09/30/1993 - Minutes SALT LAKE VALLEY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT COUNCIL
AMENDED COUNCIL AGENDA
Thursday, September 30, 1993
3 : 00 P.M.
West Valley City Council Chambers
3600 South 2700 West
West Valley City, Utah
BUSINESS ITEMS:
1 . Approval of Minutes (August 12, 1993)
2 . Recommended Changes to SWAB Bylaws & Membership
3 . 1994 Solid Waste disposal Budget - Presentation, Discussion
and Request for Preliminary Approval
4 . Request for Acceptance of Waste Excavated at Airport
Reasonable Accommodations for persons with disabilities provided
upon request. Contact Jan at 963-3220
agendas93 . sep
•
Minutes of the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council held
on Thursday, September 30, 1993 at 3 : 00 P.M. , West Valley City
Council Chambers, West Valley City, Utah
Those present: Lonnie L. Johnson Salt Lake County
Kent Miner SLC/County Health Dept.
Dr. Ryan Dupont Utah State University
Russell Willardson West Valley City/COG
Others in Attendance:
Daniel L. Bauer Solid Waste Disposal
Romney M. Stewart Solid Waste Disposal
Bud L. Stanford Solid Waste Disposal
Pam Derbidge Solid Waste Disposal
Dave Lore Solid Waste Disposal
Renee Tanner Mayor' s Office, SLC
Brian Bennion SLC/County Health Dept.
Joyce Leach Recycling Info. Office
Paul Maughan Co. Attprney' s Office
Bill Lujan Salt Lake City
Dustin Bills Salt Lake City
•
BUSINESS ITEMS :
1, Approval of Minutes (August 12, 1993)
Kent Miner made a motion to approve the minutes of the Council
meeting held August 12, 1993; Russell Willardson seconded the
motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Romney Stewart introduced David Lore, recently hired as the
Environmental Technician at the Landfill.
Lonnie Johnson indicated at this time that citizen comments were
welcome during the proceedings of the meeting.
2 . Recommended Changes to SWAB Bylaws & Membership
Romney Stewart introduced a letter from Craig Posselli,
Chairman of SWAB, recommending amendments to the SWAB Bylaws
and changes in the membership to include a representative from
the Salt Lake Valley Landfill, Utah State Department of
Environmental Quality, an educator, and a small commercial
waste hauler representative. A representative from the League
of Women Voters had also been included in the recommendation.
Romney Stewart recommended that the amendments to the bylaws
and the expanded membership be approved. A list of suggested
individuals to serve as these new members on SWAB was also
included.
Russell Willardson made a motion to accept the recommendation
from SWAB to amend the bylaws and increase the membership as
outlined; Kent Miner seconded the motion. The motion passed
unanimously.
Kent Miner also made a motion to accept the recommendation
from SWAB of suggested individuals to be asked to serve on
SWAB. The motion was seconded by Russell Willardson; the
motion passed unanimously.
Romney Stewart was asked to proceed in contacting
representatives to serve on SWAB.
3 . 1994 Solid Waste Disposal Budget - Presentation, Discussion,
and Preliminary Approval
Romney Stewart stated that existing revenues will cover 1993
operating and capital expenditures through the end of 1993 .
Romney began his review of the 1994 Solid Waste Disposal
Budget and indicated that the 1994 proposed budget included a
$2 . 00 fee increase beginning July 1, 1994 . The fee increase
is needed to fund reserves largely driven by financial
assurance, liability, closure, and post closure maintenance
costs required by Subtitle D.
Changes in 1994 expenditure line items include substantial
increases in the professional fees category to obtain base
line monitoring data for Subtitle D. Module 3 will be
constructed during 1994, providing enough space for disposal
of solid waste through 1995 . He noted that there had been a
10% YTD increase in commercial waste; this is substantially
greater than the 2% originally projected. Scheduled capital
purchases of both on and off road equipment will be made
during 1994 . Additional capital project items have been added
in 1994 including the Landfill Visitors' Center, the Wildlife
Resources Overlook, and the composting processing area. He
felt additional input to the budget at the next. Landfill
Council meeting would be an excellent idea. (A copy of the
budget summary is attached. ) The Council discussed the
projected increases in material brought to the Landfill and
the increase in revenues as a result of the fee increase.
Russell Willardson made a motion to give the proposed 1994
Solid Waste Disposal Budget preliminary approval and
recommended a public hearing be held prior to the next Council
meeting for input on the proposed $2 .00 per ton fee increase.
Kent Miner seconded the motion; the motion passed unanimously.
4 . Request for Acceptance of Waste Excavated at the Airport
Kent Miner made a motion to table the request pending an
opinion on the request from Paul Maughan of the County
Attorney' s Office and a determination from the Salt Lake
City/County Health Department regarding the disposal
requirements of the material from the Airport runway site
under construction; Russell Willardson seconded the motion.
the motion passed unanimously.
Russell Willardson made a motion to adjourn; meeting adjourned at
3 :20 P.M.
mins93 . sep
fi
•
MEADOW VALLEY
CONTRACTORS, INC GENERAL BUILDING AND GENERAL ENGINEERING
P.O.BOX 121,MOAPA,NV 89025
TELEPHONE 702-864-2575
FAX 702-864-2580
September 15 , 1993 9304-94
Salt Lake Valley Solid
Waste Management Council
P . 0 . Box 308
Midvale , Utah 84047
Attn : Mr . Bradley Stewart ;
Re : Airport expansion project
Project No . 1 40-07-91 r,_
•
�� i 2 ; 1993
Vv/aS I E DISPOSAL
Dear Mr . Stewart :
We are currently in the process of constructing Grading and
Drainage for the New Runway at the Salt Lake City Airport . A
portion of this project involves removal and disposal of
"Unsuitable Excavation" . It has become apparent that some of
this Unsuitable excavation cannot be disposed of in a demolition
landfill as originally planned . Salt Lake International Airport
needs an alternate disposal site .
We originally anticipated that there may be as much as 45 . 000
tons of material to be disposed of in a .landfill which will
accept municipal waste . It is now apparent that we only have
20 , 000 tons yet to be removed and that umber is very likely to be
on the high side .
It is our intention to place about 14 , 000 tons before March of
1984 . There may be an estimated 6 , 000 tons to be moved later .
•YN ':yv a 4`/ v'+)�".*fa.-.,i ii' ,'1,.
�r�. s L.'��,'_'.' - i'{',, -• ..
September 15 . 1993 9304-94
Page 2 .
We request that you consider accepting this material in your
facility . If you are not able to accept all of it . could you
consider accepting a portion of it? We would also consider a
schedule to deliver it over a period of time to allow for your
facility to handle the material .
The new runway and expanded airport facilities will be of benefit
of all of Salt Lake County , including the Jordan area of the
Valley . The materials to be excavated originated in the Salt
Lake Valley . The materials to be excavated originated in the
Salt Lake Valley . and it is impractical to attempt to ship it
elsewhere .
Because the runway progress now is being held up . your early
consideration would be greatly appreciated .
Sincerely Yours ;
acob N . Je. op
Project Manager
1/02/9J-3 13:22 $801 468 2646 SLCo ATY Coy CTR el001/004
-
., • THE OFFICE " 14b)/1 ,$
. I�, . SALT LAKE COUNTY ,kTTORNEY
DAVID E.YOCUM
COUNTY ATTORNBY
III
WALTER R.ELLETT.cl-fleFnePvry
JUSTICE DIVISION
WILLIAM R.HYDE.oiisP DEPUTY
Oyu_Donne N
DONALD SAWAYA,tt11F:P PEPJTY
QQVERNMENTAL SERVICES DIviS1ON
SAX TRANSMSSION
•f
Civil Division
2001 South State .treet
Suite#S360
Salt Lake City, Utah 84190-1200
Telephone: (801) 4 -3420
Fax Number: (801) 68-2646
•
PERSON SENT TO: 4 • , 7/4.2
Agency Name:
Agency Fax Number: 9 I / -- E 9 3
PERSON SENT FROM:
Total Number of Pages (including this cover sheet):
C OMNfENTS:
PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The information in this teIecopy is intended for they, named recipient(s) only- It may contain
privileged and confidential material. If you have rece s d this telecopy in error, please notify us
immediately by a collect telephone call to (801) 468-3420, d return the original to the sender by mail.
We will reimburse you for postage. Do not disclose the con is to anyone. Thank you.
•
2001 SOUTH STATE STREET SALT LAKE CITY.U t'AH 84 190.1200
11/02/93 13:22 Ty801 468 2646 SLCo ATY COV CTR 0 002/004
1
,el f, ror ryC
Al
li14: % '4'!
i. ;- ''r THE OFFICE OFNip !
ii ',` SALT LAKE COUNTY ATTORNEY4rk 4-::e
DAVID E. YOCOM
• COUNTY ATT)RNeY
WALTER R.ELLETT,CHIEF DEPUTY
JUSTICE DIVISION I
WfLLIAM R.HYDE,CHtEP DEPUTY
CJVIL DIVISION
DONALD SAWAYA,CHIEF bF.PU Y
OOveRNMSNTAL•SERVICES DIVISION
7
October 29, 1093
b R A Fir
A. Dennis Norton FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
SNOW, 'CHRISTENSEN & MARTINEAU OAT
10 Exchange Place, 11th Floor
P. O. Box 45000
Salt Lake City, Utah 84145-5000
Dear Mr. Norton:
This office has been asked to *espond to your letter of
September 29 , 1993 , written on behalf of Limhi Builders, who has
sought permission from the Salt Lake Valley Landfill to accept
approximately 20, 000 tons of waste, which is currently in an old
Salt Lake city landfill located on land cheduled for an additional
runway at the Salt Lake City Internati nal Airport.
The Salt Lake Valley Landfill is jointly owned by Salt Lake
City and Salt Lake County. Salt LakeCounty is charged with the
daily operations of the landfill. Salt Lake County, after
consulting with Salt Lake City aid numerous other local
jurisdictions and private companies lbcated within the County,
recently prepared and filed a statutarily required Solid Waste
Management Plan which outlines the Coutity's solid waste disposal
plan for municipal solid waste generated within the counts' over the
next 20 years. The plan contains no piovision for the acceptance
of waste from old or abandoned landfills. There are many such
landfills located throughout the county. It would be counter
productive to displace capacity which has been designed and
constructed to meet Subtitle D reguireients of RCRA for currently
generated waste by accepting waste mat „rials located, in these old
and abandoned landfills.
Contrary to your belief, the Salt Lake Valley Landfill has
never accepted such waste in the past! from other landfills and
declines the invitation to accept this particular waste material
for the following reasons:
2001 SOUTH STATE STREET SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 8410412(X)
. 11/02/93 13:23 $801 468 2646 SLCo ATY GOV CTR U 003/004
A. Dennis Norton
October 26, 1993
Page 2
First, since the closure of tI'e City's landfill at the
airport, the federal government has ,; adopted new and stringent
regulations, under Subtitle D of RCRA regarding the disposal of
municipal solid waste. Included an these regulations are
requirements for synthetic liners, lea ate collection systems, gas
monitoring, and the monitoring of aterials deposited in the
landfill to ensure against environmental damage from municipal
solid waste.
I
At the time the City operated thins landfill, there were few,
if any, legal or environmental restric ions regarding the types of
material disposed of in landfills. In our letter you refer to the
subject material as "qualifying solid aste" . However, the City-
County Health Department has refused tjo certify or guarantee that
the material in the City's landfill coflsists of only material that
meets current federal, state and local municipal solid waste
requirements. In fact, the health department has found specific
items in the waste material that canno ' be disposed of in the Salt
Lake Valley Landfill such as lead bateries. By permitting this
material in the Salt Lake Valley Landf411, Salt Lake County would
be accepting the risk of potential liJability for a waste stream
that is currently the sole responsibility of Salt Lake City. Salt
Lake County is not inclined to do so.
Second, as stated previously, there are many old landfills
located in Salt Lake County. Acceptinn this waste would create a
perilous precedent if in the future economic or political need were
to dictate that one or more of the ;! County's old landfills be
excavated. If such waste materials ere taken to the Salt Lake
Valley Landfill, the roles would be reversed and Salt Lake City
would be accepting potential liability and a risk of loss it
currently does not have. Precedet would also have been
established regarding waste material from any old or ' abandoned
publicly owned landfill.
Third, the 20 , 000 tons of waste material you seek to transfer
to the Salt Lake Valley Landfill consi t of over three percent of
the landfill's current total annual ton age. Even if this material
were to be accepted, the nature of this waste would require special
handling in that the landfill would re uire that it be placed in a
separate area for separate monitoring , o isolate potential future
liability. The area requested for disposal would be significantly
greater for this type of material . ?It would also require the
landfill to expedite future design and. construction of additional
modules at increased cost and ahead f current schedules. The
impact on landfill capacity and the landfill's current operations
by allowing for the separate disposal of this waste material is
unacceptable.
1,1/02/93 13:24 '801 468 2646 SLCo ATY GOV CTR 004/004
A. Dennis Norton
October 26, 1993
Page 3
The Salt Lake Valley Landfill played no role in the letting of
the contract by Salt Lake City Int rnational Airport for the
construction of its runway. Neither landfill management nor the
County received any written request .or proposal to place this
material in an open module. In fact, -io permit was obtained from
the City-County Health Department to even begin the excavation of
this material at the old City site. The County did entertain a
request to receive such material provided it could have been placed
on a closed landfill module on property. owned by the State Division
of Wildlife Resources and provided the material could have been
transferred and the Wildlife proper y restored prior to the
effective date of Subtitle D regulation . This proposal was vetoed
by the federal government.
No other discussions were had regprding placing the material
in open modules of the landfill. A spcial handling disposal fee
of $20. 00 per ton was quoted to Lilnhi Builders to place the
material on the now closed Wildlife Resources module. Even if the
material were to be accepted by the Salk Lake Valley Landfill, the
special handling fee would be even higher than the present $13 . 00
per ton and higher than the $20.00 pe ton fee quoted earlier in
order to meet the special handling coss, on-site inspection costs
upon excavation at the airport, the increased risk of liability,
and the loss of current landfill capacity.
To suggest that this is a probl '�m that can or ought to be
handled between two city departments mistates the magnitude of the
issues involved as far as the Salt Lake Valley Landfill is
concerned. For the reasons stated above, the Landfill Council has
voted to decline the acceptance of thi0 material.
UN
Sincerel -,
MI
FOR MICE USE ONLY
DATE PAUL G. UGHAN
Deputy unty Attorney
Civil Di ision
Telephony: (801) 468-2637
.tt t1imhi,pgm