Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
11 <br />- "low" technology approaches before employing capital - intensive, <br />higher- technology, post - collection, volume reduction <br />facilities. <br />Use of policy measures such as volume -based garbage fees and <br />landfill bans on certain high volume items were also stressed at <br />the public hearing. <br />A complete summary of citizen remarks was presented to the LOG in <br />a staff memo of March 25, 1992. <br />One key element of the proposed planning process is to use the <br />input from two formal citizens' committees now active on solid <br />waste, as well as from other members of the community. <br />Use of Duke University <br />We have received an offer from Duke University through their Board <br />of Trustees, to assist in the study of reducing the volume of solid <br />waste produced in Orange County. We recommend in the scope of work <br />the following areas in which they could be useful: <br />--- a review of the proposed scope of work <br />-- a market study of Refused Derived Fuel and Compost <br />Products <br />-- a review of the final report produced by the consultant <br />We are in the process of discussing this scope of work and other <br />opportunities with them. At this time, they have concurred orally <br />that the areas we have identified are suitable for their <br />participation, but these are not firm commitments. We will develop <br />specifics in consultation with Duke University. It is not apparent <br />at this point whether their work will have a direct cost or not. <br />Cost will be part of the negotiation. <br />Use of a consultant <br />The LOG believes that a consultant is necessary for development of <br />this plan. We have identified the following five areas in which <br />they could play a major role: <br />1) Data gathering and verification for solid waste collection and <br />disposal are major tasks for which the staff has capability <br />but no time. <br />2) Development of alternatives for collection in both rural and <br />urban settings has been examined but needs additional work. <br />Rural collection alternatives have been investigated by the <br />Orange County staff and now are being reviewed by the Orange <br />County Solid Waste Committee. Because the research has not <br />been exhaustive, additional expertise in developing and <br />analyzing alternatives is needed. The impending ban on <br />