HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-09-17 SWAB MeetingNEW HANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD
SEPTEMBER 17, 2008 MEETING PAGE 1
ASSEMBLY
The New Hanover County Solid Waste Advisory Board met on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, at 4:00
p.m. in the Lucie F. Harrell Conference Room 601 at the New Hanover County Government Center, 230
Government Center Drive, Wilmington, North Carolma.
Members present were: Chairman Claud "Buck" O'Shields, Jr.; Martin J. Michaelson; Robert W. Mitchell;
John Richard Newton; David Sims; Deputy County Attorney Kemp P. Burpeau and Deputy Clerk to the Board of
Commissioners Kymberleigh G. Crowell.
Others present: Assistant County Manager David F. Weaver and Environmental Management Director
John Hubbard.
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 September 10, 2008 for any
needed corrections and/or changes. Hearing no comments, Chairman O'Shields called for a motion to approve the
meeting minutes of September 10, 2008.
Motion: Mr. Sims MOVED, SECONDED by Mr. Michaelson, to approve the meeting minutes as presented. The
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
DISCUSSION OF ADDITIONAL WASTEC FINANCIAL INFORMATION REQUEST
In continuation of the September 10, 2008 discussion, Director Hubbard provided additional information
concerning annual costs per ton to landfill with and without WASTEC; several assumptions were made to arrive at
the information being presented. The following points were made in explaining the information:
• Assumed 280,000 tons disposed/year in landfill without WASTEC;
• Assumed 140,000 tons disposed/year in landfill with WASTEC, if operating efficiently;
• Tip fees do not include costs associated with the recycling program or administration (assumed to
be equal with or without WASTEC);
• Tip fees do not include post closure costs (assumed to be equal with or without WASTEC);
• Operating costs without WASTEC are adjusted higher to account for loss of revenue due to $2
surcharge and increased fuel, equipment maintenance, posi-shell costs;
• Wages and benefits without WASTEC are adjusted higher to reflect additional staff requirements;
• The cost of the use of soils as intermediate cover is projected to equal that of daily cover at such
time that the site runs out of on-site soils which, without WASTEC, will happen sooner than later;
and
• Tip fees do not reflect a quantified value of lost life expectancy of twelve years at the landfill
facility due to potential operation without WASTEC and the value of additional land to replace;
not sure could obtain land for new landfill due to new state laws.
Director Hubbard confirmed the spreadsheet only reflects landfill costs and does not give credit to
electricity generated by WASTEC.
DISCUSSION OF PENDING LEGISLATION REGARDING RENEWABLE RESOURCES
CLASSIFICATION AND DRAFT LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION
Deputy Attorney Burpeau presented information on Senate Bill 3, enacted during 2007 session. The Bill
covers defmition of what qualifies for energy efficient/renewable energy standards; does not specifically address
New Hanover County WASTEC facility nor reference any waste-to-energy facility utilizing municipal solid waste
as a fuel source for purposes of generating electricity Based on Director Hubbard's discussion with Progress Energy
NEW HANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD
SEPTEMBER 17, 2008 MEETING PAGE 2
representatives about the legislation, their position is that without New Hanover County WASTEC stated in specific
terins, general category or otherwise specifying municipal solid waste as an energy source in the legislation, that it
does not include WASTEC. The Bill is written more toward landfill gas than waste-to-energy.
Deputy Burpeau presented the following options to have a WASTEC type facility added to the definitions:
(1) Ask legislature to specifically include the New Hanover County WASTEC facility; or
(2) Ask legislature to amend the Bill in the following generic terms:
• Add verbiage to 62-133 7(a)1: "including, but not limited to, awaste-to-energy
facility utilizing municipal solid waste";
• Add verbiage to 62-133.7(a)5. (5)(d) "A waste-to-energy facility utilizing municipal
solid waste that delivers electric power to an electric power supplier; and
• Add verbiage to 62-133.7(a)(8) in the list of "renewable energy resources".
municipal solid waste.
Deputy Attorney Burpeau suggested Duector Hubbard share this information with Progress Energy to
receive any suggestions, there is hxne to work through this with Progress Energy due to session not starting until
January 2009. Duector Hubbard noted that Progress Energy is planning a workshop luncheon on October 14, 2008
to discuss renewable energy; he will see about reserving seats for any members that wish to attend. In response to
questions, Director Hubbard confirmed that New Hanover County has the only waste-to-energy facility in North
Carolina.
In response to questions, Deputy Attorney Burpeau explained that including a "direct user" definition in the
options would not be advisable as it would put New Hanover County in direct competition with Progress Energy as
a retail supplier. Progress Energy is a wholesale purchaser from New Hanover County. Including a "direct user"
definition would require additional modifications of existing law and may not be consistent with Federal law as well
as subjecting the County to utility commission regulations. This inclusion may also cause Progress Energy not to be
on board with the County.
Deputy Attorney Burpeau presented a draft letter to be sent to the County Commissioners regarding this
issue. Staff will also draft a resolution to include with the draft letter for review during the October 1, 2008 meeting.
Board would like to have the matter on the October 20, 2008 Board of Commissioners agenda.
PRESENTATION/DISCUSSION OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON WASTEC PROJECTED FIVE
YEAR MAINTENANCE PLAN
In response to the September 10, 2008 additional information request, Director Hubbard presented a
revised WASTEC five year projected plan reflecting work priorities to be done in a year:
• Priorities are fisted as a priority for the year work is scheduled to be done;
• Revised plan provides total costs and priority costs for each year;
• The base tonnage assumption is 280,000;
• The entire amount was used for both landfill and WASTEC because it would raise the overall
tipping fee;
• 140,000 tons goes to the incinerator, and through WASTEC, almost 100,000 tons was sent to the
incinerator in 2007; and
• WASTEC is on pace this year to do better than 2007.
In response to questions, Director Hubbard clarified that most items are maintenance costs for WASTEC
and the only capital expenses would be trucks and loaders. He explained that with exception of items noted in plan,
all items listed for FY09-10 are included in current $51 tip fee. After brief discussion, Staff will provide information
reflecting assumptions for each year beyond current year and give bottom line of how much funding, whether by tip
fees or other means, would be needed to make improvements.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD
SEPTEMBER 17, 2008 MEETING PAGE 3
In response to questions, Director Hubbard stated inflation was not added into budget. He noted that
budget has not kept up with CPI in recent years. The tip fee is recommended based on expenses for upcoming year
minus revenues from other sources and remainder is based on assumption of how many tons of waste is brought in.
The tip fee was held flat for five years, increased to $49 in 2007 and current budget is $51; decrease in incoming
tonnage has been a detriment.
PRESENTATION/DISCUSSION OF LANDFILL AND PROJECTED MAINTENANCE PLAN
Director Hubbard presented an overview of the landfill projected maintenance plan. Spreadsheet is divided
up into two parts: heavy equipment replacement and construction and engineering projects with priority listings for
each part; the following points were made for each part:
Heavy Equipment Replacement:
• All capital projects removed from FY08/09 budget due to fmancial constraints;
• All equipment replacement based on machine hours, 10,000 hour minimum;
• Current tip fee of $51/ton includes everything listed on sheet in FY09/10 except the partial closure
of Ce115 and office relocation costs;
• Compactors financed for 3 years; and
• Bulldozers and Front End Loaders financed for five years.
Construction and Engineering:
• All capital projects removed from FY 08/09 budget due to fmancial constraints;
• All equipment replacement based on machine hours, 10,000 hour minimum; and
• Current tip fee of $51 per ton includes everything fisted on sheet and on the Heavy Equipment
Replacement page in FY09/10 except the partial closure of Cell 5 and office relocation costs, this
represents $800,000 or a tip fee increase needed of $2.85/ton.
After further discussion, Director Hubbard noted that the department is playing catch-up with cell closure
at the landfill whereas at WASTEC it is with the boilers; these are major items that facility needs to recover from to
move forward. Board asked him to continue to work on information in the same manner as he will do with the
projected five year plan for WASTEC; will also create spreadsheets with the information combined.
PRESENTATION/DISCUSSION ON RECYCLING PROGRAM
Director Hubbard introduced Lynn Bestul, Solid Waste Planner, and explained that he would present the
information on the recycling program at Environmental Management. Mr. Bestul thanked the members for the
opportunity to present the recycling program information.
Mr Bestul presented an overview of the recycling sites and servicing schedule noting that a new site would
be added in the upcoming week at Murray Middle School. Recycling staff transports roll-off containers of scrap
metal from debris on WASTEC tip floor for recycling; baling equipment is at recycling division site and uses five-
day laborers to bale cardboard, mixed paper, plastic and old newspapers.
Mr. Bestul reported that currently, he does not deal directly with the markets. Baled materials are sold to
Carolina Fibre at 93% of market value. The Carolina Fibre contract will end in 2010. In 2010, Mr. Bestul will be
able to start marketing throughout industry. He gave an overview of the processes used to handle aluminum,
plastics and glass; noting that in June 2008 division changed from accepting only recyclable numbers 1 and 2 to
accepting numbers 1 through 7 with the exception of plastic bags and Styrofoam. If facility could further sort and
separate plastics, value would greatly increase. Glass commodity value has increased and volume has increased but
facility does not make much money per ton. As of January 2008, all establishments selling liquor have to recycle
drink containers. In March 2008, division contracted with a Raleigh company to purchase the glass and within three
months brought in over $10,000.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD
SEPTEMBER 17, 2008 MEETING PAGE 4
Mr. Bestul explained that the Household Hazardous Waste event (HHW) is organized and primarily
operated by the recycling staff; community volunteers and Environmental Management staff also help; 2008 event
will be held on October 25`x; noted the following items were collected dunng 2007 event:
• 60,420 pounds of paint;
• 54,792 pounds of electronics;
• 1,269 pounds of batteries;
• 840 gallons of oil,
• 225 gallons of antifreeze;
• 1,485 gallons of hazardous liquids; and
• 75 pounds of cell phones which were donated to cellphonesforsoliders.com
Division participated in four month pilot electronic waste event; since pilot event, made contact with Wal-
Mart about electronics recycling and participated in electronics recycling event at Onslow County store. Through the
Personal Sustainability Program, Wal-Mart was able to give division grant dollars through Keep Amenca Beautiful
program. This has proven to be a good partnership for Keep America Beautiful, Environmental Management and
Wal-Mart.
Mr. Bestul reported that for this past FY for performance of matenals captured, materials brought into
facility increased by 38%; last year budgeted recyclable revenues were projected at $125,000; actually did $366,000
in revenues. He explained a scrap company removed metal from working face of landfill and did not pay for
material for a number of years; only benefit was more landfill space available. Starting this year, the company now
pays for removed material; added approximately over $12,000 over a six month period. For first two months of
current fiscal year, $92,000 in revenue has been generated and may possibly make over $500,000 in revenue this
year. In response to Board questions, he explained why this does not cover expenses. He explained that division
does not have facility to sort material; commodity values increase when recyclables are sorted; options available
where other companies can be paid, such as Recyclable America, to take recyclables and ship to material recovery
facility that will sort.
In response to Board questions, Mr. Bestul confirmed a start-up cost/imtial investment would be
approxunately $4.5 million for inside sorting equipment; does not include property; once facility is able to sort
material, can deal directly with vanous markets and prices greatly increase; grant monies also may be available
through the State as well as receiving State's support for a facility in this area. Mr. Bestul reported that State has
spoken with some private industries about putting a facility here and he thinks the County would benefit and profit if
it had the facilities.
Mr. Bestul reported that the following items will be banned from NC landfills and, for New Hanover
County, will be handled by County's recycling facility and hazardous waste areas:
• October 9, 2008: oil filters, pallets and plastics;
• January 2011: televisions,
• January 2012: computers
In response to Board questions, Mr. Bestul stated the New Hanover County recycling facility does not
receive City of Wilmington's recyclables. The City is under contract with Recycle America (RA); they pay a fee to
have materials dropped off at RA's site. As RA is closed on Saturday and Sunday, County division receives portions
of material as it allows the City to come in those days to drop some recyclables so it does not have to be stored over
the weekend; pnmarily receive cardboard and glass. Wnghtsville Beach has adrop-off recycling program. Town
brings all materials to division for baling; benefit to the Town is they pay for trucking but not tip fees. Mr. Bestul
explained recyclable tip fee was changed about a year ago. It use to be $24 per ton tip fee for cardboard which is a
very good and easy commodity and as the division wanted as much cardboard as possible, fee was eliminated. A
mixed glass fee was instituted and Mr Bestul explained that there is no charge for glass not mixed, which is most of
the glass brought in; only make about $9 per ton on glass but benefit is no charge to citizens or bars to dump it at the
division.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD
SEPTEMBER 17, 2008 MEETING PAGE 5
In response to program cost questions, Mr. Bestul stated the entire recycle program is not costing less than
$51 per ton than what is being made; the advantage is that landfill capacity is being saved; factors such as amount
spent on equipment/vehicle maintenance, although mainly done in-house, may be more wisely spent on newer
equipment, if funding was available; see better savings on the far end.
In response to questions, Mr. Bestul reported there are government grants available to assist with
processing costs through the State and other organizations. Staff will be applying for a USDA grant this year and
gave further explanation of how grants are useful. Mr. Bestul further explained that through a combination of grants
and recycling events, goals such as opening a Household Hazardous Waste facility year round are a possibility.
Discussion held on Mr. Bestul's future opportunities list:
• Build and operate a Material Recovery Facility (MRF)
• Build and operate a C&D sorting and recovery system;
• Join a few of the local cities and provide curb side recycling collection;
• Support the commercial sector with recyclmg programs; and
• Implement a permanent HHW facility.
In response to questions, Mr. Bestul confirmed that this list is where the $4.5 million investment would
come into play but is unable to tell if able to profit with C&D. At the Board's request, Mr. Bestul will prepare a
projected five year plan based on these five future opportunities for presentation in a few weeks.
INFORMATION REQUESTED BY MEMBERS FOR UPCOMING MEETINGS
Discussion held on what is to be on upcoming agenda. Mr. Mitchell would like a session to discuss items to
be considered crediting back to some of these programs; what value can be given for extending the hfe of the
landfill (replacement costs, third party bidding or something similar); an economic review rather than financial
review.
At Board's request, Staff will research and report back with information from other locations on
benchmarking information or commentary on how their facilities have operated. In response to questions, Director
Hubbard responded there were approximately eighty-nine active incinerators in the U.S. and most might be private.
He will see if information is available on these incineration operations. Mr. Sims stated that he would make a call
concerning incinerator proposals for Mississippi and report back. Director Hubbard will also provide the recent
white paper for American Society of Mechanical Engineers on waste-to-energy.
Staff will continue to work on financial spreadsheets with possibility of providing updated information
based on discussions to date. In regard to discussion about Board having time to review information provided and
prepare for meetings, as well as allowing staff time to prepare requested information, Chairman O'Shields asked if
the members had any objections or concerns about cancelling the September 24`x' meeting. Hearing no objections,
Chairman O'Shields called for a motion to cancel the September 24~' meeting.
Motion: Mr. Sims MOVED, SECONDED by Mr. Newton, to cancel the September 24, 2008 meeting and
reconvene on October 1st. The MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chairman O'Shields adjourned the meeting at 5:33 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
berleigh CW. Crowell
Deputy Clerk to the Board