2008-12-03 SWAB MeetingNEW HANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD
DECEMBER 3, 2008 MEETING PAGE 1
ASSEMBLY
The New Hanover County Solid Waste Advisory Board met on Wednesday, December 3, 2008, at 4:08
p.m. in the Lucie F. Harrell Conference Room at the New Hanover County Government Center, 230 Government
Center Drive, Wilmington, North Carolina.
Members present were: Chairman Claud "Buck" O'Shields, Jr.; Vice-Chairman Robert W. Mitchell; Martin
J. Michaelson; John Richard Newton; David Sims; Deputy County Attorney Kemp Burpeau and Deputy Clerk to the
Board of Commissioners Kymberleigh G. Crowell.
Others present: David F. Weaver, Assistant County Manager, Environmental Management Director John
Hubbard, and Beth Schrader, Senior Budget Analyst.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
Chairman O'Shields called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone to the meeting of the New
Hanover County Solid Waste Advisory Board.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairman O'Shields asked the members to review the draft meeting minutes of November 19, 2008 for any
needed corrections and/or changes. Hearing no comments, Chairman O'Shields called for a motion to approve the
meeting minutes of November 19, 2008.
Motion: Mr. Michaelson MOVED, SECONDED by Mr. Sims, to approve the meeting minutes as presented. Upon
vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
DISCUSSION AND REVIEW OF UPDATED SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD SCENARIO
ANALYSIS
At the Board's request and based on discussion during the November 19, 2008 meeting, Beth Schrader,
Senior Budget Analyst, presented the updated Solid Waste Advisory Board Scenario Analysis. She stressed that the
document is to be considered a draft, and welcomed the members to provide her with any comments or changes for
inclusion in the document and stated the categorization of the scenarios:
• Scenario #1: Status Quo PLUS (PUBLIC)
• Scenario #2: Cascade Scenario (PUBLIC/PRIVATE)
• Scenario #3: LandfilUTransfer Station (PRIVATE/PUBLIC)
She explained the common model assumptions made for all three scenarios:
1) 5 year forecast model (FY09-10 through FY 13-14)
2) Revenue Drivers
a. Solid Waste: 260,000 total tons of waste in FY08-09, growing at 3% per year (or an
average of 284,357 tons/year)
b. Scrap Sales: $380,000 in scrap sales in FY08-09, growing at 7.5% per year
c. Electrical Rate (where applicable): Assumes 19.6% rate increase vs. FY07-08 for
duration of projection period; Assumes 30,000 Megawatt hours/year
3) Expense Drivers
a. CPI: 4.5% average
b. Salary/OT/Benefits: Increases 3.5% yearly, medical benefit cost remains constant
c. Solid Waste Surcharge: Includes $2/ton solid waste surcharge on tonnage going to NHC
Landfill
4) Pay-As-You-Go -All capital outlay, CIP projects, and large M&R projects are funded via cash
5) Tipping Fee is the "Even Billing"/ 5-Year Weighted-Average tipping fee
6) Excludes the large C&D Facility and the Landfill Gas Project. Neither the investment nor return
for either project is reflected in the results below.
7) Excludes $5.5 million ofpost-closure costs and $3.0 million for financial assurance (currently not
reserved because NHC meets the Local Government Financial Test)
NEW IIANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD
DECEMBER 3, 2008 MEETING PAGE 2
Ms. Schrader reviewed each scenario and in response to questions, provided clarification that the $2/ton
solid waste surcharge is all the County pays on tonnage going to the landfill and that Local Government Financial
Test is based on the net assets of the County as a whole. If the County fails the fmancial health test, it would be
required to put the total $8.5 million into reserves. She noted that assumptions were not made in regard to fuel costs.
In response to additional questions, Ms. Schrader explained that under scenario 3, the assumption of 86,100 tons
maximum being sent to the Landfill, with the balance going to Sampson County was derived by reviewing where the
essential efficiency step-ups would occur, requiring additions in personnel, equipment and operating costs.
Essentially, she looked at the optimal level where the facility is still able to be open, meeting minimum requirements
and have the least costs and not adding any incremental costs.
Ms. Schrader explained that under scenarios 2 and 3 the relocation of administrative offices and
construction of the southern property are not included in the base tip fee because they would occur outside the 5 year
projection. In response to questions about scenario 2, Director Hubbard will provide copies of the Human
Resources department spreadsheet, which is several years old, reflecting the effect of employee reduction.
Essentially, whatever costs incurred in scenario 2 would be approximately 5 times greater within scenario 3 in
regard to employee termination. The Qualitative Discussion section was based on what staff understood the Board's
prior discussions to be and is organized into domain areas of Control /Flexibility of Future Operations, Potential
Additional Revenue Sources, Landfill Life, Capital Costs /Expenses, and Other. She reiterated that members were
welcome to make corrections and additions to the document. Mr. Mitchell stated that he provided several of the
qualitative listings as he did not feel it was fair for staff to have to provide the listings. Ms. Schrader stated the
important notes to be considered in reviewing the three scenarios:
Scenario 2 maintains the highest degree of flexibility and has an associated optionality value;
When WASTEC is not being operated there are certain revenue streams (such as electricity
generation or receiving credits for being a green energy source) that are not available;
When the quantity of solid waste to the landfill is reduced, it makes the landfill gas project
significantly less attractive (less gas generation, harder to do) to either a 3rd party or the County.
Scenario 1 is probably the most attractive for this project as a future potential revenue source.
In review of page 3, Ms. Schrader reported that with the help of Director Hubbard, Sam Hawes, Landfill
Manager and Mr. Mitchell numbers were able to be attained to create the Base Tipping Fee analysis. In response to
questions, Ms. Schrader explained that the $.91 under scenarios 2 and 3 is the development of the southern property
which is $1.3 million and would occur between years six and eight; $2.64 in scenarios 1 and 2 is the assumption of
the 30,000 megawatt hours; $3.99 remedial correction in scenarios 1 and 2 is the amount of the M&R performed at
WASTEC and if M&R is done correctly, it would be credited back. She further pointed out the following notes as
listed on page 3:
1) WASTEC capital investment of $9.5 million is artificially high due to the need for remediation
due to non-perforrnance of routine maintenance and repair of the facility. Based on typical M&R
schedules /part replacement schedules, the actual average 5 year ongoing M&R would be $3.83
million. Correction for the artificially high value results in a $3.99 reduction to tipping fee.
2) If WASTEC is designated "green energy", only scenarios 1 or 2 (where WASTEC remained in
operation) would be eligible for the additional revenue. Assuming capital investment to bring
WASTEC up to peak efficiency, it would produce 30,000 Megawatt hours /year. For calculations,
1 REC (1 Megawatt hour) is assumed to be worth $25.
3) Additional Landfill life - In Scenario 1 this is the incremental benefit provided due to improved
efficiency. For Scenarios 2 and 3, this represents the additional value realized for the reduction of
tonnage going to the landfill (358,750 tons in scenario 2, 338,393 tons in scenario 3).
4) WASTEC Landfill lost value - If for any reason we are no longer able to send waste to Sampson
County, this is the intangible lost value of the 652,894 tons that WASTEC prevents from going
into the Landfill today, that would now need to be land filled.
Discussion was held about a fourth scenario of total shutdown not being listed on the document. Ms.
Schrader commented that as it was not actually an issue discussed, it was not included in the document. Although
members feel this is not an option, they would like to have it included in the summary portion of the
recommendation along with what the cost may be for total shutdown. A brief conversation was held about Mr.
Mitchell's suggestion that a fifth scenario could be anaerobic digestion and its current use in the Midwest. For this
NEW HANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD
DECEMBER 3, 2008 MEETING PAGE 3
situation, it could be considered as a future operational flexibility of scenarios 1 and 2. The members thanked staff
for their hard work on the document and feel that it was exactly what was needed and gives the best economic
impact picture of the situation.
In further discussion about the model, Ms. Schrader commented that the 5 year total tonnage of 1,421,787
is more towards the aggressive end; validity of scenario comparison is there and it is important to remember that as
tonnage decreases, tipping fees increase. In discussion of scenario 2, Mr. Mitchell commented it reflects that as
tonnage decreases, base amount still goes to private contractor, WASTEC continues to operate efficiently and result
is tonnage going to the landfill is minimized and extends the life in that scenario. He also felt that while the
committee agrees that the C&D investment or a more aggressive recycling program that further reduces landfill
tonnage and programs including the methane gas project have to stand on their own, should they be adopted, the
greatest impact on the landfill comes through scenario 2. Chairman O'Shields commented that Mr. Mitchell has
also taken ownership of the Additional Discussion section concerning the proposals from Waste Management and
Republic.
In response to the Board's November 19, 2008 request, staff provided copies of the Waste-to-Energy
Advisory Committee's December 1991 document entitled Analysis and Recommendations for Management of The
New Hanover Count) Waste-to-Energy Facility. Chairman O'Shields stated that in some areas one of the hurdles is
controlling the waste stream as it impacts on the incinerator, landfill, recycling, etc. and in this document the
executive summary reflects several recommendations which have not been completed by the County. He feels that
the mandatory trash collection recommendation is an option the County needs to consider.
At the Board's request and based on discussion held, Ms. Schrader will update the model to reflect the cost
of total shutdown. It will not be included as an option but rather, on a summary page of the document. Discussion
was held that although the model presented is excellent and the Board clearly understands it, due to working with it
for so long, it needs to be simplified further for use and understanding by the Board of Commissioners. The Board
requested that Ms. Schrader work on simplifying the model and Mr. Mitchell offered to assist Ms. Schrader in this
task.
At the Board's request, Director Hubbard will report back with a cost range for the demolition/salvage of
WASTEC. He confirmed that he is being requested to look at costs of demolition, not mothballing, and will look at
the history of the closings of the Savannah and Charlotte plants which should be able to provide the information. In
response to additional requests about note 2 on page 3 of the model, he will also included for that section, the carbon
offset value, the number of homes that generated power would cover and also what is the WASTEC equivalent of
gasoline/carbon fizel not being used and/or the number of cars that are being kept off the road.
A copy of the updated Draft Solid Waste Advisory Board Scenario Analysis dated December 3, 2008 is
included herein as Attachment 1.
LEGAL RESEARCH
Deputy County Attorney Burpeau reported that at the Board's request during the November 19, 2008
meeting, he researched the legalities that impact acquiring property or existing landfill operations outside the county
for landfill purposes. He stated that N.C.G.S. §153A-15. "Consent of board of commissioners necessary in certain
counties before land may be condemned or acquired buy a unit of local government outside the county" discusses
this matter. Bottom-line, the County would need the consent of the board of commissioners where the land is
located in order to acquire said land. In regard to the legalities of the Landfill Gas RFP respondents providing a
signing bonus, he reported that in discussions with the Institute of Government, they stated there is nothing right on
point about this and thought the County would have really broad authority as they look at it more as a service
arrangement, which is not subject to bid requirements, rather than a sale of a commodity. The Institute thought the
County could have flexibility of bonuses or the possibility of requiring bidders to contribute to the cost of the
exploratory/preliminary wells or testing and then the high bidder either bearing that cost, maybe receiving
reimbursement. Essentially, they thought that the County has very broad latitude and as there is no case law there is
a possibility of challenge but they didn't anticipate it as the thought is that there was an analogy of sludge projects
and other items that are not considered commodities.
TIME EXTENSION REQUEST AND ADDITIONAL MEETINGS
Chairman O'Shields reported that based on discussions during the November 19, 2008, a letter was
submitted to Chairman Greer requesting a time extension until January 2009. He explained that after discussions
NEW HANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD
DECEMBER 3, 2008 MEETING PAGE 4
with Chairman Greer and staff, the date of Tuesday, January 20, 2009 was the requested time extension. Chairman
Greer has granted the extension until Tuesday, January 20, 2009 which is the regularly scheduled meeting date for
the Board of Commissioners, beginning at 9:00 a.m. Staff confirmed that the agenda deadline for this meeting is
noon on January 6, 2009 and the agenda review date is January 15, 2009 at 4:00 p.m. After a brief discussion,
general consensus of the Board was to add December 17, 2008 to the meeting schedule and discuss scheduling
additional meetings at that time.
TOPICS FOR DECEMBER 10, 2008 MEETING
A brief discussion was held about topics for the December 10, 2008 meeting. Some topics to be discussed
during the meeting are the executive review of the alternatives, perhaps reaching aconclusion/consensus of the
scenarios, the methane gas project, C&D and recycling elements positions. Discussion was held that Environmental
Management is an enterprise fund and objective in looking at the 5 year model is that whatever is spent is digested
in the tipping fee, which has always been the intent.
Chairman O'Shields commented on the offer from Greg Peverall with Waste Management to travel to
facilities in Florida to look at the single-source recycling/C&D recycling and incineration. Discussion was held that
most members do not feel there is a need to visit the site but if one member would like to go, then only one member
should go. Mr. Michaelson commented that he may be interested and would discuss the offer with Mr. Peverall.
Chairman O'Shields thanked Mr. Peverall for the offer.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chairman O'Shields adjourned the meeting at 5:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted, ~!
"I
K / berlei h G. rowell
Y~ g
Deputy Clerk to the Board
ATTACHMENT 1
a
0
h
.N
f6
c
a
c
Vf O
-O N
fLp M
m ~
O y
Vf
~ 0
Q
GJ
H
f6
3
~_
.O
N
C
ca
J
U
~, z
d'
r-I
M
a--1
Y
LL
L
OD
7
0
i
t
0
r-I
01
Y
iri v
c
0 0
v~
a
~ +' v
N
7 ~
y~ U ~
a" ~' °
_ ~ Q1
N O
L
C ~ >
G T N
c ~ ~
CO _ _
G '-f N
0
v
O
N
v
c
.~
co
lD
v
O
Q
a
a
a
W
3
a
v
Oul
W
f0 L U
c
~ o
cn b4
C C
O O
u ~
N ~
c
•m rya
C
C
~ O
~M+
O O
U ~
~ ~
N ~
c L
U ~
~-+
N ~
E 3
T
~ O
N
T C
~ N
m t/~
H ~
(0 ~
7
~ U
C ~
v
N O
a~ t
~ m 3
H
~ ~
~ 3
~ a
v
N
C
N
Q
x
w
V H ~
f6 L V
N },
w ~
oA 0
c ~
a a
~. Z
~ U
~ ~
~ .
~ o
Q a`
ro
41 C7
L -
Dp `~-
•~ ~
f0
J
~ ~
N Y
}
Lf) ~
\ ~
do ~
C
U
m LL
c o
w °~
v
a, °~
L ~
H ~
N L
4J +•+
LL y
41
00 ~
•Q 7
Q U
F w
M Ch ~ lD t~
~
'6 5;
N u ~
C
~
o c c o
T ~
-o ~ ~ a~ o_
v ~ ~ d
. -a
~
~
C
i
~''
y ~ C
J 7 '~
~ C C
C f0 w
`
~ C N
~ Q ~
~
C C
L L V O O ~~ a
.
p~ o y L ~ Q
~
• t0
w Y C
o u N 0 '''
~ N 00.0 d? ~ `
~ __ O
C 6J ~ Y ~ ~ ~ C ~ O m ~ ~ -
l ~
L m
C p-
~
.U ~
C?
f0
~ 'L
u N p.
C
~
~ r
~
V a 3
~
~ ~ N
H
N
~
C O v
'C O 7
~ ~,
~n ~ . ~ O ~ ~ 4J d c0
:-. ~ O aJ t6 G1 ~ W (~ ~ T ~ ~ w ~ 3 a.
~~ ~ t10 U O •~ C `~ ~ C ~ _
N O L V C
° L +T+
~'' -
E - ~ L
d gyp" ~ p~ 0 'O T C O_ `y O ~ O r y = r
0
- a o
0
~ o c ~ o ~
a m c v m c ~ ~+ o L ~o
~ co ~
~ c~
J ~ a~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ o c c a
O o c
O
J
C 7 L O = N N O L -_ ~
C ~
CC
N L W C a! ~ N 7 C ~ f6 (6 a.+ 3 3 ~ O C
L ~ "
J t6 ~ E O
~
~ +
..
3 Q
of
~v o
O m ~
~ O > a
n
x
a
°' C
y
t
~ °
3 ~ Vf >
v
c
Q oc ,~ Q c i
c
a u i
a
x ~; ~
p~ U -o
C
C
'
a
i
~ c ~ N `~
°' C O
~ 0
c v
" ,a? c
~
rd . 0
.0
O C
U 'rp ~ a) c
u
C C c 3
f6 w ~
OJ N
~ ~ C
C y O
. C ~ ~=
C
a~+ C
E
O
C M O.
O=
~ O ` ~ 0 ~
0 O •N O ~ ~ = v ~
. ~ ~
C
~
W ~ ~
E 'C
L 0) a
+
d y ~ ~ Q 0
>' O
N E t
>~ u r
o
~ J
H f" ro c0 O 'p 0 ~ ce ~ ~ m ~
~ ~ " p
> o T y E ~ Q 3 o
~ u
U
v
>•
m u ~ c V v
u a ~~ ~ .~ c a •~ o "- 0
o ~ a a~ c~
~ v N ~ u v E a `~ ~ ~ i v c
~ "
J
N ~ L=
O ~ ~ T
O ri C ~ ~ Q L V C
O a+
m N
C 'C C a E ~ u ~~ ~ T C 3
~ w O
V
o
o L
~
.. Q ~
d '
Q
~
c c - n ~ _°
c +'
m c a m
c ,~ c
~o ~ p
o
~... ai ~ a
~ L
N ~
p 0 U1
~ }' O ~ O
~ ~ ~ t6 tD 0
N ~ ro ~ ~p
L ~
~ O C C O.
C ~
~ ~ L
00
I~ N ~ p
Ql v J =
-
i~ in ~ ~ ~
v ~+ ~
.
~
O u O
v L
6 0 ~ 3
~
1~ E_ C
' N ~
p U C
p ~ ~ =p
7 i C
N D) ~ C V~ L
~^ u~ v ~+
a.+ u
+
x ro
~ ~ f9 Q1
C S N M r0
vii O y a v~
N E
~ O
GJ O 'c 0) ~ 41
E~ +, oc .~ Q c ~n v a ...~ ac °u 3~ ~ v
c a ~„
.~ ~ ~ v
f0 ~ ~ C 41
VI
DD ~
L
.~
~ +-' O! DA
C f6
o L
a c
~ ~ T ~~ c
u O
T C p u
+,,, C C ~ O O
a~+
O
0
O N U D
u C w
O 0 w~
+, _ O
C`
.~ w
H w _
N ~ N o
_
~ _
CC
Q L
C)
M J
fO V- N Q
~ C
N~ L ++
C E O
m
H d C Q
J ~
~ 0 0 ~ ~
H •
f6 ~
~ fl O
~ C
*' O
.
o ~
~ L ~ ~_
-o
• co -
• c t~ c v y
R X O) ~ fC .
p- v J ~ ~ c0
~
a
u
`^ Y
~ c p
~
v
N `^ O
.C V
d ~
01 ~
~
~ N O
f0 vi
Q
'i >
~
0
ra w O ~ O a-+
~ ~" C ~ GJ ~ Q Ol 4J C
vy.~i
~ 3
~ ~
~ N V?
~ ~ J
`°
r..
-o
~
N
O
+ ~
'
+
C. N
C
c
C ~
~
3
~ OI
Q c
01 ~
7 ++
~ f0
~ t
3
~ L
~=
N
T
N
°
~ ~ "'
3
~ a
i c ~
• ~ U 3 N N N C O O C H O C C -
_ c x ~ N c v on N -° ° a u ~ c - ~+
~ 3 c co c u= ,~ ~ o f ai ~ c c U
~ ;_
O
N
p N Q 0 0 O C y ~ U N T VI ~ '~.' °~ H O J ,
y.,
=
v
i
O u M V ~ ~ ++ >~ +.'
p O
C
C '
N ~ N "O N
N> Z
a.+ G1
~
c
L o~ c a •
a~
~ T
f0
~ a~ c T
p O
c - T~ ~ c c ~ w T
a
i -
O U
-a ~o w v ~ ra c o ~
° +~ N
c co u °' ~ U y ° ~ ~' a on u E c •c °' v
C
'~ ~ ~' O
~ ~ C ~ ~ _ C ~ C ~ ~ '6 C 2 v O ~ j, C
to
In
a+ ~ °
¢
N > p
V .+
N
C ,+
+
N V
t6 +-' O 'D y
~ O
- ° ca ~+ N N .~_ ~ ~-+ z ~-+ ++ co _O O
~
O ~
o ~ ~
y ~
O N
3 +' d ` ~ Q. ~ N ~ W ~ Y ~ T ` N !Z ~
~
v ~ -~ ~ ~ o a
O ~
O c ~ ~._ ~
G1
f ~ ~ E ~ a ~ ~ ~ o ~
~ of Oi ~ ~ a
i c~
_
7 ~ CY1 - ` t H V O O p
p
0 .O ~ J V1 a+ do C ¢ '~, N "O _
"6 O N ~ N ` O
O
' 7 •"' ~..+
Y O e-1 O f6 ~
w C ~ T
,
O N +' ~
C Q ~
° N N ~+ ++
C O J U
U
•` C N 0 =_
C
f
N N f9 a+
C ~ N
~+ fC U ° -
~a n1 `
v : O H
~[ r¢
~
° U C C 41 Y f6
U ~ O a+ sO+ ~ +-~ ~ ~ 3 !Z +.+ +' `- ~ ~ ~ C C f6 H z
Y~ ~° _
~~ y oA N V ~..~ N !?
i+ !Z N~ 7~
3 v O N C N L'd +~ O ~ ~ N V U
'~
c ~ n ~ o ~ ~ ~ a ~ $ .
~ -° ~ v ~ _
>' U ~ ~o a~ .a +' ° ~ cv c • c in
•
°
'f9 - ° O ~ C '° O +' C
°~ of C C
3
a _
~ O Y
3 2 C N fC T~
c ~~ ~ N C
O
•..~ -° N
u o ~ ~ +~ ~
E ~
~
' m
.% ro ~
,
~ Y ro ca
~ c ~ `-
z °
° U - +'
~ E
v o ro
N
~ o o ~
o v a
v
a
u r -- u
u
a; ' } co °
; v
°
5 ~ u
L T
w ' o ;r ~
N E
c
-o
~ : w-
~ 3 ~ ;_, c
o
0o
N `
~ ~ a; ~,_.
~ w ~ 3 _
c 0 3 ~ °
=
a Y ~
~ o~ Lon o~ v`°i a m p ~ m ~ ~ E~
~ }' aco `° ~ o ~ Q~~ o c ¢ c o v a v t
rn v = u ac w 3 in ~ a~ N LL ~ •
, v
w N~ ~ o in E m U ¢ v¢¢ o_ o ~ m U ~ o F- +~
~
N • • • • • • • ~ • • • • • •
a~ o
~' N
N
~ N
L
7 N
+ O
~ N
j ~ O 'O 7
C
Y
+•
of ~
u +-+ W ~ O ~
~
°
N w > ~ u "~ ~~ a
L E
-o
E
> o d v w 3 °
N
0 to r C to a..
o ¢ 4J ~.
° N ~ ro ~ >,
3 -° L
°D
3> ~ u v~ ° v T~
c l
E a
~ ~ a ~ o v
U ° c o
v ` ~ ~ a ~
L
'~
v
~ ~ v . r
a
~o +,
u
_ '6 O O `
d ~ ~ O
~ - L
O f0 ~ of L w ~ +-+
N
i O
Z cco
uc ~ c ~ O ~ ~ ;~ ~ > ~ i c ~ ~
o o ~ v c O
.
~
V7
~
~
y
~ C L
~ O O
' - d0 Y
~ IA
~
C w
+
1 +
L
V
f0 7
V O
3 ~
~ ~
7 'a+
~ p a v
C
~ ~ O .~ ~ L!1
N
N
~ in
7 ~ E U
~ w ~ .> C U v N
N r 'O Q (
O _
~ ~ y
~ 41 ~ vi
~ ~ °- ~n ++ ++ t0 i fC u t0 to C tD > +-' T U O
o
~ o co ~ u
~ m a ~ 3
•~ ° i ~ N ~ ~ °- ~ v o c i `Lo a
i
o
o c m~
N m ~. `°
c a
i
° c v
u E o
v
c E
N •~ T
L
v
E o
-a3 u c
` >, ° u~•°- c
c v
i
° s
~n rn v
1~ OO i--{ ^ m
•~ L ~ ~..~ O. N ~ ~+ o
tin
f6 f0 N L ~'' ai r-
'j~ N ~7 O ~ (6 Y d
~ ° Q ~+
00
~ ~ `-' a a o- Z a°1i o p p a ~; o c ~ ~ co ~ ° o
v ~ ~ c o - c ~ ~
,
N m o o ~c a ,r u oC N a v ~ o ~ +, s~~ w u¢ a o W ,~
m m ~t
.-i • • • • • • • • • • •
c
6 N W ..-.
~ N N
v N U
~ ~ ~
'
*
a
a o~ Q~ o v~ ~° 3
~
v
v ~a v ;,,
+, o ~ ~
° N +~
c c ~ L
an
• E
~o ~ c c °>~ w o~ ~ c ~ a N
° N 41 U ~ ~ •~ `~ ~ L1 p C v ~ U ~ C 'D op ~ N
O a~ LO W
in F- C¢ U ~ N On C
O N m
V L. ~ W U
C ~ ~ d ~ w V1
_ O
O "O O ~ N ti. (n O1 f0 -° ~ N > = p ~ {r Lll ° ~ 7 O
C L p > t0
in
f0 Z C ~ ~' >
~ ~
' ~ ~
N f6 ~ T ~ +-~
N
i
ca _
~ V ~
N V
00 00 W Y E O~ .4 C C `0 . ~+ N C ~ 7 N N N t6 ~
T
N' 00 rj y
= CO O °'
X
l+ ~ 'X
d N N
++ j +p+ v ~
41 y O C
O p
~
ap+yV-_ O.
X w. ~ c
a
O' ~ C p L 7 -°
41
O L C O O
V1 l0 N Z 2 3 v O oC r- ~~ a N~ ~ Q w N C
e u +~ w v +.+
tp ^~
.-i • • • • • • • • •
.-, c N
o co ,~ o o c
~ ' a
u c
3
O .~ w= ~ ~ ~
~
V O g N
p
' w
~ to ~ Y !_'
U \
LL C
"O f0
ro ¢ c +~ Q X f6
v L "O j
'° N
+~
~ ~ o
H r~ O fB N -i U
~
N r 0 Q1
f6 ~ O
O ~ (O ~.
} C y
~ +
+ >
o
a C
` ~ L
O
v
i v ~i o
c _° v
00 ~ ~ ~ O o0 O M
O 01 N O O u'f O I~
N O .-a M 0~ 0 !A
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N
00 a-I I~ O Q1 00 ~ V1
ai Q1 N O Ol LO lD O
~O O ~-I O M •-I N O
am ~
! to V? L? L? to V?
L i
/-
.ioooo,~~ .i
1~ O O O Q~ 00 tD N
N O O O m O N 1A
ce ~
/? +/~ t/? L? V? L} L}
i i
/~
a~ u
c ~ ~ v >
o y~ ~o ~ v v
~
U ~ U
y O m ~
.
~
+ 0
J
~. s. ~ ~ ~ - W
ya o o;~~ LL.
a
i
~
~
c ~
~
N
;~
o
~
Q
~ J ~
C
C ~
• ~
a Y 0 J ~ ~ ~ ~
H. ~i ~ ~ o~c Q Q Q
~ 3 3 3~~ H
m
' y
a a
a J J J z
v
0
m
T
'u
v
t
O
.~
a
N
.~
C
f0
N
U
C
f0
C
O1
~+
C
.C~
C
C
Y
O
L
W
O
u
co
L
O
lH
L
Q
O
O
G1
7
C
O
Y
C~
C
Q)
i
O
v
C
G1
L
O
v
7
t
ao
s
T
is
U
f6
c
0
.c
lf1
0
a-~
C
a~
E
v
C
ro
a
V
U
W
H
N
N Q
O
z .~
c
•N
O
v
a
7
f0
t
CO
t
T
io
~u
w
N
f0
N
L
O
C
O
~+
U
d
L
U
v
w
ao
.Q
n
O
c
0
a=+
v
7
N
Ql
rn
m
t6
a+
a
m
U
UD
C
.~
Q
0
.N
3
u
H
D
C
a+
'O
a
u
N
C
O
~_+
f6
C
OJ
N
N
Q
N
~..+
C
.~
C
ca
L
U
N
L
u
to
C
O C
U
N fY6
a ~
Q
N O
.~ Y
O ~
d ~ ~
O N m
~6
~ v
C ~ ~ ~
Y ~ u
N N ~N w
3 `- ~ ~
-0 3 Yi c
v ~ ~ o
~ ro E ~
v ~.
7 i.= O. N
°' " E o
~ ~- '~ O
> 'i' I ~'
a
U ~ w 7
~ s - U
•' +_+ = W
c 3 ~ N
YI ~ ~
~p O f0
3 ~,
' ~ N ~
7 ~ ~~
~ ~ cXa O
c
N ~ ~ aJ
~ o ~
~ c ...~ a~
v
c c
~ o a~i ~
~ ~ O
c ~ ~ w
~ ~ 0 0
~ O v u
N ~- J J
f0 _ _
3 c-I N M
d
t
a
O
a
O
a
u
co
C c
~ ~
3 O
~ ~
,~ 'n `° 3
.~ v ~ 3 v
\ Q ~ .V 'j
~ Q. ~ N
O ~ ~ a ~
a~ f0 ; ~ >
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ro O-
ro ~
Cp O ++ y YO
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~, ~- ~ > v
v .~ v ~ ° ~
c Q Q S a o
~ v O y c w
L
VI VI fl. ~ ~ ~
'~ ~ v m ~ 3
n ±, ~ d ~ Q
O a ~ O
W S O ~ ~ N
u
ct u1 3 c-1 N
a
d
v
U
c
N
.~
C
0
~ ~
U '-
~p U
n T
E
0 0
a ~
C7 U
to
40
O
a
C
U
N
v
.~
~o
u
v
'o
a
fC
C7
C
~o
J
a~
O
ro ~ u 'o
Scenario 1: Status Quo PLUS
~!4~:14 fl(~.1~ EY33:~ ~sz.l3
Adman S744,538 $767,232 $790,719 $815,029 $840,190
Landfgl 782,566 805,749 829,743 854,577 880,281
Recycling 506,240 520,874 536,019 551,695 567,919
WASTEC 3,222,096 3,320,847 3,423,054 3,528,838 3,636,324
Salary & Benefits $5,255,440 $5,414,701 $5,579,535 $5,750,139 $5,926,714
Adman 63,762 66,631 69,629 72,763 76,037
landfill 2,199,437 2,298,411 2,401,840 2,509,923 2,622,869
Recycling 278,963 291,516 304,634 318,343 332,668
WASTEC 4,973,464 5,197,270 5,431,147 5,675,549 5,930,949
Operating Expenses 7,515,625 7,853,829 8,207,251 8,576,577 8,962,523
Debt Service 663,893 520,068 294,009 291,156 116,372
Capkal0utlay 52,205 53,509 55,917 58,433 61,063
Transfer to GF 77,244 79,569 82A33 84,645 87,413
Total Base Expenditures $13,563,408 $23,921,675 $14,218,745 $14,760,950 $15,354,085
Offsetting Revenue
Giectrial Sales (1,223,141) (1,322,989) (1,422,837) (1,422,837) (1,223,141)
Scrap Sales 408,500) (439,138) (472,073) (507,478) (545539)
Total Offsetting Revenue (1,631,641) (1,762,126) (1,894,910) (1,93D,315) (1,768,680)
Estimated Total Tonnage 267,800 275,834 284,109 292,632 301,411
Implied TIp fee Pre GP/CO/MAR S44S5 544.08 543.38 $43.85 544A1
X09-10 F1fIQ-il EY31_12 EY32:3~ F.Y3~4.
landfill Lar®e Equipment 620,000 800,000 900,000 880,000 990,000
WASTEC Large Equipment 150,000 150,000 175,000 175,000 $0,000
Unk 1 M&R 960,500 231,000 295,000 244,000 600,000
Unk 2 M&R 0 160,000 150,000 400,500 760,000
Unk 3 M&R 665,000 1,654,000 84,000 84,000 84,000
T/G i• MB.R 0 0 0 985,000 0
T/G 2- M&R 0 0 985,000 0 0
Material Building/vvarehouse 0 0 0 250,000 0
Cooling Tower 8l 0 75,000 0 0 0
Cooling Tower If2 0 0 95,000 0 0
fire System Up grade 125,000 0 0 0 0
Roof ventilation fans 20000 0 20,000 0 20,000
Ash Area 0 200,000 0 0 0
Tip Hoor 190,000 0 0 0 0
Tank and pumps for hydro water 0 0 130,000 0 0
Poskive Pressure MCC rooms 0 40,000 0 0 0
Total large Capital Malntensnce 2,73050D 3,310,OOD 2,834,000 3A38,500 2,534,000
pP Projccts FYQ9.1Q r~ ia~ i~Y11_12 FY32_33 F1I~
CeR Constnxtion 6D 2,500,000 0 0 D 0
CeN Construction 6E 0 0 1,250,000 1,250,000 0
Southern Property Permitting 200,000 200,000 0 0 0
CeA Construction So. Property D 0 0 0 1,300,000
Cell Closure (Partial Ce115) 500,000 500,OOD 0 0 0
Ceti Cosure (Partial Cell 6) 0 500,000 500,000 0 0
[ell Cbcure (Partial Cell 6) 0 0 0 800,000 800,000
c& o Processing Fadlky o 0 0 0 0
Landfill Gas Project 0 0 0 0 D
Re-Location of Offices: 0 0 0 D 0
Office construction 300,000 600,000 600,000 0 0
oanvenience site modification 0 75,000 75,000 0 0
scalehouse construction 0 75,000 75,000 0 0
Total Cpr 3,500,000 x,950,000 2,500,000 2,050,000 2,300,000
Tipping Fee S6L71 $62.71 562.71 $62.71 $82.71
Scenario 2: Cascade Scenario
Adman
$312,785 ~Y34~1i
$322,050 ~1_i2
$331,639 Fru_13
$341,564
$351,836
lardfig 481,989 496,615 511,752 527,420 543,636
RecyrBng 506,240 520,874 536A19 551,695 567,919
WASTEC 3,222,096 3,320,847 3,423,054 3,528,838 3,638,324
Salary & Benefits $4,523,110 $4,660,385 $4,802,464 $4,949,516 $5,101,715
Adman 49,445 51,670 53,995 56,425 58,964
Landfill 1,658,578 1,722,793 1,790,543 1,881,691 2,016,105
Recycling 278,963 291,516 304,634 318,343 332,668
WASTEC 4,973,464 5,197,270 5,431,147 5,675,549 5,930,949
Operating Expenses 6,960,451 7,263,250 7,580,320 7,932,008 8,338,686
Debt Servke 663,893 520,068 294,009 291,256 316,372
Cap}talOutlay 51,205 53,509 55,917 58,433 61,063
Transfer t0 GF 77,244 79,569 82,033 84,645 87,413
Total Base Expenditures $12,275,903 $12,576,781 $12,814,744 $13,315,759 $13,705,250
Contract Transfer Fee ($/ton) $41.49 S42S8 $43.70 S44.85 546.02
Transfer Fee Expense $2,977,000 $3,055,146 $3,135,344 $3,217,646 $3,302,110
Offsetting Revenue
Ekctricai Sales (1,223,141) (1,322,989) (1,422,837) (1,422,837) 11,223,141)
Soap 58ks (40E,500) (439,138) (472,073) (507,478) (545,539)
Total Offsetting Revenue (1,631,641) (1,762,126) (1,894,910) (1,930,315) (1,768,680)
Estimated Total Tonnage 267,800 275,834 284,109 292,632 301,411
implied Tip Fee Pre qP/COJMiR $50.86 SS0.28 $49A7
d $49.90 S50.56
landfill Wrge Equipment J
620,000 Friail
800,000 EY3L-~~
900,000 ~!~-?~
880,000 tti13.14
270,000
VIfASTEC large Equipment 150,000 150,000 175,000 175,000 80,000
Unit i M&R 960,500 231,000 295,000 244,000 600,000
Unk 2 M&R 0 160,000 150,000 400,500 760,000
Unit 3 M&R 665,000 1,654,000 84,000 84,000 84,000
T/G 1- M&R 0 0 0 985,000 0
TJG 2- M&R 0 0 985,000 0 0
Material Bugding/rr+rehouse 0 0 0 250,000 0
Cooling Toweritl 0 75,000 0 0 0
Goofing Tower#2 0 0 95,000 0 0
Fire System Upgrade iZ5,000 0 0 0 0
Roofventi4ationfans 20,000 0 20,000 0 20,000
Ash Anm 0 200,000 0 0 0
Tip Floor 190,000 0 0 0 0
Tank and pumps for hydro water 0 0 130,000 0 0
Positive Pressure MCC rooms 0 40,000 0 0 0
Total Large Capital NWntenance 2,730,500 3,310,000 2,834,000 3,018,500 1,814,000
CIP Projects F~j~~Q EY10-11 FY11-it P1/12-13 FY33-14
CeR Construction 6D 2,500,000 0 0 0 0
Cell Construction 6E 0 0 1,250,000 1,250,000 0
Southern Property Permitting 200,000 200,000 0 0 0
Ceq Construction So. Property 0 0 0 0 0
Cep Ckxure (Partial Ceti 5) 500,000 500,000 0 0 0
Cep Closure (Partial Celi 6) 0 500,000 500,000 0 0
Ce0 Closure (Partial Cell 6) 0 0 0 800,000 800,000
Re-Location of Offioas: 0 0 0 0 0
office construction 0 0 0 0 0
comrenknce site modification 0 0 0 0 0
snkdwtrse construction 0 0 0 0 0
Total ClP 3.200,000 1,200,000 1,740,000 2.040.000 800,000
TippirM Fee $66.18 $66.ss $66.18 $66.11 S6i.18
5cena- io 3: 86,100 tons to tandfi8 /Transfer Station Model
Pr'o/e~d
Admfn FY09-10
$312,785 ~1I70•IS
$322,050 ~~
$331,639 fY12-l3
$341,564 FY33•l4
$351,836
landfltt 481,989 496,615 511,752 527,420 543,636
Recycling 506,240 520,874 536,019 551,695 567,919
WASTEC 0 0 0 0 0
Salary & Benefits $1,301,014 $1,339,538 $1,379,411 $1,420,679 $1,463,391
Admin 49,445 51,670 53,995 56,425 58,964
landfill 1,687,875 1,763,829 1,843,202 1,926,146 2,012,822
Recycling 278,963 291,516 304,634 318,343 332,668
WASTEC 0 0 0 0 0
Operating Expenses 2,016,283 2,107,016 2,201,831 2,300,914 2,404,455
Debt Service 663.893 520,068 294,009 291,156 116,372
CapiialOutlay 51,205 53,509 55,917 58,433 61,063
Transfer to GF 77,244 79,569 82,033 84,645 87,413
Total Base Expendkures $4,109,639 $4,099,700 $4,013,201 $4,155,827 $4,132,694
Contact Transfer Fee (S/ton) 541.49 $42.58 $43.70 $44.85 $46.02
Transfer Fee Expense $7,538,967 $8,078,956 $8,652,632 $9,261,992 $9,909,148
Offsetting Revenue
Electrical Sales 0 0 0 0 0
Scrap Sales (408,500} (439,138) (472,073) (507,478) (545,539)
Total Offsetting Revenue (408,500) (439,138) (472,073) (507,478) (545,539)
Estimated Total Tonnage 267,800 275,834 284,109 292,632 301,411
knplied lip Fee Pre qP/CO/M&R $4197 $42.56 $42.92 544.12 $44.78
pro/aaed
~ ~riQii fY3 - fl32_i3 Fyi3.~4
landflli large Equipment 620,000 800,000 900,000 880,000 270,000
WASTEC Large Equipment 0 0 0 0 0
Unit i MihR 0 0 0 0 0
Unit 2 M&R 0 0 0 0 0
Unit 3 M8iR 0 0 0 0 0
T/G 1- M&R 0 0 0 0 0
T/G 2- M&R 0 0 0 0 0
Material Building/warehouse 0 0 0 0 0
Cooling Tower#i 0 0 0 0 0
Cooling Tower#2 0 0 0 0 0
Fire System Up grade 0 0 0 0 0
Roof ventilation fans 0 0 0 0 0
Ash Area 0 0 0 0 0
Tip Floor 0 0 0 0 0
Tank and pumps for hydro water 0 0 0 0 0
Positive Pressure MCC rooms 0 0 0 0 0
Total large Capital Maintenance 620,000 800,000 900,000 880,000 270,000
aP Prof FY09-10 ~~~. FYll_12 fYi2-13 11113-14
Cell Construction 6D 2,500,000 0 0 0 0
Cett Construction 6E 0 0 1,250,000 1,250,000 0
Southern Property Permitting 200,000 200,000 0 0 0
Cell Constnktlon So. Property 0 0 0 0 0
Cett Clacure (Partial Cell 5) 500,000 500,000 0 0 0
Cell closure (Partial Cell 6) 0 500,000 500,000 0 0
Cell Closure (Partial Cet16) 0 0 0 800,000 800,000
Re-tocatlon of Offices: 0 0 0 0 0
office construction 0 0 0 0 0
convenience site modification 0 0 0 0 0
scalehouse instruction 0 0 0 0 0
Tots) pP 3,200,000 1,200,000 3,750,000 2,OS0,000 800,000
Tipping Fee $52.08 552.08 S52.08 $52.0>i 552.08