Multnomah County v. Department of Revenue

5 Or. Tax 437
CourtOregon Tax Court
DecidedFebruary 28, 1974
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 5 Or. Tax 437 (Multnomah County v. Department of Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Multnomah County v. Department of Revenue, 5 Or. Tax 437 (Or. Super. Ct. 1974).

Opinion

Carlisle B. Roberts, Judge.

Multnomah County, Oregon, a political subdivision, through its Department of Assessment and Taxation, appealed to this court from the defendant Department of Revenue’s Order No. VL 72-97, dated February 28, 1973, which held that the improvements in an indus *438 trial plant complex located in Section 26 2N-1W, Tax Lot 25 (141411ST. Eivergate Boulevard), in the City of Portland, County of Multnomah, were exempt from ad valorem taxation as of January 1, 1970, pursuant to OES 307.330 and 307.340. The property was owned by Midland-Eoss Corporation, the intervenor herein.

OES 307.330 provides a property tax exemption for commercial facilities under construction, not to exceed two consecutive years, if the building or structure:

“(a) Is in the process of construction on January 1;
“(b) Is not in use or occupancy on January 1;
“(c) Has not been in use or occupancy at any time prior to such January 1 date;
“(d) Is being constructed in furtherance of the production of income; * *

See Collier Carbon v. Dept. of Rev., 5 OTR 1 (1972), aff'd, 263 Or 414, 502 P2d 595 (1972); Allen v. Dept. of Rev. [Blue Mt. Forest Products, Inc., Intervenor], 5 OTR 185 (1973).

The intervenor, in the mid-1960s, developed a technique for reducing iron oxide pellets to a pellet containing 95 percent metallic iron by a new process known as the gaseous reduction of iron oxide. The new method was developed and tested in a pilot plant constructed in intervenor’s laboratory in Toledo, Ohio. Having established in the laboratory the feasibility of producing an iron pellet of the desired quality, construction was begun by the intervenor in February 1968 of a prototype plant in the Eivergate Industrial Park of Portland, Oregon.

Application for exemption under OES 307.330 for the tax year 1969-1970 was approved by the Depart *439 ment of Assessment and Taxation of Multnomah. County. The intervenor filed a timely application for cancellation for the allowable second consecutive year, 1970-1971, and this was subsequently approved with respect to the unfinished “pellet plant” and an office building but the rest of the facility was held taxable by the county’s Department of Assessment and Taxation and was assessed at a true cash value of $8,000,000. Intervenor’s petition to the Department of Bevenue for relief resulted in the exemption order referred to above; an appeal has been made to this court by Multnomah County.

In appealing to this court, the county relied solely upon the testimony of its chief industrial appraiser (who has had much experience in appraising industrial properties but who admitted as a witness that he was not a “technical man,” having no formal training in chemical engineering or metallurgy). The witness testified that his recommendation to assess had been based chiefly upon two matters: a story in a local commercial newspaper, dated December 10, 1969, that “[t]he world’s first full-scale metallized pellet plant had started production in Portland’s Bivergate Industrial District,” and by his knowledge that in 1969 some tons of the iron pellets produced in the plant’s furnace had been sold to and used by Oregon Steel Mills (a division of Grilmore Steel Corporation) at its new plant on a site adjacent to the intervenor’s plant site. In his opinion, this evidence justified taxing the property under the rule of Allen v. Dept of Rev., supra.

The court finds that the intervenor had developed a background of technical experience in learning to reduce iron ores from Minnesota to economically usable iron, achieving a continuous flow of the raw material *440 through specially designed furnaces and converting the ore into a product acceptable in the market. It undertook to reach a similar result in converting Peruvian iron ores, reduced and shipped to the United States in the form of a slurry, seeking an end product consisting of 95 percent pure iron in pellet form. After study, a model was constructed in its laboratories in Toledo, Ohio, proving the correctness of its hypotheses and demonstrating the feasibility of its process.

Following demonstrated laboratory proof of its ability to process the slurry, the intervenor and Gilmore Steel Corporation entered into an agreement, requiring Gilmore to build a steel mill in Portland, Oregon, using electric-arc furnaces for converting to steel the iron pellets to be supplied by intervenor’s proposed plant. The two plants were to be located in Portland on adjoining sites to permit the use of a conveyor system to carry intervenor’s product directly to Oregon Steel Mills’ furnaces.

Construction was begun by intervenor in Portland in February 1968 of the industrial complex which was to include a slurry pond, thickener tank, oxide pellet plant, multitube furnaces, pellet storage silos, and conveyors from the storage to the steel mill’s furnaces, together with scrubbers, recuperators, metallizing furnaces, necessary controls, and office space.

The process involved drying the slurry to about 10 percent moisture, after which it was made into an oxide pellet. The unique part of the process was the subsequent removal of the oxygen from the iron oxide, ending up with a metallized pellet to be refined into steel in electric-arc furnaces. The Portland plant was a prototype; prior to its construction, the gaseous re *441 duetion of iron oxide on a commercial basis had never been attempted.

The product of the pilot plant in the Toledo laboratory had convinced G-ilmore Steel Corporation of the utility of the process. However, when intervenor’s Portland structure was in place, with a gas reformer 120 times the size of the laboratory model and a metallizing furnace 64 times the size of the pilot plant furnace, a number of serious difficulties were encountered which had never arisen in the Toledo laboratory tests. For example, there was a release of hydrogen sulfide which had a negative effect upon the metallizing process by “poisoning” the catalyst in the gas reformer, with a gradual reduction of an essential catalytic function which was finally cured in January 1970 by closing down one of the two furnaces so that both reformers could be used with one furnace (involving reconstruction at a cost of $500,000). Simultaneously, there was a clustering of the metallized pellets, prohibiting the constant flow which was one of the essential economic features of the process, since the clusters jammed and choked the furnace, requiring its shutdown and the elimination of the jam through mechanical force. This problem was resolved in October 1969. A third, vital problem was the high carbon content of the pellets produced, resulting in a commercially unacceptable product, and this was not resolved until March 12, 1971. A fourth problem was the excessive dust and “fines” generated by the process in the prototype, creating many problems in production and much waste in derogation of commercial feasibility. This was resolved in 1970 upon the expenditure of another $500,000 on a new screening plant, dust collection equipment, and briquetting.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Multnomah County v. Department of Revenue
13 Or. Tax 223 (Oregon Tax Court, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
5 Or. Tax 437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/multnomah-county-v-department-of-revenue-ortc-1974.