OCR Scan (approximately)

This OCR scan may contain automatically generated text as generated using Apache Tika and Tesseract. It may not be correct. No effort has been made to correct any of these scans (so far). These OCR scans are also used in the site's Search feature. Please review the Search Policy for details about the site features. The OCR scan is provided here for reference purposes. It provides searchable text when the underlying document might not. But the scan process may not always work perfectly.

Cumberland Plateau Regional Waste
Management Authority
Regional Solid Waste Management Plan For:
Buchanan County
Dickenson County
Russell County
(PER 9 VAC 20-130-10 ET SEQ)
Submitted to DEQ
February18, 2016
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0 INTRODUCTION.
2.2.6
3.0 DEMOGRAPHIC DATA.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION …
Legislation.
Authority (9 VAC 20-130-20)
Purpose (9 VAC 20-130-40)
Planning Area.
Planning Perio
Critical Definitions (
Status of solid waste management nationally
Waste generation:
‘What is in the waste’
Disposal.
Recycling
Waste reduction and reuse
Highlights from original solid waste plan (1991).
Waste generation projections.
‘System components …
Goals of Original Plan
Long Term Vision for Integrated Waste Management System .
Short-term (interim) vision for Integrated Waste Management System
Twenty-year milestones.
Buchanan County, Virginia …
Location
Population
Geographic condition
Climate.
Transportation.
Infrastructure
Economie Growth
Land Use.
Community Facilities/Activities:
Dickenson Count}
Location
Population
Geographic conditions…
Climate.
Transportation .
Infrastructure / Uti
Economic Growth…
Land Use.
Russell County.
Location…
Population…
Geographic conditions …
Climate.
4 o WASTE GENERATION AND COMPOSITION
4d
42
4.21
4.2.2
43
43.1
43.2
43.3
43.4
43.5
44
5.0 | EXISTING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
‘Transportation.
Infrastructure / Utilities & Serv
Economic Growth
Land Use… .
Community Facilities/Activities
Population Summary…
Existing Conditions (2003)…
Historical Waste Generation (1998 — 2003).
Total Tonnage Recorded at Transfer Stations
Pounds per person per day
Projected Waste Generation Rates Relative to Disposal Needs
Population Growth Rate.
Commercial and industrial growth.
‘Annual change in MSW (residential/commercial) tonnage:
Annual change in total tonnage with population considere«
Projected tonnage:
Waste Composition.
5.1 Collection…
5.1.1 Overview.
5.1.2 Russell County Collection site:
5.2 ‘Transfer Operations
5.2.1 Summary of transfer station information .
5.2.2. Contractual Relationships
5.2.3 Tipping Charges and Fees at transfer station
5.2.4 Materials permitted for acceptance at transfer stations.
5.2.5 Materials not accepted at the transfer stations…
53 Disposal.
53.1 Landfill
5.3.2 Previously operated landfills.
5.3.2.A Previously operated landfills continued.
5.3.3 Household hazardous waste collectior
5.3.4 — Central Archive
54 Recycling
5.4.1 Description of programs
5.4.2 Recycling rates…
5.4.3 Composition of materials recycled …
5.4.4 Volunteer Programs
5.4.5 Recycling Markets
5.4.6 Projected recycling rates
55 Public Education
5.6 Public/Private Partnership.
6.0 BUDGET.
7.0 WASTE MANAGEMENT HEIRARACHY …
TW
72
13
Source reduction
Reuse…
Reeyeling …
ii
74
15
8.0
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
Resource recovery and incineration
Landfilling…
GOALS AND OBJECTIV.
Collections
ES OF PROGRAM…
Transfer… 89
Disposal 90
Recycling 1
Litter Prevention and Control
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
FUNDING AND FINANCING…
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
RECORD KEEPING
iii
Table 1
‘Table 2
Table 3
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10
Table 11
Table 12
‘Table 13
Table 14
Table 15
Table 16
Table 17
Table 18
Table 19
Table 20
Table 21
Table 22
Table 23
Table 24
Table 25
Table 26
Table 27
Table 28
Table 29
Table 30
Table 31
Table 32
Table 33
Table 34
Table 35
Table 36
Table 37
Table 38
Table 39
Table 40
Table 41
Table 42
Table 43
Table 44
Table 45
Table 46
LIST OF TABLES
Key Elements of Existing Solid Waste Program…
USA Waste Generation — Pounds per Person per Day
USA Waste Composition by Material Type
USA Reeyeling and Composting Rates.
USA Source Reductios
‘Tonnage Projections From Original SWMP.
1991 Solid Waste System Components…
Summary of Goals and Action Items…
Proposed Action Long Term Vision
Proposed Action Short Term Vision…
‘Twenty-Year Milestones…
Population - Buchanan County
Population Projections 1980-203!
Population by Age…
Selected Racial Data Estimates by Population and Percentage
Household Income and Benefits…
Unemployment Rates-Buchanan County 200-2014
Commuting Patterns,
Major Employers in Buchanan Count;
County Versus State Data
Employment by Industry — Buchanan Count
Taxable Sales 2000-2014
Population ~ Dickenson County 1990-2014.
Population Projections 1990-2041
Population by Ag
Selected Racial Data by Population and Precentage.
Household Income and Benefits .
Dickenson County Unemployment Rates 2000-201
Commuting Patterns,
Major Employers ~ Dickenson Count:
County Versus State Data
Employment by Industry ~ Dickenson County.
‘Taxable Sales 2000-2014.
Population — Russell County 1990-2014
Population Projections 1990-2040…
Selected Racial Data Estimates by Population and Precentage…
Population by Gender & Age 2000-2010, 2014
Household Income and Benefits
Umployment Rates —Russell County 2000-2014.
Cummuting Patterns,
Major Employers ~ Russell County
County Versus State Data.
Taxable Sales 2000-2014.
Employment by Industry — Russell County
Population Summary 1990-2014
iv
Table 47
Table 48
Table 49
Table 50
Table 51
Table 52
Table 53
Table 54
Table 55
Table 56
Table 57
Table 58
Table 59
Table 60
Table 61
Table 62
Table 63
Table 64
Table 65
Table 66
Table 67
Table 68
Table 69
Table 70
Table 71
Table 72
Table 73
Table 74A
Table 75
Table 76
Table 77
Table 78
Table 79
Table 80
Table 81
Table 82
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
DEQ Form 50-25 Summary 2015
‘Tansfer Station Reporting Data — Buel
‘Transfer Station Reporting Data — Dickenson County 2010-20151
‘Tansfer Station Reporting Data ~ Rusesll County 2010-2015
‘Transfer Station Reporting Data ~ Regional…
Evaluation of Waste Tonnage as Pounds Per Person Per Day Buchanan
County.
Evaluation of Waste Tonnage as Pounds Per Person Per Day Dickenson
County …
Evaluation of Waste Tonnage as Pounds Per Person Pet Day Russell
County… 58
Evaluation of Waste Tonnage as Pounds Per Person Per Day Regional …59
Houschold and Commerical Waste Received at Transfer Stations …60
mated Waste Tonnage 2004-2024 — Buchanan County
Estimated Waste Tonnage 2004-2024 — Dickenson County
Estimated Waste Tonnage 2004-2024 ~ Russell County.
Estimated Waste Tonnage 2004-2024 ~ Regional
Regional Waste Composition by Material Type
Regional Waste Composition by Product Type
Summary of Information of Collections
Russell County Collection Sites Tonnag
Summary of Information on Transfer Stations.
Contractual Relationships
Summary of Authoruty’s Tipping Charg
Summary of Tipping Fees at Transfer Stations
Sumary of Authority Agreements
AEP Industrial Landfill…
Summary of Recycling Programs in the Region.
Locality Recyling Rate …
Recycling Datea by % Materia
Summary of Operation Budgets and Revenues
Summary of Refuse Facilities in Region
Collection System Goals and Action Item:
Tansfer State System Goals and Action Item:
Disposal System Goals and Action Item:
Reeyeling System Goals and Action Items
Projected Micsellaneous Expenditures by Authority 2004-2024
Projected Expenditures for Authority Transfer and Disposal 2000-2024 .96
LIST OF FIGURES
Vicinity Map
Location May
Buchanan County - Permit 218 Location Map …
Dickenson County - Permit 261 Location Map
Russell County - Permit 515 Location Map…
v
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Appendix §
Appendix 6
Appendix 7
Appendix 8
Appendix 9
APPENDICES
Regional Documentation
DEQ Forms 50-25
Summary of Previously Permitted Landfills and Location Maps
DEQ Recycling Reporting Form
Recycling Markets
Sampling of Public Education Materials
Questionnaire and Responses
Authority Meetings: Agendas and Minutes
Resolutions
vii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY,
The following solid waste management plan prepared for the Cumberland Plateau Regional
Waste Management Authority (Authority) is submitted in accordance with 9 VAC 20-130-40 et
seq. ‘The region under the umbrella of the Authority is composed of Buchanan County and the
incorporated town of Grundy, Dickenson County and the incorporated towns of Clinchco,
Clintwood and Haysi, and Russell County and the incorporated towns of Cleveland, Honaker,
and Lebanon. ‘The region was formed in 1991 under the original solid waste management plan
prepared by the Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission in conjunction with
‘Thompson and Litton for the Counties of Buchanan, Dickenson, and Russell. ‘The plan was
dated July 1, 1991. The documentation forming the region is included in Appendix 1.
Since 1991, the region has moved from landfill operations within each County to transfer
operations with disposal outside of the region. In addition, since 1991, a regional authority has
been established. ‘This Authority has the oversight of the plan and control of the transfer
operations, The Authority is responsible for the following activities:
¢ Financing of the transfer stations. The Authority took out $3,000,000 in bonds in 1993 to
cover the estimated cost of the construction of the three stations. These bonds were
refinanced in 2001 leaving the Authority with a $2,356,400 debt. Final payment on this
initial bond was completed on December 1, 2008. In 2009, the Authority reviewed the
conditions of all three facilities and decided to secure a bond for $1.3 million for
rehabilitating the facilities. In 2010 all work was completed for extending the life of the
facilities for fifteen additional years. Final payment on the 2009 Bond was completed in
November 2015.
© Oversight of and provision of funding to the Counties for the operations of the transfer
stations. The localities can chose to provide manpower or to privatize the manpower for
day to day operations. Only Russell County has privatized their operations.
Collecting revenues from the Counties for use of the transfer stations.

Permit compliance.

¢ Negotiating and holding the contract on hauling from the transfer stations to the landfill.
Currently Advanced Disposal) Safe Landfill holds the contract for hauling. CEI is
sub-contracted by Advanced Disposal for hauling services.
© Negotiating and holding the contract on disposal. The Authority currently holds the
contract with Advanced Disposal/Eco Safe Lanfill for disposal at the Blountville, TN
landfill located in Sullivan County Tennessee.


Negotiating and holding the contract for periodic household hazardous waste collection
programs.


The Authority has been actively involved in the promotion of recycling efforts in the
region. In 1995, the Authority encouraged the establishment of County operated
recycling drops off centers. Buchanan, Dickenson and Russell County embraced the
program which still operates today.


‘The counties and some towns are responsible for some or all of the following activities:
Collection services
Recycling activities
Litter control activities including clean-up of open dumps and enforcement of litter laws
Public education
Post closure activities at all closed landfills as required by DEQ.
Both Buchanan and Dickenson Counties completed their PCC termination at the Hoot
Owl Landfill Permit #218 and the Dickenson County Landfill Permit #261, Russell
County has completed a partial PPC termination on Russell County Landfills Permits
258 and #515. Russell County is currently seeking out alternatives to treat their
Leachate rather than pump and haul,
No treatment of any waste as defined in Section 1.6 occurs within the region.
In addition to the daily record keeping, the Region documents its solid waste activities in several
ways:
Annual reports to the Cumberland Plateau Regional Waste Management Authority
prepared by the Executive Director of the Authority
‘Annual reports to the Board of Supervisors of the member Counties based on information
provided by the Authority
Periodic updates to the Authority and Boards by the Executive Director
Annual submittal by March 31 of each year of the Waste Information and Assessment
Report (Form 50-25) to DEQ
Annual submittal by April 30 of each year of the Recycling Rate Report (Form 50-30) to
DEQ
Annual submittal usually by December of each year of the update to the financial
assurance forms to DEQ
All these reports, updates and DEQ submittals as well as all background and permitting
information relative to the transfer stations are kept in the central archive (files) of the
Cumberland Plateau Regional Waste Management Authority located at 224 Clydesway Road,
Lebanon, Virginia, 24266. Information on the landfills is kept at the Counties. The Director of
DEQ or other DEQ representatives receive copies of appropriate information relative to the
Region’s solid waste management program through the following sources:
Direct submittal to DEQ of Forms 50-25 and 50-30 on an annual basis
Permit applications
Permit amendment applications
Updates to the solid waste management plan
General correspondence which may be required from time to time
ES-2
‘The following table summarizes important key elements of the Region’s existing program:
TABLE 1
KEY ELEMENTS
EXISTING SOLID WASTE PROGRAM.
_ ELEMENT. ee )ESCRIPTION Oe oe
Collection Buchanan County — Residential and commercial door-to-door
collection.
o Town of Grundy — Residential and commercial door-to-door
collection.
Dickenson County — Residential and commercial door-to-door
collection.
o Town of Clintwood — Residential and commercial door-to-
door collection.
Russell County — 14 green box sites
o Town of Cleveland - Residential and commercial door-to-door
collection.
© Town of Honaker - Residential and commercial door-to-door
collection,
o Town of Lebanon ~ Residential and commercial door-to-door
collection.
Transfer Buchanan County Transfer Station
o PBR# 106
Opened March 1996
5,000 square feet
Scales — (2) B Tek 10°x70”
Cost $73,412.50
Managed by the Authority and staff by the County
© Tonnage transferred 2015 — 16,426 tons
Dickenson County Transfer Station
© PBR #049
Opened December 1993
5,000 square feet
Scales ~ (2) B Tek 10°70”
Cost - $73,412.50
Managed by the Authority and staffed by the County
‘© Tonnage transferred 2015 ~ 10,049 tons
Russell County Transfer Station
PBR #001
Opened April 1994
7,500 square feet
Scales — (1) B Tek and (1) Meter Toledo 10°x70”
Cost - $73,412.50
Managed by the Authority and staffed by a private contractor
‘Tonnage transferred 2015 — 16,986 tons
00000
00000
°
o00000
ES-3
[ELEMENT |
DESCRIPTION -
Hauling contract with Advanced Disposal and subcontracted with CEI
Trucking, Inc, The contract expires on October 26, 2018.
Permits are held by Authority who owns the buildings and equipment
and holds ownership of the properties in Buchanan and Dickenson.
‘The Authority has a 25 year lease on the property at Russell County.
As of December 1, 2015, the Authority does not have any outstanding
debt. Bond debt was paid off on December I, 2015.
As permit holder, the Authority is responsible for permit compliance.
As owner of the buildings, the Authority is responsible for all
maintenance/repairs and equipment replacement.
Disposal
Contract with Advanced Disposal/Eco Safe, Inc. It expires on
October 26, 2018.
Location: Sullivan County Tennessee approximately 10 miles south of
Bristol
TDEC Permit #SNL 820-000-0282 Ext., Class 1
Total acreage of site — 655 acres
Total acreage available for permitting ~ 255 acres
Liffe remaining ~ 78 years at 675 tons per day (2094).
Recycling
DEQ Recycling Form for region — Recycling rate 2014 = 30%
Buchanan County ~ Currently Buchanan County offers a drop off site
Iocated in the town of Grundy for paper, plastic and cardboard. White
goods collected and recycled, Tires collected, Individual recycling
rate in 2014 of 25.2%.
© Town of Grundy — No formal program but county operates
drop off site in town limits. Shreds leaves, brush, and
Christmas trees for muleh.
Dickenson County ~ Currently Dickenson County offers drop off
location in Clintwood and Haysi. Have one scrap metal dealer in
County who recycles white goods, aluminum, scrap metal, and
abandoned autos. Tires are collected. Individual recycling rate in
2014 of 33.4%.
© Town of Clintwood — no formal program but county operates
drop off site in town limits.
Russell County ~ 7-8 drop off sites; plastic, newspaper, cardboard,
aluminum and oil are collected. White goods and scrap metal
recycled at transfer station. Tires sent off site for recycling.
Individual recycling rate in 2014 of 31.9%.
© Town of Lebanon ~ No formal program.
Since original submittal of this plan on 06/25/04, the Authority has
hired a full time recycling coordinator to work to improve the
programs in the Region
| Treatment
‘The region does not treat any waste per the definition in Section 1.6.
ES-4
During preparation of the plan, the following goals and objectives were developed for the
program. Sce Section 8.0 for a more detailed description of the activities.
Collection - Goals and Objectiv
© Towns and Counties will continue to handle their own collection.

Authority to evaluate the possibility of developing a private contract for collection in the
region.
Town of Lebanon may consider servicing citizens in immediately adjacent areas of
Russell County with door-to-door service if practical.

‘Transfer
‘* Current hauling contract expires on October 26, 2018. Authority has been instructed to
continue in its oversight role and will begin competitive bid process in early 2018,

Repair work was completed in 2010, e.g. floor repairs, door repairs, lighting, new scales,
new scale house, ete. Authority preformed oversight during the repairs. Following
completion of the repairs, the Authority agreed to create a line item in its budget for long
term maintenance and repairs.

Disposal - Goals and Objectives:
Current disposal contract expires on October 26, 2018. Authority has been instructed to
continue in its oversight role and will begin competitive bid process in early 2018.
The Advanced Disposal/Eco Safe waste disposal facility in Sullivan County, Tennessee
has a life expectancy estimated to the year 2094. Thus, prior to the end of the planning
period, the Authority will need to consider alternative disposal locations unless this
facility is expanded
Recycling - Goals and Objectives:
Authority has hired a regional recycling coordinator to work with the Counties, Towns
and the commercial sector. Coordinator is responsible for pursuing markets, assisting
with the establishment of collection programs, developing educational programs, and
expanding the overall interest in recycling in the region.
4 Authority to consider assisting directly with the recycling programs but coordinator will
need to research markets and develop a specifi plan for the Authority to act on
Authority has established a periodic electronic waste collection program.
4 Authority has established a periodic household hazardous waste collection program.
4 The Authority will continue to encourage its localities to increase programs offered and
public participation in annual environmental events,
¢ The Authority will continue to encourage the localities to increase the percentage of
residents that are educated about proper disposal and recycling practices within the
region.
Secure additional competitive state grants to fund additional environmental education
programs.
Continue to expand and increase programs in the schools and community.
ES-5
Litter Prevention and Control
The regional coordinator has been tasked with involvement in regional coordination of
litter prevention and enforcement.
The Authority through the coordinator will seek out alternative funding sources for litter
prevention and clean up.
The Authority through the coordinator will encourage the organization of grassroots
environmental groups to assist in litter prevention and litter control activities. An
example is the already established Keep Southwest Virginia Beautiful.
The Counties will continue to map illegal dump sites and will coordinate clean up as
funding is available.
The Counties will continue to support existing Adopt a Highway and Adopt a Stream
campaigns.
¢ The Counties will continue to provide periodic cleanup days throughout the year to
encourage the collection of bulk items.
The Counties will continue to provide and improve enforcement activities relative to
illegal dumping and littering.
‘Treatment
The Region does not have any plans to incorporate treatment into their solid waste
program,
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Legislation
‘The following solid waste management plan has been prepared in accordance with the Virginia
Waste Management Board’s, Regulations for Solid Waste Management Planning, Amendment 1,
9 VAC 20-130-40 et seq., effective date August 1, 2001.
1.2 Authority (9 VAC 20-130-40)
‘The regulations were promulgated pursuant to Chapter 14 (See.10.1-1400 et seq. and specifically
Sections 10,1-1402, 10.1-1411 and 10.1-1413 of Title 10.1 of the Code of Virginia which
authorized the Virginia Waste Management Board to promulgate and enforce such regulations as
may be necessary to carry out its duties and power, and the intent of the Virginia Waste
Management Act and the federal acts.
1.3 Purpose (9 VAC 20-130-40)
‘The purpose of the regulations as generally stated in 9 VAC 20-130-40 and elsewhere in the
regulations is to:


Establish minimum solid waste management standards and planning requirements for
protection of public health, public safety, the environment, and natural resources
throughout the Commonwealth;


Require the development of a comprehensive and integrated solid waste management
plan that addresses all components of the solid waste hierarchy established by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as embraced by the Commonwealth as
follows:


Source Reduction (most desirable activity)
Reuse
Recycling
Resource Recovery (Wwaste-to-energy)
Incineration

Landfilling (least desirable activity)


Promote local and regional planning that provides for environmentally sound and
compatible solid waste management with the most effective and efficient use of available
resources;

4, Establish procedures and rules for designation of regional boundaries for solid waste
management plans;


Establish state, local government, or regional responsibility for meeting and maintaining
the minimum recycling rates of 25%;


Establish the requirement to withhold permits for failure to comply with the regulations;


Provide a method to request reasonable variance or exemptions from the regulations;
Provide for reporting and assessment of solid waste management in the Commonwealth.
ooeee
en
1.4 — Planning Area
‘The region under the umbrella of the Authority included in this solid waste management plan is
composed of Buchanan County and the incorporated town of Grundy, Dickenson County and the
incorporated towns of Clinchco, Clintwood and Haysi, and Russell County and the incorporated
towns of Cleveland, Honaker and Lebanon, See Figure 1 for a vicinity map indicating the
location of the region within Virginia and Figure 2 for Region Map. The tegion was originally
formed in 1991.
15 Planning Period
‘The planning period for this solid waste management plan is 20 years from 2016 — 2036.
1.6 — Critical Definitions (9 VAC 20-130-40)
It is important that the reader of this solid waste management plan have a clear understanding of
the terms used throughout the report. The following selected definitions are taken directly from
the regulations:
Construction, demolition and debris waste (CDD) — Construction and demolition waste means
solid waste which is produced or generated during construction, remodeling, repair or destruction
of pavements, houses, commercial buildings, or other structures. Construction wastes include,
but are not limited to lumber, wire, sheetrock, broken brick, shingles, glass, pipes, concrete,
paving materials, and metal and plastics if the metal or plastics are a part of the materials of
construction or empty containers for such materials. Paints, coatings, solvents, asbestos, any
liquid, compressed gases or semi-liquids and garbage are not construction wastes. Debris waste
means wastes resulting from land clearing operations.
Household hazardous waste (HHW) ~ means any waste material derived from households
(including single and multiple residences, hotels and motels, bunk houses, ranger stations, crew
quarters, campgrounds, picnic grounds and day-use recreation areas which, except for the fact
that it is derived from a houschold, would otherwise be classified as a hazardous waste in
accordance with 9 VAC 20-60.
Integrated Waste Management Plan ~ means a governmental plan that considers all elements of
waste management during generation, collection, transportation, treatment, storage, disposal, and
litter control and selects the appropriate methods of providing necessary control and services for
effective and efficient management of all wastes. An “integrated waste management plan” must
provide for source reduction, reuse, and recycling within the jurisdiction and the proper funding
and management of waste management programs.
Principle recyclable materials ~ means paper, metal (except automobile bodies), plastic, glass,
yard waste, wood, and textiles. It does not include large diameter tree stumps.
Recycling ~ means the process of separating a given waste material from the waste stream and
processing it so that it may be used again as a raw material for a product, which may or may not
be similar to the original product. Recycling does not include processes that only involve size
reduction,
Reuse ~ means the process of separating a given solid waste material from the waste stream and
using it, without processing or changing its form, other than size reduction, for the same or
another end use.
Source reduction — means any action that reduces or eliminates the generation of waste at the
source, usually within a process. Source reduction measures include process modifications,
feedstock substitutions, improvements in feedstock purity, improvements in housekeeping and
management practices, increases in the efficiency of machinery, and recycling within a process.
Supplemental recyclable material — means waste tires, used oil, used oil filters, used antifreeze,
automobile bodies, construction waste, demolition waste, debris waste, batteries, ash, sludge, or
large diameter tree stumps, or material as may be authorized by the director.
‘Treatment — means any method, technique, or process, including but not limited to incineration,
designed to change the physical, chemical or biological character or composition of any waste to
render it more stable, safer for transport, or more amenable to use, reuse, reclamation or
recovery. Per email from D. Gwinner, DEQ, treatment includes tire shredding but not mulching.
Used or reused material - means a material which is either:


Employed as an ingredient (including use as an intermediate) in a process to make a
product, excepting those materials possessing distinct components that are recovered as
separate end products; or


Employed in a particular function or application as an effective substitute for a
commercial product or natural resource,


2.0 | BACKGROUND INFORMATION
To provide background to the discussions contained in this solid waste management plan, a
discussion of the status of solid waste management nationally and an overview of the key points
of the Region’s original Solid Waste Management Plan dated July 1, 1991 are being provided in
this Section,
2.1 Status of solid waste management nationally
The following information is taken from “Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 2001
Facts and Figures Executive Summary,” produced by the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), EPAS30-S-03-011, dated
October 2003. This report provides data on the national municipal solid waste stream for 1960
through 2001.
It should be noted that as used by the EPA, the term muni il solid waste (MSW) consists of
“everyday” items such as product packaging, grass clippings, furniture, clothing, food scraps,
newspapers, appliances, and batteries. It does not include materials that may also be landfilled
but are not generally considered MSW, such as construction and demolition debris, sludge, and
non-hazardous industrial wastes. Virginia’s definition is similar defining MSW as waste that is
normally composed of residential (household), commercial (businesses other than manufacturing
or construction) and institutional solid waste. However, record keeping of localities may not
segregate the waste materials in a similar way. Thus, when comparing the information in this
section with the data in the solid waste plan, care must be given to the term MSW,
2.1.1 Waste generation
According to the EPA report, the United States generated approximately 88.1 million tons of
MSW in 1960 and approximately 254.1 million tons in 2013. This represents a 260% increase in
the solid waste generated over the 53-year period. At the same time the United States population
increased from 180.0 million persons in 1960 to 316.12 million persons in 2013 or a 158%
increase over the 41-year planning period. Clearly, the increase in tonnage is not just a factor of
population but is also impacted by other factors including the commercial sector. ‘The following
table summarizes the waste generation for 1960 ~ 2013 on a pounds per person per day basis:
TABLE 2
USA WASTE GENERATION (MSW)
1960-2015
POUNDS PER PERSON PER DAY
AS REPORTED BY EPA JUNE 2015
7 [| POUNDS PER
| YEAR | PeRSON PER DAY
[ 1960 24
1970 — 32
[ 1980 - 3.7
[ 1990 : 45 |
45
4.6
47
4.6
4.44
44
44
‘The report noted that residential waste is estimated to be 55% - 65% of the total MSW generated,
and that commercial waste (including institutional wastes, some industrial sites where packaging
is generated and businesses) constitutes between 35% and 45% of the total MSW generated.
2.1.2 What is in the waste?
In evaluating waste generation, the report examined the composition of the waste materials as
discarded before recycling and the amount of the material recovered through recycling programs.
‘The following table summarizes the findings from this report:
TABLE 3
USA WASTE COMPOSITION
BY MATERIAL TYPE
AS SUMMARIZED IN EPA REPORT
2014 DATA
Paper 26.6 49.7
Glass : 44 33
Metals 9.0 88 -
Plastics 12.9 3.5
Rubber, leather, & textiles 9.5 0
Wood 62 29
Yard trimmings 13.3 23.6
Food scraps : 14.9 2.2
Other 3.2 6.0
Based on this information a significant portion of the yard waste, paper and metal wastes are
being recovered while there remains limited recovery of plastics, wood, and food scraps.
2.1.3. Disposal
‘The report tracks the ultimate handling of the wastes generated and indicates that 12.8% of the
waste generated is combusted, 34% of the waste is recovered and that 53% of the waste is
landfilled, In the 2014 report, it noted that the number of landfills has decreased from nearly
7
8,000 in 1988 to 1,858 in 2001 while the average landfill size increased. It further states that,
“At the national level, capacity does not appear to be a problem, although regional dislocation
sometimes occur.”
2.1.4 Reeyeling
According to the report, the United States recycled approximately 5.6 million tons of materials in
1960 and approximately 89 million tons in 2014. This represents a 900% increase in recycling
over the period. In addition, composting of yard trimmings, food scraps, and other MSW
organic material has increased from negligible reported quantities in 1960 to 21.1 million tons in
2014. This does not include back yard composting projects. Thus, in 1960, the recycling rate as
calculated as recyclables over total MSW was 6.4%, and in 2014 is 34% without composting or
29.7% with composting. ‘The following table summarizes the recycling and composting rates for
1960 ~ 2014 on a pounds per person per day (PPPD) basis:
TABLE 5
USA RECYCLING AND COMPOSTING RATES.
1960 ~ 2014
AS REPORTED BY EPA
is Dy |
1960 2 Neg. 2
1970 2 _Neg. 2
[ 1980 A Neg. 4
1990 6 al 7
2000 1.0 3 13
2005 if 4 15
2010 im A 15
2012 il 4 15
2013 i 4 15
2014 11 A 15
2.1.5 Waste reduction and reuse
The following information is taken from the EPA document, “Advancing Sustainable Materials
Management: 2014 Fact Sheet,” and republished November 2016 as cited above. When EPA
established its waste management hierarchy in 1989, it emphasized the importance of reducing
the amount of waste created, reusing whenever possible, and then recycling what is left. When
municipal solid waste is reduced and reused, this is called “source reduction”, meaning that the
material never enters the waste stream. Instead it is managed at the source of generation. Source
reduction includes the design, manufacture, purchase or use of materials, such as products and
packaging, to reduce their amount or toxicity before they enter the MSW waste stream.
Examples of source reduction activities are:
‘* Designing products or packaging to reduce the quantity or the toxicity of the materials
used, or to make them easier to reuse.

Reusing existing products or packaging; for example, refillable bottles, reusable pallets,
and reconditioned barrels and drums.

Lengthening the lives of products so less material is thrown away over time.


Using packaging that reduces the amount of damage or spoilage ofa product.


Managing non-product organic wastes through onsite composting or other alternative
disposal techniques.


‘According to the EPA, the United States prevented more than 55 million tons of MSW from
entering the waste stream using 1990 as the baseline year. ‘The EPA believes that reducing the
amount of yard trimmings is particularly important in reducing the MSW in landfills across the
United States. The following table taken from the EPA indicates the source reduction by major
material categories:
TABLE 6
USA SOURCE REDUCTION BY MAJOR CATEGORY
2014
AS REPORTED BY EPA
Durable goods 54
(c.g. appliances, furniture)
Nondurable goods 93 16.8%
(e.g. newspapers, clothing)
Containers and packaging 15.5 28.1%
(e.g. bottles, boxes) : :
Other MSW 25.0 53%
(e.g. yard trimmings, food scraps) _ -
Total Source Reduction 35.1 100.0%
(1990 baseline year)
Source reduction avoided an increase in the waste stream from 1999 to 2000 of nearly 25
percent. According to EPA, between 2 and 5% of the waste stream is potentially reusable and
reflecting the interest in reuse is the establishment of over 6,000 reuse centers throughout the
country ranging from specialized programs for building materials, to salvage facilities at
landfills, to local/national programs such as Goodwill and Salvation Amy.
2.2 Highlights from original solid waste plan (1991)
The original solid waste management plan for the Cumberland Plateau Region was prepared by
the Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission in conjunction with Thomson and Litton
and was dated July 1, 1991. The following sections provide highlights from the original plan.
2.2.1 Waste generation projections
The following table summarizes the estimated waste tonnages in 1991, the projections during the
original planning period and provides the actual 2003 tonnage data. In 1991, scales did not exist
9
at the landfills so tonnages were estimated from temporary weighing programs, When the
transfer stations were constructed, scales were installed and the 2003 data represents actual
reported values. The original plan stressed that without accurate scale information the projections
could vary considerably.
TABLE 7
TONNAGE PROJECTIONS FROM ORIGINAL SWMP
7 31,200 28,600 : 47,190. 20,472
15,600 15,730 28,600 10,607
35,880 14,300 28,600 22,945
TOTAL 82,680 58,630 104,390 54,024
Projected minimum and maximum Tonnage Taken from Page 18 ofthe original SoTid Waste Management Pan, Waluss in he Plan
‘were reported as tons pr day based on 5.5 day, week,
‘The tonnage as recorded for 2016 is significantly lower than that estimated in the original plan.
While the Counties may have realized a slight decrease in tonnage due to the declining
population, the reduction most likely indicates an over estimation of the tonnage during
preparation of the original study.
10
2.2.2 System components
‘The solid waste management system consisted of the following components in 1991:
TABLE 8
1991 SOLID WASTE SYSTEM COMPONENTS
COMPONENT
"DESCRIPTION.
Buchanan County
Collecti
The County provided door-to-door service to
approximately 7,200 residences and 700 business pick-up
points excluding the Town of Grundy. The Town had its own
nitation service and offered door-to-door collection to its
Disposal: The County landfill, Permit 218, was placed into
operation in 1974 and had an estimated closure date of June
1992. The landfill consisted of approximately 28 acres, which
would require closure under the 1988 regulations. Tires were
collected and shredded prior to placement in the landfill. No
scales existed at the landfill. No tipping fees were charged.
The landfill was operated on a 6-day work week.
Reeyeling: White goods only.
Estimated cost of system:
‘© $122.70 per ton for collection and disposal
© $63.57/year per person
Dickenson County
Collection: The County contracted the collection of solid
waste to M.T.D., Inc, a locally owned and operated private
company. The contract included collection of waste at
County-owned, 6-yard green boxes and waste hauling to the
County owned and operated landfill, In 1991, approximately
44 green box sites existed. Commercial businesses had to
contract directly with the private contractor for collection. The
contractor also collected white goods, scrap metal, tires and
debris. The Town of Clintwood owned and operated its own
sanitation department servicing businesses and residences
within the town limits. Town residences were paying $4.25
per month for service. The Town did not pay a tipping fee at
the landfill, Haysi and Clinchco were served by the County
green boxes.
sal: Disposal of all waste collected was at the
Dickenson County landfill Permit 261, permit date November
14, 1978. The landfill is located on a previously developed
surface mine bench, ‘The property on which the landfill was
situated was leased in 1991 from Clinchfield Coal Company
by the Board of Supervisors. As of 1991, the landfill
consisted of two asbestos waste disposal sites, a sanitary fill
area,_a debris disposal _area_and_a_tire disposal area.
ll
fill activities and
Drseriprion ©
Approximately 11.2 acres had been used foi
of that approximately 8.3 acres would require closure under
the new solid waste regulations, The landfill had an estimated
life expectancy to early 1994. No tipping fees were charged at
the landfill. The landfill was operated on a 5-day work week.
Debris and yard waste: ‘These materials were burned on site
at the landfill. _ |
Recycling: Only scrap metal and white goods were recycled
Estimated cost of system:
© $69.91 per ton for collection and disposal

$56.32 per person per year |
Russell County Collections: The County had an annual lease with Harold
Beasley Disposal Service to provide service to 15 drop-off
centers. The Towns of Cleveland, Honaker and Lebanon
operated their own sanitation services and provided door-to-
door collection to residents and businesses.
Disposal: Disposal of waste collected in the County was at
the County landfill, Permit 515. The landfill had been in
operation since July 20, 1988 and in 1991 approximately 12
acres were active. The landfill is equipped with a single
synthetic liner system, leachate collection system, leachate
storage facilities and groundwater monitoring system. The
landfill was expected to be full by July 1992. A potential 2-
acre expansion area existed with an estimated life of 10 — 15
years, ‘The County was considering the expansion option
seriously. No tipping fees were charged at the landfill. The
landfill was operated on a 6-day work week.
Reeyeling: Scrap metal, tires and white goods__
Estimated cost of system:

© $61.16 per ton for collection and disposal
$17.98 per person per year
¥ Gosis for collection and disposal include the Town and Counties collection costs.
2.23 Goals of Original Plan
Under the original plan, the following goals were identified:
TABLE 9
SUMMARY OF GOALS AND ACTION ITEMS:
ORIGINAL GOAL \CTION ITEM
‘To address solid waste management from a regional ARC Planning Grant late 1991 funded
standpoint, thereby enhancing project economics and _| planning services of Thompson & Litton, Inc.
the environment and public health. Regional solution means reduced tipping fees,
_ minimizing impact on citizens and business.
To view solid waste as a resource, not simply “trash” _| Private sector to investigate markets for
12
ACTION ITEM
"ORIGINAL GOAL
which should be buried and forgotten recyclables “|
To minimize reliance on landfilling as a sole or Recycling to become part of management
principal means of solid waste management. plan
To provide an opportunity for the creation of jobs in | Contracts require that local qualified
the planning area upon implementation of the solid _| personnel be hired as truck drivers, fuel and
| waste management system. parts for trucks be purchased in the CPPDC.
To meet the recycling mandates as set forth by the _| In addendum 7/2/93, CPRWMA to initiate
DWM in the most feasible and practical manner. REP to solicit services of private waste
management firms for recycling
To address the short term and long term needs of the
planning area with respect to solid waste management. _
To provide an update to DWM with respect to ongoing | Completed as part of the addendum to the
and future work necessary to implement a regional —| Waste Management Plan dated August 2,
solid waste system 1993. ;
To file a petition to the DWM for the establishment of | Spring of 1992, SCC issued a charter to the
a regional boundary between the counties of ‘Authority, thereby deeming it to have been
Buchanan, Dickenson, and Russell. lawfully and properly created.
To develop the most cost-effective and All counties have signed User Agreements
environmentally sound solid waste management with the CPRWMA
| system for the planning area.
2.24 Long Term Vision for Integrated Waste Management System ’
‘The three Counties under the original plan envisioned a regional system overseen by a solid
waste authority, The long-term vision included the following activities:
TABLE 10
PROPOSED ACTIVITIES LONG TERM VISION
Collection ach county and town inthe planning area would collect solid waste
and deliver the materials to a transfer station for haulage to the
regional facility, Russell and Dickenson Counties were to evaluate
their collection systems relative to “flow control.”
Transfer Stations The Authority would operate three solid waste transfer stations (one
in each county) for the delivery of solid waste to the regional facility.
These transfer stations would be centrally located to best facilitate
delivery of waste to the regional facility.
Central Processing Solid waste would be delivered to a central processing facility for
Facility recycling purposes. It was envisioned that the system would separate
such materials as ferrous metals, glass, non-ferrous materials, and
plastics. Such a system was considered feasible only from a regional
perspective.
Further Waste ‘Two further waste reduction techniques were being evaluated while
Reduction the original 1991 plan was being prepared. The first was composting
and the second was waste to energy. The evaluation had not been_
13
ACTIVITY
Landfilling
completed.
Residual materials from the central processing facility, which could
not be composted or combusted, and possible ash from the waste-to-
energy facility would be landfilled in a modern, state-of-the-art
landfill. It was estimated that if all the facilities were constructed as
outlined above, the landfill would only need to handle approximately
10% of the waste materials delivered to the landfill.
2.2.5. Short-term (interim) vision for Integrated Waste Management System
The three Counties under the original plan envisioned a regional system overseen by a solid
waste authority. The short-term (interim) vision included the following activities
TABLE 11
PROPOSED ACTIVITIES SHORT TERM VISION
The existing collection sy
Collection
counties would remain in place. _
Landifilling Landfills would continue in each of the counties until completion of
the regional system. Vertical or lateral expansions may have been
needed for Buchanan and Dickenson Counties or interim disposal
| alternatives within the region explored.
2.2.6 Twenty-year milestones
‘The following twenty-year milestones were set in the original plan:
TABLE 12
TWENTY-YEAR MILESTONES
Ste a
L. Transfer Stations (Developmental)
Finalize Waste Management, Ine | August/September 1993
Tn 2013, agreement was
agreement made with Advanced
Disposal, LLC. _|
Rehabilitation — Dickenson Co. _| Opened December 1993 Completed 2010
Rehabilitation — Russell Co. Opened April 1994 Completed 2010
| Rehabilitation — Buchanan Co. _ | Opened March 1996 ‘Completed 2010
‘Commence Operations (Full ‘April 1994 See above.
| Seale)

Transfer Stations (operational)

Procure Equipment Ongoing/As needed Three new loaders were
leased in Jan 2016
Hire Staff September 1993-March 1994 | Authority provides funding
to Counties for operation
14
ITEM”
TIMETABLE”
Develop Operational Procedures
September — November 1993
Negotiate Service Agreements for
utilities
September — December 1993
[3. Recycling Program
Evaluate existing system
performance
‘September — November 1993 |
Using money received from
an ARC grant, the Authority
contracted with TH&P
Environmental Engineering
to complete a report on
recycling in the region, ‘The
report was dated 1996 and
made recommendations for
drop off collection.
Evaluate Alternatives November 1993-February | See above.
1994
| Develop REP February — April 1994 No activit
Evaluate proposals ‘April — June 1994 No activit _|
Consider Privatization Tune — August 1994 No activit
Implementation ‘August 1994- January 1995 | The Authority started to
implement the
recommendations of the
recycling study by
purchasing collection boxes.
However, only Russell
County availed themselves
of the program and still
continues to run it today.
‘The other Counties did not
have funding available to
proceed with recycling.
Hire a Regional Coordinator
Spring 2004
The Authority hired a
regional litter and recycling
coordinator to assist the
member counties with
development and
implementation of recycling
programs.
4, Future Landfilling Alternativ
&
Evaluate potential CPRWMA
Jandfill in Planning Atea
Spring 2012
The Authority and its
member counties did a study
in 2012 that determined that
the cost saving of a transfer
station system veruses a
landfill would not be needed.
Decision on CPRWMA landfill
Spring 2012
Completed 2012
15
[CURRENT STATUS |

Solid Waste Management Plan Amendments

‘Amend plan per DEQ regulations
September 1998
September 2003
September 2008
September 2013
March 2016
Plan being updated in 2016 |
per Amendment 1 of the
regulations.

Future recycling program (Re

evaluation of item #3)
Evaluate recycling program.
July 2017
No activit
Develop additional alternatives
‘Aug-September 2017
No activity
Develop REP
September 2017
No activity
Evaluation of proposals
‘September-November 2017
No activity.
‘Award contract for recycling
January 2018
No activity

Repeat Step #4

3 year increments up to 2021
No activity

Repeat Step #6

5 year increments up to 2026
No activity
‘As the current plan will indicate, consideration of a regional central processing facility and/or a
landfill have been dropped from further consideration and limited recycling activities have been
implemented in the region due to the expense.
16
3.0 DEMOGRAPHIC DATA
3.1 Buchanan County, Virginia
3.1.1 Location
Buchanan County, Virginia is located in the southwestern portion Virginia along the border of
Kentucky, which lies to the west. The county shares a border with West Virginia to the northeast.
This 508 square mile community is bounded by Dickenson County to the southwest, Russell to
the south and Tazewell to the east.
Roanoke is approximately 200 miles east and Richmond, the state capital, is 389 miles east
3.1.2. Population
Grundy, the county seat, functions as the trade center for Buchanan County and for portions of
neighboring counties in Kentucky and West Virginia. According to the 2014 Census Bureau
American Community Survey Estimates, the town had a total population of 1,063. Vansant, a
few miles to the south of Grundy, is the other population center with a total population of 433.
rable 13 Popuaton
Population - Buchanan County, ina Townot Gundy & Vansant COP, Vigna
1990 2008
em aaa
Howat nal Heal
cenus | vear | ropuson | chome | | Popuation| change | popustion| “change
ens] 1980 |
iver | ato | oa
fave | 3t0
toes | 30700
gz | iso | 30300
B | isos | 20700
EB | isse | aas0
too | 28a00
tose | 27300
1299 | 27300
ema] 2000 | 20008 sans oss
on | 26319
too2 | 25088
zoos | 25407
| 20m | 350
B | tom | asase
B | toe | 3962
yeor | 23526
zone | 23020
2o09 | 22060 son sos
Genser] 2010 | more ton] asx] a70| anne
S| aoit | 23aae Yaar] aun) sr] asia
2 2012 23,837 1,081 | -13.31%| 411) -28.27%|
§ | ois | aasss ast] ieoon) 298) 28,9
. 2014 23,106 1.90% 1,063 | _-15.23%| 433 41.78%
‘Source: US Census Bureau & US Census Bureau American Community Survey Estimates
17
‘The entire coal-producing region of southwest Virginia has seen significant population decline
since the mid-1980"s due to dramatic job loss in the coal industry. The weak economy forced
workers to move to find jobs elsewhere. Another factor in the decline is the loss of young adults
leaving the area for education ot employment. Isolation, poor transportation routes and limited
commercial variety make it difficult to attract new residents and new industry.
Population projections from the Virginia Employment Commission show population decreases
for Buchanan County through 2020 of about -3.00% a year. For the next twenty years (2030-
2040) the county is projected to gain population at rates of approximately 0.14%.
In the county, the population is spread out with 19.5% under the age of 19, 5.5% from 20 to 24,
24.5% from 25 to 44, 31.0% from 45 to 64, and 19.4% who are 65 years of age or older. The
median age is 45.3 years.
Table 14
Population Projections - Buchanan County, Virginia
1990-2040
Year [USCensus Bureau] VEC Projections | _% Annual Change By Decade
1990 31,333
2000 26,978 1990-2000 -13.90%|
2010 24,098 2000-2010 -10.67%|
2020 23,383 2010-2020 -2.96%|
2030 23,263 2020-2030 -0.51%|
2040 23,296 2030-2040 0.1496}
Source: Virginia Employment Commission
Table 15
Population by Age - Buchanan Count
Buchanan Couy
hoe 300 2010 2014 Eamets
tao [Fema | 22% | wai | roma | 22% | ato | Fema
Tota population TaaeT | TazaT | Bane | Tae | rave | 9,100 | Ty7e | 1898
Unders youre css | a4 | tare | sor | saa | 1000 | 520 | soo
Stosyeae aca | 74a | sare | seo | ser | tos | seo | 525
1010 14 years ais | ass | tae | oe | 57 | 1100 | or | sve
481019 eae sore | oo | rate | 700 | o2r | tse | om | 515
oto 24 yore sez | ros | tate | 700 | sio | tae | 7m | soe
2510 29 oars aco | eos | s4ao | roe | eso | raze | aor | 0x8
2010.4 youre too | s65 | tate | aoe | sie | toe6 | 740 | coe
351039 yore 206 | soo | sie | coe | rir | tas | 250 | 508
s0t0.44yeurs sar | tz | trae | eos | am | ter | 000 | 735
48049 eure taso | 1099 | te62 | 102 | ase | tee | ore | ote
010 64 yours toae | toe | 2006 | 1302 | see | tesa | ox | oor
5610.9 year as | eze | teu | or | oes | 1950 | 1010 | 040
0064 years vr | ror | axe | sie | eo ora | asa
51069 yoare sos | sao | tase | cco | 009 ma | 834
Toto 14 years sss | a7 | tor | so | oo | i200 | see | ote
751079 years zr | ass | ose | ote | ace | axe | avo | sto
a0 084 are tis | ze fats | tse | ase | aos | 22 | ore
85 and over es | tor | sos _| tos | 200 | ose | 102 | 2s
18
‘According to the US Census American Community Survey of 2014, there were 23,106 people,
9,406 households, and 6,618 families residing in the county, which calculates to a population
density of 48 persons/mi?, There are 11,508 housing units at an average density of 24 units/mi?
‘The racial makeup of the county is 96.1% White, 2.3% Black or African American, and 1.6%
from other races. There were 9,406 households, with the average household consisting of 2.41
persons and the average family size being 2.89 persons.
The median income for a household in the county is $29,678, and the median income for a
family is $39,722. Males have a median earnings of $40,587 versus $18,883 for females. The per
capita income for the county is $18,357 with 24.0% of the population and 20.6% of families
living below the poverty line.
Table 16
Selected Racial Data Estimates By Population and Percentage
Black or
Jurisdiction Population White | Percent | African | Percent | Other | Percent
American
Buchanan County | 23,106 | 22,204 | 96.1% | 532 2.3% 370 1.6%
Table 17
HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND BENEFITS IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS (IN 2014 INFLATION-
ADJUSTED DOLLARS)
Income Buchanan County % of
Group Households Households
Less than $10,000 4,138 12.10%
$10,000 to $14,999 957 10.20%
$18,000 to $24,999 1.997 20.20%
$25,000 to $34,999 4.190 12.70%
$95,000 to $49,999 4465 12.40%
{$50,000 to $74,998 1,328 14.10%
$75,000 to $99,999 916 9.70%
{$100,000 to $149,999 630 6.70%
$150,000 to $199,999, 112 1.20%
$200,000 or more n _ 0.80%
Total 9,406 100.00%
Median Household Income Dollars 29,678
Per Capita Income Dollars 18,357
Poverty all families, 20.60%
Poverty all people 24.00%
19
‘Source: Unites States Bureau American Community Survey Estimates
3.1.3 Geographic conditions
‘The surface of the entire county is rugged and mountainous. Plat lands are rare and valley slopes
are steep so that the entire area is covered with ridges, valleys and streams, Some of the ridges
in the southern section of the county are sufficiently wide for roads and a few houses.
The maximum relief of the county is 2,890 feet, the lowest point being on Levisa Fork at the
Kentucky boundary, where the elevation is 845 feet, and the highest on Big A Mountain, where
the elevation is 3,735 feet. Sandy Ridge, the divide that forms the county boundary on the
southeast, is the natural barrier that separates the county from other parts of Virginia. Another
main divide that forms the boundary between Buchanan County and McDowell County, West
Virginia is called State Line Ridge.
A\ll the drainage of the county is tributary to Big Sandy River through its three main branches
Russell Fork, Levisa Fork, and Tug Fork. Although most streams and creeks contain some water
all year round, none has a very large flow. The topography of Buchanan County limits
development somewhat to the low laying areas along streams and rivers.
Buchanan County lies in the Cumberland Plateau Physiographic Province where formations are
mostly sandstone and shale with mineable coal deposits. The Province, for the most part,
contains weather-resistant sandstone, which accounts for the steep V-shaped mountains.
3.1.4 Climate
Buchanan County lies in the warm temperate region, Latitude, mountainous topography, and
prevailing winds exert considerable influence upon the climate.
‘The area receives an average annual rainfall of 40.95 inches and an average snowfall of 23
inches. ‘The average maximum temperature is 72 degrees, and the average minimum temperature
is 36 degrees for the Cumberland Plateau region, Buchanan County’s average July temperature
is 76 degrees and for January the average temperature is 36 degrees.
‘Thunderstorms and cloudbursts, normally occurring in the summer months, produce heavy
rainfall over sections of the county and runoff is significant. Prevailing winds are westerly at an
ayerage velocity of 8 miles an hour but can reach high speeds during storms.
3.1.5 Transportation
A. Highways
There is no Interstate running through the County but U.S. Route 460 runs through its center
from Richlands (Tazewell County) to the state line in common with Pike County, Kentucky.
Route 460 is a major collector road providing direct access to Grundy, Keen Mountain, Vansant,
and other communities. Route 83 runs east through the center of the county from Haysi
20
(Dickenson County) to McDowell County, West Virginia, Route 460 and Route 83 converge at
Grundy.
Virginia Primary Route 80 provides access to the southwest and northwest corners of the county.
It enters Buchanan County from Honaker in Russell County, enters Davenport, and exits
Buchanan County to Haysi in Dickenson County.
Bo Air
‘The nearest airport is the Mercer County Airport, located 42.3 miles to the north in West
Virginia and is served by U.S. Airways. Raleigh County Memorial Airport is 57.2 miles away
and is also served by U.S. Airways. ‘The Tri-Cities Regional Airport lies 62.4 miles to the
southeast in the Bristol/Johnson City, Tennessce area. It is served by five of the major airlines ot
their regional partners.
General aviation services can be found at Grundy Municipal Airport or at the Tazewell County
Airport.
Cc. Rail
Norfolk Southern provides freight rail service to Buchanan County.
D. Water
The nearest ports are located in Richmond (389 miles) and Norfolk (480 miles).
3.1.6 Infrastructure
A. Electricity
American Electric Power provides power to the County.
B. Natural Gas
Virginia Natural Gas provides natural gas to the County.
Cc Water
Buchanan County Public Service Authority oversees the water supply in the County.
D. Sewage
Buchanan County Public Service Authority oversees the sewage treatment in the County.
3.1.7 Economie Growth
Buchanan County’s unemployment rate hit a high in 1994 at 18.3%. Since that high, the rate has
been falling each year, In early 2004, the unemployment rate was between five and six percent.
Between 2002 and 2004, the number of individuals in the labor force and the number of
21
unemployed declined by approximately the same amount, This could indicate that “discouraged
workers” have stopped looking for work and have permanently left the work force. ‘The high
rates of individuals below the poverty level and on Medicaid also indicate that many are no
longer looking for work.
Table 18
Buchanan County Unemployment Rates 2000 - 2014
Year lLabor Force|__ Employed Unemployed Annual Unemployment Rate
2000} 8,738 8,223) 515) 5.9
2001] 8,881 8,344) 837] 6.005
2002 8,983} 8,344) 639) 7.10%}
2003} 8,838) 8,221 618, 7.005
2004] 8,317] 7,834, 483) 5.8
2005| 8,401) 7,947 454) 5A
2006} 8,419) 7,997, A22 5.00:
2007} 8,657) 8,23! 422) 4.90%,
2008 8,951 8,502} 44 5.00%
2005 9,236} 8,445 78% 8.50%
201( 8,326} 7,497) 829) 10.00%,
2011) 8,474) 7,755} 719) 8.50%
2012! 8,598} 7,819) 779| 9.105
2013} 8,174) 7,286) 888) 10.905
2014} 7,874] 7,058) 816| 10.405
Source: Virginia Employment Commission
Buchanan County sees fewer of its workers leaving the county to work elsewhere than does its
neighbor, Dickenson County. According to the 2014 Census estimates, the worker retention rate
was 50.6%, with 4,168 individuals, (out of a workforce of 8,235) traveling to surrounding
counties to work. The median travel time to work was 33.4 minutes in the year 2014.
22
Table 19
‘Commuting Patterns
People who live and work in the area 3,060
In-Commuters 4,767
Out-Commuters 4,168
Net In-Commuters (In-Commuters minus Out-Commuters) _ 599
Source: U.S, Census Bureau,On The Map Application and LEHO Oriin-Destinatlon Employment Statistics, 2012
Table 20
Major Employers - Buchanan County
[Company Product Employees
Buchanan County School Board | Educational Services 500 to 999 employees
‘Consol Buchanan Mining Co. LLC |Mining (except Oil and Gas) 250 to 499 employees,
Keen Mountain Correctional Institute| Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities 250 to 499 employees
[Dominion Coal Corporation [Mining (except Oil and Gas) 250 to 499 employees:
[Sykes Enterprises Administrative and Support Services 250 to 499 employees
Buchanan General Hospital Hospitals 100 to 249 employees
Rapoca Energy Company Mining (except Oil and Gas) 100 to 249 employees
[County of Buchanan Executive, Legislative, &Other General Government 100 to 249 employees:
Food City Food and Beverage Stores 100 to 249 employees
‘Wal Mart General Merchandise Stores 100 to 249 employees
The poverty rate in Buchanan County is 24% versus 11.5% in Virginia. The per capita income
for the county is only 18,357 versus 33,958 for Virginia. The proportion of county residents over
the age of 25 without a high school diploma is much higher than in Virginia
Table 21
County Versus State Data
Buchanan County
Economic Indicators Buchanan | _ Virginia
Population with Public Health Coverage 51.70%| 24.20%
Poverty Rate 24.00% 11.50%
Per Capita Income 18,357 33,958
Population Aged 16+ in Labor Force 40.80%| 66.70%
Population Aged 25+ w/o High School Diploma] __31.80%| __12.50%|
Source: Unites States Census Bureau American Community Survey Estimat:
Mining jobs are still a significant sector of the employment in Buchanan County. Education
services jobs make up the largest segment of jobs with health care and social services right
behind mining and education services. ‘Taxable sales for Buchanan County have been steadily
23
increasing since 2000 when sales totaled $115,923,478. By 2014, sales were up to
$147,726,232.
‘The whole Cumberland Plateau Region is focused on the development of tourism as one way to
strength the economy and create jobs. Industrial development is very limited in Buchanan
County due to its isolation and the lack of large plots of fairly flat land. Information technology
and health care are two areas that could see growth in the county
Table 22
Employment By Industry
Buchanan County
Category Percentage
Mining 21.66%
Education Services 11.96%
Health Care and Social Assistance 10.74%
Retail Trade 9.83%
Public Administration 9.45%|
Construction 6.13%
Admin, Support, Waste Mtg. Remediation 5.80%|
Transportation and Warehousing 4.24%
Accomodation and Food Services 4.20%
Professional Scientific & Technical Svc 3.42%
Manufacturing 2.67%
Finance and Insurance 2.27%
Wholesale Trade 2.20%
Other Services 2.14%
Manangement of Companies and Interprizes 1.32%
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 0.34%
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting 0.24%
Utilities Confidential
Information Confidential
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Confidential
Source: Virginia Employment Commission
24
Table 23
Taxable Sales

_ 2000-2014
[Year __ Buchanan _

2000 $115,923,478
2001 $114,597,950
2002 $14,720,922
2003 $12,152,118
2004 $16,924,712
2005 $107,211,477
2006 $123,290,187
2007 $127,687,900
2008 $139,948,887
2009 $127,560,716
2010 $125,345,514
2011 $142,304,553
2012 $156,984,874
2013 $148,802,737
2014 $147,726,232
Source: Virginia Department of Taxation
3.1.8 Land Use
AL Residential:
In the coalfields of Virginia, 70% of the land is above a 20 percent slope and 90% is above a 12
percent slope. Much of the county is unsuitable for residential development. Most of the
population density in Buchanan County is centered in the northwest-central area where both
Grundy and Vansant are located. Of the 11,508 housing units in the county, 18% are vacant.
The vacancy rate is 31% for housing in Grundy.
Since the population of the county is expected to continue to decline, there are no future growth
areas for subdivision development. Provision of public services would need to be considered a
priority before concentrated growth could be expected in new areas of the county.
B, Commercial:
Independent shopping establishments offering a variety of retail goods and services are located
throughout the county. The county has one shopping center with 12 retail outlets. Grundy is the
county seat and the commercial area as well with approximately 30 retail establishments. This
25
town was flooded out three times in the 20th century and the town center is being relocated from
the banks of the Levisa Fork River to a site on higher ground.
Future commercial development in the county will depend on an increase in the population, an
increase in jobs or an increase in tourism.
In 2004, the Virginia Coalfield Economic Development Authority approved a $3 million Ioan to
the Buchanan County Industrial Development Authority (IDA) for the construction of the
University of Appalachia School of Pharmacy in Grundy. The University of Appalachia is
projected to have an economic impact of approximately $20 million per year and to create 138
new jobs in Buchanan County. The Appalachian School of Law is also located in Grundy.
Cc Industri:
‘There are a limited number of developed industrial parks in Buchanan County. This is partly due
to the lack of large parcels of suitable land for development and the lack of good transportation
routes. The decision was made to develop an informational park and service sector jobs as a way
to diversify the economy of Buchanan County.
In 2003, the Virginia Coalfield Economic Development Authority granted $1,040,000 to the
Buchanan County Industrial Development Authority (IDA) to equip the Virginia Employment
Commission’s (VEC’s) new customer contact center at the Buchanan Information Park. The
board also approved up to a $2,090,000 loan to the Buchanan County IDA for construction of a
30,000 sq. ft. addition to the Buchanan Information Park facility.
"SITE SPECIFICATIONS - INDUSTRIAL SITES -BUCHANAN COUNTY _
MILESTO | MILESTO
SITENAME | LOCATION | NEAREST | NeaREST4 | {Y2VMNE | CREME
INTERSTATE | LANE HWY J E
Buchanan
Informational Park
State Route 83 | 1-77-70mi_ | Rt. 460-8 mi 38.013, | 4.75 acres
There is a unique opportunity for significant economic development in the coalfield counties
with the plan to build the Coalfields Expressway along the region’s ridge tops. Preliminary
construction plans indicate that as many as 500 acres of new developable land will be created by
the Expressway. With 500 acres of new developable land, the three counties could realize as
many as 4,000 to 6,000 new jobs from the successful marketing of these new sites. With a
standard accepted multiplier of 1.7 for indirect jobs, a total of 6,800 to 10,200 new jobs are
foreseeable for the coal counties of Southwest Virginia.
When construction begins, it is estimated that 1,400 construction jobs will boost the local
regional economy over the expected 10-year lifespan of the road’s construction. Local income
will also be generated by the purchase of supplies, materials, and equipment from local
businesses. In the long-term, tourism will increase as destinations that are now remote become
accessible. For example, currently the Breaks receives over 400,000 visitors a year, but the TVA
estimates that when the Coalfields Expressway is in place, attendance could increase to 1 million
visitors per year.
26
‘The hope is that local colleges and institutions will see their profiles and enrollment figures ris
as more and more people consider higher education a viable alternative. Additionally, technology
and industrial parks will finally be able to recruit to their full potential and existing businesses
will be able to fan out and offer their goods and services to more and more customers.
D. Agricultural:
The amount of land used for farming is decreasing in Buchanan County, Land in farms
decreased 27% from 8,627 acres in1992 to 6,303 acres in 1997, while the average size of farms
increased from 85 acres (1992) to 90 acres (1997). The number of full time farms decreased
58% during the same period from 36 farms in 1992 to 15 farms in 1997,
Crops such as burley tobacco and hay account for nearly 60% of the market value of agricultural
products sold, Beef cattle and livestock sales make up the remaining 40% of the market.
E. Open Space/Recreation:
Nearly all of Buchanan County is covered in trees. Over 90 percent of the county is covered by
hardwood forest growth and about 1% is evergreen forest.
3.1.9 Community Facilities/Activities:
Buchanan County General Hospital, located in Grundy, is a 134-bed hospital that serves the
county,
Public schools in the county include 2 elementary, 4 combined, and 4 high schools. Several
schools are located in Grundy including Mountain Mission School, a private K-12 school. ‘The
town is also home to the Appalachian School of Law and the planned University of Appalachia
School of Pharmacy.
‘The Jefferson National Forest and the Breaks Interstate Park in neighboring Dickenson County
offer extensive outdoor recreation activities.
Sources:
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 and 2014 Census, 1990 Census, Economic Census,
Census of Agriculture
Virginia Economic Development Partners
Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission
Virginia Employment Commission
3.2 Dickenson County
3.2.1 Location
Dickenson County, Virginia is located in Southwestern Virginia on the border of Kentucky.
Dickenson lies in the coal-bearing hills of the Appalachian Plateau. Though rich in natural
resources with abundant coal, natural gas, timber and mineral assets, the economy of the region
is transitioning from natural resources to technology.
27
Dickenson is bounded by Wise County to the southwest, Buchanan County to the northeast and
Russell County to the southeast. Roanoke is approximately 184 miles east and Richmond, the
state capital, is 255 miles east.
3.2.2 Population
Dickenson County, like the other counties in the Cumberland Plateau Planning District, has seen
alternating periods of population growth and decline related to a series of coal-related “booms
and busts”. But since the 1990’s, the region has seen a steady decline in population, Dickenson
County declined -3.00% from 2000-2010 and continues to decline although the rate has slowed,
The Virginia Employment Commission projects that Dickenson County will continue to see
population decreases through 2040 but at rates considerably less than the 3.0% the county saw
over the past decade (2000-2010). Between 2020 and 2030 the decline is projected to level off
so that the population remains rather constant at 15,375.
‘The population centers of the county are the towns of Clincheo (pop. 365), Clintwood (1,448),
and Haysi (408). During the last decade (2000-2010), the population of Clintwood lost -8.7%
remained constant while Haysi gained 167.7% of its small population, Haysi’s population
increase was due mainly to the town being annexed.
28
Table 24
Population - Dickenson County, Vigna Popuation
1990-2014 Town of Clintwood, lnc & Hay, Vina
2 Ginwood Cinckeo ri
Amal annual Wanna
census_| Year | _popuston _|x¢annuatchange| | popustion| Change |Popustion| charge [Poputton} change
census] 1990 175
1991 17,600 041%
s82 17700 osm
1993 17600 “0.56%
g | 190 17.500 “057%
EB | toss 7800 “57.00%
3 1996 17,000 2.30%
1357 16900 “0.59%
1998 16,700 “18%
1999 16,600 “0.60%
Gens} 2000 | s6a05 “123% 154s anal 1280
200% 16200 “0.94%
2002 16334 “0.65%
2003 16080 “0.29%
2 | 200 16079 00%
£ | d00s 16475 osm
S| 00 | ssoza “093%
2007 16033, 00%
oa | 16,76 80%
2009 | 16087 “055%
Geum] 2010 | asm “110% sau 2x7] 4
2 | mn 15,765 030% 1501] 270%] eee] o7.con] 320) 22.69
@ 2012 15,668 0.61% 1,620] 1.63%) 567) -14.86%) 458] 20.52%
2013 15409 “1.40% ses] 329] 472| ao7sx] as] -2.70%
s 2014 15,308 0.91% 1,448] _-7.47%| 365] _-22.66%| 408] _ -2.39%]
Source US Census Bureau & US Census Sura evercan Communy Suvey Estima
Table 25
Population Projections - Dickenson County, Virginia
1990-2040
Year [US Census Bureau| VEC Projections | _% Annual Change By Decade
1990 17,620
2000 16,395, 1990-2000 -6.95%|
2010 15,903 2000-2010 -3.00%|
2020 15,600 2010-2020 -1.90%
2030 15,375 2020-2030 “1.44%
2040 15,193 2030-2040 -1.18%
Source: Virginia Employment Commission
According to the 2014 Census Bureau Estimates, there were 15,308 people, 6,200 households,
and 4,289 families residing in Dickenson County. This calculates to a population density
49.4/mi?. There are 7,548 housing units in the county and 17.9% are vacant.
In the county, the population is spread out with 22.38% under the age of 19, 5.65% from 20 to
24, 12.83% from 25 to 44, 14.73% from 45 to 64, and 8.477% who are 65 years of age or older.
‘The median age is 43.5 years.
29
he racial makeup of the county is 99.% White, 0.4% Black or African American, and 0.6%
from other races. There were 9,406 households, with the average houschold consisting of 2.41
persons and the average family size being 2.89 persons.
Table 26
Population by Age - Buchanan County
Dickenson County
hoo 200 2010 201d Eat
Bath | ato [romata| 25% | wate [roma] 22 | mato [roma
Total population] 16,395] 6017 | 8378 | 15,003] 7,580 | 7,988 | 15,308] 7,771 | 7.537
underSyears | 875 | 442 | 433 | a75 | 446 | 429 | 794 | 414 | 303
Stodyears | o45 | 473 | a72 | 914 | asa | ae | a79 | 456 | 423
40to14 years | 1,079 | 555 | 524 | 970 | 484 | 436 | 901 | 463 | 438
46to19 years | 1.215 | 643 | 572 | 959 | ase | 473 | a52 | 424 | are
2oto24 years | 971 | 507 | 464 | 754 | 300 | 355 | aoe | 452 | 414
25t029yoars | 944 | 454 | 490 | 921 | 481 | 440 | azz | a2 | a70
301034 yoars | 1.017 | 487 | 530 | 954 | S09 | 445 | 940 | 501 | 439
36t039 years | 1,223 | soz | 631 | 1,001] 49a | sos | o36 | 492 | aaa
40044 years | 1.349 | 657 | 92 | 1,003} 520 | 483 | 1,008 | 520 | 406
45049 yoars | 1,350 | oa | 652 | 4,241] 621 | 620 | 971 | 517 | asa
50t0 54 years | 1.239 | 634 | 60s | 1204] 659 | 635 | 1,148 573 | 573
s5tos9years | 950 | 485 | 47a | 1217] 614 | 603 | 1210| 626 | saa
60064 yoars | 256 | 393 | 463 | 1,137] 562 | 875 | 1,097] 40 | 557
65 t069yoars | 714 | 338 | 376 | 93 | a7t | 422 | 1030] so2 | 528
70t074 years | 638 | 201 | 347 | 673 | 316 | 367 | 760 | 394 | 305
76t079years | 460 | 190 | 270 | 464 | 109 | 265 | sie | 228 | 288
goto 84 years | 316 | 106 | 210 | 351 | 125 | 226 | att | 126 | 185
esandover | 245 | 72 | 173 | 282 | o2 | 190 | 271 | o4 | azz
‘Source: United States Census Bureau American Community Suvey
Table 27
Selected Racial Data By Population and Percentage
Black or
Hispanic
Jurisdiction | Population] White | Percent] African | Percent] Asian | Percent] "1 | Percent |
American
Dickenson County | 15,308 | 15,078 | 98.5% | 122 [| oa% | 15 | 01% [107 | 0.7%
Source : U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey
The median income for a household in the county is $33,106, and the median income for a
family is $42,308. Males have a median earnings of $43,806 versus $29,495 for females. ‘The per
capita income for the county is $17,954 with 20.2% of the population and 15.5% of families
living below the poverty line. ’
30
Table 28
HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND BENEFITS IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS (IN 2014 INFLATION-ADJUSTED
DOLLARS)
Income Dickenson County % of
Group Households Households
Less than $10,000 746 12.03%
|$10,000 to $14,999 679 10.95%|
|$15,000 to $24,999 974 15.70%
525,000 to $34,999 873 14.08%
{535,000 to $49,909, 928 14.96%
{$50,000 to $74,999 4,032 16.64%
[$75,000 to $99,999 526 8.48%
|$100,000 to $149,999 387 6.24%|
$150,000 to $199,999 23 0.46%
{$200,000 or more 26 0.41%
| Total 6,200 100.00%
[Median Household income Dollars 33,106
Per Capita income Dollars 17,954
Poverty all families 15.50%
Poverty all people 20.20%
‘Source: Unites States Bureau American Community Survey Estimates
3.2.3 Geographic conditions
Encompassing a land area of 335 square miles, the County lies in the Appalachian Plateau with
Pine (Cumberland) Mountain running along its Kentucky border. ‘The southern slopes of the
mountain are long and comparatively gentle, but the northern slopes area very steep and descend
a vertical distance of nearly 2,000 feet. Elevations in general vary from 1,200 feet above sea
level to 3,137 feet on the northwest border. The mountainous surface of the County is
characterized by many small streams separated by sharply rising ridges, steep slopes, and narrow
valleys. The principal streams are the Russell Fork, Pound, Cranesnest, and McClure Rivers.
Alll the rivers gather and flow out of the County through a remarkable chasm ripped through the
northern end of Pine Mountain known as “The Breaks.” In 1954, through a joint action of the
legislatures of Virginia and Kentucky, the Breaks Interstate Park was created.
‘The topography of Dickenson County limits development somewhat to the low laying areas
along streams and rivers. Although some plateaus are suitable for development, access to these
sites is a limiting factor.
31
Dickenson County lies in the Cumberland Plateau Physiographic Province where formations are
mostly sandstone and shale with mineable coal deposits, The Province, for the most part,
contains weather-resistant sandstone, which accounts for the steep V-shaped mountains.
3.24 Climate
Dickenson County lies in the warm temperate region, Latitude, mountainous topography, and
prevailing winds exert considerable influence upon the climate.
The area receives approximately 47 inches of precipitation annually with snowfall averaging
about 18 inches a year. The average maximum temperature is 72 degrees, and the average
minimum temperature is 36 degrees.
‘Thunderstorms and cloudbursts, normally occurring in the summer months, produce heavy
rainfall over sections of the county and runoff is significant. Prevailing winds are westerly at an
average velocity of 8 miles an hour but can reach high speeds during storms.
3.2.5. Transportation
A. Highways
There is no Interstate highway running through the County but there are four Virginia Primary
Routes serving the area, VA 63/83 runs north/south bisecting the county and serves the towns or
‘Nora, McClure, Clinchco, Haysi and Clintwood. VA 80 enters from the east and continues along
this boundary in a north/south direction serving the communities of Birchleaf and Haysi and all
the way up to the Breaks Interstate Park. VA 83 enters the county from the west and bisects the
county as it runs east to west. It intersects with U.S. Route 460 in Vansant in Buchanan County.
VA 72 runs north/south joining VA 83 at George’s Fork. All four VA routes intersect with U.S
Routes providing access to castern Tennessee, eastern Kentucky, West Virginia and eastern
Virginia.
B. Air
The nearest airport is the Tri-Cities Regional Airport located 45.6 miles to the southeast in the
Bristol/Johnson City, Tennessee area, It is served by five of the major airlines or their regional
partners. Mercer County Airport is located 59.7 miles to the north in West Virginia and is served
by U.S. Airways.
General aviation services can be found at Grundy Municipal Airport in Buchanan County.
Cc. Rail
Freight rail service is available in the county from CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern.
D. — Water
‘The nearest ports are located in Richmond (370 miles) and Norfolk (439 miles).
32
3.2.6 Infrastructure / Utilities & Services
A Elect
ity
‘American Electric Power provides power to Dickenson County.
B. Natural Gas
Equitable Resources Exploration provides gas to the County.
C. Water
Water is handled by the following entities:
© Dickenson County Public Service Authority
© Town of Clintwood
D. Sewage
Sewage is handled by the following enti
© Dickenson County Public Service Authority
© Town of Clintwood
3.2.7. Economic Growth
‘Throughout the 20" century, the economy of Dickenson County and the entire Cumberland
Plateau Planning District has been primarily dependent on coal. With almost 35 percent of the
local economy and 40 percent of wages dependent on the coal industry, the economy has been
tied to the trends in the price and demand for coal. Job losses have been staggering and the
manufacturing and wholesale/retail trade have not been able to absorb these losses
Unemployment rates in the coal region of Virginia generally run the highest of anywhere in the
state. The weak economy has been the main cause of the population decline.
Industrial development outside the area of mining has been slow. Access to markets has been a
major hindrance to development. The last twenty years have seen a dramatic change in the
mining industry. Coal mining in the region is still strong, however, the increased mechanization
of the industry has resulted in fewer job opportunities for residents. Dickenson County has led
the Commonwealth with its high unemployment rate for the last few years.
33
Table 29
Dickenson County Unemployment Rates 2000 - 2014
Annual
Year | Labor Force | Employed | Unemployed |Unemployment Rate
2000) 5,365 5,052 313 5.80%
2001 5,491 5,104 387 7.00%
2002 5,650 5,206 444 7.90%
2003 5,796 5,304 492 4.10%
2004) 5,558 5,206 352 6.30%
2005 5,720 5,350 370} 6.50%
2006 5,660 5,369 291) 5.10%
2007 5,787 5,484 303 5.20%
2008 6,074 5,727 347| 5.70%
2009 6,442 5,884 558 8.70%
2010} 5,513 4,934 579 10.50%
2011] 5,454 4,923 531] 9.70%
2012 5,214 4,669 545 10.50%
2013 5,342 4,761 581] 10.90%
2014] 5,239 4,720 519] 9.90%
Source: Virginia Employment Office
About half of the workforce is traveling out of the county to work each day and commuting an
average of 35.8 minutes. Unemployment rates are still running very high in 2014. Mining
employment paid well and workers have not been able to replace their lost jobs with comparable
salaries, Even new industries are having a hard time as Travelocity announced plans (2004) to
close its 3-year old operation in Dickenson County.
Table 30
Dickenson Commuting Patterns
People who live and work in the area
In-Commuters
Out-Commuters
Net In-Commuters (In-Commuters minus Out-Commuters)
1,676)
2,206)
5,789)
3,583,
Source: U.S. Census Bureau,OnTheMap Application and LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics, 7
34
Table 31
Major Employers - Dickenson County
[Serco Ine.
Food City
[County of Dickenson
Food and Beverage Stores
Range Resources - Pine Mountain, Inc.| Oil and Gas Extraction
‘Sw Virginia Regional Jail Auth
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Executive, Legislative, and Other General Government Support| 100 fo 249 employees
\Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities
(Company Product [Employees
Paramont Coal Company Virginia | Mining (except Oil and Gas) 1500 to 999 employees
Dickenson County Schoo! Board Educational Services 1500 to 999 employees
100 to 249 employees
100 to 249 employees,
100 to 249 employees
100 to 249 employees
Heritage Hall Nursing and Residential Care Faciiities 50 to $9 employees:
Dickerson Russell Coal Company _| Mining (except Oil and Gas) 50 to 99 employees
Dickenson County Community [Ambulatory Health Care Services 20 to 49 employees
‘Source: Virginia Employment Gommission
The population of Dickenson County is less prosperous than the population of Virginia. The
poverty rate is more than two and a half times higher than the average for the state. The per
capita income of residents of Dickenson County is only 53% of the per capita income of
Virginians. The proportion of county residents over the age of 25 without a high school diploma
is significantly higher than in Virginia.
Table 32
County Versus State Data
Dickenson County
Economic Indicators Dickenson Virginia
Population with Public Health Coverage 46.80% 24.20%
Poverty Rate 16.60% 8.00%
Per Capita Income 18,215} 33,493
Population Aged 16+ in Labor Force 43.50% 66.70%
Population Aged 25+ w/o High School Diploma 27.60% 12.50%
Source: Unites States Census Bureau American Community Survey Estimat:
Mining jobs are still a significant sector of the employment in Dickenson County. Mining jobs
make up the largest segment of jobs with Education Services and Health Care and Social
Services close behind. Taxable Sales for Dickenson County have been increasing most years
over the past decade.
35
Table 33
Employment By Industry
Dickenson County
Category Percentage
Mining 25.15%
Education Services 14.02%
Health Care and Social Assistance 12.99%
Retail Trade 11.08%
Public Administration 7.77%)
Construction 6.33%|
Professional Scientific & Technical Svc 5.97%|
Accomodation and Food Services 5.19%|
Transportation and Warehousing 4.30%
Other Services 1.77%)
Finance and Insurance 1.74%
Manufacturing 0.91%|
Admin, Support, Waste Mtg. Remediation 0.69%|
Utilities 0.44%|
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting 0.38%|
Wholesale Trade 0.38%|
Manangement of Companies and Interprizes 0.22%
Information Confidential
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Confidential
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Confidential
Source: Virginia Employment Commission
36
Table 34
Taxable Sales
2000-1014
Year Dickenson
2000 $48,398,260
2001 $47,977,617
2002 $49,531,310
2003 $50,249,767
2004 $52,914,791
2005 $50,357,215
2006 $57,182,687
2007 $60,083,344
2008 $63,232,095
2009 $64,054,957
2010 $65,984,411
2011 $68,042,398
2012 $66,417,728
2013 $65,552,723,
2014 $69,962,263
Source: Virginia Department of Taxation
What is the outlook for transforming the economy of the counties in “coal country”? One
strategy to attract new jobs has been the construction of shell buildings by the Cumberland
Plateau Planning District Commission (PDC). Eight buildings have been constructed since 1987
and four have been sold, providing about 450 jobs to regional residents. Only one of these
buildings, the Happy Valley Industrial Park is located in Dickenson County. It is a 40,000 sq ft.
shell building and is being marketed through the PDC.
The more recent economic development strategy is to provide the region with an advanced
communications infrastructure that can offer a competitive advantage in attracting and retaining
industry. It also serves to educate and train or retrain the workforce, as the county attempts to
transition to a technology based economy.
The Dickenson County Wireless Integrated Network “DCWIN” will provide wireless service to
enhance local government services to citizens and enhance small business’ ability to compete in
world markets, while additionally improving high-speed data transmission and high-speed
Internet services to its citizenry. It is expected that DCWIN will serve as a catalyst to improve
infrastructure within Dickenson County and the utilization of DCWIN will enhance economic
development throughout the entire coalfield region, Dickenson County looks to the future and
joining the technology corridor within the Commonwealth of Virginia.
The development of regional tourism is still an area of focus for improving the economy. ‘The
Breaks Recreation Area is recognized as having potential for further development. In addition,
Health care provision could bring with it good paying jobs.
37
Dickenson County will have a section of the proposed Coalfield Expressway, currently under
discussion. ‘This route will be a wider, more direct route through the mountainous counties in
Southwest Virginia into West Virginia, connecting with U.S, Route 460 and I-77.
3.2.8 Land Use
A. Residential
Due to the population decline and housing vacancy rate (about 12%), new housing starts are not
expected to be significant in the near future. ‘The county reported approximately 20-25 building
permit requests a year from 1998-2002. Future growth in the form of subdivisions is not
currently being planned. Sewer/water projects will be dependent on Community Development
Block Grant or Appalachian Regional Commission funding.
B. Commercial
Most of the commercial activity is concentrated in and around Clintwood and Haysi. Clintwood
has developed several sites, including their historical theater and the Ralph Stanley Museum, as a
way to promote itself as a tourist destination. Festivals help bring tourist in during the summer
and fall,
Cc Industrial
Industrial Park development has been promoted by the Planning District Commission as one way
to diversify the regional economy. In Dickenson County progress has been slow with most
developed sites remaining vacant, Transportation routes and isolation are two big obstacles to
future industrial growth. The planned expressway may change these conditions but the
construction schedule remains unclear.
DICKENSON COUNTY INDUSTRIAL PARKS
SITE SPECIFICATIONS ~ INDUSTRIAL PARKS — DICKENSON COUNTY
Miles to Nearest | Miles to Nearest | Square | Total
Site Name Location Interstate | 4-Iane Highway | Footage | Acreage
| Dickenson Shell Building | State Route 707 | T-81-G0mi | Rt23-8mi [40,000 [11.95 acres |
Haysi Manufacturing facility | Route 80 West|_1-77-75 mi Rt.460- 20 mi| 31,250 | 13.48 acres
Furniture World Building | T-1001 1-81 - 60 mi Rt23-10mi| 13,500 [0.2 acres
Source: Virginia Peonomic Development Partners
D. Agricultural
Farmers in Dickenson County primarily raise beef cattle, and grow hay and burley tobacco. In
1997, the Census of Agriculture reported a total of just over 100 full time farms in the county.
Most land in the county is unsuitable for growing crops.
E, Open Space/Reereation
38
About 93% of the county is forested, mainly covered with deciduous trees with a small amount
of evergreen forest cover mixed in.
Breaks Interstate Park is located on the Virginia-Kentucky border with most of the 4,500 acres
falling within Dickenson County, ‘The park has numerous recreational facilities including a
lodge, dining hall, amphitheater, camping and hiking.
‘The John W. Flannagan Dam and Reservoir is located five miles from Haysi on the Pound River,
a tributary of the Russell Fork River. The 7,507-acre facility is operated by the U.S. Corp of
Engineers and includes a 1,143-acre lake. Future activities are to include white-water rafting and
kayaking.
3.2.9 Community Facilities/Activities
Dickenson County maintains 2 elementary schools, 3 combined schools and 3 high schools.
Vocational training can be found at all the high schools plus the Dickenson County Career
Center.
The Dickenson County Medical Center, located in Clintwood, is a 50-bed acute care center.
County cultural activities include the Ralph Stanley Music Festival in Clintwood, held in May.
A new Ralph Stanley museum will also be located in Clintwood.
Sources:
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census, 1990 Census, Economic Census, Census of
Agriculture
Virginia Economic Development Partners
Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission
Virginia Employment Commission
3.3 Russell County
3.3.1 Location
Russell County, Virginia is located in the southwestern portion Virginia and is one of four
counties in the Cumberland Plateau Planning District, The county shares a border with
Dickenson County to the northwest and Buchanan County to the north, Tazewell County lies to
the northeast, Washington County to the south and Scott County to the southwest.
Western Russell County rests on a high, open, relatively level plateau amid a circle of mountains.
The high mountain pastures of Clinch River Valley are legendary. Clinch Mountain forms the
southern border of the county and the northern section stretches into the coal-bearing hills of the
Cumberland Plateau.
Russell County is 35 miles north of Bristol, 150 miles west of Roanoke and 290 miles west of
Richmond. This 475 square mile community lies midway between the isolated coal producing
counties of Virginia and the dynamic Tri-Cities metropolitan area of Bristol-Kingsport-Johnson
City.
39
3.3.2 Population
‘There are several small towns in Russell County including Cleveland (pop. 296), Honaker (pop.
1626), and Lebanon (pop. 3,399), which serves as the seat of local government. ‘The county lost
population during the 1980’s but was the only county in the planning district to gain population.
during the 1990’s. Its location next to Washington County and its proximity to I-81 and the Tri-
Cities area makes it the least isolated of the planning district’s member counties.
Russell County seems to have dodged the significant population decreases observed in the rest of
the coal-producing region of southwest Virginia. The local economy is not as dependent on coal
as in Dickenson and Buchanan Counties and residents have more jobs opportunities available
within commuting distance in the Tri-Cities area.
Table 35 Population
Population - Russell County, Virginia ‘Town of Cleveland, Honaker & Lebanon, Virginia
1990-2014
Cleveland Honaker iebanon
% Anal % Arnal % Annual % Annual
census |Year| Population | change Population| Change | Population | change | Population| Change
Census| 1990 [28,667
asot_| 28,800 | 0.46%
1992 | 28,900 | 0.35%
1993 | 29,300 | 1.36%
2 | 1994 | 29400 | 0.34%
E | 1995 | 2300 | -0.30%
& 1996 | 29,300 | 0.00%
1997 | 23300 | 0.00%
1998 | 23,200 | 0.34%
1999] 29,200 | 0.00%
Census | 2000 ] 3008 | 3.80% 4a ous 3273]
zor | 23,060 | -4.11%
zor | 28825 | -0.80%
2003 | 28857 | 0.13%
g | 2004 | 28648 | -0.72%
E | 2005 | 28596 | -o.18%
a 2006 | 28,725 | 0.45%
2007 | 29,029 | 1.05%
2008 | 29,006 | -0.07%
2008 | 29,250 | 0.84%
Germs] 2010 | 28,897 | -1.20% 202 1449 sina
| zou | 29,657 | 2.63% 307) si.se%| 1873] 29.26%] 3442] 0.524
2 | 2012 | 28426 | -a.10% 392) 27.68%] 1693] -9.61%| 3420] -0.34%
g | 213 | e274 | -0.53% sai] aa.o1%| —1603| 4.96%] 3422|_ 0.238
“| co | 28023 | 0.80% 226] -13.19%| 1626] 1.05%] 3399] _-0.673
‘Source: US Census Bureau & US Census Bureau American Community Survey Estimates
40
Population projections from the Virginia Employment Commission show that Russell County
will continue to see population growth through 2020 of about 0.53% a year. For the twenty
years thereafter (2030-2040), the county is projected to see continued growth but at rates of
approximately 0.81% annually.
Table 36
Population Projections - Russell County, Virginia
1990-2040
Year | US Census Bureau| VEC Projections | % Annual Change By Decade
1990 28,667
2000 30,308 1990-2000 5.72%
2010 28,897 2000-2010 -4.65%
2020 29,051 2010-2020 0.53%
2030 29,296 2020-2030 0.84%
2040 29,534 2030-2040 0.81%
Source: Virginia Employment Commission
According to the United States Census Bureau American Community Survey Estimates of 2014,
there were 28,897 people, 11,037 households, and 7,386 families residing in the county. That
calculates to a population density of 63.9/mi2. There are 13,439 housing units with a vacancy rate
of 10.2%.
‘The racial makeup of the county is 98.5% White, 1.4% Black or African American, and 0.1%
from other races. The average household consists of 2.54 persons and the average family size is
3.16 persons.
In the county, the population spread is not far from the Virginia average. The 2014 United States
Census Bureau Estimates shows that 5.2% of the population is under 5 years old, 10.69 % is
under the age of 19, and 8.37% of the population is 65 years of age or older. The median age is
43.6 years.
Table 37
Selected Racial Data Estimates By Population and Percentage
Black or
Jurisdiction Population! White | Percent | African | Percent | Other | Percent
American
Russell County | 28,023 | 27,615 | 98.5% 384 1.4% 24 0.1%
Source : U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey
41
Table 38
Population By Gender & Age 2000 - 2010 Census and 2024 Estimates (as of July 1, 2014)
Russell County
Age 2000 2010 2014 Estimates
Both | tate |Femate| PO" | mate |Femate Both | Male | Female
Total population] 30,308 | 15,519 | 14,080 | 28,897 | 14,165 | 14,742| 28,023 | 13,679 | 14,344
Unders years [ 1,584 | 779 | 80s | 1549 | 779 | 770 | 1,462 | 729 | 733
Sto9years [1,746 | 804 | sez | 1,588 | 709 | 79 | 1518 | 765 | 753
10 to 14years [ 1.837 | 907 | 930 | 1678 | 827 | 851 | 1,556 | 759 | 797
15to 19 years [ 1,942 | 1,021 | 921 | 1,754 | 908 | 846 | 1,490 | 743 | 747
20to 24 years 1,837 | 1027 | eto | 1520 | 788 | 741 | 1,613 | 854 | 759
26 to 29 years [2,271 | 1,281 | 990 | 1561 | 821 | 740 | 1,536 | 761 | 775
30to 34 years [ 2,138 | 1,155 | 983 | 1681 | 864 | 817 | 1,577 | 818 | 759
35to 39 years [ 2,486 | 1,341] 1,145] 1.923 | 938 | 985 | 1,627 | 819 | 808
40 to 44 years [2,443 | 1,252 | 1,191 | 1,945 | 964 | 981 | 1,852 | 913 | 939
45 to 49 years { 2,467 | 1,263 | 1,204 | 2,206 | 1078 | 1,128 | 1,916 | 936 | 980
50 to 54 years [ 2,172 | 1,143 | 1,029 | 2,493 | 1,225 | 1,268 | 2,180 | 1,069 | 4,111
55to 59 years [1912 | 897 | 1,015 | 2,246 | 1,008 | 1,148 | 2,302 | 1,114 | 1,188
60 to64 years [ 1428 | 697 | 731 | 2,004 | 4,002 | 4,002 | 2,120 | 1,051 | 4,069
65to6ayears [ 1,196 | 512 | 684 | 1.574 | 737 | 837 | 1,809 | 891 | 918
70to74years [ 1,105 | 522 | 563 | 1,198 | 536 | 662 | 1,326 | 596 | 730
75to79years [ 824 | 364 | 460 | 920 | 383 | 537 | 967 | 412 | 555
80to84years [ 469 | 169 | 300 | sez | 233 | 320 | 644 | 251 | 393
asandover [ 451 | 126 | 326 | 486 | 175 | 311 | 528 | 198 | 330
Source: United States Census Bureau American Community Survey
42
‘The median income for a household in the county is $31,491, and the median income for a
family is $26,834. The per capita income for the county is $14,863 with 16.3% of the population
living below the poverty line, These figures are slightly higher than the averages in the rest of
the planning district.
Table 39
HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND BENEFITS IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS (IN 2014 INFLATION-ADJUSTED
DOLLARS)
Income Russell County % of
Group Households Households
Less than $10,000 4,173 10.60%
$10,000 to $14,999 4.492 10.80%
$18,000 to $24,909 41,678 15.20%
528,000 to $34,909 1,508, 13.70%
$35,000 to $49,099 4,377 12.50%
|$50,000 to $74,999 1,914 17.30%
|$75,000 to $99,999 4,137 10.30%!
|$100,000 to $149,999 769 7.00%|
$150,000 to $199,999 223 2.00%
200,000 or more 6 0.60%
otal 11,057 100.00%
Median Household Income Dollars 34,768
Per Capita Income Dollars 20,117
|Poverty alll families 15.00%
Poverty all people 18.70%
‘Source: Unites States Bureau American Community Suney Estimates
3.3.3 Geographic conditions
The entire Russell coalfield is characterized by steep, mountainous topography. It lies in the
southeastern edge of the physiographic province known as the Allegheny Plateau.
‘The highest point of the county is Big A Mountain (3,735 feet) on Sandy Ridge, which forms the
divide between the Clinch River drainage on the southeast and the Big Sandy drainage on the
northwest. ‘The lowest point in the area is on the Clinch River at Body (1,481 feet).
Russell County has fewer topographic constraints than Dickenson or Buchanan Counties but
areas around Clinch, Garden and Big A Mountain have limited economic development potential.
The entire Russell coalfield drains into the Clinch River. The principal tributaries are Mill
Creek, Swords Creek, Lewis Creek, Hart and Musick Forks of Dumps Creek and Lick Creek in
43
the western part of the county, ‘There are numerous springs in the coalfield, many of which are
located on the outcrops of fields and fed by water percolating along the joints of the coal.
All the drainage of the county is tributary to Big Sandy River through its three main branches:
Russell Fork, Levisa Fork, and Tug Fork. Although most streams and creeks contain some water
all year round, none has a very large flow. The topography of Buchanan County limits
development somewhat to the low laying areas along streams and rivers.
Russell County straddles two distinct physiographic regions. The Valley and Ridge Province
extends from east to west through the southern portion. ‘This province is underlain by
sedimentary rock strata that has been folded, tilted, and deformed. The chief rock types are
limestone, shales, dolomites, and sandstone.
Cumberland Plateau Physiographic Province covers the northern portions of the county that lie
north of the Cumberland escarpment, The region is underlain by sandstones, conglomerate
sandstones, and shales, with numerous coal beds at varying elevations. ‘The soil of the plateau is
very thin so that much of the precipitation in this region penetrates into the ground to shallow
depths. The dense vegetation prevents heavy eroding in high precipitation events.
3.3.4 Climate
Russell County lies in the warm temperate region, Latitude, mountainous topography, and
prevailing winds exert considerable influence upon the climate.
The area receives an average annual rainfall of 43.1 inches and an average snowfall of 21 inches.
‘The average maximum temperature is 72 degrees, and the average minimum temperature is 36
degrees for the Cumberland Plateau region, Russell County’s average July temperature is 74
degrees and for January the average temperature is 35 degrees.
Thunderstorms and cloudbursts, normally occurring in the summer months, produce heavy
rainfall over sections of the county and runoffis significant. Prevailing winds are westerly at an
average velocity of 8 miles an hour but can reach high speeds during storms.
3.3.5. Transportation
A. Highways
Russell County is served by two U.S. Routes: U.S. Alternate Route 58 runs along the western
and southern corners of the county from the common boundary line of Wise and Russell
Counties to its junction with U.S. Route 19, which enters Russell from Washington County. U.
S. Route 19 runs east/west along the southern portion of the county to the Tazewell/Russell
County line.
Virginia Primary Routes 63, 65, and 71 serve the western portion of the county. Primary Routes
67 and 80 serve the easter portion of Russell County.
B. Air
44
The Tri-Cities Regional Airport lies 45 miles to the southeast in the Bristol/Johnson City,
Tennessee area. It is served by five of the major airline or their regional partners. Mercer
County Airport lies about 54 miles north and west in West Virginia.
General aviation services can be found at Grundy Municipal Airport or at the Tazewell County
Airport.
CG Rail
Norfolk Souther and CSX Transportation provide freight rail service to Russell County.
D. Water
The nearest ports are located in Richmond (290 miles) and Norfolk (360 miles).
3.3.5. Infrastructure / Utilities & Services
A. Electricity
American Electric Power and Old Dominion Power Company provide power to the County.
B, Natural Gas
Virginia Natural Gas provides gas to the County,
CG Water
Water is provided by the following entities:
© Russell County Water and Sewer Authority
© Three Creek Apparel Waterworks
‘Town of Honaker
‘Town of Lebanon
Town of St. Paul
D. — Sewage
Sewage is handled by the following entities:


Town of Honaker


Town of Lebanon
¢ Town of St. Paul


45
3.3.6 Economic Growth
Russell County’s unemployment rate hit a high in 2009 at 10.52% due to the recession of 2008.
The recession was a major worldwide economic downturn that began in 2008 and continued into
2010 and beyond. Since that high, the rate has remained around 8% for the past four or five
years.
Table 40
Russell County Unemployment Rates 2000 - 2014
Annual
Year_| Labor Force | Employed | Unemployed | Unemployment Rate
2000 11,865 11,248 617 5.20%
2001 11,903) 11,139 764) 6.40%
2002 12,140] 11,369 771) 6.40%
2003 12,281) 11,519 762| 6.20%
2004 11,521) 10,840 681 5.90%
2005 11,955] 11,265 690 5.80%
2006 11,812} 11,099 713) 6.00%
2007 14,772) 11,165 607 5.20%
2008 11,877] 11,194] 683 5.80%
2009 12,397| 11,095 1,302 10.50%
2010) 12,081) 10,844] 1,237 10.20%
2011 11,949] 10,816} 1,133 9.50%
2012 11,799] 10,780} 1,019 8.60%
2013 11,631] 10,644] 987| 8.50%
2014) 11,307| __ 10,406} 901) 8.00%
Source: Virginia Employment Commission
46
According to the 2014 Census, the worker retention rate was 60%, with 58.5% of the work force
traveling out of the county to work. ‘The median travel time to work was 31.2 minutes in the
year 2014. Those traveling out the county are mostly commuting southeast to Abingdon, Bristol
and beyond. Russell County also sees a significant in-migration of workers with about 36.6% of
its workforce residing in surrounding counties.
Table 41
Russell Commuting Patterns
In-Commuters
Out-Commuters
People who live and work in the area
Net In-Commuters (In-Commuters minus Out-Commuters)
2,533
4,144
6,619
-2,475|
Source: U.S, Census Bureau,OnTheMap Application and LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics, 7
Table 42
Major Employers - Russell County
[Lebanon Apparel Corporation
Northrop Grumman Corporation
‘American Management Systems,
Apparel Manufacturing
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
[Company Product [Employees
Russell County School Board [Educational Services 500 to 999 employees
Cingular Wireless Employe [Telecommunications 250 to 499 employees
Steel Fab Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing 1250 to 499 employees
Wal Mart |General Merchandise Stores 100 to 249 employees.
CGI Federal Inc Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 100 to 249 employees
‘Mountain States Health Al Hospitals 100 to 249 employees,
[County of Russell Executive, Legistave, and Other General Government Support} 100 to 249 employees
100 to 249 employees,
100 to 249 employees
4100 to 249 employees.
‘Source: Virginia Employment Commission
While the poverty rate in Russell County is significantly higher than the Virginia rate, the county
appears to be in better economic health than the other counties in the Cumberland Plateau
district. Proportionately fewer residents of Russell County are in the work force and a much
smaller percentage has graduated from high school than Virginians in general.
47
Table 43
County Versus State Data
Russell County
Economic Indicators Russell_| Virginia
Population with Public Health Coverage 40.20% 24.20%
Poverty Rate 15.50% 8.00%
Per Capita Income 19,735, 33,493
Population Aged 16+ in Labor Force 49.20% 66.70%|
Population Aged 25+ w/o High School Diploma 25.30% 12.50%,
Mining/Agricultural jobs are not as significant a sector of employment in Russell County
(4.13%) as in Dickenson and Buchanan Counties. Health care & Social Services jobs make up
the largest segment of jobs. The economy of Russell County seems to be more diversified than
its neighboring counties with the manufacturing sector significantly higher. Wholesale and retail
trade also employs a significant portion of the county’s residents.
Taxable sales for the county went up dramatically between 2001 and 2002 with a 20% increase.
Between 2001 and 2002, sales continued to increase as they jumped another 5.5%.
Table 44
Taxable Sales
2000-2014
Year Russell
2000 $07,862,419
2001 $01,878,423
2002 $12,525,574
2003 $129,188,820
2004 $138,753,368
2005 $132,085,662
| 2006 $149,040,720
2007 $156,657,814
2008 $161,030,985
2009 $157,889,960
2010 $158,276,136
2011 $159,840,501
2012 $160,139,687
2013 $153,199,811
2014 $159,893,054
Source: Virginia Department of Taxation
48
Table 45
Employment By Industry
Russell County
Category Percentage
Health Care and Social Assistance 15.68%
Retail Trade 12.14%
Professional Scientific & Technical Sve 9.67%
Construction 8.30%
Accomodation and Food Services 7.24%
Public Administration 6.60%
Manufacturing 6.16%
Admin, Support, Waste Mtg. Remediation 5.21%
Mining 4.13%
Transportation and Warehousing 3.83%
Finance and Insurance 3.43%
Other Services 2.28%
Information 0.81%
Wholesale Trade 0.72%
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting 0.44%)
Manangement of Companies and Interprizes 0.32%]
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 0.30%
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 0.21%|
Education Services Confidential
Utilities Confidential
Source: Virginia Employment Commission
3.3.7 Land Use
A. Residential
Russell County has more buildable land than the counties to its west and north, The areas around
the Clinch River and on the high plateaus have fairly flat lands. New construction of single-
family homes is occurring in the town of Lebanon. ‘The Cumberland Plateau Planning District
Commission reports that Russell County, especially around Lebanon, is expected to grow
because new jobs are being created in the arca’s industrial parks. Housing vacancy rates in
Lebanon and Castlewood in the year 2000 were only 8.3% while that of Cleveland was 28.3%.
It is anticipated that new subdivisions will be built in Lebanon and public services may need to
be extended to new areas to provide public sewer and water. Building permits for the county
have averaged about 70 per year over the last five years (1998-2002).
49
B. Commercial
Numerous shopping opportunities are available in Russell County, including four shopping
centers and 345 retail and service-related businesses. The town of Lebanon serves as the
commercial center for the county with over 150 retail establishments located in its downtown
area, Additional shopping centers and malls in the Bristol metropolitan area are easily accessible
for county residents.
Future commercial development in the county may occur in the Lebanon area in response to
future population growth or tourism.
C Industrial
‘The Cumberland Plateau PDC has constructed eight shell buildings throughout the region since
1987. Five have been sold, including two in the Russell County Industrial Park located in
Lebanon. Teleflex Corporation, Inc. and Lear Corporation are both currently operating in these
shell buildings. Grundy, Honaker and Clintwood are sites of three other PDC constructed shell
buildings that are currently being marketed. Other sites with space available are listed in the
following table:
RUSSELL COUNTY INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS
CATIONS = INDUS BU s ‘OUNIY |
Miles to nearest | Miles tonearest | Square | Total
Site Name Location Interstate | 4-lane Highway | Footage | Acreage
Russell County Authority
| Building Route 1, Box 570 1-81-36 mi__| U.S.Rt 58-6 mi | 29,302 | 0 acres
2.74
Custom Vents Building 1 US. Route 19 North |1-81-15mi| US.RL19-NWA | 18,752 | _ acres
2.74
Custom Vents Building 2 US. Route 19 North | 1-81-15mi| US.RLI9-N/A | 9,056 | acres
US. REID
‘Three Creek Apparel Building | Rt. 683, Nicklesville | I-81-28mi| Bypass-0.5mi_| 23,700 | 5.0 acres
12.6
Leonard Properties Building _ | $90 E. Main St. 1-81-20mi| U.S.Rt.58-7mi | 172,000 | _ acres
Railroad Ave,
Honaker Shell Building Honaker 1-81-35 mi__| US.Rt19-Smi | 12,000_| 1-7 acres
Source: Virginia Economic Development Partners
The proposed new Coalfields Expressway will run to the north of the county but may benefit the
county by allowing residents to travel north and west more conveniently. This may open up job
opportunities for county residents and make markets in the north and central parts of the United
States more accessible to Russell County industry. When the expressway construction begins, it
is estimated that 1,400 construction jobs will boost the local regional economy over the expected
10-year lifespan of the road’s construction. Local income will also be generated by the purchase
of supplies, materials, and equipment from local businesses.
50
D. Agricultural
Russell County’s rolling landscape and high elevations make this area prime pasture, ha
burley tobacco country. It is also a good corn-growing area, Ample rains, productive soils and
cool nights help grasses to thrive here. Because of this, Russell County farmers primarily raise
beef cattle that graze off pastureland during the growing season and eat hay and corn at other
times.
Many of those same farmers also raise burley tobacco. Russell County produced more than 3.12
million pounds of burley tobacco, according to the 1997 census. Russell is also home to
smattering of other agricultural enterprises, including nursery stock operations, apple orchards as
well as sheep, dairy, chicken and hog farms.
The amount of land used for farming declined slightly between 1992 and 1997 in Russell County
decreasing 5%. Over the same period the average size of farms increased slightly from 146
acres (1992) to 149 acres (1997). ‘The number of full time farms decreased 11% from 495 farms
in 1992 to 442 farms in 1997, At that time, crops accounted for nearly 31% of the market value
of agricultural products sold. Beef cattle and livestock sales made up the remaining 69% of the
market.
E. Open Space/Reereation
Although most (approximately 70%) of Russell County is covered in trees, about 30% is cleared
land or natural meadows. The non-forested land can be found along Routes 58 and 19 and
around the population centers of Lebanon, Castlewood and Honaker. Over 90 percent of the
county is covered by hardwood forest growth and about 1% is evergreen forest.
3.3.8 Community Facilities/Acti
8:
Russell County Medical Center, a 78-bed facility, offers comprehensive services.
Clinch Mountain Wildlife Area, located in the eastern part of the county, offers outdoor
recreation activities. Canoe launch sites have been built on the Clinch River. The Jefferson
National Forest and the Breaks Interstate Park in neighboring Dickenson County also offer
extensive outdoor activities.
Public schools in the county include 9 elementary and 3 high schools. Vocational training is
offered at the high schools as well as the Russell County Career and Vocational Center.
Sources:
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census, 1990 Census, Feonomic Census, Census of
Agriculture
Virginia Economic Development Partners
Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission
Virginia Employment Commission
Si
3.4 Population Summary
‘The following table summarizes the population by year for the three Counties.
Table 46
Population Summary
1990-2040
Buchanan Dickenson Russell
+% Annual ‘% Annual ‘% Annual
Census | Year | Population | Change | Population | Change Change
Census | 1990) 31,333 17,620
1991 31,400 0.21% 17,600 0.11% 0.46%
1992] 31,200 | -0.64% 17,700 0.57% 0.35%
1993 30,700 -1.60% 17,600 0.56% 1.38%
2 1994 30,300 -1.30% 17,500 -0.57% 0.34%
e 1995 29,700 -1.98% 17,400 -57.00% 1.34%
% | 1996} 28,900 2.69% 17,000 -2.30% 0.00%
1997 28,400 1.73% 16,900 -0.59% 0.00%
1998 27,900 1.76% 16,700 1.18% 1.34%
1999 27,500 1.43% 16,600 -0.60% 0.00%
Census | 2000 26,978 -1.90% 16,395 1.23% 3.80%
2001 26,319 2.44% 16,240 0.94% 11%
2002 25,945 1.42% 16,134 0.65% 0.80%
2003 25,407 -2.07% 16,080 0.33% 0.11%
g 2004 24,950 -1.80% 16,079 0.00% -0.72%
& 2005 24,452 -2.00% 16,175 0.59% 0.18%
| 2006} 23,992 1.88% 16,024 -0.93% 0.45%
2007 23,526 -1.94% 16,033 0.56% 1.05%
2008 23,090 -1.85% 16,176 0.89% 0.07%
2009 22,860 -0.99% 16,087 0.55% 0.84%
Census
a 2011 24,006 0.09% 15,762 -0.88% 29,014 0.40%
2 2012 23,990 -0.07% 15,747 -0,09% 28,890 0.42%
4 2013 23,867 0.50% 15,660 0.55% 28,311 -2.00%

2014 23,754 0.47% 15,741 0.51% 28,636 1.14%
a 2015 22,983 3.24% 15,339 -2.55% 28,008 -2.19%
2 2016 22,473 -2.21% 14,996 2.23% 27,697 -1.11%
4 2020 23,383 4.00% 15,600 4.23% 29,051 4.88%
“ 2030 23,263 -50.00% 15,375 -1.44% 29,296 0.84%
2040 23,296 0.14% 15,193 71.18% 29,534 0.81%

Source: US Census Bureau & US Census Bureau American Community Survey Estimates
52
4.0 WASTE GENERATION AND COMPOSITION
Waste tonnages are tracked at the individual transfer stations in the Counties. Annually the
Authority completes the reporting to the DEQ for the facilities.
4.1 Existing Conditions (2015)
‘The Region at the three transfer stations tracks their waste in accordance with the categories
outlined on DEQ Form 50-25 which includes the following:
Municipal Solid Waste
Construction/Demolition/Debris
Industrial Waste
Regulated Medical Waste
Vegetative/Yard Waste
Incinerator Ash
Sludge
Tires
White Goods
Friable Asbestos
Petroleum Contaminated Soil
In addition, the Region also expands their tracking at the transfer stations and includes the
following categories:
Household Waste
Commercial Waste
Industrial Waste
Construction Debris
Mine Waste
Yard Waste
Flood Debris
Roofing Materials
Shingles
Sawdust
Wood Chips
Pallets
Sludge
Other
The more specific data is then combined into the categories identified in the DEQ 50-25 form.
The Counties also track the following materials under their recycling programs. These materials
are listed under 9 VAC 20-130-150.3 as special wastes.
Waste Tires
Used Oil
‘Used Oil Filters
53
Used Antifreeze
Abandoned Automobiles Removed
Batteries
‘The Region does not receive any agricultural waste nor does it accept stumps or large land
clearing debris at the transfer stations. Septage is not accepted at the transfer stations and is not
tracked by the Region under the solid waste programs. Hence data is not available, Spill residues,
if meeting the allowable limits of the regulations, would be recorded as “Other” on Form 50-25.
The following section discusses existing conditions in terms of Form 50-25 data.
Appendix 2 contains the DEQ Forms 50-25 for the three transfer stations for 2015. Based on this
information, the Region received 43,461 tons of waste materials at the transfer stations in the
following categories (all values represent tons):
TABLE 47
DEQ FORM 50-25 SUMMARY
2015
:
[Municipal Solid Waste 12,742.38 7,330.37 13,891.17 | 33,963.54 | 78.2%
[Construction/Demolition/Debris | _327.63 243 683.71 4,231.51 | 2.83%
industrial/Commercial Waste 2,867.02 | 2,336.26 1,969.92 7,172.20 | 16.5%
/egetative/Yard Waste 27.09 65 170.05 197.79 | _.45%)
ludge* 0 0 0 0 0
fri 137.51 120.40 4111.60 369.51 85%
Goods, a7 0 43.26 44.03 44%
her Waste 323.69 19.96 116.44 323.69 74%
[TOTAL 16,426.09 10,049.64 16,986.15 | 43,461.88 | 100.0%|
[% of Total Regional Waste 37.8% 23.1% 39.1% 100.0%
‘The table also indicates that Russell County receives the largest percentage of the regions waste
(39.1%) and Dickenson County the smallest percentage (23.1%).
The aforementioned table evaluates the tonnage delivered as percent of the waste stream for cach
County as well as the total. Buchanan receives the most industrial/commercial waste, followed
by Dickenson County, and Russell County the most municipal solid waste and Construction
debris.
54
4.3 Historical Waste Generation (2010-2015)
4.2.1 Total Tonnage Recorded at Transfer Stations
‘Tables 48 through 50 summarize the data collected at the transfer stations from 2010 through
2015 for Buchanan and Dickenson Counties and for 2010 — 2015 for Russell County. The
categories are not identical to those indicated on the DEQ 50-25 forms but are expanded and
represent the data as collected across the scales at the transfer stations, These tables also indicate
the percent annual change in various categories of waste and indicate a positive increase in
household and commercial tonnage especially over the past several years even though the
population has been declining. ‘They also indicate that Buchanan County receives a significant
percentage (50.79%) of mine waste, and Dickenson County’s waste is primarily household as
collected by the County with limited amounts of other waste types.
TABLE 48
TRANSFER STATION REPORTING DATA
BUCHANAN COUNTY
2010 — 2015
Wastetype | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | AVERAGE |% of TOTAL
[Household Waste 13,374.07|13,565.02|13,551.90|13,006.11|12,781.03|12,742.38| _ 13,170.08} 64%]
yommercial Waste 2,125.43) 3,459.87| 4,408.16 2,119.38] 2,136.72| 1,050.25] 255} 12%
|construction Debris 459.12| 436.20, 870.97| _535.01| _361.84| _ 304.89] 493) 02%)
[Mine Waste 3,223. ZI 4,860.40| 4,666.17} 4,902.08) 3,070.47| 1,816.77| 3,756.60] _.18%|
te Goods | 22 Bal 1.53) 87 7 7 003%
[Tires 467.99] 400.58] 479.36] 226.74] 241.12] 137.5%] 326.38] on
ard Waste 268.66| 460.79 718.16] od 8.21| 27.09] 247.15 011
[Flood Debris | 25.87; 45.81 55.25| 238.47| 60.9] 0.003%
[shingles o| 60.33, 18.75, —46.48|_69.74| 22.89) 36.35) (0.002%)
Recyctable 0.0%
JAnimal Carcass 1.05 326| 2.54] 2.08] 13.51] a.7al 12.09 06%]
[Trash Clean-up 86.91} 155.01] 117.98] 81.68} __ 101.90) 75.48) 103.16} 005%]
TOTAL |20,046.97|23,401.70|24,860.69|20,965.90/18,830.66/16,426.09| 20,755.33] 100.0%]
[% change total waste
jstream 16.74%] 6.23%|-15.67%| -10.18%| -12.77%|
% change
|Household only 1,42%|-0.09%|-4.02%|__-1.72%| __-0.30%|
[% change
lCommercial only _ 62.77%| 27.43%) -51.92%| 0.80%| -50.84%|
% change mine waste |
lon 50.79%) -3.99%| _6.05%| -37.37%| -40.84%4
55
TABLE 49
‘TRANSFER STATION REPORTING DATA
DICKENSON COUNTY
2010 - 2015
Tie Tn yeas oe ae % OF
| WasteType | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 |AVERAGE| TOTAL
[Household Waste 8,209.33] 8,189.02] 7,782.99 _7,476.60|_7,224.21| 7,330.37] 7,702.03] 64%}
[Commercial Waste 2,250.77] 434,25) 303.64] 389.51] 939.37] 944.11 876.94) 06%}
(Construction Debris 276.27 272.84 _ 236.72 218.26) 288.53) 160.16) 242.13) 02%
|Mine Waste _ 1,039.90] 3,106.17| 4,268.32] 5,421.48| 3,475.86, 1,391.15] 3,115.48) 25%)
[Tires _ 161.11) 164.44) 192.14] 158.46) 125.60} 120.40) 153.69) 02%
‘ard Waste 0.13} 32) 2.68] 73) 08) 65] _ 76] .00062%I
|Flood Debris 0 0) oj 0) 3.49 58] _.00047%)
|Carcass 18.09| 18.10, 17.66| 14.84 15.30 12.90) 16.14] _.0013%
Roofing Material 85.06) 119.09) 125.37] 37.23) 61.44) 82.84) 85.17| _.0069%
ludge: | _ _ 0%
[Dump Cleanups 11,74) 4.27| 2.86 38) 3.57] 3.80 .00031%}
[TOTAL 12,040.66} 12,315.97), 12,923.79| 13,719.94) 12,130.77} 10,049.64) 12,196.79] 100.0%
% change total
jwaste stream 2.28% 4.92% 6.16%|__-11.58%| _-17.15%|
% change
Household ont 0.24%) -4.95% 3.94%) -3.37%| 1.46%
Pe change mine
aste only. 198.94%| 37.08%| 27.31%) __-35.89%) __-59.97’
TABLE 50
‘TRANSFER STATION REPORTING DATA
RUSSELL COUNTY
2010-2015
Lee 5 z ie [OF
|__Waste Type _ 2010 | 2011 | 2012 2014 | 2015 _|AVERAGE| TOTAL
[Household Waste. 17,047.34] 16,871.33]16,238.92| 15,548.79] 14,701.12] 13,891.17] 15,716.44] 81%
[Commercial Waste 2,961.37| _2,128.60| 2,193.45] 1,522.67| _1,671.81| 1,862.35 2,056.70| 119
[Construction Debris 1,403.16] 944.98| 1,398.35] 730.49| 617.15] 683.71) 962.97| 05%}
[Mine Waste 143.03] 305.17} 462.00, 374.34] 96| 0.00] 214.24) 01%
fhite Goods and 53.92}
Metal 37.79 26.18| 18.97 8.00] 43.26 _31.35] .0015%|
[Tires - 52.96] 96.20, 149.94] 134.84[_117.60| 99.68] _.005%|
lindustrial Waste 746.52] 105.90|__118.12| 112.06] 85.48| 107.57| 112.601 __.006]
Recycle _ 0%|
Yard Waste 4A] -535.41|_778.65| _476.75| 149.66| 170.05] 369.16 001%
Illegal Dump Cleanup 30.41] 24.76| 33.70] 123.72) 65.03| 95.61] 62.20] .0031%|
Roofing Material on q a a O qo
[Carcass 26.94] 30.39) 20.60) 24.05) 23.49} 20.83} 24.38) .0012%|
[TOTAL 21,910.13] 21,036.90|21,366.17| 19,081.75] 17,457.51] 16,986.15] 19,639.26] 100.0%|
[% change total waste |
[stream -3.98%|__1.56%| -10.69%| 8.51% __-2.69%|
% change Household
commercial only -$.04|-2.98%|-7.38%| 4.08%) -3.78%|
3
The following table summarizes the regional totals for 2010 — 2015 and indicates the percent
annual change:
TABLE 51
‘TRANSFER STATION REPORTING DATA
REGIONAL SUMMARY
2010 20,046.97 12,040.66 21,910.13 53,997.76
2011 23,401.70 12,315.97 21,036.90 56,754.57 5.10%
2012 24,860.69 12,923.79 21,366.17, 59,150.65, 4.22%
2013 20,965.90, 13,719.94 19,081.75 53,767.59 9.1%
2014 18,830.66 12,130.77 17,457.51 48,418.94 9.94%
2015 16,426.09 10,049.64 16,986.15 43,461.88 -10.23%
4.2.2. Pounds per person per day
‘The population data from Section 3.1 can be coupled with the tonnage data reported above to
consider the waste stream as average pounds per person per day. The following tables
summarize the data for the total tonnage received at the transfer stations and regionally:
TABLE 52
EVALUATION OF WASTE TONNAGE
AS POUNDS PER PERSON PER DAY
BUCHANAN COUNTY
2010 24,028 20,046.97 46
2011 23,888 23,401.70 54
2012 23,837 24,860.69 57
2013 23,555 20,965.90 49
2014 23,106 18,830.66 45
2015 16,426.09
Average 20,755.33
57
TABLE 53,
EVALUATION OF WASTE TONNAGE
AS POUNDS PER PERSON PER DAY
DICKENSON COUNTY
2010 15,903 12,040.66 4.1
2011 15,765 12,315.97 43
2012 15,668 12,923.79 45
2013 15,449 13,719.94 49
2014 15,308 12,130.77 43
2015 10,049.64
Average
TABLE 54
EVALUATION OF WASTE TONNAGE
AS POUNDS PER PERSON PER DAY
RUSSELL COUNTY
POPUI
21,910.13
21,036.90
21,366.17 .
19,081.75 37
17,457.51. 34
16,986.15
58
TABLE 55
EVALUATION OF WASTE TONNAGE
AS POUNDS PER PERSON PER DAY
REGIONAL TOTAL
53,997.76 43
56,754.57 4S. 5.1%
59,150.65 4.6 42%
53,767.59 44 9.1%
48,418.94 4.0 9.9%
43,461.88 10.2%
‘Average
‘To put these values in perspective, the national average for MSW generation as reported by the
EPA for the year 2001 was 4.4 pounds per person per day, which is up from 2.7 pounds per
person per day in 1960. MSW as defined by the EPA does not include CDD waste, sludge or
industrial wastes which is included in the values listed above. ‘Thus the Counties and the region
are all averaged at or below the national value indicating a limited amount of commercial or
industrial waste relative to the municipal solid waste component.
4.3 Projected Waste Generation Rates Relative to Disposal Needs
Itis important to consider the various ways in which the waste generation within the region may
change to anticipate future needs relative to collection, disposal and recycling. As described in
Section 3.0, the region is not expected to grow and is in fact projected to have a decrease in
population ranging from —0.04% in the later years of the planning period to a maximum decrease
of -0.4% during the earlier years of the planning period.
There is no one methodology for evaluating future waste generation rates as the rates can be
impacted by many different factors including population changes, recycling participation and
markets, the commercial or industrial sector, natural disasters ete, For rural areas, changes in the
waste will track closely with the population trends. For urban or developing areas, changes in
the waste are more difficult to predict. Certainly the population factor is one aspect, however the
commercial waste must also be considered. ‘The following section will consider various factors
that could impact waste generation in region and will propose a final growth factor to be used in
the study.
4.3.1 Population Growth Rate
59
As Section 2.1 discussed, the region has been losing population and population is projected to
decrease at a rate of 0.4% per year from 2003 ~ 2010, at a rate of 0.2% from 2011 - 2020, and
finally at a rate of 0.04% from 2021 — 2024, The estimated population for the region for 2004 is
71,619 and the estimated population for 2024 is 68,780. Because of the decline in population,
the residential waste tonnage would be expected to decrease proportionately. ‘To be conservative
in this report, the residential waste tonnage will be estimated based on the national average rate
of change as discussed under Section 4.3.3 below.
4.3.2 Commercial and industrial growth
The region is not anticipating significant growth in the commercial sector, over the planning
period although efforts are being made to encourage economic development. Review of tables
56 through 58 indicates that the commercial tonnage is relatively flat over the period from 2010
to 2015. Commercial waste makes up a small component of the Buchanan and Dickenson
County collections and, as would be expected, makes up a larger percentage of the Russell
County waste stream. Quantifying growth in this sector is difficult as it can be unpredictable.
For this report no distinction between the residential and commercial waste will be made, and so
the national average rate of change will be used as discussed below.
4.3.3 Annual change in MSW (residential/commercial) tonnages
The following table summarizes the data taken from the transfer station records for household
and commercial waste delivered to the three transfer stations and provides a total for the region.
‘The percent annual change was then calculated with this data.
HOUSEHOLD AND COMMERCIAL WASTE
RECEIVED AT THE TRANSFER STATIONS
Ee “Waste Type_ 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015
[Buchanan County
[Household Waste 399] 311 832| 777| 687 374
[Commercial Waste 292) 212) 193) 283) 287] 149)
|Govt. Household Waste 12,938} 11,577; 12,914) 13,902} 14,364} 15,308}
|Govt. Commercial Waste _ 609| 533) 22] 568) 555] 518)
SUBTOTAL 14,238 | 12,633 | 15,530 | 15,893 | 16,346
% Annual Change| 114.3% | 14.5% | 7.4% 2.3% 2.9%
[Dickenson County
[Household Waste 280) 363) 394) 617 729) 550}
|Commercial Waste 49) 47, 24) 56 29) 23)
|Govt. Household Waste 7,381 7,134) 7,461 7,669) 7,929} 8,289|
IGovt. Commercial Waste Q ai 9 | q
SUBTOTAL] 7,710 7,546 7,879 8,343 8,687 8,862
% Annual Change| 2.1% 44% 5.9% 41% 2.0%
Russell County
[Household Waste 14,579] 21,394) 17,272| 17,588] 18,504]
60
Waste Type [2010 | 2011 [2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2018
[Commercial Waste _ 2.928] 3,018) 3,077|__—3,479)
SUBTOTAL] 17,507| 21,394) 20,290, 20,665, 21,979}
% Annual Change! 22.2% 5.2% 1.8% 6.4%
Region
[Buchanan County 12,633 | 14,461 | 15,530 | 15,893 | 16,346
Dickenson County, 7,546 7,879 8,343, 8,687 8,862
JRussell County _| 17,507 _| 21,394 | 20,290 | 20,665 | 21,979
SUBTOTAL| 37,686 | 43,734 | 44,163 | 45,245 | 47,187
% Annual Change| 16.0% 1.0% 25% 4.3%
Of interest is that the total residential and commercial tonnage for the region has been growing
over the last three years. From 2010 to 2015 there was a 1.0% increase, from 2001 to 2002, a
2.5% increase and from 2002 to 2003 a 4.3% increase. All three Counties experienced a steady
increase in tonnage during this three year period. However, it is not expected that this trend
would continue given the projections for the declining population and the difficult economic
environment of the region. ‘Thus the national average will be used for this report as described in
the paragraph below.
Nationally from 1990 to 2001 the MSW waste stream grew at a rate of 1.0% per year. MSW
includes residential, commercial and institutional waste. For this region, a 1.0% growth in the
MSW sector will be assumed with no growth assumed for the other waste categories.
4.3.4 Annual change in total tonnage with population considered
Another way to consider the annual change in solid waste is to couple the population with the
total tonnage delivered to the transfer stations as determined in the calculation for pounds per
person per day. Table 52 in Section 4.2.2 contains this information and indicates regionally a
change from 2010 to 2012 of a 5.3% increase and from 2013 to 2015, a 2.5% decrease.
The total tonnage includes all waste delivered to the transfer stations regardless of its handling.
Total tonnage includes construction waste, industrial waste, white goods and other waste
materials, ‘The following table evaluates the regional population and regional tonnage for the
commercial and residential sectors:
4.3.5 Projected tonnages
As stated at the beginning of this section, there is no single methodology to use to predict the
fature changes in the region’s waste stream. ‘The region is facing a decline in population and is
currently experiencing economically challenging times in most areas. ‘Thus, as discussed above,
the national average of 1.0% per year was used for projecting the residential and commercial
tonnages while all other tonnages were assumed to remain constant.
61
‘Tables 57 through 60 provide the tonnage projections for the individual Counties and the region
by year.
|
|
|
.
.
62
TABLE 57
ESTIMATED WASTE TONNAGE 2010-2040
BUCHANAN COUNTY
Estimated rate of change 2010-2040 4.0% |
Estimated rate of change for other waste materials. O%lyear
Population growth factor variablelyear
x [COMME 1 |
NTIAL |
4,126) 21,654] 83] 24,028) 4.5)
4,126} 21,826) 84 23,888} 5.0) |
2012! 17,877| 4,126) 22,003} 85] 23,837] 5.4) |
204 18,056) 4,126) 22,182] 8g 23,556] 5
2014] 18,237| 4,126] 22,369 86| 23,106] 53
2015] 18,419] 4,126] 22,548] 87| 23,800) 5.2
2016| 18,603] 4,126) 22,729 87] 23,680 Ex
2017] 18,789] 4,126] 22,915 aa 23,560) 5.)
201 18,977] 4,126, 23,103 ag 23,440 Sl |

19,167| 4,126] 23,293 30] 23,320 5.5)

2021 19,369) 4,126 23,485) 90] 23,200] 5.5)
2021 19,552! 4,126) 23,678 91 23,090] x |
2022| 19,748] 4,126] 23,874 99 22,980 5.
2023] 19,945] 4,126] 24,071 93] 22,870 53] |
2024 20,145) 4,126] 24,271 | 22,760) 5.
2030] 20,073) __ 4,126 24,199) 94 23,269 57
2040) 20,107] 4,126} 24,233} 93] 23,296} 5.7
63
TABLE 58
ESTIMATED WASTE TONNAGE 2010-2040
|
|
|
DICKENSON COUNTY |
Estimated rate of change 2010-2040 1.0% |
Estimated rate of change for other waste materials. O%lyear |
Population growth factor variable/year
2011 9,504| 1,744) 11,245) 43| 15,903] 3.9)
2011 9,596) 1,744] 11,340) 44! 15,675} 4A.
2012] 9,692] 1,744) 14,436] ad] 15,66: 4
2013] 9,789) 41,744) 11,539 4a 15,449 44
2014 9,887| 4,744) 11,634 4 15,30 J |
2015 9,986) 1,744| 11,730 45| 15,101 43)
2016 10,086] 4,744) 14,830) 45) 16,020 4, ’
2017] 10,187 4,744) 11,934 46] 14,940 al
2018) 10,289) 1,744) 12,033) 46 14,860} 4.4)
2019) 10,3911 1,744) 12,135) 47] 14,780} 4.5) ;
2020 10,495) 1,744) 12,239) 47| 14,700) 46]
2021| 10,60( 1,744 12,344) ATI 14,700 46
2022] ~10,70 41,744] 12,451 agi 14,700, 46]
2023) 10,813} 1,744} 12,557} 48) 14,700) 4Ad|
2024) 40,921 47. 12,668] ag 44,700 4]
203 11,158 4,744 12,902 EY 15,375} 4
204 11,010] 4,744) 12,754 49| 45,493) 4
ESTIMATED WASTE TONNAGE 2010-2040
TABLE 59
RUSSELL COUNTY
Estimated rate of change 2010-2040
1.0%
Estimated rate of change for other waste materials O%lyear
Population growth factor variable/year
2010) 23,564 2,233] 25,797| 99] 28,897|
2011) 23,800] 2,233] 26,033] 10 29,657|
2012 24,038| 2,239] 26,271] 101 28,426|
2019] 24,278] 2,233] 26,511] 102) 28,274
2014] 24,524 2,233] 26,754| 10: 28,023|
2015] 24,766| 2,233] 26,999] 104| 30,600]
2016] 25,014 2,233] 27,247| 108) 30,680
2017| 25,264| 2,239 27,497| 106) 30,760]
2011 25,517 2,233] 27,751 107| 30,840]
2019] 25,772| 2,239] 28,005] 408] 30,920]
2020] 26,030] 2,233) 28,263] 409] 31,000] x
2021] 26,291 2,233) 28,523] 110 31,080] 5.
2022| 26,553| 2,233) 28,786] 114 34,160 5.4
2023] 26,819) 2,23% 29,052] 112) 31,240] 54
2024| 27,087| 2,233) 29,32 1131 31,320) 5.4
2030] 24,716) 2,233) 26,949] 104) 29,296] 50)
2040] 24,717] 2,23% 26,950] 404) 29,534) 5.
65
TABLE 60
ESTIMATED WASTE TONNAGE 2010-2036
REGION
Estimated rate of change 2010-2036 1.3%
Estimated rate of change for other waste materials. O%lyear
Population growth factor variable/year
2010] 53,997] 207/ 68,828] 6
2014 56,754 218) 68,252| 6.
2012| 59,150] 227| 67,676| 67
2013] 53,767] 206, 67,100] 64
2014| 48,416) 186 66,437| 55)
2015] 43,461 167 67,194) 4.9
2016] 40,307| 158 67,404) 4g
2017| 42,191 162 67,614) 4
2016] 48,494 186, 67,824) 55)
2019] 53,924 207| 68,000) 64
2020 55,721 214) 68,036 6.3
2021 53,052] 204) 68,016) 6.
2022] 53,920) 207| 67,996) 6.4
2023 53,904) 207| 67,976) = 64
2024 53,889) 207| 67,956 64
2030 ___ 52,991 20. 67,938 : 6.
2036 54,682) 210) 68,956 6.4]
4.4 Waste Composition
‘The region does not receive significant quantities of unusual or special wastes or industrial
wastes. Therefore its composition would be assumed to be similar to the national estimates
discussed in Section 2.1.2. ‘The following tables summarize the expected waste compositions by
material type and by product type utilizing the percentages developed by EPA from the 2001
data for the region only:
66
|
TABLE 61
REGIONAL WASTE COMPOSITION
BY MATERIAL TYPE
AS SUMMARIZED IN EPA REPORT - 2014 DATA
Paper 35.7 16,846
Glass 3.5 2,595
Metals 79 3,728
Plastics ita 5,238
Rubber, leather, & textiles 7A 3,350
Wood 3.7 2,690
Yard trimmings 12.2 5,757
Food scraps U4 5,379
Other 3.4 1,604
TOTAL 100.0 47,187
Tonnage from Table 45 for region of 47, 187,
TABLE 62
REGIONAL WASTE COMPOSITION
BY PRODUCT TYPE
‘Durable goods
Nondurable goods 26.4
Containers and packaging 32.0
Food scraps 14
Yard trimmings 12.2
Other wastes 1.6
TOTAL 100.0
“Tonnage from Table 45.
67
5.0 EXISTING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
‘The following section describes the major components of the region’s current solid waste
management system in existence in 2003.
5.1 Collection
S11 Overview
The following table summarizes the information relative to collection as provided by the various
localities:
TABLE 63
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION ON COLLECTIONS
manna ae DESCRIPTION
| Buchanan County Equipment: 13 trucks
Personnel: 23 collection workers; | full time litter control
coordinator, | full time litter control coordinator,
Collection: Door to door from 9,485 residential and 1,383
business curbside customers.
| Residential: one time per week
Commercial: one time per week, fixed or by request; 4cy or 6cy
containers.
Other collections:
«Large items collected monthly by request
© White good collection is performed by a local recycling
business; refrigerant removal by private contractor; materials
hauled away by private contractor twice per year
© Tires are accepted at the transfer station. The CPRWMA
provides services via WV Tire.
Fees:
Households - $3.00 per month split equally between electric
and telephone bill each electric meter and each telephone line.
© Commercial - $6.00 per cubic yard (based on size of box)
© Tires - $70.00 per ton; sent off site for recycling
‘* Fees do not meet the operations expenses. Operations
supplemented from County’s general fund.
| Annual budget (FY 2015): $2,329,309.
| Grundy Equipment: 2 trucks, 1 brush shredder
Personnel: 3 employees
Collection: Door to door from 216 residential and commercial
customers.
time per week
Commercial: 1-5 times per week
| Other collections:

Bulky item pickup monthly by request of residential or

68
LOCALITY
__ DESCRIPTION
commercial customers.
© Leaves, brush, and Christmas trees collected by request.
‘Town shreds and sells for mulch
Fees:
© Residential - $8.00 per month charged on utility bill

Commercial — based on number of collections. Current
billing range from $48 - $240 per month.
© Fees covers cost of operations. No additional funding is
needed to supplement the system.
Annual budget (FY 2015): $251,200

Dickenson County
Equipment: 7 rear load packer trucks
Personnel: 15 employees; 2 litter control officers
Collection: Door to door from 6,352 residential and 891
‘commercial customers; 3 green box sites with one 6cy box per
site on roads where packer trucks cannot service homes.
1 time per week
1-2 times per week
Other collections:
‘* No leaf, brush or general bulky item pickup.
« Temporary collection sites are established for Christmas tree
collection. Trees are hauled to the lake for the Army Corp of
Engineers to use as fish attractors.
© Tires - $70.00 per ton; sent off site for recycling
Fees:
¢ Residential - $60 per ton at transfer station and Free crub side
collection.
© Commercial - $60 per ton at transfer station.
© Operations subsidized from general fund.
Annual budget (FY 2015): $1,333,555
| Clintwood ‘Equipment: 2 trucks — I regular sized rear loader, 1 smaller
truck.
Personnel: 4 employees
Collection: Door to door.
Residential: 1 time per week
Collection frequency variable depending on
agreement with town.
Other collections:
Bulky items, leaves, and brush are picked up on request.
Pickup usually on Friday. No additional charge.
Tires are transported by the ‘Town to the transfer station,
Fees: Residental is $7 per month and Commercial is $10. 4 cy, 6
cy, 8 cy range is from $32.00-$300 per month.
Annual budget (FY 2015): $76,460 |
Haysi No solid waste collection operations -
Clincheo_ No solid waste collection operations __
69
LOCALITY
~DESERIPTION
Russell County
~ | Equipment: System
s county managed and staffed with hauling
privatized.
Personnel: 6 personnel to staff the sites
Collection: 10 convienent sites around County serviced by
County staff. Most of the sites have 1-3 boxes or compactors and
use 40 ~ 50 cy open top roll-off boxes. The County owns the
sites. Collections is contracted out 10 sites and the County
provides staff. The sites are staffed 40 hours per week.
Residential: 10 Convienent Centers Drop off.
Commercial: Town of Lebanon and Private Company’s.
Other collections:
© Brush or leaf collection is a drop off at Transfer Station.
© White goods can be taken to the transfer station, Once
collected, the material is managed by the County.
‘Tires - $83.50 per ton; sent off site for recycling
Fees: $60.00 per ton for commercial and construction,
Annual budget (FY 2015): $900,000.
Lebanon
Equipment: 2 rear load packer trucks and 2 roll-off trucks
Personnel: 4 employees plus public works director. 1 driver for
the roll-off truck; 3 person crew for the packer truck.
Collection: Door to door from 1,794 residential and commercial
customers, Private collection is not allowed within City limits.
Residential: 1 time per week
Commercial: 1 time per week (minimum), can request greater
frequency for collection; Town provides containers.
Other collections:

Bulky item collection: By request each Friday
‘© Leaves and grass: By request as needed.
Fees:
© Residential - $7.20 per month on utility bill
© Commercial —

© Curbside - $14.20 per week.
© 6 cy box - $25 per load
© 8 cy box - $25 per load
°
°
40 ey box - $100 per load
Compactor - $150.00 per load
Annual budget (FY 2015): $285,499.
Cleveland
Equipment: | rear loader packer truck
Personnel: 3
Collection: Door-to-door
Residential: Weekly
Commercial: Weekly
Other collections:

Bulky item collection: Once per year in May.
Leaves and grass: None.

Fees:
70
(ocanrry:
© Residential: ~ $12/month
© Commercial: ~ $18/month
Annual budget (FY 2015): $16,940
Honaker Equipment: I rear loader packer truck
Personnel: 3
Collection: Door-to-door
week
Commercial: 1/week
Other collections:
‘© Bulky item collection: By request as needed
© Leaves and grass: None
Fees:
© Residential — $15.00/month
© Commercial - $20-200 per/month
Annual budget (FY 2015): $95,500
5.1.2 Russell County Collection sites
Russell County is the only one of the localities which uses drop off collection sites for handling
garbage collection. There are 14 sites. ‘The following table summarizes the tonnage collected
from each site for the years 2010 — 2016:
TABLE 64
RUSSELL COUNTY COLLECTION SITES
TONNAGE
2009 — 2016
Lebanon 1,167.6 4,167.24] 1,338.18) 1,385.57] 5,058.62] 1,264.66 2.96
Belfast 662.26) 720.39] 465.81] 495.78] 2344.24] 586. 1.37
Blackford : 685.87| 431.86] 465.81 495.78| 2079.32] 519.8: 1.23
‘Swordscreek 122.75| 1,352.40] 229.59] 857.06 2561.6] 640.4! 1e
Pinecreek 1,388.58) 1,356.34] 1,384.40] closed| 4129.29] 1,376.43| 3.22
Flatrook. ~___ 1,100.52) 4,078.57 1,495.74] 4,558.74) 5233.57| 1,308.39 3.0€
Finney 350.44| 360.25) 308.57] 299.25 1318.51 329.6275 0.77
Daw Road 201.97| 237.0. 261.49) 250.77| 951.26] 237.815, 0.5E
Sarbo 623.99] 630.98 449.17| 420.25] 2124.39] 531.097: 1.24
Hamlin 1,124.41] 4,120.20] 825.88 293.27| 3363.76] 840.94] 1.97
Radio Station (Castlewood)| 1,288.25] 737.48| 686.8: 713.87|_ 3426.43] 856.61| 2.01
71 (604) Grassy Creek 362.04 387.58| closed| closed| 749.66] 374.83 OBE
Mocassin 347.79) 332.44 455.13] 481.30] 1616.69] 404.16: 0.9
71 Site 2,623.23] 3,834.95] 4,300.99] closed|_7759.17| 2,586.39) 6.0€
TOTAL 42,049.74) 43,747.71 9,667.59] 7,251.64)42,716.68] 17,086.67| 410¢
n
Figure 2 illustrates the location of these
5.2 Transfer Operations
5.2.1 Summary of transfer station information
‘The following table summarizes the information on the transfer operations. Most of the waste
generated within the three County region is delivered to one of the transfer stations. Some waste
may be taken directly to one of the private landfills, but this waste is not tracked. As noted
below, the Authority owns the buildings, holds the permits, is in charge of operations and
maintenance and holds the contracts with the hauling company and the disposal facility.
TABLE 65
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION ON TRANSFER STATIONS
oe
PBR # 106
Opened March 1996
5,000 square feet
Scales — BTek 10°x70°
Orginial Cost $609,000
Operated by the County
‘Tonnage transferred 2015 ~ 16,426 tons
Buchanan County
PBR #049
Opened December 1993
5,000 square feet
Scales — BTek 10°x70°
Orginal Cost - $640,689
Operated by the County
Tonnage transferred 2015 — 10,049 tons
Dickenson County
PBR #001
Opened April 1994
7,500 square feet
Scales — BTek 10°x70°
Orginal Cost - $625,000
Operated by a private contractor
Tonnage transferred 2015 ~ 16,986 tons
Russell County
ele we eee ele ee eee ele e eee we,
General Information Hauling contract with Advanced Disposal, Inc. The contract
expires on October 26, 2018.
© Permits are held by Authority who owns the buildings,
equipment and property and holds long-term leases with
VDOT in Dickenson and Russell Counties on the properties,
© Asof January 1, 2016, the Authority has no outstanding bond
debt.
«As permit holder, the Authority is responsible for permit
R
‘DESCRIPTION
compliance.
® As owner of the buildings, the Authority is responsible for all
maintenance and repairs.
5.2.2 Contractual Relationships
‘The following table summarizes the contractual relationships between the Authority, Contractor
and Counties:
TABLE 66
CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS,
\ AS ea PURPOSE |
Solid ‘Waste Disposal Advanced Disposal Inc. Establishes contract for disposal
Agreement at Advanced Disposal Landfill
and sets fees for disposal.
Current contract expires October
26, 2018.
Solid Waste Transportation Authority and Advanced _ | Establishes contract for
Agreement Disposal, Inc, transportation and sets fees for
hauling. Current contract
_| expires October 26, 2018.
User Agreement for Solid Waste | Authority and each county | Establishes contract for use of
Disposal individually transfer stations, obligations of
users, tipping fees, etc. No
specific expiration date.
Members can leave Authority
: when all debt is paid off.
Manpower Service Agreement | Authority and each county | Establishes contract for County
individually operation of transfer stations for
Authority. Contract renewed.
annually.
Administrative contract Cumberland Plateau PDC _| Establishes an agreement for the
and Authority PDC to administer the
Authority’s program, Contract
renewed annually.
5.2.3 Tipping Charges and Fees at transfer station
Fach County holds a user agreement with the Authority and the Authority only has three
customers, the three Counties. The Authority sets the tipping charges as follows (taken from the
agreement with Russell County): “The tipping fee shall be calculated by determining the total of
(a) the disposal fee charged by any landfill operator with whom the Authority may contract for
the ultimate disposal of any Solid Waste delivered under the contract; (b) the transportation
73
costs incurred in the transport of the waste from the transfer station to the landfill; © the
amount of principal premium, if any, and interest or any other amounts due, or to become due,
with respect to any indebtedness of the Authority or required to avoid a default with respect to
such indebtedness, and (d) all expenses of the Authority relating to the operation and
maintenance of the disposal system, including any reserves. This amount is divided by the
tonnage projected to be received to derive the cost per ton to be charge for use of the disposal
system.”
‘The current tipping charges established by the Authority may be summarized as follows:
TABLE 67
SUMMARY OF AUTHORITY’S TIPPING CHARGES
me oe TE 7 COMME?
Buchanan County $34,06/ton. + Monthly charge of $17,000.
[Dickenson County $34.05/ton + Monthly charge of $17,000
Russell County $31.96/ton. + Monthly charge of $17,000
“*Monthly charge covers operations and debt service.
Each County is invoiced on a monthly basis by the Authority for the tonnage delivered to the
transfer station. Each County can then chose to charge transfer station users.
‘The following table summarizes the current tipping fees established by the Counties as of
October 2013 at the three transfer stations:
TABLE 68
SUMMARY OF TIPPING FEES AT TRANSFER STATIONS
BUCHANAN COUNTY
Fousehold waste $30/ton Houschold billed $7.00 per
month on utility bill
Commercial waste - _ $60/ton _|
Tires - $70/ton _
DICKENSON COUNTY
Household waste $60/ton
Commercial Waste $60/ton
Construction demolition debris $60/ton
Tires i S70/ton
| Sludge | $40/ton
RUSSELL COUNTY _
Houschold waste No charge —
Commercial waste $60/ton
Industrial waste $60/ton
Shingles $60/ton
Tires $83.50/ton
14
Contract fees as negotiated by the Authority with the hauling and disposal company may be
summarized as follows. The contracts expire on October 26, 2018:
TABLE 69
SUMMARY OF AUTHORITY AGREEMENTS
| conrracr | NEGOTIATED FEE COMMENTS |
TRANSPORTATION
AGREEMENT _| -
Buchanan County $17.18/ton CPI for agreement shall
not exceed 3% and will
not be considered until
— - | 12/03.
Dickenson County $17.17 /ton, Same as above
Russell County $15.08/ton Same as above _
DISPOSAL AGREEMENT __
Disposal price $16.07 /ton, 3% CPI each year (not to
_ exceed $17.74 in 2018).
State fee ___| $0.10/ton _
Total disposal price _ $16.07/ton -
Under the disposal agreement, the current federal, state and local fees/taxes of $0.95/ton shall not
exceed a total of $3.00/ton, Should fees/taxes exceed $3.00/ton, the Authority reserved the right
to renegotiate the fee schedule.
5.2.4 Materials permitted for acceptance at transfer stations
In accordance with the Virginia Solid Waste Management Regulations, the following materials
may be accepted at the transfer stations subject to permit specific limitations:
a Agricultural waste
b. Ashes and air pollution control residues that are not classified as hazardous ’
waste, Incinerator and air pollution control residues should be incorporated
into the working face and covered at such intervals as necessary to prevent
them from becoming airborne.
‘Commercial waste
‘Compost
Construction waste
Debris
Demolition waste
Discarded material
Garbage
Household waste
Industrial waste meeting all criteria contained in DEQ Regulations
Inert waste
crore meas
75
m. Institutional waste except anatomical waste from health care facilities or
infectious waste as specified in Waste Management Board’s Infectious
Wastes Regulations.
n. Municipal solid waste

Putrescible waste. Occasional animal carcasses may be disposed of within a

sanitary landfill. Large number of animal carcasses shall be placed in a
separate area within the disposal unit and provided with a cover of
‘compacted soil or other suitable material.
Refuse
Residential waste
Rubbish
Scrap metal
Sludge
‘Trash
White goods
Non-regulated hazardous wastes by specific approval only
Specific wastes as approved by the Director
xeserenes
5.2.5 Materials not accepted at the transfer stations
‘The following wastes are prohibited at the transfer stations:
1, Under the DEQ regulations (taken from 9VAC 20-80-250.C.16):
a, Free liquids
b. Regulated hazardous wastes
©. Solid wastes, residues, or soils containing more than 1.0 ppb (parts per
billion) of Dioxins
d. Solid wastes, residues, or soils containing more than 50.0 ppm (parts per
million) of PCB’s
ec. _ Unstabilized sewage sludge or sludges that have not been dewatered
f. Pesticide containers that have not been triple rinsed and crushed
g. Drums that are not empty, properly cleaned, and opened
h. Waste oil that has not been adequately adsorbed in the course of a site
cleanup
i, Contaminated soil unless approved by the Director
76
5.3 Disposal
5.3.1 Landfill
Currently the Cumberland Plateau Regional Waste Management Authority is under contract with
Advanced Disposal, Inc. for disposal at the Advanced Disposal Landfil located in Sullivan
County Tennessee. The landfill is located approximately 5 miles south of Bristol. Distances
from the transfer stations to the landfill range from 120 miles one way for Buchanan County, to
95 miles one way for Dickenson County, to 68 miles one way for Russell County.
‘The following list summarizes information on the landfill:
Permitted by Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC)
Permit number SNL 820-000-0282 Ext. Class 1
Subtitle D liner and cap system
Total acreage — 655 acres
Disposal acreage ~ 255 acres (not all permitted at this time)
Remaining life expectancy — 78 years @ 675 tpd from 1/1/12, Estimated closure date
2094.
eee eee
5.3.2 Previously operated landfills
Appendix 3 includes a table summarizing the status of previously operated landfills in the region
and location maps for the most recently closed landfills. The information was provided by the
Southwest Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Quality. All landfills owned
and operated by the Counties have been closed.
One industrial landfill is open in the Russell County. It is operated by American Electric Power
(AEP) and is the disposal site for coal combustion by-products produced by the Clinch River
Power Plant. Information on this facility is summarized in the following table and was obtained
from AEP:
77
TABLE 70
AEP INDUSTRIAL LANDFILL
NSS ] DESCRIPTION”
Permit Number : 223
Date Permitted _ [1974
“Materials placed in landfill Coal combustion by-products: flyash, bottom
ash; limited amounts of special waste by
permit (contaminated soil, filter media from
waste treatment plant, boiler refractory, etc.
Liner system ‘Subbase of insitu soil, layer of select fill,
flexible membrane liner (FML), covered with
double sided geocomposite material, leachate
collection zone, covered by aggregate drainage
layer, buttresses in specified bench areas.
Cap system Flyash infiltration layer on top of waste, 40 mil
FML, covered by layer of topsoil and
vegetation.
Teachate collection and handling Two leachate collection ponds. Discharges are
pumped back to the plant for disposal through
the waste water treatment system.
Environmental monitoring programs Daily, monthly, quarterly and annual
inspections; groundwater monitoring wells
sampled semi-annually.
Taformation on remaining life, closure date or annual tonnage was not available.
5.3.2.A Previously operated landfills continued. Please see Possum Hollow Landfill attachment.
5.3.3 Household hazardous waste collection
Periodically the Authority assists Counties with the collection of household hazardous waste. In
the future, the Counties have expressed interest in developing a comprehensive houschold
hazardous waste program that would be run at specific times of the year. ‘The Counties would
like to pay for this program out of their general fund instead of raising tipping fees at the transfer
stations to cover the expenses.
5.3.4 Central Archive
Records of all closed and active solid waste disposal sites within the region ate maintained at the
offices of the County Administrators within the Region. The Authority did not take over
management of the landfills when it became the regional coordinator for disposal services for the
Region. The Counties retain responsibility for all closure and post closure activities at the
landfills and for documenting and addressing any open dumps. The Authority however maintains
information on the transfer stations and recycling. ‘The addresses for these archives are listed
below:
78
Cumberland Plateau Regional Waste Management Authority
224 Clydesway Road
Lebanon, Virginia 24266
276-889-1778
Buchanan County
PO Box 950
Main Street, 4" Floor
Grundy, VA 24614
276-935-6501
Dickenson County
PO Box 1098
Mainstreet Courthouse
Clintwood, VA 24228
276-926-1676
Russell County
PO 1208
121 E. Main Street
Lebanon, VA 24266
276-889-8000
The files kept in these locations constitute the central archive and operating record for all
permitted landfills within the Counties. New landfills, closure and post closure cate
documentation is kept at the Counties. Transfer station and recycling information is kept at the
Authority. All correspondence to and all correspondence from DEQ is kept in the files of the
appropriate entity.
In addition, the Solid Waste Management Plan prepared by the Authority for the Region will
serve as a central archive and summary of solid waste collection, disposal, recycling and
treatment activities within the Region. ‘The plan will be revised as appropriate as activities
change and the revised plan will be submitted to DEQ for review and approval.
5.4 Recycling
Recycling programs in the region are implemented on an individual basis by locality, The data is
reported regionally. A recycling Action Plan (RAP) has been submitted to VA DEQ and
approved.
5.4.1 Description of programs
‘The following table summarizes the existing programs within each County.
79
TABLE 71
SUMMARY OF RECYCLING PROGRAMS IN THE REGION
i i “DESCRIPTION |
Limited recycling program in County.
© White goods are collected at the transfer station and recycled
«There is one private collection site at the Anchorage Shopping
Center. Information on this center was not available.
© There is a private scrap yard in the County which accepts
batteries, aluminum, and scrap metal, The company pays for
the materials they accept. Detailed information on this facility
was not available,
‘The Town of Grundy collects and mulches their brush.
Some tracking of commercial and industrial recycling.
Moc
Buchanan County
Dickenson County Limited recycling program in County.
Private contractor recycles aluminum, scrap metal, white
goods, and abandoned vehicles.
«Some tracking of commercial and industrial recycling.
Russell County ‘* 7-8 drop off sites are located throughout the County.
© The drop off program is privatized.
«The program accepts plastics, newspaper, cardboard, and
aluminum.
© The materials are transported to a recycler in Kingsport, TN.
© Sites are staffed and contamination is limited.
© Used oil is collected at the transfer station and is pumped and
hauled away by Necessary Oil.
« Scrap metal is collected at the transfer station. .
‘© Aggressively tracks commercial and industrial recycling. ’
Authority Hired a recycling coordinator 08/01/04.
5.42 Recycling rates
The following table provides information on the recycling rates for the Counties for 2010 and
2015. Appendix 4 contains the DEQ reporting form for 2015 for the region.
80
TABLE 72
eee S ENGR
2010 2015
408.64 om | 263.39 vo | 91535 | 740 _| 1,587.38 1,587
484636 | 6,799 | 4,414.42 3240 | 5,713.5 | 5,200 [14,974.28] 15,239
| 42.99 16 9.24 10 58.73 26 | 110.96 52
Glass 01s 28 - 26 26 oo
Commingled - : 0
Yard Waste (composted|
or mulched) . - 2
‘Waste Wood (chipped
cor mulched) 1 5 40 too | 180.02 220.03, 105
Textiles 2 23.69 40 0 115.69 40
suproraL| 5390015 | 7,497| 4,750.99 3,560 | 6,867.86 | 5,966 _| 17,008.6 17,023
Total Supplemental RM - -
7 Waste Tires 66.82 49 299.22 100 190.04 | 215 | 556.08 364
Used Oil 82.91 108 2,480.65, 220 | 701.53 | s80 | 3265.09 908
Used Oil Filters 3,100 | 2 8.11 o 8.11 6 4. 8
Used Antifreeze 10.55 | 1 2.21 10 | 24.51 2 37.27 13
‘Auto Bodies 925 230 250 20 881 20 | 2,056.73 270
Batteries 200 143 877 60 37.1 28 | 1,002.22 231
Sludge (composted) - :
Other (E-Waste) 11.66 2 20 1 1731 12 | 48.97 1s
Ash
SUBTOTAL] 4,396.94 535 3,937.19 3u1| 1859.61 | 863 _| 7,077.47 1,809
Total PRM and SRM 9.786.955 | 8,032 | 8,688.18 371|8,727.47| 6,829 [24,086.07 18,832
Recycling rate as reported to DEQ - Reported as region onl 30.2%
81
5.4.3 Composition of materials recycled
‘The following table summarizes the recycling tonnage for 2014 for the region by percent of total
products.
|
TABLE 73
RECYCLING DATA BY % MATERIAL |
(ADJUSTED BY DEQ)
[Total Principle RM
Paper. 1,703.76 0.8% |
Metal 15,720.92 | __76.0%|
Plastic 6197 | 29%)
Glass 0 0.00%|
Commingle
Yard Waste (composted or
mulched) 173 83%
Waste Wood (chipped or
mulched) 5
Textiles 100 |
Waste Tires 516.35 | _.0249%4)
Used Oil 1,428.57 069%
Used Oil Filters 98 047%
| ___Used Antifreeze 13.57 065% |
| ___ Auto Bodies 264 012%
Batteries 525.22 025%
Sludge (composted) ot
Electronics 23.88 115%
SUBTOTAL] 20,672.19
Totall__ 20,672.19
As review of this data indicates the percentages of the materials have shified dramatically when
fly ash and other industrial recycling is eliminated from consideration.
82
5.4.4 Volunteer Programs
‘There is some voluntary recycling within the region. In particular, Keep Buchanan County
Beautiful is active in educational and promotional programs for recycling and litter control. The
litter control personnel in both Russell County and Dickenson County also assist with volunteer
programs as interest is expressed by volunteer organizations.
5.4.5 Recycling Markets
Appendix 5 includes a list of recycling markets that would be available to the region. Only scrap
metal is marketed directly by the Counties. All other recycling is privatized.
5.4.6 Projected recycling rates
The region’s overall rate of recycling rose from 15% in 2004 and peaked in 2013 at 33.1%. As
we see a decline in both population and solid waste tonnages the Authory reported a recycling
rate of 25.4% in 2016. Not only are markets unstable at this time, citizens are recycling less.
The following table projects the recycling rate over the planning period if nothing changes in the
recycling program and the waste tonnages increase as discussed in Section 4.3. The table also
indicates the amount of additional recyclable material which must be captured to meet the 25%
mandate. Programs developed in 2004 are still in place to help improve the recycling rates and
educational programs, however, citizens are recycling less in our opinion based on the failing
regional economy.
5.5 Public Education
Public education relative to recycling in the region is handled primarily through either volunteer
organizations or the litter control departments of euch County. The litter control departments try
to visit public schools at least once a year and to have a presence at the County Fair. The Russell
County Environmental Council works diligently to promote such programs as recycling, litter
control, beautification and water quality. Dickenson County hosts a county-wide clean up
program each spring. Adopt a Highway, Adopt a Stream and Adopt a School programs are active
in the region, Appendix 6 contains information on public education in the region.
5.6 Public/Private Partnership
The region seeks to support all activities relative to reuse, reduction and recycling. Russell
County’s recycling program is privatized with local company. The Authority holds private
contracts with the waste haulers and the private landfill. Bach County handles their own
contracts for scrap metal recycling.
83
6.0 BUDGET
‘The following table summarizes the operating budgets and revenues for the localities of the
region for FY 2015:
TABLE 744
SUMMARY OF OPERATION BUDGETS AND REVENUES
FY 2015
Ons ANSE, E al 7 PERIETT
th FUND
4 |
ie)
lBuchanan County |$ 2,329,309] $ = $898,621 __ $0] $ 2,329,309 $285,000$ (2,329,309)
[Dickenson County | $ 1,333,555) $ - $592,27: $O}$1,33,555 _ $36, $__(1,333,555)|
[Russell County. $ 900,000 | $ oO $933,002) $15,000] $ 900,000 $38, $__ (900,000)
[TOTAL-County only | $ 4,562,864) $ oO $ 2,423,895] $ 15,000} $ 4,562,964 $358,000 |$(4,562,864)|
‘As can be seen from this table, approximately 93% of the operating expenses of the region are
addressed through the general funds of the local governments.
The following table evaluates the operating costs for FY 2015 as costs per ton delivered to the
transfer station and as cost per person:
7.0 | WASTE MANAGEMENT HETRARACHY
Under 9 VAC 20-130-30, the following policy is set forth:
“It is the policy of the Virginia Waste Management Board to require each region designated
pursuant to 9 VAC 20-130-180 through 9 VAC 20-130-220, as well as each city, county and town
not part of such a region, to develop comprehensive and integrated solid waste management
plans that, at a minimum, consider and address all components of the following hierarchy:
Source reduction
Reuse
Recycling
Resource recovery (waste to energy)
Incineration
Landfilling”
ABAWKN
Section 9 VAC 20-130-150.6, also addresses this requirement by stating:
“The local government or regional solid waste management plan shall include data and
analyses of the following type for each jurisdiction. Each item below shall be in a separate
section and labeled as to content:
84

A description of programs for solid waste reduction, reuse, recycling, resource
recovery, incineration, storage, treatment, disposal and litter control.”

The following section provides the information as available as required by the regulations.
7.1 Source reduction
Source reduction refers to any change in the design, manufacture, purchase, or use of materials
or products (including packaging) to reduce their amount or toxicity before they become
municipal solid waste. Source reduction can help reduce waste disposal and handling costs,
conserve resources, and reduce pollution, Section 2.1.5 previously discussed the trends in source
reduction nationally noting that the reduetion of yard waste in landfills is the most significant
source reduction activity at the moment as localities and states ban yard waste from landfills.
While individuals can attempt to reduce their volume of waste, source reduction policies will be
aimed primarily at businesses and industries. Many source reduction policies are not feasible at
the local level but are best handled at the state or federal level. An example of this is the banning
of yard waste from landfills, or requiring minimum packaging standards. Financial incentives
and disincentives, broad regulations concerning source reduction and changes to manufacturing
processes are difficult to implement on a local basis, As waste tipping fees increase at the
region’s transfer stations and the outside facilities, the commercial sector will become more
sensitive to the expenses involved in their disposal programs, and will begin to consider source
reduction more closely.
‘The most effective source reduction activity that can occur at the local level is public education.
It should be noted that the counties within the region seck information annually from their
commercial sector relative to recycling activities. ‘This exercise in and of itself can serve as an
educational tool as the businesses and industries compile the data and consider the expense of
their disposal programs. It is also an opportunity for the businesses or industries to report any
‘major changes in their waste disposal programs, including source reduction.
In summary, the region is currently engaged themselves or entities within the region ate
currently engaged in the following source reduction efforts:
© Yard waste mulching programs
© White good recycling

Environmental education programs for citizens relative to the need for source reduction

The following activities are proposed under this plan as interest and funding are available:
Expansion of yard waste mulching programs
Enhanced educational programs for the commercial and industrial sector
7.2 Reuse
Reuse is similar to source reduction as it prevents materials from entering the waste stream, but
involves separating a given solid waste material from the waste stream and using it, without
processing or changing its form, other than size reduction, for the same or another end use.
85
Examples of reuse include such activities as swap shops or thrift stores, clothing collection
centers, pallet reuse, use of refillable bottles, reconditioning of drums or barrels
As with source reduction, private citizens can make an effort to reuse or encourage reuse of
many items that would normally be discarded to the landfill. However, the focus of the program
would be better aimed at the commercial sector including the region’s businesses and industries.
‘The region does not currently focus its educational programs on the commercial sector and does
not currently collect specific information on reuse by the commercial sector.
Currently there are multiple reuse centers available to the public in the region including the
following:
TABLE 75,
SUMMARY OF REFUSE FACILTIES IN REGION
ie "NAME OF STORE MATERIALS ACCEPTED
Buchanan County Bins-Counts Community Center, | Clothing, appliances, and
— Stratton, VA housewares
‘Outreach Community Center Clothing, appliances, and
Clinchco, VA housewares
Thangs Clothing, appliances, and
_ Clintwood, VA. housewares
Dickenson County The Attic Clothing, appliances, and
| Grundy, VA. housewares
Helping Hand Clothing
—_ Whitewood, VA
Gift of Love Clothing
_ Oakwood, VA
Russell County Christian Center| Clothing and appliances
Lebanon and Honaker, VA 7
‘The following activities are proposed under this plan relative to reuse, as interest and funding are
available:
‘© Continue to educate public relative to the need for reuse
Expansion of education to commercial sector to address reuse
© Collection of data on commercial reuse programs
7.3 Recycling
Recycling is the process of separating a given waste material from the waste stream and
processing it so that it may be used again as a raw material for a product, which may or may not
‘be similar to the original product. Scotion 5.4 outlined the recycling activities in the region.
The following activities are proposed under this plan as interest is expressed and as funding
becomes available:
86
© Authority as of August 1, 2004 hired a regional recycling coordinator to work with the
Counties, Towns and the commercial sector, Coordinator is responsible for pursuing
markets, assisting with the establishment of collection programs, developing educational
programs, and expanding the overall interest in recycling in the region.

Authority to consider assisting directly with the recycling programs but coordinator will
need to research markets and develop a specific plan for the Authority to act on.

«Authority to consider establishment of a periodic electronic waste collection program.
« Authority to consider establishment of a periodic household hazardous waste collection
program,
« The Authority will continue to encourage its localities to increase programs offered and
public participation in annual environmental events.

The Authority will continue to encourage the localities to increase the percentage of
residents that are educated about proper disposal and recycling practices within the
region.

Secure additional competitive state grants to fund additional environmental education
programs.
7.4 Resource recovery and incineration
Resource recovery refers to a system that provides for collection, separation, recycling and
recovery of energy from solid wastes, including disposal of non-recoverable waste residues.
Incineration means the controlled combustion of solid waste for disposal. According to the EPA
burning MSW can generate energy while reducing the amount of waste by up to 90 percent in
volume and 75% in weight. The two activities are similar and are therefore combined for this
discussion.
‘At this time, the region does not generate enough waste to make resource recovery or
incineration feasible.
75 Landfilling
Landfilling at an out of region facility is the primary disposal mechanism for the region. Sections
5.2 and 5.3 outlined the region’s transfer and disposal activities in detail.
8.0 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF PROGRAM
The following section outlines the goals and objectives for the region’s solid waste management
program. Some of the program activities will remain under the supervision of the local
governments. Other program activities will remain or become regional as described below. ‘The
Authority oversees all regional activities.
87
8.1
Collections
Collection will remain in the hands of the local governments as indicated below.
TABLE 76
COLLECTION SYSTEM
GOALS AND ACTION ITEMS.
Cl
Continue to provide cost
effective collection
systems for the citizens
of the region
Buchanan County to | No change
continue with its door to | proposed
door pick up program.
Towns to continue with.
their existing programs
‘Not applicable.
Dickenson County to No change
continue with its door to | proposed
door pick up program.
‘Towns to continue with
their existing programs.
Not applicable
Russell County to No change
continue with its drop | proposed
off collection sites.
Towns to continue with
their existing programs.
‘Not applicable”
Evaluate the potential
for privatizing the
collection system of the
region
Authority to evaluate 2016-2018
privatization through
inquities of the private
haulers. May develop a
request for proposals if
preliminary discussions
indicate a potential
savings in the collection
programs.
No specific
budget
proposed at
this time.
C3
Increase door to door
service to citizens in
more densely populated
areas,
‘The Town of Lebanon | 2016-2017
may consider ways to
provide service to
Russell County residents
who live outside Town
limits in a reasonably
densely populated area.
No specific
budget
proposed at
this time.
88
8.2
Transfer
During the planning period, the Counties will continue to transfer their waste to a disposal
facility outside of the region and the Authority will continue to oversee the hauling contracts, to
provide funding for the transfer operations and to provide maintenance as needed. Towards the
end of the planning period, the transfer stations will be 30 years old. Depending on the
maintenance provided at the facilities, the buildings might be at the end of their useful life and
require replacement or significant renovation.
If replacement is required, the Authority in
conjunction with the Counties may seek new, more central locations. As noted in previous
sections, the waste stream is not anticipated to increase significantly over the planning period
and hence the facilities should continue to be appropriately sized for the anticipated waste
stream.
TRANSFER STATION SYSTEM
GOALS AND ACTION ITEMS
TABLE 77
Continue to provide for
adequate hauling from
the transfer stations at a
cost competitive price.
‘The Authority will
continue to oversee the
hauling contracts and to
provide funding for the
operations of the
transfer stations. The
current contract with
Advanced Disposal, Inc.
expires in October 26,
2018 at which time the
Authority will have
cither renegotiated the
contract or selected a
new contractor.
January 2018
‘No cost
associated with
this action.
Provide for the care and
maintenance of the
transfer facilities.
The Authority will
continue to oversee the
repair and maintenance
of the facilities.
Maintenance items
already identified
include floor slab repair
and door repair.
As soon as
funding
becomes
available and
the need
becomes
significant.
T-3
Provide accurate weigh
scales at the facilities.
Depending on
maintenance and care of
scales, scales at the
three facilities may need
to be replaced or
‘Annually
consider
condition of
scales. If
deterioration
Cost to replace
scales
assuming that
foundation is
still intact
89
.
is noted, estimated at
towards the end of the replace or $40,000-
planning period. repair as 80,000 per
_ necessary. _| scale.
T-4 Consider providing The Authority may No schedule | No cost
additional recycling consider developing or | established established for
activities at facilities. expanding recycling for this this effort at
programs at the transfer | effort. Will | this time.
stations, Their efforts | depend on
will be a function of the | interest of
interest of the localities | localities.
_ of the region. -
T-S Improve efficiency Relocation of stations as | No schedule | No cost
stations wear out, established | established for
Authority may consider | for this this effort at
relocation of stations to | effort. this time.
more central area.
83 Disposal
Disposal will continue through 2018 at the Advanced Disposal Inc. landfill located in Sullivan
County Tennessee.
Prior to the end of 2018, the Authority will initiate contract renewal.
Throughout the planning period, the Authority will need to evaluate the remaining disposal
capacity in which ever facility they are contracted with and to consider alternatives as necessary.
TABLE 78
DISPOSAL SYSTEM
GOALS AND ACTION ITEMS
D-1
Provide consistent
disposal facilities for the
Region.
‘The current contract
held by the Authority
with Advanced Disposal
expires on October 26,
2018. Prior to
expiration, the Authority
will begin contract
negotiations to assure
continued and consistent
disposal.
January 2018
There is no
cost associated
with renewal.
D2
Assure that sufficient
Annually the Authority
‘Annually
There is no
90
will evaluate the
cost associated
available for the region _| remaining disposal with this
at an economical cost. capacity at the landfill action,
currently in use and,
should it be found that
sufficient long term
capacity does not exist,
seck alternative disposal
facilities, _
The Authority will Evaluate There is no
assure the region that | during cost associated
‘any contracts written | contract with this
with the disposal facility | negotiations. | action.
will allow termination
for lack of capacity.
D3 ‘Assure that post closure | Bach locality will No specific
is effectively handicd at | continue to handle the | schedule. | a
the previously operated | post closure care of their this action,
landfills within the landfills. ‘The Authority
region. may in the future,
consider regionalization
of the environmental
monitoring at the
facilities if interest is
expressed by the
localities.
8.4 — Recycling
As indicated above the recycling rate for the region, if the industrial recycling is excluded, fails
to meet the mandated 25% as set by the DEQ. To improve the recycling opportunities and to
encourage commercial and industrial recycling, the region considered the establishment of a
recycling coordinator position within the Authority as indicated below. As of August 1, 2004,
the Authority has hired a full time recycling coordinator. ‘This individual is be tasked with
evaluating markets, providing proposals to the local governments for the development or
expansion of recycling programs, and for educating the public and commercial sector in the
importance of recycling.
1
TABLE 79
RECYCLING SYSTEM
GOALS AND ACTION ITEMS
Rl Provide The Authority is Coordinator | Funding for
professional considering the hired 08/01/04, | position comes
oversight of the establishment of a directly from
recycling program | recycling coordinator local
position if funding is governments.
forth coming from the
region. This
individual will be
tasked with the
development of
programs and public
| _| education. _
R2 Expand the existing | ‘The recycling Dependent on | As funding and
recycling coordinator will the findings of | interest
programs, evaluate the existing | the recycling —_| indicate.
programs to seek ways | coordinator.
to expand or improve
the programs in a cost
effective manner.
R3 Develop program | ‘The Authority will [Dependent on | No cost
for electronic waste | consider pursuing E- | interest and —_| established for
recycling. Waste recycling with | funding and _| this program.
or without the funding | ability of Dependent on
of a recycling Authority to | funding by
coordinator position. | advertise the | local
Will probably be program governments.
established asa once | effectively.
per year program with
citizens charged to
deliver their E-waste, _
R4 Develop an annual | The Authority will | Dependent on | No cost
collection program | consider the best way | interest and _| established for
for household to annually provide for | funding. this program at
hazardous waste. _ | the collection of this time.
household hazardous Funding will
waste as delivered by probably be
the citizens to the sought from the
transfer stations. individual
92
localities
outside of
__| tipping fees.
RS Seek ways to ‘One of the primary In progress by | No costs
educate the public | goals of the recycling | new established for
and commercial coordinator is that of | coordinator. this program at
sector relative public education. this time.
recycling, waste Coordinator
reduction and will seek grants
reuse. for funding
education. —|
8.5,
Litter Prevention and Control
‘The region has a commitment to seek ways to improve the litter prevention and control programs
in the region and to reduce the amount of litter and illegal dumps in the Counties.
TABLE 80
LITTER PREVENTION AND CONTROL
GOALS AND ACTION ITEMS
Ll Provide oversight | ‘The Authority is ‘As funding is | Funding for
of regional litter | considering the available. position to
prevention and establishment of a come directly
control programs. | recycling coordinator from local
position if funding is, governments or
forth coming from the to be subsidized
region. In addition to from litter
the recycling control grants
programs, this ron state to
individual will be cal .
tasked with the governments in
coordination of Teton.
regional litter
prevention and control
programs.
12 Assist local Recycling/litter As funding is | No specific
governments with | control coordinator _| available. project planned
education will work directly with at this time,
93
governments to assist
dumps and to seek
additional funding for
clean up as well as to
improve enforcement
actions.
programs,
with the development
of educational
programs.
L3 Encourage the Recyeling/litter As funding is | No specific
organization of | control coordinator __| available. project planned
grassroots will work with citizens at this time.
environmental to develop the
organizations who | organizations.
will assist with
litter prevention
and control. _|
L4 Seek out alternative | Recyclingylitter As funding is | No specific
funding sources for | control coordinator —| available. project planned
litter prevention —| will work with the at this time.
and control. Authority to seek
funding.
LS Continue to support | Recycling/litter As funding is | No specific
and expand the control coordinator —_| available. project planned
Adopt a Highway, | will work with the at this time.
Assign a Highway | citizens to promote
and Adopt a Stream | these programs and
programs active in | will assist in the
the region organization of
additional programs. _
Minimize illegal | The Counties will As funding is | No specific
dumping continue to provide | available. project planned
bulk collection days to at this time.
discourage illegal
dumping.
L7 Encourage cleanup | The Counties will ‘As funding is | No specific
ofillegal dumps. | continue to map illegal | available. project planned
at this time.
94
9.0 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
‘The implementation schedule for the region’s integrated waste management program has been
summarized under separate sections above.
95
10.0 FUNDING AND FINANCING
The following tables summarize the estimated expenditures for the Authority over the planning
period. It does not include collections or recycling which would fall to the individual local
governments at this time. Funding for the Authority’s program will come from tipping fees and
monthly charges billed to the Counties. Funding for the collections and recycling will come
from user fees included with utility bills, commercial fees, and/or the general fund of the local
government. Program development must be sensitive to the economic environment of the region
which is difficult at this time. Local governments do not have the funds available to them to
embark on many new programs. Should the tax base improve or the commercial/industrial
sectors grow, then the local governments will have a greater ability to embrace new programs.
TABLE 81
PROJECTED MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES
BY AUTHORITY
(Equipment, building repairs ete.)
2004 — 2024
Inflation rate__ 2.00%
Replacement] $150,000 | $150,000 |$150,000| $100,000 $20,000 $40,000
costs (2004)
Replacement! 7 Years | 7 years | 7 years 15 years Upgrade one 20 years
period time in 2009
Current age (year Needs 2 years | 1993, 1994 and | 1993, 1994, | 1993, 1994, and
Jof equipment replacement 1996 and 1996 1996
soon
| 2004 - 80
2005 |__$163,000] _ $153,000)
2006 $0]
2007 - _ s
2008 $162,366) $108,243) $162,365]
2009 | $165,642] $110,408) $66,245) $165,612
2010 | St
2011. $114,869) 8
2012 $175,749} $175,749}
2013 $47,804] x
2014 $48,760) s
2015 $186,506 $186,506)
2016 $190,236} $50,730| $190,236}
2017 Ei
2018 Ei
96
YEAR” | RUBBER] RUBBER |RUBBER) FLOOR | NEWSCALE| SCALE TOTAL
: TIRE TIRE | TIRE | REPAIRS HOUSES |REPLACEMENT| =
a, LOADER | LOADER |LOADER| (Stagger after | p
_____|(Buchanan| (Dickenson |(Russell] 2008)
County) | County) | County)
2019 - __ $201,880] | - $201,880]
2020 - _ _ 0)
2021 | _ _ _| 30)
| 2022 | $214,237| _ $214,237]
2023 $218,522) $145,681 - - $218,529)
2024 $148,595) 30
TABLE 82
PROJECTED EXPENDITURES FOR AUTHORITY
TRANSFER AND DISPOSAL
2004 — 2024
DEBT | MISCELLANEOUS | HAULING] DISPOSAL _ TONNAGE|COST PER|
“STATION | SERVICE| EXPENDITURES ale Ul oe ile eTON |
| [OPERATIONS] sie ses ah 2d ig sib
Description] 3transfer | From See Table 71 2003 2003
stations at ‘schedule |Includes new loaders,| Estimated | Estimated
$75,000 per |provided by| floor repairs, new
year ‘Authority | scales and scale
house
2004! $225,000| $434,089) $0|$509,000| $1,134,000) $2,302,089) 55,762| $41.28)
2005) $229,500] $431,011) $153,000| $519,180| $1,156,680) $2,489,371] 56,238) $44.26}
2006| $234,090] $436,334 $0|_ $529,564] $1,179,814] $2,379,798] 6,720, $41.96
2007) $238,772| $429,629) $0) $540,155] $1,203,410] $2,411,966, 57,206] __ $42.16)
2008| $243,547| $426,617, «8 162,365| $550,958| $1,227,478|$2,610,965| 57,697| $48.26]
2009| $248,418) J $165,612} $561,977| $1,252,028] $2,228,035) 58,193} $38.29)
2010) $253,387) | $0| $573,217| $1,277,068) $2,103,671| 58,694) $35.84)
| 2011] $258,454) $0| $584,681] $1,302,610] $2,145,745, _ 59,200] __ $36.25]
2012| $263,623} | $175,749| $596,375] $1,328,662] $2,364,409) 59,711) $39.60)
2013| $268,896 $0| $608,302) $1,355,235] 60,227] $37.07|
2014] $274,274, _ $0| $620,468 $1,362,340|$2,277,082| 60,748, $37.49
2015| $279,759 __ $186,506] $632,878 $1,409,986 $2,509,129) 61,274) $40.98]
2016) $285,354] _ $190,236] $645,535, $1,438,186) $2,559,312 61,806|—$41.41]
| 2017| $291,064] _ $0|_ $658,446 $1,466,950) $2,416,457] 62,343) $38.76)
2018) $296,883) _ $0|_ $671,615| $1,496,289| $2,464,786] 62,886|$39.19}
} 2019} $302,820} _ $201,880| $685,047| $1,526,215] $2,715,962| _ 63,433)
2020} $308,877| $0| $698,748] $1,556,739] $2,564,364) 63,987
| 2021 $315,054) $0|$712,723|$1,587,874| $2,615,651] 64,546] $40.52]
2022] $321,356] $214,237] _$726,977| $1,619,634] $2,882,201] 65,110, __$44.27/
2023) $327,783 $218,522) _$741,517| $1,652,024] $2,939,845] 65,680| $44.76)
2024) $334,338) $01 $756,347| $1,685,064] $2,775,750] 66,256) $41.89}
97
11.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
In the preparation of this plan, the Authority held several meetings
members of the various local governments included in the region. In addition, the Authority met
with numerous local groups to gage the needs of the member counties.
The Authority passes a resolution adopting the plan on March 31, 2016. A copy of this
resolution and other resolutions are included in Appendix 10.
98
12.0 RECORD KEEPING
In addition to the daily record keeping, the Region documents its solid waste activities in several
ways:
Annual reports to the Cumberland Plateau Regional Waste Management Authority
prepared by the Executive Director of the Authority

Annual reports to the Board of Supervisors of the member Counties based on information.
provided by the Authority

© Periodic updates to the Authority and Boards by the Executive Director


Annual submittal by March 31 of each year of the Waste Information and Assessment.
Report (Form 50-25) to DEQ


Annual submittal by April 30 of each year of the Recycling Rate Report (Form 50-30) to
DEQ


¢ Annual submittal usually by December of each year of the update to the financial
assurance forms to DEQ
All these reports, updates and DEQ submittals as well as all background and permitting
information are kept in the central archive (files) of the Cumberland Plateau Regional Waste
Management Authority located at 950 Clydesway Road, Lebanon, Virginia, 24266. The Director
of DEQ or other DEQ representatives receive copies of appropriate information relative to the
Region’s solid waste management program through the following sources:
Direct submittal to DEQ of Forms 50-25 and 50-30 on an annual basis
Permit applications
Permit amendment applications
Updates to the solid waste management plan
General correspondence which may be required from time to time
99
Appendix 1
Regional Documentation
Appendix 2
DEQ Forms 50-25
SOLID WASTE INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM REPORTING TA…
‘Stoel stuns. Hoo
SSMS,
SOLID WASTE INFORMATION ANO ASSESSMENT PROGRAM REPORTING TABLE -FonMADEO 50.25
Note: Submission daa ls March Stor We reparing period. "Todays bale: 4/35016
Page 1 of 1
Tonle TE
apie cS Ta a _ :
hae" [ron ae [F [sone [etaras [ee [ae T[e rer rene nur 7089-17
7 pacts Rio [eipearacaearet Tee bo ca yore pn Sou i om ETE
haste sn change ot Ari Fee lng Cone Aas Tasos Nana? O Yer
Ces
esi Fathne [Toor estat ste eave (oS
fonas cies [20 Chasey bi POS esac ena a obese
es Leer Techn ip cose eos [aes
eT Clee Feseves [so opens rnanng Pome
JoferearSerrecsstetion | Jeeves I
[1>]oces tty se acto seats? © Yes O No a sss
[7 [onaraina aon [en <I [Ft4feuunt of Econamicbanetis stmies?O Yas © ho
frees mang vA Manet Rete ram Naan) saeete
PRT 0 Cont eases Ramey Gears Ban Or
PORTO, US Deparment ol Beteee-Priagm
PORSOD, Whee Ponsmeu ne Wasits Eng Foe
PERSOS. Jn G Nort Company erased
PoRStS Covet Fai persed
PoRSST, Conta Recanas ingen POD
SPA Hep Gy “NASA Seon Pat
slau meson Crm Ocanievare
TER acon psi RTT
cot sto ee a a ra a Yh
behead ‘cee On-site Management of Waste Gent Oats oe
wasirecenea| Mnee Hea Tras | Recyioa | composed | icin | aachea one Tregena | et
i) ° @ @ @ C) G _
aE [rues eae
fence eae en
re
Reed [zrco
—
Sona
Gen] [ana
£4 Jers Reprod otis Pane
hitp://www.deq. virginia. gov/S WIA WebApp/doPost.do
1/12/2016
Toby Edwards
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 4:36 PM
To! [email protected]
Ce: stephan.martin@deq. virginia. gov
Subject: The Annual SOLID WASTE INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM report has
been Accepted by your DEQ regional contact
SWIA Form 50-25 submitted on: 1/12/2016 has a status of: Accepted for reporting period:
2015.
Facility: Buchanan County Transfer Station Permit Number: PBR106
Jurisdiction: VA - Virginia
Submitter: Toby Edwards Mr.
Please contact your DEQ regional representative with questions.
Toby Edwards
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 1:25 PM
To: [email protected]
Ce: [email protected]
Subject: The Annual SOLID WASTE INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM report has
been submitted
DEQ has received SWIA Form 50-25 for reporting period: 2015.
Date: 01/12/2016
Facility: Buchanan County Transfer Station Permit Number: PBR106
Jurisdiction: VA - Virginia
Submitter: Toby Edwards Mr.
This facility reported:
15376.6180 tons of total waste for the current reporting period. and
16694.8100 tons of total waste for last year.
You are receiving this message for one of the following reasons, either:


Your Facility has submitted the SWIA data on-line to DEQ; or,


The SWIA data that you submitted to DEQ in hard copy form has now been entered into the


SWIA database by DEQ staff on the date noted above.
To view the data on-line, please click here: http://ecmae:9084/SWIAWebApp/login. jsp
If you need further assistance with SWIA on-line application, please send a message to:
swia@deq. virginia. gov
SOLID WASTE INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM REPORTING TA…
Seneca shuns. Hs
‘90L1D WASTE INFORMATION AND ASSESSHENT PROGRAM REPORTING TABLE FORM OE 50 25
Note! Submission deaalin is Mare 3a fr reporting pion. Today Date: 0122016
Page | of I
Teva pag Pais
5 ay nae i ye Se — ———
= esr" Prony ae La ee ee
7 rer Soa Rae Teennteeiwet Taal ei ec eu a ao OD
eso eva arg ti on Fs ii ict Aloe Tebpons inna Ove Oo Pens vu
tet it ame [ Tey [evettattane [oo [camaro [TET
nic Aes [204 Cpls DR FOB [vac Addo ome Ty
iy tenon Tela Pincus [pion B=
Sree a Poscvais [pe [orawnenmromiwun |
| ooes tay use acne ene? @ vex O Wo
[et en en ey motte)
ome
Alene of coamictnais iO ves @ Ho
Ine VA erat oh Rect rPun No Fact)
© rons or Ocitc Yrs
PaRI7S, US Canal Walgence Aasney-Gearpe Bush Ga
PaRi07 US Daparwantof Osler Petopon
PBRSOO, Wosiatrator Paremout Waste Enray Fae
PORSDS, John C Not Conpary neorpaatad
PORS4S, Covi Fatexneoparied
PORSST, Covais Alana Angin incapeaed
SW7207, Hampton Gy -NASA Steam Pant
Wiest amounts measured in
os
@ ‘Onic Yass
‘Wasa ope: Rept Apa gOS aT
iwpuing ena be caro he fs utara Ye
o
ci
eagies
o
o 0 ‘a o Pecet
saa Cac
ore
ia
be “oon
4-4 rust Rspering etot
[eee] Lean
http:/hwww.deq. virginia gov/S WIA WebApp/doPost.do
1/12/2016
Toby Edwards
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 4:34 PM
To! [email protected]
Ce: [email protected]
Subject: The Annual SOLID WASTE INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM report has
been Accepted by your DEQ regional contact
SWIA Form 50-25 submitted on: 01/12/2016 has a status of: Accepted for reporting period:
2015.
Facility: Dickenson County Transfer Station Permit Number: PBRO49
Jurisdiction: VA - Virginia
Submitter: Toby F. Edwards
Please contact your DEQ regional representative with questions.
Toby Edwards
From: stephan.martin@deq virginia gov
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 1:28 PM
[email protected]
[email protected] gov |
Subject: The Annual SOLID WASTE INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM report has
been submitted
DEQ has received SWIA Form 50-25 for reporting period: 2015.
Date: 01/12/2016
Facility: Dickenson County Transfer Station Permit Number: PBRO49
Jurisdiction: VA - Virginia
Submitter: Toby F.Edwards
This facility reported:
9998.6500 tons of total waste for the current reporting period and
11189.3200 tons of total waste for last year.
You are receiving this message for one of the following reasons, either:

Your Facility has submitted the SWIA data on-line to DEQ; or,
The SWIA data that you submitted to DEQ in hard copy form has now been entered into the

SWIA database by DEQ staff on the date noted above.
To view the data on-line, please click here; http: //ecmae:9084/SWIAWebApp/ login. isp,
If you need further assistance with SWIA on-line application, please send a message to:
swia@deq. virginia. gov
SOLID WASTE INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM REPORTING TA… Page 1 of 1
‘Semralnstuctons. lo test
0LD WASTE NFORMATIO AND ASGESENENT PROGRAM REPORTING TABLE FORM DEO 50.25,
ia Susan denne sch ttt napa pr olay Die Waste
a ar STE
2 pai er _ ooo 7 a apg PE
sper [ror eS [eee Fore Foe P= [lo reece omen rnb] 768557
7 [rp Ea Ase [eremteonaret [Reena Saati ce ua go aoa sm
West eva ange tis Fs iy Ce Aton er Tupi hba Ove Ona renner
nt ste Toby [sree on [esses Paes ro
[enacts oat Chay ire POR Pot adios eyes
les Leon Teale i cote ane [ee
Se escrow [polorctnonereomnste |
fer nays acest @ vos O Wo [caracuat emetine cio emt
[erase sree cer TZ Aston f coor ert ies?_© Yes @ No
races etna VA non ash: Reosved eogPomt NO Fcyans) ‘Oron  Ocatic Yas
PaRITS_ US Canal lise Ape Gearpe Bah Cr
RIOT. US Daprmentof Defense. Penisso0
PBRSDD, WheeistrstorPansmeu ne- Waste Erg Foe
PARSOS, Jobo C Not Company incorporated
R545, CovenaFarfaxincoperated
RSS! .Covewa Nevandia Aton Incorporated
[SWP297 ,Hamgton Gy = NASA Scam Pon
Wise amounts massed on a Ocwieveds
Teepe Roper om by ToT
fap ci ral 3 ar ee
‘Wesco | MO ‘erates | Rect | composed | intos ] nutes | oer
o e o io ‘° ‘ ° =
TEESE | aor fears
naval Wats 7ST war
ote
veores=9 [ra fea
te
=
3
i
i
To, [iso bear fare
[eer] [eae
(4-4 Aout Roporing Paiod BB a
http://www.deq. virginia.gov/S WIA WebApp/doPost.do 1/12/2016
Toby Edwards
[email protected]
Tuesday, January 12, 2016 4:33 PM
[email protected]
[email protected]
The Annual SOLID WASTE INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM report has
been Accepted by your DEQ regional contact
SWIA Form 50-25 submitted on: @1/12/2016 has a status of: Accepted for reporting period:
2015.
Facility: Russell County Solid Waste Transfer Station Permit Number: PBReOL
Jurisdiction: VA - Virginia
Submitter: Toby Edwards Mr.
Please contact your DEQ regional representative with questions.
Toby Edwards
From: [email protected].
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 1:34 PM.
To: [email protected] ]
Ce: stephan.martin@deq,virginia.gov |
Subject: The Annual SOLID WASTE INFORMATION AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAM report has |
been submitted
DEQ has received SWIA Form 50-25 for reporting period: 2015.
Date: 01/12/2016
Facility: Russell County Solid Waste Transfer Station Permit Number: PBROO1
Jurisdiction: VA - Virginia
Submitter: Toby Edwards Mr.
This facility reported: .
15123.8000 tons of total waste for the current reporting period and
15785.7000 tons of total waste for last year.
You are receiving this message for one of the following reasons, either:


Your Facility has submitted the SWIA data on-line to DEQ; or,


The SWIA data that you submitted to DEQ in hard copy form has now been entered into the
SWIA database by DEQ staff on the date noted above.


To view the data on-line, please click here: http://ecmae:9084/SWIAWebApp/ login. jsp
If you need further assistance with SWIA on-line application, please send a message to:
swia@deq. virginia. gov
ware Saunnoo
sued 25eNNOL
Lo Swi0L =
ovear’st 000 ovo Ea ows ovo svou ovo wut wees seva0 ee = cl]
i
irre wo wo arr 7 wo oc} coo ro Te aa soa]
35060 a0. 08. vee wor 090. zor 00. war ran zit 310469]
twee 000 O00 ire 8 00 Ea 000. an a B60 spaeaiwads|
ooseh a0 on os ios wo. ez a0 | eve ireor isi SSD
oozstr oo 00. 352 se0r 00 ri 00. yan S08 TeaeT stir]
eons oo 0 ome a 00 ra oo #3 4 orsset Si-unr|
ae ooo o_o er wo a8 oo $i a seeiet sre
ieee a0 oo [18 aya 0 wr 300. tor ais wee Sriudy
iguvt 100) ooo ee 0 300. wos 00 ze e682 zea s-ueH
o018 00. 08. an. os 200. 00 wo ose wo ‘ori Spun
war 00. 00. 200 wer oo woe 00. 8 zeit rar si Aienver
ws 00 ooo 300 sr wo ro wo iss soe oseerT Fie]
(30005 sows
WE RIO | “Soissesy_[~-summ | ssa sams a 7m
aD BY SDHANOT HOEIRE KINDO TSS
veuee  ae ovo 0 suse ovo wu 00 O00: enor ow eusn 2 ese amo
ase 5 we 0. aor oa we oo oo ie Trae Scr
‘ya0es 00. a0. 00. wer ovo ey 00. 000. pa Toe Beno
sor 03. ooo wo 393 ooo 09. 00. wor erniet | spaoauaides
ZE Doe wo oo. 300 ez on zt a0. 00. za aeser srs)
sri oo a0 00. 39 200 oo ooo 0 e808 eeieet
zr a0m 00. on 77a} sie ooo we oo 0 i5¥ Se Lae
er on oo ooo ra ooo irs a0 000. et [ais
ray ooo ooo wo ie a0 7 oo 300. wor wearz
zoos oe oo 0 wz a0 are on. 00. ore eee
swers oo 90. 309. iso 08. oa ca wo 00 wees |
Tes0r 00 00 O00 iis 000. aoa oo 000 vast ares |
iwa0er oo 00. a0. rr} 300. ee oo 00 ae area’s
3005 i “Towa
WwioL WGHIO_|S0Is386V sum | sui | ~soams ‘oak | awoiosw rsa “iso os
f _ aS SEWN TOE INOS THON
aaa See I) oon evo wo ee wor) ao seo rio
WoL a oe a wo wo wo ww iT syiauaron|
eevee ooo. a0. 00 386 ono 30 300 300 raat syieqe29|
se 36° oo 90. oor on. a0. 209. ‘00. se 982 Trsoquatas|
rors) 03. on oo 01 ovo ono ooo 00 ii6 srisstny|
zis on ova 00. aor on. a0. 00. 200. aL e8e sit
aiize 200. oa 300. ori O00 ovo oo 0 $508 si-s0nr|
eis 000 ov wo 062 a0 ‘ooo ovo 00 a6 si-eal
ca on 00 a0 cin ‘00. 308 200. 309. Lia ary
reser a0. 300. ooo BL ov ov 300. a0. wey. sore
oars ooo 0. ooo az 00 a0 ow. O00 crore Srtoenae
seis I wo oo ore 300 a0 oo a0 rar sr-foenue|
save ac} wo. ono 8 200. 39 a0 200 w0e2l Frawesea
1
sa005
77s ssini0_—~-sorssesv_|— Simm [ssa oak yens_| aso 7S
t t
-Tu0JUSOVNNOL STOCHI0E AINKOO NOGNDOG
USGs
Location Map
Buchanan County Closed Landfill - Permit #218
Buchanan County, Virginia
SCALE: 1"=2000’
PLAN NO. B03205-01
<> Draper Aden Associates
j
in Street
Blacksburg, VA 24060
540-552-0444 Fax: 540-552-0291
Engineering ¢ Surveying ¢ Environmental Services
+2206 South ae
Hampton Roads, VA
alelgh.DEurham, NC
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
DATE
FIGURE
MF 3
Lc
05-10-04
fh = cm) f
=a
<i aes i K << S 0)
[uses apo: negeriddd A A BROAS
Location Map SCALE: 1" =2000’
Dickenson County Closed Landfill - Permit #261
Dickenson County, Virginia PLAN NO. B03205-01
<=> Draper Aden Associates DESIGNED FIGURE
FH —nsnestng Surveying Bavionmental Serves DRAWN MF
7206 South Main Strost Rehmond VR CHECKED LC 4
Blacksburg, VA 24060 Hampton Road VA DATE 05-10-04
s40-s82-0044 Fax 540-552-0291 fag bear Ne
Oe i 000 3
fe 5 7/5! Tepoarabhhio. Series: Carbo; Hangonvillé
Location Map
Russell County Closed Landfill - Permit #515
Russell County, Virginia
SCALE: 1"=2000’
PLAN NO. B03205-01
< Draper Aden Associates
SS tests Suen tenn Si
7206 South Main Steet etna. Ya
Blacksburg, VA 24060 iampton Rose, VA
540-552-0446 Fax: 540-552-0291 Fel beara NC
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
DATE
FIGURE
MF
LC 5
05-10-04
Appendix 3
Summary of Previously Permitted Landfills
and Location Maps
LANDFILL |
PERMIT
NUMBER
OWNER TYPE OF
LANDFILL
ACREAGE
DATE
PERMITTED
DATE | ADDITIONAL
CLOSED INFORMATION
type, current usage)
052
Buchanan Sanitary
County
‘Approx. 10
01/01/1972
10/12/1982__| Permit revoked 10/1982
No monitoring required
2’ soil cover-closure cap
472
Beaver CDD
Construction
Landfill
Os
05/30/1985
Final receipt of waste
05/27/1987 | 07/1985
Permit revoked 05/1987
|__No monitoring required
218
Buchanan Sanitary
County
28.8
01/10/1977
10/17/1995 Post-closure care
(groundwater, gas)
GCL closure cap
578
Buchanan Sanitary
Count;
Never
Constructed
1994
Never Permitted but never
Constructed constructed
019
Dickenson Sanitary
County
NIA
09/13/1971
10/12/1982 Permit Revoked
‘No monitoring required
2’ soil cover-closure cap
261
Dickenson | Sanitary
County
68
11/14/1978
Amended
1/23/1979
10-30/1996
Post Closure Care
(groundwater, gas)
synthetic closure cap
250
Lebanon’ | Sanitary
Landfill |
13
06/23/1978
OWMION7S | Permit Revoked 10/1982
Fly ash disposal site
No monitoring required
O18
Russell County | Sanitary
Carbo Site
10-12
09/13/1971
TO/T2/1982 Permit Revoked
No monitoring required
2’ soil cover-closure cap
258
Russell County
Copper Ridge
Sanitary
79.1
09/27/1978
12/30/1997 Post Closure Care
(Groundwater, gas)
GCL closure cap
499
Russell County
(No permit
record)
Sanitary
N/A
N/A
NA N/A
515
Russell County
Sanitary
30.16
11/10/1987,
Amended
11/27/89
| 11706703 | Post Closure Care
| (groundwater, gas)
| GCL closure cap
Appendix 4
DEQ Recycling Reporting Form
D Commonwealth of Virginia
Locality Recycling Rate Report
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Calendar Year 2016
DEQ Form 50-30 (Revised December 2016)
Email completed form to: [email protected]
Solid Waste Planning Unit Information (Enter in Rows 4 - 14.)
Solid Waste Planning Unit Cumberland Plateau Regional WM Authority
Preparer’s Name Toby F. Edwards
Preparer’s Title Director of Waste Services
Address Line 1 P.O. Box 548 Lebanon, VA 24266
Address Line 2
Address Line 3
Phone Number 276-889-1778
Email address [email protected]
Date 4/17/2017,
Population Density
67,347|for SWPU
Mandated Recycling Rate Reporting
(15% or 25% will auto calculate) 15% Frequency Every 4 years
Total Population for SWPU
Enter tons (whole numbers only) in the yellow highlighted boxes for PRMs and MSW Disposed.
Totals will auto calculate.
Principal Recyclable Materials (PRM)
PRM Material Tons recycled MSW Disposed
Paper 2,119] Household Waste 33,799|
Metal 7,341 Commercial Waste 2,944]
Plastic 543| Institutional Waste 169
Glass | lother 4,062
commingled o Total msw 40,974]
Yard Waste 370]
Waste Wood 0
[Textiles 110]
Waste Tires 879)
[Used Oil 665)
Used Oil Filters 49]
Used Antifreeze 36]
Batteries 241]
Electronics 11
Inoperative Motor Vehicles 183]
Jother (Specify)
lOther (Specify)
{Total PRM in Tons 12,547
Enter facility information and material in columns A and B. Enter tons (whole numbers only) in the yellow
highlighted boxes. Totals will auto calculate.
Credits Recycling Residue
Facility/Operation Material Tons
[Total ty)
Credits Solid Waste Reused
Reuse Method Material Tons
Total t)
Credits Non-MSW recycled
Recycling Method Material Tons
|
[Total |
CREDITS TOTAL 0
Credit for Source Reduction Program (SRP)
‘SRP does not apply enter “0”
SRP does apply enter “2” 2%
Recycling rates auto calculate.
Base Recycling Rate 23.4% Base Rate
Adjusted Recycling Rate 23.4% Rate with credits
Adjusted Recycling Rate + SRP 25.4% Credits + SRP
Credit Max Allowed Base +5 28.4%
Final Recycle Rate 25.4% Final Recycle Rate
[Sources for PRM Data
Example: Permit #112, County Landfill
Other Sources for collected
data
lExample: Walmart/Target
(Comments: Data is collected by the authority’s member counties recycling coordinators,
[Additional Contacts:
Commonwealth of Virginia
Locality Recycling Rate Report
For Calendar Year 2014
‘VRGINNA DEPARTMENTOR. Sp
NVIRONMENTAL QUALIEY
Contact Information
Reporting Solid Waste Planning Unit: Cumberland Plateau RWMA
Person Completing This Form: —_Toby Edwards
Title: _Director of Waste Services
Address: —_P.0. Box $48 Lebanon VA 24266
Street/P.0. Box City State Zip
Phone #: (276 ) 889-1778 Fax #: (276_) 889-5732
Email Address: tobyedwards@bvu-net
Member Governments (The local governments identified in your regional solid waste
management plan and whose data is included in this report):
Town of Grundy
Towns of Clinchco, Clintwood and Haysi
“Towns of Cleveland, Honaker and Lebanon
Counties of Buchanan, Dickenson and Russell
Due to the complexity and difficulty in obtaining data, this report reflects the best efforts
of the solid waste planning unit to represent its recycling efforts for CY 2014, I certify
that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this
form and any attached documents, and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals
immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe that the submitted
information is true, accurate, and complete. These records will be made available for
ses, if requested.
Niebeotiest. SLL
‘Authorized $jgnature Title Seevices — nhte
Return completed form by April 30, 2015 to: Virginia DEQ, Attn: Recycling
Rates, P.O. Box 1105, Richmond, VA 23218.
DEQ Form $0.30 (Revised) lof 8 sonen014
Locality Recycling Rate Report For Calendar Year 2014
PART A: Recycling Rate Calculation - Using the formulae provided below and the information
reported on Pages 3, 4 and 5 to calculate your recycling rates,
———–_____
Step 1: [(PRMSs) /(PRMs + MSW Disposed)] X 100 = Base Recycling Rate %
roor9 | | 2067219 | 4} 48.417 x100=| 3 ”
Step 2: CREDITS calculation
a, Total Recycling Residue tons
b, Total Solid Waste Reused tons
©. Total Non-MSW Recycled tons
CREDITS 0 tons
Adjusted
Step 3: [(PRMs + CREDITS) / (PRMs + CREDITS + MSW Disposed)] X 100 = Recycling Rate #1*
20,672.19 | 4. | 9, /}20,672.19 + | 0 + | 48,417 X100= | 30 %
Step Source Reduction Credit does not apply; or
Oo Adjusted Recycling Rate #1 +2% SRP Credit = Adjusted Recycling Rate #2*
0 1% + 2%
30 %
Step 5: Final Recycling Rate* for Solid Waste Planning Unit = %
30

Total credits resulting from Steps 3 and 4 may not exceed 5 percentage points above the Base
Recycling Rate achieved by the Solid Waste Planning Unit.

DEQ Form 50-30 (Revised) 2of 8 on02014
Locality Recycling Rate Report For Calendar Year 2014
PART B: DATA
Part I: Principal Recyclable Materials (PRMs): Report only PRM material generated within the
reporting SWPU and recycled, NOT imported PRMSs for recycling.
PRM TYPE
Paper
Metal
Plastic
Glass
‘Commingled (also known as Single Stream)
‘Yard Waste (composted or mulched)
‘Waste wood (chipped or mulched)
Textiles
Tires 516.35
Used Oil 1,428.57
Used Oil Filters
‘Used Antifreeze
Batteries
Electronics
Inoperative Motor Vehicles (see guidance)
Other (specify: )
Other (specif) )
TOTAL PRMs 20,672.19 (PRMs)
Enier Total on Page 2, Step 1)
legory (see Credits Worksheet, Page 5)
A. Recycling Residue — “Recycling residue” means the (j) nonmetallic substances, including but not
limited to plasti, rubber, and insulation, which remain after a shredder has separated for purposes of
recycling the ferrous and nonferrous metal from a motor vehicle, appliance, or other discarded metallic
item and (ii) organic waste remaining after removal of metals, glass, plastics and paper which are to be
recycled as part of a resource recovery process for municipal solid waste resulting in the production of a
refuse derived fuel. (§ 10.1-1400 of the Code of Virginia) (use only SWPU generation)
MATERIAL
DESCRIPTION FACILITY/OPERATION TONS OF MATERIAL
from
from 7
from _
TOTAL RECYCLING RESIDUE, o
(Enter Total on Page 2, Step 2 2)
DEQ Form 50-30 (Revised) 30f 8 1072072014
Locality Recycling Rate Report For Calendar Year 2014
Solid Waste Re-Used
MATERIAL
DESCRIPTION REUSE METHOD TONS OF MATERIAL
TOTAL SOLID WASTE REUSED 0
Enter Total on Page 2, Step 2)
C. Non-Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Recycled
MATERIAL
DESCRIPTION RECYCLING METHOD TONS OF MATERIAL
TOTAL NON-MSW RECYCLED o
(Enter Total on Page 2, Step 2 ¢)
if the Solid Waste Planning Unit has implemented a Source Reduction Program (SRP).
Examples of SRPs include Grass-cycling, Home Composting, Clothing Reuse, Office
Paper Reduction (duplexing), Multi-Use Pallets, or Paper Towel Reduction. The SRP
must be included in the Solid Waste Management Plan on file with the Department:
SRP description:
SRP deseription:
SRP description:
(Cert
on Page 2, Step 4)
1, Biosolids ~industrial stadge, animal manures; or, sewage sludge (unless composted)
2. Automobiles unless part of the Inoperable Vehicle Program (DMV)


Leachate


Soils — contaminated soils, soil material from road maintenance


Household hazardous waste


Hazardous waste


Medical waste


8 Rocks or stone
DEQ Form 50-30 (Revised) Tots ToR0;014
Locality Recycling Rate Report For Calendar Year 2014
MSW TYPE TOTAL AMOUNT DISPOSED (TONS)
Household 20,672.19
Commercial _
Institutional
Other (DO NOT INCLUDE INDUSTRIAL WASTES)
‘TOTAL MSW DISPOSED 20,672.19
(Enter Total on Page 2, Step 1 and Step 3)
**MSW DISPOSED for the purpose of this report means delivered to a permitted sanitary landfill,
transfer station, or waste incinerator for disposal.
‘DEQ Form 50-30 (Revised) Sof 8 1072072014
Locality Recycling Rate Report
[Credits Worksheet _
L
cia
UL
For Calendar Year 2014
v Material description
__ PRM
—— PRM
—— PRM
Industrial
= Construction
Demolition
Debris
Other
Other
Other
LEE
TOTAL TONS
Recycling of any Non-Municipal Soli
Vv Material description
__ Industrial
= Constru
= Demolition
= Debris
= Other
Other
Other
TOTAL TONS
‘Tons
(enter data on Page 4,
Solid Waste ReUsed)
Tons
a Center data on Page 4,
Non-MSW Recycled)
Inoperable Vehicles Removed and Demolished ~ include number of vehicles that the
localities received reimbursement from DMV under §46.2-1207 of the Code of Virginia.
of vehicles removed/reimbursement received
Average tonnage per vehicle
‘Total Tons
264
X 1 Ton each
264 (enter data on Page 3,
PRM, Inoperative
‘Motor Vehicle
Program)
NOTE: Check “Exclusions” on Page 4 to avoid listing of those materials on this worksheet and/or in
the
data fields of this report,
DEQ Form 50-30 (Revised)
Gof 8
102072014
Locality Recycling Rate Report For Calendar Year 2014
et Seq.) require
that Solid Waste Planning Units (SWPUs) in the Commonwealth develop complete, revised solid waste
‘management plans, Section 9 VAC 20-130-120 B & C of the Regulations requires that a minimum recycling rate of
the total municipal solid waste generated annually in each solid waste planning unit be maintained, It also requires
that the plan describe how this rate shall be met or exceeded and requires that the calculation methodology be
included in the plan, Section 9 VAC 20-130-165 D establishes that every solid waste management planning unit
with populations over 100,000 shall submit to the department by April 30 of each year, the data and calculations
required in 9 VAC 20-130-120 B & C for the preceding calendar year. SWPUs with populations of 100,000 or less
| years (CY years 201 rd).
NOTE: ONLY RECYCLING RATE REPORTS FROM AN APPROVED SOLID WASTE PLANNING UNIT (SPU) WILL BE
ACCEPTED FOR PROCESSING. JURISDICTIONS WITHIN A SWPU MUST SUBMIT THEIR RECYCLING DATA TO THE SWPU
FOR INCORPORATION INTO THE ANNUAL REPORT.
Its requested that all amounts included on the form be listed in tons 2,000 pounds), rounded to the nearest whole
ton, If actual weights are not known, volumes can be converted to weight estimates. ‘To assist you with these
estimates, a standardized volume-to-weight conversion table is attached.
Contact Information Section: Please provide information on the Reporting SWPU and information on the
individual completing this form, Under Member Governments, please list the local governments identified in the
applicable solid waste management plan.
Calculated Recycling Rate Section: Using the formulae provided, calculate your recycling rates for the reporting
period from information identified in the Recycling Rate Calculations Section
Signature Block Section: Please provide an authorized signature prior to submitting the completed form,
Authorized signatories include Executive Officer, Administrator, of other legally designated representative of the
SWPU reporting entity
Recycling Rate Calculations Section: Please provide the requested information:
Part I: Principal Recyclable Material (PRM) - Report the amount in tons of each PRM collected for recyeling in
the named jurisdiction(s) during the reporting period. PRMs include paper, metal, plastic, container glass,
commingled, yard waste, waste wood, textiles, tires, used oil, used oil filters, used antifreeze, batteries, electronics,
and other materials approved by the Director taken from the Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) generation. A one ton
credit may also be entered for each inoperable motor vehicle for which a locality receives reimbursement from the
Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles under §46.2-1207 of the Code of Virginia. The total weight in TONS of all
PRM collected for recycling is represented as PRMS in the Recycling Rate Calculation.
Part Il: Credits - Report the amount in TONS of each material for which recycling credit is authorized in §10.
1411. of the Code of Virginia: ()) one ton for each ton of recycling residue generated in Virginia and deposited in
a landfill permitted under §10.1-1408.1 of the Code of Virginia; (ji) one ton for each ton of any solid waste material
that is reused; and, (iil) one ton for each ton of any non-municipal solid waste that is recycled, ‘The total weight in
‘TONS of all material for which credits ate authorized is represented as CREDITS in the Recycling Rate
Calculation, A credit of two percentage points of the minimum recycling rate mandated for the Solid Waste
Planning Unit (SWPU) may be taken for a soutce reduction program that is implemented and identified in its Solid
‘Waste Management Plan. Total credits may not exceed five percentage points above the Base Recycling Rate
achieved by the SWPU.
Part IIt: Total Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Disposed: Report the total amount in TONS of MSW that was
disposed of by the Solid Waste Planning Unit (SWPU) during the reporting period for each of the source categories
(Household, Commercial, Institutional, and Other). For the purpose ofthis report, “disposed,” means delivery to a
permitted sanitary landfill or waste incinerator for disposal, and excludes industrial wastes. Industrial waste and
by-products should not be included in the MSW or Recycling calculation. ‘The total weight in tons of MSW
disposed is represented as MSW Disposed in the Recycling Rate Calculation,
DEQ Form 50-30 (Revised) Tof 8 10/20/2014
Locality Recycling Rate Report Volume to Weight Conversion Table
‘Material ‘Volume ‘Weight in Pounds
Metal
‘Aluminum Cans, Whole ‘One cubie yard 50-74
Aluminum Cans, Flattened ‘One cube yard 250
‘Aluminum Cans ‘One full grocery bag 15
Ferrous Cans, Whole ‘One cubic yard 150.
Ferrous Cans, Flattened ‘One cubie yard 850
‘Automobile Bodies ‘One vehicle 2,000,
Paper
‘Newsprint, Loose ‘One cubie yard 360-800
‘Newsprint, Compacted ‘One cubie yard 720-1,000
‘Newsprint 12” stack — 35
‘Corrugated Cardboard, Loose ‘One cubie yard 75-100
[ Corrugated Cardboard, Baled One cubie yard 1,000-2,000
Plastic
PETE, Whole, Loose ‘One cubic yard 30-407
PETE, Whole, Loose Gaylord 0-53
PETE, Whole, Baled 30" x62" 500
Film, Baled 30" 42" A 7,100
Film, Baled Semi-Load 44,000
Film, Loose ‘Standard grocery bag, 15
HDPE (Dairy Only), Whole, Loose | One cubic yard 24
HDPE (Dairy Only), Baled 32" x60" 400-500,
HDPE (Mixed), Baled 32x60" 900
Mixed PET & Dsity, Whole, Loose | One cubie yard 32
Mixed PET, Dairy & Other Rigid | One cubic yard 38
(Whole, Loose)
Mined Rigid, No Film ‘One cubie yard o
Glass
Glass, Whole Bottles ‘One cube yard 600-1,000
Giass, Semi-Crushed. One eubie yard 7,000-1,800
‘Giass, Crushed (Mechanically) ‘One cubie yard 800-2,700
Giass, Whole Bottles ‘One full grocery bag 16
Glass, Uncrushed to Manually ‘35 gallon drum 125-500
Broken
‘Arboreal
‘Leaves, Uncompacted ‘One cubie yard 200-250.
eaves, Compacted ‘One eubie yard 300-450
eaves, Vacuumed ‘One cubic yard 350
‘Wood Chips ‘One cubie yard 500
Grass Clippings ‘One cubie yard 00-1,500,
Other
‘Battery (Heavy Equipment) One a
Battery (Auto) ‘One 359
‘Used Motor Oil One gallon 7
Used Oil Filters (Unerashed) 35 gallon drum 6 LbsiUsed OFF
110 Lbs/Ferrous Metal
35 gallon drum 165 Lbs/Used Oil +
368 Lbs./Forrous Metal
Tire = Passenger Car ‘One 20
Tire = Truck, Light ‘One 35
Tire Semi One 105
“Antifreeze ‘One gallon Baz
Food Waste, Solid Liquid Fats | 55 galion dram 412
lectfonics: CRI/CPU/LapTop/TV | Each (avg wt from NCER) JRRUTRIAD respecivel
‘This Table For General Guidance Only.
DEQ Form 50-30 (Revised) tonono14
Appendix 5
Recycling Markets
Apes
Recyclable Materials Market Survey
COMPANY NAME & | ALUMINUM
‘ADDRESS
GLASS
‘ONE
PLASTIC]
TAXED
PAPER
CORRUGATED] BATTERIES
OTHER
Far and Wetal SOaaT:
liwheets Recycling SOaTTE.
P.0. Box 225
Ewing, VA
276-445-5349
Capper FT SO SST,
copper #2 $0.75
7 SoS eae
‘s50iton
's35iton
‘s50iten
clean white paper $8svton
|chiaboard $25/ton
Limestone, TN.
[432-257-2081 i
10
[see other
$45-55!ton
see other no
Jaccepts ground wood paper Such as
newspapaer, magazines, mixed paper
old sheellcast
$0.42,
ccans $0.52,
szo0r100tbs.| no
‘S0.A6ii. Serape
‘90.50, Cans
[Johnson City, TN 37601
‘cooper $0.20
28s $0.
stainloss steo! $0.35/b,
radiators $0.40,
enbrier Reoycing $0.42
[204.645.4232
[will accapt newspaper. magazines, offce
paper, cardboard, plastic #1 & #2, steel
[cans and aluminum feil- do not pay
Appendix 6
Sampling of Public Education Materials
aS
ZS Draper Aden Associates
RECORD OF COMMUNICATION
Project Name: Cumberland Plateau Regional SWMP Date: 4/13/04. Time: 10 am
JobN 8 035050-01 D1 incoming — [] Outgoing
‘Talked with: Eugene Mullins, Litter control office Recorded by: Barber
Company: Dickenson County Phone No. 276-835-8806
Topi Public Education ~ litter and recycling
ce:
Out of the litter office, they manage to visit all the public school classrooms once a year with a
presentation about litter and recycling. ‘They do produce some literature they hand out to the
kids. They also have a booth at the county fair with things to give away to folks publicizing the
programs.
‘They have an Adopt-a-Highway program and Adopt-a-Steam program that help with litter
cleanup. In addition, they maintain a website http://www.dcct.naxs.com/ publicizing their Clean
Up activities and illegal dumping information. There is a group called the Clean Team made up
of civic group that do cleanup. The site also has information on the Adopt a highway program.
‘They do have the probation program with the courts that sentences people to community service
cleaning up 1-2 stretches of Highway.
The office has been do this for two and a half years.
Russell County Environmental Council Page | of |
Next RCEC Meeting: Wednesday, March 3, 2004
&) Russell County
Environmental Council
PURPOSE: The Russell County Environmental Council (RCI is a voluntary
organization whose purpose is to help Russell County programs such as recycling, litter
control, beautification, and water quality,
RCEC will address any other environmental issue that may effect the citizens of Russell
County.
RCEC EVENTS FOR FY 2003-2004
Russell County Fair: Exhibitor August 29 - September 6, 2003
School Beautiful: Fall 2003 and Spring 2004
Fall Judging - Completed October 2003
Spring Judging - Scheduled for Late March or Early April 2004
Trash Cart-to-Art: Scheduled for April 2004
2004 Contest Stats- None
Clinch River Clean Up: Scheduled for April-May 2004
2003 Clean-Up Totals = 15 sites, 254 Volunteers, 1,536 bags of trash collected!
Meeting Information
When? Quarterly. ist Wednesday of the month
Where? Bonanza Restaurant in Lebanon, VA
Time? 12 o’clock noon
Next RCEC Meeting: Wednesday, March 3, 2004
Want to get involved?
We are always in need of volunteers. If you live in Russell County and are interested in getting
involved with any of our programs call (276) 889-0968.
http://www. geocities.com/evswed/rcec.html 4/13/2004
Dickenson County Clean Team Page | of |
Choose a button to your left to explore the Dickenson County’s Clean
Team’s web-site
April is County Wide Cleanup Month
CALL THE LITTER CONTROL OFFICE AT: #835-8806 FOR MORE DETAILS
http://dect.naxs.com/pages/main.html 4/13/2004
Oy)
raper Aden Associates
i) OF COMMUNICATOR
Project Name: Cumberland Plateau Solid Waste Date:
Mang, Plan 45-04 2:30pm
Job No.: B03205-01 CJ) Incoming —x{_] Outgoing
Talked with: — Angie White Recorded by: —_L. Barber
Compan, Russell County ~ Litter office Phone No.: 276-889-0968
Topic: Public Education on litter/recycling
Angie works with the Environmental Council to do education for Buchanan County. She will
send via email a list of what she is doing.
Received 4-6-04
The Russell County Environmental Council (RCEC) is a voluntary organization whose purpose is to assist
w/ Russell County environmental programs such as, litter awareness/prevention education, recycling,
beautification and water quality.
Council activities are primarily funded through a grant provided by the VA DEQ Litter Grant. The Clinch
Valley SWCD staff coordinates Council activities,
Clinch River Clean-Up
Annual counly- wide clean-up taking place April-May. Site coordinators lead a group of
volunteers that clean a specific site in the county. The RCEC provides trash bags, gloves and
trash “grabbers”. Volunteers are also given a promotional event t-shirt when clean-up is
complete.
2003 Totals = 1536 bags collected w/ 254 volunteers
Council Meetings
The Council meets every quarter to discuss ongoing projects, environmental issues, etc. A
guest speaker is also invited to each meeting
This year speakers have included:
John Watson, VDOT – Adopt-a-Highway Program
Angela White, Clinch Valley SWCD — Erosion and Sediment Control Program
David Reichert, DCR Division of Natural Heritage — Ongoing Projects
Russell County Fair Booth
Annually, co-sponsor with Clinch Valley Soil & Water Conservation District an informational
booth at the Russell County Fair.
School Beautiful Program
School Beautification Award ~ A panel of judges representing RCEC is appointed each year to
judge the schools in both the fall and spring of each school year. Points are awarded on the
overalll appearance and cleanliness in the following areas: campus grounds, entry-way, office
suite, cafeteria, classrooms, halls, library and restrooms, Monetary awards and certificates are
awarded to winners. (15 schools participate)
School Beautiful Projects/Activities Portfolio Award ~ Schools submit a portfolio/scrapbook that
showcases the various projects/activities that directly relate to conservation education,
environmental awareness and school beautification
Monetary awards and certificates are awarded to winning schools. (15 schools participate)
Trash Cart-to-Art Contest
‘Annual exhibition of art created from ‘trash’. Designed to increase public awareness and help
install a recycling ethic into the daily routine of people within the community. (9 classes, 8
categories) (Pre-school thru Adult)
2003 ~ 69 entries,
Other
The Council also funds educational/promotional items that are distributed or utilized when the
Clinch Valley SWCD conducts school presentations, etc
Pnnsanno22esw8n05 9NWORKIROC -040228- Rae pubes oe
Appendix 7
Questionnaire and Responses
Cumberland Plateau Regional Waste Management Authority
Solid Waste Planning
Questionnaire
¢ Cumberland Plateaw RWMA was formed to help coordinate and finance the
management of Solid Waste which included the construction and operation of transfer stations
for Buchanan, Dickenson and Ru:
il Counties. The bonds for the construction and start up will
be paid off in 2008. ‘The Authority also holds the contract with BFI for hauling and disposal of
municipal solid waste, which expires in 2008, ‘The following questions are meant to help our
local governments and the Authority brainstorm future actions and relationships. ‘Thank you for
your help.
A
+3.
Please rank the following community services from 1 ~ 9 in order of perceived
importance by your citizens.
Schools Police Economic Development
Water ~~ Fire Roads
Sewer Solid Waste ___ Parks and Recreation
In your mind, what are the top three issues which impact economic growth in the region?
1



Solid waste services can encompass a wide range of activities. Please check those
activities that are currently provided in your locality. Based on your knowledge or belief,
please denote Authority services with an ‘A’; locality provided services with an‘L’; and
services provided by others with an ‘O”.
All Waste Yard Waste Recycling
__ Collection ___ Collection ‘Newspaper
__ Green boxes —__ Mulching ___. White paper
__Staffed collection sites ~~ Glass
___ Disposal Sludge Handling ____ Beverage/food cans
__Existing landfill ____ Land application —__ Plastics
___ Transfer station ___ Disposal ____ White goods
__ Private landfill —__ Composting ___ Other metal
—_ Oil
Other 7
__Litter Prevention ___Waste Reduction

___ Computer Disposal Household Hazardous Waste Collection





E.

Please check those activities that your citizens or government would or may want offered
in the future in addition to those already provided as identified in Item 4 above. Check
all that apply.

All Waste Yard Waste Recycling
Collection ____ Collection ‘Newspaper

“~~ Door-to-door ____ Disposal ___ Cardboard
__ Green boxes Mulching ___ White paper
___ Staffed collection sites __ Glass

____ Disposal Sludge Handling ___ Beverage/food cans
__Existing landfill ____ Land application Plastics

Transfer station ___. Disposal ~~ White goods
__Private landfill Composting Other metal
—_ Oil

Other

___Litter Prevention

___ Waste Reduction

Computer Disposal

“Household Hazardous Waste Collection

If you could only make one change in the current Solid Waste system, what would it be?

Currently, the Authority holds the bonds for the transfer stations and the contracts with
BFI. The bond obligation is over in 2008 and the contract with BFI expires the same year.
At that time, either the Authority could renew the hauling and disposal contract and
continue to assist with various solid waste activities in your community, or the Authority
could turn the coordination and contracts back to the local governments and cease to
exist. Please indicate your preference:

In 2008, have the Authority renew hauling and disposal contracts and continue as is
or with an expanded role.

In 2008, disband the Authority and allow each local government to handle its own
solid waste services.

Other Solid Waste authorities in Virginia have indicated that they have been suecessful in
expanding various solid waste programs because of the increased volumes and
participation of a region. What programs could you see our Authority expanding into?
Check all that apply.




Recycling Collection

Cardboard ___ Door-to-door
Newspaper ~_ Staffed convenience centers
Glass ~_ Commercial

~_ Plastic Other

~ Beverage/food cans Yard waste/sludge composting

~ White goods/scrap metal ~__ Yard waste mulch

~ Used oil
~ Anti-freeze

Solid waste disposal services are generally paid for by the localities from the General
Fund. Commercial businesses and industries do not totally pay for their solid waste
services as they do in other localities in Virginia, nor do the citizens. If some form of
billing was implemented, the additional funds raised could be used to offset the funding
from the General Funds and/or be used for modifications to the transfer stations,
improvements to collection or enhanced recycling. Please check the various billing
scenarios below that you believe your citizens might support, recognizing that many
details would need to be worked out.

__Tipping fee assessed to all users of transfer station.
Tipping fee assessed to only commercial businesses at transfer station
Tipping fee assessed to only industries at transfer station

Tipping fee assessed citizens bringing waste directly to the transfer station
~~ Monthly charge to all residents or households.

Monthly charge to all industries and businesses

~ Continue use of General Fund; and partial tipping fees.

Please offer any comments below relative to the existing or future solid waste services.

Thank you for your help.

Person completing questionnaire (optional): Please return to:

Date:

Cumberland Plateau Regional Waste
‘Management Authority

P.O. Box 548

Lebanon, Virginia 24266




TABLE 1

CUMBERLAND PLATEAU REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
SOLID WASTE PLANNING QUESTIONNAIRE

SUMMARY OF ANSWERS TO QUESTION A - RANK COMMUNITY SERVICES.

SERVICE RANKING POINTS RANKING BY TOTAL,
Schools 53 1
Water 63 2
Sewer 116 6
Police 102 5
Fire 127, 7
Solid Waste. 133 8
Economic Development 86 4
Roads 78 3
Parks and Recreation 177 9
INOTE:

1. Several questionnaires were eliminated from this summary as the question had not been
correctly completed.

<—_
=

> Draper Aden Associates

Engineering + Surveying + Environmental Services





TABLE 2

CUMBERLAND PLATEAU REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
SOLID WASTE PLANNING QUESTIONNAIRE
SUMMARY OF ANSWERS TO QUESTION B - Top 3 issues with Economic Development

RANKING
ISSUE 1 2 3__| TOTAL % OF TOTAL
Roads 9 1 5 15 23.8%
Water and Sewer 1 3 1 5 7.9%
Infrastructure 3 2 3 8 12.7%
Schools / Education 5 3 1 9 14.3%
Work Force 1 6 1 8 12.7%
Economic Development / Jobs 3 4 z 11%
Land / Geography 1 3 4 6.3%
Housing 2 2 3.2%
Finances 2 2 3.2%
Solid Waste 1 1.6%
Declining mining 1 1 1.6%
Progressive Attitude 1 1 1.6%
TOTAL 63 100.0%
<—_—

SS Draper Aden Associates

Engineering « Surveying » Environmental Services




TABLE 3

CUMBERLAND PLATEAU REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
ISOLID WASTE PLANNING QUESTIONNAIRE
SUMMARY OF ANSWERS TO QUESTION D - What services would your locality like
in addition to the existing services

‘% of Total Questionnaires

SERVICE # of Responses Received
COLLECTION
Door to door 6 26.1%
Green boxes 3 13.0%
Staffed Convenience Centers 5 21.7%
YARD WASTE
(Collection 9 39.1%
Disposal 6 26.1%
Mulching 7 30.4%
SLUDGE HANDLING
Land Application 3 13.0%
Disposal 2 8.7%
Compost 3 13.0%
RECYCLING
Newspaper 8 34.8%
Cardboard 9 39.1%
White Paper 8 34.8%
Glass 10 43.5%
Beverage and food cans 410 43.5%.
Plastics W 47.8%
White Goods 10 43.5%
Other scrap metals 8 34.8%
Waste oil 8 34.8%
OTHER
Litter Prevention Hi 47.8%
Waste Reduction 9 39.1%
Computer recycling / disposal 9 39.1%
Household Hazardous Waste 8 34.8%

a

SBS Dr aper Aden Associates

‘ering + Surveying + Environmental Services





TABLE 4
CUMBERLAND PLATEAU REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
SOLID WASTE PLANNING QUESTIONNAIRE

SUMMARY OF ANSWERS TO QUESTION F - Should the Authority continue after 2008

# of % of Total
Responses | Questionnaires
QUESTION Received
In 2008, should the Authority renew hauling and disposal
contracts continue as is or with an expanded role? 24 91.3%
In 2008, should the Authority dispand and allow each
local government to handle its own solid waste services? 1 4.3%
No response 1 4.3%

>
> Draper Aden Associates

Engineering + Surveying + Environmental Services





TABLE 5

CUMBERLAND PLATEAU REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
SOLID WASTE PLANNING QUESTIONNAIRE
SUMMARY OF ANSWERS TO QUESTION G - Expanded Authority Services

# of % of Total Questionnaires

SERVICE Responses Received
RECYCLING
Cardboard 16 69.6%
Newspaper 15 65.2%
Glass 18 65.2%
Plastics 7 73.9%
Beverage and food cans 14 60.9%
White goods 14 60.9%
Used oil 7 73.9%
Antifreeze 15 65.2%
COLLECTION
Door to door 10 43.5%
[Staffed convenience centers 12 52.2%
[Commercial collection 5 21.7%
OTHER
Yard waste - sludge composting 21.7%
Yard waste - mulching 26.1%

LN

SP Draper Aden Associates

Engineering + Surveying + Environmental Services





TABLE 6
ICUMBERLAND PLATEAU REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
ISOLID WASTE PLANNING QUESTIONNAIRE

SUMMARY OF ANSWERS TO QUESTION H - How should the solid waste
program be financed

% of Total

QUESTION # of Responses| Responses
Tipping fee assessed to all users of transfer station 6 15.0%
Tipping fee assessed to only commercial businesses at
transfer station 5 12.5%
Tipping fee assessed to only industries at transfer station 3 7.5%
Tipping fee assessed to citizens bringing waste directly to
the transfer station 3 7.5%
Monthly charge to all residents or households 5 12.5%
Monthly charge to all industries and businesses “7 17.5%
Continue use of General Fund; partial tipping fees WW 27.5%
TOTAL 40 100.0%

<_

> Draper Aden Associates

Engineering + Surveying + Environmental Services





Appendix 8

Authority Meetings:
Agendas and Minutes





BUCHANAN COUNTY:,

Mi Earl Rife
Mr. Buddy Fuller

JMBERLAND PLATEAU PDC:
Vir. Andrew Chafin, PDC Representative

DICKENSON COUNTY:

Mr. Damon Rasnick
Mir, Donnie Rife

RUSSELL COUNTY:

Mr. Danny Brown:

Mr. Franke Horton
Mi. Toby F. Edwards, Director of
Waste Management Services

February 18, 2016

Mr. Sanjay Thirunagari
Manager

Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Land Protection and Revitalization
P.O. Box 1105

Richmond, VA 23218

RE: Update for the Cumberland Plateau Regional Waste Managemient Authority
(CRRWMA) Solid Waste Planning Unit S-Year Solid Waste Management Plan
Update,

Dear Mr. Thirtnagati: 7 |
I am writing in regards to our scheduled 5-year update of the CPRWMA’s Solid

Waste Management Plan. In a letter dated! October.7,:2015, you stated that our next 5.year |

update is due by February 10, 2016. ‘The CPRWMA Board of Directors met on February 18, :

2016 and approved this 5 year update.

: [trust this leter dnd’ attachments will stil those réquitéments needed for ou 5-year
* “update. If you have any questions or need additional information please feel free to contact
me at 276) 889-1778. :

Co: Mr. Earl Rife, CPRWMA Chair
‘Co: Mr. Frank Horton, CPRWMA Vice Chair 7 . |

224 Clydesway Drive / P.O: Box 848": Lebanon, VA 24266 |
Phone 276-889-1778: FAX 276-889-5732
wuw.cprwma.com

®





© Page?” CPRWMA Solid Waste Management Plan 5-Year Update. February 18,2016
‘Attachment

Reporting Requirements fouind in Section 9 VAC.20-130-120.C of the regulations.

A) Waste generation-estimates are current’in both quantities generated and composition.
At the current rate of waste generation, Buchanan, Dickenson and Russell counties
have seen. reduction/tonnages. in the calendar year of 2014-2015. As for the
‘composition for all three localities, they are per the solid waste mariagement plan

B) The scheduled 20-year planting increments have been met:per section 8, page 79-85
of the CPRWMA’s solid waste’ management plan. The authority has met or exceeded.
the 20-year planning increments outlined in the regional solid: waste plan with the
hiring of a regional-litter prevention and recycling coordinator.. In addition, Russell
County is currently updating its convenience centers to, manned compactor sites which
should be completed in'thie next two years.

C) The projected 20-year waste mahagement capacity remains available or the projects»
dsigtied to.meet the required capacity are on schedule. ‘The authority and its member:
counties regional solid waste Inanagement plan is meeting the 20 year capacity and are
onschedule.

D): Ceiisus data has’ showni a’coritinual. population decrease in all-three member counties
since'the development’of the regional solid Waste management plain. This reduction int
population is a result of the economic situation of the three counties. Many citizens-are
simply moving to where they can find employment. In both Buchanan and Dickenson ,
Counties, coal jobs have been reduced heavily since the, creation of the SWMP and it
is reflected in the reduction of mine waste processed at both facilities,

E) The estimates of the solid waste generation from ‘residential, cornmercial institution,
industrial, consttuction,. demolition, ‘debris and.other sources, including the amounts
reused; recycled, recoveied asa resource, incinerated and land filled. The Authority: is
on track. with’ the’SWMP ‘solid.‘waste generation. estimates’ for the counties of
Dickenson and Russell per section 4.2.1 pg 44, Buchanan County’s estimate indicated
‘a inuch larger portion for Mine Waste and’a smaller portion for Household Waste in
2015. Current waste stream data: indicates that'these two, cateragoriés for Buchanan.
County are reyersed-Household Waste is the largest generated source’ within this
particular county.

F) Existing and planned solid waste collection, storage; treatment, transportation, disposal
and other management facilities, their projected capacities, expected life and systems
for theit use are. all on. course with the pla. “In.2010, the: Authority. coripleied a
rehabilitation of all thre¢ of our facilities to extend their projected 20-year life span an
additional 15-year. This was accomplished by upgrades to lighting systems, repair
of tipping. floors, new’ weighting: scales, push ‘wall-extensions and new metaly new
hoppers; ventilation systems, rubber cutting edges for Toading” equipment and-new
-scale howses. Russell County is currently in thie process of upgrading their’ colleetion
system from: unmanned. convenience stations to manned’ cofnpactor: converiience
centers. for collection of both household waste and recyclables. ‘This will be
accomplished in thenext two to three; yeas,





© Page 3 CPRWMA Solid Waste Management Plan 5-Year Update; February 18, 2016

G) All patties responsible for carrying out the 20-year projections are resolved to meetiall
obtainable’ miléstones. AS outlined in our plan, the Authority and its member counties
have taken ‘great strides in meeting citizen’s needs’ for proper waste disposal and.
recycling, In 2004, thé member counties agreed to hire a regional recycling and litter
prevention coordinator. to ‘ensure. theit meeting. the recycling and litter. prevention, -
goals. Reeyeling i inour SWMP unit his seen an increase in recycling (8% in 2003:to.
30.1% in 2014). This increase. in recycling isa direct result-of the solid: waste * ;
management plan and’ the counties investing resources’ in programs. “In 2010, ‘the :
miember counties further demonstrated their resolve in securing a bond to extend the

Life of all three facilities.

H) The future need of the 20-year plan is the developnieiit of a regional recycling facility
within the Authority’s area. Currently, the Authority is Pursuing giatits to study the.
feasibility of such.a recycling facility.

1) Currently, the CPRWMA is in the process of reviewing our population siurhbers from
the latest 2010 census, reviewing, our torinages from 2005 to'2015 and analyzing the
future trends in solid waste tonnages. Onice this data is completed it will b besent to VA
DEQ for review.





Appendix 9

Resolutions





RESOLUTION
FOR THE ACCEPTENCE OF THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
BY
CUMBERLAND PLATEAU REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

WHEREAS, Section 10.1-1411 of the Code of Virginia authorizes the Virginia Waste Management Board
to promulgate regulations specifying requirements for local and regional solid waste management
planning, and

WHEREAS, the Virginia Waste Management Board has promulgates such regulations entitled,
“Regulations for the Development of Solid Waste Management Plans, Amendment 1 as 9 VAC 20-130-10
eq seq.’ effective date August 1, 2001, through the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and

WHEREAS, these regulations require every county, city, and incorporated town within the
Commonwealth to submit a solid waste management plan update by February 10, 2016, and

WHEREAS, the Counties of Buchanan, Dickenson, and Russell, members of the Authority have
determined that it is in their best interest to submit the plan as a regional plan, and

WHEREAS, the Authority enlisted the services of their staff to complete such a plan, and |
WHEREAS, the was submitted to the Authority Board for approval on February 18, 2016, and |

WHEREAS, Authority recognizes the annual reporting requirements pursuant to 9 VAC 20-130-165.A
(Waste Assessment Report), and 9 VAC 20-130-165. D (Recycling Report) and agrees to provide said

reports, and

WHEREAS, the Authority recognizes its responsibility to amend the plan as required by the regulations
under 9 VAC 20-130-175.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors for the Cumberland Plateau Regional
Waste Management Authority has reviewed the plan and, meeting in regular session on February 18,
2016, hereby adopts it, and authorizes its submittal to the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality.

\ » ot LS ‘ Fh ucla

Toby F. Edwards, Director of Waste Services. |