disposal tonnages, is minimal.

When Tables IV-5 and IV-8 are compared, there is a difference of 49,858 tons, which represents 32 percent of the 155,950 tons shown in Table IV-8. The District feels that the MSWUS residential/commercial generation is higher than the actual residential/commercial generation based on disposal plus recycling. Even though the District was not able to gather accurate scrap yard recycling data, and therefore reported recycling is less than actual recycling, the District feels that the amount of residential/commercial recycling is actually occurring is less than the 49,858 ton difference between disposal plus recycling and the MSWUS generation. Therefore, the District will use the “known” residential/commercial generation based on disposal plus recycling.

However, the District also feels that the industrial generation shown in Table IV-3 is more accurate than the industrial generation of 13,349 tons disposed (as listed in the Facility Data Report) plus 30,265 tons recycled (for a total of 43,614 tons). A comparison of the known industrial generation from survey respondents (35,158 tons, from Table IV-3) with the disposal plus recycling tonnage of 43,614, the disposal plus recycling data may not be accurate. The discrepancy between the disposal plus recycling generation rate and the data in Table IV-3 is most likely based on the fact that many haulers commingle industrial waste with MSW and therefore industrial waste is reported as MSW at waste disposal facilities. It is unlikely that the total industrial disposal for the District is only 13,349 tons.

Therefore, the District will establish the reference year residential/commercial of 108,391 tons (based on 92,989 tons disposed from Table III-1 and Table III-3 plus 15,402 tons reduced) and an industrial generation of 75,820 (from Table IV-3). The District will use the MSWUS projected percentage change in waste generation to determine the increase or decrease in District waste generation throughout the planning period, as described in Section V. For exempt waste, actual tonnage generated in the District and disposed at Ohio landfills will be used.



Table IV-9 Adjusted Reference Year Waste Generation

Type of Waste Generation Rate(lbs per person/day)

Tons per Year

Residential/Commercial 3.96 108,391Industrial 2.77 75,820Exempt 0.14 3,944

Total 6.87 188,155

H. Waste Composition


The residential/commercial waste composition for the District is derived from the Municipal Solid Wastes in the United States, 2007 Facts and Figures (MSWUS) issued by the US EPA.

Waste categories listed in the MSWUS are shown as a percentage of waste generated. These values are multiplied by the total residential and commercial solid waste generated in 2008 to arrive at the reference year tonnage for any given material. These calculated values have been entered in Table IV-10. It is assumed that the composition of residential and commercial solid waste is uniform throughout the District, because of the rural character of the District.


The methodology used to determine the industrial waste composition is based upon a combination of reported data and information provided in Appendix JJ of the 1996 Format. The survey data was used to calculate the waste composition for all industries that responded. Many industries that responded to the survey did not identify the composition of waste that was disposed. Therefore, oil, general waste and all unspecified waste are grouped as mixed waste in Table IV-11 due to the fact that these categories were not generally reported by survey respondents. The majority of the SIC categories have fewer than 20 industries and the data in Table JJ-3 of the format was used for all non-respondents. In some cases, the per-material generation rates in Table JJ-3 of the plan format were adjusted based on the total generation rates in Table JJ-2 of the Format.

This methodology was used to derive the waste composition data presented in Table IV-11 and Appendix F.

Table IV-10 Estimated Residential/Commercial Waste Stream Compositionfor the District for the Reference Year (2008)



Waste Stream Type Tonsyard waste 13,874

tires 2,059lead-acid batteries 1,084

office paper 2,601newspaper 4,661nonferrous 2,168

ferrous metals 6,720glass 5,745

plastics 13,115cardboard 13,332

mixed paper 7,154food scraps 13,549

unspecified waste 22,329TOTAL 108,391

Assumptions: The composition of District residential and commercial MSW is similar to that shown in the Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 2007 Facts and Figures prepared by US EPA.

Table IV-11 Estimated Industrial Waste Composition for the Reference Year in the District (2008)

Waste Stream Type TonsPaper 2,760.75

Cardboard 2,925.06Glass 63.66

Aluminum 156.84Copper 3.97Ferrous 29,800.97

Non-Ferrous 52.45Plastics 3,338.55Wood 2,360.11

Stone/clay/sand 10,331.15Fabric 26.60

Mixed waste 23,999.40Total 75,819.51

Oil, general waste and unspecified waste are grouped as mixed waste in Table IV-11 due to the fact that these categories were not generally reported by survey respondents.



V. Planning Period Projections and Strategies

A. Planning Period

The District has established a sixteen-year planning period for all projections beginning January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2026.

B. Population Projections

Table V-1 tabulates the projected population for Carroll, Columbiana and Harrison Counties based on Office of Strategic Research (OSR) projections. The population estimates were calculated using straight-line projections.

Adena in Harrison County, Magnolia and Minerva in Carroll County are the only villages where the majority of the population resides outside their respective counties. The populations of these villages that reside within Carroll and Harrison Counties have been removed from the total District population as indicated in Table V-1. Additionally, a small percentage of Washingtonville residents living in Mahoning County were added to the Columbiana County population. Population projections for these villages were calculated using the projected percentage change in population for the county where the majority of population resides. For example, the majority of the population of Adena resides in Jefferson County. The projected percentage change in population for Jefferson County was used for straight-line projection of the population change for the section of Adena in the District.

The District population projections used in the previous Plans shows a population increase. The Plan indicated a District population of 169,241 in 2008, 177,742 in 2015 and 184,125 in 2020. This Plan Update projects a population increase throughout the District. Both plans used OSR and straight-line projections to determine population. OSR projections have changed since the 2002 plan.

Solid Waste Management Plan V-1 October 2010


Table V-1 District Population Projections

County Populations Adjustments to Population Total DistrictYear Carroll Columbiana Harrison Adena Salem Minerva Magnolia Washingtonville Columbaiana Population2008 28,439 107,873 15,387 134 7 1,915 317 334 379 150,0532009 28,667 107,873 15,349 133 7 1,913 317 333 377 150,2432010 28,896 107,873 15,311 132 7 1,911 317 332 375 150,4342011 29,127 107,873 15,273 131 7 1,909 317 331 374 150,6282012 29,360 107,873 15,235 130 7 1,907 317 330 373 150,8242013 29,595 107,873 15,197 129 7 1,905 317 329 372 151,0222014 29,832 107,873 15,159 128 7 1,903 317 328 371 151,2222015 30,071 107,873 15,121 127 7 1,901 317 327 370 151,4242016 30,312 107,873 15,083 126 7 1,899 317 326 369 151,6282017 30,554 107,873 15,045 125 7 1,897 317 325 368 151,8332018 30,798 107,873 15,007 124 7 1,895 317 324 367 152,0402019 31,044 107,873 14,969 123 7 1,893 317 323 366 152,2492020 31,292 107,873 14,932 122 7 1,891 317 322 365 152,4612021 31,542 107,873 14,895 121 7 1,889 317 321 364 152,6752022 31,794 107,873 14,858 120 7 1,887 317 320 363 152,8912023 32,048 107,873 14,821 119 7 1,885 317 319 362 153,1092024 32,304 107,873 14,784 118 7 1,883 317 318 361 153,3292025 32,562 107,873 14,747 117 7 1,881 317 317 360 153,5512026 32,822 107,873 14,710 116 7 1,879 317 316 359 153,775

Sample Calculations and Assumptions: Populations for portions of municipalities located “outside the District” are calculated using straight-line projections of respective counties. Projected population changes were computed using percentage increase or decrease in county populations. For example, the percentage change in population for Carroll County determines change in population of Magnolia and Minerva.

Municipality Population yearx + % Change in County Population yearx to yearx+1 = Municipal Population yearx+1

Total District Population (TDP) = Carroll + Columbiana + Harrison - (Adena + Magnolia + Minerva)+ Washingtonville + ColumbianaExample: TDP in 2025= 35,562 + 107,873 + 14,710 – (116 + 317 + 1879) + 316 + 359 + 7 = 153,775



C. Waste Generation Projections


The District residential and commercial generation rates for the 16-year planning period are based on the reference year generation calculated in Section IV, Table IV-9.

Per capita waste generation has remained almost constant for the past seven years according to the Municipal Solid Wastes in the United States, 2007 Facts and Figures (MSWUS) from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Based on this fact, the District projects that the per capita generation rate for the District will remain constant through the 16-year planning period.

Table V-2 includes the total District population, waste generation rates and total waste generation for the period 2008 to 2026.

Table V-2 District Residential/Commercial Waste Generation (TPY)

District Per Capita Generation Rate TotalYear Population TPY PPPPD Residential/Commercial

Generation2008 150,053 0.72235 3.96 108,3912009 150,243 0.722 3.96 108,4752010 150,434 0.722 3.96 108,6132011 150,628 0.722 3.96 108,7532012 150,824 0.722 3.96 108,8952013 151,022 0.722 3.96 109,0382014 151,222 0.722 3.96 109,1822015 151,424 0.722 3.96 109,3282016 151,628 0.722 3.96 109,4752017 151,833 0.722 3.96 109,6232018 152,040 0.722 3.96 109,7732019 152,249 0.722 3.96 109,9242020 152,461 0.722 3.96 110,0772021 152,675 0.722 3.96 110,2312022 152,891 0.722 3.96 110,3872023 153,109 0.722 3.96 110,5452024 153,329 0.722 3.96 110,7042025 153,551 0.722 3.96 110,8642026 153,775 0.722 3.96 111,026

*Source: Based on Municipal Solid Wastes in the United States, 2007 Facts and Figures, USEPA

Sample Calculation: Generation Rate * Populationyearx = Total Waste Generatedyearx Waste Generation in 2015 = 151,424 people * 0.722 TPYPP = 109,328 tons




The projection of industrial solid waste generation uses the most recent employment projections from the Job Outlook to 2014 for the East Central Ohio Economic Development Region 10 (which includes all three counties in the District); this information was obtained from the Ohio Labor Market Information (OLMI) website. This report identifies employment projection for all job categories in the East Central Region 10. It lists employment by category, such as Goods-producing and Service-providing. Under Goods-producing industries, there are three sub-categories: Natural Resources and Mining, Construction and Manufacturing. The manufacturing sub category in this report is not broken down further into individual SIC codes. SIC codes are currently obsolete and have been replaced by the NAICS (North American Industry Classification System) code and OLMI no longer generates Job Outlook reports with SIC-specific data.

The District has developed annual industrial generation projections based solely on the annual change in total manufacturing employment within East Central Region 10 as outlined in the Job Outlook report. The District will not project annual industrial generation for each individual SIC code; only total annual industrial generation will be projected. The rationale for this is two-fold: there are very few businesses in each SIC category in the District and the District does not have adequate SIC employment projections because OLMI does not provide SIC-specific data due to the fact that SIC codes are obsolete.

The OLMI Job Outlook data projects 10-year manufacturing employment will decrease by 10.2 percent during the period 2004 to 2014; annual changes in employment are assumed equal (1.02 percent). Projections of employment beyond the ten-year data provided by OLMI are assumed a straight-line continuation. In 2008, total industrial employment was 8,464; based on an annual decrease in industrial employment of 1.02 percent, this equates to an annual decrease in industrial employment of 86 people during each year of the planning period.

In 2008, a total of 75,820 tons of industrial waste was generated by 8,464 employees. This equates to 8.96 tons per employee. The District will use this generation rate, in conjunction with the projected industrial employment to calculate the total industrial generation for each year of the planning period. The District assumes that the industrial generation rate will remain constant throughout the planning period.

Table V-3 summarizes the annual waste generation projections for each year of the planning period. Table V-3a summarizes the OBES projected employment change for the planning period.



Table V-3 Projected Industrial Waste Generation

IndustrialYear Generation2008 75,8202009 75,0672010 74,2962011 73,5262012 72,7552013 71,9852014 71,2142015 70,4442016 69,6732017 68,9022018 68,1322019 67,3612020 66,5912021 65,8202022 65,0502023 64,2792024 63,5082025 62,7382026 61,967

Assumptions: The Industrial Waste projections are based on projected changes in industrial employment. This information was obtained from the OLMI website. The anticipated change in number of employees, combined with the current generation rate, is used to arrive at the projected generation.

Sample Calculations:

The projected industrial waste generation for each year is calculated by multiplying the industrial generation rate of 8.96 tons per employee by the projected industrial employment (Table IV-3a).

Example: Industrial waste generation rate = Total industrial generation / Number of industrial employees =

75,820 tons / 8,464 employees = 8.9579 tons/emp/year, rounded to 8.96.

2020 estimated generation (WG2020 ) = WG2020 = Employment2020 * 8.96 tons/emp/year = 66,591 tons



Table V-3a Projected Industrial Employment

IndustrialYear Employment2008 8,4642009 8,3782010 8,2922011 8,2062012 8,1202013 8,0342014 7,9482015 7,8622016 7,7762017 7,6902018 7,6042019 7,5182020 7,4322021 7,3462022 7,2602023 7,1742024 7,0882025 7,0022026 6,916

Assumptions: This information was obtained from OLMI; OLMI projected an annual 1.02 percent decrease in industrial employment. The annual percentage decrease in employment was multiplied by the 2008 employment figures to obtain a yearly employment decrease. This decrease was subtracted from the previous year's employment to arrive at the tabulated values. Industrial employment is expected to decrease by 1.02 percent each year, which equates to 86 employees per year.

Sample Calculations: Annual change in employment = Reference year employment * percentage change in employment = 8,464 employees * 0.0102 = 86 employees per year

Employment (2012) = Employment (2011) – 86 employees= 8,206 – 86 = 8,120 employees

3. Total Waste Generation

The projections for residential/commercial and industrial waste generation are from Tables V-2 and V-3.



Table V-4 Total Waste Generation for the District During the Planning Period (in TPY)

YearResidential/Commercial Industrial Exempt1

Total Waste Generation

Generation Rate*

2008 108,391 75,820 3,944 188,155 6.872009 108,475 75,067 3,944 187,486 6.842010 108,613 74,296 3,944 186,853 6.812011 108,753 73,526 3,944 186,223 6.772012 108,895 72,755 3,944 185,594 6.742013 109,038 71,985 3,944 184,967 6.712014 109,182 71,214 3,944 184,340 6.682015 109,328 70,444 3,944 183,716 6.652016 109,475 69,673 3,944 183,092 6.622017 109,623 68,902 3,944 182,469 6.592018 109,773 68,132 3,944 181,849 6.552019 109,924 67,361 3,944 181,229 6.522020 110,077 66,591 3,944 180,612 6.492021 110,231 65,820 3,944 179,995 6.462022 110,387 65,050 3,944 179,381 6.432023 110,545 64,279 3,944 178,768 6.402024 110,704 63,508 3,944 178,156 6.372025 110,864 62,738 3,944 177,546 6.342026 111,026 61,967 3,944 176,937 6.30

*Sample Calculations - The generation rate was calculated by dividing the total generation by the District population and converting it to pounds per person per day: In 2015: 183,716 tons / 151,424 people x (2000 pounds per ton / 365 days/year) = 6.65 pounds per person per day

1. In 2008, a total of 3,944 tons of exempt waste originating in the District was disposed at out-of-District landfills. This is an insignificant amount when compared to the total waste. Because this value is low compared to the total waste generation, the District projects 3,944 tons of exempt waste per year for the 16-year planning period.

D. Projections for Waste Stream Composition

The waste stream composition has not changed much during the previous five years of the current planning period. The District does not expect anything more than a statistical deviation throughout the sixteen-year planning period.

E. Waste Reduction Strategies Through the Planning Period

1. Residential and Commercial Waste Reduction Strategies

Goal 1 - Availability of Recycling Programs

The following programs will be implemented to meet Goal 1:Recycling Drop-offCurbside RecyclingAppliance and Scrap Metal RecyclingElectronics RecyclingScrap Tire Recycling



Commercial RecyclingLead Acid Battery RecyclingComposting, “Don’t Bag It,” Leaf Collection and Christmas Tree RecyclingBuy-Back and Privately Owned Recycling OpportunitiesSubscription Curbside RecyclingNon-subscription Curbside Recycling

1) Recycling Drop Off

The District will implement the recycling drop-off program as outlined in Section IV. E. 1 for the entire length of the planning period.

Assumptions and Projections for Drop-off Programs:Recycling will continue to increase through the implementation of this program. The District has committed itself to promoting drop-off recycling as one of the primary ways to reduce waste; the District will promote the drop-off program as outlined in Section IV. Drop-off recycling is cost-effective to set up and operate while at the same time provide access to a large percentage of the population. The District has seen drop-off recycling increase over 950 percent since 1994 and recycling has increased by 60 percent between 2005 and 2008. This increase is not entirely attributable to the increased number of drop-off sites; the increase in recycling has greatly exceeded the number of new sites. Therefore, the District projects a conservative increase of three percent each year of the planning period.

Rationale: It is assumed that the percentage change in recycled materials will increase more than the percentage increase in solid waste. This assumption is based upon the fact that the District’s education and awareness activities augment the drop-off recycling sites. Additionally, the District has spent a considerable amount of time working with communities to place drop-off recycling sites in areas that are centrally and strategically located that make them convenient for people to recycle. On the other hand, it can be expected that waste disposal cost will go up as smaller landfills close and regional subtitle D facilities will become more expensive to operate. The rising cost of disposal combined with the implementation of volume-based collection, which the District will encourage, will eventually provide incentives for people to recycle.

2) Curbside Recycling Programs

2a) Existing Non-subscription Curbside Recycling Programs

Assumptions and Projections for Volume Based Garbage Collection with Curbside Recycling – Carrollton Village:

Based on the most recent five years of historical data, Carrollton residents and commercial businesses have recycled an average of 330 tons per year and recycling has remained relatively constant throughout this period. The Carrollton Village curbside program does not accept as many types of recyclable materials as the District's drop-off program. Because the amount of materials collected as part of the Carrollton curbside recycling program is less than the number of materials collected at the District's sites and the fact that the curbside collection is part of a volume-based refuse collection program, the District does not expect the amount of recyclables collected annually in Carrollton to vary significantly over time. In 2008, this program collected 293 tons of recyclable material and the District will project a constant 293 tons of recycling throughout the 16-year planning period.



Assumptions and Projections for Non-subscription Curbside Recycling – Lewis Refuse and Hauling:Lewis Refuse has been offering non-subscription curbside recycling since 2006. The number of customers that have participated in this program has remained constant since its inception. Based on data from Lewis Refuse, an average of 1,650 pounds of recyclables are collected weekly. This program is implemented solely by Lewis Refuse. The District is projecting that there will be no annual increase in volume from this program and will use 43 tons for each year of the planning period.

2b) Non-subscription Curbside Recycling Programs to be implemented after 2008

Non-subscription Curbside Recycling – East LiverpoolThe City of East Liverpool is establishing a non-subscription curbside recycling program for its residents. The implementation of this program is based on the cost savings that will be incurred by the City. This program will be operated by the City and will include a weekly collection of recyclable materials including newspaper, office paper, cardboard, PETE and HDPE plastics, glass, aluminum and bi-metal cans. The City will collect these materials source-separated at the curb and transport them to one or more recycling processing facilities. The City will report the quantity of recyclable materials collected to the District. As part of the program, residents will be educated by the City and/or the District as to the types of materials that will be accepted.

With the implementation of the East Liverpool curbside program, the District is expecting recycling volumes to increase in the City due to the convenience of curbside recycling; residents will be able to leave their recycling at their curb instead of having to load it up in their car and drive to the recycling site.

Date when strategy will be implemented: 2009

Who will Implement the Strategy (Entity responsible for maintaining the Program): The City of East Liverpool

Who will benefit from the Strategy (Service Area which benefits): The entire residential population of the City

Strengths of the program:

! No cost to residents! Convenient collection of recyclables at the curb! Weekly curbside collection allows residents to set out materials every

week! Residents are provided with a recycling for their recyclables! Helps keep the City's disposal costs down! All businesses have the advantage of being able to recycle materials at a

lower cost than disposal

Weaknesses of the program:

! Not currently part of a volume-based collection system! Fewer types of plastics are collected in the curbside program compared

to the plastics that are collected at the District's drop-off sites



Assumptions and Projections for East Liverpool Curbside Recycling:Because the program is in its infancy, there is very little data regarding the amount of material that can be collected from this program. Between April and August 2009, an average of 65 tons per month of materials have been collected from residential households. Based on this data, it is estimated that a total of 780 tons of recyclable material will be collected during the first full year of the program. Because of the lack of data, the District is projecting a constant 780 tons of recyclable materials will be collected for each year of the planning period.

2c) Volume-Based Refuse Collection with Curbside Recycling (see section IV-E (1) H4)The District will continue to encourage municipalities to bid out garbage collection in their political boundaries and also require collection of recyclables as part of the contract.

The District cannot guarantee that all (or any) municipalities will be participating in this program. While the District would like to implement the volume-based refuse collection with curbside recycling program in 2011, there is no guarantee that municipalities will decide to contract their garbage at that time, if they ever decide to contract. Therefore, the District will not project any data for this contingent program. If the amount of revenue received from the proposed Harrison County Landfill is sufficient, the District may provide funding for the non-subscription curbside recycling program.

2d) Subscription Curbside Recycling (see section IV-E (1) H3)Due to the limited number of participants in this program, the District is not projecting any waste reduction values from this strategy.

3) Appliance and Scrap Metal Recycling, Scrap Tire Recycling and Electronics RecyclingAssumptions and Projections for Appliance and Scrap Metal Recycling, Scrap Tire Recycling and Electronics Recycling:The one-day collections have proven very popular with residents since their inception in the 1990's. The actual amount of each material (scrap metal, tires and electronics) has varied from year to year, partially due to the price to scrap metal at the time of the collection. Historically, between 2005 and 2009, an average of 28 tons of appliances and scrap metal have been collected annually during the three one-day collections held throughout the District. Because of the fluctuation of the scrap metal market, the District will project a constant annual 28 tons of material for each year of the planning period.

The amount of electronic devices used by society today is increasing rapidly. As current devices become obsolete, residents and businesses alike will need to handle these products in an environmentally-friendly manner. The District is expecting a two percent increase in electronics recycling as a result of device obsolescence. The District has strived to promote both local and national electronics recycling outlets and the District constantly receives requests for information as to locations of electronics recycling facilities.

An average of 50 tons of scrap tires have been collected annually during the three one-day collections held throughout the District; additionally, municipalities and townships have collected, on average, an additional 95 tons of tires per year. Factoring in the tires collected from District at the Liberty Tire Recycling facility, which is a Ohio-EPA licensed scrap tire recovery facility, a total of 1,617 tons of scrap tires were collected in 2008. The District will project a constant 1,617 tons of scrap tires throughout the planning period.

4) Commercial Recycling



Assumptions and Projections for Commercial Recycling:Because the District cannot accurately determine the amount of recyclables that will be collected by each business during the 16-year planning period, the District projects a constant 2,511 tons throughout the planning period.

5) Lead Acid Battery RecyclingAssumptions and Projections for Lead Acid Battery Recycling:Section 3734.911 of the Ohio Revised Code prohibits disposal of lead-acid batteries in landfills. Additionally, retailers selling lead-acid typically charge a “core charge” when they sell every new battery. The “core charge” is between $5.00 and $10.00 per battery; this core charge acts as a financial incentive for consumers to recycle their old batteries.

The District contacted auto parts stores and other facilities that collect lead-acid batteries throughout the District and determined that 451 tons of lead acid batteries were collected in 2008. According to the MSWUS, lead-acid battery generation is one percent of MSW generation. Using this data, a total of 1,087 tons of lead-acid batteries were generated in 2008. The District's lead acid battery recycling rate is only 41 percent (US EPA estimates that 99 percent of all lead-acid batteries are recycled). With the landfill ban in effect, clearly the District's lead-acid battery recycling numbers are low due to incomplete reporting. There is more lead-acid battery recycling in the District than has been reported. Based on the landfill ban and US EPA data, the District is projecting a 30 ton per year increase during the planning period.

6) Composting, “Don’t Bag It,”, Leaf Collection and Christmas Tree Recycling Assumptions and Projections for Composting, “Don’t Bag It”, Leaf Collection and Christmas Tree Recycling:The District is projecting that yard waste composting (which includes backyard composting and Christmas tree recycling) will increase by two percent per year. This is over and above the quantity of leaves that are currently collected by municipalities. This projection is based on the extensive education campaign. The information regarding yard waste management will be widely available and easily accessible to all residents. Additionally, one of the Class 4 composting facilities, JDS Landscaping, has been promoting its service to all the municipalities in Columbiana County. The class 4 compositing facility advertises its facility to residents and businesses alike.

7) Buy-back, Privately Owned and Other Recycling OpportunitiesBuy-back recycling facilities play a key role in recycling by both residents and commercial businesses. Many residents and businesses will take their recyclable materials to a facility where they can receive revenue. Although the District expects recycling through buy-back and private opportunities to increase, it is difficult to determine the exact increase. Therefore, the District conservatively projects a constant 1,078 tons throughout the planning period.

Goal 2 - Recycle at least 25 percent of waste generated

The following District programs will be used for Goal 2 (these programs are described in Section IV.E. and above):Recycling Drop-offNon-Subscription Curbside RecyclingSubscription Curbside RecyclingAppliance and Scrap Metal RecyclingElectronics Recycling



Scrap Tire RecyclingCommercial RecyclingLead Acid Battery RecyclingBuy-Back and Privately Owned Recycling OpportunitiesComposting, “Don’t Bag It”, Leaf Collection and Christmas Tree Recycling

Projection of the amount of recyclables collected through each of these strategies is outlined above.

Goal 3 - Provide Source Reduction Information

The following programs will be used to meet the requirements of Goal 3:(these programs are described in Section IV.E.):Composting, “Don’t Bag It”, Leaf Collection and Christmas Tree Recycling Management of Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Source Reduction and Recycling Awareness

Assumptions and Projections for Source ReductionSource reduction is more advantageous than recycling because there are no costs incurred for processing and storage. The District's educator will conduct educational programs for residents, students and businesses. The programs are aimed at various audiences and use different presentation styles. The topics covered depend on the audience and are usually tailored to each particular group. However, the majority of the presentations cover recycling and buying recycled, closing the loop, and use of recycled materials to manufacture new products.

Materials regarding recycling and waste prevention are available to all residents and students. These “lively” information brochures make recycling and pre-cycling fun and easy to understand. Brochures aimed at the business community are also available, covering a variety of topics, including: how to set up a recycling program, ways to reduce waste, saving money by recycling, to name a few. Additionally, the District maintains a website that lists waste prevention and recycling ideas, as well as links to other sites of interest.

Measuring source reduction, is difficult. Waste prevention eliminates the need to manage waste by not creating it. It requires individuals and businesses to evaluate their purchasing habits and lifestyle to see what simple changes can be made. Small changes can add up to a large reduction in the amount of waste that is generated. But these changes can be hard to quantify, and as such, the District will not project actual source reduction numbers.

Goal 4 – Technical Information and Assistance

The following programs will be used to meet the requirement of Goal 4:(these programs are described in Section IV.E.):Composting, “Don’t Bag It,” Leaf Collection and Christmas Tree Recycling Management of Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Source Reduction and Recycling Awareness

Additional Recycling AwarenessThe District will also promote all companies that provide curbside recycling to residents throughout the three-county area. Although the District cannot actively promote one private business over another, the District will maintain a list of all the haulers that offer curbside



recycling and provide information to the residents about the benefits of curbside recycling. The list of haulers that offer curbside recycling will be listed on the District’s website.

Assumptions and Projections for Goal 4:The three strategies listed above will be implemented as outlined in Section IV. The District’s environmental educator will promote recycling, source reduction and pre-cycling education and awareness, as outlined in Section IV, through presentations at area schools, civic and community groups and businesses. Additionally, the education program (and the educator) provides information about the District’s Recycling programs, such as dates, times and locations of District programs, preparing recyclables properly, materials accepted at the drop-off sites, etc.

The District will maintains a list of locations where residents can recycle a large variety of materials, including paper, cans, rechargeable batteries, pallets, cardboard, electronics, oil and batteries. This information will be available as a brochure and on the District's website.

The District will maintain the District's website as outlined in Section IV, which will continue to provide information regarding the location of the District's drop-off recycling sites and other waste reduction information. The District will survey commercial businesses that generate cardboard at least every three years during the planning period, to ensure that these businesses are recycling their cardboard and to gather waste reduction data. The amount of material that is recycled because of the website cannot be measured directly. The commercial survey will gather data regarding commercial recycling. Therefore neither the website nor the survey will have any projections directly associated with them.

Success of the education and awareness program is difficult to measure directly. Each presentation can cause one person to get motivated to recycle, but unless the drop-off sites are staffed around the clock, it will be difficult determine exactly which component of the education program contributed to the increase. While the education program contributes to the increase in recycling, it may not be the only factor. The District has included the effects of the education program in the projections for each of the other residential/commercial programs in this sub-section.

Measurement of success of the composting and yard waste program is dependent on several factors, including the amount of source-separated yard waste collected versus the total amount of yard waste generated. Because the District has chosen to promote backyard composting over a centralized composting facility, the District anticipates that the amount of “bagged” yard waste will decline. In addition, the District will contact all the municipalities that collect leaves to improve data collection. The success of educational efforts including the number of presentations offered during any given calendar year is expected to improve the recycling rates and increase the number of participants. Part of the annual increase in recycling will be directly attributed to the education and awareness program.

The projections of waste reduced by Christmas Tree Recycling Program are included in the projections for yard waste and composting.

Goal 5 – Restricted Wastes and Household Hazardous Waste Management

The following programs will be implemented to achieve Goal 5Scrap Tire RecyclingLead Acid Battery Recycling



Composting, “Don’t Bag It”, Leaf Collection and Christmas Tree RecyclingManagement of Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)Electronics Recycling

Strategies for Managing HHW

HHW Education and Source Reduction: The District will continue to provide data regarding safe HHW disposal and “environmentally friendly” substitutes to all the residents for the period covered by this Plan. This information will be available at the District office, libraries, and other governmental offices. Information included in the flyer includes the types of HHW materials commonly found in the home, proper methods of disposal, why these materials are toxic, and less toxic substitutes. The District will also demonstrate the effectiveness of these substitutes at county fairs and other community events. A second strategy to reduce the quantity of HHW being landfilled is to encourage residents to use all the HHW they purchase.

HHW Collection ProgramSince 2004, the District has conducted annual HHW collection events every year. These events were aimed strictly at the residential sector, since most businesses fall under RCRA and EPA regulations for hazardous waste. These collections were staffed and operated by a licensed hazardous waste contractor who was responsible for the safe and efficient operation of the collection site. The District collected a vast range of HHW materials, including oil-based paint, solvents, pesticide, cleaners, antifreeze, and other vehicle fluids. All materials were sorted and handled by the contractor and taken to licensed disposal facilities. Latex paints, lead-acid batteries and used oil are not collected at these events. Latex paint is not classified as a hazardous material, and once solidified, it can be safely placed into the trash. There are numerous full-time outlets throughout the District for lead-acid batteries and used oil and the District promotes these sites to residents throughout the year.

The District will offer one HHW collection event each year on a rotating basis in each county. The District will contract the collection of HHW for years when the collection event will take place. The District will also work with Heritage WTI to continue the CitySweep program in East Liverpool and the HHW collection program in Columbiana County.

If the demand warrants and provided there is adequate funding, the District may decide to set up a permanent Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Collection Program. This HHW Program may be operated by a lab technician experienced in handling, storage and transportation of the HHW. Depending on available funds, the District may continue to have annual collection events with the help of the lab technician in all three counties.

The majority of the HHW diverted from landfills throughout the planning period will be collected through the Districts HHW collection program. The HHW that will be source reduced is difficult to measure. HHW is generally disposed and not recycled; therefore, no data will be included in Table V-5 because Table V-5 tabulates recycling, not collection, data.

Used Oil: In an effort to encourage do-it-yourself oil changers to recycle used oil, the District provides informational brochures containing used motor oil collection sites to all residents. This information will be available at the District office, libraries, government buildings, auto parts stores and on the District's website. The District does not have information as to the total tonnage of oil recycled and therefore does not estimate oil recycling during the planning period.



Goal 6 - Economic Incentive Analysis

The District has continually worked with municipalities throughout the District to encourage them to implement volume-based collection for their residents. Many municipalities do not have franchise agreements with a single hauler. The District is very rural, with approximately half the population residing in unincorporated townships. Many of these townships are too small, and their residents too spread out for single-hauler franchise agreements to be cost-effective.

Additionally, there are no operating landfills within the District. Therefore, the District's current revenue is insufficient to subsidize the cost of implementing a volume-based system. The District cannot require implementation of these types of programs, but the District intends to work with municipal officials to encourage them to franchise where feasible.

Goal 7 – Strategies to Promote Markets for Recyclables

Provided additional funding is available from Harrison County Landfill, the District may implement a “Buy Recycled” Program. This program includes assistance that encourages the purchase of recycled content material for public entities like schools, townships, villages and cities. If implemented, the funds allocated for this program can only be used for buying recycled content materials like plastic lumber, plastic drainage pipes and other similar products.



Table V-5 Residential/Commercial Waste Reduction Strategies

Type of Material Reduced Tons of Waste ReductionStrategy And/or Recycled 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Source Reduction StrategiesSource Red.education

paper, metal, glass, plastic, magazines, phonebooks 1

Recycling StrategiesDrop-off Recycling paper, metal, glass, plastic,

magazines, phonebooks 2,413 2,485 2,560 2,637 2,716 2,797 2,881 2,967 3,056 3,148Appliance Recycling Refrigerators, stoves 13 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28Electronics Recycling TVs, VCRs, etc 24 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

Tire Recycling Scrap tires 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617Yard Waste2 Yard Waste, composting,

Christmas trees 6,959 7,098 7,240 7,385 7,533 7,684 7,838 7,995 8,155 8,318Comm. Recycling Cardboard 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511

Curbside recycling1 paper, metal, glass, plastic 336 1,116 1,116 1,116 1,116 1,116 1,116 1,116 1,116 1,116Lead-acid batteries batteries 451 481 511 541 571 601 631 661 691 721Buybacks and other

recycling opportunitiespaper, metal, glass, plastic,

cardboard 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078Volume Based

Disposal/Curbside - contingent1

Paper, metal, glass, plastic

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Total 15,402 16,438 16,686 16,939 17,197 17,460 17,729 18,003 18,283 18,569



Table V-5 Residential/Commercial Waste Reduction Strategies

Type of Material Reduced Tons of Waste ReductionStrategy And/or Recycled 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026


paper, metal, glass, plastic, magazines, phonebooks 1

Recycling StrategiesDrop-off Recycling paper, metal, glass, plastic,

magazines, phonebooks 3,242 3,339 3,439 3,542 3,648 3,757 3,870 3,986 4,106Appliance Recycling Refrigerators, stoves 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28Electronics Recycling TVs, VCRs, etc 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41

Tire Recycling Scrap tires 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617Yard Waste2 Yard Waste, composting,

Christmas trees 8,484 8,654 8,827 9,004 9,184 9,368 9,555 9,746 9,941Comm. Recycling Cardboard 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511 2,511

Curbside recycling1 paper, metal, glass, plastic 1,116 1,116 1,116 1,116 1,116 1,116 1,116 1,116 1,116Lead-acid batteries batteries 751 781 811 841 871 901 931 961 991Buybacks and other

recycling opportunitiespaper, metal, glass, plastic,

cardboard 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078 1,078Volume Based

Disposal/Curbside - contingent1

Paper, metal, glass, plastic

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Total 18,860 19,158 19,462 19,773 20,090 20,414 20,745 21,083 21,429

Notes: 1. Curbside recycling includes Carrollton, East Liverpool and Lewis Refuse; it does not include Salem and other yet-to-be implemented volume-based refuse collection programs. It is difficult to project the actual amounts that will be collected with these other programs. Therefore, the District will not project any recycling/reduction data for these other programs.2. Yard waste also includes these District programs: leaf collection, Christmas Tree Recycling and the “Don’t Bag It” program.

Sample Calculations: Recyclables Collectedyearx+1 = Recyclables Collectedyearx x (1 + percentage increase)Year 2020 Tons of Recyclables Collected through drop-off = 3,339 tons in 2019 x (1.03) = 3,439 Tons in 2020

(these calculations also apply to the industrial recycling table)



2. Industrial Programs

Goal 2 - Recycle at least 50 percent of waste generatedGoal 3 - Source Reduction InformationGoal 4 – Technical Information and Assistance

Industrial RecyclingCurrent industrial recycling will continue throughout the planning period. Each industry will be responsible for implementing its own program.

Recycling markets vary widely based on location of manufacturing and recycling facilities in addition to market volatility. This makes it difficult for some industrial businesses to establish or increase the amount of materials they can recycle. Further compounding the situation is the rural nature of the District. Often, it is not cost effective for recyclers to pick up recyclable materials from industries that are a long distance from a recycling facility. Additionally, low disposal costs makes recycling less attractive.

Throughout the 16-year planning period, the District will make source reduction and recycling information available to the industrial businesses in the District, both as mailers, articles in Chamber of Commerce newsletters and through the District's website. Information will include determining the types and quantities of waste generated, recycled, reduced and disposed, the financial benefits of recycling, how to set up recycling and waste prevention programs, waste audits, and how to manufacture in a manner that is good for the environment.

The waste exchange can be a valuable resource for District industries as it allows industries to sell or give away certain materials that were once considered solid waste. There are several practical limitations that affect the success of waste exchange programs including: limited markets, limited on-site storage capacity, and the lack of a process to reuse some industrial waste materials in new products.

Based on the District’s experiences, there are businesses that do not have any incentive to set up source reduction and waste reduction programs. The current cost of disposal is low compared to some of the costs that are incurred with recycling. As was mentioned above, the rural nature of the District makes it difficult for some industrial businesses to obtain recycling services. Therefore, this District is only projecting a modest 0.5 percent annual increase in recycling. These assumptions reflect the interdependence between the increase in solid waste disposal costs and the economic benefits of source reduction and waste minimization. However, if the cost of disposal increases, companies may look for new ways to reduce costs and explore, both source reduction and recycling. The District will consider an increase in recycling and source reduction as a successful implementation of the Source Reduction and Recycling Awareness program.

The District will survey industrial businesses at least every three years during the planning period, to gather accurate recycling data from each business. The data from this survey will be used to determine the amount and type of materials that are being recycled by industrial businesses throughout the District.



Table V-6 Strategies for Industrial Source Reduction and Recycling

Type of Material Reduced Tons of Waste ReductionStrategy And/or Recycled 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017


paper, metal, glass, plastic,

Recycling StrategiesIndustrial Recycling paper, metal, glass, plastic,

cardboard 30,265 30,416 30,568 30,721 30,875 31,029 31,184 31,340 31,497 31,654

Total 30,265 30,416 30,568 30,721 30,875 31,029 31,184 31,340 31,497 31,654

Type of Material Reduced Tons of Waste ReductionStrategy And/or Recycled 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026


paper, metal, glass, plastic,

Recycling StrategiesIndustrial Recycling paper, metal, glass, plastic,

cardboard 31,813 31,972 32,132 32,292 32,454 32,616 32,779 32,943 33,108

Total 31,813 31,972 32,132 32,292 32,454 32,616 32,779 32,943 33,108



VI. Methods of Management: Facilities and Programs to be Used (ORC Section 3734.53(A)(7)–(12)

A. District Methods for Management of Solid Waste

Table VI-1 lists the waste generation, reduction, recycling and disposal data for each year of the planning period. Table VI-2 reports generation, reduction, recycling and disposal data for the residential/commercial sector, while Table VI-3 reports generation, reduction, recycling and disposal data for the industrial sector. Each table below includes waste that is disposed at out-of-state facilities.

Solid Waste Management Plan VI-1 October 2010


Table VI-1 Waste Management Methods Used and Processing Capacity Needed for Each Year of the Planning Period

Tons ofSW

Generated

Tons Source

Reduced

Net Tons to be

Managedby SWMD

Management Method Used and Processing Capacity Required in TPY

Year Recycling TransferYard Waste Compostingand Land Application Incineration

MSWComposting Landfilling

2008 188,155 0 188,155 38,708 10,212 6,959 142,4882009 187,486 0 187,486 39,756 10,079 7,098 140,6322010 186,853 0 186,853 40,014 10,005 7,240 139,5992011 186,223 0 186,223 40,275 9,931 7,385 138,5632012 185,594 0 185,594 40,539 9,856 7,533 137,5222013 184,967 0 184,967 40,805 9,781 7,684 136,4782014 184,340 0 184,340 41,075 9,706 7,838 135,4272015 183,716 0 183,716 41,348 9,630 7,995 134,3732016 183,092 0 183,092 41,625 9,554 8,155 133,3122017 182,469 0 182,469 41,905 9,478 8,318 132,2462018 181,849 0 181,849 42,189 9,401 8,484 131,1762019 181,229 0 181,229 42,476 9,324 8,654 130,0992020 180,612 0 180,612 42,767 9,247 8,827 129,0182021 179,995 0 179,995 43,061 9,169 9,004 127,9302022 179,381 0 179,381 43,360 9,091 9,184 126,8372023 178,768 0 178,768 43,662 9,012 9,368 125,7382024 178,156 0 178,156 43,969 8,933 9,555 124,6322025 177,546 0 177,546 44,280 8,853 9,746 123,5202026 176,937 0 176,937 44,596 8,773 9,941 122,400

Notes: The total tonnage of waste generated and landfilled. Recycling values include appliances, electronics and lead-acid batteries. The disposal tonnage includes exempt waste and waste disposed at out-of-state facilities.

Sample Calculations: Net Tons Managed = Tons Generated - Tons Source ReducedYear 2010 example: Tons Generated = 186,853 TPY; Tons Source Reduced = 0Net Tons Managed in 2010 = 186,853 - 0 = 186,853 TPYTons Landfilled = Net Tons Managed - Recycling -Yard Waste Year 2010 example: Net Tons Managed = 186,853 TPY; Recycling = 40,014, Yard Waste = 7,240; Tons Landfilled = 186,853 – 40,014 – 7,240 = 139,599 Tons

Note: Waste taken to transfer facilities is included in the landfill tonnage (far right column).



Table VI-2 Summary for Residential/Commercial Waste

Tons Management Method in TPYYear Generated,

Res/CommSource

Reduction/Recycling

IncinerationYW

Composting/Land App.

Landfilling Ash Disposal

2008 108,391 8,443 0 6,959 92,989 02009 108,475 9,340 0 7,098 92,037 02010 108,613 9,446 0 7,240 91,927 02011 108,753 9,554 0 7,385 91,814 02012 108,895 9,664 0 7,533 91,698 02013 109,038 9,776 0 7,684 91,578 02014 109,182 9,891 0 7,838 91,453 02015 109,328 10,008 0 7,995 91,325 02016 109,475 10,128 0 8,155 91,192 02017 109,623 10,251 0 8,318 91,054 02018 109,773 10,376 0 8,484 90,913 02019 109,924 10,504 0 8,654 90,766 02020 110,077 10,635 0 8,827 90,615 02021 110,231 10,769 0 9,004 90,458 02022 110,387 10,906 0 9,184 90,297 02023 110,545 11,046 0 9,368 90,131 02024 110,704 11,190 0 9,555 89,959 02025 110,864 11,337 0 9,746 89,781 02026 111,026 11,488 0 9,941 89,597 0

Assumptions: There are no plans for incineration or MSW composting during the planning period. Recycling values include appliances, lead-acid batteries and tires. Exempt waste is not included in this table.

Sample Calculations: Projected Landfilling = Total SW Generated (Res./Comm) – Source Reduction/Recycling - YW composting/Land Application



Table VI-3 Summary for Industrial Waste Management Methods

Management Method in TPYYear Tons

Generated Source

Reduction/Recycling

Incineration MSW Composting

Landfilling Ash Disposal

2008 75,820 30,265 0 0 45,555 02009 75,067 30,416 0 0 44,651 02010 74,296 30,568 0 0 43,728 02011 73,526 30,721 0 0 42,805 02012 72,755 30,875 0 0 41,880 02013 71,985 31,029 0 0 40,956 02014 71,214 31,184 0 0 40,030 02015 70,444 31,340 0 0 39,104 02016 69,673 31,497 0 0 38,176 02017 68,902 31,654 0 0 37,248 02018 68,132 31,813 0 0 36,319 02019 67,361 31,972 0 0 35,389 02020 66,591 32,132 0 0 34,459 02021 65,820 32,292 0 0 33,528 02022 65,050 32,454 0 0 32,596 02023 64,279 32,616 0 0 31,663 02024 63,508 32,779 0 0 30,729 02025 62,738 32,943 0 0 29,795 02026 61,967 33,108 0 0 28,859 0

Assumptions: The total generation of industrial waste is based on the latest employment projections. The total tonnage of waste landfilled is simply a difference of the two.

Sample Calculations: TPY (Landfilling) = TPY (Tons Generated) - TPY (Source Reduction/Recycling)



B. Demonstration of Access to Capacity

Landfilling: Thirty-seven landfills are designated by the District to accept solid waste (Table VI-6). The Harrison County Landfill is not in operation, however it has an approved PTI and is currently under construction. To provide assured capacity for the current 16-year planning period, the District has determined that there is sufficient capacity at local landfills to meet the District’s disposal requirements.

Within 50 miles of the District, there are at least 10 operating landfills and one permitted landfill, with a total available net airspace of 259,303,805 cubic yards. Using the conversion factor of three cubic yards per ton of waste, the 259,303,805 cubic yards translates into 86,434,602 tons of disposal available at these facilities throughout the planning period. The District needs a total of almost 2.4 million tons throughout the planning period.

District haulers will not be the only users of these facilities during this 16-year period. In order to accurately determine if there is an adequate disposal capacity for the entire region during the period, the District calculated the total disposal requirements for the surrounding region for the period 2011 to 2027.

The District based the regional disposal requirements for the population of 22 counties in Ohio:

Ashtabula Geauga TrumbullPortage Summit MahoningStark Wayne ColumbianaCarroll Holmes TuscarawasJefferson Harrison Muskingum*Guernsey* Belmont* Morgan*Noble* Monroe* Washington*Coshocton

Total population (2008 population estimates, ODOD): 2,896,153note: the counties that make up the District are in bold.

These counties are chosen based on the proximity to the major landfills that are used by the District: American Landfill (Stark County), Mahoning Landfill (Mahoning County), BFI - Carbon Limestone (Mahoning County), Central Waste Landfill (Mahoning County), Kimble Landfill (Tuscarawas County) and Apex Landfill (Jefferson County).

Several of the counties in the southeastern part of the state do not have an Ohio landfill located within close proximity to their residents; these counties are marked with an * in the above table. Based on historical data, most of the waste from these southeastern counties either goes to Kimble Landfill in Tuscarawas County, Suburban South Landfill in Perry County, or to out-of-state facilities.

In order to calculate the disposal requirements for this 22-county region, the District multiplied its reference year per capita disposal rate of 0.94 tons per person per year by the total regional population of 2,896,153. This amounts to an annual disposal requirement of 2,732,115 tons per year. For the period 2011-2026, the region needs almost 44,000,000 tons of disposal capacity; this figure includes the needs of the District. (The District’s per capita disposal rate was calculated using total disposal from Table VI-1 and dividing it by the 2008 District population of 150,053.)



Comparing the required capacity of 44,000,000 with the available capacity of 93,841,000, there is sufficient disposal capacity for all 22 counties, and in particular for the District, in the selected region for the entire 16-year planning period. The landfills that are accepting District waste are listed in Table VI-4a.

Recycling: The District is currently using the Lewis Refuse and Hauling recycling facility to process its recyclable materials collected from drop-off sites. Lewis also processes the recyclable materials collected through its curbside recycling program. The recyclables collected in the Carrollton volume based collection are processed at Kimble Recycling and Transfer Facility in Canton. The curbside recycling program in East Liverpool uses several recycling facilities to process the materials collected in the City.

In the case of the volume-based disposal with curbside recycling in municipalities and townships, they will be individually contracted to the lowest bidder. Part of the contractual requirements will include letters indicating access to capacity for each community’s projected volume of recyclables.

The District is not aware of every recycling facility that is used by each business and industry throughout the District. Therefore, the total quantity of recyclables collected by commercial and industrial businesses is listed under miscellaneous commercial and industrial recycling companies. The same is true for the appliance, scrap metal and electronics recycling program. The District contacts these programs every year, and therefore does not know which facility will collect the materials in any given year. Regarding the volume-based disposal with recycling program, the municipalities will be responsible for contracting with the haulers for this service.

Transfer Facilities: District haulers used three designated transfer facilities in the reference year 2008. A minimal amount of waste was taken to one non-designated transfer facility. Chapter 343 of the Ohio Revised Code and District rules prohibit haulers from taking District waste to non-designated facilities. If waste is delivered to a non-designated facility, such volumes will be included in the total waste delivered to designated facilities during the planning period based on the District’s activities to correct the improper disposal of District solid waste at facilities that are not designated.



Table VI-4a Waste Management Method: LandfillingFacilities Used by District Remaining Capacity Tons of Solid Waste Managed by Each Facility

Name and Location AMDWR Years Gross CY Net CY 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Apex Landfill 5,250 7 12,714,610 10,257,407 16,480.86 21,010 20,856 20,701 20,546 20,390 20,233 xMahoning Landfill 2,500 8 3,112,559 2,123,427 38,182.29 48,687 48,329 47,971 47,610 47,249 46,885 xBFI Carbon Limestone LF 6,500 25 29,685,424 26,449,713 29,402.90 37,492 37,217 36,941 36,663 36,385 36,105 102,419Central Waste 5,000 13 4,929,651 3,486,800 6,088.58 7,763 7,706 7,649 7,591 7,534 7,476 7,417American Landfill 15,000 72 85,461,871 69,224,116 2,519.51 3,206 3,183 3,159 3,136 3,112 3,088 3,064Kimble Landfill 10,000 85 42,938,166 32,348,541 16,418.20 20,940 20,786 20,632 20,477 20,322 20,165 20,008Countywide LF 7,800 25 46,236,568 34,764,336 1,070.69 1,364 1,354 1,344 1,334 1,324 1,314 1,303Pine Grove LF 5,000 52 18,675,338 12,605,853 6.95 8 8 8 8 8 8 8Coshocton LF 1,500 87 9,904,257 8,049,189 21.05 45 44 43 43 41 40 42 Out-of-StateArden Landfill Unknown Unk Unknown Unknown 27.74 35 35 35 34 34 34 34Seneca Landfill Unknown Unk Unknown unknown 63.8 82 81 80 80 79 79 78

TOTALS110,282.57 140,632 139,599 138,563 137,522 136,478 135,427 134,373

Facilities Used by District Tons of Solid Waste Managed by Each FacilityName and Location 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Apex Landfill x x x x x x x x x x xMahoning Landfill x x x x x x x x x x xBFI Carbon Limestone LF 101,611 100,799 99,983 99,161 98,337 104,570 103,676 102,778 101,875 100,965 100,050Central Waste 7,359 7,300 7,241 7,181 7,122 x x x x x xAmerican Landfill 3,040 3,015 2,991 2,966 2,942 2,917 2,892 2,867 2,842 2,816 2,791Kimble Landfill 19,850 19,691 19,532 19,372 19,211 19,049 18,886 18,722 18,558 18,392 18,225Countywide LF 1,293 1,283 1,272 1,262 1,251 1,241 1,230 1,220 1,209 1,198 1,187Pine Grove LF 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 7Coshocton LF 41 40 40 41 40 39 39 39 38 39 38 Out-of-StateArden Landfill 33 33 33 33 32 32 32 31 31 31 31Seneca Landfill 77 77 76 75 75 74 74 73 72 72 71

TOTALS 133,312 132,246 131,176 130,099 129,018 127,930 126,837 125,738 124,632 123,520 122,400Source of Data for Table VI-4a: Ohio EPA 2008 Facility Data Report and District records.



Assumptions: Landfill receipts in 2008 indicate that only 109,481 tons of the 142,488 tons of waste calculated as disposed went to known landfills. Therefore, the District will use the generation and recycling values that were calculated for all projections as to the quantity of waste that will be disposed. For the purposes of projecting the quantity of waste that will be sent to any given facility during each year of the planning period, the District multiplied the projected disposal (from Table VI-1) by the fraction of total waste that waste disposed at that facility in 2008. However, if a facility has less than sixteen years of permitted capacity at the time the Plan was written, waste receipts will be shown only for the currently permitted lifetime of the facility. Waste that would have gone to those facilities with less than 16 years capacity will be shown as received by other landfills in Table VI-4a. This table includes exempt waste and waste that was taken to transfer facilities prior to disposal.

The Harrison County Landfill has an approved PTI; however, construction has not been completed.

Table VI-4b Waste Management Method: Recycling Facilities

Facilities Used by District Processing Tons of Solid Waste Managed by Each FacilityName and Location Capacity

TPD2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Lewis Refuse and Recycling 5,000 2,413 2,485 2,560 2,637 2,716 2,797 2,881 2,967 3,056Other recycling facilities

(including buyback)*N/A

1,414 2,194 2,194 2,194 2,194 2,194 2,194 2,194 2,194Misc. commercial & industrial

recyclers*N/A

32,776 32,927 33,079 33,232 33,386 33,540 33,695 33,851 34,008Misc. appliance recyclers* N/A 13 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28

Composting facilities and Yard Waste land application

N/A6,959 7,098 7,240 7,385 7,533 7,684 7,838 7,995 8,155

Misc. Lead-Acid battery recyclers*

N/A451 481 511 541 571 601 631 661 691

Misc Tire recyclers* N/A 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617Misc Electronics Recyclers* N/A 24 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

TOTALS xxx 45,667 46,854 47,254 47,660 48,072 48,489 48,913 49,343 49,780



Table VI-4b continued Waste Management Method: Recycling Facilities

Facilities Used by District Processing Tons of Solid Waste Managed by Each FacilityName and Location Capacity

TPD2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Lewis Refuse and Recycling 5,000 3,148 3,242 3,339 3,439 3,542 3,648 3,757 3,870 3,986 4,106Other recycling facilities (includes

curbside and buyback)*N/A

2,194 2,194 2,194 2,194 2,194 2,194 2,194 2,194 2,194 2,194Misc. commercial & industrial

recyclers*N/A

34,165 34,324 34,483 34,643 34,803 34,965 35,127 35,290 35,454 35,619Misc. appliance recyclers* N/A 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28

Composting facilities and Yard Waste land application

N/A8,318 8,484 8,654 8,827 9,004 9,184 9,368 9,555 9,746 9,941

Misc. Lead-Acid battery recyclers* N/A 721 751 781 811 841 871 901 931 961 991Misc Tire recyclers* N/A 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617 1,617

Misc Electronics Recyclers* N/A 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41

TOTALS xxx 50,223 50,673 51,130 51,594 52,065 52,544 53,030 53,524 54,026 54,537

*Assumptions: Recyclable materials collected from the District-operated (and sponsored) programs will be taken to existing facilities in and around the District, primarily Lewis Refuse and Recycling. The District is not aware of every recycling facility that is used by each commercial business and industry throughout the District. Therefore, the total quantity of recyclables collected by commercial and industrial businesses is listed under miscellaneous commercial and industrial recycling companies. The same holds true for the appliance recycling program.

Sample calculations: Total quantity of recyclables collected by District-operated programs (the drop-off sites) in 2017 is 3,148 tons.



Table VI-4c Waste Management Method: Transfer Facilities

Processingcapacity 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

J & J Refuse unk 9,594 9,469 9,400 9,330 9,260 9,189 9,119 9,047 8,976Kimble TF & Rcy. unk 259 256 254 252 250 249 246 245 243

Cambridge TF unk 359 354 351 349 346 343 341 338 335Total 10,212 10,079 10,005 9,931 9,856 9,781 9,706 9,630 9,554

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026J & J Refuse 8,905 8,832 8,760 8,688 8,614 8,541 8,467 8,393 8,317 8,242

Kimble TF & Rcy. 241 239 237 235 234 231 228 227 224 223Cambridge TF 333 330 327 324 321 319 317 313 312 308

Total 9,479 9,401 9,324 9,247 9,169 9,091 9,012 8,933 8,853 8,773

Assumptions: The projections shown are based on the quantity of waste taken to each transfer facility during 2008, the reference year. Projections are based on the fractional decrease in waste disposal, as shown in Table VI-4a. All waste delivered to the transfer facilities in this table was ultimately disposed at one or more of the landfill in Table VI-4a. Exempt waste is included in this table.



C. Schedule for Facilities and Programs

Table VI-5 lists the schedules for new facilities, expansions and closure activities for facilities used for the management of solid waste generated within the District. Table VI-5 also listed the scheduled implementation for all of the programs the District will continue or implement with the approval of this Plan. Several of these programs such as drop-off recycling will be implemented by the District. Some programs like the volume-based garbage collection and commercial and industrial recycling activities will be implemented by the communities and/or businesses that contract for the collection services.

D. Identification of Facilities

Table VI-6 tabulates the major facilities where District waste is disposed and/or transferred. The District has contracts with landfills that have been designated to receive District waste. The Harrison County Landfill is in the construction stage. The residential recyclables collected by the District programs are taken to the Lewis Refuse recycling facility in Kensington. The facilities listed in Table VI-6 represent the known landfills and transfer stations that receive District waste.

E. Authorization Statement to Designate

Pursuant to Section 3734.53(E)(1) of the Ohio Revised Code, the Board of Directors of the District is hereby authorized to establish facility designations under Section 343.014 of the Ohio Revised Code.

F. Waiver Process for Undesignated Facilities

Any person may submit a request for a waiver from facility designation. The request must be in writing and provide information regarding the type and amount of material, the facility to be used, the duration of the waiver, the reason for requesting the waiver and the impact on Plan implementation and financing. The Board may request additional information from the applicant for a waiver if the information it receives is incomplete. Once the application is submitted and complete, the Board of Directors will determine within 90 days whether to approve or disapprove the waiver request. The Board of Directors may grant the request for waiver if the Board of Directors determines that:

1.) The waiver is not inconsistent with projections contained in the District’s approved plan under Sections 3734.53(A)(6) and (A)(7) of the Ohio Revised Code; and

2.) The issuance of the waiver will not adversely affect implementation and financing of the plan.



Table VI-5 Implementation Schedule for Programs and Identification of Facilities: Dates and Descriptions

Approximate Date the Following Will Take Place:

Program Name Location Implemented by

Program Description Begin Operations

Operations Cease

Non-subscription Curbside Recycling (with Volume-based garbage collection)

Carrollton Carrollton Garbage and curbside recycling contracts

Existing Ongoing

Source Reduction & Recycling Awareness –

brochures and flyers

District-wide

District Source reduction and waste minimization information

Existing Ongoing

Source Reduction & Recycling Awareness -

website

District-wide

District Maintain District website with information regarding recycling and

waste reduction

Existing Ongoing

Source Reduction & Recycling Awareness -

educator

District-wide

District Educator for making presentations to schools, civic groups and businesses

Existing Ongoing

Appliance &Scrap Metal Recycling

District-wide

District Recycling of appliances and scrap metal items

Existing Ongoing

Scrap Tire Recycling District-wide

District Recycling of Tires Existing Ongoing

Commercial Recycling District-wide

Commercial businesses

Commercial recycling programs Existing Ongoing

Commercial Recycling - survey

District-wide

District Survey commercial businesses regarding recycling programs every

three years

Existing Ongoing

Industrial Recycling District-wide

Industrial businesses

Recycling of industrial process waste Existing Ongoing

Industrial Recycling - survey

District-wide

District Survey industrial businesses regarding recycling programs every three years

Existing Ongoing

Industrial Recycling - awareness

District-wide

District Information regarding recycling and waste reduction

Existing Ongoing

Management of Household Hazardous

Waste - Collection

District-wide

District Provide a minimum of one HHW collection event each year

Existing Ongoing

Management of Household Hazardous

Waste - education

District-wide

District HHW education and awareness – brochures and website

Existing Ongoing

Lead-Acid Battery Recycling - education

District-wide

District Provide information about battery recycling

Existing Ongoing

Electronics Recycling District-wide

District Recycling of electronic items Existing Ongoing

Non-Subscription Curbside Recycling

Columbiana County

Lewis Refuse Non subscription curbside recycling for Lewis Refuse Customers

Existing Ongoing

Non-Subscription Curbside Recycling

East Liverpool

East Liverpool

Non subscription curbside recycling for East Liverpool Residents

2009 Ongoing

Yard waste recycling, Don’t bag it education

District-wide

District Provide information about yard waste recycling opportunities

Existing Ongoing

Christmas tree recycling

District-wide

District Provide Christmas tree recycling drop-off to District residents

Existing Ongoing

Composting - Information

District-wide

District Provide composting information to residents

Existing Ongoing



Table VI-5 (continued) Implementation Schedule for Programs and Identification of Facilities: Dates and Descriptions


Program Name Location Implemented by

Program Description Begin Operations

Operations Cease

Composting of yard waste District-wide

Composting facilities

Composting of yard waste

Existing Ongoing

Used Oil Recycling - education District-Wide

District Provide information about used oil recycling

Existing Ongoing

Non-subscription Curbside Recycling – with volume-based

collection

District-wide

Various communities

Garbage and curbside recycling contracts

Based on contingent

funds

Based on contingent funds

Subscription Curbside Recycling Salem Salem Subscription Curbside Existing OngoingDrop-off RecyclingFull-time, rural drop-offs

Carroll County:Carrollton – Center Twp

Malvern – Brown TwpAugusta – Augusta TwpDellroy – Monroe Twp

Harlem Springs – Lee TwpKilgore – Loudon Twp

Leesville – Orange TwpMechanicstown – Fox Twp

New Harrisburg – Harrison TwpPerrysville – Perry Twp

Sherrodsville – Orange TwpLake Mohawk – Brown Twp

Full-time, urban drop-offsColumbiana County:

St. Clair TownshipColumbiana – Fairfield TwpEast Palestine – Unity Twp

East Liverpool #1 – Liverpool TEast Liverpool #2 – Liverpool T

Leetonia – Salem TwpLisbon – Center Twp

New Waterford – Unity TwpSalem Township

Salem – Perry TwpFairfield Township

Liverpool TownshipCalcutta (St. Clair Township)

Unity TwpWellsville – Yellow Creek Twp

District-wide

District Drop-off bins provided for recycling

Existing Ongoing



Table VI-5 (continued) Implementation Schedule for Programs and Identification of Facilities: Dates and Descriptions

Location Implemented by


Program Name Program Description Begin Operations

Operations Cease

Full-time, rural drop-offsColumbiana County:

Butler TownshipHanoverton – Hanover Twp

Guilford Lake – Hanover TwpKnox Twp

Rogers – Middleton TwpSalineville – Washington Twp

West TwpMadison Township

Wayne TownshipSummitville – Franklin Twp

Middleton TownshipElkrun Township

Beaver Creek State Park (note 1)

Full-time, rural drop-offsHarrison County:Cadiz – Cadiz Twp

Bowerston – Monroe TwpScio – North Twp

Jewett – Rumley TwpHopedale – Green Twp

Freeport – Freeport Twp

District-wide

District Drop-off bins provided for recycling

Existing Ongoing

Drop-off Recycling

Full-time, urban drop-offsColumbiana County:

JDS Landscaping – Unity Twp Unity Twp

DistrictDrop-off bins provided

for recycling2009 Ongoing

Notes: 1 – Beaver Creek State Park is in Middleton Twp



Table VI-6 Facilities Identified and Current Designations

Facilities DesignatedName Location

Arden Sanitary Landfill Washington, PAAmerican Landfill Stark CountyCoshocton Landfill, Inc. Coshocton CountyHarrison Landfill Harrison CountyMahoning Landfill Mahoning CountySuburban Landfill Perry CountyCountywide LF Stark CountyKimble TF & Recycling Fac Stark CountyCentral Waste, Inc. Mahoning CountyLiberty Tire Services Monofill Stark CountyCarbon Limestone Landfill Mahoning CountyImperial Landfill Imperial, PAJ & J Refuse TF Carroll CountyTwingsbug TF Recycling Fac Summit CountyCambridge TF & Recycling Fac Guernsey CountyKimble Sanitary Landfill Tuscarwas CountySeneca TF Mars, PASeneca Landfill, Inc. Mars, PATri-County Industries TF Mars, PATri-County Landfill Mars, PAShort Creek Landfill Wheeling, WVAkron Transfer Station Summit CountyCleveland Transfer Station Cuyahoga CountyAthens-Hocking Reclamation Ctr Athens CountyNoble Road Landfill Richland CountyLorain County Landfill Lorain CountyGeneva Landfill Ashtabula CountyPine Grove LandfillPortage County Solid Waste TF Portage CountyKelly Run SanitationLaurel Highlands LandfillSouth Hills LandfillEvergreen LandfillSouthern Alleghenies LandfillValley LandfillShade LandfillApex Landfill Jefferson CountyPort Clinton Landfill Ottawa County



G. Siting Strategy for Facilities

I. Purpose and Objective

The Carroll-Columbiana-Harrison Solid Waste Management District Plan includes a detailed strategy for the review of proposals to construct, enlarge or modify solid waste facilities within the District, including transfer stations, sanitary landfills, recycling facilities and yard waste composting facilities. Upon ratification of this Plan Update and receipt of the approval from the Director of the Ohio EPA, the Board of Directors may adopt the proposed rule requiring the submission of general plans and specifications by any person municipal corporation, township or other political subdivision desiring to construct, enlarge, or modify a solid waste facility within the District for a determination by the Board of whether the proposed facility complies with the Plan. To facilitate the review and siting of these facilities, the Ohio EPA recommends the creation of a Siting Evaluation Committee (SEC) by the District specifically for siting evaluations. The SEC, if formed by the Board, may initiate, conduct and evaluate preliminary surveys to aid in the selection of suitable sites for these solid waste facilities and to assist the Board in its determination of compliance with the Plan. Approval authority remains with the Board of Directors.

The Board will not approve general plans and specifications for any proposed solid waste facility or the modification of any existing in-District solid waste facility where the construction and operation of the proposed facility, as determined by the Board, will:

(1) have significant adverse impacts upon the Board’s ability to finance and implement the Plan;(2) interfere with the Board’s obligation to provide for the maximum feasible utilization of

existing in-District solid waste facilities;(3) adversely affect the quality of life within 300 feet of the proposed facility; or (4) have significant adverse impacts upon the local community, including community businesses

within 500 feet of the proposed facility and the infrastructure to serve the proposed facility.

II. Implementing Siting Strategy and Requirement for Submission and Approval of General Plans and Specifications for the Construction or Modification of Solid Waste Facilities

A. Definitions. As used in this Siting Strategy:

1. “Applicant” means the owner or operator of a solid waste transfer, disposal, recycling or resource recovery facility located within the District that proposes to construct, enlarge, modify or improve such facility.

2. “Board” means the board of directors of the Carroll-Columbiana-Harrison Joint Solid

Waste Management District.

3. “District” means the Carrroll-Columbiana-Harrison Joint Solid Waste Management District.

4. “Plan” means the District’s amended solid waste management plan approved or ordered to be implemented by the Director of Ohio EPA pursuant to Ohio Revised Code Sections 3734.52 et seq.



5. “Recycling” means the systematic sorting or processing of solid waste for the purpose of returning recovered materials to commerce as commodities for use or exchange.

6. “Resource recovery” means the conversion of solid wastes into energy, or some

material which can be used to create energy at any stage before ultimate disposal. “Resource recovery” includes, but is not limited to, “energy recovery” in which the organic fraction of waste is converted to some form of usable energy, and “waste-to-energy” in which solid waste is incinerated to produce electricity, steam or some other useful energy product.

7. “Rule” means a rule approved by the Board pursuant to section 343.01 of the Revised Code.

B. Review of General Plans and Specifications and Form of Rule.

No individual, public or private corporation, partnership, political subdivision or agency thereof, or any other entity shall commence the construction, enlargement, modification or improvement of any solid waste transfer, disposal, recycling or resource recovery facility, except for such facilities that are owned or operated by the Board, until general plans and specifications for the proposed construction, enlargement, modification or improvement have been reviewed and approved by the Board as complying with the District’s Plan. General plans and specifications submitted to the Board for review shall include all information necessary for the Board to evaluate whether the proposed construction, enlargement, modification or improvement complies with each of the criteria listed below. For the purpose of this Review, “modification” or “improvement” includes a physical change or change in the method of operation of a solid waste facility, or the utilization of a legitimate recycling facility as a solid waste transfer facility. The Board may obtain the assistance of outside consultants for purposes of performing the review required by this Siting Strategy. After conducting the review, the Board shall determine whether the proposed construction, enlargement, modification or improvement:

a. Is consistent with the goals, objectives, projections and strategies contained in the Dis-trict’s Plan;

b. Will not adversely affect financing for the implementation of the District’s Plan;

c. Will not adversely affect achievement of the Board’s objectives for designating and enter-ing into Agreements with existing in-District and out-of-District solid waste facilities, in-cluding, but not limited to, promoting the maximum feasible utilization of existing in–District solid waste facilities, in accordance with Section 3734.52 of the Revised Code;

d. Will be installed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appear-ance with the existing or intended character of the area proximate to the proposed con-struction, enlargement, modification or improvement;

e. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services;

f. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities or ser-vices, and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community;



g. Will not involve the excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes or odors;

h. Will have vehicular approaches to the property that are designed not to create an interfer-ence with traffic; and

i. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance.

To the extent that any of the criteria listed in subparagraphs (B)(a) through (i), above, establish a design standard that is addressed by rules of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency for the issuance of a solid waste facility construction permit, the Board shall exclude those criteria from the Board’s review and determination.

C. Development Agreement.

The Board shall approve the Applicant’s general plans and specifications as complying with the Plan after: (a) determining the proposed construction, enlargement, modification or improvement meets the criteria listed in subparagraphs (B)(a) through (i) above; and (b) the Applicant and the Board have entered into a development agreement memorializing the terms and conditions upon which the Board based its conclusion that the Applicant’s general plans and specifications complied with the criteria in subparagraphs (B)(a) through (i) of this Siting Strategy. The Applicant shall have a continuing obligation to comply with the Plan and the development agreement.

III. Waiver

The Board may waive application of the rule requiring the submission and Board approval of general plans and specifications, and any portion or all of the Siting Strategy or otherwise grant exceptions to the Rules of the District, or unilaterally modify or amend the Siting Strategy if the Board concludes that such waiver, modification or amendment is in the best interest of the District, its residents and businesses and will assist the Board in the successful implementation of the Plan and further District goals with respect to solid waste and waste reduction activities. Further, any decision by the Board to proceed with the construction, enlargement or modification of a District owned facility shall be deemed to be in compliance with the Plan and with this Siting Strategy.

H. Contingencies for Capacity Assurance

The District has concluded that there is sufficient solid waste disposal capacity available to the District and does not require a contingent strategy to assure that adequate disposal capacity is available to the District during the planning period. See Section VI-B for additional information.



VII. Measurement of Progress Toward Waste Reduction Goals

A. District Will Comply Wth Goals Identified

Goal 1 - Program standards for SWMDs: ensure the availability of reduction, recycling, and other waste reduction methods that are alternatives to landfilling for residential/commercial solid waste.

Goal 2 - a) a 25 percent reduction rate for the residential/commercial sector and b) a 66 percent waste reduction rate for the industrial sector.

The District will meet Goal 1 for the Residential/Commercial sector and Goal 1 for the Industrial sector.

B. Demonstration of Compliance with Goal 1

Goal 1 states that Solid Waste District programs collect a minimum of four of the materials identified as highly amenable to recovery from solid waste generated in the Residential and Commercial/Industrial sectors; these are listed in Table VII-1. In addition, access to recycling must be provided for a minimum of 90 percent of the residents of each county in a multi-county solid waste district.

1. Residential

a. Service AreaFor the purposes of determining compliance with Goal 1, the District will establish three service areas, Carroll County, with a 2011 population of 26,901, Columbiana County, with a 2011 population of 108,585 and Harrison county, with a 2011 population of 15,142. These service areas include both incorporated and unincorporated areas of the county.

b. AccessThe District used the following Ohio EPA default population credit to determine the population that has access to the drop-off sites in each county.

!5,000 people for full-time urban drop-offs available 40 hours per week for townships and municipalities with a population equal to or greater than 5,000.

!2,500 people for full-time rural drop-offs available 40 hours per week for townships and municipalities with a population less than 5,000.

Solid Waste Management Plan VII-1 October 2010


Table VII-1 Materials Designated to Demonstrate Compliance with Goal 1Materials Highly Amenable to

Recycling Residential Sector Commercial/Institutional Sector

Corrugated cardboard XMixed paper X XNewspaper X XGlass containers XScrap Tires X XUsed Motor Oil XTextilesLead-acid batteries XMajor appliances X XYard waste X XSteel containers X XAluminum containers X XPlastic containers X XOffice Paper X XWood Pallets and Packaging XFood Waste

Table VII-2a Residential Sector Access: Carroll County Service areaReference Year (2008) Year 2011

Program Population Population w/ access

Population Population w/ access

Non-subscription curbsideCarrollton Village 3,208 3,208 3,260 3,260

Full-service urban drop-offsLake Mohawk (Brown Twp) 6,277 5,000 6,378 5,000Malvern (Brown Twp) 6,277 5,000 6,378 5,000

Full-service rural drop-offsAugusta (Augsta Twp) 1,564 1,564 1,590 1,590Carrollton (Center Twp) 4,395 2,500 4,465 2,500Dellroy (Monroe Twp) 1,873 1,873 1,903 2,390Harlem Springs (Lee Twp) 1,102 1,102 1,120 1,120Kilgore (Loudon Twp) 1,007 1,007 1,023 1,023Leesville (Orange Twp) 178 178 180 180Mechanicstown (Fox Twp) 1,050 1,050 1,066 1,066New Harrisburg (Harrison Twp) 2,451 2,451 2,491 2,491Perrysville (Perry Twp) 1,000 1,000 1,016 1,016Sherrodsville (Orange Twp) 261 261 265 265

TOTALS 26,194 26,901Service area population

(2011) 26,901 100%

Assumptions: Although the District is planning to encourage municipalities to contract out volume-based disposal with recycling, the drop-off recycling programs are expected to continue.

The District only used the default population credit of 5,000 for Malvern and 2,500 for the Carrollton site because Ohio EPA does not allow access percentage to exceed 100 percent. Therefore, it was necessary to choose a lower population with access for the remainder of the sites in Carroll County to keep the total county access percentage at 100 percent.



Table VII-2b Residential Sector Access: Columbiana County Service area

Reference Year (2008) Year 2011Program Population Population

w/ accessPopulation Population with

accessNon- Subscription curbside

East Liverpool 11,996 0 11,996 11,996Lewis Refuse 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500

Subscription curbsideSalem 11,781 85 11,781 81

Full-service urban drop-offsCalcutta - St Clair Twp 7,632 3,969 7,632 3,750Columbiana - Fairfield Twp 9,819 3,969 9,819 3,750East Liverpool #1 – Liverpool Twp 16,146 3,969 16,146 3,750East Liverpool #2 – Liverpool Twp 16,146 3,969 16,146 3,750East Palestine – Unity Twp 9,923 3,969 9,923 3,750Fairfield Twp. 9,819 3,969 9,819 3,750JDS Landscaping – Unity Twp 9,923 3,969 9,923 3,750Leetonia – Salem Twp 5,538 3,969 5,538 3,750Lisbon – Center Twp 6,238 3,969 6,238 3,750Liverpool Twp. 16,146 3,969 16,146 3,750New Waterford – Unity Twp 9,923 3,969 9,923 3,750Salem Twp 5,538 3,969 5,538 3,750Salem – Perry Twp 16,350 3,969 16,350 3,750St. Clair Twp. 7,632 3,969 7,632 3,750Unity Twp. 9,923 3,969 9,923 3,750Wellsville – Yellow Creek Twp 6,004 3,969 6,004 3,750

Full Service Rural Drop-offsBeaver Creek -Middleton Twp 3,533 2,500 3,533 1,847Butler Twp. 3,342 2,500 3,342 1,847Elkrun Twp. 4,758 2,500 4,758 1,847Guilford Lake – Hanover Twp 3,658 2,500 3,658 1,847Hanoverton – Hanover Twp 3,658 2,500 3,658 1,847Knox Twp. 4,636 2,500 4,636 1,847Madison Twp. 3,276 2,500 3,276 1,847Middleton Twp. 3,533 2,500 3,533 1,847Rogers – Middleton Twp 3,533 2,500 3,533 1,847Salineville – Washington Twp 2,268 2,500 2,268 1,847Summitville – Franklin Twp 746 2,500 746 1,845Wayne Twp. 768 2,500 768 1,846West Twp. 3,232 2,500 3,232 1,847TOTALS 108,589 108,585Service Area Population (2011) 108,585

Access Percentage 100%

Assumptions: Although the District is planning to encourage municipalities to contract out volume-based disposal with recycling, the drop-off recycling programs are expected to continue.

The District did not use the default population credit of 5,000 for full-time urban and 2,500 for full-time rural sites because Ohio EPA does not allow access percentage to exceed 100 percent. Therefore, it was necessary to choose a population credit for Columbiana County to keep the total county access percentage at 100 percent.

*The population of Yellow Creek Township is incorrect in ODOD report. The population listed in this table includes the population of Wellsville Village, which is located in Yellow Creek Township.



Table VII-2c Residential Sector Access: Harrison County Service areaReference Year (2008) Year 2011

Program Population Population w/ access

Population Population with access

Non-subscription curbsideFull-service urban drop-offsFull-service rural drop-offs

Bowerston 1,203 2,500 1,194 2,500Cadiz 3,603 2,500 3,576 2,500Freeport 742 2,500 736 2,500Hopedale 1,850 2,500 1,835 2,500Jewett 1,524 2,500 1,512 2,500Scio 1,572 2,500 1,560 2,500

TOTALS 15,000 15,000Service area

population (2011) 15,142Access

percentage 99.06%

c. ParticipationEducation and AwarenessIn order to meet the participation standard defined by Ohio EPA, the District will use the following strategies that are fully described in Section IV- E.1 and in Section V - E.1 under Goal 3 and Goal 4.

Composting, “Don’t Bag It,” Leaf Collection and Christmas Tree Recycling Management of Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Source Reduction and Recycling Awareness

As part of the education and awareness process, the District will maintain both print and on-line materials that relate to residential recycling opportunities, including the location of all currently available drop-off sites, instructions for properly using these sites, and materials accepted. The District will also maintain an inventory of all known recycling opportunities throughout the District.

Financial Incentives Establishing a volume-based garbage program for municipal residents that includes the curbside collection of recyclable materials is an optimum way to increase recycling: the more a resident recycles, the lower the garbage bill. Because residents are paying for the amount of garbage they dispose, this program provides an incentive to recycle, and the District’s recycling rate increases. The District has already conveyed this concept to one municipality in the District; a successful volume-based garbage program with weekly curbside recycling has been established in Carrollton.

The District will continue to encourage townships and municipalities to bid out garbage collection in their political boundaries and require collection of recyclables as part of the contract. The District will convey this reduced-cost, increased-recycling concept to the municipalities in hopes that they will then seek combined contracts. District staff will visit the larger-population townships and municipalities and describe the benefits of these programs, showing how it has worked successfully in several Ohio jurisdictions.



2. Commercial/Industrial

For the commercial and industrial sector, there are three service areas in the District: Carroll County, Columbiana County and Harrison County. In order to meet the access standard for the commercial/industrial sector, District's must show that recycling opportunities exist that collect at least four of the materials highly amendable to recycling for the commercial/institutional sector, as identified in Table VII-1, in each service area. The following facilities will be used to satisfy the access goal for commercial and industrial businesses:

Facility/Program Materials collectedCarroll CountyCCH Drop-off steel containers, office paper, newspaper,Non-subscription curbside - Carrollton cardboard, office paper, newspaper, J&J Refuse cardboardLewis Refuse and Recycling cardboard, paper

Columbiana CountyCCH Drop-off office paper, newspaperLewis Refuse and Recycling cardboard, paper, industrial plasticsAlliance Recycling Paper, steel containersJDS Landscaping Yard wasteJaSar Recycling Cardboard, paper, plastics

Harrison CountyCCH Drop-off office paper, newspaper, steel containersSlesnick Recycling CardboardJ&J Refuse Cardboard

Education and AwarenessIn order to meet the participation standard defined by Ohio EPA, the District will use the following strategies that are fully described in Section IV and in Section V - E.2 under Goal 3 and Goal 4:

Source Reduction and Recycling AwarenessIndustrial Recycling



3. Targets for Reduction and Recycling

a. Residential/Commercial sector

The District chose to comply with Goal 1 for the residential/commercial sector. This goal states that the District will ensure the availability of reduction, recycling, and other waste reduction methods that are alternatives to landfilling for residential/commercial solid waste. However, the Ohio EPA requires that Districts that are demonstrating compliance with Goal 1 calculate the Waste Reduction Rate (WRR); these values are tabulated in Table VII-3. Because the 2008 reference year WRR is less than the required 25 percent, the District will identify a year 2015 target of 16.5 percent. This target is consistent with the District’s strategies listed in Section V.

The District’s residential/commercial WRR is lower than 25 percent for two reasons: First, even though the District provides educational programs to its residents and businesses explaining the benefits of recycling, many residents still do not have a significant incentive to recycle. Even in communities with volume-based residential disposal, “throwing it away” is easier than sorting recyclables materials. Commercial businesses typically pay for garbage disposal on a per-pull basis. Since they are already using volume-based service and are aware that recycling will save them money, it is apparent that many businesses find the extra effort involved to establish and maintain additional recycling activities not economically viable for them.

Recycling for the commercial sector can be difficult when there is limited space for an extra recycling container next to their dumpster. Without space for recycling containers, few businesses will implement recycling programs.

The second reason the WRR is less than 25 percent is due, the District believes, to the lack of reported waste reduction. The District only counts documented waste reduction toward the WRR. The District does estimate, extrapolate or generalize waste reduction data to the entire population or to its commercial and industrial sectors. The District makes a substantial commitment of time and resources to obtain complete residential, commercial and industrial waste reduction and recycling information from recycling facilities, commercial businesses and industries. Many do not maintain complete information and the information that is available is often inaccurate. Mandatory reporting is not required. All information gathered by the District was provided voluntarily by recycling facilities and businesses. Recycling facilities are not required to track the origin of the materials they receive.

The WRR shown in the table below is based solely on known, reported recycling; there is more recycling and waste reduction occurring than what has been reported and the actual WRR is higher than is shown below. Until such time as the District can collect accurate data from the vast majority of recycling facilities and commercial businesses, or District's are permitted to use state-provided generalizations regarding waste reduction, the WRR will always be lower than the actual recycling rate.

b. Industrial sector

As with the Residential/Commercial Sector, the District chose to comply with Goal 1 for the industrial sector. As is shown in Table VII-4, the District will not meet the state goal of 66 percent reduction. Districts that are demonstrating compliance with Goal 1 calculate the Waste Reduction Rate (WRR); these values are tabulated in Table VII-4. Because the WRR



is less than the required 66 percent, the District will identify a year 2016 target of 45 percent. This target is also consistent with the District’s strategies listed in Section V.

The District has offered waste prevention services to local industries; however, it has been the experience of the District that many businesses do not have adequate incentives to initiate new programs. The current cost of disposal is low when compared to the costs that are incurred to successfully recycle.

Additionally, recycling markets have fluctuated over the past few years with a significant drop in 2008 and 2009 that interferes with the decision to start recycling when the costs are unpredictable. While the ferrous recycling market remains strong, the markets for other materials generated by industrial businesses have dropped to the point where it is not economical to recycle. Waste streams such as ceramics and composites prove difficult to recycle due to the limited number of recycling facilities that accept these materials.

However, the District believes that the most significant reason the WRR is less than 66 percent is again due to inadequate and inaccurate reporting. Industrial businesses are not required to submit recycling reports to the District. All recycling information is provided voluntarily. As was mentioned in Section IV, the District conducted a comprehensive recycling survey to gather 2008 recycling data. The District improved its response rate from the survey. However, only 25 percent of the industries throughout the District provided usable information. Many businesses will not complete survey instruments because they do not weigh or document the volumes of recyclable materials that are collected.

The District can only count known industrial recycling and waste reduction toward the WRR. The industrial WRR shown in the table below is based solely on documented, reported recycling. Based on other sources of data, the District believes that there is significantly more recycling and waste reduction in the industrial sector than what has been reported and the actual WRR is higher than is shown below. If the WRR is based solely on known recycling and reported disposal, the 2008 WRR is 69 percent. It should be noted that the 2008 reported industrial disposal is most likely less than the actual industrial disposal, due to the commingling of industrial waste with commercial waste by haulers (industries that have dumpsters are picked up on the same route as commercial businesses, thus mixing waste streams). The District will continue its efforts to improve reliable reporting by the industrial sector.

Until such time as the District can collect accurate waste reduction data from the majority of industries, or District's are permitted to use waste reduction estimates for specific industry groups, the industrial WRR will continue to be lower than the actual recycling rate.

All of these factors play an important role in the District’s industrial WRR. Some of these obstacles can be overcome by the District’s programs, while others are dependent on factors that are beyond the District’s control.

c. Calculating Goal #2, the Waste Reduction Rate (WRR)

The District’s Residential/Commercial WRR is listed in Table VII-3, Industrial WRR in Table VII-4, and total WRR in table VII-5. These rates are based on the calculated generation and not actual disposal data. The WRR was calculated as follows.



WASTE REDUCTION RATE (WRR)

WRR = [TWR / (TWR + DL)] x 100 ,

where TWR is the total tons of waste reduced in the reference year, and DL is the tons of waste landfilled in the reference year.

1. Reference Year Residential and Commercial WRR

WRR2008 = [15,402 / (15,402 + 92,989)] x 100 = 14.21 percent

2. Reference Year Industrial WRR

WRR2008 = [30,265 / (30,265 + 45,555)] x 100 = 39.92 percent

3. Reference Year Total WRR (includes exempt waste)

WRR2008 = [45,667 / (45,667 + 142,488)] x 100 = 24.27 percent

PER CAPITA WASTE REDUCTION (PCWR)

PCWR = (TWR x 2000 lbs) / (P x 365 days)

where TWR is the Tons of waste reduced in the reference year,and P is the District population in the reference year

1. Reference Year Residential PCWR

PCWR2008 = (15,402 TPY x 2000 lbs) / (150,053 people x 365 days) = 0.56 lbs / person / day

2. Reference Year Industrial PCWR


3. Reference Year Total PCWR




Table VII-3 Annual Rate of Waste Reduction: Residential/Commercial Waste

Year R C DL TWR P WRR PCWR2008 8,443 6,959 92,989 15,402 150,053 14.21 0.562009 9,340 7,098 92,037 16,438 150,243 15.15 0.602010 9,446 7,240 91,927 16,686 150,434 15.36 0.612011 9,554 7,385 91,814 16,939 150,628 15.58 0.622012 9,664 7,533 91,698 17,197 150,824 15.79 0.622013 9,776 7,684 91,578 17,460 151,022 16.01 0.632014 9,891 7,838 91,453 17,729 151,222 16.24 0.642015 10,008 7,995 91,325 18,003 151,424 16.47 0.652016 10,128 8,155 91,192 18,283 151,628 16.70 0.662017 10,251 8,318 91,054 18,569 151,833 16.94 0.672018 10,376 8,484 90,913 18,860 152,040 17.18 0.682019 10,504 8,654 90,766 19,158 152,249 17.43 0.692020 10,635 8,827 90,615 19,462 152,461 17.68 0.702021 10,769 9,004 90,458 19,773 152,675 17.94 0.712022 10,906 9,184 90,297 20,090 152,891 18.20 0.722023 11,046 9,368 90,131 20,414 153,109 18.47 0.732024 11,190 9,555 89,959 20,745 153,329 18.74 0.742025 11,337 9,746 89,781 21,083 153,551 19.02 0.752026 11,488 9,941 89,597 21,429 153,775 19.30 0.76

Explanation of Symbols:R = Tons of waste source reduced and recycledC = Tons of waste composted (includes Land application)P = District populationDL = Tons of waste landfilledPCWR = Per capita waste reduction in lbs/person/dayWRR = Waste reduction rate in percent

Sample calculation is provided in Table VII-5



Table VII-4 Annual Rate of Waste Reduction: Industrial Waste

Year R C DL TWR P WRR PCWR2008 30,265 0 45,555 30,265 150,053 39.92 1.112009 30,416 0 44,651 30,416 150,243 40.52 1.112010 30,568 0 43,728 30,568 150,434 41.14 1.112011 30,721 0 42,805 30,721 150,628 41.78 1.122012 30,875 0 41,880 30,875 150,824 42.44 1.122013 31,029 0 40,956 31,029 151,022 43.10 1.132014 31,184 0 40,030 31,184 151,222 43.79 1.132015 31,340 0 39,104 31,340 151,424 44.49 1.132016 31,497 0 38,176 31,497 151,628 45.21 1.142017 31,654 0 37,248 31,654 151,833 45.94 1.142018 31,813 0 36,319 31,813 152,040 46.69 1.152019 31,972 0 35,389 31,972 152,249 47.46 1.152020 32,132 0 34,459 32,132 152,461 48.25 1.152021 32,292 0 33,528 32,292 152,675 49.06 1.162022 32,454 0 32,596 32,454 152,891 49.89 1.162023 32,616 0 31,663 32,616 153,109 50.74 1.172024 32,779 0 30,729 32,779 153,329 51.61 1.172025 32,943 0 29,795 32,943 153,551 52.51 1.182026 33,108 0 28,859 33,108 153,775 53.43 1.18

Explanation of Symbols:R = Tons of waste source reduced and recycledC = Tons of waste composted P = District populationDL = Tons of waste landfilled PCWR = Per capita waste reduction lbs/person/dayWRR = Waste reduction rate in percent

Sample calculation is provided in Table VII-5



Table VII-5 Annual Rate of Waste Reduction: Total District Waste

Year R C DL TWR P WRR PCWR2008 38,708 6,959 142,488 45,667 150,053 24.27 1.672009 39,756 7,098 140,632 46,854 150,243 24.99 1.712010 40,014 7,240 139,599 47,254 150,434 25.29 1.722011 40,275 7,385 138,563 47,660 150,628 25.59 1.732012 40,539 7,533 137,522 48,072 150,824 25.9 1.752013 40,805 7,684 136,478 48,489 151,022 26.21 1.762014 41,075 7,838 135,427 48,913 151,222 26.53 1.772015 41,348 7,995 134,373 49,343 151,424 26.86 1.792016 41,625 8,155 133,312 49,780 151,628 27.19 1.802017 41,905 8,318 132,246 50,223 151,833 27.52 1.812018 42,189 8,484 131,176 50,673 152,040 27.87 1.832019 42,476 8,654 130,099 51,130 152,249 28.21 1.842020 42,767 8,827 129,018 51,594 152,461 28.57 1.852021 43,061 9,004 127,930 52,065 152,675 28.93 1.872022 43,360 9,184 126,837 52,544 152,891 29.29 1.882023 43,662 9,368 125,738 53,030 153,109 29.66 1.902024 43,969 9,555 124,632 53,524 153,329 30.04 1.912025 44,280 9,746 123,520 54,026 153,551 30.43 1.932026 44,596 9,941 122,400 54,537 153,775 30.82 1.94

Explanation of Symbols:R = Tons of waste source reduced and recycledC = Tons of waste composted (includes land application)P = District populationDL = Tons of waste landfilledPCWR = Per capita waste reduction in lbs/person/dayWRR = Waste reduction rate in percent

Sample Calculations for Tables VII-3 (VII-1 and VII-2 similar):

TWR = R + C

Year 2018 example: TWR = R + C = 42,189 + 8,484 = 50,673 DL = 131,176

WRR = [50,673 / (50,673 +131,176)] x 100 = 27.87 percent

PCWR = (50,673 tons x 2000 lbs) / (152,040 people x 365 days) = 1.83 lbs/person/day



VIII. Cost and Financing of Plan Implementation

A. Funding Mechanisms and Amount of Money Generated

1. District Disposal Fees

The schedule of fees to be levied in accordance with Section 3734.57(B) of the Ohio Revised Code when the approval of this Plan update by the Director of the Environmental Protection Agency until 2026 shall continue to be the fees currently being levied as follows:

! Fee for disposal at a sanitary landfill located in the District of solid wastes generated within the District:

$1.00 Per Ton

! Fee for disposal at a sanitary landfill located in the District of solid wastes generated outside the boundaries of the District, but inside the state:

$2.00 Per Ton

! Fee for disposal at a sanitary landfill located in the District of solid wastes generated outside the boundaries of the state:

$1.00 Per Ton

The District fees to be levied under Divisions B (1) to B (3) of Section 3734.57 of the Ohio Revised Code are shown in Table VIII-1. Currently there is no operating landfill in the District.

The construction of Harrison County, owned by Waste Management Inc., landfill is not complete at the time of writing this Plan and plans with respect to major construction efforts and operation of this landfill are currently uncertain.

Since the amount of waste that will be disposed at Harrison County Landfill is unknown, no projection of revenues has been made in Table VIII-1.

2 Contract Fees

The District has designated solid waste facilities pursuant to 343.014 of the Revised Code and has entered into contracts with designated facilities pursuant to which the District will receive a contract fee in the amount of $3.50 per ton of solid waste generated within the District and received at each designated facility. Between 1998 and 2009, the amount of District waste disposed at landfills ranged from 98,681 tons in 2009 to 114,362 tons in 2003; the average annual disposal is almost 110,000 tons per year. The District feels it is important to make conservative revenue projections because the District must have sufficient revenue to operate the waste reduction programs mandated by the Ohio Administrative Code. Due to the economic conditions in 2008 and 2009, the District will project a disposal of 100,000 tons in 2010 through 2012, 105,000 tons in 2013, and 110,000 tons in 2014 through 2016. For the balance of the planning period, the District is expecting revenue-generating disposal to increase to 115,000 tons in 2026. There are two major reasons for this increase: 1) the District has had several years with higher than average disposal volumes and 2) the District has expanded the number of designated facilities from 22 to 37, which will decrease the possibility that haulers can go to a non-designated facility and dispose of waste without reporting to the District.

Solid Waste Management Plan VIII-1 October 2010


3. Recycling Revenue

Since 2008, the District has sold recyclable materials collected at the District's drop-off recycling sites. In 2008, the District received $43,914 in revenue from sale of recyclables and in 2009, $35,439 was received from the sale of recyclables. The District expects to receive revenue from the sale of recyclables from the drop-off recycling sites throughout the entire planning period. The District is projecting that the amount of material collected at the drop-off sites will increase to 4,100 tons during the planning period. Recycling markets were down significantly in 2009 and the District still received just over $35,000 in recycling revenue for 2,485 tons of material. Because the District is projecting drop-off recycling will increase each year throughout the planning period, the amount of recycling revenue should increase proportionally. However, due to market volatility, the District will base future recycling revenue on an amount lower than the revenue received in 2009, when recycling markets were down. Therefore, the District is projecting a constant recycling revenue of $30,000 per year for each year of the planning period. It is estimated that the projected recycling revenue is significantly less than the amount of recycling revenue that the District will actually receive for each year of the planning period. The District feels it is important to be conservative with revenue projections to ensure that the District has sufficient revenue to implement the programs outlined in this Plan.

The District anticipates that the revenues from the contract fees and recycling revenue will be sufficient to fund implementation of the Plan.



4. Summary of District Revenues

Table VIII-3 summarizes the total revenue anticipated by the District. This table includes contract fees, which are the primary sources of income, as well as other secondary sources of revenue.

The secondary sources of revenue for the District also include receipts from the District's annual scrap tire and electronics collection events where District residents are charged fees for bringing used tires and televisions; these fees are projected as constant throughout the planning period.

Table VIII-1 District Disposal Fee Schedule and Revenues Generated

Fee Schedule ($/ton) Tons Disposed in the District TotalYear In-

DistrictOut-of District

Out-of State

In-District

Out-of District

Out-of State

District Fee Revenue

2011 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002012 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002013 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002014 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002015 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002016 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002017 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002018 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002019 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002020 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002021 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002022 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002023 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002024 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002025 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.002026 $1.00 $2.00 $1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0.00

Assumption: The District does not know when the proposed Harrison County Landfill will be opened and how much solid waste it will receive after it goes into operation.



Table VIII-2 Contract Fee Schedule and Revenues

Year Contract FeeAmount of District Waste

to be Disposed(in tons)*

Total Contract Fee Revenue

2011 $3.50 100,000 $350,0002012 $3.50 100,000 $350,0002013 $3.50 105,000 $367,5002014 $3.50 110,000 $385,0002015 $3.50 110,000 $385,0002016 $3.50 110,000 $385,0002017 $3.50 111,000 $388,5002018 $3.50 111,000 $388,5002019 $3.50 112,000 $392,0002020 $3.50 112,000 $392,0002021 $3.50 113,000 $395,5002022 $3.50 113,000 $395,5002023 $3.50 114,000 $399,0002024 $3.50 114,000 $399,0002025 $3.50 115,000 $402,5002026 $3.50 115,000 $402,500

*Assumptions: According the disposal volume shown in Table III-1, a total of 96,128 tons of solid waste from the District was disposed at various Ohio and Pennsylvania landfills. The District’s contract fee collection report indicates that approximately 109,000 tons of District waste was taken to Ohio and Pennsylvania landfills and transfer facilities in 2008. The difference between Table III-1 and 109,000 is primarily due to waste taken to transfer facilities prior to disposal. The waste shown in this table includes waste that was taken to transfer facilities prior to disposal, but does not include exempt waste.

The District renewed solid waste facility designation in 2009 and the number of designated solid waste facilities increased from 22 to 37. Based on experiences with designation in other solid waste districts, the District estimates that the District will have an increase in “revenue producing waste” as a result of improved reporting by designated facilities. Other solid waste districts in Ohio have reported that haulers tend to misrepresent the origin of waste in an attempt to reduce their costs by not paying an out-of-district fee and a district's generation or contract fee. Section 343.01 of the Ohio Revised Code prohibits District waste from being disposed at non-designated facilities and Chapter 3745-502-03 of the Ohio Administrative Code requires that haulers accurately report the origin of waste. The District feels that some of the waste generated in the District is being misrepresented and will use its authority in the Ohio Revised Code to recover lost waste.

The District is projecting less than average waste disposal for 2011, which is significantly less than the disposal projected in Table VI-1. This is due to the slow economic recovery. From 2014 to 2016, the District is projecting disposal will remain constant at 110,000 tons per year. Waste disposal will increase from 110,000 in 2016 to 115,000 in 2026, as the District gains compliance from haulers with respect to the District's facility designation. It should be noted that all the disposal projections shown in Table VIII-2 are significantly less than the disposal projections in Table VI-1. These assumptions prevent the District from overestimating annual revenues.



Table VIII-3 Summary of Revenue Generated and Mechanisms Used

Total Year Contract Fee Recycling

RevenueCollection

eventsRevenue

2011 $350,000 $30,000 $3,000 $396,052 1

2012 $350,000 $30,000 $3,000 $383,0002013 $367,500 $30,000 $3,000 $400,5002014 $385,000 $30,000 $3,000 $418,0002015 $385,000 $30,000 $3,000 $418,0002016 $385,000 $30,000 $3,000 $418,0002017 $388,500 $30,000 $3,000 $421,5002018 $388,500 $30,000 $3,000 $421,5002019 $392,000 $30,000 $3,000 $425,0002020 $392,000 $30,000 $3,000 $425,0002021 $395,500 $30,000 $3,000 $428,5002022 $395,500 $30,000 $3,000 $428,5002023 $399,000 $30,000 $3,000 $432,0002024 $399,000 $30,000 $3,000 $432,0002025 $402,500 $30,000 $3,000 $435,5002026 $402,500 $30,000 $3,000 $435,500

Note 1: The District received USDA grant funding, $13,052 of which will be paid to the District in 2011. This funding will be used to implement some of the programs outlined in the Plan. These funds are included in the 2011 total revenue. The District cannot guarantee any additional grant funding will be received beyond 2011 and therefore no additional grant funding is included in the above table.

Assumptions: Disposal fees are not included in the total district revenues as there are no operating landfills in the District, and there is no date set for the opening of the Harrison County Landfill.

B. Cost of Plan Implementation

The costs to implement the District’s recycling and waste reduction programs is detailed in the following paragraphs. There are other programs identified in Section IV and Section V that are not implemented by the District. The costs for these “non-District” programs are not identified in this Section, as they are not the responsibility of the District.

Education:

The following programs will be implemented under this expenditure category:

Lead Acid Battery RecyclingComposting, “Don’t Bag It”, Leaf Collection and Christmas Tree RecyclingBuy-Back and Privately Owned Recycling OpportunitiesNon-subscription Curbside RecyclingManagement of Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Source Reduction and Recycling Awareness

The District has contracted with an environmental educator for education and outreach pertaining to recycling and waste reduction as outlined in Section IV and V. The educator is an independent contractor with a fixed annual cost. The District is projecting that the cost for this contract will be $12,000 per year for 2011 through 2026.



Table VIII-4a Cost of Plan Implementation: Education

Year Education2011 $12,0002012 $12,0002013 $12,0002014 $12,0002015 $12,0002016 $12,0002017 $12,0002018 $12,0002019 $12,0002020 $12,0002021 $12,0002022 $12,0002023 $12,0002024 $12,0002025 $12,0002026 $12,000

Recycling Drop-off Program: The District currently operates 47 drop-off recycling sites. The Carroll County and Harrison County sites are serviced by 30-cubic-yard roll-offs and the Columbiana County sites are serviced with six cubic-yard containers. The District contracts with a hauling company to transport the containers and recyclable materials from all the drop-off sites. In addition to the transportation contract, the District has a Recycling Coordinator. The Recycling Coordinator is a District employee, who is responsible for implementing the drop-off recycling program. The Recycling Coordinator checks all recycling sites at least once per week, schedules the transportation of the roll-of containers and performs site maintenance.

The cost to operate the drop-off recycling program is divided into three parts: Transportation, Fuel and Labor.

Transportation covers the cost to transport the roll-offs and empty the front load containers. The cost for roll-off transportation is based on a per-pull cost for each site. Because the front-load containers are operated on a regular route, the cost for the front-load containers is a fixed cost per year. The District is projecting a two percent increase in transportation costs for each year of the planning period.

Fuel includes purchasing fuel for the District's vehicle necessary for checking the recycling sites on a weekly basis. The 2011 costs are based on the 2009 expenditures. Due to the uncertainty in the fuel market, the District is projecting a four percent increase in fuel costs for each year of the planning period.

Labor includes the wages and fringe benefits for the Recycling Coordinator. The Recycling Coordinator position is a part-time position (24 hours per week), so the only fringe benefits include PERS, Workers' Compensation and Mandatory Medicare. Fringe benefits are calculated at 18.95 percent of wages. The District is projecting that employees will receive a two percent pay raise every year

These costs are delineated as such in Table VIII-4b below.



Table VIII-4b Cost of Plan Implementation: Recycling Drop-off Program

Year Transportation Fuel Labor Total2011 $218,616 $2,547 $15,142 $236,3052012 $222,988 $2,649 $15,445 $241,0822013 $227,448 $2,755 $15,754 $245,9572014 $231,997 $2,865 $16,069 $250,9312015 $236,637 $2,980 $16,390 $256,0072016 $241,370 $3,099 $16,718 $261,1872017 $246,197 $3,223 $17,052 $266,4722018 $251,121 $3,352 $17,393 $271,8662019 $256,143 $3,486 $17,741 $277,3702020 $261,266 $3,625 $18,096 $282,9872021 $266,491 $3,770 $18,458 $288,7192022 $271,821 $3,921 $18,827 $294,5692023 $277,257 $4,078 $19,204 $300,5392024 $282,802 $4,241 $19,588 $306,6312025 $288,458 $4,411 $19,980 $312,8492026 $294,227 $4,587 $20,380 $319,194

Rent and Utilities: The projected cost for District office rent, telephone service, long distance and cellular phones is $10,436 in 2011. The projected cost for the planning period is estimated to increase at a rate of two percent per year.

Table VIII-4c Cost of Plan Implementation: Rent and Utilities

Year Rent/Utilities2011 $10,4362012 $10,6452013 $10,8582014 $11,0752015 $11,2972016 $11,5232017 $11,7532018 $11,9882019 $12,2282020 $12,4732021 $12,7222022 $12,9762023 $13,2362024 $13,5012025 $13,7712026 $14,046



Payroll and benefits: The following programs will be implemented under this expenditure category:

Lead Acid Battery RecyclingComposting, “Don’t Bag It,” Leaf Collection and Christmas Tree RecyclingBuy-Back and Privately Owned Recycling OpportunitiesNon-subscription Curbside RecyclingManagement of Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Source Reduction and Recycling Awareness

The programs in the list above are the same programs discussed in the Education program discussed earlier in this section. The Executive Director and Administrative Assistant typically receive requests for information regarding recycling and waste reduction and often meet with residents and businesses to discuss recycling. Although the Educator will be primarily responsible for implementing these programs, it is envisioned that the Executive Director and Administrative Assistant will be providing the same types of service, to supplement the educator’s role.

The District administrative staff oversees all District programs and activities. The administrative staff is responsible for completing EPA reports, preparing, revising, implementing and monitoring the implementation of the District's solid waste plan and coordinating the District's one-day collection events. The administrative staff prepares the District’s annual budget, manages payroll, writes bid specifications and contracts, develops and updates personnel and safety policies. Other responsibilities include attending meetings, workshops, conferences, writing grants, and taking and preparing minutes and financial reports for Board meetings.

The projected costs for payroll for the Executive Director and Administrative Assistant in 2011 is $81,290. This includes wages, fringe benefits (PERS, Workers' Compensation and Mandatory Medicare) and health insurance. The District is projecting that employees will receive a two percent pay raise every. Benefits include PERS, workers compensation, mandatory medicare and medical insurance. PERS, workers compensation and medicare calculated at 18.95 percent of wages and will increase as wages increase. Medical insurance is projected to go up at a rate of nine percent every year throughout the planning period.

Table VIII-4d Cost of Plan Implementation: Payroll and Benefits

Year Payroll Benefits Total2011 $61,110 $20,180 $81,2902012 $62,332 $21,186 $83,5182013 $63,579 $22,266 $85,8452014 $64,851 $23,427 $88,2782015 $66,148 $24,675 $90,8232016 $67,471 $26,019 $93,4902017 $68,820 $27,465 $96,2852018 $70,196 $29,024 $99,2202019 $71,600 $30,705 $102,3052020 $73,032 $32,519 $105,5512021 $74,493 $34,476 $108,9692022 $75,983 $36,591 $112,5742023 $77,503 $38,876 $116,3792024 $79,053 $41,347 $120,4002025 $80,634 $44,019 $124,6532026 $82,247 $46,912 $129,159



Repairs: The repair cost for the District's truck and roll-offs was $3,620 in 2009. The District purchased a new vehicle and has made the operation of checking the drop-off recycling sites more efficient. The District feels that there will be less need for major repairs compared to previous repair frequency. Therefore, the District is projecting that repair costs will be $3,696 in 2011 (based on a one percent annual increase). Repairs are expected to increase at a rate of one percent per year.

Table VIII-4e Cost of Plan Implementation: Repairs

Year Repairs2011 $3,6962012 $3,7332013 $3,7702014 $3,8082015 $3,8462016 $3,8842017 $3,9232018 $3,9622019 $4,0022020 $4,0422021 $4,0822022 $4,1232023 $4,1642024 $4,2062025 $4,2482026 $4,290



Other Expenses: This category includes expenses for legal fees, state audit, office supplies, postage, petty cash, miscellaneous advertising, travel, computer hardware and software, parts, membership, office cleaning, etc. The District is projecting the 2011 expenditures for other expenses will be $10,000 and will increase two percent every year.

Table VIII-4f Cost of Plan Implementation: Other Expenses

Year Other Expenses2011 $10,0002012 $10,2002013 $10,4042014 $10,6122015 $10,8242016 $11,0402017 $11,2612018 $11,4862019 $11,7162020 $11,9502021 $12,1892022 $12,4332023 $12,6822024 $12,9362025 $13,1952026 $13,459

Appliance and Scrap Metal Recycling: Every year during the months of April and May, the District holds three, one-day events, one in each county, for the collection of scrap metal and used appliances. The cost for this program is limited to advertising. Because this program has been in existence since 1996 and is well utilized, the District is projecting a constant $1,200 cost per year.

Table VIII-4g Cost for Plan Implementation: Appliance andScrap Metal Recycling Program

Year Appliance and Scrap Metal Recycling

2011 $1,2002012 $1,2002013 $1,2002014 $1,2002015 $1,2002016 $1,2002017 $1,2002018 $1,2002019 $1,2002020 $1,2002021 $1,2002022 $1,2002023 $1,2002024 $1,2002025 $1,2002026 $1,200



Electronics Recycling: Every year during the months of April and May, the District holds three, one-day events, one in each county, for the collection of electronics. The District established the electronics recycling program in 2000. There is one event held in each county.

The cost for this program is limited to contracting for electronics transportation and recycling. The majority of the expense for the electronics program is for the processing of CRT televisions and monitors. CRTs contain leaded glass, which is difficult and costly to process and recycle and must be properly handled before the balance of the unit is disassembled and recycled. The District charges residents a small fee for CRT televisions and monitors to help offset some of the expenses with the program.

The District spent $3,665 in 2009 and $4,370 in 2010. The District may increase the fee charged to residents for larger televisions in 2011 and therefore, the 2011 expenses for electronics recycling are expected to increase by two percent compared to 2010. The estimated 2011 cost for contracting for transportation and processing of electronics will be $4,457 and will increase by two percent each year during the planning period.

Table VIII-4h Cost for Plan Implementation: Electronics Recycling Program

Year Electronics Recycling2011 $4,4572012 $4,5462013 $4,6372014 $4,7302015 $4,8252016 $4,9222017 $5,0202018 $5,1202019 $5,2222020 $5,3262021 $5,4332022 $5,5422023 $5,6532024 $5,7662025 $5,8812026 $5,999



Christmas Tree Recycling: The District coordinates this Program with the Carroll County Highway Department, the Harrison County Highway Department, the Columbiana County Career and Technical Center and participating villages and municipalities. The County highway departments put up the signs, supply the manpower and chippers to mulch the trees; townships and municipalities are responsible for transporting the trees to one main location in each county where the trees are converted to mulch.

The District pays for the advertisement of this program in the local newspapers. The District has spent between $387 and $586 for advertising in 2008 and 2009. It is estimated that the cost for these ads will be $500 in 2011 and will remain constant throughout the planning period.

Table VIII-4i Cost of Plan Implementation: Christmas Tree Recycling/Collection Program

Year Advertisements2011 $5002012 $5002013 $5002014 $5002015 $5002016 $5002017 $5002018 $5002019 $5002020 $5002021 $5002022 $5002023 $5002024 $5002025 $5002026 $500

(note: although the Christmas Tree Recycling Program is included in the yard waste strategies listed in Section IV and V, it is the only part of the strategy that has a separate cost associated with it. The balance of costs of the yard waste strategies is included in the Education Program, Table VIII-5a)

Scrap Tire Recycling Program: The District organizes an annual Scrap Tire Recycling program in conjunction with the Appliance and Scrap Metal Recycling and Electronics Recycling programs.

The scrap tire recycling program helps to reduce illegal dumping of tires by providing a convenient and inexpensive way to dispose of tires for do-it-yourselfers. It reduces the number of illegally dumped tires on township and county roads. Many municipalities and townships hold their own collection events for their people in communities and transport tires on scheduled dates to collection sites. Some townships pick up tires on their roads and bring them to the tire recycling facilities. The District pays for the disposal and recycling of these tires. The Program allows District residents to bring used tires; residents pay a small fee based on the size of the tire.

The District’s cost for this Program is limited to contractor charges for transporting and processing scrap tires. The District also allows townships and municipalities to transport their tires directly to tire recycling facilities which helps to reduce the cost for this Program. In the 2010, the District's total cost for this Program was $11,469. The District is projecting that this program will cost $11,698 in 2011 and will increase at an annual cost of two percent per year.



Table VIII-4j Cost of Plan Implementation: Scrap Tire Recycling Program

Year Contract Cost 2011 $11,6982012 $11,9322013 $12,1712014 $12,4142015 $12,6622016 $12,9152017 $13,1732018 $13,4362019 $13,7052020 $13,9792021 $14,2592022 $14,5442023 $14,8352024 $15,1322025 $15,4352026 $15,744

Management of Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) – (collection event): The District's Management of Household Hazardous Waste program has two components: education and collections. The educational portion of this program (and associated costs) was discussed in Table VIII-a above. The collection portion of the program is outlined below.

The District started collecting HHW from residents in 2000 by holding one collection event in each county. Since then, the District has changed the format of the HHW collections. The District now holds one HHW collection event each year and rotates the location of the event from year to year. All District residents are permitted to bring HHW to any of the events regardless of their county of residence. In addition, Heritage WTI has offered a free HHW collection event to the residents of Columbiana County at no cost to the District.

The District’s cost for the collection segment of the Management Household Hazardous Waste program is limited to cost to contract with a HHW contractor who collects, segregates, packages, transports and processes the HHW. The District has eliminated the collection of several types of materials at the HHW collection events. Latex paint is not hazardous and is not collected at the collection events. In addition, there are many outlets that accept lead-acid batteries and used oil for recycling. By eliminating these materials from the HHW collection events, and having only one District-sponsored HHW collection each year, has significantly reduced the cost to the District for the HHW collection portion of the program.

In 2009, the District paid $3,235 for the HHW collection event. In 2011, it is anticipated that collection segment of the program will cost $3,366 and will increase by two percent each year of the planning period.



Table VIII-4k Cost of Plan Implementation: Management of Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) – (collection event)

Year Contract Cost 2011 $3,3662012 $3,4332013 $3,5022014 $3,5722015 $3,6432016 $3,7162017 $3,7902018 $3,8662019 $3,9432020 $4,0222021 $4,1022022 $4,1842023 $4,2682024 $4,3532025 $4,4402026 $4,529

C. Funds Allocated from ORC 3734.57(B), ORC 3734.573

Table VIII-5 lists the annual contract fee revenues, allocations and balance for each year of the planning period. The annual revenue data was taken verbatim from Table VIII-3. Certain areas of expenditure listed in the Plan Format will not be used by the District. These expenditure areas will be listed as zero during each year of the period. The District receives a fee from solid waste facilities that contract with the District and remit $3.50 per ton to the District as consideration for designation. While the District acknowledges that it is not subject to the language of Section 3734.53 (A)(12) of the Revised Code, the District anticipated that the Board will direct and authorize the use of the contract fee revenue to finance implementation of the District Plan. For convenience and clarity, the following table reflects the projected use of the contract fees received by the District.

Plan preparation and monitoring accounts for the salary and benefits of the District Executive Director.



Table VIII-5 Revenues and Allocations in Accordance With ORC 3734.57, 3734.572, ORC 3737.573

Anticipated Expenditures of the Contract Fee Revenues for the following purposes*:Year Revenue 1 2 3 4 5, 6,

7 and 89

*BalanceBeginning Balance $194,218

2008 $553,826 $0.00 $474,104 $273,9402009 $451,920 $27,275 $409,680 $288,9052010 $437,719 $42,164 $322,839 $361,6212011 $396,052 $42,922 $332,026 $382,7252012 $383,000 $44,081 $338,708 $382,9362013 $400,500 $45,290 $345,554 $392,5922014 $418,000 $46,554 $352,566 $411,4722015 $418,000 $47,875 $359,752 $421,8452016 $418,000 $49,257 $367,120 $423,4682017 $421,500 $50,705 $374,672 $419,5912018 $421,500 $52,224 $382,420 $406,4472019 $425,000 $53,818 $390,373 $387,2562020 $425,000 $55,494 $398,536 $358,2262021 $428,500 $57,257 $406,918 $322,5512022 $428,500 $59,115 $415,530 $276,4062023 $432,000 $61,073 $424,383 $222,9502024 $432,000 $63,141 $433,484 $158,3252025 $435,500 $65,327 $442,845 $85,6532026 $435,500 $67,639 $452,481 $1,033

1) plan preparation and monitoring of plan implementation 2) implementation of plan 3) financial assistance to health departments for solid waste enforcement4) financial assistance to counties within the District to defray the costs of maintaining roads and contracts with

health departments for collecting/analyzing samples from water wells adjacent to solid waste facilities6) out-of-state waste inspection program7) financial assistance to local health departments to enforce ORC 3734.03 or to local law enforcement agencies

having jurisdiction within the District for anti-littering8) financial assistance to health department employees to participate in Ohio EPA’s training and certification

program for solid waste operators and facility inspectors.9) financial assistance to local municipalities and townships to defray the added cost of road maintenance of roads

and services related to the operation of solid waste facilities

The beginning balance of $194,218 is the carryover balance at the beginning of 2008. The 2008 and 2009 revenue, expenditures and balances are actual values. 2008 and 2009 revenue includes grant funding, some of which was passed through grants to other entities. The balance of each year is used as carryover for the next year. The revenue and expenditures for 2008 and 2009 are actual expenditures and the individual expense amounts match the Ohio EPA Quarterly Fee Reports (QFR). For the 2008 and 2009 QFRs, the District commingled some of the Administrative Assistant's salary and benefits with the Director's salary and benefits. The amount of commingling was based on whether the District was actively working on the writing the plan. Because it is difficult to project actual amounts for the plan preparation and monitoring of plan implementation for the planning period, the District will be projecting only the Director's salary and benefits in the plan preparation and monitoring of plan implementation category above during the entire planning period.

Sample Calculations:Balance 2014 = (Revenues from 2014 + carryover from 2013) - (2014 expenditures from Column 1 + Column 2)



D. Contingent Funding or Financing

The designation/contract fee funding mechanism established by the District provides adequate funding for Plan implementation. All solid waste generated within the District is required to be delivered to a designated facility for transfer or disposal. All designated facilities are contractually obligated to pay a $3.50 per ton contract fee on all District solid waste received at the facility. To date, the District has entered into designation agreements with the owners and operators of 36 solid waste facilities (see list of designated facilities, attached at Appendix H). Each designation agreement includes the unilateral right of the District to increase the amount of the contract fee, provided any such increase applies equally to all designated solid waste facilities (see representative Designation Agreement, also attached at Appendix H). The District Board of Director’s primary contingent funding mechanism to increase revenues is to increase the amount of the contract fee if the District Board of Directors determines that it is necessary or appropriate to increase that fee. If the current $3.50 per ton contract fee plus other available revenue sources (such as revenues from the sale of recyclable materials) are insufficient to fully fund the District, the District Board of Directors can increase the amount of the contract fee by an amount necessary to assure that sufficient funds are available to fund the District Plan. The District Board of Directors has complete authority and will exercise that authority if necessary to ensure that sufficient funds are available to secure the financial solvency of the District and fund implementation of the Plan.

If the construction of the Harrison County Landfill is completed and the landfill begins accepting waste during the planning period, the District may receive additional revenue from the collection of a tiered disposal fee pursuant to Section 3734.57 of the Revised Code. Any tiered disposal fees from the Harrison County Landfill or any other facility constructed within the District greater than the revenue anticipated from the contract fee will be used to improve waste reduction and recycling activities within the District and achieving the goals outlined in the District Plan. Those funds may be used for activities including, but not limited to, the following: implementation of buy recycled programs, financial assistance to boards of health for enforcement of solid waste laws, financial assistance for publicly-owned solid waste facility closure and post-closure activities and regulation and enforcement of litter laws.

As an alternative or in addition to using additional contract fees as a source of contingent funding, the District may exercise the authority under R.C. 343.08 to collect rates and charges. The amount of contingent funding to be obtained through rates and charges depends on the costs of the programs, assistance and activities to be implemented by the Board. The District’s Board of Directors will determine whether to implement the contingency funding mechanisms available to the Board, after evaluating the costs to implement such programs, assistance and activities. A copy of R.C. 343.08 is listed in Appendix I.



Table VIII-6 Contingent Funding Sources*

Amount of Contingent FundingYear Harrison County Landfill Other sources Total2011 Unknown Unknown Unknown2012 Unknown Unknown Unknown2013 Unknown Unknown Unknown2014 Unknown Unknown Unknown2015 Unknown Unknown Unknown2016 Unknown Unknown Unknown2017 Unknown Unknown Unknown2018 Unknown Unknown Unknown2019 Unknown Unknown Unknown2020 Unknown Unknown Unknown2021 Unknown Unknown Unknown2022 Unknown Unknown Unknown2023 Unknown Unknown Unknown2024 Unknown Unknown Unknown2025 Unknown Unknown Unknown2026 Unknown Unknown Unknown2027 Unknown Unknown Unknown

*These are the only sources of contingent funding;

Assumptions: Harrison County Landfill has an approved PTI; however, its construction has not been completed at the time this Plan was written. As the disposal amount in Harrison County Landfill is unknown, the District cannot anticipate the amount of revenues generated by the landfill.



E. Summary of Costs and Revenue

Table VIII-7 is a compilation of District revenue and expenditures for the 16-year planning period. District revenue includes District contract fees and other sources of income. The current disposal fees are set at one dollar for in-district waste, two dollars for out-of-District Ohio waste and one dollar for out-of-state waste.

Table VIII-7 includes actual revenue and expenditures for 2008 and 2009. The District received several grants in 2008 through 2010. Some of the grant funding was used for the education program to run various recycling advertisements in the local newspapers. This is the reason that the education program expenditures were $34,342 in 2008.

The District also received grant funds in 2008 and 2009 on behalf of other entities (the District was the legal applicant, but the projects were being implemented by sub-grantees). The expenditures for these “pass thru” grants are shown in the “Other Expenses” category for 2008 ands 2009 and this is why there is a significant decrease in the Other Expenses category in 2010 in Table VIII-7

Projected revenue and expenditures for 2010 are based on 2009 and the projections for 2011 through 2026 are based on the previous tables in this section. The District cannot guarantee that any grants will be received during the planning period and therefore, grant revenue will not be projected for any future years of the planning period.

The expenditures below include the Education Program (Table 4a), the Recycling Drop-off Program (Table 4b), Rent and Utilities (Table 4c), Payroll and Benefits (Table 4d), Repairs (Table 4e), Other Expenses (Table 4f), the Appliance and Scrap Metal Recycling Program (Table 4g), the Electronics Recycling Program (Table 4h), the Christmas Tree Recycling program (Table 4i), the Scrap Tire Recycling Program (Table 4j) and Management of Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) – (collection event) (Table 4k).



Table VIII-7 Summary of District Revenues and Expenditures

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017Total Revenue $553,826 $451,920 $437,719 $396,052 $383,000 $400,500 $418,000 $418,000 $418,000 $421,500

1. Education $34,342 $8,158 $10,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,0002. Recycling Drop-off Program $234,681 $227,326 $231,623 $236,305 $241,082 $245,957 $250,931 $256,007 $261,187 $266,4723. Rent/Utilities $9,908 $10,030 $10,231 $10,436 $10,645 $10,858 $11,075 $11,297 $11,523 $11,7534. Payroll and benefits $79,050 $78,312 $79,232 $81,290 $83,518 $85,845 $88,278 $90,823 $93,490 $96,2855. Repairs $2,112 $3,623 $3,659 $3,696 $3,733 $3,770 $3,808 $3,846 $3,884 $3,9236. Other Expenses $97,469 $88,427 $10,000 $10,000 $10,200 $10,404 $10,612 $10,824 $11,040 $11,2617. Appliance and Scrap Metal Recycling $1,727 $2,241 $619 $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $1,2008. Electronics Recycling $2,530 $3,665 $4,370 $4,457 $4,546 $4,637 $4,730 $4,825 $4,922 $5,0209. Christmas Tree Recycling $586 $387 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $50010. Scrap Tire Recycling $9,713 $11,551 $11,469 $11,698 $11,932 $12,171 $12,414 $12,662 $12,915 $13,17311. Household Hazardous Waste $1,986 $3,235 $3,300 $3,366 $3,433 $3,502 $3,572 $3,643 $3,716 $3,790Total Expenditures $474,104 $436,955 $365,003 $374,948 $382,789 $390,844 $399,120 $407,627 $416,377 $425,377

Cumulative Balance $273,940 $288,905 $361,621 $382,725 $382,936 $392,592 $411,472 $421,845 $423,468 $419,591

Notes: The District received several grants in 2008 through 2010. Some of the grant funding was used for the education program to run various recycling advertisements in the local newspapers. This is the reason that the education program expenditures were $34,342 in 2008.

The District also received grant funds in 2008 and 2009 on behalf of other entities (the District was the legal applicant, but the projects were being implemented by sub-grantees). The expenditures for these “pass thru” grants are shown in the “Other Expenses” category for 2008 ands 2009 and this is why there is a significant decrease in the Other Expenses category in 2010.

Solid Waste Management Plan VIII-19 May 2010


Table VIII-7 Summary of District Revenues and Expenditures (cont)

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026Total Revenue $421,500 $425,000 $425,000 $428,500 $428,500 $432,000 $432,000 $435,500 $435,500

1. Education $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,0002. Recycling Drop-off Program $271,866 $277,370 $282,987 $288,719 $294,569 $300,539 $306,631 $312,849 $319,1943. Rent/Utilities $11,988 $12,228 $12,473 $12,722 $12,976 $13,236 $13,501 $13,771 $14,0464. Payroll and benefits $99,220 $102,305 $105,551 $108,969 $112,574 $116,379 $120,400 $124,653 $129,1595. Repairs $3,962 $4,002 $4,042 $4,082 $4,123 $4,164 $4,206 $4,248 $4,2906. Other Expenses $11,486 $11,716 $11,950 $12,189 $12,433 $12,682 $12,936 $13,195 $13,4597. Appliance and Scrap Metal Recycling $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $1,2008. Electronics Recycling $5,120 $5,222 $5,326 $5,433 $5,542 $5,653 $5,766 $5,881 $5,9999. Christmas Tree Recycling $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $50010. Scrap Tire Recycling $13,436 $13,705 $13,979 $14,259 $14,544 $14,835 $15,132 $15,435 $15,74411. Household Hazardous Waste $3,866 $3,943 $4,022 $4,102 $4,184 $4,268 $4,353 $4,440 $4,529Total Expenditures $434,644 $444,191 $454,030 $464,175 $474,645 $485,456 $496,625 $508,172 $520,120

Cumulative Balance $406,447 $387,256 $358,226 $322,551 $276,406 $222,950 $158,325 $85,653 $1,033

Solid Waste Management Plan VIII-20 May 2010


IX. District Rules

A. Existing Rules

The District does not have any rules in effect.

B. Proposed Rules

The Board of Directors of Carroll, Columbiana and Harrison Joint Solid Waste Management District is hereby authorized to make, publish and enforce rules in accordance with Divisions (G)(1), (2), (3) and (4) of Section 343.01 of the Revised Code and Divisions (C)(1), (2), (3) and (4) of Section 3734.53 of the Revised Code, to the extent any such rules are determined by the Board to be necessary or desirable to implement the District Plan. The Board may adopt, amend or rescind any rules adopted by the Board at any time, as the Board deems appropriate.

Those rules may include, without limitation by the Board of Directors or rules that are substantially related to the following:

1. Prohibiting or limiting the receipt of solid waste generated outside the District or outside a service area proscribed in the District Plan, at facilities covered by the District Plan.

2. Governing the maintenance, protection and use of solid waste collection or other solid waste facilities located within the District.

3. Governing the development and implementation of a program for the inspection of solid waste generated outside the boundaries of this state that are disposed of at solid waste facilities within the District.

4. Exempting the owner or operator of any existing or proposed solid waste facility provided for in the District Plan from compliance with any amendment to township zoning resolution that rezoned or redistricted parcels where the solid waste facility to be constructed or modified occurs within the 2 year period stated in Division (G)(4).

The following draft rule may be adopted by the Board, which requires the submission of general plans and specifications for the construction of any proposed solid waste facility within the District or the modification of an existing in-District solid waste facility upon ratification and approval by the Director of the Ohio EPA of this Plan Update:

“No person, municipal corporation, township or other political subdivision, shall construct, enlarge, or modify any solid waste facility, including transfer stations, sanitary landfills, recycling facilities and yard waste composting facilities, until the general plans and specifications for the proposed facility have been submitted to and approved by the Board of Directors of the District as complying with the Plan or a waiver from this requirement has been granted by Board.”

Solid Waste Management Plan IX-1 October 2010

APPENDIX A:

RESOLUTIONS OF DISTRICT FORMATION

APPENDIX B:

COPIES OF PUBLIC NOTICES

Appendix B

This Appendix will contain copies of the public notices for public hearings and public comments. This Appendix will be populated after the public hearings.

APPENDIX C:

COPIES OF RESOLUTIONS DOCUMENTING RATIFICATION

Appendix C

This Appendix will contain copies of the resolutions from all the political subdivisions approving or disapproving the plan. This Appendix will be populated after the plan has been ratified by the political subdivisions.

APPENDIX D:

IDENTIFICATION OF CONSULTANTS RETAINED

Appendix D -- Identification of Consultants Retained

The Carroll-Columbiana-Harrison Solid Waste District retained Eastman & Smith Ltd, to assist the District staff in the preparation of this amended plan.

APPENDIX E:

DISTRICT MAPS

CARROLL COUNTY

0 1 2 3 4 5

SCALE: 1/4" = 1 mile

9

183

43

39524

43

9

164

212

39

39

332

171

542

164

LEGEND

STATE HIGHWAYS

TOWNSHIP BOUNDARIES

COUNTY BOUNDARIES

O OPEN DUMP

O

O

O

T

BROWN

AUGUSTA

EAST

ROSE

HARRISON

CENTER

WASHINGTON

FOX

MONROE

UNION LEE

ORANGE

PERRYLOUDON

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

T TRANSFER FACILITIES

RDO DROP OFF RECYCLING FACILITY

RBB BUY BACK RECYCLING FACILITY

RDO RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

MAY 2010

O

RDO

Drawn By: C.P. Jacobs, P.E.

COLUMBIANA COUNTY0 1 2 3 4 5


LEGEND

STATE HIGHWAYS

TOWNSHIP BOUNDARIES

COUNTY BOUNDARIES

U.S. HIGHWAYS

172

30

9

30

644164

39

45

267

11

39

170

7

11

9

14

45

344

11164

170165

147

170

154

154

30

45

7

30

7

O

OO

OOO

O

O

OO

O OO

O

KNOX BUTLER

WEST

HANOVER

PERRY

SALEM

FAIRFIELD UNITY

CENTER

ELKRUN

MIDDLETON

FRANKLINWAYNE

MADISON

WASHINGTON

YELLOWCREEK

LIVERPOOL

ST. CLAIR

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDORBB

RDO

O OPEN DUMP

WT WASTE TIRE DUMP

L LANDFILL

X COMPOSTING FACILITY

RDO DROP OFF RECYCLING FACILITY


T TRANSFER FACILITIES

O

O

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO


RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDORDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

X

RDO

May 2010

0 1 2 3 4 5


HARRISON COUNTY

LEGEND

STATE HIGHWAYS

TOWNSHIP BOUNDARIES

COUNTY BOUNDARIES

O OPEN DUMP

WT WASTE TIRE DUMP

U.S. HIGHWAYS

151

332

646

9

9151

250

646

22

151

800799

22

9

519

250

O

O

O

L *

O

342

OL LANDFILL

APPROVED PTI, BUT IS NOT OPERATIONAL

MONROE

NORTHRUMLEY

GERMAN

FRANKLIN

STOCK

ARCHER

GREEN

NOTTINGHAM

CADIZ

WASHINGTON

FREEPORT MOOREFIELD

ATHENS

SHORT CREEKRDO DROP OFF RECYCLING FACILITY


RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

RDO

O

May 2010

* THE HARRISON COUNTY LANDFILL HAS AN


X

X

X COMPOST FACILITY

APPENDIX F:

INDUSTRIAL SURVEYAND RESULTS

Appendix FIndustrial Survey Results

Reference: Section IV-D

2008 Industrial Generation by Material and SIC code, in tons

20 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Total

paper 0.00 2.46 6.00 28.48 0.00 741.69 979.93 158.06 2.57 14.62 0.00 6.67 36.40 35.02 611.51 12.40 120.56 0.00 4.38 2,760.75

Cardboard 1,231.19 2.82 4.00 76.14 0.00 1,009.96 45.31 20.83 3.47 74.06 0.00 5.72 70.10 83.17 89.30 21.20 186.32 0.00 1.46 2,925.06

Glass 0.00 0.30 0.00 15.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.40 0.00 1.91 17.42 0.00 0.00 16.80 10.96 0.00 0.00 63.66

Aluminum 0.00 0.07 0.00 5.64 0.00 0.00 12.95 0.00 0.74 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 101.50 0.68 32.88 0.00 0.00 156.84

Copper 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.97

Ferrous 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.20 0.00 6.58 2.16 0.00 1.84 10.79 0.00 463.18 4,715.71 9,238.88 14,977.59 5.72 191.80 125.36 33.18 29,800.97

Non-Ferrous 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.30 13.64 31.51 0.00 0.00 52.45

Plastics 0.00 5.64 0.00 0.28 0.00 148.06 6.47 22.07 0.61 2,886.23 0.00 91.49 0.00 21.89 127.75 1.20 26.85 0.00 0.00 3,338.55

Wood 0.00 0.69 6.00 1,454.42 25.11 526.45 22.44 0.00 1.68 33.56 0.00 33.83 0.00 125.97 23.12 5.20 97.27 0.00 4.38 2,360.11

Stone/clay/sand 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 75.02 0.00 0.00 9,917.99 230.60 0.00 0.00 4.00 97.54 0.00 0.00 10,331.15

Fabric 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 3.81 15.30 0.00 1.83 1.20 4.38 0.00 0.00 26.60

Waste 1,376.61 18.00 11.80 3,768.17 311.44 517.35 1,954.25 689.53 67.64 1,480.32 3.41 87.80 2,210.97 8,518.35 2,594.91 37.16 79.46 28.40 243.82 23,999.40

Total 2,607.80 29.97 33.80 5,376.84 336.55 2,950.10 3,023.50 890.49 153.93 4,502.53 3.41 10,612.40 7,296.50 18,023.29 18,538.69 119.20 879.54 153.76 287.21 75,819.51

Solid Waste Management Plan App F-1 October 2010

2008 Industrial Waste Reduction by Material and SIC code in tons

20 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Total

Paper 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.10 0.00 676.25 452.19 2.60 0.00 7.70 0.00 1.50 0.00 0.00 227.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,368.64

Cardboard 1,062.68 0.00 1.00 52.00 0.00 920.85 19.00 11.80 0.00 46.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 32.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,146.53

Glass 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.10

Aluminum 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 53.21

Copper 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.65

Ferrous 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00 0.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.60 0.00 240.00 3,039.50 3,760.00 9,017.69 0.00 0.00 25.00 22.75 16,137.54

Non-Ferrous 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00

Plastics 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 135.00 1.00 12.50 0.00 2,212.60 0.00 48.00 0.00 1.20 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,410.80

Wood 0.00 0.00 2.00 1,015.66 0.00 480.00 10.40 0.00 0.00 21.00 0.00 13.75 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,543.06

Stone/clay/sand 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,440.00 150.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,591.00

Fabric 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 1,062.68 0.00 5.00 1,100.76 0.00 2,218.10 488.59 26.90 0.00 2,295.55 0.00 6,744.25 3,189.50 3,761.20 9,324.25 0.00 0.00 25.00 22.75 30,264.53

Solid Waste Management Plan App F-2 October 2010

CCH Solid Waste District

Industrial Recycling and Solid Waste SurveyPrinted on Post-Consumer Recycled Paper

Instructions: Please complete the following questions to the best of your ability and return the survey in the envelope provided. If you have any questions regarding the completion of this survey, please contact Chris Jacobs at (330) 627-7311 or (800) 980-7311.

All information received from this survey is strictly confidential. This information will be used for summary purposes only to identify types of wastes that may be reduced or recycled.

A. General Information1. Name of Company _____________________________________________2. Address ___________________________ 3. City ___________________ Zip ___________ County _____________4. Contact Person _____________________ Phone (_____)______________5. SIC category (4 digit) ___________ 6. Number of employees ___________

B. Solid Waste Generation

Table 1 should include all of the solid waste and recyclables generated by your company in 2008. Please estimate the quantities of each type of solid waste disposed and report the actual number of tons recycled. The data in the recycled column is used to calculate the County's progress toward meeting the state recycling goals. Please enter data in tons (2000 lbs = 1 ton). Conversion from cubic yards to tons is 3cy = 1 ton. If you do not have specific values for waste generation, use Table 2 to estimate solid waste disposed and then estimate the percentage of each type of material discarded.

Table 1- Solid Waste Generation and Recycling in 2008

Waste typeSolid Waste Disposed (a) (tons)

Solid Waste Recycled (b) (tons)

Total Generation (a+b) (tons)

Waste typeSolid Waste Disposed (a) (tons)

Solid Waste Recycled (b) (tons)

Total Generation (a+b) (tons)

Paper HDPE (#2)

Cardboard PVC (#3)

Newsprint LDPE (#4)

Office paper Polypropylene (#5)

Other Paper (specify)

Polystyrene (#6)

Fabrics and cloth

Other plastics(specify)

Wood Rubber

Sawdust Stone/Clay/Sand

Boardends Concrete

pallets Composites

Aluminum cans

Non-Exempt foundry sand/slag

Steel cans Food

Aluminum General waste

Ferrous Other (specify)

Copper

Glass

PETE (#1) Total TonsTable 2 is a method used to estimate your company's annual solid waste disposal. If you have more accurate information on solid waste disposal and have completed Table 1, please skip Table 2 and complete Part C below.

Dumpster Number of pickups per week (a)

Size of dumpster (cubic yards) (b)

Percentage full when picked up (c)

Estimated Solid Waste Disposed (tons)

(a) x (b) x (c) x 52/3

ExampleDumpster #1

2 8 80% 222 tons

Total tons

In the example above, the formula is used a follows:Number of pickups x size of dumpster x percentage full = weekly waste generation in cubic yards x 52 weeks per year gives annual waste generation in cubic yards. Dividing this number by 3 gives annual waste tonnage.

D. Solid Waste Disposal and Recycling Processors

In the table below, please list the facilities where solid waste from your company is taken for disposal in calendar year 2008. Include the amount of waste taken to each facility. These totals should match the totals in Table 1.

Facility Name Landfill, Transfer Facility, Recycling or Incinerator

County, State Amount (tons)

Example: ABC Landfill Landfill Columbiana, Ohio 5,000

Example: DEF Recycling Recycling Carroll, Ohio 250

Totals

Please return the survey by April 30, 2009 in the enclosed stamped envelope to:CCH Solid Waste District618 Canton Road, Suite BCarrollton, Ohio 44615

(330) [email protected]

2

APPENDIX G:

DOCUMENTATION FOR PROVISION OF SERVICES

AND CAPACITY

Appendix G -- Documentation Of Capacity Assurance

The Carroll-Columbiana-Harrison Solid Waste District will be demonstrating capacity based on regional disposal capacity as described in Section VI - B. Therefore, contracts and other documentation of capacity assurance are not necessary.

APPENDIX H:

LIST OF DESIGNATED FACILITIES

Appendix H

List of Currently Designated Solid Waste Facilities

Name Address Type of Facility1. Arden Sanitary Landfill, Inc. 200 Rangos Lane,Arden Station Road, Washington,

PA 15301Landfill

2. American Landfill 7916 Chapel St., SE, Waynesburg, OH 44688 Landfill3. Coshocton Landfill, Inc. 19469 County Road 7, Coshocton, OH 43812 Landfill4. Harrison Landfill State Route 9, Cadiz, OH 43907 Landfill5. Mahoning Landfill 3510 Garfield Road, New Springfield, OH 44443 Landfill 6. Suburban Landfill 3415 Township Road #447, Glenford, OH 43739 Landfill 7. Countywide Recycling and Disposal Facility

3619 Gracemont St. SW, East Sparta, OH 44626 Landfill

8. Kimble Transfer & Recycling Facility

8500 Chamberlin Road, Twinsburg, Ohio 44087 Transfer Facility

9. Central Waste, Inc. 12003 Oyster Road, Alliance, OH 44601 Landfill 10. Liberty Tire Services 14864 Lincoln St. S.E., Minerva, OH 44657 Tire Monofill11. Carbon Limestone Landfill 8100 S. Stateline Road, Lowellville, OH 44436 Landfill 12. Imperial Landfill 11 Boggs Road, Imperial, PA 15126 Landfill 13. J & J Refuse Transfer Facility 2403 Chase Road, SE, Carrollton, OH 44615 Transfer Facility14. Kimble Transfer & Recycling Facility

2295 Bolivar Road, SW, Canton, OH 44706 Transfer Facility and MRF

15. Cambridge Transfer & Recycling Facility

4217 Glenn Highway, Cambridge, OH 43725 Transfer Facility

16. Kimble Sanitary Landfill 3596 State Route 39 NW, Dover, OH 44622 Landfill 17. Seneca Landfill, Inc. 421 Hartman Road, Evans City, PA 16033 Transfer Facility

18. Seneca Landfill, Inc. 421 Hartman Road, Evans City, PA 16033 Landfill19. Tri-County Industries Transfer Station

159 TCI Park Drive, Grove City, PA 16127 Transfer Facility

20. Tri-County Landfill 159 TCI Park Drive, Grove City, PA 16127 Landfill 21. Short Creek Landfill 258 N 4th Rd, Wheeling, WV Landfill22. Akron Transfer Station 389 Fountain St, Akron, Ohio 44306 Transfer Facility23. Cleveland Transfer Station 7450 Oakwood Village, Ohio 44146 Transfer Facility24. Athens-Hocking Reclamation Center

17970 SR 33, Nelsonville, Ohio 45764 Landfill

25. Noble Road Landfill 170 Noble Road East, Shiloh , Ohio 44878 Landfill26. Lorain County Landfill 43502 Oberlin-Elyria Road, Oberlin, Ohio 43502 Landfill27. Geneva Landfill 4339 Tuttle Road, Geneva, Ohio 44041 Landfill28. Pine Grove Landfill 5131 Drinkle Road, Amanda, Ohio 43102 Landfill29. Portage County Solid Waste Transfer Facility

3588 Mogadore Road, Kent, Ohio 44240 Transfer Facility

30. Kelly Run Sanitation 1500 Hayden Boulevard, Elizabeth, PA 15037 Landfill31. Laurel Highlands Landfill 260 Laurel Ridge Road, Johnstown, PA 15909 Landfill32. South Hills Landfill 3100 Hills Road, South Park, PA 15129 Landfill33. Evergreen Landfill Route 19 N and Locciousboro Road, Coral, PA 15731 Landfill34. Southern Alleghenies Landfill843 Miller Picking Road, Davidsville, PA 15928 Landfill35. Valley Landfill 6015 Pleasant Valley Road, Irwin, PA 15642 Landfill36. Shade Landfill 1176 Number 1 Road, Cairnbrook, PA 15924 LandfillW1. Apex Landfill 11 County Road 78, Amsterdam, Ohio 43903 Landfill

Note: Apex Landfill has been granted a designation waiver by the District and is authorized to accept District waste.

APPENDIX I:

OHIO REVISED CODE 343.08 FIXING REASONABLE

RATES OR CHARGES

Appendix I

Ohio Revised Code 343.08 Fixing reasonable rates or charges.(A) The board of county commissioners of a county solid waste management district and the board of directors of a joint solid waste management district may fix reasonable rates or charges to be paid by every person, municipal corporation, township, or other political subdivision that owns premises to which solid waste collection, storage, transfer, disposal, recycling, processing, or resource recovery service is provided by the district and may change the rates or charges whenever it considers it advisable. Charges for collection, storage, transfer, disposal, recycling, processing, or resource recovery service shall be made only against lots or parcels that are improved, or in the process of being improved, with at least one permanent, portable, or temporary building. The rates or charges may be collected by either of the following means:

(1) Periodic billings made by the district directly or in conjunction with billings for public utility rates or charges by a county water district established under section 6103.02 of the Revised Code, a county sewer district established under section 6117.02 of the Revised Code, or a municipal corporation or other political subdivision authorized by law to provide public utility service. When any such charges that are so billed are not paid, the board shall certify them to the county auditor of the county where the lots or parcels are located, who shall place them upon the real property duplicate against the property served by the collection, storage, transfer, disposal, recycling, processing, or resource recovery service. The charges shall be a lien on the property from the date they are placed upon the real property duplicate by the auditor and shall be collected in the same manner as other taxes.

(2) Certifying the rates or charges to the county auditor of the county where the lots or parcels are located, who shall place them on the real property duplicate against the lots or parcels. The rates or charges are a lien on the property from the date they are placed upon the real property duplicate by the auditor and shall be collected in the same manner as other taxes.

The county or joint district need not fix a rate or charge against property if the district does not operate a collection system.

Where a county or joint district owns or operates a solid waste facility, either without a collection system or in conjunction therewith, the board of county commissioners or board of directors may fix reasonable rates or charges for the use of the facility by persons, municipal corporations, townships, and other political subdivisions, may contract with any public authority or person for the collection of solid wastes in any part of any district for collection, storage, disposal, transfer, recycling, processing, or resource recovery in any solid waste facility, or may lease the facility to any public authority or person. The cost of collection, storage, transfer, disposal, recycling, processing, or resource recovery under such contracts may be paid by rates or charges fixed and collected under this section or by rates and charges fixed under those contracts and collected by the contractors.

All moneys collected by or on behalf of a county or joint district as rates or charges for solid waste collection, storage, transfer, disposal, recycling, processing, or resource recovery service in any district shall be paid to the county treasurer in a county district or to the county treasurer or other official designated by the board of directors in a joint district and kept in a separate and distinct fund to the credit of the district. The fund shall be used for the payment of the cost of the management, maintenance, and operation of the solid waste collection or other solid waste facilities of the district and, if applicable, the payment of the cost of collecting the rates or charges of the district pursuant to division (A)(1) or (2) of this section. Prior to the approval of the district’s initial solid waste

management plan under section 3734.55 of the Revised Code or the issuance of an order under that section requiring the district to implement an initial plan prepared by the director, as appropriate, the fund also may be used for the purposes of division (G)(1) or (3) of section 3734.57 of the Revised Code. On and after the approval of the district’s initial plan under section 3734.521 or 3734.55 of the Revised Code or the issuance of an order under either of those sections, as appropriate, requiring the district to implement an initial plan prepared by the director, the fund also may be used for the purposes of divisions (G)(1) to (10) of section 3734.57 of the Revised Code. Those uses may include, in accordance with a cost allocation plan adopted under division (B) of this section, the payment of all allowable direct and indirect costs of the district, the sanitary engineer or sanitary engineering department, or a federal or state grant program, incurred for the purposes of this chapter and sections 3734.52 to 3734.572 of the Revised Code. Any surplus remaining after those uses of the fund may be used for the enlargement, modification, or replacement of such facilities and for the payment of the interest and principal on bonds and bond anticipation notes issued pursuant to section 343.07 of the Revised Code. In no case shall money so collected be expended otherwise than for the use and benefit of the district.

A board of county commissioners or directors, instead of operating and maintaining solid waste collection or other solid waste facilities of the district with county or joint district personnel, may enter into a contract with a municipal corporation having territory within the district pursuant to which the operation and maintenance of the facilities will be performed by the municipal corporation.

The products of any solid waste collection or other solid waste facility owned under this chapter shall be sold through competitive bidding in accordance with section 307.12 of the Revised Code, except when a board of county commissioners or directors determines by resolution that it is in the public interest to sell those products in a commercially reasonable manner without competitive bidding.

(B) A board of county commissioners or directors may adopt a cost allocation plan that identifies, accumulates, and distributes allowable direct and indirect costs that may be paid from the fund of the district created in division (A) of this section and prescribes methods for allocating those costs. The plan shall authorize payment from the fund for only those costs incurred by the district, the sanitary engineer or sanitary engineering department, or a federal or state grant program, and those costs incurred by the general and other funds of the county for a common or joint purpose, that are necessary and reasonable for the proper and efficient administration of the district under this chapter and sections 3734.52 to 3734.572 of the Revised Code. The plan shall not authorize payment from the fund of any general government expense required to carry out the overall governmental responsibilities of a county. The plan shall conform to United States office of management and budget Circular A-87 “Cost Principles for State and Local Governments,” published January 15, 1983.

(C) A board of county commissioners or directors shall fix rates or charges, or enter into contracts fixing the rates or charges to be collected by the contractor, for solid waste collection, storage, transfer, disposal, recycling, processing, or resource recovery services at a public meeting held in accordance with section 121.22 of the Revised Code. In addition to fulfilling the requirements of section 121.22 of the Revised Code, the board, before fixing or changing rates or charges for solid waste collection, storage, transfer, disposal, recycling, processing, or resource recovery services, or before entering into a contract that fixes rates or charges to be collected by the contractor providing the services, shall hold at least three public hearings on the proposed rates, charges, or contract. Prior to the first public hearing, the board shall publish notice of the public hearings once a week for three consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the county or counties that would be affected by the proposed rates, charges, or contract. The notice shall include a listing of the proposed rates or charges to be fixed and

collected by the board or fixed pursuant to the contract and collected by the contractor, and the dates, time, and place of each of the three hearings thereon. The board shall hear any person who wishes to testify on the proposed rates, charges, or contract.

APPENDIX J:

LIST OF THE DISTRICT'S DROP-OFF RECYCLING SITES

Appendix JAddresses of District-operated Drop-off Recycling Sites

CARROLL COUNTYAugusta New Fire Station – 3041 Aurora Road, NE, Augusta 44607Carrollton Behind D&D TV & Appliance (618 Canton Rd NW, Carrolton 44615 – Rt. 43) Dellroy Monroe Twp. Garage (Rt. 39/5072 Roswell Rd.- Across from the school)Harlem Springs Lee Twp. Community Bldg., Apollo Rd, Harlem Springs 44631Kilgore Fire Station (7177 Germano Rd. SE, Carrollton 44615 – Rt. 43)Lake Mohawk At the Main Gate (Gate 1, Mohawk Dr., Malvern, OH 44644) Leesville Village Building (175 Green St., Leesville 44639 - off of Rt. 212 )Malvern Village Fire Department (120 West Water Street - behind US Bank)Mechanicstown Fire Station (7119 Salineville Rd., Mechanicstown 44651 – Rt. 39)New Harrisburg Harrison Twp. Garage (2258 Waynesburg Rd. Carrollton – Rt. 171)Perrysville Fire Station - Routes 332 & 164 (178 Amsterdam Road, SE, Scio 43988)Sherrodsville Across From Dave's Diner - 142 S. Church St., Sherrodsville

COLUMBIANA COUNTYBeaver Creek State Park Main Entrance - 11991 Echo Dell Road, E. Liverpool, OH 43920 Butler Twp. Twp. Building - between Carey & Tower (2974 Slater Road, Salem)Calcutta Skyview Plaza - 15937 St. Rt. 170 - Calcutta (Giant Eagle Plaza)Columbiana Marathon Station (31 West Park Avenue, Colmbiana 44408 (Rt. 164 & Walnut)East Liverpool #1 Across from Mason Color (250 E. 2nd St., E. Liverpool 43920)East Liverpool #2 Corner of Pennsylvania (Rt. 39) & Oakland Streets (East Side) 43920East Palestine Municipal Parking Lot (Main & Walnut Street, E. Palestine 44413)Elkrun Twp. Water Treatment Plant (41833 St. Rt. 154, Elkton 44415)Fairfield Twp. Government Building (3062 Fairfield School Road, Columbiana 44408)Guilford Lake Ruritan Pavilion (on Rt. 172 - East of New Garden)Hanoverton Village Building - Corner of Rt. 9 & Howard St. (10180 First Street, 44423)JDS Landscaping 46486 State Route 14 - Columbiana Knox Twp. Twp. Building (2895 Knox School Rd., Alliance, OH 44601)Leetonia Village Building (330 E. Main Street, Leetonia 44431)Lisbon Educational Service Center, 38720 Saltwell Road, Lisbon, OH 44432Liverpool Twp. At the Twp. Building – 353 Ada Street 43920 (LaCroft)Madison Twp. Madison Twp. Hall - Corner of Rt. 518 & Rt. 30 (13011 Rt. 30, W. Point 44492)Middleton Twp. Middleton Twp. Garage, 50738 Richardson Street, NegleyNew Waterford Village Garage (46834 Taylor Street, New Waterford 44445)Rogers Village Garage (Routes 7 and 154, Rogers 44455)Salem Twp Kent State - Salem - 2491 St. Rt. 45, Salem OH 44460Salem Filbert Street, next to the Salem Fire DepartmentSalineville Village Building (34 Washington Street, Salineville 43945)St. Clair Twp. Old St. Clair Twp. Bldg. (15446 E. Liverpool Road, E. Liverpool 43920)Summitville Twp. Garage -- off 644Unity Twp. Unity Twp. Garage (1430 Brookdale Avenue, E. Palestine 44413) (Hunston Rd.)Wayne Twp. Wayne Twp. Garage - Gavers (13209 St. Route 164, Lisbon 44432)Wellsville Village Building (1200 Main Street, Wellsville 43968)West Twp. Old Twp. Building (10621 Rochester Road, E. Rochester 44625) (Cty. Rd. 402)

HARRISON COUNTYBowerston Village Building (205 Water Alley, Bowerston 44695 - Main & Grant Sts.)Cadiz DJFS Building (520 N. Main St., Cadiz 43907 – Old Rt. 22)Freeport Village Park (Rt. 800)Hopedale Behind Fire Station (Off Main Street - 1 Firehouse Lane, Hopedale 43976)Jewett Community Park (High St. off Routes 9 and 151)Scio Across from Baker’s Foods (Eastport Street)

joint solid waste management district · christopher jacobs, p.e., executive director barbara...

Documents