The new Crisp County facility, now under construction, is "about as remote as you can get."

%=wT-F 2 7 / t L L /J /s

Landfill expansions, ~ u b t ~ t l e D compliance, community relations, waste-

reduction goals, and publi~/pr~vate par tner~hip~ are issues that local

gov~rnments in outhern Georgia, like gov~rnment~ throughout the U S ,

are dealing with. hen WasteExpo '97 was held in Atlanta in May,

this magazine and others published articles on

particular solid waste facilities in and around

Atlanta, focusing on public, private, and

public/private arrangements (see Waste Age,

April 1997, p. 48, and May 1997, p. 100). As WasteExpo attendees vis-

ited these facilities, their interest in learning more about these and oth-

ers grew, particularly as they related to cities and counties in Southern

Georgia and their public/private partnerships. This article visits or revis-

its operations in and around Atlanta and then travels a few hours away

to examine what appears to be a unique public/private arrangement

October 1997 A Waste Age

In and around Atlanta The city of Atlanta is mostly in Fulton County, but its

northern part is in DeKalb County. DeKalb, which has almost 600,000 residents, recently celebrated the opening of its first county Subtitle D landfill-Seminole Landfill. The Seminole Landfill opened in 1977 with 573 acres. Since that time, 272 acres have been added for borrow material and additional buffer.

When construction is complete on the Subtitle D Phase 2A of the Seminole Landfill, it will feature an 18- acre footprint, with a six- to seven-year life expectancy. The county also announced it has just submitted a design application to the state Environmental Protection Division (EPD) to review for a methane gas collection system.

Meanwhile, in nearby Cobb County, one of the major suburban counties near Atlanta, the saga of the county’s co-composting facility continues. Two fires and one law- suit later, Bedminster Bioconversion Corp. (Marietta, Ga.) intends to fully rebuild its co-composting facility, and just received approval from the county solid waste authority to restart operations.

Bedminster’s first fire destroyed a large part of the plant in August 1996, and was reportedly caused by a buildup of methane gas (see Waste Age, November 1996, p. 48). Fire officials determined that a string of circum- stances led to the fire, beginning with engineers shutting down the facility to make adjustments to process pri- marily undigested sludge, garbage accumulating and caus- ing a methane buildup, and then the ignition of garbage by an unknown cause.

Possible explanations have included a violent thun- derstorm, or the weld droppings from a welder making repairs, to some other form of electrical surge. Officials estimated damage at $5 million, with more than 50% of the struc- ture damaged (see Waste Age, December 1996, p. 8).

Company officials predicted the redesigned plant would be fully operational no later than the summer of 1997, and a tour of the facility was scheduled for Waste- Expo ’97 in May. The re-start plans were scuttled when a second fire hit the facility on Christmas Eve, 1996 (see Waste Age, February 1997, p. 12).

Bedminster officials say they still do not have an answer from the local fire investi- gators as to the cause of the second fire. “It was storming that night-we’re thinking it could have been hit by lightning over the tip

floor, or it could have been construction-related because we were doing welding in the building,” says Lorrie Bonds, a Bedminster spokeswoman. “But this is specula- tion, it has not been confirmed, but we do believe it was construe tion-related.” ~

Company representatives now say the plant will not be fully operational until March 5, 1998. The WasteExpo ’97 facility tour was still held, even though the plant was under construction. The equipment was in place, and WasteExpo representatives indicate that the tour was well-received.

The plant has been the subject of much controversy, since it is close to residential areas and was taking in sludge mixed with garbage. Representatives from the facility admit that the reason they shut down the plant in August was because they were treating some “pretty nasty stuff.” At the time of the first fire, Bedminster represen- tatives insisted that the problem was an isolated incident and not an odor control problem.

Weighing in heavily in the fight against the facility has been a Marietta, Ga., newspaper. To add insult to injury, that newspaper sued Bedminster in June for access to com- pany notes regarding the dual fires and uncovered hand- written notes authored by John Accortt, project manag- er for Cobb County, that referred to the company as “a loser.” Several sources say that as a result of an ongoing political rivalry between the newspaper and the compa- ny, the newspaper pulled the comments out of context and splashed them across headlines.

Accortt had been hired in early January to oversee the reconstruction. He says hejoined at a time when morale was low. “The company was still reeling from the second

_____

~

A Harris baler helps the Crisp County balefill bale 350-400 tpd.

Waste Age A October 1997

fire ...p eople were depressed at the time,” he says. “This [that the company was a ‘loser’] was a personal obser- vation,” he says, and the notes were either initial impres- sions or notes taken from meetings. “It took me a while to get up to speed.”

Now, Accortt tells Waste Age, his outlook regarding the future of the facility is far more optimistic. “Ask me the same question today about the future of the facility, and I would say, ‘Yes, definitely, I am confident that the problems it experienced will be gone, and that it will be a successful operation.”’

Bedminster now is renegotiating its arrangement with the county. A possible outcome of the negotiations would be a 15-year reduction in the life of the contract. “We’re taking a look at it ... if we don’t do a good job, we wouldn’t want to continue operating [in Cobb County],” says Roder Russo, vice president of marketing for Bed- minster Cobb Corp., the joint venture between the coun- ty and Bedminster.

Russo says that the public release of Accortt’s notes has not affected Bedminster’s operation in any way. “Bedminster has been unfairly maligned by the local news media, he says.

Reconstruction efforts are well under way, and the main building already has been replaced. “We are cur- rendy doing mechanical and electrical work on the facil- ity, Russo says.

Meanwhile, in the city of Atlanta, Georgia’s EPD recently ordered the city to bring its landfills up to Sub- title D compliance, and is fining the city $7,000 per month until the city is in compliance with certain orders.

The consent orders center on four municipally owned and operated landfills: Key Road municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill; Cascade Road MSW landfill; East Con- federate landfill; and the Gun Club Road MSW landfill. All other landfills in the city are privately owned.

Two consent orders currently are in place for the Key Road and Cascade Road landfills. The city “is delin- quent-[it] failed to produce a closure, post-closure care plan, [and] failed to have methane and water monitoring as required by Subtitle D” for these two landfills, says Don McCarty, manager of the compliance unit for EPD’s Solid Waste Program.

Because of these violations, the city accumulated $207,000 in penalties for each landfill, but renegotiated a settlement with EPD of $70,000 up front, plus $2,500 a month “until [the city] issues a closure certificate” for the two landfills, McCarty says. “We’re looking for a commitment from them as to the date when [the land- fills] will be closed.”

EPD also is working on a new consent order for the city’s East Confederate landfill.

McCarty says, however, that the city “has made sig- nificant progress toward closure” of its Gun Club Road landfill, which also is under order.

~

~

~

Two hours away, 37 counties unite When people mention the problems Cobb County

was having with its co-composting facility, those con- nected with the planned Crisp County Integrated Waste Processing site in Cordele, Ga., will only say, “wrong location”-meaning that the operation accepted sludge and was too close to homes.

They then point to the area around the Crisp Coun- ty facility, which is currently under construction. It is a two- hour drive from Atlanta and largely surrounded by trees, with virtually no residences for miles around. “We’re about as remote as you can get,” says a facility represen- tative. When it is in full operation, which is currently scheduled for next summer, it and its adjoining balefill will constitute a unique partnership between a private company, Crisp, and 37 other counties and cities.

The starting point of the project was actually in 1991 when the county passed a 1% sales tax to work on ways to replace its unlined landfill as required by Subtitle D. Bill Goff, who worked for the county for 26 years and was county administrator and later executive director of the Crisp County Solid Waste Authority, says, “The county asked me to look into creating a 200 tpd Subtitle D land- fill. It takes at least 500 tpd for such a landfill to be fea- sible. Also, Senate Bill 533-which we expect to be manda- tory-requires a 25% waste reduction.

“A regional landfill, for example, wouldn’t help us meet the waste reduction goal. So, we started talking about an integrated project-landfill, recycling, composting-that would take outside waste to give us the volume. We also knew we’d have to get support of our county to do this. So, we set to work and got involved with Municipal Waste Management, LLC [MWM, Atlanta],” Goff says.

MWM was formed by the original owners of WASTECH, which, according to John H. Hayes, chairman and CEO of MWM, was started in 1988 as an equipment

for anything,” says Hayes. “There were no turnkey oper- ations and almost nobody did any marketing. So we shut down for four years and spent our money doing research. Now our business strategy is that there is money to be made in recycling if the result is manufacturer-ready and consumer-finished goods.”

In developing the new facility with Crisp County,

~

distributor. “But we found nobody was one-stopshopping ~

~.

-

October 1997 A Waste Age

te in Georgia contct

operating properly. And we’re going again for the second one.”

There have been detractors of the project. Some claim that the Authority is courting disaster by putting all of its eggs in one basket, relying on repaying the loan with fees its receives from tqash collection. “They say they’re using the revenue the et from the sale of recy- clables as a cushion, but we know % % yw unstable those mar- kets are,” says someone familiar wi$ the project. Others have objected to the exclusive akangement with Transwaste, although there have been“Qtt1e or no com- plaints about the hauler’s service. \

But MWM and the Authority point a trend-setter in the way that one another and with private

installed at the new Crisp County Integrated Waste Pro- public/private partneEship is so ir;lportant,” says This Triple S/Dynamic (Dallas) trommel is one of two to be

that those outside of politics don’t understand works. Those not in business don’t works. We-MWM, the Authority, and the

project. ”

three at-large members. They’ve been very active and sup

“But we know when we go to duplicate it that it will that each state is different, the rules and culture

Hayes adds. “In Georgia, for example, a can only contract for 12 months at a

with other local governments, and

to happen is that local govern-

50 years. It’s different in Florida,

across jurisdictional lines,”

became one another’s staffs. When I say ‘we,’

arrangement elsewhere. “Our project has done a lot that has traditionally been done by the “What really works about it is that waste authorities that have IO to to 15 members on the board, Here, we have local a host county that is made up of the Board

MWM looks forward to duplicating

/

Waste Age A October 1997

Reprinted with permission from Waste Age Magazine 0 1997 Printed on@ recycled paper

The Cobb County Co-Composting facility was damaged by fire in August 1996 and again in December 1996. Repre- sentatives say it will re-open in March 1998.

Hayes says that “we went to manufacturers, got their specs, and got letters of intent. We found out how the man- ufacturers wanted the material and then designed the plant accordingly. Everytlng processed by the plant-food, glass, paper, plastic, ferrous and non-ferrous waste-will already have been sold.” Goff says, “In government, we call this ‘design/build.”’

When discussing the planned facility with the coun- ty, Hayes says, “The county decided that it wanted to own and operate the facility itself, that it wanted to control its own destiny. Once the county decided to own it, we said we want to manage it and sell anything that comes out of the facility on a five-year rolling contract.”

In 1994, the Crisp County Solid Waste Authority was formed, with Goff as executive director. The arrange-

ment that developed was that the county would own the landfill, which was later approved as a balefill operation, and the authority would own the facility.

This was in keeping with the community mentality, says Goff. “Our community has for over 50 years owned, operated, and generated its own electrical power. The Crisp Power Commission takes Georgia Power rates and discounts them.”

The plan called for a balefill and a 54-acre site that would include recyclables processing and composting facilities. “This is an agricultural community, and there’s a lot of interest in composting,” says Hayes. “It is, after all, the ‘Watermelon Capital of the World.’ But the yield per acre is declining.” Ultimately, says Hayes, the University of Georgia offered to help the new facility develop high quality, classh compost in MWM’s nine-acre roofed com- posting area.

Meanwhile, Goff knew that they couldn’t go forward unless they had enough waste. “First, there were public hearings to make sure the community was comfortable with taking outside waste-by which I mean ‘in-state,”’ he says. “According to the bylaws of the Authority, we can’t accept out-of-state waste but can only take waste that comes from one of our transfer stations and one of our trucks. Once the community was sold on the project, I spent three years going to other counties asking them to give us put and pay contracts for residential waste. We start- ed with financing a 25-year bond. A contract that long is a hard sell. But we needed the long-term put or pay con- tracts so that the waste stream wouldn’t go away.

“It was slow going,” Goff adds. “It was not until 1995 that people realized that Subtitle D was real. Also, most of the communities around here do 50-60 tpd-they can’t have their own Subtitle D landfill. A lot of them are small waste streams pulling from 100 miles away. So, it was logical for them to do it with us, and, while lots of gov- ernments want to privatize, perhaps it was easier for them to deal with another local government. Governments want simple solutions.

“But it took a lot of doing-3’7 governments is a lot,” he continues. “We estimated that we needed 1,250 tpd to operate. So we went to county commission meetings- Wilcox, Sumter, Worth, Macon, Albany, Lee, and Coffee- and did the presentation over and over again and went from meeting to meeting, trying to get commitments.”

When asked what someone else who wanted to do this would need, Goff responds, “Persistence and a plan that will work. Also, tell the same story in every place, and do what you say you’ll do.”

“Also, a willingness to invest, to educate,” Hayes adds.

Waste Age A October 1997

“During this five-year process, nobody got paid but the engineers.”

Press reports of these meetings with other counties and cities show that constant concerns were voiced that the €acility would turn into a situation like the one at Cobb County. “But we told them we’re using traditional windrows technology, with no co-composting and no sludge mixed with garbage,” says Hayes.

There were also worries expressed at these meetings that the project would end up like the one in San Diego, where the city got into debt with its new resource recov- ery facility and consequently put its solid waste system up for bid (see Waste Age, June 1997, p. 20). In fact, there was actually a “San Diego-like” example closer to home.

In 1988, because its landfill was running out of space, Berrien County, Ga., financed a recycling facility with $2 million in revenue bonds. On the assumption that fees and the revenue from the sale of recyclables would pay off the bonds, the county agreed to guarantee the bonds itself if the facility didn’t make enough money. The plant failed, and the county’s taxpayers saw their tax bills triple so that Berrien could meet the bond payments. At the meet- ings, representatives of the Crisp County project respond- ed that their project was different from the one in Berrien: It would be financed by fees alone and the county would not guarantee the bond beyond its own contracted ton- nage.

“We welcomed the opportunities to go to these meet- ings because it is our belief that all facilities need to be developed in the 111 public eye,” says Hayes. “We explained things. We answered questions. And we accepted sug- gestions-there were, for example, concerns about litter on the highways and dusts from trucks. We assured them that the trucks would be covered and washed out and sanitized after they dumped.”

In May 1995, Crisp County reached its tonnage goal with a 25-year term agreement with Sumter County. As of press time, 37 cities or counties were part of the arrange- ment.

With these 25-year put or pay contracts, which were used to secure debt, the $53-million project was financed by Bankers Bank, an entity representing several banks, with a 25-year loan guaranteed by the Farmers Loan Admin- istration. The initial rate is prime, but the interest rate will not increase more than 10% in one year or more than 5% over the loan term. The guaranteed loan amount is $49.95 million, with Bankers Bank covering the remainder.

The pouring of concrete began in April 1997. There was a formal ribbon-cutting ceremony on May 18, and the facility is scheduled to be operational by summer 1998.

Crossing the (jurisdictional) lines Goff left his job with the county and became gener-

a1 manager of MWM. Charles Walker, who was CFO of Harris Press and Shear, which has one of the largest man- ufacturing facilities in Crisp County, became the execu- tive director of the Crisp County Solid Waste Authority. The facility was designed “to be a total recycling and processing plant,” says Walker. Crisp County “is the hub, the outlying counties are the spokes, and I’m where the rubber meets the road.”

The facility is permitted to handle up to 1,700 tpd. “We need 1,250 tpd to break even. We’re working to do 1,500 tpd in a single shift,” says Hayes. “The 54-acre site encompasses the old county landfill, the new balefill, and the new facility. We will have 165 employees and an annual payroll of $3 million-excluding transportation.”

The estimate is that 87% of the waste stream from the 37 government jurisdictions will be segregated, pro- cessed, and reused, with the remaining 13% baled and placed in the balefill. The Authority states that the new operation will facilitate the closing of 16 landfills in Southern Georgia. “We are sitting on one of the largest aquifers in the US., so shutting down old landfills becomes really important,” says Goff.

MWM does not handle the collection. The Author- ity has signed a 25-year contract with Transwaste of Albany (Ga.) to haul all waste from counties with whom the authority has contracts. “Everywhere I went I was run- ning into them as competition,” says Goff. “They had a good lick on the waste stream.” Transwaste also operates and maintains the five transfer stations. The trucks- “rear-loading, door-to-door trucks, some Heils [Chat- tanooga, Tenn.], and a few rolloffs,” says Goff, with most- ly Ford and Mack chassis-are owned by the Authority and operated by Transwaste under a subcontract.

“The back end is supported by the balefill, which is already in place, using a huge Harris [Peachtree City, Ga.] solid waste baler [HRB 10451, and currently baling 350- 400 tpd,” says Hayes. “The baler can conserve 60% more space.” Goff says that the balefill will double the life of the landfill.

As for the facilities themselves, Hayes says that they will have a two-line system with two Triple S (Dallas) trommels, along with Eddy (Erie, Pa.) separators and Mac/Saturn (Grand Prairie, Texas) shredders. The trom- mels (Triple S 9974 trommel) are 70 feet long and weigh 166,000 pounds each, says Dennis Dyer, project manag- er. “We went to their manufacturing facility in Dallas where they are set by lasers. We watched the runoff and made sure that everything was set up and aligned and

~

~

~

__

___

October 1997 A Waste Age

operating properly. And we’re going again for the second one.”

There have been detractors of the project. Some claim that the Authority is courting disaster by putting all of its eggs in one basket, relying on repaying the loan with fees its receives from trash collection. “They say they’re using the revenue they get from the sale of recy- clables as a cushion, but we know how unstable those mar- kets are,” says someone familiar with the project. Others have objected to the exclusive arrangement with Transwaste, although there have been little or no com- plaints about the hauler’s service.

But MWM and the Authority point to the project as a trend-setter in the way that local governments work with one another and with private companies. “The reason the public/private partnership is so important,” says Goff, “is that those outside of politics don’t understand how it all works. Those not in business don’t understand how it works. We-MWM, the Authority, and the counties- became one another’s staffs. When I say ‘we,’ I mean the project.”

MWM looks forward to duplicating this type of arrangement elsewhere. “Our project has done a lot that has traditionally been done by the county,” Hayes says. “What really works about it is that there are lots of solid waste authorities that have 10 to 15 counties and put 10 to 15 members on the board, which is too big a board. Here, we have local governments that buy into a plan and a host county that makes decisions. The Authority board is made up of the Board of County Commissioners and

This Triple WDynamic (Dallas) trommel is one of two to be installed at the new Crisp County Integrated Waste Pro- cessing facility.

three at-large members. They’ve been very active and sup portive.

“But we know when we go to duplicate it that it will be hard, that each state is different, the rules and culture are different,” Hayes adds. “In Georgia, for example, a local government can only contract for 12 months at a time, unless it contracts with other local governments, and then the limit becomes 50 years. It’s different in Florida, it’s different in Maryland.”

“One thing that has to happen is that local govern- ments have to learn to work across jurisdictional lines,” Goff says. I

Waste Age A October 1997

Reprinted with permission from Waste Age Magazine 0 1997 Printed on@recycled paper

i