Materials Separation Plan

Transcription

1 Energy Answers Arecibo LLC The Atrium Business Center, Suite Constitution Avenue San Juan, PR Materials Separation Plan April 2012

2 Table of Contents Contents 1. Introduction Purpose Background Project Description Description of Existing Solid Waste Management Situation Dynamic Itinerary Summary Island-wide Population Projections Projected Island-wide Solid Waste Generation Recycling Rates for Puerto Rico Island-wide Landfills Summary Existing Operating Landfills Overview Island-wide Landfill Closure Projections ADS Projections for Operating Landfills for Years 2014 and Alternative Processing Strategies Suggested in the Dynamic Itinerary Solid Waste Characterization Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Service Area Core Service Area Population Projections Projected Solid Waste Generation Broader Service Area Population Projections Projected Solid Waste Generation Area to be served by a Potential Facility in the North East Materials Separation Plan Materials Separation Strategy Overview Overview of Diversion Strategies Reuse and Reduction Strategies Recycling Strategies in Puerto Rico Collection Programs Overview Infrastructure Systems and Programs Recycled Materials Markets Program Materials Separation Programs Core Service Area Programs Existing Recycled Materials Programs Proposed Materials Separation Program Integration of the Resource Recovery Facility Program with Community Separation Programs Considerations for Increased Separation, Recovery, Diversion and Reuse Opportunities to Enhance Materials Separation Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan i

3 Table of Contents 4.3. Conclusions Preliminary and Final Draft Plans Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan Final Draft Materials Separation Plan List of Tables Table 2-1: Projected Population for Puerto Rico Table 2-2: Projected Waste Generated for Puerto Rico Table 2-3: ADS Published Standard Recycling Rate Distribution for Table 2-4: ADS Published Standard Recycling Rate Distribution for Table 2-5: Landfills Not Assumed To Expand Due To Subtitle D Siting Requirements and Expansion Space Availability Table 2-6: Landfills That Meet Subtitle D Requirements But Are Not Recommended To Expand2-7 Table 3-1: Population Projection for the Core Service Area Table 3-2: Projected Waste Generation for the Core Service Area Table 3-3: Population Projection for the Broader Service Area Table 3-4: Projected Waste Generation for the Broader Service Area Table 3-5: Projected Waste Generation for the Core & Broward Service Areas Table 3-6: Population Projections for the North East Region Table 3-7: Projected Waste Generation for the North East Facility Table 4-1: Core Service Area Recycling Centers and Programs List of Figures Figure 1-1: Puerto Rico Aerial Map and Location of the Resource Recovery Facility Figure 1-2: Arecibo Area Aerial Map and Location of the Resource Recovery Facility Figure 1-3: Four Steps in the Comprehensive Resource Recovery Process Figure 2-1: Landfills in Operation by the end of Year Figure 2-2: Landfills in Operation by the end of Year Figure 2-3: Landfills in Operation by the end Year Figure 2-4: Solid Waste Characterization Breakdown Figure 3-1: Defined Core Service Area for the Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Figure 3-2: Defined Broader Service Area for the Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Figure 3-3: Defined Core & Broader Service Areas for the Proposed Resource Recovery Facility3-5 Figure 3-4: Defined North East Region for Potential Facility Figure 4-1: Processed Refuse Fuel Boiler Figure 4-2: Ash Processing Diagram Figure 4-3: Material Flow Diagram for Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Appendices Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Appendix 3 Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Arecibo Area Recyclable Programs Information Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Notice Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan ii

4 Table of Contents Appendix 4 Appendix 5 Appendix 6 Appendix 7 Appendix 8 Appendix 9 Appendix 10 Appendix 11 Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Transcript Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Agenda Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Presentation Final Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Notice Final Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Transcript Final Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Agenda Final Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Presentation Final Draft Materials Separation Plan Procedural Question Response Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan iii

5 Table of Contents List of Acronyms Energy Answers BTU HHV PRF ASR TDF AQCS RSCR POTW ADS PERMS C&D HHW MRF MSW tpd tpy WTE IPC Energy Answers Arecibo LLC British Thermal Unit Higher Heating Value Processed Refuse Fuel Automotive Shredder Residue Tire Derived Fuel Air Quality Control System Regenerative Selective Catalytic Reduction Publicly Owned Treatment Works Solid Waste Management Authority of Puerto Rico Strategic Plan for Solid Waste Management Construction and Demolition Household Hazardous Waste Materials Recovery Facility Municipal Solid Waste Tons per day Tons per year Waste-to-Energy Intermediate Processing Center Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan iv

6 1. Introduction 1.1. Purpose Energy Answers Arecibo LLC (Energy Answers), a subsidiary of Energy Answers International, Inc., intends to develop a 80 megawatt Resource Recovery Facility to generate renewable energy 1 and recyclable materials from 2,106 tons per day (tpd) 2 of municipal solid waste (MSW) at Barrio Cambalache in the Municipality of Arecibo, Puerto Rico. The technology to be employed at the Arecibo Resource Recovery Facility will represent the next generation of Energy Answers patented Processed Refuse Fuel (PRF) technology, developed by Energy Answers to maximize the recovery of energy and marketable materials from MSW, a renewable fuel, and minimize the need for landfill disposal. This Materials Separation Plan is prepared by Energy Answers Arecibo LLC to satisfy the requirements set forth in 40 CFR 60.57b, which applies to the development of a resource recovery / waste-to-energy facility, and specifically seeks to identify goals and an approach for separating certain components of municipal solid waste for a given service area prior to waste combustion and making them available for recycling Background Energy Answers International is an award-winning, designer, developer, owner and operator of environmentally sound resource recovery systems. The company has also worked with communities to establish recycling and composting infrastructure; has developed programs to help communities cost-effectively and expenditiously close their non-compliant landfills; has partnered with other companies to establish a MRF and a metals recovery and marketing company; and owned and operated a wood waste processing company. Energy Answers makes the distinction between Resource Recovery Facilities (RRFs) and Waste-to-Energy (WTEs) systems, because the former are designed to maximize the recovery of materials and energy from the waste stream, and the latter are designed with the primary objective of efficient volume reduction and solid waste disposal. Energy 1 The term renewable energy generally refers to electricity supplied from renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, geothermal, hydropower, and various forms of biomass (i.e. wood, fuel crops, agricultural waste and other waste materials derived from similar sources). These energy sources are considered renewable sources because they are continuously replenished on the Earth. 2 The Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan stated the facility would be designed for 2,000 tpd. Based on the final design, the size has been increased to 2,106 tpd. Energy Answers has reviewed the Plan based on this nominal increase and determined the conclusions are the same. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 1-1

7 Section 1 Introduction Answers goal is to reach zero disposal by effectively recovering all the resources in the material now seen as 'waste'. To achieve this objective, Energy Answers International designed and developed the Processed Refuse Fuel system. The system has been successfully implemented at the SEMASS Resource Recovery Facility, located in Rochester, Massachusetts and has proven over its 20 year operating history to be a highly efficient energy and materials recovery system. Energy Answers is proposing to construct the Resource Recovery Facility in the Cambalache Ward, of the Municipality of Arecibo, PR (See Figures 1-1 and 1-2) at the former Global Fibers Recycled Paper Mill site. Locating the Facility at an inactive industrial site, in an area which was known for heavy industry (Paper Mill and adjacent Cambalache Sugar Mill) for well over fifty years, is the first step in Energy Answers resource recovery process reuse an existing and underutilized site; restore the infrastructure and industrial capacity and reduce the ecological footprint of the project. The Resource Recovery Facility will be designed to combust an average of 2,106 tpd of PRF generated from post-recycling, municipal solid waste and supplemental fuels, having an average reference higher heating value (HHV) of approximately 5,400 BTU/lb, and to generate steam and approximately 80 megawatts of electricity. The electrical energy generated will be sold to the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA). Because the Resource Recovery Facility is designed to accept solid waste that remains after recycling and composting programs reduce the overall quantitiy, Energy Answers will also commit to work with communities in the service area to increase their recycling and composting rates. Areas in which Energy Answers will seek to partner with other companies and municipal entities to achieve a higher diversion rate will include: Providing access to Energy Answers metals marketing services and contacts to ensure that municipalities are receiving the benefit of the contracts the Project will negotiate for the consistant quantity (approximately 100_ tons per day) and quality of metals recovered from the incoming waste and outgoing combustion residues. Coordinating with the Municipality of Arecibo to improve their current recycling efforts with establishiment of a dedicated Drop-Off center with expanded opportunities to recycle various materials, provide options for reuse of serviceable items and divert household hazardouse materials from the waste steam. Meeting with each contracted community to understand their current recycling and composting efforts to determine ways to improve the effectiveness of those efforts. Programs that could be considered include: o book recycling with Better World Books Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 1-2

8 Section 1 Introduction o REMAG magazine recycling kiosks o Expansion of our Project education campaign to promote all recycling efforts in the region o Evaluating financial barriers to project effectiveness including purchasing of equipment, bins, home composting supplies, etc. o Evaluating logistics and potential effectiveness of a Blue Bag recycling system. o Textile recycling o Coordinated effort to encourage reuse and repair of serviceable goods. o Exploring the development of regional appliance or White Goods dopoff centers Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 1-3

9 Section 1 Introduction Figure 1-1: Puerto Rico Aerial Map and Location of the Resource Recovery Facility Figure 1-2: Arecibo Area Aerial Map and Location of the Resource Recovery Facility Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 1-4

10 Section 1 Introduction 1.3. Project Description The Energy Answers resource recovery process consists of four steps as illustrated in Figure 1-3. First, communities and industries will reduce the amount of waste through effective reduction, recycling and composting programs. What remains will be delivered to the Resource Recovery Facility. Energy Answers will not implement put or pay contracts, ensuring that municipalities will not be penalized for reducing the amount of waste they generate through reduction, recycling or composting programs. The waste will be delivered to the Resource Recovery Facility by collection vehicles, transfer trailers and/or roll-off containers where it will be weighed, deposited in an enclosed receiving building, inspected and processed into fuel. Some bulky recyclable or reusable materials may be separated at this point (such as cardboard, metals or white goods/appliances) depending on market conditions. The waste is then shred to create a homogenous fuel. Immediately after shredding a portion of the ferrous metal is recovered by magnetic separation and placed in a designated area within the PRF storage building before being shipped to scrap markets. The proposed Facility will be capable of supplementing the PRF with alternative fuel sources such as: Automotive Shredder Residue (ASR), Tire Derived Fuel (TDF) and shredded urban wood waste, if and when practical. In the third step of the process, the PRF is fed to the boiler building feed chutes and combusted. PRF will be combusted to produce both high pressure and low pressure steam and electricity. The Facility will consist of two (2) Babcock Power, Inc. spreader-stoker boilers, each with a design heat input rate of 500 MMBtu/hr 3, which translates to an approximate PRF feed rate of 1,053 tons per day, each. Each boiler will also be equipped with three (3) 150 MMBtu/hr oil or propane burners to be used for startup, shutdown, and during upset conditions to maintain temperature within the pollution control system. Flue gases will be treated, monitored and controlled to meet all applicable air quality regulations and emission limits. Energy Answers plans to install air quality control systems that use state-of-the-art technologies for removing particulate matter, acid gases, nitrogen oxides, heavy metals and other regulated air emissions. 3 The Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan included a design heat input of 450 MMBtu/hr. Based on the final design, the rate has increased to 500 MMBtu/hr. This change does not alter the analysis or conclusions presented here. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 1-5

11 Section 1 Introduction As part of the fourth step, the Resource Recovery Facility will include a patented bottom ash collection and processing system which will recover ferrous and non-ferrous metals and produce a granular material known as Boiler Aggregate for commercial use. A separate and independent processing system will collect and condition the fly ash to ensure its ability to be used as an input in commercial products or as an ingredient in landfill cover material. The Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permit application will provide a more detailed and comprehensive description of the proposed Resource Recovery Facility and its operation. Figure 1-3: Four Steps in the Comprehensive Resource Recovery Process Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 1-6

12 2. Description of Existing Solid Waste Management Situation 2.1. Dynamic Itinerary Summary The Puerto Rico Solid Waste Management Authority (ADS, for its initials in Spanish), is a government agency created under Law 70 of June 23, 1978, as amended. The ADS has the task of establishing and executing public policy with respect to the technical, administrative and operational aspects of the solid waste management system. The ADS developed a Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects (Itinerary) in This Itinerary provided strategic guidance to the ADS, so that it can develop the appropriate infrastructure needed to manage the solid waste generated in Puerto Rico for the next 25 years in a technically and environmentally sound manner. The Itinerary went on to become public policy in December The development of the Itinerary followed prior efforts completed by the ADS: First in 1995, the Regional Infrastructure Plan for the Recycling and Disposal of Solid Waste was developed. This plan created mandatory disposal regions and suggested an ambitious list of infrastructure projects. Secondly in 2003, the Strategic Plan for Solid Waste Management (PERMS, for its initials in Spanish), was prepared by the agency. This plan considered areas that had been mostly ignored in prior plans such as market development and citizen participation. Appendix 1 provides excerpts of the Itinerary. In addition to these efforts, the ADS has completed two additional major studies in recent years. One study, the Solid Waste Characterization Study, consisted of an analysis of the solid waste stream generation quantities and characteristics. The second study, the Landfill Useful Life Study, provided a detailed analysis of the remaining capacity of all the disposal (landfill) facilities. For additional information see Appendix Island-wide Population Projections The population projections used for the development of this MSP are provided in Table 2-1 and present the updated population projections for Puerto Rico up to the year These projections were obtained from the Census Office, Planning Board of Puerto Rico (Junta de Planificación de Puerto Rico) for the years 2010 to This information was gathered and revised on August 2006 by the Census Office. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 2-1

13 Section 2 Description of Existing Solid Waste Management Situation Table 2-1: Projected Population for Puerto Rico Year Population Projection ,030, ,110, ,172, ,214,387 Notes: 1 Source: Puerto Rico Planning Board, population projections as of August 22, Projected Island-wide Solid Waste Generation The solid waste generation rate that was estimated in the Itinerary used the daily generation rate and the population projections developed by the Puerto Rico Planning Board. The Itinerary used a daily generation rate of 5.56 lbs per person based on historical waste generation data. The projected solid waste generation was then calculated using the population projections published by the Puerto Rico Planning Board and assuming that the estimated daily generation rate would remain constant in the future. A summary of the projected solid waste generation for Puerto Rico, as presented in the Itinerary, is shown in Table 2-2 below. Table 2-2: Projected Waste Generated for Puerto Rico Projected Waste Generated Year (Tons/year) ,089, ,170, ,233, ,276,338 1 Based on population projection and estimated daily generation rate Recycling Rates for Puerto Rico The ADS has reported for four consecutive years (2004 through 2007) the recycling rates achieved in Puerto Rico. According to the ADS, these rates are based on the Recycling Measurements Guide for the US and Local Governments as published by the EPA in In summary, the ADS has reported that recycling rates have increased from 6.81 percent in 2004 to 8.43 percent in 2006 (See Table 2-3); and then increased to percent in 2007 (See Table 2-4). Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 2-2

14 Section 2 Description of Existing Solid Waste Management Situation Table 2-3: ADS Published Standard Recycling Rate Distribution for Materials Considered for Standard Recycling Rate 2004 (tons) 2005 (tons) 2006 (tons) Cardboard 83, , , Paper 50, , , Plastic 10, , , Glass 3, , , Aluminum 15, , , Other Metals 5, , , Tires 12, , , Yard waste and wood pallets 18, , , Electronics Total 199, , , Census 3,905,116 3,929,885 3,948,044 Growth Rate Disposal 2,731, ,748, ,761, Recovered 199, , , Generated 2,930, ,974, ,015, Standard Recycling Rate (%) Source: Tasa de Reciclaje y Tasa de Desvio, Informe Final 2006, ADS. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 2-3

15 Section 2 Description of Existing Solid Waste Management Situation Table 2-4: ADS Published Standard Recycling Rate Distribution for Materials Considered for Standard Recycling Rate 2005 (tons) 2006 (tons) 2007 (tons) Cardboard 85, , , Paper 54, , , Plastic 14, , , Glass 4, , , Aluminum 18, , , Other Metals 6, , , Tires 22, , , Yard waste and wood pallets 19, , , Electronics Textiles , Fluorescent Lamps Total 225, , , Census 3,929,885 3,948,044 3,966,375 Growth Rate Disposal 2,748, ,761, ,773, Recovered 225, , , Generated 2,974, ,015, ,05, Standard Recycling Rate (%) Source: Tasa de Reciclaje y Tasa de Desvio, Informe Final 2007, ADS Island-wide Landfills Summary Existing Operating Landfills Overview According to the ADS, Puerto Rico should have twenty-four 4 (24) remaining landfills in operation by the end of These landfills are currently managed by private and public entities. On the following page Figure 2-1 presents a summary of the landfills that are anticipated to be in operation by the end of year Source: Solid Waste Management in Puerto Rico: Realities, Facts and Figures; February 26, 2010 Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 2-4

16 Section 2 Description of Existing Solid Waste Management Situation Figure 2-1: Landfills in Operation by the end of Year 2010 This summary of the projected operating landfills by the end of 2010 is an estimate and is dependent upon the actual closure schedule of several landfills in Island-wide Landfill Closure Projections The Itinerary projects the closure of additional landfills over a 25 year timeframe, based on a disposal capacity model that considers the remaining useful life of the landfills documented in the Useful Life Study. The capacity model also assumes disposal rates for each landfill and assumes a potential feasible waste flow transfer scenario from closed landfills to other remaining landfills. These landfills are divided in two categories: 1) non-compliant landfills that will not be expanded for various reasons; and 2) landfills that potentially comply with Subtitle D requirements but will not be expanded. Tables 2-5 and 2-6 present a summary of these landfills and the reasons why each was not considered for expansion at the time of the preparation of the Itinerary. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 2-5

17 Section 2 Description of Existing Solid Waste Management Situation Table 2-5: Landfills Not Assumed To Expand Due To Subtitle D Siting Requirements and Expansion Space Availability 1 Landfill Closure Date Reasons for Closure Waste Transferred to the Following Disposal Facilities Aguadilla 2007 EPA Ordered Closure Cabo Rojo LF/North West WTE Arecibo 2012 Limited space for expansion near flood and wetland areas North East WTE Barranquitas 2015* Limited space for expansion Ponce LF Carolina 2015 Possible space for expansion located near wetlands and flood areas North East WTE Cayey 2010 Limited space for expansion Ponce LF Culebra 2010 Limited space for expansion Fajardo LF Florida 2009 EPA Ordered Closure Arecibo LF Guaynabo 2007 Decision by Municipality to close Humacao LF Hormigueros 2022 Located in the Karst Region and has limited space for expansion North West WTE Jayuya 2025 Limited space for expansion Peñuelas New LF Lajas 2018 Limited space for expansion Peñuelas New LF Mayaguez 2011 Limited space for expansion Peñuelas New LF Moca 2013 Located in the Karst Region and has limited space for expansion North East WTE Santa Isabel 2010 EPA Ordered Closure Ponce LF Toa Alta 2014 Located in the Karst Region and has limited space for expansion Humacao LF Toa Baja 2010 EPA Ordered Closure Humacao LF Vega Baja 2009 EPA Ordered Closure Arecibo LF/ Toa Baja TS Vieques 2028 Limited space for expansion Fajardo LF Note: These dates may vary based on changes in load and modifications in operational practices. 1 Source: Dynamic Itinerary by the ADS. * Landfill closure date changed based on recent (2010) information from ADS. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 2-6

18 Section 2 Description of Existing Solid Waste Management Situation Table 2-6: Landfills That Meet Subtitle D Requirements But Are Not Recommended To Expand Landfill Closure Date Reasons for Closure Añasco 2011 Expansion is not consistent with consolidation strategy Arroyo 2010 Limited space for expansion and expansion is not consistent with consolidation strategy Cabo Rojo 2021 Expansion is not consistent with consolidation strategy Guayama 2011 Expansion is not consistent with consolidation strategy Juana Diaz 2026 Limited space for expansion and expansion is not consistent with consolidation strategy Peñuelas 2023 Limited space for expansion and expansion is not consistent with consolidation strategy Waste Transferred to the Following Landfill(s) 1 Peñuelas New Salinas Peñuelas New Salinas Yauco Peñuelas New Yabucoa 2010 Limited space for expansion and expansion is not consistent with consolidation strategy Humacao Note: These dates may vary based on changes in load and modifications in operational practices. 1 Source: Dynamic Itinerary by the ADS ADS Projections for Operating Landfills for Years 2014 and 2020 Figures 2-2 and 2-3 present a summary of the landfills that are projected to be operating in Puerto Rico by the years 2014 and Figure 2-2: Landfills in Operation by the end of Year Source: Solid Waste Management in Puerto Rico: Realities, Facts and Figures; February 26, 2010 Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 2-7

19 Section 2 Description of Existing Solid Waste Management Situation Figure 2-3: Landfills in Operation by the end Year 2020 As it can be seen from the previous figures, the ADS expects most of the remaining landfill facilities to close in the next decade, including all the facilities in the north region. This consolidation in the number of disposal facilities creates an urgent need for Puerto Rico to develop alternate ways of managing and disposing of its solid waste, especially in the northern region of the island Alternative Processing Strategies Suggested in the Dynamic Itinerary In order to successfully implement the waste diversion strategy from disposal in landfills, the Itinerary recommends the development of two thermal processing technology facilities with a combined processing capacity of approximately 2,910 tons per day. Specifically, the Itinerary recommends the development of a 1,350 ton per day facility in the North West Region to become operational in 2012 and a 1,560 ton per day facility in the North East Region to become operational in The proposed Energy Answers Resource Recovery Facility has a planned capacity of 2,106 tons per day. A Resource Recovery Facility of this size would have enough capacity to meet the estimated municipal solid waste disposal demand required under the Dynamic Itinerary for the North West Region, assist with commercial waste management needs of the region and add to the existing materials recovery and recycling infrastructure. See Section 4 for details. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 2-8

20 2.2. Solid Waste Characterization Section 2 Description of Existing Solid Waste Management Situation As mentioned in Section 1 of this report, the ADS has invested in determining the characterization of the Puerto Rico municipal solid waste stream. Waste characterization is defined as the classification of different types of waste elements (glass, metal, paper, food waste, etc.) in the waste stream. This typically is determined by collecting, sorting, and weighing waste generated at different facilities and classifying the material into the appropriate composition categories. In 2003, ADS retained the consulting firm Wehran Puerto Rico, Inc. (Wehran) to conduct a Solid Waste Characterization Study. Wehran s report, provides an estimate of the waste composition (types of waste) disposed at 12 landfills and 2 transfer stations. For this study, waste characterization activities were performed concurrently with waste measurement activities at the selected landfills and transfer stations. The Solid Waste Characterization Study was performed at the following 12 landfills: Ponce, Toa Baja, Mayagüez, Humacao, Jayuya, Cabo Rojo, Salinas, Fajardo, Yauco, Vieques, Arecibo and Culebra. Four of the 12 landfills were sampled a second time to compare seasonal impacts of the vacationing population in these municipalities during the peak tourism season. The four landfills where a second sampling was conducted include: Cabo Rojo, Fajardo, Vieques and Culebra. The overall characterization breakdown of the results of the Wehran study is provided in Figure 2-4 and also see Appendix 1 for additional information. Figure 2-4: Solid Waste Characterization Breakdown 6 6 Source: ADS Solid Waste Characterization Study, 2003 Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 2-9

21 3. Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Service Area The proposed Energy Answers Resource Recovery Facility plans to receive most of its municipal solid waste from two defined service areas: 1) a Core Service Area; and 2) a Broader Service Area. A detailed explanation of these two service areas is presented in the following sections Core Service Area The proposed Energy Answers Resource Recovery Facility expects to serve a Core Service Area that includes the following seven (7) municipalities: Arecibo, Camuy, Hatillo, Lares, Florida, Manatí and Utuado. These municipalities currently rely on the Arecibo landfill as their primary MSW disposal facility and periodically act as a group regarding other matters Population Projections The population projections used for the development of this MSP are provided in Table 3-1. These projections were obtained from the Census Office, Planning Board of Puerto Rico (Junta de Planificación de Puerto Rico) for the years 2010 to This information was gathered and revised on August 2006 by the Census Office. The Table presents the updated population projections for the core service area of the proposed Resource Recovery Facility. For the purpose of this plan, this service area is defined as the Core Service Area. Please refer to Figure 3-1 on the following page. Table 3-1: Population Projection for the Core Service Area Population Projection 1 Year , , , ,836 Note: 1 Source: Puerto Rico Planning Board, population projections as of August 22, Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 3-1

22 Section 3 Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Service Area Figure 3-1: Defined Core Service Area for the Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Projected Solid Waste Generation Using the estimated daily generation rate in the Itinerary of 5.56 lbs per person per day, the following Table 3-2 shows the projected waste generation for the Core Service Area. Table 3-2: Projected Waste Generation for the Core Service Area Projected Waste Generated (Tons/year) 2 Projected Waste Generated (Tons/day) 2 % Recycling 3 Waste Generated After Recycling (Tons/day) Population Year Projection , , , , , , , , Notes: 1 Source: Puerto Rico Planning Board, population projections as of August 22, Based on population projection and estimated daily (seven days/week) generation rate. 3 Source: Dynamic Itinerary, ADS 2009 Therefore, the projected waste to be generated in the defined Core Service Area should amount to approximately 948 tpd (before recycling) and 616 tpd (after recycling) by the Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 3-2

23 Section 3 Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Service Area year This estimate does not take into consideration waste allocations from future landfill closings, waste commitments from other municipalities outside of the Core Service Area or contracts with private haulers. Energy Answers estimates that it will enter into long and short-term contracts with a combination of municipalities and commercial collection companies sufficient to secure a volume of waste that will approximate the capacity of the proposed Resource Recovery Facility. See section 3.2 for more details Broader Service Area In addition to the Core Service Area, the Energy Answers Resource Recovery Facility expects to serve additional communities and customers in the municipalities and regions adjacent to the Core Service Area. Specifically, Energy Answers believes it will also be able to efficiently serve the municipalities along the North Central and North West Coasts as well as the mountain regions. This service area has been defined as the Broader Service Area (See Figure 3-2) Population Projections Table 3-3 presents the updated population projections for the Broader Service Area of the proposed Resource Recovery Facility. The Broader Service Area is composed of the municipalities of Toa Baja, Cataño, Guaynabo, Aguas Buenas, Comerío, Barranquitas, Naranjito, Bayamón, Dorado, Vega Alta, Vega Baja, Morovis, Orocovis, Ciales, Barceloneta, Adjuntas, Las Marias, Añasco, Rincón, Aguada, Aguadilla, Moca, Isabela, Quebradillas, San Sebastián and Corozal. For the purpose of this plan, this service area is defined as the Broader Service Area (See Figure 3-2). Table 3-3: Population Projection for the Broader Service Area Population Projection 1 Year ,221, ,246, ,266, ,280,069 Note: 1 Source: Puerto Rico Planning Board, population projections as of August 22, Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 3-3

24 Section 3 Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Service Area Figure 3-2: Defined Broader Service Area for the Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Projected Solid Waste Generation As previously done with the Core Service Area, a summary of the projected solid waste generation for the Broader Service Area is also shown in Table 3-4 below. It should be noted that, even when the region reaches its 35% recycling goal, there is still a large supply of waste that must be managed in an environmentally responsible manner. A 2,106 tpd resource recovery facility would help meet this need for disposal capacity, add to the achievement of the region s recycling rate and become part of the region s integrated and comprehensive solid waste management program. Table 3-4: Projected Waste Generation for the Broader Service Area Projected Waste Generated (Tons/year) 2 Projected Waste Generated (Tons/day) 2 % Recycling 3 Waste Generated After Recycling (Tons/day) Population Year Projection ,221,724 1,239,683 3, , ,246,906 1,265,236 3, , ,266,242 1,284,856 3, , ,280,069 1,298,886 3, ,313 Notes: 1 Source: Puerto Rico Planning Board, population projections as of August 22, Based on population projection and estimated daily generation rate. 3 Source: Dynamic Itinerary, ADS 2009 Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 3-4

25 Section 3 Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Service Area Combining the Core and Broader Service Areas provides an idea of the overall potential waste available to the Proposed Facility. Figure 3-3 below shows the two service areas together. Also, as done with the Core and Broader Service Areas individually, Table 3-5 shows the waste available in tons per day prior to and after recycling efforts and goals are applied. Once the 35% recycling goal is reached, there is still over 2,900 tons per day available in this area. Any landfill closures in the combined Core and Broader Service Areas would further contribute to the waste needing to be handled. Figure 3-3: Defined Core & Broader Service Areas for the Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Table 3-5: Projected Waste Generation for the Core & Broward Service Areas Projected Waste Generated (Tons/year) 2 Projected Waste Generated (Tons/day) 2 % Recycling 3 Waste Generated After Recycling (Tons/day) Population Year Projection ,546,964 1,569,704 4, , ,579,234 1,602,449 4, , ,604,217 1,627,799 4, , ,620,906 1,644,732 4, ,929 Notes: 1 Source: Puerto Rico Planning Board, population projections as of August 22, Based on population projection and estimated daily generation rate. 3 Source: Dynamic Itinerary, ADS 2009 Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 3-5

26 Section 3 Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Service Area 3.3. Area to be served by a Potential Facility in the North East As stated in the Dynamic Itinerary (See Section 2.1.5), the construction of two thermal processing facilities is suggested; one in the North West Region and one in the North East Region of Puerto Rico so that combined, they may handle approximately 2,910 tons per day of municipal solid waste. The ADS estimated that the North East Facility should have a minimum processing capacity of approximately 1,560 tons per day. The solid waste generation stream in the North East region has been evaluated as part of this report with the purpose of ensuring that the projected processing capacity for the potential facility in the North East is not affected by the projected processing volume of the North West Facility. Tables 3-6 and 3-7 present a summary of the population projections and solid waste generated in the North East Region. Table 3-6: Population Projections for the North East Region Population Projection 1 Year ,077, ,093, ,105, ,112,997 Note: 1 Source: Puerto Rico Planning Board, population projections as of August 22, These projections include the population that currently lives in the municipalities of: Carolina, San Juan, Trujillo Alto, Gurabo, Caguas, San Lorenzo, Canovanas, Rio Grande and Luquillo. This area has been defined for the purposes of this report as the North East Region (See Figure 3-4). Table 3-7: Projected Waste Generation for the North East Facility Projected Waste Generated (Tons/year) 2 Projected Waste Generated (Tons/day) 2 % Recycling 3 Waste Generated After Recycling (Tons/day) Population Year Projection ,077,327 1,093,164 2, , ,093,617 1,109,693 3, , ,105,077 1,121,322 3, , ,112,997 1,129,358 3, ,011 Notes: 1 Source: Puerto Rico Planning Board, population projections as of August 22, Based on population projection and estimated daily generation rate. 3 Source: Dynamic Itinerary, ADS 2009 Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 3-6

27 Section 3 Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Service Area Figure 3-4: Defined North East Region for Potential Facility The results shown in Table 3-7 confirm that the waste generation of the North East Region will support the potential North East Regional Facility at a minimum capacity of 1,560 tons per day, consistent with the ADS plans. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 3-7

28 4. Materials Separation Plan 4.1. Materials Separation Strategy Overview Overview of Diversion Strategies Diversion strategies are classified in the following categories: solid waste reuse and reduction strategies and recycling strategies Reuse and Reduction Strategies Reuse and reduction strategies are strategies designed to reduce the amount of waste generated. These may include promoting grass reuse and on-site composting; promoting new product and packaging designs; expanding producer responsibility for waste generated by their products; promoting changes in consumption patterns; providing technical assistance to businesses to identify ways to reduce the amount of waste generated; promoting reuse businesses such as charities, used clothing and furniture stores, book exchanges, etc. The successful development and implementation of reuse strategies requires significant education; a shift in consumer thinking towards packaging, consumption and discards; development of more efficient business operations and legislation to promote producer responsibility for packaging and waste generated by their products; and historically occur gradually over a period of time. Reuse can be greatly enhanced through implementation of pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) pricing systems, whereby residents pay based on the number of bags of waste discarded or size of trash containers. Under such a pricing system, reuse and recycling are encouraged through economic incentives. It is noted, however, that these pricing systems are often highly unpopular with residents because of its direct cost impacts and residential need to monitor the waste disposed. Typically, PAYT systems often give rise to concerns of potential illegal disposal practices and dumping activities and increased litter generation. As such, the advantages and disadvantages of implementation should be weighed and disadvantages mitigated. For example implementation of stiff fines for litter and illegal dumping and enforcement of such fines serve to mitigate these activities. The potential impact of reuse and reduction strategies is difficult to measure and quantify and will take time to implement, but the major benefits include reduction in the amount of waste generated, and consequentially requiring processing and disposal, and the corresponding cost reduction for collection processing and disposal of this waste. ADS promotes the growth of reuse and reduction strategies by implementing programs designed to reward the general population for resource conservation. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-1

29 Recycling Strategies in Puerto Rico Section 4 Material Separation Plan It is estimated that the island currently recycles approximately 10 percent of the waste stream, or approximately 409,000 tons per year of the estimated 4 million annual tons of waste generated in Puerto Rico. Based on this percentage of recyclables and the information provided in the Solid Waste Characterization Study, it is estimated that these recyclables may amount to approximately 83,000 tons of yard waste, 274,000 tons of commercial recyclables and 52,000 tons of residential recyclables. This material is being recycled by communities and sold to markets through operators of recycling facilities. The ADS, with the support of local laws, has established a goal of recycling 35 percent of the total waste stream generated. This 35 percent recyclable material recovery goal is considered to be achievable when compared to recycling rates achieved in many state in the United States. Many communities in the United States have exceeded this goal and several states such and New York, New Jersey, California, Connecticut and Massachusetts have set goals in excess of 50 percent over the next 10 years. It should be noted however that communities that have achieved these high goals have been pressured by rising disposal costs (thereby making recycling much more economical) and have implemented aggressive programs over a series of years. These programs have included mandating curbside recycling, implementing PAYT pricing systems, separating the organic waste fractions (including food scraps and soiled paper) for recovery, designating a wide range of waste types for recycling including bulky waste, electronic waste, C&D and other strategies. Many of these strategies require substantial financial resources, implementation of comprehensive education and enforcement programs, as well as time for implementation. During the preparation and development of the Itinerary, it was reported that the markets for recyclable materials on the island were strong and the private recycling operators had capacity available for source-separated materials in excess of demand. In general, recycling operators have focused their efforts on sourcing their needs primarily from the commercial sector, as these efforts usually produce cost effective results. Industrial and commercial sectors usually produce large quantities of source-separate material (such as corrugated cardboard, wood pallets, etc.) and this material is often more cost effective to collect and market (i.e., more material for less transportation and processing cost). Residential sector recyclable materials are not as readily separated. As such, significant additional labor and expense is required to separate or sort recyclable materials and collect and process the materials for market supply. These programs also require significant residential education and participation in the program. This is not as easily obtained as with the commercial sector since residents often do not directly feel the cost impacts of their non-participation. Since the global financial crisis in 2008/2009, demand in the worldwide recycling markets has significantly declined. The impacts of this decline have been felt in Puerto Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-2

30 Section 4 Material Separation Plan Rico contributing to the closure and/or exit of several on-island recycling operations, and the weakening of pricing for recycled materials. However, the fundamental principles and economic drivers outlined above remain true Collection Programs Overview The success of reaching the island s recovery and recycling goals will greatly depend on four factors: 1) Establishing, incentivizing and enforcing recyclable materials recovery mandates; 2) Facilitating and promoting the public participation in the waste separation process; 3) Having enough infrastructure capacity to manage the recyclable waste; and 4) Having economical access to local and international recycling markets. Based on the experience of other jurisdictions in the United States, the public participation could be greatly increased by: Promoting, enforcing and facilitating curbside collection of designated recyclable materials. Most residents in Puerto Rico are provided with curbside collection service of regular MSW but not recyclables. While establishment of drop-off centers for disposition of recyclables may be cost effective from the standpoint of minimizing municipal curbside collection costs, it generally results in low participation and low recyclable material recovery rates. Curbside collection of recyclables provides the greatest opportunity for participation and recyclable materials recovery. Providing residents with large containers for the collection of recyclable materials. Some municipalities in Puerto Rico have already started recycling programs that provide these containers, including the municipality of Arecibo. Providing containers with sufficient capacity to hold recyclables are reported to result in a 20 percent increase in material recovery and participation in some communities in the US. Minimizing the requirements for separation of recyclables by type (i.e., single-stream). This would make it easier for the public to participate by eliminating the process of categorizing the recyclable waste by material types. For example, in Collier County, Florida switching from source-separate curbside recyclables collection to singlestream curbside recyclables collection increased residential recyclable material capture rates by 30 percent. Minimizing the cost associated with the purchase of additional equipment and the staff needed to manage the collection and processing equipment required to establish and/or expand municipal recycling programs in Puerto Rico. Energy Answers developed and patented the Recycle Bag system to eliminate the need to establish separate Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-3

31 Section 4 Material Separation Plan dedicated collection programs for recyclable materials and/or the need to purchase specially designed collection vehicles, both of which can be costly. The Recycle Bag system provides residents with a convenient inexpensive way to participate in community recycling efforts. A similar system is being successfully implemented in Muncie Indiana (please see web link Infrastructure Systems and Programs The majority of current recycling efforts are focused on the collection of materials that have already been separated from the rest of the waste at the source of the collection point by either the resident, commercial establishment or waste hauler (ie., sourceseparated materials). These source-separated materials require minimal processing and often can be sold direct to market or brought to an Intermediate Processing Center (IPC) to be sold in bulk. The costs, however, associated with collecting source-separated materials, particularly from residents, is often an inhibiter to achieving high recycling and participation rates. This is because it is more costly to procure compartmentalized trucks to collect the materials and/or have workers sort materials at the curb and because residents do not want to take the time to separate the material and/or store separated materials. There are close to one hundred (100) private companies and community entities recycling waste in Puerto Rico. See Appendix 2 or visit the ADS website ( for a listing of the recycling facilities identified in the Itinerary. These companies/entities are recycling most of the waste that is currently recycled. According to information reported to the ADS, many of the recovery facilities managed by these entities are working under capacity because not enough recyclables are received for processing. However, as more municipalities successfully implement the curbside collection programs, this capacity could be utilized and the private sector will be encouraged to develop additional processing capacity to meet the demands Recycled Materials Markets Program According to information provided by the ADS, there is an existing international market for recycled materials that could sustain the implementation of a recycling strategy that supports the 35% diversion goal. Currently, most of the recycled material is shipped overseas, including recovered tires and metals. However, opportunities exist to develop new recyclable material markets on the island that would use the recovered materials as raw material inputs for end products that could be sold to the local or international markets. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-4

32 Section 4 Material Separation Plan 4.2. Materials Separation Programs Core Service Area Programs This section provides an overview of the existing and proposed material separation programs for the communities within the Resource Recovery Facility s Core Service Area Existing Recycled Materials Programs Currently, the Core Service Area has approximately twenty three (23) recycling centers and/or materials separation programs that benefit the communities residing in this area. These recycling centers constitute twelve percent (12%) of the approximately one hundred ninety one (191) recycling centers that operate throughout Puerto Rico 7. In addition to these recycling facilities, the Core Service Area also has six (6) community drop-off centers. Table 4-1 presents a summary of the recyclables that are currently being recovered in the Core Service Area and the number of facilities that receive/process these. Table 4-1: Core Service Area Recycling Centers and Programs Recyclable Category Auto batteries 3 Bio-solids 1 Electronic equipment 3 Cardboard 1 Fluorescent lamps 1 Ferrous metals 1 Non-ferrous metals 5 Wood pallets 1 Paper 1 Newspaper 1 Plastic 2 Yard waste 2 Glass 1 Number of Facilities 1 Note: Source of information from ADS, Lista de Centros de Acopio e Instalaciones de Reciclaje, Revised 11 September Source: ADS, Lista de Centros de Acopio e Instalaciones de Reciclaje, Revised 11 September 2009 Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-5

33 Section 4 Material Separation Plan Additional materials separation programs 8 information is provided in Appendix 2. It is important to note that the Municipality of Arecibo has taken major steps towards reaching these recycling goals by implementing drop-off recyclable materials collection facilities required in its municipal waste collection and landfill operations contract Proposed Materials Separation Program Energy Answers International is an award-winning, designer, developer, owner and operator of environmentally sound resource recovery systems. Energy Answers makes the distinction between Resource Recovery Facilities (RRFs) and Waste-to-Energy (WTEs) systems, because the former are designed to maximize the recovery of materials and energy from the waste stream, and the latter are designed with the primary objective of efficient volume reduction and solid waste disposal. Energy Answers goal is to reach zero disposal by effectively recovering all the resources in the material now seen as 'waste'. To achieve this objective, Energy Answers designed and developed the Processed Refuse Fuel system. The system has been successfully implemented at the SEMASS Resource Recovery Facility, located in Rochester, Massachusetts and has proven over its 20 year operating history to be one of the most efficient energy and materials recovery system in the United States. SEMASS Resource Recovery Facility Operational highlights: the highest net energy generation rate in KWh/ton the lowest tipping fee for municipalities the highest ferrous metal recovery the highest non-ferrous metal recovery the lowest ash production the highest ash recovery rate the lowest capital cost per ton/day of waste processed SEMASS Resource Recovery Facility (80MW/3000tpd) designed and developed by Energy Answers. 8 These programs include battery, electronics and common domestic materials recycling. Please visit the following websites for more information: and Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-6

34 Section 4 Material Separation Plan In the PRF system, municipal solid waste that is not diverted through recycling and composting programs is delivered to the resource recovery facility where it is first inspected and bulk recyclables are separated from the waste stream. Then, the remaining waste is thoroughly shredded at the front end of the system, creating a homogonous fuel in a simple and cost effective manner. Supplemental fuels that have been successfully tested at varying substitution rates in the PRF system include: Auto Shredder Residue (ASR), Shredded Urban Wood Waste and Tire Derived Fuel (TDF). The PRF produced is further processed to magnetically remove a portion of the ferrous metals. The PRF is then blown into a specially designed and dedicated boiler that allows for the majority of the combustion to take place in suspension, with a better mix of air, thereby creating a more efficient and complete combustion. (See Figure 1-3) Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-7

35 Section 4 Material Separation Plan Figure 4-1: Processed Refuse Fuel Boiler As shown in Figure 4-1 above, the heavier material in the PRF fall to a slow moving grate that has combustion air forced through it to ensure a near complete burnout of materials, resulting in a clean, dry, non-hazardous ash that is processed to recover both ferrous and non-ferrous metals and create Boiler Aggregate TM, an aggregate substitute material that can be commercially used in concrete and the manufacturing of other construction products. This metal and ash recycling program will consist of the following components: 1. Pre-combustion separation of: a. Ferrous metals b. Bulky recyclable items (such as cardboard, metals and other potentially recyclable materials) c. White goods (appliances) 2. Post combustion separation of ferrous and non-ferrous metals: As mentioned above, the Resource Recovery Facility will include a bottom ash collection and processing system which will recover ferrous and non-ferrous metals, and Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-8

36 Section 4 Material Separation Plan produce a granular material, Boiler Aggregate, for commercial use. As part of this process, the bottom ash is conveyed to the on-site Energy Answers proprietary Ash Processing System where the bottom ash is separated into three components for recycling: Ferrous metals (magnetic material) from items such as steel cans, steel appliances, iron-containing parts. Non-ferrous metals (non-magnetic) from items such as aluminum, stainless steel, copper, brass, coins, jewelry. Boiler Aggregate. 3. Ash recycling program: Boiler Aggregate is Energy Answers trademarked name for the balance of the bottom ash material. This material consists primarily of ground glass but also contains sand, stone, ceramics and any other product in the PRF which will not burn and which is not captured in the metals recovery process. Boiler Aggregate is a granular material which is usable as a substitute for natural granular materials needed to manufacture asphalt, concrete/concrete block, or as a fill material appropriate as road sub-base or as daily landfill cover. Please refer to Figure 4-2 below to see the illustration of the ash processing. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-9

37 Section 4 Material Separation Plan Figure 4-2: Ash Processing Diagram Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-10

38 Section 4 Material Separation Plan Integration of the Resource Recovery Facility Program with Community Separation Programs The implementation of the Energy Answers Resource Recovery Facility will result in a significant addition to the participating communities solid waste management infrastructure and materials separation programs. Specifically, the Resource Recovery Facility will directly enhance the following programs: Metals Recovery and Recycling Construction and Demolition Debris Management Disaster Debris Management White Goods and Bulky Waste Management Special Waste Management (such as ASR, HHW, tires, batteries, electronics, etc) The Energy Answers Resource Recovery Facility will also facilitate the expansion of the following regional programs: Residential Materials Recycling Vegetative Waste Recycling and Composting Commercial Recycling Institutional and Industrial Recycling In addition to the current programs within the Core Service Area and the materials recovery and recycling that is an inherent part of the Resource Recovery Facility, Energy Answers proposes to work with participating communities to facilitate and enhance their existing and planned recycling programs in several specific manners. First, Energy Answers will not implement put or pay contracts so municipalities will not be penalized for reducing the amount of waste deliver to the Facility because of reduction, recycling or composting efforts. As is shown in Figure 4-3, the proposed Resource Recovery Facility will recover approximately 88 tons per day of pre- and post- combustion ferrous metal, 8 tons per day of non-ferrous metals and 168 tons per day of Boiler Aggregate TM. Establishing commercial contracts for the consistent sale of these materials is an integral part of the Resource Recovery Facility development process. Due to economies of scale, the associated contracts will likely offer rates that are more attractive than can be negotiated by smaller individual recycling programs and/or companies. Energy Answers would offer access to its materials recycling partners and contract pricing to participating communities to help enhance the recovery of metals and other materials of mutual interest. Additionally, and as feasible, Energy Answers may provide temporary storage Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-11

39 Section 4 Material Separation Plan space for metals recovered by grass roots groups and other community based organizations prior to delivery to international recycling firms. Energy Answers will also provide planning and management assistance to participating communities without established recycling programs and/or those wishing to enhance established programs. Energy Answers will work with all participating communities to establish and operate a regularly scheduled Household Hazardous Waste collection program. Additional programs that Energy Answers may assist with that require further detailed evaluation include corrugated cardboard recycling, white goods (appliances), bulky waste recycling, tire derived fuel production, and glass recycling, as well as battery and electronics recycling. Post-combustion recovery of all these component types will contribute to the region s annual recycling/recovery rate. Figure 4-3: Material Flow Diagram for Proposed Resource Recovery Facility Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-12

40 Section 4 Material Separation Plan Considerations for Increased Separation, Recovery, Diversion and Reuse Opportunities to Enhance Materials Separation With a 30 + year history in many facets of integrated solid waste management, and a solid background and hands-on experience with community waste reduction, recycling and composting programs, Energy Answers is committed to exploring and developing ways in which the Arecibo Resource Recovery Project can play an important role in helping to increase the rate of materials recovery and recycling in Puerto Rico and become part of a truly integrated solid waste management program. While our goal is to bring a 2100 ton per day resource recovery facility on-line to manage a portion of the waste which is not recycled or composted, we do understand the severity of the solid waste problem in Puerto Rico and the need to develop an environmentally and economically sound solution for the remainder of the waste in the region. We are therefore committed to exploring and developing options for increasing recycling and materials recovery rates in addition to the energy and substantial materials recovery that will occur within the proposed resource recovery system. The recovery inherent in the proposed system is expected to increase the recycling rates of the participating municipalities by 5.5% based on the anticipated recovery of ferrous and non-ferrous metals in the waste stream. This rate increases to 15.1% if suitable uses for the Boiler Aggregate produced by the facility are identified and to 20.1% if uses for the Fly Ash are also identified. Therefore a municipality with a current recycling rate of 10% has the potential to increase its recycling rate to 30% just through the materials recovery activities inherent in the proposed system. Recognizing the severity of the existing solid waste management problems and challenges, we believe that it is important to rely on proven programs and to work with established organizations and businesses to expand and build on the infrastructure that has already been created. To that end, we have already begun discussions with many of the established businesses and community groups focused on reducing, reusing, recycling and composting, and look forward to working with them to explore opportunities that are inherent in the system that we are developing. Preliminary discussions with these entities indicate a strong desire to coordinate and expand recycling services in the region. These proactive steps were taken to help ensure that Energy Answers experience, central location, and commitment to the effort would be viewed as helping to yield a positive impact and not as a competitive threat. It is Energy Answers intention to identify viable options and interested and committed partners during the development stage of the Project so that once the Arecibo Resource Recovery Project enters construction, we can determine the most efficient and productive way that Energy Answers can contribute to the solution and begin to build upon the existing recycling and re-use networks in order to enhance their potential and together grow the recycling programs. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-13

41 Section 4 Material Separation Plan The remainder of this sub-section describes some of the ideas and programs that are being considered as potential means to enhance materials separation in the service area. Some of the components have been previously discussed in Sections and and some of the components have not been discussed. Establishing the partnerships, budgets and stakeholder commitments necessary to implement the components is an ongoing process to which Energy Answers is committed. 1. Additional Materials Separation Resource Recovery Tipping Floor As stated above, the Arecibo Resource Recovery Facility will utilize Energy Answers Processed Refuse Fuel technology and not a Mass-Burn incineration technology, and as such, the opportunities at the tipping floor location for recovering recyclable materials and materials separation are significantly greater. Increasing the recovery of recyclable material is feasible because the system is designed for delivery of residual waste to an enclosed building with a large floor where waste is deposited directly from waste collection and/or transfer vehicles. Once the waste is on the floor it is visually inspected with the potential for recovery of select marketable materials. Because the system is designed to process 2100 tons of waste per day, it is only feasible to consider the removal of large, easily identifiable items or loads with a high concentration of recyclable materials that can be segregated and consolidated for market delivery. Large pieces of metal, machinery, appliances, electronics and OCC (corrugated cardboard) are obvious targets. Also any load of waste that is relatively homogeneous, such as a load of commercial waste with a high paper or plastic content, is another target. These recyclables could be segregated and stored in a roll-off trailer or bin located on the tipping floor and then sent for additional processing or market delivery. 2. Expanded municipal curbside collection with Recycle Bag Energy Answers developed and patented the Recycle Bag system to eliminate the need to establish separate dedicated collection programs for recyclable materials and/or the need to purchase specially designed collection vehicles, both of which can be costly. The Recycle Bag system provides residents with a convenient inexpensive way to participate in community recycling efforts. This system has been successfully implemented in Muncie Indiana (please see web link Blue Bags are used in municipalities throughout the U.S. mainland to designate that the Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-14

42 Section 4 Material Separation Plan contents are recyclable. Various types of Blue Bags are commercially available at reasonable costs. Expansion of recycling programs in most municipalities in Puerto Rico are currently hindered by the cost associated with the purchase of additional equipment and staff to manage the additional collection and processing required. The Recycle Bag program requires residents to fill a brightly colored durable plastic bag with recyclables and deposit the bags curbside along with their household trash. The Recycle Bags would be collected with the rest of the MSW and delivered to the Resource Recovery Facility. Once brought to the Waste Receiving Facility, Energy Answers staff could easily identify the Recycle Bags on the tipping floor and put them aside for processing. Energy Answers would look to partner with a recycling entity that could focus on processing and marketing the recyclable materials received in the bags. This program has the potential to expand the materials separation and recycling rates of those municipalities relying on the proposed resource recovery facility for solid waste management services, by reducing the two historic barriers to recycling in Puerto Rico. Specifically, the program: 1. Eliminates the capital and operating cost associated with the provision of curbside collection services, by eliminating the need to purchase, operate and maintain special collection vehicles and associated equipment. 2. Greatly increase the ease of participation, by eliminating the need for special collection bins and collection days. 3. The result of easier participation will be increased numbers of people participating in municipal recycling programs and a greater percentage of the recyclable material in the waste streams being captured. 3. Recyclables Drop-Off Center Energy Answers is considering the development, in conjunction with the Municipality of Arecibo, of a recyclables drop-off site on or near the Project site. Because not all residents have curbside recycling, and not all recyclable items are being collected by the municipality, this site could become a center for recycling, reuse and education activities. Activities and programs envisioned at this site could include: 1. Periodic Household Hazardous Waste collection; Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-15

43 Section 4 Material Separation Plan 2. A trash to treasure shed, where residents can bring used objects such as furniture, fixtures, toys and books, that other residents will be welcome to take; 3. A used clothing bin for donations to the Salvation Army or other charities; 4. Bins for recyclable materials and processing equipment (i.e. paper baler); 5. Receptacles for florescent bulbs, electronics waste and other special wastes; The Drop-off site could be an ideal location for a redemption center where community groups and businesses could bring segregated loads of recyclables. Because Energy Answers Resource Recovery Technology recovers over 90% of the metals that are received in the MSW delivered to the facility (estimated to be approximately 120 tons per day), and the quantity and quality will be consistent, we will be able to negotiate a favorable contact for the sale of both ferrous and non-ferrous metals. Energy Answers can make these market contacts available to smaller scale recyclers. Loads delivered to the drop-off location will be weighed and payment made based on the negotiated rates realized by Energy Answers. Identification of businesses and institutions such as universities, schools, and civic groups that generate large, and in some cases single streams of recyclables, (e.g., paper from print shops) could be encouraged to coordinate delivery to the Drop-Off site. The Drop-Off site would also have a comprehensive information area to educate residents about recycling, reuse, composting, hazardous materials management, and WTE. Discussions with the Municipality may lead to a joint effort to establish the site, coordinate the receipt and processing of recyclables, and ensure that it is properly staffed. 4. Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Collection Although not regulated as a hazardous waste under RCRA Subtitle C, household waste contains toxic items such as cleaning agents, pesticides, herbicides, paints, mercury/lead containing items and solvents. In an effort to minimize the presence of such materials in the waste stream, Energy Answers will work to identify partners and sponsors of HHW Collection Days. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-16

44 Section 4 Material Separation Plan The event will be coordinated with a licensed and regulated HHW handler. A meeting with Clean Harbors Caribe, Inc. has confirmed that, although there has been very limited effort to target the reduction or removal of HHW from the waste stream, the Puerto Rico based company has the capabilities and experience to manage all collected material according to federal regulations. It is our understanding there have been limited attempts to educate the public about the risks associated with HHW materials or proper methods of disposal, so public education will be key to successfully separating increasingly larger portions of HHW materials from the waste stream.. Energy Answers Community Outreach Coordinator will work to publicize the HHW collection days and will meet with community groups, businesses and schools to ensure wide participation. In addition, the Community Outreach Coordinator will provide information about alternative products that can be used for similar household functions that are more environmentally friendly. 5. Mercury and Lead Diversion Energy Answers will implement a program to promote the identification, diversion, and recycling of lead and mercury-containing products including: Fluorescent light bulbs Thermostats Button-cell batteries and car/boat batteries Foreign made toys with batteries Fever Thermometers Insecticides, pesticides, herbicides and solvents Medicines in pill or liquid form Other items identified as containing mercury, lead or other potentially hazardous materials The program for the diversion of mercury and lead will become an integral part of the overall communication and outreach efforts promoted by Energy Answers. Key aspects of the program that will be considered include: 1. The development and distribution of a brochure, with a message that will also be adapted for print media outlets, radio stations and internet Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-17

45 Section 4 Material Separation Plan web pages, which clearly describes the type of products that are frequently in homes and commercial establishments that contain mercury. 2. A call-in number for residents to request a pick-up and/or drop-off of car/boat batteries and mercury containing items. 3. Highly publicized collection events to encourage residents to bring or arrange for pick-up any lead or mercury containing products in their homes, businesses, churches, schools, etc. 4. Collaboration with the Association of Retired Persons (AARP); health organizations; medical staff; and/or community organizations to sponsor a Thermometer Swap at convenient locations in the communities served by the Resource Recovery Facility. Old mercury containing thermometers will be traded in for a new digital replacement. 6. Lead Diversion 5. Development and promotion of a website similar to but in both Spanish and English which defines the products that contain mercury and lead and other hazardous materials and details proper disposal procedures and local drop off locations. A significant source of lead in the waste steam can be attributed to lead wheel weights, used for balancing automotive tires. As of September 2011, Puerto Rico has not enacted any legislation banning the use of lead wheel weights or encouraging alternatives. Therefore, lead wheel weights end up in storm drains or in trash that is currently landfilled. Energy Answers will evaluate the best method for targeting the automotive and tire industry in the region with a campaign to help ensure that: 1. No lead weights leave the shop comingled in trash or litter. 2. Lead wheel weights will not be left on bay floors or parking lots. 3. That wheel weights will not be allowed to fall into floor drains or storm water drains. 4. That workers are educated about the need to treat lead wheel weights with special care and the need to wash their hands regularly for proper hygiene. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-18

46 Section 4 Material Separation Plan Aspects of the campaign may include: 1. Installation of a collection bin, capable of handling the excessive weight of lead, which is clearly labeled with information about the procedures and importance of proper lead handling and disposal. (Provide the net profit for material to location) 2. Promotion of alternative, green products and transitioning away from lead wheel weights. 3. Coordination of the regular pick-up or receipt of lead weights from participating shops. 4. Collaboration with the National Lead Free Wheel Weight Initiative (NLFWWI) Members, the Tire Industry Association (TIA) and other leaders in this effort to prepare an effective bilingual program that can serve as a model for other Spanish speaking businesses. 7. Lead Batteries Diversion Energy Answers goal is to remove 100% of the lead batteries from the region s waste stream and to ensure that they are properly recycled. Used batteries from cars, boats and trucks and generally recycled by battery dealers and recycled at the Arecibo Battery Recycling Facility. To ensure that all batteries are recycled, Energy Answers will work to educate residents about the dangers associated with the improper disposal of certain types of batteries and encourage widespread collection. Energy Answers will incentivize its tipping floor inspection staff to identify and remove all batteries found in the waste stream entering the facility. The facility will also prepare an area at the Resource Recovery Facility where batteries that are removed from the MSW are stored on pallets prior to delivery to the Battery Recycling Facility. Energy Answers will also work to develop a recycling program for Nickel- Cadmium ( NiCad ) batteries and is in the process of investigating the logistics of shipping them off-island in an economical and environmentally sound manner. 8. Waste Quality Assurance plan Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-19

47 Section 4 Material Separation Plan Energy Answers will implement a waste quality assurance plan for the Arecibo Resource Recovery Project to prevent the delivery of unacceptable wastes to the site. Unacceptable Waste is defined in the PSD to include: Unacceptable Materials means materials that will not be processed into PRF, and includes radioactive material, explosive material, cesspool and other human wastes, industrial sludges, liquids, ashes and other combustion residues, human and animal remains, motor vehicles, trailers, marine vessels, pathological and biological wastes, infectious and chemotherapeutic wastes, foundry sand, offal, agricultural and farm machinery and equipments, leadacid automobile batteries, cathode ray tubes, button batteries, flurescent bulbs, mercury-bearing electrical switches and thermostats or any material which may present a substantial endangerment to healt or safety or a reasonable possibility of adversely affection the operations of the Project. Energy Answers will monitor all loads of waste that are deposited on the tipping floor of the Waste Receiving building, inspecting for hazardous and unacceptable materials. If hazardous or unacceptable material is found, staff will try to determine who generated the materials, what hauler and truck brought it to the site and any other information about the source. A report with all available information will be generated and provided to the Government. The material will then be appropriately segregated and a member of the onsite hazardous waste team will be called to lead staff through the proper procedure. 9. Hurricane Debris In the event of a hurricane or major storm, Energy Answers will work with local authorities to provide the space and capabilities to manage the resulting waste and debris, should the facility be called upon to assist with the management of these materials. 10. Potential Recycling and Composting Partners The successful and robust implementation of the abovementioned programs will require, in part, coordinated development and implementation efforts between Energy Answers, participating municipalities and established recycling firms/entities in the Arecibo and northern Puerto Rico region. The knowledge, skills and resources of those firms will be essential to creating systems that are built on proven methods, but that are also tailored for the Puerto Rico market, environment and culture. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-20

48 Section 4 Material Separation Plan To begin the process of exploring and assessing the resources, capacity and interest level of the existing recycling and related firms, meetings have been held with the following entities: 1. Puerto Rico Recycling Partnership 2. Nova Terra Corporation electronics waste, OCC, other materials depending on quantity and quality 3. E-Recycling electronics waste and florescent light bulbs 4. Clean Harbors Hazardous materials and HHW Collection Day coordination 5. Schnitzer Steel Industries metals 6. ProNatura paper, plastic 7. Hugo Neu electronics waste, plastic and other recyclables 8. Battery Recycling of Arecibo lead, car / boat batteries 9. Better World Books current paperback and hard cover books 10. Salvation Army used clothing, household items 11. AARP volunteer support for community projects 12. Lions Club - volunteer support for community projects, potential to reactivate their drop off center for used clothing 13. Arecibo Business Association - volunteer support for community projectslocal Universities, schools, and vocational center strong interest in on-site recycling program and volunteer support 14. Job Corp - strong interest in on-site recycling program and volunteer support 15. Arecibo Composting green waste and pallets 16. Bio Composter in-vessel system 17. Arecibo DPW Mr. Soto is managing the municipality s recycling program which currently collects green waste, paper and plastic. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-21

49 11. White Goods Section 4 Material Separation Plan Recycling rates will increase with improved education, advertising, additional central locations for drop off, and additional equipment. Appliances or white goods constitute a significant part of Arecibo s metal waste steam. Without a convenient location to recycle or efficient system for collection, many are abandoned by the side of the road. As discussed previously, Energy Answers would strongly consider creating a central drop off location onsite for the separation of these materials. Energy Answers will work with waste haulers, and municipal and community partners to establish proper procedures for managing white goods that are delivered in the MSW to the Resource Recovery Facility. 12. Glass With relatively low cost equipment (i.e. Andela Glass Pulverizer), glass could be recycled for possible reuses such as aggregate for asphalt, concrete and drainage systems or finer processing into sand. Decorative use of crushed glass or glass containers may provide a small-scale business opportunity for a local entrepreneur. Energy Answers will coordinate with the municipality to explore the potential of establishing a central drop off station, receiving both deliveries from individuals and segregated loads of glass waste from large customers such as resorts, restaurants, the University and local businesses. The establishment of such a facility, would be dependent upon the existence of sufficient local markets for the material and the price of off island markets, but could ultimately provide the foundation for reuse programs and the creation of local industries that require steady streams of these materials. 13. Plastics Currently the Municipality of Arecibo collects plastics, bales the material and IFCO collects the bales for recycling. Expanding this recycling rate will require a stronger education program and advertising which Energy Answers will support. The use of the Recycle Bag could also be beneficial to expanding this program. 14. Tires Tires in small amounts, which are delivered within the MSW, will be processed with a shear shredder and mixed in the MSW for energy recovery in accordance with permit specifications. Dedicated loads or loads of waste Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-22

50 15. Yard Waste Section 4 Material Separation Plan containing large quantities of tires will be redirected entirely to a dedicated tire recycling facility or the tires will be extracted from the waste and placed back on the vehicle for alternate disposal. In many other municipalities in the US Mainland, shredded tires have been used for contouring in a landfill closure plan as well as other construction uses. The potential to reuse shredded tires is extensive and established companies that mange these exist in Puerto Rico. Energy Answers will initially rely on these facilities to manage the tires redirected away from the facility. Yard waste dedicated loads will be redirected to composting facilities Conclusions The proposed Energy Answers Resource Recovery Facility will work in conjunction with existing materials separation programs to increase the amounts of recovered and recycled materials within the Core and Broader Service Areas. According to the ADS projections, approximately four (4) landfills will be closing in the northern region of Puerto Rico in the near future. This reduction in municipal solid waste disposal capacity will limit the disposal options available to several municipalities and direct additional waste to the remaining few landfills, therefore reducing their available capacity and the useful life of the remaining compliant landfills. The proposed Energy Answers Resource Recovery Facility will provide an environmentally sound solution for a significant portion of this waste in a manner that captures valuable recyclable materials that would otherwise be buried and lost. The Dynamic Itinerary proposes the implementation of a 1,350 ton per day facility in the North West Region to become operational by 2012 and meet the municipal solid waste disposal needs of the area. The proposed Energy Answers Resource Recovery Facility, with a capacity of 2,106 tpd, will have the capacity to meet the solid waste disposal needs of the North West Region. As part of the Integrated Solid Waste Management Program in the Itinerary, the proposed Resource Recovery Facility will incorporate a materials separation program aimed at recovering bulky recyclables, ferrous materials, non-ferrous materials and Boiler Aggregate. Energy Answers is committed to developing and implementing a recycled materials program that works in conjunction with existing materials separation programs established in the Core and Broader Service Areas and, as such, contribute to these programs reaching and exceeding their recovery goals. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 4-23

51 5. Preliminary and Final Draft Plans 5.1. Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan The Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan was made available for public review from August 5, 2010 through September 17, 2010 at all public libraries in the Arecibo area. A public notice was published both locally and regionally in the Vocero and Pulso, La Estrella, El Norte newspapers, respectively, on August 17 th, 2010 and August 18 th, 2010 notifying the public that the Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan would be available for review. The notice also provided the date, time and location of the public meeting to discuss any comments on the plan. A copy of the public notice is provided in Appendix 3. No one from the public submitted any comments on the plan during the review period and the public meeting was held on September 17 th, 2010 at 6pm at the Auditorium of the Pontificia Universidad Catolica of Puerto Rico in Arecibo, PR. Approximately 15 members from the public were in attendance and a PowerPoint presentation was given outlining the requirements of 40 CFR 60.57b and specific portions of the Materials Separation Plan. At the conclusion of the meeting the public was given an opportunity to ask questions specifically related to the plan, additional questions regarding the facility were also welcomed. The questions posed during the public meeting were answered by members of the Energy Answers Team present at the meeting. The questions / comments and answers discussed at the meeting are outlined in the full meeting transcript provided in Appendix 4. The only changes to this final draft material from the Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan is the throughput increased from 2,000 tpd to 2,106 tpd, resulting in an increase in the design heat input rate from 450 MMBtu/hr to 500 MMBtu/hr. The increase in throughput does not otherwise alter the discussions or conclusions in the report. Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 5-1

52 5.2. Final Draft Materials Separation Plan Section 5 Preliminary and Final Draft Plans The Final Draft Materials Separation Plan and the Siting Analysis were made available for public review from July 8, 2011 through August 12, 2011 at all public libraries in the Arecibo area. A public notice was published both locally and regionally in the Vocero, Pulso, and El Norte newspapers, respectively, on July 8, 2011, July 12, 2011 and July 12, 2011 notifying the public that the Final Draft Materials Separation Plan and Siting Analysis would be available for review. The notice also provided the date, time and location of the public meeting to discuss any comments on the documents. A copy of the public notice is provided in Appendix 7. The public meeting was held on August 12 th, 2011 at approximately 5pm at the Lions Club of Arecibo, Manuel T. Guillán Ave., Connector Carretera Number 10 y Number 651, Km. 1.9 Interior, Barrio Hato Abajo, Arecibo PR Approximately 195 members from the public were in attendance and a PowerPoint presentation was given outlining the requirements of 40 CFR 60.57b and specific portions of the Materials Separation Plan and Siting Analysis. At the conclusion of the meeting the public was given an opportunity to ask questions specifically related to the plan and Siting Analysis, and additional questions regarding the facility were also welcomed. The questions received prior to the public meeting and posed during the public meeting were answered by members of the Energy Answers Team present at the meeting. The questions/comments and answers discussed at the public meeting are summarized for convenience and also presented at the beginning of the full public meeting transcript provided in Appendix 8. The changes to this final Materials Separation Plan are in Section 1 related to partnering opportunities and electrical generation, Section related to collection program enhancements, the addition of Section , Considerations for Increased Separation, Recovery, Diversion and Reuse Opportunities to Enhance Materials Separation, and the addition of the Appendices related to the 2 nd Public Meeting: Appendix 7 - Final Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Notice; Appendix 8 - Final Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Transcript; Appendix 9 - Final Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Agenda; and Appendix 10 - Final Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Presentation. Appendix 11 - Final Draft Materials Separation Plan Procedural Question Response Energy Answers Arecibo LLC Resource Recovery Facility Materials Separation Plan 5-2

53 APPENDIX 1 DYNAMIC ITINERARY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS

54 Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Apartado San Juan, Puerto Rico Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document May 2008 Report Prepared By: MP Engineers of Puerto Rico, P.S.C. Las Vistas Shopping Village 300 Ave Felisa Rincon de Gautier, Suite 23 San Juan, Puerto Rico In collaboration with: Technical personnel from the Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos

55 Table of Contents Contents 1. Introduction Existing Solid Waste Management System General Description Recycling/Composting Collection and Transfer Operations Energy/Resource Recovery Landfill Facilities Litter Control Solid Waste Generation and Landfill Facility Assessment Population Projection Existing Solid Waste Generation and Diversion Existing Solid Waste Generation Existing Solid Waste Diversion Waste Composition Projected Solid Waste Generation Evaluation of Potential Landfill Expansions Fajardo Landfill Humacao Landfill Juncos Landfill Ponce Landfill Salinas Landfill Yauco Landfill Capacity Assessment Model Capacity Assessment Model Description Capacity Model Projection for the Do Nothing Scenario Capacity Model Projections for the Base Case Dynamic Itinerary Capacity Model Projections for the Backup Case Dynamic Itinerary Base Case Dynamic Itinerary Diversion Strategies Reuse Strategies Recycling Strategies Composting and Yard Waste Management Strategies Other Strategies Disposal Strategies Alternative Processing Strategies Landfill Disposal Enhancement Strategies Transport Strategies Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 1

56 Table of Contents Infrastructure Map for Every Five Year Interval Summary of Dynamic Itinerary for Base Case Short Term Years 1 through Intermediate Term Years 6 through Long Term Years 15 through Backup Case Diversion Strategies Reuse Strategies Recycling Strategies Composting and Yard Waste Management Strategies Other Strategies Disposal Strategies Alternative Processing Strategies Landfill Management Strategies Transport Strategies Infrastructure Map for Every Five Year Interval Summary of Dynamic Itinerary for Backup Case Short Term Years 1 through Intermediate Term Years 6 through Long Term Years 15 through Tables Table 1-1: Main Assumptions and Projections for the Base, Back-up, Modified Base Cases and the Case Scenarios 1 and Table 2-1: MRF Facilities in Puerto Rico Table 2-2: Compost Facilities in Puerto Rico Table 2-3: ADS Implemented Diversion Programs for Table 2-4: Summary of 2005 Traditional Recycling Rate by ADS Table 2-5: Diversion Rate Comparison Table 2-6: Overview of Transfer Stations in Puerto Rico Table 2-7: Existing Landfills in Puerto Rico Table 3-1: Wehran Waste Characterization Study Results Table 3-2: Projected Waste Generation Table 4-1: Main Assumptions and Projections for the Base and Backup Cases Table 5-1: Diversion Goal Percentages Breakdown Table 5-2: Quantity of Materials Potentially Diverted by the Residential and Commercial Sectors5-5 Table 5-3: New Transfer Stations for the Base Case Table 5-4: Base Case Scenario Financial Information Table 5-5: Short Term Facility Financial Summary (Construction Cost dollars) Table 5-6: Intermediate Term Facility Financial Summary (Construction Cost dollars) Table 5-7:Long Term Facility Financial Summary (Construction Cost dollars) Table 5-8: New Transfer Stations for the Backup Case Table 5-9: Backup Case Financial Information Table 5-10: Short Term Facility Financial Summary Backup Case (Construction Cost dollars) Table 5-11: Intermediate Term Facility Financial Summary (Construction Cost dollars) 5-38 Table 5-12: Long Term Facility Financial Summary (Construction Cost dollars) Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 2

57 Table of Contents Appendices A-1 Landfill Information B-1 Population Projections C-1 Base Case Scenario Model C-2 Backup Case Scenario Model D-1 Base Case Infrastructure Maps D-2 Backup Case Infrastructure Maps Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 3

58 1. Introduction The Puerto Rico Solid Waste Management Authority [Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos (ADS, for its initials in Spanish)] has developed an integrated, comprehensive infrastructure program to provide environmentally sound and cost-effective solid waste management services for Puerto Rico. The solid waste program policy includes the development of a Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects (Dynamic Itinerary or Itinerary). The main objective of this Itinerary is to develop and implement infrastructure strategies to manage Puerto Rico s solid waste in a safe and efficient manner for the next 25 years in compliance with regulations. It will provide strategic guidance for the development of the appropriate infrastructure needed according to the technology and the environment. The implementation of this Itinerary compliments the work plan established by the ADS. The Strategic Plan for Solid Waste Management (PERMS) was prepared by the ADS in 2003 and elevated to a public policy through Executive Order of July 21, The PERMS considers areas that have not been attended by previous plans, such as the development of markets and the participation of citizens. This Itinerary represents the operations part to implement the established strategies in the different areas contained in the PERMS. On November 2, 2007, Executive Order was approved through which the reduction on the use of landfills as a principal method of disposition and management of solid waste in Puerto Rico was ordered. Through this mandate it becomes necessary the development of this Itinerary. Furthermore, over the last few years, ADS initiated and completed two additional major studies. The Waste Characterization Study report prepared by Wehran (2003) consisted of an analysis of the solid waste generation quantities and characteristics. The Study of Evaluation Diagnosis and Recommendations for Sanitary Landfills in 2004 also known as the Landfill Useful Life Study by VHL/Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. provided a detailed analysis of the remaining capacity of all the currently operating landfill disposal facilities. These two studies provided critical information on which many assumptions of this itinerary are based. During the development of this planning document several suppositions were developed to project possible future conditions. Periodically, this suppositions will be evaluated and adjusted accordingly. The Dynamic Itinerary provides an overview of the existing solid waste management system. The Puerto Rico solid waste management system serves seventy-eight (78) municipalities that generate almost four million tons per year of residential, industrial, and commercial waste. It consists of: several programs that help with the source Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 1-1

59 Section 1 Introduction reduction/reuse and recycling of this waste; nine (9) materials recovery facilities (MRFs); four (4) compost plants; seventeen (17) transfer stations; and thirty-two (32) operating landfills. The Itinerary considers the diversion programs that have been implemented and the existing facilities, as well as the proposed changes to optimize these. It also projects the waste generation for the next 25 years. For the purposes of this Dynamic Itinerary, the average daily generation rate reported in the Waste Characterization Study was adjusted for the published 2003 population projection and the amount of recycled materials per person per day to determine a final generation daily rate of 5.56 lbs per person. An evaluation of all 32 of the existing landfills in Puerto Rico was performed as part of this Itinerary to identify potential landfill expansions. The evaluation utilized the criteria outlined in the 40 CFR Part 258 Subpart B regulation that specifies the municipal solid waste landfill location restrictions to determine the potential expansion capabilities of these systems. The Dynamic Itinerary discusses the development of the capacity model to be used as a tool for understanding solid waste management planning: Do Nothing Scenario The capacity model projection of the Do Nothing scenario (i.e., no additional disposal or processing capacity added and no growth in the diversion rates is achieved) shows that Puerto Rico would run out of disposal capacity by 2018 giving the current system a useful life of approximately 12 years. This projection demonstrates the need for urgent action in terms of planning and execution of waste management strategies. These actions should include the diversion of waste from landfills while providing adequate disposal capacity during the development and implementation of the proposed strategies. Base Case Scenario The Base Case scenario capacity model projection (i.e., ADS planned diversion strategies reach the diversion goals) demonstrates that there will be seven (7) landfills in operation with 17.8 years of useful life left at the end of the planning period (2030). The following assumptions are considered in the Base Case scenario: Diversion rate begins at 15.3% in 2006 and reaches the 35% goal in 2016 Assume the diversion rate stays constant at 35% from 2016 to 2030 A 1,560 ton per day waste-to-energy processing facility will be in service in 2013 in the North East Region and another 1,350 tons per day will be in service in 2012 in the North West Region. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 1-2

60 Section 1 Introduction The closed landfill loads that are projected could be transferred to the North East Region waste- to-energy facility are: Carolina, Toa Alta, Toa Baja, Guaynabo, Florida, and Vega Baja 1. The closed landfill loads that are projected and could be transferred to the North West Region waste-to-energy facility are: Aguadilla, Añasco, Arecibo, Moca, Hormigueros, and Mayaguez 1. Existing landfills use all of their remaining useful life before closing Six landfills are expanded outside of current footprint: Fajardo, Humacao, Ponce, Juncos, Salinas and Yauco for a total additional capacity of 63.4 Million Tons The expansion for the Isabela landfill will be performed with the purpose of mitigating environmental conditions at the site and stabilizing the slopes of the landfill. This expansion was calculated in approximately 0.6 million tons. Transfer of waste from closed to operating landfills is facilitated through the use of transfer stations Includes the incoming capacity added by the new Peñuelas landfill, coming on line in However, this landfill could begin operating sooner since the construction phase of the landfill could start at any moment. The Base Case scenario establishes the necessary steps to reduce the use of landfills as a primary alternative to manage the municipal solid waste (MSW). It also defines the initial goals to increase the deviation rate and to incorporate the waste-to-energy technology. Once the projects proposed for the next ten years have been developed, Puerto Rico will be in a suitable position to increase the Diversion Rate and the use of the waste-to-energy technology. This scenario provides the flexibility necessary to surpass these expectations because, after having developed these projects, increasing both alternatives will only require the reduction of existing landfill capacity. Back up Case Scenario The Back up Case scenario capacity model projection (i.e., diversion rate goal of 35% met in 2026 instead of 2016 and the alternative technology processing facility is never implemented) demonstrates that in year 2030 there will be eight (8) landfills in operation with 7.5 years of useful life left. The following assumptions are considered in the Back up Case scenario: Diversion rate in Puerto Rico begins at 15.3% in 2006 and reaches the 35% goal in 2026 No alternative technology processing facilities are constructed during this period Existing landfills use all of their remaining useful life before closing 1 Possible load transfer alternative Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 1-3

61 Section 1 Introduction Seven landfills are expanded outside of their current footprint: Cabo Rojo, Fajardo, Humacao, Juncos, Ponce, Peñuelas New and Yauco for a total additional capacity of 70.6 million tons. The expansion for the Isabela landfill will be performed with the purpose of mitigating environmental conditions at the site and stabilizing the slopes of the landfill. This expansion was calculated in approximately 0.6 million tons. Transfer of waste from closed to operating landfills is facilitated through the use of transfer stations Includes the incoming capacity added by the new Peñuelas landfill, coming on line in However, this landfill could begin operating sooner since the construction phase of the landfill could start at any moment. Scenario 35% recycling goal met? Base Case Backup Case Table 1-1: Main Assumptions and Projections for the Base and Back-up Year when 35% diversion goal is met Proposed WTE capacity added in tons/yr Proposed # of landfill expansions Total disposal capacity added through landfill expansions in M Tons, # of landfills in operation in 2030 Landfill capacity available in 2030 in M Tons Yes , Yes Remaining Landfill useful life at 2030 in Years Table 1-1 summarizes the importance of increasing the Deviation Rate and establishing the waste-to-energy facility proposed in the base case. These will provide additional processing capacity and will extend the remaining life of the infrastructure system for the management of the MSW. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 1-4

62 2. Existing Solid Waste Management System 2.1. General Description The Puerto Rico solid waste management system serves seventy-eight (78) municipalities that generate almost four million tons per year of residential, industrial, and commercial waste. It consists of: several programs that help with the source reduction/reuse and recycling of this waste; nine (9) materials recovery facilities (MRFs); four (4) compost plants; seventeen (17) transfer stations; and thirty-two (32) operating landfills. The federal and state regulations are an important factor in the Solid Waste Management System in Puerto Rico and determinant on identifying which facility continues operating and which facility closes. The most critical regulations that are affecting current landfill facilities are the EPA s Subtitle D (40 CFR 258) regulations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of the EPA. These regulations enforce how the construction, operation and closure of landfills should be undertaken Recycling/Composting On September 18, 1992 the first legislation mandating recycling was approved in Puerto Rico. This legislation came to be known as Law 70 or Law for the Reduction and Recycling of Solid Waste in Puerto Rico. Law 70 promotes the development and implementation of a program for the reduction, reuse, and recycling of the solid waste in Puerto Rico with the integration of the public and private sector. The same established the 35% as an initial goal for recycling. The Dynamic Itinerary proposes assertive strategies to reach at least the 35% deviation rate on or before year Table 2-1 presents a summary of the MRF facilities, while Table 2-2 presents a summary of the compost facilities. As identified in the two tables above, not all facilities are in operation. Table 2-1: MRF Facilities in Puerto Rico Facility Owner Municipality Operational Status Hatillo MRF PRIDCO Hatillo In Operation Hormigueros MRF ADS Hormigueros In Operation Guayanilla MRF ADS Guayanilla In Operation Pronatura Private Bayamon In Operation Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 2-1

63 Section 2 Existing Solid Waste Management System Facility Owner Municipality Operational Status IFCO Private Caguas In Operation GC Reciclaje Inc. Private Humacao In Operation Carolina MRF* Municipality Carolina In Operation Guaynabo MRF Municipality Guaynabo In Operation Ameriplast Private Arecibo In Operation * The Carolina Dirty MRF is in the process of changing to a Clean MRF. Table 2-2: Compost Facilities in Puerto Rico Facility Municipality Operational Status Toa Baja Compost Toa Baja Not in Operation Arecibo Compost Arecibo In Operation El Fresal Compost Aibonito Not in Operation Mayaguez (PRASA) Compost Mayaguez In Operation Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 2-2

64 Section 2 Existing Solid Waste Management System The ADS has also implemented several recycling programs with the help of local community groups, private commerce and industries, schools, and government entities, among others. Among these are collections of recyclables via blue bags, drop off programs or other source separation programs. Table 2-3 summarizes the number of programs established as of the year Table 2-3: ADS Implemented Diversion Programs for 2006 Program Number of Programs Established Blue Bags 1,422 Commerce 5,603 Industries 454 Schools 1,104 Agencies 456 Dependencies 1,347 Drop Offs 129 During the preparation of this Dynamic Itinerary, ADS calculated the Deviation Rate which includes the reduction, reuse, recycling and compost. In 2006, the Deviation Rate was 15.3%. Table 2-4 summarizes the related information. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 2-3

65 Section 2 Existing Solid Waste Management System Material Table 2-4: Summary of 2006 Diversion Rate by ADS Recycled Material Reports (tons) Cardboard 109, Paper 61, Plastic 17, Glass 5, Aluminum 14, Iron and Steel 167, Other Metals 42, Tires 18, Tires (non structural use) 37, yardwaste 20, wooden palets 37, E-waste Vegetable oil 4, Cotton Asphalt 32, Printer cartredges Sludge 23, Concrete 33, Total Material Diverted 627, General Data Population (persons) 3,948, Disposed Solid Waste (tons) 3,468, Diversion Rate Recycling Material 627, Generated Solid Waste 4,096, Diversion Rate 15.3% 2.3. Collection and Transfer Operations Solid waste in Puerto Rico is currently being collected by private and municipal solid waste haulers. Municipalities may self-haul its waste to disposal locations with its own public workforce or contract out for such services with the private sector. Such municipality-sponsored collection systems are generally for residential waste generation. There are different types of contracts established by each municipality with the private Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 2-4

66 Section 2 Existing Solid Waste Management System collectors. In addition, some municipalities participate in the collection of solid waste with private companies in the same municipality. Although the municipalities have traditionally been in charge of collecting most of the waste, private collection of residential solid waste has been increasing in Puerto Rico. Commercial waste is often arranged for and collected by private sector haulers via direct contractual arrangements with the commercial generators. Some municipalities utilize waste transfer stations to process and transport the waste to the ultimate disposal sites due to long distances. The solid waste management system in Puerto Rico currently has seventeen (17) transfer stations of which fourteen (14) are in operation. The facilities are presented in Table 2-6: Table 2-5: Overview of Transfer Stations in Puerto Rico Transfer Station Location Operating (Yes or No) Processed Waste (TPD) 1 2 Operator Landfill Disposal Location 3 Comerio MTS Comerio Yes 30 Municipality of Comerio Morovis MTS Morovis Yes 67 Municipality of Morovis Toa Alta Arecibo Jayuya MTS Jayuya No 47 NA NA Quebradillas MTS Quebradillas Yes 30 L&M Waste Yauco San Sebastian MTS San Sebastian Yes 60 Municipality of San Sebastian Moca Lares MTS Lares Yes 40 Municipality of Lares Arecibo Las Marias Las Marias Yes 10 Municipality of Moca MTS Las Marias Maricao MTS Maricao Yes 10 Municipality of Maricao Mayaguez San German San German Yes 80 Municipality of Yauco MTS San German Villalba MTS Villalba Yes 40 Municipality of Villalba Juana Diaz Cidra MTS Cidra Yes 70 BFI Ponce and Salinas Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 2-5

67 Section 2 Existing Solid Waste Management System Transfer Station Location Operating (Yes or No) Processed Waste (TPD) 1 2 Operator Landfill Disposal Location 3 Maunabo MTS Maunabo Yes 30 L&M Waste Arroyo San Juan TS San Juan Yes 1,500 Waste Management Caguas TS Caguas Yes 375 Waste Management Humacao Humacao Cataño TS Cataño Yes NA BFI Ponce Trujillo Alto TS Trujillo Alto No (Under Construction) 125 Municipality of Trujillo Alto Juncos Utuado- Utuado/Adjuntas No 150 NA NA Adjuntas TS (Under Construction) Note: 1 Represents the processed waste at the Mini-Transfer Station (MTS) or Transfer Station (TS) 2 Operated by designated entity through operations contract 3 Represents designated disposal location for solid waste received and processed through facility 2.4. Energy/Resource Recovery Currently, there are no resource recovery facilities operating in Puerto Rico. The existing flares at the Carolina and Humacao landfills burn the methane that is collected in the landfill but none of it is converted to energy. However, there are initiatives to install generators at these facilities to produce energy but none of them have been formalized. The Ponce landfill is also in the permitting process to construct a flare station to burn the methane from the landfill. At this moment there are no energy recovery facilities constructed and/or operating in Puerto Rico. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 2-6

68 Section 2 Existing Solid Waste Management System 2.5. Landfill Facilities There are currently 32 operating landfills in Puerto Rico, all of them located in different municipalities. Landfills are owned and operated by a private company; owned by a municipality and operated by private companies; and others owned and operated by a municipality. Table 2-7 details this information. Landfill Name Table 2-6: Existing Landfills in Puerto Rico Owner Operator Municipalities utilizing Landfill for disposal Aguadilla Municipality Landfill Technologies In the closure process Añasco Municipality Municipality Añasco Arecibo Municipality Landfill Technologies Arecibo, Camuy, Utuado, Manati, Lares, Hatillo, Barceloneta Arroyo Municipality L&M Waste Arroyo, Patillas Barranquitas Municipality Municipality Barranquitas, Orocovis Cabo Rojo Municipality Landfill Technologies Cabo Rojo Carolina Municipality Landfill Technologies Carolina Cayey Municipality Municipality Cayey Culebra Municipality Municipality Culebra Fajardo Municipality Landfill Technologies Fajardo, Luquillo, Ceiba, Loiza, Rio Grande, Canovanas, Naguabo Florida Municipality Waste Disposal Management Guayama Municipality Carlos Rental Equipment Florida Guayama Guaynabo Municipality Landfill Technologies In the closure process Hormigueros Municipality Municipality Hormigueros Humacao Waste Management Waste Management Gurabo, Caguas, Humacao, San Juan, Las Piedras, San Lorenzo Isabela Municipality Municipality Isabela Jayuya Municipality Municipality Jayuya Juana Diaz Municipality L&M Waste Juana Diaz, Villalba, Coamo Juncos Municipality Municipality Canovanas, Aguas Buenas (C&D), Trujillo Alto, Juncos, San Lorenzo (C&D) Lajas Municipality Municipality Lajas Mayaguez Municipality Waste Management Mayaguez, Maricao Moca Municipality Municipality Rincon, Quebradillas, Moca, San Sebastian, Las Marias, Aguada Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 2-7

69 Section 2 Existing Solid Waste Management System Landfill Name Owner Operator Municipalities utilizing Landfill for disposal Peñuelas Waste Management Waste Management Industrial Ponce Municipality BFI Adjuntas, Ponce, Comerio, Aguas Buenas, Cidra Salinas Municipality BFI Aibonito, Salinas, Cidra Santa Isabel Municipality Municipality Santa Isabel Toa Alta Municipality Landfill Technologies Comerio, Corozal, Toa Alta, Naranjito Toa Baja Municipality Landfill Technologies Bayamon, Catano, Toa Baja, Morovis, Dorado Vega Baja Municipality AR Waste Disposal Vega Alta, Manati, Ciales, Vega Baja Vieques Municipality Municipality Vieques Yabucoa Municipality Landfill Technologies Yabucoa, Maunabo Yauco Municipality L&M Waste Yauco, Guanica, San German, Sabana Grande, Penuelas, Guayanilla In 2005 and 2006, the EPA ordered the closure of additional landfills for lack of compliance with Subtitle D regulations. These landfills included: Vega Baja, Florida, Santa Isabel, Aguadilla and Toa Baja landfills. These facilities are in the process of negotiations with the corresponding regulatory agencies in order to establish a final closure date for each landfill. More information on the capacity, operating hours, and tipping fees for each one of these operating landfills can be found under Appendix A Litter Control Illegal dumping of solid waste continues to be a nuisance and health problem for Puerto Rico. Although Puerto Rico has 32 operating landfills and there is waste collection by private and public entities, noticeable quantities of solid waste is illegally dumped in the streets, water bodies, and environmentally protected areas. This has become an increasing concern for the government and also the general public. The government has promoted educational programs targeted at the elimination of this problem. Additionally, non-profit organizations have established programs to help eliminate these illegal dumps by educating the public. These organizations have helped in the process of restoring the solid waste impacted areas by removing the illegally dumped solid waste. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 2-8

70 Section 2 Existing Solid Waste Management System Future waste disposal projections provided in the Itinerary assume that the waste disposed at all of these clandestine landfills and illegal dump sites will eventually make its way to the appropriate landfill in that community. At this moment most of these illegal dump sites are cleaned up by the municipality and the waste recovered is deposited back in a nearby landfill. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 2-9

71 3. Solid Waste Generation and Landfill Facility Assessment 3.1. Population Projection Existing and projected population is an important component for developing future solid waste generation projections. The anticipated population projections coupled with the estimated per capita waste generation provides the basis for projecting the total solid waste generation quantities during the planning period. (25 years) The population projections used for the development of this Itinerary are provided in Appendix B-1. The population projections were obtained from the Census office, Planning Board of Puerto Rico (Junta de Planificación de Puerto Rico) for the years 2000 to This information was gathered and revised on August 2006 by the Census office and compiled in the table provided in Appendix B-1. The basis of these projections is the latest US Census (2000), which not only provides the population in 2000 but additional information like vital records, migration, etc Existing Solid Waste Generation and Diversion Existing Solid Waste Generation The existing solid waste generation is defined as the amount of solid waste generated by all sources: residential; commercial and industrial disposed in landfills and the amount of solid waste recycled. This total amount is then divided by the current population to obtain the average daily generation rate per person. The Plan of Regional Infrastructure for Recycling and Disposal of Solid Waste in Puerto Rico (1995) prepared by Quiñones, Diez, Silva and Associates/Brown and Caldwell suggested an average daily generation rate of 3.66 pounds per person per day (lbs/persday). In comparison, the Waste Characterization Study report prepared by Wehran (2003), reported an average daily generation rate per person of 5.18 lbs or 3.91 lbs per person per day (excluding C&D debris, special waste, and automobiles, which are not included in the EPA estimates of MSW). Although these two studies evaluated the same type of MSW, their respective waste generation rates (3.66 and 5.18) differ by 1.52 pounds per person per day. The rate of 5.18 per person per day was selected since it is more recent and complete. According to the Wehran study, the 3.91 rate of lbs per person per day excludes C&D residues; Special residues and automobiles. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Strategic Plan for Solid Waste Management Public Policy Document 3-1

72 Section 3 Solid Waste Generation and Landfill Facility Assessment To calculate the 5.18 lbs per person rate information of the 2000 Census was utilized and not the 2003 population projection. For this reason, it was necessary to adjust the generation rate with the published 2003 population projection (Junta de Planificación de Puerto Rico). The revised daily rate amounted to 5.07 lbs per person. This number had to be further revised given that Wehran used weight of the trucks coming into the landfills to calculate the generation and therefore the amount of recycled material, which was separated before entering the landfill, was not accounted for. According to ADS, the amount of recycled materials per person per day amounted to 0.49 lbs per person, which when added to the adjusted rate of 5.07 results in a final generation daily rate of 5.56 lbs per person. For planning purposes of this Itinerary, the final generation daily rate of 5.56 lbs per person is assumed to remain constant for the next 25 years. This information was verified with EPA Municipal Solid Waste in the United States publications that report that between the 1990s and 2003 MSW generation rate remained constant at 4.5 pounds per person per day (excluding C&D, special and auto wastes). The only increase in waste generation will be from population increase in the next 25 years Existing Solid Waste Diversion In the US, recycling, including composting, diverted 72 million tons of material away from disposal in 2003, as reported by the EPA. This number surpasses significantly the 15 million tons in Typical materials that are recycled include batteries, recycled at a rate of 93%, paper and paperboard at 48%, and yard trimmings at 56%. These materials and others were recycled through curbside programs, drop-off centers, buy-back programs, and deposit systems (EPA, 2006). In Puerto Rico the Deviation Rate for 2006 was calculated in 15.3% which is equivalent to 627, 233 tons of recovered material according to the Report on Deviation and Recycling Rate, 2006, published by ADS. Another way for vegetative waste diversion is through the processing in compost facilities. An example of this is the compost plant in Arecibo. This facility processes sludge, wood and vegetative waste. The estimated composition of the material composted is as follows: sludge: 51%, yard waste: 37% and wood: 12%. This plant produces approximately 100 ton per day Waste Composition Waste composition or characterization is defined as the classification of different types of waste (glass, metal, paper, food waste, etc.) in the waste stream. This typically is determined by collecting, sorting, and weighing waste generated at different facilities and classifying the material into the appropriate composition categories. In 2003, Wehran conducted a Waste Characterization Study. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 3-2

73 Section 3 Solid Waste Generation and Landfill Facility Assessment Wehran s report, provides an estimate of the waste composition (types of waste) disposed at 12 landfills and 2 transfer stations. For this study, waste characterization activities were performed concurrently with waste measurement activities at the selected landfills and transfer stations. The waste characterization study was performed at the following landfills: Ponce, Toa Baja, Mayagüez, Humacao, Jayuya, Cabo Rojo, Salinas, Fajardo, Yauco, Vieques, Arecibo and Culebra. Four of the 12 landfills were sampled a second time to compare seasonal impacts of the vacationing population in these municipalities during the peak tourism season. The four landfills where a second sampling was conducted include: Cabo Rojo, Fajardo, Vieques and Culebra. The overall results of the Wehran study are provided in Table 3-1. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 3-3

74 Section 3 Solid Waste Generation and Landfill Facility Assessment Table 3-1: Wehran Waste Characterization Study Results, 2003 Components Combined % By Weight Plastic Type 1 Polyethylene 1.1% Type 2 - HDPE 2.9% Types 3 7 (PVC, LDPE, PP, PS, Mixed) 6.5% Paper/ High Quality Paper 1.3% Cardboard Low Quality Paper 8.7% Corrugated Carton 9.3% Metals Ferrous Metals 9.4% Non-Ferrous Metals 1.1% Yard Yard Waste 20.4% Organic Organic Waste 12.9% C&D Construction and Demolition Debris 17.1% Glass All Types Glass 2.4% HHW Household Hazardous Waste 0.5% Other Not Otherwise Defined 6.3% Total 100.0% 3.4. Projected Solid Waste Generation In order to develop a solid waste management Itinerary for the next 25 years the amount of solid waste to be generated must be estimated. The solid waste generation was estimated using the daily generation rate and the population projections developed for Puerto Rico. As described in Section of this Itinerary, the estimated daily generation rate amounted to 5.56 lbs per person. The projected solid waste generation was then calculated using the latest version (August 22, 2006) of the population projections published by the Puerto Rico Planning Board and multiplying then by the calculated daily generation rate. A summary of the projected solid waste generation is given in Table 3-2. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 3-4

75 Section 3 Solid Waste Generation and Landfill Facility Assessment Table 3-2: Projected Waste Generation Year Population Projection 1 (Tons) 2 Projected Waste Generated ,956,003 4,014, ,030,152 4,089, ,110,528 4,170, ,172,242 4,233, ,214,387 4,276, ,256,441 4,319,011 Notes: 1 Source: Puerto Rico Planning Board, population projections as of August 22, Based on population projection and estimated generation rate (pounds per person per day) Evaluation of Potential Landfill Expansions An evaluation of all 32 of the existing landfills in Puerto Rico was performed in order to identify potential landfill expansions outside of the existing property boundaries. The evaluation was performed following the 40 CFR Part 258 Subpart B regulation, which specifies the location restrictions for municipal solid waste landfills. This evaluation was conducted by reviewing the site conditions of each landfill, reviewing the topography, geology, groundwater, floodplain, wetlands, zoning, and aerial photography plans. The location restrictions outlined in the 40 CFR Part 258 Subpart B include the following: 1. Airport Hazard 2. Floodplains 3. Wetlands 4. Fault Areas 5. Seismic Impact Zone According to the Documentation for 2003 USGS Seismic Hazard Maps for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands published by the United States Geological Survey, Puerto Rico is located in an area of seismic impact zone. Therefore, the landfill expansions could be developed as long as the appropriate design measures are taken. 6. Unstable Areas Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 3-5

76 Section 3 Solid Waste Generation and Landfill Facility Assessment The karst region of Puerto Rico is an area composed of mostly limestone formations located in different areas of the island. This type of region is considered as unstable terrain. For expansions in the karst region the owner or operator must demonstrate that the expansion will incorporate the necessary engineering measures to ensure that the integrity of the structural components will not be disrupted. In addition, according to the Act for the Protection and Preservation of Puerto Rico s Karst Region, Act No. 292 of the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources (DNER), the owner or operator must have an approval from the Secretary of the DNER prior to the commencement of any activities of construction or expansion of a landfill on the Karst Region of Puerto Rico. Following are the recommended landfill expansions. The proposed expansions appear to generally comply with the requirements of 40 CFR 258 Subpart B Location Restrictions with the exception of seismic areas Fajardo Landfill The Fajardo Landfill is a municipally-owned solid waste management facility situated in the eastern region of Puerto Rico. The landfill is privately operated by Landfill Technologies. According to the Solid Waste Characterization Study (Wehran, 2003), the Fajardo Landfill accepts waste from the municipalities of Fajardo, Canóvanas, Ceiba, Las Piedras, Trujillo Alto, Loíza, Luquillo, Río Grande, and Naguabo. Incoming waste consists primarily of municipal solid waste (81%) with minor composition of automotive wastes (1%), construction debris (16%), and yard wastes (2%). The average filling rate of the landfill is estimated to be 4,095 tons of waste per week (ADS, 2006). The tipping fee for waste entering this landfill is reported to be $27.00/ton (ADS, 2006) Humacao Landfill The Humacao Landfill is privately owned and operated by Waste Management Inc. According to the Solid Waste Characterization Study (Wehran, 2003), the Humacao Landfill accepts wastes from the Municipalities of Humacao, Caguas, San Juan, San Lorenzo, Las Piedras and Gurabo. Incoming waste to the Humacao Landfill consists primarily of municipal solid waste (87.5%) with minor composition of construction debris (10%), special wastes (0.8%), and yard wastes (0.9%) (Wehran, 2003). The average filling rate of the landfill is estimated to be 13,800 tons of waste per week (ADS, 2006). The tipping fee for waste entering this landfill is reported to be $42.00/ton (ADS, 2006) Juncos Landfill The Juncos Landfill is a municipally-owned and operated waste management facility situated in the eastern region of Puerto Rico. According to the Solid Waste Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 3-6

77 Section 3 Solid Waste Generation and Landfill Facility Assessment Characterization Study (Wehran, 2003), the Juncos Landfill accepts waste from the Municipalities of Juncos, Caguas, Canovanas, Carolina, Ceiba, San Juan, Trujillo, Alto and other small municipalities. Incoming waste consists primarily of municipal solid waste (61.7%) and construction debris (34.6%), with minor composition of yard wastes (3.7%) and auto wastes (<0.5%). The average filling rate of the landfill is estimated to be 4,296 tons of waste per week (ADS, 2006). The tipping fee for waste entering this landfill is $21.00/ton (ADS, 2006) Ponce Landfill The Ponce Landfill is jointly owned by the Municipality of Ponce and Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI), and privately operated by BFI. According to the Solid Waste Characterization Study (Wehran, 2003) the Ponce Landfill accepts waste only from the Municipalities of Ponce, Cataño, Ciales, Barceloneta, Mayagüez, Carolina, San Juan, Peñuelas, Adjuntas and Villalba. Incoming waste consists primarily of municipal solid waste (51%) with minor composition of special wastes (17%), construction debris (26%), auto waste (1%) and yard wastes (5%). The tipping fee for waste entering this landfill is reported to be $27.00/ton (ADS, 2006) Salinas Landfill The Salinas Landfill is municipality owned solid waste management facility and is privately operated by Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI). According to the Solid Waste Characterization Study (Wehran, 2003), the Salinas Landfill acts as a regional landfill that accepts wastes from Salinas, Aguas Buenas, Aibonito, Caguas, Cataño, Cidra, San Juan, and other municipalities. Incoming waste to the Salinas Landfill consists primarily of municipal solid waste (70%) with minor composition of special wastes (19%), construction debris (8%), and yard wastes (3%) (Wehran, 2003). The tipping fee for waste entering this landfill is reported to be $27.00/ton (ADS, 2006) Yauco Landfill The Yauco Landfill is a municipally-owned solid waste management facility situated in the southern region of Puerto Rico, and is privately operated by L & M Waste. According to the Solid Waste Characterization Study (Wehran, 2003), the Yauco Landfill accepts waste from the Municipalities of Yauco, Coamo, Cayey, Ponce, Guánica, Guayanilla, Sabana Grande & San German. The incoming waste consists primarily of municipal solid waste (66%) with minor composition of special wastes (17%), construction debris (14%), and yard wastes (3%). The tipping fee for waste entering this landfill is reported to be $ /ton (ADS, 2006). Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 3-7

78 4. Capacity Assessment Model 4.1. Capacity Assessment Model Description The ADS developed a model to project how much disposal capacity is available at different times during the 25 year plan period. This model is a tool for the development of the Itinerary, as capacity to manage solid waste is the driver that will shape the longterm management approaches identified for implementation in the Itinerary. The model incorporates different factors that will affect the depletion rate of the disposal capacity of landfills and also considers the current hierarchy of solid waste management strategies established by the ADS by including the proposed recycling, alternative processing and disposal volumes that are proposed in the Itinerary. One of these factors that affect the depletion rate of the disposal capacity of landfills is the amount of recyclables recovered from the waste stream. In general, as the recycling rate increases the useful life of landfills increases. The capacity assessment model projects the solid waste generation for the island using the population projections developed by the Planning Board of Puerto Rico and the waste generation per capita rates presented in the Wehran study. The model then incorporates the projected diversion rates that are consistent with the recycling, composting and alternative processing strategies of the Itinerary. After subtracting the diverted volumes from the projected generation, the model then allocates the remaining volume to be disposed of in each of the 32 existing landfills according to their current disposal participation rates as estimated by the ADS. The model projects when landfills deplete their current useful life and close. Based on this projection, a distribution in the flow of solid waste to other facilities in operation is recommended. Most of the current available landfill capacities used in the model projections were provided by the Useful Life study completed in However, the available capacity for several landfills was updated based on recent information compiled by the ADS. The model projects the available capacities for two case scenarios: Base Case, which incorporates the main strategy to be implemented by the Itinerary; and the Backup Case scenario which projects how much capacity is available when some of significant strategies of the Base Case are not implemented as planned. These scenarios used the following governing criteria for the creation of their projections: Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 4-1

79 Section 4 Capacity Assessment Model Targeted the strategic objective of having enough capacity to manage all the solid waste generated in Puerto Rico for the next 25 year horizon ( ). Considered available information compiled by the ADS related to the proposed landfill closures, expansions as well as discussions with regulatory agencies. Promoted landfill consolidation in order to reduce total number of landfills and favor the elimination of those with: limited size, difficult access to service other communities and no potential for expansion due to Subtitle D compliance. Promoted the closure of some landfills in the sensitive North region while favoring expansions of landfills in the South and East. Did not promote the creation of new landfills, however included the capacity that will be available on the New Peñuelas landfill, which has already been approved and where construction will start proximately. Assumed that waste transfer from closed landfills to operating ones will be based on: distance, facility ownership and operation and loading constraints. Assumed that landfills expansions for selected facilities in the South and East will be readily approved by the regulating agencies. Allowed landfills to deplete all their current useful life before closing, with two exceptions: Santa Isabel and Florida, as their closures have been suggested by the EPA before complete depletion of their capacities. The landfills that deplete their useful life must first establish the corrective actions to improve their current operations and at the same time comply with local and federal regulations. A Do Nothing Scenario has also been prepared, which shows the future available capacity in the event that there is no additional disposal or processing capacity added and no growth in the diversion rates is achieved. The purpose of showing this scenario is to demonstrate what the remaining useful life is for the current management system Capacity Model Projection for the Do Nothing Scenario The Do Nothing scenario projects how quickly the available disposal capacity that exists in 2006 is depleted if no future actions are taken and no growth in the current diversion rate occur. The following assumptions are considered in the Do Nothing scenario: Diversion rate of 15.3% remains constant from 2006 to 2030 No alternative technology processing facilities are implemented during the period Existing landfills use all of their remaining useful life before closing No landfill expansions are implemented Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 4-2

80 Section 4 Capacity Assessment Model Transfer of waste from closed to operating landfills is facilitated through the use of transfer stations Includes the additional disposal capacity associated with the new Peñuelas landfill, coming on line in 2010 Used the same waste generation projections as in the proposed two scenarios. The projection of the Do Nothing scenario demonstrates that Puerto Rico would run out of disposal capacity by 2018 giving the current system a useful life of approximately 12 years. This projection clearly demonstrates the need for urgent action in terms of planning and execution of waste management strategies that will divert waste from landfills while providing adequate disposal capacity during the development of new or expanded landfills and other processing disposal facilities. The following Base Case scenario projects how the proposed Dynamic Itinerary attempts to achieve this for the next twenty five years Capacity Model Projections for the Base Case Dynamic Itinerary The projection of the Base Case shows how increasing the deviation rate, integrating the waste-to-energy facilities and increasing the landfill capacity by means of the recommended expansions will benefit the management of the MSW. The following assumptions are considered in this Base Case: Diversion rate in Puerto Rico begins at 15.3% in 2006 and reaches the 35% goal in Diversion goals are achieved through: Implementation of curbside collection of designated recyclable materials. Development of a 250 tons per day on a single shift, and up to 500 tons per day on a double shift single stream materials recovery facility at the existing Toa Baja non-operating compost facility or on an alternate site located in the metropolitan area. Development of a single stream materials recovery facility in the South Region with a processing capacity of 200 tons per day on a single shift and 400 tons per day on a double shift. Development of three composting facilities with a combined capacity of 500 tpd (implemented in 2008 and 2010) to process yard waste. The development and sizing of the proposed facilities should be predicated on the proposed implementation of the residential communities recycling programs. Some residential communities, if permitted, may desire to implement or continue to collect source separated materials and as such would not require processing at a single stream facility. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 4-3

81 Section 4 Capacity Assessment Model Assume the diversion rate stays constant at 35% from 2016 to A 1,560 ton per day waste-to-energy processing facility will be in service in 2013 in the North East Region and another 1,350 tons per day will be in service in 2012 in the North West Region. The closed landfill loads that are projected could be transferred to the North East Region waste- to-energy facility are: Carolina, Toa Alta, Toa Baja, Guaynabo, Florida, and Vega Baja 1. The closed landfill loads that are projected could be transferred to the North West Region waste-to-energy facility are: Aguadilla, Añasco, Arecibo, Moca, Hormigueros, and Mayaguez 1 Existing landfills use all of their remaining useful life before closing Six landfills are expanded outside of current footprint: Fajardo, Humacao, Ponce, Juncos, Salinas and Yauco for a total additional capacity of 63.4 Million Tons The expansion for the Isabela landfill will be performed with the purpose of mitigating environmental conditions at the site and stabilizing the slopes of the landfill. This expansion was calculated in approximately 0.6 million tons. Transfer of waste from closed to operating landfills is facilitated through the use of transfer stations Includes the incoming capacity added by the new Peñuelas landfill, coming on line in However, this landfill could begin operating sooner since the construction phase of the landfill could start at any moment. Landfill closure and transfer assumptions shall be implemented as per the following list: Closed landfill Transferred to 1 Year of transfer 2 Aguadilla Cabo Rojo 2007 Añasco Peñuelas New 2011 Arecibo Northwest Region WTE 2012 Arroyo Salinas 2009 Barranquitas Ponce 2008 Cabo Rojo Peñuelas New 2014 Carolina Northeast Region WTE 2015 Cayey Ponce 2010 Culebra Fajardo 2008 Florida Arecibo 2007 Guayama Salinas Possible load transfer alternative Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 4-4

82 Section 4 Capacity Assessment Model Guaynabo Humacao 2007 Hormigueros Northwest Region WTE 2022 Jayuya Peñuelas New 2025 Juana Diaz Yauco 2026 Lajas Peñuelas New 2018 Mayagüez Peñuelas New 2011 Moca Northwest Region WTE 2013 Peñuelas Peñuelas New 2026 Santa Isabel Ponce 2007 Toa Alta Humacao 2007 Toa Baja Humacao 2007 Vega Baja Arecibo 2007 Vieques Fajardo 2028 Yabucoa Humacao 2007 Note: 1 Represents facility that could be designated to receive diverted waste from closed landfill. 2 These dates were based on the results of the Study of Evaluation, Diagnosis and Recommendations for Sanitary Landfills in Puerto Rico, prepared by Malcom Pirnie. They can vary according to the changes in flow and operational optimization In year 2030, the end of the Itinerary period, the projections for the Base Case show that there should be 7 landfills in operation with approximately 34.9 Million Tons of available disposal capacity and 17.8 years of remaining useful life. Please refer to Appendix C-1 for the Base Case Model printout. The Base Case scenario establishes the necessary steps to reduce the use of landfills as a primary alternative to manage the municipal solid waste (MSW). It also defines the initial goals to increase the deviation rate and to incorporate the waste-to-energy technology. Once the projects proposed for the next ten years have been developed, Puerto Rico will be in a suitable position to increase the Diversion Rate and the use of the waste-to-energy technology. This scenario provides the flexibility necessary to surpass these expectations because, after having developed these projects, increasing both alternatives will only require the reduction of existing landfill capacity Capacity Model Projections for the Backup Case The projection of the Backup Case scenario shows how reaching the Deviation Rate of 35% on 2026 and not implementing the waste-to-energy facilities would affect the Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 4-5

83 Section 4 Capacity Assessment Model management of the MSW. landfills capacity. The absence of both alternatives reduces dramatically the The following assumptions are considered in this Backup Case scenario: Diversion rate in Puerto Rico begins at 15.3% in 2006 and reaches the 35% goal in No alternative technology processing facilities are established during the period. Existing landfills use all of their remaining useful life before closing. Seven landfills are expanded outside of their current footprint: Cabo Rojo, Fajardo, Humacao, Juncos, Ponce, Peñuelas New and Yauco for a total additional capacity of 70.6 million tons. The expansion for the Isabela landfill will be performed with the purpose of mitigating environmental conditions at the site and stabilizing the slopes of the landfill. This expansion was calculated in approximately 0.6 million tons. Transfer of waste from closed to operating landfills is facilitated through the use of transfer stations Includes the incoming capacity added by the new Peñuelas landfill, coming on line in However, this landfill could begin operating sooner since the construction phase of the landfill could start at any moment. Landfill closure and transfer assumptions shall be implemented as per the following list: Closed landfill Transferred to 1 Year of transfer 2 Aguadilla Cabo Rojo 2007 Añasco Peñuelas New 2011 Arecibo Peñuelas New 2010 Arroyo Ponce 2009 Barranquitas Ponce 2008 Carolina Fajardo 2014 Cayey Ponce 2010 Culebra Fajardo 2008 Florida Arecibo 2007 Guayama Ponce 2011 Guaynabo Humacao 2007 Hormigueros Peñuelas New 2019 Jayuya Peñuelas New 2022 Juana Díaz Yauco 2022 Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 4-6

84 Section 4 Capacity Assessment Model Lajas Peñuelas New 2016 Mayagüez Peñuelas New 2011 Moca Peñuelas New 2012 Peñuelas Peñuelas New 2010 Salinas Ponce 2007 Santa Isabel Ponce 2007 Toa Alta Arecibo 2007 Toa Baja Peñuelas 2007 Vega Baja Arecibo 2007 Vieques Fajardo 2025 Yabucoa Humacao 2007 Note: 1 Represents facility designated that could receive diverted waste from closed landfill. 2 These dates were based on the results of the Study of Evaluation, Diagnosis and Recommendations for Sanitary Landfills in Puerto Rico, prepared by Malcom Pirnie. They can vary according to the changes in flow and operational optimization In year 2030, the end of the Itinerary period, the projections for the Backup Case show that there should be 8 landfills in operation with 21.1 Million Tons of available capacity and 7.5 years of remaining useful life. Please refer to Appendix C-2 for the Backup Case Model printout. The following table summarizes the main assumptions and projections for the Base and Backup cases: Table 4-1: Main Assumptions and Projections for the Base and Backup Cases Scenario 35% recycling goal met? Year when 35% diversion goal is met Proposed WTE capacity added in tons/yr Proposed # of landfill expansions Total capacity added through landfill expansions in M Tons, # of landfills in operation in 2030 Landfill capacity available in 2030 in M Tons Remaining Landfill useful life at 2030 in Years Base Case Backup Case Yes , Yes Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 4-7

85 Section 4 Capacity Assessment Model Table 4-1 summarizes the importance of increasing the Deviation Rate and establishing the waste-to-energy facility proposed in the base case. These will provide additional processing capacity and will extend the remaining life of the infrastructure system for the management of the MSW. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 4-8

86 5. Dynamic Itinerary Section 5 presents the Dynamic Itinerary for the Base and Backup Cases. It includes a set of strategies that should be further developed into specific implementation plans. The strategies presented in this Itinerary are consistent with the model projections presented in Section Base Case Dynamic Itinerary The following section details the developed strategies for the Base Case. These strategies are classified in the following categories: diversion strategies, disposal strategies, and transport strategies. This section also presents the infrastructure maps showing all facilities at different time frames and summarizes the implementation schedule for each of the three planned periods: short, intermediate, and long term Diversion Strategies This section summarizes the strategies that have been identified to divert waste from landfill disposal. These strategies include the following activities: reuse, recycling, composting, yard waste management, and others Reuse Strategies Reuse strategies are strategies to reduce the amount of waste generated. These may include promoting grass cycling and on-site composting; promoting new product and packaging designs; expanding producer responsibility for waste generated by their products, promoting changes in consumption patterns; providing technical assistance to businesses to identify ways to reduce the amount of waste generated; promoting reuse businesses such as charities used clothing and furniture stores, book exchanges, etc.; and others. Development of reuse strategies requires significant education, a shift in consumer thinking towards packaging, consumption and discards, development of more efficient business operations and legislation to promote producer responsibility for packaging and waste generated by their products. Reuse can be greatly enhanced through implementation of pay as you throw (PAYT) pricing systems, whereby residents pay based on number of bags of waste discarded or size of trash containers. Under such a pricing system, reuse and recycling are encouraged through economics. It is noted, however, that these pricing systems are often highly unpopular with residents because of its direct cost impacts and residential need to monitor the waste disposed. As such, PAYT systems often give rise to concerns over potential illegal disposal practices and dumping activities and increased litter generation. As such, the advantages and disadvantages of implementation need to be weighed and Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-1

87 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary disadvantages mitigated. For example implementation of stiff fines for litter and illegal dumping and enforcement of such fines serve to mitigate any such activities. The potential impact of reuse strategies is difficult to measure and quantify and will take time to implement, but the major benefits include reduction in the amount of waste generated for processing and disposal and the corresponding cost reduction for collection processing and disposal of this waste Recycling Strategies There are four (4) critical elements that must be developed in any successful recycling program. These elements are: Legislation mandating recycling and clearly setting forth requirements. A successful collection program with high participation rates from all the sectors (industrial, commercial and residential). A cost efficient infrastructure system that can separate and handle the recyclable material that is collected. Access to healthy markets that create demand for the recycled products. It is estimated that the island currently recycles more than 15 percent of the waste stream, or approximately 627,000 tons per year. It is estimated that these recyclables included approximately 38,000 tons of yard waste, 420,000 tons of commercial recyclables and 170,000 tons of residential recyclables. This material is being recycled by communities direct to markets and by several private operators of recycling facilities. Table 5-1 below presents a breakdown of the composition of the waste as presented in the 2003 Wehran Report and potential estimates of capture and participation rates for these materials that are capable of achieving 35 percent waste diversion. The term capture rate in the below table pertains to the quantity of material that can readily be separated from the rest of the trash. For example, newspapers would have a high capture rate because it is easily separated from the rest of the waste, however, aluminum foil is more difficult to capture since it is generated in smaller quantities and often soiled with other items. The participation rate serves to provide a factor to reflect the resident and/or commercial establishment s participation in recovering the designated material. For example, many residents and establishments are willing to participate in the recycling of aluminum cans because they are light-weight, easily separated and they understand the value of recovering this material. On the other hand, participation in recovery of plastic milk jugs might be less due to storage space requirements and need to rinse container to prevent odors. Multiplying the capture rate for a material by the participation rate of the material provides a recovery rate for that material. As illustrated below, the sum total of these Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-2

88 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary recovery rates based on the composition of the waste identified in the Wehran Report result in an overall waste recovery rate of 35% which is consistent with the ADS goal. P l a s t i c P a p e r M e t a l s G l a s s Component Table 5-1: Diversion Goal Percentages Breakdown Disposed Tons (2005) Estimated Waste Composition Total Generation (Tons) Recycled Estimated Capture Participation Recovery Percent Tons (2005) Generation Rate (%) Rate (%) Rate (%) Overfed 33,300 3,000 36, % 0.2% Type 1 Polyethylene Durable Goods 0.1% % Soft Drink Bottles 0.3% % Other Plastic Containers 0.3% % Other Packaging 0.1% % Other 0.1% % Type 2 - HDPE 107,400 6, , % 0.3% Durable Goods 0.3% % Milk & Water Bottles 0.4% % Other Plastic Containers 0.7% % Trash Bags 0.1% % Other bags, sacks & wraps 0.4% % Other Packaging 0.6% % Other 0.2% % Types 3 7 (PVC, LDPE, PP, PS, Mixed) 240,900 5, , % 0.6% Durable Goods 3.1% % Other Plastic Containers 0.2% % Plastic Plates & Cups 0.3% % Trash Bags (LDPE) 0.3% % Other bags, sacks & wraps 1.5% % Other Packaging 0.7% % High Quality Paper 41,600 27,300 68, % % Low Quality Paper 320,100 27, , % 2.8% Newspaper 3.2% % Books 0.3% % Magazines 0.7% % Telephone Directories 0.2% % Mail 1.7% % Tissue Paper & Towels 1.0% % Paper Plates & Cups 0.3% % Milk & Juice Cartons 0.1% % Other 1.2% % Corrugated Carton 307,000 85, , % % Ferrous Metals 350, , , % 6.6% Durable Goods Metals 9.8% % Steel Cans 1.8% % Other 0.2% % Non-Ferrous Metals 34,400 18,700 53, % 0.4% Beer and Soft Drink Cans 1.0% % Foil and closures 0.3% % Other 0.0% % Yard Waste 776,200 19, , % % Organic Waste 469, , % % Construction Debris 583, , % % All Types Glass 86,800 4,700 91, % 0.8% Beer & Soft Drink Bottles 1.2% % Wine & Liquor Bottles 0.3% % Food Jars 0.5% % Other Durable (windows, etc.) 0.3% % Household Haz. Waste Not Otherwise Defined Total Diversion Rate Estimate for 35% Diversion 18,000 18, % % 278,200 23, , % % 3,647, ,300 3,988, % 35.1% 15.3% Yard Waste Recycling 13.41% Private Commercial 13.76% Residential 7.95% 35.12% tpd tpy Yard Waste Processing Capacity Required (tons per year) 1,308 2, ,000 Private Commercial Recycling 1,538 2, ,000 Residential Direct to Market ,000 Materials Recovery Facility Capacity Required 808 1, ,000 1,400,000 Exisitng Yard Waste Capacity Exisitng MRF Capacity Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-3

89 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary As illustrated in Table 5-1 this 35 percent diversion/recyclable material recovery goal is achievable based on mandating the recovery of designated materials and achieving the capture and participation rates identified in the table. This recycling rate is consistent with many state averages in the United States. Many communities in the United States have exceeded this goal and several states such and New York, New Jersey, California, Connecticut and Massachusetts have set goals in excess of 50 percent over the next 10 years. It should be noted, however, that communities that have achieved these high goals have been pressured by rising disposal costs (thereby making recycling much more economical) and have implemented aggressive programs. These programs have included mandating curbside recycling, implementing PAYT pricing systems, separating the organic waste fractions (including food scraps and soiled paper) for recovery, designating a wide range of waste types for recycling including bulky waste, electronic waste, C&D and other strategies. Many of these strategies require added financial resources, implementation of comprehensive education and enforcement programs, and time to implement. Currently, it is reported that the markets for recyclable materials on the island is strong and the private recycling operators have capacity available for source separated materials in excess of demand. As illustrated by the types and quantities of materials currently being recycled, these recycling operators have focused their efforts in sourcing their needs primarily from the commercial sector, as these efforts usually produce cost effective results for the operators. Industrial and commercial sectors usually produce large quantities of source separated material (such as corrugated cardboard, wood pallets, etc.) and as such this material is more cost effective to collect and market (i.e. more material for less transportation and processing cost). In many instances, source separated materials can be sold direct to market or brought to a Intermediate Processing Center (IPC) for additional processing and market preparation. With respect to the residential sector, recyclable materials are not as readily source separated. As such, significant additional labor and expense is needed to separate recyclable materials from the remaining trash and collect and process the materials for marketing. It also requires significant residential education and participation in the program. This is not as easily obtained as with the commercial sector since residents often do no directly feel the cost impacts of their non-participation. Due to the strong markets and low capital investment associated with processing source separated materials, it is anticipated that the free markets will respond with the infrastructure required to meet the recycling needs of the industrial and commercial sectors once recycling mandates are in place. Collection Programs Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-4

90 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary The success of reaching the islands recycling goals will greatly depend on three factors: 1) establishing and enforcing recyclable materials recovery mandates, 2) public participation in the separation process, and 3) having enough infrastructure capacity to manage the recyclable waste. Based on the experience of other jurisdictions in the United States, the public participation could be greatly increased by: Providing curbside collection of designated recyclable materials. Most residents in Puerto Rico are provided curbside collection of trash but not recyclables. While establishment of drop-off centers for disposition of recyclables may be cost effective from the standpoint of minimizing municipal curbside collection costs, it generally results in low participation and recyclable material recovery rates. Curbside collection of recyclables provides the greatest opportunity for participation and recyclable materials recovery. The Municipalities providing residents with large containers for the collection of recyclable materials. Some municipalities in Puerto Rico have already started recycling programs that provide these containers. Providing containers with sufficient capacity to hold all recyclables has reported to result in as much as a 20 percent increase in material recovery and participation in some communities in the US. Minimizing the requirements for separation of recyclables by type. This would make it easier for the public to participate by eliminating the process of categorizing the recyclable waste by material types. In Collier County, Florida switching from source separated curbside recyclables collection to single stream curbside recyclables collection increased residential recyclable material capture rates by 30 percent. In order for this strategy to work, the existing ordinances/regulations that require the municipalities to prepare and submit recycling plans on how they will meet the goals of the ADS would need to be amended and/or new regulations passed. The regulations, at a minimum, should address the following: Clear specification of recycling goals (i.e., 15% within two years of municipal recycling plan approval, 25% within 5 years and 35% or above within 10 years of plan adoption). Clear specification of plan requirements including: definition of materials to be designated for recycling, identification of a recycling coordinator, establishment of Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-5

91 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary record keeping duties, reporting requirements, and creation of curbside collection program (communication, materials, transportation, coordination with recycling facilities and markets, etc.). Requirements for submission and implementation of individual recycling plans. Incentives for municipalities to implement single stream curbside collection. Establishment of an enforcement program that would define what enforcement actions will be taken to make the general public sector comply with the requirements. Sufficient recyclable material markets exist for source separated recyclables, therefore, additional processing capacity would be required for single stream collected recyclables. For this reason, the development of one or two single stream material recovery facility(ies) should be considered for this purpose. The development of such processing capacity is discussed below. Infrastructure System The majority of current recycling efforts are focused on the collection of materials that have already been separated from the rest of the waste at the source of the collection point by either the resident, commercial establishment or waste hauler (i.e. source separated materials). As such, these source-separated materials require minimal processing and often can be sold direct to market or brought to an IPC to be sold in bulk. Under such a scenario, limited processing infrastructure is needed. The costs, however, associated with collecting source separated materials, particularly from residents, is often an inhibiter to achieving high recycling and participation rates. This is because it is more costly to procure compartmentalized trucks to collect the materials and/or have workers sort materials at the curb and because residents do not want to take the time to separate the material and/or store separated materials. As discussed above, single-stream curbside collection of recyclables is a highly cost effective method for collection of recyclables and results in the highest participation rates. A single stream processing facility, however, is needed in conjunction with single stream collection to separate recyclables for market. Such facilities include high-tech components which require significant capital investment. Because of this capital investment, the free markets may not readily respond to development of such a facility until many entities have implemented single stream collection. Communities will not implement single stream collection until there is a facility to bring the materials to for processing. Therefore, the development of two single-stream materials recovery facility to encourage single stream curbside collection of recyclables is proposed. The single stream facility locations can also be used as an intermediate processing center to accept Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-6

92 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary and market source separated recyclable materials from residential and/or commercial sectors. Initially, a facility will be developed in the Metro area with a processing capacity of 250 tons per day on a single shift and 500 tons per day on a double shift for up to 140,000 tons per year of processing capacity. A second single stream facility will be developed in the South Region to meet demands. This facility will have a processing capacity of 200 tons per day on a single shift and 400 tons per day on a double shift. Combined with the proposed Metro area facility, these facilities could provide up to 900 tons per day of recyclable material processing capacity to service almost all of the future residential material recovery processing needs. They can also be used as a location to accept and market source separated materials from the residential and/or commercial sector, as needed. It is anticipated, based on current recycling rate projections, that the facility in the South Region would go into operation in 2012 to once again provide approximately 100 percent of the residential processing capacity needs at that time. Current projections indicate total residential recyclable materials recovery of approximately 280,000 tons per year by Currently, there are close to one hundred private companies and community entities recycling waste in Puerto Rico. These companies/entities are recycling most of the waste that is currently recycled. Many of the recovery facilities managed by these entities are working under capacity because not enough recyclables are received for processing. It is anticipated that as more municipalities successfully implement the curbside collection programs, this capacity will be utilized and the private sector will be encouraged to develop additional processing capacity to meet the demands. Markets for Recycled Materials There is an existing international market for recycled materials that could sustain the implementation of a recycling strategy that supports the 35% diversion goal. Currently most the recycled material is shipped overseas. However, opportunities exist to develop new recyclable material markets in the island that would use the material that was recycled and produce an end-product that could be sold to the local or international markets. For these reasons, the relationships between private facility operators and potential buyers for these materials should be fomented. The ADS will promote local market for recyclable materials with the following strategies: Identify raw materials that are currently used by local manufacturing companies and look for opportunities. Promote the creation of potential business relationships between private recyclers and users. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-7

93 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Lobby for the creation of incentives for manufacturers who use recycled materials in their process. Providing general education and technical assistance; Providing sample collaboration plans between producers, processors and users of recycled materials; Providing guidance on collection programs; Providing cooperative marketing arrangements; Identify recycling facilities/markets/processing capacity; and Providing priority consideration to persons engaged in the business of recycling. Strategies to Aid Implementation The ADS plans on undertaking the following activities to assist in diversion program implementation: Compile information related to the current diversion programs that exist in all 78 municipalities to develop a base line. Develop a model residential recycling plan based on a single stream separationcurbside collection program. Develop guidance documents as needed, such as recyclable material market directory, cooperative marketing programs, waste composition detail, education/awareness brochures and handouts, etc., for residential and commercial establishments regarding collection alternatives and methods, processing and marketing alternatives, etc; Communicate with municipalities the proposed requirements including, but not limited to: provision of recycling containers, collection and transportation of materials, education and promotion, enforcement, cost and funding opportunities, and delivery of material to recycling facilities and markets (destination negotiations). Communicate with existing recycling facilities. Assess current capacity, guide on negotiations with municipalities, and project future needs. Develop strategy for the procurement of single stream materials recovery facilities: ADS or privately owned. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-8

94 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Implement a single stream materials recovery facility in the metropolitan area. The initial facility could have a capacity of 250 tons per day on a single shift, and up to 500 tons per day on a double shift and be operating by the year Implement a single stream materials recovery facility in the South Region. The facility could have a capacity of 200 tons per day on a single shift, and up to 400 tons per day on a double shift and be operating by the year Promote and foster private sector investment for the development of additional facilities in other regions of the island. Review funding mechanisms and establish new funding models Develop plans to fund diversion (i.e., rebates for recycled material, subsidizing material recovery facility capital costs, and/or implementation of pay as you throw programs with free recycling to further incentivize diversion); Fiscalize the implementation of the program and its enforcement. Advise the municipalities to establish a funding program to secure the financial stability of this program. To further enhance the implementation strategy, education of the public and private companies will continue as the program progresses Composting and Yard Waste Management Strategies Regulations have been promulgated that prohibit the disposal of yard waste in landfills effective October 1, This regulation is contained under Chapter 9 of Reglamento Número 6825 better known as Reglamento para la Reducción, Reutilización y Reciclaje de los Desperdicios Sólidos en Puerto Rico dated June 15 th The regulation also establishes penalties for the entities or parties that don t comply with the regulations. Since the yard waste must be diverted from the landfills, several strategies need to be analyzed for the management of this material. The estimated amount of yard waste that could be diverted by the establishment of this regulation could exceed 500,000 tons per year. This estimate is based on the waste composition study conducted by the 2003 Wehran Study which identified yard waste as comprising approximately 20% of the waste stream and assuming that approximately 63% of this material could be diverted for processing. Ideally, this yard waste should be composted and sold as a soil amendment. To handle this amount of yard waste ADS is Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-9

95 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary proposing several compost facilities with a combined capacity of approximately 1,800 tons per day (on a 6 day week). As discussed in Section 3, currently, there are three known existing composting plants. There is also one future planned composting facility that should be in operation by 2010, the Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (PRASA) plant in Mayaguez.. It is estimated that these four facilities can provide approximately 400 tpd of processing capacity when in full commercial operation. However, only one facility (Arecibo Compost Facility) is currently in operation that is capable of processing approximately 100 tpd of yard waste. It is also anticipated that communities will implement smaller alternative yard waste diversion programs, including back yard composting programs. Therefore, as individual communities begin to implement their programs to divert this waste from landfill disposal, re-evaluation of potential composting facility specific siting and sizing requirements is required. Another option is grinding or mulching the material as pre-processing for use in another application. Currently, many municipalities have grinding or mulching machines that could be used as a way to process the yard waste that is received as diversion. In some applications, the grinded yard waste is used as a fuel source. Although this alternative succeeds in diverting the waste from landfill disposal it is typically not considered as being recycled. Often grinding is a pre-cursor to simple windrow composting. Multiple low tech mulch and windrow compost facilities could be established at existing landfill and/or transfer station sites and other locations. To help develop these low tech mulching/composting facilities, the ADS will provide technical assistance and support in developing yard waste collection and education programs, developing and permitting compost sites, assisting in developing regional facilities or developing cooperating agreements for private composting outlets. As additional information becomes available, ADS will evaluate additional opportunities for co-composting of yard waste with food waste and other biodegradable materials. In the short-term, however, it is anticipated that many communities will implement back yard composting programs, grinding or mulching programs, and/or their own low tech composting system or other alternatives to manage the yard waste in response to the October 2006 banning of yard waste from landfill disposal. In addition, it is also anticipated that the private sector will respond to assist in meeting community demands. The ADS proposes the construction of approximately 500 tons per day of composting capacity to service approximately thirty (30) percent of the total amount of yard waste anticipated to be diverted. The location of these compost facilities was evaluated by utilizing the Waste Characterization Study of The study provided information on the amount of yard waste that was disposed in each one of the landfills in Puerto Rico. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-10

96 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary An analysis was performed to measure the highest percentage of yard waste disposed at each one of the landfills. From this information, the Ponce, Toa Baja and Humacao landfills were found to have the greatest quantities of yard waste being disposed. As a result, three facilities are being proposed to be constructed in the North, South and East regions. Currently, the required space for the establishment of such facilities and technologies needs to be analyzed. To promote the delivery of yard waste (e.g., mulch or compost) to any of the proposed low tech or high tech compost facilities, low cost tipping fees and/or surcharging waste disposed in landfills to offset diversion costs should be fomented. After the material is processed the end product could be sold at nominal prices or given away to whoever is interested in utilizing this product. There are several uses that have been identified for these products, among these are: Utilized in green areas at the municipalities or in residential areas; As a fertilizer (mostly compost); Bedding material for horse stables; Alternative cover material for landfills (will need previous authorization from the EQB); and Stabilizing material for landfill slopes. No alternative technology was currently identified to have demonstrated economically sustainability to solely handle yard waste for the waste processing quantities currently estimated for Puerto Rico. If the strategies and facilities identified above to handle yard waste do not sufficiently address the entire yard waste required to be disposed of, then ADS may re-evaluate the status of alternative processing technologies for disposal of yard waste Other Strategies Other strategies for diverting waste from the landfills include the following: Continue a public education regarding the benefits of source reduction and reuse strategy that complements the waste diversion education program. Continue to develop and implement source reduction and reuse programs. Develop electronic recycling program including battery recycling program to increase recyclables and reduce air emissions for any waste processed at a thermal processing facility. Continue to divert C&D and other wastes that may be recoverable or detrimental to operation away from landfills and future alternative processing facilities. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-11

97 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Assist in developing markets for C&D recovered products to encourage C&D diversion. Electronic Recycling (E-Cycling) Electronic products make life more convenient. However, the stockpile of used, obsolete products continues to grow. E-Cycling is a program for reusing or recycling of these consumer electronics. Computer monitors and older TV picture tubes contain an average of four pounds of lead and require special handling at the end of their useful lives. In addition to lead, electronics can contain chromium, cadmium, mercury, beryllium, nickel, zinc, among others. Toxic materials from electronics that are not disposed of or recycled properly pose many problems. Extending the life of or donating working electronics save money and valuable resources. Safely recycling outdated electronics promotes safe management of hazardous components and supports the recovery and reuse of valuable materials. Recycling electronics reduces pollution that would be generated while manufacturing a new product and the need to extract valuable and limited resources. It also reduces the energy used in new product manufacturing and increases landfill useful life. According to the USEPA, one thousand or more municipalities offer computer and electronics collections as part of household hazardous waste collections, special events, or other arrangements. In addition, public and private organizations emerged that accept computers and other electronics for recycling. In June 2007 the ADS conducted a special event to recover electronic equipment waste during which more than 60,000 lbs of this was collected. At this moment there are about six (6) electronic recycling companies working in Puerto Rico. These companies reportedly recycle about 1,000 tons per year of this material. Most of this material is dismantled manually and the usable parts are exported to the US. In some companies the reusable materials are utilized as spare parts in the repair of computers, monitors and other electronic equipment. The ADS will foster an e-cycling program through the following: Divert the flow of e-cycling from the landfills. considerate is projected to amend the existing Reglamento Número 6825 to include ordinances requiring the diversion of electronic equipment to these and future identified recycling centers. Among the articles that should be recycled or reused are such as computers, monitors, televisions, cathode ray tubes, printers, scanners, fax machines and telephones, household batteries, etc. as part of the revised ordinances. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-12

98 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Develop procedures for the establishment of host sites that secure the collection in a secure manner of the electronic equipment, as well as of re-manufature, recycling or reuse. Set-up events to collect such waste streams on given days at municipal properties and parks. Develop guidelines for how to become a host recycling center for such streams. Monitor the locations and investigate additional options to increase the number of collections and recycling of unwanted electronics. Promote a product stewardship approach that shares cost and responsibility for environmentally safe collection, reuse and recycling among those involved in the life cycle of the product. Such methods would be user charges to cover program costs and providing funding for sites that join the program for limited site development and direct costs to handle the products. Establish a public education and outreach program similar to the recycling efforts. Provide incentives could also be provided to these companies to expand their operations as well as an educational program to promote the disposal of this type of waste in these specialized centers. Assist in developing market outlets for electronic waste. Evaluate the need for additional e-cycling facilities. Construction & Demolition Recycling (C&D) Some C&D products are recyclable also such as wood, metal, concrete, stone, asphalt, tires, etc. Currently, there are five (5) companies in Puerto Rico that recycle such waste streams. It is projected to amend the existing Reglamento 6825 to include ordinances encouraging the diversion of C&D to these and future identified recycling centers. C&D diversion programs have included such strategies as: Removing rebar from concrete to recycle the metal. Using crushed concrete as the road base material. Chipping woody wastes and grinding stumps for compost. Removing metal from tires, chipping, dyeing and selling as non-degradable compost. The market for C&D recycling is dependent on the price of the raw material and need for private operators to modify operations accordingly. After the regulations are established and sufficient information regarding the capacities for the private recycling programs is analyzed, the need for additional ADS funded C&D diversion facilities will be Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-13

99 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary determined. Developing markets for recycled C&D through actions such as mandating recycled content in products and applications to encourage operators to modify operations to accommodate recovered materials should also be evaluated Disposal Strategies Alternative Processing Strategies In order to successfully implement the strategy of diverting waste from disposal in landfills, the Base Case Dynamic Itinerary includes the development of two thermal processing technology facilities with a total processing capacity of approximately 2,910 tons per day. It includes the development of a 1,350 ton per day facility in the North West Region to become operational in 2012 and a 1,560 ton per day facility in the North East Region to become operational in The siting of the facilities in the North West and North East Regions will provide adequate disposal capacity to service those areas impacted by the projected landfill closures and the need for additional disposal capacity given the projected waste generation for the region. Thermal processing facilities have proven demonstrated experience both internationally and domestically. Over 63 operating advanced thermal processing facilities are currently operating successfully in the U.S. For the first time in the past ten years, new facilities are being planned, existing facilities are being expanded, and shuttered plants are re-opening. The energy generated by these facilities is substantial and reliable and do not result in the depletion of natural resources. With increasing energy costs and demand, the demand for these types of facilities will also increase. Some of the waste to energy conversion technologies could generate residual products like gases and slag. These could be used in the chemical industry as well as construction., Advanced thermal recycling exhaust emissions are treated using maximum available air pollution control equipment to meet regulatory requirements. Modern thermal processing facilities have successfully demonstrated the ability to comply with the various federal and state environmental regulations to which they are subject. There is a related concern to the impact that this technologies could have on the recycling program. However, studies have found this not to be true. In fact, many communities which use this technology boast recycling and re-use rates that is higher than other communities. In addition, many facilities conduct post-combustion ferrous and nonferrous metal recovery further extending the landfill useful life and producing an additional revenue stream. At some facilities, post metals recovery has contributed to millions of dollars of revenues annually which would have otherwise been landfilled. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-14

100 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary The developmet of these facilities will be carried through an RFP process that would further refine the procurement process and result in identifying the most appropriate responsive Proposer for a specific technology Landfill Disposal Enhancement Strategies This section discusses the landfill disposal enhancements such as expansion and closure strategies and landfill operation enhancements. The landfill expansion strategies and capacity requirements take into account the development of the above thermal processing facilities Expansion Strategies Based on the assumptions presented in Section 4, only six (6) landfill expansions are proposed. These landfills are: Fajardo, Humacao, Ponce, Yauco, Salinas and Juncos. These landfill expansions, in addition to the new Peñuelas landfill, will provide approximately 64 million tons of additional disposal capacity. The expansion of each of these landfills is based on the following assumptions: 1) A Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) will need to be performed to help identify, among other information, the expansion area that will need to be constructed to accommodate for the proposed expansion volume; 2) A title study will also need to be performed to verify ownership of the site proposed for expansion and identify any land acquisition that should be performed; and 3) the proposed expansion criteria presented below. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-15

101 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Fajardo The Municipality of Fajardo is currently proposing the expansion of this landfill in an area comprised of approximately 59 acres. It is estimated that the expansion of this landfill can provide approximately 4,000,000 tons of additional capacity and extend the life of the landfill to Although this is the total capacity needed, the expansion could be performed in different stages with the construction of certain disposal cells to minimize the extent of the construction. Construction should take from 1 to 2 years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Humacao Waste Management reportedly owns a parcel of approximately 200 acres located to the south of the existing landfill. Waste Management reports the intention of expanding the landfill in this area at a later date. It is estimated that the expansion of this landfill can provide approximately 15,000,000 tons of additional capacity and extend the life of the landfill to Although this is the total capacity, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. Construction should take from 1 to 2 years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Ponce The Ponce landfill has vertical expansion capabilities as well as horizontal expansions in areas privately owned. This expansion will require additional land acquisition to accommodate the space needed for the expansion. The area identified for the expansion is located in the west part of the landfill. It is estimated that the expansion of this landfill can provide approximately 8,000,000 tons of additional capacity and extend the life of the landfill to Although this is the total capacity, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. Construction should take from 1 to 2 years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-16

102 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Yauco The Municipality of Yauco and L&M Waste are currently proposing the expansion of this landfill in an area comprised of 60 acres. The capacity needed for this landfill to operate and continue operating over 2030 has been calculated at approximately 3,500,000 tons. Although this is the total capacity needed, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. Construction should take from 1 to 2 years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Salinas The Municipality of Salinas is currently proposing the expansion of this landfill in an area comprised of approximately 25 acres. It is estimated that the expansion of this landfill can provide approximately 4,000,000 tons of additional capacity and extend the life of the landfill to Although this is the total capacity needed, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. The permitting process has reportedly been completed. Construction should take from 1 to 2 years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Juncos The Municipality of Juncos is currently proposing the expansion of this landfill in an area comprised of approximately 35 acres. It is estimated that the expansion of this landfill can provide approximately 6,200,000 tons of additional capacity and extend the life of the landfill to Although this is the total capacity, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. Construction should take from 1 to 2 years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Closure Strategies The Base Case Scenario of the Itinerary takes into consideration the closure of twentyfive (25) landfills over a 25 year timeframe. These landfills will be in operation until they use their remaining useful life. The rest of them will be closed due to one or more of the following reasons: limited space for expansion, located in areas that no comply with the Subtitle D Siting Requirements, such as the Karst Region, near flood and wetlands areas. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-17

103 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Landfill Operation Enhancements Operational enhancements can further improve the operational efficiency and the life of landfills. These enhancements could be implemented by shredding of the solid waste, bailing, mechanical compaction with vehicles, and utilizing alternative daily covers. Depending on the technology that is utilized, these strategies could enhance the operational life of landfills anywhere from 10% to 50%. It is critical that landfills begin the process of establishing, as a minimum requirement, the compaction of the solid waste with the proper equipment recommended for each individual landfill to maximize disposal capacity. Alternative cover is another enhancement that could be implemented but it depends on the approval by the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) for the implementation. There are several programs for the use of alternative cover materials that have been implemented so far. These programs range in the use of shredded tires, ash and concrete mix, and sludge mixed with soil, among others Transport Strategies Landfill closures will force municipalities to divert their MSW and recyclables to other facilities or landfills. Under the Base Case, it is recommended in the Itinerary recommends that the transfer stations shown in Table 5-2 be designed and constructed to accommodate receipt and processing of waste diverted from closed landfills based on the following assumptions. Location Table 5-2: New Transfer Stations for the Base Case Initial Throughput Capacity (tpd) 1 Year of Startup Closed Landfills that could be Served by Transfer Station Possible waste transfer to processing or disposition facilities Aguadilla Aguadilla and Moca Cabo Rojo / Penuelas New Mayaguez Mayaguez and Hormigueros San German/Lajas Peñuelas New / North West WTE Cabo Rojo and Lajas Penuelas New Juana Diaz Juana Diaz Yauco Cayey Cayey Ponce Vieques Vieques Fajardo Culebra Culebra Fajardo Toa Baja 1, Toa Baja and Toa Alta, Humacao / North East WTE Guaynabo Guaynabo Humacao / North East WTE Barranquitas Barranquitas Ponce Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-18

104 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Location Initial Throughput Capacity (tpd) 1 Year of Startup Closed Landfills that could be Served by Transfer Station Possible waste transfer to processing or disposition facilities Carolina Carolina Humacao / North East WTE Arecibo 1, Arecibo and Florida Peñuelas New / North West WTE Notes: 1. The initial transfer station throughput capacity indicated in the table is a preliminary capacity sizing of the throughput required by the Service Area relating to that transfer station considering other landfill and diversion facilities. 2. The Guaynabo transfer station has been proposed following the closure of the Guaynabo Landfill Infrastructure Map for Every Five Year Interval The infrastructure plays a major role in the development and successful execution of the Itinerary. Therefore, it is of great importance to visualize and understand the changes in infrastructure proposed in the Itinerary. The infrastructure maps with all the existing and proposed new facilities for the Base Case scenario are included in Appendix E-1. The facilities shown in these maps include the following as of 2030: open landfills, closed landfills, existing operating mini transfer stations, out of service mini transfer stations, proposed new mini transfer stations, existing operating transfer stations, proposed new transfer stations, existing materials recovery facilities, proposed new materials recovery facilities, existing composting facilities, proposed new composting facilities, and proposed new alternative waste processing facilities. In order to illustrate the evolution and operating status of the different facilities throughout Puerto Rico, a map was prepared for every five year interval of the planning period. This way it is possible to keep track of facilities that have closed and those that have opened or been rehabilitated and the strategic locations where they have been placed Summary of Dynamic Itinerary for Base Case The Dynamic Itinerary proposes the construction of approximately $2.5 billion in infrastructure over the next 25 years to meet the processing and disposal capacity needs of the island through This investment in infrastructure and the life of these facilities, however, will extend beyond 2030 and as such also serve to provide more than 17 years of remaining processing and disposal capacity beyond Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-19

105 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Table 5-3 summarizes the financial costs associated with the capital investment (public and private investments) and the net present value of the blended cost to process waste at the diversion facility or landfill over the 25-year planning period. Please note that the capital investment presented in this table is less than the $2.5 billion construction cost to account for life and capacity of facilities remaining beyond the 25-year planning period. More specifically, of the total $2.5 billion construction cost, $1.91 billion in debt service payments will be incurred during the 25-year planning period. The blended cost to process waste includes estimated capital costs and operations and maintenance costs net any projected material revenues such as recyclable material sales or energy sales (from waste-to-energy). Facility Table 5-3: Base Case Scenario Financial Information Estimated Net Present Value of Total Capital Investment (2006 dollars) Composting Facility $8,000,000 $18 Net Present Value Estimate of Required Tipping Fee ($/ton in 2006 dollars capital and O&M) Material Recovery Facility Alternative Processing Facility $30,000,000 $12 $461,000,000 $54 Landfill Expansion $840,000,000 $31 Landfill Expansion Closure & Post Closure $210,000,000 $8 Transfer Station $78,000,000 $8 Waste Managed by Other Municipal or Private Facilities / Landfills Waste Managed by Other Landfill Closure & Post Closure Total Capital / Estimated Average Tip Fee $229,000,000 $29 $57,000,000 $8 $1,910,000,000 $39 As illustrated, the above costs include the development of new composting and material recovery facilities, new alternative processing facilities, new landfill expansions and Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-20

106 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary development of new transfer stations. The net present value of the required tipping fee takes into account both the debt service payment requirements and the operation and maintenance cost of the facilities, net of anticipated revenues. For example, the anticipated tipping fee for the alternative processing facility would be net of energy revenues received for the sale of electricity produced by the facility and the material recovery facility tipping fee would be net of revenues received for the sale of the processed recyclables. The above table also includes a category entitled waste managed by other municipal or private facilities/landfills. This category was included to develop an estimate of the debt and operation and maintenance cost associated with continued operation of existing municipal and private facilities during the planning period. The purpose of including this category was to provide an assessment of the total cost of infrastructure and estimated total cost for disposal of solid waste in Puerto Rico. It should be noted that the estimates provided above and in subsequent cost tables include all of the anticipated ancillary costs associated with the development of these facilities. These costs include land acquisition, permitting, design, engineering, construction, construction oversight, contingency and financing costs. In the case of the landfills, the costs also include landfill closure and post closure costs. They also assume the development of state-of-the art facilities in compliance with applicable regulations with useful lives of 20 to 30 years. For a perspective on the alternative processing technology tipping fees, the tipping fee for the alternative processing technology in the above table is within the range of tip fees for advanced thermal recycling waste-to-energy facilities as reported in the Chartwell Publisher s Solid Waste Digest for January 2006 ($55 to $90 per ton). The following sections summarize the short term, intermediate, and long term planning periods to understand the capital investment costs associated with the development of the various facilities and when they come on-line. For the purposes of this financial analysis, the capital investment costs for all facilities are designated in the year that the facility needs to become operational. Actual capital investment costs will require upfront spending in prior years for the study, engineering, construction, oversight, financing, legal and other project costs depending on whether the facility will be publicly or privately financed. The costs provided below illustrate the amount of funding or size of the bond issue that would be required in that year to finance the proposed infrastructure Short Term Years 1 through 5 Table 5-4 summarizes the facilities that will be operational in the first five years of the planning period ( ), the year that they need to be operational, and the estimated Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-21

107 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary capital investment required at that time. As illustrated, it is estimated that approximately $764 million in construction costs, in today s dollars (i.e dollars) will be required over the next five-years to fund new solid waste systems in addition to existing landfill capacity and investments that have or are in the process of being made by municipalities and the private sector. As noted earlier, a portion of these costs will be incurred earlier as part of the upfront planning costs. Table 5-4: Short Term Facility Financial Summary (Construction Cost dollars) Facility Year 1 (2006) Composting Facility No. 1 Composting Facility No. 2 Composting Facility No. 3 Material Recovery Facility No. 1 New Landfill Peñuelas New Landfill Expansion Yauco Landfill Expansion Salinas Landfill Expansion Juncos Transfer Station - Aguadilla Transfer Station - Guaynabo Transfer Station Toa Baja Transfer Station - Barranquitas Transfer Station Culebra Transfer Station Cayey Year 2 (2007) $62.3 M $10.8 M $6.7 M $20.0 M Year 3 (2008) $2.9 M $1.9 M $0.4 M Year 4 (2009) $15.6 M $66.9 M $119.2 M Year 5 (2010) $2.9 M $1.4 M $451 M $1.8 M Subtotal $0.0 $100 M $5.2 M $202 M $457 M Intermediate Term Years 6 through 15 Table 5-5 summarizes the facilities that will need to be constructed and operational in the Years 6 through 15 and their estimated capital cost at that time. As illustrated, it is estimated that over $1 billion in construction costs (2006 dollars) will be required from 2011 through 2020 to fund the proposed solid waste systems. It should be noted that this level of investment includes the full investment into the required landfill facilities to develop all of the capacity over the life of the landfill. It should be noted, however, that the landfill expansion would likely be implemented in stages and as such this estimate is overstated. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-22

108 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Table 5-5: Intermediate Term Facility Financial Summary (Construction Cost dollars) Facility Material Processing Facility No. 2 Alternative Processing Facility West Alternative Processing Facility North Landfill Expansion Fajardo Year 6(2011) Year 7(2012) $11.9 M $216 M Landfill Expansion Humacao $288M Landfill Expansion Ponce Transfer Station - Mayaguez Transfer Station - San German/Lajas $4.5 M Year 8(2013) $246 M Year 9(2014) $6.1 M Transfer Station Carolina $3.9 Transfer Station Arecibo $13.4 M Years ( ) $77 M $154 M Subtotal $4.5 M $529 M $246 M $6.1 M $235 M Long Term Years 15 through 25 Table 5-6 summarizes the additional facilities that are anticipated to be constructed in the years 15 through 25 and the capital investment that will be required at that time. Table 5-6:Long Term Facility Financial Summary (Construction Cost dollars) Facility Year 16 (2021) Transfer Station Juana Diaz Transfer Station - Vieques Subtotal Year 17 (2022) Year 18 (2023) Year 19 (2024) Year ( ) $2.8 M $0.4 M $0 $0 $0 $0 $3.2 M 5.2. Backup Case As explained in Section 4, the Backup Case scenario focuses on providing an alternative in the case that the Base Case scenario is unachievable. The Backup Case proposes a slower or less aggressive diversion plan reaching 35 percent by the end of the studied timeframe, in year It also does not incorporate the participation of an alternative waste processing facility. Therefore, it mainly relies on landfill expansions and new transfer stations for long-term solid waste management. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-23

109 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary The following sections discuss the implementation strategies necessary to meet these assumptions as separated into diversion strategies, disposal strategies, and transport strategies. This section also presents the infrastructure maps showing all facilities and summarizes the financial analysis for each five year period and the planning period as a total Diversion Strategies Reuse Strategies The residential and commercial reuse strategies for the Backup Case are the same as those for the Base Case. These strategies would include promoting grass cycling and onsite composting, promoting new product and packaging designs, expanding producer responsibility for waste generated by their products, promoting changes in consumption patterns, providing technical assistance to businesses to identify ways to reduce the amount of waste generated, promoting reuse businesses such as charities, used clothing and furniture stores, book exchanges, and others as noted above Recycling Strategies The residential and commercial recycling strategies for the Backup Case are the same as those for the Base Case. The only difference is that participation and compliance is assumed to take longer than that anticipated in the Base Case. Specifically the Backup Case assumes the 35 percent diversion goal will not be met until 2026, whereas the Base Case assumes it will be achieved by As such, additional landfill capacity will be needed. The development of the north and south material recovery facilities at the planned capacities are anticipated to stay the same with single shift operations continuing until two shift days are required to meet demand Composting and Yard Waste Management Strategies The composting and yard waste strategies for the Backup Case are the same as for the Base Case. As with the recycling strategies, the only difference is that anticipated recovery rates will take longer to achieve and as such additional landfill capacity may be needed Other Strategies The other strategies recommended under the Base Case, including education, reuse, electronics recycling, C&D processing and others, are the same strategies assumed and recommended for the Backup Case. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-24

110 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Disposal Strategies Alternative Processing Strategies The Base Case assumed the implementation of two thermal processing facilities capable of processing 2,910 tons per day of municipal solid waste beginning The Backup Case assumes that these facilities are never developed and as such the development of additional landfill capacity is required Landfill Management Strategies Expansion Strategies The Base Case proposed the expansion of six landfills in addition to the new Penuelas landfill to provide approximately 64,000,000 tons of disposal capacity and resulted in approximately 17 years of remaining processing/disposal capacity after the 25-year planning period (i.e. beyond 2030). This Backup Case requires a larger expansion of three (3) of these six (6) landfills (Fajardo, Humacao and Ponce). This Backup Case also requires the expansion of two additional landfills (Cabo Rojo and Peñuelas New) that were not anticipated to receive any expansion under the Base Case. These additional expansions would increase the disposal capacity from 64,000,000 tons to approximately 70,600,000 tons. At the end of the planning period (i.e. beyond 2030), however, only 7 years of disposal capacity will remain under this Backup Case vs. the 17 years under the Base Case. The following presents a summary of the landfills requiring expansion under this Backup Case, including the following expansion assumptions: 1) A Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) will need to be performed to help identify, among other information, the expansion area that will need to be constructed to accommodate for the proposed expansion volume; 2) A title study will also need to be performed to verify ownership of the site proposed for expansion and identify any land acquisition that should be performed; and 3) the proposed expansion criteria presented below. Fajardo The Municipality is currently proposing the expansion of this landfill in an area comprised of 59 acres. The capacity needed for this landfill to operate and continue operating over 2030 under this Backup Case has been calculated at approximately 5,900,000 tons. Although this is the total capacity needed, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. Construction would take from 1 to 2 years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-25

111 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Humacao Waste Management reportedly owns a parcel of around 200 acres located to the south of the existing landfill. The company has the intentions of expanding in this area at a later date. The capacity needed for this landfill to operate and continue operating over 2030 has been calculated at approximately 19,000,000 tons under this Backup Case. Although this is the total capacity needed, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. The landfill expansion would need to start operations by the year Ponce The Ponce landfill has vertical expansion capabilities as well as horizontal expansions in areas privately owned. This expansion will require additional land acquisition to accommodate the space needed for the expansion. The area identified for the expansion is located in the west part of the landfill. The capacity needed for this landfill to operate and continue operating over 2030 has been calculated at approximately 10,100,000 tons. Although this is the total capacity needed, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. Construction should take from 1 to 2 years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Yauco The Municipality and L&M Waste are currently proposing the expansion of this landfill in an area comprised of 60 acres. The capacity needed for this landfill to operate and continue operating over 2030 has been calculated at approximately 6,500,000 tons. Although this is the total capacity needed, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. Construction should take from 1 to 2 years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Salinas The Municipality of Salinas is currently proposing the expansion of this landfill in an area comprised of approximately 25 acres. It is estimated that the expansion of this landfill can provide approximately 4,000,000 tons of additional capacity and extend the life of the landfill to Although this is the total capacity needed, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. The permitting process has reportedly been completed. Construction should take from 1 to 2 Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-26

112 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Juncos The Municipality of Juncos is currently proposing the expansion of this landfill in an area comprised of approximately 35 acres. It is estimated that the expansion of this landfill can provide approximately 6,200,000 tons of additional capacity and extend the life of the landfill to Although this is the total capacity, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. Construction should take from 1 to 2 years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Cabo Rojo The Cabo Rojo landfill has expansion capabilities in adjacent areas west of the landfill. This expansion will require additional land acquisition to accommodate the space needed for the expansion. The area identified for the expansion is located in the west part of the landfill. The capacity needed for this landfill to operate and continue operating over 2030 has been calculated at approximately 1,500,000 tons. Although this is the total capacity needed, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. Construction should take from 1 to 2 years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Peñuelas New The capacity needed for this landfill to operate to provide long-term disposal capacity has been calculated at approximately 4,000,000 tons. Although this is the total capacity needed, the expansion could be performed in different stages to minimize the extent of the construction. This capacity has been assumed based on the projected demand for the area. Construction should take from 1 to 2 years, depending on site and design considerations. The landfill expansion has been calculated to start operations by the year Closure Strategies This Backup Case Scenario takes into consideration the closure of twenty-four (24) landfills over a 25 year timeframe (vs. 25 landfills under the Base Case) due to the same reasons mentioned on the Base Case. In the Base Case the Cabo Rojo Landfill was Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-27

113 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary assumed to close in 2021 with the future waste consolidated into another landfill. Under this Backup Case the Cabo Rojo landfill is not closed within the 25-year planning period, but is expanded via additional land acquisition to provide 1.5 million tons of capacity and extend the life of the landfill to Landfill Operation Enhancements The landfill operation enhancement strategies are the same under the Backup Case as those recommended under the Base Case Transport Strategies As previously discussed, landfill closures will force municipalities to transport their MSW and recyclables to other diversion facilities or landfills. The transport strategies for the Backup Case are similar to the Base Case; however, the capacities and start-up dates for the facilities will vary to accommodate the revised landfill closure and expansion requirements. Specifically, the proposed Juana Diaz, Vieques and Arecibo transfer stations will need to be constructed several years earlier than that under the Base Case because of the faster landfill capacity depletion rate for the Backup Case. Construction of the Lajas transfer station, however, will not be needed until after 2030 because of the requirement to expand the Cabo Rojo landfill instead of closing this landfill as proposed under the Base Case. The following Table 5-7 presents a summary of the transfer stations anticipated to be required under the Backup Case. Location Table 5-7: New Transfer Stations for the Backup Case Initial Throughput Capacity (tpd) 1 Year of Startup Closed Landfills that could be Served by Transfer Station Possible waste transfer to processing or disposition facilities Aguadilla Aguadilla, Moca and Isabela Cabo Rojo / Peñuelas New Mayagüez Mayaguez, Añasco, and Hormigueros Juana Diaz Juana Diaz Yauco Peñuelas New Vieques Vieques Fajardo Culebra Culebra Fajardo Toa Baja Toa Baja and Toa Alta Humacao Guaynabo Guaynabo Humacao Arecibo 1, Arecibo and Florida Peñuelas New Barranquitas Barranquitas Ponce Cayey Cayey Ponce Notes: Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-28

114 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary 1. The initial transfer station throughput capacity indicated in the table is a preliminary capacity sizing of the throughput required by the Service Area relating to that transfer station considering other landfill and diversion facilities. 2. The Guaynabo transfer station has been proposed following the closure of the Guaynabo Landfill Infrastructure Map for Every Five Year Interval As explained in this Section 5 the infrastructure plays a major role in the development and successful execution of the Itinerary. Therefore, it is of great importance to visualize and understand the changes in infrastructure proposed in the Itinerary. The infrastructure maps with all the existing and proposed new infrastructure facilities for the Backup Case scenario are included in Appendix D-3. The facilities shown in these map include: open landfills, closed landfills, existing operating mini transfer stations, out of service mini transfer stations, proposed new mini transfer stations, existing operating transfer stations, proposed new transfer stations, existing materials recovery facilities, proposed new materials recovery facilities, existing composting facilities and proposed new composting facilities,. In order to illustrate the evolution of the different facilities around the island, a map was prepared for every five year interval. This way it is possible to keep track of facilities that have closed and those that have opened or been rehabilitated and the strategic locations where they have been placed Summary of Dynamic Itinerary for Backup Case Table 5-8 summarizes the financial costs associated with the capital investment and the net present value of the blended cost to process waste at the diversion facility or landfill. The blended cost to process waste includes capital costs and operations and maintenance costs net any material revenues such as recyclable material sales. As previously discussed, these costs include the development of new composting and material recovery facilities, new landfill expansions and development of new transfer stations. In addition, it includes a category entitled waste managed by other municipal or private facilities/landfills. This category was included to develop an estimate of the debt and operation and maintenance cost associated with continued operation of existing municipal and private facilities during the planning period. The purpose of including this category waste to provide an assessment of the total cost of infrastructure and estimated total cost for disposal of solid waste in Puerto Rico. Table 5-8: Backup Case Financial Information Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-29

115 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Facility Estimated Net Present Value of Total Capital Investment (2006 dollars) Composting Facility $8,000,000 $18 Net Present Value Estimate of Required Tipping Fee ($/ton in 2006 dollars capital and O&M) Material Recovery Facility $30,000,000 $12 Alternative Processing Facility NA NA Landfill Expansion $1,190,000,000 $34 Landfill Expansion Closure & Post Closure $298,000,000 $9 Transfer Station $72,000,000 $8 Waste Managed by Other Municipal or Private Facilities / Landfills Waste Managed by Other Landfill Closure & Post Closure Total Capital Cost / Estimated Average Tip Fee $288,000,000 $29 $72,000,000 $8 $1,960,000,000 $41 As illustrated in the above table the capital cost over the 25-year planning period under the Backup Case is slightly higher than that under the Base Case even though the total construction cost of the infrastructure is less under the Backup Case then under the Base Case. As previously discussed, the primary difference is that the Base Case scenario provides for an additional 17 years of capacity beyond 2030, whereas the Backup Case only provides 7 years of capacity beyond The tipping fee is also slightly higher under the Backup Case then under the Base Case due in part to the higher capital cost as well as due to higher operation and maintenance costs. The operation and maintenance costs are higher under the Backup Case scenario because of the reduced recycling rates which require landfilling this waste at a cost which is greater than the cost to recycle this material Short Term Years 1 through 5 Table 5-9 summarizes the facilities that will be operational in the first five years, the year that they need to be operational, and the estimated capital investment required at that time. As illustrated, it is estimated that approximately $774 million in construction cost Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-30

116 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary (2006 dollars) will be required over the next five-years to fund new solid waste systems in addition to existing landfill capacity and investments that have or are in the process of being made by municipalities and the private sector. Table 5-9: Short Term Facility Financial Summary Backup Case (Construction Cost dollars) Facility Year 1 (2006) Composting Facility No. 1 Composting Facility No. 2 Composting Facility No. 3 Material Recovery Facility No. 1 Landfill Expansion Salinas Landfill Expansion Juncos Landfill Expansion Yauco Year 2 (2007) $62.3 M Year 3 (2008) $2.9 M Year 4 (2009) $15.6 M $119.2 M $66.9 M Year 5 (2010) $2.9 M $1.4 M New Landfill Peñuelas New $451M Transfer Station Aguadilla Transfer Station Culebra Transfer Station Toa Baja Transfer Station - Guaynabo Transfer Station Arecibo Transfer Station - Barranquitas $11.4 M $19.4 M $4.3 M $0.4 M $1.5 M $15.2 M Subtotal $ 0 $97 M $4.8 M $202 M $471 M In addition, as previously noted, the estimates provided in the above and subsequent cost tables include all of the anticipated ancillary costs associated with the development of these facilities. These costs include land acquisition, permitting, design, engineering, construction, construction oversight, contingency and financing costs. In the case of the landfills it also includes landfill closure and post closure costs. They also assume the development of state-of-the art facilities with useful lives of 20 to 30 years. As such, these costs may appear to be high in comparison to published costs for construction of comparable facilities Intermediate Term Years 6 through 15 Table 5-10 summarizes the facilities that will be operational in the Years 6 through 15, and their estimated capital cost at that time. As illustrated, it is estimated that approximately $721 million construction costs (2006 dollars) will be required from 2011 through 2020 to fund the proposed solid waste systems. Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-31

117 Section 5 Dynamic Itinerary Table 5-10: Intermediate Term Facility Financial Summary (Construction Cost dollars) Facility Year 6 (2011) Year 7 (2012) Material Processing Facility No. 2 $11.9 Alternative Processing Facility Landfill Expansion Cabo Rojo Landfill Expansion Fajardo Landfill Expansion Humacao Landfill Expansion Ponce Transfer Station Mayaguez $6.7 M $28.8 M $365 M $194 M Year 8 (2013) $0 M Year 9 (2014) $114 M Subtotal $6.7 M $600 M $0 M $114 M $0 Years ( ) Long Term Years 15 through 25 Table 5-11 summarizes the additional facilities that are anticipated to be constructed in the Years 15 through 25 and the capital investment that will be required at that time. As illustrated below, approximately $80 million (2006 dollars) is anticipated to be required for investment in disposal capacity.. Table 5-11: Long Term Facility Financial Summary (Construction Cost dollars) Facility Year 16 (2021) Landfill Peñuelas New Transfer Station Juana Diaz Transfer Station Vieques Subtotal Year 17 (2022) $2.9 M Year 18 (2023) Year 19 (2024) Year ( ) $77 M $0.4 M $0 $2.9 M $0 $0 $77 M Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document 5-32

118 APPENDIX A-1 COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY LANDFILL INFORMATION Landfill Operator Hours of Operation Tons per week (2006) Municipalities that Dispose Tipping Fee Aguadilla Landfill Technologies M-Sun 6:00-3:00 1,012 Aguadilla $7.00/CU.YD Añasco Municipality M-F 7:00-3: Anasco $6.00/CU.YD Arecibo Landfill Technologies M-F 7:00-3:30 6,510 Arecibo, Camuy, Utuado, Manati, Lares, Hatillo $31.00/TON M-F 6:00-5:00 Sat Arroyo L&M Waste 6:00-12: Arroyo, Patillas $35.00/TON Barranquitas Municipality M-F 7:00-3: Barranquitas, Orocovis $25-100/CU.YD Cabo Rojo Carolina Landfill Technologies Landfill Technologies M-F 6:30-4:00 Sat 7:00-12:00 1,018 Cabo Rojo M-F 6:30-4:00 Sat 6:30-2:00 2,356 Carolina $6.00/CU.YD (Domestic) $18.00/ea Scrap/Auto $100/ton (Private) $90.00 (state) Cayey Culebra Fajardo M-F 6:00-1:00 SAT $12.00/CU.YD $16.00/CU.YD Scrap Municipality 6:00-11: Cayey $30.00/CU.YD C&D M-F 6:00-3:30 SAT Municipality 6:30-10:30 89 Culebra N/A M-F 6:30-4:30 SAT Fajardo, Luquillo, Ceiba, Loiza, Rio Grande, Landfill Technologies 7:00-12:00 4,095 Canovanas, Naguabo $9.00/CU.YD Florida Waste Disposal Management M-F 6:00-2: Florida $35.00/TON M-F 6:00-5:00 Guayama Carlos Rental Equipment SAT 6:00-12: Guayama $7.35/CU.YD Guaynabo Landfill Technologies M-F 7:00-4:00 2,000 Guaynabo N/A Hormigueros Humacao Municipality Waste Management M-F 7:00-4:00 SAT 7:00-12: Hormigueros M-F 5:00-7:00 SAT Gurabo, Caguas, Humacao, San Juan, Las 5:00-2:00 13,800 Piedras $25.00/ pickup truck $40/ pickup 350 $100/ 6 cu.mt truck Isabela Municipality M-F 7:00-1: Isabela $12.50/cu.yd $80 per 10 cu.yd M-F 6:00-6:30 SAT $160 per 20 cu.yd to Jayuya Municipality 8:00-4: Jayuya Utuado $42/ton Juana Díaz L&M Waste M-F 7:00-4:00 SAT 7:00-12:00 1,527 Juana Diaz, Villalba, Coamo $7.50/cu.yd (domestic) $9/cu.yd C&D M-F 6:00-5:00 Canovanas, Aguas Buenas (C&D), Trujillo Alto, $7.00/cu.yd (domestic) Juncos Municipality SAT 6:00-12:00 4,296 Juncos, San Lorenzo (C&D) $10/cu.yd (C&D) M-F 7:00-3:30 SAT Lajas Prime Inc. 7:00-12:00 1,080 Lajas $6/cu.yd Mayagüez Waste Management M-F 6:00-3:00 SAT 6:00-12:00 1,375 Mayaguez, Maricao $40/ton Moca Municipality M-F 6:00-3:00 3,855 Moca, San Sebastian, Las Marias, Aguada, Rincon, Quebradillas $6/cu.yd Peñuelas Waste Management M-F 7:30-4:30 3,000 Industrial N/A Ponce Salinas Santa Isabel Toa Alta BFI BFI Municipality Landfill Technologies M-F 3:00-7:00 SAT Adjuntas, Ponce, Comerio, Aguas Buenas, $9/cu.yd (domestic) $11.75/cu.yd (C&D) $40/cyd seizures $45.75/cuyd (Auto) 3:00-12:00 6,620 Cidra (Part of it) $10-14/cuyd (sludge) M-F 6:00-4:00 SAT 6:00-12:00 2,750 Aibonito, Salinas, Cidra $9.00/CU.YD M-F 6:00-3:00 SAT 6:00-12: Santa Isabel $7.00/cu.yd M-F 6:30-4:00 SAT 7:00-12:00 2,887 Comerio, Corozal, Toa Alta, Naranjito $9.00/CU.YD Toa Baja Landfill Technologies M-F 6:00-6:00 9,000 Bayamon, Catano, Toa Baja, Morovis, Dorado $31.00/ton $6.75/cyd M-F 7:00-3:00 SAT (municipality) Vega Baja AR Waste Disposal 7:00-12: Vega Alta, Manati, Ciales, Vega Baja $9.00/cyd (Private) Vieques Municipality M-F 6:00-3: Vieques N/A Yabucoa Landfill Technologies M-F 6:00-4: Yabucoa, Maunabo N/A Yauco L&M Waste M-F 7:00-4:00 SAT 7:00-12:00 2,410 Yauco, Guanica, San German, Sabana Grande, Penuelas, Guayanilla $7.25/cyd (domestic) $9.50/cyd (C&D) 76,067 A-1-1

119 Appendix B-1 Solid Waste Generation and Recycling Appendix B-1: Population Projections Municipio Adjuntas 19,143 19,168 19,193 19,218 19,243 19,268 19,259 19,250 19,241 19,232 19,224 19,552 19,787 20,057 Aguada 42,158 42,652 43,152 43,658 44,170 44,687 45,126 45,569 46,016 46,468 46,923 48,401 49,599 50,283 Aguadilla 64,791 65,254 65,720 66,190 66,663 67,139 67,483 67,829 68,177 68,527 68,878 69,993 70,764 71,136 Aguas Buenas 29,096 29,373 29,653 29,936 30,221 30,510 30,746 30,983 31,222 31,463 31,706 32,524 33,172 33,543 Aibonito 26,515 26,632 26,750 26,868 26,987 27,106 27,192 27,278 27,365 27,452 27,539 28,124 28,553 28,872 Añasco 28,406 28,650 28,896 29,144 29,394 29,645 29,841 30,038 30,237 30,437 30,638 31,276 31,767 32,006 Arecibo 100, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,004 Arroyo 19,128 19,185 19,242 19,299 19,356 19,414 19,442 19,470 19,498 19,526 19,555 19,962 20,275 20,528 Barceloneta 22,349 22,470 22,592 22,715 22,838 22,963 23,041 23,120 23,199 23,278 23,357 23,816 24,228 24,579 Barranquitas 28,961 29,219 29,480 29,743 30,008 30,276 30,511 30,748 30,987 31,227 31,469 32,690 33,737 34,590 Bayamón 224, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,381 Cabo Rojo 47,033 47,545 48,063 48,586 49,115 49,649 50,090 50,535 50,984 51,437 51,896 52,665 53,256 53,227 Caguas 140, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,881 Camuy 35,343 35,764 36,190 36,621 37,057 37,498 37,883 38,272 38,665 39,062 39,463 40,624 41,637 42,139 Canóvanas 43,437 43,884 44,336 44,792 45,253 45,718 46,115 46,515 46,919 47,326 47,738 49,297 50,565 51,349 Carolina 186, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,898 Cataño 30,027 29,887 29,747 29,608 29,470 29,332 29,152 28,973 28,795 28,618 28,443 28,801 29,020 29,513 Cayey 47,397 47,550 47,703 47,857 48,011 48,165 48,231 48,297 48,363 48,429 48,495 49,138 49,553 49,901 Ceiba 18,016 18,100 18,184 18,268 18,353 18,438 18,472 18,506 18,540 18,574 18,607 18,958 19,224 19,511 Ciales 19,837 19,961 20,086 20,212 20,338 20,465 20,573 20,681 20,790 20,899 21,009 21,613 22,138 22,549 Cidra 42,880 43,426 43,979 44,539 45,106 45,680 46,183 46,691 47,205 47,725 48,250 49,946 51,374 52,209 Coamo 37,660 37,942 38,226 38,512 38,801 39,092 39,328 39,565 39,804 40,044 40,285 41,390 42,346 43,088 Comerio 20,006 20,044 20,082 20,120 20,158 20,197 20,207 20,217 20,227 20,237 20,246 20,642 20,906 21,184 Corozal 36,935 37,247 37,562 37,880 38,200 38,523 38,786 39,051 39,318 39,587 39,857 41,090 42,103 42,849 Culebra 1,872 1,893 1,915 1,937 1,959 1,981 2,002 2,023 2,045 2,067 2,089 2,103 2,103 2,067 Dorado 34,079 34,348 34,619 34,892 35,168 35,446 35,657 35,870 36,084 36,299 36,515 37,379 38,023 38,420 Fajardo 40,763 41,008 41,254 41,502 41,751 42,002 42,177 42,352 42,528 42,705 42,883 43,592 44,183 44,596 Florida 12,399 12,538 12,679 12,821 12,965 13,111 13,236 13,362 13,490 13,619 13,749 14,365 14,938 15,179 Guánica 21,924 22,083 22,243 22,404 22,567 22,731 22,857 22,983 23,110 23,238 23,366 23,851 24,234 24,464 Guayama 44,355 44,605 44,856 45,109 45,363 45,618 45,813 46,008 46,204 46,401 46,599 47,684 48,551 49,207 Guayanilla 23,099 23,229 23,360 23,492 23,624 23,757 23,857 23,957 24,058 24,159 24,260 24,762 25,122 25,387 Guaynabo 100, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,052 Gurabo 36,878 37,439 38,009 38,588 39,175 39,772 40,306 40,847 41,395 41,950 42,513 44,054 45,417 46,091 Hatillo 39,035 39,505 39,981 40,462 40,949 41,442 41,869 42,300 42,736 43,176 43,621 44,936 46,051 46,640 Hormigueros 16,639 16,736 16,833 16,931 17,030 17,129 17,191 17,253 17,316 17,379 17,442 17,499 17,448 17,337 Humacao 59,115 59,481 59,850 60,221 60,594 60,970 61,217 61,465 61,714 61,964 62,217 63,343 64,104 64,582 Isabela 44,532 44,913 45,297 45,685 46,076 46,470 46,796 47,124 47,455 47,788 48,124 49,097 49,866 50,188 Jayuya 17,345 17,474 17,604 17,735 17,867 18,002 18,116 18,230 18,345 18,461 18,578 19,180 19,710 20,106 Juana Díaz 50,630 51,058 51,490 51,926 52,365 52,809 53,176 53,546 53,918 54,293 54,670 56,436 57,964 59,149 Juncos 36,558 37,017 37,482 37,953 38,430 38,912 39,327 39,747 40,171 40,600 41,034 42,412 43,634 44,420 Lajas 26,304 26,498 26,694 26,891 27,089 27,289 27,442 27,596 27,751 27,907 28,064 28,410 28,615 28,609 Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects B-1-1

120 Appendix B-1 Solid Waste Generation and Recycling Municipio Lares 34,496 34,851 35,209 35,571 35,937 36,307 36,632 36,960 37,291 37,625 37,961 38,996 39,859 40,287 Las Marías 11,093 11,231 11,370 11,511 11,654 11,798 11,928 12,059 12,191 12,325 12,460 12,887 13,240 13,448 Las Piedras 34,600 35,090 35,587 36,091 36,602 37,121 37,576 38,037 38,504 38,976 39,454 40,827 41,949 42,520 Loíza 32,617 32,953 33,293 33,636 33,983 34,334 34,641 34,951 35,263 35,578 35,896 37,467 38,870 40,048 Luquillo 19,847 19,970 20,094 20,219 20,345 20,472 20,563 20,654 20,746 20,838 20,930 21,319 21,623 21,824 Manatí 45,519 45,969 46,424 46,883 47,347 47,815 48,206 48,601 48,999 49,400 49,804 51,028 51,987 52,447 Maricao 6,453 6,487 6,521 6,555 6,589 6,624 6,652 6,680 6,708 6,736 6,764 6,961 7,111 7,251 Maunabo 12,751 12,808 12,865 12,922 12,980 13,038 13,086 13,134 13,182 13,231 13,280 13,592 13,822 13,986 Mayagüez 98,393 98,552 98,711 98,871 99,031 99,191 98,995 98,799 98,604 98,409 98,215 98,513 98,281 98,454 Moca 39,820 40,333 40,852 41,378 41,911 42,451 42,915 43,384 43,858 44,338 44,823 46,376 47,727 48,586 Morovis 30,039 30,367 30,699 31,035 31,374 31,717 32,023 32,332 32,644 32,959 33,276 34,655 35,910 36,879 Naguabo 23,783 23,911 24,040 24,170 24,300 24,431 24,524 24,618 24,712 24,807 24,902 25,370 25,703 25,944 Naranjito 29,739 29,895 30,052 30,210 30,369 30,529 30,649 30,769 30,890 31,011 31,133 31,984 32,678 33,251 Orocovis 23,881 24,053 24,226 24,400 24,575 24,752 24,911 25,071 25,232 25,394 25,559 26,402 27,146 27,726 Patillas 20,160 20,216 20,272 20,328 20,384 20,441 20,471 20,501 20,531 20,561 20,590 20,887 21,066 21,197 Peñuelas 26,794 27,115 27,440 27,769 28,102 28,439 28,746 29,056 29,369 29,686 30,006 31,249 32,338 33,099 Ponce 186, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,172 Quebradillas 25,519 25,809 26,103 26,400 26,700 27,004 27,269 27,536 27,806 28,079 28,354 29,205 29,895 30,257 Rincón 14,799 14,945 15,092 15,241 15,391 15,542 15,665 15,789 15,914 16,040 16,167 16,382 16,507 16,423 Río Grande 52,477 52,974 53,476 53,983 54,495 55,011 55,422 55,836 56,253 56,673 57,098 58,538 59,680 60,328 Sabana Grande 25,982 26,184 26,388 26,593 26,800 27,009 27,173 27,338 27,504 27,671 27,840 28,357 28,769 28,979 Salinas 31,161 31,371 31,582 31,795 32,009 32,224 32,393 32,563 32,734 32,905 33,077 33,941 34,688 35,268 San Germán 37,137 37,298 37,460 37,623 37,787 37,951 38,051 38,151 38,252 38,353 38,454 38,800 38,955 38,951 San Juan 434, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,778 San Lorenzo 41,098 41,540 41,987 42,439 42,896 43,357 43,754 44,155 44,559 44,967 45,378 46,707 47,833 48,497 San Sebastián 44,287 44,638 44,992 45,348 45,707 46,069 46,352 46,637 46,924 47,213 47,504 48,231 48,750 48,864 Santa Isabel 21,704 21,879 22,055 22,232 22,411 22,591 22,739 22,888 23,038 23,189 23,342 24,051 24,677 25,168 Toa Alta 64,261 65,662 67,094 68,557 70,052 71,580 72,989 74,426 75,891 77,385 78,908 83,069 86,996 89,125 Toa Baja 94,212 94,761 95,313 95,868 96,427 96,989 97,351 97,715 98,080 98,447 98, , , ,026 Trujillo Alto 75,970 76,993 78,030 79,081 80,146 81,224 82,148 83,082 84,027 84,982 85,948 88,726 91,101 92,351 Utuado 35,348 35,426 35,505 35,584 35,663 35,742 35,770 35,798 35,826 35,854 35,882 36,416 36,795 37,140 Vega Alta 37,981 38,290 38,602 38,916 39,233 39,552 39,802 40,053 40,306 40,560 40,816 41,942 42,841 43,525 Vega Baja 62,032 62,476 62,923 63,374 63,828 64,285 64,636 64,989 65,344 65,701 66,058 67,634 68,892 69,754 Vieques 9,107 9,120 9,133 9,146 9,159 9,173 9,175 9,177 9,179 9,181 9,183 9,185 9,145 9,063 Villalba 27,981 28,276 28,574 28,876 29,181 29,489 29,757 30,027 30,300 30,575 30,852 32,001 33,020 33,774 Yabucoa 39,313 39,595 39,879 40,165 40,453 40,743 40,965 41,188 41,412 41,638 41,865 42,968 43,893 44,647 Yauco 46,458 46,781 47,107 47,435 47,765 48,097 48,351 48,606 48,862 49,120 49,378 50,376 51,131 51,579 Puerto Rico 3,814,004 3,838,318 3,862,861 3,887,634 3,912,634 3,937,869 3,956,003 3,974,292 3,992,749 4,011,368 4,030,152 4,110,528 4,172,242 4,214,387 Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects B-1-2

121 Appendix C-1: Base Case Scenario Model Puerto Rico Solid Waste Management Authority Solid Waste Processing Capacity Model Scenario 1 Base Case Assumed generation rate = 5.56 lbs/person/day East WTE online year 7 North WTE online year 6 Year # Year Consolidation to 8 landfills Generation High diversion rate Projected population 3,905,116 3,929,885 3,956,003 3,974,292 3,992,749 4,011,368 4,030,152 4,045,869 4,061,648 4,077,488 4,093,391 4,110,528 4,122,859 4,135,228 4,147,633 4,160,076 4,172,242 4,180,586 4,188,947 4,197,325 4,205,720 4,214,387 4,222,559 4,231,005 4,239,467 4,247,945 4,256,441 Generation rate/person entering landfills (lbs/pers*day) Annual generated waste in Tons 3,962,521 3,987,654 4,014,156 4,032,714 4,051,442 4,070,335 4,089,395 4,105,343 4,121,354 4,137,427 4,153,564 4,170,953 4,183,465 4,196,016 4,208,603 4,221,229 4,233,574 4,242,041 4,250,525 4,259,026 4,267,544 4,276,338 4,284,631 4,293,201 4,301,787 4,310,390 4,319,011 Waste diversion Waste Diversion Rate (The reported ADS diversion rate from the "Tasa Reciclaje Informe Final 2004 y 2005" does not include C&D in the waste stream. To calculate the percentage, the amount of waste diverted reported by the ADS was divided by the amount of waste generated on this model.) 13.11% 11.56% 15.3% 17% 19% 21% 23% 25% 27% 29% 31% 33% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% Total waste diversion volume w/o C&D in Tons 329, , , , , , ,561 1,026,336 1,112,766 1,199,854 1,287,605 1,376,414 1,464,213 1,468,606 1,473,011 1,477,430 1,481,751 1,484,714 1,487,684 1,490,659 1,493,640 1,496,718 1,499,621 1,502,620 1,505,626 1,508,636 1,511,654 C&D Waste before entering WTE , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,610 Total volume reduced by waste diversion efforts in Tons 329, , , , , , ,561 1,026,336 1,182,621 1,360,689 1,444,519 1,542,577 1,625,899 1,630,777 1,635,669 1,640,576 1,645,374 1,648,664 1,653,620 1,656,927 1,660,241 1,663,662 1,666,888 1,670,222 1,673,563 1,676,910 1,680,264 Volume requiring disposal at landfill or WTE facilities in tons 3,633,100 3,646,198 3,399,589 3,347,153 3,281,668 3,215,565 3,148,834 3,079,007 2,938,733 2,776,738 2,709,045 2,628,376 2,557,566 2,565,239 2,572,934 2,580,653 2,588,200 2,593,376 2,596,905 2,602,099 2,607,303 2,612,676 2,617,742 2,622,978 2,628,224 2,633,480 2,638,747 Annual waste diversion volume growth rate 0.36% -6.76% -1.54% -1.96% -2.01% -2.08% -2.22% -4.56% -5.51% -2.44% -2.98% -2.69% 0.30% 0.30% 0.30% 0.29% 0.20% 0.14% 0.20% 0.20% 0.21% 0.19% 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% Waste to Energy Diversion North WTE Facility 1. Annual Capacity at new technology facility in Tons (1,560 tpd at 85% capability) , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Actual Annual Disposal Rate at North WTE new technology facility in Tons , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Ash produced from WTE facility (25% by weight)- Transferred to Humacao Landfill , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Available Capacity at North WTE (1-2) ,102 57,753 60,131 15,917 14,513 13,105 11,692 10,311 9,363 8,718 7,767 6,815 5,831 4,904 3,946 2,986 2,024 1,060 West WTE Facility 1. Annual Capacity at new technology facility in Tons (1,350 tpd at 85% capability) , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Actual Annual Disposal Rate at West WTE new technology facility in Tons , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Ash produced from WTE facility (25% by weight)- Transferred to Penuelas New Landfill , , ,441 99,390 96,713 97,003 97,294 97,586 97,871 98, , , , , , , , , , Available Capacity at West WTE (1-2) ,182 (1,164) 9,075 21,276 31,987 30,826 29,662 28,495 27,353 26,570 17,489 16,687 15,882 15,052 14,269 13,460 12,649 11,837 11,023 Net volume requiring disposal at landfill facilities in tons 3,633,100 3,646,198 3,399,589 3,347,153 3,281,668 3,215,565 3,148,834 3,079,007 2,684,742 2,121,586 2,069,865 2,000,493 1,904,875 1,910,589 1,916,321 1,922,070 1,927,691 1,931,546 1,927,764 1,931,619 1,935,483 1,939,471 1,943,232 1,947,119 1,951,013 1,954,915 1,958,825 Assumptions Landfill Disposal Closure in Aguadilla Move to Cabo Rojo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 48,335 48,509 45, West WTE Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 145,451 96,942 51, Volume transffered from others Growth of volume of Aguadilla 44,531 43,660 42,780 41,892 40,963 39,097 36,942 36,041 34,968 34,026 34,128 34,230 34,333 34,434 34,502 34,549 34,618 34,688 34,759 34,827 34,896 34,966 35,036 35,106 C&D Waste Recovered before entering WTE (17.1%) 7,615 7,466 7,315 7,164 7,005 6,686 6,317 6,163 5,980 5,818 5,836 5,853 5,871 5,888 5,900 5,908 5,920 5,932 5,944 5,955 5,967 5,979 5,991 6,003 Volume transferred to WTE 36,916 36,194 35,465 34,729 33,959 32,411 30,625 29,878 28,989 28,208 28,292 28,377 28,462 28,545 28,603 28,641 28,699 28,756 28,815 28,871 28,929 28,987 29,045 29,103 Closure in Anasco Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 38,926 39,066 36,424 35,862 35,161 34,452 33, West WTE Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 260, , , , ,911 79,459 45, Volume transffered from others Growth of volume of Anasco 32,989 31,486 29,751 29,025 28,161 27,402 27,485 27,567 27,650 27,731 27,786 27,824 27,880 27,935 27,993 28,047 28,103 28,159 28,216 28,272 C&D Waste Recovered before entering WTE (17.1%) 5,641 5,384 5,087 4,963 4,816 4,686 4,700 4,714 4,728 4,742 4,751 4,758 4,767 4,777 4,787 4,796 4,806 4,815 4,825 4,835 Volume transferred to WTE 27,348 26,102 24,663 24,062 23,346 22,717 22,785 22,853 22,922 22,989 23,035 23,066 23,112 23,158 23,206 23,251 23,298 23,344 23,391 23,438 Closure in Arecibo WTE Annual disposal Move to North rate in Tons / yr 310, , , , , , , , West WTE Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 2,508,443 2,196,392 1,905,447 1,581,059 1,263, , , , Volume transffered from others , Vega Baja Transferred to North WTE 20,077 Growth of volume of Arecibo 284, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,654 C&D Waste Recovered before entering WTE (17.1%) 48,702 42,584 41,546 40,309 39,223 39,340 39,458 39,577 39,693 39,772 39,826 39,906 39,986 40,068 40,146 40,226 40,306 40,387 40,468 Volume transferred to West WTE 236, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,186 Closure in Arroyo Move to Salinas Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 34,150 34,273 31,955 31,462 30, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 171, , ,221 73,759 42, Volume transffered from others Closure in Barranquitas Move to Ponce Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 22,353 22,433 20,916 20, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 89,302 66,869 45,953 25, Volume transffered from others Closure in Cabo Rojo Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 48,622 48,797 45,496 89,325 87,578 85,814 84,033 82,169 39,329 37, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 659, , , , , , , ,132 96,803 59, Volume transffered from others , Capacity added through expansion - Volume transferred to WTE 39,097 Closure in Carolina Move to East WTE Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 112, , , , ,642 99,595 97,528 95,365 91,020 86,003 83, North WTE Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 725, , , , , , , , , ,040 81, Volume transffered from others C-1-1

122 Appendix C-1: Base Case Scenario Model Puerto Rico Solid Waste Management Authority Year # Year ,232 Volume added by expansion w/in property limits Growth of volume of Carolina 81,408 79,215 79,452 79,691 79,930 80,164 80,324 80,433 80,594 80,755 80,922 81,079 81,241 81,403 81,566 81,729 C&D Waste Recovered before entering WTE (17.1%) 13,921 13,546 13,586 13,627 13,668 13,708 13,735 13,754 13,782 13,809 13,838 13,864 13,892 13,920 13,948 13,976 Volume transferred to WTE 67,487 65,669 65,866 66,064 66,262 66,456 66,588 66,679 66,812 66,946 67,084 67,214 67,349 67,483 67,618 67,753 Closure in Cayey Move to Ponce Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 37,827 37,964 35,396 34,850 34,168 33, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 208, , , ,491 66,323 32, Volume transffered from others Closure in Culebra Move to Fajardo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 4,251 4,266 3,978 3, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 14,035 9,769 5,791 1, Volume transffered from others Expansion in Fajardo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 195, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,023 Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 2,162,040 1,965,750 1,782,736 1,514,540 1,247, , , , ,123 4,088,391 3,939,382 3,794,811 3,654,134 3,513,035 3,371,513 3,229,567 3,087,205 2,944,559 2,801,718 2,658,592 2,515,179 2,371,471 2,227,485 2,083,210 1,929,802 1,776,086 1,622,064 Volume transffered from others 0 89,384 3, , Capacity added through expansion 4,000,000 Growth of volume transferred from Guaynabo 95,524 95,868 89,384 88,005 86,284 84,546 82,791 80,955 77,267 73,008 71,228 69,107 67,245 67,447 67,649 67,852 68,051 68,187 68,279 68,416 68,553 68,694 68,827 68,965 69,103 69,241 69,380 C&D Waste Recovered before entering WTE (17.1%) 15,049 14,755 14,457 14,157 13,843 13,213 12,484 12,180 11,817 11,499 11,533 11,568 11,603 11,637 11,660 11,676 11,699 11,723 11,747 11,769 11,793 11,817 11,840 11,864 Volume transferred to WTE 72,956 71,529 70,088 68,634 67,112 64,054 60,523 59,048 57,290 55,746 55,913 56,081 56,249 56,414 56,527 56,604 56,717 56,830 56,947 57,058 57,172 57,286 57,401 57,516 Closure in Florida Move to Arecibo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 14,902 14,955 13, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 249, , , Volume transffered from others Closure in Guayama Move to Salinas Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 17,099 17,160 16,000 15,753 15,445 15,134 14, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 111,623 94,463 78,463 62,710 47,265 32,131 17, Volume transffered from others Closure in Guaynabo Move to Fajardo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 95,524 95,868 89, North WTE Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 286, , , Volume transffered from others Closure in Hormigueros Move to West WTE Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 14,424 14,476 13,497 13,289 13,029 12,766 12,501 12,224 11,667 11,024 10,755 10,435 10,154 10,184 10,215 10,246 10,276 10, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 213, , , , , , , , ,242 99,218 88,462 78,027 67,873 57,689 47,474 37,228 26,952 16, Volume transffered from others Growth of volume of Hormigueros 10,310 10,331 10,351 10,373 10,393 10,414 10,435 10,455 10,476 C&D Waste Recovered before entering WTE (17.1%) 1,763 1,767 1,770 1,774 1,777 1,781 1,784 1,788 1,791 Volume transferred to WTE 8,547 8,564 8,581 8,599 8,616 8,633 8,650 8,668 8,685 Expansion in Humacao Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 659, , ,750 1,163,871 1,141,101 1,118,115 1,094,912 1,070,632 1,021, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,433 Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 10,074,141 9,412,651 8,795,901 7,632,030 6,490,929 5,372,814 4,277,902 3,207,270 17,185,414 16,470,386 15,772,790 15,093,387 14,418,380 13,741,348 13,062,285 12,381,185 11,698,092 11,013,634 10,328,245 9,641,484 8,953,350 8,263,798 7,572,909 6,880,638 6,186,982 5,491,940 4,795,507 Volume transffered from others - 565, Ash from North WTE 109, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,733 Volume added by expansion 10,043, ,000, Growth of volume transferred from Toa Baja 429, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,208 Growth of volume transferred from Toa Alta 137, , , , , , , , , , ,817 99,756 97,068 97,360 97,652 97,945 98,231 98,427 98,561 98,758 98,956 99,160 99,352 99,551 99,750 99, , C&D Waste Recovered before entering WTE (17.1%) 74,201 72,392 70,236 68,344 68,549 68,754 68,961 69,162 69,301 69,395 69,534 69,673 69,816 69,952 70,092 70,232 70,372 70,513 Volume transferred to WTE - 359, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,844 Closure in Isabela Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 21,732 21,810 20,335 20,021 19,630 19,234 18,835 18,417 17,578 16,609 16,204 15,722 15,298 15,344 15,390 15,436 15,481 15,512 15,534 15,565 15,596 15,628 15,658 15,690 15,721 15,752 15,784 Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 86,223 64,413 44,078 24, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,003 Volume transffered from others Capacity added through expansion 656,565 Closure in Jayuya Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 15,045 15,099 14,078 13,861 13,590 13,316 13,040 12,750 12,170 11,499 11,218 10,884 10,591 10,623 10,655 10,687 10,718 10,739 10,754 10,776 10, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 251, , , , , , , , , , , ,746 99,155 88,532 77,878 67,191 56,473 45,734 34,980 24,204 13, Volume transffered from others Closure in Juana Diaz Move to Yauco Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 72,932 73,195 68,245 67,192 65,878 64,551 63,211 61,809 58,993 55,741 54,382 52,763 51,342 51,496 51,650 51,805 51,957 52,060 52,131 52,236 52,340 52, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 1,246,272 1,173,077 1,104,832 1,037, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,635 93,295 40, Volume transffered from others Closure in Juncos Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 205, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,027 Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 1,030, , , , ,836 6,275,360 6,097,524 5,923,633 5,757,663 5,600,843 5,447,845 5,299,404 5,154,961 5,010,086 4,864,775 4,719,029 4,572,856 4,426,391 4,279,727 4,132,770 3,985,518 3,837,964 3,690,123 3,541,986 3,393,553 3,244,823 3,095,796 Volume transffered from others Capacity added through expansion 6,199,128 Closure in Lajas Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 51,583 51,769 48,267 47,523 46,593 45,655 44,707 43,716 41,724 39,424 38,463 37,318 36,312 36, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 178, ,544 78, , , , , , , , , ,898 79,586 43, Volume transffered from others Volume added by expansion w/in property limits 422,744 Closure in Mayaguez Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 65,673 65,909 61,452 60,504 59,320 58,125 56, West WTE Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 428, , , , , ,461 66, Volume transffered from others Growth of volume of Mayaguez 55,657 53,121 50,193 48,969 47,511 46,231 46,370 46,509 46,648 46,785 46,878 46,942 47,036 47,130 47,227 47,319 47,413 47,508 47,603 47,698 C&D Waste Recovered before entering WTE (17.1%) 9,517 9,084 8,583 8,374 8,124 7,906 7,929 7,953 7,977 8,000 8,016 8,027 8,043 8,059 8,076 8,092 8,108 8,124 8,140 8,156 Volume transferred to WTE 46,139 44,037 41,610 40,595 39,387 38,325 38,440 38,556 38,671 38,785 38,862 38,915 38,993 39,071 39,151 39,227 39,306 39,384 39,463 39,542 Closure in Moca Move to North WTE Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 184, , , , , , , , , West WTE Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 1,479,856 1,295,070 1,122, , , , , , , Volume transffered from others Growth of volume of Moca 140, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,729 C&D Waste Recovered before entering WTE (17.1%) 24,064 23,477 22,778 22,164 22,231 22,297 22,364 22,430 22,474 22,505 22,550 22,595 22,642 22,686 22,731 22,776 22,822 22,868 C-1-2

123 Appendix C-1: Base Case Scenario Model Puerto Rico Solid Waste Management Authority Year # Year Volume transferred to North WTE 116, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,861 Closure in Penuelas Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 143, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 2,485,923 2,342,121 2,208,045 2,076,037 1,946,611 1,819,793 1,695,606 1,574,174 1,458,273 1,348,762 1,241,920 1,138,260 1,037, , , , , , , , , , Volume transffered from others Volume transferred to North WTE - - Expansion in Closure in Ponce Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 316, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,277 Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 3,831,018 3,513,695 3,217,833 2,913,951 2,595,823 2,284,104 1,946,068 1,615,528 1,300,047 1,001, ,133 8,428,970 8,154,408 7,879,023 7,602,811 7,325,771 7,047,921 6,769,515 6,490,730 6,211,387 5,931,486 5,651,008 5,369,987 5,088,403 4,806,256 4,523,544 4,240,268 Volume transffered from others - 12,782 20,593 33, Capacity added through expansion 8,000, Salinas Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 131, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,619 Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 395, , ,526 3,258,275 3,139,635 2,993,160 2,849,724 2,694,978 2,547,283 2,407,728 2,271,576 2,139,479 2,010,940 1,882,015 1,752,704 1,623,004 1,492,926 1,362,587 1,232,071 1,101, , , , , , , ,493 Volume transffered from others ,846-14, Capacity added through expansion w/in property limits 3,238,756 Closure in Santa Isabel Move to Ponce Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 13,660 13,709 12, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 120, ,705 93, Volume transffered from others Closure in Toa Alta Move to Humacao Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 137, , , North WTE Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 358, ,223 91, Volume transffered from others Closure in Toa Baja Move to Humacao Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 429, , , North WTE Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons , , Volume transffered from others Closure in Vega Baja Move to Arecibo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 26,269 26,364 24, North WTE Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 79,050 52,686 28, Volume transffered from others Growth of volume of Vega Baja 24,201 23,728 23,250 22,768 22,263 21,248 20,077 19,588 19,004 18,492 18,548 18,604 18,659 18,714 18,751 18,777 18,814 18,852 18,891 18,928 18,965 19,003 19,041 19,079 C&D Waste Recovered before entering WTE (17.1%) 4,138 4,057 3,976 3,893 3,807 3,633 3,433 3,349 3,250 3,162 3,172 3,181 3,191 3,200 3,206 3,211 3,217 3,224 3,230 3,237 3,243 3,250 3,256 3,263 Volume transferred to North WTE 20,063 19,671 19,274 18,874 18,456 17,615 16,644 16,238 15,755 15,330 15,376 15,422 15,469 15,514 15,545 15,566 15,597 15,628 15,661 15,691 15,722 15,754 15,785 15,817 Closure in Vieques Move to Fajardo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 12,227 12,271 11,441 11,265 11,044 10,822 10,597 10,362 9,890 9,345 9,117 8,846 8,607 8,633 8,659 8,685 8,710 8,728 8,740 8,757 8,775 8,793 8,810 8, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 232, , , , , , , , , , , , ,607 99,974 91,315 82,630 73,919 65,191 56,452 47,694 38,920 30,127 21,317 12, Volume transffered from others Closure in Yabucoa Move to Humacao Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 36,442 36,574 34, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons ,089 38, Volume transffered from others Expansion in New Capacity Yauco Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 115, , , , , ,877 99,763 97,551 93,107 87,974 85,830 83,274 81,030 81,273 81,517 81,762 82,001 82,165 82,277 82,441 82,606 82, , , , , ,574 Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 601, , , , ,793 3,543,545 3,443,782 3,346,231 3,253,124 3,165,150 3,079,321 2,996,047 2,915,016 2,833,743 2,752,226 2,670,464 2,588,463 2,506,298 2,424,022 2,341,580 2,258,974 2,176,198 2,040,711 1,904,954 1,768,925 1,632,624 1,496,050 Volume transffered from others , Capacity added through expansion - 3,477, Volume transferred to WTE Penuelas - New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr ,646 84, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,729 Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons ,452,380 23,367,716 23,262,716 23,124,020 22,989,454 22,858,514 22,727,181 22,558,923 22,390,160 22,220,904 22,051,310 21,879,348 21,707,042 21,534,391 21,350,565 21,063,142 20,775,144 20,486,570 20,197,419 19,907,689 Volume transffered from others ,656 37, ,421-10, ,041 - Volume transferred to WTE 84, Ash from West WTE 84, , ,441 99,390 96,713 97,003 97,294 97,586 97,871 98, , , , , , , , , ,954 Total annual disposal rate 3,633,100 3,646,198 3,399,589 3,347,153 3,281,668 3,215,565 3,148,834 3,079,007 2,684,742 2,121,586 2,069,865 1,929,400 1,904,875 1,910,589 1,916,321 1,922,070 1,927,691 1,931,546 1,927,764 1,931,619 1,935,483 1,939,471 1,943,232 1,947,119 1,951,013 1,954,915 1,958,825 Net volume requiring disposal at landfill facilities in tons 3,633,100 3,646,198 3,399,589 3,347,153 3,281,668 3,215,565 3,148,834 3,079,007 2,684,742 2,121,586 2,069,865 2,000,493 1,904,875 1,910,589 1,916,321 1,922,070 1,927,691 1,931,546 1,927,764 1,931,619 1,935,483 1,939,471 1,943,232 1,947,119 1,951,013 1,954,915 1,958,825 Difference in annual tons , Total volume capacity in Tons 32,088,125 28,441,927 25,042,338 24,270,919 21,618,580 28,036,861 25,187,416 45,519,858 57,557,157 59,366,313 57,324,679 63,399,401 61,591,031 59,777,236 57,914,835 56,090,141 54,260,110 52,426,420 50,581,752 48,750,084 46,914,753 45,062,232 43,061,005 41,214,640 39,352,093 37,498,335 35,640,870 Total useful life for all facilities in years C-1-3

124 Appendix C-2: Backup Scenario Model Puerto Rico Solid Waste Management Authority Solid Waste Processing Capacity Model Scenario 2 Back-up Case Assumed generation rate = 5.56 lbs/person/day Moderate Diversion Year # Year Consolidation to 8 landfills Generation Projected population 3,905,116 3,929,885 3,956,003 3,974,292 3,992,749 4,011,368 4,030,152 4,045,869 4,061,648 4,077,488 4,093,391 4,110,528 4,122,859 4,135,228 4,147,633 4,160,076 4,172,242 4,180,586 4,188,947 4,197,325 4,205,720 4,214,387 4,222,559 4,231,005 4,239,467 4,247,945 4,256,441 x Generation rate/person entering landfills (lbs/pers*day) Annual generated waste in Tons 3,962,521 3,987,654 4,014,156 4,032,714 4,051,442 4,070,335 4,089,395 4,105,343 4,121,354 4,137,427 4,153,564 4,170,953 4,183,465 4,196,016 4,208,603 4,221,229 4,233,574 4,242,041 4,250,525 4,259,026 4,267,544 4,276,338 4,284,631 4,293,201 4,301,787 4,310,390 4,319,011 x Waste diversion xx Waste Diversion Rate (The reported ADS diversion rate from the "Tasa Reciclaje Informe Final 2004 y 2005" does not include C&D in the waste stream. To calculate the percentage, the amount of waste diverted reported by the ADS was divided by the amount of waste generated on this model.) 13.11% 11.56% 15.3% 16.00% 17.00% 18.00% 19.00% 20.00% 21.00% 22.00% 23.00% 24.00% 25.00% 26.00% 27.00% 28.00% 29.00% 30.00% 31.00% 32.00% 33.00% 34.00% 35.00% 35.00% 35.00% 35.00% 35.00% x Total waste diversion volume in Tons 329, , , , , , , , , , ,320 1,001,029 1,045,866 1,090,964 1,136,323 1,181,944 1,227,736 1,272,612 1,317,663 1,362,888 1,408,290 1,453,955 1,499,621 1,502,620 1,505,626 1,508,636 1,511,654 x Total volume reduced by waste diversion efforts in Tons 329, , , , , , , , , , ,320 1,001,029 1,045,866 1,090,964 1,136,323 1,181,944 1,227,736 1,272,612 1,317,663 1,362,888 1,408,290 1,453,955 1,499,621 1,502,620 1,505,626 1,508,636 1,511,654 x x Volume requiring disposal at landfill in tons 3,633,100 3,646,198 3,399,589 3,387,480 3,362,697 3,337,675 3,312,410 3,284,275 3,255,870 3,227,193 3,198,244 3,169,924 3,137,599 3,105,052 3,072,280 3,039,285 3,005,838 2,969,428 2,932,862 2,896,137 2,859,255 2,822,383 2,785,010 2,790,581 2,796,162 2,801,753 2,807,357 x Annual waste diversion volume growth rate 0.36% -6.76% -0.36% -0.73% -0.74% -0.76% -0.85% -0.86% -0.88% -0.90% -0.89% -1.02% -1.04% -1.06% -1.07% -1.10% -1.21% -1.23% -1.25% -1.27% -1.29% -1.32% 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% x Assumptions Landfill Disposal x Closure in Aguadilla Move to Cabo Rojo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 48,335 48,509 45, Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 145,451 96,942 51, Volume transffered from others Closure in Anasco xx Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 38,926 39,066 36,424 36,294 36,029 35,761 35, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 260, , , , ,611 76,850 41, x Volume transffered from others x x Closure in Arecibo x Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 310, , , , , , Remaining actual useful life in yrs Volume available in Tons 2,508,443 2,196,392 1,905,447 1,448, , , Volume transffered from others , x Closure in Arroyo x Move to Salinas Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 34,150 34,273 31,955 31,841 31, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 171, , ,221 73,380 41, x Volume transffered from others x x Closure in Barranquitas x Move to Ponce Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 22,353 22,433 20,916 20, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 89,302 66,869 45,953 25, x Volume transffered from others x Expansion in Cabo Rojo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 48,622 48,797 45,496 90,402 89,740 89,073 88,398 87,647 86,889 86,124 85,352 84,596 83,733 82,865 81,990 81,109 80,217 79,245 78,269 77,289 76,305 75,321 74,324 74,472 74,621 74,770 74,920 x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 659, , , , , , , ,791 1,532,902 1,446,778 1,361,426 1,276,831 1,193,098 1,110,233 1,028, , , , , , , , , , , , ,380 x Volume transffered from others , x Capacity added through expansion 1,500,000 x Closure in Carolina x Move to Fajardo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 112, , , , , , , , ,843 99, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 725, , , , , , , , , , x Volume transffered from others x Volume added by expansion w/in property limits - 332,232 Closure in Cayey x Move to Ponce Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 37,827 37,964 35,396 35,270 35,012 34, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 208, , , ,071 65,059 30, x Volume transffered from others x x Closure in Culebra x Move to Fajardo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 4,251 4,266 3,978 3, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 14,035 9,769 5,791 1, x Volume transffered from others x x Expansion in Fajardo x Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 195, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,816 x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 2,162,040 1,965,750 1,782,736 1,600,374 1,415,412 1,231,826 1,049, , , ,386 6,137,411 5,864,871 5,595,110 5,328,147 5,064,003 4,802,694 4,544,262 4,288,960 4,036,802 3,787,801 3,541,971 3,299,312 3,050,493 2,801,176 2,551,360 2,301,045 2,050,230 x Volume transffered from others 0 3, , , x Capacity added through expansion 5,900,000 x Closure in Florida x Move to Arecibo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 14,902 14,955 13, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 249, , , x Volume transffered from others x x Closure in Guayama x Move to Salinas Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 17,099 17,160 16,000 15,943 15,826 15,708 15, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 111,623 94,463 78,463 62,520 46,694 30,986 15, x Volume transffered from others x x Closure in Guaynabo x Move to Humacao Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 95,524 95,868 89, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 286, , , x Volume transffered from others x x Closure in Hormigueros x Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 14,424 14,476 13,497 13,449 13,351 13,251 13,151 13,039 12,926 12,813 12,698 12,585 12,457 12,328 12,198 12,067 11, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 213, , , , , , , , ,552 93,739 81,042 68,456 56,000 43,672 31,475 19,408 7, x Volume transffered from others x x Expansion in Humacao x Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 659, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,280 x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 10,074,141 9,412,651 8,795,901 8,058,304 7,326,103 6,599,350 5,878,098 5,162,973 4,454,032 3,751,336 3,054,943 2,364,717 1,681,529 20,005,428 19,336,463 18,674,682 18,020,184 17,373,614 16,735,006 16,104,395 15,481,814 14,867,262 14,260,848 13,653,220 13,044,378 12,434,318 11,823,037 x Volume transffered from others - 123, x C-2-1

125 Appendix C-2: Backup Scenario Model Puerto Rico Solid Waste Management Authority Year # Year Volume added by expansion w/in property limits 10,043, ,000, x Expansion in Isabela x Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 21,732 21,810 20,335 20,262 20,114 19,965 19,813 19,645 19,475 19,304 19,131 18,961 18,768 18,573 18,377 18,180 17,980 17,762 17,543 17,323 17,103 16,882 16,659 16,692 16,725 16,759 16,792 x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 86,223 64,413 44,078 23, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,855 x Volume transffered from others x Capacity added through expansion 656,565 x Closure in Jayuya x Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 15,045 15,099 14,078 14,028 13,925 13,822 13,717 13,600 13,483 13,364 13,244 13,127 12,993 12,858 12,723 12,586 12,447 12,297 12, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 251, , , , , , , , , , ,891 99,764 86,771 73,912 61,190 48,604 36,156 23,860 11, x Volume transffered from others x Volume added by expansion w/in property limits 251,251 x Closure in Juana Diaz x Move to Yauco Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 72,932 73,195 68,245 68,002 67,504 67,002 66,495 65,930 65,360 64,784 64,203 63,634 62,985 62,332 61,674 61,012 60,340 59,610 58, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 1,246,272 1,173,077 1,104,832 1,036, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,965 85, x Volume transffered from others x x Expansion in Juncos x Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 205, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,550 x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 1,030, , , , ,982 6,261,610 6,074,536 5,889,052 5,705,172 5,522,911 5,342,285 5,163,259 4,986,058 4,810,696 4,637,184 4,465,536 4,295,776 4,128,073 3,962,436 3,798,872 3,637,391 3,477,993 3,320,705 3,163,103 3,005,185 2,846,952 2,688,402 x Volume transffered from others x Capacity added through expansion 6,199,128 x Closure in Lajas x Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 51,583 51,769 48,267 48,095 47,744 47,388 47,030 46,630 46,227 45,820 45,409 45, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 178, ,544 78, , , , , , , , ,678 81, x Volume transffered from others x Volume added by expansion w/in property limits 422,744 x Closure in Mayaguez x Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 65,673 65,909 61,452 61,233 60,785 60,332 59, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 428, , , , , ,060 59, x Volume transffered from others x x Closure in Moca x Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 184, , , , , , , , , x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 1,479,856 1,295,070 1,122, , , , , , , x Volume transffered from others x x Closure in Penuelas x Move to Penuelas New Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 143, , , , , , x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 2,485,923 2,342,121 2,208,045 1,673,651 1,143, , x Volume transffered from others - 402, x Volume added by expansion w/in property limits - x Expansion in Ponce x Closure in 2033 Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 316, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,470 x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 3,831,018 3,513,695 3,217,833 2,910,290 2,584,307 2,260,750 1,905,154 1,552,578 1,203, ,603 7,513,263 7,172,963 6,836,133 6,502,797 6,172,980 5,846,704 5,524,019 5,205,243 4,890,392 4,579,484 4,272,535 3,969,545 3,670,566 3,370,990 3,070,814 2,629,227 2,186,757 x Volume transffered from others - 12,782 20,841 34, ,530 0 x Volume added by expansion w/in property limits 3,598,757 7,000, x Expansion in Salinas x Closure in 2029 Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 131, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , x Move to Ponce Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 395, , ,526 3,256,817 3,135,248 2,983,210 2,832,323 2,667,261 2,503,627 2,341,433 2,180,695 2,021,380 1,863,689 1,707,635 1,553,227 1,400,478 1,249,409 1,100, , , , , , , , x Volume transffered from others ,608-15, x Capacity added through expansion w/in property limits 3,238,756 x Closure in Santa Isabel x Move to Ponce Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 13,660 13,709 12, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 120, ,705 93, x Volume transffered from others x x Closure in Toa Alta x Move to Arecibo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 137, , , x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 358, ,223 91, x Volume transffered from others x x Closure in Toa Baja x Move to Penuelas Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 429, , , x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons , , x Volume transffered from others x Closure in Vega Baja x Move to Arecibo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 26,269 26,364 24, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 79,050 52,686 28, x Volume transffered from others x x Closure in Vieques x Move to Fajardo Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 12,227 12,271 11,441 11,400 11,317 11,233 11,148 11,053 10,957 10,861 10,764 10,668 10,559 10,450 10,340 10,229 10,116 9,993 9,870 9,747 9,623 9, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 232, , , , , , , , , , , ,101 98,542 88,092 77,752 67,524 57,408 47,414 37,544 27,797 18,175 8, x Volume transffered from others x x Closure in Yabucoa x Move to Humacao Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 36,442 36,574 34, x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons ,089 38, x Volume transffered from others x x Expansion in Yauco x Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr 115, , , , , , , , , , , ,431 99,407 98,376 97,338 96,292 95,233 94,079 92, , , , , , , , ,300 x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons 601, , , , ,948 3,535,832 3,430,886 3,326,832 3,223,677 3,121,432 3,020,103 2,919,671 2,820,264 2,721,888 2,624,550 2,528,258 2,433,025 2,338,946 2,246,025 2,096,130 1,948,143 1,802,065 1,657,921 1,513,489 1,368,768 1,223,758 1,078,458 x Volume transffered from others , x Capacity added through expansion - 3,477, x New Capacity Penuelas - New x Expansion in 2029 Annual disposal rate in Tons / yr ,289 1,055,612 1,046,482 1,200,816 1,190,044 1,179,507 1,212,026 1,199,454 1,186,794 1,174,049 1,161,128 1,158,853 1,144,582 1,142,243 1,127,697 1,113,155 1,098,414 1,100,611 1,102,813 1,105,018 1,107,228 x Remaining actual useful life in yrs x Volume available in Tons ,452,380 22,396,768 21,350,286 20,149,470 18,959,426 17,779,919 16,567,893 15,368,439 14,181,645 13,007,596 11,846,468 10,687,615 9,543,033 8,400,790 7,273,093 6,159,939 5,061,524 3,960,913 2,858,100 5,753,082 4,645,854 x Volume transffered from others ,682 95, , , ,934 12, x Capacity added through expansion 4,000,000 x x C-2-2

126 Appendix C-2: Backup Scenario Model Puerto Rico Solid Waste Management Authority Year # Year ,633,100 3,646,198 3,399,589 3,387,480 3,362,697 3,337,675 3,312,410 3,284,275 3,255,870 3,227,193 3,198,244 3,169,924 3,137,599 3,105,052 3,072,280 3,039,285 3,005,838 2,969,428 2,932,862 2,896,137 2,859,255 2,822,383 2,785,010 2,790,581 2,796,162 2,801,753 2,807,357 x Total annual disposal rate Net volume requiring disposal at landfill facilities in tons 3,633,100 3,646,198 3,399,589 3,387,480 3,362,697 3,337,675 3,312,410 3,284,275 3,255,870 3,227,193 3,198,244 3,169,924 3,137,599 3,105,052 3,072,280 3,039,285 3,005,838 2,969,428 2,932,862 2,896,137 2,859,255 2,822,383 2,785,010 2,790,581 2,796,162 2,801,753 2,807,357 Difference in annual tons x x Total volume capacity in Tons 25,042,338 24,230,592 21,497,520 27,794,831 48,044,466 44,644,250 42,888,380 39,548,965 49,128,419 45,958,495 42,739,225 58,634,173 55,561,893 52,522,608 49,516,770 46,539,868 43,607,006 40,614,064 37,754,809 34,932,426 32,138,740 29,348,160 26,551,998 27,649,329 24,841,972 x x Total useful life for all facilities in years x C-2-3

127 Appendix D-1 Base Case Infrastructure Maps BASE CASE 2010 Aguadilla Isabela Hatillo Quebradillas Arecibo Moca San Sebastian Añasco Mayagüez Cabo Rojo Hormigueros San German Lajas Las Marias Maricao Lares Yauco Guayanilla Utuado/ Adjuntas Peñuelas New Peñuelas Ponce Florida Jayuya Villalba Juana Diaz Vega Baja Morovis Santa Isabel Barranquitas San Toa Baja Cataño Juan Toa Alta Salinas Bayamón Comerío Cayey Guaynabo Cidra Guayama Arroyo Carolina Trujillo Alto Caguas Juncos Maunabo Humacao Yabucoa Fajardo Culebra Vieques LEYEND Closed Landfill Open Landfill Limited Landfill Expansion Existing Op. Mini Transfer Sta. Out of Service Mini Transfer Sta. Proposed New Mini Transfer Sta. Existing Op. Transfer Sta. Proposed New Transfer Station Transfer Station Under Construction Existing MRF Proposed New MRF Existing Composting Facility Proposed New Composting Facility Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document D-1-1

128 Appendix D-1 Base Case Infrastructure Maps BASE CASE 2015 Two thermal processing facilities in the Northwest and Northeast Regions Aguadilla Añasco Mayagüez Cabo Rojo Moca Isabela Hatillo Quebradillas Hormigueros San German Lajas San Sebastian Las Marias Maricao Lares Yauco Guayanilla Utuado/ Adjuntas Arecibo Peñuelas New Peñuelas Ponce Florida Jayuya Villalba Juana Diaz Vega Baja Morovis Santa Isabel Barranquitas Toa Baja Cataño Toa Alta Salinas Bayamón Comerío Cayey Guaynabo Cidra Guayama San Juan Arroyo Carolina Trujillo Alto Caguas Juncos Maunabo Humacao Yabucoa Fajardo Culebra Vieques LEYEND Closed Landfill Open Landfill Limited Landfill Expansion Existing Op. Mini Transfer Sta. Out of Service Mini Transfer Sta. Proposed New Mini Transfer Sta. Existing Op. Transfer Sta. Proposed New Transfer Station Transfer Station Under Construction Existing MRF Proposed New MRF Existing Composting Facility Proposed New Composting Facility Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document D-1-2

129 Appendix D-1 Base Case Infrastructure Maps BASE CASE 2020 Two thermal processing facilities in the Northwest and Northeast Regions Aguadilla Añasco Mayagüez Cabo Rojo Moca Isabela Hatillo Quebradillas Hormigueros San German Lajas San Sebastian Las Marias Maricao Lares Yauco Guayanilla Utuado/ Adjuntas Peñuelas New Arecibo Peñuelas Ponce Florida Jayuya Villalba Juana Diaz Vega Baja Morovis Santa Isabel Barranquitas San Toa Baja Cataño Juan Toa Alta Salinas Bayamón Comerío Cayey Guaynabo Cidra Guayama Arroyo Carolina Trujillo Alto Caguas Juncos Maunabo Humacao Yabucoa Fajardo Culebra Vieques LEYEND Closed Landfill Open Landfill Limited Landfill Expansion Existing Op. Mini Transfer Sta. Out of Service Mini Transfer Sta. Proposed New Mini Transfer Sta. Existing Op. Transfer Sta. Proposed New Transfer Station Transfer Station Under Construction Existing MRF Proposed New MRF Existing Composting Facility Proposed New Composting Facility Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document D-1-3

130 Appendix D-1 Base Case Infrastructure Maps BASE CASE 2025 Two thermal processing facilities in the Northwest and Northeast Regions Aguadilla Isabela Hatillo Quebradillas Arecibo Moca San Sebastian Añasco Mayagüez Cabo Rojo Hormigueros San German Lajas Las Marias Maricao Lares Yauco Guayanilla Utuado/ Adjuntas Peñuelas New Peñuelas Ponce Florida Jayuya Villalba Juana Diaz Vega Baja Morovis Santa Isabel Barranquitas San Toa Baja Cataño Juan Toa Alta Salinas Bayamón Comerío Cayey Guaynabo Cidra Guayama Arroyo Carolina Trujillo Alto Caguas Juncos Maunabo Humacao Yabucoa Fajardo Culebra Vieques LEYEND Closed Landfill Open Landfill Limited Landfill Expansion Existing Op. Mini Transfer Sta. Out of Service Mini Transfer Sta. Proposed New Mini Transfer Sta. Existing Op. Transfer Sta. Proposed New Transfer Station Transfer Station Under Construction Existing MRF Proposed New MRF Existing Composting Facility Proposed New Composting Facility Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document D-1-4

131 Appendix D-1 Base Case Infrastructure Maps BASE CASE 2030 Two thermal processing facilities in the Northwest and Northeast Regions Aguadilla Isabela Hatillo Quebradillas Arecibo Moca San Sebastian Añasco Mayagüez Cabo Rojo Hormigueros San German Lajas Las Marias Maricao Lares Yauco Guayanilla Utuado/ Adjuntas Peñuelas New Peñuelas Ponce Florida Jayuya Villalba Juana Diaz Vega Baja Morovis Santa Isabel Barranquitas San Toa Baja Cataño Juan Toa Alta Salinas Bayamón Comerío Cayey Guaynabo Cidra Guayama Arroyo Carolina Trujillo Alto Caguas Juncos Maunabo Humacao Yabucoa Fajardo Culebra Vieques LEYEND Closed Landfill Open Landfill Limited Landfill Expansion Existing Op. Mini Transfer Sta. Out of Service Mini Transfer Sta. Proposed New Mini Transfer Sta. Existing Op. Transfer Sta. Proposed New Transfer Station Transfer Station Under Construction Existing MRF Proposed New MRF Existing Composting Facility Proposed New Composting Facility Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document D-1-5

132 Appendix D-2 Backup Case Infrastructure Maps BACKUP CASE 2010 Aguadilla Isabela Hatillo Quebradillas Arecibo Moca San Sebastian Añasco Mayagüez Cabo Rojo Hormigueros San German Lajas Las Marias Maricao Lares Yauco Guayanilla Peñuelas New Peñuelas Ponce Florida Jayuya Villalba Juana Diaz Vega Baja Morovis Santa Isabel Barranquitas San Toa Baja Cataño Juan Toa Alta Salinas Bayamón Comerío Cayey Guaynabo Cidra Guayama Arroyo Carolina Trujillo Alto Caguas Juncos Maunabo Humacao Yabucoa Fajardo Culebra Vieques LEYEND Closed Landfill Open Landfill Limited Landfill Expansion Existing Op. Mini Transfer Sta. Out of Service Mini Transfer Sta. Proposed New Mini Transfer Sta. Existing Op. Transfer Sta. Proposed New Transfer Station Transfer Station Under Construction Existing MRF Proposed New MRF Existing Composting Facility Proposed New Composting Facility Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document D-2-1

133 Appendix D-2 Backup Case Infrastructure Maps BACKUP CASE 2015 Aguadilla Isabela Hatillo Quebradillas Arecibo Moca San Sebastian Añasco Mayagüez Cabo Rojo Hormigueros San German Lajas Las Marias Maricao Lares Yauco Guayanilla Peñuelas New Peñuelas Ponce Florida Jayuya Villalba Juana Diaz Vega Baja Morovis Santa Isabel Barranquitas San Toa Baja Cataño Juan Toa Alta Salinas Bayamón Comerío Cayey Guaynabo Cidra Guayama Arroyo Carolina Trujillo Alto Caguas Juncos Maunabo Humacao Yabucoa Fajardo Culebra Vieques LEYEND Closed Landfill Open Landfill Limited Landfill Expansion Existing Op. Mini Transfer Sta. Out of Service Mini Transfer Sta. Proposed New Mini Transfer Sta. Existing Op. Transfer Sta. Proposed New Transfer Station Transfer Station Under Construction Existing MRF Proposed New MRF Existing Composting Facility Proposed New Composting Facility Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document D-2-2

134 Appendix D-2 Backup Case Infrastructure Maps BACKUP CASE 2020 Aguadilla Isabela Hatillo Quebradillas Arecibo Moca San Sebastian Añasco Mayagüez Cabo Rojo Hormigueros San German Lajas Las Marias Maricao Lares Yauco Guayanilla Peñuelas New Peñuelas Ponce Florida Jayuya Villalba Juana Diaz Vega Baja Morovis Santa Isabel Barranquitas San Toa Baja Cataño Juan Toa Alta Salinas Bayamón Comerío Cayey Guaynabo Cidra Guayama Arroyo Carolina Trujillo Alto Caguas Juncos Maunabo Humacao Yabucoa Fajardo Culebra Vieques LEYEND Closed Landfill Open Landfill Limited Landfill Expansion Existing Op. Mini Transfer Sta. Out of Service Mini Transfer Sta. Proposed New Mini Transfer Sta. Existing Op. Transfer Sta. Proposed New Transfer Station Transfer Station Under Construction Existing MRF Proposed New MRF Existing Composting Facility Proposed New Composting Facility Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document D-2-3

135 Appendix D-2 Backup Case Infrastructure Maps BACKUP CASE 2025 Aguadilla Isabela Hatillo Quebradillas Arecibo Moca San Sebastian Añasco Mayagüez Cabo Rojo Hormigueros San German Lajas Las Marias Maricao Lares Yauco Guayanilla Peñuelas New Peñuelas Ponce Florida Jayuya Villalba Juana Diaz Vega Baja Morovis Santa Isabel Barranquitas San Toa Baja Cataño Juan Toa Alta Salinas Bayamón Comerío Cayey Guaynabo Cidra Guayama Arroyo Carolina Trujillo Alto Caguas Juncos Maunabo Humacao Yabucoa Fajardo Culebra Vieques LEYEND Closed Landfill Open Landfill Limited Landfill Expansion Existing Op. Mini Transfer Sta. Out of Service Mini Transfer Sta. Proposed New Mini Transfer Sta. Existing Op. Transfer Sta. Proposed New Transfer Station Transfer Station Under Construction Existing MRF Proposed New MRF Existing Composting Facility Proposed New Composting Facility Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document D-2-4

136 Appendix D-2 Backup Case Infrastructure Maps BACKUP CASE 2030 Aguadilla Isabela Hatillo Quebradillas Arecibo Moca San Sebastian Añasco Mayagüez Cabo Rojo Hormigueros San German Lajas Las Marias Maricao Lares Yauco Guayanilla Peñuelas New Peñuelas Ponce Florida Jayuya Villalba Juana Diaz Vega Baja Morovis Santa Isabel Barranquitas San Toa Baja Cataño Juan Toa Alta Salinas Bayamón Comerío Cayey Guaynabo Cidra Guayama Arroyo Carolina Trujillo Alto Caguas Juncos Maunabo Humacao Yabucoa Fajardo Culebra Vieques LEYEND Closed Landfill Open Landfill Limited Landfill Expansion Existing Op. Mini Transfer Sta. Out of Service Mini Transfer Sta. Proposed New Mini Transfer Sta. Existing Op. Transfer Sta. Proposed New Transfer Station Transfer Station Under Construction Existing MRF Proposed New MRF Existing Composting Facility Proposed New Composting Facility Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos Dynamic Itinerary for Infrastructure Projects Public Policy Document D-2-5

137 APPENDIX 2 ARECIBO AREA RECYCLABLE PROGRAMS INFORMATION

138 Lista de Centros de Acopio e Instalaciones de Reciclaje Porque todos merecemos una segunda oportunidad Revisado: mayo 2009

139

140 Tabla de Contenido Categoría de Material Reciclable Aceite Usado de Motor... 3 Aceite Vegetal (de cocina).. 4 Baterías de Autos (plomo-ácido) 4 Bio sólidos / Cienos (lodos) Cartón... 5 Cartuchos de Impresora.. 6 Equipos Electrónicos (computadoras, TVs, DVD, VHS, etc)... 6 Escombros de Hormigón y asfalto. 7 Lámparas Fluorescentes (bombillas) Mattress. 7 Metales Ferrosos (enseres, autos, varillas, etc.)... 8 Metales no Ferrosos (cobre, aluminio, bronce, etc.) 9 Neumáticos 11 Paletas de Madera Papel.. 13 Periódico Plástico Residuos de alimento.. 15 Residuos de jardinería / Material vegetativo Vidrio.. 16 NOTA: El propósito de esta lista es informar a la ciudadanía sobre los centros de acopio y empresas de reciclaje que la Autoridad de Desperdicios Sólidos (ADS) ha identificado. La ADS no recomienda ni favorece a ninguna compañía de las aquí descritas y no garantiza que estas cuenten con el endoso de nuestra agencia. De existir un centro o empresa que no esté incluido en esta lista o para conocer más información sobre alguna de las empresas, favor contactar la Oficina de Desarrollo de Mercados e Industrias, al teléfono (787) extensión 4150.

141 Aceite de Motor Usado Procesadores Alternative Fuels Carretera Núm. 2 Km Sector Guarisco Barrio Espinosa Dorado / 8821 Olein Recovery Corp. (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera 901 Km. 2.7 Barrio Camino Nuevo Yabucoa Rubén Martínez Oil Collection Services Carretera 887 km. 0.4 Urb. Julio N. Matos Bo. Martín González Carolina EMSCO Carretera 865 Km. 2 Barrio Campanilla Toa Baja Oil Energy System 256 Concordia Petrowest Plaza Piso 2 Mayagüez / 5790 PR Used Oil Collectors Bayamón Aceite de Motor Usado Transportistas EMSCO Toa Baja Induchem Services Guaynago PR Safety Transport Ponce Safety Kleen Environmental System Manatí Ashland Chemical Company Bayamón Transporte Sánchez Caguas Oil Energy System Mayagüez Oil & Tramp Rio Piedras PR Used Oil Collectors Bayamón Rubén Martínez Oil Collection Services Carolina Septix Waste, Inc. Ponce Indutech Environmental Caguas

142 Ensco Caribe Cataño Díaz Transport Yauco Olein Recovery Corp. Yabucoa Aceite Vegetal (de cocina) Edelcar (Instalación de reciclaje) Calle Central Esquina San Pablo Area Industrial Cataño (787) Biodiesel & Fuels de Puerto Rico Carretera # 169 Km. 2.0 Barrio Camarones Guaynabo (787) Baterías de Autos (plomo-ácido) Almacen Caraballo Parcelas Rodríguez Olmos Arecibo El Gran Tadeo Mill Carretera Núm. 110 Km. 4 Moca Isla Bonita Metals Calle Léster Lote 8 Carolina The Battery Recycling (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera Núm. 2 Barrio Cambalache Arecibo Safety Kleen Environmental System Carretera Núm. 2 Km. 51 Manatí Borinquen Metal Scrap Carretera Núm. 1 Km Caguas Borinquen Metal Scrap Carretera Núm. 189 Km. 9 Gurabo Santurce Metal & Bag Avenida Las Palmas 1104 Santurce Environics Carretera Núm.1 km. 39 Ubr. Villa Esperanza Calle Bonanza Caguas WR Recycling Carretera Núm. 103 km. 2.3 Bo. Bajura Cabo Rojo /

143 Biosólidos / Cienos (Lodos de plantas de tratamiento) Caribbean Composting (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera 681 Km. 3.4 Islote II Arecibo (787) Autoridad de Acueductos y Alcantarillados Planta de Composta (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera 342 Km. 0.5 Bo. Sabanetas Mayagüez (787) Cartón R-4 Enterprises (solo transportan) Carretera 1 Km Bo. Pastilla Juana Díaz (787) Guaynabo Recycling Carretera Núm. 1 Km Barrio Mamey Industrial Fibers, Corp (IFCO) Carretera 872 Km. 1.3 Rio Plantation Bayamón IFCO Recycling Carretera Núm. 1Km (int) Barrio Bairoa Caguas Cartonera de PR Carretera Núm. 167 Km Bayamón Smurfit Fibras Internacionales Barrio Puerto Viejo Playa de Ponce Ponce Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT Carretera Núm. 2 Km Hatillo Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT División Península de Cantera Calle Santa Elena 2425 Península de Cantera Bo. Obrero San Juan GC Reciclaje, PT Carretera Núm. 3 Km Punta Santiago Humacao WR Recycling Carretera 103 Km. 2.3 Barrio Bajura Cabo Rojo Multi Recycling Systems Vater Industrial Park Carolina Pronatura Parque Industrial Luchetti Calle C Lote 30 Bayamón

144 Cartuchos de Impresora Alternative Kartridge Carretera 194 Ext. Fajardo Gardens Fajardo PR Imagine Solutions Riveras del Río B-32 C11 Bayamón La Casa de las Tintas Calle Villas Plaza Sol de Borinquén Suite 116 Ponce Facsímil Paper Connection La Cerámica Industrial Park Carolina Toner Plus of PR Calle 2 B-34 Santa Mónica Bayamón Toner Solutions, Inc. Urb. Country Club 886 Calle Galápagos San Juan / / Equipos electrónicos (Computadoras, TVs, DVD, VHS, entre otros) Nova Terra (procesador) Carretera Núm. 655 Km. 1.0 Bo. Islote Arecibo Environics Recycling Carretera Núm..1 Km. 39 Urb. Villa Esperanza Calle Bonanza Caguas GC Reciclaje, Inc. PT Carretera Núm. 3 Km Punta Santiago Humacao Caribbean Hi-Tech Recyclers (procesador) Carretera Núm. 332 Lote # 7 Zona Industrial Ciénaga Guánica / Ecologic PR, Inc Carretera Núm. 2 Km Bo. Cocos Quebradillas / E-cycling Carretera Núm. 924 Km. 2.8 Humacao Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT Carretera Núm. 2 Km Hatillo Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT División Península de Cantera Avenida Eduardo Conde Esq. Villa Palmeras Santurce R-4 Enterprises Garden Hill Plaza MSC Carretera Núm. 19 Guaynabo Safety Kleen Environmental System Carretera Núm. 2 Km. 51 Manatí River City Communications cswiderski@rccom.net

145 Escombros Hormigón y Asfalto Controlled Demolitions & Recycling (hormigón) Carretera Núm. 2 Km Barrio Espinosa Dorado Toledo Engineering Corp (hormigón) Monte Atenas Office Park Suite 206 San Juan Betterecycling Corp (Asfalto) Carretera Núm. 1 Km Salinas Sunset Contractors & Recycling (hormigón) Arroyo Reliable Recycling (hormigón) Carretera Núm. 865 Km. 0.6 Toa Baja Betterecycling Corp (Asfalto) F-2 PR 887 Km. 0.4 Urb. Industrial Julio N. Matos Carolina Betterecycling (Asfalto) F-3 PR-2 Km Aguada Lámparas Fluorescentes (bombillas) Onyx Environmental Services Turabo Industrial Park Gurabo Safety Kleen Environmental Systems Carretera Núm. 2 Km. 51 Manatí Environics Recycling Carretera Núm. 1 Km. 39 Urb. Villa Esperanza Calle Bonanza Caguas Lamp Recycling Calle 16 SO Núm Caparra Terrace Guaynabo Mattress Comfort Mattress Carretera Núm. 423 Km. 0.0 San Sebastián /

146 Metales Ferrosos (Enseres, autos, varillas, entre otros) Schnitzer PR DBA Ponce Resources Carretera Núm. 3 Km Barrio Aguirre Salinas Schnitzer PR DBA Ponce Resources Carretera Núm. Km. 7.7 Camino Principal Sector Industrial Corujo Hato Tejas Bayamón Schnitzer PR DBA Ponce Resources Barrio Bairoa Carretera Núm. 1 Km. 30 Caguas Materials Management Km Carretera Núm. 2 Bo. Espinosa Dorado / Multi Recycling Systems Vater Industrial Park Sabana Abajo Carolina Nova Terra Carretera Núm. 655 Km. 1 Bo. Islote Arecibo Puerto Metal Recycling Carretera Núm. 2 Km Bo. Espinosa Dorado Castillo Metals Carretera Núm. 3 Km Punta Santiago Humacao / Daltra Carretera Núm. 967 Km. 0.3 Sector las 3T Rio Grande Homeca Recycling Carretera Núm. 309 Km. 1.4 Hormigueros Homeca Recycling Carretera Núm. 1 Km Mercedita Ponce Homeca Recycling Calle Comercio Núm. 1 Playa Ponce Ponce Homeca Recycling Carretera Núm. 183 Km. 4.5 Bo. Tomas de Castro Caguas R-4 Enterprises Carretera Núm. 1 Km Bo. Pastilla Juana Díaz GC Reciclaje, PT Carretera Núm. 3 Km Sector Industrial Punta Santiago Humacao Scrapyard Metal Recycling Carretera Núm. 2 Km Bo. Candelaria Toa Baja Procesadora de Metales Carretera Núm.2 Km Calle Hucár Sector Guarisco Bo. Espinosa Dorado

147 Metales no Ferrosos (cobre, aluminio, bronce, entre otros) Almacen Caraballo Parcelas Rodríguez Olmos Arecibo El Gran Tadeo Mill Carretera Núm. 110 Km. 4 Moca GC Reciclaje, PT Carretera Núm. 3 Km Sector Industrial Punta Santiago Humacao Schnitzer PR DBA Ponce Resources Barrio Bairoa Carretera Núm. 1 Km. 30 Caguas Schnitzer PR DBA Ponce Resources Carretera Núm. Km. 7.7 Camino Principal Sector Industrial Corujo Hato Tejas Bayamón Schnitzer PR DBA Ponce Resources Carretera Núm. 3 Km Barrio Aguirre Salinas Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT División Península de Cantera Avenida Eduardo Conde Esq. Villa Palmeras Santurce Borinquen Metal Scrap Carretera Núm. 1 Km Caguas Borinquen Metal Scrap Carretera Núm. 187 Km. 9 Gurabo Homeca Recycling Calle Comercio Núm. 1 Playa Ponce Ponce Homeca Recycling Carretera Núm. 183 Km. 4.5 Bo. Tomas de Castro Caguas Homeca Recycling Carretera Núm. 1 Km Mercedita Ponce Homeca Recycling Carretera Núm. 309 Km. 1.4 Hormigueros Pronatura Parque Industrial Luchetti Calle C Lote 30 Bayamón Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT Carretera Núm. 2 Km Hatillo Guayama Metals Carretera Núm. 3 Km Bo. Aguirre Salinas Harry s Metal Recycling Avenida Juan Rosado 415 Arecibo Nova Terra Carretera Núm. 655 Km. 1 Bo. Islote Arecibo

148 Isla Bonita metals Calle Lester Lote 8 Carolina Moncho Metal Calle Nueva Palma 1056 Santurce WR Recycling Carretera 103 Km. 2.3 Bo. Bajura Cabo Rojo Taller de Reciclaje de Metales Carretera Núm. 2 Km. 688 Vega Baja IFCO Recycling Carretera Núm. 1Km (int) Barrio Bairoa Caguas Industrial Fibers, Corp (IFCO) Carretera 872 Km. 1.3 Rio Plantation Bayamón Guaynabo Recycling Barrio Mamey La Villa Metals 251 Calle Villa Ponce Los Muchachos Metals Carretera Núm. 2 km Toa Baja Pagán & Pagán Recycling Carretera Núm. 2 Km. 35 Bo. Pueblo Nuevo Vega Baja Multi Recycling Systems Váter Industrial Park Sabana Abajo Carolina Vega Aluminum Recycling Carretera Núm. 119 Km. 8.8 Bo. Ciénaga Camuy Santurce Metal & Bag Avenida Las palmas 1104 Santurce Metal Recycling Calle Pedro de Castro 705 Santurce Castillo Metals Carretera Núm. 3 Km Punta Santiago Humacao / La Virgencita Recycling Carretera Núm. 2 Km Toa Baja (939) Southwest Metal Recovery Carretera Núm. 121 km. 1.6 Sector La Pica Sabana Grande

149 Neumáticos desechados Procesadores Ambrosiani Hermanos (recauchadores) Carretera Núm. 188 Km. 0.8 San Isidro Canóvanas Correa Tire Recycling (recauchadores) Carretera Núm. 2 Km Bo. Espinosa / / REMA (procesador) Carretera Núm. 1 Km Barrio Rio Caña Abajo Caguas / Embos (recauchadores) Carretera Núm.29 Km. 2.3 Dorado Integrated Waste Management (procesador) Barrio Tallaboa Peñuelas Neumáticos Desechados Transportistas y Exportadores Chris & John Recycler (Exportador) Aguada Technique Recycling (Exportador) Dorado CN Recycling Camuy R-4 Enterprises Guaynabo JR Recycling Carolina K & V Tire Collector Rio Grande PR Safety Transport Ponce Prospero Tire Recycling (Exportador) Carolina / Terralina Environmental Co. (Exportador) San Juan N & E Transport Guayama RDB Recycle Luquillo Transportadores de Neumáticos Guaynabo WL Caribbean Works Juana Díaz (939) El Nuevo Ciclo Comerío

150 BJ Transport Salinas HL Transport Recycling Guayama Perdí Caguas Ski Service Cayey Paletas de Madera Caribbean Composting** (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera 681 Km. 3.4 Islote II Arecibo (787) Caribe Recycling** (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera Núm. 1 Km. 26 Parque Industrial Quebrada Arenas Rio Piedras / 789/0885 Héctor Caro Wooden Pallets (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera 412 Km. 3 Rincón Caribe Pallets & Packaging 876 Barrio Las Cuevas Trujillo Alto J Torres Wooden Pallets** (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera 693 Km Int. Finca 14 Local # 3 Vega alta Demolition Pallets** (Instalación de reciclaje) Bo. Guavate Sector Los Nieves Carr Km. 8.1 Int. Cayey / Autoridad de Acueductos y Alcantarillados Planta de Composta (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera 342 Km. 0.5 Bo. Sabanetas Mayagüez (787) GC Reciclaje, PT Carretera Núm. 3 Km Sector Industrial Punta Santiago Humacao Puerto Rico Pallet Recycling** (Instalación de reciclaje) Barrio Espinosa Sector Laguna II Dorado CC Pallets Carretera 735 Int. Carretera Núm. 1 Barrio Montellanos Cayey Nephesh Wood Recycling Carretera Núm. 1 Km Barrio Bairoa Caguas /2701 / Soil & Mulch** (Instalación de reciclaje) Bo. Garrochales Carretera 682 Km. 4.1 Barceloneta / ** Compañías que colorean viruta (mulch) 12

151 Papel Periódico Guaynabo Recycling Carretera Núm. 1 Km Barrio Mamey Industrial Fibers, Corp (IFCO) Carretera 872 Km. 1.3 Rio Plantation Bayamón IFCO Recycling Carretera Núm. 1Km (int) Barrio Bairoa Caguas Cartonera de PR Carretera Núm. 167 Km Bayamón Smurfit Fibras Internacionales Barrio Puerto Viejo Playa de Ponce Ponce Pronatura Parque Industrial Luchetti Calle C Lote 30 Bayamón Guaynabo Recycling Carretera Núm. 1 Km Barrio Mamey Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT Carretera Núm. 2 Km Hatillo Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT División Península de Cantera Calle Santa Elena 2425 Península de Cantera Bo. Obrero San Juan GC Reciclaje, PT Carretera Núm. 3 Km Punta Santiago Humacao WR Recycling Carretera 103 Km. 2.3 Barrio Bajura Cabo Rojo Multi Recycling Systems Vater Industrial Park Carolina Shred it Calle Progreso Núm. 852 Esq. Perdón Santurce / Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT Carretera Núm. 2 Km Hatillo

152 Industrial Fibers, Corp (IFCO) Carretera 872 Km. 1.3 Rio Plantation Bayamón IFCO Recycling Carretera Núm. 1Km (int) Barrio Bairoa Caguas Cartonera de PR Carretera Núm. 167 Km Bayamón Smurfit Fibras Internacionales Barrio Puerto Viejo Playa de Ponce Ponce Pronatura Parque Industrial Luchetti Calle C Lote 30 Bayamón Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT División Península de Cantera Calle Santa Elena 2425 Península de Cantera Bo. Obrero San Juan GC Reciclaje, PT Carretera Núm. 3 Km Punta Santiago Humacao WR Recycling Carretera 103 Km. 2.3 Barrio Bajura Cabo Rojo Multi Recycling Systems Vater Industrial Park Carolina Plástico Ameriplast, Corp (Instalación de reciclaje) Cabo Caribe Ind. Park Carretera 686 Km Vega Baja Ameriplast, Corp Carretera Núm. 2 Antigua Central Cambalache Arecibo WR Recycling Carretera 103 Km. 2.3 Barrio Bajura Cabo Rojo Plastic Home Products Carretera Núm. 3 Km Maunabo / Jael Plastics (Instalación de reciclaje) Barrio Cerro Gordo Km 4.4 San Lorenzo Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT División Península de Cantera Calle Santa Elena 2425 Península de Cantera Bo. Obrero San Juan

153 Pronatura Parque Industrial Luchetti Calle C Lote 30 Bayamón Guaynabo Recycling Carretera Núm. 1 Km Barrio Mamey Plastex Corp. Carretera Núm. 112 Km. 2.3 Parque Industrial Mora Guerrero Isabela / US Recycling Carretera Núm. 3 Parque Industrial Palmas Arroyo Multiplast Corp Carretera Núm. 701 Km. 4 Salinas IFCO Recycling Carretera Núm. 1Km (int) Barrio Bairoa Caguas Multi Recycling Systems Vater Industrial Park Carolina Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT Carretera Núm. 2 Km Hatillo GC Reciclaje, PT Carretera Núm. 3 Km Punta Santiago Humacao Las Marías Recycling Carretera Núm. 119 Km Las Marías International Plastics Process Carretera 5538 Urb. Industrial Felicia Final Santa Isabel Industrial Fibers, Corp (IFCO) Carretera 872 Km. 1.3 Rio Plantation Bayamón Residuos de Alimento (no procesados) Asociación de Porcinocultores (Instalación de reuso) Carretera Núm. 375 Sector Javilla Bo. Quebradas Yauco Residuos de Jardinería Caribbean Composting (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera 681 Km. 3.4 Islote II Arecibo (787) Autoridad de Acueductos y Alcantarillados Planta de Composta (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera 342 Km. 0.5 Bo. Sabanetas Mayagüez (787)

154 Agro Ambiente (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera Núm. 10 Sector Los Caños Barrio Tanamá Arecibo Héctor Caro Wooden Pallets Carretera 412 Km. 3 Rincón Nephesh Wood Recycling Carretera Núm. 1 Km Barrio Bairoa Caguas /2701 / Demolition Pallets (Instalación de reciclaje) Bo. Guavate Sector Los Nieves Carr Km. 8.1 Int. Cayey / Bioreciclaje (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera Núm. 2 Marginal Bo. Sabanetas Antigua Central Igualdad Mayagüez Composta Angelorum (Instalación de reciclaje) Villalba (787) Vivero Hábitat (Instalación de reciclaje) Carretera Núm. 510 Km. 1.0 Barrio Sabana Llana Juana Díaz Soil & Mulch (Instalación de reciclaje) Bo. Garrochales Carretera 682 Km. 4.1 Barceloneta / Vidrio Guaynabo Recycling Carretera Núm. 1 Km Barrio Mamey Industrial Fibers, Corp (IFCO) Carretera 872 Km. 1.3 Rio Plantation Bayamón IFCO Recycling Carretera Núm. 1Km (int) Barrio Bairoa Caguas Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT Carretera Núm. 2 Km Hatillo Corporación Comunitaria Reciclaje del Norte, PT División Península de Cantera Calle Santa Elena 2425 Península de Cantera Bo. Obrero San Juan Comercial la Pino (Instalación de uso de final) Carretera Núm. 111 Km. 25 Barrio Piedras Blancas San Sebastián

155 Multi Recycling Systems Vater Industrial Park Carolina WR Recycling Carretera 103 Km. 2.3 Barrio Bajura Cabo Rojo GC Reciclaje, PT Carretera Núm. 3 Km Punta Santiago Humacao

156

157 Oficina de Desarrollo de Mercados e Industrias (787) extensión 4150 mercados@ads.gobierno.pr

158 APPENDIX 3 PRELIMINARY DRAFT MATERIALS SEPARATION PLAN PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE

159

160

161

162

163 APPENDIX 4 PRELIMINARY DRAFT MATERIALS SEPARATION PLAN PUBLIC MEETING TRANSCRIPT

164 MP ENGINEERS OF PUERTO RICO SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO PUBLIC MEETING * PRELIMINARY DRAFT * MATERIALS SEPARATION PLAN * DATE : Friday, September 17, 2010 HOUR : 6:30 p.m. CLIENT : MP ENGINEERS OF PUERTO RICO ADDRESS : Las Vistas Village Shopping Center Suite Las Cumbres Avenue San Juan, Puerto Rico HELD AT : Pontificia Universidad Católica de Arecibo Arecibo, Puerto Rico ATTENDING IN REPRESENTATION OF ENERGY ANSWERS: Attorney Rafael Toro Eng. Mark Green IN REPRESENTATION OF MP ENGINEERS OF PUERTO RICO: Eng. Jaime Abreu Mr. Sam Rosania IN REPRESENTATION OF CSA GROUP: Mrs. María Berio

165 DEPONENTS: Mrs. Raquel Ortiz Mr. Luis Camacho Mr. Ramón Nieves Prof. Joaquín Faría RECORD STENOGRAPHER: Mr. Félix López * * * The proceedings were held as transcribed below: INTRODUCTION ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: Good Evening, let us start. Good evening and welcome you all to the presentation and community meeting of the Material Separation Plan convened by Energy Answers Arecibo. My name is Rafael Toro and tonight I will be the moderator of this meeting. First I will like to clarify, this meeting has been convened by Energy Answers Arecibo as part of the presentation of its project, which is the Material Recovery and Electricity Generation Project that Energy Answers is proposing for the Municipality of Arecibo. Accompanying me tonight is, from Malcolm Pirnie, a company of consultants and environmental engineers with worldwide operations, Engineer Jaime Abreu, who is an environmental engineer, specialized in the

166 3 solid wastes management area. Also here, from Malcolm Pirnie is Mister Sam Rosania, who is a specialist in recycling programs and waste management and was the recycling programs coordinator in several municipalities in Florida, USA. Also here tonight, from CSA Group, a consulting and engineer firm in charge of managing this project is Mrs. María Berio, who is a specialist in environmental sciences and works as coordinator and support in project management. Also accompanying us tonight, from the company itself, Energy Answers Arecibo, is Engineer Mark Green, who is the director and manager of the project. Energy Answers Arecibo is the company proposing the Material Recovery and Electricity Generation Project for the Municipality of Arecibo and is the one that has convened and organized the meeting being held tonight, which is a community meeting. With respect to this meeting, I would like to make several clarifications: First, this is not a public hearing similar to those normally held as part of the evaluation process of a project. It is not a public hearing, it is a public meeting, which is part of the commitment that Energy Answers Arecibo has made with the Municipality of Arecibo to first present and share the information with the community, the people and the town, and, above all, to discuss and bring to the public discussion all the aspects of the project. In this case what we are going to discuss today, the object of this

167 4 public discussion is what has been called the Materials Separation Plan, which is not as such the Energy Answers project; it is a plan to separate the materials. In essence, stated in simple words it is a Materials Recycling Plan. Consistent with the commitment that Energy Answers has made with the Municipality of Arecibo is that in this meeting we want to obtain the citizens participation, so that they can get to know the project presented by us to them, they can challenge the project and we can all discuss it publicly to avoid what in many occasions have been stumbling stones, obtaining the best communication between the proponent and the community. That is our goal; that is part of our purpose. This is not a process in which there is an examining officer hearing the people, hearing witnesses to issue a final resolution; that is not the process. This is merely sharing information that, as a fact, we are recording. We want to record it with the purpose of picking up all the questions that may emerge and, in such manner, prepare a final Materials Separation Plan that includes the comments, doubts and recommendations that arise from this process; for it to be reliable, in other words, accurate of what happens here. For the purpose of such record, I wish to state that today is September 17, 2010 and that we have started this public meeting around 6:30 p.m., in this school, Pontificia Universidad Católica, Arecibo Campus. The call was to start at six o clock but we waited until six thirty to allow time for the people to arrive. Ok. How will we structure this presentation? First, Engineer Abreu,

168 5 from Malcolm Pirnie, will present and explain the Energy Answers project in general. After which, always in an environment of. We want to have a rather informal environment but at the same time with order, truth, we will open to questions and answers. We will request. As a fact, we have some log sheets, index cards. As a fact, Julio, if you could distribute the index cards that we brought, since what I would like, what we would like is that as the doubts that come up during the presentation you can write them down so that you will not forget them during the questions and answers session. Those index cards are so you can make your annotations during the presentation and make your questions at the end. With pleasure we will respond to any type of questions presented, any concern, all comments, but we would like to make a clarification and it is that first we want to address the Materials Separation Plan issues and those questions related directly to such plan. Once the plan related questions are over, we will take a little break for snacks and whatever, then we will reconvene and have an open questions session related to the Energy Answers project, within the limitation that, I want you to know that the Energy Answers project has not been pre. is in the process of preparing the Environmental Impact Statement; the Environmental Impact Statement has not been issued. Therefore, in this stage, which is a preliminary stage, we can address only those questions that in such stage can be answered, without being in a position now, neither by you nor us, to enter further in the

169 6 project s aspects. That will be object of the Environmental Impact Statement, which is being prepared, will be made public and will be object of public participation during the environmental revision process. But, although it is not the object of today s meeting, we want to open, have an open questions session just in case someone wants to raise them at this stage and we could answer them in this stage. With nothing else to add and preferring that the engineers complete their presentation and that we prepare ourselves, writing down the questions for the end, therefore, allowing them to complete what they have prepared for us tonight. With nothing else to add, I leave you with Engineer Abreu. PRESENTATION OF ENG. JAIME ABREU ENG. JAIME ABREU: Good evening to all. Yes, as stated by Rafael, one of the things we want to emphasize is that this is public, and that today s public meeting was announced in the news media, in the Vocero newspaper, the Pulso de Arecibo newspaper, El Norte, La Estrella and I think that I do not know if I am missing some other. And it was published the week of August 16, more than. almost a month ago. We want to start.. we want to... You have the agenda for this activity; there were some copies there; I do not know if they were distributed. But in this slide here we have tonight s agenda. We will start with a brief introduction of what the project is. We will

170 7 also talk about the economic benefits of the facility. We will describe the central service area for the facility, the extended area, the existing material recycling programs, the proposed methods to recover those recyclable materials, the alternate disposal methods and the locations for revising the Materials Separation Plan when the comments have been incorporated, so that you can revise it for a second time. We will briefly talk about the proposed project and we will open the questions session. Ok? We would like to emphasize once more that this is a Materials Separation Plan, as Rafael Toro said, and in a subsequent phase we will address the permits that will follow, but for now we will concentrate in the Materials Separation Plan. What is a Material Separation Plan? It is a plan that establishes how the facility will encourage or promote the recycling in the community and how the facility will be internally performing the recycling process. Who proposes this facility? It is being proposed the proponent is Energy Answers Arecibo. A resources recovery facility is being proposed and, eventually, the generation of electricity. It is expected that this facility will be operational by 2013, once all the permit requirements are met; the objective is to comply with all of EPA s requirements, that are included in, as shown here, 40 CFR 60.57b; it establishes that community meetings must be held to explain the Materials Separation Plan and that we receive your ; it is a friendly meeting, we want to show you what we are proposing and that you tell us and give us input or feedback of what you think what you belief, your

171 8 opinion of the plan up to now. And it will be here, in the Cambalache Ward. Now I will show you, so you can see an aerial photograph of the exact location of the site. Ok. If you see the area here if you know more or less the area, here in Road Num. 2, after you go by the Ferretería Pajuil there used to be what was the former. Police station in that area and immediately after, almost before Cambalache, to the left, a steel structure that used to be a paper mill; in that area the facility will be located. If you look here in the aerial photograph, here is the area of the Ferretería Pajuil, here is the old facility of the Cambalache sugar mill and here would be the area of the facility, which is the old paper mill. What we ; what Energy answers always establishes, what they try to find are areas that have already been impacted by industries as to minimize any type of impact to the area; not searching for a new site to establish an industrial area; we try to reuse an area that already has been impacted by industries. In summary, the project proposes the recovery of recyclable materials and during this process the generation of seventy megawatts of energy; it will recover the recyclable materials and all of this, with the consumption of two thousand tons of garbage per day. The electricity that is generated will be sold to the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority by means of contracting directly with them. After the community recycles as much as possible, starts the processes inside the facility, which we will detail further ahead, where the

172 9 material becomes a processed refused fuel, which is the fuel for that feeds the facility. The facility will be located, as I explained, in the old paper mill, here in the Cambalache area and it will have two service areas: the central area and expanded area sorry, extended. This is a general sketch of how the facility will be, more or less, so that you have an idea. That is, this is for you to have an idea of how it will be. That is here is Road Number 2; Road Number 2 in this area has the vehicles entrance for the cars, here there are although later I will describe it, but for you to have an idea, the materials are received in this area and everything is basically enclosed, encapsulated to minimize any type of odor impact to the community. Shortly ahead you will get to see more details of the facility and I will explain it in more detail. I only wanted to show you briefly, a little bit. During the facility s construction and operation, it is expected rather based on some technical studies performed by Estudios Técnicos, the facility will generate direct and indirect jobs during the construction. It is expected that during the construction phase the direct jobs will be from four hundred to one thousand two hundred and that the indirect jobs will be from four hundred to one thousand two hundred. The duration of the construction phase will be, more or less, two years. During the facility s operation phase, almost one hundred fifty full time jobs will be generated and it is expected that this type of facility will boost the

173 10 economy of the Arecibo area in nearly one hundred fifty nine million dollars. Ok. We already showed an overview, now we will tell you what the service area is: the Central Service Area. The Central Service Area is defined by the municipalities served: Arecibo, Hatillo, Lares, Utuado, Florida and Manatí. We established these municipalities as a planning tool, there is nothing that we have to say about them, we only chose them for planning, there could be more or less, this is what we established. In this graph, I want to show that to determine the amount of garbage available in each one of the service areas we used the existing information from the Solid Wastes Authority that establishes ; it was in the 2003 Characterization Study where the percent of recyclable material in the garbage was established and also from the study ; the 2009, 2008 dynamic itinerary, which establishes the amount of garbage generated per person per day, which I belief is 5.18 pounds per person per day. From these two numbers, we could establish this and with the area population, we established these numbers. That is, although this is explained in the Materials Separation Plan, I have more or less showed you how we got to these numbers. This graph gives you an idea. Here, in the next table, you have the exact numbers for you to have an idea and these numbers, well, are approximate of what we have, of the best we have up to this moment, that were the studies of the Solid Wastes Authority. Materials are defined as garden wastes, construction and demolition materials or C&D, organic

174 11 wastes, ferrous materials, corrugated cardboard, low quality paper and other type of wastes. It is expected that the Central Region will have around. by 2010 will generate about three hundred twenty five thousand tons per year and by 2025 a projection of almost three hundred forty thousand tons per year. This is more or less near Yes, exactly. This is the facility s Extended Area that includes the municipalities. there are several. And as I previously explained, is a we are that is, this is a planning phase, as I explained there could be more or less. It is a more or less idea to have to establish the facility, the type of municipalities from which we can receive garbage. These municipalities, the ones we have up to now, are Quebradillas, Isabela, Aguadilla, Moca, San Sebastián, Las Marías, Añasco, Aguada, Rincón, Adjuntas, Barceloneta, Ciales, Morovis, Orocovis, Vega Baja, Vega Alta, Dorado, Toa Baja, Cataño, Guaynabo, Aguas Buenas, Naranjito, Comerío, Barranquitas, Orocovis and Corozal. I belief that I did not miss anyone; they are the green areas here and that would be the Extended Service Area, together with the Central Area and the Extended Area. Once the Central Area is implemented, the area near the facility and the extended area, would arrive through the transfer stations or other type of method to near the facility. As in the previous graph, which was of the Central Area, this is the Extended Area. Here in the Extended Area the generation of garbage increases slightly but the composition of the solid wastes is basically the

175 12 same. Here in the graph you can see a little more generation, same composition; what varies is the amount. The amount increases from almost one million two hundred tons in 2010, in this extended area, to one million three hundred tons per year by This is basically, if we look at it in tons per day, almost three thousand tons per day, more or less, the composition of this type of facility. The facility will accept up to two thousand. That is, that is why I tell you that no we use a representative area until we reach our other goal, near to two thousand tons per day. And this, clearly, is after recycling. Ok. What programs...? We also want to talk about the existing programs in the community, what is there available. We have talked with the Solid Wastes Authority; we have also talked with several recycling companies in the area and have information. According to the Solid Wastes Authority there are about twenty three recycling centers and materials separation programs. Here in the service area, for example, there is one nearby which is the battery recycling center that is right here by the side. And the centers we have identified, that you can access, are in one of the Annexes of the Materials Separation Plan; it has a list of the SWA that includes these programs, these lists. This includes automobile batteries, electronic equipment, ferrous metals, non ferrous, plastics, garden wastes, bio-solids and paper Very good. The proposed methods for separating materials, inside the

176 13 facility, are three. These include the following, as we will explain later, you will see how and when it is done in the explanation of the project; in summary, separation is performed before the combustion process, in moving ferrous materials, that is, steel, also bulk materials and also materials that are white goods such as refrigerators, air conditioners, any type of big appliance that is discarded, that is recovered by the companies that collect wastes in the streets, which supposedly should not go to the landfills and similarly should not arrive to this type of facility. And if this material arrives, it is separated and left outside for recovery by the recycling companies. After combustion there will also be separation, mostly in the ashes at the bottom of the boiler, where ferrous material is recovered and materials non ferrous metals. At the end, the remains of the ashes at the bottom of the boiler we call boiler aggregate, which is a type of aggregate that can be used for some types of concrete, concrete mixtures and blocks. It is at present used in the United States, that is, there is a market for it and we hope to be able to incentivize it and find resources, maybe in Puerto Rico, for this type of material Also, we incentivize and promote that the local recycling companies join with us and that we can assist them to increase their recycling ratio. And generally this type of facility increases the recycling ratio in all types of that has been established in the United States, in Europe, everywhere, since it has to incentivize and promote recycling in the communities; an example could be helping in materials recovery. Any type of ferrous material

177 14 recovered in the process is working for the local recycling companies, to incentivize and promote, and increase the ferrous material recycling. Next comes the removal of construction and demolition materials, the C&D, for which the SWA is in the process of developing a permit application process to prohibit that they are dumped in the landfills and, similarly, we would prevent that they land in the facility; they would go to the companies that recycle this type of material. Another one is managing the disasters debris. The white goods, such as, air conditioners, refrigerators, etc., and any type of special materials, batteries, that arrive to the facility can be segregated and turned over to the recycling companies, as an example. Ok. This facility promotes several alternate methods that are not used or practiced know, as are the. the distribution method that we have in Puerto Rico. The facility promotes a type of combustion, we will explain it with some detail, it is a complete combustion, much more efficient of what is of the facilities that are operating now in the United States; it generates more electricity and less ashes, and also have less emissions; all of it with the objective of sending zero materials to the landfills. We want to eventually find a market for each one of the facility s products so that eventually nothing goes to the Puerto Rico s landfills. In this process, there will always be something that will go to the landfill, but our estimate is that it will be the minimum. As I explained, low ash percent, also high recovery of ferrous

178 15 materials, low disposal of residues, capital costs will also be lower, and we expect that the fees will be competitive and also lower than those implemented now. This information had been published before; the location of the places where you can find copies of the Material Separation Plan, and I emphasize again, this plan will be published again with the changes and comments that come out of today s meeting and it will be published in these seven locations. There will be another public notice informing where is that the document, with your comments, is once more available for the public review; you will be able to revise it and if you have any type of comments, another public meeting will be held, in which you can express them and clarify any other doubt that you may have. The places, as I told you, are the University s library here, the General Court of Justice, the library at the Institute of Commerce of the Puerto Rico Junior College, the library of the National College of Business and Technology, the Inter, the library of the University of Puerto Rico and the Arecibo Public Library. Now, we will tell you a little bit more about the project; what is being proposed in the project. Mark Green from Energy Answers will help me with this, I will be at the extreme other side; he will talk in English and I will translate what he says for those that do not speak English.

179 16 Mark Green from Energy Answers We basically want, although some of you have already heard this presentation, we will be providing a synopsis, a brief description of the project we are promoting. The area that we will be developing, the area towards the area, that is, the river outflow, there is an area that has been impacted with some wells that previously belonged to the Paper Mill; it is an industrial area that has already been impacted and it is part of sugar cane area. Now we want to try to an analogy and compare recovery versus disposal. If we notice and compare what eight thousand tons per day of waste disposal entails, it would be more or less ten thousand barrels of oil per day that will be recovered in this type of facility, ninety hundred tons of aggregate, about fifty tons of ferrous materials... sorry, non ferrous, and five hundred tons of steel materials, ferrous materials. Also, the other is how we compare, if we look at it this way; if we take them to the facility we will recover these materials; if not, we will dispose of them in the landfills, and close to three hectare of the landfill will be consumed, every day a feet of garbage would be packed plus a daily cover must be made, it must be made every day; and you have environmental problems, which are some of the cases for which we have photographs here, fires, leachate, these issues must be weighted to determine what will be better for you: recover and avoid environmental problems or continue having these problems affecting the city.

180 17 The first phase there are four phases that we are we will talk of how we recover the materials. The first phase is recycling in the community and how the community can recover those materials. We are providing assistance in the recovery of the materials, helping the community to increase their recycling ratio; but it is a first step. The second phase of the process is one in which the materials arrive, after recycling in the community, and are inspected at the facility s entrance; it is a double inspection to determine that there are no materials that can be hazardous to the facility and if there are materials that can be recovered, bulky; a stove that arrives will be put aside, a battery, etc. After that process the garbage goes to a shredding system, where the ferrous material, steel, is recovered; it is recovered in trucks and can be recycled. The remaining material is the processed refuse fuel that goes to the facility s combustion process. After as I explained to you, this fuel material goes to a boiler that was designed to treat, to recover as much as possible, an efficient system, in which the boiler heats at high temperatures with air injection in order to maximize the combustion process and generate ashes. It has a process inside the boiler there are water columns; those water columns are heated at very high temperatures, causing steam to be generated, the steam moves a the generator, the generator s turbine and that generates the electricity. It also has if there is extra steam, it can be sold to the industries or can be used within the facility.

181 18 After the combustion process, the ashes go through some grids to the systems emission control section, which removes most of the that is the bulk of the particulate. Once it enters the process, which is a complex high technology process to recover materials the ashes (that in the past were usually seen as a black smoke in the chimneys, now with this high technology system all those materials are removed and you will not see that smoke coming out of the chimney) will be recovered in trucks in what is known as fly ash; and that type of ash will then go to the landfill. In the fourth and final phase, the boiler s bottom ashes go to another recovery system, in which, as I previously told you, the ferrous and non ferrous materials, and the aggregates are recovered. This type basically we want to demonstrate with this graph the difference between what we are promoting, which is a process fuel boiler, and what is usually known as incinerators, here to the right, which was the technology used in the 60 s and 70 s, in which the garbage was burnt as it arrived. Basically, as I was telling you we are comparing two types of technology. The old one, in the old one you had mass incineration, in which all the garbage was thrown into the combustion system, burnt and what happened was that a lot of ashes were produced, the combustion was not as effective; not much electricity was generated but a lot of ashes were produced, a lot of ashes and was something that a little bit more

182 19 traditional, old, that is not used now. As will you see if you look at it by phases, first they had incineration; later they thought, If I burn the garbage, why don t I generate electricity with it? So they added the boiler. The boilers, during the 80 s, had emission problems. Then, they had to implement an advanced emission control system and then, they implemented another system and that is why it has the incineration system to the right. To the left, the system that we have is much more advanced, it shreds the garbage in very little pieces so the combustion is more efficient, eliminates the amount of ashes generated, increases the energy that is recovered and minimizes the emissions to the environment. Here is a summary, this is what I said, these are the advantages of the proposed system: There is a more complete combustion, better combustion control since it has much higher temperatures, the energy recovery ratio is also much higher, the capital cost is also much lower which promotes the facility s construction, also less combustion ashes, there is a higher reuse potential for the ashes because there is a material that can be reused versus the previous method that produced a large amount of ashes and most of it could not be reused, less excess air and less contaminants when removing the combustion gases. We have here a diagram of Massachusetts facility that was operated by them for some time; and these numbers are representative of that facility. The facility here can vary some, depending on the numbers, but this data

183 20 is a more or less parallel to the data that this facility could have. In that facility, about two thousand one hundred tons per day are received; it arrives to the place where the material is poured. In this area about 1.6 percent of the material that cannot be reused is recovered, be it batteries or materials that arrived and cannot be processed in this facility, the remnant goes to the area where it is shredded and ferrous material is recovered; it goes to the boiler; later, at the top is where the fly ash is recovered, the ash goes through the advanced air control system and then it would goes to the dump at the bottom. In the bottom of the boiler there are about 10 percent of bottom ashes; ferrous material, non ferrous material and aggregate is recovered from this type of material. From that, then this facility generates what it generates This is Massachusetts facility, it generates about 62 megawatts, therefore, in the process around 75 percent is generated goes to energy, around 13 percent are recovered recyclable materials and about 12.5 percent is diverted. This is the Massachusetts area where Semass facility is located, which is the other facility that they also operate. This facility has several components, one is the most important aspect is that they are encapsulated, they are enclosed. You go near many of these facilities and do not notice that they are resource recovery facilities because you do not see them. Before you would see them: the chimney, the smoke and the bad odors, as in the landfills; you could find the landfill by its bad odors: but this

184 21 type of facility is enclosed and avoids any type of objectionable odor; Since it has in its entrance the area of encapsulated, closed, where the trucks arrive and drop the garbage; then it goes to a warehouse area. Later it is processed and the processed material is stored in the facility. Later it goes to the boiler area where the combustion process takes place, and then to an advanced emission control area, and eventually to the ashes area. The area is in a very sensitive environmental area, near the Cape Cod area, an area near agricultural areas and it was constructed around in Another type of improvements made to this facility has mainly been the energy production in the facility and the most the most important component is the emission control; a lot of money has been spent for its improvement and compliance with the environmental standards. These are the counties, the ones in blue are the counties that take their garbage to this type of facility, even the Massachusetts area, the Cape Cod area, and these are the communities. As he said, this is the facility, a little more explained in more detail here, as I explained at the beginning, the trucks enter to the solid wastes receiving area, which is encapsulated and enclosed, they dump the wastes and go out through the backside and into Road Number 2. Once the materials are received, they are processed, stored in this area, then they go to the boilers area, where the advanced emission control system is located. Once there, the ashes go to this area. This is, in summary, how here in

185 22 Arecibo the facility would be. We have finished the presentation, now we want to address we turn over to Mister Rafael Toro who will help us with the process now. Now we will go to the Materials Separation Plan s Questions and Answers Session. Thank you. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: Thank you, Jaime, thank you, Mark. I would like to add a fact. You saw those municipalities in Massachusetts where it is implem that serve the Energy Answers plant, or what used to belong to Energy Answers. Their technology, the recycling percent in these municipalities increased in 33.8 percent. The existing recycling percent at present in Puerto Rico, as you know, at the most, is around 12 percent, 10 percent. Why? Because from the garbage you would have to prepare the fuel that would go to the technology, true? And since you must prepare a fuel that can be processed, in that process you must recycle the garbage, take out those things that cannot go to that system. Therefore, with this technology we are promoting, forcing, obliging that materials from the waste stream be separated in the process, true, from that garbage. And that is today s presentation, the Materials Separation Plan that has been presented to you today as a draft. Now we are open to the questions that you may have, the comments that you may have. We ask that you go near the microphone since we want to document all of this accurately for the record and, with your questions, prepare the final draft of the Materials Separation Plan.

186 23 Therefore, with confidence, feel free, this is very informal, make your questions to us and the comments that you may have; that is our purpose here. Take advantage that we have the technical personnel here, we have personnel from the project and we want, we want to share with you the aspects of the project and the questions that you may have. I invite you to come near the microphone. If you want, if it is easier for you, we can move around one of this modern microphones. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SESSION Good afternoon. My name is Raquel Ortiz, yes I have several questions. I do not know if you can answer all of them or if you want to address the other persons questions. I have some concerns. First, I would have liked that the opposition groups had been invited to this forum, to the public hearing, I do not know if this was done. I found out through this man, Professor Joaquín Faría, because he works here. Today, I also had a communication with a friend, but I understand that the announcement of the public hearing was not adequate, if not this would be full; that is the first thing. The second, I am concerned... ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: I would like to address your comment.

187 24 MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Yes. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: I think that you arrived a little bit late, when I had already started talking. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Yes, I arrived at six thirty, excuse me. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: This is not a public hearing. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: No? ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: This is a public meeting to share information and present to you the Materials Separation Plan. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Oh, when I arrived here, I was told that it was a public hearing, when I signed. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: Good, good. This is a mere clarification. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Ok. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: In the next permit process. We are not doing this to present to you a

188 25 permit request, we have not got there. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Ok. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: This is a Materials Separation Plan that is being promoted by a company that will promote its project. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Yes. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: That will come, it has not arrived. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Ok. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: The Environmental Impact Statement document is being prepared, which will be MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Exactly, when will it be ready? ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: It will be published, I understand, based on the schedule that I have been told, within the next month, month and a half. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Very good.

189 26 ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: The Preliminary Impact Statement will be published and then the public participation process will be opened. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Will it go then to public hearings? ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: Exactly, if it is requested and the Environmental Quality Board grants it, a public hearing will be held. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Ok. Well since this is preliminary, what percent of ashes is what you preliminary understand will go to the landfills and how much of this percent of ashes is what you call boiler aggregate that can be used to complement concrete blocks? And, if we are not taking the risk that these concrete blocks will afterwards become new asbestos, which has so much affected in the old constructions here? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Jaime Abreu, answering here: Yes, from this graph we have some percents, more or less, that gives you an idea. Clearly, as we indicated to you, we are in a planning phase. But if we use the data from the existing facilities in Massachusetts, the fly ash is about 11 per cent of the incoming material, the fly ash is 11 percent, that is 11 percent of two thousand tons; it is about two hundred tons per day, more or less.

190 27 MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Yes, yes. ENG. JAIME ABREU: And the bottom ash is about 10 percent, also around two hundred tons. But, that bottom ash is recovered in ferrous materials, non ferrous materials and aggregates. The aggregate is near 8 per cent or one hundred fifty tons per day, more or less. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: The danger of using those ashes is what makes me worry. As you say, there is a market to make concrete blocks for construction and this could be, well maybe a cheaper block to be used in housing developments, for the for low costs developments and it will be the new asbestos that can affect us in the future. ENG. JAIME ABREU: Well, for all and that well MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: I do not say asbestos, that is, another material that can affect the people since they are wastes. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: Ok. The boiler aggregate is the remaining material, after that was burnt. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Yeah.

191 28 ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: When you burn, what you burn is organic material, because it is the one that burns, the organic. The inorganic material, true, the inert material, the material that is a little piece of stone that true, that is the one that becomes the boiler aggregate. In that process the metals are separated: those that have an iron base, true, ferrous, and those that do not have a ferrous base, non ferrous. The result of the burnt material, to name it that way, is the boiler aggregate that serves as a construction material; it would substitute the aggregate that would be extracted from a quarry to make a construction project. Therefore, there MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Will it be used for the bottom? ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: Excuse me? MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: It will be for the bottom? ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: It is by the bottom, it is by the bottom of the primary combustion chamber, after the separation process they showed you. But I would lik I want to address the thing about asbestos. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: No, I am saying, would the ashes go to the bottom of the development?

192 29 ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: To the bottom of? MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: I am talking about the ash that will be recycled and later used, that is my point of concern, the ones for the blocks. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: Yes, yes, those, the boiler aggregate, the one in the bottom. But I want to address the asbestos issue. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Yeah. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: All the known and unknown studies have been performed to that material, what is called TCLP. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Yeah. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: TCLP is an analytical procedure established by EPA, it is called Toxicity Contaminants Leaching Procedure, true, to find out the contaminants a sample of that material is submitted to an extraordinary process to extract what can be taken out and compare it to the standards published by, true, based in environmental risks studies that they

193 30 publish. The boiler aggregate passes all the TCLP studies. Do you understand? When submitted to the extraction processes, it does not release, it does not leach contaminants under the EPA standards. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: That is, in no way will the ashes affect us when they are used? ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: Based on the studies performed, that will be included in the Environmental Impact Statement, they do not represent an environmental risk. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Up to now. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: Well, those are the studies performed. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Good. You have one. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: But, that is what we are here for. MR. LUIS CAMACHO: Greetings. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: Continue. MR. LUIS CAMACHO: Luis Camacho from NotiUno, here in the North. Since you are talking

194 31 about ashes and the aggregate materials that will be produced at the plant, do you have the numbers of the amount of the aggregate material, product of this type of plant, for example in the United States, that is distributed to construction projects? ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: I leave that question for them since I do not know. ENG. MARK GREEN: Energy Answers, our company is the only company that produces this type of ash that can be recycled in this batch. The other technologies go into what is called quench, a wet quench, that makes the... is very difficult to use that material. But the fact that we go to a complete combustion allows the... eliminates all the organics, so it s very easy to reuse that material. We sold the facility in 1996 and the company that operated the facility chose to make some changes to the facility and they no longer produce that product. While we produced it, we stored it until we passed all the tests, show the state of Massachusetts that we could meet all of their requirements. And then we used one hundred percent of that material in roads on our site, in blocks, in buildings on our site and off-site and then also on several highways stretches in Massachusetts. But none of the other facilities produce that type of product; this is unique to our facility, in the U.S. MR. LUIS CAMACHO: Ok. Thank you. I had another question related to the landfills. We are

195 32 saying that the landfill here in Arecibo has a useful life of maybe a couple of more years, but I saw in your presentation that an amount of ashes are produced. First I want to know, of the total production, what is the percent of ashes, I lost it, I know you mentioned it. ENG. JAIME ABREU: Around ten percent. MR. LUIS CAMACHO: Ok. And then, in what landfill will they be deposited? Because the Arecibo landfill is going to be closed. How will that ash product be handled? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Yes, Jaime Abreu. The quest.. the the We address basically The disposal of this type of ashes, generally, is required to be at a landfill that complies with Subtitle E, EPA s requirements, so that there is no type of environmental contamination, be it to the underground water. Energy Answer has not determined yet, but at the proper time a landfill that complies with these requirements will be sought for that type of ashes. It is my understanding that the Arecibo landfill does not meet these requirements, that is, that it is not an option for disposal, at this moment. Unless it has an enabled cell of future expansion that complies with the liners and the requirements of Subtitle E, in such case, disposal could be done in it. But, for now, this type of facility disposes in landfills that are complying with Subtitle E. In that case, evaluations will be performed to find and determine the landfill they would do business with; the landfill they would use to dispose

196 33 of the ashes. MR. LUIS CAMACHO: You have not identified one that complies with these requirements? ENG. JAIME ABREU: No. That is, but there are few in the island. That is, it is easy maybe That is, many of the landfills are private. I would not dare to say which since not yet they are in the process of determining that, but there will come the time when it is determined. MR. LUIS CAMACHO: I have one more question and it is also about landfills. ENG. JAIME ABREU: Yes. MR. LUIS CAMACHO: We received the information, documents, I do not have them here, but I could show them to you later, in the sense the documents are from the Solid Wastes Authority, indicating that they have a prospect plan to bring 50 percent of the wastes that are being taken to Humacao, to the Humacao landfill, to a plant some place in the North Zone. Obviously, it does not mention any specific plant because right now there is none, but we all suppose that it will be the plant that you are projecting to establish in Arecibo. Since they take about ten tons of garbage there, around five tons, more or less, will come here. You mentioned that your number is, how much daily, the capacity?

197 34 ENG. JAIME ABREU: Two... MR. LUIS CAMACHO: Two? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Two thousand tons. MR. LUIS CAMACHO: Then, are we saying that there will be two plants? Are they talking about your plant? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Yes, several things must be clarified. First, SWA in its dynamic itinerary established that there will be as a minimum two energy resource recovery plants or waste-to-energy, one for the northwest area and one for the northeast area. Minimum capacities were established, I belief there were one thousand five hundred to one thousand three hundred per day for each one of them and the service areas were established, more or less. The service area that we have now is for planning, it is not final and binding, and there are agreements and commercial businesses still being established. There is a possibility that an agreement is reached with Humacao, but it could also be with Vega Baja, with Arecibo, any other. No type of commercial business has been closed; they working on it but I do not have the information, I cannot evaluate I have not evaluated that information from the SWA, I only know that there will be what the SWA

198 35 promotes is two facilities, as a minimum. Up to now, this one is being established, which would be the one for the northwest; there is supposed to be another one for the northeast. But I do not know if there is anything for that facility yet, I understand that there is nothing yet. MR. LUIS CAMACHO: Ok. PROF. JOAQUÍN FARÍA: Good evening, my name is Joaquín Faría. I am a professor from this Institution but I am here in my civil character. I have two questions. From the graphs I saw and the plant s location, we are near the river, the Río Grande of Arecibo. How...? Does this plant affect the Arecibo aquifers or its location? That is one of my concerns. And the second is what logistics...? If some logistic has been planned for the garbage/solid wastes trucks because, obviously, it means that from the areas from which the Arecibo solid wastes are coming there must be a logistic to work with what we have here and how it will affect us that live here. ENG. JAIME ABREU: Excellent questions. Those two questions will be developed as part of the Environmental Impact Statement, the traffic study issue and the Well, the aquifers issue we know that they will not be impacted because there are no type of water discharges nor of anything else to the river. It does not discharge, or anything, like a wastewater plant or another type of processing plant. The answer is no. Neither there will be an impact to the soil

199 36 because it is not a type of landfill, no materials will be left It will depend directly on the citizens for a considerable time, as in the case of a landfill, that will be deposited and stored in the area. In this case it would be temporarily stored in a concrete floor and all that if some type is generated some type of liquid is recovered inside the facility and treated. With respect to the traffic, there will be a report in the EIS in which the traffic will be evaluated. But it is our understanding that the increase in the traffic will not be significant for the Arecibo area. I estimate about two hundred tons.. two hundred trucks per day, more or less, versus, for example, I belief that they added preliminary information but, as I told you, once the EIS report is made, you will have the information for evaluation and can comment about it. Basically, as I was telling you, during the phase of the EIS preparation there will be a component of ecologic evaluation in which all the angles are studied and up to know, for example, no impact is foreseen. There is no type of discharge neither to the river, nor to aquifers so it is our understanding that we foresee no type of impact for the area. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: That is... Ok. How then? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Name, please. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Raquel Ortiz, again, Raquel Ortiz from Arecibo. How are you going

200 37 to, if you are going to do it, incentivize those recycling programs that do not exist in Arecibo? Because we are the head of the district. ENG. JAIME ABREU: Basically, the materials recovered in this facility will be those for which we know that there are facilities nearby. In the case of the batteries we have the facilities nearby, we can take the batteries to that facility and there has been an approach to facilities that need, for example, recycling or recovery, that need that we take corrugated carton to them. There have been approaches to these facilities. We are implementing, excuse me, trying to find the way to allocate an area for their materials, be it packed or in some other way, so that they can come and pick them up, and in that way have the materials separated for each type of facility. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: What are the incentives for the creation of recycling firms of different types of materials, of cardboard, of glass, of.? ENG. JAIME ABREU: This type has let s say a firm that could be at Ponce and recycle some specific material that can be separated in this type of facility, that type of can be done I would also like to add that we try to recover the most That is, if in the market some type of new recyclable material appears, we will look for ways to incentivize the market and the companies that recycle it in the area, especially in Arecibo. If it is not possible to start recycling it, we would assist

201 38 in finding the area within Arecibo so that the recycling of this new type of material is incentivize and therefore, promote a little bit of more recycling in the area. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Will these companies go and get the material or will you sell it to them? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Rather, we will try to maintain the recycling within the Arecibo area, for example, the case of the batteries. If it is an area nearby, we could take them to an area nearby. But it is also influenced by costs. For example, there may be a company far away from the area but, it could be that taking corrugated cardboard to that company does not have a cost impact. In that case a contract can be made with that company in a friendly way in which way it is beneficial for both to recover materials, promote recycling, one way or the other. In the other hand, for example, if we have a truck full of tires or some type of material that we want to take some place, we could choose to take it to company X one day and to company Y another; that would be the way to find the market for those products. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: So you are not sure if you sell them or pick them up, that was my original question. It is a simple question.

202 39 ENG. JAIME ABREU: No, yes, yes. Basically, it has to be established. Obviously, it depends on the market and may vary with the agreements performed. That is, I cannot tell you an exact answer since it may vary from one week to another. We do want to incentivize and promote recycling in the area because it is of benefit to us; it is of benefit to the community and of benefit to all of Puerto Rico. We look for ways with the community s process, but we have got to establish with the community leaders some way to incentivize and promote some type of future recycling that we do not have right now. MRS. RAQUEL ORTIZ: Thank you. ENG. JAIME ABREU: Your welcome. MR. RAMÓN NIEVES: Good evening. For the record, Ramón Ruiz Nieves, Member of the House of Representatives and university professor. I was listening a little while ago the expressions related to the landfills and everybody knows that in Puerto Rico nearly there are practically eight remaining landfills and the Environmental Quality Board has expressed that those landfills have about eight useful life years left, which has created a solid waste disposal problem for Puerto Rico. In the past, a company named Thermoselect came to the island to perform a viability study, if it was feasible or not to construct an energy plant in the Caguas Industrial Zone.

203 40 That project practically was objected but it was bringing something that was very important. And from what I will bring, some concerns of this servant will be made public. Number one, I brought the project s cost, many of us have questioned in many several occasions: who will finance the projects? This is not a project of five or six million dollars, this is a project of a considerable amount. Subsequently, where will the solid waste come from to be able to generate what is needed for the project to be totally viable? Because it will not be viable to construct a plant while looking at the eight or nine towns that will dispose of their solid wastes; for that project to be viable there is a factor. It has been talked about the ashes disposal, it has been said that we will not have the landfills to collect them and consequently that the project is in an area where many persons have brought here their concerns. If it is near or not from the aquifer, from the south, from the north, where will it be, is it near the karsts? The importance of all of this is where will the final disposal be and the energy that it generates; if the project is going to generate energy, to whom will this energy be provided, if it will be sold, if it is going to be a project that in the corresponding burning generates energy because it is not only the jobs, but subsequently, what the project might bring. And based on this, there are other concerns that will arise on the way. Among them, I bring it up, the mechanism to dispose of the leachate in a zone that is part of the Arecibo Valley, which in many occasions has been said to be a floodable zone and also an area that has been protected and has never had this type of disposal.

204 41 Consequently, we saw the Massachusetts photograph. There is something more important, Europe has been one of the most responsible countries with respect to the particles per million air emissions. We want to know this project s corresponding air emissions with respect to the Environmental Quality Board and the community s concerns. ENG. JAIME ABREU: Ok. I we will divide it in several stages since you have several concerns. I will address some of them, Mark will address the others. Let us start at the beginning, you started talking of the landfills, of the closing of the landfills, that there will be eight landfills, you said in about eight years. Clarifying, right now there are thirty landfills in operations, eventually, gradually they will be closing, and that s true. MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: There will remain around in practically eight years, six landfills in Puerto Rico. ENG. JAIME ABREU: Eventually there will be five landfills in the South area, remaining most of them being Humacao if I remember well, they are Humacao, Ponce, Peñuelas... MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: Peñuelas. ENG. JAIME ABREU: Almost all of them are in the South area. I do not have a complete

205 42 recollection, but basically they are closing. EPA s problem in the North Region is the Karsts area, the problem many of the landfills that are in the North area do not comply with Subtitle E, the leachates are reaching the underground area, which creates environmental problems and that is why EPA, the past and present administration, is promoting that those landfills be closed and that they comply with the requirements for those landfills, that is separate. Second, you talked, also talked of the Thermoselect project in Caguas. That project, well, is a little bit complex process. That also even the Colegio de Ingenieros gave its opinion. After the Colegio de Ingenieros gave its opinion, there was a problem among several problems, one of them was air emissions in a valley, since it was going to be there was an investment problem. Then, the contamination in the Caguas Valley, among several aspects, was one of them. The other one was economic; they promoted about three thousand tons per day of garbage; they did not have the markets; they asked the government to guarantee the amount of garbage. That was a quite complex project and the Mayor, Willie Miranda Marin, realized it and objected the project. It was a complex process, it does not compare with this case and in this case well. Also it was a technology that was not approved in the United States, has not worked in the United States. It was established in Europe: a pilot plant of fifty tons per day was built and they jumped to three thousand tons. They built it in Germany, that plant never worked and they

206 43 wanted to do it in Caguas and everybody said, Look, you are crazy. Invest that amount of money, it will not work. Nevertheless, this type of technology works in the United States and there are several facilities operating. There is one that is also being established now in the Baltimore area and there are about eighty eight facilities in all the United States. Europe basically uses waste to energy; they try to eliminate the landfills. Therefore, this is a proven technology; it is not a guinea pig experiment or anything similar. That is, it is something proven that works and in the United States was proved to work and complies with EPA requirements. In the part of the disposal of the you also talked about the leachates. And that comes in the landfills. We, well, it is not a facility that generates leachates and it would be contained within the facility if it were generated. It will not leach into the soil or nothing; it is not like a landfill. In the landfill, well, storage is for years, centuries, and the leachates are at the mercy of the weather and the environment and do not comply with Subtitle E. In the term, as I said a little while ago, of the disposal of the I think that you talked about the wastes, where will they be taken to what landfill. That still is being established, but it will be a landfill that complies and mostly it will be in the South, where the landfills that comply with Subtitle E are located. But I would not dare to say which because it has not been established, but it will be a landfill that complies with those requirements.

207 44 MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: Therefore, the most important factor is how many tons of daily garbage/waste would this plant need to make this operation functional? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Sorry, could you repeat the question again? MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: Yes, there is no problem with that. How much garbage, be it, organic waste, how many tons would there have to be generated daily on this zone so that it would be operational? ENG. JAIME ABREU: There are two thousand tons per day that are generated. Actually, for example, I understand that the Arecibo s landfill receives round a thousand tons per day, other closer landfills is the Vega Baja, I believe around three thousand tons per day, Isabela another closer one, is about a thousand or less than a thousand tons per day. I do not know the exact numbers, I cannot dare to tell exactly but it exceeds the two thousand tons per day, for the area. There was another question about the emissions, the particulates, for what I will ask Mark Green to answer. The part about the particulates, the doubt was about how the emission control system will minimize MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: Exactly, and the last factor, before you answer, a factor that exists in Puerto Rico, which was mentioned by the other attendant here. Puerto Rico

208 45 has been about sixteen years in a considerable struggle, with television and radio programs, to train the community with respect to the garbage disposal, separation of its garbage, that is, recycling. ENG. JAIME ABREU: Correct. MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: And we have coupled efforts, I say coupled because all the corresponding efforts have been exhausted and it has not been able to exceed 11.9 percent in the disposal of recycling as such. Could the plant operate with material that has not been separated in recycling? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Yes, that is basically the process. The facility will only assume that there is zero percent, which is not the case of recycling. Let s say that the what SWA says, that it is 10 percent. According to the numbers of the Massachusetts facility operation, when you operate the facility you recover 13 percent of the recyclable material. That is, that only by operating the facility, the recyclable material in the region increases from 10 to 23% only by operating the facility. That does not include the incentive to the community to perform curbside collection, which is to collect the recyclable material in what that, well, that need to be spoken with the municipality and coordinated with the areas, maybe with the collection companies, so that they locate containers to place plastics, etc. There are some municipalities that have implemented it.

209 46 In this way, recycling will increase much more and that is also included in the dynamic itinerary of the Solid Waste Authority, which have tried to promote that type of legislation to promote, incentivize and comply with the goal of 35% that up to now is for 2016, as it appears in the dynamic itinerary. That is, when the facility starts in 2013, it would be already near 23%, maybe a little bit more, depending on the increase in the community s recycling at that time. And when the municipality joins, someway the community leaders with the municipality, incentivizing the community so that it recycles, it would increase and exceed that 35%. Surely, I am sure that it would exceed that 35 percent. MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: And lastly, would it work also with the rubber recycling, which is the problem that Puerto Rico has with the tires disposal? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Of tires? I am going to ask Mark so that he answers that. MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: Thank you. ENG. JAIME ABREU: Basically, our facility will have a type of recovery of of what is rubber. It could be that some rubber almost always shredded, small rubber material, and the regulations, allow up to certain amount, do not throw away all the things that are of rubber and

210 47 MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: It would recover, but not process it. ENG. JAIME ABREU: It will be recovered, the majority must be recovered. It could be that some is processed because not all will be recovered. But there are some strict regulations that allow the type the amount of rubber that can be processed. Not everything can go to the facility and we will try, as possible, to recover the rubber. MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: Simply, the final question, how much would be the cost of the project and how much time would the construction take? ENG. JAIME ABREU: The construction investment will be three hundred fifty millions, more or less, with a construction process of two years. The total investment (planning, design, and all those things) will be about five hundred million dollars. And it is a private investment. The construction process will be of two years or two and a half years. It is a process To address the particulate question; there are two types of particulates: the ones that are particulates particulate matter 10, of 10 microns, and particulate matter of 2.5 microns. And for that type of facility there is a system called bag house, which is a canvas system similar to the vacuum cleaner, that have the filters that work in series recovering that type of ash, particulate matter.

211 48 MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: And finally, most of the municipalities in Puerto Rico are allocating money to pay the landfills for the disposal of organic garbage, be it domestic garbage and else. Will the municipalities continue paying you to receive the wastes when the product at the end of the road will generate energy that could be sold? ENG. JAIME ABREU: There are two types of charges, what would be the charge for receiving garbage, which is the tipping fee, and the other type is the energy fee, which is the fee that we would receive from the energy sale. The benefit of that is, of all this process is what incentivize most to using the facility, the landfills disposal costs are near low numbers. Near to I cannot say, you know, they vary. Some of them are from fifteen to forty six dollars, in that range, but the facility, our facility would be competing with those numbers. That is, it will not be a very high cost as it was in the Caguas case. Caguas had a very high number, which made it impossible to dispose in that type of facility. In this type of facility it is more attractive to dispose. MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: Remember that we will not have a regional a landfill. See? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Yes, yes, correct. That is the purpose, because, if a type of facility is established in a municipality in which things are not very good right now and

212 49 you are charging a very high number, well, there will be no incentive. I would dispose in the landfills if it is cheaper. I would continue disposing in the landfills. I would look for some landfill where I can dispose it. But when you have a number the cost of disposing the garbage here in the area, near of what at that moment would be the closed Arecibo land field, well you will keep almost near the same cost that you actually pay and you would not... They will also make contracts and businesses with the municipality, which is a part that would enter directly with them. MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: And have there been approaches with the Electric Energy Authority to dispose of the energy generated by the burning of the products? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Yes, there have been some approaches to the Electric Energy Authority for selling of energy. That is, that basically now how the situation is in Arecibo, an incentive will be provided to what is received in the landfill, not charging the Arecibo area for disposing in the facility. MR. RAMÓN RUIZ NIEVES: Thank you. PROF. JOAQUÍN FARÍA: For the record, my name is Joaquín Faría. With respect to the combustion process, do we know which material will go into the atmosphere? That is, what is going to go into the air and how will it affect the environment

213 50 and how will it really affect us the human beings? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Basically this type of facility has an emission control system that complies with EPA requirements. The facilities that we have in Semass, Massachusetts, have very strict emission standards, and the facility is complying with those standards, it is even below them and it would be a similar facility complying with those parameters already established by EPA. That is, a part of the EIS will be an evaluation of the impact of those types of emission in the citizens health. It will be and exhaustive evaluation will be performed in which well, it is prove that there is no direct impacts to the citizens and that will be in the EIS. That is a study that is performed and will also be available for your evaluation. MRS. MARÍA BERIO: Yes. In the Environmental Impact Statement. First of all, good evening to all. In the Environmental Impact Statement that is being prepared for the project, as support to the analysis that is being performed of the possible impacts to the region, it is being considered, well, not only the human health and ecological risks studies, but also flora and fauna and noise studies are being performed; air studies, air modeling and other studies are also being performed; and all these studies will be part of the environmental document that will be available to the public. We expect that within the next month it will be available for the review and comments of the community.

214 51 MR. RAFAEL TORO: Any other questions? No more questions? Although there are no more questions, now I will explain what is going to happen. All this comment process will be compiled in a document that will be prepared by the company, which will be a final draft of the Material Separation Plant. A final draft. That draft will be available to you; by means of another public notice, and I want to make it clear, as engineer Abreu said, that this type of meetings are notified by means of announcements in the newspapers, announcements in the library in the municipality. And that I encourage you to be looking for these announcement because that is the process that is followed. The next public hearing celebration sorry, not hearing. The next public meeting with respect to the final document will be announced in a similar manner. When the Environmental Impact Statement document is issued, it will be announced in a similar manner, by means of an announcement in the newspaper and the internet and so forth. Therefore, what you can do with respect to those notifications is to be looking for them because this is part of an evaluation process that continues. It is starting today, but it continues, and your participation is important, it is essential for this to work, to work well. ENG. JAIME ABREU: A last clarification, in the public announcement there was a PO Box in the Garrochales Ward, to which you can continue sending any comments, doubts or questions that you may have. If you remember something after

215 52 this meeting, send it to us and with pleasure we will try we will address it in the next version of the document. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: With nothing else, thank you. It is, what time is it? ENG. JAIME ABREU: Ten pass eight. ATTORNEY RAFAEL TORO: We close the public meeting at ten past eight in the evening, today, September 17 th, Thank you very much. We invite you to some refreshments and to some sharing. Thank you. ENG. JAIME ABREU: Thank you. * * * - PUBLIC MEETING FINALIZED AT 8:10 P.M. -

216 53 DATE: Friday, September 17 th, 2010 HOUR: 6:30 p.m. MATTER: Public Meeting CERTIFICATION OF THE RECORD STENOGRAPHER I CERTIFY that the above is a true and correct transcription of the record taken by the subscriber of the procedures during the Public Meeting of the Materials Separation Plan. In San Juan, Puerto Rico, today October 7, FÉLIX LÓPEZ RIVERA Record Stenographer

217 54 INDEX Page Introduction 2 Presentation of the Project 6 by Eng. Jaime Abreu Questions and Answers Session 23 Certification of the Record Stenographer 53

218 APPENDIX 5 PRELIMINARY DRAFT MATERIALS SEPARATION PLAN PUBLIC MEETING AGENDA

219 Energy Answers Arecibo Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting Agenda Pontifical Catholic University of Puerto Rico State Road 662 km 2.3 Arecibo, PR September 17, :00 p.m. - 10:00 p.n. PUBLIC MEETING AGENDA A. Introduction B. Proposed Resource Recovery Facility and Economic Benefits C. Core Service Area serviced by the Facility D. Broader Service Area serviced by the Facility E. Existing Recycling Materials Program F. The Methods Proposed for Materials Separation G. Alternate Disposal Methods for Handling Residual Waste H. Location for MSP Review I. Proposed Project J. Public Comments and Questions

220 APPENDIX 6 PRELIMINARY DRAFT MATERIALS SEPARATION PLAN PUBLIC MEETING PRESENTATION

221 Energy Answers Arecibo Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting September 17, :00 pm

222 Agenda A. Introduction B. Proposed Resource Recovery Facility and Economic Benefits C. Core Service Area serviced by the Facility D. Broader Service Area serviced by the Facility E. Existing Recycled Materials Programs F. The Methods Proposed for Materials Separation G. Alternate Disposal Methods for Handling Residual Waste H. Location for MSP Review I. Proposed Project J. Public Comments and Questions

223 A. Introduction Who? What? When? Why? Where? Energy Answers Arecibo Resource Recovery Facility Commercial Operation Materials Separation Plan to satisfy the requirements set forth in 40 CFR 60.57b Cambalache Ward, Arecibo PR

224 A. Introduction

225 A. Introduction Arecibo Resource Recovery Facility Project Generates 70 Megawatts of renewable energy and recyclable materials from 2,000 tons per day of MSW. Electricity will be sold to PREPA. Processed Refuse Fuel (PRF) converted from post-recycling MSW Facility will be located at a former Paper Mill Site Two service areas: Core and Broader Areas

226 A. Introduction Arecibo Resource Recovery Project

227 B. Proposed Resource Recovery Facility and Economic Benefits 4,004 Indirect Jobs 150 Direct Jobs 4,283 Construction Jobs Economic Benefits Direct and indirect employment opportunities for local residents is expected to generate over $159 Million

228 C. Core Service Area serviced by the Facility

229 C. Core Service Area serviced by the Facility Solid Waste Generated in Core Service Area 350,000 T o n s p e r Y e a r 300, , , , ,000 50,000 Other Waste Low Quality Paper Corrugated Cardboard Ferrous Metals Organic Waste C&D Yard Waste Year

230 C. Core Service Area serviced by the Facility Projected Amounts of Solid Waste in Core Service Area (tons) Year Yard Waste 66,349 67,795 68,947 69,531 C&D 55,616 56,828 57,794 58,283 Organic Waste 41,956 42,870 43,599 43,968 Ferrous Metals 30,573 31,239 31,770 32,039 Corrugated Cardboard 30,247 30,907 31,432 31,698 Low Quality Paper 28,296 28,913 29,404 29,653 Other Waste 72,203 73,777 75,030 75,666 Total 325, , , ,836

231 D. Broader Service Area serviced by the Facility

232 D. Broader Service Area serviced by the Facility Solid Waste Generated in Broader Service Area 1,400,000 T o n s p e r Y e a r 1,200,000 1,000, , , , ,000 Other Waste Low Quality Paper Corrugated Cardboard Ferrous Metals Organic Waste C&D Yard Waste Year

233 D. Broader Service Area serviced by the Facility Projected Amounts of Solid Waste in Broader Service Area (tons) Year Yard Waste 249, , , ,134 C&D 208, , , ,892 Organic Waste 157, , , ,129 Ferrous Metals 114, , , ,326 Corrugated Cardboard 113, , , ,046 Low Quality Paper 106, , , ,366 Other Waste 271, , , ,175 Total 1,221,724 1,246,906 1,266,242 1,280,069

234 E. Existing Recycled Materials Programs Approximately 23 recycling centers and/or materials separation programs in the area. Among these are the following: Auto Batteries Electronic Equipment Ferrous and Non-ferrous metals Plastic Yard Waste Bio-Solids Paper

235 F. The Methods Proposed for Material Separation Metal and ash recycling programs Pre-combustion separation of: Ferrous metals Bulky recyclable items White goods Post-combustion separation of: Ferrous metals Non-ferrous metals Ash Recycling Program: Boiler Aggregate TM

236 F. The Methods Proposed for Material Separation Integration with Community Separation Programs. The Resource Recovery Facility will directly enhance the following programs: Metals Recovery and Recycling Construction and Demolition Debris Management Disaster Debris Management White Goods and Bulky Waste Management Special Waste Management (such as ASR, HHW, tires, batteries, electronics, etc)

237 G. Alternate Disposal Methods for Handling Residual Waste Efficient complete combustion of the PRF Complete recovery of usable or recyclable materials from the ash Zero Landfill objective High energy recovery Low percentage of ash High ferrous recovery rate Low residues requiring disposal Low capital costs per ton Low tipping fees

238 H. Location for MSP Review Name Phone Number Hours of Operations Pontificia Universidad Católica de Puerto Rico Centro de Arecibo Biblioteca Tribunal General de Justicia Centro Judicial de Arecibo Instituto Comercial de Puerto Rico Junior College, Arecibo Biblioteca National College of Business and Technology, Biblioteca Universidad Interamericana de PR, Recinto de Arecibo Centro de Acceso a la Información Universidad de Puerto Rico en Arecibo Biblioteca (787) (787) ext (787) (787) (787) (787) Monday Friday: 8:00am 4:pm Saturday: 8:00am 4:00pm Sunday: Closed Monday Friday: 8:30am 12:00pm - 1:00pm 5:00pm Monday Thursday: 7:30am 9:00pm Friday: 8:00am 4:30pm Saturday / Sunday: Closed Monday Thursday: 7:30am 9:00pm Friday: 7:30am 4:00pm Saturday: 8:00am 3:00pm Sunday: Closed Monday Friday: 8:00am 9:30pm Saturday: 8:00am 5:00pm Monday Thursday: 7:00am 9:50pm Friday: 7:00am 4:30pm Saturday: 8:00am 4:30pm Sunday: 8:00am 5:00pm Biblioteca Pública de Arecibo (787) Monday Saturday: 8:00am 4:30pm

239 I. Proposed Project Arecibo - Global Fibers Paper Mill

240 Recovery vs. Disposal 8,000 tpd of trash represents: 10,000 barrels of oil 900 tons of aggregate 50 tons of non-ferrous metals 500 tons of steel Or: 12.6 acres of land, buried one foot deep each day with long-term environmental problems.

241 I. Proposed Project

242 I. Proposed Project

243 I. Proposed Project

244 I. Proposed Project

245 I. Proposed Project

246 I. Proposed Project

247 I. Proposed Project Processed Solid Waste Storage Ashes Handling Solid Waste Arrival Arecibo Resource Recovery Project

248 Questions & Comments

249 APPENDIX 7 FINAL DRAFT MATERIALS SEPARATION PLAN PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE

250

251 APPENDIX 8 FINAL DRAFT MATERIALS SEPARATION PLAN PUBLIC MEETING TRANSCRIPT

252 Preface The Materials Separation Plan (MSP) Public Meeting held on August 12, 2011 at the Lions Club in Arecibo Puerto Rico followed the agenda set by federal regulation for the Final Draft Materials Separation Plan and Siting Analysis for the Arecibo Resource Recovery Facility proposed by Energy Answers International. The Public Meeting started at 5:22 pm, and following the presentation of the MSP and Siting Analysis, a Question and Answer (Q & A) session began which lasted until 10:06 pm. A transcript of the meeting has been completed and, upon review of the comments and questions, this summary of the topics discussed at the public meeting was prepared by Energy Answers. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 1

253 Table of Contents PROCEDURE 3 ROLE OF RECYCLING 5 CRITICISM OF LOCAL AND FEDERAL REGULATORS AND ENERGY ANSWERS 9 PERMITTING PROCESS 13 SITE COMMUNITY CONCERNS 14 PLANT OPERATIONS 17 ASH MANAGEMENT 22 WASTE QUANTITY, QUALITY AND TRANSPORT 24 STATUS OF PUERTO RICO LANDFILLS 26 ECONOMICS OF THE PROJECT 28 QA/QC COMMENTS 30 MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 2

254 PROCEDURE 1. How were people notified of the hearing? The official public announcement for the project was printed on Friday, July 8, in the El Vocero newspaper, one of the three daily newspapers with island-wide circulation and known for its island-wide focus, as opposed to the other two island-wide daily papers which are known more for their focus on San Juan related matters.. The minimum 30-day notice period commenced on that day and provided over 30 days for comment and evaluation. The period ended on the date of the public meeting, August 12 th. In addition to El Vocero, the notice was also published in the El Norte and Periodico Pulso, both weekly newspapers in which the notice was published during the week of July 12. The list of all of the locations where the Siting Analysis and the Final Draft Materials Separation Plan could be evaluated was included in the advertisements. 2. Was Friday at 5:00pm the best time to hold the hearing? After considering other options, Energy Answers felt that a Friday meeting would ensure the largest attendance. If the meeting was held on a weekday evening, the requirements of preparing children for school and adults for work the next day were believed to limit the effective length of the meeting. If the meeting was held on a Saturday or Sunday, weekend activities would have posed a conflict. 3. Why are there security guards and why are the questions limited to only one minute? There were many people that came to the meeting to ask questions and make comments. So, in an effort to make sure everyone had an opportunity to speak, the time allowed for each question was initially limited to approximately one minute per question and subsequently extended to two minutes, with substantial leniency. However, anyone who wanted to ask additional questions could to the rear of the line and have an additional opportunity to pose a question, which occurred numerous times. The number of questions or comments made by an individual was not limited, nor was their total time; it was simply broken into approximately two minute segments. Security Guards were hired to ensure that everyone had access to the meeting and the opportunity to participate, without inappropriate disruptions. 4. Were people paid to come and defend the position of Energy Answers? Energy Answers technical and communications consultants were on hand to answer questions and to manage the meeting. No others were paid to attend the meeting or defend Energy Answers. Questions that were presented to Energy Answers through public meetings and meetings with the regional EPA were prepared and distributed prior to the meeting to ensure that they were presented, answered and included in the record. 5. How will people of the community stay informed about the project and how can they get answers to their questions? Once Energy Answers gets the permits, will they MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 3

255 continue making presentations and participating in radio programs to explain the progress of the project to the communities? Energy Answers has entered into a formal agreement with the Municipality, which includes the commitment to maintain a strong communication and community outreach effort. A council of community members will convene regularly to receive updated information and bring issues of concern to the company. Energy Answers will have a community outreach coordinator who will work to educate the community and answer questions. The Energy Answers website, which has a section in Spanish about the Arecibo Project, will be updated frequently and newspapers articles, radio talk shows and s will provide additional information regarding the progress of the Project. 6. Why, if you are not the government, are you under executive order , at the Environmental Quality Board level, thereby evading all of the established procedures in Puerto Rico? The Project is not evading all of the established procedures in Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico has an executive order that set guidelines establishing how certain projects, such as energy projects, should be reviewed and the Project has complied with those guidelines., Additionally, the federal permitting process, imposes a number of conditions and controls, and the company must comply with these as well. 7. Until when do we have to submit questions in writing? According to the regulations, questions must be submitted by today, the day of the public meeting. You can submit your questions after this, but the obligation is to respond to the questions submitted up to today. 8. How will the transcript and answers to the questions be provided to the people? The final MSP with the transcript and Q & A will be available at locations in the community (i.e., in the libraries previously advertised). A public notice will be made when the final document is available for your review and will include the location where the document can be reviewed. If someone does not have access to the public locations where the document is available, they can send us a request and we will help make arrangements for them to have access to the document. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 4

256 ROLE OF RECYCLING 1. Shouldn t recycling, composting and technologies like bio-digestion be implemented as the EPA hierarchy puts them over incineration and landfilling? The first step in solid waste management should be to reduce, reuse, recycle and compost. The Arecibo Resource Recovery Project will accept, residual waste, which is all waste that is not managed through one of these systems. At the facility, the waste will be processed into a fuel for energy production and additional recyclable materials (metals and aggregate) are recovered. Currently in Puerto Rico, all residual waste (about 90% of the waste generated) is sent to landfills, many of which do not have EPA mandated environmental controls for leachate and gas emissions. Bio-Digestion and other technologies for waste management can still be pursued in Puerto Rico even with the Arecibo Project in operation. The Arecibo Project will accept 2100 tons per day of residual waste. Currently there is about 10,000 tons of waste going to landfills each day. Even with more aggressive recycling and composting programs, there will be a large quantity that must be managed in an environmentally sound manner. 2. How will this project help us increase recycling in our community? The recovery inherent in the proposed system is expected to increase the recycling rates of the participating municipalities by 5.5% based on the anticipated recovery of ferrous and non-ferrous metals in the waste stream. This rate increases to 15.1% if suitable uses for the Boiler Aggregate produced by the facility are identified and to 20.1% if uses for the Fly Ash are also identified. Additionally, Energy Answers has begun discussions with recycling businesses in Puerto Rico to determine if additional pre-processing separation can be effectively implemented and how we can work together to expand existing programs to reduce, reuse, recycle and compost. Also, Energy Answers is working to determine the feasibility of creating a central drop off center for residential and commercial recyclables. Also refer to the Materials Separation Plan. 3. What source was quoted related to the diagram that shows that communities with waste-to-energy (WTE) also have high recycling rates? Eileen Brettler Berenyi, PhD, Recycling and Waste-to-Energy: Are They Compatible? Update, Governmental Advisory Associates, Inc., June How are you going to encourage recycling, when you need people to generate garbage to stay in business? Based on the analysis of the waste stream in Puerto Rico and included in the MSP, there will be sufficient waste to be processed at the Arecibo Project even if recycling increases and achieves the goal of 35% and beyond. Puerto Rico is currently recycling at a rate of about 11% and there is about 10,000 tons per day going into landfills. Energy Answers will have contracts with communities based on a tonnage that we can expect to receive from that MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 5

257 municipality on a yearly basis. If the amount is actually delivered is less than the contracted amount because of an increase in recycling or composting, there will be no penalty imposed. There will not be put or pay contracts with municipalities. Finally, because the resource recovery facility technology was designed to maximize the recovery of recyclable materials, the recycling rates for the area will increase solely due to the operating of the resource recovery facility and the materials that it recovers from the residual waste it receives. 5. Puerto Rico currently imports 90% of its food from abroad. A major reason for this is the high cost of fertilizers and the biochemical degradation of our fields, due to intensive, unsustainable cultivation. Composting provides an excellent, less expensive alternative to improve agriculture in Puerto Rico. But to achieve a quality compost, to be able to assimilate nitrogen-rich materials, it is necessary to add large amounts of shredded wood into the composting process. The intent of the incinerator to use wood-based products for up to 50% of the volume competes directly with the compost industry. How will you ensure that a higher priority is placed on that wood using it for compost instead of burning it in the incinerator? The intent of the resource recovery facility is to manage the material that remains AFTER recycling, reduction and composting (i.e., residual waste). Additionally, the proposed Project will not accept dedicated loads of green waste, rather it is seeking partners in the region to which it can direct this waste. In the PSD permit submitted to EPA, Energy Answers states that the plant will be designed to combust up to 50% Processed Urban Wood Waste. This is comprised of the wood extracted from Construction and Demolition (C&D) operations as well as storm clean-up and dead tree removal, as well as other similar periodic activities. The Project does not anticipate operating at these levels on a daily basis. This operation is not incompatible with a composting operation. As a matter of fact, Energy Answers owned and operated a wood waste composting project (Cape Resources) in a town on Cape Cod that was also served by the WTE project in Massachusetts. 6. A resident expressed that Recycling programs are not providing the solution now. The government is not forcing the people to change from a throw-away culture to a recycling culture. Puerto Rico must embrace a solution and Energy Answers is the only solution being presented that can solve a problem of waste management and energy generation. We agree that our proposed resource recovery facility can be a vital component of the island s solid waste, recycling and renewable energy program. 7. Zero waste is being done in many countries. Why not develop recycling solutions instead of incineration? Setup a factory to make plastic garbage cans, to recycle tires and waste, for recycling aluminum. There are no countries in the world that have achieved zero waste and are recycling at 100%. Those countries that are at high rates of recycling have been MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 6

258 working at it for many years and many of them rely on WTE for the materials that are not recycled. The Arecibo Project does not preclude the establishment of recycling operations. Also refer to the Materials Separation Plan. 8. Currently at the 29 landfills in Puerto Rico, there are only 400 jobs managing the ten thousand tons per day, 365 days a year. If we recycled and composted 67% of that, do you know how many jobs that can create? 8,000-plus permanent jobs. The Arecibo Project is for the material which remains after recycling and composting. The Project will produce thousands of construction jobs that will last about three years and approximately 150 full time operating phase jobs. In addition, indirect jobs will be created in the region to support the operation and the economy will definitely see the positive effects of the construction and full time operation. 9. The "Bottle Bill was introduced in Puerto Rico 6 times, from 93 to 2001, and each time it died in the legislature. If the Bottle Bill is enacted... there are states that recycle up to 83% of their bottles and a glass recycling industry could be brought to Arecibo. The Bottle Bill has been very successful in many states which now have reduced litter and a source of recyclable material which can attract recycling businesses. However, even if 100% of the bottles and cans in Puerto Rico were recycled, there would still be a need for the Proposed facility. 10. How much of the waste produced in the homes is recyclable? In theory, the vast majority of the waste produced in homes can be recycled, composted or reused. However, there is a critical difference between the potential for a material to be recycled and it actually being recycled. Before materials can be recycled, they must be separated which requires differing levels of effort. (For example, it is simple to separate and recycle newspaper and office white paper, but more difficult to recover facial tissues, paper towels and labels. Glass bottles are easy to separate, but broken glass is a bit more difficult.) Add to this issue the level of participation; the percent of households that will participate in a recycling program; the extent of participation; and the percentage of the recyclable materials each participant is recovering from the waste stream. Most municipalities find that, although the vast majority of materials in the household waste stream may be recyclable, there will likely always be some materials destined for a form of final disposal other than recycling. Also, many of those items which could be recycled are difficult to recycle and may not be cost effective to do so. Consider items like disposable diapers, toys made of multiple plastics, disposable food wrappers, clothing and shoes which can be reused but are hard to recycle, office supplies, and entire contents of homes that have been turned to trash because of a natural disaster. The estimated recycling rates for Puerto Rico were provided in Section of the MSP. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 7

259 11. Let's assume that 50% of the amount of waste that arrives, can be recycled. You said you needed 2,100 tons of garbage a day to operate, right? If half of that trash is recycled, we'll assume that's the amount of trash there. I wonder what is the amount, if you have calculated what is the amount of garbage produced in the town of Arecibo and at the other towns that you say you will also serve? The amount, we need numbers. These figures are presented in the Material Separation Plan. It is projected that in 2025, the region served by the project will generate approximately 4,506 tons per day of waste. If 35% is recycled, which is what is established by law and what is set in the Dynamic Itinerary of the Solid Waste Authority, then up to 2,900 tons per day could reach our facility. Therefore, if half of the waste in the region is recycled, there would be approximately 2,250 tons still needing disposal within the region. Thus, even with a 50% recycling rate, sufficient waste remains for the operation of the proposed facility. 12. I know ADS has a study but has Energy Answers done a study related to the amount of recyclable material? Energy Answers has relied on the study prepared by the Solid Waste Management Authority. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 8

260 CRITICISM OF LOCAL AND FEDERAL REGULATORS AND ENERGY ANSWERS 1. Why was the Dynamic Itinerary Plan, believed by many to be plagued with errors and inaccuracies, used by the Separation Plan as a primary source of information? This document is the official planning document of the Puerto Rico Solid Waste Management Authority and the basis of current public policy. 2. We have seen many times in our island, how the regulations are written to protect the environment and people, but we don't see the enforcement necessary by the local or federal authorities, Department of Natural and Environmental Resources or the EPA, how can we be sure that these regulations will be met? It has been our experience that the US EPA Air Branch in Region 2 aggressively enforces the permit conditions. Additionally, the facility will be required to certify compliance with the permit conditions on an annual basis and report exceedances to the EPA and EQB. 3. In reference to a documentary on Channel 6 related to a town in the State of Texas, several oil companies wanted to establish their operations, and installed a monitoring system in order to get EPA approval. An environmental specialist was concerned about the high levels of pollution and realized the monitors were positioned away from the homes. When they were positioned near the homes, they found that the levels of contamination were higher than in the rest of the United States. Because lawmakers and representatives from Texas had been financed by companies the people suffer. In Puerto Rico the PPP (Public Private Partnerships) will create the same problems. Energy Answers is developing this privately. This project is not part of the PPP process. The emissions from the proposed Energy Answers facility will be monitored by local as well as federal regulators on a regular and continuous basis. Additionally, there are ambient air quality monitoring stations in the region which are designed to identify the concentrations of certain compounds in the air. These seem to be the type of exceedances referenced in the example provided. When exceedances of this type are identified, steps are taken to identify the source, or combination of sources, and to implement more stringent control mechanisms to eliminate the exceedance. 4. Once Energy Answers gets the permits, will they be given a waiver so that they do not have to comply with the requirements like all of the other agencies (PREPA, Water and Sewer) and the Battery Recycling Company? Energy Answers will not need a waiver from the air permit requirements since the emission limits that will be established in the air permit have been demonstrated as achievable in practice. The WTE industry is highly regulated and the permits have precise conditions that must be met. Energy Answers will operate pursuant to the strict guidelines defined in our permits. 5. Since we do not believe much in certain government offices, who can guarantee that you are going to do exactly what everyone has said here today? We do not believe, MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 9

261 because we have had already past experiences, of others saying "we'll do, we'll do" and nothing is done. Do you understand? Since we do not trust government agencies, can we trust what you are telling us? Because you say, everything will be so, that the filters... But when the time comes, because of the weakness of government agencies to bring you or anyone else back in line and say, "Look, we gave you a playbook, and this book tells you exactly what you have to do. And if you don't do it, we will take action against it." But since they don't take action, there are some companies that take advantage of this procedure and do whatever they want. Because the ones to pay the consequences are the town people. You guys, can you guarantee us that you are going to do what, in truth, you have to do, without us having to going there, to ask you to comply or to hold you responsible for not doing what you said? Because if something happens, someone will have to be held accountable and someone will have to be responsible for what happens. Are you guys responsible for that? Energy Answers is responsible for operating the facility in a manner that meets the established permit requirements, which have been established to ensure that the emissions will not cause damage to the environment or to the health of the residents. There are well established penalties for not complying with these limits, which include the potential shutdown of the facility. While compliance is reviewed at the local level, for these types of facilities and the associated permits, the assessments are also performed at the federal level. Therefore, the ultimate determination of compliance and penalties is not only local but also federal. It is also important to note that the results of annual performance testing and reporting will be available to the public via the EPA Region 2 website. 6. What is the relationship between Energy Answers and the Albany NY Solid Waste Energy Recovery System (ANSWERS) which was shut down in the 1990 s? Is the technology the same as the proposed Arecibo project? No, the technology is different. The fuel production technology utilized at ANSWERS is an earlier design of the Processed Refuse Fuel technology that is being proposed for Arecibo. Also, the materials handling, combustion system, emissions control and materials recovery systems are a completely different design. The Arecibo plant design is based on the SEMASS Resource Recovery Facility, located in Rochester Massachusetts and operational since As background, Energy Answers is headquartered in Albany NY and some of the principals of the company were involved in the conceptual design of ANSWERS. Energy Answers was not involved in the final design, construction or operation of the NY State Steam Plant (the combustion component of ANSWERS) which used waste derived fuel to produce energy and which was converted to natural gas in In the late 1970 s the State of NY and the City of Albany NY agreed to create a regional WTE system which would dispose of MSW and save oil by burning waste derived fuel to provided steam for heating and cooling of downtown Albany State office buildings. The project was called the Albany NY Solid Waste Energy Recovery System (ANSWERS). The system was developed with 2 distinct components: MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 10

262 (a) The waste processing and fuel preparation facility was constructed and owned by the City of Albany. Waste from private haulers was delivered to this facility where it was processed into a fuel. (b) The Steam Plant, which could burn oil, natural gas or Refuse Derived Fuel, was constructed, owned and operated by the State of NY and produced steam for heating and cooling of State office buildings in downtown Albany NY. Smith & Mahoney, PC, an Albany engineering firm was involved in the conceptual design of the entire system. (Some of the principals of Smith & Mahoney formed Energy Answers in 1981.) Smith & Mahoney only completed the final design for the City owned waste processing and fuel production facility. The final design of the Steam Plant was the responsibility of the NY State Office of General Services who also constructed the facility and was the operator since the plant went online in According to a Jan 11, 1994, New York State Department of Health Fact Sheet : The plant malfunctioned while burning oil. As a result, a heavy soot was released for about one-half hour until the plant was switched over to natural gas. The soot that was released consists of carbon, some unburned oil and compounds formed by incomplete burning of hydrocarbon fuel oil... A related article published several days later in the Times Union, Jan 12, 1994, reported that another soot release occurred in the incinerator-neighborhood, which the NY State Office of General Services (the Steam Plant Operator) said was caused when they burned a load of wet trash resulting in excessive particulate release. Due to these legitimate concerns raised by environmentalists and neighbors related to the operation of the State s Steam Plant, coupled with the fact that it would cost millions of dollars for a retrofit to meet federal air emission standards by 1995, the State chose to switch to natural gas as a fuel. 7. We know that agencies in Puerto Rico are ineffective. They have no budget, capacity or staff and cannot regulate this type of technology. The less vigilant these agencies are, the easier it is for companies to violate these standards. If a corporation violates the law, the communities have the right to sue but they cannot afford to take a corporation to court. They simply lose. The US EPA has authority to regulate this facility and will be monitoring compliance with the PSD permit requirements. The facility will be responsible for certifying compliance with the requirements annually. Knowing violations or falsification of the compliance status holds the facility subject to criminal sanctions. This facility has every intention of meeting the requirements in its permit as it has for years at the SEMASS facility in Massachusetts. 8. Who will be responsible if, after ten or twenty years of operation, we find that people are diagnosed with diseases related to the toxins from the plant? Energy Answers is responsible for its actions, and all studies show that compliance with the established emission limits will protect human health and the environment and does not represent a significant risk to Arecibo or the surround communities. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 11

263 Additionally, the SEMASS facility in Massachusetts has been in operation for over 20 years and no increases in any diseases or health issues have been identified near that facility. This facility s emissions will be even lower than the emissions from that facility since it is based on current technology which produces lower emissions. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 12

264 PERMITTING PROCESS 1. You say that your technologies are approved by the EPA but on August 4th, you received a notice from the EPA, four and a half pages, not authorizing the original permit requested. This is a highly technical document. Please explain. EPA deemed the permit application incomplete and requested additional information which Energy Answers will provide. This is not an unusual event. The permit application is hundreds of pages long and is scrutinized closely by EPA staff to ensure that all aspects of the permit are clearly defined. We have been in dialogue with the EPA for many months to establish limits for the facility and are confident that we will meet their safety regulations. 2. You submitted a new document today, which is the Material Separation Plan, which was not included with the original DIA. This is not a new document. It is the Final Draft of the Materials Separation Plan resulting from the Preliminary Draft published in Pursuant to federal regulations, the Material Separation Plan is to be included in the Air Permitting process and it is a completely separate plan. It is not part of the DIA. The meeting held on August 12 th was a public meeting, not a public hearing which would require the presence of a hearing officer. The MSP public meeting is an opportunity to share information with the public, to receive public questions and concerns and to receive questions and concerns as commentaries. The DIA Public Hearing took place in November There will be an additional, separate Public Hearing for the USEPA PSD permit, which will be announced once the review of the project documents is complete. 3. Will you hold these public hearings in the other towns like Vega Baja, Toa Baja and Aguadilla, which are affected by the Project? It is important to note that first, the meeting on August 12 th was a Public Meeting to share information with the public and to receive public comments. A Public Hearing is a more formal process, typically held by a permitting agency. Second, there is not a public hearing associated with the MSP process specifically, however there is a public hearing associated with the USEPA PSD permitting process, to which the MSP is related. The public hearing associated with the proposed Arecibo project will most likely be held in Arecibo and, like all other hearings associated with this project, will be open to the public from Arecibo as well as the surrounding communities MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 13

265 SITE COMMUNITY CONCERNS 1. Energy Answers has said that they selected the site for the project in Arecibo because that land was an area that was already impacted and contaminated. If the incinerator does not pollute, why then select a site, that according to you, is contaminated? Energy Answers considers the site for the project to be a Brownfield. (EPA defines Brownfields as abandoned, idled, or under-used industrial or commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination.) Because of the previous industrial uses and existing structures, the redevelopment requires careful management. Energy Answers preferably seeks to establish facilities on former industrials sites, Brownfields, that may have been impacted. Reuse is the first step in proper solid waste management so Energy Answers looks to reuse sites that are no longer being fully utilized for industrial purposes. It is our belief that the redevelopment of impacted, former industrial sites by those entities well suited to undertake such efforts, helps to lessen potential impacts on, and competition for, greenfield sites; reserving these sites for residential, commercial and recreational uses or preservation. Bringing new jobs and economic activity to an industrial area which is abandoned and under-used is also good for the economy. 2. The site is near the Rio Grande de Arecibo which flooded and completely closed State Road #2 during Hurricane George. During a major flooding event or tsunami (like the recent event in Japan), could the ash leave the site and contaminate Caño Tiburones and other parts of Arecibo? Energy Answers has done extensive research and hydrological modeling of the site and surrounding area with regards to the potential impact on the site of both 100 and 500 year flooding events. The Project construction includes elevation of the facility buildings out of the flood plain. Additionally the ash and waste are maintained within enclosed structures, further minimizing the chance of any materials from leaving the site during a flood event. In regards to the question related to the fate of the Japanese incinerators during the recent tsunami, Energy Answers does not have specific information on the impact to these facilities and does not feel it is germane to the MSP process. In a disaster situation, such as the one referenced, the facility would implement its emergency operating plans, which would include the shut down of the system in a controlled fashion. It should be noted that the facility, as part of its normal operating procedures, does not accept, produce or store hazardous waste materials and therefore these types of releases are not anticipated. 3. Clarification was requested regarding the ownership of the land. Energy Answers has entered into a purchase option for the property, which is currently privately owned. During the meeting it was incorrectly stated that the property would be controlled under a 30-year lease, which reflects the duration of the power purchase agreement, not the control of the 92 cuerdas in Barrio Cambalache. The Mayor signed an agreement with Energy Answers documenting MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 14

266 the commitments that Energy Answers has made to the town of Arecibo. The agreement is not related to the property. 4. Is the site of the Project where Puerto Rico Chemical, chemical weapons processing plant, was located? No, it is our understanding that Puerto Rico Chemical was previously located where the battery recycling plant is currently located. The Global Fibers Paper Mill operated on the site where Energy Answers is proposing to build the resource recovery facility. 5. At the peak or during construction, you guarantee 2,000 jobs, but these are not long-term jobs. Only the 140 jobs during the full operation are those with full benefits. Are these the type of jobs that provide the security needed for the high number of unemployed in Arecibo? Energy Answers is not guaranteeing 2000 specific jobs. What we anticipate is that over the course of the construction process there will be thousands of direct indirect and induced jobs created by the construction activities. These jobs are well paying, skilled construction jobs. As construction jobs, only a portion of them will extend over the full duration of the construction process, which is unlike the approximate 150 fulltime operation position the facility is anticipating. These positions are well paying positions that range from entry level and administrative to upper management and could extend for the thirty year expected life of the facility. The person who asked the question was correct saying that construction workers would only be used during the approximately three years that the project will be under construction. During a recent job fair, Energy Answers and the Department of Labor received hundreds of resumes of local people who are looking for this type of work and have the skills to be considered for this employment. As we have seen in the past, these construction workers sometimes stay on to fill positions that are part of the full time operation. 6. When the plant goes into operation, will it have an engineering department that is responsible for which preventive and corrective maintenance needs to be performed on all of the machinery that will be at the incinerator plant? The Project will employ a full time plant engineer along with multiple maintenance managers responsible for preventative and corrective maintenance operations. Having an engineering department to deal with the preventive maintenance of machinery will be essential during the operation of the project. Preventative operations and maintenance programs are standard operating procedure for Energy Answers facilities. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 15

267 7. Is Energy Answers aware of all the pollution that already exists in the area and that Arecibo is an Environmentally Discriminated Community? Arecibo and Barceloneta carry more weight in pollution than any other community and have superfunds sites related to the pharmaceutical plants. Energy Answers completed an environmental justice study to show that the proposed Project does not place a disproportionate burden on an economically disadvantaged population. Additionally, the environmental justice analysis was revised based on the final modeling results and shows that there is no disproportionate impact to low income barrios in the area from the facility. 8. I want to explain to you that I worked at the Palo Seco plant and at the San Juan Power Plant for 12 years. And there, and you know this since you are a chemical engineer, there were a lot of cases of cancer reported due to asbestos contamination, and, many colleagues were in the UTIER (Labor Union). I was President of the UTIER and we had to take cases to court. And the EPA itself said, this needs to be handled by the Employment Fund, and ultimately, we ended up having to take the workers to the United States, to undergo studies. You are aware that where the facility is going to be built was the Cambalache sugar plantation. Where sugar cane was burned, crushed, but also in the area, the sugar cane was burned, so they could cut it. And all that soot would be up in the Hatillo area, the wind would carry it. What concerns me greatly, is the release of toxins, and at what quantity, do you know how much toxin will go into the air? And how much will come reach the community, is it going to be the whole community? Please answer the question. ADALBERTO RAMIREZ: I ask of you, with all due respect, I want to give you my mailing address: PO Box 9723, Cotto Station, Arecibo, Puerto Rico. Zip code The PSD application, the EQB application, the Environmental Justice Report and the Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment all discuss the emissions from the facility and document that the impacts are below acceptable federal levels and do not have a disproportionate impact on lower income areas. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 16

268 PLANT OPERATIONS 1. How many kilowatts of energy are you going to produce? And at how much will you sell the electricity? Does PREPA really need the energy considering they do not use the Cambalache Power Plant to full capacity? The electrical production capacity is 80 megawatts, the plant equipment consumes approximately 7 of those megawatts, so the remaining approximately 73 megawatts is sold to PREPA at a rate of approximately 10 cents per kilowatt hour. The energy produced at the facility is generated at approximately one half the cost of what it currently costs PREPA to produce the same amount of electricity at the Cambalache facility. The Cambalache facility was originally designed as a peeking facility and therefore designed to operate for shorter limited periods of time. To meet the electrical needs of a region, utilities typically use the lowest cost energy first and proceed to continue to use the next lowest cost energy, until sufficient energy is available to meet the demands of the region. Considering that the proposed Project will be one of the lower cost power sources, it is needed and will likely allow PREPA to rely less on more expensive power generating units. The Project does not depend on fossil fuel (except for initial startup, shutdown and temperature control in select areas of the air pollution control system) and therefore, will not be significantly impacted by the swings in market prices of fossil fuel. In addition, public policy requires that, by 2014, 10% of the energy produced in Puerto Rico should be generated from renewable energy sources, such as this plant. This plant represents a little less than 2% of the non-fossil energy source. 2. Will communities that are downwind of the facility, like Guaynabo and Hatillo, and the barrios of Arecibo like Garrochales, Hato Viejo, La Plata Ward, Caños, and Dominguito be affected by contamination? And will the emissions negatively impact the dairy and livestock industry there? Energy Answers has conducted two risk studies -- a human health risk study and an ecological risk study. These studies were conducted as part of the Project s Environmental Impact Statement and thoroughly evaluated the effect on human health, including the food chain, and the environment. Specific pathways were investigated based on regional dynamics. These included for example: the cattle industry in the surrounding region in Camuy and Hatillo, and fishing in the Rio Grande de Arecibo and Caño Tiburones. These studies have clearly demonstrated that there will not be a negative impact to the dairy and livestock industries. It is important to note that this process and the referenced studies are specific to the proposed Project and the performance of that Project. We therefore focus on the studies prepared for this Project and have, at times, referenced the performance of the SEMASS Resource Recovery Facility, the reference facility for this Project. However, we recognize various data and studies have been circulated related to technologies and operations that are different from the Energy Answers technology proposed for Arecibo. The negative impacts related to other operations should not be considered typical of all technologies. With MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 17

269 hundreds of WTE facilities in operation world-wide it would be unlikely that widespread contamination and destruction would go undocumented for years. 3. The report contends that more than 99% of the contaminants, including dioxins, can be removed. However, there is no technology to remove nano-particles which are smaller than 2.5 microns. The only way for there to be no danger is if nothing was generated. How can you say this is safe? With regard to the control of particulate. The EPA emission standards include three Particulate Matter (PM) limits, one for PM2.5, which is for particles that are 2.5 microns and smaller, one for PM10, which is for particles that are 10 microns and smaller, so this includes PM2.5 particles and one for total PM which includes all particle emissions. Therefore, nano-patricles are included in the emission rates and modeling to demonstrate that there are no exceedances of the national ambient air quality standards. Dioxin occurs as a by-product of combustion and a variety of manufacturing processes that involve high-temperature operations. Dioxins can be formed in the emissions of vehicles such as trucks or buses and even charcoal grills and fireworks. It also can be formed naturally, by forest fires and volcanic eruptions. Nanoparticles are also not new to combustion technology. Everyone in Puerto Rico generates waste, creates car exhaust and needs electrical energy and each action has environmental impacts. The Project is not claiming that it has zero emissions, or zero potential for impact. We have said that the agency charged with ensuring the protection of the health and the environment sets acceptable limits and establishes standards that allow development to occur in a responsible manner. We have conducted the necessary studies and determined that we meet these standards. For example, drinking water has chlorine in it and chlorine is a poison at certain concentrations. However, an agency has determined that it is safe to drink water with residual chlorine. Similarly, in this case, an agency sets a limit, and this plant s emissions will meet those limits. We have not said that the emissions and potential for impact will be zero, we have said that based on conservative studies conducted specifically for this Project, we comply with the limit set. Our PSD permit and the Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessments document that there are no impacts that are above the established acceptable levels. 4. In your presentation, you pointed out the need for that flame to be at a high temperature. At most of the existing incinerators, an additional fuel is used -- natural gas, oil, etc, --- so that the flame is as stable and as close to that point as possible, before burning waste. First, will you be using an additional fuel, to generate stable conditions for the flame? No. An auxiliary fuel is used to bring the temperature from zero degrees temperature to the operating temperature of the boiler. Once the boiler reaches the operating temperature, there is a transition from fuel oil to Processed Refuse Fuel. Once that transition is complete, we stop using that auxiliary fuel, which in the case of the Arecibo Project, will be #2 fuel oil. So, once it reaches the MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 18

270 temperature, what is fed to the flame is purely the Processed Refuse Fuel, and no other fuel is burned. The processing of the trash by shredding and removing a percentage of the metals creates a homogeneous fuel that burns efficiently and completely in the boiler at very high temperatures. Complete combustion at high temperatures ensures a high energy production, an ash product which allows for the recovery of recyclable materials, and the destruction of harmful materials that are in the waste. 5. From that supplemental fuel, how much of the heat generated, perhaps in percentages, goes into the production of electricity? The purpose of auxiliary fuel is to bring the boiler to operating temperature. At that point, the waste fuel is used to generate electricity. The purpose of auxiliary fuel is not to generate electricity, it is to raise the operating temperature of the unit and to allow the system to stay at the design temperature as the system is periodically shut down for maintenance. 6. How much money will Energy Answers contribute to create a health fund? Because disease will increase greatly here. WTE projects are located throughout the world and there are no confirmed cases of widespread diseases or illnesses associated with the workers or nearby residents. WTE projects are located in major European cities such as Paris and London as well as US Cities like Baltimore MD and West Palm Beach Florida. The health risk assessment completed for this project confirms that nearby residents, people that live downwind and workers will not be at risk. 7. We have to eliminate all sources of pollution, including the ones that we create. Does this project produce any kind of pollution? The PSD permit application discusses the emissions for the proposed facility and documents that the facility will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Every combustion source, including trucks and cars, emits the same types of emissions as our proposed facility. It is not possible to eliminate all sources of pollution, so the next best goal is to make sure that the emissions that are generated meet standards and help to reduce the total impacts. We have documented that this facility will reduce emissions from power generation and will eliminate the need to landfill a resource that can be used to generate electricity. 8. The population density of the Town of Rochester was questioned to determine if the population is so low that the impact is not detected. Rochester is 34 square miles with a population of 4,850. Maricao is 36 square miles with a population of 6,276. Therefore, the population density is somewhat lower in Rochester Massachusetts as compared to Maricao. (The size of Rochester was stated by the questioner to be larger than Puerto Rico which is not accurate.) MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 19

271 There are over 120 full time employees working at SEMASS, many that have been working there for 20 years or more. Their health is monitored and there is no sign of a negative impact from working at the project. 9. Are the cranberries that grow in the vicinity of SEMASS edible? There are about 1200 acres of cranberry bogs within a 3-mile radius of the SEMASS Resource Recovery Facility. A large percentage of these cranberries are sold to commercial operations such as Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. whose production facility in Middleboro, MA is 9 miles from SEMASS. According to Ocean Spray s website this is the largest in Ocean Spray s network and each year produces 32 million pounds of Sweetened Dried Cranberries and 1.4 million gallons of cranberry concentrate. The cranberry bogs directly adjacent to the SEMASS project are owned and operated by one of the Town municipal leaders, Mr. Brad Morse. He sells the cranberries to Ocean Spray. The fruit is regularly tested and is consistently high quality and have never shown signs of contamination. 10. Is Energy Answers aware that in the area where you will locate the plant, there is a power plant operating with a waiver from the EPA because of toxic emissions? Have you have done a study on the emissions and pollution that currently exist from the power plant, the battery recycling plant, the Rio de Arecibo, the plant in Tanamá which incinerates biological products, because the toxicity in the Cambalache area will not rely solely on Energy Answers? The analysis conducted for this facility included the current emissions from the Cambalache power plant with the waiver. The analysis shows that there are no exceedances of any standards resulting from their project combined with our project in any areas where we are above the significant impact levels. The cumulative impact of emissions from various sources in the area was analyzed for the Project emissions over the significant impact level in the Project s modeling analysis, and took into account all major emission sources within an approximate radius of 57 kilometers of the Project and all minor sources within a 7 kilometers radius of the Project. This included the battery recycling facility and the power plant, among others. The results of the study show that there are no exceedances of any standards resulting from their project combined with our project in any areas where we are above the significant impact levels 11. The EPA allows certain percentage of toxic releases, am I right? The PSD permit will define the limits of all emissions. Yes, EPA has established limits for toxic chemicals that are considered safe for the public and the environment. The facility has documented that it will meet the applicable limits. 12. Where will the water used in the Plant be disposed? MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 20

272 The water discharge from the Project will go to the Water and Sewer Authority waste water treatment facility. 13. Where will you get the water used for cooling and other processes in the Plant? The water that will be used at the plant comes from the El Vigie Pump Station, which discharges water from Caño Tiburones to the Atlantic Ocean. It's not water from Caño Tiburones, but the water that is already draining from the Caño for purposes of flood control. 14. What company will be responsible for the filters? Energy Answers and its construction contractors are ultimately responsible for the selection of the fabric filters used in the air pollution control system. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 21

273 ASH MANAGEMENT 1. The air pollution control equipment is designed to remove the mercury, dioxin, and other toxins from the emissions but what will be done with these toxic residues? Will they be mixed with the bottom ash? The two ash streams have different properties and will be managed separately. Energy Answers technology is different from mass-burn combustions systems and the properties of the ash streams in Puerto Rico are assumed to be similar to the ash created at the Massachusetts reference facility, SEMASS, and, to some extent, other Refuse Derived Fuel facilities. Bottom ash can be processed to remove almost all ferrous and non-ferrous metals, which includes those items which cannot be easily recycled, and the remaining materials, which has a high content of glass, ceramic, stone, etc. can be used as a construction aggregate. The ash recovered from the air pollution control equipment has consistently been tested and found to be a non-hazardous material. These non-hazardous materials can be discarded in Subtitle D landfills The fly ash generated in the air pollution control system can contain heavy metals such as lead and mercury, however what is of concern is the ability for these metals to leave the ash stream and enter the environment. This typically occurs through the leaching, or seeping or dissolving, of metals from the ash into water which could then enter the environment and possibly food chain. This is specifically what the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) test investigates. The TCLP test does not measure total metals content or hazardous materials content of the ash; rather, it measures the potential for these materials to seep or "leach" into groundwater. Therefore, if the fly ash passes the TCLP test, which indicates that it is not a hazardous waste, it can be disposed of in a non-hazardous waste landfill. Subtitle D landfills do exist in Puerto Rico and it would be at one of these facilities that the ash from the Arecibo Project would be deposited, if alternative equally safe uses could not be identified. 2. In which landfill specifically will the ash be deposited? Do you plan to build one near this community? Discussions are in progress with multiple landfill owners in Puerto Rico, however a final determination has not been made and agreement executed. Once we enter into a business agreement with one or more of the landfills for the disposal of ash, we will provide this information. The Project has no intention of building a landfill in Puerto Rico or using the Arecibo Landfill for the disposal of ashes. 3. Is it true that one of your ash depository proposals is to open a landfill in Peñuelas and will you hold public hearings in Peñuelas? MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 22

274 No, we're not going to open a landfill in Peñuelas and therefore we will not be holding any public hearings there. There is an existing landfill in Pañuelas and a new facility under construction, however these facilities are owned and operated by other companies. 4. Mercury, dioxins, uranium and many other carcinogens and toxins are not altered in the ashes, their chemical identity remains. The only thing that is neutralized is the acids and a few oxides are transformed, but the chemicals and metals, they do not change their properties and remain dangerous, harmful, toxic, carcinogenic. Where are you going to send these toxic materials that are dangerous and harmful, that are caught in the traps and ash? See answers to previous questions above. 5. It saddens me to see how big interests are looking to exploit our mother earth. I am not against true development like agriculture, recycling, etc. I am also against the privatization of the Poza del Obispo. The big interests want to keep everything that is ours, and our land is not for sale. Do you understand? The SEMASS reference facility has operated for over twenty years in a growing community, which has not shown detrimental health effects, that has substantial private and commercial agricultural resources and a recycling rate above the national average. These are the results we expect the Project to have in Arecibo and the surrounding communities. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 23

275 WASTE QUANTITY, QUALITY AND TRANSPORT 1. How does this facility fit into the Dynamic Itinerary for Solid Waste Management established by the Puerto Rico government? The Dynamic Itinerary recommends the construction of two processing facilities, one in the northeast and another one in the northwestern region of Puerto Rico." The Arecibo Resource Recovery Facility would fulfill the recommendation to build a facility in the Northwest. 2. How much garbage would the Project accept daily? The project is designed to accept approximately 2,100 tons per day of residual waste. Based on the service area defined in the MSP, there is more than 4,300 tons of waste currently landfilled in this area. 3. Will the Port of Arecibo be used to bring in trash from other locations, like the Virgin Islands, Culebra, Vieques or other Caribbean countries? No. We will not use the Port to bring waste to the Project. 4. Where will you acquire the trash? The MSP explains that the waste, both residential and commercial, will come from the central area, which consists of the following municipalities: Hatillo, Camuy, Lares, Utuado, Florida and Manati. Waste will also come from the municipalities in the extended area, which includes Toa Baja, Cataño, Guaynabo, Aguas Buenas, Comerio, Barranquitas, Naranjito, Bayamon, Dorado, Vega Alta, Vega Baja, Morovis, Orocovis, Ciales, Barceloneta, Adjuntas, Las Marias, Añasco, Rincon. Also refer to the Materials Separation Plan 5. Why was Barceloneta not included in the central area? Barceloneta is an adjacent town, with the most waste and consumes much more energy. The central and extended service areas were based on the ADS Dynamic Itinerary which establishes what garbage is generated in each. Barceloneta is definitely being considered as a community that will supply waste to the Arecibo Project. 6. Varnished wood and wood used for electric light poles are treated chemically so they do not rot. How much of this type of wood (and other wood) will be burned? Large bulky items such as power poles are not accepted at the Arecibo Project. However, if small quantities of treated wood are received in the waste, it will be shredded and combusted in a controlled environment. Ash residues would still test at non-hazardous levels. Despite the fact that clean wood and vegetative should be composted, wood products can be accepted as part of the waste composition, and processed at the Arecibo Project in minimal quantities. 7. Municipal Solid Waste can contain chlorine, paint, pesticides, tires and plastics. There are hazardous or toxic wastes that are discarded daily from every home. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 24

276 Currently, all of that goes to the landfill. What will happen when they are burned in your plant? Won t burning these materials create dioxins and dangerous emissions? First, Energy Answers will be working with the community to establish programs for proper disposal of household hazardous wastes, including pesticides, herbicides, fluorescent light bulbs, batteries. These materials should not be sent to a resource recovery facility or a landfill but should be processed properly. Workers at the facility will be trained to remove and test for batteries, BBQ gas tanks and other hazardous and toxic materials. Based on over 20 years safe operating experience at the reference facility in Massachusetts, Energy Answers will ensure that emissions levels are below permit limits established by EPA. Finally, the analysis provided in the PSD air permit application shows that these products, in the quantities contained in the waste stream, can be safely burned at our proposed facility. We believe that burning these substances at our facility and generating electricity is better than dumping them in a landfill. 8. References were made to the burning of tires and plastics from cars. Are these waste materials safe to burn? In the PSD permit submitted to EPA, Energy Answers states that the plant will be designed to combust up to 20% auto shredded residue (ASR), 20% tire derived fuel (TDF), or 50% shredded Processed Urban Wood Waste (PUWW) as supplemental fuel. The facility is designed to safely burn these materials up to the quantities identified above. We believe that burning these materials at our facility and generating electricity is better than dumping them in a landfill. Although Energy Answers has designed this project to primarily combust the fuel derived from MSW, the project was designed and the appropriate equipment (shredders, air quality control systems, etc.) specified so that the project could be a solution for some of the other wastes generated in PR that currently are landfilled. No matter what type of fuel or waste combusted, EA must meet the permit limits and operating procedures defined by EPA. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 25

277 STATUS OF PUERTO RICO LANDFILLS 1. Will this Project extend the life of landfills? No, the Arecibo Project is a waste management and renewable energy project which provides an alternative to landfilling residual waste. It will be an environmentally sound solution for a portion of Puerto Rico s waste but expanded recycling and composting programs are necessary. The establishment of this facility may present a viable alternative to some non-compliant landfills, allowing them to close sooner. 2. Do you plan to assist ADS in extending the life of Arecibo landfill? No. The Arecibo landfill does not comply with the subtitle D of the Federal Law. It should be closed in accordance with Subtitle D regulations. 3. The trash in Arecibo currently causes problems to the environment and threatens the health of residents. Waste, including syringes used by drug addicts, enters our waters and beaches and affects plants, vegetation. Will this Project improve the quality of life here? Yes, this plant has a rigorous permitting process and it follows a strict audit process once it's built and operating. Also, continuous monitoring occurs to ensure that it does not affect the health of residents or the environment. So, to the comment made we believe that this project is compatible with the ideal presented regarding a healthy and a better environment. 4. The week prior to the hearing there was a fire in the Arecibo Landfill. A resident living near the landfill asked if there is any information available about the amount of contamination and dioxin emitted during the course of the one or two hour landfill fire in comparison to the emission levels of the proposed project. Such data exists but we do not have it here right now. Landfill fires are uncontrolled burning with no emission control possible. They emit gasses at low levels with limited ability for dispersion so residents nearby can be highly impacted. Although we agreed to provide information on the emissions from the landfill fire in our response, upon further reflection we realized that without more information on the size and duration of the fire it would be difficult to accurately quantify the emissions with any accuracy. In general, open burning produces significantly more emissions of every pollutant than our facility which will have state-of-the-art pollution control equipment. 5. A resident of Arecibo asks why people are not concerned about the emissions from the landfill which has been operating for 35 years and yet are so concerned about the emissions from this project? The Arecibo landfill has been out of compliance for years. What will happen when it finally closes, supposedly in 2015? The person who asked the rhetorical question answered -- Without a solution and with only minimal recycling; there will be illegal dumps which will impact health, tourism and economic development. Energy Answers agrees with the question posed. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 26

278 6. Energy Answers is purporting to have the power to close the Arecibo Landfill. Is this a valid? Energy Answers does not have the power to force the closure of the Arecibo Landfill. 7. A resident of Factor 2 ward, facing the front of the landfill, stated that the landfill is next to Caño Tiburones nature reserve. He sees the project as a way to ensure the landfill will be closed and the pollution to Caño Tiburones stopped. He asked why no one says anything against the problems we have right now. Energy Answers agrees with the question posed. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 27

279 ECONOMICS OF THE PROJECT 1. Will Energy Answers push for legislation planned to charge us for the incinerator? No, this Project is being developed privately and revenue is generated to support the project in three ways. First, we charge municipalities and private haulers to bring their waste to us just as landfill operators do. This "Tipping Fee" will be about the same price range per ton as what is currently paid to landfills. Next, we sell electrical energy to Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority under a contract that Energy Answers negotiated with PREPA. We will sell electricity at 10, 11 cents a kilowatt hour which is an inexpensive way for PREPA to obtain electricity. The third revenue source comes from the sale of the materials recovered and recycled. 2. Energy Answers has said that the project will bring an economic boom to Arecibo. The question is whether the town of Rochester, where for the past 26 years the SEMASS plant has been located, has had a similar economic boon? The SEMASS Project is located in a major cranberry growing area. About 25% of the town s budget comes from payments made by SEMASS. This broadened tax base has resulted in a school system that is ranked very high in the State, quality fire and police protection and a major corporate sponsor of community activities. Real Estate in the area has definitely not suffered. Data provided by the website shows the following data for the Town of Rochester: (a) Estimated median household income in 2009: $80,945 (it was $63,289 in 2000) (b) Estimated median house or condo value in 2009: $370,237 (it was $184,800 in 2000) Single-family new house construction building permits: (a) 2007: 13 buildings, average cost: $386,800 (b) 2008: 6 buildings, average cost: $309,100 (c) 2009: 11 buildings, average cost: $294,700 (d) 2010: 21 buildings, average cost: $341,900 Rochester compared to Massachusetts state average: (a) Median household income above state average. (b) Median house value above state average. 3. The plant in Rochester is larger than the one proposed for Arecibo, correct? The SEMASS Resource Recovery Facility was originally constructed and went into operation at 1800 tons per day, smaller than the 2100 tpd of the Arecibo Project. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 28

280 SEMASS was expanded in 1993 to 2700 tons per day because additional communities were closing their landfills and needing a long term solution. It should be noted that there were no negative comments filled during the expansion permit hearings. 4. There have been conflicting numbers about the number of jobs that will be created. How many jobs will be created? The project will generate approximately 150 full time positions during the operation of the Project. These positions may last for the full life of the project which is estimated to be thirty years. The project will also produce construction jobs, which unlike the operation period jobs, last for far shorter periods. For example, landscapers are only needed during the landscaping phase of the construction process, which may last two to three months. The people performing these services are considered to have a construction jobs while they perform the service. The same can be said for the painting crews. If you were to hire someone to paint your home, it would be consider a painting job which would be equivalent to one construction job for that contractor. If the contractor got a job painting the home next door, that would be a second job. The construction of the Arecibo Project will generate thousands of these jobs directly and, depending on the skills of the individual person, these may last for varying portions of the two plus year construction period. In addition to these direct jobs, the Project will produce thousands of indirect jobs. (i.e.the additional person at the paint store needed to purchase, stock and deliver the paint purchased by the Project.), and induced jobs (i.e.the new person at the restaurant needed now that there are more people eating out in general). An economic impact study was performed by Estudios Tecnicos and included as a component of the EIS, which includes the projected numbers. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 29

281 QA/QC COMMENTS 1. Waldemar Flores asked and repeated a series of questions related to quality assurance and quality control as it applies to the proposed facility. His detailed questions are provided in the transcript provided. It was stated at the public meeting that Energy Answers would respond in writing. Response to Mr. Flores All of the comments by Waldemar Flores address the issue of QA/QC for the application and/or the facility once it is operating. We respectfully disagree with Mr. Flores assertion that adequate QA/QC was not performed. First Mr. Flores did not cite one concrete example of inadequate QA/QC but rather stated that none of it met QA/QC requirements. Second, the application and the modeling analysis document the source of the emission rates and the control technology efficiencies that were used. Third, the analysis includes a complete discussion of all of the applicable state and federal requirements and demonstrates how the facility intends to meet them. Fourth, the modeling uses the EPA prescribed models and protocols for establishing background concentrations, sources that must be included in the analysis, the source of the emission rates for these sources and the resultant modeled impacts. There is a very clear description of all of this information and it has been thoroughly reviewed by the EPA staff in Region II. Fifth, once the facility is built, it will be required to measure the emissions of various chemicals from its stack as well as operating conditions in the boiler. Sixth, the Continuous Emission Monitors (CEMs) will be required to complete automatic daily span gas calibrations and quarterly relative Accuracy tests using prescribed EPA testing protocols which can be accurately verified. Seventh, the facility will be required to do annual stack testing using EPA prescribed testing protocol. Eighth, All of this monitoring and testing will need to follow the rigorous procedures that are the same for any new facility built anywhere in the US and will be reviewed by EPA before being accepted as accurate. MSP 2 nd Public Meeting Q & A Summary Page 30

282 TRANSCRIPT PUBLIC MEETING: 5PM to 10:00 PM PROJECT: ENERGY ANSWERS DATE: FRIDAY, AUGUST 12, 2011 PLACE: LIONS CLUB-ARECIBO (HOUR 00:00:00 to 1:00:00 APPROX) >> RAFAEL TORO: Good afternoon to all. Let's begin. Please, start to find your seats. Can you hear well? Can you hear me well in the back? Raise your hand if you hear. Ah! OK. Good afternoon, good afternoon and welcome to Energy Answers Public Meeting. I would like to make some brief introductory explanations. First, I want to acknowledge the presence of Carlos Mulero, who will be doing sign language during this public meeting. For purposes of record, my name is Rafael Toro, representing Energy Answers. Today is August 12, 2011, and we are at the Lions Club of Arecibo. It's 5: 22 pm. We are starting in the public meeting as part of what is known as the Material Separation Plan and Analysis of Location, in English, Material Separation Plan and Sight Analysis, which is part the permit, the Federal permitting process which is currently being evaluated by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency, known as the EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency. The events during the course of today will be all in Spanish, so everything we present will be in Spanish. Those of you who do not speak Spanish, who only speak English, we have available a few headsets, because there will be simultaneous translation into English. So, we have available a few units for translation, which are available for those of you who only understand English.

283 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 2 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo We further request that, for purposes of having order during today's presentation, to turn off your phones or put them on vibrate, so that we do not have interruptions and can have this presentation as orderly as possible. We would like to recognize the presence some community leaders, the presence Mrs. Auria, who is with us, and is the closest neighbor to the location of the project, where the project is proposed. Also, Raquel Ortiz, community leader, is present. We want to acknowledge her presence here. Mr. Grau, who has always been mobilizing people and citizen of Arecibo for these Energy Answers activities, of which we have held several with the community. But in this case, we are here to meet about the Material Separation Plan and Sighting Analysis, right? The Location Analysis. All of this afternoon, before starting today's process, I want to let you know that we have the technical staff, plus other members who are part of the team for Energy Answers. Now, I will explain to you how we are going to address your comments, your questions during tonight's process. All of these resources have been mobilized by Energy Answers to meet the community's needs in this evaluation process. This is the second of two public meetings we are holding as part of the federal permitting process. The first one was held on September 17, This second public meeting is for the Material Separation Plan. At this second meeting, in addition to the Material Separation Plan, we are talking also about the location analysis. This is a public meeting, not a Public Hearing. Unlike a public hearing, where a hearing officer presides and where he is preparing a file in relation to an adjudicative or administrative procedure. This is not that kind of activity. This is a meeting to share information with you and to receive information from you.

284 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 3 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo We ask also you to sign up at the entrance. We have a list of people who are appearing here today, so that your presence here today becomes part of the administrative record that the EPA, the Federal Environmental Protection Agency, has in relation to this permitting process. So we urge you, put your name, your information there so that you can be on the record as of this process. Because citizen participation is important in this process, and that's why we're here. For you to participate in the decisions of government agencies. And this is one of those opportunities. What sequence are we going to follow? Well, first, engineer Jaime Abreu will make a presentation of what is the Material Separation Plan. I will also work with him, to give an explanation of what the technology being proposed is. After we finish this presentation, we will give you an opportunity to present us with your comments and questions in regards to what we are presenting today. And how are we going to do that? First, we will address the questions we have received prior, because this Material Separation Plan and Sighting Location Plan were available in several public places in the municipality of Arecibo since the 8th of July of this year. And it was also available to the public, so we have received written questions, and those we are going to address first. After we address those questions, we will then address the questions you have for us today. For that we are going to ask you to speak at the microphone in the middle of the room, and we ask you to do so in an orderly fashion. Identify yourself for the record, and for purposes of time, so that others can also speak, we're going to ask you, not that we are going to limit the amount of questions you can ask, but we're going to ask that you make your question in 1 minute. If you have any other questions or if you want to continue, you can go again to the back of the

285 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 4 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo line, so the next person also has an opportunity to also ask their question. And you can go to the back of the line as many times as you want and continue asking more questions. The first questions we will address will be those related to the Material Separation Plan and the Sighting Analysis Plan. So, we're going to stay on that topic. When we finish that, we'll take a brief break, OK? To drinking soda, whatever, and we will reopen the public meeting. And this will be an open discussion. And you will be able to ask the questions that you have regarding the project. Not just related to the Plan and sighting Analysis, but about the entire project. And we want to seize this opportunity that we have available here today the technical staff of Energy Answers. This is the staff that has carried out the studies that are part of this evaluation process, so that with the technical staff, we can address your questions as best as possible. So, these open questions, we will leave them for last. First, we want to finalize the comment process related to the Separation Plan and the Sighting Analysis. Having said that, I will leave you with Jaime Abreu, who will begin to make today's presentation. Before that, Jamie, I wanted to add something. The Material Separation Plan describes the goals, the Material Separation Plan describes the goals... and mechanisms related to the separation of certain components of municipal solid waste, from that source, from municipal solid waste for the area proposed to be served by the plant. And the purpose is to make available, to separate materials that can be used to be recycled. So that's part of the purpose of this plan.

286 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 5 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Number two. The Sighting Analysis analyzes the impacts of the proposed facility on air quality, visibility, soils, vegetation, taking into consideration the pollution control technology which will be part of this plant and that minimizes potential risks to health and environment. Tonight's meeting is going follow an agenda that is set by federal regulation. So in the agenda right now is going to be Jaime's presentation. And both the sighting plant proposed as well as the summary of comments received from you, and the responses by Energy Answers, along with the plan, will be made available to you once we complete this process. We anticipate that within the next 30 days, depending on how many comments we receive, of course, and the scope thereof, that we will make available, in a public place for your review, the Plan, your comments and the company's responses. So, having said this introduction, I leave you with Jaime Abreu, Engineer Jaime Abreu. >> JAIME ABREU: Good afternoon to you all. Thank you very much, Rafa. As Rafa said, let me... I like it here in front, but the microphone is not helping me too much. I like being here in front so that people see me a bit better... than being up there. Let's start the agenda. Let's start by talking a little about the introduction of the project, what is the project about, which basically Rafael already provided some detail. The material resource handling facility and economic benefits proposed for the area of Arecibo, the region comprising the facility, which is the service area, is composed of the central area, the extended area; and we'll see what the extended service facility area is. The existing recycling programs. Proposed methods for material separation. The amount of residual waste for disposal. Alternative disposal methods for residual management, analysis of air pollution control alternatives, impact analysis of the proposed facility, and

287 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 6 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo the changes that have been made to the Materials Separation Plan after its last publication, and the location were comments will be available for public comments. We would like to begin with the official public announcement, which was printed for the project in the El Vocero newspaper, the highest circulation newspaper in the Arecibo area. That was Friday, July 8. From that day started the 30 calendar days for the evaluation and comment period. At the end, we have the list all of the facilities where the material was distributed, and that also was included in the ad. In the annex we have the list of facilities. They are available for evaluation. The comment period, basically, ends during today's meeting. That is, today is the 30th day from July 8, for comments. In addition to the newspaper, which has the largest circulation, we also published the notice in several regional newspapers, such as the El Norte newspaper, a weekly newspaper in which it was published during the week of July 12. Also in the weekly newspaper Pulso, also during the week of July 12. That is how we basically convened and called this meeting so that the general public became aware of this meeting. I have to speak a little slower, so that the interpreters can interpret better. OK. Let's talk about what it is, why we are here. The proponent company is Energy Answers Arecibo. What is being proposed? A resource recovery facility. When will the facility be in operation? It would be for the fourth quarter of 2013, that's when operations at the facility would begin. Why are we holding this meeting? As Rafa Toro said, for the Material Separation Plan, and that document satisfies the requirements set forth in 40 CFR, 60.57, as established in that document. Where? Well, not here in this area, but near the Cambalache area, here at Arecibo.

288 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 7 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Here is a view of where it's located. Sorry to turn my back on you. This is where the facility is located; this is state road number two. Here you have the existing Cambalache plant. Also here is the battery recycling area. Here's the hardware store that is in this area. Here's the old Cambalache sugar mill in this area here. And what is now proposed is a facility that is on the grounds of what once was the old paper mill. And what Energy is trying to is impact new areas as little as possible. In this case, we're impacting an industrial area, therefore the impact is minimal. In short, a facility that will generate about 80 megawatts of renewable energy, using about 2,100 tons of municipal solid waste. The electricity generated at the facility will be sold to the PR Power Authority, through a sale of energy contract, which is already established. The fuel for the facility, called processed post-recycling unusable fuel, will be used, after the WO2 recycling process, then it enters the facility. And as I said above, will be built on the old paper mill. The facility has two service areas, the central area and the extended area. What we want to show here, basically, is how the project benefits the Arecibo. In terms of economic benefits, we have what are direct jobs, indirect jobs, and construction jobs. In summary, all of this economic activity in the region (direct jobs, indirect and construction) is expected to generate about 159 million dollars for the area of Arecibo. In addition to that, we also have the facility. The construction of the facility is expected to be an investment of about $500 million of infrastructure investment in Puerto Rico. It is a private investment for the area's infrastructure, but specifically for the area of Arecibo. Also, about 15 million dollars in annual payments to employees, benefits. And about 40 million in goods and services in the area.

289 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 8 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Also, the facility provides a gain, a savings in energy costs compared to other facilities that generate electricity. By generating electricity at this facility, can save about $ 55 million in power generation when compared to other facilities in the area. Here is the central area, which will supply the facility. It consists of the following municipalities: Hatillo, Camuy, Lares, Utuado, Florida and Manati. This is an area, basically, the area, served by the current Arecibo landfill Arecibo, just to give you an idea. The extended area covers a different area of service. Next. The central service area. What we are presenting in this chart, so that you have an idea, we put together the numbers as established by the Solid Waste Authority in its dynamic itinerary, and the Solid Waste Characterization Plan shows the composition, percentage-wise, of the garbage materials: such as other waste, poor quality paper, cardboard, etc. and based on the population and the waste generated, as established by the agency, it gives an idea of how much waste may be generated in that service area, which is the central area. Now let's look at a graph that explained in more detail, from 2010 to 2025, based on population growth in the area. This area, sorry, table, explains in detail the composition of the waste. Here, what we get is how much the central service area contributes in tons per day, from the facility, basically, has 904 tons in 2010 and in 2025 about 950 tons of garbage per day. Now we have the extended area, which is the area that includes more municipalities, here are several: Toa Baja, Cataño, Guaynabo, Aguas Buenas, Comerio, Barranquitas, Naranjito, Bayamon, Dorado, Vega Alta, Vega Baja, Morovis, Orocovis, Ciales, Barceloneta, Adjuntas, Las Marias, Añasco, Rincon.

290 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 9 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Aguada, Aguadilla, Moca, Isabela, Quebradillas, San Sebastian and Corozal. I hope I said all of them there. And as the chart above, this shows how much waste can be generated in the extended area service for the facility. In the table, the same type of information. For 2010 nearly 3,400 tons per day and in 2025, about 3,600 tons per day, in the extended area. Now, the facility will be working with both service areas. If we combine the two, we have the combination of the central and extended areas. The sum of the two gives us about 4,300 tons per day in 2010, and about 4,500 for Let's talk about what are the existing recycling programs in the area. According to information we put together, there are about 23 collection points and recycling points in this area of Arecibo. We also know that there are several new facilities to come or in the planning process in Arecibo, too. So we are taking into account all of these facilities. And of the facilities which we have information, we see these are existing facilities, promoting car battery, electronic equipment, ferrous and nonferrous metals, plastics, yard waste, bio solids and paper recycling. Here we show another graph. In summary, the communities who have a "Waste-to-Energy" or resource recovery facility, they always have a recycling rate that is higher than communities that don't. Data from an American publication provides all information for all of the states. Maybe you cannot tell too well from there, but the section on the left hand of each State has information on the recycling rate of the communities that have resource recovery facilities, and the right hand one show recycling for that state. As an example, the first Alabama, which is perhaps the closest to Puerto Rico, has a recycling rate, about 9% statewide, but communities that have

291 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 10 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo "Waste-to-Energy", it s about 35%. Other states, near Oregon, for example, up to 55% recycling near facilities "Waste-to-Energy", and about 45% without "Waste-to-Energy". So, basically, the "Waste-to-Energy" facility has shown in all the documentation and examples we have, that through the course of the operation of the facility, it increases recycling. OK. The methods proposed for separation of materials at the facility, consist of the following: There will be a pre-combustion separation, this is a separation before combustion. When materials arrive at the facility, we will segregate ferrous materials, recyclable bulky, any metal that is big and that cannot be received at the facility, will be separated and taken to a recycling company. The white-line goods, i.e. appliances, refrigerators, air conditioners, etc... are not received, they are put aside. Then the postcombustion separation. After combustion, it also has recovery of ferrous and nonferrous metals. In the end, then, is the ash recycling program, which is what we call the Boiler Aggregate. How does this facility plan integrated into the community? In summary, we have the following programs, the recycling recovery facility, recycling for the recovery of metals. It will have, as I mentioned, pre-combustion and post combustion ferrous and nonferrous metal recovery. Construction and demolition materials and debris can be received and we could receive up to a certain amount of material from natural disasters. Appliances and special waste management. In the case, for example, let's take an example, if a battery reaches the facility, Energy Answers' employees are trained to recover this battery, it even encourages those employees, if a battery arrives, they will take it out of the waste stream, and separate it, so that it does not get into the system. It can happen that something might get into the system, but put forth the

292 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 11 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo maximum effort to remove them so that these materials don't reach the facility. OK. What we are seeing here now is information also based on information from the Solid Waste Authority. We are saying here that if recycling takes place, how much residual material is left to operation the facility. Based on information from the Solid Waste Authority, as I said, here is information on waste generation and recycling percentage as established by the dynamic itinerary, and it varies from 11% to 35% in And the residual waste varies from 2,900 to 3,800 tons, that's the range of waste in the region of the facility. OK. The amount of waste materials for reuse or disposal. Here we are presenting in this chart, we have the total tons per day, 600 thousand tons per day, about 161,000 tons, sorry, 600 thousand tons per year, 161 thousand tons per year. That is, of the waste that enters. On burning, it consumes 600,000 tons per year. From that, there are about 161,000 left, this material is waste and that residual waste is broken down as follows. Boiler Aggregate, ferrous, nonferrous materials and ash. We, what Energy Answers proposes is to recover and reuse these materials as much as possible, to minimize the disposal of these materials, and thus reach zero waste. This is Energy Answers goal. Here, if we do not use the facility, we have two options. Or we deposit it in landfills or go with a resource recovery facility, called "waste to energy". These are basically two options in the long run that have been tested in the United States that work.

293 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 12 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Regarding other options, there are several that are out in the market. But of those that have been tested, and that have worked long term, there is only these two. OK. Here I want to show you a cross-section of what is a landfill, for those of you who do not know what makes up the inside a landfill that complies with the subtitle D, which is a requirement, that came out in 1994, that states that the landfill must have a type of protection for the environment, prevent any migration of gases. These sites have an installation, they have a membrane on the bottom, and they also have a leachate collection system. This leachate collection system prevents leachate, which is a liquid rich in metals, from entering into the aquifer. It prevents it from happening, and the landfill also has a gas collection system to prevent gases, mostly methane, from entering the atmosphere, these are greenhouse gases. At the top, you have a cover that keeps out rain and prevents gases from spacing. It has a rainwater collection system to avoid damage by rain, etc. OK. Here we will discuss what the process, the proposed process in our proposed facility for resource recovery. It has four simple steps. First step. The community generates trash, it recycles, what is recycled at home as it passes across the region, makes recycling easy and it comes to the facility. At facility, you get the trash, then the process I previously described takes place. The trash is shredded into pieces, it recovers ferrous materials. And there it goes to step three. Step three is combustion. This combustion generates steam. The steam drives a turbine that generates electricity. If there are companies interested in buying the steam, we can also sell them the steam. And gas emissions pass through an air emissions control process, which is ongoing. And the ashes of the facility, which is step four,

294 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 13 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo are recycled. They are reused in ferrous, nonferrous and aggregate materials. What are the objectives of this facility? Is to promote the complete and efficient combustion of the fuel processed, which is the fuel facility, which is the grounded waste. We try to maximize recovery of reusable and recyclable materials at the facility. Our goal is zero-waste, a high rate of energy recovery, low percentage of ash, high recovery rate of ferrous and nonferrous and no waste disposal. The costs per ton are low and the fee to haul to the facility is also. Now I'll leave you with Rafael Toro, who will speak about air quality. >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes, Rafael Toro for purposes of record. Yes, I have it here. Now let's start talking about the second phase of this public meeting today, the Location Analysis. The Location Analysis aim is to assess the possible impact of the proposed plant on air quality, visibility, soil and vegetation. While taking into account the emission control technology that minimizes potential risks to health and to the environment. So, that said, let's talk about the air quality as it is relates to the plant, as proposed by Energy Answers. Energy Answers evaluated the technologies that are available for purposes of controlling emissions. Jamie gave us the outline of the process. After the waste is processed in the boiler, which is a fluidized bed because air flows from underneath and the waste is suspended in the air, and that's when this combustion takes place, from the fuel coming from the trash, right? And there, suspended in air, that's where combustion takes place. What does it generate? It generates heat. This heat generates steam, through some water lines inside, steam is generated. That steam runs a turbine and generates

295 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 14 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo electricity. But then, the combustion gases, what do we do with them? That's what we all, as a community, are concerned and want to know and understand. Well, for those greenhouse gas emissions, the EPA, the agency mentioned just now, the Environmental Protection Agency, established which is the best available technology to control these emissions. And it says to Energy Answers, you have to comply with that best technology available, which is what is called the Best Available Control Technology, as established by the EPA. And Energy Answers has to comply with it. And what is this technology? For this plant, this technology is in the emissions control technology. This technology in this equipment here, which I will describe briefly to you. First, this technology includes a catalytic reactor. Do you know the catalytic in your cars? Just like in your car, a similar catalytic is required, but an industrial grade one. What comes out of that plant has to go through this catalytic process, through the catalytic reactor. This catalytic reactor, controls nitric oxide emissions. Why nitric oxide? The air we breathe is about 80%, 79% nitrogen, and everything else is oxygen, the air in which we live. So as this is the air used in the combustion below, thus forming nitric oxide, the EPA tells us that we need to control such emissions and for that we need to establish this technology shown here. This catalytic reactor, just as it happened many years ago with automobile mufflers. Second, another technology of this kind, which is part of what Energy Answers is proposing, is an oxidation catalytic. This is also a catalytic reactor, and this is to control emissions of what are called volatile organic compounds that can go out because they have the potential be emitted, but their emissions are controlled with this equipment. Which is the best

296 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 15 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo available technology, as established by the EPA. And we must comply with that. If we do not install it, we cannot operate. Third. An absorption system, which neutralizes, called a Turbo Sort, which is fed lime. Lime and activated carbon, these two are fed into the system, to neutralize acidic gases that may be generated from combustion, and also to control potential emissions from metals, such as mercury. So that is injected into the system, a large, industrial system, it s injected in powder form; it mixes with the gases there and then passes through a filter, a filter bag. Like in a Vacuum Cleaner, which has a filter bag. Here it s like a Vacuum Cleaner, but an industrial strength one to control this material. So that the material does not leave into the atmosphere. And that bag filter, also established as the Best Available Control Technology by the EPA, the agency, and it controls particulate sizes up to 2.5 microns. We're talking very small. That's the Regulation. That is what is set in the regulation. We must comply with that. Besides that, as I explained, to control emissions of other potential compounds that may result from an incomplete combustion. What do I mean? When you are burning a BBQ or lighting firewood, there is no control in that burning, it burns uncontrolled. But here, we have a process, a combustion process, but under some controls to eliminate those emissions. And its set that the combustion system of that fluidized boiler, as I said, is the best technology to prevent uncontrolled production of compounds, and it takes the combustion to the highest possible degree of a complete combustion. Although we know that there isn't such a thing as a complete combustion, but we take it to the highest degree possible. And that, based on technology set by the EPA as the best technology available. OK. This is a brief summary so that we can see the technology we are talking about. Here is the list of the technology that I described. The filters,

297 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 16 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo the RSCR reactor, which is the reactor, the catalyst, that I said, the Turbo Sort, which is for the neutralization. These are technologies that seek to control these pollutants. These are the ones that the EPA says that they are criteria pollutants and others that are not considered criteria pollutants, which the EPA says that these contaminants have to be controlled with this technology. And the emission limits, the EPA also establishes them via permits. And these are the emission limits. So this technology has to meet these emission limits. For example, if we look at the first one, particulate matter, that means 24 milligrams per dry cubic meter, the EPA sets maximum that can be emitted, 24 milligrams. Milligrams is a thousand times less than a gram, its point zero 24 grams. That merely is to explain, so that you have an idea what this number, I do not pretend for us to go into the meaning of each one of them. But in short, this is the stage of the technology and potential contamination. What do we do with that? Well, with that, as part of the federal permit, we do modeling, a modeling which takes into account these emissions and says, how will it behave in the Cambalache Ward of Arecibo, using survey data from Arecibo and of the Arecibo weather, and it generates a model to see what impact it can have. And that modeling, you can see here the parameters, calculates emissions in different timeframes, which are overseen by the EPA. For example, in a minute, sorry, in an hour, which is the time that the emission occurs. In eight hours, 24 hours and yearly. And for that, the EPA establishes what is called, this table here, Significant Impact Levels. A level considered significant, for purposes of this analysis, but let me explain what that means. The EPA has a water quality standards which are set based on air quality. Sorry, establishing what is the quality of air in which a human being can live healthy, right? That's what they call the National Ambient Air Quality Standard. And this number here, for example, in this

298 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 17 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo case, CO, you see here, the standard is 40,000. And the EPA says, this level of two thousand, which is 5% of the water quality standard, 5%. If your facility goes beyond 5%, further studies are required. The facility needs to evaluate. Do you understand that? OK, so it's a very conservative number, and we performed that modeling. And for this modeling, all emissions were at concentrations below those levels, except two, which are here. Which said, says yes and yes, these exceeded the 5% of the air quality standard, a rather conservative number. And it exceeded, based on that study, on two occasions, for the 1 hour emission average. And what does that do? That then causes us to go to an evaluation process, a second evaluation process, a multisource air emission, a multisource modeling, a modeling of multiple sources in the area. For these two emissions that I mentioned, an hour of CO2 and NO2, which are two pollutants, we ran the multisource tube, and that evaluation includes all existing emissions 7 kilometers around the plant and all major emission sources 57 kilometers in radius around the plant. So all of this is taken into consideration in evaluating these two 1-hour scenarios. And all the modeling we did for these two that exceeded the 5%, remember? It showed that the air quality standard established by the EPA is not exceeded. That we comply with the air quality standard average for that hour. That is, for the wider scenario, for which we did the additional studies, we do comply with the air quality. And that air quality is to be met to protect your health and that of the environment, and the plant complies with that. With this data, as part of the evaluation process, were carried out two risk assessments, a risk assessment on human health, and risk assessment for ecological risks. Risk to water, pangola, that the cow eats, which gives milk, which enters our food

299 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 18 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo chain. It's all part of the evaluation process, with the data that the EPA allows us to issue after the modeling. This evaluation process, which is rigorous and very conservative, because it s based on the assumption that a person will be constantly there breathing that air continuously throughout his life, drinking the milk that comes from that cow that is eating the pangola and where that maximum level is occurring. They are very conservative assumptions. And even with all these rather conservative assumptions, the studies show that the facility does not have an impact beyond those risks that are allowed by the EPA for a facility like this one. The EPA, to give you an example, can say, I accept a risk of 1 in a million, that to me, the government, is acceptable. As an example, you drink water that has residual chloride, right? The water has chloride, chlorine, and chlorine is a poison. However, one agency said that that amount of chloride in the water can be drunk. Similarly, the EPA says, if that amount of pollution has a risk of one in a million, I accept it. Well, all the results of these studies did much lower than one in a million, so we met all of that. Thus, it demonstrates that this plant will not impact the health of the environment. It will not impact the soil. It will not impact vegetation. It will not impact visibility, which is part of the analysis that must be done, and is the subject of this meeting tonight to explain to you and for you to give us your concerns and questions. To continue with the Material Separation Plan, I leave you now with Jaime. >> JAIME ABREU: OK. Very good. What has happened since the publication of the Material Separation Plan? We took the task of incorporating the comments we received from the previous document. Those comments were

300 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 19 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo made into a new section in the previous document. They were incorporated into the new document, which is what was circulated in the library, the courthouse, etc. it was included in a list that we will see later and were incorporated for public review. We also included last year's presentation in this document, in an affidavit that was published in the newspapers. Also, the transcript of the meeting. All that was included as appendixes into the document. The changes made in the document were related to the facility's capacity of the facility. It was increased from two thousand to 2,100 tons, based on design calculations. When the planning is initially done, an amount is provided. When the capacity us thoroughly calculated, then, we get the amount of 2,100 tons of solid waste entering the facility. This leads to an increased capacity of the boilers, which increases from 450 million BTUs per hour to 500 million BTUs per hour. That's the only change to the document. But these changes did not alter anything, neither the discussion nor the conclusion of the Material Separation Plan. We want to be clear on that. So, what are the next steps? From now on, here in this activity, we will have a QA session. We will address any questions or comments made at this meeting. We will clarify them, and those comments will be incorporated into the final document. That final document will be published again and made available for public review in one of the established facilities. And then, that is the final document. That is, there will not be another process for additional comments. Tonight is the end of the comments period. This is the list of places where it was published. Here is the library of the Pontifical Catholic University of Puerto Rico, the General Court of Justice, the Library of the Business College of the Puerto Rico Junior College, the National

301 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 20 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo College of Business and Technology College Library, Inter American University of Puerto Rico, The University of Puerto Rico Library and the Public Library of Arecibo. It was available in all of these sites since July 8, which was advertised in the newspaper, and it ends today. And you could have evaluated it and provided comments regarding the document, and we would clarify them in this meeting today. If it was mailed, then, we can answer them in the meeting today. What we did was, as indicated earlier, we have a session of several questions that have already been asked by the community, through different methods. So, we want to bring these questions to you and explain them directly, to clarify questions. Then, after this, we open the floor to additional questions. We are more than glad to answer questions related to the Material Separation Plan and the Sighting Analysis Plan of the facility and those comments will be incorporated into the final document. OK. Let's look at some of the questions; we'll look at several of them, perhaps with the support of our team here. I hope to cover almost all. The first question has always been regarding tires, how will tires be handled at the facility? The facility may receive tires, but the purpose is not to receive tires in large quantities. We might process the odd tire that comes in with the garbage. But we have no plans to receive tire trucks at the facility. Will you apply for a combustion permit for a specific quantity of tires? Yes. What will happen to the ashes? The ashes, our primary purpose is to recover, reuse and recycle those ashes as much as possible. In the event

302 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 21 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo that we cannot either recycle or reuse the ash, they will be disposed in a landfill that meets the requirements of Subtitle D. That is, that has a membrane, etc, as stated in the law. Will the facility have high lead emissions? No. How will the facility handle electronic waste, "E-Waste"? These materials, which are like refrigerators, large equipment, batteries, all that kind of material, will be segregated at the entrance of the facility and will not be accepted into the facility. Have you considered the impacts of the flow of truck traffic on our air and the existing traffic? Yes, there have been traffic studies in the area, and we found that basically there was no significant impact on the area of Arecibo. How could a Put or Pay contract impact recycling in the area? It won't. This facility will not have any Put or Pay in the area of Arecibo. And I demonstrated before, the facility itself will promote recycling in the region, as has been demonstrated in other regions. Also, one of the things that had been spoken about regarding the landfill system, is that it has not closed, as had been mentioned earlier. There are more expansions and it does not go with what the Solid Waste Authority had said. Yes, it has changed, because the process, just like the Solid Waste Authority said, its itinerary, is a dynamic itinerary. It is a dynamic itinerary, which fluctuates and may change. Still, the facility has no problem if several landfills continue their operations. Eventually, in the future, and the EPA already established this, since many landfills in the northern part of Puerto Rico are in a karst area, and must be closed, due to the problem of groundwater contamination and the leachates that enter the north zone system. And for that primary reason is that the Solid Waste Authority

303 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 22 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo promoted the use of resource recovery facilities for energy generation, which was to be two. One in the northeast area and another one in the northwest area of Puerto Rico. Well, now we will open the meeting to the public. We remind you, there will be a microphone in the back, the microphone is being setup. It will go in the back of the room. As stated in the rules of the game earlier, one person at a time, we will form a line, asking one question at a time. Yes, there. One question at a time. If you have several questions, then you go to the back of the row, and get in line again. We will address each question, and try to clarify. What we now will address is questions related to the presentation just given, as we indicated earlier. If there are any questions in general about the facility, we will be here as long as possible to address all questions you have, and use this opportunity to discuss them as much as possible. So let's go to the mike now. TIME 01:00 to 2:00 approx. >> JAIME ABREU: I ask you, when you go to ask your question or make your comment, to first identify yourself, for the record, that way your participation here today is entered into the record. Second, we want to have control and do this in an orderly way. So, out of respect for those in line after you, state your question quickly. We'll give you a minute, and if you want to ask another question, you can go back to the rear of the line, and you'll have other opportunities to ask more questions. But we want everyone to participate. So we ask that within this period of time, which we're going to keep under some control, because we want to maintain control and order

304 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 23 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo during the presentation, for you to try comply with this rule so that we can hold this meeting as effectively as possible. OK. Next rule. We'll give a minute to ask the question regarding the MSP and an extra minute to ask a question related to the location. So, you have two minutes. In addition, Rogelio, if you want, you can return to the end of the line and come back to ask additional questions. And I want you to know that when we finish this part, which we want you to limit the questions to the Material Separation Plan and the Sight Analysis Plan, we will open a new session, fully open, for you to ask questions about the entire project. Not just these issues presented here tonight. So, the opportunity to discuss other topics is available after we finish this first session of questions. Okay? We do not want you to feel in any way limited in what you want to ask about the project. So, that said, go ahead, Rogelio. >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: Yes, good afternoon to all the colleagues who are here with the yellow shirts, good afternoon. First, why do you insist on not giving complete or correct information? I will cite several instances where the professionals here this afternoon have told totally incorrect or totally incomplete information. I'll start. First, it s been said here that the only two proven ways to handle the waste of humanity are incineration and landfills. False, recycling, composting and bio-digestion, which are all healthy alternatives, economically better and more appropriate for communities, are better. By the way, that's why the EPA puts them over incineration and landfills. So, that's false information and should be corrected. Second, why insist that this is a zero-waste facility? False. Why not say that this vacuum cleaner that you say you have is going to collect all of the mercury, poison, all toxins?...its two minutes... and you don't say where they are to be deposited. Well let me finish the question. Where will you deposit them?

305 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 24 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo They do not want to say where will they throw the poison from the vacuum. God knows, in one of your communities, and I'll come back for the next question later. >> WOMAN: This question is for Mr.... >> RAFAEL TORO: Pardon me. Rogelio, thanks for having complied with the rule of the game, we appreciate it. Go ahead, ma'am. >> WOMAN: Answer it, answer Rogelio's question. They are waiting. Rafael, will they be answered immediately, or you will answer... >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes, we will reply immediately. >> WOMAN: How many minutes are for the answer? >> RAFAEL TORO: Before you have the opportunity to ask a question, what we will do is have the engineer answer the questions raised by Rogelio. >> JAIME ABREU: Basically, we want to answer Rogelio's questions. First, what we are showing in that graph, is for the waste handling, the residual waste, that is, after recycling. We have always talked about the facility, that when waste reaches the facility, the community will be recycling. After recycling, it arrives at the facility and that facility; there will be two methods to handle residual solid waste material. One is the landfill, which is what is happening now in Puerto Rico. Recycling takes place and then it goes to a landfill. And the second method is to recycle or to take it to an energy resource recovery facility. That's what's working in the U.S., these two methods, and in Puerto Rico, only the first one works. That is, disposal in landfills. So, maybe you got confused about that part. But we understand and clarify that currently, only the disposal of waste materials. In the second question, the ash produced in the facility, has been found to be non-

306 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 25 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo hazardous material. And these non-hazardous materials will be discarded in landfills that meet Subtitle D. Non-dangerous, we would like to stress, and we have proof of that. The ash is non-hazardous material. Therefore, there's no problem with discarding them in landfills that meet Subtitle D. >> RAFAEL TORO: When the engineer tells you that there is proof, he is talking about analytical tests. Laboratory tests are performed on the ashes of this particular technology. Because there might be questions or concerns with other technologies, but that is not the technology used by Energy Answers. Energy Answers technology, in particular, is the one used in Massachusetts. Which has been in use over 23 years, operating in Massachusetts. That ash undergoes a chemical analysis called TCLP. It's a laboratory test established by the EPA that determines that it is not a hazardous waste. And that's the proof that the engineer is referring to. Go ahead, ma'am. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: Good afternoon to all present. I am an attorney Aleida Zenteno Rodríguez. I was born in Arecibo. I chair the Commission on Environmental and Natural Resources at the Puerto Rico Bar Association. I also chair the American Association of Jurists. And I have questions for Mr. Patrick Mahoney. For Mark Green. According to the document that you just discussed, on page 36, you say you will install three incinerators to burn about 5,000 tons of garbage daily. Which will cover everything from Carolina to Rincon, as per your graph. The question is, do you plan to use the port of Arecibo as a port to bring in trash? The second question. According to the document that you just discussed, are you extending the life of landfills? >> WOMAN: It was a minute, the first question, they will answer and then you can do the next question.

307 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 26 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: The question is yes or no? No, I have not asked the second question >> RAFAEL TORO: Well, let's answer the first question. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: Is it yes or no? >> RAFAEL TORO: Well, the answer to the first one is no. The first question. The Dynamic Itinerary, what it establishes is that there will be two facilities, one of 1,500, according to the dynamic itinerary, its two facilities. 1,500 tons per day and 1,300. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: In other towns, but in Arecibo, 2,100. >> RAFAEL TORO: No, no. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: It's 5,000 tons of garbage for all. >> RAFAEL TORO: I'm going to ask the attorney to allow the engineer to finish his answer, and then you will have the opportunity to make a new question at your next opportunity. >> JAIME ABREU: Basically, the operating region is going to be the one established here, in the central area and the expanded area. This is the region where waste will be generated that will be disposed at this facility. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: I am referring to page 36. >> JAIME ABREU: I'm on page 36. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: They say they will put two additional facilities besides the one in Arecibo. >> JAIME ABREU: No, no, what it talks there about, directly from the Itinerary, and I quote: "As mentioned in the Dynamic Itinerary, the

308 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 27 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo construction of two processing facilities, is recommended, one in the northeast and another one in the northwestern region of Puerto Rico." It does not say that they will be in this area. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: That would be three, plus the one in Arecibo. >> JAIME ABREU: No, no. What we are talking about in that section, specifically, we are saying, that the one in Arecibo is going to fulfill that step, which is the facility to the northwest. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: You don't mention the Pajaro Ward in that document. >> JAIME ABREU: No. The Solid Waste Dynamic Itinerary... >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: I join Rogelio's comment, that you are lying. The second question. In your document, you say that with your technology you can help extend the life of landfills? Do you plan to assist ADS in extending the life of Arecibo landfill? >> JAIME ABREU: The answer to your question is no. Because the Arecibo landfill does not comply with the subtitle D of the Federal Law. Madam attorney, thank you. Please take a new turn, and we will allow attorney Torres to speak now. Please proceed, Mr. Attorney. >> FRANCIS TORRES: Good afternoon to all. My name is Francis Torres. I am a lawyer, practicing in environmental law in Puerto Rico. And more than questions, I have some comments. But first, I wanted to know if the limitation imposed on people who want to express themselves, to ask questions in one minute, of that also applies to comments that can be made for the record. >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes.

309 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 28 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> FRANCIS TORRES: Well, then, I have written comments. I want to take enter them into the record. These comments are already in the hands of the EPA. In essence, they are several, and I hope they are answered, but there are two fundamental ones which would like to take the 20 seconds I have left to make them. And that is that the public notice was published, not in the main newspaper. And that is the same error that occurred in September of last year, contrary to what is required by regulation. And second, the Dynamic Itinerary Plan, which has been the source of information for almost all the conclusions that have been carried out in the Separation Plan, it is known by everyone in the environmental practice in Puerto Rico, that it is plagued with errors, inaccuracies, errors that are serious errors fir it to be used to plan ahead in Puerto Rico. And those are two fundamental statements that I wanted to clarify. I shall now give you, so that you have a copy of this document, and that it becomes part of the official record, so that the questions there can be answered promptly. >> RAFAEL TORO: OK. I understand that you are giving us a complimentary copy of the document, but officially, it's been filed with the EPA already, right? >> FRANCIS TORRES: Yes. >> RAFAEL TORO: The lawyer tells me so. Officially, it was filed with the EPA. These comments will be part of the record, and we're going to answer them as part of this process. Go ahead, next attorney. >> ONOFRE ALMODOVAR: Good afternoon, my name is Onofre Almodóvar, from the Clean Arecibo Group. Where will you acquire the trash? >> JAIME ABREU: Well, the garbage is going to come from the area already established in the presentation. These are the central area and the extended

310 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 29 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo area, covering several towns, I do not know them by heart, but they are listed in the presentation. >> ONOFRE ALMODOVAR: Will that be the service area? >> JAIME ABREU: Where we will receive waste from. >> RAFAEL TORO: And in addition, also a combination of waste which is both residential and commercial. Go ahead. >> OSVALDO ROSARIO: Good. Osvaldo Rosario, a professor at UPR Rio Piedras. It was clear in the presentation by Attorney Toro, that the burning of garbage produces dangerous and harmful materials, and I add, as it has been documented in the literature, thousands of toxic and carcinogenic compounds. So that is why they need all those traps and filters to remove it. There will be a hazardous, harmful, toxic, carcinogenic material trapped in this material. Where will this hazardous, harmful, toxic, carcinogenic material be disposed of? >> RAFAEL TORO: OK. The ashes, the analytical tests, and you have a PHD in chemistry, and you know what they are made of, the TCLP, I'm sure you know it. It shows that these ashes are not hazardous waste. They do have dangerous contaminants, as may be present in other compounds in our daily lives. But they don't have high enough levels to become hazardous waste. Therefore, the laws and regulations establish that the ash, which is not hazardous, can be disposed of in a non-hazardous waste landfill. A nonhazardous waste landfill, which is to receive these ashes from Energy Answers, has to be one that meets, in turn, with another law, which is subtitle D, as mentioned earlier. A federal law, that landfill that Jaime Abreu talked about just now, and that has all these control mechanisms. In Puerto Rico, there are a few that meet that. So, at the landfill that complies with the

311 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 30 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo law, that can receive this material, that although it contains some hazardous components, it does not contain them at a level that makes them hazardous waste. So, following the law and regulations, they will be discarded in that landfill. I wanted... >> OSVALDO ROSARIO: In my question, at no time did I say ash. I was referring to the material in the traps. The material in the traps that EPA uses to regulate emissions. Where will that material, from the traps that the EPA requires to be elimination from the air flow, which has the properties that I mentioned, dangerous, harmful, toxic and carcinogenic? Not the ashes. >> JAIME ABREU: I do not understand what trap is it that you are referring to. If you can clarify that a bit... >> OSVALDO ROSARIO: The Turbo Sort, I speak of the activated carbon injection, I speak of the lime. I know there are other materials that are sued prior to that one, the fine particulate in the bag houses; these are the materials that I am referring to. >> JAIME ABREU: Of course. That lime that neutralizes the acid, it's a solid, right? And as you know, it's collected in the filter bag. So that goes through, that lime, becomes the ash in that filter system. So, it's in that ash, that's where that material is. >> OSVALDO ROSARIO: You will mix it with the bottom ash? That's the answer. >> JAIME ABREU: bottom ash? No, we're talking about two completely separate things, doctor. Bottom ash, bottom ash, is the one coming from the bottom of the boiler, from the fluidized bed. That first stuff that comes in as a piece of stone, a piece of metal, glass, pottery broken at home and it

312 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 31 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo goes into the trash. Its heavy and it falls down first. That's the bottom ash at the boiler. Is a material that is used for aggregate. That has nothing to do with the ash emission control system, which is the ash that we are talking that works with lime, right? And is applied to the gases, and it neutralizes, and that is a solid particulate that is collected in the bag filter. So that becomes the ash that has to be disposed from the emission control process. So that trap that you talk about, is what becomes ash. That ash, again, passed laboratory tests and is discarded as non-hazardous waste. >> OSVALDO ROSARIO: If you need me to explain... >> RAFAEL TORO: Let's let someone else have a chance and we'll address your further questions at your next turn, Doctor. >> JORGE SEILE: Yes, I would like to know how much you varnished wood did you burn in front of the EPA? >> RAFAEL TORO: Varnished wood. Sorry, if you please, can you identify yourself for the record. >> JORGE SEILE: Chemist. How much you varnished wood did you burn in front of the EPA? Electric light poles are varnished so they do not rot, so that they do not rot in the rain, how much wood? How much wood? >> RAFAEL TORO: We have not burned any wood in front of the EPA, we... >> JORGE SEILE: But you will burn wood in the incinerator, right? And you know what wood varnishers use to seal it against water, so that water does not penetrate the wood so that it will not rot, even n boats? Pentachlorophenol. Pentachlorophenol, two molecules of pentachlorophenol and one of dioxin.

313 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 32 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> JAIME ABREU: The facility, the primary purpose is the combustion of municipal solid waste material. >> JORGE SEILE: So, will you sort the wood apart from the fridges, cheap watches from JC Penney, radios, refrigerators, E-waste. >> JAIME ABREU: All this is mixed into the municipal waste. >> JORGE SEILE: Ah! They're going to mix everything, and they will burn everything, they will sort it, not recycle it. >> JAIME ABREU: That is in it. Right now, waste from Puerto Rico, the way that it is disposed, it comes that way. >> JORGE SEILE: Thank you. >> RAFAEL TORO: We wanted to add, the gentleman just now spoke of electrical poles or other such items. Those bulky materials are not received at the facility. Yes, wood product can enter the facility, as part of the waste composition, as it has been stated by ADS, and within that amount, you may a minimal amount of vegetative material entering the facility. Next question. >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: I'm back. Yes, Rogelio Figueroa. Why do you insist on not wanting to tell the people where is it that you will deposit the ashes? You do not want to tell them because you don't have a landfill to take them to. And most likely, you will have to build one near this community. And those ashes, if you breathe them, all that ash poisonous captured, in the dust bag from the vacuum, you and your children will breathe it. And you will believe the proponents of the plant that it is harmless, after what it did was that it captured the poisons out of the combustion? They do not want to answer that question. Look at the answer

314 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 33 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo they give. On that table, they put the number point zero zero zero zero 25, for air emissions, but when they spoke of the ashes, you know what they said? Try to recover as much as possible. Place it in a landfill somewhere. By the way, we cannot tell you where, because we do not know where. The thing is that they do not have where to put it, and the problem we are seeing here is they are hiding information. Give us the complete information and you will avoid these problems, and I'll come back in my next turn. And the EPA says, first recycle, compost second, third, Reduce, first, fourth, burn, and landfill last. There are three alternatives first. They are choosing to just separate the metals, because they can't burn them. If they could burn the metal, they would burn it too. But since metals are not burned, they have to take them out, so that the machine does not get damaged. And then, finally, they take out the metals that were not burned because they do not burn. But all the chlorine, all the pesticides, all the tires gums, they have asked for a permit to burn tires. All of the materials from cars, which are broken into pieces, they contain chlorine. All that goes into the air, and our children breathe it. I am sure that none of the plant owners live near the plants. Perhaps you might live near the plants, but they do not live near one. And if it's so good, have them take it to San Juan. Let them go to San Juan to burn waste. I would have no problem with going to work at the plant in San Juan, right? They can offer the same job they are offering you here at the plant in San Juan. But, have them put the pant over there. And let them breathe what comes out of the waste when its burned in San Juan. That's the question that I have for them. Why do you continue to provide incomplete information about the ash? >> JAIME ABREU: We want to clarify. The ash will be disposed of at a landfill that meets the requirements of Subtitle D.

315 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 34 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: Where, where? >> JAIME ABREU: I will speak clearly, in Puerto Rico there are few... >> RAFAEL TORO: Rogelio, I would ask you to maintain a little control. >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: I am controlled. >> RAFAEL TORO: The engineer heard your question, let him answer. >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: The question is, where? >> RAFAEL TORO: Let him speak. >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: Answer the question, where? >> JAIME ABREU: I am answering the question. There are few PR landfills that meet Subtitle D. So few that you can count them with your hands. Most of them are private landfills, although a few are municipal landfills. We have not revealed this information because it is part of the business strategy. Likewise, go ask a private landfill where it receives trash from where and how many contracts they have. They are not going to give you that information. We are in a business strategy, trying to establish where we will dispose them, but we have already been approached by several landfills that comply with subtitle D. >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: Do not you think the community adjacent to that landfill deserves to know where you are going to put the ashes? Come on. We request to know where you will place the ashes. >> RAFAEL TORO: We gave you the opportunity, and we'll request that you take advantage, and let the engineer answer. Do not interrupt, please. >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: He did not answer.

316 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 35 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> JAIME ABREU: I want to give you additional information, Rogelio. This information, once we enter into a business agreement, we will provide the information. We will give information, but not now. Not until we have the contract. We are still planning the facility. It has not been built. >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: You're not fulfilling your commitment for this hearing. It is to provide answers. And you're not answering. >> JAIME ABREU: I did answer. >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: Is that you have to clearly state it, the commitment that... >> RAFAEL TORO: Please. I am not going to allow you, I'm not going to allow you. Please, let's keep order, please. >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: I, too, because I've known you for some time and you are not telling the information to the community. >> WOMAN: That is not correct. Next question please. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: Yes, good afternoon, for the record, again. I am attorney Aleida Zenteno Rodríguez. You say that your technologies are approved by the EPA. The truth is that on August 4, you received a notice from the EPA, four and a half pages, not authorizing the original permit requested. The question is, yes, you can take them this copy. Do you have it? The question is, you submitted a new document today, which is the Material Separation Plan, which was not included with the original DIA. You are holding these public hearings here, to avoid public hearings in the towns of Vega Baja, Toa Baja and Aguadilla, which are other towns affected by your incinerator proposal.

317 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 36 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> JAIME ABREU: To the first question, we are in the dialogue with the EPA to establish limits, set by EPA, for the facility. The second question... >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: The truth is that the EPA... >> JAIME ABREU: Let me answer both questions. The Material Separation Plan is entirely separate, it is included in the Air Permit, but it's a completely separate plan. And also, this is a public meeting, not a public hearing. Here, as it was very clearly indicated at the beginning by Rafael Toro, we don't have a hearing officer. This meeting is a meeting to share information with the public. To receive public concerns and receive them as commentaries. There was a time for the Public Hearing, and it took place, and there will be more. And you will have all of the time to talk about it. >> WOMAN: It's the doctors turn, madam attorney. You left... Ah! Do you have another question? What is your other question? >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: The question is if you will hold public hearings in those other towns? >> RAFAEL TORO: The answer is no, nothing requires it. We are complying with federal regulations, holding these meetings, holding the meetings with the public. And this is what is stipulated in the regulations and we are complying with that. The Public Hearings were held, the Environmental Impact Statement process. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: Not for those towns, no. >> RAFAEL TORO: Go ahead. >> ANGEL GONZALEZ: Good afternoon, Ángel González from Guaynabo. I hope not to be out of order with this question, but I would like to know... what happens is that Guaynabo, to explain to the gentleman, can be affected

318 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 37 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo by contamination of the milk produced in this area, which will be downwind, from the chimney. Specifically, as you know, Hatillo will receive the poisonous winds from the chimney and can contaminate the milk, as well as other products like dairy and meat, and so on. And I understand that I can be hurt by this. So the question is, initially, and with great respect, I would like to know, how much are the fees being paid to the people who come to defend the position of Energy Answers? I think it would be appropriate to have that information and I am not criticizing the people that get those fees. It seems perfectly legitimate for them to take advantage of that, and then vote against the project. (Applause) >> ANGEL GONZALEZ: It was kind of a statement. So that was the question, the second question. Indeed, within your considerations regarding this project, have you considered the potential in terms of the damage caused to the jobs generated in the livestock industry and the dairy industry, in the event that these pastures become contaminated, and that the milk and milk products become contaminated and it cripples the country's dairy industry? Thank you. >> JAIME ABREU: I want you to know, doctor, right? I want you to know that the ecological risk studies, as we explained just now and on human health and on the food chain, are part of the studies that have been conducted for this project. These results are there, they are summarized, right? However, these are comprehensive studies, contained in the Environmental Impact Statement. What you are saying, does not reflect in any way what is reflected in those studies. In no way, what you are saying is

319 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 38 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo indicative of the results of these studies. So, the premise of your position in relation to you in Guaynabo being contaminated with the milk, is based on a premise that is incorrect. Because studies show that this will not happen. So, you, being a person of science, need to rely on the data and scientific studies. And these data and scientific studies for this project. Because maybe you can bring data from other technology elsewhere in the world. But I ask you that, for you to criticize this project, use the information for the technology to be used in this project and with our data, for you try to make such an argument. Because our data shows that the premise of your statement is not correct. Do you understand, doctor? >> ANGEL GONZALEZ: I understand your statement and I disagree completely. You contend that the dioxins, for example, of these emissions will be 99% negative. That is, 99% of dioxin will be moved by the control systems. This technology does not exist. Particles, nano-particles smaller than 2.5 microns, speaking in technical terms, there is no technology to remove them. There is no technology that can eliminate these nano particles, and you must know this, and your scientists should know this, too. Let me tell you that I studied, I looked at the Arcadis study, your consultants regarding this project. And Arcadis does not say that there's 0% of danger potential. Absolutely, they cannot make such a claim. Meaning, if they are scientists, they can't claim that there is no danger with this. Absolutely. Why? Because the only way for there to be no danger is if nothing was generated. Thank you very much. >> WOMAN: Do we continue to the next question or do you want to answer? >> JAIME ABREU: We have answered that already. We've answered already regarding the Arcadis studies. Nobody here says that this is zero. In life

320 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 39 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo nothing is zero. Here we have said clearly that the agency charged with ensuring the health and the environment, sets a limit, and we explained in simple words, it's one in a million. We have already said, and we meet with that limit, just like when you drink a glass of water and it has chloride. And chloride is a poison, but an agency says you can drink water with residual chlorine and it does not kill. Similarly, in this case, an agency sets a limit, and this plant, which is acceptable to the agency, and we have not said that the number is zero, but we comply with that limit set. And we said that. But, to come and say that we said that the risk is zero, that is not the reality and that is not the truth. >> WOMAN: Next question. >> AUGUSTO VALLE: My name is Augusto Valle. I live in the neighborhood, next to the landfill. Let's talk about the hazardous or toxic waste that is discarded daily in every home, such as paint, insecticides, pesticides, etc. Currently, all of that goes to the landfill. What will happen when they are burned in your plant? >> JAIME ABREU: Basically, addressing your comments and questions. All the material that are, as you explained, insecticides or batteries, any hazardous material that comes to the facility, that can be recovered, the team trained at the facility, first at the garbage trucks which collect at their facilities; you yourself at home, if somehow it gets away, inside the facility, a team of trained personnel recovers these materials and prevent them from reaching the facility. >> RAFAEL TORO: Sandra, we will allow the gentleman to ask us a question. >> JAIME ABREU: Give him a chance first, the gentleman here in front.

321 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 40 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> MARTIN CORTES: My name, Martín Cortés. I live in Arecibo y... and I'm not... Senator, candidate for the town of Arecibo, in law and I want to clean up the trash in Arecibo and other things that cause problems to the environment. I have a responsibility to stop the government... we need a way for the community to stay healthy and handle their waste to leave a healthy life... I support the cleanup. It is very important. And that's what I wanted to say. >> WOMAN: It's more of a concern. >> RAFAEL TORO: Question. Do you have a concern? Any questions? >> WOMAN: He is concerned... >> MARTIN CORTES: I am concerned with the waste generated, that it can affect many people, our beaches; the syringes used by drug addicts. And that is very sensitive; it also affects plants, vegetation. And that worries me. And there are many things that thousands of people may die from. Because the plants, the dirty water is not clean, and it affects people and that's important. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you very much. Indeed, this plant has a rigorous permitting process, it follows a rigorous audit process once it's built and operating. A rigorous, continuous monitoring, so that it does not affect the health nor the environment. So, in the comment made by him, then, we understand that this project is compatible with the ideal that he has regarding a healthy and a better environment. The operation of a plant like this one, which is highly controlled in regards to health and environmental concerns, and that is the technology here and the existing regulation. Go ahead.

322 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 41 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo ERICA RIVERA: My name is Erica Rivera, a resident of the Factor Ward in Arecibo, where the landfill is located. For the doctor that has concerns, it is us here in Arecibo who are affected the most. Which is why we are here. Not because we are paid... My question is, we want to recycle in our homes, will we have the facilities such as trucks, so that what we recycle is taken to the different areas? >> RAFAEL TORO: First, we ask the citizens, as the first step in a process of recycling, to separate their waste. There are many efforts directed towards it. The operation of this plant is compatible with that. The data show that where a plant like ours is built, as Engineer Abreu said, statistics show that recycling is achieved, but the first step is the separation at home. In answer to your question, the machinery, equipment, in reality, is not available now in your home to do that. But it is part of an evolutionary process that will evolve to be that first stage of separation. So that it can occur in homes, and that is very compatible with the operation of this plant. >> ERICA RIVERA: But for it to go directly to you have, there has to be a truck to pick it up and make it get there, because everyone is not going to drive it there. To take it to you. >> RAFAEL TORO: Exactly, it will be the same route as you have now. There would be no change, basically, we see the trucks passing by to collect, they will continue to come, and will go to our facility. That is, there are not going to be more trucks just because there's a new facility. It will be the same amount, the same municipal trucks that collect, will continue collecting. >> ROGELIO GONZALEZ: Good afternoon, my name is Rogelio Gonzalez. I watched the orientation and I wonder, why, in the central phase, was Barceloneta not included? Barceloneta is a town that has, from what I

323 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 42 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo understand, the most waste and consumes much more energy, too. And the other thing, Is that I understand that at this hour and this day, I do not think that it was the best time to make this meeting because many people are working and many people have other commitments. And I believe that there's a need for this kind of dialogue to take place, for them to hear from you and of the concerns brought by... >> RAFAEL TORO: Good question. Let's clarify. The municipality of Barceloneta is included in the extended area. The extended area is included in the central, it was not extended, it's only a technicality... we used the ADS's Dynamic Itinerary to establish what garbage is generated in each municipality and that was established first as the service area. It has nothing to do for some... x or y reason, but the Barceloneta area is included in the area that will operate the facility. >> ROGELIO GONZALEZ: Well. Thank you very much. >> RAFAEL TORO: And we want to clarify, forgive me for interrupting, we want to clarify that because the facility, why the meeting is being held here in Arecibo, it s because the facility is going to be here in Arecibo. >> FERNADO BETANCOURT: and regarding using a weekday, a workday... in fact, we calenderized this five-hour meeting until ten at night to be on a week day, but the children have class the next day. There are a number of circumstances which we believe today is better than a Saturday, people get up late and so on, so a day like today was more appropriate. If we had done the meeting Saturday or Sunday, then people would have criticized it, saying "because we have activities for those days off,". Well, there is no perfect day, so within these different alternatives, we understand that today was the best option to hold this meeting.

324 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 43 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> JAIME ABREU: Go ahead. >> WALDEMAR FLORES FLORES: First round, comments, quality system, structured and documented system describing the policies, objectives, principles, organizational authority, responsibilities, to respond in case of trials and declarations, implementation of an organization to ensure quality in their work processes, products, articles and services. The quality system provides the framework for the planning, implementation and evaluation of the work of the organization and for the assurance and quality control required at a given time. This requires that a project like this. Meets the three phases, planning, implementation and validation and evaluation of data quality. For quality management tools, these are indicators of data quality, data quality objectives, operational procedures patterns. This is gathered in quality assurance manuals for the validation and evaluation included in a project's quality assurance plans, with quality objectives and standard operating procedures, performance evaluation samples, there are audits and assessments of technical systems, audits and management systems, validation and verification of data quality and data quality assessment. All of the studies that have been made, including wood, either waste or demolition, plus the ones related to cars, do not meet, even by mistake, quality requirements, quality systems. You have to make a project quality assurance plan. One of the studies makes the blunder of saying that they are acting on behalf of EPA, if it serves on behalf of EPA, it must have a quality system. First, project quality assurance plan, formal technical document, which contains detailed quality assurance and quality control and other technical procedures, to ensure the quality of the environmental data for each activity, recovery of environmental data, approved before collecting data. A formal

325 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 44 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo document describing the full detail, the quality assurance and quality control and other technical activities that must be implemented to ensure the result, meets... I'll continue in my second turn. >> WOMAN: Only, sir, just so you know, I know you are going fast due to time constraints, but they are mostly questions, however, for translation purposes, it is very, very difficult if you go that fast. Take how many turns you want, but try to do it at a reasonable pace, because the problem is that the translation suffers already, and if people have to hear this in English and Spanish, they will not understand. Don't worry, they are the ones that made the observation. >> RAFAEL TORO: Also, please, when you speak, identify yourself for the record, so that you are on the record as having participated. >> JAIME ABREU: And what we'll do, regarding the question of the colleague who spoke earlier, we'll address it in the final document. If the comment was a bit long, then, we will fully address it and include it in the final document, to evaluate it. >> OSVALDO ROSARIO: Again, Osvaldo Rosario. Before the clock starts ticking, I want to make an important clarification. Those of us opposed to the incinerator and who have always been opposed to incineration, we do not defend landfills, do not defend landfills like the one in Arecibo. We have also fought tenaciously against the landfill and to correct the ills of the landfill. I think that has to be clear, here in the audience; opposition to the incinerator is not a defense for the landfill. In my previous remarks, a point I made was unclear. You think, Mr. Attorney, that substances such as mercury, dioxins, uranium and many other carcinogens and toxins, are not altered in the ashes, their chemical identity remains. I can say so with authority, they

326 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 45 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo remain the same. The only thing that is neutralized are the acids. And a few oxides are transformed, but the chemicals and metals, they do not change their properties, are remain dangerous, harmful, toxic, carcinogenic. And wherever they end up, the ash, filter, or whatever, they have to be disposed. And wherever they go, they will still be toxic. Hence I go back and ask again, where are you going to send these toxic materials, dangerous, harmful, that is caught in the traps? >> RAFAEL TORO: OK. First, the answer to your question, we will reply in writing. And you, being a man of science know, as we said already, that there may be a toxic substance in the water you drink, but an agency said that at that level you can drink it. Then, although the presence is there, but not at a level, at a concentration that requires some other kind of consideration. And this was already answered several times, right? If you want to understand that point of view, of the concentrations, doctor, because you know about that, then you understand it. But to say that something is toxic, and not to mention the levels at which is found, then the argument is missing a part. You know? Hence, as we have repeated several times, and we don't want to continue to repeat, the same answers, we will reply formally in writing. >> OSVALDO ROSARIO: It's not allowed in the air, but allowed in other forms. >> ALBERTO DE JESÚS MERCADO: Yes, good evening. My name is Alberto de Jesus Mercado. I represent an organization called Friends of the Sea I'm not from here, from Arecibo. I came not to seek confrontation, I understand that there is a situation with the trash, and different missions, I personally know the doctor. How are you doing? Javier Vera Arocho and many people in these situations, I am very fond of Rogelio and of the people of Arecibo.

327 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 46 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Where I worked. Where I've shared many times. Now I am here, with great respect. I feel sorry that you want to trick people into giving the prepared questions in advance. I think it is disrespectful to people. People who have the yellow shirts, with all due respect, analyze, discuss, listen to what is being discussed, the questions, the concerns. Because ultimately, you, who live here in Arecibo, are the ones to pay the consequences and so will your children. I am not here seeking confrontation, but there is deception involved here, even when there's question, not even with the question, there's no respect. Thank you. (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: Please proceed, madam attorney. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: Yes, again, Aleida Zenteno, for the record. In Massachusetts, after they put incinerators, they charge the "Waste Bill," the "Waste Bill" in Massachusetts has three parts, one for incineration, a second batch to produce energy, and a third one they say is to maintain the environment. The specific question is, do you plan to push for legislation planned to charge us for the incineration? >> JAIME ABREU: The answer is no. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: For the record, they have answered no to all my questions. Next question. >> JAIME ABREU: Let me clarify. >> RAFAEL TORO: The answer to whether we plan to propose a bill to charge, the answer is no, that was your question. Let us now address the issue. The rest of your question.

328 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 47 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> JAIME ABREU: And I want to clarify. We do charge, as any landfill charges, for waste handling. You pay to have garbage facility to accept the garbage. So the facility will charge for the garbage, but it will not charge extra. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: And the energy, will the people have to pay for that? >> JAIME ABREU: I did not hear, can you repeat the question? >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: The energy production, will the people have to pay for that? >> JAIME ABREU: It is included in the cost... >> RAFAEL TORO: No, the answer to your question again, if we are going to charge, is no. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: All my questions are answered in the negative. >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: And the next one... >> RAFAEL TORO: No, but let me answer, because I allowed you to ask the question. The answer is, we sell to the Electric Power Authority the energy generated at the plant through a contract with the Electric Power Authority, and it is fed to the transmission lines, and PREPA transmits the electricity to the citizens. Now that is a matter... let me finish, madam attorney, between PREPA and the people. We will sell electricity at 10, 11 cents a kilowatt hour. This is an inexpensive way for PREPA to obtain electricity, OK? Number two, that is a source of income for the plant. Second form of income for the plant, charging for garbage. Likewise, as it happens now in landfills, what they call the "Tipping Fee" because you now have to pay an

329 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 48 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo amount per ton, and in the same price range that is charged now, then, this plant will operate in the same range. Number three. Of the materials removed from the garbage line to be recycled, that will be sold and that is another source of income for the plant. So those are the three sources of income for the plant. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: You heard him say it. The garbage you throw away is a source of income for them. The reality of Arecibo, is that you it has a power generating plant that is producing zero energy, and we are paying for it, because it cost millions of dollars to build it. We are paying for it every day. We'll have to pay for that plant plus the incinerator. >> FERNADO BETANCOURT: Good afternoon. Mr. Toro, it caught my attention when you talked about recycling, which was on par with the incinerator. Can you clarify that for me?. When you spoke of recycling, a minute ago, you said that it is compatible with the incinerator. >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes, that's correct. And let me explain what I mean by that. Where a plant like this has been installed and I think you were not at the beginning of the presentation. >> FERNADO BETANCOURT: No. >> RAFAEL TORO: You arrived late, OK. >> FERNADO BETANCOURT: Not that I got here late, now is when I could make it here. >> RAFAEL TORO: But you did not hear the beginning of the presentation, engineer Abreu, I'm going to ask Jaime to come back and repeat, for your benefit, what are the percentages of recycling associated with an operation like this.

330 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 49 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> JAIME ABREU: We presented a graph in which we show that it has been proven throughout the United States, that in all facilities, communities that have the resource recovery facility, increase their recycling by 50%. So, we're talking about, that this facility is going to be like others, that it will increase the recycling rate. >> FERNADO BETANCOURT: isn't it contradictory? For the simple reason that the incinerator, look, let's be fair, this is a business. You need garbage to create energy and money. Because the incinerator is a business. So, how are you going to encourage recycling, when you need people to generate garbage to stay in business? This is totally contradictory. Now I wonder, is this education? >> JAIME ABREU: Please understand, OK, there is no penalty for recycling. We encourage, the recycling facility, for example, for example, here in Puerto Rico, let's look at the document. Right now in Puerto Rico, there are facilities that recycle around 11%. This facility, which does metal recovery, ferrous metals, nonferrous metals, etc.., is expected to increase its recycling in this area of Arecibo, from 11% to 24%, solely due to us operating our facility here. In other words, recycling in the area of Arecibo and the region that feeds the facility, will increase, because the facility recycles within the facility. It increases recycling. And then the communities, of course, also has the government established programs, and each municipality has different guidelines setting out their recycling program, etc. But the facility, to clear up any doubts, does increase recycling. >> FERNADO BETANCOURT: Well, that's your point of view, but I understand that if I am Energy Answers, and I'm going to produce energy, and I am going to charge to generate it, and I need raw material and that raw material is called garbage. I am going tell people, one way or another,

331 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 50 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo generate garbage in order to maintain my business. Now, however. I want to talk to, I see young students here. I tell you young people, seek out information on incineration. Don't let the grownups put words in your mouths or minds. Do research on the Internet. Speak to your science school teacher. Seek out information. Parents of these students, all information that these students seek out and find, respect that information. Remember that an educated community is a well-developed one community. Thank you very much. (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: Thanks. Your name for the record, please. >> FERNADO BETANCOURT: Etienne Soto González. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you. Go ahead. >> CRISTINA RIVERO: Good afternoon, my name is Cristina Rivero. I belong to the group Mothers in Black Against the Incinerator. I have only two or three simple questions, right? That are easy to understand here by the majority of the youngsters who are here in front. At a hearing that took place in the town of Arecibo, one of the first hearings that took place at City Hall, I asked a question which went unanswered and a long time has passed since I asked my question. Then attorney Toro, he speaks in a local station here, from Arecibo. Well, I was able to call in to the station to ask the same question, and he avoided answering it, which of you is attorney Toro? OK. A pleasure, sir. One thing was that, during the hearing that day in Arecibo, one of the first things you said was that you had selected the site for the incinerator in Arecibo, because that land where it was to be located, was a

332 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 51 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo field that was already impacted. And I understand, among other things, contaminated. And I wondered then if the incinerator does not pollute, why then select a site, that according to you, is contaminated? I don't doubt its polluted. But let me finish please, I know the rules well, but what I have to say is important. OK. I'll make my statement, and then he can answer it, because he can later... >> RAFAEL TORO: Point of order, please. >> CRISTINA RIVERO: Well, if you believe that, you don't pollute, why do you have, then, to use that information? "No, we want to place it here because that area is already affected". Why? I have not finished. >> RAFAEL TORO: I will answer your question. Is that you were not here at the beginning of the meeting, and we established a rule so that everyone has the opportunity to speak. >> CRISTINA RIVERO: Alright, I'll go to the back of the line and come back. >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes, do come back with your second question. >> CRISTINA RIVERO: And I also wanted to ask, and reverend Freddy here also wondered the same thing, is what was the need for a police officer here next to us as if we were criminals. >> RAFAEL TORO: Go ahead, Jaime. HOUR 02:00 to 3:00 approx.

333 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 52 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> JAIME ABREU: I'll answer the first question, ma'am. What I spoke at the presentation, and I stated clearly at the outset was that Energy Answers, always seeks to establish the facilities, and not to impact new areas, by reusing industrial areas, an area which has been classified as industrial. We evaluated the Paper Mill property and that's the area being reused. We did not say anything about it being polluted or anything like that. But yes, we are reusing this area, which was previously industrial first. >> Mr. LOYOLA: Good afternoon, my name is... Loyola, I am the President of the Regional Advisory Committee of Arecibo. I live in the Hato Viejo ward and I want to tell the neighbors who are here from the Garrochales ward, that I've always been against the landfill at Arecibo, and have always been in favor of that area being greatly improved. Now, the neighbors and the whole area of Garrochales have to drive through all of Arecibo, and practically, will be as contaminate as we who live on this side. Where I live, the winds are practically from east to west. And in the Hato Viejo La Plata Ward, Caños, Dominguito and the whole area, the winds blow in that direction and those people there will be affected. All of the residents of these communities will be affected by the incinerator. That's my first question. Yes, it's a question. >> RAFAEL TORO: The answer to your question, whether it s a question or a comment, is no. >> Mr. LOYOLA: No, what? >> RAFAEL TORO: That this will not contaminate the neighbors of Dominguito, of Garrochales, no to everything you said. The answer, let me finish, all of the studies presented here, all of the studies that have been done, show the opposite of what you are saying.

334 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 53 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> Mr. LOYOLA: Yes, because practically, when you build the incinerator, you are going to put a tube that will divert the gases, are you planning to invent that? The other question is, what are you going to do with the waste generated by the incinerator? Where are you going to toss it out and what will you do with that waste? >> JAIME ABREU: That has already been answered a lot here today, we discussed... >> Mr. LOYOLA: Well... I have not heard it, I am now getting here, I had another meeting... >> RAFAEL TORO: I regret that you were not here earlier, but we have talked quite extensively about it. Out of respect for other people's time, I do not think we should go back to give that explanation again. >> JAIME ABREU: We also want to add, that information will be available in the final document, which will be circulated in the area. >> Mr. LOYOLA: Well. Thanks. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you. >> ANGEL GONZALEZ: Good evening, again, Angel Gonzalez, MD from Guaynabo. By the way, I am a member of the Alliance Pro Health and Better Environment, a group of doctors who are concerned about environmental issues. I did not mention it earlier. I wanted to do make a couple of statements, and perhaps questions. I wanted to know, what magazine do you quote when you talk about a higher rate of incineration leads to a higher the recycling rate? And specifically, I wonder if it's an industry magazine related to the incineration industry. That's my first question. If I could have that info. You showed a slide that correlated the rate of incineration with the

335 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 54 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo recycling rate, and both were related, and I wanted to know... it was mentioned it was in a magazine in the U.S., but in America there are many journals, and the incineration industry has one of them, so I wonder if that is the magazine that you are citing. >> RAFAEL TORO: To your question, we will answer it in the final document. We don't have the information right now with us, but we will answer. >> ANGEL GONZALEZ: Excellent. I would ask if you are considering for this project, which is a very current issue, the fact that this is a tsunami zone. I want to know, specifically, whether this is being considered in this project, what would happen to the ashes in case a tsunami occurs? And if possible, and if you have the information, because maybe if you studied this issue, regarding what happened to the incineration plants in Japan after the recent tsunami. We know that the nuclear plant in Fukushima, basically, has hoarded most of the attention on Japan. But we do not know what happened to these plants, and we know, specifically, that Japan is a country with high levels of incineration plants. And nowhere has it being mentioned what happened to the incineration plants. It's very certain that some of them must have been affected by this phenomenon. >> RAFAEL TORO: OK, we will answer that question. We want to clarify that your second question is not related to the issue at hand, but we will answer that question in the final document. >> CARLOS RIVERA: Good evening to all. A question with two parts, OK? >> RAFAEL TORO: If you please, can you identify yourself for the record. >> CARLOS RIVERA: Yes, my name is Carlos Rivera, I am a resident of the Factor 2 Ward, neighbors of the landfill, and current member of Arecibo

336 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 55 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Limpio (Clean Arecibo). The first part of my question is, for people who are here, so that you have a frame of reference, on Wednesday, around halfpast ten at night, the landfill caught fire. During this period, let's say a period of one hour, two hours, how many... I do not know if it s in tons that the uranos and the dioxins are measured, but how many were released in the fire? In relation to that, compare how much needs to be released by the plant to reach the same level of what was in that fire. How many years of emissions by the plant could it take, and I bring this up so that people can keep this as a point of reference, because I think in the landfill, an hour of a fire can release much more than what's going to be released by a plant like this. Thank you. >> RAFAEL TORO: Such data exists. However, we do not have it here right now, but that data for landfill fires, which are so detrimental, is available and there are publications that have them. I don't have the information available now, but we include it as part of the final answer. Those calculations will be included in the final answer, and I assure you, that in the same way you suspect, they are significantly higher than what is emitted in the course of operation of this plant. >> CARLOS RIVERA: Yes, because here we are talking about whether we are going to be affect, but we do not have an idea, and many people have no idea, of how long it will be that the emissions will be released. But those of us who are residents there, we have been breathing these pollutants for the past 25, 30, 35 years. I don't think anyone here has presented a solution for us, and the only solution presented here is the solution presented by the people of Energy Answers. Because right now we have recycling programs. If the government in session is not serving the needs of the people to help the citizens change the existing culture of throwing everything into the

337 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 56 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo landfill and into a recycling culture, how long will it take us to embrace recycling 20, 25 years? And in the meanwhile, what do we do? (Applause) >> BRENDA LOPEZ: OK. My name is Brenda Lopez. The question is, how can people of the community stay informed about the project and how they can get answers to their questions? Once Energy Answers gets the permits, will you continue making presentations and participating in radio projects, to explain the progress of the project to the communities? >> JAIME ABREU: In addition to... Energy Answers will keep in touch with the community. remember, this is a long process. It won't be overnight, the order is given, we get the permits, we build, and that's it. We will keep in touch with you. Also, there's an agreement with a committee established to keep the community informed of things going on and basically, in response to your question, we will maintain communication with the community up to the operation of the facility. >> BRENDA LOPEZ: Thank you. >> RAFAEL TORO: In fact, I want to add something to the engineer's answer. There is a group of communication with the community, which is here, Alexis Molinares, Javier Velez Arocho and they are continuously visiting the communities and sharing project information with communities so that the communities stay abreast of the progress of the project. But the information is being taken to them. I wanted to briefly interrupt. We will not stop for the second phase, but we will let them continue to present their concerns and questions. But at the same time, I want to let you know that there will be sandwiches and

338 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 57 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo refreshments, because I know it's late on a Friday, and everyone starts getting a little hungry. So you may, in an orderly fashion, make your way to the sandwiches and soft drinks, meanwhile, we will not interrupt the process of submitting questions. >> WOMAN: For purposes of record. Always remember that for purposes of record, this has to all be document, and obviously, if there are questions that have to be answered, we need to know who are the people who ask the questions in order to answer them properly. So, always state your name and if you belong to any organization, if you wish to mention it and also, your community. >> JUSTO VALLE: My name is Justo Valle. I live in the Factor 2 ward. Facing the front of the landfill. Then, Caño Tiburones is like a nature reserve. And Caño Tiburones is being polluted and no one says anything. Nobody fights, no one argues. And now when we bring you a chance to clean this area up, everyone is against it. That's it. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you very much. >> LUIS RIVERA: Good evening, my name is Luis Rivera of Arecibo. We have seen many times in our island, how the regulations are written to protect the environment and people, but we don't see the enforcement necessary by the local or federal authorities, natural resources or the EPA, how can we be sure that these regulations will be met? >> RAFAEL TORO: As part of the permit granted by the EPA, the Federal agency... it establishes permit conditions, which dictate under what operating conditions you can carry out the operation of the plant. Among these are continuous monitoring of what is coming out of the chimney, there is continuous monitoring of the types of contaminants that are indicators of

339 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 58 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo how the system is operating. Besides this, there is also sampling, sampling which is done and analyzed, from time to time, about every year. A sampling process of what's coming out of the chimney. And all this is compared with the limits contained in the regulation and permits. And based on this, it is shown and required that the plant complies with these limits. So it's a very rigorous, well controlled process, and all of this is contained in the operating conditions established for that permit. So that monitoring, that control, when the plant begins operating, that's when that process starts and from there continues to continuous monitoring of the operation. What you are saying, that is so. >> WOMAN: I believe the gentleman also has a comment. >> LUIS RIVERA: I have one comment for my friend, Rogelio Martinez, when the dust from the Sahara comes to our island of Puerto Rico, what method does he use to not inhale it? Rogelio Martínez. (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: Next. I wanted to let you know that we still have two hours of public meeting left here with you. So there's no need to go too fast, take your time. Submit your questions calmly. And also, who you can have some soft drinks and sandwiches. But let's continue. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Waldemar Flores Flores, an expert in quality systems. In environmental activities, all data generated and processed, must be scientifically sound, precise, and with known and appropriate accuracy. With a degree of acceptable comparability, completeness, representativeness and sensitivity and, if necessary, legally defensible. For this, it first has to meet quality system requirements in regard to quality assurance programs, quality control and quality assurance. What is not

340 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 59 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo totally, completely, fully and absolutely known, then, it has not being done. If it has been done, then it has not been done properly. And if it has been done properly, then it cannot be defended legally. All of the data which you have submitted here for all of the studies, do not meet with, not even by accident, that which I have just said. The second point, and Mr. Toro, this applies to you, the TCLP is not acceptable for this type of sample, the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure, is used to simulate what happens to waste from our homes in a landfill in 30 years. Not for this type of resident waste. The fact that EPA has used it and has caved in to industry lobbyist to accept such a method, with all of its faults, starting with the acid correction, is an affront to what is the responsibility of such an agency, and this you know. Third, this not only applies, as I said, to sampling and analysis, it also applies to inspections, traditional sampling and analysis, environmental assessments, Environmental Impact Statements, and in this case also, to the general office of permits, which does not meet, not even by accident, these requirements and this you also know, because... I'll continue in my next turn. >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes, briefly, the comments by Mr. Flores, we'll reply to them in writing. But we want to let you know that the model evaluation process, the mathematical modeling process, is subjected to rigorous quality control, which called QA/QC, I know that Mr. Flores knows it well, and that's part of the evaluation process. In addition, the QA/QC which he refers to, is also part of the ash evaluation process. But to get into more detail about it, we will reply in writing to your concern. With pleasure. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: I'm glad that this is so, but the problem is that it has to be done to what was already done. The problem is that it does not

341 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 60 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo meet, not even by chance, and when you have studies that have been made, which you say that they are done using EPA methods, that they are working on behalf of EPA. So I'll ask then, that all that related to quality, I guess then you give me your phone number, to ask in writing, to have it sent to the Sierra Club, for you to provide it as soon as possible, because without that, which I know that it does not exist, because the problem is that nobody is complying with that. The Laboratories in Puerto Rico, I have evidence that they are committing fraud. What they are sampling, including the TCLP.. and whoever tells you that the TCLP is acceptable, does not know where their nose is, much less their head. And I'll continue in my next turn. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you. I'll ask the youth, please, give a little space, to be a little quiet. Well, let's avoid, let's avoid... OK, let's avoid it. Please, let the adults behave like adults and the youngsters behave in an orderly fashion. All we want is the best for Arecibo and for Puerto Rico. I know we all have that in mind. Next person. >> PEDRO MORALES: Good evening to all. My name is Pedro Morales. I live in the Factor 2 ward of Arecibo... and I have the landfill within 150 feet of my house. I have heard many people commenting here who are not from Arecibo. >> RAFAEL TORO: Pardon me, pardon me. I am going to ask here, so that we may listen to the comment, I am going to ask, please do not speak too aloud, out of respect for him. Let's allow him to express himself. Order, please. Go ahead. >> PEDRO MORALES: I have heard many people commenting here who are not from Arecibo. We have lived for the past 35 years in front of the landfill. The landfill pollutes a lot, not only my neighborhood, but Arecibo as well.

342 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 61 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Here in the town center, since Arecibo is in a valley, the smell from the landfill reaches the town center, and when it catches on fire, it contaminates everything with bacteria. Do you understand? Many people do not know what a landfill is. I can speak to you about landfills, because I worked 13 years there in the landfill. And I can tell you what is tossed into a landfill, you know? And they are Caño Tiburones here in Arecibo. The waters of Arecibo get contaminated by the landfill. And I support the incinerator, because I know it's good, clean. My brother lives next to one of them, and here in Arecibo we have to move forward with progress. We cannot stay behind the times. If it goes to Barceloneta, we'll end up paying $20 in the trash. Thank you. (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you very much. Go ahead. >> WOMAN: Good evening to all of us here. I am naturally from Garrochales... My throat is a little sore, because I spend a lot time near the landfill, the road right there. So, what happens?, That all those smells that come out at night, you can also smell them during the day. Because, although they throw dirt on top, when it rains, all that garbage, that water runs down the dirt, and leaves the landfill. So I want to know, because I've seen Rogelio near the landfill. So why isn't he in favor of what we, the residents of Garrochales and Factor 2 are in favor of? Why can't he support us, we are all brothers and sisters? So, I am and the whole community is, in favor of closing that landfill. We are waiting to hear on what day it will be shut down, when will it be removed from there. Because the landfill cannot stay there. So, what's the problem? That all of the older people living close by to Factor 2, go on foot to fish, they are at risk of being poisoned from all of the garbage from the landfill.

343 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 62 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo I ask that all those people who are against the incinerator, talking about the dust, that the emission s from the plant cause harm, but the landfill causes more damage than that. No one or nothing causes more damage that the landfill. So we are asking, pleading, to sympathize with the neighbors there. And for them not to leave in a bubble, to not live alone, because they live far away. We live nearby. I do not have anything else to say. And I'll be here as many times as I am needed because I am in support of the plant. <APLAUSOS> >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you very much. Ma'am, if you please, tell us your name for the record. >> WOMAN: For purposes of the record. >> ELISA MOYA: Elisa Moya, from Garrochales. >> WOMAN: Elisa Moya, from Garrochales. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you very much, thank you. >> OSVALDO ROSARIO: Mr. attorney, first, a comment. Osvaldo Rosario again. First, I'm seeing a trend, more and more of the questions you want to answer them in writing, and I understand that given the nature of some of them, that it is difficult to answer them due to time constraints, but even a short answer, a summary of the answer, should be given because this hearing should have an educational and informational purpose for the audience. In your presentation, you well pointed out the need for that flame to be at a high temperature and for it to be stable to minimize the formation of certain hazardous contaminants. At most of the existing incinerators, an additional fuel is used. Natural gas, oil, etc, so that the flame is as stable and as close

344 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 63 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo to that point as possible, before burning waste. First, will you be using an additional fuel, to generate stable conditions for the flame? >> RAFAEL TORO: No. An auxiliary fuel is used to bring the temperature from zero degrees temperature to the operating temperature of the boiler. Once the boiler reaches the operating temperature, we stop using that auxiliary fuel, which we are planning for it to be diesel, as I'm reading, diesel number two. So, once it reaches the temperature, what is fed to the flame is purely the trash, and no other fuel is burned. So that's the answer regarding using auxiliary fuel. With regard to high temperatures, the explanation we gave was not the concept of dangerous or not dangerous, but complete or incomplete combustion, and that was the explanation we gave earlier. >> OSVALDO ROSARIO: As it happens, many of the incomplete combustion byproducts are dangerous. This fuel to be used, by chance, is it gas from the natural gas pipeline? >> RAFAEL TORO: The answer is no. >> OSVALDO ROSARIO: And third, the energy to be generated for that extra fuel, what percent of the heat used for electricity generation will come from that fuel? >> RAFAEL TORO: I did not hear the question, if you please, can you repeat it. And we ask, please, out of respect for Dr. Rosario, because others also were heard when they spoke. I ask you to please keep your voice down as much as possible and let the doctor talk, so that we can hear him. Thank you. >> OSVALDO ROSARIO: From that supplemental fuel, which generates heat when burned to generate the flame, how much of the heat generated,

345 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 64 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo perhaps in percentages, goes into the production of electricity, the heat that comes from that fuel? That's the last question. >> RAFAEL TORO: Ok. None. The purpose of auxiliary fuel is to bring the boiler to operating temperature. At that point, the waste fuel is used to generate electricity, but the purpose of diesel fuel, diesel number two, is not to generate electricity, is to raise the temperature the operating temperature of the unit. >> OSVALDO ROSARIO: Thank you. >> FELIX ORTIZ BONILLA: Good evening, my name is Felix Ortiz Bonilla., Currently, a real estate broker and former public school teacher. One question, merely yes or no. According to the pr-agreement contract with the mayor, you will impact 86 acres of land at the entrance of the town of Arecibo, yes or no? I'm talking about the understanding agreement contract that you have with the mayor of Arecibo. >> RAFAEL TORO: It's 91 cuerdas. >> FELIX ORTIZ BONILLA: Even more. Right at the entrance of the town. >> RAFAEL TORO: What do you mean by impact? >> FELIX ORTIZ BONILLA: That is, since that will be your property, when we speak about a 30 year lease, its virtually a purchase. And I'm speaking as a realtor. >> RAFAEL TORO: No, no. It is privately owned, this has nothing to do with the municipality, this is private property, which Energy Answers is acquiring from a private owner.

346 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 65 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> FELIX ORTIZ BONILLA: Well, but the pre-agreement contract is with the municipality. >> RAFAEL TORO: Pardon me. >> WOMAN: The partnership agreement. >> FELIX ORTIZ BONILLA: Oh, the partnership agreement, whatever it's called, it's with the municipality. If the municipality does not sign, if it does not endorse the project, there's no project. I am speaking as a realtor. >> JAIME ABREU: The contract with the municipality has nothing to do with the property. The contract with the municipality is to write down a commitment by Energy Answers related to job creation, for the people of Arecibo. To set the company's commitment to recycling programs, to establish the company's commitment to green community programs, and that is all contained in a contract with the municipality. But it has nothing to do with the property. >> FELIX ORTIZ BONILLA: As an aside, very well. I understand that the contract of understanding, is for 30 years, at the peak or during construction, you guarantee 2,000 jobs, how many jobs will you create at the peak of construction? Number two. Sure, you can answer it. >> JAIME ABREU: The presentation that has been made in relation to job creation, is for the full term of the construction. The peak number, which you are referring to is an amount that should be around several hundred job opportunities on the ground at the same time, at a particular time of construction. But the amount of two thousand or three thousand jobs if throughout the construction period.

347 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 66 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> FELIX ORTIZ BONILLA: I understand, but the publicity for project you say will impact 2000 employees, yet you do not dare to guarantee... >> WOMAN: Jobs. >> FELIX ORTIZ BONILLA: Two thousand jobs. but you do not dare to guarantee how many will be at the peak of construction. Are we or are we not? >> JAIME ABREU: We are saying... >> FELIX ORTIZ BONILLA: That will create two thousand jobs, but... >> JAIME ABREU: Exactly, and you want me to say what exact day I will have more employees versus fewer employees. That is a number that's going to fluctuate... >> FELIX ORTIZ BONILLA: Again. One more question. Look, sir, the banks in Puerto Rico, in order to give a loan, even for a motorcycle, require that at least, an one employee has two years or more of work experience or job longevity. None of these jobs, except the last, 140 jobs for 30 years, are those that will have that benefit. (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: That comment, plain and simple, is not true. There are people with the ability to work in a plant like this in Puerto Rico, there are. They exist. The ability of Puerto Ricans to work in a plant, in an industry like this, those workers exist today, and we cannot underestimate that. So that comment you just made, quite simply, not true. The Puerto Rican talent is available. The Puerto Rican worker's productive capacity in industry, in manufacturing, exists.

348 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 67 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> WOMAN: You must respect your turn. >> RAFAEL TORO: Next person. Sir. >> ELMER PEREZ: Good afternoon. My name is Mr. Elmer Perez. I have a question, when the plant goes into operation, will it have an engineering department that is responsible for which preventive and corrective maintenance needs to be performed on all of the machinery that will be at the incinerator plant? >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes, that's part of the workforce in a plant like this. Having an engineering department to deal with the preventive maintenance of machinery, that's part of this factory. Yes, that's correct. >> ELMER PEREZ: OK. >> DIOGENES PARDO: I support the incinerator here in Puerto Rico, in Arecibo, because my daughters and my grandchildren live here. It is the responsibility of all Puerto Ricans, to contribute to improving the health and quality of life for ourselves and for the future generations. At the Arecibo landfill, the situation is critical. It has been out of compliance for years, with the following agencies: The Federal Environmental Protection Agency, the Environmental Quality Board and the Solid Waste Authority. Its closure is imminent in What will happen then? We will have illegal dumps in the communities, roads and river banks. These illegal landfills will affect our health. Mainly, our children and elderly and they will pollute our environment. Tourists and investors that visit us will get a very bad image of our island. My experience, in this industry, as a chemical plant manager, is that the machinery and safety systems are reliable, as these teams have preventive and corrective maintenance programs that are very strict. And

349 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 68 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo they are validated for greater control and to avoid accidents that affect health and environment. Thank you. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you very much. Go ahead. >> CRISTINA RIVERO: My name is Cristina Rivero. This is my second speaking turn. I hope I have better luck this time. I would like to ask, from how many towns will the plant receive trash from? Well, the other question is... Are you timing me... >> JAIME ABREU: I think you were not present for the... >> CRISTINA RIVERO: I was not, I was outside, across. >> JAIME ABREU: Well, you were not here. Unfortunately, this information was given already, and we will not repeat it again, out of respect for others, but that information is part of the plan. It's there. >> CRISTINA RIVERO: OK. Are you including Vieques and Culebra, as well as the Caribbean islands? >> RAFAEL TORO: If you had been here, and had heard the presentation, you would have heard that they are not included, but you were not here. >> CRISTINA RIVERO: How much money will you contribute? I changed the question... how much money will Energy Answers contribute for the purposes of having funds to create a health fund? Because we know that in Puerto Rico, health is very precarious and hospitals are horrible. And we know in advance, even if you do not want to admit, that disease will increase greatly here. And not just diseases. But there will also be genetic diseases transmitted to the children. Because you do not admit it, but it is so. What amount is Energy Answers going to contribute to a health fund, when these diseases arise? Because we see it here already, that people from Garrochales

350 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 69 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo have been affected a lot by the landfill, unfortunately. And for them, nothing gets resolved and they have their diseases. But we would like, right? that if all these people and you are bent on placing that incinerator here, then it is necessary to establish a health fund, which is necessary for us to be able to look after when we get sick. I am sure that the Japanese themselves have had such a health fund, and other places as well, right? Tell me about that. Thank you. >> RAFAEL TORO: First, in relation to the Material Separation Plan, the answer to Mrs. Rivera is that we are not bringing in waste into Puerto Rico in a barge for this plant. So that insinuation, hence, is not part of this plan. Number two. With regard to other questions on other topics, like the one she presented, we will continue with the questions regarding the Material Separation Plan, after that, we will answer any other questions. The premise of your statement is not correct, Mrs. Rivera, because studies show the opposite. But that we will answer later in greater detail. Go ahead. >> WOMAN: One moment, Rafa. I would ask a little quiet, because even me, standing right next to the person speaking, I find it a bit difficult to follow what is being said. Some people have to translate, it's probably very hard for them, and we want everyone who is in the room to be able to hear the question and the answer here, so please. >> JAIME JIMENEZ: Good evening to all. I ask the young people who are here... My name is Jaime Jimenez. I am a civil engineer. I will ask permission from the young people present, I would like for you to listen to me, so that the message I have you and for Energy Answers reaches you.

351 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 70 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> RAFAEL TORO: Please, let's keep order, please. >> JAIME JIMENEZ: As I said, I am a civil engineer. I live in Cercadillo. I've lived there for 15 years. I feel what is happening in the landfill, here at Arecibo. I have worked in landfills here in Puerto Rico. I know what it is to receive garbage. I know what it is to cover garbage. I know what it is when it rains, the leachate emanating from a landfill to all rivers, streams and seas. Therefore, I know of what we are talking about. I ask these young people here today, and the community, those people who stand here to ask meaningless questions without rhyme or reason. Because you need facts, you must have documentation. You must seek a little more information, because I've been where they are standing. Second, we need to think where does the garbage comes from. We generate that garbage, our children, family, our cousins, brothers, we, the community as a whole. Here in Arecibo, we receive garbage, if I am not mistaken, from other towns as well, not only from Arecibo. Because these are privately managed landfills and they receive garbage from other people as well. And they charge municipalities for that garbage they receive. Just like Energy Answers will also charge. Because they have the right. They have to handle that waste, and that costs money. We, our town, needs to start a recycling program. These existing landfills, the EPA has been trying to close them for many years because those landfills are not in compliance. Forgive me for taking too long, but others have as well, and what I want is, I want to convey this message. These landfills, soon, or in the next years, will be closed, and we must have another source of recycling. If there are other sources, we must bring them, we must find them. Energy Answers is here, bringing these new technologies.

352 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 71 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Now, with regard to the question of the ashes, the ashes are going to other landfills that do meet the EPA requirements. They will ensure that that happens. There are in Puerto Rico, I understand, there are about five landfills that comply, and they know which ones they are. There are five in Puerto Rico. What happens is that here, the landfill in Arecibo, does not comply, and what we have to do is ensure is that they take the ashes to one that does comply. That's what you, as young people, have to watch out for. And we have to keep an eye out as well. They will have quality control, where we have to analyze, I say we, because I wanted to be near there. Because I am a civil engineer. I am unemployed. The government has not generated employment sources, and these people want to bring jobs here. You are the future of Arecibo. Arecibo has to get up. Arecibo does not have... its immersed in misery. Arecibo has to get up. See how other towns have risen, Barceloneta, Hatillo, and us, stuck in a hole. I'm still here in Arecibo, and I want to stay here. Thank you very much. (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you very much. Go ahead. >> ANGEL GONZALEZ: Good evening to all. Dr. Gonzalez, Angel Gonzalez, again. Incidentally, I wonder, this question is very relevant. I wonder, the Arecibo Landfill, has it been discarded as a possible repository of the ashes? >> RAFAEL TORO: The answer is yes, it has been ruled out. We have consistently said so, is discarded. >> ANGEL GONZALEZ: Excellent. Let me mention a couple of things. First. You know that there are studies that link work at incinerators with some

353 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 72 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo cancers. It is important that you know this, those who think that maybe they will work in these facilities. This from a health perspective. Specifically, I mention that recently, in countries with the highest technology, the high technology, such as Germany, Iceland, the latest technology applied to these incinerators yet they have had incidents of contamination of milk, dairy and meat from the areas surrounding these facilities. Know this. Countries with the highest technologies. Not Puerto Rico, where we know we often have problems in terms of application of technology and we end up suffering the effects. I wanted all of you to have that information. And Second, you cannot say that you support recycling, and at the same time that you will burn waste. Because at the end of the day, what are the main materials that are recycled? paper, cardboard, plastic. And those are primarily what they will burn. I mean, I do not understand how you can truly consider that you are supporting recycling at the same time that these are the main materials for burning. >> JAIME ABREU: Regarding your first comment, I want to let you know that Energy Answers' technology, which has been in operation 20-plus years in the State of Massachusetts, has none of those problems that you speak with regard to the technology used in Europe. That's the first point. Second, the EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency would not allow this facility to operate if it does not meet air quality standards, which we explained previously. Those standards have been published, to protect health and the environment. So, if we do not comply with that, this plant cannot operate. And that's the requirement by the EPA.

354 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 73 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Regarding the doctor's comment, if recycling is compatible with the proposed technology, I think I already answered that and we will not return to answer this issue, because it was addressed in previous answers. Go ahead. >> RAFAEL TORO: Next. >> JOSÉ ALSINA: Good evening to all. My name is José Alsina, I am the director of Conservation for the Sierra Club of Puerto Rico. I reside in Caguas. And I want to confirm an event that I heard about, which I was able to verify on the Internet. A company called Energy Answers in Albany, New York, which had an incinerator in the 90's, where there was an incident. There was a snowfall, and black snow fell on top of the city hall. And the mayor called them to see what was going on and then the next week black snow fell again on the city. The company was called Energy Answers, the incinerator was closed, and I just want to know if this is the same Energy Answers or if this is another Energy Answers, and if... >> RAFAEL TORO: Well, the answer is no. We are... that company was not called Energy Answers, it was called Answers, which is Albany New York Solid Waste Energy Recovery System. In other words, it's an acronym, and that facility was operated, and the owner of that plant, was the state of New York. And it was the State of New York that operated that plant. That is not us. OK. Energy Answers operated another system in which, as I explained earlier in the graphics, that I believe you were not here for that, waste is processed, we remove the metal and then produces what is called the resulting fuel from that remaining waste. Energy Answers prepared it in a completely separate facility from the one ran by the state, and it supplied

355 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 74 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo them that material as fuel. But the technology, operation, and the owner was the State of New York. >> JOSÉ ALSINA: So that facility did not use the same technology that you use? >> RAFAEL TORO: No. >> JOSÉ ALSINA: Puerto Rico currently imports 90% of its food from abroad. A major reason for this, is the high cost of fertilizers and the biochemical degradation of our fields, due to intensive, unsustainable cultivation. Composting provides an excellent alternative, and cheaper, to improve agriculture in Puerto Rico, but to achieve a quality compost, to be able to assimilate nitrogen-rich materials, it is necessary to add large amounts of shredded wood into the composting process. The intent of the incinerator, of using up to 50% of the volume to burn, from wood-based products, competes directly with the compost industry. How will you ensure that a higher priority is placed on that wood, which is used for the composting industry, as opposed to burning it in the incinerator? >> RAFAEL TORO: Mr. Alsina, we know that you have a composting business. We are aware, ok? Composting as its own problems of pollution, methane emission, leachates, emissions from microbiological and bacteriological compounds, etc. So, it's not a panacea, is just another alternative. >> JOSÉ ALSINA: Depends on how you handle it. If handled properly, it doesn't.

356 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 75 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> RAFAEL TORO: Exactly. Depends on how you handle it. It can be handled properly. properly. Correct? Depends on how you handle it. It can be handled >> JOSÉ ALSINA: Exactly, but then, we continue to import 90% of our food. We continue to increase the cost of agriculture. And to make things worse, the material we have to make cheap fertilizers and get out of that predicament, we are going to burn it. That's my question, and then, if we properly compost, it does not contaminate as you are saying. >> RAFAEL TORO: That's not true. This operation is not incompatible with a composting operation, like the one you own. There is enough material to supply your business, material that is compostable, and there is enough. This facility receives waste materials, after they have sorted different materials in the process of recycling or diversion, and that waste material that remain, is being processed in this plant, which may include wood or plant materials, other they may be waste. Or is that your company can handle all of the wood in all Puerto Rico? Understand? There's enough material. The data is there. >> JOSÉ ALSINA: I am in the Salinas area and I do not compete with, meaning, you are not going make a dent in my supply. That does not concern me. I do not come here for personal reasons. I am here on behalf of Puerto Rico. I am a good Puerto Rican. I worry about our future. >> RAFAEL TORO: I am too. I am too. >> JAIME ABREU: I wanted to add that one of the things that ADS established, and which is already being incorporated into the island's landfills is that landfills cannot receive large amounts of vegetative debris. Each municipality is supposed to have a segregated area to separate the plant

357 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 76 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo material. It could be that may, certain bags, if you cut the lawn at home, that 2 or 3 bags, might get discarded with the rest of the garbage, but bulky plant waste is grind and separated, and that material is sold to people who compost. So, there's minimal vegetative material that is now reaching the waste stream. And that is staying that way. That will not change. >> JOSÉ ALSINA: And that law, it applies to the incinerator as well? >> JAIME ABREU: This applies to all of Puerto Rico, to all landfills, all of them fall under that law. >> JOSÉ ALSINA: OK. Thank you. >> PEDRO VAZQUEZ: Good evening to all. My name is Pedro Vasquez. I am a resident of Arecibo. And I feel reassured, because I know that at last we are doing something responsible with our waste. Unfortunately, today, we are drinking water contaminated by the garbage buried by our grandparents and I think it's our fault that we are in this situation. Since only zero point zero one percent of us recycles or does something responsible with our garbage. Currently, we are only concerned about the neighbor's cow, and not our children or grandchildren. And so far, I have not heard of any of us, any of our fellow opponents, ask the EPA to make tap water tests at Caño Tiburones to find out what is the mercury content there. Since that's the water we will drink in the future and where the fish that we eat will live. It is time to do something before we are buried by the landfill's garbage. Thank you. (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you very much. Go ahead.

358 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 77 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: Yes, in conclusion, to conclude. I have been able to conclude that you do not own the land. I was able to conclude that you don't have anywhere to deposit the ashes. I was able to conclude that you have not yet being able to get anyone to cancel their contract to deposit garbage in the landfill, and come to you instead. I was also able to conclude that you don't the EPA permit. And I have also concluded that you have no power to close the Arecibo landfill. Therefore, why do you make the good people of Factor and Garrochales believe that you are going to solve a problem that you are not going to solve, because you do not have the capacity, commercial, legal or business wise, to close the landfill? And what we would end up with is a landfill at Factor and Garrochales and an incineration plant. So, I think that the Garrochales and Factor communities, like I do, we understand that the existing landfill must be changed to something else. Recycling, compost must be carried out properly, as Alsina says. So that we can end the problems associated with landfills in Puerto Rico. But they are not going to solve this. They can turn our landfills into ash landfills. And I think the question is, why do you keep saying you do not create landfills? You create landfills, ash landfills. (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: I wanted to tell you, Rogelio, and with all due respect. While there is no alternative, you continue to perpetuate these sites. Having an alternative, there is hope for that landfill to close. But if there is no alternative, you are perpetuating it. >> ROGELIO FIGUEROA: that's true, thanks. But you know what, quickly, Alsina gave you the alternative. And he gave this alternative to this town.

359 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 78 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Yes, there are alternatives... composting, recycling, these are the alternatives. And in closing, I think that, ideally, I think, I invite you to hold a forum like this one, which I think is an excellent forum, and congratulations to the organizers. And I recommend to you to organize another forum where all of the alternatives are presented. And we start to create something where you can truly work together, not only, not only with an incinerator, but with all of the alternatives and that way, everybody wins, right? Thank you very much. (Applause) >> FERNADO BETANCOURT: I wanted to add also, based on Rogelio's question, that the Dynamic Itinerary is established by the Solid Waste Authority. We, based on that information, we have the information that landfills will be closed, and we take that planning information from the Solid Waste Authority. We are not forcing any closings or anything specific. And what is being promoted in this itinerary is that the facilities that are not compliance, to come into compliance. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you. >> WOMAN: Look, I have a question, at the location where you say that... >> RAFAEL TORO: Sorry, if you please, can you identify yourself for the record. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: I am attorney Aleida Zenteno Rodríguez. Is it not true, that where you say that Grey was, that's where the Puerto Rico Chemical was? Is that right? >> RAFAEL TORO: Where? Pardon me. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: Where the incinerator will be built, before...

360 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 79 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> RAFAEL TORO: That's not true. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO:... there was the Puerto Rico Chemical. >> RAFAEL TORO: Puerto Rico Chemical, Puerto Rico Chemical was not there, so that we are clear... let me answer. Let me answer ma'am, because what you are saying is not correct. Let me say the following so that everyone here knows. Puerto Rico Chemical is where the battery recycling plant is at. OK? The Energy Answers facility was proposed where Global Fibers is at. Which is on the other side, after the Central Cambalache, on the left, as you come into town. Thanks, sorry. Go ahead. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: Isn't it true that Puerto Rico Chemical shows up in a DOD Core of Engineer 2009 report and it identifies it as a chemical weapons processing plants in Arecibo. Yes or no? Is that true? And isn't it true that the waste from Puerto Rico Chemical was packed and placed in the landfill at Arecibo, and hence it s the Defense Department and not the residents of Arecibo who polluted Garrochales sector. They have us here Puerto Ricans fighting Puerto Ricans. But the reality is that who came and polluted Arecibo was the Department of Defense, when they had Puerto Rico Chemical. And the area is identified as an industrial area, due to the Puerto Rico Chemical. And the landfill area is so polluted, due to the Department of Defense. And the problem that we Puerto Ricans and Arecibo has, is that the Department of Defense uses us continuously. They pollute us, and we can't really see what is going on, because they their confidential reports are only published after 40 years. And it's after 40 years of having Puerto Rico Chemical in Arecibo that the Corps of Engineers of the Department of Defense admits that Arecibo is contaminated in two sites because of them. And ask you here, people Garrochales, for you to think very well about these people want

361 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 80 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo to do to us, these interests. They are putting neighbor against neighbor. When we're all going to be contaminated the same by the incineration plant. >> JAIME ABREU: We want to clarify that the place where the facility is to be built is in the old premises of Global Fibers. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Waldemar Flores Flores, an expert in quality systems. In the old law from Friday November 12, 1993, and the new law 416 from Wednesday September 22, In the preamble and in the powers of the Governing Board it says to "adopt, promulgate, amend and repeal regulations to establish a mechanism to control the quality of data generated during the sampling and analysis of parameters indicative of the existing environment's quality, which is generated by a pollution source, and that is subject to compliance by the rules and requirements of applicable environmental regulations, including limiting it to a) establish a procedure that is directed to certify and accredit individuals, corporations, public or private institutions that generate data on environmental quality, in compliance with environmental regulations. And b) keep a record of individuals, corporations or public or private institutions, which generate data on environmental quality and waste generated by pollution sources, with the goal of ensuring the reliability of these data, to streamline the data validation process, before consideration by the Environmental Quality Board. " I have one more minute, I can continue. >> RAFAEL TORO: Waldemar, I'll ask you, with all due respect and great courtesy, to you, particularly, if you can submit it in writing, we will gladly attend. But reading the law here, you know, I think it is not the time nor the mechanism to do so. But submitted in writing.

362 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 81 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Okay, but since you used that statement... this I read to you in 1997 when you were representing "Celsius Waste System," and the Environmental Quality Board, at a hearing regarding a proposed fine of 96 million, won 4.6 million, "Celsius Waste System" won 2 million and you took a million. And among the arguments used, both the Environmental Protection Agency, as did their consultant Weston, and in Puerto Rico Rajiero & Associates, had not met the minimum quality system and quality assurance requirements, therefore, did not comply with a quality system, and all information reported, and at the Environmental Protection Agency, which supposedly looks after the interests, yet they don't look out after our interests in the Caribbean, because Carl Soderberg has been kept quiet, because he has his own interests in the mud injection project in Arecibo. Neither in New York, they have to go to Edison in New Jersey and with Washington District of Colombia, but Ill' keep talking in my next turn. (Applause) HOUR 03:00 to 4:00 approx. >> ROSARIO FELICIANO: Yes, well, for purposes of the record, my name is Rosario Feliciano, a student at the University of Puerto Rico and a resident of Rio Piedras. I have only one question. Obviously, it's more than clear that the majority of people who speak in your support, do not have a vast knowledge of the harm that this can cause to our community of Arecibo and the neighboring towns. I counted about 60 yellow shirts, of which about 25 are children. And I'm studying to become a teacher. What you are doing is education, indoctrination or buying their consciousness. Thank you.

363 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 82 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: The decision to be by the EPA, because this is part of a permitting process, does not rely on the color of the shirt or any of that, but does rely on the technical discussion and on the merits of this project. So your comment, will be accepted within that context. Next speaker. >> ALBERTO RAMIREZ: Yes, my name is Alberto Ramirez. Representative of the Board of Trustees and also Representative of the Association of Retired Electric Power Employees, and President Island-wide of all PREPA retirees in Puerto Rico. My question is, the question that I want you to answer me is, because Energy Answers will produce energy. How many kilowatts are you going to produce? And at how much will sell the electricity? >> JAIME ABREU: The production consists of 80 megawatts a day, and the plant consumes about 7 of those megawatts, so the remaining, which is about 73, 70 megawatts daily. That will be sold to PREPA at a rate of 10 to 11 cents per kilowatt hour. >> ALBERTO RAMIREZ: I'll tell you, with all the respect you deserve, that PREPA does not need you to buy fuel, since the Power Authority built a plant here in Cambalache and currently is closed and not being used. All plants are shutoff. And therefore, I must say also that the area in which you are going to build the plant, please correct me if I am wrong, is near the Rio Grande de Arecibo. When you are storing the ashes that will be generated there, what guarantee can you give us? I mean, when Hurricane George hit, State Road number two was completely closed due to the torrential rains and rising water, won't you contaminate Caño Tiburones with all the ash that will seep through the northern area of Arecibo? and the answer is when the

364 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 83 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Malmelos (Marshmellows?) here took out the bridge entering the town of Arecibo. >> RAFAEL TORO: Regarding the first question, the energy production in this plant is approximately half the cost of what it currently costs PREPA to produce electricity. We do not depend on fossil fuel, or the swing in market prices of fossil fuel. I would also add that public policy requires that, by 2014, 10% of the energy produced in Puerto Rico has to be from renewable energy sources, such as this plant. This plant represents a little less than 2% of the non-fossil energy source. So it's a step in the right direction to achieve this public policy. >> ALBERTO RAMIREZ: I want to tell you, that where these facilities have been established, and the wind in Arecibo, these toxins... the winds come from the east to west. Collect plastic bags to carry the many people who are still sick with cancer, fatigue, and when it reaches Arecibo, it will be the town of Arecibo and its people who will suffer. Thank you very much. >> RAFAEL TORO: Well. Thanks. >> BONILLA: Yes.. Bonilla again. Once a teacher, always a teacher. In a documentary on Channel 6, in a little town in the State of Texas, several oil companies wanted to establish their operations, and installed a monitoring system for the EPA to give them the nod. What happened? That they put the monitors away from the houses, away from the entrances of the houses. An environmental specialist went and realized that there was too much pollution, and put the sensors on the door of the residents, and what did he find out? That the levels of contamination there were higher than in the rest of the United States. And what was the outcome? Lawmakers and representatives from Texas had been financed by companies like this one.

365 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 84 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Why do you, those that believe in the PPP, is it that you are the only ones as bidders for this? Believe in what your government tells you. For the airport, there are 12 that want to do the PPPs. How nice, ah? 95 million in profit, that's the score. Practice what your government says. Energy Answers is very democratic, it contaminates everybody the same. (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: So, to clarify, sir, this is not a PPP, this is a completely private project. Go ahead, counsel. >> WOMAN: Give me a minute, because he arrived too late, and does not know the process and he think I'm limiting him, and that's not the case. It's to establish order. No problem with you speaking, Mr. attorney. >> RAFAEL TORO: At the beginning of the meeting, we established that, out of respect for others, we will give a limited period of time for everyone to ask their question. When you finish, if you need more time, you can go to the end of the line, and return with the next question. But we will give you two minutes. >> FERNANDO BETANCOURT: Wow! That's a lot. >> RAFAEL TORO: Go ahead. >> FERNANDO BETANCOURT: First of all, I am attorney Fernando Betancourt Medina. First of all, see how democratic you guys are that the incinerator will pollute all of our lungs, yet you give us 1 minute to talk. So do not panic, because I have a folder here in my hand. My position is in this folder and I am speaking specifically to those young people here who are dressed in yellow, who after all these stories and I am not underestimating any of you, but, are doomed to make the same mistakes. Do you know that

366 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 85 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo on August 5, 1702, the British came to attack us, and we, with a small group, with Captain Correa, took them out and ran them out of town. That's why we are called the Villa of Capitan Correa, truly a land of warriors. But look, I'll give the reference apart from history. I always come to talk about history, I am not here to talk about anything else. The history of environmental struggle here in Arecibo has been very arduous. Atty. Toro knows me. He was captain as well and we love him a lot, and you know that the PR Electric Power Company, came ten years ago and set up a plant to generate electricity in Cambalache, right? >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes, indeed. >> FERNANDO BETANCOURT: They raised the ground level ten feet across 30 cuerdas (30+ acres), right? It's true. Next to Caño Tiburones. Is it true... correct? >> RAFAEL TORO: What you are saying, that is so. I do not know the details, but if you say so. >> FERNANDO BETANCOURT: But you know. They came and told us that they had these special filters. And those people, and I do not know if you are aware, I think you might know, I have the document that said that after they had installed the whole plant, and said they had installed this huge filter... this...you are curtailing my right to express publicly. So when the alarms went off, because the filters did not work, you know what they said...? "It was the one that sold me the filter. Whoever built the filter is responsible. Since it does not work, let's see what we can do. " Do you know what EPA did? the same thing that it s going to do here. If they get the permit, they are going to get give them a waiver to operate. Guys, all of these agencies, PREPA, Water and Sewer and the people burning batteries, they all operate

367 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 86 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo with waivers so that they do not have to comply with the requirements to not pollute. that's why respiratory diseases and cancer have skyrocketed. Arecibo will be 500 years old on March 13, And we will celebrate. We have four nature reserves. We have a sanctuary. We have three rivers. And you know what? You know where we're going to find jobs? In Eco-tourism. We do not want you to work with garbage...recycling. Arecibo is going to rise again through eco-tourism, for the glory of the promised paradise to us by God, which is Arecibo. Arecibo has nothing to envy anyone, so take these words to ponder. Thank you very much. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you, colleague, thanks, always. >> FERNANDO BETANCOURT: One more thing, I think, despite... some of my best friends, one of my best friends are the people who are in charge of Energy Answers. Because they are the only ones who have come here concerned with our garbage problem. No politician has come. The only thing we differ is that they want to burn the garbage. I agree and willing to work together with our colleagues, because they are great people. Except when you turn on the boiler to burn the trash. Because the garbage is not garbage. It's a business. You pick up cans, paper and sell it. You can take anything and make compost. That is called zero waste. This is being done in lots of countries. Go on the Internet... and look, I would like to work with these people, but not burning garbage. Recycling. Look, let's setup a factory to make plastic garbage cans. Let's build a factory for recycling tires and waste. Let's build a factory for recycling aluminum. There is work for everyone. But let's not burn trash, that we will oppose. Thank you very much. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you. Go ahead.

368 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 87 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> WOMAN: Piro, Piro. For the record, I left you extend yourself a couple of times. Okay, don't forget, I gave you extra time. >> RAFAEL TORO: Go ahead. >> JOSÉ ALSINA: Yes, my second speaking turn. José Alsina. It's a pity that we are in this discussion here tonight. It's really a shame that we are not discussing things that are more productive for the people of Puerto Rico. And who can we trust, the government, the governments, in which political party? They have done nothing, nothing regarding the trash. Look, for every ten thousand tons of waste per year buried in landfills, do you know how many jobs are created? One. Do you know how many jobs are created for every ten thousand tons of waste incinerated? One. So... eh... we have a chance that if we recycle 67% of our trash in Puerto Rico, which now only generates about 400 jobs in all 29 landfills. 400 jobs with ten thousand tons per day, 365 days a year, 400 jobs. If we recycled and composted 67% of that, do you know how many jobs that can create? plus permanent jobs. Not temporary. Permanent. Forever. But you know what happens? Look, this bottle here, you could deposit 5 cents for it and every time you buy it and when you return the empty bottle, you get back five cents. In Hawaii this law exists. It's called the "Bottle Bill". That, in Hawaii, has enabled them to recycle 77% of the bottles, 77%, creating jobs. That law was tried in Puerto Rico, in our legislature, 6 times, from 93 to Six times it has died in the legislature. So, they have us fighting one against the other, because we do not recycle. If the Bottle Bill is enacted... there are states that recycle up to 83% of their bottles, and we were approached by a glass company, which is aware that we are trying to get this law passed and they want to establish a company to grind glass and are looking where to locate and, if you want we can reach out to them so that they can establish it

369 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 88 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo in Arecibo, and grind the bottles here and create real jobs here. That's what we should be discussing, not whether we burn or bury this resource. (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: Go ahead ma'am. >> MIRNA APONTE: Good evening, my name is Mirna Aponte. I wanted to know... can you hear me? First of all, I think it is very important, and it is true, that we should look for an alternative to the landfill issue. I understand that many people here are worried about that. But the primary alternative should be recycling. And going back to the issue of recycling, I want to know why you, all of you there on that table, you spoke today of all the studies that you will meet, everything. That will not contaminate anything. This is the wonder of the world, right? And then I want to know if in these studies, did you calculate how much of the waste from these people that you put into those maps, from whom you will collect the waste, as you said, how much of the waste produced in the homes, how much of that trash is recyclable? That has to have a number, because I recycle at home, and I do not fill up half a can of garbage, and I now compost for my plants, so it's less garbage in my trash, because all the vegetation of potatoes, bananas, I am making less waste. So therefore, I estimate, if I do that myself, and if everyone in your house accomplishes this, I understand that we will solve a big problem, both for the landfill and incinerator. So what happens? Most importantly, and my question is, I want to know the calculation of the amount of waste to be collected by you, how much is recyclable? A number. If all of those people start to recycle at home, I wonder, then, what will happen to the garbage incinerator when you don't get enough trash to reach you? What will you do? Where are you going to get it from? Someone here asked a question...

370 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 89 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> WOMAN: Answer that question first, because she used up her two minutes, and we'll come back then... >> RAFAEL TORO: You are asking for numbers, the numbers were part of the tables, which engineer Abreu presented. So Jaime, if you want to summarize it, but that was part of the presentation. Those numbers were in the tables. >> MIRNA APONTE: I know, but that was very general, if you could give me... >> RAFAEL TORO: So you want us to clarify, how much will be recycled? According to the information we have, from the Solid Waste Authority in the region... >> MIRNA APONTE: No, no, no. Look, the issue is that garbage is recyclable, right? We all here know that. The alternative to the issue of the landfill problem, which is a real problem for this community, right? The fact is that there's a lot of garbage going to the landfill. But if you calculate how much of that garbage is really garbage, we should be able to, at least how I see it, should be able to turn that into a minimal amount if we emphasize the primary option to be recycling. We should be teaching recycling, rather than building an incinerator, where, as much as you paint this as a beautiful thing and that it will not pollute, you know, the truth is otherwise, and I invite all of you, as it has been said here, to seek information. People from these communities, educate yourself on this topic, because you will be the ones most affected. You will be the ones getting cancer. The rest of the people in Puerto Rico as well, but you are the first ones who will get cancer, because you will live right next to it. So, best to get yourselves educated and support the idea of recycling.

371 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 90 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> RAFAEL TORO: We want to answer your question. >> MIRNA APONTE: Pardon me. >> RAFAEL TORO: Earlier in the presentation, as we said, we gave the information, we have information on the recycling rate, but we will clarify it in the final document, so that it s there... in the document, for the record. >> MIRNA APONTE: But you have no idea? You made the presentation and you should know that by heart. >> RAFAEL TORO:... it was discussed in the presentation and we will discuss it again in the document, we will discuss it again in the document. >> MIRNA APONTE: You don't have it there? Because, excuse me, what happens is that you read it from there, but you went really fast and I did not see it. If you know it great. If not, oh well. >> RAFAEL TORO: The document was evaluated, it was left for evaluation. What we have here in the presentation and the information we showed is for how much will be recycled in the region of Arecibo, and the composition of the garbage, from the Arecibo community, which will be received at the facility. That information is in the presentation and was in the document. >> MIRNA APONTE: Well, you see, with all due respect, sir. But it is very important that when these meetings are given, especially these meetings to educate the public and the people, that you know all of this information from memory. And if you don't know it, you should have it in front of you. That information where you can read it from. >> JAIME ABREU: Ma'am, I'll answer your question. I'll answer the question. If we recycle, if we recycle 35% of the trash, do you know how much we recycle right now? About 11%. If we make an extraordinary effort

372 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 91 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo and reach 35%, the residual tons per day, available to the plant, exceeds the capacity of the facility. Meaning, there's a lot of waste still available to the plant. That number, for 2020, just to give you a date, is 2,900 tons per day. The proposed plant can process 2,100 tons per day. And that is making an effort to reach 35% recycling. >> RAFAEL TORO: Next question. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Waldemar Flores Flores, an expert in quality systems. From my previous reading. Look, nobody here is producing data that is legally defensible, that complies with what I said earlier. And that you very well know, when you defended (?) incorporated, against the Environmental Protection Agency. Neither the Environmental Protection Agency, nor the Field Office in the Caribbean, nor New York can be trusted. All of the data which you have submitted here for all of the studies, do not meet with, not even by accident, the minimum requirements for a quality system. Here the problem with the three Rs, reuse, reduce and recycle, is that it has not been done due to the incompetence of all administrations, the New Progressive Party, as I call it, the Puerto Rican Nazi Party and the Popular Democratic Party, The Pure Demagoguery Party. Because they do not want to recycle. Because that's the long-term solution, as Edgardo Resto said, there's a lot o talk, a lot of planning, but nothing ever gets done. Why? Because this is the solution for the large economic interests, which benefits nothing our country, but only the few. Here, at one point, the New Progressive Party, wanted to put six coal plants, four incinerators and two nuclear plants. I imagine that the two nuclear plants are out of the picture after the Japan tsunami. The problem is that nothing of what has been built, complies with the law. The TCLP is unacceptable and that you know, and there's information about that. And I demand that, since you will be

373 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 92 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo answering my questions, that you send them to me at Forest Hills B20, lane 4, Bayamon, Puerto Rico, And I hope that before Monday that I have that response. But the problem is that the TCLP is unacceptable, that was done to benefit polluters. What is needed is a characterization, which is to know what's in this waste and how much. And in the last response, they say it is like cement, and that it will be deposited at a municipal landfill. I pity whoever accepts that crap. Simply put, nothing of what has been done by quality system experts, and you defended Celsius, so you know that said I was the one who determined that it was dangerous, and that better than I, there was no one, because I have more than 60 trainings in the field, and you made a million, the Board 4.6 million from a 96 million dollar fine. That does not work, it is useless, and I avail myself to train those interested in this community, on quality systems, so you can refute this crap. (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: Go ahead. Go ahead. >> WOMAN: We will ask for some respect, regardless, so that we can continue the process. >> RAFAEL TORO: Your name, attorney. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: Yes, Aleida Zenteno, for the record. The document you presented today, says that one of your ash depository proposals is to open a landfill in Peñuelas. The specific question is, will you hold public hearings in Peñuelas? The second question is, you just say you are a completely private entity, that you are not the government, the question is, why, if you are not the government, are you under executive order ? for the authorization of this project, at the Environmental Quality Board level, thereby evading all of the established procedures in Puerto Rico.

374 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 93 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> RAFAEL TORO: First, we're not going to open a landfill in Peñuelas. So that's not true. If anyone were to propose to the state to open a landfill in Puerto Rico, as part of its permitting process, that has to go to Public Hearings. So, the premise of your statement, quite simply, is not true. With respect to the executive order, executive order, we meet it. It's a provision of this government that established guidelines on how certain projects could be implemented, such as energy projects, and we comply with those guidelines. And we've complied with everything that has been asked for. And part of the federal permitting process, is that it also imposes a number of conditions and controls, and the company must comply with them. So, the law of the land determines if this plant can operate and how it can operate. And we have but no choice to comply with the law and those regulations. >> JAVIER BIAGGI: Good evening, my name is Javier Biaggi, I represent... I am a resident of Arecibo, of this community. I thank all of those from Arecibo who are here and, particularly, those people coming from the outside who are interested in helping us understand these processes, which are very important. The most important thing is that you have made us here in Arecibo, some proposals and some... some, you have assured us that this plant will bring, in addition to jobs, etc.., that it will bring an economic boom to Arecibo. And really, you are betting on that. And you are selling this project to us through radio ads and the press, that economic boom, because we will have more hotels, we will have more business. The question is whether the same economic boom that is offered to Arecibo, and that Arecibo is going to have, if Rochester has it, where for the past 26 years the SEMASS plant has been located... we know they don't. That which you promise, which you promise to Arecibo, which is a small plant, you have not

375 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 94 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo been able to give Rochester, which has a bigger plant. And I think that sometimes the ads offend us. Because it seems that you are trying to convince us that we are fools and that what you say is true. But frankly, thanks to the Internet, we can communicate and understand. Here you speak to us that you will generate about 2,000 job opportunities in the construction process. Once, you said 8,000 on radio WKAQ. And... from that amount you went town to about 4,000. But in Baltimore, the speech in Baltimore was different. There you said that you will only produce 400 jobs. With a plant that is twice the size of this plant. And then, you make a job announcement and took in 4,000 applicants for 150 jobs. I think it's false, it's false hope to many here in Arecibo, who have been waiting for two and a half years to receive those benefits. The question is, why do you not show us more respect and tell us the truth? Tell us things how they really are. And not try to paint things different from what they are. This permit you are waiting for from the EPA, is a pollution permit. It is a pollution permit. Why? Because it pollutes. You spend 150 million dollars in a filter. Why? To prevent the pollution from reaching the air. But those filters must be cleaned and you have to remove the contamination from those filters, and where does that pollution go? To the ashes. And like it or not, that is produced. Thanks for the time, have a good night. >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes, Mr. Biaggi. We have a lot, a lot of respect for the town and people of Arecibo. This is why this company has, for nearly two years, communicating directly with the people from Arecibo and giving them real information about the project. So, that respect for the people of Arecibo is there. And Energy Answers has shown it through action. With regards to the bonanza, 1 job is a bonanza. We need to give that person the job. Just

376 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 95 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo like two, three, four jobs. So to create employment opportunities is to bring a better life for a citizen. And a dedicated effort to create even a single job, that effort has value. Go ahead. >> EDUARDO GONZALEZ: Good evening to all. My name is Eduardo Gonzalez. I live in Factor. I want to thank you for this opportunity. To all the people who are listening and you who are the connoisseurs and owners of knowledge. I live in the ward across the landfill and when I open my door, my front porch view is the landfill. I have walked Caño Tiburones in numerous occasions for different reasons. I have climbed the wooden towers that are in different areas of the Caño. I have seen dead fish. I have seen how the landfill is part of it because it has invaded it. As a boy I used to walk around this area, and I have seen how the landfill has invaded Caño Tiburones. And I had to stop taking my children to the dock, because since Caño Tiburones flows into the dock, well, it's contaminated. And I would not want my children to swim in contaminated water. I also... I have no interest, because I do not work with the government. I work very little, I have very little work, I need employment, I acknowledge the need for jobs. But, although I have no resources, I make an effort and have reduced by over 50% the waste generated by my family. I have reduced my use of gasoline, we reuse materials, as a matter of fact, things that others throw away, we use them. >> RAFAEL TORO: OK. >> EDUARDO GONZALEZ: The question is, does the incinerator produce any kind of contamination? When Patrick Mahoney and Francisco Perez spoke to me several years ago, they said yes. I personally appeal to this concept where Erich Fromm wrote that love is inherent to knowledge. We need to know very well what will happen, things. That is, we have to love Puerto Rico

377 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 96 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo because we know it and we must protect it. I personally at this moment, I am opposed to the incinerator because it adds itself to all sources of pollution that we are receiving. Once I said to Mr. Carl Soderberg, in front of Mr. Arocho, at a meeting in San Juan, that after twelve o'clock at night, in Factor, you could smell a smell that was different from the day smell. You live there. I feel the smell of the pharmaceutical plants, you live there. And two days later the smell was over, but it returned four months later. I don't have the political or economic power, but what I can do is give advice in good faith. That we meet, that we join together and do the part that corresponds to each of us, which is to recycle and to learn about the process. Pardon me. Indeed. It is unfair. It is. So we have to eliminate all sources of pollution, including the ones that we create. We pollute a lot. We have to eliminate that. The question was? does it produce any kind of pollution? Thank you. >> WOMAN: Thank you very much. >> JAIME ABREU: I want to do, simply make a comment regarding your position, Mr. Gonzalez. Is that we are not presenting this as the total solution. We are presenting this project as an alternative. Which is part of a way to address a problem that, as a society we have, and we have to face this problem because we cannot pass it on to future generations. And we are proposing a technology that serves in part, A solution is an alternative to have comprehensive approach, as we search for that solution, and within that, this is a technology that meets certain requirements, a series of operational commitments in monitoring, very different from an operation that does not comply, which is what you have in front of your house. There, you don't have any kind of system monitoring or controlling what is happening there. Very different from the landfill operation, ours is a very

378 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 97 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo controlled, rigorously audited operation. And we do not say that it is the panacea nor the total solution, but is part of the commitment and responsibility we have to tackle this problem we have in our society, which is garbage. And we see it as part of the overall solution. No, it's not zero pollution. No, of course not. >> ROSARIO FELICIANO: For purposes of record, my name is Rosario Feliciano. Regarding the dust of the Sahara which someone here commented on: that is a natural process. While the ashes of this plant, which you want to install, instead of generating employment, it will generate disease in our community, us. It saddens me to see how big interests are looking to exploit our mother earth, and I am not against development. Instead of creating a true development, e.g. agriculture, recycling, there are a thousand ways to do this. And especially the young here, join the fight. Because I am also against the privatization of the Poza del Obispo. The big interests want to keep everything that is ours, and our land is not for sale. understand? Thank you. Do you (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: Briefly, a comment to Mrs. Feliciano. And it s that, what you talk about, the disease and so on. That's not the experience we have had at Energy Answers. In the other plant where we use this technology, let me talk. May I? That might happen in other places, but not where this technology has operated. So, the premise of your comment, quite simply, is not reflected in what our experience has shown. In regards to other farming activities that may exist. What prevents this is from being carried out? This plant does not prevents that from being carried out? Agriculture can occur in

379 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 98 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Puerto Rico, let the farmers work it. We work in another industry. But this plant is not an impediment to the efforts of other industries. This does not stop, does not prevent... but okay. Next person. >> JOSE JUAN LOPEZ: My name is Jose Juan Lopez, I represent the community of Islote. Many of you already know, a few years back when we had odor problems. That still is minimized, but not quite. Since we do not believe much in certain government offices, who can guarantee us that you are going to do exactly what everyone has said here today? We cannot believe, I mean, there might be one group that believes you. But we do not believe, because we have had already past experiences, of others saying "we'll do, we'll do" and nothing is done. Do you understand? Now, if a problem occurs, there are not listening... if a problem occurs, those of you sitting there, you are the main responsible people, if we go to the plant or wherever, to get answers for any potential problems that may come up? Because we just don't trust. Since we do not trust government agencies, can we trust what you are telling us? Because you say, everything will be so, that the filters... But when the time comes, because of the weakness of government agencies to bring you or anyone else back in line and say, "Look, we gave you a playbook, and this book tells you exactly what you have to do. And if you don't do it, we will take action against it." But since they don't take action, there are some companies that take advantage of this procedure and do whatever they want. Because the ones to pay the consequences are the town people. You guys, can you guarantee us that you are going to do what, in truth, you have to do, without us having to going there, to ask you to comply or to hold you responsible for not doing what you said? Because if something happens, someone will have to be held

380 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 99 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo accountable and someone will have to be responsible for what happens. Are you guys responsible for that? >> RAFAEL TORO: I can say the following. This system has a control, pardon me, has a system of continuous monitoring of what comes out of the chimney. Aside from that, there's sampling of what comes out of the chimney, let me talk, let me talk, let me talk. That I guarantee it. And that information is available to you continuously. It is available in person, via the Internet. It is information that you, the citizen, have available. If that information shows that is not being met, you as a citizen, under this law, have the right to file civil action against the company and have recourse for civil action against the EPA because it is not supervising, because it is not holding the company accountable. So the remedy exists in law, the mechanism exists, so that you, as responsible citizen, worried about what might happen, can initiate an action to require and ensure that an action is being fulfilled, are you understanding me? So the mechanism exists. Go ahead. >> HIRAM RUIZ: Good evening all of you. I am Dr. Hiram Ruiz. Greetings to the panel, especially Faelo Toro, whom I had the joy of bringing many years ago to play with our Captains of Arecibo. And a special greeting to all who are here from Arecibo. I commend you all, those who are in favor and those against, because you have decided to be here tonight. And you've been here, you are here and that is very important. You have a concern for the environment, have a concern for energy, so it is very commendable what you are doing. I'll try to be as brief as possible. What I will do is ask some questions and then comment. I want to know, I know that the panel already knows the problem, the landfill, and I think they are aware of that. But I wanted to know is whether the panel is aware that the area where you will

381 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 100 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo locate the plant, Energy Answers, there is a power plant there now that operating with a waiver from the EPA because of toxic emissions. I wonder if you are aware, and if you have done a study on the emissions from the plant. It is important to know that toxicity in the Cambalache area will not rely solely on Energy Answers. And indeed, the final decision on this, actually, I think will be on how many toxins are being produced right now. I also wanted to ask, Energy Answers, the EPA allows certain percentage of toxic releases, am I right? >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes. >> HIRAM RUIZ:... a minimum amount, supposedly. I wonder if you, Energy Answers, has done a study on current emissions from the thermoelectric plant. Number two, if you are aware that there is... A plant facility in Tanamá, biological products that are incinerated. If Energy Answers is aware of that, and if they know what the emissions from the plant Tanamá are. And third, if they know that there are lead emissions, which is one of the toxins to be released in any of these companies, which is being emitted and is polluting the Cambalache area, the battery recycling plant. So, they are processed lead and plastics. Because I think that my, in the end, the decision ultimately will hinge on if we already have a very big pollution Santana Cambalache and Islote wards. In addition, we have the contamination of the River, where now they have prohibited bathing, fishing and even boat rides at the mouth of the Rio Grande de Arecibo, because there is a problem of black water contamination, from 20 years ago. There is a pollution problem in the mouth of the Rio Grande de Arecibo. So in closing, I believe that the decision of the Arecibeños, on both sides, is that the information needs to be made public. How much toxicity? How many toxic products will be added? And then, if Energy Answers, although it may

382 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 101 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo add a minimal amount, this total toxic load in our area, this, to some extent, may not justify the Energy Answers plant, at least in Arecibo. Thank you for the time given to me. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you, doctor. >> WOMAN: For the record, that we have a lot of trust in Hiram, hence we gave him more time, so he does not have to come back for a second speaking turn. >> RAFAEL TORO: Earned privilege. >> WOMAN: In addition, he was talking. >> HIRAM RUIZ: Please answer the question. >> WOMAN: And Piro asked me. Rafa, do you answer them now? >> RAFAEL TORO: Sure, I'll answer now. The technical staff tells me that they are aware of the issue that exists in the Cambalache thermoelectric. That they tried to install emissions control equipment, and apparently it did not work technically. And they are operating under a waiver at that installation for such equipment, but because the installation of the equipment did not work. So yes, they are aware of that. Number two. Regarding Dr. Ruiz's question, the cumulative factor, because I think that's worrisome to him. The cumulative factor that this plant could generate vis-à-vis the existing issues already on the site. So, what could this accumulation result in? Well, the risk assessment study, takes into account all sources. And I mean all. They don't have to be major sources. It includes all sources in a 7 kilometers radius around the plant, and that includes the lead plant, the thermoelectric, the one in Tanamá I do not know where it is physically nor know if it is within those 7 kilometers. But then,

383 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 102 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo we also considered all the major sources of emissions within a radius of 57 kilometers. And the study, what it does, is besides that, it uses actual water quality data. I am sorry, air, actual air quality data. In order to find out the quality of the air there, right now. And the study shows, and it's the study we mentioned earlier, right? It shows that adding this plant, on top of the air quality that exists now, and the operation of all these sources of emissions, we do not exceed, we do not go over, and the study shows that it does not exceed the standard published by the EPA. Which is the one we talked about, the national standard for air quality, which is a standard promulgated to protect the health and the environment. So this data is there, it's part of the modeling, of the study, and demonstrates that that standard, which is called the National Ambient Air Quality Standard, is not exceeded. So, I think the technicians, who are with us tonight, in their studies have taken into account this concern which you bring up Dr. Ruiz, the issue of the cumulative factor of this plant. And it's part of their study. The information is there for your inspection, comment, criticism. There are executive summaries, so that they can be easier to understand, but the study is there. It's published by us, and you can look at it. Yes, we have one hour left. So, we'll try to be a little shorter when we respond to you. But we want to give you a better opportunity to present us with your questions. Go ahead. >> MIRNA APONTE: Good evening, again. My name is Mirna Aponte, and I have another question. But I want to make a comment. As it happens, you just mentioned, that a technology did not work at a plant in another situation. Precisely, that has been talked about here, that can happen to the plant that you are proposing. And I wanted to make that observation, that it might happen later.

384 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 103 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Going back to the subject of recycling, I understand that this is the real solution that will solve all our problems. Assuming, assuming, because you say, and from what I understood, you said that this incinerator will be a facility that will help to recycle. Which I see as impossible, but that's what you say. Let us assume that all material that can be recycled, we will be more conservative. Let's assume that 50% of the amount of waste that arrives, can be recycled. You said you needed 2,100 tons of garbage a day to operate, right? If half of that trash is recycled, we'll assume that's the amount of trash there. I wonder what is the amount, if you have calculated what is the amount of garbage produced in the town of Arecibo and at the other towns that you say you will also serve? The amount, we need numbers. You said that you have done studies. We also know, how much garbage is being produced already? Which is the one that you justify saying that you need it to operate. If that's the case, let's see, if I can get an answer, if not, answer me as soon as possible. I asked you already the question regarding the amount of waste. The other thing is, if you also know, the other question, how many people, if they have done a study regarding the recycling of Arecibo and the people who returned to mention on their maps, how much is being recycled in these people now? Because the focus, and I urge you, should be instead of proposing the incinerator plant, all efforts should focus to a recycling plant. And we will solve the landfill problem, of the pollution that affects the health of people, lots of problems that will be caused by this incinerator on top of the ones caused by the landfill. So if we focus on that, we could focus on helping. Yes. >> RAFAEL TORO: we will address your question. >> MIRNA APONTE: Its two questions.

385 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 104 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> JAIME ABREU: Addressing your first question, in the presentation we gave, we indicated that in the Material Separation Plan, and to get to the point of your question, here are some numbers... In 2025, there is a projection of solid waste generation in this facility's region, of 4,506 tons per day, approximately. And if 35% is recycled, recycling in the region of Puerto Rico, which is what is established by law and what is set in the Dynamic Itinerary of the Solid Waste Authority, which is a residual waste, up to 2,900 tons per day could reach our facility. So, if I collect half of the original number, that's 2,250. Meaning, even with a 50% recycling rate, we would have no problem. Going to your second question, the percentage of recycling in Puerto Rico, was established according to a study, done by the Solid Waste Authority. They generated yearly estimates. And based on that information, and that's the information we are providing from that report, that information is based on the Solid Waste Authority. This includes local area information for Arecibo. Several municipalities. That was dictated by the Solid Waste Authority. So, we did not invent these numbers, nor did we assume any information. >> MIRNA APONTE: My question was whether you had done a study, I know that ADS has. What I wanted to know was if you, in particular, have taken the time to know the amount, because if your interest is in recycling, as you have said here all along, so I wanted to know if you, personally, as Energy Answers, if you have done that? >> JAIME ABREU: Yes, it's in the presentation... >> MIRNA APONTE: Ok, because I would like to see those numbers...

386 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 105 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> RAFAEL TORO: I would like to add that, and I hear a lot of good people interested in recycling. As we have said, recycling has increased in other places where this technology has been established. I am sure that this company is in the best position, with all those entities that are interested in recycling, to work with them, so that recycling can happen. I am sure, because that's the commitment this company has expressed publicly, and all the commitments we have made to the public, up to now, have been met. So, all of you that are so interested in the recycling industry, I invite you to make approach the company with your ideas. The company certainly is open to talking with you, to work together to increase recycling rates in Puerto Rico. I am sure that this commitment is real from these people, from this company. >> JAIME ABREU: I want to also add a list of companies that we've talked with regarding recycling in the area of the facility. Who are interested in working with us recycling. And these are, so you have the information: Reciclaje del Norte,) (Inaudible) Corporation, We Recycle, The Battery Recycling Company, (Inaudible) Society, Clean Harbors Caribe, New Port Recycling Corp, ARS Waste Disposal Enterprises, Borinquen Container Corporation, Pronatura, Caribbean Composting, Institute of Local Self- Reliance, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands Recycling Partnership, Arecibo Salvation Army, Better World Books, Puerto Rico Solid Waste Authority, and the Municipality of Arecibo. Las compañías, o sea, las Autoridades de Desperdicios Sólidos y el Municipio de Arecibo. These are companies that have approached us and have reached out to us to collaborate on recycling. >> RAFAEL TORO: Go ahead. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Waldemar Natalio Flores Flores, again, an expert in quality systems. OK. So that a quality management system is acceptable, it

387 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 106 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo must have data quality indicators, data quality objectives. This is the scientific method promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency. And the communities need to be consulted. Operational Procedure Frameworks are incorporated into the Quality Assurance Project Plans, which also include validation and verification of data quality. Sample Performance Assessment, audit and assessment of technical systems. Audit and review of management systems and data quality evaluation. In regards to all the technical information that has been allegedly submitted, which I understand is useless, who of you have done the assessments on that information, who have served as quality assurance auditors? Who among you, if any? And they must have generated a report, and we, the community is entitled to have copies of these reports. Has anyone made these reports? That's my question. I have no other... (HOUR 4:00 TO END OF MEETING) >> WALDEMAR FLORES: That was my question. Who among you, if any, performed that? >> RAFAEL TORO: Please state your question again. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Well, I'll repeat it, but don't count it against my time allotment. All quality systems must include three phases, which is for studies like the one you are presenting here, like manna from heaven. First, they must have data quality objectives, you must consult with the community. Operational procedure frameworks. Data quality indicators. Performance evaluation samples. Validation and verification of data quality.

388 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 107 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Audits and evaluations of technical systems. Audits and reviews of management systems. and data quality assessments. For all the information you have submitted, and from what I've seen, and I would have to look at the preliminary EIS, plus those who have made such assessments with the alleged letters of endorsement. Because the one done at the Environmental Quality Board, they did not know what they were doing. So, who among you, if any of you has performed these functions of evaluating, reviewing, promoting and approving information?... >> WOMAN: I think we got it. >> RAFAEL TORO: The technical staff informs me that all these requirements and quality assurance controls are parts of the studies they have done. They were carried out and are part of the studies that are published. But they worked and met all those QA / QC requirements. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: When will they provide the community with that information. >> RAFAEL TORO: It is part of the permit request. So, it's contained in the permit application to the EPA, and that is a public document. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: That's the permit application that... >> RAFAEL TORO: The PSD. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: The PSD. Well, I hope that when I get that copy that it meets all of these requirements, because I doubt that they were met. Because right now, one of you is doing these audits. You, you, for the information submitted by the different consultants, regarding wood, automobiles, did any of you check, corroborate, comment and approve the information? The 1996 and 2006 studies being looked at, did you check to

389 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 108 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo see if that information is correct? Any of you present here, and if one of you did, I would like to know, and please tell this community now, who you are. That's what I'm asking. >> RAFAEL TORO: Well, the people who accompany me here tonight, the technicians who accompany me, complying with the method approved by the EPA, followed all the requirements for control and quality assurance. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Fantastic. First, I have to tell you, a method approved by the EPA, is just a reference method, operational procedure frameworks need to be prepared. A method cannot be referenced, as was done, based on this method because the method does not cover everything. And that is quality assurance and quality control, and that's my area of expertise. Now, the studies that are going to done, what entities will be used? Any idea? Because the problem is that based on what I read to you before, nobody here in Puerto Rico is in compliance, because the Environmental Corruption Board, which has nothing to do with quality, where I worked for 17 ½ years, has not established a system for accrediting institutions or certifying individuals. Therefore, any of you here, tomorrow can become an environmental consultant. There are no requirements, and that applies to the new General Permit Office, which is the Office of Political Doodles. >> WOMAN: I think that... >> RAFAEL TORO: we have received your comments and we'll to them reply in writing. >> WOMAN: OK. >> RAFAEL TORO: Next person.

390 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 109 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> WOMAN: I believe we have answered you already. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: That is the answer to not answer anything. >> WOMAN: Like we said, we'll reply in writing. >> RAFAEL TORO: In writing. Next person. >> ADALBERTO RAMIREZ: Adalberto Ramirez. Representing the Association of Retired Electric Power Employees and Arecibo resident. First of all, you are holding these hearings, and the same respect that we are giving to the people with the yellow shirts, from Energy Answers, I request from you, that the people in the back with the yellow shirts, that they also treat us with respect. And that you take care ensuring that there's respect at this hearing. >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes, everyone from the beginning we have requested order. I think that it has been exemplary the way we have all behaved, so congratulations. And please, let's not ruin that spirit of good citizenship that has prevailed tonight. So those who are in the back with the yellow shirts, I ask you not to ruin what we have done so far. Go ahead. >> ADALBERTO RAMIREZ: We live in the same town, we are citizens of Arecibo, and independently of all, we are friends and brothers. >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes, that's correct. >> ALBERTO RAMIREZ: I want to explain to you that I worked at the Palo Seco plant and at the San Juan Power Plant for 12 years. And there, and you know this since you are a chemical engineer, there were a lot of cases of cancer reported due to asbestos contamination, and... many colleagues were in the UTIER. I was President of the UTIER with Lausel (?). We had to take cases to court. And the EPA itself said, this needs to be handled by the Employment Fund, and ultimately, we ended up having to take the workers

391 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 110 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo to the United States, to undergo studies. You are aware that where the facility is going to be built was the Cambalache sugar plantation. Where sugar cane was burned, crushed, but also in the area, the sugar cane was burned, so they could cut it. And all that soot would be up in the Hatillo area, the wind would carry it. What concerns me greatly, is the release of toxins, and at what quantity, do you know how much toxin will go into the air? And how much will come reach the community, is it going to be the whole community? Please answer the question. >> RAFAEL TORO: OK. Those numbers are part of the ecological risk studies which we described earlier, I don't know if you were here for that part. We described two risk studies. A human health risk study and an environmental risk study. This includes an assessment of what are the risks that this facility can have on the pangola grass, or the water where fishes live, caught and eaten. For that food chain, that's part of this evaluation. We gave that information earlier. We will not repeat it, but it is part of the study, and the numbers are there. >> ADALBERTO RAMIREZ: I ask of you, with all due respect, I want to give you my mailing address: PO Box 9723, Cotto Station, Arecibo, Puerto Rico. >> RAFAEL TORO: Pardon me... >> ADALBERTO RAMIREZ: Cotto Station, Arecibo, Puerto Rico. On behalf of Adalberto Ramirez, so that you can send me a copy of that study, please. >> RAFAEL TORO: With pleasure. >> ADALBERTO RAMIREZ: Thank you very much. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you. What's the Zip code? >> ADALBERTO RAMIREZ: Zip code

392 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 111 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> JOSÉ ALSINA: Pardon me. My name is José Alsina, I am the director of Conservation for the Sierra Club. I have three things to say. In addition to generating energy through burning, and that's what they're doing, you can generate energy with anaerobic digestion. It is much cleaner, it's a tank, where you put all the food together, or take the manure and the microorganisms produce methane, and that methane moves a generator and produces electricity, and when you use that material from the inside from inside that tank, what remains at the bottom makes compost. Nothing is wasted, it does not generate toxic ash, because the material was segregated from the beginning. So in school cafeterias, food can be picked up, the leftovers from the town, from restaurants and cafeterias, and it s an opportunity to make money. There is a seminar in Yauco, given by the Association of this industry, now in November, whoever is interested, can call me at I can give you their contact information. I'm going to go to that seminar, it's very interesting for you to set up your company and make money. The other thing I wanted to say is, I offer a seminar on how to make compost at home, in your garden, your school. This is a free seminar. That is, if you want me to go to your school and I offer that course. In my home I compost meat, rice, beans, bread, everything. I do not throw any of that away, my trash does not stink. I convert it. I use it as fertilizer. I use it in my home garden. And I offer a free seminar, one hour on this subject. The other thing that I want to talk to you is regarding the "Bottle Bill," the 5 cents I told you about earlier, we are again promoting that bill. We already have two representatives interested in promoting the measure, Nuno Lopez and Aponte, Jose Aponte. And then, I' want to request from Energy Answers, because it is very difficult for us to get on the radio, to announce the bill and move it forward it, if you can help us go to the radio programs that you have access to so that we can present the Bottle Bill to

393 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 112 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo the people and they can know about it and support it. So that it does not die as it has the six previous times. You can contact me whenever you want. >> WOMAN: We hope you are successful. >> RAFAEL TORO: We want, before you continue madam attorney, we want to point out..., we want you to know that the facility that uses this same technology, in Massachusetts, in the State of Massachusetts. Which has been there for the past 23 years, is surrounded by intensive farming, cranberries. Cranberry juice. This uses a lot of water. And this technology is surrounded by that farming operation and there has never been any problems. Go ahead. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: Yes, precisely, I want to talk about Rochester. >> RAFAEL TORO: If you please, identify yourself for the record. >> ALEIDA ZENTENO: I am attorney Aleida Zenteno Rodríguez. In Rochester, the population of this place is smaller than the population of the town of Maricao, which is our least populated town. Rochester itself, is much larger than Puerto Rico. Cubanta's(?) property, in Rochester, includes the cranberries just mentioned, but it is uncertain whether these berries are edible or inedible. Why do you insist on confusing us? Telling us that we are not going to get sick, when you cannot ensure that your operations do not pollute the people of Rochester, because there are no people living nearby. Next. You say that you will be under the purview of the EPA. EPA applies only to particulate matter 2.5 to Nano particles, dioxins, furans and thanatos are much smaller than 2.5 to That is, they fall outside the jurisdiction of EPA oversight. Why do you insist on fooling the people here,

394 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 113 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo saying that the EPA will regulate? When the truth is that the EPA does not include that particulate matter, which is nano particles, dioxins and furans. And third, when I asked you this afternoon, my first question was whether you were going to use Arecibo as a port to import trash, and you answered no. However, right now, you just said that among the agencies that you are considering for contract is Virgin Island Recycling. So, you said no to me, but then later on right now, you admit that you are making efforts to bring trash from other countries. Why do you lie to us? >> RAFAEL TORO: Regarding the cranberries surrounding the SEMASS plant, these cranberries are used to make juice, are sold commercially as juice that comes out of those cranberries. So, your comment, quite simply, does not conform to reality. Again, as we said, we're not going to import garbage from the Virgin Islands and your comment, then, your inference does not conform to reality either. With regard to the control of particulate. The standards include particles that are 2.5, and even smaller than 2.5, 2.5 microns. So they are included in the monitoring and emission control systems. Next person. >> ANGEL GONZALEZ: Good evening, again, Dr. Angel Gonzalez. Medical doctor. I want to go more in depth regarding the nano particles, because for these particles, there is no technology to prevent them from going up into the air, because there is no way to measure them, they are below 2.5 microns. And particularly, from what is known about these nano particles, these ultra fine particles is that precisely they serve as surfaces to carry heavy metals, lead, mercury, dioxins, furans, and these particles travel long distances. Meaning that they can reach far beyond Hatillo. They can travel to Aguadilla, even Mayaguez, depending on the wind, obviously.

395 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 114 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Now, think about what happens with these nano particles. They are so microscopic that if you inhale them, they are quickly absorbed into the blood. And travel to all organs of the body. They can travel to the brain. They can cross the membranes of the brain. They can reach the kidneys, the liver, and that's were these substances cause harm: lead, mercury, dioxins, furans. That's where cancer starts, for example. These substances are also associated with diabetes and with reproductive problems. We know, for example, that they are associated with decreased sperm count in men and with reduced fertility in women, and a number of other adverse effects. We know that agencies in Puerto Rico are ineffective. First, they have no budget and cannot regulate this type of technology. They can't. They don't have the capacity. They do not have the staff. They do not have the budget to do so and these corporations know that. They know it and foment it. Let's be clear, they foster it. The less vigilant these agencies are, the easier it is for these companies to violating these standards. And finally, frankly, for you to suggest that if you violate the law, we are entitled to sue. Look, we are all aware of the disastrous legal system we have in this country. Come on, that is not an alternative. In other words, communities cannot afford to take a corporation in court. They simply lose. Thank you. >> WOMAN: Again, we ask for you to be brief. We are now almost at the end of this hearing. The last person is going to be this gentleman here. I think we have had ample time so that many of you could speak more than one turn.. Yes, because I gave him an earlier turn, no problem. Until Piro, please. And of course, remember, the technicians are telling me. Obviously, remember that you can send in your comments and questions in writing. I

396 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 115 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo imagine that any additional questions that was not made here, can be answered. Is it or is not it? >> RAFAEL TORO: That is so, and we will extend the end of the meeting until 10:15pm. Yes, we will extend it. >> WOMAN: OK. Okay, then. Ten fifteen. We continue with the same two minute speaking turn. >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes, we will try to be a little quicker, but continue, go ahead. >> WOMAN: OK. I being asked until when can questions be answered or turned in. Meaning, until when do they have to submit their questions in writing? >> RAFAEL TORO: Questions must be submitted today. The time frame established by regulation ends today. You can submit your questions after this, but the obligation is to respond to the questions submitted up to today. So if you have not submitted them today, whether in writing or on the microphone, then tomorrow, if you want to submit a question, you can. But the commitment is to answer written and verbal questions up to this day. That's what the regulations require us. >> WOMAN: Remember that a public notice was made for a while now for this very purpose. Likewise, questions will be answered in the process, and even today. >> RAFAEL TORO: Yes, that's correct. >> MIRNA APONTE: Well, again. My name is Mirna Aponte. To conclude, I have several questions, but more importantly, going to the question of the location of the plant, I have a very big concern and it has to do with the

397 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 116 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo water to be used. At this facility, whether it is to cool something or for whatever other purpose. Where will this water be disposed? Because I know that the plant is near a body of water. I worry greatly that this operation will contaminates that body of water. And I wonder if you have that clear, where are you going to dispose that water. The other question is the issue of asthma in Arecibo. Particularly, it is very important, as is has been revealed through studies carried out here in Puerto Rico, that it is the area where the highest incidence of asthma exists. And due to this, we understand that this facility will increase the disease even more. Now, my question is... let's suppose, and hopefully, hopefully this will not happen, that if you are able to get this project approved. And I would not want to be the case, but based on my knowledge and experience with several other environmental situations, who's going to be responsible, ten, fifteen, twenty years from now? When, we find out that the city of Arecibo and its surrounding cities, not counting all of the ones there on that map, when they have been diagnosed with diseases caused by the toxins that can be prove at that point, that are being produced at your facility. Who, from all of you sitting there, all of the experts there, will be liable on behalf of Energy Answers? I want names, because we must keep those names, and I invite the community, that you must have it very clear, who is to be responsible, ten, fifteen, twenty years from now, when we are getting cancer, who will pay the hospital bill, all of the health conditions that I and others will suffer? It is very important, because I want to know, how are you going to handle that? Are you going to provide us, or send us a copy of what has been spoken about here, a transcript? How is that going to be handled? So that those of us that have participated here have all of the information and be aware if the questions were answered or not. Because we know that

398 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 117 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo as part of the PSD permitting process, that you have to answer the questions posed here, whether it's today or later on. But you need to answer them in order to get the permit, when are you going to do that? >> RAFAEL TORO: In relation to the process of water discharges, the water discharge goes into the Water and Sewer Authority pipeline that passes by the plant. With regard to who is responsible, Energy Answers is responsible for its actions, and all studies show that this does not represent any risk. I will not repeat this again so many times, but we have shown that this is not represent any risk. So everyone is responsible for its actions, Energy Answers for theirs. Just like the landfill operator is responsible for theirs. And citizens for theirs. But in this system of government we live in, everyone is responsible for their actions. >> MIRNA APONTE: OK, the name of the person from Energy Answers, who is responsible, it's a corporation. >> RAFAEL TORO: It's not like that, it's not just a name. >> MIRNA APONTE: But it is a corporation, and corporations are not liable... >> RAFAEL TORO: It's an entity. With respect to the documents, your questions and the answers, they will all be part of the final document, which will be available, and a public notice will be made, when the final document is available for your review. >> MIRNA APONTE: OK, but since I do not buy El Vocero, and that's the paper that you use for the notices, I need that for me, and I've been here all day. I want a copy of the document, if possible, at least to me, because I'm not going to find out when that notice goes out. Because I do not buy that

399 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 118 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo paper, therefore, I might miss it, right? What I am saying is that, with all due respect, I do not trust such notices. I been fighting public meeting notices for years, because not everyone really finds out about them. >> RAFAEL TORO: Send us your address. We already have that. Go ahead. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Waldemar Flores Flores, an expert in quality systems. Now, I'll go slow, the quality assurance officer, is the one that receives and reviews. Comments verbally and in writing, asking for information until there's compliance with that repetitive process, with all the requirements, guidelines and protocols, to ensure that the data generated and processed is scientifically valid, precise, accurate and appropriate. With a degree of acceptable comparability, completeness, representativeness and sensitivity. And having documented such data, generated and processed, fully, completely, absolutely. Therefore, the data generated and processed is totally, completely, fully and absolutely reliable. Then, that data can be legally defensible in any judicial forum, local or federal level, agencies, quasijudicial powers, like the Board of Environmental Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, Courts of First Instance, local or federal, Courts of Appeals, local or federal, and Supreme Courts, local or federal. Who is the only person that can assure me that all of the studies that have been done, are being doing and will be done, are legally defensible, because they meet all the above? Who among you, if any, is, was or will be the quality assurance officer for this company? Because that person is liable. Who is this person? If any. That's the only person who can assure me that this is reliable, not any of you if you are not that person. Because the studies that have been done, do not met, even by mistake, the quality system requirements. What was previously known as the Quality Assurance Program. And quality control and

400 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 119 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo quality assurance is non-existent, and it is known, and you know it, Rafael Toro, it has not changed since you represented Celsius, tat here in Puerto Rico, we don't generate or process data that is legally defensible, because they do not meet the criteria that I just mentioned, locally or federally. And you used this, to win 1 million, Celsius two million Celsius, and the Environmental Quality Board, 4.6 million, out of a 96 million dollar fine, in one of the cases(?)... (Inaudible) Who among you is, was or will be the quality assurance officer? That's my question. >> RAFAEL TORO: The staff of Arcadis, represented here by John, is in charge of everything that you have well described, of all of the quality control and quality assurance processes. That company is a company with numerous employees, who ensure that these procedures and that the data obtained is legally defensible, as you very well indicated. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Very good. From what I've seen regarding Arcadis, nobody signed as having reviewed and approved. So it him that has to say that it complies with the requirements. Not you. It is him that has to say so, not you. Because you cannot speak by reference. Because you as an attorney, that's by reference. It's him, not you, the one that needs to be making the assertions. >> RAFAEL TORO: If you had been here from the beginning, which you were not... >> WALDEMAR FLORES: That's true. >> RAFAEL TORO: When we set the agenda for today, we said that the whole presentation was going to be in Spanish, so that most people could understand it. The gentleman here does not know Spanish. He is giving me

401 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 120 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo the information and I am passing it to you. Okay? That rule we established early tonight so that everyone could understand what we are saying. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Well, for those who arrived late, unfortunately, you should have said that it was he who could ascertain, not you. And here you are saying that him he, he who is speaking, that's Kevin Scott, he is Kevin R. Scott. >> RAFAEL TORO: Pardon me? >> WALDEMAR FLORES: That if the person you are speaking of is Kevin R. Scott. >> RAFAEL TORO: No. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: What is his name? >> RAFAEL TORO: John Hanisch. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: So, he is the quality assurance officer for the company. >> RAFAEL TORO: No, no, I did not say that. I did not say that. He is the representative of Arcadis. And Arcadis has employees, a number of professional engineers who signed, with their licenses. Quality control, quality assurance personnel, which are part of the company that he is representing here today, and who are the working group working for him. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Well, that's the person, the quality assurance officer, after what I described, I will not repeat it, unless someone wants, who can be here on behalf of Arcadis making that determination. He cannot speak for that person, and I do not know if in any document...

402 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 121 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> RAFAEL TORO: Please, submit your written comment and that person is going to reply in writing, thank you very much and we a... >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Well, then, say so clearly, that that's the person in the documents, that he is the official quality assurance, which is the one that can make that assertion. It is neither you nor him. Then, that's the person that needs to talk. I hope you've written down the name, who is the person who can talk about the findings. Because you are speaking by reference. You don't know if its correct or not, nor you, just because you have signed it, can accept it. Because you know what happened in the Celsius case, the Environmental Quality Board, the Environmental Protection Agency and its consultants. Everything was done with their feet, for lack of mentioning another body part. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you very much. Piro. Last. Last turn. >> WOMAN: (Inaudible) >>FERNADO BETANCOURT: Welcome to the Jungle, John. First of all, I need to ask a question, as it is important for purposes of record. >> RAFAEL TORO: It's 9:50, and we extended the meeting to 10:15. So, Mr. attorney, I don't know if you plant to occupy the full 25 minutes. I ask you to give someone else a chance as well. But we'll be here until a quarter past ten. >>FERNADO BETANCOURT: First I want to state for the record that the public participation procedure in this process, from the beginning, has been significantly limited, based on the energy emergency created, which in reality, does not exist. And that has been challenged at the state level. But one question I do have: the waivers. I recently received a memorandum

403 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 122 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo from the EPA, addressed to you, dated August 4, where you are requesting a waiver. It is highly technical and I need information about it. I did not understand it, please write it down as something that I want an answer from you. I want to ask John, I will speak in Spanish and I will translate to you. I imagine you are the person who is working with the filters. Are you the guy in charge of the filter analysis? The company who is advising? He is not the person in charge, I cannot hear you. >> RAFAEL TORO: He is not in charge of the filters. >> FERNADO BETANCOURT: That is, he is in charge of the company that represents the technicians who are dealing with that. >> RAFAEL TORO: the ones that have done the studies related to air quality, impact air, etc.. >> FERNADO BETANCOURT: OK. Is he aware, I do not know if you are aware and I want you to take note please. I beg you to jot down the following, because we had bad experience with companies similar to yours. With Electric Power Company, which underwent a series of technical studies, saying they were going to be filtered, and would not create emissions, and when lit the turbines began to learn the alarm and had to go to the EPA for a waiver for noncompliance. And that is what is happening at the power plant. And that is a genuine concern, and that's one reason why we are against this. In addition to that, in Arecibo, it is important for you to take into account, in your technical studies, the history of contamination of this area. Because Aleida Zenteno, my colleague, and I am not going to go into many technical details, but in that same region, the radius of a mile from where you are, it's a highly polluted area. You have to take into consideration that the Puerto

404 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 123 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo Rico Chemical plant was there, which made chemical weapons for the Department of Defense. Please take that into consideration. You are near the river, in a flood zone, that recently was, it's a flood zone. And you are thinking of pumping out 2.2 million gallons of water, from the Caño Tiburones Nature Reserve, a wetland. And then, you are going to build an incineration plant in the middle of a 1-mile radius from the urban area of Arecibo, downwind. You, who know the technical aspects of this project, you certainly know that this not the best location to build an incinerator. Furthermore, take those studies into consideration. Because we are very aware, that you can assure us, because this community, that this pollution charge is an addition, meaning, we are an Environmentally Discriminated Community. Arecibo and Barceloneta carry more weight in pollution than any other community. Because Arecibo and Barceloneta have a superfund because of all the pharmaceutical plants. Moreover, we had to participate in lawsuits against the Water and Sewerage Authority in Barceloneta, because they did not meet the minimum requirements at the Barceloneta Waste Treatment Plant, the water treatment plant used in Arecibo does not meet the requirements. PREPA, with all of their filters, I do not know if it was your company or what other company it was, but those filters did not work, and now they have to operate with a waiver. And you know what? I am a cancer patient. I am a cancer survivor. And you know why? Because these toxins affected me. I am alive thanks to the Heavenly Father. Also, please take into consideration that Arecibo has four natural reserves. Arecibo has four nature reserves and three rivers and one estuary.

405 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 124 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo That the future of Arecibo, with a garbage facility, with an incinerator at the entrance of town, it hurts us. Because no one will want to come to enjoy the eco-tourism attractions at Arecibo with a facility burning toxins. In addition to that, in Arecibo, it is important for you to take into account, in your technical studies, the history of proactive opposition of this area. That is, the fact that you get your permit, does not necessarily imply that the general public will allow it. Arecibo and Vieques. You need to study well the history of Puerto Ricans in that aspect, I mean, nobody in the world has confronted the U.S. Navy. And we took them out through civil disobedience. And in Arecibo, the US Corps of Engineers U.S. was building a (?) and we stopped it, we sat on the pipes because the work was being poorly done. That is, there are sociological factors that I want you to be aware and analyze. There are alternatives to the trash, but not incineration. We can be partners in the business of garbage, but not in burning it. And on the technical side, John, John, it's is very important, for the purposes of the record with the EPA, that this concern is recorded. Arecibo is a highly polluted, contaminated sensitively since long ago. And if we were to take the measure, the distance of that whole area right now, so you know and take it into consideration, there is a battery recycling plant that is protected by a (?) (Inaudible), and they are violating all environmental laws. And the people are getting lead in their blood. So, this is not child's play. I ask people who are making noise, to show respect, because we are talking here for the record. >> RAFAEL TORO: Please, let's listen to him, please. >>FERNADO BETANCOURT: I have no personal agenda. The only agenda I have is whatever future we will leave our children at Arecibo. That is, when one thinks of the future, one thinks about what will be our legacy. Look, I think. We, ten years ago, look, John. I do not know where you were ten

406 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 125 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo years ago, but ten years ago, the first time I saw the governor of Puerto Rico, Fortuño, I saw him getting off a helicopter with Paul Mahoney and Richard Carrión. Fortuño was carrying Richard Carrion's briefcase, he was just starting out, he wasn't Governor at the time. And now, what a coincidence that he is governor and wants to put an incinerator here. Ten years ago we said no, I was there Pat. He knows me. Ten years ago we said no. But guess what, we will say yes. That you are welcome, if we work with zero waste. If we are going to recycle, if we are to make plastic into chairs. If we are to convert the metals and generate eco-tourism jobs. You will be our best partners. I appreciate the opportunity you have given us. I urge attorney Toro, and his staff, to lead a series of forums with Molinari at the Interamerican University. I believe, and I ask also that if there is a real genuine interest. That if the purpose of this public meeting is for the people to understand the situation. I mean, here is not even half of 1% of the population of Arecibo. We, the opponents, have the ability to convene, to put at least 10% of the people who are affected, with the premise that they are 120,000, we would have to use a stadium or we'll do the forums in universities. Let us not make the same mistake as the state (?Inaudible). If the real intention of Energy Answers is... there is still time. There are more, much more energy questions than energy answers. Thank you very much, good night. (Applause) >> RAFAEL TORO: Mr. Attorney. I would like to comment on a couple of points. Number one. Regarding the use of water, the water that will be used at the plant comes from the discharge of the Caño Tiburones, towards the sea. It's not water from Caño Tiburones, but the water that comes out to sea, that's where we will connect, it's excess water from the Caño. You

407 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 126 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo know, that the Caño has to have level controls, for purposes of flood control. And the issue is that right now, water is pumped, out to sea and is lost to the sea. So, we are going to use that water, that is being wasted anyway. Number two. With regard to possible impacts on the people and all areas that you mentioned. The studies, what they show is that it does not exceed the SIL, the Significant Impact Level. It is not exceeded, that limit established by EPA. And studies show that for both the town of Arecibo, as well as the agricultural areas, these levels are not exceeded. Regarding the studies performed, we also carried out n environmental justice study, to show that there is no discrimination here as it relates to the population, in relation to the environmental effects of this plant. And finally, this multisource study, of many existing sources, used for the studies, background air quality, right?, on top of what exists already. And analyzes these issues on that background. On that existing air quality. So that's part of that analysis. Comments, nothing else, that I wanted to do in a general fashion, for the benefit of all. We have about 10 minutes left. We had agreed, when Sandra was here, that Piro would be the last person. I do not know then what will be the procedure. >> Mr. FLOWERS: What time is it? >> RAFAEL TORO: Mr. Flores, if you want, go ahead and speak. Before speaking, Mr. Flores, I want to know if tonight we have any official from any government agency, here with us. Please identify yourself for the record, to have your presence noted in the record. Any government agency official. For the record, if there has been any government representative with us

408 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 127 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo tonight. Ah! Yes. Please, bring him the microphone. If you could identify yourself, for the record, please. >> JOHN APONTE: Good evening to all. From the Environmental Protection Agency. >> RAFAEL TORO: John Aponte, EPA. OK. Thank you very much. Go ahead, Mr. Flores. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Waldemar Natalio Flores Flores, an expert in quality systems. And I do not know if Mr. Aponte was present, but my comment, and I can give more detail, that this does not meet any of the requirements... Can you hear me? One, two, three. In regards to Mr. John Aponte, I am pleased to inform you, I do not know if you've been here before, that nothing that has been done, meets the minimum requirements for quality systems. My question is, if you know who are the companies that will be contracted for all of the sampling activities and traditional analysis, which truly meet the guidelines, protocols and requirements of a quality system? Do you have any idea who will be used for that? >> RAFAEL TORO: Which company? >> WALDEMAR FLORES: Exactly, which company? >> RAFAEL TORO: We have not reached the stage of hiring a company for sampling or monitoring the chimney. That, when the time comes, after construction, that company has to prepare the sampling protocol. You know the process well. So, we must meet the whole quality control and quality assurance system. But we have not hired a company as such.

409 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 128 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo >> WALDEMAR FLORES: How then, can the EPA and the Environmental Quality Board be certain, and the community, that you will meet all of the requirements, when nothing of what has been done so far complies? >> RAFAEL TORO: Well, those protocols are prepared and submitted for agency approval by the agencies. >> WALDEMAR FLORES: The problem is that agencies, such as the Environmental Quality Board, don't have the capacity to do that. The agency, for example, for soil, they do not have one quality assurance officer. For air, the quality assurance officer that is there, is to validate what has been done in the sampling area of the Environmental Quality Board, not for what is submitted to the Environmental Quality Board. The one that deals with water knows about water what I know about Eskimos. The problem is that the Environmental Protection Agency, since 2006, is demanding the Environmental Quality Board to comply with a quality system. The information I received from all political parties, blue, green and red, on the Environmental Quality Board, is that the EPA is demanding that the Environmental Quality Board comply with that. Carlos W. Lopez Freitas did not tell that to the press when he said it was a high risk entity because it did not comply with mechanized systems of information, Internet. What I just said is the main reason. The problem is that EPA Caribbean does not comply either. EPA Caribbean does not have a single quality assurance officer on staff. EPA Region 2 is the same. The only one that has a quality assurance officer, is EPA Edison, who are consulted when they have no other choice, as happened in the case of that river, which you well know, that based on what I indicated, it was confirmed that what the EPA had done, your consultant Weston, in Puerto Rico, Razariera(?) did not meet those requirements. With whom they have to consult directly is with EPA Edison, Not EPA New York,

410 Energy Answers - Public Meeting - Page 129 of 138 August 12, 2011 Lions Club of Arecibo which is where the quality assurance officer is and with EPA in Washington. The problem is then, who among you? I guess it will be the person you told me, who is going to ensure compliance with all the requirements. And I understand, at least my position then, probably with the Sierra Club and other stakeholders, is to train the community so we can have our own expertise, to avoid being sold, not bait and switch or cat for a hare, but more like a bunny or something smaller yet. Thank you. It's 10:05pm. >> RAFAEL TORO: Thank you. Well. Thank you very much. I think with this we end the public meeting, now being 10, 10:06 pm, Friday August 12, We appreciate the participation of all of you and have a good night. (Applause)

411 APPENDIX 9 FINAL DRAFT MATERIALS SEPARATION PLAN PUBLIC MEETING AGENDA

412 Agenda A. Introduction B. Proposed Resource Recovery Facility and Economic Benefits C. Core Service Area serviced by the Facility Amount of Solid Waste in the Service Area Types and Estimated Amounts of Materials Proposed for Separation D. Broader Service Area serviced by the Facility Amount of Solid Waste in the Service Area Types and Estimated Amounts of Materials Proposed for Separation E. Existing Recycled Materials Programs F. The Methods Proposed for Materials Separation G. Amount of Residual Waste for Disposal H. Alternate Disposal Methods for Handling Residual Waste I. Analysis of Air Pollution Control Alternatives J. Analysis of Impacts of the Proposed Facility K. Changes to the Materials Separation Plan L. Location to Review Comments Received and Final MSP

413 APPENDIX 10 FINAL DRAFT MATERIALS SEPARATION PLAN PUBLIC MEETING PRESENTATION

414 2/2/2012 Energy Answers Arecibo Final Draft Materials Separation Plan Public Meeting August 12, :00 pm Agenda A. Introduction B. Proposed Resource Recovery Facility and Economic Benefits C. Core Service Area serviced by the Facility Amount of Solid Waste in the Service Area Types and Estimated Amounts of Materials Proposed for Separation D. Broader Service Area serviced by the Facility Amount of Solid Waste in the Service Area Types and Estimated Amounts of Materials Proposed for Separation E. Existing Recycled Materials Programs F. The Methods Proposed for Materials Separation G. Amount of Residual Waste for Disposal H. Alternate Disposal Methods for Handling Residual Waste I. Analysis of Air Pollution Control Alternatives J. Analysis of Impacts of the Proposed Facility K. Changes to the Materials Separation Plan L. Location to Review Comments Received and Final MSP 1

415 2/2/2012 Public Announcements Official Newspaper Ad: El Vocero Newspaper Friday July 8, 2011 Public Announcements Additional Newspaper Ad: El Norte Newspaper July 12,

416 2/2/2012 Public Announcements Additional Newspaper Ad: Pulso Newspaper July 12, 2011 A. Introduction Who? What? When? Why? Where? Energy Answers Arecibo Resource Recovery Facility Fourth Quarter 2013 Commercial Operation Materials Separation Plan to satisfy the requirements set forth in 40 CFR 60.57b Cambalache Ward, Arecibo PR 3

417 2/2/2012 A. Introduction A. Introduction Arecibo Resource Recovery Facility Project Generates 80 Megawatts of renewable energy and recyclable materials from 2,100 tons per day of MSW. Electricity will be sold to PREPA. Processed Refuse Fuel (PRF) converted from post-recycling MSW Facility will be located at a former Paper Mill Site Two service areas: Core and Broader Areas 4

418 2/2/2012 A. Introduction INSERT FACILITY RENDERING B. Proposed Resource Recovery Facility and Economic Benefits Indirect Jobs Direct Jobs Construction Jobs Economic Benefits Direct and indirect employment opportunities for local residents is expected to generate over $159 Million 5

419 2/2/2012 C. Core Service Area serviced by the Facility C. Core Service Area Estimated Amount of Solid Waste Generated Estimated Solid Waste Generated in Core Service Area 350,000 T o n s p e r Y e a r 300, , , , ,000 50,000 Other Waste Low Quality Paper Corrugated Cardboard Ferrous Metals Organic Waste C&D Yard Waste Year 6

420 2/2/2012 C. Core Service Area Types and Estimated Amounts of Materials Proposed for Separation Projected Amounts of Solid Waste in Core Service Area (tons) Year Yard Waste 67,324 68,791 69,960 70,553 C&D 56,434 57,663 58,643 59,140 Organic Waste 42,573 43,500 44,240 44,614 Ferrous Metals 31,022 31,698 32,237 32,510 Corrugated Cardboard 30,692 31,361 31,894 32,164 Low Quality Paper 28,712 29,338 29,836 30,089 Other Waste 73,265 74,861 76,133 76,778 Total 330, , , ,846 Total (tons per day) D. Broader Service Area serviced by the Facility 7

421 2/2/2012 D. Broader Service Area Estimated Amount of Solid Waste Generated Estimated Solid Waste Generated in Broader Service Area 1,400,000 T o n s p e r Y e a r 1,200,000 1,000, , , , ,000 Other Waste Low Quality Paper Corrugated Cardboard Ferrous Metals Organic Waste C&D Yard Waste Year D. Broader Service Area - Types and Estimated Amounts of Materials Proposed for Separation Projected Amounts of Solid Waste in Broader Service Area (tons) Year Yard Waste 252, , , ,973 C&D 211, , , ,110 Organic Waste 159, , , ,556 Ferrous Metals 116, , , ,095 Corrugated Cardboard 115, , , ,796 Low Quality Paper 107, , , ,003 Other Waste 275, , , ,353 Total 1,239,683 1,265,236 1,284,856 1,298,886 Total (tons per day) 3,396 3,466 3,520 3,559 8

422 2/2/2012 D. Combined Core and Broader Service Areas - Types and Estimated Amounts of Materials Proposed for Separation Projected Amounts of Solid Waste in Core and Broader Service Areas (tons) Year Yard Waste 320, , , ,525 C&D 268, , , ,249 Organic Waste 202, , , ,170 Ferrous Metals 147, , , ,605 Corrugated Cardboard 145, , , ,960 Low Quality Paper 136, , , ,092 Other Waste 348, , , ,131 Total 1,569,704 1,602,449 1,627,799 1,644,732 Total (tons per day) 4,301 4,390 4,460 4,506 E. Existing Recycled Materials Programs Approximately 23 recycling centers and/or materials separation programs in the area. Among these are the following: Auto Batteries Electronic Equipment Ferrous and Non-ferrous metals Plastic Yard Waste Bio-Solids Paper 9

423 2/2/2012 E1. Recycling Rates in the US F. The Methods Proposed for Material Separation Metal and ash recycling programs Pre-combustion separation of: Ferrous metals Bulky recyclable items White goods Post-combustion separation of: Ferrous metals Non-ferrous metals Ash Recycling Program: Boiler Aggregate TM 10

424 2/2/2012 F. The Methods Proposed for Material Separation Integration with Community Separation Programs. The Resource Recovery Facility will directly enhance the following programs: Metals Recovery and Recycling Construction and Demolition Debris Management Disaster Debris Management White Goods and Bulky Waste Management Special Waste Management (such as ASR, HHW, tires, batteries, electronics, etc) G. Projected Residual Waste for the Core and Broader Service Areas Year Waste Generated (tons/yr) Projected Waste Generated (tpd) % Recycling Residual Waste (tpd) ,569,704 4, , ,602,449 4, , ,627,799 4, , ,644,732 4, ,929 11

425 2/2/2012 G. Amount of Residual Materials for Reuse or Disposal (tons/yr) H. Alternate Disposal Methods for Handling Residual Waste Landfill permanent burial of residual material. RRF or WTE use of a Resource Recovery Facility or Waste-To-Energy Facility to recover energy and additional recyclable materials. Other options -- There are no other solid waste disposal options that have a long-term record of successful operations in the United States. 12

426 2/2/2012 H1. Landfill Schematic (Subtitle D Compliant) H2. Resource Recovery Facility 13

427 2/2/2012 H3. Alternate Disposal Methods for Handling Residual Waste Efficient complete combustion of the PRF Maximize recovery of usable or recyclable materials from the ash Zero Disposal objective High energy recovery Low percentage of ash High ferrous and non ferrous recovery rate Low/no residues requiring disposal Low capital costs per ton Low tipping fees I. Proposed Air Quality Control Equipment Energy Answers has evaluated all available and feasible control technologies used worldwide and will use the Best Available Control Technology (BACT), as determined by the US EPA : Selective Catalytic Reduction (RSCR) for NO x Control Oxidation Catalyst for VOC and CO Spray Dryer Absorber and Fabric Filter Control Systems to Minimize Emissions of Acid Gases, Metals and Particulate Matter Activated Carbon Injection for Control of Mercury Emissions Good Combustion Practices to Reduce Emissions of CO and Organics 14

428 2/2/2012 I. Proposed Air Quality Control Equipment (Proposed Permit Limits (BACT)) Pollutant Emission Limit Control Technology Particulate Matter (PM) 24 mg/dscm Fabric Filter Particulate Matter < 10 microns (PM 10 ) 24 mg/dscm Fabric Filter Particulate Matter < 2.5 microns (PM 2.5 ) 17 mg/dscm Fabric Filter Nitrogen Oxides (NO x ) 45 ppmvd RSCR or Equivalent Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 ) 24 ppmvd Turbosorp / Fabric Filter Carbon Monoxide (CO) 75 ppmvd Good Combustion Practices / Oxidation Catalyst Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC as propane) 7 ppmvd Turbosorp / Oxidation Catalyst Hydrogen Chloride (HCl) 20 ppmvd Turbosorp / Fabric Filter Mercury (Hg) 17 ug/dscm Turbosorp/Carbon Injection Lead (Pb) 75 ug/dscm Fabric Filter / Fabric Filter MWC Organics (dioxins/furans) 10 ng/dscm Turbosorp/Carbon Injection Fluorides (as HF) 3.5 mg/dscm Turbosorp / Fabric Filter Sulfuric acid (H 2 SO 4 ) 3.8 ppmvd Turbosorp / Fabric Filter Ammonia 10 ppmvd N/A Greenhouse Gas (GHG) TBD Use of Biomass Fuel J. Analysis of Impacts of the Proposed Facility Compared to EPA Significant Impact Levels Modeling results indicate that the proposed emission rates from AREP will be less than the established PSD significant impact levels (SILs) for all pollutants and time averaging periods except for the 1 hour interim SIL for NO2 and SO2. Parameter Averaging Period Class II SIL (µg/m 3 ) Maximum Concentration (µg/m 3 ) Greater Than SIL? (Yes/No) CO No No PM No 10 Annual No PM No 2.5 Annual No Yes SO No No Annual No NO Yes Annual No 15

429 2/2/2012 J. Analysis of Impacts of the Proposed Facility Compared to EPA Significant Impact Levels For the 1-hour SO2 and NO2 emissions the Facility completed a multi-source modeling analysis Includes all minor sources within 7 kilometers Includes all major sources within 57 kilometers Results showed that the National Ambient Air Quality Standards will not be exceeded J. Analysis of Impacts of the Proposed Facility (Summary of Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessments) A Comprehensive Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) and Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment (SLERA) were conducted for the Facility The HHRA concluded that emissions from the proposed facility are below the levels of concern for human health established by the US EPA SLERA results were below the levels of concern for ecological risk to soils, vegetation, or wildlife established by the US EPA Studies also showed no visibility impairment 16

430 2/2/2012 K. Changes to the Materials Separation Plan Preliminary Draft Plan vs. Final Draft Plan Since the publication of the Preliminary Draft Materials Separation Plan, Energy Answers has: Added Section 5 ( Preliminary Draft Public Comments ), which outlines the public review process of the Draft Plan. Included the PowerPoint presentation, meeting agenda, proof of publication, and meeting transcript as appendices 3-6. Increase the throughput from 2,000 tpd to 2,100 tpd, resulting in an increase in the design heat input rate from 450 MMBtu/hr to 500 MMBtu/hr. The increase in throughput does not otherwise alter the discussions or conclusions in the Materials Separation Plan. Next Steps Comments received at this public meeting will be addressed by Energy Answers. Energy Answer s response to comments will be included in the Final Materials Separation Plan, which will be made available for review. 17

431 2/2/2012 L. Location for MSP Review Name Phone Number Hours of Operations Monday Friday: 8:00am 4:pm (787) Saturday: 8:00am 4:00pm Sunday: Closed Pontificia Universidad Católica de Puerto Rico Centro de Arecibo Biblioteca Tribunal General de Justicia Centro Judicial de Arecibo Instituto Comercial de Puerto Rico Junior College, Arecibo Biblioteca National College of Business and Technology, Biblioteca Universidad Interamericana de PR, Recinto de Arecibo Centro de Acceso a la Información Universidad de Puerto Rico en Arecibo Biblioteca (787) ext (787) (787) (787) (787) Monday Friday: 8:30am 12:00pm 1:00pm 5:00pm Monday Thursday: 7:30am 9:00pm Friday: 8:00am 4:30pm Saturday / Sunday: Closed Monday Thursday: 7:30am 9:00pm Friday: 7:30am 4:00pm Saturday: 8:00am 3:00pm Sunday: Closed Monday Friday: 8:00am 9:30pm Saturday: 8:00am 5:00pm Monday Thursday: 7:00am 9:50pm Friday: 7:00am 4:30pm Saturday: 8:00am 4:30pm Sunday: 8:00am 5:00pm Biblioteca Pública de Arecibo (787) Monday Saturday: 8:00am 4:30pm Questions & Comments How would tires be handled at the facility? Would you apply for a permit to burn a certain quantity of tires? What will happen with the fly ash and bottom ash? Will the Facility have significant lead emissions? How is the Facility handling e-waste? Has truck traffic been taken into consideration (air and traffic impacts)? How would a put-or-pay waste contract impact the recycling in the area? 18

432 2/2/2012 Questions & Comments Lack of closures of landfills & potential extensions Questions & Comments Open to the Public 19

433 APPENDIX 11 FINAL DRAFT MATERIALS SEPARATION PLAN PROCEDURAL QUESTION RESPONSE

434

435

436

437

438

439

440

441

442

443

444

445

446

447

448

449

450

451

452

453

454

455

456

457

458

459

460