MEETING NOTICE RAMSEY/WASHINGTON RECYCLING · PDF file1 | page meeting notice ramsey/washington recycling & energy board facility committee date: thursday, june 23, 2016

1 | P a g e

MEETING NOTICE RAMSEY/WASHINGTON RECYCLING & ENERGY BOARD

FACILITY COMMITTEE Date: Thursday, June 23, 2016 Time: 11:00 a.m. ***NOTE MEETING TIME*** Place: Ramsey County Environmental Health Offices

2785 White Bear Ave | Suite 350 | Maplewood, MN 55109 AGENDA:

I. Call to Order and Introductions

II. Approval of Agenda Action Page 1

III. Approval of R&E Facility Committee Minutes – March 4, 2016 Action Page 3

IV. Monitor Facility Operations

a. R&E Center Operations Update Information Page 6 b. Odor Mitigation Study Update Information Page 12 c. 2017 Facility Budget Recommendations Action Page 13 d. Update on Waste Designation Planning Information Page 24

V. Review Major Facility Improvements

a. 2016 Capital Improvement Budget Update Information Page 28

VI. Oversee New Technology a. Updates on Emerging Technologies Information Page 32

Presentation by Curt Hartog, Foth

b. Enerkem and SKB Gasification Project Information Page 54 c. Process for New Technology Evaluation and Site Visits Information Page 55

VII. Adjourn

Next Committee Meeting: Tour, dates to be determined.

1

2 | P a g e

FACILITY COMMITTEE (Approved by the R&E Board, October 22, 2015) Policy The Facility Committee is authorized to monitor management of Facility operations and Facility operational procedures and policies, and make recommendations to the Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board Executive Committee or Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board (R&E Board) as appropriated to ensure efficient management and operations of the Facility. Guidelines

The Facility Committee consists of the 3 members, includes one commissioner from Washington County and two commissioners from Ramsey County.

Members of the Facility Committee are appointed by the Chair of the R&E Board each year. When votes occur, a member of each county must be present.

Responsibility 1. Monitor Facility operations. 2. Monitor Facility operational procedures and policies. 3. Review new technologies that are appropriate to the Facility. 4. Review major Facility improvement plans. 5. Make Facility recommendations, including capital and technology improvements, to the R&E Board. 6. Other duties as assigned. The committee will operate in accordance with operating procedures established by the R&E Board. Meetings are scheduled as necessary. Source

Approval of Amended and Restated Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board Joint Powers Agreement Resolutions (Washington County Board #2015‐160 and Ramsey County B2015‐296), September 22, 2015.

Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board approval of Bylaws, October 22, 2015. Standing committees are subject to the orders of the R&E Board and committee actions may not conflict with actions or directions of the R&E Board. Subject to the notice requirements set forth in Article II, Section I of the R&E Board Bylaws, committee meetings may be held at the discretion of the respective chairperson of each committee.

2

FRIDAY, MARCH 4, 2016

FACILITY COMMITTEE MINUTES A meeting of the Ramsey/Washington Recycling & Energy Board (R&E Board) Facility Committee meeting was held at 10:30 a.m. on Friday, March 4, 2016 at the Recycling & Energy Center, 100 Red Rock Road, Newport, Minnesota. MEMBERS PRESENT Commissioner Karla Bigham – Washington County Commissioners Rafael Ortega, Mary Jo McGuire – Ramsey County EX‐OFFICIO MEMBER Tom Ingemann – City of Newport ALSO ATTENDING Kate Bartelt, Gary Bruns, Bob Gagne, Mike Hagen, Zack Hansen, Judy Hunter, Jennefer Klennert, Nathan Klett, Sue Kuss, Michael Reed, Katie Shaw, Tim Steinbeck, Ryan Tritz, Brittany Voss Commissioner Ortega moved, seconded by Commissioner McGuire to appoint Commissioner Bigham as Chair of the Facility Committee.

Roll Call: Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Motion Carried. Introductions were made. CALL TO ORDER/APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Chair Bigham called the meeting to order. Commissioner McGuire moved, seconded by Commissioner Ortega, to approve the agenda with moving the Capital Expenditures to the end of the Agenda.

Roll Call: Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Motion Carried. FACILITY OPERATIONS Review of Committee Purpose Zack Hansen said the Facility Committee responsibilities are:

Monitor Facility Operations. Monitor Facility Operational procedures and policies. Review new technologies that are appropriate to the Facility. Review major Facility improvement plans. Make Facility recommendations, including capital and technology improvements, to the R&E Board. Other duties as assigned.

3

Odor Mitigation Study Proposal Judy Hunter said there is a perception of odor in the area surrounding the R&E Center. There hasn’t been a comprehensive review or plan developed to acknowledge, manage or test it. Ms. Hunter introduced Jennefer Klennert from Foth. Ms. Klennert reviewed the scope of tasks of the Odor Mitigation Study.

Foth will be working with St. Croix Sensory, an expert in odor mitigation. Understand what the current issue is and what has happened in the past. Communicate with surrounding cities including Newport, South Saint Paul, Saint Paul Park and Saint Paul. Review ordinances that is related directly to the solid waste permit. Review similar waste processing odor plans. Analyze data. Collection plan for collecting odor. Based on research, develop mitigation recommendations.

Commissioner McGuire questioned if other companies other than St. Croix Sensory deal in odor mitigation. Ms. Klennert said that St. Croix Sensory is a specialty company. They have a laboratory at their facility where they can do a lot of sampling. Commissioner Ortega said he would like a comparative analysis to include: short‐term goals and hierarchy of fixes. Chair Bigham questioned is something could be done beforehand like a hotline or complaint link. Ms. Hunter said yes, they were thinking of some form of communication in the interim. Commissioner Ortega moved, seconded by Commissioner Bigham that the Ramsey/Washington Recycling & Energy Board Facility Committee hereby authorizes the Joint Leadership Team to proceed with the odor mitigation study as proposed, reporting to the Facility Committee as the study progresses. The Facility Committee directs the Joint Leadership Team to bring to the Committee recommendations related to operational and design improvements at the Facility, including a proposed budget, based on the study. Roll Call: Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Motion Carried. Strategic Communications Update Kate Bartelt updated the Commissioners on the new strategic communications including the Re‐envisioning event scheduled on April 22 for key stakeholders. Commissioner McGuire questioned if there was a plan in place for demonstrators. Zack Hansen said this is by invite only. No press releases will be issued. Ms. Bartelt moved on to the next item which is a new Facility name and logo redesign. She said there has been a lot of confusion around the name of the Facility. Three different Facility names and various logo options have been prepared for the Facility Committee’s consideration and recommendation. The Facility Committee’s recommendation will be presented to the R&E Board at the March 24th meeting. Ms. Bartelt introduced Bob Gagne & Brittany Voss, Exponent. They reviewed the various options of new Facility names and logo redesigns. Ryan Tritz, GRE Newport Services, reviewed the facility employee’s reactions to the re‐naming and logo redesign shared their preferred logo and name. The Facility Committee’s recommendation to the R&E Board is to go with the Renewable Waste Center name and display that name with the four logo designs in colors blue and green. They directed staff to include all Facility names and logos, the Facility employee’s decision and various Ramsey and Washington County staff and consultant’s decision in a PowerPoint to the R&E Board. Capital Expenditures Budget ‐ 2015 Zack Hansen said that during the analysis and due diligence leading up to the purchase of the Facility, staff and Foth identified to the R&E Board that there would be capital improvements needed at the Facility upon purchase. The needs were identified

4

in three general categories: trailer replacement, bulky waste residue load out redesign and equipment rebuilds. Since the facility purchase, staff and Foth have further evaluated immediate facility needs and discussed those needs with GRE Newport Services management. The following is a summary of capital expenditures:

Replace existing diverter gates and chutes – fabrication and replacement of diverter chutes which are used for loading RDF into transfer trailers at the facility.

Replace two belt scales – replace components to the two scales on the processing lines at the point where RDF is loaded.

Replace grapple cranes – replace the two grapple cranes on the tipping floor which are used to remove unprocessible waste from each of the two processing lines.

Replace inbound scale deck – remove old decking on inbound scale, replace with associated wiring, scale equipment, concrete.

Replace bulky waste residue transfer area – replace existing pit and transfer conveyor with ramp and new loading system, include tip floor repairs in the immediate area.

Replace 36 trailers – replaced 36 trailers with new aluminum trailers. Rebuild front‐end loader – rebuild one of the four loaders through a CAT certified program which includes engine,

drive train, electronics and hydraulics. Rebuild yard tractor – complete rebuild of one of four vehicles used to move trailers around the exterior of the

facility. Replace underground storage tank – replace the existing underground storage tank installed during facility

construction with a dual walled tank. The tank is used to store diesel fuel for facility equipment. Commissioner Ortega asked whether both grapple cranes were needed to be purchased in 2016 or if one grapple crane could be purchased in 2016 and the second one in 2017. Commissioner McGuire said that before the recommendation goes to the full Board, she would like a chart created with two columns titled “anticipated” and “available for use in the future”. Commissioner Ortega added that he would like a column with the life expectancy of the equipment. The Commissioners said for future meetings: first the Facility Committee would meet, the Facility Committee would bring their recommendation to the Budget Committee, and then the Budget Committee would discuss and bring that recommendation to the R&E Board. Chair Bigham said that there should be a Committee Report at the beginning of the agenda so that both Chairs of the committees can report to the R&E Board. Commissioner Ortega moved, seconded by Commissioner McGuire that the Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board Facility Committee hereby recommends that the R&E Board approve the Capital Expenditure Budget ‐ 2016 in the total amount of $5.71 million. The Facility Committee further recommends that the R&E Board provide notice to Ramsey and Washington Counties to make their respective capital contributions for initial Facility capital expenditures as provided for in the Joint Powers Agreement, with 73% provided by Ramsey County ($4,168,300) and 27% by Washington County ($1,541,700).

Roll Call: Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Motion Carried. OTHER BUSINESS The next R&E Board Facility Committee meeting is scheduled for Thursday, April 28, 2016. ADJOURNMENT Chair Bigham adjourned the meeting.

Approved: ______________________________________________

Date: __________________________________________________

5

FACILITY COMMITTEE

R&E BOARD FACILITY COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: June 23, 2015 AGENDA ITEM: IV.a.

SUBJECT: R&E Center Operations Update

TYPE OF ITEM: ☒ INFORMATION ☐ POLICY DISCUSSION ☐ ACTION

SUBMITTED BY: Joint Leadership Team

FACILITY COMMITTEE ACTION REQUESTED: Information only. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Since January 1, 2016 the R&E Center has been operated by GRE‐Newport Services (GRENS). Staff have developed two reports: The Quarterly Operations Report and the R&E Center Quarterly Report; both are attached for the first quarter, 2016, and the committee will be asked for feedback on these reports. R&E Board and GRENS staff will provide updates on waste delivery, operations and facility permit re‐issuance status.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. First quarter 2016 R&E Center Quarterly Report 2. First quarter 2016 Quarterly Operations Report

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None.

6

SUBJECT: R&E Center Operations Update

Coversheet Page 2 of 2

AUTHORIZED SIGNATURES DATE

JOINT LEADERSHIP TEAM

6/14/16

RAMSEY COUNTY ATTORNEY

WASHINGTON COUNTY ATTORNEY

RAMSEY COUNTY DEPT OF FINANCE

WASHINGTON COUNTY FINANCE

7

The Recycling & Energy Center is owned by the

Ramsey/Washington Recycling & Energy Board www.MoreValueLessTrash.com

Report Production Date: May 4, 2016

First Quarter Key Activities

The R&E Center took “A‐line” offline to perform a complete rebuild of the in‐feed conveyor.

All GRE‐Newport Services employees received Emergency Action Plan training.

No injuries reported at the R&E Center. R&E Budget and Finance Committee members took tours of the R&E

Center as part of the 2016 Capital Improvements budget consideration approval.

Planned outages at the 2 Xcel Energy Power Plants show up as low dips in the MSW deliveries to meeting capacity needs in the graph below.

Environmental Impact o Since 1988, processing waste into RDF and recycling metals at Newport has avoided landfill space of 107.2 acres at 40’ deep.

Waste Deliveries

02,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Tons M

SW

Week of the Year

MSW to meet capacity needs Actual MSW

Recycling & Energy Center Quarterly Report

Waste Delivery and Benchmark Data

YTP Tons

MSW Delivered from R/W Counties

68,833

MSW Delivered from Other Counties

23,379

Delivery Total 92,212 MSW Processed 85,757 (92%) RDF Produced 79,942 (96%) Metal Recycled 3,086 Bulky Waste 6,284 Residue 3,261

Featured this Quarter

The R&E Board funds the production and mailing of the annual Green Guides in both counties. The Green Guides provide comprehensive recycling, Household Hazardous Waste, Yard Waste, Organics, and disposal information. The Green Guides were mailed to all residents in Ramsey and Washington County in February and March 2016.

January – March 2016

8

The Recycling & Energy Center is owned by the

Ramsey/Washington Recycling & Energy Board www.MoreValueLessTrash.com

Report Production Date: May 4, 2016

Definitions

Acceptable Waste: Solid waste acceptable at the Facility, which includes most mixed municipal solid waste (MSW) from residential, commercial, industrial and community activities.

Bulky Waste Residue: This is waste that, because of its bulk or character, cannot be processed. The Technical definition is “Acceptable Waste that is not processed at the Facility due to its physical characteristics or potential harmful effects.”

Excess Waste: This is processible waste in excess of the Facility capacity. The technical definition is “Acceptable Waste delivered to the Facility by licensed haulers or citizens that is accepted at the Facility but is in excess of the Facility’s ability to process and, as a result, such Acceptable Waste is transferred to another processing facility or to a landfill and is not processed at the Facility.

Recyclable Materials: Means materials that are separated from Mixed Municipal Solid Waste for the purpose of recycling, including paper, glass, plastics, metals, automobile oil, and batteries. RDF or other material that is destroyed by incineration is not a Recyclable Material.

Refuse Derived Fuel or RDF: Material which is produced by the Processing of Acceptable Waste to produce a fuel suitable for combustion in Xcel’s solid fuel‐fired boilers as a source of energy.

Residue: The residual material remaining after acceptable waste is processed into RDF, but doesn’t include recyclables or RDF.

Operating Performance Guarantees

There are two Processing Efficiency Standards for Acceptable Waste:

Objective 1: 85% of Acceptable Waste accepted by Operator at the Facility is processed, as calculated on a rolling six (6) month, to be determined as follows:

Processed Waste (weight of) = RDF produced + Secondary materials + Process Line Residue RDF produced + Secondary materials + Process Line Residue + Bulky Waste Residue

Objective 2: 85% of Acceptable Waste processed is recovered as Secondary materials or RDF, as calculated on a rolling six (6) month, to be determined as follows:

Recovered Waste (weight of) = RDF produced + Secondary materials RDF produced + Secondary materials + Process Line Residue

9

Report production date: April 27, 2016

R&E Center

93% of MSW Processed

96% RDF Production

Quarterly Operations Report / January – March, 2016

Tons of Bulky

Waste

6,284

Tons of

Residue

3,261

Tons of RDF

79,942

Tons of Metal

Recycled

3,086

Various Markets

Tons to Xcel Energy Redwing

45,786

Tons to GRE

6,970

Tons to Xcel Energy Wilmarth

27,186

Landfill

10% of Delivery

Tons to Burnsville Landfill

3,513

Tons to Seven Mile Creek Landfill

2,530

Tons to Pine Bend Landfill

3,502

The Recycling & Energy Center is owned by the Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board www.MoreValueLessTrash.com

Tons of R/W

Waste

Delivered

68,833

Tons of Other

County Waste

Delivered

23,379

10

Report production date: April 27, 2016

Definitions

Acceptable Waste: Solid waste acceptable at the Facility, which includes most mixed municipal solid waste (MSW) from residential, commercial, industrial and community activities.

Bulky Waste Residue: This is waste that, because of its bulk or character, cannot be processed. The Technical definition is “Acceptable Waste that is not processed at the Facility due to its physical characteristics or potential harmful effects.”

Excess Waste: This is processible waste in excess of the Facility capacity. The technical definition is “Acceptable Waste delivered to the Facility by licensed haulers or citizens that is accepted at the Facility but is in excess of the Facility’s ability to process and, as a result, such Acceptable Waste is transferred to another processing facility or to a landfill and is not processed at the Facility.

Recyclable Materials: Means materials that are separated from Mixed Municipal Solid Waste for the purpose of recycling, including paper, glass, plastics, metals, automobile oil, and batteries. RDF or other material that is destroyed by incineration is not a Recyclable Material.

Refuse Derived Fuel or RDF: Material which is produced by the Processing of Acceptable Waste to produce a fuel suitable for combustion in Xcel’s solid fuel‐fired boilers as a source of energy.

Residue: The residual material remaining after acceptable waste is processed into RDF, but doesn’t include recyclables or RDF.

Operating Performance

There are two Processing Efficiency Standards for Acceptable Waste:

Objective 1: 85% of Acceptable Waste accepted by Operator at the Facility is processed, as calculated on a rolling six (6) month, to be determined as follows:

Processed Waste (weight of) = RDF produced + Secondary materials + Process Line Residue RDF produced + Secondary materials + Process Line Residue + Bulky Waste Residue

Objective 2: 85% of Acceptable Waste processed is recovered as Secondary materials or RDF, as calculated on a rolling six (6) month, to be determined as follows:

Recovered Waste (weight of) = RDF produced + Secondary materials RDF produced + Secondary materials + Process Line Residue

11

FACILITY COMMITTEE

R&E BOARD FACILITY COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: June 23, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: IV.b.

SUBJECT: Odor Mitigation Study Update



FACILITY COMMITTEE ACTION REQUESTED: Information only.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At its February 25, 2016 meeting the R&E Facility Committee approved a work scope for an Odor Mitigation Study. Odor Mitigation Study work has begun and St. Croix Sensory, as a subcontractor to Foth, has been engaged as the odor mitigation consultant. Staff will provide an update on the Study at the June 23 meeting. ATTACHMENTS: None. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None.



6/14/16





12

FACILITY COMMITTEE

R&E BOARD FACILITY COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: June 23, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: IV.c.

SUBJECT: 2017 Facility Budget Recommendations

TYPE OF ITEM: ☐ INFORMATION ☐ POLICY DISCUSSION ☒ ACTION


FACILITY COMMITTEE ACTION REQUESTED: Recommend that the Budget Committee approve and forward the Addendum to the 2017 approved Facility Budget to the R&E Board. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At its October 22, 2015 meeting the Recycling and Energy Board approved the 2016‐2017 Facility and Joint Activities Budgets. The R&E Board Bylaws state that an annual Facility budget is to be prepared by the Budget Committee and submitted to the R&E Baord for approval each year prior to August 1. At its February meeting, the Facility Committee requested that it have the opportunity to provide recommendations about the Facility budget to the Budget Committee. A proposed addendum to the approved 2017 Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board (R&E Board) Facility budget is presented for consideration by the Facility Committee, and is included with this documentation. ATTACHMENTS:

1. Draft Resolution 2. Staff Memorandum

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Explained in the Staff Memorandum

13

SUBJECT: 2017 Facility Budget Recommendations




6/14/16





14

Addenda to 2017 Facility Budgets

RESOLUTION R&EB ‐ FC ‐2016 ‐ __

WHEREAS, The Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board (the “R&E Board”) is governed by the amended and restated joint powers agreement by and between Ramsey County and Washington County dated September 22, 2015, ( “Joint Powers Agreement”); and

WHEREAS, the Joint Powers Agreement provides that the R&E Board shall establish a Facility Budget and a Joint Activities Budget; and

WHEREAS, the Joint Leadership Team has prepared an addendum to the 2017 Facility Budget, for consideration by the R&E Board Facility Committee. Now, Therefore, Be It

RESOLVED, the Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board Facility Committee hereby recommends that the Recycling and Energy Board Budget Committee approve the Addendum to the 2017 Facility Budget at its July 11, 2016 meeting and forward it to the Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board for approval.

Commissioner: Aye Nay Bigham ___ ___ _______________________________ McGuire ___ ___ Facility Committee Chair Ortega ___ ___

_______________________________ Date

15

Page 1 of 8

June 10, 2016 To: Finance Committee of the Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board From: Joint Leadership Team RE: Recommendations to the R&E Board Budget Committee At its October 22, 2015 meeting the Recycling and Energy Board approved the 2016‐2017 Facility and Joint Activities Budgets. The R&E Board Bylaws state that an annual Facility budget is to be prepared by the Budget Committee and submitted to the R&E Baord for approval each year prior to August 1. At its February meeting, the Facility Committee requested that it have the opportunity to provide recommendations about the Facility budget to the Budget Committee. The Budget Committee has approved a process for addressing changes to the R&E Baord budgets, which is found in Attachment 1. The budget structure for the R&E Board is shown in Attachment 2. Introduction A proposed addendum to the approved 2017 Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board (R&EB) Facility budget is presented for consideration by the Facility Committee, and is included with this documentation. Action Requested

1. Recommend that the Budget Committee approve and forward the Addendum to the 2017 approved Facility Budget to the R&E Board.

Attachments

1. R&E Board budget and finance processes 2. R&E Board Budget Structure 3. 2016 – 2017 Facility Budget ‐ Explanation of Selected Line Items 4. Proposed Addendum to the 2017 Approved Facility Budget

2016‐2017 Budget Structure As provided in the Joint Powers Agreement and the Bylaws, there are two main parts to the budget, for Joint Activities and the Facility. Overview of Facility Budget The Facility budget operates as an enterprise fund. This budget includes funding to operate and administer the Recycling & Energy Center. In 2016‐2017 the R&E Board has contracted with GRE Newport Services (GRENS) as the Transition Facility Operator, and pays that operator a management fee and reimburses various pass‐through expenses. The R&E Board pays some expenses directly.

16

Page 2 of 8

The Facility Budget was approved in October 2015, two months before the Facility was purchased, and was based on Life Cycle analyses that Foth prepared in 2015. The Committee will recall that the R&E Board did not have access to Resource Recovery Technologies financial statements or budgets, and the 2016‐2017 Facility Budget was built without direct knowledge of facility operations. As provided for in the Transition Agreement with GRENS the Joint Leadership Team and GRENS have prepared an Annual Budget, which creates the understanding of actual operating costs. The Transition Agreement states that “because it is prepared without any actual operating history, [the Annual Budget] will be based upon the limited financial and operational information that has been obtained from RRT and is otherwise subject to speculation and estimation by the Operator.” In other words, it is acknowledged that the approved 2016 Facility budget was a “best guess,” and until there was operating experience, actual operating costs couldn’t be known until R&E Board operations began. The R&E Board and counties understood this budgeting conundrum, and created an Operating Reserve Fund of $10,000,000 in the Joint Powers Agreement and Bylaws to address this circumstance, and to maintain essential Facility operations. On December 3, 2015 the R&E Board requested transfer $4 million from this fund for working capital upon purchase of the Facility, and to address any unexpected costs going forward into 2016. After five months of ownership and operations, the JLT and GRENS have a better understanding of operating costs associated with the R&E Center. The JLT has developed revisions to the approved 2017 Facility Budget, which are explained below. For reference, the expenses that are included in the line Items that appear in the budget are described in Attachment 3. The proposed revision to the 2017 budget, in the form of an addendum, is included in Attachment 4. Description of the Addendum Summary: The projected expenses for the Facility are projected to be a total $847,527 over the approved 2017 Facility Budget. The principal changes fall into two categories (explained below): Operating Expenses and Transportation. Revenue to pay for these expenses is available from the Operating Reserve Fund, which, as explained above, was created for this purpose. The following are line item explanations for the proposed revisions: Expenses 411101 – Salary and Fringe Benefits; Decreased $11,000

The Facility Manager and Assistant Facility Manager are not expected to be hired until late 2016 and/or early 2017, so costs associated with annual increases are not expected

421504 – Xcel Fuel Supply Agreement; Increased $300,554

When the 2017 budget waste prepared the amendment to the Xcel Fuel Agreement had not been completed. The R&E Board has an additional expense in that agreement related to maintenance of the RDF storage barn at the Xcel Energy Wilmarth facility in Mankato.

421524 – Operating Expenses; increased $1,047,684

This is the area of greatest difference, and is the area that the R&E Board had the least knowledge about prior to Facility Purchase. There are two areas of operation where the R&E Board estimated low: fixed equipment maintenance, and trailer maintenance. Fixed equipment maintenance includes ongoing and annual maintenance of the property, building, processing equipment, mobile equipment and trailers. The

17

Page 3 of 8

approved Facility budget underestimated the cost of processing equipment, and did not account for the use of contract labor (electricians, welders, metal workers) in maintenance. Trailer maintenance estimates were also low, and the delay in acquiring new trailers has increased that line item projection for 2017.

421524 – Personnel Costs; Increased $134,191

Overall personnel costs were well estimated, but the approved 2017 budget underestimated expenses associated with non‐represented supervisors and administrative staff, formerly employed by RRT, and currently employed by GRENS.

421531 – Consulting; Decreased $75,000

Ramsey County Human Resources originally thought that it would need outside consulting services to assist the R&E Board as it developed its own employment policies; that was determined not to be necessary, reducing expenses by $75,000.

422304 – Landfills; Decreased $62,435

Projected landfill costs, based on agreements negotiated after the 2017 Facility Budget was approved, are expected to be lower.

424506 – Transportation; Increased $878,715

Until waste designation is in effect, the R&E Board has to provide incentives to haulers to secure a flow of waste into the R&E Center this includes hauler rebates (budgeted elsewhere) and contracting with transfer stations to make delivery more convenient for haulers. To secure waste, the R&E Board has contracted with 7 transfer stations, while the Budget included only two. The additional costs for transload fees and transportation explain this increase.

471107 – Contingent; Decreased $1,157,794

The approved 2017 Facility Budget included a contingency line item, which is proposed to be zeroed out to assist in covering other expenses.

44400 – Equipment Repair and Maintenance Fund; Decreased $139,198

This is a line item to be used to build an equipment repair and maintenance fund to cover capital expenses in future years; several items in the original budget were funded using the initial capital contributions made by the counties. This funding level is equal to the amount of projected revenue for sales of metals for recycling, which was a recommendation from the Facility Committee.

Revenues Sales of Recyclable Materials; Decreased $537,467

The market price for ferrous and non‐ferrous metals has decreased substantially since the 2017 Facility budget was approved. This projected revenue is based on payments for metals for the first four months of 2016. The Facility Committee has recommended that, because of market volatility, revenue from the sales of recyclables be targeted at the equipment maintenance and repair fund, and, going forward after 2017, expenses for operations be covered exclusively by tipping fee revenues.

Needed from Operating Reserve Fund – Increased $1,384,994

The approved 2017 budget projected that revenues would exceed expenses by $490,688, which was identified as an additional contingency to address unknown expenses. Based on the projected overall increase in expenses for 2017 of $847,527, that budgeted surplus is no longer projected, and funds from the operating reserve will be used to cover expenses.

18

Page 4 of 8

Recycling and Energy Board – Facility and Budget Committees Budget and Finance Processes 2018 – 2019 Budget Process

2016

Facility Committee Budget Committee

Monthly Operations Report Budget Status Report

March 2016 Operating budget review Initial Capital Expenditures Committee process

2017 Budget Adjustment

April 2016 Facility status report Discuss Facility issues to be addressed in

2017 budget addenda

2017 Budget Adjustment

April 2016 Operating and Joint Activities Budget status report

Receive Facility Committee issues related to 2017 budget

Discuss possible changes to 2017 budget

June 2016 Facility status report Identify Facility issues to be forwarded

to Budget Committee

June 2016 Operating and Joint Activities Budget status report

Recommend 2017 budget addenda to full R&E Board

2016

Budget

Monitoring August,

October 2016

Facility status report Identify Facility issues to be forwarded

to Budget Committee 2

016

Budget

Monitoring August,

October 2016

Operating and Joint Activities Budget status report

Make recommendations to R&E Board on necessary budget issues

Attachment 1

19

Page 5 of 8

Attachment 2

20

Page 6 of 8

Ramsey/Washington Recycling and Energy Board

2016 – 2017 Facility Budget Explanation of Selected Line Items

PROGRAM : FACILITY (51813) 411101 Salary and Fringe Benefits: The sum of expenses related to R&E Board employee salaries and

benefits for work on the Facility. In 2016 there are two such positions: 1. Facility Manager (Approved by Project Board 5/15; County Boards 6/16) 2. Deputy Facility Manager (Proposed for 2016)

421502 Xcel Fuel Supply Agreement: Expenses associated with marketing of refuse derived fuel (RDF) to

Xcel energy, pursuant to a Fuel Supply Agreement. 421522 Operating Fee – Transition Facility Operator: Contract Expenses for the Transition Facility Operator. 421524 Operating Expenses: Expenses associated with operating the Facility, some of which will be pass‐

through costs from the Transition Facility Operator, and some of which will be paid directly by the R&E Board. These include expenses such as: Site maintenance (pavement, landscaping, roads) Building maintenance Fixed equipment maintenance (processing equipment) Trailer maintenance Mobile equipment maintenance Overhead (laboratory, health and safety, IT consulting, etc.) Tipping floor maintenance Utilities Insurance

421531 Personnel Costs: Expenses associated with personnel that work at the Facility and employee by the Transition Facility Operator, but excusing employees of the R&E Board. Includes union and non‐union positions.

421531 Consulting – IS Superior Services: Contracted expenses for Superior Services, to maintain software

to process information for hauler rebates. 421531 Consulting – Human Resources and Labor Relations: Contracted services to assist and advise in

negotiating a new labor agreement with the IBEW local 23, as well as to retain a consultant to assist the R&E Board with HR issues related to the transition to public ownership and operation.

422304 Landfills: Contracted costs to deposit residue, bulky waste and excess waste at landfills. 424506 Transportation: Contracted costs for trucking firms to transport material to various destinations,

such as metal markets, Xcel energy facilities, landfills. 471107 Contingent: A contingency account because of uncertainty associated with new ownership and

operation.

Attachment 3

21

Page 7 of 8

481101 Transfer Ramsey County Bonds: Debt service for Ramsey County’s contribution for Facility

purchase. 481101 Transfer Washington County: Debt service for Washington County’s contribution for Facility

purchase. 440000 Equipment Repair and Maintenance Fund: Funding for the Equipment Repair and Maintenance

Reserve fund, created by the R&E Board Bylaws.

22

Page 8 of 8

Addendum to 2017 Facility Budget

Account Description 2016 Approved 2017 Approved2017 Proposed

Revision2017 Change

411101 Salary & Fringe Benefits‐Facility Manager, Asst. Facility Manager 300,559 311,569 300,559 ‐11,010421502 Xcel Fuel Supply Agreement 4,727,700 4,727,700 5,028,254 300,554

421522 Operating Fee‐Transition Facility Operator 1,100,000 950,000 950,000 0

421524 Operating Expenses 3,484,381 3,484,381 4,532,065 1,047,684

Personnel Costs 6,665,352 6,831,986 6,966,177 134,191

421531 Consulting‐ Labor Relations 175,000 175,000 100,000 ‐75,000Consulting‐IS Superior Services 1,500 1,500 1,500 0

422304 Landfills 2,005,973 2,005,973 1,943,538 ‐62,435424201 Payment In Lieu of Taxes 386,000 386,000 386,000 0

424506 Transportation 5,329,618 5,329,618 6,208,333 878,715

471107 Contingent 1,155,029 1,157,794 0 ‐1,157,794481101 Transfer RC Bonds 0 1,096,775 1,059,150 ‐37,625

Transfer Washington Co 0 399,285 368,730 ‐30,555440000 Equipment Repair and Maintenance Fund 818,730 839,198 700,000 ‐139,198Facility Management Expense Total 26,149,842 27,696,779 28,544,306 847,527

Estimated Revenue/Reserve Fund2016 Approved 2017 Approved

2017 Proposed

Revision2017 Change

Tipping Fees ( @385,000) 26,950,000 26,950,000 26,950,000 0

Sales of Recylable Materials 1,237,467 1,237,467 700,000 ‐537,467Needed from Operating Reserve Fund (2,037,625) (490,688) 894,306 1,384,994

Facility Management Revenue Total 26,149,842 27,696,779 28,544,306 847,527

Attachment 4

23

FACILITY COMMITTEE

R&E BOARD FACILITY COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: June 23, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: IV.d.

SUBJECT: Update on Waste Designation Planning




EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In 2015 the two county boards authorized amendments to their respective county solid waste master plans, and development of a joint designation plan. At the Committee meeting, Staff will provide an update on the progress towards amending county solid waste master plans, development of a joint designation plan and engaging the community, including a timeline. At this time, we expect that the master plan amendments, and designation plans, will be before the R&E Board for consideration at the July 28th meeting, and the County Boards before the end of August. Following MPCA review and approval, there are then other steps required by law to proceed to implement designation. The timeline as currently outlined would have designation effective at the end of 2017.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Waste Designation Summary FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None.

24

SUBJECT: Update on Waste Designation Planning




6/14/16





25

Version: June 16, 2016

Ramsey/Washington Joint Designation Plan: A Summary What is Waste Designation? Waste designation is the term used in Minnesota law that allows the counties to enact an ordinance (aka regulatory tool) that requires all or a portion of solid waste to be delivered to a designated waste management facility. Sometimes called “flow control,” waste designation can be put into place after a thorough planning process that is approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Designation relates to what happens to waste after it is collected – it does not affect who collects trash, or when it is collected. What is the Planning Process? Minnesota’s waste designation statutes (Minn. Stat. §§ 115A.80‐.893) provide that a Minnesota county may require “all, or a portion, of the solid waste that is generated within its boundaries… be delivered to a processing or disposal facility identified by…the county.” Before a county may begin the designation process, it must adopt a comprehensive solid waste management master plan. Plans for designation must be consistent with the State’s waste management hierarchy and other policies, and with each county’s approved solid waste management master plan. Following approval of a designation plan, counties are required to hold a public hearing, and then proceed to negotiate waste delivery agreements with waste haulers. Following that, a county proceeds to adopt a designation ordinance. The MPCA oversees the process and has several points of review. The overall process takes about 18 months. Ramsey and Washington Counties Designation Plans Ramsey and Washington Counties purchased the Ramsey/Washington Recycling & Energy Center in Newport, Minnesota (“R&E Center”), and plan to use that waste processing facility as a key component in managing waste and resources in the East Metro area. During a three year planning and evaluation period, the counties anticipated the use of waste designation as a critical policy choice to achieve state waste management goals. A Joint Waste Designation Plan has been developed and will be submitted to the MPCA for approval on behalf of both counties, as the necessary next step in achieving the vision for waste and resource management in the East Metro. In addition to the Designation Plan, the counties are updating their current solid waste master plans to reflect the purchase of the R&E Center and to provide more detail about the R&E Center’s operations.

How will designation work? After approval of the designation plans by the MPCA, the counties will conduct a public hearing on the Plan, and proceed with implementing the Plan.

Designation will apply to “acceptable waste,” which is waste that the R&E Center is capable of receiving and processing. Designation does not apply to materials separated for recycling.

The first step is to negotiate long‐term waste delivery agreements with waste haulers, for the voluntary delivery of all acceptable waste generated in the two counties. Long‐term waste delivery agreements are a preferred way to achieve more certain deliveries to the facility, and have been a successful tool in other counties in Minnesota.

The second step is to adopt waste designation requirements in each of the county solid waste ordinances; this will require acceptable waste that is not subject to contract to be delivered to the R&E Center, by law.

The ordinance and contracts have to be reviewed by the MPCA, and there is a waiting period before they can go into effect.

26

June 16, 2016

What will be different? Very little will change. At this time almost 85% of the trash generated in the two counties, around 335,000 tons per year (TPY), is delivered to the R&E Center. Designation will require 100% of it, about 400,000 TPY, to be delivered to the R&E Center in Newport. This means that the difference between the two which is now being landfilled will be diverted from those landfills to the R&E Center for processing. Designation “levels the playing field,” so that all haulers deliver to the same facility at the same tipping fee. Why is designation being considered? Designation allows for a more stable, predictable trash processing system that can help better manage various risks and control costs. Ramsey and Washington Counties are working to find ways to create a modern trash processing system that offers more stability and predictability, and ultimately ensures greater control of our costs. Designation gives the counties the legal authority to oversee where and how that trash is processed and to ensure that it is done so in a way that manages environmental and public health risks and avoids putting the costs and risks of today’s waste management on future generations. Designation is necessary to secure sufficient waste supply to support the reliable operation of and long‐term financial viability of the R&E Center as well as future endeavors the R&E Board undertakes to further make advances in waste management. It will ensure that all waste from the two counties is delivered to the R&E Center where metals are recycled and trash is made into fuel to be converted to electricity, or, at a later date, biofuels. Designation will help the counties meet state, regional and county goals of using waste in the highest and best use.

Designation is also necessary for the Counties to reach the statutory 75 percent recycling goal imposed by the State on metropolitan counties. Designation directs all trash to the R&E Center so that the existing separation equipment can remove the ferrous and non‐ferrous metals. It provides the necessary assurance of waste flows to invest in capital‐intensive equipment for Mixed Waste Processing, (MWP), or the mechanical separation of the trash, to remove more recyclable materials from the trash and other potential waste streams delivered to the R&E Center. This does not replace source separation of recyclables by residents and businesses but seeks to remove additional recyclables not recycled at the source by those residents and businesses. Through extensive recycling studies, the R&E Board has determined that a 75 percent recycling goal is not feasible without the additional recovery of recyclables and other materials that MWP at the R&E Center provides over and above what is achievable through source separation. Where can I learn more, and where can I provide input? You can do both at the R&E Board’s website, found at www.MoreValueLessTrash.com, and click on the tab labeled “Designation.”

The Recycling & Energy Center (R&E Center) is located in Newport, MN on the border between Ramsey and Washington counties.

27

FACILITY COMMITTEE

R&E FACILITY COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: June 23, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: V.a.

SUBJECT: 2016 Capital Improvement Budget Update



FACILITY COMMITTEE ACTION REQUESTED:

Information only.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

At its March 24, 2015 meeting the Budget Committee recommended, and the Ramsey/Washington Recycling & Energy Board approved, the revised Capital Expenditure 2016 Budget in the total amount of $5,710,000. The action also included authorization to reissue a request for bids for purchase of up to 36 trailers, authorization to the JLT to proceed with procuring goods and services as outlined in the budget, and notice to the Counties to distribute their respective contributions for the initial capital expenses. Attached is the summary matrix of the capital projects. The current status of the improvements will be reviewed with the Budget Committee.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Capital Expenditures Budget – 2016 ‐ Summary

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

None.

28

SUBJECT: 2016 Capital Improvement Budget Update




6/14/16





29

Category Project Amount Description Date of

Origin/Last Replaced 6

Expected Life

Expectancy of Cap Imp 7

Suitable for

Future Plans? 8

When Capital Need was

Identified 9 Priority

Expected Timeline for

Improvement

Mobile Equipment

Replace 36 trailers $3.6 million Previously approved; replace 36 trailers with new aluminum trailers. 2

1987 >15 years Yes Mid-2015

In Process In Process

Processing Lines

Replace existing diverter gates and chutes

$175,000 Fabrication and replacement of diverter chutes which are used for loading RDF into transfer trailers at the Facility.

1986 30 years Yes Post-closing; RRT would not allow access during due diligence 4

1 Immediately

Processing Lines

Replace two belt scales

$60,000 Replace components to the two scales on the processing lines at the point where RDF is loaded.

2000 15 years Yes Post-Closing; RRT would not allow access during due diligence 5

2

Contracting to begin immediately; installation summer 2016

Mobile Equipment

Rebuild front-end loader

$313,000 Rebuild one of the four loaders through a CAT certified program which includes but is not limited to engine, drive train, electronics, and hydraulics. The rebuild includes tires.

2009 Has not yet been rebuilt

4 – 5 years, Depends on hours used

and condition of

loader

Yes During Due Diligence following approval of Asset Purchase Agreement

3

Contract development immediate; rebuild begins summer 2016

Waste Receiving

Replace grapple cranes

$400,000 Replace the two grapple cranes on the tipping floor which are used to remove unprocessible waste (e.g. propane tanks, large metal objects) from each of the two processing lines.

2000 15 years Yes During Due Diligence following approval of Asset Purchase Agreement

4

Contract development immediate; installation fall 2016

Mobile Equipment

Rebuild Yard Tractor

$75,000 Complete rebuild of one of four vehicles used to move trailers around the exterior of the Facility.

10 years Yes During Due Diligence following approval of Asset Purchase Agreement

5

Procurement summer 2016; rebuild fall 2016

30

Category Project Amount Description Date of

Origin/Last Replaced 6

Expected Life

Expectancy of Cap Imp 7

Suitable for

Future Plans? 8

When Capital Need was

Identified 9 Priority

Expected Timeline for

Improvement

Waste Receiving

Replace bulky waste residue transfer area

$950,000 Replace existing pit and transfer conveyor with ramp and new loading system, include tipping floor repairs in the immediate area. 1

1987 >20 years Yes Mid-2015

6

Design-build procurement to begin after MWP decisions

Waste Receiving

Replace inbound scale deck

$67,000 Remove old decking on inbound scale, replace with associated wiring, scale equipment, concrete.

1995 10 – 15 years

Yes Post-Closing; RRT would not allow access during due diligence 3

7

Procurement start immediately, construction August 2016

Facility Equipment

Replace Underground Storage Tank

$70,000 Replace the existing underground storage tank installed during Facility construction with a dual walled tank. The tank is used to store diesel fuel for facility equipment.

1987 >15 years Yes Mid-2015 following Phase 1 Env. Assessment 8

Procurement 2016; Install spring 2017

Total $5,710,000

Notes

1 This improvement will reduce the need for 12 high-maintenance R&E Board-owned trailers that require compaction, and allow for the use of larger trailers provided by a vendor.

This reduces the capital needs for future trailer replacement, and reduces transportation costs by being able to haul more per load.

2 Trailer procurement is in process.

3 RRT would not allow access to this area for safety reasons, as it is a confined space. Information in the data room was not available to judge the condition of the inbound scale.

4 RRT would not allow access to this area for safety reasons; written documents did not describe the condition of the diverter gates.5 These scales are specialized equipment and the components needing replacement were not visually accessible. Records were not available to determine condition.

6 The date that the item being addressed was most recently put in service or installed.

7 The length of time that the capital improvement is expected to perform before replacement.8 Whether the capital improvement will be suitable for changes to the facility as new technologies are considered.9 When the R&E Board first learned of the capital need.

31

FACILITY COMMITTEE

R&E BOARD FACILITY COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: June 23, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: VI.a.

SUBJECT: Updates on Emerging Technologies




EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Curt Hartog, Foth Infrastructure & Environment, will provide an overview and update on emerging technology providers that have the potential to change the waste industry including updates on Abengoa, INEOS Bio, Enerkem, Fulcrum Bioenergy, Infinitus Energy, and Rational Energies. The presentation will also cover new fuel markets that could encourage future waste‐to‐fuels technologies. ATTACHMENTS:

1. Update on Emerging Technologies for MSW and RINs FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None.



6/14/16





32

Update on Emerging Technologies for MSW and RINs

R&E Board Facility Committee meeting

June 23, 2016

33

Emerging Technologies for MSW

Game ChangersGasification

Pyrolysis

Plasma Arc

Mixed Waste Processing

Plastics to Fuel

34

Emerging Technologies

In 2013Barrel of Oil was $108.00Gallon of Gasoline $4.28Number of Companies – 165

In 2016Barrel of Oil is $46.21Gallon of Gasoline $2.05Number of Companies < 20

35

Emerging Technologies

So what happened?Grant/loan funding dried up

Cost/benefit went away

Technical issues

Show me

36

Where Did the Funding Go?

DOE and USDA grants and loans dried up$250,000,000 from 2008-2013 for USDA

$23,000,000 from 2014-2018 for USDA

ARRA - $600,000,000 for DOE in 2008

In 2016 $90,000,000 for DOE

37

Cost/Benefit

Capital costs are $200M or more

Private equity challenging

Concept not proven at large scale

Investor risk

Output costs down over 50%

38

Technical Issues

Indian River Bioenergy CenterIt is all in the bugs

Fulcrum/Sierra BiofuelsConstruction expected late 4th quarter 2014Biorefinery expected to reach commercial operation

early 3rd quarter 2016

Enerkem EdmontonStill in Commissioning

AbengoaNow EPCM for Fulcrum

39

40

Technical Issues

AgilyxContamination and supply challenges

Now focused on Polystyrene

Plasma Power Left Iowa because they learned “MSW to be

extremely political and very competitive”

Air Products Offloads two large plasma gasifiers in Teesside

(operational challenges)

41

Not ALL Bad News

Clearing the decks

Enerkem is in the lead

Fulcrum issued $200M for procurement for their Nevada plant

Ineos Bio has indicated they would be producing ethanol in 2016

Other technologies focused on plant feedstock to avoid the variability of MSW

42

Not ALL Bad News

Plant in Tennessee using gasification on wood waste, scrap tires and sewage sludge. Produce electricity

Europe opportunities available

RES Polyflow plastic to fuel plant in Ashley, Indiana

Pearl Harbor has waste gasifier (10 TPD)

Enerkem considering entering the TC market

43


Proven technology Commodity markets for recyclables make

private investment difficult New machinery to separate by density and

shape at the same time Needed to meet higher recovery/recycling

goals Likely to be led by public agencies

44

Where is this Going?

PUBLIC/private partnerships

Securing funding sufficient to construct

No free lunch

Europe may see faster growth

Continue to see small scale plants

Twin Cities market ideal

45

Why Produce Ethanol from Waste?

Economics

RINs (renewable identification number)

46

RIN Codes

Fuel Types and RIN D Codes

47

RIN Needs

Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Mandate, by Type, 2008-22

48

Show Me The Money

Corn Ethanol Cellulosic Ethanol

49

Take Aways

Using Emerging Technologies (even AD) that produces transportation fuels has income from RINs

Understand the market dynamics with RINs and impacts to development

If gasification can produce 100 gallons of ethanol per ton, RINs can be >$100 per ton!

50

Conclusions

Emerging Technologies are not Dead!

Projects will be more Public/private

partnerships

Positive financial benefits for waste to ethanol continue…

If it works

51

Questions

52

53

FACILITY COMMITTEE

R&E BOARD FACILITY COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: June 23, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: VI.b.

SUBJECT: Enerkem and SKB Gasification Project



FACILITY COMMITTEE ACTION REQUESTED: Information only. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: SKB, a local waste management firm owned by Waste Connections, and Enerkem have entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to evaluate and develop an MSW gasification project on land near SKB’s industrial waste landfill in Rosemount, Dakota County. SKB and Enerkem briefly discussed the project with the R&E Board Executive Committee on May 10, 2016, and has met with the MPCA, Dakota County and City of Rosemount. Ryan O’Gara from SKB will provide an overview of the project. ATTACHMENTS: None. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None.



6/14/16





54

FACILITY COMMITTEE

R&E BOARD FACILITY COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: June 23, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: VI.c.

SUBJECT: Process for New Technology Evaluation and Site Visits




EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Staff will provide an update on information learned attending the Waste Expo 2016 held in Las Vegas. Staff will also provide updates on two memos the R&E Facility Committee previously received via email on May 9.

1. Options for Scope of Work for Alternative Technology at the Recycling & Energy Center outlined a scope of work for development of new technologies at the R&E Center.

2. Scope of Work for Alternative Technology Equipment Review. Site visits for Committee consideration.

Staff will also discuss scheduling of two local tours to view mixed waste processing equipment components and organics separation alternatives. Tour 1 is to Dem‐Con ‐ Shakopee Environmental Campus (tour time: 90 minutes + travel). Tour 2 is visiting both Randy’s Environmental Services – Delano and Organix Solutions – Maple Grove (tour time: 2 hours + travel). Additional details are enclosed in the attached Revised Tour List. ATTACHMENTS:

1. Staff Memorandum 2. Options for Scope of Work for Alternative Technology at the Recycling & Energy Center 3. Scope of Work for Alternative Technology Equipment Review 4. Revised Tour List

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None.

55

SUBJECT: Process for New Technology Evaluationand Site Visits




6/14/16





56

May 9, 2016

To: Recycling & Energy Board’s Facility Committee Members

From: Joint Leadership Team (JLT)

Re: Technology Improvements at the R&E Center and Site Visits

Attached are two memos prepared by Foth related to technology improvements at the R&E Center in Newport. We would like your feedback on the site visits, as explained below.

The first memo, “Options for Scope of Work for Alternative Technology at the Recycling & Energy Center,” outlines a scope of work for development of new technologies at the R&E Center. This memo provides a timeline and steps in 2016‐2018 to implement mixed waste processing, the first improvement anticipated in the vision adopted by the Board in 2015. The Joint Leadership Team and Foth will be moving ahead with this work, starting immediately, and will provide updates to you as we proceed. In the second memo, “Scope of Work for Alternative Technology Equipment Review”, Foth has identified two local technology site visit opportunities for the R&E Board to consider as it evaluates the potential technologies including Mixed Waste Processing and Anaerobic Digestion. The site visits identified will give Commissioners and staff the opportunity to view components of specific equipment that may be used at the R&E Center, see it in operation and address concerns and questions. Two tour options are outlined below for your consideration. Additional detail on each of the site visits identified in the tour can be found in the attached memo. Kate Bartelt, Ramsey County, will contact you in the next couple of days to answer any questions you may have and identify which tours would be the most valuable to you. JLT will then work to schedule tours over the next 3 to 5 months. Tours would be offered to other members of the R&E Board, if they are interested.

Tour Options

1) Southern Tour – 2 hours 40 minute total travel time a. Dem‐Con – Shakopee Environmental Campus (tour time: 90 minutes – visiting two locations)

i. Mixed Waste Processing Equipment Components (disc screens, optical sorter, air classifiers, eddy current separators, magnets, and hand pick stations)

ii. National recognized education center iii. Blue Bag organics hand sort

b. Hometown BioEnergy (Avante) – LeSeuer (Tour time: 1 hour) i. Anaerobic Digestion

Tour trip time needed: Full day

57

2) Northern Tour – 2 hours travel time

a. Randy’s Environmental Services – Delano (Tour time: 1 hour) i. Mixed Waste Processing Equipment Components (trommel screens, disc screens,

optical sorter, air classifiers, eddy current separator, magnets, and hand pick stations)

ii. Blue Bag organics hand sort b. Organix Solutions – Maple Grove (Tour time: 1 hour)

i. Anaerobic Digestion discussion with vendor that is in the process of permitting installing a BurCellTM system for anaerobic digestion (AD) of organics from MSW

Tour trip time needed: Half Day National Options for Tours

As the evaluation of technology develops, the JLT and Foth will identify possible opportunities to see equipment in operation that does not exist locally. These site visits would be designed to include anaerobic digestion and gasification facilities if possible.

58

Memorandum

X:\FOTH\IE\Ramsey Wash Co RRP\16R002-00\10000 Reports\Alternative Technology Study\M - Alternative Technology Scope of Work

Final.docx

1

Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC

Eagle Point II � 8550 Hudson Blvd. North, Suite 105

Lake Elmo, MN 55042

(651) 288-8550 • Fax: (651) 288-8551

www.foth.com

April 18, 2016

TO: Zack Hansen and Judy Hunter, Ramsey/Washington Recycling & Energy Board

(R&E) Joint Leadership Team (JLT)

CC: Curt Hartog, Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC (Foth)

FR: Nathan Klett, Foth

Jennefer Klennert, Foth

RE: Options for Scope of Work for Alternative Technology at the Recycling & Energy

Center (R&E Center)

This memorandum is intended to provide a proposed scope of work for development of

alternative technology strategy implementation at the R&E Center. The R&E Board has

been undertaking a process called Scope for Resource Management which graphically

examines future uses and technology upgrades to the R&E Center; as well as uses for the

products produced at the R&E Center.

Foth is providing a proposed timeline and recommended steps needed to determine

proposed changes to the R&E Center, which may include some form of mixed waste

processing (MWP).

Previously, MWP was proposed to be implemented in 2018 at the R&E Center. The

specific details and necessary decisions points for implementing MWP have not yet been

determined. Many steps are needed prior to a final decisions being made on MWP at the

R&E Center. Foth proposes a timely and methodical process that includes the following:

♦ Determination of the specific materials to be recovered using MWP (metals,

organics, plastics, cardboard).

♦ Completion of waste sorts targeting specific materials and accounting for

seasonality and with or without bag breaker.

♦ Conduct biological methane potential (BMP) tests on process residue to examine

potential uses for residue in an AD system.

♦ Research what equipment will separate the specific target materials for future

procurement; including estimated recovery rates based on waste sort.

♦ What changes to the R&E Center may be necessary to accommodate installation

of MWP equipment.

59

X:\FOTH\IE\Ramsey Wash Co RRP\16R002-00\10000 Reports\Alternative Technology Study\M - Alternative Technology Scope of

Work Final.docx

2

A tentative timeline has been proposed for your review and consideration of the steps

needed and is provided as Attachment 1.


The description of MWP is intended to refer to a system of equipment and labor utilized

to remove specific products (organics, metals, plastics, cardboard or a combination of all)

from the waste stream that can be recycled or digested, or removal of materials from the

waste stream that results in refuse derived fuel (RDF) that can be used as a feedstock for

gasification. MWP is proposed to be added at the front end of the R&E Center and

separation of materials would occur prior to traditional RDF production.

Types of MWP

Foth understands that the R&E Board desires to examine modifications at the R&E

Center to target one or all of the following materials.

♦ MWP to remove organics only;

♦ MWP to remove organics, metals, and plastics and potentially cardboard;

♦ MWP to remove Blue Bags.

A decision on the extent of MWP is part of the proposed process. Each material to be

removed prior to producing RDF needs to add economic, process and/or environmental

value. Ongoing discussions with the R&E Board are recommended as decisions are

made to determine the final system.

Waste Sorts

Foth on behalf of the R&E Board completed a comprehensive waste sort analysis Waste

Composition Study in September, 2014. This comprehensive waste sort looked at what

items were specifically in the waste stream. This analysis determined waste composition

by manually sorting waste into predetermined categories. However, for implementing

MWP, it is important to correlate waste composition with the equipment’s ability to

effectively sort the desired material from the waste stream. That is to say, actual material

recovered is dependent on the equipment being utilized. The waste sort was conducted at

a single point in time (July, 2014) and therefore does not take into account the seasonality

of material received at the Facility.

Foth recommends a series of waste sorts occur quarterly starting 2nd Quarter of 2016 and

ending 1st Quarter of 2017. The waste sorts will be completed with two (2) primary

goals:

♦ Determination of what can be removed from the waste stream utilizing currently

available processing technology. (With and without a bag breaker).

♦ Determination of seasonal change on the composition of the waste.

60


Work Final.docx

3

The waste sorts will be instrumental in helping the R&E Board determine the appropriate

materials to recover as well as the amount of materials that are recoverable.

Evaluation of the Separation Process

The equipment used for sorting material is dependent on the targeted materials. When

targeting organics, metals, and plastics (and potential cardboard) the technology used in a

MWP system is similar to the technology used in a Material Recovery Facility (MRF),

which is a mature technology and can be utilized as a good comparison for the R&E

Board’s study of equipment for use in MWP. However, there is some question if the

MRF equipment is robust enough to handle MSW at the volumes anticipated.

Foth proposes a systematic approach to determining the equipment necessary in a MWP

system. The individual pieces of equipment will depend on the targeted materials. If

organics from Blue Bags are the only target a simple inclined conveyor to a flat conveyor

with hand sorting is generally the only equipment necessary. If organics (not in Blue

Bags), metals and plastics are targeted additional equipment is necessary to provide a

complete MWP system. Furthermore, if cardboard is targeted, machine and manual

sorting equipment may be required.

A list of equipment that may be in the MWP and should be researched further is listed

below.

♦ Bag Breaker (to liberate materials)

♦ Trommel screen or disc screens (size separation)

♦ Optical Sorter (if plastics are targeted)

♦ Air classifiers (density separation)

♦ Eddy Currents (nonferrous)

♦ Magnets (ferrous material)

♦ Cardboard

Foth recommends R&E representatives undertake tours of other facilities in the

Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa to observe various types of equipment. These tours

should be scheduled during 2nd and 3rd quarter 2016.

Throughput Evaluation of MWP

Part of the process to be undertaken as the R&E Board explores MWP is the size of the

system. Previous work, by Foth pertaining to MWP system design assumed 2 separate

MWP lines capable of 35 ton per hour or approximately 335,000 tons of incoming MSW

annually. The system also assumed the commercial and residential MSW would be

handled on separate lines.

61


Work Final.docx

4

Based on Ramsey and Washington MSW generation data, 500,000 tons of MSW are

produced and could potentially be managed at the R&E Center after 2018. The ultimate

through put of a separation technology (i.e. MWP system) will depend on the materials

targeted.

Systematic Approach to MWP Vendor Technology

Current vendors of sorting equipment believed to be capable of adapting to manage

mixed waste at volumes anticipated at the R&E Center include:

♦ Bulk Handling Systems

♦ CP Group

♦ Machinex

♦ VecoPlan

After the MWP system design is further determined, Foth recommends a Request for

Expressions of Interest (RFEI) or Request for Proposal (RFP) to narrow down the

respondents to the equipment procurement request. Foth recommends the RFEI occur 4th

quarter of 2016 through 1st quarter of 2017. The RFEI will be to narrow the respondents

to the MWP procurement. A follow-up RFP with the narrowed respondents for the MWP

system will be completed in 3rd and 4th quarter of 2017. This RFP would be to receive

designs of the proposed MWP as well as guaranteed performance of the equipment.

Actual procurement and ordering of the MWP equipment would occur in 2018 with

installation and operation startup to begin in 2019. This would also provide sufficient

load time to initiate any building improvements prior to receiving the MWP system. This

is further discussed below.

Other Needed Steps

R&E Center Facility Scoping Improvements

As part of the installation of the MWP system Foth anticipates improvements and

potentially an expansion needed to the R&E Center to accommodate the equipment and

process change. Foth has recommended R&E Center scoping of the needed

improvements or expansions occur in 1st and 2nd quarters of 2017 to design the approach

for the building. The type of procurement and method of determining the building

changes is not proposed in this memo. Based on the building improvements needed, a

cost estimate for the improvements and concept development will be done in 3rd quarter

2017. In 4th quarter 2017 and 1st quarter 2018 the concept should be selected with

building improvements occurring in 3rd and 4th quarter of 2018. Permitting the expansion

by the MPCA would occur in the second or third quarter of 2018. Further discussion

should occur with the R&E Board on building improvements.

62


Work Final.docx

5

Anaerobic Digestion Markets

In order to successfully implement MWP, an Anaerobic Digestion (AD) market should

be procured. Currently there are limited opportunities for AD in the Twin Cities market.

Markets must be encouraged and evaluated throughout 2016 with a plan for an AD

procurement prior to 2019. An end market will need additional information on the

product available. Waste sorts, MWP technology vendors, and continued exploration of

this market should lead to a long-term solution for organics processing. Alternatives to

AD may also be explored as a backup option for organics processing.

Permitting

If the R&E is to install MWP that targets organic materials and make changes to the

processes at the R&E Center the permits must be updated. Timelines will be dependent

on the individual permit. It is anticipated that at a minimum the following permit

modifications must be completed to install MWP at the R&E Center:

♦ Major Modification to the MPCA SW-286 Permit

♦ Conditional Use Permit

♦ Watershed District Permit

♦ (Potential) Air Permit

♦ Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Update

♦ Building Permit (Contractor would acquire)

RDF use in Alternative Technologies

The R&E Board is considering other alternative technologies, including gasification, in

lieu of combustion. In considering this it is important to understand the composition of

the RDF produced at Newport. During the waste sorts described previously, Foth will

also collect samples of the RDF for analysis of particle size, bulk density, BTU content,

moisture content, carbon content, metal content and ash content of the samples.

This analysis would be conducted to provide seasonal data on RDF composition and its

ability to meet specifications for alternative technologies like gasification. Additionally,

Foth is recommending RDF samples from GRE also be obtained and tested at the same

time as the Newport samples are collected. This would provide a comparison of the RDF

waste streams and the composition of each RDF processing plant for use in alternative

technologies. Additionally, the RDF testing results will be evaluated to determine if

MWP is implemented, the potential composition changes to the RDF and if the changes

to the RDF composition would still meet the requirements for alternative technology

applications.

63


Work Final.docx

6

Financing Facility Improvements

As the technology evaluation moves ahead, it will be important to evaluate financing

options for improvements to the Newport Facility. This is beyond the scope of Foth’s

work, but Foth will work with the JLT as it examines financing options. Once the scope

of the work is known, a financing plan will be prepared. The Joint Powers Agreement

provides that the R&E Board could issue bonds, or one of the counties could issue bonds

on behalf of the R&E Board, with permission of the other county. Such bonds or

obligations must be connected with the Facility, and are repaid using revenue from the

Facility. Because of this, any bonding would occur after waste designation has been

implemented, so that there is assurance of waste supply. Previous research and reports on

financing have discussed financing options, such as Short Term financing, Long Term

financing, and pursuing State of Minnesota assistance, either through a Capital

Assistance Program grant, or special legislation.

64

Attachment 1: Scope of Work for the Future

The Alternative Technology Pathway

2016 - 2019

(Q1-Q4)

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Waste Sorts

Waste sorts based on targeted items and seasonality

Processing Equipment

Processing equipment components review

RFEI for MWP

RFEI for equipment manufacturers

RFP for MWP

Targeted RFP for equipment manufacturers

Equipment procurement and manufacture

Installation and start of operations for MWP

Facility Improvements

Design approach for building

Facility scoping improvements

Cost estimate for improvements

Concept development

Concept selection

Building improvements and upgrades

Organics

Determine organics market

Permits

Solid waste permit

All other permits

Financing

Secure financing for improvements

2016 2017 2018 2019Task

X:\FOTH\IE\Ramsey Wash Co RRP\16R002-00\10000 Reports\Alternative Technology Study\Scope of Work Timeline.xlsx 65

Memorandum

X:\FOTH\IE\Ramsey Wash Co RRP\16R002-00\10000 Reports\Alternative Technology Study\M - Technology Tours.docx

1

Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC

Eagle Point II � 8550 Hudson Blvd. North, Suite 105

Lake Elmo, MN 55042

(651) 288-8550 • Fax: (651) 288-8551

www.foth.com

April 21, 2016

TO: Zack Hansen and Judy Hunter, Ramsey/Washington Recycling & Energy Board

(R&E Board) Joint Leadership Team (JLT)

CC: Curt Hartog, Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC (Foth)

FR: Nathan Klett, Foth

Jennefer Klennert, Foth

RE: Scope of Work for Alternative Technology Equipment Review

This memorandum is intended to provide a proposed scope of work for reviewing alternative

technology equipment for the Recycling & Energy Center (R&E Center). The R&E Board

has been undertaking a process called Scope for Resource Management which graphically

examines future uses and technology upgrades to the R&E Center as well as uses for the

products from the R&E Center.

This memo is intended to accompany Foth’s memorandum Options for Scope of Work for

Alternative Technology at the Recycling & Energy Center (R&E Center), dated April 12,

2016. As the R&E Board explores alternative technologies, it is critical the Board understand

the types of equipment used in processing waste and how the equipment impacts the RDF

produced through processing. Foth is providing a list of possible tour options to begin

evaluating and observing equipment that could comprise a Mixed Waste Processing (MWP)

system.


The description of MWP is intended to refer to a system of equipment and labor utilized to

remove specific products (organics, metals, plastics, cardboard or a combination of all) from

the waste stream that can be recycled or digested, or removal of materials from the waste

stream that results in refuse derived fuel (RDF) that can be used as a feedstock for

gasification. Currently, it is envisioned to install a MWP system at the front end of the R&E

Center to separate materials from the MSW prior to traditional RDF production.

Evaluation of the Separation Process

The equipment used for sorting material is dependent on the targeted materials. When

targeting organics, metals, and plastics (and potential cardboard) the equipment used in a

MWP system is similar to the equipment used in a Material Recovery Facility (MRF). The

66


2

equipment used in MRF’s is mature and can provide a good comparison for the R&E Board’s

study of equipment for use in MWP. However, there is some question if the MRF equipment

is robust enough to handle MSW at the volumes anticipated.

Foth proposes a systematic approach to determining the equipment necessary in a MWP

system. A list of equipment that may be in the MWP system and should be researched

further is listed below.

♦ Bag Breaker (to liberate materials)

♦ Trommel screen or disc screens (size separation)

♦ Optical Sorter (if plastics are targeted)

♦ Air classifiers (density separation)

♦ Eddy Currents (nonferrous)

♦ Magnets (ferrous material)

♦ Hand Pick Stations

Foth recommends tours of facilities to provide the R&E Board with a relative size and

function review for the equipment. Since each sorting line for a MWP system is unique, it

will be important the R&E Board understands the relative size and complexity of the

components that make up a MWP system. Foth believes the tours presented below will assist

the Board with an understanding of the individual components needed to assemble a MWP

system for targeted materials.

Local Options for Tours

Foth recommends R&E representatives undertake tours of other facilities in Minnesota to

observe various types of equipment that should be considered for the R&E Center. These

tours should be scheduled during 2nd and 3rd quarter 2016. At this time Foth is

recommending the following facilities be toured:

Dem-Con Companies - Shakopee Environmental Campus

Dem-Con owns and operates a 60,000 square foot (20 tons per

hour of source separated recyclables and 20 tons per hour of

single stream recyclables) MRF in Shakopee, MN. The MRF

has the following equipment: disc screens, optical sorter, air

classifiers, eddy current separators, magnets, and hand pick

stations. An additional feature of the Dem-Con MRF is a

nationally recognized education center. Dem-Con also owns

and operates a 40,000 square foot Construction and Demolition

Recycling Facility (CDRF) on the same campus. The CDRF

has a trommel screen. Dem-Con also owns and operates a

10,000 square foot MSW transfer station. At the transfer

station Dem-Con is currently hand separating Blue BagsTM of

organics from the waste stream.

67

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwichpjRvsjLAhXIJCYKHUPOCZAQjRwIBw&url=http://dcmrf.com/&psig=AFQjCNF3nDS7HGInEfuW1_rtFLJ5iPT_Cw&ust=1458330498557360

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi04K6Rv8jLAhUFPCYKHfsmD9UQjRwIBw&url=http://www.startribune.com/global-shifts-put-squeeze-on-twin-cities-recycling/328384591/&bvm=bv.117218890,d.eWE&psig=AFQjCNEoGFPgBWlMai9Fjbuulrr8U3KfAw&ust=1458330618652218


3

Randy’s Environmental Services – Delano

Randy’s Sanitation owns and operates a MRF in

Delano, MN. The MRF has the following

equipment: trommel screens, disc screens, optical

sorter, air classifiers, eddy current separator,

magnets, and hand pick stations. The trommel

screen has “spikes” which act as a bag breaker at

the facility. Sorting staff at the beginning if the

processing system at Randy’s separate Blue

BagsTM of organics from the waste stream at their

Delano facility.

Great River Energy (GRE) – Elk River

Great River Energy’s (GRE) Elk River Processing

Plant is a 1,000 ton per day refuse derived fuel (RDF)

facility. GRE’s Elk River facility was built in 1989.

GRE has an optical sorter located on its residue line,

which is intended to maximize removal of the

burnable materials remaining in the residue. An

optical sorter at the R&E Center would likely be used

to target plastics for recycling.

Organix Solutions – Maple Grove

Organix Solutions, LLC is currently in the process of permitting and installing a BurCellTM

system for anaerobic digestion (AD) of organics from MSW at the Randy’s Environmental

Services location in Delano. The AD technology is stated to be the SMARTFERM system

provided by Zero Waste Energy which is a dry AD technology. Foth provided further detail

to the JLT in the December 21, 2015 memorandum Organix Solutions Developing MSW

Processing Facility.

Hometown BioEnergy (Avante) - LeSeuer

Avant Energy in collaboration with Minnesota Municipal Power

Association developed an AD facility in LeSeuer called

Hometown BioEnergy. Hometown BioEnergy produces

renewable energy from food processing and agricultural waste.

The facility uses a thermophilic wet technology to create

methane which is then burned to create electricity.

National Options for Tours

In addition to local tours Foth is providing the following recommendations for tours of

facilities outside of Minnesota. These tours may be best conducted after the local tours and

after decisions have been made on the proposed products to be removed with MWP to review

and additional equipment that may not be locally available to observe. While Foth is

recommending the following facilities be toured it is critical that this list continue to be

updated as new technologies and facilities are permitted and begin operation.

68


4

Athens Services Mixed Material System – Sun Valley, California

Athens Services a private solid waste and

recycling company owns and operates a 70 ton

per hour mixed material system in Sun Valley,

California that opened in 2014. The facility

processes MSW to separate targeted

recyclables and organics. The facility is fully

enclosed and includes fast acting doors and a

misting system to assist with dust and odor

impacts. The technology includes bag

breakers, disc screens, optical sorters, air

classifiers, eddy current separators, magnets,

and hand pick stations.

Zero Waste Energy Development Company (ZWEDC), a GreenWaste/Zanker

Project – San Jose, California The ZWEDC facility is the result of a

partnership between GreenWaste

Recovery and Zanker Road Resource

Management. The 90,000 ton per year

facility processes organics separated

from MSW utilizing SMARTFERM

technology. SMARTFERM is a dry,

thermophilic anaerobic digestion system

that processes organics feedstock and generates natural gas. The facility consists of 16

concrete AD digestors and a 4 in-vessel compost tunnel. This facility is believed to be

applicable to the organics waste stream anticipated from MWP at the R&E Center.

Enerkem – Edmonton, Ontario, Canada Enerkem owns a gasification facility in Edmonton, Ontario, Canada. The gasification facility

utilizes RDF created from MSW to create a cellulosic ethanol, syngas, and bio-methanol.

The facility is currently under commissioning. Under commissioning, RDF has been used to

create methanol. The summer of 2016 additional construction will occur to add equipment to

chemically convert the methanol to ethanol. After the facility is successfully making ethanol,

Foth recommends a tour of the facility.

69

June 23, 2016

Revised Tour List

Two tour options are outlined below for your consideration. Additional detail on each of the site visits identified in the tour can be found in the “Scope of Work for Alternative Technology Equipment Review” Foth memo. Tours would be offered to other members of the R&E Board, if they are interested.

Tour Options

1) Southern Tour – 2 hours total travel time a. Dem‐Con – Shakopee Environmental Campus (tour time: 90 minutes – visiting two locations)

i. Mixed Waste Processing Equipment Components (disc screens, optical sorter, air classifiers, eddy current separators, magnets, and hand pick stations)

ii. National recognized education center iii. Blue Bag organics hand sort

Tour trip time needed: Half day

2) Northern Tour – 2 hours travel time

a. Randy’s Environmental Services – Delano (Tour time: 1 hour) i. Mixed Waste Processing Equipment Components (trommel screens, disc screens,

optical sorter, air classifiers, eddy current separator, magnets, and hand pick stations)

ii. Blue Bag organics hand sort b. Organix Solutions – Maple Grove (Tour time: 1 hour)

i. Anaerobic Digestion discussion with vendor that is in the process of permitting installing a BurCellTM system for anaerobic digestion (AD) of organics from MSW

Tour trip time needed: Half Day

70

Documents

MEETING NOTICE RAMSEY/WASHINGTON RECYCLING · PDF file1 | page meeting notice ramsey/washington recycling & energy board facility committee date: thursday, june 23, 2016