Difficult to Manage Waste Stream Analysis
Purpose
This analysis evaluates existing programs the District offers for managing restricted wastes and difficult to
manage wastes in the residential sector. In addition, this analysis assesses the need to expand, change, or create
new programs based on need and feasibility.
Definitions
Electronic Waste: Discarded electrical or electronic devices destined for reuse, resale, salvage, recycling, or
disposal.
Household Hazardous Waste (HHW): Leftover household products that contain corrosive, toxic, ignitable, or
reactive ingredients. Products, such as paints, cleaners, oils, batteries, and pesticides, which contain potentially
hazardous ingredients, require special care when you dispose of them.
Scrap Tire: Any unwanted or discarded tire, regardless of size, that has been removed from its original use.
Yard Trimmings: Also referred to as yard waste. Includes any unwanted grass clippings, leaves, brush, or wood
resulting from residential yard maintenance.
Overview of Current District Programs: Scrap Tires
Many communities in Hamilton County face issues with illegal dumping of scrap tires. The City of Cincinnati
estimates they spend about $150,000 per year in tire recycling costs and associated staff time. In 2014, Hamilton
County Public Health and Cincinnati Health Department conducted a combined 176 inspections of open dumps
or nuisance cases where scrap tires were involved. These health departments also inspect businesses managing
scrap tires either annually or every two to three years depending on the classification system and the health
department. Table 1 details each health department’s tire-related open dump inspections and total businesses
managing scrap tires in 2014.
Table 1: Health Department Scrap Tire-Related Oversight
Open dumps with
Businesses managing
tires inspected in 2014
scrap tires
Hamilton County Public Health
19
126
Cincinnati Health Department
157
58
Residents’ options for disposing of tires include:
1. Private outlets (e.g., Tire Discounters) for a fee
2. Curbside pickup in some communities
3. Community tire collection events
Page 1
The District estimates that in 2014 about half of the communities did not provide tire recycling programs (see
Figure 1). Some of these communities report that this service is not needed for their residents because there is
no illegal dumping and residents are unlikely to change their own tires. Other communities do not have the staff
resources to plan and manage such a program.
Residents can recycle their scrap tires with Rumpke,
Figure 1: Scrap Tire Programs in
Tire Discounters, and Walmart Tire & Lube for a fee.
Hamilton County Communities in
The District maintains a list of these outlets on our
2014
website.
The District partners with Ohio EPA and Keep
Cincinnati Beautiful (KCB) to assist communities with
scrap tire collection.
Did not
hold tire
collection,
25
Keep Cincinnati Beautiful Scrap Tire Partnership
Every year the District partners with KCB to hold
scrap tire drop-off events throughout Hamilton
County. The District grants $20,000 to KCB who
coordinates tire collection containers for delivery to
a community site. The communities organize and
carry out the collections.
Held tire
collection,
23
In 2014, this program recycled 70 tons (7,001 tires) and supported:



26 collections in 11 communities
14 collections outside of the City of Cincinnati
12 collections within the City of Cincinnati
These events predominantly focus on residentially collected and dropped off tires, either from individuals or
through community cleanup efforts. Unlike most of the District’s programs, these tire drop-offs are often
community specific and are not open to all Hamilton County residents. Eleven of the 48 communities in the
District accessed this program for their tire drop-off events.
Communities using KCB scrap tire partnership program in 2014 are as follows:




City of Cincinnati
Crosby Township
City of Forest Park
Harrison Township




Village of Lockland
City of Norwood
City of Reading
Springfield Township



Sycamore Township
Symmes Township
Whitewater Township
Community-Provided and Ohio EPA Scrap Tire Recycling
Outside of the partnership with KCB, at least 12 other communities offered tire recycling options in 2014. For
example, the Village of Newtown collected tires curbside for recycling. None of these programs, including the
KCB partnership, ask for a user fee to recycle tires. Because communities promote these events and/or services
Page 2
to their residents and they are not open to all Hamilton County residents, the District does not promote these
tire collections to the general public.
The District received a 2012-2014 Ohio EPA Tire Amnesty grant to conduct tire amnesty collections throughout
the county. In 2014, this grant with the District match funds assisted eight communities recycle 32 tons or 3,200
tires. All events were planned, promoted, and staffed by communities. The District helped coordinate the scrap
tire recycling containers.
Community-provided scrap tire recycling opportunities occurred in the following municipalities: (*Communities
accessed Ohio EPA Tire Amnesty grant in 2014):





Village of Addyston*
Anderson Township*
Colerain Township
Delhi Township*
Village of Elmwood Place*





Village of Indian Hill
Village of Lincoln Heights*
Village of Lockland
Village of Newtown
City of Norwood*



City of St. Bernard*
City of Springdale
Village of Woodlawn*
Comparing to Other Solid Waste Management Districts’ Programs
Butler County holds a tire amnesty collection day each fall for all Butler County residents. In 2014, they collected
84 tons or 8,400 of tires at a cost of $15,451.
Clermont County holds tire amnesty events and has a permanent collection spot at the Clermont County
Engineers for cleanups of larger quantities of illegally dumped tires. Clermont County accesses the Ohio EPA
scrap tire remediation program and the Ohio EPA scrap tire amnesty grant dollars. Clermont County spent about
$32,617 (including grant funds) on tire collections in 2014 and collected 230 tons or 22,990 tires.
Cuyahoga County conducts a scrap tire roundup every September by partnering with local communities to hold
tire collection at their community garages. In 2014, they collected 236 tons of tires (19,016 tires) and spent
$47,124 on the program.
Program costs and tire
tonnages for these selected
SWMD programs are
summarized in Table 2.
Table 2: Comparison of Solid Waste Management District 2014 Tire Programs
Solid Waste District
Tons of Tires Collected
Cost of Tire Program(s)
Butler County
84
$15,451
Clermont County
230
$32,617
Cuyahoga County
236
$47,124
Hamilton County
102
$25,251
Comparison with Reference Year in Current Plan (2009)
Compared to the reference year program for the current plan (2009), the 2014 tire collection program was
larger as shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Scrap Tire Collection Program 2009 vs. 2014
2009
2014
Tires Collected
7,166 tires (72 tons)
10,017 (102 tons)
Scrap Tire Costs
$23,000
$25,251
Page 3
The 2014 scrap tire program was supplemented with Ohio EPA grant funds (~$4,030 in 2014, included in Table 3)
so more events were held. The partnership with KCB for the Scrap Tire Collection Program in 2014 was
conducted similarly to the program in the last plan reference year of 2009. In 2014, the District supplemented
the annual program with an Ohio EPA Scrap Tire Amnesty grant so more events were held and tires collected.
Scrap Tire Gap Analysis and Solutions
Table 4: Strengths and Weaknesses of District Scrap Tire Programs
Strengths
Weaknesses
 Provides collection containers to encourage
 Participating communities may not realize the
cleanup of scrap tire piles.
KCB Partnership is funded by the District since it is
operated by KCB.
 Partnering with KCB and communities
reduces staff time.
 No enforcement of existing laws to prevent illegal
dumping.
 Helps alleviate public health issue.

Community specific; not open to all HC residents.
 Support from communities.
 No reduction in tires collected over the life of
 Saves communities money.
program.
 Cleans up blighted properties.
 Illegal dumping is making current program
 Tires are recycled.
inadequate to deal with larger issue.
1. Improve existing scrap tire fee system. Currently, residents are required to pay an Ohio EPA fee of $1 per
tire when they purchase a new tire. To dispose of a tire at retail tire stores, there is a recycling fee between
$2 and $3 per tire. This cost discourages some residents and tire scrappers from properly recycling the tire
and adds to the significant scrap tire dumping problem seen in Hamilton County and throughout the state of
Ohio.
 The District could work with Ohio EPA and other statewide partners to change the statewide
program to encourage proper recycling of scrap tires and discourage illegal dumping.
2. Improve availability of existing tire drop-offs. Eleven communities held 26 scrap tire collections through the
KCB partnership in 2014.
 Work with the Hamilton County Sheriff Work Detail program to help staff tire amnesty events for
communities lacking staff resources to hold an event.
3. Increase awareness of District sponsored program. Often communities accessing the scrap tire containers
through the KCB program are unaware that the containers are funded through the District.
 The District could start coordinating this program in house.
 KCB could communicate to communities how the program is funded.
4. Decrease illegal dumping of scrap tires.
 The District could work with local health departments and communities to identify chronic scrap tire
dumping areas and provide signage and cameras to deter illegal dumping.
 Work with Cincinnati Police Department and/or Hamilton County Sheriff to enforce scrap tire
transporter regulations.
5. Develop an Environmental Crimes Taskforce.
Page 4
Overview of Current District Programs: Yard Trimmings
In 2012, the District conducted a characterization study of residential waste entering Rumpke Sanitary Landfilli.
Yard trimmings comprised 7.2% of the total waste residents’ landfilled (or approximately 17,411 tons). Figure 2
shows the percent of material that could have
Figure 2: Yard Trimmings Landfilled by Hamilton County
been composted through backyard composting,
residents.
including the portion that was yard trimmings.
Figure #: Hamilton County Residential Waste Landfilled
Community Curbside and Drop-Off
Programs for Yard Trimmings
Soiled Paper,
8.9%
Recyclable, 40.9%
Compostable,
Vegetative Food,
Of the 48 communities in the District, 20 have
22.5%
3.9%
curbside collection of yard trimmings for the
Yard Waste,
7.2%
majority of the year, 12 have seasonal curbside
Trash, 36.6%
collection, and 2 have drop-offs. Fourteen
Wood, 2.4%
communities offer no collection of yard
trimmings. Fall leaves and/or Christmas trees
comprise much of the seasonal collection. Figure 3 gives a breakdown of community yard trimmings programs.
The 14 communities with no yard trimmings
programs are:
Figure 3: Hamilton County Community
Yard Trimmings Programs
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
20
14
12
2
Curbside
Collection
Seasonal
Curbside
Collection
Drop-Off
None
Village of Addyston
Anderson Township
City of Cheviot
Village of Cleves
Colerain Township
Delhi Township
Green Township
Harrison Township
Village of Lincoln Heights
Miami Township
City of Mt. Healthy
Village of North Bend
Springfield Township
Whitewater Township
The District has two programs targeting yard trimmings, both residential in focus. One is the annual Yard
Trimmings Drop-Off Program which began in the early 1990s, and the other is the Get the Dirt on Backyard
Composting seminar series which began in 2012.
Yard Trimmings Drop-Off Program
The District operates three residential drop-offs for yard trimmings via contracts with outside providers. The
sites open in March and close in November, with two days in January for Christmas tree composting. All
Page 5
contractors are required to compost or mulch materials that are dropped off. In 2014, the Yard Trimmings DropOff program is summarized as follows:



Cost $134,565
37,582 households participated
2,642 tons of yard trimmings composted
Figure 4: Households Participating in Yard Trimmings
Drop-Off
45000
40000
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
Figure 4 shows the
participation in the yard
trimmings program from
2010 to 2014. Participation
in the program is contingent
on the weather.
The District intentionally
sited the three Yard
Trimmings Drop-Off sites to
provide convenient access
to residents in the northern,
western, and eastern areas
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
of the county. Host
communities do not provide separate curbside collection of yard trimmings for composting. The sites are
located in Anderson, Green, and Colerain Townships.
The Green Township site served the most
households and received the largest amount
of yard trimmings in 2014. Table 5 breaks
down the tons collected and households
using each of the three locations in 2014.
Table 5: Yard Trimmings Drop-Off Performance by Location
Location
Tons Collected
Households
Anderson
973
11,517
Colerain
320
3,045
Green
1,348
23,020
The District does not assess user fees for participating in the Yard Trimmings Drop-Off program. Program
promotion included the following components:






Direct mail postcard sent to a 6,425 households
Email sent to about 4,400 residents at opening and closing
Press releases and newspaper columns
Community-level promotion (e.g., websites, newsletters)
District website
Social media
Comparing to other SWMD programs:
The only similarly-sized Ohio solid waste district that offers a program comparable to Hamilton County’s Yard
Trimmings program is the Montgomery County Solid Waste Management District. In 2014, Montgomery
County’s yard trimmings drop-off collected 5,993 tons at a cost of approximately $130,641 ($92,641 for
contracted recycling and $38,000 for a part-time employee monitoring the drop-off site). Montgomery County
Page 6
pays an employee full time between March and September and part-time the other 5 months of the year to
manage the site. This cost is estimated to be about $38,000 per year. In 2014, Montgomery County’s program
cost about $21.80 per ton if staff costs are included, whereas Hamilton County’s program cost $50.85 per ton.
The large cost difference between the programs could be the result of Hamilton County’s program offering three
drop-off locations while Montgomery County offers one.
Table 6: Comparison of Solid Waste Management District Yard Trimmings Programs
Solid Waste District
Tons Collected in 2014
Cost in 2014
Hamilton County
Montgomery County
2,642
5,993
$134,565
~$130,641
Comparison with Reference Year in Current Plan (2009)
The District conducts the Yard Trimmings Drop-Off program much the same as in 2009, with all the same
locations and similar levels of promotion. The amount of material collected at the site is largely dependent on
weather. One contractor estimated cubic yards in 2009 but weighed the material in 2014. In the fall of 2008,
Hamilton County experienced a very serious wind storm leading to many residents dropping off fallen trees and
large amounts of other yard trimmings to the site in 2009. The City of Cincinnati also temporarily eliminated
separate yard trimmings pick up in August of 2009
resulting in more tons collected in 2009.
Table 7: Yard Trimmings Program 2009 vs. 2014
2009
2014
One difference between 2009 and 2014 is that the
Tons Collected
4,431
2,642
District now calls the program the Yard Trimmings DropHouseholds
33,230
37,582
Off instead of the Yard Waste Drop-Off. Because
Costs
$211,359
$134,565
residents usually associate the term “waste” as material
with no value that should be landfilled, the District chose to use the term “yard trimmings” to better describe
the nature of the program.
Table 8: Strengths and Weaknesses of Yard Trimmings Drop-Off Program
Strengths
Weaknesses
 Drop-offs located in communities that do not have  High cost.
access to curbside yard trimmings collection.
 Transporting yard trimmings to composting sites
 Effective in diverting material from landfill.
can be a barrier and require multiple trips.
 Fulfills need in community.
 Sites may not be in most populated areas.
 Creates jobs and feedstock for commercial
 Residents may not identify as a District program.
products.
Backyard Composting Seminar and Composting Blog
The District conducts an annual seminar series titled “Get the Dirt on Backyard Composting” to promote
residential backyard composting of yard trimmings and food scraps. When residents compost material in their
backyards, local governments have no energy or other costs associated with the transportation and composting
of the material. Residents are able to use that material to improve soil in their lawns and gardens.
In 2014, 557 residents attended the one-hour seminar, which the District held in 13 locations throughout the
county.
Page 7
The District also writes a composting blog to encourage residents to compost yard trimmings in their backyards.
In 2014, the blog received 73,645 page views.
Yard Trimmings Incentive Program
In the 2012-2027 Hamilton County Solid Waste Management Plan Update, the District included a new program
similar to the Residential Recycling Incentive (RRI) grant to give communities funds based on the tons of yard
trimmings the community diverts from the landfill. This program was developed but the Plan Update stipulates
that grant dollars would only be available if revenues from the prior year exceed projections. This program has
not been implemented given District revenue reductions.
Yard Trimmings Gap Analysis and Solutions
1. Encourage communities to maintain or adopt curbside collection of yard trimmings. Use of the three
yard trimmings drop-off sites is limited to those residents with vehicles large enough to transport
materials, whereas curbside collection receives a much higher participation.
 Include yard trimmings into the Residential Recycling Incentive (RRI) grant program. Allowing
communities to count the yard trimmings toward the RRI would give communities operating yard
trimmings programs financial incentive to maintain these programs. This would also mean the RRI
would shift from a recycling rate to a diversion rate.
 Shift funding away from the yard trimmings drop-off sites and to communities to operate yard
trimmings program on the community level.
 Create a program for communities to drop off yard trimmings at sites paid for by the District. This
program would be separate from the residential yard trimmings drop-off program.
2. Decrease cost of Yard Trimmings Drop-Off program.
 Condense the yard trimmings sites to one central site similar to Montgomery County.
 Reduce the hours or number of days the drop-offs are open.
 Reduce the number of sites to two. Most likely the easiest site to eliminate would be the Colerain
location since it receives the fewest number of households using the site and the cost per ton at the
Colerain site is higher than the other two sites.
Page 8
Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)
In the 2012 waste characterization study at Rumpke Sanitary Landfill, household hazardous waste (HHW)
comprised 0.3% of the residential waste landfilled.i Although a small percentage, this equates to about 716 tons
of automotive fluids, non-latex paint, lead-acid batteries, and other HHW in 2014.
HHW Drop-Off Program
Historically, the District has offered a variety of programs to help residents recycle or dispose of HHW. These
range from one-day events to promoting permanent outlets to holding a semi-permanent program. Table 9
gives an overview of the results of the one-day events and the semi-permanent program by year. In 1998, 1999,
2001, and 2002, the District did not hold an event but promoted the other permanent outlets.
In 2014, the District issued a Request for Proposals (RFPs) for the semi-permanent program as outlined in our
last Solid Waste Management Plan; however, no useable bids were received. The District then issued a RFP for a
one-day event and conducted a one-day collection event in the fall of 2014.
Table 9: HHW Results and Costs for One-Day Events and the Semi-Permanent Program
Year
Participants
Waste Recovered
(tons)
Cost
No. of
Events
Cost/Event
Cost/Ton
12
4
5
2
4
1
$59,698
$141,273
$88,028
$52,587
$109,644
$94,300
$2,341
$1,093
$1,031
$1,156
$821
$1,654
---------------
$504
$512
$437
$901
$413
$438
$361
One-Day events
1995
1996
1997
2000
2003
2014
7,421
6,499
4,854
1,340
8,220
1,597
306
517
427
91
534
57
$716,377
$565,091
$440,140
$105,173
$438,574
$94,300
Semi-Permanent Program**
2007
9,288
525
$264,480
--2008
10,511
585
$299,621
--2009
9,127
594
$259,635
--2010*
4,096
132
$118,987
--2011
4,044
226
$93,341
--2012
5,869
299
$131,054
--2013
5,727
341
$123,131
--*Latex paint was not accepted in 2010. **2004-2006 programs not listed.
As seen in Table 9, the year of highest participation in an HHW program was 2008 with 10,511 participants. This
represents about 3.20% of the households in Hamilton County. In 2014, 1,600 households participated
representing about 0.49% of the households in Hamilton County. Nationally, HHW events only reach 1% to 2%
of the population.
If the vast majority of households are not using the District program, they likely fall into at least one of four
categories:
Page 9




They find alternative recycling or disposal outlets.
They dispose of HHW in the trash or down the drain.
They store the material in their homes.
They use up or never purchase hazardous household products.
Figure 5: Breakdown of HHW Collected in
2014
Mercury,
Metal Halides,
Bulbs, etc.
2%
Misc. Cylinders
3%
Other Gasoline,
4% Kerosene,
Figure 5 gives a breakdown of the
material collected from the 2014
one-day event. Paints and paintrelated materials consistently rank
as the largest category of materials
received.
The District has never assessed a
user fee for this program. In early
2015, the District conducted an
online survey to determine if
residents would be willing to pay a
Pesticides and
Poisons
user fee of $10, $15, or $20. Just
25%
over 70% of 1,745 respondents
Paints and
said they would be willing to pay a
Paint Related
user fee with the most preferred
Material
fee being $10. However, many of
39%
Batteries
the residents surveyed added
Roof
7%
Tar/Driveway
comments suggesting that both
Sealer
the District’s and Hamilton
10%
County’s image would be
compromised by charging a user
fee. Because a $10 fee would have
only raised $16,000 in 2014 and not nearly covered the full cost of the program ($94,300), the District chose to
not consider a user fee in 2015.
Solvents,
Thinners
10%
The District promoted the HHW program in 2014 via following techniques:








Direct mail postcard sent to 21,547 households
Email sent to 7,570 residents
Press releases and editorials
Community-level promotion (e.g., websites, newsletters)
Promotion on District website
Flyers at libraries and outreach events
Mention on yard trimmings flyer
Social media
The 2014 HHW program cost $58.94 per household. If just 10% of the households in Hamilton County
participated, the cost could run nearly $2 million. An alternative program would have to be devised to allow for
greater participation.
Page 10
Comparison to other Solid Waste District’s Programs
The only solid waste district neighboring Hamilton County that conducts a HHW program is Butler County. They
operate a semi-permanent drop-off similar to that which Hamilton County held from 2004 to 2013. Warren
County does not offer a HHW program to their residents and Adams-Clermont County offers a voucher that is
rarely redeemed by residents.
Cuyahoga County partners with 59 communities in their District to offer local, more frequent, collection events
for disposal of HHW. This is possible because many of the communities in Cuyahoga have the staff, facilities, and
equipment to conduct these events. Cuyahoga then covers the cost of recycling and disposal of the HHW.
Cuyahoga County does not accept latex paint in their HHW program.
Montgomery County collects HHW from residents two days per week all year round at their transfer facility. The
collection, recycling, and disposal are contracted to a hazardous waste company. In 2014, Montgomery County
accepted latex paint at this drop-off location.
Table 10: Comparison of Solid Waste Management District HHW Program Costs and Tons
Solid Waste District
Tons Collected in 2014
Cost in 2014
Hamilton County
Butler County
Cuyahoga County
Montgomery County
57
105
228
349
$94,300
$78,462
$290,330
$270,000
Comparison with Reference Year in Current Plan (2009)
As seen in Table 11, participation in the 2014 oneday event was lower than participation in the
semi-permanent program during the reference
year of the current plan. Similarly, tons collected
and cost decreased between 2009 and 2014.
Table 11: HHW Drop-Off Program 2009 vs. 2014
2009
2014
Tons Collected
594
57
Households
9,127
1,597
Costs
$259,635
$94,300
Table 12: Strengths and Weaknesses of One-Day HHW Drop-Off Event
Strengths
Weaknesses
 Provides outlet for HHW that could be
 High cost per ton disposed compared to MSW.
disposed of improperly otherwise.
 Only available one day per year.
 Clear hierarchy which favors reuse and
 Low percentage of participation by Hamilton
recycling.
County households.
 Site centrally located.
 Many residents are unaware of the program.
 Popular program among communities.
 Public does not understand if a product is
 Helps prevent pollution.
hazardous waste.
 Popular among residents who participate.
 Residents mostly want to use program for
latex paint, which is not a hazardous waste
 Protects waste haulers.
(and is no longer accepted under current
 Reduces risk of dumping into sewer system.
program).
 Requires significant staff time (e.g., work the
event, registrations, web site development,
acquire donations for food, drinks, roll off
boxes )
Page 11
Privately-Provided HHW Recycling and Disposal Options
A large number of outlets exist for residents to safely recycle or dispose of certain types of HHW. Motor oil,
antifreeze, batteries, compact fluorescent lights (CFLs), fire extinguishers, fuel, and propane tanks all have
outlets, typically at low or no cost. One business exists that will accept HHW from residents for a fee. All of these
outlets are listed on the District website (www.hamiltoncountyrecycles.org/index.php?page=recycling-outlets).
HHW Gap Analysis and Solutions
1. Promote HHW reduction. Applying the reduce-reuse-recycle hierarchy to HHW, the District should
encourage reduction of HHW first and foremost before promoting reuse, recycling, and disposal. The
District could conduct more outreach and create more tools to promote smart purchasing of hazardous
products (only buy what you need) and promotion of alternatives to hazardous products that have no
convenient or free disposal outlet (for example, pesticides and fertilizers).
 Spend the program budget promoting HHW reduction and less toxic alternatives to the hazardous
products being purchased. This could include many paid promotion opportunities such as direct
mail, radio, and print advertising.
 Use low- or no-cost promotion techniques such as our website, social media, and email. Solicit
community support on their websites and newsletters. Have signs promoting HHW reduction while
cars are waiting to drop off HHW at our event. Work with retailers to see if they would promote
waste reduction in their stores. Create a blog about HHW similar to the District’s composting blog.
2. Promote Alternative HHW Outlets. Many outlets for certain types of HHW exist (e.g., motor oil, CFL
bulbs, batteries). The District could promote these outlets more heavily instead of conducting a drop-off
program. The District currently promotes these outlets on our website in list form.
 Spend program budget promoting alternative outlets for HHW.
 Use low- or no-cost promotion techniques such as our website, social media, and email. Improve the
promotion on our website by creating an attractive searchable database. Distribute information
identifying alternative outlets at events attended by District staff. Include promotion of alternative
outlets on any HHW promotion.
 Do not accept materials at our HHW events for which free alternative outlets exist. Create an HHW
exchange on Facebook.
 Create an app for mobile phones that would tell people where they can recycle/dispose of a
material. Alternatively, if the District’s website was more mobile friendly this might not be
necessary.
3. Find alternative funding sources and partners for the HHW program. The District could expand the
reach of the HHW program by securing partners or sponsors of the program.
 Reach out to local agencies that could be considered stakeholders in the program to see if they
would be able to help financially support the program. These could include Metropolitan Sewer
District, Hamilton County Storm Water District, and Hamilton County Soil and Water Conservation
District.
 Seek corporate sponsors from the private sector that could be considered stakeholders in the
program. For example, manufacturers of the original products.
Page 12
4. Increase awareness of the HHW disposal issue at the state level. Hamilton County is not the only
District struggling to fund HHW collection and reaching only a small portion of the population. If Ohio
passed producer responsibility legislation requiring companies to create a safe disposal or recycling
outlet if they manufacture hazardous products, then the cost burden of disposal would be on the
manufacturer and the consumer choosing to purchase the product. Similar programs usually require
outlets at the store of purchase making disposal easy and convenient for residents and achieving greater
participation.
Electronic Waste
Residents and businesses in Hamilton County have access to many electronics recycling options. The District
maintains a web page with updated permanent outlets and events as they arise. The District used to hold annual
electronics collection and recycling programs, but ended the programs in January 2014 because the private
sector was fulfilling this need.
Conclusions
During the District’s analysis of the difficult to manage waste streams, two areas arose that seem to require
legislation or cooperation on a statewide level rather than a District level. Both scrap tires and household
hazardous waste could benefit from state-level action. Programs for all of these waste streams are costly and
result in varying levels of success. As seen in Table 13, the Yard Trimmings Drop-off program, although the most
costly, achieves a lower cost per ton and higher participation. Household hazardous waste requires significant
staff time, achieves low participation, and has the highest cost per ton of any of the special waste streams.
Table 13: Results and Costs of Special Waste Stream Collection in 2014
Tons Collected
Cost
Cost per ton
Scrap Tire
102
$25,251
$248
Yard Trimmings Drop-Off Program
2,642
$134,565
$51
Household Hazardous Waste Drop-Off
57
$94,300
$1,654
*Only includes positions funded 100% through solid waste.
Table 14 summarizes some potential District actions to address the gaps identified in this analysis.
Page 13
Staff Hours*
64
197
222
Yard Trimmings
Scrap Tire
1
2
Improve availability of existing
drop-offs
25 communities offer no scrap
tire program
3
Increase awareness of District
sponsored program
Communities are unaware that
this is a District program
4
Decrease illegal dumping of
scrap tires
Illegal scrap tire dumping still
persists
5
Develop an environmental
crimes taskforce
Illegal scrap tire dumping still
persists and little enforcement
currently happening
1
Encourage community collection
of yard trimmings
Many residents do not have
access to vehicles capable of
hauling yard trimmings to drop
off
2
Decrease cost of yard trimmings
drop-off program
Yard trimmings program is
costly
1
Household Hazardous Waste
Table 14. Summary of Potential District Actions to Address Identified Gaps
Infrastructure Improvement
Gap Addressed
District Program
Suggestions
Improve existing scrap tire fee
Illegal scrap tire dumping still
Work with stakeholders on
system
persists
statewide program
Promote HHW reduction
Little focused effort given to
promoting HHW reduction
2
Promote alternative HHW
outlets
Little focused effort given to
promoting alternative outlets
for HHW
3
Find alternative funding sources
or partners for HHW Drop-Off
Program is too costly to sustain
an increase in participation
4
Increase awareness of HHW at
state level
HHW programs are costly and
participation is low
Page 14
Work with Sheriff work detail to
staff events
District take program in house
KCB communicate program
funding to participants
Provide signage and cameras to
deter dumping
Work with law enforcement to
prevent illegal dumping of tires
Help organize and provide
support for taskforce
Include yard trimmings in RRI
Give funds to communities to
support yard trimmings
collection
Provide yard trimmings dropoff for communities
Condense to one location
Reduce hours
Reduce number of sites
Budget funds for HHW
reduction promotion
Promote with low- or no-cost
promotion resources
Budget funds for HHW
alternative outlet promotion
Promote with low- or no-cost
promotion resources
Do not accept HHW with
alternative outlets at District
events
Create a mobile app
Find local agency partners
Find private sector sponsors
Work with state to create
producer responsibility
legislation
Questions for Policy Committee
 Fourteen communities do not provide some type of separate yard trimmings program. Should the
District continue to spend up to $200,000 on the yard trimmings drop-offs?
 Do we need three yard trimmings drop-off sites when yard trimmings are only 7 percent of the material
being landfilled?
 Should the District continue HHW collection program in long term given it only reaches, at most, 3% of
the population?
 Given that .3% of residential waste landfilled is HHW, would District funds be better spent on diverting
material that is a larger percentage of the waste stream?
 Should we concentrate more efforts and paid advertising to promote HHW reduction and alternative
outlets instead of our current HHW drop-off program?
i
See Waste Composition Study Summary of Results. Hamilton County Recycling and Solid Waste District, presented by SCS
Engineers (2012).
Page 15