December 23, 2003

Eric G. Crispin, AIA
Director, Department of Planning and Permitting
650 South King Street
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

                                SUBJECT: 2003/SMA-51
                                Island Recycling – Sand Island Facility
                               Tax Map Key 1-2-23: 29, 34, 40, 42, 45, 47, 72 and 90
Dear Mr. Crispin:
I am writing to express my concerns about the above-referenced facility, 
that is the subject of a SMA Minor Permit processed by your  department 
earlier this year. It is also the subject of a Notice of  Violation 
(No. 2001/NOV-08-215, issued August 30, 2001), and a Notice of  Order 
(No. 2003/NOO-070, issued May 20, 2003).  My concerns center mainly 
around the SMA Minor Permit; I believe that a new SMA permit should be 
required, since your department was apparently unaware of, and therefore did 
not consider, the health and environmental impacts or other concerns posed by 
the handling of metals from the H-power facility.
More specifically, in the issuance of Solid Waste Management Permit (SWMP) 
No. RY-0081-01, the Hawaii State Department of Health (DOH) states, "the 
metals from the H-power facility which have gone through the combustion 
chamber are coated with municipal solid waste ash. The H-power facility has 
conducted some sampling and analysis of the ash for total metals and limited 
dioxin cogeners. The data  indicate that EPA Region IX’s preliminary remediation 
goals for  industrial exposures may be exceeded”. A search of City and County 
records relating to the issuance of SMA Permit file No. 2003/SMA-51 does 
not reflect that this information was considered in the earlier issuance 
of any City and County permits to Island Recycling, Inc., i.e., to process 
the ash coated non-ferrous metal at its facility on Sand Island Access Road. 
Further, I believe that a Conditional Use Permit-Minor (CUP-m) should also be 
required for this facility, in light of this new  information which I have obtained.
According to State Department of Health (DOH) records, Island Recycling 
 applied for a SWMP in a letter dated September 25, 2001, to accept and 

Island Recycling, Inc.
December 23, 2003
Page 2
 process fiber materials (including, but not limited to, corrugated 
 cardboard, newspaper, office paper, computer paper, magazines, egg 
 cartons); ferrous and non-ferrous scrap metal, glass containers, tires, 
 electronic scrap, pallets; and plastic containers, at the subject site 
 (i.e., Parcel 34).  EnviroWatch, Inc. is in possession of the State DOH 
 Permit. I am enclosing a copy for viewing.  I would draw to your attention 
 To the fact that the permit allows the recycling facility to operate ONLY on 
Parcel 34.  It specifies that no waste shall be stored or processed on any 
adjacent parcels.  DPP records indicate that the facility occupies 8 parcels.  
In addition, Condition 7 of the permit specifies that Island Recycling 
obtain "any and all necessary approvals and permits from the appropriate 
federal, state, and local agencies, including zoning clearances, prior to the 
start of operations".  Since Island Recycling has not complied with the 
conditions of SMA permit No. 2003/SMA-51, I believe the facility may be 
operating in conflict with this provision.  (EnviroWatch, Inc. will shortly be 
notifying the State DOH of this, as well as other apparent violations.) 
The SMA Permit file contains application materials from Island Recycling. Inc, 
which state that Parcel 34 has a concrete slab "covering the parcel, ranging 
in elevation above sea level from approximately 10.1 feet to 6.7 feet. 
This minor elevation change is designed into the concrete surface to
facilitate rainwater runoff". The file also states (under the heading 
"Justification") that "No water is used in Island Recycling's recycling 
operations." And, "Wastewater disposal is not applicable to Site." The 
description of the uses/structures on Parcel 34 includes "Scrap metal 
containment. This area is used to stage Scrap Metal prior to shipment."
According to the applicant's submittal to DPP, the concrete slab is 
sloped about 3 feet or more, for "rainwater runoff". If hazardous 
materials are routed off the concrete slab, where are they going? Are 
they not going into the soil or the adjacent drainage ditch? This facility is 
very near the ocean, and we would like to know what precautions the City 
has taken, or will take, to protect the environment, the groundwater, and the 
public's health and safety. It appears that this aspect of the operation (the 
dioxin and hazardous ash from H-power) was not considered under processing of 
2003/SMA-51.  It is possible that the DPP was unaware of this information 
during the course of processing the permit.
In light of this new information, we believe that a CUP-m and a SMA Major 
Permit should be required. I saw the file and noted that the total cost 
of structures does not exceed $125,000, and that is why a Minor SMA 
Permit was required. However, despite the cost of the improvements, we 

Island Recycling, Inc.
December 23, 2003
Page 3
believe a Major SMA Permit is warranted, based upon the potential damage 
to the environment and to the public's health and safety from this facility. 
We request that the City take steps to stop this component of the operation 
immediately, until the matter can be resolved and the public can be assured 
that the necessary precautions are in place to protect them from possible 
exposures as noted in the State document. The processing of a CUP-m and 
a SMA Major Permit would require the applicant to disclose information 
in this regard, and then mitigative measures could be proposed. However, 
without these permits, how can the public be protected? These are issues 
pertaining to coastal resources, and also to our zoning laws.
When reading the SMA file, I noted that the use of the facility is 
 Manufacturing, Processing and Packaging Establishment, General, which is 
 a permitted use in the I-2 District. The DPP's letter to the applicant 
 regarding the proposed battery and appliance recycling states that this 
 use falls into the category of Salvage, Scrap and Junk Storage and 
 Processing, which requires a CUP-m. However, the DPP indicated that as 
 long as it does not exceed 50 percent of the total recycling activities 
 on the site, it is considered accessory to the principal use. In light 
 of the hazardous materials processing and the potential for damage to 
 coastal resources, EnviroWatch, Inc. believes that a CUP-m is warranted 
 since it moves the use into the Salvage, Scrap and Junk Storage and 
 Processing category, and a SMA Major Permit is also required. Without 
 the CUP-m and the Major SMA Permit, how can we, the public, be assured 
 that groundwater and ocean waters are not being contaminated, and that 
 the health of employees and the general public is not being threatened?  
The process involved deals with the ash-coated metals, and this activity must 
 be fully evaluated under these permits.
 I have noted that an Environmental Assessment was done for Keehi 
 Industrial Lots Development Plan (numerous lots), and a FEA/FONSI was 
 issued and published in the June 23, 2002 Environmental Notice. This was 
 for redevelopment of 20 acres of reclaimed land adjacent to and 
 including Pier 60, development of 7 industrial lots, installation of 
 on-site utility lines, and a wastewater pump station. This was described 
as a "long-range planning effort". The Island Recycling facility 
however, and its processing of hazardous waste materials, was never 
considered in a SMA Permit or a CUP-m. Island Recycling's documents 
state, "We are very conscious of any contaminants, like paper and 
fluids, that may travel into the man-made canal, which drains into 
nearby Kalihi Bay. We try to mitigate this by putting up barriers along 
and over the perimeter of the canal." There is absolutely no mention of 

 Island Recycling, Inc.
December 23, 2003
Page 4

the dioxin and ash. The DOH has found materials in the drainage canal, 
and has stated that Island Recycling should put up a fence along the 
property line to prevent this. Does the facility have a building permit 
for a fence?

 The violation notice (2001/NOV-08-215) for illegal structures, and also 
 the notice of order imposing civil fines (2003/NOO-070) have been 
 issued. However, to date, the building permits still have not been 
 applied for. A time extension was approved (under 2003/SMA-51) on 
 September 10, 2003, and they have until December 20, 2003 to obtain 
 after-the-fact building permits. I ask that no more extensions be 
 approved, and that the DPP inform Island Recycling that the illegal 
 structures must be removed immediately, and that they must apply for a 
 CUP-m and a Major SMA permit in light of the increased scope of the 
 facility's processing, including toxins and other hazardous materials.
 In summary, EnviroWatch, Inc. believes that the proper permits from DPP 
 must be processed to evaluate any potentially negative impacts from the 
 ash and possibly from other contaminants which may not have been 
 considered by the DPP. Preparation of an EA for a SMA Major Permit would 
 aid in rectifying this situation and its uncertainties. A CUP-m will 
 also help to protect the public and the environment from the processing 
 of the municipal solid waste ash-coated metals at this facility. The 
 City is giving metals from H-power to Island Recycling, and I am asking 
 that the City issue a cease and desist order on any further delivery of 
 these materials to Island Recycling, Inc. until any and all human health 
 and environmental impacts can be properly evaluated, and all necessary 
 permits have been secured. 

                                                                                            Sincerely Yours
                                                                                            Carroll E. Cox