Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan

BUTLER COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN

Prepared for

Butler County Department of Public Works 205 West Central El Dorado, KS 67042

Prepared by

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. 51 Corporate Woods 9393 W. 110th Street, Suite 500 Overland Park, KS 66210 (800) 298-1851

November 15, 2002 Updated October 2008

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1 CITIES IN STUDY AREA, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY

STUDY AREA CITIES 1-1

City Characteristics 1-3

Economic Characteristics 1-5

DEMOGRAPHICS 1-6

Population Distribution and Density 1-7

Seasonal Variations 1-8

GEOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY 1-8

Topography 1-8

Geology 1-10

Seismic Impact Zone 1-12

Faults 1-13

Unstable Areas 1-13

Wetlands 1-13

CHAPTER 2 TRANSPORTATION NETWORK IN STUDY AREA

MAJOR ROUTES 2-1

ROAD LIMITATIONS 2-3

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 3 SOLID WASTE GENERATION

WASTE COMPOSITION 3-1

SPECIAL WASTE 3-3

SOLID WASTE GENERATION PROJECTION 3-4

CHAPTER 4 EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS

EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS 4-1

RECYCLERS, SCRAP METAL DEALERS, COMPOSTING FACILITIES, AND SPECIAL WASTE HANDLERS 4-2

DISPOSAL 4-8

CHAPTER 5 SOLID WASTE ISSUES AND PROBLEMS

WITHIN THE STUDY AREA

DEFICIENCIES IN THE PRESENT SYSTEM 5-1

KEY ISSUES 5-4

KDHE Regulations 5-4

Constraints 5-4

Administration 5-4

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 6 SOLID WASTE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS

TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS 6-2

Storage 6-2

Collection 6-3

Solid Waste Processing 6-3

Recycling 6-5

Solid Waste Disposal 6-5

CHAPTER 7 OPTIMAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

ACTIVITIES 7-1

Information 7-2

Waste Reduction 7-2

Household Hazardous Waste 7-2

Recycling 7-2

Composting 7-2

Electronic Waste or Scrap 7-3

Universal Waste 7-3

Collection 7-3

Transfer 7-3

Disposal 7-3

GUIDELINES 7-4

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 Page iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 8 COST OF RECOMMENDED SYSTEM

CHAPTER 9 SYSTEM FINANCING

CHAPTER 10 WASTE REDUCTION

CHAPTER 11 IMPLEMENTATION TIMETABLE

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 Page iv

CHAPTER 1 CITIES IN STUDY AREA, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY

The study area is comprised of Butler County which is located in the east-central part of Kansas. The Butler County Solid Waste Management Planning Committee was formed in 1994 for the purpose of formulating an integrated solid waste plan to implement solid waste collection, recycling, and disposal. The Butler County Solid Waste Management Planning Committee, comprised of appointees from each incorporated community plus county representatives, was formed to initiate and complete the preparation of a solid waste management plan. This planning effort took two years to complete and a final plan was accepted by the county in 1995.

STUDY AREA CITIES Butler County is geographically the largest county in Kansas. This size has translated into a rather diverse number of communities – 13 totals – that are located throughout the county. The major urban areas within Butler County are located along the major transportation routes: Interstate 35, U.S. Route 400, U.S. Route 54, and U.S. Route 77. The transportation system is discussed in further detail in Chapter 2, Transportation Network in the Study Area. For the purposes of this study, the terms “urban” and “urban area” refer exclusively to communities referenced by the League of Kansas Municipalities Population Information (January 1996) as having a formalized governmental structure, regardless of population, geographic size, manner of waste collection or other distinguishing factors.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-1

Source: Kansas Geological Survey

MAP 1.1 BUTLER COUNTY LAND COVER

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-2

The cities in the study area range in size from the largest, El Dorado at 12,057, to the smallest, Cassoday at 130 residents. And while there are a total of 13 cities in the study area, nearly three quarters (74% or approximately 27,178 people) of the urban population resides in just 3 communities: El Dorado, Augusta, and Andover.

City Characteristics The characteristics of the 13 cities in the study area — city class, governmental structure, and assessed valuation — are tabulated in the table on the following page. The first category by which the cities in the study area are identified is the Class Category. This category ranks cities in terms of population. However, this classification is frequently not a reliable indicator of current city population, since each community must request an official transfer to the next class when an increase in population would warrant it. Many communities have not made such requests as their population has increased, making the Class Category somewhat misleading. For this reason, population figures from sources within each community have been included for clarification. Governmental Structure is the second category by which the urban areas of the study area have been classified. The predominant form of government among Class 2 and Class 3 cities is the Mayor/Council structure, in which both mayor and council members are elected by the local residents. El Dorado operates with a modified structure of Commission and City Manager while Augusta operates with a modified structure of Mayor, Council, and City Manager. Assessed valuation figures for the communities have been included in the table on the following page. These figures were provided by planning committee participants and county staff members.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-3

TABLE 1.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF CITIES IN BUTLER COUNTY

2006 Government Assessed City Class Population Structure Value ($)

Andover Class 2 9,546 Mayor/Council 98,801,283

Augusta Class 2 8,560 Mayor/Council/Manager 49,426,498

Benton Class 3 827 Mayor/Council 5,183,670

Cassoday Class 3 130 Mayor/Council 388,346

Douglass Class 3 1,813 Mayor/Council 5,884,167

El Dorado Class 2 12,717 Commission/Manager 55,766,997

Elbing Class 3 218 Mayor/Council 808,671

Latham Class 3 164 Mayor/Council 315,000

Leon Class 3 645 Mayor/Council 1,934,307

Potwin Class 3 457 Mayor/Council 1,080,505

Rose Hill Class 3 3,857 Mayor/Council 21,660,472

Towanda Class 3 1,342 Mayor/Council 5,908,934

Whitewater Class 3 653 Mayor/Council 2,540,390

URBAN TOTAL 36,855 181,186,381

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-4

Economic Characteristics The economic characteristics of the cities in the study area comprise a snapshot of the area’s economic base, the types of industrial, manufacturing, and agricultural entities operating in the county, the number of residents employed by each, and the overall rate of unemployment among the area’s residents. Light industry and manufacturing are the dominant employers in the county, comprising up to one quarter of the work force. Industry and manufacturing is centered in the cities of El Dorado, Augusta, and Andover.

TABLE 1.2 WORK FORCE CHARACTERISTICS

Work Manufacturing Government Services Retail Agriculture Misc. Jobless Force Rate

30,879 3,504 5,076 7,858 5,270 1,531 7,640 5.3%

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-5

DEMOGRAPHICS The total population of the study area is approximately 59,482. At 12,057 residents, El Dorado is the most populous community in Butler County, encompassing 20% of the total study area population; and Cassoday, the least populous, with 130 residents, contains only 0.2% of the study area population. The tables below show the recent population trend throughout the study area, an increase over the period from 1994 to 2000. The most recent 40-year projections (taken from The Governor’s Economic and Demographic Report, 2001- 2002) indicate a steady population increase in the study area -- approximately a 15% increase in population by 2040.

TABLE 1.3 1994 AND 2000 POPULATION TRENDS

1994 2000 % Change

53,504 59,482 + 11.2%

TABLE 1.4 2000 TO 2040 POPULATION PROJECTIONS

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040

59,482 62,456 64,954 66,903 68,241

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-6

Population Distribution and Density The population distribution within Butler County is categorized as urban and rural, 62% to 38%, respectively. This study area distribution does not correlate to the State of Kansas population distribution, which is 79% urban and 21% rural (according to League of Kansas Municipalities data). The recent trend toward rural living accounts for the relatively high rural population. Given Butler County’s proximity to Sedgwick County and the City of Wichita, it is possible this rural growth trend will continue. Butler County’s unique rural-urban population is further defined by the location of its population centers. The three largest communities – El Dorado, Augusta, and Andover – are located in the central and western portion of the county. Additionally, the major rural growth is also occurring in these portions of the county. This unbalanced population growth results in a higher population density in the western half of the county with a steady or falling population in the eastern half of the county.

TABLE 1.5 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION IN BUTLER COUNTY

Urban Rural % Urban % Rural

36,855 22,627 62% 38%

TABLE 1.6 POPULATION DENSITY IN BUTLER COUNTY

Area Population Density (in square (people per miles) square mile)

1,443 59,482 41.2

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-7

Seasonal Variations Seasonal population variations throughout the study area are minimal, limited primarily to small fluctuations from educational institutions, tourism, and recreational facilities. Butler Community College has a student population of approximately 8,400. Of these students, a majority are full-time residents of the study area and therefore do not contribute to population fluctuations. Most of the out-of-county student population commutes into Butler County from adjacent counties. The primary recreational facility in Butler County is El Dorado Lake which is situated in the central part of the county. The lake supports fishing, hunting, boating, swimming, camping, and picnicking.

GEOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY This section discusses the geography and geology of the study area -- the topography, the groundwater quality, and characteristics unique to Butler County.

Topography Butler County lies almost entirely within the Flint Hills Upland physio-graphic division of the Osage Plains section of the North American Central Lowland Province. The extreme southwestern corner of the county lies within the Great Bend Lowland division of the Arkansas River Lowlands section. The Flint Hills Upland physio-graphic division is characterized by rugged, rolling hills dissected by wooded valleys such as occur in the eastern part of Butler County, and by rolling and hilly country in the north and gently sloping land in the south. The major rivers in Butler County are the Walnut River and the Whitewater River. The Walnut River flows southeast from the north-central part of the county to Augusta where it is joined by the Whitewater River which flows north to south in the western part of the county.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-8

Source: Kansas Geological Survey

MAP 1.2 BUTLER COUNTY SHADED RELIEF

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-9

Land surface elevations in Butler County range from greater than 1500 feet mean sea level in the northeast portion of the county to less than 1250 feet mean sea level in the southwest.

Geology The consolidated rocks exposed in Butler County belong to the Sumner, Chase, and Council Grove groups of the Permian System. The youngest rocks crop out along the western boundary of the county and the oldest rocks are exposed in the extreme eastern part. The maximum thickness of the rocks of: (1) the Sumner group is about 65 feet; (2) the Chase group is about 340 feet; and (3) the Council Grove group is about 310 feet. The attitude (direction of dip) of subsurface bedrock strata in Butler County is affected by two major structural features, the Nemaha Anticline and the Chautauqua Arch. The northwest flank of the Chautauqua Arch underlies the southern part of the county. The Nemaha Anticline enters Butler County near the southwest corner and extends north- northeast through the centerline of the northern county boundary. From the crest of the Nemaha Anticline, subsurface bedrock units dip westward into the Sedgwick Basin and eastward into the Cherokee Basin. Quaternary-age sediments overlying the bedrock in Butler County consist of alluvium in the major stream valleys, and residuum (soils formed from the in-place weathering of rocks) in the uplands. Soil thicknesses in the uplands are typically 3 to 4 feet or less. In the stream valleys, soil thicknesses are greater. The extreme western portion of the county contains soils and geology generally suitable for receiving solid waste. The majority of the remaining portion of the county is deemed locally suitable, depending on soil type, depth to the water table, degree of groundwater utilization, and drainage. Only the areas along the major stream valleys are generally unsuitable because of periodic flooding, high water tables, and proximity to locally used alluvial aquifers. Butler County is the most important oil-producing county in eastern Kansas. The El Dorado Oil and Gas Field has yielded more oil than any other field in the county. Oil and gas are present in several production zones in this field at depths from 600 to 2,750 feet.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-10

Source: Kansas Geological Survey

MAP 1.3 BUTLER COUNTY GEOLOGY

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-11

Seismic Impact Zone The western portion of the county lies within an area where the probability of the horizontal acceleration due to seismic activity is 0.1g or greater, with a 90% probability of this factor not being exceeded in 250 years (Algermissen et al, 1990). This area coincides roughly with the portion of the county west of the Nemaha Anticline. The remainder of the county has a horizontal acceleration factor equal to or less than 0.1g. Seismic activity occurs occasionally along the Nemaha Anticline, including a micro-earthquake (less than IV on the Modified Mercalli scale) which occurred in the northwestern part of Butler County. Other recent tremors are outlined in the following table. Seismologists estimate that a magnitude 6.0 earthquake might occur in Kansas every 2,000 years.

TABLE 1.7 RECENT TREMORS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Date Time Magnitude* Location

May 26, 1919 Unknown 4.0 mg Unknown

½ mile east of Towakoni on June 25, 1979 7:30 am 1.6 mg NW 150th ½ mile east of Butler Road November 14, 1995 2:51 pm 2.3 mg on SW 50th

July 24, 2001 9:04 am 3.0 mg 10 miles west of El Dorado * Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale

1 -- Not felt except by very few people.

2 -- Felt by persons at rest (especially on upper floors). Hanging objects sway.

3 -- Felt noticeably (especially indoors). Parked cars rock slightly.

4 -- Felt by many. Dishes, windows and doors disturbed, walls creak, sensation like a truck hitting the building, parked vehicles rock noticeably.

5 -- Felt by all. Dishes, windows, etc. break, plaster cracks, unanchored objects overturn.

6 -- Felt by all. Heavy furniture moves, chimneys can fall, damage is slight.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-12

Faults Several faults have been mapped in Butler County. The mapped faults are all in the western half of the county with the exception of one in the extreme northeastern portion. The Humbolt Fault Zone is a major fault area that traverses the county from northeast to southwest passing near El Dorado.

Unstable Areas Unstable areas are generally associated with karst features. Some karst features have been mapped in Butler County. These are sinkholes and caves normally associated with the Fort Riley Limestone Member of the Barneston Formation (Chase group) which is present at the surface throughout most of the central and eastern parts of the county. Locally, groundwater quality in the outcrop area of the Fort Riley Limestone Member has been affected by contamination from the petroleum industry in the vicinity of El Dorado. This contamination was possibly introduced and spread through the subsurface via connected passageways dissolved in the carbonate rocks of the Fort Riley Limestone Member (Wilson, 1994).

Wetlands Wetlands are typically located in close proximity to water bodies (lakes, rivers, creeks), but can be found wherever the topography, soil, and/or geology are capable of supporting wetland vegetation. Wetlands are classified by the type of soil and vegetation, and sometimes according to animal habitat. It is impossible to identify all of the wetlands in Butler County since their size can range from a quarter of an acre to many hundreds of acres. National Wetland Inventory Maps available from the Natural Resource Conservation Service can be used for preliminary identification of suspected wetlands. It is typically necessary that a trained wetland scientist conduct a field study to identify any wetlands.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 1: CITIES, DEMOGRAPHICS, GEOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Page 1-13

CHAPTER 2 TRANSPORTATION NETWORK IN STUDY AREA

There are two major issues in assessing the study area’s transportation network: (1) the highways, state roads, and county routes that link the communities in Butler County into a cooperative solid waste organization; and (2) the county roads and urban streets which provide the network for solid waste collection within each county.

MAJOR ROUTES The study area is served by a major interstate highway, U.S. routes, state routes, and various county roads. The major highways in Butler County consist of Interstate 35 operated by the Kansas Turnpike Authority, U. S. Route 54 running east-west, U.S. Route 77 running north-south, U.S. Route 400 and state routes K254, K196, and K177.

• Interstate 35 connects Wichita to Andover, El Dorado, Cassoday, and Emporia.

• U.S. 54 links Wichita, Andover, Augusta, El Dorado, Rosalia, and Eureka.

• U.S. 77 connects Winfield, Douglass, Augusta, and El Dorado.

• U. S. 400 connects Wichita, Andover, Augusta, Leon, Beaumont, and Severy.

• K254 links El Dorado, Towanda, and Benton to the north Wichita area.

• K196 connects El Dorado to Potwin, Whitewater, and Newton.

• K177 connects Cassoday and Cottonwood Falls to the El Dorado area.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 2: TRANSPORTATION NETWORK IN STUDY AREA Page 2-1

Federal Aid Secondary (FAS) roads serve as feeders from the federal and state highways to rural areas of Butler County. FAS roads maintained by the Butler County Public Works Department include the following classifications and lengths.

TABLE 2.1 FEDERAL AID SECONDARY ROADS MAINTAINED BY BUTLER COUNTY

Surface Classification Mileage

Medium/Heavy Asphalt 297.7

Light Asphalt 64.2

Aggregate 52.6

TOTAL 414.5

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 2: TRANSPORTATION NETWORK IN STUDY AREA Page 2-2

ROAD LIMITATIONS The following table indicates bridges on the FAS road system that have reduced gross weight limits. Use of these bridges by loaded solid waste collection vehicles would be limited to smaller capacity payload vehicles. The bridges on the state and federal roads are of adequate load capacity for loaded solid waste collection vehicles.

TABLE 2.2 FEDERAL AID SECONDARY ROAD BRIDGES AND GROSS WEIGHT LIMITS

Gross Location No. of Overall Roadway Weight Designation Bridge Type Spans Length Width Limit (ft) (ft) (tons)

21E1-23-3 Continuous Concrete Slab 3 118 24.0 10

19E3-25-4 Continuous Concrete Slab 3 94 24.0 15

7E9-25-4 Continuous Concrete Slab 3 107 24.0 15

7N5-29-8 Steel Girder 1 28 24.0 16

8E3-24-6 Steel Girder 1 32 23.3 10

5E3-26-6 Continuous Concrete Slab 3 118 24.0 10

Source: Butler County Engineer, 2002

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 2: TRANSPORTATION NETWORK IN STUDY AREA Page 2-3

Other county roads that are non-FAS or “off-system” roads have many small bridges suitable for automobile and pick-up truck traffic. Weight and width limitations on these bridges would restrict the passage of loaded solid waste collection vehicles. The following table indicates vertical clearances for highway underpasses on the federal highway system, FAS roads, and urban arterial streets in the City of El Dorado that have clearances less than the desired Federal Highway Administration standard of 16.5 feet on the interstate system and the minimum standard of 14.5 feet on other highways.

TABLE 2.3 HIGHWAY UNDERPASSES WITH RESTRICTED CLEARANCE

Location/Designatio Vertical Clearance n

18E-26-3 14’ – 6”

15NE-26-4 14’ – 0”

35C-25-5 13’ – 7”

36C-25-5 15’ – 0”

11N-26-5 14’ – 7”

1W-26-5 15’ – 0”

35E-25-5 15’ – 0”

24S-27-3 14’ – 7”

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 2: TRANSPORTATION NETWORK IN STUDY AREA Page 2-4

CHAPTER 3 SOLID WASTE GENERATION

WASTE COMPOSITION The following table details the solid waste delivered to the Butler County Landfill for selected years from 1996 to 2007. Data on solid waste is from county records and from information provided by communities within the county. A waste composition study for Butler County has not been conducted.

TABLE 3.1 BUTLER COUNTY LANDFILL SOLID WASTE INFLOW

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2007

Waste (tons/year) 39,006 42,475 53,080 53,136 44,703 45,443 44,668

The dramatic increase in tonnage in 1998 and 1999 was due to a major flood event that generated a significant amount of tree limbs and construction and demolition debris. The flood occurred in the later half of 1998. Cleanup was conducted during late 1998 and through the first quarter of 1999. An important aspect of this data is that it does not represent all of the solid waste generated in Butler County. A portion of the county’s solid waste is collected by private haulers who take the waste collected to neighboring counties.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 3: SOLID WASTE GENERATION Page 3-1

TABLE 3.2 WASTE COMPOSITION IN BUTLER COUNTY FOR 2007

Waste Category Amount

Municipal Solid Waste 29,497 tons

Construction & Demolition Debris 10,938 tons

Special Waste 3,099 tons

Yard Waste (compostable material) 1,134 tons

Tires 4,429 units

White Goods 3,179 units

Recycled Materials (co-mingled) includes cardboard, newspaper, office paper, glass, tin cans, HDPE plastics, 3,200 tons PET plastics, and aluminum cans *

Wood Grinding (on- and off-site) 1,134 tons

Sewage Sludge 0 tons

*Information from City of El Dorado and City of Augusta recycling operations.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 3: SOLID WASTE GENERATION Page 3-2

SPECIAL WASTE The disposal of special waste requires additional handling beyond that typically used for municipal solid waste disposal. County staff members and planning committee members provided additional information regarding special waste. This information is presented in the table below.

TABLE 3.3 SPECIAL WASTE HANDLING

Abandoned Vehicles Salvage yards

Agricultural HHW or municipal waste

Asbestos Landfilled as special waste w/locations.

Construction & Landfilled in unlined cell. Demolition

Batteries Accepted separately. Picked up by Interstate Battery.

Dead Animals Landfilled as municipal solid waste.

Forestry Wood waste accepted separately. Ground for mulch.

Household Hazardous HHW facility.

Pesticides HHW facility.

Land application by septage haulers off-site or Septage taken to wastewater treatment plants.

Tires Accepted separately. Picked up by Champlin Tire.

Used Oil Accepted separately. Picked up by Universal Lubricants.

White Goods Recycled by A-Z Recycling, BND Recycling, & Budget Recycle. Compost sites at landfill and some communities Yard Waste (Augusta, Andover, Benton, Whitewater, and El Dorado).

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 3: SOLID WASTE GENERATION Page 3-3

SOLID WASTE GENERATION PROJECTION To address the future needs of the region, it is essential to project the future solid waste generation for the study area. Utilizing the population projections presented in Chapter 1 and the 2000 solid waste generation totals, future solid waste generation is projected. The tons per person factor utilized is based on 2007 actual solid waste generation tonnages. The factor is then utilized in the following formula:

Projected County Population x County Factor

= Projected Solid Waste Tonnage

TABLE 3.4 BUTLER COUNTY SOLID WASTE GENERATION AND POPULATION

2007 * 2006** Tons Per Tonnage Total Population Total Person

Butler County 44,668 46,727 0.96

* Amount of solid waste received at Butler County Landfill

** Population based on communities that send solid waste to Butler County Landfill

TABLE 3.5 PROJECTED SOLID WASTE GENERATION

2010 Tonnage 2020 Tonnage 2030 Tonnage 2040 Tonnage

50,500 54,600 58,900 62,150

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 3: SOLID WASTE GENERATION Page 3-4

CHAPTER 4 EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS

This chapter discusses the collection, storage, transportation and disposal systems that presently operate in the study area. Recycling, scrap metals, composting, and special waste facilities are delineated and open burn sites are listed. The last section of this chapter discusses ordinances related to solid waste that exist in each of the communities and in Butler County. A summary of present municipal solid waste collection, storage and transportation is presented in the following paragraphs.

EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS The table below delineates the public and private haulers that operate in Butler County.

TABLE 4.1 PUBLIC AND PRIVATE HAULERS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Area or Frequency Cost of Collection Community Served Hauler Name Hauler Address of Collection ($/Mo) Unincorporated Various/ 1X/Week or Butler County Open Market Self Haul Varies Varies Andover Open Market Various 1X/Week 17.70/28.80 Augusta City of Augusta Augusta, KS 2X/Week 11.30/14.50 Benton Waste Connections Wichita, KS 1X/Week 9.00 Cassoday D & T El Dorado, KS 1X/Week 9.50/Varies Douglass Waste Connections Wichita, KS 1X/Week 9.50/Varies El Dorado City of El Dorado El Dorado, KS 1X/Week 12.60/Varies Elbing Stutzman Refuse, Inc. Hesston, KS 1X/Week 9.75 Latham Waste Connections Wichita, KS 1X/Week 10.50/Varies Leon D & T El Dorado, KS 2X/Week 9.50/15.00 Potwin Stutzman Refuse, Inc. Hesston, KS 1X/Week 7.50/9.00 Rose Hill Open Market Various Varies 20.00/Varies Towanda Waste Connections Wichita, KS 1X/Week 13.00/15.00 Whitewater Stutzman Refuse, Inc. Hesston, KS 1X/Week 11.25/Varies

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 4: EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS Page 4-1

RECYCLERS, SCRAP METAL DEALERS, COMPOSTING FACILITIES, AND SPECIAL WASTE HANDLERS

The table below presents an inventory of recyclers, scrap metal dealers, composting facilities, and special waste handling facilities within the study area. These facilities are delineated by community.

TABLE 4.2 RECYCLERS, SCRAP METAL DEALERS, COMPOSTING FACILITIES, AND SPECIAL WASTE HANDLERS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Household Operator/Facility Recycling Composting Special Scrap Hazardous Location Waste Metal Waste

Butler County y y y y y

City of El Dorado y y

Wal-Mart y

Radium Petroleum y

Augusta y y y

Benton y

Andover y y

A-Z Recycling y

Budget Recycling y

BND Recycling y Rose Hill y

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 4: EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS Page 4-2

The following tables present the methods and resources the various entities within the county utilize to address the various aspects of solid waste, excluding collection and disposal.

TABLE 4.3 RECYCLING PROGRAMS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Location Recycling Method of Recycling Taken To Collected By Collection

City City Center Center Combo County Private Facility Augusta Drop Off Recycling Curb Side Curb Side El Dorado Out-of County Unincorporated Butler County y y y y

Andover y y y y y y y y

Augusta y y y

Benton y y y

Cassoday y y y

Douglass y y y

El Dorado y y y

Elbing y y y

Latham y y y

Leon y y y

Potwin y y y

Rose Hill y y y

Towanda y y y

Whitewater y y y

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 4: EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS Page 4-3

TABLE 4.4 PRESENT SOLID WASTE PROGRAMS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Location Composting Recycling Curb Side Tree/Brush Drop-Off Recycling Burning Unincorporated Butler County y y

Andover y y y y

Augusta y y y

Benton y y

Cassoday y

Douglass y y

El Dorado y y y y

Elbing y

Latham y y

Leon y y

Potwin y y y

Rose Hill y y

Towanda y y

Whitewater y y y

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 4: EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS Page 4-4

TABLE 4.4 PRESENT SOLID WASTE PROGRAMS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Recycling Volume Based Waste Oil Tree/Brush Location Process Fees Grinding Unincorporated y y Butler County

y Andover

y y Augusta

y y Benton

y Cassoday

y Douglass

y y y El Dorado

Elbing

y Latham

y y Leon

y Potwin

y Rose Hill

y Towanda

y Whitewater

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 4: EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS Page 4-5

TABLE 4.5 SPECIAL WASTE HANDLING PROGRAMS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Location Green Waste Motor Oil HHW Tires

Unincorporated Butler County Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Radium Butler Co/ Andover City Petro Sedgwick Co Butler Co

Augusta City Butler Co. Butler Co Butler Co

Benton City City Butler Co Butler Co

Cassoday Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co

Douglass Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co

El Dorado El Dorado Butler Co El Dorado

Elbing Butler Co Oil Burners Butler Co Butler County

Latham City Oil Burner Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co/ Leon Varies City Wichita Butler Co

Potwin City Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co

Rose Hill City Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co

Towanda Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co

Whitewater Butler Co City Butler Co Butler Co

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 4: EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS Page 4-6

TABLE 4.5 SPECIAL WASTE HANDLING PROGRAMS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Auto Antifreeze White Goods Others Location Batteries Butler Co/ Unincorporated Wal-Mart Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler County

Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Andover Glickmans Butler Co Butler Co Recycling Butler Co Augusta

Interstate Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Benton

Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Cassoday

Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Douglass

Interstate Butler Co Butler Co El Dorado

Butler County Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Elbing

Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Latham

Varies Private Butler Co Butler Co Leon

Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Potwin

Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Rose Hill Interstate Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Towanda

Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Butler Co Whitewater

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 4: EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS Page 4-7

From information provided by county staff members, there are 6 permitted open burn sites in Butler County. The following table lists these sites.

TABLE 4.6 OPEN BURN SITES IN BUTLER COUNTY

Location Permit No.

Butler County Landfill 0296-100

El Dorado Compost Site 0296-1019

Potwin Brush Pile 0296-1329

Whitewater Brush Pile 0296-1145

Kansas Aluminum El Dorado 0299-03

Towanda Brush Pile

DISPOSAL Butler County operates a Subtitle D landfill located southwest of the City of El Dorado. This landfill provides disposal services to all urban and rural areas of the county as well as drop-off areas for scrap metal, appliances, green waste, brush and limbs, tires, household hazardous wastes, and construction and demolition debris. A composting facility is also located at the site. The landfill is permitted under Kansas Department of Health & Environment regulations. Presently, a landfill gas collection system is installed at the landfill. It is anticipated that the present landfill operation has a life span of more than 50 years. The landfill does not accept solid waste generated outside of Butler County. Because the present solid waste systems operate independently, the organizational structure of each system is often dependent upon local and county ordinances. The following table delineates a brief overview of these ordinances.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 4: EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS Page 4-8

TABLE 4.7 SOLID WASTE ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Ordinance Name and Enacting Entity Ordinance Description Date

Storage, collection, transportation, processing, disposal, Resolution 419 (1980) Butler County permits & licenses, prohibited practices, penalties

Ordinance 250 (1975) City of Andover Collection, licenses, disposal Ordinance 619 (1989) City of Andover Burn ban Ordinance 503 (1977) City of Andover Penalties Ordinance 591 (1988) City of Andover Hours of collection

Ordinance 1825 (2001) City of Augusta Collection, storage, contracts, permits, charges, disposal, and Ordinance 1940 fines, definitions, fees (2007)

Ordinance 205 (1976) City of Benton Definitions, collection. licensing, fees, prohibiting litter, penalties

Provides for collection and disposal of refuse, fees, volume Ordinance 658 (2001) City of Douglass (>200 lbs)

Ordinance G614 City of El Dorado Solid Waste Ordinance G878 (2000) City of El Dorado Curbside recycling

Storage, collection, disposal, permits, prohibited practices, Ordinance 76-1 (1976) and City of Latham service charges, penalties, definitions Ordinance 88-2 (1988)

Storage, accumulation, burying, unauthorized handling & disposal, collection, hazardous material permits, fees, Ordinance 598 (1990) City of Potwin contractors, penalties, prohibited practices

Disposal, removal, license, containers, collection, burn ban Ordinance 83 (1976) City of Rose Hill

Ordinance 241 (1973) City of Towanda Collection, disposal, charges, unlawful practices, definitions Ordinance 394 (1990) City of Towanda Collection is a municipal function

Definitions, collection, contracts, storage accumulation, Ordinance 379 (1980) City of burying, hazardous materials disposal, permits, prohibited Whitewater practices, penalties Ordinance 516 (2001) City of Fee increase Whitewater

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 4: EXISTING SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS Page 4-9

CHAPTER 5 SOLID WASTE ISSUES AND PROBLEMS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA

DEFICIENCIES IN THE PRESENT SYSTEM The planning committee utilized a series of questionnaires and evaluation of solid waste systems within the county to identify deficiencies within the present solid waste system. These deficiencies were identified during the committee’s compilation of data for this plan and through committee member experiences in utilizing the various solid waste systems. In addition, the committee was surveyed to further identify solid waste system deficiencies. The data presented in the previous chapters presents a snapshot of the present system from a statistical perspective. This chapter presents an analytical perspective based on system-user experience and available data. Five specific areas of solid waste management system were evaluated as they relate to Butler County.

Collection: Ensuring the availability of collection services for all interested parties.

Recycling/Composting: Collection of recyclables is available on a regularly- scheduled basis throughout the county. Materials accepted and times of operation are established.

Public Education: Type and adequacy of information is inconsistent throughout the area. No consistency in school programs.

Data Collection: Need to provide better public access and dispersal of information.

Disposal: Need to better control flow of solid waste in county to support the landfill.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 5: SOLID WASTE ISSUES AND PROBLEMS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA Page 5-1

TABLE 5.1 RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SYSTEMS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Location SW Who Collects Contract Disposal Who Collects Ordinance Trash Location Fee Unincorporated Butler County Y Private Open Butler Co Hauler

Andover Y Private Open Sedgwick Co/ Hauler Butler Co

Augusta Y City NA Butler Co City

Benton Y Waste Contract Butler Co City Connections

Cassoday N D & T Contract Butler Co/ City Sedgwick Co

Douglass Y Waste Contract Butler Co/ City Connections Sedgwick Co

El Dorado Y City NA Butler Co City

Elbing N Stutzman Contract Butler Co City

Latham Y Waste Contract Cowley Co City Connections

Leon N D&T Contract Butler Co City

Potwin Y Stutzman Contract Butler Co City

Rose Hill Y Private Open Butler Co/ Hauler Sedgwick Co

Towanda N Waste Contract Butler Co City Connections

Whitewater Y Stutzman Contract Butler Co City

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 5: SOLID WASTE ISSUES AND PROBLEMS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA Page 5-2

TABLE 5.1 RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SYSTEMS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Frequency of Collection Days Basic Fee Collection Per Week Residential/ Commercial ($) M T W T F

1 or Varies X X X X X Varies

1 X X X X X 17.70/28.80

2 X X X X 11.30/14.50

1 X 9.00

1 9.50/Varies

1 X X X X X 12.60/Varies

1 X 9.75

1 X X 10.50/Varies

2 X X 9.50/15.00

1 7.50/9.00

X X X X X 20.00/Varies Varies

1 X 13.00/15.00

1 X 11.25/Varies

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 5: SOLID WASTE ISSUES AND PROBLEMS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA Page 5-3

KEY ISSUES The first issue the planning committee wants to address is that of long-term disposal control. The county’s control of the solid waste system does not necessarily indicate that the county would physically collect, operate and dispose of the waste. Rather, the county desires oversight of the solid waste system in order to guarantee that the solid waste is collected, transferred, recycled, and disposed in a manner that best meets the needs and concerns of the county and its constituents. It is recognized that the county is presently operating a disposal facility and actively recycles and composts. The second issue recognized by the planning committee is the development of a coordinated approach to recycling. The planning committee identified the first step in a coordinated approach as the establishment of a unified recycling collection to service the entire county.

KDHE Regulations All solid waste regulations prepared by KDHE will be utilized as a basis for the development of all criteria and guidelines prepared for this plan. County policies and facilities will meet KDHE regulations.

Constraints Butler County’s large geographical area, sizeable rural population, and number of incorporated communities are all constraints to the solid waste system. Clear and concise criteria and guidelines for the implementation of this plan (see Chapter 7.0, Optimal Solid Waste Management System) will assist the county in mitigating these constraints. These detailed and specific criteria and guidelines indicate the purpose, goals, and concerns of the county. This approach affords the county flexibility while developing the solid waste system. It further allows the county the ability to easily modify the system as changes occur in solid waste technology, regulations and constituent attitudes.

Administration The county takes a very active role in solid waste management. Further, the county recognizes its role as a leader in solid waste management as demonstrated by its establishment of a Solid Waste Director and its decision to further support recycling, composting, and public education.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 5: SOLID WASTE ISSUES AND PROBLEMS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA Page 5-4

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan Update – October 2008 CHAPTER 5: SOLID WASTE ISSUES AND PROBLEMS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA Page 5-5

CHAPTER 6 SOLID WASTE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS

Presently, the solid waste technologies utilized in the study area include the following:

1. Curbside collection 2. Recycling drop-off centers 3. Household hazardous waste drop-off facility 4. Municipal solid waste landfill 5. Construction and demolition landfill 6. Special waste disposal facility 7. Recycling process center 8. Composting facilities 9. E-Scrap collection facility (opened in December 2008)

The complexity of these technologies varies in accordance with the size of the facility and the particular needs of the service area. Waste throughout the county is primarily collected at least once per week curbside by means of semi-automated as well as manual rearloading packer trucks or daily at local drop-off centers. Final disposal of municipal solid waste is accomplished exclusively through landfilling within the county. It is the intent of the county to continue operating its present landfill. To support the landfill, it will be important to capture as much of the solid waste generated in the county as possible.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – October 2008 CHAPTER 6: SOLID WASTE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS Page 6-1

TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS While there are many solid waste technologies currently available that could be beneficial to the county, few of them are feasible in practice due to prohibitively high cost and questionable reliability. The following paragraphs present the most applicable methods for storage, collection and transport, solid waste processing, recycling, and disposal for the county. This discussion is based on present data and applicable technology for the area and is not an endorsement of any specific technology.

Storage The most cost-effective and waste-reductive method of solid waste storage at the household level is through the use of plastic or metal containers. Containers can have a variety of capacity and should be fitted with wheels and a formfitting, hinged lid for ease and convenience of movement and use. The most commonly implemented arrangement is to provide each household a single container for weekly disposal. By allowing only one container per household, the user is restricted in the volume of solid waste that can be generated. This is a first step in waste reduction. Convenience centers are facilities utilized for the collection of solid waste from private citizens. These facilities typically have large containers for the collection of municipal solid waste plus designated areas for the collection of various special wastes. Convenience centers are usually fenced in and permanent facilities. Convenience centers should utilize larger, roll-off containers to accommodate the public disposal of materials that do not fit in the smaller household containers. In addition, each center should designate an area for the stockpiling of white goods, yard waste, tires, and household hazardous wastes. These waste items should remain isolated and separated and should be collected for final disposal or reuse once a month, or as required, to maintain good housekeeping and safety standards.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – October 2008 CHAPTER 6: SOLID WASTE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS Page 6-2

Collection For maximum efficiency, and if possible, all waste collection at the household level should be accomplished by automated vehicles. All vehicles should be water tight and cleaned frequently. Overpacking of vehicles should not be tolerated. Front-end loaders, rear loaders, or roll-off containers, varying with the volume of wastes generated, should collect the solid waste from commercial and industrial sites. These vehicles should possess the flexibility and capacity to handle all loads and all service areas. These vehicles should be water tight and cleaned frequently. Given the central location of the landfill site, all solid waste should be direct hauled to the landfill. This eliminates the need for transfer stations. Given the relative consistency of topography in the county, direct hauling of solid waste should not adversely impact the collection vehicles.

Solid Waste Processing Those technologies that are presently available for solid waste processing, as well as those technologies that will be available in the near future, significantly impact the solid waste stream generated within the county. This in turn affects solid waste planning, collection, and disposal throughout the county. Because there are many available technologies that could be implemented, and also because of the uncertainty of future technologies, this plan focuses on key questions the county must answer before any technology is accepted for implementation.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – October 2008 CHAPTER 6: SOLID WASTE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS Page 6-3

New Technology Checklist

1. Does the technology improve the present system?

2. Is the technology proven and reliable?

3. Is the technology cost effective?

4. Does the technology require extensive training?

5. Has the technology completely evolved?

6. Can the technology be enhanced in the future without excessive cost or changes?

7. What commitment is required to use this technology?

By answering these seven basic questions, the county can make informed, clear decisions regarding the implementation of any technology. The answers to all seven questions lead to the most important question the county will ask of present and future technologies: Does the technology fit with the present system, and does it serve the mission of the solid waste system to provide the best service to the county area at a reasonable cost?

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – October 2008 CHAPTER 6: SOLID WASTE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS Page 6-4

Recycling The present method of recycling (through drop-off centers and area collections) continues to be the most effective method for the study area. There are a significant number of recycling collection programs operating throughout the study area now, and they should be encouraged to continue and their mission promoted. The county needs to focus on compiling a uniform data base for all of the recycling programs in the county. Based on the information gathered, the county can implement a recycling and waste reduction program. This multifaceted program would be designed to reduce materials entering the solid waste disposal stream and reinforce the importance of recycling and waste reduction. Additionally, the program would also work with present recycling and waste reduction efforts within the county to further enhance these efforts.

Solid Waste Disposal The most cost-effective method of solid waste disposal at this time is landfilling. This type of disposal is cost effective and easily accessible through the facility presently operated by the county. The county recognizes that disposal must be integrated with recycling and waste reduction to be successful. Through integration, the cost of solid waste processing can be controlled and changes in technologies can be considered and utilized without adversely impacting the system or its costs.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – October 2008 CHAPTER 6: SOLID WASTE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS Page 6-5

CHAPTER 7 OPTIMAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

In 2002 the county established a solid waste system that met both its short- and long-term needs. This system was structured to allow the county and communities to work together while allowing the system to work successfully. The system presented in this chapter is the result of the planning committee identifying the common needs and interests of the county and communities. This is based on the experiences of the county and the communities during the past five years as well as successes and failures in the management of solid waste. The county continues to have overall responsibility for its solid waste. This responsibility will follow three courses. First, the county, and the various governmental bodies within the county, will be responsible for all solid waste collection throughout the county. Collection can continue as it is presently handled via private and public haulers. Second, each community will be involved in the establishment and functioning of a centralized recycling collection program. Third, the county will continue to improve upon solid waste disposal services and will begin implementation of a recycling plan for the county. The county’s responsibility includes further enhancement and improvement to its solid waste information gathering and dissemination process. Also, the county is responsible for all solid waste disposal in the county. The county will be responsible for the review and approval of solid waste facilities in the county and the control of solid waste facilities developed for use by the entire county. The county, working with the communities, will begin implementing the new recycling plan prepared in 2008.

ACTIVITIES The solid waste system is divided into five activities: information, waste reduction, collection, transfer, and disposal. The activities and the relationship of these activities with the communities and the county are detailed in the following paragraphs.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 7: OPTIMAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Page 7-1

Information All data concerning solid waste in the county will be collected by the county utilizing one data compilation system. The information is made available to anyone interested within the county. The county would be the only official source for solid waste data for the county. All information would be computerized and a network system utilizing internet technology to share information and experiences would be developed to allow each community data inputting capabilities.

Waste Reduction A recycling plan for the county has been developed. In addition to recycling efforts it is important that other aspects of waste reduction be further enhanced. These include household hazardous waste collection and reduction, composting, yard waste reduction, electronic waste or scrap collection and reuse, and universal waste reduction. Each of these areas is discussed in the following paragraphs.

Household Hazardous Waste - The household hazardous waste efforts should be expanded to include service to the entire county. This service should be through collections days at various locations in the county.

Recycling - The recycling plan provides guidance in the implementation of a recycling program that is designed to significantly increase the recycling rates in the county and to educate county citizens in recycling and waste reduction efforts. The plan calls for the county to take a greater role in the recycling efforts. The plan also focuses on the importance of interaction between the communities in the county. A copy of the new plan is attached as an appendix to the solid waste plan.

Composting - Efforts in the county should be expanded to provide composting service within a reasonable distance to all residents of Butler County. Yard waste reduction should be promoted through increased use of mulcher mowers and home compost units.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 7: OPTIMAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Page 7-2

Electronic Waste or Scrap (E-Scrap) - E-Scrap collection should be coordinated with state agencies and with private enterprises in Butler County. Electronic reuse programs should also be utilized to find new users for discarded electronic equipment. A first step in this direction is the opening of an E-Scrap drop-off facility at the Butler County Landfill. This facility will open in December 2008.

Universal Waste - Collection and reuse of universal waste should be more aggressively approached through public awareness campaigns and increased drop off locations for batteries and fluorescent bulbs. A program to educate the public to issues regarding these wastes should be established.

Storm Debris – All storm debris will be taken to the nearest disposal site. As much as possible, the debris that is tree limbs or similar material will be chipped or ground and then either utilized for mulch or composted. A detailed storm debris plan will be prepared within the first six months of the implementation of this document.

Collection Each community as well as the county should establish regulations or guidance procedures for collection. These regulations or procedures should briefly describe the requirements for collection and collection vehicle restrictions. Additionally, all solid waste generated in Butler County should be delivered to the Butler County Landfill for final disposal.

Transfer Transfer of solid waste and recyclables would not be practical for Butler County at this time. As population growth continues it should be considered based on increased truck traffic or increased solid waste volume. Consideration of this option should be evaluated annually.

Disposal The Butler County Landfill would continue to operate under its present management. Additionally, the landfill would continue to provide disposal services to all residents of the county. The landfill staff would continue to investigate procedures that will further

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 7: OPTIMAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Page 7-3 streamline operation. The solid waste system would include the landfill activities, composting, household hazardous waste, recycling, waste reduction, E-Scrap collection, public education programs, and other similar activities. This system would be supported by the landfill tipping fee and a one mill levy assessment for solid waste activities.

GUIDELINES It is imperative that guidelines are established to focus the implementation process so the county can further develop this solid waste system. For purposes of this plan, a guideline is defined as an indicator or outline of policy. The guidelines for information, waste reduction, collection, transfer, and disposal follow.

INFORMATION GUIDELINES

• All information should be gathered uniformly.

• All communities in the county are responsible for proper collection of data for their community.

• The county should be responsible for quality control.

• All data would be available to each community.

• The county should assist with all public education with regard to solid waste activities in the county.

• Solid waste activities and information on solid waste issues should be provided to the citizens of the county.

• The present Butler County web site should be utilized to collect and disseminate information. The website should also have links to other web sites that provide additional information to county citizens. These links should include KDHE’s and USEPA’s web sites.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 7: OPTIMAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Page 7-4

COLLECTION GUIDELINES

• Collection services are defined as the collection and direct haul of solid waste to the landfill.

• All collection should be conducted by local or county entities and the entity can supply the service itself or retain a private firm to conduct collection.

• All solid waste collected in Butler County should be delivered to the Butler County Landfill.

• All collection containers should satisfy State of Kansas regulations.

• All county collection regulations should meet State of Kansas regulations as well as standards set by the county for delivery of solid waste to the Butler County Landfill.

TRANSFER GUIDELINES

• The transfer of solid waste is presently not applicable within the county.

• The transfer of solid waste should only be utilized if it is more cost effective than direct haul to a disposal facility by a collection vehicle.

• All transfer of solid waste should be in vehicles that are water tight.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 7: OPTIMAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Page 7-5

WASTE REDUCTION GUIDELINES

• The recycling plan recently prepared for the county should be approved and implementation should proceed.

• The various aspects of the recycling plan need to be implemented following the schedule presented in the recycling plan.

• Waste reduction efforts should be increased and included as a part of the public education program identified in the recycling plan.

• Household hazardous waste collection and reduction, composting, yard waste reduction, electronic waste or scrap collection and reuse, and universal waste reduction should be aggressively increased.

DISPOSAL GUIDELINES

• The county should be responsible for the disposal of municipal solid waste produced in the county.

• The county should continually work to identify the best options for disposal of municipal solid waste.

• Cost for disposal incurred by the county should be included in the uniform tonnage rate charged for disposal.

• The disposal facility must meet or exceed KDHE, EPA, and all local rules and regulations pertaining to disposal facilities.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 7: OPTIMAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Page 7-6

CHAPTER 8 COST OF RECOMMENDED SYSTEM

As presented in Chapter 7, a number of criteria have been established that the county must work within as the system develops. Unlike the previous 5-year planning horizon there is a major project that Butler County faces; the implementation of a new recycling plan. Implementation will involve a number of changes that the county and communities will face. The funding needs for the next five years will focus on the implementation of the recycling plan and further enhancement of the entire solid waste system. It is important that the present system be further supported through the existing mill levy system. The entire one mill levy that has been identified for solid waste efforts in Butler County should be maintained in order to ensure that the solid waste programs in place and the new programs are financially supported on a continual basis. Further, financial support must be provided for more aggressive public education and coordination of existing programs. The Butler County solid waste system modifications recommended in this plan address areas that require additional fine tuning. These areas include: (1) improved sharing of information; (2) the establishment of procedures that will result in a consistent assembly of information; (3) more aggressive efforts in recycling coordination, processing, and marketing; and (4) increased capture of solid waste for disposal at the Butler County Landfill. Given the variety of activities anticipated during the next five years, it is recommended that the Butler County solid waste system be fully supported by the County Commission by providing the entire one mill levy for the solid waste system. It is further recommended that county staff be responsible for developing an annual budget that clearly identifies the uses of these funds. Additionally, the one mill levy funds should be supplemented, where possible, with tipping fee funds for programs developed or established that will improve the operation and/or landfill site. The tipping fees set at the landfill need to be established to provide adequate and realistic financial support for the disposal of solid waste.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 8: COST OF RECOMMENDED SYSTEM Page 8-1

The difference between the solid waste system and the disposal of solid waste is as follows:

Solid Waste System – The solid waste system is comprised of the disposal of solid waste at the landfill as well as composting of waste, recycling and waste reduction, collection and reduction of electronic waste or scrap, collection and reduction of universal waste, and educating the public regarding all aspects of the solid waste system.

Disposal of Solid Waste – Disposal of solid waste involves the actual effort to place solid waste in or take action to have the waste properly disposed of in a secure facility. This includes disposal of waste at the Butler County landfill working face, the Butler County landfill construction and demolition debris working face, and the household hazardous waste collection facility. All of the efforts necessary to support these activities include, but are not limited to, scale house and scale, leachate collection system, storm water controls, groundwater monitoring, equipment, equipment maintenance, excavation and movement of daily and final soil cover, building and maintenance of on-site roads, fencing, litter and other vector control, and necessary personnel.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 8: COST OF RECOMMENDED SYSTEM Page 8-2

CHAPTER 9 SYSTEM FINANCING

The communities within Butler County collect funds to support the solid waste system in a variety of ways. The following tables present these methods. It is anticipated that these methods of funding will continue. The majority of communities support the concept of utilizing the present tax levy to support the solid waste system. A majority of communities also support the tipping fee system at the landfill. It will be very important in the further enhancement of the present solid waste system to correlate system development and improvement with a reliable funding source. For example, the third table indicates the level of interest and support a regional landfill would have within Butler County. Although it is obvious the regional concept has limited support, it is also obvious that the communities within the county are not interested in eliminating the present disposal system. Finally, the ultimate cost for developing and expanding the programs identified in this plan will only be determined through a complete analysis of each proposed program and system. It is important to recognize that the size of the program or improvement, the timing of the development, and the potential user-fee generation will all impact the potential cost and benefit of each program or improvement.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 9: SYSTEM FINANCING Page 9-1

TABLE 9.1 RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SYSTEMS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Location SW Who Collects Contract Disposal Who Collects Ordinance Trash Location Fee

Unincorporated Butler County Y Private Open Butler Co Hauler

Andover Y Private Open Sedgwick Co/ Hauler Butler Co

Augusta Y City NA Butler Co City

Benton Y Waste Contract Butler Co City Connections

Cassoday N D & T Contract Butler Co/ City Sedgwick Co

Douglass Y Waste Contract Butler Co/ City Connections Sedgwick Co

El Dorado Y City NA Butler Co City

Elbing N Stutzman Contract Butler Co City

Latham Y Waste Contract Cowley County City Connection

Leon N D&T Contract Butler Co City

Potwin Y Stutzman Contract Butler Co City

Rose Hill Y Private Open Butler Co/ Hauler Sedgwick Co

Towanda N Waste Contract Butler Co City Connections

Whitewater Y Stutzman Contract Butler Co City

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 9: SYSTEM FINANCING Page 9-2

TABLE 9.1 RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SYSTEMS IN BUTLER COUNTY

Collection Days Basic Fee Frequency of Residential/ Collection Per Week Commercial ($) M T W T F

X X X X X Varies 1 or Varies

1 X X X X X 17.70/28.80

2 X X X X 11.30/14.50

1 X 9.00

1 X X X X X 9.50/Varies

1 X X X X X 12.60/Varies

1 X 9.75

1 X X 10.50/Varies

2 X X 9.50/15.00

1 X X X X X 7.50/9.00

Varies X X X X X 20.00/Varies

1 X 13.00/15.00

1 X 11.25/Varies

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 9: SYSTEM FINANCING Page 9-3

CHAPTER 10 WASTE REDUCTION

Butler County has developed a recycling plan. This plan is devised to increase recycling and waste reduction efforts in the county. A copy of the plan is provided in the appendix to this plan.

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan – Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 10: WASTE REDUCTION Page 10-1

CHAPTER 11 IMPLEMENTATION TIMETABLE

The county has been active in implementing a solid waste system for more than five years. During this time, changes to disposal activities, recycling and waste reduction programs have either been established or existing ones improved. The county and planning committee have identified a number of activities that require additional support to ensure the continuity and longevity of each activity. The following table provides a schedule for completion or implementation of the various activities.

TABLE 7.1 TIMETABLE

Duration for Activity Start Year Implementation

Develop Remote Collection 2009 On-going Program for HHW

Update Education Information 2009 On-going Program to Maintain Public Awareness of Solid Waste Activities Prepare a Natural Disaster Waste Handling Plan 2010 1-year

Reinstate and Maintain One Mill Levy 2010 On-going to Support Solid Waste Activities

Conduct Survey as directed by Solid Waste As Requested On-going Committee or County Commission

Annually On-going Analyze the Transfer of Solid Waste

Annually On-going Assess Solid Waste Landfill Operation

Annually On-going Assess Landfill Development Progress

The Committee will Meet Annually in March or April to Review Plan Progress and Issues and will Select a 2009 On-going Representative to Meet with the County Commission to Discuss Plan Progress and Solid Waste Issues

Butler County Solid Waste Management Plan –Updated October 2008 CHAPTER 11: IMPLEMENTATION TIMETABLE Page 11-1

BUTLER COUNTY, KANSAS RECYCLING PLAN

Prepared for

Butler County 121 South Gordy El Dorado, Kansas 67042

Prepared by

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. 9393 W. 110th Street, Suite 500 Overland Park, Kansas 66210 800/298-1851

August 5, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS Butler County Kansas Recycling Plan

Chapter Title Page

INTRODUCTION 1

1 COUNTY AND COMMUNITY INFORMATION 2

2 SOLID WASTE GENERATION 7

3 EXISTING RECYCLING SYSTEMS 10

4 EVALUATION OF RECYCLING TECHNOLOGIES 17

5 OPTIMAL RECYCLING PROGRAM 20

6 RECYCLING PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION 37

7 COST OF THE OPTIMAL PROGRAM 42

LIST OF TABLES

Number Title Page

1.1 Community, Estimated Population, and Highways 3 2.1 Estimation of Recycling Potential from All Tons Currently Being Delivered to the Butler County Landfill 8 2.2 Estimation of Recycling Potential from All Tons Generated in Butler County 9 3.1 Recyclables Collected in Butler County Trailers in 2007 15 5.1 Responsibility Matrix 31 5.2 Education Matrix 32 5.3 Collection Matrix 33 5.4 Processing Matrix 34 Cost Estimate 46

LIST OF CHARTS AND MAPS

Title Page

Butler County Population Contours 4 Production Rate for El Dorado Facility 12 Present Recycling Program in Butler County 16 Implementation Schedule 41

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page i INTRODUCTION In 2006 the Butler County Commission established a Recycling Committee to address the issue of recycling and waste reduction. This committee was asked to develop a plan for implementing a recycling program that would increase both recycling and waste reduction county wide. This document represents the efforts of the Recycling Committee in developing a recycling plan for the county. The recycling plan builds on the efforts of the county as well as the numerous community and private efforts that have been established. This plan also considers the need to protect the environment of Butler County and to offer the citizens of Butler County an alternative to landfilling of their solid waste. This document is divided into seven chapters. Each chapter presents the information and analysis that was utilized in the development of this plan. A brief description of each chapter follows.

Chapter 1 – Overview of the county, communities, and demographics Chapter 2 – Discussion of present solid waste generation and potential for waste reduction and recycling Chapter 3 - Overview of existing recycling programs Chapter 4 - Consideration and evaluation of recycling technologies Chapter 5 - Identification of optimal recycling program Chapter 6 - Development of the cost of the optimal program Chapter 7 – Development of the program implementation

Each of these chapters provides insight to the planning process and the extensive efforts made by the planning committee to develop this recycling plan. The planning effort involved a series of meetings, the collection of data, the consideration of options, and careful consideration of many programs before the optimal recycling program was identified.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 1 CHAPTER 1: COUNTY AND COMMUNITY INFORMATION Butler County is the largest county in the State of Kansas based on land area. The Office of Social and Economic Trends Analysis (SETA, Iowa State University) estimate the 2004 population of Butler County as 61,828. There are 13 communities in Butler County. These communities are dispersed throughout the county with the majority of them located in the central and western portions of the county. The communities within Butler County are located along major transportation routes such as Interstate 35, U.S. Route 400, U.S. Route 54, and U.S. Route 77 or are served by state or county highways. Table 1.1 presents each community, its 2004 estimated population, and the highways that service the community.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 2

Table 1.1 Community, Estimated Population, and Highways

2004 Highway(s) City Estimated Servicing Population Community

Andover 8,617 Interstate 35

US 54, US 400, Augusta 8,560 US 77

Benton 817 K – 254

Cassoday 127 K – 177

Douglass 1,810 US 77

El Dorado 12,717 US 54, US 77

Elbing 210 County Road

Latham 164 County Road

Leon 648 US 400

Potwin 438 K – 196

Rose Hill 3,857 County Road

Towanda 1,342 K – 254

Whitewater 639 K – 196

TOTAL 39,946

The cities in the study area range in size from the largest, El Dorado at 12,717, to the smallest, Cassoday at 127 residents. These 13 communities contain 65% of the population of the entire county and the four largest communities, El Dorado, Augusta, Andover, and Rose Hill account for over 54% of the county’s population. Population is an important aspect of any study involving solid waste. To further emphasize the population situation in Butler County, Map 1 presents the population contours for the county.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 3 500

1,000

2,000

4,000

8,000

6,000 As the population contour map indicates, the majority of the population of the county is within a triangular area that fans out from El Dorado and is bordered on the north by Highway K-254, the south by a line running from El Dorado to Rose Hill, and on the west by the Butler County - Sedgwick County line. The population distribution within Butler County is categorized as urban and rural, 65% to 35%, respectively. This study area distribution does not correlate to the State of Kansas population distribution, which is 79% urban and 21% rural (according to League of Kansas Municipalities data). The continuing trend toward rural living likely maintains the relatively high rural population. This can be seen in the most recent rural urban numbers from SETA which indicates a continued decrease in farm population (from 2,638 in 1990 to 1,854 in 200) while the rural population stays relatively the same (24,440 in 1990 to 24,399 in 2000). Butler County’s unique rural-urban population is further defined by the location of its population centers. The three largest communities – El Dorado, Augusta, and Andover – are located in the central and western portion of the county. Additionally, the major rural growth is also occurring in these portions of the county. This unbalanced population growth results in a higher population density in the western portion of the county with a steady or falling population in the remainder of the county.

Major Employers In Butler County over 55 percent of the work force is employed by the government, service providers, or retail businesses. Each of these economic sectors generates a significant amount of recyclable materials including white paper, cardboard, plastics, and mixed paper. The majority of the business and industry in Butler County is located around El Dorado and in the Augusta and Andover areas.

Transportation Butler County has a major network of highways and roads as well as a number of rail lines that cross through the county. The study area is served by a major interstate highway, U.S. routes, state routes, and various county roads. The

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 5 major highways in Butler County consist of Interstate 35 operated by the Kansas Turnpike Authority, U. S. Route 54 running east-west, U.S. Route 77 running north- south, U.S. Route 400 and state routes K-254, K-196, and K-177. Federal Aid Secondary (FAS) roads serve as feeders from the federal and state highways to rural areas of Butler County. FAS roads maintained by the Butler County Public Works Department include approximately 310 miles of medium to heavy asphalt, 65 miles of light asphalt, and 55 miles of aggregate roads. Both the Union Pacific and the BNSF Railroads have trackage in Butler County. The main east-west line of the BNSF Railroad crosses the county from the northeast to the southwest. The railline passes through Cassoday, El Dorado, Augusta, and Rose Hill. A spur line for the Union Pacific Railroad runs from Wichita to El Dorado.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 6 CHAPTER 2: SOLID WASTE GENERATION Solid waste in Butler County is collected by both public and private entities. The solid waste collected in the county is either taken to the Butler County Landfill or exported to transfer stations in Harvey or Sedgwick counties. Table 2.1 presents the potential amount of recyclables that could be captured based on the current solid waste inflow to the Butler County Landfill. The population for the townships reflects the portion of the Butler County population that is not within the limits of the 13 communities. Table 2.2 presents an estimate of the amount of recyclables that could be captured based on an estimate of the total solid waste generated in Butler County. In order to determine the amount of waste generated in the entire county it was assumed that the per person generation rate of the county was 0.66 tons per person per year. This figure is similar to the ton per person for both the communities of Leon and Augusta.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 7 Table 2.1 Estimation of Recycling Potential From All Tons Currently being Delivered to the Butler County Landfill

Category

Leon Total Elbing Potwin Benton Latham Augusta Andover Rose Hill Rose Towanda Douglass Cassoday El Dorado Townships Whitewater

Population 8,617 8,560 817 127 1,810 210 12,717 164 648 438 3,857 1,342 639 21,882 61,828

Total Tonnage 5,687 5,660 539 229 1,195 139 9,925 108 434 289 2,546 886 639 14,442 42,701

Tons/Person 0.66 0.66 0.66 1.80 0.66 0.66 0.78 0.66 0.67 0.66 0.66 0.66 1.00 0.66 0.69

Newspaper (6.9%) 392 390 37 16 82 10 684 7 30 20 176 61 44 997 2,946

Office Paper (8.2%) 466 463 44 19 98 11 813 9 36 24 209 73 52 1,184 3,501

Corrugated Paper (14.4%) 819 814 78 33 172 20 1,428 16 63 42 367 128 92 2,080 6,149

Magazines (3.9%) 222 220 21 9 47 5 387 4 17 11 99 35 25 563 1,665

Other Paper (6.2%) 353 350 33 14 74 9 615 7 27 18 158 55 40 895 2,647

PET (1.2%) 68 68 6 3 14 2 119 1 5 3 31 11 8 173 512

HDPE (1.2%) 68 68 6 3 14 2 119 1 5 3 31 11 8 173 512

Tin (4.1%) 233 232 22 9 49 6 407 4 18 12 104 36 26 592 1,751

Aluminum (0.6%) 34 34 3 1 7 1 60 1 3 2 15 5 4 87 256

Glass (2.7%) 154 153 15 6 32 4 268 3 12 8 69 24 17 390 1,115

Remaining Tons 2,877 2,858 272 116 605 70 5,019 55 219 146 1,288 448 324 7,308 21,605

NOTES:

1. Total tonnage based on an estimate of 0.66 tons per person rate for those communities that do not send all of their solid waste to the Butler County Landfill. Those that do send all of their waste to the Butler County Landfill the amount provided is based on Information provided by Butler County. 2. Category percentage based on 2003 State of Kansas Waste Characterization Study 3. Population figures based on 2004 population estimate

CHAPTER 3: EXISTING RECYCLING SYSTEMS This chapter discusses the collection, transportation, processing, and marketing systems for recyclables as presently operated in Butler County. Recycling is conducted by most of the communities in the county either directly or through the efforts of the county. The following sections describe the efforts of the communities and the county.

Community Efforts The community efforts are divided into three groups, El Dorado, Augusta, and the remaining communities. El Dorado and Augusta have established collection programs that are designed specifically for their communities. The other communities in the county utilize recycling services provided by the county or private recycling efforts. The following paragraphs described these three groups.

El Dorado The City of El Dorado has offered curbside recycling since 2000. The city solid waste charges are based on the number of bags of waste placed at the curb. Citizens are allotted two bags for solid waste disposal each week and can have as many bags for recyclables as needed. Each household can utilize a maximum of two bags per week for disposal. The solid waste program in the city is supported by a base monthly fee per household. At present, the City of El Dorado operates two recyclable collection vehicles daily (one residential and one commercial). The trucks collect upwards of 6 - 10 tons of recyclables per day and deliver the recyclables to the present recycling processing center located at the corner of East Olive and South Vine Street. The recycling processing facility processes approximately 10 - 12 tons per day. The facility receives recyclables from City of El Dorado trucks as well as from Butler County trailers, from Greenwood and Elk counties, and from the drop-off center at the recycling facility. The facility operation involves unloading a truck or trailer at the northwest entrance of the building. The load is hand sorted on the floor to remove large items and cardboard. The material is then pushed onto a conveyor where a hand sort separates the recyclables. The El Dorado trucks bring

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 10

in presorted bags of recyclables while the Butler County trailers bring in recyclables in presorted bins. The processed recyclables are sold to various brokers and end users. The City of El Dorado staff work with a variety of brokers and agents to identify the optimal price for the processed recyclables. Revenues have increased over time from an annual revenue of $27,000.00 in 2000 to over $200,000.00 in 2007. Chart 3.1 indicates the annual production rate for the El Dorado facility. The blue line represents the amount of material processed from curbside collection in El Dorado. The red line represents the amount of material from other programs, including Butler County. The green line indicates the commercial OCC or cardboard that is delivered from El Dorado. The orange line is the total amount of recyclables processed annually.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 11

Production Rate for El Dorado Facility

2500

2000

1500 Curbside Other Programs Comm. OCC Tons Total 1000

500

0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Year

City of Augusta The City of Augusta operates a recycling processing facility near 5th and Osage at its public works yard. The facility processes approximately 5 tons per week. Only City of Augusta recyclables are delivered to the facility. Recyclables are collected utilizing a trailer, dumpsters, and a drive-through, drop-off service on Saturdays at the processing facility. The dumpsters and the trailer are located between the Wal-Mart and Dillon’s parking lots. These dumpsters and trailer are rotated regularly. The processing facility consists of a small building that allows for the unloading of the trailer or dumpster. Material is presorted in the trailer and dumpsters and moved into bins. The facility has a fork-lift truck that is utilized to load trailers. There is a loading dock for two semi-trailers. A skid loader is utilized to load the baler which bales cardboard and aluminum cans. The recyclables obtained from the trailer and dumpster are sent to Weyerhaeuser. In 2006 the City of Augusta received over $14,000.00 for the recyclables.

Remaining Communities All of the remaining communities in Butler County are served by private haulers. Some of these haulers provide various levels of service including collecting recyclables. If recyclables are collected by the private haulers the recyclables are delivered to locations in Sedgwick or Harvey County. Some of the communities require that the private hauler provide recyclable collection if the resident requests this service. The resident must request the service from the private hauler and the resident is responsible for any costs associated with the service. In addition to private hauling services these communities are also provided with recyclable collection trailers. These trailers, furnished by Butler County, are placed at locations within each community on a regular schedule and are typically manned.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 13

Butler County Recycling Efforts As noted in the previous section, Butler County provides trailers at selected locations around the county for the collection of recyclables. The trailers are comprised of a series of bins that will accept cardboard, newsprint, magazines, plastics, tin, glass, office paper, junk mail, plastic bags, phone books, paper and hard back books, and aluminum. Residents of the communities where the trailers are located as well as residents of the county are allowed to drop off recyclables at these trailers. Table 3.1 provides information on the amount of recyclables collected via these trailers during the period beginning January 2007 and ending December 2007. Based on the 2007 results, over 234 tons of recyclables were collected in the county. As noted in the following table, the majority of these recyclables come from five communities - Andover, Benton, Whitewater, Rose Hill, and Towanda. These five communities account for over 79% of the recyclables collected in the trailers. Of these five communities, Andover and Rose Hill account for over 50% of all recyclables collected by trailers in the county.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 14

Table 3.1 Recyclables Collected by Butler County Trailers In Pounds January through December 2007

January March May July September November February April June August October December Community (Pounds) (Pounds) (Pounds) (Pounds) (Pounds) (Pounds) Total

Andover 17,350 22,390 24,540 31,120 25,975 17,240 138,615

Benton 10,660 11,860 12,640 14,520 11,790 10,125 71,595

Elbing 2,280 2,960 2,400 2,280 2,500 2,980 15,400

Whitewater 4,660 4,760 6,920 5,260 7,050 7,200 35,850

Cassoday 460 440 1,420 440 800 400 3,960

Rose Hill 10,760 14,540 19,340 16,640 24,760 10,560 96,600

Towanda 4,160 5,060 6,940 3,860 5,060 4,000 29,080

Latham 2,455 2,035 2,090 2,230 2,135 240 11,185

Leon 2,260 2,300 3,120 3,610 2,660 2,020 15,970

Potwin 760 1,120 1,380 1,200 980 1,160 6,600

Rosalia 680 480 390 780 1,280 340 3,950

Beaumont* - - - - 300 160 460

Landfill 4,040 9,050 8,980 9,020 1,720 6,140 38,950 Total (Pounds) 60,525 76,995 90,160 90,960 87,010 62,565 468,215 Total (Tons) 30.3 38.5 45.1 45.5 43.5 31.3 234.1

* Beaumont did not have trailer service until September 2007

Map 3.1 on the following page presents the existing recycling system in Butler County. As noted on the map there are 13 communities that have some access to recycling.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 15

MAP

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 16

CHAPTER 4: EVALUATION OF RECYCLING TECHNOLOGIES Presently, the recycling technologies utilized in the study area include the following:

1. Curbside collection 2. Recycling drop-off centers 3. Recycling process center

The complexity of these technologies varies in accordance with the size of the facility and the particular needs of the service area. Recyclables are collected through drop-off centers (trailers or dumpsters) or curbside collection. The two processing facilities in the county, at El Dorado and Augusta, are sized to meet present demand. For example, the facilities have balers and some sorting capabilities. The City of El Dorado has 8,000 square feet of storage capacity while the Augusta facility has very little storage capacity within its facility. The following paragraphs briefly discuss the technologies that may benefit Butler County recycling efforts.

Collection The present system of either drop-off centers or curbside collection is the predominate method utilized nationally to collect recyclables. These systems are often enhanced through such changes as unmanned drop-off centers with specially configured openings that discourage large bags or other containers or objects that would contaminate the recyclables. Drop-off centers can also be improved with drive-up structures that improve the movement of the recyclables from the vehicle to the receptacles. Finally, drop-off centers can be located inside a structure where a variety of receptacles can be arranged for as much pre-sorting as possible. One of the keys to successful drop-off programs is the combination of convenience with maximum sorting. In this manner, a service is provided to the facility user as well as the processing center. For curbside collection, the use of automated trucks and containers that reduce the amount of sorting at the residence improves the amount of recyclables

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 17

obtained as well as the amount of recyclables collected at as low a labor cost as possible. Unlike drop-off centers, the emphasis of curbside collection should be to capture as many recyclables as possible. To this end, technologies should be utilized that make recycling as user friendly as possible at the generator level, and as efficient as possible at the collection level.

Processing The processing technologies available today span the entire spectrum of automation. Beginning with the unloading of vehicles delivering recyclables to the processing facility, receiving pits are now designed to monitor the flow of material as well as weigh the material to identify potential problems or need for additional pre-fluffing. Metering systems are incorporated into the sort line feed belts that continually adjust the flow of recyclables onto the sort line. Sort lines can be designed to accommodate both dual- and single-side sorts as well as provide for modulating belt movement to address piling situations. Sort lines can also be built to allow for both sitting and standing operation and the belt height can be adjustable to address changes in crew members’ height. The majority of advances in the process area is in mechanical sorting. Star screens and filter equipment have been further enhanced to improve the separation of papers, plastics, and metals. These processes reduce the amount of manpower needed to separate materials and the amount of material sorted in an hour has increased significantly. Plastic sorting has improved with the use of optical readers that detect variations in plastics based on the plastics’ structure, color, and other characteristics. Finally, the separation of metals has further improved through the utilization of various magnetic equipment as well as eddy currents.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 18

Application to Butler County All of the technologies described could, in time, benefit the recycling system in Butler County. Each of the technologies should be considered based on the following:

• Ease of Use – Does the technology improve the usefulness of the collection or processing procedures?

• Efficiency – Does the technology allow for the maximum efficiency in collection and/or processing based on amount and type of material?

• Value Enhancement – Does the technology provide added value to the recyclable through the ease of collection and/or processing?

• Cost Effective – Is the technology cost effective based on the amount of recyclables, where the recyclables are collected, and the level of processing required.

As the county develops its recycling program and the implementation of the plan proceeds, it will be invaluable to the system to continually address the technology issue. This process is enhanced not only by access to a number of sources via the internet, but also through a variety of organizations such as the National Recycling Coalition, the Soft Drink Container Organization, container organizations, and a number of manufacturing groups that provide collection and processing equipment and technologies.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 19

CHAPTER 5: OPTIMAL RECYCLING PROGRAM The optimal recycling program for Butler County is based on the present conditions in the county and identifying types of recycling methodologies would best apply to the county. The previous four chapters have provided all of the information needed to identify the optimal recycling program. Important aspects of the county are:

1. The county and its communities are favorable to a more aggressive recycling program.

2. Recycling programs are in place that provide various levels of service to the citizens of the county.

3. The majority of the population of Butler County is located in one portion of the county, which has a significant transportation system in place.

4. Recycling programs for rural areas are in place and functioning well.

5. A variety of recycling programs such as curbside collection, drop-off centers, and rotating trailers are presently in place in the county.

6. There are efforts in place to educate the public on the benefits of recycling and waste reduction.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 20

Although there are recycling efforts in Butler County these efforts vary from community to community. For example:

1. Some communities do not control nor provide solid waste collection.

2. The use of drop-off centers and the rotating trailers varies from community to community.

3. The existing processing facilities for recyclables are limited in capacity due to a lack of space or equipment.

4. Public awareness and education programs are not consistent throughout the county.

5. There is a lack of coordinated involvement by commercial and industrial sectors in recycling and waste reduction.

A critical component in the planning process was the Butler County Recycling Committee. This committee met on a monthly basis (starting in October 2006) to discus the various aspects of the present recycling system and to identify potential approaches to improving and expanding the recycling program in Butler County. This critical and vital input coupled with the all of the information gathered was utilized to develop a list of criteria or needs that the optimal recycling program should meet or satisfy. These include:

1. The establishment of a focused recycling and waste reduction program throughout the county.

2. Greater access to recycling collection particularly in the four largest communities in the county.

3. Expanded access to the present rotating recycling trailer system.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 21

4. Provide access to the recycling program for commercial and industrial sectors of the county.

5. Expand recyclables processing through the utilization of existing facilities or consolidation of facilities.

6. A centralized coordination of the overall recycling efforts in the county.

Utilizing this list, a series of matrices were developed to address the four major components of the recycling system:

• Responsibility: Who is responsible for the overall recycling system?

• Education: How are the users of the system educated and motivated to utilize the system?

• Collection: How are the recyclables collected?

• Processing: How are the recyclables processed and where?

The options that comprise each matrix are as follows:

Responsibility: • Community and Area Based – Control of the recycling program would rest with each community and a selected area around the community. Decisions on the level of effort and recycling goals would be decided by committees formed from the community and area.

• County Based – The recycling program would be the responsibility of the county. The county would spearhead all efforts in the county and work with and coordinate efforts with communities. A recycling committee comprised of six to eight members appointed by City Councils or Commissions and by the County Commission would be

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 22

established. This committee would provide guidance to the County Commission.

• County/Community Coordination – The county and communities would work together in managing recycling in county. A committee would be formed with all communities and the county to provide guidance.

• New Authority - A recycling authority or similar organization would be established to address all of the recycling needs for Butler County. This organization would be responsible for all aspects of recycling including education, collection, and processing.

Education: • School Program – The school systems in the county would be provided funding to prepare educational tools and lesson plans to instruct students at all grade levels on the various aspects of recycling. These tools would be updated to reflect changes in recycling and waste reduction as well as comply with the Kansas State Environmental Education Standards.

• Public Awareness Program – Utilizing national and state programs complimented with local information, this program would provide public awareness of recycling and waste reduction efforts. The program would be updated quarterly and would focus on existing information distribution systems such as radio, television, newspapers, web sites, and other formats.

• Centralized Program – A combination of a school program and public awareness program would be the responsibility of the county or an organization charged with this responsibility. This program would develop all educational documents for use in schools or as a public

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 23

awareness effort. The county or organization would be responsible for updating information and determining the success of the program.

Collection: • Expand Drop-Offs – Expanding the availability of drop-off bins in selected communities would provide greater opportunity for the collection of recyclables as well as provide greater visibility to the recycling efforts.

• Expand Trailer Program – As with the expansion of drop-off bins, increasing the availability of the present trailer system would provide extended access for recycling and make the recycling effort more visible.

• Expand Curbside Collection to Four Communities – The present collection of recyclables utilizing curbside collection would be expanded to include four communities: El Dorado, Augusta, Andover, and Rose Hill. These are the major population centers in the county. A curbside collection program would potentially generate a larger amount of recyclables and would make the recycling efforts easier on the residents of these communities.

• Status Quo – The present collection program would remain as is.

Processing: • Upgrade Existing Facilities – The facilities in El Dorado and Augusta would be expanded as the amount of recyclables increases. These facilities would be upgraded to provide more storage space, increase automation, and provide easier access to the public.

• Modify Facilities – The existing facilities in the county would be modified to meet increased demand and improve processing rates.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 24

The Augusta facility would be modified to receive more material that is then transferred to the El Dorado facility for final processing. Some easy sorting or segregation of pure loads would be accomplished at the Augusta facility prior to transfer. The El Dorado facility would be automated and expanded.

• Centralized Facility – Both of the existing facilities would be modified to operate as collection and transfer points for recyclables. Both facilities would compact pure loads with all other recyclables transferred to a centralized facility. The centralized facility would be located at the present landfill site. This new facility would be designed to process all of the recyclables collected in the county.

• Status Quo – The present system would remain. The two existing facilities would be improved if and when additional recyclables are generated. Any improvements to these facilities would be based on actual need rather than future potentials.

To evaluate each of the options in each matrix, a rating system was established. The rating system includes a number of assessments of each option with potential varying scores dependent on the importance of the assessment. The assessments and rating range for each matrix are provided in the following sections.

Responsibility Assessment There are a total of seven assessments utilized to evaluate the four options that comprise the responsibility matrix. The assessments and their rating range are as follows:

Implementation of Option 10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Easy Hard

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 25

Resistance to Option

20 10 0 + ------+ ------+ Well Strong Received Resistance

Confidence in Management

20 10 0 + ------+ ------+ Will Get Doubt Things Done About Results

Control Issues

10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Easily Lack of Accessible Access

Long-Term Viability

10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Stay With Lack Will Program to Stay Course

Ease of Operation

10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Easy to Complicated Interact and Process Get Results

Cost

20 10 0 + ------+ ------+ Very Cost Lack of Conscientious Accountability

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 26

Education Assessment There are a total of five assessments utilized to evaluate the three options that comprise the education matrix. The assessments and their rating range are as follows:

Ease of Operation

10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Simple Complicated Program

Confidence Level

10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Reliable and Inconsistent Verifiable

Long-Term Viability

10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ System in Limited Place Experience

Commitment

10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Focus Multiple On Task Agendas

Cost

20 10 0 + ------+ ------+ Reasonable Cost High Cost Good Benefit Limited Benefit

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 27

Collection Assessment There are a total of eight assessments utilized to evaluate the four options that comprise the collection matrix. The assessments and their rating range are as follows:

Process 10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Easy Complicated

Resistance to Option 10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Want Not Open Improvements to Change

Confidence in Option 10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Will Improve Do Not Present System See Advantages

Control Issues 10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Want Value Wants and Consistency Free Market

Long-Term Viability

20 10 0 + ------+ ------+ Easy Option Limited Ability to Expandable Respond to Growth

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 28

Commitment

20 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Wants Doubt Control Usefulness

Ease of Operation

20 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Simple Complicated Painless

Cost

20 10 0 + ------+ ------+ Good Value Excessive

Processing Assessment There are a total of five assessments utilized to evaluate the four options that comprise the processing matrix. The assessments and their rating range are as follows:

Process 10 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Easy Complicated Transition Transition

Access 20 10 0 + ------+ ------+ Easy to Out of Access the Way

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 29

Long-Term Viability

20 10 0 + ------+ ------+ Ample Space and Limited Space Growth Potential and Growth Potential

Ease of Operation

20 5 0 + ------+ ------+ Simple to Complicated Process High Up-Keep

Cost

20 10 0 + ------+ ------+ Good Value Excessive

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 30

The following pages are the four matrices. A brief discussion regarding the rating for each option is provided after each matrix. 5.1 Responsibility Matrix

Responsibility Matrix Cost Cost Total Option Option Option Management Resistance to Confidence in Control Issues Ease of Operation Implementation of Implementation Long-Term Viability

Community and Area Based 5 10 10 8 5 5 8 51 County Based 9 15 15 10 10 10 8 77 County/Community Coordination 8 15 12 8 5 5 8 61 New Authority 4 9 10 5 10 6 6 50

Seven assessments were utilized to evaluate the four options that comprise the Responsibility Matrix. The option that ranked first is placing all responsibility for recycling in the county with the County Commission and county staff. This option scored well in all categories because of the county’s record of performance, its responsibility for solid waste as provided in legislation enacted at the state level, and the county’s present involvement with solid waste through recycling collection and the operation of the Butler County Landfill. The second highest ranked option - County/Community Coordination - is very similar to the present system utilized in the county with the key exception that not all communities are active in solid waste management. This lack of consistent activity and involvement is why this option ranked lower than the County Based option. The remaining two options both ranked relatively low compared to the highest ranked option. This lower ranking is the result of the newness of the option and the likely difficulty in implementing either option. Of these two lower ranked options; the New Authority may be a viable option if the cost of implementation and control issues can be addressed.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 31

5.2 Education Matrix

Education Matrix Cost Total Commitment Confidence Level Ease of Operation Long-Term Viability

School Program 10 10 5 8 8 41 Public Awareness Program 5 10 5 8 5 33 Centralized Program 8 10 10 10 8 46

The Education Matrix evaluated three options. Five assessments were utilized in this analysis. The small variation in the rankings between the options reflects the quality of the options as well as the need for some combination of these options. The highest ranking option is a Centralized Education Program. The reason this option ranked highest is because it would establish a new education program with only one focus. The other two options utilized existing programs that have a number of responsibilities. These other responsibilities reduce the focus that would be needed to provide a continual education program. The best example of this is the School Program option. Although the school systems in Butler County are well versed in developing exceptional educational programs, these school systems are also charged with educating on a number of subjects. This broad spectrum of education results in a divided focus which reduces the potential for continual and updated educational material. This same problem exists with the Public Awareness Program. Utilizing an existing public awareness program to educate the public on recycling could be cost effective; however, because the recycling message is incorporated into a variety of other messages the strength of the program is diluted.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 32

5.3 Collection Matrix

Collection Matrix Cost Total Process Commitment Control Issues Ease of Operation Long-Term Viability Resistance to Option Resistance to Confidence in Option

Expand Drop-Offs 10 10 8 10 10 15 15 15 93

Expand Trailer Program 10 10 8 10 10 15 15 15 93 Expand Curbside Collection 5 8 8 5 20 15 20 10 91 to Four Communities

Status Quo 10 5 3 5 0 10 10 10 53

The Collection Matrix evaluated four options. Eight assessments were utilized in the evaluation. The result of the evaluation identified three of the four options as being very viable while a fourth option ranked poorly. The three options that ranked highest all involved expanding present recycling collection services. The evaluation results are not surprising given the anticipated increase in recycling in the county and the subsequent need for expanded collection services. This matrix analysis indicates that the county would be best served with multiple collection options because of the size and diversity of the county. Further, the present collection system provides multiple options for residents of the county to utilize and the residents appear to utilize all of these options. The likely reason the Status Quo option did not score well is because it lacks the depth of service that will be needed in the future. Further, the present system has limited expansion capability because it is operated by a variety of government and private agencies with differing motivations and goals.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 33

5.4 Processing Matrix

Processing Matrix Cost Total Access Process Ease of Operation Long-Term Viability

Upgrade Existing Facilities 10 15 10 10 10 55 Modify Facilities 8 18 10 15 10 61 Centralized Facility 8 18 20 15 10 71 Status Quo 5 15 5 5 15 45

The Processing Matrix evaluated four options utilizing five assessments. This matrix produced the most uniform results with the Status Quo option ranking lowest and the most involved option - Centralized Facility - ranking the highest. These results were not necessarily surprising given the five assessments. Each of the five assessments considered the basic needs of any processing option: ease of operation, ease of access, long-term viability, and cost. Unlike the other matrices processing of materials becomes more efficient with greater improvement to these assessments. For this analysis the three most important assessments were access, long- term viability, and ease of operation. Considering the four options, each of these assessments will gradually improve as improvements are made to the processing procedures and facilities. For example, access improves as the facilities are improved because movement of material and accessibility to the processing facilities changes from two separate processing facilities to two very integrated facilities. What is of greatest significance in this analysis is the long-term viability of each option. Given the limited space to expand at the El Dorado site and the lack of useable structures at the Augusta site, it is not surprising that a new facility more centrally located and coupled with a new transfer station would result in the best long-term viability.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 34

Identification of Optimal Recycling Program The present recycling system is administered by both the county and some of the larger communities in the county. The majority of the small communities and the rural areas of the county are provided recycling services by the county. The cities of Augusta and El Dorado provide varied levels of recycling services. The remaining communities in the county with recycling services have these services provided by private companies. This present system has resulted in the collection of some recyclables, but it is not possible to determine the exact amount. Taking into consideration the results of the matrix analysis, the present system could be modified in such a manner as to provide a greater level of service and this would likely result in an increased level of recycling in the county. The modifications to the system would include:

1. The county would take a greater lead in the recycling efforts in the entire county. This increased involvement would focus on expanded public education, improvements and upgrades to the collection of recyclables, and expanded capabilities within the county to process recyclables.

2. The public education efforts would involve working directly with the school districts within the county to establish a recycling education curriculum that is flexible and meets the environmental education standards for Kansas. The county would establish an on-going public relations campaign that would instruct and inform the public on the recycling efforts in the county and how to utilize the recycling system in their area.

3. The county will expand its present trailer collection program to provide increased times and places for the collection of recyclables. The county would also work directly with the four largest communities in the county - El Dorado, Augusta, Andover, and Rose Hill - to establish curbside recycling collection. For some communities, El Dorado and Augusta, this effort would involve supporting the community’s present program and providing guidance and assistance in establishing or enhancing its present system, while with other communities, Rose Hill and Andover, the effort would entail providing guidance and support in establishing a curbside program.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 35

4. A commercial recycling program would be established. The county would establish the program requirements and methods of collection. The program would be established in El Dorado, Augusta, Andover, and Rose Hill and would be implemented by these communities.

5. The processing of the recyclables would be centralized. The county would evaluate uses of existing facilities and determine the optimal location of the processing facility.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 36

CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION The modifications to the present recycling system in Butler County will take some time to implement. Time will be needed to educate both the public and public officials. Further, these modifications will involve some significant changes in the way certain communities address recycling and solid waste issues in general. The following implementation program identifies the key steps that must be taken for this new recycling program to take effect and make the changes that Butler County wants.

Adoption of the Plan – The first step in the process will be the adoption of this plan. The County Commission and each community within the county must adopt this plan in order for it to be successful. This adoption process will vary depending on the extent the plan will impact each community. For some communities the changes will be negligible. For other communities this plan will be a major change in how solid waste is addressed. The adoption process will begin with the plan’s submittal to the County Commission. A presentation will be made to the commission that provides an overview of the proposed recycling system and a description of the implementation process. Once the commission accepts the plan, presentations will be made to all of the incorporated communities within the county. For those communities that the plan will impact similarly, joint presentations will be made. For communities where the new recycling system will require more substantial changes individual presentations will be made. Once the presentation portion is complete, county staff will conduct follow-ups with communities that have questions or concerns regarding the plan. This step will conclude with the acceptance of the plan by the county and all incorporated communities.

Public Education Program – In conjunction with the presentations to the various public entities, a public education program should be established. This program will evolve from an initial public relations campaign to an information program, to a long-term effort to educate the public through a

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 37

variety of efforts. The initial emphasis of the Public Education Program will be to inform the public of the benefits the new recycling program. This initial effort should continue until the plan has been adopted by the county and all incorporated communities. In addition, the information program will involve educating the public on how the program will function. This phase will be constructed to be as localized as possible. This phase will further enforce the need for citizens to recycle and the significant benefits of the recycling program. The long-term education program will be divided between education programs within the various public and private schools in the county and a continuing public awareness and information campaign.

Collection of Recyclables - There are three areas where the collection of recyclables will change. First, with the aggressive public education and awareness campaign there will be a heightened interest in recycling. This increase will dictate an increase in the availability of the collection trailers at the smaller communities in the county. Second, this education and awareness campaign will affect the larger communities that presently have limited recycling collection options. For these communities, additional drop- off locations will be needed. In addition to the residents of these communities, it is likely this education and awareness campaign will also affect neighboring communities in Sedgwick County. Because of this impact, additional drop-off centers will need to be established to accommodate the increased in-flow of recyclables. Third, a curbside collection program for residential recyclables and a commercial recyclables collection program should be established or enhanced in the four largest communities in the county. The communities will be responsible for establishing the program with county guidance and support as needed. For those communities that do not have an organized solid waste collection system, the county will assist in establishing a franchise system that will provide an economical approach to recyclable collection. The curbside collection system will be the most effective method for generating

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 38

and collecting residential recyclables in these larger communities. The commercial recyclables collection program should be organized through a joint effort of these communities and the county. Based on this effort, the communities can either provide the collection services themselves or franchise the collection of commercial recyclables. Both the residential and commercial recyclables will be directed to the Butler County processing facilities.

Processing of Recyclables – The need for the improvement and expansion of the present processing system in Butler County will be predicated on the rate of increase in recyclable generation in the county. The two existing facilities will be modified as follows:

• The Augusta facility will be expanded to allow for increased recyclables. Recyclables collected in Augusta, Andover, Rose Hill, and adjoining areas will be delivered to the Augusta facility. At this facility, vehicles delivering the recyclables will unload onto a tipping floor sized to accommodate a maximum of 30 tons of recyclables. Those loads that are only one material (i.e., cardboard, newsprint, aluminum cans, etc.) will be pushed into the storage bin for that material or sent directly to the baler. Those loads with commingled materials will be pushed onto a floor conveyor that will take the material onto a sort line. The sort line will be utilized to separate the materials. All of the materials will be stored in segregated bunkers until enough of the material is captured to make a bale or bales. It is anticipated that a 10,000 square foot facility with a 25-foot clearance will be required at the Augusta site. This facility should be able to process 10 to 25 tons of recyclables a day depending on how many loads with only one material are received.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 39

• The El Dorado facility will be modified to allow for processing of recyclables collected in El Dorado and delivered from the trailers and drop-off locations that are not taken to the Augusta site. The El Dorado facility will be remodeled to allow for the processing of a maximum of 25 tons of recyclables a day. This remodeling will include expanding the tipping floor, adding a sort line, installing a larger baler, and reconfiguring the truck loading area and storage facility.

Because of the limited expansion area at the El Dorado facility, it is anticipated that once the 25-ton capacity is reached the county will establish a new processing facility. Given the location of other operations relating to solid waste at the present landfill site, consideration should be made to locate the new processing facility in the vicinity of the existing landfill. With the improvements to the Augusta and El Dorado facilities, it is possible that a new facility will not be needed until after the first five years of the plan’s implementation. The growth of recycling in Butler County will drive the need for the new facility. This growth should be monitored regularly. The schedule on the following page has been generated to present this implementation plan graphically. This schedule provides a general timeline with emphasis on adjusting the timeline based on the success of previous efforts. For example, until the plan is adopted other aspects of the plan cannot be initiated. Further, until the collection system is in place and the initial success of the system determined, improvements to the processing facilities should be delayed.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 40

Butler County Recycling Plan Implementation Schedule Years 1 through 5 ID Task Name 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

1 2 Adoption of Plan 3 4 5 Hire Coordinator and Staff 6 7 8 Hire Education Consultant 9 10 11 Plan and Implement Education Program 12 13 14 Obtain Additional Trailers 15 16 17 Establish Additional Drop-off Centers 18 19 20 Plan and Establish Curbside Collection 21 22 23 Transfer Processing Facilities 24 25 26 Update Processing Facilities

Task Milestone External Tasks Project: Implementation Schedule Split Summary External Milestone Date: August 2008 Progress Project Summary Deadline

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc.

CHAPTER 7: COST OF THE OPTIMAL PROGRAM In order to establish the cost of the optimal recycling program for Butler County it is important to establish parameters. These parameters provide the limits in which the cost estimate is developed. The cost estimate is divided into three segments. Each of the segments and the cost parameters for each segment are provided in the following paragraphs.

Implementation and Education – As indicated in the previous chapter, the county will be responsible for the overall recycling program within the county. The county will be directly or indirectly involved in all aspects of the recycling effort. To this end, it will be very important to establish a coordinator for the recycling program. The coordinator will be a county employee and will have a one-person support staff. The coordinator will be located within the present Butler County facilities and the office equipment and supplies for the coordinator and support staff will be provided by the county. The recycling program coordinator will be charged with implementing the recycling plan. As noted in the previous chapters, a critical part of this effort will be public education and awareness. The coordinator will be responsible for retaining the services of a public relations firm or similar company to provide the education services. The coordinator may also determine that a portion of these services could be developed as a joint effort with the school districts within the county. For the purposes of the cost estimate, all of the education and awareness efforts will be provided by an outside consultant.

Collection of Recyclables – The coordinator will work with county staff in the acquisition of additional trailers for recyclable collection. It is anticipated that two additional trailers will be needed after the first year of the program. The present county staff members who are responsible for the trailers will continue to manage the placement and oversight of the trailers. The coordinator will work with the communities served by the trailer system to

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 42

identify any changes in schedule and the frequency of the trailers at each community. The coordinator will work with the communities of Augusta, Andover, and Rose Hill to identify when additional drop-off centers for the collection of recyclables will be needed. The coordinator will work with county staff members who are presently responsible for the trailers to establish the drop- off centers and methods for collecting the recyclables. It is anticipated that no new drop-off centers will be required until after the second year of the recycling program’s implementation. The curb side collection of recyclables will be the responsibility of the four communities identified for this effort. The community of El Dorado has a well-established program that will not be modified unless requested by this community. The community of Augusta will be requested to expand its present solid waste collection system to include the curbside collection of recyclables. Because Augusta has a collection system in place, it would be more practical and cost effective for Augusta to operate the curbside collection of recyclables. For the communities of Rose Hill and Andover, the recycling program coordinator will work with these two communities to establish curbside collection of recyclables. Because both communities do not presently control the collection of solid waste, the recycling program coordinator will provide guidance in establishing a franchise program that will allow both communities to contract for the collection of recyclables. The collection of commercial recyclables will also be the responsibility of these four communities. The collection program will be established by a joint effort between the communities and the county. Each community will determine if it will conduct the commercial recyclables collection or if the collection will be franchised.

Processing of Recyclables – The County will assume the operation of processing of recyclables in Butler County. The county will work with the communities of El Dorado and Augusta to establish the procedures for taking over operations at the existing facilities. The county will also address how

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 43

both facilities will be upgraded. It is anticipated that the transition will take at least one year after the adoption of the plan. Any improvements to the existing facilities will be dependent upon the implementation and initial success of the education and collection efforts. During the transition of operation responsibility, an assessment of the operation at each facility will be conducted. This assessment will consider a variety of scenarios relating to the increased flow of recyclables to these facilities. Responses to each scenario will be developed so that operations personnel can quickly respond to the increased flow of recyclables. For this cost analysis, it is anticipated that the greatest increase in recyclables will occur at the Augusta Facility. Improvements at this facility will include a larger processing building and baler. The addition of an eight-man sort line will also be included. For the El Dorado Facility, the only change would be a permanent eight-man sort line.

The tables at the end of this chapter present an estimate of the cost of the recycling program. The costs are presented for the first five years of the program. These costs reflect the scheduled implementation of the recycling program as described in Chapter 6. A number of assumptions and estimates were made in the generation of these cost tables. A list of these assumptions and estimates and a brief explanation of each is provided as follows.

1. All labor rates include social security taxes and an estimated insurance burden.

2. All costs are escalated at an inflation rate of 3.5% annually.

3. The cost for supplies and printing is based on typical office operations.

4. Consultant costs are based on fees from similar projects. These costs can vary based on the number of consultants interested in any of this work.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 44

5. Trailer costs are based on the type of trailer presently utilized by the county.

6. The drop-off center is comprised of three-yard dumpsters located in parking lots at commercial establishments.

7. The transfer processing facility rate is based on the inspection of the facilities in 2007 and the estimated value of the equipment and structures.

8. The building updates cost is based on the anticipated construction of a new structure at the Augusta site and some minor structural modifications to the El Dorado facility.

9. The equipment updates cost is based on a baler, conveyor, and sort line for the Augusta facility and a sort line for the El Dorado facility.

10. It is anticipated that no new processing facility will be developed during the next five years.

11. The operations training consultant is provided for consistent training among all facilities and maximizing productivity.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 45

Butler County Recycling Program Cost Estimate

IMPLEMENTATION AND EDUCATION

Inflation Item Rate Unit Rate 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 ($) Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost

Coordinator 20 Hour 3.5% 700 14,000 2080 43,056 2080 44,563 2080 46,123 2080 47,737

Staff 12 Hour 3.5% 700 8,400 2080 25,834 2080 26,738 2080 27,674 2080 28,642

Supplies & Printing 5,000 Lump Sum 3.5% 0.33 1,650 1 5,175 1 5,356 1 5,544 1 5,738

Education Consultant 25,000 Annual 3.5% 0.2 5,000 1 25,875 1 26,781 1 27,718 1 28,688 - Waste Characterization Study 70,000 Lump Sum 3.5% 0.5 35,000 0.5 36,225 0 - 0 - 0 -

Total 64,000 136,000 103,000 107,000 111,000

COLLECTION

Inflation Item Rate Unit Rate 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 ($) Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost

Additional Trailers 20,000 Lump Sum 3.5% 0 - 5 103,500 0 - 0 - 0 -

Service Additional Trailers 15 Hour 3.5% 0 - 600 9,315 650 10,444 700 11,642 750 12,910

Drop-off Centers 3,500 Lump Sum 3.5% 0 - 4 14,490 0 - 0 - 0 -

Service Drop-off Centers 20 Hour 3.5% 0 - 1000 20,700 1100 23,567 1200 26,609 1100 25,246

Curbside Collection Consultant 35,000 Lump Sum 3.5% 0.25 8,750 1 36,225 0.25 9,373 0 - 0 -

Commercial Recycling Consultant 45,000 Lump Sum 3.5% 0.3 13,500 1 46,575 0.2 9,641 0.2 9,978 -

Total 22,000 231,000 53,000 48,000 38,000

PROCESSING

Inflation Item Rate Unit Rate 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 ($) Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost

Transfer Processing Facilities 300,000 Lump Sum 3.5% 1 300,000 0.5 155,250 0 - 0 - 0 -

Initial Operations Staff 15 Hour 3.5% 8,000 124,200 14,560 233,956 14,560 242,144 14,560 250,619

Processing Facility Consultant 50,000 Lump Sum 3.5% 0 - 0 - 1.5 80,342 1 55,436 0.5 28,688

Augusta Facility Improvements 250,000 Lump Sum 3.5% 0 - 0 - 1 267,806 2 554,359 0 -

El Dorado Facility Improvements 250,000 Lump Sum 3.5% 0 - 0 - 1 267,806 0.75 207,885 0 -

New Equipment 75,000 Lump Sum 3.5% 0 - 0 - 0 - 6 498,923 0 -

Additional Operation Staff 15 Hour 3.5% 0 - 0 - 0 - 4200 69,849 25,000 430,321

Operations Training Consultant 25,000 Lump Sum 3.5% - - 0.5 13,859 1.5 43,032

Total 300,000 280,000 850,000 1,640,000 750,000

Total Annual Cost 386,000 647,000 1,006,000 1,795,000 899,000

Note: 1. The Processing Costs do not include payment to City of El Dorado or City of Augusta for existing facilities

Funding the Program The present recycling efforts in Butler County are funded through a number of sources and by a number of government agencies. For example, Butler County pays for the trailers that collect recyclables in the county; the City of El Dorado pays for the curbside collection and recyclable processing; and the City of Augusta pays for drop-off centers and the processing of its recyclables. With the proposed changes to the recycling program in Butler County the funding of the system will change. The collection of the recyclables will still be paid for by both the county and by select communities. The processing of the recyclables will now be the responsibility of the county. To fund the new program a number of revenue sources are available. These revenue sources include fees charged to the generators, taxes on property or purchases, payment for the recyclables generated, and state or federal grants or loans. Each of these revenue sources have limited funding capability and should be utilized carefully so that no one funding source is overburdened. It is recommended that the two funding sources that should carry the major responsibility for funding the program are the generators and the income gained from selling the processed recyclables. These two sources of revenue should be utilized as follows:

Generator Fees – These fees should be utilized to defray the costs of the collection and processing of recyclables.

Income from Processed Recyclables – This funding source should be utilized to pay for the recyclables processing.

Recognizing these funding sources, Butler County staff developed a program for funding the recycling program. The staff presented its funding program during a work session with the Board of County Commissioners. County staff discussed the desire to develop a funding plan that was fair and equitable to all citizens of the county.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 47

The proposed recycling plan recommends that the four larger cities provide curbside collection of recyclable materials. Furthermore, collection in the remaining cities, communities and rural areas will be provided through a county program consisting of recycling trailers and drop-off locations. County staff felt that a county-wide assessment should not be used to fund collection services. A county- wide assessment would result in a duplication of charges for collection services in the four larger cities. Thus, it was suggested to and supported by the Board of County Commissioners to divide the costs for recycling into separate categories and to apply a funding mechanism to each category that equitably spreads the cost to all citizens on a fair basis. The proposed categories would include: 1) collection and transportation services; 2) general administration and education; and, 3) sorting, processing and marketing. Collection and transportation services would be funded by a direct user charge. Residents in each of the four larger cities providing curbside collection would be assessed a charge on a monthly or periodic bill to each household by the city. Residents in the unincorporated areas and in the smaller cities receiving collection service from the county would receive an annual assessment from the county. General administration would be supported by a county-wide levy. General administration would include coordination of recycling activities county- wide, providing public education and marketing of processed materials. Materials processing would be funded by a combination of a county-wide levy and by proceeds from the sale of processed recycled materials. Additional work will need to be performed to refine the costs of the separate categories. The major refinement of costs will include determining costs for curbside collection, recycling trailer and drop-off collection, and processing costs including facilities, sorting equipment, processing and storage. One of the main factors in any funding consideration is how the increase in the recovery of recyclables will impact the other portions of a solid waste system. In Butler County the impact could be significant. With recyclables comprising almost 60% of the waste stream, the impact of an aggressive recycling program on the remainder of the solid waste system could be significant. Some of the impacts are:

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 48

1. The volume of solid waste entering the landfill could diminish by as much as half. This would result in lower income from tipping fees. In turn, this reduction of flow into the landfill would result in cost savings from reduced labor and equipment and increased landfill life which reduces the frequency of constructing new landfill cells. The longer landfill life will increase the length of the operating period of the landfill gas and leachate collection systems and groundwater monitoring which would be an added cost.

2. Because of the removal of the majority of recyclables from the waste stream, the type of waste entering the landfill will have a limited amount of organics. With the reduced level of organics two situations will occur. First, the amount of compaction that can be obtained will likely decrease. Compaction of inorganic material is more difficult because the structure of the material does not breakdown as easily as organics. Second, with fewer organic materials the decomposition of the solid waste will be reduced. This may reduce the amount of landfill gas generated; however, it will also reduce the amount of liquids absorbed by the solid waste, which may result in an increase in the amount of leachate generated by the landfill.

3. The amount of solid waste collected would be reduced which reduces the cost of collection. The reduced cost is because the number of collection routes would be reduced as trucks collecting the solid waste could visit more houses before going to the landfill to unload.

4. One of the organics that will likely remain in the solid waste stream is food. Food begins to decompose faster than any other organic waste and has the potential to generate odors quicker than any other organic. With the other organics, particularly the papers, removed from the waste stream, food waste can become a major nuisance issue for both collection and disposal.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 49

As the implementation of the recycling plan progresses it will be very important that certain assessments be made to ensure the program’s potential can be reached and the impact the program has on other portions of the solid waste system is clearly understood. These assessments include:

1. A waste characterization study should be performed within the next two years to determine the actual types of waste in the Butler County waste stream. This information is critical in determining improvements to the processing facilities and the size of any future processing facility.

2. Once the education program is in place, an evaluation of its impact should be conducted. This would include determining the increase in the amount of recyclables collected, the types of recyclables collected, and how the amount of recyclables collected varies. This assessment will be invaluable in guiding future education efforts.

3. The solid waste collection and disposal segments of the solid waste system should be assessed at least two years after the recycling program is implemented to determine initial impact. This assessment should look at both the flow of solid waste as well as the solid waste composition. The assessment should focus on how solid waste collection routes have changed and the inflow and composition of the solid waste at the landfill.

4. The increase in the amount of recyclables collected and processed should be assessed at least annually. This assessment should recognize both overall quantities as well as certain specific constituents in order to determine the quality of recyclables received. These assessments should be utilized to adjust the focus of the education program and the need to expand collection or processing in the coming

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 50

year. An additional aspect of this assessment should be the program’s costs and income. Adjustments to the program should be made based upon variances in both costs and income.

Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. Page 51