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 

( 
E–CYCLING—2014 
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

88–277 PDF 2016

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 

( 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware Chairman 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

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 
(III) 

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 

(1) 

1The prepared statement of Senator Carper appears in the Appendix on page 27. 

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. 

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. 
2 

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. 
3 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Kampschroer appears in the Appendix on page 30. 

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. 

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 
4 

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 takeback 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. 
5 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Day appears in the Appendix on page 35. 

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. 

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 govern-
6 

ment-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. 
7 

1The prepared statement of Ms. Pulley appears in the Appendix on page 39. 

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. 

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. 
8 

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. 
9 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Alcorn appears in the Appendix on page 44. 

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. 

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. 
10 

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. 
11 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Skurnac appears in the Appendix on page 109. 

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. 

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 recy-
12 

cling 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. 
13 

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? 
14 

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? 
15 

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. 
16 

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 
17 

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. 
18 

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. 
19 

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 escrap 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 escrap 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. 
20 

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. 
21 

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. 
22 

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. 
23 

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. 
24 

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 
25 

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. 
26 

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.] 
(27) 

A P P E N D I X 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 
94 
95 
96 
97 
98 
99 
100 
101 
102 
103 
104 
105 
106 
107 
108 
109 
110 
111 
112 
113 
114 
115 
116 
117 
118 
119 
120 
121 
122 
123 
124 
125 
126 
127 
128 
129 
130 
131 
132 
133 
134 
135 
136 
137 
138 
139 
140 
141 
142 
143 
144 
145 
146 
147 
148 
149 
150 
151 
152 
153 
154 
155 
156 
157 
158 
159 
160 
161 
162 
163 
164 
165 
166 
167 
168 
169 
170 
171 
172 
173 
174 
175 
176 
177 
178 
179 
180 
181 
182 
183 
184 
185 
186 
187 
188 
189 
190 
191 
192 
193 
194 
195 
196 
197 
198 
199 
200 
201 
202 
203 
204 
205 
206 
207 
208 
209 
210 
211 
212 
213 
214 
215 
216 
217 
218 
219 
220 
221 
222 
223 
224 
225 
226 
227 
228 
229 
230 
231 
232 
233 
234 
235 
236 
237 
238 
239 
240 
241 
242 
243 
244 
245 
246 
247 
248 
249 
250 
251 
252 
253 
254 
255 
256 
257 
258 
259 
260 
261 
262 
263 
264 
265 
266 
267 
268 
269 
270 
271 
272 
273 
274 
275 
276 
277 
278 
279 
280 
281 
282 
283 
284 
285 
286 
287 
288 
289 
290 
291 
292 
293 
294 
295 
296 
297 
298 
299 
300 
301 
302 
303 
304 
305 
306 
307 
308 
309 
310 
311 
312 
313 
314 
315 
316 
317 
318 
319 
320 
321 
322 
323 
324 
325 
326 
327 
328 
329 
330 
331 
332 
333 
334 
335 
336 
337 
338 
339 
340 
341 
342 

Æ