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

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

CHAPTER II NYC'S CURRENT SOLID WASTE SITUATION New York City generates an enormous amount of waste -approximately 18,500 tons per day of residential and commercial waste, plus 8,600 tons per day of construction and demolition debris and 11,500 tons per day of fill material (dirt, rocks, concrete). In fact, no one knows exactly how much waste is generated and carted off daily. This is because there are actually two waste streams in NYC, as in most areas of the country. One, picked up by the Department of Sanitation (DOS), is largely residential and institutional. The second, managed by private sector waste companies and haulers, consists of commercial waste. While we have relatively good data on the DOS-collected residential waste, the data on commercial waste is poor. These two waste streams have been largely separate since the late 1980s when in an effort to extend the life of the landfill, the City raised dumping fees for private carters at Fresh Kills. Private carters then stopped dumping at the Municipal Marine Transfer Stations, which transport garbage to Fresh Kills, and instead began utilizing existing private transfer stations or opened new ones. Residential Waste Historically, the Department of Sanitation (DOS) has collected garbage curbside in packer trucks and delivered it to eight City-owned Marine Transfer Stations(MTSs). These stations are designed to allow dumping of garbage directly into deep barges. A small amount of waste is also collected from dumpsters. Each barge is capable of holding 600 tons of garbage. Tugboats shuttle the garbage barges over to the Fresh Kills Landfill on Staten Island, where cranes remove waste from the barge and place it on trucks. The trucks then shuttle the waste to the active working area of the 3000-acre landfill. Today in the year 2000, approximately 11, 441 tons of garbage per day are currently sent for disposal. Some 2403 tons per day are diverted for recycling from the curbside collection program (Figures for FY 2000, May 2000 Draft Solid Waste Management Plan). Some 4000 tons per day of waste are currently going to Fresh Kills. This is a sharp decline from the late 1980s when a maximum of 27,000 tons per day of commercial and residential waste was moved through the City's marine transfer system for disposal at Fresh Kills. Currently the entire operation of marine transfer stations and disposal at Fresh Kills involves City-owned and operated facilities. The remainder is being exported under "interim contracts." In 1997, as part of the Fresh Kills shut down, for the first time the City began to contract with private companies to dispose of residential, DOS-collected waste. The City has issued interim contracts to export residential waste for the Bronx, parts of Brooklyn and Queens, Manhattan and Staten Island. "Interim" contracts will last until a more permanent long term plan is in place. In the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens, waste goes by DOS truck to private waste transfer stations where it is repackaged into larger trailer trucks for the trip to a distant landfill. For Staten Island and Manhattan, under interim contracts, DOS garbage trucks will deliver waste to New Jersey transfer stations and a Newark incinerator immediately after picking up from city streets. As a result of these contracts, on an annual basis, an estimated 700,000 extra truck trips will clog bridges and the Hudson River tunnels (Lipton, NYTimes, 2/21/00) spewing additional diesel exhaust into a region already burdened with unhealthy air quality. Truck traffic would increase 15% in the Lincoln Tunnel alone (Lipton, NYTimes, 2/21/00). The City claims that these interim contracts will not have a significant effect on the environment. However, the NYS Attorney General filed suit in early 2000 disputing that claim (Lipton, NYTimes, 2/21/00). Community groups and citywide organizations have raised concerns that in the absence of a good long term plan for waste export that adopts more environmentally sound transportation plans and is acceptable to the public, the interim plans will become permanent or at least long term, thus aggravating the air pollution burden. Commercial Waste Handling in NYC The private commercial system has been even more problematic. The influx of transfer stations into low-income, communities of color began in the late 1980's when Fresh Kills landfill tipping fees increased. Private carters then began to send the garbage out of town -- and out of state. Commercial carters scrambled to open up or expand transfer stations, where garbage is taken off a standard truck and put on bigger trucks for a long haul trip to a landfill. For the most part, the operations were established without the required environmental reviews or permits. Zoning has offered little protection in these communities. According to the May 2000 Draft Solid Waste Management Plan prepared by the NYC Department of Sanitation, in 1999 private carters handled 2.2 million tons of mixed solid waste (7051 tons per day), 2.7 million tons of construction and demolition debris (8654 tons per day) and 3.6 million tons of fill material (11,538 tons per day) (1999 Projections, May 2000 Draft SWMP). It is important to note, however, that accurate information about the amount of waste actually generated in NYC and handled at private transfer stations is not available. When tipping fees were raised at Fresh Kills, private carters were dumping 13,000 tons per day of mixed waste there, significantly more than the 7051 tons DOS says they handle today. The Department of Sanitation attempts to collect this information on a quarterly basis from the private station owners. However, given the enormous compliance problems connected with many of the facilities, the quality of the information must be questioned. From inspection reports, many facilities operate way over their permit limits. It is doubtful that an owner will report handling a waste amount in his quarterly report that clearly shows he has been operating over the permit limit. More than half of the city's 85 private waste transfer stations are located in just four waterfront neighborhoods. There are 17 stations in the South Bronx (Community Boards 1 and 2), 20 in Greenpoint/Williamsburg, Brooklyn (CB1), 5 in Red Hook, Brooklyn (CB6) and 9 in Jamaica, Queens(CB12). The problems of the transfer stations are numerous. The first is truck traffic - hundreds of garbage trucks arriving and leaving daily, bringing in and taking out waste. A second is typically odor. A third is often loose waste and vermin, especially in poorly operated facilities. A fourth is dust escaping from windows and doors or just drifting over from open air operations. Over a decade ago, a Mayoral Task Force under Mayor Ed Koch was set up to address the transfer station problem. An outgrowth of this effort was the passage in 1990 of Local Law 40, which called for siting regulations and for a number of operational standards. However, by 1996 the City still had not promulgated these regulations, prompting a lawsuit on behalf of community residents by New York Lawyers for the Public Interest. Testimony by a Deputy Commissioner of the Department of Sanitation in the court proceedings makes it clear why the City failed to adopt the siting regulations: They "would have required the closure of non-complying transfer stations in five years, they had the potential to severely limit the location and number of available sites for existing and future transfer stations and lead to a serious shortage of transfer station capacity." (Neighbors Against Garbage v. Doherty, No. 10923, N.Y. Sup. Ct. March 16, 1997) In 1997, seven years after the passage of Local Law 40 regulating transfer stations, community members won their suit; however, there was still considerable cause for concern. Fresh Kills was now closing, and private companies were receiving interim contracts to dispose of City waste. New transfer stations were popping up and waste volumes were increasing. Siting regulations were issued by the City in 1998, but they complied neither with the 1990 law nor with a judge's order requiring that they protect public health and the environment. For example, the regulators grandfathered existing transfer stations, including those with only applications for permits, and required a buffer of only 400 feet between new facilities and residential zones, less than the 500 feet required for a pornographic establishment. The judge's 1997 order also rested on an understanding that the Administration had committed to working with the Borough Presidents and City Council to receive community input and accomplish borough-specific recommendations associated with Fresh Kills closure. At the time of the judge's order, there was no way to know that the City would subsequently have little or no substantive interactions with the boroughs related to solid waste planning or transfer station issues. The final siting regulations were issued in October of 1998, but the Department of Sanitation has not adequately implemented them. The Department recently moved to approve a new application that amazingly actually violated even the weak siting regulations. Brooklyn Crush Materials attempted to secure a permit for a fill material transfer facility in Red Hook for transfer of 5,000 cubic yards per day and storage of 20,000 cubic yards per day. The pile of fill could be as much as 40 ft. high, while the fence is only 10 feet high. The site was on the same site as Recycling Unlimited which operated an illegal facility and was ordered, by DOS, to shut down in 1996. The site has been vacant since then. The applicant claimed, and DOS agreed, that the facility was a replacement facility, and that the initial application was filed before the siting regulations went into effect; therefore it did not have to meet the requirement for a 400 foot buffer zone from parks, open spaces or residential areas. The facility is only 50 feet from a park and ballfields where hundreds of kids play. New York Lawyers for the Public Interest brought a lawsuit on behalf of Red Hook Civic Association, Groups against Garbage Stations, Congressmember Nydia Velazquez, Councilmember Angel Rodriquez, and Jocelyn Philips, arguing that it did fall under new siting regulations issued in October of 1998. The judge agreed, ruling this facility was not a "replacement" facility and that the application was not complete until after the siting regulations went into effect because it was missing essential documents when filed. As a result, the City is enjoined from permitting this facility at this site. If the decision is upheld, no permit for any solid waste transfer station can ever be issued for this site under the siting regulations, because it is 50 ft from a park (Conversation with John McGettrick, Red Hook Civic Assn. and memo from NYLPI). The City also failed to address these problems with waste transfer stations in the context of removing organized crime from the carting industry. In 1995, the City Council began hearings on proposed legislation to regulate the carting industry and make it more competitive. This legislation created the Trade Waste Commission to rid the industry of organized crime and to reduce waste hauling costs for businesses. However, no recognition was given to the connection of the carting industry and organized crime to improperly permitted and substandard waste transfer stations. Andy van Kleunen of Neighbors Against Garbage, noted, "No one is talking about what happens to New York City neighborhoods like mine that continue to be the dumping ground for that garbage once it is collected. That is where one finds the real crime in this city's commercial carting industry." (Press Release of Brooklyn Borough President Howard Golden, Dec. 12, 1995). The Mayor and the Trade Waste Commission in March announced plans to issue refunds to 16,000 businesses affected by the garbage cartel which ended in the mid-1990s, (Gynn,Waste News, March 6, 2000, p.1) but offered no compensation or remediation to the affected communities. Prosecution of organized crime in the carting industry by District Attorney Robert Morgenthau resulted in the sale of assets-the transfer stations--to the major waste companies. However, because of the City's grandfathering decision in 1998 associated with the issuance of siting regulations, illegally installed stations became legal. The low-income waterfront communities that are host to most commercial waste transfer stations are generally zoned either "mixed use" or "industrial" even though they contain many residential buildings. Zoning and land use regulations are supposed to serve as a first line of public health protection by separating industrial from residential uses. However, in NYC some industrial zones have been created where residential housing already existed, leaving the housing as a non-conforming use. In higher-income communities industrial zones have often been upgraded to commercial, leaving fewer industrial zones remaining. Performance standards for land use categories are by and large antiquated and unenforceable or just plain not enforced. Variances from existing standards are common for transfer stations, given by the Department of Buildings. Within remaining industrial zones, the City has an as-of-right policy-which means whatever you want to site on a piece of land you have a right to site. Environmental agencies may impose some restrictions, but there is a presumption that if the project is in the correct zone, there will be no unacceptable environmental impacts. In a densely populated city like New York and with mixed zoning, such a policy is extremely problematic. Today there are reasonably comprehensive regulations for design and operation , as opposed to siting, of waste transfer stations at the state level, issued by the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, and at the city level, by the NYC Department of Sanitation, with some notable exceptions. One serious problem is that there is no adequate standard for the amount of garbage that can be handled per square foot of transfer station. In addition, although permits establish operating capacity, DEC will allow a 49% increase in permit capacity with no opportunity for public comment, since these increases are considered "minor." However, enforcement of these operational regulations is also poor. Existing regulations do not seem well understood and implemented by agency personnel. For example, we have not seen any transfer station with the air filtration equipment required under DOS regulations. Finally penalties are minimal-- whether it be facilities operating over their permit limits almost continuously, garbage processing occupying city streets, or sizeable rat populations, owners often get nothing more than a verbal warning. Verbal warnings or minor monetary penalties do little to change company practices. Worker safety and health is also a serious problem at commercial waste transfer stations. In 1996, three workers were killed on separate occasions at Waste Management Inc.'s Brooklyn Varick Avenue facility, and the company has been slapped with $100,000 in OSHA fines. In California, it received $800,000 in OSHA fines. "This would be an appalling safety record for even a third world sweatshop" according to one reporter (Gonzalez, p.10). One of the most serious problems associated with the commercial waste transfer stations is the truck traffic in and out, with its attendant traffic congestion and air pollution. "No more trucks!" is a common refrain in neighborhoods throughout NYC. Communities currently suffering from concentrations of private waste transfer stations are also inordinately impacted by excess truck traffic on local city streets and on major thoroughfares that run nearby. In Greenpoint/Williamsburg, there is the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway, in Red Hook there is the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel and the Gowanus Expressway and in the South Bronx there is the Bruckner Expressway, the Major Deegan and the Tri-Boro Bridge. More environmentally sound options for moving garbage are limited however by the lack of alternative transportation infrastructure in NYC. Rail transport is particularly inadequate in the NY Metro region east of the Hudson River. Rail freight transports one third of all goods in the nation, but only 2.7% of goods in NYC. (Dept of City Planning, p. 28) Almost all cargo that comes to New Jersey by rail and is destined for points in the Northeast now moves on truck. (NYC Dept of City Planning, p.15) Some 30,000 trucks enter the City each day. (Holtzman, p.1) Total costs imposed by vehicular traffic were estimated by Community Consulting Services to be $25 billion in FY 1997 with 25% of those costs due to truck traffic. (Messinger, Manhattan Borough Waste Plan, p. 52) The consequence of concentration and expansion of waste handling in a few communities is continued economic depression in those areas. Non-polluting businesses go elsewhere, and the land is not available for public sector uses, like parks and museums. In Red Hook plans for a major film studio and 400 jobs vanished after the announcement of a proposed huge waste handling facility (Conversation with John Mc Gettrick, Red Hook Civic Assn.). In the South Bronx, Waldbaum's moved elsewhere taking 150 jobs and leaving an empty warehouse after a new large transfer station was proposed at an immediately adjacent site. (Conversation with Brielle Epstein, The Point CDC). Expansion of the waste industry can lead to a downward spiral of increasing blight and pollution and decreasing economic and recreational opportunity. Environmental Justice and Waste Transfer Stations.   Congressman Jose Serrano and a coalition of community organizations filed a letter with the EPA Office of Civil Rights in 1998 seeking an investigation into possible discriminatory practices of the City and the State in relation to the siting of waste facilities in the South Bronx, a predominantly low-income minority community. In March of 1999, the EPA agreed to conduct the investigation, which is still ongoing at this time. The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC), which advises EPA on environmental justice issues, first heard about transfer station issues in December of 1997 in relation to the closure of Fresh Kills. The Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee of NEJAC developed and approved a resolution calling upon EPA to establish a Waste Transfer Station Working Group to look closely at waste transfer stations. Fact-finding tours and hearings over the course of two days were held in two cities-NYC, in November 1998 and Washington, DC, in February 1999. The Working Group made extensive recommendations to the NEJAC, which were approved and released in March of 2000. The recommendations called for EPA to: 1) Develop Federal criteria to be included in requirements for State Solid Waste Management Plans that address the safe and equitable siting and operation of waste transfer stations. 2) Proactively work with states and local governments on siting and permitting of waste transfer stations in low-income communities of color to structure improved environmental and cumulative impact reviews, to increase public participation in these decisions and to plan for substandard facilities to be phased out. Develop a transition plan and an advisory panel to address clustering of waste transfer stations. 3) Develop Best Management Practices for waste transfer stations, to be used by industry, local and state governments, and the public. 4) Reduce the total quantity of waste generated and increase recycling nationally. 5) Reduce air emissions from stationary and mobile source equipment associated with waste transfer stations including through use of alternative fuels. 6) Encourage increased state and local permit fees sufficient to fund adequate enforcement. 7) Ensure meaningful public participation in the implementation of these recommendations. Waste News, a publication devoted to waste and recycling industries published an editorial on the NEJAC recommendations on March 27, 2000 saying, "A federal advisory council has finally stated what most have taken as fact for quite some time-waste management companies are clustering transfer stations in communities populated mostly by minorities and the poor…. But for the sake of good business and what's right here's hoping EPA will step in and right what has been so wrong for so long" (Waste News, March 27, 2000 p. 8 ).