HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.1 Attachment 1
~
e ',..-"
CITY OF DUBLIN
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
FOR
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT
SERVICES
It It It
January 18, 1995
Prepared by:
Hilton Famkopf & Hobson
HI8I11
January 18, 1995, Draft
71
ft' ')
CITY OF DUBLIN
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
FOR
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT
SERVICES
Table of Contents
Section
I.
Description
Introduction
Purpose of RFP
Background
Scope of Services Requested
Proposal Process
II.
Description of Current Services
Description of Service Area
Current Municipal Solid Waste Collection and. Disposal Services
Current Rates
AB 939 Planning
III.
Proposal Guidelines
Procurement Schedule
Preparation of Proposals
Other Proposal Requirements
Submission of Proposal
City Rights and Hold Harmless
IV.
V.
Proposal Evaluation
Attachments
1.
2.
3.
4a.
4b.
4c.
5.
6.
7.
Draft Franchise Agreement
Dublin SRRE Excerpts
Current Rates
Price Proposal Summary Form
Price Proposal Form Guidelines
Price Proposal Worksheet
Anti-Collusion Affidavit
EEO Certification
Notary's Certification
January 18, 1995, Draft
~
1
1
1
1
4
5
5
5
9
9
10
10
11
26
26
26
28
f: II"
A. PURPOSE OF RFP
The City of Dublin (City) is requesting proposals from qualified firms to
provide refuse collection, transport and disposal, and yard waste and
recyclable materials collection, processing and marketing services to the
residents and businesses in the City for a period of seven (7) years with an
option for up to three (3) twelve (12) month extensions. Through this
procurement process, the City hopes to achieve long-term rate stability in
both collection and disposal and to increase the level of solid waste services
provided in the City.
B. BACKGROUND
The City is currently receiving refuse coll~ction, transport and disposal
services and recyclables collection, processing and marketing services from
Waste Management of Alameda County, Inc. (WMAC) thtough separate
agreements. There is currently no yard waste collection service. The
agreements with WMAC will terminate on March 31, 1996.
C SCOPE OF SERVICES REQUESTED
The following sections briefly describe the services that are requested by the
City.
1. Refuse Collection, Transport and Disposal
a. Refuse Collection
i) Residential Refuse Collection (Option A- Current Service)
· Manual, mandatory, weekly backyard refuse collection
with customer provided containers;
H) Residential Refuse Collection (Option B-Automated
Service)
· Automated, mandatory, weekly curbside residential
refuse collection in Company-provided containers and
a method to service hard-to-serve areas if other than
automated service;
Hi) Other Residential Refuse Services
-1-
January 18, 1995, Draft
"
· Four (4) annual clean-ups with an option for an
incremental reduction to three (3) or two (2) annual
clean-ups;
· On-call bulky waste collection;
, iv) Other Refuse Collection
· Bin service (includes multi-family, commercial and
industrial refuse collection);
· Debris box service (includes residential, commercial
and industrial refuse collection); and,
· Service to City facilities, and special events.
b. Refuse Transport
i) Refuse transport to disposal site.
Co Refuse Disposal
i) Refuse disposal
2. Recycling Collection, Processing and Marketing
a. Recycling Collection
i) Weekly, residential (all can or cart accounts) curbside
recyclable materials collection, on the same day as refuse
collection, of at least the following materials: newspaper,
glass, aluminum, PET, tin and bi-metal cans. Option A
shall include the collection and processing of corrugated
cardboard and mixed paper (including magazines, phone
books and junk mail). Option B shall include the
COllection and processing of HOPE. Proposals must
include the additional incremental costs per household
for each option;
ii) Weekly, multi-family recyclable materials collection,
processing, and marketing of .at least the following
materials: newspaper, glass, aluminum, PET, tin and bi-
metal cans. Option A shall include the collection and
processing of corrugated cardboard and mixed paper
(including magazines, phone books and junk mail).
Option B shall include the collection and processing of
-2-
January 18, 1995, Draft
Pf
~):
HOPE. Proposals must include the additional
incremental costs per household for each option;
Hi) Commercial recyclable materials collection (to be
implemented at the City's option); and,
iv) Service to City facilities and special events.
b. Recycling Processing and Marketing
i) Recyclable materials processing and marketing.
3. Green Waste Collection, Processing and Marketing
a. Green Waste Collection
i) Residential Green Waste Collection;
· (Option A) - Weekly, residential (all accounts
receiving cart or can service) curbside green waste
collection with Company provided containers, on
the same day as refuse collection.
· (Option B) - Bi-weekly, residential (all accounts
receiving cart or can service) curbside green waste
collection with Company provided containers, on
the same day as refuse collection.
ii) Christmas tree collection;
iii) Multi-family green waste processing and marketing to
those complexes requesting the service; and,
i v) Service to City facilities and parks.
b. Green Waste Processing and Marketing
i) Green waste processing and marketing; and,
ii) End uses for green waste.
4. Periodic Reporting Related to AD 939 Diversion Goals
a. Company shall be responsible for accurately reporting progress
toward State mandated diversion requirements (see Article 8 of
the draft franchise agreement).
-3-
JanuarylS, 1995, Draft
t.
D. PROPOSAL PROCESS
Written questions will be accepted before the Mandato." rre-fmposal Bidders
Conference on Fel,Jrual:f 22. lti5. and written responses will be provided at
the Conference. Oral questions will be accepted at the Conference and written
responses will be provided thereafter. The City has requested that all
communications regarding this Request for Proposal be conducted through
its consultants, Hilton Farnkopf & Hobson. The contact person there is Scott
Hanin, who can be reached by phone at 510/713-3270 and by facsimile at
510/713-3294.
In order to fairly evaluate all proposals, the City has attempted to describe the
types of services and business terms and conditions in a manner that will
allow a reasonable level of comparability between the proposals. Therefore,
the City discourages and may disqualify any and all proposals that
substantially deviate from the RFP. Also,pro.posals received after the
submission deadlitte of M,rch 30. 1995. will not be acc~t~d.
A contractor will be selected on the basis of the City's evaluation of the
qualifications and reputation of the firm, the technical and financial
proposals, and the number and nature of exceptions taken to the Draft
Franchise Agreement which is provided as Attachment 1 to this RFP. Upon
selection, the firm will be required to enter into an agreement based on its
proposal in a timely manner.
The City reserves the right to reject or accept any or all complete proposals, or
parts of proposals, to issue addenda to the RFP, to modify the RFP, to -modify
the draft franchise agreement or to withdraw the RFP.
-4-
. January 18, 1995, Draft
c )-
The City has prepared the following descriptions based upon information readily
available to it, and upon historical trends. It is the responsibility of the proposers to
undertake at their sole cost any verification of this information necessary to submit a
response to this Request for Proposals (also, see Section lV.B.)
A. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE AREA
The City has a population of approximately 26,270. The City is located at the
intersection of Interstate 580 and Interstate 680. The current City limits comprise
approximately 9 square miles, with the majority of existing development
occurring within 4.5 square miles. Much of the u.ndeveloped area is currently
comprised of Institutional uses including: the Camp Parks Reserve Forces
Training Area, the Federal Bureau of Justice Correctional Facility, the Alameda
County Jail, and the Alameda County Public Works facility. The County owns
approximately 614 acres which is slated for future mixed use development as
part of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
The City has an approved General Plan and Specific Plan, which outline the
potential for additional development both within the City Limits, and in areas
which may eventually be annexed. The Eastern Dublin General Plan
Amendment covered approximately 6,920 acres of which approximately 3,300
acres are also covered by a Specific Plan. The Specific Plan Area alone includes
approximately 700 acres projected to be used for commercial/industrial purposes.
The Specific Plan area proposed for residential uses cOVers approximately 1,690
acres, which can accommodate approximately 12,350 residential units". The
projected population for this area is 27,551.
B. CURRENT MUNIOPAL SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
SERVICES
1. Refuse Collection
a. Residential Collection
The City currently has mandatory, once-a-week backyard residential
collection services; however, a substantial, but unknown, number
of customers place their containers at the curb. A total of 5,453
households are serviced under this category, classified as follows:
Single family
Duplex
Townhouse
4,977
92
384
-5-
January 18, 1995, Draft
,
These residential customers are currently serviced by two (2) routes.
One route uses a two person crew and one route uses a three person
crew. Rear...load vehicles are used for these routes.
The estimated residential can count is currently:
1-Can
3,085
2-Can
2,261
3-Can
186
4-Can
12
5-Can
3
In addition, in 1994, a total of 1,618 tons were co1leded through the
four annual clean-ups. The current hauler also operates a "Handy
Hauler" program where a 4-yard bin can be ordered by residential
customers on an occasional basis and is serviced by the regular
commercial route vehicles.
b. Commercial Collection
The approximate number of current commercial accounts is 642.
The approximate number of commercial customers by size of
container and collection frequency is presented in the following
table.
Fc:y/Size
1 Week
2 Week
3 Week
4 Week
5 Week
Totals
Dublin
Commercial Cust9mer Data
(December, 1994)
Pick-up Frequency Per Container Size
lfi~ ~fiM 3fiM 4fiM 6~M
100 ~ ~ ~ M
5 13 84 44 3
o 8 8 28 8
o 0 140
o --D. -2 -12. --D.
105 109 177 180 42
Table 1
7 YaM
9
2
16
1
1
29
Commercial customers are currently serviced by two (2) routes
composed of one-person front-end load vehicles. In addition, there
are 2,404 multi-family units receiving bin service, 1,027 with their
own compactor.
-6-
January 18, 1995, Draft
c. Debris Box Collection
( )
The approximate number of annual debris box pulls is 2,197, as
described below.
DrQP Box
SiB
2o-yard compactor
24-yard compactor
25-yard compactor
3O-yard compactor
40-yard compactor
6-yard
2o-yard
3O-yard
4o-yard
Number of PvU,
13
46
81
350
21
246
925
294
221
2. Waste Transport and Disposal.
WMAC currently utilizes a direct haul to their Altamont facility for
disposal. The City does not have any provision for long-term disposal
capacity beyond the term of the current agreement. The approximate
amount of waste disposed is:
.
Residential
Residential clean-ups
Commercial (including multi-family)
Debris Box
1993
A~tual
5,836 tons
1,416
9,990
~.195
25,437 tons
.
.
.
Total
1994
Proj~cted
5,724 tons
1,618
9,523
za42
24,714 tons
Approximately 555 additional tons were estimated to be collected at City
facilities in 1994.
3. Current Recycling Programs
a. Residential Curbside Recycling
The City contracts with WMAC to operate a weekly curbside
recycling program for collection of newspapers, glass, metal
-7-
January 18, 1995, Draft.
( ,
food !beverage cans, and plastic (PET). Participation in the program
is voluntary; however, all residents pay for recycling services which
are subsidized by City Measure D funds. The recyclable materials
are placed at the curb on the regular refuse collection day. The
current recycling agreement with WMAC expires on March 31,
1996. The estimated amount of residential recydables collected and
processed in 1994 was:
Newspaper
Glass
Tin
Aluminum
PET
Sil\gle familY
734
338
76
15
U
1,177
M:ulti-F,mt1y
233
59
5
1
2.
300
Ima1
967
397
81
16
16
1,477
b. Commercial Recycling
There is currently no formal commercial recycling program.
However, any commercial recycling taking place must be source
separated according to the City ordinance.
4. Green Waste
Currently, the City does not operate a green waste collection program.
5. Household Hazardous Waste Management
Household hazardous waste (lniW) management programs ale operated
by the County. Dublin residents are encouraged to utilize the HHW
facility in Uvermore which is managed by the County Health Department
and funded by landfill tip fees.
6. Billing Process
The City currently bills all residential customers for one 32-gallon can for
refuse collection, weekly recycling collection, and four special clean-ups
on their property tax bills, and forwards this revenue to the current
hauler. Any additional residential container and other non-standard
service, multi-family, commercial or debris box service is billed directly to
the customers by the hauler.
-8-
January 18, 1995, Draft
~
C. CURRENT RATES
The City's current schedule of rates is presented as Attachment 3. However,
companies are not expected to include rates as part of their proposal.
D. AD 939 PLANNING
The City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element (sRRE) of the County's
Integrated Waste Management Plan was adopted by the City Council on March
23,1992. The sRRE describes plans to achieve 30.9% diversion by 1995 and 54.4%
diversion by the year 2000. This will be accomplished through source reduction,
recycling and composting as described in Attachment 2. The City and County
have estimated that the 1995 diversion rate for the City will be 27.1%, using a
disposal based methodology.
-9-
January 18, 1995, Draft
!
The City is soliciting proposals to provide solid waste services for residences, businesses
and City facilities beginning April 1, 1996, for a period of seven (7) years with an option
to extend the agreement for up to three (3) twelve (12) month extensions.
For all services, the Company is required to comply with federal, state and local
environmental standards, Provide reporting to meet City, County Recycling Initiative -
Measure D, and AB 939 requirements, provide high-quality public service/education
and other related activities as described in the draft franchise agreement.
A copy of the draft franchise agreement containing the business terms and conditions
under which service will be Provided is included as Attachment 1 and is an integral
part of this RFP. The agreement includes information related to service standards, rate
setting, billing, reporting and other activities related to the performance of these
services. The City reserves the right to modify the draft franchise agreement.
A. PROCUREMENT SCHEDULE
Request for Proposals available om:
Scott Hanin
Hilton Famkopf &t Hobson
39350 Civic Center Drive, Suite 100
Fremont, California 94538-2331
· February 22, 1995 Pre-Proposal Conference:
· March 30, 1995 Proposal Submission by 4:00 P.M.
Finance Department
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza, 2nd Floor
Dublin, California 94568
· April 24-25, 1995 Interviews with Selected Firms
· May 15, 1995 Preliminary Approval by City Counci
· June 26, 1995 Final Approval by City Council
· April 1, 1996 Start of Waste Collection Services
These dates are tentative only, and subject to change by the City.
-10-
January 18, 1995, Draft
1
B. PREPARATION OF PROPOSALS
1. Proposal Outline
All proposals shall be prepared using the following outline:
i. TItle Page
ii. Transmittal Letter
iii. Tables of Contents, Attachments, etc.
iv. Proposal Summary
a. Company Description
i) Overview
ii) Details of Ownership of Company
iii) Description of Company Experience
iv) Description of Company's Service Initiation Experience
v) Information Regarding Pending Litigation
vi) Financial Information
vii) Key Personnel
b. Technical Proposal
i) Refuse Services - Refuse Collection, Transport and Disposal
ii) Recycling Collection, Processing and Marketing
iii) Green Waste Collection, Processing and Marketing
i v) General Requirements
v) Implementation Plan
vi) Customer Service/Billing
vii) Environmental Component
Co Financial Proposal
i) Financing Plan
ii) Cost Proposal
d Exceptions to Proposed Business Terms and Conditions in the Draft
Franchise Agreement
Description of the contents of several of these sections are presented below.
-11-
January 18, 1995, Draft
2. Proposal Content
a. Company Description
i) Overvi~w
Indicate w~r the legal entity which would enter into the
Agreement is an individual, a partnership, a corporation, or
a joint venture.
Indicate the number of years the entity has been organized
and doing business under this legal structure (if other than
an individual).
ii) Details of Ownership of Company
a) Corporation (including Non-Profit and Not-far-Profit)
- If you are a corporation, indicate in which State you
are incorporated. Also, provide the names and
addresses of all:
· Officers;
· Stockholders owning ten percent (10%) or more of
any class of stock in the corporation; and,
· Creditors who are owed a debt equal to ten percent
(10%) or more of the firm's total assets. .
b) Partnership - If you are a partnership, list the names
and addresses of all general and limited partners and
their percentage ownership.
c) Joint Venture - If you are a joint venture, list the
names and addresses of all venturers. If any venturer
is a corporation or partnership, provide the
information requested in Sections a. and b. for each.
iii) Description of Company Experience
Each firm must submit a description of experience that
qualifies it to perform the services being procured thtough
this RFP.
In describing your firm's experience in each area, list the
following information:
-12-
January 18, 1995, Draft
a) The city and state where activities were performed.
b) What service was performed (e.g., refuse collection,
yard waste collection and recyclable materials
collection).
. c) The type of equipment used.
d) The dates during which services were performed.
e) The name, address and telephone number of the
responsible city representative.
f) The number of households or commercial
establishments served, tons collected, and number of
vehicles dispatched per day, etc.
iv) Description of Company's Service Initiation Experience
Describe how your firm has handled the specific
requirements for:
a) Procurement of vehicles and personnel.
b) Training of personnel.
c) Establishing billing and fee collection services,
particularly interfacing with billings on the property tax
bill.
d) Determination of routes and operating procedures.
e) Delivery of refuse containers.
f) Liaison with the community including complaint
resolution, public relations and promotion of new
programs.
g) Preparation of procedures to ensure a smooth
transition from one contractor to another and one type
of service to another in other communities.
Include examples of lead time and critical path or
other time charts used in start-up situations similar to
Dublin. Indicate how your firm will assure an
-13-
January 18, 1995, Draft
. '
effective, trouble-free, timely start-up of your
operation in the City.
v) Information Regarding Pending litigation
List all dvillega1 actions with potential liability above
$10,000 and all criminal1egal actions now pending or
threatened against the individual or entity identified in
answer to Section 2. For each action, please provide:
a) The name of the action;
b) The court in which it is pending;
c) The action number;
d) The amount at issue; and,
e) A brief statement of the current status of all criminal
actions and all civil actions involving amounts greater
than $100,000.
If the legal entity identified in Section 2 is a corporation,
include in your answer all actions which are pending that
involve as a party a current corporate officer or a person who
served as an officer within the last two years, which arise
from the officer's activities on behalf of the corporation.
If you answered the portion of Section 2 regarding "parent"
corporations, include in your answer to this Section all
criminal actions and all civil actions involving potential
liability greater than $100,000 involving that "parent"
corporation.
If this legal entity identified in Section 2 is a partnership,
include in your answer to this Section all legal actions
involving individual partners, which arise from their activ-
ities on behalf of the partnership, not otherwise disclosed in
your answer.
vi) Financial Information
Submit audited financial statements for your firm for the
most recently completed fiscal year. All such reports are to be
prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles applied on a consistent basis including a statement
-14-
January 18, 1995, Draft
by the chief financial officer of your firm that there has been
no material adverse change in such condition or operations
as reflected in the submitted balance sheet and income
statements since the date on which they were prepared. If
your company is a wholly-owned subsidiary of a parent
company, also submit audited financial statements for the
parent company for the most recently completed fiscal year.
vii) Key Personnel
Provide an organizational chart and. job descriptions indi-
cating the qualifications and experience the City could expect
of key personnel your firm would assign to the transition
and to this contract and the percentage of time dedicated to
work related to the City. Provide resumes of the proposed
management team member that will fill the described jobs in
the City. Indicate which positions should, in the opinion of
your firm, be considered "key" in a procurement of this
nature.
b. Technical Proposal
i) Refuse Collection, Transport and Disposal
Refuse collection, transport and disposal proposals must
include a description of how you propose to provide all of
the following services:
a) Residential Refuse Collection (Option A - Current
Service) - Manual, mandatory, weekly backyard
refuse collection with customer provided
containers.
b) Residential Refuse Collection (Option B -
Automated Service) - Automated, mandatory,
weekly curbside residential refuse collection in
Company-provided containers. Provide an.
alternative method to service hard-to-serve areas,
senior citizens, and handicapped individuals, if
different than automated service. Include an
estimate of the number of accounts requiring this
alternative and the number of routes required to
service them, if any.
-15-
January 18, 1995, Draft
c) Other Refuse Services ..
· Bulky Goods Collection;
Describe your plan for the collection,
processing, reuse, marketing, and residue
disposal of bulky goods, including;
A description of your bulky goods
collection, processing and marketing
plan, including the staff and
equipment that will be utilized.
Continuation of the current "Handy
Hauler" program. (It is not
anticipated that an additional bin
route be required for this program.)
A method of collection and recovery
of reusable or recyclable materials.
A listing of collection equipment by
type, make, model! year, including
collection, transport, and support or
supervisory vehicles.
A listing of, and maintenance
schedule for, bulky goods
processing I dismantling equipment
with key specifications about method
of storage, haul, and disposal of non-
processible waste and process residues.
Primary and contingent marketing
plans for the major types of bulky
goods, including quantities, prices,
specifications, and other terms and
conditions.
A description of your plan to
incorporate non-profit and for-profit
reusers and recyclers.
A description of public education
materials to be used.
-16-
January 18, 1995, Draft
i
· Four annual dean-ups and a description of
how the extra vehicle and labor
requirements will be handled (costs should
be included in residential refuse cost
proposal). A description of annual clean-up
collection, processing and marketing plan
should include the staff and equipment that
will be utilized Proposers should also
include the incremental cost reduction for
lowering the number of clean-ups from four
to thtee and/or two;
· Commercial and multi-family refuse
collection (bin service);
· Industrial, commercial, residential and
refuse collection (debris box service); and,
· Service to City facilities.
d) Refuse Transport (or Transfer)
Refuse transport (or transfer) proposals must
include a description of how you propose to
provide all of the following services:
· Refuse transport to disposal site - Proof that
direct haul (if proposed) for City refuse is not
prohibited at the proposed disposal site.
· If a transfer station is to be used, at a
minimum, the following information
specifically related to refuse transfer is
required:
Statement regarding affiliation to
transfer station.
Proof that the proposed transfer
station has the proper permits.
Information on the transfer station
induding a description of facility
operations, tons per day currently
processed and available tonnage
capacity per day.
-17-
January 18, 1995, Draft
Transfer station tonnage
commitments/ guaranteed capacity for
the term of the agreement, including
price per ton transferred and method
of future price adjustments.
· Description of the transfer process in the
event that a transfer station is not proposed
for use.
· If the transfer station or transport service is
owned or operated by a third or related party,
the terms and conditions of the agreement
must be summarized and a copy of the
formal agreement for services made
available to the City for review.
e) Refuse Disposal
· Refuse disposal must include a description
of where and how you propose to provide
refuse disposal service.
· For rate purposes, disposal expense (tipping
fee), and regulatory fees will be treated as a
pass-through expense.
· At a minimum, the following information
specifically related to refuse disposal is also
required:
Name and location of disposal site.
Current daily permitted capacity and
traffic.
Type of permit in place (i.e., Class 1, 2,
3).
Permit amendments required (e.g.,
Water Board, Air Board, etc.).
Statement regarding affiliation to the
disposal site.
-18-
January 18, 1995, Draft
Proof that the proposed disposal site
has the proper permits.
Information on the disposal site
including a description of facility
operatio1l$, tons per day currently
disposed and available tonnage
capacity per day.
Disposal site tonnage commitments/
guaranteed capacity for the term of the
agreement.
Initial price per ton delivered for
disposal (tip fee) and method of future
fee adjustment and method for
treating local fees.
Information on the disposal site
including: remaining capacity and
projected years to closure; if closure
arid post-c1osure costs ~e included in
the tip fee; if Subtitle D requirements
are fulfilled; and any pending
litigation against the landfill owner or
management..
The proposer must agree to hold the
City harmless for hazardous waste as
described in Section 9.2 of the draft
franchise agreement, which may be
amended.
H the disposal site is owned or
operated by a third or related party, the
terms and conditions of the
agreement must be summarized and a
copy of the formal agreement for
services made available to the City for
review.
ii) Recycling Collection, Processing & Marketing
Recycling collection, processing and marketing proposals
must include a description of how you propose to provide
all of the following services:
-19-
January 18, 1995, Draft
a) Weekly, residential (all can or cart accounts)
curbside recyclable materials collection, on the
same day as refuse collection, of at least the
following materials: newspaper, glass, aluminum,
PET, tin and bi-metal cans. Option. A shall include
the collection and processing of corrugated
cardboard and mixed paper (including magazines,
phone books and junk mail). Option B shall
include the collection and processing of HOPE.
Proposals must include the additional incremental ..-
costs per household for each option.
b) Weekly, multi-family recyclable materials
collection, processing, and marketing of at least the
following materials: newspaper, glass, aluminum,
PET, tin and bi-metal cans. Option A shall include
the collection and processing of corrugated
cardboard and mixed paper (including magazines,
phone books and junk mail). Option B shall
include the collection and processing of HOPE.
Proposals must include the additional incremental
costs per household for each option.
c) Source-separated commercial recyclable materials
collection, processing, and marketing (to be
implemented at the City's option).
d) Recycling services to City facilities.
At a minimum, the following information
specifically related to recycling collection,
processing and marketing is also required:
· Estimated annual tons of recyclable materials
that will be collected, processed and
marketed. Include basis for assumptions and
participation rate. ..
· Estimated annual tons of residual waste that
will be disposed, and disposal site.
· Name and description of faci1ity(ies) where
recyclable materials will be processed, proof
of capacity, processing fee per ton, method of
-20-
January 18, 1995, Draft
future fee adjustments, and tonnage
commitment. .
· Processing methods and procedures.
· Marketing plan and materials marketing
experience.
e) Any opportunities for the use of Measure D Capital
Grants should be identified.
iii) Green Waste Collection, Processing and Marketing
Green waste collection, processing and marketing
proposals must include a description of how you propose
to provide all of the -following services:
a) Option A - Weekly, residential (all cart and can
accounts, except that 384 townhouse units may be
excluded) mandatory pay, residential curbside green
waste collection on the same day as refuse collection.
b) Option B - Bi-weekly, residential (all cart and can
accounts, except that 384 townhouse units may be
excluded) mandatory pay, residential curbside green
waste collection on the same day as refuse collection.
c) Green waste processing and marketing.
d) Christmas tree collection, processing and diverting.
e) Multi-family green waste collection, processing and
marketing to those complexes requesting the service. .
f) Service to City facilities.
At a minimum, the following information specifically
related to green waste collection, processing and marketing
is also required:
a) Estimated annual tons of residential green waste that
will be collected, processed and marketed from
curbside. Include basis for assumptions and
participation rate assumptions.
-21-
January 18, 1995, Draft
b) Estimated annual tons of residual waste that will be
disPOSed, and disposal site.
c) Name and description of facility(ies) whete
residential green waste will be processed, proof of
capacity, fee per ton delivered, method of future fee
adjustments, and location capacity commitment.
d) Processing methods and procedures including
information on how contamination will be
controlled.
e) Description of finished product (i.e., compost, mulch)
and customers.
f) Marketing plan and green waste marketing
experience.
iv) General Requirements
At a minimum, for eaCh service for which proposals are
submitted, the following information is required:
a) Collection methodology to be employed.
b) Equipment to be utilized (e.g., vehicle, number,
types, capacity, age, etc.). H equipment can be
considered non-standard (e.g., dual collection
vehicles, alternative fuel vehicles, etc.) you must
provide examples of where the proposed
equipment is currently being utilized as it is
proposed.
c) The number of routes required per day, per week,
and the estimated number of actual stops and
drive-bys per route.
d) Assumptions and basis of each assumption for
labor requirements (number of employees by
classification (i.e., drivers, helpers, mechanics,
etc.)).
e) Types and numbers of containers to be utilized.
f) Location for equipment and personnel staging.
-22-
January 18, 1995, Draft
g) Arrangements for maintenance of equipment.
h) Office location for management and franchise
administration operations.
i) Estimated annual tons collected.
j) Billing/Customer Service.
v) Implementation Plan
Prospective companies shall provide an implementation
plan describing its approach to facilitating a smooth
transition to the new franchise agreement and, if applicable,
a smooth transition between types of service and refuse
haulers. The proposal must clearly demonstrate that the
company has the ability to implement the services by April 1,
1996. Such a plan should include:
a) A timeline and accompanying written explanation for
complete project implementation including:
· "Back-up" plan during the transition (e.g.,
personnel, vehicles, etc.).
· Equipment procurement.
· Hiring of personnel.
· Acquisition of storage and maintenance facili-
ties and administrative offices.
· Development and printing of customer rela-
tions materials (such as collection schedules,
route maps, billing forms, complaint forms,
service request forms, etc.).
b) Assumptions regarding the City's staff participation
and (as appropriate) the current hauler's participation.
c) A description of and resumes for the transition team
members highlighting previous experience in
transitioning/ start..up of new operations.
d) Methods for handling customer inquiries.
-23-
January 18, 1995, Draft
e) Announcements and publicity.
vi) Customer ServiceIBilling
Prospective contractors &hall describe their procedures for
dealing with customer service requests and for customer
billing. The current billing process of the basic residential
rate on the property tax will be continued.
vii) Environmental Component
Applicants should address the following points and provide
additional information, as needed, for preliminary
environmental review of proposed services.
a) Environmental Issues. Describe potential
environmental effects and their mitigation measures.
Address each of the following issues separately, as
applicable: odor, noise, dust, vectors, traffic, litter, and
visual effects.
b) Hazardous Waste Management. Describe procedures
for identifying and handling hazardous waste disposed
with the solid waste stream. The plan shall describe
screening procedures, notification plan, and employee
training program.
c. Financial Proposal
i) Financing Plan
Each Company shall describe its plan for financing its capital
requirements in a "Sources and Uses of Funds" format
which describes the sources of required capital (e.g., banks,
leasing companies, cash reserves, etc.) and uses (property,
trucks, equipment, containers, reserves, etc.) and shall attach
such supporting documents that demonstrate its ability to
implement the plan. Proposers should provide written
documentation (e.g., letters from banks or leasing
companies) demonstrating their ability to finance their
capital requirements.
.24-
January 18, 1995, Draft
ii) Cost Proposal
Attachment 4 describes how each company should
complete its cost proposal and provides forms and
workSheets that must be completed in order for your
proposal to be considered.
d Exceptions to the Proposed Business Terms and Conditions
Proposers should describe in detail any exceptions to the proposed
business terms and conditions described in the draft franchise
agreement (Attachment 1).
-25-
January 18, 1995, Draft
A.' SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL
1. Submit five (5) copies (one (1) unbound, camera..ready) of the complete
proposal in a sealed package. Included with the proposal should be the
following:
a. Transmittal letter, signed by an official authorized to bind the
proposing firm.
b. Anti-Collusion Affidavit (Attachment 5).
c. EEO Certification (Attachment 6).
d Notary's Certification (Attachment 7).
e. Proposal Bond. The company is to furnish a proposal bond with
submission of their proposal. The proposal bond shall be furnished
as surety for performance and completion of the 'work in
accordance with the terms of this RFP and its attachments, the
service contract and its attachments, and for the prices contained in
the contractor proposal. The proposal bond must be approved by
the City and must be in an amount of $50,000. The proposal bond
shall be returned to any proposer not ultimately selected to provide
these services.
2. Label this package:
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE COLLECTION PROPOSAL
NAME OF PROPOSER
ADDRESS
CONTACT PERSON
TELEPHONE
All proposals must be received at the City of Dublin Finance Department,
2nd Floor, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, by March 30, 1995, at 4:00 p.m.
Proposals received after this time and date will be retumed unopened.
Postmarks will not be accepted as proof of receipt.
B. an RIGHTS AND HOLD HARMLESS
The data presented in Section U. of this Request for Proposals is for information
only and the proposer agrees to hold the City harmless for the accuracy of this
-26-
January 18, 1995, Draft
data. All proposers should take whatever steps they feel are necessary to
reasonably establish the actual service information in preparing their proposal.
The City reserves the right to reject or accept any or all complete proposals, or
parts of proposals, to waive non-substantial irregularities in the RFP, to issue
addenda to the RFP, to modify the RFP and draft franchise agreement, or to
withdraw the RFP. Proposals must comply fully with the requirements detailed
in this document. Required supporting documentation should be included as
attachments and should be appropriately identified. Incomplete proposals,
proposals containing errors or inconsistencies, failure to submit the proper
quantity of copies, or other process or content errors or deficiencies may
constitute cause for rejection.
Dublin must have the right and your firm must agree to cooperate with the
City's investigation and review of your firm's ability to perform the work
required. Such cooperation shall apply not only to the verification of the firm's
capability and experience in the provision of services but also to the provision of
any other component of work which may be required under this procurement.
The City reserves the right to retain all propos~ submitted and the proposals
shall become the property of the City. The City also reserves the right to use any
or all ideas presented in any proposal submitted in r~ponse to an RFP without
charge or limitation. The selection or rejection of a proposal does not affect
these rights.
The City may request clarification or additional information from the proposer
at any point in the RFP process.
Submission of a proposal shall constitute acknowledgment and acceptance of all
the terms and conditions contained in this RFP and draft franchise agreement
unless exception to particular terms and conditions are expressed in writing in
the proposal. Upon acceptance of its proposal, in whole or in part, by the City,
the contractor is bound to execute a contract and furnish a performance bond
approved by the City for performance of the contract in accordance with the draft
franchise agreement, as may be modified by the City , and all documents
referenced therein, as modified by this proposal, the terms of which are firm for
a period of 120 days. .
-27-
January 18, 1995, Draft
.
SECI10N V · PROPOSAL BY ALUATION
The proposals will be objectively evaluated based on the following factors:
. Company's Qualifications
· General Experience - Demonstrated experience providing similar services,
including diversion programs, to other areas. Experience of key personnel.
· Jurisdiction Satisfaction - Satisfaction of company references with services
received, including implementation, customer service, billing, payment of fees,
reporting, and the handling of legal and labor issues.
· Public Education - Company's public education experience and adequacy of the
company's public education plan.
Technical Proposal
· Implementation Plan - Reasonableness of implementation schedule and ability
to meet deadlines (i.e., equipment procurement schedules, personnel available,
back-up plan, notice to customers).
· Operations - Reasonableness of assumptions (i.e., number of routes, drivers).
· Equipment - Collection methodology used and proven.
· Disposal, Processing and Marketing - Realistic plan and guaranteed capacity for
refuse disposal, recyclable material and green waste processing and marketing.
· Other Technical Services- Provisions for bulky waste collection, annual clean-
ups, Christmas tree recycling and hazardous waste management.
· Ability to achieve the AB 939 diversion goals.
Exceptions to the Terms and Conditions
· Exceptions to the RFP - Number and nature of the exceptions and effect upon the
City's ability to evaluate the proposal.
· Exceptions to the Draft Franchise Agreement - Number and nature of the
exceptions and effect on entering into.an agreement.
-28-
January 18, 1995, Draft
Financial Ability
Profit -
· Reasonableness of requested profit.
· Financing - Evidence that financing requirements will be fulfilled.
Reasonableness of terms. Proposed collateral against loans.
· Financial Stability - Comparison of additional revenue from contract to
company's current revenue stream. Vulnerability of company based on its
debt-to-equity ratio. Demonstrated ability of company to obtain adequate
insurance.
Costs
· Costs - Reasonableness of costs. Rational relationship between costs and
operational assumptions.
· Competitiveness - Cost of service to customers. Cost competitiveness relative to
other similar types services in other jurisdictions and other proposals.
Predictability
· Costs - Ability to provide rate stability assurance in collection and disposal for
the term of the franchise agreement (e.g., without major capital purchases
including, but not limited to, the need to replace vehicles and equipment).
· Operations - Ability to provide efficient and timely service for the term of the
agreement.
-29-
January 18, 1995, Draft
AlTACHMENT 1
PLEASE SEE EXHIBIT 2
JANUARY 23, 1995 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
STAFF REPORT
January 18, 1995, Draft
ATTACHMENT 2
DUBlwIN SRRE
(Excerpts)
. .
City of Du~lin
Source Reduction and
Recycling Element
and
Household Hazardous
Waste Element
Adopted March 23, 1992
rc 'f/~ t, R. ~T S
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Dublin (Dublin) has prepared a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRR
Element) and a Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHW Element) in accordance with
statutory requirements of the State of California. This Executive Summary describes what is
required for these documents and presents the essential information they contain.
INTRODUCTION
The California Integrated Waste Management Ad
In 1989, the California legislature enacted the California Integntted Waste Management Act
(Act) requiring diversion of waste materials from ]at)dfill~ in order to preserve decreasing landfill
capacity and natoral resources. This Act requires cities and counties in California to diven 25
percent of solid waste from landfill disposal by January 1, 1995, and 50 percent of solid waste
by January 1, 2000.
The Act further requires every city and county in Califomia to prepare two documents to
demonstrate how the mandated rates of diversion will be achieved. The fiIst of these documents
is the Source Reduction and Recycling Element, (SRR Element), a report describing -( 1) the chief
characteristics of each jurisdiction's waste, (2) existing waste diversion programs and CUIIeI1t
rates of waste diversion, and (3) continuations of existing waste diversion programs and new or
expanded prognuns the jurisdiction intends to implement. The seconddocumem is the Household
Hazardous Waste Elemen~ (HHW ~ement), a report describing what each jurisdiction will do
to ensure _that household hazardous wastes are not mixed with regular nonhazardous solid waste. .
Household hazardous wastes are defined as any discarded material from homes that may threaten
human health or the. environment if disposed of incouectly.
OVERVIEW OF THE SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELE:MENT
Solid Waste Generation Study
The fiIst requirement for the SRR Element is preparation of a Solid Waste Generation
Study. This repon identifies the quantity and composition of wastes generated by a jurisdiction
and the total waste generated which is disposed and diverted. For Dublin and other Alameda
CIty of DtlbIID
'Priuted Oft ~ded OIl......
ES-2
County jurisdictions, the source of infozmation on waste quantities and characteri.stics for the
Solid Waste Generation Study was a countywide report prepared by Brown and Caldwell
Consultants. This countywide report generated waste composi~n and quantity data on a
countywide ,basis. Dublin's specific waste characteristics were detemrined by the city' s relative
share of the county's population or by the city's ~ of the total number of Alameda County
businesses.
The Solid Waste Generation Study for Dublin includes four parts. These are:
· A Demo2Y3Phic Studv showing the total CU1ICnt population of Dublin, the proportion
of residents in single- and multifamily dwelling units. and in low, medium, and high
income households, and the number and type of commercial and industrial
establishments in Dublin.
· A Solid Waste Characterization Study showing the quantity and composition of wastes
generated by Dublin residents and commercw and industrial waste generators.
· A Solid Waste Disposal Study showing the quantity of residential, commercial and
industrial wastes collected in Dublin by franchised waste haulexs and additional
Dublin solid waste taken to 1aDnfi11~ both by nonfranchised commercial haulers
collecting primarily construction and demolition debris and by members of the public
hauling smaller individual loads of sclf-hlmlett wastes.
· A Solid Waste Diversion Studv showing the quantity and types of Dublin wastes
currently diverted from hlIlnfill disposal.
The results of these studies indicate that in 1990 the major types of waste generated in
Dublin were concrete and asphalt (163 percent), paper (33.7 percent), and yard waste
(8.4 percent). The total quantity of waste generated in Dublin in 1990 was 55,143 tons, of which
41,707 tons were taken to ]annfi11~ for disposal and 13,437 tons were diverted through source
reduction and recycling programs. The overall rate of diversion of waste materials for Dublin
for 1990 was 24.4 percent. -
Existing Material Recovery Programs
Waste diversion in Dublin occurs both as a consequence of publicly org~nl"',ed recycling
programs and waste diversion activity emanating solely from private injrimive. The major
publicly organized program is its curbside recycling program. In September 1990, Dublin
contracted with its franchised waste hauler, Livermore-Dublin Disposal, to provide a tbree-bin
curbside recycling program for single-family residences in Dublin with a provision to expand this
service to Dublin multi-family residences in the future. In addition, since 1986 Dublin has
contracted with Livermore-Dublin Disposal to provide as part of its base solid waste collection
service, a quarterly cleanup program. Livermore-Dublin Disposal has also provided a one-day
CIty of DllbUD
ES-3
household hazardous waste collection event for residents of the cities of Dublin, Livermore, and
Pleasanton.
Even more significant is Dublin's privately initiated waste diversion activity. Priv~
recycling activities provided an estimated 7;.1.71 tons of concrete and asphalt to a major paving
materials contractor in Oakland, where they were remade into road construction materials.
Cmrent state regulations [CCR section 18722(j)(7)(A)] identify concrete, asphalt and other inert
solids as a waste type which must be accounted for in a joxisdictiOIi's Solid Waste Generation
Study, and materials of this waste type class which are diverted may cmrently count toward the
25 and 50 percent diversion credit if they are solid wastes which are nOImally disposed of at
pennitted solid waste landfills or ~itted solid waste transformation fact1i1ies [CCR. section
18722 (m)]. In late 1991, legislation was introduced which would alter the procedures for
detennining whether and to what extent diversion credit could be claimed for recycled concrete
and asphalt; This issue, however, will probably not be resolved by the state legj~lature until late
1992; in the interim period during which Dublin is producing its initial SRR Element, existing
state regulations regarding the counting of concrete and asphalt inert solids will be observed.
As a result of private commercial recycling activities, significant quantities of conugated
cardboard (1,526 tons) and high grade ledger paper (725 tons) were also diverted from landfill
disposal. Likewise, privately iniri~ted source reduction activities provided an estimated 34 tons
of cloth diapers to Dublin by commercial diaper services and 100 tons of used clothing were
diverted from landtill disposal through being taken instead to second-hand clOthing and used
textile stores.
SUMMARY OF SRR ELEMENT COMPONENTS
Introduction and Statement of Goals and Objectives-Chapter 1
The first chapter of Dublin's SRR Element describes the requirements of the Califomia
Integrated Waste Management Act and the required format for the SRR Element.
Solid Waste Gene11ltion Analysis-Chapter 2
Each jurisdiction preparing an SRR Element is required to prepare a Solid Waste Generation
Analysis chaptex: serving as a summary of the characteristics of the solid waste generated within
a jurisdiction. For Dublin and most other jurisdictions in Alameda County, the Solid Waste .
Generation Analysis chapter summarizes a larger, more detailed countywide waste
characterization IepOn which is included in the SRR Element as Appendix A-l(2). InfOImation
pertinent to solid waste characterization in Dublin is excerpted from the larger countywide study
and presented in the Solid Waste Generation Analysis chapter.
CIty of Dablla
Priated oa recycled paper
""""~~'t,~
ES-4
Source Reduction Component-Chapter 3
Source reduction is defined as a set of activities which resolt in the reduction or prevention
of solid waste generation. Since source reduction is focused on the p.timm~tion of waste
generation rather than management of materials after they become wastes, the Califomia
Integrated Waste Management Act requires cities and counties to place this fonn of waste
diversion at the top of the hierarchy of waste management practices for local solid waste
management programs.
Source reduction programs selected for Dublin's SRR Element include:
· . RestrUcturing garbage collection rates to reduce the discount provided for additional
cans of service with a goal of eventually achieving a unifoxm can rate.
· Continuation of support for a countywide home composting education program.
· Development of a recycled and reusable products procurement policy.
Recycling Component-Chapter 4
Recycling, the diversion of waste materials for use in the manufacture of new products, is
intended to be a sigTIificant waste diversion activity in Dublin. New recycling programs to be
implemented by 1995 include:
· A two-fold expansion of the existing residerlti~) curbside collection program as
follows:
First, an expansion of the existing curbside progxam to include multifamily
residences in Dublin.
Second, as a consequence of a decision to require mandatory solid waste
collection service to all residences, an- increase in the number of single-family
homes participating in the curbside collection program.
· A requirement that specifies loads of concrete and asphalt inert wastes be delivered
to apPlopriate recycling facilities;
· Consider establishing a collection program for source-separated white office paper,
and
· Consider participation in a regional m~tp.ri~)li: recoveIY facility (MRF) to divert
additional recyclable materials from Dublin's waste stream. Participation by Dublin
would be considered in order for the city to achieve the mandate of SO percent
diversion of wastes by 2000.
CUy of DtlbIIa
ES-5
Composting Component - Chapter 5
Composting is a biological decomposition process that converts, under controlled conditions,
organic constituents of the material into a stable humus-like product. In Dublin, composting will
become an important asPect of the waste diversion programs after 1995. At this time, Dublin
will support the development of a subregional composting facility for source-sq>arated yard waste
and will evaluate a program providing for collection of source-separated yard waste..
Special Waste Component-Chapter 6
Special waste is solid waste that requires unique hanrl1ing and disposal methods in order to
mmimi7.e ~ to public safety and health. Special waste includes bulky, difficn1t to handle
wastes (such as tires, large appliances, and mattresses), sewage sludge, and potentially harmful
wastes such as asbestos and medical wastes. .
In most cases, special wastes generated from Dublin can only be accounted for on a
countywide basis; the only special waste types for which it is possible to generate an estimate
of Dublin-specific special wastes are asbestos, bulky items, street sweeping and catch basin
debris, and used tires. L1kewise, the only feasible special waste programs for Dublin to consider
are countywide programs. These include:
.
Continued support for the countywide asbestos monitoring program of the County
Environmental Health Department.
.
Work with the County to implement the Medical Waste Management Act- new state
legislation to reduce hazards associated with improper hanrl1ing of biomedical wastes.
.
Support for new countywide programs to divert bulky items for recycling or reuse and
to reuse, recycle, or transform used tires.
Education and Public Information Component-chapter 7
The Education and Public Information Component is designed to increase the source
reduction and recycling awareness of public and private sector target andiences. The component
identifies three target groups for education and public infonnation activities-residents, businesses,
and schools. To reach these groups and increase their awareness of source reducti~ recycling
and composting activities, Dublin will promote the following program activities:
· Community outreach, through use of speakers, to publicizC waste divelSion activities
and participation in booths and demonstrations at filiIS and special events.
· Utilization of available educational matP-riah:,promotional items and opportuniries for
media exposure in the local community newspaper and cable TV channel.
Oty of Dalllla
PriDted OD recTcJed oaoer
_......~"".-..---.,....
ES-6
· Suppon for the development of local school recycling educational activities.
· Implementation of targeted educational programs for industry and commercial groups,
government agencies, and professional groups.
Disposal Facility Capacity Component. Chapter 8
This chapter discusses the capacity of solid waste disposal facilities receiving wastes from
Dublin. It notes there are no solid waste disposal or transformation facilities located in Dublin.
Cw:rendy, wastes collected by the city's franchised waste hauler, Livennore-Dublin Disposal are
taken for disposal to the Altamont Landfill in eastem Alameda County. In addition, some self-
hauled wastes from Dublin are also taken to the Vasco Road Landfill in eastem ~eda County.
The chapter also includes projections of the capacity of landfills receiving Dublin wastes and
concludes that if Dublin and other jurisdictions achieve the 25 and 50 percent diveISion rates,
there will be sufficient capacity to provide for the needs of Dublin and other participating
jurisdictions until 2005.
Funding Component-Chapter 9
This chapter describes the funding sources and alternatives for the SRR Element for the City
of Dublin and shows the potential funding for implementation of the SRR Element programs.
Integration Component-Chapter 10
This chapter explains how Dublin has integrated the Source ReductiOlly Recycling,
Composting and Special Waste components to achieve the 25 and 50 percent mandates specified
by the California Integrated Waste Management Act. It also includes a schedule illustrating the
proposed time frame for implementation of an programs presented in the SRR Element and the
anticipated achievement dates for the solid waste diversion mandates.
ESTIMATED PROGRAM COSTS
Source Reduction
In the shott tenn, it is anticipated that source reduction programs will consist of a
continuation of the programs of restructming collection and disposal rateS to p.1immme quantity-
based discounts, and city-supported county home composting prognun and a city govemment
procurement policy establishing a means to increase purchases of repairable products and
products with recycled matp.ri~Is content. The total cost for these prognuns, including monitoring
and evaluation is expected to be around $1,750 per year.
CIty of Dablla
ES-7
Recycling
In the shan tenn, the programs in the. recycling category include an expansion of the
existing residential curbside collection program to include multifamily housing units,
establishment of a collection program for source-separated office paper and a program for .
directing inens to appIopriate recycling facilities. It is estimated that the costs for these programs
will total $45,900 per year in the. short teml.
Special Waste
Programs in this category include city support for the following county programs: an
asbestos monitoring program, a program to promote bulky item recycling and reuse, a program
to promote sandblasting material reuse, a medic3l waste monitoring program, and a used tire
program. It is estimated that these programs will cost approximately $8,000 per year including
monitoring and evaluation.
Education and Public Information
Programs in this category include a community outreach program, a public infonnation
program, a school information program and a program of education and public infonnation
targeted toward Dublin's business community. It is estimated these.programs will cost $22,000
per year, including monitoring and evaluation.
OVERVIEW OF THE HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE ELEMENT
When inm~l1y enacted in 1989, the California Integrated Waste Management Act required
a household hazardous waste component to be included in an SRR Element, in addition to the
. components discussed above. Subsequently, a new piece of legislation was enact~ AB 2707,
which elevated the importance of the HHW component by making it a separate element, similar
to. the SRR Element. The HHW Element includes a discussion of obj~es, existing conditions, .
an evaluation of several HHW program altematives, selection of a program, implementation
details, monitoring and evaluation efforts, HHW education and public information programs, and
funding for proposed HHW programs. .
For Dublin and other jurisdictions in Alameda County, management of household hazardous
wastes will be a county govemment responsibility. In June 1990, the Alameda County Board
of Supervisors approved a countywide Household/Mini-Generator Hazardous Waste Collection
Program consisting of the development of tluee pem1anent household and mini-generatOr
hazardous waste collection fa~'jries located in the northc:m, southem and eastem valley areas of
Alameda County. In August 1990, the Alameda County Waste Management Authority
(Authority), a joint powers agency comprised of city and county elected representatives, approved
a funding mecl'lani$l't1 for this program, by imposing a fee of $1.32 per ton of solid waste
CIty of DabUII
PrUat.d oa ncydecI paper
m~""
l
I
ES-8
received at Alameda County solid waste disposal facilities. The money generated by this fee will
cover the program costs associated with the development of these facilities. In Aprl11991, the
Authority acted to reduce the fee to $1.25 per ton and to retain the approximate $77,000 already
collected by the fee differential for future household hazardous. waste related purposes to be.
design~ted by the Authority.
The Dublin HHW Element indicates that Dublin's principal HHW activity will be its support
of the cOWltywide. HHW program. Additionally, household hazardous wastes from Dublin and
other Alameda COWlty jurisdictions will also be detected and removed through implementation
at Alameda COWlty solid waste disposal facilities of a program to randomly inspect loads of
incoming waste for the presence of HHW. In addition, Dublin will also support the COWlty in
its committnent to develop and disseminate educational materials on the proper use of the
permanent HHW collection facilities and on steps Alameda County residents can take to
minimize HHW generation by substituting non-hazardous household products for equivalent
hazardous products.
CllyofDabUa
CHAPTER 4
RECYCLING COMPONENT
Clty of DabUD
PrintJ!d 00 ~cled ..........
CHAPTER 4
RECYCLING COMPONENT
This chapter describes the recycling objectives, existing conditions, program altematives and
selected programs for the City of Dublin (Dublin). The chapter begins with an overview of
recycling. To familiJ:lrize readers with the general features of recycling as a preface to the
technical discussions of recycling which follow, a more detailed description of the constellation
of activities which generally comprise recycling can also be found in Appendix B. After the
recycling overview discussion, the chapter describes the objectives of the Recycling Component,
existing recycling activities in Dublin, altematives for consideration in selecting recycling
programs for this SRR Element, the particular alternatives which Dublin has selected, and the
programs for implementation and monitoring and evaluation of Dublin's chosen recycling
programs. These topics are in accordance with the requirements of the Model Component FOImat
of State's Planning G(JjdeHnes for Implementation of Countywide Integrated Waste Management
Plans.
Recycling Overview
Recycling involves a set of activities which result in mJ:ltf!T'ia1s which would otherwise be
discarded for disposal being used for the manufactoIe of new prodncts. Recycling occurs when
a waste material is removed from the waste stream and remade into a new prodnct without
changing the essential natnre of the material itself. Thus, when meta4 glass and paper are taken
out of the waste stream and remelted or rcpulped into new products, recycling has taken place.
Recycling waste materials differ from the reuse of waste products, a source reduction
technique. Reuse is the use, in the same fonn ~ it was produced,..of a material which might.
otherwise be discarded. For example, when damaged appliances are repaired and resold, reuse,
but not recycling ~ occurred. Recycling is also not the same as transfonnation which is defined
as the combustion, conversion, or processing of a waste prodnct for the pmpose of volume
reduction, synthetic fuel production or energy recovery. This latter distinction is important
because the Califomia Integrated Waste Management Act of 198.9 (Act) allows full diversion
credit for recycled m~tP.riJ:lls; for materials which are transformed, however, this bill allows no
diversion credit for the shon-tenn period. up to 1995 and a credit of 10 percent during the
medium-tenn period up to 2000.
Recycling typically involves the following set of interdependent activities:
CIty of DaIlUa
:P...;"t~.~ ~~IM "'~n,lIt"
4-2
Separation. Often the first step in the reCycling process, separation is the removal from
the waste stream of the recyclable material which will ultimately be remade into a new product.
Separation can occur either at the source of waste generation or at a central materials recovezy
facility where recyclable materials are soned and separated manually, mechanically, or both.
Collection. This is typically either the pick-up and transpOnation of source-separated
recyclables by an authorized hauler (curbside collection) or the transponation of recyclable
materials by individuals to facilities where these materials are either sold {buy-back facilities) or
left for donation (drop-off facilities). .
Materials Processing. This stage involves the preparation of recyclable materials for
marketing. It can include the initial stage of separation of recyclables from residue materials
intended for disposal, and also typically involves the removal of C()l1tammants and reconfiguration
of recyclable materials through baling or other fonns of materials consolidation.
Marketing. The marketing phase of recycling involves the identification or the
development of end users for recycled materials. Typically, the end users are the manufactUrers
who create new products from the recycled materials.
Manufacturing. At this stage, industrial processes occur to remake the recyclable material
into a new product. In the United States, this aspect of the recycling process is undertaken by
private industrial enteIprises.
Th.is chapter focnses mainly on. the separation, collection, materials processing, and
marketing aspects of recycling. The chapter, howeve:-, does not deal with the manufacture of
products from recyclables; this aspect of recycling is affected principally by free l)'U,ljeet forces
of supply and demand and is not typically under the control of factoIS emanating from local
government recycling plans.
RECYCLING COMPONENT OBJECTIVES
Shon- and medium-tenn objectives have been established for the recycling component to
1995 and the year 2000: respectively. For each time period, waste types targeted for diveISion
are identified based on Chapter 2, the Solid Waste Generation Analysis. As Chapter 2 indicates
the key constituents of Dublin's waste stream are conaete and asphalt (16.3 percent), paper
(33.7 percent), and yard waste 8.4 percent).
Short Term to 1995
Through source reduction and recycling, Dublin has already achieved an overall diveISion
rate of 24.4 percent in the 1990 baseline year and existing programs are expected to continue at
1990 levels. Thus, in 1995, through existing efforts, Dublin will almost exceed the mandated
CIty of DubliD
4-3
diversion rate of 25 percent. However, the city intends to inaugurate additional efforts prior to
1995, to improve the recycling rate and provide additional relief to landfill pressures.
Waste Types Targeted for Diversion. The following waste types have oQeen targeted and
will be evaluated for diversion:
· High-grade office paper.
· Newspaper, PET, glass containers, tin and aluminum cans to increase panicipation in
the existing residential curbside collection program. Securing 50 percent of these
materials remaining in the Waste stream will generate an additional 1.2 percent
diversion from the total waste stream.
· Inert Solids-Concrete and asphalt generated in Dub~ currently being disposed in
area ]annfil1!':, are estimated at 3.2 percent of the total waste stream. Securing 50
percent of these materials remaining in the waste stream will generate an additional
1.6 percent diversion from the total waste stream.
Objectives. The following objectives have been established for Dublin to implement in the
shon teml.
1. Expand the existing residential curbside collection program for the collection of
source-separated newspaper, and glass and metal containers, to include all single and
multi-family households in Dublin. This program will diven 1.2 percent of the waste
stream (662 tons).
2. When feasible direct all appiOpLiate loads of concrete/asphalt generated in Dublin to
existing recycling facilities for these materials. This could be done on city
government projectS, for example, by including, as part of the specifications for city
contract work, a requirement to recycle when feasible and to report all materials
recycled to city staff. This program will diven 1.6 percent of the waste stream (870
tons ).
3. The collection of high-grade office paper from the commercial sector will diven 3.5
percent of the waste stream (1,937 tons).
Medium Term to 2000
By the end of the medium term, Dublin is projected to have achieved a.diversion rate of
54.4 percent.
Waste Types Targeted for Diversion. The following additional waste typeS have been
targeted for diversion in the medium teml:
City of DUUa
1',..;...,..... ,..... ,...,...,...,,~~ "~~
_.----~.... -.....,...,~.-
4-4
· All materials commonly recovered at a material recoveIY facility (MRF), baclcing out
the. yard and concrete/asphalt waste.
Objectives.
1. Participate in evaluating a regional :MRF altemative which would accept all of
Dublin's nomesidential waste to that facility, diverting 17.1 percent of the. waste
stream (9,444 tons).
Market Development Objectives
CCR Section 18735.1 requires SRR Elements to contain a statement ofmar.ket development
objectives to be achieved in the shon-and medimn-teon planning periods. In addition to the
market development objectives which follow, this subject is discossed extensively in subsequent
sections of this chapter and in Appendix D.
1. Encourage the local siting of commercial recycling processing facilities, especially
those employing processing procedures wbich enhance material quality.
2. Encourage the local siting of enteIprise wbich use recycled material feedstock.
3. Continue pmsuit of the option of enabling Dublin to become a Recycling Market
Development Zone.
4. Publicize the CIWMB' s Material Exchange Program (CALMAX), a cl~s~ed ad
listing for "waste" materials available and wanted throughout Califomia.
RECYCLING COMPONENT EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing recycling activities in Dublin accounted for 22.5 percent ~ the total solid waste
generated in 1990. No existing recycling activities wilfbe phased out or decreased in the shon
or medium teon. The fonowing infomation is provided per CCR Sections 18733.2 and 18735.2.
In September 1990, Dublin 'contracted with its franchised waste hauler, Livemlore-Dublin
Disposal, a division of Oak-land Scavenger Company, to provide a three-bin curbside recycling
program for single family residences in Dub~ with a.provision to expand this service to Dublin
multifamily residences in the future. In addition, since 1986, Dublin has contracted with
Liveonore-Dublin Disposal to provide as part of its base solid waste collection service a quarterly
cleanup program.
CJty or DabllD
4-5
Recycling activity is not bound by city or county jurisdictional boundaries. Therefore, in
order to track: as much existing recycling activity for materials generated in the City (Jf Dublin,
all relevant sources in the greater Bay Area were contacted. Those responding are indicated in
Table 4-1.
The data collect~ analyzed, and summarized in the following tables were derived from
written survey responses, telephone interviews, and relevant reports. Where infonnation was
provided for multiple jurisdictions without specificity, allocations were made on the basis of
population to all relevant jurisdictions.
In order to secure 'data from commercial sources in highly competitive businesses, it is
necessary to present this data in such a manner as to prech1de specific numbers directly
associated with specific businesses. Therefore, only aggregated numbers, shown in Table 4-2,
will be presented apart from the listing businesses responding.
RECYCLING CO:MPONENT EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
This section includes an evaluation of the recycling diveISion altern~tives that State Planning
Guidelines require cities to consider for local impleml'!ntation. In accordance with
Section 18735.3 of the State of Califomia Planning Guide1i71es and Procedures for Preparing and
Revision Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plans (State Planning Guidelines), recycling
alternatives to be considered include the following:
· Source separation of recyclable materialS
· Drop-off recycling centers
· Buy-back recycling centers
· Manual material recovery operations
· Mechanical material recovery facilities
· Salvage at solid waste facilities
Separation at Source _
This altcmative. entails the removal of recyclable materials at the source of waste generation.
Such an activity will involve segregation of the recyclable mMfl'rial!ll from the regular waste
stream and their separate storage. A program of source separation must also involve a separate
collection program for segregated recyclable marfl'rials. Source .separation programs can be
developed as voluntary or, by regulatory requirement, mannariTlg participation.
Effectiveness in Reduction of Waste. Material separated at somce and collected will result
in high rate of recovery, especially if accompanied by an ordinance mandating such separation.
Hazards Created. If material is not stored in containers prior to collection, and set out
loose, there is the potential for litter and attraction of vectors.
~
CJcy or DabUD
Priated oa recycled DII~r
.m""'-~lJ:ItN':MA~_,I.
Table 4-1 Businesses Contacted for Recycling Waste Diversion Study
City of Dublin
Alum. Rock&. Food
Company Metals Cans Paper Glass Plastic Asphalt Tires wastes
Recycling Data Provided
2 Independent supennarketsb .[
AD2020a , .[ .[ .[
Action Recycllnga .[ .[ .[ .[
Alco Iron &. Metal Co. a .{ .{ .{ .[
~ Day IJolymcra .[
enl West Scrap Metals Co.b .[
Circo Recyclers- .{ .[ .[
Container Recovery Corporation- .{ .[ .[ ..[ .[
Envlpco CaUrond. Co.. .[ ..[ .[
Fitch &. Associates. ..[
,
llillman Metals- .[
Independent Renderen- ,(
l..aVlsta Quarry- ,- {
Llvennore Auto Recycllngb .[ .[ .[
-
Uvenllore-Dublin Disposal - curbsideb .[ .[' .{ .[
Luckyb .{
Oxford Tire. .{
Paper Recovery or Nortllern California Inc.- .{
f'
Table 4-1 Businesses Contacted lor Recycling Waste Diversion Study
Cley 01 Dublin (continued)
Alum. Rock&. Food
Company Melals Cans Paper Glass Plaslic Aspball Ures wasles
Recycle Now Inc. a { { { I" t
Royal Tallow &. Soap. ,
Safewayb { I"
--
Secondary fiber. I"
, 11,e Sullu Co.a I"
WaslC fiber Hecovery. I"
Wesl Coasl Melnls Process Inc.- /" .j
Weyerhauser Paper Co.- I"
Quantitative Recycling Data Nol Available
Aaron Melals .j I"
Allstaac .( { { {
American Metals { .j
Appling &. Sons Recycllng . .( I" .f .f .f
Berkeley Iron &. Metals, Inc.
iloilo's m ferrous &. Non-ferrolls Melals .( I"
California Cline .f
Coles Aulo Wrecking {
CommunilY l~ecycnnl Center { .j { .f .f
-
Dave's Recycling .f { .f
Table 4-1 BlIslnesses Contacted for Recycling Waste Diversion Study
City or Dublin (continued)
r.=
. Alum. Rock&. Food
Company Melals Cans Paper OIass Plasllc Asphall TIres wasles
---
Encore .[
Pounlni" RuUdina Demolhion, Inc.
Gaylord Container I"
Independent Paper Stock, Inc. I" I" I" I"
John Dollo I"
,
, KMC Paper I" I" I" I"
I.akeslde Export, Inc. I"
Lakesldc Non-Ferroul MCCall I" I"
Major Salvaac Co.
Nordle", California Pulp &: Paper Co. ..{
Paper Tradc Inc. .[
Pelers Scrap Iron &: Meaal I
Radomsky Salvage Co.
Sclmllzcr SId. I I
.'
Slandard Iron &. Metal I .{
Tri-Golden Services "
Velss-Zaken Scrnp Metal &: Iron I
W. C. Rose ..{ f
-uuslllesses COlllllCleo mal rovloea recycling aaut on a coumY-WllIC OIlS IS.
p
bDusincsses contacled Ihal provided city-spectnc recyclina dala.
Table 4-2 Existing Recycling Quantities -1990
City of Dublin
~~~~~;:;~~.:...... ',; ..~.~<<.~::. .......":.: .:t!j~..~" "",... ",: . .. ..... ...... .....;. . .~~.. . .:.:-: :.....:.~ .::::~.;;
.... . -.'.... .
High-density polyethylene (HDPE) containers
Polyethylene terephth~ l~te (PET) con~;ners
Film plastics
Other lastics
:~.till~~it~.t1:m._i.
Rcfill.able glass beverage containers
Califamia Redemption Value glass*
Other recyclable glass
Other non- Iable
A}nmmmn cans
Bi-metal r.onrn;n~ .
Feaous metals and tin cans
Non-feaous metals in.cl. alum. saap
White goods
Other metals
:~__~i~r~~~~.w&~t~i!l.
Food waste
Rubber products
Wood wastes
Agricultural crop residues -
Manure
Textiles and leather
Other miscellaneous . cs
Inert solids in.cl. concrete, asphalt
Gypsum wallboard
Household hazardous materials*.
Other
sr<:':::''''''':..'.W'~1f.*~Jf-m.~'j_.
* Includes all recycled coominer glass.
** Includes containerS and contents.
Residenri~1
(mc1udcs AB2020 & Non-ftSideDrial
curbside)
tons tonS. 'Total
1.526
172
72S
153
581
240
97
109
4-
7'2.
9
4
12
1
13
12
1
:SititOrat."Th_Il~~~t%a~~;lit~~~
697
937
97
Siblo~_~W.tf@f#1...,.:: ~'%:1~~~~:~
2
4-
110
146
300
111
8
182
146
300
.....x:.:.. .;(.:;..:.::..-:.:-:....;...,. .....~ ........:......;.', ..x..~......... ...
" .. :.~~.v... ..."':.. . . ..~>>" ..... :i
105
105
29
29
:SQtjfj~~.i41t~l;~~*lll'lfli9~~i1\1m
7;zTl
7;1.71
:SUli6r_i:W_f6Wiil$l~:~:..".: ::;.;., -.~..~ :tf~ml
7fW91
4-10
Ability to Accommodate Change. Subdivided tmcks and storage containers provided may
limit flexibility in adapting to new materials or widely changing proportions of existing materials.
Single material collection may be more flexible.
Consequences on the Waste. If a particular material is mandated for source separation and
collection, a generator may look to altemative materials to avoid the additional effort.
Implementable in Short or Medium Term. Can be implemented within short term.
Need for. ExpandingIBuiIding Facilities. Some facility expansion or building may be
required to accommodate the sorting and processing of the material' collected.
Consistency with Local Conditions. Source separated collection of residential recyclables
is required under Dublin's cmrent franchise.
Institutional Barriers to Implementation. None
Estimate of Costs. $1.50 to 2.00 per household per month is the general range for net costs
based on a survey of curbside recycling programs in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Availability of End Uses of Diverted Materials. End use markets for newspaper, PET,
rin and aluminum cans, and glass containers are plentiful in the greater San Francisco Bay Area
for any such matP-ri;lls generated. Yard waste marlcets will be available as public uses, both
individual and institutional.
Drop-OfT Recycling Centers
These facilities are designed to facilitate the donation of selected materials for recycling by
the public. Material from both the residential and non-residential waste streams are impacted.
The public contributes the m~t~al and provides the transpOrt to the site. The site may be staffed
or unstaffed; accessible or not after nonnal homs.
Effectiveness in Reduction of Waste. Fairly limited if in conjunction with
source-separated curbside collection. Some increase in volume recovered may be anticipated if
material types not separately collected are included. .
Hazards Created. If unstaff~ or accessible when staff is absent, the potential for illegal
dumping and littering is high.
Ability to Accommodate Change. Can accommodate material quantity and/or type changes
easily within a relatively short time frame and with minimum expenditure.
Consequences on the Waste.. None
CIty of Dablln
4-11
Implementable in Short or Medium Term. Drop-off sites can be put in place in the shon
term.
Need for Expanding/BuDding Facilities. Adequate paved spaces with good access, at
convenient locations for the public and avoidance of unsightly appearance will be IeqUired in
addition to the contalnCl'S and signage for the material to be accepted. '
Consistency with Local Conditions. The siting of drop-off facilities will be consistent with
local conditions.
Institutional Barriers to Implementation. Possible siting problems such as NIMBY
reactions, particularly if the site is to be unstaffed and susceptible to littering and vanda1i~.
Estimate of Costs. $300 to $2,000 per stoIage container, $7 per square yard of paving, and
$12 per linear foot of fencing.
Availability of End Uses of Diverted Materials. Materials accepted will be related
directly to the existence of end use m3Ikets.
Buy-back Recycling Centers
These facilities are generally multi-material and are equipped with truck and platfOIID. scales,
paymaster space. They are often connected with additional sorting and processing facilities.
Effectiveness in Reduction of Waste. Good potential directly related to the pricing of the
material. As market prices dip, material delivered for sale decreases.
Hazards Created. None, if traffic management is adequate.
Ability to Accommodate Change. Pricing mechm1;~s make it easy to accommodate
change in quantities, qualities, or material types desired.
Consequences on the Waste. High pricing for selected material types may encOUrage
generators to shift from less valuable or wholly nonrecyc1able materials.
Implementable in Short or Medium Term. Can be implemented in the shon term.
Need for Expanding/Building Facilities. Usually required as an addition to planned
sorting/processing facilities.
Consistency with Local Conditions. Buy-back is fully consistent with commercial
commodity markets present in the Greater San Francisco Bay Area.
City or Dablla
"D,..;"f~ ..._ __I...,.... "..,.~...
4-12
Institutional Barriers to Implementation. None apart from the siting problems inherent
in the larger sorting/processing facility. There may be some difficulty arising out of increased
traffic generation.
Estimate of Costs. Minimal increment to sorting/processing facility cost.
Availability of End Uses of Diverted Materials. Buying l1Ultnjal must be directly related
to immediate availability of end use markets.
Manual Material Recovery Operations (MMRO)
An M:MRO relies on hand picking of materials that are typically deposited at a transfer
station or landfill site by a variety of vehicles delivering commercial, industrial, constmction, and
demolition debris. For this type of operation, a concrete pad for depositing the materials is
preferable, though not required. A dedicated area for the sorting keeps the sotteI'S away from
normal waste disposal operations.
Waste Diversion Potential. The potential amount of material divened from the
nomesidential waste stream utilizing an M:MRO can be moderately high.
Hazards .Creation. Although there are several hazards which arise in an MMRO facility,
they can be minimi7.ed by a safety-oriented operation sttategy and a wc11-designed facility layout.
.
The number of vehicles and the variety of equipment used can create potential hazards
to workers. Proper traffic management and a training program related to equipment
use can mitigate these hazards.
.
The volume and diverse characteristics of the waste ir:self can presem a hazard to
workers. Therefore, protective gear such as bard hats, gloves, ear protection, eye
protection, and dnst masks arc essential.
.
~azardous materials that are illegally disposed present hazards. A load-cl1e,.1nng
program can minimi7.p. hazards and identify generators (see Household Hazardous
Waste Elem~nt).
Ability to Accommodate Economic, Technological, and Social Change. The effect of
economic changes on an MMRO is expected to be moderate.
The recent wave of activity in the solid waste indnstty is triggering attention to developing
mechanical processes for extracting recyclables from Waste. It is m1ricipated that the :MMR.O will
have a high ability to incorporate technologies that are proven, as they become viable. The
ability of the facility to accommodate social change will be high.
Shift in Waste Type Generation. An MMRO will have no effect on shifts in waste
generation nor be affected by them.
0"" of Dablln
.
4-13
Ease of Implementation. A significant amount of planning may be required in the
implementation of an MMRO, including siting, j)"!nnitting, approval, economic evaluatiOn, and
facility design and construction. Implementation may be achieved in the short- and will be
achievable in the medium-term planning periods.
Facility Needs. An M:MR.O requires a facility that can safely receive, process, store, and'
haul material to markets.
Coosistency With Local Conditions. If a regional facility were developed, Dublin could
consider participation.
Institutional Barriers to Implementation. Siting a new MMRO could be difficnlt due to
local NIMBY reaction against the siting of any solid waste facility. Development of a MMRO
at an existing transfer station or landfill would cause less local opposition. Although there is
currently a lack: of aflPlOPriate1y zoned sites within Dublin, this represents an obstacle but not
a barrier to implementation.
Estimate of Costs. There are marginal costs involved in the establishment of an MMRO,
sited at an existing solid waste facility, wbich can be partially offset by revenues from materials
extracted and sold. No such solid waste facility exists in Dublin and an MRF is the more likely
regional facility of this type.
A vaiJability of End Uses of Diverted Materials. The MMRO is designed to extract a
limited variety of mlltP.rial~ that can be easily marketed.
Mechanical Material Recovery Facility (MRF)
A mechanical MRF differs from manual matP.rial~ recovery operations in how matP.rial~ are
handled after they are unloaded from the collection vehicles. An MMRO is typically a
labor-intensive "dump and pick" type facility, while a MRF is usnally equipped with special
material handling and processing components such as conveyms, balers, and magnets, to name
just a few.
-
Waste Diversion Potential. The potential amount of material diverted from the
nomesidp.ntial waste_ stream utilizing an MRF can be relatively high.
Hazards Creation. Other than traffic, potential hazards to surrounding areas such as noise
and dust can be mitigated.
The Operation of an MRF can CICate potential hazards to workers considering the number
of vehicles and variety of equipment required. As mechmn7M"ion of recovery increases, the
hazards of operation will also increase. As with the MMRO, proper traffic management and
employee safety training can mitigate much of these.
CIty of Dalllla
Priated oa rec:yded paJler
~
4-14
A potential hazard to personnel is present due to the volume and diverse characteristics of
the waste itself. These hazards can be minimi'7ed by providing workers with protective gear such
as hard hats, gloves, ear and eye protection, and dust masks.
Another hazard could be presented by hazardous ~ that are illegally disposed. These
situations can be mitigated by instituting a load-checking program and identifying the generators.
Ability to Accommodate Economic, Technological, and SOc:ia1 (:bange. The effect of
economic changes on an MRF is expected to be moderate.
The recent wave of activity in the solid waste industty is triggering attention to developing
mechanical processes for extracting recyclables from waste. It is anticipated that the MRF will
have a high ability to incorporate technologies that are proven, as they become viable. The
ability of the facility to accommodate social change is high.
Shift in Waste Type Generation. An MRF will have no effect on shifts in waste
generation nor be affected by them.
Ease of Implementation. A significant amount of planning is required in the
implementation of an MRF, including siting, permitting, approval, economic evaluation, and
facility design and COnstIUction. This may be achieved in the shOlt- and can be achieved in the
medium-teml planning periods.
Facility Needs. An MRF requires a facility that can safely receive, process, store, and haul
materials to markets. Facility requirements are high.
Consistency with Local Conditions. H a regional facility were developed, Dublin could
consider panicipation.
Institutional Barriers to Implementation. There are a number of potential bmicIs to a
facility. First, the existing collection franchise with Oakland Scavenger wID have to be reviewed
to determine whether it needs to be revised to accommodate an MRF. Dublin's cum:nt franchise
with Liveonore Dublin Disposal, a division of Oakland Scavenger, expires in April 1996.
Second, there may be a problem with acquiring building permits for an expansion of the Davis
Street Transfer Station, should that be the preferred site. Fmally, there may be a problem ofwaste
flow control should a facility be owned and/or operated by any party other than the franchised
hauler.
Estimate of Costs. There are significant costs involved in the establishment of an MRF,
wbich can be partially offset by revenues from materials exttaeted and sold. Savings can be
realized by panicipating in a regional facility of this type (see Appendix B for detailed cost data).
These costs are applicable to Dublin because the city will be participating in a regional or
subregional MRF. Dublin's portion of the capital and operational costs will be based on their
throughput tonnage.
Oty of Dablla
.
4-15
Availability of End Uses of Diverted Materials. The MRF has been designed to extract
only those materials that can be easily marlceted.
Salvage at Solid Waste Facilities
Salvage at solid waste facilities, typically l:miffiTI$ and transfer Stations, involves an attempt
to extract recyc1ables from the waste stream at the Jantffi11 face or on the tipping floor of the
transfer station. Time and waste disposal requirements generally limit such extraction to those
bulky materials that are easy to identify and remove, such as corrugated cardboard, wood, and
metals. Since Dublin has no solid waste faCJ1ities, this altemative is not considered a viable ODe. '
Effectiveness in Reduction of Waste. Salvage at solid waste facilities is marginally
effective in contributing to the reduction of waste.
,Hazards Created. The principal hazard associated with salvaging operations is that arising
from worlreIs interfering with the ongoing disposal operation. Getting in the way of heavy
waste-moving loadexs, for example, can be dangerous.
Materials handling in this environment is also potentially hazardous in ways discussed in
the previous two alternatives.
Ability to Accommodate Change. The flexibility to accommodate change is su~nriany
limited by the pressures of the waste removal operation which has high priority at such fiI~1iries.
Shift in Waste Type Generation. An operation of this type will have no effect on shifts
in waste generation nor be impacted by them.
Ease of Implementation. An operation of this type can be easily implemented at any solid
waste facility.
Facility Needs. Dublin has no transfer station, transfcmnationor solid waste disposal
facilities. Therefore, no salvage operation is possible.
CODSistency with Local ConditioDS. As there are no solid waste facilities in Dublin, this
alternative is highly- inconsistent with local conditions.
Institutional Barriers to Implementation. It is most lmH1cp.ly that. a solid waste facility
will be sited in Dublin, but participation in efforts to develop a regional program of salvaging
at existing solid waste transfer stations or disposal sites would be a possibility. .
Estimate of Costs. A salvage operation can be implemc::nted at marginal costs, ntt1i7ing
existing labor and equipment.
Availability of End Uses of Diverted Materials. Only materials with established end use
markets would. be salvaged.
f .
CIty of DUIID
Prillted 011 ~cJf!d __"
m"'~~
4-16
Additional Recycling Options
Section 18735.5 of the State Planning Guidel11'1es requires consideration of the fonowing
recycling options:
.
Changing zonmg and building codes to encourage recycling.
Methods to increase markets for recycled materials.
Actions to encourage handling to preserve material integrity. .'
.
.
These options are discussed below. An additional required discussion, changing existing
rates to encourage solid waste recycling, has been discussed previously in Chapter 3.
Changing Zoning and Building Codes to Encourage Recycling. Storage and collection
of recyclables from points of generation are often hampered by inadequate allocation of space
for storage containers and by limited access to such storage areas by conection ttncks. This
limited access is commonly a combination o~ IWIOW width access lanes and no tom around
opportonity for the vehicles. These space and access deficiencies are most often to be found in
multifamily complexes, office pa:dcs, shopping malls, and concentrated commercial downtown
areas.
These deficiencies are subject to signifiCant mitigation in revised building codes requiring
adequate design to accommodate efficient removal of discarded m~tmtJl Existing codes will be
reviewed with such mitigation in mind.
Various f01lIls of recycling activities, such as drop-off and buy-back: sites, and, to a lesser
extent, materials recovery faciJjries, would be better suited to their purpose if located
conveniently for use by the public. Well designed facilities could be located in commercial and
light industrial areas. Zoning restrictions will be evaluated to detennine if any barrierS exist in
such sitings and, if so, whether they can be safely removed.
Methods to Increase Markets for Recycled Materials. As a jurisdiction in the greater San
Francisco Bay Area, Dublin is fortunate in having ready access to almost all West Coast and
many export marlc:ets, particolarly in the Pacific Rim. Consequently, efforts to inci:ease markets
will be most useful in increasing the quantity and especially the quality of recovered materials.
In this regard, Dublin will cooperate with other Alameda County jurisdictions and the County
Waste Management Authority to achieve positive results. Dublin recog:nizes- that such
cooperation may be extended to other counties and jurisdictions in the Bay Area. A market
analysis is included as Appendix D in this SRR Element. State and local efforts are smnmm'T.M
bel~. .
Local Policies. To the extent it is consist with Dublin's development plans, those
enteIprises processing or otherwise ~haTlcing the quality of recyclables as well as those utilizing
recycled feedstock will be encomaged to site their facilities within the city. Additionally, as
mentioned in Chapter 3, the Dublin city government will explore purchasing procedures which
establish a price preference for the purchase o~ recycled materials.
CIty of DabUD
4-17
State Polides. The State of Califomia recognizes that matkets need to be developed to
consume the collected secondary materials and several bills were passed in 1989 introducing state
programs. The Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board will implement most of these
programs. Procurement, mJ~ development, and recycling investment tax credit are three
areas which the State is focusing on for ~t ~velopment.
· Procurement promotes the purchase of recycled products. An example of In:OCU1'eDlent
legislation is AB 4 which requires both state and local procuring agencies to give
purchase preference to speci:tic recycled products over nonrecycled products when
price and quality are comparable.
· Industrial development programs combine economic development and waste diversion
by providing incentives for manufactUrers which consume waste matP.riaI~. SB 1322
established the Recycling MaIket Development Zones program. Dublin would
consider becoming a Recycling Market Development Zone. The program provides
financial and regulatory incentives for particular manufacturers to site in these zones.
· The Recycling Investment Tax Credit program provides incentive for manufactUrers
to purchase equipment that conswnes waste materials generated in Califomia and
produces finished products composed of these materials.
..
ActioDS to Encourage Handling to Preserve Material Integrity. AIl other factors being
equal, Dublin will strive to encourage those recovery efforts that maximize segICgation at the
source. Source separation is especially valid for high grade papers, . yard waste; and glass. If
sorting is required, Dublin prefers hand-sorting over mechanical separation for all materials that
would be- downgraded by passing through met'l1an;cal systems.
Public vs. Private Ownership/Operation
Section 18735.3 further requires an evaluation of public vs. private ownership and/or
operations of recycling facilities.
The underlying imperative for local jurisdictions when considP.ring the various options for
public or private ownership and/or operations of recycling programs and facilities is that of public
responsibility. Regardless of the option(s) chosen, the local jurisdiction remains responsible for
waste management and, especially under AB 939, for the results of waste reduction and recycling
efforts in their commODity.
There is a continuum of public control that is manm;'7P.Ci with public ownership and
operation and m;n1m;'1',ed with private ownership and operatio~ with varying combinations of
public ownership and private operation falling in between. Other advantages and disadvantages
for the public jurisdiction are noted below.
. Ot)' of Da"
Prl~ _ ~e~ "I".......
4-18
Public Ownership and Operation
Advantages. Direct control and access to data. Primacy of policy compliance over short-
term negative profit conditions. Stability of operation over changing market conditions with
access to a1temative revenue sources.
Disadvantages. Probably need to hire exterD:U expertise or allow for significmt intcmal
leaming curve. Possible legal or administtative constraints to shOIt-teml marketing flexibility.
Similar constraints to flexible staffing changes.
Private Ownership and Operation
Advantages. Potentially quick start-up of ~ons. Immediate expertise without a
leaming curve. MaIket and staffing flexibility (the latter less so if the industty is unionized).
Availability of private capital resources.
Disadvantages. Loss of direct operational control and data access, requiring more intensive
monitoring. Breaks in policy compliance motivated by short-teml negative profit market
conditions.
Analysis of Alternatives
Dublin cmrently provides single family residences wbich have chosen to have garbage
collection service a residential curbside collection progI31ll for source sepaxatetf recyclables. The
city intends to contract to extend this curbside collection service to multi-famiIy residences. The
city will also consider contracting to establish a commercial source-sepatated wbite office paper
collection progI31ll. High-grade office paper represents 13.4 peICCnt of comm~ waste
disposal. An additional expansion of source separation programs will be efforts by the city to
require city projectS to divert loads of concrete and asphalt inert wasteS to GpJ.110priate recycling
facilities. Inert solids represent 4.2 percent of waste disposed.
There are no CUIIeDt plans in Dublin to establish drop-off or buy-back facijjries. The
amount of additional waste divened via such far.11iries would not be as cost-effective as other
progI31lls planned for implementation.
Dublin will consider participating in effortS to develop a regional MRF for additional
processing and diversion of wastes. Participation by Dublin would be considered in order for the
city to achieve the mandate of 50 percent diversion of wastes by 2000. The MRF will target the
commercial and industrial sectors which are not included in the IeSidential curbside progI31ll.
The high-grade office paper collected in the commercial recycling program would have an
exU'Clnely low recovery rate at a MRF; therefore, this progI31ll will continue after participation
in a MRF begins. Waste types that represent high percentages of the total waste disposed (e.g.,
wood waste-8.2 percent; non-feII'Ous metals-1.8 percent) have high recovery rates at a MRF.
CIty of DabUa
4-19
RECYCLING COMPONENT PROGRAM SELECTION
Recycling program selection for Dublin has been based. on the results of the above
evaluation of alternatives, the Solid Waste Generation Study, and on the ease of implementation
by the city. The existing recycling activities are achieving 22.5 percent diversion. ShoIt-teim
programs will add 6.3 percent to the total waste diverted.
Short Term to 1995
Based on the levels of various materials reported in the waste characterization component,
the existing recycling activities in Dablin and the review and analysis of alternatives, the
following have been selected to enhance short tenn divemon and to meet the mandated diversion
goal of 50 percent by the year 2000.
Expansion of Residential Curbside Collection. Expansion of the residential curbside
collection program carried out by the city's franchised hauler, LiveImore-Dablin Disposal, a
division of Oakland Scavenger, will be accomplished by requiring mandatory garbage collection
service, a step wbich would expand residential cmbside collection to all single-family houses in
the City. The City will also consider adding all multi-family households to the single families
now receiving1'eSidential cmbside collection service and increasing program participation through
enhanced publicity and community organi7arion. Assuming a recovery rate of 50 percent for all
the remaining matP.rial~, we anticipate an additional divexsion of 1.2 percent of the total waste
stream (662 tons).
Direction of Specified Inert Loads to Recycling Facilities. It is estimated that
approximately 1,740 tons per year of concrete/asphalt generated in Dablin are cum:nt1y disposed
at area landfills. Since there are existing commercial facilities in and around Alameda County
that will accept this material for recycling, such as GallagJ1er & Burk, and American Rock and
Asphalt, the city will undertake to ensure, through its issuance of construction and demolition
pemrits, that such loads be diverted. to such recycling facilities. In addition, the recycling of
generated concrete/asphalt will be made a part of an relevant city contracts. Assuming that
50 percent of the material is -acceptable to recycling rnr.11iries. an adrlirionaldiveISion of 1.6
percent of the total waste stream is anticipated (870 tons).
High-Grade Paper Recycling. It is estimated that approximately 3,995 tons per year of
high-grade paper generated in Dublin are cum:nt1y disposed at the landfill The city will
undertake a commercial source separated high-grade office paper collection program. Assuming
a recovery rate of 50 percent of the high-grade paper now going to landfill, an additional
diversion of 3.5 percent of the total waste stream is ant1Qpated (1,930 tons).
City of DablID
PriDted GO rec:ycJed paper
~
4-20
Medium Term to 2000
Given the enhancement programs in the shon term noted above, adding approximately 6.3
percent to the 24.4 percent divetSion CUIre11tly enjoyed, the programs implemented in the shon
term will leave 19.1 percent to be added to reach the SO percent diversion required by the year
2000.
Participation in a Regional MRF. In preparation for the time a regional MRF comes on
line to which Dublin may direct its nomesidential waste stream, Dublin will take such steps as
are necessary to insure that such direction of said waste stream can take place. Backing out the
material already being diverted by programs described above, the remaining diversion of
recyclables from Dublin's waste will provide an additional diversion of 17.1 percent of the total
waste stream (9,444 tons).
Unfavorable Market Conditions
H unfavorable marlret conditions seem likely to prevent Dublin reaching the 25 and SO
percent diversion goals, measures to be taken may include:
· Enhanced efforts to increase quality since there is rarely a zero market and maIket
share will go to those with the best quality materiaL
· Shift of targeted material to more marketable components.
· Consideration of temporary storage if unfavozable marlcet conditions are deemed to be
. short term.
RECYCLING COMPONENT PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
This section discusses implementation of those programs selected and discussed in the
previous section. Table 4-3 shows an implementation sclicdule for recycling programs. The
composting program will be funded through direct user fees.
The planning estimate of the cost of expanding Dublin's existing residential curbside
. collection program is $28,800 per year. The costS associated with implementing a policy to
encourage diversion of concrete and asphalt inert wastes to recycling facility are estimated at
$1,500 per year for program implementation. The costS associated with implementation of a
commercial office high-grade paper recycling program are estimated at $11,000 per year.
Government Agencies Responsible tor Implementation. The Dublin City Manager's
Office will be responsible for coordinating the implementation of all programs selected.
City 0( Dablla
"...:-......... n-_ ~ ...,.......... ,..,...._
Table 4.3. New and Expanded Recycling Program Implementation Task Schedule
City of Dublin
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Task description Implementing entity 1 2 3 I 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
RECYCLING PROGRAMS ,
Residential Curbside Expansion DCCa
-Contact existing recycling , .
contraclor
-Develop prosram .
-Slart-up expanded prosram .
-Monilor and cvalualc . Onsolng
Office Recycling Program DCMOblPCcC
-Idcnlify additional rccyclablcs . ,
-Conlract for additional services .
-Slart-up expaqded recycling .
programs
-Monllor and evalualc . Ongoing
,
Dln:ct Inerts DCMOIDCC
-RevilO City poUcy .
-Slart-up program .
-Monitor and evalualc . Ongoing
-DubUn CllY CouncU
boubUn Clly Managcr's Offlcc
cPrivate contract collector
51 tMRPORTS\DUBl.JN\DUBUN.TO
4-22
Expausion of Residential Curbside Collection. City staff will continue discussions with
Oakland Scavenger to determine a program and scbedule for canying out and monitoring an
expansion of panicipation from cmrent levels including the addition of service to multi-family
residences.
Direction of Inert Loads. Staff will initiate a city-wide ordinance that will mandate the
diversion of acceptable loads of concrete and asphalt generated in Dublin to a facili~ that
recycles these materials. Costs will be mainly administrative and there will be no revenue
genentted
High-Grade Paper Recycling. City staff and the private contract collector will conduct
a stUdy to identify additional commercial sources of high-grade paper for recycling. Other
activities for implementation include negotiating changes to the collection contract and then
starting up the expanded program. The estimated dates for each step of implementation are given
in Table 4-3.
Participation in a Regional MRF. Staff will panicipate in any process involving the
evaluation of developing an MRF to wbich Dublin could send its nonresidential waste. One
action already taken in this regard was a stUdy undertaken in 1991 by Brown Vence and
Associates, consultants to the Alameda County Waste Management Authority. This stUdy
evaluated the costs and feasibility of siting one or more regional MRF's and/or composting
facilities. Dublin will provide input to this stUdy and will review and comment on its findings.
In addition. staff will evaluate and take whatever action is required with respect to Dublin's
franchised hauler to facilitate the city's ability to panicipate in the MRF. A timeline, similar to
Figure 4-1, will be developed to detail impleme11ta1ion before 2000.
Unauthorized Removal of Recyclables
CCR Section 18733.5 requires the recycling component of an SRR Element to address
actions planned to deter unauthorized removal o~ recyclable materials. It is imponant to note that
any program in wbich the material to be collected fore recycling is accessible to unauthorized
persons is subject to "scavenging," ie., the unauthorized removal of some or all of these
materials by unauthorized parties. Since, in most cases, the economics of such programs include -
the potential revenues from collected materials, such scavenging can have significant impact on
program viability. 'ThiS problem is made worse for the public jurisdiction involved in that the
tracking of scavenged materials for local diversion credit is vinnally impossible. To deter such
unauthorized removal of recyclables, Dublin will publicize the imponancc of not allowing
unauthorized scavenging of recyclables and will encourage its citizens to repon scavenging in
progress. The city will enforce its anti-scavenging ordinance along with state law.
City of DabUa
Tasks
Environmental
Pennits (Start 3/95)
Site Selection
Design Services RFP
Process
Facility Design
Construction Bid
Process
Equipment Procurement
Building Pennits
FacUlty Pennits
FacUlty Construction
Equipment Installation
Equipment Testing
Public Information
Facility Start.Up
Year
1996
1997
1999
2000
1998
Figure 4-1. MRF Implementation Schedule (Medium Term)
4-24
RECYCLING COMPONENT MONITORING AND EVALUATION
There are several methods to quantify and monitor achievement of objectives. These are
discussed and analyzed below. .
Solid Waste Generation Study. Monitoring of waste generation, disposal, and diversion
may be accomplished through the peIfonnance of periodic Solid Waste Generation Studies
(SWGS). SWGS must be peIfonned in accordance with Chapter 9, Article 6.1, Section 18722
of the California Code of Regulations. This section of the State Planning Guidelines for
Preparing and Revising Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plans requires each
jurisdiction preparing an SRR Element to submit to the Califomia Integrated Waste Management
Board (ClWMB) an annual analysis of whether there is a need to zevise the SWGS. H the
jurisdiction or the CIWMB make a detfo.nnination that a revision of the SWGS is rcqui:red, a
revised SWGS will need to be prepared. .
As defined in the zegulations, the total waste generated is:
GEN = DISP + DIVERT
where the total quantity of solid waste generated within a jurisdiction (GEN) equals the waste
disposed at permitted solid waste facilities (DISP) plus the total quantity of solid waste generated
within said jurisdiction wbich is divened from such disposal through source reduction, zecycling,
and composting programs (DIVERT). In the medium term, ttansfonnation may be counted as
contributing a maximum of ten percent to the diversion. The SWGS needs to be repzesentative
of the sources of solid waste generation, and of solid waste categories such. as residential,
commercial, etc. and be sensitive to seasonal variations. Additionally, the SWGS must be' canied
out in such a manner as to characterize the various snbstreams by material types.
Allowable monitoring methodologies include quantitative field analysis (sampling), tracking
of material flows through the jurisdiction, the use of jurisdiction specific published data, and the
use of existing data from statisti~y comparable jurisdictions.
DISP. Regardl~ of the characterization methodology used, disposal data is most
commonly secured by tracking quantities and waste categories delivered to permitted solid waste
facilities, i.e. transfer stations and landfills. While ~ingly straightforward, this process is
complicated by the following factors:
· V chicles delivering waste to the facility are not unifonnly weighed in and out. Small
self haul vehicles are almost never weighed. .
· Vehicles are not consistendy tracked by the generation S01JICe (i.e. jurisdiction) of the
waste they are transporting.
rt.... ,..# n.....Jf~
4-25
· Vehicles are not consistently tracked' as to the catcgoxy of waste they ate cmying.
This factor, too, is further complicated by the fact that more than one waste categoxy
may be carried in the same load. For ~ple, waste from multifamily ~deuces is
often commingled with commercial wastes on commercial collection routes.
DIVERT. Trar.Inng of diversion through recycling historically has been accomplished by
surveying of businesses and public operations engaged in the collection, processing, and
marketing of recyclables. The businesses involved ate in a highly competitive maz:ket place and
are generally reluctant to release data, particnlarly source or material specific data. This data
. collection process, already possessed of limited reliability is further complicated by the following:
· Securing data specific to a particular jurisdiction is new. It is contrary to the real way
recyclables flow through the marlc:etplace with no regard to jurisdictional boundaries.
Businesses generally .keep records as to the identity of the patty from whom they
received the material. This patty is not necessarily the generating source.
· Recyclables commonly pass through a number of bands before reaching an end user,
thereby making the problem of double counting a substantial one.
· The definition of recycling diversion that "countS" has been narrowed by State
regulation, requiring entities to distinguish one from the other in ways not heretofore
necessary .
Waste characterization has been evaluated using a variety of SWGS methodologies as
indicated.
Quantitative Field Analysis. This has traditionally been the most commonly used method
for characterizing the solid waste stream.. Random sampling of various type truckloads entering
the solid waste facility is most often caIIied out.
This sampling has historically under rated the heterogeneity of the solid waste stream,
especially the various non-residential categories. The number of samples have consequemly been .
- too few, resulting in very wide variances at acceptable confidence levels. These wide variances
make. planning very uncertain in tcnns of the predictability of futme composition.
Tracking of Material Flows. This methodology involves the tracking of a material type
(ego glass containers) generated or coming into the jurisdiction and remaining there until
discarded. Therefore, it requires an identification of every source for this material (generator,
distributor, etc.) and surveying them to ascertain that percentage which remains 11DIil discard.
Since commercial activity crosses jurisdictions, tracking disposition is very complex and uncenain
in highly urbanized areas.
Targeted Solid Waste CharaderizatioD Studies. This method of monitoring and
evaluation involves the 'selection of all or a representative sample of generator sites to be t:racked
to measure both relative quantities and composition of solid waste over time so as to be able to
CUyotDabUa
1'''';",''''' ""_ ............l.....,.t ....~..."".......
4-26
observe changes useful in fulfilling reporting requirements and planning needs. This method
requires extensive knowledge of the jurisdiction's demographics (residential, commercial, and
industrial).
Residential variables may include housing type, eg., single-family , townhouse, multifamily,
high rise, etc. Other variables may be population density, socioeconomics, etc.
CommeIcial variables may include business type, size (as number of employees, gross sales,
rooms, tables, etc.); concentration (office parle, shopping man,. etc.). For many commercial
enteIprise categories, the degree of expected variance of waste discards may be small (eg, beauty
parlors, banks, realtors, etc.) and representative sampling may be carried out to monitor the
categmy., '
Industrial enteIprises in any given jurisdiction are more likely to be relatively unique; one
from the other. In these instances, it may be desirable to select all of the facilities for tracking.
Industrial sources can have tremendous impacts on the waste disposal and/or diversion within a
jurisdiction.
After the representative sources have been selected, initial data would be. obtained to
describe the source and identify the quantities and characteristics of the waste materials generated
by the source. It is also necessary to identify any existing source reduction or recycling activities
being perfoImed. The selected sources would be tracked by keeping records of waste matP.rial~
sent to disposal or transformation facilities, mat~;l1s recycled, and activities implemented to
source reduce waste generation. In addition, it may be necessary to periodically sample the waste
from the source to evaluate changes to waste character.istics and hazards.
Data obtained from tracking of the representative sources can be used to project and assess
changes occurring within the nonse1ected sources of waste within the jurisdiction. The results
of this assessment will ttack progress towards meeting the diversion xcquirements.
Board-Approved Other Method. Other methods may be used to monitor and evaluate
progress toward achieving the mandated diversion goals. However, the method must be approved
by the Board prior to its use.
Selected Monitoring aDd Evaluation Method
Based on the description and analysis of the monitoring and evaluation methodologies
above, the following elements have been selected.
Dublin will build its system based on the Targeted Solid Waste Characterization Study
(TSWCS) approach. Building on the stUdy in Chapter 2, the city will need to annually determine
whether a revised SWGS is required.
The city will evaluate instituting an operational fonnat by which all non-residential waste
generators will be required to track: diversion through either recycling or reduction.
CJty o( Dahl...
.
4-27
To assist the city in cmying out this effort, existing records such as construction and
demolition pemtits, business licenses, and available service level data from waste haulers will be
examined and evaluated for future use.
The city will review its franchise agreement with its waste hauler,' its relationship to all
permitted dispOsal f3cilities receiving Dublin waste, to determine what modifications may be
necessary to secure direct weigh data, Le., not derived from a volume conversion, for all discards
properly identified as generated in Dublin and, wherever feasible, by waste category. WIth
regard to the permitted disposal facilities, Dublin will work with the"County of Alameda and the
County Solid Waste Management Authority to ascertain and secure the modifications of use
pemrits necessary to secure the data desaibed above.
Criteria for Evaluating Effectiveness of Progress
Program progress will be considered successful if the following waste diversions are
achieved:
· Diversion of 3.5. percent of the total waste stream through collection of high-grade
office paper (1,937 tons).
· Diversion of 1.2 percent of the total waste stream through collection of newspaper,
PET, glass containers, and tin and alnminum cans (662 tons).
· Diversion of 1.6 percent of the total waste stream through collection of inert solids
(870 tons).
· Diversion of 17.1 percent of the total Waste stream through participation in a ~
(9,444 tons).
Responsible Parties for Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting
For Dublin, the responsible patty for coordinating the monitoring and evaluation will be
assigned by the City Manager.
Identification of Funding Requirements and Revenue Sources
The funds required for the implementation of the monitoring and evaluation program will
be available from direct user fees or grants. Monitoring and evaluation of the curbside recycling
program is estimated at $3,000 per year; for directing inerts, $500 per year; and for the
commercial recycling program, $1,100 peI'-year.
Clty of DabUa
PriDIed OR nncled oa_r
.'m:~~,,.t_.~~_""""J
4-28
Measures to be Implemented in the Event of Shortfalls in Meeting Diversion Mandates
If the shortfall is only by a small percentage (1 to 2 percent) the monitoring frequency will.
be increased and the monitoring prognun evaluated for possible expansion and/or improvements
to ensure that as much valid data as possible are being obtained.
If the shortfall is greater than 2 ~ the objectives and altematives will be modified to
incorporate expansions and additional activities as necessaxy.
CIty of Dabl..
CHAPTER 5
COMPOSTING COMPONENT
, '
I
CItJ of.....
Prtaad 011 recycled paper
CHAPTER 5
COMPOSTING COMPONENT
This chapter descn1>es the composting objectives and program altematives analyzed for the
Composting Component of the City of Dublin (Dublin) SRR Element. The chapter discusses
composting objectives, existing conditions, alternatives, program selecti~ implementation and
monitoring and evaluation in accordance with the requirements of the Model Component Format
set forth in the State's Planning Guidelines.
Please refer to Appendix C for a detailed description of composting processes, which is
provided to fami1i:n;7.e readers of this chapter with the varieties of technologies employed in
composting programs. This appendix also contains an extensive analysis of the various regional
options in which Dublin may take pan.
COMPOSTING COMPONENT OBJECTIVES
Dublin will not pmsue implementation of composting programs until the- medium teml
(1995-2000); the city's plans for continued, exp~ and new recycling and source reduction
programs will provide sufficient waste diversion to meet the mandated short-tenD goal of
25 percent by 1995. After 1995, however, Dublin will consider participation in a regional
composting program to enable the city to achieve the 50 percent level of waste diversion by
2000.
For the medium ~, waste types targeted for diversion through composting activities are
identified. Waste type priorities were established based on the waste generation analysis in
Chapter 2, Solid Waste Generation Analysis.
Medium Term to 2000
The section below descn1>es the waste type targeted for diversion through composting by
Dublin. -
. Yani Waste. This refers to any waste generated from the maDttfl!l'lance or altetation of
public, commercial, or ~nf'!T1rial landscapes including, but not limited to, yard
clippings, leaves, tree trimmings, pronings, brush and weeds. In Dublin, yard waste
comprises about 8.4 percent of the total waste stream. ~ this quantity, part is self-
Cllf ef Dablla
Priated oa recycled pa.,er
_........--__.. ......._ 1._
5-2
hauled to disposal and the remaining part is collected with solid waste collection
vehicles where it is commingled with the municipal solid waste (MSW) collected on
regular residential pick: ups. Assuming an 80 percent recovery rate, through source
separated yard waste collection and participation in a regional composting facility, .
Dublin could divert an amount equivalent to 6.6 percent of its total waste stream by
2000.
Objectives
The following goals are established through which Dublin can achieve the mandated
diversions:
· Support the feasibility evaluation and subsequent development and implementation of
subregional composting programs for source separated yard waste.
· Evaluate and consider source-separated collection and delivery of yard waste from
residences to a subregional composting facility and direct self-hauled yard waste to this
same facility.
The following objective is established: .
· Divert 6.4 percent of the total waste stream through collection and composting of yard
waste (3,359 tons) by 2000.
. COMPOSTING COMPONENT EXISTING CONDITIONS
In order to determine levels of composting needed in the future to meet the mandated
diversion requirements, it is necessary to ascertain and describe existing public and private
composting activities. The existing conditions description presents the waste types and quantities
of cmrent composting activities in Dublin.
To determine the existing conditions for composting, the landfill operatOIS, the Dublin
Public Works Deparanem, and Caltrans were contacted. At this time, there is no sigrtificant
public or private composting activity in Dublin.
CIty of Dablla
5-3
COMPOSTING COMPONENT EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
Two sets of alternatives are discussed in this section: yaId waste versus municipal solid
waste and a local facility versus a regional facility. The discussion of these altematives here is
a snmm3-ry of a more detailed analysis of these same altematives in Appendix C.
Yard Waste vs. MSW
Different mixes of the organic constitnents of MSW can be composted into a marketable
product. In this section an evaluation is presented on the relative advantages of yard waste
versus municipal solid waste (i.e., all of the compostable organic constituents of the municipal
waste stream). Two other composting altematives are not considered. A leaves~y altemative
is not evaluated because the quantity of leaves would not support a composting facility. Co-
composting organic wastes with sewage sludge is also not considered becanse sewage sludge is
not accounted for in Dublin's waste stream. The State Plannmg Guiclelwes inc:flc9tp. that sewage
sludge is to be accounted for at the local wastewater treatment facility, which in Dublin's case,
is the Dublin San Ramon Services Distria treatment facility in Pleasanton.
Effectiveness In Reduction of Waste. A yaId waste composting program would be highly
effective in the reduction of waste; a municipal solid .waste composting program would reduce
other organic wastes in addition to yard wasteS.
Hazards Created. No hazards are created by composting either yard waste or MSW.
However, the potential for odors is higher for MSW. Contamination of the produa is also more
likely to occur wjth MSW because yaId waste is easier to keep sepantte.
Ability to Accommodate Change. It is anticipated that a yard waste composting program
would be more flexible than a MSW program. .
Shift in Waste Type Generation. None are expected with either type.
-
Ease of Implementation. Both a yaId waste and a MSW composting program would be
easily implemented in the medium-tcml, as recommended to meet diveISion goals.
Facility Needs. A yani waste composting program requires more land than a MSW
program. A MSW composting program requires a bul1if1ng; yard. waste composting does not.
Consistency with Loc:a1 Policies. Neither type of compost will conflict with local policies.
Institutional Barriers. BaIIiers are ~ with MSW because of the poor quality of the
end product.
CIty of DtlIIUII .
Prbded oa rec:yded ,.per
~
5-4
Estimate of Costs. Costs for a yard waste composting program are expected to be
moderate for a MSW program. they would be higher because it requires higher technology. The
impact of these increased costs on collection rates will depend on the proportion of total
collection, transpOrtation and disposal costs attributable to new composting program costs (see
Appendix C for cost data).
Availability of End Uses of Diverted Materials. The quality of material produced by yard
waste is relatively low, which could affect the options available for end:uses and the revenues
received, if any. MSW product is of even poorer quality.
Local Facility vs. Regional Facility
Dublin has the option of operating its own local composting facility or supporting a regional
facility. These alternatives are evaluated beloW; a discussion of the various regional options
available' to Dublin is presented in Appendix C.
Effectiveness in Reduction of Waste. Local and regional composting programs would be
equally effective in the reduction of waste.
Hazards Created. No hazards are related to composting. Nuisances related to composting
(e.g., odor) would not differ with a local or ICgional facility.
Ability to Accommodate Change. Because of its size a.regional composting program may
be more flexible in accommodating change than a local. program.
Shift in Waste Type Generation. This problem is not created by a composting program
of any tYPe.
Ease of Implementation. A regional composting program may be easier to implement
because of the greater flexibility in siting the facility.
Facility Needs. _ Both a local and regional composting program will need a facility,
however, with the regional program the burdens of cost and location are shared.
Consistency With Local Policies. There are no local plans, policies or ordinances which
conflict with the siting of either a local or required composting facility. A regioDal facility is
probably IP:0Ie feasible because of lower 1lDit costs.
Institutional Barriers. No barriers are expected with either a local or regional program.
Estimate of Costs. Operation costs for a regional composting facility are expected to be
lower than with a local facility. Collection costs will be comparable, but t:ransponation costs
would be higher for the regional facility. The two potential subregional facilities would cost
Clt)' of DllbUa
PriDted oa ncTcled paM!"
~
5-5
( -
I .
Dublin $54,000 to $76,000 annually (see Appendii C). The regional facility would cost Dublin
$43,000 to $50,000 annually.
A vaiJability of End Uses of Diverted Materials. The quality of material produced is not
affected by the size of the facility.
Alternatives Evaluation
", ~
There would be higher unit costs, greater difficulty in marketing the end product, and a
greater potential for odOIS and other hazards associated with participation in a MSW composting
facility than with a facility composting yam waste alone. For these zeasons, consideration of
participation in a yard waste facility would be a preferred altemative for Dublin.
Likewise, because there would be significantly lower unit development and operating costs
for a regional composting facility than for a local composting facility, the pzeferred alternative
for Dublin would be to explore participation in a zegional composting facility.
COMPOSTlNG COMPONENT PROGRAM SELECTION
This section describes the selected pmgnrm, the proposed composting facility, and the
market uses of the compost product.
Program Description
Based on the quantities of biodegradable matP-rial!C: reponed in the Solid Waste Generation
Study, Dublin will consider contracting for the provision of source separated yard waste
collection and will exploze participation in a subregional or zegional composting facility to assist
in meeting the city's requirement of 50 percent diversion of waste by 2000.
As noted in Olapter 2, Table 2-7, yard Waste is estimated to comprise 8.4 percent, of
Dublin's total waste stream. Assuming an 80 percent recovery rate, through somce separated
yard waste collection and participation in a snhtegional or regional composting facility Dublin
could divert an amount equivalent to 6.4 percent of its total waste stteam by 2000 (3,359 tODS).
Facility Description
Dublin may participate in either a subregional or zegional facility. There are Ct1IIently
facilities in the development stage. When Dublin receives detailed infOImation on these
alternatives, including costs, the city will select a facility.
'--
l'_'
CIty of J>.1JUa
Printed _ l"ee'YeLo-f n........
I :
5-6
/"
End Uses of Compost Products
End useIS (markets) must be established to accept the compost product in aider to qualify
as diversion goals. Potential end users can be id~~ed in the county and need not be limited
to useIS in Dublin. The potential end users are listed" below;
1. Agricn1toral use of compost product as soil enhancer.
--
2. Residential uSe of compost product for mulching and landscaping by individual
homeowners and home building enterprises.
3. Regional Park District use of compost product for landscaping. "
4. Caltrans use of compost product as soil enhancer on road embankment.
A more detailed discussion of markets for compacted yard waste is located in Appendix D of this
SRR Element.
The following methods will be used to develop compost useIS (mm:kets):
1. Consider ways.to encourage residents and home builders to use compost product.
2. Consider establishing policies to use compost product "in-house" whenever possible.
\-,"
3. Establish understandings/agreementS with Caltrans to use compost product whenever
posSlble.
COMPOSTlNG COMPONENT PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Organizations
The Dublin City Manager's Office will be the lead agency for Dublin's involvement in
composting program implementation and monitoring. It is likely that the implementation and
monitoring responsibility for regional composting facilities will rest with the Alameda County
Waste Management Authority (ACWMA).
Implementation Tasks
Medium Term. The implementation of Dublin's composting program consists of three
pans: source separated yard waste for self-haDl, participation in the new regional composting
facility, and secure end users of compost product.
CJty of DabllD
5-7
t'
,
-
;
Dublin will consider implementing residential curbside conection of yard waste to be carried
out by the franchised waste hauler. The collection of separated yard waste will use a dedicated
collection tmck. Additionally, Dublin will explore all mmuiatcny' self-hauled yard waste to be
delivered to the composting facility.
The tasks for implementing a curbside yard waste conection program are as follows:
· Establish program staff needs
· Pass ordinance requiring residet'ltS to participate
· Amend collection contracts
Require franchised" hauler to submit collection program design and costs.
Evaluate proposal.
Award contract.
· Purchase collection containexs
· Implement a public education program
· Implement ttaining program for collection staff
· Receive and distribute collection conra;I,ers
· Start-up program
The implementation time1ine is summarized on Figure 5-1.
Implementing a subregional or regional composting facility involves the following major
tasks:
o. Obtain CEQA approval
1. Create composting task force to review the composting program.
. 2. Issue RFP to solicit professional engineering services.
3. Sign agreement for pzeHminary nfl$ig11 services. '
4. Begin detailed design and prepare plans and specifications.
5. Bidding and award CODStmction contract.
6. Cmy out facility CODStmction.
7. Develop requirementS for source separated wastes.
8. Prepare Report of Compost Site Infmmation (RCSl) and obtain operation pen:nit.
9. Start-up aIJ.d training.
10. Complete operation and maintenance manual.
---
This part of the composting program will take 18 to 24 months to complete. FIgUre 5-2
shows the implem~on schedule. The facility will be implemented to allow for at least two
YeaIS of operation before 2000. Securing end users of compost production, the thini feature of
Dublin's proposed composting program, should begin no later than commencement of facility
CODStmcti.on. The facility will conduct pilot tests during the first 18 months of operation. Yard
waste will be obtained from. residential self-haul.
"--
L'
CIty of hbUa
Pri8Ied oa rec:yded peper
m~A
Year
Tasks
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Start-Up Program
Establish Program
Staff Needs
Pass Ordlnance Requirlng
Residents to Participate
Amend Collection
Contracts
Purchase Collection
Containers
Implement Public
Education Program
Implement 1i'aining Program
lor Collection Staff
Receive tlnd Distribute
Collection Contalners
Figure 5-1. Curbside Yard Waste Collection Implementation Schedule
r
\,
'''"';
. \
\
. .; . ~
. ',-. \
l.
, '" ~ . '" .
,'--
r. -..
(----- ,
(-- .---,
oj
i -
"--1
/ ..-- .
.
.' 1
-....;
'-. .,,,,
I
.1
....,-...
-.-..... ...
I
Tasks 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Envlronmenta' Permi,s f}J
(Start 3/95J
Site Se'ectlon f}J
Design Services Bid
Process .
Facility Design fZI .
Construction Bid , fm
Process
Equipment Procurement 1m
Building Permits ,
Facility Permits
Facility Construction
Equipment Installation fBj
Equipment Testing B
TI'alnlng of Processing CI'ews rm
Public InformatIon I
Facility Start-Up II
II
Figure 5-2. Compost Facility Implementation Schedule (Medium Term)
5-10
I'
Costs and Revenues
,...
The capital costs of the possible facilities are shown in Appendix C to i:ange between $1 to
$2 m.i1Iion, excluding land purchase costs. Operating costs, not including residual hauling costs,
range below $12 to $16 per ton. Costs in this range are not likely to be cheaper than landfill
disposal costs. The annual cost to Dublin would range from $40,000 to $54,000.
Revenues for this program will come from tipping fees and the sale of compost (if any).
COMPOSTlNG COMPONENT MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Monitoring and evaluation of the composting program is most easily performed by the
Dublin City Manager's Office.
Monitoring and Evaluation Method
Dublin will require that the regional facility record weights of yaIdwastes that are brought
in by self-hauls. Dublin will perfonn a targeted waste generation study that will fmther assess
the amount of yaId waste diverted or disposed.
For Dublin's yaId waste curbside collection program and self-haDl vehicles, the regional
facility operator will weigh all incoming vehicles. 01apter 4, Recycling Compon~ details a
more complete monitoring and evaluation program, including the perfounance of periodic Solid
Waste Generation Studies.
Program Effectiveness Criteria
Program progress will be considered successful ifby 2000 yaId waste composting programs
are divening 6.4 percent of the total waste stream from landfill disposal (3,359 tons).
Responsible Parties for Monitoring, Evaluatio~ and Reporting
The responsible patty for coordi1'l~rjng the monitoring, evaluation, and reporting of the
progress of the program will be assigned by the City Manager.
Funding Requirements
Revenues for monitoring and evaluation will come from tipping fees and the sale of comp>st
(if any). Monitoring and evaluation of this program is expected to require only minor
administrative costs.
CIty of DabUa
5-11
Measures to be Implemented in the Event of ShortfaDs in Meeting 'the Diversion Mandates
/,.
1. IT the shortfall is only by a small pen:entage (1 to 2 percent) the monitoring frequency
will be increased and the monitoring program evaluated for possible expansions and/or
improvements to ensure that as much valid data as possible are being obtained.
2. IT the shortfall is greater than 2 per~ the objectives and alternatives will be modified
to incoIpOIate expansions and additional activities as necessary.
'-,
CIty of DtlIIIIa
P1iaced OD recJded paper
~;l"'-..mu
~
.'
CHAPTER 10
INTEGRATION COMPONENT
,., .
\-
--
CIty or Da'"
PriJsted oa nnded na'Def'
r "
CHAPTER 10
INTEGRATION COMPONENT
'Ibis component contains a desaiption of the solid waste management practices that promote
integrated waste management in the City of Dublin (Dublin), and an explanation of how Dublin
has integrated the Source Reduction, Recycling, Composting, and Special Waste components to
achieve the 2S and 50 percent mandates specified by the California Integrated Waste
Management Act of 1989. The chapter begins with a description of the solid waste management
practices which Dublin will implement to promote integrated waste management and follows this
with an explanation of how Dublin has integrated the components to maximize the Use of all
feasible source reduction, recycling, and composting options.
The chapter then discusses how thecomponems jointly achieve the 2S and 50 percent
diversion mandates and provides an explanation of how priorities between components were
detemrined. Finally, the chapter concludes with an integmted schedule snmmari7:ing all
implementation tasks previously iden1i:5P.d in the Source Reduction, Recycling, Composting,
Special Waste and Education and Public Information components and the anticipated date of
achievement of the required solid waste diversion mantjates.
Integrated. Solid Waste Managem~t Practices
To achieve the diversion reqaiIements of the Califomia Integmted Waste Management Act,
Dublin must develop and implement waste diversion programs which confonn to the integrated
waste management bieraIchy of (1) SOUICe reduction, (2) recycling and composting, and
(3) environmentally safe transformation and disposal. In Dublin, this has been achieved by first
identifying source reduction activities which the city can_implement to decrease the quantity of"
waste generated in Dublin, by then developing recycling and composting programs for waste
which will continue to be generated within the city and then by developing programs to cnsore
hazard reduction and environmentally safe disposal of the remaining wastes" which are not likely
to be diverted through other source reduction, recycling or composting activities.
The specific source reduction, recycling, composting and sPecial waste activities which
Dublin intl'!nns to implement are as follows:
Source Reduction
'-
.
A restIUctUIing of garbage collection rates to reduce the discount provided for
additional cans of service with a goal of evenmaUy achieving a uniform can rate.
.
, '
," .
CllJ .,...
PrIIIUd CIII recyded paper
~..
10-2
· Support for the Alameda CoUIIty Home Composting Education Program.
· Consider implementation of a city government offices proct1Iement policy that favors
purchase of products with recycled material content.
Recycling
· Expansion of Dublin's exIStIng Residem:ial Curbside Collection Program to
multifamily households and single-family residences electing to participate in this
program after the imposition of mandatory garbage collection service.
· Consideration where appropriate of directing inert loads of concrete/asphalt to existing
commercial facilities that recycle these materials.
· Consideration of establishing a source-separated high grade office paper collection
program.
· Study and evaluation of participation in the medium term regional matP.rial~ recovery
facility (MRF) by directing all of Dublin's nonresidential waste to that facility.
Composting
.
Study and evalnarion of the development and implementation of subregional
composting programs for sonn:e-separated yard waste.
.
Consider providing for source-separated collection and delivery of yard waste from
residences to the subregional composting facility and direct self-hauled yard waste.to
this same facility.
Special Waste
· Continue to sUpport the asbestos monitoring program of the Air Pollution Control
Division (APCD) of the County Environmental Health Department in order to reduce
as much as possible the risks associated with asbestos removal. This activity will be
maintained throughout the short and medium tem1S.
· Consider sapporting clp.1J~opriare programs to divert bulky items for recycling or reuse.
· . Work with the County to implement the new Medical Waste Management Act, in
order to reduce hazards associated with improper handling of biomedical wastes and
provide docmnentation of quanriries.
· Support appropriate programs to reuse, recycle, or transform used tires.
CIty of n.1ll1a
.,
10-3
.Component Integration
Dublin, through existing source reduction, recycling, and composting activities, Cum:nt1y
divertS 24.4 percent of its waste stream. This rate of diversion is only slightly less than the
25 percent diversion' rate required by 1995; thus, Dublin bas nearly achieved this short-tenn
planning period goal. To reach the medium-term planning period goal of SO percent diversion
by 2000, Dublin will continue its existing diveISion activities and implement the programs
discussed above. Dublin will achieve 25 percent diversion in 1993 and SO percent in 1998.
Table 10-1 shows how the programs combine to achieve the required diveISion rateS.
Component Priorities
The following criteria have been utilized to determine priorities for implementation of
source reduction, recycling, composting and special waste programs:
· Confonnity to the integrated waste management hierarchy.
· Cost-effectiveness and ease of implementation.
· Effectiveness in reducing total wastes generated.
· Effectiveness in reducing hazard potential and other potential advc:me environmental
effects.
Integrated Schedule
Table 10-2 shows the proposed timeframe for implementation of all programs presented in
this SRR Element and the anticipated date of achievement of the solid waste diversion mandates
specified in the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. FIgUre 10-1 shows the
schedule for availability of funds.
.
'-
i
l _
CIty of DaItUa
Priated _ recyded paper
"---'- --
Table 10-1. Component Program Diversion Rates
Waste diversion program Baseline 1995 2000
Somce reduction
County home composting program .2 .2
Procurement guidelines <.1 <.1
Unifmm can rates . <.1 <.1
Existing second-hand distributors 1.9 1.9 1.9
Total source reduction 1.9 2.1 2.1
Recycling programs
Curbside recycling expansion 1.2 1.2
Direction of inerts 1.6 1.6
Office paper recycling 3.5
Materials recovery facility 17.1
Existing recycling distributors 22.5 22.5 22.5
Total recycling 22.5 28.8 42.4
Composting
Direction of yard waste to composting
facilities 6.4
Total composting - - 6.4
Special wasteS - - -
Total diversion 24.4 30.9 54.4
-"^.""__--..-.-..T'-.....-..,...,.,..__. ~,....
"I
I,
Page 1 of 4
Table 10-2. New and Expanded Program Implementation Task Schedule
City of Dublin
, 1991 1992 1993 1994 199,5
T.1k dcacription Implementins entily 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
SOURCE REDUCTION
PROGRAMS I
Unifonn Can Rile DCC-
-.Analyze uniform can nite. .
-Slut-UP. program .
-Monitor and evalu.te . . Onsoins
County Home Compollins Program ACHCBPb/OCMOc
-BstabUIh Uaison with County .
-Publicize program .
-Di'lOminate mllerial. .
-Monitor and oValll.to .
Procuremont GuldoUn" DCMOIDCC
-Review Model GuldeUne. ..
-Adopt a. City Policy .
-Train procurement .Iaff .
-Monitor and evalu'lo I . Ongoins
RECYCLING PROGRAMS
Roaidenlial Curbaido Bxpan.ion DCC ,
-Contact oxictins recyc1inS .
contractor
-Develop prolnm .
-Start-up oxpan~d Pro8ranl .
-Monitor and evaluate . On8oln8
Table 10-2. New and Expanded Program Implementation Task Schedule Page 2 of 4
City of Dublin (continued)
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Task description Implementing entity 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 .3 4
Office Recycling Program DCMOIPCcf
-Identify additional recyclable. .
-Contract for additional .ervice. .
-Start-up expanded recycling .
I
prosram.
-Monitor and evaluate . Ongoins
Direct Inert. ADPW
-Revi.- City policy .
-Start-up program .
-Monitor and evaluate . Ongoing
COMPO~GPROGRAMS
All cornpollins prosram. to
commonce after 1995 (medium-
tcon plannJnS pedod)
SPECIAL WASTE
Albo.to. Monitodn, ACBHDSIDCMO
-Continue countywide ..bello. . I
monitodns program
-Monitor and evaluate .
Allbt Witb Medical Wa.te ACEHDIDCMO
Management
-SlIablilb UailOn with County .
-Monitor and evaluate . Onsoin,
A..ilt With County Sandblall Sand ACBHDIDCMO
Proarun
-EstabUsh Uallon . ~
.
~ ' i I I I ! " I
i I I ' , ! ,
I I , (
."
Table 10-2. New and Expanded Program Implementation Task Schedule
City of Dublin (continued)
Page 3 of 4
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Task dclCription Implementins entity 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
-Monitor and evaluate . OnsoinS
A.Ii.t With Bullcy Item Pros ram ACWMAJDCMO
-BatIbHah HallOn I .
-Monilor and evaluale . Onsoins
A.ai.t With U.cd Tire Program ACWMAJDCMO
-BIlIb~sh Halson .
-Monilor and evaluale . Onsoins
,
EDUCA nON AND PUBLIC
JNFORMA nON paOGRAMS
Community Outreach DCMO
-Develop outreach pideline. .
-DI'lOInlnate WNto cIIvorlion .
Informadon
-Nelshbomood and civic group . Ongoing
pre.entation.
-Monitor and ovaluate . Onsoins.
MedieJPubHc Infonnadon
-Develop media .tratesy .
.Publicize proSraJn' . OnSoinS
-Monitor and evaluate . Ongoing
School ProSraJn' PUSDh/DCMO
-Ani.t in cuniculum .
development
-School prcaentalionl . Onsoins .
-Monitor and evaluate . Ongoing .
Table 10-2. New and Expanded Program Implementation Task Schedule
City of Dublin (continued)
Page 4 of 4
1991 1992 1993 1994 199.5
TuIc dclCription fmplemenlins enlily 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Commen:ial, Indu.bial, DeMO
ProfCl.lonal
-Conlllel local .ervlce .
ol)udzalion
-Conl~1 by wulo seneraton . .
-Monllor IUld evaluale . Onsoins
aDubUn City Council.
b Alameda County Home Compollins Education Program.
cDubUn City MlUlaser'. Office.
dAlameda Counly Wa.te MIUla8ement Authorily-Technical Advl.ol}' Committee.
OUvennoro-DubUn Di.posal.
'Private contract coUector.
SAlameda County Environmental Heallh Departmenl.
hDubUin Unified School Di.rict.
, .
'., I
. 1
, I
.
V.ar I
I
Prog",m 1882 !
1881 1883 1884 18N 18fHJ 1887 1"". 18_
Primary Funding Sourc..
Re.ldentlsl Curb.ide Recycling Ch.rg.
. will be Implem.nted to psy for co.t of
curb.lde expsns/on i
I
Commerciel Recycli"g Chsrge I
. will b./mpl.mented to psy for I
, cost of commerclsl recycling progr.m I
W..1e Imp.ct Mltigstlon Fee
I
Contlnpnt Funding Source.
. will b. con.ld.red if primary funding
aourc.. do not provide sufflci.nt
rev.nu. I
I
Res/dentlsl R.t.lncr.... f--- 100--. --- --- --- --- --- --- ,..-- --- --- ---. --- --- 1---. ---I
Comm.rclsl R.t.lncre..e 1--- ---. --- --- --- ---- --- --- 1---' --- --- ---. --- --- 1--_. ---
Aclvsnced DI.poslIl Fee. t--- ---- --- --- --- ---- --- --- 1---' --- --- ---. --- --- 1---. --.I
I
. Funding ltOurce in plsce
- Funds avsllsble
FundIng .ource to be consIdered If shortfsll eKlsr.
Figure 10-1. Funding Source Schedule - City of Dublin
ATTACHMENT 3
~
January 18, 1995, Draft
. CITY OF DUBLIN
RATES FOR GARBAGE COLLECTION & DISPOSAL SERVICES CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO A
FRANCHIS! AGR!!M!RT B!'l'W!!N THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND
OAKLAND SCAVlNGERCOMPANY
[Now Called Waste Management of Alameda County}
I. IfFEC'fIVE DA~
The rates shown for the collection of refuse within the City of Dublin
are effective as of January 1, 1994.
II . RES;}:DINTIAL SERVICE
A. Minimum Residential Co!le9tion cpst
Minimum residential service shall apply separately to each unit
within a duplex or other attached housing, which receives
individual garbage collection services. The rates shown below
shall apply to the initial can of service and include once per week
collection and disposal of the standard sized container.
Addi tional services described in Section IV are also provided as
part of the minimum service. The rate shown includes $1.37 (one
dollar and thirty-seven cents) charge for weekly Curbside
Recycling.
32 gallon container (Standard Container)
Monthlv Cost
$ 8.63
B. pavment and Billina for Minimum Residential Service
City shall make arrangements to collect assessments on the property
tax bill for all services identified in Section A above. Further,
payment for said services shall be made to Company by City pursuant
to agreements and ordinances regulating solid waste collection.
C. Additional Conta~ner Collection Costs
Once per week collection of each additional container beyond
service provided under "(A)" above:
32 gallon container (Standard Container)
$ 5.95 .
D.
Soecial Services
Large accumulations:
Special Pick-ups:
$8.05 per cubic yard
$12.00 minimum per pick-up
III. DESIGNAT~ON OF POINT OF COLLECTION
For Single Family Residential Service, the above rates shall be' for
"back yard service" for regular garbage service. The term "back yard
service" shall mean the container(s) shall be on the outside of and in
close proximity to the structure being served, and at a location which
is the customer's option. Padlocks or other devices which deny the
Collector reasonable access will relieve said collector from
responsibility of such collection. The Curbside Residential Recycling
Program requires that containers be placed in location which _ can be
easily seen and readily accessible, within five feet from the curb.
IV. ADDITIONAL SERVI~$ PROVIDED IN RATE~
The above rates shall include four ( 4 ) annual residential cleanups.
Dates of said cleanups shall be at the discretion of the City upon
reasonable notice to the Company. The rules regulating the special
Cleanup shall be approved by the Contractor and the Director. The
Contractor shall separately account for costs associated with this
service and report information as requested by the City.
V. COMMERCIAL AND MULTIFAMILY BIN SERVICE
A. The following rates include collection, disposal, and bin rental at
commercial establishments and multifamily projects serviced by
centralized bins. The rates shown are for a monthly period. All
charges are based upon bins being filled no higher than water
level.
Excess rate for waste which exceeds water level: $8.05 per yard.
-1-
. VolulII8 of Service Fr,ayeoqx Mont.p.... f-.""....;j;;.,
1 Yard 1 week $ 25.40 A'1"l'ACIH.!:tl 3
1 Yard 2/week $ 57.15
1 Yard 3/week $ 88.90
1 yard 4/week $120.65
1 Yard 5lweek $152.40
2 Yard 1/week $ 50.80
2 Yard 2/week $101.95
2 Yard 3/week $165.10
2 Yard 4/week 1$222.25
2 Yard 5/week $219.40
3 Yard 1/week $ 76.20
3 Yard 2/week $158.75
3 Yard 3/week $241.30
3 Yard 4/week $323.85
3 Yard 5/week $406.40
4 Yard \ 1/week $101.60
4 Yard 2/week $209.55
4 Yard 3/week $317.50
4 Yard 4/week $425.45
4 Yard 5/week $533.40
6 Yard 1/week $152.40
6 Yard 2/week $311.15
6 Yard 3/week $469.90
6 Yard 4/week $628.65
6 Yard 5/week $787.40
7 Yard 1/week $171.80
7 Yard 2/week $361.95
7 Yard 3/week $546.10
7 Yard 4/week $730.25
7 Yard S/week $914.40
B. Commercial Can Service
Commercial locations subscribing to service on a per COIItainer
basis shall be charged the following monthly rates accord:f.nq to the
size of the container serviced:
32 Gallon container (Standard COntainer)
40 Gallon container (OVersi~ed Container)
45 Gallon container (OVersized Container)
48 Gallon container (Oversized Container)
Monthlv Cost
$ 7.45
$ 9.35
$10.50
$10.70
/
VI. HANDY HAULER
The followinog rates apply to the collection of a 4 eubic yard Handy
Hauler Collection Bin.
Total Cost for Placement, One Week
Bin Rental & Disposal of Container
filled no higher than water level
Rental COst beyond first week
Cost for Additional Dump
E~cess Charge for Bin Filled higher
than water level .
$45.00
$10.00 per week
$32.20
$8.05 per yard
-2-
r
AT1'AC1MENl' 3
VII: Q\tOP BOX
'!'be followinq rates shall be charged for drop box services rena.red.
The cost shall be on a per pick-up basis and costs are based upon the
load not exceedinq the water level. Certain miscellaneous chuves as
noted in, subsection (H) ..." also apply.
A.
6 Cubic Yard Con-taine!:' (Oirt/Roclst~l;)ds)
The pick-up cost of this container
shall be the same as the 14 yard
container due to the weight 'accommodated.
~:.~'~br~r:a~nta~ner
2~ pubic Yard Containe!:'
$8.0S/cubic yard
ig.~'~bi~~a~ntainer
40 Cubic Yard CQntaiper
SB.OS/cubic yard
Rat. Dt~ Bas, Pick-uo
$112.70
$112.70
$161.00
$241.50
. $322.00
$8.05 per
cubic yard
$16.10 per
cubic yard
H. Miscell,neous Charaes
The following charges are in addition to the container charges
desCJ:'ibed above.
/
I' Ex-aGar. agenda 11 5
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Excess Rate Per Yard
If container loaded above water level
G.
Como,c~e~ Rate Per YJrd
For service and collection of compacted
materials, the total rate shall include
cubic yard rate.
1-
2.
3.
4.
S.
6.
7.
Flasher Charge
Initial Placement Charge
Weekly Container Rental Fee
Beyond 1st Week
Daily Container Rental Fee
After First week
Stand-by Time
Relocation Fee
Cancellation of Automatic Collection
at End of Rental Period
$1 0 . S S PER PLACIIIIlHr
$23.00
$11.90*
$1.70/day*
$77.00 per hour
$31.50 per request
$41.90
*Note: This charge is waived if the following service
frequency is maintained:
Service Level
6 yard/14 yard/20 yard
30 yard
40 y-ard
-3-
Fr~QUency
4 pUlls/month
3 pulls/month
2 pulls/month
ATTACHMENT4a
January 18, 1995, Draft
Attachment 4a
SOUD WASTE COLLECTION AND YARD WASTE SERVICES
(Company) has thoroughly read and examined the draft
franchise agreement and all documents referenced therein, and understands said
documents. The Company proposes to provide these services for the prices quoted
below, and to perform all other necessary acts related thereto. The attached detailed
cost estimates supporting the lump sum amounts are provided as part of this proposal.
Residential, weekly, manual back yard re
service usin resident- rovided containers.
lb. Residential, weekly, automated curbside
refuse service using company-provided
containers.
2. Residential recycling collection, processing
and marketin .
3. Commercial recycling collection, processing
and marketin .
4a. Weekly residential green waste collection,
rocessin and marketin .
4b. Bi-weekly residential green waste collection,
rocessin and marketin .
5. Bin service.
6. Debris box service.
7. Refuse disposal fee per ton.
8. Refuse transfer cost per ton (if other than
direct haul).
Company agrees to provide the services described herein for the first and second years
of the Agreement for the amounts shown above, which are to be adjusted thereafter as
described in the draft franchise agreement and documents referenced therein. Items la.
and lb., and 4a. and 4b. are options, of which the City will select only one.
January 18, 1995, Draft
..
ATrACHMENT4b .
January l8, 1995, Draft
Attachment 4b
SOUD WASTE COLLECTION AND YARD WASTE SERVICES
The following worksheets must be used to support the prices proposed in the Price
Summary Form (Attachment 4a) for this contract. Additional cost items, unless
prohibited, may be inserted in the worksheet if the item is specifically described and does
not fit into one of the listed items.
The 'cost' items described in Section 6.3 of the draft franchise agreement are specifically
prohibited; i.e., the City will disallow such costs should they be included in this chart of
accounts or any later chart of accounts under this contract.
For the purposes of this contract, vehicles, equipment and containers must be depreciated
on a straight-line basis over seven (7) years. Contractor must docwnent initial capital
costs, useful lifetimes assumed, and salvage values assumed for all such equipment. This
information shall be listed separately as an attachment to this worksheet. If any vehicles
will be "shared" with service provided under another contract, contractor must indicate
such a situation by allocating the costs between the two contracts. Contractor should point
out any such allocations on the attached forms.
When completing the worksheets you should be aware of the following:
1. Include the desired percentage Operating Ratio. The Company will be
allowed a fixed Operating ratio for the duration of the agreement. '
2. Disposal costs must include all components and fees (e.g., County and other
regulatory fees) and will be treated as a pass-through expense. Categories of
costs should be presented on a cost per ton basis.
3. For the green waste processing costs line item, only the cost at the gate should
be included. All other related costs (e.g., transfer, personnel, etc.) should be
included as part of the appropriate worksheet line items.
4. You must define "other" if dollar amounts are included on these lines.
5. For the administrative and maintenance divisions, you must allocate these
expenses to each service area, as appropriate. If there are changes in
administration or maintenance costs related to the different service options
(i.e., manual versus automated and weekly versus bi-weekly green waste
collection), they must be identified and explained.
January l8, 1995, Draft
.
6. For each service proposed you must provide the following (include separate
sheets as necessary):
· Number of routes per day per week
· Number of workers
· Number of and type of vehicles
· Number of tons collected
· Hourly wage by employee classification (e.g., driver, helper, mechanic,
etc.)
· Number, cost and type of containers purchased
· Number of actual stops per route as opposed to pass bys
· The participation rate for .recycling and green waste for both
commercial and residential.
7. Interest expense will be treated as a pass-through expense.
8. The worksheet for transfer should only be completed if the Company is nw:
direct hauling the refuse to a disposal site. If refuse is direct hauled to a
disposal site, the transport costs should be included in the individual refuse
service areas (residential, bin service, and debris box service).
January 18, 1995" Draft
ATTACHMENT ok .
January 18, 1995, Draft
Oty01 DabUn
PmpciAllor Solid Waste Franchise
Dttailed Pinanciallniormation
la.. RESlDENnAL SOUD WASTE MANUAL COUScnON (OmON A)
Labor Costs
RepJarWages
Overti.D8 Wages
Holiday Wages
Vac:ation Wages
Sick Leave Wages
. Worlcers CoItlp8O$Ation Insurance Ie Claims
Employers Liability Insurance
Health Ie Welfare
Pension/Retirelnent Benefits
Payroll Taxes
Other (Please List)
Total Labor Costs
Vehicle Related Costs
Fuel
Tires Ie Tubes
Parts
Supplies (fluid, oil, etc.)
Taxes Ie Licenses
Other (Please List)
Total Vehicle Related Costs
Other Costs
Liability Ie Property Damage Insurance
Equipment Insurance
Rent
Utilities
Telephone
Non-vehicle Related Supplies
Non-vehicle Related Taxes and Licenses
Training Ie Safety Programs
Public Education and Promotion
Unifol'Jl1S
Other (Please List)
Total Other Costs
Depreciation
Container Depreciation
Truck and Other Depreciation
Total Depreciation
Profit <- ey. Operating Ratio)
Allocated Costs
From Administrative Oivisioft
From Maintenance Division
Other (Please List)
Total Allocated Costs
Total Revenue Requirement
Annual
Costs
Year 1
. I '" .._.__. ...
AttacIlment 4c
Annual
Costs
Year 2
City of Dublin
PropGsaI for Solid W.. franchise
Detailed FinaneW Jnformatioll
lb. RESIDENTIAL SOUDWASTE AuroMATED COLLEC'l10N (OmON B)
Labor Costs
Regular Wages
Overtime Wages
. Holiday Wages
Vacation Wages
Sick Leave Wages
Workers Compensation Insurance & Claims
Employers Uability Insurance
Health & Welfare
Pension/Retirement Benefit$
Payroll Taxes
Other (Please List)
Total Labor Costs
Vehicle Related Costs
Puel
Tires & Tubes
Parts
Supplies (fluid, oil, etc.)
Taxes & Licenses
Other (Please List)
Total Vehicle Related Costs
Other Costs
Uability & Property Damage Insurance
Equipment Insurance
Rent
Utilities
Telephone
Non-vehicle Related Supplies
Non-vehicle Related Taxes and Licenses
Training & Safety Programs
Public Education and Promotion
Uniforms
Other (Please List)
Total Other Costs
Depreciation
CanWner Depreciation
Truck and Other Depreciation
Total Depreciation
Profit L'Ye Operating Ratio)
Allocated Costs
Prom Admini<strative Division
Prom Maintenance Division
Other (Please List)
Total Allocated Costs
Total Revenue Requirement
Annual
Costs
Year 1
.
Attachment 4c:
Annual
Costs
Year 2
CUr of Dub1ht
P10paRl f<<SolidWaIte Prd~
Detail_ Pbuadal ~<<ticm
2. WEEXLY RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING COLLEcnON
Annual Tons Processed
MRFTip Fee
Annual Pl'OC8S5ing Fees
Labor Costs
Regular Wages
Overtime Wages
Holiday Wages .
Vacation Wages
Sick Leave Wages
. Workers Compensation Insurance &: Claims
Employers Liability [nsurance
Health &: Welfare
Pension/Retirement Benefits
Payroll Taxes
Other (Please List)
Total Labor Costs
Vehicle Related Costs
Fuel
Tires &: Tubes
Parts
Supplies (fluid, oil, etc.)
Taxes &: Ucenses
Other <Please List)
Total Vehicle Related Costs
Other Costs
Liability" Property Damage Insurance
Equipment Insurance
Rent
Utilities
Telephone
Non-vehicle Related Supplies
Non-vehicle Related Taxes and Licenses
Training &: Safety Programs
Public Education and Promotion
Uniforms
Other (Please List)
Total Other Costs
Depreciation
ContaiMr Depreciation
Tnack and Other Depreciation
Total Depreciation
Profit (_"Operating Ratio)
Allocated Costs
From Administrative Division
From Maintenance Division
Other (Please List)
Total Allocated Costs
Total Revenue Requirement
Anltua1
Costs
Yeart
.-,---- .....,
.............,..u_
AttadDent u
Anltua1
Costs
Year 2
.----- -------
_____ ..._'1' ......
Qty of Dublin
Pl'OpONIlot Solid Waste Francla_
Detailed PinanciaJ JnfotInat1on
lilltimated I..idential I.ec:yclins l.evenue
Estimated Newspaper Tonnage
Estimated Newspaper Price per ton
Batimated Newspaper I.evenue
Estimated Glass Tonnage ,
Estimated Glass Price per ton
Batimatecl Gl.. I.evenue
Estimated PET Tonnage
Estimated PET Price per ton
Batimated PET Revenue
Estimated Tin/BiMetal Tonnage
. Estimated 1m/BiMetal Price per ton
Batimated TInlBiMetal Revenue
Estimated Aluminum Tonnage
Estimated Aluminum Price per ton
Batimated Aluminum Revenue
Batimated Total Recycling Revenue
Actual Revenue Requirement (Total Costs less Revenue)
Incremental Additional Material Costs
Mixed Paper
HOPE
Waste on
Annual
Costs
Yearl
Attachment 4c
Annual
Costs
Year 2
City of OubUD
Proposal for Solid Waste Franchise
Detailed Finmdallnformation
Annual
Costs
Yearl
3. COMMEROAL RECYCLING COLLEC110N
AMual Tons Processed
MRFTip Fee
AMual Ptoc:essing Fees
Labor Coats
Regular Wages
Overtime Wages
HoUday Wages
Vacation Wages
Sick Leave Wages
Workers Compensation Insurance &: Claims
Employers Uability Insurance
Health &: Welfare '
Pension/Retirement Benefits
Payroll Taxes
Other (Please List)
Total Labor Costs
..--.-."-." ~
. Vehicle Related Costs
Fuel
Tires &: Tubes
Parts
Supplies (fluid, oil, etc.)
Taxes &: Ucenses
Other (Please List)
Total Vehicle Related Costs
........M......'.lrl...n..n...
Other Costs
UabiUty &: Property Dariuage Insurance
Equipment Insurance
Rent
Utilities
Telephone
Non-vehicle Related Supplies
Non-vehicle Related Taxes and Licenses
Training &: Safety Programs
Public Education and Promotion
Unifonns
Other (Please List)
Total Other Costs
Depreciation
Container Depreciation
Trock and Other Depreciation
Total Depreciation
Profit <_" Operating Ratio)
Allocated Costs
From Administrative Division
From Maintenance Division
Other (Please List)
Total AIloc:ated Costs
Total Revnue Requimnent
Attadunent 4c
Annual
Costs
Year 2
City of Dublin
Proposal for Solid Waste Frandaise
Detailed Pinandal Information
Estimated Commen:ial ~iDlltevenue
Estimated Newspaper Tonnage
Estimated Newspaper Price per ton
Eatimated Newapaper Revenue
Estimated Glass Tonnage
Estimated Glass Price per ton
Estimated Glasa Revenue
Estimated PJast:ie Tonnage .
Estimated Plastic Price per ton
Estimated Plastic Revenue
Estimated Tin/BiMetal Tonnage
Estimated 1m/BiMetal Price per ton
Estimated naiBiMetaJ Revenue
Estimated Aluminum Tonnage
Estimated Aluminum Price per ton
Estimated Aluminum Revenue
Estimated White Paper Tonnage
Estimated White Paper Price per ton
Estimated White Paper Revenue
Estimated Corrugated Tonnage
Estimated Corrugated Price per ton
Estimated Corrupted Revenue
Estimated Other (please list) Tonnage
Estimated Other (please list) Price per ton
Estimated Other (pI... list) Revenue
Estimated Total Recycling Revenue
Actual Revenue Requirement (Total Costs less Revenue)
Annual
Costs
Year 1
Attachment 4c
. Annual
Costs
Year 2
City of DahU. .
Ptoopoeal for Solid W.... Jruda_
Detailed Finaadallalormatloa
fa. WEEKLY JlESIDENnAL YAIlD WASTE COLLlC'l1ON
Annual TQI1S Proc8ssed
Proc:essing/Composins Fee Per Ton
P1ocessing/Composting Costs
Labor Costs
Regular Wages
Overtime Wages
Holiday Wages
Vacation Wages
Sick Leave Wages
Worlan Compensation Insuranc:e.lt Claims
EmployeJs Liability Imurance
Health &c Welfare
Pension/Retirement Benefits
Payroll Taxes
Other (Please List)
Total Labor Costs
Vehicle Related Costs
Fuel
Tiles &c Tubes
Parts
Supplies (fluid,.oil, etc.)
Taxes &c Licenses
Other (Please Ust)
Total VeNcle Related Costs
Other Costs
Liability &c Property Damage Insurance
Equipment Imurance
Rent
Utilities
Telephone
Non-vehicle Related Supplies
Non-vehicle Related Taxes and Licenses
Training &c Safety Programs
Public: Education and Promotion
Uniforms
Other (Please List)
Total Other Costs
Depreciation
Container Depreciation
Truck and Other Depreciation
Total Depreciation
Profit L% Operating Ratio)
Allocated Costs
From Administrative Division
From Maintenance Division
Other (Please List)
Total Allocated Costs
Total Revenue Reqaire....m
Annual
Costs
Year 1
AttacIuaeat 4c:
Annual ,
COIlS
Year 2
Ot)' of Dublin
PIOpOHI for SoUd Watbt PranchiA
Detailed PinlUlcial Inlonnation
4b. BI-WEEKLY 1lESJDEN11AL YARD WASTE COLLECDON
Annual TOIlS Processed
Processing/Composing Fee Per Ton
Processing/Composting Casts
Labor Costs
Regular Wages
Overtime Wages
Holiday Wages
Vacation Wages
Sick Laave Wages
Workers Compensation Insurance Ie ClaUns
Employ81'S Liability Insurance
HealthleWe1fare
Pension/Retirement Benefits
Payroll Taxes
Other (Please u.t)
Total Labor Costs
Vehicle Related Casts
Fuel
TiNs Ie Tubes
Parts
Supplies (fiuid. oil, etc.)
Taxes Ie Ucenses
Other (Please u.t)
Total Vehicle Related Costs
Other Costs
Liability Ie Property Damage Insurance
Equipment Insurance
Rent
Utilities
Telephone
Non-vehicle Related Supplies
Non-vehicle Related Taxes and Licenses
Training Ie Safety Programs
Public Education and PromOtion
Uniforms
Other (Please List)
Total Other Costs
Depreciation
Container Depreciation
Truck and Other Depreciation
Total Depreciation
Profit Ley. Operating Ratio)
Allocated Costs
Prom Administrative Division
From Maintenance Division
Other (Please List)
Total Allocated Costs
Total R.evenue R.equirement
Annual
Casts
Year 1
Attachment 4e
Annual
Costs
Year 2
City of Dublin
Proposal for Solid Waste Franchise
Detailed Financial Information
,5. MULn.PAMlLY/COMMEltCJAUINDUSTlUAL BiN SERVICE
Labor Costs
RepJar Wages
Overtime Wages
Holiday "Wages
Vacaliol\ Wages
Sick Leave Wages
Workers Compensation 1:nsurance Ie Claims
Employers Liability Insurartce
Health Ie Welfare
Pension/Retirement Benefits
Payroll Taxes
Other <Please List)
Total Labor Costs
Vehicle Related Costs
Fuel
Tires Ie Tubes
Parts
Supplies (fluid. oil, etc.)
Taxes & Ucenses
Other (Please Ust)
Total Vehicle Related Costs
Other Costs
Uability & Property Damage Inswance
Equipment Insurance
Rent
Utilities
Telephone
Non-vehicle Related Supplies
Non-vehicle Related Taxes and Licenses
Training & Safety Programs
Public Education and Promotion
Unifonns
Other (Please. Ust)
Total Other Costs
Depreciation
Container Depreciation _
Truck and Other Depreciation
Total DepNCiation '
Profit (_ 'lrt Operating Ratio)
Allocated Costs
From Administrative Division
From Maintenance Division
Other (Please List)
Total Allocated Costs
Total Revenue Requirement
Annual
Costs
Year 1
Attadtmeat 4c:
Annual
Costs
Year 2
.......-.--.....-...-.-. ..--..--
Oty of Dublbt
PropoA1 for SoDd Waste &a11.chUe
Detailed Plnandal hUonnation
6. DEBRIS BOX SERVICE
Labor Costs
Regular Wages
Overtime Wages
Honday Wages
Vacation Wages
Sick Leave Wages
Workers Compensation Insurance lk Claims
Employers Liability Insurance
Health lk Welfare
Pension/Retirement Benefits
Payroll Taxes
.Other (Please List)
Total Labor Costs
Vehiele Related Costs
Fuel
Tires &: Tubes
Parts
Supplies <fluid, oil, etc.-)
Taxes &: Licenses
Other (Please List)
Total Vehicle Related Costs
Other Costs
Liability &: Property Damage Insurance
Equipment Insurance
Rent
Utilities
Telephone
Non-vehicle Related Supplies
Non-vehicle Related Taxes and Licenses
Training &:Safety Programs
Public Education and Promotion
Uniforms
Other (Please List)
Total Other Costs
Depreciation
Container Depreciation _
Tn.ac:k and Other Depreciation
Total Depreciation
Profit (_ CJ(, Operating Ratio)
Allocated Costs
From Administrative Division
From Maintenance Division
Other (Please List)
Total Allocated Costs
Total Revenue Requirement
Annual
Costs
Yeart
_..__...... n............
_....~..IIIT
--_.....~--
AttadIment 4c
.
Annual
Costs
Year 2
..
7. REPUSE DISPOSAL FEE PEK TON
Estimated Annual Tons Disposed
Capital Costs Per Ton
CeJJ Construction Amortization
Closure/Post Closure
Total Capital Costs
Operating Costs Per Ton
Equipment/LandftU Labor
Equipment Operating Expense
Other Operating Expense
Equipnwnt Maimerlance
Insurance Claims
Facility Costs
Depreciation Expense
Landfill Maintenance
Landfill Expansion
Liquids Disposal
Groundwater Monitoring
SG&A Expenses
Corporate S&D I Managoment Fees
Total Operating Costs .
Total Capital and Operating Costs
Operating Ratio
Profit <_ ~ Operating Ratio)
Taxes and Regulatory Fees PerTon
Local Fees
AB 939 Fees
State Facility Fees
Other
Other
Other
Other
Total Taxes and Regulatory Fees
Interest Expense Per Ton
Otyof Dublin
Ploposid for Solid Wute Franchise
Detailed Fbwldalbtformation
Total Cost Per Ton (Total Capital & Operating Costs
plus Profit plus Total Taxes and Regulatory fees
plus Interest Expense)
Total Revenue Requirement <Cost per Ton · Annual ToftJlage Disposed)
Per Ton
Costs
Year 1
_.11....
Attachmellt 4c
Per Ton
Costs
Vear2
.___ ..1 _un. J.
s. REFUSE TRANSFER (If Dot direct bauD
Estimated Annual TODS Transfemd
Labor Costs Per Ton
Wages
Insurance It Claims
Health, Welfare It Benefits
Payroll Taxes
Total Labor Costs
Vehicle Related Costs Per Ton
Fuel
Tires, Parts It Supplies
Taxes It Licenses
Total Vehicle Related Costs
Other Costs Per Ton
Insurance
Rent It Utilities
Non-vehicle Related SuppUes
Training It Safety Programs
Public Education and Promotion
Other
To.tal Other Costs
Depreciation Per Ton
Total Operating Costs
Profit C_ 'JO Operating Ratio)
Taxes and Regulatory Fees PerTon
Total Taxes and Regulatory Fees
Interest Expense Per Ton
CttyofDublin
Pzopa8al for SoIld Waste PtaDcl:WIe
Detailed PhtnadallDformatloll
Total Cost Per Ton (Total Operating Costs plus profit
plus Total Taxes and Regulatory Fees)
Total Revenue Requirement (Cost per TOD · Annual Tonnage TraJlSfened)
Per Ton
Costs
Year 1
. AttacluDent ~
Per Ton
Costs
Year 2
-.
Qtyof 0uWin
rro,o.l for Solid Waste Fraacbl.e
DetGled PhaaadallDtoaa..
ADMINJS'I'RAnvE DIVISION
Labor Costs .
Regular Wages
Overtime Wages
Holiday Wages
Vac:atioft Wages.
Sick Leave Wages
Workers Compensation Insurance &r: Claims
Employers Liability Insurance
Health &r: Welfare
Pension/Retilement Benefits
Payroll Taxes
Other (Please List)
Total LaborCosts
Vehicle RaJatad Costs
Fuel
Tires &r: Tubes
Parts
Supplies (fluid, oil. etc.)
Taxes &r: Licenses
Other (Please List)
Total Vehicle Related Costs
Other Costs
Liability &r: Property Damage Insunmce
Equipment Insurance
Bonds
Rent
Utilities
Telephone
Postage
Non-vehicle Related Supplies
Non-vehicle Related Taxes and Licenses
Bank Fees
Legal Fees
Accounting Fees
Dues &r: Subscriptions
Advertising
Office Equipment Rental
Uniforms
Training and. Safety Programs
Corporate Service and Development Fees
Corporate Management Fees
Deposit Amortization.
Other (Please List)
Total Other Costs
Depreciation
Profit (_ '1ft Operating Ratio)
Interest Expense
Total Costs
Am1ual
CaRs
Year 1
_....11.11
~......_4c
AImua1
COIlS
Year 2
Oty of DuJ;.Un
Proposal for Solid Waste Franchise
Detailed finandal htfom.lation
ADMJNISTRAllVE DIVISION (c:ont.)
Allocated. Out
To Residential Collection
To Residential Rec:yding CoDec:tion and p~
To Residential Green Waste Collec:tionand Proceuing
To Bin Service
To Debris Box Service
To Commercial Recycling Collection and Processing
Total Allocated. Out
Total Revenue Requirement
Annual
Costs
Year 1
Attachmen~ .fc
Annual
Costs
Year 2
o
o
CltyofDabIia
Pmpoeal for SoUcI Wute Ftanchise
Detai1ecI. ~'ftA1IdlJ Iafomaation
Allocated Out
to Residential Collectioft
To Resiclential Rec:ydhig CoUection and Proc.esIinS
To ~I Green W... ColJectlon and Processing
To Bin Service
To Debris Box Service"
To Commercial Recyc11ng CoUdon and Pl'oc:essing
Total Allocated Out
Total Revenue Requirement
A1'lnual
Colts
Yearl
Attachmestt 4c
Annual
Costs
Year 2
o
o
CltyofDabh
Proposal forSolld Waste Franchise
Detailed FlaandaJ Ialannation
MAINfENANCE DIVISION
Labor Costs
Regular Wages
~meWages
Holiday Wages
Vacation Wages
Sick Leave Wages.
Wortcen Compensation Insunmce Ie Claims
Employers Liability Insuranee
HeaJth Ie Welfare
Pension/Retbement Benefits
Payroll Taxes
Other CPtease List)
Total Labor Costs
Related. Costs '
Fuel
TIres & TubeS
Parts
Supplies (fluid. oil, etc.)
Taxes & Licenses
Other (Please List)
Total Related Costs
Other Costs
Liability & Property Damage lnsunsnce
Equipment lnsunsnce
Rent
Utilities
Telephone
Non-vehicle Related SuppUes & Parts'
Non-vehicle Related Taxes and I..icenses
Training & Safety Programs
Uniforms
Shop Equipment Rental
Outside Repair Services
Other (Please List)
Total Other Costs
Total Depredation
Profit C_ " Operating Ratio) .
Interest Expense
Total Costs
Annual
Costs
Year 1
Attadu:aent 4c
Ammal
Colts
Year 2
-...---..----- .-----
Cltyof01abb
Propoeal for SolId Waste PrandWle
~~aqdu~
Allocated Out
To Residential Collection
To Residential RecycJiftg Co1lection and Processing
To Residential Green W.... Col1ection and Processing
To Bin Service
To Debris Box Service'
To Commercial Recycling CoUection and Proc:essing
Total Allocated Out
Total Revenue Requiftment
A1uwal
Colts
Year 1
Attadustent 4c:
"
A1uwal
Costs
Year 2
'J
o
o
~
ATIACHMENT 5
January 18, 1995, Draft
J.
Attachment 5
The following affidavit is submitted by Proposer as a part of this proposal:
The undersigned deponent, of lawful age, being duly sworn, upon his oath deposes and
says: that he has lawful authority to execute the within and foregoing proposal; that he has
executed the same by subscribing his name hereto under oath for and on behalf of said
proposer; that proposer has not directly or indirectly entered into any agreement, express
or implied, with any proposer or proposers, having for its object the controlling of the
price or amount of such proposal or proposals, the limiting of the proposals or proposers,
the parceling or farming out to any proposer or proposers or other persons of any part of
the contract or any part of the subject matter of the proposal or proposals or of the profits
thereof, and that he has not and will not divulge the sealed proposal to any person
whomsoever, except those having a partnership or other financial interest with him in
said proposal or proposals, until after the said sealed proposal or proposals are opened.
Deponent further states that the proposer has not been a party to any collusion among
proposers in restraint of freedom of competition; by agreement to make a proposal at a
fixed price or to refrain from submitting a proposal; or with any state official or employee
as to quantity, quality, or price in the prospective contract; or in any discussions between
proposers and any City official concerning exchange of money or other things of value for
special consideration in the letting of a contract; that the proposer/contractor has not paid,
given or donated or agreed to pay, give or donate to any official, officer or employee of the
City directly or indirectly, in the procuring of the award of contract pursuant to this
proposal.
Executed under penalty of perjury on this
day of
at
SIGNED
BY
Name of Proposer
TITLE
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
day of
. at
Notary Public
My Commission expires:
January l8, 1995, Draft
"'
ATTACHMENT 6
January 18, 1995, Draft
'<
Attadunent 6
NOTICE
THIS COMPANY IS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Bidders are required to accept the following operating policy for Equal Employment or
submit their own.
lilt is the policy of this Company to assure that applicants are employed and that
employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, religious creed,
color, sex, age, national origin or ancestry. Such action shall include but not be limited to,
employment upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising,
lay-off or termination; rates of payor other forms of compensation; and selection for
training, including apprenticeship, pre-apprenticeship training and on-the-job training. II
Dated:
By:
Legal Name of Contractor
Title, Signature
January l8, 1995, Draft
~ ~"
ATIACHMENT7
January 18, 1995, Draft
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF
) ss:
~.
Attachment 7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal in
the County of this day of
My Commission Expires:
Notary Public
January 18, 1995, Draft