OCR Text |
Show Getting Garbage To Clearfield Is Btfl. Problem By GARY R. BLODGETT Clipper News Editor BOUNTIFUL -- Transportation costs. THESE TWO words spell "bug-a-boo" for the Bountiful City Council as they debate de-bate whether or not to join other Davis County communities in the proposed Resource Re-source Recovery (garbage burn) Plant in Clearfield. A representative of the Wasatch Front Regional Council presented a lengthy and detailed proposal to the council last Wednesday night that seeks to have all cities within the county participate in the proposed Clearfield plant. THE SAME proposal was presented the previous night to other south Davis County city councils in a "last minute" effort to get the councils to approve and the mayors to "sign on the dotted line." Wilbur Jefferies. executive director of Wasatch Front Regional Council, told the city councils that they would like all service contracts signed by March 15. THE PROPOSAL has been under consideration - with numerous public hearings hear-ings - for the past three years. Mr. Jefferies is one of three members of the county staff to present the proposal and answer questions regarding the complex proposal. AND THERE were many questions from the different city councils, primarily because be-cause the councils included a majority of . newly elected officials who had never before be-fore heard the proposal in detail. "What we've heard tonight is a lot of garbage to swallow," joked one new councilman. coun-cilman. But overall, the councils were serious se-rious and intent in their questioning. IT APPEARS that the councils were favoring the proposal to have a 500-ton a day garbage burn plant constructed near Hill Air Force Base on property presently owned by the Utah Department of Transportation. Bountiful Council, however, has at least one serious stuhbling block to overcome if the council is expected to approve entrance into the project. THAT PROBLEM is transportation costs. There is no means of subsidy for transportation trans-portation costs from Bountiful -- or other south Davis County communities - to the proposed plant located on the north side of State Highway 1 93 just west and adjacent to Hill AFB. "THAT'S A 50-mile round trip for our trucks - whether city-owned or commercial haulers -- to deliver garbage.", commented City Engineer Jack Balling, w ho has made studies of the anticipated costs. "Based on 50 cents per mile and using a 6-ton truck, that would amount to $25 per load, or more than $4 per ton. for garbage going to the plant." he said. BOUNTIFUL HAS a pickup of about 10.000 tons of garbage per year. That means.; it would cost Bountiful an additional : S40.000 a year to transport garbage to the proposed plant instead of maintaining the Bay Area Refuge Disposal (BARD), it was explained. City Manager Tom Hardy told the council that the household fee for garbage disposal -- if Bountiful has to pay full transportation ' costs to the Clearfield plant -- would be increased 50 percent. MR. JEFFERIES suggested that Bountiful Bounti-ful join other cities and engage in commercial commer-cial haulers, instead of using their own trucks and personnel. He said North Salt Lake haulers have agreed to transport garbage to the plant for less than $3 per load. BUT MR. BALLING countered with, "that's a bunch of bull. They can't even buy the gas for that amount." There are other alternatives to the current proposal. Mr. Jefferies pointed out to the Bountiful City Council -- but most include potential environmental problems. HE NOTED that Bountiful could maintain the BARD site because the city owns the property. Studies show that at the same CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 Transportation Costs Continued from pg. one level of disposal. BARD would have a lifespan life-span of about 14 years. Bountiful also has the options of ( 1 ) waiting wait-ing for 10 or 12 years and seek other methods of disposal: (2) could secure additional addi-tional property or expand the present BARD site for waste disposal beyong 14 years: (3) could investigate the construction of its own plant, or a plant that would serve south Davis County communities now or in the future: (4) could build a plant that would provide power to serve the city-owned power pow-er generation plant, thus keeping power costs to a minimum: or (5) could seek a contract to deliver garbage to Salt Lake County's garbage disposal plant. "GRANTED, these are options that most other cities do not have, but there are serious se-rious potential environmental problems." said Mr. Jefferies. "Potential problems already exist at the BARD site because of inadequate coverage daily of newly disposed waste." he said. "Other environmental and political problems prob-lems would have to be overcome, and sometimes some-times they are not easy to do." LAYTON COUNCIL, too. have indicated they will not approve the burn plant proposal. propos-al. Other Davis County cities have indicated they will join in the pact -- and all this will be determined when contracts are returned, signed or unsigned, by the March 15 deadline. dead-line. "I can agree with the proposed concept, that the plant is workable," said Bountiful Mayor Dean S. Stahle. "But it's only a place to dump, with no potential revenue return to the city, such as a local or city-owned city-owned plant could provide. 1 think we need to seriously study other alternatives in the next few weeks before signing a "Hl-year contract with the Clearfield plant " THE COUNCIL scheduled a work session ses-sion for last (Tuesday) night at which time a citizens' opposition group -whotot- a lot of study on the project - their views. What happens to the project if Be. does not sign the service agreement ' happens if Layton does not sign- At- happens if both do not agree to t- osal? . v SINCE THE proposal is for a.u day operation, proponents say tW must cooperate to make the plan--mically feasible. However, ifone orthe twociliev-- twociliev-- tiful or Layton -decide not to F-the F-the plant probably would be built --400-tons per day capacity. down" version would generate -would not convert the steam to T Jefferies explained. 7 BUT IF BOTH cities decide impale, im-pale, it's questionable whetheror"; scaled-down version of the pt'; economically feasible unless F hauled in from Weber County. Between Bountiful and U "generate" 46 percent oflhe101" of garbage in Davis County. . AND THERE are other qu110' concerning the proposed plant- . Although Air Force oflicials. signed the agreement to generated by the pln,-anlft,: answer is expected withm a according to Mr. JclTcries. ALSO, THE agreement lor and Light Company to pur',: crated by the plant is Service Commission O' answer is forthcoming, he ' "WITHOUT AFHRMATjS , to all these questions, the pr ! .. dead and the service ugrei.ni the cities would be void, emphasized. |