State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation Office of the Commissioner 1 National Life Drive Main 2 Montpelier, VT 05620 (802)

) 249-4393

AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES

matt.chapman@state.vt.us
February 14, 2014

Mr. Ingenthron: I am responding to your e-mail of January 28, 2014 where you request We would like ANR to A) expressly interpret the Contract to allow self transportation, as it insisted Good Point do in the previous contract (when a delivery from Earth Waste was delayed, Karen Knaebel intervened), and if not B) allow us to either process the material collected after the injunction or instruct Casella to accept it in good faith. The Agency has consistently advised Northeast Resource Recovery Association (NRRA) and Good Point Recycling (GPR) that we do not object to a subcontract between your organizations and Casella Waste Systems (CWS), however, 10 V.S.A chapter 166 and the terms of the E-cycles program contract do not require CWS to accept self transportation under the contract. The Agency never required that NRRA allow self transportation under prior contracts. Under NRRAs administration of the prior contract, NRRA chose to use a spoke and hub collection system where smaller collection facilities would transport to a larger facility that would consolidate material or simply store material prior to shipment to GPR. NRRAs choice to administer prior contracts in this manner does not mean that the contract or the Agency required such administration. The Agency has also consistently disagreed with your position that CWS is required under the terms of the current e-cycles contract to accept self transportation. The contract may allow, but does not require, CWS to accept self-transportation. Likewise, nothing in any statute or regulation requires CWS to do so. The Agencys position is also documented in the attached e-mails and further supported through the discussions GPR and that Agency have had. On October 18, 2013, the E-cycles Program and NRRA/GPR met in the National Life Building to discuss settlement after the Civil Division, Washington Unit dismissed your case. At that meeting, you stated that you intended to conduct a collection event at the Dorset School and alleged that such an event should be covered under the E-Cycles program contract. The Agency advised you that the Dorset event specifically and self transportation generally were not eligible for payment under the contract, and that you should obtain a subcontract with CWS prior to the event if you wished to conduct that event. You acknowledged that conducting the event would be at your own risk. In a separate meeting on November 6, 2013, with GPR, CWS, and representatives of the Agency regarding implementation of the opt-out plan and E-cycles program, it was made clear to you and other parties in the room that the Agency did not concur with your interpretation that self transport was required by the contract.

Regional Offices Barre/Essex Jct./Rutland/Springfield/St. Johnsbury

I point all this out to clarify that the Agencys consistent interpretation of the contract has been that self transportation is not required, that GPR was placed on notice of this fact, and that GPR knew at all times that any self transportation it undertook was at its own risk. If CWS and GPR can reach an agreement on payment for materials that GPR collected outside the program and without a subcontract, the Agency would be willing to compensate CWS for those services. In the alternative, if GPR can reach an agreement with manufacturers participating in the opt-out plan to accept the material and compensate GPR for that material, then the Agency will allow those manufacturers to count that material toward their goal under the opt-out plan.
Sincerely,

Matthew Chapman, General Counsel Department of Environmental Conservation

Regional Offices Barre/Essex Jct./Rutland/Springfield/St. Johnsbury