10-11-2011 CC RPT 15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Eoio °th.4i Tertniiiatzoi of Letter,4greernefit— EnerTech Eivzroirnrental C'cdzforszza, LLC' 'Page 3 Since January 2003, Class B biosolids were no longer land applied in any Southern California county, as counties had passed ordinances banning the practice, imposed conditions that were uneconomical to meet or because there were no permitted acres available. Land application of Class B biosolids was projected to be obsolete by the year 2010. Due to these issues, many agencies, including the City of Riverside, had their biosolids hauled to Arizona where a few counties still allowed Class B land application; although, even in these areas, regulatory concerns had surfaced. For example, Mohave County, Arizona had already imposed permit fees that made Class B land application uneconomical. Limited options and the need to transport biosolids further resulted in higher costs to transport and dispose of the City's biosolids. Moreover, Kern County, California sought to ban land application of Class A biosolids. Brown and Caldwell Study — Biosolids Handling Options In April 2002, the City Council authorized an agreement with Brown and Caldwell Environmental Engineering and Consulting ( "Brown and Caldwell ") to analyze and compare various biosolids management strategies including digester conversion, air drying, heat drying, and composting, based on projected flow rates of 40 MGD by the year 2010 and 50 MGD by 2030. In March 2003, Brown and Caldwell presented the Public Works Department with a Biosolids Handling Improvements Report, which recommended $60 million in capital expenditures and nearly $1 million in operating costs per year to convert the City's biosolids treatment facility from Class B to Class A. This would require the construction of heat drying facilities that would be used in conjunction with the WQCP's existing digesters. In an effort to postpone capital upgrades and considering the regulatory climate, the Public Works Department sought data from other agencies confronted with the same issues. EnerTech Proposal — Rialto Regional Biosolids Project In December 2003, CH2MHill completed a Long Range Biosolids Management Plan (LRBMP) for the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). The plan evaluated long -term non -Class B agricultural land application options in Southern California and determined that the four most viable alternatives were composting, heat drying, energy recovery, and organo - mineral fertilizer manufacturing. The Orange County Grand Jury reviewed the OCSD's plan and agreed that there was "clear and convincing evidence of the tenuous future of biosolids land application...". In July 2004, the OCSD, with the assistance of CH2MHill, other environmental firms and a citizen's advisory committee issued five (5) Request for Proposals (RFPs) for the four (4) most viable technology areas to 100 potential vendors. Nine (9) proposals were received in October 2004; however, only four (4) met the minimum requirements of the RFP. EnerTech's proposal ranked the highest based on a comprehensive set of criteria and was the only proposal recommended for contract negotiations. EnerTech proposed to use a patented SlurryCarb® technology to convert the WQCP's Class B biosolids into a renewable fuel, beginning in March 2008, which could then be used by local cement kilns as an environmentally sound alternative to coal. However, in order to secure financing for construction and operation of a SlurryCarb® facility in Rialto, California (the "Rialto Regional Biosolids Project "), EnerTech was required to secure long -term contacts with various agencies that would employ 100% of the facility's capacity upfront. EnerTech sought contracts with the City of Riverside, the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (LACSD), OCSD, the San Bernardino Municipal Water Department (SBMWD) and the City of Rialto. 15 -2