R90-29 11-26-90 RESOLUTION NO. R90-29
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PEARLAND, TEXAS, SUPPORTING A LEGISLATIVE BILL
FOR THE CREATION OF A SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY FOR
BRAZORIA COUNTY.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND,
TEXAS:
THAT the City of Pearland, Brazoria County, Texas supports
the Solid Waste Task Force in its decision to initiate the process for
the creation of a Solid Waste Authority for Brazoria County to oversee
the planning and implementation of an integrated approach to programs
in solid waste management for all of the areas in Brazoria County
wishing to contract for such services; and
THAT the City Council of the City of Pearland, Brazoria
County, Texas, understands that a legislative bill for the creation of
the Solid Waste Management Authority for Brazoria County, Texas, will
be introduced in the Legislature of the State of Texas for
consideration during their next legislative session to be held in
1991, and
THAT upon becoming law, if so required, the City of
Pearland agrees to submit the acceptance of this legislation to its
citizens for approval at its next succeeding municipal election.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this c~ ~ day of
~~ , A. D., 1990.
Mayor
ATTEST:
APP~D AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
BERNARD JOHNSON INCORPORATED
ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE PLANNING
SYSTEMS ECONOMICS
BRAZORIA COUNTY
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
STUDY
PROPERTY CITY OF
PHASE PEARLAND - DO NOT
REMOVE FROM OFFICE
J.O. 74001
APRIL 1974
moo
we '
„ BRAZORIA COUNTY
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL STUDY — PHASE I
w
in
w
in
iw
gm
ow
No
BJI J.O. 74001
April, 1974
1.
BERNARD JOHNSON INCORPORATED
wi
r
S ERNGRO JOHNSON INCORPORATED '-+OUSTON • W GS- N GTON
BRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL STUDY
PHASE I
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
Po
List of Tables I.
List of Plates I.
List of Figures I.
•
Synopsis 1
I. INTRODUCTION 2
A. Purpose and Scope 2
•
B. Authorization 2
.• II. POPULATION TRENDS 3
A. Methodology 3
B. Projections 4
rIII. SOLID WASTE VOLUMES 11
A. Current Solid Waste Generation 11
B. Projected Solid Waste Volumes 14
C. Sanitary Landfill Requirements 14
IV. LOCATION OF SANITARY LANDFILL OPERATIONS 19
A. Areas with Significant Limitations 19
1. Flood Plain 20
2. Geologic and Ground Water Considerations 21
3. Incompatible Land Use 23
r
O ERN A RO J OHNSON INCORPORATED H O US TO N • WAS.+i N G T ON
*
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS(continued) Page
B. Feasible Areas for Sanitary Landfill Operations 23
1. Existing County and Municipal Property 23
2. Areas favorable to Sanitary Landfill Location 23
C. Soils Investigations 24
V. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 25
A. Acquisition of Land 25
B. joint Use of Existing Sanitary Landfills 25
C. Transfer Stations 25
an D. Rural Collections 37
E. Sanitary Landfill Located in Flood Plain (Central Brazosport Area)37
VI. ECONOMICS OF LANDFILLS 41
A. Proposed Capital Expenditures 41
1. Pearland Site 41
2. West Columbia 42
•• B. Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs 44
• 1. Pearland Site 44
2. West Columbia 45
C . Total Costs 66
D. Individual City Disposal Costs 46
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS 50
VIII. REFERENCES 52
APPENDIX A-1-A-9
D E R N A R D J O H N S O N INCORPORATED H O U S T O N • WASH,N G T O N
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE Page
No. I Existing Sanitary Landfills in Brazoria County 13
No. II Solid Waste Generation Volumes in Tons/Year By
Incorporated City 15
No. III Solid Waste Generation Volumes in Tons/Year By
i County Census Tract 16
No. IV Sanitary Landfill Area Requirements 18
No. V Annual Cost of Handling Solid Waste With and Without
a Transfer Station 36
No. VI Proposed Sanitary Landfill Costs 47
No. VII Disposal Costs in 1977 for Cities Using Proposed
Sanitary Landfills 49
LIST OF PLATES
am
.Plate No. 1 Areas Unsuitable for Solid Waste Disposal Operations
.. Plate No. 2 Proposed and Existing Solid Waste Disposal Sites
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. 1 Population Projections in 1977 by County Census Tract 5
Figure No. 2 Population Projections in 1982 by County Census Tract 6
Figure No. 3 Population Projections in 1987 by County Census Tract 7
Figure No. 4 Population Projections in 1977 by Incorporated City 8
Figure No. 5 Population Projections in 1982 by Incorporated City 9
r
I
F3 ERN A R D J OH NSON INCORPORATED HOU STON • W A SH,N GT O N
�. LIST OF FIGURES(continued) Page
Figure No. 6 Population Projections in 1987 by Incorporated City 10
Figure No. 7 Geologic Map 22
pa Figure No. 8 Proposed Transfer Station Configuration 28
PA
t
I
r
r
r
r
r
r
rII
f7ERNARD J OHNSON INCORPORATED I-+OUSTON • W AS.INGTON
r
SYNOPSIS
As authorized by letter of agreement dated January 10 , 1974, between
r Bernard Johnson Incorporated and Brazoria County Commissioners Court, the
following studies were conducted:
1. Establishment of population projections for three time periods over
a 15 year study period (to 1990).
2. Determination of projected solid waste volumes for all areas of
Brazoria County.
3. Estimation of solid waste transportation and disposal costs for the
optimum combination of hauling and landfilling.
4. Recommendation of sanitary landfill sites and sizes for disposal of
r•
solid waste during the 15 year study period.
o• By 1977 approximately 126,000 tons of solid waste annually will require
disposal. Under average landfill practices 19.6 acres of land will be filled
annually. Our study indicates that utilization of available land west of Pearland
ern in combination with existing sanitary landfills would service the county's solid
waste disposal requirements until 1990.
This study has recommended that the governments of Brazoria County enter
into contractual arrangements that would permit the financing of sanitary landfill
operations at the Pearland site and County operation of the Brazoria-West
r
Columbia and Angleton landfills.
am
1
C3ERNARO JOHNSON INCORPORATED HOUSTON • W ASH,NGTON
on
CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION
lon
A. Purpose and Scope
Pm
This Phase I preliminary engineering study evaluates the feasible solid
,, waste disposal sites in Brazoria County for a 15 year planning period (to
the year 1990) . The objective of the study is to recommend the most
economical locations compatible with environmental considerations for
,,• establishment of county owned and/or operated sanitary landfill(s). The
scope of the Phase I study includes the following items:
1. Establish population projections for the periods; January, 1974
to January, 1979, January, 1979 to January, 1984, and January,
1984 to January, 1989.
OR
2. Project volumes of solid waste for all areas of the county for the
•■ above periods.
3. Estimate disposal costs and recommend the best combination of
vas
hauling and landfill for each period.
.. 4. Prepare an interim report indicating the general area(s) for the
recommended site location(s) for each period.
B. Authorization
Authorization of the Solid Waste Disposal Study - Phase I - is covered by
a letter of agreement between Bernard Johnson Incorporated and Brazoria
rCounty Commissioners Court, dated January 10, 1974.
r
r2
C3ERNAPO J OHNSON INCORPORATED i-+OUSTO N • W A SH I N G T ON
i
■• CHAPTER II - POPULATION TRENDS
A. Methodology
r
In order to evaluate the solid waste system requirements for Brazoria
County it has been necessary to first determine what quantities and where
solid wastes are produced within the county. Solid waste generation is a
function of population and the geographic distribution of these two para-
., meters is inter-related. Thus present and projected populations have
been determined in this study. For this purpose statistics from a special
report, "Population Projections 1970 - 2020 for the Gulf Coast Planning
Region, " published by the Houston-Galveston Area Council, April 1, 1972
have been used. The figures published in this report are based on the
1970 census with projections being made on the basis of a large number
of criteria. These criteria have included land use, economics, national
policies and programs, historical trends, industrial impact, transportation
facilities, potential employment centers, physical character of the land,
nature and characteristics of land ownership, and other functional con-
siderations .
In lieu of the time frames specified in the letter agreement (Page 2 preceed-
r
ing) it was decided to adjust each period by one year in order to use the
population projections established by HGAC. These are as follows:
1 January 1975 - 1 January 1980
1 January 1980 - 1 January 1985
1 January 1985 - 1 January 1990
3
(1 E R N A R D .J O H N S O N INCORPORATED H D U S T O N • W A S H I N G T O N
r
• G
B. Projections
The mid-year in each five-year time period has been used for the purposes
of calculating average population, and hence average solid waste genera-
,. tion for the period. For the purpose of determining the population in
different parts of the county, the county has been divided into the same
regions as used in the HGAC report. These are called County Census
Tracts and are shown in Figure 1, along with the projected 1977 populations
for each census tract. Figures 2 and 3 show the 1982 and 1987 population
projections for these same areas.
Along with the regional population distributions, population projections
have also been made for each incorporated city in Brazoria County. These
projections are on the same time frame as those for the census tracts, and
are presented in Figures 4, 5, and 6.
All population statistics have been derived by interpolating between the
figures presented in the HGAC study.
r
Oa
4
r
OERNARD .COI-INSON INCORPORATED -OuSTON • WAS- NGTON
MP
N MI
S W
1 1,287
7
BRAZO R I A COUNTY ~� c 601
12,817
/ C soy /
CENSUS TRACT LINE
Oa ENUMERATION DISTRICT LINE
CENSUS COUNTY DIVISION LINE -
COUNTY BOUNORY LINE
CENSUS TRACT NUMBER C 1008
ENUMERATION DISTRICT NUMBER E 22 C 603
as CENSUS COUNTY DIVISION sricav L4N0 OW 3,586
— , AL V/ PEARLAND DI...
3 C 604
11,773
/ 4,7 43 C 607 6,838
C 608 1,300 C 605
`') M \
/ / a.'•%.. ( (% ...--,
I �, t i
1,061
C 616 C 615 6,118 I C 606
/ \
�
465 C 609 �\ 1,615
AM ) \s j
C 614 3,600 ( i
/ 3,203 C 610 � i
3,645 I ANGLETON RiSHARON DIV \ /
a` C 617 1 / 1111)11° /
--/ 4,29 C 6
J 32
2 0 6 / C 61�-'- 158/4
/
.. c
I C 613 j 761
BRAZOR/A WEST Co MB/A l� 2,958 2,809 / C63
C 612 //
BRAZOSPO' DIY.
D/V.
13,801~ �. ;7 CJ C,623
627 C 631 1,287
C 620 C� ` N2:5,383 - C 626 ��C 619 j '�� '
a. /C
2,037 C 624 13,255
��. / 2,41
�i 628
"'� \ 1,816 N.
1,348 \\ C 622 12,994 `411110‘
C 621 1 C 629 7,651
am \\V\
asL '—21,803
Re
FIGURE NO. II POPULATION PROJECTIONS IN 1977 BY
COUNTY CENSUS TRACT
..
5
I.
a.
um
�` 18,080
/------...----*/ C 67,-
BRAZOR I A COUNTYi 19,8 0-'-
/ C 602 i
CENSUS TRACT LINE
ENUMERATION DISTRICT LINE
CENSUS COUNTY DIVISION LINEMk
—
COUNTY BOUNORY LINE -----
CENSUS TRACT NUMBER G 1008
ENUMERATION DISTRICT NUMBER E 22 C 603
CENSUS COUNTY DIVISION SUG*Ld/O ON
4,866
/— ALV/ PEARLAND 0/
C 604
I14,614
"' C 607 8,980
C 608 2,400 C 605 \
5,400
mun
""'"--.. ( ,\ -\
\:..—. \
1,560 800 ZL 2,820 i
C 616 C 615 1 7, 7,280 280 1 C 606 \
/ lam` //�
l` �l \ '
a. �j 3,900 t
C 614 4,880 ��
C 610
5,620 t � ANGLETON RISHAHON D/V. //
osi c
C 618
�J 5,-•• C 632
•
2,360 / 4,220 C 61 � 580
,4
I G 613 j 1,240
mu
BRAZOR/A WEST CO UMB/A `�\\ /
C,�2 f�/ BRAZOSPO' 0/V. C �
C..m....\
DlV.
18,540~ 7 C627� C 631 2,700
a' C 620500
C
• 6,740 Lam- j 625 -- C 626
C 619 • / `41. ;
fC6c i
17,720
woo / 3,460 C 624 ,,.
��� / 5,480 •
/ 628
t 2,300
" 1,600 \\ C 622 17,720 lip,
` C621 I� _ C629
\ \\\ 11,200
1. •
in• • 1..............„- 27,600
FIGURE NO. 2 = POPULATION PROJECTIONS IN 1982 BY
COUNTY CENSUS TRACT
+r
6
sis
in
• r 29,530
r C j,
BRAZORIA COUNTY / 30,50J
/ C 602
CENSUS TRACT LINE
ENUMERATION DISTRICT LINE
r CENSUS COUNTY DIVISION LINE -
COUNTY BOUNDRY LINE --� .-•
CENSUS TRACT NUMBER C 1008
ENUMERATION DISTRICT NUMBER E 22 C 603
CENSUS COUNTY DIVISION SUCA*0moLWV 6,981
/'-- j ALV/ PEARLAND 0/
C 604
13
18,449
an
/ C 607 12,180
C 608 4,650 C 605 \
6,400
Ns / 1 \\/ ""•%...`i-� _
_ 2,460 C 615 l" t 5,120 %i
C 616 1,550 11 8,980 ) 06 \
, C 609
\` //
/
Pm / 4,900 \� �i
/ C 614 7,080
C 610 i
7,170 �� ANOLEroN HiSHAHON D/V. \\ ���
C 617 11 C 637111.1* /
Cum
,760 6 8 //J6 020 C�61 ji�i 1,460
,4
no
C 613 / 2,340
L......\ BRAZORIA WEST CO MB/A \� 5,510 / C 63
\ C 612 // BRAZOSPO- DIV
D/V.
24 140 ��. �� J C11�627 C 631 5,950
C 20 � 4625
C 626
C 090 / 'NI?
• /
C6210
110 C 624fir
�\ /i 10,=• 1,,, 21,770
ri 628
3 050
'• 1,850 \\ d 622 23,520 illi,..
C 621 1� C b�29
L--\
\. 16,700
me
--33,475
• L__.__-
FIGURE NO. 3 , POPULATION PROJECTIONS IN 1987 BY
COUNTY CENSUS TRACT
7
am
I!
BROOKSIDE (2,132)
BRAZORIA COUNTY / pEARLAN
me
CENSUS TRACT LINE /
( 15,995) /
ENUMERATION DISTRICT LINE ---
CENSUS COUNTY DIVISION LINE -
COUNTY ROUNORY LINE ---- ►
.. MANV •
17f)-
r._" -1/-; ACV/ PEARLAND 01
so
ALVIN
- (14,051) •
/ HILLCR ST
VILLAG
*� I (527)
I \
(_ LIVER \
f I POOL
/\ \- (4'
L).- t .
1 .. ) / \
as
1 4
�1 DANBURY tom` i
/ \
(1,082) \ //
No
t i
lipilop
c r BAILEY IS ANGLE
TON H .SRARON o,v \\ �//
WEST COLUMBIA PRAIRIE ANGLETO �, /
/
C---‘
BRAZORIA WEST CO M81A
,1111( /
/ BRAZOSPO /
-
DIV. �-'\ LAKE
BRAZORIA JACKSO)V J RICH 'OD
.. SW (4,004) v�(21,5`2)J • (1,9 '
(3,967) / • AKE =ARBARA ,�
// CL4)E (1,021)
/
(15,806 1
iI. )—..---.
/
/
C/ JONE-
CREE
FREE PO
SIP \1 (i 640 (12,90 S
\ .
ow
FIGURE NO.4 = POPULATION PROJECTIONS IN 1977 BY
INCORPORATED CITY
8
•
BROOKSIDE (2,600)
..
,7----:
BRAZOR I A COUNTY / PEAR AN
.. / 000
CENSUS TRACT LINE f/ (2B,W )
ENUMERATION DISTRICT LINE
CENSUS COUNTY DIVISION LINE -
COUNTY BOUNORY LINE ---�-- ?
Oft MANYY0•
1-71 AL PEARLANO DI
�' �_ V! ALVIN
(17,400) •
/13 H1LLCR ST
VILLAG
'� (660
LIVER
/ `%., __ POOL
~�` \-�l(54'' )
LL i/
. 1 - ) /i
DANBURY \ //
•
(1,240 1 �i \
l /
�i
�J I AN6LETON 1,' .SHARON D/V. \\ ///
�, BAILEYS ANGLETO /
WEST COLUMBIA J PRAIRIE ��
(/
1 um C•....\
BRAZORIA WEST CO !MINAL---
/ / . 001111(
BRAZOSPO•, 0/V
orv. \', LAKE
BRAZORIA JACKS* RICH •OD
w SW (6,100) ' �(27,6••I • (2, .6
(4,820) /
• AKE =ARBARA �
� k,
CL�`E(1,46•)
/
w �`
(23,-••
/
JOKE'
REE
w \\\ (1,880C (30,000)
O P
•
.. FIGURE NO. 5 : POPULATION PROJECTIONS IN 1982 BY
INCORPORATED CITY
9
.w
r
s. BROOKSIDE ( 3,100)
r — -���
BRAZOR I A COUNTY / pEARi.AN
CENSUS TRACT LINE / (48,000) /
ENUMERATION DISTRICT LINE ----
CENSUS COUNTY DIVISION LINE -
S O COUNTY ROUNORY LINE ---- ,
MANY •
760)
—LI
os (-- ALV/ PEARLANO 0/
ALVIN
(.3 (22,150) •
to
I HILLCR ST
VILLAG
. (810) \
ow _ LIVER
/ / ..." .. -_ \
�, _ POOL
��... `� (6' •)
C
t-L
on
C/ 1 1 / \
�1
' ` /
DANBURY ��\ //
w // (1,340 \ //
/ ( // 11).
BAILEY I$ANGLETON R SHARON 0/V \\ /.,
▪w WEST COLUMBIA j PRAIRIE 8 2 TO /
11,630) • -�—
/ -" /
r r 1
n• Cm
BRAZOR/A WEST CO JMB/A `�\
BRA ZOSPO- DIV
s) DIV. \' LAKE
/
BRAZORIA JACKSO,V�J RICH •OD ' illiP"'
•
i SWEENY (8 850) v L(34 1`00) • ( 2, :')
(5,860) / -• AKE 'ARBARA AP
/ CL\E(2,11 )
/on / (32,.•..) r'
/
JONE-
1 CREE
•r. \\ (2,080) FREEPO 4
(42,500)
\ 1....—\
so
l..........„-
..
.. FIGURE NO. G : POPULATION PROJECTIONS IN 1987 BY
INCORPORATED CITY
• 10
r
CHAPTER III - SOLID WASTE VOLUMES
A. Current Solid Waste Generation
rSolid waste generation rates for Brazoria County have been determined
from statistics provided by major cities in the county. Site visits were
made to the cities of Alvin, Angleton, Clute, Freeport, Lake Jackson,
Pearland, Sweeny and West Columbia. Details of the solid waste dis-
�,. posal systems in each of these cities were obtained from the respective
city managers. This information is summarized in Table I.
r
Residential solid waste generation rates in Brazoria County vary from
0.26 tons/capita/year to 0.99 tons/capita/year, or an overall average
of 2. 8 lbs./capita/day, which appears to be close to the national average
according to a recent series of EPA publications. This figure does not,
however, account for bulk refuse (tree limbs; yard trimmings; metal goods--
refrigerators, stoves, and other appliances; furniture, etc.) , for which no
statistics are available in Brazoria County. Also commercial source
refuse is not accounted for in these figures as this is usually collected
by private contractors. Per capita generation for these wastes varies
r throughout the nation, but for the purposes of the Brazoria County Solid
Waste Study are assumed to total a maximum of 1. 2 lbs./capita/day.
Thus total solid waste generation in Brazoria County in 1974 has been
estimated to total 4 lbs./capita/day. This figure appears relatively lower
than the 5 to 6 lbs./capita/day usually assumed as the national average
r 11
[3 ERNARO J O - NSON INCORPORATED ri OU STON • W A SH I N G T ON
r
r for the United States for the past several years. However, the higher
figures have almost always been quoted for larger metropolitan centers
r
with a considerable degree of industrialization such as the City of
r Houston. Brazoria County, with its more rural character, relatively few
and small towns, and smaller industrial base except in the Freeport-
rLake Jackson area, necessarily experiences a lesser production rate of
r solid wastes. Also the street cleaning activity predominant in major
metropolitan centers lends additional solid waste volumes in such areas,
r
whereas most areas in Brazoria County do not possess such a utility.
P
Agricultural solid wastes, which normally burden rural areas with as high
or higher solid waste generation rates than major cities experience within
their confines, are not included within the scope of this study. The
r
bulk of agricultural solid wastes are disposed on site at or near the point
of generation and are seldom hauled away for disposal to a distant site
as are most city wastes. The growing tendency to reuse and recycle agri-
cultural wastes (especially in light of the energy crisis and the inflationary
prices of fertilizer and animal feed) at the point of generation indicates
rthat agricultural solid wastes need not be of major concern as regards
r disposal either at present or in the future. For the purposes of this study,
therefore, only residential and commercial source wastes have been con-
sidered to be of significance.
i 12
D E R N A R O J O H N S O N INCORPORATED H O U S T O N • W A S H i N G T O N
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
TABLE I
EXISTING SANITARY LANDFILLS IN BRAZORIA COUNTY
D
m
D
Size Rate of Use Depth of fill (feet) Approved
City Involved Location (Acres) (Acres/Year) Acres Left Below Natural Ground By THD*
L
0
I Alvin Between FM
z
O 2403 and CR
z 160 147 5.0 47 4 Yes
z
n
° Angleton Adjacent to
o CR 44 NW of
D City 81 3. 0 66 5 Ye s
m
Freeport Bryan Mound
South of City 20 3. 5 2 8 - 10 No
Lake Jack son- SW Part of
O Clute City 20 3. 0 5 6 Ye s
c
N
Pearland Solid waste is transported to Galveston County Landfill near Hitchcock.
Sweeny NE part of City 40 0. 85 32 8 Yes
D
N
1 West Columbia- Between CR 342
Brazoria and FM 522 100 2. 5 92 8 Yes
0
z
*THD=Texas Health Department
13
P
B. Projected Solid Waste Volumes
Utilizing the figure of 4 lbs./ capita/day, solid waste generation projec-
tions have been made based on anticipated population in the county. The
population figures developed in the previous chapter of this report have
been used for this purpose. Solid waste volumes expected in the county
are presented in Tables II and III for the three selected years (1977, 1982,
1987) for each incorporated city in Brazoria County and for each County
Census Tract respectively.
rC. Sanitary Landfill Requirements
The solid waste volumes projected in this chapter will be utilized to
determine the amount of land required in Brazoria County to dispose of its
solid wastes now and in the future. For the purposes of these calcula-
tions a density of 800 lbs./cubic yard has been assumed for solid waste
placed and compacted in a landfill. The total solid waste generation in
r
the county has thus been converted into volume of space required for its
disposal. After observing several landfills in Brazoria County, it is
evident that land can be filled with wastes usually to a maximum depth
of 10 feet below natural ground level. Piling wastes to a height of more
than 10 feet above ground level has also not been common and, in view
of the almost constantly flat terrain in the county, it may not be advis-
able from an aesthetic and visual aspect as the existence of these
landfills would be all the more obvious in surrounding areas. Average
total thicknesses of fill (below and above ground level) have therefore
r14
C3ERNARO JOI-INSON INCORPORATED HOUSTON • WAS1,INGTON
r
r ,___I
TABLE II
r
SOLID WASTE GENERATION VOLUMES IN TONS YEAR
BY INCORPORATED CITY
r CITY 1977 1982 1987
Brookside 1556 1898 2263
Pearland 11675 20440 35040
rManvel 125 263 555
Alvin 10257 12702 16170
r
Hillcrest Village 385 482 591
rLiverpool 325 394 467
Danbury 790 905 978
rAngleton 9345 11154 13308
rBailey's Prairie 305 380 416
rWest Columbia 4563 6336 8490
Sweeny 2896 3519 4278
r Brazoria 2923 4453 6461
rLake Jackson 15704 20148 24893
Richwood 1442 1723 2015
rLake Barbara 743 1066 1540
r Clute 11538 17228 23798
Jones Creek 1197 1372 1518
rFreeport 9422 21900 31025
r15
r [3 E ANARD J OHNSON INCORPORATED HOU STO N • W ASH i N GT O N
ill
N. NN (000r100v7NL!') aoCN11) NNCO � 1f) C0N 000a0N00 c) 00 (0 V'
co O CT) CO C}) CO 0) N. v7 C0 (f) N 0) N. co a) co - co NI If) N CO CO CO 0) N- 0) N. O V. CO CO
0) (f) co O V' co N. co (0 u) O O co tf) ,-1 N. Ni O (0 (0 co N V' QO v M u7 —I •--I r-- co O co
- r1 N u7 co co co co V' C0 (0 u) V' V' co .-1 u) N CO N. r+ N V N V' CO N N. V ,-i CO
N N ,-1 N r+ '--1 I--I V'
N
Z
0
4-
0
Z
a Q
I
Li)
N O V' N a) Li) 0) N N V. N N. CO (-IN. V' CT) a) co O V' a) a) COO a) CO � CO CO u7 '"+ 0) CO 4
CO a) 0) (!) u) CD u7 Lo u) Q' r-1 (0 O '"1 O V' CO M M N N M CO (. N O V' M N. (. M O (� O N. 3
0) ,-1 V' (f) c0 Cf) O N. 0) co in coCO O CO Li, ri 1-, N 0) If) ,-1 CO Li
.-1 to) V' '—I 0) 0) 0) V' O
co V' co (z) (0 fV .--u co (f) COV' N COCs/ .--1CO .--.1V' CO ,-1 r1 N V. O N u) Co N .--1 CO
•
O .-I — N r1 - N.
1 Z
Hr
H 0
Z U a
ti 0
w• H 0
I
0)
a �
OI1
")
I-1 7 W n O CO CO V' N 0) Q7 N CO a0 M •--I Cn 00 0) in ,-1 .-r Co r!' (0 n V' CO CO (f) (n (0 COO i. (0
I"'I1 N. N. CO co If) V' .--I It) '�
W Z 0 to -� 1CT)0 Cr) S. V CO C0 N COM u7 u7 COM COM N- CO O co)M N. CO00 N CO00 CO
O) N M CO u7 .1 0) V V CO O CO CO L� CO co 0) O O M V' N. 0) CO co u7 V r1 CO
O ,r ,-I CO (3) Cy CO v r1 CO) V' N CO N N N N ,-.4 CO O r+ r1 r1 to 0) CO If) 0) CO N 0
a H H c
H i a
zo a
W
0
CD >-. z
Ca H z
V) 0
L H a
z
0 I
0
H
Q o
a
O 4
Cl) (/) z
Z a
W ,-1 N CO V. u) (0 N. Co 0) O '--I N CO V. If) CO N. a) 0) O '"4 N CO V (f) CO (- CO Cr) C) .1 N w
C.) ,-1 ,-1 .-1 .--1 r1 ,--4 ,-i ,-4r-1 ,--4 NJ N N N N N N N N N Cr) COCO)
H
z �1
03
0 0
U H
t t l I 1 1 t 1 $ it l l L l t I 1. t.---- I .
r
been assumed to be 10, 15, and 20 feet for the purposes of calculating land
area required by Brazoria County for sanitary landfilling. Utilizing these
assumptions the land area required by Brazoria County for landfilling all
of its wastes in 1977, 1982, and 1987 is presented in Table IV for different
thicknesses of fill. It is evident that the greater the thickness of fill
rthe more economical the land use. It would appear that the County should
plan to acquire sufficient land to meet its needs at least through 1990.
For this purpose, land would be consumed at rates ranging from 9. 82 to
18.25 acres/year at a 20 foot fill thickness between now and 1990. At
t these rates of usage, the County would need approximately 200 acres to
r fulfill its needs through 1990.
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r17
f3 E R N A R D J O H N S O N INCORPORATED H O U S T O N • W A S H I N G T O N
r
TABLE IV
SANITARY LANDFILL AREA REQUIREMENTS
r
rYear Solid Waste Generation Sanitary Landfill
Thickness Area Required (Acres)
Tons/Year Cubic Yards/Year* of Fill (feet) Per Day Per Year
1977 126,656 316,640 10 . 0538 19. 62
15 . 0358 13. 08
20 . 0269 9. 81
1982 176,076 440, 190 10 .0748 27. 31
15 . 0498 19. 19
20 . 0374 13. 64
1987 248,534 621, 335 10 . 105 38. 55
PIP 15 . 07 25. 68
20 . 05 18. 25
r
*Assuming in-place density of 800 lbs./cubic yard
r
r
r
r
18
[3ERNARD JONNSON INCORPORATED HOUSTON WASHN GTON
t
r CHAPTER IV - LOCATING SANITARY LANDFILL OPERATIONS
A. Areas With Significant Limitations
r
In the Texas coastal plain, there are three primary factors that can possibly
t" preclude location of a sanitary landfill: (1) location within the estimated
100 year frequency storm flood plain; (2) potential for ground water contami-
nation; and (3) existing adjacent land uses which are incompatible with
rdisposal operations. These factors are aggravated by the geologic con-
formation of Brazoria County and its economic base.
r
Most of the country is a nearly flat coastal plain which rises gradually to
the northwest. As shown in Figure 7 , the surface of the plain to the north-
west and northeast consists of Beaumont Clay. The Beaumont surface,
composed primarily of clay type soils, rises from a minimum altitude of
several feet in the southeastern part of the country to about 65 feet in
the northern part. The rest of the land surface is composed of coastal
swamps, the Gulf of Mexico beach, the bay beaches, and the Brazos and
San Bernard River valleysystems that transect theplains
Y in a generally
northwest-southeast direction. Most surface sediments in the beach and
river areas are sand.
Brazoria County, with an estimated population of 128,000 in 1974 , ranks
among the wealthier and more rapidly growing counties in Texas. It is
a part of the Houston Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area. The county
is a leading producer of oil, petrochemicals, rice, cattle, and sea-water
19
C3 E RNARO J OHNSON INCORPORATED HO U ST O N • W ASH IN GTON
r
• �
minerals. The production of oil, natural gas, sand, clay, lime, sulfur,
magnesium, salt, iodine, fluorine, and bromine form the basis of indus-
trialization. The 75 square mile Brazosport area which contains the
large industrial complex has an estimated present population of 48,000
and generates one-half the solid waste in Brazoria County. One factor
unique to Brazoria County is the large acreage used by Texas Department
of Corrections facilities.
Detailed below are the criteria used to determine feasible potential areas
for sanitary landfill location.
1. Flood Plain. Areas prone to flooding from a 100-year frequency
storm are delineated on Plate 1. Generally the southeastern part
of the county below + 20.0 MSL is susceptible to flooding in
addition to the Chocolate Bayou flood plain and the Brazos-San
Bernard River Valley. The determination of flood prone areas was
based on Corps of Engineers Chocolate Bayou studies, USGS
Federal Flood Insurance Data, and Soil Conservation Service
Brazos River data. Any landfill located in a flood prone area would
require waiver from the Texas Water Development Board and Texas
Health Department.
Also plotted on Plate 1 is the approximate extent of the 1961
Hurricane Carla flooding. By Corps of Engineers criteria, Carla
was a 25-year frequency storm.
20
DERNARD JOHNSON INCORPORATED H O u S TON • W A SMr iN G TON
2. Geologic and Ground Water Considerations. As Figure 7 shows, the
two major geologic formations in Brazoria County are Alluvium and
Beaumont Clays. As would be anticipated the alluvium deposits
nearly define the 100-year flood prone areas.
rThe most widespread fresh-water aquifer in Brazoria County and
1
the only one containing fresh water in much of the southern part of
1 the county is the upper unit of the Chicot aquifer. It supplies all
water for public supply and domestic use as well as part of the
water used by industry in the Brazosport area. It is utilized by
industries and towns in the Sweeny and Old Ocean areas. The
deepest occurrence of the aquifer is approximately 350 feet and the
greatest observed sand thickness is 213 feet. Fresh water sand
thickness in most of the county is less than 100 feet and probably
averages about 75 feet in the central, south, and western parts of
the county. Because of the height of the ground water table in
Brazoria County, the Texas Health Department scrutinizes very
closely any sanitary landfill proposal.
Based on conversations with the Brazoria County Soil Conservation
District personnel, particular groups of soils in Brazoria County
may be more desirable than others for sanitary landfill use. However,
no generalizations can be made and preliminary soils investigations
were required and are discussed later in this chapter.
21
(1ERNARD JONNSON INCORPORATED I-+OUSTON WAS.,N GTON
p
•
3. Incompatible Land Use. On Plate I areas of existing land use
are delineated that would probably preclude sanitary landfill opera-
tions. Basically these areas are either (1) incorporated cities, (2)
high density suburban areas, (3) oil and gas fields, (4) Texas
Department of Corrections property, or (5) wildlife refuges.
B. Feasible Areas for Sanitary Landfill Operations
1. Existing County and Municipal Property- As shown in Table No. I,
there are only four municipally operated landfills with significant
1 operation time left; Angleton, Alvin, West Columbia-Brazoria, and
Sweeny. Although Freeport and Lake Jackson presently operate
sanitary landfills they are rapidly depleting remaining available land.
The City of Pearland is under contract with a subsidiary of Browning-
Ferris Inc. for this purpose.
As shown by Plate 2, the City of Pearland owns 50 acres abutting CR
100 approximately 7.5 miles southwest of downtown Pearland.
Approximately 200 acres of county owned land is located 7 .0 miles
northeast of Angleton adjoining CR 45.
2. Areas Favorable to Sanitary Landfill Location. Generally there are
two areas of Brazoria County with no apparent constraints to locating
a sanitary landfill. First a large area exists north of Angleton
between the Brazos River and Chocolate Bayou flood plains. The
rother major area lies between Linville Bayou and the San Bernard River
in the extreme west and northwest sections of Brazoria County.
23
[3 ERNAR D .i O - NSON INCORPORATED ROUST ON • W A SI'+4 N G T ON
r
C. Soils Investigations
Soil borings were made on the 50-acre tract of land owned by the City of
rPearland and the 200 acre tract of land owned by Brazoria County north
of Angleton.
The two borings at the Pearland site indicate that solid waste can be filled
r to a depth of at least 10 feet. Ground water was encountered at 23 feet
1 below ground surface. However the cores were both highly impervious
clays, exceeding Texas Health Department criteria on permeability.
rAll four borings indicated that the 200 acre Angleton site is totally
I unsuitable for landfill operations because of the high water table
encountered and scattered sand strata .
The Appendix contains boring logs from both sites.
r
r
r
r
r
r
24
C3 E RNARO JO`+NSON INCOR POR ATE O - OU ST ON • WAS - NG TON
low
CHAPTER V - ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
A. Acquisition of Land
In the last chapter the constraints to sanitary landfill location in Brazoria
County were discussed. It would appear that the most promising (for
landfill purposes) existing county or municipal property consists of the 50
racre tract near Pearland. It is recommended that the county consider use
of this site for a county sanitary landfill. Twenty acres of property
adjacent to the 50 acres belonging to Pearland should be purchased by
rthe county and added to the Pearland acreage. Thus possession of
approximately 70 acres earmarked for sanitary landfilling in addition to
existing remaining land in the Alvin landfill should be adequate for North
Brazoria County's needs until 1990.
B. Toint Use of Existing Sanitary Landfills
The cities of West Columbia and Brazoria operate a landfill southwest of
rWest Columbia that has land considerably in excess of future requirements. An
attractive alternative exists for the county to "buy" into this site and
operate it as a county regional landfill. It would be advisable to
racquire an additional 20 to 30 acres adjacent to the existing 100 acre
tract. If additional land is acquired the 120 acres of usable land will
satisfy south and west Brazoria County's disposal needs for the next 15
ryears.
C. Transfer Stations
Transfer stations are a logistic convenience utilized when sanitary landfill
1 sites must, for one reason or the other, be placed so far from the point of
25
B E RN AR D J 0.-INSON INCORPORATED O U S TON • W A SH.,N G T ON
r
solid waste generation that it becomes uneconomical for conventional
garbage collection trucks to travel the long haul distances to the disposal
rfacility. At first this would appear to be the case in Brazoria County for
certain communities. This is because some urban centers, especially
the Brazosport area, including Freeport, Lake Jackson, Clute, Lake
Barbara, Richwood, and Jones Creek are located within the 25 year flood
plain and have very high ground water levels. This not only makes landfill
operation very difficult, but also makes it very hard to obtain Texas Health
rDepartment approval for the site. Unfortunately, these are also the very
same communities which are currently running out of landfill space and
are seeking alternative solutions on an immediate basis. As stated in the
previous chapter, an acceptable landfill site appears to be available to
the County adjacent to Pearland. While this site would be ideal for the
Pearland and even Alvin metropolitan areas, the closest available site for
the Brazosport area is southwest of West Columbia, 23 miles from
Freeport, 18 miles from Lake Jack son, and 19 miles from Clute and Lake
Barbara. Angleton and Sweeny currently have adequate landfill sites and
so would not be influenced by location of a county landfill facility.
In view of the 2 to 4 miles round trip haul distance currently experienced
by most communities, the 36 to 46 mile round trip made twice a day by
each truck would considerably change the collection schedules and routing in
these communities if regular collection trucks were used for this purpose.
26
P E R N A R O J O H N S O N INCORPORATE❑ H O u S T O N • W A S H i N G T O N
1
f
A transfer station, centrally located in the Brazosport area, may be the
solution for these communities . The six incorporated cities in the
Brazosport area have a total solid waste generation of 109 tons/day in
1977, 174 tons/day in 1982, and 232 tons/day in 1987. Considering
those collected wastes suitable for processing through a transfer station
r (about 90% of the total) the area would require the following approximate
transfer station capacities: 114 tons per day immediately, a 183 ton/day
station in 1982 and a 244 ton/day operation by 1990, based on 6 days per
week station operation. The remaining 10%, bulk items such as furniture,
major appliances, tree limbs etc. , would be hauled directly to the landfill.
Various designs have been used in transfer station construction. One of the
more successful configurations previously used in other parts of the county
for handling similar volumes of waste as experienced in the Brazosport area
has been the push-pit concept. This type of transfer station is relatively
economical to construct and operate, is esthetically acceptable to surround-
.
ing communities, has minimal detrimental environmental impact, and is
amenable to expansion at a later date without entailing considerable added
initial capital cost for this purpose.,
5
The transfer station envisioned for the Brazosport area is depicted in Figure
8 . It should be noted that the building can be easily expanded longitudi-
rnally to accomodate one more push-pit when it is needed in the future. The
operation of this station consists of incoming collection trucks just passing
27
l3 E R N A R D J O- N S O N INCORPORATED H O U S T O N • W A S H I N G T O N
I
f i i I I t1
1 :5-,...4 Dm.
F___, ...../.
PLAN
N
till ii
'to■itNW
_________ , 1,61
oraord-,110101111111111111111Womile
FIGURE NO.6 : PROPOSED TRANSFER STATION CONFIGURATION
r
over scales to have their weights recorded and then backing up to a push-
pit into which they empty their load. A hydraulic ram in the push-pit then
pushes the wastes into an open hopper at one end of the push pit. The
wastes pass through the hopper and into a stationary compactor standing
at a lower level beneath the push-pit and hopper. A 65 cubic-yard transfer
trailer with its rear doors open backs up to the stationary compactor. The
compactor then pushes solid wastes into the transfer trailer, compressing
the waste material against the other end of the transfer trailer. When the
100
transfer trailer is full, the hopper feed into the stationary compactor is
temporarily shut off and the full transfer trailer is replaced by an empty
transfer trailer with the aid of a trailer truck. The trailer truck then hauls
the full transfer-trailer to the landfill site where it is emptied by means of
an unloading mechanism (a ram located at the front end of the trailer) .
The trailer-truck then returns to the transfer station with the empty
transfer-trailer which can be used to substitute the transfer-trailer that
was being filled in the meanwhile.
Details of the buildings, equipment, initial site preparation, and other
facilities required to install a transfer station in the Brazosport area are
presented below, along with the costs for these items. The list is
intended tb cover the requirements for a 114 ton/day operation. Provision
has been made to expand this facility to a 244 ton/day operation at
minimal cost when the need arises.
1 29
f ERNOR D J O.NSON INCORPORATE. HOUS-ON • W AS1,INGTON
r
r - ...
r 1 Steel building 120' x 20' x 20'
(@ $20 /square foot) $ 50,000
I 1 Push-pit 40' x 10' x 10' with packer
mechanism inside the building 7,000
r 1 Hopper 10' x 10' x 10' (feeding from the
push-pit into a stationary compactor) 2,000
r 1 Stationary Compactor (capable of pushing
solid waste fed into it into a transfer
trailer) 5,000
r
i 2 Transfer Trailers (60 cubic yards) 40,000
7 1 Trailer Truck (for hauling transfer
trailers) 24 ,000
I 1 Scale 10,000
1 Scale-house/office/personnel
rfacilities @ $20/square foot 16, 000 $ 154 ,000
Site Preparation:
rExcavation (for lower level) $ 3,000
r Excavation (for ramp for trailer-
truck access to lower level) 2,000
rRoad surface (at lower level) 4,000
Road surface (for ramp) 5,000
rRoad surface (on upper level) 3,000
r Drainage (including pump, grading,
pipes, etc.) 10,000
r Utilities 15,000 42,000
j Sub Total 196,000
rPlus 15% contingencies 29,400
r30
rC3ERNARO JOHNSON INCORPORATED I,OU STON • WASHIN GTON
9
F' Plus 15% engineering, legal, and administrative 29 ,400
Total $ 254, 800
r
Annual amortized cost (over respective life spans of individual items;
buildings and site preparation over 15 years, and equipment over 5 years,
assuming financing by 5 1/2% municipal bonds) = $34,022.
r
The annual operating and maintenance costs for this transfer station are
presented below. Eight men would have to be employed full-time to operate
the facility. A full-time mechanic would not be retained for equipment
maintenance which could be done contractually.
Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs:
Personnel:
1 Supervisor $ 14,000
1 Clerk 6,000
r 1 Truck-Trailer Driver 12,000
1 Push-pit Operator (lower
level activities coordinator) 10,000
1 Stationary Compactor Operator
(upper level activities
coordinator) 10,000
1 Maintenance man/guard/
traffic director 8,000
t 1 Scale-house operator 8,000
I 1 Relief man 8,000
Sub Total $ 7 6,000
f 31
[3 E RNAR D J O HNSON INCORPORATED HOU S TON • WAS H'N GT ON
I
25% Fringe Benefits 19,000
Total $ 95,000
Equipment Maintenance
1 Trailer-truck $ 2400
2 Transfer trailers 800
1 Stationary Compactor 400
1 Push-pit 300
t
1 Scale 200
Sub Total 4 , 100
Hauling (from transfer station to Landfill)
@ 7 round-trips per day by the truck-trailer,
40 miles travelled/round-trip, and
approximately 15 tons carried/trip, @
50 /gallon, fuel costs = $35/day = per year 12,775
e•
Total Annual Operating & Maintenance Costs= $ 111,875
r
The total annual costs of operating this transfer station, including
"' amortization of capital for facilities and equipment and operation and
maintenance costs would. be $34,022 + $111, 875 = $145, 897.
For the year 1977, when approximately 114 tons/day would be received at
this site, this cost would be $4 . 10/ton. By the year 1982, when
solid waste generation would exceed 114 tons/day, an extra push-pit
could be added, along with one more hopper, stationary compactor, and
32
D E R N O R D J O H N S O N INCORPORATED H O U S T O N • WASH N G T O N
#• trailer-truck, and two more transfer-trailers. One more man would be
added to the staff in the capacity of an assistant supervisor who would
be able to act in a relief position for any of the other staff members.
This equipment and staffing should be adequate through the year 1987.
The costs for these additional items are presented below.
Added Capital Expenditures:
• 1 Push-pit $ 7 ,000
1 Hopper 2,000
1 Stationary compactor 5,000
1 Trailer-truck 24,000
2 Transfer trailers 40,000
Total $ 78,000
Annual amortized cost $ 15 ,896
Added Operation and Maintenance Costs:
Personnel:
1 Assistant supervisor $ 12,000
1 Trailer-truck driver 12,000
25% Fringe benefits 6,000
Sub total $ 30,000
Added Equipment Maintenance:
1 Push-pit $ 300
1 Stationary compactor 400
33
BERNARD JOHNSON INCORPORATED HOUSTON • WASHINGTON
r
1 Truck tractor 2,400
2 Transfer trailers 800
Sub total $ 3,900
Added fuel costs 6,387
Total Added Annual Operation and
Maintenance Costs = 40,287
Total Added Annual Capitilization= 15,896
Total Added Costs = $ 56, 183
r Total Annual Expenditure in 1982= $ 202,080
Cost per ton from transfer station to landfill at a 183 tons/day rate of
solid waste in 1982 = $3. 54/ton.
r
In 1987, when solid waste received at the transfer station would have
increased to 244 tons/day one extra transfer trailer and one extra trailer-
s', truck should be added on. The incremental cost would be:
Transfer trailer and truck tractor
Capital cost $ 44,000
r' Amortized annual cost 8,967
Maintenance 2,800
Fuel costs 6,387
Driver (including 25% fringe
benefits) 15,000
Total added costs in 1987
over 1982 $ 33, 154
Total annual expenditure in 1987= $ 235,234
Cost/ton in 1987 = $3.09/ton
34
{ O E R N A R D J O H N S O N INCORPORATE❑ H O U S T O N • W A S H I N G T O N
a.
To determine the justification for a transfer station these costs have been
compared to the incremental cost of hauling solid waste to a distant landfill
so
in conventional collection trucks without an interim transfer station. Table
Pi V shows these costs. It would appear from this table that a transfer sta-
r
tion is currently not the most economical solution for most Brazosport area
0
communities. These cities may do better acquiring additional collection
Pi trucks andcrews to compensate for the extra time lost by these trucks
making a long haul to the distant landfill site. However, by 1987, a
transfer station may become more attractive in the Brazosport area and its use
should be re-evaluated. Depending upon the results of the re-evaluation,
a 244 ton/day transfer station might be constructed and put into operation
at that time. The economy of scale factor makes smaller transfer stations
*� extremely expensive to operate.
Another factor that may influence the time frame for introducing a transfer
station is the possibility of locating another municipal facility such as
wis
an equipment maintenance garage at the same site. The reason for this
• is to reduce some of the overhead costs at the transfer station in the form
of a guard, mechanic, or clerk who could be shared with the other facility.
Other personnel and possibly some equipment could also be used inter-
changably. This idea may be especially feasible for some of the larger
rcommunities in the Brazosport area such as Lake Jackson and Clute which
r are fairly close together. The economy of scale on such facilities preclude
35
1
F3ERNORO JOHNSON INCORPORATED f+OU STON • W G St+i N GTO N
r
r �
TABLE V
ANNUAL COST OF SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
P, WITH AND WITHOUT A TRANSFER STATION 1
WITH TRANSFER STATION2 WITHOUT TRANSFER STATIONS
✓ CITY 1977 1982 1987 1977 1982 1987
Lake Jackson $ 72,300 $ 82,607 $ 91,978 $ 53,864 $ 69 , 107 $ 85,382
Richwood 6,385 6,761 7,090 5,998 7, 167 6 ,911
r Lake Barbara 3, 105 3,918 5,037 3,643 5,212 7, 530
Clute 50, 144 66, 189 81,791 43,729 64,294 90, 194
Jones Creek 6,096 6,296 6, 351 3,662 4, 198 4,645
1r Freeport 48,297 101,221 130, 522 34,013 79 ,059 112,000
t
Total for
f Brazosport
Area $ 186,327 $ 266,992 $ 322,764 $ 144,909 $ 230,037 $ 306,662
✓
1. These costs reflect operation of a transfer station located in the vicinity of Lake
• Barbara versus the alternative incremental hauling by collection trucks directly to the
West Columbia - Brazoria landfill.
2. These costs are based on 90% of total solid wastes generated within the respective
cities being hauled to and processed through the transfer station. The remaining 10%
(furniture, major appliances, etc.) are expected to be hauled directly to the landfill
and this direct haul cost has been added to the cost of the transfer station.
3. These costs are based on direct haul transportation costs for each individual city
to the West Columbia landfill, based on the data developed in Table VII of this report.
r
36
D E R N A R O J O H N S O N INCORPORATED H O u S T O N • W A S H i N G T O N
r--
•
any city in the Brazosport area from economically implementing such a
ala
scheme individually. Joint municipal facilities such as an equipment
s garage and transfer station would considerably reduce costs to the
cities involved and permit earlier construction of new facilities.
r
D. Rural Collections
One of the prime solid waste problems experienced by Brazoria County
is the illegal roadside dumping that has occurred in areas not serviced
by municipal collection systems. Because of the absence of convenient
Pa
disposal facilities, garbage and trash are frequently discarded at
random throughout the county. It is suggested that in order to alleviate
this problem, a number of containers of approximately 3 to 10 yard capacity
should be set up on roadsides and clearly marked. The containers should
be of a type that can be latched completely shut to keep the weather out,
but can be easily opened and trash thrown in without undue stress. The
containers should be of the type that can be serviced by a dumpster type
N,, of truck. This type of a system can be made operational by the county
at a minimum cost compared to the vast aesthetic benefits to be gained.
E. Sanitary Landfill Located in Flood Plain icentral Brazosport Area)
In view of the relatively high costs associated with the long haul from
the heavily populated Brazosport area to the landfill near West Columbia,
the potential of a closer-in landfill has been investigated. The West
a• Columbia site has been chosen for disposal of Brazosport area wastes
because of geologic and hydrologic factors which made sanitary landfilling
37
C3 ERNARO JOHNSON INCORPORATED H OUSTO N • W A S H IN G TO N
V
•
in the 100-year flood plain undesirable and difficult. However if these
difficulties were overcome, the extra costs of a long haul could be
avoided.
The Texas Health Department has set standards for sanitary landfilling
within various frequency flood plains. Class I landfills (handling toxic
and hazardous materials) must be located outside of the 50 year flood
plain. Class II landfills (handling domestic wastes) must be located
* outside of the 25 year flood plain. A waiver of the restriction on Class
II landfills can be obtained by application to the Texas Health Depart-
ment. In order to obtain such a waiver it will be necessary to show
that adequate flood prevention measures are being adopted, that the
site is protected from inundation, drainage facilities have been provided,
ground water has been protected by an impervious layer of material
between the landfill and the water table, and that operational procedures
are well defined over the entire area of the fill. In order to fulfill
these conditions in the Brazosport area, the site preparation detailed
below would be necessary.
The basic requirements of a landfill located in the Brazosport area flood
plain would be provision of adequate drainage and flood protection for
r
the site from a 25 year frequency flood. An impervious 2 foot layer of
clay underlying the landfill should provide adequate ground water pro-
tection. A dike 4 feet high built surrounding the landfill would afford
38
r �
F3E RNARD J OHNSON INCORPORATED H O U S T ON • W A SH iN GTON
i
•
flood protection. A drainage ditch running parallel to the dike on the
outside perimeter from the landfill should suffice for draining the
► landfill. The costs of these protection measures are presented below.
As has been shown in the section on transfer stations in this report,
f' the Brazosport area currently produces approximately 100+ tons of
solid wastes per day. This figure will reach over 200 tons/day by
1990. A sanitary landfill that could accept all these wastes through
1990 would have to be capable of absorbing 2, 190,000 cubic yards of
solid wastes. Because of high ground water levels in the area it would
probably not be possible to fill to more than 5 feet below natural ground
level. The fill could be operated to a height of 10 feet above natural
ground level. With a total 15 ft. high fill, 440,000 square yards or 90.91
r
acres would be needed. Thus a 100 acre site would suffice for the landfill
and necessary buildings.
Olm To spread an impervious layer of clay 2 feet deep over 100 acres would cost
$1 , 137,435 (@ $3.5O/cu.yd. for the clay). The cost of building the
dike, adjacent drainage ditch, and pump station, is predicated on the
potential of obtaining a square site and would cost approximately
$ 125,000 to build. Thus the total cost of flood protection, ground
water protection, and drainage on this site would be $1 , 262 ,435 In
addition to this cost, land is extremely expensive in the Brazosport
area. Assuming land costs at $3,000/acre, the 100 acres needed would
39
r
C3 ERNA RD J OHNSON INCORPORATED HO U STON • W A SH.N GTO N
I
•
•
cost $300,000. Thus a Brazosport area landfill would require an extra
initial capital expenditure of $1,562,435 (amortized out to $155,696
Fover 15 years using 5 1/2% municipal bonds) , compared to the other
two proposed landfills outside the 100 year flood plain. At an intake
of 127 tons/day, this cost is an additional $3.92/ton. The maximum
saving in transportation cost by hauling to an available tract of land
r 4 miles east of Richwood rather than to the West Columbia site would
1
be $2.60/ton for the Freeport/Jones Creek area and correspondingly
less for other Brazosport cities. Therefore a wet landfill location is
still economically undesirable and this alternative is rejected.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
R
r
40
B E R N A R D J O H N S O N INCORPORATED H O U S T O N • W A S H i N G T O N
r
r-
CHAPTER VI - ECONOMICS OF LANDFILLS
Capital and operating costs have been both based on 1974 dollars. Operating
and maintenance costs are expected to increase with time. However, this will
r not affect the analysis since values are comparative rather than numerically
absolute. Capital amortization is based on 5. 5 percent municipal financing and
a project life of 15 years.
A. Proposed Capital Expenditures
1. Pearland Site
a. Acquisition of additional 20 acres
adjacent to existing 50 acres $ 36,000
Annual amortized cost (15 years at
5 1/2 %) 3, 587
"' b. Preparation of 70 acre site
Access road $ 13, 860
Fencing 10, 560
Drainage 10,000
Guard House and Scales 25,000
Equipment garage 20,000
r Utilities 15,000
Sub total $ 94,420
r
15% Contingency 14, 163
r
41
C3E RNARD J OHNSON INCORPORATED HOUSTON • W ASH I N GT O N
f
r 15% Engr. legal and administrative 14, 163
Total Site PreparationCost $ 122,746
Annual amortized cost
(15 years at 5 1/2%) $ 12,232
C. Landfill equipment
1 Crawler tractor $ 60,000
1 Dragline 50,000
1 Water truck 12,000
1 Light truck 3,000
Sub total $ 125,000
r
Annual amortized cost
(5 years at 5 1/2%) $ 29,273
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $ 283,746
ANNUAL AMORTIZED COST $ 45,092
In 1982 one additional crawler tractor would be required which would
increase annual amortization costs by $14,000 to $59,000. In 1987 one
more crawler tractor and dragline would be required increasing annual
amortization costs by $25,600 to $84,600.
2. West Columbia - This is an ongoing landfill. To accommodate
Brazosport solid waste, additional equipment will be required and
ran additional 30 acres of land should be purchased to augment the
! existing 100 acre tract.
42
OERNARO JOHNSON INCORPORATED HOUSTON • WASHiNGTON
r
r �
a. Acquisition of additional 30 acres
of land $ 75,000
Annual amortized cost
(15 years at 5 1/2%) $ 7,474
b. Site improvements necessary because
of increased volume $ 20,000
15% Contingency 3,000
15% Engr. , legal and administrative 3,000
Sub total $ 26,000
Annual amortized cost
(15 years at 5 1/2%) $ 2,591
c. Landfill equipment
2 Crawler tractors $ 120,000
r" 1 Dragline 50,000
1 Water truck 12,000
1 Light truck 3,000
Sub total $ 185,000
Annual amortized cost
(5 years at 5 1/2%) $ 43,324
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $ 286,000
/•
ANNUAL AMORTIZED COST $ 53,389
r In 1982 an additional crawler tractor and dragline would be required which
would increase annual amortization costs by $25,600 to $79,000. In 1987
43
O E R N A P O J O H N S O N INCORPORATED H O U S T O N • W A S H i N G T O N
r
r �
r' an additional crawler tractor would be required which would increase
amortization costs by $14,000 to $93,000.
B. Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs
1. Pearland Site
a. Annual equipment operation and maintenance
r
1 Crawler tractor $ 6,000
1 Dragline 5,000
1 Water truck 1,200
1 Light truck 300
r
$ 12,500
b. Annual personnel costs
1 Supervisor $ 14,000
2 Equipment operators 24,000
1 Watchman 6,000
1 Mechanic, 1/2 time 6 000
i
$ 50,000
25% fringe benefits $ 12,500
$ 62,500
TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE $ 75,000
In 1982, the addition of another crawler tractor will increase annual
operation and maintenance costs by $21,000 ($6,000 equipment main-
tenance and $15,000 personnel costs) to $9 6,0 0 0. In 1987 , the additional
crawler tractor and dragline will increase annual operation and
44
O E R N A R O .J O H N S O N INCORPORATED H O U S T O N • w A S H i N G T O N
r
rr=j1
maintenance costs by $41,000 ($11,000 equipment maintenance and
$30,000 personnel costs) to $137 ,000
r2. West Columbia - Current operation and maintenance costs of the
landfill are $2.50/ton based on approximately 6000 tons/year.
Below are costs if Brazosport solid waste were processed.
a. Annual Equipment Operation and Maintenance
2 Crawler tractors $ 12,000
1 Dragline 5,000
r
1 Water truck 1,200
1 Light truck 300
$ 18,500
rb. Annual Personnel Costs
1 Supervisor $ 14,000
3 Equipment operators 36,000
1 Watchman 6,000
r 1 Mechanic, 1/2 time 6,000
$ 62,000
25% fringe benefits $ 15, 500
Sub total $ 77,500
TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE $ 96,000
In 1982 the additional crawler tractor and dragline will increase annual
operation and maintenance cost by $41,000 ($11,000 equipment main-
tenance r and $30,000 personnel costs) to $137,000. In 1987, addition
t 45
C3EPNARD JOHNSON INCORPORATED HOUSTON • WASHINGrON
r
of a crawler tractor will increase operation and maintenance cost by
$21,000 ($6,000 equipment maintenance and $15,000 personnel costs) to
I $158,000.
C. Total Costs
Table VI contains estimated disposal costs for each landfill based on the
above calculated annual capital, operational, and maintenance costs for
the years 1977, 1982, and 1987. The costs in dollars per ton are pre-
dicated on the Pearland site serving County Census Tracts C601 through
C607. Likewise it is assumed that the West Columbia site could handle
County Census tracts C612 to C618 and C620 to C630. Sweeny would
service C619 and Angleton would service its immediately surrounding
area.
D. Individual City Disposal Costs
Based on sanitary landfill costs calculated in the previous section and
long haul distances by most cities in the two chosen landfill sites for
Brazoria County, Table VII presents total disposal costs (exclusive of
local collection) to incorporated cities in Brazoria County. It should be
rnoted that the cities of Sweeny and Angleton are missing from this table
as these cities have adequate landfill space to satisfy their needs for
some time to come. They have not been assigned to either of the two
rproposed county landfills.
rThe transportation costs in Table VII have been based on the assumption
r 46
B E R N A R D J O H N S O N INCORPORATED H O U S T O N • WASH.N G T O N
TABLE VI
PROPOSED SANITARY LANDFILL COSTS
m
D
z
D - _
• LANDFILL LOCATION ANNUAL TONNAGE HANDLED TOTAL ANNUAL COST COST/TON-DOLLARS
0
m
0
Pearland
(65 Acres)
O 1977 35,928 120,000 3. 34
1982 52,238 155,000 2. 98
1987 78,447 221,600 2. 82
o West Columbia
(122 Acres)
0
z
1977 57,974 149,400 2. 58
1982 81,280 216,000 2. 66
1987. 116,688 251,000 2. 15
0
47 [L1
that cities operate conventional 20 cubic yard packer trucks with 3-man
crews. It has also been assumed that when fully loaded these trucks
carry 5 tons of solid waste and can travel at an average speed of 35 mph
to a distant landfill. The cost of the long-haul has been based on con-
verting round-trip distance to the landfill into terms of time, adding 20
minutes for time to unload at the landfill, and assuming the total cost
of operating a packer truck with 3-man crew at $16.00/hr. It is evident
that the long-haul transportation costs shown in Table VII are less than
either of the other two alternatives previously considered - transfer
stations or a landfill within the 100 year flood plain.
ans
w ,
48
O E R N A R O J O H N S O N INCORPORATED H O U S T O N • W A S H I N G T O N
r
r -
•
rTABLE VII
TOTAL DISPOSAL COSTS IN 1977 TO CITIES
t
USING PROPOSED SANITARY LANDFILLS
i
rRound Trip Total Refuse Disposal
I Landfill Distance Transportation* Cost Exclusive
City Used to Landfill Cost ($/ton) of Collection ($/ton)
r
Brookside Pearland 10 2. 16 5.50
f Pearland ($3. 34/ton)
Pearland 10 2. 16 5. 50
($3. 34/ton)
r Marvel Pearland 10 2. 16 5. 50
($3.34/ton)
Alvin Pearland 24 3.71 7.05
r ($3. 34/ton)
Hillcrest
Village Pearland 26 3.94 7.2 8
I ($3.34/ton)
Liverpool Pearland 25 3.83 7. 17
($3.34/ton)
r Bailey's
Prairie West Columbia 20 2. 88 5.46
($2.5 8/ton)
r' Lake
1 Jackson West Columbia 36 4. 34 6.92
($2.58/ton)
r Richwood West Columbia 44 5.08 7 .66
($2.5 8/ton)
Lake
r Barbara West Columbia 42 4.90 7.48
($2.58/ton)
Clute West Columbia 34 4. 16 6.74
r ($2. 58/ton)
lone s
Creek West Columbia 38 4.53 7. 11
r ($2. 58/ton)
Freeport West Columbia 46 5.26 7 . 84
($2.5 8/ton)
r *Includes cost of unloading time at the landfill
r49
BERNARD J OI-INSON INCORPORATED HO U STON • W ASI-B NG T ON
r
CHAPTER VIII - RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the foregoing discussion of Brazoria County's solid waste disposal needs
through the next 15 years and the analysis of various alternatives to resolve
these needs, the following recommendations are presented:
1. The 50 acres of land owned by the City of Pearland should be leased by the
County and converted to a regional county sanitary landfill this year servicing
m
the Pearland-Alvin metropolitan areas. An additional 20 acre tract adjacent to
this site should be acquired by the county to augment sanitary landfill space.
2. A regional county sanitary landfill should not be attempted in the
flood prone Brazosport area as state requirements indicate that a special waiver
would have to be obtained for a site in such a location. The cost of site
preparation and operation for such a landfill does not appear competitive with
hauling solid waste to other locations.
3. Immediate construction and implementation of a transfer station for the
Brazosport area is not economically feasible. Direct long haul of solid waste
in conventional collection trucks is recommended for the present. However,
within 10 years, waste generation in the Brazosport area may have reached
sufficient proportions to justify the economy of scale necessary for a transfer
station. A re-evaluation of such a facility should be made at that time. Ten
acres of municipal property in the Lake Barbara vicinity appears to be an ideal
location for such a facility.
50
DERNARD J DI"INSON INCORPORATED O US TON • W AS.i N GT O N
r
Pa
fL
i 4. A pooling of municipal facilities among Brazosport communities, especially
the combination on the ten acre Lake Barbara site of an equipment maintenance
garage serving local municipalities and a solid waste transfer station serving
the entire Brazosport metropolitan area would economically justify a transfer
facility at an earlier date.
me
5. Rural collection facilities in the form of 3 to 10 cubic yard road-site
- containers conveniently placed and serviced regularly by county-owned or
contract front-loader trucks, should be provided as soon as possible.
6. The cities of Sweeny and Angleton have adequate municipal landfills for
the study period.
7. A contractual arrangement by the county should be made with the cities
of West Columbia and Brazoria to enable disposal of Brazosport solid waste
Ps there. Additional property in the amount of approximately 30 acres should be
obtained if at all possible.
110
Pe
r
r51
(1E RNAR D J O H+NSON INCORPORATED HOUSTON • WA SH IN GTON
OM
•
CHAPTER VIII - REFERENCES
1. An Accounting System for Solid Waste Collection, for Transfer
System Operations, for Solid Waste Management in Small
Communities, and for Sanitary Landfill Operations, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency publication numbers
(SW-27ts, SW-38 ts, SW-28ts, and SW-15 ts) , 1970.
2. "An Analysis of Solid Waste Collection Systems" , in Chemical
Engineering Applications in Solid Waste Treatment, AIChE
Pa
Symposium Series No. 122, Vol. 68, 1972.
3. "Economic Considerations in the Location and Design of Solid
Waste Transfer Stations" presented by Narayan Thadani at
The First Texas Solid Waste Management Conference, May,
1971.
4. Evaluation of Sanitary Landfill Sites, Texas Coastal Zone-
r
Geologic and Engineering Criteria, Bureau of Economic Geology,
The University of Texas at Austin, 1972.
5. Financing Solid Waste Management in Small Communities, U. S.
fm
Environmental Protection Agency publication number (SW-57ts) ,
1971.
6. Ground-Water Resources of Brazoria County, Texas, Report 163,
PP
Texas Water Development Board, Austin, Texas, February, 1973.
52
P
C3EPNAPO J OHNSON INCOPPOPAT E O HOU STON • WA SH IN G TON
1
•
7. Guidelines for Local Governments on Solid Waste Management,
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency publication number
(SW-17c) , 1971.
r8. Personal Communication from Charles Deahl, Sales Manager
Hyco Equipment Co. , Houston, Texas, to Narayan Thadani,
Senior Engineer, Bernard Johnson Incorporated, March 4, 1974.
9. Population Projections 1970-2020 for the Gulf Coast Planning
Region, Houston-Galveston Area Council, April 1, 1972.
a•
10. Recommended Standards for Sanitary Landfill Design,
Construction, and Evaluation, Model Sanitary Landfill Operation
Agreement, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Publication
r
number (SW-86ts) , 1971.
11. The Sanitary Landfill, Caterpillar Tractor Co. , Sales Training
Division, Training Package Number (TE GO 7038-01) , July, 1971.
12. Sanitary Landfill Facts, U. S. Department of Health, Education
and Welfare, publication number (SW-4ts) , 1970.
13. Sanitary Landfill Machine Selection Guide, Caterpillar Tractor
Co.
1 14. "Solid Waste Collection Systems, " Narayan Thadani in
rProfessional Engineer, July 1971.
15. Solid Waste Management, A Comprehensive Assessment of
Solid Waste Problems, Practices and Needs, Office of Science
53
BERNARD J OHNSON INCORPORATED f+OUSTON • W ASH I N GTO N
A
and Technology, Executive Office of the President, Washington
D.C. May 1969.
16. "Solid Wastes System Planning Studies in the Houston-
Galveston Area," presented by Narayan Thadani at conference
on Land Use, Transportation, and Environmental Pollution
r Control for the Houston-Galveston Urban Area, June 1969.
17. Solid Waste Transfer Stations A State-of-the-Mt Report on
Systems Incorporating Highway Transportation, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency publication number (SW-99) ,
1973.
18. The Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act, Acts of 1969, 61st
Legislature, Chapter 405, as amended, Article 4477 - 7,
P. Vernon's Annatated Civil Statutes, as presented in Texas Water
Quality Board Agency Publication Number 72-03, March, 1972.
r
0
r
01.
54
D ERNARD JO -NSON INCORPORATED +OUST ON W AS'+,N GT ON
a
•
APPENDIX
r
a
t
a
a
C
a
[3 ERNARO JO- NSON INCORPORATED .0 U S T ON • W AS'+,N GTO N
141!fit! sssrtlle engineering & testing service, ire.
3801$INTLIFF DRIVE.SUITE ISO • (7131782-0800 • HOUSTON.TEAS 7703!
`„I
r
OP
r
i a-1
r
r 1 1
r
r '
1
P
r
BORING PLAN
PEARLAND SITE
APRIL 1974
r A-1
r �I1��► soperille eiPPNesri+N 4' testier service, fie.
6401 EINTUFF DRIVE.SUITE EEO • (7131761-06SO • HOUSTON.TEXAS 7701
aos
mor
C• R• 45
T--)1. B-3
B-6 B-4
I `
1 `
+3-5
BORING PLAN
ANGLETON SITE
APRIL 1974
•- A-2
. r Egiiii... tatsr4lio engineering Jo testing /terries, ine.
►'i►a ri f,•1
`,I'. Blot BINTUFF DRIVE,SUITE 560 0 13)7BZ 0610HOUSTON.TEXAS 77101
r
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST DATA
. r
PROJECT LAND FILL SITE
r
r W w ►- Z Q
y � a
41 a k J E ! - h' C
? ¢ z ,Q 144> o
W F- yFj to d 4 W d G ~ C•T 't A J
r II
0. f6.
i/�
o
G LL p F- J J d d Yf § i
r 8-1 8-10 37 73 24 49
18-20 28 56 25 31
PP
i
23-25 20 30 19 11
r 8-2 8-10 26 59 23 36
13-15 30 75 25 50
r ,
23-25 20 30 19 11
P.
r 1
r
r ,
I"
I
r . . . .
r
r
r
A-3
II1l'b► **urine engineering it, feeling merefee, Sire.
1.40
`,I` 5601$INTLIfF O111VE,SUIT[660 • 1713)MONK) • HOUSTON,T/XAS 77036
PROJECT PEARLANP LAND FLLL SITE BORING NO 3-1
... F W u. N NO RECOVERY DATE 3-2 1-7 4
N
LL O. p C - UNOISTURBEO CORE LOCATION S e e Plan
z )- O z LL P PENETRATION TEST ELEVATION
x J - JAR BORING TYPE 3" Core
t
Q W W 0
° y a. CC
0° DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM
04
C 0 . 5 Plastic dark gray clay (CH)
C 1 . 5
5 C 1 . 5
C 2 . 5 Stiff gray and tan clay
w/calcareous nodules
C 4. 0
10`-
-� Very stiff red and light gray clay
C 4. 0
154
111,204 C 4 . 5
C 4 . 5 Stiff red sandy clay
25
.. _ w/silt and sand lenses, waterbearing
(CL)
C 1 . 5 plastic red sandy clay
030
Bottom @ 30 ft .
1 . Boring drilled to 10 feet without using
drilling fluid .
2 . Water encountered at 25 feet after 30 minutes.
4
I
r' A-4
Oa% fluorine engineering ' testing serciee, inc.
�il.0 8 5801 01NTLIFF DRIVE,SUITE 650 • 17131 782-0580 • HOUSTQN,TEXAS 77038
PROJECT PE:ARLAND LAND FILL SITE, BORING NO B-2
a I e N • NO RECOVERY DATE 3-2 1-7 4
rn
ut > la C - UNDISTURBED CORE LOCATION See Plan
z la CI.
z u. P - PENETRATION TEST ELEVATION
CC
a 1- (!1
J • JAR BORING TYPE 3 " Core
o ( 4 m n
' - -
DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM
0 4
C 1. 0 Plastic dark gray clay (CH)
C 1 . 5
51 C 2 . 5
Stiff gray and tan clay w/calcareous nodules
C 3. 0
101 C 4. 5 Very stiff red and light gray clay
C 4 . 5
154,(
201 C 4. 5
{ C 2 . 0
254 - Plastic red sandy clay (CL)
w/sand seams , waterbearing
C 2 . 5
3 0/
Bottom @ 30 ft.
1
1 1 . Boring drilled to 10 feet without using
drilling fluid.
2 . Water encountered at 23 feet after 30
tminutes .
4
A-5
II/��► sourIUO engineering 4 testing service, two.
at�c.1 -
�ut�\�I� �1 8INTUf F DRIVE,SUITE 660 • (713)7132-0590 . HOUSTON,TEXAS 77036
PROJECT ANGLETON LAND FILL SITE BORING NO B-3
w LL N o NO RECOVERY DATE 3-2 8-7 4
In
U. a. w p C • UNDISTYRBED CORE LOCATION See Plan
w Z U. P • PENETRATION TEST ELEVATION
6� a. Z Q 0
J - JAR BORING TYPE 3" Core
N
d cc 03
0 DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM
C 1. 8 Plastic dark gray clay (CH)
C 1 . 6
5 C 1 . 6
Plastic gray and tan clay
C 1. 9
C 1 . 7
10 Plastic tan and gray clay
C w/calcareous nodules
C 2 . 7
r 15 Stiff tan and gray clay
20 C 2 . 5
C 1. 9 Firm tan and gray clayey sand (SC)
`254
Loose tan sand (SP)
r 11301 P 111
Bottom @ 30 ft .
a
1 . Boring drilled to 12 feet without using
drilling fluid.
a
2 . Water encountered at 12 feet.
r , 3 . Water rose to 4 feet after 30 minutes .
, 4
a
A-6
-' II/��► sosurille eseisseering do testing service, ine.
4. -4...,,1 mot BINTLIFf DRIVE.SUITE 660 • (713178200 0 • HOUSTON.TEXAS 77035
VIIII
PROJECT ANGLETON LAND FILL SITE BORING NO 13-4
Wu. N - NO RECOVERY DATE 3728-74
Va
LL > W p C UNDISTURBED CORE LOCATION See PJ.a n
z f" 0 LL P - PENETRATION TEST ELEVATION
2 _
= w o g J - JAR BORING TYPE 3" Core__
a
a do m
DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM
0
C 2 . 6 Plastic dark gray clay (CH)
C 1 . 4
Plastic gray and tan clay
51 C 1. 1
C 1 . 1
Plastic tan and gray clay
C 1 . 0
101
C 0 . 5
15#
Firm tan sand (SP )
204 15
4
16 Firm gray and tan sand
2 5♦--
304 P15
�— Bottom @ 30 ft .
1 . Boring drilled to 12 feet without using
drilling fluid .
2 . Water encountered at 12 feet.
3. Water rose to 4 feet in 30 minutes .
A-7
II/it »surillo engineering do testing service, inc.
. Wiz ITT iiTvs�`, � 6E01 81NTUFf DRIVE,SUITE 660 • 17131762-0690 • HOUSTON,TEXAS 77036
i
PROJECT ANGLETON LAND t'ILL SITE BORING N O 13-5
w LL N - NO RECOVERY DATE 3-2 8-7 4
N
g ~ C - UNDISTURBED CORE. LOCATION See Plan
-- F. w 2 Z P - PENETRATION TEST ELEVATION
d Qw
J - JAR BORING TYPE 3' Core
A.
t y d w
m
DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM
0
C 2 . 6 Plastic dark gray clay
•— C 1. 0 (CH)
51 C 1. 2 Plastic gray and tan clay
. C 1 . 2
10� C 1. 4 w/silt layers
154 P 16 Firm tan sand (SP)
i2 0' P 18
P 16
025
1 P 16
30
Bottom @ 30 ft.
D ' 1 . Boring drilled to 12 feet without using
drilling fluid .
2. Water encountered at 12 feet .
4 3 . Water rose to 4 feet 3 inches after 33
minutes.
a / ,
—
A-8
ffiliatio neuritis engineering Jo testing .e vee7 Ow.
,rri,I�1��1/ Po0I BINTuFF DRIVE.SUITE 650 • 1713)7820690 • HOUSTON,TEXAS 7703E
NSW
PROJECT ANGLETON LAND FILL SITE BORING NOB-6
T
N - NO RECOVERY DATE 3-28-74
U. G. W ~ p C • UNDISTURBED CORE LOCATION See Plan
Z W z U. P = PENETRATION TEST ELEVATION
x I- 0 J - JAR BORING TYPE Aug3e r
Q a
O e
wm
DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM
0
plastic dark gray clay (CH)
5 Plastic gray and tan clay
104 Firm tan and gray clayey silt (SC)
Firm tan sand (SP)
Bottom @ 15 ft .
1 4
1
i
A-9
elk
November 13, 1990
VIV
Honorable John Damon and
Members of the Brazoria County
Commissioner' s Court
Brazoria County Courthouse
Angleton, Texas 77515
Final Report of Brazoria County
Solid Waste Management Task Force
Dear Judge Damon and Commissioners :
This is the final report to be issued by the Brazoria County Solid
Waste Management Task Force appointed by the Brazoria County
Commissioner' s Court on November 27, 1989 . The task force is
composed of thirteen appointed members (we have had two
resignations ) , and these members are listed below:
County Judge:
Nelva Urick, Route 5, Box 320A, Alvin 77511
Neal Bess, Jr. , 1408 Forest Park Court, Sweeny 77480
James E . Bost, 2102 Shadybend, Pearland, Texas 77581
Precinct 1 :
Toni Hurt, 52 Orchid Court, Lake Jackson 77566
Mike Vargo, 133 Luciana, Clute, Texas 77531
E . C. "Ed" Stokley, 514 Circle Way, Lake Jackson 77566
Precinct 2 :
Margurite Croix, 4623 Croix Parkway, Manvel, Texas 77575
Kim Rouse, 1024 Cannon Drive, Angleton, Texas 77515
Precinct 3 :
Fran Coppinger, 2111 North Galveston, Pearland, Texas 77581
David Harner, 216 W. Sealy, Alvin, Texas 77511
D. A. Miller, Jr. , 2707 Pinecone Lane, Pearland, Texas 77581
Precinct 4 :
Kenneth Lott, P. O. Box 248, Sweeny, Texas 77480
A. A. MacLean, 25 Oak Drive, Lake Jackson, Texas 77566
In addition to the above set out appointed members, there are
twenty-six ex-officio members, which include the mayors of the
twenty-three cities, village, and townships in the County, and
three facilitators : Charles Moss, County Extension Agent; Larry
Larrinaga, Dow Chemical Company; and Leo O'Gorman, Brazoria County
Health Unit .
41M fah.
Solid Waste Management Task Force
Final Report
November 13, 1990
Page 2 of 5
The Task Force has met monthly or bi-monthly since their
appointment at the Old Armory Building in Angleton at 11 : 30 a.m. on
Tuesdays .
We refer you to the first interim report issued by this Task Force
in regard to the mission we set about accomplishing. This mission
included determining the magnitude of the municipal solid waste
problem in Brazoria County, studying both the long-term and short-
term aspects of solid waste management in Brazoria County,
evaluating a realistic course of action, and reporting our findings
in a final report to your Court.
Officers and committee chairpersons were appointed as follows :
Officers :
Chairperson Ed Stokley
Vice-Chairperson Fran Coppinger
Secretary Nelva Urick
Treasurer Neal Bess
Committee Chairpersons :
Finance Committee Neal Bess
Source/Generators
Committee Mike Vargo
Recycling Committee Fran Coppinger
Incineration Committee Toni Hurt
Landfill Committee A. A. MacLean
Collection/Transfer
Transportation
Committee Kenneth Lott
Education Committee Nelva Urick
Composting Committee Ken Timmermann
This report is to finalize the recommendations made in our second
interim report on September 24 , 1990 to the Brazoria County
Commissioner' s Court. This final report and its recommendations
have been approved by the Solid Waste Management Task Force on
November 13, 1990 . The recommendations are:
1 . A SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM should
be enacted for Brazoria County through the Brazoria
County Commissioner' s Court.
2 . A SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SPECIAL AUTHORITY should be
created to address the needs of Brazoria County in
planning and implementing an integrated approach to waste
management.
Arm
Solid Waste Management Task Force
Final Report
November 13, 1990
Page 3 of 5
The Task Force feels that the public education program can and
should be implemented at the very earliest possible date. This
recommendation has also been supported by citizen' s groups who have
appeared before this court on numerous occasions, the Brazoria
County Cities Association at their meeting on October 17 , 1990, and
the Houston Galveston Area Council of Governments as spoken before
the Court by Mr. Jack Steele on September 24 , 1990 .
A public education program would have a mission of educating the
public on the benefits and avenues for the participation of each
citizen in proper solid waste management techniques . Goals would
include, but not be limited to, the reduction of litter,
eliminating illegal dumping, recycling, composting, and reduction
of the waste stream.
The creation of a new special district or authority for the express
purpose of managing effectively, efficiently, and economically, a
comprehensive solid waste management program according to the
hierarchy of solid waste as adopted by the State of Texas, which is
as follows :
1 . Waste reduction or minimization
2 . Recycling or reclamation of materials from the waste
stream.
3 . Resource Recovery, Incineration, or Waste-to-Energy
4 . Landfill (as a last resort)
The Task Force has mailed resolutions to Brazoria County cities
asking for an indication of their support for these recommendations
and to-date have received affirmative responses from the Cities of
Lake Jackson, Richwood, Alvin, Sweeney, Freeport, Brookside, and
Oyster Creek.
A summary of the survey that was sent to all Brazoria County cities
is also attached for your review. As you will notice, with the
exception of one "maybe" , all other cities indicated that they are
interested in and free to join a county-wide effort directed to
this purpose. If forced to act as individual cities rather than as
a cooperative effort, there will be many duplicative expenses and
efforts for our cities .
It is the feeling of the Task Force after a full year of study,
discussion, the cooperation and involvement of different cities and
the Houston Galveston Area Council, and much hard work, that there
is a need for a special authority to develop any further plans that
A
Solid Waste Management Task Force
Final Report
November 13, 1990
Page 4 of 5
are necessary. A group of volunteers simply cannot legally or
competently act in a manner to accomplish the enormous task at hand
nor can we represent municipalities and county government. The
time has come for decision-making and for action to be taken.
This recommendation is made with the full understanding on the part
of the Task Force that the Brazoria County Commissioner' s Court has
full authority to contract for and perform any action or function
that will be undertaken by the new Special Waste Authority.
However, it is the consensus of the Task Force that the County is
not desirous of assuming the financial responsibility nor the
managerial duties of undertaking such an endeavor. It is also the
feeling of the Task Force that cities lack resources and the
ability to handle all aspects of an integrated waste management
approach, and that they too, are wary of assuming such a role. If
the cities assume the responsibility there will be no economies of
scale and implementation of any new programs would be spotty at
best. A special authority would allow the county and the cities to
transfer this responsibility to a local board for planning and
implementation.
This Task Force recommends that legislation supporting the creation
of this new authority be presented to the legislature in 1991 and
should contain the charge that recycling and composting be attacked
first on a county-wide level and then other programs on a time
schedule according to when they are feasible, practical, needed,
and economical . We recommend goals of the special authority be:
1 . Reduction of the waste stream through recycling and
composting on a county-wide basis of 25% in 1992 .
2 . Reduction of the waste stream through recycling and
composting on a county-wide basiss of 40% in 1996 .
3 . The ultimate goal should be to landfill only 10-20% of
our waste by year 2010 .
Currently in the United States waste is disposed of in the
following manner:
Landfill 80%
Incinerate 9%
Recycle 11%
We would further recommend that the Commissioner' s Court appoint
and fund a Task Force to work out the details of the legislation to
create this district and to do the necessary coordination and
communication with the various cities in order to have the
Solid Waste Management Task Force
Final Report
November 13, 1990
Page 5 of 5
authority approved by the citizens of Brazoria County. If the
Court so desires, there are several members of the Solid Waste
Management Task Force who would agree to serve in this new capacity
to help accomplish the next step in the effort to initiate a
comprehensive and well managed system for waste in Brazoria County.
It is the opinion of the Task Force that time is of the essence.
Presently there are four regional landfills in Brazoria County and
if we fail to act on our own behalf, we may well solve the problems
of Harris County while ignoring our own. There are approximately
1,400 acres of landfill capacity in Brazoria County. A rule of
thumb is that one acre of landfill will serve a population of
10, 000 for one year. That would mean that Brazoria County has a
projected life of landfill capacity of 65 years if these landfills
are only to serve this county. To our knowledge, none of the
current landfills presently in Brazoria County will meet the new
criteria from the Environmental Protection Agency without major
expenditures .
We thank the Brazoria County Commissioner' s Court for the
opportunity to serve as Task Force members and would be happy to
serve in any further capacity that the Court may deem useful . It
has been our pleasure to serve at your direction.
This report is being presented to you by the Vice Chairperson of
the Task Force due to the illness of our Chairperson, Ed Stokley.
Very truly yours,
Fran Coppinger
Vice Chairperson
Attachments
TO: All Cities in Brazoria County
FROM: Brazoria County Solid Waste Task Force
RE: Community support for a Solid Waste Authority
The Solid Waste Task Force (SWTF) is a group of fifteen appointed
by Commissioners Court to study the needs of the County and to
make a recommendation to the Court on a program.
As a result the SWTF has recommended the creation of a Solid
Waste Authority for Brazoria County. This Solid Waste Authority
would be a non taxing governmental agency to deal with all
phases of the waste management problem.
Most of our cities are aware that between EPA and Texas Water
Commission many new and numerous restrictions are going to be
forced on all of us before the end of 1991. A SWA will allow our
county to be self supporting. The disposal area provided can be
used both by the cities and by private haulers all of whom would
pay a tipping fee to support the venture.
In order to accomplish this the first step is to present a
legislative bill to the 1991 Legislature. This would be
introduced by our Senator and Representatives. In order to know
that all of our cities and any other groups are truly interested
in such an undertaking the Task Force is asking that the attached
Resolution be approved by each City Council. A previous survey
of the cities was answered by city staff. It will add
considerably to the backing of the project to havecity council
endorsement. Because the legislature will conven in January
Y
there is a need to hurry. Please send you complete resolution to
Ed Stokely
P. O. Box 668
Clute, Texas 77531
If the responsible groups in the County agree this is 4 move they
would like then the Task Force will move forward as quickly as
possible. No group will be committed until firm facts and
figures can be presented but a starting place is necessary to get
the show on the road.
(44----- CO"yc- /0D— 02
BRAZORIA COL' rY SOLID WASTE MANA_ 2MENT TASK FORCE
P. 0. BOX 668 (409) 265-3391 CLUIE, TX 77531
ANALYSIS OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FOR BRAZORIA COUNTY
fruit the
Survey on Current Practices on Waste Management
- The population shown by each city is in most cases the 1980 census.
- Currently we have identified 23 nucleus of population.
- 80 percent of the County population is concentrateA in seven
cities: Lake Jackson, Pearland, Alvin, Angleton, Freeport, Clute,
and West Columbia.
- The population is polarized in two regions: North and South of the
County. If divided by Area Code:
(713) North of the County -- 7 communities -- 49.000 people
(409) South of the County -- 16 communities — 82,000 people
- 80 percent of the population in the North of the County is
concentrated in two cities:
Pearland -- 22,000 people
Alvin — 19,000 people
- 80 percent of the population in the South of the County is
concentrated in six cities:
Lake Jackson — 23,000 people
Angleton -- 15,000 people
Freeport -- 12,000 people
Clute — 9,000 people
West Columbia -- 5,000 people
Sweeny — 3,800 people
- 14 communities have city-wide contracts with a garbage collector:
* Waste Management of America - 8 cities (40,000 people)
* Fact Way System, Inc. - 3 cities ( 6,000 people)
* Mendoza Sanitation - 2 cities ( 1,500 people)
* Oli Tribble Co. - 1 city ( 1,000 people)
** TOTAL 48,500 people
6 communities awn equipment and collect their own garbage:
Lake Jackson - 23,000 people Pearland - 22,000 people
Alvin - 19,000 people Clute - 9,000 people
Swccny - 3,800 people Brazoria - 3,400 people
** TOTAL 80,200 people
3 communities let people make their own arrangements (1,300)
- There are 5 "active" landfills in the County:
* BC Disposal Corp. (800 Acres) CLLTI'E Owner: J. Lyst' r
* E and D Ways (Hwy 6) (Galveston County) ALVIN Owner: Best Way
* City of Alvin ( 70 acres) ALVIN Owner: City
* City of Lake Jackson ( 20 acres) L. J. Owner: City
* City of Sweeny ( 7 acres) SWEENY Owner: City
Larry Larrinaga
Facilitator (8/17/90)
24
22 -� �
20 �\
18 � \\ 1
16
°O 14 \ � \
d 10 -1\ \\ �� � �
8 \ \ \ \ \ \
6 -\ \\ \ \ \
2 1�
U PE AL AN FR CL WC SW MA BR RI JC OC BV DA IC HL U HC SU BP BO QU
BRAZORIA COUNTY COMMUNITIES
100
90 -
Z O 80 -
3
n• 70 —
a
Ii 60 -
O
• 50 -
w
U
40
• 30 -
✓ 20 -
80 %
10 - OF THE POPULATION
IN 7 CITIES
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
U PE AL AN FR CL WC SW MA BR RI JC OC BV DA IC HL IJ HC SU BP BO QU
BRAZORIA COUNTY COMMUNITIES
. 014
. `,... , . A. Art 6 ..•II ,..
I 'THE BRAZOSPORT FACTS Thursday, August 16, 1990
A ,
1 .
" Illai jr.4 ' 1 ' ' Plit9i re Or
,.„ ... ,..,. ,. ... .-.,s. ... m lz
costly PE' 1 0, 'at Alt, - , . •
. ill0 , ,
'.' X ,^Y•• , -..,,,,,0,,,,,,i. ow,o,,gf-, (
By KEN CHAMBERS
-4,-- • • •
"There is not a perstitthilhereltit
The B : .....: rOaqs-f:Ps.g4,1i7 ...„„a1-94. 14F;11e0orl°0!bi;know we willInd
• have hili,Yelgti ' - tnevflit ,..
-, i ,, • .1-- -.,r1....tb. . 0..tc$Vrpo 7 V...3XX)41 Viirtr_XY'Xii.: t t°...- rrra- 1.-c-* ' a
officio task force tnisnb(Ifielizitileti 1116iS Yiejlippe
ildrldf ill 6.1
-tS will have to increase drimitic gent 'blot! Bois itronsinszA Ezil
before a • citizens will agree to fund a waste incine-'-hm: Two in. cin. erato. rfr:tr.post ." VI;13iik9n IggshOil Pr
rotor, members of a waste management task force 1/1;and inatall
•
,and$1.8 milli° a,Year to npeialeF,;,- d
said.
' be necessl ry to handle ther50*,60 tons of w4.40
:It costs bout $15 a ton.to dispose of wastes in a erated evt ry day In BraiospoFf, task force'', •', '
landfill co ParedAo about**ft toniforticineratorS,Ve Linidlikkeltackson City Manager AX 'Ma' *
members.' Ahell3ragoriarcointy,eolid Waste Man- rr Leanaaid.• • r...—..........—..........,-- :.
_, ,,„ -51 = . I?., ......—...........—
Eirenk. zorcv,§4.051,41 qi,riltIA!1*illisuay.,inF..c17 C MACLEAN BA116,THE statistics were provided by
ut Ake a cui4rt fir canybe ma e op6ra..9-e ileck and itsocitites, a company that installs and
tonal the ebets of using a landfill will have•In-"-•fl oPerates incinerators.
creased, they say,And all agreedim incinerator is -He Said 1,()0 acres would be needed for the facility
necessary and for a lai dfill for the remaining ash. Some task
,.... aorce memters suggested that prison land might hpizei •I "SO OFTEN YOU get„everyone aligned,yen navy
ideal for thefacility. '' . twi--ei,10 do the engineering and then get a permit -that
But tasIfforce member David'Japer of Alvin saiclnit.could be,15.yearsnclneration CraMttg9A4"4
the expel,* of such ittaciliV would be difficult,,t .0 iwoman Tom Hurtisaid; ,Ii. ,,,,,11,, .41$1.41 *tiKeirviN16 lit I
justify. :,'' ''''A*°n"44"it° ' '' . Other members,estimated4he timez.to&kin ineilt:
"That'i about$1 million a year to go from landfillArop,eratOr operating at ar0u4440 years
to incineration in one year. I doubt the mayorland?, qfj MacLean said that while thwU.S.,Environnientalt
City Council (in Alvin) would be willing to do that,!'fmi? Protection Agency advocates incinerators,the tegtt:
he said. lations regarding incinerators are unclear. •.0
"I suspect that a Int of the areas will not Want tdgo---7----:- "I think we are all kind of flying blind The rulek:
with incineration until the costs are a little closer to . aren't out yet and every time we hear about thetE
the costs of a landfill," he said. ' ' they are getting worse and worse," he said.
Other task force members said the costs could be-. . But task force members agreed that they must std.:
come comparable by the time an incinerator can be dy incinerators and begin looking for the land tb1
installed, erect one. 4 I
I ,
i I
• .
Task force wants education program
Members of the Brazoria County Solid Waste Management Taslt•
Force voted unanimously Tuesday to request that Brazoria County com- Tr,
missioners consider funding a countywide waste management publici.),
education program.
Task Force member Fran Coppinger has asked qommiseioners in
past for$100,000 to fund an education program.AV County Judge John Damon,who attended the meeting,recoinmenth
that the task force ask commissioners for the money before the budiv. 0/
. ot
is passed. ,
It's not too late to get$100,000 i theixiblic would accept a fraction ..i
tax increase,"he said. ° io_orptl
-
t
4
BRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
SURVEY ON CURRENT PRACTICES ON WASTE MANAGEMENT P RELIMINARY
`
CITY CITY TONNAGE OWN/OPER. LANDFILL INTEREST FREE TO RECYCLING
CITY PEOPLE CONTACT PHONE JOB TITLE COLLECT CONTRACT CONTRACTOR ADDRESS PHONE N TONS/MONTH GARBAGE YARD WASTE LANDFILL USED REG. ORG. JOIN RECYCLING INTEREST
LAKE JACKSON 23,000 A. A. MacLean 409-297-7441 City Manager yes no -- -- -- 3,450 1,750 1,750 Tons
yes same yes yes yes yes
PEARLAND 22,000 James 0. Deshazer 713-485-2411 City Manager yes no -- -- --
1,200 -- -- no ESQ (Hwy6) yes yes no yes
ALVIN 19,000 David Berner 713-585-6165 City Manager yes no -- -- -- 2,230 1,800 430
yes --
yes yes no yes
y
ANGLETON 15,000 Tcm Pugh 409-849-4364 City Administrator no yes S&B Sanitation Angleton 409-239-1378 1,500 -- — no -- yes yes no yes
-r
111
FREEPORT 12,000 Earl Heath 409-233-3526 City Manager no yes S &B Sanitation Angleton 713-337-2513-1,350 -- -- no -- yes yes no yes
-r
CLUTE 9,000 W. M. Pennington 409-265-2042 City Manager yes no -- — -- 650 520 133 no BB Disp Corp yes yes planning 9 yes
WEST COLUMBIA 5,000 Vicky Knight 409-345-3123 City Manager no yes Garbage Gobblers San Antonia 800-292-5804 260 260 800 Yards "yes` BB Disp Corp yes yes not yet yes
SWEENY 3,800 Kenneth Lott 409-548-3321 City Administrator yes no -- -- -- 200 120 80 Tons yes same yes yes no yes
r
MANVEL 3,549 Gail Gaidosek 713-489-0630 City Secretary no yes Best Way Systems Dickinson 713-337-2513 ?? -- -- no E&D (Hwy6) yes yes no yes
BRAZORIA 3,400 Ken Timmerman 409-798-9131 City Administrato yes no -- — -- 180 110 70 no BB Disp Corp yes yes no yes
RICHWODD 3,300 Karen Schram 409-265-2082 City Secreatry no yes S&B gauitation Angleton 409-239-1378 70 -- -- no -- yes yes no yes
-r -
JONES CREEK 2,700 Anita McCoy 409-233-2700 Village Secretary no yes S&B Sanitation Angleton 409-239-1378 ?? -- -- no -- yes yes no _yes
OYSTER CREEK 1,473 Mike Maxey 409-233-0243 Supt. Public Wor - no yes S&B Sanitation Angleton 409-239-1378 72 72 0 no -- yes yes no yes
BROOKSIDE VIL. 1,453 Gayle GaMie 713-485-3048 City Secretary no yes Best Way Systems Dickinson 713-337-2513 ?? -- -- no E&D (Hwy6) yes yes no yes
DANBURY 1,350 Debbie Warner 409-922-1551 City Secretary no yes Best Way Systems Dickinson 713-337-2513 no E&D (Hwy6) yes yes no yes
+ F T
IDWA COLONY 1,000 Jeri Frank 713-595-2095 Village Secretary no no Freddie Pribble Arcola 713-423-2708 ?7 -- -- no Alvin? 'yes yes no "yes J
HILLCREST VIL. -750 Grace Collins 713-331-3031 City Secretary no yes Mendoza Sanitatio Alvin 713-331-0992 ?? -- -- no Alvin yes yes no yes
BAILEY'S PRIE. 500 Mrs Jo Mapel 409-849-8663 City Mayor no "no" ?? -- -- ?? -- -- no ?? "
yes yes no -yes
HOLIDAY LAKES 900 Barbara Schattel 409-849-1136 Town Secretary • .:ct yes S&B Sanitation Angleton 409-239-1378 ?? no --
yes yes no yes
-4-
LIVERP00L 800 Doris Saucier 713-581-2567 City Secretary no "no" Mendoza Sanitatio Alvin 713-331-0992 ?? -- -- no Alvin? yes yes no yes
SURFSIDE BEACH 604 Terry White 409-233-1531 City Mayor no "no" S&B/Tarter/Baliew 3 -- ?? -- --
no ?? yes yes no yes II
225 Marie E. Coleman 409-595-3546 City Mayor no "no" -- — -- — -- -- no Private disp maybe -- no maybe
QUINTANA 100 Sharon Cornett 409-233-2734 City Secretary no yes S&B Sanitation Angleton 409-239-1378 12 48 none no --
Cl°4 ?
i_—� 1- yes yes not yet yes
\3fl,
,q$ S, ' tom£ 7 Lb Pot_ Q Ph^2 (
BRAZORIA CO..ATY SOLID WASTE MANI_DEMENT TASK FORCE
P. O. BOX 668 (409) 265-3391 CLUTE, nc 77531
MARK YOUR CALENDAR i i i
NEXT MEETING OF THE TASK FORCE HAVE BEEN SCHEDULED FOR
THE SECOND TUESDAY OF THE MONTH:
SEPTF'MRER 11 ,. 1 9 9 0
AT 1 1 = 3 O A _ M
AT
THE OLD ARMORY BUILDING
ANGLETON , TEXAS
4011, AM!
BRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
BRAINSTORMING SESSION ON THE "SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY"
August 14, 1990
VOTE
PROPOSED DISCUSSION OR EMPHASIS TOPICS YOUR PRIORITY
1 How much AUTHORITY or POWER will the "Solid Waste ! !
Authority" have? ! !
r r
2 How the "Solid Waste Authority" will be composed? ! !
City Officials? County officials? Private Citizens? 1
3 Areas of responsibility: Public Education, Collection, !
Recycling, Incineration, Landfill, Transfer Stations. !
4 Structured similarly to the current Brazosport Water !
Authority? ! !
! !
5 The "Solid Waste Authority" will provide an integrated!
approach to the garbage problem in the County. ! !
! !
6 Will the "Solid Waste Authority" be a taxing entity !
like the School Districts? ! !
! !
7 How the "Solid Waste Authority" will obtain fundings !
or financial solvency to operate. ! !
! !
8 What JURISDICTION or AREAS will be overseen by ! !
the SWA: Cities, rural, other counties !
! !
9 It will require the to be put to a vote by each of the!
23 communities in the County. !
r
10 How the city participation will be: VOLUNTEER vs !
MANDATORY? ! !
! !
11 The Solid Waste Authority for Brazoria County must 1
be compatible with the HOUSTON-GALVESTON AREA COUNCIL. ! !
! !
12 The Solid Waste Authority should have built-in ! !
controls to keep COST DOWN. ! !
! !
13 How the Cities, County, and Regions will work ! !
together? Own Trucks? Own Landfills? Contract? ! !
14 The creation of the "Solid Waste Authority" could ! !
be a LEGAL NECESSITY due to the complexity of the EPA !
regulations. ! !
! !
15 The creation of the "Solid Waste Authority" could be a!
PRACTICAL NECESSITY to have an entity able to TAKE ! !
ACTION. !
! !
16 How to RAISE the CAPITAL and OPERATING budget? ! !
! !
17 How the Communities will work together given the ! !
different sizes and characteristics. ! !
! !
18 The "Solid Waste Authority" could become the ! !
overseer to award County-wide or District-wide ! !
contracts for Garbage collection, Recycling, etc. ! !
!
19 What will be the functions and/or responsibilities of !
SWA: "Overseer", "Manager", or "Administration." ! !
! !
20 The "Solid Waste Authority" will be required as a ! !
legal entity to receive State Grants for solid waste ! '.
management. ! !
! !
21 OTHERS: ! 1
� f
1 4
2s
ED STOKELY, Chairman
Brazoria County Solid Waste Management Task Force
P. O. Box 668
Clute, TX 77531
NAME:
ADDRESS:
CITY:
FOLD OVER THE DOTTED LINE
We need to know what the proposed
SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY can do for you.
Please indicate topics #1, #2, and #3
according to what you consider to be the
most important to you.
Thank you,
FACILITATOR
BRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
BRAZORIA COUI'TY SOLID WASTE MANAP—'MENT TASK FORCE
P. 0. BOX 668 (409) 265-3391 C WE, TX 77531
Gee
MONTHLY MEETING
TUESDAY, AUGUST 14, 1990
11:30 A.M.
OLD ARMORY BUILDING, ANGLETON
AGENDA
I . Call to order
II. Approval of July 10, 1990 minutes
III . Treasurer's report, Neal Bess
IV. Committees' Reports (With emphasis on Vision of year
2,000, Alternatives (Options to meet the "vision" ) and
analysis of the alternatives (pros and cons) . Each
committee chairperson should present an OUTLINE of a
"plan of action" and "timetable" intended by the
committee.
A. Source/Generators Committee, Mike Vargo
B. Recycling Committee, Fran Coppinger
C. Incineration Committee, Toni Hurt
D. Landfill Committee, A.A. MacLean
E. Collection/Transfer/Transp, Kenneth Lott
F. Education Committee, Nelva Urick
G. Composting Committee, Ken Timmermann
V. Preliminary report on the Questionnaire to the cities
(Data tabulated by Larry Larrinaga)
VI. Preliminary discussion on the pros and cons of a "Solid
Waste Authority for Brazoria County" (Current city
contracts, capital costs, legal entanglements, etc. )
VII. New Business
VIII . Adjourn
*** BRING YOUR OWN SACK LUNCH ***
RSVP with Hope at Brazoria County Courthouse--extension 1564
APPOINTED BY BRAZORIA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT
BRA Z OR=A COUN=
3OL=D WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
DISTRIBUTION LIST
APPOINTED MEMBERS:
James E. Bost Nelva Urick Neal Bess
Toni Hurt Mike Vargo E.C. Ed Stokely
Marguerite Croix Kim Rouse Tom Pugh
Fran Coppinger D.A. Miller, Jr. David Harner
Kenneth Lott Marjorie Haseloff A.A. MacLean
EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS:
Charlie Moss Larry Larrinaga Leo O'Gorman
AND CITY MAYORS:
Allen Gray Alvin
B.G. Peck Angleton
Jo Mapel Bailey' s Prairie
Cathy Cannon Bonney
Joe Ann Miller Brazoria
Phillip Rutter Brookside Village
Jerry Adkins Clute
Ken Walters Danbury
Allen Faulk Freeport
Mrs. Joe B. Jansen Hillcrest Village
Claude M. Hunter Holiday Lakes
Maurice Bright Iowa Colony
Larry Reed Jones Creek
Doris Williams Lake Jackson
Allan F. Moore Liverpool
J. Alton Bailey Manvel
Richard Merriman Oyster Creek
Vic Coppinger Pearland
Mary K. Cornett Quintana
David Head Richwood
Terry White Surfside Beach
Harry Beverly Sweeny
M. A. Brooks West Columbia
COMMISSIONERS COURT
John Damon County Judge
Ronnie Broaddus Precinct # 1
G.L. "Bubba" Rouse Precinct # 2
Billy Joe Plaster Precinct # 3
John P. Gayle, Jr Precinct # 4
TO: All Cities in Brazoria County
FROM: Brazoria County Solid Waste Task Force
RE: Community support for a Solid Waste Authority
The Solid Waste Task Force (SWTF) is a group of fifteen appointed
by Commissioners Court to study the needs of the County and to
make a recommendation to the Court on a program.
As a result the SWTF has recommended the creation of a Solid
Waste Authority for Brazoria County. This Solid Waste Authority
would be a non taxing governmental agency to deal with all
phases of the waste management problem.
Most of our cities are aware that between EPA and Texas Water
Commission many new and numerous restrictions are going to be
forced on all of us before the end of 1991. A SWA will allow our
county to be self supporting. The disposal area provided can be
used both by the cities and by private haulers all of whom would
pay a tipping fee to support the venture.
In order to accomplish this the first step is to present a
legislative bill to the 1991 Legislature. This would be
introduced by our Senator and Representatives. In order to know
that all of our cities and any other groups are truly interested
in such an undertaking the Task Force is asking that the attached
Resolution be approved by each City Council. A previous survey
of the cities was answered by city staff. It will add
considerably to the backing of the project to havepity council
endorsement. Because the legislature will conven in January
Y
there is a need to hurry. Please send you complete resolution to
Ed Stokely
P. O. Box 668
Clute, Texas 77531
If the responsible groups in the County agree this is a move they
would like then the Task Force will move forward as quickly as
possible. No group will be committed until firm facts and
figures can be presented but a starting place is necessary to get
the show on the road.
r
BRAZORIA COU 1Y SOLID WASTE MANA iMENT TASK FORCE
P. 0. BOX 668 (409) 265-3391 CLUTE, TX 77531
ANALYSIS OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FOR BRAZORIA COUNTY
front the
Survey on Current Practirps on Waste Management
- The population shown by each city is in most cases the 1980 census.
- Currently we have identified 23 nucleus of population.
- 80 percent of the County population is concentrated in seven
cities: Lake Jackson, Pearland, Alvin, Angleton, Freeport, Clute,
and West Columbia.
- The population is polarized in two regions: North and South of the
County. If divided by Area Code:
(713) North of the County — 7 communities — 49,000 people
(409) South of the County — 16 communities -- 82,000 people
- 80 percent of the population in the North of the County is
concentrated in two cities:
Pearland -- 22,000 people
Alvin -- 19,000 people
- 80 percent of the population in the South of the County is
concentrated in six cities:
Lake Jackson -- 23,000 people
Angleton -- 15,000 people
Freeport — 12,000 people
Clute -- 9,000 people
West Columbia -- 5,000 people
Sweeny -- 3,800 people
- 14 communities have city-wide contracts with a garbage collector:
* Waste Management of America - 8 cities (40,000 people)
* Post Way System, Inc. - 3 cities ( 6,000 people)
* Mendoza Sanitation - 2 cities ( 1,500 people)
* Oli Tribble Co. - 1 city ( 1,000 people)
** TOTAL 48,500 people
6 communities own equipment and collect their awn garbage:
Lake Jackson - 23,000 people Pearland - 22,000 people
Alvin - 19,000 people Clute - 9,000 people
Sweeny - 3,800 people BLdzoria - 3,400 people
** TOTAL 80,200 people
3 communities let people make their own arrangements (1,300)
- There are 5 "active" landfills in the County:
* BC Disposal Corp. (800 Acres) CLUTE Owner: J. Lystpr
* E and D Ways (Hwy 6) (Galveston County) ALVIN Owner: Rest Way
* City of Alvin ( 70 acres) ALVIN Owner: City
* City of Lake Jackson ( 20 acres) L. J. Owner: City
* City of Swecny ( 7 acres) SWEENY Owner: City
Larry Larrinaga
Facilitator (8/17/90)
24
7
22 � �\
20 \\
18
16
00v 14 \ `
12
RE 0
8
6 —\ N
0
W PE AL AN FR CL WC SW MA BR RI JC OC BV DA IC HL U HC SU BP BO QU
BRAZORIA COUNTY COMMUNITIES
100 —
90 —
O 80 —
3
a 70 —
0
a.
to 60 —
0
I—
w 50 —
0
4W 40
• 30 -
3
O 20 —
80 %
10 — OF THE POPULATION
IN 7 CITIES
0 1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1
LJ PE AL AN FR CL WC SW MA BR RI JC OC BV DA IC HL U HC SU BP BO QU
BRAZORIA COUNTY COMMUNITIES
► M A
' t•e ,,p►p ,/,. 1''/'THEBRAZOSPORT FACTS Thursday, Aughst'18 "1990. !,
-4—tais - ----7---A L i i ft ii-
force says iNkrat&
: :
i . Wâryj
e . StIV i4
By KEN BERS `z
��s u , �� , � "There is not a person'in the room`vc�io`',__`.,
The B 't' t '' +uc r.A. know we will have to ha*till incinerator,4 , .-
+' . „ � :,riT�� si1i,- aa�fkeyt�yf7 ir+t�►rt}9y�ilf: . � . �,
officio task force hembei ChatIesl�Ioss ''�'
-Landfill is will have to increase.dramatically►"PC extension agent rilloa nets in9nis_s$ ri
*fore citizens will agree to fund a waste mcmefbm'' ' -,'j . r �* tcr,a�'tl. +:
Astor,'me bers`of a waste management task torce'i' ± Two incinerators, costu> �2¢ fill� to
s�id ' ,. ,, , j;,,�p` .,and install,and$1 8 million a year to operae woiild
' be necess:ry to handle the'50 to 60 tons of waste gen-
,It costs bout $15 a ton to dispose* of wastes in a crated eve ry day In Braiosport, task force embler
' lindfill•eo pared;toabouti$50h noe'dncineratorS, ,
to f f8l�nd make i IaCkson City Manager AA: '`Ma•e'`Mac-
embere4f the;Prazoriarcegnty Solid Waste Man-,trr Leansaid.,
Tpsk orde,said;i 4:meeting Tue�sdayra�z,3T f: FMACLEAN:SA;ID TH E statistics were provided by
ut iy° he- mb hn inciii4rr'for cad be mieie i r 1g 9'iBeck and Sssocinfss, a company that installs and
tional the Costs of using a landfill will. havek 4n-vornoperates incinerators.
creased, tsey say, and all agreed-an f neineratoeis `! .1-He Said 1,t 10 acres would be needed for the facility
neeessari• and for a la' dfill for the remaining ash. Some task
_ r f.
... ,..force memtiers suggested that,prason+laf►d might pg1��! ,."SO OFTEN YOU get,everyone aligned, ,J +
ideal for the facility ,4 ,, f,,,x s ..�to do,the engineering peen get a perrmt+t-'i
"'-But tall force member David Harper,of Alvin said Mould be,15 ears' . tion Co
the expeae of such a'facile ` woy d 9 'oa ;
such
fi€ac , Jy,ibet fficuttotto /woman Toni Hurt,said:. 7,4 ':i/ifeil e.K,T,.41
j shy Other members estimated the time to get an inch:
"That's about$1 million a year to go from landfill per orator operating at around:10 years. : r :1 to incineration in one year. I doubt the mayor,/anti. .ace MacLean saidthat while the+fl.S.,Environmentli�.
City Council.(in Alvin).would be willing to do that;'"9c#-' Protection Agency advocates incinerators,the t'egt.;
he said. lations regarding incinerators are unclear. .
"I suspect that a'lot of the aredgwi rnotwant''fd o==`9I think:weare`all kind-of flying blind.'-The toles
with incineration until the costs are a little closer,toy,�,� aren't out yet and every time we hear about then)1
�
the costs of a landfill, he said. they are getting worse and worse, he said. ,+ ,
Other task force members said the cost$could be-.. .. But task force members agreed that they must stun
come comparable by the time an incinerator can be dy incinerators and begin looking for the land`tb;
installed. erect one. ; ;
A ,
Task force wants education program . Jilsil
Members of the Brazoria County Solid Waste Management Task
Force voted unanimously Tuesday to request that Brazoria County comIip
missioners consider funding a countywide waste management public:.,,
education program.
Task Force member Fran Coppinger has asked commissioners in , -
past for$100,000 to fund an education program.,:le { o
County Judge John Damon,who attended themeeting,recorhmend: d
that the task force ask commissioners for the money before the bud::
is passed. di,:
"It's not too late to get$100,000 if the public would accept a fractiorj'
tax increase,"he said.
t
BRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMIT TASK FORCE _—_------_-_
SURVEY ON CURRENT PRACTICES ON WASTE MANAGEMENT PRELIMINARY
CITY CITY TONNAGE OWN/OPER. LANDFILL INTEREST FREE TO RECYCLING
CITY PEOPLE CONTACT PHONE JOB TITLE COLLECT CONTRACT CONTRACTOR ADDRESS PHONE M TONS/MONTH GARBAGE YARD WASTE LANDFILL USED REG. ORG. JOIN RECYCLING INTEREST
- r -r
LAKE JACKSON 23,000 A. A. MacLean 409-297-7441 City Manager yes no -- -- -- 3,450 I,750 1,750 Tons yes same yes yes yes yes
rt Y
PEARLAND 22,000 James 0. Deshazer 713-485-2411 City Manager yes no -- -- -- 1,200 -- -- no E&D (Hwy6) yes yes no yes
ALVIN 19,000 David Harper 713-585-6165 City Manager yes no -- -- -- 2,230 1,800 430
yes -- yes yes no yes
ANGLETON 15,000 Tca Pugh 409-849-4364 City Administrator no yes S&B Sanitation Angleton 409-239-1378 1,500 -- — no -- yes yes no yes
-r f .
FREEPORT 12,000 Earl Heath 409-233-3526 City Manager no yes S&B Sanitation Angleton 713-337-2513-1,350 -- -- no -- yes yes no yes
t
CLUTE 9,000 W. M. Pennington 409-265-2042 City Manager yes no -- — -- 650 520 130 no BB DispCorp yes yes planning yes
WEST COLUFBIA 5,000 Vicky Knight 409-345-3123 City Manager no yes Garbage Gobblers San Ant.. • 800-292-5804 260 260 800 Yards "yes' BB Disp Corp yes yes not yet yes
SWEENY 3,800 Kenneth Lott 409-548-3321 City Administrator yes no -- -- -- 200 120 80 Tons yes same yes yes no yes
•
MANVEL 3,549 Gail Gaidosek 713-489-0630 City Secretary no yes Best Way Systems Dickinson 713-337-2513 7? -- -- no E&D (Hwy6) yes yes no yes
BRAZOAIA 3,400 Ken Timmerman 409-798-9131 City Administrato yes no -- — -- 180 110 70 no BB Disp Corp yes yes no yes
RICHWDOD 3,300 Karen Schram 409-265-2082 City Secreatry no yes S&B Sanitation Angleton 409-239-1378 70 -- -- no -- yes yes no yes
r
JONES CREEK 2,700 Anita McCoy 409-233-2700 Village Secretary no yes S&B Sanitation Angleton 409-239-1378 ?? -- -- no -- -
yes yes no -yes
OYSTER CREEK 1,473 Mike Maxey 409-233-0243 Supt. Public Wor - no yes S&B Sanitation Angleton 409-239-1378 72 72 0 no -- yes yes no yes
-r ,
BROOKSIDE VIL 1,453 Gayle GaMis 713-485-3048 City Secretary no yes Best Way Systems Dickinson 713-337-2513 ?? -- -- no ESL (Hwy6) yes yes no yes
DANBURY 1,350 Debbie Warner 409-922-1551 City Secretary no yes Best Way Systems Dickinson 713-337-2513 no E&D H( w6p ) yes yes no yes
IOWA COLONY 1,000 Jeri Frank 713-595-2095 Village Secretary no no Freddie Pribble Arcola 713-423-2708 ?? no Alvin? yes yes no -Yes
HILLCREST VIL. -750 Grace Collins 713-331-3031 City Secretary no yes Mendoza Sanitatio Alvin 713-331-0992 ?? -- --
no Alvin yes yes no yes
BAILEY'S PRIE. -500 Mrs Jo Mapel 409-849-8663 City Mayor no "no" ?? -- -- ?? -- -- no 7? es p yes no yes
HOLIDAY LAKES 900 Barbara Schattel 409-849-1136 Town Secretary . ..ct yes S&B Sanitation Angleton 409-239-1378 ??
no -- yes yes no yes
LIVERPOOL 800 Doris Saucier 713-581-2567 City Secretary no "no" Mendoza Sanitatio Alvin 713-331-0992 ?? -- -- no Alvin? yes yes no yes
n
SURFSIDE BEACH 604 Terry White 409-233-1531 City Mayor no "no" SO/Tarter/Bailer 3 -- ?? -- -- no 7? yes yes no yes
---_—_—.-_---__—__-__-
BONNIE 225 Marie E. Coleman 409-595-3546 City Mayor no "no" -----_- no Private— -- -- disp maybe -- no maybe
QUINTANA 100 Sharon Cornett 409-233-2734 City Secretary no yes S&B Sanitation Angleton 409-239-1378 12 48 none no --
1- yes yes oot yet yes
''s(„(
V3D clot
• ,..,t .
19$ S, �£ 7 Lb P 4 4�2 (
BRAZORIA CO.. ATY SOLID WASTE MAN,_. EMENT TASK FORCE
P. O. BOX 668 (409) 265-3391 CLU1E, TX 77531
MARK YOUR CALENDAR i i
NEXT MEETING OF THE TASK FORCE HAVE BEEN SCHEDULED FOR
THE SECOND TUESDAY OF THE MONTH:
S EPTFMRER 1 1 ,. 1 9 9 0
AT 1 1 = 3 O A - NI -
THE OLD ARMORY El U=LID I NG
ANGLETON TEXAS
Amw
BRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
BRAINSTORMING SESSION ON THE "SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY"
August 14, 1990
VOTE
PROPOSED DISCUSSION OR EMPHASIS TOPICS YOUR PRIORITY
1 How much AUTHORITY or POWER will the "Solid Waste 1
Authority" have? ! !
! !
2 How the "Solid Waste Authority" will be composed? ! !
City Officials? County officials? Private Citizens? 1 1
3 Areas of responsibility: Public Education, Collection,!
Recycling, Incineration, Landfill, Transfer Stations. !
! !
4 Structured similarly to the current Brazosport Water 1
Authority? ! !
! !
5 The "Solid Waste Authority" will provide an integrated!
approach to the garbage problem in the County. ! 1
! !
6 Will the "Solid Waste Authority" be a taxing entity !
like the School Districts? 1
! !
7 How the "Solid Waste Authority" will obtain fundings ! !
or financial solvency to operate. 1
8 What JURISDICTION or AREAS will be overseen by ! 1
the SWA: Cities, rural, other counties ! !
! !
9 It will require the to be put to a vote by each of the!
23 communities in the County. ! !
r r
10 How the city participation will be: VOLUNTEER vs 1 !
MANDATORY? ! !
! !
11 The Solid Waste Authority for Brazoria County must ! !
be compatible with the HOUSTON-GALVESTON AREA COUNCIL. !
12 The Solid Waste Authority should have built-in ! !
controls to keep COST DOWN. ! !
! !
13 How the Cities, County, and Regions will work ! !
together? Own Trucks? Own Landfills? Contract? ! !
1
14 The creation of the "Solid Waste Authority" could ! !
be a LEGAL NECESSITY due to the complexity of the EPA 1
regulations. ! !
r r
15 The creation of the "Solid Waste Authority" could be a!
PRACTICAL NECESSITY to have an entity able to TAKE 1
ACTION. ! !
! !
16 How to RAISE the CAPITAL and OPERATING budget? ! !
17 How the Communities will work together given the ! !
different sizes and characteristics. ! !
! !
18 The "Solid Waste Authority" could become the ! !
overseer to award County-wide or District-wide ! !
contracts for Garbage collection, Recycling, etc. ! !
19 What will be the functions and/or responsibilities of !
SWA: "Overseer", "Manager", or "Administration." ! !
! !
20 The "Solid Waste Authority" will be required as a ! !
legal entity to receive State Grants for solid waste !
management. ! !
21 OTHERS:
f
STAmii
2s {
ED STOKELY, Chairman
Brazoria County Solid Waste Management Task Force
P. O. Box 668
Clute, TX 77531
NAME:
ADDRESS:
CITY:
FOLD OVER THE DOTTED LINE
We need to know what the proposed
SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY can do for you.
Please indicate topics #1, #2, and #3
according to what you consider to be the
most important to you.
Thank you,
FACILITATOR
BRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
BRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAMENT TASK FORCE
P. O. BOX 668 (409) 265-3391
CU1iE. TX 77531
et :
MONTHLY MEETING
TUESDAY, AUGUST 14, 1990
11:30 A.M.
OLD ARMORY BUILDING, ANGLETON
AGENDA
I. Call to order
II. Approval of July 10, 1990 minutes
III. Treasurer's report, Neal Bess
IV. Committees' Reports (With emphasis on Vision of year
2,000, Alternatives (Options to meet the "vision") and
analysis of the alternatives (pros and cons) . Each
committee chairperson should present an OUTLINE of a
"plan of action" and "timetable" intended by the
committee.
A. Source/Generators Committee, Mike Vargo
B. Recycling Committee, Fran Coppinger
C. Incineration Committee, Toni Hurt
D. Landfill Committee, A.A. MacLean
E. Collection/Transfer/Transp, Kenneth Lott
F. Education Committee, Nelva Urick
G. Composting Committee, Ken Timmermann
V. Preliminary report on the Questionnaire to the cities
(Data tabulated by Larry Larrinaga)
VI. Preliminary discussion on the pros and cons of a "Solid
Waste Authority for Brazoria County" (Current city
contracts, capital costs, legal entanglements, etc. )
VII. New Business
VIII. Adjourn
*** BRING YOUR OWN SACK LUNCH ***
RSVP with Hope at Brazoria County Courthouse--extension 1564
APPOINTED BY BRAZORIA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT
-
BRAZOR=A COLIN=
SOL I ID WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
DISTRIBUTION LIST
APPOINTED MEMBERS:
James E. Bost Nelva Urick Neal Bess
Toni Hurt Mike Vargo E.C. Ed Stokely
Marguerite Croix Kim Rouse Tom Pugh
Fran Coppinger D.A. Miller, Jr. David Harner
Kenneth Lott Marjorie Haseloff A.A. MacLean
EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS:
Charlie Moss Larry Larrinaga Leo O'Gorman
AND CITY MAYORS:
Allen Gray Alvin
B.G. Peck Angleton
Jo Mapel Bailey's Prairie
Cathy Cannon Bonney
Joe Ann Miller Brazoria
Phillip Rutter Brookside Village
Jerry Adkins Clute
Ken Walters Danbury
Allen Faulk Freeport
Mrs. Joe B. Jansen Hillcrest Village
Claude M. Hunter Holiday Lakes
Maurice Bright Iowa Colony
Larry Reed Jones Creek
Doris Williams Lake Jackson
Allan F. Moore Liverpool
J. Alton Bailey Manvel
Richard Merriman Oyster Creek
Vic Coppinger Pearland
Mary K. Cornett Quintana
David Head Richwood
Terry White Surfside Beach
Harry Beverly Sweeny
M. A. Brooks West Columbia
COMMISSIONERS COURT
John Damon County Judge
Ronnie Broaddus Precinct # 1
G.L. "Bubba" Rouse Precinct # 2
Billy Joe Plaster Precinct # 3
John P. Gayle, Jr Precinct # 4
Dow DOW CHEMICAL U.S.A.
August 7, 1990
TEXAS OPERATIONS
FREEPORT,TEXAS 77541
To the Members and Ex-Officio Members
of the Brazoria County Solid Waste Management Task Force
Dear friends,
AUGUST MEETING - MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION
In the enclosed packet, you will find information showing
that we need you. First, I want to emphasize the nine
slides "Let's make Brazoria County a better place to live."
These slides outline the program that Charlie Moss and I are
trying to sell to you. We think that it is simple and
clear. I might be leaving the area permanently. If this
happens, I am asking you not to disappoint Moss. Follow his
leadership and you will benefit from it.
Second, I am including the agenda for the meeting on
Tuesday, August 14, 1990, at 11:30 a.m. at the Old Armory
Building in Angleton. Please join us if you can and let us
know what the Task Force can do for you.
Also enclosed is a preliminary table showing the answers to
our questionnaire from seven communities. Sixteen
communities have not sent their answers yet. PLEASE HURRY,
we need your information. I want to point out that I see
the possibility of a conflict between a Regional Solid Waste
Management Authority and the cities that do their own
collection versus cities who have signed five-year contracts
to haul their garbage. I strongly suggest that the city
officials in Brazoria County discuss their options with each
other and gain bargaining power by joining forces. The Task
Force meets on the second Tuesday of each month at noon.
Until further developments, each of the city officials
responsible for garbage disposal is invited to come to our
meetings to exchange information useful to all of us.
Finally, I want you to know that the different committees
have developed a preliminary "Vision of Year 2,000". The
next step is to define all the alternatives available to us
to reach the ideal vision. We must list all the
alternatives and analyze the pros and cons of each. The
advantages of the best alternative will emerge. Implement
it!
Sincerely yours,
II,
Larry Larrinaga, Facilitator
��°s"° f llfan e
AN OPERATING UNIT OF THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY Means More At Dow
i I�� srre
WHAT
IS
THE
. r
4
MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE MANAGEMENT
MUST
HAPPEN
DEFINE AT � DEVELOP
THE THE THE
PROBLEM / SAME � TEAM
1 (
• .
' ��� TIME �-0
THE PROBLEM
SOURCE REUCTION
, ,
, ,
, ,
/ , TODAY
, ,
, ,
i % ALL THE
RECYCLING ;
/ ` SOLID WASTE
/
I i x GOES TO
,
/ % THE
1
I N C I N E R T I O N , LANDFILLS
,
I
I ,
I
I
LA N D E I L L'',,,.,_,---
THE PROBLEM
. :. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LACK OF
CRITICAL MAS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EACH CITY IN THE COUNTY DOES NOT
HAVE ENOUGH POPULATION TO FINANCE
THE SOLUTION BY ITSELF.
THE TEAM
WE MUST SET THE GOAL • • .
WHERE WE WANT TO BE BY YEAR 2 , 000 . . .
.•:•:•.
..............
:❖.•.❖.❖.❖.❖.•.❖..❖.❖.❖.❖.•.
•❖.❖. ❖. ❖.❖.❖.❖.❖.•.
❖.❖. .❖.❖. ❖.❖.•.
❖.• THE '••••'..
sl,i
❖:❖:
..... ►.....
❖:❖ I:❖:❖.
;.;.:. O F THE ;.;.;.;.;
'••:•:� FUTURE
• •.❖.❖•••❖.❖.❖••••❖•❖•❖•❖.-.❖..-
•
••❖•.❖•.•❖.❖.•❖•.❖.❖.•.••❖.❖•.❖•.••-
.....................•
,•• ❖.•.•.❖.•.•.
r-.i,inF
THE PROBLEM
RECYCLED
MATERIALS BRAZORIA COUNTY
MARKETING
STEAM 4 CENTRAL TO LAN D F! LL
SOLIDS MANAGEMENT
GENERATION STATION
4 RECYCLING
117 INCINERATION
STATE
CITIES GENCIES
BUSINESS BANKS HOSPITALS SCHOOLS
THE TEAM
11 HE MISSION OF THE
HRAZORIA COUNTY TASK FORCK
FOR
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMhNT
TO STUDY THE TECHNICAL AN D
ECONOMICAL FEASIBILITY OF A
VASTER PLAN FOR SOLIDS WASTE
MANAGEMENT IN BRAZORIA COUNTY .
�oA
THE TEAM
ROJECT PHASES
APPOINT COMMITTEES
1
FEASIBILITY STUDY
1
Nt
ISSUE REPORT
1
IMPLEMENTATION
Cc c-vu <
4.11114
BRAZORIA COUN I SOLID WASTE MANAG.I RENT TASK FORCE
P. O. BOX 668 (409) 265-3391 MUTE, TX 77531
MISSION
A. To determine the magnitude of the municipal solid waste problem
in Brazoria County.
B. To study the short- and long-term--technical and economical--
feasibility of all aspects of solid waste management including
but not limited to waste generation, storage, collection,
transfer/transport, processing/recovering (recycling) , and
disposal (incineration and landfill) in Brazoria County.
C. To evaluate a realistic course of action to follow in solving the
solid waste problem, for the benefit of the citizens of Brazoria
County, both now and for generations to come.
D. To report to the Commissioners' Court of Brazoria County on a
regular basis.
E. To write a final report with its recommendations.
OFFICERS
Chairman Mr. Ed Stokely ( 409) 265-3391
Vice-chairman---- Mrs. Fran Coppinger (713) 485-1349
Secretary Mrs. Nelva Urick (713) 585-6054
Treasurer Mr. Neal Bess ( 409) 548-3766
SUB—COMLKITTEES
1. Finance Committee Chairman: Mr. Neal Bess
( 409) 548-3766
2. Source/Generators Committee Chairman: Mr. Mike Vargo
( 409) 265-2541
3. Recycling Committee Chairman: Mrs. Fran Coppinger
(713) 485-1349
4. Incineration Committee Chairman: Mrs. Toni Hurt
( 409) 297-3533
5. Landfill Committee Chairman: Mr. A. A. MacLean
6. Collection/Transfer ( 409) 297-2481
Transportation Committee Chairman: Mr. Kenneth Lott
( 409) 548-3321
7 . Education Committee Chairman: Mrs. Nelva Urick
8. Hazardous Household Waste (713) 585-6054
Committee Chairman: Mr. David Harner
(713) 585-6165
9. Composting Committee Chairman: Mr. Ken Timmermann
( 409) 798-9131
EX—OFF I C I O MEMBERS
THE MAYORS OF THE 23 CITIES, TOWNSHIPS, AND VILLAGES
IN THE COUNTY
Dr. Leo O' Gorman, Brazoria County Health Unit.
FACILITATORS
Charlie Moss, County Extension Agent (Court House ext 1564)
Larry Larrinaga, Dow Chemical Company ( 409) 238-3748
modw
Solid waste •_...,
c 0 , liiw is
Continued from Page 1 rip vlra
I
,, cated on a major highway, the A Brazoria County Sorting"Zir " center could be landscaped so as ter could provide marketinO St
e •t s! liriatrt w not to be an "eyesore." tential for communitie§, �I� ;o
; l} rs +tcf�,. "Incineration can be accom- clubs and service'organziatid -,
„> ,;`•, AMA n� • plished with modern methods she •said. Each community''• I g od
4 txzisi� Z]t,; without being offensive to the have chipping centers to redu2
Members of task fordairto }o „taw traveling public or to abutters," waste and provide materiati'id
r� m ,4,. ':, Y. he said. "Landfill pits can be hid- gardeners, she said. ` g° �61
envision manage) 1 1ernt plans den from the public view." In education, Urick envisi6 a'oi
The difficult task of establishing waste management semin '99
By KEN CHAMBERS ed chairman of the Education the center could be handled by an sponsored by school district ag'
independent organization similar part of the training program toga`
The Brazosport Facts Committee, projected legislative to the Brazosport Water Authori- teachers and career ladder cuz
approval for a county waste man- ty, he said. it. Community colleges'could�'
Brazoria County Solid Waste agement authority. IN ADDITION TO the waste
velop prototype waste projec •
Management Task Force mem- Toni Hurt, the newly appointed management authority, Urick en- ►zsv nc
Hurt sees strict g .o
hers see waste management au- chairman of the Recycling Com visioned a waste-to-energyplant regulations �u
thorities, regional solid waste mittee and a' member of the fi- north of Danbury to provide 20 waste separation in the ratefutu g Span
facilities and incinerators on the nance and collection committees, percent reduction in the waste allowu incinerators
ess ratuti n.to operate w
horizon. said the "realities of solid waste" out excess pollution• .
:•Four more members of the ap- are going to make an incinerator stream and produce warm water "CURRENTLY, WE are a13pn
for aquaculture. ed toput anything we choose in 4
pointed task force submitted their necessary despite possible public y g
'ritten versions of the future of opposition. black garbage bag," she Said;,' n$
solid.waste management in the Mike Vargo, chairman of the the near future we will have t6 '. .q
}�etIr 000 during a meeting Tues- Source Committee, also envi- very careful about the content u1
day sioned a regional solid waste fa- - the garbage bag. ,i, , ti�,, I
Their reports, called vision cility using recycling, composting - tkC;ttl,!'�G"3 . "The"solid waste oin i �`A<t Wm
Statements, are part of the task and incineration to lighten the cinerator will have to beI •�" g nsi
forte's goal-setting process. Two waste load. Q �`t she said. eoul, y
members of the task force sub- MacLean said the county is "too Vargo said recycling' n'atio: J
fhitted their visions last month. big and diverse" for one location, accomplished by a combination
City Managerpredicted that finances curbside pickup and dropoff
n.
'>�ake Jackson but he 4e
li;A +IacLean a member of the might limit the number of waste ters. g�s,
' "Ideally, there will be a de- ?
t► 'orce's source and incinera- centers.
ti`ot .committees and chairman of "IF HANDLED CORRECTLY, ing plant in this part of t!`ie co t 4. .th
e%andfill Committee, says the all the functions of disposal, in- to help create a market for ni ,f,al
county will need 200 to 1,000 acres eluding recycling, incineration, paper and other paper joroduchsab
ottind near a major highway to electric generation and landfill he said. bns
.his vision of"the ultimate in could be accomplished in one loca- He said the power generatedi im
taste management." tion," he said. the incinerator could be used4q •
-'HE SAID THE area along High- MacLean predicted that the cen- operate the regional solid;w t„
way 288 north of Lake Jackson ter could be a good neighbor. He facility.Like the other three task f ni
should be considered. said that although it should be lo- i 1e wj
Nelva Urick, the newly appoint- See SOLID WASTE, Page 14A members who submitted v 'u1Is
statements, Vargo said land• i
would carry a much smaller
of the load. atop,
THE BRAZOSPORT FACTS June 14, 1990, "Landfilling g will be thq
choice for any materials that re q
collected,"he said. `1niir:oD
BRAZORIA COUI`" Y SOLID WASTE MANAG_.MENT TASK FORCE
P. O. BOX 668 (409) 265-3391 CLUTE, TX 77531
R.
TO THE
BRAZORIACOUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT
Tune 25, 1990
Angleton, Texas
S 1.3P4TiIMMY
The Task Force reported:
1. THERE IS NO CURRENT COUNTY-WIDE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT CRISIS
IN BRAZORIA COUNTY.
However, some of the cities in the county are closing their
city-owned landfills and other ,cities will close theirs in the
near future.
In addition, the Brazosport Economic Development Corporation
(BEDCO) has indicated that the area needs to plan for future
industrial waste facilities to attract new industrial
facilities to the county.
2 , CITY OFFICIALS CAN AND MUST START PLANNING IMMEDIATELY TO AVOID
FUTURE SOLID WASTE. MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS.
Planning of solid waste management issues will require regional
cooperation and consultation among all the cities in the
county.
3 . THE CREATION OF A BRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
AUTHORITY NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Issues like Private versus Public owned/operated facilities for
collection/recycling/landfill need to be planned by the
interested parties instead of letting it just happen.
T'LTTURE AG1K1,41:3211, T DR SHE TASK FARCE
1 . CONCEPTION AND CONSOLIDATION OF THE "VISION OF YEAR 2,0 0 0" ON
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ISSUES FOR BRAZORIA COUNTY.
2 . ANALYSIS OF THE PROS AND CONS OF THE DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVES TO
ACHIEVE THE DESIRE "VISION."
3 . RECOMMENDATION OF A COURSE OF ACTION.
BRAZORIA COUrY SOLID WASTE MANAG LENT TASK FORCE
P. O. BOX 668 (409) 265-3391 CUJ E, 1X 77531
June 25, 1990
YOUR HONOR, COUNTY JUDGE JOHN DAMON,
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RONNIE BROADDUS, G. L. "BUBBA" ROUSE, BILLY
JOE PLASTER, AND JOHN P. GAYLE, JR.
On behalf of the Brazoria County Solid Waste Management Task
Force--appointed by this Court on November 27, 1989--I have been
asked to present the following interim report.
TASK FORCE COMPOSITION
* The Brazoria County Solid Waste Management Task Force is
composed of fifteen appointed members.
* In addition, there are 26 ex-officio members, which are the
three facilitators: Charles Moss, County Extension Agent, Larry
Larrinaga, Dow Chemical Company, Leo O'Gorman, Brazoria County
Health Unit, and the mayors of the 23 cities, villages, and
townships in the County.
MEETINGS
* The Task Force has met ten times. The regular meetings are
scheduled on the second Tuesday of each month at the Old Armory
Building in Angleton. (In January, March, and May the Task
Force met also on the fourth Tuesday of the month. )
June 25, 1990 Page 1 of 5
i t t
BRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
QUESTIONNAIRE
DOES CITY DOES CITY TONNAGE OWN/OPER LANDFILL INTEREST
CITY POPULATION CONTACT PHONE JOB TITLE COLLECT CONTRACT CONTRACTOR ADDRESS PHONE # TONS/MONTH GARBAGE YARD WASTE LANDFILL USED REG. ORG
LAKE JACKSON 23,000 A. A. MacLean 409-297-7441 City Manager yes no a -- -- 3,450 ,750 1,750 Tons yes same yes
CLUTE 9,000 W. M. Pennington 409-265-2042 City Manager yes no -- -- -- 650 520 130 no BB Disp Corp yes
WEST COLUMBIA 5,000 Vicky Knight 409-345-3123 City Manager no yes Garbage Gobblers San Antonio 800-292-5804 260 260 800 Yards yes BB Disp Corp yes
SWEENY 3,800 Kenneth Lott 409-548-3321 City Administrator yes no — -- -- 200 120 80 Tons yes same yes
OYSTER CREEK 1,473 Mike Maxey 409-233-0243 Supt. Public Works no yes S & B Sanitation Angleton 409-239-1378 72 72 0 no -- yes
BONNIE 225 Marie E. Coleman 409-595-3546 City Mayor no no -- — — — -- — no Private disp maybe
QUINTANA 100 Sharon Cornett 409-233-27 City Secretary no yes S & B Sanitati Angleton 409-239-1378 48 yards 48 none no -- yes
THESE ARE THE SEVEN RESPONSES RECEIVED
A COMPLETE REPORT CONTAINING THE ADDITI
WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE TASK FORCE ON
ee .
BRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
P. O. BOX 668 (409) 265-3391 CLUE, DX 77531
April 25, 1990
Neal Bess, Chairman Finance Committee
Fran Coppinger, Chairman Recycling Committee
Toni Hurt, Chairman Education Committee
Vicky Knight, Chairman Incineration Committee
Kenneth Lott, Chairman Collection/Trans Committee
A. A. MacLean, Chairman Landfill Committee
Ken Timmermann, Chairman Composting Committee
Mike Vargo, Chairman Source/Generators Committee
xc: Members and Ex-officio members of the BCSWMTF
COMMITTING TO A DEADLINE - PRELIMINARY TIMETABLE
Enclosed find a blank chart listing your committee on the
left column and the months of the year on the right hand. I
am asking each of you to report to me when your committee
will achieve the proposed milestones. (Give me your best
guess -- see the example on the reverse of this letter. )
Larrinaga suggested to me four milestones. I am using them
as an example and asking you to use them or to propose new
ones according to the needs of your committee:
GATHERING DATA. It is the current stage of all the
committees and each of you must decide how long it would
take to get all the necessary data.
VISION OF YEAR 2,000. It is a written statement explaining
what Brazoria County ideally should be doing in the area of
concern of your committee by year 2,000.
ALTERNATIVES. It is a written statement describing all of
the alternatives that are available to Brazoria County to
achieve the vision of year 2,000. This list of alternatives
is the most important part of our work. They must be
presented as completed as possible -- answering to questions
like Who, Where, How, How much, When, and Why. In addition
it is important that you list the advantages and
disadvantages of each alternative separately.
In the final stage, the Task Force as a whole will study
each of the alternatives -- and ask you any additional
necessary questions -- to decide which alternatives are to
be listed as the recommendations of the BCSWM Task Force in
our final report.
.4)- —(2t
Ed Stokely, Chairman
Brazoria County Solid Waste Management Task Force
EXAMPLE OF HOW TO USE THIS CHART
FIR T
QUARTIR 199
•
HRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
BRAZ\°RIA CO
WORKING SCHEDULE PRELIMINARY
fi
1090 2Q90 3Q90 4Q90 1Q91 2Q91 3Q91 4Q91
JANUARY
JFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASOND
11111111111111111111111
LANDFILL. coimariza
INCINERATION COMMITTEE
RECYCUNO COMMITTEE
SOURCES COMMITTEE r :'•''�'�n
COLL,/TRANS COMMITTEE
COMPOSTING COMMITTEE
HHW COMMITTEE
EDUCATION COMMITTEE
FINANCE COMMITTEE
' DATA OA NO • VISION • 2.000 ALTUWATIV :I
GATHERING STATING LISTING AND
DATA THE VISION DESCRIBING ALL
UNTIL OF YEAR 2,000 THE ALTERNATIVES
JUNE 1, 1990 BY SEPT 1, 1990 1 BY MARCH 1, 1991
1 ,
BRAZORIA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
WORKING SCHEDULE PRELIMINARY
1090 2Q90 3Q90 4Q90 1Q91 2Q91 3Q91 4Q91
J FMAMJ J ASONDJ FMAMJ J ASOND
1 1 I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I
LANDFILL COMMIT TEE )
INCINERATION COMMITTEE
RECYCUNG COMMITTEE
SOURCES COMMITTEE
COLL/TRANS COMMITTEE
COMPOSTING COMMITTEE
HHW COMMITTEE
EDUCATION COMMITTEE
FINANCE COMMITTEE
/ DATA GATHERING V1310N OF 2.000 ALTERN/►17VE3
4
soswwTr/AMILI/O
arse of CX �I(i)
C � 1l,,
M1li[{PQ
JOHN DAMON _ . 0(1
Brazoria County Judge DEC a REC'D
December 6, 1989
Mayor Tom Reid
City of Pearland
P. O. Box 2068
Pearland, Texas 77588
Dear .
As you are probably aware, Commissioners Court has approved
the appointment of a county wide Solid Waste Management Committee.
The committee is to be comprised of 15 citizens. Each
court member will appoint three committee members "to serve at
the pleasure of the court to study, evaluate and recommend a
course of action to be taken by the county. " Enclosed is a
listing of those appointed members to date.
I believe that county government, working in concert with
the city governments and industry, will be able to devise or
discover a realistic course of action to follow in solving our
solid waste nightmare, for the benefit of the citizens of
Brazoria County, both now and for generations to come.
Mr. Charlie Moss of the County Extension Service and
Mr. Larry Larrinaga of Dow Chemical Company have volunteered to
coordinate the project. Because of their expertise and interest,
they will, I feel, contribute greatly to this project.
The members of the Court, Mr. Moss, Mr. Larrinaga, and
Dr. Leo O'Gorman, Brazoria County Health Department Director, as
well as the mayors of the cities, such as yourself, will serve as
ex-officio members of the committee.
We will need every bit of information available in order to
best study and evaluate the problem, and to avoid any oversight
or omission. We look forward to your personal participation.
You may want to enlist the aid of someone in your area whom you
know to be particularly knowledgeable on the subject.
As this is a problem of monumental proportions, we hope
that we will have a strong committee, dedicated to a better
environment for all of Brazoria County.
Brazoria County Courthouse, Angleton, Texas 77515
(409) 849-5711 x1200 (713) 331-6101 (Houston)
(2)
I appreciate having the opportunity to work with you on
behalf of the people of Brazoria County.
If I can ever by of service to you, please let me know.
liYo s re = -ctfully,
John W. Damon
Bra oria County Judge
JWD/jp
BBACORIA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS '' COURT
VOLUME 32 PAGE 67
' SPECIAL SESSION - NOVEMBER 27 , 1989
ORDER NO. 12 RE: SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE COMMITTEE
Motion by Commissioner Gayle, seconded by Commissioner Broaddus
that the Commissioners' Court of Brazoria County appoints the
following to the Brazoria County Solid Waste Management Task Force
Committee:
1. Theta Sessac
2 . Dr. B. G. Peck
3 . -4i key-woks_
4 . Kenneth Lott
5. Vicki Knight
6. A. A. MacLean
7 . Tony Hurt
8 . Mike Vargo
9 . Fran Coppinger
Motion carried, all present voting aye including Judge Damon.