MINUTES OF THE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Subcommittee on Recycling Issues
Sixty-seventh Session
March 24, 1993
The Senate Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Recycling Issues, was called to order by Chairman Ernest E. Adler, at 8:30 a.m., on Wednesday, March 24, 1993, in Room 224 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator Ernest E. Adler, Chairman
Senator Dina Titus, Vice Chairman
Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr.
OTHERS PRESENT:
Verne L. Rosse, Chief, Bureau of Waste Management, Division of
Environmental Protection, Department of Conservation and
Natural Resources
Douglas Miller, Ph.D., Representing the Sierra Club
John D. Madole, Lobbyist, Associated General Contractors of
Northern Nevada
Helen A. Foley, on behalf of Ashley J. Hall, Lobbyist, Auto
Recyclers & Dismantlers of Southern Nevada and the Southern
Nevada Recycling Association
Thomas A. Isola, Vice President, Silver State Disposal Service Inc.
Carl Cahill, Director, Environmental Health Services, Washoe
County Health Department
John Pappageorge, Lobbyist, Silver State Disposal Service Inc., Reno Disposal Service
Ron Hill, Deputy Director, Director's Office, Department of Transportation, State of Nevada
Frank Cassis, Counsel, Lockwood Landfill
Doug Martin, Metzger Engineering
Chairman Adler advised those in attendance that the subject of the day's discussion would be defining the term "recyclable" and the establishment of a funding source for the recycling and disposal of waste tires.
Chairman Adler pointed out these discussions would assist the subcommittee in drafting a bill dealing with the waste tire issue. He then opened the hearing and invited those individuals wishing to present testimony on waste tires to do so.
Verne L. Rosse, Chief, Bureau of Waste Management, Division of Environmental Protection, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, introduced himself to members of the subcommittee.
ASSEMBLY BILL (A.B.) 320
OF THE SIXTY-SIXTH SESSION: Makes various changes regarding reducing, recycling and disposing of solid waste.
Mr. Rosse explained the Division of Environmental Protection (DEP) is in the midst of developing a plan for waste tire disposal in response to A.B. 320 of the Sixty-sixth Session. He continued by saying the DEP is attempting to establish regulations which would keep waste tires out of the state's landfills. Mr. Rosse testified this plan will make suggestions regarding possible uses of waste tires, but stressed the options are limited until the Oxford Energy Facility moves ahead with its program.
In response to a question from Senator Neal, Mr. Rosse explained he is not aware of the current status of the Oxford Energy Facility, but mentioned that he had heard the facility is experiencing financial problems.
Chairman Adler summarized Mr. Rosse's testimony by saying the DEP intends to develop a plan for the recycling and disposal of waste tires, but cannot guarantee there will be a place to dispose of them. Mr. Rosse said the DEP will suggest possible options, but emphasized it will be up to private industry to follow through on the DEP's suggestions.
Senator Neal asked if waste tires are considered a "recyclable." Mr. Rosse said the DEP is suggesting that waste tires be treated as a recyclable. Senator Neal asked what definition the DEP would use in reference to waste tires. Mr. Rosse explained the DEP's focus will be to utilize waste tires as a source of energy or, perhaps, as a road surface material. He mentioned some manufacturers have been known to utilize waste tires for doormats and the soles of sandals. Mr. Rosse stressed there are more waste tires than can possibly be utilized in the manufacture of doormats and sandals.
Senator Neal inquired how waste tires would be used as a road service material. Mr. Rosse explained one use would involve melting down the tires and using them as a liquid binder with asphalt. He said another use would be to shred the tires into small bits, heat and mix this product with asphalt and utilize the mixture as a service material for the state's highways.
Chairman Adler asked if Mr. Rosse knew of a process utilized in Europe involving the pelletization of waste tires, which is then used in a variety of ways. Mr. Rosse explained he is not aware of the process described by the senator, but said he is aware some waste tires are chipped into small pieces and used for heating fuel.
Chairman Adler asked how feasible is the process described by Mr. Rosse in which the tires are shredded and mixed with asphalt. Mr. Rosse stated a current federal transportation law requires that each state develop a program utilizing a certain percentage of waste tires as construction material for its highways.
Senator Neal asked Mr. Rosse if he could provide members of the subcommittee with the DEP's current definition of recyclable. Mr. Rosse explained the current definition listed in Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 444A.010 reads:
3. 'Recyclable material' means solid waste that can be processed and returned to the economic mainstream in the form of raw materials or products, as determined by the state environmental commission.
Senator Neal asked Mr. Rosse if the current definition of "recyclable" is not meeting the needs of the state. Mr. Rosse said he felt the definition currently in use is adequate, and wondered what is the recycling industry's problem. He continued by saying the current definition gives the DEP enough flexibility to help recyclers in the state maintain their interests and businesses. Mr. Rosse stressed the DEP does not intend to impede the recycling effort and said it is in the best interests of the citizens of the state to remove recyclables from the solid waste stream.
Chairman Adler asked if Mr. Rosse has any ideas about a possible source of income for recycling waste tires. Mr. Rosse apologized and explained he does not currently have any innovative ideas on the subject. Chairman Adler said the original solid waste bill provided approximately $1 to $1.5 million for the establishment of a pilot program dealing with tires. Mr. Rosse said he does not think this is the correct total of funding for the entire program, which includes grants to community services. Chairman Adler said he remembers the program was supposed to have been shifted over to the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), but this never happened.
Chairman Adler asked Mr. Rosse what would be the total number of waste tires in the State of Nevada per year. Mr. Rosse explained 1.2 million tires is a widely accepted estimate. Chairman Adler asked what the cost per tire would be in a recycling effort. Mr. Rosse replied the Oxford Energy Facility feels the bottom line will be the cost of transporting the tire from the disposal site to the recycling facility. He estimated the cost of transporting waste tires will be in the area of 50 cents per tire.
Chairman Adler asked the NDOT to supply members of the subcommittee with information on the cost of shredding one tire into small enough pieces so that it could be combined with asphalt and used as a road surface material.
Douglas Miller, Ph.D., representing the Sierra Club, said the question of what to do with waste tires had been addressed during the Sixty-sixth Session by adding a $1 charge to every new tire purchase. He continued by saying the $1 fee was to help fund facilities for the recycling and reuse of waste tires. Dr. Miller advised subcommittee members that he feels it would be a very good idea for the legislature to reconsider this issue. He stressed that the $1 new tire fee should be utilized exclusively for the recycling and disposal of waste tires.
Dr. Miller said the more waste disposed of at municipal waste sites, the higher the cost of disposal. In other words, this creates more incentive to recycle. He continued by emphasizing the fact that new tire fees should fund the recycling and disposal of waste tires, and solid waste tipping fees should fund waste management programs. Dr. Miller concluded his testimony by saying it makes absolutely no sense to fund waste management programs with tire fee money.
Senator Neal asked Dr. Miller why it does not make sense to fund waste management programs with tire fee money. Dr. Miller commented A.B. 320 of the Sixty-sixth Session is based upon the concept of creating a fee to assist in the recycling and disposal of waste tires.
Senator Neal asked Dr. Miller if he interprets waste management as the end of a product life. Dr. Miller explained waste management involves the handling of landfills, solid waste management, etc. He continued by saying when a milk carton is disposed of and taken to the landfill, an administrative and regulatory program must be funded to handle the disposal of this item. Dr. Miller said it only makes sense to fund this type of waste management program by increasing disposal costs to the consumer. He said, during the Sixty-sixth Session, enacting solid waste tipping fees received so much opposition that it was decided the new tire fee should fund the entire program.
Dr. Miller stressed the recycling program is amazingly successful and the level of public participation in the recycling effort is much higher than anticipated. He suggested that a possible solution would be to lower the new tire fee from $1 to 75 cents, and increasing the solid waste tipping fee by 25 cents. Dr. Miller explained this would result in a zero net cost to the consumer, and the appropriate funding would be supporting the appropriate program.
Chairman Adler commented that Dr. Miller has recognized the political problems associated with the $1 new tire fee. However, he said, one political problem legislators had to contend with concerned quite a few declarations, approved prior to that session, which restricted new fees and taxes.
Chairman Adler said another major obstacle for the legislators was the fact that the solid waste bill had to be passed out of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources by mid-March. He explained the money generated by the tipping fees requires a fiscal note, which refers the solid waste bill to the Senate Committee on Finance. Chairman Adler stated the committee on finance was not in a position to process a bill of financial impact in such a short time frame. He explained the chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance, Senator William J. Raggio, agreed to allow the solid waste bill to move through the senate without being heard in the finance committee.
Dr. Miller stated he feels the senate, assembly and Governor Miller had taken the only course of action at that time (the Sixty-sixth Session). However, he emphasized there is now time to reconsider the entire issue before the end of this session. He advised members of the subcommittee to vigorously address the issue and fix the problems, otherwise it is bound to return again and again until something is done.
Senator Neal asked Dr. Miller for his recommendations on how the tipping fees could be utilized to do what is not currently being done in the waste management area. Dr. Miller said the solid waste management program in the State of Nevada is being handled fairly well. However, he suggested that household hazardous waste could be better dealt with if additional funding could be provided. He concluded his statements by saying he does not see any major problems in the solid waste area in the State of Nevada.
Senator Neal asked Dr. Miller what portion of the $1 new tire fee is actually funding solid waste management. Dr. Miller explained 100 percent of the tire fee is funding solid waste management. Senator Neal asked if solid waste management was being handled well before funding began to increase as a result of the $1 new tire fee. Dr. Miller explained the answer to this question is fairly complex. He explained the recycling program has placed additional demands upon the solid waste management issue. He continued by saying the process of recycling materials is not free so the administrative costs to solid waste management for recycling has increased. He stressed this is the basis for concerns about solid waste management utilizing money generated by the tire recycling and disposal fee. Dr. Miller stressed the costs for managing the problem of disposing of household garbage should be generated by a tipping fee.
Senator Neal asked Dr. Miller how much time did the legislature have to fix the problems. Dr. Miller explained a lot of programs "run indefinitely and poorly." He suggested the legislature fix the problem as quickly as possible so the programs could begin to operate more efficiently, for a longer period of time.
John D. Madole, Lobbyist, Associated General Contractors of Northern Nevada, introduced himself to members of the subcommittee. He said he shared many of the same concerns voiced earlier by Dr. Miller.
Mr. Madole declared a lot of effort had been put into establishing a $1 new tire fee during the Sixty-sixth Session. He stressed the importance of utilizing the monies collected from this fee as a means of removing used tires from the waste stream and putting them back into productive use (as a road surface material).
Mr. Madole said he felt the March 15 deadline for the solid waste bill had been imposed by those individuals who were opposed to seeing the revenue from the $1 tire fee deposited into the highway fund. He said he is not overly concerned about the deadline, because he is hoping the trailer bill will address his concerns and take care of the details.
Mr. Madole suggested that if the legislature is not interested in taking the current $1 tire fee revenues away from solid waste management, legislators might increase the fee to $2. He continued by explaining this increase would allow $1 to support solid waste management and $1 to support the recycling and disposal of waste tires.
Mr. Madole emphasized a Carson City firm, Carsonite, has put a lot of effort into researching the possible uses of waste tires. He said Carsonite was very disappointed when revenues from the $1 tire fee were routed to solid waste management.
Mr. Madole encouraged the subcommittee to remedy the problems associated with this matter. He concluded his comments by stressing the Associated General Contractors of Northern Nevada feel the $1 tire fee should be utilized exclusively for the recycling and disposal of waste tires.
Chairman Adler mentioned there is a current federal transportation law requiring that each state develop a program utilizing a certain percentage of waste tires as construction material for its highways. He wondered if the NDOT is meeting this federal requirement and what is the NDOT's funding source. Mr. Madole explained he is not speaking for the NDOT but, based upon conversations he had been privy to, he stated 15 percent of the recycling needs would come from the waste tire fund. He stated $1.5 million is not nearly enough to meet all of the NDOT's needs, so matching funds would be utilized to cover all of the recycling costs.
Chairman Adler said he knew Carsonite's research had developed a use for waste tires by incorporating them into sound barriers. Mr. Madole said he feels Carsonite has developed some very innovative uses for waste tires. He is very encouraged that a firm located in the State of Nevada might be able to take advantage of this situation by putting themselves on the leading edge of this technology.
If the legislature redirected the $1 new tire fee to a fund for the express purpose of recycling and disposing waste tires, Senator Neal asked Mr. Madole who would administer this fund. Mr. Madole explained the NDOT would be responsible for administering this fund. Senator Neal asked Mr. Madole to provide further information. Mr. Madole reiterated that he is not representing the NDOT but, based upon conversations he had been privy to in 1991, the NDOT is hoping to augment the approximate $1.5 million with additional funds (federal grant money, etc) in order to recycle tires back into the state's highway projects.
Helen A. Foley introduced herself and stressed she is not representing any particular group, but had been asked to make a brief presentation at the request of Ashley J. Hall. She explained Mr. Hall represents the Auto Recyclers & Dismantlers of Southern Nevada and the Southern Nevada Recycling Association.
Ms. Foley referred to a handout previously provided to subcommittee members listing definitions from the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. She explained these definitions attempt to delineate the difference between "solid waste" and "recycling." Ms. Foley pointed out the term "recycling" means "reuse," and "solid waste" more accurately refers to waste disposed of at landfills.
On behalf of Mr. Hall, Ms. Foley asked members of the subcommittee to ensure the trailer bill incorporates language contained in the previously mentioned handout.
Chairman Adler stated he had spoken earlier with Mr. Hall, who is attending a meeting in Las Vegas and had apologized for missing the subcommittee hearing.
Thomas A. Isola, Vice President, Silver State Disposal Service Incorporated, introduced himself to members of the subcommittee. As a representative of the solid waste industry, Mr. Isola said he hoped to start from the beginning and explain what had happened with tires and recycling. He stated A.B. 320 of the Sixty-sixth Session had originally been designated as a recycling and solid waste bill, because tires are solid waste.
Mr. Isola said the disposal industry is very concerned with the diversification of the solid waste stream. He continued by saying hazardous waste, recyclables, liquid waste, industrial waste and some types of solid waste should be removed from the solid waste stream. In the last 3 years, Mr. Isola asserted the industry has spent millions of dollars in an effort to expand the recycling effort and household hazardous waste collection. He maintained Silver State Disposal is addressing the issue of tires and stated that he had a problem with adding another dollar to the existing $1 new tire fee to fund a program to figure out how best to dispose of and recycle waste tires. He stated the tire industry makes billions of dollars each year and should be responsible for finding a solution for the waste tire problem.
Mr. Isola pointed out a solution to the waste tire problem would be resolved if the economics for that particular market was good. In other words, propose that interested parties develop the technology to dispose of and recycle waste tires. If the return on the investment for research and development is there, the technology would be developed and the problem of waste tires would be solved.
Mr. Isola stated he feels it is pointless to impose another fee on the state's taxpayers to develop a program for just waste tires. He stressed waste tires are just a very minute portion of the solid waste landfill. Prior to the onset of the recycling effort, he said the Las Vegas area had 150 years of landfill space available. He said 4,000 tons of recyclables are being removed from the waste stream each month, extending the life-span of the landfill. Mr. Isola said Silver State Disposal is searching for additional recycling markets every day and, currently, recycles 11 different items. He emphasized two more recyclables would be removed from the waste stream on Earth Day.
Mr. Isola remarked a solution for the tire problem would be found and thought it is inappropriate to place an additional charge on the $1 new tire fee. He believes the criteria set forth in A.B. 320 of the Sixty-sixth Session was apropos, because used tires are a solid waste problem. Mr. Isola said the fee was distributed so that the Clark County Health Department and Washoe County Health Department could impose regulations and enforce the new subtitle deregulations enacted by the United States Congress. He continued by saying these regulations changed the handling of solid waste across the entire country.
Mr. Isola stated if the legislature elected to impose a tipping fee, the end result would amount to a huge tax on every one of the citizens of the State of Nevada. He stressed a tipping fee would increase the garbage bills of every disposal service customer.
Chairman Adler inquired how Silver State Disposal currently handles waste tires. Mr. Isola stated Silver State Disposal is putting waste tires into the landfill, which causes problems when the tires work their way to the surface. However, he disagreed with earlier testimony that the cost of disposing of waste tires is in the area of 50 cents per tire. He emphasized Silver State Disposal's cost for waste tire disposal is approximately $2 per cubic yard (which equates to five garbage cans). Mr. Isola stated Silver State Disposal is planning to cut waste tires into quarters and place heavier construction materials on top to prevent the tires from working their way to the surface.
Mr. Isola said Oxford Energy Facility is proposing to construct a multi-million dollar facility which would transform waste tires into a source of energy. He stated train loads of tires would have to transported from other states, because there are not enough waste tires in the State of Nevada to operate the facility.
Mr. Isola said if the State of Nevada really wants to create an incentive for recycling waste tires, the legislature would enact a law stating "a certain percentage of the road base must be made up of pelletized rubber from waste tires." If such legislation were enacted, the asphalt paving industry would have to purchase pelletized waste tires and add this ingredient to their road base mixtures. Additionally, the solid waste industry might consider pelletizing waste tires and selling them to asphalt manufacturers. Mr. Isola stressed this type of legislation would establish a chain reaction and he does not think it would be necessary to place an additional charge on the $1 new tire fee. He stated he feels the appropriate way to tackle the waste tire problem would be to pass a law stating a percentage of road base materials must contain pelletized rubber from waste tires.
Senator Adler asked Mr. Isola if Silver State Disposal's current cost for waste tire disposal is approximately 25 to 30 cents per tire. Mr. Isola Silver State Disposal's cost for waste tire disposal is approximately $2 per cubic yard (which equates to five garbage cans). He admitted that he really did not know how many tires each garbage can could hold, but emphasized the type of tire would also make quite a difference. Mr. Isola said car tires would be much smaller than a tire off of a piece of large equipment (one tractor tire would equate to one cubic yard).
Mr. Isola testified he feels the waste tire issue is being blown out of proportion and really does not consider waste tires to be such a horrendous problem. He assured members of the committee that recycling is here to stay and asserted the recycling market would evolve if given the opportunity. He said American citizens are becoming more environmentally conscious, so recycling facilities are being constructed to meet the demand. Mr. Isola stated it would be a mistake to attempt to rush the progress being made by charging more taxes and adding more fees.
Senator Neal thought he heard Mr. Isola state that waste tires are still being put in the landfill. Mr. Isola replied this is correct. Senator Neal asked if Silver State Disposal currently has the equipment to pelletize tires in the manner stated Mr. Isola earlier in his testimony. Mr. Isola said Silver State Disposal does not currently have the equipment to recycle tires. However, he stressed it wouldn't take very long at all to acquire the equipment and become operational.
Mr. Isola remarked he is aware of federal legislation which requires that each state establish a program by which a certain percentage of road base construction material contain pelletized waste tires. He explained this type of legislation would create the market, thus demanding that industry respond by acquiring equipment which will pelletize waste tires.
Senator Adler asked how much a machine would cost which could shred, or pelletize, waste tires. Mr. Isola replied he really has no idea what the creation of such a facility would cost. He continued by explaining a rubber tire "chopper" may cost $100,000, while a "shredder" might possibly run into the millions of dollars. He admitted he has absolutely no idea what a "pelletizer" might cost.
Carl Cahill, Director, Environmental Health Services, Washoe County Health Department, introduced himself to members of the committee. He stated he disagreed with earlier testimony indicating that waste was well-managed within the State of Nevada. He insisted the waste industry is barely "hanging on by their fingernails."
SENATE BILL 97: Makes various changes regarding regulation of and funding for management of solid waste.
Mr. Cahill said S.B. 97 had been enacted to focus on the management of solid waste and landfills. He stated the purpose of the bill was to comply with federal laws in the permitting of landfills. Of the approximate $1 to $1.5 million in revenue generated by the new tire fee, Washoe County had received a total of $50,000. He continued by explaining $10,000 would fund a recycling project at Incline Village and the remaining $40,000 would fund a household hazardous waste program.
Mr. Cahill stated a lot of interest has been focused on waste tires. He said the Washoe County Health Department intends to work closely with the disposal industry to "monofill" them into a specific area away from the household disposal site. In other words, while the state is considering possible regulations involving the disposal of waste tires, the industry should put them in a special area of a landfill for removal at a later date. Mr. Cahill admitted this method may increase the cost of disposal for the short term, but makes them available for future use.
Senator Adler questioned Mr. Cahill's position on independent funding. Mr. Cahill stated he is not sure how the new tire fee is going to be used. He said there is currently a market for the tires in the asphalt industry, but certainly not large enough to use all the tires dumped every year.
Senator Adler commented there is a bid preference in the statute for contractors using recyclable products which are of Nevada origin, but apparently that is not working. Mr. Cahill answered he thinks this is a marketplace issue right now.
Senator Neal asked whether "the feds would come in" if the state does nothing about the issue of recycling. Mr. Cahill said he does not believe they would. He stated, "S.B. 97 has been adopted and that was the reason to keep the feds out. If that continues forward unamended we will be successful. I don't think the feds will come in on a simple tire issue."
John Pappageorge, Lobbyist, Silver State Disposal Service Inc., Reno Disposal Service, asked if the subcommittee would be willing to discuss proposed language. Senator Adler stated they would.
Ron Hill, Deputy Director, Director's Office, Department of Transportation, State of Nevada, explained the federal government will require, beginning in 1994, that rubber be used in surfacing in certain proportions. By 1997 the required proportion will be 20 percent.
Senator Adler asked if there are requirements for sound barriers or any of the other innovative technology. Mr. Cahill said right now the mandates are simply in pavements.
Senator Adler wondered if the state has sufficient funding to meet the federal requirements. Mr. Cahill said the state will have to meet those requirements whether there is sufficient funding or not. Other programs may suffer, but the department will comply.
Senator Neal asked where the department is currently obtaining their materials. Mr. Cahill explained for the trial project in Hawthorne the materials were supplied by a manufacturer. Mr. Cahill suspected the tires were obtained from out-of-state.
Senator Adler clarified that if the state were to try to make certain the tires added to the asphalt were Nevada tires, it would be worthwhile to fund a program to grind the tires within the state. Mr. Cahill agreed, saying seven miles of surfacing uses about 43,000 tires.
Mr. Madole admitted:
I guess I'm a little bit confused. I listened to the gentleman from Silver State [Disposal Service, Inc.] say we're disposing of tires. They are just being buried in a landfill. And yet, we're proposing putting this dollar on which would create an incentive to use more of those up, which is what this is all about. Mr. Cahill said a few years from now maybe we'll be mining these things. Why not go ahead and create the incentive to use those, particularly with what Ron Hill said from [N]DOT. It seems to me like what you have just heard made a very strong case for going ahead and adding a dollar that will be used to recycle those tires. I think 43,000 tires used in a 7 mile stretch is a pretty impressive number. Once the tires are buried in Nevada, it probably doesn't matter where they originated; they are ours. We ought to get as many out of there as we can.
Mr. Isola rebutted:
That's exactly what I am talking about. If we proposed a law that says a percentage of the road base has to be 20 percent, 30 percent, 40 percent, 50 percent, whatever you determine is the right number, and if the people that make the road base have to utilize that, then they will go buy the tires. You don't need to have sources of a tax to go pay for that. It will come automatically. Just like a few years ago we talked about glassphalt, about putting glass as an aggregate in the road base. Well, the cost of sand or gravel was cheaper than glass, because the markets for glass went up higher. So, glass wasn't a good commodity to put in the road base because sand was cheaper and glass was still being recycled. If asphalt is demanded by law to be put into road base, and you go back to the industry and they have to go find it, they'll pay for it, and they'll raise the price until it's economically feasible to go recycle tires. You would have made the system work, and not taxed the people to pay for it a different way. You've made the tires pay for themselves.
Senator Adler agreed, except he wondered whether those tires are going to be Nevada tires or not.
Mr. Isola pointed out that even though the federal law says the percentage must be 5 percent by 1994, Nevada does not have to limit the percentage used to 5 percent.
Senator Adler called for a 5 minute break to enable the subcommittee members to read the definition of recyclable materials.
Frank Cassis, Counsel, Lockwood Landfill, stated the first issue the legislature should ask is, "Is there a problem we need to fix?" He said that while looking at the definitions he does not see that the proposed legislation would solve anything. Mr. Cassis said he does see a possibility of creating some serious problems, not only with the regulation of solid waste, particularly with enforcement, but also the concern the industry would have from a legal standpoint as to the integrity of their franchises.
Doug Martin, Metzger Engineering, said he had spoken with someone in Arizona the previous day regarding their tire program. They presently are collecting about $4 million per year in their tire program. To date they have given $2 million to counties to establish tire collection areas at each landfill, and $2 million to a private industry as a collection point to recycle. With the $4 million spent to date Arizona has created stockpiles at each landfill and a 3 million tire stockpile on 40 acres in Mesa, Arizona. The plan for next year's $4 million revenue is to, hopefully, get some actual recycling efforts going.
Senator Adler said that does not sound very appealing for Nevada. He stated Nevada would be providing incentives to use the tires as opposed to stockpiling them.
Mr. Martin stated he brought forward the figures to show it takes a great deal of money even to stockpile the tires. The eventual goal is to construct a tire crumber and create a stockpile of tire crumb to be used by the highway department. Mr. Martin did not know how expensive a tire crumber would be.
Senator Adler stated if there were any more comments he would like them in writing for the meeting the following Thursday. He announced the subject of that meeting will be possible problems with disposal of waste tires. Senator Adler asked that anyone who came up with a "new and imaginative funding source" contact a subcommittee member prior to the next hearing.
There being no further business before the Senate Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Recycling Issues, Chairman Adler adjourned the hearing at 9:40 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Rayanne J. Francis,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Ernest E. Adler, Chairman
Subcommittee on Rycyling Issues
DATE:
??
Senate Committee on Natural Resources
March 24, 1993
Page 1