My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/15/1994
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1994
>
2/15/1994
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:04:23 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 1:45:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/15/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
- M M <br />Utilities Director Terry Pinto reported that after a year of <br />operation of the treatment plant, we have gone back and looked at <br />the actual cost of operations and the cost of treatment of septage <br />and sludge. There are several areas of particular importance in <br />deriving a rate for a new facility. Because the facility is <br />working at approximately 10 percent of its operating capacity, it- <br />is not equitable to the customers to strike a rate placing all of <br />the operating costs and all of the capital costs on its existing <br />customers. A private utility normally is allowed to recover at 100 <br />percent when they reach 70 percent of their capacity. If they are <br />operating at less than 70 percent of their capacity, the company <br />usually is made to absorb the excess cost so as to not penalize the <br />customers who were first on the system. In our case, the costs <br />would be distributed across the entire system and a rate struck for <br />those truckers dumping septage and sludge. The rest of the funds <br />would be recovered through the entire system. We have chosen 70 <br />percent because we think it is a fair and equitable way to strike <br />the rate. <br />Commissioner Macht asked if we had received Tallahassee's <br />standpoint on the spreading of sludge. It seems that the spreading <br />of sludge is an acceptable practice by important elements of both <br />the state and federal governments and no short-term change is <br />expected. <br />Director Pinto explained that when the new regulations were <br />developed, there were some strict requirements for the spreading of <br />sludge. The problem is that the requirements are self-monitoring, <br />and we don't really know who is spreading the sludge or whether <br />they are meeting those requirements. Indian River County would be <br />allowed to spread treated sludge, but we don't think that is the <br />most effective method. Director Pinto emphasized that at this <br />point, it is a Health Department issue. Any costs incurred by the <br />Health Department in these matters have to be borne by the Health <br />Department, not Utility Services. <br />Administrator Chandler noted that there are certain areas in <br />our Comp Plan and LDRs that define where we can spread sludge and <br />more information on that will be brought to the Board in the near <br />future. <br />Commissioner Bird asked how these proposed rates compare to <br />other counties, and Director Pinto advised that the rates run <br />anywhere from $12 to $100, depending on the degree of treatment. <br />He wished to emphasize that the County had no choice but to build <br />a sludge treatment facility and the City of Vero Beach must build <br />a sludge facility also. The preferable way to get rid of treated <br />sludge is through compost. <br />31 <br />JEB 1519941 BOOK PAC�Y'•�c� <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.