Minutes of the Board of Directors Meeting
November 16, 2001

The Board of Directors of the Lancaster County Solid Waste Management Authority met on Friday, November 16, 2001 at 7:30 A.M. at the Authority office, 1299 Harrisburg Pike, Lancaster, PA.

ATTENDANCE

Board of Directors present were: Chairman Ebel, Clark, Hammel, Houck, Kassees, Musser, Snoke and Wood. Absent was Frost. Staff present were: Warner, Buller, Forster, Lausch, Norris, Olson, Zorbaugh and Dougherty. Also present were: Solicitor George T. Brubaker of Hartman Underhill & Brubaker; Jim Klecko, Covanta Energy; and citizens as listed on the attached sign-in sheet.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES

Wood moved to approve the minutes of the October 12, 2001 meeting. Second by Musser.

Special Note:

Cabell Kladky (109 Chestnut Grove Road) stated that it was her belief that she was misquoted in the October 12, 2001 Board Meeting minutes. The record from that meeting shows her saying, "We are not approachable because we are in litigation". In these November board meeting minutes, the Board acknowledges her correction.

The minutes of the October 12, 2001 Board of Directors meeting were unanimously approved.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Mr. Ebel stated for the record that an Executive Session was planned following the Board meeting.

Ron Harper (1 Harper Lane, Stevens) commented on the one year anniversary of the real estate transaction, his dissatisfaction with the arrangement, and on Mr. Barley's upcoming primary.

Jim McElroy (2445 Gamber Road, Washington Boro) distributed copies of the Authority's mission statement to the Board members, and asked them a question regarding it.

Mr. Brubaker reminded the assembly that the public comment segment should not be used as a question and answer session.

John May (100 Red Fox Road, Millersville) asked Mr. Warner if Harrisburg had been in communication with LCSWMA concerning the disposal of waste, and additionally, if Mr. Warner knew what Harrisburg was doing with their waste.

Mr. Warner responded that they hadn't been in communication. He added that several years ago Harrisburg received a permit for a Transfer Station on the same site as the incinerator and would likely be transferring waste to a municipal landfill.

Mr. May posed a question about a hypothetical parallel, in terms of long-term planning, between LCSWMA and a past-presentation to the public by the Lancaster County Planning Commission.

Mr. Ebel stated that the Board did what it thought was best for long-term planning. He stated that detailed studies will be done by ARM, then reviewed by the Citizens Advisory Committee and the Board. Mr. Ebel also noted that the public is welcome to attend both the CAC and Board meetings.

Mr. May noted that LCSWMA had previously mentioned that it saves money by using ash in its operations instead of soil. He asked if, because of that, soil would not be needed from Mr. Barley's property.

Mr. Ebel responded that those issues would be determined by a consultant.

Mr. Warner added that ash is a percentage of the amount of dirt needed as daily cover and that there are many other needs for dirt in the landfill.

Mr. May inquired about the present source of the soil.

Mr. Warner responded that it came from on-site, from excavating a cell. He explained that that was the issue with re-using Creswell, because waste was in the cells at Creswell, not dirt.

Mary Glazier (269 River Road) inquired about the members of the CAC, their meeting schedule, whether the meetings were advertised and the date of their next meeting.

Mr. Warner said a list of members would be mailed to Mrs. Glazier later that day. He added that the CAC met as needed, noting that their activity level varied according to the projects before them. Past projects included updating the Municipal Waste Plan in '98 and reviewing the budget. Mr. Warner stated that no meetings were scheduled at present, but that future meetings would be advertised or posted.

Mrs. Glazier asked about the CAC's role in the previous year's plans.

Mr. Warner responded that the CAC was advised that the Authority was going to be entering into options to purchase real estate, and that it was advised prior to the Board action.

Mrs. Glazier said that she had seen the minutes of the CAC meeting.

Larry Kirchner (3100 River Road, Conestoga) asked about costs vs. actual revenue and savings in terms of the possible landfill expansion.

Mr. Ebel stated that the question will be addressed in studies expected to take place in the next 12 -18 months.

Rhea Cosentino (332 Oak Road) asked about the monitoring of the constituents of landfill gas, and how frequently the gas would be monitored.

Mr. Norris responded that, pending Board approval, a firm would test the Frey Farm site in regards to NMOC's (Non-Methane Organic Compounds) on an annual basis. He stated the test would better allow the Authority to evaluate the availability of Landfill gas in a fuel relation aspect. Mr. Norris noted that if the Landfill was over the regulatory threshold, an Active Landfill Gas Project would have to be implemented.

Mr. Warner noted that 'modeling' showed that the Landfill is below the threshold; that the gas could be captured and possibly used to generate electricity for on-site purposes.

Ms. Cosentino asked about the $1.2 million budgeted for capital projects for the Landfill expansion.

Mr. Warner responded that it covered many items, including option costs in regards to real estate.

Ms. Cosentino asked if options could be exercised before a permit is given to expand the landfill.

Mr. Warner responded that any of the 8 or 9 options currently held could be exercised, with Board approval, because they involve a real estate transaction, not a permit for expansion. Some options could expire or be exercised. He observed that the Authority cannot apply for a landfill permit for at least 14 or 15 years under the current regulations.

Ms Cosentino asked about how the Authority determined the fees it charged to the public for providing information.

Mr. Warner responded that it varied according to the length of the request, if its complexity required the attention of a senior-level manager etc. He noted that sometimes the information was provided free of charge, and that sometimes the Authority charged less time than it actually took to fill the request.

Mr. Kirchner asked if it would be at least 14 years before LCSWMA could apply for a permit to expand, and what would happen if the law changed within the 14 year period.

Mr. Warner said that the Authority manages its operations according to current regulations, and would have to abide by any future changes made to the regulations.

Jean Stark (1535 Wheatland Avenue) asked if the CAC was an elected committee or appointed and expressed an interest in joining or attending the meetings. She also asked where the meeting schedule would be publicized.

Mr. Ebel responded that the CAC is appointed by the County Commissioners.

Mr. Warner said the next meeting hadn't been scheduled, but that future meetings would be advertised and posted on the LCSWMA web site.

Mike Bare (107 Chestnut Grove Road) expressed the view that the Board's vote, in regards to the purchase of options of real estate, was to expand the landfill.

Mr. Ebel advised that the matter was under litigation.

Mr. Warner stated that the likely use of the land would be for long-term expansion but that no such decision had been made by the board.

Mr. Harper expressed the opinion that the Authority was free to talk about anything it wanted in public. He then asked about the County Commissioners' authority to appoint the people to the CAC, and reiterated the question about advertising the CAC's meeting schedule.

Mr. Warner responded that Act 101 (Municipal Waste Planning and Recycling Act of 1988) required Lancaster County to have a CAC. The 1986 Municipal Waste Management Plan stipulated that the County Commissioners appoint a CAC to oversee the Authority's implementation of the aforementioned Plan. The County Commissioners appoint people for one-year terms. Mr. Warner explained that in the past the CAC had been very active in looking at sludge management, household hazardous waste, medical waste, yard waste etc.

Leslie Osborne (109 Oak Road) inquired about the incinerator taking waste after hours, and for clarification on an application to DEP to extend the permitted hours.

Mr. Warner responded that the Authority added 2 drivers to a 3^rd shift to alleviate traffic due to construction during the day on Harrisburg Pike. Permission was granted by host townships, Conoy and Manheim to add the 3^rd shift. DEP and the Authority determined that a Minor Permit Modification was needed, but DEP didn't require the cancellation of the 3^rd shift pending its approval. Mr. Warner then clarified for Ms. Osborne the difference between taking customers, and an internal transfer of waste.

Ms. Osborne expressed her dissatisfaction with the delivery of a lead compound from Envirite to the Landfill citing environmental concerns.

Mr. Ebel asked Ms. Osborne to submit the report from the EPA in regards to Envirite after the meeting.

Mrs. Kladky asked if there was any chance the real estate options would be exercised before the court case goes to trial.

Mr. Ebel responded that he wasn't certain.

Mrs. Kladky then asked about the Authority's commitment to expanding the Landfill.

Mr. Warner responded that the Authority would spend the next few years examining the feasibility of expansion, that in 20 years the inevitable need of the community would be to dispose of 650 to 700 thousand tons of waste.

Mrs. Kladky reiterated her dissatisfaction with the process. She asked for clarification of an earlier statement by Mr. Ebel who had drawn a comparison between Manheim Township's acquisition of the Schwartz Property and LCSWMA's purchase of options on the Barley property.

Mr. Ebel stated that in both cases, the decision to acquire property were made in private.

Mrs. Kladky said she remained frustrated in her attempts to communicate with the Board in terms of policy making.

Mrs. May expressed the opinion that she did not think the Board was concerned about big expenditures, citing a motion by the Board to spend $275,000 on an ARM contract.

Mrs. Bare asked if the Authority owned the Abram Barley property on Chestnut Grove Road and also asked about the Hank home.

Mr. Warner replied the Authority didn't own the Abram Barley home or exercised the option. He added that the Hanks asked the Authority to purchase their home under the existing agreement and that the Authority responded to their request.

Mr. Ebel stated the public comment had reached its allotted time, and that the meeting would proceed to the Executive Director's report.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT - Warner reported on the following:

On November 19, 2001, Glen Thomas, Chairman of the Pennsylvania Utility Commission will be touring the Resource Recovery Facility.

A copy of a draft House Resolution endorsing the development of Clean Energy in Pennsylvania, sponsored by Representative Carole Rubley (R., Chester County), was distributed to Board members. Mr. Warner sent a letter to the Lancaster delegation noting the support of LCSWMA of this resolution and asking them to co-sponsor the resolution.

Mr. Warner noted the Waste Transportation Legislation is going to be getting consideration on November 19, 2001. Mr. Warner gave a report to the Board on what this legislation will involve.

Columbia Truck By-Pass - A meeting was held on November 5 at the Columbia Borough office regarding the Columbia truck by-pass. They will be asking organizations responsible for the majority of truck traffic through the Borough to proportionately contribute funding to help in moving the project forward.

At this time Mr. Ebel went over changes to the 2002 Rules & Regulations for the benefit of the public. Mr. Bare was allowed to ask a question; Mr. Ebel and Mr. Warner responded.

Prior to the move to adopt Resolution 2001-5, Mrs. Kladky asked if questions about the budget would be entertained. Mr. Ebel granted her request, permitting questions specific to the budget. Mrs. Kladky had questions about line items regarding legal fees, marketing and public education; an unidentified woman had a question about salaries and wages; Penn Glazier further commented on the marketing line item. Mr. Ebel and Mr. Warner answered all questions.

Resolution No. 2001-5 - Wood moved to adopt Resolution 2001-5. Second by Hammel. The Resolution included the 2002 Operational Budget, the 2002 Capital Projects and Equipment Budget, and the Rules and Regulations for 2002. Mr. Ebel noted that the Budget has been available to the public for review. After a lengthy question and answer period on the Budget and Rules and Regulations for 2002, Ms. Clark called for the question. Resolution 2001-5 was unanimously adopted by the Board.

Resolution No. 2001-6 - On motion by Clark, second by Snoke and unanimous vote, Resolution No. 2001-6 was adopted. The Resolution authorizes the Executive Director and Solicitor to take all actions necessary to acquire the 1291 Harrisburg Pike Property for the sum of $372,500. The Resolution also ratified and approved all such actions previously taken by the same in connection with such acquisition.

FINANCE DEPARTMENT - Olson reported on the following:

• LCSWMA Preliminary Results Actual vs. Budget - All Programs for the Month ended October 31, 2001.
  
  
• LCSWMA Accounts Receivable Report and Past Due Detail Analysis as of October 31, 2001.
  
  
• Approval of Disbursements - On motion by Hammel, second by Musser and unanimous vote, the Summary of Disbursements for October 2001 in the total amount of $4,759,156.49 was unanimously approved.

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT - Lausch reported on the following:

• Summary Tonnage Report - During October, revenue tons received were 48,992 or 1,503 less than budgeted. The Resource Recovery Facility received 33,490 total tons or 2,097 more tons than budgeted for the month. Revenue tons to the Landfill were 15,392 or 3,648 less tons than budgeted. Total system tons year-to-date are 484,686, which is 9,253 tons ahead of budget.
  
  
• Recycling - Last month it was reported that forty-one Act 101, Section 904 Performance Grant applications were prepared and submitted to DEP for tons recycled in the municipalities during 2000. We have compiled the data in summary form and can report that we expect a total of $850,000 will be received by the municipalities. Also, we will be getting a 902 Implementation Grant for $10,668 for curbside containers and publicity materials for the Penn and Mount Joy Township programs; and we will be receiving a 903 Coordinator Grant in the amount of $33,096 for wages and expenses associated with the Recycling Manager position. These grants in combination with other Act 101 grants awarded will likely match the $1,267,000 in Act 101 fees the Authority paid to DEP in 2000.

Mr. Ebel asked Mr. Lausch what the average tonnage per household would be.

Mr. Lausch responded that it is about one (1) ton.

On October 30, a meeting was held with DEP to discuss the Authority's definition of Yard Waste and issues of open burning. Concerning Yard Waste, DEP wants the Authority's definition to include shrubbery and tree trimmings which are in the Act 101 definition of Leaf Waste. We have revised our definition of Yard Waste in the 2002 Rules and Regulations. Concerning open burning, municipalities mandated to recycle must have a "no burn" ordinance in place or it may jeopardize eligibility for grants.

Insurance - The Government Self Insurance Fund Board of Directors met on October 29. The Board approved payment of $2,323.97 for expenses incurred by the Authority for deductibles and the GSIF audit.

Compensation/Benefits - The Authority's United Way campaign began on October 24. The campaign goal is to increase participation to 50 employees.

Managers are working on the annual Employee Appraisals/Evaluations and they should be completed by Thanksgiving.

OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT - Zorbaugh reported on the following:

• Landfill - The Landfill Assistant Manager position was filled from within the organization by Jeff Munster, who has been on the Landfill staff for over eleven years.

The Creswell Pump House Wet Well was cleaned prior to the installation of the pump that was removed in September for scheduled maintenance.

• Transfer Station - Provided driver training and orientation for the new night shift driver who began work in late October.
  
  
• Resource Recovery Facility - Work was completed on the ash hauling analysis. The analysis showed it is significantly more cost effective to continue to transport ash "in-house", as opposed to privatization of this task.
  
  
• Household Hazardous Waste - The HHW Facility had the second bulk pick-up of hazardous materials for the year.

There was an increase in October in the participation in the Computer Recycling Program. Citizen participation rose 60% over the previous two months.

• Safety - There were no notable accidents to report at any of the facilities in October.

Mr. Warner and Mr. Zorbaugh met with a safety consultant who will be evaluating the Authority to see how we can improve safety.

RRF CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT - Forster reported on the following:

• Site Operations - Electric revenues for October were $1,023,649, or $211,649 ahead of budget. Revenues exceeded budget because Covanta had originally planned to do two boiler outages in October, when in fact only one took place.

Unit #3 was taken off-line on September 30^th for its scheduled fall outage.

Unit #1 came down on October 9^th after a tube leak was discovered. Repairs were made quickly, and the unit was back producing power within 37 hours.

Unit #2 was forced off-line following a tube rupture in the 2^nd pass of the boiler, and several minor leaks developed during the course of the repair. A successful hydro was achieved, and the unit was back on-line within 50 hours.

A total of 31,777 tons of waste was processed by the facility in October.

• Regulatory Activities - A meeting was held with DEP's Air Quality Program personnel to discuss emissions exceedances resulting from a black plant condition that occurred on May 3, 2001. The event began when another facility that supplies power to the GPU grid tripped off-line, causing repetitive line surges to be experienced at the RRF. This in turn took all three boilers out-of-service leading to emissions excursions for each of the units. A similar event happened on October 3, 2000. The exceedances that happened in October were forgiven by DEP, since they viewed it as an external event over which Covanta had no control. We are seeking similar relief for this event. The cause of the line surges is still being investigated.
  
  
• Semi-annual stack testing was conducted from October 22-26 by Testar, Incorporated. Preliminary results look good.
  
  
• Submitted the 3^rd quarter tonnage report to DEP on October 9^th. The report stated that average daily deliveries during the quarter were 1,128 tons, or approximately 6% below the permitted limit of 1,200 tons per day.
  
  
• As expected, Randy Weiss of DEP visited the facility twice in October to make up for the one he missed in September. He found no operational violations on either of the inspections.
  
  
• Other Activities - Craig Davis was on site on October 25^th to gather information for the annual facility audit report. He performed a complete boiler building walkdown, reviewed the control room logs, as well as outage reports and plant maintenance records.

Covanta initiated work on the non-ferrous metal recovery system, which is planned to be installed in the Spring of 2002. An issue paper will be presented for Board review at the December meeting. The project funding will be coming solely from LCSWMA, as DEP has denied our grant request on the basis that the project was, in their estimation... "not a new and innovative way of recycling solid waste".

Work was completed on the first draft of the Authority's Transportation Compliance Plan. The plan is being written to satisfy DEP's desire to improve waste transportation safety and environmental compliance in the Commonwealth.

TECHNICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT - Norris reported on the following:

• Capital Project Administration - The Phase 2 Capping Project continues with Grace Industries. Approximately 4 acres have been hydro-seeded and mulched with the remaining areas being seeded as they reach final grades. Substantial Completion and Final Acceptance will occur in November.

Environmental site work has begun at the CFI property. These activities include the installation of groundwater monitoring wells and geoprobes.

A meeting was held with the architect for the 1299 Renovation Project and it is moving on schedule.

Every other month we complete a volume topographic survey at the landfill and do density calculations. Year-to-date, we have achieved an in-place density of 1,942 pounds per cubic yard, almost one ton per every cubic yard. It is very much above industry standards of 1,400 pounds pr cubic yard.

• Frey Farm Landfill; Landfill Gas Sampling and Analysis; Award of Professional Services Agreement for Engineering Services - On motion by Snoke, second by Kassees and unanimous vote, the Board approved the Authority entering into a Professional Services Agreement with IT Corporation in an amount not to exceed $52,800 for services necessary to complete the Frey Farm Landfill gas sampling and analysis project.

CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE

The CAC met on November 7^th at the Authority office to review the Authority Facility Operations in 2001, review the 2002 Draft Budget, and receive an update on landfill planning.

EXECUTIVE SESSION

After a brief recess, the Board of Directors went into Executive Session at 9:45 A.M. to discuss real estate, litigation matters and personnel issues.

The Executive Session adjourned at 11:00 A.M.

OTHER BUSINESS

Nominating Committee - The following is a list of the Nominating Committee members: Jesse Wood, Chairperson, William Ebel and Barbara Hammel. This committee will meet to prepare a slate of officers for the Board of Directors for 2002. This slate will be considered at the December meeting.

There was no further business to come before the Board.

ADJOURNMENT

On motion by Musser, second by Hammel and unanimous vote, the Board meeting adjourned at 11:05 AM.

APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE LANCASTER COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY THIS 14^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2001.

John S. Kassees, Secretary