Laserfiche WebLink
releasing an RFP to identify ideas for the UCRTS. lam-. D. Barrett also discussed SWAC's focus <br /> on waste and the need to address recycling Capewide, and the possibility of the UCRTS assisting <br /> with regional recycling. Mar. O'Connor added that recycling would only increase, which would <br /> impact volumes of solid waste. Mr. O'Connor stated that a site assigned transfer station in <br /> Massachusetts would be a valuable commodity. Mr. Cavossa stated that there was not a lot of <br /> money in recycling and that the UCRTS was only a good location for Falmouth and Mashpee. <br /> Mr, 0' Connor noted that there was volatility in the recycling market which could prove <br /> problematic in paying the expenses. Mr. D. Barrett stated that recycling would reduce the costs <br /> of MSW; rather than make money. There was discussion regarding the possible increased costs <br /> of MSW and Mr. Cavossa suggested that prices would go down since consumption and waste <br /> streams were being reduced. <br /> Mr. D. Barrett stated that the whole picture needed to be considered. Mr. O'Connor <br /> recommended that municipalities consider the costs of managing the trash removal, as well as <br /> the cost to move it elsewhere. <br /> Chairman Elliott inquired whether more than one recycling facility was needed on Cape. Mr. <br /> Cavossa stated that there was no viable off-loading of recyclables except heavy metal that could <br /> be transported by rail. The Chair stated that the UCRTS was not a feasible operation for <br /> diversification since it had only one track. Mr. Cavossa stated that the UCRTS was handling a <br /> low volume and could split the floor to divide recycling and waste. Mr. Cavossa stated that there <br /> was a benefit to loading recyclables to a truck that could then be transferred to a larger truck that <br /> would deliver it to a further location and become a revenue generator. Mr. O'Connor suggested <br /> that there would be insufficient volume available in recyclables on Cape to transfer by rail. Mr. <br /> D. Barrett recommended flexibility due to fluctuating volumes and suggested that final decisions <br /> be based on what happens in 2015. Mr. D. Barrett suggested that as waste was reduced, the <br /> volume of recycling would be increased. Mr. Goddard also referenced TB D, suggesting that <br /> trucks prefer not to travel empty and the possibility of those trucks transporting recycling. <br /> Ms. Laurent summarized that the current operation was not working and that, if nothing changed <br /> by the end of 2014, the towns would go their separate ways due to the current costs. Ms. Laurent <br /> inquired whether the Board wished to look in to expanding the facility themselves or put it out to <br /> a private entity for management. Ms. Laurent suggested that the towns were not in the business <br /> of waste management. Mr. Goddard stated that towns needed to understand what they would be <br /> willing to do to help focus planning by developing a list of questions. Ms. Laurent suggested <br /> being flexible in some aspects of the transfer station and allowing a private entity to notify the <br /> Board of the cost to accommodate the waste streams. Mr. Cavossa inquired about C&D and <br /> freight and Ms. Laurent indicated that it was unclear because Falmouth had expressed concern <br /> about increased truck traffic. There was discussion about a future possible food waste ban. <br /> Mr. Goddard inquired about DCAM and exemptions if located on the Base. Mr. Elliott stated <br /> that there should be further discussion at the next meeting. Mr. Goddard added that there could <br /> be an additional "summit" style meeting in the future to allow contributions from all <br /> communities. Mr. Cavossa inquired whether a decision about the UCRTS could be made by <br /> June and Managers responded that it would be unlikely. Mr. O'Connor noted that waste had <br /> been contracted through 2014. <br /> 3 <br />