Robert Weygandt, Placer County, Chair John Allard, Roseville

Jack Duran, Placer County Scott Yuill, Rocklin

Dan Karleskint, Lincoln Ken Grehm, Executive Director

Recycling and Disposal Made Easy 11476 C Avenue Auburn, CA 95603

(916) 543-3960 / (916) 543-3990 fax www.wpwma.com

MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA

November 8, 2018 6:00 PM Materials Recovery Facility Administration Building

3033 Fiddyment Road, Roseville, CA 95747 Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the Board of Directors after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at the Clerk of the Board, 3033 Fiddyment Road, Roseville, CA 95747, during normal business hours and at the meeting location immediately before and during the meeting. The Western Placer Waste Management Authority is committed to ensuring that persons with disabilities are provided the resources to participate fully in its public meetings. If you are hearing impaired, we have listening devices available. If you require additional disability-related modifications or accommodations, including auxiliary aids or services, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (916) 543-3960. If requested, the agenda shall be provided in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. All requests must be in writing and must be received by the Clerk five business days prior to the scheduled meeting for which you are requesting accommodation. Requests received after such time will be accommodated if time permits.

1. Call Meeting to Order 2. Pledge of Allegiance (Director Karleskint) 3. Roll Call 4. Statement of Meeting Procedures (Clerk of the Board) 5. Agenda Approval 6. Public Comment

This is a time when persons may address the Board regarding items not on this Agenda. It is requested that comments be brief, since the Board is not permitted to take any action on items addressed under Public Comment.

7. Announcements & Information a. Reports from Directors ---- b. Report from the Executive Director (Ken Grehm) ---- c. Financial Reports (Valerie Bayne) ---- d Monthly Tonnage Reports (Keith Schmidt) ---- e. 2018 Auburn HHW Collection Event Summary (Stephanie Ulmer) Pg. 3 f. Summary of Community Meeting to Discuss Odors (Stephanie Ulmer) Pg. 5 g. Legislative Update (Chris Hanson) Pg. 11 h. WPWMA Engineer’s Report (Keith Schmidt) Pg. 19

8. Action Items a. Minutes of the Board Meeting held October 11, 2018

Approve as submitted. Pg. 21

WPWMA BOARD AGENDA NOVEMBER 8, 2018 PAGE 2

b. Waste Action Plan - MODA and NPV Preliminary Results (Eric Oddo) 1. Provide input to staff on the preliminary Waste Action Plan MODA

and NPV results; and 2. Direct staff to return at the December 13, 2018 meeting with a

recommended preferred Plan concept.

Pg. 25

9. Closed Session Anticipated Litigation: a. Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (d)(4) of Government Code

§54956.9: one potential case. 10. Upcoming Agenda Items

Identification of any items the Board would like staff to address at a future meeting.

11. Adjournment

2

MEMORANDUM WESTERN PLACER WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

TO: WPWMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS DATE: NOVEMBER 8, 2018 FROM: KEN GREHM / STEPHANIE ULMER SUBJECT: 2018 AUBURN HHW COLLECTION EVENT SUMMARY

RECOMMENDED ACTION: None. This report is for information purposes only. BACKGROUND: In addition to the WPWMA’s permanent Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) facility, the WPWMA has conducted annual HHW collection events in the Auburn area since 2003 as a more convenient disposal option for residents located between Loomis and Colfax. Use of the permanent facility as well as participation in the annual events is free to Placer County residents; disposal costs apply to businesses. On October 12, 2017, your Board approved renewal of the Agreement with Stericycle Environmental Solutions, Inc. dba PSC Environmental Services LLC, for HHW collection event services for 2018. The event was held Saturday and Sunday, September 22nd and 23rd at the Gold Country Fairgrounds in Auburn. This year’s event drew 925 participants (563 on Saturday and 362 on Sunday); a total of 38,110 pounds of HHW and 30,000 pounds of electronic waste were collected. For purposes of comparison, the 2017 event served 348 participants and 28,918 pounds of HHW and 8,520 pounds of e-waste were collected. A summary of attendance, quantities collected and costs for previous events is attached. While attendance had been declining over the last several years, participation was back up this year. Staff had intended to reevaluate the need and frequency of these events and present a recommendation to your Board after this year’s event. Since there appears to be no clear pattern or trend in participation, and due to increased participation this year, staff feels it is appropriate to continue providing the events annually, and will continue to evaluate attendance patterns. FISCAL IMPACT: The FY 2018/19 Final Budget included $65,000 for this event. Although Stericycle has not yet submitted their final invoice, preliminary estimates suggest the actual cost of the event was approximately $66,000. For purposes of comparison, the 2017 event cost $45,758. ATTACHMENT: EVENT HISTORY SUMMARY

3

WPWMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2018 AUBURN HHW COLLECTION EVENT SUMMARY NOVEMBER 8, 2018 PAGE 2

HHW COLLECTION EVENT HISTORY

DATE PARTICIPANTS HHW

COLLECTED (pounds)

E-WASTE COLLECTED

(pounds)

TOTAL EVENT COST

COST PER PARTICIPANT

October 21 & 22 2006 1,425 146,277 NA $97,680 $68.55

October 19 & 20 2007 880 124,045 NA $92,650 $105.28

August 23 & 24 2008 763 100,500 NA $80,610 $105.65

October 10 & 11 2009 1,116 88,500 55,800 $82,833 $74.22

October 23 & 24 2010 1,231 99,000 40,000 $85,181 $69.20

August 13 & 14 2011 1,127 93,000 34,000 $71,810 $63.72

October 6 & 7 2012 758 73,000 26,500 $56,595 $74.66

September 21 & 22 2013 578 41,000 27,300 $46,935 $77.80

November 15 & 16 2014 1,076 77,600 21,300 $61,733 $57.37

October 3 & 4 2015 430 36,030 12,448 $49,893 $116.03

October 29 & 30 2016 750 42,324 26,400 $62,068 $82.75

August 26 & 27 2017 312 28,918 8,520 $45,758 $146.66

September 22 & 23 2018 925 38,110 30,000 ~$66,000 ~$71.35

4

MEMORANDUM WESTERN PLACER WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

TO: WPWMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS DATE: NOVEMBER 8, 2018

FROM: KEN GREHM / STEPHANIE ULMER SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY MEETING TO DISCUSS ODORS

RECOMMENDED ACTION: None. This item is for information purposes only. BACKGROUND: On October 23, 2018, the WPWMA held its eighth annual community meeting to discuss facility odors. Staff provided information from previous facility odor studies and steps taken to help reduce composting, active landfill odors and landfill gas related odor emissions. Staff also introduced the Renewable Placer Waste Action Plan, highlighting the potential for increased odor mitigation measures that may be incorporated as part of the selected Plan concept. The workshop was advertised via the following avenues: press release; print and online ads via Gold Country Media; WPWMA.com; direct email to users of the online odor notification form; NextDoor.com; and on the One Big Bin Facebook page. Fifty people RSVP’d for the meeting and thirty attended. Attendees included staff from the Member Agencies as well as representatives from Nortech Waste, Rio Bravo, the Placer County Air Pollution Control District, and Placer County’s Community Development Resource Agency and Environmental Health Department. Several stakeholders with whom WPWMA staff met regarding the Waste Action Plan also attended. The majority of resident participants were from Roseville’s Blue Oaks, Westpark/Fiddyment Farms, and Sun City neighborhoods. After a brief introduction and facility overview, attendees engaged with WPWMA staff at three information stations to further discuss: regional odor sources and the WPWMA’s odor monitoring efforts; WPWMA odor reduction efforts; and the Renewable Placer Waste Action Plan. A summary of the meeting questions and responses are attached for your Board’s reference. Future odor community meetings will be organized to continue communication with local residents regarding odors and the WPWMA’s efforts to reduce them. ATTACHMENT: MEETING Q&A SUMMARY

5

Odor Workshop Meeting Summary October 23, 2018 | 6:00 PM

WPWMA staff provided a brief overview of the WPWMA’s history, operations and odor reduction efforts, followed by a breakout session consisting of three stations where attendees had the opportunity to delve into the following topics led by WPMWA staff: Regional Odor Sources & Odor Monitoring; WPWMA Odor Reduction Efforts; and Renewable Placer: Waste Action Plan. The following summarizes the questions posed by participants at each station and during a general Q&A period following the breakout session:

Q1 What is the prevailing wind pattern in the region?

A1 The general wind direction during winter months is from the north-northwest to the south-southeast and from the north-northeast to the south-southwest during summer months.

Q2 Does the weather affect the odor plume?

A2 Wind, inversion, diffusion and advection can all impact the intensity, frequency and duration which odors from the WPWMA’s and other facilities are experienced.

Q3 How does the WPWMA know what odors other facilities are generating? How does the WPWMA know that the odor plumes are accurate?

A3 The WPWMA worked with the odor monitoring system creators to input industry standard odor profiles of various facilities into the modeling system. Odors from nearby facilities are modeled estimates and do not reflect actual operations occurring at those facilities yet do provide insight into the potential impact of odors from these sites. The plumes generated in the model use real-time weather data from a station sited at the WPWMA’s facility. That weather data is combined with onsite odor sensors to generate a modeled plume representing estimated odor intensity and movement.

Q4 Does the WPWMA ever get fined for odors?

A4 The WPWMA received two violations with proposed fines from the Placer County Air Pollution Control District for nuisance odors since March 2015. The violations were precipitated by unusually high numbers of odor notifications submitted by residents to the WPWMA during periods of stagnant wind or atmospheric temperature inversion conditions.

6

ODOR WORKSHOP MEETING SUMMARY OCTOBER 23, 2018

Q5 What is the Master Planning timeframe?

A5 WPWMA staff plans on providing preliminary findings of the master planning concept evaluation process at its November 8, 2018 meeting and recommending a preferred Plan concept to the WPWMA Board at their December 13, 2018 meeting for approval to initiate the CEQA process. The CEQA process could take up to 2 years, with another 2 years or more for permitting. Additional opportunities for the public to comment on the project will be available during the CEQA process.

Q6 Are the cities of Lincoln and Roseville providing input on the WPWMA’s plans?

A6 The WPWMA convened an Advisory Committee comprised of staff from each of its Member Agencies (Placer County and the cities of Lincoln, Rocklin and Roseville) to provide input at various stages of the planning process. WPWMA staff also presented the Waste Action Plan to Member Agency City Councils and the County Board of Supervisors.

Q7 When will the existing landfill be closed?

A7 The Western Regional Sanitary Landfill is currently permitted to accept waste until 2058. Master planning efforts could significantly alter that date based on which project concept is selected by the WPWMA Board of Directors.

Q8 How will Placer County’s Sunset Area Plan affect the WPWMA’s facilities?

A8 The Sunset Area Plan proposes residential, commercial and educational uses very near the WPWMA’s properties and could potentially impact operational flexibility. WPWMA staff regularly engages with Placer County staff regarding the compatibility of both agencies’ projects.

Q9 Will proposed compatible manufacturing produce odors?

A9 Any future operations or facilities sited on the WPWMA’s properties will be evaluated for their potential to produce and/or reduce odors and impacts to surrounding land uses.

Q10 What odor control measures has the WPWMA implemented to date?

A10 Landfill – The daily active landfill area is minimized and the landfill does not operate on the weekend. Waste water treatment sludge is immediately mixed with other waste and buried. Alternative daily cover materials are utilized that have been shown to better control odors that soil. Landfill gas collection wells are installed ahead of regulatory requirements and in 2018 the WPWMA completed a landfill gas collection system upgrade to provide more consistent and reliable landfill gas control. Portions of the landfill have also been closed ahead of regulatory requirements in an effort to reduce odors. The WPWMA also tested odor neutralizers along the southern perimeter of the landfill as well as directly on

7

ODOR WORKSHOP MEETING SUMMARY OCTOBER 23, 2018

waste prior to burial at the landfill. Compost – Compost is carefully managed to prevent anaerobic conditions which can exacerbate odors. Compost runoff ponds are aerated to reduce odors. The WPWMA is conducting a pilot study to evaluate use of aerated static piles to reduce odors. Monitoring System – In 2014, the WPWMA installed a continuous odor monitoring system to track odors moving offsite and conducted a comprehensive facility evaluation in 2015 to improve the accuracy of the system.

Q11 Why not spread the different operations to more specialized facilities across the county?

A11 Space for solid waste operations is extremely limited in Placer County. The WPWMA has begun discussions regarding co-locating other operations (e.g. biomass) with the WPWMA’s facilities to leverage resources and eliminate the need for duplicative efforts and repeated material handling.

Q12 What gasses are at the facility besides methane?

A12 By volume, landfill gas is typically comprised of approximately 50% methane and 50% carbon dioxide with trace amounts of nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen and non-methane organic compounds.

Q13 Is there medical or radioactive waste at the facility?

A13 The WPWMA’s processing facilities do not accept medical or radioactive wastes. Any medical waste delivered to the landfill is autoclaved prior to delivery per regulatory requirements which serves to reclassify the material as municipal solid waste.

Q14 Is there any toxic level to the odor plumes from the facility?

A14 According to Dr. Oldham, Placer County Health Officer, most of what is known about odors is based on experience. For the most part, science says that there are no health impacts from living near a landfill and no long term health impacts at the general population level. However, odors affect individuals differently. Speaking also as a psychiatrist, odors can trigger memories and emotional responses.

Q15 Are odors from the facility making air quality worse? At what point does the Health Officer get involved with regulating the WPWMA and the particulate matter generated?

A15 According to Dr. Oldham, Placer County Health Officer, that responsibility lies with the Placer County Air Pollution Control District. The landfill does not pose any major air quality concerns, at least not of which he is aware. Odors do not impact air quality.

8

ODOR WORKSHOP MEETING SUMMARY OCTOBER 23, 2018

According to Bruce Springsteen, Placer County Air Pollution Control District Compliance and Enforcement Manager, there is no particulate matter associated with the breakdown of materials. Mr. Springsteen stated he does not believe the landfill has an impact on air quality and that compost particulates are so small that they would not constitute a health impact.

Q16 What does the composting process entail?

A16 Current green waste composting operations consist of turning and watering materials in open windrows. The WPWMA is conducting a pilot study to evaluate the ability of aerated static pile (ASP) composting to manage more odiferous materials such as food waste. ASP composting introduces air into the piles and uses a biofilter of finished compost to reduce odors.

Q17 Can the Roseville sludge trucks be rerouted to minimize odor impacts to residents?

A17 The WPWMA does not control the method by which materials are delivered to its facilities. The City of Roseville should be contacted with questions regarding their waste hauling practices.

Q18 Given what WPWMA staff knows, what do we think will happen regarding odors?

A18 Before the MRF was constructed, everything went to the landfill. In 25 years, that process evolved so that nearly half of the material received at the facility is diverted from the landfill. New waste management and odor technologies are emerging that could drastically alter the way facilities operate in the near future. All planning efforts will include odor reduction strategies in an effort to minimize facility odors and potential impacts to current and future neighboring land uses.

9

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

10

MEMORANDUM WESTERN PLACER WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

TO: WPWMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS DATE: NOVEMBER 8, 2018 FROM: KEN GREHM / CHRIS HANSON SUBJECT: LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

RECOMMENDED ACTION: None. This report is for information purposes only. BACKGROUND: On April 6, 2018, your Board approved the 2018 Legislative Strategic Agenda that outlined the WPWMA’s legislative priorities and would serve to guide Shaw / Yoder / Antwih’s (SYA) advocacy efforts for the year. The legislative session began in January and the deadline for bills to pass was August 21, 2018. The Governor had until September 30, 2018 to sign or veto passed bills. SYA has been tracking solid waste related legislation and regulation that might impact the WPWMA and will present the attached 2018 year-end report to your Board this evening. As noted in the attached report, the WPWMA took the following positions and engaged either informally (e.g. SYA advocacy, public testimony, informal comments, etc.) or formally through written comment letters on the following proposed bills and regulation:

• AB 1981 – Organic waste: composing (Support)

• AB 2411 – Solid waste: use of compost (Support)

• AB 3178 – Integrated Waste Management Plans (Support)

• AB 3187 – Biomethane: gas corporations: rates (Support)

• SB 212 – Sharps and Pharmaceuticals (Support)

• SB 1440 – Energy: biomethane (Support)

• DTSC Rulemaking on Photovoltaic Modules Universal Waste Regulations

• Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund: CalRecycle

ATTACHMENT: SYA REPORT

11

Date: October 23, 2018

To: The Western Placer Waste Management Authority Board of Directors

From: Jason Schmelzer, Shaw / Yoder / Antwih, Inc.

Karen Lange, Shaw / Yoder / Antwih, Inc.

Melissa Immel, Shaw / Yoder / Antwih, Inc.

RE: 2018 Year-End Report

On behalf of all of the employees of Shaw / Yoder / Antwih, Inc., we’d like to thank the Board of Directors

for once again entrusting our firm with the important task of providing legislative and regulatory advocacy

services to the Western Placer Waste Management Authority. In order to aggressively advocate on behalf

of WPWMA, our firm devotes two partner-level advocates who are also policy experts on local government

and environmental policy, as well as an additional advocate to provide supportive efforts. Our core function

is to identify legislation of interest, assist in the policy analysis, consult on the political implications of

engaging, and then to actively lobby in furtherance of WPWMA’s position.

The California State Legislature ended the second year of the 2017-2018 legislative session on August 31,

2018 and Governor Jerry Brown completed the signature and veto process on September 30, 2018. The

legislature sent a total of 1,564 bills to Governor Brown for consideration. Governor Brown and the

legislature focused on several important public policy areas in 2018, including producer responsibility,

energy and the environment, and housing and homelessness, among others.

This report outlines legislation related to solid waste more completely below; however, the legislature

focused mostly on producer responsibility and taking steps towards meeting the 75% statewide diversion

goal and the goals established by SB 1383. We also outline relevant regulatory efforts and budget

updates.

2018 LEGISLATIVE REPORT

WPWMA staff directed the SYA lobbying team to actively advocate on several pieces of legislation in 2018,

which are outlined below. We have also identified and described several other pieces of legislation that,

despite WPWMA having no official position, could have an impact on the operations of WPWMA.

Bills with WPWMA Position

The most significant success this year was the passage of SB 212 (Jackson, Ting and Gray), which

was the culmination of years of negotiation and collaboration, ultimately achieving a deal that was

enacted into law. WPWMA’s support had a positive impact on ensuring the bill’s passage out of the

Senate Environmental Quality Committee, as Senator Ted Gaines (R-El Dorado Hills), one of

WPWMA’s legislative delegation members, voted Aye.

12

SB 212 (Jackson, Ting and Gray) Solid waste pharmaceutical and sharps waste stewardship –

Signed into Law

WPWMA supported this bill that establishes comprehensive statewide take-back systems for home-

generated sharps waste and pharmaceutical medications. When these products are improperly

disposed, they create safety hazards for park, hotel, solid waste, wastewater, and sanitation

workers, in addition to the myriad of health and safety problems that they create for the public. SYA

drafted, updated, and distributed support letters, testified in committee hearings, and lobbied

legislators door-to-door in support of this bill on behalf of WPWMA.

Additionally, WPWMA took a position on and actively engaged on the following bills:

AB 1981 (Limón) Organic waste: composting – Signed into Law

WPWMA supported this law that is intended to support the end market for recycled organics in

California. This bill instructed CAL FIRE to develop and implement policies to aid in organic waste

diversion by promoting the use of compost as an effective tool to stabilize slopes and reduce the

erosion of soil exposed after a wildfire. SYA drafted, updated, and distributed support letters and

testified in committee hearings in support of this bill on behalf of WPWMA.

AB 2411 (McCarty) Solid waste: use of compost: planning – Signed into Law

WPWMA supported this law that aims to expand the end market for recycled organic waste by

instructing CalRecycle to develop and implement a plan to maximize the use of compost in slope

stabilization and establishing vegetation during post-fire debris removal services. The bill also

requires CalRecycle to coordinate with Caltrans to increase the use of compost along roadways.

SYA drafted, updated, and distributed support letters and testified in committee hearings in support

of this bill on behalf of WPWMA.

AB 3178 (Rubio) Integrated waste management plans: source reduction and recycling element:

diversion requirements - Vetoed

WPWMA supported this bill that aimed to ensure that California accounts for changes in the end

market of recycled goods when determining a local government’s “good faith effort” to meet the

requirements of the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. The bill would have specifically

stated that China’s recently introduced changes to its importing requirements are factored into the

good faith effort determination.

In his veto message, Governor Brown stated that, in his opinion, “[C]urrent statute and regulations

already require the Department to consider market conditions when reviewing a local jurisdiction's

compliance with recycling laws. As such, this bill is not necessary.” He also mentioned that while he

vetoed the bill, he wants to “encourage the Legislature to work with the Department [CalRecycle] to

focus on increasing California's infrastructure and development of domestic markets.” SYA drafted,

updated, and distributed support letters and testified in committee hearings in support of this bill

on behalf of WPWMA.

AB 3187 (Grayson) Biomethane: gas corporations: rates: interconnection – Signed into Law

WPWMA supported this law that intends to expand the ability of gas corporations to be able to

recover pipeline interconnection costs. Currently, the costs associated with connecting biomethane

to common-carrier pipelines present an almost insurmountable hurdle to any attempt to increase

biogas production, especially since these costs are not currently eligible for rate recovery. SYA

drafted, updated, and distributed support letters and testified in committee hearings in support of

this bill on behalf of WPWMA.

13

SB 1440 (Hueso) Energy: biomethane: biomethane procurement – Signed into Law

WPWMA supported this law that aims to ensure that California can create sufficient levels of in-

state production and distribution facilities for bio-methane. The bill would accomplish this goal by

requiring the ARB to work with the CPUC to consider the appropriateness of adopting specific

procurement targets or goals for biomethane procurement to make sure that each gas corporation

is procuring its proportionate share. SYA drafted, updated, and distributed support letters and

testified in committee hearings in support of this bill on behalf of WPWMA.

Other Bills of Interest

Although WPWMA did not directly take a position on the bills below (note: WPWMA did participate in

determining positions for the SWANA LTF on some of these bills), they do warrant some attention

because of their potential impact on WPWMA operations.

AB 1288 (Eggman) Solid waste: management funding – Held in Senate Environmental Quality

Committee

This bill would have required CalRecycle to hold a public workshop to discuss funding strategies for

new and expanded organic waste reduction infrastructure during their regulatory process. During

that public workshop, they would have been directed to discuss both existing public and private

funding models as well as additional opportunities for new statewide funding sources.

AB 1884 (Calderon) Food facilities: single-use plastic straws – Signed into Law

This bill requires full-service restaurants to only provide plastic straws upon customer request. The

goal of this legislation is to reduce plastic pollution and prevent plastic straws from harming wildlife

and negatively impacting California’s oceans and waterways while also encouraging individuals to

change their behavior toward single-use plastic items.

AB 1975 (Chu) Nuisance: odors – Held in Assembly Appropriations Committee

This bill would have required CalRecycle, no later than July 1, 2019, to establish the South Bay

Interagency Odor Taskforce to identify sources of odor emissions and nuisance complaints based

on odor emissions received by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and the City of

Milpitas, the City of Fremont, the City of Santa Clara, and the City of San Jose. The bill would have

required the taskforce, by January 1, 2020, to identify sources of odor emissions in the region

represented by the taskforce representatives and provide updates on inspections and enforcement

actions conducted by each enforcement agency represented on the taskforce.

AB 2097 (Acosta) Carpet recycling: annual reports – Signed into Law

This bill amends the current Carpet Stewardship Program to allow carpet manufacturers to submit

their annual report to CalRecycle on September 1st instead of July 1st.

AB 2447 (Reyes) California Environmental Quality Act: land use: environmental justice – Vetoed

This bill would have established additional CEQA requirements for projects that are located within

½ mile of a disadvantaged community (DAC). These new requirements include the lead agency

providing CEQA notices by direct mail to all owners and occupants of property within a ½ mile of a

DAC, in addition to calling at least one local evening scoping meeting. The bill was amended late in

the session to exclude public water and energy suppliers because they are essential public

services. However, waste management services did not receive an exclusion on the same grounds.

In his veto message, Governor Brown noted that it is his belief that since land use is

quintessentially a local matter, the notice and meeting requirements outlined in this bill are too

prescriptive.

14

AB 2627 (Kalra) Migratory nongame birds: Migratory Bird Treaty Act: authorized take – Held in

Senate Appropriations Committee

This bill would have deemed an entity in compliance with the state prohibition against taking any

migratory nongame bird, if the potential take is incidental to otherwise lawful activity, the entity

completes a certification process by submitting certain information to the department, and the

entity implements best management practices for avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating take of

migratory nongame birds that are intended to avoid significant adverse impacts to migratory

nongame birds.

AB 2908 (Berman) Tire recycling: California tire regulatory fee and waste tire program – Vetoed

This bill would have temporarily extended the Rubberized Asphalt Concrete Market Development

Act and then transitioned it to a Tire Recycling Incentive Program (TRIP). Under TRIP, eligible

entities and local governments would be eligible to receive an incentive payment for tire-derived

products manufactured from California-generated waste tire material. To fund this new program,

CalRecycle would use surplus dollars in the California Tire Recycling Management Fund. Once the

surplus is drawn down, CalRecycle would be authorized to establish the “California tire regulatory

fee” (in an amount not to exceed $1/tire) applicable to retail tire sellers.

In his veto message, Governor Brown said that while the incentive program that this bill would have

created would limit CalRecycle’ s ability to respond to innovation in this area, he believes that the

policy does have merit and directed CalRecycle to recommend an incentive program in this area as

part of the State Budget.

AB 3036 (Cooley) Solid waste: byproducts from the processing of food or beverages – Signed into

Law

This bill prohibits counties, cities, districts, or other local government agencies from entering into an

exclusive franchise agreement for the hauling of byproducts from the processing of food or

beverages if they are to be used as animal feed.

SB 168 (Wieckowski) Recycling: beverage containers – Failed passage on the Assembly Floor

This bill would have required, commencing January 1, 2020, a beverage container that is a PET

plastic container to be constructed with a minimum of 20% postconsumer recycled plastic. The bill

would have required CalRecycle, by January 1, 2021, to establish minimum postconsumer recycled

content standards for beverage containers that are constructed of plastic, material other than

metal, glass, or plastic, or any combination of plastic and material other than metal, glass, or

plastic. The bill would also have authorized CalRecycle to adjust the minimum content standards

annually.

SB 452 (Glazer) The California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act – Vetoed

This bill would have made a variety of changes to the “Bottle Bill” program. An earlier version of the

bill would have required CalRecycle to withhold payments to local governments if a local

government imposed any restrictions on supermarket sites. The bill was later amended to simply

authorize CalRecycle to do so, which is consistent with current law.

In his veto message, Governor Brown said that SB 452 (Glazer) is inconsistent with his

Administration's principles for reforming and modernizing this program and that any legislation to

update these statutes should balance three different components: fiscal sustainability, improved

collection, and incentives for innovative recycling.

15

SB 1335 (Allen) Solid waste: food service packaging: state agencies, facilities, and property –

Signed into Law

This bill prohibits a state food service facility from dispensing prepared food using food service

packaging unless the packaging is on a specified list maintained by CalRecycle and has been

determined to be reusable, recyclable, or compostable.

2018-19 STATE BUDGET REPORT

2018-19 State Budget

The Legislature approved and the Governor signed the Budget Act of 2018, which includes $201.4

billion in total state funds, consisting of $138.7 billion from the General Fund, $58.5 billion from

special funds, and $4.2 billion from bond funds.

SYA monitored the budget process for WPWMA, with a particular focus on conversations held in the

Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 3 on Resources and Transportation and the Senate Budget

and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection, Energy &

Transportation. SYA provided regular updates to WPWMA on these discussions.

Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF)

SYA advocated in committee hearings and submitted a letter to the Budget Committees on behalf

of WPWMA in support of GGRF dollars for CalRecycle to support waste diversion and recycling

infrastructure, which ultimately amounted to $20 million this year.

2018 REGULATORY REPORT

Federal Regulations

Migratory Bird Act

SYAI continued to follow any possible changes or proposals related to the Migratory Bird Act, which

could require operators of landfill gas flares to apply for Take Permits. The Federal Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS) is still incorporating public comment and pondering the path forward. Their stated

intent was to have a draft rule published in the Federal Register sometime before the end of 2016.

However, as of this writing, there is no new proposed rule on landfill gas flares published in the

Federal Register.

In addition, earlier this year the Interior Department issued an opinion to federal wildlife police,

stating that “the take [killing] of birds resulting from an activity is not prohibited by the Migratory

Bird Treaty Act when the underlying purpose of that activity is not to take birds”. With this broad

guidance in place, it appears unlikely that waste facilities will be required to apply for permits for

incidental migratory bird deaths.

State Regulations

Short-Lived Climate Pollutants

SB 1383 (Lara, Chapter 395, Statutes of 2016) codified that ARB’s Short-Lived Climate Pollutants

Reduction Strategy, establishing methane emissions reduction targets in a statewide effort to

reduce short-lived climate pollutants. Specifically, the bill established targets to achieve a 50%

reduction in the level of statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a

75% reduction by 2025. The bill also established a target of not less than 20% of currently

disposed edible food to be recovered for human consumption by 2025.

16

In May, CalRecycle hosted the final informal public workshop to discuss regulatory concepts as SB

1383 implementation moves forward. These workshops provided opportunities to discuss

definitions, collection and planning articles, edible food recovery, requirements for solid waste

facilities, markets and procurement, and different aspects of reporting and enforcement. SYA

attended this workshop on behalf of WPWMA, taking notes and participating as necessary. SYA

worked with WPWMA staff to draft and submit comments on behalf of WPWMA regarding many of

the regulatory concepts discussed. In partnership with the SWANA LTF, WPWMA staff attended a

meeting with lead CalRecycle staff and advocated for increased flexibility on landfill regulations and

MRF performance standards.

CalRecycle will begin the formal rulemaking process in the next couple of months. SYA will continue

to review, discuss, and weigh in on this regulatory process on behalf of WPWMA.

AB 901 Reporting Regulations

AB 901 was signed by Governor Brown in 2015. The purpose was to change how disposal and

recycling data is reported to CalRecycle. Waste, recycling, and compost facilities, as well as

exporters, brokers, and transporters of recyclables or compost will be required to submit

information directly to CalRecycle.

The seventh draft of the proposed regulatory text was released on October 1, 2018 for a 15-day

formal comment period that will close on October 16, 2018. CalRecycle staff will then review the

comments received during that 15-day comment period. According to their tentative schedule, the

first round of reporting is scheduled to being near the beginning of 2019.

SYA has and will continue to monitor the AB 901 regulatory process and relevant developments,

discuss the impacts on WPWMA with WPWMA staff, and provide comments on behalf of WPWMA as

requested.

China’s “National Sword” Policy

China has released a proposal to expand its scrap import ban beyond plastics and the other

materials that are currently restricted. A new plan would ban every form of “solid waste” from

import. The Ministry of Ecology and Environment on July 11 posted a draft document that lays out

numerous regulations covering solid waste management. The proposal is in line with recent reports

indicating the country will end scrap imports entirely by 2020.

China’s National Sword policy has already shut the door on most recovered plastics and mixed

paper since the start of this year. Moreover, China announced it would ban imports of post-

industrial plastic by the end of this year. SYA is working on discussing this issue with CalRecycle

and legislators to address the significant impacts this ban presents. SYA will continue to discuss

this issue with WPWMA and keep WPWMA staff apprised of relevant updates.

Rulemaking on Photovoltaic Modules Universals Waste Regulations

WPWMA joined with a coalition of concerned parties to urge the Department of Toxic Substances

Control (DTSC) to move quickly to adopt regulations to designate end-of-life photovoltaic modules

as hazardous waste. While we have heard from DTSC staff that their goal is to publish the notice of

proposed rulemaking this year, the process has already taken a significant amount of time and

caused severe problems for many hazardous and solid waste facilities. SYA will continue to engage

with DTSC to ensure that these important regulations are completed promptly.

17

2019 PREVIEW

The following is a brief preview of potential issues that could surface next year.

CalRecycle Packaging Reform Concepts

CalRecycle held their final informal public workshop to discuss legislative and regulatory concepts

pertaining to packaging reform, as part of the efforts to reach the statewide 75% by 2020 diversion

goal, on October 10th, 2017. Since that workshop, CalRecycle staff has continued to develop their

recommendations related to reducing packaging waste. In light of the changes to global import

policies, they want to ensure that their packaging reform recommendations thoughtfully and

adequately reflect the new realities of global recycling markets. They hope to present the draft

recommendations to their Director at a monthly public meeting for consideration.

Additionally, we have heard that there is potential for legislation on this issue in the coming year(s).

SYA will continue to actively monitor CalRecycle and the Legislature’s packaging reform efforts.

SB 212 Regulatory Process

On September 30, 2018, Governor Brown signed SB 212 (Jackson, Ting, and Gray), a bill to create

a statewide takeback program for pharmaceutical medications and sharps products from

households. The bill requires manufacturers of these products to create, fund, and operate a

stewardship program that provides for the takeback of covered drugs and home-generated sharps

waste from households. CalRecycle is required to adopt implementing regulations by January 1,

2021. Program operators must submit their proposed programs within six months of CalRecycle

adopting relevant implementing regulations.

SYA will monitor and engage in the SB 212 regulatory process on behalf of WPWMA.

Compost Contaminates

WPWMA staff has expressed concerns about the strict contamination standards on compost,

specifically related to glass content. Since the volume of compost is anticipated to increase due to

the steadily growing amount of food waste collection, and it only takes a relatively small amount

glass to contaminate a load under current standards, SYA will continue to work with WPWMA to

explore the possibility of adding provisions at the state level to provide an additional market-

dependent leniency standard for glass contamination in compost.

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)

We expect the legislature to continue working with a range of stakeholders, including the California

Product Stewardship Council, to further develop and expand statewide EPR models. On behalf of

WPWMA, SYA will continue to monitor and support legislation that would expand EPR-related efforts

to help responsibly manage the end-of-life stages of products such as lithium-ion batteries,

aerosols, mattresses, and others.

18

MEMORANDUM WESTERN PLACER WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

TO: WPWMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS DATE: NOVEMBER 8, 2018 FROM: KEN GREHM / KEITH SCHMIDT SUBJECT: WPWMA ENGINEER’S REPORT

RECOMMENDED ACTION: None. This report is for information purposes only. BACKGROUND: This report focuses on the performance of landfill environmental control systems. Gas Collection and Control System (GCCS) Since the new WPWMA flare began operations in December 2017, the landfill gas (LFG) flow rate has been slightly lower than prior measurements, though more consistent. This flow rate (approximately 1,350 standard cubic feet/minute, scfm) is 24-31% lower than the theoretical predicted LFG flow rate.1 When the LFG flowrate estimates were prepared, measurements from the WPWMA’s old blower/flare station (BFS) flow meter were used to calibrate the model. It was later learned that the old BFS flow meter did not reliably produce repeatable results; resolving this issue was one of several goals of the BFS upgrade project. The new BFS flow meters demonstrate 98% accuracy during typical operations and LFG emissions measured at the surface of the landfill are in compliance with state and federal regulations despite lower LFG flow rates. WPWMA staff continues to work with its design engineer (Golder Associates) and the construction contractor (RJ Gordon) to facilitate full completion of the new BFS. RJ Gordon has not been able to demonstrate that the flare will consistently remain lit at the low flow rates identified in the construction project specifications and, as such, Cornerstone (the WPWMA’s LFG operations and maintenance consultant) has had to divert more LFG to the flare system thereby reducing the amount of LFG that is available for the WPWMA to provide to Energy. Golder prepared a checklist of final tasks for the contractor to complete, most of which involve the flare manufacturer and are aimed at demonstrating the BFS response to low flow rates and flow changes during varied operations at Energy’s facility. Staff is also working with Energy and Placer County Information Technology to complete improvements that will allow Energy and WPWMA equipment to share vital real-time operational data. In late August, Cornerstone began an additional program to pump liquids out of eight (8) LFG wells consistent with the Third Amendment to their Agreement. Since that time, Cornerstone has pumped liquids from seven of the eight wells, removing an average of

1 As part of the LFG Strategic Plan, Golder Associates generated a theoretical predicted LFG generation rate based on limited food waste diversion for future years. The year 2017 LFG generation rate was predicted to be approximately 1,772 scfm using a model utilized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and approximately 1,965 scfm using a model utilized by the Environmental Protection Agency.

19

WPWMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS WPWMA ENGINEER’S REPORT NOVEMBER 8, 2018 PAGE 2 500 gallons of liquid per well. According to Cornerstone personnel, there has been no noticeable or appreciable change in the amount of LFG collected from these wells. Subsurface LFG at Perimeter Probes As noted in prior reports, a subsurface oxidation event (Event) required LFG wells to be shut down in the closed modules, causing LFG levels at several nearby perimeter monitoring probe clusters along the northeast site border to exceed the regulatory compliance threshold. In response to these elevated LFG readings, the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) issued a violation to the WPWMA on December 13, 2016, and with each subsequent monthly LEA inspection report. No monetary penalty has been identified by the LEA as part of this NOV. WPWMA staff is working with the LEA on revising the Event remediation plan schedule. The subsurface oxidation event appears to have stabilized, and Cornerstone is drawing approximately the same flow rate of LFG from that area of the landfill as before the Event. At this time, nine (9) of the thirteen (13) perimeter probe monitoring points once in exceedance are back in compliance. The online LFG wells in the area appear to be having a positive influence on the perimeter probes. Liner Monitoring System As noted on May 10, 2018 and in prior staff reports to your Board, the WPWMA received two letters from the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board) in April 2015 alleging that Modules 15 and 16 may have a compromised liner system. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) later conducted an inspection related to the processing, storage and disposal of Treated Wood Waste (TWW) and submitted a letter to the WPWMA indicating that the WPWMA was no longer able to bury TWW in Modules 15 and 16 due to the “verified release” 2 from the Module 15 and 16 liner systems. At the May 10, 2018 meeting, your Board authorized SCS Engineers to conduct a thorough evaluation of water quality data collected from existing monitoring systems to determine whether the Module 15 and 16 liner systems are compromised. Preliminary results suggest that Module 15 does not have a compromised liner system. In Module 16, however, data from both sampling locations indicate impacted water in the secondary (i.e. leak detection) liner system. SCS intends to further their analysis and prepare a final report, which will be presented to your Board at a future meeting. TWW continues to be accepted in Modules 5 and 14 during this investigation.

2 DTSC referenced the RWQCB’s April 22, 2015 letter as a basis for its May 2017 allegation.

20

WESTERN PLACER WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY Minutes of October 11, 2018

The meeting of the Western Placer Waste Management Authority Board of Directors was called to order at 6:00 PM by Chairman Weygandt in the WPWMA Administration Building at the Materials Recovery Facility. Directors Present: Staff Present: Robert Weygandt Ken Grehm Robert Sandman Jack Duran Bill Zimmerman Jim Kotey Scott Yuill Eric Oddo Heather Wilden Dan Karleskint Keith Schmidt

1. Call Meeting to Order: Chairman Weygandt called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. 2. Pledge of Allegiance: Director Yuill led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Roll Call: Director Allard was absent. 4. Statement of Meeting Procedures: Heather Wilden read the Statement of Meeting

Procedures into the record. 5. Agenda Approval:

MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA: Duran/Yuill Vote: Unanimous

6. Public Comment: No one from the public addressed the Board. 7. Closed Session:

Anticipated Litigation: a. Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (d)(4) of Government Code

§54956.9: two potential cases. b. Conference with Real Property Negotiator. Government Code

Section §54956.8

Property: Portion of APNs 021-281-001-000, 021-281-002-000, 017-063-003-000.

WPWMA Negotiator(s): Bill Zimmerman, Eric Oddo, and Robert Sandman

Negotiating Parties: Western Placer Waste Management Authority; IHI Power Services Corporation and North American Power Group, Ltd

Under Negotiation: Price, terms of payment or both.

WPWMA Counsel reported out of closed session noting that the Board heard two items pursuant to 7a and provided direction to Counsel. The Board had a conference with the real property negotiator pursuant to 7b and provided direction to its negotiators.

21

WESTERN PLACER WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 2018 PAGE 2 8. Announcements & Information:

a. Reports from Directors: There were no reports from the Directors. b. Report from the Executive Director: Ken Grehm introduced Kim Catsis from

Environmental Utilities and Michelle Darling from Environmental Engineering and noted that they are cross training with Heather Wilden for potential coverage at future Board meetings.

c. Financial Reports: Eric Oddo summarized the report. There were no questions from the Board.

d. Monthly Tonnage Reports: Keith Schmidt summarized the report. There were no questions from the Board.

9. Consent Agenda: a. Minutes of the Board Meeting held September 13, 2018 Staff recommended approving the minutes as submitted. b. Legal Services Agreement with Churchwell White: Staff recommended authorizing the Chair to sign an agreement with

Churchwell White, LLP for legal services for an amount not to exceed $100,000.

c. Establishing Criteria for, and Entering Into, Non-Exclusive Site Access Agreements for Possible Public-Private Partnerships:

Staff recommended the Board: 1. Approve the attached criteria related to potential future public-private

partnerships between the WPWMA and third-party entities interested in siting compatible operations on the WPWMA’s property; and

2. Authorize the Executive Director or designee, upon review and approval by WPWMA Counsel, to enter into individual, short-term, non-exclusive site use agreements, consistent with the approved criteria, with prospective private entities allowing initial site investigations when evaluating the feasibility of siting an operation on the WPWMA’s property.

d. First Amendment to the Agreement with HydroScience Engineers for Compost Pond Improvement Design Services:

Staff recommended authorizing the Chair to sign the First Amendment to the Agreement with HydroScience Engineers, Inc. (HSE) for design of compost pond improvements for an amount not to exceed $21,046, increasing the total not-to-exceed amount of the Agreement to $94,495.

MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA: Yuill/Duran Vote: Unanimous

22

WESTERN PLACER WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 2018 PAGE 3 10. Action Items:

a. Fiscal Year 2018/19 Final Budgets: Staff recommended approving the Fiscal Year 2018/19 Final Budgets for the Operating Fund, the Closure Fund and the Self-Insurance Fund as presented in Exhibits A and B. Eric Oddo summarized the report. There were no questions from the Board.

MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 10a: Duran/Yuill Vote: Unanimous

b. Fourth Amendment to the Agreement with Cornerstone for Landfill Gas Operation and Maintenance Services: Staff recommended authorizing the Chair to sign the Fourth Amendment to the Agreement with Cornerstone Environmental Group, LLC for operation and maintenance of the landfill gas collection system for an amount not to exceed $185,000, increasing the total not-to-exceed cost of the Agreement to $1,549,032. Keith Schmidt summarized the report and answered questions from the Board.

MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 10b: Duran/Yuill Vote: Unanimous

11. Upcoming Agenda Items: None. 12. Adjournment: Meeting was adjourned at 7:10PM.

Respectfully Submitted,

Heather Wilden, Clerk of the Board Western Placer Waste Management Authority

23

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

24

MEMORANDUM WESTERN PLACER WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

TO: WPWMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS DATE: NOVEMBER 8, 2018 FROM: BILL ZIMMERMAN / ERIC ODDO SUBJECT: WASTE ACTION PLAN – PRELIMINARY MODA AND NPV RESULTS

RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Provide input to staff on the preliminary Waste Action Plan (Plan) MODA and NPV

results; and 2. Direct staff to return at the December 13, 2018 meeting with a recommended

preferred Plan concept. BACKGROUND: At the July 9, 2015 meeting, staff presented your Board with potential modifications and enhancements intended to maintain the long-term viability of the WPWMA’s facilities by: 1) responding to changes in applicable regulations, 2) addressing anticipated regional growth, 3) optimizing material diversion rates, 4) maximizing operational efficiencies to improve customer safety and maintain a stable cost structure, and 5) enhancing compatibility between operations and current and future adjacent land uses. At the October 13, 2016 meeting, your Board approved an agreement with CH2M to develop a facility Waste Action Plan (Plan) addressing these needs and prepare the appropriate CEQA-related documents. As planning efforts progressed, staff and CH2M felt that stakeholder engagement and more robust evaluation was appropriate to insure your Board is provided with the most comprehensive, transparent and objective analysis of the Plan concepts utilizing the WPWMA’s existing, eastern and western properties. At the July 12, 2018 meeting, your Board approved the First Amendment to the CH2M Agreement providing funding for additional stakeholder engagement and a Multi Objective Decision Analysis (MODA) and net present value (NPV) cost analysis of the Plan concepts. Over the past several months, staff and CH2M met with a broad range of stakeholder groups and performed the MODA and NPV analysis for three Plan concepts. Based on preliminary analysis results and stakeholder feedback, Plan Concept 1 appears to best meet the WPWMA’s project goals noted above. The following provides detail on the concepts, stakeholder engagement efforts, and the MODA and NPV analysis supporting this preliminary finding. Waste Action Plan Concepts Narratives and figures describing the three Plan concepts are included as Attachment A and are summarized as follows:

• Concept 0: All future activities occur exclusively on the existing permitted 320 acre parcel; significantly limiting future adaptability. Existing permitted landfill airspace capacity is reduced to accommodate the need for increased processing and recycling system infrastructure. The unlined waste in cells 1,2,10 and 11 is immediately excavated and relocated to make space for needed changes. No space is

25

WPWMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS FACILITY MASTER PLANNING UPDATE – PRELIMINARY MODA AND NPV RESULTS NOVEMBER 8, 2018 PAGE 2

allocated for compatible manufacturing or technology.

• Concept 1: The 158-acre eastern property is configured for future landfilling contiguous to the existing landfill as necessary. The 480-acre western property is utilized for non-landfilling operations including composting and public waste receiving; providing flexibility for future needs. Portions of the western property are set aside for compatible manufacturing/technology. The existing permitted 320 acre property will contain a smaller landfill than is currently permitted and is reconfigured to optimize MRF operations and provide space for emerging technology pilot studies.

• Concept 2: The 480-acre western property is configured for future landfilling as necessary. The existing permitted 320 acre property will contain a smaller landfill than is currently permitted and is reconfigured to optimize MRF and composting operations, public waste receiving, and provides space (as available) for emerging technology pilot studies. Portions of the eastern and western properties are set aside for compatible manufacturing/technology.

Stakeholder Engagement Staff met with the following stakeholders to solicit feedback on the Plan concepts:

Elected Officials, Boards, Councils Large Land Owners

• Placer County Board of Supervisors • Placer Ranch, Inc.

• Roseville City Council • United Auburn Indian Community

• Rocklin City Council • AKT Development Corp.

• Lincoln City Council • Placer Athens Limited Partnership

• Pioneer Energy

Community and Business Groups Regulators

• Rocklin Chamber of Commerce Government Relations Committee

• Placer County Air Pollution Control District

• Lincoln Chamber of Commerce • Regional Water Quality Control Board

• Placer County Associations of Realtors • CalRecycle

• North State Building Industry Association • Placer County Environmental Health Department

Environmental Groups General Public

• Sierra Club • Residents from the Blue Oaks, Westpark, Fiddyment Farms, and Amoruso neighborhoods were engaged as part of the annual community meeting to discuss odors.

• Audubon Society

While each group has a different perspective, they have all been generally supportive and understand the need for the Plan and the value of maintaining the long-term viability of the facility. Many also expressed concerns regarding the potential for increased odors. Staff reinforced the WPWMA’s commitment to being a good neighbor, provided information on odor mitigation efforts to date, and noted that the WPWMA is working on specific odor mitigation strategies as a core Plan element.

26

WPWMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS FACILITY MASTER PLANNING UPDATE – PRELIMINARY MODA AND NPV RESULTS NOVEMBER 8, 2018 PAGE 3 MODA Analysis The MODA process is designed to provide a quantifiable, objective, robust and transparent method for comparing the Plan concepts by analyzing non-monetary aspects of each Plan concept based on a series of project criterion. The criteria were developed with input from the Member Agency Advisory Committee to reflect the priorities most important to the WPWMA, Member Agencies, and key stakeholders and provide a reasonable level of differentiation between the concepts. Other factors (typically evaluated in the CEQA process) such as potential greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and utility requirements were deemed to not be sufficiently definable at this point in the planning in a way that distinguishes between the concepts, thus were excluded from this part of the analysis. At the September 13, 2018 meeting, your Board approved the MODA criteria, included as Attachment B. WPWMA staff and the Member Agency Advisory Committee then provided feedback on the relative importance of each criterion (through a weighting exercise). CH2M independently scored how well each Plan concept met the criteria and applied the WPWMA staff and Member Agency Advisory Committee weighting factors to determine the ultimate MODA score. Attachment C includes a summary of the WPWMA staff and Member Agency Advisory Committee weighting factors. To account for feedback received during the stakeholder engagement process, staff and CH2M created several additional MODA weighting “profiles” to consider how the feedback received may influence the MODA results. These additional weighting profiles are generally described below. A summary of the weighting factors for these additional profiles are included in Attachment C.

• Proximate Stakeholders

This profile is heavily weighted towards consideration of the impact of odor on nearby sensitive receptors and available future disposal and diversion capacity. The financial implications as well as the potential opportunities related to siting compatible technologies and fostering emerging solid-waste related technologies were also weighted as being important.

• Odor Potential This profile has all weighting on the “sensitive receptors” criterion, which represents the potential impact of odors on surrounding residential and commercial receptors.

• Operational Capacity

This profile is weighted toward the ability to provide sufficient future disposal and diversion capacity, maintain flexibility to accommodate changes in future operations, traffic and material flow patterns, and the potential to attract compatible technologies.

• Financial Implications

This profile is heavily weighted towards the relative need to obtain near-term external financing for the proposed concepts.

The following table summarizes the preliminary MODA results for WPWMA staff, Member Agency Advisory Committee members and modeled ranking profiles. With the exception of the “Odor Potential” profile, the MODA results suggest that Plan Concept 1 best meets the WPWMA’s project goals when viewed from multiple perspectives.

27

WPWMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS FACILITY MASTER PLANNING UPDATE – PRELIMINARY MODA AND NPV RESULTS NOVEMBER 8, 2018 PAGE 4

Profile

MODA Score

Concept 0 Concept 1 Concept 2

WPWMA staff 33.9 75.1 52.9

Advisory Committee 34.4 75.8 53.0

Proximate Stakeholders 41.2 61.7 47.4

Odor Potential 72.6 17.1 28.4

Operational Capacity 28.9 85.1 59.8

Financial Implications 47.6 74.6 52.0

NPV Analysis The purpose of the NPV analysis is to produce an annualized cost in current (2018) dollars for each Plan concept and to identify when significant changes in capital and operating expenditures could be necessary. For the purposes of this analysis, the overall project timeframe was equal to the longest landfill life expectancy of the three Plan concepts (approximately 90 additional years from now). Similar to the MODA process, the NPV is intended to reflect the relative difference between Plan concepts. The NPV includes only the capital, operating and overhead costs for the elements identified in the Plan concepts. Other costs or revenues that may be realized in the future (such as renovations or replacement of MRF equipment – which are not an element of the master planning exercise) are not included in the NPV. The NPV cost results are not intended to be viewed in their absolute terms or used to directly predict future tipping fees. Rather, they should be compared to provide general insight into the budgetary-level costs needed to achieve the goals for each Plan concept over the entire life of the NPV evaluation period. CH2M utilized costs from past WPWMA construction projects and operating budgets, current industry standard unit cost figures, and discussions with Nortech to develop individual capital, operating and overhead costs for each Plan concept element (e.g. composting, landfill, public area, office space, etc.). A key element in the NPV analysis was estimating future waste generation, processing and disposal rates. For the purposes of this analysis, CH2M assumed the wastestream received and processed at the WPWMA’s facility would roughly double over the next 30 years (consistent with population growth estimates included in the Participating Agencies’ general plans) and flatten thereafter. The following table provides the preliminary NPV estimates for each Plan concept:

Concept 0: $75,300,000

Concept 1: $51,700,000

Concept 2: $60,800,000

Additional detail that summarizes the relationship between capital and operating costs for these estimates as well as information about when these costs may be incurred is included in Attachment D.

28

WPWMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS FACILITY MASTER PLANNING UPDATE – PRELIMINARY MODA AND NPV RESULTS NOVEMBER 8, 2018 PAGE 5 Next Steps Staff will work with CH2M to finalize the MODA and NPV analysis, including addressing any feedback on the preliminary results received from your Board and/or any of the previously engaged stakeholder groups. Staff plans to return to your Board in December with the finalized analysis, a recommendation regarding the preferred Plan concept, and a request for authorization to initiate the CEQA process. ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE: The recommended actions do not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no additional fiscal impact to the WPWMA associated with the recommended actions. Any costs associated with incorporating input from your Board on the preliminary MODA and NPV results and directing staff to return with the final Plan concept recommendation at the December meeting are already included in the Agreement with CH2M. ATTACHMENTS: ATTACHMENT A – PLAN CONCEPT NARRATIVES ATTACHMENT B – MODA CRITERIA ATTACHMENT C – MODA WEIGHTING FACTORS ATTACHMENT D – PRELIMINARY NET PRESENT VALUE ESTIMATES

29

ATTACHMENT A

PLAN CONCEPT 0 EXISTING SITE RECONFIGURED

Ability to Meet Project Goals Increase recycling rates X Maintain local control Regulatory compliance X Provide long-term recycling capacity X Provide long-term disposal capacity Enhance compatibility X Opportunity for innovation

General Description All future solid waste activities will occur exclusively on the existing permitted 320-acre parcel. The WPWMA could elect to continue leasing to tenants or sell the western and eastern properties. Processing and Recycling Operations Core processing and recycling operations (MRF, C&D and composting) will occur on the northern portion of the existing property. Systems will be sized to accommodate anticipated material growth rates over the next 25 years. Maintaining relatively close and compact proximity of these operations to each other is intended to initially yield increased operational efficiencies and reduce operating costs. Flexibility to further expand or modify these operations in the future may be hampered by lack of available space between operations. Landfill Operations Modules 1, 2, 10 and 11 (closed, unlined modules) will be immediately excavated and relocated to a lined module to facilitate expansion of processing and recycling operations. The space currently allocated for future Modules 8 and 9 will be utilized for processing and recycling operations and no longer available for landfilling. The overall permitted capacity of the landfill will be reduced from ~36.5 million cubic yards to ~17.7 million cubic yards, yielding an estimated remaining landfill life of approximately 30 years. Upon closure, wastes will continue to be received at the facility, processed for diversion, and the residuals transferred via long-haul trucks to a third-party landfill. Potential local options include Recology’s Ostrom Road Landfill, Sacramento County’s Kiefer Landfill, and Yolo County’s Central Landfill. Compatible Operations and Opportunities for Innovation Space for compatible operations, emerging technology pilot studies and collaboration with universities is not included in this concept. The WPWMA could potentially pursue a separate project in the future to permit the western and eastern properties for such uses. Enhanced Compatibility Facility odors could be reduced by utilizing ASP composting technologies and earlier closure of the landfill, although opportunities to employ new odor-reducing waste processing technologies may be more limited (compared to Concepts 1 and 2) due to lack of available space

30

ATTACHMENT A

PLAN CONCEPT 1 LANDFILL EAST

Ability to Meet Project Goals Increase recycling rates X Maintain local control X Regulatory compliance X Provide long-term recycling capacity X Provide long-term disposal capacity X Enhance compatibility X Opportunity for innovation X

General Description The majority of the 158-acre eastern property will be reserved for future landfill capacity. MRF and C&D operations will remain proximate to each other on the existing 320-acre property. Composting and other organics management will occur on the 480-acre western property. Portions of the western property will be reserved for compatible third-party operations. Processing and Recycling Operations Systems will be sized to accommodate anticipated material growth rates over the next 25 years. Placement on the western property provides additional space specifically allowing for expansion of composting operations as necessitated by current and anticipated future organics regulations. Landfill Operations Future filling operations could occur on the eastern property. Modules 1, 2, 10 and 11 (closed, unlined modules) will be excavated and relocated to a lined module to facilitate expansion of processing, recycling operations and additional landfill space if necessary. Excavation and relocation can be phased as needed or as finances allow. The space currently allocated for future Module 9 will be utilized for processing and recycling operations and no longer available for landfilling. Landfill capacity will increase from ~36.5 million cubic yards to ~75.8 million cubic yards, yielding an estimated remaining landfill life of approximately 90 years. Compatible Operations and Opportunities for Innovation A significant portion of the western property will be available for compatible operations, emerging technology pilot studies and collaboration with universities. Doing so will serve to increase the recovery and marketability of materials and produce alternative fuels and energy. Enhanced Compatibility Concept 1 provides the WPWMA the greatest opportunity to employ new odor-reducing waste processing technologies such as ASP composting. Landfill odors could persist for a longer period compared to Concepts 0 and 2 due to a longer projected remaining life.

31

ATTACHMENT A

PLAN CONCEPT 2 LANDFILL WEST

Ability to Meet Project Goals Increase recycling rates X Maintain local control X Regulatory compliance X Provide long-term recycling capacity X Provide long-term disposal capacity X Enhance compatibility X Opportunity for innovation X

General Description Over half of the 480-acre western property will be reserved for future landfill capacity. All non-landfill solid waste activities will occur exclusively on the existing permitted 320-acre parcel. Portions of the eastern property will be reserved for compatible third-party operations and could also include a biological reserve area. Processing and Recycling Operations Systems will be sized to accommodate anticipated material growth rates over the next 25 years. Maintaining relatively close and compact proximity of these operations to each other should initially yield increased operational efficiencies and reduce operating costs. Flexibility to further expand or modify these operations in the future may be hampered by the lack of available, unencumbered space between the individual operations. Landfill Operations Future filling operations could occur on the western property. Modules 1, 2, 10 and 11 (closed, unlined modules) will be immediately excavated and relocated to a lined module to facilitate expansion of processing and recycling operations. The space currently allocated for future Modules 8 and 9 will be utilized for processing and recycling operations and no longer available for landfilling. Landfill capacity will increase from ~36.5 million cubic yards to ~54.3million cubic yards, yielding an estimated remaining landfill life of approximately 70 years. Compatible Operations and Opportunities for Innovation A significant portion of the eastern property will be available for compatible operations, emerging technology pilot studies and collaboration with universities, which could serve to increase recycling rates and produce alternative fuels and energy. Enhanced Compatibility Concept 2 provides the WPWMA some opportunity to employ new odor-reducing waste processing technologies such as ASP composting. Landfill odors could persist for a longer period compared to Concepts due to a longer project remaining life.

32

ATTACHMENT B

MODA Criteria

Criterion Description Performance Measures

Enhances operational compatibility with current and future neighboring land uses

Sensitive Receptors: Optimizes separation of potential odor and nuisance generating elements from existing land uses with potentially sensitive receptors.

Prefer concept with fewest potential (relative) odor and other nuisance effects (e.g. windblown litter or dust from landfill, windblown compost fines) on surrounding land uses with potentially sensitive receptors.

Acres (current or planned) with the following sensitive receptors: residential, commercial, schools, hospitals, daycares, recreational areas within 3 zones (0 – 1.5 miles, 1.5 – 2.5 miles, 2.5 – 4 miles) from center of primary operations (landfill and compost).

Wetland Impacts: Minimizes environmental impacts to wetlands or vernal pools.

Prefer concept that minimizes potential for impacts to documented wetlands, vernal pools and related receptors on the Eastern or Western properties.

Acreage of potential environmental impacts to wetlands or vernal pools that will be impacted on the Eastern or Western properties in two categories (critical and non-critical elements).

Cultural Resource Impacts: Minimizes impacts to areas of cultural significance.

Prefer concept that minimizes potential for impacts to documented historic properties or archeological resources that may require mitigation measures.

Number of identified potential historic or cultural impacts on the Eastern or Western properties in two categories (critical and non- critical elements).

Offsite Vehicle Impacts: Minimizes offsite traffic impacts (air emissions, traffic impacts, wear and tear on roads).

Prefer concept that has the fewest offsite vehicle miles traveled (from MRF to alternative disposal site outside of county and/or outside of state).

Measure based on estimated round trip trucks needed for offsite disposal based on the waste forecast through the years requiring disposal.

Provides capacity to support current and future population development, ensures compliance with expanding regulations, increases diversion, and allows for industrial innovation

Disposal and Diversion Capacity: Addresses disposal and diversion capacity: Provides onsite capacity and expansion area to support current and anticipated compost, C&D, and landfill needs of the current and future population and development.

Prefer concept that provides capacity and area to support current and anticipated diversion and disposal needs of future population and development and ensure compliance with state regulations.

Measure based on years of available landfill disposal capacity

Opportunities for Industrial Innovation: Creates opportunities for industrial innovation and economic growth. Acres reserved for potential compatible manufacturing. Reflecting the potential to create opportunities for industrial innovation and economic growth, including land for growth and availability or readily upgradable utility connections.

Prefer concept that creates opportunities for industrial innovation and economic growth, including available land and available or readily upgradable utility connections necessary for development.

Measure based on acres available for third-party industrial innovation space.

33

ATTACHMENT B

Optimizes onsite operational adjacencies

Traffic and Material Flow: Optimizes onsite traffic and material flow.

Prefer concept that provide access points that improve separation of traffic and safety; onsite traffic circulation patterns that improve separation of public, commercial, and operational traffic and minimize traffic congestion and risk of traffic collisions or other traffic accidents; optimized traffic flow patterns for operational materials transport and reduced wait times and improved customer convenience.

1-5 scale the reflecting degree to which the planned concept improves separation of public, commercial, operational traffic; provides minimal traffic congestion and impacts to risk of traffic collisions or other traffic accidents; optimizes traffic flow patterns for reduced wait times and improved customer convenience; optimizes operational materials transport (time, air emissions).

Flexibility for Future Operations: Provides flexibility for future operations or infrastructure needs.

Prefer concept that provides space between project elements to allow for future operational changes while maintaining proximity to allow for efficient material flow.

1-5 scale reflecting potential for space between project elements to allow for future changes including odor mitigation enhancements or necessary operational changes resulting from fluctuating recycling markets while maintaining sufficient proximity to allow for efficient flow of materials.

Provides a safeguard for future generations by maintaining local control and stable rates

External Financing: Minimizes external financing.

Prefer concept that requires the least amount of external financing.

Total capital cost in first 5 years; reflecting degree that concept may require external financing (for large capital expenditures) in the first 5 years.

34

ATTACHMENT C

MODA Weighting and Ranking

WPWMA Staff and Member Agency Advisory Committee Members

Criteria WPWMA Lincoln Rocklin Roseville Placer County

Sensitive Receptors 16% 17% 10% 21% 15%

Wetland Impacts 4% 2% 2% 2% 5%

Cultural Resource Impacts 3% 2% 2% 2% 7%

Offsite Vehicle Impact 12% 6% 10% 14% 5%

Disposal and Diversion Capacity 16% 22% 21% 17% 18%

Opportunities for Industrial Innovation 12% 12% 10% 11% 11%

Traffic and Material Flow 13% 9% 8% 6% 13%

Flexibility for Future Operations 15% 11% 19% 11% 16%

External Financing 9% 19% 17% 17% 9%

MODA Weighting and Ranking

Additional Modeled Profiles

Criteria Proximate

Stakeholders Odor

Potential Operational

Capacity Financial

Implications

Sensitive Receptors 38% 100% 5% 8%

Wetland Impacts 2% 0% 1% 8%

Cultural Resource Impacts 2% 0% 1% 8%

Offsite Vehicle Impact 4% 0% 3% 8%

Disposal and Diversion Capacity 19% 0% 26% 8%

Opportunities for Industrial Innovation 15% 0% 13% 8%

Traffic and Material Flow 2% 0% 23% 8%

Flexibility for Future Operations 8% 0% 25% 8%

External Financing 11% 0% 3% 38%

35

ATTACHMENT D

Net Present Value Cost Estimates

36