Five-Year Countywide or Regional Agency Integrated Waste Management Plan Review Report Guidelines

What is Expected in a County’s or Regional Agency’s Five-Year CIWMP or RAIWMP Review Report?

A county’s or regional agency’s five-year review report is a comprehensive analysis regarding the continuing adequacy of the individual planning documents (SRRE, HHWE, NDFE, SE, SP) that make up its waste management plan since those documents were first adopted (or last amended). The analysis should:

• Address whether the current planning documents are sufficiently updated via annual reports and other existing reporting systems.
• Conclude with a determination as to whether one or more of these documents need to be revised and the basis for that decision. The county’s or regional agency’s determination should be the end result of a joint effort between the county or regional agency and its jurisdictions; the local task force would be the general vehicle for the necessary information exchange.

If a revision is determined necessary, the five-year review report must include a revision schedule for the applicable planning documents.

Note: The unincorporated county completes and submits a five-year review report evaluating the adequacy of all the planning documents in the county (i.e., the planning documents for each city, regional agency and the unincorporated county area). The evaluation of individual city SRREs, HHWEs, and NDFEs would be based on information provided by those individual cities. A five-year regional plan review report would include the same scope but would be completed by the regional agency, unless otherwise provided in the Regional Agency Agreement.

CalRecycle’s Process for Evaluating Five-Year CIWMP or RAIWMP Review Reports

CalRecycle’s Local Assistance staff will review the information provided in each jurisdiction’s annual report with respect to the continuing adequacy of the planning documents and any need for revision.

• Title14, CCR sections 18794.3 and 18794.4 require jurisdictions to address in their annual reports the adequacy of, or the need to revise, each of their planning documents.
• PRC section 41821(d) provides that CalRecycle shall use the annual report in the determination of whether a jurisdiction’s SRRE needs to be revised. Similarly, Title 14, CCR section 18794 states the annual report will serve as a basis for determining if any of the planning documents need to be revised to reflect new or changed local and regional solid waste management programs, facilities, and other conditions.

Local Assistance staff’s evaluation of a five-year review report will also be based on the requirements specified in Title 14, CCR section 18788 (as outlined in the next section). This review will determine whether the county or regional agency’s five-year review report addresses the fundamental changes in a jurisdiction that could affect waste quantities and management since its planning documents were prepared. The review also includes an evaluation regarding whether such changes necessitate a revision to one or more of the planning documents. Jurisdictions may use the annual report reporting process, to update programmatic information in cases where a revision is not necessary. In the event that a revision is determined necessary, Local Assistance staff will also review the required revision schedule for completeness, accuracy and reasonableness (with respect to the specified amendment guidelines and procedures). Local Assistance staff will also offer assistance with the revision process, as necessary.

1. When is our Five-Year County/Regional Agency Integrated Waste Management Plan Review Report due?

The five-year review report is due five years from the CalRecycle approval date for the waste management plan (for regional agencies to which all of the jurisdictions in the county(s) belong). If you have questions about your five-year review report due date, contact your local assistance staff representative at (916) 341-6199.

2. Is the next five-year review report due five years from the date the first report is approved by CalRecycle?

No, the five-year review report due date is calculated every five years from CalRecycle-approval date of the waste management plan. So, as mentioned above, the first five-year review report is due five years from the date CalRecycle approved the plan. The second five-year review report is due five years from the date of the first report due date (or 10 years from CalRecycle approval date of the plan) and so forth.

3. What is the difference between a five-year review report and a five-year revision?

The five-year review is a county’s or regional agency’s evaluation of all the planning documents included in its waste management plan and a vehicle for notifying CalRecycle whether one or more of its planning documents needs to be revised. The five-year review report is the document that is due on the anniversary dates referenced above, not a revised planning document. If the county or regional agency determines that a revision to one or more individual planning documents is necessary, a revision schedule for the planning document(s) must be included in the five-year review report.

4. Can you clarify when a county has to prepare the five-year review report as opposed to a regional agency?

The county is responsible for preparing the five-year review report for the entire county, including any regional agencies. For example, a county includes two regional agencies, one to which the unincorporated county area belongs, and three other cities. The county will prepare the five-year review for the whole county (i.e., the two regional agencies and the three cities). The five-year review report is due five years from the date the county’s waste management plan was approved by CalRecycle.

The county is responsible for preparing the five-year review report for the entire county, including any regional agencies. For example, a county includes two regional agencies, one to which the unincorporated county area belongs, and three other cities. The county will prepare the five-year review for the whole county (i.e., the two regional agencies and the three cities). The five-year review report is due five years from the date the county’s waste management plan was approved by CalRecycle.

5. So, what happens when the waste management plan is approved for a county and then all the jurisdictions in the county, including the unincorporated county area, form a regional agency? Is the five-year regional review report due date based on the date of the county or regional waste management plan approval?

If the planning documents were not altered in the formation of the regional agency (e.g., they did not prepare new planning documents for the new regional agency, but rather incorporated them by reference), the due date is still based on the waste management plan’s approval date. If, however, the regional agency prepared regionwide or multijurisdictional planning documents, which were approved as their regional waste management plan, then the five-year regional plan review report due date is calculated based on the date of the regional plan’s approval.

6. Our county no longer has a local task force, but does have a “Solid Waste Committee” that addresses and votes on solid waste issues. The five-year review process requires a local task force to provide written comments to the county or regional agency, and CalRecycle, on areas of the waste management plan that need revision, if any. In the case where the local task force no longer exists, can another entity (e.g., Solid Waste Committee or regional agency) act as the local task force for the purpose of the five-year review? If not, are there options for reconstituting the local task force that do not involve the approval process that was required previously (e.g., membership determined by the county and by a majority of the cities within the county which contain a majority of the population of the incorporated area of the county)?

PRC, section 40950 references convening a local task force every five years, presumably for the purpose of the five-year review. With respect to determining membership, the statute is clear regarding these requirements. There is, however, no provision for “disbanding” the local task force, so the original one, with the original members, still exists even though it may not have met in years. So, the original local task force can resume meeting (for example, send notices of the next meeting) and to the extent that vacancies need to be filled, include that as an agenda item for the next meeting. At the present time, statute does not authorize the use of a different body instead of the local task force.

7. What is the appropriate level of local task force involvement in the five-year review (i.e., what exactly does the task force need to do)?

Regulations (Title 14, CCR section 18788) require a county’s local task force to provide written comments to the county or regional agency and to CalRecycle, on areas of the waste management plan that need revision, if any, prior to the five-year anniversary date of CalRecycle approval of the plan, but no later than 45 days prior to the anniversary date.

Since the exact level of local task force involvement is not specified in the statute or regulations, it is recommended that this decision be addressed/negotiated by the county and the local task force. As the regulations are written, the local task force essentially serves as a vehicle for getting the individual jurisdictions’ comments on the continuing adequacy of their original SRREs, HHWEs, and NDFEs to the county (and CalRecycle). The county is responsible for making the final determination regarding any need for a plan revision in the five-year review report. In part of its making this determination, the county will most likely rely heavily on the information provided by the local task force as a part of its review regarding each jurisdiction’s individual planning documents. It is recommended that the county and local task force discuss the data needed for the analysis and review and develop a plan regarding how the local task force will collect and prepare the information. How much effort each local task force member contributes to the project, however, is a local matter.

Please remember that your local assistance staff representative is an excellent resource to you during this process. For example, you can request a report of the Electronic Annual Report information relating to each jurisdiction’s planning document adequacy to help prepare the local task force comments as well as the five-year review report.

8. Where exactly does it say that it is the county’s responsibility to review all of the cities’ planning documents?

Title 14, CCR section 18788 provides that the county or regional agency is responsible for determining if a revision is necessary and notifying the local task force and CalRecycle of its findings in a five-year review report. This same section, however, also provides that the local task force is first required to complete a review of the waste management plan to assure that the county’s and regional agency’s waste management practices remain consistent with the hierarchy of waste management practices defined in statute. The local task force is also required to submit written comments on areas of the waste management plan which require revision, if any, to the county or regional agency and CalRecycle. The county’s determination should be based, at least in part, on the local task force’s comments.

9. Who (as in a jurisdiction) would be responsible before CalRecycle if a jurisdiction fails to conduct a planning document review and/or provide review comments to the county for the five-year review (e.g., a jurisdiction does not participate in the required local task force review and input)?

PRC section 41822 provides that each city, county, or regional agency shall review its SRRE or the waste management plan at least once every five years to correct any deficiencies in the element or plan. Additionally, Title 14, CCR section 18788 requires a county’s local task force to provide written comments to the county or regional agency, and CalRecycle, on areas of the waste management plan that need revision, if any.

Since the exact level of local task force involvement is not specified in the statute or regulations, the specific expectations for each local task force member in conducting the review and preparing comments is considered a local matter. As a result, it is recommended that this decision be addressed/negotiated between the county and the local task force (e.g., at a local task force meeting). If the county requests information from a jurisdiction regarding its five-year review and none is forthcoming, it is recommended that the county document this fact in its five-year review report and indicate that, as a result, the county cannot determine whether a revision of the jurisdiction’s planning documents is necessary.

There is no explicit penalty provided in statute or regulations for noncompliance with the five-year review requirements (e.g., planning document review, local task force comment process, reporting). Noncompliance could, however, be taken into account during the applicable biennial or quadrennial review.

10. What is the difference between an update to the planning documents and a revision?

Updates include reporting technical changes or modifications that have already been undertaken by jurisdictions to fulfill the requirements of AB 939 (program implementation information in annual reports, etc.). A revision to a planning document is needed if significant changes to the overall plan are proposed that should involve the formal local public input process.

11. What level of analysis is CalRecycle looking for with respect to demographic and waste stream changes in determining whether a SRRE revision is needed?

The five-year review report template provides a number of resources to document demographic and waste stream changes. Additionally, the analysis needs to address whether, in light of these changes, the SRRE is still adequate (e.g., does not contain any deficiencies). If not, can the deficiencies be addressed via program updates or is a revision necessary?

12. Do counties or regional agencies have to include statewide per capita generation and disposal tonnage in their five-year review report?

No, such statistics are not required by either statute or regulation and therefore, are not necessary to include in the report. You should keep in mind that what is required for the five-year review is an analysis of how things have changed in the county (or regional agency) since the planning documents were written, and whether a revision to one or more of the planning documents is necessary.

13. Would rural reductions (or other programmatic changes related to time extensions or alternative diversion requirements) cause a significant enough change as to require SRRE revision?

Generally, a revision would only be recommended when there are changes to the overall structure of how the jurisdiction planned to achieve the diversion goals, in which case there should be local formal public input for policy-making decisions through the formal SRRE revision process. Otherwise, jurisdictions can use their annual reports to CalRecycle to update diversion program information, e.g., selected, implemented, alternative, planned programs, where it has been determined that a revision is not necessary. Additionally, if a jurisdiction is on compliance or has a time extension or alternative diversion rate, the compliance order or plan of correction, respectively, can serve as updates to the SRRE or HHWE in terms of program implementation. Corrections to, or approved new base years, also update the Solid Waste Generation Study component of the SRRE.

14. PRC 41736 indicates that “At the time of the five-year revision of the source reduction and recycling element, each city, county, and city and county shall incorporate the nondisposal facility element and any amendments thereto into the revised source reduction and recycling element.” Does the NDFE have to be incorporated into the SRRE at time of the five-year review?

According to PRC 41730, “the nondisposal facility element and any amendments to the element may be appended to the city’s source reduction and recycling element when that element is included in the countywide integrated waste management plan, prepared pursuant to section 41750.” This language was changed to provide that incorporating the NDFE into the SRRE is not mandatory and CalRecycle regulations were modified accordingly.

15. PRC 41770 (a) indicates that the city, county, or regional agency shall conduct waste disposal characterization studies, as prescribed by the board, if it fails to meet the diversion requirements of section 41780, at the time of the five-year revision of the SRRE. So, if at the time of the five-year review the jurisdiction has not met the diversion requirements, will it have to conduct a waste characterization study?

PRC 41770 does reference a waste characterization study, but it is linked to CalRecycle being authorized, but not required, to order one when a jurisdiction is not in compliance with the mandates. (…the city, county, or regional agency shall conduct waste disposal characterization studies, as prescribed by the board, if it fails to meet the diversion requirements of section 41780…). Any CalRecycle action or direction associated with failing to meet the diversion requirements of PRC section 41780 is addressed via the biennial or quadrennial compliance review process.

If at the time of the five-year review a jurisdiction is not achieving the diversion requirements, the respective county will have to address in the five-year review report whether that jurisdiction’s SRRE, as updated, is still meeting the jurisdiction’s planning needs. Specifically, the county should address whether the jurisdiction’s SRRE should be revised or has been sufficiently updated with respect to program implementation in the jurisdiction’s annual reports, compliance order, or other CalRecycle reporting mechanism. In analyzing the jurisdiction’s current waste stream and whether the current or planned programs are addressing the largest waste generators and types, CalRecycle’s waste characterization data, Electronic Annual Report and Countywide, Regionwide, and Statewide Jurisdiction Diversion Progress Report are recommended resources.

16. With the passage of Senate Bill 20 (Sher, Chapter 526, Statutes of 2003) on hazardous electronic waste, do jurisdictions need to revise their HHWE by Jan. 1, 2004 to identify those actions the city, county, or regional agency is taking to promote the collection, consolidation, recovery, and recycling of covered electronic waste?

No, this requirement only applies if, after Jan. 1, 2004, as a result of the five-year review, a jurisdiction or CalRecycle determines that a revision to the HHWE is necessary. For example, if as a result of the five year review, the county or regional agency determines that a revision to one of the jurisdiction’s HHWE is necessary to address significant funding and/or administrative changes, the revision must also identify those actions the city, county, or regional agency is taking to promote the collection, consolidation, recovery, and recycling of covered electronic waste. If however, the county or regional agency determines no revision to the jurisdictions’ planning documents are necessary, no revision to applicable jurisdictions’ HHWE is necessary as a result of this bill. Similarly, if the county or regional agency determines that a revision to one or more of the other planning document (but not one of the jurisdiction’s HHWEs) is necessary, still no revision to the HHWE is required as a result of this bill.

However, when reviewing each jurisdiction’s planning documents for adequacy during the five-year review, please keep in mind that e-waste program implementation should be updated in the electronic annual report (9045 program code). This allows jurisdictions to update their planning documents relating to e-waste programs when a revision is not necessary.

17. If we have a new nondisposal facility in our jurisdiction, do we need to revise our NDFE?

Statute requires a revision (i.e., an amended NDFE) if a nondisposal facility is being used (or planned to be used) in your jurisdiction that is not already identified in the NDFE.

18. There have been changes to the nondisposal facilities used outside of our jurisdiction (e.g., we have changed haulers and now use a different material recovery facility). Do we need to revise our NDFE, as a result of such changes?

If your jurisdiction has started using a nondisposal facility that is not identified in your NDFE and you are not the “host” jurisdiction (i.e., the nondisposal facility is not sited or planned to be sited in your jurisdiction) you do not have to amend your NDFE at the time of the five-year review (of course, you may if you want to), but you should provide an update as follows:

• Identify the nondisposal facility in your Electronic Annual Report providing the information required in 14 CCR 18753.5 (type of facility, estimated amount of waste the jurisdiction will transport to the facility, anticipated/expected diversion rate for the facility as a whole, location of the facility); and,
• Attach a copy of this information to your NDFE (to provide anyone reviewing the document access to the current information).

19. Does each jurisdiction included in a multi-jurisdictional NDFE have to adopt an amendment(s) made by another jurisdiction(s)? For example, if one of the jurisdictions amends the NDFE to site a new composting facility, do all of the other jurisdictions included multi-jurisdictional NDFE also have to adopt the amended NDFE?

Although the multi-jurisdictional NDFE includes nondisposal facility information for multiple of jurisdictions, each jurisdiction locally adopted it as their own planning document. As a result, each jurisdiction would only need to revise its NDFE to reflect changes in nondisposal facilities sited or planned to be sited within its jurisdiction (A jurisdiction may wish to update its NDFE at the time of the five-year review to reflect current conditions, but it is not required). The exception to this would be a CalRecycle-approved regional agency with a multi-jurisdictional NDFE, in which case each member jurisdiction would need to locally adopt any amendments to the NDFE unless one of the member jurisdictions is specifically appointed to do so for the regional agency and its member jurisdictions.

20. If the NDFE and/or SE are amended, is there a requirement that the entire waste management plan be revised?

The NDFE and the SE can be amended without having to revise the entire plan. Depending on the nature of the change, however, these amendments may require a revision to the summary plan at the time of the five-year review. So, in the five-year review report, the county should address these changes and whether they affect the adequacy of the summary plan to the extent that a revision is necessary. The five-year review report template is designed to assist you in analyzing and reporting the need for revising each element and plan comprising the waste management plans.

21. What type of “proof” or documentation is necessary to demonstrate 15 years disposal capacity?

The Countywide Siting Element (SE) will need to be revised if the county has less than 15 years disposal capacity and the SE does not include an adequate strategy for obtaining 15 years disposal capacity. With respect to documenting 15-year disposal capacity, Title 14, CCR section 18755.3 Disposal Capacity Requirements, requires the following for the preparation of the SE:

• Existing disposal capacity in cubic yards and tons.
• Anticipated disposal capacity needs in cubic yards and tons on an annual basis and aggregated for a minimum five-year period.

In terms of “proof” of 15-year disposal capacity, the county should have available the method and sources of data for determining these estimates for CalRecycle staff review. For a discussion of the statutory, regulatory and content adequacy requirements of a SE, see the CIWMP Enforcement Part 1: Plan Adequacy. The section on Countywide Siting Element Adequacy contains information regarding what staff focused on during the review of a SE to determine and define adequacy.

22. A city has newly incorporated since the preparation and approval of the county’s planning documents and is still determining whether to join the regional agency to which the county is a member. If the city does not join the regional agency, the city will need to prepare its own planning documents. How should this change be addressed in the five-year review report? Should the county wait to see what the city decides even if that delays the submittal of the five-year regional review report past the due date?

The county should not wait for the city to decide whether to join the regional agency to submit the five-year review report. The county should include the details of the incorporation in its report, including the possibility that the city’s planning elements may be added to the waste management plan (i.e., if the city does not join the regional agency and prepares its own planning documents).

Additionally, the county should include an analysis regarding how the withdrawal of the newly incorporated city (and any other changes) affect the county’s waste stream, demographics, program implementation, etc; and whether this change is so significant that the county’s existing planning documents become less than adequate to meet and maintain the diversion requirements. In other words, does this change alter what the county reported it would do in terms of program implementation, funding, etc. in its SRRE and HHWE, and does this change affect the facilities and information provided in the NDFE, SE and SP? If so, are these changes addressed via updates to these documents or is a revision necessary? If the county determines that a revision is necessary, it will need to include in its five-year review report a timeline showing when the revision(s) will be completed (provided that the city does not join the regional agency).

23. Title 14 CCR, section 18788 provides that the county or regional agency shall determine if a revision is necessary, and notify the local task force and CalRecycle of its findings in a five-year review report, but it is not clear who in the county makes this determination nor how the determination is made. Does the county need a resolution from the county Board of Supervisors or can the recycling coordinator make the determination?

The internal process by which each county responds to the requirements of CalRecycle may vary. In some cases, the county Board of Supervisors makes such determinations based on the recommendations of county staff; in other cases, the AB 939 coordinator (or other such personnel) may be authorized to make such determinations (depending on the level of authority the county has given its AB 939 coordinator). With respect to the submittal of the five-year review report, CalRecycle will need whatever is considered an official determination from your county.

Many county Boards of Supervisors will want to hear the county’s findings and determination prior to submittal of the five-year review report to CalRecycle, with or without action (e.g., adopting or approving the five-year review report). In such cases, a copy of the meeting agenda and/or minutes or resolution would be an appropriate reference/appendix to the five-year review report. In other cases, the AB 939 coordinator may be authorized to make this determination and to author and submit the five-year review report. Ultimately, it will depend on the county’s internal procedures.

It is recommended that you check with your department head regarding what the county’s internal process is for such reports and whether it is something that should go before your county Board of Supervisors. You should also include any approval documentation in the five-year review report and/or have it available for CalRecycle staff review.

24. A letter regarding the five-year revision process went out on July 21, 2000 to city and county contacts. The letter had a copy of CCR 14 section 18788 attached. (4) (b) of section 18788 (CIWMP or RAIWMP Revision) states that “if a revision is necessary the county or regional agency shall submit a waste management plan revision schedule to CalRecycle.” How much time does the county or regional agency have to submit this revision schedule?

The revision schedule must be included in the county’s or regional agency’s five-year review report to CalRecycle. The revision schedule should outline the steps and time frames necessary to prepare, review, approve and submit the applicable revised documents to CalRecycle. There is no guidance in statute or regulations, however, on how much time a jurisdiction has to actually revise and submit the revised planning documents to CalRecycle. Part of local assistance staff’s review of any revision schedule(s) included in a five-year review report will be an evaluation of whether time frames included in the revision schedule are reasonable.

 

Original Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan (CIWMP) or Regional Agency Integrated Waste Management Plan (RAIWMP) Requirements, Guidelines and Procedures

Pursuant to PRC section 41750 et. seq., each county and city or regional agency shall prepare and submit to CalRecycle a CIWMP or RAIWMP.

Regulations on content requirements, planning guidelines and procedures for preparing countywide or regional integrated waste management plans are outlined in Title 14, CCR Chapter 9, Article 8, sections 18776-18788.

Five-Year CIWMP and RAIWMP Review Report Process and Content Requirements

PRC section 41770 provides that each CIWMP or RAIWMP shall be reviewed, revised, if necessary, and submitted to CalRecycle every five years.

Additionally, PRC section 41822 requires review of the CIWMP at least once every five years to:

• Correct any deficiencies in the individual planning documents.
• Comply with the source reduction and recycling requirements established under PRC section 41780.
• Revise the documents, as necessary.

The Five-Year CIWMP or RAIWMP review process and report content requirements are further clarified in Title 14, CCR Section 18788.

Planning Document Amendments

If a jurisdiction revises or amends its Source Reduction Recycling Element (SRRE), Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE), or Nondisposal Facility Element (NDFE), the jurisdiction shall revise or amend and submit its SRRE, HHWE, or NDFE pursuant to the requirements of Title 14, CCR sections 18765 through 18768.

• Additionally, PRC section 41515 indicates that if a jurisdiction conducts an aerosol can recycling program, a requirement to educate the public on the safe collection and recycling or disposal of aerosol cans shall be incorporated into the HHWE prepared by the jurisdiction when that element is revised.

Note: A jurisdiction is not required to amend its HHWE for the sole purpose of updating aerosol can recycling program implementation, as this information can be updated via the annual report process, i.e., under the HHWE program codes (9000 series). If, however, a jurisdiction determines that a revision to its HHWE is necessary, then the jurisdiction must include program information regarding aerosol can recycling education in its amendment.

• Similarly, PRC section 41516(b) established through Senate Bill 20 (Sher, Chapter 526, Statues of 2003) provides that on or after Jan. 1, 2004, if a jurisdiction revises its HHWE pursuant to Section 41770, the document must identify those actions the city, county, or regional agency is taking to promote the collection, consolidation, recovery, and recycling of covered electronic waste.

Note: A jurisdiction is not required to amend its HHWE for the sole purpose of updating electronic waste program implementation, as this information can be updated via the annual report process, i.e., under the HHWE program code (9045-HH-EWA). However, independent of SB 20, if a jurisdiction determines that a revision to its HHWE is necessary, then the jurisdiction must include information regarding e-waste program implementation in its amendment.

If a county or regional agency revises its Countywide Siting Element (SE) and/or Summary Plan (SP), the county or regional agency shall revise and submit those documents pursuant to the requirements of Title 14, CCR sections 18780 through 18784. Additionally,

• PRC 41701 (e) provides that SEs submitted (i.e., new) or revised on or after Jan. 1, 2003, shall include a description of the actions taken by the city or county to solicit public participation by the affected communities, including, but not limited to, minority and low-income populations (i.e., environmental justice actions). For additional information regarding these environmental justice requirements, refer to the section addressing Countywide Siting Element Adequacy in CIWMP Enforcement Part I: Plan Adequacy.

Note: A jurisdiction is not required to amend its Siting Element for the sole purpose of documenting environmental justice efforts. If, however, a jurisdiction determines that a revision is necessary, then the jurisdiction must include a description of its environmental justice actions in its amendment.

The Countywide and Regionwide Integrated Waste Management plans are required to be reviewed every five years after they have been approved by CalRecycle. The table below will give the dates for review or revision.

We hope this clarifies any questions you may have regarding the five-year revision due dates. If you have any questions regarding these due dates, contact your local assistance staff representative at (916) 341-6199.

Due Dates for Jurisdictions from A-L | M-Z

County or Regional Agency	CIWMP Approval Date	1st Review Report Due Date	2nd Review Report Due Date	3rd Review Report Due Date	4th Review Report Due Date	5th Review Report Due Date	6th Review Report Due Date
Alameda	3/25/1998	March 2003	March 2008	March 2013	March 2018	March 2023	March 2028
Alpine	12/17/1997	December 2002	December 2007	December 2012	December 2017	December 2022	December 2027
Amador County Integrated Solid Waste Management Agency	10/23/1996	October 2001	October 2006	October 2011	October 2016	October 2021	October 2026
Butte	3/25/1998	March 2003	March 2008	March 2013	March 2018	March 2023	March 2028
Calaveras	5/28/1997	May 2002	May 2007	May 2012	May 2017	May 2022	May 2027
Colusa County Regional Agency	3/23/1999	March 2004	March 2009	March 2014	March 2019	March 2024	March 2029
Contra Costa	12/15/1993	December 1998	December 2003	December 2008	December 2013	December 2018	December 2023
Del Norte Solid Waste Management Authority	1/25/2000	January 2005	January 2010	January 2015	January 2020	January 2025	January 2030
El Dorado	11/15/1995	November 2000	November 2005	November 2010	November 2015	November 2020	November 2025
Fresno	6/25/1997	June 2002	June 2007	June 2012	June 2017	June 2022	June 2027
Glenn County Waste Management Regional Agency	10/21/1998	October 2003	October 2008	October 2013	October 2018	October 2023	October 2028
Humboldt	1/22/1997	January 2002	January 2007	January 2012	January 2017	January 2022	January 2027
Imperial	5/23/2000	May 2005	May 2010	May 2015	May 2020	May 2025	May 2030
Inyo Regional Waste Management Agency	7/27/1999	July 2004	July 2009	July 2014	July 2019	July 2024	July 2029
Kern	2/25/1998	February 2003	February 2008	February 2013	February 2018	February 2023	February 2028
Kings Waste & Recycling Authority	10/24/1995	October 2000	October 2005	October 2010	October 2015	October 2020	October 2025
Lake	12/15/1998	December 2003	December 2008	December 2013	December 2018	December 2023	December 2028
Lassen Regional Solid Waste Management Authority	3/22/2000	March 2005	March 2010	March 2015	March 2020	March 2025	March 2030
Los Angeles	6/23/1999	June 2004	June 2009	June 2014	June 2019	June 2024	June 2029
Madera	11/15/1999	November 2004	November 2009	November 2014	November 2019	November 2024	November 2029
Marin County Hazardous and Solid Waste Management Authority	4/25/1998	April 2003	April 2008	April 2013	April 2018	April 2023	April 2028
Mariposa	5/27/1998	May 2003	May 2008	May 2013	May 2018	May 2023	May 2028
Mendocino	3/23/1999	March 2004	March 2009	March 2014	March 2019	March 2024	March 2029
Merced County Solid Waste Regional Agency	3/27/1996	March 2001	March 2006	March 2011	March 2016	March 2021	March 2026
Modoc	4/27/1999	April 2004	April 2009	April 2014	April 2019	April 2024	April 2029
Mono	5/23/2000	May 2005	May 2010	May 2015	May 2020	May 2025	May 2030
Monterey	10/22/1997	October 2002	October 2007	October 2012	October 2017	October 2022	October 2027
Napa	7/23/1997	July 2002`	July 2007	July 2012	July 2017	July 2022	July 2027
Nevada	2/23/1999	February 2004	February 2009	February 2014	February 2019	February 2024	February 2029
Orange	3/27/1996	March 2001	March 2006	March 2011	March 2016	March 2021	March 2026
Placer	11/18/1998	November 2003	November 2008	November 2013	November 2018	November 2023	November 2028
Plumas	1/28/1998	January 2003	January 2008	January 2013	January 2018	January 2023	January 2028
Riverside	9/23/1998	September 2003	September 2008	September 2013	September 2018	September 2023	September 2028
Sacramento	5/27/1998	May 2003	May 2008	May 2013	May 2018	May 2023	May 2028
San Benito County Integrated Waste Management Regional Agency	6/26/1996	June 2001	June 2006	June 2011	June 2016	June 2021	June 2026
San Bernardino	11/19/1997	November 2002	November 2007	November 2012	November 2017	November 2022	November 2027
San Diego	6/25/1997	June 2002	June 2007	June 2012	June 2017	June 2022	June 2028
San Francisco	4/24/1997	April 2002	April 2007	April 2012	April 2017	April 2022	April 2027
San Joaquin	3/26/1997	March 2002	March 2007	March 2012	March 2017	March 2022	March 2027
San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management Authority	4/24/1996	April 2001	April 2006	April 2011	April 2016	April 2021	April 2026
San Mateo	10/26/1999	October 2004	October 2009	October 2014	October 2019	October 2024	October 2029
Santa Barbara	10/21/1998	October 2003	October 2008	October 2013	October 2018	October 2023	October 2028
Santa Clara	6/26/1996	June 2001	June 2006	June 2011	June 2016	June 2021	June 2026
Santa Cruz	3/23/1999	March 2004	March 2009	March 2014	March 2019	March 2024	March 2029
Shasta	10/21/1997	October 2002	October 2007	October 2012	October 2017	October 2022	October 2027
Sierra County Regional Agency	2/23/1999	February 2004	February 2009	February 2014	February 2019	February 2024	February 2029
Siskiyou County Integrated Solid Waste Management Regional Agency	5/27/1998	May 2003	May 2008	May 2013	May 2018	May 2023	May 2028
Solano	4/24/1997	April 2002	April 2007	April 2012	April 2017	April 2022	April 2027
Sonoma County Waste Management Agency	11/15/1995	November 2000	November 2005	November 2010	November 2015	November 2020	November 2025
Stanislaus	6/26/1996	June 2001	June 2006	June 2011	June 2016	June 2021	June 2026
Tehama County Sanitary Landfill Regional Agency	5/27/1998	May 2003	May 2008	May 2013	May 2018	May 2023	May 2028
Trinity	3/23/1999	March 2004	March 2009	March 2014	March 2019	March 2024	March 2029
Tulare	4/27/1999	April 2004	April 2009	April 2014	April 2019	April 2024	April 2029
Tuolumne	11/20/1996	November 2001	November 2006	November 2011	November 2016	November 2021	November 2026
Ventura	6/19/2001	June 2006	June 2011	June 2016	June 2021	June 2026	June 2031
Yolo	12/18/1996	December 2001	December 2006	December 2011	December 2016	December 2021	December 2026
Yuba/Sutter Regional Waste Management Authority	4/24/1996	April 2001	April 2006	April 2011	April 2016	April 2021	April 2026