Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/13/1996m MINUTES ATTACHED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING THURSDAY, JUNE 139 1996 DEVELOPMENT OF WASTE CONVERSION INDUSTRIAL PARK 9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CHAMBERS COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUELDING 1840 25TH STREET VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 9:00 A.M. - MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 10:30 A.M. 10:30 A.M. - NORTON ENVIRONMENTAL, INDEPENDENCE, OHIO 12:00 P.M. 12:00 P.M. - BREAK - LUNCH 1:30 P.M. 1:30 P.M. - RMVCO, NEW YORK, NEW YORK 3:00 P.M. 3:00 P.M. - DISCUSSION / SELECTION OF FIRM 3:30 P.M 600K 9� FArr: •�:� JUNE 139 1996 r INDEX TO MINUTES JUNE 13, 1996 _ SPECIAL MEETING OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC. - ATLANTA, GEORGIA . . . . --2 NORTON ENVIRONMENTAL, INDEPENDENCE, OHIO . . . . . . . . 9 INRIVCO PRESENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 DISCUSSION/SELECTION OF FIRM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 BOOK 98. FACE 3'30 SPECIAL MEETING Q®®K `98 F'Ac •� Thursday, June 13, 1996 The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, met in Special Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Thursday, June 13, 1996, at 9:00 a.m. Present were Fran B. Adams, Chairman; Carolyn K. Eggert, Vice Chairman; Richard N. Bird; Kenneth R. Macht; and John W. Tippin. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; Barbara Bonnah and Patricia Ridgely, Deputy Clerks. The Chairman called the meeting to order. Chairman Adams announced that this meeting is being telecast live, and we have been assured by our Legal Department that this is legal. However, as Chairman, she had to say that she feels this gives an unfair advantage to the second and third presenters who are able to see and hear the questions posed by the Board and be better prepared to answer those questions during their presentations. She felt there may be things that are legally right, but morally wrong, and this is one of those. She just wanted to put that on the table at the very beginning and let the first presenter know they are already in deep dark trouble. Commissioner Eggert didn't feel that the first presenters are in any kind of deep, dark trouble and she didn't want them to think _ in those terms whatsoever. She believed the Commissioners stay totally open minded throughout. She noted that she doesn't even have the same questions for each of the presenters. Commissioner Tippin added that some of the Board members have been around long enough to not be impressed by the sequence of things. Commissioner Bird pointed out that this is a public meeting and if the second and third presenters want to sit in the audience and listen, they could. The fact that it is being televised is not anything unusual as far as giving them any advantage or disadvantage. 1 JUNE 139 1996 Chairman Adams understood that other presenters are not allowed in the room during the normal interview process where contracts are being decided and consultants are being chosen. Administrator Chandler noted that the process varies depending on the types of presentations. For example, architects made their proposals on the new Courthouse while other architects were available and sat in on the presentations. What we are looking for today is background, experience and qualifications of the individual firms. Questions are asked and a decision is made prior to the Board authorizing detailed negotiations on contracts with - respect to dollars and cents. Chairman Adams introduced Utilities Director Terry Pinto who advised that the presentations today will be from representatives of 3 strong companies who wish to do something for us that has not been done in this form any where else in the country, at least in the magnitude that we want for this project. This is different from a bid process in that these companies are coming to us for an opportunity to invest millions of dollars to build an industrial park in our community. Different than other industrial parks, this park will have a great effect on the county for years and -years as it relates to our solid waste problem. We will be looking for a major reduction in solid waste going into our Landfill, which will extend the life of the Landfill. That extension will equate to literally millions of dollars, and an industrial park will create a multitude of jobs and increase the county's tax base. MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC. - ATLANTA, GEORGIA Director Pinto introduced John H. Hayes, president and CEO, who expressed his appreciation of Chairman Adams' remarks and concern about fair play on their behalf. Mr. Hayes stated that MWM understood the process and was accustomed to the government process of evaluating information. Mr. Hayes stated that their presentation stands on its own and they are happy to make it. JUNE 13, 1996 2 dou 98 PACE 332 Indian River County, Florida Thursday - June 13, 1996 Agenda BOOK 90 FmE 333 L Introduction of Meedng Participants - John Hayes (zo,,, m) • Ellis -Don - Corporate Overview - Jeff Fry • Hayes James & Associates - Corporate Overview - Jim Aton • 1st Commerce Capital - Corporate Overview - Belle Walker II. Design Model - John Hayes ao „p,,..) III. Project Overview - Jim Aton tm =,, IV. Financial/Legal Structure - Belle Walker ao,,,,v,. V. Questions and Answers -John Hayes oo �._) Project Overview Site Design Permitting Schedule Proposed Businesses to be Included Waste Processing Facility & MSW Composting Plant Key Features: > Supports a 1500 TPD plus Operating Plan > ISO plus Employees > S 3 million plus Payroll > Integrated Mining & Manufacturing D&O Plan > Soils Laboratory & Greenhouse > Significant Landfill Avoidance > Computerized Management & Control System > Class "A"Compost Miscellaneous Technoloev > Alternative Fuel Sources > Plastic Construction Materials > Recycled Glass Surfaces > Aluminum Smelting > Glass Blast Material > Landfill Gasification > Mini Repulping Mill 3 =13, 1996 Project Participants Municipal Waste Management Developer Ellis -Don and Project Management Williams & Associates Site Development Project Construction - Project Bonding WASTECH Equipment Equipment Selection Put or Pay System Design Contracts Process and Procedure Hayes/James & Associates Civil and Site Engineers Morgan Keegan & Financial Package 1st Commerce Capital Miscellaneous Technology ENER-O--TECH Trimax Futuristic Tile WASTECH Hayes/James Alternative Fuel Plastic Lumber Recycled Glass Surfaces Aluminum Smelting Glass Blast Material Landfill Gasification Legal & Financial Structure MWM Indian River Owner/Operator Service Provider -80% Debt Int "" River Solid 20% Equity Waste Authority MOV Participation Guarantor 25 Year Federal or IRS/Loan Bank LOC 20/25 Year Put or Pay Contracts Backed By Put or Pay rip Fee Marketed By Contracts Mw Waste Processing Facility Composting Facility Glass Plastic Alternative Aluminum Re u in P !P S Processing Technology Fuels Smelting Plant antcs Miscellaneous & Ground Technologies Covers JUNE 139 1996 4 800K98 w E -33 OVERVIEW General Objectives BOOK 98 PA,F 335 Municipal Waste Management, LLC is proposing to develop, own and operate a Waste Technology Park in Indian River County, Florida that will enable the County to meet the goals set forth in the Indian River County Waste Management Master Plan, The Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County and other goals as defined in RFQP 6047. The general goals of the developmenTare as follows: 1. Provide sensible landfill alternatives that are economically sound. 2. Provide a solid waste reduction plan that will at least allow the County to achieve the reduction required to comply with the State's recycling and waste reduction guidelines. 3. Reduce the amount of material to be taken to the landfill by as much as 85 percent. 4. Provide new jobs in the County with an annual payroll in excess of $3,000,000. 5. Surround the Waste Processing Facility with optional integrated ancillary technologies that utilize the manufacturing -ready raw materials provided by the WPF. 6. Provide a flexible plan that will easily adapt to changes in regulations, incoming waste stream, enhanced technologies and changing market needs. 7. Provide an environmentally friendly approach the will gain public support, protect ground water recharge areas, conserve energy resources and instill community pride. S. Provide a computerized Management System that tracks and records detailed information regarding each days activity and automatically provides state and federal compliance reports, management reports and predictability overlays. 9. Provide financial incentives that assist the County in waste management cost recovery. Waste Processing Facility Size The proposed feed stream and operational basis for the general Plan is: 1. 1,500 tons per day of Municipal Solid Waste ('MSW'). Facility will be capable of processing in excess of 1,500 tons per shift per day of MSW by adding an additional shift. 2. It is anticipated that the facility will process approximately 500 TPD of the County's waste and that the County will allow an additional 1,000 TPD to be transferred from surrounding counties under an approved plan. No waste from outside the state would be received. 3. Standard eight (8) hours per day of operation (slightly longer on heavy days - slightiy shorter on light days). 4. Six (6) days per week, 52 weeks per year of operation. Organizational Structure 1. It is proposed that Municipal Waste Management, LLC serve as the Developer, Owner and Operator of the Waste Processing Facility and the surrounding ancillary businesses. 2. Municipal Waste Management, LLC will form a Florida corporation that may include a technology partner in some of the ancillary businesses and a minority financial partner (less that 30 percent) in the total project 3. The County will need to form a Solid Waste Authority (if not currently in place) to enter into long-term contracts (15 years or greater) with MWM. 4. All waste coming to the facility will be contracted through the Authority, and the Authority will in tum contract with MWM to service the contracts. This will allow the County input and ultimate control over the origin of incoming waste and protect the long-term investment interest of MWM. k, =13, 1996 Strategic Alliances MWM is strategically aligned with key providers in the Waste Services Industry. Project team members are: 1. Williams and Associates - General Contractor 2. Hayes James and Associates - Civil and Site Engineers 3. Rader Resource Recovery - Equipment Provider 4. Wastech Equipment - Design Services and Equipment Provider 5. Municipal Waste Software Solutions - Computerized Management Systems More detailed information is included in the project Teamm section of this presentation. Financial Structure 1. It is expected that the County will form an Indian River Authority empowered by the State of Florida to enter into long-term 'put -or -pay' contracts of 15 years or more with the participants in the Waste Management Plan. 2. The Authority will then enter into an agreement with MWM as the service provider for the contracts. These contracts will be utilized to secure Industrial Development Bonds secured by a Letter of Credit 3. Equity in the development project will be provided by a partner with MWM. Several options are available to MWM depending on the final structure of the agreement between MWM and the County. 4. Financing for three ancillary businesses will be included in the initial package with the WPF; MSW Composting, Glass Blasting Materials and Plastics Extrusion. Others such as Alternative Fuel Sources and Futuristic Tile will be funded through expansion reserves or separate financial methods. 5. It is not anticipated that the financial structure of the MWM Development Plan will in any way conflict with the guidelines discussed in RFOP 6047. SCOPE OF SERVICES Legal 1. MWM,s general counsel will work with the attorney for the County/Authority to structure an agreement and strategy that is in the mutual best interest of the parties. 2. MWM personnel and general counsel will structure and secure participation agreements approved by the County/Authority attorney that secure long-term put -or -pay contracts with the project. 3. MWM will comply with all state and federal regulations. 4. MWM is an equal opportunity employer. 2 JUNE 139 1996 BOOK 98 FArE 3.36 I Box 98 P,�I ,E 9:3 7 Technical Design MWM will design and develop a complete Waste Processing Facility and such other Complementary Facilities as defined in this Plan with the capacity to handle a minimum of 1,500 TPD of municipal solid waste. Services and equipment will include the following: Complete engineering and design of a twin trommel, semi -automated Waste Processing Faclllty to Include the following. 1. One twin trommel semi -automated recycling and waste processing system with automatic bag openers, using an integrated tipping floor design; twin glass pre -pick systems; twin fiber pre-sort systems; magnetic and eddy current separation systems; aggregate recovery system; and three dual hand -sort - conveyor systems in enclosed climate -controlled picking platforms. 2. Dual direct infeed conveyor system leading to the picking platform for processing industrial, commercial, and commingled recyclables that do not require being processed through the trommel. 3. Baling system for cardboard, aluminum and other commodities. 4. Automated plastics separation, grinding, washing and processing system. 5. Dual shredders for processing the nonrecycled organic fraction of solid waste for composting. 6. Integrated MSW composting facility. 7. Integrated wood waste management system. The following presentation booklets are on file in the Office of the Clerk to the Board: MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT, INCORPORATED ELLIS-DON THOMPSON COMPANY, INC. -FIRST COMMERCE CAPITAL, DIV. OF MORGAN KEEGAN & CO., INC. At the conclusion of the presentation, Commissioner Eggert asked why MWM felt, in light of the fact that it wasn't included in the rfp, they needed to make the approach of the County having co - ownership of the project, i.e. IRC creating an authority, having full obligation and risk of operation, with all buildings owned jointly between MWM and IRC. Mr. Hayes wasn't sure that they communicated appropriately if that is what Commissioner Eggert understood. The only thing that they have asked is for IRC to form an authority. That is the only requirement. In the past, it was always their intent to build, own, and operate waste management facilities themselves and provide services for a community. Frankly, that is where the money is. They believe there is a partnership with the community, whether or not the County has a legal obligation. They know how much a FA Jua 13, 1996 _I project like this would generate. The Crisp County operation in Georgia will generate just over $16 million a year, so they are looking at a pre-tax profit of $19 million a year for a relatively small county. Crisp County made the decision to own and operate the plant themselves, and MWM serves as management advisers. What we are saying to you is that once you get into this deal and see the numbers that are here, you may want to participate in some of those profits. MWM is open to that. If you don't want to do that, there is no obligation, no financial obligation, and no obligation to the bonds. The only thing they are asking is that, from a legal standpoint, they need a vehicle that will allow them to secure long term contractors in order for them to secure a debt in the range of $60-70 million to develop this project over a period of time. Commissioner Eggert asked how many employees would be at the higher income level, and Mr. Hayes anticipated 35-40 in the waste processing facility alone. In the waste collection operation, the wages are competitive. They pay higher than minimum wage and offer incentive programs for employees. Chairman Adams inquired about a time frame for completion, and Mr. Hayes anticipated that the permitting ,process would be completed in one year, with the financing taking a year to 18 months. The contracting for waste would take place in that period of time. Mr. Hayes anticipated that they would have the project under construction within a 2 -year time frame. A 14 -month time period would be needed for the waste processing facilities and composting operations and some of the ancillary businesses will be developed in that same time frame. They expect the park to be up and operational in 4-1/2 years. Chairman Adams asked if the County's lack of a curbside garbage pickup would pose a problem, and Mr. Hayes answered that it would not. In response to Commissioner_ Bird's questions, Mr. Hayes explained that MWM would own and operate the glass and plastic operations. To achieve the County's goals, it is extremely important to have a significant stream of quality products that can be delivered day after day after day. That is what drives the industry, which is why they are looking at 1500 tons a day. That amount of waste stream would provide a flow of materials out of the plant that will attract other businesses such as a mini pulp mill. In response to Commissioner Tippin's question of legality in creating an authority to do this project, Attorney Vitunac advised JUNE 139 1996 8 aooK 98 FnE 338 BOOK 98 PA.,IJE.339 that the establishment of an authority is not required under Florida law. The County has the authority to enter into 25 -year contracts. The authority Mr. Hayes is speaking of would be an independent authority and there is no such ability to that under Florida law. Any proposed authority would be subject to approval by the BCC. Director -Pinto asked if MWM could proceed with the project if the decision is made not to issue industrial development bonds or to have an authority. Mr. Hayes stated that they would proceed with the project, but the time for commencing might be a little bit longer. They would have to get back to the County on that. There being no further questions, Chairman Adams thanked the MWM group for their presentation. The Board recessed for 10 minutes before resuming the presentations at 10:30 a.m. with the same members in attendance. NORTON ENVIRONMENTAL INDEPENDENCE, OHIO NORTON E n' v -1 r o n m e n t a I May 14, 1996 Indian River County Purchasing Department Attn: Mr. Terrance Pinto 2625 19th Avenue Vero Beach FL 32960 Dear Mr. Pinto: On behalf of Norton Environmental and the entire Dalad Group, I take great pleasure in responding to your RFP for the Development of a Waste Conversion Industial Park. While we routinely respond to RFD's for recycling services, this is the first RFP which requests services from all -the deciplines of the Dalad Group. <J JA 13, 1996 r The Dalad Group is a 49 year old family of companies specializing in the fields of real estate development, construction, and solid waste management. We currently own and manage almost two million square feet of real estate and maintain a substantial inventory of raw land for future development. In addition, we serve as general contractor for all of our properties and have a broad range of construction experience. Finally, our solid waste management division (Norton Environmental) designs, builds, and operates state of the art recycling and waste containment facilities. Our Medina County Central Processing Facilty has received international attention and has been toured by over 6000 people from 25 states and 18 countries. Truely what stands out is our unique in-house qualifications to satisfy this RFP. I am confident that our highly skilled staff coupled with our financial strength and related experience can provide the county of Indian River with positive reults. You have a wonderful concept and we anxiously await the opportunity to serve your needs. Please do not hesitate to call me if you have additional questions or wish a personal visit. Sincerely, Louis W. Perez Vice President, Marketing CO/ootwe Heodnuo"ers 6200 Rockwe Woods Btio k+de)7endence. Onm 44131 (276) 447-0070 • Fox (216) 447.5028 - 4 MEMBER OF THE Steven M. Viny, principal of Norton Environmental, gave a brief introduction before making a slidefilm presentation of Norton Environmental's proposal covering the history of the Dalad Group; project requirements; project approach, including recycling, composting, and engineered fuels; real estate development; proposed action plan; phase development; organizational chart. NORTON ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSAL IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD JUNE 139 1996 10 BOOK 98 GOOK � 98 P,,,f 341 1.6 PLANT DESCRIPTION The Central Processing Facility consists of an attractive building and an outdoor compost pad on a park like setting. The CPF is designed to accept 400-500 tons per day of unsorted municipal solid waste and extract recyclables, compostables, and fuel through a combination of automated and manual separation. In addition, the facility accepts source separated yard waste such as grass, leaves, and brush which is placed in windrows and composted. No obvious odors can be noticed on the facility grounds. The CPF features heavy duty equipment for maximum uptime, comfortable employee facilities, and a large conference room overlooking the processing area. Waste flo, In bound waste trucks stop at the scale house where all loads are weighed. Loads with source separated yard waste are directed to the compost area. All other trucks are directed to the building's tip area to eject their load. Large metal objects such as white goods are extracted and loaded into roll off containers. The items are sold as scrap and bypassing the processing sorting line. A rubber tired front end loader moves waste (---"o the infeed conveyor. Waste is then metered onto an incline conveyor into the processing area to the first sorting area where bulky items, wood, cardboard, newspaper, and mixed paper are removed. The sorting rooms at this facility are fully enclosed and ergonomically designed for worker comfort including their own heating and air conditioning systems, office style finish, and stereo system. Remaining waste enters a 40 foot long trommel screen which provides three services: opens bags, tumbles the material outside of the shredded bag and separates the stream removing fines and coarse material. First, a specially designed bag opener rips open plastic garbage bags thus liberating its contents. Next, small holes in the trommel separate fines which are conveyed to a storage bin. This material is predominantly a mixed organic fraction which will be mixed with yard waste and wood chips and co -composted for use as soil to sustain plant growth. 11 il" 13, 1996 material is predominantly a mixed organic fraction which will be mixed with yard waste and wood chips and co -composted for use as soil to sustain plant growth. Next, larger diameter holes in the trommel remove a course fraction rich in metals - predominantly cans. This material passes by an overband magnet for ferrous recovery. All remaining material proceeds to a Lindemann eddy -current separator for aluminum recovery. Permanent "super magnets" mounted on a concentric inner rotor repel aluminum beverage cans which literally "jump" into a storage bin. This system provides for excellent separation and an energy efficient design. All remaining waste is combined with the trommel discharge conveyor to a second sorting room designed to recover the following materials: newspaper, mixed paper, HDPE and PET plastic, and miscellaneous larger metallic objects. All recyclables from both sorting stations are dropped into large binned areas allowing a front end loader to push the material onto one of two baler conveyors. These materials are then compressed into dense bales -and loaded onto trucks for resale. Currently, all of the paper produced is marketed through Tenneco (PCA) where they are used to produce boxboard for products such as detergent, cereal, and pet food boxes. Ferrous scrap is sold to local scrap dealers and non-ferrous metal and plastic are brokered through PCA and sold on the spot market. All recycled material from Norton's comparable Medina County CPF has been well received in the market place since day one. PCA regards Norton's recyclable paper as more acceptable than clean MRF material. All non -recyclable items continue through the second sorting area to a large Saturn shredder producing RDF or "refuse derived fuel." It is anticipated that the RDF product will be marketed to local coal burning power producer. Norton Environmental is currently working with Ohio Edison Power Company in order to further advance the development of RDF as a substitute for coal, or wood. Additional information on the advantages of RDF is found in the next sections. While most recycling programs focus on beverage containers, the CPF extracts a material called Bulk Ferrous which includes items such as white goods, pipe, steel angle and plate, automotive parts such as brakes, springs, and gears, and small household appliances. When comparing the percentages of Bulk Ferrous to Ferrous Cans it becomes obvious that this material cannot be overlooked. Other items such as wood pallets and scrap dimensional lumber as well as mixed paper can account for healthy percentages of the recyclable stream yet do not lend themselves to curbside or blue bag recycling systems. Recycling a large percentage of the waste stream is tricky. We need to not only look at the obvious commodities such as newspaper, cardboard, plastic, and metals but create new markets for materials such as wood, organics (compost), fuel, aggregate, mixed plastic, textiles, or even highbred markets such as the production of ethanol. All of these items must be based on the individual waste stream and then tailored to site specific markets. With that in mind, the following pie chart represents Norton's goal for landfill diversion for Mixed Waste Processing: JUNE 139 1996 12 aooK 9.8 F -Au 342 NULL BCOK 98' I r,�ol. 343 C 0 M P 0 S T I v a r d 1 8% LANDFILL 30% COMPOST(fiaes) 17% R E C Y C L A 8 L E S 15% Please keep in mind that are goal is based upon receiving all of the solid waste produced by a community. Another advantage of the Mixed Waste Processing Facility concept as developed by Norton Environmental is the ability to receive and therefore visualize the entire waste stream. This allows the operator to tailor the operation to the site specific materials and markets. Many so called "nontraditional" materials can be identified and marketed. As the waste stream and recyclable markets are always changing, we can keep a constant finger on the pulse of the industry and local opportunities to maximize the efficiency of such an operation. Our past experience with Mixed waste Processing has allowed us to project the following recovery percentage for recovered recyclables from the CPF: ONP 19. Mixed Paper 23, -11" 13, 1996 OCC 26.1% 13 Glass 3.4% Ferrous Bulk 7.7% 'lastic 1.6% vvvvu 9.5% For the past three years, Norton Environmental has been marketing all of the paper and recyclables through the Tenneco (PCA). PCA has expressed great interest in our project and they have agreed to market the following recyclables: old corrugated containers (OCC), old newspaper (ONP), mixed paper (Mix), HDPE plastic, PET plastic, and aluminum beverage cans (UBC). PCA is currently purchasing all such material from Norton's Medina County CPF and has never rejected a load of its recyclables. PCA regards the recyclable paper products as cleaner than that of a traditional or "clean" MRF. The reason is quite understandable. Norton uses a positive sort, meaning the desired material is pulled out of the waste stream and recovered. Any material which is missed becomes fuel. Most clean MRF's use a negative sort where contaminants are removed and product is allowed to pass. Any contaminant missed remains with the product stream and therefore adds a level of contamination to the baled product. PCA also has experience with blue bag recycling systems and avoids this material altogether as materials such as glass actually contaminate the paper within the blue bag. While a limited amount of contaminants such as plastic or metal can be screened out in the hydropulper, imbedded glass cannot be removed. Norton Environmental plans to work with local markets or we could market the material through PCA. The following is a short list for recyclable material and markets available through the Mixed Waste Process: White Goods and Scrap Metal The CPF will be able to receive white goods such as stoves, refrigerators and appliances. White goods will be sold to local scrap dealers for recycling. - Wood Wood will be recovered in two places. Large pieces of wood will be removed by a small skid loader at the tipping floor. Smaller items of wood will be manually sorted at the primary sorting station. The recovered wood will be ground into nominal 1" x V chips. These chips will be used as a bulking agent in our mixed organic compost operation. Ferrous and Non -Ferrous Cans . , Our large electro magnet will recover a major portion of ferrous cans found in the waste stream. The plant will also be equipped with an Eddy Current Separator. The Eddy Current will automatically remove non-ferrous cans from the waste stream. Both ferrous and non-ferrous cans can be sold to local scrap producers. Plastics Light plastic commodities that are not sold to PCA may be used as fuel in our RDF. The system we are proposing has the ability to extract light plastics typically non-recoverable and recycle them for beneficial reuse as RDF fuel. Heavier plastic containing PVC will be removed through our air separation system. The light plastics such as polypropylene and polystyrene will be mixed with residual paper to produce an engineered fuel. It can be burned like coal to produce energy 14 JUNE 139 1996 a00K.344 BOOK 98 F'a r..34 Glass Our Medina operation handles glass in a slightly different manner than most operations. Instead of having our workers sort through broken pieces of glass we have twelve drop-off "igloo" centers throughout the County. Residents can drop off their glass containers when they go food shopping or other related activity. The program has worked efficiently for Medina County. Currently we are recovering over 70% of the glass through our igloo drop off centers and our workers are not exposed to dangerous working conditions. Another added plus for the glass drop off program is to insure good quality control of our recovered paper. PCA has indicated to us that broken glass fibers cause extensive quality control problems in their operation. Eliminating, or reducing the percentage of broken glass helps insure our quality control for recyclable paper. Lead Acid Batteries Our program in Medina County accepts lead acid batteries at no charge to the residents. We are proposing a similar program to your community assuming that there is a market for lead acid batteries. Compost Operation The program we have established for Medina County accepts source separated yard waste free of charge. Incoming loads of yard waste are delivered directly to the compost pad adjacent to the CPF and avoid the mixed waste processing line altogether. Yard waste is unloaded and formed into windrows. The windrows are turned as necessary to maintain aerobic conditions and stable compost is created in about 34 months. The final product is be screened, bagged, and sold to area residents for $1.00 per ten lb. bag. The compost has become so popular that sales are limited to 4 bags per resident. The material produced is an excellent class Y compost that can be used to enrich soil. The compost operation in Medina County is odorless and meets all of the EPA requirements. Norton Environmental is proposing the same concept for Indian County. We would require approximately 4 acres for our compost operation. Markets for Class Y compost: Like Medina County, compost can be bagged and sold to the general public. Compost can also be sold to area landscaping companies in bulk. Price for the compost will depend on supply and demand. Norton plans to conduct a thorough marketing plan if it becomes the vendor of choice for Indian County. Since we are out of state we will conduct more conclusive marketing research for the compost market and provide a marketing plan if we are selected as the successful bidder. Mixed Organic Compost Norton has another source of material which is suitable for composting; trommel fines. The trommel fines are a 2" minus product containing approximately 40% dirt, leaves, grass, food waste, yard waste, small paper items, and some inorganic material such as broken glass, bottle caps, batteries and fine plastic. The trommel fines are homogeneously mixed at predetermined 15 JUNE 139 1996 r Fl - rates with structure material such as wood chips and source separated yard waste and composted using special European equipment manufactured by Komtech. The operation produces a product that is considered a class A compost. This material is an excellent product for landfill final vegetative cover or other bulk uses. The material can be screened to become a fine quality material as well. Norton Environmental has evaluated four different types of compost mixtures that could be utilized with our trommel fines. The samples were tested by Norton and its consultant, RNK Environmental. Results of our study were prepared and presented to the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. A full report on our mixed organic compost operation can be made available. The mixed organic compost operation will incorporate a 2 acre hard surface pad, computer controlled batch mixer and a sophisticated windrow turner. The turner has a water attachment where leachate (collected water) can be sprayed into the compost during turning. Markets for Class A compost: Markets for this material will vary, but may include landfill cover, road base and other bulk uses. Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) The search for alternative landfill diversion has driven Norton Environmental to develop a Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) that can be co -fired with coal. The objective was not to replace coal, but to utilize portions of Municipal Solid Wastes (MSW) that are both clean byMing and rich in BTU's. Co -firing coal with MSW requires a delicate balance of coal burning technology and MSW know-how. For this reason Norton Environmental joined forces with Ohio Edison. Ohio Edison is a local power company serving northeast Ohio. They operate several coal burning power plants and have conducted significant research on alternative fuels..' Norton Environmental has been successful in developing a fuel pellet (dRDF), or densified Refuse Derived Fuel, made from targeted material in the waste stream; paper and light plastics. These pellets are rich in BTUs and contain virtually no sulfur or chlorine thus burning cleaner than coal. We have conducted test burns in utility boilers on several occasions as well as laboratory analysis, the results of which can be made available upon request. Working as partners, Ohio Edison and Norton Environmental offer both fuel manufacturing and fuel combustion expertise. We have the technology to custom tailor fuel as well as retrofit existing coal firing boiler for burning dRDF. Our objective is to work with local users and help develop the market for the fuel. In certain markets RDF, or dRDF, offer a considerable cost saving since it is less expensive than coal. Additionally, emissions credits may be made available as the RDF burns cleaner than coal. Markets - dRDF: Preliminary research has already identified some potential markets for dRDF. Marketing research is required in order to investigate the RDF/dRDF markets in central Florida. JUNE 13, 1996 16 Boa 98 FIG, 346 F - BOOK 498 FA. �� •,4 3.0 PROJECT APPROACH As a developer our objective is to first review and understand the waste composition for Indian River County. A waste composition analysis is needed in order to evaluate the various segments of the waste stream. The waste composition will serve as a resource for the future Environmental Industrial Park development. Quantitative and qualitative review of available recyclables is essential in order to target the proper environmental companies to the Park. Targeted recycling industries can be contacted and their desired land use needs can be recorded use in the development plan. Next, we will need to perform a site assessment to review the site and understand its unique characteristics. A boundary survey is needed along with environmental records for the proposed site. Locations of available utilities and easements must be located and plotted. A traffic study is another element that will be part of the site review. Once the site assessment is complete, the data can be combined with the needs of the targeted industries to prepare a preliminary development plan for the Environmental Industrial Park. The Mixed Waste Processing Facility can be plotted as well as the adjacent compost site. Upon completion of the site review a market study will be conducted. First, an overall market study will be conducted on the environmental needs of the regional infrastructure. This study will evaluate regional markets for recyclables recovered by the MRF. This section may also expand to outside markets beyond the region. The second section of market study will focus on individual target markets. The marketing study will developed segments for the target industries. Each of these segments will be reviewed and classified in order to identified target companies. The development of the Mixed Waste Processing Facility (MWP) is crucial to attracting other industry to the park. Once the facility is completed, other environmental firms may be able to benefit from the recovered products. Construction of the MWPF will take approximately 10 to 12 months. We estimate approximately 6 months for obtaining local permits (see Phase I). While the facility is under construction we will begin a marketing campaign. Our marketing department will develop a marketing strategy for each of the target industries. The marketing strategy is just part of the overall marketing plan for each industry and will incorporating a mix of advertising, trade show exhibits, direct mail, and other types of promotions directed to environmental companies and real estate brokers. With the launching of this phase, our objective will focus on the future development of the park. In addition to our marketing and promotional approach, our attention will also focus on local state and federal agencies for support and funding. Grant programs and tax benefits will be part of the incentive package for a target company (or industry). We need to develop these options and make them available to prospective companies. We also plan to meet with state and county governments to discuss innovative financing options for building the recycling infrastructure. The Federal Environmental Protection Agency also sponsors investment seminars designed to bring together the financial community and environmental industries in an open workshop. Venture capitalist and other financiers will have an opportunity to meet with recycling industry representatives who seek financing for new growth in Indian River. Along with promotional packages and advertising, Norton is a progressive company with its ear to the environmental industry. We have direct contact with all the major sections of the environmental industry and deal directly with the target industries. Norton is routinely contacted by manufacturers from the plastic, wood, paper, metal and power industries. We attend national and international exhibitions in order to meet and exchange information with developing companies. Our Medina Central Processing Facility has already been toured by nearly 6,000 visitors from 17 countries. We maintain a consistent network and will utilize our contacts and associations during the development of this project. JUNE 139 1996 17 I 6.0 Project Schedule Years 1 to 3 The first three years of the park's development will be categorized as Phase I. Phase I will include market research, planning and the development of the material recovery facility. See Appendix for gantt chart. Years 4 to 6 After the MWPF is completed, Phase II will go into operation. The focus of Phase II is to attract other industries to the park. Part of the market research for Phase II will be conducted during Phase I. At this stage we anticipate communication with target companies interested in the park. A dialogue with these companies will be in place and we will be preparing site plans. Years 7 to 10 Years 7 to 10 will focus on secondary target companies if no closure was made with primary targets. We also plan to target new industries as technology changes and markets open for different types of recyclables. 7.0 Financial Proposal for Material Recovery Facility Financial Condition Based on the information received with the RFP, our financial proforma takes into consideration the following conditions: — A minimum of 225 tons per day (TPD) of residential and commercial MSW, — A minimum of 112 TPD of yard waste, — Land cost for the Material Recovery Facility is set at zero, _ — Facility will be financed and owned by the county, — Disposal cost for residential material is set at zero, and — A Mixed Waste Processing Facility will direct nearly 60% of the incoming material away from the landfill. Tipping Fee Norton is proposing to operate the facility for the county at a set tipping fee of $17.50/ton. We will also operate the compost operation for a tipping fee of $6.00/ton. The tipping fee was calculated according to the current 1996 market condition for recyclables and takes into consideration the capital costs from the attached table. If Norton were to finance the facility we will need to charge the county $35.00/ton for the MWPF operation and $6.00/ton for the compost operation. The increase in tipping fee is due to higher financial charges for Norton and increase personal and property taxes cost. Profit Sharing Plan Norton is proposing a profit sharing plan for the revenue generated on the sale of recyclables. We will split 50/50 on the sale of recyclables if prices go beyond the based prices on the attached table. — 18 JUNE 139 1996 BOOK 98 Pg, 348 J soap 98 PAu.34 Upon conclusion of the Norton presentation, Commissioner Eggert asked whether Norton realized that the rfp stated that the County would not run the industrial park, and Mr. Viny explained that if the County does not want to have ownership, they could look at it the other way -- as a tenant in the industrial park with the mixed waste processing plant. Commissioner Eggert asked if they have any insight into the county's waste stream other than what was given in the rpf. Mr. Viny advised that the mass balance is based on the waste stream information that was given to them. They would have to verify those figures and look very intensely at the composition of the waste stream. They would look at products used within 500 miles of Vero Beach and find a way to recycle by making products that are used in the county or in the area, such as pallets for citrus. Commissioner Eggert asked why they would be concentrating on selling recyclables to regional markets when the big thought is to utilize them within the manufacturing activities right in the park. Mr. Viny explained that there will be certain products that will not be used right in the park. In the case of aluminum, the waste stream will be only one half to one percent aluminum. He did not expect an aluminum smelter to move in for that small amount of material. The most important thing is that they do not want to put anybody out of business that is already located in Indian River County. That would not be fair to anyone who has built their livelihood here. In response to Commissioner Eggert's question about employment and wages, Mr. Viny advised that there would be 60 employees at the mixed waste processing plant. Norton pays higher than minimum rate, $6 an hour to start. There are frequent raises and incentive plans; benefits include hospitalization and a 401K plan. Commissioner Eggert inquired into their statement about generating several million dollars a year for economical development in the county, and Mr. Viny said that they were talking about tax base. Commissioner Eggert also inquired into their statement about receiving a 10% development fee plus real estate commission for each lease. Mr. Viny stated that would be exclusive of real estate commission because they don't know who the broker would be. 19 ja 13, 1996 Commissioner Eggert questioned the statement that all leases would be by the developer and the tenant. She asked whether they are expecting the County to pay any fees. Mr. Viny explained that goes back to the public/private partnership that he talked about earlier where there would be a cost for the land. If the land cannot be sold, they would have to structure something with a long term lease. Mr. Viny extended an invitation to the Board to tour a Dalad Group plant. There being no further questions, Chairman Adams thanked Mr. Viny for his presentation. The Board recessed for lunch and Chairman Adams announced that the Board would resume the presentations at 1:30 p.m. JUNE 139 1996 20 Bon, 98 pv;f 350 BooK 98 mliF 351 The meeting was reconvened at 1:30 p.m. by Chairman Adams with all members of the Board of County Commissioners present, as well as staff from the morning session, and Deputy Clerk Patricia Ridgely. Q #2 W t "I Y II: ICI I I Utility Services Director Terry Pinto introduced the third firm, INRIVCO- Recycling Park- LLC, and their first presenter, Kenneth Knigin. Kenneth Knigin began his presentation by advising that INRIVCO had tailored their program specifically for Indian River County. He explained they would not give details of their proposal, but planned to cover the following: 1) what they are going to provide, 2) how they are going to use it, 3) how they are going to pay for it with the County making no investment, and 4) what are the benefits to the County. Mr. Knigin described the layout, time frame, organizational chart, and planned elevations for Phase I using the following graphics: 9 TH STREET [OSLO RD.) �, _J a A o_ INRIVCO RECYCLING LLC June 13, 1996 21 Rams in mum -AIA arohIboob 0- 21 - OFFICE auaowa &F. DevelopmeM�e Conversion Industrial -• �� Q t7 © C7 E% Q I © © Q © © 0 9 TH STREET [OSLO RD.) �, _J a A o_ INRIVCO RECYCLING LLC June 13, 1996 21 Rams in mum -AIA arohIboob 0- 21 - OFFICE auaowa &F. DevelopmeM�e Conversion Industrial r INFRA -STRUCTURE ?.IRF ATAD NEWSPAPER RECYCLING REFUSE DERIVED FUEL ' STORAGE i TIRE RECLAMATION I PLASTIC RECYCLING RECYCLED FIBER RECLAMATION RUBBER RECLAMATION Phase I INDIAN RIVER COUNTY WASTE PARK 1999 1907 Oct Now Dec _Jon Feb Mor A -- pMeJun Jul Am Sm l)N ti—n... .eee ..,... 2001 IENGINEERING I OVERSIGHT u:oomo womtw'm _ mpou"m — PROJECT ORGANIZATION INMVCO RECYCLING PARK LLC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GROUP (.operation & maintenance) MATERIALS M & G CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION CO. REAL ESTATE. RECOCERI' FACILITI' AIANAGEb1E\TCO. (w erre conre"lon tecbnolop) MANUFACTURING TEAANTS FEED SUPPLEMENT CAT LITTER RECYCLED RUB ER TIRE RECLMNIATION CITRUS PULP. ETC. RECYCLED NEWSP FLOOR COYERINC CRL'MII RUBBER V %RIOt'S RECYCLED SOIL REFUSE DERIVED RECYCLED FIBER PLASTIC LUMBER ELASTIC PRODUCTS REMEDIATION FUELS PRODUCTS PRODUCTS June 13, 1996 22 Boa 98 uU 352 BOOK 98 pg,.,353 Mr. Knigin advised they are -planning to recycle organics and operate within the framework of the findings of a study the Utilities Department had done with local citrus growers. He related the involvement of his partner, Marvin Slamowitz (Chairman of the Board, Mark Centers Trust, a NYSE development company) and listed affiliated companies and their functions. Mr. Knigin introduced three other speakers: Norman Lipshie, CPA, Chief Financial Officer of INRIVCO (financial information), Don Graham of PSG (workings of the company), and Dominick Martorana (human element and community involvement). Mr. Knigin presented copies of Mr. Lipshie's curriculum vitae (not included in original submission) to the Commissioners. Norman Lipshie described his extensive background in accounting and reported the financing requirements of the INRIVCO project. He projected that the cost for Phase I will be approximately $20 million, which will be financed through facility or project financing. He recounted that General Electric Credit Corp. has indicated they are very anxious to work with IRC and INRIVCO on this project and they directed Mr. Lipshie to inform the Board of County Commissioners that they are in a "go mode". He 23 June 13, 1996 FF,_ M M M __7 added that other lenders they contacted also seem interested in the - project. Participants' capital is also available to them. Income will come from rentals, sale of recyclables, and from tipping fees. Income to Indian River County will be part of the negotiations, and might be generated through either a ground lease, real estate taxes, and/or a share of the recycling profits. Donald Graham, Vice President of Composting of PSG, introduced his Florida -based associate, Allan Williams. He described the involvement of PSG in the project and reviewed their affiliations with their parent company, Compagne General des Eaux, and other - companies; described other operations; and presented slides of current projects. He presented the company's philosophies of employees' roles in the local community, training and safety policies, importance of communications, facilities maintenance, and checks and balances. He reviewed some of the recycling industries that might be located at the "park" and experiences at other industrial parks. Dominick Martorana described the methods the group will use for employment and training local residents for the "park". He has - met with several local, county, and state organizations,and found a lot of cooperation and interest. Pre -recruitment announcements will be disseminated along with public awareness of the park by media coverage and community and civic organizations. Attention will focus on the creation of the park and job opportunities that will be available. He described in detail the recruitment, interviewing, screening, upgrading of skills, training processes and funding, and involvement of various local, county, and state organizations. He detailed how they would seek community involvement, and advised that tours of the park for education and information would be available. Prior to closing their presentation, Mr. Knigin called to the Board's attention that they have begun discussions with the Florida Department of Transportation regarding an interchange at I-95 and Oslo Road, which is presently scheduled sometime in the year 2022. He wanted to see it done sooner, so they have offered to participate with FDOT in the development of the interchange, but not without the permission of the Board of County Commissioners. Mr. Knigin then summarized the income and other benefits which will be flowing to the County without the County making a capital investment. 24 June 13, 1996 BOOK 98 P,% -354 Boa 98 P,�r,,: -3 5 During their presentation, while they reviewed information in additional detail, INRIVCO's representatives projected several pages contained their full RFQP, as well as other charts and slides for the viewing audience. INRIVCO'S FULL RFQP IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD At the conclusion of the INRIVCO presentation, Chairman Adams opened the floor for Commissioners' questions. Commissioner Eggert began by asking a series of questions. First, she asked where would INRIVCO go for alternative financing if General Electric Capital Corporation was unable to provide financing. Mr. Lipshie advised that he was already in communication with Grunthal in Ft. Lauderdale and they have been approached by others, so, he was very confident that financing would be available. Next, Commissioner Eggert asked if it would be a problem if a tenant came along that did not quite fit into one of their classifications. She also wanted to know what safeguards would be in place to ensure that undesirable tenants would not be in the park. Mr. Knigin offered assurances that tenants would be judged on quality of performance and compatibility with their perception of the park. He emphasized that the prospective tenants would be thoroughly evaluated, especially as to their financial stability and -projected performance, since INRIVCO would be, in fact, advancing financing for their facility. Commissioner Eggert wondered what would happen if INRIVCO decided not to exercise their option in the 20 -year lease which called for two 20 -year options. Mr. Knigin assured her that, as a matter of economics, they would not be planning a $25 million Phase I, which would take several years to build, if they had any intention of relinquishing it. He added that if INRIVCO were to walk away, the property would revert to the County. In response to Commissioner Eggert, Mr. Knigin advised they had based their estimate of 500 employees on a presumption of 35-50 employees for each of the it businesses they expect to operate in the park, plus construction workers. He projected a minimum of $13 OV June 13, 1996 million per year would be received by employees involved in the park. Concerning Commissioner Eggert's question on composting, Mr. Knigin recounted Mr. Graham's previous experience and maintained he was an authority on composting. He advised that only Class A, or under certain circumstances Class B, composting material would be generated. Recognizing there is a big responsibility in Indian River County to the food chain, they probably would want to aim for Class A. Commissioner Eggert inquired if they were interested in operating the Landfill and, if so, how they would do it. Mr. Knigin responded in the affirmative, if the Board desired them to do it. Mr. Graham added that PSG would be interested in operating the Landfill as part of this contract or a future RFQP. Commissioner Bird cited the original objectives were to extend the life of the present landfill, create jobs, and reduce costs to the County for disposal of taxpayers' garbage. He pointed out that each of the three f irms had predicted a very wide range of how much trash would end up in our Landfill. He was concerned that the Landfill would fill up much faster by having "outside" garbage' going into it, and wanted assurances that County residents would not have to pay more for garbage disposal in the future. Mr. Knigin understood and stressed the need for a tipping fee. He stated that Indian River County waste alone would not satisfy 11 companies. He suggested there would-be no "outside" waste in the Landfill if it is segregated and goes directly to the facility where it will be recycled. He acknowledged that the Board and INRIVCO will have to agree to a ceiling of what will be going into the Landfill, and the overload will go elsewhere. Commissioner Bird emphasized that the final agreement had to include some kind of tipping fee to help offset the utilization and life of the Landfill. County Attorney Vitunac wondered if INRIVCO had given any thought to mining the existing landfill, and Mr. Graham responded that landfill mining is an option which is rapidly becoming popular and worth considering. Commissioner Macht was curious how profits will be derived and who has the authority on the tipping fees, and Mr. Lipshie enumerated the various sources of income, advised that the rents will be based on square feet of occupancy, and that the Board of 26 - June 13, 1996 8 o o K 98 P,� :356 County Commissioners will control the tipping fees, dependent upon the contract. Commissioner Bird asked if the Board needed to make a selection today, and County Attorney Vitunac advised it was up to the Board, but it had to be done in public. At approximately 3:00 p.m., Chairman Adams called for a 10 minute recess,_ whereupon the final presenters exited the Chambers. At approximately 3:10 p.m., Chairman Adams reconvened the meeting. DISCUSSION/SELECTION OF FIRM Director Pinto commented on some of the questions the Board asked. He advised that approximately 500 tons per day are dumped currently into the Landfill. With the implementation of a waste conversion industrial park, he intended that amount to be reduced at least to 50%. The Board of County Commissioners will regulate the tipping fees. He enumerated other possible means for the County to derive income from the waste conversion industrial park. He believed this contract would be a lengthy process. Director Pinto addressed concerns of Commissioners Eggert and Bird about tipping fees and trash from outside of Indian River County. Commissioner Eggert understood that under the plan the residents would be paying for one pick up in the future, instead of paying for both recycling and trash. Director Pinto advised that she was correct, the items would be separated at the "park" for recycling or waste for the Landfill. Commissioner Bird asked if a truckload of obvious yard trash would bypass the MRF (Material Recovery Facility), and Director Pinto advised that any trash already separated will go directly to the recycling plant. There was a brief speculative discussion concerning citrus waste being recycled into cattle feed. Commissioner Macht inquired if any of the presenters have somebody ready to sign a lease, but Director Pinto did not know. That would be the responsibility of the developer, who he believed would get tenants signed quickly before making their investment. Commissioner Bird inquired about the boundaries of the property offered in this project and whether Ocean Spray and the Dritenbas' 5 acres would be included. Director Pinto advised the park would consist of only the properties the County owned at the June 13, 1996 27 e time, and site planning has to be worked out. The three firms were also advised that the availability of the 5 -acre parcel was 10 years away. Commissioner Bird wondered if there would be any negative affect due to the 5 acres, and Director Pinto advised that parcel will be incorporated into the park when it becomes available, it j will not obstruct development, nor is it critical to the development of the park. Infrastructure access must be available on the 5 -acre parcel and the Dritenbas' lease is structured in that manner. In response to Commissioner Macht, County Attorney Vitunac instructed the Board that by law they were required to rank the 3 proposers for negotiation purposes. He also suggested that the Board inform the negotiators what they wanted included in the contract. Commissioner Macht felt it important to research -.the vera -city of what they had heard today. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously ranked the presenters as follows: INRIVCO RECYCLING PARK LLC MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT NORTON ENVIRONMENTAL. Chairman Adams inquired if direction to negotiators should be in writing from the individual Commissioners, and County Attorney Vitunac replied that it is important to have a general policy to direct the negotiators. Commissioner Eggert thought that was covered in the RFQP. Administrator Chandler thought that negotiations could become very complicated with a lot of different disciplines (e.g.: financial, legal, technical) which will have to be considered and consolidated to negotiate a contract in everybody's best interest. Commissioner Eggert stressed that the County has to be enormously careful and go over the contract word -by -word, not just line -by-line to make sure it is correct and includes everything discussed. 28 June 13, 1996 Boa 98 FAr,c:358 Bea 98 pi ;E 359 Commissioner Bird agreed that negotiations and structure of the agreement are tremendously important to the future of Indian River County. He suggested there might be a need for outside consultants, if Administrator Chandler feels it necessary. Commissioner Tippin volunteered that he is a composting specialist. Chairman Adams requested staff give consideration to the disciplines needed and report to the Board in a couple of weeks. She wanted to be certain the contract includes the ability to incorporate current employees in the new operation. The Board members agreed wholeheartedly. Commissioner Macht suggested that a staff person visit tenants of similar parks in order to get more information on employee policies, profitability, relationship with parent organization, and operation practices. Commissioner Eggert interjected that not all recycling places are the same, and Commissioner Bird remarked that we are pioneering a new area. Commissioner Tippin commented that the recycling industry and technology is moving and changing so rapidly. Commissioner Eggert mentioned the United States is way behind Europe as she had seen recycling being done in Germany 10 years ago. Director Pinto thought it was very important, if Commissioners have specific concerns, they jot them down, so that those points can be covered in negotiations. He assured them that whoever is doing the negotiating, any questions and issues will be brought to the Board. He also believed it necessary that negotiations be done as quickly as possible. There being no further comments, Chairman Adams adjourned the meeting at 3:30 p.m. ATTEST: J. arton, Clerk Minutes approved on 7- - 96 W June 13, 1996 Fran B. Adams, Chairman