HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - 1989.04.13 - 16937MISCELLANDXS RESOLUTION # 89091 - April 13, 1989
BY: PLANNING & BUILDING COMMITTEE, Anne N. Hobart, Chairperson
IN RE: PUBLIC WO1';ES/SOLID MSTE - APPLICATION TO MICHIGAN DNR FOR
TWO (2) RECYCLING PROJECT GRANTS
TO THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMISSIONERS
Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen;
WHEREAS the County has begun an aMbitious Solid Waste Management
Program that includes material reuse, waste reduction, recycling,
composting, household hazardous waste collection, and landfilling; and
WHEREAS the State Solid Waste Policy promotes a statewide goal of 20
to 30 pelcFmt leryciiny; and
WHEREAS the County is pursuing the development of two processing
centers to process source-separated recyclables consistent with the
statewide goal; and
WHEREAS by establishing these facilities the County plans to divert as
much recyclable waste as possible from waste-to-energy facilities and
landfills; and
WHEREAS the Michigan Department of Natural Resources is accepting
applications for grant funds under the Quality of Life Bond Program for
each Recycling Center Project up to $500,000 each with a County match of
at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the total project cost for each; and
WHEREAS if both grants are accepted the total County match would be
$333,333; and
WHEREAS the County would be counitted to all cost overruns, if any.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of
Cmnissioners hereby authorizes the Chairperson of the Board to apply for
Recycling Center Project Grants for two recycling centers in the amount of
$500,000 each with an anticipated County match of $166,666 each -.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon acceptance of the grant award, the
Board of Commissioners agrees to the County match of twenty-five percent
(25%) of the total project cost and will provide for cost overruns if any
on this project.
Mr. Chairperson, on behalf of the Planning and Building Committee, I
move the adoption of the foregoing resolution.
PLANNING AND BUILDING COMMITTEE
p.," '7-7,, -..-.. ' „F:_l 1 HERE -10," pl. . f R A: !,,p1, ,_ ...., . . ,..... ,..„„...
."."' I t",....,..1,.-- le 2. .f i / , e ' 4-. •=. , i ....,` A .,...::.• t , ,f ) , (
/ / I 1 p,a14,117A T „ ',N. '.',,• , , , f f'f ,.,,,,,, if.y" ,N1:-(,...66.V. il DatA 4/
April 13, 1989
ITPOI,-,IT TO THE PLANNIIIG AND BUILDING COMMITTEE .
BY: FINANCE COMMITTEE, DR. G. WILLIAM CADDE1T,, CHAIRPERSON
IN RE: - PUBLIC WORKS/SOLID WASTE - APPLICATION TO MICHIGAN DNR FOR
TWO (2) RECYCLING PROJECT GRANTS
The Department of Management and Budget has reviewed the above mentioned
application and finds:
1) The application is to the Michigan Department of Natural
Resources for two (2) $500,000 grants from the Michigan Quality
of Life Fund with a county match of $166,666 each;
2) Acceptance of these grants would offset construction costs of the
Solid Waste program for two (2) facilities to handle recyclable
waste consistent with the statewide goals;
3) Project period is January 1990 through December 1990;
In accordance with Miscellaneous Resolution #86186, revised Federal
and State Grant Application and Reimbursement Contract Precedures, this
grant is being submitted to the Chairperson of the Board of Commissioners.
FINANCE COMMITTEE
reppwsolid
OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN
QUALITY OF LIFE BOND PROGRAM
APPLICATION FOR FUNDING
RECYCLING PROJECT
APRIL 1989
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
QUALITY OF LIFE BOND PROGRAM
1988/89 SOLID WASTE ALTERNATIVES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
'Al5 PLICANT 1APTE7-- -
OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN
3) OTHER 5PONSUI415; 01:ZGN7AT
NONE .
4) SITE LOCAT ION RiffTHE PTQJECT
2) FUNDING CATEGORY:
RECYCLING PROJECTS
OAKLAND num, MICHIGAN
) GEOGRAPHIC AREA-i-Wv,ititR i'ALSOLID WASTE STREAM WILL BE IMPACTED BY THE
PROJECT.
OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN
6) OVERALL PROGRAM GOALS (ALSO EXPLAIN HOW THIS PROJECT ADVANCES THE GOALS CIF THE au
WASTE ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM).
Oakland County, Michigan has begun to implement a thoroughly
integrated, regional solid waste management program that includes
materials reuse, waste reduction, recycling (up to two County-owned 400
ton per day materials recovery facilities), composting (at least one
regional 300 ton per day facility), household hazardous waste
collection, waste-to-energy (up to three 1500 ton per day facilities),
and landfilling (a County-owned facility with a life of 40 years).
The state Solid Waste Policy promotes a statewide goal of recycling 20
to 30 percent of the solid waste stream. Oakland County has
aggressively adopted that goal and is establishing regional materials
processing centers to process source-separated recyclables.
Implementation of the project described in this application, a 400 ton
per day materials recovery facility, would provide the means for
processing recyclable materials collected from Oakland County residents
and businesses and for producing marketable materials for sale.
-7) SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES— S FLWFD IC—MI.16H THE SOLID WASTE ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM.
The County is currently preparing the Request for Qualifications/Request
for Proposals that will be issued to procure a contractor to design,
construct and operate (for 10 years) up to two 400 ton per day materials
recovery facilities in Oakland County. By establishing these
facilities, the County plans to divert as much of the recyclable waste
stream as possible away from the County's waste-to-energy facilities and
landfills. The facility described in this application will mark the
first step in providing a County-wide recycling processing facility.
The success of the program will be evaluated by participation in these
programs and materials recovery rates and the absence of recyclable
materials at the County's other solid waste processing and disposal
facilities. The county will submit reports to the State annually
summarizing the information received through the above evaluation.
Ti IIETABLE FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION - ATTACH COPY (filiiii:IgiTitirfIRETABLE,
The County has already begun implementation activitiee for this project.
TheCounty anticipates issuing a notice to proceed for facility
construction in January 1990. Please refer to attaLhed Project Timetable.
. _
) GRANT OR LOAN BUDGET: ATTACH A COPY OF THE GRANT OR LOAN fitiMET.
To accomplish this recycling project, Oakland County is requesting a grant
of $500,000. The County has committed $166,666 of its own funds towards
this project and assumes full responsibility for the additional costs that
will be incurred. (Please refer to attached form.)
1.645.aires.
PROJECT BEI
PROJECT ENDING DATE: JANUARY 1991
January 199
TASK
Construct 400 ton per day
materials processing facility
TASK
LOCATION
Oakland Cour
ENDING 1 GROUP/PERSON
DATE FOR RESPONSIBLE FOR
EACH TASK, TASK COMPLETION
E
BEGINNING
DATE FOR
EACH TASK
January 1990 Oakland County
Board of
Commi ssi oners
and the County
Executive
MAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
QUALITY OF LIFE BOND PROGRAM
1988/89 SOLID WASTE ALTERNATIVES
PROJECT TIMETABLE
APPLICANT NAME: ,,CH 1 GAN
FUNDI NG CATEGORY:_ RECYCLING PROJECTS
NOTE: Total timetable must not exceed a one year period It is eSt1122c 7 ta:e
that grants will be a warde d in October, 1 989
(Household hazardous waste center applicants may submit a three year timetable).
1/89
400 ton per day material recover
DESCRIPTION
OF I
MILIIIOAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
QUALITY OF LIFE BOND PROGRAM
1983/89 SOLID WASTE ALTERNATIVES
GRANT OR LOAN BUDGET
APPLICANT
APPLICANT'S TAX IDENTIFICATION I10.:_aa-L.004 876
FUNDING CATEGORY: RECYCZ PROJECTS
A. STATE Sal E OF BUDGET (75% for grants)
(90% for loans)
$ 500,000
$ 166,666 B. MATCHING FUND SHARE ( 25 %OF TOTAL FOR GRANTS):
(10% OF TOTAL FOR LOANS):
The tot! of A + B must equal the budget total
2Tate: Oa1yell:4'A1' iremx can te 14' Udfct. re ouciger. ADIZEMBIR to arract: wrirren granarion.r.
*Oak] and County recognizes that facility costs will greatly exceed this amount and is 1/89
assuming full responsibility for additional costs
Appendix A:
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix F:
Appendix G:
Appendix H:
B;
C:
D:
E:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part I Application Cover Sheet
Part 11 Narrative Response and Attachments
Executive Summary
1. Introduction
2. Need for Recycling
3. Recycling Project Goals
4. Recycling Project Objectives
5. Procedures
6. Recycling Project Evaluation
7. Budget
Summaries of Oakland County Solid Waste Studies
Qualifications of Project Team
Draft Intergovernmental Agreement
Oakland County Data Base
Description of Private Sector and Public Sector Outreach
Effort
Michigan Department of Natural Resources Permit
Coordination Form
County Resolution: Grant Match Commitment
Letter of Consistency with Approved County Solid Waste
Management Plan
OAK12.4
FOR STATE USE ONLY
DATE REC'D.
APP NO
PART ir A PPif ;CA :(70.117 VER SIZET
LOAN:
MICHIGAN DEPAFITME..NT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
QUALITY OF LIFE BOND PROGRAM
SOLID WASTE ALTERNATIVES
1986/89 APPLICATION FOR FUNDING
RECYCLING •
1) APPLICANT NAME: OAKLAND I:I.-MIL_ MICHIGAN
2) STREET ADDRE,;S. 1 Publ ic Works Drive . .
3) CITY/STATE/ZIP: Pontiac, M1i,219:_arLIES25i,
4) MAILING ADDRESS. Of IEF.FIRTNT FROM -57REET ADDR23:5)
(same)
5) CITY/STATE/ZIP.
6) TELEPHONE NO.. (313) 858_0160
„
7) CONTACT PERSON: Mr. Mil ton Handorf
0) COUNTY APPLICANT IS LOCATED IN: Oakland County, Michigan
-9) TOVNSH IP APPLICANT IS LOCATED I-14: Not applicable.
10) STATE SENATE AND HOUSE DISTRICT 'APPLICANT IS LOCATED IN:
slwATEDisnucilyv .8 ,15 ,16 ,17 imus E Dz.5- ic hro .20,24,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,67,69
1. )--APPLICANT TYPE:
LZ4L MUT iwz r
12) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Oakland County is implementi ng
PRIVATE FOR PROFIT___ FR/ VA TE NOT-MR-PROM
recycl abl es. recovery facility to process source-separated
13) fYTE OF FUNDING REQUESTED: 6RAN2.:
14) AMOUNT OF FUNDING REQUESTED:
15) AMOUNT OF MATCHING FUNDS COMMITTED:
16) TOTAL (LINE 14 PLUS LINE 151
17) AUTHORIZED APPLICANT SIGNATURE:
comingl ed
$ 500,000
$ 166,666
$666,666
DATE:
MA IL OR IWINAL AND TWO COPIES OF COMPLETED A P.PLICA RON 70
MICIIIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
WASTE MANAGEMENT DIVISION, RESOURCE RECOVERY SECTION
P11_ BOX 30241
LANSING, MI 48909
FORA COWL-Z.770N at THIS APPLICATION LS Ricr6 7 /RED 7r7 B.E CONSID.ER
3Z JD E4-57-F 12RN4TIV23 6RANT OR LOAN
AUTHORITY: ACT 323, 19t
FR-5508 ; 12/88
PART 11
PONSE AND AMC/DENTS
This section of the grant application package is provided to address all
of the requirements listed for recycling projects. The following table
provides an index that corresponds with each of the requirements listed
in the instructions for completing the application package and responds
to the requirement or identifies where the information is found within
this application.
OAK12.4
Requirement Response
1.) Oakland County has submitted a complete application.
2.) The application was submitted by the established
deadline.
3.) Refer to Introduction and Appendix B.
4.) Refer to Appendix F.
5.) Not applicable. Refer to Procedures.
6.) Refer to Procedures, Budget, and Appendix G.
7.) Refer to Budget and Appendix G.
8.) Requirement noted. Refer to Appendix H.
9.) Requirement noted. Refer to Appendix G.
10.) Not applicable.
11.) Requirement noted. Refer to Introduction and
Budget.
12.) Requirement noted. Refer to Budget.
13.) Requirement noted. Refer to Budget.
14.) Requirement noted. Refer to Budget.
15.) Refer to Executive Summary.
16.) Refer to Introduction and Appendix D.
17.) Refer to Appendix A, Resource Recovery Facility
Siting Analysis.
18.) Refer to Introduction and Appendix B.
19.) Refer to Need for Recycling.
20.) Refer to Need for Recycling.
21.) Refer to Project Goals, Project Objectives,
Procedures, and Budget.
22.) Refer to Budget.
23.) Refer to Procedures.
24.) Refer to Procedures, Recycling Project Evaluation
and Budget.
25.) Refer to Recycling Project Evaluation.
26.) Refer to Introduction.
27.) Refer to Introduction.
28.) Refer to Need for Recycling and Appendix D.
29.) Refer to Need for Recycling.
30.) Refer to Appendix D.
31.) Refer to Recycling Project Objectives, Procedures,
and Appendix D.
32.) Refer to Appendix D.
33.) Refer to Need for Recycling and Appendix E.
34.) Refer to Procedures and program Implementation
Schedule.
35.) Refer to Recycling Project Evaluation.
OAK12.4
1. IIITRODUCTION
Oakland County has engaged in extensive studies and planning for over 12
years to establish a regional integrated County solid waste disposal
system in the County. These studies have addressed siting facilities,
financing the system, recovered resources markets, and technology
alternatives, Appendix A includes summaries from these reports.
Oakland Cbunty received grant money from the State of Michigan under the
Act 641 solid waste management planning program to conduct some of these
studies and to prepare the original County solid waste management plan.
The funding received is as follows:
o 1980: $66,206.57
o 1981: $39,574.71
o 1982-83: $41,008.00
o 1983-84: $48,833.00
o 1984-85: $49,076.00 (specifically for a solid waste
generation rate study and a peer match for a European
resource recovery study tour)
o 1985-86:
$49,011.00 (specifically for augmentation of solid
waste generation rates in conjunction with
implementation of the County's Act 641 plan)
o 1986-87: $49,261.00 (specifically for analysis of a solid
waste program fee structure in conjunction with
implementation of the County's Act 641 plan)
o 1987-88:
$49,988.00 (for the five-year update of the County's
Act 641 plan)
o 1988-89:
$49,615.00 (for the five-year update of the County's
Act 641 plan).
As this history of planning and study demonstrates, Oakland County has
devoted a great deal of attention and effort to planning an effective
1-1
solid waste management program. These efforts have provided the County
with the data and knowledge that it requires to proceed into
implementation.
The County has now begun to implement an integrated regional program
that will include waste reduction and reuse, recycling (up to two 400
ton per day materials recovery facilities), composting (at least one
regional 300 ton per day facility), household hazardous waste
collection, resource recovery combustion (up to three 1500 ton per day
facilities) and landfilling (to provide 40 years of life for the
County). This grant application is for one of the two MRFs that the
County is immediately implementing.
Recycling mu7t he implemented in this system as a key component:
Oakland County is striving to recycle the greatest quantity of materials
possible before anything is sent to a resource recovery facility or
landfill. To attain this goal, the County is planning to implement
two 400 ton per day materials recovery facilities (MRFs) to accept as
much recyclable material as County residents can bring. Further,
Oakland County plans to implement an extensive public education program
using newsletters describing solid waste disposal technologies and
issues and pamphlets providing how-to's in recycling (distributed to
school students in the County). This education program is intended to
motivate County residents to participate in recycling programs being
established by the County and local municipalities.
To ensure that the appropriate expertise is applied'to implementation of
this enormous project, the County has assembled the following team of
consultants to assist:
1-2
Project Coordinator
and contract
negotiations and
implementation
Bishop, Cook, Purcell & Reynolds
(Bishop, Cook, Purcell & Reynolds is a law
firm located in Washington, D.C.
specializing in solid waste procurements.
This firm has represented numerous
communities coast-to-coast, including Kent
County, Michigan.)
Consulting Engineer Camp Dresser & McKee
Fiscal Advisor
Local Counsel
(A nationally known consulting engineering
firm headquartered in Boston, with an office
in Detroit. It has acted as consulting
engineer for numerous communities
implementing solid waste projects, including
Kent County, Michigan.)
Public Financial Management, Inc. (PFM)
(PPM is headquartered in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania and has represented numerous
communities on solid waste transactions,
including Kent County, Michigan.)
Kohl, Secrest, Wandle, Lynch, Clark and
Hampton
(Kohl, Secrest, Wandle, Lynch, Clark and
Hampton represents the Board of County
Commissioners and is located in Farmington
Hills, Michigan.)
1-3
Bond Counsel Dickinson, Wright, Moon, Van Dusen and Freeman
(A nationally recognized financing law firm,
located in Detroit, Michigan,)
Landfill Expert Rogers, Golden & Halpern
(A nationally known firm located in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.)
Recycling Resource Recycling Systems
(Resource Recycling Systems is located in
ATIP Arbor, Michigan and specializes in the
development and implementation of waste
reduction and recycling programs.)
These consultants bring to Oakland County's solid waste program many
years of experience gained throughout the United States. Appendix B
contains the qualifications for each of these firms and provides
discussions of solid waste projects that have been successfully
implemented.
Oakland County has received $300,000 from the Michigan Public Services
Commission through the Michigan Resource Recovery Implementation Program
to implement its first 1500 ton per day resource recovery facility
project. Thus far in the implementation process, the project team has
negotiated a contract with Westinghouse Electric Corporation to design,
construct and operate (for 20 years) a 1500 ton per day resource
recovery facility. The County has decided to finance the project by
issuing bonds. The project team is now ready to begin the permitting
process, negotiate the energy contract with Detroit Edison, and
negotiate with connuunities to commit their waste to the facility. The
project is being implemented as expeditiously as possible to relieve the
landfill capacity shortage in Oakland County. Please note that this
grant application did not include funding for public education; it
provided monies for the actual facility implementation activities.
1-4
The County is also pursuing other activities. Currently a Request for
Qualifications/Request for Proposals is being prepared by the project
team to begin negotiations to procure a contractor to design, construct,
and operate (foe 10 years) two 400 ton per day materials recovery
facilities. A landfill siting advisory committee has been assembled,
composed of representatives from various interest groups and from
various geographical areas in the County. This committee, working with
the consultant, will identify a landfill site in Oakland County capable
of serving the County for 40 years by September 1989. The County is
currently identifying an appropriate composting site and developing a
long and short term strategy for collecting household hazardous waste,
thereby diverting it from the municipal waste stream.
Oakland County is actively supporting the reuse or recovery of materials
as well as promoting disposal facilities. The County offices are
currently implementing an office paper recycling program, and the County
is reviewing its procurement procedures to incorporate the purchase of
recycled materials to the extent feasible.
The County cannot implement a successful solid waste management program
without the support of its municipalities. Although the County will
provide facilities to process and dispose of waste generated within its
borders, the municipalities will be responsible for causing the
transportation of the waste to the County's facilities. The details of
the agreement that will be made between the County and the
municipalities are explained in detail in the draft Intergovernmental
Agreement for solid Waste Disposal Services contained in Appendix C of
this application (it should be noted that this document is still in
draft form).
The next section of this application, Need for Project, discusses how
the recycling project is intertwined with all of the activities
described above and stresses the importance of proper citizen
participation in responsible solid waste management.
1-5
. Need For Recycling
Michigan's Solid Waste Policy promotes a goal of recycling 20 to 30
percent of the municipal solid waste stream. Further, the Policy
states:
"Recycling reduces waste, saves energy, protects
natural resources, reuses resources, and creates jobs.
A ton of paper recycled, for example, conserves about
34/2 cubic yards of landfill space, avoids $12-30 in
landfill disposal costs, and can be marketed for
sale."
The most critical steps in getting citizens motivated and interested in
participating in recycling are taken through education and providing
facilities to accept and process recycled materials, producing a marketable
end-product.
Although many close to the solid waste management industry understand the
current concerns and challenges faced by those responsible for waste
disposal, many do not recognize the importance of recycling and minimizing
the amount of waste deposited in the land or burned. As long as the
garbage is taken from their doorstep each week, there is no problem in
their winds.
Education can create the mindset necessary to successfully implement
recycling as proposed by the State of Michigan and pursued by Oakland
County. However, the County must proceed further and implement facilities
to accept recycled materials from County residents and businesses.
Additionally, ordinances must be in place that facilitate the waste flow
control needed to coordinate recycling. The County is working with local
municipalities to establish these ordinances.
2-1
•
Oakland County contracted Resource Recycling Systems to prepare a detailed
study of Oakland County's existing recycling opportunities and to offer
recommendations to the County on future recycling activities. Resource
Recycling Systems produced a detailed report that provided this information
to the County. A portion of this report is summarized below.
Limited residential and commercial recycling options are currently
available- within the County. For most materials out-of-county brokers and
processors service larger clients in the County and are the principal
source of recycling activity for the area For example, large generators
of old corrugated containers (OCC) such as Krogers, the Wixom Ford Plant,
and Meijers all have on-site baling equipment and have brokering agreements
with a number of dealers from the Southeastern Michigan area. At least two
haulers serving Oakland County, Bestway Recycling and Mister Rubbish,
currently have or are bringing on-line facilities to bale corrugated. Both
of these facilities are located in adjacent counties.
A number of municipally-sponsored recycling programs are available,
including:
o The Recycling Center of Birmingham, co-sponsored by the city of
Birmingham, accepts newspapers, glass, aluminum, metals, and
plastic. The Center is open Saturday mornings.
o The Village of Holly Recycling Program operates a drop-off center
at the DPW Yard and a curbside collection service to most of the
Village. The drop-off center, open during daylight hours, accepts
newspaper and glass.
o The City of Huntington woods operates a center in the City Hall
parking lot, which is open weekdays for plastics, glass, and used
motor oil only, and the first Saturday of the month for all
recyclables including newspapers.
2-2
o The City of Madison Heights Drop-off Center, located near by
Public Works building, accepts newspaper, glass, and, some plastics
24 hours a day. Used motor oil is accepted Monday through Friday,
from 7:00 A.M. to 4:30 P.N.
o The St, Joseph grade school in Lake Orion. operates an unstaffed
newspaper drop-off center during daylight hours.
o Five times each year Rochester holds a paper drive for the
collection of newspaper and returnable bottles.
o The City Parks and Recreation. Department in Southfield operates an
unstaf fed drop-off center for newspapers during daylight hours.
o The Southeastern Oakland County Incinerator Authority (SOCIA)
operates a white goods and scrap metal recovery program at its
incinerator site in Madison Heights and a leaf transfer and
composting operation at its landfill.
Some commercial recycling operations also operate within the County:
o Confidential Records Destruction Service, Inc. destroys records
for law offices, banks, laboratories, high technology firms and a
number of related businesses in Oakland County. The shredded,
pulverized and baled paper is sent to mills in Michigan, Illinois
and Wisconsin for recycling.
o The Eagle Valley Landfill Recycling Center accepts newspapers,
plastics, and appliances during business hours on Fridays and
Saturdays. Its parent company, Waste Management, Inc. requires
that all their, facilities provide some type of recycling
opportunity.
o JSL Services, Inc. of Bloomfield Hills will shred pallets and
• selected wood waste streams on-site with their portable tub
grinder and materials handling system.
2-3
O Recycled Polymers, in Madison Heights, accepts clean milk jugs and
other !WE containers, baled, shredded or loose.
o Royal 01,", Waste Paper, in the City of Royal Oak, accepts
newsprint, old corrugated containers and high grade office papers
during business hours at its paper baling facility near downtown
Royal Oak.
o The St, Julian Wine Tasting Center near Holly, MI pays five cents
for each St. Julian bottle which is returned to the Center.
o Scrap metal Dealers: Approximately 15 metal and junk dealers buy
and process metals, automobiles, appliances, batteries, radiators,
and medical x-rays. One of the largest scrap dealers in the area
is Standard Lead Co., Inc. This firm handles an estimated 30,000
to 35,000 tons of non-ferrous metals (copper, brass, aluminum,
zinc, lead, stainless steel) each year. Allen & Sons, Inc. in
Pontiac is another major scrap metal dealer in the area.
The existing networks discussed above help to reduce the amount of waste
that is entering the waste stream and reaching the landfill. However, a
tremendous amount of recycled materials processing capacity remains
untapped in the County.
The following two conclusions are offered by Resource Recycling Systems,
the County's consultant (refer to Appendix B):
o The capacity of the existing system to collect, process and market
twenty to thirty percent of the waste stream in Oakland County
through waste reuse, recycling and composting is not currently in
place and will need to be developed. Of special concern is
processing capacity for most papers, glass, tin cans, LDPE
2-4
plastic, tires, wood and yard waste. In other areas, such as
white goods, metals and HDPE plastic, existing opportunities to
use local processing capacity are not taken advantage of.
o The reliability of the existing system over the long term is weak
in many areas. material recovery efforts by theprivate sector
may not survive the coming decade in competition against the joint
public/private programs that are expected to dominate. This,
combined with many other business pressures, could further weaken
the existing material recovery system.
Oakland County is ready to negotiate a contract with a contractor to
design, construct, and operate up to two 400 ton per day materials
recovery faeilities. This contract is expected to exceed $20 million.
The County also is in the process of identifying a composting site for a
300 ton-per-day facility and developing a household hazardous waste
collection program. The County is investing enormous amounts of money
in the County-wide disposal system, which will exceed $500 million and
will be available for the citizens of Oakland County to use. The
recycling facilities are necessary to divert waste from landfills and
resource recovery facilities.
The County must solicit the support of the municipalities to enter into
intergovernmental agreements to use the facilities (see Appendix C) so
the County can be sure to meet its contractual obligations to deliver
waste to the facilities operators. Faced with rising landfill rates and
decreasing landfill capacity, the County expects municipalities to
endorse the County's plans and support efforts required at the municipal
level to implement recycling (refer to Appendix E for an opinion
survey). Changes in current waste collection and disposal practices are
necessary to implement recycling. Some of these changes will require
the financial supportof local municipalities. By providing the capital
required to implement the processing facilities that will be used by
local municipalities, Oakland County is relieving its municipalities of
a large portion of the economic burden that will accompany a recycling
program.
2-5
As discussed in the Introduction, Oakland County has assembled a project
team with unmatched expertise (refer to Appendix B for a discussion of
project implementation successes). These consultants have combined
resources to implement the County's recycling project and are working
with the County to find solutions to potential problems, such as
environmental protection issues, financial responsibility, and detailed
plans for municipality participation. Details of the County's recycling
project will be shared with appropriate State agencies to enhance the
database available for communities throughout Michigan.
Oakland County, with the assistance of its team of project consultants,
plans to provide recycling facilities to its citizens of the County to
reduce reliance on landfilling and resource recovery facilities and to
emphasize the importance of reusing available materials to the extent
possible,
The next section of this application, Project Goals, presents the
overall direction of Oakland County's recycling project.
2-6
Recycling Project Goals
The goals for Oakland County's recycling project are:
o To promote recycling as part of the solution to current solid
waste disposal problems.
o To support solid waste management solutions that the State of
Michigan is currently pursuing by implementing facilities within
the County that are capable of exceeding the State goal of
recycling 20 to 30 percent of the waste stream.
o To convey a sense of individual responsibility to each citizen in
Oakland County to participate positively in the County's and
municipalities' recycling programs by providing facilities for
them to use.
These goals will be accomplished by meeting the objectives set forth in
Section 4 of this application and by using the procedures outlined in
Section 5.
3-1
1.
Project Objectives
As described in Section 2 of this application, recycling is a solid
waste management alternative that is being emphasized in the
implementation. of Oakland County's program.
Over one million people currently live in over 400,000 households in the
County; over 600,000 people currently work in the County. Recent
studies estimate that nearly two million tons of waste per year is
generated within Oakland County borders (refer to Appendix D for
detailed demographic and waste generation information gathered for
Oakland County's draft Act 641 Solid Waste Management Plan Update). The
County's recycling project must be designed to effectively serve as much
of its residential and business communities as possible.
Reduction of the waste stream going to the County's landfills and future
resource recovery facilities must be aggressively pursued through -
recycling. Working with the budget discussed in detail in Section 7,
Oakland County plans to implement one of two 400 ton per day County mRFs
under this grant project. This facility will be available to any
citizen or merchant in Oakland County that wishes to use the facility.
The facility will be designed to process 400 tons per day during one
eight-hour shift; thus it will add an additional 400 tons of capacity
with another shift. The facility will accept paper, glass, metals,
plastics, batteries and used motor oil. The specific process lines will
be defined once a contractor is selected to design, construct, and
operate (for 10 years) the facility. Selection of this contractor is
anticipated in August 1989.
Thus, Oakland County's primary objective in developing its recycling
project is to reduce the volume of waste disposed of in landfills and
resource recovery facilities by implementing a F. This project will
4-1
provide recycling capacity to the majority of people living and working
within a reasonable distance of the facility, and the facility will be
capable of expanding to accept new materials or a greater quantity of
materials as the recycling field evolves.
The County has already begun work to implement the MRF. The project
team has prepared a draft Request for Qualifications/Request for
Proposals that will be used to select a contractor to design, construct,
and operate the MRFs (for 10 years). It will be released in April 1989.
Refer to 1\ppendix E for a copy of the draft document. The County
intends to implement the MRFs as quickly as it is feasible.
The next section of this application, Procedures, describes the specific
process that the County will use to implement its recycling project in
detail, and provides a timeframe for completion of each component of its
recycling program.
5. Procedures
Oakland County is using a procedure for implementing its recycling
project that is very similar to the process that the County is using to
successfully implement its resource recovery project. This procedure
involves the following steps
1) Issue a Pequest for Qualifications/Request for Proposals to
identify a number of contractors that meet minimum financial,
technical, and legal criteria established by the County (under the
advise of its consultants).
2) using draft contract documents provided to each of the qualified
contractors, negotiate contract details simultaneously with all
qualified contractors to produce a contract document that
addresses all of the parties' concerns.
3) Request bids from each of the contractors based on the common
negotiated contract document. The lowest bidder that meets all of
the contract's requirements is awarded the contract.
This process permits the County to evaluate like bids and to more easily
determine who indeed is the lowest bidder for the work.
As mentioned previously, this process was used to procure a contractor
for the County's first resource recovery facility, and it resulted in a
very favorable bid for a quality facility.
The County currently is planning to negotiate a contract for a company
to design, construct, and operate (for 10 years) up to two MRFs. The
County intends to maintain ownership of these facilities. The County
will agree to cause to be delivered 400 tons per day of source-separated
5-1
comingled recyclables from municipalities. The contractor will then
agree to process the materials, producing a marketable end -product that
is a specified percentage of the incoming materials. The contractor
will be responsible for marketing the recovered materials, and the
County and the contractor will share the revenues from materials sale
(exact percentages will be negotiated).
The County will guarantee that it can cause to be delivered sufficient
materials through the Intergovernmental Agreements with municipalities,
whereby the County will agree to provide the processing capacity and the
municipality will agree to deliver or cause to be delivered its
source-separated comingled recyclables. The agreement will require
communities to establish mandatory source-separation recycling programs
and to pass ordinances to prevent scavenging. Refer to Appendix C for
other details of the Agreement.
The chart on the following page illustrates Oakland County's solid waste
management program schedule, which includes implementation of the MRFs.
The Board of County Commissioners and the County Executive are
responsible for monitoring the implementation of the activities shown on
the schedule.
The MRFs will be implemented one at a time as the municipalities sign
the Intergovernmental Agreement (refer to Appendix C) necessary to
guarantee use of the MREs. The schedule shows the specific
implementation activities for the first two MRFs and notes that
additional HRFs will be phased in as needed. The County anticipates
that two MRFs at the very least will be required to service the County
and expects that further recycling will also be achieved by the private
system (Appendix D contains a market assessment and a waste stream
assessment that justifies this expectation). As discussed earlier, the
County will negotiate a contract with a company to design, construct,
and operate up to two MRFs.
5-2
_i_ _1_
5111NATES TM5 PROJECT'S ERTTICAL P95I4 195 SENEDULE 41E1 US
04111 &SW.< VTE f1,1 SITE IS pLIT IN ORIGINAL ACT 8441 01.411.
NOTE. TIE 119151191. 09111 DoES NOT arssmsoc TASK tourrom CT
LCSIGNAIES 741 195105 REWIRING TLE 0145E07 LUG INC
rI11 RPPLPPENTApcp
ESTOPPED ARNNEKM_ NAT 0.00E90 PPTIPOSTIS, itOvEVCP, IT IS TIC CCLINTY'S Han 11447 114 COOPERATION !MN OATS WILL 4f. 9F.P.R/1,,,, IS NECESSARY 10 01,11419 PERETT un4I1N ARE COLIENTIONS PPECENNT TK- !MICE IC PROCEED. 11 IS 141.E111115859 551 1119E TIlt 4105155 IL FRIEZES UN 149, 0I957 98515-114'ErERST FACILITY DT PARCH 1990 TI) AVOID ESCALATION OF 1111995110 MITT.
NN ASSuRES RIBAIEZNE FOR FIRST NEC. CDPONISTIK SITE MN LANWILL 445011755I514* COSTS.
14 9 F's
CoroastIN
EZE1 V-T-E
11111 1 It t
1 1 1 1 1 I I 1
R 7;1 •
1 I 1 " 1 1 1 r'.11/i, Brit/11711 1 11 1 1111 11 ""1 "
, 1111
±tCtErt. Il'IJE "114" V1a17".'r n3P 'al "31 vista sa 1 REcvw 1 i NOTICE sa I I I } enflt To 1 I
PR111=t) 1 1 1 1 VIE EN 1 1
&Val 2111S. 16...MS.W.00.k. . - . ' . ' . . I. . 'MX!. 1,...e,X7kiSA.. . ... NNI... ' • . "'IN.' .41...‘"SNM'
II III I II MI IIIIIIIIIII1 II I I I M III IIIIII1111111
I i 1 anmsrms " - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 DEDIN i 1
SYSTEM
COMPONENTS p.,Fs *RIB no .A....1,. Auq. sip Dos Nov DEc JAI, FEs 14$2, Ape AIM JUN .....L NW SCR CET NON SEC JAN FED MAR APR MY -R-RI At RIZ SEP EICIND9 DEC -IIIIN FEE RAP "2 ", JUN' JUL AOC Sr, OCT NO9 EEC JAN rEB MR APR My 4.14 AB. ALIO O[P OrI NOV ME .jAN FED NAN MX MY _LK AL Aus sEp 057 109 DEE
E tII /1.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 +11 n I I I 1 I I I I I +I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 ilstae-Y 1S10.9 1orgiEt 1 IS1S0E 1NOITITS 1 1, milt 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ,IIiiriiIiII 1 ISSUE I I AccEtvE 1st or To oncra I TO maTF-ED I 1 1 1 1191 t1Ff t tg.„...,:;11 , PHASE IN ADDITIONAL MRF's (IF NEEDED) 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 If 1 1 111111 It 11111
To-tvar,, i stvc SI 15 Lae .ser , 1 zee mils , i i 1 1 . 1 I -Á _L..1_1_ _L --I - I_ -1 - L 4. t__ 4- ' I I II I " L L 1 _i _.L 4 I I 1 _L I I J. .L_i_ _1_ L I _ t..,,I I I " 1 - 1 t I , , , IIIIIIIIII_Ilati 11_4_1I , i , , T -1 r -T -1 1 i tt ,,,ti 1 t I 1 1 I I..1
I I ; teorurr I I I 1 1 I i I I i I I 1 I i i I I i I 1 I I 7.- -1- --I T---1 r- --',--1-- , 1 / t 1 -1 1 t 1 7 7 1 1 i i . I I I I
iii / Imwgzsmill 1 . n i -M111111111111111;1 1111111i 1 II 11111 1 1 I}11111
Itorarrl 1 ; t ISSUE 1(J11-1CEBEO/11$111"1"11111111111 111111111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1111111
1 IDENTIFY SITE 't,t.E 1 I ' I li To 81=D ittPc""T14"' 1 1 PHASE IN ADDITIONAL FACILITIES (IF NEEDED) I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
-H t / 1 , 1
' 1 I I
I 1111111 111 1 t "MI" I I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 t 1 I 1 I I Il
1 I III! r111111 1111111I11 11 1/11i1111
I 1 1 mvu'amiII IIIIIIi ':14.am "JZ ----... ?,,..„,,,,.....
1 1 1 1
I I t 150.15 NOTICE TO PROCEED
kadriri III'
1 TTE°1 1 RiserM0 1 1 1
1 1 IDE4TIFICAMIN SITES, DF- sITE
I i W1-1,3 1 L.
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM CHEDULE tk•
1389 1990 1991 • 1998 199O 1994
Lassie' al
Demaution Waste
laPeCteaws Vests.
Kaosehola Ne.slarnemes Waste
loosolot Socha
s-tc;
1 I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 . .
I I I I I I 1 1 I 1 1111 11111
i DISPOSAL i
' PCILICI 111111111'11 I111/1111i1
I wrarai I I I PeCCuRIKNY moctss cir .CESEIN DEPENDING IIIN RELICT RECISIONS 1 1 1 1 1
I I 1 ---1 I . -7 . . , 1 -7 F- -1 -F- -1- 7-1-- 1- -- r --T -I"- •-F -1-- 7 7
I I I I 1 I M I I II I l t I 11111'
1 1I 1 1 11 11 1 1 11111111 1 t 1 Ilflt
1 1 1 I I mit I IIIIIIIt Mit
I T I 1 I pc‘,....tip SESPEISAL STRATEOT 1 I
HT!'
1
1 / 1
IESROSAL POLICY SECISIZIN
1 1
1I I 1111
1 1I t 1 1 1 DEVELOP CEUXCITIN PROGRAIN
1 DEEM 111, pry
1 a'..03.
t I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 i I i É 1 1 I I 1
I 1 i 1 1 1 1 1_1_
1 LATEST DATE PP rDISPEISAL IRPLENENTAIIEN
1 1
1 1 1 I ! I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 1 I it I 1 1 ' 1.6 flt.tle 1 F:zomqL 1 " i i ....r_i_s.r t.,- L J. - I
-T 7°77 T ,IiIII,...IT TI -
I
T-1-77 -77 11-111- T -1-111--111.-1.- -E. -1. ;11 ;1- ; ; I I I I I-7 -171-7
1 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 i I i $ 1 [ L i1 1 111111111111111 11111 ',H .`11111[1 1 11 / 1 1111 , DESISMPOP1- I 1 1 1 1 II I I III I 1 ; 1 1 I 1] I I I I I ' ,1 I I I i [11 I i i 1
I 1 1 I smoy INEXUSION IN STSTEN INCUSSITA 1 1 •• I 1 pmmoNT TRAPEM STATION ir insrooRED TO scLunc in SYSTER / L 1 t J,,. III I t ," ' I II
Tr-ems:sr Stations I 1 ' 1 i ,--r-------i-4---4.-----'r-i-j I , 7
1 ,..11 1:,,,
1 1 1 I iml II I 1 t 1 1 I
I I I I 1 1 I I II II I I t t I I tIrt t ill] 11 lill ti iiiiittlir t
1 I ! I I I I I 1 I 1 1 I I I I I j I I , PRELDER,,,ev , wit 4t B. 1 1 s n I I I i 1 1 1 11111 LEGIStarta4 1 PROJECT ` Hu PP 1 1 II
1 1 FINAPEDE. UTE N2 1 Fmatntal wIt IS 1 I .dtt tt IIIHIt!I t itittit'it I
ADOPTED I rINA4PCIM '4 1 1 P INP.IIIC I , ,
I 1 1 , i I I 1-ÉNANct AS NECESSARY DEPENDENT ON ADDITIONAL PACILITIES 1 1111111111 1 1 I I
System FemmstIn '
= , , .....±.:2=‘,-.,....i_ , i ; rT7 I 7 -, 77 7-1"------77 -1-T --k
• • , 1
1 1 1 1 I t ; I 11111111 I 1 ; [ ; t 1 till 1 1 ' I ' 1 1 1 1 1 I I .15 C4: PLAN MD Sr w5.1' 641 ,67E ,F1,13ArED PLIK ,..' 4^.w.0.7 1517,micry- 1 I rti, NEW , LEGAL UNIT i 1 I I I 1 I ; ; ; I
É II 1 1 i I ; Tip PEVIEV P.Ov1.1::," APPREvaLIAPPROvAL ! . 1 ! I I I ARRROVON, I ; I I 1 I I I i I I I I ACt. ‘41 RINNI Update 4..":".c.,,- .....t.•,....1.- -..,...-t...-...,..i....,,.:,::•:...i.......:.,.....:- ....".........L__H___ I 1 t t t t 1 1 i tI II I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 , 1 I ; ; caOtsrAzORT ' 11111Dtv'"" 1 I I i : I. ! ! I 1 1 1 11,1 11' APPROVAL 1 ,ESTIPASE11 1 1 1 1 SUNNIT mgr. 1.01./SZIELI I I 1 I I . I APPI/014.1nL , 1 1 1
1 I 1 i II I
I I I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I 1 1 1 1 1 . I t
liAL WASTC, EDNEATION 1 SUSASC7 VIE 1 CLEAN PP 1 I I I 1 1 I ; I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I a;efticArtrms , CIIPPLINITY ORPLICATIT90 I / i 1 1 I sump ADDITILME GRANP APPLPENTSCIRS AS APPROPRIATE
a...lity of Uf t Grants .• 1 I I I 1 I 1 II I i i i tozcave Norcut 1 t i 1 t 1 1 I i 1 I [ i 1 I 1 ; 1 1 1 1 i ‘, 1 1 i i I I I ,,E551vE"' .3. 1ES 1 1;1111
1 1 1 1 1 1 47/7' ''''''''''- 1 I SUPIST VTE N2 1 1 vT'S. ER 1 1 MIR.. "GUS1 ,r 1 1 1I l I l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 I II III 1 I 1 1 1
1 [ 1 suorr syrT gl I ' I AP Z.::15 1 1 7= 1 1 'i 1 1 I 11 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 PEPLILIE AP0i_ICATIENS I 1 I
' ' 1 / / , • -1 I 1 1 1 III I 11111 1 I II III III I I I 1 I I .1 '. t ! I,' L11144,..1%.11421111111111M& : '; .91111-1 I I i [ I-I 1111111 I 1111 III ,
.4.41 1111 111 I 111I11111 III III 1 1 I IIIIIIIIIII,E., ./PE44P1157 1 I I i 54105151 1415 9541 1 '..,IS 07 , , . , ,
1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 : ISSUED I I I I PERK'S% ARPLECATME e !pumps =smut 1 1 3 t 11111 j I I I I II 1 . I
Per9tt46ng LNA,MMINIIMa ,"%tnL'
A project
following
recycling
The costs
from
Timetable form provided by the MDNR is -included on the
page which illustrates the implementation schedule for the
project that is the subject of this grant application.
incurred by the county for implementation of the mREs will be
o Project coordination.
o Consultant fees.
o Expenditures related to the MRF site.
o Capital expenditures for the MRF structure and equipment.
The County is requesting funding only for a portion of the capital
expenditures under this grant application. These costs are discussed in
detail in Section 7 of this application. Costs incurred beyond the
budget of this grant will be the full responsibility of the County.
Currently the County is planning to issue bonds to cover the additional
costs of the recycling project.
5-3
UAW, APPLICANT NAME: jvl CH I GAN
PROJECT ENDING DATE: JANUARY 1991
January 199
TASK
Construct 400 ton per day
material s processing facility
TASK
OCATION
Oakland County
ENDING GROUP/PERSON
DATE FOR RESPONSIBLE FOR
EACH TASK TASK COMPLETION
BEGINNING
DATE FOR
EACH TASK
January 1990 Oakland County
Board of
Commi ssioners
and the County
Executive
AN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
QUALITY OF LIFE BOND PROGRAM
1988/89 SOLID WASTE ALTERNATIVES
PROJECT TIMETABLE
RECYCLING PROJECTS FUNDING CATEGORY:_,
PROJECT BEGINNING DAfE:UML
NOTE: rota' timetabi e must not arireeed a 0.125 year pe2-foci, it is estimated
that grants wilfbe awarded ectoir, 1 989
(Household hazardous waste center applicants may submit a three year timetable).
1 /89
6. Recycling Project
Evaluation
The success of Oakland County's recycling project will be evaluated
through two primary mechanisms
o Participation in programs established by the County and the
municipalities - what quantity of recyclables is being received by
the materials recovery facilities? Are certain areas.
participating more fully than others? Can the areas not
participating be better reached by the public education program?
o Participation of municipalities in the Intergovernmental Agreement
(Appendix C) - are communities willing to bring their recyclables
- to the County's facilities? If not, why not?
The County has taken its first steps in implementing its recycling
project (as described in Section 5) and is rapidly proceeding with other
implementation activities. This project, however, will be constantly
evaluated, and Oakland County will be attentive to feedback (through the
above two mechanisms) on the success of its project. If participation
rates and materials received are beyond what the County expected, then
it can add shifts at the facility and evaluate the need for implementing
another MRF. However, if participation rates and materials received are
lower than expected, or if municipalities are not willing to enter into
the Intergovernmental Agreement, then the County must evaluate its
project to identify ways of increasing its usefulness.
Since the County will be maintaining records of waste received at its
FIEFs, it will have access to trends in the use of the facilities. If
a particular facility is not used as extensively as expected, the County
6-1
could enhance its education program to boost the participation rates
and/or recruit additional communities to bring their recyclables to the
MRF.
If a large number of municipalities are not willing to enter into the
Intergovernmental Agreement, then the County will determine the reasons
behind the hesitancy and address the problem areas.
Oakland County will submit all project summaries required by the Solid
Waste Alt :natives Program Emergency Rules. Additionally, the County
will provide summaries of participation rates and materials received at
the MRF annually.
Oakland. County believes that its recycling project will be a model for
other commnities in Michigan and throughout the country, and the County
intends to provide the resources necessary to ensure • its success. The
County will be pleased to assist the State in the future by providing
appropriate information on its project and the role that recycling plays
in the County's solid waste management program.
7. Budget
As described in detail in Section 5 of this grant application, Oakland
County is planning to implement a 400 ton per day NRF.
The costs that will be incurred by the County for this project will be
from:
o Project coordination.
o Consultant fees.
o Expenditures related to the NRFsite.
o Capital expenditures for the mRF structure and equipment.
The County is requesting funding only for a portion of the capital
expenditures under this grant application.
The following tables provide estimates of the total cost of MRFs capable
of processing SO and 800 tons per day of materials. These tables were
generated by Resource Recycling Systems (a County consultant - see
Appendix B) based on a survey of the average costs of these materials.
As illustrated by the tables, capital costs for a 400 ton per day
facility will clearly exceed the $666,666 budget of this grant
application.
7-1
MII711.911.1.0,51.8.
d purchase and oadway construction
50 Ton per Day Class III MRF Capital Budget
Building 20,000 sqft $25 isqft average
Tipping areas,
Material sort areas
Warehouse and shipping dock
Mixed waste transfer area
Utilities
4" water line for fire control
150 kilowatt eleosticai. service
Fixed Equipment
Mixed waste and, paper sort lines with auto baler
Mixed container sort line
Waste transfer cmas..t2r_ • .
Mobile Equipment
Forklifts wl fork rotator and 5,000# lift capacity
Skid loader w/ grapple type bucket
Articulating wheel loader with grapple type bucket
Roll-off truck
1 eight axle walking-floor transfer trailer w/ tractor
8 thirty cubic yard roll-off containers
20 three cubic yard forklift boxes
$500,000
$100,000
$260,000
$100,000
$50,000
$20,000
$25,000
$75,000
$90,000
$160,000
$24,000
$8,000
-- Total Facilly Cost (excluding
7-2
Facilly Cost (exch. xchas and roadway co struction) $10,379,000 di
800 Ton per Day Class III MIIF Capital Budget
200,000 sqft @$30/sqft average $6,000,000 Building
Tipping areas,
Material sort areas
Wood and yard waste shredding area
- Warehouse and shipping dock
Mixed waste transfer area
Wood and yard waste transfer area
Utilities
6" water line for fire control
500 kilowatt electrical service
Fixed Equipment
3 mixed waste and paper sort lines with 2 auto balers
Mixed container sort line
Wood and yard waste grinding line
Waste transfer conveyor and compac
lobile Equipment
3 forklifts w/ folk rotators and 5,000# lift capacity
2 skid loaders w/ grapple type buckets
2 articulating wheel loaders with grapple type buckets
2 roll-off trucks
3 eight axle waiking-floor transfer trailers w/ tractors
20 thirty cubic yard roll-off containers
60 three cubic yard forklift boxes
$150,000
$2,200,000
$250,000
$525,000
$160,000
$60,000
$50,000
$240,000
$180,000
$480,000
$60,000
$24,000
7-3
As required, MDNR's Grant or Loan Budget form is provided on the following
page, summarizing the project costs. Please note that this project has not
received previous funding through any other solid waste or resource
recovery grant. program.
Oakland County believes that the recycling project that is contained within
this application is an effective use of the $500,000 grant funding that the -
County is requesting. The County has committed $166,666 of its own funds
to this project (refer to Appendix G for the resolution from the Board of
County Commissioners) and assumes full responsibility for the additional
costs that will be incurred.
Oakland County will maintain detailed accounting records of this project to
keep track of eligible costs and expenses of the grant budget. The County
will pay the costs as they are incurred through the County's general fund
and then submit the proper paperwork to the State in the format specified
in the application rules. As the County receives reimbursement from the
. State through the grant program, the money will be noted in the accounting
records and receipted into the County's general fund. Oakland County has
worked with the State previously in grant programs (refer to Introduction)
and is accustomed to the accounting procedures required to maintain proper
records.
7-4
$ 500,000
6 166,666
1iil:111GAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
QUALITY OF LIFE BOND PROGRAM
1988/89 SOLID WASTE ALTERNATIVES
cR14N1 OR LOAN BUDGET
APPLICANT NAME:_QA
APPLICW`3 TAX I DENT! liCATION NO.; 3.4„--fia04 876
FUNDING CATEGORY: a.ING PROJECTS
GET TOTAL (Eligible items only)
400 ton per day material recover
DESCRIPTION
OF ITET1
10.000.000
UNIT
PRICE
S666.666*
$666,666*
A. STATE SHARZ OF BUDGET (75% for grants)
(90% for loans)
13. MATCHING FUND SHAPE ( 25 % OF TOTAL FOR GRANTS):
( 10% OF TOTAL FOR LOANS):
The totezi of A 1- B must equal the budget total
Note.. only eAgi biciR .wst:0,..12 thcIudth the bugger RiMEM.82R to arrac winen Tycretions.
*Oakland County recognizes that facility costs will greatly exceed this amount and is 1/89
assuming full responsibility for additional costs. .
RESOLUTION # 89n' April 13, 1989
Moved by Hobart supported by Wolf the resolution, with a positive Fiscal Note
attached, be adopted.
AYES: R. Kuhn, S. Kuhn, Law, McConnell, McCulloch, McPherson, Moffitt, Oaks,
Pernick, Price, Rewold, Skarritt, Wolf, Aaron, Bishop, Chester, Crake, Ferrens,
Hobart, Jensen. (20)
NAYS: None. (0)
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the resolution was adopted.
STATE OF MICHIGAN)
COUNTY OF OAKLAND)
I, Lynn D. Allen, Clerk of the County of Oakland and having a seal, do
hereby certify that I have compared the annexed copy of the attached resolution,
adopted by the Oakland County Board of Commissioners at their regular meeting
held on April 13 , 19 89 with the original record thereof now remaining
on file in my office, and that it is a true and correct transcript therefrom,
and of the whole thereof.
In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal
of said County at Pontiac,Michigan this 13th day of April , 1989
LYNN /O. ALLEN, County Clerk
Register of Deeds
treTiiify—C1TF.R