Authority keeps current rules on concrete, roofing and asphalt at Gaskill and Klamath transfer stations

2143780 · January 22, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Sign Up Free
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After discussion of a recent overweight concrete load that could not be picked up, the Del Norte Solid Waste Management Authority directed staff to make no immediate policy changes and to improve gate-staff training; the board voted unanimously to retain current restrictions and operational practice.

The Del Norte Solid Waste Management Authority voted unanimously to retain existing practices for accepting concrete, roofing and asphalt at the Gaskill and Klamath small-volume transfer stations, after staff and commissioners reviewed a recent incident in which a concrete-filled bin exceeded truck-lift weight limits.

The board’s action, moved and seconded during the meeting, directed no immediate change to policy but instructed staff to improve gate-attendant training and to close bins when they reach capacity. The motion passed on a roll-call vote with Commissioners Tompkins, Greenough and Wright and Acting Chair Short all voting "yes."

Why it matters: staff said the two small transfer stations have limited lift capacity and infrequent service days (Gaskill typically opens one day a week in winter; Klamath two days), so a single heavy load of concrete can fill available capacity and force a temporary closure for other customers. Staff presented three options: ban roofing/asphalt/concrete at those facilities; impose per-day quantity limits; or keep acceptance as-is while strengthening gate controls. The board chose the third option as the measured step.

Authority staff described the operational constraints that shaped the decision: the sites use 40-yard roll-off boxes that reach their safe lifting weight if only about one-quarter of the box is filled with concrete, and neither site has powered scales. Staff said gate attendants assess loads visually and by measurement; they collect payment by cubic yard and write receipts at the gate. When Recology personnel were unable to lift an overweight bin during the recent incident, the authority paid a contractor (identified in the meeting as Dave Mason) to remove material so the bin could be emptied and service restored.

Staff clarified current material-acceptance rules: concrete may be accepted at a reduced rate (about one-third the price of trash) only if the largest dimension of any concrete chunk is no greater than 18 inches and any embedded steel does not extend more than 3 inches; concrete containing protruding rebar must be disposed of as regular solid waste and is not placed in the concrete pile for reuse. The authority and the haul contractor noted the operational risk of steel puncturing outbound trailers, blocking unloading at the receiving landfill.

Board members and staff discussed possible mitigations: adding a dedicated concrete box (10-yard) at one site, imposing per-trip limits (for example 2 cubic yards), or relying on better gate training and earlier closure of bins when loads appear heavy. Recology staff at the meeting said separate, dedicated boxes are feasible but can sit idle between collections and may increase costs; operational constraints also include limited unloading bays at small facilities.

Ending: The authority scheduled no further immediate policy changes; staff will update training for gate attendants, and the board asked staff to monitor whether the training and day-of enforcement resolve the problem before considering infrastructure changes or formal limits.