Laserfiche WebLink
SWAC will take field trips and have additional meetings. Topics will be reviewed around the <br />key areas as opposed to working on a chapter at a time. <br /> <br />Mr. Scharf asked Mr. Miller what his best success story was, and Mr. Miller responded <br />that in Washington, he did a back-to-back plan. It was a very realistic and up front plan, and it <br />included recycling and facility improvement. He also worked on a study of curbside collection <br />of recyclables and trash pickup for an urban county. <br /> <br />Mr. Scharf asked Mr. Miller whether it is hard to convince a community to implement <br />new technology into the infrastructure and whether he had insight on that. Mr. Miller said you <br />don’t want to hang the whole plan on technology. A feasibility study would help to get deeper <br />on waste characteristics so they would know what they’re dealing with. <br /> <br />Chair Hayducsko explained that he had asked the committee members to delete/recycle <br />the contract that was sent to them earlier via email and replace it with the hard copy provided <br />today, as the copy sent via email has proprietary information. <br /> <br />Vice Chair Okinaka asked for clarification about the term “update the plan” and whether <br />it was assumed the former plan is quite solid and the backbone for how solid waste management <br />will be addressed for the next several decades. Chair Hayducsko said he feels the current SWAC <br />will help design the best plan they can with today’s knowledge. The plan is something that is <br />never truly finished, as new ways of doing things always come along. They will do their best to <br />look into the future, figure out what to do, and provide the roadmap. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodale added that a lot of different methodologies have been looked at on disposing <br />of trash, recycling, and diversion; and the reality is that over the years there has not been a lot of <br />change. DEM sees the update to the plan as incorporating whatever new technologies would <br />make sense. Some methodologies have gotten better, and they need to figure out how the <br />County can do better. No one wants to look at the plan as just maintaining the status quo or <br />being stagnant. The update is to make it better for the whole County. It is a state mandate for <br />the plan to be updated every ten years, but the reality is that the plan is looked at and used <br />frequently by DEM. His copy of the plan is dog-eared and tagged all over. The overall system, <br />however, can always be improved. He does not want the program to be inflexible or rigid. <br /> <br /> 2) Schedule <br /> <br />Mr. Miller provided the schedule via PowerPoint and said it would be emailed to the <br />members. <br /> <br />d. Discuss proposed limited meeting and site visit for June 13, 2018: The <br />proposed sites to visit on June 13, 2018 are Pāhoa Recycling and Transfer <br />Station, Kea‘au Recycling and Transfer Station, Hilo Recycling and Transfer <br />Station, South Hilo Sanitary Landfill, East Hawai‘i Organics Facility and <br />East Hawai‘i Regional Sort Station. Areas of these site visits would be <br />potentially dangerous to the health and safety of the public and <br />impracticable for the public to take part in all sections of these site visits, it is <br />recommended that the Committee approve a limited meeting for the site <br /> <br /> <br />