The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1973-09-25-MRRDB-min.pdf Next Meeting October l8, Thurs., 8 P.M. tiQ Josiah Smith tavern, Weston \ \ / t /*t (across 'from Town Hall) MINUTEMAN REGIONAL REFUSE DISPOSAL BOARD AGENDA for October 18ch Review and vote on by- laws Elect new officers ACTION TAKEN September ?:,52_1973 The legal subcommittee recommended and the board voted support for House Bill H6643 with the following conditions 1. The entire program fall under the control of the Secretary of Environrae:rtFa1 Affairs, not be splintered among several agencies, providing the administrative section is suffi- ciently independent from the enforcement and inspection section. 2. The administration costs of she state agency be taken from the general fund 3. Money for research and development programs come from a state-wide aesessment as long as conforming volunteer groups like planning hoards are eligible for such grants. 4 . Capital costs be recovered from user fees. 5. Operation costs be recovered from user fees. 6 Voluntary groups whish meet state resource recovery require- ments he exempt from assesAments. The technical siabcowm?ttee summarized its recommendations to date: Method - landfill with volume redtecti.on by shredding;, possibly a traveling landfill which spends five years at 'each site. Estimated landfill ill z equir.ed - 23O acre-feet per year (15% re- cycle") at a curt of about 6cy per ton (exclusive of, land cost and site preparation) . Mandatory si iifiied reeycl Lng on regional basis - of paper, bottle:; , cans, aluminum appliances Bob Hong reviewed a field trip to Resource Recovery, Inc. in Holliston which looks like eery promising system suitable for our region. The site committee asked .etch town committee to search its own town for possible landfall sites; ho).d a meeting with one or two long-time residents who know the town well and invite the site committee OCT 1. 51973 2 The by-law review was postponed to the next meeting due to lack of time The current membership was read as eonsisting of the towns of Acton, Bedford, Bcxborough, Burlengrete, Carlisle, Concord, Lincoln, May- nard and Stow The goal was restated to be a sound enough plan of action to garner substantial support from member towns at the spring town meetings. If this support is not won, the Board will be disbanded. The mem- ber towns were urged to stick with the Board until after the spring town meetings. MINUTES The meeting was called to order at 8 20 P.M. , a quorum ei present. Marion Thornton reminded the membership that our goal is to present a sound plan to the spring town meetings. She reminded the membership that the Board will disband if significant support from the towns is not won. She mentioned that she has heard sev- eral members are considering resignieg She urged all the towns to stick with the Board until after the spring town meetings. House Bill H6643 was discussed by the legal subcommittee It is now before Nays and Means. Amendments are being considered John Hutchins outlined the provisions for the bill. It provides a system of local, district and regional transfer stations, with the latter two being run by the state through contracts with the private sector. The regions will be the present planning regions. The Regional Planning Agencies (RPA) will set up the districts and choose the disposal sites by next June By 1975 all disposal sites will be acquired. Eventually, all who do not comply with the state regulations will be forced to jotr Resource Recovery is to be implemented at district and re- gional levels State agencies will be required to use recycled material. State administration will fall under the Bureau of Solid Waste Disposal and sections of the Board of Health, Natural Re- sources and Public Works. The financing is to be user fees to cover operating costs; state-wide assessment to cover capital. costs There is to be 50% reimbursement for municipal facilities required to join the system Income from Resource Recovery goes into the state fund for solid waste disposal. There are to be incentives to the host towns. Amendments are now being considered, especially as regards financing of capital costs, R S D grants and general administration. OCT 15 1973 - 3 - It was unanimously voted by the Board to send a letter of support with certain provisions (as outlined above under ACTION TAKEN) over Marior Thornton's signature Copies will be distrib- uted to the membership. The statue of the menhenshie -ea reviewed Those which are now members are listed above (under ACTION TAKEN) Sudbury still needs a third member before their committee can meet and vote whether to join Weston awaits word from their town counsel on whether they are legally free to join (they would like to) Way- land has enabling legislation on their spring warrant after which they intend to join. The next meeting was set for October /8th in Weston The following meeting will be on November 8th whech will return to the regular schedule of the second Thursday of each month. The technical subcommittee outlined its preliminary findings Donald Muse handed out a summary sheet explaining the pros and cons of various processing systems. More of these sheets will be available at the next meetings for those who would like a copy. He indicated that a rough cost comparison shows that for a 700 T/ day facility landfill costs $1.16/T, incineration costs $6 - $9/T, composting $5 - $16/T and pyrolysis $4 - $13/T. Larry Gogolin estimated landfill statistics assuming 180 thousand people in a thirteen town region in 1975 and assuming that 25% of the waste stream was recycled He estimates the re- gion would fill 230 acre-feet/year with shredded refuse at an amortized cost of $2 04/toe. excluding land, site preparation and shredder cost (shredder adds 12/ton) . He estimates a refuse volume of 675 ton/day Pete Reiman presented figures obtained in a consultant study done for the West Suburban Region by Camp, Dresser 6 McKee. Their figures project to 12 0 million for are incinerator figuring to $14/ton for a 260 ,000 ton annual capacity. A landfill of the same size was estimated to cost $4 50-05/T and require 480 acre-ft /yr. Ruth Ann Hendricksoon outlined a possible method of recycling for the region. It was indicated that the householder would sepa- rate trash into three cetegeries " bendled paper, "containers" (cans, clear glass , aluminum) and minted ranee At each transfer station there would be a compactor 4nad large container for the mixed refuse and two recycling containers one for the paper and one for the mixed "containers". The paper would go directly to the paper dealer The "containerre" would go to the regional cen- ter where they would be separated. First a magnet would pull out steel cans Then glass and aluminum would be separated by air classification. It was alio hoped that tires, white goods and wood could be salvaged. It was noted that all towns in the pro- posed region but one rurrently have some sort of recycling program. Robert Meng deacriteed a facility currently under construction in Holliston, Mass by the R. L Lawrence Trucking Company under OCT 151973 ta - national, affiliation with the Brown nd Ferris Co The facility is called "Resource Recovery, Incl " and is a pilot plant It bears close watohi�s benaa=s,s ?.t low-.:5 like an e:ttrsmely flexible system of shreddia.e sepatJatsng and sontai,neriziang refuse which mirtht *.ael.i. suit etc z"�giorse The site com-titte urged that ,.=i& h town committee seriously un. sertaka: to surv .y its town 1.4rfl'4r possible regional land sites. We are th nking a. a traveling landfill which would use an area in a g: yeas town lc( , five years or so, then landscape and move on to another town. It is suggested that non committee find one or two long-term .,,P .defy s and sit down and discuss sites. The site committee should be invited. The meeting was adjourned about 10 20 P.M. P,eapoctful,ly, Ruth Ann Hendrickson Temporary Secretary Mailing address M.d :,uteman Regional Refv,e Board cic Hendrickson Concord Road Lincoln, Mass. 01773 OCT 15 '07