[Senate Hearing 113-759]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 113-759
RECYCLING ELECTRONICS: A COMMON SENSE
SOLUTION FOR ENHANCING GOVERNMENT
EFFICIENCY AND PROTECTING OUR ENVIRONMENT
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
----------
FEBRUARY 27, 2014
----------
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov/
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
88-277PDF WASHINGTON : 2015
________________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
JON TESTER, Montana RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MARK BEGICH, Alaska MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire
HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
Richard J. Kessler, Staff Director
John P. Kilvington, Deputy Staff Director
Deirdre G. Armstrong, Professional Staff Member
Jonathan M. Kraden, Senior Counsel
Keith B. Ashdown, Minority Staff Director
Christopher J. Barkley, Minority Deputy Staff Director
David Z. Demirbilek, Minority Counsel
Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
Lauren M. Corcoran, Hearing Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Opening statements:
Page
Senator Carper............................................... 1
Prepared statements:
Senator Carper............................................... 27
Senator Levin................................................ 29
WITNESSES
Thursday, February 27, 2014
Kevin Kampschroer, Director, Office of Federal High-Performance
Green Buildings, Office of Governmentwide Policy, U.S. General
Services Administration........................................ 3
Thomas G. Day, Chief Sustainability Officer, U.S. Postal Service. 5
Brenda Pulley, Senior Vice President of Recycling, Keep America
Beautiful...................................................... 7
Walter L. Alcorn, Vice President, Environmental Affairs and
Industry Sustainability, Consumer Electronics Association...... 9
Stephen Skurnac, President, Sims Recycling Solutions, Inc........ 11
Alphabetical List of Witnesses
Alcorn, Walter L.:
Testimony.................................................... 9
Prepared statement with attachment........................... 44
Day, Thomas G.:
Testimony.................................................... 5
Prepared statement........................................... 35
Kampschroer, Kevin:
Testimony.................................................... 3
Prepared statement........................................... 30
Pulley, Brenda:
Testimony.................................................... 7
Prepared statement........................................... 39
Skurnac, Stephen:
Testimony.................................................... 11
Prepared statement........................................... 109
APPENDIX
Additional statements for the Record from:
Electronics TakeBack Coalition............................... 112
Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries...................... 115
Umicore USA, Inc............................................. 121
Urban Mining Co.............................................. 125
RECYCLING ELECTRONICS:.
A COMMON SENSE SOLUTION FOR.
ENHANCING GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY AND PROTECTING OUR ENVIRONMENT
----------
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2014
Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:01 p.m., in
room 342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Thomas R.
Carper, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senator Carper.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN CARPER
Chairman Carper. The hearing will come to order.
Good afternoon. I want to thank our witnesses and our
staffs for your flexibility. I think originally we were going
to have this hearing in the morning, and then we were going to
have it later in the afternoon. Now, we are going to have it
now.
Unfortunately, they do not let Dr. Coburn and I decide when
there are going to be votes on the floor. There are a bunch of
votes that start at 2 o'clock, maybe 5 or 6 of them in a row.
So that kind of messes things up, the way we originally
scheduled it.
So thanks for bearing with us and for being so flexible.
I will ask that my statement be entered into the record.\1\
Since there is no one to object, that will happen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Senator Carper appears in the
Appendix on page 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
But I would just say very briefly that this is an issue
that is very close to my heart. I started recycling because a
lieutenant junior grade in the Navy, who was a naval flight
officer (NFO) stationed at Moffett Field, California, lived in
Palo Alto, when he went overseas, and used to recycle stuff
right there in Palo Alto. Took it to an old garage where they
took newspapers and bottles and cans and stuff over time.
However, they would not recycle computers. They would not
recycle cell phones. They would not recycle BlackBerrys,
iPhones, or iPads. And we did not have them. Now we have a lot
of them.
And the question is, what do we do when they get old and
cannot be used? Or, maybe they just go out of style.
And it is a challenge, but in the words of Albert Einstein,
``In adversity, lies opportunity.'' There is great opportunity
here to not just mine, if you will, discarded electronics, but
to find value in it.
I will just tell one quick story. When I was Governor of
Delaware and in the National Governors Association (NGA), we
were always looking at other States to see what we could learn
from them and steal their best ideas, and hopefully, they would
steal some of ours.
I learned of a good idea they were doing out in the
California prison system. They would have some of their inmates
that would be trained to take used computers, upgrade them and
then do something else with them.
We took their idea, and we used it. We have a lot of banks
in Delaware. We asked them, when you have to discard your old
computers or laptops, how about donating them to the State of
Delaware? We will have trained inmates in our prisons who will
upgrade them, and then we will distribute them to our schools.
And, when I stepped down as Governor, we had the best ratio
of students to computers of any State in America. And we had
people who were inmates who worked in upgrading computers and
had a new job skill. Some saved some money because they got
paid for doing a little bit of this. So it worked on a lot of
different levels.
Who is here from the Postal Service?
Mr. Day, as you know, the Committee has jurisdiction over
the Postal Service. Dr. Coburn and I and our colleagues have
spent a whole lot of time, trying to make a path forward for
the Postal Service, and I will just say this and stop.
I think part of the secret to ensuring that the Postal
Service will not just be around, hanging on, but making sure
they are relevant and robust, is to find ways to use what is
unique about the Postal Service; it goes to every mailbox in
America five, usually six, days a week. Nobody else does that.
And, to find ways to use what is unique about the Postal
Service, that distribution network, to generate revenues.
And I think we are going to hear today about maybe a good
idea, and we are excited about that.
So, having said all of that, some of my other colleagues
may join us here. Votes start at 2 o'clock, but we have
compressed these two panels into one. You look good.
And I am not even going to give you formal introductions.
We will just save the time, if you will, and we will do those
for the record.
But, Kevin, we are happy to see you and grateful for your
participation today, and we would like for you to lead off,
please. Thank you.
TESTIMONY OF KEVIN KAMPSCHROER,\1\ DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF FEDERAL
HIGH-PERFORMANCE GREEN BUILDINGS, OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTWIDE
POLICY, U.S. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Mr. Kampschroer. Good afternoon, Chairman Carper and
Members of the Committee when they arrive. My name is Kevin
Kampschroer, and I am the Deputy Senior Sustainability Official
at the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA). Thank you
for inviting me to testify about electronics recycling and the
opportunities that this area provides for increased
environmental stewardship by the Federal Government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Kampschroer appears in the
Appendix on page 30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-waste is the largest growing waste stream in the country.
According to the most recent estimates, more than 5 million
tons of electronics were in storage, nearly half was ready for
end-of-life management, and yet, only 25 percent were collected
for recycling.
The Administration is committed to reducing e-waste and
realizing efficiency by standardizing procedures across the
government. As the world's largest consumer of electronics, e-
waste is a significant opportunity for the Federal Government.
Acting under the President's Executive Order (EO) 13514, 3
agencies led an Interagency Task Force on Electronics
Stewardship. They are the General Services Administration, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the White House
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). The President charged
the task force with developing a national strategy for
electronic stewardship, which the task force released on July
20, 2011.
Today, I look forward to discussing the development of the
strategy, its important tenets, and our work to help address
this critical challenge.
The General Services Administration has always had programs
for the disposal of equipment, including electronics, but these
programs were not designed with the specific challenges of e-
waste in mind.
The 16 agencies on the task force hosted several listening
sessions with electronics manufacturers and recyclers, with
nongovernmental organizations, with State and local
governments, and with Federal agencies. We solicited public
comments and addressed all of these in the strategy issued on
July 20. The strategy details the management of electronics
throughout the products' life cycle, from design to eventual
reuse or recycling.
Several items are being addressed over the coming years--
issuance of governmentwide policy and guidance on the reuse and
disposal of electronics, including acquisition of electronics
that are more sustainable, can be easily reused and are
designed to have minimal end-of-life environmental impact, and
transparency of newly collected Federal data about this.
On February 29, 2012, we published a bulletin in the
Federal Management Regulations, presenting a specific list of
options to consider when electronics are identified as no
longer meeting their original use. First, offer them to other
Federal agencies for reuse through GSAXcess, a program that we
run, or transfer them to schools and other educational
organizations through the Computers for Learning program.
Second, donate them to State and local governments and
nonprofit organizations. Third, sell or return the electronics
to the original vendor. We are incorporating these take-back
provisions into many of our contracts, and we are also
developing governmentwide guidance about doing that for other
agencies. Fourth, direct nonfunctional electronics to a third-
party certified electronics recycler and not landfills or
incinerators. All electronics recyclers listed on schedules
today are third-party certified.
Another goal of the strategy is to promote the purchase of
green electronics to reduce their life cycle environmental
impact. We will continue to improve our contract vehicles in
order to simplify Federal agencies' acquisition of green
electronics.
Currently, there are over 120,000 Energy Star products
offered across several schedules. Used and refurbished
electronics are also offered on schedules.
We have developed two online tools to help agencies find
products that meet the goals. GSA Advantage uses icons such as
the Energy Star, and the Green Procurement Compilation tool
which consolidates all sustainable products designated for
Federal procurement preference--Energy Star, bio-preferred and
so on--and they show where to buy the product and how to find
vendors.
We have been deploying Energy Star servers and work
stations since 2001 in the General Services Administration.
Servers and personal computers have been Electronic Product
Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT)-compliant since 2005 and
EPEAT-Gold since 2009.
A crucial part of this strategy is the collection and use
of consistent, reliable data about electronics. Although many
e-waste recycling programs exist, there are no guidelines
across the Federal Government to measure their use
governmentwide.
We will publish a proposed rule for public comment next
week, which already includes a requirement for agencies to
submit data for all disposed electronics. This data, which
could be publicly available on data.gov, would provide greater
transparency into Federal Agencies' performance against the
goals of the strategy and provide access to business
opportunities to multiple parties.
The Federal Government, as the largest purchaser of
information technology (IT) in the world, has a unique
responsibility to be a leader in the management and disposal of
electronics. We play an important role in helping agencies meet
the goals set forth in the National Strategy for Electronics
Stewardship and through policy guidance and responsible
acquisition, donation and disposal of electronics.
We have a lot more work ahead of us and hope to continue to
make progress on this important issue.
I am pleased to be here with you today, and I am happy to
answer any questions you may have. Thank you.
Chairman Carper. Thank you so much.
Do you pronounce your last name, Kampsure?
Mr. Kampschroer. I do. Thank you.
Chairman Carper. Why?
Mr. Kampschroer. It is----
Chairman Carper. I look at it, and it looks like
Kampshrower.
Mr. Kampschroer. Well, it is a German-Dutch name, and
when----
Chairman Carper. They just mispronounced it, right?
Mr. Kampschroer. Yes, my grandfather moved to this country,
and it seemed simpler to just slur over a lot of letters. So it
is Kampsure like New Hampshire. Oh, that is good.
Mr. Kampschroer. Thank you.
Chairman Carper. Well, maybe we will have a Senator here,
and she will know how to pronounce your name--Senator Ayotte.
OK, Mr. Day. Your first name is Thomas. I got that one
down. Day is a pretty good one, too.
We are excited that you are here.
Mr. Day. Thank you.
Chairman Carper. Happy to learn about the Postal Service
and what the Postal Service might do here to make a few extra
bucks and do a good public deed. Thank you.
TESTIMONY OF THOMAS G. DAY,\1\ CHIEF SUSTAINABILITY OFFICER,
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE
Mr. Day. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Carper, and
thank you for calling this important hearing on recycling
electronics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Day appears in the Appendix on
page 35.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My name is Thomas Day, and I am the Chief Sustainability
Officer for the United States Postal Service (USPS).
Working closely with departments throughout the Postal
Service, our vendors and the mailing industry, my team sets
policies and assists in areas of environmental compliance,
sustainability and energy initiatives.
I am pleased to be here today to provide an overview of the
USPS BlueEarth Federal Recycling Program. This new program
offers participating Federal agencies and their employees a
free and easy solution to securely and efficiently recycle
unwanted lightweight electronic devices in an environmentally
friendly way.
Chairman Carper. When you say lightweight, what are we
talking about, if you can tell me what would be lightweight and
what would not?
Mr. Day. Under 20 pounds.
Chairman Carper. Thank you.
Mr. Day. Improper disposal of electronic waste is an
acknowledged worldwide environmental problem, and this program
aims to increase the percentage of used electronics that are
recycled.
Federal agencies can enroll in the BlueEarth Recycling
Program to recycle unwanted electronics, free of charge,
throughout the mail. Examples of items eligible for recycling
include cell phones and their accessories, laptops, tablets,
and cameras and, as I already indicated, up to the weight of 20
pounds. This program is designed to supplement an agency's
existing recycling program. Currently, there are 11
participating Federal agencies in the program. There is no cost
to the agencies to implement this program, and it is a very
simple process for them to launch it on a national level. The
program has two components. Agencies can recycle government-
owned electronics, and employees of participating agencies can
dispose of their own personal electronics.
The BlueEarth Recycling Program is web-based. An employee
from a participating agency selects their agency name and their
device information on a website. The individual then packages
the device and prints a shipping label, free of charge, from
the website. The shipping includes free package tracking. In
the course of normal delivery, a postal letter carrier picks up
the package while completing his or her route, a certified
recycler receives the item, wipes the data as appropriate and
ensures it is either securely recycled or prepared for resale
opportunities. The recycler receives the residual value of the
recycled product, which funds the transportation costs via the
U.S. Mail to the recycler's destination.
The recycler is responsible for removing the data
associated with electronic devices, wiping the data in
accordance with the data sanitization standards of the National
Association of Information Destruction (NAID) as well as the
Department of Defense (DOD) standards. A certificate is issued
confirming such an action takes place.
Through the BlueEarth Recycling Program, Federal agencies
receive recycling activity. They get the reports with data to
assist them in meeting the documentation requirements of
Executive Order 13514.
USPS BlueEarth is a branded suite of customer services and
product initiatives from the Postal Service, designed to
provide sustainability solutions and innovations to our
customers. The Postal Service is perfectly positioned for this
program because we are using existing processing,
transportation and delivery networks, making it a financially,
as well as an environmentally, efficient way to recycle.
The BlueEarth Recycling Program was launched in April 2013,
and while we are encouraged by the number of agency agreements
that we have signed thus far, the participation in the program
has been low. Rather than continuing to pursue additional
participating agencies, our focus is on developing promotional
materials to expand the use of the program at the existing
agencies.
So far, in fiscal year (FY) 2014, the BlueEarth Recycling
Program collected and recycled approximately 15,000 items. The
most popular items being recycled have been printer and toner
cartridges, smartphones, and laptops. The most active agencies
have been the Postal Service followed by the Department of
Energy (DOE) and the Department of the Interior.
A study commissioned by the Postal Service showed a large
potential market for electronics recycling by mail. There are
some hurdles that stand in the way of full potential. Current
law restricts the work the Postal Service can do with
commercial entities and State and local governments. Pending
Senate postal reform legislation would allow potential
expansion of the program to the State, local and tribal
government level.
Mr. Chairman, we look forward to working with you and the
rest of the Committee to expand recycling efforts and
especially take advantage of the Postal Service's existing
processing, transportation and delivery network.
This concludes my remarks, and I would be pleased to answer
any questions.
Chairman Carper. Thank you so much.
Brenda Pulley, welcome. How are you?
Ms. Pulley. Thank you. Delighted to be here, sir.
Chairman Carper. Very nice to see you.
TESTIMONY OF BRENDA PULLEY,\1\ SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF
RECYCLING, KEEP AMERICA BEAUTIFUL
Ms. Pulley. So thank you. Thank you for your interest in
recycling and for holding the hearing today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Pulley appears in the Appendix on
page 39.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a society where each of us generate 4.4 pounds of trash
each day, there is a critical need to raise awareness and,
ultimately, provide the motivation to change behaviors to
position recycling as a daily social norm.
So, obviously, I am Brenda Pulley, Vice President of
Recycling at Keep America Beautiful (KAB), and on behalf of KAB
we appreciate the opportunity to reignite the dialogue on
recycling and share information on how to increase recycling
participation.
We are a leading national nonprofit that has been around
for 60 years. We take public spaces and work to transform them
to beautiful places. Recycling is one of those issues. We were
founded over 60 years ago, and our work is based on executing
actionable strategies in environmental education and behavior
change.
So a challenge that spurs our work is the fact that the
national recycling rate hovers at 34 percent. We have estimates
here on electronics recycling. Whatever the exact number is we
believe the recycling rates could and should be much higher.
While recycling is considered one of the easiest
environmental behaviors to perform and one on which survey
after survey individuals indicate it is something they want to
do, it does have complexities.
Recycling electronics, like other materials, always relies
on an individual taking an action, and so we ask ourselves,
what can we do to make recycling easier and to make it second
nature?
Behavioral psychologists indicate that recycling behavior
can be positively influenced, and further, there is research
that has been done to date on how to identify factors that most
effectively encourage recycling behavior.
So summarizing the research, surveys, and on-the-ground
work done to date, we at KAB categorized the following three
areas as the greatest opportunities for improvement--
convenience, communication and cause.
And, by cause, I mean, what can we do to make recycling
matter?
So, clearly, addressing the convenience factor has the
greatest opportunities to increase participation. It is helpful
to offer recycling opportunities that are proximate to the
behavior--where that material is generated. Briefly a used
beverage can--for example, consumption occurs at places like a
sports fields and offices, so set the recycling bin near where
the recyclable is generated.
But, for electronics, the challenge is greater. You are now
trying to capture material that may have been purchased 7
years, 7 months, but not 7 minutes, ago. So the creation of
easy access to recycling, such as retail locations and the
Postal Service, where consumers go to replace their obsolete
electronics, is an excellent example of overcoming that
convenience barrier. Special collection events have also proven
successful for electronics. You have a specific date, a
specific time, and there is usually good promotion around it.
Another key factor is communication. So consumers need to
know what is recycled in their community. They want easily
accessible information on where, when and what to recycle.
But, while information can make it easier to recycle, there
is evidence that increasing knowledge does not mean individuals
are motivated to engage in that behavior. So behavioral
psychologists recommend that information and knowledge is also
combined with a cause, and by that, we mean striking that
emotional chord with consumers.
So, at Keep America Beautiful, that is the approach we have
taken and particularly in our most recent efforts. In
partnership with the Advertising Council, we recently released
a national advertising campaign to motivate Americans to
recycle more. Based on the research, we learned that when
people understood that their garbage can become something else,
something new, they are more likely to take the extra step to
recycle.
So I invite you to take a look at the campaign. The theme
is all about ``I want to be recycled'' and gives examples of
what materials can become.
In addition to convenience, communication and cause, there
are other known strategies. I will not go into all those except
mention one--social modeling or norming. For example, in a
study conducted among 600 households on curbside recycling,
when residents were provided with what we call descriptive
normative feedback--so, in other words, they were told about
the number of residents that participated in recycling and the
quantity of material that was recycled--there was a 19 percent
increase in recycling among the residents.
For Members of this Committee--and I know you live and
breathe this--Mr. Chairman as a public official you have a
powerful role to lead by example and to be seen recycling and
to be talking about recycling in a very positive way with your
colleagues and constituents. I know you do, and I thank you.
Electronics recycling has one additional unique aspect that
I want to talk about that influences recycling, and that is
electronics have a perceived value. That perceived value causes
people to want to store their old electronics--their
television, their computer, their printer--in basements and
garages rather than readily recycle them.
So we do need to identify ways to overcome this barrier,
and prompting about recycling when purchasing a new laptop or
printer, or putting prompts on packaging or new product
instructions, or having that salesperson prompt the new
purchaser on the recycling of obsolete products are all
important steps in that.
I take the example of the Dell and Goodwill partnership.
They partnered in an attempt to address both convenience and
the perceived value. Not only is it more convenient for
donators to bring along their used electronics for donation, as
they are dropping off their household items also they know they
are going to be put to good use.
So, look, recycling is a simple action, but there are
complexities around it.
Thank you for holding the hearing. We look forward to
working with you and your staff on ways that we can overcome
these barriers and increase recycling. Thank you, Senator.
Chairman Carper. Thank you so much and thanks for your
leadership and for those who preceded you 60 years ago.
Mr. Day. Thank you.
Chairman Carper. Walter Alcorn, it is very nice to see you.
Thanks so much.
You have a tough act to follow, the three of these, but you
are the warm-up act for Stephen here.
All right, please proceed.
TESTIMONY OF WALTER L. ALCORN,\1\ VICE PRESIDENT, ENVIRONMENTAL
AFFAIRS AND INDUSTRY SUSTAINABILITY, CONSUMER ELECTRONICS
ASSOCIATION
Mr. Alcorn. Thank you very much, Senator Carper.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Alcorn appears in the Appendix on
page 44.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My name is Walter Alcorn. I am the Vice President at the
Consumer Electronics Association (CEA).
CEA represents more than 2,000 companies who make, sell and
install consumer electronics (CE)--so televisions, computers,
tablets, the range of consumer electronics. Many of our members
are also deeply involved in the recycling of those products,
and I appreciate very much the opportunity to testify today on
behalf of the industry.
Most consumer electronics products contain valuable
materials such as metals, plastics and other things that can be
resold in the commodity markets by recyclers, like the one on
my left.
Consumer electronics manufacturers and retailers recognize
the importance of recycling and support electronics recycling
efforts like never before. In April 2011, a dozen leading
consumer electronics companies announced the eCycling
Leadership Initiative.
And we also issued an unprecedented national challenge to
recycle responsibly 1 billion pounds of electronics annually by
2016--something we are calling the billion-pound challenge.
This represents a threefold increase over recycling amounts in
2010.
In 2013, last year, we reported 580 million pounds of
consumer electronics recycled responsibly by our industry in
third-party certified facilities, and that is an increase of 25
percent over the previous year. In order to get this, it
requires collection locations, and our industry has sponsored
more than 8,000 ongoing public collection locations around the
country, all of which can be found in an online zip code
locator that CEA sponsors, called GreenerGadgets.org.
We also have done public service announcements for
television and radio, reached out to consumers through
traditional and social media on numerous occasions, and
incorporated implementation of a national recycling system into
our organizational goals at CEA.
But there are challenges.
Challenge No. 1 I will mention is collection. According to
our own research at CEA, the average household contains 28
distinct electronic devices, and reaggregating those devices
whenever they are ready to be recycled is a tremendous
challenge. It is a very big issue.
But there are two other challenges I would like to note
today that are more recent.
First of all is the patchwork of diverging state
electronics recycling programs and laws. Exactly half of the
U.S. States have enacted some form of electronics recycling
mandate, and unsurprisingly, no two States have the same
program. For consumer electronics manufacturers, there are now
21 separate registration forms to fill out, 19 different annual
State registration fees to pay, 15 State-specific annual
recycling reports to file and all with different calendars and
deadlines, and lots of wasted energy on administrative
requirements.
The second challenge I will mention is the market for
Cathode Ray Tube glass (CRTs). Until about a decade ago, this
was the most common technology used for displays like
televisions and computer monitors. However, CRT sales have
plummeted with new products entering the market with better
technologies.
And it used to be that as many old CRTs you could collect
for recycle you could recycle into new CRT products, but
obviously, since new CRT sales have waned, so has the demand
for old CRTs to recycle.
So CEA--and this is in our written testimony--has embarked
upon several projects in order to help facilitate the
development of demand and markets for CRT glass, but there is a
lot more that needs to be done.
And, in terms of recommendations, CEA recommends the
creation of a national harmonized industry-driven framework for
recycling consumer electronics to facilitate more efficient
electronics recycling. A national framework should be
structured to maximize the use of market forces and ensure a
level playing field that is implemented fairly across consumer
electronics manufacturers.
Also, it should incorporate the ideal of shared
responsibility as a key system function for things like
collection and consumer education, and also, should ensure that
recycling is done responsibly and results, probably most
importantly, in convenient collection opportunities for the
consumer.
In lieu of a blanket Federal mandate, CEA recommends a
Federal framework that authorizes implementation of a
harmonized cross-State consumer electronics recycling system in
which specific States mutually agree with the consumer
electronics industry to enact such a program. CEA and its
members are working to develop the infrastructure to do this,
and we look forward to working with this Committee and Congress
in order to make that a reality nationwide.
And, second, I will also recommend that the Federal
Government should continue to set a good example by ensuring
that all Federal electronics are responsibly recycled. And to
help address shortfalls in the CRT recycling market, the
Federal Government should step up procurement of materials such
as recycled CRT glass whenever the economies make sense and,
also, when it is safe and environmentally sound and the
function of those recycled materials meets government
specifications.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify today.
Chairman Carper. Thank you.
Do you pronounce your name Skurnac?
Mr. Skurnac. Yes, sir.
Chairman Carper. Skurnac, OK. Great. Thank you.
Welcome, Mr. Skurnac.
TESTIMONY OF STEPHEN SKURNAC,\1\ PRESIDENT, SIMS RECYCLING
SOLUTIONS, INC.
Mr. Skurnac. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank
you for the opportunity to testify today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Skurnac appears in the Appendix
on page 109.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My name is Steve Skurnac. I am the President of Sims
Recycling Solutions, and by way of background, Sims is the
largest e-recycler in the world. We process approximately 1.4
billion pounds a year of e-waste in 42 facilities in 14
countries.
In the United States, we have 12 facilities. We have about
2,000 employees here in the United States.
So e-recycling is a big job creator. It is a big industry
on a global basis, and it presents significant opportunities
for further business growth.
As you have heard from the other speakers, though, it is
not without a significant amount of complexity and an awful lot
of issues, particularly domestically here in the United States,
and I will try and address some of those today without
reiterating the points that have already been made.
We have had comments about the size of the marketplace. The
numbers are all over the map, but nonetheless, the United
States is estimated to generate anywhere from 5 to 10 million
tons a year of e-waste, and a lot of that still remains in
storage for the reasons you have heard. There is not an
incentive to bring it out into the marketplace for recycling.
This is significant because electronic scrap presents
significant opportunity to recover valuable commodities from
the material contained therein. There is also significant
opportunity for businesses and consumers to benefit from reuse
of equipment. It is refurbished, repaired, put back into the
marketplace, either domestically or in developing markets where
they do not necessarily have access to that technology.
The issue, though, that has to be understood is that
electronics, particularly older equipment, does contain
hazardous components that need to be removed in a responsible
recycling environment. Otherwise, they can cause significant
environmental harm if it is not recycled responsibly. And that
makes the issue a bit more complex and turns it more from a
pure commodity collection and recycling into something that
requires a sophistication of service offering and certainly
some scrutiny in terms of how the material is actually recycled
in the marketplace.
Now, with the notable exception of the United States, most
developed countries in the world actually have Federal rules
designating electronic scrap as some type of special waste
within their economy.
And what that means is they arrange for it to be collected
on a mandatory basis. It is banned from landfills. There are
mechanisms in place to have it recycled domestically in those
countries. And there are pretty rigorous reporting requirements
to go along with it. And that is an environment that I say we
operate in generally except in the United States.
Now, in the United States, the only rules that apply from a
management point of view, as Walter indicated, apply to cathode
ray tubes, where recycling rules and export rules are very
strict with respect to that material.
So there is still an awful lot of room to work on
regulatory perspectives because what we have ended up with is a
patchwork of State mandates which are creating confusion for
consumers, certainly difficulty for manufacturers of equipment
and, frankly, difficulty for recyclers having to juggle and
jump back and forth between jurisdictions that have different
rules applied to them.
If it is not being stored, it has three homes. Obviously,
it can end up in a landfill. There are many States in the
United States that still allow landfill of e-waste. It can end
up with a domestic recycler, or of course, it can be exported
for recycling out of the country, typically to developing
countries.
If it ends up with a domestic recycler, typically, it will
be handled in a very responsible fashion because there are two
certifications available to recyclers in the country, both of
which have very high standards and both of which will indicate
to consumers and to manufacturers that those recycling
companies have achieved a very high level of sophistication in
their operation and that the material will be handled in a
responsible fashion.
And you have heard through the Executive Order that there
was a mandate that the government agencies must use certified
recyclers to manage e-scrap coming from Federal agencies.
There is no doubt that the volumes are continuing to grow
around the world and in the United States, but the outlook for
electronics recycling is not as rosy as simply saying that
volume will continue to grow, the reason being is that the
material----
Chairman Carper. When you say volume, are you talking about
the volume of materials that can be recycled or the volume of
materials that have been recycled?
Mr. Skurnac. No, the volumes that are coming into the
market to be recycled, so discarded electronics that consumers
are bringing out.
The single biggest issue that we have domestically in the
United States--and Walter has alluded to this--is the
collection incentive; that is, to get this material that is
stored in homes into the recycling chain, into the hands of
recyclers.
The cost of it is exorbitant, and it is not something that
you can simply say, well, the manufacturer should pay for it;
consumers should pay for it; recyclers should pay for it.
It is a complicated issue because it depends where it is.
It depends how much cost is involved in recycling it. It
depends what kind of material is being recycled.
Obviously, from a recycler's point of view, if we see cell
phones, laptops, and old computer units, that has a significant
amount of inherent value associated with it. If we get
televisions, if we get old printers, there is not enough
commodity value, or in fact, there is a negative commodity
value associated with it. So, suddenly, the cost of acquiring
that material and getting it through the recycling chain has a
real bearing on how much of the material actually gets
collected on an ongoing basis.
The other item that I think government needs to consider--
and certainly, all consumers should as well--is that in today's
technology everything that we tend to carry around in our
pockets or have in our home contains a significant amount of
personal or private data. And, when that material is discarded,
it is critically important that the consumer or corporation or
government agency understands how that data will be erased from
the equipment and not end up being sold into foreign markets
where, whether it is private information of consumers or
private information from the government, it ends up being
discoursed in a public way because it simply was not managed
properly.
So, fundamentally, I think we are faced with some key
discussion points.
What government-led programs, in addition to the ones that
are in place now, should be initiated to further collection and
to drive more recycling infrastructure in place?
What do we do with the notion of e-waste going into
landfills domestically because it is still a viable route in a
lot of States in the United States? And there are many
arguments back and forth about whether that is a viable route
for this material from a treatment point of view.
And how do we protect consumers and businesses from
unwanted leaks of private information through the recycling
supply chain when material does go out and consumers that do
not have the sophistication or have not taken care of erasing
all of that private information that they have on all of their
devices?
So we would really like to continue this discussion on an
ongoing basis, both with the Committee and with members of
government because we think that all of the stakeholders--
manufacturers, recyclers, Federal, State and government
agencies and environmental groups--all have a vested interest
in doing a better job of recycling and figuring out a path
forward.
Thank you.
Chairman Carper. Thank you, Mr. Skurnac.
Let me start with the first question to you, if I could.
How old were you yesterday?
Mr. Skurnac. How old was I?
Chairman Carper. Yesterday.
Mr. Skurnac. Yesterday? Fifty-three.
Chairman Carper. And today?
Mr. Skurnac. A day older, sir. Fifty-four.
Chairman Carper. Happy birthday.
Mr. Skurnac. Thank you very much.
Your staff did a good job. Thank you.
Chairman Carper. No, I knew this. [Laughter.]
Mr. Skurnac. I could not think of a better way to spend my
birthday. Thank you.
Chairman Carper. I bet you could, but we are delighted you
are sharing it with us.
I want to drill down, if I can, on the role of the Postal
Service and whether or not there is the kind of opportunities
that I hope there is.
But before I do that, let me just say that I have been very
much involved in past years in strengthening Corporate Average
Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, fuel efficiency standards, for
cars, trucks and vans. Several of you mentioned that the
Federal Government--and maybe other governments as well--us, as
individuals, have a responsibility to set an example. It should
not be like do as I say but do as I do.
When we were working with fuel efficiency standards, we
said, what is the role of the Federal Government to try to make
sure that when these vehicles are made, created by
manufacturers and car companies, somebody is going to buy them.
So we said, well, one of the things we could do is buy some
ourselves to help create a market.
Another thing that we could do is to offer tax credits. If
somebody buys a highly energy efficient vehicle, then they get
a tax credit to help buy down the price of the car.
Those were the kinds of things that we thought we could do.
I am trying to think about how we do the same kind of thing
here to make a market. What is the role for the government to
contribute and to be responsible legislatively, with our tax
code, our regulations, just setting a good example?
I want to come to you, Mr. Day, for the second question,
and that is I just want you to explain to me.
Let's say if I were a private citizen and I was not one of
the Federal agencies that you mentioned.
Did you say there were 11? Eleven Federal agencies that are
involved in this project?
Mr. Day. Yes, Senator, 11.
Chairman Carper. And did you say one was Interior?
Mr. Day. I can give you the full list if you want.
Chairman Carper. All right, real quickly.
Mr. Day. Read through it quickly? OK, the Postal Service,
Department of Interior; Federal Aviation Administration (FAA);
Department of Agriculture (USDA); Department of Energy;
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) ; Housing and Urban
Development (HUD); Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC);
Department of Homeland Security (DHS); Small Business
Administration (SBA); and Department of Commerce.
Chairman Carper. All right. Now, if I had a member of my
family who worked at one of those agencies, could they
participate in the program?
Mr. Day. Yes, Senator, absolutely. I have done it myself.
It is very easy to use.
Chairman Carper. Just explain it very simply. How does it
happen?
Mr. Day. This is the key. We need to communicate.
So what we do is we send the information out. You can
actually Google it and find your way there.
It is on the Postal Service website. So, if you were to
Google Federal recycling, you would go straight there. But, on
top of that, we communicate out what the link is.
Once you go to the link, very easy. It is going to ask you
what agency you work for to confirm that you work for one of
these 11 agencies. It will then ask you to simply certify yes,
I work for this agency.
It will then ask you for--on the next web page will be your
name and address information because we are going to then
connect you to print a shipping label that will allow you, free
of charge, to ship whatever item you are sending back to the
vendor. It will ask that.
And then the next thing it will ask you is, what do you
want to ship?
Now what I have personally used it for are printer
cartridges and for some old hard drives that I did not need any
longer, and those are two separate things.
And it will tell you how to package it, give you the
shipping label, put it on the box.
And then the final step on the final page is it will ask
you, would you like to schedule a delivery, or if it is small
enough I can just put it out in the box for my carrier to pick
up with the rest of the mail that day.
It is very simple.
Chairman Carper. When you say schedule the delivery, what
does that mean?
Mr. Day. So, if you are concerned about what you have in
that box, particularly if it might be a laptop, a tablet, or a
hard drive, you can actually, through the Postal Service--it is
connected to our website--schedule one of our letter carriers
to come pick it up.
Chairman Carper. OK. All right.
So we schedule a pick-up, not a delivery?
Mr. Day. I am sorry. Yes.
Chairman Carper. All right. Good. OK.
How is it going?
Mr. Day. It is going slow. As I indicated, since we
started, we have about 15,000 items. We would have hoped to be
beyond that.
I think it is what some of the other witnesses testified.
It is about awareness. It is getting people to do it.
It is about perceived value of the item. I, personally,
will tell you I am guilty. I have some electronic goods in my
basement that are completely out of date, and yet, if I wanted
to, I could plug them in and turn them on and still use them
though I will never do that again. So I have just got to bring
myself to do it.
So we have to get past that with a lot of people, but I
think what we are offering is making it easy. And that is
another part of it, just making it convenient.
Chairman Carper. Let me ask our other four panelists. Just
stay focused on the Postal Service for now and think out loud
about how this could be made more successful. And I do not
care--Ms. Pulley, you go first.
Ms. Pulley. Well, it is one of the things that we do. We
have various national programs.
And we spend a lot of time thinking how best to communicate
to individuals the recycling opportunities and to make them
feel that it is easy. So I think there are potentially
opportunities to work with the Post Office to help communicate
that not only to government employees, but I think more broadly
to the public.
So maybe you get something in the mail that tells you about
the program. You go to the Post Office, and you see it
advertised. Your neighbor then talks about it. It is those
kinds of things.
Chairman Carper. Your organization may already be
coordinating and collaborating with the Postal Service on this
pilot. Are you? If so, how? And, if not, is it something you
might consider?
Ms. Pulley. We currently are not. In all fairness, though,
we have had one conversation about it because I, personally,
did not realize it until a couple of months ago that they were
offering this. And so it is something that we will definitely
pick up.
I mean, there are things like America Recycles Day, which I
know you are aware of, but there are opportunities that we can
clearly leverage to raise the visibility.
I am happy to followup and explore those opportunities.
Chairman Carper. Others, please. Mr. Kampschroer.
Mr. Kampschroer. I think two things.
I think from an individual's point of view there is a great
hesitancy to give up a machine that has data on it. So the
knowledge of how the data are protected through this whole
period so that I can feel very comfortable as a person saying,
OK, I have not wiped all of my kids' stuff off of the computer
that I no longer use--I can rely that this chain of custody
exists all the way through the recycler.
I happen to know this myself, but I can tell you that most
of the people in my neighborhood do not.
I think there is a second opportunity, which is especially
in the States that have requirements and have recycling and so
on, to get them to be the messengers. And I think they would be
motivated to do that because every piece of equipment that they
do not have to recycle reduces State and local government
expenses.
And I think that this is an opportunity to really get more
of a national understanding of how the Postal Service can be
the connector for a more national approach to the management of
the waste.
So those are a couple of thoughts.
I think it is, I have to say, a terrific program. I would
love to see it available for everybody and not just Federal
agencies and their employees.
Chairman Carper. Thank you. Mr. Alcorn.
Mr. Alcorn. Thank you.
Our focus is primarily in the consumer market. And,
although the Postal Service's program does go somewhat into the
consumer market, we really have focused on the larger devices
and making sure there are opportunities for the heavier----
Chairman Carper. Before you do that, again, just go back to
my question. I want you to think out loud.
We have a lot of smart people at this table. Just think out
loud on maybe some perspectives or some ideas that the Postal
Service has not thought of.
Mr. Alcorn. Well, that is actually my point. There are a
lot of people that are trying to collect the smaller devices,
like what the Postal Service is doing.
It is a pretty competitive market, particularly when you
talk about the newer mobile devices. Pretty much every major
retailer has trade-in programs, and so we are actually seeing
sort of a sea change on the smaller devices where actually
somebody will pay you for them.
So I think beyond the Postal Service's program for the
Federal agencies--I think getting out in the consumer market;
we welcome it. We would love to see that happen.
We encourage all opportunities for consumers to recycle,
but it is going to be a little bit of a competitive
marketplace.
Chairman Carper. OK. All right. Mr. Skurnac.
Mr. Skurnac. Thank you.
Well, I have one idea, and Tom may have thought about it
from a Postal Service point of view, and it relates a bit to
what Walter said. Instead of going door to door as they do--
obviously, they are there delivering the mail every day--if
they had their postal stations set up as drop-off points in the
community, you give consumers an opportunity to bring bigger
and bulkier items on their own, if they can, down to the postal
station where you can consolidate it.
Now, of course, the Postal Service is running trucks
throughout their massive network across the country every day.
Continue to consolidate and bring bigger volumes of this stuff
back to regional distribution centers where certified
recyclers, qualified recyclers, with the Postal Service, now
have access to large quantities of material that the Postal
Service has effectively done the consolidation for them along
the way.
That actually takes the bigger, bulkier, older stuff out of
the household, which tends to be more problematic than some of
the smaller, lightweight, easier to sort of hand pick-up
equipment.
Like I say, they may have already thought about that. I do
not know. But that is certainly something that comes to my mind
given the incredible distribution and reverse logistics network
that they have available to them.
Chairman Carper. Mr. Day, would you just react to some of
these ideas, and feel free to say those are the worst ideas I
have ever heard.
Mr. Day. Senator, I will not say that.
I will start in reverse. I think it is a very interesting
concept of not just using our network to the individual
household but also our 33,000 retail facilities. We have
actually done some of that, but it still has been focused on
smaller products. The larger products would be an interesting
opportunity.
We certainly do have the reverse logistics and the
transportation in place, but in general, the volume, the size,
the weight of what we handle is 70 pounds or less on an
individual package basis. It would be a bit more experimental
to take a look at doing something bigger.
I know from a personal standpoint my wife and I had to
dispose of one of our original big-screen TVs. I happen to live
in Fairfax County, Virginia, and it was rather expensive to get
it picked up curbside. So we decided to transport it ourselves,
but it was not the easiest thing, and even then it cost us a
few dollars.
So there certainly is a need out there. I know, as a
citizen who has tried to do the right thing it is not always
easy and it is not always cheap.
Chairman Carper. All right. Do you want to react to any
other ideas?
Mr. Day. Certainly, we need to collaborate to get the word
out, hopefully, as the legislation moves forward, if we do get
some of the freedom and flexibility to expand this product,
certainly beyond just the Federal Government to the State and
local governments, but really to get it to the individual
consumer.
What the program speaks of, and the lesson we have already
learned from what we are doing in the Federal sector, is
communication is the key. You have got to get the word out. You
have got to make people aware of what it is, how it is and what
the benefits are. That is the key, and so we are more than
willing to collaborate with any group.
So, within the Federal sector, to be more effective with
the existing program, within the general industry and the
individual consumers, to get the word out--that is the key.
I find, as someone who was guilty in the past but now do it
right, it is literally, how do you get people to that trigger
point where they actually start to do it?
And, once you do it and realize how easy it is, then it is
just easier to do. But it is that first step of getting the
stuff out of the basement, out of the garage, and properly
disposing of it.
Chairman Carper. I am just going to think out loud. Our
sons, who are both Boy Scouts--turns out, Eagle Scouts. And I
remember trying to figure out with them what their Eagle Scout
projects would be, and I think there is probably a good Eagle
Scout project in this.
We celebrate, in Delaware, Earth Day every year, every
spring, as we do across the country. And one of the things I
oftentimes do is I will choose a particular focus for Earth Day
and try to highlight that, and I could see us doing something
like that in Delaware this year around electronic recycling.
And there are probably any number of other ways--the idea
of having this hearing, and we will do a fair amount of
communications following up from the hearing.
Senator Boozman who is my wing man, is a co-chair of the
Recycling Caucus in the Senate. He and I can work together. We
have some other folks that are in the Recycling Caucus, and
maybe get them to sort of amplify the message.
There is a lot that we can do, and it is not just the
government that needs to do it.
The 25 percent--and I do not care who answers this one, but
the 25 percent or so of electronic stuff that we buy and
eventually dispose of--obviously, only a fraction of it is
going to be picked up by the Postal Service and transported by
the Postal Service. We will say one percent because I know it
is less than that.
But just walk through for us the ways that the other 24
percent would be handled. Some could be basically taken and
sold if it is still good to use. Some could be stripped down
and pull the components out and that sort of thing.
But just give us some idea of that 24 percent that would be
left. Roughly, how is it disposed of and reused?
Mr. Skurnac. Yes, I will comment first, Senator.
There are a number of ways that it gets collected. In
States that have programs--as Walter indicated, half of the
States now have State-run programs that mandate some form of
collection and recycling of e-scrap.
Typically, there will be collection entities. Some are
private enterprises. In a lot of States, they are municipal-
county facilities, transfer stations, solid waste companies,
that will collect the e-scrap as it is dropped off by
consumers, and then they will deliver it to recyclers for
processing. And, in some cases, private recycling companies
will do their own collection, either through collection events,
weekend e-scrap drop-offs or just have regular drop-off
facilities in order to get the material.
Some of it, unfortunately, is just exported as is out of
the country. There is an export trade, if you like, where
people will buy e-scrap and put it in ocean containers and send
it overseas.
There are two issues with that. One, of course, is there
are domestic jobs that are not existing here in the country as
a result of that, and two, nobody is really sure what is
happening to it when it is exported. So we have to share that
concern and sort of think about how we manage that going
forward.
The other way that material shows up to recyclers is
through corporations that run their own recycling programs, and
they go out of their way to take back their own products. And I
will let Walter deal with that because it is a very viable and
vibrant part of the industry where you have manufacturers who
are taking on sustainability programs to go and collect their
own equipment in the marketplace and take it back from their
customers.
Mr. Alcorn. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
Chairman Carper. Sure.
Mr. Alcorn. I think one of the things that we have seen
develop over the last few years is an expansion of the
collection infrastructure. Like in my testimony, we now have
8,000 different locations around the country that our industry
sponsors.
If you have electronics, I would recommend going to
GreenerGadgets and looking for a place nearby where you can
recycle. For example, Best Buy will take back all your
electronics at no charge at this point. So, in all----
Chairman Carper. Roughly, how long have they been doing
that?
Mr. Alcorn. They started about 5 years ago. They used to
charge $10 for the bigger stuff. They dropped that, I believe,
3 years ago.
Chairman Carper. They dropped it entirely?
Mr. Alcorn. Dropped it entirely, so there is no charge.
Chairman Carper. Why do you suppose they did that?
Mr. Alcorn. Well, they figured out how to incorporate this
into their business model, which is something we encourage
companies to do. They figured out getting people into the door
is worth the pain and hassle and expense of running a recycling
program.
Chairman Carper. This reminds me of we have shared
jurisdiction on cyber policy here in the country in this
Committee.
And a fellow from the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST), which has been very much involved in
developing standards for helping us deal with cyber attacks,
Pat Gallagher was his name, I think, and he testified here
once. I think he said, when good business policy and good cyber
policy are one and the same, we know we are on the right track.
And it sounds like Best Buy has figured out how good
business policy and good environmental stewardship can
coincide. They are on the right track.
Do you think other companies are looking at Best Buy and
thinking maybe they are on to something?
Mr. Alcorn. Yes. What has happened is some of the other big
retailers have gotten into taking back smaller devices. And
Staples, actually, they have gotten into the business of taking
back computer equipment. They do not take back TVs, but they
really do not sell TVs.
So we look at those two companies as models that we
encourage.
Also, our nonprofits, like Goodwill that Brenda mentioned
earlier and their partnership with Dell. A very strong----
Chairman Carper. Would you explain that partnership,
please?
There is a Goodwill about a mile from our house. We visit
them often.
Mr. Alcorn. It is called the ReConnect program.
Chairman Carper. I just took them a printer.
Mr. Alcorn. Ah, and they took it? That is good. OK.
By the way, in Delaware, you also have the Delaware Solid
Waste Authority who has an excellent program and has for a
number of years.
Chairman Carper. I was just at their recycling center where
they recycle all--we have single-stream in Delaware.
We were going, oh, gosh, 30 years ago, to an earlier effort
to try to do single-stream, and we just did not have the
ability to sustain the operations of the facility and finally
gave up on it. And we finally figured it out pretty well now.
Mr. Alcorn. Well, specifically with the Goodwill----
Chairman Carper. As you know, they do not put the
electronics along with the stuff in single-stream, though.
Mr. Alcorn. Right. That is right. That is a separate
system.
But the Goodwill program in working with Dell--that is
something that has developed really over the last decade, and
Goodwill will take computer equipment. Dell backs them up and
helps cover their costs and also provides outreach and
promotion for the recycling program.
We like those business models very much. We like those
efforts, and we are encouraging more.
Chairman Carper. Who is your executive director, chief
executive officer (CEO), or president of your association?
Mr. Alcorn. Gary Shapiro is our CEO.
Chairman Carper. Was Dave McCurdy ever your CEO?
Mr. Alcorn. He was not. He was with a different
association, but we know him.
Chairman Carper. OK. Good.
Anybody else? I have another question, but I want to make
sure I have heard from everybody on this.
Please, go ahead.
Mr. Kampschroer. I just thought I would give you sort of a
sense of the order of magnitude within the Federal Government.
Chairman Carper. Yes, please, I would like to hear that.
Mr. Kampschroer. So, in the last year we measured, about 23
percent of the equipment was actually transferred to other
agencies for further use, 23 percent again was surplussed and
sold for parts or for reuse, 50 percent was given to schools or
other educational----
Chairman Carper. Fifteen?
Mr. Kampschroer. Fifty.
Chairman Carper. To where? Schools?
Mr. Kampschroer. To schools. And then only 4 percent was
actually recycled. So there is a lot of secondary use of
equipment going on--of Federal equipment.
Chairman Carper. When one of my sons was in college, he
spent a summer working for Apple out in California, and the
next year I was out at Apple and just wanted to visit with
Visitor Operations and try to learn more about what they were
doing. It was maybe--I do not know--4 or 5 years ago.
And it was interesting during my visit at Apple. I stayed
for an hour or two, and they spent the whole time just talking
about the thought and the consideration they give to the
materials that are in the equipment that they build and sell.
Looking at this--and this is, of course, sustainability and
what can be harvested from those devices when they are disposed
of--I was struck by how much time and energy and thought they
have given to this.
I am sure there are other manufacturers who have a similar
bent. Could you share some of those with us?
Mr. Alcorn. I will take that one on. Thank you for the
question, Senator.
That is something that we have seen a number of companies
step up--Apple is first and foremost, probably, on that
particular issue--and spend a lot of time and effort to take
care of their supply chain and the materials that are used and
that go into their products.
It is a very dynamic industry. The technology is changing
very quickly. Innovation really powers the industry to move
forward, and one of the innovations is something that I like to
call dematerialization, where we are seeing products get
smaller. Using less material.
I mean, it used to be the big TV set in a console, and it
was super heavy. And now they get hung on the wall, with better
technology, better performance and using less energy.
We actually have documented a number of case studies in a
sustainability report that CEA published and I entered into our
written testimony, that really talks about some of these
examples, not just on the recycling side but also on design and
energy efficiency and other issues like that.
Chairman Carper. OK. Thank you.
Anybody else want to say something before I change the
subject just a little bit?
[No response.]
All right. I mentioned earlier fuel efficiency standards,
CAFE standards, and what can the government do to try to make a
market, that sort of thing.
Let me just ask. I will not ask this for Mr. Kampschroer or
Mr. Day but for Ms. Pulley, Mr. Alcorn, and Mr. Skurnac. What
do you see as the role of the Federal Government, or the roles
of the Federal Government, in this space? Do you want to go
first, Mr. Skurnac?
Mr. Skurnac. Well, at the risk of repeating the comment, I
think it needs to lead by example, and I was very encouraged--
--
Chairman Carper. Did you all just hear that clock back
there making a noise? Are we back in session?
All right. We are going to start voting pretty soon, but we
are going to go probably another 10 to 15 minutes.
Mr. Skurnac. I will just make one quick----
Chairman Carper. No. You have plenty of time.
Mr. Skurnac. One quick comment with regard to what Kevin
was referring to--I think that getting the data from the
government in terms of their efficacy of the Executive Order
and the programs and what happens to the material, who is
managing it, how it is being recycled and/or refurbished or
reused will be terrific information for everybody to have
access to because it will show us just how much traction the
Federal Government on its own has with trying to do the right
thing with the equipment.
I mean, they are the largest purchaser of IT equipment and,
by definition, the largest creator of e-scrap at the end of its
useful life. So it will be very interesting and useful for all
of us stakeholders and the industry to find out exactly what is
happening with that equipment.
Chairman Carper. All right. Thank you. Mr. Alcorn.
Mr. Alcorn. Thank you.
And I would just expound a little bit on an idea of a
different type of affirmative procurement. There are--not just
CRT glass, although CRT glass is the most obvious one. There
are some materials coming out of the electronics recycling
stream where there are not strong markets. There is not
intrinsic demand in large measure.
And I think that is something that is really called for in
the Federal National Strategy from 2011--and that is something
we would like to see the Federal Government step up their
efforts really, to look to see where they could buy recycled
materials in lieu of virgin materials, particularly for items
like CRT glass.
It is not obvious a lot of times if there is a fit, but
certainly, we have seen some of that done already, and we would
encourage more of it.
Chairman Carper. Good. Ms. Pulley.
Ms. Pulley. I would just add also, as the others have
indicated, the leading by example.
And one thing I would add, it has been mentioned a couple
times, but I think also helping to inform constituents about
the importance of it, as you do.
But also, to make sure that the importance of using a
certified recycler--I want to reiterate a point that was made
earlier because it is so important with the data that are on
personal electronic devices.
Chairman Carper. I think I know why that is important, but
tell us again.
Ms. Pulley. Just because, as was mentioned earlier, when
people have all kinds of financial data and other personal
information, and then they turn over a computer to be recycled,
if it is not with a certified recycler--I mean, there are
horror stories about electronics being sold in third-world
countries and not for the computer but for the data that are on
the computer.
So it is an issue that--as you continue this dialogue about
what you can do, it is important to remember that one because I
think there is some additional work to do in that area.
Chairman Carper. I always look for ways to incentivize
behavior. So, if we want to incentivize folks in other
countries to pay top dollar for these items, we could sort of
imply, or let them think, that there are data.
Ms. Pulley. Maybe. Well----
Chairman Carper. And then clean everything up and then sell
it to them.
Ms. Pulley. I totally like your line of thinking about
incentivizing. We like that.
Maybe we can talk about a study very specific to
recycling----
Chairman Carper. We call that bait and switch, I think.
Ms. Pulley. But another one where there is the
opportunity--Walter, I hope you do not mind--we want it to be
embedded in the business model for manufacturers and retailers,
and we are seeing that.
But to continue to look for ways that it could also be
communicated so not only is that convenience factor overcome,
but there are various touch points in communication about
recycling with the customer, as I said previously.
When you go buy a new car, what is the first thing they ask
you? Not how much you want to spend, but hey, have you got an
old car to sell?
And so just those kinds of things that we could work with
manufacturers and retailers on that--those are the other things
that I would look at.
Chairman Carper. I have an old car, but I am not ready to
sell it yet. My wife always says to me, when are you going to
buy a new car?
Ms. Pulley. What about those CAFE standards?
Chairman Carper. It is a 2001 Chrysler Town and Country
minivan, and I bought it the year that I stepped down as
Governor, and it just went over 361,000 miles--original engine,
original transmission, original owner.
Someday we will recycle it, but not soon.
Mr. Day, do you want to jump in here, or Mr. Kampschroer?
Mr. Day. In terms of what the Postal Service can do?
Chairman Carper. Well, we are talking about the role of the
Federal Government in the space. We are trying to set a good
example. We are trying to partner with the Postal Service.
Anything else come to mind?
Mr. Day. Well, I do not think you can stress enough that
setting a good example. I think the President, through the
Executive Orders, and what the Federal agencies are doing--it
is just a matter of following through on that.
And, as has already been said, it will be important to see
that, and my understanding is we will see that on what the
agencies do through the Council on Environmental Quality. We
have an annual Office of Management and Budget (OMB) scorecard,
and so that is dated, and it is out there.
It is more than saying we are going to do it. We have to
demonstrate we are going to do it.
And I know the Postal Service is. We are not just promoting
this to do it for other agencies, but we are doing it
ourselves.
Chairman Carper. OK, Mr. Kampschroer.
Mr. Kampschroer. I think just one last point is really a
reiterated one. The proposed rule that we will publish next
week will require agencies to submit the data at a much more
detailed level than is currently being collected and submitted.
So we will have a much better handle on what the potential
markets are, and that will allow the market to react with the
potential for business opportunities.
We found that to be true in Energy.Data.gov, where we have
put our utility consumption data out there and have gotten
private sector individuals who figured out ways that we had not
figured out, how to more cost effectively manage the Energy
budget.
So, hopefully, the same thing will happen here.
Chairman Carper. OK. Thank you.
You hear that clock again making noise. That means that we
are about 7 or 8 minutes into a fifteen-minute vote.
I am going to ask one more quick question, and then we will
leave the record open for additional questions from my
colleagues and from me.
But, the last question. I like to talk about the three Cs
that are secrets to a vibrant, long marriage between two
people--communicate, compromise and maybe collaborate.
I think one of you mentioned three Cs that were similar,
though. I think one was communicate. Was that right?
Ms. Pulley. Absolutely.
Chairman Carper. And I think another one might have been
convenience.
Ms. Pulley. Absolutely.
Chairman Carper. And there was a third. What was it?
Ms. Pulley. Cause, or the motivational factor.
Chairman Carper. Cause, yes. OK.
All right. Good.
I will kind of relate to that and touch on that again but
one of the biggest challenges that we face in moving ordinary
Americans toward--what are some of the biggest challenges
toward moving us toward a recycling-first mentality?
And so, just think about that. Challenges. Lack of
convenience. People do not even know about it, so lack of
information.
But think about that and then give us just some thoughts.
When we have that old cell, or we have that old computer, or we
have that old TV, not the cathode ray tube, but what is just
maybe one good idea from each of you on how we can better
ensure that people say, I am not going to just throw this away
or whatever or leave it in the basement?
Give me one great idea, Mr. Skurnac, on your birthday. This
will be your gift to us.
Mr. Skurnac. Well, I think the simplest thing we can do for
those individuals is to impress upon them the fact that there
is so much of their lives in that equipment that they have, and
it does not need to stay in the garage or in their basement. It
does need to be recycled because they are valuable commodities,
and it makes a lot more sense to recycle it than to let it sit
somewhere and collect dust.
But, if that message gets out--and everybody today on the
panel has talked about getting the message out.
If the message gets out that says, look, we can recycle
this. There are responsible people that can do it. We have an
easy and convenient way to get it from you. You need to get rid
of it and get the valuable components back into commerce--we
will come a long way, absolutely.
Chairman Carper. All right. Thank you.
I just thought of an idea. In schools that our boys have
gone to and then others we are aware of, we do recycling
drives. We have done Campbell's Soup cans, with the labels and
stuff. We have done newspapers and bottles and stuff like that,
and aluminum cans.
Have you ever heard of a school that has maybe 1 day a
week, 1 day a year, or 1 day a quarter, something like that,
where they invite folks to take stuff out of their garages and
basements and bring it to the school, where they work with the
solid waste authorities there to pick it up and take it out,
and the schools make some money?
Anybody? Is that too far-fetched an idea?
Just very briefly because we are running out of time.
Mr. Alcorn. Well, on electronics, I think that happened a
lot in the past, or it happened some in the past, not so much
recently.
But I think you raise the schools issue, and that gets to
my idea. I am not sure it is a new idea completely. But,
frankly, getting recycling into the curriculum is really
important. I mean, that changed the world in the late eighties
when that happened with recycling in general, and that is
something we have been working on a little bit at the Consumer
Electronics Association.
But when kids hear that, yes, these old electronics should
be recycled and, hey, here is a way to find out how, and they
bring that home to their parents, it makes a huge difference.
Chairman Carper. OK. Good. Please.
Ms. Pulley. I was just going to add.
Chairman Carper. Just 30 seconds, and then I have to run.
Ms. Pulley. I would just say it is--going back to your
original question. We work with schools all the time. There are
issues about the schools being drop-offs for electronics per
se. We can talk about that at another time. OK?
But I think turning up the volume, as we have said today,
so that we make it a social norm. And there are many different
pressure points that we could do that, whether it is curriculum
or talking about it. Those are things that I continue to look
at, but that would be my key recommendation.
Chairman Carper. OK. Thanks.
Mr. Day, just real fast.
Mr. Day. I will just keep the theme. I mean, I have been
very impressed with----
Chairman Carper. You are on message. You are what we call
on message.
Mr. Day. It is what universities are doing today. I mean,
colleges and universities--as I talk to the younger employees
coming into the Postal Service, fresh off of university
campuses, they get it. I think if there is anything we are
going to see as the generations move forward; they do get it.
And maybe it is our generation that has not gotten it yet,
but we just need to keep pushing that.
Chairman Carper. OK. Great. Thanks. Mr. Kampschroer, last
word.
Mr. Kampschroer. I think really emphasizing the value of
something that has no value to the person. It has value
elsewhere. So move it to where it has value. I think people get
excited about that.
Chairman Carper. Good. All right.
Well, I just want to thank Mr. Kampschroer and thank you,
Mr. Day. Thank you, Ms. Pulley. Mr. Alcorn, thank you for
joining all of us for the celebration of the 54th anniversary
of Mr. Skurnac's birth.
What we hope to do here today, on this day, is to spread
the news. Spread the good news that we are hearing about, and I
am, frankly, excited about.
And I thank you all for helping us to do that.
The three Cs. Ms. Pulley, tell us the three Cs one more
time.
Ms. Pulley. Right. It is convenience that we have talked
about a lot today, clearly communication, but then finding the
right way and the right message to communicate, which is give
the cause so you have an emotional connection.
Chairman Carper. That is great.
All right, the hearing record will remain open for 15 days.
That is until March 14, at 5 p.m., for the submission of
statements and questions for the record.
With that, this hearing is adjourned.
Again, our thanks to each of you. Happy birthday.
[Whereupon, at 2:08 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]