rutherford county solid waste advisory/ · “2016 estimate of remaining life” form estimated the...

Rutherford County Solid Waste Advisory/ Steering Council ‐Workshop No. 2

February 27, 2017

1

Rutherford County Solid Waste Advisory/ Steering Council

Workshop 2: Technologies and Organization

February 27, 2017

Murfreesboro City Council Chambers

6:00 pm – 9:00 pm

Agenda (estimated minutes)

2

Welcome and Project Update (15 min)Welcome and Project Update (15 min)

Analysis of Future Needs (15 min)Analysis of Future Needs (15 min)

Technology and Management Options (40 min)Technology and Management Options (40 min)

Defining Scenarios for Evaluation – Part I (10 min)Defining Scenarios for Evaluation – Part I (10 min)

Break (10 min)Break (10 min)


February 27, 2017

2

Organizational Possibilities (20 min)Organizational Possibilities (20 min)

Paying for Your System (10 min)Paying for Your System (10 min)

Defining Scenarios for Evaluation – Part II (30 min)Defining Scenarios for Evaluation – Part II (30 min)

Next Steps (10 min)Next Steps (10 min)

Questions, Comments, Answers & Discussion (20 min)Questions, Comments, Answers & Discussion (20 min)

Agenda (continued)

3

Middle Point Landfill Capacity and Closure

Date

Field Trip to PHG Energy

Other Possible Field Trips:

• Huntsville, AL WTE

• WastAway

• Proton Power

Public Outreach

Project Update

4


February 27, 2017

3

“2016 Estimate of Remaining Life” form estimated the remaining capacity at 11 years (2027)

Publicly stated life may be 8 years (2024)

Republic’s 2016

Estimate

Final Grades (volume)

Waste disposal tonnage

•Historically 3,500 tpd

•Recently have been taking in more

Items Affecting Capacity

TDEC and Republic are in correspondence to define if capacity and closure date

Sludge deliveries may cease before garbage

TDEC/ Republic

5

Middle Point Landfill

6

Field Trip to PHG Energy


February 27, 2017

4

7

Other Possible Field TripsHuntsville Solid Waste to Energy Facility (Huntsville, AL)https://www.covanta.com/Our‐Facilities/Covanta‐Huntsville

WastAway (Morrison, TN)http://www.wastaway.com/

Proton Power (Lenoir City, TN)http://www.protonpower.com

ANALYSIS OF FUTURE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT NEEDS

8


February 27, 2017

5

Project population

growth for 20 years (FY2015 –

FY2035)

Calculate the per capita waste disposed for each material

Multiply the per capita waste

disposed by the following year’s population

9

Waste Projection Methodology

•2015 population is 298,612

•2030 population estimated to be 420,000

•Represents a 2.3% compound annual growth rate

Population of Rutherford County

•2015 population is 126,118

•2035 population estimated to be 228,000

•Represents a 3.0% compound annual growth rate

Population of City of Murfreesboro

•258,000 tons at Middle Point Landfill

• 21,027 tons at County Class III/IV Landfill

Total waste disposed in FY2015 is 279,027

• Individuals will generate equal amounts of garbage per person

Waste disposed per capita does not

change

10

Waste Projection Assumptions


February 27, 2017

6

11

Rutherford County FY15 Waste and Recycling by Generator

Recycling Center Garbage: 36,765 tons,

13%Recycling Center

Recycling: 3,000 tons, 1%

Murfreesboro Curbside Garbage: 35,503 tons,

13%

C&DD/Brush: 21,027tons, 7%

Private Hauler Garbage: 185,732 tons, 66%

282,027 tons total

12

Estimated FY15 Rutherford County Material Generated

Garbage: 108,511tons, 38%

Single Stream Recycling: 83,331

tons, 30%

Organics: 69,157tons, 25%

C&D: 21,027 tons, 7%

282,027 tons total


February 27, 2017

7

13

Projection of Rutherford County Waste and Recycling

298,612

374,860

470,576

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

500,000

County Class III/IV Landfill Disposal Garbage Tons (Murfreesboro only)

Recycling Center Recycling Tons (FY2015 estimated) Recycling Center Garbage Tons

Private Hauler Garbage Tons County Population

14

Rutherford County FY15 Garbage and Recycling by Recycling Center (approx. 40k tons)

Almaville7%

Bradyville4%

Buchanan0%

Cranor Rd2%

Christiana/Fosterville1%

Eagleville2%

Epps Mill2%

Lascassas4%

Leanna4%

Rock Springs2%

Rock Crusher7%

Rockvale3%

Sand Hill10%

Walter Hill6%

Weakley17%

Hill Yard28%


February 27, 2017

8

15

Map of Recycling Centers

LaVergneSmyrnaMurfreesboroEagleville

PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF IDENTIFIED TECHNOLOGY AND

MANAGEMENT OPTIONS

16


February 27, 2017

9

17

Summary of Current OptionsOption Overview

No Change Direct Haul/Go It Alone

Source Reduction Education, bans, financial penalties

Collection System ResidentialCommercialRecycling centers

Landfill Expand Middle Point*New facility in‐CountyOut of County

Transfer Station New facility in‐County

Diversion/Processing MRFAD/CompostingMWP

Energy WTE

Advanced Conversion GasificationPyrolysis

PolicyPolicy

• Flow Control

• Mandatory Curbside Collection

• Franchising

ProgrammingProgramming• Recycling

• Education/Outreach

• HHW/HCW

TechnologyTechnology

• Landfill Gas

• Fuel preparation

• Advanced Conversion Technology

Policy Drives Programs which are Powered by Technology

18


February 27, 2017

10

19

U.S. Waste Management Infrastructure

Technology Number

Transfer Stations 3,350

Material Recovery Facilities (MRF) 586

Curbside Recycling Programs 9,000+

Mixed Waste Processing Facilities & Hybrid MRFs

70*

Composting 2,300

Anaerobic Digestion 21

WTE 77

Landfills 1,908

*Excludes facilities that solely produce RDFGBB 2016

NO CHANGE/DIRECT HAUL

20


February 27, 2017

11

21

Materials Management Facilities within 20 miles of Rutherford County

SOURCE REDUCTION

22


February 27, 2017

12

SOURCE REDUCTION

23

Description

• Education

• Material bans (e.g. plastic bags)

• Financial penalties

• Grasscycling

• Backyard composting

Typical Cost

• First years: $2‐4 per household per year

• After 3rd year: $1‐2 per household per year

Impact on Diversion

• 2‐3%

Implementation

• Education is key

• Desire for legislative action is unknown

Risks

• Can be challenges for legislation

• Backyard programs are easier

SOURCE REDUCTION

24


February 27, 2017

13

Example: Source ReductionPortland, OR

25

Population: Approx. 600,000Area: 146 sq. miPart of Metro Regional Government

Portland

• Statewide Bottle Bill• City Plastic bag ban• Residential messaging:

o Waste‐wise holidayso Stop junk mailo Opt out of phone bookso Back to school tipso Backyard compostingo Grasscycling

http://www.oregonmetro.gov/tools‐living/garbage‐and‐recycling/reduce‐waste‐home

COLLECTION OPTIONS

26


February 27, 2017

14

Description

• Residential

• Curbside collection

• PAYT (variable rates)

• Commercial

• Recycling mandates

• Recycling Centers

• Bulky items

Typical Cost

• Residential: $15‐40 per household per month

• Commercial: varies

• Centers: varies

Recycling Improvement

• Residential: 20‐30%

• Commercial:25‐35%

• Centers: 3‐5%

COLLECTION

27

Implementation

• 1‐2 years to implement

• Coordinated effort is best

• Evaluate best mechanism for working with haulers

Risks

• Possible negative reaction from private haulers

• May be too expensive

COLLECTION

28


February 27, 2017

15

29

Curbside Collection Options

Compost roll cart with indoor food waste pailAustin, TX

Kraft bags for yard wasteMontgomery County, MD

Roll carts for solid waste, recycling and compost, with additional motor oil and batteries set outSonoma County, CA

Example: CollectionAustin, TX

30

Population: Approx. 900,000Area: 272 sq. mi

• Curbside single stream

• PAYT• Recycle & Reuse Drop‐Off Center

• Bulk Collection

http://austintexas.gov/what‐do‐i‐do


February 27, 2017

16

LANDFILL OPTIONS

31

Description

• EPA Subtitle D Landfill

• Lined

• Leachate and landfill gas collection and control

• Burial of waste under soil cover

Typical Cost

• $15‐30/ton Note: ‘cost’ of landfilling is different than ‘market’ pricing, which will go as high as it can relative to closest alternatives.


• N/A

LANDFILLS

32


February 27, 2017

17

Implementation

• Expand Middle Point (combining County and Middle Point)*

• New in‐County Landfill

• Out‐of‐County Landfill

Risks

• Local Public Concerns

• Not‐in‐my‐backyard (NIMBY)

• TDEC Approval

• Finding a site (if new landfill in‐County)

33

LANDFILLS

Example: Keystone Sanitary Landfill Expansion, Scranton, PA

Source: The Times Tribune, August 2014

http://www.dep.pa.gov/About/Regional/Northeast‐Regional‐Office/Community%20Information/Pages/Keystone%20Landfill%20Expansion.aspx


February 27, 2017

18

35

Name OwnerRemaining Life (Years)

Driving Distance (Mi) (Truck Route)

Gate Rate and/or Contract Rate if it can be determined

BFI Middle Point LandfillBFI Waste Systems of Tennessee, Inc. (Republic

Services)11 8.5 $19.50

Cedar Ridge Landfill, Inc. Cedar Ridge Landfill, Inc. 5 58.4 $31.68; $24.50

Dekalb County Landfill DeKalb County Government 1 39.3 $35/ton residential, $40/ton commercial

White County Landfill White County Government 2 60.5 $41.25/ton

Smith County Landfill Smith County Government 11 57.7$33/ton household; $33/ton demolition; no

charge for residents

Bi‐County Balefill Bi‐County Solid Waste Management System 3 95.8 $32/ton; $20/ton

West Camden Sanitary Landfill

Waste Management, Inc. of Tennessee 25+ 126 $32/ton

Decatur Landfill Decatur County 25+ 139 $32/ton out of county

Upper Cumberland LandfillCornell Smith (dba/Upper Cumberland Solid

Waste Management, Inc.)6 88.4 N/A

City Of Chattanooga Landfill City of Chattanooga 4 127 $30.50/ton and $24.40 minimum

Rhea County Class I Landfill Rhea County Government 15 117 $36.50/ton residential; $38.25 commercial

Pickett County Landfill Pickett County Government 34 122

Glasgow Regional Landfill City of Glasgow 75 99.3$26/ton (9.00 minimum per load)

Residential; Contracted Rate $25/ton

Morris Farm Sanitary Landfill BFI Waste Systems of Alabama, LLC 50 130 N/A

Huntsville LandfillSolid Waste Disposal Authority of the City of

Huntsville45 115 $39.90/Ton MSW; $26.50 C&D/Yard Waste

City of Decatur‐Morgan County Sanitary Landfill

City of Decatur N/A 127 $26/ton; $100/ton tires

Scottsboro LandfillSolid Waste Disposal Authority of the City of

ScottsboroN/A 97.4 $38.45/ton residential; $29.64/ton C&D

Sand Valley Landfill GEK Inc. (Republic Services) N/A 141 N/A

36


February 27, 2017

19

TRANSFER STATION OPTIONS

37

Description

• Enclosed building for transferring waste from collection vehicles to larger trailers

• Reduces hauling distances and truck wear/tear

• Likely in‐County

Typical Cost

• $50‐70/ton

• $15‐25/ton cap/operation

• $15‐25/ton transportation

• $20/ton disposal


• Could pre‐sort bulky waste and recycling

• 3‐5%

38

TRANSFER STATION


February 27, 2017

20

Implementation

• Could be at existing County C&D Landfill site

• Requires coordinated effort to balance costs

Risks

• Need to have enough flow

• Takes typically 2+ years to develop

TRANSFER STATION

39

Example: Transfer StationLee County, FL

40

Buckingham Campus Transfer Lee County, FL

Recycling load

http://www.leegov.com/solidwaste/facilities/rrf


February 27, 2017

21

DIVERSION PROCESSING

41

Landfill

Residue

MSW

Organics

MaterialsFor Recycling

Organics

Mixed Waste Processing

Refuse Processed

Fuel

Energy Recovery

• Oil Refineries• Dedicated RE‐Boilers• Paper Mills

Food Scraps

Power

WWTP CompostingAnaerobic Digestion

Landfill

Biogas

Residue

Soil Amendment

Steam

Trucks and/or gas grid

Biofuel

42


February 27, 2017

22

Description

• MRF

• AD/Composting

• Mixed Waste Processing

• Refuse Derived Fuels

• Mechanical Biological Treatment

Typical Cost

• MRF $75‐100/ton

• Composting $25‐30/ton

• AD $45‐65/ton

• MWP $45‐65/ton


• MRF 10‐15%

• Composting/AD 15‐20%

• MWP 40‐60%


43

Implementation

• Requires coordinated effort to balance costs

Risks

• Need to have enough flow

• Takes typically 1‐3 years


44


February 27, 2017

23

Ballistic Separator

45

Typical MRF Equipment

Heavy‐Light Air Separator

46

Optical sorting

Typical MRF Equipment


February 27, 2017

24

Organics Management

Landfill

Residue

MSW

Organics

Organics


Refuse Processed

Fuel

Energy Recovery


Food Scraps

Power


Landfill

Biogas

Residue

Soil Amendment

Steam


Biofuel

47

AD Feedstocks

48

Sources for Organic Materials

GrocersRestaurants

and Cafeterias

Urban Farms

Food Processing Industries

Curbside Collections

Source: Seattle Public Utilities

Source: GettyImages


February 27, 2017

25


49

Landfill

Residue

MSW

Organics


Organics


Refuse Processed

Fuel

Energy Recovery


Food Scraps

Power


Landfill

Biogas

Residue

Soil Amendment

Steam


Biofuel

Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT)

Mechanical‐ Biological Treatment Plant (MBT)

Products:RecyclablesCompost

Biogas/ ElectricityRDF/EF

Mechanical (grinding, screening, recyclables separation, palletizing)Biological (bio‐drying, aerobic

composting, anaerobic digestion)

Mixed MSW

Source Separated Organics

Source Separated Recyclables

MSW source

Over 330 MBT facilities in operation throughout Europe

50


February 27, 2017

26

Example: MBTBerkeley County, WV

• Front end sorting of MSW to remove high value recyclables

• Remaining material is processed by mixed waste composting to create Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF)

Uses High Efficiency Mechanical Biological

Treatment (HEBioT) Process

• EPA approved alternative to coal to reduce emissions

SRF marketed to cement kilns valued

at ~$30/ton

51http://entsorgawv.com/

TRADITIONAL WTE

52


February 27, 2017

27

Waste to Energy

Landfill

Residue

MSW

Organics


Organics


Refuse Processed

Fuel

Energy Recovery


Food Scraps

Power


Landfill

Biogas

Residue

Soil Amendment

Steam


Biofuel

53

Description

• Combustion/mass burn

• Products: steam, power, hot water, and/or chilled water; also metals, aggregates, and ADC

• Processes MSW, biosolids, special wastes

Typical Cost

• $90‐150/ton (before electricity revenues)


• Recovered metals on the backend

TRADITIONAL WTE

54


February 27, 2017

28

Implementation

• It works!

• Well demonstrated

• Financeable

• Advanced emissions controls

Risks

• Political will

• Perceived to be polluting

• Perceived to compete with recycling

• Electricity prices low

• Expensive

Trends

• Pre‐processing for fuel preparation and recycling

• Ash processing for recycling

TRADITIONAL WTE

55

Example: WTESolid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County, FL

• 3,000 TPD Mass Burn facility (1,040,000 TPY)

• Babcock & Wilcox

• 130 MW renewable power; enough for over 86,000 houses

• $668 million construction price

• $20.5 million first year O&M cost

• Advanced emissions controls, ferrous and non‐ferrous metals recovery

56

Source: SWA of Palm Beach County

http://www.leegov.com/solidwaste/facilities/rrf/wte


February 27, 2017

29

Example: WTEDurham York Energy CentreOntario, Canada

57https://www.durhamyorkwaste.ca

• Operated by Covanta• 140,000 tonnes of garbage/year• Thermal mass burn with Martin GmbH stoker grate

combustion technology• Advanced air pollution controls and monitoring• Net electrical energy generation of approximately 14 MW• Recovery of ferrous and non‐ferrous metals• Zero wastewater discharge

ADVANCED CONVERSION TECHNOLOGIES

58


February 27, 2017

30

Description

• Gasification: converts carbonaceous materials into carbon monoxide, hydrogen and carbon dioxide, no combustion

• Pyrolysis: plastics to oil, no oxygen

Typical Cost

• ???????? (not enough commercial data)


• Can take additional materials (waste plastics, etc.) compared to WTE


59

60


Implementation

• Can produce multiple products

• Reduced air emissions

• Perceived more compatible with recycling

Risks

• Political will

• Perceived to be polluting

• Gasification not demonstrated commercially in US with MSW


February 27, 2017

31

• 330 TPD refuse derived fuel

• 10 million gallons/year of ethanol

• Produces cellulosic methanol, ethanol (planned for 2017), syngas, and chemical intermediates

• Edmonton Waste Management Centre:

– Refuse Derived Fuel Facility

– Enerkem Waste‐to‐Biofuels Facility

– Advanced Energy Research Facility

61

Example: Advanced ConversionEnerkem Waste‐to‐Biofuels Facility, Alberta, CA

Source: SWANA Northern Lights 2013, Bud Latta, Processing and Disposal Waste Management Services, City of Edmonton

http://enerkem.com/facilities/enerkem‐alberta‐biofuels/

Alternative Risks/Liability Risk Summary

Processing for Recyclables and Fuel

Proven commercial technology Low

Composting Proven commercial technology Low

Mass Burn Combustion Proven commercial technology Low

RDF CombustionProven technology; limited U.S. commercial

experienceModerate to Low

Anaerobic DigestionProven technology; limited U.S. commercial

experienceModerate to Low

Pyrolysis and Gasification

Previous failures at scale; no operating experience with large ‐scale operations in the U.S.; full‐scale

demonstrations nearing operationHigh

Conversion Technologies have Different Risk Profiles

Source: Gershman, Brickner & Bratton, Inc. 2017

62


February 27, 2017

32

Option Overview Cost/Impact Ranking

No Change Direct Haul/Go It Alone

Source Reduction Direct messaging $

Collection System ResidentialCommercialCommunity partners

$$

Landfill Expand Middle PointNew facility in‐county

$$

Transfer Station New facility out‐of‐countyExpand Middle PointNew facility in‐county

$$$

Diversion Processing

MRFAD/CompostingMWP

$$$

Energy WTE $$$$

Advanced Energy GasificationPyrolysis

$$$$ 63

Summary of Current Options

DEFINING SCENARIOS FOR EVALUATION (PART 1)

64


February 27, 2017

33

65

Exercise

BREAK (10 MIN)

66


February 27, 2017

34

ORGANIZATIONAL POSSIBILITIES

67

68

No Action/Go it Alone

Rutherford County

Management

Murfreesboro‐Rutherford

County Authority

Regional Authority

Options


February 27, 2017

35

No Action / Go it Alone

69

Description County, municipalities and private carters manage own waste collected

Solid waste direct hauled to nearest and/or negotiated facilities

Benefits Low level of investment

No inter‐governmental agreements needed

Challenges Less efficient

No economy of scale

Retail pricing

Rutherford County Management

70

Description County takes primary responsibility for solid waste management planning, implementation, and reporting

Municipalities may have inter‐local agreements to participate in County system

Could include public‐private partnerships

Benefits Local control

Some economy of scale

Negotiated pricing

Challenges Additional County staff needed (2‐3 people)

Inter‐governmental agreements needed

Change from current practice

May limit the technology options


February 27, 2017

36

Example: Lee County, FL

71

Population: Approx. 700,000Area: 1,212 sq. mi6 municipalities(cities, towns, village)Unincorporated areas

Services

• WTE

• Landfill

• Collection (unincorporated)

• HCW

• MRF

• C&D Processing

• Composting

• Tire Recycling

Tonnages

• MSW 542k tpy

• Hort (yard waste) 119k tpy

• C&D 88k tpy

• Recycling 86k tpy

• Sludge 64k tpy

Board/Staff

• 5 elected County Commissioners

• 102 full time employees

• 17 temporary laborers

72



February 27, 2017

37

Budget

• Operating $76 million

• Annual debt service $9.1 million

Revenues

• Tipping Fees ($38/ton)

• Assessments ($196/yr average)

• Franchise Fees ($1.8 million)

• Sales of recyclables

73


Murfreesboro‐Rutherford County Authority

74

Description Independent solid waste authority

Could include other municipalities (Smyrna, Eagleville, LaVergne)

Created pursuant to TN Solid Waste Authority Act of 1991 (Title 68, Chapter 211, Part 9)

Benefits Operates independently of elected officials (somewhat outside of politics)

Independent revenue, debt and expenses

Provides services on behalf of its member communities

Some economy of scale and negotiated pricing

Challenges Administration needed (3‐4 people)

Offices needed (could co‐locate within County and/or municipal offices)

Possible perception of new fees or taxes


February 27, 2017

38

Example: Pollution Control Financing Authority of Warren County, NJ

75

Population: Approx. 109,000Area: 363 sq. mi22 municipalities(cities, towns, townships)No unincorporated areas

Services

• Landfill

• WTE partner

• Convenience Center

• Recycling Markets

Tonnages

• MSW (WTE) 200k tpy

• Ash, Bulky (Landfill) 100k tpy

Board/Staff

•5 Board members appointed by County

•11 staff


76


February 27, 2017

39

Budget

• Operating $7.3 million

• Capital $1.3 million

Revenues

• Tipping Fees ($40‐$96/ton)

• Grants

• Sales of recyclables


77

Regional Authority

78

Description Independent solid waste authority

Could include other counties municipalities

Created pursuant to TN Solid Waste Authority Act of 1991 (Title 68, Chapter 211, Part 9)

Benefits Operates independently of elected officials (somewhat outside of politics)

Independent revenue, debt and expenses

Provides services on behalf of its member communities

Economy of scale and negotiated pricing

Challenges Administration needed (3‐4 + people)

Offices needed (could co‐locate within County and/or municipal offices)

Possible perception of new fees or taxes


February 27, 2017

40

Middle Tennessee Solid Waste “Crunch”

Bi‐County Solid Waste Board, which is comprised of Montgomery and Stewart Counties northwest of Nashville along the Kentucky border

•They have stopped accepting waste from City of Franklin

•They may or may not have a “landfill crisis”

Franklin County is part of the Interlocal Solid Waste Authority with Lincoln, Moore, & Bedford Counties and City of Tullahoma

•Their 5‐year SW plan says they are interested in waste to energy because they currently haul from a TS to Middle Point which is closing.

Nashville Metro wants Zero Waste to Landfill within 30 years

•In 2015, just over 1 million tons of waste was generated in Davidson County and sent to MSW or C&D landfills.

Middle Tennessee is going through a growing pain beyond Rutherford County and Murfreesboro

Middle Tennessee Solid Waste “Crunch”

•The northern border with Kentucky to the southern borders with Alabama and Georgia is about 150 road miles

•Almost any place in Middle Tennessee is within long‐hauling distance of almost any other place within it

Location, Location, Location

• Counties are courting WTE in the northern part of Middle Tennessee

• Rutherford Co. and Murfreesboro would be midway between that theoretical site and the WTE in Huntsville

• Two WTE plants 160 miles apart might be anchors for making all of the Middle Tennessee Grand Division Zero Waste to Landfill

Solid waste managers looking

at options


February 27, 2017

41

Example: Three Rivers Solid Waste Management Authority, SC

81Source: Waste360; Rutherford County Solid Waste

Population: Approx. 374,000Area: 5,329 sq. mi9 counties

Services

• Planning

• Landfill

• Transfer Stations –(County Responsible) (6)

• Waste Tires

• White Goods

Tonnages

• 255,000 tons

Board/Staff

•9 Board Directors

•25 staff

82



February 27, 2017

42

Budget

• $7.5 operating million

Revenues

• Tipping Fees $22/ton

• Landfill Gas to Electricity Sales

83Source: Waste360; Rutherford County Solid Waste


PAYING FOR YOUR SYSTEM

84


February 27, 2017

43

Revenues should cover the costs of

the system

Revenues should include reliable sources that do not depend

entirely on the amount of

material disposed

Revenues should equitably

distribute costs among residents and businesses

Fees must be affordable

85

Revenue Objectives

86

General Fund (Taxes)

Tipping FeesSystem Benefit

Charges / Assessments

Sales of Commodities or Energy

Host Community

FeesLicense Fees

Franchise Fees Impact Fees

Options


February 27, 2017

44

87

General Fund (Taxes)

Broad distribution of system costs

Does not depend on the amount of waste generated

Tipping Fees Gate fees (no contract)

Contract based fees (may depend on waste quantity and credit worthiness

May be different by waste type

System Benefit Charges / Assessments

Residential fee based on dwelling type (sing family, multi‐family)

Commercial fee based on business type (NAICS code) and size (sq. footage)

Fee based on incorporated or unincorporated areas (depending on service)

Sales of Commodities or Energy

Recyclables

Compost/Biogas

Refuse derived fuel (RDF)

Electricity

Options

88

Host Community Fees

Private or publicly owned waste facility payments to community (similar to current fees)

License Fees

Fees charged to license private haulers to provide waste collection services in the County

Franchise Fees

If decision to franchise collection in the County, a fee the selected franchise hauler pays (typically a % of gross revenue – 5 to 20%) for the right to provide collection services

Impact Fees

Fee based on new construction (square footage or cubic yards of C&D debris generated)

Fee charged when Certificate of Occupancy is issued

Options


February 27, 2017

45

DEFINING SCENARIOS FOR EVALUATION (PART 2)

89

90

Discussion and Deliberation on Potential System Scenarios


February 27, 2017

46

NEXT STEPS

91

Laying the Foundation of a Successful Project

92

Develop and articulate an integrated strategy

Clearly define project

objectives and opportunities

Develop internal

economic and risk profile

Clearly define roles and

responsibilities

Knowledgeable and

trustworthy advisor


February 27, 2017

47

• Workshop 1

• Workshop 2

• Workshop 3

Workshops

• Media Outreach

• Community Outreach

• Public Meetings

Public Involvement Process • Develop draft

Strategic Plan

• Review Process

• Finalize Plan

Planning Document

• Execute Chosen Scenario

Implementation

Overview of the Planning Process

93

Workshop 2:

• Options for organization of a countywide or regional authority

• Detailed analysis of future recycling and solid waste management needs

• Determine technology and management options

Workshop 3:

• Determine scenarios for analysis in Strategic Plan

• Finalize content/TOC for Strategic Plan

Workshops

94


February 27, 2017

48

Today

Dec 2017 Feb Mar Apr May

Workshop #1December 2016

Workshop #2February 2017

Workshop #3April 2017

First Draft of PlanMay 2017 Review Draft of Plan

June 2017

Final PlanAugust 2017

12/12/2016 April 2017Workshops

January 2017 May 2017Public Outreach

May 2017 Development of Strategic Plan

June July August September

August 2017

Proposed Schedule

95

QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANSWERS & DISCUSSION

96

rutherford county solid waste advisory/ · “2016 estimate of remaining life” form estimated the...

Documents