Agenda Packet November 4 2013PERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MEETING AGENDA
304 South Morgan Street, Room 215
Roxboro, NC 27573-5245
336-597-1720
Fax 336-599-1609
November 4, 2013
6:30 pm
CALL TO ORDER …………………………………………………Chairman Clayton
ITEM #1
Closed Session for the purpose of considering appointment of individuals through
an informal interview process with applicants of competitive committee, boards, and
commissions per General Statutes 143-318.11(a)(6).
Return to Open Session and Recess until 7:00 pm for regularly scheduled meeting.
7:00 pm
CALL TO ORDER…………………………………………………. Chairman Clayton
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
DISCUSSION/ADJUSTMENT/APPROVAL OF AGENDA
1
INFORMAL COMMENTS
The Person County Board of Commissioners established a 10 minute
segment which is open for informal comments and/or questions from citizens
of this county on issues, other than those issues for which a public hearing
has been scheduled. The time will be divided equally among those wishing to
comment. It is requested that any person who wishes to address the Board,
register with the Clerk to the Board prior to the meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
ITEM #2
October 21, 2013
TAX ADJUSTMENTS:
ITEM #3
1) Releases for the month of October, 2013
2) October 2013 NC Vehicle Tax System pending refunds
OLD BUSINESS:
NEW BUSINESS:
ITEM #4
Site Assessment Report for Person-Durham Multi-Jurisdictional Park ... Heidi York
ITEM #5
Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy for PATS ………………………........ Kathy Adcock
ITEM #6
Kirby Rebirth Project Update and Request …………… Heidi York & Ray Foushee
ITEM #7
Appointment to the Board of Adjustment ……………………………. Brenda Reaves
ITEM #8
CDBG Monthly Reporting …………………………………………………. Heidi York
ITEM #9
Budget Amendments ……………………………………………...… Amy Wehrenberg
CHAIRMAN’S REPORT
MANAGER’S REPORT
COMMISSIONER REPORTS/COMMENTS
CLOSED SESSION (if desired by the Board)
Note: All Items on the Agenda are for Discussion and Action as deemed
appropriate by the Board.
2
October 21, 2013
1
PERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OCTOBER 21, 2013
MEMBERS PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
Jimmy B. Clayton Heidi York, County Manager
Kyle W. Puryear
B. Ray Jeffers Brenda B. Reaves, Clerk to the Board
Frances P. Blalock
David Newell, Sr.
The Board of Commissioners for the County of Person, North Carolina, met in
regular session on Monday, October 21, 2013 at 9:00 am in the Commissioners’ meeting
room in the Person County Office Building.
Chairman Clayton called the meeting to order. Before invocation, Chairman
Clayton asked for a moment of silence in tribute to Lieutenant Chad Pergerson, a City of
Roxboro firefighter who lost his life in an accident. Vice Chairman Jeffers led the Pledge
of Allegiance.
DISCUSSION/ADJUSTMENT/APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
A motion was made by Vice Chairman Jeffers and carried 5-0 to remove Item
#10 Federal Shutdown Impacts from the agenda and to approve the agenda as adjusted.
EXCELLENCE IN INNOVATION AWARD FOR PERSON COUNTY’S
REVALUATION COMMUNICATION AND EDUCATION EFFORTS:
County Manager, Heidi York announced Person County has been recognized for
educating its citizens about the revaluation process with a Local Government Federal
Credit Union Excellence in Innovation Award for 2013. Ms. York stated the awards
program is sponsored by North Carolina Association of County Commissioners
(NCACC).
Ms. York noted in an effort to educate citizens about the revaluation process,
Person County made a concerted effort to improve its communication with citizens; staff
re-designed forms to be clearer about the process and more user-friendly. Ms. York
further noted the Tax Office hosted two public meetings, both before and after the tax
bills were mailed, specifically designed to allow for discussion about the revaluation
process. Ms. York stated staff designed a “frequently asked questions” page for the
county website, as well as created informational fliers. Additionally, the Board of
Commissioners invited a representative from the N.C. Department of Revenue to their
annual budget retreat to discuss the property revaluation process.
Ms. York told the group the Excellence in Innovation Awards program provides a
total of $8,000 in rewards to county employees who develop successful programs that
help counties improve services to citizens. Cash awards of $1,000 each are given to two
3
October 21, 2013
2
programs in each of four categories - general government, health and human services,
public information/participation and intergovernmental collaboration.
Person County’s Revaluation Communication Efforts won for the category of
public information/participation.
Mr. Neil Emory, Outreach Associate from the NCACC presented the 2013
Excellence in Innovation Award to the employees of the Tax Office. Receiving the
award were the following employees of the Tax Office: Russell Jones, Phillip Christy,
Teresa Phillips, Carolyn West, Debbie Wilson and Michelle Poole. Mr. Jones
acknowledged other tax employees that were not able to attend the meeting: Becky
Gentry, Susan Allen, Robin Hensler and Violet Burch.
INFORMAL COMMENTS:
There were no comments from the public.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
A motion was made by Vice Chairman Jeffers, and carried 5-0 to approve the
minutes of October 7, 2013.
APPOINTMENT OF DEPUTY TAX COLLECTOR:
Tax Administrator, Russell Jones stated General Statute 105-349(f) allows the
appointment of deputy tax collectors by the Board of Commissioners to assist the tax
collector in forced collections. Mr. Jones noted there are three other employees that are
currently sworn in as deputies. If approved by the Board, Ms. Teresa Phillips will need
to be sworn in as a deputy and take the tax collector’s oath under General Statute 105-
349(g). Mr. Jones further noted that Ms. Phillips has worked for the tax office since July
19, 2010 and has completed the Fundamentals of Property Tax Collection, Property Tax
Listing & Assessing, Personal Property Appraisal & Assessment, and the Advanced
Personal Property Seminar.
Mr. Jones requested the Board to approve appointment of Ms. Teresa Phillips as a
Deputy Tax Collector as well as administer the Oath. It was the consensus of the Board
to appoint Ms. Teresa Phillips as a Deputy Tax Collector. Chairman Clayton
administered the Oath to Teresa Phillips as a Deputy Tax Collector.
Mr. Jones stated all of the tax office staff is state certified in their field of work.
4
October 21, 2013
3
5
October 21, 2013
4
CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF LATE EXEMPTION APPLICATIONS:
Tax Administrator, Russell Jones informed the Board that every year, the tax
office receives applications for the Senior, Disabled, Veteran, and Circuit Breaker
exemptions that fail to meet the June 1st deadline.
Mr. Jones stated in an effort to help inform the public of these exemptions, the tax
office:
• mailed information along with the tax listing forms to 6,000 citizens,
• developed brochures for all three exemption programs and passed out over
500 copies, and
• included information about these exemptions on the revaluation notice of
value forms.
Mr. Jones stated these efforts resulted in 86 new applications, with 76 approved
applications, 10 denied applications (over the income limit) and 7 late applications.
Mr. Jones stated the 7 late applications would have been approved if they had
been received by the tax office by June 1st. These applications met all requirements,
however since these were late, they could not be approved by the tax office noting the
Board of Commissioners may approve late applications if they are received by December
31st. Since these applications met all guidelines (other than the application deadline) Mr.
Jones recommended approval. Mr. Jones noted a spreadsheet was included with the
Board’s packet that outlines the tax impact and the reasons for the late applications noting
he did not include the applications as they have personal identifying information such as
social security numbers and income information.
Mr. Jones noted Person County currently has 702 properties that are receiving
benefit from these exemptions, which does not include the 7 applications that are
submitted for approval today.
A motion was made by Commissioner Blalock, and carried 5-0 to approve the
seven late exemption applications as presented.
6
October 21, 2013
5
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION/BROADBAND UPDATE:
Assistant County Manager, Sybil Tate reminded the Board that staff provided an
update about the broadband project at its September 19, 2013 meeting to which the Board
directed staff to move forward with both the broadband project and the public safety
communications project.
Ms. Tate highlighted the report from the public safety communication analysis
which provided three options for improving Person County’s public safety
communication system.
• OPTION #1: Fix existing listening towers at a cost of $12,000,
• OPTION #2: Build a Simulcast Repeater System (includes building five county-
owned tower sites) at an estimated costs of $3,000,000, and
• OPTION #3: Utilize State Viper System at a cost of $1,000,000 to $2,000,000.
Ms. Tate noted the results of the public safety communication study are under review
by a public safety focus group, which includes representatives from the Fire Chief’s
Association, Roxboro Fire, Roxboro Police, Sheriff, EMS, Emergency Management and
911-Telecommunications.
Mr. Tommy Cole, Telecommunications Manager, told the Board a final
recommendation has not been made; however, it was noted that OPTION#1 is a short
term solution and that OPTION#2 was the preferred long-term solution. Mr. Cole noted
the three current sites: Ceffo, Bethel Hill and Moriah are all in urgent need to be updated
to standard for present use. Mr. Cole and Sheriff Jones stated the focus group expressed
concern about joining the State Viper System since it does not perform well inside of
buildings and it is designed for the State Highway Patrol which would not be compatible
with public service current radio and paging equipment. Ms. Tate noted that OPTION#2
can be combined with the broadband project, but the State’s Viper System through
OPTION #3 does not allow commercial applications, such as broadband.
Mr. Cole and Sheriff Jones told the group of the potential daily transmissions that
interrupted as well as interference with inclement weather.
Ms. Tate stated the Board may want to consider funding OPTION#1 immediately
and include a long-term solution, i.e. OPTION#2, and possibly combined with the
broadband initiative in the Fiscal Year 2015 Capital Improvement Plan. The Board
expressed a desire to have firmer costs with OPTION#2 as well as merge the public
safety needs with the broadband initiative to provide access to un-served areas. County
Manager, Heidi York reminded the recent broadband Request for Proposals resulted in a
50/50 match of $100,000 for both the County and the private provider.
Ms. Tate confirmed the proposed height of the OPTION #2 towers would be 180
feet noting that coincides with the county’s current ordinance restriction noting staff have
7
October 21, 2013
6
identified possible revisions to the county’s ordinance which would come back before the
Board as a recommendation in the future.
Ms. Tate stated the next steps for OPTION#2 would be to obtain from the state
combined coverage maps for public service and broadband areas at which time a Request
for Proposal for additional towers could be released to confirm actual costs.
Ms. Tate requested Board consideration for an additional $2,520 funding for use
in obtaining public safety maps.
A motion was made by Commissioner Blalock, and carried 5-0 to appropriate
$12,000 to fix the existing listening towers (OPTION#1) and to fund $2,500 for public
safety maps from the County Contingency Fund.
APPOINTMENT TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
Clerk to the Board, Brenda Reaves stated Ms. Felicia Swann has submitted an
application for Board consideration for appointment to the Board of Adjustment for one
of its vacancies. Ms. Reaves noted the Board of Adjustment currently has one position
available for a three-year term as well as one position for an alternate The Board of
Adjustment functions in judicial-like hearings and reviews special zoning permit
requests, special variance requests and appeals to interpretations of zoning
administrator.
Ms. Reaves stated the Board of Adjustment is one of the County’s competitive
boards and committees to which the Board may consider scheduling an informal
interview should the Board deem it appropriate.
Ms. Reaves requested the Board to consider appointment for a three-year term if
the Board deems appropriate or schedule an informal interview with Ms. Swann.
It was the consensus of the Board hold the informal interview process with Ms.
Swann, preferably at the Board’s November 4, 2013 at 6:30 pm prior to the next regular
scheduled meeting.
Commissioner Newell suggested staff investigating the need for a background
check as policy for competitive board/committee members. County Manager, Heidi
York suggested consideration for a background check as a revision to the Board’s Rules
of Procedures which will be before the Board for review in December.
PERSON COUNTY AIRPORT 2014-2020 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM:
8
October 21, 2013
7
County Manager, Heidi York stated Talbert & Bright, Inc., Person County’s
Consultant Engineer for the Person County Airport, along with the members of the
Airport Commission have submitted a list of proposed projects for the Airport to be
undertaken for the years of 2014-2020. Ms. York noted this list of proposed projects is
much like a capital improvement plan for the Airport with funding provided through state
and local sources. Ms. York stated the Airport Commission reviewed and approved these
projects at their meeting held on October 10, 2013. Ms. York requested the Board to
review the proposed projects and approve the submission of these requests by November
1, 2013 for State aid to Airports. Ms. York added the Person County Airport has been
taken off the list as a reliever airport for Raleigh-Durham (RDU) Airport and staff are
inquiring as to why this took place and the possibility to be put back on the list.
Commissioner Blalock requested the Board receive an Airport Reports noting any
activity and usage. Commissioner Newell added all hangars are full at this time.
A motion was made by Commissioner Newell, and carried 5-0 to approve the
Person County Airport 2014-2020 Transportation Improvement Program as presented.
9
October 21, 2013
8
10
October 21, 2013
9
JAMES EDWARD RAMSEY DAY PROCLAMATION:
Chairman Clayton read the James Edward Ramsey Day Proclamation for
adoption.
A motion was made by Vice Chairman Jeffers, and carried 5-0 to adopt the
Proclamation declaring October 29, 2013 as James Edward Ramsey Day in Person
County. Chairman Clayton stated the dedication ceremony will take place on October
29, 2013 at 2:00 pm at the Courthouse in which the Proclamation will be read and
presented.
11
October 21, 2013
10
BUDGET AMENDMENT:
Finance Director, Amy Wehrenberg presented and explained the following
Budget Amendment.
Upon a motion by Vice Chairman Jeffers and majority vote (5-0), the Board of
Commissioners of Person County does hereby amend the Budget of the General Fund(s)
on this, the 21st day of October 2013, as follows:
Department Name Amount
Incr / (Decr)
EXPENDITURES General Fund
Human Services 33,881
Education 466,641
Culture and Recreation 3,556
REVENUES General Fund
Intergovernmental Revenues 466,641
Fund Balance Appropriation 37,437
EXPENDITURES Economic Catalyst Fund 300,000
REVENUES Economic Catalyst Fund
Intergovernmental Revenues 300,000
EXPENDITURES Airport Capital Construction Fund
2010 Vision 100 Projects (144,262)
2011 Vision 100 Projects 154,702
2012 Vision 100 Projects 166,667
Fencing Perimeter & Emergency Repair
Project
156,227
REVENUES Airport Capital Construction Fund
Intergovernmental Revenues 300,000
Local Match Funds 33,334
Explanation:
Appropriation of fund balance ($33,881) in DSS for temporary staffing to assist with the
conversion of all income maintenance files to NCFAST; carrying forward the remaining
school lottery funds ($466,641) for the completion of the Alternative School Building
construction; received Economic Development grant ($300,000) from the One North
Carolina Fund for CertainTeed, Inc.; appropriating fund balance in the Public Library
Fund for programming expenses associated with unspent grant funds from the Rural
EDC ($3,556); and amending the Fencing Perimeter project at the Airport using available
funds from new and existing federal airport grants ($300,000) and the required local
matches from remaining balances of other projects ($33,334).
12
October 21, 2013
11
CHAIRMAN’S REPORT:
Chairman Clayton had no report.
MANAGER’S REPORT:
County Manager, Heidi York told the Board the Dan River Hearing related to
Caswell County’s request for reclassification will be held on November 13, 2013 at 8:30
am in Raleigh noting if any members had interest in going to let her know. Ms. York
stated the City Attorney, City Manager as well as a few council members along with the
County Attorney, Ron Aycock would be attending noting the City Attorney would be the
only one allow to speak during the comment period.
COMMISSIONER REPORT/COMMENTS:
Commissioner Newell requested the Clerk to the Board to set up the Ethics
Webinar training in the county offices and he would attend to meet the October 30, 2013
deadline.
Commissioner Blalock reported the Helena Steering Committee would be
meeting on Friday, October 25, 2013 at 1:30 pm in the old cafeteria. Vice Chairman
Jeffers inquired about the plans to continue to use the old cafeteria as a polling place for
elections. County Manager, Heidi York confirmed there would be space available in the
building to continue to hold the elections as done in the past.
Commissioner Blalock noted the Health Department would be receiving a Public
Sector Site Award on November 6, 2013 in the FEMA room starting at 1:00 pm. All
Board members are invited to attend.
Commissioner Puryear had no report.
Vice Chairman Jeffers stated he recently chaired his first NACo Rural Action
Caucus meeting with the following federal legislative priorities being set for 2013:
• Oppose Efforts to Eliminate or Limit the Tax-Exempt Status of Municipal Bonds
• Authorization of long-term Farm Bill with a focus on Rural Development
• Secure funding for Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) and Forest Payments to
Counties
• Renewed focus on improving Rural Health and Substance Abuse programs with a
focus on rural veterans and youth
• Promote Rural County Priorities within Immigration Reform
• Implementation of the new Surface Transportation Law (MAP-21)
13
October 21, 2013
12
CLOSED SESSION:
A motion was made by Commissioner Blalock, and carried 5-0 to enter Closed
Session at 10:06 am per General Statute 143-318.11(a)(6) to review personnel
performance with the following individuals permitted to attend: County Manager, Heidi
York, Clerk to the Board, Brenda Reaves, and Assistant County Manager, Sybil Tate.
A motion was made by Commissioner Newell, and carried 5-0 to return to open
session at 10:44 am.
RECESS:
A motion was made by Vice Chairman Jeffers, and carried 5-0 to recess the
meeting at 10:44 am until October 28, 2013 at 6:30 pm for the Community Conversations
meeting at Ceffo Volunteer Fire Department located at 1291 Concord-Ceffo Road,
Roxboro.
_____________________________ ______________________________
Brenda B. Reaves Jimmy B. Clayton
Clerk to the Board Chairman
(Draft Board minutes are subject to Board approval).
14
AGENDA ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 4, 2013
Agenda Title: Tax Adjustments for October 2013
Summary of Information: Attached please find the tax releases and motor vehicle pending
refunds for October 2013.
1. October 2013 tax releases.
2. October 2013 North Carolina Vehicle Tax System (NCVTS) pending refunds.
Recommended Action: Motion to accept reports and authorize refunds.
Submitted By: Russell Jones, Tax Administrator
15
COSSYS PERSON COUNTY TAX OFFICE COLLECTION SCROLL-12:LEVY ADJUSTMENTS ALL TAX YEARS 10282013 PAGE: 1
ACCOUNT # COLREC COUNTY-TAX DISTRICT DISTRICT DOG PENALTY INT/DISC LIEN-COST TOTAL NUMBER TRNREC CLRK DATE
DISTRICT-"
61754 2012013 BARBEE ALLAN C 2012 CARR UL
61754 201 39758 -84.00 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 -8.96 0.00 0.00 -92.96 6374R 2170 CW 09302013
REASON:SENT IN PROOF OF PURCHASE AMOUNT
2286847392013 WALKER ROBERT JR TAHOE 4DR 4X4 MP 228684739 81097 -146.33 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -146.33 15659R 2171 MP 09302013
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
2286847392013 WALKER ROBERT JR TAHOE 4DR 4X4 MP 228684739 81097 146.33 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 146.33 15659R 2172 MP 09302013
2286847392013 WALKER ROBERT JR TAHOE 4DR 4X4 MP
228684739 81097 -112.56 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -112.56 15659R 2173 MP 09302013 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
57422 3012013 HORNER THOMAS L 7&2/100 ACRES/LT2/DW
57422 301 21510 0.00 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 -5.97 0.00 0.00 -5.97 6375R 2174 CW 09302013
REASON:RLEASED LATE LISTING
49552 1122012 VANINWAGEN DAVID PERSONAL/BOAT 49552 112 60940 -6.90 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 -0.69 -0.63 0.00 -8.22 6376R 2175 CW 09302013
REASON:REGISTRATION EXPIRED IN NC ALVIN 7/31/08 SOLD BOAT FALL 2009 IN WAKE
57775 1122012 ROBINSON RICKEY LEWIS JR CAMRY LE 4S 57775 112 60367 -52.01 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 -3.38 0.00 -55.39 15660R 2186 MP 09302013 REASON:RELEASE TO ORANGE
5944834802013 DEANS JORDAN BLAKE PICKUP X CAB 1/2 TON 4TK 594483480 79838 -33.66 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -33.66 15661R 2187 MP 09302013 -30.44-50 0.00 0.00 -30.44__________ -64.10
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
5750942482013 ZEHNER WILLIAM JOHN JR 2007 COAM HC HC 575094248 80606 -183.65 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -183.65 15662R 2188 MP 09302013 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE REGISTERED IN VIRGINIA
5750942842013 ZEHNER WILLIAM JOHN JR BOAT TRAILER BT 575094284 76231 -1.87 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.87 15663R 2189 MP 10012013 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE REGISTERED IN VA
5469541712013 CAVALIER JOANNE 2006 SHAN MC MC
546954171 80529 -90.72 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -90.72 15664R 2190 MP 10012013 REASON:INCORRECT VALUE
4898129962013 LONG JUSTIN BLAKE 10 FT CT
489812996 74943 -9.45 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -9.45 15665R 2191 MP 10012013
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
784717072013 TURNER CLARICE RUSSELL CONTINENTAL 4S 78471707 78065 -10.67 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -10.67 15666R 2192 MP 10012013
-9.66-50 0.00 0.00 -9.66__________
-20.33 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
2681244412013 FOWLER WILLIAM CRAIG 2012 KARA TL TL
268124441 80799 -69.51 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -69.51 15667R 2193 MP 10012013
REASON:CORRECTED VALUE PER BILL OF SALE
5987233402013 HAWKINS CASSIDY DAWN COMMANDER 4X4 MP 598723340 75287 -69.53 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -69.53 15668R 2194 CW 10022013
REASON:TURNED TAG IN AND SOLD VEH
13760 1122012 PENNINGTON NICKY LEE PICKUP F150 4X4 X CAB TK 13760 112 59067 -8.63 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -8.63 15669R 2195 MP 10022013 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE IN VA
60707 1122012 MILLER ANTHONY CURTISS SENTRA 4S
60707 112 60409 -80.15 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 -5.21 0.00 -85.36 15670R 2196 MP 10022013 REASON:RELEASE TO ORANGE COUNTY
784243302013 SAUNDERS TANYA MICHELLE NEW SPECTRA 4S
78424330 80688 -32.84 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -32.84 15671R 2197 MP 10022013
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE OSLD
3975231182013 VAUGHAN ROSE MARIE LS 4S
397523118 75065 -20.36 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -20.36 15672R 2198 MP 10022013
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE TRADED IN ON ANOTHER
16
COSSYS PERSON COUNTY TAX OFFICE COLLECTION SCROLL-12:LEVY ADJUSTMENTS ALL TAX YEARS 10282013 PAGE: 2
ACCOUNT # COLREC COUNTY-TAX DISTRICT DISTRICT DOG PENALTY INT/DISC LIEN-COST TOTAL NUMBER TRNREC CLRK DATE
DISTRICT-"
2001329352013 CRABTREE MORRIS WILSON VAN VENTURE VN
200132935 79293 -9.80 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -9.80 15673R 2199 MP 10032013
REASON:RELEASE TO CASWELL
43730 1122012 JONES PAULINE SMITH SEBRING 4S 43730 112 60417 -0.29 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.29 6350R 2200 BSG 10032013
-0.33-50 0.00 0.00 -0.33__________
-0.62 REASON:UNDER DOLLAR
9728 1122012 KNOTT RANDALL WAYNE P UP RAM 4 DR 1/2 TN TK
9728 112 59370 -0.11 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.11 6350R 2201 BSG 10032013
-0.16-50 0.00 0.00 -0.16__________ -0.27 REASON:UNDER DOLLAR
5152536182013 MASSE GARY WARREN 4 RUNNER 4WD MP
515253618 75565 -72.76 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -72.76 15674R 2202 MP 10032013 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
18442 1122012 ALBRIGHT CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL PICKUP RANGER 1/2 TON TK
18442 112 58922 -3.92 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 -0.29 0.00 -4.21 15675R 2203 CW 10042013
REASON:SOLD VEH TURNED IN TAG
2407120702013 EGGLESTON BRADFORD ALLEN ACCORD EX 4S 240712070 78428 -16.11 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -16.11 15676R 2205 CW 10042013
REASON:MILEAGE ADJUSTMENT OF27 14 PERCENT
4935 3042013 CARVER DOROTHY W 6 & 75/100 ACRES 4935 304 9627 -25.03 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -25.03 6377R 2209 CW 10042013 -22.53-50 0.00 0.00 -22.53__________
-47.56
REASON:CORRECT LAND FOR 2013
21691 3062013 MANGAN TIMOTHY J & CAROLYN C DEF/T 117&32/100 ACRES 21691 306 22221 -246.38 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -246.38 6378R 2210 CW 10042013
REASON:CHANGED LAND FOR 2013
33232 3022013 HILL LESTER PARRISH & GLORIA 2 & 63/100 ACRES/HSE 33232 302 27032 -218.96 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -218.96 6379R 2211 CW 10042013 REASON:CORRECT SFD 90PCT COMP F2013
62688 3012013 STEWART CHERISH S WOODBERRY/LT12/MOD&L 62688 301 26008 -213.76 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -213.76 6380R 2213 CW 10072013 REASON:UNF UPS/CORRECT F2013
44224 3022013 CARLTON STANLEY J & ANNEMARIE 1&90/100AC/LT2/MOD
44224 302 25643 -161.52 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -161.52 6381R 2214 CW 10072013 REASON:UPS/PART UNF F2013
4413 3032013 DUNCAN KATHLEEN B & OTHERS 7&25/100AC & HOUSE
4413 303 6600 -151.29 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -151.29 6382R 2215 CW 10072013
REASON:RMVD FRM LAND USE BY MISTAKE F2013
27673 1122012 HOWERTON KEITH ALLEN WRANGLER S MP 27673 112 57381 -3.83 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.83 15677R 2218 MP 10092013
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE TOTAL LOSS
12752 1012013 YEARWOOD GRADING INC BUSINESS PERSONAL 12752 101 37271 -146.20 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -146.20 6383R 2227 RH 10102013 REASON:ADJ VALUE DAMAGED EQUIP
12752 1122012 YEARWOOD GRADING INC BUSINESS PERSONAL 12752 112 60989 -8.13 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 -0.82 0.00 0.00 -8.95 6384R 2228 RH 10102013 REASON:CORRECTION ON VALUE OF EQUIP
12752 1112011 YEARWOOD GRADING INC BUSINESS PERSONAL
12752 111 51790 -8.14 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 -0.82 0.00 0.00 -8.96 6385R 2229 RH 10102013
REASON:CORRECTION VALUE EQUIP
61720 1122012 DAVIS KATHY PENDLETON MILAN PREMIER 4S
61720 112 55518 -58.19 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -58.19 15678R 2230 MP 10102013
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
5210840422013 ALEXANDER SONYA GAIL CAMRY 4S 521084042 80400 -15.16 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -15.16 15679R 2232 SRJ 10112013
REASON:MILEAGE ADJUSTMENT
17
COSSYS PERSON COUNTY TAX OFFICE COLLECTION SCROLL-12:LEVY ADJUSTMENTS ALL TAX YEARS 10282013 PAGE: 3
ACCOUNT # COLREC COUNTY-TAX DISTRICT DISTRICT DOG PENALTY INT/DISC LIEN-COST TOTAL NUMBER TRNREC CLRK DATE
DISTRICT-"
2312145812013 WINSTEAD ROY LEE JUNIUS TAURUS SE 4S
231214581 80939 -43.05 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -43.05 15680R 2233 CW 10112013
-38.94-50 0.00 0.00 -38.94__________ -81.99 REASON:TURNED IN TAG AND SOLD VEH
4024934362013 ROXBORO ANIMAL HOSPITAL OF PER VAN SIENNA XLE VN
402493436 79794 -58.92 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -58.92 15681R 2234 MP 10142013 -53.99-50 0.00 0.00 -53.99__________ -112.91 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
2444142042013 BAREFOOT SHEILA GRAVES 4 RUNNER LIMITED 4WD MP 244414204 76151 -86.03 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -86.03 15682R 2235 MP 10142013 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SODL
2444142042013 BAREFOOT SHEILA GRAVES 4 RUNNER LIMITED 4WD MP
244414204 76151 86.03 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 86.03 15682R 2236 MP 10142013 REASON:INTEREST
2444142042013 BAREFOOT SHEILA GRAVES 4 RUNNER LIMITED 4WD MP
244414204 76151 -86.03 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 -4.30 0.00 -90.33 15682R 2237 MP 10142013
441416772013 STEPHENS AL HALEY LE SABRE CUSTOM 4S 44141677 78035 -9.66 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -9.66 15683R 2238 MP 10142013 -18.69-50 0.00 0.00 -18.69__________
-28.35
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
4744237132013 WILKERSON DEREK ANTONIO GALANT ES 4S 474423713 80071 -18.13 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -18.13 15684R 2239 MP 10142013
-26.32-50 0.00 0.00 -26.32__________
-44.45 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
27802 1122012 REID TOM MARCUS 4 RUNNER SR5 4WD MP
27802 112 59306 -9.80 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -9.80 15685R 2240 MP 10142013
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
1059421882013 CLAYTON DONNIE ANDREW COROLLA CE 4S 105942188 78546 -6.44 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -6.44 15686R 2241 MP 10142013
REASON:MILEAGE ADJ OF 19 57
597839572013 HARRIS JOHN DAVIS ENDEAVOR LTD AWD MP 59783957 75904 -34.58 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -34.58 15687R 2242 MP 10162013 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
55997 1122012 MCCORMACK NANCY WOOTEN 1 & 83/100AC & D/WIDE 55997 112 61199 0.02 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 2012R 2243 BSG 10162013 REASON:PAYMENT RECEIVED
4817845192013 LUNSFORD LEMMIE DEE CHARGER SXT 4S
481784519 65723 -60.61 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -60.61 15688R 2244 CW 10172013 REASON:SOLD VEH TURNED IN TAG
4741930902013 JACKSON CHARLES ROY VAN SAFARI 4X2 VN
474193090 79448 -2.73 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.73 15689R 2245 MP 10172013
-2.48-50 0.00 0.00 -2.48__________ -5.21 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
32126 1032013 501 TRUCK SERVICES INC F D LONG EST/TR4/H&L
32126 103 21898 -158.43 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -158.43 6386R 2246 CW 10172013 REASON:CORRECT OFBS HEAT CONDITION F13
49814 3012013 GROTHE JOHN C JR & KRISTINA M CARWINCO PT/L13/MOD&L
49814 301 24956 -86.81 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -86.81 6387R 2247 CW 10172013
REASON:CORRECTED STORY HEIGHT FOR 2013
56609 1012013 REW LAND LLC 12 & 85/100AC/TRT 1 56609 101 27664 -148.24 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -148.24 6388R 2248 CW 10172013
REASON:APPROVED FOR PUV FOR 2013
39904 3022013 THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TR TIMBERLAKE AC/LT22/H&L 39904 302 5959 -305.02 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -305.02 6389R 2249 CW 10172013 REASON:REMOVED ALL BUILDINGS FOR 2013
18
COSSYS PERSON COUNTY TAX OFFICE COLLECTION SCROLL-12:LEVY ADJUSTMENTS ALL TAX YEARS 10282013 PAGE: 4
ACCOUNT # COLREC COUNTY-TAX DISTRICT DISTRICT DOG PENALTY INT/DISC LIEN-COST TOTAL NUMBER TRNREC CLRK DATE
DISTRICT-"
4990629522013 PERKINS SHANE DANIEL PICKUP X CAB 1/2 TON 4TK
499062952 64156 -26.93 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -26.93 15690R 2251 MP 10182013
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHCILE SOLD
25366 1122012 ALKINS GARY WARD STRATUS SE 4S 25366 112 58828 -7.96 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -7.96 15691R 2252 MP 10182013
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE TOTAL LOSS
6090819692013 CARTHEN BRANDON ALLEN PICKUP F150 4X4 1/2 TOTK 609081969 63173 -22.52 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -22.52 15692R 2253 MP 10182013 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
14294 1012013 PROVIDENCE BAPT CH PER CO INC PARSONAGE HWY 49 NORTH 14294 101 15730 -446.98 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -446.98 6390R 2255 CW 10212013 REASON:HSE RAZED F13 AND MVD GARAGE TO REC 16704 FOR 2014
14294 1012013 PROVIDENCE BAPT CH PER CO INC PARSONAGE HWY 49 NORTH
14294 101 15730 0.00 0.00- 0 -6.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -6.00 6391R 2256 CW 10212013 REASON:EXEMPT FOR 2013
14294 1012013 PROVIDENCE BAPT CH PER CO INC PARSONAGE HWY 49 NORTH
14294 101 15730 0.00 0.00- 0 6.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 6391R 2257 CW 10212013
REASON:SHOULD NOT RELEASE STORMWATER
14294 1012013 PROVIDENCE BAPT CH PER CO INC PARSONAGE HWY 49 NORTH 14294 101 15730 -80.56 0.00- 0 -6.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -86.56 6391R 2258 CW 10212013
REASON:EXEMPT FOR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES FOR 2013
1599 3012013 CARVER FLOYD HARSON ESTATE HOUSE & LOT 1599 301 9585 -225.01 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -225.01 6393R 2260 CW 10212013 -202.50-50 0.00 0.00 -202.50__________
-427.51
REASON:SR EXEMPTION APPROVED FOR 2013
33550 3012013 CHANDLER MARY LUCILLE LIFE EST HOUSE & LOT 33550 301 14785 -414.85 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -414.85 6394R 2261 CW 10212013
-373.36-50 0.00 0.00 -373.36__________
-788.21 REASON:SENIOR EXEMPTION APPROVED FOR 2013
7403 3012013 CLAYTON ELBERT B L/E H/L
7403 301 258 -381.16 0.00- 0 -6.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -387.16 6395R 2262 CW 10212013
REASON:SENIOR EXEMPTION APPROVED FOR 2013
52652 3012013 COOK PATRICIA BREEZE THE WOODLANDS/LT 3 52652 301 25649 -522.72 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -522.72 6396R 2263 CW 10212013
-470.44-50 0.00 0.00 -470.44__________
-993.16 REASON:SENIOR EXEMPTION APPROVED FOR 2013
6286 3012013 GARRETT EARL THOMAS HOUSE & 9 & 29/100 ACRES
6286 301 4239 -520.72 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -520.72 6397R 2264 CW 10212013
REASON:SENIOR EXEMPTION APPROVED FOR 2013
1265 3012013 HOLLOWAY ANNETTE H/L LOT NO 3 1265 301 8083 -264.84 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -264.84 6398R 2265 CW 10212013
REASON:APPROVED SENIOR EXEMPTION FOR 2013
18233 3012013 SMITHERS CAROLYN P 1 & 52/100 AC & HOUSE 18233 301 1266 -468.75 0.00- 0 0.00-30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -468.75 6399R 2266 CW 10212013 REASON:SENIOR EXEMPTION APPROVED FOR 2013
31515 2012013 GENTRY THOMAS A PERSONAL/BOAT 31515 201 35979 -18.62 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 -2.46 0.00 0.00 -21.08 6400R 2273 CW 10222013 REASON:SOLD BOAT AND MOTOR AUGUST 2012
6308921852013 LANE ROBERTA JEAN COROLLA 4S
630892185 82436 -36.34 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -36.34 15693R 2274 MP 10222013
REASON:GAINED 2 MONTHS
1639533972013 DIXON WARREN PRESTON SIE 2500 EXT HD SLE 4XTK
163953397 83648 -217.35 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -217.35 15694R 2275 MP 10222013
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
4019635912013 COLE NANCY MACKIE ENCLAVE CXL AWD MP 401963591 83842 -29.16 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -29.16 15695R 2277 MP 10232013
-26.24-50 0.00 0.00 -26.24__________
-55.40
19
COSSYS PERSON COUNTY TAX OFFICE COLLECTION SCROLL-12:LEVY ADJUSTMENTS ALL TAX YEARS 10282013 PAGE: 5
ACCOUNT # COLREC COUNTY-TAX DISTRICT DISTRICT DOG PENALTY INT/DISC LIEN-COST TOTAL NUMBER TRNREC CLRK DATE
DISTRICT-"
4764140782013 CLAYTON BONITA GAIL MOUNTAINEER MP
476414078 84329 -12.09 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -12.09 15696R 2278 MP 10232013
REASON:GAINED 4 MONTHS WITH NEW TAG CBK6297
498239582013 JONES JOYCE WALKER VAN ODYSSEY EX VN 49823958 84209 -64.15 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -64.15 15697R 2279 MP 10232013
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD
3884520052013 WESLEY KATRINA LEVETTE CAVALIER 4S 388452005 82256 -5.10 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -5.10 15698R 2280 MP 10232013 -4.58-50 0.00 0.00 -4.58__________
-9.68
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE TOTAL LOSS
3036534632013 CURRY JANET KAY ION 2 4S 303653463 83714 -36.54 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -36.54 15699R 2281 MP 10232013
REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE TOTAL LOSS
6345424912013 ASHLEY STEPHEN ROGERS VIBE 2WD SW 4S 634542491 82742 -40.60 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -40.60 15700R 2282 MP 10232013 REASON:TAG TURNED IN VEHICLE SOLD HAD TAG LESS THAN ONE MONTH
372245542013 WARD LISA JEANINE CIVIC HYBRID L 4S 37224554 84805 -17.70 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -17.70 15701R 2283 MP 10242013 REASON:MILEAGE ADJ OF 12 74 PERCENT
5861820762013 FOUSHEE ENTERPRISES, LLC P UP C2500 X CAB 3/4 TTK
586182076 82327 -39.40 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -39.40 15702R 2284 MP 10242013 REASON:MILEAGE ADJ 68 31 PERCENT
1834448122013 WILLIAMS JAN 2012 COAM CT CT
183444812 85063 -102.42 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -102.42 15703R 2285 SRJ 10242013
REASON:VEHICLE SOLD TAGGED FOR LESS THAN 30 DAYS
17307 1012013 PIEDMONT LANDSCAPE BUSINESS PERSONAL 17307 101 41857 -3.50 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.50 15151R 2286 RH 10252013
REASON:DELETE MOTV BILLED ON PERS REC
54680 1122012 TELLO MARCELINA BERNARDA PEREZ SRX FWD LUX MP 54680 112 55449 0.00 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15704R 2288 CW 10252013 -183.03-50 0.00 0.00 -183.03__________
-183.03
REASON:DOES NOT LIVE IN CITY
36866 1092009 CLAYTON JOSHUA NELSON HHR LT VN 36866 109 45283 -87.85 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 -37.39 0.00 -125.24 6350R 2289 BSG 10252013
REASON:BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE 10/24/13
36866 1122012 CLAYTON JOSHUA NELSON MIRAGE DE 4D 4S 36866 112 55332 -14.21 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 -1.70 0.00 -15.91 6350R 2290 BSG 10252013 REASON:BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE 10/24/13
36866 1122012 CLAYTON JOSHUA NELSON RANGER S/C XLT TK 36866 112 56564 -102.27 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 -10.50 0.00 -112.77 6350R 2291 BSG 10252013 REASON:BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE 10/24/13
3649529082013 MOLL DONALD PHILIP SL1 SEDAN 4S
364952908 83159 -8.43 0.00- 0 0.00- 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -8.43 15705R 2292 MP 10252013 REASON:SALVAGE TITLE
20
COSSYS PERSON COUNTY TAX OFFICE COLLECTION SCROLL-12:LEVY ADJUSTMENTS ALL TAX YEARS 10282013 PAGE: 6
TRANSACTION TOTALS PAGE
TRANSACTIONS FROM 1 THROUGH 2292 IN SY0:TAX .MOD AMOUNTS FROM -999999999.99 THROUGH 999999999.99TRANSACTION TYPES:R
TRANSACTIONS 09302013->10262013 0 PAYMENTS 0 DISC/CORR 86 RELEASES TOTAL CREDIT NET CREDIT (PAYMENT+RELEASE) (TOTAL-DISC/CORR)PERSON COUNTY TAX OFFICE 0.00 0.00 -7473.25 7473.25 7473.25LATE LISTING 0.00 0.00 -19.72 19.72 19.72
DOG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CODE DISTRICT NAME 30 STORMWATER FEE 0.00 0.00 -12.00 12.00 12.00 --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- SUB-TOTAL 0.00 0.00 -7504.97 7504.97 7504.97
STATE 3PCT INTEREST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
DISCOUNT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00INTEREST 0.00 0.00 -63.40 63.40 63.40LIEN SALE COST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
TOTAL 0.00 0.00 -7568.37 7568.37 7568.37
50 CITY OF ROXBORO 0.00 0.00 -1463.69 1463.69 1463.69LATE LISTING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
SUB-TOTAL 0.00 0.00 -1463.69 1463.69 1463.69
DISCOUNT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00INTEREST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- TOTAL 0.00 0.00 -1463.69 1463.69 1463.69
TOTAL TAXES 0.00 0.00 -8968.66 8968.66 8968.66TOTAL LIEN COST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00TOTAL DISCOUNT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
TOTAL INTEREST 0.00 0.00 -63.40 63.40 63.40
TOTAL STATE 3PCT INTEREST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 =============== =============== =============== =============== =============== GRAND TOTAL 0.00 0.00 -9032.06 9032.06 9032.06
21
NameAddress 2 Address 3Bill # Status Transaction #Refund Description Refund ReasonCreate Date Tax District Levy Type Change Interest Change Total ChangePERSON COUNTYTax ($88.90)$0.00 ($88.90)Refund $88.90PERSON COUNTYTax ($31.36)$0.00 ($31.36)ROXBORO Tax ($27.51)$0.00 ($27.51)ROXBORO Vehicle Fee $0.00$0.00$0.00Refund $58.87PERSON COUNTYTax ($27.37)$0.00 ($27.37)Refund $27.37Refund Total $313.6710/03/20130005963964 AUTHORIZED 475372 Refund Generated due to adjustment on Bill #0005963964-2012-MileageTERRY CLEVELAND WORLEY 4217 MORTON PULLIAM RD ROXBORO, NC 27574Adjustment < $10010/03/2013RONNIE THOMAS CARVER PO BOX 53 ROXBORO, NC 27573Adjustment < $1000008461044 AUTHORIZED 1130976 Refund Generated due to adjustment on Bill #0008461044-2012-2012-0000-00Over Assessment09/27/20130008574385 AUTHORIZED 475370 Refund Generated due to adjustment on Bill #0008574385-2013-Sold/TradedRICHARD LEE RICE 35 COUNTRY SIDE DR ROXBORO, NC 27574Adjustment < $100North Carolina Vehicle Tax SystemNCVTS Pending Refund reportReport Date 10/28/2013 9:28:58 AMAddress 1 Refund Type Page 1 of 322
AGENDA ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 4, 2013
Agenda Title: Site Assessment Report for Person-Durham Multi-Jurisdictional Park
Summary of Information: In 2012, Person and Durham Counties completed a Feasibility Study for
a Multi-Jurisdictional Business Park Development. The feasibility study was positive and the two
counties agreed to continue to pursue a joint development by following the key recommendation
from the study – to complete a site assessment process. The site assessment was to yield cost
information and a plan that would launch into the development of a multijurisdictional business park.
In early 2013, Person and Durham Counties engaged Creative Economic Development Consulting to
complete the site assessment. The attached site assessment included identifying potential tracts,
evaluating options and providing future recommendations.
Crystal Morphis, Founder and CEO of Creative Economic Development Consulting will present her
report to Board and provide some guidance on next steps.
Recommended Action: Receive the information
Submitted By: Heidi York, County Manager
23
1
October 29, 2013
Site Assessment Report
Person-Durham
Multi-Jurisdictional Park
24
Person-Durham Site Assessment
1
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 2
Site Identification 4
Site Assessment Summary 9
Recommendations and Next Steps 13
Attachment: Article on Multi-Jurisdictional Parks
25
Person-Durham Site Assessment
2
Executive Summary
In 2012, Person and Durham Counties completed a
Feasibility Study for a Multi-Jurisdictional Business
Park Development. The feasibility study was
positive and the two partners continued to pursue
a joint development by following the key
recommendation from the study – to complete a
site assessment process. The site assessment was
to yield cost information and a plan that would
launch into the development of a multi-
jurisdictional business park. In early 2013, Person
and Durham Counties engaged Creative Economic
Development Consulting to complete the site
assessment.
The consulting team began the site assessment by reviewing the areas of recommended focus
from the Feasibility Study. Those areas are south of Roxboro along Hwy 15-501 and near the
two-county border. After preliminary review was complete, Person and Durham County staff,
along with members of the consulting team, contacted landowners of key large tracts to
determine willingness to sell. These large tracts would be necessary to anchor a park
development. The results were unfavorable. Most landowners were unwilling to sell and of
those that were willing to sell, a selling price was indicated well above market price.
Staff and the consulting team went back to the drawing board and expanded the area of review
to include areas in northeastern Orange County and areas in Person and Durham Counties
closer to the Person-Durham-Orange border. Landowner inquiries were not favorable in terms
of willingness to sell and/or sell at a fair market price. Plus, this area is farther from
infrastructure which would require a large-scale development to make the return-on-
investment for infrastructure extension feasible.
Given the inability to find key large tracts of land available for sale in areas where infrastructure
extensions are cost-feasible, Creative EDC recommends that Person and Durham Counties
pursue business park developments individually at this time. Both communities have
opportunities outside of developing a joint park. We also recommend revisiting the multi-
jurisdictional park opportunity every couple of years. Often, development is a matter of timing.
The opportunity to develop a joint Person-Durham park may emerge when a key tract of land
becomes available or when infrastructure is extended to areas that render a once unfeasible
location feasible. Getting the word out about the counties’ interest in business park
development could encourage landowners to come forward with cost-competitive options not
realized in this study process.
26
Person-Durham Site Assessment
3
Primary Study AreaKey Large
Tracts of
Land
•Unwillingness
to sell
•Above market
pricing Expanded Study AreaExpand study
area
•Areas in
northeastern
Orange County
•Expand Person
and Durham
study areas Secondary Study AreaKey Large
Tracts of
Land
•Unwillingness
to sell
•Above market
pricing RecommendationsNext Steps
•Revisit with
future
opportunities
•Pursue
individual
County park
developments
Person and Durham Counties are to be commended for thinking outside-the-box. A multi-
jurisdictional park is one way for communities to leverage resources in economic development
to create a better, more marketable product. We encourage the two partners to continue to
work together in economic development and in other areas of public investment.
Project Summary
27
Person-Durham Site Assessment
4
Site Identification
In the 2012 Feasibility Study, it was determined that the following areas should be considered
for a multi-jurisdictional park. These areas were selected due to their accessibility to
infrastructure and transportation and lack of major development impediments. For a full
understanding of why these areas were selected, please review in detail the previous Feasibility
Study.
Areas near the Person County Airport
Areas near the Person County Business and Industrial Center
Areas near the Person-Durham County border
To recap from the Feasibility Study, areas farther south into Durham County were eliminated
from consideration due to Durham’s Urban Growth Boundary which limits the extension of
water and wastewater services from the City of Durham to the area.
When this study process began, further discussion with Durham County revealed that areas
near the Person County Business and Industrial Center were too far away from Durham County
to be considered viable for the multi-jurisdictional park project. Thus, the consulting team
focused on areas near the airport and the two-county border.
To identify which sites in these areas had potential for a business park development, the
consulting team reviewed a host of factors:
Infrastructure – Extensions would come from Roxboro. It was determined in the
Feasibility Study that Roxboro has sufficient excess capacity. Person County staff
assisted in the determination of distance of extension needed to specific site areas.
Location – Discussed above, the site would need to be south of Roxboro in order to take
advantage of the Durham workforce but within reasonable extension of utilities.
Highway and rail access – The site would need to be easily accessible from Hwy 15-501,
the major transportation route to access I-85. Rail access would be an added advantage
but was not a requirement.
Developable acreage – The total acreage would need to be large enough to provide a
return-on-investment for utility extension. Also, key large tracts will need to be available
to anchor the development. For example, if our team is able to find a 200-acre tract that
is available, then smaller tracts could be added to form a development. It is much
harder to compile many small tracts for a development.
Future growth potential – Beyond the initial tracts reviewed, other land in the area
should be available in order to grow the business park. It would be ideal to have
available adjoining land that would allow for a multi-phased development.
28
Person-Durham Site Assessment
5
Assessed value – The assessed value indicates a fair market price and is used to
determine general cost-competitiveness.
Ownership – Tracts in single ownership are preferred to tracts with many owners.
Topography – A flat, gentle slope is preferred.
Development and environmental impediments such as wetlands, streams – A review
of streams, flood plain, and water bodies was performed to identify obstacles for
development
Zoning/land use compatibility – The current use, adjacent uses, and zoning were
reviewed.
Marketability – Qualitative features are important to determine whether a site will be
marketable such as surrounding land use compatibility.
The consulting team reviewed the above factors on many tracts of land in the target areas. The
following maps show the areas of review.
29
Person-Durham Site Assessment
6
Person County Airport Area
The area near the airport has good access to Hwy 15-501. It can be served with utilities from
Roxboro with extensions that are feasible. The area included several large acreage tracts which
could be the cornerstone of a business park development. The added feature of access to the
airport is an advantage. There are some streams in the area, but there are significant areas not
impacted by streams where development could be concentrated. The consulting team was
encouraged by the opportunity for development in this area.
Airport
HWY 15-501
30
Person-Durham Site Assessment
7
Person-Durham Border Area (Person County)
The area along the border between Person and Durham Counties is farther from Roxboro utility
service but still feasible for extension. Person County owns a large tract of land in this area
which could be the anchor tract for a development; however, it is landlocked and additional
land would need to be joined to create an access. Again, streams are present in the area, but
their position leaves ample room for development to be concentrated. The consulting team
focused on how the large anchor tracts could be accessed from Hwy 15-501.
HWY 15-501
Person-Durham
Border
31
Person-Durham Site Assessment
8
Person-Durham Border Area (Durham County)
The area along the Person-Durham border that lies in Durham County has several large to
medium-sized tracts near Hwy 15-501, some with access from feeder roads. This area is the
farthest from utility service which would be extended from Roxboro. The stream impact in this
area was less but still present. In general, this area has smaller tracts of land which would need
to be combined with tracts in Person County to create a development large enough to warrant
utility extension.
Person-Durham
Border
HWY 15-501
NC 57
32
Person-Durham Site Assessment
9
Site Assessment
Creative EDC began the assessment with the reviews noted above which included
infrastructure, land use, accessibility, etc. We found that the study areas near the airport and
two-county border contained appropriate land for a business park development. There were no
red-flags in our initial review.
Airport Area Two-County Border Area
Infrastructure Extension feasible Extension feasible but farther
away
Location Good Good
Highway and rail access Accessible to Hwy 15-501 Accessible to Hwy 15-501
Developable acreage Yes – 650 acres identified Yes – 700 acres identified
Future growth potential Yes Yes
Assessed value Competitive Competitive
Ownership Good Good
Topography Good Good
Development impediments Limited stream and wetlands
impact
Limited stream and wetlands
impact
Zoning/compatibility Rezoning required Rezoning required
Marketability Good Good
Following the initial review, the consulting team went on to the next steps recommended in the
2012 Feasibility Study. We excerpt it here for reference.
“Complete a site assessment and prioritization process. This feasibility study identified
some potential areas for a large park development. However, it is important to
thoroughly assess these areas and rank order for development. All of the assessment
steps, and more, will be needed if the site is to be certified through the NC Department
of Commerce – and Sanford Holshouser would recommend that a park be certified.
None of the funds expended on these steps would be wasted; rather, they will be a part
of making the site marketable. Some of the steps in the process would include:
o Confirm willingness of landowners to sell or be a part of a public-private
partnership.
o Determine general costs of land development such as infrastructure extension,
road improvements, land purchase or option, etc.
o Rank the sites in order to focus on the site with the highest development
potential. If for some reason the first priority sites does not work out
(environmental issues for example), you automatically have another site
identified.”
33
Person-Durham Site Assessment
10
We commenced with the steps to confirm the willingness of landowners to sell and/or be a part
of a public-private development. The consulting team compiled a list of landowners of the
largest tracts of land in each study area. From that list, we identified key tracts that would be
necessary to anchor a business park development. Smaller tracts could be added as the park
progressed. The tracts identified were in excess of 100 acres.
In both Person and Durham Counties, landowners of the key identified tracts were contacted by
either County staff or the consulting team. Responses were not favorable. Most were unwilling
to sell their property or be a part of a development venture. Those that were willing to sell
indicated that the sales prices would have to be significant for them to consider it. An above
market sales price would make a business park development uncompetitive. One of the reasons
for exploring land in Person County was the general price-competitiveness of land.
Staff and the consulting team decided to go back to the drawing board. Without available key
tracts of land in the first two study areas, we expanded the evaluation area. Through
discussions with staff and a review of transportation corridors, the consulting team explored
areas in northeastern Orange County. We also included additional tracts of land in Person
County farther west along the Person-Orange border and tracts in Durham County closer to the
Durham-Person-Orange border.
34
Person-Durham Site Assessment
11
Orange County Area
The area in northeastern Orange County along NC 57 was reviewed because of the connection
to Hwy 15-501. There are a few mid-size tracts in this area that are proximate to the tracts
reviewed in northwestern Durham County. Also, the search into Person County along the
Orange County border revealed a small number of large acreage tracts. In Durham County, the
tracts close to this area were smaller.
NC 57
Orange-Durham
Border Orange-Person
Border
35
Person-Durham Site Assessment
12
Primary Study AreaKey Large
Tracts of
Land
•Unwillingness
to sell
•Above market
pricing Expand Study AreaExpand
study area
•Areas in
northeastern
Orange County
•Expand Person
and Durham
study areas Secondary Study AreaKey Large
Tracts of
Land
•Unwillingness
to sell
•Above market
pricing
Staff and the consulting team made inquiries to landowners. Again, the inquiries failed to yield
a willingness to sell at a fair market price. Most were unwilling to sell and out of those that
were willing to sell, most indicated an above market price would be required.
After a planning session with Person, Durham, and Orange County staff, another hurdle to
development was identified. In this area of Orange-Person-Durham Counties the distance to
infrastructure from Roxboro is much greater. Infrastructure extension from an Orange County
provider is not available, as is the case with the City of Durham. Even if acreage could be
assembled in this area, a business park development would likely not be large enough to
provide a return-on-investment for infrastructure extension. The distance is so great that a very
large park would likely be need to provide the volume of users which would return the
investment to Roxboro.
36
Person-Durham Site Assessment
13
Next Steps
Creative EDC recommends that Person and Durham Counties move forward individually with
business park and site development at this time. The multi-jurisdictional park concept is ideal
for these two communities because of a shared transportation corridor, workforce, and feasible
utility extensions from Roxboro. Thus, we also recommend that Person and Durham Counties
continually watch real estate transactions in the areas of review and revisit this project every
few years. Often business park developments depend on timing. If one of the large tracts of
land identified as a cornerstone for this project becomes available, then seize the opportunity
to brush off this body of work for implementation.
Person County has individual opportunities around the existing
Person County Business and Industrial Center as well as areas in
northern Person County. The area around the industrial park was identified in the Feasibility
Study, and we believe it remains a valid area for development. There is already infrastructure in
the area and there are large tracts of undeveloped land.
Durham City-County Planning Department and Durham Chamber of
Commerce has been working to identify business development sites
as well. Durham County has many sites but, in general, they are smaller and are priced higher
which often eliminates the County from consideration for larger recruitment projects. The
challenge of identifying cost-competitive sites for manufacturing and distribution remain. We
encourage Durham County to take an active role in product development to ensure that it
remains a location to attract a diverse set of industry targets. Examples of an active role could
include a public-private partnership with a private developer that would attract larger projects
and/or partnering on development costs to keep the overall cost to companies lower.
We recommend that the process used for this study and the previous Feasibility Study be used
as an outline for future site and park development.
Site identification and preliminary review
Landowner contact
Due diligence study
o Preliminary planning
o NC Department of Commerce Site Certification Check List (Phase 1, geo-technical
review, utility documentation, etc.)
o Cost analysis
Master Planning
Development
Person County
Durham County
37
Person-Durham Site Assessment
14
In summary, we commend Person and Durham Counties for forging this partnership in
economic development. Throughout the feasibility study and site assessment, Person and
Durham Counties remained focused on their intent to support economic growth. The
communities see how together they can leverage strengths to create a better opportunity for
sustainable growth.
We encourage Person and Durham Counties to continue this partnership as the future will likely
offer an opportunity for a multi-jurisdictional park as well as other public investment
opportunities.
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
AGENDA ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 4, 2013
Agenda Title: Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy for PATS
Summary of Information: PATS had a Drug and Alcohol Review by RLS & Associates, Inc. who
is contracted through NCDOT. This is a required review of NCDOT. We passed the review and
inspection but needed to update/revise the Drug and Alcohol Policy. The policy has not been
updated since January 18, 2011. This policy is basically the same with a few changes in wording.
This action is a formality to maintain the board’s approval on the policy.
Recommended Action: Adopted by the Board of Commissioners
Submitted By: Kathy Adcock, PATS Manager
48
DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING POLICY
Person Area Transportation System
Adopted as of ______________
A. PURPOSE
1) The Person Area Transportation System provides public transit and paratransit
services for the residents of Person County. Part of our mission is to ensure that
this service is delivered safely, efficiently, and effectively by establishing a drug
and alcohol-free work environment, and to ensure that the workplace remains
free from the effects of drugs and alcohol in order to promote the health and
safety of employees and the general public. In keeping with this mission, Person
Area Transportation System declares that the unlawful manufacture,
distribution, dispense, possession, or use of controlled substances or misuse of
alcohol is prohibited for all employees.
2) Additionally, the purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines to maintain a
drug and alcohol-free workplace in compliance with the Drug-Free Workplace Act
of 1988, and the Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act of 1991. This
policy is intended to comply with all applicable Federal regulations governing
workplace anti-drug and alcohol programs in the transit industry. Specifically, the
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) of the U.S. Department of Transportation
has published 49 CFR Part 655, as amended, that mandates urine drug testing
and breath alcohol testing for safety-sensitive positions, and prohibits
performance of safety-sensitive functions when there is a positive test result.
The U. S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) has also published 49 CFR
Part 40, as amended, that sets standards for the collection and testing of urine
and breath specimens.
3) Any provisions set forth in this policy that are included under the sole authority of
Person Area Transportation System and are not provided under the authority
of the above named Federal regulations are underlined. Test conducted under
the sole authority of Person Area Transportation System will be performed on
non-USDOT forms and will be separate from USDOT testing in all respects.
49
B. APPLICABILITY
This Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy applies to all safety-sensitive employees(full- or
part-time) when performing safety sensitive duties Person Area Transportation
System employees that do not perform safety-sensitive functions are also covered
under this policy under the sole authority of Person Area Transportation System. See
Attachment A for a list of employees and the authority under which they are included. A
safety-sensitive function is operation of mass transit service including the operation of a
revenue service vehicle (whether or not the vehicle is in revenue service), maintenance of a
revenue service vehicle or equipment used in revenue service, security personnel who carry
firearms, dispatchers or person controlling the movement of revenue service vehicles and
any other transit employee who is required to hold a Commercial Drivers License.
Maintenance functions include the repair, overhaul, and rebuild of engines, vehicles and/or
equipment used in revenue service. A list of safety-sensitive positions that perform one or
more of the above mentioned duties is provided in Attachment A. Supervisors are only
safety sensitive if they perform one of the above functions. Volunteers are considered
safety sensitive and subject to testing if they are required to hold a CDL, or receive
remuneration for service in excess of actual expense.
C. DEFINITIONS
Accident: An occurrence associated with the operation of a vehicle even when not in
revenue service in revenue service, if as a result:
a. An individual dies;
b. An individual suffers a bodily injury and immediately receives medical
treatment away from the scene of the accident; or,
c. One or more vehicles incur disabling damage as the result of the
occurrence and are transported away from the scene by a tow truck or
other vehicle. For purposes of this definition, disabling damage means
damage which precludes departure of any vehicle from the scene of the
occurrence in its usual manner in daylight after simple repairs. Disabling
damage includes damage to vehicles that could have been operated but
would have been further damaged if so operated, but does not include
damage which can be remedied temporarily at the scene of the
occurrence without special tools or parts, tire disablement without other
damage even if no spare tire is available, or damage to headlights,
taillights, turn signals, horn, mirrors or windshield wipers that makes them
inoperative.
Adulterated specimen: A specimen that has been altered, as evidence by test results
showing either a substance that is not a normal constituent for that type of specimen or
showing an abnormal concentration of an endogenous substance.
50
Alcohol: The intoxicating agent in beverage alcohol, ethyl alcohol, or other low
molecular weight alcohols contained in any beverage, mixture, mouthwash, candy, food,
preparation or medication.
Alcohol Concentration: Expressed in terms of grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath
as measured by an evidential breath testing device.
Aliquot: A fractional part of a specimen used for testing, it is taken as a sample
representing the whole specimen.
Canceled Test: A drug test that has been declared invalid by a Medical Review Officer.
A canceled test is neither positive nor negative.
Confirmatory Drug Test: A second analytical procedure performed on a different aliquot
of the original specimen to identify and quantify the presence of a specific drug or
metabolite.
Confirmatory Validity Test: A second test performed on a different aliquot of the original
urine specimen to further support a validity test result.
Covered Employee Under FTA Authority: An employee who performs a safety-sensitive
function including an applicant or transferee who is being considered for hire into a
safety-sensitive function (See Attachment A for a list of covered employees).
Covered Employee Under Company Authority: An employee, applicant, or transferee
that will not perform a safety-sensitive function as defined by FTA but is included under
the company’s own authority. (See Attachment A).
Designated Employer Representative (DER): An employee authorized by the employer
to take immediate action to remove employees from safety-sensitive duties and to make
required decisions in testing. The DER also receives test results and other
communications for the employer, consistent with the requirements of 49 CFR Parts 40
and 655.
Department of Transportation (DOT): Department of the federal government which
includes the, Federal Transit Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, Federal
Highway Administration, Federal Motor Carriers’ Safety Administration, Pipeline &
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, United States Coast Guard, and the Office
of the Secretary of Transportation.
Dilute specimen: A urine specimen with creatinine and specific gravity values that are
lower than expected for human urine.
Disabling damage: Damage which precludes departure of any vehicle from the scene of
the occurrence in its usual manner in daylight after simple repairs. Disabling damage
51
includes damage to vehicles that could have been operated but would have been
further damaged if so operated, but does not include damage which can be remedied
temporarily at the scene of the occurrence without special tools or parts, tire
disablement without other damage even if no spare tire is available, or damage to
headlights, taillights, turn signals, horn, mirrors or windshield wipers that makes them
inoperative.
Evidentiary Breath Testing Device (EBT): A Device approved by the NHTSA for the
evidential testing of breath at the 0.02 and the 0.04 alcohol concentrations. Approved
devices are listed on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
conforming products list.
Initial Drug Test: (Screening Drug Test) the test used to differentiate a negative
specimen from one that requires further testing for drugs or drug metabolites.
Initial Specimen Validity Test: The first test used to determine if a urine specimen is
adulterated, diluted, substituted, or invalid
Invalid Result: The result reported by a Department of Health & Human Services
(HHS)-certified laboratory in accordance with the criteria established by the HHS
Mandatory Guidelines when a positive, negative, adulterated, or substituted results
cannot be established for a specific drug or specimen validity test.
Laboratory: Any U.S. laboratory certified by HHS under the National Laboratory
Certification program as meeting standards of Subpart C of the HHS Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs; or, in the case of foreign
laboratories, a laboratory approved for participation by DOT under this part.
Limit of Detection (LOD): The lowest concentration at which a measurand can be
identified, but (for quantitative assays) the concentration cannot be accurately
calculated.
Limit of Quantitation: For quantitative assays, the lowest concentration at which the
identity and concentration of the measurand can be accurately established.
Medical Review Officer (MRO): A licensed physician (medical doctor or doctor of
osteopathy) responsible for receiving laboratory results generated by the drug testing
program who has knowledge of substance abuse disorders, and has appropriate
medical training to interpret and evaluate an individual's confirmed positive test result,
together with his/her medical history, and any other relevant bio-medical information.
Negative Dilute: A drug test result which is negative for the five drug/drug metabolites
but has a specific gravity value lower than expected for human urine.
52
Negative result: The result reported by an HHS-certified laboratory to an MRO when a
specimen contains no drug or the concentration of the drug is less than the cutoff
concentration for the drug or drug class and the specimen is a valid specimen.
Non-negative test result: A urine specimen that is reported as adulterated, substitute,
invalid, or positive for drug/drug metabolites.
Oxidizing Adulterant: A substance that acts alone or in combination with other
substances to oxidize drugs or drug metabolites to prevent the detection of the drug or
metabolites, or affects the reagents in either the initial or confirmatory drug test.
Performing (a safety-sensitive function): A covered employee is considered to be
performing a safety-sensitive function and includes any period in which he or she is
actually performing, ready to perform, or immediately available to perform such
functions.
Positive result: The result reported by an HHS- Certified laboratory when a specimen
contains a drug or drug metabolite equal or greater to the cutoff concentrations.
Prohibited drug: Identified as marijuana, cocaine, opiates, amphetamines (including
ecstasy), or phencyclidine at levels above the minimum thresholds specified in 49 CFR
Part 40, as amended.
Reconfirmed: The result reported for a split specimen when the second laboratory is
able to corroborate the original result reported for the primary specimen.
Rejected for Testing: The result reported by an HHS- Certified laboratory when no tests
are performed for s specimen because of a fatal flaw or a correctable flaw that has not
been corrected.
Revenue Service Vehicles: All transit vehicles that are used for passenger
transportation service.
Safety-sensitive functions: Employee duties identified as:
(1) The operation of a transit revenue service vehicle even when the vehicle is
not in revenue service.
(2) The operation of a non-revenue service vehicle by an employee when the
operation of such a vehicle requires the driver to hold a Commercial Drivers
License (CDL).
(3) Maintaining a revenue service vehicle or equipment used in revenue service.
(4) Controlling the movement of a revenue service vehicle and
(5) Carrying a firearm for security purposes.
Split Specimen Collection: A collection in which the urine collected is divided into two
separate bottles, the primary specimen (Bottle A) and the split specimen (Bottle B).
53
Substance Abuse Professional (SAP): A licensed physician (medical doctor or doctor of
osteopathy) or licensed or certified psychologist, social worker, employee assistance
professional, state-licensed marriage and family therapists, or addiction counselor
(certified by the National Association of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Counselors
Certification Commission or by the International Certification Reciprocity
Consortium/Alcohol and other Drug Abuse (ICRC) or by the National Board for Certified
Counselors, Inc. and Affiliates/Master Addictions Counselor (NBCC) with knowledge of
and clinical experience in the diagnosis and treatment of drug and alcohol related
disorders.
Substituted specimen: A urine specimen with creatinine and specific gravity values that
are so diminished that they are not consistent with normal human urine.
Test Refusal: The following are considered a refusal to test if the employee:
(1) Fails to appear for any test (excluding pre-employment) within a
reasonable time, as determined by the employer, after being directed to
do so by the employer
(2) Fails to remain at the testing site until the testing process is complete
(3) Fails to provide a urine or breath specimen for any drug or alcohol test
required by Part 40 or DOT agency regulations
(4) In the case of a directly observed or monitored collection in a drug test,
fails to permit the observation or monitoring of your provision of a
specimen
(5) Fails to provide a sufficient amount of urine or breath when directed, and it
has been determined, through a required medical evaluation, that there
was no adequate medical explanation for the failure
(6) Fails or declines to take a second test the employer or collector has
directed you to take
(7) Fails to undergo a medical examination or evaluation, as directed by the
MRO as part of the verification process, or as directed by the DER as part
of the ``shy bladder'' or “shy lung” procedures
(8) Fails to cooperate with any part of the testing process (e.g., refuse to
empty pockets when so directed by the collector, behave in a
confrontational way that disrupts the collection process)
(9) If the MRO reports that there is verified adulterated or substituted test
result
(10) Failure or refusal to sign Step 2 of the alcohol testing form
(11) Failure to follow the observer’s instructions during an observed collection
including instructions to raise your clothing above the waist, lower clothing
and underpants, and to turn around to permit the observer to determine if
you have any type of prosthetic or other device that could be used to
interfere with the collection process.
(12) Possess or wear a prosthetic or other device that could be used to
interfere with the collection process
54
(13) Admit to the collector or MRO that you adulterated or substituted the
specimen.
Verified negative test: A drug test result reviewed by a medical review officer and
determined to have no evidence of prohibited drug use above the minimum cutoff levels
established by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Verified positive test: A drug test result reviewed by a medical review officer and
determined to have evidence of prohibited drug use above the minimum cutoff levels
specified in 49 CFR Part 40 as revised.
Validity testing: The evaluation of the specimen to determine if it is consistent with
normal human urine. Specimen validity testing will be conducted on all urine specimens
provided for testing under DOT authority. The purpose of validity testing is to determine
whether certain adulterants or foreign substances were added to the urine, if the urine
was diluted, or if the specimen was substituted.
D. EDUCATION AND TRAINING
1) Every covered employee will receive a copy of this policy and will have ready
access to the corresponding federal regulations including 49 CFR Parts 655 and
40, as amended. In addition, all covered employees will undergo a minimum of
60 minutes of training on the signs and symptoms of drug use including the
effects and consequences of drug use on personal health, safety, and the work
environment. The training also includes manifestations and behavioral cues that
may indicate prohibited drug use.
2) All supervisory personnel or company officials who are in a position to determine
employee fitness for duty will receive 60 minutes of reasonable suspicion training
on the physical, behavioral, and performance indicators of probable drug use and
60 minutes of additional reasonable suspicion training on the physical,
behavioral, speech, and performance indicators of probable alcohol misuse.
E. PROHIBITED SUBSTANCES
1) Prohibited substances addressed by this policy include the following.
a. Illegally Used Controlled Substance or Drugs Under the Drug-Free
Workplace Act of 1988 any drug or any substance identified in Schedule I
through V of Section 202 of the Controlled Substance Act (21 U.S.C. 812),
and as further defined by 21 CFR 1300.11 through 1300.15 is prohibited
55
at all times in the workplace unless a legal prescription has been written
for the substance. This includes, but is not limited to: marijuana,
amphetamines (including ecstasy), opiates, phencyclidine (PCP), and
cocaine, as well as any drug not approved for medical use by the U.S.
Drug Enforcement Administration or the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration. Illegal use includes use of any illegal drug, misuse of
legally prescribed drugs, and use of illegally obtained prescription drugs.
Also, the medical use of marijuana, or the use of hemp related products,
as which cause drug or drug metabolites to be present in the body above
the minimum thresholds is a violation of this policy
Federal Transit Administration drug testing regulations (49 CFR Part 655)
require that all employees covered under FTA Authority be tested for
marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines (including methamphetamine and
ecstasy), opiates, (including heroin) and phencyclidine as described in
Section H of this policy. Employees covered under company authority will
also be tested for these same substances. Illegal use of these five drugs is
prohibited at all times and thus, covered employees may be tested for
these drugs anytime that they are on duty.
.
b. Legal Drugs: The appropriate use of legally prescribed drugs and non-
prescription medications is not prohibited. However, the use of any
substance which carries a warning label that indicates that mental
functioning, motor skills, or judgment may be adversely affected must be
reported to a Person Area Transportation System supervisor and the
employee is required to provide a written release from his/her doctor or
pharmacist indicating that the employee can perform his/her safety-
sensitive functions.
.
c. Alcohol: The use of beverages containing alcohol (including any
mouthwash, medication, food, candy) or any other substances such that
alcohol is present in the body while performing safety-sensitive job
functions is prohibited. An alcohol test can be performed on a covered
employee under 49 CFR Part 655 just before, during, or just after the
performance of safety-sensitive job functions. Under Person Area
Transportation System’s authority, a non-DOT alcohol test can be
performed any time a covered employee is on duty.
56
F. PROHIBITED CONDUCT
1) All covered employees are prohibited from reporting for duty or remaining on duty
any time there is a quantifiable presence of a prohibited drug in the body above
the minimum thresholds defined in 49 CFR PART 40, as amended.
2) Each covered employee is prohibited from consuming alcohol while performing
safety-sensitive job functions or while on-call to perform safety-sensitive job
functions. If an on-call employee has consumed alcohol, they must acknowledge
the use of alcohol at the time that they are called to report for duty. The covered
employee will subsequently be relieved of his/her on-call responsibilities and
subject to discipline.
3) The Transit Department shall not permit any covered employee to perform or
continue to perform safety-sensitive functions if it has actual knowledge that the
employee is using alcohol
4) Each covered employee is prohibited from reporting to work or remaining on duty
requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions while having an alcohol
concentration of 0.02 or greater regardless of when the alcohol was consumed.
5) No covered employee shall consume alcohol for eight (8) hours following
involvement in an accident or until he/she submits to the post-accident
drug/alcohol test, whichever occurs first.
6) No covered employee shall consume alcohol within four (4) hours prior to the
performance of safety-sensitive job functions.
7) Person Area Transportation System under its own authority also prohibits the
consumption of alcohol all times employee is on duty, or anytime the employee is
in uniform.
8) Consistent with the Drug-free Workplace Act of 1988, all Person Area
Transportation System employees are prohibited from engaging in the unlawful
manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of prohibited
substances in the work place including Transit Department premises and transit
vehicles.
G. DRUG STATUTE CONVICTION
Consistent with the Drug Free Workplace Act of 1998, all employees are required to
notify the Person Area Transportation System management of any criminal drug
statute conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace within five days after such
57
conviction. Failure to comply with this provision shall result in disciplinary action as
defined in Section Q.10 of this policy.
H. TESTING REQUIREMENTS
1) Analytical urine drug testing and breath testing for alcohol will be conducted as
required by 49CFR part 40 as amended. All employees covered under FTA
authority shall be subject to testing prior to performing safety-sensitive duty, for
reasonable suspicion, following an accident, and random as defined in Section K,
L, M, and N of this policy, and return to duty/follow-up. All employees covered
under company authority will also be subject to testing for reasonable suspicion,
post-accident, random and return to duty/follow up suing non-DOT testing forms.
2) A drug test can be performed any time a covered employee is on duty. A
reasonable suspicion and random alcohol test can be performed just before,
during, or after the performance of a safety-sensitive job function. Under Person
Area Transportation System authority, a non-DOT alcohol test can be
performed any time an employee is on duty.
3) All covered employees will be subject to urine drug testing and breath alcohol
testing as a condition of ongoing employment with Person Area Transportation
System. Any safety-sensitive employee who refuses to comply with a request for
testing shall be removed from duty and subject to discipline as defined in Section
Q of this policy.
I. DRUG TESTING PROCEDURES
1) Testing shall be conducted in a manner to assure a high degree of
accuracy and reliability and using techniques, equipment, and laboratory
facilities which have been approved by the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Service (HHS). All testing will be conducted consistent with the
procedures set forth in 49 CFR Part 40, as amended. The procedures will
be performed in a private, confidential manner and every effort will be
made to protect the employee, the integrity of the drug testing procedure,
and the validity of the test result.
2) The drugs that will be tested for include marijuana, cocaine,
opiates,(including heroin), amphetamines (including methamphetamine
and ecstasy), and phencyclidine. After the identity of the donor is checked
using picture identification, a urine specimen will be collected using the
split specimen collection method described in 49 CFR Part 40, as
amended. Each specimen will be accompanied by a DOT Chain of
58
Custody and Control Form and identified using a unique identification
number that attributes the specimen to the correct individual. The
specimen analysis will be conducted at a HHS certified laboratory. An
initial drug screen and validity test will be conducted on the primary urine
specimen. For those specimens that are not negative, a confirmatory Gas
Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) test will be performed. The
test will be considered positive if the amounts of the drug(s) and/or its
metabolites identified by the GC/MS test are above the minimum
thresholds established in 49 CFR Part 40, as amended.
3) The test results from the HHS certified laboratory will be reported to
a Medical Review Officer. A Medical Review Officer (MRO) is a
licensed physician with detailed knowledge of substance abuse
disorders and drug testing. The MRO will review the test results to
ensure the scientific validity of the test and to determine whether
there is a legitimate medical explanation for a confirmed positive,
substitute, or adulterated test result. The MRO will attempt to
contact the employee to notify the employee of the non-negative
laboratory result, and provide the employee with an opportunity to
explain the confirmed laboratory test result. The MRO will
subsequently review the employee’s medical history/medical
records as appropriate to determine whether there is a legitimate
medical explanation for a non-negative laboratory result. If no
legitimate medical explanation is found, the test will be verified
positive or refusal to test and reported to the Person Area
Transportation System Drug and Alcohol Program Manager
(DAPM). If a legitimate explanation is found, the MRO will report
the test result as negative to the DAPM and no further action will be
taken.
4) If the test is invalid without a medical explanation, a retest will be
conducted under direct observation. Employees do not have
access to a test of their split specimen following an invalid result.
5) Any covered employee who questions the results of a required drug
test under paragraphs L through P of this policy may request that
the split sample be tested. The split sample test must be
conducted at a second HHS-certified laboratory with no affiliation
with the laboratory that analyzed the primary specimen. The test
must be conducted on the split sample that was provided by the
employee at the same time as the primary sample. The method of
collecting, storing, and testing the split sample will be consistent
with the procedures set forth in 49 CFR Part 40, as amended. The
employee's request for a split sample test must be made to the
Medical Review Officer within 72 hours of notice of the original
59
sample verified test result. Requests after 72 hours will only be
accepted at the discretion of the MRO if the delay was due to
documentable facts that were beyond the control of the employee.
Person Area Transportation System will ensure that the cost for
the split specimen are covered in order for a timely analysis of the
sample, however Person Area Transportation System will seek
reimbursement for the split sample test from the employee.
6) If the analysis of the split specimen fails to confirm the presence of
the drug(s) detected in the primary specimen, if the split specimen
is not able to be analyzed, or if the results of the split specimen are
not scientifically adequate, the MRO will declare the original test to
be canceled. If the split specimen is not available to analyze the
MRO will direct Person County to retest the employee under direct
observation.
7) The split specimen will be stored at the initial laboratory until the
analysis of the primary specimen is completed. If the primary
specimen is negative, the split will be discarded. If the primary is
positive, the split will be retained for testing if so requested by the
employee through the Medical Review Officer. If the primary
specimen is positive, it will be retained in frozen storage for one
year and the split specimen will also be retained for one year.
8) Observed collections
a. Consistent with 49 CFR part 40, as amended, collection under
direct observation (by a person of the same gender) with no
advance notice will occur if:
i. The laboratory reports to the MRO that a specimen is invalid,
and the MRO reports to Person Area Transportation
System that there was not an adequate medical explanation
for the result;
ii. The MRO reports to Person Area Transportation System
that the original positive, adulterated, or substituted test
result had to be cancelled because the test of the split
specimen could not be performed;
iii. The laboratory reported to the MRO that the specimen was
negative-dilute with a creatinine concentration greater than
or equal to 2 mg/dL but less than or equal to 5 mg/dL, and
the MRO reported the specimen to you as negative-dilute
60
and that a second collection must take place under direct
observation (see §40.197(b)(1)).
iv. The collector observes materials brought to the collection
site or the employee's conduct clearly indicates an attempt to
tamper with a specimen;
v. The temperature on the original specimen was out of range;
vi. Anytime the employee is directed to provide another
specimen because the original specimen appeared to have
been tampered with.
vii. All follow-up-tests; or
viii. All return-to-duty tests
J. ALCOHOL TESTING PROCEDURES
1) Tests for breath alcohol concentration will be conducted utilizing a
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)-approved
Evidential Breath Testing device (EBT) operated by a trained Breath
Alcohol Technician (BAT). Alcohol screening tests may be performed
using a non-evidential testing device which is also approved by NHSTA. If
the initial test indicates an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or greater, a
second test will be performed to confirm the results of the initial test. The
confirmatory test must occur on an EBT. The confirmatory test will be
conducted at least fifteen minutes after the completion of the initial test.
The confirmatory test will be performed using a NHTSA-approved EBT
operated by a trained BAT. The EBT will identify each test by a unique
sequential identification number. This number, time, and unit identifier will
be provided on each EBT printout. The EBT printout, along with an
approved alcohol testing form, will be used to document the test, the
subsequent results, and to attribute the test to the correct employee. The
test will be performed in a private, confidential manner as required by 49
CFR Part 40, as amended. The procedure will be followed as prescribed
to protect the employee and to maintain the integrity of the alcohol testing
procedures and validity of the test result.
2) An employee who has a confirmed alcohol concentration of 0.04 or
greater will be considered a positive alcohol test and in violation of this
policy. The consequences of a positive alcohol test are described in
Section Q. of this policy. Even though an employee who has a confirmed
alcohol concentration of 0.02 to 0.039 is not considered positive, the
61
employee shall still be removed from duty for at least eight hours or for the
duration of the work day whichever is longer and will be subject to the
consequences described in Section Q of this policy. An alcohol
concentration of less than 0.02 will be considered a negative test.
3) Person Area Transportation System affirms the need to protect
individual dignity, privacy, and confidentiality throughout the testing
process. If at any time the integrity of the testing procedures or the validity
of the test results is compromised, the test will be canceled. Minor
inconsistencies or procedural flaws that do not impact the test result will
not result in a cancelled test.
4) The alcohol testing form (ATF) required by 49 CFR Part 40 as amended,
shall be used for all FTA required testing. Failure of an employee to sign
step 2 of the ATF will be considered a refusal to submit to testing.
K. PRE-EMPLOYMENT TESTING
1) All applicants for covered transit positions shall undergo urine drug testing
and breath alcohol testing prior to performance of a safety-sensitive function.
a. All offers of employment for covered positions shall be extended
conditional upon the applicant passing a drug and alcohol test.
An applicant shall not be allowed to perform safety–sensitive
functions unless the applicant takes a drug test with verified
negative results.
b. An employee shall not be placed, transferred or promoted into a d
position covered under FTA or company authority until the
employee takes a drug test with verified negative results.
c. If an applicant fails a pre-employment drug test, the conditional
offer of employment shall be rescinded and the applicant will be
referred to a SAP. Failure of a pre-employment drug test will
disqualify an applicant for employment for a period of at least one
year. Before being considered for future employment the applicant
must provide the employer proof of having successfully completed
a referral, evaluation and treatment plan as described in section
655.62 of subpart G. The cost for the assessment and any
subsequent treatment will be the sole responsibility of the applicant.
d. When an employee being placed, transferred, or promoted from a
non-covered position to a position covered under FTA or company
authority submits a drug test with a verified positive result, the
62
employee shall be subject to disciplinary action in accordance with
Section Q herein.
e. If a pre-employment test is canceled, Person Area Transportation
System will require the applicant to take and pass another pre-
employment drug test.
f. In instances where a FTA covered employee is on extended leave
for a period of 90 consecutive days or more regardless of reason,
and is not in the random testing pool the employee will be required
to take a pre-employment drug test under 49 CFR Part 655 and
have negative test results prior to the conduct of safety-sensitive
job functions.
g. Following a negative dilute the employee will be required to
undergo another test. Should this second test result in a negative
dilute result, the test will be considered a negative and no additional
testing will be required unless directed to do so by the MRO.
h. Applicants are required (even if ultimately not hired) to provide
Person Area Transportation System with signed written release
requesting FTA drug and alcohol records from all previous, DOT-
covered, employers that the applicant has worked for within the last
two years. Failure to do so will result in the employment offer being
rescinded. Person Area Transportation System is required to ask all
applicants (even if ultimately not hired) if they have tested positive or
refused to test on a pre-employment test for a DOT covered employer
within the last two years. If the applicant has tested positive or refused
to test on a pre-employment test for a DOT covered employer, the
applicant must provide Person Area Transportation System proof of
having successfully completed a referral evaluation and treatment plan
as described in section 655.62 of subpart G.
L. REASONABLE SUSPICION TESTING
1) All Person Area Transportation System covered employees will be
subject to a reasonable suspicion drug and/or alcohol test when the
employer has reasonable suspicion to believe that the covered employee
has used a prohibited drug and/or engaged in alcohol misuse..
Reasonable suspicion shall mean that there is objective evidence, based
upon specific, contemporaneous, articulable observations of the
employee's appearance, behavior, speech or body odor that are consistent
with possible drug use and/or alcohol misuse. Reasonable suspicion
63
referrals must be made by one or more supervisors who are trained to
detect the signs and symptoms of drug and alcohol use, and who
reasonably concludes that an employee may be adversely affected or
impaired in his/her work performance due to possible prohibited substance
abuse or alcohol misuse. A reasonable suspicion alcohol test can only be
conducted just before, during, or just after the performance of a safety-
sensitive job function. However, under Person Area Transportation
Systems, authority, a reasonable suspicion alcohol test may be performed
any time the covered employee is on duty. A reasonable suspicion drug
test can be performed any time the covered employee is on duty.
2) Person Area Transportation System shall be responsible for transporting
the employee to the testing site. Supervisors should avoid placing
themselves and/or others into a situation which might endanger the
physical safety of those present. The employee shall be placed on
administrative leave pending disciplinary action described in Section Q. of
this policy. An employee who refuses an instruction to submit to a
drug/alcohol test shall not be permitted to finish his or her shift and shall
immediately be placed on administrative leave pending disciplinary action
as specified in Section Q. of this policy.
3) A written record of the observations which led to a drug/alcohol test based
on reasonable suspicion shall be prepared and signed by the supervisor
making the observation. This written record shall be submitted to the
Person Area Transportation System.
4) When there are no specific, contemporaneous, articulable objective facts
that indicate current drug or alcohol use, but the employee (who is not
already a participant in a treatment program) admits the abuse of alcohol
or other substances to a supervisor in his/her chain of command, the
employee shall be referred for assessment and treatment consistent with
Section Q of this policy. Person Area Transportation System shall
place the employee on administrative leave in accordance with the
provisions set forth under Section Q. of this policy. Testing in this
circumstance would be performed under the direct authority of the Person
Area Transportation System. Since the employee self-referred to
management, testing under this circumstance would not be considered a
violation of this policy or a positive test result under Federal authority.
However, self-referral does not exempt the covered employee from testing
under Federal authority as specified in Sections L through N of this policy
or the associated consequences as specified in Section Q.
64
M. POST-ACCIDENT TESTING
1) All employees covered under FTA authority will be required to undergo
urine and breath testing if they are involved in an accident with a transit
revenue service vehicle regardless of whether or not the vehicle is in
revenue service that results in a fatality. This includes all surviving
covered employees that are operating the vehicle at the time of the
accident and any other whose performance cannot be completely
discounted as a contributing factor to the accident.
2) In addition, a post-accident test will be conducted if an accident results in
injuries requiring immediate transportation to a medical treatment facility;
or one or more vehicles incurs disabling damage, unless the operators’
performance can be completely discounted as a contributing factor to the
accident.
a. As soon as practicable following an accident, as defined in this
policy, the transit supervisor investigating the accident will notify the
transit employee operating the transit vehicle and all other covered
employees whose performance could have contributed to the
accident of the need for the test. The supervisor will make the
determination using the best information available at the time of the
decision.
b. The appropriate transit supervisor shall ensure that an employee,
required to be tested under this section, is tested as soon as
practicable, but no longer than eight (8) hours of the accident for
alcohol, and within 32 hours for drugs. If an alcohol test is not
performed within two hours of the accident, the Supervisor will
document the reason(s) for the delay. If the alcohol test is not
conducted within (8) eight hours, or the drug test within 32 hours,
attempts to conduct the test must cease and the reasons for the
failure to test documented.
c. Any covered employee involved in an accident must refrain from
alcohol use for eight (8) hours following the accident or until he/she
undergoes a post-accident alcohol test.
d. An employee who is subject to post-accident testing who fails to
remain readily available for such testing, including notifying a
supervisor of his or her location if he or she leaves the scene of the
accident prior to submission to such test, may be deemed to have
refused to submit to testing.
65
e. Nothing in this section shall be construed to require the delay of
necessary medical attention for the injured following an accident, or
to prohibit an employee from leaving the scene of an accident for
the period necessary to obtain assistance in responding to the
accident, or to obtain necessary emergency medical care.
f. In the rare event that Person Area Transportation System is
unable to perform an FTA drug and alcohol test (i.e., employee is
unconscious, employee is detained by law enforcement agency),
Person Area Transportation System may use drug and alcohol
post-accident test results administered by local law enforcement
officials in lieu of the FTA test. The local law enforcement officials
must have independent authority for the test and the employer must
obtain the results in conformance with local law.
N. RANDOM TESTING
1) All covered employees will be subjected to random, unannounced testing.
Employees covered under FTA authority will be selected from a pool of
DOT-covered safety-sensitive employees. Employees covered under
company authority will be selected from a pool of non-DOT-covered
employees. The selection of employees shall be made by a scientifically
valid method of randomly generating an employee identifier from the
appropriate pool of employees.
2) The dates for administering unannounced testing of randomly selected
employees shall be spread reasonably throughout the calendar year, day
of the week and hours of the day.
3) The number of employees randomly selected for drug/alcohol testing
during the calendar year shall be not less than the percentage rates
established by Federal regulations for those safety-sensitive employees
subject to random testing by Federal regulations. The current random
testing rate for drugs established by FTA equals twenty-five percent of the
number of covered employees in the pool and the random testing rate for
alcohol established by FTA equals ten percent of the number of covered
employees in the pool.
4) Each covered employee shall be in a pool from which the random
selection is made. Each covered employee in the pool shall have an
equal chance of selection each time the selections are made. Employees
will remain in the pool and subject to selection, whether or not the
employee has been previously tested. There is no discretion on the part
of management in the selection.
66
5) Covered transit employees that fall under the Federal Transit
Administration regulations will be included in one random pool maintained
separately from the testing pool of employees that are included solely
under Person Area Transportation System authority.
6) Random tests can be conducted at any time during an employee’s shift for
drug testing. Alcohol random tests can be performed just before, during,
or just after the performance of a safety sensitive duty. However, under
Person Area Transportation System’s authority, a non-DOT random
alcohol test may be performed any time the employee is on duty. Testing
can occur during the beginning, middle, or end of an employee’s shift.
7) Employees are required to proceed immediately to the collection site upon
notification of their random selection.
O. RETURN-TO-DUTY TESTING
All covered employees who previously tested positive on a drug or alcohol test or
refused a test, must test negative for drugs, alcohol (below 0.02 for alcohol), or
both and be evaluated and released by the Substance Abuse Professional before
returning to work. For an initial positive drug test a Return-to-Duty drug test is
required and an alcohol test is allowed. For an initial positive alcohol test a
Return-to-Duty alcohol test is required and a drug test is allowed. Following the
initial assessment, the SAP will recommend a course of rehabilitation unique to
the individual. The SAP will recommend the return-to-duty test only when the
employee has successfully completed the treatment requirement and is known to
be drug and alcohol-free and there are no undo concerns for public safety.
P. FOLLOW-UP TESTING
Covered employees will be required to undergo frequent, unannounced drug
and/or alcohol testing following their return-to-duty. The follow-up testing will be
performed for a period of one to five years with a minimum of six tests to be
performed the first year. The frequency and duration of the follow-up tests
(beyond the minimums) will be determined by the SAP reflecting the SAP’s
assessment of the employee’s unique situation and recovery progress. Follow-
up testing should be frequent enough to deter and/or detect a relapse. Follow-up
testing is separate and in addition to the random, post-accident, reasonable
suspicion and return-to-duty testing.
67
Q. RESULT OF DRUG/ALCOHOL TEST
1) Any covered employee that has a verified positive drug or alcohol test will
be removed from his/her safety-sensitive position, informed of educational
and rehabilitation programs available and referred to a Substance Abuse
Professional (SAP) for assessment. No employee will be allowed to return
to duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive job functions without
the approval of the SAP and the employer.
2) Following a negative dilute the employee will be required to undergo
another test. Should this second test result in a negative dilute result, the
test will be considered a negative and no additional testing will be required
unless directed to do so by the MRO.
3) A positive drug and/or alcohol test will also result in disciplinary action as
specified herein.
a. After receiving notice of a verified positive drug test result, a
confirmed alcohol test result, or a test refusal, the Person Area
Transportation System Drug and Alcohol Program Manager
will contact the employee’s supervisor to have the employee
cease performing any safety-sensitive function.
b. The employee shall be referred to a Substance Abuse
Professional for an assessment. The SAP will evaluate each
employee to determine what assistance the employee needs in
resolving problems associated with prohibited drug use or
alcohol misuse.
4) Refusal to submit to a drug/alcohol test shall be considered a positive test
result and a direct act of insubordination and shall result in termination and
referral to an SAP. A test refusal includes the following circumstances:
a. Fails to appear for any test (excluding pre-employment)
within a reasonable time, as determined by the employer,
after being directed to do so by the employer.
b. Fails to remain at the testing site until the testing process
is complete
c. Fails to attempt to provide a urine or breath specimen for
any drug or alcohol test required by Part 40 or DOT
agency regulations
d. In the case of a directly observed or monitored collection
in a drug test, fails to permit the observation or
monitoring of your provision of a specimen
e. Fails to provide a sufficient amount of urine or breath
when directed, and it has been determined, through a
required medical evaluation, that there was no adequate
medical explanation for the failure
68
f. Fails or declines to take a second test the employer or
collector has directed you to take
g. Fails to undergo a medical examination or evaluation, as
directed by the MRO as part of the verification process,
or as directed by the DER as part of the “shy bladder” or
“shy lung” procedures
h. Fails to cooperate with any part of the testing process
(e.g. refuse to empty pockets when so directed by the
collector, behave in a confrontational way that disrupts
the collection process)
i. If the MRO reports that there is verified adulterated or
substituted test result
j. Failure or refusal to sign Step 2 of the alcohol testing
form
k. Failure to follow the observer’s instructions during an
observed collection including instructions to raise your
clothing above the waist, lover clothing and underpants,
and to turn around to permit the observer to determine if
you have any type of prosthetic or other device that could
be used to interfere with the collection process
l. Possess or wear a prosthetic or other device that could
be used to interfere with the collection process.
m. Admit to the collector or MRO that you adulterated or
substituted the specimen
5) For the first instance of a verified positive test from a sample submitted as
the result of a random, drug/alcohol test ( 0.04 BAC), disciplinary action
against the employee shall include:
a. Mandatory referral to Substance Abuse Professional for
assessment, formulation of a treatment plan, and execution of a
return to work agreement;
b. Failure to execute, or remain compliant with the return-to-
work agreement shall result in termination from Person Area
Transportation System employment.
c. Compliance with the return-to-work agreement means that the
employee has submitted to a drug/alcohol test immediately prior to
returning to work; the result of that test is negative; in the judgment
of the SAP the employee is cooperating with his/her SAP
recommended treatment program; and, the employee has agreed
to periodic unannounced follow-up testing as defined in Section P
of this policy.
d. Refusal to submit to a periodic unannounced follow-up drug/alcohol
test shall be considered a direct act of insubordination and shall
result in termination.
69
e. A periodic unannounced follow-up drug/alcohol test which results in
a verified positive shall result in termination from Person Area
Transportation System employment.
6) The second instance of a verified positive drug or alcohol ( 0.04 BAC)
test result including a sample submitted under the random, reasonable
suspicion, return-to-duty, or follow-up drug/alcohol test provisions herein
shall result in termination from Person Area Transportation System
employment.
7) A verified positive post-accident, or reasonable suspicion drug and/or
alcohol ( 0.04) test shall result in termination.
8) An alcohol test result of 0.02 to 0.039 BAC shall result in the removal of
the employee from duty for eight hours or the remainder or the work day
whichever is longer. The employee will not be allowed to return to safety-
sensitive duty for his/her next shift until he/she submits to an alcohol test
with a result of less than 0.02 BAC. If the employee has an alcohol test
result of 0.02 to 0.039 two or more times within a six month period, the
employee will be removed from duty and referred for assessment and
treatment consistent with Section Q.9-10 of this policy.
9) The cost of any treatment or rehabilitation services will be paid directly by
the employee or their insurance provider. The employee will be permitted
to take accrued sick leave or administrative leave to participate in the
prescribed treatment program. If the employee has insufficient accrued
leave, the employee shall be placed on leave without pay until the
employee has successfully completed the required treatment program and
released to return-to-duty. Any leave taken, either paid or unpaid, shall be
considered leave taken under the Family and Medical Leave Act.
10) In the instance of a self-referral or a management referral, disciplinary
action against the employee shall include:
a. Mandatory referral for an assessment by an employer
approved abuse professional, formulation of a
treatment plan, and execution of a return to work
agreement;
b. Failure to execute, or remain compliant with the
return-to-work agreement shall result in termination
from Person Area Transportation System
employment.
c. Compliance with the return-to-work agreement means that the
employee has submitted to a drug/alcohol test immediately prior to
70
returning to work; the result of that test is negative; in the judgment
of the SAP the employee is cooperating with his/her SAP
recommended treatment program; and, the employee has agreed
to periodic unannounced follow-up testing as defined in Section P
of this policy.
d. Refusal to submit to a periodic unannounced follow-up drug/alcohol
test shall be considered a direct act of insubordination and shall
result in termination. All tests conducted as part of the return to
work agreement will be conducted under company authority and
will be performed using non-DOT testing forms.
e. A self-referral or management referral to the employer that was not
precipitated by a positive test result does not constitute a violation
of the Federal regulations and will not be considered as a positive
test result in relation to the progressive discipline defined in Section
Q.4-5 of this policy.
f. Periodic unannounced follow-up drug/alcohol test conducted as a
result of a self-referral or management referral which results in a
verified positive shall be considered a positive test result in relation
to the progressive discipline defined in Section Q.4-5 of this policy.
g. A Voluntary Referral does not shield an employee from disciplinary
action or guarantee employment with Person Area Transportation
System.
h. A Voluntary Referral does not shield an employee from the
requirement to comply with drug and alcohol testing.
11) Failure of an employee to report within five days a criminal drug statute
conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace shall result in
termination.
R. GRIEVANCE AND APPEAL
The consequences specified by 49 CFR Part 40.149 (c) for a positive test or test
refusal is not subject to arbitration.
S. PROPER APPLICATION OF THE POLICY
Person Area Transportation System is dedicated to assuring fair and equitable
applicant of this substance abuse policy. Therefore, supervisors/managers are
required to use and apply all aspects of this policy in an unbiased and impartial
manner. Any supervisor/manager who knowingly disregard the requirements of
this policy, or who is found to deliberately misuse the policy in regard to
71
subordinates, shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including
termination.
72
T. INFORMATION DISCLOSURE
1) Drug/alcohol testing records shall be maintained by the Person Area
Transportation System Drug and Alcohol Program Manager and, except as
provided below or by law, the results of any drug/alcohol test shall not be
disclosed without express written consent of the tested employee.
2) The employee, upon written request, is entitled to obtain copies of any records
pertaining to their use of prohibited drugs or misuse of alcohol including any drug
or alcohol testing records. Covered employees have the right to gain access to
any pertinent records such as equipment calibration records, and records of
laboratory certifications. Employees may not have access to SAP referrals and
follow-up testing plans.
3) Records of a verified positive drug/alcohol test result shall be released to the
Drug and Alcohol Program Manager, Department Supervisor and Personnel
Manager on a need to know basis.
4) Records will be released to a subsequent employer only upon receipt of a written
request from the employee.
5) Records of an employee's drug/alcohol tests shall be released to the adjudicator
in a grievance, lawsuit, or other proceeding initiated by or on behalf of the tested
individual arising from the results of the drug/alcohol test. The records will be
released to the decision maker in the preceding. The information will only be
released with binding stipulation from the decision maker will make it available
only to parties in the preceding. 6) Records will be released to the National
Transportation Safety Board during an accident investigation.
6) Information will be released in a criminal or civil action resulting from an
employee’s performance of safety-sensitive duties, in which a court of competent
jurisdiction determines that the drug or alcohol test information is relevant to the
case and issues an order to the employer to release the information. The employer
will release the information to the decision maker in the proceeding with a binding
stipulation that it will only be released to parties of the proceeding.
7) Records will be released to the DOT or any DOT agency with regulatory
authority over the employer or any of its employees.
8) Records will be released if requested by a Federal, state or local safety agency
with regulatory authority over Person Area Transportation System or the
employee.
73
9) If a party seeks a court order to release a specimen or part of a specimen
contrary to any provision of Part 40 as amended necessary legal steps to contest
the issuance of the order will be taken
10) In cases of a contractor or sub-recipient of a state department of transportation,
records will be released when requested by such agencies that must certify
compliance with the regulation to the FTA.
74
This Policy was adopted by the Person County Governing Board on
_______________2013
________________________________________________________________Jimmy
B. Clayton
Chairman, Person County Board of Commissioners
Attest
(Seal)
75
SYSTEM CONTACTS
Any questions regarding this policy or any other aspect of the substance abuse policy
should be directed to the following individual(s).
Person Area Transportation System (PATS) Drug and Alcohol Program Manager
Name: Kathy Adcock
Title: Transportation Manager
Address: 341 South Madison Blvd., Roxboro, NC 27573
Telephone Number: (336) 597-1771
Medical Review Officer
Name: John G. Camestas, MD
Title: MD (Pembrooke Occ Health)
Address: Richmond, Va.
Telephone Number: (804) 364-1010
Substance Abuse Professional
Name: Safe-T-Works
Title: Drug & Alcohol Testing & Employment Services
Address: 624 S. Fayetteville St., Asheboro, NC 27203
Telephone Number: (336) 736-8038
HHS Certified Laboratory Primary Specimen
Name: MedTox Labs
Address: 402 W. Country Rd., St. Paul, Mn
Telephone Number: (800) 832-3244
HHS Certified Laboratory Split Specimen
Name: MedTox Labs
Address: 402 W. Country Rd., St. Paul, Mn.
Telephone Number: (804) 346-1010
76
AGENDA ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 4, 2013
Agenda Title: Kirby Rebirth Project Update and Request
Summary of Information: As the Kirby Rebirth project is underway, an assessment of the structure
of the facilities revealed termite damage to the footings under the Kirby Cultural Arts Complex
(former florist shop space). The Architects have estimated a cost of $110,000 to repair the damaged
areas, plus an additional $10,000 in engineering fees associated with this repair. This repair work
will need to be completed before any additional improvements are made as this involves the
foundation of the building.
Two options for the Board’s consideration: delay the project and include this $120,000 in the FY14-
15 Capital Improvement Plan; or appropriate $120,000 from the County Fund Balance to allow this
project to remain on schedule.
Recommended Action: Receive the information and decide when to allocate an additional $120,000
to remediate the termite damage under the Kirby Cultural Arts Complex.
Submitted By: Heidi York, County Manager and Ray Foushee, General Services Director
77
October 7, 2013
Ray Foushee
Person County General Services Director
Kirby estimated repair costs:
Estimated costs to repair termite damaged floor joist. Damaged area
encompasses approximately 2,000 sq. ft. of floor.
Floor demolition
(remove raised floor, floor finishes, and decking). $17.00 per sq. ft. = $34,000.00
Structural repair and replacement
(new 2x12 floor joist and ¾” decking). $20.00 per sq. ft. = $40,000.00
Replace and repair finishes
(replace floor finishes, repair affected walls and ceilings). $18.00 per sq. ft. =$36,000.00
Total $110,000.00
Estimated costs to install 3 hr. party wall between Carver Agency and Kirby (area
will also include first floor space at the Chamber of Commerce). Party wall shall
separate two floors and a roof, approx. 90 linear ft. in length.
Construct 3 hr. fire wall at property line. $370.00 per linear ft. = $33,300.00
Replace and repair finishes (walls, floors, ceilings) = $200.00 per linear ft. = $18,000.00
Total $51,300.00
The cost estimates listed above are best estimates based on both known and
anticipated unknowns that could become present. While we feel confident that these
numbers are the best estimates we could provide, there is still the possibility of
uncovering additional unforeseen elements.
Thank you,
MHAworks
78
79
80
81
82
Upon a motion by Commissioner __________________________, and a second by Commissioner
_____________________________ and majority vote, the Board of Commissioners of Person County
does hereby amend the Budget of the General Fund(s) on this, the 4th day of November 2013, as follows:
Department Name Amount
Incr / (Decr)
EXPENDITURES General Fund
Public Safety 75,000
Human Services 1,750
Transportation 21,144
REVENUES General Fund
Intergovernmental 34,967
Fund Balance Appropriation 62,927
EXPENDITURES Person Industries & MRF Fund
Community Rehab Program Services 2,041
REVENUES Person Industries & MRF Fund
Intergovernmental Revenues 2,041
EXPENDITURES Airport Capital Construction Fund
Runway 6 Approach Clearing (100,004)
Runway 6 & 24 PAPI Survey (43,000)
Taxiway Lighting (19,713)
REVENUES Airport Capital Construction Fund
Intergovernmental Revenues (146,446)
Local Match Funds (16,271)
EXPENDITURES Capital Improvement Projects Fund
County (304,964)
Schools (51,910)
PCC (362,993)
REVENUES Capital Improvement Projects Fund
Intergovernmental Revenues (117,465)
Other Revenues (50,844)
Transfers from Other Funds (414,903)
Fund Balance Appropriation (136,655)
Explanation:
BUDGET AMENDMENT
Receipt of ROAP funds ($24,935); Receipt of unauthorized substance tax revenues ($12,073) and
appropriation of fund balance in the Restricted Law Enforcement Fund to cover local match for two grants
(Highway Safety and Bulletproof Vest Grants) and other eligible equipment purchases and upgrades ($62,927);
Closing out completed Airport projects for Runway 6 Approach Clearing (-$100,004), Runway 6 & 24 PAPI
Survey (-$43,000) and Taxiway Lighting (-$19,713); and Closing out completed CIP projects for the County (-
$304,964), Schools (-$51,910), and PCC (-$362,993).
Budget Amendment 683
Upon a motion by Commissioner __________________________, and a second by Commissioner
_____________________________ and majority vote, the Board of Commissioners of Person County
does hereby amend the Budget of the General Fund(s) on this, the 4th day of November 2013, as follows:
Dept./Acct No.Department Name Amount
Incr / (Decr)
EXPENDITURES General Fund
General Government 132,108
Public Safety 24,287
Economic Development 736
Environmental Protection 26,359
Education 99,137
Transportation 59,226
Cultural & Recreational 37,115
Human Services 63,841
REVENUES General Fund
Intergovernmental Revenues 63,584
Fund Balance Appropriated 379,225
EXPENDITURES Person Industries & MRF Fund
PI MRF 1,600
REVENUES Person Industries & MRF Fund
Fund Balance Appropriated 1,600
Explanation:
BUDGET AMENDMENT
Carryforward of purchase orders and commitments outstanding as of June 30, 2013
Budget Amendment 784