Page 16 - May/June 2015 Vol. 33 No. 1
P. 16
2025 PLAN By Larry Christley
Tennessee’s 2015-2025 Solid Waste
and Materials Management Plan
The Mobro 4000 started it all. The na- Eight Objectives of the 2025 Plan
tion was horrified to watch the New York
trash barge travel to Belize and back in OBJECTIVE 1 – Establishing Goals and Strengthening Reporting
1987, searching for a landfill that would OBJECTIVE 2 – Increasing Access to and Participation in Recycling
take its cargo. This increased awareness OBJECTIVE 3 – Enhancing Processing and End Markets
of the limits of landfill space prompted OBJECTIVE 4 – Diversion of Organics
a nationwide effort to review solid waste OBJECTIVE 5 – Supporting New Diversion Technology
management practices and create a plan OBJECTIVE 6 – Expanding and Focusing Education and Outreach
for disposal assurance for the future. OBJECTIVE 7 – Planning for Adequate and Environmentally Sound Disposal Capacity
OBJECTIVE 8 – Developing Sustainable Funding Sources
In Tennessee, the Waste Manage-
ment Education and Research Institute Implementation of the State’s plan household hazardous waste facilities,
launched the Barkenbus Study, as it was therefore started on “clean, clear ground,” are in operation in four large cities with
originally called, to review the counties’ and the state government took the lead. another two pending construction. Hub
solid waste systems as well as those in To address public education, the State and spoke technology and infrastructure
other states. This study heavily impacted contracted for the development of the is growing in the state. Tennessee has a
the development and passage of the Solid Pathways to Education toolkit. The State 33 percent reported recycle rate across all
Waste Management Act of 1991 (SWMA) created grants for convenience centers to sectors. In some areas, Tennessee leads the
and created a starting point for munici- replace the green boxes and for scales at Southeast and the nation. Tennessee plays
pal solid waste management planning Class I landfills to promote accurate mea- a leadership role working with EPA and
within the state. The Barkenbus Study surement of wastes going into the landfill. other states in a national measurement
was adopted as the State’s plan to address Local governments developed regional project sharing solid waste data to im-
disposal assurance. It identified nine areas solid waste plans and became solid waste prove planning and policy development.
of action needed to put Tennessee on the planning regions to actualize their plans.
right road for the future, including: Special revenue funds and enterprise PREPARING THE 2025 PLAN
• Planning by local governments funds were instituted to provide sustain-
• Collection provided by counties able funding. In 2007, the State’s Solid Waste Advi-
• Adoption of a 25 percent waste sory Committee commissioned a Waste
As a result of these efforts, 24 years later Reduction Task Force to examine the
reduction goal Tennessee has a different solid waste and materials management topic and to make
• Institution of waste reduction initiatives material management landscape. Counties recommendations for improvement in
• Separation of problem wastes now utilize convenience center collection Tennessee. This task force consisted of 25
• Education of the public or have a higher level of service. Almost all solid waste professionals, environmental
• Provision of technical assistance of the 95 counties now collect one mate- advocates, and county, municipal, and
• Collection of data and research rial for recycling, if not more. Compost- industry representatives. Their facilitated
• Implementation of full cost accounting ing and mulching are present in many discussions on materials management
counties. More than two-thirds of the provided recommendations for consid-
Since then, each of these action areas counties have solid waste directors leading eration by the Tennessee Department of
have been reviewed and implemented their efforts. During these years, TDEC Environment and Conservation (TDEC).
with varying levels of success. has provided more than $325 million in This laid the foundation for the promul-
grants and rebates to local governments to gation of several new rules. The task force
In 1991, recycling and other waste assist in funding infrastructure. also noted that the State’s plan had been
reduction efforts were minimal in Ten- in place for more than 20 years without
nessee. Back then, unmanned county Tennessee now has an intermediate a major revision and suggested that it
collection systems (“green boxes”) were level of waste management infrastructure. should be updated.
the primary rural collection system. This Newer technologies, such as permanent
system was very problematic. Class I land-
fills had few scales to weigh materials, and
some were lacking scales all together. The
counties had little to no ability to take and
process recyclables. There were no plan-
ning efforts, no state grants to support
infrastructure, and no coordinated means
of educating the public. The state literally
had no waste reduction infrastructure.
16 TPW May/June 2015
Tennessee’s 2015-2025 Solid Waste
and Materials Management Plan
The Mobro 4000 started it all. The na- Eight Objectives of the 2025 Plan
tion was horrified to watch the New York
trash barge travel to Belize and back in OBJECTIVE 1 – Establishing Goals and Strengthening Reporting
1987, searching for a landfill that would OBJECTIVE 2 – Increasing Access to and Participation in Recycling
take its cargo. This increased awareness OBJECTIVE 3 – Enhancing Processing and End Markets
of the limits of landfill space prompted OBJECTIVE 4 – Diversion of Organics
a nationwide effort to review solid waste OBJECTIVE 5 – Supporting New Diversion Technology
management practices and create a plan OBJECTIVE 6 – Expanding and Focusing Education and Outreach
for disposal assurance for the future. OBJECTIVE 7 – Planning for Adequate and Environmentally Sound Disposal Capacity
OBJECTIVE 8 – Developing Sustainable Funding Sources
In Tennessee, the Waste Manage-
ment Education and Research Institute Implementation of the State’s plan household hazardous waste facilities,
launched the Barkenbus Study, as it was therefore started on “clean, clear ground,” are in operation in four large cities with
originally called, to review the counties’ and the state government took the lead. another two pending construction. Hub
solid waste systems as well as those in To address public education, the State and spoke technology and infrastructure
other states. This study heavily impacted contracted for the development of the is growing in the state. Tennessee has a
the development and passage of the Solid Pathways to Education toolkit. The State 33 percent reported recycle rate across all
Waste Management Act of 1991 (SWMA) created grants for convenience centers to sectors. In some areas, Tennessee leads the
and created a starting point for munici- replace the green boxes and for scales at Southeast and the nation. Tennessee plays
pal solid waste management planning Class I landfills to promote accurate mea- a leadership role working with EPA and
within the state. The Barkenbus Study surement of wastes going into the landfill. other states in a national measurement
was adopted as the State’s plan to address Local governments developed regional project sharing solid waste data to im-
disposal assurance. It identified nine areas solid waste plans and became solid waste prove planning and policy development.
of action needed to put Tennessee on the planning regions to actualize their plans.
right road for the future, including: Special revenue funds and enterprise PREPARING THE 2025 PLAN
• Planning by local governments funds were instituted to provide sustain-
• Collection provided by counties able funding. In 2007, the State’s Solid Waste Advi-
• Adoption of a 25 percent waste sory Committee commissioned a Waste
As a result of these efforts, 24 years later Reduction Task Force to examine the
reduction goal Tennessee has a different solid waste and materials management topic and to make
• Institution of waste reduction initiatives material management landscape. Counties recommendations for improvement in
• Separation of problem wastes now utilize convenience center collection Tennessee. This task force consisted of 25
• Education of the public or have a higher level of service. Almost all solid waste professionals, environmental
• Provision of technical assistance of the 95 counties now collect one mate- advocates, and county, municipal, and
• Collection of data and research rial for recycling, if not more. Compost- industry representatives. Their facilitated
• Implementation of full cost accounting ing and mulching are present in many discussions on materials management
counties. More than two-thirds of the provided recommendations for consid-
Since then, each of these action areas counties have solid waste directors leading eration by the Tennessee Department of
have been reviewed and implemented their efforts. During these years, TDEC Environment and Conservation (TDEC).
with varying levels of success. has provided more than $325 million in This laid the foundation for the promul-
grants and rebates to local governments to gation of several new rules. The task force
In 1991, recycling and other waste assist in funding infrastructure. also noted that the State’s plan had been
reduction efforts were minimal in Ten- in place for more than 20 years without
nessee. Back then, unmanned county Tennessee now has an intermediate a major revision and suggested that it
collection systems (“green boxes”) were level of waste management infrastructure. should be updated.
the primary rural collection system. This Newer technologies, such as permanent
system was very problematic. Class I land-
fills had few scales to weigh materials, and
some were lacking scales all together. The
counties had little to no ability to take and
process recyclables. There were no plan-
ning efforts, no state grants to support
infrastructure, and no coordinated means
of educating the public. The state literally
had no waste reduction infrastructure.
16 TPW May/June 2015
