Composting Council boots another executive director

By Ken McEntee
Composting News

For the third time in about three years, the U.S. Composting Council has terminated its executive director. The council’s board of directors, on July 29, announced that it was “bidding farewell” to Lori Scozzafava, who had been hired as executive director 14 months earlier, in May 2013. The decision to let Scozzafava go actually had been made sometime during the previous week, sources said.

Lorrie Loder, president of the USCC, indicated that the board could hire an association management company instead of an individual executive director to manage the organization.
 
Loder, senior director of technical services at Synagro, said the board has been disappointed with the Washington lobbying efforts of past executive directors. She said the board is seeking a leader who “has connections in order to help facilitate some of the missions of the industry and our membership.”
 
Asked whether that is an area in which previous executive directors have fallen short, Loder said, “There were various reasons, but that is probably quite a bit of it. We moved our office to where we were close to Washington D.C. in the hope that we would have more legs on the ground on Capitol Hill.”
 
Asked whether there are any specific issues that require a better lobbying effort, Loder said, “Yes. It was the persistent herbicide issue and some of those yard waste bans and really the movement to recover organics from the waste stream. And then building healthy soils by putting compost back instead of shoving all of this great stuff in a landfill.”
 
The July 29 press release, in which Scozzafava’s departure was announced, was headlined, “USCC undertakes restructuring to prepare for surge of organics composting efforts.” Scozzafava’s termination was announced in the manner of an afterthought in the fifth paragraph of the press release: “With the restructuring process, the USCC board of directors bids farewell to Lori Scozzafava, who is moving on to other career opportunities, as executive director. The transition team is integrating the executive director search into the restructuring process.”
 
According to the announcement, “In a move set to position the U.S. Composting Council to continue its quarter-century as the foremost authority on composting, the USCC's board of directors announced a restructuring effort to prepare the organization for rapid growth. The vigorous restructuring process is being led by a transition team developing growth plans that are targeted toward sustainable diversified growth in a dynamic, growing organics industry.”
 
In just the past year, USCC said, the number of states taking legislative and administrative actions, such as food scraps diversion, requirements for compost in public and private projects, has multiplied.
 
"This will require states to quickly grow their public and private organics composting infrastructure, and the USCC is the best resource to help guide that," Loder said in the announcement.
 
As a result, USCC said, the organization is shifting more and more resources towards development of educational programs and outreach to membership.
 
Scozzafava's departure follows the April 2013 termination of Michael Virga, who had been in the position of executive director for 19 months, starting in September 2011. Before Virga, Stu Buckner served in the role for about nine years, from 2002 until the summer of 2011. Buckner had been under contract as executive director through the end of 2011. Earlier that year, the board told Buckner that it planned to conduct a search for an executive director, but invited him to re-apply for his job.
 
When Virga was hired, Frank Franciosi, then president of USCC, said the appointment was in line with USCC’s aim to heighten its role as an advocate for the industry to impact policy areas such as agriculture, energy and climate change. Franciosi said USCC membership had been surveyed two years earlier about the direction they wanted the organization to take. 
The survey suggested that members wanted a stronger effort to lobby for industry issues and a stronger market development effort, he said.
 
Shortly after Virga took the position, the council moved its headquarters from New York to Bethesda, Md.
 
In April 2013, the board announced Virga’s departure and the hiring of Scozzafava, who had previously been deputy director of the Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA). 
The board, at the time, declined to confirm whether Virga was fired or quit. Loder described the parting as “a mutual agreement.” Loder, at that time, described Scozzafava as “a perfect fit” for the council, citing her 25 years of experience in the solid waste management industry.
 
Now, as the council looks for a new leader for the fourth time since 2011, Loder said she has no concerns about the stability of the organization.
 
“Not at all,” she said. “The organization is very stable financially. We’ve got a strong membership and a strong involvement by our board. There are no concerns about that. Can we find a one size fits all executive director? No. And that’s what this succession planning committee is going to bring to the board.”
 
When it was suggested that from a member’s standpoint, USCC members can’t be blamed for being uneasy about the volatility in the leadership position, Loder replied, “I have actually spoken a couple members and one of them said to me that Abe Lincoln went through a few people, too, to find the right person,” a reference to Lincoln’s appointment of Ulysses S. Grant as commander of the Union armies.
 
The succession planning committee, she said, will make a recommendation to the board regarding a replacement for Scozzafava. The committee, she said, is made of past board presidents and several other board members. No timetable has been set for a decision, Loder said.
 
“Whether it will be a position or we look to go a different route with a management company, it’s really up to the succession planning committee,” she said. “The sooner the better of course, but we want to make sure this is the change we make to take us into the future for a longer term and not have to make a change again for a while. I am willing to let them take their time to make the right recommendation.”
 
The ideal leader, she said, would be “somebody that has knowledge of the composting industry, knowledge of the issues and has connections in order to help facilitate some of the missions of the industry and our membership.”
 
Established in 1990, the USCC has nearly 1,000 members in the U.S., Canada, and other countries. In its most recent tax filing, for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2013, the council reported revenue of just more than $1 million and expenses of about $1.16 million, with assets totaling $788,000. During that year, Virga earned about $155,000.
 
The council’s revenue was derived from several sources, as follows:
Conference Revenue    $408,000
Membership Dues    $284,000
Seal of Testing Assurance    $136,500
Training    $62,700
Publication sales    11,100
Other    $6,800

See more from the monthly Composting News publication.

Composters oppose climate tax, cap and trade

 By Ken McEntee

Although about 75 percent of compost producers responding to a Composting News survey this month believe global warming is occurring, more than half of the respondents believe that a tax on greenhouse gas emissions or a mandatory cap and trade system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would have negative impacts on the economy that would outweigh any environmental benefits.
 
Only about 17 percent of respondents believe a tax on greenhouse gas emissions would be an effective way to reduce or stop global warming and only about 22 percent believe a cap and trade system to reduce greenhouse gases would be effective in reducing or stopping global warming.
 
The survey was emailed to almost 700 producers, permitted only one response  per computer IP address and had a response rate of about 14 percent, representing a only small portion of the nation’s composting facilities.
 
But certain trends were made clear by the responses.
 
Of the 75 percent of respondents who believe global warming is occurring, about half believe human activities are responsible, and half believe it is due to circumstances beyond our control. One respondent commented that the survey did not allow for an opinion that global warming is caused by both human activities and natural occurrences beyond our control.

The survey indicated that many composters remain unsure about global warming issues. Asked whether global warming is happening, about 14 percent responded, “I don’t know” – an answer that garnered 14 to 25 percent of the responses on most of the nine questions on the survey.

Regarding a tax on greenhouse gas emissions, 19 percent of respondents said it would be worth it despite a negative impact on the economy. Only 5.4 percent said such a tax would not have a negative impact on the economy.
 
Regarding a cap and trade system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, 17 percent said it would be worth it despite the negative impact on the economy. About 14 percent said a cap and trade system would not have a negative impact on the economy.
 
Although more than half of the respondents believe a greenhouse gas tax or a cap and trade system would have a negative impact on the economy and would not be worth it even if it had environmental benefits, almost 29 percent of the respondents said they would like to make money by selling carbon/greenhouse gas reduction credits by composting because it would be good for them, the environment and the economy. 

Almost 26 percent said they would like to make money selling such credits which would be good for them, good for the environment but bad for the economy. Twenty percent said they would not want to make money by selling greenhouse gas credits. But 26 percent of those responding to the question agreed to none of the eight options, indicating a flawed question.
 
Details of the survey questions follow below. Six respondents chose to provide comments regarding the issue of global warming as it relates to composting. Those comments are published below.
 
If you are a compost producer and did not receive this survey by email, we may have no email for you, or we may have an incorrect email. You can get into our database by sending your email and other company information to ken@recycle.cc. 


1. Which of the following do you most agree with?Human activities are responsible for global warming.        38.90%
Global warming is occurring but it is a natural occurrence that is beyond our control.        36.10%
Global warming is not occurring.        11.10%
I don’t know.        13.90%
Skipped question (1)

2. Which of the following do you most agree with?Global warming is happening and a tax on greenhouse gas emissions would be an effective way to reduce or stop it.        16.70%
Global warming is happening but a tax on greenhouse gas emissions would not be an effective way to reduce or stop it.        44.40%
Global warming is not happening.        13.90%
I don’t know.        25.00%
Skipped question (1)

3. Which of the following statements do you most agree with?Global warming is happening and a “cap and trade” system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would be an effective way to reduce or stop it.        21.60%
Global warming is happening but a “cap and trade” system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would not be an effective way to reduce or stop it.        48.60%
Global warming is not happening.        10.80%
I don’t know.        18.90%   
 
4. Which of the following statements do you most agree with?A tax on greenhouse gas emissions would have a negative impact on the economy but it would be worth it
because it would have positive environmental benefits.        18.90%
A tax on greenhouse has emissions would have a negative impact on the economy and would not be worth it
even though it would have positive environmental benefits.        54.10%
A tax on greenhouse gas emissions would not have a negative impact on the economy.        5.40%
I don’t know.        21.60%   
 
5. Which of the following statements do you most agree with?A mandatory cap and trade system for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions would have a negative impact on the economy but it would be worth it because it would have positive environmental benefits.        17.10% A mandatory cap and trade system for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions would have a negative impact on the economy and would not be worth it even though it would have positive environmental benefits.        54.30%
A mandatory cap and trade system for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions would have not have a negative impact on the economy.        14.30%
I don’t know.        14.30%
Skipped question (2)

6. Which of the following statements do you most agree with?The use of compost in its various applications can help to reduce global warming.        59.50%
The use of compost in its various applications has no effect on global warming.        18.90%
Global warming is not occurring.        8.10%
I don’t know.        13.50%   
 
7. Please rank the following revenue steams according to which you believe are the most important to your composting operation, with “1” being the most important and “3” being the least important. This question assumes the implementation of a cap and trade system in which greenhouse gas reduction credits can be sold.
Sales of compost:Most important:  61.1%     Second most important: 38.9%      Least important: 0.0%
Tipping fees to accept feedstock: Most important: 38.9%     Second most important: 55.6%     Least important: 5.6%
Revenue from the sale of carbon/greenhouse gas credits:Most important: 0.0%     Second most important: 5.6%     Least important 94.4%
Skipped question (1)

8. Which of the following statements best reflects your attitude toward carbon/greenhouse gas reduction credits in a cap and trade system?• I would like to make money by selling carbon/greenhouse gas reduction credits by composting.
It would be good for me, good for the environment and good for the economy.        28.60%
• I would like to make money by selling carbon/greenhouse gas reduction credits by composting.
It would be good for me and good for the environment but bad for the economy.        25.70%
• I would like to make money by selling carbon/greenhouse gas reduction credits by composting.
It would be good for me and good for the economy, but bad for the environment.        0.00%
• I would like to make money by selling carbon/greenhouse gas reduction credits by composting.
It would be good for me, but bad for the environment and bad for the economy.        0.00%
• I would NOT like to make money by selling carbon/greenhouse gas reduction credits by composting
even though it would be good for me, good for the environment and good for the economy.        5.70%
• I would NOT like to make money by selling carbon/greenhouse gas reduction credits by composting.
 It would be good for me and good for the environment but bad for the economy.        0.00%
• I would NOT like to make money by selling carbon/greenhouse gas reduction credits by composting.
It would be good for me and good for the economy, but bad for the environment.        0.00%
• I would NOT like to make money by selling carbon/greenhouse gas reduction credits by composting.
It would be good for me, but bad or neutral for the environment and bad for the economy.        14.30%
• I don’t agree with any of these statements.        25.70%
Skipped question (2)

Comments from respondents:

 1. I find this idea of cap and trade a very fascist and oppressive concept. It is not about the environment it is another way for those in power to tax those who are productive. Compost should be about healing the soil and improving nutrient density in crops.

2. Global warming has many influence and your survey does not represent that. the survey questions are very slanted and made me feel that you should have put the "I don't agree with any of these statements" at the end of each survey question. also, compost use doesn't have the greatest impact, it is the act of composting that has the greatest greenhouse impacts.

3. I could not provide an answer to #1 because none of the options given adequately cover my view. I would say most experts and probably most people would say that global warming is caused by both human activities as well as by natural occurrences. I think a loud minority of folks believe that human activities have had no impact on global warming and (if it is even happening), it is entirely due to natural occurrence. On the other hand, those that do believe that human activities are having an impact on global warming generally also agree that there may be natural occurrences at play. So to conclude, most would likely say both factors contribute to global warming but there is no option to select this point of view. Regardless of what is to blame, the most important thing is do people believe it is happening and if so is it a bad thing. If it is a bad thing, then we should try to stop or slow it down. What caused it has become a bit of a red herring and an unnecessary lighting rod. Rather than assigning blame, the focus should be on recognizing it is occurring and figuring out ways to combat it.

4. The balance is creating a system that is fair but not overly complex to administer so that it outweighs the benefits.

5. In the value chain there appears to be a bottle neck at the end user level. As a public facility our largest problem is to have a steady end user base that will take our mulch material made from the green bin pick-up. These users are typically farms that don't like contamination and expect tipping fees. Private facilities pay a tipping fee to the farms. This has forced our operation to differentiate our product as a premium one since we can't pay a tipping fee. This strategy has worked more or less but the longevity of these end users and the total capacity at this level needs to be better determined and enhanced if more material is to be processed by this system.

6. What little I know about it and what other countries that been involved with global warming and cap and trade that it has not been a benefit and more costly to implement than was projected. It is a money making scheme for a very few as far as I am concerned.

Virga out, Scozzafava in as USCC director

By Ken McEntee
Composting News
May 2, 2013

After exactly 19 months on the job, Michael Virga’s tenure as executive director of the U.S. Composting Council ended on April 19. The council announced on May 2 that Lori Scozzafava, former deputy executive director of the Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA), was hired as Virga’s replacement.

Scozzafava

Lorrie Loder, president of the council, declined to say whether Virga or the board initiated the parting.

“It was a mutual agreement,” she said. “Mike indicated that he had some other career opportunities.”

When asked whether the vote by the council’s Board of Directors was a vote to terminate an employment agreement, or whether it was a vote to accept a resignation, Loder said it would not be appropriate to comment.

Loder, however, confirmed that Virga, through his consulting company, Green Solutions, has submitted a proposal to do contract work for the council – possibly in a fundraising capacity. She said the board has not made a decision about accepting the proposal. Virga could not be reached to comment.
Virga operated Green Solutions before he was hired as executive director of USCC in September 2011 and after he left his position as executive director of the American Forest and Paper Association.

Frank Franciosi, past president of USCC, said Virga’s strengths were soliciting sponsors and raising money for the council’s Research and Education Foundation. He also confirmed that Virga has submitted a proposal to do contract work for the council.

“The board may consider it,” Franciosi said. “He left on good terms.”

Loder said the board is “excited” to hire Scozzafava.

“We did a search and we are very pleased that Lori accepted our offer,” she said.

She declined to say how many candidates were interviewed.

“Lori happened to be available,” she said. “With the industry growing like it is it is a perfect fit.”

The council said Scozzafava is a highly experienced association executive who has been involved in solid waste management for more than 25 years. She left her position as deputy executive director of SWANA in 2012.

Franciosi said Scozzafava’s experience in dealing with municipalities through SWANA will be valuable in her new position.

Scozzafava joined SWANA in 1999 and was deputy executive director from 2004 to 2012. Before that she was the director of the Maryland Department of the Environment’s Recycling Division, a consultant with Gershman, Brickner & Bratton Inc. and recycling coordinator for Morris County, N.J.

"Lori's extensive industry and association management experience will help the USCC and its membership reach their goals and rise to a new level," Loder said.

Scozzafava said this is a great opportunity to bring her association expertise and understanding of the industry to the council.

“The timing is perfect to position organics management into national prominence as a major contributor to achieving recycling goals and environmental sustainability,” she said.

Wholesale pricing added to Composting News market survey

Since Composting News was launched in 1992, we have accumulated prices for compost in a variety of market regions throughout the U.S., using a variety of methods to obtain price information. Recently, several producers suggested that our price quotations should include producers’ wholesale prices along with the retail prices at their facilities.

In an attempt to collect wholesale price information, we revised our anonymous online survey (www.recycle.cc/formcompostpricesurvey.htm) and asked respondents by email to report wholesale prices for several common products along with their retail prices. We received the usual good number of responses from around the country reporting pricing for compost made from yard waste and food residuals, along with shredded wood mulch and colored mulch.

The response level was lower for biosolids compost. We received only two responses that provided wholesale prices for composted cow manure and zero data for wholesale prices for composted chicken manure.

The wholesale price data have been added to the table that is always published on page 6 of Composting News.

We will continue to survey the market on a monthly basis with an emphasis on getting more participation in providing wholesale pricing. Your participation is welcome, whether you complete the anonymous web survey, or simply call or email (ken@recycle.cc) to share prices and market insights. We are also interested in hearing how market pricing and reporting can be improved to benefit your businesses.

Since 1990, our company also has published The Paper Stock Report, a publication that tracks transaction prices in the recovered paper industry.

Wastepaper prices are somewhat easier to track. The paper recycling industry has specifically-defined grade categories, such as Old Corrugated Containers, Old Newspaper and Sorted Office Paper, which are accepted globally.

Compost is a much different product from scrap paper. Producers have their own recipes based on locally available feedstocks and demand for specific end uses.
Privately owned facilities that produce high quality compost often are in competition with public facilities that give away their products.

Compilation of data that offers an apple-to-apples comparison of compost prices from region to region and from product to product is a larger challenge than in the other market we serve. That’s one reason why your input is so valuable.

Following are some observations from this month’s pricing surveys.
* Some respondents provided prices ranges for their products, for both retail and wholesale prices. Those prices were entered as both a low price and a high price for their respective categories.
* In Missouri, one producer provided a retail price of $27.95 per yard for a compost product that evidently contained yard waste and food waste. The wholesale price is $19.50 per yard – a 30 percent reduction.  The same producer reported a retail price of $34.95 for shredded wood mulch, with a wholesale price of $24.95, a 29 percent markdown. For colored mulch, the retail price is $31.95, while the wholesale price is $17.50, a 45 percent reduction. Another Missouri producer offers a smaller discount for wholesale orders. The company reported a retail price ranging from $25 to $35 per yard for its compost product, with a wholesale price ranging between $22 to $30 per yard, with margins apparently between 12 and 14 percent. Margins for wood mulch, colored and natural, came in between 10 and 20 percent.
* In Texas. A producer reported a retail price of $15 a yard for compost, and a wholesale price of $8.50 to $9.00 a yard, a discount of 40 to 43 percent.
* A large percentage of respondents came from the Mid-Atlantic East Coast, or locations surrounding the Chesapeake Bay, from Baltimore down through the Norfolk, Va. area. Producers in those areas generally reported a fairly consistent discount of around 50 percent on their wholesale prices of compost made from yard waste and food waste compared to their retail price. Yard waste compost averaged about $24 per yard; $12 per yard wholesale.

Is compost important?

Gardeners: What's your favorite product to make your soil healthier for thriving plants? Do you use compost on your vegetable and flower gardens? Why or why not? Let me know at ken@recycle.cc

New DuPont herbicide will contaminate compost

New herbicide will contaminate compost
Composting News
By Ken McEntee
June 17, 2011
In reply to the U.S. Composting Council’s (USCC) request for a special review of the registration for the new herbicide Imprelis, the U.S. EPA Office of Pesticide Programs said it is seeking the advice of legal council about the matter. Imprelis, made by DuPont, can survive the composting process and remain active in a finished compost product.
The product label specifies that clippings from lawns treated with Imprelis should not be used as a mulch or placed in a compost pile.
Imprelis has been registered in every state except California and New York for use by licensed applicators on lawns and other turf areas for control of broadleaf weeds like dandelion, clover and plantain. The Composting Council of Canada said it doesn’t appear that Imprelis is available for sale in Canada, having yet to be registered through Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA).
USCC last month issued an alert warning composters to watch out for grass clippings contaminated with the new herbicide. USCC said grass from treated lawns could end up in a compost pile, and unlike most herbicides, Imprelis will survive the composting process and still be active in the finished compost. Preliminary research has shown that Imprelis does not break down significantly faster than the leaves and grass in the compost, so the concentration stays about the same. An unsuspecting gardener using contaminated compost could end up damaging their flowers and vegetables, most of which are also broad-leafed.
The product label contains a warning about composting:
“Do not use grass clippings from treated areas for mulching or compost, or allow for collection to composting facilities. Grass clippings must either be left on the treated area, or, if allowed by local yard waste regulations, disposed of in the trash. Applicators must give verbal or written notice to property owner/property manager/residents to not use grass clippings from treated turf for mulch or compost.”
In March, DuPont issued suggested language for applicators to use regarding management of grass clippings from areas treated with Imprelis:
“Today we have treated your lawn with an innovative weed control product from DuPont. The product label requires that you do not use grass clippings from areas treated with Imprelis for mulching or compost, or allow for collection to composting facilities. Grass clippings must either be left on the treated area, or, if allowed by local yard waste regulations, disposed of in the trash.”
"One problem is that the warning is on page seven of a nine page label," said Dr. Stuart Buckner, executive director of the USCC. “Unfortunately not everyone reads or follows the label. We are requesting the U.S. EPA initiate a special review of the registration due to the likelihood of residual herbicide levels in compost damaging non-target plants."
He said he received a reply from the EPA acknowledging the request and saying that the Office of Pesticide Programs is seeking the advice of counsel. No timeframe was given.
USCC said it is unlikely that municipal or commercial compost will contain significant amounts of Imprelis, though it is possible in suburban areas where a large amount of clippings could come from commercially treated lawns. It could especially be an issue for places like schools, recreational fields or golf courses that use their grass clippings to make compost and then use the compost in landscape beds or gardens instead of placing back on turf.
"We are alerting our members to this issue, that they need to make sure their haulers are informed to not bring them grass clippings that have been treated with Imprelis," Buckner said. "We also suggest they work with their state's bureau of pesticide applicator licenses to ensure applicators know about this restriction.”
DuPont said Imprelis, an innovative product to control a wide spectrum of broadleaf weeds, is the “most scientifically advanced turf herbicide in over 40 years.” Imprelis contains a single active ingredient – Aptexor - that is absorbed by the roots and shoots of target weeds providing consistent performance.
Aptexor, the first compound in an advanced generation of carboxylic acid herbicides, has unique properties at both the molecular and whole plant levels that translate into more powerful herbicidal activity. The most noticeable symptoms after application include the bending and twisting of stems and the cupping of leaves.

The June 2011 Composting News now available

The June issue of Composting News will mail on Monday.

Please support the great companies that make Composting News possible:
Morbark Inc., Grinder Wear Parts, Rotochopper Inc., Hamer, Roto-Mix, HCL Machine Works, Clear Span, SludgeFacts.Org, Peterson, SWANA WasteCon, Aschl Management Systems.

Find all the products, equipment and services you need for your composting, organics recycling or wood waste management business from the Composting News Product, Equipment and Services directory, now featuring immediate-link QR codes.

Headlines from the June 2011 issue of Composting News
*New DuPont herbicide will contaminate compost
*PepsiCo rolls out compostable cups
*Waste Management to develop organics facility in Central Florida
*Turning Earth licenses anaerobic technology
*World's largest wood pellet production plant opens in Georgia
*National compost prices
*Kreider Farm gets credit for certification for poultry waste processing
*Holland Mulch offers new yard waste site
*Most restaurants recycle; 13 percent compost
*Compost product news: ClearSpan, Norco

Composting Council to search for new executive director

From Composting News, May 2011

By Ken McEntee

Frank Franciosi, president of the U.S. Composting Council, said the USCC board will conduct a nationwide search for an executive director. Present executive director Stu Buckner’s contract expires at the end of 2011. Buckner will be considered as part of the search if he wishes to be.
Franciosi said the USCC board has retained the services of Sterling Martin Associates, a national firm, to conduct the search.
“This will be an open and transparent search that will include our existing executive director, staff and members, as well as individuals within and outside the composting industry,” Franciosi said. “We are confident that Sterling Martin Associates possesses the skills and experience to deliver the leadership that the USCC wants and deserves.”
“The search is due diligence on our part as a board, to see who is available and at what salary,” Franciosi said.
The board in 2010 did a compensation study for the executive director’s position and other positions within the organization. However, he said, salary is not an issue in Buckner’s possible replacement, noting that Buckner’s earnings as executive director are substantially incentive based.
Franciosi said in the announcement that USCC is entering a “new phase of growth.”
He didn’t indicate that the board has any philosophical differences with Buckner regarding the future direction of the organization.
The search process is expected to launch in early May.
Buckner, who previously served as USCC president, was hired as executive director of the struggling organization in December 2001. Since that time, USCC membership has grown substantially and is on a solid financial footing. Net assets as of the end of 2009 exceeded $715,000.
Matt Cotton, who served three years as president, acknowledged the progress made by the organization during Buckner’s leaders, but said conducting the national search “is the responsible thing to do.”

January 2011 Composting News

Headlines from the January 2011 issue of Composting News

 Ohio releases updates to composting rules

Dow to restrict aminopyralid usage to limit compost exposure

Enviva LP plans North Carolina wood pellet plant

Michigan extends public comment on compost rules

EPA to defer greenhouse gas permitting for biomass plants

National compost prices

SWANA e-session: best practices in food waste programs

EPA releases data on animal feeding operations

Waste Management to open organics plant in Florida

Compost product news: Morbark, Vertal, Peterson

Headlines for the August 2010 Composting News

Headlines from the August 2010 issue of Composting News

Testing finds txoics in San Francisco's free compost

Garick acquisitions could mean more composting for Waste Management

Mississippi biofuel plants will convert wood chips to crude oil

Dow looking at biomass energey at Michigan plant

Enviva acquires CKS Energy

National compost prices

Compost product news: Norco Equipment, Gaia Recycle

For more information visit www.compostingnews.com.

Composting News Web Site

For the latest news in composting, wood recycling and organics management visit Composting News on the Web.

Vermont regulations may close composter

Vermont regulations may put an end to 20 year old compost producer
By Ken McEntee
Unless a bill currently before the Vermont legislature offers a reprieve, Vermont environmental regulators appear to have succeeded in shutting down the state's largest compost facility. The board of directors of the Intervale Center voted on February 26 to take initial steps to wind down the operations of Intervale Compost Products at its current location. For the near future, Intervale Compost will continue to operate as usual, including accepting all feedstocks. The inventory of compost and soil products will continue to be sold to current and new customers.
Intervale said it will work over the next several months with the Composting Association of Vermont, the Vermont Legislature and the state administration on the issue of composting in Vermont. Should the regulatory situation change, the Intervale Center will consider halting the closure process to revisit the issue of composting at the Intervale.
A bill (H.873) that deals with the cleanup of Lake Champlain includes a provision that would exempt composting facilities from the state’s “Act 250” solid waste regulation. The provision that exempts composting facilities from Act 250, comes in the middle of controversy surrounding the state’s two largest composting operations, Vermont Compost Co., of Montpelier, and The Intervale Center, of Burlington. Both facilities have been targeted by environmental regulators over the past year. Compost supporters say composting should be encouraged, rather than thwarted by difficult regulations because they contribute to cleaning the Lake Champlain watershed.
Issues at Intervale began in September, when the facility received a Notice of Alleged Violation from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) regarding
several violations alleged to have occurred at composting operation. DEC said Intervale accepted more food waste than it was allowed to, a violation that was later revoked by DEC.
Intervale also denied that it used leachate from the composting process to irrigate fields that grew food and that it discharged leachate into a river. However, DEC determined that the operation required an Act 250 permit to continue its operations. Intervale began the permitting process.
In February, however, the Intervale board decided that the regulatory process is too expensive.
“The Intervale Center can no longer afford to pay toward an uncertain and increasingly expensive permitting process for Intervale Compost," said Charles Lief, treasurer and member of the Intervale Center board of directors. "Hiring civil engineers, wetland scientists, hydrologists and other technical experts, as well as legal counsel—along with the site work required by the Agency of Natural Resources—cost the Intervale Center about $200,000 in 2007. Even more than that total would be needed to continue permitting work in 2008. Despite the fact that scientific testing to date clearly shows that Intervale Compost neither contributes to groundwater pollution nor in any way negatively impacts public health or safety, the costs are too great for the Intervale Center to support from its current revenues. Given the drain on the programs and resources of the Intervale Center as a whole, our board has taken the only responsible step for this organization going forward.”
Over the next several months, none of the steps taken to wind down Intervale Compost operations will involve the sale of equipment or removal of infrastructure. As a result, composting operations could possibly be resumed after a temporary interruption.
Intervale Center Executive Director Kit Perkins said, while the action is disappointing, it is fiscally necessary to ensure that the rest of the Intervale Center’s programs and initiatives are able to continue.
"I hope that the experience with Intervale Compost will ultimately result in an improved regulatory environment and proactive partnering on the part of state agencies to create incentives for composting and organics recycling," Perkins said. "I would like to find a way to resume composting at some scale in the Intervale.”
It is unclear whether H. 873, if it passes, would exempt Intervale from Act 250. Reports said it is unknown whether the bill would be retroactive.
Vermont Compost last month also was notified that it requires an Act 250 permit to operate. The facility, located on a farm, makes compost from poultry manure and other feedstocks. Because more than half of the feedstocks originate off-site, regulators say, the operation is commercial, not agricultural, and therefore subject to regulation. The company has produced compost for several years without a permit.
State Rep. Jon Anderson, has pushed for the compost exemption after learning of Hammer's regulatory issues, according to the Rutland Herald.
"I have been up to (Vermont Compost owner) Karl Hammer's property,” Anderson told the Herald. “I have been to the top of the compost pile. I view him as a small-business owner who is struggling. Let's stop arguing over whether Act 250 applies to composting and just say it doesn't."
An exemption for Intervale is more complicated because the organization, unlike Vermont Compost, didn’t appeal the order to get a permit and has begun the permitting process already.
Some charge that politics is involved in the new bill.
Gaye Symington, speaker of the house, is the former director of development for Intervale. David Zuckerman, a member of the House Agricultural Committee, farms on the Intervale site.
The bill amends the state’s solid waste law by exempting from the definition of solid waste “animal manure and absorbent bedding used for soil enrichment; high carbon bulking agents used in composting; or solid or dissolved materials in industrial discharges which are point sources subject to permits under the Water Pollution Control Act.”
The bill also says that on or before January 15, 2009, the agency of natural resources, after consultation with the agency of agriculture, food and markets, shall report to the house committee on fish, wildlife and water resources, the senate committee on natural resources and energy, and the house and senate committees on agriculture with recommended amendments or improvements to the existing rules governing the construction, alteration, or operation of a composting facility. The report shall include recommendations for increasing public awareness of the benefits of composting; recommendations for increasing awareness within the composting community and those interested in initiating a composting operation of the existing regulations governing composting; and the contact information of an individual or department at the agency of natural resources that can assist interested persons in understanding and complying with the agency’s regulations for composting.
Intervale Compost Products was founded in 1987 for the purpose of renewing the fertility of depleted agricultural lands in Burlington’s Intervale, and has been operating on its current site for 15 years. The Intervale Compost facility has been composting up to 30,500 wet tons of leaves, food waste, manure, and wood waste to produce 25,000 cubic yards of compost, garden soil, and compost products annually. Intervale's compost and blended soil products are sold in numerous retail centers in Vermont and the the Northeastern U.S. and are approved for use for use by the Northeast Organic Farming Association of Vermont.
The Intervale Center’s mission is to develop farm- and land-based enterprises that generate economic and social opportunity while protecting natural resources. Through the center’s 20 years of operation, almost 350 acres of formerly abandoned, junk-strewn agricultural land in Burlington’s Intervale have been reclaimed and put to productive agricultural and recreational use.