Amendment Grant for baler on 02-01-2011to Contract #4119

Browse Search

Attachment A Amd 1 Orange County Solid Waste ManagemenTR Contract 4119 P.O. Box 17177 Chapel Hill, NC 27516 -7177 (919) 968 -2885 FAX(919)932-2900 www.co.orange.nc.ustrecycling �rrt' igtf� Orange County Landfill 932 -2989 Orange Community Recycling 968 -2788 February 28, 2012 Mr. Rob Taylor NCDAEO 1639 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699 -1639 Ref: Grant Contract # 4119 Dear Rob: This is to request a change in the use of grant funds that Orange County was awarded during the 2011 grant round for local governments, grant contract #4119. We now want to use the $11,968 that was initially awarded to buy three roll -off containers to haul tear -off shingles to a recycling market to instead help pay for part of the baler we plan to buy to improve the efficiency, safety and density of our baling process for rigid, non - bottle plastics, mixed paper and other materials that might also require baling. The baler was also to be purchased using an additional $18,000 from that same grant. We estimate the baler will cost about $50,000 when purchased and installed, so shifting the $11,968 in funds from the purchase of roll -off containers to the purchase of a baler will still keep Orange County's share of the match well above the 20% hard match required by the grant. The reason for the change is that we are no longer expecting favorable terms from the local licensed shingle recycling vendor i.e. sufficient revenue from the combination of hauling shingles to market or from selling the shingles themselves to cover program costs and minimally acceptable tip fee revenue losses. Those two potential sources of revenue combined with an anticipated increase in the tonnage of shingles due to a lowered tipping fee would have made up for the projected revenue loss we anticipated by lowering the tipping fee 50% for loads of shingles only from $44 per ton for mixed C &D to $22 per ton for shingles only. Once the shingle recycler we'd planned to use determined it was far cheaper for them to haul the shingles themselves that anticipated source of hauling revenue was eliminated, Additionally the shingle recycler determined that the value of what they deemed a 'processing fee' was to be set at $2 per ton, rather than a higher value we had projected. Further with the depressed building market and overall recession causing deferred maintenance, there was some doubt as to our ability to make up all other lost revenue from a possible doubling of shingle tonnage coming into the landfill due to the proposed 50% lower tipping fee; doubling shingle tonnage would have arithmetically allowed break even, without any hauling revenue or processing fee revenue. At further issue internally, was the fact that we are now faced with closing the MSW landfill, transition to single stream recycling and rebuilding one of our convenience centers. This big increase in work load, along with the standard set of everyday challenges has we feel diminished our ability to effectively take