HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 6a - 2019 ISWMP Chapter 102019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
County of Hawaii
10. ADMINISTRATION, FUNDING, AND IMPLEMENTATION
10.1 Introduction
The current solid waste management programs, as discussed in previous sections, are primarily
administered and funded through various state grants, property taxes, and tipping fees. Departments
within the County of Hawaii develop their budgets on an annual basis. The budgets and funding are
submitted by the mayor's office and approved by the County Council.
This chapter describes current conditions of the existing administration and funding within the County,
identifies current issues and concerns, presents options currently under consideration by the County,
and provides a recommendation for implementation.
10.2 Review of 2009 Plan Update
Exhibit 10-1 below provides a summary of the recommendations put forth in the 2009 Plan update
relative to administration, funding, and implementation, and describes the actions taken to achieve
each recommendation.
Exhibit 10-1. Status Update of 2009 Plan Recommendations for Residuals Management
2009 Plan Update Recommendation Status
Establish Solid Waste Division (SWD) Operating
Expenses
Establish Capital Improvement Fund Expenditures
Projection of Solid Waste Fund Revenues and Expenses
10.3 Existing Conditions
Ongoing
Ongoing
Maintained existing funding mechanisms with
increased tip fees
The County accounts for revenues and expenses for solid waste management in its solid waste fund.
Revenues are received from state and county sources. The state provides grants and subsidizes
programs, such as glass recycling, a -waste recycling, and the beverage container deposit program (1-1I-5).
State funding is generally allocated based on County population or County's budgetary requests to the
state for program administration. The sources of solid waste funding from the County primarily include
revenues transferred from the general fund and revenues from fees associated with solid waste disposal
at the landfills. In addition, the County typically finances large capital improvement projects with general
obligation (GO) bonds.
Budgets for the solid waste fund and capital improvement program are created on an annual basis and
approved after a review process by the mayor's office and the County Council that includes public
testimony.
10.3.1 Solid Waste Fund Revenues
Exhibit 10-2 presents FY 2017-18 actual and FY 2018-19 budgeted revenues for the solid waste fund.
The main sources of revenue are discussed below.
August 2020 10-1
2019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
Percent of Total
County of Hawai'i
Actual Budget
Exhibit 10-2. Status Update of 2009 Plan Recommendations for Residuals Management
Solid Waste Fund Revenue
Tip Fees
36% 32%
FY 2017-18
FY 2018-19
Revenue Category
Actual
Budget
Federal Grants
Total Federal Grants
5,267
0.00
State Grants
Glass Recycling Program
35,751
111,876
E -Waste Recycling
45,000
160,000
Beverage Container Deposit Program
300,013
452,153
Lava 2018—State
1,756
0.00
Solid Waste
Landfill Tipping Fees
11,415,595
11,600,000
Landfill Permit Fees
18,230
20,000
General Fund
General Fund Balance (Previous Year)
0.00
4,385,252
Transfer from General Fund
19,483,277
19,281,770
Miscellaneous Revenue
Charges for Services—General Government
0.00
0.00
Sale of Equipment
12,965
0.00
Sundry Revenues—Current Year
1,767
0.00
Sundry Revenues—Prior Year
6,629
0.00
Certified Redemption Center 204,625 226,104
Total Solid Waste Fund $31,530,874 $36,237,155
Note: Figures have not been finalized by the County and are pending approval.
A summary of the funding methods used in FY 2017-18 and projected for FY 2018-19 is shown in
Exhibit 10-3.
10-2 August 2020
Percent of Total
FY 2017-18 FY 2018-19
Actual Budget
General Fund
62% 53%
Tip Fees
36% 32%
Other
2% 15%
Tota 1
100% 100%
10-2 August 2020
2019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
County of Hawaii
10.3.1.1 State Programs
Glass Recycling. The glass recycling program consists of glass containers not included in the state
Beverage Container Deposit Program. The program is administered through the state and is subsidized
with an advance disposal fee (ADF), currently at 1.5 cents per container. The state allocates funds from
this program to the counties based on the population size of each island and distributes these funds on
a quarterly basis.
Beverage Container Deposit Program (HI -S). The Beverage Container Deposit Program is a state -
administered program, which places a 5C redeemable deposit on each beverage container, as defined
under law. Consumers may then return the container to redeem their 5C at any redemption center. A 1C
non-refundable container fee is assessed to support the costs of recycling and program administration.
Any funds that are not redeemed by consumers may be distributed to County -based programs. The
County submits a list of requests to the state on annual basis, outlining budgetary needs for HI -5
projects and program administration.
Electronic Device and Television Recycling Law. The Electronic Device and Television Recycling Law
(Chapter 339D-7.5) reinforces product stewardship by requiring manufacturers of electronics to run
recycling programs to comply with local government regulations. Manufacturers of covered electronic
devices (CEDs) sold in the State of Hawai'i must register with HDOH and pay an annual registration fee
of $5,000 and must set up recycling plans. Television manufacturers must follow the same protocol
except for the fee, which is $2,500 annually. Any manufacturer that sells both CEDs and covered
televisions (CTVs) are required to pay a combined $7,500 in annual registration fees. The state allocates
funds from this program to the counties based on the population size of each island and distributes
these funds on a quarterly basis. According to HDOH, these programs have been scaled back because of
budget constraints (HDOH 2015).
The State Revolving Fund (SRF) program. The SRF program assists local governments in the financing
the construction of water pollution control projects necessary to prevent contamination of our
groundwater and coastal water resources and to protect and promote the health, safety and welfare of
the citizens through awarding of low interest loans. Since the 2009 Plan, the County has benefited from
the SRF to finance stormwater-related projects at their recycling and transfer stations.
The County may request additional funds during the year for more redemption centers, shelters, bins, or
public awareness programs.
10.3.1.2 County Programs
Landfill Tipping Fees and Permit Fees. The County generates revenue from solid waste disposal through
landfill tipping fees and permit fees. In 2019 non-residential customers paid $110 per ton of solid waste
to the landfill, and for customers that dispose of waste on a routine basis, a $25 one-time annual fee is
assessed for account setup and administration costs. Businesses, agencies, farms, and nonprofits are
subject to a $27.50 per ton tip fee for source -separated green waste.
Customers may also pay special handling fees on non -routine disposal of solid wastes that require
additional personnel or costs for disposal (i.e., solid waste that requires special storage, handling, or
disposal practices such as asbestos or petroleum -contaminated soil).
Transfers from the General Fund. The primary revenue source for County solid waste programs is
transfers from the General Fund. Property taxes account for the largest portion of the General Fund.
Other fund sources include hotel/tourism taxes, public service company taxes, interest on invested
funds, and any carryover of the General Fund balance from the prior year. Each County department
August 2020 10-3
2019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
County of Hawai'i
forecasts its budgetary needs for the year, and the Mayor's office and County Council approve the
budgets pending a review process.
10.3.1.3 Other Programs
Abandoned Vehicle Program. The abandoned vehicle program is funded directly from a portion of the
vehicle registration fee. The program receives $25 per registered vehicle to pay for program
administration, towing companies, and scrap metal vendors.
Residential Hauler Credit. Vendors that charge a fee for residential waste pickup may qualify for a
residential hauler credit. To qualify, the vendor must have a physical address of each customer. The
annual credit to the vendor is determined by the annual number of single-family accounts multiplied by
a factor of 1.5 (tons per year per customer) multiplied by the landfill tipping fee (e.g., $110/ton).
10.3.2 Solid Waste Fund Expenses
FY 2017-18 (actual) and FY 2018-19 (budgeted) expenses for the County solid waste fund are shown in
Exhibit 10-4. Expenses have been grouped into categories that reflect the main solid waste functions
provided by the County. The expense groupings shown were prepared by an allocation process in which
greater than 500 lines of expenditures were assigned to functions using appropriate, available data and
professional judgment by County staff.
Exhibit 10-4. Solid Waste Fund Expenses
Note: Totals may not add because of rounding
As shown, budgeted expenses for FY 2018-19 are higher than FY 2017-18 actuals. Expenses are
projected to increase because of inflation, waste stream increases, increased staffing at recycling and
transfer stations, tariffs, import bans, and substantial reductions in forecast prices received for recycled
materials. Also, due to the 2018 Kilauea Volcano lava event, many properties were devalued, which
resulted in the loss of real property tax revenues, the main source of taxes to the general fund. As
shown in Exhibits 10-2 and 10-3, the general fund is the primary source of revenue for the management
of solid waste in the County.
Exhibit 10-5 provides the SWD's prioritized capital improvement funding request as submitted to the
County Council. These improvements have been included in the Capital Improvement Program forecasts
shown later in this section. As shown, the County also made provisions for SHSL closure requirements.
Closure and post -closure requirements for the WHSL are the responsibility of the County's contractor.
10-4 August 2020
FY 2017-18
Actual
FY 2018-19
Budget
Percent of Total
FY 17-18 FY 18-19
SWD Operations
13,642,032
15,383,194
43%
43%
West Hawai'i Sanitary Landfill
9,326,825
12,647,456
30%
35%
Recycling Programs
6,570,097
8,046,505
21%
22%
FY 2016-17 Encumbrances
5,416,274
0.00
17%
0%
FY 2017-18 Encumbrances
-3,873,145
0.00
-12%
0%
FY 2017-18 Fund Balance for Future Years
448,790
0.00
1%
0%
Total
$31,530,874.37
36,077,155.00
100%
100%
Note: Totals may not add because of rounding
As shown, budgeted expenses for FY 2018-19 are higher than FY 2017-18 actuals. Expenses are
projected to increase because of inflation, waste stream increases, increased staffing at recycling and
transfer stations, tariffs, import bans, and substantial reductions in forecast prices received for recycled
materials. Also, due to the 2018 Kilauea Volcano lava event, many properties were devalued, which
resulted in the loss of real property tax revenues, the main source of taxes to the general fund. As
shown in Exhibits 10-2 and 10-3, the general fund is the primary source of revenue for the management
of solid waste in the County.
Exhibit 10-5 provides the SWD's prioritized capital improvement funding request as submitted to the
County Council. These improvements have been included in the Capital Improvement Program forecasts
shown later in this section. As shown, the County also made provisions for SHSL closure requirements.
Closure and post -closure requirements for the WHSL are the responsibility of the County's contractor.
10-4 August 2020
2019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
County of Hawaii
Exhibit 10-5. Projected Solid Waste Capital Improvements
Prior Funds Estimated Cost (in thousands)
Project Allocated FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 Total
South Hilo Sanitary
$678
$20,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$20,678
Landfill Closure
Rural Recycling and
$9,874
$2,000
$2,000
$2,000
$2,000
$2,000
$2,000
$21,874
Transfer Station
Reconstruction
Closure of Cesspools at
$100
$1,100
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$1,200
Solid Waste Facilities
East Hawai'i Organics
$100
$10,401
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$10,501
Processing Facility
Hilo Scrap Metal Site
$0
$0
$7,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$7,000
Remediation
West Hawai'i Materials
$0
$0
$500
$0
$0
$0
$0
$500
Recovery System
Replacement of Kona
$0
$0
$500
$0
$0
$0
$0
$500
Baseyard Building
Replacement of Hilo
$0
$0
$0
$0
$3,000
$0
$0
$3,000
Disposal Area
Replacement of the Kona
$0
$0
$0
$3,000
$0
$0
$0
$3,000
Disposal Area
East Hawaii Regional
$0
$0
$0
$700
$0
$0
$0
$700
Sort Station (EHRSS)
Reload Facility Upgrades
(for future transfer of
waste to WHSL)
Ongoing WHSL Gas
$2,651
$2,000
$0
$0
$0
$2,000
$0
$6,651
Collection and Control
System
Stormwater
$0
$0
$17,500
$0
$0
$0
$0
$17,500
Improvements for East
Hawai'i Transfer Stations
10.4 Issues and Concerns
As discussed in prior sections, the County is considering several potential changes to the current waste
management program. Some of the options currently under consideration could be implemented
relatively easily and integrated as part of the County's existing waste management system. Other
options will require more significant changes including new infrastructure, new administrative positions
within the County, coordination with other County agencies, community outreach, behavioral changes
by the public (paradigm shift), and in some cases, will require passage of policies, ordinances, and
legislation requiring public and commercial participation.
A central issue for the County is determining the best policies and procedures to fund both existing and
new waste management programs and initiatives. Currently, residential customers can deliver waste to
County recycling and transfer stations at no charge, while commercial haulers must pay tipping fees at
the landfills. As shown in Exhibit 10-4, the FY 2017-18 County general fund provides approximately two-
thirds of the revenue used to fund current solid waste expenses (excluding debt financing for major
August 2020 10-5
2019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
County of Hawai'i
infrastructure). This aligns with the 2009 Plan update. However, general fund transfers supporting solid
waste expenses are expected to drop to around 50 percent in FY 2018-19 compared to about 60
percent in FY 2017-18. This is attributable to excess monies from the FY 2017-18 general fund that are
expected to carry over to FY 2018-19, and to a lesser extent, an increase in state grant contribution to
the glass recycling, e -waste, and beverage container deposit programs.
In FY 2017-18, about 36 percent of the funding was derived from landfill tipping fees, and in FY 2018-
19, tipping fees are estimated to contribute closer to 32 percent. Except for a projected lessened
reliance on the general fund in FY 2018-19, these percentages are relatively unchanged from those
reported in the 2009 Plan update. This indicates that few changes to the overall funding structure have
occurred since the last planning effort, although tipping fees have increased from $85 to $110 per ton
during the past 5 years. According to Ordinance Number 18-5 (Appendix F), which amends HCC 20 of
the, the landfill charge rate per ton cannot exceed $116 in 2022. Exhibit 10-6 shows a breakdown of the
landfill charge rates through 2022 (Ordinance No. 18-5).
Exhibit 10-6. Landfill Charge Rates 2018-2022
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
$108 $110 $112 $114 $116
The funding mechanisms, administration, and types of programs and legislation required to implement
modifications to the existing waste management program will depend on the options selected for
implementation in this Plan update. It is likely that additional regulations will be necessary to
successfully implement changes to the County's current program and to encourage changes in the
current patterns of waste disposal by both the public and commercial businesses.
Three key issues facing the County that may require legislative changes include:
• Increasing diversion by thinking of waste as a resource and reducing wasteful behavior.
• Minimizing or eliminating illegal dumping.
• Reducing contamination at the recycling and transfer stations and green waste facilities.
In addition to legislation and ordinances, community outreach and education will also be necessary to
effect a change in public perception of the issues surrounding waste management, and thereby influence
established behavior patterns. As community involvement and concern for waste -related environmental
stewardship increase, it is expected that acceptance of additional fees and regulation regarding waste
disposal practices will become more widely embraced by the public and commercial sectors.
As part of the Plan update process, the County is evaluating potential options and setting both
recommendations for waste management. To successfully expand and adapt the current county -wide
waste management program to meet its goals, the County will need to:
• Make decisions regarding the path forward according to the Plan's recommended priorities.
• Take advantage of best practices and lessons learned from other jurisdictions regarding funding
and administration mechanisms, and related legal and regulatory requirements.
The County must also consider the potential implications of various existing Federal, State, and County
regulations on the implementation of the waste management program.
10-6 August 2020
2019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
County of Hawaii
10.5 Administration and Funding Options
Many of the options being considered in previous chapters of this Plan update would require changes to
existing methods of administering and funding programs. Some administration and funding options for
consideration follow.
10.5.1 Establishing Solid Waste as an Enterprise Fund
As discussed above, about two-thirds of the County's expenditures for solid waste management are
currently funded by the County's general fund which is primarily supported by property taxes. There are
some disadvantages associated with the current funding system, including:
• Property tax funding provides no financial incentive for residents to reduce waste.
• Using property taxes to fund solid waste services can be perceived as unfair because property
tax collections are not correlated specifically with the types and volumes of waste generated,
potentially leading to inequitable subsidization.
It can be somewhat more challenging to manage solid waste programs based on funding
allocation of money from the general fund, because the money in the general fund may be
redirected towards other pressing county needs.
Another funding mechanism for solid waste systems costs commonly used in many communities is to
establish a self-sustaining enterprise fund. An enterprise fund can be supported primarily by user fees,
dedicated taxes, or dedicated property taxes. Some advantages often cited for enterprise funds include:
• Promoting fairness by charging specifically for waste composition and volume disposed.
• Reducing burden on the general fund.
• Requiring more sensitivity to customer's needs.
• Allowing managers more discretion; however, still holding them accountable to customers.
• Running government more like a business.
The main disadvantages cited for enterprise funds is that they can be regressive and place a burden on
the poor by increasing the amount they must pay for an essential service like waste management.
Enterprise funds also may be more cumbersome to administer (management of financing) and politically
unpopular for those with the expectation that solid waste is subsidized through the general fund.
Several factors would be considered to establish an enterprise fund system:
• Determine local authority (i.e., Can the County legally charge solid waste management user
fees?).
• Gain support from decision makers.
• Decide the appropriate type of user fees to support the enterprise fund.
• Perform full cost accounting to identify and report costs of operation, including the preparation
of a long-range budget.
• Educate the public.
August 2020 10-7
2019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
County of Hawaii
10.5.2 Separating Solid Waste Management as a Line Item on
Property Taxes
The County could provide additional information to customers about the cost of managing solid waste
by adding a separate line item on property tax bills outlining the amount of the tax used to fund solid
waste services. A possible breakdown might include the three primary categories of expenses shown in
Exhibit 10-3: SWD Operations, West Hawai'i Sanitary Landfill, and Recycling Programs. The addition of a
line item on property taxes would be an interim step to educate the public on the breakdown and costs
of solid waste management.
10.5.3 Establish PAYT System at County Recycling and Transfer Stations
As discussed in greater detail in Chapter 3, there are several ways that the County could implement a
PAYT system at recycling and transfer stations. A PAYT program may be implemented via:
• Charging residents' solid waste by weight through the addition of scales at County recycling and
transfer stations while accepting drop-off of recyclable or compostable materials at no charge.
• Charging residents' solid waste by volume where residents pre -purchase tags and/or bags that
they would then place their waste in and haul to their nearest recycling and transfer station.
• Charging residents' solid waste by volume being disposed of, while allowing drop-off of
recyclable or compostable materials.
• Implementing universal curbside collection of garbage for all households in the County where
practical.
Two methods that would minimize staffing requirements at the stations include a "tag' or "bag" system.
In a tag system, property owners would be issued tags along with their semi-annual property tax bills
that could be used as "currency' for delivering waste, and extra tags could be available for purchase at
County offices or retail outlets. Arrangements would need to be made for renters not served by a
building collection service.
A bag system would consist of requiring all residents to put waste into a standard type of plastic bag
that would be available for purchase at County offices and/or retail outlets.
There would be many implementation challenges associated with this system. An extended phase-in
period would be necessary accompanied by an intensive public education program. A PAYT program
could be a user fee option integrated into an enterprise funding program (see Section 10.5.1). This
program has been shown to work in other jurisdictions on the mainland and in Hawai'i (e.g., Kaua'i).
10.5.4 Modifications to Existing Programs and Practices
The County could consider modifications or improvements to existing programs that may increase
revenue instead of changing funding mechanisms (e.g., enterprise fund):
• Seek more non -user -fee funding (e.g., federal grants, opportunities such as SRF).
• Increase recycling rates through improved operations (e.g., public outreach, transfer and
recycling station upgrades).
• Determine adequacy of handling fees on non -routine solid wastes (e.g., asbestos, petroleum -
contaminated soil).
• Increase participation of the hotel/tourism industry through tax incentives or other
mechanisms.
10-8 August 2020
2019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
County of Hawaii
• Determine adequacy of the registration fee for the abandoned vehicle program.
• Reevaluate the residential hauler credit program.
• Regularly review and, when appropriate, renegotiate the WHSL contract.
10.5.5 Illegal Dumping Prevention
Illegal dumping of household and commercial waste can have a variety of potential negative impacts.
Hazardous chemicals generated from illegally dumped waste can contaminate groundwater and surface
water, potentially affecting both human health and aquatic habitats. Flooding can result from blockage
of streams and drainage culverts. Property values can be affected by illegal dumping, economic impacts
resulting from costs of clean up can affect County resources, and illegal dumping degrades quality of
life —the beauty of the island for residents and visitors. Additional efforts to prevent illegal dumping
would be particularly important if the County were to implement a PAYT program or dramatically
increase the tipping fee.
This section describes existing regulations at the federal, state, and local level. It also describes illegal
dumping prevention measures within the County, issues and concerns, and options to deter illegal
dumping that have the potential to bolster the County's existing prevention system.
10.5.5.1 Regulations
At the federal level, Statute 42 United States Code (USC) 6928(d)(2)(B) & (C) of the Criminal Provisions of
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) indicts offenders who knowingly treat, store, or
dispose of hazardous waste without a permit with penalties up to 2 years of incarceration and a
$50,000 per day in fines.
The County regulates "littering" and the state regulates "illegal dumping." The state defines illegal
dumping as the illicit disposal of solid waste that is equal to or greater than 1 cubic yard. The County's
litter law does not quantify what is considered litter; therefore, it could be less than or greater than 1
cubic yard.
In accordance with Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 342H (HRS 342H), illegal dumping could be subject
to enforcement action and administrative civil penalties up to $10,000 per day. Those who knowingly
dispose of solid waste equal to or greater than 1 cubic yard and less than 10 cubic yards are subject to
criminal penalties (petty misdemeanor) up to $25,000 per day for each offense. If illegal dumping is
equal or exceeds 10 cubic yards, it is considered a class C felony and potentially subject to $50,000 for
each separate offense. If illegal dumping is suspected, a complaint can be filed with the State
Department of Health, Solid and Hazardous Waste Branch, State Department of Attorney General
Investigations Office, District Health Office located in Hilo, or Hawai'i County Police Department (HCPD).
Hawai'i County Code (HCC 20-8) contains provisions that prohibit littering. In the past five years,
revisions such as Ordinance 12-1, aimed at reducing plastic bag littering and pollution, have been
enacted to further reduce contamination. These provisions cover the materials commonly encountered
in the municipal waste stream and prohibit discarding or disposing of these materials on either public or
private property. Violators may be fined up to $1,000 and/or not more than 200 hours of community
service for each offense. Cost recovery for cleanup is also allowed under the current County code.
August 2020 10-9
2019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
County of Hawai'i
10.5.5.2 Countywide Illegal Dumping Prevention
The County's HawaiiZeroWaste.org website provides a wealth of information related to illegal dumping
including:
• A link to "Trash Free Hawai'i" website, an initiative by the State of Hawaii Department of
Transportation (DOT), Highways Division, and Oahu District's Storm Water Management
Program, which seeks to reduce litter entering the storm drains that ultimately enter the ocean.
• State of Hawai'i's regulations, including information related to potential hazardous
contaminants that may be within commercial or industrial waste from small quantity
generators.
• Education of the potential health consequences of open dumps (illegal dumps).
• Actions that can be carried out by private landowners, contractors, and "everyone" to address
and prevent illegal dumping, including reporting procedures.
• A link to a brochure that describes how to conduct a community cleanup of a dump site.
• Contact information for the County Department of Public Works, Highways Maintenance
Division, to request rubbish removal in County right-of-way.
• Information emphasizing the role of small businesses in the handling of hazardous materials,
including a link to HDOH guidance and other resources.
The County holds household hazardous waste collection events per year at well-known and well-
publicized locations in Hilo, Kona, Waimea, and Pahoa. Chapter 6 provides further information regarding
the handling of hazardous waste.
The 501(c)(3) nonprofit, Keep the Hawaiian Islands Beautiful website, provides an online litter "hotline"
as another avenue to report illegal dumping. The nonprofit's mission emphasizes the engagement of
individuals to take a greater responsibility for improving the community environment and preserving the
beauty of the Hawaiian islands. Solid waste initiatives and recycling, beautification, and litter prevention
and control are activities emphasized by the nonprofit.
10.5.5.3 Issues and Concerns
Regardless of the existing regulatory framework and "grassroots" approach to prevent illegal disposal of
rubbish, illegal littering or dumping still occurs, notably along roadways in more rural areas, on vacant
lots, and in gulches with major roadways crossing them or near industrial facilities. Enforcement of
existing illegal dumping and litter laws is challenging due in part to the rural nature of the County.
Currently enforcement of the County code is the responsibility of the HCPD. Because littering is not one
of the higher priorities for HCPD, many of the violators who litter are not caught or penalized. DEM staff
do not have the training or legal authority to enforce litter laws. The County would increase its potential
liability if it required DEM employees to enforce policy, even within the confines of County recycling and
transfer station properties.
10-10 August 2020
2019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
County of Hawaii
10.5.5.4 Options to Prevent Illegal Dumping
Illegal Dumping Prevention Studies
It is anticipated that passing ordinances or legislation that requires the public to pay for waste disposal
on a per unit basis may, in the short term, increase the occurrence of illegal dumping. Studies conducted
in rural areas of Kentucky concluded that when additional fees were implemented for public waste
disposal, illegal dumping increased, especially in areas where a higher percentage of the population had
low or poverty -level incomes. However, most jurisdictions implementing programs such as PAYT
reported only short-term increases in illegal dumping, and a decline to pre -implementation rates of
incidence within the first 1 to 2 years after implementation. Exhibit 10-7 presents four programmatic
areas the EPA has suggested focusing on for preventing illegal dumping.
Exhibit 10-7. Four Programmatic Areas for Preventing Illegal Dumping (EPA 1998)
Cleanup Efforts. Cleanup projects will require a coordinated planning effort to ensure that adequate resources and funding
are available. Once a site has been cleaned, signs, lighting or barriers may be required to discourage future dumping. Signs
should indicate the fines and penalties for illegal dumping, and a phone number for reporting incidents. Landscaping and
beautification efforts may also discourage future dumping, as well as provide open space and increase property values.
Community Outreach and Involvement. This may be the most important tool in ensuring that this practice is effective. The
organization of special cleanup events where communities are provided with the resources to properly dispose of illegally
dumped materials increases the understanding among residents of illegal dumping impacts and supplies opportunities to
correctly dispose of materials which may otherwise be illegally dumped. Integration of illegal dumping prevention into
community policing programs or use of programs such as Crime Stoppers may also be an effective way to increase
enforcement opportunities without the additional cost of hiring new staff. Producing simple messages relating the cost of
illegal dumping on local taxes and proper disposal sites will aid in eliminating the problem. Having a hotline where citizens
can report illegal activities and educating the public on the connection between the storm drain and water quality, and
other potential hazards associated with dumping refuse into streams or drains will decrease disposal of waste into streams
or storm drain inlets.
Targeted Enforcement. This tool involves the use of ordinances to regulate waste management and eliminate illegal
dumping through methods such as fines, cost recovery penalties for cleanup, and permit requirements for waste
management activities, to name a few. These fines and penalties can be used to help fund the prevention program or to
provide rewards to citizens who report illegal dumping activities. Other recommendations for this tool include training of
staff from all municipal departments in recognizing and reporting illegal dumping incidents, dedicating staff who have the
authority to conduct surveillance and inspections, and writing citations for those caught illegally dumping.
Tracking and Evaluation. This tool measures the impact of prevention efforts and determines if goals are being met. Using
mapping techniques and computer databases allows officials to identify areas where dumping most often occurs, record
patterns in dumping occurrence (time of day, day of week, etc.), and calculate the number of citations issued and the
responsible parties. This allows for better allocation of resources and more specific targeting of outreach and education
efforts for offenders.
Source: EPA (1998)
The New South Wales Environmental Protection Agency conducted a report on illegal dumping including
an online survey consisting of 63 government authorities, 100 trade and industry authorities, and 1,009
community members. Respondents were given various methods to reduce illegal dumping and were
asked to rank their effectiveness. Patrolling and surveillance were viewed as the most effective, with 81
percent of participants responding that the method was "somewhat or very effective." Community
outreach and education was viewed by 77 percent of participants as "effective," and fines/enforcement
were viewed by 70 percent of participants as "effective." Relating to joint campaigns with the New
South Wales EPA, 56 percent of local government authorities stated the method was "very effective,"
while signage received the least support with 43 percent of respondents stating the method was "not
August 2020 10-11
2019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
County of Hawai'i
effective" (NSW 2015). Exhibit 10-8 graphically depicts the outcome of the illegal dumping survey
performed by the New South Wales EPA.
Exhibit 10-8. New South Wales Survey on Illegal Dumping (North South Wales 2015)
■ Somewhat effective ■ Very effective ■ Don't Know Not effective
Patrolling/surveillance (n=46)
Community events (n=43) 9
Community educationlawareness 9
Limiting access (n=30)
Changes to council waste services 4
Fineslenfbrcement 0=40) 23
Joint campaigns with EPA (n=18) 11
Source: NSW (2017)
9 59 22
14 61 16
14 61 16
r 3 53 23
Signage (n=42) 43 J=
-60% -50% -40% -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Base: n=63, all respondents
Q22. How effective have each of these initiatives been in reducing illegal dumping
and/or illegal landfilling?
Illegal Dumping: County's Options
A combination of passing more severe penalties for illegal dumping, targeted enforcement actions by
HCPD, establishment of new community outreach and participation programs, and other actions found
to be successful in other jurisdictions may help to curb illegal dumping in the County. Potential actions
that may be considered for the County to prevent illegal dumping are listed below.
Civil and Criminal Penalties. Develop legislation that sets more severe civil and criminal penalties
for illegal dumping activities than what is legislated by the state (HRS 342H). Legislation could be
worded such that the penalties increase with the egregiousness of the violation, and based upon
a weight, volume, or types of material that are dumped, and location of illegal activity (that is,
higher penalties for dumping into streambeds). Legislation could require violators to pay for
consequential damages and cleanup costs resulting from specific violations.
Targeted Enforcement. Work with the community and the HCPD to develop a targeted
enforcement program. Incentives could be offered for monitoring and reporting of illegal
dumping to authorities, and methods could be developed for periodically evaluating illegal
dump sites for evidence of the identity of the violators. Legislation supporting prosecution of
violators based on the evidence of ownership at the time of the violation derived from dumped
materials may need to be developed to effectively implement such a program.
Community Education, Outreach, and Involvement. Develop programs with school and
community groups or organizations to emphasize prevention, and conduct periodic clean ups of
illegal dump sites, to raise community awareness and involvement in reducing illegal dumping
activities.
• Install Signage at Problem Areas. Install signage where illegal dumping typically occurs listing the
more severe civil and criminal penalties for violators to curb future dumping. This process may
be completed in conjunction with the planned re-signing at recycling and transfer stations, as
stated in Chapter 5, Public Education and Information.
10-12 August 2020
2019 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan Update
County of Hawaii
Increase Security at Recycling and Transfer Stations. Hire full-time attendants to monitor the
recycling and garbage facilities to deter potential violators. Install a fence around Miloli'i to
reduce illegal dumping during non-operating hours.
• Small Quantity Generator Program. Inform small businesses how to best dispose of their
hazardous waste to reduce illegal dumping and contamination. Businesses who are small
quantity generators (SQGs) and produce between 100 and 1,000 kilograms per month of
hazardous waste may accumulate waste for up to 180 days without a permit. As described in
Section 10.5.5.2, the County provides information and guidance targeting businesses (SQGs) on
their HawaiiZeroWaste.org website. This program could be bolstered by initiatives such as
County interaction with small businesses through meetings and site visits.
• Recycling and Transfer Stations. Allow small businesses to utilize the recycling and transfer
stations for recycling (see Recommendations, Chapters 4 and 8).
10.6 Plan Recommendation
Exhibit 10-9 outlines the 10 -year funding projections for the 84 recommendations identified throughout
this Plan. Fluctuations in markets and uncertainties regarding the outcomes of programs that will be
operational early in the planning period will likely involve the County continuing with the current system
of funding most operating expenditures using property taxes and tip fees until the outcome of programs
are better understood. The County must ensure that DEM has resources commensurate with the needs
of all current and future solid waste programs. Based on the analyses presented above and discussions
with the SWAC, the Plan recommends implementing the following administrative activities during the
next planning period:
Prepare a Solid Waste System Financial Analysis. Prepare the analysis to align with programs
identified in this Plan and to achieve less reliance on the general fund. Major capital
expenditures would continue to be funded through general obligation bonds. The planning
effort would also consider methods and costs associated with the discouragement of illegal
dumping, particularly because there is a correlation between this undesirable activity and the
implementation of a PAYT program.
Note: Chapter 3, Section 3.6 (Recommendation 2) discusses the analysis of a PAYT program or
other funding mechanism for source reduction. Chapter 8, Section 8.8 (Recommendation 1)
discusses the continued operation and maintenance of recycling and transfer stations until a
decision on the best method of collection and transfer is determined, and to also explore
alternative funding mechanisms via a feasibility study.
2. Regularly review and, when appropriate, renegotiate WHSL contract.
August 2020 10-13
+ 01
lD N
L U1
f6 N
} LL
111 N
1a M
y N
} }
LL
T
� O
a
a
c
m ar
3 T
Y F
N
E
0
0
L
O
O
m
a• -I
IA
p u
M Q
o E
c ns
00
tko
c O
O a_
CL
CL
W
CL
O
L > a
u a w w
a
O O
c
a Ap a;
to ca
al fa �
WO f0
N 0
CL c a a1
v ar c >
> E E mo 0
ice -)y Y
a m ° U c
o u, E
G OL w
y u Q
c CL p O U
O CL v C
0OC u m
a a >
a1 �W M
4-6 y 0 0 0
cu
Y Y L
c
O O
O O �
E a E
CC 0
A
ota E
c 1a
Uaatko
OO
O d
aJ
v
E U
cLo �
a
QC
L = O
3 u
C —Cu n
7
v Y O
� N
a E >
fi C
OD
u O +s+
o Q 3
0
v
E v (,
� U �
L
>o°1n u
O c to
tko C 4
T v a) C
7 7T Z
O -O C
U a) N cl
o
Q (, a
A N £
E a, E t
Q U i1 C
Q -C
A
W
E £
C tk c
O C
CL a CL a
1G
to E
c m
L
U UDtkoO
C
p CL
al C
LO T O
E � N
-0 tio
C
o OLa
i � O
Y
o L a1
Y N
U � �
i v E
>
v c
I
i N CL
.
o^ E
= s
S C: c
0o E o
N � Y
C
a
M
E L o ai
a U �
o c a o
'i m O c
m u O t
Y L M i
v
a E
s O ca O
Y C' T
Y w a CL
O Oil C
A
c (,
Oo C
c L
Oa
w
c
ca
cu cu CL
t
M >
CL
ar a
Y O
to y
L
CL i
U Y L
— vl -
� O C
�a
CL a
CU = S
C � f
a
U (D
F1
L a
N C
S
o a
o C
o
E f
oa a
O S
Q+
a) a
L T
y fl
C !
a -
f6 �
X
X C
O C
C
O +
O
U u
FW
S Lo
7 Oa0 C
c i
01
V
O
e-1
H
a
a,
a
a,
v
c
O
N
Ln n
I ^
v n
� r
y r
m n
cu
f6 n
} u
N r
C'
CJ ^
} >
u
v
c
m u
v) i
3
� F
N
o
ar
o
m a U
M O
z
X X
-0 EOyu E
C) m c co
� L
O O O
� C
CL CL 0 CL
N
7
E v
� v
C2 i O
C CJ
O
u
U U C
7 �
� � C
v 7
� Q O —
O -O c
U f0 Q
U U
Z i
m
+U Q
y
7 -0
3 0 �
i C
CL
O N�
m f6
U
� O 7
O O
U
O N N
O O
y
CJ C
0 O M vi
0 + Q- N
> C E C
U u Q)
A
0
0
0
0
m
0
0
0
O
O
O
m
-4
IA
c n
to
C i
0°
C1
U
C:
(6
I =
L 6
O
N
iZ
;
C
co
s=
i
I �
LU
LU
I\
A
0
0
0
0
Ln
)
0
0
0
0
O
O
0
0
0
O
0
r -I
t4
O
O
O
M
m
V)
-a E
d m
� C O
N
d LL
y L
� O
d cu C
U CO
C
co u _
C T —
O C
ca
� C
5.
I _ C
U
r E
-O y CJ
C O -
ca
C .E
cu
L
a 6
I :3
m N
ar '� 5
i O
7
O F
a) H
O '� n
' N � •f0 C
m
E 75 E c
$ O
-303
+c
I
CJ
t Q U
Lu 3 Y
A
0
0
0
X
�a £
N i
C t
C C
(CI
CL O
1
X
Olio
I C a
U C U
0
OU
C
0
0
ut
I-
m
0
0
0
c n
no t
Ci
0c
0
0
0
ib
r`
14
O
O
O
v
M
v►
Ln0
O
m
m
0
N
N
m
In
X
-a E
C) m
tio
C O
N
d LL
U
U
I �
y0
C
O
f0
y
L
C
cL6
L +'
L -0
I c
D M
OA
C
•T
Ln
0
a
L
m �
u
N N
m C
r
} u
X
ar IL0
C �
CO
m
d CL
Cu) ho
C
UC •u
U T
w u
N
w �
O
Em
O X
w
u w
c Y
C m
m 0
m O
w E
Y E
m O
u
m
7 O
O Y
- Y
m E
N
m �
= fl_
-0 OA
C C
m
- Y
m
Q
2 O
p c
Q
2 m
m
� Y
L N
Y
L (D
Y c
3 L a)
Y Y U
M
M Iwn
o
0
0
C
0
0
Ln
0
00
r
0
Ln
0
0
0
0
0
CD
LnLn
m
0
0
�
V).�
m
�
�
0
0
0
0
C
Ln
C
0
0
0
Ln
O
O
vmi
M
N
aI
ao
in
iMif
t4
Vi
a-
w
w
O
O
O
O
O
V)
-O �+
-O
U
O U
m
.C14N-�
O
to
to
to
z
z
Ln0
O
7
Ln
O
M
O
N
O
a --I
CZ
t/t
X
X
X
X
-C-to
C N
C N
C N
CE
fE6
O
O Gocto
O to
ctoO to
ctoO to
O to
c O
c O
c O
c O
c O
o a
o a
o a
o a
o d
O
�
w
Y
tn
0
N
m
z
3
CL
E C O
O
C O
U
_O
m
N
O
0
0
LnO
>C L
a)
Y
Y
mw
o
w >
-0
w
N -p
m
C O.
m
L
m
O
a-
E L
to
a) c
u
LF -
E>
O
7
aw+ w
O
L a)
O'
N
C —
C w "O
N >
O L
O
w
-aCU
"O
m
Y
T
,aT+ m
v
v
0
X
m O ho
m M
uo
E E
m
E
Evru
c2 o
OD U
Y
E
O
a C 0
0 Y
hA a
C a
O C
m
O-
u
Y
C
m ,� O
+. }
C toO
wC
bOA
(u E c
x m C
t o—
U +,
o
w
w p
v E
o a
a
d a s
0)
E
a) CL
a
C
L ti4ia
w n
Y (,)
O
h0
C
L
X M
w IA
Lw+ C
m {A L
•�
O
w O C
>, m a
C O"
m
U
w
a
OY
m t V
C U
m C
O w C
N
L
�
m cu
t w m
C Y L
O O
Ia
C
y, O_
C
v 0
p
+�
U
m w m
O ho
0
a
O
"O w
'6
v
O
u
00 N hU
O
Q) H
N
w
u
N
In C
c w-
O
o
N
- a) w
m t
m 7
Q 'A
m
a)
c m—>
CL
:3y C
C C
W-0
IYif
C
U
Y = U
W
m
E C
0
0
0
0
0
0
00
0
00Ln
m
�
V).�
0
0
0
0
C
Ln
C
V1
.zN
m
N
vmi
00
ao
in
0
a-
c
O
0
0
Ln0
7
Ln
M
w
N
CZ
Y
S,
O
O
o
O'aw
w
>
O
LQ
N
m
Q
O
�
tn
0
o
z
CL
O
o
N
LnO
ai
m
N
O
O
O
O
O
ll'1
�i
M
N
t4
N
X
C fE6
N
N N N
N N
C (Ea
u
w
O toC
C
C
C toC
C toO
wC
bOA
C O
m
O m O
m O
pL
tCa
o a
a
d a s
a s
O a
a
bA
C
t
hI
u
C
C
u
U
U
Q
w
V1
�
GA
>
O
bo 7
m
-
C
O
u
C
i
w
E
s
I
Ebi
_
o
to
O
c
cm0
O
E
i
ho
O
O
O
+w+
O
CL
CL
3
o+;
a`r
o
C
vY
p
m
t
E
m
Cw
CL
a)
E
E
E
o
E
a)
w
a) OU
C
po
O
to
O
7
�_
O
E
CL
cr
7
c-
O
-C
o
m
EC
hA
=0
u
m
cL
m
O
C
Y
L
U O_
O
GA
(a
i
C
Y
C C
O w
O
m
O
V1
m
m ho
C
U -O
CW C
L
Q
Y
N
U
•0a
CL
O
C w O
CW
Q Y
L
cu
w
a) i c
j m
Y
L
m 0
I
a c
+'
E w
E
m O
L
a
v E
s
=' w
m L
c 0-
`w
> to
a
co
m� a
c
w
E m
`
m
L
C
oa
w
w U
w
C
i
Q m
E
C
X� C
a) m
In
U
E
w
a w m
0 ho
m
CTL
0
0
0
0
O
O
0
m
X
tto E
E n
w C
C
Q G
C
E
Q
._
O'
w
C
m
w
u
w
E
w
m
C
m
E
c
ho
Lel
10
to
e -I
c
ti
O
N
+�
� N
x
to
x
v E
nE
C6 N
wE
opo£
O1 }
c m
to
r- 2
} LL
c 0
t
c C
a s
p a
N
O
O
M
O
O
cu N
} LL
Ln
Vi
V►
� N
N
�cu
m n
c
CU
} u
N n
c
O1 n
v
c
m u
vl C
3
Y F
N
O O
O O
C O
M O
M ei
x
E to £
C) m c n
�
O O `C
C w C
a al p o
C 41
0 0o
C m
aco
v �
u
U �
� L
� U
Q 0
0 00
ce O
O H
0 0
Y
N 0
O
�CL
L
v
� f0
O
Q �
E
o In
U U
O1 �C
C O
LL a
A A
x
I-
to E
c n
00 C
C
po
O
O
O
Ln
Ln
0
v
c
a
3
C
01
01
W
F1
FW
O
O
O
00
rn
in
c
0
N
C
O)
C
v
a
E
E
CL6
00
O
CL
L
00
7
O
L
H
O)
C
L
N
Y
O1
L
0
O
O
O
00
00
i�
c
0
O
+ O
C Ln
OD pj
E m
v yr
o .
E
E
m
00
O
CD_
L
00
7
0
L
H
cu
O1
C
E
L
O1
Y
N
O1
L
0
O
O
O
T
M
A
x
x
x
v E
nE
wE
opo£
ar m
to
12 2
c m
to
r- 2
c m
tko
C O
c 0
t
c C
a s
p a
p a
p o
O
O
O
T
M
A
�Otto E
a) {Q c tQ
to
L L
tko
m O C O
E d Q 0-
0
O >
O O
a a�
C E
cu
Eo
aJ
O
CL E f0 In
aJ (U
}d
U
U -0 w
ru
� T 7
tQ C
o E m
aJ L a
Y N W
O �
U aJ U U
O L cQ c +i
+� aiS
o m a)
v 'c`n c
N
0 OL N a
C �
L Y O N
(6
U n a
U -a ¢ 3 m
A A
X
a) £
N i
c t
c C
f0
d O
O
O
O
cr
E E
a) {LQ aJ z
O O
L1 d C1 d
O
a O
v
D T +�+ C
a +� to
`J U T i
Y =
v 0 t' t
U -O Q C
m Q L a t
E Lo
f
0 H U U V
E
M tQ C a !
v{ 00u OL f
t10 OL CL v
N Q N n f
Y E o
L L) h0 a
3 S? c N
In aJ m O
+, tQ f
vOi Y Li
fO NaJ m QJ O
0 a
SZ `
Ym L 0 C
Em v 'fu <
4
L1 fcQ V�I L C f
v — oo 3 v
ra a to
L a)
= N N
N
E s Q c
A A
c
s
X
b\A E \O E
c t6 aJ t0
.O L
t10 O C O
c t6
O (1 d
O
a+ �
c L
t 3
U c
E 0
OD co -C
O t aJ
c
O ° �+
L E C,
O —
o to N E
L
CL
a c c O
nO Y u
F
t6 T
7
}w Ua Q)
C � � n
a t
a'' C Uj•�'' (
O c6 v
0 co
o o z
n
cQ 0 a
O Cc L Q) t
fYLQ 7 OcuE
f
�+
(v UQJ i
c S
Oa t r-
0)
0) ^ N U }
7
c aT+ m 1n `•�
a) a t
U £
U U o0a 'C
X
tto £
E f
Oo t
c i
Oc
■r
X
N i
C t
c C
f0
d �
O
rn
O
O
O
0
N
Ili
0
N
.Ln
O
O
O
O
O
N
In
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
N
V).
O
C7
O
0
0
0
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
in
co
N
0
c
O
N
Ln n
� n
N ^
c
m u
of C
3
� F
N
E
OJ ILO
C �
O O
O
a a
N
a N cD
v
s
CL u O c
E
CL to n
E
o'2 w
E `� £
c > 0 L M
a v v £
> c•
M C
L a N £
o a ?
TCi fO C
O N Y^ N i
C T
ar E 0 c
U L O ai
i Y fo I6 EO+
c p
O
i O) aO+ u C O i
U U £
N
i v _� a _ £
i f0 7 S
O 0 O a
i Nt m C T'
0 N M C
U O iZ V +'
C
O m OS
v :L } c n
L .a OJ -O O 0 4
{ (y '> •a
O m t m O
u 3 m 3 w n
0
(]
0
u
u
cu
0
a
L6
v
-0
C-4
v
aa
�
a
0
0
z
O
z
o
O
O
Ln
to
N
Ln
N
a/?
O
N
O
O
M
c -I
c
m u
of C
3
� F
N
E
OJ ILO
C �
O O
O
a a
N
a N cD
v
s
CL u O c
E
CL to n
E
o'2 w
E `� £
c > 0 L M
a v v £
> c•
M C
L a N £
o a ?
TCi fO C
O N Y^ N i
C T
ar E 0 c
U L O ai
i Y fo I6 EO+
c p
O
i O) aO+ u C O i
U U £
N
i v _� a _ £
i f0 7 S
O 0 O a
i Nt m C T'
0 N M C
U O iZ V +'
C
O m OS
v :L } c n
L .a OJ -O O 0 4
{ (y '> •a
O m t m O
u 3 m 3 w n
X
a
v
X
T
m
CL
°i)
0
ti
0
(]
0
u
cu
0
L6
v
-0
C-4
v
a
�
a
0
0
00 z
z
o
O
Ln
N
N
V?
N
X
a
v
X
T
m
CL
°i)
0
ti