Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
3 <br />1 "waste collected" be used in place of "landfilled" and that staff analyze exactly how much of that <br />2 material is destined to be buried in the ground. He pointed out that the State of North Carolina has <br />3 identified their first priority as the reduction of waste at its source, and their second priority as the <br />4 recycling of collected materials. The sixth (6th) priority on the State list is disposing of material in <br />5 the landfill. The same General Statute indicates that local officials are encouraged to research <br />6 innovative solutions to this problem. He requested that a resolution be adopted that the landfill <br />7 would be used only as a last resort. He also requested that recycling options be analyzed. He <br />8 suggested that one possibility would be to resolve to get out of the landfill business and get into <br />9 the recycling business. He asked that landfilling waste be our lowest priority. A copy of his <br />0 comments, in their entirely, are in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. <br />1 <br />2 Dr. Ron Hass, of Overland Drive, Chapel Hill also mentioned that the NC Legislature has <br />3 given landfills the lowest priority as a means of handling solid waste. He stated that he was an <br />4 expert in the field of analyzing data for incinerator permit applications. His research shows that <br />5 incinerators are not a more serious source of air pollution than landfills. He felt that because of the <br />6 rapidly changing technology it would be preferable to have an independent contractor handle the <br />7 disposal of our trash. His comments in their entirely are in the permanent agenda file in the <br />8 Clerk's office <br />9 <br />0 Mr. Roger Barr, of Oak Hill Road, Chapel Hill asked about the method of record keeping <br />1 being employed by the Owners Group. He asked that the State plan be followed, including the <br />2 use of their starting date. He also requested that the recycling of coal ash be included in Orange <br />3 County's calculations, as the State has done. He mentioned that although ash is no longer <br />4 recycled in our landfill, there has been no corresponding credit to Orange County citizens. A copy <br />5 of his comments are in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. <br />6 <br />7 Mr. Pankaj Agarwal, an employee of the North Carolina Department of Natural Resource, <br />8 discussed current EPA regulations. He mentioned that the gas emissions from landfills contribute <br />9 significantly to air pollution. Those emissions have the potential to cause cancer due to off-site <br />0 migration. They also contribute to global warming. He suggested that the non-regulatory <br />1 program that the EPA oversees is a good program and should be considered for our landfill. <br />2 <br />3 Richard Perzley, of North Hawick Court, Chapel Hill mentioned that as a pediatrician his <br />4 concern is in regard to the medical hazards associated with gas emissions from the landfill. He <br />5 mentioned two studies of which he is aware. In one of them the risk of cancer was greatly <br />6 increased for residents within 4 kilometers of the site and the other study showed an elevated risk <br />7 of low birth weight. He stated that this is not just a noisy nuisance. It is a serious health hazard. <br />8 He asked that the Owner's Group take into account the need to manage gas emissions from <br />9 landfill sites. <br />0 <br />1 Dave Laudicina, of Wood Dock Lane, Hillsborough, commented that there appeared to be <br />2 no relationship between the landfill search and the plan being suggested by the Owner's Group. <br />3 He commented that it was time to do the right thing. He asked the elected officials to consider <br />4 building the smallest possible landfill and focus on reducing and recycling. He submitted petitions <br />5 against siting the landfill at either Site 17 or Site 13. <br />6 <br />