March 19, 2010
WORK SESSION: Resolution Pending on Waste Water Treatment Plant Project
Remediation Could Impact Incinerator
By Tony Rutherford
Huntingtonnews.net Reporter
Huntington, WV (HNN) – Huntington City Council’s agenda includes a resolution that would potentially stop work on remediation at the Waste Water Treatment Plant until council and board agree on the non operable incinerator. Councilwoman Frances Jackson added the resolution to the agenda after learning that draining and filling in the ash slurry pond / lagoon would be a decision to never restart the broken incinerator.
Jackson , the resolution’s sponsor, believes the governing body should have input in a decision that affects the huge capital investments placed in the incinerator upgrade. At the Friday session, Ms. Jackson will also move that the resolution’s wording be altered from a “request” that the Sanitary Board stop work to “require” that work be put on hold.
Council chairman Jim Insco said, “To my knowledge there’s been no further study on the incinerator,” since the last time council met with the Sanitary Board in December. “We were supposed to get some numbers on repair costs so council and the Sanitary Board could make a fair determination.” This resolution would “stop the removal of the ash pond until we determine whether the [scraping the] incinerator is “in the best interest of the [waste treatment] plant and the citizens of Huntington.”
Describing the remediation as a first step in abandoning the incinerator and potentially building a parking lot on the pond site, Insco said to my knowledge during [the Sanitary Board’s] last fee increase presentation, “there was nothing to do with parking lots or roadways at the plant. If they have enough money to do that kind of stuff, they do not need a fee increase.”
The chairman added that “Council’s ad-hoc [fact finding] committee could help determine” whether maintaining the ash pond where it’s currently located is in the best interest of the city.” He stressed “there are experts out there that know.”
At the December 2009 meeting Sanitary Board representatives, Stanley J. Chilson (CET Engineering Svcs), and council members discussed the complicated incinerator repair issue. In 2006 the heat exchange failed which cause the incinerator to go offline. The breakdown came not long after the city had spent over $1 million dollars to upgrade the incinerator. A catastrophic failure so soon after the upgrade, “sends a red flag,” councilman Russ Houck said at the December meeting.
Sanitary Board members have a preference favoring the Cooksey Landfill citing costs and flexibility. Chilson interjected that the spread sheets “have included zero labor” in the landfill option.
Use of the incinerator would increase costs for coal, but cut down on electricity, fuel (to the Kentucky landfill) and dumping [in Kentucky].
No one at the December meeting could provide an estimate. (SEE: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/local/091209-rutherford-localincenerator.html)
The Ad Hoc committee chaired by Ms. Jackson has inquired about safety complaints and other allegations. She delayed further actions until after March budget adopting activities.
One allegation relates to trucks with broken driver’s side doors not closing properly.
“The pictures presented [to council ] did not reflect all the new equipment we have purchased for that department,” Insco said. “I think some of the equipment shown to us was not even used. They are surplus items that have run their course of use.”
After council authorized purchases, some of the new equipment has allegedly gone to management level employees, rather, than for replacement of alleged trucks whose doors do not shut properly.
However, the council chairman differed vehicle “inventory [assignment] responsibilities” such as these to the administration, particularly since the administration recommended specific pieces of equipment which have to be repaired / replaced.
“There are still equipment needs in public works, the police and fire departments, whether trucks, cars or backhoes.” However, “we are taking the word” of department heads and administration. “[If you need a backhoe], Don’t come and tell me your most pressing need is a dump truck.”
Asked whether that implied equipment could have been “assigned to management personnel” rather than “to what council though it was going to be used,” Insco firmly DENIED that would be a fair interpretation of his words. Instead, he clarified, if past practices have continued, “Usually when we a buy new truck, management drives those,” then other equipment filters down “to every day workers.”
Both Insco and Jackson also favor moving the Sanitary Board’s monthly meeting to the late afternoon, which would be more friendly to those people who work the a first shift or 9 a.m.-5 p.m. time frame.
Share This Story:
Make HNN Your Homepage (IE Users Only)
WORK SESSION: Resolution Pending on Waste Water Treatment Plant Project
Remediation Could Impact Incinerator
By Tony Rutherford
Huntingtonnews.net Reporter
Huntington, WV (HNN) – Huntington City Council’s agenda includes a resolution that would potentially stop work on remediation at the Waste Water Treatment Plant until council and board agree on the non operable incinerator. Councilwoman Frances Jackson added the resolution to the agenda after learning that draining and filling in the ash slurry pond / lagoon would be a decision to never restart the broken incinerator.
Jackson , the resolution’s sponsor, believes the governing body should have input in a decision that affects the huge capital investments placed in the incinerator upgrade. At the Friday session, Ms. Jackson will also move that the resolution’s wording be altered from a “request” that the Sanitary Board stop work to “require” that work be put on hold.
Council chairman Jim Insco said, “To my knowledge there’s been no further study on the incinerator,” since the last time council met with the Sanitary Board in December. “We were supposed to get some numbers on repair costs so council and the Sanitary Board could make a fair determination.” This resolution would “stop the removal of the ash pond until we determine whether the [scraping the] incinerator is “in the best interest of the [waste treatment] plant and the citizens of Huntington.”
Describing the remediation as a first step in abandoning the incinerator and potentially building a parking lot on the pond site, Insco said to my knowledge during [the Sanitary Board’s] last fee increase presentation, “there was nothing to do with parking lots or roadways at the plant. If they have enough money to do that kind of stuff, they do not need a fee increase.”
The chairman added that “Council’s ad-hoc [fact finding] committee could help determine” whether maintaining the ash pond where it’s currently located is in the best interest of the city.” He stressed “there are experts out there that know.”
At the December 2009 meeting Sanitary Board representatives, Stanley J. Chilson (CET Engineering Svcs), and council members discussed the complicated incinerator repair issue. In 2006 the heat exchange failed which cause the incinerator to go offline. The breakdown came not long after the city had spent over $1 million dollars to upgrade the incinerator. A catastrophic failure so soon after the upgrade, “sends a red flag,” councilman Russ Houck said at the December meeting.
Sanitary Board members have a preference favoring the Cooksey Landfill citing costs and flexibility. Chilson interjected that the spread sheets “have included zero labor” in the landfill option.
Use of the incinerator would increase costs for coal, but cut down on electricity, fuel (to the Kentucky landfill) and dumping [in Kentucky].
No one at the December meeting could provide an estimate. (SEE: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/local/091209-rutherford-localincenerator.html)
The Ad Hoc committee chaired by Ms. Jackson has inquired about safety complaints and other allegations. She delayed further actions until after March budget adopting activities.
One allegation relates to trucks with broken driver’s side doors not closing properly.
“The pictures presented [to council ] did not reflect all the new equipment we have purchased for that department,” Insco said. “I think some of the equipment shown to us was not even used. They are surplus items that have run their course of use.”
After council authorized purchases, some of the new equipment has allegedly gone to management level employees, rather, than for replacement of alleged trucks whose doors do not shut properly.
However, the council chairman differed vehicle “inventory [assignment] responsibilities” such as these to the administration, particularly since the administration recommended specific pieces of equipment which have to be repaired / replaced.
“There are still equipment needs in public works, the police and fire departments, whether trucks, cars or backhoes.” However, “we are taking the word” of department heads and administration. “[If you need a backhoe], Don’t come and tell me your most pressing need is a dump truck.”
Asked whether that implied equipment could have been “assigned to management personnel” rather than “to what council though it was going to be used,” Insco firmly DENIED that would be a fair interpretation of his words. Instead, he clarified, if past practices have continued, “Usually when we a buy new truck, management drives those,” then other equipment filters down “to every day workers.”
Both Insco and Jackson also favor moving the Sanitary Board’s monthly meeting to the late afternoon, which would be more friendly to those people who work the a first shift or 9 a.m.-5 p.m. time frame.
Share This Story:
Make HNN Your Homepage (IE Users Only)
