Silver Anniversary

USCC: 25 Years and Growing

The People, Programs and Conditions that Shaped the Organization!

You may remember the early 90s—our first introduction to the world-wide-web, the Gulf War, the retirement of Magic Johnson and the Rodney King trial; Silence of the Lambs and “Achy Breaky Heart”.

Narrow your focus to the environmental movement and it will begin to come back to you.


In 1987, the Mobro garbage barge was making its way up and down the East Coast in search of a home.

BioCycle Magazine was still a gleam in the eye of Ina Goldstein, whose husband Jerry had been publishing Compost Science. The ingredients that led to the first industry organization for composting were present.

Nora and Rill discuss pre-USCC years.

Brown Bear, Scarab and a turner by Les Ulhlman (King of the Windrow) were revolutionizing the ability to turn wood and landscaping waste into manufactured compost.
Dr. Les Kuhlman, King of the Windrow
Corporate leaders whose products or services were vulnerable to public criticism joined together under, facilitated by Procter and Gamble, to respond to the role their products were playing in the waste going to Americas landfills. They formed the Solid Waste Composting Council to explore technologies around composting mixed waste to divert these materials from landfills.

Interviewed in 2016, he said: “The Solid Waste Composting Council was motivated by intense concern with the garbage crisis; and Procter and Gamble’s organization was modeled on the Plastics Council. At the initial industry meeting in 1990, big players like Grand Metropolitan, International Paper, Waste Management, and BFI were there. The paper industry came on board because they were concerned with personal care products. The goal was to demonstrate to people that you can compost them.”
–Charlie Cannon (retired)

The price to participate was $2,500 and attracted about a dozen large corporations, led by Procter and Gamble, maker of Luvs and Pampers disposable diapers. The company was under increasing pressure, due to the public relations problem the diapers caused in landfill disposal.

The new Council tapped Jim McNelly, who was running a mixed-waste compost facility in Minnesota, to do its first diaper composting study.

We have initiated a cooperative effort in St. Cloud, Minnesota, in conjunction with Recomp, Inc. to demonstrate the viability of composting diapers and other municipal solid waste into humus that can be used to re-establish fertile land along the roadside or for use as a common garden compost. And we are funding a pilot program in Seattle, Washington to study the feasibility of recycling diapers into plastic “lumber” and wall-board liner.

We are also supporting research by groups like the Plastics Recycling Institute at Rutgers University and the Council of Plastics and Packaging in the Environment.

Jim: “We were doing a six-month study in 1989 at the facility I was running in St Cloud, MN. When it was done, 30 people from the Solid Waste Council came up to tour the experiment,” he remembers. While they were there, Jim said, the group asked him what would help move the industry to the next level. “They asked me what I thought needs to happen to move this industry forward. An industry group, I told them.”

Nora Goldstein, longtime editor of BioCycle magazine, remembers those early, “Wild West” times well.
Click HERE to listen.





Landscapers like Patrick Geraty, saw an opportunity to expand into a new area, and opened a compost facility in Valley Park, MO. He said, “I started looking into what was involved in yard-waste composting when the ban was still in the planning stages. I had been thinking about expanding into other areas, and yard waste composting seemed like a good complement to my landscaping business.


Jim McGill, who had studied composting at Rutgers University, Noel Lyons, of McGill Compost, and his partner, had come to the U.S. from Ireland and found a new industry in formation: Compost. They focused initially on source-separated materials from agribusiness sources. Hear more here.

Mixed or Source Separated?
“I think one of the downsides of the MW composting period, is that it was difficult from a compost end use standpoint; it became, high volume low value, trying to push this compost out into the marketplace and as compost manufacturers you capitalize, you can grow an industry and grow a particular company or facility by making high quality product for high value markets. But it was part of the evolution.”

In this environment, the second gathering of the SWCC occurred, but conversations had begun to escalate that year about separate collection of organics—which became the topic of an after-hours meeting at the 1993 BioCycle magazine conference. The group that met was called SCOR.

Hear more about that meeting from Rhonda Sherman, one of the early attendees, here.

“Our organization was SCOR,(Source separated Composting and Organics Recycling association). We knew we needed the funding to pay for a phone and an office or try to become part of a larger organization, either the NRC or composting council. It was between the National Recycling Coalition and the Solid Waste Composting Council, and the SWCC won by a narrow vote.”

Having that occur at one of their conferences brought a lot of satisfaction to the BioCycle team.“That’s why we were very involved in organizing the conference, methods to bring them together, the conference provided that forum for those communities to come together and make things happen,” said Rill Miller, publisher of BioCycle.In 1993, after that decision was made a national meeting about source-separated organics was organized by the National Recycling Coalition.

Rhonda, Craig Benton, JD Lindeberg and Steve Mojo joined P&G executives along with Rod Tyler, Clark Gregory and Carla Castagnero, who were already on the SWCCs board.
“They welcomed us,” she said. Listen here.

The SWCC put more emphasis on source separation after the SCOR members joined the board. It was an interesting mix between the corporate “suit and tie” members of the SWCC and the advocates and program/facility operators who came to the table through SCOR. It was a new experience for some of them to sit at a gleaming corporate conference table with fellow board members who represented multi-million dollar companies, Rhonda remembered.




In the mid-90s, a total of $30 million dollars in investment, according to Charlie Cannon, executive director at the time, was used largely for studies and reports from scientists like Frank Gouin, Rufus Chaney, Pat Millner, and Eliot Epstein.





The money was also spent on education and training. Rhonda and staff member Rebecca Roe worked on the Composting Council’s National Backyard Composting Program, a “train the trainer” program.

Another accomplishment that lives on: Phil Legge, a Proctor and Gamble employee working on USCC projects, wrote the first Compost Training Manual.

Jeff Gage remembers meeting in Seattle to flesh out the first “in person” training, that eventually became the Compost Operations Training Course.

“Oley Sheremeta and I worked on curriculum for the first courses using the new manual; we met a local pub went through chapters and shared our experiences in the subject chapters, and put our own test together,” Jeff remembers.

Meanwhile, though, the sense of urgency for the corporate participation in the new USCC was flagging. Momentum around MSW composting and the garbage crisis faltered and Proctor and Gamble’s funding shrunk to $2 million in 1998 to $750,0000 in 1999.

Jack Hoeck, of Rexius Industries, one of USCC’s past presidents, decided to try out one of the Composting Council’s conferences in 2000, and got a rude awakening at the sparse attendance. “We went to this conference expecting to learn from all these experts, and we looked around and there weren’t many of us in the room,” he remembered. Sharon Barnes was another new person whom he met at that meeting. She had convinced her team at Barnes Nursery to try composting.

“Ohio only had three sites so I had to go look for information nationally, I had made some phone calls in 92 prior to my first annual meeting,” she said. She spoke about her research at the conference, and was treated like a rock star, she remembers. “It was because I was asking questions of all these people before I came, about composting hog hair,” she said. “People at the conference kept talking about ‘the composter from Ohio’, and I looked around and said, who are they talking about?—imagine my shock when I realized it was me.”

“When I raised my hand and started asking questions, people treated me like a rock star. They were so excited,” she said.

The shrinkage of the Composting Council’s active members and budget continued at an accelerated pace after that.

Longtime board member Wayne King said it was a nervewracking time. “The biggest difference after P & G pulled their funding out, was we went back to a membership driven organization, and trying to put the wheels back on the wagon and get it rolling again. Those were the rough years…Rod Tyler and Sharon Barnes did an incredible job; Sharon paid for a lot of it out of her own pocket.”

A transition committee of Will Brenton, Jim McNelly and JH Dane joined Sharon and Rod to figure out next steps for the depleted USCC, whose treasury dropped to $18000 and members to 50)




Rhonda Sherman remembers, “The Composting Council just seemed to collapse and go away; but Sharon and Rod were trying to stick their finger in the dyke. Ginny Black and Sharon held everything together; Ginny used to practically run the conference.”

Listen here to Sharon tell why she decided to step in.






She said, “I didn’t come to the rescue for the Council; I rescued it for my company! The EPA looks to the Council for the data they use to regulate the industry, so there had to be a Council to provide that data.”




Cary Oshins, now USCCs director of education and advocacy, remembers the days. “I came to the council in around 2000, when Sharon was the volunteer E/D. I was working for Rodale Institute and my boss nominated me for the board. We were at our nadir; we were down to about 50 members.”





Leadership changes eventually settled in with Stuart Buckner, who had been board president, becoming Executive Director from his location in Islip, NY.






Ron Alexander, who had entered the industry selling and brokering compost in 1984, remembers the decline.

The shrinkage, he said, forced a rethinking of the organization’s mission. “When I was a board member I tried to be very vocal about our members being our customers; what do our customers need? And what do we need to do to grow the industry? If you’re an organization like ours and you are not helping the industry grow, what are you really doing?”


The first official Board president of the era echoed that feeling. Kevin Tritz: “The emphasis was to build up the membership and the annual conference.” (Kevin Tritz was president 2002-2004) “We also wanted to see the USCC run as a business; in the past, every entity was doing its own thing, but we worked to consolidate it.”

Ginny Black, along with Sig Shirley and Dave Benke, was one of the leaders of Minnesota’s push in the 90s towards source separated organics composting by facilitating equipment grants for screens and other processing equipment. The purpose: to help counties separate high-value feedstock. The national “wind” began to change, she remembers, when the corporate members in USCC began to withdraw their participation due to a drop in focus on landfill space. In the end, it turned out to be what was needed to allow the smaller, source-separated compost industry to gain a foothold. The conferences, small as they were, were critical in bonding what became the core of the industry.

Listen to Ginnys recollections here.

“The networking and information at the annual conference at a minimum has held the industry together,” Black said. She also credited Stuart Buckner as executive director, who dramatically grew the size of the conference, membership and stability for the organization.Bob Yost has been involved for many years through A1 Organics. Hear his view of the importance of conferences here.



Noel Lyons has always made sure McGill Compost was represented at USCC Conferences. “That first conference was very helpful, proof positive that we were not alone.,” he remembers. “Things like access to knowledge in the early mid 90s— pre universal access to internet information. We would find out technical info about compost performance; and learning about the equipment that was available was always an important thing to find out through conferences.”

Seal of Testing Assurance: The Standards that Have Kept the Industry Aligned

The Seal of Testing Assurance Program, launched in 1999, became a positive focus point for a Council in rebuild mode. It was the direct fruit of the corporate members’ research investment made in the first years of the council.

Companies that have thrived and grown in the decades since the USCC began credit the research and confidence in the standards set by the STA program with providing a platform to present quality compost to regulators, customers and consumers.

Said Kevin Tritz (see video here) “When I got into the business, you could hardly give compost away; working on the STA program gave USCC the continuity and a huge drive to get compost to the level it is at today; before there was no standard that ties across the whole country.”

McGill Compost has embraced STA compost as the standard for all of their products. “If and when we look back 100 years from now and we pick out a half dozen major milestones, that has got to be at the very top,” says Noel Lyons. “Everybody is on the bandwagon today talking about how we need to be shaping ourselves and presenting ourselves and operating as a manufacturing business. The standards and the STA program are totally pivotal. There’s no product with any market that is not successful without standards.”

At the same time the group was swelling with new grassroots-oriented membership, advocacy for the industry became a priority . Composters suddenly had to contend with the fallout from ccurrences of Persistent Herbicides (the crisis struck in the late 90s) a class of herbicides called “pyridine and pyrimidine carboxylic acids” that was designed for use in hayfields, horse pastures, agricultural crop production, golf courses, right-of- ways, and lawns to kill off unwanted weeds and to remain effective for several months to years. These herbicides do not impact grasses, but once ingested, can pass through mammals into their manure, urine or bedding chemically intact.

The first incidents of herbicide contamination in compost were reported in 2000 in Spokane, Washington, where compost produced from yard trimmings contaminated with clopyralid damaged vegetable and garden crops. The City of Spokane suffered an estimated $4 million in damages and the facility was forced to close. The City had joined a class-action lawsuit with other composting operations against Dow, but only received $23,000 in compensation. At Washington State University, the cost from two years’ lost sales, analytical testing, and liability claims paid to growers whose tomato crops were decimated by clopyralid-contaminated compost totaled approximately $250,000. A year later, organic growers in Eastern Washington State lost their certification due to clopyralid contamination.

Ginny Black remembers the shock waves it sent through the industry.
It was one of two major issues the Council has had to face: “persistent herbicides, and rolling over of yard waste bans, are the two single most important issues that the compost council has been involved with, and made positive strides.”


Landfill Ban Overturns

As the pressure on landfills eased (the garbage barge finally ended its long-haul up and down the Atlantic Coast in 1999) the political outcry for recycling and landfill diversion waned. Waste companies used the opportunity to pressure municipalities to reverse their early bans on yard trimmings and green waste in landfills. “There were attempts to repeal them in the late 1990s and 2000s; the issue really was, if regulations have changed and we are required to collect methane gas, why do we need to compost this material anymore, when we can collect the methane,” Ginny says. “The USCC didn’t buy that.” Instead, the organization banded with state organization partners to advocate the value of continued yard waste bans, and were successful everywhere except Florida.

Wayne King was past president at the time.

“When they tried to overturn the yard waste ban, …I got heavily involved; when it happened here in the SE and in my own backyard and in FL I had been serving on the LEAC having been past president for a couple years and knowing a lot about what was going on, we were able to rally the troops and put some funding together to fight the battle. We were successful in a lot of areas; we lost a few battles.”


New Frontiers in the New Millenium

During the last decade USCC has expanded into new areas.

Sarah Martinez of Eco-Products, board member 2016 and 2017:
“The USCC by forming a compostable products task force has done a great job in providing a platform for compostable products companies to get engaged and to work together on some of the challenges .” The task force, which originated in 2011 with the first Compostable Plastics Symposium at the conference in Santa Clara, California, has produced a body of work that includes a Compostable Plastics Toolkit, a Compostable Serviceware Guide, and compostable labelling model legislation. The group has broadened to consider impacts of all types of compostable products.

Cedar Grove is a longtime council member that has taken a leading role in helping tackle compostables and contamination in the compost stream.


Susan Thoman of Cedar Grove discusses compostables

Susan Thoman, who spent many years in various roles at Cedar Grove, discusses the relationship between compost manufacturers and products businesses: “There’s a lot of people working on this. I always said it’s easy to see yourself in a singular system, folks that sell packaging and food service items and composters are part of the same system.

Hear more from Susan in the video.

“There are a number of ways the industry is still young,” says Cary Oshins, staff to the Compostable Products Task Force. “The whole compostable products area, both the standards being used to judge whether a product is compostable or not and the composters who are taking those products, both need to learn what it takes to make a compostable product.,” he said. “We can’t blame composters for not taking products that are not compostable; we can’t blame the manufacturers for composters who don’t operate with the parameters those products are designed to operate in. Composting can operate in a wide range of circumstances in terms of moisture, aeration, how aggressive is the grinding, how quickly they make it All those technologies can make a decent compost but they can’t all compost products the same; part of our job is to educate compost manufacturers on what it takes to take those materials at the same time we educate the manufacturers what it takes for those composters to handle that.”

Creating New Markets

The USCC’s Market Development Committee took on many projects over the years besides the development of the STA program.

The Million Tomato Campaign of 2013 was a high visibility effort. It targeted compost producers, chefs and community gardens and reached its goal of growing 1 million tomatoes using compost donated by Seal of Testing Assurance participants within 6 months.

The USCC spearheaded the donation of 2,888 cubic yards of compost from 85 compost manufacturers –enough to fill 540 dump trucks. More than 100 community gardens participated, resulting in the harvest of more than 1.2 million tomatoes. The campaign united compost manufacturers, chefs, community gardens and food pantries to build healthy soil for sustainably grown, local food.


The Consumer Use program was another campaign of the Market Development Committee to put compost squarely in the minds of American gardeners.

The Consumer Use (CCUP) Program was also introduced in 2013, giving Seal of Testing Assurance members tools for customers about compost in landscaping projects and nurseries about using compost on lawns, flowers and trees and shrubs.

In more recent years, the MDC has worked hard to have compost required in government highway specifications; landscape architecture projects and stormwater and erosion control applications.



“We wanted to get more knowledge to the consumer and to the end user, about how to use compost,” said Frank Franciosi, a longtime MDC committee and Board member who is now executive director. “To me that was one of the most satisfying programs I have worked on.”





Drawing on the Early Years to Provide a Foundation for the Future

Veterans of the early Council all seem to agree that the compost industry took a necessary path. Appreciation of the organization’s beginnings helps to fully understand the capabilities that exist in the industry today.

Sharon Barnes is adamant that the organization would never be what it is today without the infusion of corporate support in the early years, even if its purpose (solid waste composting) is different from the priorities of most members of the organization today. Listen to her analysis.

Oley Sherimeta is another early compost industry leader and researcher who credits the success of the present to the work of the past. “We’ve been incredibly lucky that we had people like Rufus Chaney, Pat Millner, who have kept driving to fund meaningful research along the way. Yes, P & G is done with their dollars, but we are still fighting to make it better, and that takes people. Eliot Epstein, the Goldsteins, these are the people that are really the cement between these myriads of organizations and the science to move it forward and legitimize it.”

It has been admittedly difficult to regain the level of corporate financial support for research that the early SWCC’s corporate focus achieved. Ron Alexander says the support at that level has never returned.



What’s the future of USCC and the Compost Industry?

“Certification,” says Executive Director Frank Franciosi with no hesitation. “This is another piece of that puzzle; the training component and certification. It’s a huge advantage for us in the future It raises the bar for us.”

Who is the Future of USCC?
Cary Oshins, who began his involvement with the USCC in the early 2000s when he joined as a board member representing his employer at the time, Rodale Institute, said the runup to certification has been a long time coming. It need to come at the right time, though, as you can hear in observation from Cary:

The relationship between composting and related industries—food rescue and diversion, anaerobic digestion—is taking shape as the Council grow. Oshins said. Anaerobic Digestion is an industry that the compost industry should see as a partner to the future.

“A/D is something we need to embrace. For under the right circumstances, A/D makes a lot of sense, it allows you to harvest the energy in those feedstocks and at the same time make compost a little easier, because you’ve taken out some of the energy which is really the source of the odors.,” he said.

And the industry challenge that underlies all the others is infrastructure: how to make sure there is an accessible compost facility all over the USA.

The future is in forming chapters, new partners such as food rescue and climate change advocates, and young members–and new ways of looking at compost and sustainability.

The youth of the Decentralized/Community Composting sector—many of whom collect on bicycles and carry feedstock directly to compost manufacturers—has energized the Council in recent years.

It’s a good thing, says Susan Thoman. “We need to bring in a lot more young people; they know how to communicate and get things out….I remember the first fax, but I know now you can get on social media and touch thousands of people in a day.”

Noel Lyons of McGill Compost is bullish on where the compost manufacturing industry is headed. “When we look at the research going on, fabulous research in California about compost an climate change, and water, and the feedback from our customers is incredibly exciting, we want to go down the road after compost markets that are very demanding.”

Nora Goldstein sums up the expanded place at the table that compost manufacturing now occupies. “We can play in job creation sandboxes, build clean water by creating healthy soils, food production and food access, transportation fuels via AD, biogas, the list goes on..and we have to wrestle ourselves away from being an alternative to landfilling and incineration and mixed waste processing to really being this sector that is much more part of the resiliency discussion.”

What do you think is the future of the USCC? Comment below!

Back to Top


This project generously underwritten by:

History compiled by Linda Norris-Waldt, USCC communications manager