Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 master plan for solid waste

 collection and disposal <~> tri-parish

 metropolitan area of

 final report on a solid

 irasle management

 demonstration

 :;

 Vil

 -.-.t-.-.r

 /

 \

i> »0 *»

 -.v.-.^

 i

.A \

-------

 This report has been reproduced as received

from the grantee. No editorial or other changes

have been made, although a new title page, foreword, and preface have been added .

-------

MASTER PLAN FOR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL

 TRI-PARISH METROPOLITAN AREA OF NEW ORLEANS

 Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

 This report (SW-4d) was prepared by

Albert Switzer & Associates, Inc., and Greenleaf/Telesca,

for the City of New Orleans under Grant No. D01-UI-00063.

 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

 Public Health Service

 Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service

 Environmental Control Administration

 Bureau of Solid Waste'Management

 1969

-------

 Library of Congress catalog card no. 77-602040

 PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE PUBLICATION NO. 1932

Single copies of this publication will be distributed as supplies permit.

Requests should be directed to the Bureau of Solid Waste Management,

Environmental Control Administration, 222 East Central Parkway, Cincinnati,

Ohio 45202.

-------

 FOREWORD

 An estimated 900 million pounds of wastes in the solid state are

produced in the United States every day. What to do with these solid

wastes, how to dispose of them without needlessly endangering public

health and welfare, and how to recover and reuse valuable materials

now "thrown away" are among the most challenging and perplexing of

current national problems. Because of lack of suitable planning, interest, and public understanding, these problems have reached such

proportions that nationwide attention is demanded and action for the

development of adequate solutions must be taken.

 Intensified action concerning these problems was made possible

by the Solid Waste Disposal Act, Title II of Public Law 89-272, which

was signed by the President on October 20, 1965. This legislation

directs the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and

Welfare to initiate, encourage, and support a national program aimed

at discovering and evaluating better methods of coping with the solid

waste problem.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 The Secretary is authorized (1) to conduct and support research

on the nature and scope of the problem, on methods of more safely

and efficiently collecting and disposing of solid wastes, and on

techniques for recovering from solid wastes potentially valuable

materials and energy; (2) to provide training and financial and technical assistance to local and State agencies and other organizations

-------

 \* the planning, development, and conduct of solid waste management

 programs; (3) to encourage and support projects that may demonstrate

 new and improved methods of solid waste collection, handling, and

 disposal. The Bureau of Solid Waste Management carries out these

 responsibilities.

 Among these responsibilities, the Bureau provides grant support

 for demonstrations relating to the development and application of new

 and improved methods of solid waste collection, storage, processing,

 and ultimate disposal; and grants for studies and investigations that

 may lead to a demonstration of improved disposal practices, or may

 provide solutions for regional or national solid waste disposal prob-

 lems. Associated with this is the responsibility for collecting and

 making available by appropriate means the results of, and other

 information pertaining to, such federally supported demonstrations,

 studies and investigations.

 Accordingly this report has been reproduced to disseminate as

widely as possible the latest available information and findings of a

 project that has received grant support from the Bureau of Solid

Waste Management. It is hoped that it will provide those working

 in this field with useful information that will be of assistance in

developing approaches to the solutions of their solid waste disposal

problems.

 — RICHARD D. VAUGHAN, Director

 Bureau of Solid Waste Management

-------

 PREFACE

 This report was prepared by the consulting firms of Albert

Switzer & Associates, Inc., and Green!eaf/Telesca, Engineers & Architects, for the City of New Orleans. It results from studies and investigations carried out by the two firms for the purpose of analyzing

existing solid waste collection and disposal facilities in the New

Orleans Metropolitan Area, and for develbping a master plan for an

integrated collection and disposal system. A solution to the refuse

problem is proposed in two stages, covering periods from the present

to 1980, and from 1980 to 1990. The study was supported, in part, by

demonstration grant DOl-UI-00063, made to the City by the Bureau of

Solid Waste Management under provisions of the Solid Waste Disposal

Act (PL 89-272).

 We trust that this report well illustrates the method of developing a solid waste management plan for a major metropolitan area and

the elements that should be included in such a plan. It should be

useful to others who may be considering a similar study.

 It may be noted (see page VI-I of report) that a separate study

of a portion of the New Orleans Metropolitan Area was conducted by the

consulting engineering firm of Pepper & Associates. This latter study,

partially supported by demonstration grant D01-UI-00019, has been completed. The final report is being reviewed by the Bureau of Solid

Waste Management, and will also be made available for widespread distribution by the Bureau.

 —ANTON J. MUHICH, Director

 Division of Demonstration Operations

-------

Study of Solid Waste - New Orleans, La.

 INDEX

 Preface

 Acknowledgements

 Purpose and Scope

 Conclusions and Recommendations

 Page

 (omitted)

 (omitted)

CHAPTER I
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

CHAPTER II

 CHAPTER

 CHAPTER IV

BRIEF HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION OF THE

METROPOLITAN AREA

METROPOLITAN POPULATION

A. General

 B. Growth Areas

C. Application to the Metropolitan Solid Waste Study

COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL PRACTICES IN THE AREA

A. History of Disposal

B . Existing Public Solid Waste Systems in the Area

C. Private Collection and Disposal Services

 D. Private vs. Municipal Operation of Refuse Collection

 and Disposal Systems

 E . Area Ordinances

 F . Salvage and Reclamation

 1. Basic Salvage Materials

 2. Abandoned and Junk Automobiles

G. Required Tri-Parish Regulations

 METHODS OF REFUSE DISPOSAL

 A. Open Dumping

 1-1

ll-l

ll-l

11-5

11-9

111-1

Ill-l

111-3

111-9

III-H

111-14

111-15

111-16

111-16

111-19

IV-1

-------

Study of Solid Waste - New Orleans, La.

B. Hog Feeding

C. On-Site Disposal

D. Composting

E. Incineration

F. Other Processes for Reducing Waste with Heat
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1. Melt-Zit Process

2. Pyrolysis

G. Landfill

H. Sanitary Landfill

1. Transport of Waste by Barging

1. Route Distances

2. Speed and Haul Time

3. Equipment Requirements

4. Weather Factors

5. Policies of Governmental Authorities

6. Summary - Transport of Waste by Barging

J. Special Preparation of Refuse for Disposal

1. Shredding

2. Grinding

3. Compaction

K. Applicable Methods of Refuse Disposal

1. Composting

2. Central Incineration

3. Landfill

4. Sanitary Landfill

CHAPTER V NEW ORLEANS

A. Description of the Sanitation Department

1. Organization and Personnel

2. Budget and Operating Costs

3. Municipal Waste Collection

4. Frequency of Municipal Refuse Collection

5. Municipal Waste Disposal

6. Emergency Operations

7. Comments on Operation of the Sanitation Departn

Page

IV-1

IV-2

IV-2

IV- 10

IV- 12

IV- 12

IV- 13

IV- 14

IV- 14

IV- 16

IV- 16

IV- 17

IV- 18

IV- 18

IV- 19

IV-20

IV-21

IV-21

IV-22

IV-22

IV-23

IV-23

IV-23

IV-24

IV-24

V-l

V-l

v-n

V-13

V-26

V-28

V-44

lent V-45

-------

Study of Solid Waste - New Orleans, La.

 Page

 B. Quantities and Types of Refuse V-48

 1. Present Quantities - Municipal and Private V-48

 2. Forecast of Future Waste Production V-49

 3. Characteristics of Waste V-50

 C. Analysis of Refuse Collection System V-63

 1. General V-63

 2. Haul Study V-63

 3. Revised Collection Districts to Serve Present

 Incinerators (1968) V-66
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 4. Savings in Haul Costs V-73

 5. Future Collection Districts for First Stage Development V-73

 6. Future Requirements in Number of Trucks V-74

 7. Collection Service to Fringe Areas V-79

 8. Summary of Analysis of Collection System V-79

 D. Discussion of Existing Disposal Facilities V-80

 1. General V-80

 2. Evaluation of Present Landfills V-81

 3. Evaluation of Present Incinerators V-82

 4. Operations Review and Evaluation V-84

 5. Seventh Street Incinerator V-87

 6. Florida Avenue Incinerator V-90

 7. Algiers Incinerator V-92

 8. St. Louis Incinerator V-95

 9. New Orleans East Incinerator V-95

 10. Recommendations Concerning Existing Incinerators

 (A. Michaels) V-96

 11. Incinerator Residue - Characteristics and Disposal V-97

 12. Fly Ash Characteristics and Disposal V-99

 13. Disposal of Non-Combustible Refuse V-99

 14. Process Water V-100

 E. Air Pollution Control Requirements V-101

 1. General V-101

 2. Guidelines and Regulations for Federal Buildings V-102

 3. Louisiana Air Control Law V-105

 4. Requirements for New Orleans Incinerators V-105

-------

Study of Solid Waste - New Orleans, La.

 Page

 F. First Stage Refuse Disposal Program 1970 to 1980 V-107

 1. Present Incinerator Capacities V-107

 2. Proposed Program of Development V-108

 3. Anticipated Income V-113

 4. Proposed Incinerator Design Criteria V-113

 5. Estimate of Project Cost V-115

 6. Cost of Operation and Maintenance V-116

 7. Proposed Layout V-117

CHAPTER VI ST. BERNARD AND JEFFERSON PARISHES

 •

 A. General Vl-l

 B. Collection and Disposal Practices VI-2

 1. City of Kenner (Jefferson Parish - Eastbank) VI-2

 2. City of Harahan (Jefferson Parish - Eastbank) VI-3

 3. Jefferson Parish Eastbank Unincorporated Area VI-5

 4. Jefferson Parish Westbank Unincorporated Area VI-6

 5. City of Westwego (Jefferson Parish - Westbank) VI-7

 6. City of Gretna (Jefferson Parish - Westbank) VI-8

 7. St. Bernard Parish VI-8

 C. Evaluation of Waste Disposal Facilities in the Area VI-10

 1. Incinerator Installations VI-10

 2. Landfill Operations Vl-l8

 D. Quantities and Types of Wastes Vl-l9

 1. Present Quantities Vl-l 9

 2. Forecast of Future Waste Production VI-24

 E. First Stage Refuse Disposal Program 1970-1980 VI-24

 1. Jefferson Parish VI-25

 2. St. Bernard Parish VI-25

VII MASTER PLAN FOR TRI-PARISH AREA

 A. General VI1-1

-------

Study of Solid Waste - New Orleans, La.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

APPENDIX 1

APPENDIX II

APPENDIX III

APPENDIX IV

APPENDIX V

B. Characteristics of Future Development

C. Proposed Methods of Refuse Disposal

D. Economic Size of Incineration

E. Proposed Master Development Program

1 . Orleans Parish - General

2. St. Bernard Parish

3. Jefferson Parish

F. Implementation of the Program

1. Estimated Capital Investment

2. Overall Effect on Cost of Disposal

3. Central Management

DIGEST OF SOLID WASTE ORDINANCES

HAUL STUDIES

INCINERATOR MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE

INDUSTRIAL WASTE SURVEY FORMS

SUGGESTED REGULATIONS FOR SANITARY

LANDFILLS

Appendix

thru

Appendix

thru

Appendix

thru

Appendix

thru

Appendix

thru

Page

VI 1-2

VI 1-2

VI 1-2

VIM

VIM

VI 1-6

VI 1-7

VI 1-7

VII-7

Vll-10

VII-10

1-1

1-9

ll-l

IM

Ill-l

111-7

IV-1

IV-3

V-l

V-5

 APPENDIX VI REFUSE SAMPLING PROCEDURES

Appendix Vl-l

-------

$9lid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

1

II

II

II

II

II

III

III

III

III

III

Ml

IV

IV
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

IV

IV

IV

IV

IV

IV

- 1

- 1

- 2

- 3

- 4

- 5

- 1

- 2

- 3

- 4

- 5

- 6

- 1

-2

-3

-4

-5

-6

-7

-8

LIST OF TABLES

Climatic Conditions of the Metropolitan New Orleans Area

Tri-Parish Population Distribution 1900-1960

Metropolitan Population 1900-1960

Estimated Tri-Parish Population Distribution 1965-1990

Metropolitan Population 1960-1990

Population Distribution City of New Orleans 1960-1990

Refuse Collection District and Present Disposal Facilities

Collection Systems of the Tri-Parish Area Communities

Existing Tri-Parish Disposal Facilities

Typical Hourly Variation in Refuse Collections Received at

Selected Disposal Points

Daily Variation in Tri-Parish Refuse Collection

Estimated Number of Abandoned Vehicles Collected Annually

in the Tri-Parish Area

Commercial Venture - Compost Plant

Resume of Costs and Income for a 300- Ton (Refuse) Per day

Composting Plant

Waterway Transport Routes

Requirements for Land Area and Cover Material

Estimated Minimum Operating Costs of Disposal by Sanitary Landfill

Transfer Trailer Operating Costs

Cost of Hauling Refuse from Collection Districts to Proposed

Sanitary Landfill Sites

Cost of Refuse Disposal by Sanitary Landfill Within New Orleans Area

Page

1 - 3

II - 1

11-2

11-3

11-4

II -10

III- 5

III - 6

III- 7

III - 8

III - 9

111-17

IV- 4

IV- 6

IV-17

IV -26

IV -27

IV -28

IV -30

IV -30

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

IV

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

- 9

- 1

- 2

- 3

- 4

- 5

- 6

- 7

- 8

- 9

-10

-11

-12

-13

-14

-15

-16

-17

-18

-19

Haul Distance and Cost of Disposal Truck Transport to Landfills

Outside. Parish Area

Monthly Pay Rates

Sanitation Department Employment Experience in 1967

1968 Allocated Personnel - Incineration

1968 Allocated Personnel - Landfills

1968 Allocated Personnel - Garbage and Trash Collection

1968 Allocated Personnel - Incinerator Support

1968 Allocated Personnel - Shops and Stores (City Garage and Yard)

Operating Costs - Sanitation Department

1968 Collection Fleet Assignment

Incinerator Support Container Service Collection

Trends of Collections and Haul Costs (1965-1968)

Comparison of Municipal Collection and Haul Costs

Frequency of Refuse Collection in Selected Sites

Collection District Assignment to Disposal Facilities

Number of Ash Trucks Assigned to Incinerators

1968 Equipment Assignment at Landfills

Incineration Costs (1967-1968)

Breakdown of Cost of Refuse Disposal at Various Facilities for the

Years 1965, 1966, and 1967

Transfer of Combustible Wastes (1967)

Page

IV -32

V - 4

V - 5

V - 6

V - 6

V - 7

V - 8

V - 9

V -12

V -21

V -23

V -24

V -25

V -27
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

V -30

V -32

V -32

V -37

V -38

V -41

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

V -20

V -21

V -22

V -23

V -24

V -25

V -26

V -27

V -28

V -29

V -30

V -31

V -32

V -33

V -34

V -35

V -36

V -37

V -38

Transfer of Oversize and Non-Combustible Wastes (1967)

Fleet Assignment to Incinerator Support (1968)

Breakdown of Incinerator Support Costs - 1967

Incinerator Support Annual Operating Expenses

Total Refuse Production (1967)

Forecast of Total Refuse Production

Physical Composition of Refuse - City of New Orleans

Methods of Collection and Disposal of Commercial and Industrial

Wastes

Quantities and Types of Wastes Reported

Distribution of Reported Private Wastes

Estimated Port Wastes 1965-1985

Distribution of Port Wastes

1967 Demolition Permits - City of New Orleans

Refuse Collected by Sanitation Department by Collection Districts

1967-1990

Summary of Refuse Produced in Each District

Summary of Collection and Haul Study

Present and Adjusted Number of Truck Routes Required by Districts

1967-1968

Annual Cost of Collection Trucks

Estimate of Future Requirement - Truck Routes Per Day

Page

V -41

V -42

V -43

V -44

V -49

V -50

V -51

V -53

V -53

V -54

V -56

V -56

V -58

V -61

V -62

V -65

V -68

V -73

V -75

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

V -39

V -40

V -41

V -42

V -43

V -44

V -45

V -46

V -47

V -48

VI - 1

VI - 2

VI - 3

VI- 4

VII- 1

VII- 2

VII- 3

VII- 4

Types of Control Equipment

Volume of Incinerator Residue

Water and Sewer Charges in 1967 Based on Monthly Consumption

Collection Efficiencies - Air Pollution Requirements

Monthly Variation in Municipal Waste Collection

Estimated Quantities of Incinerable Refuse

Schedule of Proposed Incinerator Utilization

Design Criteria - Florida Avenue & Seventh Street Incinerators

Estimate of Cost - Florida Avenue & Seventh Street Incinerators

Annual Operating Cost - Florida Avenue Incinerator

Total Refuse Production - 1967

Solid Waste System Cost Analysis - Municipal Collection & Disposal

Jefferson and St. Bernard Parishes - 1967

Estimated Disposal Costs by Incineration - Jefferson Parish - 1967

Forecast of Waste Production to 1990

Proposed Master Development Program

Chronological Program of Capital Investment

Projected Costs of the Tri-Parish Solid Waste Disposal Program

1971 - 1990

Estimated Variations in Operating Costs

Page

V - 86

V - 98

V -100

V -102

V -107

V -108

V -112

V -113

V -116

V -117

VI - 21

VI - 22

VI - 23

VI- 24

VII- 8

VII- 9

(backcover)

VII- 11

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

1 - 1

II - 1

11-2

IV- 1

IV-2

V- 1

V- 2

V- 3

V- 4

V- 5

V- 6

V- 7

V- 8

V- 9

V-10
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

v-n

V-12

V-13

V-14

V-15

V-16

V-17

V-18

V-19

V-20

V-21

V-22

LIST OF FIGURES

Existing Collection Districts

Population Forecasts for the Tri-Parish Area

Population Forecast by Parishes

Haul Cost to Disposal Area

t

General Soils Classification

Organizational Structure - Sanitation Department -

City of New Orleans

Existing Central & Night Districts

Existing Western District

Existing Eastern 1 District

Existing Eastern II District

Existing Algiers District

Cost per Ton to Incinerate in Relation to Plant Size

Revised Collection Districts

Revised Central District

Revised Western District

Revised Eastern ] District

Revised Eastern II District

Future Collection District

Future Number of Truck Routes - Night & Eastern 1 Districts

Future Number of Truck Routes - Central & Eastern II Districts

Future Number of Truck Routes - Western & Algiers Districts

Proposed Schedule of Incinerator Improvements

Proposed Incinerator - Site Plan

Proposed Incinerator - Ground Floor Plan

Proposed Incinerator - Operating Floor Plan

Proposed Incinerator - Charging Level Plan

Proposed Incinerator - Longitudinal Section Thru Furnace

Partial Rear Elevation

Page

(backcover)

11-6

11-7

IV- 29

(backcover)

V- 2

V-15

V-16

V-17

V-18

V-19

V - 37

(backcover)

V- 69

V- 70

V- 71

V - 72

(backcover)

V - 76

V- 77

V- 78

v-in

V-H9

V-120

V-121

V-122

V-123

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Page
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

V -23 Proposed Incinerator - Cross Section Thru Furnace V -124

V -24 Proposed Incinerator - Front Elevation V -125

V -25 Proposed Incinerator - Perspective V-126

Vll-l Economic Size of Incinerator - Cost of Operation and Haul VII- 3

-------

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The preparation of this study and report was financially aided in part by a grant

from the U. S. Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and

Welfare.

No study of the scope or magnitude of the present one can be successfully concluded without the assistance, cooperation, and advice of many people. We

are grateful for all such help, and particularly wish to acknowledge the assistance of the following:

From the City of New Orleans: Mr. Thomas J. Heier, Jr., Chief Administrative Officer, and his Assistant, Mr. Ben Levy; Mr. Stewart Brehm, Director,

City Planning Department; Mr. John E. Cassreino, Director, and Mr. F. Earl

Berry, Superintendent of the Sanitation Department together with staff members

of the Sanitation, City Planning, and Data Processing Departments.

From St. Bernard Parish: Mr. Valentine Riess, President of the Police Jury; Mr.

Angela Chetta, Director-Secretary of the Planning Commission, and Earl P.

Deselle & Associates, Consulting Engineers.

 From Jefferson Parish: Mr. Thomas F. Donelon, Parish President; Mr. Richard

C. Mouledous, Director of the Planning Commission; Mr. Eddie D'Geralamo,

Mayor, City of Kenner; Mr. Freddie Wilcox, Mayor, City of Harahan; and

 Gerome Pepper and Associates, Consulting Engineers for the Parish, the City

of Gretna, and the City of Westwego.

 In addition to the City and Parish officials, their staffs and consultants men-

 tioned above, we wish to acknowledge the help and assistance of:

 Mr. Charles F. O'Doniel, Director of the Regional Planning Commission; Mr.

 Gerald D. Healy, Jr., of the Louisiana State Board of Health; the Greater

 New Orleans Chamber of Commerce; private waste contractors, and the many

 business and industrial firms in the area which assisted in this work.

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleansy La. - 15 May 1968

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CONCLUSIONS

In the following we have summarized the findings and conclusions resulting from the detailed

studies contained in this Report. These have been grouped into those which apply to the TriParish area as a whole or where inter parish cooperation is considered, and into those which apply to a single parish each of which has been treated separately.

A. TRI-PARISH AREA

 1. Existing landfills, municipal as well as private, are not operated in accord-

 ance with accepted health standards due principally to: a) filling in areas

 where leachates can contaminate streams and bayous, b) lack of suitable

 cover material in the area, and c) the practice of burning refuse at the site.

 2. Existing landfills should be converted to sanitary landfills by diking and 

drain-

 ing and by providing adequate and suitable cover material so as to stop air

 and water pollution and eliminate possible health hazards. (See Appendix

 for suggested regulations).

 3. In order to immediately prohibit further open dumping or burning of 

combustible

 materials, sanitary landfills should be establishedand operated for the 

disposal

 of all putrescible and combustible refuse in excess of the capabilities of the

in-

 cinerators until such time as sufficient incinerator capacity can be provided.

 4. Enforcement of regulations concerningcollectionand disposal of solid waste is

 lax due largely to insufficient funding and manpower assigned for this 

purpose.

 5. The need for diking and draining the site, for purchasing suitable cover ma-

 terial and for limiting the depth of fill, each adds to the cost of sanitary 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

land-

 fill operation in the area, making this method of disposal less competitive 

than

 is frequently the case. (Page IV-24 to IV-30).

 6. Incineration was found to be the most practical and economical method of sat-

 isfactory refuse disposal to meet both present and future needs, based upon 

a

 study of methods considered for the area. (Page IV-23 to IV-31).

 7. An incineration program to cover the requirements of the Tri-Parish area for

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans/ La. - 15 May 1968

 the next twenty years will increase considerably the reliability of the 

entire

 waste collection and disposal system.

 8. Cooperation in the joint usage of facilities between the parishes in the 

Tri-

 Parish area will result in a more effective and economical refuse disposal

 system, and couid save as much as 10-15% in overall disposal costs. (Page

 VII-10roVII-12).

 9. The communities should formulate and adopt common standards, preferably

 under the administration of a single Authority, for the control and 

regulation

 of the disposal of waste. These standards in the form of a master 

ordinance

 should incorporate by reference the recommended specifications for disposal

 of all types of solid wastes by methods that are acceptable to local, state

 and federal authorities. (Page 111-18 to 111-19).

 10. This Authority should establish policy, administer, control, and enforce 

the

 adopted regulations. Such regulations should specifically prohibit open

 dumping and open burning of all wastes that would present environmental

 hazards or any means of disposal that would contribute undesirable 

pollution

 levels to the air, water, or land. (Page 111-18 to 111-19).

 11. Control of all refuse disposal facilities under a single authority would 

provide

 the maximum reliability and flexibility of operation at the lowest 

possible

 operating cost. This would probably result in an annual savings of 5-10%.

 (Page VII-10 to VII-12).

 12. Orleans and St. Bernard Parishes should consider the use of a joint 

disposal

 facility before 1980 to handle refuse in excess of the capacities of the 

en-

 larged Florida Avenue and the New St. Bernard Incinerators.i(PageVII-6 to 

VII-7)1

 13. Orleans and Jefferson Parishes and the City of Gretna should consider the

 joint use of the Algiers incinerator for the disposal of refuse generated 

in

 the area. (Page VI1-4).

 14. Combustible refuse production in the area will amount to 3,675 tons/day

 in 1980 and is expected to reach 5,700 by 1990. (Page Vll-l).

 15. The proposed disposal program by incineration will require an estimated

 capital investment of $19,100,000 by 1980 and an additional capital in-

 vestment of $17,100,000 in the continuing period to 1990, based on 

1967

 costs. (Page VII-7 to VI1-9).

it

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 16. An effective annual incineration capacity of 1,400,000 tons will be available

 under the proposed program by 1980 and will be expanded to slightly over a

 1,800,000 ton capacity by 1990. (Page VII-8).
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 17. Operating at full effective capacity, estimated annual costs of these 

inciner-

 ator facilities are expected to be about $4,500,000 by 1980 and $6,400,000

 by 1990 based on 1967 costs.

B. ORLEANS PARISH

 1. The total production of waste in Orleans Parish at present, amount to 1,950

 tons per day and includes 1,285 tons of combustible refuse of which 55% is

 collected by the City and the remainder by private disposal companies and

 individual business firms. This represents a per capita production of 5.69 

Ibs.

 per day total and 3.96 Ibs. per day of combustible refuse. (Page V-48

 to V-50).

 2. The per capita production of combustible refuse in Orleans Parish is expected

 to increase to 4.31 Ibs/day by 1980 and 5.08 Ibs/day by 1990, thus requiring

 incinerator capacities of 2,200 tons/day and 2,900 respectively. (Page V-108).

 3. Regulations covering solid waste handling and disposal are reasonably adequate

 except for establishing firm air pollution control limits and specific 

operating

 criteria for sanitary landfills and other methods of disposal.

 4. The total capacity of existing incinerators in Orleans Parish, including the

 St. Louis plant which is presently out of service, is not sufficient to handle

 all combustible refuse presently produced in the City.

 5. Neither the Florida Avenue nor the Seventh Street plants can meet anticipated

 air pollution standards without major reconstruction of the furnaces and 

appur-

 tenances.

 6. The existing incinerators in Orleans Parish are excellently located with 

respect

 to their service areas so that the additional incinerator capacity required at

 present should be provided at those sites.

 7. The St. Louis plant must be rehabilitated and returned to service, as an 

early

 step of any improvement program. Included in the rehabilitation should be

 

iii

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 the Installation of wells and pumps to supply the 120 million gal. per 

year

 estimated water requirements of the plant under full operation.

 8. The First Stage Development Program should provide sufficient incinerator

 capacity for at least a 10-year period. This will require a total of 2,200

 tons per day (6-day week) to meet the needs of the City (1980). (Page V108).

 9. The additional capacity required should be provided by increasing the com-

 bined capacity of the Florida Avenue and the Seventh Street Incinerators to

 1,500 tons per day. (Page V-10& to V-l 10).

 10. Substantial savings in operating cost will be realized by enlargement of 

the

 two existing plants, over the operating cost of reconstructing these 

plants

 to their present size and providing the additional -capacity required by a

new

 incinerator at another site.

 11. The Florida Avenue Incinerator can be modified and enlarged utilizing a

 portion of the existing facilities. Such enlargement should provide for a

 total of 600-ton per day capacity utilizing two 300-ton per day furnaces.

 12. The Florida Avenue Incinerator should be rebuilt first under the develop-

 ment program since removing the present plant from operation will cause

 a minimum interference with refuse disposal operations. Its construction

 should be started in 1969 so as to place it in operation by 1971.

 13. Additional incinerator capacity required by 1973 should be provided by
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 enlarging the Seventh Street plant to a rated capacity of 900 tons per

 day utilizing three 300-ton furnaces.

 14. The quality of the residue at the Algiers Incinerator can be improved by

 increasing the capacity of the forced draft fan and the downtime and

 operating cost can be substantially reduced by modifying the residue con-

 veyor as outlined in this report. Also, this plant should be provided 

with

 its own wells and pumps to supply the estimated 50 million gal. per year

 required for its operation.

 15. Treatment of the waste water from both, St. Louis and Algiers 

Incinerators

 will remove settleable matter before discharge into storm or sanitary 

sewers

 and will permit its reuse to the extent practicable.

 16. Once the St. Louis Incinerator has been placed in regular operation, the

IV

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 collection districts and truck routes should, subject to field verification, 

be

 modified as recommended herein. Such modification will result In the re-

 duction in the present number of truck routes at an annual savings of $23,000

 per year, per route without increasing the present work day.

 17. Calculations based on our survey show a possible reduction In the number of

 routes from the present 111 to 101 which number will increase in 1970 to 108

 and by 1980 to 139 due to the growth anticipated in the area. (Page V-63

 to V-80).

 18. After the additional incinerator capacities have been provided, further modi-

 fication of the collection districts as outlined in this report will result 

in an

 annual savings of approximately $50,000 by the elimination of two additional

 truck routes.

 19. The anticipated growth within the service area of the Algiers Incinerator in

 Orleans Parish requires that this facility be enlarged prior to 1975.

 20. The addition of a 300-ton furnace by 1975 with a second similar furnace be-

 fore 1990 is required if the Algiers Incinerator is to serve as a joint 

facility

 for the City of Gretna and part of Jefferson Parish in addition to its present

 service area.

 21. The N. O. East Incinerator will reach its full capacity by 1980 when ad-

 ditional disposal facilities will be required. Interim use of the St. Bernard

 facilities until 1987 should be considered, after which a site for a sanitary

 landfill containing 50 to 100 acres should be prepared with dikes and drain-

 age in the Blind Lagoon Park area and utilized as a sanitary landfill. The

 sanitary landfill should be operated until such time as the growth in refuse

 production justifies the construction of an additional incinerator. Such in-

 cinerator should have an initial capacity of 400 tons per day with provisions

 for expansion to 600 tons.

 JEFFERSON PARISH

 1. The present Gretna and Marrero Incinerators are of an obsolete type, ex-

 pensive to operate and cannot meet anticipated air pollution standards and,

 therefore, should be retired from service.

 2. The Marrero Incinerator is well located in its service area and should be

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 replaced by a modern incinerator with an initial capacity of 500 tons per 

day.

 This incinerator will require enlargement to 750 tons per day prior to 

1990.

 3. The Algiers and Marrero Incinerators with proposed enlargements through 

1990,

 can adequately serve the entire Westbank development in both Orleans and

 Jefferson Parishes.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 4. Two new incinerators, in addition to the present David Drive Incinerator,

wi''

 be required to serve the Eastbank of Jefferson Parish prior to 1980. 

One to

 be located near the Kenner city limits, having an initial capacity of 400

tons

 per day with provision for expansion to 600 tons prior to 1990. The 

second,

 to be located near Labor re Road and Airline Highway having an initial 

capa-

 city of 600 tons per day with provision for expansion to 900 tons prior to

1990'

 D ST. BERNARD PARISH

 1. A new 400-ton per day incinerator wil I be required before 1980 to dispose

of

 combustible waste generated within the Parish and that produced within the

 adjacent area of Orleans Parish. This incinerator will require enlargement

 to 600 tons per day prior to 1990.

 2. Continued operation of the present 100-ton per day incinerator would not 

be

 economically feasible and should be discontinued once the new plant is 

com"

 pleted.

VI

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

RECOMMENDATIONS

In the following recommendations, those applying to more than one parish or to the Tri-Parish

area as a whole have been placed in a group, and those applying to a single parish have been

so separated.

A. TRI-PARISH AREA

 1. Convert present landfills receiving putrescible and comkfUstible'refuse to

 sanitary landfills by diking, draining, and-adequately covering the refuse

 daily with suitable material and adopt ordinances to regulate these opera-

 tions (see Appendix V, Suggested Regulations for Sanitary Landfill).

 2. Limit use of landfills not converted to sanitary landfills to receiving only

 non-combustible refuse which will not contaminate waters leaching or drain-

 ing from the fill.

 3. Prohibit further open dumping or burning.

 4. Enforce regulations concerning collection and disposal of solid wastes and

 assign sufficient personnel for this purpose.

 5. Dispose of all combustible waste generated in area by incineration in modern

 incinerators with adequate air pollution control.

 6. Adopt air pollution control limits conforming to the Los Angeles County re-

 quirements, namely:

 An allowance of not more than 0.3 grains per standard cubic foot of flue

 gas corrected to 12 percent CO2.

 7. Select incinerator service areas that will produce at least 600 tons of refuse

 per day within a reasonable period in order to insure minimum disposal costs

 through economical incinerator operation and haul costs.

 8. Undertake, through an agency such as the Regional Planning Commission, to

 sponsor an Authority which will formulate standards and encourage adoption

 and implementation of such standards by each community as rapidly as pos-

 sible with an agreement upon deadline for compliance by not later than 1980.

 VII

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 9. Arrangements be made by Orleans and St. Bernard for the joint disposal 

of

 refuse in excess of the capacities of the enlarged Florida Avenue and St.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Bernard Incinerators.

 10. Arrangements be made by Orleans and Jefferson Parishes and the City of

 Gretna for the joint disposal of refuse generated in the area at the 

Algiers

 Incinerator.

 B. ORLEANS PARISH

 1. Correct deficiencies of the St. Louis Incinerator including the addition

of

 wells and pumps for its water supply requirements and place this plant in

 regular service as soon as possible.

 2. Modify the fans, residue conveyor, and provide wells and pumps for 

water

 requirements at the Algiers Incinerator to improve its operation and 

reduce

 its cost. Also, repair cyclones and ductwork to extent required to 

permit

 proper operation.

 3. Conduct stack emission tests at the Algiers, St. Louis, and New Orleans

 East Incinerators once these plants are in regular operation to determine

 emission rates and verify design criteria for new plants.

 4. Authorize design for the modernization, reconstruction, and enlargement 

of

 the Florida Avenue Incinerator, so that construction may be started by 

1969/

 after the St. Louis plant is in service, and initiate immediately the 

steps ne

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 2. Construct a new incinerator before 1980 to serve the City of Kenner and

 the surrounding unincorporated area. Incinerator to have an initial capac-

 ity of 400 tons and an ultimate capacity of 600 tons per day.

 3. Construct a new incinerator before 1980 to serve the easterly part of the un-

 incorporated area on the Eastbank. Incinerator to have an initial capacity

 of 600 tons and an ultimate capacity of 900 tons per day.

 ST. BERNARD PARISH

 1 . Construct an incinerator to provide for the needs of the Parish and to serve

 the adjoining area of Orleans Parish. Incinerator to have an ultimate ca-

 pacity of 600 tons per day with 400 tons being provided initially.

 2. Retire present incinerator from operation when larger plant is placed in

 service.

 3. Supplement present incinerator with sanitary landfill until refuse quantities

 can justify incinerator construction.

 IX

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 BRIEF HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION OF THE METROPOLITAN AREA

 For purposes of this study the metropolitan New Orleans area is defined as the

 existing contiguous developed area of Orleans, Jefferson, and St. Bernard Parishes

 and that area expected to develop within the next two decades.

 Accounts of the historic development of the metropolitan area are generally cen-

 tered around that of the City of New Orleans. New Orleans was founded by Jean

 Baptiste le Moyne, sieur de Bienville and was named in honor of Due d'Orleans,

 Regent of France. The founding date (contested by historians) has been established

 legally by the Mayor and City Council as April 16, 1718. New Orleans has flown

 under various flags and has been considered one of the principal cities and/or ports

 during its 250 years history. Having been established as a French colony in 1718,

 New Orleans remained a French possession until it was given to Charles III of Spain

 by his cousin, Louis XV, in 1762. Spanish rule extended to 1803 when it was

 transferred back to France and later was purchased by the United States in the 

same

 year. As a result of the Louisiana Purchase of 1803, the City became an integral

 and strategic part of the United States and it was capital of Louisiana during the 

mid
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 19th Century.

 Orleans, the first County created after the Louisiana Purchase comprised all that

 portion of Louisiana lying on both sides of the Mississippi River from the mouth of

 the River to the Parish of St. Charles. Thus, Orleans County incorporated all the

 territory included in the present parishes of Orleans, Jefferson, St. Bernard, and

 Plaquemines. The Orleans Territorial Legislature of 1807 revoked the establishment

 of the original 12 counties and created instead nineteen parishes. Two of these new

 parishes, St. Bernard and Plaquemines, were taken from Orleans. All of the remain-

 ing territory of Orleans County became Orleans Parish. Jefferson Parish was created

 in 1825 by its removal from Orleans Parish which extended from Felicity Street to

 St. Charles Parish and Lake Pontchartrain on the Westbank of the Mississippi River,

 and on the Eastbank from the river to the Gulf of Mexico. Annexation of Lafayette

 (1833), Jefferson City (1890), and Carrollton (1874) by rapidly growing New 

Orleans

 have altered the original parish boundaries. Jefferson's Eastbank comprises an un-

 incorporated area and the incorporated areas of Kenner (1873) located 12 miles above

 New Orleans and Harahan (1920) two miles below Kenner. Metairie, a large unin-

 corporated community is located west of and adjacent to New Orleans. The West-

 bank comprises an unincorporated area and the incorporated areas of Gretna (1916),

 the Parish Seat, (adjacent to the New Orleans community of Algiers) and Westwego

 (1919), located above Gretna.

 This metropolitan community as illustrated in Figure 1-1 (backcover)is located in 

south-

 eastern Louisiana, situated on Lake Pontchartrain to the north and is divided by the

meander-

 ing Mississippi River. It is situated approximately 85 miles north of the mouth of

the

 1-1

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Mississippi and 76 miles southeast of Baton Rouge. Variable routes of access to 

the

 Gulf of Mexico exist via the Mississippi River, Lake Pontchartrain, the recently

 completed Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, and the Intracoastal Waterway, all of

 which are interconnected by the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal.

 The Governmental structure of the area is unique. Orleans Parish, being 

coexten-

 sive with the City of New Orleans, has a Mayor-City Council (7) form of govern-

 ment. A President and Police Jury govern St. Bernard Parish. Jefferson's unin-

 corporated area has a Parish President - Council. The incorporated cities of 

Kenner/

 Harahan, Gretna, and Westwego have Mayor - Aldermen forms of government.

 New Orleans' strategic location on the Mississippi River provided the setting 

for

 its inevitable major role in various historical conflicts, including the War of 

1812,

 Civil War, World War I, and World War II. Great strides in commercial and in-

 dustrial expansion from the late 19th Century to the present time may largely be

 attributed to this strategic location.

 The Central Business District of this metropolis is characterized by a major and

 growing complex of high rise structures, including retail stores, hotels, apart-

 ments, a hospital, private and governmental offices and multi-level parking 

garages-

 The port is one of the principal business and trade centers on serving the 

midwest an»

 Latin America. Its location and accessibility have gained for New Orleans the

 rank of 2nd largest port (in value of foreign commerce) in the United States.

 The Country's second Foreign Trade Zone is located in New Orleans. Within this

 zone, products from foreign countries may be stored indefinitely, examined, 

re-

 handled, assorted, graded, combined, relabeled, processed, and packaged. 

Duties

 are paid only if products enter into domestic commerce. Wharfare, cargo 

handling/

 and associated port fees are nominal. With ownership vested in the State of 

Louisi-

 ana, the operations are governed by an appointed commission. The port Includes

 harbor frontage in Orleans, Jefferson, St. Bernard, and Plaquemines Parishes, 

total'

 ing approximately 51.4 miles on both banks of the River, 11 miles along the 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Inner

 Harbor Navigation Canal and nearly unlimited frontage available for 

development

 along the Mississippi River-Gulf Ojtlet Channel. Catering to both domestic and

'\f

 ternational trade has encouraged numerous firms, foreign representatives, and 

trans-

 portation lines to locate in New Orleans. Such representation has led to the 

devel'

 opment of International Trade Mart and Rivergate Exhibition Hall. It is the 

primary

 purpose of the International Trade Mart to provide office facilities to firms 

and or-

 ganizations which are .directly connected or interested in foreign trade and 

business

 of the port. Upon completion of Rivergate Exhibition Hall in 1968, New Orleans

 will be able to accommodate the larger conventions and exhibitions. The 

Internati^

 al Center Complex is located centrally within the metropolitan port area.

1-2

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Extremely low ground is characteristic of the area. Topographic characteristics

 necessitate a system of flood control levees through the metropolitan area. The

 extreme low elevations in the New Orleans area range to five feet below mean

 gulf levels in some locations. In addition to the disadvantage of topography, low

 elevations, and poor natural drainage, the area receives annual rainfall in excess

 of 60 inches, which further necessitates the elaborate system of drainage canals

 and pumping stations.

 The area has a semi-tropical climate, with high humidity, yet the mean temper-

 ature for southeastern Louisiana is only 69.5°F. The climate is affected by pre-

 vailing southerly winds and the influence of the surrounding water masses. Freez-

 ing weather is seldom experienced. Mean summer highs can be expected to range

 in the 90's. This "hot-house" type of climate makes a growing season possible

 330 to 350 days a year. Monthly climatic conditions are presented in Table 1-1.

 TABLE 1-1

 CLIMATIC CONDITIONS OF THE METROPOLITAN NEW ORLEANS AREA

 JAN. FEB. MAR. APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC.

ANNUAL

 Normal Mo. Av8. Temp. 55.5 57.7 62.1 68.9 75.7 81.1 82.6 82.5 78.9 71.1 

61.0 56.6 69.5

 Normal Mo. Max. Temp. 64.8 67.3 71.7 78.4 85.3 90.3 91.4 91.6 88.1 81.4 

71.3 65.9 79.0

 Normal Mo. Min. Temp. 46.2 48.0 52.4 59.4 66.0 71.9 73.7 73.4 69.7 60.7 

50.6 47.2 59.9

 Highest Temp, on Record 83 85 90 91 97 102 100 100 99 93 89 

84 102

 lowest Temp, on Record 17 20 28 41 50 62 66 65 54 40 31 

19 17

 Normal Monthly Preeip. 4.4" 4.7" 6.2" 5.4" 5.1" 5.5" 7.9" 6.3" 6.0" 3.2" 

3.7" 4.9" 63.3"

 A*g. No. Day. with Precip. 10 9 9 7 9 12 15 14 10 7 7 10 119

 Avg. % Posjtble Sunshine 49% 51% 57% 65% 69% 67% 61% 64% 65% 72% 62% 48% 61%

 Avg. Wind Speed - MPH 7.5 7.6 7.8 7.5 6.7 5.9 5.6 5.6 6.7 6.9 7.2 

7.3 6.9

 A*Q. Relative Humidity-% 85-67 85-64 83-60 84-59 83-59 83-60 84-63 85-63 85-62 82-

59 82-60 85-66 84-62

 : Statistical Abstract of the U. S., 1964

 As recently indicated by planning studies conducted by Larry Smith and Company,

 Inc., a dual economy actually exists in New Orleans, being largely dependent

 on the industries of tourism and port activities. The overall economy of the metro-

 politan area incorporates extensive agricultural enterprises, exploiting the fertile

 alluvial soil in the outlying areas of the delta region and producing rice, sugor-

 1-3

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 cane, cotton/ corn, fruit, and vegetables. Animal husbandry, trapping, and 

com-

 mercial fishing, together with agricultural production and importation of foreign

 and domestic products have led to manufacturing and industrial activities, such

as

 food processing and packaging, granaries, sugar refineries, rice milling, 

coffee

 processing, furs, and textiles. The abundance of natural resources of the 

region

 such as timber, salt, sulphur, natural gas, and oil, have also led to major 

industrial

 development, including the petro-checmial plants, shipbuilding, aluminum 

produc-

 tion and petroleum refineries.

 Supplementing agriculture and its natural resources, as vital factors in the 

area's

 industrial growth, are the natural advantages of the port with its easy 

accessibility

 to inland and coastal ports via various routes; the unlimited and inexpensive 

fuel

 supply of natural gas and the ample supply of fresh water which is taken 

directly

 from the River. To attract and encourage large corporations to settle within 

the

 State and metropolitan area, the Louisiana State Legislature has granted a tenyear

 property tax exemption.

 Area industry is served by 8-trunk railroads, 100 steamship lines, 70 barge 

lines,

 60 motor freight lines, and the Public Belt Railroad with 175 miles of trackage

 which connects the various terminals and facilities of all carriers on a common

 circuit and interchange. The highway network serving the metropolitan area 

pro-

 vides principal east-west access via Interstate 10 (under construction) and 

U.S.

 90. Principal northerly routes include U. S. 11, Lake Pontchartrain Causeway,

 and U. S. 61. The traffic network within the metropolitan area is severely con-

 gested today at peak load hours. Highway access between the Eastbank and West-

 bank communities is limited to two bridges spanning the River; (I) the Huey Long

 Bridge to the west and (2) the Mississippi River Bridge centrally located in 

the met-

 ropolitan area. Several ferry routes at intermediate points supplement these 

cross-

 ings. Various expressway system modifications, including additional bridge 

cross-

 ings, are anticipated to relieve this congestion in the coming years. The 

area is

 also served by three airports: The New Orleans Airport on Lake Pontchartrain 

for

 private planes; the Moisant International Airport for commercial traffic; and 

Cal-

 lender Field for military aircraft.

 The metropolis offers many cultural and recreational attractions to its citizens

and

 visitors. Various theatrical, musical, and operatic productions are sponsored 

and

 produced by municipal, university, and private organizations throughout the 

year.

 The Municipal Auditorium, Civic Theater, Gallery Theater, and Le Petite Theater

 de Vieux Carre are among the many facilities housing these productions. The 

pro-

 posed Cultural Center Complex, to be located centrally in New Orleans, will 

soon

 be added to these facilities. The cultural heritage of the area is being 

preserved

1-4

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 by such civic-minded groups as the Folklore Society, the Louisiana Historical As-

 sociation, and Vieux Carre Commission. Local museums, including Isaac Delgado

 Museum of Art, Louisiana State Museum, Confederate Museum, and Tulane Medi-

 cal Museum also relate the area's heritage. Complimenting the cultural advantages

 of the metropolis are its 380 public and private schools, colleges, universities,
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 business colleges, and vocational trade schools. Within the area there are two 

major

 medical schools and 21 hospitals, including general, special, industrial, army, 

and

 public health hospitals.

 Metropolitan New Orleans has much to offer and accommodate her thousands of

 tourists annually. It is noted internationally for its varied and numerous 

restaurants,

 hotels, the entertainment and historic aspects of the Vieux Carre, the Mid-Winter

 Sports Carnival climaxed by the Sugar Bowl Classic, and the famed Mardi Gras

 season. Spectator sports have been dominant in the past in New Orleans and re-

 cent interest in the professional sports field through local franchises of National

 Football League and American Basketball Association teams have been the stimu-

 lant for the promotion of the proposed fifty to eighty thousand seat domed stadium

 to be centrally located in the City of New Orleans.

 1-5

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

II

METROPOLITAN POPULATION

 A.

 General

 Tri-parish population data used in this report has been taken from the U. S. Bureau

 of Census 1900 to I960, and studies undertaken by local planning agencies. Plan-

 ning forecasts of population growth have been based upon detailed studies of the

 various trends and influences affecting the respective areas.

 The historic change in population of the various parishes from 1900 to 1960 in-

 dicates the great growth and urbanization trend of the 20th Century. At the turn

 of the century, 93.5% of the Tri-parish population was located in Orleans Parish,

 5.0% in Jefferson and 1.5% in St. Bernard. A gradual change in this percentage

 distribution started during the 1920-30 decade. Table ll-l illustrates the 

population

 ratio changes of Orleans, Jefferson, and St. Bernard Parishes at each decade from

 1900 to the last census year, 1960.

 TABLE ll-l

 TRI-PARISH POPULATION DISTRIBUTION 1900-1960

 Year

 1900

 1910

 1920

 1930

 1940

 1950

 1960

 Total Tri-Parish

 Population

 307,456

 362,599

 413,750

 503,306

 552,244

 685,405

 868,480

% Distribution

Orleans

93.5

93.5

93.6

90.7

89.6

83.3

72.4

Jefferson

5.0

5.0

5.2

8.0

9.1

15.1

24.1
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

St. Bernard

1.5

1.5

1.2

1.3

1.3

1.6

3.5

 "able 11-2 further details this population distribution by communities of the Tri-

 parish area during this same period and their individual growth rates during each

 decade.

 1-1

-------

 TABLE 11-2

 METROPOLITAN POPULATION 1900-1960

Jefferson Parish

(Eastbank)

Unincorporated Area

City of Kenner

City of Harahan

TOTAL Eastbank

(Westbank)

Unincorporated Area

City of Gretna

City of Westwego

TOTAL Westbank

Jefferson Parish (TOTAL)

St. Bernard Parish

Orleans Parish

Metropolitan Area

1900

Pop.

4,289

4,289

11 , 032

11,032

15,321

5,031

287,104

307,456

* %

15.9

16.3

18.6

18.4

1910

Pop.

4,320

4,320

13,927

13,927
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1 8, 247

5,277

339,075

362,599

* %

.7

.7

26.2

26.2

19.1

4.9

18.1

17.9

1920

Pop.

4,352

1,882

6,234

8,132

7,197

15,329

21,563

4,968

387,219

413,750

* %

.7

44.3

-41.6

10.1

18.2

-5.9

14.2

14.1

1930

Pop.

10,065

2,440

892

1 3, 397

13,064

9,584

3,987

26,635

40,032

6,512

458,762

505, 306

* %

131.3

29.6

114.9

60.6

33.2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

73.8

85,7

31.1

18.5

22.1

1940

Pop.

15,375

2,375

1,082

18,832

15,724

1 0, 879

4,992

31,595

50, 427

7,280

494,537

552, 244

* %

52.8

-2.7

21.3

40.6

20.4

13.5

25.3

18.6

26.0

11.8

7.8

25.7

1950

Pop.

45,068

5,535

3,394

53,997

27,735

13,813

8,328

49,876

103,873

11,087

570,445

685,405

* %

193.1

133.1

213.7

186.7

76.4

27.0

66.8

57.9

106.0

52.3

15.3

24.1

1960

Pop.

106,638

17,037

9,275

132,950

44,037
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

21,967

9,815

75,819

208,769

32,186

627,525

868,480

* %

136.0

207.8

173.3

146.2

58.8

59.0

17.9

52.0

101.0

190.3

9.9

27.3

* Percent change from previous census

 Source: Bureau of U. S. Census

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans/ La. - 15 May 1968

 Table 11-3 illustrates the forecast change in percentage distribution between Or-

 leans, Jefferson, and St. Bernard from 1965 to 1990.

 TABLE 11-3

 ESTIMATED TRI-PARISH POPULATION DISTRIBUTION 1965 - 1990

 Year

 1965

 1967

 1970

 1975

 1980

 1985

 * 1990

Total Tr?-Parish

 Population

 987,750

 1,073,570

 1,131,000

 1,297,000

 1,489,000

 1,700,000

 1,966,000

% Distribution

Orleans

67.8

64.0

63.2

58.9

55.2

51.5

47.7

Jefferson

27.9

31.7

32.2

36.2

39.6

43.2

47.0

St. Bernard

4.3

4.3

4.6

4.9

5.2

5.3

5.3
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 *Projection from 1985 to 1990 based on the same percent of growth as the prior

 5-year period.

 Table 11-4 shows distribution of this population as forecast for the communities 

of

 the Tri-Parish area to the year 1990.

 In 1960 the Metropolitan Area of New Orleans (SMSA, including St. Tammany

 Parish) ranked as the 16th largest Metropolitan Area in the United States, with a

 population of 907,123. The Tri-Parish area alone (excluding St. Tammany Parish)

 has increased greatly within the last seven years, surpassing the 1,000,000 

plateau

 in the mid-sixties.

 Three principal factors have had a continuing effect on the population increase of

 this area. First, the Metropolitan Area has developed as a manufacturing center

 oF the first magnitude. There were 900 plants with average employment of 58,000

 in 1966, receiving an estimated annual payroll of $293 million. From 1946 through

 1966, over $1.59 billion has been invested in capital expenditures for new and

 expanded manufacturing facilities, making it one of the fastest growing industrial

 sections in the United States. Secondly, a vast complex of petro-chemical plants

 has developed in recent years along the Mississippi River between New Orleans

 and Baton Rouge. The rapid and continuing growth of the petro-chemical industry

 11-3

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May T968

 TABLE 11-4

 METROPOLITAN POPULATION 1960 - 1990

Jefferson Parish

(Eastbank)

Unincorporated Area

City of Kenner

City of Harahan

TOTAL Eastbank

(Westbank)

Unincorporated Area

City of Cretna

City of Westwego

TOTAL Westbank

Jefferson Parish (TOTAL)

** St. Bernard Parish

** Orleans Parish

METROPOLITAN AREA

1960

U.S.

Census

106,638

17,037

9,275

132,950

44,037

21,967

9,815

75,819

208,769

32, 1 86

627,525

868,480

1965

Est.

145,360

23,200

12,640

181,200

54,850

27,500

12,250

94,600

275,800

42,300

669,650

987,750

1967

Est.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

179,000

35,000

16,000

230,000

63,750

32,000

14,250

110,000

340,000

46,380

687,190

1,073,570

1970

Est.

190,000

43,000

17,000

250,000

66,700

33,400

14,900

115,000

365,000

52,500

713,500

1,131,000

 

1975

Est.

249,500

50,000

20,500

320,000

90,000

35,500

16,000

150,000

470,000

64,000

763,000

1,297,000

1980

Est.

311,000

72,500

26,500

410,000

125,000

38,000

17,000

180,000

590,000

77,000

822,000

1,489,000

1985

Est.

380,000

97,500

32,500

510,000

164,000

41,000

18,000

220,000

730,000

90,000

880,000

1,700,000

•1990

Est.

460,000

120,000

40,000

620,000
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

242,000

44,000

19,000

305,000

925,000

104,000

937,000

1,966,000

 * Projection from 1985 to 1990 based on same percent of growth as 

the prior 5-year period

 ** City of New Orleans Planning Commission estimates (Larry Smith 

Consultant)

 has become one of the area's major economic assets. Thirdly, NASA Michoud As*

 sembly facility has created 23,000 job opportunities within the area. Not 

only

 have these factors affected the Metropolitan Area's population increase during

the

 sixties, but it is anticipated that they will continue to do so in the 

future, togeth^

 with intensified industrial growth throughout the area, supported by improved 

trans'

 portatlon systems, availability of economical fuels and an adequate labor 

supply.

 Several forecasts of population have been made for the Tri-Parish area as well

as

 for each of the individual parishes. The Louisiana State University (L. S. 

U. N. O.)

 through its Department of Business and Economics has made a forecast based 

upon

 a detailed study of the area. It has been suggested that this forecast will 

probably

 be adopted by the State in its future planning for the area. Larry Smith, 

Consult^

 to the New Orleans Planning Board has made a detailed forecast for Orleans 

ParisH

 as well as a forecast covering the Tri-Parish area. Both Planning Services, 

Inc.

11-4

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 and the Chamber of Commerce have also prepared forecasts covering the area. These

 forecasts for 1985 vary from a low of 1,300,000 to a high of 2,075,000. For the

 purpose of our study we have adopted a figure of 1,700,000 for 1985 and have pro-

 jected this to 1,966,000 for 1990. These forecasts are shown on Figure 11-1. On

 Figure 11-2 we have shown our proposed subdivision between each of the Parishes.

 Jefferson Parish has been further subdivided between Eastbank and Westbank. In

 subdividing the population between the Parishes we have adopted the forecasts of

 Larry Smith for Orleans and St. Bernard Parishes.

 B. Growth Areas

 Details of available land, the developed area and the direction and rate of growth

 are essential in defining the present and future waste disposal problem of the Tri-

 Parish area, and in understanding present collection and disposal practices that

 prevail in the area.

 The gross land area of the Tri-Parish area consists of some 1,115 square miles or

 711,520 acres. Orleans Parish (City of New Orleans) with the greater ratio of

 population, contains the lesser land area with approximately 200 square miles or

 127,360 acres. St. Bernard Parish with a gross land area of some 405 square miles

 and Jefferson Parish with about 510 square miles jointly contain 82% of the total

 Tri-Parish land area. Figure 1-1 (backcover) illustrating the relationship of these

 Parishes, also shows vast areas of marshlands that generally remain inaccessible

 today. Only some 160 square miles or 14,5% of the total Tri-Parish land area is

 presently developed or being developed. The principal developed areas is general-

 ly contained within a ten to twelve mile radius or a nominal 25 minute driving time

 range from the Central Business District of the City of New Orleans, with the 

majori-

 ty of the population located in the Eastbank communities. The geographic barrier

 of the Mississippi River with its limited crossings was the chief deterent, 

affecting

 the rate of growth of the Westbank area prior to 1900. It was not until the 1920-

 30 decade, that the Westbank began to show significant population growth, as may

 be noted in Table 11-2.

 Historic evolution of the communities within this Tri-Parish area and their
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 respective population growths has produced eight separate and distinct populous

 areas with differing characteristics of government.

 11-5

-------

 2, 000, 000

 1,800, 000

 1,600, 000

 O Chamber of Commerce

 =FL.S.U.N.O:

 Larry Smith, Consultants

 New Orleans Planning Board

 A Planning Services, Inc.

 400, 000

 1950 1955

I960 19 5 1970 1975 1980 1985

 POPULATION FORECASTS FOR THE TRI-PARISH AREA

11-6

 FIG.

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 FIGURE 11-2

 POPULATION FORECAST BY PARISHES

 2,000,000

 1,600,000

 1,200,000

 800,000

 400,000

 1955 m° "965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990

 Referring again to Figure 1-1 (backcover) and Table 11-4, the geographic

 Dnship of the communities of the Tri-Parish area will be noted, together

 with current and forecast population growth of each over the next two *

 decades.

 Principal areas for new expansion to meet forecast population growth are limited.

 In Jefferson Parish the Eastbank unincorporated area and the Cities of Kenner and

 11-7

-------

 Study of Solid Waste - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Harahan are confined by their present boundaries. Though population is 

expected

 to increase by 160,000 in the 1970-1980 decade and about 210,000 in the 1980-

 1990 decade, this growth will all be within existing limits. However, 

extensive

 land reclamation projects along the lakeshore area, presently programmed over

a

 twenty year development period, will add substantial land area of premium 

value

 within these limits. The Westbank area of Jefferson, in addition to "fill-in"

in

 the populous areas generally paralleling the River to a two-mile depth, offers

 extensive areas for future development to the south bounded by Plaquemines

 Parish (to the east) and St. Charles and LaFourche Parishes (to the west). 

The

 ultimate potential of Jefferson Parish growth after the year 2000 is 

predicted to

 be in the vast areas of the Westbank, Jefferson Westbank population is 

expected

 to increase by 65,000 from 1970-1980 and about 125,000 from 1980 to 1990 with

 the principal increases likely to occur in the two mile wide band paralleling 

the

 River.

 Principal developed areas of St. Bernard Parish also parallel the River, 

extending

 eastward some three miles from its common boundary with the City of New 

Orleans*

 Sparsely populated areas parallel the River to the southeast. Principal areas for

 expansion lie to the west and southwest, bounded on the north by the Parish 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

line

 and Lake Borgne and to the south by Plaquemines Parish. During the 1970-1980

 decade a total population growth of 24,500 is forecast for St. Bernard with 

an ad-

 ditional population increase of 26,000 expected in the 1980-1990 decade.

 The major developed area of the City of New Orleans, generally referred to as

 Orleans Central, is contained within the boundaries formed by Jefferson 

Parish to

 the west, Lake Pontchartrain to the north, the River and Intracoastal 

Waterway

 to the south, and the Industrial Canal to the east. The area east of the 

Industrial

 Canal, generally referred to as New Orleans East, today is only partially 

develop*"'

 but is one of the principal growth areas of the City. In addition to the 

above, the

 Westbank community of Algiers, a part of New Orleans and generally referred to

 as Orleans South, is substantially developed in that area lying north of the 

Algiers

 Canal (Intracoastal Waterway). This area is bounded by the River and its 

common

 boundaries with Jefferson and Plaquemines Parishes.

 A total population growth of 108,500 is forecast in the 1970-1980 decade for 

NeW

 Orleans of which about 20% or 22,000 is expected to occur in Orleans South, 

53%

 or 57,500 in Orleans East and the balance, 27% or 29,000, occurring in the 

Orlea(|i

 Central area.

 During the 1980-1990 decade additional population growth of 115,000 is 

forecast

 with the projected distribution expected at 27% or 31,000 in Orleans South, 

55%

11-8

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri -Parish Area

J^w_Qrleans, Lg . 15 Mg 1

 . 15 Mgy 1968

or 63,000 in Orleans East, and 18% or 21,000 in Orleans Central. By 1990

Orleans Central is expected to approach its ultimate population capacity.

C. Application to the Metropolitan Solid Waste Study

Population distribution within the Metropolitan Area, to be meaningful, for

purposes of this study, must be correlated to each solid waste collection and

disposal system existing in the area. Those communities of the Metropolitan

New Orleans Area as listed in Tables 11-2 and 11-4 each have independent

systems. Each of these communities, other than the City of New Orleans

proper, is operating with a single collection district and independent disposal

facilities. The importance of producing reasonably accurate population estimates

for each collection district is, of course, to provide the basis for calculating

current and future per capita waste production factors of each area.

The City of New Orleans with its large developed area and high percentage

(67%) of the metropolitan population is sub-divided into six separate districts,

functioning independently, but under central supervision of the Sanitation Department. It follows that further detail on population distribution within this

City is necessary for application in this report. We have reviewed census reports and comprehensive planning studies of present and future population distribution to the year 1990. Data available and presented in these planning

studies provided 1965 distribution on a block-by-block basis in the City, as

well as summaries by planning sections and planning areas as illustrated in

Table 11-5.

Correlation of this data for application in this study required plotting the present collection district boundaries (Sanitation Department) on available planning

maps, then recording composition of each pertinent area by planning units. This

analysis involved considerable manual recording of data and with the assistance

of the Data Processing Department of the City of New Orleans computations

of population distribution were compiled in summary form by collection routes

and districts. The base year of this estimate was 1965. Population projections

were then manually calculated by collection districts, based upon planning

forecasts of the various planning units composing each district. The summary

of these forecasts covering the period 1967 to 1990 is shown in Table V-33

(Page V-61) which presents population distribution by each of the City's collection districts.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 11-9

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Trf-Parish Area

New Orleans/ La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE 11-5

 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION CITY OF NEW ORLEANS 1960- 1990

Plan.

Sec.

No. Planning Area and Section

Orleans Cenfral

1 Lakeview

2 Gentilly

3 Broadmoor

4 Mid-City

5 Bywater

6 Carrol Iron

7 University

8 Lafayette

9 Central Business District

TOTAL Orleans Central

Orleans East

10 Downtown

11 Edgelolce

1 1 c East Lakefront

1? East Gent illy

16 New Orleans East

1 8 Visvant

19 Chef-Rigolers

TOTAL Orleans East

Orleans South

13 Algiers

) 4 Aurora

15 Elmwood

17 Lower Algiers

TOTAL Orleans South

TOTAL City of New Orleans

1960

21,350

70,697

56,636

106,912

71 ,049

33,129

62,171

76,667

37,618

536,229

33,002

7,333

1 3, 1 49

118

2,370

592

56,564

25, 486

8,327

517

402

34,732

627,525

1965

23,650

80,300

60,300

104,350

64,200

30,000

67,750

81,650
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

38,350

550,550

39,050

10,400

19,600

1,850

1,150

1,450

73,500

31,200

13,400

550

450

45,600

669, 650

1967

24,190

81,380

60,980

104,610

64,520

30,000

68,250

81,790

39,010

554,730

39,230

13,440

22,960

3,910

1,090

1,670

82,300

32,920

15,240

1,490

510

50,160

687,190

1970

25,000

83,000

62,000

105,000

65,000

30,000

69,000

82,000

40,000

561,000

39,500

18,000

28,000

7,000

1,000

2,000

95,500

35,500

18,000

2,900

600

57,000

713,500

1975
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

27,000

86,000

63,000

105,000

67,000

30,000

70,000

83,000

43,000

574,000

40,000

24,500

3,000

35,000

15,500

500

2,500

121,000

39,000

23,000

5,000

1,000

68,000

763,000

1980

29,000

89,000

64,000

105,000

71,000

31,000

71,000

84,000

46,000

590,000

40,500

33,000

10,000

41,000

25,500

3,000

153,000

41,000

28,000

8,000

2,000

79,000

822,000

1985

31,000

92,000

65,000

105,000

74,000

31,000

72,000

85,000

50,000

605,000

41,000

41,000

16,000

47,500

36,000

3,500

185,000
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

42,000

31,000

14,000

3,000

90,000

880,000

1990

33,200

93,000

66,000

103,000

76,000

31,300

73,000

84,000

54,000

613,500

41,500

47,000

22,400

52,500

46,000

4.100

213,500

44,000

35,000

27,000

4,000

110,000

937,000

-------

I*1 <="" 1-1="" 1968.="" by="" operation="" full="" in="" be="" to="" expected="" are="" and="" 

1966="" construction="" under="" were="" louis)="" st.="" east="" orleans="" (new="" 

incinerators="" new="" two="" plants,="" older="" the="" of="" obsolescence="" gradual="" as="" 

well="" production,="" waste="" tion="" popula-="" increase="" continuing="" with="" 1961.="" 

plant="" algiers="" augmented="" later="" street="" seventh="" avenue="" florida="" 1957="" 

until="" waste,="" quantities="" increasing="" receive="" continued="" landfills="" 1948,="" 

since="" markets.="" diminishing="" costs="" labor="" due="" discontinued="" was="" contract="" 

this="" metals.="" other="" various="" cans="" tin="" bottles,="" paper,="" rags,="" including=""

articles="" saleable="" reclamation="" for="" force="" contracts="" salvage="" private="" 

1940's="" late="" during="" westbank.="" on="" locations="" several="" park,="" city="" 

audubon="" front="" bature="" locations,="" highway="" gentilly="" old="" street),="" 

(agriculture="" dump="" agricultural="" orleans,="" utilized="" been="" have="" landfill="" 

years="" over="" disposal.="" refuse="" supplementary="" use="" resumed="" closing="" resulted=""

budgetagain="" reduced="" a="" plants.="" incinerator="" existed="" capacity="" burning="" 

reserve="" no="" practically="" where="" point="" reached="" had="" production="" years,="" 

war="" end="" at="" ation="" oper-="" time="" operation.="" lack="" because="" necessary="" 

became="" diversion="" additional="" ii,="" world="" period="" incineration.="" again="" once="" 

disposed="" garbage="" household="" all="" permitting="" operation,="" plants="" existing="" 

then="" improvements="" expansions="" after="" 1940="" haulers.="" commercial="" producers="" 

areas="" diverted="" portion="" which="" eastbank="" one="" ceasing="" required="" 1935,="" 

1934="" depression="" budgets="" restricted="" however,="" cineration.="" in-="" five="" next="" 

1929.="" december="" 1929="" 1928="" three="" funds="" provided="" issues="" bond="" 1925="" 

streets.="" perdido="" genois="" location="" 1922="" constructed="" being="" first="" area="" 

four="" grammed="" pro-="" government="" authorities="" health="" public="" plague.="" bubonic=""

cases="" few="" accelerated="" installation="" planning="" 1920="" refuse.="" eventually="" 

contemplating="" disposal,="" program="" started="" 1916,="" ator="" inciner-="" orleans.="" 

around="" centered="" generally="" is="" tices="" prac-="" disposal="" solid="" concerned="" 

metropolitan="" history="" available="" a.="" practices="" collection="" 1968="" may="" 15="" -

="" la.="" tri-parish="">

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Following the various cycles of incineration and landfill operation since 

1916, the

 City of New Orleans Sanitation Department ago in today is faced with 

determining

 the most suitable method of solid waste disposal that will be acceptable to 

the

 City Administration, Public Health authorities, and the public.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Jefferson Parish, followed a pattern similar to that of New Orleans, 

utilizing land*

 fill operations as the predominant means for disposal of solid wastes, until 

the con-

 struction of the David Drive Incinerator located in the Eastbank 

Unincorporated

 Area. That plant operated until 1962 and handled about 60% of the area 

wastes

 generated at the time of its replacement by a modern plant facility. The new

pic"1''

 the Eastbank Incinerator, operating since 1962, is presently handling nearly 

all

 putrescible wastes generated in the Unincorporated Area, as well as wastes 

col-

 lected in the City of Harahan. It has a substantial surplus burning capacity

remain*

 ing at this time. The City of Kenner is the only community in the Eastbank 

Area

 which continues to utilize open dumping as a means of disposal. The 

Westbank coi*"

 munities in Jefferson Parish also utilized open burning as their principal 

means of

 refuse disposal, until the early fifties, at which time small plants were 

built in the

 City of Gretna and the Unincorporated Westbank Area. The general intent of 

ope'"'

 ation of those plants was for the disposal of the majority of putrescible 

wastes genef

 ated in these communities with the balance of wastes handled by the open 

dumping

 method. Those plants by comparison to today's modern incinerator facilities

would

 be considered obsolete. The City of Westwego is the only community in the 

West-

 bank Area which continues to utilize open dumping exclusively, as a means of

 disposal.

 Methods of solid waste disposal in St. Bernard Parish have been generally 

limited

 to that of open burning dumps, with such operation continuing up to the 

present ti<"

 However, in late 1966, the Parish after investigation of their solid wastedisposal

 problems, awarded a contract for construction of their first incinerator. 

This plant/

 though generally complete, is not in operation at this date. It is 

anticipated that .

 the capacity of this plant will be adequate to handle all putrescible wastes 

gener"'

 in the presently developed area of St. Bernard Parish.

 Previous reports have emphasized area factors affecting the selection of a 

long rctnSr

 program for waste disposal. The principal factors, concerned with the 

geography/

 physiography, and economy of the area, as well as the character and habits 

of the

 population are: (1) Long, hot, humid summers promoting rapid decomposition

of

 garbage; (2) Excessive rainfall; (3) Rapid seasonal growth of vegetation; 

(4)

 ural soil is not suitable as cover material for disposal method by sanitary 

fill;

 (5) Flat terrain and elevations below sea level of over 60% of inhabited 

areas cre°

 difficult drainage problems; (6) Mixed population; (7) Habits of refuse 

prep

 storing and collection acquired over generations; and (8) Change in 

composition

 refuse material.

111-2

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 La. - 15 May 1968

 In the early 1920's refuse was composed of 60% rubbish and 40% garbage. De-

 clining percentages of garbage in the composition of waste has been due to more

 complete food processing at processing plants, extensive use of refrigeration,
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 and expanding use of domestic garbage disposal equipment. The increase in the

 production of rubbish (non-food waste) is due largely to continued progress in

 development of containers for packaging processed foods and other consumer pro-

 ducts.

 B. Existing Public Solid Waste Systems in the Area

 Each of the eight communities in the Tri-Parish area (Unincorporated and Incor-

 porated areas) differ widely in their methods of handling public services includ-

 ing the collection and disposal of solid wastes. Orleans Parish and St. Bernard

 Parish have singular control in their collection and disposal of solid wastes,

 with the City of New Orleans Sanitation Department and the St. Bernard Gar-

 bage Department operating these services in their respective areas of jurisdiction.

 Jefferson Parish introduces complexities to the regional (Tri-Parish) waste dis-

 posal program under consideration. It has six separate systems of waste collection

 and disposal contained within the Parish boundaries. The entire Eastbank area,

 including the Unincorporated area, the City of Harahan and the City of Kenner,

 each operate with independent private contracts covering both collection and dis-

 posal of solid wastes and providing services to households and small commercial

 installations. In addition to the private contractor services, each of these com-

 munities provide public collection systems for the collection of oversize wastes.

 Conversely the solid waste systems of the communities of the Westbank, including

 the Unincorporated area, the City of Gretna, and the City of Westwego each

 operate independent collection and disposal services.

 By and large, the scope of services provided by each of these communities is

 similar, in that the public services are in practice limited to household and small

 commercial installations with the commercial collectors in the area servicing

 multi-family apartments, high rise developments, and large commercial and in-

 dustrial installations.

 Though the scope of services are similar in all of these communities, wide

 variations occur in actually providing these services. Major variations in-

 clude:

 

111-3

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 1. Frequency of collection services vary from two times per week in the

 Eastbank Unincorporated area of Jefferson Parish to six times per 

week

 as provided by St. Bernard Parish.

 2. Though the type of service, i.e., curb and alley pickup is general-

 ly common in all communities, required preparation of refuse for

 separate pickup of household garbage and supplementary pickups

 of rubbish will be found in the City of Gretna which varies from

 the more common combined pickup that will be found in the other

 communities.

 3. Methods of funding these public services varies between funds pro-

 vided exclusively from revenues generated from tax sources, to

 combinations of tax revenues and direct service charges. Variables

 also occur between communities in the basis of determining 

assessed

 valuations, as well as the mileage rate applicable to solid waste

 and the rates established as direct service charge to the recipients

 of these services.

 4. The cost of collection and disposal services varies extremely 

between

 these communities. Costs vary due to the size of the community,

 closeness of supervision, and attitude toward equipment mainte-

 nance and housekeeping! Collection costs also vary with the den-

 sity of population, type and frequency of service, type of col-

 lection equipment used, and haul distances to the disposal 

facili-

 ties. Variation In disposal costs are affected by the volume of

 wastes handled, and method of disposal vs. the crew size and equip*

 ment investment.

 As noted in the foregoing text, methods of collection as well as disposal vary

 erable between the communities, with either incinerator or landfill operations or

 binations of both servicing the communities. Tables 111-1, 111-2, and UI-3 

provide

 brief descriptions and comparisons of these various systems and facilities. 

Reference

 to Figure 1-1 (backcover) shows the relationship of the communities, districts, 

and
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 disposal facilities. In order to further illustrate the magnitude of the TriParish soM"

 waste problem, we have prepared Tables IM-4 and 1 11-5 showing hourly and daily

 variations in refuse collection activities at selected disposal points as 

observed in

 actual field studies conducted during December 1967 and January 1968. Chapters v

 and VI of the text will explore the systems of each of these communities in 

greater

 depth with analyses of quantities and types of wastes produced and further 

details

 of the field surveys.

1-4

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

NgwDrleans La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE Ill-l

 REFUSE COLLECTION DISTRICT AND PRESENT DISPOSAL FACILITIES

 Orleans Parish

 Night District

 Central District

 Western District

 Eastern I District

 Eastern II District

 Algiers District

 Private Collectors

Seventh Street Incinerator

Seventh Street Incinerator

St. Louis Incinerator as transfer

 station to Algiers Landfill

Florida Avenue Incinerator

N. O. East Incinerator in

 partial operation

Remainder to Gentilly Landfill

Algiers Incinerator

Algiers, Gentilly and New

 Orleans Disposal Co. Landfills

 Jefferson Parish

 East Bank Unincorporated

 Harahan

 Kenner

 West Bank Unincorporated

 Westwego

 Gretna

David Drive Incinerator

David Drive Incinerator

St. Charles Parish Landfill

Marrero Incinerator

Parish Landfill

Westwego Landfill

Gretna Incinerator

Gretna Landfill

 St. Bernard Parish

 Private Collectors

St. Bernard Incinerator (not in use)

St. Bernard Landfill

Private Landfill

 

111-5

-------

 TABLE 111-2

 COLLECTION SYSTEMS OF THE TRI-PARISH AREA COMMUNITIES

Community

St. Bernard Parish

Jefferson Parish

Eastbank Uninc. Area

Kenner

Harahan

Westbank Uninc. Area

Westwego

Gretna

City of New Orleans
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Owner

Parish

Contractor

Parish

Contractor

City

City

Contractor

City

Parish

Parish

City

City

City

City

City

City

Trucks

No.

10

5

17

5

NA

4

1

1

NA

NA

16

4

3

2

6

13

125

13

Type

Packers

Stake Body

Packers

Stake Body

NA

Packers

Packers

Stake Body

Packers

NA

Packers

Stake Body

Packers

Stake Body

Packers

Stake Body

Packers

Misc.

Type

Collection

Curb

Curb

Curb

Curb

Curb

Curb

Curb

Curb

Frequency and Type Refuse Collected Point of Disposal

Garbage

6/Wk

-

-

_

~

_

-

:

-

3/Wk
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-

Trash

2/V/k

-

-

_

••

_

-

-

-

3/Wk

-

Combined

_

2/Wk

-

3/Wk

1/Wk

3/Wk

-

*3/Wk

5/Wk

-

3/Wk

Oversize

Continuous

-

1/Wk

_

1/Wk

_

1/Wk

1/Wk

5/Wk

Continuous

On Call

Parish Dump

Eastbank Incinerator

Westbank Dump

St. Charles Private Dump

ii ii ii ii

City Dump

Eastbank Incinerator

Westbank Dump

Marrero Incinerator

and Westbank Dump

City Dump

City Incinerator

City Dump

3 City Incinerators

2 City Dumps

Notes

1. Frequency of collection in the community of Terrytown is provided only 2 times per week.

2. See pages VI-2 through VI-9 for further detail of individual collection systems of

 St. Bernard and Jefferson Parish and pages V-13 through V-28 for City of New Orleans.

3. See Table V\-2, Page V\-22 for CosV Data - Jefferson and St. Bernard Parishes.

-------

 TABLE 111-3

 EXISTING TRI-PARISH DISPOSAL FACILITIES

Location, Owner

Type of Refuse

Rated

Capacity

Tons/Day

Residue

Disposal

Present

Usage

Tons/Day

EXISTING INCINERATORS

 of New Orleans

 Seventh Street

 s*. Louis Street

 Florida Avenue
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Algiers

 New Orleans East #1

 ^ 

 Garbage & Trash 400

 Garbage & Trash 450

 Garbage & Trash 400

 Garbage & Trash 200

 Garbage & Trash 400

 Algiers Dump 270

 N. A. under construction

 GentillyDump 200

 Algiers Dump 150

 Gentllly Dump under construction

 t- Bernard Parish

 Paris Road

Jefferson Parish

 Westbank (Marrero)

 Gretna (City of Gretna)

 Eastbank (David Drive)

 Garbage

 100

under construction

 Garbage 90

 Garbage 100

 Garbage & Trash 400

 Westbank Dump 60

 Gretna Dump 30

 Hattaway Dump 220

 .__..ju_[---- j _i__._L__r"-- —

EXISTING LANDFILLS

 of New Orleans

 Algiers

 Gentilly

 New Orleans Disposal Co.

 NonComb. Oversize, Residue

 NonComb. Oversize, Residue

 Garbage, Trash, Non Comb. Oversize

 350

 600

 230

 • Bernard

 Parish Dump - Paris Road

 Private Dump - Paris Road

 Trash, Oversize

 Trash, Oversize, NonComb.

 68

 8

Jefferson Parish

 Westbank

 Gretna

 Westwego

 Kenner

 Hattaway

Notes: (I)

 (2)

 (3)

 (4)

- (U.S. Hwy#90) Trash, Oversize, Residue

- (City of Gretna) Trash, Oversize, Residue

-(City of West-

 wego) Garbage, Trash, Oversize

- (City of Kenner) Trash

Disposal Co. Garbage, Trash, Oversize

 180

 20

 30

 10

 36

See Figure 1-1 (Backcover) for location of the above community disposal facilities.

All landfills are operated as open dumps in violation of accepted standards.

Existing facilities to be utilized in future program includes only St. Louts, Algiers,

New Orleans East, Paris Road and David Drive Incinerators.

Detailed descriptions of individual facilities may be found on pages V-80 through

V-98 and VI-10 through VI-19.

 III-7
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

00

 TABLE IIM

 TYPICAL HOURLY VARIATION IN REFUSE COLLECTIONS RECEIVED AT SELECTED DISPOSAL 

POINTS

LOCATION

Seventh Street Incinerator

Municipal - Loads 69

Tons 172. 0

Comm. & Private - Loads 32

Tons 7. 1

Combined - Loads 101

Tons 179. 1

Jefferson Eastbank Incinerator

Municipal - Loads 51

Tons 215.1

Comm. & Private - Loads 12

Tons 3.2

Combined - Loads 63

Tons 218,3

Gentilly Landfill

Municipal - Loads 89

Tons 303.9

Comm. & Private - Loads 186

Tons 342.6

Combined - Loads 275

Tons 646.5

% of Daily Loads & Tons Handled Hourly

0600

M

_

-

_

-

-

-

7.0

8.9

4.7

4.7

0700

4.3

5.4

6.2

2.8

5.0

5.3

23.6

26.6

_

19.1

26.2

3.4

3.7

2.1

4.5

2.5

4.1

0800

18.9

24.4

6.2

15.6

14.8

24.1

3.9

5.1

8.3

6.2

4.8
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

5.2

16.9

23.7

5.9

7.5

9.5

15.1

0900

24.6

23.3

-

16.8

22.4

19.7

20.4

_

15.9

20.1

20.2

20.7

8.1

9.1

12.0

14.5

1000

16.0

16.9

3.1

4.2

11.9

16.4

7.8

6.1

16.7

31.4

9.5

6.5

23.7

22.8

11.8

13.7

15.6

18.1

1100

17.5

14.9

6.2

22.5

13.9

15.2

7.8

4.7

8.3

3.1

7.9

4.7

13.5

11.1

11.3

13.9

12.0

12.6

1200

11.6

9.9

6.2

2.8

9.9

9.5
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

7.8

7.9

25.0

18.8

11.1

8.0

7.9

5.3

11.3

11.3

10.2

8.5

1300

1.4

1.3

37.6

23.9

12.9

2.2

9.8

7.9

25.0

28.0

12.7

8.2

6.8

7.1

7.5

5.8

7.3

6.4

1400

5.7

3.9

34.5

28.2

14.8

4.9

3.9

3.5

16.7

12.5

6.3

3.7

5.6

3.9

16.1

8.7

12.7

6.4

1500

_

-

-

15.7

17.8

—

12.7

17.4

2.2

1.7

8.6

8.5

6.6

5.3

1600

_

-

-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-

-

-

-

10.2

8.1

6.9

4.3

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

.Ng^Orleans, La, - 15 May 1968

 TABLE II I -5

 DAILY VARIATION IN TRI-PARISH REFUSE COLLECTION

 % of Average Day

 Mon. Tues. Wed. Thurs. Fri. Sat.

Municipal Collections;

 %Avg. No. Loads/Day 106 93 103 106 109 81

 % Avg. Tons/Day 116 95 98 101 105 88

 & Private Collections;

 %Avg. No. Loads/Day 95 95 101 97 100 112

 % Avg. Tons/Day 101 94 103 109 112 82

Cgrnbined Collections;

 %Avg. No. Loads/Day 100 94 102 101 104 100

 % Avg. Tons/Day 110 94 99 104 107 85

Note: Above data based on field observations at 13 points of disposal during

 December 1967 and January 1968

 Avg. Day (100%) Municipal Collection: 386 Loads 1,259 Tons

 Comm. & Private Collection: 566 Loads 949 Tons

 Combined Collection: 952 Loads 2,208 Tons

 C. Private Collection and Disposal Services

 Private collection and disposal services, supplementing the area's public solid

 waste systems, consist of complete contractor services, collection services, on-

 site incinerators and landfills operated by individual enterprises for their own 

use,

 as well as private dumps operated for profit through salvage and/or direct dumping

 charges.

 111-9

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 A limited number of firms provide complete collection and disposal services 

within

 the Tri-parish Area. New Orleans Disposal Company, Inc. is the principal 

firm

 serving commerce and industry. Operating from modern plant facilities, 

centrally

 located in the City of New Orleans, this firm is servicing accounts with a 

well

 maintained collection fleet of some 50 radio-equipped vehicles of various 

types.

 The type of service offered by this company is that of container service 

operation.

 The principal point and method of disposal utilized by this company is their 

pri-

 vately operated landfill located on the Orleans - St. Bernard Parish line, 

south of

 Bayou Bienvenue. This landfill, though an open burning dump, is generally 

run in

 an orderly fashion, with adequate equipment on site to follow up rapidly in 

the com*

 pact ion, grading, and final application of cover material.

 Jefferson Disposal Company, Inc. with its subsidiaries is the principal firm 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

providing

 contract collection and disposal services to community governments in the 

area. It

 presently serves the Unincorporated Eastbank Area of Jefferson, as well as the 

City

 of Harahan and is also active in contract services with commerce and 

industry. This

 firm operates from modern plant facilities located in Jefferson Parish 

Eastbank Area

 under lease from Jefferson Parish. The majority of wastes collected under their

 public service contracts are delivered to the Eastbank incinerator for 

disposal. This

 firm operates with a well maintained fleet of about 40 radio-equipped 

vehicles, a*

 required for collection and. disposal operation.

 Hattaway Disposal Company services the City of Kenner under contract for 

collection

 anddisposal of wastes generated by household and small commercial 

installations. Ope

 ing witha small compactor truck collection fleet, wastes are hauled into St. 

Charles

 Parish to the contractor's operated landfill, located some 7 miles west of the 

Jeffers*"1

 Parish line. There is a limited number of other independent col lection 

contractors,

 operating with enclosed compactor type vehicles in theTri-Parish area, 

however, the

 are innumerable open truck owners operating as independent general haulers. 

Their

 waste hauling activities vary with thedemand. Available statistics obtained 

from

 local licensing agencies generally does not classify or limit trucks by .types 

of,use.

 On-site incinerators and landfill operations are not uncommon in the area. Onsite

 incineration is found consistently in the commercial-retail installations 

throughout

 the area, with concentrations in the high-rise structures of the Central 

Business

 Districts. In one major industrial complex in the New Orleans East area, the

NA$^

 Complex, an on-site landfill operation is presently being conducted for 

disposal of

 their own wastes. The method of operation of this landfill closely approaches

the

 concept of a true sanitary landfill and from our observations is the only 

compar^

 one in existence in the New Orleans area. This is made economically feasible 

by

 large stock piles of cover material that remained from dredging the Industrial 

Canfll

 in the NASA Complex area. This landfill is receiving a combination of food 

wastes/

111-10

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

N -

 La. - 15 May 1968

commercial and industrial wastes generated by the various firms within the complex.

Due to a rapidly diminishing supply of cover material, management of this complex

is anticipating early construction of an incinerator plant to handle all wastes generated from their combined operations. A small on-site incinerator currently exists

at this complex for the destruction of classified materials, principally paper products.

Various industrial firms operate on-site landfills or landfills remote from the developed areas for disposal of hard fill materials generated by their own operations.

This "self disposal is augmented by many commercial and industrial firms transporting wastes by their own trucks to public and privately operated landfills.

In the communities with higher growth rates, such as the Jefferson Eastbank area,

garbage grinder installations are common place in both single family units and the

numerous multi-family garden apartment complexes. High density apartment districts with grinder installations appear to reduce household collections some 25%

by weight but negligible volume reduction occurs.

Quantities of combustible wastes handled by on-site disposal facilities in the over-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

all Tri-parish area are generally minimal and their effect is noticeable only by

limited areas of concentrated use.

D. Private vs. Municipal Operation of Refuse Collection and

 Disposal Systems

The preceding review of area collection and disposal practices shows wide variations in methods of management of the solid waste systems of the various Tri-parish

communities. Private enterprise participation in management of the public systems

in Jefferson Parish is the most significant departure in the area from normal practices in that the three communities comprising the Eastbank area of Jefferson Parish

(the Unincorporated Area, the City of Harahan, and the City of Kenner) have

entered into contractual agreements for collection and disposal services within the

past two years.

The Jefferson Parish contractual agreement with the private firm of Jefferson Disposal Company, Inc., (as required by bidding specifications) includes not only collection of refuse, but also operation and maintenance of the Parish owned and built

Eastbank Incinerator. Later contractual arrangements between WES Enterprises,

Inc. (a subsidiary company of Jefferson Disposal Co., Inc.) and the City of Harahan

also Included collection services with the disposal of wastes to be handled by

 111-11

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 incineration at the Eastbank Incinerator. The latter, of course, occurred 

with the

 approval of Jefferson Parish authorities.

 The City of Kenner, after seeking bids, entered into contract for services 

includ-

 ing collection and disposal of wastes. In this case, however, the 

contractor,

 Hattaway Disposal Company, provided disposal in their privately operated land-

 fill located in adjacent St. Charles Parish.

 These local examples of "packaged services" for both collection and disposal 

of

 wastes differ somewhat from the normal contractual services presently being 

expe-

 rienced in other areas. There are numerous cases in the United States where 

house'

 hold refuse is collected by private agencies operating through contracts with 

the

 municipal authorities. A survey of some 956 cities in the United States and 

Canada/

 conducted in 1964 by the American Public Works Association, listed 225 cities

or

 23.5% of all cities surveyed, where refuse collection is by contract with the 

mu-

 nicipality. This type of service is most often-found in small communities 

where

 there is an insufficient quantity of refuse to justify operating a municipal 

service

 and where a private collector can operate economically, particularly if he 

has con-

 tracts with several communities.

 This aforementioned survey showed some notable exceptions for large 

communities

 which are listed below.

 Population

 San Francisco, California 750,000

 Seattle, Washington 557,000

 Baltimore County, Maryland 500, 000

 Omaha, Nebraska 301,000

 Ottawa, Canada 259,000

 San Jose, California 203,000

 Anaheim, California 118,000

 Peoria, Illinois 103,000

 Santa Ana, California 100,000

 In most of the communities, where municipal contracts with private collectors

exist/

 disposal is generally handled by open dumping or sanitary landfill.

 In recent years there have been a number of instances where cities have 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

undertaken

 to contract refuse disposal to private contractors on the basis of the 

private collectof

111-12

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 La. - 15 May 1968

 owning and operating the facilities and receiving a disposal fee for their use.

 Recently, the City of Houston, Texas, let four contracts; three for the construc-

 tion of compost plants and one for the construction of an incinerator. Each to be

 constructed and financed by private capital with payments to be made from disposal

 fee revenues from the use of the facilities charged to the municipality as well as

 other users. Similarly, the City of St. Petersburg, Florida, entered into two 

sepa-

 rate contracts for disposal of wastes which required the private construction and

 operation of an incinerator plant and a compost plant. The above contracts dif-

 fered from the Eastbank Jefferson Parish contract in that the local disposal 

facility

 was built by the Parish, taking advantage of the lower financing costs. The Parish

 originally operated the facility for a period of about two years. When faced with

 rising costs, lack of trained manpower, and costly breakdowns, the Parish requested

 bids and awarded a contract for private operation of the facility in mid-1966. The

 contract is in its second year of operation and a successful working arrangement

 has apparently been achieved.

 The principal advantages of contracting refuse collection and disposal to private

 enterprises are as follows:

 1. A firm basis of cost is guaranteed to the City for the contract period.

 2. Periodic bidding insures the minimum cost for the City.

 3. Limitation of responsibility for social and fringe benefits on payroll.

 4. Freedom from political pressure in management.

 5. The opportunity to utilize the most efficient methods and equipment.

 6. The opportunity of adopting personnel policies that will attract the most

 competent personnel.

 7. The opportunity to establish optimum crew sizes.

 The principal disadvantages of this system are:

 1. Lack of direct contact between the City and its inhabitants in providing

 a necessary municipal service.

 111-

13

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 2. Difficulty in anticipating possible cost increases beyond the 

effective con-

 tract period.

 3. Selection of bid specifications that will limit bidding to reputable 

and

 rienced contractors, yet not discourage competition of those most 

qualified.

 4. The payment of taxes and earning a profit may make this method more 

expensiv6'

 Further data, covering each of the private contracts in effect in Jefferson 

Parish, is

 presented in Chapter VI with more detailed discussions of the solid waste system 

used

 In the individual communities.

 E. Area Ordinances

 The ordinances which are now in force within the principal communities of the 

Tri-

 Parish area covering the collection of solid waste by or on account of the 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

municipal

 agency are similar in scope, A digest of the Ordinances for Orleans and 

Jefferson

 parishes and of the bid specifications for the City of Kenner are included in 

Appen-

 dix I. It goes without saying that the larger communities (the City of New 

Orleans

 and the Unincorporated Areas of Jefferson Parish) have, of necessity, developed 

or-

 dinances over the years of their growth that are comprehensive in coverage, 

whereas

 the smaller communities, in their developing stages, have adopted only those 

minimum

 regulations appearing to be necessary. In the case of St. Bernard Parish, this

commu-

 nity has not yet officially adopted regulations covering any phase of solid waste

col-

 lection or disposal. However, officials of this community are aware of the need 

and

 are now in the process of formulating ordinances covering regulations in this 

field.

 State regulations on disposal of solid wastes provide minimum standards 

concerned

 with the accumulation and collection of refuse as well as methods of disposal and

 operation of disposal facilities. These regulations are presented in Appendix 

l-E.

 The ordinances of the City of New Orleans and Jefferson Parish define the kinds

 and classes of refuse, handling requirements, detail of collection services, and

 methods and permitted means of disposal, as well as defining the responsibility 

for

 administration of these services and enforcement of the regulating ordinances.

 These ordinances provide detailed explanations of the pre-col lection practices 

that

 are expected of those receiving service, such as preparation of refuse, 

container

 requirements, weight limitations, and in the case of bundled rubbish, length 

limi-

 tations. The scope of the ordinances further sets forth limitations as to 

types of

 properties that are entitled to receive this public service, generally the small

pro-

 ducers of waste such as residential and small commercial installations and 

specifi-

 cally excluding industrial establishments. Without exception all the 

communities

 require curb and alley locations of containers for collection. Specified 

frequency

111-14

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 La. - 15 May 1968

 of collection varies substantially from community to community with pickup oc-

 curring as often as six times per week and as few as twice a week. Conformity in

 container standards exists among all communities which require containers of

 either metal or other approved material, with watertight covers. In New Orleans

 and Jefferson two 30-gallon containers or three bundles of trash, or reasonable

 combinations thereof are the limiting factors. Allowable container weights and

 volumes vary slightly from community to community. The ordinances also specify

 certain special services such as the collection of small dead animals and oversize

 trash which are generally collected upon notification by the residents. Private

 collection vehicles and methods of disposal are also regulated by ordinance. Regu-

 lations concerned with waste disposal prohibit open dumping and burning in some

 communities, opposed to relatively no regulation or control existing in neighboring

 communities. No pollution control regulations exist in any of the communities.

 Existing ordinances vary considerably in regards to financing and payment for ser-

 vices. As a general rule, all communities provide at least a part of the operating

 funds of the solid waste system through property tax assessments with the rate 

varying

 from 4 mils to 7 mils among the communities. In Jefferson Parish a service charge

 supplements the tax revenues varying from as little as 20 to 50 cents per month.

 Failure to comply with regulations stipulated by ordinance carries penalties ranging

 from $2.50 to $100.00 per violation and/or three days to ninety days imprisonment,

 or both.

 Enforcement of these regulations for all practical purposes is very minor in the 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

area

 due partially to the lack of adequate funds and manpower for issuing violation 

notices,

 following up to verify compliance or fining of repeated violators. Violations in 

some

 cases are probably due to ignorance of the requirements by the residents and lack

 of effective communication between the regulating agency and citizenry.

 F. Salvage and Reclamation

 In the Tri-parish Area various special disposal problems are partially handled by

 private enterprise through salvage and reclamation of certain waste materials. Rev-

 enues generated from salvage of waste materials has been of varying importance to

 municipal collections and disposal systems in past years. With a strong fluctuation

 in the markets for salvage material, as well as the rising costs of salvage, 

munici-

 pal participation in this field has gradually diminished. In the Tri-parish Area

 today, nearly all salvage activities are handled by private contractors.

 111-

15

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 1. Basic Salvage Materials

 Salvage contractors in the area, generally specializing in a particular 

material, in*

 elude those dealing with paper, cullet, rags, non-ferrous metals, ferrous 

metals and

 building materials. Generally, materials handled by salvage contractors in 

the Qte°

 are selected and collected directly by the contractor prior to being mixed 

with other

 general refuse. Also, materials are delivered to the contractor by 

individuals who

 hand pick the products from local dumps and other sources.

 Other than dealers in scrap metal and used building materials, a very limited

 of salvage contractors serve the area and it appears that they provide 

adequate serV*

 ices to meet the local need.

 2. Abandoned and Junk Automobiles

 Numerous salvage lots and garages engaged in automobile salvage operations 

are

 active in the Tri-parish Area. Initial salvaging or stripping of automobiles

handled

 by salvagers may see the immediate removal of all usable spare parts or 

the autom°*

 bile itself may be used as a "warehouse" until the need for its parts 

occur. Timing

 of salvage, of course, depends on the demand and the availability of labor.

What-

 ever the time element may be, ultimately the remaining hulk, chassis and 

body/

 must in effect be stored for lack of a permanent point of disposal, method of

destruc'

 tion, or further reclamation, as may be seen by observation of the many 

"storage"

 yards throughout the area.

 Abandoned vehicles on the highways and the streets pose a problem that is 

common

 to all the communities of the Tri-parish Area. As in other areas, these 

automobi'65

 are usually found stripped of all readily usable and saleable parts that 

would be of

 interest and profit to commercial salvage yards. Their value in the 

condition that

 they are found hardly would warrant the cost of removal. However, they must 

be

 removed by municipal authorities or under local governmental control and 

stored

 temporarily by the collecting agency until the hulk is claimed by the owner 

(whi^1

 rarely occurs) or legal permit to junk is obtained and then later hauled to 

comrnei"

 cial storage yards. The invested costs for removal, temporary storage and 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

transfer

 to permanent storage yards generally exceeds the salvage value.

 Various methods and arrangements exist for the pickup and removal of 

abandoned

 automobiles in each of the Tri-parish communities. However, by observation, 

ft

 is apparent that the rate of removal does not quite keep pace with the need

on a

 day to day basis. Although each of the communities is making sincere efforts

to

 keep the streets free of the abandoned vehicles, the solution of providing a 

local

 means for ultimate disposal still remains to be developed.

Ill-16

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

Nw La. - 15 May 1968

 It is estimated that approximately 10,000 abandoned automobiles are collected an-

 nually in the Tri-parish Area. Table 111-6 illustrates the estimated number of auto-

 mobiles collected by each of the communities in the Tri-parish Area during 1967.

 This Table shows the number of vehicles picked up for storage or disposal and does

 not reflect the total number of vehicles abandoned in the streets and highways.

 TABLE 111-6

 ESTIMATED NUMBER OF ABANDONED VEHICLES

 COLLECTED ANNUALLY IN THE TRI-PARISH AREA

 City of New Orleans 5,000

 St. Bernard Parish 300

 Jefferson Parish 3,500

 City of Gretna 350

 City of Westwego 150

 City of Harahan 100

 City of Kenner 400

 TOTAL UNITS COLLECTED ANNUALLY 9,800

 In a recent environmental reports on the City of New Orleans, it was estimated

 that some 12,000 vehicles were abandoned or "permanently" parked on the city

 streets. The Police Department estimated that 5,000 of these were actually junk

 and approximately 7,000 repairable. The Police Department indicated that with

 current procedures complete removal of these vehicles from the streets would re-

 quire approximately four years. It is estimated in this report that the rate of ac-

 cumulation of these abandoned cars on the streets of the City of New Orleans is in

 excess of 1000 units annually. This inventory and accumulation is over and above

 the number of cars removed annually by the City of New Orleans Police Depart-

 ment.

 The responsibility for removal of autos falls on different public agencies in the

 various communities of the Tri-parish Area. Typical of this variation occurs in the

 City of New Orleans where the Police Department is charged with this responsibil-

 ity, in Jefferson Parish, the Department of Roads and Bridges is responsible for

 removal of vehicles, and in the City of Kenner, though the responsibility was

 charged to the Police Department, removal was handled by private contractor until

 such time as it no longer became profitable to the contractor when the City started

 paying a fee to the contractors to remove the automobiles. However, this proved

 feasible for only a short period. At the present time even this subsidy does not at-

 tract haulers, having been recently estimated by local authorities that there are

 111-17

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 between 1500 and 2000 cars on the streets and private property of the City that

must

 be removed.

 The 10,000 automobiles abandoned in the Tri-parish Area are equivalent to about

 7,500 tons of scrap. To this must be added a considerable number of 

automobiles

 retired from service annually in the area that are sold directly to salvage 

yards,

 thus increasing substantially the number of tons annually of scrap available 

from

 this source.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Various types of equipment have been developed and adopted for disposal or 

recla-

 mation of automobiles bodies. Included in this array of equipment are scrap 

baling

 machines capable of compressing an automobile into a bale of metal of 

approxima-

 tely an 8 cubic foot volume from its original 250 cubic foot volume, or a 96% 

vol-

 ume reduction. Controlled incineration in large continuous flow incinerators 

are als"

 available that can burn out from 100 to 200 car bodies in eight hours and 

hammer-

 mills that can consume an average car body in 45 seconds or a'rate of 250 to 

400 car5

 per eight hour day. Combinations of these various methods are sometimes 

employed

 to achieve the desired results.

 Today's market value of the end scrap product of the hammermill method is 

about $30

 per ton. This would indicate a potential scrap value between $225,000 and 

$330,0$

 from automobiles abandoned annually on the public right of ways In the Triparish

 Area. This volume, together with the potential value of the inventory of 

automobi'6

 bodies presently in the "storage" yards in the area and those delivered 

annually by

 their owners, together with oversize metal wastes generated annually, should w

 investigation by private enterprise. Local governments should jointly encourage

 private investors in development of reclamation operations in this field to 

serve the

 Tri-parish Area. A plant located centrally within the Tri-parish Area with 

facilities

 for water and rail shipments might well provide the means for disposal of 

abandoned

 vehicles from more distant communities, as well as having dual means of 

shipping ^e

 end product to domestic or foreign markets.

 G. Required Tri-Parish Regulations

 Upon review of existing collection and disposal practices, regulations 

controlling

 these practices and upon analyses of various disposal methods adaptable to the 

area/

 our study indicates the need to determine and program disposal facilities for 

the im-

 mediate requirements of the areas; such facilities to be adequate for the next 

decade

 and adaptable in the long range program to the following decade.

 We have determined in the course of study that programming of these facilities 

may

 best be handled by the individual communities for the first stage development

111-18

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 La. - 15 May 1968

 period 1970-1980 (as covered in Chapters V and VI) and on a cooperative regional

 program for the second stage development period 1980-1990 (as covered in Chapter

 VII).

 In order to provide a common denominator applicable to the communities of the Tri-

 Parish Area, these communities need to formulate and adopt common standards,

 preferably under the administration of a single authority, for the control and 

regul-

 ation of the disposal of waste. These standards in the form of a master ordinance

 should incorporate by reference the recommended specifications for disposal of all

 types of solid wastes by methods that are acceptable to local, state and federal

 authorities. This authority should establish policy, administer, control and 

enforce

 the adopted regulations. Such regulations should specifically prohibit open dump-

 ing and open burning of all wastes that would present environmental hazards or any

 means of disposal that would contribute undesirable pollution levels to the air,

 water, or land.

 Immediate efforts should be undertaken through such an agency as the Regional

 Planning Commission to sponsor an authority to formulate these standards and en-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 courage adoption and implementation of such standards by each community as

 rapidly as possible with an agreement upon deadline for compliance by not later

 than 1980.

 It would also be desirable for this central authority to provide minimum recom-

 mended standards covering other phases of the solid waste system; standards to be

 incorporated in the local ordinances of the various communities. Each community

 should retain those standards of waste collection best suited to their individual

 needs such as frequency of collection, number of containers, weight limitations,

 type of service, etc. However, basic regulations covering health standards, pre-

 paration of wastes, container requirements, violations, compliance, penalties, en-

 forcement of ordinances, control of private collectors, disposal of special wastes,

 etc., should be common to all communities. In fact, it would be desirable to draw

 a common overall ordinance for all communities adopted by each and amended as

 required to suit the individual needs.

 Specific standards related to waste disposal should be adopted covering operation of

 incinerators, sanitary landfills, as well as landfills designated for dumping of 

non-

 combustibles and oversize wastes. In the case of incineration, regulations concern-

 ing air pollution limits should be adopted, and enforcement of such regulations to

 be controlled by periodic stack emission tests.

 111-19

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

IV METHODS OF REFUSE DISPOSAL

 Refuse by definition is something worthless to be left or thrown aside. Tradition-

 ally man has attempted to dispose of his refuse in the least costly manner and with

 a minimum of effort. Only recently, as larger urban areas have developed and

 citizens have become aware of the hazards to public health, has more attention

 been given to refuse disposal.

 A. Open Dumping

 Open dumping has been practiced for years and is probably the oldest organized

 effort of refuse disposal. Generally a site for such purpose was selected at some

 distance from the community and frequently a scavenger was permitted to reside

 on the dump property in hopes that he would exercise some control over the process

 of dumping. Frequently, materials are delivered to the dump by the community

 refuse collector and by industries and home owners. In some dumps open burning

 is encouraged in order to reduce the volume and in hopes that such fires might

 reduce the quantities of garbage, thus discouraging the harboring of vermin and

 insects. Some years ago the open dump was the site of a rat shooting sport. Open

 dumps are looked on with disfavor by Public Health authorities and are being leg-

 islated out of existence in nearly all metropolitan areas.

 The Tri-Parish area has agreed to discontinue this form of disposal as a condition

 to obtaining financial assistance from the Department of Health, Education, and

 Welfare, with which this study is being undertaken.

 B. Hog Feeding

 The feeding of garbage portions of refuse to hogs was probably the first attempt 

to

 salvage benefits from refuse. The system generally involves a program wherein

 the hog farmer provided for collection of selected wastes from residences, hotels,

 restaurants and food processing plants. Years back the hog farmer actually paid

 certain garbage producers for the privilege of removing their wastes. However,

 increased labor and transportation costs in recent years has reversed the 

procedure.

 Some time dgo investigations by Health Departments determined that the feeding

 of such garbage to swine in many cases was detrimental from a public health view-

 point. The hogs contracted diseases and sometimes ingested parasites. Under

 certain circumstances the meat resulting from slaughtering of the hogs carried 

dis-

 ease causing organisms which transmitted diseases to humans. The result of this

 IV-1

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 investigation was that hog farmers were required to process the garbage by 

cooking
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 before feeding. This additional processing costs money and reduces 

profitfrom this

 operation to a marginal level. This method has fallen into general disfavor 

and in

 Louisiana there are at least tv o laws which control the feecttng of garbage 

to hogs.

 C. On-Site Disposal

 On-site disposal frequently includes incinerator devices installed in the 

structure

 where the refuse is generated. Many of the larger apartment houses have 

refuse

 chutes leading to flue fed incinerators and into refuse storage areas where 

the build"

 ing caretaker finds it and feeds it to the on-site incinerator. Many 

industries, in-

 cluding food process ing plants and supermarkets, are constructed with on-site

incin-

 erators for the reduction of the volume of refuse. The use of on-site 

incinerators is

 being discouraged because there is little or no control over the combustion 

process

 or the gases produced by combustion. In the absence of proper control, these 

gases

 are large contributors to air pollution and residue from improper combustion 

may be

 putrescible and require burial for proper final disposal. The installation of

such de-

 vices in new construction is forbidden in a number of cities and it is 

expected that

 this method of disposal will be discouraged or materially upgraded as more 

rigid

 air pollution control standards are imposed.

 Garbage grinders are also used for on-site disposal of food wastes. These 

installations

 have proven tobe a popular method of garbage disposal and the number of 

installations

 is increasing rapidly in many areas.

 D. Composting

 Composting is a biochemical degradation of organic materials to a sanitary, 

nuisance

 free, humus-like material. Modern scientific composting has been described as 

a

 rapid but partial decomposition of solid organic waste matter by the use of 

aerobic

 microorganisms under controlled conditions. The major advantage of the 

process op"

 pears to be that it produces a potentially marketable and useful product. 

However,

 unlfess some economically beneficial use is made of the product, composting 

as such

 is of limited value as a means of municipal refuse disposal since the 

resulting

 is equivalent to approximately 70% of the original volume of the refuse less 

any

 lume of materials salvaged*

 The first full-scale European composting plant for the disposal of city refuse

was

 begun in the Netherlands in 1932 where the refuse was composted in large open

IV-2

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 windrows without grinding or sorting. The windrow method of composting combined

 with the rasping system which involves grinding the refuse before the composting

 process is started, and turning the compost piles during a three to six week period,

 has become popular in Europe and by 1950, twelve plants based on this process

 were either in construction or use.

 Between 1953 and 1956, Michigan State University conducted extensive labora-

 tory and field experiments on the composting of municipal wastes. Numerous

 variables affecting the process were studied and a pilot plant was operated for 2

 years in which 45 tons of garbage per day from the City of East Lansing were

 processed. These experiments were based on a multiple deck silo type of digester.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Also, the United States Public Health Service initiated two research projects on

 composting in 1953, one in Savannah, Georgia and the other in Chandler,

 Arizona, near Phoenix. Considerable information has been obtained from the

 operation of both of these plants. The Arizona studies included the development,

 construction, and operation of a 10-ton-per-day experimental plant at Chandler

 in which aeration, bin and windrow composting were used.

 In 1956, a 100 ton-per-day composting plant was placed into operation at

 McKeesport, Pennsylvania, This plant operated for about a year and was sub-

 sequently closed. More recently the plant has been dismantled and we understand

 it has been installed at Kingston, Jamaica, where it is again in operation, in-

 termittently.

 A visit to the S.A.C. compost plant in March 1967, located in San Fernando,

 California, revealed that this plant had been shut down for about two years

 because of inability to find a market for the end product.

 A visit in July 1966 to the 150 ton-per-day compost plant in St. Petersburg,

 Florida, indicated that contracts had been obtained with growers for taking the

 compost directly from the windrows; however, another visit in S'eptember 1967

 revealed that except for limited quantities sold in bags to hardware stores, most

 of the compost has been disposed of by dumping. Also serious odor problems

 have plagued the plant, causing it to be shut down in 1968.

 Recent inquiries to Mobile, Alabama, indicate that the lack of a market for the

 end product is the greatest problem in the operation of that City's new 300-ton

 per day composting plant.

 IV-3

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Houston Tex'as, awarded three contracts for compost plants and one for an 

incin-

 erator in April 1966. One compost plant was completed and commenced operation

 in the spring of 1967, a second plant was completed but not placed in operation

 because of complaints by neighbors of odors. The Contract for the other compost

 plant was cancelled.

 The most recent compost plant to be placed in operation is the 160-ton per day

 plant at Gainesville, Florida which receives the refuse from the City of 

Gainesville

 and the University of Florida. This plant was constructed by the same company 

that

 is operating the plant at Houston, Texas. Operating costs for a plant of this 

size

 were estimated by its operators on an annual and per ton basis as shown in Table

IV-1

 TABLE IV-1

 COMMERCIAL VENTURE - COMPOST PLANT

 (160 T/D - 50,000 tons Annually - Capital needs $1,500,000)

 Rate Per

 Ton Amount

 Operating Costs:

 Labor and payrolI expense $3.28 $164,000

 Utilities .42 21,000

 Supplies .40 20,000

 Repairs .50 25,000

 Travel .04 2,000

 Telephone .12 6,000

 Equipment rental .03 1,500

 Licenses and fees .02 1,000

 Consultants .05 2,500

 Contract hauling .26 13,000

 Total Controllable Expense $5 12 $256,000

 Insurance .20 10,000

 Land rental .12 6,000

 Property taxes .20 10,000

 Legal and audit .09 4,500

 Management fee .60 30,000

 Franchise taxes, start-up expense, etc. ,20 10,000

 Total Non-Controllable Expense $1.41 $ 70,5u5

 Total Operating Expense $6.53 $326,500

IV-4
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Rate Per

 Ton Amount

 Depreciation or Debt Service:

 Note: Debt service - $1,200,000 at 6 1/2% for

 20 years equals $107,424 per year; depreciation

 on $1,250,000 at 8% annually is $100,000.

 Capital needs include some working capital, which

 are not depreciable $2.15 $107,500

 Total Operating Expense $8.68 $434,000

 Less Credits for:

 Sludge $..10 $ 5,000

 Metal and paper salvage 1.30 65,000

 Compost 2.00 100,000

 Total Credits $3.40 $170,000

 Net cost for 50,000 Tons $5.28 $264,000

 The net cost of $5.28 per ton is predicated upon finding a market for the compost 

pro-

 duced from 50,000 tons per year of refuse. Arecentstudy make for Riverview, 

Michigan,

 covering an estimated population of 319,970, by Johnson and Anderson, Inc., Con-

 sulting Engineers, had the following to say regarding the marketing of compost:

 "This study of the possible uses of refuse compost from a manufacturing

 facility located in lower Michigan indicates the presence of a special-

 ized market probably large enough to absorb 25,000 tons annually of

 compost out of an annual production of from 25,000 to 44,000 tons from

 the Riverview plant, provided that there is no immediate development

 of additional compost manufacturing capacity in the Ohio-Michigan

 region."

 The City of Gainesville together with the University of Florida has about one quarter

 of the population of the Riverview Study Area.

 The estimated operating costs for the proposed Riverview Plant are shown in Table

 IV-2.

 IV-5

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE IV-2

 RESUME OF COSTS AND INCOME FOR A

 300-TON (REFUSE) PER DAY COMPOSTING PLANT

 COST PER TON

 ITEM OF REFUSE

 Capital Costs $2.88

 Operating Expenses 5.12

 TOTAL PRODUCTION COST $8.00

 Other Costs $0.47

 Disposal of 70 Tons of Compost Per Day

 in Nearby Landfill

 Disposal of 70 Tons of Compost Per Day $1.40

 transporting 200 miles by rail to land

 reclamation area

 GRAND TOTAL COSTS $8.47 $9.40

 Income

 Salvageable Material $3.50

 Compost Sales 3.24

 TOTAL INCOME $6.74

 The net cost per ton of $1.73 and $2.66 respectively depends upon obtaining an
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

in-

 come of $6.74 per ton from the sale of compost and salvageable materials or 

about

 twice that estimated for Gainesville.

 In commenting on the history of composts plants in the United States, Johnson 

and

 Anderson, Inc. have the following to say:

 " 1 • Aside from some Technical Difficulties, the Principal Cause 

of

 Failure has been Economic.

 "With few exceptions, the plants that have shut-down were operated

 by private businessmen who expected to realize a profit, balancing

IV-6

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

Hew Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 the cost of processing refuse into compost against a fee charged to the

 city plus proceeds from the sale of the compost. Ideally, the amount

 charged the city for each ton processed would pay for plant operation,

 and compost sales would provide the profit.

 "It has not worked out that way. Generally, the fees paid by munici-

 palities to plant operators for each ton of refuse processed range from

 $1.00 to $5.00, while the cost to process a ton of refuse is between

 $5.00 and $10.00.

 "Running a deficit, the operators looked belatedly inro the marketing of

 compost. Still believing that there was a wide requirement for the com-

 modity, they tried to sell it to the people they thought had the greatest

 need for humus; farmers. They were, except in Florida, usually disap-

 pointed. The market was not there.

 "2. Compost Plants have Failed because of Technical Difficulties and

 Poor Location, even before Encountering the Marketing Problem.

 "The main complaint in most start-up operations is the unsuitability of

 many items found in city refuse for hammermill and grinding operations.

 Large objects, usually metal, have caused extensive damage to the

 machinery and long down-time. The designers then consider procedures

 or machines to detour "tramp" metal, paper and other items having sal-

 vage value.

 "Another factor, one which has a new plant in Houston closed at the

 moment, is poor location. Despite all claims to the contrary, there

 is an odor from compost and from compost plants, especially in warm,

 humid weather. There is a temptation to relocate the plant at the end

 of a refuse pick-up line, even though that location may be in a resi-

 dential area. Whether for real or imagined reasons, people do not like

 to have refuse or sewage plants in their neighborhoods. The Houston

 plant, one of two built recently, was placed in a better-than average

 residential area not far from a house of worship. Five hundred residents

 have signed a petition to have it moved.

 "In short, composting plants built over the past seventeen years gener-

 ally have not been successful. Many have not proven to be econo-

 mically feasible. Several have had technical difficulties and a poor

 IV-7

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 location is a problem to at least one new plant. Those that have 

suc-

 ceeded have done so principally because of successful compost 

market-

 ing efforts."

 To the above comments we should like to add that all compost plants in the 

United

 States with a successful history of operation of five years or more were of 

less than

 50 tons per day capacity and the compost produced was for a special and 

limited

 market. Concerning the market in the Riverview area, Johnson and Anderson, 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Inc.

 comment as follows:

 "Riverview and the other towns that would participate in the use of

the

 proposed plant are relatively small in comparison with nearby 

Detroit

 and its larger suburban communities. The marketing opportunities

that

 we believe do exist for a quantity of about 25, 000 tons of 

compost an-

 nually will be sharply altered if parallel plans for compost 

plants are

 endorsed by the Federal government within this region which, for

market-

 ing purposes, must include both Michigan and Ohio.

 "If, on the other hand, the disposal problem becomes too acute in 

the

 area to be concerned with the development of end-product sales for

one

 plant so that it becomes self-supporting, then, we believe, 

compost may

 have a final virtue.

 "Our findings indicate that it would be difficult to give compost 

to near-

 by farmers. They do not appear to want it, free or otherwise. 

Making it

 free to local citizenry in small amounts does not seem a 

practical means

 of moving large amounts of compost continuously.

 "However, compost making does reduce refuse volume substantially, 

and

 in an area saturated by over-production this may be an advantage

if the

 final plan is to use the compost in landfill and soil reclamation 

projects

 some distance from the plant.

 "It may be necessary to add a compacting operation to achieve 

greater

 density, but sanitary landfill may be both a supplement to current

 marketing efforts and a future (5 to 10 years) alternative as 

other com-

 munities enter the program."

IV-8

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

fsjew Orleans/ La. - 15 May 1968

 Advantages*

 1. A composting plant produces a usable end product that may be sold, thus

 either paying for, or at least reducing, costs.

 2. Composting can be used to dispose of many industrial wastes such as

 those from meat packing plants, paper mills, saw mills, tanneries, stock-

 yards, and canneries; also dewatered sewage solids, especially if they

 are mixed with ground refuse; and cans and bottles that have no salvage

 value can be economically ground with the remaining refuse.

 3. Normally composting offers favorable conditions for salvage of rags,

 glass, cardboard, paper, cans, and metals.

 4. A well located refuse composting plant may reduce the cost of hauling

 refuse to the point of disposal.

 5. Flexibility of operation permits a 100 to 200 per cent overload in de-

 sign capacity for several days by increasing the time the receiving bins

 and grinders operate.

 Disadvantages*

 1. Capital and operating costs are relatively high.

 2. Whether the end product can be marketed is not yet proven and seasonal
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 use of the end product may require special marketing procedures or exten-

 sive outdoor storage.

 3. Trained personnel to operate composting plants are not readily available.

 4. Refuse that damages grinders must be removed and disposed of separately

 such as tires, pipes, heavy stones, mattresses.

 IV9

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 5. If cans and bottles have no local salvage value they must either be 

re-

 moved and disposed of separately or ground with the organic matter,

 thus somewhat reducing the quality of the finished compost.

 6. Site procurement for a composting plant is difficult.

 *From Municipal Refuse Disposal, A.P.W.A.

 Although composting plants continue to capture the imagination of the public, 

par-

 ticularly those who are conservation minded and a number of plants have been 

built,

 none of those constructed and presently operating in the United States have a 

capa-

 city sufficient to be seriously considered in the present study.

 We have considered the possibility of constructing a small compost plant 

sized

 to meet the needs of the various Parks Departments within the City. The 

conserva-

 tion of the parks, parkways, and gardens within the City is divided among the 

follow-

 ing agencies, each of which we have contacted: the City Parks Department, the

 Department of Streets; the New Orleans Recreation Department; the New Orleans

 District Levy Board; the Parks and Parkway Commission; and the Audubon Parks. 

In

 general, we find that river sand is used almost exclusively for lawn and garden 

dress-

 ing by each of these Departments. In almost every case, the organic matter 

required

 is obtained from the operation of compost piles maintained and operated by the 

De-

 partments using cuttings and other materials from the Departments' operations as the

 raw material. In the case of the Parks and Parkway Commission, records indicate

 that some 240 cubic yards of organic muck material was purchased.

 As shown by the above, there is no demand in any of the Parks Departments for 

com-

 post material such as might be manufactured from the City's refuse.

 E. Incineration

 A modern municipal incinerator must meet a number of basic design requirements.

 It must be free of public nuisance. Neither air pollution, water pollution nor 

ugly

 appearance is permissible. It must be economical to own and operate. It must 

be

 dependable in its operation and be able to process a maximum variety of solid 

waste.

 Avoidance of public nuisance is of prime importance since the principal reason 

for

 the existence of an incinerator is to dispose of a public nuisance—solid waste 

or

IV-10

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 refuse, (n our rapidly expanding metropolitan areas, it is safe to assume that, 

re-

 gardless of the remoteness of the incinerator site selected, there will be taxpaying

 neighbors nearby during some part of the life of the plant. Consequently, inciner-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 ator design must provide extremely close control of air pollution to prevent dust

 fallout and unpleasant odors or fumes in neighboring areas. Air pollution code

 restrictions have become increasingly stringent in recent years and it seems most

 appropriate for publicly owned and operated facilities to be models of good perform-

 ance in this regard. Recognition and acceptance of the need for very low stack

 emission rates has a marked effect on the design of incinerators.

 Mechanical developments in the last several years since the advent of more strin-

 gent air pollution control regulations, which have demanded a high degree of ef-

 ficiency, have now made it possible to construct incinerators requiring a minimum

 of operating personnel and capable of functioning without smoke or other stack

 emission while producing a completely burned-out residue which can be disposed

 of without nuisance or the need for burying.

 Such incinerators are good neighbors and can be built in any area zoned for in-

 dustry or commerce without blighting the surrounding area or causing complaints

 from adjacent property owners.

 Advantages *

 1. Much less land is required than for disposal in landfills. If there are

 insufficient sites available for landfills within economic haul distan-

 ces, incineration may be the most economical method of disposal.

 2. A central location for an incineration plant is possible. A carefully

 operated plant in a well-designed building that has well-landscaped

 grounds is acceptable in many neighborhoods, and so site selection is

 not as difficult as it is for some other disposal methods. A location

 near-central to tributary collection areas reduces hauling costs.

 3. An incinerator can produce ash residue that contains a negligible a-

 mount of organic materials and thus is nuisance-free. The residue is

 also acceptable as fill material.

 4. The modern incinerator can burn a good many kinds of refuse. It can

 efficiently burn combustibles to ash and can even reduce the bulk of

 the non-combustible components of mixed refuse.

 ivn

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 5. An incinerator is not affected to any degree by climate or unusual 

weather.

 Disadvantages

 1. Large capital investment and high operating costs.

 2. Difficulty in securing a site because disposal operations in any 

form are

 offensive to many people. Moreover, truck traffic to and from the 

plant

 may be considered a hazard and a nuisance, particularly in 

residential

 neighborhoods.

 3. Not a complete disposal method. Ash and other residue from the 

burning

 process, including fly ash, must be disposed of by other means.

 4. Inability to handle bulky and industrial waste.

 5. Requirement of trained personnel.

 6. Necessary to treat and dispose of quench and scrubber waters, and 

possi-

 bility of air pollution.

 F. Other Processes for Reducing Waste with Heat

 Considerable research into modifications of the generally recognized incinerator

 process has been undertaken. Two such projects are worthy of mention.

 1. Mel t-Zit Process
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 The American Design and Development Corporation of Whitman, Massachusetts,

 has been developing the Melt-Zit Process. The literature on this process makes

it

 sound very attractive. The technical details were unavailable and it was not 

pos-

 sible to see the existing experimental 100-ton per day unit in operation. This

 process requires auxiliary fuel and it is reported that coke is used at the 

rate of

 1.0 ton per 40 tons of refuse. This unit does not utilize grates and is 

presumed

 to be a form of blast furnace which uses a refractory lined column into 

which

 the refuse is fed. Temperatures in this zone are maintained at approximately

 3,000°F. Such temperature results in the melting of the glass and metals to 

pro-

 duce a melted pool of residue. The pool is drained into a quench tank where 

the

IV-12

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

|s|ew Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 rapid chill results in production of a granular material. It is reported that the

 weight of residue is approximately 3% of the weight of refuse treated. This very

 high reduction in weight is especially attractive in areas where residue disposal

 is a problem and can be a substantial element of cost.

 The cost of auxiliary fuel, together with the maintenance of the high temperature

 refractory lining of the furnace make this process inherently more expensive than

 the normal incineration process and thus its use can only be justified where residue

 disposal is a serious problem. In the case of New Orleans, a well burned residue

 from a modern incinerator which is a high quality fill material is in demand, and

 the considerably larger volume of residue produced under normal conditions is an

 advantage rather than a detriment.

 The development of refractories for such high temperatures is relatively new and

 no data has been obtained on the service life of the refractory. The Federal Gov-

 ernment through the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare has approved

 a grant. The objective: "To investigate and evaluate the Melt-Zit high temper-

 ature pilot incinerator at Whitman, Massachusetts..."

 The Melt-Zit Process appears to have a great deal of potential for future applica-

 tion. However, there is presently no such process in use on a community basis and

 there are no evaluating data available from independent concerns on which defi-

 nite conclusions may be based.

 Because of the still experimental nature of this process at this time, as well as 

for

 the reasons stated above, this process should not be considered for the New Orleans

 area.

 2. Pyrolysis

 The City of San Diego, California, is experimenting with another process for the

 reduction by heat of municipal wastes. This process is described as pyrolysis. Py-

 rolysis amounts to destructive distillation. Destructive distillation is 

accomplished

 by heating the material to be subjected to distillation in a container with suitable

 vents. The products of destructive distillation include hydrogen, carbon dioxide,

 carbon monoxide, methane, ethylene, ethene and other gases. The gases produced

 can be burned with an expected heating value of 300 to 400 BTU per cu. ft.

 Other products of destructive distillation which escape through the same vents and

 can be condensed, are termed pyrol igneous acids. Although the pyrol igneous acids

 IV13

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 can be expected to contain 70 to 80% water, the remainder will be a variety 

of

 alcohols, ketones, tars, and organic acids. It is expected that these 

materials can

 be separated and sold. The char resulting from this method contains 

substantial

 amounts of inert materials such as metal and glass and has a heating value 

of ap-

 proximately 11,000 BTU's per pound. Experimental work indicates that this 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

process

 can be self-sustaining.

 This process has been developed in the southern California area where because

of

 smog conditions air pollution is critical and cost is of secondary 

importance. Such

 a process cannot be expected to compete economically with normal modern 

incin-

 eration except under special circumstances which do not exist in the New 

Orleans

 area.

 For these reasons, as well as the experimental nature of the process, we do 

not

 consider this method suitable for use in the New Orleans area.

 G. Landfill

 Landfill is required for the ultimate disposal of residues from all refuse 

reduction

 processes as well as .for the disposal of such wastes as are not amenable to 

reduction.

 Proper refuse disposal recognizes two types of landfill, namely: The 

sanitary

 landfill, which is treated at length in a subsequent section, and the 

landfill which

 is limited to the disposal of non-putrescible, non-incinerable waste 

materials

 such as demolition and construction wastes, oversize wastes, ash, 

incinerator

 and industrial residues, and similar materials that form satisfactory fills 

and do

 not require the use of cover material or special precautions to prevent the 

develop-

 ment of health hazards. Landfills of this type can be undertaken with a 

mini-

 mum of precaution in most low areas requiring fill material for their proper 

de-

 velopment and subsequent use of the area need not be limited. This type of 

land-

 fill must form a part of the planning in every refuse disposal program.

 H. Sanitary Landfill

 This method was developed in the United States early in the 1930's when 

disposal

 of refuse by dumping in open areas, due to the offensive nature of refuse, 

had

 created conditions in most cities that were unsatisfactory to all. It 

consists of

 dumping of refuse in a selected site in which the refuse is compacted in 

cellular

 construction and covered at least once a day with a layer of earth that is 

also

 compacted to provide a tight seal.

IV-14

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 During the early part of World War II, military installations, faced with ever

 increasing quantities of solid waste, adopted this method of refuse disposal at

 many camps and other installations. It was soon adopted by many municipali-

 ties across the nation, so that from less than 100 cities using it in 1945, 

more

 than 1,400 cities had adopted it by 1960. More recently, however, the me-

 thod had to be curtailed in a number of large cities including New York and

 Baltimore because of the lack of suitable sites within economic haul distances

 and because of the need to preserve the sites for other uses.

 Sanitary landfill operations may be classified into three categories: The 

Trench,

 the Area, and the Ramp methods. The method selected is usually dictated by

 the topography of the site and characteristics of the soil.

 Regulations and recommendations of state and federal health agencies have

 done much to improve the operation and upkeep of the landfill sites. Few so-

 called sanitary landfills, however, meet the recommendations of the United

 States Public Health Service.

 Advantages
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 1. A well designed and efficiently operated sanitary landfill can meet

 all the requirements of public health standards.

 2. If adequate land with suitable cover material is available at a rea-

 sonable distance from the collection center relatively low capital

 investment and operating cost will result.

 3. Unlimited as to kind or type of refuse that can be accepted for

 disposal.

 4. Limited number of skilled personnel required for operation.

 5. Unlimited capacity for emergency conditions.

 6. Improvement of property for limited use after fill is completed, such

 as play areas, parks, athletic fields, parking areas, etc.

 IV15

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans/ La. - 15 May 1968

 Disadvantages

 I. Usually located at considerable distance from the geographical 

cen-

 ters of the collection area so that hauling distances are long, thus

 resulting in a higher overall cost of refuse collection, not to

men-

 tion the effect of delays and emergencies, particularly during 

in-

 clement weather.

 2. Under certain conditions, contamination of the ground water or 

surface

 waters has occurred particularly where refuse is dumped into pits,

quarries

 and depressions that extend below or close to the water table 

which per-

 mits the leaching of contaminants.

 3. Limited use of the completed landfill area.

 4. Explosion hazards due to lateral passage of decomposition gases 

to

 adjacent areas.

 !• Transport of Waste by Barging

 Investigation of factors affecting the feasibility of barging wastes, included

 determination of routings, distances, equipment, and time factors, as well

 as consideration of weather factors and methods of preparation of wastes 

prior

 to shipment. Policies of the various governmental agencies must also be 

con-

 sidered in evaluation of the methods of disposal, such as burning and/or 

dump-

 ing at sea. Investigation of these latter methods were specifically 

requested by the

 City of New Orleans.

 1. Route Distances

 The principal routes considered for waterway transfer include the 

Mississippi

 River, the Gulf Outlet Channel, and the Intracoastal Waterway.

 Maps and charts of these waterways indicate nominal distances ranging from

 80 to 120 miles (one-way) from the Mississippi River Bridge in downtown

 New Orleans to open Gulf waters. These route distances shown in Table

 IV-3 include a ten-mile allowance beyond the mouth of the outlets into

 open waters

IV-16

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 TABLE IV-3

 WATERWAY TRANSPORT ROUTES

 Route Nautical Miles

 Via the Mississippi River

 Southwest Pass 120

 South Pass 114

 Pass Loutre 118

 Tiger Pass (proposed) 105

 Via the Gulf Outlet Channel 80

 Via the Intracoastal Waterway and Lake Borgne 80

 2. Speed and Haul Time

 Discussions with experienced and knowledgeable parties in barge transport on

 the Mississippi River discloses average towing speeds of five knots (round-

 trip basis ) should be contemplated for the time and size of cargo to be

 transported. With this speed, an elapsed roundtrip haul time to open waters

 varying from 32 to 48 hours must be allowed, depending on the route selected.

 Allowing additional loading and discharge time would immediately indicate

 the need for three sets of barges and the availability of additional tug units

 for a reliable system.

 It should be noted that multiple barge units in tow may be allowed in in-

 land waterways, but generally, only single units in tow are permitted on the

 open sea. It follows, that small barges towed in a group to the mouth of

 IV17

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 the River or other outlets would then require individual shuttling a 

distance

 of approximately ten miles for discharging cargo. At five knots, each unit

 would require about four hours for the roundtrip.

 3. Equipment Requirements

 Preliminary discussions indicate that the tonnage and volume requirements 

for

 one day's production of refuse (assumed at 600 tons per day) as received

at

 a single transfer station, could be incorporated in a single barge with 

special

 design features for burning or unloading at sea. Assuming that natural 

com-

 paction of this material in loading would achieve a density of about 300

 pounds per cubic yard, or say, six cubic yards per ton, the magnitude of

 this load would be comparable to a net cargo space (volume) of 

approxi-

 mately 50' x 165' x 12' depth. Local opinions are that barges 

for this

 particular purpose would necessarily be of special design and limited in

use

 for other purposes. Should grinding or shredding of refuse be performed 

at

 the transfer station thereby reducing volume, much smaller barges would 

be re-

 quired, but higher preparation costs would be incurred.

 4. Weather Factors

 Considerations for employment of barge transport of waste for disposal 

should

 also include evaluation of weather factors that affect the reliability of 

this

 means of transport. The frequency and hours of duration of fog and storm

 conditions that slow or close navigation of the inland and open waters are

 unpredictable conditions that would affect the reliability of the system.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Statistics are lacking on these conditions. However, indicative of the 

prob-

 lem is the Corps of Engineers records of heavy fog in the immediate 

vicinity

 of New Orleans during 1965, 1966, and 1967. For these years, fog slowed

 or closed river traffic as follows:

 37 days in 1965

 28 days in 1966

 43 days in 1967

 It averaged 33 days per year over the past 19 years with the normal occur-

 rence during the five month period from November through March.

IV-18

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Local shipping operators indicate modern sea-going tugs with radar navigational

 equipment are generally all-weather craft, and continue operations regardless

 of weather, except for severe storm conditions. A reliable transport system

 would require properly equipped craft. Costs of this type of equipment, of

 course, are extremely high. Preliminary indications of contract costs for tugs

 capable of furnishing this service range up to $900 per day.

 5. Policies of Governmental Authorities

 Extremely important and perhaps the deciding factors against dumping or burn-

 ing at sea are the probable unfavorable reactions of state and federal gov-

 ernmental authorities (due to indicated violation of their policies).

 These governmental authorities concerned with and/or previously ruling on

 the utilization of inland waterways and offshore waters include the U. S.

 Supreme Court, the U. S. Public Health Service, the State Board of

 Health, the U. S. Coast Guard, the Corps of Engineers - U. S. Army,

 State Stream Commission, Wildlife and Fisheries Commission, the tourist

 agencies of Lousiana communities and communities of adjacent coastal states.

 Specific obstacles against dumping at sea may be cited in a U. S. Supreme

 Court Ruling of 1933. Prior to this time, dumping refuse at sea was a

 fairly common practice of various coastal cities in the United States. In

 this Ruling, the Supreme Court prohibited this practice in a decision in-

 volving New York City. At the time, New York faced court action ini-

 tiated by coastal cities in New Jersey to force cessation of dumping its

 refuse at sea. The Supreme Court upheld a ruling requiring that New York

 City cease this practice due to its effect on the neighboring communities and

 resort areas in the coastal region.

 Although Louisiana has no major coastal resort cities or heavily populated

 communities in the coastal region, the resort areas of neighboring states

 would in all likelihood be affected by waterborne deposits of refuse, resulting

 in contamination of the Gulf beaches.

 Deposits of this waterborne debris could also be expected in the relatively

 shallow coastal waters, thereby contributing to their pollution. Health

 IV19

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 authorities, the Wildlife and Fisheries Commission, and representatives of 

the com-

 mercial fishing industry are continually striving to minimize the dangers of 

pollution

 in inland and coastal waters. Hundreds of square miles of comparatively 

shallow in-

 land waters and marshlands parallel the coastal areas of Louisiana as well 

as the

 coastal areas of adjacent states, and currently provide highly productive 

fishing

 grounds for the commercial shellfish and fishing industry.

 The U. S. Coast Guard and Corps of Engineers among their many duties, are 

highly

 concerned with maintaining minimum navigational hazards on inland and coastal

 waterways. The discharge point of unloading large volumes of refuse at sea 

would

 be subject to control to eliminate drift of masses of material into 

navigable chan-

 nels. Burning at sea or in inland waters would also be subject to their 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

control. Un-

 official recommendations indicate that dumping of this daily volume and type

of

 material should not be permitted in less distance than a 24-hour run to 

sea.

 The Coast Guard, Stream Commission, and the Corps of Engineers jointly would 

pro-

 hibit dumping or burning refuse in or near the principal inland waterways due

to

 pollution and navigational hazards.

 Formal and joint application to all agencies affected would be required in 

pursuing

 this means of disposal. It would be highly unlikely that approval could be obtained

 from all agencies. Assurance that approval would be granted or guaranteed 

for a

 sufficient period to amortize investment requirements is even more unlikely.

 6. Summary - Transport of Waste by Barging

 In this area, barging of wastes for final disposal appears to be a highly 

undesirable

 and unreliable method of disposal. Distance and time, together with the 

unpre-

 dictable weather factor alone, rule out serious consideration of this method. With

 consideration of the rightful emphasis placed on pollution controls (of air,

water,

 and land) by governmental authorities, disposal by dumping at sea and 

especially

 in inland waters today is in direct violation of the aims of the pollution 

control

 program.

 Based upon the factors detailed above, economic evaluation for barging to 

sea is

 not considered warranted.

 Barging to inland locations for disposal by sanitary landfill was considered

as an

 alternate method for utilizing water transport. Preliminary investigation 

indicates

IV-20

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 this method of handling would not be economical. Based upon a 50-mile one-way

 haul to a site that would be suitable for sanitary landfill operations/ costs 

of$5.50/

 Ton were estimated, allowing $1.00/Ton for transfer station costs (loading), 

$1.50/

 Ton for unloading and transport costs at the landfill site and $1.50/Ton for the sa-

 nitary landfill operation. Excessive rehandltng costs are unfavorable in this 

method.

 Further, unpredictable weather factors contribute to the unreliability of this method

 of transport of solid wastes. Although some barging of wastes has been practiced

 by some coastal communities in the past, consideration for this method of disposal

 for the Metropolitan New Orleans area appears to have no merit in the foreseeable

 future.

 J. Special Preparation of Refuse for Disposal

 The light weights and low densities of many types of wastes have resulted in large

 volumes to be transported and at relatively high cost per ton. Likewise, these

 wastes, because of their low densities occupy large initial volumes in landfills 

and

 are subject to a high degree of settlement.

 Numerous efforts have been made to consolidate these wastes in order to reduce the

 cost of transportation and the space required at the disposal area. A considerable

 amount of experimental work has been done in both shredding and compacting ref-

 use as a means of reducing its volume, and full scale installations of both types of

 equipment have been made outside of the United States.

 1. Shredding
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 One of the more common uses today is for shredding automobile bodies and preparing

 the material for scrap. Experiments have been carried out using the same type of 

e-

 quipment which have shown that the volume of refuse can be reduced to about one-

 fifth with a corresponding increase in density, thus reducing the cost of 

transportation

 from the collection points to the disposal site. The increase in density reduces 

the

 subsequent settlement in a landfill and lessens the amount of cover material 

required.

 Also, the shredding changes the appearance of refuse, so that areas may be filled

 with shredded refuse which otherwise would be unacceptable to the general public

 and neighbors in the vicinity.

 Shredding is also particularly useful for the reduction of volume of garden trash,

 oversize waste, and other materials for which disposal is currently a problem, 

either

 at incinerators or on landfills.

 Economic studies by the authors covering garden trash in the Miami area have shown

 that savings in transportation costs due to increase in density can be greater than

 IV21

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 the cost of installing and operating a shredding plant. Several special types of 

equip-

 ment have been developed for this purpose. It is believed that this type of 

waste

 processing will come into more general use as transportation to more distant areas

 becomes an important factor in the cost of refuse disposal. However, the 

limitations

 on the use of sanitary landfill in the area would still be applicable and 

shredding

 on a large scale is not indicated at this time.

 2. Grinding

 The grinding of garbage and other putrescible wastes, either in home units or 

con-

 veniently located central stations for disposal of the ground material into the 

sani-

 tary sewerage system has become increasingly popular since its introduction about 

30

 years ago. Locally, a comprehensive study undertaken by Godat & Associates for the

 New Orleans area in 1952 recommended against grinder discharge into the river or

 sanitary sewers. Today, increased use of home grinders is occurring in the new

 areas of development and is expected to increase further with proposed 

improvements

 in the sanitary sewerage systems. However, the findings of this earlier report 

against

 discharge from central stations into the river are still valid, for conditions 

have not

 improved materially in the intervening years.

 3. Compaction

 Large hydraulic presses have been in use to process car bodies into blocks which 

can

 be shipped as scrap to the steel mills. Recently, processes have been developed 

util-

 izing this type of equipment for compressing refuse into a small volume for its 

tran-

 sportation and final disposal. The Tezuka Kosan Co., Ltd., of Tokyo, Japan, has

 developed a refuse compressing system which we have studied based upon their

 literature.

 Briefly, the process involves a reduction in volume by the use of hydraulic 

pressure

 in order to obtain a final specific gravity of the compressed refuse in the order 

of

 1.2 and 1.9 and it is our opinion that the final specific gravity of the resulting 

cube

 or bale is a function of the nature of the refuse, as well as the nature of the 

cover

 which is added to the finished bale. The finished bale can be enclosed with 

chicken

 wire and hot asphalt, chicken wire and Portland cement concrete, chicken wire and
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 vinyl, chicken wire or iron strap only, vinyl only, iron sheet or unconfined, 

depend-

 ing on the final disposition of the material.

 It appears that this is a modification of the process being used in Mobile, 

Alabama,

 in that, by the Tezuka process, no effort is made to sort the refuse or to 

salvage any

IV-22

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans/ La. - 15 May 1968

 materials, whereas in Mobile, non-compos tables are removed prior to the baling

 process. The literature from Mobile and from Tezuka are completely contrary to

 each other in that according to the Mobile, Alabama Process the material after

 completion of the cubes undergoes anaerobic decomposition with the resulting for-

 mation of a compost. The literature from Tezuka makes a claim that the materials,

 once baled, will not decompose (corrode) and that due to the absence of oxygen,

 the propagation of micro-organisms is prevented.

 The Tezuka Process proposes to use the finished product as landfill and claims that

it

 is particularly well suited to underwater filling. The Tezuka literature indicates 

that

 the cost of baling will be in the range of $2.50 to $3.50 per ton, and since these

 calculations appear to be a conversion from the predicted cost in yens on the Tokyo

 basis, the reliability of the estimate is questionable. Furthermore, the estimate 

does

 not provide for debt service. It is quite possible that, with debt service the 

cost may

 reach $6.00 per ton or more. Also, the literature indicates the need for much power.

 As of December 29, 1967, a news release indicates that no plant of this nature is 

in

 service and that the first installation is scheduled for Kofu, a City northwest of 

Tokyo.

 This process produces a liquid waste which Tezuka apparently proposes to treat by

 the activated sludge process. It is our opinion that this process is still 

experimental

 and should not be considered for this project at this time.

 K. Applicable Methods of Refuse Disposal

 In the foregoing we have discussed the various methods of refuse disposal and where

 possible have indicated the relative advantages and disadvantages of each. Of

 these various methods there are several that should be singled out . further dis-

 cussions as applied to the refuse disposal problem in the Tri-Parish area. These

 include composting, central incineration, landfill and sanitary landfill.

 1. Composting

 This method can be expected to convert the refuse into about 70% of the equivalent

 volume of the raw refuse less any materials that may be salvaged. The finished

 product is a humus-like material very similar to the organic muck covering much

 of the Tri-Parish area so that little market can be expected locally for this 

product

 in competition with the abundant supply of natural material.

 2. Central Incineration

 Since the construction of the first incinerator in 1916, central incineration has 

been

 the preferred method of refuse disposal in the Tri-Parish area. Although capital 

and

 operating costs for this type of plant are higher than those required for sanitary 

land-

 fill operations, they are well located within their respective collection districts

 IV23

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 thus reducing transportation costs to a minimum. Also the increase in 

disposal capa-

 city required through 1980 can be largely accommodated by enlarging and 

rebuilding

 the presently obsolete plants to modern standards on existing sites.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Details required to carry our the program of enlargement and modernization 

together

 with records of operation and maintenance cost for the existing plants as 

well as

 estimates for those proposed are included in subsequent chapters where they 

are dis-

 cussed in detail.

 3. Landfill

 Landfill areas must be a part of any refuse disposal program. There is need 

for fill-

 ing much of the land in the Tri-Parish area prior to its development so 

that obtaining

 convenient sites for this purpose presents no problem and areas need not be 

reserved

 in advance for this purpose.

 4. Sanitary Landfill

 The swampy terrain in and around the Tri-Parish area would require extensive

diking,

 drainage, or filling before a sanitary landfill could be constructed without

danger of

 either contaminating the ground water or the surface streams. Contamination 

of these

 streams by leachates from sanitary landfills has been found to upset the 

ecological

 balance which could adversely affect the marine life including bivalves, 

shellfish,

 and fish, all of economic importance to the area.

 A preliminary report on environmental conditions prepared recently by the 

City Plan-

 ning Commission of New Orleans with their consultants, emphasized the 

characte-

 ristics of the Mississippi River delta lands in and adjacent to the City of 

New Orleans

 as follows: "Characteristics of the alluvial deposits include generally high

water

 tables and low load bearing capacities of the soil. The majority of the 

area has a

 ground surface elevation less than the mean delta level with water tables 

within a

 foot or two of the surface requiring surface and storm drainage via a system 

of pump-

 ing stations. Subsurface soil composition is characterized by an overlayer 

of natural

 humus some 20 feet !n thickness consisting of a combination of organic sand 

and peat.

 The underlayer of this strata is lined with soft gray clays, silt, and fine 

sand with

 the distribution of sand layers at very irregular pattern depths and 

locations."

 These soil characteristics limit the depth of fill that can be placed in a 

given area

 without foundation failure and the lateral movement of the underlying soils. 

Such

 failures have already been experienced in certain of the open dump 

operations.

 Because of the limited bearing capacity of the soils in this area, the 

Louisiana State

 Highway Department follows the practice of limiting the height of 

embankments to

 4 feet. Bridge approaches and other structures which would normally require a

IV-24

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 greater depth of fill are constructed with pile bents and unsupported concrete 

slabs,

 at considerable additional cost. Recently, on interstate construction where highway

 grades are generally maintained several feet above that of the surrounding terrain,

 practice has been to excavate all peat and muck and to refill with river sand. This

 preparation to ensure stable embankments, which has required an average of more

 than 20 feet of excavation and fill, has greatly increased the cost of highway con-

 struction in this area. This condition extends throughout most of the Mississippi

 River Delta land in Louisiana as is evidenced by recent soils investigations under-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 taken by us for the Baton Rouge Incinerator, which showed a limiting depth for fills

 in that area of not more than 10 feet in order to avoid failure of the subsurface 

strata.

 A map showing the soils classification in the Tri-Parish area has been included 

with

 this report (backcover of Appendix).

 In view of these conditions we have found it necessary to limit the depth of fill 

for a

 sanitary landfill to a maximum of about nine feet including both refuse and cover 

ma-

 terial especially in the lower areas. Although the higher and better drained areas

 might support a somewhat greater depth of fill, the limited amount and high price 

of

 such areas would preclude their use as sanitary landfills even though they may be

 dedicated to park purposes.

 Also thehumus type of soil which is subject to cracking on drying is not suitable 

for

 use as cover material in a sanitary landfill. The only available material which 

could

 be used for this purpose would, therefore, be river sand which is dredged 

commercially

 from deposits in the river and sold generally throughout the area at a price of 

about

 $1.50 per cubic yard.

 In summation we find that the need for diking and draining the site, the limiting 

of

 the depth of fill and the need for purchasing cover material each odd to the cost of

 this method of disposal in the Tri-Parish area and make it less competitive than 

is

 frequently the case.

 In order to further evaluate this method of refuse disposal we have selected two 

pos-

 sible areas within Orleans Parish where a sanitary landfill might be developed. 

One

 is on the land lying between the parish boundary and the Intracoastal Waterway

 between Paris Road and the Industrial Canal. This land is controlled by the Dock

 Board and is being reserved for future industrial development. The other is at 

Blind

 Lagoon in the Chef Menteur area where 500 acres are presently preserved for park

 purposes. No specific inquiries have been mode as to the availability of either 

site

 for use as a sanitary landfill.

 Both of these sites are low and must be diked, drained, and pumped to be maintained

 in a dry condition during placing of the waste material and maintained watertight

 afterwards to prevent contamination by leachates of the surrounding waters. Also

 sand for cover must be imported.

 IV25

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 In determining the cost of waste disposal by sanitary landfill we must 

consider not

 only the cost of operating the landfill, but also the additional cost of 

transporting

 the waste from the present collection districts to the landfill. Such waste 

can either

 be transported directly in the collection vehicles or if the distance becomes

too great,

 these vehicles can deliver their loads to a transfer station and larger 

transfer vehicles

 be used to haul the waste to the disposal site. Since the incinerators 

presently serv-

 ing the City are centrally located in each of the refuse collection 

districts, we have

 considered the additional haul distance from each of these incinerators to 

the pro-

 posed landfill site as a part of the cost of sanitary landfill.

 In the following text we have made a brief analysis of the cost of refuse 

disposal

 by sanitary landfill.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 In order to arrive at comparative cost figures we have made the following 

calcu-

 lations, based on a selected daily quantity of600rons of waste, with 

compaction to

 adensity of 1,000pounds per cubic yard, layered in two-foot depths with six inches

 of cover material on each of three lifts and a final topping of 18 inches 

of cover

 material.

 We have selected a600-ton/day landfill for the cost analysis, since we 

consider

 that this size operation represents the work that can be accomplished daily 

with

 one set of spreading and compacting equipment. This, therefore, represents 

the

 minimum cost of operation since a larger landfill will require more 

equlpmen!'

 and additional crew with correspondingly greater costs.

 Table IV-4 illustrates daily and annual requirements of acreage and cover 

materials.

 TABLE IV-4

 REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND AREA AND COVER MATERIAL

 Daily Annually

 Tonnage of Waste 600 187,200

 Acreage Required (9 sf/ton) . 125 39.0

 Compacted Cover Material 600 CY 187,200 CY

 Based on these factors, one acre of land will accommodate eight days waste 

production

 (4,800 tons)and require4,800 cubic yards of compacted cover material which is

e-

 quivalent to about 6,000 yards of loose cover material allowing 20% for 

compaction.

IV-26

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The minimum cost per cubic yard of sand to be used as cover material delivered

 within a 5-mile radius of its source would be about $1.50. This at the Dock

 Board site would probably give a cost of about $1.70 per cubic yard and at the

 Blind Lagoon site we have assumed the same price. The minimum per ton cost

 for placing, spreading, and compacting waste material is estimated at about

 $0.30 with an additional cost of about $0.20 per cubic yard for spreading and

 compacting the cover material.

 Preparation of these marshland sites would include a required levee and de-

 watering system to provide suitable ground conditions for equipment operation.

 Cost of these improvements, together with provision of surface drainage, road

 construction within the work area, fencing, water supplies, and required

 structures, excluding cost of land or access roads and based on minimum de-

 velopment of 100 acre plots, are estimated to range from about $1,750 to

 $2,000 per acre or about $0.35 to $0.40 per ton of waste handled.

 Combining the above cost factors, Table IV-5 illustrates that the minimum cost of

 working 600 tons of waste per day at sanitary landfill will be approximately

 $2.58 per ton, excluding cost of land.

 TABLE IV-5

 ESTIMATED MINIMUM OPERATING COSTS OF DISPOSAL

 BY SANITARY LANDFILL

 Item Per Ton of Waste

 Site Preparation $ 0.38

 Spread and Compact Waste 0.30

 Spread and Compact Cover Material 0.20

 Cost of Cover Material Using River Sand 1.70

 Estimated Minimum Working Cost $ 2.58

 We have also determined that a 60-cubic yard compactor trailer similar to that
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 presently used by the Sanitation Department would be required for transferfng

 refuse from the transfer station to the sanitary landfill. The cost of operating

 these units including the cost of the driver is shown in Table IV-6.

 IV-27

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri- Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May T968

 TABLE IV-6

 TRANSFER TRAILER OPERATING COSTS

 (60-Cubic Yard Compactor Trailer with Tractor and Operator)

 Annual Daily Hourly

 "Operating and Maintenance $ 7,820 $25.20

 Labor and Fringe Benefits 6,814 21.84

 TOTAL $14,634 $47.04

 ''Based on 312 operating days per year, seven hours production per day.

 These 60-cubic yard transfer trailers have a maximum tonnage capacity of 

15

 tons based upon a 500 pound per cubic yard weight of compacted refuse. As-

 suming that nominal operation of these units would be at approximately 

90%

 of capacity or 13.5 tons per load, the cost is calculated at $0.0083 per ton/

 minute.

 The cost of transportation of the refuse In terms of cost per ton/minute 

has

 been calculated for the 20-cubic yard (5 ton) compactor collection trucks

 with three-man crews as presently operated by the City of New Orleans.

 Based upon annual average operating costs of these trucks (see Chapter V),

 the hourly operating cost including labor was calculated at $10.50. As-

 suming a nominal 80% working capacity of these trucks at four tons, 

results

 in a cost of $0.0438 per ton/minute.

 The cost of operating a transfer station for disposal within the Tri-Parish

 area has been estimated at $1.00 per ton including tractive equipment while

 the cost for disposal outside the Tri-Parish area has been estimated at $1.32

 per ton due to the additional tractive equipment required. The cost per 

ton

 per minute for operating the 20-cubic yard and the 60-cubic yard compactor

 trucks together with the cost of operating the stations has been shown 

graphi-

 cally on Figure IV-1.

IV-28

-------

 3.00.

 2.50.

 2.00.

 c

 o

§1.50 \

 8

u

 1.00

 Operating Cost for Transfer Equipment

 including tractor and 60 cu.yd. trailer

 12-ton load (cost per ton/min. $0.0094)

 Transfer Cost for Disposal Outside the Tri-Parish Area

 Including Transfer Station and Tractive Equipment

 H

Transfer Cost for Disposal Within the Tri-Parish Area

Including Transfer Station and Tractive Equipment

 1.00.

 H20 cu. yd. 3-man Collection Truck (cost per ton/minute $0.0438)

 .50

 20

 40

60

80

100

 Minutes - Roundtrip Driving Time

 HAUL COST TO DISPOSAL AREA

120
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 FIG. IV-1

 Page IV-29

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The haul distances from each of the incinerators to the Dock Board land will 

vary

 considerably depending upon whether access is from Florida Avenue or from 

Paris

 Road. These distances together with the distances to the Blind Lagoon site 

and

 the estimated times of travel are shown in Table IV-7. Also shown is the 

cost of

 hauling as determined by Figure IV-1.

 TABLE IV-7

 COST OF HAULING REFUSE FROM COLLECTION DISTRICTS

 TO PROPOSED SANITARY LANDFILL SITES

Incinerator

Designation

Florida Avenue

St. Louis Street

Seventh Street

New Orleans East

Algiers

Dock Board Property

Florida Avenue Entr.

Dist. Travel Cost*

in Time Per

Miles Min. Ton

@

15mph ($)

6.0 48 1.52

6.0 48 1.52

9.0 72 1.73

14.0 112 2.03

11.0 88 1.87

Paris Road Entr.

Dist. Travel Cost*

in Time Per

Miles Min. Ton

@

20 mph (IJ )

11.0 66 1.67

11.0 66 1.67

13.0 78 1.78

3.5 21 0.90

16.0 96 1.92

Blind Lagoon

Dist. Travel Cost*

in Time Per

Miles Min. Ton

@

25 mph ($)

13.3 64 1.65

14,8 71 1.72

17.7 85 1.83

7.4 36 1.42

19.8 95 1.92

 * Includes 15 minutes at dumping area for unloading

 In Table IV-8 we have shown the total cost of waste disposal at both Dock 

Board and

 Blind Lagoon sites. It will be observed thatthe cost of sanitary landfill for

a site on

 the Dock Board property, depending upon location even from those areas closer 

to

 this property would average about $4.17 per ton while the cost of operating a 

sani-

 tary landfill at Blind Lagoon would be somewhat higher.

 TABLE IV-8

 COST OF REFUSE DISPOSAL BY SANITARY LANDFILL

 WITHIN NEW ORLEANS AREA ($ per Ton)

Florida Avenue

St. Louis

Seventh Street
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

New Orleans East

Algiers

Dock Board Property

Fla. Ave. Entr.

4.10

4.10

4.31

4.61

4.45

Average

4.17

4.17

4.33

4.04

4.47

Paris Rd. Entr.

4.25

4.25

4.36

3.48

4.50

Blind Lagoon

4.63

4.30

4.41

4.00

4.50

IV-30

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Based on the proposed program of incinerator improvement and enlargement

 discussed in detail in Chapter V, we estimate the cost of refuse disposal by

 incineration at $3.50 per ton including interest and amortization of the capi-

 tal cost as well as operation and maintenance.

 We conclude, therefore, that except for sanitary landfills located within the

 Tri-Parish area close to the collection disrr'cts this method of disposal is not

 as economical as central incineration.

 a. Truck Transport of Refuse to Locations Outside the Tri-

 Parish Area

 The relatively high cost of sanitary landfill at these previously dis-

 cussed sites, compared with that generally experienced, is due to

 the extensive site preparation required and to the necessity for im-

 porting river sand as a cover material. If it were possible to lo-

 cate a site where suitable cover material was available and the

 land was sufficiently high as not to require diking, these costs

 could be reduced by approximately half of those estimated here-

 in, or say $1.30. We have also considered the cost of develop-

 ing sanitary landfills outside of the area where cover material

 would be available and cofferdamming would be unnecessary. We

 have examined each of the highways leading from the Tri-Parish

 area and determined the probable distance that would be neces-

 sary to travel to reach a suitable site for a sanitary landfill. We

 have assumed that a sanitary landfill under these conditions could

 be operated for $1,50 per ton including the cost of land. In

 Table IV-9 we have shown the haul distance and cost as well as

 total cost for disposal at these relatively remote sites using 

transfer

 trucks to haul the refuse from transfer stations located in each col-

 lection district. It shows total disposal costs per ton, ranging 

from

 a low of $3.80 to $5.65, all above the estimated cost of inciner-

 ation shown in Chapter V. We conclude, therefore, that truck

 transportation of refuse to remote sanitary landfills is not the best

 solution to the waste disposal problem particularly since the disposal

 areas would be in other political jurisdictions outside of the control

 of the Tri-Parish area.

 IV31

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE IV-9

 HAUL DISTANCE AND COST OF DISPOSAL
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 TRUCK TRANSPORT TO LANDFILLS OUTSIDE PARISH AREA

Route

U. 5. 90 East leading through New Orleans East

via the Chef Menteur Highway

U. S. Highway 1 1 leading northeast to St. Tammany

Parish

Interstate 10 East leading to New Orleans East and

St. Tammany Parish

U. S. 90 West through St. Chorles Parish

U. S. 61 leading northwest through St. CharlesParish

Pontchartroin Causeway (Toll Road) leading north across

Lake Pontchartrai n to St. Tammany Parish

State Road 18 leading to the east on the Westbank

of the Mississippi River

State Road 44 leading west on the Eastbank of the

Mississippi River

State Road 45 leading to the south into Jefferson

Parish

State Road 23 leading southeasterly on the Westbank

of the Mississippi River

State Road 39 leading southwest on the Eastbank of

the Mississippi River

State Road 46 leading easterly in St. Bernard Parish

Average

Speed

(mph)

40

40

45

40

30

40

20

20

30

30

20

30

Dist. To

Disposal

Site

(Miles)

35

30

35

37

50

35

25

50

None

None

None

None

Travel

Time

Outside

City

Round Trip

(Min.)

105

90

93

111

200

105

150

300

.

-

.

-

Plus 40 Min.

Travel

Inside

City

(Min.)

145

130

133
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

151

240

145

190

340

-

-

.

-

Cost of

Haul

To Possible

Disposal Sites

ft/Tor.)

2.52

2.40

2.42

2.58

3.30

2.53

2.90

4. 15

-

-

-

-

Total Cost

of Sanitary

Landfill

ft/Ton)

3.°2

3.80

3.82

3.98

4.70

3.93

4.30

5.65

-

-

-

-

 b. Rail Transport of Waste to Locations Outside the TriParish

 Area

 Since several areas in the United States are presently considering

rail

 transportation of refuse from the collection areas to remote 

sanitary

 landfill areas, we have also considered this method of 

transportation

 for the Tri-Parish area.

 Factors affecting the feasibility of rail transport of wastes 

include

 determination of routes, distances, classification of cargo and 

appli-

 cable rates, availability of equipment, time schedules, 

availability

 of rail spurs at locations of transfer stations and assembly of 

the loaded

 cars. Method and time for unloading, and equipment requirements

 for rehandling and transporting wastes from point of unloading to 

point

 of deposit at the sanitary landfill operation. Assuming that the

IV-32

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 point of transport would be beyond the Tri-Parish limits, private and

 public reaction of the recipients must then also be considered.

 In order to establish guidelines for this investigation, discussion with

 experienced and knowledgeable railroad officials and other personnel

 was undertaken. In the initial discussions the following data pertaining

 to transport of wastes by rail were outlined:
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Assume base quantity of 600 tons per day to be handled at a single

 transfer point.

 Weight of waste material assumed to be 250 pounds per cubic yard

 (600 tons would be equal to some 4,800 cubic yards).

 Weight of ground waste material would average approximately 700

 pounds per cubic yard (600 tons would occupy 1,800 cubic yards).

 Daily loading of wastes at the transfer station would require a no-

 minal seven hours, between 7:00 AM and 2:00 PM at the transfer

 station.

 The City would own and operate the transfer station.

 A minimum ten-year contract period was assumed to allow for amor-

 tization of the plant as well as railroad equipment.

 The unloading method (type of car, hopper chutes, conveyors, etc.)

 though not determined, must be considered together with the time

 requirements for unloading in order to permit rapid return of the

 cars to the transfer station for re-use. Minimum unloading time

 has been estimated at four hours.

 Cars must be cleaned to prevent return of flies, etc. to the City as

 has happened in the Netherlands.

 Assume a nominal 50-mile transport distance as a basis for tonnage

 or carload rates.

 Determine transport time and arrival at the point of disposal for

 scheduling daylight operation of sanitary landfill.

 IV33

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, Lo. - 15 May 1968

 With the guidelines as outlined above, the railroads were asked to

deter-

 mine the type and number of cars required to handle this material,

the

 availability of equipment and to specify those routes that could 

be con-

 sidered for the mo\ement of this material as well as the 

availability and

 location of spurs wilhin this maximum distance range.

 In consideration of these factors, railroad representatives 

emphasized the

 following:

 A specified number of cars would necessarily be reserved 24 

hours a

 day, 6 days a week for this service.

 Productivity of these cars would be limited to a short payload

dis-

 tance "dead heading" on the return.

 Expensive car-types (bottom or side discharge) would be best 

suited

 for this service.

 Certain uncontrollable variations in arrival and departure of 

other

 rail traffic would, on occasion, also cause extreme variations

in

 departure and/or arrival time of refuse cars. This 

circumstance

 would in all likelihood occur frequently.

 Due to the above factors exploration of the economics of rail 

transport

 was not considered warranted. However, for comparison purposes 

similar

 investigations in the State of Florida revealed that costs of 

transport-

 could be expected to be about $5.20. This cost was based on a 

Class 20

 rating at a rate of $0.26/100 Ibs., transporting 50 miles, with 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

minimum

 20 ton weight per car. Transport costs together with transfer 

(loading)

 costs at $1.00/ton, unloading & transfer to working site of 

landfill at

 $1.00/ton and sanitary landfill operation at $1.50/ton would 

present

 total disposal costs of $8.70/ton.

 It should be pointed out that the above is based on a density of 

400 Ibs.

 per cubic yard, which density is usually obtained with a 

conventional

 packer. However, research under way at the present time indicates

that

 the cost of rail haul for refuse may be reduced to as little as 

$2.00 per

 ton, provided that suitable compaction equipment can be 

developed to

 give a density of 80 Ibs. per cubic foot to the refuse being 

transported,

 which would permit loads of 100 tons per car. This will require 

the de-

 velopment of baling equipment capable of about twice the compaction

 possible with presently available commercial equipment. We 

estimate

 that under such conditions, the total cost of refuse disposal 

utilizing

 rail haul might be expected to be in the vicinity of $6.00 per ton.

IV-34

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. . - 15 May 1968

V NEW ORLEANS

 A. Description of the Sanitation Department

 1. Organization and Personnel

 Organizational structure of the Sanitation Department is complex in terms of de-

 partmental responsibilities. Functions of the Department consist of municipal col-

 lection and disposal of solid wastes in the City of New Orleans, allied duties in

 connection with these operations and miscellaneous services not directly connected

 with the solid waste system. Including administrative and supervisory personnel,

 the Department consists of a labor force of nearly 1,000 employees, a fleet of 

some

 300 vehicles, an operational budget in excess of $5 million, and a multi-million

 dollar investment in existing waste disposal facilities, all under the management

 of the Director of Sanitation with responsibility to the Mayor, City Council, and

 taxpayers.

 In order to operate efficiently, all supervisory and administrative personnel must,

 to varying degrees, understand the functional operations necessary to manage con-

 trol and administer the responsibilities with which they are charged. 

Organizational

 structure of this Department is illustrated in Figure V-l showing the principal 

divi-

 sions within the Department. In 1968, for performance of the respective duties of

 these various departmental divisions, authorized personnel numbering 946 was ap-

 proved with the following distribution by division:

 Administration 17

 Shops and Stores 124

 Incinerator Support 15

 Waste Collection 415

 Waste Disposal 224

 Other Services 151

 Total Personnel 946

 It is the aim of the Director's office to establish a relationship among the 

various

 operational divisions involved and their respective first-line supervisors so 

that joint

 coordinated action of each division is possible in the accomplishment of their 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

common

 tasks. Departmental communication is established with the supervisory personnel by

 V-l

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 FIGURE V-l

 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

 SANITATION DEPARTMENT - CITY OF NEW ORLEANS

 SANITATION

 DEPARTMENT

 DIRECTOR OF SANITATION

. WASTE

COLLECTION

WASTE

~~ DISPOSAL

H INCINERATION |

^ LANDFILL |

L

OTHER

SERVICES

STREET

CLEANING

1 GRASS

CUTTING

 means of weekly staff meetings held by the Director of the Sanitation 

Department

 to update on changing policies and procedures, criticism of the operation, and

ex-

 change of ideas for a better coordinated operation.

 A safety education program was expanded in 1967 for the minimizing of 

accidents

 and personnel injuries. The program now in effect is divided into the two 

phases

 of vehicular accidents and occupational injury.

 The vehicular phase of the program commences when a driver applies for an 

Equip-

 ment Operator I job. All drivers are thoroughly screened by Civil Service, 

which

 includes medical examination, investigation through traffic courts, a written 

ex-

 amination, and an on-the-road driving test by a Department representative to

 determine the required skill and ability of the applicant in operating large 

equip-

 ment. Once these pre-requisites have been met, the applicant is ready to be 

clas-

 sified as an Equipment Operator I. In conjunction with the Vehicular 

Accident

 Control Safety Program within the Department, a Safety Committee has been 

formed.

 All accidents (minor or major) are reported and require a written accident 

report

 by the supervisor and forwarded to the central office. In cases of major 

accidents,

v-:

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 a serious bodily injury, fatality or vehicular damage, the Department Head and

 insurer are notified immediately. From these reports a summary is prepared and

 distributed to the Safety Committee members who meet monthly with the super-

 visors and offending employees. The Safety Committee is composed of representa-

 tives of the Civil Service insurer, claims adjuster, and department supervisors. An

 account of each accident is read in the presence of the person involved. Follow-

 ing this report, the offender explains the accident with visual aids. After the 

visual

 demonstration and the question and answer session are completed, the Committee
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 discusses causes, circumstances, safety factors, and results of accident. Having

 reached a decision, the accident is judged "avoidable" or "unavoidable", and

 written in the employee's record as such. The penalty imposed depends upon in-

 dividual's previous driving record after a majority decision is reached by 

Committe.

 The penalty ranges from a reprimand, remedial driver instruction, suspension, de-

 motion, or dismissal. Pertinent safety pamphlets are distributed by the insurer.

 A Civil Service representative prepares a summary of the monthly meeting, which

 is distributed to the men in the field via the supervisors.

 The occupational injury phase of the program was added in 1967. With a 12% rise

 in occupational injuries in 1967 a program was initiated by Civil Service and

 Sanitation Department in an effort to control injuries and high medical cost to

 the City. With the cooperation of Civil Service, Sanitation, and Red Cross, a

 program has been devised to train personnel in First Aid care. In addition, Civil

 Service has organized a monthly meeting to study and develop methods of control-

 ling and preventing occupational injuries by means of education and communication

 with personnel via their supervisors. Monthly injury reports are reported to Civil

 Service for analysis. In addition, safety posters and pamphlets dealing with 

Occu-

 pational Injuries are distributed. Occupational injuries are normally lessened by

 issuance of safety equipment relative to job classifications. The range of 

equipment

 issued by the Department to personnel (dependent on type of assignment) includes

 orange decaled raincoats, orange helmets, protective gloves, orange shirts, steel-

 toe shoes, goggles, and respirators. The City of New Orleans provides this safety

 equipment free-of-charge after a six months probationary period. When a man

 resigns or is dismissed, he must return all safety equipment. Policy requires all

 men to use their safety equipment as a condition of continued employment.

 Salary levels as established by City Civil Service are based on skills and position

 classification. Each classification carries a pay range number identifying the 

mini-

 mum monthly rate and five in-grade pay steps. These in-grade pay increases are

 equivalent to about 5% of the preceding rate and are awarded on a merit basis.

 V-3

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Or leans, La. - 15 May 1968

 In addition to the six steps from minimum to maximum pay within a given 

classifi-

 cation, four additional steps are authorized as longevity increases. Table 

V-l

 provides full details on the dollar increments of these step increases by 

the appli-

 cable pay range numbers.

 TABLE V-l

 MONTHLY PAY RATES

Range

Number

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Six

Min

281

295

310

325

341

358

376

395

415
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

436

458

481

505

530

556

Steps Within

- 295-

- 310-

- 325-

- 341 -

- 358-

- 376-

- 395-

- 415-

- 436-

- 458-

- 481 -

- 505-

- 530-

- 556-

-584-

310

325

341

358

376

395

415

436

458

481

505

530

556

584

613

Each Classification

Max.

- 325-

- 341 -

- 358-

- 376-

- 395-

- 415-

- 436-

- 458-

- 481 -

- 505-

- 530-

- 556-

- 584-

- 613-

-644-

341 -

358 -

376 -

395 -

415 -

436 -

458 -

481 -

505 -

530-

556 -

584 -

613 -

644 -

676 -

358

376

395

415

436

458

481

505

530

556

584

613
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

644

676

710

1st

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

28

29

31

32

34

35

Longevity

2nd

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

28

29

31

32

34

35

37

Increases

3rd

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

28

29

31

32

34

35

37

39

4th

21

22

23

24

25

26

28

29

31

32

34

35

37

39

41

 The Sanitation Department's employment experience in 1967 is detailed in Table

 V-2. A high percentage (nearly 86%) of personnel turnover was experienced 

dur-

 ing 1967, due primarily to the tremendous rate (about 140%) experienced in 

the

 Collection Division, the Disposal Division ranked second in the Department 

with

 a turnover of 80 employees or about 50% of the average 161 required. This 

turn-

 over occurred principally in the labor classifications.

 Although the percentage of turnover was high this rate was due primarily to 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

repeat-

 ed turnover of a minor number of positions in the Collection and Disposal 

Divisions,

 The availability of labor from normal waiting lists maintained by the 

Department

 was adequate to fill these vacancies rapidly. The high rate of labor turnover 

is not

V-4

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-2

 SANITATION DEPARTMENT EMPLOYMENT EXPERIENCE IN 1967

Division

Director's Office

Shops and Stores

Garbage and Trash Collections

Cartage and Trash Disposal

Other Services:

Street Cleaning*

Grass Cutting

TOTALS

Employees

Avg.No.

15

120

392

161

125

12

82S

Man Days

3,936

35,538

116,400

49,385

39,680

3,844

248,783

Sick Leave

Days Used

164 1/2

2,139 1/2

435 1/2

4,080

1,936

213

12,885 1/2

%

4.18

6.02

3.74

8.26

4.88

5.54

5.18

Annual Leave

Day* Used

276 1/2

1 ,486 1/2

3,132 1/2

2,955 1/2

1 ,682 1/2

161

9,694 1/2

%

7.02

4.18

2.69

5.98

4.24

4.19
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

3.90

Employee Turnover

No.

—

43

548

80

36

1

708

%

0

35.83

139.80

49.69

28.80

8.33

85.82

 * Includes Incinerator Support

 unusual and is due largely to several interrelated factors (1) disagreeable nature

 of the work, (2) physical output, (3) extremes in climate, and (4) a six-day work

 week.

 Certain apparent inequities exist in labor classification. The present pay scale 

for

 incinerator plant laborers, ranging from $281 to $358 per month and requiring six-

 hour, forty-minute shifts, six days per week Is equivalent to an hourly wage scale

 of $ 1.625 to $2.075. Incinerator plant laborers are predominantly at the lower

 rate which is below prevailing rates for semi-skilled labor in the area. Conver-

 sely, the same pay range applicable to the collectors, working on the task basis,

 and averaging say, 5 1/2 hours per day, permits them the opportunity, based on

 crew productivity, to draw about $1.975 per hour as a starting rate.

 Classification of collection, disposal, and support personnel authorized by the

 1968 Budget and employed as of February 15, 1968, is listed in Tables V-3 through

 V-7, and also shows monthly pay range of each position. When occasional short-

 ages of qualified personnel occur in the various divisions and manpower is not

 available to permit the Department to build up to the authorized level, it is com-

 mon practice to double-shift existing personnel. Due to pay scales and short work-

 day shift presently in force, it is not uncommon for employees to hold a second 

job

 either within the Department or in private enterprise.

 V-5

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-3

 1968 ALLOCATED PERSONNEL - INCINERATION

Classification

General Superintendent

Incinerator Foreman III

Plant Superintendent

Incinerator Foreman II

Shift Foreman

Incinerator Foreman 1

Crane Operator

Equipment Operator III

Maintenance Repairmen

Ash Driver

Equipment Operator 1

Laborer. ••

Monthly Pay Kan ge

Minimum

(530.00

481.00

395.00

4*5.00

376,00

325.00

281.00

Maximum

J676.00

013.00
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

505.00

530.00

481 .00

415.00

358.00

*No.

27

25

21

22

20

17

14

TOTAL

Fla . Ave

A

-

I

4

4

2

6

25

42

E

-

1

2

3

1

5

21

33

Personnel Assignment by Incinerator Plants

Algiers

A

-

1

4

2

4

20

35

E

-

1

2

0

3

20

30

Seventh St .

A

1

,

4

2

6

24

42

E

1

0

3

1

3

24

36
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

St. Louis

A

-

1

4

2

6

24

41

E

-

1

0

2

1

0

8

12

N . O . Eos

A

-

1

4

4

2

4

24

39

E

-

1

2

2

'

2

17

25

Total

A

1

5

20

20

10

26

17

99

E

1

4

11

13

4

13

90

136

 *See Table V-l for steps by Pay Range No.

 "Scalemon and clerks are included in laborer classificatio

 A - Number of Personnel Allocated by 1968 Budget

 E - Number of Personnel actually Employed 2/15/68

 TABLE V-4

 1968 ALLOCATED PERSONNEL - LANDFILLS

Classification

General Superintendent

Labor Foreman II

Bulldozer Operators

Equipment Operator IV

Crane Operators

Equipment Operator III

Laborers

TOTAL '

Monthly Pay Range
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Min imum

1458.00

458.00

415.00

281.00

Maximum

$584.00

584.00

530.00

358.00

No."

24

24

22

14

Personnel Allocated by Location

Genrilly

Landfill

2

4

6

8

20

Algiers

Landfill

1

-

2

2

5

Total

3

4

8

10

25

Total

Personnel Employed

2/1 5/68

3

2

8

9

22

 * See Table V-1 for steps by Pay Range No.

V-6

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-5

 1968 ALLOCATED PERSONNEL - GARBAGE AND TRASH COLLECTION

Classification

General Superintendent

Labor Foreman Ml

District Superintendent

Labor Foreman II

Section Foreman

Labor Foreman 1

Drivers

Equipment Operator 1

Waste Collectors

Laborers

Monthly Pay Range

Minimum

(530.00

458.00

358.00

325.00
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

281.00

Maximum

J676.00

584.00

458.00

415.00

358.00

No.*

27

24

19

17

14

TOTAL

Personnel Allocated by Districts

t W E-l E-2 A N

1 ...

Ill 1-1

444 421

25 26 31 25 11 13

49 52 64 49 21 24

79 84 100 79 34 39

Total

1

5

19

131

259

415

Total

Personnel Employed

2/15/68

1

5

18

111

259

394

 •See Table V-1 for steps by Pay Range No.

 "Collection Districts: C (Central), W {Western), E-l (Eastern-l), E-2 (Eastern-II),

 A (Algiers), N (Night)

 Incentives to attract qualified labor are provided in the generous fringe benefits,

 which include holiday pay, annual leave, sick leave, civil leave, educational

 leave, a retirement program, group insurance, and optional participation in the

 municipal credit union, as well as certain required equipment furnished free of

 charge to special classifications of employees.

 The Mayor and City Council determine which holidays with pay will be granted to

 City employees. Normally ten official holidays, as listed below, are recognized

 and observed, however these holidays are dependent solely upon the governing

 body of the City that granted them.

 New Year's Day
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Mardi Gras

 Good Friday

 Independence Day

 Labor Day

 All Saints' Day

 Veterans' Day

 Thanksgiving Day

 Huey P. Long's Birthday

 Christmas Day

Other days, by special proclamation

 V-7

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-6

 1968 ALLOCATED PERSONNEL - INCINERATOR SUPPORT

Classification

General Superintendent

Labor Foreman 11

Transfer Service

Tractor-trailer Driver

Equipment Operator III

Equipment Operator II

Container Service

Dumpster Driver

Equipment Operator II

Transfer Service

Dump Driver

Equipment Operator 1

Laborers

Monthly Pay Range

Minimum

$458.00

415.00

358.00

358.00

325.00

281.00

Maximum

$584.00

530.00

458.00

458.00

341.00

358.00

No.

*

24

22

19

19

17

14

TOTAL

Total Personnel

Allocated

1968 Budget

1

3

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

4

2

3

15

Employed

2/15/68

1

2

2

2

2

2

11

 *See Toble V-l for steps by Pay Range No.

 A full-Hme employee of the Sanitation Department, accumulates annual leave

 with pay at a rate of one and one-half days each month throughout the year but

 can accrue to a maximum of only ninety days. Annual leave with pay cannot be

 taken until completion of six months of service. Request for annual leave is 

made

 to the supervisor who in turn submits the request through the Central Office 

for ap-

 proval. The Department grants an additional day of annual leave for each 

calen-

 dar year of completed service up to a maximum of three additional days. In 

the

 event an employee should resign from the Department, the City will pay the ac-

 crued annual leave time at the current rate of pay provided the employee gives

the

 superintendent a ten-day notice of his resignation.

V-8

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans/ La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-7

 1968 ALLOCATED PERSONNEL

 SHOPS AND STORES (CITY GARAGE AND YARD)

Classification

Superintendent!

Workshop Foreman

Auto Mechanic Foreman

Electric ian

Plumber

Machinist

Carpenter

Welder

Auto Mechanics

Sheet Metal Worker

Spray Painter

Equipment Operator 1

Storekeeper II

Typist Clerk II

Storekeeper 1

BroomrfKiker

Maintenance Worker

Laborers

Watchmen

Monthly Pay Range

Minimum

$4.4o.OO

530.00

505.00

505.00

505.00

505.00

458.00

456.00

458.00

458.00

415.00
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

325.00

325.00

325.00

281.00

281.00

281.00

281.00

281.00

Maximum

(710.00

676.00

644.00

644.00

644.00

644.00

584.00

584.00

584.00

584.00

530.00

415.00

415.00

415.00

358.00

358.00

358.00

358.00

358.00

No.«

28

27

26

26

26

26

24

24

24

24

22

17

17

17

14

14

14

14

14

TOTAL

Personnel Allocated by Location

City

Yard

1

1

-

1

1

1

3

3

-

2

1

3

-

-

2

1

-

22

4

46

City

Garage

1

-

5

-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-

2

-

2

28

-

3

2

1

2

3

-

1

28

-

78

Total

2

1

5

1

1

3

3

5

28

2

4

5

1

2

5

1

1

50

4

124

Total

Personnel Employed

2/15/68

2

1

5

1

1

3

3

5

25

2

3

4

1

2

3

1

1

44

4

111

 *See Table V-l For steps by Pay Range No.

 Sick leave with pay is earned at the rate of two days per month. If during any

 month the employee has taken any leave without pay, he does not accrue sick

 leave for that month. Unlike annual leave, there is no limit to accruement and

 it may be used within the first six months. Sick leave is granted to employees

 absent from duty only because of illness, injury, or death in the immediate family.

 If the employee is on leave for more than six consecutive working days a doctor's

 certificate must be furnished upon returning to work.

 Civil leave with pay is granted to perform such civic duties as voting, serving as

 an election official, answering a subpoena, and for taking Civil Service, Armed

 Forces, or Selective Service examinations.

 Military leave is granted employees who have entered active military service in

 the armed forces and they are allowed leave-of-absence with pay up to 15 work-

 ing days. Military leave without pay is also granted with assurance of reinstate-

 ment in the position vacated within 90 days of his honorable discharge.

 V-9
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Educational leave is granted to permanent employees by the approval of the

 City Civil Service Commission. A special leave with pay up to one year

 may be obtained for educational training directly related to an 

employee's

 work in his department.

 A Retirement Program administered by a Board of Trustees consisting of 

five

 members, was established by the City in 1947. Membership in the retire-

 ment system is compulsory for all City employees. Each employee contrib-

 utes five per cent (5%) of his salary each pay day and the City of New

 Orleans contributes a larger percentage to maintain the system on an 

actu-

 arily sound basis. For example, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1967

 the City contributed 60.5% while the members of the program contributed

 39.5%. The employee and the City also contribute to the Social Security

 Program which further supplements the Municipal Retirement Program.

 Eligibility for retirement benefits of the Municipal Program is based 

upon

 at least ten continuous years of creditable service with the City by age

 sixty, with retirement compulsory at age sixty-eight. Upon retirement, 

the

 employee chooses one of several optional plans for settlement which best

 meets his requirements. The employee's monthly benefit is based upon 

type

 of plan, number of service years, and average earnings. The amount of

 the monthly pension is basically equivalent to two percent (2%) of the 

aver-

 age monthly salary earned during the employment period times the number of

 years employed. If an employee is separated from City employment, he

may

 either withdraw his retirement contributions with interest or permit the 

accu-

 mulated contributions to continue drawing interest for five years.

 The group medical and hospitalization insurance is provided by the City

 through a Blue Cross Plan. A basic plan, for employees only, including

 major medical coverage, is paid for in full by the City. If an 

employee in-

 cludes dependents or optional riders, he is required to pay for the 

additional

 coverage through automatic payroll deductions. Medical, surgical, and 

hos-

 pital care under the provision of the Workmen's Compensation Law of Louisi-

 ana are assured to an employee injured on the job.

 If it is determined that an employee is to be absent due to workconnected

 injury, generally, he has a choice of using his sick leave, annual leave, 

or

 file a claim for Workmen's Compensation. At present, maximum benefits 

are

 based on the Workmen's Compensation rate of $35.00 per week over a 

maxi-

 mum period of 400 weeks.

V-10

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Credit Union membership is available in New Orleans Municipal Employee's

 (NOME) Credit Union, a non-profit organization. Savings on deposit draw

 5 1/4% interest annually and loans are available to members at an interest rate

 of 1% a month on the unpaid balance. Loan repayments or savings deposits can

 be made through automatic payroll deductions. The Credit Union is governed by

 Federal and State laws which protect the rights and investments of all members.

 2. Budget and Operating Costs

 Operating costs of the Department are financed through the City's General Fund.

 Current Operating Budget for 1968 as approved stands at $5,161,703. Allocations

 within this Department budget are as follows:

 Administration $ 115,420

 Shops and Stores 1,543,717

 Incinerator Support 77,800
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Waste Collection 1,787,253

 Waste Disposal 1,027,774

 Other Services 609,739

 Total Budget $5,161,703

 Pro rata reduction of those funds (such as administration, shops and stores, etc.)

 not entirely applicable to the solid waste budget and elimination of the total funds

 budgeted for "Other Services" presents the net funds approved for solid waste 

col-

 lection and disposal in the amount of $4,222,445 allocated to the various divi-

 sions as follows:

 Administration $ 94,644

 Shops and Stores 1,234,974

 Incinerator Support 77,800

 Waste Col lection 1,787,253

 Waste Disposal 1,027,774

 Total Solid Waste Budget $4,222,445

 This budgeted sum generally includes allocations for all out-of-pocket operating

 expenses for the year, but certain known costs such as the cost of fringe benefits

 v-n

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 (including group insurance, social security, and pension fund) totalling 11 

.4% of

 gross payroll, utilities at the various plant locations, equipment insurance 

and ca-

 pital expenses are not included in the budgeted fund. Such variable cost 

items as

 plant and equipment maintenance are reflected in the budget as allowance 

items.

 Previous years' maintenance records indicate that costs will be 

substantially higher.

 As additional funds for maintenance or emergency needs are required they may 

be

 obtained through justified supplementary budget requests.

 Analyses of actual costs incurred in 1967 and projected costs anticipated in 

1968,

 (including adjustments to the budget allocations for 1968), were made of the

 principal divisional activities of the Department as shown in Table V-8. By 

com-

 parison to the foregoing allocation of budgeted funds, those sums classified 

as

 Shops and Stores (maintenance and repairs) have been distributed to the 

divisions

 receiving these services.

 The anticipated increase in costs from 1967 to 1968 (about $625,000 or 

14.0%) is

 due principally to the assumed full operation of both St. Louis and New 

Orleans

 East incinerators, together with expected increases in labor rates in all 

division.

 These projected costs as anticipated for 1968 (including those adjustments 

for

 payroll taxes, insurance, utilities, probable maintenance requirements and 

capi-

 tal expense) exceed the budget as approved by some 20.4%.

 TABLE V-8

 OPERATING COSTS - SANITATION DEPARTMENT

Division

Administration

Collection

Disposal:

Incineration

Landfill

Incinerator Support

Total Solid Waste Costs

1967

Actual Costs

$ 104,638

2,581,537

1,343,371
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

269,505

181,016

$4,480,067

% Total

2.3

57.5

30.0

6.0

4.2

100.0

1968

Projected Costs

$ 104,638

2,693,354

1,869,028

267,157

171,648

$5,105,825

% Total

2.1

52.7

36.6

5.2

3.4

100.0

V-12

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Based upon the population estimate of 687,190 and costs of $4,480,067 experienced

 in 1967, the per capita cost for operation of the solid waste system in New 

Orleans

 can be estimated at $6.42 for that year.

 Cost analyses presented in detail later in this Report include all the above noted

de-

 partmental costs of the solid waste system and exclude only the applicable portion 

of

 overhead costs of City government.

 3. Municipal Waste Collection

 The Sanitation Department of the City of New Orleans is charged with the collec-

 tion and disposal of solid waste generated in the developed corporate area. This

 service is provided for the small producers of waste, such as households, small 

com-

 mercial and business installations, and this service is not provided to areas of 

low

 population density such as the southeast section of Algiers and the extreme north-

 eastern area of the City.

 a. Districts and Routes

 The area being served by the Sanitation Department is divided for ad-

 ministrative and supervisory purposes into six collection districts.

 Referring to the District Map, Figure 1-1 (backcover), the Central,

 Western, Eastern I, Eastern II, Night, and Algiers District are geo-

 graphically delineated. Each of these districts is subdivided into the

 Monday-Wednesday-Friday and Tuesday-Thursday-Saturday collection

 areas with garbage and trash (combined), being collected three times

 each week in these areas.

 In the Central District, each of the day group collection areas are

 subdivided into 22 collection routes, in the Western District 28 

routes,

 in the Eastern I District 22, in the Eastern II District 23, in the 

Al-

 giers District 8, and in the Night District 8 routes. In the case of

 the Night Districts, Routes 1, 2, and 3 are collected on a nightly

 basis, with the balance of the district subdivided into the Monday-

 Wednesday-Friday and Tuesday-Thursday- Saturday collection areas.

 In total, 111 collection routes are picked up daily in the City of

 V13

-------
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 New Orleans, as illustrated in the route maps of each district,

Fig-

 ures V-2 through V-6.

 b. Supervision

 The line of supervision in the collection division consists of a 

general

 superintendent Jn charge of all collection activities, six 

district super-

 intendents and the number of section foremen as the various 

districts re-

 quire. The Central, Western, Eastern I, and Eastern II 

Districts are sub-

 divided for supervision and policing into four sections each. 

These sec-

 tions, each under the supervision of a section foreman, consist

of from

 five to eight routes, variable by districts. Due to the limited 

number of

 routes in both the Night and Algiers Districts no further 

subdivision is

 made.

 c.

 Collection Method

 The collection method employed by the Sanitation Department 

consists

 of pick up at curb and alley locations. Advantages exist in this

method

 in the rapidity of making collections along with resulting lower 

labor

 costs. Also, it is unnecessary for the collectors to enter onto

private

 property. This collection method is the most economical from the

stand-

 point of direct cost, although the amount of service provided 

is less com-

 pared with such systems as the setout and setback methods. There

are

 certain disadvantages to this method such as the unsightly 

appearance of

 the streets on collection days when the full and empty containers

re-

 main on the streets or alleys for long periods of time. Also, it

is not un-

 usual for the refuse to be strewn over the streets, alleys, or 

yards. Al-

 though the curb and alley collection system is the cheapest from

the stand-

 point of direct cost, generally street cleaning expense 

increases.

 d. Equipment and Maintenance

 Collection equipment for each of the districts is assigned to the 

district

 garages, which are located as accessory facilities at the 

existing incin-

 erator plants. In the case of the Algiers District, equipment is 

based at

 the Algiers Incinerator Garage and the Western District equipment

is

V-14

-------

 EXISTING CENTRAL 9, NIOHT DISTRICTS

 LEGEND

 | HO.I m-r. LOUIS a, NO.a rth.sT INCINERATOR

 BOUNDARIES :

 •*^*'-^'-* COUUECTION OISTKICT*

 ' ^ I •• I COU.ECTION DAYS

 " ' TRUCK ROUTES

SOOO ISOO

 sooo

 sooo

 SCALE IN FEET

 FIG. V-2

 Page V-15
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

aooo 1000 o

 SOOO BOOO

 • CAt_E IN FEET

 EXISTING WESTERN DISTRICT L. E 9 E N D

r^^ COLLECTION DISTRICTS

TM I COLLECTION DAYS

 • TRUCK ROUTEO

 FIG. V-3 Page V-16

-------

 EASTERN 3X DISTRICT

 EASTERN 1C DISTRICT

 NI.GHT DISTRICT

 CENTRAL- DISTRICT

 WESTERN DISTRICT

3OOO IOOO O

 SOOO

 eooo

 SCALE IN FEET

EXISTING EASTERN I DISTRICT

 LEGEND

| FLORIDA AVENUE INCINERATOR

BOUNDARIES :

 m**r^r*r COLLECTION DISTRICTS

 I • t • I COLLECTION DAYS

 TRUCK ROUTES FiG.V-4

 Page V-17

-------

 EXISTING EASTERN 31 DISTRICT

 i- e a E N D f N. O. EAST INCINERATOR

BOUNDARIES : ••SWO^^-. COLLECTION DISTRICTS • SB I im I COLLECTION DAYS

............ TRUCK ROUTES

•000 I BOO O FIG. V-5 Page V-18

------- EXISTING ALGIERS DISTRICT LEGEND

I ALGIERS INCINERATOR BOUNDARIES : •P^pr-^F^^J COLLECTION DISTRICT* I • I •• I COLLECTION DAYS TRUCK ROUTE* \ \
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

3OOO I BOO O 3OOO 6OOO

 SCALE IN FEE

 FIG V-6

PageV-t9

-------

Solid Waste Disposal -Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 based at the St. Louis Incinerator Garage. Collection equipment for

 both the Night and Central Districts are based at the Seventh Street

 Incinerator Garage. Collection equipment for both Eastern I and East-

 ern II Districts is presently based at the Florida Avenue Incinerator

 Garage. Upon completion of the New Orleans incinerator, construc-

 tion of garage facilities is planned for location of the collection 

equip-

 ment of Eastern II District.

 Communications with all district offices and disposal facilities are pro-

 vided by telephone and radio networks. The Sanitation Department

 operates on its own radio frequency from its departmental control sta-

 tion in the City Hall. Another control station is established at the

 Maintenance Garage. Departmental managers and first-line field

 supervisors and some operators are equipped with mobile units. Portable

 transmitters are also available for assignment for emergency or special

 communication needs.

 Preventive maintenance, routine servicing, and minor repairs to the

 collection equipment are handled at facilities in the respective district

 garages. Major repairs are handled at the City Garage in downtown

 New Orleans.

 The collection vehicle fleet consists of 125, 20-cubic yard, side load-

 ing, Hobbs "Hyd-Pak" packer units with International and Ford chassis

 of 1962 to 1966 vintage. Each collection route is serviced with a 

packer

 unit. In addition to the packer fleet, each district is assigned two 

trash

 trucks and one dog truck. The trash trucks and dog trucks assigned to

 each district are utilized principally for complaint calls on oversized

 waste, missed collections, and pick up of dead animals. Table V-9

 presents a summary of the operating equipment assigned to each of the

 collection districts.

 Past operating experience with the side loading trucks has been favor-

 able from the viewpoint of initial cost and service life. However, the

 department now has on order five rear loading Heil Mark III packers on

 International Model C-0190 chassis. Rear loaders have certain 

advantages

 such as added protection and reduced lifting height for the collectors

 when loading. It is hoped by the Department that this new type of e-

 quipment may help reduce accident and employment turn over ratios of

 V-20

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLEV-9

 1968 COLLECTION FLEET ASSIGNMENT

MANUFACTURE AND TYPE

Garbage Fleet:

Internal ional-Hobbs Hyd-Pak

Ford -Hobbs Hyd-Pak

International-Hobt» Hyd-Pak

Internationdl-Hobbs Hyd-Pak

Internat ional-Hobbs Hyd-Pak

International-Hobbs Hyd-Pak

Ford -Hobbs Hyd-Pak

Internal ional-Hobbs Hyd-Pak

Internal ionol-Thiele Pak

International -Hobbs Hyd-Pak

Ford -Hobbs Hyd-Pak

International-Hobbs Hyd-Pak

TOTAL Packer Flee*

Number of Daily Routes

Fleet Reserve-Number of Units
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Fleet Reserve -Percent

Trash & Dog Trucks:

International-Packer

International-Packer

Ford -Dump

Ford -Dump

International-Dump

TOTAL Miscellaneous Vehicles

CYCAP

20

tt>

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

YR.

60

60

61

62

62

62

63

64

64

65

65

65

65

61

65

66

66

TOTAL Investment in Present Fleet

Route Trucks

Misc* Trucks

TOTAL

PRICE

t 7,000

7,006

8,566

9,000

7,608

7,37:,

7,#0

6,4dO

6,480

7,142

6,575

7,211
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

$ 7,000

8,500

3,017

2,670

i[soo

$908,774

48,884

$957,658

Central

2

1

2

5

1

1

8

7

27

22

I

I

1

3

Western

3

25

4

32

28

1

1

2

Eastern

1

4

2

11

9

26

22
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1

1

1

3

Eastern

II

2

2

2

1

10

9

26

23

1

1

2

Algiers

3

2

1

2

3

11

8

1

1

1

3

Night

2

1

3

•8

*0
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

TOTAL

2

1

4

17

3

2

7

20

10

25

9

25

125

111

14

12.6%

1

2

2

5

3

13

'Night District also utilizes equipment

of Central District

 the collectors and provide increased efficiency in collection. This

 new equipment at about $12,000 per unit exceeds by one-third of the

 cost of the side loaders. Should this type of equipment prove satisfac-

 tory the Department plans replacement of the collection fleet.

 e.

Special Collection Services

 In addition to the collection districts and routes serviced regularly in

 the New Orleans area, the Department also maintains a special con-

 tainer service for waste collection. This service is handled under the

 V-21

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 supervision of the Incinerator Support Section. Twenty-nine 

locations

 at public and semi-public installations within the City are 

provided

 with this service. A total of some 44 containers varying in size 

from

 two to eight cubic yards each are presently in use. The type of 

collec-

 tion vehicles servicing this container operation is the Dempsey 

Dumpster.

 A listing of facilities receiving this service is indicated in 

Table V-10,

 together with container sizes and frequency of pick up.

 f. Work Schedule

 The scheduled work week of the collection districts consists of 

six days

 of variable hours depending on the workload. The collection crew

on

 each truck consists of a driver and two collectors. The crews 

normally

 leave the district garages at 6:00 in the morning on work days 

and com-

 plete their routine collections in a nominal six to seven hour 

period.

 When the areas (routes) assigned are completed and refueling and 

clean-

 ing of equipment is performed, the work day is also completed, 

regard-

 less of the hours required. The basis of pay for drivers and 

collectors

 is a flat daily rate for each route, which provides the incentive

to get

 the fob done as quickly as possible.

 Prior to the latter part of 1967, collections were made on all 

holidays,

 with the exception of Christmas. A policy change in late 1967 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

modified

 the collection procedure to exclude collection activities on all 

City

 holidays. This policy change in effect would reduce the normal 

annual

 work days from 312 to 303 days.

 g. Collection Records

 The Sanitation Department has been maintaining a comprehensive rec-

 ord system of waste collection since January 1966. The 1966 

records

 also incorporated the best estimates available for the year 1965 

for

 comparison purposes. Some 80% of solid waste collected by the

 Sanitation Department during this period of time has been delivered

 to the municipal incinerators which are equipped with scale 

facilities.

 In these cases, recorded quantities of wastes have been based on

 scaled weights.

V-22

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-10

 INCINERATOR SUPPORT CONTAINER SERVICE COLLECTION

Location

 Collection

 District

Collection

Frequency

 Containers

No. CY

 Night

 Night

 Night

 Night

 Night

 Western

 Western

 Western

 Western

 Western

 Western

 Algiers

 Eastern I

 Eastern I

 Eastern I

 Western

 Night

 Western

 Night

 Night

 Eastern II

 Western

 Eastern I

 Eastern I

 Central

 Western

 Eastern II

 Night

 Eastern II

City Hall

Civil Court

Juvenile Court

Traffic Court

Auditorium

Masonic Cemetery

Yatch Harbor

Police Harbor

Propeller Club

Coast Guard Station

Audubon Park

Gumbel Old Folks Home

Port of Importation

Riverview School

Little Sisters of Poor

St. Patrick Cemetery

New Library
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Police

Wildlife and Fishery

French Market

Prytania Private School

Power Squadron

S.P.C.A.

St. Claude Apts.

Goodwill Industries

Police Riding Academy

Pontchartrain Beach

St. Louis Cemetery

Mount Olivet Cemetery

Maximum - Weekly container capacity 1,484 cy or about 185 tons

 Avg. daily collection 247 cy or about 31 tons

 Avg. daily tonnage collected by each truck about 15.5 tons

Nominal - 1967 collection records indicate actual collections of 6,430 tons or an average daily

 tonnage of 20.6 tons

* 7 days per week (all other daily service is 6 days per week)

 Daily

 Daily

 Daily

 Daily

 Daily

 2/WK

 MWF

 MWF

 MWF

 MWF

 TTHS

 2/WK

 MWF

 TTHS

 TTHS

 2/WK

 TTHS

 Daily

 Daily

 "2/Day

 MWF

 TTHS

 TTHS

 MWF

 2/WK

 MWF

 TTHS

 TTHS

 2/WK

 2

 1

 1

 1

 2

 1

 1

 1

 8

 1

 1

 1

2

2

2

2

2

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

8

8

8
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

 V-23

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Weekly route cards are maintained for recording daily collections 

and

 activities of each route, including crew hours worked, number of 

loads

 collected per day, a scale record of the weight of each load, and 

total

 mileage (where odometers are in operation). Mechanical 

breakdown,

 hours and reasons of breakdown/ are also recorded daily. This 

record is

 maintained by the driver and the scaleman at the point of 

disposal. The

 weekly summary of individual route activities is compiled either 

by the

 section foreman or the district foreman. The weekly records 

provide re-

 quired information for compiling the monthly summary of 

activities.

 h. Cost of Refuse Collection

 Records were obtained from the Sanitation Department of collection

 costs for the period of 1965 through 1967 and budget allocations 

for

 1968. In evaluating these records we find that total 

collection and

 haul costs are equivalent to about 55% of total annual costs of 

the muni-

 cipal solid waste system. Total social and fringe benefits 

(including an-

 nual leave, sick leave, holidays, and terminal leave) are 

equivalent to

 about 25% of direct productive payroll costs. During this threeyear

 period total labor costs including benefits have averaged 

approximately

 74% of the total collection costs.

 A summary of the annual costs of collection and haul appears in 

Table

 V-11, which also shows total tons of refuse collected, cost per 

ton, and

 number of collection vehicles for each respective year. 

Anticipated

 costs are also shown for the 1968 budget year.

 TABLE V-11

 TRENDS OF COLLECTIONS AND HAUL COSTS (1965 - 1968)

Division of Operating Costs

Labor and Fringe Benefit!

Fuel, Repairs, Maintenance

Licenses and Insurance

* Depreciation (Allowed)

TOTAL Annual Operating Cost!

TOTAL Tons Refuse Collected

Collection and Haul Cost per Ton

* Number of Collection Vehicles

Actual Costs

1965

$1,600,790

317,368

20,907

127,600
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

$2,066,665

253,552

$8.15

102

1966

$1,809,282

460,760

27,232

166,300

$2,463,574

267,779

$9.20

134

1967

$1,912,129

475,706

27,402

166,300

$2,581,537

270,567

$9.55

134

Estimated Costs

1968

$1,990,348

501,283

27,523

174,200

$2,693,354

125 .

V-24

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The increase in collection and haul cost from 1965 to 1966 was due pri-

 marily to wage rate increases and additions to the collection fleet. In

 1965 a limited number of trucks were in operation often doubling-up

 daily on route assignments. With the increase in the number of trucks

 in 1966, annual depreciation expense as shown increased substantially.

 Areasonable leveling off of col lection and haul costs was experienced in

 1966 and 1967, resulting in an increase of only 3.8% in the unit cost per

 ton. Budget allocations for 1968are predicated on this indicated trend.

 Collection costs are expected to continue to increase gradually due to

 annual salary increases and higher equipment maintenance and operating

 costs.

 A further analysis of the present collection and haul costs of$9.55per ton

 (see Table V-I1) is presented later in this Chapter breaking down the 

collec-

 tion and haul components respectivelyat72%and28%of total costs. This

 ratio indicated that for each ton of waste handled, a cost of $6.87 for 

col-

 lection and $2.68 for haul is incurred. Based upon present methods of col-

 lection and an incentive wage basis, it appears that any possible economies

 to be found will most likely occur in the haul component of these costs.

 Costs of collection and haul experienced by New Orleans compares

 favorably with cost statistics available from other cities. Table V-12

 shows this comparison and it is of interest to note that the collection

 component is substantially lower than other cities.

 TABLE V-12

 COMPARISON OF MUNICIPAL COLLECTION AND HAUL COSTS

 Cost Per Ton

 City Year No. Coll./wk Collection Haul Total

 Los Angeles *1965 2 $8.49 $4.25 $12.74
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Washington, D. C. *1965 2 NA NA 14.11

 Philadelphia *1965 1 8.13 2.70 10.83

 Pittsburgh **1966 1 14.82 2.62 17.44

 Providence **1965 NA NA 7.67

 NEW ORLEANS 1967 3 6.87 2.68 9.55

 *1965 PHS Survey ** Engineering Studies

 Note: Pittsburgh has backyard collection, all others curb and alley.

 V-25

-------

 Study of Solid Waste - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans/ La. - 15 May 1968

 Recommendations made under the Analysis of Collection and Haul,

 covered later in the report, propose certain changes Fn the route

 system whereby economies in haul time may be achieved without

 changing present service to which the public is accustomed. 

Also,

 possible reduction in frequency of service merits consideration 

as

 a means of reducing costs. This topic is discussed in more 

detail in

 the following section.

 4. Frequency of Municipal Refuse Collection

 The frequency of municipal collection of household refuse varies in 

different

 communities, depending on the amount, characteristics of the waste produced,

 climate, mode of payment, and to a certain extent, on the demands of the 

cit-

 izens. It follows that the more frequent the collections the more 

convenient it

 is for the residents. However, economic factors should also be consfdered 

so that

 a proper balance is often difficult to establish.

 The Manual on Refuse Collection Practice published by the American Public

 Works Association (APWA, Third Edition), sets forth the following 

criteria:

 The maximum period between collections should not be greater than:

 a. The normal time for the accumulation of the amount of 

refuse

 that can be placed in a container of reasonable size.

 b. The time it takes fresh garbage to putrefy and to give off

foul

 odors, under average conditions of storage.

 c. The length of the fly-breeding cycle. Unwrapped garbage

 should be removed from the premises at regular intervals spaced 

ac-

 cording to the minimal time required for the development of 

flies

 from eggs to mature larvae. During the hot summer months this 

is

 frequently less than /days.

 It is the consensus that most municipal agencies meet the above criteria 

as found

 in a survey carried out by the APWA in 1964 on the frequency of collection

from

 residential areas by municipal forces covering 418 communities across the 

United

V-26

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May T968

 States. This survey revealed that 46.7% of the cities provide pick-up service once

 a week, 48.5% twice a week and 3.6% three times per week. It can be stated,

 therefore, that the practice among most cities in the country for municipally col-

 lected refuse containing garbage is on the basis of two collections per week or

 less.

 Pursuing this matter further, we have prepared Table V-13 showing the frequency
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 of collection and other pertinent data for several selected cities located in 

the

 southern sections of the U. S. having characteristics similar to those of New

 Orleans. Of'the 17 cities selected, including New Orleans, 14 provide two

 or less collections per week, and the remaining three show three collections per

 week.

 TABLE V-13

 FREQUENCY OF REFUSE COLLECTION IN SELECTED SITES

 (From "Refuse Collection Practice" - APWA, Third Edition)

City

Los Angeles, California

San Diego, California

San Diego County, Col.

Phoenix, Arizona

Tucson, Arizona

Corpus Christ! , Texas

Dallas, Texas

Fort Worth, Texai

Beaumont, Texas

Austin, Texas

Savannah, Georgia

Miami, Florida

Dade County, Florida

Tampa, Florida

Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

Baton Rouge, Louisiana

New Or leans, Louisiana

Pop. in

Thousands

2,479

523

225

439

213

168

673

364

119

187

140

292

500

276

100

153

657

1.

System

Used

M.P.

M

P

M.P.

M.C.

M.P.

M.P.

M.P.

M

M.P.

M

M.P.

M.P.

M

M

M

M.P.

2.

Area

Served
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

R.C.I.

All

All

R

R.C.I.

All

All

R.C.M.

All

All

All

All

All

All

All

R.C.I.

All

3.

Collection

Points

A.C.

A.C.

C

A

A.C.

C.R.

A.C.R.O.

A.C.R.O.

V

R

R

A. C.R.

R

A.C.

V

(Pick-up Per Week)

Combined Refuse

Summer

Res.

1

1

2

2

2

3

2

2

3

2

3

Cam.

5

5

R

6

R

R

R

R

R

R

3

Winter

Ret.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1

1

2

2

2

3

2

2

3

2

3

Com.

5

S

R

6

It

R

R

R

R

R

3

Garbage

Summer

Res.

2

2

2

2

2

Com.

2

R

R

6

Winter

Rei.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

2

2

"om.

2

R

R

6

Rubbish

Summer

Res.

1

1

B

B

1

Com.

1

1

1

Winter

Rei.

1

1
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

B

1

3om.

1

1

1

4

Method

of

FinancT. E.

G.T.

G.T.

G.T.

5.C.

G.T.

T.C.

S.C.

G.T.

G.T.

S.C.

S.C.

G.T.

G.T.

G.T.

 CODING: 1. Systems Used: M • Municipal; C = Contract; P - Private

 2. Areos Served: R ; Residential: C = Commercial; M = Manufacturing & 

Industrial; I = Institutional & Public

 3. Collection Points: A : Alley; C ; Curb; F - Front of house; R ; Rear of 

house, V - All four collection points used; O ; Other

 4. Method of Financing: GT : General Tax; SC : Service Charge; TC : General

Tax & Service Charge

 If the City of New Orleans were to reduce the collection of refuse From the present

 three to two times per week, the savings to be realized from this move are difficult

 to estimate accurately but it would probably be in the neighborhood of 10 percent

 of the cost of collection. Nonetheless, since the citizens have been receiving

 

V-27

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 this service for several /ears for which nodirect charge is made, any 

reduction of

 the frequency of collection would be strongly resented unless a solid wellorga-

 nized campaign of selling the public on this change is undertaken.

 In summary, we feel that should the rise in operating costs become 

unreasonable

 the City may consider the possibility of reducing the frequency of service 

to off-

 set costs and be more in line with the practice in most large southern 

cities.

 5. Municipal Waste Disposal

 Observations of disposal practices indicate that in 1967 about 477,400 tons

of

 waste were handled by municipal disposal facilities of which 44% or 196,000
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

tons

 were incinerated with the balance being deposited in the municipal 

landfills oper-

 ated by the City.

 a. Brief Description of Disposal Facilities

 Prior to January 1968, the Sanitation Department of the City of 

New

 Orleans operated three incinerator plants and two landfills for 

disposal

 of solid wastes.

 The Algiers Incinerator, with a rated capacity of 200 tons per 

day,

 is located in the Westbank community of Algiers at the 

intersection

 of the Westbank Expressway and Victory Drive.

 The Seventh Street Incinerator, with a rated capacity of 400 

tons

 per day, is located in the southern section of the City, 

midway

 between Claiborne Avenue and St. Charles Avenue on Seventh

 Street.

 The Florida Avenue Incinerator, with a rated capacity of 400 

tons

 per day, is located in the north central portion of the City 

of New

 Orleans, at Florida Avenue and Elysian Fields Avenue.

 The landfills presently in operation are the Algiers landfill, 

a 57-

 acre tract, located in the extreme southern portion of Algiers 

on the

 Westbank immediately adjacent to the Plaquemines Parish line and

 the Gentilly landfill, a 34.7-acre tract, located on old 

Gentilly

V-28

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Road approximately one mile west of Paris Road. Each of these pro-

 perties are leased from private owners on a year-to-year basis. Lease

 costs are limited to the amount of City and State taxes.

 Two new incinerator plants are being added to the disposal system in

 1968. Renovation of the St. Louis Incinerator, located on St. Louis

 Street and N. Derbigney Street only one block north of Clairborne, is

 near completion. The rated capacity of the plant is 450 tons per day.

 During the past year this plant has seen limited use, in the function of

 a transfer station. Concurrently with the preparations of this report,

 New Orleans East Incinerator, with a rated capacity of 400 tons per

 day, is complete and undergoing burning tests. This entirely new facil-

 ity is situated on a 5-acre site on old Gentilly Road about three miles

 west of Paris Road.

 Adjacent to this new plant, a vacant tract of approximately 15 acres

 owned by the City is reserved for the deposit of incinerator residue.

 The District Map, Figure 1-1 (backcover) illustrates the location of

 the above mentioned disposal facilities, as related to the six collec-

 tion districts. Detailed evaluations of each of the municipal dis-

 posal facilities are set forth later in this Chapter.

 b. Present Assignment of Use by Collection Districts

 Utilization of the municipal disposal facilities in 1967 by the six col-

 lection districts is shown in Table V-14.

 Changes in the utilization of disposal facilities by the various 

collection

 districts will occur as soon as the New Orleans East and St. Louis 

Incin-

 erators are in operation. This redistribution, in accordance with the

 methods set forth in the Haul Study will provide substantial economies

 in haul costs to the Collection Division.

 c. Policies of Use of Disposal Facilities
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 The major user of the incinerators at present is the Sanitation 

Department

 of the City. The sites are fenced with entrance gates for control and

 V29

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-14

 COLLECTION DISTRICT ASSIGNMENT TO DISPOSAL FACILITIES

District

Central

Western

Eastern 1

Eastern II

*Night

Algiers

Disposal Facilities Used

Seventh Street Incinerator

Seventh Street Incinerator

Algiers Incinerator

St. Louis (Transfer Station)

Florida Avenue Incinerator

Florida Avenue Incinerator

Gentilly Landfill

Seventh Street Incinerator

Algiers Incinerator

Algiers Landfill

Collections

Received

100%

25%

65%

10%

100%

20%

80%

100%

60%

40%

 *Alternate location - St. Louis (Transfer Station)

 prior to 1968 only limited deliveries of refuse were accepted from

private

 and commercial vehicles, free of charge. Commencing in 1968 all 

com-

 mercial vehicle deliveries will be subject to a disposal charge on

a ton-

 nage basis. Private vehicles with household refuse will continue 

to be

 admitted without restriction or charge. Similar policies of use 

will be

 placed in effect at landfill sites in 1968.

 Disposal facilities are open to the public seven days a week 

during day

 light hours. Control of access at the incinerators is reasonably 

adequate*

 however, at the landfills control is more difficult after normal 

work hour*

 due to inadequate lighting, lack of fencing, and the remote 

locations.

 d. Weighing Facilities and Use Charge

 Prior to 1968, weighing facilities were available only at the 

incinerator*

 Scale installations were completed during the latter part of 1967 

at the

V-30

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 landfills and it is now an effective policy to weigh all waste deliveries

 at all points of disposal.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Simultaneously with the installation of scales at landfills a new use

 charge was conceived as a means of producing revenue for the City.

 The established rate of charge (for wistes delivered by commercially

 licensed vehicles) effective January 1, 1968, is one dollar ($1.00)

 per 1,000 pounds or fraction thereof when delivered to any landfill,

 and one dollar ($1.00) per 500 pounds or fraction thereof when deli-

 vered to any incinerator.

 e. Disposal Plant Facilities

 (1) Emergency Fire Protection

 Fire control equipment (hoses and fire extinguishers) is available at all

 incinerators and arrangements with municipal fire fighting agencies have

 been made to assist in major emergencies. Maximum distances from in-

 cinerator locations to the fire stations are three miles. Landfills are 

not

 equipped with an adequate water supply to control fires in their early

 stages, therefore, principal fire control, rests with the heavy equip-

 ment such as bulldozers.

 (2) Support Equipment

 Each of the disposal facilities is assigned the necessary support equip-

 ment for a self-contained operation under normal conditions.

 Each incinerator is assigned from two to three ash trucks of adequate

 size to meet their peak requirements in residue hauling. These are

 shown in Table V-15. Heavy equipment such as bulldozers, graders,

 etc., as assigned to landfills Is shown in Table V-16.

 (3) Operational Maintenance

 Crew members at the incinerators handle normal repair and service re-

 quirements of the plant equipment. Expendable spare parts are stored

 at each site. Major repairs are performed by personnel from the City

 V31

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V- 15

 NUMBER OF ASH TRUCKS ASSIGNED TO INCINERATORS

Truck Description

Diamond T - Dump

International - Dump

Diamond T - Dump

Diamond T - Hiele Dump

International - Hiele Dump

International - Hiele Dump

Total Ash Truck Fleet

Cap.

(c.y.)

16

16

20

20

20

20

Year

62

63

64

65

65

68

Price

$15,000

15,000

12,594

14,186

13,050

14,864

Fla.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Ave.

2

1

3

7th

St.

1

1

1

3

Algiers

1

1

1

3

St.

Louis

3

3

N.O.

East

2

2

Total

2

2

5

2

1

2

14

 Total Investment in Fleet

$194,120

 TABLE V-16

 1968 EQUIPMENT ASSIGNMENT AT LANDFILLS

Location

Gentilly Landfill

Algiers Landfill

Description

EIMCO Model 103C Tractor

Cummins CR 160 Diesel Engine

Caterpillar D7 Tractor

(#1 73 AyD . Control 7A Bui Idozer Blade)

P & H Crane

255 ALC w/Draglrne

Koehring Comb. Drag

International Harvester

Caterpillar D7 Tractor

(#1 73 HyD . Control 7A Bui Idozer Blade)

Year

1964

1965

1958
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1952

1951

1965

Price

$ 26,520

37,132

30,941

10,000

800

37,132

No. of

Units

2

3

1

1

1

1

 TOTAL EQUIPMENT INVESTMENT

 $243,309

V-32

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleons/ La. - 15 May 1968

 Yard and Shop which maintains a labor pool of approximately 45 men

 of various skills. Priority has been established with this shop for 

servic-

 ing incinerator plants in case of emergency breakdown. Major repairs

 and service to rolling equipment at both incinerator and landfill lo-

 cations are provided by the facilities of the City Garage presently oper-

 ated by the Sanitation Department. During 1968 it is anticipated thot

 major repairs will be handled by the newly organized Central Garage

 facility. Details of this arrangement are presently being resolved.

 4) Area Sanitation

 Reasonable sanitary conditions are maintained within the incinerator

 plants, although violations of good sanitary practices occur on the aprons

 adjacent to the pits. Often this condition is caused by overloading and

 infrequent cleanings of the storage pits. The Board of Health reportedly

 sprays the pits daily, however, long retention of wastes in these pits 

con-

 tributes to the problems of sanitary control with the presence of flies,

 birds, and rats not uncommon.

 Landfill operations are conducted as open dumps with area sanitation a

 major problem at both locations. Open burning occurs frequently at the

 Algiers location whereas underground fires are more prevalent at the

 Gentilly landfill where unburned wastes are compacted and covered.

 Cover material is limited in supply and must be hauled into both loca-

 tions. Neither location is operated in a manner that meets the accepted

 standards of sanitary landfills.

 5) Salvage and Scavengers

 Salvaging at disposal points is officially banned, however, this policy

 is not strictly enforced. Existing salvage and scavenging operations,

 although apparently not interfering with the disposal operations, are

 detrimental to "good housekeeping" practices, especially at the in-

 cinerators.

 Local observations indicate the minor salvage and on-site storage prac-

 tices permitted to incinerator personnel are the principal cause of the

 littered appearance evident at the various plants. If this practice were

 discontinued and basic housekeeping and maintenance practices made

 mandatory, morale should improve and greater plant efficiency can

 be expected.

 V-33

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, LQ. - 15 May 1968

 f. Waste Disposal Records

 Daily operating records maintained at both incinerators and 

landfills

 are forwarded to the Department offices for analysis by 

management.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 The daily records include cumulative totals of each activity, as 

well

 as personnel reports of each shift. These daily records are used

as

 control measures on labor costs (budgeted personnel and payroll), as

 well as evaluation of daily operational conditions at each plant 

con-

 cerning daily tonnage received from municipal and private trucks,

 tonnage of refuse burned, residue removed, and remaining floor 

ton-

 nage. An operational cost section illustrating in detail the 

cost of

 labor, maintenance, and fuel required to operate the facility is 

also

 included in the report. From the total cost, a cost per ton is 

calcu-

 lated. Weather, refuse, and residue conditions are recorded 

since

 they also have a direct effect on solid waste disposal and 

disposal cost.

 These daily reports together with furnace charts are retained in

per-

 manent record files on each plant.

 The Chief Administrative Office in 1965 adopted the Performance 

Type

 Budget (PTB). Monthly Performance Reports in support of the 

budget

 are compiled from the daily operating records. This report 

provides

 a monthly summary of activities for each location and comparisons

to

 the same period of the previous year and provides a means for 

review

 and analysis of program alternatives.

 In early 1968 a data processing system was designed to provide 

ac-

 curate recordings of all wastes delivered at each of the disposal

facil-

 ities. This system initially conceived to facilitate billing 

procedures

 of commercial accounts was broadened to encompass activities of 

all

 vehicles and users of the municipal disposal facilities. Seven 

Standard

 Registers (source-record-punch) Model 1601 were installed at the

dis-

 posal sites for this recording activity. In order to simplify 

the billing

 of fees, a credit record procedure similar to credit cards was 

devised

 by the Department of Finance. Application for credit cards is 

made

 through the Sanitation Department. Predesigned punch cards 

(charge

 forms) used with the credit cards are used to record net weight 

and

 identify type of refuse for billing purposes. If a person does 

not have

 a credit card the machine operator writes his name, address, and

 license number of vehicle on the blank charge card. White 

(original)

V-34

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 copy is given to customer, and other two copies are retained by machine

 operator. Charges are billed monthly to the owner of the licensed ve-

 hicle or credit card holder thereby eliminating the handling of cash.

 The Sanitation Department anticipated further use of the punch card

 machines and with cooperation of EDP was able to set up a program

 which would not only record information necessary for billing purposes

 but also additional record data pertinent to the Department. All muni-

 cipal trucks, including garbage, ash, and trash trucks of the Sanitation

 Department are assigned cards to be presented at the disposal site. The

 punch cards are forwarded to the Department offices where they are
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 segregated and sent to EDP for final analysis. Here the information be-

 comes input to the IBM Computer Model 30. Output in the form of

 monthly statistical reports and customer billing is timely.

 The programmed computer can by means of card sorting obtain various

 combinations of desired information. Statistical data can be acquired

 as to tonnage collected per route and district, tonnage of combustible

 and non-combustible collected, and tonnage detail received at each

 disposal facility. A monthly print-out is made of the six collection

 districts and each disposal facility. The monthly summary for disposal

 facilities includes tonnage and types of material received from City,

 State, and Federal agencies, and commercial and private sources.

 With application of data processing to the Department it is hoped to

 eliminate redundant paper work and also assure accurate and concise

 data. This system now in its first month trial period (May 1968) is ex-

 pected to produce records that will be invaluable to management in

 planning and controlling within the Department.

 g. Cost of Disposal

 Evaluation of the Sanitation Department cost records for 1967 indicate

 disposal through operation of incinerators and landfills was equivalent

 to about 36% of the total annual cost of the solid waste system. Bud-

 get allocations for 1968 project costs for solid waste disposal (inciner-

 ator and landfill) at an estimated 41.8% of total budgeted cost. The

 projected increase of some $523,000 for 1968 is due principally to

 the assumed full operation of both St. Louis and New Orleans East

 incinerators as well as expected increases in labor rates. The summary

 of the total annual cost for solid waste disposal as experienced by the

 V-35

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Department in 1965, 1966, and 1967 is illustrated in Table V-18. 

This

 table/ illustrating in detail the costs of disposal by both 

incineration

 and landfill, resolves all costs to a cost per ton basis, ranging

from a

 low of $0.45 per ton at the Algiers landfill to a high of $6.91 

per ton at

 the Algiers incinerator.

 The per ton cost for both the Florida Avenue and the Seventh 

Street

 incinerators shows a sharp increase for 1967 over the two 

previous years

 due principally to the smaller tonnage handled at each of these 

plants.

 This was largely due to more downtime for repairs. Based on the 

quan-

 tities burned in two previous years the $5.57 per ton shown for 

the

 Florida Avenue Incinerator should have been about $4.80 per ton 

and

 the $4.87 per ton shown for the Seventh Street Incinerator should

have

 been about $4.25 per ton. The lesser cost per ton at the Seventh

Street

 Incinerator, even though the total annual costs are 15 and 30 per

cent

 higher than at Florida Avenue and Algiers effectively 

demonstrated the

 advantage of the larger plants. This is shown graphically on 

FigureV-7

 on which is also shown the cost for the 600 and 900-ton plants 

proposed

 later in this report.

 Table V-17 shows the breakdown of incinerator costs for each of 

the

 three incinerator plants operated in 1967 as well as the 1968 

budgeted

 cost breakdown for St. Louis and New Orleans East incinerators. 

Brief

 operating experience in 1967 of the St. Louis Incinerator, as 

well as

 current experience at the New Orleans East Incinerator reasonably 

jus-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 tifies that budgeted figures for these two plants are realistic. 

In pract-

 ice each of these five incinerator plants incur similar gross 

payroll costs

 in their annual operation.

 Excluding both St. Louis and New Orleans East incinerators, the 

total

 labor cost (including benefits) for the three year period (1965-

67) a-

 veraged approximately 58.9% of the total incineration cost per 

ton.

 St. Louis and New Orleans East incinerators are expected to be

 operated at a labor ratio of about 45-50% of total costs.

 The variations of landfill operations present a low unit cost of

$0.45

 per ton in Algiers where open burning is conducted and $1.27 per 

ton

 at the Gentilly landfill which is operated as an open dump, 

without

 burning being practiced.

V-36

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

|s|ew Or I eons, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-17

 INCINERATION COSTS (1967-1968)

 (Cost Per Ton)

Division of Operating Cosh

Labor and Fringe Benefits

Utilities, Fuels, Maintenance

Repairs, Lie. and Insur.

Sub-Total

•Depreciation and Amortization

TOTAL COST PER TON

Capacity of Plant (Tom/Day)

Rated Capacity

Effective Capacity

ACTUAL COSTS 1967

Florida A've.

$3.45

1.22

$4.67

.90

$5.57

400

200

Seventh St.

$2.77

1.06

$3.83

1.04

$4.87

400

270

Algiers

$4.01

1.33

$5.34

1.57

$6.91

200

150

ESTIMATED COSTS 1968

St. Louis

$1.55

.49

$2.04

.68

$2.92

450

410

New Orleans Eait

$1.65

.42

$2.07
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1.50

$3.57

400

365

 •Includes straight line depreciation of ash trucks (6 yr. life) and amortization 

of plant

 (20 yr. life @ 3 1/2% interest)

 FIGURE V-7

 COST PER TON TO INCINERATE IN RELATION TO PLANT SIZE

 7.00

 -6.00

 • 5.00

 .4.00

 . 3.00

 I Algiers

 NOTE: Present Florida Ave. and Seventh

 St. based on 1967 costs and average quan

 tities 1965 & 1966.

 Enlarged Algiers

 100

 200

, I „-

 Proposed Florida Ave

 Proposed Seventh Street-

 300

400

-L.

 500

 600

 Tons Per Day

700

 '

 800

 V-37

-------

TO

OO

00

 TABLE V-18

BREAKDOWN OF COST OF REFUSE DISPOSAL AT VARIOUS FACILITIES FOR THE YEARS 1965, 1966, and 1967

INCINERATORS:

Florida Avenue

Seventh Street

St. Louis*

Algiers

Incinerator Support

(All Incinerators)

* *

LANDFILLS:

Gentilly

Algiers

Year

67

66

65

67

66

65

67

67
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

66

65

67

66

65

67

66

65

67

66

65

Incinerator and Landfills

Labor, Inc.

Fringe

Benefits

($)

223,790

214,144

175,070

235,999

214,144

179,558

76,808

185,878

158,626

151,876

98,471

94,642

91,276

118,526

126,900

114,469

32,114

29,230

28,430

Utilities

Elec.

and Gas

($)

6,647

10,196

10,212

19,463

18,702

16,388

33,943

10,974

13,438

17,510

—

—

—

386

556

404

232

162

321

Repairs

($)

55,566

52,095

43,617

48,612

39,559

42,045

6,575

34,142

31,176

23,562

796

1,262

217

1,862
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

3,143

2,346

1,361

541

979

Amortization

20 years

at 3 1/2%

»)

47,806

47,806

47,806

78,307

78,307

78,307

75,507

65,660

65,660

65,660

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Vehicular Equipment

Licenses

&

Insurance

($)

509

484

490

494

488

479

498

479

473

468

1,321

1,300

1,299

1,395

1,363

1,358

211

200

200

Gas

&

Lube.

($)

4,536

2,271

2,064

9,299

3,406

3,069

8,618

4,30?

2,271

2,064

12,928

6,812

6,812

12,960

6,812

12,385

2,592

1,135
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1,032

Maintenance

($)

12,000

9,975

8,000

12,000

9,975

8,000

9,000

12,000

9,975

8,000

36,000

29,925

24,000

60,000

49,875

40,000

8,978

8,579

8,000

Amortization

5 years

($)

10,500

10,500

10,500

10,500

10,500

10,500

9,875

7,000

7,000

7,000

31,500

31,500

31,500

25,792

25,792

25,792

3,095

3,095

3,095

Total

Annual

Oper.

Cost

($)

361,354

347,471

297,759

414,674

375,081

338,346

220,824

320,442

288,619

276, 140

181,016

165,441

155,104

220,921

214,441

196,754

48,583

42,942

42,057

Tons

Incinerated

or dumped
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

64,835

75,845

75,062

85,181

98,185

99,730

5,691

46,382

43,382

40,480

196,398

217,412

215,272

174,000

—

—

107,000

—

Cost

Per

Ton

($)

5.57

4.58

3.97

4.87

3.82

3.39

N.A.

6.91

6.65

6.82

Q.92

0.76

0.72

1.27

—

—

0.45

—

 *Not in full Operation

 ** See TaWe V-22, Page V-43 for detailed breakdown

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The above cost data includes all operating and capital costs of these

 plants and in the case of incinerators, includes both labor and equip-

 ment cosh for residue removal. These costs specifically exclude those

 portions of Incinerators'Support costs (covered in the next section of

 this report) applicable to transfer of wastes between incinerators or

 from incinerators to landfills.

 Total departmental costs of disposal by incineration and landfill in-

 cluding transfer operations during 1967 averaged $6.55 per ton based

 only on that tonnage collected by the City or an average of $3.70

 per ton for the disposal of all municipal and private collections handled

 at the City facilities. This latter overall cost, showing a great re-

 duction in the unit price for disposal, is of course due to the high

 percentage of commercial wastes handled by landfill.

 In review of total disposal costs by incineration the individual cost

 of residue removal was investigated to some extent. The present

 method of handling quenched residue at each incinerator is by direct

 discharge from conveyors and hoppers to 16 or 20 cubic yard diesel

 powered dump trucks. Records of the Sanitation Department indicate that

 a total of 97,962 tons (wet weight) of residue was removed from the

 three operating incinerators (Algiers, Seventh St., and Florida Avenue)

 in 1967.

 This volume required 11,089 truck loads to be hauled to the various
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 landfill points. Based upon a 312 day operating year, average daily

 activity involved 35.5 roundtrip hauls to remove 314 tons of residue.

 Three trucks are assigned at each incinerator. These nine trucks each

 averaged approximately four loads per day with 8.7 tons per load.

 Haul distances from each incinerator to points of disposal vary. With

 Algiers and Seventh Street incinerators delivering residue to the Algiers

 landfill their respective roundtrip haul distances are estimated at 10

 and 18 miles requiring an estimated 45 minutes roundtrip haul time

 from Algiers incinerator and 105 minutes from Seventh Street. Florida

 Avenue incinerator delivering to Gentilly landfill has an estimated

 roundtrip haul distance of 12 miles requiring an average roundtrip

 haul time of 60 minutes.

 1967 records indicate 3,325 roundtrips were from Algiers, 4,477 trips

 from Seventh Street and 3,287 trips from Florida. Based upon haul

 V-39

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans/ La. - 15 May 1968

 distance and time requirements for each load from the respective 

inciner-

 ators, combined annual mileage of these nine trucks servicing these 

in-

 cinerators was 153,280 miles requiring 13,616 truck operating hours 

ex-

 cluding loading time. It follows that each truck averaged about 

17,000

 miles per year and 1,513 operating (haul time) hours or 54.5 miles 

and

 4.85 operating hours per 24 hour work day.

 Department records indicate frhatthe annual cost of operation of each

truck

 is about $15,600. This cost includes payroll (with social and fringe

 benefits) of $9,550, insurance and licenses at $250, capital cost 

(6year

 equipment life) $2,345, maintenance and repairs at $2,440 and fuels,

 oil, and lubrication at $1,020 $0.06 per mile).

 With these nine trucks,in operation, total annual costs of $140,400 

were

 incurred in 1967 for residue removal at these three plants, or it may

be

 expressed that an average cost of $1.43 per ton was experienced in 

the

 removal of residue. Relating this total cost to the gross volume of

 196,400 tons of waste burned at these three plants indicates a unit 

cost

 of $0.71 per ton of waste incinerated or approximately 13% of total

 incineration costs.

 It should be noted'that average daily haul time of 4.85 hours per 

truck

 represents only 20% of the availability of truck time or total daily 

truck

 costs. The balance of time is consumed by "down-time" in the loading

 cycle and maintenance and repairs which contributes to the high unit

 cost experienced.

 h. Support Services Common to Collection and Disposal Divisions

 The Incinerator Support division functions as an independent service 

in

 both collection and disposal activities. As noted earlier, this 

division

 provides container collection for public installations and utilizes 

front-

 end loading (fork lift) compactor trucks in this service.

 In addition to this responsibility, the division also provides the 

transfer

 operations needed at the St. Louis incinerator, and at other 

incinerators

 during prolonged breakdowns. Transfer of wastes may occur either 

between

 incinerators or between incinerators and landfills. During the year 1967

 about 43,735 tons combustible wastes, or 16% of total municipal 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

collectfof

 were handled in this operation, representing an average of about 140 

tons

V-40

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 per day. The quantifies removed from each of the incinerator plants

 during this period are shown in Table V-19.

 TABLE V-19

 TRANSFER OF COMBUSTIBLE WASTES (1967)

 Incinerator Tons

 St. Louis (Transfer Station)

 Florida Avenue

 Seventh Street

 Algiers

 Total Waste Transferred 43,735

 A large portion of this material was transferred to the somewhat distant

 landfill by the Incinerator Support equipment consisting of transfer 

trailers

 (compactors) and diesel tractors.

 This division also provides transfer service of oversize and noncombustible

 wastes from the incinerator plants to the landfills which in 1967 amounted

 to about 2,215 tons or 1% of total annual collections. Three 20-cubic

 yard diesel powered vehicles are utilized for this transfer operation. 

Table

 V-20shows the quantities handled from each plant in 1967.

 TABLE V-20

 TRANSFER OF OVERSIZE AND NON-COMBUSTIBLE WASTES (1967)

 Incinerator Tons

 St. Louis (Transfer Station)

 Florida Avenue

 Seventh Street

 Algiers

 Total Transferred 2,215

 V-41

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The equipment assigned to Incinerator Support for performance of 

both,

 collection and transfer operations for 1968, is shown in Table V-2T.

 TABLE V-21

 FLEET ASSIGNMENT TO INCINERATOR SUPPORT (1968)

 Capacity No. of

 Truck Description (C.Y.) Year Price Units

 Transfer Equipment;

 International Tractors - 64 $ 11,312 

3

 Hobbs Hyd-Pak Transfer Trailer 53 64 14,777 2

 Hobbs Hyd-Pak Transfer 60 64 15,679 2

 Diamond T- 20 67 13,750 3

 Container Service Equipment:

 Diamond T - Hydro Ex-Pak 20 64 14,950 1
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 International - Dumpmaster 20 63 16,000 1

 Total Equipment Investment:

 Transfer Equipment $136,098

 Container Service Equipment 30,950

 Total Investment $167,048

 In addition to the foregoing, Incinerator Support also provides 

services

 within the Sanitation Department and other municipal departments not

 directly connected with collection and disposal of wastes. In 1967

 costs of special project assignments outside departmental activities 

were

 estimated to be equivalent to 15% of the total annual costs incurred 

by

 this division. The nature of these projects range from removal of 

abandoned

 automobiles for the Police Department to assistance to other 

departments

 in clearing and preparing City land for various uses. Another 5% of

the

 annual costs in 1967 were attributable to hauling of dirt, rock, and

leafajj*

V-42

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 stockpiles resulting from street sweeping operations. This material was

 hauled to City owned property (parks, etc.) for fill material.

 A total cost of $181,000 was incurred in 1967 by the Incinerator Support

 division for performance of all services. A breakdown of this cost appears

 in Table V-22 which shows, in addition, the estimated unit costs and

 amounts of waste materials handled for the entire year.

 TABLE V-22

 BREAKDOWN OF INCINERATOR SUPPORT COSTS - 1967

Service

Container Collection

Transfer Combustible Material

Transfer Oversize and NonCombustible Material

Tons

Handled

6,430

43,735

2,455

Est. Cost

Per Ton

$6.00

2.30

3.00

Total Cost

$ 38,580

99,855

7,365

 Total Collection and Transfer

 Costs 52,620 $2.77 $145,800

 Special Assignments 27,150

 Hauling Miscellaneous Materials 9,066

 Total Other Costs $ 36,216

 Total Division Costs - 1967 $181,016

 Table V-23 provides a summary of total annual operating expenses such

 as labor and fringe benefits, maintenance and repairs, etc. as incurred

 in 1967 and projected for 1968. Economies are expected to be achieved

 in the future from reduced transfer of combustible materials, when St.

 Louis and New Orleans East incinerators go into full operation.

 V-43

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-23

 INCINERATOR SUPPORT ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSES

Division of Operating Expenses

Labor and Fringe Benefits

Fuel and Lubrication

Repairs and Maintenance

License and Insurance

Amortization of Equipment (5 years)

Total Annual Costs

1967

Actual Costs

$ 98,471

12,928

36,796

1,321

21,500

$181,016

1968

Proj. Costs

$ 86,603

13,228

38,996

1,319

31,500

$171,646

 6. Emergency Operations

 Specific policies, preparations, controls, personnel, and equipment are 

employed

 during times of disasters and emergencies, when called upon by local, state, or

 federal direction. The Department has appointed eight key men as the nucleus 

of

 the emergency team on call 24 hours a day, each with the responsibility of 

assembling

 assigned personnel at a designated emergency station in the event of disaster 

alert.

 These stations located throughout the City consist of the various branch 

facilities of

 the Department.

 City Hall - Sanitation Department Central Offices

 Seventh Street Incinerator

 St. Louis Incinerator

 Florida Avenue Incinerator

 City Yard & Shop

 City Maintenance Garage

 New Orleans East Incinerator

 Algiers Incinerator

 Various types of departmental equipment are assigned to these locations. In 

all,

 these emergency stations are equipped and manned with approximately 186 men,

 123 pieces of equipment, 29 radio-equipped vehicles, and 10 portable radios.

V-44

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Emergency operations are controlled from the Sanitation Department central offices

 with liason and communications with Civil Defense Headquarters, American Red

 Cross, Police Department, other emergency agencies, and the facilities of the

 eight Department emergency stations.

 In severe emergencies, such as the not uncommon area hurricane conditions, this

 Department's first responsibility is evacuation. All mobile equipment is deconta-

 minated upon notice of hurricane alert conditions for use as may be required.

 Once hurricane conditions have passed and emergency evacuations completed,

 this Department joins with other agencies in clearing debris in the area. In some

 cases the Department is not able to dispose of contaminated garbage, spoiled foods,

 and debris at the regular disposal facilities due either to breakdowns of inciner-

 ators or excessive amounts of refuse and debris at these locations. In the case

 after Hurricane Betsy in 1965, seven additional dumps were opened to accept the

 estimated 136,500 loads of mixed garbage, trash, trees, etc. Reactivation of

 former dumps or designations of new emergency dump locations can readily be

 obtained by the Department in case of emergency needs.

 7. Comments on Operation of the Sanitation Department
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 In the foregoing sections we have reported on the organization and operation of

 the Sanitation Department as the result of more than eight months of detailed study

 of its operation, during which time we have developed certain opinions and con-

 clusions which we believe should be set forth in this report. Our comments are as

 follows:

 a. The basic responsibilities with which the Department is charged

 are clearly defined and its organizational structure defines the

 scope of duties for each major function or division.

 b. Weekly staff meetings provide good communication with first line

 supervisors in all divisions.

 c. Salary levels together with fringe benefits under the Civil 

Service

 system are generally in line with prevailing area rates for the

 various classifications and respective skills required.

 d. The subdivision of the City into six collection districts for 

refuse

 V-45

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 collection, each under a district foreman, represents a 

sound

 practice in that it limits collection areas to a reasonable 

size

 for supervising and policing.

 e. The provision of an incinerator to serve each collection 

district

 reduces collection costs to a minimum by reducing travel 

distance

 and time to and from the point of disposal.

 f. The garaging of collection vehicles at the incinerator 

sites re-

 duces dead running time and permits better crew control.

 g. With theshort haul tothe point of disposal in each 

collection dis-

 trict, the collection vehicleof 20-cubic yard capacity is 

adequate.

 h. The use of rear loading packer trucks recently purchased 

will re-

 duce the lift that is required to load the truck from that 

required

 by the present side loading trucks thus reducing the efforts

re-

 quired by the collector.

 i. Packer trucks should be of the type that unload with a 

pusher plate

 to avoid strain on the truck chassis and facilitate 

unloading.

 j. The present practice of obtaining the weight of refuse in 

each ve-

 hicle delivered to either an incinerator or dump as well as

the

 practice of identifying the truck route and collection 

district for

 each Sanitation Department vehicle should be continued.

 k. Type and format of records maintained by both Collection 

and Dis-

 posal Divisions appear adequate and generally concise.

 I. Our study of these records indicate the, need for 

improvement in

 accuracy and completeness in their preparation.

 m. Information concerning both collection and disposal should 

be sum-

 marized monthly and the information analyzed to ensure an 

equi-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 table distribution of the work between the crews and 

control of

 the overall operation.

 n. The substantial differences between the quantities 

collected by

 crews working in adjacent areas as disclosed by our survey 

should

 be further investigated by analysis of the records over a 

longer

 period and by field observations.

V-46

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Trl-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 o. Consideration should be given to raising the pay scale of the sec-

 tion foreman to ensure a higher scale than that of the personnel

 under their supervision.

 p. Consideration should also be given to increasing the car allowance

 for foremen required to use their own cars in connection with their

 jobs to ensure adequate supervision.

 q. The general appearance of the three regularly operating inciner-

 ators, Florida Avenue, Seventh Street, and Algiers, could be

 substantially improved by better housekeeping and a regular pro-

 gram of preventive maintenance.

 r. The increasing degree of complexity and mechanization of the

 newer incinerators beginning with Algiers, St. Louis, and New

 Orleans East as well as those proposed hereunder require a care-

 fully planned and executed program of regular preventive main-

 tenance to minimize costly breakdowns in equipment and inter-

 ruptions in plant operation.

 s. An adequate budget allowance under which regular maintenance

 can be accomplished including the renewal or replacement of

 equipment is a necessity for a program of preventive maintenance.

 t. The present budget of the Sanitation Department is unrealistic

 and inadequate to provide for proper maintenance and contributes

 to plant neglect and lack of pride of the operators.

 u. Personnel requirements should be reviewed on the newer inciner-

 ators and qualifications and pay rates established commensurate

 with the duties required.

 v. Efforts being made to provide an effective safety program to re-

 duce vehicular and occupational accidents are vital and should

 be further emphasized. The safety programs introduced at the

 various plants should be more vigorously enforced and employees

 required to use safety equipment provided for their protection.

 The requirement that all collection employees wear safety shoes

 should be rigidly enforced.

 V-47

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 B. Quantities and Types of Refuse

 1. Present Quantities - Municipal and Private

 In order to determine the present quantities of waste generated within the 

City,

 records for the years 1965, 1966, and 1967 were examined. These records 

in-

 cluded the weight of all materials delivered to the incinerators and 

estimated

 weights for both the Gentilly and Algiers Dumps.

 In order to verify these records, a field survey was made covering the 

first two

 weeks in December. For this purpose, scales were installed at both of the

munic-

 ipal dump sites. During the survey a man was stationed at each scale to 

check
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 the weights, as well as the source and types of refuse. The weights thus 

deter-

 mined were checked against the City records and related to the annual 

produc-

 tion. In the case of the incinerators, the correlation was excellent and 

as the

 results the City's records were adopted without correction. Estimates of 

weights

 made at both dumps, however, proved to be grossly in error. The Gentilly

Dump

 records showing several times more refuse than determined by survey while 

the

 Algiers Dump records were somewhat less than that indicated by the survey. Sur-

 vey figures projected to reflect annual coverage figures were adopted for 

this

 portion of the record.

 In addition to the City dumps, the New Orleans Disposal Co. operates a 

large

 landfill within the City. This is the only major commercial disposal 

facility in

 the City receiving any substantial quantities of refuse. A similar twoweek sur-

 vey was made at this dump and the volume and amounts of the different type

of

 refuse were estimated.

 We find the total refuse production in New Orleans amounts to 1,950 tons 

per

 day (7-day week) of which 43% is collected by municipal forces and the 

remain-

 der by private disposal concerns and demolition companies. Generally, the

 latter collects all waste from commercial and industrial enterprises and 

that gen-

 erated from the port facilities. The total quantity of refuse, expressed 

in terms

 of per capita production, amounts to 5.69 pounds per day, which is about 

25%

 higher than the national average. A breakdown of our findings into 

combustible

 and non-combustible refuse is shown in Table V-24 which includes the per 

capita

 figures for each classification. It should be noted that the amounts 

recorded in

 the Table as Municipal refuse include that collected by other public 

agencies in

 addition to the Sanitation Departments.

V-48

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-24

 TOTAL REFUSE PRODUCTION (1967)

 (7-Day Week)

Municipal

Private (Ind.,

Comm., Port, etc.

Demolition and

Construction

TOTAL

Combustible per Day

Tons

750

610

1,360

Lbs/Cap

2.18

1.78

3.96

Non-Combustible per Day

Tons

75

115

400
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

590

Lbs/Cap

0.22

0.24

1.17

1.73

Tofal per Day

Tons

825

725

400

1,950

Lbs/Cap

2.40

2.12

1.17

5.69

 The regular refuse collection service provided by the City through its established

 collection routes is largely limited to the collection of combustible refuse, i. 

e.,

 that which can be charged into an incinerator. Special crews are used for the col-

 lection of oversize and non- combustible refuse, i.e., that which cannot be

 charged into an incinerator.

 2.

Forecast of Future Waste Production

 Records show that nationally the per capita production of refuse has increased from

 2.7 Ibs. per day in 1920 to 4.2 Ibs. in 1960 and forcast projections anticipate a

 steady continuing increase as disposable items come into greater use. A similar 

sit-

 uation has been experienced by the City so that approximately 15% increase per

 decade in per capita production over the next twenty years has been adopted in this

 report in forecasting future refuse quantities.

 Based on the above criteria, it is expected that the present per capita production

 of 5.69 Ibs. per day will reach 7.69 Ibs. by 1990 which amounts to 3,610 tons

 per day distributed as shown on Table V-25 The national average as estimated

 by APWA for that year is 6.4 Ibs. per capita.

 V-49

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-25

 FORECAST OF TOTAL REFUSE PRODUCTION

 (7-Day Week)

 Year Population Lbs/Cap/Day Tons/Day

 1967 687,170 5.69 1,950

 1970 713,500 5.81 2,080

 1980 822,000 6.69 2,750

 1990 937,000 7.69 3,610

 3. Characteristics of Waste

 As previously mentioned, most household refuse produced in the City'is 

collected by

 Sanitation Department forces. Except for oversize and special wastes this refuse

is de-

 livered to the incinerators, as much as it is possible to do so and within the 

availability of

 incinerator capacity. As additional incinerator capacity becomes available it is 

expected

 that all combustible and household refuse, with some exceptions, will be 

incinerated .

 In order to determine the composition of the waste presently delivered to the 

incinerators/

 samples of such refuse were col lected for five consecutive days and analyzed. A 

summary

 of the test appears in Table V-26 which shows the results of the average 5-

daysampling

 and includes moisture content and the calculated calorific values for the various

component*'

 The samples were collected during a dry period. (See Appendix VI for Sampl ing 

Procedur^'
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 a. Incinerable Refuse

 Under this heading we have included all refuse which would be 

acceptable

 for burning at an incinerator. Amounting presently to 1,310 tons per 

day/

 it includes some non-burnable materials such as glass, cans and other 

metal*

 which are normally found in household refuse. Our survey revealed 

that

 municipal collection accounts for approximately 55% of the total com-

 bustible refuse produced in the City and it is expected that this 

proportion

 will remain fairly constant over the years.

 b, Non-incinerable Refuse

 In the New Orleans area non-combustible waste must be considered in

 two separate classifications. That which makes satisfactory fill 

material

 and, therefore, presents no problem in that it may be in demand in the

V-50

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Classification

 of Compohents

 3. Paper Products

 5. Plastic & Misc.

 Total Combustibles

Mon-Combustibles:

 1. Glass

 2. Misc. Metals & Cans

 TABLE V-26

 PHYSICAL COMPOSITION OF REFUSE

 CITY OF NEW ORLEANS

 (Averages of 5-day Sampling)

 Calorific Value*

 Percent Composition Percent (BTU/Lb.)

 Wet Weight Basis Moisture (Dry, Ash-

 (As Delivered) Free Basis)

 18.9

 9.2

 39.4

 2.6

 1.5

 71.6

39.5

39.2

10.5

4.9

-

5,900

5,500

7,150

7,600

16,000

9,800

9,350

8,000

8,000

16,000

 21.3

 16.2

 12.2

5.9
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Total Non-Combustibles

 Total

 28.4

 100.0

 3.1

 16.2** 4,890**

5,890**

 Basis, values from Proceedings, 1964 National Incinerator Conference.

 sendix B & C, Page 46-47.

 As Delivered, values reduced to moisture content shown.

 Weighted Average

 ;. See Appendix VI for sampling procedures and other data.

 V-51

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 area for filling low ground. Under this heading is included most 

demoli-

 tion waste and some forms of industrial wastes. Since they present no

prob-

 lem and are frequently disposed of by the contractor or industry 

producing

 them, reliable estimates of the amounts of such waste are difficult to

ob-

 tain. Ash and incinerator residue from a properly operated 

incinerator

 are also in this classiffication.

 The second category includes waste which cannot be used as fill 

material

 such as discarded or abandoned vehicles. In the New Orleans area some

 of these are processed as scrap and the remainder are a problem which

was

 covered in Chapter III. Old refrigerators, stoves, large pieces of 

furniture,

 bedsprings, stumps, logs, timbers, and similar materials including 

some auto

 bodies, cannot be incinerated without special handling. Such 

materials

 will continue to be dumped in landfills where they can be crushed, 

com-

 pacted, and covered for disposal.

 c. Industrial and Commercial Waste

 Field observations made in December 1967 of the activities at both 

munici-

 pal and private disposal facilities, reasonably established the 

gross tonnage

 of wastes being delivered to incinerators and area landfills. These 

observation5

 also provided'a breakdown between municipal and privatewastes 

delivered

 to these locations. However, as a means of providing further detail of

private

 wastes produced in the area, that is, type and composition as well as 

major

 producers and methods of disposal not revealed by the field 

observations, a

 direct mail survey of industry and commerce was undertaken. The 

support of

 theChamberof Commerce of Greater New Orleans was obtained in 

launching

 this survey covering some 2,100 selected firms in the Tri-Parish area 

(about

 1,700 within New Orleans, 300 in Jefferson, and 100 in St. Bernard).

This

 direct mail approach together with follow up via telephone (to more 

than 1^

 firms) and mail produced a response of about 30%. This percentage of 

repHe5'

 though low, was reasonable considering the broad range and number of 

bust'

 ness firms initially solicited. Review of the initial mailing list 

and replies

 indicates that representative coverage of the major industrial and 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

commer-

 cial firms was obtained.

 Table V-27 summarized 453 replies from firms solicited in New Orleans

 and illustrates the number of firms utilizing the various methods of 

collection

 or disposal listed. A sample of the questionnaire is included in 

Appendix IV'

 Excluding those firms receiving municipal collection and those which 

pro-

 vided incomplete replies, the resulting number (about 84%) was 

considered

 pertinent to further analysis. Table V-28 covers quantities and types,

i.e./

 combustible and non-combustible wastes reported by these 381 firms.

V-52

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Par?sh Area

.New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-27

 METHODS OF COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF

 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL WASTES

Firms Solicited

Firms Replying (by 2/15/68)

Municipal Collection

Collection by Private Contractor

Haul Own Trucks

On-Site Incineration

Combination of Methods

Incomplete Reply

No.

1,686

453

71

259

82

25

15

1

% Replies

Received

15.7

57.2

18.1

5.5

3.3

.2

 TABLE V-28

 QUANTITIES AND TYPES OF WASTES REPORTED

Method of Col lection or Disposal

By Private Contractor

Haul Own Trucks

On-Site Incineration

Combination of Methods

Total

Avg. Tons Daily (6 Day Wk.)

Percent of Total (Tons/Day)

No. of

Firms

259

82

25

15

381

Tons per Week

Comb. Non-Comb.

730.3 122.0

81.5

3.5

*

815.3

135.8

85.6
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

15.8

.2

*

138.0

23.1

14.4

Total

852.3

97.3

3.7

*

953.3

158.9

100.0

 * Included above

 By comparison, our December field observations at all disposal points in-

 dicated a total of 725 tons per day from private commercial and industrial

 sources with 610 tons per day (84.2%) combustible and 115 tons/day (15.8%)

 V-53

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 non-combustible material, which compares very favorably with the 

ma-

 terial classification from replies to the mail survey. However, 

compa-

 rison of quantities based on percentage of replies to total firms 

solicited

 does not appear to be a reliable method of evaluation of total 

wastes

 generated.

 To correlate the point of origin of the wastes reported in the 

survey,

 to the collection districts of the Sanitation Department, we 

prepared

 Table V-29which presents distribution of quantities, types and 

percent

 of total wastes by district, as well as percentage distribution of

the

 firms reporting.

 TABLE V-29

 DISTRIBUTION OF REPORTED PRIVATE WASTES

Collection

District

Central

Western

Eastern 1

Eastern II

Algiers

Night

Total

%of

Firms

Report

14.5

19.3

5.0

8.9

1.2

51.0

100.0

Tons Per Week

Comb.

57.2

246.3

34.1

131.2

1.2

345.3

815.3

%

7.1

30.2

4.2

16.1
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Tr.

42.4

100.0

NonComb.

16.6

37.2

1.4

33.1

.7

49.0

138.0

%

12.1

26.9

1.0

24.0

.5

35.5

100.0

Total

73.8

283.5

35.5

164.3

1.9

394.3

953.3

Avg.

Tons

/Day

12.3

47.3

5.9

27.4

.3

65.7

158.9

%of

Total

7.7

29.7

3.7

17.5

Tr.

41.4

100.0

 The principal points of disposal as indicated by the replies were 

private

 landfills, with municipal landfills receiving only 32.0 tons/day 

and mu-

 nicipal incinerators 4.5 tons per day.

 The composition of the combustible materials reported included 

paper,

 cardboard, carton, wood, plastics, cloth and food wastes. 

Considered6

 variations in the combinations of materials occurred in the 

replies, with

 paper products'predominantly high in the order of quantities. Other

 combustibles reported less frequently were leather, rubber, grass, 

lint/

V-54

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

.NewjDrleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 etc. Principal non-combustibles consisted of metals and glass. Occa-

 sionally, limited quantities of oversize wastes, such as discarded ap-

 pliances, furniture, machinery, defective and damaged plumbing fixtures

 were reported. Also, large quantities of waste materials were reported,

 such as those from a gypsum producer with 50 tons of waste per day, and

 a plumbing fixture manufacturer with wastes in the form of broken pottery

 molds producing about 40 tons per day. Special wastes of this nature have

 been excluded from the foregoing summaries of combustibles and non-

 combustibles as this type of material does not present a major disposal 

pro-

 blem !n the area, being disposed of normally in landfill developments.

 d. Port Wastes
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Of principal interest and application to our study of Metropolitan Wastes,

 is the determination of the quantities and types of wastes produced in

 the port facilities, the origin, their point of dijposal and projection of

 the increasing quantities of wastes to be expected.

 In 1965 a comprehensive study entitled "Wharf Refuse Collection and

 Disposal" was prepared for the Board of Commissioners, Port of New

 Orleans by Godat and Pepper, Consulting Engineers, New Orleans.

 This study was concerned with all aspects of collection, removal, and

 disposal of dunnage and other refuse accumulating in the wharf areas,

 from transfer of incoming and outgoing cargo between ships and rail or

 motor freight carriers. It will be noted that the scope of this study is

 confined to those public facilities operated by the State and excludes

 coverage of wharfage operated by private industry.

 In the study, quantities of wastes were determined through evaluation of

 field observations taken over a four-month period which included weigh-

 ing of trucks at the Algiers incinerator enroute to the Algiers landfill and

 daily collection records of the Dock Board. Wide fluctuations found in

 daily quantities of wastes generated varied with, the number and frequency

 of berthings, the tonnage of vessels serviced and the nature of cargo 

carried,

 The results of this study reasonably established the quantity of wastes pro-

 duced in 1965 with projections of the annual level of wastes to be 

expected

 through the year 1985 based on increases anticipated at the rate of 5%

 per annum as shown in Table V-30,

 V-55

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-30

 ESTIMATED PORT WASTES 1965 - 1985

 (tons)

 Year Annual Weekly *Daily

1965

1967

1970

1975

1980

1985

* 6-day week basis

6,864

7,540

8,736

11,128

14,228

18,127

132

145

168

214

274

349

22

24

28

36

46

59

 It was estimated that 90% by weight of port wastes were combustible ma-

 terials, consisting mostly of heavy wood scantling, timber, pallets, 

crates,

 boxes, building paper, and waste paper. Other miscellaneous 

combustibles

 included broken bales of produce, broken bags of coffee, grain, 

fertilizer,

 carbon black, rope, and plastics. Non-combustibles consisted of steel

 bandings, baling wire, nails, and bolts. Much of the combustible 

materials

 were found to be large and bulky, difficult to handle for disposal, 

either

 in a properly operated landfill or by incineration without first 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

crushing or

 pulverizing. The practice of disposal of these materials was by open 

burn-

 ing at the Algiers landfill.

 Distribution of the origin of these wastes as produced in the wharf 

area is

 identified in the port study by wharf name and plotted by location. 

Orientinfl

 these wharfs and the respective quantities of waste produced in 1965 

to the

 boundaries of the collection districts of the Sanitation Dept., as they

exist

 today, we find the approximate distribution of tonnage as shown In 

Table V~3'

 TABLE V-31

 DISTRIBUTION OF PORT WASTES

 (Tons)

 *District % 1965 **1967

Western

Central

Eastern 1

Night

20

25

25

30

1,372

1,716

1,716

2,060

1,508

1,885

1,885

2,262

 TOTAL 100 6,864 7,540

 * Trace percentages (not shown occurred in Algiers and Eastern II 

Districts

 ** Assumed same percentage distribution as 1965

V-56

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 e.

 Demolition and Construction Wastes

 1967 records show that 437 demolition permits were issued in the City.

 These included 143 single family units, 152 duplex buildings, and

 56 buildings of other residential classification (triplex, four pi ex,

 apartments, etc.). In total, 351 buildings containing 765 living

 units were demolished in 1967. The remaining 86 demolition per-

 mits issued covered all other classifications of buildings. 

However,

 small commercial buildings were most predominant in this group.

 Table V-32 provides the complete listing of building types covered

 by 1967 permits.

 Principal waste materials resulting from demolition projects include

 concrete and masonry rubble, plaster, roofing, lumber, wiring,

 piping, etc. A great portion of these wastes consists of non-

 combustible, hard fill materials, and of oversize wastes.

 In New Orleans, as in other areas throughout the country, the sal-

 vage of bricks and other materials from demolished buildings is

 actively practiced to satisfy the growing demand in this market.

 Several specialized demolition contractors in the City compete for

 demolition projects which have large quantities of salvage material.

 Discussions with the major contractors revealed that a substantial

 amount of this type of material is also imported into the City from

 sources out of state to satisfy the local market demand.

 Combustible materials such as wood, roofing, etc., are normally

 disposed of by burning at permitted locations within the City. Or-

 dinarily, collection and disposal of such materials is handled by the

 demolition companies, or in some cases, especially on the larger

 projects, by private hauling contractors.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 The general practice for disposal of non-combustible fill materials

 is through private hauling by individuals in need of such material

 for land development. Common practice in this area indicates that

 usable fill is loaded free of charge for removal from demolition

 sites. A considerable amount of this waste has gone to the outlying

 V57

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-32

 1967 DEMOLITION PERMITS - CITY OF NEW ORLEANS

 Building Type No. Bldgs. No. Living Units

 Apartment Houses 11

 Dormitory 1

 Sororities 2

 Motel 1

 Single Family 143 143

 Two-family 152 304

 Triplex 11 33

 Fourplex 16 64

 Roominghouse 2 19

 Theatre 3

 Public Elementary School 1

 Universities 2

 Churches 2

 Convalescent Home 1

 Orphanage 1

 Private Garages 2

 Carport 1

 Open Sheds 2

 Enclosed Sheds 6

 Factory 1

 Machine Shop 1

 Warehouses (Storage of Non-Combustibles) 23

 Lumber Yard 1

 Wholesale Store 1

 Retail Stores over 1000 sq. ft. 13

 Commercial and Residential 16 92

 Restaurant T

 Cocktail Lounge - Bar 1

 Bar and Restaurant 1

 Service Stations 5

 Repair Shop over 1000 sq. ft. 1

 Office Buildings 5

 Small Commercial Stores under 1000 sq. ft. 7

V-58

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 areas in the northeastern section of Orleans Parish for filling 

marshland

 areas in this section of the City.

 In order to arrive at an estimate in the amount of demolition waste

 produced in the City, we contacted some of the most active demo-

 lition companies in the area and reviewed the demolition permits

 issued by the Buildings Department in the City of New Orleans. It

 is estimated that the total amount of non-combustible demolition

 waste produced in the City of New Orleans in 1967 ranged between

 100 and 150 tons per day, with the majority of this material being

 deposited in private fills for land development purposes.

 In addition to demolition wastes, activities in new construction, as

 well as alterations and additions contribute a substantial quantity

 of non-combustible wastes from the construction industry. In 1967

 some 4,000 building permits were issued in the City of New Orleans

 for new construction and alterations and additions to existing struc-

 tures. It is estimated that non-combustible wastes from new con-

 struction activities (materials similar to those waste materials of demo-

 lition projects) ranged from 200 to 250 tons per day in the year 1967

 Non-combustible wastes produced by these construction activities are

 also used in landfill developments.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Although it is the practice of most building contractors to handle

 disposition of their combustible wastes, large building contractors in

 the area, especially those operating in the central business district

 and on major projects such as hospitals, schools, etc., in the out-

 lying sections, are looking more to the private hauler for the disposal

 of combustible wastes.

 f. Refuse Collection by Sanitation Department

 As previously mentioned, the Sanitation Department collects approx-

 imately 43% of the refuse generated within the City. For this

 purpose, the City of New Orleans is divided into six collection

 districts.

 V-59

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Data gathered in the field survey, supplemented by information 

ob-

 tained in the collection and haul study, made it possible to 

deter-

 mine the quantity of combustible refuse collected by the City 

from

 each collection district, and also to determine the per capita 

pro-

 duction in each district. This breakdown was essential in 

develop-

 ing the collection and haul study covered later in this Report, 

and

 is pertinent to the analysis of the refuse collection system of 

the

 City's Sanitation Department.

 In order to determine future quantities of refuse to be 

anticipated

 from each district, population forecasts made by the Planning De-

 partment were correlated to the collection districts and applied 

to

 the per capita waste production projected to future years up to

 1990.

 Forecast of population in five-year intervals by collection 

districts

 is shown in Table V-33 together with our estimate of the total 

tons

 of combustible refuse expected from each district, based on the 

per

 capita production. It should be noted that the quantities 

shown

 have been adjusted to a 6-day week basis to conform to the oper-

 ating schedule for both, the collection and disposal operation.

 Also, the collection districts for 1975 to 1990, except for the

Al-

 giers and Night Districts, have been modified in accordance with

 the First Stage Development Program discussed later in this 

Report.

 g. Quantities of Refuse Delivered to Municipal Incinerators

 In addition to the refuse delivered to each incinerator from the

 collection district by the Sanitation Department, private haulers

 account for much of the refuse from industrial, commercial, and

 multi-family residential units. Also, the Port Authority 

disposes

 of substantial quantities of refuse from shipping both into and 

out

 of New Orleans.

 A summary of the estimated quantities of waste produced from 

each

 of these sources in each collection district from 1967 through 

1990

 is given in Table V-34.

V-60

-------

 TABLE V-33

 REFUSE COLLECTED BY SANITATION DEPARTMENT BY COLLECTION DISTRICTS - 1967 

- 1990
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 (6-Day Week)

Collection

District

Central

Western

Eastern 1

Eastern II

Algiers

Night

Total

Population

Weiahted

Average

Lbs/Capita

TOTAL

Tons/Day

1967

Population

152,760

162,440

142,660

106,490

5C.160

42.680

687,190

Lbs.

Cap.

Day

1.92

2.73

2.82

2.69

2.15

3.19

2.52

Tons

Per

Day

176

222

202

143

54

63

865

1970

Population

184,060

164,440

144,100

120,600

57,000

43,300

713,500
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Ihs.

Cap.

Day

1.96

2.79

2.88

2.75

2.20

3.20

2.56

Tons

Per

Day

180

228

208

165

63

69

913

1975

Population

225,250

124,750

194,740

105,000

68, 000

45,260

763, 000

Lbs.

Cap.

Day

2.00

2.98

3.07

2.94

2.35

3.30

2.66

Tons

Per

Day

225

186

299

155

80

75

1,020
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1980

Population

229, 000

127,750

203,000

1 36, 000

79, 000

47, 250

822, 000

Lbs.

Cap.

Day

2,10

3.18

3.27

3.14

2.50

3.40

2.85

Tons

Per

Day

240

203

332

214

100

81

1,170

1985

Population

231,750

129,750

210,750

168,000

90, 000

49, 750

880, 000

Lbs.

Cap.

Day

2.28

3.46

3.55

3.41

2.72

3.70

3.10

Tons
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Per

Day

264

224

374

286

123

92

1,363

1990

Population

234,750

132,750

212,250

195,500

110,000

51,750

937, 000

Lbs.

Cap.

Day

2.47

3.78

3.84

3.68

2.94

4.00

3.36

Tons

Per

Day

290

251

407

360

162

104

1,574

NOTES: 1 . Population estimates for 1970, based on revised collection districts, (Figure v'-

S).

 2. Population estimates for 1975 to 1990, based on future collection districts of the

 First Stage Development Program with Florida Avenue, Seventh Street and Algiers

 Incinerators enlarged and in service. (Figure V-14).

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

TABLE V-34

SUMMARY OF REFUSE PRODUCED IN EACH DISTRICT

(6- Day Week)

Algiers:
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Municipal

Comm. & Ind.

Port

Total Algiers Incinerator

Central:

Night:

Municipal

Comm. & Ind.

Port

Municipal

Comm. & Ind.

Port

Total Seventh Street Incinerator

Western:

Total St.

Eastern 1:

Municipal

Comm. & Ind.

Port

Louis Incinerator

Municipal

Comm. & Ind.

Port

Total Florida Avenue Incinerator

Eastern II

: Municipal

Comm. & Ind.

Port

1967

54

60

-

114

176

144

6

68

56

7

457

222

118

5

345

202

130

6

338

143

95

-

1970

63

70

-

133

180

147

7

69

56

8

467

228

120

6

354

208

133
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

7

348

165

105

-

1975

80

92

- .

172

225

190

9

75

61

10

570

186

122

7

315

299

184

9

492

155

110

-

1980

100

110

-

210

240

197

11

81

68

13

610

203

130

9

342

332

200

11

543

214

150

-

1985

123

139

-

262

264

213

14

92

75

17

675

224

142

12

378

374

227

14

615

286

204

—

1990

162

184

—

346

290

228
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

17

104

80

20

739^

251

1 CO

152

15

418

407

n A C

245

17

669

 ^

360

1CK

255

_

 Total N.O. East Incinerator

238 270 265 364 490 615

V-62

-------

Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 C. Analysis of Refuse Collection System

 1. General

 In order to properly evaluate the present system, it was necessary that we study the

 pick up and haul aspects of the refuse collection operations of the parish and thus,

 determine what modifications of the collection districts would be required to pro-

 vide an effective system under present and future conditions.

 2. Haul Study

 The analysis comprises a comparison of the system under present operating condi-

 tions and that resulting from the addition of the New Orleans East Incinerator and

 the rehabilitation of the St. Louis Incinerator. The former is, at this writing, un-

 dergoing final tests and should be in operation shortly. The unit at St. Louis is

 expected to be in service within a year. Therefore, the present system consisting

 of three incinerators and two dumps, plus a transfer station at St. Louis, will be

 operating in the near future with all five incinerators in service. The dumps will

 be confined to absorbing non-combustibles from all sources and residue material

 from the incinerators.

 The study is limited to the operations of the Sanitation Department and does not

 include private or other municipally collected refuse.

 The existing collection districts were modified with respect to the five incinerators

 in operation on the basis of reducing, as much as it was possible to do so, the

 haul distance and time of the vehicles and of confining the service area of each

 incinerator to a collection district, except for the Central and Night Districts

 which will continue to share the Seventh Street Incinerator as they are presently

 doing. The general layout of the proposed system is shown in Figure V-8 (back-

 cover) and a detailed description is covered later in this section.

 The Data Processing Department of the City provided valuable assistance in the

 evaluation of the large amount of information gathered in the survey. Data ob-

 tained in the field were adjusted to computer input form and a special program

 developed to carry out the necessary calculations of the study.

 It was evident from the start that the five incinerators are excellently located with

 respect to the quantity of refuse production and the haul distances within their re-

 spective service areas.

 V-63

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The analysis of collection and haul operations was developed from actual 

field

 records collected with the cooperation of Sanitation Department personnel, 

from

 each truck route in each district. The total number of hours and mileage 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

of col-

 lection and haul, as well as the tonnage collected, number of trips, etc.,

were

 recorded and evaluated. We were then able to calculate the average travel 

speed

 of the vehicles and the min jtes-per-ton of collection for each truck route

and for

 every collection day. The haul distances were then adjusted to the 

proposed col*

 lection districts with the five incinerators in operation. In the process 

of analys'5'

 the total number of working hours and the travel speed of the vehicle were 

kept

 the same. In the latter case the only exception was in the evaluation of 

the re-

 vised Eastern II District where the Mon-Wed-Fri routes were assigned an 

average

 haul speed of 15 1/2 mph, to and from the New Orleans East Incinerator 

which 's

 easily accessible through U.S. 90 most of the way. As would be expected, 

these

 routes recorded lower speeds when delivering to the Florida Avenue 

Incinerator

 due to the more congested area of travel.

 It should be noted that the collection crews do not work any specified 

number of

 hours and perform their task as long as required to cover their respective 

areas,

 thus the actual number of working hours vary from day to day and from route 

to

 route. It was necessary, therefore, that in the process of analysis the 

total work"

 ing hours recorded in each case be maintained constant when applied to the 

neW

 conditions. Similarly, the calculated minutes-per-ton of collection was 

applied

 throughout, for each case.

 It follows that the savings to be realized will be reflected in the 

reduction in

 haul time. It was found, for instance, that under present conditions the 

pick up

 crews average approximately 28% of the total working hours in hauling refuse

 and the remainder in collection. With the revised collection district, the 

haul

 time is reduced to 19% which, expressed in terms of haul cost, represents a 

de-

 crease from $721, 000 to approximately $490, 000, or a savings of $231, 000 

per

 year, based on 1967 cost data. These savings can only be realized if any 

time

 available, as the result of the reduction in haul time, were applied to col 

lectio11'

 By so doing, we find that the present collection crew could pick up an 

addition0'

 93 tons of refuse per day within the same working hours. Since this 

additional

 tonnage represents an amount greater than that produced during the survey, 

it

 necessary that the data be further reduced in terms of number of trucks 

required

 to serve each area and thus determine what reduction in the number of 

trucks

 would be obtained in each district. For this, it was necessary that the 

load per

 truck, per trip be maintained at, or less than the capacity of the vehicles,

so

 in some instances additional trips were required. The corresponding 

increase i°

 haul time for such cases were included in the analysis.

V-64

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The data gathered In the survey together with the result of calculations and

 projection to future operating conditions, that is, all five incinerators in oper-

 ation under a revised collection layout, appear in Tables A-8 through A-37 In
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Appendix II, together with a detailed explanation of Data Processing application.

 Results of the data compiled and calculated are summarized in Table V-35,

 which shows a total savings of ten trucks in the number of vehicles required

 to serve the present areas by the same crew and within the same working hours.

 It should be noted that the Algiers and Night Districts remain at eight truck

 routes each, since normal conditions do not affect these districts, which will

 continue operating as presently.

 Attention is directed to the fact that the analysis is confined to conditions

 presently existing when applied to a revised collection system that can be

 best served by the five incinerators. While future conditions will change as

 the City continues to grow, the survey provides valuable information on which

 realistic projections and estimates can be made.

 TABLE V-35

 SUMMARY OF COLLECTION AND HAUL STUDY

 (Trucks/Day)

District

1 . Central

2. Western

3. Eastern 1

4. Eastern II

5. Algiers

6. Night

TOTAL

Number of Trucks Required - Five Incinerators in Service

Man.

20.5

25.5

17.5

21.3

8.0

8.0

100.8

Tues.

22.0

24.7

21.9

19.8

8.0

8.0

104.4

Wed.

20.0

21.2

20.6

23.2

B.O

8.0

101.0

Thur.

22.0

23.8

18.0

19.5

e.o

8.0

99.3

Fri.

20.5

21.7

17.5

21.9

8.0

8.0

97.6

Sat.

22.0

21.7

21.9

21.3

8.0

8.0

102.9

Total

127.0

138.6

117.4

127.0

48.0
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

48.0

606.0

Adjusted

Average

21

23

20

21

8

8

101

No. of Trucks

Presently

In Use

22

28

22

23

8

8

111

Savings

(Trucks/Day)

1

5

2

2

0

0

10

 V-65

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 3. Revised Collection Districts to Serve Present Incinerators (1968)

 The collection districts were modified and the disposal point of several 

truck

 routes rearranged in order to reduce haul distance and time and provide a 

more

 efficient and economical system within the limits of incinerator capacity. 

It

 would have been possible to maintain the districts as at present by confining

 the proposed changes to points of disposal for the truck routes only. 

This

 approach would have been impractical under the present operating scheme of

 the Sanitation Department, because trucks assigned to the same districts 

would

 unload at different locations and operate from different garages.

 It has been the practice of the department to maintain the collection 

districts as

 separate units, each with its own vehicles and supervisory personnel 

operating

 from the same garage and unloading generally at the same incinerator or 

dump.

 We believe this method of operation to be sound and practical and the 

proposed

 changes in collection districts and truck routes maintains the present 

operating

 set up.

 With the New Orleans East and the St. Louis incinerators in service, the

 logical distribution of the five-incinerator service areas is as follows:

 District Incinerator

 Central Seventh Street

 Western St. Louis

 Eastern I Florida Avenue

 Eastern II New Orleans East

 Algiers Algiers

 Night Seventh Street
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 The layout of the revised district is shown in Figure V-8 (backcover). It 

may be

 seen that the district boundaries, except for the Algiers and Night 

Districts which

V*66

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 remain the same, have been adjusted by interchanging several truck routes from

 one district to another, but maintaining the boundaries of the present truck routes.

 Specifically, the modifications are as follows:

 a. Central District

 Increases from the present 22 to 26 truck routes, by relinquishing

 Routes No. 13 through 22 (Monday-Wednesday-Friday) to the West-

 ern District and picking up Routes No. 1 through 14, also 19> 21,

 25, and 27 (Tuesday-Thursday-Saturday) from Western. In summary,

 it exchanges with the Western District, losing five and gaining nine

 truck routes, for a net gain of four.

 b. Western District

 The number of truck routes remains at 28, but they are rearranged. In

 the exchange with the Central District, as explained above, it loses

 four routes, but gains four from Eastern I, as follows: Routes 1, 2,

 4, and 7 (Monday-Wednesday-Friday) and Routes 1, 3, 7, and 8

 (Tuesday-Thursday-Saturday).

 c. Eastern I

 The number of truck routes is increased from the present 22 to 23 by

 relinquishing four to Western District as explained above, and picking

 up five from Eastern II as follows: Routes No, 8 through 12 (Monday-

 Wednesday-Friday) and Routes No. 7 through 10 and 12 (Tuesday-

 Thursday-Saturday).

 d. Eastern II

 The number of truck routes is reduced from the present 23 to 18, by

 losing five routes to Eastern I as explained above.

 V-67

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The aforementioned changes appear in Figures V-9 to V-12 which show the indi-

 vidual truck routes for each revised district and Table V-36 summarizes the 

ex-

 change of truck routes among the collection districts. By applying the 

results of

 the haul study to the particular routes involved, we determined the number 

of

 trucks required in the revised collection districts. These appear in the 

same Table

 which shows the distribution of the total savings in number of trucks among 

the

 different districts.

 TABLE V-36

 PRESENT AND ADJUSTED NUMBER OF TRUCK ROUTES

 REQUIRED BY DISTRICTS 1967 - 1968

 (Trucks/Day)

DISTRICT

1. Central

2. Western

3. Eastern 1

4. Eastern II

5. Algiers

6. Night

TOTAL

Present

Operation

22

28

22

23

8

8

111

Recommended
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Reassignment

+4

—

+1

-5

—

—

0

REVISED DISTRICTS

(Five Incinerators in. Service)

. Adjusted

26

28

23

18

8

8

111

Required

24

24

20

17

8

8

101

Savings

2

4

3

1

0

0

10

 A breakdown of the specific truck routes assigned to each revised collection 

dis-

 trict is shown in the tables included with the above Figures. In these 

tables, each

 route is identified as to its number, day of collection, and the districts to 

which

 they are presently assigned. Also, the calculated number of trucks required 

for each

 route is shown.

 In order to implement the reduction in truck routes, only those routes 

requiring less,

 or more, than one truck to serve their respective areas should be affected. 

The redoc*

 tion may then be accomplished by combining portions of certain adjacent routes

ac-

 cording to the tabulated values computed for each, and to the special 

characteristics

 of the area as determined by field investigation. This subject is covered 

further in

 the Summary at the end of this section. For more clarification as to the 

specific truck

 routes involved, they have been noted in Figures V-9 to V-12, where, in 

addition,

 all routes in each district are clearly identified.

V-68

-------

MON - WED - FRI COLLECTION

Present Operation

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

g

9

10

1 1

12

4
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

5

6

10

11

14

15

16

17

20

21

22

Day

MWF

,<

,,

„

i,

„

„

,,

ii

ii

..

ii

n

"

..

n

.i

.i

.i

..

District

Central

n

..

n

..

,i

i,

,;

,,

n

n

n

..

..

n

||

ii

..

..

ii

"

ii

n

TOTAL

No..

Trucks

Req'd.

.00

.00

.00
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

24.00

TUBS - THURS - SAT COLLECTION

Present Operation

Route

No.

1

2

3

7

8

9

12

13

18

19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

19

21

25

27

Day

TTS

1

n

"

i'

"

"

||

"

||

"

"

11

»

"

"

"

"

"

"
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

"

11

"

"

"

11

District

Central

11

••

n

11

"

11

11

11

Western

11

"

i'

"

"

11

"

"

11

"

11

"

"

11

"

11

"

No.

Trucks

Req'd.

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

.89

.77

.70

.79

.75

.75

.75

.84

.68

.79

.87

.82

.77

.79

.86

.81

.86

.87

24.36

Average

 Use

24.18

24.00

 I i

REVISED CENTRAL. DISTRICT

 LEGEND
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Tlh STREET INCINERATOR

BOUNDARIES-

 •naW.^^' COI-1-ECTION DISTRICTS

 REVISED COLJ-ECTION

 •• ' •• DAY OROUP

 PRESENT

 "^^^^' DAY 0»0

 TRUCK ROUTES NOTES: 1 . Truck routes ore identified by present truck-route numbers.

 2. Truck-route numbers shown inside o circle indicate Tues - Thurs - Sat routes re-assigned from Wesiern District FIG.

Page

-------

 I_AKF PONTCHARTRAIN

 JEFFCMON PARIS

 NOTES:

 1. Truck routes are identified by present

 truck-route numbers.

 2. Truck routes re-assigned from other

 districts are shown as follows:

 Q Re-assigned from MWF of Central District

 Q " " " Eastern I

 " TTS

3OOO | OOO

 SCALE IN FEET

MON- WED- FRI COLLECTION

Present Operotion

toutf

No.

1

2

c

7

g

9

0

^

16

17

1 8

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

27

28

16

TOTAL

Doy

MV, I
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

TTS

DMrid

No.

Trurki

Req'd

83

84

7;

.76

.B5

86

.89

.65

67

82

75

.80

80

.86

70

oB

.84
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

.90

79

.83

.83

85

87

91

.80

.84

.81

88

23.71

TUES - THURS - SAT COLLECTION

Present Operation

Route

No.

15

17

18

20

?2

23

24

26

28

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

1

2

4

7

1

3

7

8

Day

TTS

MWT

11

TTS

District

Western
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

"

11

Central

fastem 1

No

Trucks

Ruq'd.

.93

1 .00

91

.92

.81

87

.91

91

.90

1.00

.85

83

.78

.80

.87

.78

69

94

.80

.75

87

.74

1.03

98

.96

1 . 00

.93

23.76

23.74

24.00

 ISSI3SIPP1 RIVER REVISED WESTERN DISTRICT

 LEGEND

 ST L.OUIS INCINERATOR

 BOUNDARIES •

 ^^i^-*T^^ COL.L.ECTION DISTRICTS

^ I • | ^ REVISED COL.L.ECTION DAV OROUP
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 ^^'VK'Vk^ PRESENT COLLECTION DAV OROUP

 TRUCK ROUTES

 CENTRAU 

DISTRICT

 FJe. V-10

 Page V-70

-------

MON - WED - FRI COLLECTION

Present Operation

Route

No.

0

5

6

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

8

9

10

11

12

12

Day

MWF

ii

"

"

"

"

"

ii

"

ii

||

ii

||

||

||

ii

"

||

"

"

"

District

Eastern 1

•i

||

||

"

||

||

||

"

ii

||
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

||

||

"

"

"

Eastern II

||

||

"

"

TOTAL

No.

Trucks

Req'd

.86

.81

.82

.70

.77

.98

.81

.77

.72

.91

1.00

.74

1.00

.96

.81

.84

.85

.75

.90

.65

1.01

.66

.89

1.00

20.21

TUES - THURS - SAT COLLECTION

Present Operation

Route

No.

2

4

5

6

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

7

8

9

10

Day

TTS

1

|'

11

||

"

"

||

"

11

"
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

"

"

"

1

11

"

||

"

"

District

Eastern 1

"

"

n

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

11

"

11

"

"

"

"

Eastern II

11

"

"

No.

Trucks

Req'd.

.92

.93

.92

.86

.91

1.00

.92

.90

.97

.89

1 .01

.91

.90

.99

.96

1.00

.90

.88

.92

.81

.82

.86

20.18

Average

 Use

20.19

20.00

NOTES: 1. Truck routes are identified by present truck-route numbers.

 2. Truck routes re-assigned from other districts are shown as follows:

 Q Re-assigned from MWF of Eastern II District

 " TTS

 MON.. WED., » FRI.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

REVISED EASTERN I DISTRICT

 LEGEND

•| FLORIDA AVENUE INCINERATOR

BOUNDARIES:

 B^^^T^r^ COLLECTION DISTRICTS

 REVISED O PRESENT

 COLLECTION DAY OROUP

 TRUCK ROUTES

 3OOO I BOO CALE IN FEET FIG. V-ll

Page V-71

-------

NOTE: Truck routes are identified by present truck-route numbers.

MON - ME) - Fftl COLLECTION

l»r.»nl Optiulia"

tout*

He,

1

1

]

;

°"

wwr

EOIT«M. II

TUIAI

Truck >

»*<="" as="" incinerator="" no="" collection="" page-72="" v-12="" fig-="" routes="" truck="" 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

oroup="" day="" present="" m="" revised="" district*="" coulcction="" ••^t-.^4^d="" cast="" o.=""

n.="" d="" n="" qc="" e="" l="" district="" h="" eastern="" 68="" 16="" 85="" 7j="" bo="" 93="" 

98="" 08="" 1="" s3="" .99="" reqd="" irucki="" i,="" !«,;,„="" ii="" hail*..="" dti-rice="" 

«w,="" rrs="" ?="" 2="" .="" ]="" ,="" maul*="" optratlon="" prawn!="" sat="" thurs-="" tufs-=""

13="" 17="" 11="" 9="" 3="" 5="" 1.="" h7="" .as="" .77="" 1.07="" 0="" .«*="" c6="" i="" 

.07="">

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 4. Savings in Haul Costs

 In order to arrive at the dollar savings that would result from the adjusted refuse

 collection system, cost data obtained from the Sanitation Department were reduced

 to cost per truck per year.

 The cost figures include payroll, operating and maintenance expenses, fringe ben-

 efits, and other miscellaneous expenditures covering the cost of operating the

 vehicles. As would be expected, with generally rising prices the cost is 

increasing

 yearly as shown by Table V-37 which covers expenditures of the last three years.

 TABLE V-37

 ANNUAL COST OF COLLECTION TRUCKS

 (Cost Per Truck)

 1965 1966 1967

 1. No. of Trucks Route 125 125 111

 2. Payroll (Incl. Social &

 Fringe Benefits $12,806 $14,474 $17,226

 3. Insurance & Licenses 220 220 250

 4. Operating & Maintenance 3,300 3,640 4,270

 5. Capital Cost (Estimated) 1,250 1,250 1,250

 Total Cost (Trucks/Year) $17,576 $19,584 $22,996

 A savings of ten trucks will, therefore, amount to approximately $230, 000 per

 year, based on 1967 prices. This figure compares favorably with the annual savings

 of $231,000 in haul cost previously described which savings was based strictly on

 the reduction in haul time.

 5. Future Collection Districts for First Stage Development

 As previously mentioned, we were able to verify in the process of the haul study,

 the excellent location of the present incinerators with respect to their service 

areas.

 The revised collection layout to be implemented as soon as the incinerator at St.

 Louis is put in service, was based on the present capacities of the various 

inciner-

 ators and their ability to handle the refuse produced in their tributary areas.

 V-73

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 By increasing the capacities of the Florida Avenue and the Seventh Street 

inciner-

 ators, it would be possible to further improve the collection system to 

meet the fu-

 ture requirements of the City. Whereas the revised collection districts to 

be served

 by the present incinerators were limited by the capacities of these units, 

it is

 obvious that the larger plants at Florida Avenue and Seventh Street provide 

more

 flexibility in adjusting the boundaries of the service areas. These 

incinerators are

 located within relatively short distances from the source of most intense 

refuse pro-

 duction so that their service areas may be increased in relation to the 

larger incin-

 erator capacities, and thus achieve additional savings in the cost of 

refuse collec-

 tion and disposal.

 Following the above criteria, we have further revised the collection 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

districts served

 by the two incinerators. These are shown in Figure V- 13 (backcover) where

it may

 be noted that the Eastern I and Central Districts have been enlarged 

considerably by

 taking in areas from the adjacent Eastern II and Western Districts. The 

Night and

 Algiers District will remain within their present boundaries. In order to 

properly

 evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed system, it was necessary that we 

project

 the population growth of the revised districts and estimate the quantities 

of refuse

 production in each.

 Based on the result of the haul study, we were able to estimate the savings 

that

 would result by implementing the changes recommended herein at approximately

 $50,000 per year in haul cost (1967 prices) when both of these incinerators 

are

 enlarged and placed into operation (1973). The major savings will be 

obtained

 by assigning all of the Mon-Wed-Fri routes from Eastern II District to the 

Florida

 Avenue incinerator instead of New Orleans East. In addition, the new 

system

 will relieve the load from the St. Louis and New Orleans East incinerators

which

 will be too small to serve their present service areas by 1975.

 The distribution of the load among the incinerators under the proposed 

layout from

 1975 to 1990 is shown in Table V-45 (page V-112). We estimate that the 

recom-

 mended districting will be adequate at least until 1980 when the entire 

system

 will have to be re-evaluated.

 6. Future Requirements in Number of Trucks

 We have previously established in Table V-33 (page V-61) the projected 

amount

 of refuse, by districts, to be collected by the City forces in future years. Based

 on these estimates and on the average tonnage picked up by the vehicles per 

day

 in each district so as to maintain the work load of the crews about the same 

as

 presently, we calculated the number of truck routes that will be required in

the

 future.

V-74

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The result of our calculations are presented graphically in Figures V-14 V-15 and

 \/- 1 6 covering a period from the present to 1985. A summary of the estimated

 number of truck routes required by districts in a five-year interval is shown in 

Table

 V-38.

 TABLE V- 38

 ESTIMATE OF FUTURE REQUIREMENT-TRUCK ROUTES PER DAY

 1985

 1. Central 24 24 25 31 33 36

 2. Western 24 25 25 20 22 24

 3. Eastern I 20 21 21 30 33 37

 4. Eastern II 17 19 20 19 26 34

 5. Algiers 8 9 9 12 15 18

 6. Night __8 __8 8_ 9_ 10 11

 Total 101 106 108 121 139 160

 *From 1975 on, based on districts for First Stage Development with Florida

 Avenue and Seventh Street Incinerators enlarged and in service. (Refer to

 Map V-14, backcover).
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 The rapid increase in the number of truck routes in the Algiers and Eastern II Dis-

 tricts is reflected by the greater rate of growth anticipated by the City Planning

 Department for these areas.

 The above figures are estimates based on the best information available. The actual

 number of routes required in the future will vary according to operating conditions

 then existing which will require a re-evaluation of the system every few years. 

Also,

 some of the districts may be reduced in size once it becomes apparent that they are

 too large to function effectively.

 V-75

-------

 NIGHT DISTRICT

 Truck Routes

 Required

 60

 1965

 EASTERN I DISTRICT

 350 -

 300 -

 250

 200

 150

 Truck Routes

 Required

 cue

 -Effect of Redistricting

 to increasing capacity

 Florida Avenue 8> Seventh

 Street Incinerators

 Truck Routes

 Required

 40

 o

 -

 35

 30

 25

 20

 965

1970

 1975

YEAR

1980

1985

 FUTURE NUMBER OF TRUCK ROUTES

 NIGHT AND EASTERN I DISTRICTS

 FIG. V-W

V-76

-------

 CENTRAL DISTRICT

 1865

 1970

 1975

YEAR

1980

1985

 EASTERN II DISTRICT

3001—

250

200

150

100

 35

 965

 Routes

 Required

 Truck Routes

 Required
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 -

 Effect of Redistricting due

 to increasing capacity of

 Florida Avenue & Sevtenth

 Street Incinerators

 I 

 1970

 1975

YEAR

 1980

 1985

 FUTURE NUMBER OF TRUCK ROUTES

 CENTRAL. AND EASTERN U DISTRICTS

 30

 25

 X

 -20

 15

 FIG. V-l$

-------

 WESTERN DISTRICT

 250

 225

 x

 o

 Q

 „ 200

 c

 175

 150

 Mruck Routes

 Required

 Effect of Redisfricti ng

 due to increasing ca-

 pacity of Flfxida Ave-

 nue & Seventh Street

 Incinerators

 1965

 1970

 1975

YEAR

1980

1985

 -,30

 25

 20

 15

 10

 ALGIERS DISTRICT

 Truck Routes

 Required

 1965

1970

 1975

YEAR

1980

1985

 FUTURE NUMBER OF TRUCK ROUTES

 WESTERN AND ALGIERS DISTRICTS

 FIG. V-16

V-7K

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Collection Service to Fringe Areas

 The greatest area of future development within the city limits is expected in the

 Eastern II collection district where the City is rapidly extending into the 

presently

 undeveloped lands along the southern shore of Lake Pontchartrain. At present,

 development in the Chef Menteur-Rigolets area is largely limited to fishing camps,

 which for the most part are occupied on a seasonal basis. The Sanitation Depart-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 ment has estimated that about 1500 of these camps exist in this area for which no

 refuse collection service is presently provided even though they are located within

 the city limits. For the most part these camps are along the highways and border

 the lake, canals, or bayous. These properties pay city taxes and are entitled to

 city services, including the collection of refuse, however, there has been no strong

 demand on the part of the owners for such services due to the periodic and tempor-

 ary nature of occupancy of these camps and to the convenience of disposing of their

 refuse on their property or in the nearest waterway. It would appear that until 

such

 time as refuse disposal becomes a problem to the residents of the area and a concer-

 ted demand for service is made, that there should be no special effort to provide

 such service. When collection service is initiated based on the demand of the res-

 idents, it should be limited only to such residents who meet the requirements, as 

to

 placing standard containers alongside of the road for easy access to the collection

 vehicles. It is our opinion that initially one collection vehicle and crew should

 adequately meet the requirements of the area on a one or two collections per week

 frequency, with additional vehicles and crews provided as the area develops.

 A second district of anticipated growth is the lower coast Algiers area. When the

 demand for collection service is made in this area one of the present truck routes

 can be extended to provide the necessary service initially, and be later served by

 a route specifically assigned to that area.

 8. Summary of Analysis of Collection System

 In this section we have analyzed the refuse collection system with particular em-

 phasis on the time required to haul refuse from each collection district to the pre-

 sent point of disposal and have calculated the savings in haul time which would be

 affected by readjusting the districts to take full advantage of the use of the five

 incinerators. These studies have shown that the savings in haul time required to

 V-79

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 transport refuse from the collection district to the disposal area would 

possibly per-

 mit reducing the number of collection vehicles by ten as shown in Table V-25. It

 must be pointed out that these studies are based on field surveys carried 

out in Nov-

 ember and December of 1967 and reflect conditions prevailing at that time.

 In Table V-38 we have shown the increase in number of truck routes required 

in each

 of the collection districts between the present and 1985. This increase is 

based on

 the anticipated growth of the New Orleans area as determined by the City 

Planning

 Department. It will be noted that the 101 truck routes required based on 

our calcul'

 ations for conditions prevailing at the end of 1967 will increase to 106 by 

1969.

 Since it is expected that the St. Louis Incinerator should be placed in 

service prior

 to implementing the modifications of the collection districts as recommended 

hereifV

 should this plant not be placed in operation until 1969 as now appears 

likely, then

 a total of 106 truck routes will be required (1969) amounting to a savings 

of five

 routes from the present 111.

 The reduction in the number of truck routes as outlined herein should be 

implement6

 based on careful field verification by the Superintendent of the Sanitation 

Depart-

 ment in close cooperation with his District Supervisors and Section Foremen

of the

 areas involved. Since these changes are affected by various factors, such 

as tonnes

 collected, distance, time, size and characteristics of the areas, as well as

crew .

 characteristics, it is recommended that the reduction in truck routes be 

accompli5"6

 gradually and by collection districts.

 D. Discussion of Existing Disposal Facilities

 1. General
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 The City at present has five incinerators and two landfill operations which 

to-

 gether with a landfill operated by the New Orleans Disposal Company 

receive

 most of the waste generated within its limits. The location of each of 

these

 facilities is shown on Figure 1-1 (backcover).

 At present the Florida Avenue, Seventh Street, and Algiers incinerators are

i11

 regular operation on a six-day, 24-hour schedule. The St. Louis 

incinerator,

V-80

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 which was rebuilt in 1966, has not yet been placed in regular operation pending

 the correction of operational difficulties. The New Orleans East Incinerator

 has just been completed and its performance is being tested prior to placing it in

 operation. Each of these incinerators is well located with respect to the area

 served and will provide for the disposal of the solid waste generated within the

 City within a reasonable haul distance.

 Since two of the five incinerators are not now operating, the landfills are re-

 ceiving considerable quantities of municipal waste as well as a large part of

 the commercial and industrial waste from the area. The Gentilly landfill is

 the largest and is located close to the New Orleans East incinerator. Fill

 is being placed to a compacted depth of about six feet. Burning is not practiced

 at this location nor is there a regular program for placing cover material. The

 Algiers landfill is located on the Westbank near the City Limits in an undeveloped

 area and here open burning is practiced as a means of reducing the volume of the

 refuse.

 2. Evaluation of Present Landfills

 All three of the landfills being operated in Orleans Parish are on low ground

 either covered with water or subject to frequent flooding where leachates from

 the landfills can cause contamination of the streams and bayous with the pos-

 sible hazards to the ecology of the waters as discussed in Chapter IV.

 While efforts are made to control burning at the Gentilly dump, fires are

 not uncommon and large areas of refuse are uncovered for extended periods.

 Burning is regularly practiced at both the Algiers Dump and at the one

 operated by the New Orleans Disposal Company.

 Little cover material is provided at any of the dumps other -than may be

 needed to provide access to the dumping area. All three of these land-

 fill operations must be considered as unsanitary contributing to both air and

 water pollution and to the breeding of insects and vermin with the always

 present hazard of spread of disease to the citizens of the area as history

 has previously demonstrated.

 V-81

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Until such time as adequate incinerator capacity is available, open dumps 

should

 be converted to sanitary landfills within properly diked and drained areas 

with

 proper and adequate cover material provided as discussed in Chapter IV. 

Since

 both the Gentilly and Algiers landfills are on leased property, it would be 

neces-

 sary for the City to acquire a suitable site in order to invest the capital 

required

 to construct the dikes and other improvements needed before filling could be

 undertaken. After filling, the area could be used for park purposes.

 3. Evaluation of Present Incinerators

 As a part of our study we engaged the services of Abraham Michaels, P. E.,

 Incinerator Consultant, to inspect and evaluate each of the following 

existing

 incinerators:

 Seventh Street Incinerator - constructed in 1959 at a cost of 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

$1,112,960.67 -

 nominally rated at 400 tons per day.

 Florida Avenue Incinerator - constructed in 1957 at a cost of 

$727,979.14 -

 nominally rated at 400 tons per day.

 Algiers Incinerator - constructed in 1962 at a cost of $933,214.28 -

 nominally rated at 200 tons per day.

 St. Louis Street Incinerator - completely renovated during 1966 and 1967

 at a cost of $1,097,813.49 - nominally rated at 450 tons per day - not

 yet accepted by the City.

 New Orleans East Incinerator - constructed in 1967 at a cost of 

$2,353,387.23

 start-up and tests scheduled for early 1968 - nominally rated at 400 

tons pe

 The report covering this work, including general comments on factors 

affecting

 the design and operation of incinerators, has been incorporated in its 

entirety in

 the following text:

 A detailed description, review of operations, and evaluation of each plant is 

in-

 cluded in this report. However, a brief statement describing the character 

of

 the design criteria for incinerators, and the recent changes of both is 

offered to

 assist in understanding the evaluation of the various incinerators.

V-82

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 On a nationwide basis, the quantity and character of refuse continues to change

 due to changes in production, packaging, and distribution of consumer goods

 and the growing affluence and wastefulness of our society. In 1966, the Na-

 tional Academy of Sciences - National Research Council reported "... the

 average per capita refuse production - those solid .wastes ordinarily subject

 to routine collection - increased from 2.75 Ibs. per day in 1920 to 4.5 Ibs.

 per day in 1965. At present, the per capita rate of refuse production is in-

 creasing at a rate of 2 per cent a year. . ."

 The character of refuse in New Orleans is somewhat different from "average"

 refuse in the United States because of weather conditions. The warm, humid

 weather with above average rainfall, approximately 63" per year compared

 with a national average between 35" and 40" per year, generates a refuse

 with more fresh food wastes, grass clippings and shrub and tree trimmings,than

 the average. However, the increased quantity of paper and plastics from

 packaging changes is also affecting New Orleans refuse, and today's refuse is

 probably less moist and contains a higher heat value than New Orleans refuse

 of the past several decades.

 Moisture content and heat value are important factors affecting the designs of

 new incinerators and the capacities of existing plants. As these factors vary,

 the need for axuiliary fuel and the grate size and combustion space require-

 ments vary. Plants designed for the heat value of refuse several years ago may

 not be capable of incinerating the original design quantities of today's refuse.

 This factor must be recognized when evaluating existing facilities.

 Other criteria used to evaluate incinerator plants are the quality of discharges

 from the plant, which include furnace residue, gaseous emissions, and waste

 water, plant maintenance experience, and plant appearance including odors and

 nuisance attraction.

 Several of the New Orleans incinerator contract specifications indicated that

 the furnaces were to be constructed to accommodate refuse with a high heat

 value of 5,000 BTU's per pound and, at the other extreme, a refuse with so

 much moisture that there would not be sufficient heat available to evaporate

 all the moisture. This is generally refuse with heat value under 3,000 BTU's

 per pound. In all instances, gas burners were provided to supply the heat re-

 quired to evaporate the excess moisture. The two extreme conditions noted

 V-83

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 appear reasonable for today's New Orleans refuse, and, although these 

values

 may not have been used for all plants, it is reasonable to use them for the

pres-

 ent evaluation.

 4. Operations Review and Evaluation

 The standard incinerator operating schedule for New Orleans consists of a

 four-shift day, six-day work week with ten legal holidays per year. This 

results

 in a 303-day work year on a regular pay basis. Operations are also continued

 on an overtime pay basis on all holidays with the exception of 

Christmas. In-

 cinerator shifts operate on a 12-6-12-6 schedule, and employees work a 6-

 hour-40 minute work day, six days per week. Twenty minutes is allowed at 

the

 start and end of each shift for washing and change of clothing. The 

plants

 start operation at 6:00 a.m. on Monday mornings. The first two or three

 hours are spent cleaning, lubricating, and maintaining equipment, 

furnaces,

 cranes, etc. Burning actually starts around 8:00 a.m. or shortly 

thereafter.

 The schedulle is well conceived since it provides a 40-hour work week and 

co-

 incides with the six-day refuse collection operation.

 It is common practice in New Orleans to permit refuse storage pits to hold 

ref-

 use for abnormally long periods of time. Plant operators report that the 

pits

 are seldom cleaned even once a year. As a result, refuse tends to 

decompose

 while in the pit, which generally creates odor and other nuisance problems.

 Although there was no evidence of serious odor problems at the time of 

inspec-

 tion, the pits contained many flies and birds. Another undesirable 

feature

 of this method of operation is that it reduces the amount of space available

in

 the storage pit for normal daily operations. Consequently, if a breakdown

 occurs in the plant, thereby reducing or eliminating furnace capacity, or 

if

 unusually high collection quantities or collection vehicle breakdowns 

result

 in above normal deliveries to the plant, the pit storage space, being 

reduced by

 the held-over refuse is less likely to be adequate for the extra load. This

practice

 also requires additional stockpiling or re-casting of refuse to provide 

dumping

 space for incoming refuse and increases the unloading time for collection 

vehicles.

 Since water level storage capacities of all the pits average better than a 

full

 day's operating capacity, the smallest being approximately one day's ca-

 pacity, it is recommended that storage pit operations be changed to 

provide

 for pit cleanouts at least once every two weeks. This can easily be

V-84

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 accomplished by scheduling deliveries to plants and landfills each day based upon

 the quantities of refuse stored in the pits.

 The residue coming from the three plants in operation at the time of the inspection

 was all of poor quality and would not be considered acceptable for disposal with-

 out daily cover with clean earth. Large amounts of unburned paper, food waste,

 and other materials were observed. This condition will be analyzed in the detailed

 evaluation of each plant. It is noted that the residue quality from the renovated

 St. Louis incinerator was reported as excellent by the City operator.

 Plant operators complained about the lack of availability of incinerator residue ve-

 hicles and the problems encountered with this equipment. This is a common problem

 with municipalities and generally occurs when the incinerator residue truck is con-

 sidered as one which is subject to the same type of service as other sanitation ve-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 hicles. Sanitation service is more severe than most any other service on vehicles

 because of the nature of the sanitation operation and the type of materials 

handled.

 The service of incinerator residue vehicles is the most severe service of any sani-

 tation vehicles because, as is true in New Orleans, the vehicles are used 24 hours

 per day and they carry material which is extremely abrasive and often corrosive.

 The truck loading area at the incinerator is usually one with severe dust and 

moisture

 problems seriously affecting the combustion air supply to the motor and the residue

 truck body. This service is further affected by the fact that these vehicles 

operate

 at landfill dumps at all hours of the day or night, which subjects them to poor 

riding

 conditions, often without adequate light. Incinerator operating costs are generally

 substantial and when plants are unable to operate as a result of lack of residue ve-

 hicles, the lost time in operation reflects in even higher operating costs. For 

these

 reasons, it is essential that properly designed trucks be used, that ample stand-by

 trucks be made available, i.e., a good stand-by number would be 100% of the

 operating number, and that these vehicles be replaced as often as once every two

 years.

 Since the City of New Orleans does not have air pollution limits for incinerators,

 there haven't been any stack emission tests performed. Therefore, the air pollution

 evaluation will be based upon the efficiency of various types of incinerator control

 equipment as described in a recent U.S. Public Health Study prepared for the

 District of Columbia, and contained in a report entitled "Air Pollution Study of

 Municipal Incinerator Effluent Gases" dated February 1967. The equipment and

 efficiencies listed in the report are shown in Table V-39.

 

"V-85

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-39

 TYPES OF CONTROL EQUIPMENT

 Electrostatic

 Precipitator

 Baghouse Filter

 Comparative

 Space Efficiency

100%

110%

90-99%

 99%

 Basic Limitations

1. Does not remove soluble

 gases.

2. No installation working

 in U.S. municipal incin-

 erators .

3. Efficiency low on large

 particles.

Scrubber

(Flooded Plate)

33%

90-99% 1 .

2.

Possible mist emitting

from stack.

Clarification and neutra-

 3.

 lization of wash water

 required.

 High water usage.

Mechanical

Cyclone

(60" Tangential) 33%

75-90% 1 . Low efficiency on small

particles.

2. Erosion from abrasive
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

fly ash.

1. Multitude of variables

 to be control led coupled

 with the complexity of

 the effluent stream.

 Settling Chamber

 67%

40-60%

1. Low efficiency.

V-86

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

[view Orleans, La, - 15 May 1968

 5. Seventh Street Incinerator

 The Seventh Street Incinerator, constructed in 1959, is a two-furnace batch feed

 installation with combustion chambers, flues, and two 8'-0"xl25' high chimneys,

 one for each furnace, to provide furnace draft and disperse the stack gases. Two

 fouMon, 2 1/2 cubic yard overhead traveling cranes are used to feed refuse from

 the storage bin to the furnaces. Only one crane is required to operate the plant

 which permits the second crane to be used as a standby. Each furnace contains

 four cells and four hydraulically actuated, manually controlled, rocker-arm burn-

 ing grates and dump grates. Each furnace is provided with one 15, 000 cfm forced

 draft fan to supply undergrate combustion air and with two gas burners with the

 capacity to supply 10,000, 000 BTU/hour of heat to each furnace. Two wet troughs

 with drag flight conveyors are used for residue quenching and loading into open

 body residue trucks. The furnace discharge chutes are bifurcated to permit the 

res-

 idue to be deposited into either conveyor. This design permits the plant to be 

oper-

 ated with one conveyor while the other is down for repairs or avaMable as a standby

 unit. A wet spray system located in the breaching to the chimney is used for 

flyash

 control.

 Plant records indicate that 99,730 tons, 98,185 tons, and 85,181 tons of refuse

 were processed in 1965, 1966 and 1967 respectively.

 The refuse storage pit contains 1300 cubic yards of space at the tipping floor 

level,

 which is equivalent to 260 tons of refuse at 400Vcubic yard. This represents 15.7

 hours of storage at the nominal plant capacity of 400 TPD or 22.2 hours at the

 1967 incineration rate of 281 TPD. Considering plant downtime for breakdowns and

 repairs, the incineration rbte at this plant is approximately 325 TPD. This storage

 space is sufficient to permit the pit to be cleaned out weekly.

 The 2 1/2 cubic yard crane bucket will lift an average of 1500#/load. For a 400

 TPD operation this represents a total of 534 loads/day or an average of one load

 every 2.7 minutes. For the 325 TPD actual capacity, the charging rate would be

 one load every 3.44 minutes. However, since the plant uses the batch feed system,

 all furnaces are charged in approximately the first third of each cycle, which rep-

 resents a charging rate of one load every 1.1 minutes, if both furnaces are 

charged

 simultaneously. This is a reasonable rate for this type of plant.

 A review of the operating records of this plant reveals that combustion chamber

 temperatures vary from lows of 600°F. to highs of 2000°F. when refuse is dry and

 highs of 1200°F. when refuse is wet. With the batch feed operation, the low

 V-87

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 temperature periods representing refuse charging, residue dumping, and furnace

 clean-out periods account for 20% to 40% of total operating time. With this

 record of operating experience, it can be concluded that the furnaces are 

operat-

 ing at capacity only 70% of the time.

 The grate size of the two furnaces is 290 sq.ft. each and combustion volume 

is

 7,800 cu.ft. each. The grate size is adequate for the design rate of 200 

tons/day

 of 5,000 BTU/lb. refuse, and the furnace volume is well in excess of the 6750

cu.

 ft. required. Combustion air for the 200 tons/day rate would be 

approximately
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 35,000 cu.fr. per minute of air for 150% excess air, a condition which is 

typical

 for batch feed plants. One 15,000 cfm forced draft fan is provided and 

additi-

 onal air is needed to complete combustion. Some of this additional air, up

to

 40%, could be Introduced over the grate, but the resr, approximately 6,000 

cfm

 should be undergrate air. It appears that lack of undergrate air may 

account for

 some of the poor burn out experience at this plant.

 Many batch feed plants operated without forced draft provided the natural 

stack

 draft is sufficient to draw undergrate combustion air through the bed of 

refuse.

 Although it might be desirable to attempt this in New Orleans, it is 

unlikely

 that this method would succeed because the spray chambers keep chimney tem-

 peratures low, thereby keeping natural draft low.

 This plant also has a small crematory which originally was intended for the

dis-

 posal of small dead animals, but currently is being used primarily for 

disposal of

 cadavers or amputated limbs. The crematory is equipped with a gas fired 

igni-

 tion burner and discharges into one of the incinerator stacks. There is no 

after-

 burner or temperature control on this furnace to insure complete combustion

of

 the gases produced. However, although low temperature, unburned 

hydrocarbons

 may be emitted from the crematory, they represent a very small part of the 

total

 gaseous emission from the plant and they are well diluted with emissions from the

 incinerator furnace.

 In addition to the gas used for the crematory, gas is used as a part of the 

regular

 incinerator burning cycle. The gas burners are used after the first bucket 

charges

 are placed in the furnace and are kept going until the furnace temperature

reaches

 1200°F. This may occur even before the furnaces are fully charged. After 

charg-

 ing is completed, the forced draft fans are turned on and the batch of 

refuse is

 burned until temperatures drop indicating that the burning has been 

completed. Oc-

 casionally during this burning process, the rocker grates are activated and 

hand

 stoking is used to improve combustion.

V-88

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

Mew Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The furnaces, flues, etc. were inspected while they were shut down on a Sunday.

 Some furnace grate beams were sagging, refractories were in need of repair in the

 furnace, and the furnace charge doors did not fit tight as they should. 

Refracto-

 ries in the combustion chambers and flues were in reasonably good shape and the

 chimney appeared to be in good repair. Generally, the condition of the equip-

 ment, other than the cranes, appeared to be good. The temperature recording

 instruments were functioning well although they were not conveniently located

 for the use of plant operating personnel. At the time of the inspection, one crane

 was out of service and the other was operating at half speed. This is an indication

 of poor maintenance probably resulting from a lack of spare parts, some of which

 require long periods of time for delivery.

 The following observations and recommendations are offered:

 a. Poor residue quality is probably due to inadequate undergrate

 combustion air and improper furnace charging procedures. The

 inadequate combustion air quantity can be increased by instal-

 ling a larger fan, say 25, 000 cfm @ 4" H2O, or by increasing the

 natural draft and operating without the forced draft fan. Natural
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 draft can be increased by reducing the water sprays. This would

 increase the particulate emissions from the stack, but part of this

 increase could be offset with the use of a stainless steel screen

 in the stack breeching and flyash traps in the flues. The furnace

 charging procedure should be changed by allowing more time

 between charges so as to permit a charge to reach a high tem-

 perature, say 1200°F., before placing another charge on top.

 This procedure would permit the initial charges to attain a bet-

 ter burnout. If this charging procedure is adopted, it is sug-

 gested that the use of the gas burners could be eliminated from

 the process, except when the refuse has a high moisture content.

 b. From the standpoint of residue conveyor operations and crane

 charging operations, it would be desirable to operate the two

 furnaces independently and preferably on an alternate time

 schedule, i.e., completely charge one furnace before starting

 the second, and completely clean out the first furnace before

 cleaning out the second.

 c. An effort should be made to reduce the dumping and clean out

 time of 20% to 40% of cycle time which is excessive. Recom-

 mendations a and b will help to accomplish this by producing a

 better burnout and reducing the quantity of residue to be re-

 moved from the furnace.

 V-S9

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 According to the Air Pollution Control Equipment table, 

settling

 chambers are capable of removing 40-60% of the flyash 

produced.

 Between 90% and 95% removal would be required to meet the

 federal standards. This plant is not capable of maintaining 

the

 1200°F. minimum combustion chamber temperature. It is apparent

 that a complete major renovation would be required to meet the

 federal air pollution standards.

 6. Florida Avenue Incinerator

 The Florida Avenue Incinerator, constructed in 1957, is a two-furnace, batch

feed

 installation with combustion chambers, flues, and a single lO'-O" x 150' 

high chim-

 ney, which provides furnace draft and disperses the stack gases. Two threeton, 2

 cubic yard bucket overhead traveling cranes are used to feed refuse from the 

storage

 bin to the furnaces. Each furnace contains four cells and four 

hydraulically acti-

 vated manually controlled rocker arm burning grates and dump grates. Each 

furnace

 is provided with a 15,000 cfm forced draft fan to supply undergrate 

combustion air

 and with auxiliary natural gas burners for additional furnace heat as 

required. A

 single wet trough with a drag flight conveyor is used for residue quenching 

and

 loading into open body residue trucks. A wet spray system is used for flyash

control.

 Plant records indicate that 75,062 tons, 75,845 tons, and 64,835 tons of 

refuse

 were processed in 1965, 1966 and 1967 respectively.

 The refuse storage pit contains 1400 cubic yards of space at tipping floor 

level

 which is equivalent to 280 tons of refuse at 400i'l/cubic yard. This 

represents 16.8

 hoursof storage at the nominal plant capacity of 400TPD or31.2hours at the 

1967

 incinerator rate of 215 TPD. Considering plant downtime for breakdowns and 

re-

 pairs, the incineration rate at this plant is approximately 250 TPD which 

will pro-

 vide 26.9 hours of storage space. This is sufficient to permit the pit to be cleaned

 out weekly.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 The 2 cubic yard crane bucket will lift an average of 1250#/load. For a 400 

TPD

 operation this represents a total of 640 loads/day or an average of one 

load every

 2.3 minutes. For the 250 TPD actual capacity, the charging rate would be 

one

 load every 3.6 minutes. Assuming all furnaces are charged in approximately 

the

 first third of each cycle, the charging rate would be one load every 1.2 

minutes

 if both furnaces are charged simultaneously. This rate would be adequate, 

how-

 ever, if the burning rate were to be increased to 350 TPD or more, it might 

be

 necessary to use two cranes if both furnaces were to be charged 

simultaneously.

V-90

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

fsjew Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 There are no furnace temperature records available at this facility. However, this

 plant is so similar to the 7th Street Incinerator that it can be safely assumed that

 operating experiences are similar with respect to temperatures in the furnaces and

 a furnace availability time of 70%.

 The grate sizes of the two furnaces are 290 square feet each and combustion vol-

 umes are 6300 cubic feet. The grate size is adequate for the design rate of 200

 TPD of 5000 BTU# refuse, but the furnace volume size is slightly shy of the 6750

 cubic feet required. Combustion air required for the 200 TPD rate would be ap-

 proximately 35,000 cfm of air for 150% excess air. A 15,000 cfm forced draft fan

 is provided, and additional air is needed to complete combustion. Approximately

 40% of the air needed could be introduced over the grate, but the remaining

 6,000 cfm should be undergrate air. The shortage of undergrate air may account

 for some of the poor residue quality.

 Many batch feed incinerators operate exclusively with stack induced natural draft.

 Although it may be desirable to attempt this at this plant, the likelihood of suc-

 cess is hampered by the low stack temperatures caused by the use of wet spray

 chambers.

 Furnace charging, burning, clean out and dumping are similar at this plant to the

 7th Street plant except that the gas burners are used at this plant only when refuse

 is wet.

 The furnaces, flues, etc. were inspected while the plant was shut down on a Sun-

 day. Conditions at this plant were similar to those at 7th Street, except that one

 wall of one furnace had been repaired on a test basis with gunited castable refrac-

 tory. This wall was repaired approximately six months before the inspection. A

 10 square feet section of the repair had fallen out, and many cracks appeared in

 the wall, but it was too early to evaluate the effectiveness of the repair design.

 A bad hole in the discharge trough from one spray chamber caused leakage of water

 from the chamber as well as leakage of air into the chimney.

 The following observations and recommendations are offered:

 a. The same comments relating to combustion air and furnace

 charging procedures which were offered for the 7th Street plant

 would apply to this incinerator.

 b. Because this plant has only one chimney, both furnaces must be

 charged simultaneously to provide adequate draft during com-

 bustion process.

 V-91

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 c. The single conveyor is a constant source of plant downtime 

and

 requires constant surveillance. If this plant is to continue

oper-

 ating without major alteration, it is suggested that the 

conveyor

 be removed and replaced with a direct dump into trucks or 

con-

 tainers. However, instead of using the old ash tunnel for 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

truck

 movement, it is suggested that the trucks or containers be 

backed

 under the residue hopper perpendicular to the old ash 

tunnel.

 This change will keep the truck motors and cabs out of the 

spray

 and dust from the residue discharge operations.

 d. An effort should be made to reduce the dumping and clean out

 time which is excessive. Recommendations a and c will help 

to

 accomplish this. If this time is reduced and furnace 

efficiency

 increased, it may be necessary to add another crane operator

 on each shift.

 e. According to the Air Pollution Control Equipment table, 

settling

 chambers are capable of removing 40-60% of the flyash 

produced.

 Between 90% and 95% removal would be required to meet the

 federal air pollution standards.

 7. Algiers Incinerator

 The Algiers Incinerator, constructed in 1962, is a single furnace traveling 

grate

 plant with a water spray cooling chamber, mechanical cyclone flyash 

collector,

 and a short metal stack and induced draft fan. The furnace, which is 

nominally

 rated at 200 TPD contains two traveling grates. An inclined grate is used for

 feeding, drying, and igniting, and a horizontal grate is used for burning 

and dis-

 charge into a wet trough conveyor. A four-ton, 2 1/2 cubic yard bucket 

over-

 head traveling crane is used to transfer refuse from the 1200 cubic yard 

storage pit—

 240 tons of capacity— to the continuous feed, water jacketed furnace charge 

hop-

 per. The furnace is provided with a total of 35, 000 cfm combustion air @ 5 

1/2"

 water gauge pressure which is distributed over and under the grate through 

overfire

 nozzles and undergrate plenum chambers. The combustion air fan is driven by 

a

 40 hp. motor.

 After cooling with water sprays to approximately 500°F., gases from the 

furnace

 pass through a mechanical cyclone collector designed for 90, 000 cfm @ 500°F.

 with 3 1/2" water gauge pressure drop which theoretically removes all 

particles

V-92

-------

Solid Waste Disposal -Tri-Parish Area

 Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 over 10 microns in size. The gases are drawn through the collector by an induced

 draft fan designed for normal operations at 90,000 cfm @ 500°F. @ 4" water gauge

 and maximum loads of 112, 000 cfm @ 500°F. @ 6" water gauge. The fan is driven

 by a 150 hp. motor.

 Plant records indicate that 40,480tons, 43,382 tons, and 46,382 tons of refuse

 were processed in 1965, 1966 and 1967 respectively.

 The refuse storage pit contains space for 300 tons of refuse @ 400*/cubic yard,

 which represents storage capacity for 36 hours at the design rate of 200 TPD or 72

 hours at the estimated average operating rate of 150 TPD. This substantial pit ca-

 pacity is adequate to permit frequent clean out of the storage pit and considerable

 flexibility in refuse deliveries to the plant.

 The 2 1/2 cubic yard bucket will lift an average 1500#/load- For a 200 TPD oper-

 ation, this represents a total of 267 loads/day or an average of one load every 5.4

 minutes. Since this is a continuous operating furnace, the charging rate of one

 load every 5.4 minutes will apply. This is a very slow rate and represents a costly

 part of the operation.

 Temperature records at this plant indicate combustion chamber temperatures are
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 maintained between 1700°F. and 1900°F. regularly except during periods of break-

 down and cooling chamber temperatures vary from 450°F. to 550 F. These are good

 temperature ranges since they indicate good gas combustion characteristics and

 good flyash collection control.

 The grate size and arrangement result in a usable grate area of 280 square feet

 which is adequate for 5000 BTU/# refuse and a total combustion volume of 5000

 cubic feet which is shy of the 6750 cubic feet desired. Combustion air required

 for a furnace of this design could be approximately 42,000 cfm representing 200%

 excess air. The fan installed is designed to provide 35,000 cfm of air which would

 indicate that more air would be required to meet the design capacity of the fur-

 nace.

 Gas burners were installed at this plant for use only when refuse is wet but were

 removed due to excessive use. Residue is removed by a flight conveyor with an

 overhead return designed to pass through the furnace. This design is poor since it

 results in frequent fouling of the conveyor and requires the full-time presence of

 an additional man at each shift. There are plans to redesign this conveyor in the

 near future to eliminate this source of downtime and extra manpower.

 V-93

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 After five years of operation, the horizontal grate has been renewed. The 

Inclined

 grate has required only a minimum of maintenance and is still in good 

condition.

 The horizontal drive coupling has worn excessively and should be replaced 

quickly

 because the worn coupling contributed to the rapid deterioration of the 

horizontal

 grate. Except for the inside refractory flue wall near the cyclone 

breeching which

 has moved and is in need of repair and the roof arch, the refractories 

throughout

 this installation are in good condition and properly maintained. Individual

cyclone

 parts, breeching, housing, and stack are all in need of repairs. The I.D. 

fan is in

 good condition.

 At the rime of inspection, the refuse appeared dry and of normal quality, 

the fur-

 nace was operating at design capacity, operating temperatures were good, 

but the

 residue quality was poor. The quality observed was reported as typical. 

Lack of

 combustion air, particularly under the grate, could account for this 

experience.

 This would confirm the calculations noted earlier indicating a need for 

additional

 combustion air.

 The observed color of the chimney discharge was good indicating good 

combustion

 of gases (Note: This would indicate adequate overfire air for the amount of 

refuse

 burned, but more refuse is available for burning as indicated by the high 

propor-

 tions of combustibles in the residue). The operators reported that 

complaints from

 flyash were minimal. However, although this plant is acceptable at this 

time

 from an air pollution standpoint, tests at other similar installations 

indicate that

 this design would probably not meet the proposed new federal air pollution

stand-

 ards. According to the Air Pollution Control Equipment table, the 

mechanical

 cyclone efficiency varies from 75% to 90%. A collection efficiency of 90% 

to

 95% would be required to meet the federal standard.

 Records indicate high operating costs for this plant. The primary reason 

for the

 high cost is the plant size. As noted earlier, the crane operation was 

inefficient

 because the charging rate was slow. The same crane operator could feed two
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 and perhaps even three furnaces. The same expensive labor cost conditions 

apply

 to other parts of the operations. If this plant were to be doubled in 

size, the

 operating cost would be reduced by 25% to 40% or to approximately 

$4.00/ton

 Improvement in the residue conveyor design as proposed would probably reduce

 operating costs another 10% by eliminating one-man shift, and reducing 

plant

 downtime.

V-94

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

.New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 8. St. Louis Incinerator

 This is an old facility which has been completely renovated with the installation

 of new furnaces and appurtenances. Although completed late in 196A, this plant

 has not performed satisfactorily and, therefore, has not been accepted by the

 City. We are advised that the difficulty in plant operation Is caused by moisture

 carry over with the flue gases from the cooling sprays to the dry cyclones. This

 moisture causes severe corrosion of the cyclones and a buildup of flyash resulting

 in clogging which prevents operation.

 The plant was not operating at the time of inspection and no operating experience

 is available for evaluation. For record purposes, a description of the plant is in-

 cluded in this report.

 Two new furnaces each rated at 225 TPD have been installed. Each furnace con-

 tains two traveling grates, one inclined for feeding, drying, and ignition, and

 one for burning and discharge of residue. The exposed grate surface is 43' long

 by 6' wide for an area of 260 square feet. The furnace and combustion space

 available is 4500 cubic feet.

 Combustion air is provided by two fans. An underfire fan which provides 15, 000

 cfm @ 4" water gauge pressure is powered by a 15 hp. motor, and overfire air is

 provided by a 25, 000 cfm fan @ 4" water gauge powered by a 25 hp. motor. The

 overfire air is introduced partly at the grate level and partly over the bed of ref-

 use. Furnace draft is provided by a 110,000 cfm, 6" water gauge pressure @

 600°F. induced draft fan powered by a 150 hp. motor. Flyash control is provided

 by a multi-cone mechanical dust collector which is preceded by water cooling

 sprays.

 A new type of gas burner is provided which can introduce 10, 000 cubic feet/hour

 of natural gas into the furnace at the top of the feeding stoker.

 9. New Orleans East Incinerator

 This is a new facility which was started up early in 1968. No operating experience

 is available and no evaluation can be made. For record purposes, a description of

 the plant is included in this report.

 The plant contains two continuous feed reciprocating grate furnaces each rated at

 200 TPD. The grates are 9' wide, are arranged in four steps, and provide 325

 square feet of exposed grate surface. The total furnace and combustion chamber

 volume is 5800 cubic.feet.

 Combustion air is provided by an underfire forced draft fan with 20, 000 cfm capac-

 ity @ 4 1/2" water gauge pressure driven by a 20 hp. motor and by an overfire air

 V-95

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 fan with 24, 000 cfm capacity @ 10" water gauge pressure driven by a 50 hp.

 motor.

 Combustion gases are cooled by water sprays and travel a long path to MultiTube

 cyclone collectors designed for 120, 000 cfm @ 600°F., and 2.7" water gauge 

pres-

 sure draft loss. A 150 hp. induced draft fan is provided. The design 

collection ef-

 ficiency of the Multi-Tube cyclone is reported as 90% removal of particulates 

con-

 taining a particle size distribution of 15% less than 10 microns and 35% less

than 20

 microns with a particulate specific gravity of 2.5.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 The refuse storage pit can hold 1750 cubic yards or 350 tons of refuse at 

water level-

 10. Recommendations Concerning Existing Incinerators (A. Michaels)

 a. Revise plant refuse storage pit operations to permit cleanout of the

 pits at least once every two weeks. This can be accomplished 

•

 conveniently by cleaning out one-half of a pit each week. 

This

 change will result in a cleaner operation and provide more 

storage

 space in case of breakdowns.

 b, Modify equipment and/or operations to provide a better 

quality

 residue than is produced by the three plants evaluated. For 

Algiers/

 this would be accomplished by increasing the size of the 

forced

 draft fan capacity. For the Seventh Street and Florida Avenue

 plants, this would involve changes in operating procedure as

des-

 cribed in the individual plant evaluations.

 c. Provide a new fleet of residue trucks designed specifically 

for this

 severe service. Establish a replacement schedule based upon a

 two-year life cycle (two years of 24 hour/day service is 

equivalent

 to six years of one shift/day service).

 d. Test the chimney emissions from the Algiers, St. Louis 

Street, and

 New Orleans East plants to determine conformance with either 

the

 New Orleans air pollution regulations when these are adopted,

°r

 the federal standards.

 e. Modify the Algiers residue conveyor as soon as this plant 

can be

 closed down for repairs. This modification should reduce

 and operating costs at this facility.

V-96

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 f. The Sevenfh Street and Florida Avenue incinerators are not designed

 to operate at rated capacity because of the lost time between batch

 charges. Although some improvement can be expected with operat-

 ing technique changes, residue quality from these plants is poor, 

and

 will probably get worse as the character of refuse changes. These

 plants cannot be operated to meet anticipated air pollution 

standards

 without major renovation to the furnaces and appurtenances. There-

 fore, these plants should be completely renovated or replaced with

 continuous feed furnace installations and air pollution control e-

 quipment capable of meeting local standards.

 g. As soon as refuse generation quantities indicate a need for 

additional

 capacity in the area served by the Algiers incinerator, enlarge

 this facility to reduce unit operating costs.

 h. Although plant personnel are diligent and cooperative, there is an

 apparent lack of understanding by many of the operators of the 

prin-

 ciples of incineration. It is recommended that an incinerator 

operators'

 training program be established for all supervisory and operating 

per-

 sonnel. Such courses are now being given by the American Public

 Works Associations, the US Public Health Service, and the ASME

 Incinerator Committee. It is suggested that these organizations

 be contacted for assistance in setting up such a training program.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 i. At the request of the Sanitation Department, Model Incinerator

 Maintenance Schedules for both Continuous Feed and Intermit-

 tent Feed Pkints have been Included in Appendix III.

 11. Incinerator Residue, Characteristics and Disposal

 From the incinerator operating records we have determined the percentage of res-

 idue at each of the incinerators and have estimated its annual volume both in cubic

 yards and acre feet. The information for the New Orleans East incinerator is based

 on only 27 days operation in 1968, with residue volumes projected to a full annual

 operating basis. This information is shown in Table V-40.

 The relatively high percentage of residue at Florida Avenue, Seventh Street and

 the Algiers incinerators makes it desirable to continue to dispose of this material

 at the. dumps at Gentilly and Algiers and because of its relatively high organic

 content to provide cover over it to prevent nuisance. The lower percentage of

 residue and greater weight per unit volume indicate that the New Orleans East

 incinerator residue contains little unburned organic matter and should therefore

 V-97

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 be suitable as a fill material. It should be expected that the St. Louis 

Incinerator

 and both the reconstructed Florida Avenue and Seventh Street Incinerators should

 produce a residue comparable to that of New Orleans East.

 If the proposed Schedule of Incinerator Improvements, Figure V-17, is followed,

 the residue requiring covering will reduce from 128-acre feet in 1968 to 35-

acre

 feet by 1971 and the quantity of residue suitable for fill will increase from

25-

 acre feet in 1968 to 147 feet (240,000 CY) by 1971. These amounts will 

increase

 annually and by 1990 can be expected to reach 240-acre feet per year or about

 400,000 CY. The residue produced during this period will fill 1000 acres 

four

 feet deep. The City can thus reclaim substantial areas of low land for public

pur-

 poses and should make provisions to acquire such property before it is needed.

 TABLE V-40

 VOLUME OF INCINERATOR RESIDUE

Florida Ave,

Seventh St.

Algiers

N. O. East

Year

1965

1966

1965

1966

1965

1966

1968

Projected Annual

Total

Incinerated

Tons/Yr.

75,062

75,845

99,730

98,185

40,480

43,382

6,800

110,000

Residue

Tons/Yr.

31,437
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

30,579

47,946

50,204

27,197

28,966

1,951

31,600

Residue

Dry

Basis

26.7

24.0

29.8

31.7

41.3

41.5

17.3

Approx .

Wt.

Lbs/CY

1100

1100

1050

1050

1000

1000

1500

Est. Annual

Volume Residue

In CY

57, 000

55, 000

91,000

95, 500

54,500

58,000

42,200

Acre

Ft.

35

34

56.5

59

33.5

36

26

V-98

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 12. Fly Ash Characteristics And Disposal

 The Algiers, St. Louis, and the New Orleans East Incinerators are each provided

 with cyclones for the removal of flyash from the flue gases. It is proposed that

 similar equipment be installed in the reconstructed Florida Avenue and Seventh

 Street Incinerators. To meet the air pollution requirements under the Federal Reg-

 ulations approximately 29 Ibs. of fly ash per ton of refuse burned must be removed

 from the incinerator gases before discharge into the atmosphere. On this basis the

 five incinerators would produce about 25 tons per day in 1970 increasing to some-

 thing over 40 tons by 1990.

 Although this material has certain pozzolanic characteristics which make it useful

 as a concrete additive, the relatively small quantities produced would preclude its

 sale to cement producers. Likewise the limited quantities available preclude its 

use

 as base for fertilizer manufacture. It has also been successfully used with lime as

a
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 road base material, however, the limited quantities produced would require that

 the material accumulate until a sufficient quantity is available for any given pro-

 ject. The dusty nature of the material would require that it be stored in closed

 containers thus adding materially to such costs. The present practice of flushing

 the fly ash from the cyclones into the residue quench tank for removal with the res-

 idue is probably, the best means of handling this material and should be continued.

 13. Disposal of Non-Combustible Refuse

 In addition to area required for residue and fly ash disposal, dumping area must 

also

 be provided for non-combustibles and oversize wastes which our survey shows

 amount to approximately 10% of the refuse collected by the City. This is about

 12.5% of the total estimated production of non-combustible wastes produced in the

 area. Since there is a demand for refuse which can be used as fill, the bulk of

 this material will be delivered to other than municipal facilities. We believe that

 the City should anticipate receiving non-combustible and oversize waste at the

 rate of about 0.3 Ibs. per capita, at present, with this amount gradually 

increasing

 to 0.4 Ibs. per capita per day by 1990. Based on the estimated 1970 population,

 this would amount to 3,900 tons per year increasing to 6,850 tons by 1990. If this

 material is assumed to have a compacted weight of fifty pounds per cubic foot, the

 volume in 1970 would equal 5,800 cubic yards or about 3.5 acre-feet. This would

 increase to 10,000 cubic yards or about 6.5 acre-feet by 1990. Based on a four

 foot depth of fill, twenty five acres would be required for this material during the

 next twenty years.

 V-99

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 14. Process Water

 Water for each of the incinerators excepting the New Orleans East plant is 

taken

 from the city mains and waste water is discharged into storm drains. In 

1967 the

 estimated charges for water and sewer service together with the quantities 

recorded

 are shown

 TABLE V-41

 WATER AND SEWR CHARGES IN 1967 BASED ON MONTHLY CONSUMPTION

 Annual Consumption

 Incinerator in Gallons Water Charge Sewerage Charge

St. Louis

Florida Avenue

Seventh Street

Algiers

10,881,000

20,773,000

18,026,000

3,121,000

$1,772.96

$3,385.68

$2,916.16

$ 531.36

$ 952.48

$1,743.84

$1,524.08

$ 331.68

 NOTE: Charges for service not actually made.

 It should be pointed out that the St. Louis Incinerator operated a total of 

only 28

 days during 1967, thus giving a daily rate of 388,000 gallons, about 10% 

more

 than that required for reducing the temperature of the gases from the 

combustion

 chamber to the 600°F. required for the operation of the cyclones. On this 

basis

 full annual operation of this incinerator would require 122,000, 000 gallons

of

 water. Consideration should, therefore, be given to the installation of 

wells and

 pumps at this incinerator relieve the water system of this heavy load. Also 

con-

 sideration should be given to installing treatment facilities for the waste 

water
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 prior to its discharge to the sewers.

 The 3,121, 000 gallons consumed at the Algiers plant appears to be seriously 

in er-

 ror since it represents only about 10% of that required to control the gas 

tempera-

 ture for the cyclone operation. The annual water demand at this plant should

be

 approximately 50, 000, 000 gallons. Consideration should also be given at 

this

 plant to the installation of both wells and pumps and to the treatment of 

waste water-

 The New Orleans East Incinerator has two wells, each equipped with 500 GPM

 pumps for its water supply needs, and a lagoon for removing the solids from

the

 waste water before discharge into an outlet canal.

 Water supply wells and pumps, together with waste water treatment 

facilities, will

 be required at both the reconstructed Florida Avenue and Seventh Street 

Inciner-

 ators and provision has been made in the estimates of cost for each of these

plants

 for such installations.

V-100

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 E. Air Pollution Control Requirements

 1. General

 Until recently little if any attention has been given in the United States to the

 control of stack emission and complaints from neighbors of soot and flyash have

 been common. However, with the realization of the hazards and health and ec-

 onomic losses caused by air pollution and the adoption of air pollution control

 codes by a number of states and metropolitan areas there has been a marked in-

 crease in the installation of air pollution devices in incinerators.

 A survey undertaken by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Incinerator

 Committee in 1965 showed that since 1959 no incinerator has been constructed

 without some air pollution control device. This survey also showed the trend

 toward more sophisticated equipment as regulations have become more stringent.

 In most of the larger incinerators operating today, flyash control devices are

 limited to subsidence chambers with or without baffles. Both the baffles and the

 chamber bottoms may be either wet or dry. In some, sprays are employed both to

 cool the gases and to aid in trapping particulate matter.

 Until recently code requirements generally considered satisfactory were those estab-

 lished by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, which limited particulate

 emission to 0.85 Ibs per 1,000 Ibs. of gas at 50% excess air. These requirements

 could generally be met with the subsidence chamber baffles and sprays, provided

 that proper attention was given to plant operation.

 There has been a marked increase in the last several years in the use of both

 cyclones and scrubbers as code requirements have been tightened

 As the demands for cleaner stack emission increases, the efficiency of the control

 devices must likewise increase. Based on an estimated 40 Ibs. of flyash leaving

 the furnace per ton of refuse charged and 32 Ibs. per ton entering the collector,

 collection efficiencies to meet code requirements are as shown in Table V-42.

 In Table V-39Mr. Michaels lists the relative efficiency of the various types of

 air pollution control equipment together with its basic limitations and comparative

 space requirements.

 V-101

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-42

 COLLECTION EFFICIENCIES - AIR POLLUTION REQUIREMENTS *

 Percentage of Efficiency

 Code Requirements Needed to Meet Code
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 0.85*/l ,000 # @ 50% Excess Air 74

 0.65*/l, 000 # @ 50% Excess Air 80

 0.20#/1,000 # @ 50% Excess Air 94

 Clear Stack (Refractory Furnace) 96-97

 Clear Stack (Water Cooled Furnace) 98.5

 * From paper presented by Alan Walker, Technical Director, Re-

 search Cottrell at symposium entitled Incineration of Solid Wastes

 sponsored by the Metropolitan Engineers Council, March 21, 1967.

 2. Guidelines and Regulations for Federal Buildings

 Under the recent Executive Order 11282 issued by the President, May 26, 

1966/

 guidelines were established for government installations relative to air 

pollu-

 tion. This Executive Order established that the federal government would

pro-

 vide leadership in the nationwide effort to improve the quality of our 

air through

 the prevention, control, and abatement of air pollution from federal 

govern-

 ment activities in the United States. The Secretary of Health, 

Education, and

 Welfare was charged with administration of the Order and with promulgation

of

 certain regulations concerning its functioning.

 The objectives of this Order for federal facilities and buildings are 

given under

 Section 4 of the order and are quoted as follows:

 "(a) Except for discharges of radioactive emissions which are 

regulated

 by the Atomic Energy Commission, Federal facilities and buildings 

shall

 conform to the air pollution standards prescribed by the State or 

commu-

 nity in which they are located. If State or local standards are 

not pre-

 scribed for a particular location, or if the State or local 

standards are

 less stringent than the standards established pursuant to this 

Order, the

 standards prescribed pursuant to Section 5 of this Order shall be 

followed'

"V-102

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 "(b) The emission of flyash and other participate matter shall be kept to a

 minimum.

 "(c) Emission of sulfur oxides shall be minimized to the extent practicable.

 11 (d) Wherever appropriate, tall chimneys shall be installed in order to

 reduce the adverse effects of pollution. The determination of chimney

 height shall be based on air quality criteria, land use, and metereological,

 topographical, aesthetic, and operating factors.

 "(e) Solid fuels and ash shall be stored and handled so as not to release to

 the atmosphere dust in significant quantities. Gasoline or any volatile

 petroleum distillate or organic liquid shall be stored and handled so as not

 to release to the atmosphere vapor emissions in significant quantities.

 "(f) In urban areas refuse shall not be burned in open fires and in rural

 areas it shall be disposed of in such a manner as to reasonably minimize

 pollution. Refuse shall not be left in dumps without being covered with

 inert matter within a reasonably short time. Whenever incinerators are

 used they shall be of such design as will minimize emission of pollutant 

dusts,

 fumes, or gases.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 "(g) Pollutant dusts, fumes, or gases (other than those for which provision

 is made above) shall not be discharged to the atmosphere in quantities

 which will endanger health or welfare.

 "(h) The head of each department, agency, and establishment shall, with

 respect to each installation in the United States under his jurisdiction,

 take, or cause to be taken, such action as may be necessary to ensure that

 discharges of radioactive emissions to the atmosphere are in accord with

 the rules, regulations, or requirements of the Federal Radiation Council as

 published in the Federal Register.

 "(i) In extraordinary cases where it may be required in the public 

interest,

 the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare may exempt any Federal

 facility or building from the objectives of paragraphs (a) through (g) of

 this section."

 In implementing this Order, Part 76 of Chapter 1 - Public Health Service, Depart-

 ment of Health, Education, and Welfare entitled "Prevention, Control, and Abate-

 ment of Air Pollution from Federal Government Activities: Performance Standards

 V-103

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 and Techniques of Measurement" was issued on June 2, 1966, by the Secre-

 tary. Section 76.8 concerning the Disposal of Refuse is quoted below:

 "(a) Refuse shall not be burned in open fires in urban areas. In

 nonurban areas there shall not be burned In open fires, within

a

 24-hour period, more than 25 pounds of material at a single site

 nor more than 500 pounds of material at any number of sites with-

 in a one-mile radius, except that these quantities may be 

exceed-

 ed when the open burning occurs at diverse sites such as are 

as-

 sociated with railroad rights-of-way, interurban highways, irri-

 gation canals, forests, agricultural operations, etc. 

Deteriorated

 or unused explosives, munitions, and certain hazardous materials

 may be burned in open fires, in accordance with recognized 

pro-

 cedures. Refuse shall not be left in dumps without being 

covered

 with inert matter within a reasonably short time.

 "(b) Refuse shall be incinerated only in facilities specially 

de-

 signed for that purpose. Incinerators shall meet the emission

 visibility standards of 76.4 (a) (2) and (a) (3). In 

addition, for

 installations burning 200 pounds of refuse or more per hour, 

emis-

 sions shall not exceed 0.2 grain of particulate matter per 

standard

 cubic foot of dry flue gas corrected to 12 per cent carbon 

dioxide

 (without the contribution of auxiliary fuel), and shall not 

normally

 include particles larger than 60 microns. For installations 

burning

 fewer than 200 pounds of refuse per hour, emissions shall not 

ex-

 ceed 0.3 grain of particulate matter per standard cubic foot 

of

 dry flue glass corrected to 12 per cent carbon dioxide 

(without

 the contribution of auxiliary fuel)."

 Based upon the limitation of particulate emission to 0.20 grains per 

standard

 cubic foot of flue gas corrected to twelve per cent carbon dioxide, under

 the new regulations established by the Federal Government for use in 

Federal

 facilities, and assuming 30-40 Ibs. of particulate matter issuing from the

 furnace per ton of refuse charged, compliance with the Federal limitations

 on particulate emission would require an overall removal efficiency of 

about

 90 per cent.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

V-104

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 3. Louisiana Air Control Law

 Under Legislative Act of 1964 No. 259, the State of Louisiana established

 the Louisiana Air Control Law for the protection of the purity of the air of

 the State of Louisiana and created a Commission to carry out its provisions.

 The Commission was empowered to promulgate and adopt rules and regulations

 to reduce undesirable levels of air contaminants which appreciably injure hu-

 man life beyond inconvenience or materially injure or interfere with reason-

 able use of animal or plant life or property. The Commission was authorized

 to control outdoor burning of waste material or refuse by issuing regulations

 establishing methods to be used. A public hearing and the written approval

 of four members of the Commission is required for the adoption, modification

 or repeal of any rule or regulation. The Law recognized the need for vary-

 ing the level of undesirable air contaminants with the physical conditions of

 the area in question including type of development, zoning, classifications,

 topography, and prevailing wind direction, and velocity, etc.

 4. Requirements for New Orleans Incinerators

 Although no specific limits of particulate emission or other air contaminants

 have been established by the Commission for the municipal incinerators of

 the City, the urban location of each of these incinerators in or close to

 residential areas makes a high degree of air pollution control mandatory.

 The increasing consciousness of the public to dangers to health from air pollution

 has progressively increased the severity of air pollution control requirements.

 Since this trend can be expected to continue and since any improvements to the

 incinerators should be made anticipating future conditions, a high degree of air

 pollution control must be established. The County of Los Angeles has long recog-

 nized the need for street air pollution control because of the peculiar almospheric

 conditions prevailing in the area. The Code regulating air pollution control

 measures within the County limits the particulate emission from stacks to 0.3grain

 per standard cubic foot of dry flue gases at 12% CO«. The results from the ap-

 plications of these standard for particulate emission appears to have been satis-

 factory since they have been in effect for a number of years.

 In view of the extensive development of heavy industry in the area, and the fact

 that no specific standards have been previously adopted under the State Air Control

 V105

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Law we belie've that the moderate standards such as those used by the County of

 Los Angeles will be satisfactory and should be adopted by the City of New Orleans

 and the Tri-Parish area for particulate emission from incinerator and other stacks.

 In addition to the 0.3 grain per cubic foot at 12% CO- for particulate emission,

 the regulations should also prohibit open burning of refuse and require it to be

 covered with suitable earth in accordance with the suggested requirements for sa-

 nitary landfill (See Appendix V).

 If the City were to avail itself of a demonstration grant under Section 204, Title 

II,

 Public Law 8^-272, the Solid Waste Disposal Act or a construction grant of up to

 two-thirds the construction cost under pending Federal legislation (HR 11405 and

 S 1646) the requirements as established by the Public Health Service of the Depart-

 ment of Health, Education, and Welfare would become a condition to such Federal

 participation. These regulations, in addition to limiting the particulate emission

 from stacks, to 0.2 grains per cubic foot at 12% CO_ also prohibit open burning

 of refuse and require it to be covered with inert material within a reasonably 

short

 time when placed on dumps.

 One of the conditions in accepting the Federal grant under which this study is 

being

 undertaken is that regulations to stop open burning are to be established and 

enforced

 within the Tri-Parish area. Such regulations would limit the amount of combustible

 refuse dumped on the landfills at Algiers and Gentilly to that for which inert cover

 material could be provided, and require that the remaining combustible matter be

 delivered to an incinerator for disposal. This would also apply to the dumps 

operated
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 by private enterprise.

 The adoption and enforcement by the City of the suggested air pollution limits of

 0.3 grains per cubic foot at 12% CO would, in effect, require the elimination of

 on-site incineration by industry, institutions, and commercial installations because

 the cost of installing, operating, and maintaining the necessary equipment would

 greatly increase the cost of this type of disposal. As a result, such wastes can 

be

 expected to be added to amounts presently being disposed of at the municipal in-

 cinerators.

 Though no stack emission tests have been -**nducted at any of the New Orleans in-

 cinerators to determine particulate emissicv.iorh the Florida Avenue and the Seventh

 Street incinerators are of the batch * ;pe which could not be expected to approach

 such rigid requirements without exf

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The Algiers, St. Louis, and New Orleans East incinerators are all of the continuous

 type and are provided with multiple cyclones for fly ash removal. Although these

 incinerators may not meet the suggested air pollution requirements for particulate

 emission, they should with careful operation be expected to approach these limits

 and result in a minimum of complaints from neighboring areas and thus not justify any

 further expense for air pollution at this time.

 F. First Stage Refuse Disposal Program 1970 to 1980

 1. Present Incinerator Capacities

 The City of New Orleans has five incinerators and two landfills which receive the

 refuse collected by the City and a substantial part of that collected by private 

haulers.

 Studies of the operation of the Florida Avenue, Seventh Street, and Algiers inciner-

 ators show these incinerators to have average operating capacities of 250, 325 and 150

 tons per day, respectively. Each of these capacities is based on operating 

experience.

 In the case of the reconstructed St. Louis Incinerator, the New Orleans East Inciner-

 ator and those proposed under this program, consideration must be given to the maxi-

 mum months of refuse production in determining the effective average capacity. In

 Table V-43 is shown the monthly percentage variation in refuse collection over the

 past three years together with a three-year average.

 TABLE V-43

 MONTHLY VARIATION IN MUNICIPAL WASTE COLLECTION

 Percent of Average

 Month 1965 1966 1967 Avg.Syrs.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

93

86

100

101.5

99

104

108.5

109.5

104

95

•94

102.5

94

90

102

103

105

107.5

109

111.5
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

106

96

94

101

94

89.5

103

98

107

106

109

112

99

96

88

98

94

88

101

101

103

106

108

110

103

95

91

100

 100

 V-107

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 From the above it will be noted that June, July, and August are the months 

of max-

 imum refuse production and that during this period collections are about ten 

percent

 greater than the annual average. Since an incinerator must be able to 

handle the

 month of maximum production at its rated capacity, its average effective 

capacity

 must be correspondingly reduced. On this basis an average effective 

capacity of

 410 tons per 24 hours has been assigned for the St. Louis incinerator and 

365 tons

 per 24 hours for the New Orleans East incinerator thus making the total 

present av-

 erage incinerator capacity 1500 tons per day.

 Waste production has been estimated as shown in Table V-44. Estimated 

quantities

 of incinerable refuse for both a six and a seven day week are given since 

both waste

 collection and incineration are on a six day basis and the larger quantities 

must be

 handled.

 TABLE V-44

 ESTIMATED QUANTITIES OF INCINERABLE REFUSE

 (Tons/Day)

 Year 7 Day Basis 6 Day Basis

 1967 1360 1585

 1970 1450 1690

 1975 1655 1930

 1980 1885 2200

 1985 2200 2565

 1990 2530 2950

 2. Proposed Program of Development

 Any proposed development program should provide additional capacity that will

be

 sufficient for at least a 10-year period (1980). The capacity of the St. 

Louis, Nev
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Orleans East, and Algiers incinerators has been established on an annual 

average

 basis as 925 tons per day. This would require an additional effective 

average incin

 erator capacity of 1275 tons per day to be provided. In order to provide for

peak

 months the rated incinerator capacity would have to be at least 1400 tons per

dayV-108

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Since both the Florida Avenue and the Seventh Street incinerators are of an older

 design that cannot be readily modified to meet proposed air pollution standards, and

 since both plants are well located with respect to their respective collection 

areas,

 these incinerators should be reconstructed, modernized and continued in operation.

 Consideration should be given to reconstructing these incinerators with the same

 rated capacity as at present, namely 400 tons per day each and a new 600 ton per

 day incinerator constructed on a new site to provide the total required capacity, or

 the existing plants could be enlarged so that they would provide the additional ca-

 pacity necessary.

 Based on the cost per ton for incineration shown in Figure V-7, tlte reconstruction

 of the Florida Avenue and Seventh Street incinerators at their present capacity 

with

 a new incinerator at some other location providing the necessary additional 

capacity,

 the average operating cost would be approximately $0.70 per ton more than if the

 present incinerators were enlarged to provide this needed capacity. In 1975 this

 would amount to about $220,000 per year increasing to about $280,000 in 1980.

 In addition, since any new incinerator would have to be located in an industrial 

area

 at a greater distance from the points of collection than the present plants, the 

cost

 of haul would be increased substantially, further increasing the cost of disposal 

under

 such a plan.

 We have, therefore, based the proposed Program of Development on the enlargement

 of both the Florida Avenue and the Seventh Street Incinerators. Each of the pro-

 posed plants will be located so as to incorporate the existing storage pits and 

high

 walls surrounding them into the enlarged plant thus saving the most expensive part

 of the existing plant structure. Due to the difference in furnace configuration be-

 tween the existing and proposed furnaces, new furnace supports and foundations

 will be required. Also, the layout of gas conditioning and pollution control equip-

 ment will require both special supports and foundations. These and other consider-

 ations, therefore, make it impossible to determine to what extent other portions of

 the existing structure may be utilized until detailed plans for the proposed 

inciner-

 ators are worked out.

 Taking into account the relative size of the two sites, the capacity provided should

 be approximately in the ratio of 2 to 3.

 If furnaces with a unit capacity of 300 tons per day were utilized, two units at 

Florida

 Avenue would provide 600 ton capacity there and three units at Seventh Street would

 give 900 ton capacity at that installation. The total additional capacity on this 

basis

 would be 1500 tons per day. The additional 100 ton capacity above the minimum

 needed by 1980 would permit taking the Algiers Incinerator out of service for 

enlarge-

 ment which will be needed by 1975 to take care of the projected growth in that area.

 V-109

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 It is therefore proposed that both, the Florida Avenue and the Seventh Street 

incin-

 erators be reconstructed and enlarged to have a rated capacity of 600 and 900 

tons

 per day respectively, after which the Algiers incinerator can be doubled in 

size.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Since the Florida Avenue incinerator has a smaller actual capacity than the 

Seventh

 Street plant and is in need of substantial repairs and modifications, if it Is 

to continue

 in operation, it should be the first plant scheduled for reconstruction and 

enlargement.

 Its removal from service will cause the minimum reduction in the total available

in-

 cinerator capacity.

 Before this incinerator can be removed from service, however, the deficiencies 

in

 the St. Louis incinerator must be remedied and that plant placed in operation. After

 the enlargement of the Florida Avenue plant is completed and placed in 

service, the

 Seventh Street incinerator can then be reconstructed and enlarged. Once the 

en-

 larged Seventh Street incinerator has been placed in operation, adequate 

incinerator

 capacity to receive all combustible refuse generated within the City will be 

available

 so that further dumping of combustible material can be discontinued. This total

ca-

 pacity will be sufficient to meet the overall needs adequately until 1979, 

except for

 growth anticipated in the Algiers area which will require the enlargement of the

Algiers

 plant before 1975.

 The above program is presented graphically with a time schedule on Figure V-17

 In preparing this graph we have assumed that the difficulties at the St. Louis 

incin-

 erator can be rectified this year and the plant placed into service in 1969. 

Plans

 for the reconstruction and enlargement of the Florida Avenue incinerator should 

be

 completed in 1968 so that construction can be undertaken as soon as the St. 

Louis

 plant becomes operable. A two-year construction period has been allowed for the

 reconstruction at Florida Avenue to allow time for receiving bids and awarding

con-

 tracts as well as time for trial operation and testing. This would permit 

placing the

 enlarged plant into operation in 1971 at which time plans for the enlargement of

the

 Seventh Street incinerator should be ready so that construction can be started 

in 1971

 and the plant placed in operation in 1973. The enlargement of the Algiers 

incinerator

 to double its present capacity has been scheduled for 1973 and 1974 so that it 

will

 become operable in 1975 when additional capacity is required in this area. 

Under

 this proposed program incinerator capacity to receive all combustible waste 

generated

 in the City will not be available until 1973 .

 This program which completes the modernization and enlargement of the present 

in-

 cinerators is adequate to take care of the needs of the City until 1983 when 

additional

 new incinerator capacity must be provided. Since a new site or sites must be 

selected

V-110

-------

 3000

1

 .

o^

 o

 dditional

 Capacity

 Required

 Enlarged Algiers

 Rebuilt Seventh Street

 s(Eff.Cap.820T/D)
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Rebuilt Florida Avenue/

 (Eff.Cap.545T/D)

 (Eff.Cap.410T/D):::

 N Seventh^

 - NStreet x

 New Orleans East

 (Eff.Cap.365T/D)

 300 T/D

 YEAR

 PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF INCINERATOR IMPROVEMENTS

 FIG. V-17

 Page V-I11

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 for this additional incinerator capacity, both the size and location of these

require-

 ments will be considered in Chapter VII - "Master Plan for Refuse Disposal 

for the

 Tri-Parish Area."

 The increase in capacity of both the Florida Avenue and the Seventh Street 

incin-

 erators to 600 tons and 900 tons per 24 hours respectively permits 

delivering the

 refuse generated within the City to incinerators located within relatively 

short haul

 distances from the point of pick up. With relatively minor changes in the 

areas

 served by each incinerator as the City continues to grow, the load on each 

plant

 can be balanced so that all plants will carry a proper proportion of the 

load. The

 service area changes required by 1975 and covered in Section 3 will be 

adequate

 until 1985 when additional incinerator capacity must be provided. This is 

shown

 for the years 1975 to 1990 in Table V-45. Should, in the interim, actual 

operat-

 ing experience require further modifications in service areas to better 

balance the

 loads among the incinerators, this may be accomplished by re-routing private 

and

 commercial waste and need not affect municipal collection.

 TABLE V-45

 SCHEDULE OF PROPOSED INCINERATOR UTILIZATION

 (Tons Per Day - 6-Day Week)

District

Algiers

Central

Night

Western

Eastern 1

Eastern II

TOTAL

Excess Cap.

Deficiency

Incinerator

Algiers

7th Street

7th Street

St. Louis

Florida Ave.

N.O. East

Tons/Day

Tons/Day

Tons/Day

1

Incin.

Cap.

300 -.

820^

410-4

545-4
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

365-«

2,440

51

975

Collected

 172

424

570

 315

 492

—265

1,930

0

1

Incin.

Cap.

300-

820V

410-

545—

365—

2,440

2'

980

Collected

 210

448

\162

 342

 543

 364

2,200

10

Incin.

Cap.

300-

820^

410-

545-

365N

2,440

2

985

Collected

 262

491

675

 378

615

^545

~75-

490

. 70-*1

\.3Z5

^365

TO,

2,565

0

1

Incin.

Cap.

300-

820

410X

545X

365-

2,440
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-3

990

Collected

346

^•300

535

204

\Tt

m

418

^159

669

N^126'

615

2,787

47

 To St. Bernard Parish

V-112

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 3. Anticipated Income

 The proposed refuse disposal program is based upon the establishment by the City of

 a policy to permit no further burning of refuse on open dumps and to limit dumping

 of combustible refuse to that which can be properly covered daily. Under this pro-

 gram most combustible refuse would be delivered to an incinerator for disposal.

 Our survey indicates that about 45% of all mcinerable wastes is handled by other

 than municipal forces for which, under the newly adopted regulations, a charge of

 $4.00 per ton would be made by the City. Although under the proposed program,

 capacity to receive all this waste will not be available until 1973, an increasing

 quantity of private or commercially collected refuse can be expected to be delivered

 to the incinerators as the savings in haul cost becomes more apparent. By 1973 if

 the entire estimated volume were delivered for disposal by incineration and a charge

 were made of $4.00 per ton, the annual income to the City would be approximately

 $1,250,000 and by 1990 the amount would be approximately $1,650,000 per year.

 Since burying of combustible refuse would be considered permissible a certain portion

 of this type of refuse would continue to be dumped and buried for disposal thus re-

 ducing the income to the City from this source.

 4. Proposed Incinerator Design Criteria

 Using as a guide the analysis of refuse shown in Table V-26, (page V-51) and making

 certain adjustments to compensate for the unusually dry period when samples were

 collected, we developed the design criteria for both, the Florida Avenue and Seventh

 Street incinerators. These are shown in Table V-46.

 TABLE V-46

 DESIGN CRITERIA

 FLORIDA AVENUE & SEVENTH STREET INCINERATORS

 Florida Ave. 'Seventh St.

 Incinerator Capacity, Tons/Day 600 900

 Storage Pit Capacity, C.Y. 3000 4500

 Number of Bridge Cranes 2 2

 Capacity of Bridge Cranes, Tons 5 5

 Size of Grag Bucket, C.Y. 3 1/2 3 1/2

 V-113

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Weighing Scales

 Capacity, Tons

 Platform Size, Feet

 Type

 Number of Furnaces

 Size of Furnace Unit Tons/Day
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Water Supply

 Number of Wei Is

 Capacity of Well, GPM

 Waste Water Treatment

 Sedimentation Time, Min.

 Capacity Required, C. F.

 Number of Units

 Florida Avenue

 50

 50x 10

Automatic Printer

 2

 300

 2

 600

 30

 1200

 2

 Rating of Furnace Unit Lbs/Hour

 Furnace Feed

 Characteristics of Refuse

 Non-combustible %

 Moisture %

 Combustible %

 Heat Value

 Combustible, BTU/Lb.

 Refuse as fired BTU/Lb.

 Heat Release, BTU/Cu.Ft./Hr.

 Furnace Volume, Cu. Ft.

 Maximum Temperature Outlet Gas F.

 Grate Area

 Loading, Lbs/Sq. Ft.

 Area, Sq. Ft.

Seventh St.

 50

 50x 10

Automatic Printer

 3

 300

 3

 450

 30

 1800

 2

 Both Incinerators (Each Furnace)

 25,000

 Chute water jacketed

 12.5

 25.0

 62.5

 8,000

 5,000

 12,500

 10,000

 1,800

 60

 417

V-114

-------

Study of Solid Waste - Tri-Parfsh Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Both Incinerators (Each Furnace)

 Spray and Baffle Chamber

 Spray Pressure, psi

 Outlet Temperature °F.

 Water Required, GPM

 Subsidence and Reaction Chamber, C.F.

 Air Pollution Control Equipment

 Type

 Efficiency %

 Combustion Air Fans

 Undergrate Capacity, cfm

 Discharge Pressure, In. of Water

 Overfire Air Capacity, cfm
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Discharge Pressure, In. of Water

 Induced Draft Fan

 Capacity, cfm

 Discharge Pressure, In. of Water]

 Stack

 Residue Handling

 50

 600

 300

 5,300

 Multiple Cyclones

 90

 45,000

 6

 30,000

 4

 230,000

 8

 Masonry Stack

 Dual quench tanks with

 drag chain

 Storage hopper with gate

 5.

Estimate of Project Cost

 The following estimates of cost are based on currently prevailing prices (Spring 

1968)

 and reflect the savings in construction cost due to utilizing portions of the 

existing

 plants. No allowance for escalation in cost of the Seventh Street incinerator has

 been made due to its being programmed for construction at a later time.

 Our estimate is shown in Table V-47.

 V115

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri.-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE V-47

 ESTIMATE OF COST - FLORIDA AVE. & SEVENTH ST. INCINERATORS

 Florida Ave. Seventh St.

 Capacity 600 Tons 900 Tons

 Site preparation incl. demolition $ 50,000 $ 100,000

 Foundations 300,000 450,000

 Building 475,000 800,000

 Mechanical

 a. Cranes 220,000 220,000

 b. Furnaces 1,250,000 1,875,000

 c. Cyclones 180,000 270,000

 d. Water treatment and piping 100,000 150,000

 e. Stacks and induced draft fans 240,000 335,000

 f. Wei Is and pumps 50,000 75,000

 Electrical 90,000 135,000

 Sub Total $2,955,000 H,410,000

 Contingencies 10% 295,000 441,000

 Sub Total $3,250,000 $4,851,006

 Engineering Design 6% 195,000 291,000

 Sub Total $3,445,000 $5,142,000

 Engineering Supervision

 a. General 2% 65,000 97,000

 b. Resident 30,000 30,000

 Sub Total $3,540,000 $5,269,000

 Legal & Miscellaneous 2% 71,000 105,000

 Sub Total $3,611,000 $5,374,000

 Interest during construction 4% 144,000 215,000

 Total Estimated Cost $3,755,000 $5,589,000

 Say $3,750,000 $5,600,000

 6. Cost of Operation and Maintenance

 The proposed new Florida Avenue incinerator will be of the continuous 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

charging

 type similar to the present Algiers plant. The labor cost for its operation 

should

V-116

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 be similar. Its larger size will require two crane operators instead of one; 

however,

 with certain design improvements some of the labor costs at the Algiers plant could

 be eliminated thus compensating for the additional crane operators. The cost of

 utilities and repairs have been proportioned in relation to the size of the two 

plants

 and the cost of residue rem'/val has taken into consideration the improved quality

 of residue anticipated. For the purpose of comparing costs with those appearing in

 Tables V-17 (pageV-37)and V-18 (page V-38)amortization has been based on 20-

 year 3 1/2% level debt service and the cost of amortizing both the present and pro-

 posed plant has been included. These costs (1967basis)are shown in Table V-48.

 TABLE V-48

 ANNUAL OPERATING COST

 FLORIDA AVENUE INCINERATOR

 Labor and Fringe Benefits $186,000

 Utilities 30,000

 Repairs 60,000

 Residue Disposal 30,000

 Amortization new plant 253,000

 Amortization existing plant 47,800

 Annual Operating Cost $606,800

 Based on the quantities shown on Table V-45 to be delivered to the proposed Florida

 Avenue Incinerator in 1975 of 153,000 tons per year, the cost per ton for 

incineration

 would be $3.97 and the cost for 1980 with an estimated 165,000 tons delivered to the

 incinerator and with retirement of the bonds covering the original plant cost would 

be

 about $3.40. (If the current interest rate of 5% were used this would increase to 

about

 $3.60).

 7. Proposed Layout

 We have made some preliminary layouts of the proposed enlargement of the Florida

 Avenue Incinerator to a modern 600-ton/day incinerator capable of meeting the pro-

 posed limitations of air pollution. This layout proposes to utilize the refuse 

storage pit

 V-117

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 and certain other parts of the existing incinerator as well as the existing

stack.

 The proposed site plan, the various floor plan elevations and sections as 

well as

 a perspective of the proposed enlargement are shown on Figures 18 thru 25

 inclusive.

V-118

-------

 PROPOSED 600 TON FLORID* AVENUE INCINERATOR

 FOR THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA

00

-------

OJ I— i
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

TO O

m •

IV vO

o

 NEW STACK

 . I O FAN

 GROUND FLOOR PLAN

 PROPOSED 600 TON FLORIDA AVENUE INCINERATOR

 FOR THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA

-------

 NEW STACK

 -I. D- FA hi

 PROPOSED 600 TON FLORIDA AVENUE INCINERATOR

 FOR THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA

TO O

n •

-------

 Q) hH

OQ O

 (I •

h- to

 CXI»T STACK

 CHAROINO LEVEL PLAN

 PROPOSED BOO TON FLORIDA AVENUE INCINERATOR

 FOR THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA

-------

 CYCL.ONE

 DILUTION AI

 I

 £ r*B.an_*

 \^ y^ CMUT1

 I

 RESIDUE 

CONVEYORS

 LONGITUDINAL. SECTION THRU FURNACE

 

PARTIAL REAR ELEVATION

 PROPOSED 600'TON FLORIDA AVENUE INCINERATOR

 FOR THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA

 —

tra O

ro to

w

-------

cro Q

en •

 TIPPING APRON

 ISO' STACK

 CROSS SECTION THRU FURNACE

 PROPOSED 600 TON FLORIDA AVENUE INCINERATOR

 FOR THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS LOUISIANA

-------

 FRONT ELEVATION

 O 10 ZO 4O

 SCALE IN FECT

O) h— I

TO O

fD •

Ln
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 PROPOSED eoo TON FLORIDA AVENUE INCINERATOR

 FOR THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS LOUISIANA

-------

 nj t— i

TO O

 [SJ Ul

 PROPOSED 600 TON FLORID* AVENUE INCINERATOR

 THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. -15 May 1968

VI ST. BERNARD AND JEFFERSON PARISH

 A. General

 After brief review of the solid waste systems in St. Bernard and Jefferson Parishes,

a

 field survey was conducted in early 1968 to determine quantities and types of waste

 generated in the area. These observations and Investigations were made in each of

 the communities, except for the Westbank Unincorporated Area of Jefferson Parish

 which is covered by a separate study now in progress.

 This Solid Waste Study of the Westbank Area is still in progress by the firm of 

Pepper

 and Associates, and on completion will supplement and complement our overall study

 of the Tri-parish Area. The Westbank Study in terms of its scope and the time 

inter-

 val of study has been divided into two phases. Its first phase consisting of the 

field-

 work covering the Unincorporated Westbank Area was conducted during the 1966-67

 period. Though not presently in final form for detailed review, pertinent findings

 have been made available for the Tri-parish Study. The second phase consists of 

the

 1968 in-depth study of the City of Gretna and the City of Westwego, and is not

 scheduled for completion until late 1968. Every effort has been made to 

coordinate

 the findings of that portion of the Westbank Study presently completed with the 

Tri-

 parish Study presented herein. Though our observations and analysis of the com-

 munities of Gretna and Westwego should precede the completion of that study, our

 findings have been submitted to the Westbank consultants for review and comments.

 It should be recognized that final results of the Westbank Study now in progress 

may

 affect the conclusions presented herein.

 As noted in Chapter II, "Metropolitan Population", current population estimates 

and

 projections made by various local agencies in the Tri-parish Area show very wide

 variations, especially in the projections beyond 1970. Although accepted popula-

 tion estimates and projections were available for portions of this study dealing 

with

 New Orleans, and St. Bernard, in the case of Jefferson Parish, planning studies 

now

 in progress are not yet advanced to the point where it would provide "accepted"

 estimates and projections. Due to the time limits requiring completion of this 

study

 we have adopted population estimates and projection for Jefferson Parish of 925,000

 by 1990, as shown previously in Chapter II. Distribution of population by communi-

 ties within Jefferson Parish has been predicated on the past growth history, and 

cur-

 rent trends within each community.

 Later in this report the effect of current and projected population estimates will 

be

 noted in the analysis of existing and future per capita waste production, as well as

 Vll

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 the analysis of existing per capita cost factors of collection and disposal 

services,

 presently experienced by the individual communities. These effects should be 

em-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 phasized so that future use of this study will consider appropriate 

adjustments on

 the development of firm and accepted estimates.

 B. Col lection and Disposal Practices

 In the course of our investigations in the Tri-parish Area, existing 

collection and

 disposal practices in each of the communities were determined, as well as 

pertinent

 data in system management. Highlights of our findings are presented in the 

follow-

 ing descriptions of each community.

 1. City of Kenner (Jefferson Parish - Eastbank)

 Collection and disposal of solid wastes in the City of Kenner is handled by a 

com-

 bination of municipal services and of private contractors. Garbage and trash 

col-

 lection of small commercial installations is picked up once a week by the City 

in

 an 18 cubic yard compactor truck. Time required for this service is 2 1/2 days

 (Monday, Wednesday, and one-half day Friday). Oversized waste from 

residential

 accounts is also picked up once a week by the City utilizing a 12 cubic yard 

stake

 body dump truck. Time allotted for this service is also 2 1/2 days (Tuesday,

 Thursday, and one-half day Friday). Combined garbage and trash collection 

from

 all residential accounts is handled under contract with a private disposal 

company.

 Equipment utilized in this service consists of four 18 cubic yard compactor 

trucks.

 Original requirements of this contract were for all pickups to be made on 

Monday,

 Wednesday, and Friday. However, recent modifications to this contract allow 

the

 contractor to pick up one-half of the City on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, 

and

 one-half on Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday. This modification was due to the

 frequency of equipment breakdowns which were affecting the reliability of 

collec-

 tion for the entire City.

 All wastes hauled by the disposal company and all garbage collected by the 

City are

 taken to a private landfill in St. Charles Parish. Trash, (excluding garbage)

collec-

 ted by the City is taken to a landfill adjacent to the St. Charles - Jefferson levee on

 the parish line.

 Cost of this service to the recipients is assessed on the basis of seven mils 

per one

 thousand dollars of assessed valuation of real property. Within the City of 

Kenner,

 assessed valuation of real property consists of the following:

VI-2

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans/ La. - 15 May 1968

 Type of Property Assessed Value

 Residential $10,000,000

 Commercial $ 2,000,000

 Public Utility $ 7,500,000

 The mileage rate on the total sum of $19.5 million assessed valuation of real pro-

 perty produces between $130, 000 and $140, 000 a year. This amount represents the

 total monies budgeted for collection and disposal costs of solid wastes by the City

 of Kenner. Actual costs incurred by the City for this service are within the 

budgeted

 amount. For 1967 the approximate costs were as follows:

 Services Annual Cost 1967

 Private contractor
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 services (approximate) $ 84,000

 Operating cost of City

 collection equipment $ 16,000

 Total cost of collection

 and disposal services $100,000

 Based upon a population of 35, 000, the per capita cost in 1967 for total collection

 and disposal services averaged $2.85 against an allocated amount of $3.85 per

 capita. With the classification of properties and their respective assessed values,

 this service costs the owners of residential property $69,300 (51.3%), the commer-

 cial property owners $13,900 (10.3%) and public utility companies $51,800

 (38.4%) during the year.

 2. City of Harahan (Jefferson Parish - Eastbank)

 Collection and disposal of solid waste in the City of Harahan is principally 

handled

 through the services of a private contractor with municipal forces handling only

 oversize wastes. Collection of garbage and trash from both household and small

 VI3

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 commercial installations is provided three times per week by the contractor. 

The

 City is divided into two areas, one receiving service on Monday, Wednesday, 

and

 Friday and the other area on Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday. Private 

contractor

 equipment utilized in this service consists of two compactor trucks of 20 cubic

yard

 capacity, one 8 cubic yard capacity flat bed trash truck, and one three quarter

ton

 pick-up truck, all radio equipped.

 All wastes collected by the private contractor are delivered to the Eastbank 

inciner-

 ator which principally services the Unincorporated Eastbank area of Jefferson 

Parish.

 Working arrangements have been made between the City of Harahan, the Parish

 Government and the contractor for disposal of waste collected in the City of 

Harahan.

 Cost of this service to the recipients is assessed on the basis of 5 mils per 

$1, 000 of

 assessed valuation of real property and a monthly service charge of $0.45. 

Within

 the City of Harahan, assessed valuation of real property consists of the 

following:

 Type of Propej-ty Assessed Value

 Residential $4,076,360

 Commercial $ 766,249

 Public Utility $ 381,640

 The mileage rate on the approximate total of $5.22 millions, assessed valuation

of

 real property produces about $26, 000 per year. An additional amount of about

 $8, 000 was generated through direct monthly service charges. This total of 

$34, 000

 represented the total monies allocated for collection and disposal costs of 

solid

 waste anticipated by the City of Harahan. Actual costs incurred by the City 

of

 Harahan for this service exceeded the allocated amount. For 1967 the 

approximate

 costs were as follows:

 Services Annual Cost 1967

 Private contractor
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 services (approximate) $48,980

VI-4

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Operating cost of City

 collection equipment $ 3,750

 Total cost of collection

 and disposal services $52,730

 Based upon the 1967 population of 16,000, the per capita cost for total collection

 and disposal services in the City of Harahan averaged $3.30, against an allocated

 cost equivalent to about $2.15 per capita in 1967.

 3. Jefferson Parish Eastbank Unincorporated Area

 Collection and disposal of solid waste in the Eastbank Unincorporated area is gen-

 erally handled by a private contractor. Contractual arrangements between the

 Parish Government and the service contractor requires this contractor to provide

 all equipment utilized in the collection service and operate the Parish owned and

 built Eastbank incinerator. Collection of garbage and trash from household and

 small commercial installations is provided two times per week. Collection equip-

 ment (all radio equipped ) utilized in this service consists of the following:

 17 - Twenty cubic yard compactor trucks

 1 - Two ton stake body trash trucks

 4 - Three quarter ton stake body dump trucks

 This contractor and other private haulers also serve the commercial and industrial

 accounts in the area.

 Oversize waste in the area is picked up by the Parish. All wastes collected by the

 service contractor are taken to the Eastbank incinerator located on David Dr. off

 Airline Highway. A service charge has been established on commercial wastes

 received at the incinerator. Oversize wastes collected by the Parish are hauled

 to the Parish landfill located on the Jefferson Parish Westbank on U. S. Highway

 90.

 Cost of this service to the recipients is assessed on the basis of 5 mils per $1,000

 of assessed valuation of real property, as well as through direct service charges.

 Eastbank recipients are subject to a $0.45 per month service charge. Total re-

 venues generated for this service for the entire Parish in 1967 included $735,260

 from property taxes, $347,503 from other tax sources (sales, etc.) and an addi-

 tional $281,170 from direct service charges. This total amount of $1,363,933

 

VI-5

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 represented total funds allocated for operating costs of the solid waste system

for

 the Unincorporated Eastbank and Westbank area. Breakdown of income generated

 by each area was not available.

 Estimated costs incurred by the Eastbank Unincorporated area for 1967 is 

es-

 timated at approximately $805,000, including both the private contractor 

services

 for collection and disposal and the Parish cost in handling miscellaneous 

oversize

 waste. This cost to the Eastbank area excludes capital costs of the Eastbank 

in-

 cinerator which is equivalent to about $120,000 annually.

 Based upon the 1967 population of 179,000 the per capita cost for total 

collection

 and disposal in the Eastbank Unincorporated area averaged about $5.15 during

 that year. With the combined population of the Unincorporated Eastbank and

 Westbank area estimated at 242,750 in 1967, total operating funds allocated for

 the solid waste system In the Parish were equivalent to an average rate of 

about

 $5.63 per capita.

 4. Jefferson Parish Westbank Unincorporated Area

 Collection of solid waste in the Westbank Unincorporated area is handled by the

 Parish Government. Collection of garbage and trash from household and small

 commercial installations is provided three times a week throughout the Unincor-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 porated area, with the exception of the community of Terrytown, adjacent to 

the

 City of Gretna, which receives collection services only twice a week. 

Collection

 of oversize wastes is also provided by the Parish on a weekly basis, 

utilizing four

 stake body trucks in this service. Equipment utilized for garbage and trash 

collection

 consists of five 20 cubic yard, ten 16 cubic yard, and one 18 cubic yard 

compactor

 trucks.

 Wastes collected by the Parish are taken either to the Parish landfill 

located on

 U. S, Highway 90 West, or the Parish incinerator located in the Marrero area.

 However, the majority of putrescible wastes are delivered to the incinerator 

for

 disposal.

 Tax revenues produced in the entire Parish for the collection and disposal of 

wastes,

 as well as revenues generated from the direct service charges were reported 

earlier

 in the previous section covering the Jefferson Parish Eastbank Unincorporated 

area.

 Although the mileage rate on property is the same throughout the Parish, in the

case

 of direct service charges to the recipients, variations occur in the Westbank 

area.

VI-6

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The Terr/town Community is charged on the basis of $0.50 per month with the bal-

 ance of the Unincorporated area (generally located nearer the points of disposal)

 being charged at the lesser rate of $0.20 per month.

 Cost of this service to the Westbank Unincorporated area in 1967 was approximately

 $420,000, excluding capital costs of the collection equipment and the incinerator

 plant, which are estimated at about $30,000 annually.

 Based upon the 1967 population of 63,750 the per capita cost for total collection

 and disposal services in the Westbank Unincorporated area averaged about $7.05

 during that year, compared to allocated operating costs equivalent to about $5.63

 per capita for the entire Parish.

 5. City of Westwego (Jefferson Parish - Westbank)

 Collection and disposal of solid waste in the City of Westwego is principally 

handled

 by municipal forces. Collection of garbage from household and small commercial

 installations is provided on a daily basis with separate collection of rubbish and

 oversize wastes provided five days per week. Garbage collection services are pro-

 vided by three 16 cubic yard compactor trucks with two stake body trucks being

 utilized in the rubbish collections. Private collection contractors, as in the 

neigh-

 boring communities, service the larger commercial and industrial accounts in the

 City of Westwego.

 All municipal waste collections are delivered to the Westwego dump located im-

 mediately south of the City at the end of Central Avenue. Garbage, garden trash,

 and oversize wastes are delivered to this landfill for disposal by open dumping and

 burning. The Parish provides both equipment and labor in operation of this dump,

 at no expense to the City.

 Estimated costs incurred by the City of Westwego for these services in 1967 were

 about $50,000 excluding capital cost for collection equipment, which is estimated

 at about $5,000 average annual expense.

 Based upon the 1967 estimated population of about 14,000, the per capita cost for

 total collection and disposal services in the City of Westwego averaged about $3.93

 during that year.

 VI7

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 6. City of Gretna (Jefferson Parish - Westbank)

 Collection and disposal of solid waste in the City of Gretna is principally 

handled

 by municipal forces. Collection of garbage and trash from both household and

 small commercial installations is provided three times a week, with one half of

 the City receiving service on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday and the balance of

 the City on Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday. This service is provided by six 

13-

 cubic yard compactor trucks operated by the City. Separate collection of garden

 trash and oversize waste is also provided by the City on a continuing cycle. 

This

 service requires the use of four 12-cubic yard stake body trucks and nine 6-

cubic

 yard dump trucks. Private collection contractors service the larger 

commercial

 and industrial accounts.

 All garbage collections from household and small commercial installations are 

de-

 livered to the Gretna incinerator for daily burning. Garden trash and 

oversize

 waste (other than food waste) are delivered to the Gretna landfill for 

disposal by

 open dumping. Deliveries of putrescible wastes are prohibited at this 

landfill.

 Costs of this service to the recipients is assessed on the basis of seven mils 

per

 $1,000 of assessed property values. The breakdown by types, classifications,

 and assessed value of taxable properties was not available. Funds generated

 from this assessment amounted to about $ 130,000 En 1967. This amount repre-

 sents the total operating costs for collection and disposal of solid wastes as 

an-

 ticipated by the City of Gretna. Actual costs incurred by the City for these

 services in 1967 were $160,000 excluding capital costs for collection equipment

 and the incinerator plant which is estimated at about $40,000 average annual 

ex-

 pense.

 Based upon the 1967 estimated population of about 32,000 the actual per capita

 cost for total collection and disposal services in the City of Gretna averaged 

about

 $6.25 against allocated operating costs equivalent to about $4.07 per capita 

in

 1967.

 7. St. Bernard Parish

 Collection and disposal of solid wastes in St. Bernard Parish is administered 

by

 the Parish Government. The Parish provides separate garbage pickup six days

 per week within the populated section north of the community of Poydras. Trash

 pickup throughout the populated area is on a continuing cycle varying from one

 to two pickups a week, depending on daily work loads.

VI-8

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The Parish collection fleet consists of two 18 ond two 16 cubic yard packers, six

 13 yard packers, and five 13 yard stake body trash trucks.

 At present both garbage and trash collections are delivered to the public dump on

 Paris Road for disposal by open burning. During 1967, St. Bernard Parish built a

 new incinerator plant (100 ton per day capacity) a short distance south of this

 dump. Operation of this plant is anticipated during 1968 at which time it is in-

 tended to deliver all putrescible materials to this plant for disposal by 

incineration.

 In the sparsely populated area below Poydras, arrangements have been made with

 Plaquemines Parish for garbage pickup and disposal.

 Private contractors provide collection services for commercial and industrial 

enter-

 prises with disposal of these materials handled at both the public and private area

 dumps.

 Cost of this service to the recipients is assessed on the basis of 4 mils per 

$1,000

 of assessed valuation of real property. Within St. Bernard Parish assessed 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

valuation

 of real property consists of the following:

 Type of Property Assessed Value

 Residential $27,500,000

 Commercial and Industrial $20,400,000

 Public Utility $ 8,900,000

 The mileage rate on the total assessed property valuation of $56,8 million produces

 between $200,000 and $225,000 per year. This amount represents the t'otal monies

 budgeted for collection and disposal costs of solid waste as anticipated by the 

Parish.

 In 1967 actual costs incurred for this service were within the budgeted amount, 

slightly

 below $200,000.

 Based upon the 1967 estimated population of 46,380 the per capita cost for total

 collection and disposal services in St. Bernard Parish averaged about $4.30, 

against

 a budget allocation equivalent to $4.65 per capita. Based upon the classifications

 of properties and their respective assessed values the tax charge for this service 

cost

 the owners of residential property about $110,000 (48.5%) of commercial property

 $81,500 (35.9%) and Public Utility Companies $35,500 (15.6%).

 

VI-9

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 C. Evaluation of Waste Disposal Facilities in the Area

 With the cooperation of various officials in the Tri-Parish communities and/or

their

 solid waste consultants, we had the opportunity to inspect the existing 

incinerators,

 review available plans and specifications and make observations of the various

land-

 fill operations in these communities. It should be'noted that the concept of 

develop-

 ment of these facilities was based on needs of the individual communities and 

on

 conditions present at differing periods over a span of twenty years without 

any thought

 of future adaptability of these facilities to a regional program. The purpose of this

 evaluation is to present our findings on their adequacy, their present 

standards of

 operations, their possible enlargement or modernization to meet present and 

future

 needs and their adaptability to a long range regional program.

 1. Incinerator Installations

 a. Eastbank Incinerator (Jefferson Parish)

 The 400-ton Eastbank incinerator is located on David Drive 

adjacent

 to the Airline Highway. The site (ISO1 x 2,650') constitutes an 

area

 of approximately 9.0 acres. Based on the 1961 study by Godat & 

As-

 sociates, justification of this project was based on 1960 garbage 

and

 trash production of 64,040 tons on the Eastbank, consisting of 

approx-

 imately 38,000 tons of garbage collected by the Parish, 10,400 

tons of

 trash collected by the Parish, and 15,700 tons of mixed refuse 

collected

 by commercial enterprises. Disposal at this time was by 

incineration

 and open dumping. Approximately 38,000 tons were incinerated at

 the old David Drive plant and some 26,000 tons handled by area 

dumps.

 In connection with this study, population and waste projections in 1975

 were estimated as follows:
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Population 346,800

 Garbage (Parish collected) 101,000 Tons

 Trash (Parish collected) 27,600 Tons

 Mixed refuse (collected by commercial

 accounts) 41,850 Tons

 Total garbage and trash for disposal 170,450 Tons

VI-10

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 During the course of this 1961 study, the solution to the problem of dis-

 posal called for an increase in incinerator capacity rather than disposal

 through landfill operations. This determination was based on the lack

 of sufficient land area located near or adjacent to good highways ca-

 pable of handling the annual tonnage and cubic yardage volumes on a

 long term basis that would be within economic haul distances for col-

 lection trucks.

 Incineration capacity was established based on a six-day operating week

 with an allowance of eight legal holidays and approximately five days

 downtime for the plant, or an effective operating year of 300 days.

 At the time of the above study it was also anticipated that the original

 David Drive incinerator (presently abandoned) would be continued in

 operation with Its then present average burning capacity of 120 tons and

 a possibility of improving its capacity to 150 tons per day. Therefore,

 based upon the 1975 annual waste forecast of 170,450 tons an inciner-

 ation deficiency of 400 tons per day was calculated. After a comparison

 study of contemporary plant types, it was the opinion and the recom-

 mendation of the consultants to design the new 400-ton plant per day

 as a continuously fed plant with two, 200-ton rectilinear furnaces e-

 quipped with traveling grate stokers.

 For design purposes the refuse characteristics were then assumed to

 have the following analysis:

 Inert solid matter 12 1/2% by weight

 Moisture content 25% to 40% by weight

 Combustible matter 27 1/2% to 62 1/2% by weight

 Heat content 8,000 BTU per pound dry

 of combustible matter

 Plant facilities and site improvements included automated scales (20

 ton capacity with a 24' x 10' platform) for weighing refuse inflow to

 the plant, paving, shelled parking area for employees, drainage and

 sewerage system, utility service and two-200 gallon per day deep water

 wells. As a part of this project the Department of Sanitation of Jeffer-

 son Parish also planned centralization of its administrative offices in

 the new incinerator building.

 VI11

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 In conjunction with this plant, accessory facilities were also 

anticipated

 at this location consisting of storage garage for collection 

vehicles,

 maintenance facilities for the maintenance of the truck fleet, and

a

 body and repair paint shop for the departmental vehicles.

 Total cost of this plant on completion of construction in 1965 

was

 $1,578,575 including engineering fees, but excluding land costs. 

In

 addition to this cost some $265,000 was expended in the 

development

 of accessory facilities for the collection division of Jefferson 

Parish

 Eastbank.

 This incinerator is a double furnace traveling grate plant with 

water

 spray cooling chambers, mechanical cyclone flyash collectors, and

 twin metal stub stacks with induced draft fans. Each furnace is 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

nomi-

 nally rated at 200 tons per day and contain two traveling grates. In-

 clined grates are used for feeding, drying, and igniting and 

horizontal

 grates are used for burning and discharge into a wet trough 

conveyor.

 Two overhead traveling cranes of four-ton (2 1/2 cubic yard 

bucket)

 capacity are used to transfer refuse from the 1500 cubic yard 

storage

 pit (300 ton capacity) to the continuous feed, water jacketed, 

fur-

 nace charging hoppers.

 Each furnace is provided with a total of 35,000 cfm combustion air

 at 5 1/2 inch water water gauge pressure which is distributed as 

over-

 fire air (entering the furnace through nozzles located in the 

roof) and

 underfire air (entering the furnace through the grates and through

side

 nozzles just above the burning grate). The forced draft system 

provid-

 ing combustion air is powered by a 40 hp motor.

 After cooling with water sprays to approximately 500°F., gases 

from

 the furnace pass through a mechanical cyclone collector. The 

gases

 are drawn through the collector by an induced draft fan designed 

for

 normal operations at 90,000 cfm at 500°F. at 4 inch water gauge 

pres-

 sure and maximum loads of 112,000 cfm at 500°F. at 6 inch water

 gauge pressure. Each fan is driven by a 150 hp motor.

 The refuse storage pit (100' x 27' x 15' deep), containing space 

for

 300 tons of refuse (@ 400 pounds per cubic yard), represents a 

storage

 capacity for 18 hours of burning, operating at a rated capacity of

400

 tons per day. The plant, presently operating on a 16-hour day, 

is

VI-12

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Or I eons, La. - 15 May 1968

 burning at an average rate of some 200 tons per day, which indicates an

 effective capacity of about 75% of the rated design.

 The 2 1/2 cubic yard bucket will lift an average 1500 pound load. The

 present 200 ton per day operation over a 16 hour period indicates a 

total

 of 267 loads per 16-hour day are lifted daily or an average of one load

 every 3.6 minutes. Since this is a continuous operating furnace with

 only one crane operating, the charging rate of one load at 3.6 minutes

 will apply. This is a nominal rate and represents a reasonable cost in

 the overall operation, however, assuming this plant will, in the 

future,

 approach its rated capacity of 400 tons per day (in a 24 hour operating

 day), the requirements on the crane would be 534 loads per day or an

 average of one load every 2.7 minutes and would substantially reduce

 this cost component.

 Total air requirements were calculated to provide a temperature of

 2000°F. in the furnace while burning mixed refuse containing the high-

 est moisture content (40%) and 1800°F. while burning dryer (25% mois-

 ture) mixed refuse. Equipment was selected to permit variation of the

 total amount of air flowing into the furnace between the values ob-

 tained from these calculations with provisions to insure that the under-

 fire quantity would be held relatively constant.

 Each furnace is equipped with auxiliary gas burners mounted on the

 roof of the furnace near the feeding end of the inclined grate. Burners

 are of the venturi type capable of delivering a maximum 30,000,000

 BTU per hour per furnace at a gas pressure of 10 psi.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Each furnace is equipped with a dry type, multiple tube flyash col-

 lector, located between the subsidence chamber and the inlet of the

 induced draft fan. The collected particulate matter is continuously

 discharged through submerged outlets into the ash conveyor trench.

 Arrangement and size of cyclone tubes were selected to insure re-

 moval of virtually all material over 10 microns in diameter and not

 less than 65% of the material down to 5 microns in diameter.

 Residue leaving the burning grate passes through a quenching trench

 and is transported by flight conveyor for deposit in the ash storage

 hopper. The 50 cubic yard ash storage hopper is located outside the

 incinerator building, permitting ash trucks to drive through for con-

 venient loading.

 VI13

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Control instrumentation is designed to indicate pressures, indicate 

and re-

 cord temperature, and in certain instances, to control functions of 

plant

 operation. Control equipment was provided to automatically, 1) 

maintain

 temperature of flue gases at approximately 500° F., 2)shut down 

forced

 draft fan and open relief vent damper if ID fan inlet temperature 

becomes

 too high or instrumentation operating air pressure is lost, and 3) 

maintain-

 ing temperature of furnaces between 1,600° F. and 2000° F.

 Upon completion of the incinerator in 1965, observations of the 

plant op-

 eration were made by the design engineers. Initial operation was 

based

 on the three eight man crew shifts per day. Reported costs of 

operation

 during its initial operation period in February 1965 were 

comparable to

 $8.66 per ton operating at less than one third of its rated 

capacity. It

 was estimated a cost of $2.70 per ton can be expected when this 

plant ap-

 proaches its rated capacity of 400 tons per day. This unit cost 

estimate

 excluded the costs of plant maintenance and residue removal.

 We anticipate that this type of plant, with proper operation, will 

be

 capable of meeting the recommended standards contained in this 

report.

 b. Westbank Incinerator - Marrero (Jefferson Parish)

 The 90-ton Westbank incinerator located in Marrero is a relatively 

old

 facility constructed in 1947-48 at a cost of approximately $210,000 

or

 about $2,300 per ton, including engineering fees, but excluding land

 costs. Located at the corner of Ames Road and Belle Terrace, this 

plant

 occupies a site (4801 x 445') constituting an area of approximately 

4.9

 acres. The site, together with adjacent properties comprising a 

total of

 17.86 acres, was acquired by the City in 1946 for a total purchase 

price

 of $8,000. Its location, about 1/2 mile south of the Westbank 

Expressway*

 is centrally situated within the developing unincorporated Westbank 

area.

 Accessory facilities on this site include maintenance garages for 

the Parish

 vehicles and offices for the Westbank garbage collection district.

 Refuse is not weighed at this location. However, it is estimated 

that
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 approximately 40 to 60 tons per day are burned in the two 8-hour 

shifts

 at this plant. The average crew size consists of five men 

including

 the ash truck driver. The plant is operated approximately 300 days 

per

 year.

VI-14

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The incinerator consists of a two furnace batch feed installation with

 combustion chambers, flues, and a single masonry stack to provide

 furnace draft and disperse the stack gases. No air pollution control

 equipment is provided. The plant is equipped with one 3 ton bridge

 crane with a 1 1/2 cubic yard clam shell bucket. Each furnace con-

 tains a single cell with burning grate and manually controlled dumping

 grate. This plant is not equipped with auxiliary burners. After burn-

 out, the accumulation of residue is discharged direct to the ash hopper

 located directly below the furnace where it is manually quenched prior

 to direct discharge to the residue trucks. An access tunnel for trucks

 passes below the furnaces and it is necessary to move the ash trucks

 from one hopper to the next for receipt of residue.

 The refuse storage pit contains a volume of about 300 cubic yards which

 is equivalent to about 60 tons of refuse at 400 Ibs. per cubic yard. 

This

 storage volume represents 16 hours fuel reserve, operating at the rated

 plant capacity of 90 tons per day and is about equivalent to its actual

 working capacity at the present time, permitting frequent clean-out

 of the pit. Relatively no reserve storage capacity is available in the

 case of plant downtime due to breakdowns and repairs. However, with

 minimum mechanical features present in this plant, normal maintenance

 and repairs require minimum time and relatively little loss in operating

 time is experienced.

 This plant is obsolete by today's standards of modern incineration. 

Based

 on annual average destruction of about 18,000 tons of refuse, it is es-

 timated that it is operating at a unit cost of about $4.00 per ton in-

 cluding capital expenses, which is comparable to the unit cost limits

 experienced locally by the larger modern plant, at New Orleans East.

 c. Gretna Incinerator (City of Gretna)

 The 100 ton Gretna incinerator is located on the Belle Chasse Highway

 in the southerly portion of the City of Gretna. It is a relatively old

 facility, constructed in 1951-52 at a cost of about $200,000. Recent

 improvements have included the addition of air pollution equipment at

 a cost of some $35,000. The incinerator installation is situated on a

 three acre site which also contains facilities for the Gretna collection

 division. This plant is operated on a single eight hour shift basis, 

six

 days per week and about 300 days per year with a crew of 5 men

 

VI-15

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 including the ash truck driver. Refuse is not weighed at this 

location,

 but it is estimated the plant burns approximately 30 tons daily.

 This plant, similar to the Westbank incinerator, is a two furnace

batch

 feed installation with combustion chambers, flues and a single 

masonary

 stack 6 feet in diameter and 100 feet high to provide furnace draft

and

 disburse the stack gases. It is equipped with a single 3 ton 

bridge crane

 with a 1 yard clam shell bucket.

 The plant also provides for direct discharge of residue from the 

furnace

 to the ash hopper where it is manually quenched prior to discharge 

to
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 the ash trucks.

 A spray cooling chamber and fly ash collector was installed in 

1967 in

 an effort to reduce this nuisance factor.

 The 215 cubic yard refuse storage pit represents approximately 43 

tons

 of refuse @ 400 pounds per cubic yard, or about 10 hours of 

storage,

 assuming operation at the rated plant capacity of 100 tons. This 

is

 adequate for the present actual working capacity of the plant. 

The

 established policy requires daily burning of all refuse received. 

This

 policy is adhered to and the storage pit is cleaned daily and 

sprayed

 to maintain excellent sanitary conditions. As in the Marrero

 incinerator, relatively little loss in operating time is 

experienced.

 This plant, obsolete by today's standards of modern incineration 

ex-

 periences relatively high operating costs due to its small capacity

and

 one shift operation. Based upon annual average destruction of 

about

 9,000 tons of refuse, this plant is operating at a unit cost of 

about

 $5.00 a ton for incineration including capital expense.

 d. Paris Road Incinerator (St. Bernard Parish)

 The Paris Road incinerator is a new facility (not yet in operation)

con-

 structed at a cost of $548,000 or about $5,500 per ton, including 

en-

 gineering fees, but excluding land costs. No operating 

experience is

 available to date. For information purposes a description of this 

plant

 is included in this report.

VI-16

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 The incinerator has a capacity of 100 tons per day and is located on an

 off-highway site (3001 x 645') constituting an area of approximately

 4.4 acres. Its location is in an undeveloped area, zoned for future in-

 dustrial use. Accessory facilities on this site include a maintenance

 building for Parish vehicles. Site improvements include paved access

 roads and parking areas, as well as a scale installation for weighing of

 all refuse. Provisions for drainage of process water and surface drain-

 age is through an open ditch system. Potable water supply, process

 water, and fire protection is provided from a 12 inch main leading to the

 property.

 This facility consists of a single furnace traveling grate plant with 

water

 spray cooling chamber, mechanical cyclone fly ash collector, a single

 metal stub stack and induced draft fan. The furnace which is nominally

 rated at 100 tons per day, contains 3 traveling grates. An inclined

 grate is used for feeding, drying, and igniting. The first horizontal

 grate is used for primary burning and the second horizontal grate is used

 for final burnout and discharge of residue into a wet trough conveyor.

 Auxiliary gas burners are furnished at this plant for firing up of the

 incinerator and for use when refuse is wet.

 A 3-ton overhead traveling crane is used to transfer refuse from the

 storage pit to the continuous feed, water-jacketed, furnace charging

 hopper. This crane, equipped with a one cubic yard clam bucket will

 lift an average 600 pound load. For a 100 ton per day operation a 

total

 of 334 loads per day or an average of one load every 4.3 minutes is re-

 quired.

 The 50 ' x 25 ' x 4' deep refuse storage pit contains space for 37 tons

 of refuse @ 400 pounds per cubic yard which represents storage capa-

 city for 9 hours operation at the designed rate of 100 tons per day, or
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 10 hours at the estimated probable average rate of 90 tons per day.

 The plant is designed to operate at combustion chamber temperatures

 between 1800 and 2000°F. The grate size and arrangement results in

 useable grate area of about 180 square feet. Design criteria assumed

 the heating value of refuse as fired would be about 4,230 BTU per

 pound. Design criteria also required 130% excess air to be supplied

 to control the temperature of the furnace exit gases. Total combustion

 air requirements were calculated at approximately 12,100 cubic feet

 

VI-17

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 per minute. The furnace is provided with a total of 18,000 cfm 

com-

 bustion air at 6" water gauge pressure, which is distributed over 

and

 under the grate through overfire nozzles and under grate plenum 

cham-

 bers. The combustion air fan is driven by a 20 HP motor.

 After cooling with water sprays to approximately 500°F., gases 

from

 the furnace pass through a mechanical cyclone collector designed 

for

 50,000 cfm at 500°F. with 5" water gauge pressure drop which 

theore-

 tically removes all particles over 10 microns in size. The gases 

are

 drawn through the collector by an induced draft fan designed for 

normal

 operations at 50,000 cfm at 500°F. with 4" water gauge pressure 

and

 maximum loads of 60,000 cfm at 500°F. at 6" water pressure. The 

in-

 duced draft fan is driven by a 60 HP motor.

 Residue leaving the burning grate passes through a quenching 

trench

 and is transported by flight conveyor for deposit in the ash 

storage hop-

 per. The conveyor was designed to receive plant discharge from 

the-

 furnace at any rate up to 3 tons per hour and at an operating 

speed of

 not less than 20 feet per minute. The ash storage hopper is 

located

 outside the incinerator building permitting ash trucks to drive 

through

 for convenient loading.

 We anticipate that this type of plant, with proper operation, will

be

 able to meet the recommended standards contained in this report.

 2. Landfill Operations

 Both private and public landfills which serve Jefferson and St. Bernard 

Parishes

 are generally operated as open burning dumps. Housekeeping and sanitation 

stand-

 ards vary only slightly between these operations although considerable 

variation

 occurs in the types of wastes handled.

 In St. Bernard Parish nearly all of the Parish waste collections are 

delivered to the

 public dump on Paris Road, a 200-acre tract, first started as a dump in the 

mid-

 forties and estimated to have a remaining life of some twenty-five years, if 

con-

 tinued to be operated as in the past. This dump is located in marshlands and

the

 progress of its development has been through continued burning of combustibles

and

 dumping of non-combustibles in the submerged land areas. A private dump, 

oper-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 ated in a similar manner, is located adjacent to the public dump and receives

com-

 mercial wastes generated in both St. Bernard Parish and the City of New 

Orleans.

 Scavenging is practiced at both locations. Equipment usage for compaction and

 grading to maintain a reasonable appearance at these locations is not 

adequate and

 relatively no cover material is used ot'ier than the on-site residue.

VI-18

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Three active dumps presently serve the Jefferson Westbank. The Parish dump located

 on U. S. Highway 90 consists of about 50 acres. It is situated about 1.5 miles 

from

 the nearest development. This dump receives oversize and non-combustible wastes

 from the Eastbank as well as about 60% of the total wastes generated in the West-

 bank unincorporated area. The Gretnq dump, consisting of about 2 acres, is lo-

 cated on Gretna Boulevard adjacent to developed areas. Policy of operation of

 this dump permits burning on a very limited basis under strict supervision. It 

receives

 approximately 40% of the wastes generated in the City, limited to non-putrescible

 wastes. It is one of the few area dumps operated on well drained land. The West-

 wego dump consisting of about 15 acres is located in marshlands off Central Avenue.

 It receives nearly all of the wastes generated in the City.

 In addition to the Parish dump located on the Westbank, the Jefferson Eastbank is

 served by two other dump facilities. A private dump operated in St. Charles Parish

 receives about 80% of all wastes generated in the City of Kenner as well as 

limited

 amounts of commercial wastes from the balance of the Eastbank. The City of Kenner

 uses an area paralleling the Jefferson-St. Charles levee for the disposal of commer-

 cial trash and all oversize wastes. This dump covers an area of some 10 to 12 

acres,

 averaging about 100 feet in width and about a mile in length. It is presently 

closed

 to public access but continues to be used by the City. There is no attendant on 

this

 dump and its method of operation presents considerable fire hazards. Due to its

 proximity to residential development and to the International Airport, burning has

 not been permitted, although the vast majority of materials are combustible. 

Neither

 compaction of wastes nor application of cover material is practiced at this 

location.

 Except for the prohibition of putrescible wastes, its method of operation presents

 the most hazardous conditions observed in the Tri-Parish area.

 All seven of the area dumps, serving Jefferson and St. Bernard Parishes, are oper-

 ated in a manner either in violation of existing ordinances or accepted methods

 recommended by health authorities. All present hazards, in varying degrees, to

 public health, welfare and safety. In order to eliminate these conditions, regula-

 tions must be adopted and enforced, not only prohibiting open dumping and burn-

 ing, but also presenting minimum standards that must be met in operation of sani-

 tary landfills and other methods of disposal acceptable to local, state and federal

 authorities.

 D. Quantities and Types of Wastes

 1. Present Quantities

 Commencing in mid January of 1968, field observations were made over a period

 VI19

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans/ La. - 15 May 1968

 of some three weeks at the principal disposal facilities in Jefferson and St. 

Bernard

 Parishes as well as one dump located in St. Charles Parish where wastes 

generated

 in the City of Kenner were hauled for disposal. These observations excluded 

those

 disposal facilities in the Westbank Unincorporated area which were covered by 

the

 previous survey of Gerome Pepper and Associates in early 1966. These field 

obser-

 vations included daily recordings of number of loads, type, size and capacity 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

of

 delivering vehicle, classifications and weight of material received, as well 

as class!"

 fications of municipal or Parish collection and private collection vehicles. 

Ob-

 servations covered an average period of fourteen days at each location with 

a mini-

 mum of eight days coverage at the private dump in St. Charles Parish where 

lesser

 volumes of materials were handled, to a maximum of seventeen days observation

 at the Eastbank incinerator where a great majority of the area tonnage was 

handled.

 In addition to the disposal facilities noted above, one open dump located on 

the

 Jefferson - St. Charles Parish line, utilized by the City of Kenner for the 

disposal

 of miscellaneous waste, was not covered by continuous observations. However,

 it was estimated by the City of Kenner and reasonably verified by spot 

checking,

 that the City delivers, on the average, about 6.5 tons per day of mixed refuse

(non-

 putrescible) wastes to this dump. Later estimates of total production for 

the City

 of Kenner will include adjustment for this one item.

 In review of the Westbank Study, we find that recorded waste collections from

 the Westbank Unincorporated area averaged about 675 tons per week consisting

 of some 500 tons of Parish collected garbage and trash and some 175 tons 

collected

 by private and commercial haulers. It was also indicated that the Parish 

inciner-

 ator at Marrero was handling an average of about 240 tons per week with the

 balance of area wastes collected being handled at the Parish dump.

 In addition to the waste from the Westbank, approximately 490 tons per week

 generated on the Eastbank were also delivered to the Westbank Parish dump.

 For the purpose of this report and for comparison of each community, 

quantities

 of refuse production will be computed in tons and/or pounds per day (7 day 

week

 basis).

 We find that the total refuse production in the total Eastbank area amounts to

366

 tons per day of which 64% is collected by municipal forces (including private

con-

 tractors providing municipal pickup) and the remainder by private disposal 

con-

 cerns. We also find that 218 tons per day were produced in the Westbank area

 of which 61% is collected by municipal and Parish forces. In St. Bernard 

Parish

 76 tons per day were produced with 35% being collected by Parish forces.

VI-20

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Generally the private haulers collect all waste from the large commercial and in-

 dustrial enterprises, in each of these areas.

 The total quantity of refuse expressed in terms of per capita production amounts to

 an average of 3.19 Ibs. per day in the Eastbank area, 3.97 Ibs. per day in the

 Westbank area and 3.30 Ibs. per day in St. Bernard Parish. A breakdown of our

 findings by individual communities, which is shown in Table Vl-lf also includes

 the per capita figures for each community. It should be noted that the amounts re-

 corded as municipal or Parish refuse also includes collections by private 

contractors

 which provide the public services in the Jefferson Eastbank area.

 TABLE VI-1

 TOTAL REFUSE PRODUCTION - 1967

 (7 Day Week)

COMMUNITY

St. Bernard

Jefferson Westbank

Gretna

Westwego

Uninc. Area
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Total Westbank

Jefferson Eastbank

Kenner

Harahan )

Uninc. Area )

Total Eastbank

Municipal*

Lbs/Cap

1.15

2.30

2.92

2.37

2.43

2.08

1.95

1.97

Tons/Day

26.4

37.0

21.2

75.2

133.4

36.0

190.0

226.0

Priv. & Comm.

Lbs/Cap Tons/Day

2.13 49.6

0.68 11.0

1.37 9.8

2.00 63.8

1.54 84.6

0.57 10.0

1.33 130.0

1.22 140.0

Total Per Day

Lbs/Cap

3.28

2.98

4.29

4.37

3.97

2.65

3.28

3.19

Tons/Day

76

48

31

139

218

46

320

366

 *That part of the refuse for which the municipality assumes responsibility

 The regular public garbage and trash collection services provided by the various 

com-

 munities through their own forces or through private contractors are largely limited

 to the collection of combustible wastes. In most cases special collections of 

oversize

 and non-combustible wastes are handled by separate collection crews and equipment.

 This type of material represents about 10% of the total wastes collected.

 VI21

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Summarizing'our findings on the existing solid waste systems of Jefferson and 

St.

 Bernard Parishes, we have prepared Table VI-2, which relates annual costs in-

 curred by each of the communities to the respective quantities of wastes 

produced

 and handled. Due to lack of cost accounting detail in these communities, we

 have necessarily estimated costs for the most part based on our observations 

and

 evaluation of those cost breakdowns available. In the case of incinerator 

costs,

 Table VI-3 was prepared to present the basis of these estimated costs.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 In review of these tables it must be recalled that Jefferson Parish Eastbank 

com-

 munities are Served primarily by private enterprise and that estimated costs 

shown

 do not propose to show actual contractor costs but only an approximate distribu-

 tion of total community costs incurred, whereas in the case of Jefferson 

Westbank

 communities and St. Bernard Parish, estimated costs are those probably directly

 incurred by the communities. Variations in the estimated costs of collection 

and

 haul can be attributed to the variations in haul distances and/or frequency of

col-

 lection, as in the case of St. Bernard Parish, which provides daily 

collections

 over a wide area with extreme haul distances.

 TABLE VI-2

 SOLID WASTE SYSTEM COST ANALYSIS

 MUNICIPAL COLLECTION & DISPOSAL - JEFFERSON AND ST. BERNARD PARISHES- 1967

bt. Population

Annual Torn Produced

Average Tons per Da/ Collected

Lbs/Capita (6 Day Bash)

Annual Collection & Disposal Cosh

Cut Per Capita

Cost Per Ton

(2) Annual Tom Incinerated

Est. CostAon

Est. Annual Cost

% of Total Collection

Annual Tons - Landfill

(3) Est. CostAon

Ett. Annual Cost

% of Total Collection

Est. Annual Cost of Disposal

Average CostAon

Annual Camtn. & Private Tons

Received at Municipal Disposal

Facilities

0) Annual Cost of Disposal of Comm.

& Private Collections

Bt. Cat of Municipal Collection

4 Haul

Average CostAon

Jefferson Parish Easlbank

Kenner

35,000

13,300

44

2.42

$100,000

$ 2.85

$ 7.53

_

-

.

-

13,300

$ 1.50

$ 19,950

100

$ 19,950

$ 1.50

.

$ 6.03

Harohan

16,000

5,700

19

2.27

$52,730

$ 3.30

$ 9.25

5,000

$ 4.62

$23,000

87
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

700

$ 1.25

$ 875

13

$23,875

$ 4.22

.

-

$ 5.03

Uninc.Areo

179,000

63,500

212

2.27

$925,000

$ 5.15

$ 14.50

55,000

$ 4.62

$254,000

86

8,500

$ 1.25

$ 10,625

14

$264,625

$ 4.17

.

-

$ 10.33

Jefferson Parish Westbank

(l)Westwego

14,250

7,600

25

3.40

$55,000

$ 3.93

$ 7.25

.

-

.

-

7,600

$ 1.50

$11,400

100

$11,400

$ 1.50

3,400

$ 5,100

$55,000

$ 7.25

GfAtno

32,000

13,500

45

2.69

$200,000

$ 6.25

$ 14.82

9,000

$ 5.38

$48,350

67

4,500

$ 1.50

$ 6,750

33

$ 55,100

$ 4.10

3,800

$ 5,700

$139,200

$ 10.30
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Uninc.Area

63,750

27,400

91

2.76

$450,000

$ 7.05

$ 16.45

18,000

$ 4.35

$ 78,200

65

9,400

$ 1.25

$ 11,750

32

$ 89,950

$ 3.28

34,600

$51,900

$308, ISO

$ 11.20

St. Bernard

Parish

46,380

9,700

32

1.34

$200,000

$ 4.30

20.60

-

-

-

-

9.700

$ 1.50

$ 14,550

100

$ 14,550

$ 1.50

15,000

$ 22,500

$170,450

$ 17.60

 (1) Westwego Landfill is operated by Parish Sanitation Dept. - Cost of Disposal 

shown is not Included In Total Annual Coif.

 (2) Data from Table VI-3

 (3) Allowance of $1.50 assumed for relatively small landfill preparations $1.25 at 

Westbank Landfill compared to average

 cost of $1.00A«n at New Orleans' large landfill operations.

 Note: See also Table 111-2, Page II1-6

VI-22

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 TABLE VI-3

 ESTIMATED DISPOSAL COSTS BY INCINERATION

 JEFFERSON PARISH - 1967

Year Constructed

Plant Cost

Rated Capacity

Present Operation

No. of Days/Week

No. of Hours/Day

No. of Men/Shift

No. of Tons/Day

Annual Tons Incinerated

Annual Costs

(1) Capital

(2) Operating

TOTAL

Cost Per Ton

Capital

Operating
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

TOTAL

Eastbank

Incinerator

1964

$1,578,575

400 T

6

16

6

200

60,000

$ 112,000

165,800

$1.86

2.76

$4^62

Marrero

Incinerator

1948

$210,000

90 T

6

16

5

60

18,000

$ 14,900

63,300

$ 78,200

$0.83

3.52

$4"35

Gretna

Incinerator

1951

$235,000

100 T

6

8

5

30

9,000

$ 16,700

31,650

$ 48,350

$1.86

3.52

$5738

 (1) Capital expense for comparison purposes is based on Amort. Factor of .07036/yr.

 (For 20 yr. Life @ 3 1/2 % Int.)

 (2) Operating expense is based on the following nominal allowances:

 Payroll & Benefits: Salary Avg. of $400/Mo. per crew member

 Utilities: Avg. $0.20/Ton Incinerated

 Maint. & Repairs: Avg. $0.40Aon Incinerated

 Residue Removal: Avg. $0.25/ton Incinerated

 VI-23

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 2.

Forecast of Future Waste Production

 In the case of our projections of per capita waste production in the City of 

New Or-

 leans, we selected a 15% increase per decade over the next twenty-year period.

 We have adopted this same allowance as the probable future increase in per 

capita

 production for St. Bernard, Jefferson Eastbank, and Jefferson Westbank over 

the

 next twenty years. Based on this factor Table VI-4 has been prepared showing 

the
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 estimated per capita production by each of these communities at five-year 

intervals

 to 1990. These figures generally indicate that the future per capita 

production of

 these various communities will be well under the 6.4 Ibs. per capita as 

forecast by

 APWA as the national average by 1990.

 TABLE VI-4

 •FORECAST OF WASTE PRODUCTION TO 1990

 (7-Day Week)

St. Bernard

Jefferson Westbank

Gretna

Westwego

Uninc. Area

Jefferson Eastbank

Kenner

Harohan

Uninc. Area

1970

Lbs/Cap Tons/Day

3.45

3.15

4.50

4.55

2.80

3.15

3.45

91

53

34

155

60

27

328

1975

Lbs/Cap Tons/Da/

3.70

3.35

4.80

4.90

3.00

3.35

3.70

117

60

38

220

75

36

460

1980

Lbs/Cap Tons/bay

3.95

3.60

5.15

5.25

3.25

3.60

3.95

152

68

44

318

117

47

615

1985

Lb»/Cap Tom/Day

4.20

3.85

5.50

5.60

3.40

3.85

4.25

189

79

50

460
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

166

62

805

1990

Lbi/Cap Ton/Day

4.55

4.15

5.90

6.00

3.70

4.15

4.55

236

92

56

725

222

83

1,050

 E.

First Stage Refuse Disposal Program 1970-1980

 An immediate need for programming additional disposal facilities in both 

Jefferson

 and St. Bernard Parishes is necessary to accommodate forecast quantities 

during the

 1970-1980 decade. A principal objective in the first stage of the proposed 

Tri-

 Parish development program is to prohibit open burning and dumping. To 

accomplish

 this objective the capacities of incinerators must be enlarged or sanitary 

landfills

 established. The following text covers Recommended Programs for each Parish 

and

 community.

VI-24

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 1. Jefferson Parish

 The effective capacity of the David Drive Incinerator can be assumed at about 365

 tons per da/. Operating at this capacity it will be capable of handling approxima-

 tely 75% of all wastes generated in the Eastbank area irv 1970. An incineration

 deficiency of about 115 tons per day will exist in 1970; 300 tons per day in 1975;

 and 545 tons per day by 1980. To meet this deficiency, an incinerator installation

 with an initial capacity of 600 tons per day should be programmed in the eastern

 portion of the Parish in the vicinity of Airline Highway and Labarre Street to be in

 operation by 1975. To accomplish this, construction should be started by 1973.

 Based on present costs (1967), such an incinerator with adequate air pollution con-

 trol would cost approximately $4,000,000 exclusive of land. An additional plant

 to serve the western portion of the Eastbank unincorporated area and Kenner should

 be programmed for construction in the mid-80's with an initial capacity of 400 

tons

 per day. Such an incinerator should be ready for operation by 1985 and is 

estimated

 to cost approximately $3,000,000 exclusive of land.

 Combined wastes generated by the communities of the Jefferson Westbank area are

 estimated to be 280 tons per day by 1970; 370 tons per day by 1975; and 500 tons

 per day by 1980. Expansion of the New Orleans Algiers incinerator to a capacity

 of 500 tons per day by 1975 would accommodate those wastes generated by the City

 of Gretna and the adjacent unincorporated area through 1980. Such an addition

 with plant modifications required would cost approximately $2,250,000. If a charge

 of $4.00 per ton were made by the City of New Orleans for this service, the cost to

 the City of Gretna and the Unincorporated area would be somewhat less than the pres-

 ent cost of incineration. Such a charge would fairly allocate the cost between the

 users of'the facility.

 A new incinerator proposed at the location of the existing Marrero plant with an

 initial capacity of 500 tons per day should be programmed for construction 

immediately

 to serve the balance of the Unincorporated area and the City of Westwegp. Such a

 plant, based on present conditions (1967), would cost approximately $3,500,000

 including air pollution control equipment. The site of the present plant is 

adequate

 and can be utilized for the new facility. This capacity would be adequate through

 1985. These two plant locations are so situated to provide reasonable haul 

distances
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 in the areas they serve.

 2. St. Bernard Parish

 Our estimates of the quantities of combustible refuse produced today in St. Bernard

 Parish indicate that the .existing Parish incinerator has little reserve capacity 

beyond

 VI25

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 existing requirements for disposal of all combustible wastes presently 

generated in

 the area. In order to meet the demand for satisfactory disposal of all 

combustible

 (incinerable) wastes generated in this developing area of St. Bernard for 

the period

 1970-1980, doubling its capacity or establishing a sanitary landfill 

operation is

 necessary.

 The probable cost of operating the present 100-ton per day unit at full 

effective

 capacity (24 hours/day and 6 days/week) can be expected to be in the 

neighbor-

 hood of $8.00 per ton including amortization (25-year period) of the plant 

invest-

 ment. Similarly, if this plant were to be doubled in capacity and the 

quantities

 of wastes delivered correspondingly increased, the cost per ton might be 

expected

 to drop to about $6.00 per ton.

 Disposal of wastes by modern incineration methods is generally relatively 

expen-

 sive in communities the size of St. Bernard Parish, due to the limited 

quantities of

 wastes generated in the area and the correspondingly small capacity of the 

re-

 quired plant.

 Based upon our analysis of quantities presently generated in the area and the

pro-

 jections of waste through 1990, it is not likely that disposal by 

incineration will be

 economical until after 1980, at which time the Parish should consider 

participation

 in the provision of larger incineration capable of meeting the future needs of

this

 Parish as well as other portions of the Tri-Parish area. Further detail of 

the future

 Tri-Parish program is covered in Chapter VII.

 As an alternate means of disposal in the interim years until 1980, St. Bernard

Parish

 should consider sanitary landfill methods for its requirements beyond the 

capacity

 of the present incinerator. Locations for sanitary landfill would be 

desirable in the

 same general area where the present open dump is operated on Paris Road. 

This

 area ?s presently removed from urban development, in an area of future 

industrial

 use and is reasonably close to the growth area. Based upon average annual 

quantities

 of wastes for the 1970-1980 period, about 10 acres per year would be 

required. Such

 a landfill could receive refuse generated in excess of the incinerator 

capacity until

 1980, and will provide a convenient point of disposal for incinerator residue. In

 connection with the landfill and future expansion of the incinerator 

program, it is

 recommended that St. Bernard provide a small transfer station in the vicinity

of Poy-

 dras, some eight miles to the southeast, when growth warrants its 

development.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 It is estimated that costs of disposal during this interim period (1970 

to 1980)

 would average about $5.50 per ton, that is, about $8.00 per ton by 

incineraVI-26

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 tion and about $4.50 per ton by sanitary landfill methods, with costs allowed

 for transfer of wastes from the southeasterly developed areas. Based upon the

 long range program designed to serve the Tri-Parish area, considerable economy,

 through reduced disposal costs, would be immediately available in 1980 to St.

 Bernard Parish.

 

VI-27

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

VII MASTER PLAN FOR TRI-PARISH AREA

 A. General

 The Tri-Parish area, which includes the parishes of Orleans, Jefferson, and St.

 Bernard, generally covers the New Orleans metropolitan area and for the purpose

 of this study is limited to the developed and populated portions of these three

 parishes. It covers an area of approximately 163 square miles, of which Orleans

 Parish occupies,66 square miles, Jefferson Parish 43 square miles on the east bank

 of the Mississippi and another 43 on the west bank, while the area under consid-

 eration in the St. Bernard Parish accounts for approximately 11 square miles

 In previous chapters we have described these areas in detail; we have discussed

 the economic factors upon which the growth of the area depends and the relative

 rate of growth of one parish to the other. We have analyzed the various sources

 and rates of waste production, the types and characteristics of the waste, and the

 present means of disposal. We have discussed the inadequacies of the present

 waste disposal facilities and the steps required to bring them up to present day

 standards.

 This is an area of dynamic growth, in which the presently estimated population

 of 1,073,000 is expected to increase to 1,131,000 by 1970; 1,489,000 by 1980;

 and 1,966,000 by 1990, or an increase of nearly 100% in the next 22 years. At

 the same time, the per capita rate of refuse production is expected to increase

 by 15% per decade.

 In terms of refuse production, it is estimated that 2,280 tons per day of combus-

 tible refuse are currently generated within the area. It is anticipated that this

 quantity will increase to 3,675 by 1980 and to 5,700 tons per day by 1990 (6-day

 week), or nearly a 2-1/2 times increase over the present.

 In Chapters V and VI we have discussed the first stage of development of

 a waste disposal program for each of the parishes covering the period from 1970

 to 1980. In this Chapter it is our purpose to develop an overall master program

 of waste disposal for the entire developed Tri-Parish area adequate to the year

 1990. We propose to integrate the waste disposal of the three parishes into a

 single whole and to present a solution without reference to parish or other po-

 litical boundaries. Such solution must continue to utilize such existing facilities

 as may be economically incorporated into the overall program.

 VIM

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 B. Characteristics of Future Development

 Because of the relatively high cost of land development due to the need for 

filling

 and draining, and otherwise reclaiming of lands on which urban development 

can

 take place in the Tri-Parish area, It is anticipated that the future growth of 

the area

 will follow the already well established pattern of small lots and dense urban develop-

 ment. The estimated population densities in the planning studies for the TriParish area

 upon which future population forecasts have been based further bear this out.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 C. Proposed Methods of Refuse Disposal

 Because of the relatively high density of developments and the relatively low 

eleva-

 tions which have been established for urban development, there is little 

likelihood

 of being able to develop large sanitary landfill sites for general use within 

a reason-

 able haul distance from the developed areas. This matter was discussed in 

detai1 In

 Chapter IV together with other possible means of refuse disposal, all of which 

were

 discarded in favor of incineration. We have, therefore, for the most part, 

based the

 development of the master plan upon the use of incineration as a means of 

disposal of

 combustible wastes, limiting dumping to non-combustible materials and 

incinerator

 residue both of which can be used for the recovery of land either for public 

or commer-

 cial purposes without creating nuisance or health hazards in their vicinity.

 D. Economic Size of Incinerator

 Before undertaking the development of the waste disposal plan for the TriParish area,

 we made a study of the cost of constructing and operating modern incinerators 

of dif-

 ferent capacities and the cost of hauling refuse from the pickup areas to the 

inciner-

 ators. Because of recent changes in market conditions, this study is based upon

a con-

 struction cost of $6,250 per ton of incinerator with an annual interest of 5% 

and amor-

 tization with level debt service over 25 years, rather than the 3 1/2% 

interest and 20

 year amortization used by the City in its records for the years 1965; 1966, 

and 1967

 appearing in Table V-18. Wages are based on those currently paid by the 

Sanitation

 Department of the City of New Orleans.

 The costs of utilities and residue disposal are also based on recent 

experience of the

 Sanitation Department in incinerator operation. Repairs have been assumed at 

2% per

 annum of the entire cost of the plant. Plant operation has been based on 90%

of the

 rated capacity (6-day week operation) and operating between 90 and 95% of the 

time,

 depending on the size of the Incinerator and the number of furnaces available. The

VII-2

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 cost of haul to the incinerator has been based on the actual records for the

 use of 20-cubic yard packers currently used by the Sanitation Department with

 an estimated average load of four tons.

 Studies have been made on collection areas having a density of 25 persons per

 acre and a waste production of 3.5 Ibs. per capita with truck travel speed from

 the collection area to the incinerator of 15 miles per hour and also, on collec-

 tion areas having a density of 15 persons per acre producing 3 Ibs. per capita

 and haul speeds of 18 miles per hour from the collection area to the incinerator.

 In the development of the study it has been assumed that the incinerator is lo-

 cated in the center of a waste production area which is square in shape. Varia-

 tion in the shape of the waste production area as well as in the relationship

 between area and incinerator would somewhat increase the haul cost from those

 shown under these ideal conditions. However, the cost would increase propor-

 tionately and the validity of the conclusions would not be altered. This infor-

 mation has been plotted on Figure Vll-l. A study of this figure will reveal

 that the minimum cost of incinerator operation plus haul to the incinerator cor-

 responds to an incinerator having a capacity of 600 tons per day. The cost per

 ton increases sharply for the smaller incinerators, increasing more gradually as

 the size of the incinerator also increases. This criteria holds true regardless of

 the density of population of the tributary area served.

 FIGURE Vll-l
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 ECONOMIC SIZE OF INCINERATOR - COST OF OPERATION AND HAUL

 10.00

 8.00

 Incinerator Oberalion (se$ Pig. V^

 800 1000

 Tons Per Day

 1200

1400

 1600

 VII3

-------

 Solfd Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 E. Proposed Master Development Program

 1. Orleans Parish - General

 In Table V-45 in Chapter V we presented a schedule of proposed incinerator 

util-

 ization based on the first stage of development recommended in that Chapter 

for

 the City of New Orleans and covering the years from 1975 thru 1990. This 

sched-

 ule showed that, whereas all of the incinerators had adequate capacity to meet

the

 requirements of 1980, substantial additional capacity was needed to meet the 

re-

 quirements of 1990.

 a. Algiers District

 The estimated waste production within the Algiers col lection 

district

 (within Orleans Parish) is 346 tons per day by 1990 or 46 tons in 

excess

 of the 300-ton capacity provided thru the enlargement of the Algiers

in-

 cinerator required as a part of the first stage of development. 

Examining

 the location of the Algiers incinerator, we find that it is located

on the

 westerly boundary of Or leans Parish, adjacent to the City of 

Gretnaand

 to a substantially developed area in the unincorporated portion of 

Jefferson

 Parish, both of which could be economically served by it, provided 

that

 sufficient capacity were available. This has been previously 

mentioned

 under Jefferson Parish in Chapter VI.

 If instead of the 200-ton addition to the Algiers incinerator 

proposed

 under the first stage development, provisions were made for 

ultimately

 increasing the capacity of this incinerator to800 tons by adding two

300-

 ton furnaces. Such an arrangement would require that the first 300-

ton

 furnacebe constructed prior to 1975and the secondafter 1980. This 

in-

 cinerator would then have adequate capacity to receive the wastes 

from

 the Algiers section of Orleans Parish, the City of Gretna, and the 

adjacent

 section of the unincorporated area of Jefferson Parish to 1985. 

After

 1985, the second 300-ton furnace would be needed to provide enough 

ca-

 pacity thru 1990.

 The additional increase of the Algiers incinerator to provide 

service to

 Gretna and part of the unincorporated area of Jefferson Parish would

 result in a reduction in the cost per ton of waste processed at this

plant

 from approximately $4.50 per ton, for the plant enlarged to provide
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 for the City of New Orleans only, to approximately $4.00 per ton 

for

 serving the enlarged area.

VIM

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 This substantial savings would benefit the City of New Orleans as

 well as the City of Gretna which will pay less than the cost of

 using Its present incinerator. Also, because of the proximity to 

the

 adjacent portion of the unincorporated area of Jefferson Parish, the

 overall cost of disposal at the Algiers incinerator should be less than

 that of hauling the refuse to the Marrero incinerator which is pro-

 posed to serve the main part of the westbank .area of Jefferson

 Parish.

 With the modification in the suggested program of the Algiers incin-

 erator mentioned above, adequate capacities would be available with

 this incinerator to serve the Algiers district thru 1990 and it would not

 be necessary to transfer refuse from this plant to the Seventh Street

 incinerator as proposed under the first stage development, thus leaving

 additional capacity at the Seventh Street incinerator for further

 growth.

 b. Western, Central, and Night Districts

 Referring again to Table V-45, we note that by 1990 there will be a

 slight shortage of capacity at the St. Louis incinerator to serve the

 Western district whereas the Seventh Street incinerator serving the Cen-

 tral and Night districts still has a capacity in excess of the require-

 ments of these collection areas. By extending the Central collection

 area east of CarrolIton Avenue from Julia to Tulane, the loads on each

 of these incinerators would be more evenly balanced.

 c. Eastern I District

 In the case of the Florida Avenue incinerator serving the Eastern I

 district, we find that its full capacity will be reached in 1982 after

 which provisions must be made for the excess of waste produced from

 the district. If the area served by this incinerator were reduced by

 eliminating the area from the St. Bernard Parish line to France Road

 (just westerly of the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal) approximately

 126 tons per day (based on 1990 estimates) would be removed from the

 district thus permitting this incinerator to have sufficient capacity to

 meet the requirements of the remaining area until 1990. The removal

 of this area from the Eastern I collection district would reduce the

 haul distance for refuse trucks within the district and thus reduce the

 cost of waste disposal at this plant. Since this district is adjacent to

 

VII-5

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 the developed areas of St. Bernard Parish, it would be logical to 

con-

 sider the waste disposal from both of these areas in a single 

facility.

 d. Eastern II District

 In Table V-45 it was shown that the New Orleans East Incinerator

 serving the Eastern II collection district would reach full 

capacity by

 1980 and that a second disposal facility would be required after 

that

 time. The anticipated growth in the Eastern II collection 

district can

 be expected to be in an easterly direction from the presently 

devel-

 oped area toward Paris Road. The subsequent development can be ex-

 pected to continue along the lake and highways as these areas are

 drained, filled, and prepared for urban development. Therefore, 

the

 additional disposal facility should be located to the east of Paris

Road.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Since a 500 acre tract, reserved for public park development, is 

lo-

 cated in the vicinity of Blind Lagoon, relatively close to the 

Paris

 Road area, consideration should be given to the development of a 

san-

 itary landfill in this area, to be in operation by 1984 to receive

refuse

 collected within the district in excess of the capacity of the 

present

 incinerator. Between 1980 and 1984 and at a decreasing rate there-

 after until 1988, the proposed St. Bernard incinerator will have 

the

 excess capacity required to receive the average of waste produced 

in

 N.O.-Eastern II District. The use of this facility by New Orleans 

to

 the extent possible will reduce disposal costs to a minimum.

 Since the area served would be in the vicinity of Paris Road, the 

haul

 distance would be considerably reduced from those shown in Chapter

 IV thus making this method of disposal more attractive even with 

the

 standards that must be observed in sanitary landfill development 

as

 previously discussed. This landfill should be continued in'full 

oper-

 ation until such time as the daily production of refuse will 

warrant the

 construction of a second incinerator. Such an incinerator should 

have

 an ultimate capacity of 600 tons provided by three 200-ton 

furnaces.

 Initial construction would provide for the construction of two 

furnaces

 having a total capacity of 400 tons with provisions for the 

addition of

 the third unit when needed. The first stage construction should 

be

 ready for use by 1989. A portion of the sanitary landfill area at 

Blind

 Lagoon should be reserved as the site for the future incinerator.

 2. St. Bernard Parish

 In Chapter VI it was proposed that St. Bernard Parish provide a new 

incinerator to

 replace the present incinerator and have it in operation by 1980. If such 

an

 incinerator were planned to have an ultimate capacity of 600 tons per day 

with

VII-6

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 Mav 1968

 three 200-ton furnaces, two of such units would meet the needs of the Parish until

 about 1995 after which the third unit would be required. The two units would pro-

 vide a nominal capacity of 400 tons per day and are estimated to cost $3,000,000

 inclusive of land based on 1967 costs. If the refuse from the easterly portion of 

the

 Eastern I district of Orleans Parish were to be disposed of with that of St. Bernard

 Parish, 400-ton capacity would be sufficient until 1990 after which the third unit

 bringing the plant to its full 600-ton capacity would be needed. The effect of

 combining the refuse from a portion of the Eastern I district of New Orleans with

 that generated within the Parish would be to reduce the operating cost of refuse

 disposal from about $6.00 per ton to approximately $4.00 per ton. Such an arran-

 gement would permit the City of New Orleans to dispose of its waste at $4.00 per

 ton and at the same time defer the capital expense required for a new incinerator.

 3. Jefferson Parish

 a. Westbank

 The Marrero incinerator proposed under the first stage of development in

 Chapter VI to serve the unincorporated area of the Westbank of Jefferson

 Parish lying to the west of the City of Gretna and including the City of

 Westwego will be adequate to meet the 1990 conditions if enlarged to its.

 ultimate capacity of 750 tons. The increase from the initial 500 tons to

 750 tons will be required between 1985 and 1990 depending on the rate
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 of growth of the area.

 b. Eastbank

 The present David Drive incinerator will be adequate to serve the needs

 of the City of Harahan and a portion of the unincorporated area of the

 Eastbank of Jefferson Parish provided that the Jefferson Kenner and Jef-

 ferson Labarre Street incinerators proposed under the first stage of 

develop-

 ment in Chapter VI are enlarged to their ultimate capacity of 600 and 900

 tons respectively. These three incinerators will have a combined capaci-

 ty sufficient to serve the entire Eastbank of Jefferson Parish including

 both the Cities of Kenner and Harahan thru 1990.

 F. Implementation of the Program

 1. Estimated Capital Investment

 The basic Master Plan Development Program is shown in Table VI1-1 and

 locations of these plants are shown in Figure V-14 {backcover). Imple-

 mentation of the proposed solid waste disposal program will require a 

total

 capital investment estimated at $36,200,000 (1967price basis) over the

 twenty period as shown in Table VII-2.

 VII7

-------

K

00

TABLE VIM

PROPOSED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

1980

1990

Incinerators

Incinerator Area Served

Seventh Street Central District

Night

(Add Western Tulane Julie area)

St. Louis Western Deduct before 1990

Tulane Julia area

Florida Avenue Eastern 1 Deduct

France Road to St. Bernard Parish

St. Bernard St. Bernard Add Eastern 1

France Road to St. Bernard Parish

N. O. East ') Eastern II

N. O. East *2

*

Algiers Algiers

Algiers - Gretna Unincorporated

Gretna

Jefferson, Marrero Jefferson West Bank Unincorporated

Westwego

Jefferson David Drive Jefferson East Bank Unincorporated

Horahan

Jefferson Kenner Jefferson East Bank Unincorporated

Kenner

Jefferson Lobarre Street Jefferson East Bank Unincorporated

TOTAL

Population

229,000

47,250

276,250
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

127,750

127,750

203,000

38,000

165,000

77,000

38,000

115,000

136,000

136,000

79,000

22,000

38,000

139,000

103,000

17,000

120,000

12.6VOOO

26,500

V52,500_

72,500

182,950

T82,950

U»,

Per

Cop.

3.92

6.87

5.35

5.35

4.65

5.35

5.35

5.30

6.15

4.20

6.15

6.0

4.65

4.25

3.80

4.65

Tore

Per

Day

448

162

6TO

342

341

543

-100

CJ

180

100

356-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

364

-365

~5

210

68

80

558

314

51

365

2*3

57

355

138

425

125"

3,^75

No. &

Size

Furnaces

3@300

2@225

2@300

2@200

2@200

-

1@200

1@300

 565

2@250

2@200

Landfill oncf 7th"

2@ 300

Average

Capacity

Tons/Day

330

410

545

365

365

-

450
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

450

365

Str«et Incin^

545

4,3T5,

Population

234,750

51,750

9,150

295,650

132,750

- 9,150

123,600

212,250

40,000

252, JSO

104,000

40,000

144,000

195,000

155,000

110,000

78,000

44,000

232,000

164,000

19,000

183,000

96,400

40,000

136,400

90,000

120,000

210,000

272,500

272,500

Lbs.

Per

Cap.

4.55

7.88

6.21

6.30

6.30

5.50

6.29

6.78

6.85

4.85

6.85

7.00

5.50

5.00

5.50

4.50

5.50
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Tors

Per

Day

535

204

29

768

418

-29

3S9

669

-126

33

286

126

ZT2

615

-365

215

346

268

106

720

561

59

620

264

100

364

247

270

5T7

750

750

5,700

Incinerators

No. &

Size

Furnaces

3@300

2@225

2@300

3@2X

2@200

2@200

1@200

2@300

 §55

3@250

2@200

3@200

3@300

Average

Capacity

Tons/Day

'
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

120

410

545

545

365

365

720

675

365

545

,$20

6,775

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - T5 May 1968

 TABLE VI1-2

 CHRONOLOGICAL PROGRAM OF CAPITAL INVESTMENT

 Based on 1967 Costs

 Estimated Cost

 J969

 Reconstruct and enlarge Florida Avenue Incinerator to 600 tons/day $ 3,750,000

 Construct new Marrero Incinerator to 500 tons/day $ 3,500,000

 -I*7!

 Reconstruct and enlarge Seventh Street Incinerator to 900 tons/day $ 5,600,000

 J973

 Enlarge Algiers Incinerators to 500 tons/day $ 2,250,000

 Construct Jefferson La bar re Street Incinerator having 600 tons/day

 initial capacity $ 4,000,000*

 J978

 Construct St. Bernard Incinerator having 400 tons/day initial capacity $ 3,000,000*

 J983

 Enlarge Algiers Incinerator to 800 tons/day $ 2,250,000

 Enlarge Marrero Incinerator to 750 tons/day $ 2,000,000

 Construct Jefferson Kenner Incinerator having 400 tons/day initial

 capacity $ 3,000,000*

J985

 Enlarge Jefferson Kenner Incinerator to 600 tons/day $ 1,600,000

J987

 Construct New Orleans East Incinerator *2 - 400 tons/day $ 3,000,000

J989

 Enlarge Jefferson Labarre Street Incinerator to 900 tons/day $ 2,250,000

 Total Investment - Twenty-Year Program $36,200,000

*p|us land

 VI1-9

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 2. Overall Effect on Cost of Disposal

 Present disposal costs averaging about $3.70 per ton, but ranging from $0.45

per

 ton at the Algiers dump to $6.91 per ton at the Algiers Incinerator, as 

experienced

 by the City of New Orleans in 1967, will level off to an estimated cost of 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

$3.50-

 $4.00 as the program is developed. In effect, the City of New Orleans will

not

 incur major unit cost increases with development of improved disposal 

facilities.

 Conversely, those communities including St. Bernard, Westwego and Kenner, 

served

 exclusively by open dumps will experience costs that will be two to three 

times their

 present unit costs of disposal, with the availability of improved standards of

disposal.

 By and large none of the communities will experience a reduction in the 

average

 cost per ton for disposal, with the possible exception of the Unincorporated 

Eastbank

 Area of Jefferson Parish, which through full operation of the existing 

Eastbank In-

 cinerator should lower unit costs substantially.

 To emphasize the magnitued of this program, by 1980 the annual combined 

capacity

 of these plants would be about 1,400,000 tons with annual costs at about 

$4,500,000

 and by 1990 the expanded plants would have a combined annual capacity of over

 1,800,000 tons with annual costs of some $6,400,000. These compare with a 

1967

 annual incinerator capacity of 340,000 tons operated at a cost of 

$1,500,000.

 Table VII-3 was prepared showing each plant expansion in the program together 

with

 projections of anticipated annual costs over the twenty-year period. In 

Table VI1-4

 is shown the operation cost for the various sizes of incinerators for each of

the col-

 lection districts and parishes used in the preparation of Table VII-3. 

(Backcover).

 3. Central Management

 A central Tri-Parish authority was suggested in Chapter IV for the control 

and reg-

 ulation of solid waste disposal. With the adoption of a long range Tri-Parish 

dis-

 posal program and development of the proposed incinerator plants, it follows 

that

 central management of these plants should also be considered. With 

increasing

 complexity of modern disposal facilities it is imperative that plant operation

and

 maintenance be closely managed, to assure maximum efficiency at minimum ex-

 pense and a reasonable period of useful life.

 Central management in operation and control of these facilities would be more

 effective in acquiring, training and utilizing all classifications of 

personnel.

 Similarly, with multi-plant operation, minimum parts and supplies inventories

 would be required and standardization of plant and equipment could be 

achieved

 where practicable. Total responsibility on management for operation and

VII-10

-------

 TABLE VIM

ESTIMATED VARIATIONS IN OPERATING COSTS

 ( Incinerators 100 Tons/Day - 900 Tons/Day)

 (6 day basis - 3 shift operation)

RATED CAP. T/D

EFFECTIVE CAP. T/D

EFFECTIVE CAPV T/YR.

OPERATING EXPENSE

LABOR & FRINGE BENEFITS

Variable

UTILITIES

Constant Unit Cost

MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS

Constant Unit Cost

RESIDUE REMOVAL

Constant Unit Cost
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

TOTAL

Average Cost/Ton

400

365

113,000

$ 150,000

1.32

20,000

40,000

20,000

$ 230,000

2.02

500

450

140,000

$ 170,000

1.22

25,000

50,000

25,000

$ 270,000

1 .93

600

545

170,000

$ 186,000

1:096

30,000

• 176/T

60,000

.352A

30,000

.176 A

$ 306,000

1.80

750

675

210,000

$ 222,000

1.06

37,000

74,000

37,000

$ 370,000

1.75

800

720

224,000

$ 234,000

1.04

39,000

78,000

39,000

$ 390,000

1.75

900

820

256,000

$ 255,000

1 .00

45,000

90,000

45,000

$ 435,000

1.70

100

35

10,000

(1 shift only)

$ 30,000

2,000

10,000

2,000

$ 44,000

4.40

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 maintenance of the plant facilities, without being charged with other 

unrelated

 functions would provide a foundation for an efficient and economical solid 

waste

 disposal program that could be operated by either public or private 

enterprise.

 The full utilization of the tri-Parish disposal facilities for the disposal

of waste

 generated within the tri-Parish area without limitation of parish 

boundaries results

 in an overall savings to the tri-Parish area of 10-15 percent with the 

savings to St.

 Bernard Parish and the Westbank Area of Jefferson Parish approaching 25 

percent.

 Additional savings through a single tri-Parish administrative and operating

orga-

 nization could conceivably reduce these costs another 5-10 percent oc an 

overall

 reduction in disposal cost through a single tri-Parish organization of 

about 20 per-

 cent.

 In the opinion of the Assistant City Attorney of the City of New Orleans, 

the City

 may join with other parishes in the establishment of a tri-parish garbage 

disposal

 area. This opinion is based upon the following portions of Section 1324 

of Title 33

 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950:

 "Any parish, municipality, police jury, harbor

 and terminal district or any combination thereof

 may make agreements between or among them-

 selves to engage jointly in the exercise of any

 power, the construction or acquisition or im-

 provement of any public project or improvement,

 or the promotion and maintenance of any under-

 taking which each of the participating authorities

 may exercise or take individually under any pro-

 vision of general or special law. Such arrange-

 ments may include but are not limited to activities

 concerning:

 (3) Sewers, drains and garbage and other refuse

 collection and disposal;****"

VII-12

-------

APPENDIX

-------

 Study of Solid Waste - New Orleans, La.

 INDEX

 APPENDIX I DIGEST OF SOLID WASTE ORDINANCES

 |-A Digest of City of New Orleans Solid Waste Ordinance

 I-B Digest of Jefferson Parish Solid Waste Ordinance

 I-C Digest of Kenner Bid Specification in lieu of Solid Waste

 Ordinance

APPENDIX II

APPENDIX III

APPENDIX iv

APPENDIX V

APPENDIX vi

 I-D Digest of Gretna Solid Waste Ordinance

 I-E Solid Waste Disposal Regulations - State of Louisiana

 HAUL STUDIES

 INCINERATOR MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE

 Continuous Feed Plant

 Batch Feed Plant

 BASIC FIELD INFORMATION FORMS UTILIZED IN SURVEY

 SUGGESTED REGULATIONS FOR SANITARY LANDFILLS

 Sec. 1 Sanitary Landfill Sites

Sec. 2 Site Approval

Sec. 3 Site Improvement

Sec. 4 Fire Protection

Sec. 5 Sanitary Landfill Operation

REFUSE SAMPLING AND TESTING.PROCEDURES

 Page
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 1-1

 1-1

 1-3

 1-5

 1-5

 1-6

 ll-l

 Ill-l

 Ill-l

 111-5

 IV-1

 V-l

 V-l

 V-l

 V-2

V-2

V-3

 Vl-l

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

jjew Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

APPENDIX I Digest of Solid Waste Ordinances

Digests of the available Solid Waste Ordinances in the TrirParish Area have been included in the

following:

 I-A City of New Orleans

 I-B Jefferson Parish

 I-C City of Kenner (Bid Specifications

 for contract collection)

 I-D City of Gretna

 I-E Solid Waste Disposal Regulations - State of Louisiana

l~A Digest of £?ty of New Orleans Solid Waste Ordinance

 Unlawful to keep, throw, deposit any refuse which is offensive to smell or injurious

 to health.

 Unlawful to leave any airtight containers such as iceboxes, refrigerators, etc.,

 which could be easily accessible to children without first removing either the door 

or

 the locks. 3/17/67

 Unlawful to use garbage, refuse, or swill for purpose of filling lots.

 Owners and occupants of all premises shall provide containers for storage which

 should be enough to hold one week's amount of trash and garbage.

 Containers should be galvanized steel or any other material approved by Director of

 Sanitation, with handles and tight fitting covers, watertight - not less than 10 gal-

 lons and not more than 30 gallons, the cover is not to be attached in anyway to con-

 tainers; combined weight of both garbage and trash is not to exceed 75 pounds.

 Cans must be covered at all times and garbage wrapped in newspaper.

 Trash containers and contents therein must not exceed 75 pounds, yet these containers

 may be made of wood or metal and need not have covers. Boxes are allowed for

 this purpose.

 Branches and shrubbery must be cut in lengths of less than four feet and tied in

 bundles not to exceed three bundles and/or 75 pounds.

 Appendix 1-1

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 Time of collection is designated by Director of Sanitation - cans placed at curb or

 alley before 5 AM for day and between 5 and 6 PM for night must be removed im-

 mediately after pickup.

 Not in excess of 60 gallons of garbage or three bundles of branches will be removed

 by department from any one household. Excessive amounts must be removed by oc-

 cupants themselves.

 Refusal to pickup garbage and trash may be made by Director of Sanitation when no

 compliance to type or quantity of refuse.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Contractor, manufacturers, and trading refuse is not accepted.

 Contagious or infectious hospital waste must meet and be prepared for removal as

 indicated by Board of Health. All such boxes labeled "Hospital Waste".

 Any flammable material must be placed in metal containers with cover and disposed

 of as stated by Director of Sanitation.

 Unlawful to dispose of explosives by putting the same in garbage or trash 

containers.

 Unlawful to put out refuse not properly separated or stored in containers or to keep

 refuse on premises if not properly stored or to remove covers other than placement

 or disturb cans of others.

 Dumps facing road must be enclosed by fence not less than seven feet nor more than

 ten-feet high having no advertisement on the fence.

 Burning on private dumps prohibited. Those who maintain private dumps must take

 all necessary precautions to prevent fire by either persons or spontaneous combus-

 tion.

 If fire does occur and New Orleans Fire Department (NOFD) is called upon to

 extinguish, the company or individual must pay for cost of personnel and equipment.

 Cost plus accrued interest at rate of 6% annum will be charged to owner's tax bill.

 If owner fails to pay full amount, a representative of NOFD shall have recorded

 in the Mortgage Office a sworn statement of cost; this recordation shall constitute

 a lien on the property until payment is made in full.

Appendix 1-2

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, Lo. - 15 May 1968

 Resident of any premises must remove all sweepings of sidewalk so as not to allow

 this debris to stop up the drains.

 Vehicle hauling wastes must be equipped with a tarpaulin in order to prevent

 spillage.

 Removal of fire debris must be done within six days by residents.

 Discharging of garbage from vessels into River is unlawful. Vessels discharging

 garbage to land in the Port of New Orleans must comply with container requirements.

 Licences to collect garbage for the Port of New Orleans must be accepted by Board

 of Health.

 The Police Department shall remove from streets abandoned, stripped junk cars

 placing a notice on them three days prior to removal and may be sold for |unk after

 removal.

I-B Digest of Jefferson Parish Solid Waste Ordinance

 All refuse accumulated in Jefferson Parish is collected, conveyed and disposed of

 by Parish. Private collectors must obtain operating permits from Director of Garbage

 and State Health Authorities. Open or stake body vehicles must be covered. This

 provision does not prohibit the actual producer or outside collectors to use 

Jefferson

 thoroughfare as long as both abide by above ordinance.

 Director of garbage is authorized to regulate and schedule days of collection, 

type

 and locations of waste containers and other matters pertinent to this Division. He

 may modify or change same after notice as required by law.

 Garbage and trash should be drained, bottles and cans rinsed and drained before

 disposing, tree trimmings and hedge clippings must not exceed 3" in diameter nor 4

 feet in length, and tied in bundles not more than 2 feet thick. Trash which exceeds

 above limits and all non-combustible materials - building materials (brick, 

plaster,

 cement) will not be picked up and should be removed by occupants.

 Occupants must supply and keep in good sanitary condition their own refuse contain-

 ers. Occupants not meeting these standards will not be serviced. Containers ere 

to

 be of galvanized steel or approved material with handles, tight fitting covers yet
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Appendix 1-3

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleons, La. - 15 May 1968

 nor secured to container, watertight and having a minimum 10 gallon to maximum

 30 gallon capacity. Combined weight will not exceed 75 pounds.

 Storing of refuse must be in approved containers unless express approval is granted

 by the Director, otherwise accumulation of refuse is prohibited. No persons shall

 place refuse in such a manner that scattering may occur due to elements.

 Director designates days of collection in Areas of Parish. Occupants place approved

 containers at curb before 4;00 AM for collection days and removed promptly after-

 wards.

 Collection of garbage and trash shall be collected not less than 3 times weekly.

 At any one collection, the occupant is limited to 60 gallons of refuse and three 

bundles

 of shrubbery and above this limit must be handled by occupant.

 Charges for collection and disposal of refuse placed between sidewalk and curb for

 Garbage District I - 45 4 / month/dwelling unit; Garbage District II - 50 4 /

 month/dwelling unit. Service charges are collected bi-monthly on same billing of

 Waterworks of Jefferson Parish. An account will be considered delinquent if not

 paid 10 days after receipt. 30 days delinquency and the Director authorizes that

 all refuse collection for that account be halted. Services will resume on payment

 of accumulated fees plus 10%. Garbage disposal at Parish incinerator by commercial

 contract haulers or actual producer rate are set at $2.10/ton or fraction thereof

 which is charged rateable at $2.00/ton. Disposal of garbage or trash at Parish 

Dump

 or Landfill are rated to vehicles capacity:

 Compaction vehicle 13-20 c.y.: 5.00/load

 Compaction vehicle excess of 20 c.y.: 7.50/load

 Vehicles such as open stake body or van type are charged .35 4 / 100 * / load.

 Fees charged are collected by Director of Garbage in a manner within his discretion

-

 provided at least one monthly by Finance Director to any Commercial Contract

 hauler. Penalties are equivalent for delinquent payments.

 Any violator of Ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction

 fined not more than $100.00 or imprisonment not more than 30 days in jail or both.

 Each day such violation is committed or permitted to continue shall constitute a

 separate offense.

Appendix 1-4

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. -15 May 1968

I-C Digest of Kenner Bid Specification in lieu of Solid Waste Ordinance

 Residential refuse collection will be combined of garbage and trash, three times

 weekly at the curb, not to exceed 15' from property line.

 Not acceptable for trash collection will be ashes, construction debris, broken con-

 crete, tree branches and wood in excess of 36* in length or debris from commercial

 and industrial establishments.

 Refuse containers shall be metal or plastic, cylindrical shape, watertight, strong

 handles and tight fitting covers. Such containers shall be provided by occupant

 and maximum capacity must not exceed 30 gallons.

 Collections shall be made on a weekly schedule by contractor who must submit

 (area scheduled for collection) within 45 days after city awards contract. Services

 shall not begin before 5:00 AM and be completed by 10:00 PM with no collections

 on Sunday. Contractor need not take more than three 30 gallon containers per

 dwelling unit. Any non-resident abides by above specifications.

 All garbage and trash should be drained of all free liquids, with garbage either

 wrapped in paper or bagged. Separation of combustible and non-combustible is

 not required, but trash must be placed in containers or tied in bundles not to ex-

 ceed three (3) feet in length. Loose trash will not be collected.

I-D Digest of Gretna Solid Waste Ordinance

 It is unlawful to dump garbage, dead animals or fish and other refuse on public or
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 private property whether enclosed or not, except on such grounds as designated by

 the City of Gretna for this purpose.

 Violators will incur a fine not less than $2.50 not more than $25.00 or imprison-

 ment for not less than 3 nor more than 30 days in jail or both.

 Refuse containers must be galvanized iron with a tight cover not to exceed 30 gal-

 lons. Violators will be fined not more .than $10.00 or imprisonment not more than

 5 days.

 It is unlawful to throw, place or deposit garbage, trash or other waste materials of

 any kind on public streets, highways, alleyways, public places and on private

 property whether enclosed by fence or not. Violators of above ordinance will be

 fined $100.00 or imprisonment not to exceed 30 days in jail or both.

 Appendix 1-5

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans/ La. - 15 Moy 1968

I~E Solid Waste Disposal Regulations - State of Louisiana

 10.50 DEFINITIONS

 10.50.1 For the purpose of these regulations the following definitions shall apply:

 REFUSE: Refuse includes garbage, rubbish, ashes, animal and vegetable

 waste from animal quarters, and all other waste matter, except sewage,

 from any public or private establishment, institution, or residence.

 GARBAGE: Garbage includes all putrescible waste matter except sewage

 and recognizable industrial by-products. It includes putrescible vegetable

 matter, animal offal, and animal carcasses.

 RUBBISH: Rubbish includes all non-putrescible waste matter, except ashes,

 from any public or private establishment, institution, or residence.

 ASHES: Ashes includes the solid residue resulting from the combustion of

 all fuels used for heating, cooking, and the production of power in any

 public or private establishment, institution, or residence.

 STABLE REFUSE: Stable refuse includes animal feces and urine, any ma-

 terial contaminated by animal body discharges, and waste feed stuff.

 10.51 ACCUMULATION AND COLLECTION OF REFUSE

 10.51.1 No owner or lessee of any public or private property or premise nor any

 agent of such owner or lessee shall permit garbage to accumulate upon the

 property or premise except in tightly covered containers constructed of such

 material and in such a manner as to be strong, watertight, not easily cor-

 roded, and rodent and insect-proof. When garbage and other types of ref-

 use are collected separately, separate containers may be required by the

 State Health Officer or his duly authorized representative.

 10.51.2 Refuse shall not be allowed to remain in any house or other building, 

cellar,

 or outhouse, or on any premise long enough to cause a nuisance or health

 hazard.

 10.51.3 The bodies of vehicles used for the collection and transportation of 

garbage

 shall be watertight and easily cleaned. Such bodies shall be covered ex-

 cept when being loaded and unloaded.

Appendix 1-6

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, Lo. - 15 May T968

 10.51.4 No person shall throw or deposit or shall allow to fall upon any walkway,

 thoroughfare, or private property any refuse of any kind.

 10.52 APPROVAL OF PLANS

 10.52.1 No garbage or other refuse disposal plant or establishment shall be con-

 structed unless plans for same have been approved by the State Board of

 Health.

 10.53 DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE AND OTHER REFUSE

 10.53.1 The disposal of garbage and other refuse shall be by a method or methods
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 approved by the State Board of Health. The method or methods of disposal

 used shall include the maximum practicable insect, rodent, and nuisance-

 control.

 10.53.2 No place for the disposal of garbage or other refuse shall be maintained 

or

 operated except by permission of the duly authorized representative of the

 State Health Officer.

 10.53,3 No refuse dump or place of deposit shall be maintained without provision

 for the prompt and proper disposal of the material deposited. Ultimate

 disposal f'nall be by incineration or burying so as to effectively prevent

 the breeding of flies and other insects, the breeding and harboring of rats

 and other rodents, and the creation of any other nuisance or health 

hazard.

 10.53.4 Refuse shall not be deposited on or allowed to remain in any place from

 whence normal drainage might tend to contaminate any well, spring,

 cistern, or other source of potable water nor shall refuse be deposited on

 or allowed to remain in any place from whence drainage may cause the

 conveyance of any toxic, noxious, or offensive material onto any private

 premise.

 10.53.5 The handling of refuse for salvage shall not be practiced except by per-

 mission of the duly authorized representative of the State Health Officer

 and then only under proper supervision.

 Appendix 1-7

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans/ La. - 15 May 1968

 10.54 SWINE FEEDING

 10.54.1 No garbage shall be fed to swine without having first been heated through-

 out to a temperature of not less than 212 Farenheit and such temperature

 maintained throughout the mass for at least thirty minutes. Such heating

 shall be done in apparatus and by a method approved by the State Health

 Officer or his duly authorized representative.

 10.55 DISPOSAL OF CARCASSES

 10.55.1 Animal offal and the carcasses of animals shall be buried or cremated as

 directed by the State Health Officer or his duly authorized representative

 or shall be cooked (rendered) at a minimum temperature of 250 Farenheit,

 which temperature shall be maintained for at least thirty minutes. The 

ap-

 paratus and method or methods used in rendering shall be approved by a

 duly authorized representative of the State Health Officer, and rendering

 shall not be carried on in any establishment except under the provisions 

of

 a permit issued by such representative, as required in Chapter XX of 

this

 Code.

 10.56 STABLE REFUSE

 10.56.1 Every owner, lessee, manager (or other agent of an owner or lessee) of any

 stable, barn, stall, or any other establishment in the built-up part of 

any

 community, in which horses, cattle, dogs, fowls, or any other animals are

 quartered or in which stable refuse may accumulate shall cause such stable

 refuse to be promptly and properly removed therefrom, and shall at all 

times

 keep, or cause to be kept, such stable, barn, stall, or quarters, and the

 yards, drains, and appurtenances in a clean and sanitary condition, so that

 no offensive odors shall be allowed to escape therefrom. Manure shall be

 kept in covered containers, or shall be treated to prevent the breeding of

 flies.

 10.56.2 It shall be the duty of every owner, lessee, manager (or other agent of an

 owner or lessee) of any stable, barn, stall, or other establishment used

 for quartering animals or fowls to cause all stable refuse to be removed

 daily from such stable, or stable premise, unless the refuse is pressed in

 bales, barrels or boxes. The removal and disposal of stable refuse without

 Appendix 1-8

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 a written permit from the duly authorized representative of the State 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Health

 Officer is prohibited.

 10.56.3 Vehicles used for the removal of stable refuse shall be loaded within the

 premise, and not upon the street or sidewalk.

 10.56.4 No stable refuse vault or receptacle shall be built, or used, on any 

premise

 except pursuant to the terms of a permit granted therefor by the duly 

author-

 ized representative of the State Health Officer.

 Appendix 1-9

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tfi-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 APPENDIX II Haul Studies

 Tables A-8 through A-37 which follow show the detailed analysis of refuse collection and haul

 by days and districts.

 These tables are each divided into two parts, namely: "Present Operation" and "Future 

Operation. "

 The information gathered in the survey is shown under "Present Operation. " In each District,

 truck routes are numbered consecutively and are shown in the first column; the numbers shown,

 under the second column "Disposal Point", each represent a disposal location and are 

identified

 as follows:

 1* Algiers Incinerator

 2. Seventh Street Incinerator

 3. Florida Avenue Incinerator

 4. New Orleans East Incinerator

 5. Algiers Dump

 6. Gentilly Dump

 ' • St. Louis Incinerator

 The next five columns including number of loads, tons collected, total haul mileage, minutes 

per

 day of collection and haul are obtained from the daily field survey data.

 Minutes per ton collected is the collection time divided by tons collected, and average speed 

of

 travel is haul time divided by the total haul mileage.

 Under "Future Operation", where no change in disposal point is proposed, additional time for

 collection is zero as are the additional tons (collected) per day and the number of trucks 

required

 to serve the area is 1.00. Where there is a change in the point of disposal (under future 

operation)

Qd justed haul miles have been scaled from the City map along the most probable route and the

naul minutes computed using the average travel speed previously established, except in such

cases where a different speed should obviously apply. Saving in haul time for the truck route

nas been considered as additional time for collection and has been posted under this heading.

Additional tons per day (collected) have been computed by dividing the additional collection

Hme by the minutes per ton collected which result has been added to the observed tons collected

°nd thus determine the total tons that could be collected under future operation.

 number of trucks required to serve the route has been determined by dividing the tons 

presently

c°Hected, by the calculated (Future) tons that could be collected without increasing the workday

 Appendix 1 1-1

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La, - 15 May 1968

 beyond that presently required. Summarizing the incremental trucks required to serve each route

 and subtracting this number from the trucks presently utilized indicates the savings in truck 

routes
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 that could be realized by readjusting the collection areas within the district.

 For additional information the reader is referred to pages V-64 and V-65 of the text.

 Use of Computer

 Planning and organization for the haul study providing for application of Data Processing 

initially

 required review of the end-product detail and desired format with supervisors in the City's Data

 Processing Division. Previous design of the route survey form (Form No. RS-1) provided for 

the

 acquisition of pertinent data from the field on an individual route basis. Processing and 

review

 of these daily route surveys required a summary of individual route activity i.e., number of 

loads,

 total tons collected, total haul'and collection mileage, total haul and collection minutes, 

with

 posting of this detail to master summary sheets (Form RS-2) which provided total input for Data

 Processing handling. These summary sheets also included complete identification of each route

 by day group (days collected), day, week, route number, collection district, point of disposal,

 truck type and capacity. (Copies of Forms No. RS-1 and RS-2 enclosed in Appendix IV.)

 This route information was converted by card punching to a form that Data Processing could then

 apply to the designed computer program. Simple formulas were provided to Data Processing for

 computer calculation of route speed (MPH), average tons per load, collection minutes per ton

 for the existing route conditions and adjusted time and distance characteristics where a change

 in the point of disposal is anticipated in future operations.

 Tables A-8 through A-37 were prepared in similar format as the Data Processing print out 

except

 for manual computations of "Additional Time for Collection" and "Trucks Required to Serve 

Area".

 The Data Processing Division was also requested to compile certain summaries to demonstrate

 types of information that could be compiled from the same input. Typical summaries included

 total daily and weekly collection activity of each district and tonnage records at each point 

of

 disposal.

Appendix 11-2

-------

TABLE A-8

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: CENTRAL Collection Day: MONDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 22

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13*

U*

15*

16*

17*

18*

19*

20*

21*

22*

Total

Disp.

Poin:

**

2

2

2

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

-

No. of

Loads

3

3

2

3

2

3

3

3

3

2

4

3

3

2

2

2

3

3

3

2

2

2

58

Tons

Collec.

6.7

8.0

7.0

10.2

7.6

8.5

9.0

7.2

8.8

7

11.0

9.3

9.0

4.6

7.6

7.3

6.0

5.7

6.9

7.2

6.0

5.7

166.3

Total

Haul

Mi leage

7

7

5

9

7

7

3
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

5

2

10

6

9

11

9

11

18

12

15

12

7

14

188

Minutes Per Day

CoMec.

315

255

210

245

275

297

234

160

275

370

360

332

190 •

255

285

185

220

200

270

225

248

185

5,591

Haul

60

65

69

50

90

68

40

30

42

20

87

55

80

45

85

75

80

84

110

105

47

65

1,452

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

47.0

39.5

30.0

24.0

36.2

32.6

26.0

22.2

31.2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

52.8

32.7

35.7

21.1

55.6

37.5

25.3

36.6

35.1

39.1

31 .2

41.3

32.4

-

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

7.0

6.5

4.3

10.8

4.7

6.2

6.0

4.0

7.1

6.0

6.9

6.6

6.8

14.7

6.4

8.8

13.6

8.6

8.2

6.9

8.9

- 12.8

-

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

-7

7

-

Adjusted Haul

Miles

6

7

5

9

7

7

3

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

5

2

10

6

9

4

1

4

8

8

6

1

5

6

121

Min.

60

65

69

50

90

68

40

30

42

20

•87

55

8Q

16

9

27

35

56

44

9

34

28

1,014

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

0

0

0

0

0

0

o

o

0

o

o

o

0

29

76

48

45

28

66

96

13

37

438

Tons/Day

Addit.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

0

0

0

0

0.5

2.0

1 .9

1.2

0.8

1 .7

3.1

0.3

1.1

12.6

Total

6.7

8.0

7.0

10.2

7.6

8.5

9.0

7.2

8.8

7 n

11.0

9.3

9.0

5.1

9.6

9.2

7.2

6.5

8.6

10.3

6.3

6.8

178.9

No. of

Loads

3

3

2

3

2

3

3

3

3

2

4

3

3

2

2

2

3

3

3

2

2

2

58 .

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

i.nn

i.m

1.00

0.90

0.79

0.79

0.83

0.88

0.80

0.70

0,95

0.84

20.48

* To be re-assigned to Western District

** (2)7fh Street Incinerator; (7) St. Louis Incinerator

-------

TABLE A-9

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: WESTERN Collection Day: MONDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 28

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Disp.

Point

*x

7

1

1

1

7

7

5

5

5

7

7

7

7

5

7

1

7

7

7

7

7

5

7

7

No. of

Loads

3

3
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

Tons

Coilec.

7.3

8.2

7.4

6.3

7.5

6.4

7.6

7.0

6.8

6.8

5.9

6.2

5.6

8.2

6.2

6.7

7.6

8.7

9.1

7.6

7.4

8.1

6.4

7.1

Total

Haul

Mileage

12

51

23

22

8

9

51

29

32

6

5

5

5

18

9

42

15

13

24

8

14

47

18

24

Minutes Per Day

Coilec.

370

295

205

175
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

250

205

215

225

265

240

170

205

100

185

205

272

255

285

345

215

170

360

165

170

Haul

90

175

65

95

50

55

160

150

145

48

45

50

55

160

55

' 120

50

80

95

115

60

180

75

100

Min.

Per

Ton of

Coilec.

51.0

. 36.0

27.7

27.8

33.3

32.0

28.3

32.1

39.0

35.3

26.8

33.0

17.8

22.6

33.0

40.6

33.5

32.7

38.0

28.3

24.9

44.4

25.8

23.9

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

8.0

17.5

21 .2

13.8
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

9.6

9.8

19.1

U.6

13.2

7.5

6.7

6.0

5.5

6.7

9.8

21.0

18.0

9.8

15.1

4.2

14.0

15.6

14.4

14.4

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

Adjusted Haul

Miles

12

30

5

9

8

9

20

10

6

6

5

5

5

8

9

14

15

13

24

8

14

16

18

24

Min.

90

103

14

39

50

55
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

63

52

27

48

45

50

55

108 '

55

40

50

80

95

115

60

62

75

100

Addit.

Time

for

Coilec.

(min. )

0

72

51

56

0

0

97

98

118

0

0

0

0

52

0

80

0

0

0

0

0

118

0

0

Tons/Day

Addit.

0

2.0

1.8

2.0

0

0

3.4

3.1

3.0

0

0

0

0

2.3

0

2.0

0

0

0

0

0

2.7

0

0

Total

7.3

10.2

9.2

8.3

7.5

6.4

11.0
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

10.1

9.8

6.8

5.9

6.2

5.6

10.5

6.2

8.7

7.6

8.7

9.1

7.6

7.4

10.8

6.4

7.1

No. of

Loads

3

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.00

0.80

0.80

0.76

1.00

1.00

0.69

0.69

0.69

1 .00

1.00

1.00

1 .00

0.78

1 .00

0.77

1 .00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

0.75

1 .00_

1.00

Note-. See following page for coding information

-------

TABLE A-9 (Continued)

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: WESTERN Collection Day: MONDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 28

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Route

No.

25

26

27

28

Total

Disp.

Point

**

7

7

7

1

_

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

59

** (1) Algiers Incinerator

(5) Algiers Dump

(7) St. Louis Incinerator

Tons

Col lee.

9.0

7.2

8.8

6.8

203.9
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Total

Haul

Mileage

25

13

16

40

584

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

200

240

283

230

6,500

Haul

100

50

80

130

2,633
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

22.2

33.3

32.1

33.8

_

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

15.0

15.6

12.0

18.5

_

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

7

7

7

7

_
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Adjusted Haul

Miles

25

13

16

24

371

Min.

100

50

80

78

1,839

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

0

0

0

52

794
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Tons/Day

Addit.

.0

0

0

1.5

23.8

Total

9.0

7.2

8.8

8.3

227.7

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

60
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.00

1 .00

1 .00

0.82

25.55

-------

TABLE A-10

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: EASTERN! Collection Day: MONDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 22

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1 *

2*

3

4*

5

6

7*

8

9

10

H

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

Total

Disp.

Point

**

6

6
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

6

6

6

6

3

6

6

3

6

6

4

6

3

3

3

3

6

3

3

6

No. of

Loads

3

2

2

2

2

3

3

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

3

2

2

j2

2

2

2

2

49

Tons

Col lee.

10.3

9.7

9.5

7.6

8.0

10.3

8.5

7.4

7.0

8.2

8.8

6.6

8.6

8.1

8,2

7.7

8.9

9.8

9.9

7.9

7.5

8.5

187.0

Total

Haul

Mi leage

39

22

35

36
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

31

90

8

35

34

9

32

26

47

31

9

2

3

2

32

5

6

28

562

Minutes Per Day

Col lee.

215

240

280

205

225

255

305

193

240

335

253

235

270

280

231

197

245

240

280

415

402

370

5,911

Haul

170

150

150

130

115

225

95

182

150

125

152

120

235

130

154

43

10

40

190

70

70

165

2,871

Min.

Per

Ton of

Col tec.

20.8

24.8

29.4

27.0

28.0

24.8
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

36.0

26.0

34.3

41.0

28.8

35.6

31.4

34,5

28.2

25.6

27.6

24.5

28.2

52.5

53.6

43.5

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

13.7

8.8

14.0

16.6

16.4

24.0

7.0

11.5

13.6

4.3

12.6

13.0

10.3

14.3

3.5

3.0

18.0

3.0

10.1

4.3

5.1

10.1

_

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Inc nerators

Disp.

Point

**

7

7

3

7

3

3

7

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

_

Adjusted Haul

Miles

9

5

5

5

5
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

8

11

5

7

9

H

1

tl

6

9

2

3

2

6

4

6

2

13?

Min.

5?

51

31

27

27

27

130

39

31

125

78

5

64

25

154

43

10

40

54

56

70

18

,157

Addit.

Time

for

CoHec .

(min.)

lift

99

119

103

88

198

- 35

143

119

o

74

115

171

105

0

0

o

0

136

14

0

147

1,714

Tons/Day

Addit .

5.7

4.0

4.1

3.8

3.1

8.0
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-1.0

5.5

3.5

o

2.6

3.2

5.4

3.0

0

0

0

0

4.8

0.3

0

3.4

59.4

Total

16.0

13.7

13.6

11.4

11.1

18.3

7.5

12.9

10.5

8.?

11 .4

9.8

14.0

11.1

8.2

7.7

8.9

9.8

14.7

8.2

7.5

11.9

246.4

No. of

Loads

4

3

3

3

3

4

3

3

2

2

3

2

3

2

3

2

2

2

3

2

2

3

59

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

0.64

0.71

0,70

0.67

0.72

0.56
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1.13

0.57

0.67

l.QP

0.77

0.67

0.61

0.73

1.00

1.00

1 1. 00

1.00

0.67

0.96

1.00

0.71

17.49

To be re-assigned to Western District

(3) Florida Avenue Incinerator; (6) Gentilly Dump; (7) St. Louis Incinerator

-------

TABLE A-l]

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: EASTERN II Collection Day: MONDAY No- °f Trucks per Day: 23

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8*

9*

10*

11*

12*

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

Total

Disp.

Point

**

6

6

3

6

6

6

6

6

6

3

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

3

6

6

6

6

3

-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

47

Tons

Collec.

5.6

6.9

9.0

6.5

7.4

6.3

8.4

9.1

7.4

6.0

7.3

8.2

6.8

6.3

7.5

5.6

6.3

7.6

5.9

5.1

9.9

6.7

7.7

163.5

Total

Haul

Mileage

33

32

11

21

31

37

32

31

31

7

29

26

34

34

35

28

35

12

32

33

53

24

8

2,284

Minutes Per Day
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Collec.

270

180

230

240

260

210

195

445

245

175

320

370

240

175

300

190

310

155

198

250

285

230

170

5,643

Haul

180

180

70

120

160

120

125

130

175

55

160

110

185

140

150

130

170

65

162

140

270

140

50

3,187

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

48.2

26.1

25.6

37.0

35.0

33.4

23.2

49.0

33.2

29.2

44.0

45.0

35.2

27.8

40.0

34.0

49.0

20.4

33.5

49.0

28.8

34.4

22.0

_

Aver.

Travel.

Speed
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

(mph)

11.0

11.0

9.4

10.5

11.6

18.5

15.7

14.3

10.6

7.6

10.9

14.2

11.0

14.5

14.0

12.9

12.3

11.0

11.8

14.1

11.8

10.3

9.6

-

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

3

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

-

Adjusted Haul

Miles

30

29

28

27

28

29

31

. 7

6

7

6

6

24

27

26

25

33

33

29

30

43

32

30

566

Min.

11-6
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

113

108

104

108

115

120

43

51

55

33

25

93

104

102

97

128

128

113

116

166

124

116

2.278

Addit.

Time

for

Collec .

(min. )

64

67

-38

16

52

5

5

87

124

0

127

85

92

36

48

33

42

-63

49

24

104

16

-66

909

Tons/Day

Addit.

1.3

2.5

-1.5

0.4

1.5

0.2

0.2

1 .8

3.7

0

2.9

1.9

2.6

1.3

1.2

1.0

n.9

-3.1

1.5

0.5

3.6

0.5

-3.0

21.9

Total

-6.9

9.4
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

7.5

6.9

8.9

6.5

8.6

10.9

11.1

6.0

10.2

10.1

9.4

7.6

8.7

6.6

72

4.5

7.4

5.6

13.5

7.2

4.7

185.4

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

9

2

2

2

3

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

49

Trucks

Req'd.

• to

Serve

Area

0.81

0.73

1.20

0.94

0.83

0.97

0.98

0.83

0.67

1.00

0.72

0.81

0.72

0.83

0.86

0.85

0.88^

1.70

0.80

0.91

0.73

0.93

1.60

21 30

To be re-assigned to Eastern I District

** (3) Florida Avenue Incinerator; (4) N. O. East Incinerator (6) Gentilly Dump
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

TABLE A-12

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

Districts: ALGIERS and NIGHT Collection Day: MONDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 8

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Total

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 .

Total

Disp.

Point

+*

'l

5

5

5

j

5

5

1

_

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

_

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

17

3

3

2

3

3

2

3

3
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

22

Tons

Collec.

8.2

8.3

6.0

12.7

8.4

5.1

8.9

8.2

65.8

8.7

9.5

6.6

9.0

7,5

6.4

8.2

8.9

64.8

Total

Haul

Mileage

5

8

14

18

12

20

20

10

107

17

15

13

. 11

10

7

15

11

99

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

325

375

285

440

390

310

250

175

2,550

240

255

197

257

195

251

230

335

1,960
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Haul

46

48

60

84

52

180

100

80

650

80

90

58

43

45

34

95

70

515

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

Aver,

Travel

Speed

(mph)

A L G

39.6

•45.0

47.5

34.6

46.5

60.8

28.0

21.3

_

6.5

10.0

14.0

12.8

13.8

6.7

12.0

7.5

_

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

Adjusted Haul

Miles

E R S

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

_

5

8

12

18

12

12

16

10
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

93

NIGHT

27.6

26.8

29.8

28.5

26.0

39.2

28.0

37.7

_

12.7

10.0

13.4

15.3

12.5

12.3

9.5

9.4

_

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

-

17

15

13

11

10

7

15

11

99

Min.

46

48

51

84

52

108

80

80

549

80

90

58

43

45

34

95

70

515

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(mm, )
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

0

0

9

0

0

72

20

0

101

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Tons/Day

Addit.

0

0

0.2

0

0

1 .2

0.7

0

2.1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Total

8.2

8.3

6.2

12.7

8.4

6.3

9.6

8.2

67.9

8.7

9.5

6.6

9.0

7.5

6.4

8.2

8.9

64.8

No. of

Loads

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

3

2

2

2

2

17

3

3

2

3

3

2

3

3

22

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.00

1.00

0.97

1.00

1.00

0.81

0.93

1.00

7.71

1.00

1 .00

1.00

1.00

1 .00

1 .00

1.00

1.00

8.00

** (\) Algiers Incinerator; (2) 7th Street Incinerator; (5) Algiers Dump

-------

TABLE A-13

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: CENTRAL Collection Day: TUESDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 22

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

. 11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

22

Total

Disp.

Point

**

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

No. of

Loads

3

3

3

3

4

2

4

3

3

3

4

3

3

4

3

3

4

4

3

3

3

4

72

Tons

Collec.

7.5

7.8

8.3

8.3

9.3

7.7

11.3

7.2

8.5

7.2

10.9

9.8

9.2

9.4

7.9

11.3

9.8

13.3

6.7

9.4

7.6

9.5

197.9
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Total

Haul

Mileage

18

12

15

13

16

6

14

17

9

7

8

8

6

6

2

3

4

10

8

7

6

13

208

Minutes Per Day

Coliec.

245

215

265

165

235

220

283

245

380

345

385

290

283

305

295

230

339

258

265

290

290

293

6,121

Haul

115

100

85

55

130

30

61

85

75

55

90

40

42

75

25

25

81

82

85

35

55

107

1,533

Min.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Per

Ton of

Collec.

32.7

27.6

32.0

19.9

25.3

28.6

25.0

34.0

44.7

47.9

35.5

29.6

30.8

32.4

37.3

20.3

34.6

19.5

39.5

30.9

38.1

30.8

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

9.4

7.2

10.6

14.2

7.4

12.0

13.8

12.0

7.2

7.6

5.3

12.0

8.6

4.8

4.8

7.2

3.0

7.3

5.7

12.0

6.5

7.3

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Adjusted Haul

Miles

18

12

15

13

16

6

14

17

9

7

8

8

6

6

2

3

4

10

8

7

6

13

208

Min.

115

100

85

55

130

30

61

85

75

55

90

40

42

75

25

25

81

82

85

35

55

107

1.533

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

o
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Tons/Day

Addit.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Total

7.5

7.8

8.3

8.3

9.3

7.7

11.3

7.2

8.5

7.2

10.9

9.8

9.2

9.4

7.9

11.3

9.8

13.3

6.7

9.4

7.6

9.5

197.9

No. of

Loads

3

3

3

3

4

2

4

3

3

3

4

3

3

4

3

3

4

4

3

3

3

4

72

Trucks

Req'd.

to
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Serve

Area

1 .00

.on

.00

.00

.00

.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

22.00

** (2) 7th Street Incinerator

-------

TABLEA-14

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: WESTERN Collection Day: TUESDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 28

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1*

2*

3*

4*

5*

6*

7*

8*

9*

10*

11*

12*

13*

14*

15

16

17

18

19*

20

21 *

22

23

24

Disp.

Poinr

**

7

1

1

7

7

1

1

7

1

7

7

7

7

1

7

1

7
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

7

1

1

7

1

7

L 7

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

Tons

Collec.

6.9

7.0

7.8

7.0

6.9

7.7

8.8

7.8

7.1

6J

8.1

7.9

8.3

7.1

8.7

8.9

8.0

9.3

7.5

10.4

9.6

9.9

7.0

7.6

Total

Haul

Mileage

20

31

24

21

16

26

36

17

33

12

16

15

12

28

14

30

14

15

32
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

28

18

35

10

12

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

235

215

245

235

210

295

222

255

240

230

215

225

280

245

255

330

255

160

260

245

210

305

200

210

Haul

85

115

115

80

80

145

123

63

120

85

80

85

50

95

85

97

95

80

100

115

80

130

55

70

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

34.1

' 45.0

31.4

33.6

30.4

38.2

25.2

32.7

33.8

37.7

32.1

28.5

33.7

34.5

29.5

37.1

31.9

17.2

34.6

23.5

22.0
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

30.8

28.6

27.6

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

14.1

16.2

12.6

15.8

12.0

10.8

17.6

16.2

16.5

8.5

12.0

10.6

14.4

17.6

9.8

18.6

8.8

11.2

19.2

14.6

13.6

16.2

10.9

10.3

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

7

7

7

7

2

7

2

7

7

7

Adjusted Haul

Miles

12

11

10

8

7

8

10

5

9

8

10

10

7

9

14

13

14

15

13

12
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

12

18

10

12

Min.

51

41

48

30

35

44

51

19

33

56

50

57

29

31

85

42

95

80

41

74

53

67

55

70

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

34

74

67

50

45

101

72

44

87

?9

30

28

21

64

0

55

0

0

59

42

27

63

0

0

Tons/Day

Addit.

1

1.6

2.1

1.4

1.4

2.6

2.9

1.3

2.5

n.8

0.9

1

0.6

1.8

0

1.4

0

0

1.7

1.8

1.2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2.0

0

o

Total

7.9

8.6

9.9

8.4

8.3

10.3

11.7

9.1

9.6

6.9

9.0

8.9

8.9

8.9

8.7

10.3

8.0

9.3

9.2

12.2

10.8

11.9

7.0

7.6

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

3

2

2

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

0.87

0.81

0.79

0.83

0.83

0.75

0.75

0.86

0.74

0.88

0.90

0.88

0.93

0.80

1.00

0.86

1.00

1.00

0.82

0.85

0.88

0.83
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1.00

1.00

N,ote: See following page for coding information

-------

TABLE A- 14 (Continued)

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: WESTERN Collection Day: TUESDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 28

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

25*

26

27*

28

Total

Disp.

Poirvt

**

7

1

7

7

_

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

57

Tons

Col lee.

5.6

7.7

7.2

7.4

219.3

* To be re-assigned to Centra! District

** 0) Algiers Incinerator

(2) 7th Street Incinerator

(7) St. Louts Incinerator
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Total

Haul

Mileage

11

15

12

12

565

Minutes Per Day

Col lee.

255

245

260

185

6,722

Haul

65

55

60

55

2,463
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

45.5

31.8

36.1

25.0

_

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

10.1

16.3

12.0

13.1

*»

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

2

7

2

7
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

_

Adjusted Haul

Miles

9

11

10

12

299

Min.

54

41

50

55

1.437

Addit.

Time

for

Col lee.

(min.)

11

14

10

0

.027
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Tons/Day

Addit.

0.2

0.4

0.3

0

30.9

Total

5.8

8.1

7.5

7.4

250.2

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

59
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

0^97

0.95

0.96

1.00

24.74_

-------

TABLE A-15

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: EASTERN! Collection Day: TUESDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 22

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1*

2

3*

4

5

6

7*

8*

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

Total

Disp.

Point

T -fr
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

6

3

3

3

_

No. of

Loads

3

2

2

3

3

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

3

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

51

Tons

Col lee.

14.2

12.5

9.4

12.8

11.8

11 .4

9.1

11.3

11.2

12.4

11.6

9.7

9.7

9.3

8.5

7.7

10.7

8.9

9.4

9.2

9.9

9.7

230.9

Total

Haul

Mileage

12

7
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

7

8

7

7

12

9

12

15

8

14

24

13

23

14

14

14

24

15

20

10

289

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

290

275

352

245

240

270

370

255

265

470

275

300

340

220

335

310

360

290

155

340

165

265

6,387

Haul

90

55

48

60

60

65

50

46

60

115

55

90

75

70

115

80

106

85

143

85

135

72

1,760

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

20.4

22.0

37.4

11.3
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

11.0

23.7

40.7

22.6

23.7

38.0

23.7

30.9

35.0

23.7

39.4

40.3

33.6

32.6

16.5

35.0

16.7

27.3

_

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

8.0

7.6

8.7

8.0

7.0

6.5

14.4

11 .7

12.0 '

7.8

8.7

9.3

19.2

11 .1

12.0

10.5

7.9

9.8

10.2

10.6

8.9

8.3

_

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

7

3

7

3

3

3

7

7

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

_

Adjusted Haul

Miles

12

7

10
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

8

7

4

12

9

12

15

8

14

24

13

23

14

14

14

13

15

20

10

278

Min.

90

55

69

60

60

37

50

46

60

115

55

90

75

70

115

80

106

85

76

85

135

72

1 .686

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

0

0

-21

0

0

28

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

9

0

0

0

16

Tons/Day

Addit.

0

0

-0.6

0
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

0

1 .2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0.6

0

0

0

1 .2

Total

14.2

12.5

8.8

12.8

11.8

12.6

9.1

11.3

11 .2

12.4

11.6

9.7

9.7

9.3

8.5

7.7

10.7

8.9

10.0

9.7

9.9

9.7

93? 1

No. of

Loads

3

2

2

3

3

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

3

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

<5l

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.00

1.00

1.07

1 .00

1.00
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

0.91

1.00

1.00

1.00

1 .00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

0.94

1.00

1.00

1 .00

21.92

* To be re-assigned to Western District

** (3) Florida Avenue Incinerator; (7) St. Louis Incinerator

-------

TABLE A-16

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: EASTERN II Collection Day: TUESDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 23

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7*

8*

9*

10*

11

12*

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

Total

Disp.

Point

**

3

6

6

6

6

3

6

6

6

3

6

3

6

6

6

6

3

5

6

6

6

3

6
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

4

2

2

2

2

3

2

49

Tons

Col lee.

8.7

8.7

9.5

8.8

10.1

9.9

10.2

8.8

9.7

6.5

7.9

7.5

9.1

10.3

7.3

10.9

14.3

10.2

11.7

9.7

11.4

11.8

8.7

221.7

Total

Haul

A! leogc

16

19

17

21

25

17

29

35

26

8

26

7

26

24

29

30

44

16

11

16

21

45

30

538
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Minutes Per Day

Codec.

420

220

215

175

210

190

195

215

244

194

370

345

305

175

345

190

450

193

265

396

195

365

350

6,222

Haul

80

95

115

125

162

78

105

145

161

50

100

65

150

95

100

110

195

82

95

130

130

146

114

2,628

Min.

Per

Ton of

Col lee.

48.3

25.3

22.6

20.0

20.8

19.2

19.1

24.4

25.1

29.9

47.0

46.0

33.5

17.0

47.2

17.4

31.5

18.9

22.7

40.8

17.1

30.9

40.2

-

Aver.

Travel
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Speed

(mph)

12.0

12.0

8.9

10.2

9.2

13.0

16.5

14.5

9.7

9.6

15.6

6.5

10.4

15.1

17.4

16.3

13.6

11.7

6.9

7.4

9.6

18.5

15.8

-

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

4

4

4

4

4

4

3

3

3

3

4

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

Adjusted Haul

Miles

12

10

8

14

17

20

6

4

8

.6

26

7

22

24

24

26

12

4

2

2

6

21

18

299

Min.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

60

50

81

82

110

92

33

25

73

38

100

65

127

95

83

96

53

31

25

24

57

68

68

1536

Addit.

Time

for

Collec .

(min. )

20

45

34

43

52

-14

72

120

88

12

0

0

23

0

17

14

137

51

70

106

73

78

46

1.087

Tons/Day

Addit.

0.4

1.7

1.5

2.1

2.5

-0.7

3.8

4.9

3.5

0.4

0

0

0.7

0

0.3

0.8

4.3

2.7

3.1

2.6

4.3

2.5

1.1

42,5

Total

9.*1
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

10.4

11.0

10.9

12.6

9.2

14.0

13.7

13.2

6.9

7.9

7.5

9.8

10.3

7.6

11.7

18.6

12.9

14.8

12.3

15.7

14.3

9.8

264 .£

No. of

Loads

2

2

3

2

2

JL

3

3

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

4

3

3

3

3

3

2

57

Trucks

Req'd.

to'

Serve

Area

0.96

0.84

0.86

0.80

0.80

1^08

0.73

0.64

0.73

0.94

1.00

1.00

0.93

1.00

0.96

0.93

0.77

0,79

0,79 .,

0.79

0.73

0.83.

0.89

19.79

* To be re-assigned to Eastern I District

(3) Florida Ave. Incinerator; (4) N. O. East Incin.; (5) Algiers Dump; (6) Genfilly Dump
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

TABLE A-17

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: ALGIERS and NIGHT Collection Day: TUESDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 8

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Total

t

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Total

Disp.

Point

**

I

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

_

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

—

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

17

2

2

3

3

3

2

3
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

3

21

Tons

Col lee.

7.9

6.3

7.1

6.2

6.3

8.9

8.2

9.7

60.6

8.4

8.4

9.8

10.1

10.2

7.5

10.4

9.0

73.8

Total

Haul

Mileage

10

8

5

6

5

8

6

6

54

11

12

19

6

9

10

16

7

90

Minutes Per Day

Col lee.

220

205

215

205

165

280

326

370

1,986

250

' 205

245

280

195

125

235

252

1,787
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Haul

40

50

35

47

60

45

40

35

352

50

50

85

39

45

87

100

88

544

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

Adjusted Haul

Miles

ALGIERS

27.8

39.5

30.3

33.0

26.2

31.5

39.7

38.1

_

15.0

9.6

8.6

7.7

5.0

10.7

9.0

10.3

_

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

_

10

8

5

6

5

8

6

6
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

54

NIGHT

29.8

24.4

25.0

27.7

19.1

16.7

22.6

28.0

..

13.2

14.4

13.4

9.2

12.0

6.9

. 9.6

4.8

—

2

?

2

2

2

2

2

2

_

11

12

19

6

9

10

16

7

90

Min.

40

50

35

47

60

45

40

35

352

50

50

85

39

45

87

100

88

544

Ad<="" to="" of="" algiers="" street="" for="" incinerator="" time="" area="" day="" 1="" 2="" 

17="" 3="" 0="" 7th="" (2)="" incinerator;="" (1)="" **="" 8.00="" 1.00="" .00="" uoo="" serve=""

req'd.="" trucks="" 21="" loads="" no.="" 73.8="" 9.0="" 10.4="" 7.5="" 10.2="" 10.1="" 9.8="" 

8.4="" 60.6="" 9.7="" 8.2="" 8.9="" 6.3="" 6.2="" 7.1="" 7.9="" total="" o="" addit.="" tons="" 

)="" (min,="" collec.="">
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

TABLE A-18

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: CENTRAL Collection Day: WEDNESDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 22

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12*

. 13*

14*

15*

16*

17*

18*

19*

20*

21*

22*

Total

Disp.

Point

**

•3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

-

No. of

Loads

3

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

47

Tons

Collec.

7.0

5.5

5.0

7.6

5.8

6.3

5.4

5.1

6.6

5.8

8.5

7.0

5.5

4.9

5.0

5.4

4.4

4.4

5.3

4.9

4.9

5.4

125.7

Total

Haul

Mileage

6

5

5

6

10

4

2

1

3

2

8

4

6

11

9

11

12

8

10

12

8

15

158

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

225

150

200

165

215

211

263

240

270

295

277

290

150

180

225

120

135

180

185

135
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

240

125

4,476

Haul

45

20

30

35

45

26

12

45

31

35

48

40

90

75

55

63

58

75

100

85

50

85

1,148

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

32.2

27.2

40.0

21.7

37.0

33.5

48.8

47.0

41.0

51.0

32.6

41.5'

27.3

36.7

45.0

22.2

30.7

40.9

35.0

27.5

49.0

23.2

.

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

8.0

15.0

10.0

10.3

13.3

9.3

10.0

_

6.0

3.4

10.0

6.0

4.0

9.0

10.0

10.5

12.4

6.4

6.0

8.5
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

9.6

10.6

_

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

_

Adjusted Haul

Miles

6

5

5

6

10

4

2

1

3

2

8

4

6

4

1

4

5

5

4

1

5

6

97

Min.

45

20

30

35

45

26

12

45

31

35

48

40

90

27

6

23

24

47

40

7

31

34
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

741

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min.)

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

48

49

40

34

28

60

78

19

51

407

Tons/Day

Addit .

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1.3

1.1

1.8

1.1

0.7

1.7

2.8

0.4

2.2

13.1

Total

7.0

5.5

5.0

7.6

5.8

6.3

5.4

5.1

6.6

5.8

8.5

7.0

5.5

6.2

6.1

7.2

5.5

5.1

7.0

7.7

5.3

7.6

138.8
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

No. of

Loads

3

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

47

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1. 00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

0.79

0r82_

0.75

0.80

0.86

0.76

0.64

0.92

0.71

20.05

* To be re-assigned to Western District

** (2) 7th Street Incinerator; (7) St. Louis Incinerator

-------

TABLE A-J9

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: WESTERN Collection Day: WEDNESDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 28

PRESENT OPERATION

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Disp.

Point

**

1

3

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 '

1

1

1

1

1

1

•No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

3

2

2

Tons

Col lee.

4.5

5.8

5.3

4.3

4.6

4.6

7.2

5.5

4.4

4.0

4.3

4.5

6.0

5.1

4.3
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

4.3

4.8

4.9

3.5

5.5

3.8

7.4

5.1

4.5

- 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Total

Haul

Mileage

25

23

21

24

19

23

21

30

24

22

20

21

23

21

26

31

28

30

16

24

26

32

32

34

Minutes Per Day

Col lee.

220

200

170

145

168

220

221

165

145

150

152

105

175

210

162

185

160

170

130

125

145

290

185

150

Haul

100

105

90

75

122

90

84

130

110

78

83

120

100

70

85

90

90
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

95

70

120

90

140

105

145

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

48.9

34.5

32.1

33.7

36.5

47.9

30.7

30.0

33.0

37.5

35.4

23.3

29.1

41.2

37.7

43.2

33.3

34.7

37.1

22.7

38.2

39.2

36.3

33.3

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

15.0

13.1

14.0

19.2

9.3

15.3

15.0

13.8

13.1

16.9

19.5

10.5

13,8

18.0

18.4

20.6

18.7

19.0

13.7

12.0

17.3

13.7

18.3

14.0

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

Adjusted Haul

Miles

8

20

5

9

8

9

20

10

6

6

5

5

5

8

9

14

15

12

8

10

14

24

18

24

Min.

32

92

21

28

52

35

80

44

28

21

15

29

22

27

29

41

48

41

35

50

49

105

59

103

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

68

13

69

47

70

55

4

86

82

57

68

91

78

43

56
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

49

42

54

35

70

41

36

46

42

Tons/Day

Addit.

1 .4

0.4

2.2

1.4

1 .9

1.1

0.1

2.9

2.5

1.5

1 .9

3.9

2.7

1.0

1 .5

1 .1

1.3

1.6

0.9

3.1

1 .1

0.9

1.3

1 .3

Total

5.9

6.2

7.5

5.7

6.5

5.7

7.3

8.4

6.9

5.5

6.2

8.4

8.7

6.1

5.8

5.4

6.1

6.5

4.4

8.6

4.9

8.3

6.4

5.8

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

3

2

2

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

0.76

0.94

0.71

0.75

0.71

0.81

0.99

0.65

0.64

0.73

0.69

0.54

0.69

0.83

0.74

0.80

0.79

0.75

0.80

0.64

0.78

0.89

0.80

0.78

Note: See following page for coding information

-------

TABLE A- W (Continued)

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: WESTERN Collection Day: WEDNESDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 28

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

25

26

27

28

Total

Disp.

Point

**

1

1

1

1

_

** (1) Algiers Inc

(3) Fla. Ave.

(7) St. Louis 1
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

56

inerator

Incinerah

ncinerato

Tons

Collec.

5.5

4.3

4.5

4.5

137.0

r

Total

Haul

Mileage

30

31

31

40

728
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

120

140

108

170

4,686

Haul

110

97

92

100

2,796

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

21 .8

32.6

24.0

37.7

-
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

16.3

19.2

20.2

24.0

-

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

7

7

7

7

-

Adjusted Haul

Miles

25

13

16

24

350
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Min.

92

41

48

60

1,327

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

18

56

44

40

1,459

Tons/Day

Addit.

0.8

1 .7

1.8

1.1

44.4
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Total

6.3

6.0

6.3

5.6

181.4

' No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

56

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

0.87

0.72

0.71

0.80

21.22
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

TABLE A-20

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: EASTERN 1 Collection Day: WEDNESDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 22

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1 *

2*

3

4*

5

6

7*

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

Totals

Disp.

Point

**

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

6

3

3

6

3

3

3

_

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

44

Tons

Collec.

7.6

9.0

9.2

7.8

9.7

9.6

7.0

7.4

6.5

8.1

8.5

7.4

9.8

7.7

6.3

6.4

6.9

7.6

9.6

7.3

6.3

7.3

173.0

Total

Haul

Mileage

8

6

7

9

6

6

8

7

8

10

11

1

7

5

6

24

3

2

32

5

6

2

179

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

295

190

221 '

195

220

215

190

175

240

255

162

195

220

210

215

170
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

285

270

215

240

260

248

4,886

Haul

60

55

80

70

45

40

75

85

71

103

100

20

96

55

60

115

20

45

100

75

57

35

1,462

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

38.8

21.2

24.0

25.0

22.7

22.4

27.1

23.7

36.9

31.5

19.0

26.4

22.4

27.3

34.1

26.6

41.3

35.5

22.4

32.9

41.3

34.0

_

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

8.0

6.6

5.3

7.7

8.0

9.0

6.5

4.9

6.8

5.8

6.6

3.0

4.4

5.5

6.0

12.5
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

9.0

4.0

19.2

4.0

6.5

3.4

_

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

7

7

3

7

3

3

7

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

—

Adjusted Haul

Miles

6

5

5

5

5

5

8

5

7

9

11

1

7

6

6

2

3

2

6

4

6

2

116

Min.

45

45

57

39

38

33

75

61

62

92

100

20

96

66

60

10

20

30
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

28

60

57

35

1.129

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

15

10

23

31

7

7

0

24

9

11

0

0

0

11

0

105

0

15

72

15

0

0

355

Tons/Day

Addit.

0.4

0.5

1 .0

1 .2

0.3

0.3

0

1.0

0.2

0.3

0

0

0

0.4

0

3.9

o

0.4

3.2

0.5

0

0

13.6

Total

8.0

9.5

10.2

9.0

10.0

9.9

7.0

8.4

6_7

8.4

8.5

7.4

9.8

8.1

6.3

10.3

6.9

8.0

12.8
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

7.8

6.3

7.3

186.6

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

45

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

0.95

0.95

0.90

0.87

0.97

0.97

1.00

0.88

0.97

0.96

1.00

1 .00

1.00

0.95

1.00

0.62

1 .00

0.95

0.75

0.94

1.00

1.00

20.63

To be re-assigned to Western District

** (3) Florida Avenue Incinerator; (6) Gentilly Dump; (7) St. Louis Incinerator

-------

TABLt A-21

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: EASTERN II Collection Day: WEDNESDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 23

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8*

9*
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

10*

11 *

12*

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

.20

21

22

23

Totals

Disp.

Point

**

3

3

3

6

3

3

6

3

6

3

6

3

3

6

6

6

3

3

6

6

6

6

3

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

1

36

Tons

Collec.

8.6

6.5

4.8

9.6

5.1

6.5

9.8

5.9

5.7
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

5.2

6.1

5.5

6.9

6.3

8.0

4.0

4.0

4.8

6.7

5.7

6.9

8.7

4.2

145.5

Total

Haul

Mileage

4

5

10

21

6

7

32

4

16

3

29

2

10

29

35

14

7

7

30

16

35

24

4

350

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

285

205

200

205

230

130

150

237

167

115

240

243

165

120

240

150

225

190

137

205

227

140

160

4,366

Haul

70

80

60

120

33

75

105

48

133

15

165

22
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

90

105

160

75

30

45

123

65

118

125

30

1,892

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

33.1

31 .5

41 .7

21.4

45.0

20.0

15.3

40.2

29.3

22.1

39.3

44.2

23.9

19.0

30.0

37.5

L 56.3

39.6

20.4

36.4

32.9

16.1

38.1

„

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

3.4

3.8

10.0

10.5

10.9

5.6

18.3

5.0

7.2

12.0

10.5

5.5

6.7

16.5

13.1

11.2

14.0

9,3

14.6

14.7

17.8

11 .5

8.0

_

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

3

3
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

-

Adjusted Haul

Miles

30

29

28

27

14

29

31

4

6

4

6

3

24

14

26

13

16

11

29

15

29

32

15

432

Min.

116

112

108

104

54

112

120

48

50

20

34

33

93

54

101

50

62

62

112

58

112

124

58

1,797

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

-46

-32

-48

16

-21

-37

-15

0

83

- 5
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

131

-11

- 3

51

58

27

-34

-19

10

7

7

1

-28

92

Tons/Day

Addit.

-1.4

-1.0

-1.1

0.8

-0.5

-1.4

-1.0

0

2.8

-0.2

3.3

-0.3

-0.1

2.7

1.9

0.7

-0.6

-0.5

0.5

0.2

0.2

0.6

-0.7

4.9

Total

- 7.2

5.5

3.7

10.4

4.6

5.1

8.8

5.9

8.5

5.0

9.4

5.2

6.8

,_ 9.0

9.9

4.7

3.4

4.3

7.2

5.9

7.1

9.3

3.5

150.4

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

1

2

1

2

1

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

1

37

Trucks

Req'd.

• to

Serve

Area

1.19

1.18

1.30

0.92

1 .11

1.27

1 .11

1.00

0.67

1.04

0.65

1.06

1 .01

0.70

0.81

0.85

1.18

1.11

0.93

0.97

0.97

0.94

1.20

23,17

F . • nutricf ** @) Florida Avenue Incinerator; (4) N. O. East Incinerator; (6) Gentilly Dump

-------

TABLE A-22

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: ALGIERS and NIGHT Collection Day: WEDNESDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 8

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Total

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Total

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Disp.

Point

**

1

1
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1

1

1

1

1

1

-

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

_

No. of

Loads

2

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

11

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

16

Tons

Collec.

6.1

4.5

5.0

5.1

4.4

3.8

4.6

4.7

38.2

6.4

6.2

6.2

6.8

6.3

7.3

8.0

6.5

53.7

Total

Haul

Mileage

5

4

12

13
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

6

6

8

5

59

11

9

13

5

9

8

8

7

70

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

282

220

255

250

200

165

235

165

1,772

185

160

145

241

125

250

250

253

1,609

Haul

31

21

53

70

18

15

29

33

270

45

60

55

25

50

55

65

53

408

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

**

Adjusted Haul

Miles

ALGIERS

46

49

51

49

46

44

51

35

-

9.7

11.4

1375

11.1

20.0

24.0

16.5

9.1

-

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

-

5

4

12

12

6

6

8

5

58

NIGHT

29

26

23

35

20

34

31

39

_

14.6

9.0

14.2

14.4

10.8

8.7

7.4

7.9

_

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

_
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

11

9

13

4

9

8

8

7

69

Min. •

31

21

53

65

18

15

29

33

265

45

60

55

17

50

55

65

53

400

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

0

0

0

5

0

0

0

0

5

0

0

0

8

0

0

0

0

8

Tons/Day

Addit.

0

0

0

0.1

0

0

0

0

0.1

0
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

0

0

0.2

0

0

0

0

0.2

Total

6.1

4.5

5.0

5.2

4.4

3.8

4.6

4.7

38.3

6.4

6.2

6.2

7.0

6.3

7.3

8.0

6.5

53.9

No. of

Loads

2

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

11

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

16

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.00

1.00

1.00

0.98

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

7.98

1.00

1.00
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1.00

0.97

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

7.97

** (1) Algiers Incinerator; (2) 7th Street Incinerator

-------

TABLE A-23

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: CENTRAL Collection Day: THURSDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 22

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12*

13

U

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

Total

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Disp.

Point

**

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

_

No. of

Loads

3

2

2

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

47

Tons

Col lee.

5.6

5.1

5.4

6.5

6.0

6.2

6.8

4.6

6.4

5.3

6,9

6.8

6.0

6.5

6.0

7.1

7.2

5.4

5.6

5.8

5.4

6.2

132.8

Total

Haul

Mileage

18

8

10

9

8

6

7

11

9

5

4

5

4

3

2

2

3

5

5

5

4

4

137

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

210

180

170

185

175

193

225
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

170

255

290

331

200

195

345

225

225

236

235

180

180

215

195

4.815

Haul

120

70

40

57

60

22

37

55

90

30

37

30

15

35

20

30

44

35

80

35

25

40

987

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

37.5

35.3

31.5

28.4

29.1

31:1

33.1

36.9

39.8

54.7

48.0

29.4

32.5

53.1

37.5

31.7

32.8

43.5

32.2

31.0

39.8

31.5*

_

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

9.0

6.9

15.0

9.5

8.0

16.4

11.4
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

12.0

7.7

10.0

6.5

10.0

16.0

5.2

6.0

4.0

4.1

8.6

4.0

8.6

9.6

6.0

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

Adjusted Haul

Miles

18

8

10

9

8

6

7

11

9

5

4

5

4

3

2

2

3

5

5

5

4

4

137

Min.

120

70

40

57

60

22

37

55

70
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

30

37

30

15

35

20

30

44

35

80

35

25

40

987

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min.)

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Tons/Day

Addit.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Total

5.6

5.1

5.4

6.5

6.0

6.2

6.8

4.6

6.4

5.3
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

6.9

6.8

6.0

6.5

6.0

7.1

7.2

5.4

5.6

5.8

5.4

6.2

132.8

No. of

Loads

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

47

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

7.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

•>•>. OQ

** (2) 7th Street Incinerator

-------

TABLE A-24

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: WESTERN Collection Day: THURSDAY No. 'of Trucks per Day: 28

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1*
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2*

3*

4*

5*

6*

7*

8*

9*

10*

11*

12*

13*

14*

15

16

17

18

19*

20

21*

22

91

24

Disp.

Point

**

1

7

1

1

7

7

1

7

1

7

7

7

7

1

7

1

7

7

7

7

7

1

7

7

No. of

Loads

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

Tons

Collec.

4.7

5.0

4.9
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

5.5

4.3

4.6

4.5

4.9

4.6

5.6

5.4

4.3

4.4

4.8

6.2

6.4

5.9

7.3

5.9

3.6

6.7

6.9

5.9

5.1

Total

Haul

Mileage

14

20

28

24

16

20

36

15

33

15

18

15

12

26

15

28

14

15

20

17

18

35

10

13

Minutes Per Day

CoMec.

240

190

172

175

212

205

133

180

140

123

140

185

110

210

173

320

205

160

198

140

145

290

175

135

Haul

55

100

152

80

69

76
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

101

62

125

82

80

73

65

95

94

120

70

. 72

100

38

101

120

48

66

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

51.0

38.0

34.7

31.8

49.4

44.6

29.6

36.8

30.4

22.0

26.0

43.0

25.0

43.8

27.9

50.0

34.7

21.9

33.6

38.9

23.8

42.0

29.7

26.5

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

12.9

12.0

11.0

18.0

13.9

16.7

21.2

14.5

15.8

11.0

13.5

12.3

11.2

16.5

9.6

14.0

12.0

12.5

12.0

11.0

10.7

17.5

12.5

11.8

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

7

7

7

7

2

7

2

7

7

7

Adjusted Haul

Miles

6

11

10

8

7

8

10

5

9

8

10

10

7

9

14

13

14

15

13

6

12

12

10

12

Min.

28

55

54

27

30

29

28

31

34

44

44

49

38

33

88

56

70

72

70

33

67

41

48

61

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

27

45

98

53
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

39

47

73

31

91

38

36

24

27

62

6

64

0

0

30

5

34

79

0

5

Tons/Day

Addit.

0.5

1.2

2.8

1.7

0.8

1.0

2.5

0.8

3.0

1.7

1.4

0.6

1.1

1.4

0.2

1.3

0

0

0.9

0.1

1.4

1.9

0

0.2

Total

5.2

6.2

7.7

7.2

5.1

5.6

7.0

5.7

7.6

7.3

6.8

4.9

5.5

6.2

6.4

7.7

5.9

7.3

6.8

3.7

7.5

8.8

5.9

5.3

No. of

Loads

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

0.90

0.81

0.64

0.76

0.84

0.82

0.64

0.86

0.61

0.77

0.79

0.88

0.80

0.77

0.97

0.83

1.00

1.00

0.87

0.97

0.81

0.78

1.00

0.96

Note: See following page for coding information

-------

TABLE A -24 (Continued)

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: WESTERN Collection Day: THURSDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 28

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

25*

26

27*

28

Total

* To be r<

** 0) A

(2) 7t

(7) St

Disp.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Point

**

7

1

7

7

_

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

54

Tons

Collec.

4.8

4.9

4.9

4.8

146.2

^-assigned to Central District

giers Incinerator

h Street Incinerator

. Louis Incinerator

Total

Haul

Mileage

11

16

13

14

531
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

223

160

192

115

5,044

Haul

49

90

57

55

2.295

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

46.5

32.6

39.2

27 .4

—
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

13.4

10.7

13.7

15.3

—

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

2

7

2

7

—

Adjusted Haul

Miles

9

11

10

12

281
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Min.

40

62

44

47

1.323

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min.)

9

28

13

8

972

Tons/Day

Addit.

0.2

0 9

0.3

0.3

28.2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Total

5.0

5 8

5.2

5 1

174.4

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

54

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

0.96

0 84

0,94

0 94

23.76
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

TABLE A-25

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: EASTERN! Collection Day: THURSDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 22

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1*

2

3*

4

5

6

7*

8*

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18^

19

20

21

22

Total

Disp.

Point

**

6

6

6

3

6

6

6

6

6

3

6

6

3

6

3

6

6

3

3

3

6

6

_

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

44

Tons

Col lee.

8.1

9.2

8.2

8.4

8.4

7.7

6.4

J0.2

7.4

8.8

8.4

7.4

8.4

6.3

6.0

7.6

6.5

7.2

7.9

6.5

7.2

6.7

168.9

Total

Haul

Mileage

14

26

36

20

32

29

12

23

33

10

28

33

16

36

15

33

32

14

15

15

33

33

538

Minutes Per Day

CoMec.

210

250

290

210

210

250
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

290

210

200

200

207

210

310

215

180

215

195

210

315

160

155

215

4,907

Haul

90

125

140

75

75

125

50

130

130

90

108

165

HO

135

85

135

150

75

120

110

125

145

2,943

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

26.0

27.2

35.4

25.0

25.0

32.5

45.4

20.6

27.0

22.7

24.6

28.4

37.0

34.1

30.0

28.3

30.0

29.2

40.0

24.6

21.6

32.1

_

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

9.3

12.5

15.4

16.0

26.0

13.9
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

14.4

10.6

15.2

6.7

15.5

12.0

8.7

16.0

10.6

14.6

12.8

11.2

7.5 ^

8.2

15.8

13.6

-

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

7

3

7

3

3

3

7

7

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

-

Adjusted Haul

Miles

8

7

10

5

4

4

12

9

12

10

8

14

16

13

15

14

14

14

13

15

14

10

241

Min.

52

51

39

19

9

17

50

76
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

47

90

46

70

110

49

85

58

66

75

104

110

53

44

1,320

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

38

74

101

56

66

108

0

54

83

0

62

95

0

86

0

77

84

0

16

0

72

101

1,173

Tons/Day

Addit.

1.5

2.7

2.9

2.2

2.6

3.3

0

2.6

3.1

0

2.5

3.3

0

2.5

0

2.7

2.8

0

0.4

0

3.3

3.1

41.5

Total

9.6

11.9

11.1

10.6

11.0

11.0

6.4

2.6

10.5
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

8.8

10.9

10.7

8.4

8.8

6.0

10.3

9.3

7.2

8.3

6.5

10.5

9.8

210.4

No. of

Loads

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

47

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

0.84

0,77

0.74

0.79

0.76

0.70

1.00

0.80

0.71

1.00

0.77

0.69

1,00

0.72

1.00

0.74

0.70

1.00

0.95

1.00

0.69

0.68

18.05

* To be re-assigned to Western District

** (3) Florida Avenue Incinerator; (6) Gentilly Dump; (7) St. Louis Incinerator

-------

TABLE A-26

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: EASTERN II Collection Day: THURSDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 23

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

No.

1

2

3

4

5

A

7*

8*

9*

10*

11

12*

13

U

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

93

Total

Disp.

Point

**

6

6

6

6

6

&

6

6

&

6

6

3

3

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

A

-

No. of

Loads

1

2

3

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

41

Tons

Collec.

5.0
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

10.1

5.1

6.6

8.4

8.8

8.8

4.9

5.1

3.5

6.9

8.0

4.4

6.7

5.0

4.4

7.0

5.1

6.3

5.5

8.6

8.1

5.4

147.7

Total

Haul

Mileage

6

19

22

21

25

25

29

14

15

15

26

7

20

25

29

18

76

14

11

16

21

25

30

449

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

175

195

240

180

175

180

185

185

185

115

190

280

145

165

192

120

340

145

255

255

259

266

231

4,658

Haul

60

99

120

125
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

115

145

80

75

145

70

115

65

190

100

115

115

76

62

80

120

141

100

110

2,423

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

35.0

19.3

47.1

27.3

20.8

20.5

21.1

37.8

36.3

32.9

27.6

35.0

33.0

24.6

38.4

27.3

48.6

28.4

40.5

46.4

30.2

32.9

42.7

-

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

6.0

11.5

11.0

10.0

13.0

10.3

21.8

11.2

6.2

12.8

13.5

6.5

6.3

15.0

15.1

9.4

12.6

13.5

8.3

8.0

8.9

15.0

16.4

-

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

4
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

4

4

4

4

4

3

3

3

3

4

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

-

Adjusted Haul

Miles

6

10

12

14

17

20

6

2

4

3

26

7

22

24

24

13

6

2

2

2

6

14

18

532

Min.

60

81

65

84

78

116

17

22

78

14

115

65

210

96

95

83

29

18

15

15

60

56

65

1,537

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min.)

0

1R
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

55

41

37

29

63

53

67

56

0

0

-20

4

20

32

47

44

65

105

81

44

45

886

Tons/Day

Addit.

0

1 0

1.2

1.5

1.8

1.4

3.0

1.4

1.9

1.7

0

0

-0.6

0.2

0.5

1.2

1.0

1.5

1.6

2.3

2.7

1.3

1.1

27.7

Total

5.0

11.1

6.3

8.1

10.2

10.2

11.8

6.3

7.0

5.2

6.9

8.0

3.8

6.9

5.5

5.6

8.0

6.6

7.9

7.8

11.3

9.4

6.5

175.4

No. of

Loads

1

3

3

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

46

Trucks

Req'd.

*to

Serve

Area

1.00

0.90

0.81

0.81

0.83

0.86

0.75

0.78

0.73

0.67

1.00

1.00

1.15

0.97

0.90

0.79

0.87

0.77

0.79

0.71

0.76

0.86

0.84

19.55

* To be re-assigned to Eastern I District

(3) Florida Ave. Incinerator; (4) N. O. East Incinerator; (6) Gentilly Dump

-------

TABLE A-27

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: ALGIERS and NIGHT Collection Day: THURSDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 8

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

2

4

5

6

7

8

Total

]

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Total
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Disp.

Point

**

r

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

^

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

_

No. of

Loads

2

1

9

1

1

2

2

2

13

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

17

Tons

Codec.

4.8

4.5

5.6

3.9

4.5

5.7

5.3

5.9

40.2

6,8

7.2

7.7

7.4

7.2

7.1

7.9

6.6

57.9
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Total

Haul

Mileage

9

4

8

2

3

5

7

4

42

12

12

19

. 4

6

10

9

4

76

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

160

165

170

170

125

183

235

263

1.471

215

190

198

141

210

190

210

186

1,540

Haul

46

34

38

16

51

75

41

27

328

55

50

72

66

30

50

60

34

417

Min.

Per

Ton of
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Collec.

Aver.

Trave 1

Speed

(mph)

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

Adjusted Haul

Miles

A L G E R S

33.3

36.7

30.4

43.6

29.8

32.1

44.4

44.6

_

10.7

7.1

12.6

7.5

3.5

4.0

10.2

8.9

_

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

_

10

4

5

3

3

5

6

6

42

NIGHT

31.6

26.4

25.8

19.1

29.2

26.8

26.6

28.2

-

13.1

14.4

15.8

3.6

12.0

12.0

9.0

7.1

-

2

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

2

_

11

12

19

4

6

10

9

4

75

Min.

56

34

24

24

51

75

36

40

340

50

50

72

66

30

50

60

34

412

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min.)

-10

0

14

- 8

0

0

5

-13

-12

5

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Tons/Day

Addit.

-0.3

0

0.5

-0.2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

0

0

0.1

-0.3

-0.2

0.2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0.2

Total

4.5

4.5

6.1

3.7

4.5

5.7

5.4

5.6

40.0

7.0

7.2

7.7

7.4

7.2

7.1

7.9

6.6

58.1

No. of

Loads

2

1

?

1

1

2

2

2

13

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

17

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.06

1.00

0.92

1.05

1.00
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1.00

0.98

1.05

8.06

0.97

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

7.97

(\) A\giers Incinerator; (2) 7tVi Street Incinerator

-------

TABLE A-28

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: CENTRAL Collection Day: FRIDAY No- of Trucks per Day: 22

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

i

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13*

14*

15*

16*

17*

18*

19*

20*

21*

22*

Total

Disp.

Point

**

2

2

o

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

o

2

2

2

2

_
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

No. of

Loads

3

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

3

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

49

Tons

Collec.

7

6.5

6.1

7.5

6.1

7.9

8.2

4.6

7.5

6.2

8.8

8.0

6.5

5.5

6.4

6.6

5.0

4.7

7.5

5.6

5.1

6.-1

143.4

Total

Haul

Mileage

6

4

5

6

7

5

3

1

6

2

7

6

6

11

9

11

12

8

15

12

7

14

163

Minutes Per Day

Collec.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

272

205

180

225

235

310

260

210

290

355

321

300

201

190

275

151

136

190

280

195

220

175

5.176

Haul

57

20

30

35

65

40

40

40

50

40

37

45

24

45

40

57

74

75

125

80

50

55

1,124

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

38.8

31.5

30.0

30.0

38.6

39.2

31.7

45.7

38.7

57.3

36.5

37.5

31.0

34.5

44.0

23.0

27.2

40.5

37.3

34.8

43. .1

28.7

_.

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

6.3

12.0

10.0

10.3

6.5

7.5

4.5

7.2

_

11.4

8.0

15.0

14.7

13.5

12.0

11.0

6.5

7.5

9.0 .

8.5

15.0

_

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

_

Adjusted Haul

Miles

6

5

5

6

7

5

3

1

5

2

8

4

6

4

1

4

5

5

6

1

5

6

100

Min.

57

20
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

30

35

65

40

40

40

50

40

37

45

24

16

4

21

31

47

50

7

36

24

759

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min.)

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

29

36

36

43

28

75

73

14

31

365

Tons/Day

Addit.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0.8

0.8

1.6

1.6

0.7

2.0

2.1

0.3

1.1

11.0

Total

7.0

6.5

6.1
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

7.5

6.1

7.9

8.2

4.6

7.5

6.2

8.8

8.0

6.5

6.3

7.2

8.2

6.6

5.4

9.5

7.7

5.4

7.2

154.4

No. of

Loads

3

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

3

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

49

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

K€0

1.00

1.00

l.vO

1.00

1.00

0.87

0.89

0.81

0.76

0.87

0.79

0.73

0.94

0.85

20.51

* To be re-assigned to Western District

** (2) 7th Street Incinerator; (7) St. Louis Incinerator
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

TABLE A-29

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: WESTERN Collection Day: FRIDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 28

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Disp.

Point

**

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

• 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

• No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

1

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

Tons

Collec.

5.2

4.5

6.3

5.4

6.4

4.7

5.0

6.0

4.6

4.6

6.1

4.5

5.6

6.5

4.8

4.3

4.4

5.1

4.4

6.6

5.3

6.8

4.4

4.9

Total

Haul

Mi leage

25

36

20

27

20

23

11

28

24

22

20

22

23

22

15

32

28

30

16

24

26

32

32

34

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

250

190

180

195

242

195

159

165

170

148

242

240

200

166

197

135

240

185

210

195

150

280

140
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

150

Haul

130

110

125

90

83

90

46

95

110

77

93

120

98

74

43

205

100

90

45

120

130

95

100

110

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

48.1

42.3

28.6

36.2

37.8

41.5

31.8

27.5

37.0

32.2

39.7

53.4

35.7

25.5

41.1

31.4

54.6

36.3

47.6

29.6

28.3

41.2

31.8

30.6

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

11.5

19.6

9.6

18.0

14.5

15.4

14.4

17.7

13.1

17.2

12.9

11.0

14.1

17.8

18.1

9.4

16.8

20.0

21.2

12.0

12.0

20.2

19.2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

18.5

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

Ad|usted Haul

Miles

8

20

5

9

8

9

10

10

6

6

5

5

5

8

5

14

15

13

8

10

14

16

18

24

Min.

42

61

31

30

33

35

42

34

28

21

23

27

21

27

17

89

54

39

23

50

70

48

56

78

Addit.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Time

for

Collec .

(min. )

88

49

94

60

50

55

4

61

82

56

70

93

77

47

26

116

46

51

22

70

60

47

44

32

Tons/Day

Addit.

1.8

1.2

3.3

1.7

1.3

1.3

0.1

2.2

2.2

1.7

1.8

1.8

2.2

1.8

0.6

3.7

0.8

1.4

0.5

2.3

2.1

1.2

1.4

1.0

Total

7.0

5.7

9.6

7.1

7.7

6.0

5.1

8.2

6.8

6.3

7.9

6.3

7.8

8.3

5.4

8.0

5.2

6.5

4.9

8.9

7.4

8.0

5,8

5.9

No. of

Loads
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

0.74

0.79

0.66

0.76

0.83

0.78

0.98

0.73

0.68

0.73

0.77

0.71

0.72

0.78

0.89

0.54

0.85

0.78

0.90

0.74

0.72

0.85

0.76

0.83

Note: See following page for coding information

-------

TABLE A-29 (Continued)

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: WESTERN Collection Day: FRIDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 28

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

25

26

27

28

Total

Disp.

Point

**

1

1

1

1

_
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

53

** (1) Algiers Incinerator

(3) Fla. Ave. Inc.

(7) St. Louis Inc.

Tons

Col lee.

5.0

4.7

5.9

4.2

146.2

Total
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Haul

Mileage

30

30

31

40

721

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

129

125

188

195

5,261

Haul

126

100

92

100

2,797

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

25.8

26.6

31.8

46.4

-

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

14.3

18.0

20.2

24.0

-

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

7

7

7

7

-

Adjusted Haul
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Miles

25

13

16

24

329

Min.

105

43

48

60

1,235

Addit .

Time

for

Collec.

(min.)

21

57

44

40

1,562

Tons/Day

Addit.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

0.8

2.1

1.4

0.9

44.6

Total

5.8

6.8

7.3

5.1

190.8

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

53

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

0.86
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

0.69

0.81

0.82

21.70

-------

TABLE A-30

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: EASTERN! Collection Day: FRIDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 22

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1*

2*

3

4*

5

6

7*

8

9

10

n

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

Total

Disp.

Point

•**

6

3

3

6

6

3

3

6

6

3

6

6

6

3

3

6

3

3

3

6

6
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

6

_

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

44

Tons

Col lee.

9.4

9.9

12.7

7.6

8.3

8.3

6.9

6.5

6.9

7.5

7.2

5.8

8.7

7.2

6.8

6.2

9.4

9.1

7.1

6.5

5.9

3.5

167.4

Total

Haul

Mileage

35

6

8

34

18

6

8

32

34

10

32

26

47

5

6

24

4

3

6

29

30

28

431
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Minutes Per Day

Col lee.

220

255

220-

165

175

215

250

170

240

265

188

215

225

225

195

172

250

280

265

240

160

200

4,790

Haul

155

75

63

100

80

105

95

107

150

65

127

130

230

50

50

123

50

55

40

170

155

180

2,355

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

23.4

25.8

17.4

21.6

21.1

25.9

36.3

26.2

34.7

35.3

26.1

37.1

25.8

31.3

28.7

27.7

26.6

30.8

37.3

36.9

27.1

57.2

_

Aver.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Travel

Speed

(mph)

13.5

4.8

7.6

20.4

13.5

3.4

5,1

18.0

13.6-

9.2

15.1

12.0

12.2

6.0

7.2

11.7

4.8

3.3

9.0

10.2

11.6

9.3

_

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

7

7

3

7

3

3

7

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

_

Adjusted Haul

Miles

6

5

5

5

5

5

8

5

7

9

11

1

7

6

6

2

3

2

6

4

6

2

116
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Min.

40

63

60

22

22

88

95

17

31

59

44

5

51

60

50

10

50

36

40

24

31

13

911

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

115

12

3

L_ 78

58

17

0

90

119

6

83

125

179

- 10

0

113

0

19

0

146

124

167

1,444

Tons/Day

Addit.

5.0

0.5

0.2

3.6

2.8

0.7

0

3.4

3.4

0.2

3.2

3.4

6.9

-0.4

0

4.0

0

0.6

0

4.0

4.6

2.9

49.0

Total
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

14.4

10.4

12.9

11.2

11.1

9.0

6.9

9.9

10.3

7.7

10.4

9.2

15.6

6.8

6.8

10.2

9.4

9.7

7.1

10.5

10.5

6.4

216.4

No. of

Loads

3

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

47

Trucks

Req'd,

to

Serve

Area

0.65

0.95

0.98

0.68

0.75

0.92

1.00

0.66

0.67

0.97

0.69

0.63

0.56

1.06

1. 00

0.61

1. 00

0.94

1.00

0.62

0.56

0.55

17.45

* To be re-awigned to Western District

(3) Florida Avenue Incinerator; (6) Gentilly Dump; (7) St. Louis Incinerator
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

TABLE A-3I

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: EASTERN II Collection Day: FRIDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 23

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8*

9*

10*

11*

12*

13

U

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

Total

Disp.

Point

**

3

3

3

6

6

6

6

6

6

3

6

6

3

6

6

6

6

3

6

3

6

6

6

-

No. of

Loads

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

1

2

2

2

39

Tons

Collec.

7.3

4.5

7.3

6.3

3.9

8.7

10.4

5.4

5.4

4.3

6.1

5.7

5.3

6.3

5.5

4.5

3.1

4.5

4.4

3.7

7.1

7.4

4.4

131.5

Total

Haul

A\ leage

12

6

11

21

31

37

32

16

31

4

27

26

10

29

35

14

17

7

30

6

35

24

32

493

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

285

180

220

240

270

190

315

165

195

155

200

270

225

170

205

180

130

130

170
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

195

252

200

205

4,647

Haul

65

24

70

120

120

100

95

55

155

35

165

90

175

100

129

65

no

35

117

40

148

98

150

2,261

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

39.1

40.0

30.1

38.1

69.2

21.8

20.7

30.6

36.1

36.1

32.8

47.4

42.5

26.9

37.3

40.0

41.9

28.9

38.6

52.7

35.5

27.0

46.6

-

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

11.2

15.0

9.4

10.5

15.5

22.2

19.2

17.4

12.0

6.9

10.5

17.4

3.4

17.4

16.3

12.9

9.3

12.0

15.4
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

9.0

14.2

U.7

12.8

-

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

3

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

-

Adjusted Haul

Miles

30

15

28

27

28

29

31

4

6

4

6

6

24

14

26

13

16

16

29

15

29

32

30

458

Min.

116

58

'108

104

108

112

120

28

30

35

34

21

93

54

100

50

62

62

112

58

112
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

124

116

1,817

Addit

Time

for

Collec.

(min.)

-51

-34

-38

16

12

-12

-25

27

125

0

131

69

82

46

29

15

48

-27

5

-18

36

-26

34

444

Tons/Day

Addit.

-1.3

-0.9

-1.3

0.4

0.2

-0.6

-1.2

0.9

3.5

0

4.0

1.5

1.9

1.7

0.8

0.4

1.1

-0.9

0.1

-0.3

1.0

-1.0

0.7

10.7

Total

6.0

3.6

6.0

6.7

4.1

8.1

9.2

6.3

8.9

4.3

10.1

7.2

7.2

8.0

6.3

4.9

4.2

3.6

4.5

3.4

8.1

6.4
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

5.1

142.2

No. of

Loads

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

2

40

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

, Area

1.22

1.25

1.22

0.94

0.95

1.07

1.13

0.86

0.61

1.00

0.60

0.79

0.74

0.79

0.87

0.92

0.74

1.25

0.98

1.09

0.88

1.15

0.86

21.91

* To be re-assigned to Eastern I District

(3) Florida Avenue Incinerator; (4) N. O. East Incinerator; (6) Gentilly Dump

-------

TABLE A-32

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: ALGIERS and NIGHT Collection Day; FRIDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 8

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Total
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Total

Disp.

Point

**

1

J

"1

1

5

5

1

1

_

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

16

2

2

2

2

2

2

4

3

19

Tons

Codec.

4.5

6.2

5.9

5.6

7.0

5.3

5.9

6.1

46.5

6.6

6.7
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

5.5

7.1

6.7

8.1

12.0

8.1

60.8

Total

Haul

Mileage

5

8

10

12

16

15

16

11

93

8

10

11

6

9

• 7

18

9

78

Minutes Per Day

Col lee.

180

240

257

200

330

230

175

165

1,777

175

185

120

173

195

250

270

178

1,546

Haul

40

50

49

41

40

46

116

70

459

50

55

90

78

45
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

55

120

122

615

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

Aver,

Travel

Speed

(mph)

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

Adjusted Haul

Miles

A L G E R S

40.0

37.7

43.6

35.7

47.1

43.4

29.7

27.1

-

7.5

9.6

12.2

17.5

14.0

19.5

8.3

9.4

-

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

-

5

8

12

12

12

6

16

10

81

NIGHT

26.5

27.7

21.8

24.4

29.1

30.9

22.5

21.9

_

9.6

10.9

7.3

4.6

12.0

7.6
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

9.0

4.4

_

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

_

8

10

11

6

9

7

18

9

78

Min.

40

50

59

41

51

18

105

64

428

50

55

90

78

45

55

30

123

526

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

0

0

-10

0

- 4

28

11

6

31

0

0

0

0

0

0

90

- 1

89
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Tons/Day

Addit .

0

0

-0.2

0

-0.1

0.7

0.4

0.2

1.0

0

0

0

0

0

0

4.0

0

4.0

Total

4.5

6.2

5.7

5.6

6.9

6.0

6.3

6.3

47.5

6.6

6.7

5.5

7.1

6.7

8.1

16.0

8.1

M.8

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

16

2

2

2

2

2

2

4

3

19

Trucks
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.00

1.00

1.04

1.00

1.01

0.89

0.94

0.97

7.85

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

0.75

1.00

7 .7.5

** (1) Algiers Incinerator; (2) 7th Street Incinerator; (5) Algiers Dump

-------

TABLE A-33

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: CENTRAL Collection Day: SATURDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 22

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

Total

Disp.

Point

**

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

No. of

Loads

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

3

2

4

3

3

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

52

Tons

Col lee.

7.4

6.2

5.8

5.1

6.3

6.6

7.8

5.5

6.6

6.1

8.1

7.1

8.3

9.8

8.5

7.1

8.9

6.3

4.8

7.0

5.9

6.4

151.6

Total

Haul

Mileage

18

9

10

9

8

6

8

12

9

5

6

5

8

5

3

3

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

5

5

8

4

4

152

Minutes Per Day

Codec.

235

180

215

222

235

185

250

216

315

290

342

280

251

347

275

181

280

225

210

250

250

195

5.429

Haul

76

40

35

38

65

30

45

69

50

40

53

25

52

63

55

39

23

70

70

60

25

40

1,063

Min.

Per

Ton of

Codec.

31.8

29.0

37.1

43.5

37.3

28.0

32.0

39.3

47.7

47.5

42.2

39.4

30.3

35.4

32.4

25.5

31.5

35.7

43.7
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

35.7

42.4

30.5

—

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

14.2

14.0

17.1

14.2

7.5

12.0

11.7

10.7

11.0

8.0

6.8

12.0

9.2

4.8

3.3

4.6

5J

4.3

4.3

8.0

9.6

6.0

—

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

_

Adjusted Haul

Miles

18

9

10

9

8

6

8

12

9

5

6

5

8

5

2

3

2

5
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

5

8

4

4

151

Min.

76

40

35

38

65

30

45

69

50

40

53

25

52

A3

55

39

23

70

70

60

25

40

1.063

Addit.

Time

for

Codec.

(min. )

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

o

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Tons/Day

Addit.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

o

0

0

0

0

0
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

0

0

0

0

Total

7.4

6.2

5.8

5.1

6.3

6.6

7.8

5.5

6.6

6.1

8.1

7.1

8.3

9.8

8.5

7.1

8.9

6.3

4.8

7.0

5.9

6.4

151.6

No. of

Loads

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

3

2

4

3

3

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

52

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

1. 00

1.00

22.00

** (2) 7th Street Incinerator

-------

TABLE A-34

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: WESTERN Collection Day: SATURDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 28

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1*

2*

3*

4*

5* '

6*

7*

8*

9*

10*

11*

12*

13*

14*

15

16

17

18

19*

20

21*

22

23

24

Disp.

Point

**

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

7

1

1

1

1

7

7

•1

1

1

1

1

1

I

No. of

Loads

1

2

2^

2

2

n

L.

1

2

2

2

2

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2_

2

Tons

Col lee.

4.7

4.8

5.1

4.8

4.8

5.1

4.1

5.8

5.3

4.1

5.7

5.5

5.0

5.1

8.1

7.5

6.7

8.2

7.4

5.3

7.1

9.1

6.8

9.3

Total

Haul

Mileage

14

31

28

24

34

26

11

17

32

22

15

38

26

26

30

17

14

33

20

14

33

35

25

29

Minutes

Colled.

225

150

175

215

195

200

203

183

185

133

180

180

120

240
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

223

240

285

165

305

185

185

300

145

195

Per Day

Haul

55

T05

140

85

95

130

52

110

115

75

48

105

120

85

99

55

48

120

102

71

100

135

T60

150

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

48.0

31.2

34.3

44.8

40.6

40.0

49.5

31.5

34.9

32.4

31.6

32.7

24.0

47.0

27.5

32.0

42.5

20.1

41.3

34.9

26.1

33.0

21.3

21.0

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

15.3

17.7

12.0

17.0

21.5

12.0

12.7

9.3

16.7

17.6

18.8

19.8

13.0
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

18.3

18.2

18.5

21.3

16.5

11.8

19.8

19.8

15.6

9.4

15.6

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

7

7

7

7

2

7

2

7

7

7

Adjusted Haul

Miles

6

11

10

8

7

8

5

5

9

8

10

10

7

9

14

13

14

15

13

6

12

12

10

12

Min.

24

37

50

28

20

40

24

32

32

27

32

28

32

29

46
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

42

48

56

66

60

36

69

64

93

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

31

68

90

57

75

90

28

48

83

48

16

77

88

56

53

13

0

64

36

71

64

66

96

57

Tons/Day

Addit.

0.6

2.2

2.6

1.3

3.5

2.3

0.6

1.5

2.4

1.5

0.5

2.4

3.7

1.2

1.9

0.4

0

3.2

0.9

0.3

2.5

2.0

4.5

2.7

Total

5.3

7.0

7.7

6.1

8.3

7.4

4.7

7.3

7.7

5.6

6.2

7.9

8.7

6.3

10.0

7.9
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

6.7

11.4

8.3

5.6

9.6

11.1

11.3

12.0

No. of

Loads

1

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

3

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

0.89

0.69

0.66

0.79

0.58

0.69

0.87

0.79

0.69

0.73

0.92

0.70

0.58

0.81

0.81

0.95

1.00

0.72

0.89

0.95

0.74

0.82

0.60

0.77

Note: See following page for coding information

-------

TABLE A-34 (Continued)

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District WESTERN Collection Day: SATURDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 28

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

25*

2d

27*

28

Total
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Disp.

Point

**

1

7

]

1

—

No. of

Loads

2

4

2

2

55

Tons

Collec.

7.3

6J

7.7

7.6

174.1

* To be re-assigned to Central District

** (1) Algiers Incinerator

(2) 7th Street Incinerator

(7) St. Louis Incinerator
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Total

Haul

Mileage

24

24

25

27

694

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

178

228

199

155

5.572

Haul

152

132

144

90

2,878
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

24.4

37.3

25.9

20.4

_

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

9.5

10.9

10.4

18.0

_

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

2

7

2

7

_
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Adjusted Haul

Miles

9

22

10

12

287

Min.

57

121

58

40

1,291

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min. )

95

11

86

50

1,586
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

Tons/Day

Addit.

3.9

0.3

3.3

2.5

54.7

Total

11.2

6.4

11.0

10.1

228.8

No. of

Loads

2

4

2

2

58

Trucks

Req'd.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

to

Serve

Area

0.65

0.95

0.70

0.75

21.69

-------

TABLE A-35

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: EASTERN I Collection Day: SATURDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 22

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1*

2

3*

4

5

6

7*

8*

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

Total

Disp.

Point

**

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

3

3

3

3

3

_

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

44

Tons

Collec.

9.8

8.3

9.1

6.7

9.1

10.0

10.2

10.3

9.1

10.7

9.0

9.5

4.8

7.7

5.9

8.5

8.2

11.8

7.1

7.8

8.7

6.3

188.6

Total

Haul

Mileage

6

8

8

5

5

6

12

10

11

10

8

14

24

15

14

14

14

15

13
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

15

14

11

252

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

240

260

213

240

230

255

236

220

210

400

270

260

300

195

205

282

300

375

240

235

215

255

5,636

Haul

60

60

62

40

40

35

99

40

63

105

60

85

80

80

65

85

85

100

79

95

70

75

1,563

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

24.5

31.4

23.4

35.8

25.3

25.5

23.1

21.4

23.1

37.4

30.0

27.3

62.5

25.3

34.8

33.2

36.6

31.8

33.8

30.2

24.7
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

40.5

_

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

6

8

7.7

7.5

7.5

10.3

7.3

15.0

10.5

5.7

8.0

9.9

18.0

11.2

12.9

9.9

9.9

9.0

9.9

9.5

12.0

8.8

_

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

7

3

7

3

3

3

7

7

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

. 3

3

3

3

3

_

Adjusted Haul

Miles

8

7

10

5

5

4

12

9

12

10

8

14

16

13

15

14

14

14

13

15
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

14

10

242

Min.

80

53

78

40

40

24

99

36

69

105

60

85

53

70

70

85

85

93

79

95

70

68

1.537

Addit.

Time

for

Col lee.

(mtn.)

-20

7

-16

0

0

11

0

4

- 6

0

0

0

27

10

- 5

0

0

7

0

0

0

7

26

Tons/Day

Addit.

-0.8

0.2

-0.7

0

0

0.4

0

0.2

-0.3

0

0

0

0.4

0.4

-0.1

0

0

0.2

o

0

0
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

0.2

0.1

Total

9.0

8.5

8.4

6.7

9.1

10.4

10.2

10.5

8.8

10.7

9.0

9.5

5.2

8.1

5.8

8.5

8.2

12.2

7.1

7.8

8.7

6.5

188.7

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

44

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.09

0.9£

1.08

1.00

1.00

0.96

1.00

0.98

1.03

1.00

1.00

1.00

0.92

0.95

1.02

1.00

1.00

0.98

1.00

1.00

1.00

0.97
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

21.95

* To be re-assigned to Western District

** (3) Florida Avenue Incinerator; (7) St. Louis Incinerator

-------

TABLE A-36

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: EASTERN II Collection Day: SATURDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 23

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1 ,

2

3

4

5

6

7*

8*

9*

10*

11

12*

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

• 20

21

22

23

Disp.

Point

**

6

6

6

6

6

6

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

6

6

6

6

6

6

3

3

_

_

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

1

2

1

2

1

1

2

1

2

1
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

1

2

1

2

3

2

2

2

39

Tons

Collec.

7.5

7.9

8.7

6.9

5.3

11.7

5.6

6.5

6.0

4.9

8.5

4.5

8.7

5.3

8.6

4.9

7.9

5.4

8.6

10.1

7.8

8.2

4.7

164.3

Total

Haul

Mi (cage

12

20

22

20

13

25

1

4

4

4

14

4

20

13

29

18

16

14

11

28

32

25

30

379

Minutes

Col lee.

360

175

250

218

195

280

145

260

235

250

300

250

200

180

210

190
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

380

195

287

263

250

345

230

5,648

Per Day

Haul

110

113

115

73

99

150

15

30

20

30

70

15

180

70

115

120

75

70

73

187

125

120

141

2,116

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

48.0

22.1

28.7

31.6

36.8

24.0

26.0

40.0

39.2

51.0

35.0

55.6

23.0

34.0

24.4

38.8

48.2

36.2

L 33.4

26.0

32.0

42.1

49.0

-

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

6.6

9.2

11.5

16.4

7.9

10.0

4.0

8.0

12.0

8.0

12.0

16.0

6.7

11.1

15.1
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

9.0

12.8

12.0

9.1

9.0

15.4

12.5

12.8

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Incinerators

Disp.

Point

**

4

. 4

4

4

4

4

3

3

3

3

4

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

Adjusted Haul

Miles

12

10

8

14

17

20

3

4

4

3

26

4

22

12

24

13

6

2

2

3

6

14

18

247

Min.

110

57

42

51

130

120

45

30

20

23

130

15

197

65

95

87

28
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

20

13

20

23

67

85

1.473

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min.)

0

56

73

22

-31

30

-30

0

0

7

-60

0

-17

5

20

33

47

50

60

167

102

53

56

643

Tons/Day

Addit.

0

2.5

2.5

0.7

-0,8

1.3

-1.2

0

0

0.1

-1.7

0

-0.7

0.2

0.8

0.8

1.0

1.4

1.8

6.4

3.2

1.3

1.1

20.7

Total

.7.5

10.4

11.2

7.6

4.5

13.0

4.4

6.5

6.0

5,0

6.9

4.5

8.0

5.5

9.4

5.7

8.9

6.8
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

10.4

' 16.5

11.0

9.5

S.fl

185,0

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

1

2

1

2

1

1

2

1

2

1

2

1

2

i

2

3

2

2

•)

39

Trucks

Req'd.

.to

Serve

Area

1.00

0.76

0.78

0.91

1T18

0.90

1.27

1.00

1.00

0.98

1.24

1.00

1.09

0.97

0.91

0.86

0.89

0.79

0.83

0.61

0.71

0.8A

0 fil

21.35

* To be re-assigned to Eastern I District

(3) Florida Ave. Incinerator; (4) N. O. East Incinerator (6) Gentilly Dump

-------

TABLE A-37

ANALYSIS OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND HAUL

District: ALGIERS and NIGHT Collection Day: SATURDAY No. of Trucks per Day: 8

PRESENT OPERATION - 3 Incinerators and 2 Dumps

Route

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

8

Total

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Total

Disp.

Point

**

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

_

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

15

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

17

Tons

Col lee.

6.1

4.6

5.9

5.3

5.2

7.0

3.5

6.2

43.8
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

8.5

8.0

7.6

7.4

7.2

8.1

7.9

7.6

62.3

Total

Haul

Mileage

10

9

8

6

3

6

7

4

53

10

12

13

4

6

15

10

4

74

Minutes Per Day

Collec.

150

170

185

189

180

183

145

243

1,445

235

200

195

150

200

310

190

180

1,660

Haul

50

26

55

90

39

50

35

29

374

40
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

45

105

60

40

75

70

30

465

Min.

Per

Ton of

Collec.

24.6

37.0

31.4

35.7

34.6

26.2

41.4

39.2

_

Aver.

Travel

Speed

(mph)

FUTURE OPERATION - 5 Inc nerators

Disp.

Point

**

A L G E R S

12.0

20.8

8.7

4.0

9.2

7.2

12.0

8.3

_

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

_

Adjusted Haul

Miles

10

8

5

6

3

5

6

6

49

NIGHT

27.7

25.0

25.7

20.2

27.8

38.3

24.0

23.7

_
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

15.0

16.0

7.4

4.0

9.0

12.0

8.6

8.0

—

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

_

11

12

12

4

6

15

9

4

73

Min.

50

23

35

90

39

42

30

43

352

44

45

97

60

40

75

63

30

454

Addit.

Time

for

Collec.

(min.)

0

3

20

0

0

8

5

-14

22

- 4

0

8
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

0

0

0

7

0

3

Tons/Day

Addit.

0

0.1

0.6

0

0

0.3

0.1

-0.4

0.7

-0.1

0

0.3

0

0

0

0.3

0

0.5

Total

6.1

4.7

6.5

5.3

5.2

7.3

3.6

5.8

44.5

8.4

8.0

7.9

7.4

7.2

8.1

8.2

7.6

62.8

No. of

Loads

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

15

2

2

2

2

2

3

2
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

2

17

Trucks

Req'd.

to

Serve

Area

1.00

0.98

0.90

1.00

1.00

0.96

0.97

1.06

7.87

1.02

1.00

0.96

1.00

1.00

1.00

0.96

1.00

7.94

** (1) Algiers Incinerator; (2) 7th Street Incinerator

-------

 Form No. RS-1 New Orleans - Rt. Survey Form

 Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal

 Orleans - St. Bernard - Jefferson Parish, Louisiana

 DQi-sw-uuoga-oOT

 Collection and DTsposaT Records for Orleans Parish

DAILY ROUTE LOG

Collection: (Circle collection day)

Division Section

 Date

Driver (Name)

Truck No.

 Leave Garage:

 Return Garage:

 Collectors (Names)

 Garage Location 

 Mileage Out 

 Mileage In 

 Total Miles

M-W-F T-Th-S Nightly

 Route No. 
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 &

 Time Out

 Time In

 Total Minutes

DRIVER'S RECORD

Start Collection: Location

Mileage

Time

Finish Collection: Location

Mileage

Time

Arrive Disposal: Location

Mileage

Time

SCALEMAN'S RECORD

Weight

Leave Disposal: Time

1st Load

LOAD

2nd Load

RECORD

3rd Load

:

4th Load
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

Form No. RS-2

METROPOLITAN NEW ORLEANS WASTE STUDY

DAY

GRP

1

DAY

.

WEEK
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

DISTRICT

RT.

NO.

FT.

DISP.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

TRK.

TYPE

TRK.

CAP.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

COLLECTION ROUTE - HAUL STUDY

KTTSTTWa

TRJ

MI.

7EI,

ON.

CONSTANT

JOL.M

MI.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

CTTON

MIN.

EXISTING

HAUL

MI.

MIN.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

EXISTINGTONS

COLL,

2tt-<="" a="" l="" 1="" no.="" total="" f="" min.="" -e="" mi.="" adjustment="" ~d="" tith="" 

adj.="" c~="" —="" trch="" mph="" tr—="" t="" min="" coll.="" "="" avg.="" d8="" t&h="" £1="" 

load3="">

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

APPENDIX III Incinerator Maintenance Schedule

The following Model Incinerator Maintenance Schedules have been prepared as a guide to good

maintenance procedures. While certain modifications may be required to adapt them to the

specific plants conditions they will nevertheless provide a sound basis for developing an 

adequate

maintenance program.

CONTINUOUS FEED PLANT

A Daily

1. Lubrication - Grease and/or oil

 (a) Crane bucket bearings

 (b) Stoker bearings

 (c) Stoker drive chain

 (d) Recirculation water pumps

 (e) Induced draft fan bearings

 (f) Mechanical dust collector discharge mechanism

 (g) Air compressors

 (h) Residue conveyor and/or grate bearings

 (i) Residue truck motor and hoist mechanism

2. Inspect, clean, and adjust

 (a) Crane operation

 (b) Water cooled charge chute

 (c) Stoker drives

 (d) Stoker shaft, fan bearing, etc. water cooling systems

 Appendix Ill-l

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 (e) Fans - forced draft, wall cooling, induced draft

 (f) Water sprays and spray piping systems

 (g) Compressed air system

 (h) Instruments and controls - replace daily instrument charts and fill ink 

reser-

 voirs
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 (i) Hydraulic systems

 (j) Flyash handling and waste water systems

 (k) Combustion air ductwork, gates, flexible connection, nozzles, etc.

 (I) Furnace siftings systems

B Weekly

1 . Lubrication - Grease and Oil

 (a) Crane wheel bearings - bridge and trolley

 (b) Stoker drive mechanism

 (c) Induced draft fan variable speed rive oil level

2. Inspect, clean, adjust, and repair

 (a) Crane cables

 (b) Crane brakes

 (c) Stoker chain tension adjustment

 (d) Grate castings, chains, pinions, fastenings, etc.

 (e) Water cooled charge chute - internal

 (f) Slag and repair all refractories

Appendix 111-2

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 (g) Clean, inspect and repair cooling and/or flyash chambers and dust control

 equipment

 (h) Waste water handling and treatment system

 (!) Air and water nozzles and openings

 (j) Instrumentation sampling openings, thermocouples, and controls

 (k) Induced draft fan housing and impellers

 (I) Adjust residue conveyor chain tension

C Monthly

1. Inspect, clean, adjust and repair

 (a) Stoker chains and sprockets

 (b) Fan drive belts

 (c) Packing glands in pumps, shaft bearings, etc.

 (d) Compressor drive belts

 (e) Replace monthly strip charts

 (f) Inspect and clean out truck scale pit

D Tri-Monthly

 (a) Inspect and adjust stoker drive mechanism

 (b) Inspect, adjust, lubricate and calibrate all instruments - to be performed by

 trained serviceman

 (c) Inspect, adjust, lubricate and calibrate truck scale - to be performed by

 trained serviceman

 Appendix 111-3
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 (d) Replace crane cables - (assume continuous use)

E Semi-Annually

 (a) Replace electrical contacts on crane

 (b) Replace crane bridge and trolley brakes

 (c) Change oil in crane geat boxes and lubricate, inspect, and adjust drive

 systems

 (d) Replace crane main line conductor wheels

 (e) Have crane inspected and tested by trained serviceman

 (f) Replace bearing grease in large fans

 (g) Inspect and lubricate all motor bearings

 (h) Check balance of Induced Draft fans

 (i) Check electrical transformer fluid

F Annual

 (a) Replace, renovate, or refurbish hydraulic cylinders

 (b) Replace, renovate, or refurbish the components of the stoker drive system

 (c) Replace, renovate, or refurbish water pumps and air compressors

 (d) Reline and/or repair refuse charge hoppers, residue discharge hoppers, and

 residue conveyor trough

 (e) Change oil in induced draft fan fluid drive if used

G Bi-Annual

 (a) Replace stoker sprockets on trunion bearings

Appendix 111-4

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 (b) Refurbish crane bucket - replace pins, rollers, sheaves, bearings, tynes, 

etc.

 (c) Replace crane wheel bearings

 (d) Replace and rebuild seals and bearings in fluid drive if used

BATCH FEED PLANT

A Daily

1 . Lubrication - Grease and/or oil

 (a) Crane bucket bearings

 (b) Stoker bearings

 (c) Charge gate bearings

 (d) Recirculation water pumps

 (e) Induced draft fan bearings

 (f) Mechanical dust collector discharge mechanism

 (g) Air compressors
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 (h) Residue conveyor and/or gate bearings

 (i) Residue truck motor and hoist mechanism

2. Inspect, clean, and adjust

 (a) Crane operation

 (b) Stoker drives

 (c) Stoker shaft, fan bearing, etc. water cooling systems

 (d) Fans - forced draft, wall cooling, induced draft

 Appendix 111-5

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal -Tri-Parish Area

 New Qrleans/ La. -15May1968

 (e) Water sprays and spray piping systems

 (f) Compressed air system

 (g) Instruments and controls - replace daily instrument charts and fill ink 

reservoirs

 (h) Hydraulic systems

 (i) Flyash handling and waste water systems

 (j) Combustion air ductwork, gates, flexible connections, nozzles, etc.

 B Weekly

 1. Lubrication - Grease and Oil

 (a) Crane wheel bearings - bridge and trolley

 (b) Stoker drive mechanism

 (c) Induced draft fan variable speed drive oil level

 2. Inspect, clean, adjust, and repair

 (a) Crane cables

 (b) Crane brakes

 (c) Charge door refractories and mechanism

 (d) Grate castings, chains, pinions, fastenings, etc.

 (e) Slag and repair all refractories

 (f) Clean, inspect and repair cooling and/or flyash chambers and dust control

 equipment

 (g) Waste water handling and treatment system

 (h) Air and water nozzles and openings

Appendix 111-6

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 (i) Instrumentation sampling openings, thermocouples, and controls

 (j) Induced draft fan housing and impellers

 (k) Adjust residue conveyor chain tension

C Monthly

1. Inspect, clean, adjust and repair
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 (a) Fan drive belts

 (b) Packing glands in pumps, shaft bearings, etc.

 (c) Compressor drive belts

 (d) Replace monthly strip charts

 (e) Inspect and clean out truck scale pit

D Tri-Monthly

E Semi-Annually

F Annually

G Bi-Annually

 (All same as for CONTINUOUS FEED PLANT)

 Appendix 111-7

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

APPENDIX IV Basic Field Information Forms Utilized in Survey

 1. Survey of Solid Waste Production

 2. Follow-up Letter

 3. Daily Route Log

 4. Route Log Summation

 Appendix IV-1

-------

 January 8, 1968

 SOLID WASTE PROGRAM FOR METROPOLITAN NEW ORLEANS

 SURVEY OF SOLID WASTE PRODUCTION'

 1. Company: Mason-Rust

 Address: P. 0. Box 29000

 Indlvldun1: Clyde H. Gordon 

 Title: ptv. Mgr. - Plant Engineering

 2. Estimate Amount of Refuse

 Daily 60 Weekly 300

 Check one (l):

 Lbs Tons X

 Cubic Feet Cubic Yards

 What Does Ycur Refuse Consist of?

 Indicate (1), (2), (3) etc. In order of decreasing quantities:

 Paper 1 Cloth 

 Cardboard 2 Leather_

 Rubber ___ Glass "_

 Plastics 4 Cartons

 Metals Wood

 Food Waste 5

 Other (describe)_

k. Method of Disposal:

 Municipal Collection

 Private Contractor Collection

 Hauled By Own Trucks. Where? mnHf^i »„ site

 On-Site Incineration

5. How Often is Your Refuse Collected:

 5 Times a week

 Times a month

 8/tripg/dav Other

6. Data on Your Present Refuse Collector:
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 Company Name Mason-Rust (Ourselves)

 Address P. 0. Box 29000 

 Telephone 255-2642

 USE THE ENCLOSED POSTAGE PAID BUSINESS RS>LY ENVELOPE...

 THANK YOU

-------

 March 5, 1968

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Michoud Operations

P. 0. Box 26078

New Orleans, Louisiana

 RE: Metropolitan Solid Waste

 Program

Gentlemen:

 The Chamber of Commerce of the New Orleans Area, assisting

us in contacting local industry earlier this year, directed a

questionnaire on solid waste disposal to your office. Not having

received your reply as yet we are following up by means of this

second request.

 We have attached a copy of the original request and questionnaire and ask your cooperation in providing the desired information. Please mail your reply to the Chamber of Commerce today.

 Very truly yours,

 SWITZER/GREENLEAF

Enclosures

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 APPENDIX V

 SECTION 1

 1.1

 1.2

SECTION 2

 2.1

 2.2

 2.3

 Suggested Regulations for Sanitary Landfills

 SANITARY LANDFILL SITES

 Location

 All refuse disposal site locations shall conform to applicable State laws and

 county or municipal zoning laws and ordinances.

 Flooding'

 Sites subfect to flooding should be avoided, if possible. Sites located in

 areas which may be subject to flooding shall be protected by impervious

 dikes. Pumping facilities shall be provided for removal of seepage and sur-

 face waters.

 SITE APPROVAL

 Sanitary landfill sites shall conform with the general requirements contained

 in Section 1. In addition, the following requirements shall apply:

 Subsoils

 The subsoil structure shall be such that there is reasonable assurance that

 leachate from the landfill will not contaminate the ground waters or streams

 in the area, or that suitable procedures to prevent such contamination will

 be followed.

 Grading
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 The surface contour of the area shall be such that surface run-off will not

 flow into or through the operational or completed fill area. Grading, dik-

 ing, terracing, diversion ditches, or tiling may be approved when practical.

Water Table

Areas having high ground water tables may be restricted to landfill operations which will maintain a safe verticle distance between deposited refuse

 Appendix V -1

-------

 Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

 New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 and the maximum water table elevation. Any operation which proposes to

 deposit refuse within or near the maximum water table elevation shall in-

 clude corrective or preventive measures which will prevent contamination

 of the ground water stratum. Monitoring facilities may be required.

SECTION 3 SITE IMPROVEMENT

 The following physical improvements shall be made before a landfill site is

 placed in operation:

 3.1 The site shall be adequately fenced, with an entrance gate that can be locked

 and posted. Opening and closing hours and days of operation shall be clearly

 shown.

 3.2 All-weather operational road(s) shall be provided for vehicular movement

 within the site. Separate operational areas may be operated within the site

 to allow for wet or dry weather operation and access. When necessary, to

 prevent dust nuisance, operational roads within the site shall be surfaced 

or

 treated.

 3.3 A shelter, convenient for use by operating personnel, shall be furnished. The

 shelter shall be screened and provided with heating facilities and adequate

 lighting. Provisions shall also be made for safe drinking water and sanitary

 hand-washing and toilet facilities.

 SECTION 4 FIRE PROTECTION

 Arrangements shall be made for fire protection services when a fire protection

 district or other public fire protection service is available. When such a

 service is not available, practical alternate arrangements shall be made.

 4.1 Burning material, or any refuse at a temperature likely to cause fire shall 

not

 be deposited in the fill. Said material may be deposited in a separate lo-

 cation a sufficient distance from the fill to prevent fires from spreading to

 the normal fill area and shall be immediately covered with a sufficient a-

 mount of earth to extinguish same.

Appendix'V-2

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

SECTION 5 SANITARY LANDFILL OPERATION

 5.1 Site Access

 Access to the site shall be permitted only during the hours when operating

 personnel are on the site.

 5.2 Dumping Area

 Dumping of refuse on the site shall be confined to the smallest practical area.

 5.3 Unloading

 Unloading shall be supervised. Portable fences shall be used when necessa-

 ry to prevent blowing litter from the unloading site. The fill and surround-

 ing area shall be policed as necessary to collect all scattered material.

 5.4 Equipment

 Sufficient equipment in operational condition shall be available at the site

 at all times to permit operation of the landfill according to the approved 

plan.
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 5.5 Spreading and Compacting of Refuse

 As rapidly as refuse is admitted to the site, it shall be spread and compacted

 in shallow layers of approximately two to three feet in compacted depth de-

 pending upon the type of material and the compaction equipment. The com-

 pleted cell shall consist of the refuse admitted and compacted during one

 working day, regardless of overall height and area covered.

 5.6 Cover

 Cover material shall be of such quality as to prevent fly and rodent 

attraction

 and breeding, blowing litter, release of odors, fire hazards, and unsightly

 appearance, and which will permit only minimal percolation of surface water

 or cracking when properly compacted. Cover shall be applied as follows:

 5.61 Daily Cover: A compacted layer of at least six (6) inches of ma-

 terial shall be used to cover all exposed refuse at the end of each

 Appendix V -3

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May T968

 working day; except that on surfaces that will not receive an ad-

 ditional depth of refuse or the final cover within 60 days, a com-

 pacted layer of cover of at least one (1) foot shall be applied.

 5.62 Final Cover: A compacted layer of at least two (2) feet of ma-

 terial in addition to the daily cover .shall be placed over the

 entire surface of all completed portions of the fill within six (6)

 months following the final placement of refuse. Final cover shall

 be graded as provided on the approved plan and to prevent pond-

 ing. The surface of the final cover shall be maintained at the

 plan elevation at all times, by the placement of additional cover

 material where necessary.

 5.7 Deposition of Liquids and Hazardous Materials

 Sewage solids or liquids, septic tank pumpings, and other liquids or hazar-

 dous substances shall not be discharged to a sanitary landfill until written 

ap-

 proval has been obtained from the Department. Special provisions may vary

 from site to site depending upon local conditions, and will be specified in 

the

 approval letter.

 5.8 Vector Control

 Insect and rodent control measures shall be employed as directed by the De-

 partment.

 5.9 . Sanitary Landfill Variation

 Large quantities of non-combustible and non-putrescible waste such as boiler-

 house cinders, broken paving, or materials resulting from construction or de-

 molition operations may be disposed of at a sanitary landfill by open dumping.

 Such material shall be leveled and spread at sufficient intervals to prevent

 unsightly appearance or rodent harborage, and shall be finally covered as re-

 quired for a completed sanitary landfill in Rule 5.07, unless approved plan

 provides for other cover.

 5.10 Prohibited Activities

 The following activities shall be prohibited in conjunction with, or upon the

 site of the sanitary landfill.

Appendix V-4

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May 1968

 5.101 AM scavenging operations. Scavenging shall mean the manual

 sorting of refuse, either in the trucks, at the face of the fill, or

 in unconfined truck discharge areas.

 5.102 All feeding of farm or domestic animals.

 5.103 Deposition of refuse in
Master Plan for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Tri-Parish Metropolitan Area of New Orleans; Final Report on a Solid Waste Management Demonstration

https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101P33U.txt[7/17/2018 2:42:49 PM]

 5.104 Burning, except in an approved incinerator.

 Appendix V -5

-------

Solid Waste Disposal - Tri-Parish Area

New Orleans, La. - 15 May T968

APPENDIX VI Refuse Sampling and Testing Procedures

Refuse sampling was performed daily at Florida Avenue Incinerator over a five-day period January

22 through 26, 1968. These samples were taken from well-mixed refuse in the storage pit. The

method consisted of removing about a two-cubic yard sample from the pit via the overhead crane

and bucket and depositing the contents on a plastic sheet on the charging floor. Here the sample

was mixed and quartered to obtain a working size sample of about 25 gallons. The working size

samples were:

1. Weighed for gross weight.

2. Physical components were separated and weighed individually.

3. Percentile composition of each component was calculated.

4. Air drying of the samples was conducted for a period of two to three weeks.

5. Re-weighing of the components was performed.

6. Each component of the laboratory sample was oven-dried for further moisture deter-

 mination; (testing was performed by Shilstone Testing Laboratory in New Orleans).

7. Total moisture content (weight loss) was calculated on the typical sample (average

 composition five-day period) as shown in Table V-26, page V-51.

During the sampling period extremely dry weather conditions prevailed and relatively no rain

occurred during the week preceeding the sampling period, so an extremely dry refuse was handled.

 Appendix VI-1

 ftU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 

1969 O - 3S«-41»

-------