1988-12-12 Special Meeting
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, DECEMBER 5, 1988, ( CONTINUED)
"
:347
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 12, 1988
I
ASSEMBLY
The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met in Special
Session on Monday, December 12, 1988, at 9:00 A.M. in the 5th
Floor Conference Room of the New Hanover County Administration
Building, 320 Chestnut Street, Wilmington, North Carolina.
Members present were: Commissioners W. Albert Corbett, Jr.;
E. L. Mathews, Jr.; Vice Chairman, Nolan O'Neal; Chairman, Fred
Retchin; County Manager, G. Felix Cooper; County Attorney, Robert
W. Pope; and Clerk to the Board, Lucie F. Harrell.
Commissioner Barfield was absent due to illness.
Chairman Retchin called the meeting to order stating the
purpose of the Special Session was to hear presentations from
consultants for a third-party review of the concept and financial
plan for expansion of the Steam Plant.
I
Director of Engineering & Facilities, Ed Hilton, presented a
brief overview of the proposed expansion stating in the Spring of
1987, the Solid Waste Task Force, after six months of study and
review, recommended expansion of the existing Steam Plant. Dr.
Stanton Peters was hired to perform a feasibility study and in
the winter of 1987/88, Dr. Peters recommended an expansion of the
existing plant. The County pursued the COP's method of financing
the project which proved to be unacceptable; therefore, a general
obligation bond referendum was held in November 1988 with passage
of the proposed expansion by a 2 to 1 vote.
Director Hilton stated Bond Counsel has indicated that a
third-party review of the financial plan as presented by Stanton
M. Peters & Associates, Inc. would be beneficial to the them in
working with the bond underwriters for issuance and sale of the
general obligation bonds. He stated the Commissioners will be
requested to decide if an independent engineering firm should
review the financial plan as presented and if so, the firm
selected should be informed that the scope of service is limited
to the third-party review with no additional services required.
PRESENTATION BY STANTON M. PETERS & ASSOCIATES
Dr. Stanton M. Peters expressed appreciation to the Board
for allowing his firm to present the plan and financial package
for expansion of the Steam Plant. The fOllowing key issues were
presented and discussed:
1. Project Status
2. Cost Estimate Summary
3. Project Schedule
4. Project Organization
5. Basis of Design
6. Preliminary Drawings
I
Dr. Peters stated the goal of the project has been to design
a state-of-the-art plant which will include the latest technology
in the incineration of solid waste to meet present and
anticipated environmental regulations by federal, state, and
local agencies.
Discussion was held on the method of procurement. Dr.
Peters stated the method selected for the existing plant and
proposed expansion is called the "design build public ownership"
method. Under this procurement process, the County is allowed to
purchase the maj or equipment installed and erected with full
guarantees to the County. Also, under this procurement method a
substantial amount of money will be saved since the County can
purchase the equipment for the same price as a contractor and
eliminate the contractor's markup.
~
348 MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 12, 1988 (CONTINUED)
Discussion was held on the cost estimate.
summary was presented:
General Contract, Building, Concrete etc.
Mechanical/Plumbing
Electrical
Instrumentation
Major Equipment
Engineering & Contract Administration
Estimated Project Cost
contingency
Total Estimated Project Cost
The following
$ 3,776,328
1,208,620
800,000
1,100,000
15,170,800
2,300,000
24,568,989
250,000
$24,818,989
Dr. Peters stated he is very comfortable with the projected
cost and encouraged the Commissioners to begin construction as
soon as possible stating the past six-months delay has cost the
County approximately $600,000. He stated the first phase of the
project will be to develop an updated weekly schedule containing
approximately 500 to 1,000 line items recording time, resources,
and cost for each item. The updated schedule will accurately
reflect the amount of money and time spent weekly to provide an
accurate comparison to budgeted figures. Once major equipment is
bid, procurement packages will be developed for each piece of
equipment with no issuance of purchase orders until bids have
been accepted for major items. He stated the purchase of major
equipment represents 60% of the expansion cost; therefore, if
figures are accurate at this point the estimated cost should be
correct. Dr. Peters stated bids on major equipment will be
awarded in June, 1989, which will provide a direct comparison of
projected costs.
Discussion was held on the importance of a third-party
review in order to satisfy Bond Counsel and the Bond
Underwriters. County Manager Cooper recommended Dr. Peters
appearing before Bond Counsel making a presentation on the cost
estimate.
After further discussion of the scope
limi ted to the review only, County Manager
authorizing Dr. Peters to proceed with the
work as proposed while the third-party review
of services being
Cooper recommended
preliminary design
is being performed.
Chairman Retchin thanked Dr.
presentation.
Peters for an excellent
PRESENTATION BY R. W. BECK & ASSOCIATES
Mr. Jeffrey F. Clunie, Partner and Director of Solid Waste
Management Consulting Services for R. W. Beck & Associates,
introduced Mr. Albert B. Malmsjo, III, Executive Engineer of the
firm who presented and discussed the following key issues:
1. Introduction to the firm
2. Proposed Scope of Services
3. Schedule and Cost Estimate
Mr. Malmsjo stated an independent engineering review will
answer the following questions:
1.
municipal solid disposal
the future?
municipal solid waste
What are the
requirements in
--Analysis of
generation.
--Projection of
future quantities.
2. Is the planned expansion adequate, too
large, or too small?
--Determine County goals/objectives.
--Analyze expansion utilization, short
and long-term.
--Determine impact of municipal solid
waste quantity variations, monthly and
long-term.
--Impact of other programs (recycling,
composting) .
~
o
n
o
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 12, 1988 (CONTINUED)
349 .,
3. Is the proposed timing of the addition
appropriate?
--Life cycle cost comparison of alternate
schedule options.
I
4. Are estimated costs reasonable?
--Review costs considered for interfacing
with existing facility.
--Ensure all major cost items are included.
--Determine if reasonable unit costs have
been used.
--Evaluate level of contingency.
--Determine adequacy of schedule.
5. How does the expansion compare with our
alternatives?
--Life cycle cost comparison of other
practical alternatives.
--Integration of alternatives.
--Effect of options on landfill life.
Mr. Clunie stated the scope of services discussed can be
performed within 30 days after receipt of required information
from the County. He stated based on a 30-day project schedule,
the cost for performing the work is estimated at $30,000 or less.
County Manager Cooper asked Mr. Clunie if he was comfortable
with performing the review only and not becoming involved with
other aspects of the project. Mr. Clunie stated ~as
completely satisfied with this procedure. .~
I
Mr. Clunie expressed appreciation to the Commissioners for
allowing the firm of R. W. Beck & Associates to present their
proposal stating the firm is very interested in performing this
third-party review for New Hanover County.
Chairman Retchin thanked Mr. Clunie and Mr. Malmsjo for an
excellent presentation.
BREAK
Chairman Retchin recessed the meeting for a break from 11:00
o'clock A.M. to 11:09 o'clock A.M.
PRESENTATION BY CRS SIRRINE, INC.
Mr. Alan G. Smith, Director of Business Development for CRS
Sirr ine, Inc. introduced Mr. Tom Johnson, Proj ect Manager; and
Mr. Larry Wann, Power Engineer. He expressed appreciation to the
Commissioners for-allowing CRS Sirrine to present their proposal
and presented slides discussing the following key issues:
1. Introduction of the firm
2. Scope of Services
3. Organization of the firm
4. Experience
5. Compensation
6. Summary of Benefits
'I
Mr. Smith commented on the concept of the present plan and
recommended utilization of a technical advisor to assist with the
project in order to review drawings; verify amount of payments;
review schedules; review costs changes; and witness performance
tests to ensure that the system is ready to turn over to New
Hanover County.
Chairman Retchin commented on utilization of a technical
advisor stating the County is comfortable with Dr. Peter's
ability and background in monitoring the project. County Manager
Cooper stated Ed Hilton, Director of Engineering & Facilities, is
quite competent in this area and can provide the expertise needed
to oversee the project. Mr. Smith stated he was not aware that
Mr. Hilton was so highly qualified. He expressed appreciation to
~
35'0 MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING, DECEMBER 12, 1988 (CONTINUED)
the Commissioners for allowing his firm to present their
proposal.
BREAK
Chairman Retchin recessed the meeting for a break from 11:45
o'clock A.M. to 11:50 o'clock A.M.
APPROVAL OF THIRD-PARTY REVIEW TO BE PERFORMED BY R. W. BECK AND
ASSOCIATES
After discussion of the benefits of a third-party review,
Vice-Chairman O'Neal MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Corbett to n
award the contract to R. W. Beck and Associates to perform the
review as presented within 30 days at a cost not to exceed I,.
$30,000, and to authorize Stanton M. Peters & Associates to
proceed with development of design plans during the time of
review. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS:
Voting Aye: Commissioner Corbett
Commissioner Mathews
Vice-Chairman O'Neal
Chairman Retchin
Absent: Commissioner Barfield
DISCUSSION OF RETREAT
Chairman Retchin commented on a proposed retreat stating
options have been presented to the Commissioners with reference
to dates and places.
After discussion, it was the consensus of the Board to
review the options presented and discuss the retreat at the
meeting scheduled for December 19, 1988.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Corbett MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman O'Neal
to adjourn. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS:
Voting Aye: Commissioner Corbett
Commissioner Mathews
Vice-Chairman O'Neal
Chairman Retchin
it
L j'
Absent:
Commissioner Barfield
Chairman Retchin adjourned the meeting at 12:20 o'clock P.M.
r:3ec~? ;~d.
~. Harrell
Clerk to the Board
n
l ~
\
',,- -