HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0550.001 2010-2012William P. Kenoi
Mayor
William T. Takaba
Managing Director
January 31, 2012
Count of
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
25 Aupuni Street • Hilo, Hawaii 96720
(808) 961 -8083 Fax (808) 961 -8086
http: / /co.hawaii.hi.us /directory/dir envmng.htm
Dora Beck, P. E.
Acting Director
Hunter Bishop
Deputy Director
Ms. Brittany Smart, Chair
And Members of the Hawai' i County Council Environmental Management Committee
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, HI 96720
Subject: Testimony on Communication No. 550 — Discussion Regarding the Possible
Implementation of Fully Funded Diversion Recycling Grant Program
Dear Chair Smart and Committee members,
The Department of Environmental Management (DEM) has been working with the Council on a
resolution relating to a multi -year contract for service of hauling recyclable materials from County
Transfer Stations. The proposed contract would replace the current contract for these services started in
2007 and is part of the County's 2 -Bin Recycling Program.
After several meetings and discussions with Council members and the Legislative Auditor, DEM revised
the Resolution 202 -11 to include recommendations from the Council. At the January 20, 2012 Council
meeting, the Council postponed voting on Resolution 202 -11 and received an unsolicited proposal from
Atlas Recycling Center, LLC.
Communication No. 550 indicates that the purpose is to discuss "concerns that were presented at the
January 20, 2012 Council Meeting" and "during the course of the discussion a diversion grant program
was mentioned as a possible alternative to the services described in Resolution No. 202-11."
To avoid misinformation, DEM is providing written testimony regarding the unsolicited proposal and
some of the claims regarding the County's 2 -Bin Recycling Program.
The 2 -Bin Recycling is part of the County's Integrated Resources & Solid Waste Management Plan
(IRSWMP) Update that is required by State Law. The IRSWMP Update was developed through many
hours of deliberation by volunteers from the community and volumes of documents and research, and the
2 -Bin Recycling was determined to be the best option for the County to encourage more recycling for
residents.
Atlas's Proposal
Atlas's proposal is to "develop a comprehensive community based recycling program for the residential
sector and small commercial sector on the Big Island through the establishment of a fully funded
Diversion Grants Program."
County of Hawai`i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.
Comm. No.
Ref. To:
Ref. Dote,
t
P 1 Emc..
1. Fact: The County has been providing a `fully funded" diversion program to encourage
recycling which provides funds to Atlas and five (5) other companies who have participated.
Over the past four years, 99.12% of all diversion funds requested were granted.
2. Fact: The County already provides a comprehensive community based recycling program for the
residential sector. The 2010 survey showed 80% of residents participated in the 2 -Bin Recycling.
3. Fact: A fully funded diversion program is already an important part of the current 2 -Bin
Recycling program.
4. Fact: The current diversion program provides stability for private recyclers by increasing
funding during downturns in the market value of the materials. It also protects taxpayers by
reducing funding when the values increase. For instance, in 2009 the average diversion payment
per ton was $102 and in 2011 it averaged only $36 per ton.
5. Fact: The proposal suggests paying $100 /ton for mixed, paper, plastic, aluminum, tin, etc. even
when a representative market value of these commodities is high. The County's current program
pays based on the market value and has been substantially less than $100 /ton for similar
commodities. For instance, paper has a high market value and, as a result, the average 2011
diversion payment rate paid by the County for paper was $12.54/ ton.
6. Fact: The proposal replicates what is already in place and simply shifts the funds from the 2 -Bin
Recycling Program at transfer stations (developed through the IRSWMP Update, supported by
Council at the time) to another recycling center outside the transfer stations. This does not serve
the community when 85% of the residents self -haul their rubbish and prefer the "one- stop"
convenience of the transfer stations. Studies consistently support that people prefer the "one-
stop" instead of driving to multiple locations.
7. Fact: The proposal states that the transfer stations in the larger populated areas generated the
most volume of materials. While this is not a surprise, it does not juste eliminating services to
smaller, less populated communities. The proposal does not provide options for servicing
smaller, less populated communities. DEM believes all citizens should have equal opportunities
to participate in the recycling programs. The 2 -Bin Recycling Program accomplishes this.
Atlas's Claims about the "problems" with the 2 -Bin Program:
1. Limits participation to users of transfer stations
Fact: 85% of the residents use the transfer stations and the residents who elect to hire a private
hauler for their rubbish can still use the transfer stations for redemption or recycling. Some
private curbside haulers do offer curbside recycling which is the best solution. Funding
recycling centers at another public location will be to no advantage.
2. Dependent on voluntary recycling
Fact: We acknowledge that recycling is voluntary and that mandatory recycling would increase
diversion. There is nothing in the proposal that offers any alternative to voluntary. It simply
offers a different location which will be less convenient and potentially result in less recycling
due to lack of a "one-stop" drop -off for rubbish and recyclables.
3. Fails to reach business community
Fact: 2 -Bin Recycling was developed primarily for the benefit of residents but there are many
small businesses who wish to utilize these services at the transfer stations. The County is in the
process of developing a program where small businesses can pay a fee and use the transfer
County of Hawai' i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.
station services which will encourage more recycling. The current landfill diversion program is
intended to provide incentives for the recyclers like Atlas to provide recycling services to the
businesses.
4. Allows for contamination & moisture
Fact: Recyclers must manage these issues as part of the contract and can, and do, provide
covered bins or compactors where needed. All recycling programs have issues with
contamination and the 2 -Bin Recycling Program has had very minimal contamination. The
recycle bins are routinely inspected by County personnel for contamination. Having the
collection sites at private sites as recommended in the proposal does not remove this problem
unless there is a paid person(s) at all times searching each customer's recyclables before they
are deposited.
5. Costs the taxpayers millions for infrastructure
Fact: During the update of the IRSWMP which considered cost impact to taxpayers, it was
determined by the Solid Waste Advisory Committee after 18 months and hundreds of hours of
research that managing solid waste services through the transfer stations was the best method
and that the cost of converting to curbside services would be prohibitive. Transfer stations will
be in our island's future for many years to come. As the IRSWMP Update was being developed,
regular public meetings and presentations to Council were conducted with subsequent approval
by Council.
6. Is overly expensive - $230 /ton
Fact: In 2010, the cost for the 2 -Bin hauling contract averaged $137 /ton. The estimated cost for
the diversion or processing in 2010 was $38 /ton. Some commodities, like paper fibers including
cardboard was at a high market value and the diversion payment was zero. The State funds most
of the glass recycling at $160 /ton through the Advanced Disposal Fee (ADF) Grant. DEM has
requested council approval since June 2011 for a 3 -year contract to seek cost reductions as well
as using compactors where feasible to further reduce the costs.
7. Creates no financial incentive to participate
Fact: DEM recognizes that offering financial incentives like the HI -5 program would increase
recycling. Normally, these types of advanced disposal fees are managed through the State and
are not an option for the County to implement such fees. The proposal does not offer financial
incentive. Despite offering no financial incentive to participants, 2 -Bin Recycling at the transfer
stations registered a higher participation rate in the 2010 survey than the HI -5 Redemption
Program.
8. Fails to create diversity & limits to mixed
Fact: Studies show that participation increases with convenience and most municipalities have
moved to single stream or mixed recycling as the norm. Participation increased with the 2 -Bin
Recycling making it more convenient and easy to recycle. Recyclers do have choices at certain
Transfer Stations (e.g. Hilo, Kea `au & Kealakehe have cardboard recycling collection; Kea `au
has newspaper too). Source - separated recycling is provided at these larger transfer stations
where demand and space is appropriate. Private recyclers like Atlas have been free to establish
recycling drop -off of any type of commodities and could have used funds from the Landfill
Diversion Program for this purpose.
9. Fails to create competition
Fact: Pursuant to State Procurement laws, contract services undergo an open competitive
bidding process and anyone who qualifies can bid. Nothing prevents a private company from
competing and offering recycling centers. Establishing at least 2 zones provides the opportunity
County of Hawai' i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.
for companies to bid on one or both zones and provides economies of scale with larger material
flows.
Other Excerpts /Claims in Atlas's Proposal:
• It will benefit the County of Hawai' i to upgrade the current Diversion Grants Incentives program
and streamline the program to focus on the residential sector and the small business sector,
removing the program's subsidies to large commercial businesses that bale and compact
cardboard. Baled and compacted cardboard from large commercial businesses can be hauled and
processed more economically and should be eliminated from the diversion program.
Fact: When market prices are good for cardboard, as they are currently, DEM pays much less
than the $100 /ton that is being proposed. Sometimes it pays nothing. A substantial portion of the
diversion program is to encourage recycling from the residents and is paid as mixed recycling. It
is important to encourage recycling from all size businesses. Many of the large businesses like
Wal -Mart and Costco do not receive any funds from the landfill diversion program — they recycle
as part of a corporate national program.
• The proposed fully funded Diversion Grants Incentives program would pay a $100 per ton
diversion fee to fully certified recycling businesses for all mixed recyclable items including;
cardboard, newspaper, magazines, all paper types, tin cans, aluminum foil, and #1, #2, #4, #5
plastic bottles and plastic bags to State - permitted certified recycling businesses. Glass bottles
would continue to be paid at a rate of $160 per ton through the State's Advance Disposal Fee
(ADF) funds.
Fact: The diversion payment rate for mixed recyclables averages much lower than the proposed
$100 /ton. The values for each commodity are quite different and therefore the proposal to pay
"one rate " for all types of materials will result in DEM paying more for high value materials and
less for the low value commodities. DEM has continued, and plans to continue, to promote glass
recycling through State ADF grant.
• This is why the County must look beyond the transfer station program to help achieve its goals of
Zero Waste. It is vital to work more closely with the private sector to expand recycling
opportunities for all the islands residents and businesses and to do so in the most cost effective
manner as to minimize the burdens on the taxpayers.
Fact: DEM has continued to provide diversion incentive funding to encourage the private sector
to offer more convenient recycling. The 2 -Bin Recycling is part of the IRSWMP and is the best
opportunity to increase recycling short of mandatory laws and financial incentives like the HI-5
program.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to provide testimony on this very important subject.
Sincerely,
Dora Beck, P.E.
ACTING DIRECTOR
cc: Billy Kenoi, Mayor
Bill Takaba, Managing Director
Hunter Bishop, Deputy Director
Greg Goodale, SWD Chief
Linda Peters, Recycling Coordinator
County of Hawai' i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.