Loading...
2012-1602-Minutes for Meeting May 01,2012 Recorded 5/31/2012COUNTY NANCYUBLANKENSHIP OFFICIAL, COUNTY CLERKRECORDS COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 05131/2012 04;02;26 PM 1111111111!1111111111111111111 2012- 2 Do not remove this page from original document. Deschutes County Clerk Certificate Page Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF PUBLIC MEETING DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TUESDAY, MAY 1, 2012 Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone, Alan Unger and Tammy Baney. Also present were Erik Kropp, Interim County Administrator; Timm Schimke, Solid Waste Department; Randy Lutz, CEO of Waste to Energy Group, LLC (proposed contractor for the project); and approximately thirty other citizens including representatives of the media. Chair DeBone opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. He said this is an informational meeting and not a public hearing, but a learning exercise. The Board is not deliberating but is here to hear concerns, questions and to learn more about the proposed project. The purpose of the meeting was to provide information to the public and the Board of Commissioners, and to provide an opportunity for the public to voice concerns and questions regarding the proposed `landfill to gas' energy project. Timm Schimke gave a brief PowerPoint presentation on Knott Landfill and the proposal to capture landfill gas to put it to beneficial use. (A copy of the presentation is attached for reference) He explained how groundwater is monitored, how the landfill cells are lined, etc. They have had no problems with groundwater pollution. They also monitor for landfill gas. The DEQ does not allow the gas to migrate laterally, so it is collected and controlled. They do not generate enough emissions in the air to have to control that; however, it is collected and flared at this point. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 1 of 13 The landfill industry has evolved. It began with a dry tomb method but then it never decomposes. The regulators and industry decided that decomposition will happen at some point, so it is better to control it before the liners break down. They do that now with adding and recirculating moisture. Research, Development and Demonstration permit is now required, allowing for the gathering of data and showing it is not creating risk to the environment and the public. They have had several informational meetings up to this point. Randy Lutz of Waste to Energy Group then provided a presentation as well. (A copy is attached for reference) The goal is to reduce methane emissions now and in the future. Landfill gas is a product of decomposition of household waste, with the gas coming from 50% carbon dioxide and 50% methane and a few other compounds. The industry has changed along with technology to allow for more control of this environment, and to do something more responsible. DPA established a landfill methane outreach program in 1994. A process has been presented to the County that has been done in other areas, injecting steam to enhance decomposition. Typically in the tomb concept, the idea was to encase it and hope it never gets into the environment. The waste is still there so eventually this process will happen. It is better to control this process. The process is patented. The gas would be scrubbed and put into the natural gas pipeline. The method of using steam is also much more effective, requiring 1/1600 of the water required for a typical process. The objective is to protect and clean the environment, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and more. All business ventures require funding to go forward, but they have found investment groups for this at no cost to the County or taxpayers. The main priority is to protect the environment, however. The company has projects in California and Texas. Most landfills have to have a collection system when they reach a certain size. (He explained how the steam is injected and how the gas is removed.) The safest and most economical way to handle the gas is to put it into a pipeline so it can be used. In some places power is generated on site but it does not make sense in Oregon since the price of power is fairly low. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 2of13 He added that this County leads in many respects as to what goes on in this industry in this region and beyond. They are far ahead of many localities. He stated that they work on a four or five acre parcel at a time. They will have a third-party engineering company monitoring everything so this information won't come from just the County or contractor. Sometimes it is hard to determine where the gas is in a cell because it can migrate away from the contents as things settle. There is now a way to get a better idea of where the gas is so therefore where the monitoring wells should be, and from where it would be removed. He explained the methane curve - the methane generation in various scenarios. Therefore, the generation of methane can be unpredictable if water is introduced in an uncontrolled manner, especially in a dry environment. It is better to introduce water following a plan and staying in control of the process. The PPT study will tell them how much gas there is and where it can be found, at which time they can report back to the County as to the timeframe and what can be expected. He then gave an overview of the technology and equipment used for the collection process. They use a standard boiler to produce the steam. They would need about 5,000 gallons a day per acre for the steam process. They have to meet the standards of natural gas production, at a 98% purity standard. The separation system is not that large, with 35 foot long skids; and the process is quiet. There are a lot of uses for this gas other than just flaring it into the atmosphere. (He went over a long list of applications and products) Mr. Schimke said that there have been a few meetings of the landfill neighbors and the DEQ. A consultant from Pennsylvania (Energy Justice) was brought in by a neighbor who did not like the proposed project. However, there were a lot of areas of agreement. They agree all landfill liners will leak someday. The warranties are for twenty years at a minimum. This is why the industry feels it is best not to wait for this process to happen in an uncontrolled fashion. They agree that no gas collection system is 100% efficient. They will concentrate on a small area with aggressive collection. Combustion of landfill gas is harmful and should be filtered prior to any combustion. The boiler is fired with a small amount of landfill gas. 500 cubic feet of gas a minute is burnt off in the current flare, which will be turned off. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 3 of 13 Commissioner Baney stated she appreciates the interest. Commissioner Unger said he attended a previous meeting, and asked about the possibilities of groundwater problems. Mr. Schimke said the landfill liners are doubled where the liquid collects, and these locations are monitored by wells. They recirculate 1.4 gallons of leachate. As they steam that leachate, they expect to show that what is in the landfill has decreased, lowering the potential for groundwater pollution. Half of the acreage in the landfill has no liner at all because it was not required at the time. They have not seen groundwater issues even in that area. They have checked the local wells for a mile out and they came back clean. Commissioner Unger asked about the pressure used for this process. Mr. Lutz said it is all low pressure, until the point where it goes into the pipeline, where it has to match the pressure in the pipeline. From an engineering standpoint, it is still considered low pressure. A vacuum system does most of the work, pulling the gas through. There will be no huge storage tank for collection; the gas gets processed as it comes in. Chair DeBone asked where the volume of the leachate comes from. Mr. Schimke says some comes in waste. Some commercial enterprises bring in waste that is wetter than others. Most of it comes from rainfall and snow. At this time public comments were solicited. Uretia Kane of the Aubrey Butte Neighborhood Association but speaking as a private citizen, asked about the storage in 35-foot skids. She is concerned regarding safety and the protocols if there is a gas leak or a brush fire. Mr. Lutz stead they are not storing gas. The containers are for purposes of moving equipment around. Inside is like a giant filter system, with the gas filtering through and leaving. Ms. Kane asked about scrubbing the gas and removing toxins. She asked where the toxic material goes. Mr. Lutz said the filters are taken out and tested for hazardous materials. They will be removed by the groups who do this kind of work already. If it is not toxic, it will go back into the landfill. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 4 of 13 Mr. Schimke said that they have a household hazardous waste program already. They contract with a company to handle this type of material. They take what is collected and it goes to a hazardous waste landfill; some things like paint go out to be recycled. Ms. Kane said when the gas is being siphoned off, she's been told that if they pull too much methane gas, they pull in oxygen and this could cause ignition. Mr. Lutz said that all landfill management deal with this on a daily basis since there is methane in all landfills. They will deploy other process not currently in use there. There are valves in place to prevent oxygen from entering the system. This can happen in conventional systems. Ms. Kane asked if employees will be trained on site. Mr. Lutz stated that they want to provide jobs and let the local employees do this work. They have been approached by people with expertise in this field. Mr. Schimke added that a fire is a possibility with any system. When you pull gas, you figure out what is methane and what is oxygen and adjust for that. Mr. Lutz said this will be monitored electronically as well as by a person 24/7. David Poboisk said he lives nearby and has been learning about this since January. He does not want to be antagonistic. There were fires the last two summers at a landfill in Lane County. He asked if there have been any here. Mr. Schimke said there have been some in the past, mostly from people bringing in burn barrels that were not completely extinguished. However, the waste is separated out now before going into the landfill, so this is not an issue. Mr. Poboisk said that landfill fires are difficult to extinguish. There was an article in the Bulletin saying that lightning is a problem there. He lives a mile west and wonders about this. Lightning and methane gas are a bad combination, and this project seems to increase the potential for disaster. He asked if anyone has talked to disaster preparedness personnel about this. He does not know how many bus trips there are past the landfill going to schools. Most entrances front 27`h Street. He asked if there will be planning for a low-probability event such as this. Timm Schimke said they have procedures in place to deal with landfill fires. Methane is there because waste decomposes in a no-oxygen environment. It will burn because oxygen is introduced. There will not be a large amount of gas stored on site. If there is an incident, they would stop operations accordingly. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 5 of 13 Mr. Poboisk asked if County emergency services will be a part of the process if there is a fire or an explosion at the site. There might be other products developed in the future, including methanol and liquefied oil, which are dangerous as well. Chair DeBone said they can study what the potential is and have the proper safety measures in place. Commissioner Baney said there is an emergency preparedness coordinator and group, and they are prepared for almost everything. An incident commander is on staff as well, and they work with local jurisdictions on these issues. It could be a train derailment, a natural wildfire, an aircraft crashing, or other problems. This is county and region wide, not just the landfill, and this type of situation is taken seriously. Mr. Poboisk stated that the incontrovertible fact is that there is a school across the road, which he feels requires a higher level of awareness. He has spoken with others with the same concerns. He added that at a January meeting at the Environmental Center, Mr. Schimke said that in regard to landfill gas production and any concerns about the middle school, the students are exposed now, and this should not expose them to anything more, and probably it would be less. It was also said that additional monitoring could go in at the school, including for lateral migration. Mr. Schimke said the landfill produces more gas than they are flaring. It goes into the atmosphere. It will produce this gas for decades. They are not turning on a spigot to create something new. The key is how much and when, and how it is controlled. They are well below any threshold that regulators say would be a concern. The new process should not increase this. Fugitive emissions should go down. Also, because this is less than 1%, regulators are not concerned. Emissions from woodstoves have many of the same toxins. It is a matter of perspective. The landfill produces some things already, and will continue to do so. Mr. Lutz said they met with DEQ air quality control representatives. They will be significantly increasing the monitoring of the landfill, and will be able to measure everything at the perimeter and on top of the landfill as well. Mr. Schimke said he was asked if there would be an additional monitor at the school. It seems to make more sense to measure what is at the perimeter of the landfill. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 6 of 13 Mr. Poboisk asked specifically about air quality monitoring, and also how many contracts the County intends to enter into. Mr. Schimke said just the one. Mr. Poboisk asked how many projects are out there now. Mr. Lutz said they have one in process and contracts on other landfills, some of them unlined. This is considered a demonstration program in Oregon because it has not been used here. They hope to prove this as the standard for the future. Every project has its own legal entity and they are going through the process as appropriate. Chair DeBone asked that Mr. Poboisk try to stay on point. Mr. Poboisk responded that he feels each Commissioner is already supportive of this project and seem to want to extend the life of the landfill and make money for the County. He has specific questions about certain processes and wants to be heard. Chair DeBone asked if he could define the issue. Mr. Poboisk emphasized he wants to do it his way. He said he spoke with Greg Stanton from the DEQ in El Dorado County. He stated that Mr. Stanton indicated he did not know of Waste Energy Group doing projects there. He did say they have two signed contracts with SDI Engineering to do a project at a landfill there that is relatively rural. He said this is in the planning stage only and has not been implemented. That project would use only steamed water. The first contract is in the planning stages and the second requires SDI to pay for environmental review through some California agencies. They examine environmental impacts, so they hired a third-party environmental firm to review the information. Mr. Lutz said that is correct. His company is the developer, and the engineering firm is on site. It would flow much the same in this County, through a permitting phase. The only correction is that he has met with many of the engineers in the DEQ there, both regarding air quality and waste management, from the beginning. Mr. Poboisk asked if the environmental review is being paid for by his company. Mr. Lutz said that the case here. Every county does things differently. That county had environmental problems before this. There is no leachate system in place at that location. Mr. Poboisk asked if it is legal to heat leachate. Mr. Lutz replied that this would be a bioreactor landfill, which they are already doing. Using steam is a smart idea to get the moisture throughout the waste. Using gravity is not efficient. There is no law or rules preventing them from doing this. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 7of13 Mr. Poboisk asked what is in the leachate in the landfill. Mr. Lutz stated that it is typical and three is nothing outstanding. It would run through an activated carbon filter to remove the toxins, and then go to the boiler. Mr. Poboisk asked if there is hazardous waste in the landfill. Mr. Schimke said that "hazardous waste" is a legal definition. There are things that can be hazardous under certain conditions. There are low level toxins in the garbage people throw out. The landfill cannot accept hazardous waste. Mr. Schimke said the permitted facility has been in place since 2006, but for ten years before then they separated it out. Mr. Poboisk asked what happens if some does get in. Mr. Lutz said they are taking out the leachate and recirculating it now. Instead they would scrub it and steam it. It would be improved by this process. Common sense indicates you are not doing anything different except putting in a vapor phase, which is more efficient. Mr. Poboisk is concerned about heating leachate that might have something bad in it, and asked if they have analyzed this. Mr. Schimke said this is analyzed once a year and that information is available to the public. Mr. Poboisk said he had questions for someone from the DEQ. At that point, Joe Gingerich of the DEQ came forward. Mr. Gingerich said that at a symposium he learned that in Germany they try to stabilize landfills to the point where they have just a minor amount of leachate and other material, because through a bioreactor system the toxins get stabilized over time. They are willing to walk away from the landfills at that point and call it good. There might be trace parameters, but nothing is absolute. You assume one puncture per acre in the liners. But no one knows how long the liners survive, since this depends on environment, temperature and more. It could be decades or much longer. The waste in the landfill will produce the same amount of gas whether you accelerate the process or walk away from it. The thinking is to take care of the stuff we created in our lifetime and stabilize it now. Ideas like this have a place. In theory it sounds pretty good, but that is why they are going through this process. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 8 of 13 Mr. Poboisk stated that he has studied this a lot and is unhappy he has to be the one to do this. He feels it is a failed process. He thinks the school and city should be more interested. He feels there are threats to groundwater, the air and or the children. He has been told that initial permitting is for lined areas only, but they may end up going to unlined areas. Mr. Gingerich indicated that the lined areas are appropriate. They will want to see how this works there first. Mr. Poboisk noted that if there are several thousand gallons applied to four acres, meaning millions of gallons a year for the process. Some is leachate and some is regular water. Mr. Gingerich said the waste forms methane and that's where a lot of the water ends up. That's where the magic happens. This initial area will be in one of the cells with its own collection system and sump. There are good records of what is collected now in the sumps. An inactive cell would be used and it should be somewhat static, resulting in less leachate. Mr. Poboisk asked if the water quality people will be involved. Mr. Gingerich responded that they would probably not be unless someone drills or abandons a well. Mr. Poboisk asked if this is getting a higher level of review because it is near a school. He thinks that it should. Mr. Gingerich said that there is a major pipeline already there. They are always concerned if there are residences nearby, but there are no additional statutory requirements. Local governments have to provide for a waste management system, and it can be a landfill or shipping to someplace else; it is left at the local level. The DEQ makes sure that the components meet federal and state law. There is nothing that says because there is a school nearby, you are subject to a higher level of review. Mr. Poboisk noted that in Pennsylvania there is a 300-yard requirement from schools. This landfill is not that far away. He has a child attending there. They also use Avion well water and he is concerned about that. Mr. Gingerich said a hydro geologist looks at groundwater issues. The cap in Area A is over the unlined areas, and the County made the cap thicker than the law requires, and a vegetation strategy is in place that should be an effective cap. This is better than in the past. Nothing has shown up in any wells. The active areas have a good liner system and a secondary system where leaks can be detected. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 9of13 Mr. Poboisk asked if the DEQ will be looking at noise or dust issues. It has been said they can't guarantee there will be no noise. He asked if there would be other types of emission piping. Mr. Lutz said it will be the boiler and the scrubber, and they met with air quality control personnel to make sure that this process won't affect any existing credentials now in place. Mr. Poboisk asked if the pipes have to be insulated in the winter or cooled in the summer. Mr. Lutz stated some locations are in the desert where it is very hot. These will be below ground. Mr. Poboisk asked what happens if a steam pipe breaks. Mr. Lutz said you shut it down because you lose pressure. Mr. Poboisk asked about fines given to someone putting asbestos in the landfill. He asked if this material was pulled out. Mr. Schimke said that they accept this type of material. In this case, the contractor's fine was because he did not go through an assessment process. There is non-friable and friable asbestos. Commissioner Baney said that clarification is needed about hazardous waste, which is a legal term. Mr. Gingerich said that household garbage already has this in it. Mr. Schimke added that it is in every home. Mr. Poboisk asked if there is anything legally termed hazardous that will be affected. Mr. Schimke responded, not that they know. Mr. Poboisk asked if there will be an increase in odor. Mr. Schimke said that this is in an enclosed system so there should be less. They treat a small area and extract the methane aggressively. Mr. Poboisk asked if they will be allowed to produce anything other than methane gas. Mr. Lutz said they talked to Bend Oil about the distribution of the same product to keep it within the state. There are communities in northern California that are willing to buy this gas. He wants to look at local alternatives. In California you can take landfill gas from outside the state but not within, so they need to purchase. Mr. Poboisk said he heard it was because of concerns about vinyl chloride in the gas. Mr. Lutz said the fact is they will accept the same product from out of the area. Others are permitted to go in the landfill and produce the same type of waste. Mr. Poboisk asked if medical waste is going in the landfill. Mr. Schimke said that nothing that isn't treated. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 10 of 13 Mr. Poboisk asked how long Mr. Lutz has been involved in this industry. Mr. Lutz said he has been with Waste Energy about five years. Mr. Poboisk stated that he believes this is not being done almost anywhere in the world. Mr. Lutz stated that he heard there is a project in New York. They have the patent over some of this, but some operators do what they want. He can probably find some locations. Mr. Poboisk said the person in El Dorado County indicated they retained an environmental specialist. They think it will require a year of additional review there before the project begins. He asked if the consultant would answer to Mr. Lutz. Mr. Lutz said that person would report to all parties. It is not their company doing this part. Mr. Poboisk feels that the County here should make that decision. Mr. Schimke said the County can choose the firm and the contractor can pay for it. Mr. Poboisk has a number of other concerns. He has his doubts about industry assurances. This will involve millions of dollars overall. The County expects about $250,000, and that does not seem like very much. Maybe the County should be making more. The Commissioners here feel the project is exciting, to extend the life of the landfill, etc. It was slated to be closed by 1998 but the landfill has a much longer life expectancy now. A number of folks have looked at waste to energy in general and feel that this process doesn't make sense. The Sierra Club is one of them, fearing more greenhouse gas. Doing separation of organics out of landfills creates jobs. They need to consider diversion from landfills. Landfills are changed by waste to energy and are managed to produce gas. They shut down areas for gas replenishment, etc. They also say that waste to energy projects inherently collect less gas. No one knows how much gas will be collected. He and others are concerned about this project. The County needs money but is better off than others. The problem is a school is located next to this facility. It should not have been sited there. He feels there needs to be a higher level of care because of it. He does not feel that extending the life of the landfill and making money should be at the top of the list. He hopes the Commissioners will give this some consideration. He does not mean to antagonize anyone but does not understand a lot of this and feels someone needs to ask the hard questions. (He went on to express his points of view.) Marty Scheafer asked if there are monitors located at the school. There are a thousand kids across the street during school hours. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 11 of 13 Commissioner Baney asked why they are asking the County about this and not the schools. What she hears that if the school district and the DEQ are concerned about this, they can talk about it. The County can't do that on its own. It has no right to go onto school property. If there was an issue at the boundary, there would be more concern. Mr. Scheafer asked what area would be handled first. Mr. Schimke said that they would be in Area D, where there is a liner. Mr. Scheafer asked when the liner could fail. Mr. Schimke that the conclusion is that if the volume decreases, this lessens the impact. Mr. Scheafer said it could fail next year. Mr. Gingerich said that they know what is in the landfill. Commissioner Baney added that it is public record. Mr. Gingerich said the liners are compatible with this use and last a long time, perhaps decades. Mr. Scheafer asked about the 35-foot skid. He asked what happens if there is a leak. Mr. Lutz said it is monitored inside and out. Mr. Scheafer said that gas could blow up. Mr. Lutz said the monitors would shut off if there was a problem. This is not gas storage. It is a filter system. They are manufactured to specs. Mr. Scheafer said there could be something that corrodes the pipes. No one knows what is in the landfill. Mr. Schimke said that in 1993 the liner system was required, and not before then. Mr. Scheafer said he heard they have canceled games because of air quality. Mr. Schimke said they have never had a call in that regard regarding anything coming from the landfill. Commissioner Baney asked if he was part of the conversation when they sited the school there. Mr. Schafer said they built where they thought growth would be. That is all hindsight. A woman from the audience (off microphone) said that the school indicated they built there because it was cheap land and they owned it. Mr. Poboisk asked what went in the old landfill. Mr. Schimke said that it was non- municipal waste - construction and development material only. Commissioner Unger asked about the next steps, and whether there a proposal to come to the Board. Mr. Schimke said the Board can take additional input, do more research, and eventually come to a decision on whether to go forward. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 12 of 13 Mr. Poboisk commented that he appreciates the opportunity. He thinks the County should get together with the school district and talk about this. He suggested that a meeting should be held and noticed a lot further in advance than a week. Perhaps it should be held at the school and all the parents notified. He still feels that this is the first public meeting on this issue and should be more, with additional notice time. Chair DeBone said that all of comments provided would be taken into consideration. Being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DATED this I Day of y 1l 2012 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. Anthony DeBone, Chair 6tc ' GGt~ Alan Unger, Vice Chair ATTEST: (4ivwv~- Tamm B ey, Co i sioner Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Meeting Tuesday, May 1, 2012 Page 13 of 13 REQUEST TO SPEAK Agenda Item of Interesti~,f%s Qora-►~'a Date Name (/((C 1 Ll _ t~ Address fW V c~Jt77`~ Ao1W, AVkA-' t0 Phone #s E-mail address F In Favor 9 NeutraWndecided Opposed Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Q Yes 040 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS9 MEETING REOUEST TO SPEAK Agenda Item of Interest Date 5 ( Zp I Z Name Dwi 1 ~b~~5k Address Z3c~ Pm R c~ Phone #s 511 - 31 7 -~7 3 2- E-mail address C, e- 1-~t Cha(-4- 1 e- CW 1 Cory 0 In Favor F-1 Neuttawndecided F-1 Opposed -11 r 113 Submitting written documents as part of E Yeas 0 No .J 40 BOARD OF CONMMSIONERS' MEETING REQUEST TO SPEAK Agenda Item of Interest Name 4-1, - Date -to/" Address o'er 3 Fs- w Phone #s syl -3~ - F a- E-mail address ❑ In Favor 2-NeutraWndecided Submitting written documents as part of testimony? ❑ Yes WASTE TO ENERGY GROUP, LLC. A Leodar h, Renewable Energy Lawrence Randall Lutz Chief Execuhive OfFcer I'A 21 Kelse, Street Irvine, CA 92618 mndylukriwosiefcene gygroup wm 6A3F[.(lwvnv wPSfe#cenergygroup com .(aLO.:RYLf Q11n n',-. r:m .c.. ❑ Opposed ❑ No