Sewage-flow samples from a multitude of Richland Township industries have confirmed what Forest Hills Municipal Authority officials had long believed. Pepsi Bottling Group's Allenbill Drive plant is a major contributor to the organic overload that is stifling growth across the entire system.
SALIX, Penn. — Sewage-flow samples from a multitude of Richland Township industries have confirmed what Forest Hills Municipal Authority officials had long believed.
Pepsi Bottling Group's Allenbill Drive plant is a major contributor to the organic overload that is stifling growth across the entire system.
"We've gotten the figures back. Pepsi is responsible. We've finally proven that Pepsi is the culprit," said Albert Clement of South Fork, a former chairman and veteran authority member. But the cost of fixing the problem will not be cheap.
Preliminary estimates of four pretreatment systems that would deal with the overload range from a low of $1.9 million to a high of $4.5 million, Forest Hills authority members are being told.
The annual cost of operating and maintaining the pretreatment facility also will carry a hefty price tag, according to figures provided by engineer Tom Riley of the EADS Group of Somerset. The yearly cost could be as low as $45,000 or as high as $75,000.
Along with the construction costs, the authority is looking at the best place to build the pretreatment facility, with indications that the most feasible site might be in its own back yard at the South Fork treatment plant.
Results of the sampling at the Pepsi plant and Johnstown Industrial Park show that the waste being dumped into the sewer system by Pepsi accounts for 27 percent of all organic-based waste being treated at the regional wastewater treatment plant.
Authority Chairman Kirk Moss said another way of reading the sampling results is that Pepsi is dumping 50 percent more organic matter into the system than it is allowed.
"We're going to debate this heavily, we have to decide what we're going to do," Moss said.
A Pepsi representative could not be reached for comment.
The results of the sampling have been forwarded to Pepsi, authority Executive Director Neal Sivic said.
Along with the type of pretreatment and where it will be built is the question of who is going to pay -- and how much of the cost will be passed on to the approximately 3,000 customers of the system.
Those decisions have to be made in time to meet the Aug. 30 deadline set by the state Department of Environmental Protection.
Whatever pretreatment system is selected, the authority should brace itself for the cost, Riley said.
"It won't be inexpensive. We're talking big-time dollars for any of these options on a capital basis, plus operating costs," he said. "It's quite a chunk of change."
The late August deadline is part of a corrective-action plan submitted to DEP in April, a plan mandated by the state after it banned new taps to the system and ordered the authority in January to reduce the amount of organic overload.
DEP backed off the total ban in April after approving the planned corrections, allowing the authority to sell 32 new taps through the end of the year.
The treatment plant that was put into service in 2000 has plenty of capacity to treat the flow if it were average municipal sewage -- but not the compounds with high sugar levels being dumped by Pepsi, and others to some degree.
The result is an organic overload at the treatment plant, creating a flow that is richer than municipal waste.
Pretreating would reduce or dilute those high sugar levels before they reach the existing treatment plant.
While not speaking publicly about the situation, Pepsi officials have told authority members that they are willing to participate in the cost of pretreatment, but that the bottling plant lacks space for a facility.
A plant at South Fork makes sense for a number of reasons, Moss said.
"If Pepsi moves out, then we have a pretreatment facility we can't use," he said. "It just seems more cost effective if it's at the treatment plant, then we won't have employees scattered everywhere."
Authority members plan to look to the state for a grant that could be coupled with Pepsi's contribution to limit any increase in rates for other customers on the system.
"They would have to contribute to the extent that they are contributing (organic material) into the system," Sivic said. "If Pepsi were in compliance, we would be in fairly good condition."
To see more of The Tribune-Democrat or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.tribune-democrat.com.
Source: Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News
