Taking Out the Trash: A New Direction for New York City's Waste by Barbara Warren, M.S. Organization of Waterfront Neighborhoods and Consumer Policy Institute/Consumers Union May 31, 2000 available in pdf format

About Acknowledgements Executive Summary Report Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fresh Kills landfill on Staten Island, which until 1997 was the final resting place for all of New York City's residential garbage, is closing at the end of 2001. This closure presents the City with both an opportunity and a danger. The City has an opportunity to rethink and restructure the City's solid waste system in an equitable and sustainable manner, which reuses and recycles valuable resources creating economic development and jobs. The danger is that the choices made now are ones that will impact the City for decades, and the wrong choices could lead to financial, social and environmental difficulties which could be severe in the years ahead. The Organization of Waterfront Neighborhoods and the Consumer Policy Institute have worked to develop an Alternative Plan for managing New York City's solid waste that maximizes opportunities and minimizes problems. Our plan is based on maximizing the sustainability-- environmental, economic, and social-- of the waste system. It therefore minimizes garbage export, which is expensive. Instead, it maximizes waste prevention and recycling which are cheaper, more environmentally sound, and can result in social benefits for low and middle income neighborhoods. Any plan for the City should be evaluated in terms of whether it is economically viable, environmentally sound over the long term, and socially just. Any unavoidable burdens of waste management must be equitably allocated among all communities and income groups. City Administration Plans, 1996-98 Over the last few years, Mayor Rudy Giuliani and the NYC Department of Sanitation(DOS) have put forward several proposals for what to do with the City's residential garbage-which amounts to some 11,500 tons per day-when Fresh Kills closes. Although the proposals varied somewhat, they generally had as their centerpiece, the building of extremely large-5,000 ton and up-privately owned waste transfer facilities in waterfront communities in the Bronx and Brooklyn. Large waste companies would contract with the City to containerize garbage at these facilities prior to transport to out-of-state landfills. The difficulties with the City Administration's solid waste plans have been numerous. The Administration's proposals have suffered from the following drawbacks: · They placed an inequitable and unjust burden on certain communities, and in particular on low-income, minority waterfront neighborhoods, for processing waste. The South Bronx, Greenpoint/Williamsburg and Red Hook in particular were targeted for these large private transfer facilities for containerization of garbage. · They failed to effectively use and develop City-owned infrastructure, particularly the City's Marine Transfer Stations and thereby left the City in an economically vulnerable situation. Instead of compacting and containerizing at these stations, the City proposed using the Marine Transfer Stations only as pass-throughs on the way to large private waste containerization facilities, which meant that the waste would be handled twice, at two separate facilities. Double handling raises the costs of the export program. · They relied too exclusively on export, rather than advancing a diverse set of responsible, environmentally sound options including waste reduction, reuse, recycling and composting. The City failed to propose the infrastructure for these sustainable options, which could save money, reduce pollution, and provide an economic boost to neighborhoods. · They relied extensively on private companies despite recent waste industry consolidation and the possible impacts of limited competition. The large containerization facilities would be built at City expense, but would be the property of the operating corporation. Once these facilities are built, the City will be at the mercy of the companies owning and operating them-it will be impossible to request bids from competing companies, because there will be no other companies with viable containerization facilities in or near the City. Long term the City would be putting itself at the economic mercy of a few large multinational waste companies. · Finally, they did nothing to address the desperate problems associated with the commercial waste stream, which is even larger than the residential waste stream. The commercial waste stream is already handled by private haulers, a number of whom have been bidding for the residential waste contracts. They currently operate waste transfer facilities in the South Bronx, Greenpoint/Williamsburg and Red Hook, which frequently do not meet environmental standards, create enormous garbage truck traffic problems in surrounding neighborhoods, and have had unacceptable worker accident rates. The drawbacks of the City Administration's proposals have been apparent to many. In fact, very different solid waste solutions have been recommended by reports published by the City Council, borough and city-wide Solid Waste Advisory Boards, academic and citizen organizations and even the Mayor's Fresh Kills Closure Task Force. Because of the shortcomings of the City Administration's proposals, the Organization of Waterfront Neighborhoods in collaboration with the Consumer Policy Institute have developed an Alternative Plan for solid waste management in New York City. This Alternative Plan is grounded in the work of these prior studies and advisory bodies. The OWN/ CPI Alternative Plan The goal of the OWN/CPI Alternative Plan for solid waste management is a system that is socially equitable, environmentally sound and economically sustainable. The central elements of the Alternative Plan are as follows: 1. Retrofit the existing municipal Marine Transfer Stations(MTSs) and sites, which are located in all five boroughs, to containerize the waste from that borough for direct export by barge or rail. This is an equitable approach, because the processing facilities will be sited in all five boroughs. This is an economically sound approach because it avoids double handling of waste and retains City options for competitive bidding for disposal in the future. It is also the most environmentally sound approach, because it minimizes truck traffic. 2. Comprehensive reform of private waste transfer stations and the handling of commercial waste, through a package of legislative measures and through regulatory enforcement. Focused analysis and planning for commercial waste generated in Manhattan is a key element. In the meantime there should be no new siting or expansion of waste transfer facilities in overburdened neighborhoods: the South Bronx, Greenpoint/Williamsburg and Red Hook. 3. Increase the amount of both waste streams that we reuse and recycle, and reduce waste generation. The City should immediately comply with the City's recycling law, and then move to meet the goal of the State 1988 Solid Waste Management Act to achieve 10 percent waste reduction and 40 percent recycling by 1997. The City is currently recycling only about 21 percent of the City-managed waste stream. And while the benefits of waste prevention are well recognized, there can be no effective programs without increased funding. Waste prevention does not happen by itself with no resources, despite its clear cost-effectiveness. Mayor's May 2000 Proposals Any proposals for the City's waste should be measured against the goals and proposals of the Alternative Plan. The Administration's latest proposals, released in May 2000 partially address some of the worst inequities in previous proposals. No borough would have to handle another borough's residential waste. Waste movement out of the City would be by rail or barge, rather than by polluting and congestion-generating trucks. However the May 2000 proposal still only partially meets criteria of long-term environmental, social and economic sustainability. · The proposal contains no plan to upgrade and improve commercial waste handling in the City of New York. The OWN Plan addresses the entire waste stream- residential and commercial. · It does not propose expanding waste reduction, reuse, recycling or composting, which are both environmentally and economically sound alternatives. The OWN Plan calls for compliance with the City's Recycling Law and Community-based planning for income and job-generating recycling and reuse programs. · Despite staggering export costs, the City is "putting all its eggs in the export basket" and relies excessively on private companies. Private companies will process a total of 10,400 tons per day of waste, building one huge containerization facility in Linden, one new facility in Queens, and possibly new facilities in the Bronx and Greenpoint/Williamsburg as well. Five City Marine Transfer Stations (all three in Manhattan, one in Queens, and one of three in Brooklyn) will continue to serve merely as pass-throughs for garbage going to Linden. In contrast the City will containerize only 2100 tons per day of waste, at one new facility on Staten Island and at one modified City Marine Transfer Station in Southwest Brooklyn. This plan leaves the City at the economic mercy of large corporations in the future. Such reliance on export also leaves the City vulnerable to efforts in importing states to restrict waste flows. The OWN Plan retains more City control of the waste transfer and containerization process, providing the City with more options for increasing recycling and maintaining competitive bidding in the future. Recommendations to City Council and Administration Officials for Modifying the Administration Plan Ideally, the City would adopt the OWN Alternative Plan for managing the City's waste. On the other hand, if the Administration's May 2000 plan is to be adopted-- with the BFI/Allied facility in Linden, New Jersey as its centerpiece, processing more than half of all City waste (6430 tons per day)-- the City Council must modify the Plan in order to meet basic standards of equity, environmental soundness and economic sustainability. If not modified, the City Council should veto the Solid Waste Management Plan and any Budget for long term export. The City Council should vote only on a specific final plan, not the current version, which actually offers a menu of options and alternatives. The Department of Sanitation must be held accountable in this process. The City Council should modify the Mayor's May 2000 proposal to: 1. Reduce private sector waste handling and increase City-owned waste handling. Specifically, the Greenpoint, Brooklyn MTS should remain in city ownership and control and be modified like the Southwest Brooklyn MTS to containerize residential waste. The new facility proposed for Queens should also be City-built, owned and operated. These steps will reduce the amount of garbage being containerized at private facilities under the May 2000 plan by approximately 2000 tons per day. 2. On Staten Island, rather than build a 1150 ton-per-day City-owned containerization facility, which is much larger than needed to process the 575 tons per day Staten Island currently generates, the City should build a previously cancelled recycling processing center. The small amount of remaining mixed waste-less than 600 tons per day--should be barged to the Linden facility for containerization. 3. Process Bronx waste (1900 tons per day) at an existing private facility. There is absolutely no need for any new private waste handling facility to be built in the Bronx. The South Bronx already hosts numerous waste facilities including a recently built one at the Harlem River Yard. 4. Expand waste reduction, recycling and composting programs and provide budget equity with export contracts. Real alternatives to expensive export contracts must be funded-waste prevention at 10% of waste collection and disposal and recycling/composting at 40% of waste collection and disposal. The May 2000 plan must show how the City will increase its recycling rate from 21 percent to the 50 percent State goal. 5. Exercise Council oversight over export contracts to ensure the City is economically protected. The City should particularly not agree to "put or pay" contracts which would require us to pay for processing and disposal of a certain tonnage, whether or not we generate that much waste. 6. Require a comprehensive study leading to comprehensive reform of the numerous problems of private transfer stations in NYC and commercial waste handling. Require stringent enforcement of environmental and occupational safety and health regulations and prohibit any further siting of private transfer stations in the three most affected communities -Greenpoint/Williamsburg, the South Bronx and Red Hook. 7. Include a back-up plan, centered on retrofit of the existing MTSs to containerize waste for direct export. This is needed to provide an option in the event that the BFI/Allied Linden proposal does not come to fruition for any reason. Location of Municipal Marine Transfer Stations and Fresh Kills Landfill (Draft Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan NYC Department of Sanitation, May 2000) (Double-click on map for larger size)