CCP 09-14-1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. , . Minutes of Solid Waste Management Committee, August 17, 1987 also point out that when a city contracts for collection, they incur all the billing and customer service problems the haulers may handle, plus they become liable in suits that may arise in the event of injury or brought under the Resource Conservation Act and Recovery Act (Superfund). Additional liability could also develop in Workers Compensation Actions. They also pointed out that efficiency of scale"can only come about if a small number of haulers - or perhaps just one - serve a large area. Even in this case, the efficiencies aren't great, they say, since stopping or pickups, not driving from one area to another, (i.e. skipping a few houses), is the least efficient (and most abusive to their equipment) part of their operation. Some discussion took place concerning the road wear argument. They said their vehicles were within the strict parameters allowed by the State in terms of weight. Their largest packers (20 yards) are said to weigh 25,000 pounds empty and the State allows 18,000 lbs. on a front axle, 20,000 lbs. on a single rear axle, and 36,000 lbs. on a rear tandem. A 20 yard packer, they say, packed firmly, will hold 20,000 lbs., which plus the weight of the truck, places 45,000 lbs. on 3 axles rated for 54,000. They contend this is the worst case. Most packers used in residential areas are smaller than 20 yds. and the average residential load is 6 tons. They said most of the "overweights everyone talks about" refer to compacter containers used by commercial customers. . In any event, they point out that the same amount of refuse must be removed from the same number of households no matter how many vehicles pick it up. Any single vehicle can make from 250 to 400 stops in a day, so multiple trips on a municipality's streets are required regardless of the number of haulers working. It also stands to reason that if routes were to become too fragmented, individual haulers would drop out of the market if their share couldn't be increased and the lack of efficiency caused an unprofitable situation. In summary, the representatives from BFI suggested: Separate pickup and disposal of yard debris. Curbside recycling - on a regular basis, using containers. Establish a volume-based "recycling rate" - about 15% below current rates. Maintain an open hauling system, which will allow the market to derive efficiency. The Solid Waste Management Committee will take BFI's comments into consideration at their next meeting. . -9-