Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/13/1990 - Solid Waste Abatement Commission AGENDA SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER CONFERENCE ROOMS A & B TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 1990 11:30 A.M. I. ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF AGENDA II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. STAFF REPORT A. Household Hazardous Waste Collections Update B. Compost Site Operations Update C. 1989 Expenditures Report /1990 /91 Funding IV. OLD BUSINESS V. NEW BUSINESS A. Multi -unit Recycling - Options for City involvement, Eagan Green Apts. B. Commission Goals for 1990 VI. OTHER BUSINESS VII. DISTRIBUTION VIII. NEXT MEETING IX. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: CHAIRS MANN AND NOEL AND ALL MEMBERS OF THE SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT COMMISSION FROM: RECYCLING SPECIALIST HAGEMAN DATE: MARCH 6, 1990 SUBJECT: EAGAN SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 13, 1990 A regular meeting of the Eagan Solid Waste Abatement Commission will be held on Tuesday, March 13, 1990 at 11:30 a.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center, Conference Rooms A and B. The City will provide a box lunch to Commission members requesting one by noon, Monday, March 12. Please call to indicate if you will attend and your luncheon preference. Please contact by phone Kris Hageman or Jane Helebrant at 454 -8100. I. ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF AGENDA The agenda, as presented or modified, requires adoption by the Commission. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Solid Waste Abatement Commission meeting of February 13, 1990 are enclosed on pages .5" through Co for your review. These minutes, subject to any change, require approval by the Commission. III. STAFF REPORT A. Household Hazardous Waste Collection Update Dakota County recycling staff have informed us that they are currently working on a management plan for the County's hazardous materials. County staff will also be going to the County Board of Commissioners with a summary of the County's requirements for handling these materials under the SCORE legislation. Local staff will be reviewing these reports at our May staff meeting. In addition, the City of Rosemount has a collection day scheduled for June 2, 1990. The City's of Burnsville and Apple Valley will be co- sponsoring a collection day sometime this summer. 1. Please see BioCycle article on page$ 7— / regarding Dakota County HHW collections. B. Compost Site Operations Update During a meeting of the Physical Development Board Committee on Tuesday, February 27, the committee passed 2 to 1 a resolution promoting the Eagan Municipal site as an additional County yard waste transfer site. The resolution stated [the most feasible alternative evaluated includes the development of a private site by R.D. Pecar and Co., Inc., together with a transfer site at the existing Eagan yard waste composting site.] After this action we met with County staff again and have outlined operation requirements and administrative details. Our main concerns during the next 30 days include: 1. Full County Board approval 2. Contractual arrangements (lease agreement) with Dakota County and /or R.D. Pecar Co., Inc. 3. Compensation levels 4. Removal of existing grass and leaves 5. Site development For your information: 1. The County Board of Commissioners has passed the new fee schedule for yard waste disposal in 1990. Please see Old Business in your February 6, 1990 Solid Waste Abatement Commission packet. 2. The Full Board of Commissioners will vote on the recommended resolution for yard waste facilities at its regular Board meeting of March 13, 1990. C. 1989 Expenditures Report /1990 -91 Funding As noted at our last meeting, City staff submitted the 1989 monitoring form to the County which included an expenditures report. See page (O for the expenditures report. An overview of the report will be given at our March 13 meeting. I wave i ncluded information regarding 1990 -91 funding on pages This information outlines eligible program activities and program costs, i.e., administrative and capital. Also included is a copy of the funding formula for 1990. IV. OLD BUSINESS V. NEW BUSINESS A. Multi -Unit Recycling - Options for City involvement, Eagan Green Apartments After the discussion with Commission members and staff evaluation, the following options have been formulated. 1. Pilot project with Eagan Green Apartments. City provided containers (72) one for each unit in one of the two buildings. Additional information and monitoring will be needed. If the containers serve as a tool to increase participation and tonnage levels, Eagan Green will purchase an additional 72 containers from the City for the second building. The City owned containers cost $5.00 each. Dv 0--1.4, .?1 k'.. . J 2. Encourage inventive solutions to M -U program. Allow individual management companies and haulers to initiate additional features to the program. Encourage residents to modify /develop their own convenient system. 2.a. In some cases a specialized container may be "the" item to increase participation. There are different models on the market that may work better than our stackable. As each complex is different in character, the system will need evaluation and that is where we can encourage the hauler to use the .50 /unit funding if the management and hauler deem an additional system is necessary. Many cities around the metro area have begun M -U programs. Some cities have conducted pilot programs similar to the one proposed. Most found that individual containers do not play a part in overall program organization. While attending a seminar on M -U recyling, in home containers were not discussed as a tool for successful programs. Educational and frequent information to residents is viewed as the most important aspect of a successful program. As originally expressed, city staff feel our role in M -U recycling will be to help organize convenient collection systems working with the management companies and the hauler. But our primary role is to formulate and distribute informational materials to residents. Continuing contact with the building and monitoring of the program activities will also be a part of our involvement. B. Commission Goals for 1990 As we move into the second year of the Recycling program we have new goals and priorities for managing a successful program. In addition to the expansion into multi -unit dwellings as a major funding requirement, the abatement goal for this year has increased to 12 %. Moving into the multi -units will be a necessary activity to meet tile oal but there are also other initiatives we must take. On page ( you will find a copy of the Program Work Plan for the year that is a guide for activities for 1990. The following table contains calculations based on existing Metropolitan Council population counts and Dakota County estimates of waste generation. Preliminary calculations for 1990 residential recycling goal 12% 3 Population Solid Waste (tons) Recycling Goal (tons) Eagan 44,058 20,906 2,509 We can review the Work Plan and discuss program goals and how the Solid Waste Abatement Commission can help staff and the community meet our goals. We can also review the original goal statement and evaluate the Commission's outlook. VI. OTHER BUSINESS V. DISTRIBUTION Enclosed in your packet you will find. 1. BioCycle article February, 1990. Hazardous waste reduction (Dakota County HHW collections), pages 7-7 2. 1989 Expenditures Report, page /0 . 3. 1990 /Community Landfill Abatement program guidelines and funding formulas, pages // to / 4. 1990 Recycling Program work plan, page /5/. MINUTES OF THE SOUD WASTE ABATEMENT COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1990 A regular meeting of the Eagan Solid Waste Abatement Commission was held on Tuesday, February 13, 1990 at 11:30 am. Present were Tim Hoel, Todd Gatz, Earl Milbridge, Darlene Bahr, Cindy Ista, Tom Molene and Terry Schnell. Absent were Larry Knutson, Tom Mann and Brenda Marshall. Also present were Recycling Coordinator Hageman, Assistant to the City Administrator Hohenstein and representatives of the public and haulers. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Discussion was had conceming the recent action by the City Council conceming the Dakota County Resource Recovery facility. Upon motion by Bahr, seconded by Schnell, all members voting in favor, the Dakota County incinerator was added as the fourth item under the staff report. Upon motion by Schnell, seconded by Ista, all members voting in favor, the old business items were combined because of their relationship to one another. Upon motion by Ista, seconded by Schnell, all members voting in favor, the agenda was adopted as amended. MINUTES Upon motion by Schnell, seconded by Ista, all members voting in favor, all minutes were approved as presented. 1990 PERFORMANCE FUNDING Hageman reported that the City Council had approved the Commission recommendation for the 1990 funding levels at $30 per ton of targeted recyclables and $.50 per multi - family unit in which the City's containers are not used. She indicated that in mutti-family complexes where the containers are used the additional $.50 per unit would not be provided. MULTI- FAMILY RECYCUNG UPDATE Hageman reported that 300 additional mufti - family units have been added since the last meeting bringing the total number of units served to approximately 1200. This compares to approximately 4800 units currently in the City. She also stated that Knutson Rubbish had proposed a concept in which one container per unit would be distributed at Eagan Green Apartments to facilitate residents' use of the centralized containers. Hohenstein pointed out the original philosophy behind the $.50 per unit would be that it would help offset haulers costs for specialized and centralized container systems. It had not been anticipated that any complexes would want to use both. Bahr pointed out that many mutti-family residents are seniors that may have difficulty managing loose materials. Hoel asked if the containers were most appropriate for seniors because of their size, weight and ability to be stored. Bahr suggested that staff explore the options both in terms of type of container and cost coverage. She stated that it could be treated as a pilot project to determine its value for other complexes. Floyd Hiar expressed concerned about the expectations from such a pilot project and indicated that adequate data is probably available from other locations on containers and multi- family units. The Commission's consensus was that staff should identify options and bring them back to the Commission for future consideration. SOUD WASTE ANNUAL REPORT Hageman reported that the City had documented 1,947 tons of recyclables removed from the waste stream in 1989. In addition, approximately 5,000 cubic yards of yard waste was removed. Commission members asked staff to check the monthly average listed on the report for compliance with the total numbers. DAKOTA COUNTY RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY RESOLUTION Hohenstein provided background to the Commission indicating that the City Council had raised this issue at their meeting of February 6 and the staff had been directed to prepare a resolution in time for a public hearing on the facility on February 12. This had prevented the issue from coming back to the Commission at that time. Hageman described the presentation at the public hearing and distributed copies of the draft resolution. Hoel expressed concern that the tendency in mass bum facilities was to minimize preprocessing separation. Hohenstein indicated that the Council resolution pointed to centralized separation as being necessary regardless of the processing technology chosen. Other Commission members discussed the general thrust of the resolution in relation to previously stated City policy. Staff indicated that the resolution dealt with only those issues the Council had directed be dealt with and that it would be beyond the abilities of existing staff to completely dissect the draft DEIS from a technical standpoint. Upon motion by Bahr, seconded by Ista, all members voting in favor, the Commission endorsed the draft resolution as prepared by staff at the direction of the City Council and indicated the desire to encourage even more strongy the concept of centralized separation as a compliment to source separation. CITY /COUNTY COMPOST ALTERNATIVES Hageman introduced the concept of using the City's existing compost site as a transfer station for County yard waste. Hohenstein explained how the County would run the site and it would continue to be available to residents and lawn services but that all compostable materials would be transferred from the site to the County's Lakeville facility. He also indicated that the County would implement its standard fee schedule for the site and that the site would be run by the County's contractor, R.D. Pecar. After further discussion, seconded by Schnell, all members voting in favor, the Commission recommended that the City Council contract with Dakota County to make the current compost site into a transfer station at rates consistent with County policy and that funds be made available for this program up to the current allocation for yard waste in the solid waste budget. EARTH DAY ACTIVITIES Hageman outlined the Earth Day activities currently contemplated by the City. They include an official declaration of April 22, 1990 as Earth Day, a celebration of the first year of the recycling program, the second annual Community Clean -up Day on Saturday, April 28, a back yard composting seminar and various activities including children's park programs, a nature walk and the City's Arbor Day celebration. FUTURE AGENDAS The Commission requested that an update on household hazardous waste programs be provided to a future meeting. In particular, the Commission was interested in progress on the County's monthly drop -off site and the flashlight battery pilot projects. They also requested agenda items on state -of- the -art plastics recycling and a financial report for 1989 and 1990. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Ista, seconded by Schnell, all members voting in favor, the meeting was adjourned at 1:10 p.m. JDH Date Secretary HAZARDOUS WASTE REDUCTION MECHANIZED PROCESSING FOR HousEHoLD PAINTS IIIIIIIIIIIIIIINIIIIII HE FIRST household hazardous blend some of the oil based paints into a fuel. waste collection day in Minnesota The county is currently planning to imple- The high costs of took place in Dakota County in ment a permanent household hazardous 1985. County sponsored collection waste collection system during 1990. The paint disposal give days have continued since then, one day events may continue, at least tempo- with several being held each year. rarily. They are valuable in promoting the a pp Y roach taken b Under current Minnesota statute, program due to the involvement of the entire any collector of household hazardous waste community. a Minnesota is a hazardous waste generator at the time One day collection events are held at a the waste is collected. By a resolution of the community site, usually at a city garage or county national County Board, Dakota County acts as the other municipally owned facility, although hazardous waste generator at all collections several business sites have been used. In Da- ck. nlf'cance• and accepts the associated liabilities. To min- kota County, the private sector is encouraged b imize these liabilities, as well as costsitwe to participate as Sponsors, providing volun- have preferred blending the wastes into a teers, publicity, and in some cases, financial hazardous waste fuel instead of choosing any 6upport. George Kinney landfill options. It has even been possible to Collection days utilize a multiple dropoff and Ray Erickson --40 4 r. -,r, ~ - M1 I, • , . .. _a « r ' is 60 BIOCYCLE 7 FEBRUARY 1990 framework with sufficient space to avoid on finding workers in the future. bottlenecks and allow for satisfactory work EFFICIENT PAINT HANDLING areas for the volunteer and contract workers. All of our collections are on a Saturday from Last summer, several discussions were 9:00 a.m.. to 3:00 p.m. held by the authors with others involved in "'^ Citizens enter the site and are first asked household hazardous waste collections about to complete a survey. They are then directed the problems involved in handling the quan- to drive to the first dropoff area. Bulky tities of paint received at the collection items— tires, lead -acid batteries, and used events. Hennepin County, which comprises oil —are usually taken first. (Tires are not a Minneapolis, Bloomington, and other cities hazardous waste, but a problem waste and on the western side of the metropolitan area, are accepted at $1.00 each, which usually en- chose to not accept latex paint at its collec- ables the county to break even.) All three of tions held in September, although oil -based these items are recycled locally and require paints were accepted. Citizens were told to three or four volunteers at each station dur- dry their latex paint and place the dried ing the hours of collection. A large semi- paint and empty cans in the trash. This infor- trailer usually is on site for tires, a lined 20 mation has been made available to homeown- yard rolloff for the batteries, and a 2,000 gal- ers in Minnesota for several years, however Twenty to 30 volunteers Ion vacuum pumper truck for the used oil. the amount of paint collected per vehicle at work in the paint area The next area at the site takes paint. The the collection events is remaining steady and sorting, stirring, emptying cans are sorted, opened, and if usable, sent to may even be increasing slightly. In addition, and scraping the cant. the swap table and recycled. The unusable any homeowner turned away from a collec- (Photos by Ray Erickson) cans are emptied into 55 -gallon drums for tion in late September in Minnesota with shipment as a hazardous waste. four or five gallons of latex paint has little The last dropoff point is the intake and chance of successfully drying it out using presort area for all other household hazard - lined cardboard boxes and kitty litter before ous wastes, including everything from aero- the weather turns cold. Because of these and sol cans to garden pesticides to drain clean- other reasons, we did not feel this was a ers. County staff and other experienced workable option. professionals work in this area, sorting the One of the groups discussing the paint waste into categories such as flammable, ac- handling problem was the Solid and Hazard - ids, bases, chlorinated solvents, pesticides, ous Materials Commission of the City of In- and aerosols to allow easier packaging by the ver Grove heights (the city which held the contracted hazardous waste management first collection in the state of Minnesota). staff. They prepare the waste for shipment During the previous year, this group had a by lab- packing the waste (a special packing Situation where volunteers had to return o- procedure) and sending it to a fully permit- Sunday to finish bulking the paint. Th ted hazardous waste facility for disposal. Cit- group was discussing mechanical methods to ziens are given an opportunity to stop at the process the unusable paint, such as the use Swap /Recycling Table on their way out to of a can flattening machine which could be pick up usable products dropped off by oth- modified for this purpose. The machine con- ers, as well as pick up recycling literature sisted of various gears, rollers, aprons, belts, and talk with members of the county and etc. and cost over $10,000. It required three - city recycling staffs. phase 240 -volt current, which limited its por- This household hazardous waste collection tability. We felt the maintenance involved in system is quite dependent on volunteers but cleanup would be excessive, and without it is the most inexpensive way to offer the scrupulous cleaning the unit would experi- service to communities. In addition to citi- ence a lot of downtime. During one of these zens, volunteers come from environmental sessions, one of the atithors suggested using groups and businesses. The county provides a modified log splitter. Two units were pur- safety training and protective clothing, t►s chased by Inver Grove Heights, modified, well as workmen's compensation coverage and used in the remaining three Dakota on the day of the collection. As stated Above, County collections. The cost of the two log the majority of the workers spend the day in Splitters, including the modifications, was the paint area, because paint is the Second less than $3,500. most common waste brought in (slightly be - The modifications involved removing the hind used oil in popularity) kid paint re- splitting wedges and placing in plate steel to quires several operations performed on each which brass was bolted. One of the plates, can (sorting, opening, stirring, pouring, emp- which is wide enough to accommodate four tying, scraping). Twenty to 30 volunteers are one gallon paint cans, has a series of holes needed to work in the paint area. drilled through it to allow paint to escape. A At the county's collection held this )last welded box with a hinged lid was fashioned May in West St. Paul, 60 volunteers pro- against the stationary plate to act as the cessed the wastes from over 900 hotiSeho ds. holder for the four paint cans. A catch basin The volunteers bulked 38 55 -gallon drams of was devised to collect the paint after it had waste paint and worked until about 9:00 pm. been extruded from the cans and served tr. The work is difficult, especially hard on the direct the paint into five gallon pails. T volunteer's back, and unless the volunteer is two log sp 'tters were of different designs, strongly motivated by an environmental and were modified individually. The oil paint ethic, this may not be viewed as a "positive" unit has an engine and hydraulic system experience and could have a negative effect mounted on a pallet for spark and noise re- 62 BIOCYCLE )( FEBRUARY 1990 duction, and the four paint cans are placed in paint can crushing. Both collections had the unit with open tops against the station - equivalent numbers of vehicles and collected ary brass plate. When the ram is activated, nearly identical quantities of paint. In 1988, the movable plate flattens the can against workers labored into the evening and some the stationary plate, forcing the paint sludge returned on Sunday to empty the remaining through the holes and down into the pail. paint. In 1989, using the crushing units, the , „t : la The latex unit has its engine and hydraulic st of the paint was emptied an hour after ,„,.- system mounted on one side of the unit. It the final homeowner dropped off his waste ' , . l • has a two way action ram, located centrally paint, and volunteer workers were perform- 9 ':' with stationary plates at the ends. The unit ing site cleanup! .� ', 4 is built to hold eight one -gallon cans, four per As the average homeowner becomes more 4 side, and the ram is actuated first to one side aware of household hazardous wastes, and and then the other, flattening all eight cans minimizing generation or disposal of them , , before opening. The paint is forced down the becomes as commonplace as recycling alumi- ' center, through the movable ram assembly. num cans or newspapers, our collection, recy- Using these can crushing units, the paint cling and disposal systems must expand cor- i �,: Modif led to splitters work k, 2 . ' ...) well as crushers for oil based +' "" paint cans (top) and latex 1i . c " % : cans (above). 4.. h: i s kill � r Citizens stop at the r~ g �� - . a, S waplRecycling Table on AP' r - their way out to pick up usable products dropped off ±tom' . ?: +' . by others. handling area was arranged in a similar fash- respondingly. Waste paint is the most ion as before. Paint was sorted after dropoff, expensive item to deal with, due to the vol- Via., and the cans were opened to check if the ume shipped to incinerators; the cost for the paint was of a quality to be recycled. Be- county is roughly $10 per gallon. One way to cause of the extreme winters experienced in reduce this cost is to identify in advance Minnesota, much of the latex has frozen re- groups or individuals willing to reuse paint. peatedly and resembles cottage cheese; this Thus a sizable fraction may be kept from en- paint cannot be reused. Unusable paint was tering the waste stream. Several quite suc- tipped onto the screens over 55 -gallon drums cessful paint recycling programs are operat- as before, to remove the liquid tops of the ing in Minnesota, and in other areas of the paint (for oil paint this also reduced the haz- country, giving paint to area farmers, social and of any sparks). The cans next were service agencies, and other users. Because of placed in the crushing units to remove the the high costs of disposal of the paint and bottom sludge. After removal, a quick scrape other items collected, innovative means of re- of the can's center removed the remaining ducing waste generation through education paint solids, and the crushed can was tossed may yield much greater rewards than find - into the lined rolloff box to dry before land- ing new ways of handling the material after Used oil is collected with a filling. These rolloffs are prepared with floor it is dropped off. ■ 2,000 gallon pumper truck. dry absorbent to further ensure that no liq- uid will enter the landfill. We have deter- mined, in a study done with our local landfill, that crushed paint cans from these units are suitable for landfilling after drying in the George Kinney is an Environmental Health Su- rolloff for 13 days. pervisor, Hazardous Waste Management in Da- Automating the paint handling area kota County, and the Household Hazardous helped ease the immediate problem of main Waste Project Director. Ray Erickson is an En- taining a large force of volunteers for the one vironmental Health Supervisor, Solid Waste day collection events. The collections held in Management in Dakota County. He was the 1988 and 1989 in Inver Grove Heights serve former Household Hazardous Waste Project to illustrate the differences before and after Director in Ramsey County. B IOCYCLE % FEBRUARY 1990 63 •1 8. Expenditures Report: Program Amount Administrative: Salaries $ 24,676.48 Consultant Services $ 24,676.48 Capital Cost: Containers (14,000 @ $10.08) 141,112.00 Storage 10,147.43 Equipment Rental 593.00 Distribution 10,530.00 162,382.43 Residential Operations & Maintenance: Contracted Services Recycle Minnesota Resources 4,000.00 Household Hazardous Waste Collection 5,000.00 Greenview, Inc. (compost site attendant) 4,657.00 Labor (compost site maintenance) 2,395.26 Utilities Postage 2,015.28 Printing 7,150.00 Other: Advertising /Promotion 2,933.39 Recycling Lottery 4,200.00 Local Mtgs. & Expenses 661.51 Dues and Subscriptions 181.00 Conferences and Ref. Materials 185.00 Program Supplies 452.93 Performance Funding 33,599.32* 67,430.69 Commercial /Industrial Activities: Printing and Promotion 974.55 974.55 Total 255,464.15 Program Revenue: Community Funds: 11,009.59 Other Funding: Total Funds received from the County: 244,454.56 * These figures include approximately +$2,600.00 to be paid to various firms for Novembe. and December 1989 tonnages. /0 • June 27, 198'. DAKOTA COUNTY COMMUNITY LANDFILL ABATEMENT PROGRAM GUIDELINES • 1990 Dakota County landfill abatement funding is available to communities in Dakota County. All applications and revisions to those applications which would result in increased costs will require final County Board approval. A community ,requesting funding must demonstrate that a recycling program is currently in operation in its municipal buildings and that the targeted community program outlined in the Dakota County Recycling Implementation Strategy, is maintained. Dakota County Board Resolution No. 88 -651 states that the County's portion of funding of recycling implementation and operating costs incurred by cities and townships will be through performance -based funding. It further states that the County's source of long term funding for recycling programs is to be from a combination of sources with priority being: 1) Landfill Surcharge Fee; and 2) Resource Recovery Facility tipping fee. Consideration is also to be given to a recycling assessment as part of a future source of funding. The County will accept the responsibility for community recycling programs and will assess the residents of the community for costs incurred (including the County's administrative, monitoring, and public education costs) in the event that a community does not maintain the level of service outlined in the Dakota County Recycling Implementation Strategy. ELIGIBLE PROJECTS Projects that are eligible for funding must be consistent with the approved Dakota County Solid Waste Master Plan, as amended. To obtain a copy of the Plan please contact the Dakota County Department of Planning and Program Management (431 - 1158). • o Multi community projects are eligible for funding: Applications for funding of such projects must identify the role of each' community, including•the lead agency for the project. o Eligible profects include, but are not limited to: - Education and promotion activities - Drop -off collection of yard waste and recyclables - Source collection of source separated materials, excluding yard waste . - Yard waste compost or yard waste transfer sites (only existing sites will be eligible in 1990 unless otherwise approved by the County Board, none will be eligible after Dec. 31, 1990 unless "otherwise approved by the County Board) • - Collection of household hazardous wastes - Commercial /industrial source separation activities - Recycling in local municipal facilities • - Special wastes handling and /or processing • ` 00009c • Page 2 • ELIGIBLE PROGRAM COSTS To be eligible for reimbursement, a preliminary budget must be submitted as • part of the application procedure described herein. Revisions of the application may be made before July 1 of the funding year. The funding year will be January 1 - December 31. • Funding Category /Activity Funding Allocation 4 o 'Administrative Costs - 1990: Communities over 5000 population and /or Consultant Costs $3888 or $.70 /household, whichever such as direct salary of is greater employees working part- Communities under 5000 population time or full -time on $388 base plus $.70 household eligible projects, or consultant services on eligible projects • • - 1991: Communities over 5000 population, $2777 or $.50 /household, whichever is greater Communities under 5000 population $277 base plus $.50 household THEREAFTER NOT ELIGIBLE • o Capital Costs - 100% eligible up to maximum allocation - 1990, and 1991 allocations dependent upon 1989 expenditures - Purchase of land is not an eligible reimbursable cost. - Equipment, supplies or other materials must be used primarily for abatement activities. • • - NOT ELIGIBLE FOR PAYMENT AFTER 1991 • • • 99,0, 1� ATTACHMENT 3 PERFORMANCE BASED FUNDING FORMULAS - 1990 ONLY • • These formulas will be used to make a final evaluation of a community's performance in 1990. The results will be used to adjust the first quarter. payments for 1991. • Formula 1 • Applies to the following communities: • Apple Valley Inver Grove Heights Burnsville Lakeville Eagan Mendota Heights Farmington Rosemount Hastings So. St. Paul West St. Paul o Expansion of residential program to multi - family households as outlined in application and approved by the- County. 30 pts. o Met a 12% residential abatement goal (4:58 points per 1% of waste abated). 55 pts. Only 1/3 of tonnage used to calculate may be yardwaste o Conducted promotional program as outlined in application and approved by the County 15 pts. • Formula 2 • • Applies to the following communities: • • • Coates Hampton Lflydale Mendota Miesville New Trier Randolph Sunfish Lake Vermillion Castle Rock Township Douglas Township Empire Township Eureka Township Greenvale Township Hampton Township Marshan Township, Nininger Township Randolph Township Ravenna Township Sciota Township Vermillion Township Waterford Township • • • 5 -1 000102 • /3 v. City of Eagan 1990 Recycling Program Work Plan Date Program Element 1/30/90 Community Annual Report. 2/01/90 Continue early program promotion- Multi- family recycling program. Payment #1. 3/01/90 Ongoing program promotion. Yard Waste information- compost site, mulching, etc. Program Update- One year anniversary. 4/01/90 Multi- family setup ongoing. Progress Report #1 Due. 4/15/90 Tonnage reports due from haulers (first quarter). 5/01/90 Payment #2. 6/01/90 Ongoing Commercial /Industrial recycling program setup, monitoring. School Presentations 7/01/90 Program Revision Deadline. Progress Report #2 Due. 7/15/90 Tonnage reports due from haulers (second quarter). 8/01/90 Payment #3. 9/01/90 Program Promotion ongoing. 10/01/90 County Program Application Due- 1991. Progress Report for payment #4 due. 10/15/90 Tonnage reports due from haulers (third quarter). 11/01/90 Payment #4. 12/30/90 Multi- family recycling program ongoing. 1