Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-12-06 Work Session NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 6, 1995 BOOK 25 PAGE 148 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners held a Special Meeting on Thursday, December 6, 1995, at 7:30 A.M. in Room 501 of the New Hanover County Administration Building, 320 Chestnut Street, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present were: Commissioners Sandra Barone; WilliamA. Caster; William E. Sisson, Jr.; vice-Chairman E. L. Mathews, Jr.; Chairman Robert G. Greer; County Manager Allen 0' Neal; County Attorney Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board, Lucie F. Harrell. Chairman Greer called the meeting to order and announced the purpose of the meeting was to allow the solid waste haulers an opportunity to comment on the proposed buy-back facility. Mr. Ray Church, Director of Environmental Management, explained the Commissioners held a Work Session on November 2, 1995 to hear a proposal on a buy-back facility to purchase recycled materials collected from the wastestream. This type of collection system would allow the waste haulers to collect commingle recyclables at curbside as well as allow civic groups to participate in collecting recyclables and selling them to the buy- back facility. The County would build a 25,000 to 28,000 square foot facility, and it would be operated by the Keys Industrial Training vocational Workshop. Keys would separate and market the materials. The collection system would be similar to the private/public partnership facility of pitt County in Greenville, North Carolina. Last year, the pitt County facility removed 25,000 tons from the wastestream at a $1.5 million profit, which resulted in returning a million dollars back into the community. Although Waste Management has a facility in operation to collect recyclables, the WASTEC Facility has seen a 35% increase ln the wastestream. Last year, the County implemented a program to remove wood waste from the wastestream of the Landfill with use of this product as fuel for the WASTEC Facility. Due to the enormous amount of waste received at the WASTEC Facility, the wood waste could not be removed from the Landfill. As a result, plans are being made to construct a new landfill cell next year, which is one year ahead of schedule. With a buy-back facility, the County anticipates removing 25,000 tons of non-burnable materials, such as glass, aluminum and steel cans, from the wastestream. This will allow more burnable materials to be handled at the Wastec Facility instead of the landfill. Director Church advised that several haulers were present and would like to speak in favor of the proposed buy-back facility because this type of facility would allow for expansion of present services into curbside recycling without the overhead cost of constructing a processing facility. Mr. Butch Saunders, representing A-1 Sanitation, spoke ln favor of the proposed buy-back facility noting that this type of facility would provide an efficient way to recycle and allow more participation from the private sector. Since pitt County has operated a successful buy-back facility and the County has the money available, it would be an ideal time for the County to initiate the system. Commissioner Sisson advised that New Hanover County would be making an investment of $300,000 to purchase the bailer for the facility to become operational. He asked the haulers why the County should defray this investment cost for other haulers when Waste Management has already made an investment in a collection system. Mr. Saunders replied if the County contracted with Waste Management as the collector of recyclables, the system would not be NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 6, 1995 BOOK 25 PAGE 149 as efficient because of alternative routing and the fact that Waste Management would be unable to pick up and separate all the curbside recycling materials. Also, the haulers are concerned about a partnership with Waste Management when this company removed trash from the County's incinerator. Mr. Buddy Lucas, representing Coastal Waste Removal, stated the collection of recyclable materials will be a necessity in the future. Currently, there is not a market in the area for plastics. The proposed facility would provide a market for plastics as well as markets for other recyclable materials. Also, the County will be using the Keys Workshop which will create jobs for mentally and physically challenged people in the community. By establishing a buy-back system, more people will participate in removing the recyclable materials from the wastestream of the WASTEC Facility and the Landfill. He challenged Waste Management to cooperate with the County in obtaining the necessary equipment and open a facility that gives a price break to the haulers by being able to bring commingled and waste materials to one location. Also, the County will be creating jobs for a work force that has limited opportunities. Commissioner Barone explained that New Hanover County was not in the employment business and stated, in her opinion, the hiring of physically and mentally challenged people should be accomplished by the private sector. She asked Director Church how many employees would be needed to operate the proposed facility. Director Church advised that Keys, not the County, would hire 15 employees to operate the facility. Under the proposal, the $1.2 million in special obligation bond money would be used to construct the building. The facility would be operated through the Keys program, and the equipment would be supplied through a broker with a payback from the sale of materials through the contract. Commissioner Barone expressed concern for the County competing with the private sector. Mr. Lucas stated he felt the facility would be helping the private sector because commingled and waste materials could be carried to one location. This procedure will reduce the cost to the haulers and in turn decrease the cost of collection services to County residents. Mr. John Bryant, owner of Southern Metals, a local recycling company, reported there are times when a market is not available for a particular product. He emphasized the importance of the County understanding that during these times, the cost of handling materials must be absorbed by the business. He asked how the County would handle the cost of these materials when the market is not available? Director Church responded the County will require a long-term contract which will establish a ceiling and floor prlce on recyclable products. He, again, reiterated that the main advantage of a buy-back facility would be to avoid the cost of replacing boilers at the WASTEC Facility and expanding the number of cells at the Landfill. Mr. Bryant advised that Southern Metals would be interested in developing a partnership with the County; however, he feels that County supported facilities should not compete with the private sector. Private companies would not be able to compete with a tax supported facility that does not have to make a profit and pay wages equal to more than one-third of the private sector. Commissioner Barone reported that Mr. Bill Reid with the City of Wilmington has cautioned the County about going into the recycling business because of unpredictable markets. She advised NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 6, 1995 BOOK 25 PAGE 150 that frequently the City has to store materials until a profit can be made on the market. Ms. Peggy Stadther, representing Waste Management, spoke in support of a recycling program in New Hanover County, but questioned why the County should invest in a facility when Waste Management already operates a recycling facility. She reported that Waste Management was a $50 million company with more accessibility to the market than any other company in the region. Several years ago, Waste Management developed a recycling program to meet the future needs of its customers. She questioned the figures used to calculate the profit of the proposed facility, and reported usually recycled newspapers sell for $100 per ton. Currently, the price is $40 per ton. She agreed that the cost of operating the facility may off-set the expense of maintenance at the WASTEC Facility and expansion of the Landfill, but questioned why the County should spend tax dollars for a facility when one is already available. She offered the services of Waste Management to the County. Commissioner Sisson advised that if Waste Management would be willing to negotiate a contract for 10 to 15 years, the County may be interested in discussing the use of the company's recycling facility. Ms. Stadther advised that Waste Management's recycling facility would be in existence for more than the next 10 to 15 years and stated if an expansion of the facility was needed, Waste Management would be capable of expanding the facility without any supplement from the County. Currently, the City of Wilmington, the New Hanover County School System, Boy Scouts, community churches, and other organizations participate in the buy-back program. Also, an office paper recycling program is offered to the company's customers at no charge. She advised that with the recycling programs that are available in the County via Waste Management, Waste Industries and A-1 Sanitation, the community needs are being met. However, the County's indecision on a plan has caused concern among the recyclers. The County should use its resources for other causes, such as maintenance of the incinerator, removal of construction debris from the Landfill, removal of metals and other harmful materials from the incinerator. In negotiations held on closing the transfer station, Waste Management was informed that the company would be considered in the operation of a MRF Buy- Back facility. As of this date, Waste Management has not been asked about a partnership, probably due to a communication problem between the Environmental Management Department and Waste Management. Ms. Stadther reiterated that Waste Management would like to form a partnership with the County on the proposed facility. Director Church asked how a contract could be negotiated with any hauler when the County has no authority over flow control. Presently, the County cannot order a waste hauler to carry its recyclable materials to Waste Management. County Attorney Copley agreed with Director Church and informed the Board that the County could not force private haulers to carry recyclable materials to Waste Management; however, the haulers could choose to carry their materials to Waste Management. Mr. Saunders advised that it would be more economical and convenient to have the commingled recyclable materials and the waste materials dumped at one location. He reported on recycling aluminum cans for nine years and stated he plans to continue his expansion into recycling other products. With establishment of a buy-back facility, it will allow for development of other recycling programs. Mr. Jim Loftin, representing Waste Industries, reported Waste Industries offers curbside recycling to some service areas. The NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 6, 1995 BOOK 25 PAGE 151 company is not interested in supporting a competitor's MRF facility; however, the company would be interested in expanding its recycling efforts. Due to the County's proposed MRF facility and no decision being made on this or other projects, Waste Industries has held back on moving forward with a project because it would be a major investment for the company. In his opinion, commingled recycling would be the best service to offer to residential customers. He supported the County's proposed facility because it would provide to the haulers a less expensive way to recycle materials. Without the facility, there will be less recycling with recycling of only the profitable materials. The Board was urged to make a decision as soon as possible in order for the private companies to plan for the future. Director Church explained that the intent of the proposed facility was not to compete with local companies, but to handle the continuous growing wastestream, which has grown 35% during the past year. A lengthy discussion was held on the advantage of removing cardboard from the wastestream and the need to have a comprehensive recycling system in place. Director Church explained that removal of cardboard from the wastestream would allow the WASTEC Facility to burn more materials. County Manager O'Neal noted that even though the haulers may be reluctant to support their competitors, the County could become a pivotal focus for the citizens of the community. The objective of the proposed facility is to decrease the amount of waste going into the Landfill. Due to a 35% increase in the wastestream, the County is having to expand costly landfill cells ahead of its schedule. Also, the WASTEC Facility is operating at 85-95%, but the population increase has caused an increase in consumption. Director Church advised that WASTEC was designed in 1982 to handle 100% of the burnable wastestream. The WASTEC expansion in 1988-89 was due to an increase in the wastestream, which had doubled from 80,000 tons to 160,000 tons per year. Presently, this figure has reached 160,000 tons. He urged the Board to place more emphasis on the recycling effort by banning certain materials from the wastestream, as currently being done in winston-Salem, Greensboro, Alamance and pitt Counties. Ms. Mary Davidson, of Southern Metals, agreed with removing recyclable materials from the wastestream, but expressed concern for a local government competing with businesses that pay County taxes. She explained that in the waste collection business, money was made from buying and reselling, not from hauling. To efficiently remove aluminum cans and other recyclable materials from the wastestream, it would require her company to make a $500,000 investment for a bailor. Director Church reported when the State enacted the steel can ban, Environmental Management contacted Southern Metals, Waste Management and other companies to see if they were interested in handling steel cans for the County. The recyclers had concern for contamination of the steel cans and did not want to provide this service. He advised that July 1, 1996, was the final deadline established by the State for counties to address the removal of steel cans from the wastestream. Commissioner Barone responded, if necessary, the State can be told that New Hanover County will not be able to remove the steel cans from the wastestream by that date. Director Church explained that without compliance to the State deadline, funds may be withheld from State grants or from the scrap-tire and white goods programs. He, again, reiterated that New Hanover County has no intention of competing with existing recycling operations, but would like to supplement or augment the NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 6, 1995 BOOK 25 PAGE 152 services of waste haulers. Currently, Southern Metals handles the removal of white goods from the wastestream. The landfill has a container in which steel items are stored. The County continues to work with private industries to secure better recycling markets. It may be possible that the County could market cardboard waste materials through the overseas market via the State Ports. vice-Chairman Mathews stressed the importance of the County finding the most economical solution to reducing the wastestream. Mr. Bryant expressed concern for the County competing with other collection sites because of the convenience to haulers in leaving commingled and waste materials at one location. If the County becomes unable to support the operation of a buy-back facility with commingled materials, the County will look for other ways to support the facility. Also, as time passes, the County will become more profit oriented and more aware of the value of recyclable materials. Director Church explained that New Hanover County was proposing a buy-back facility because the County cannot enforce flow control. Commissioner Sisson advised there are two areas of concerns: (1) multiple sites that house similar materials; and (2) the inefficiency of the delivery system with the number of multiple si tes. Under the proposed buy-back facility, the haulers will bring the materials into one central facility. Each company will be given an opportunity to bid on the materials at the County's buy-back facility as well as compete with the companies buying the materials. Instead of the County buying the materials back, one of the bidders will be buying the materials. Under this plan, the County hopes to break even with the proposed facility. Mr. Bryant explained that Mr. Lucas was a good example of how his business would not receive the metal materials. After Mr. Lucas disposes of the waste at the Landfill, he stops by his company to leave steel, copper and brass materials. If Mr. Lucas can receive the same price from the Landfill for these materials, he will not make another stop. Commissioner Sisson informed Mr. Bryant that he would have an opportunity to bid for the materials received at the Landfill. Ms. Dana Jaunzemis, representing Site Clean, reported the company had been waiting for a year to decide whether to invest in handling construction debris because the County had not made a definite decision. She advised the company would like to have a facility that separates demolition materials from new home construction sites; however, the company would not be able to compete with the County doing business across the street. Chairman Greer reported at one time incineration was thought to be the most economical and environmentally-safe method for handling and reducing the wastestream. Now, incineration has become the most expensive way to handle the wastestream. He asked if the County could place one-half of the waste received in the Landfill with the remaining half being burned? Director Church responded unfortunately the WASTEC Facility and Landfill are operating at capacity, which will require the County to build landfill cells every two years. The cost for expanding the WASTEC Facility would be approximately $30 million to handle 250,000 tons. Within ten years, landfill construction will cost $2 million plus operating costs. The proposed buy-back facility will capture 25,000 tons of the 200,000 ton wastestream, which will produce a break-even facility and leave 180,000 tons to be handled by the private sector. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 6, 1995 BOOK 25 PAGE 153 Chairman Greer expressed appreciation to the haulers for attending the Work Session and reported the remarks received would be considered when developing a plan to reduce the wastestream. He encouraged cooperation between the Environmental Department and haulers in developing a plan to address solid waste in the County. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Greer adjourned the meeting at 10:28 A.M. Respectfully submitted, Lucie F. Harrell Clerk to the Board