PETERSBURG – The borough assembly passed ordinance 2018-21 on Dec.17 in its first reading which allocates $400,000 from the sanitation fund and $200,000 from the Motor Pool to replace the borough’s baler.
Last month, the assembly had voted to completely replace the baler after public works director Chris Cotta suggested it be replaced because of deteriorating parts that included the belt conveyor, control system and wear surfaces on the rams, hopper and baler chamber.
Recently, the borough’s baler has been experiencing issues with its hardware, Cotta reported at the assembly meeting on Dec. 17. The wire tie unit on the baler was replaced and was operational again on Dec. 6. After 12 hours of run time that was spent baling the built up garbage and recyclables on the baler floor, the conveyor broke. Public works determined that the conveyor structure was failing and wouldn’t be operational for much longer. After failed attempts to repair the conveyor, employees from the sanitation and streets department modified the baler to allow a front end loader to dump garbage into the baler.
“At this point, I think it is important to note that while we have had significant
challenges keeping the solid waste baler running, that
services to the public have largely not been affected,” said Cotta in his report to the assembly.
If the ordinance passes in its third reading, Cotta would develop a request for proposals, or RFP, that would outline how much garbage and recyclable material the borough bales and how it is shipped out, said borough manager Stephen Giesbrecht. Manufacturers that respond to the RFP would give their recommendations of equipment that would best fit the borough’s needs.
Some members of the assembly expressed concerns over the quality and life-span of the replacement baler and whether it would adequately meet the needs of the borough.
“These are people in that industry, and we’re going to have to take, to a certain extent, their expertise into play here,” said Giesbrecht. “They may come back with the same old equipment we’ve got now, with just the newest version, or they may come back with something totally different that we’re not thinking of. We won’t know that until they respond to the RFP.”
As an alternative to baling the borough’s garbage, assembly member Kurt Wohlhueter asked Cotta if the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Environmental Conservation would allow an open landfill. Although it is allowed, Cotta said an open landfill is an expensive alternative. In addition to the cost, Cotta said that the Federal Aviation Administration had issues with the city’s landfill in the past because the flocks of birds that were attracted by the landfill caused difficulties due to the proximity to the airport.
“That’s just one option for disposing of waste, but in my opinion it’s one that is very costly,” said Cotta.
Reader Comments(0)