Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

SB 315: Regulating Waste Management and Recycling in Nevada, Lecture notes of Waste Management

The rationale behind SB 315, a bill aimed at regulating the waste management and recycling industry in Nevada. The bill addresses the monopolistic practices of Apex, the current state of landfills and waste management, and the need for policy changes and increased recycling rates. It also covers the creation of the Nevada Council on Recycling and Materials Management.

Typology: Lecture notes

2021/2022

Uploaded on 09/12/2022

jimihendrix
jimihendrix 🇬🇧

4.3

(15)

247 documents

1 / 12

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Why SB 315?
Apex is a natural monopoly with a large barrier to entry.
It is being used in the C&D waste market, unfairly to the
detriment of competitors.
No statewide policy has been developed for many many years.
Bill creates the Nevada Council on Recycling and Materials
Management to create policy changes.
Current Recycling Goal of 25% has not been touched since
1991.
Mandate of 25% on larger counties would encourage more
local involvement and ensure we are not behind the times
with respect to recycling.
Break-up the commercial waste and commercial recycling
monopolies so that businesses have choice.
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa

Partial preview of the text

Download SB 315: Regulating Waste Management and Recycling in Nevada and more Lecture notes Waste Management in PDF only on Docsity!

Why SB 315?

  • Apex is a natural monopoly with a large barrier to entry.
    • It is being used in the C&D waste market, unfairly to the detriment of competitors.
  • No statewide policy has been developed for many many years.
    • Bill creates the Nevada Council on Recycling and Materials Management to create policy changes.
  • Current Recycling Goal of 25% has not been touched since
  • Mandate of 25% on larger counties would encourage more local involvement and ensure we are not behind the times with respect to recycling.
  • Break-up the commercial waste and commercial recycling monopolies so that businesses have choice.

Landfills and Waste Management

  • EPA enacted regulations in 1991 and went into effect in 1993.
  • The number of landfills fell from 7,900 in 1989 to 2,142 in 2001 ( primarily due to dramatically increased costs)
  • Consolidation ensued: the top four firms controlled only 2.9% of all revenues in 1987; this went up to 48% in 1997.
  • Waste Management, Inc., Allied Waste Industries and Republic Services operate nationally and accounted for 83% of the revenues earned by the top 100 firms in 2001.

Sec. 4

  • Commission would study franchise agreements and provide a 3 rd^ party disinterested recommendation to counties and cities that are negotiating new franchise agreements.
  • Would give advice on what to include and what not to include.
    • For instance, ‘most favored nations clause’
    • R.S. says most franchise agreements are between 1-5 years yet, they have 12-20 year franchise agreements in Las Vegas (not inline with other markets).
  • If counties don’t want to follow the recommendations they have complete autonomy.

Section 4: State Environmental

Commission Reporting

Requirements

  • Republic Services would submit actual cost data to the commission for the collection and transportation costs on a per ton basis.
  • The commission would calculate the effective monthly disposal rate and then publish that rate.
  • For example, Republic Services advertises a bid for a job: for 10 tons to collect, transport and dispose would be $280.
  • If their costs to collect and transport were zero (which they are not), then in that example the commission would calculate the effective rate at $280/10= $28 per ton.
  • For the next 30 days, Apex Landfill (not Republic) would charge that $28 effective rate to businesses who collect, transport and dispose of construction and demolition debris. This a reduced rate from the current tipping fee of $37 per ton being charged to C&D waste haulers.

Section 6

  • Creates the Nevada Council on Recycling and Materials Management.
  • Intent and purpose is to create a working group of stakeholders to work together in forming and crafting policy for the State, Legislature and Local Governments.
  • 7 members, with the Director of State Dep. Of Conservation and N.R. serving as Chair.
  • Policy regarding recycling, waste diversion, etc.

Sec. 13 - 15

  • Sec. 13 creates a recycling mandate of 25%.
    • Pop cap to apply only to Washoe and Clark Counties.
      • Washoe is currently at 31%; whereas Clark County is at 17% (varies)
      • However, now that RS has opened up their award winning recycling center, a 25% diversion rate should be easily met.
      • Commission could fine counties for not reaching a diversion rate of 25%.
      • Goes into effect in 5 years. This gives counties time to comply with this provision.
  • For every 1,000 tons of materials that are recycled versus landfilled 1.5 jobs are created.
  • Section 15 increases the current recycling goal from 25 to 35%.
    • Most counties are hitting the goal.
    • We should keep educating the public of the benefits of recycling so are recycling rates keep increasing.

Current Nevada Law

  • Counties may enter into exclusive franchise waste agreements: Washoe, Clark, Reno, Sparks, Las Vegas, Henderson, North Las Vegas, etc. all have commercial waste franchise agreements.
  • The State has granted the municipalities with this right: this inoculates cities and counties from Sherman Anti-trust Liability.

Cities with Open Markets

  • Most major cities have open, competitive markets with respect to commercial waste and recycling.
  • Houston, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Orlando, LA, New York, Chicago, D.C.
  • Some operate a hybrid system: cities and counties have non- exclusive franchise agreements, whereby multiple waste haulers enter into non-exclusive franchise agreements over certain areas, zones, or services.
  • Some operate an open market: New York and Philadelphia have more than 100 waste haulers competing against each other.
  • Data from waste brokers confirms that Cities with open markets have lower prices than franchised cities of similar size and market conditions.