1993-02-24 Work Session
(~.
I.-
\~
~'I:'::
.
-...,
MINUTES OF WORK SESSION WITH 'THE WASTE-TO-ENERGY
FACILITY COMMISSION, FEBRUARY 24, 1993
-PAGE 335
ASSEMBLY
The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners held a Work
Session with the Waste-to-Energy Facility Commission on Wednesday,
February 24, 1993, at 3:30 P.M. in the williston Auditorium of the
New Hanover County Museum, 814 Market Street, Wilmington, North
Carolina.
Members present were: Commissioners Sandra Barone; William A.
Caster; William E. Sisson, Jr.; Vice-Chairman E. L. Mathews, Jr.;
Chairman Robert G. Greer; County Manager, Allen O'Neal; County
Attorney, Wanda Copley; and Clerk to the Board, Lucie F. Harrell.
The following members of the Waste-to-Energy Facility
Commission were present: R. B. Brown, Plant Manager of Corning,
Inc.; Charles Agnoff, President of Interroll Corporation; Gene
Renzaglia, Plant Manager of Oc~idental Chemical; Attorney William
A. Raney, Jr.; R. Daniel Latta, of Talbert & Bright Engineers;
Charles Wall; Chester D. Rudolf; John W. Sherrill, Wrightsville
Beach Alderman; and Jack Foster, the Mayor of Kure Beach.
Chairman Greer called the meeting to order and reported on the
need to adopt resolutions for the sale of refunding bonds before
beginning the Work Session.
ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF $4,990,000 OF
GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1993
Motion: After discussion of saving approximately $8 million on the
refunding issue for New Hanover County and the Water & Sewer
District, Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Sisson to
adopt the resolution authorizing the issuance of $4,990,000 of
General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 1993 as presented. Upon
vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as a part of
the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XX, Page 21.
RATIFICATION OF DEED TRANSFERRING PROPERTY SEIZED DURING A DRUG
RAID TO THE CITY OF WILMINGTON
Chairman Greer requested ratification of the deed transferring
Tiffany's Lounge located at 11th and Orange Streets to the City of
Wilmington. This property was seized by the U. S. Marshals Service
during a drug raid.
Motion: Commissioner Caster MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Sisson
to ratify the deed transferring the property located at 11th and
Orange Streets to the city of Wilmington. Upon vote, the MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of the deed is on file in the Legal Department.
MEETING RECESSED TO HOLD A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE WATER , SEWER
DISTRICT
Chairman Greer requested a motion to convene from Regular
Session to hold a meeting of the New Hanover County Water & Sewer
District to adopt a resolution authorizing the issuance of
$28,565,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 1993.
Motion: Vice-Chairman Mathews MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner
Sisson to convene from Regular Session to hold a meeting of the
Water & Sewer District. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairman Greer convened from Regular Session at 3:40 P.M.
Motion: Commissioner Sisson MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman
Mathews to reconvene to Regular Session. Upon vote, the MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairman Greer reconvened to Regular Session at 3:45 P.M.
~
(
MINUTES OF WORK SESSION WITH THE WASTE-TO-ENERGY
FACILITY COMMISSION, FEBRUARY 24, 1993
PAG~L336
L_-:''l''''
OVERVIEW OF THE WASTE-TO-ENERGY FACILITY AND LANDFILL
Director of Environmental Management, Ray Church, reported on
living in an environmentally sensitive area and emphasized the need
to prevent pollution of this area through the proper disposal of
solid waste. A film was presented showing the testing, monitoring,
and many duties involved with the Landfill and Waste-to-Energy
Facility.
Charts and graphs were presented reflecting the growth of
waste disposal in New Hanover County from 1980 until 1992. Also,
charts were shown reflecting the original size of the Waste-to-
Energy Facility. Solid waste disposal is seasonal with the
heaviest period during the summer months and the lowest rate during
the winter months.
o
The following analysis was presented on the installation of
landfill cells:
1981 Cell #1: 10 acres with a double liner system and a 2-
acre wastewater lagoon.
Cost: $3 million including site clearing & development; road
construction; fencing; well & water system; leachate pump
stations & force mains; and cell & lagoon construction.
1983 Cell #2: 7 acres.
Cost: $784,810 bank financed. This cell incorporated a design
modification to reduce leachate generation by subdividing the
cell. Two pump stations were located outside the cell
connected via liner penetrations. Leachate detection manholes
were also installed to monitor between the liners.
1988 Cell #3A & #3B: 7 acres each for a total of 14 acres.
0'
Cost: $1,175,567 bank financed. Cell #3A and #3B liners were
connected to previously constructed Cell #2. The 14-acre cell
was divided into 7-acre subcells for leachate minimization.
Additional leachate collection lines were installed to improve
flow and control of the surface water flow.
1990 Cell #2 Closure: 8 acres.
Cost: $664,151. This closure included the installation of
methane vent wells, collection piping and 8 "acres of 40 mil
HPDE liner.
1990 Cell #4A & #4B: 7 acres each for a total of 14 acres.
Fundinq undetermined. Engineering cost is estimated at
$131,342 and construction at $1,500,000. Engineering cost
initially included the design of 4A and 4B. Only cell 4A is
proposed to be constructed due to budget constraints. Changes
in federal and state regulations may cause a redesign from a
double lined system to a composite system of liner and clay.
The cost estimates for Cell 4A are dependent upon the State's
recommendation and may be as high as $1,500,000 for 7 acres or
$214,285 per acre.
o
~i~
The following cell usage data was presented:
Cell # Size Dates Years Rate/Year
1 10 acres Nov. 1981 to 5.5 1.8 acres/yr.
Apr. 1986
2 7 acres May 1986 to 2.5 2.8 acres/yr.
Nov. 1988
I
l
I.
"'-
.:
.
.
~
MINUTES OF WORK SESSION WITH THE WASTE-TO-ENERGY
FACILITY COMMISSION, FEBRUARY 24, 1993
PAGE 337
Cell #
Size
Rate/Year
Dates
Years
3-A
7 acres
Dec. 1988
Sept. 1990
1. 75
4.0 acres/yr.
3-B
Oct. 1990
7 acres
3.33
2/1 acres/yr.
The following chart was presented on the landfill space saved
due to incineration from July, 1984 to February, 1993:
Amount of Waste Incinerated:
705,840 tons MSW would occupy
(34,130 tons/acre)
20.81 acres
227,728 ash tons would occupy
(49,547 tons/acre)
4.59 acres
TOTAL ACRES SAVED
16.22
16.22 acres x $200,000 per acre equals to $3,224,000 saved in
landfill construction costs. This figure does not include
operating and maintenance costs.
A chart was presented on comparison of the County's tipping
fee to the national average with usage of the National Solid Waste
Management Association data. with the current $60 tipping fee, New
Hanover County is well within the national average. The average
tipping fee nationwide for the year 1993 is $107.94; however, the
$60 tipping fee is the highest in the State of North Carolina, and
an increase in this fee could force waste haulers to seek disposal
sites outside of the County. This would result in reduced waste
tonnage disposal at the County's facility.
Discussion was held on Senate Bill 111 with the following key
issues presented:
-Solid Waste Management Hierarchy: Source reduction, reuse,
recycling, composting, incineration with energy recovery,
incineration without energy recovery, and landfilling.
-Local governments were required to establish recycling
programs by July 1, 1991.
-Waste reduction goals were established as follows:
June 30, 1993; and 40% by June 30, 2001.
25% by
-Disposal bans were established for waste motor oil, lead-acid
batteries, white goods, tires, and yard waste.
-Waste reduction programs established by New Hanover County
are as follows:
A Drop-Off Recycling Program for the unincorporated area
of the County was established in 1990 composed of 3
unmanned, permanent sites; and 2 manned, mobile locations
with a collection of approximately 800 tons during FY
1992-93.
Office paper recycling established in 1989.
Appliance recovery established in 1990.
Lead-acid batteries disposal established in 1987.
Waste motor oil disposal established in 1987.
Christmas tree recycling program established in 1991.
~
/
/
MINUTES OF WORK SESSION WITH THE WASTE-TO-ENERGY
FACILITY COMMISSION, FEBRUARY 24, 1993
PAGE 338
Freon recovery from white goods established in 1992.
Waste AUdit/Waste Exchange Program established in 1992.
other programs such recycling of phone books, six-pak
rings, and school composting.
An Organizational Chart was presented showing the number of
positions and their relationship. staff is working with the N. C.
Department of Corrections for use of thirteen inmates to serve as
tip floor tenants which will eliminate the temporary positions.
Hopefully, this program will be successful.
()
Director of Environmental Management, Ray Church, reported on
the excellent staff at the WTE Facility and stated if given the
opportunity, staff will resolve the existing problems and turn the
plant into a revenue producing facility.
PRESENTATION OF THREE-YEAR PLAN FOR WASTE-TO-ENERGY FACILITY
Mr. John Hubbard, Plant Engineer of the Waste-to-Energy
Facility, reported on the lack of maintenance at the plant and
presented a three-year plan. This plan will provide the necessary
on-going preventative maintenance that is required to properly
operate the Waste-to-Energy Facility.
In order to provide proper maintenance, the following budget
figures have been projected:
FY 1992-93
FY 1993-94
FY 1994-95
FY 1995-96
$7.4 million
$8.5 million
$8.0 million
$7.5 million
Discussion was held on improvement of maintenance within the
past twelve months, and emphasis was placed on the fact that when
the preventative maintenance program is properly implemented the
facility will produce enough revenue to cover operational
expenditures.
()
Further discussion was held on whether the former consulting
Engineer, Dr. stanton D. Peters, could be held accountable for any
problems being experienced at the WTE Facility. Dr. Peter
Pattinson reported that Dr. Peters was relieved of any obligations
when the County legally accepted the plant design. It is felt that
the plant was incorrectly designed with installation of a dry ash
system instead of a wet ash system which has created many
maintenance problems due to dust; however, the County must focus on
implementing a Preventative Maintenance Program and moving forward
with developing the full potential of this facility.
Chairman Greer expressed concern for spending millions of
dollars for a new facility with retro-fitting of the old boilers
which are already experiencing problems. Director Church reported
that the old system was neglected for eight years and even with the
funds expended for retro-fitting, this system must be brought up to
the same standard as the new boilers.
FUNDING PROPOSALS
o
The following funding proposals were presented:
Construction Excise Tax: A Construction Excise Tax basically is a
charge per square foot of new construction to be paid at the time
of applying for a building permit. Payment may be deferred until
a certificate of Occupancy is issued by placement of a lien on the
property or possibly by a performance bond by the contractor.
Deferment of the tax could cause additional administrative burdens.
The County could either pursue enabling legislation to establish
the Construction Excise Tax or simply increase building permit fees
I
~
~
fu i
MINUTES OF WORK SESSION WITH THE WASTE-TO-ENERGY
FACILITY COMMISSION, FEBRUARY 24, 1993
PAGE 339
and dedicate the additional amount to Environmental Management or
Water & Sewer DIstrict capital facilities.
The Construction Excise Tax offers the following advantages:
.
(1) The Construction Excise Tax is paid only once while
a Land Transfer Tax must be paid every time the property
is sold.
(2) The Construction Excise Tax is paid only on improved
property, not on vacant land that does not provide any
return on investment.
(3) The Construction Excise Tax is directly tied into
growth and the resulting demands for County
infrastructure associated with growth. New construction
increases the need for the County to be able to handle
construction debris and the need to expand the sewer
system.
The Construction Excise Tax may be set up as,follows:
Flat Rate: The Construction Excise Tax could be charged
at the same rate for all construction, regardless of
square footage or the type of construction. Figures show
that 2,117,268 square feet of construction occurred in
the City of Wilmington and the unincorporated areas of
the County. A $1.00 Construction Excise Tax would have
generated $2,117,268 and a $2.00 Construction Excise Tax
would have generated $4,234,536.
..
Variable Construction Excise Tax Rate with an Exemption:
In Montgomery County, Maryland, no Construction Excise
Tax is charged for the first 1,200 square feet of any
type of construction in order to avoid a negative impact
on affordable housing or small business. For all square
footage above the first 1,200 square feet, a Construction
Excise Tax will be levied at rates up to $3.75 per square
foot for single-family housing. Using this formula, New
Hanover County could have generated revenue over $4
million. An alternative would be to impose a sliding
scale that would establish a higher rate as the square
footage increases.
.
Increase in the Room Occupancy Tax
The Room Occupancy Tax, presently at 3%, could be increased
with the additional revenues to be shared between Environmental
Management and the Water & Sewer District capital projects.
Present revenues from the tax are projected to be $1,505,201 in
1992-93 with revenues being split 75% for beach renourishment and
25% for tourism promotion. If the Room Occupancy Tax was increased
2%, an additional $1,000,000 would be generated. State legislation
would be required to increase the Room Occupancy Tax for New
Hanover County. Although a possibility exists that an additional
tax may slow down the growth of the tourism industry, the Room
Occupancy Tax is relatively "painless" in that it is generally paid
by non-residents visiting the County.
Shift the Debt Service Portion of the Tipping Fee to the Property
Tax Levy
Presently, 50% of the $60 per ton tipping fee goes to pay debt
service on the WTE Facility. It is suggested that the County begin
paying the debt service from the property tax levy. This would
result in a 5-cent increase in the tax rate and reduce the tipping
fee to the $30 range. This action would produce the following
benefits:
......
/"
(
MINUTES OF WORK SESSION WITH THE WASTE-TO-ENERGY
FACILITY COMMISSION, FEBRUARY 24, 1993
PAGE, 34,0.
-Property owners would be able to itemize the increase in
property tax on income tax returns, and consequently
receive some reduction in the cost.
-Trash collection charges to individual homeowners and
others should decline because the tipping fee would be
reduced by approximately 50%.
-Trash haulers, because of the reduced tipping fee, would
be more likely to tip their trash at County facilities
rather than take their trash to facilities outside the
County with lower tipping fees. It is important to note
that franchising is an additional option that may be
helpful in controlling the waste flow in the County.
()
A lengthy discussion was held on the disposal of solid waste
through incineration and meeting the 25% reduction of the waste
stream by June 30, 1993. It was generally agreed among all persons
present that the County must move forward with proper operation of
the facility through implementation of a preventative maintenance
program. The County is far ahead of many local governments in the
disposal of solid waste and with proper staffing and maintenance,
the plant can be turned around to become a revenue producing
facility.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Greer, on behalf of the Board, expressed appreciation
to each member of the Waste-to-Energy Facility Commission for
gi ving of their time, expertise, and effort to serve on the
Commission.
Chairman Greer adjourned the meeting at 6:20 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
~d/~
Lucie F. Harrell
Clerk to the Board
()
()
~