Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
RESPONSE - RFP - 7265 WASTE STREAM ANALYSIS STUDY
Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study Proposal No.7265 Presented to Submitted by: SloanvazQUEzLLC Municipal Solid Waste & Recycling Advisors 18006 Skypark Circle, Suite 205 Irvine, CA 92614 Office: 866.241.4533 Fax: 714.276.0625 info @sloanvazguez. com August 12, 2011 SloanvazQUEz,LLC Based upon our interpretation of available data, the report will quantify data for the following generator profiles: • Residential; • Multifamily; • Educational institutions; • Commercial, segregated by sectors as the budget allows (e.g., industrial, institutional, agricultural, brewing, landscaping, health care, hotels, manufacturing, offices, retail, wholesale, transportation and / or mixed). The flow of materials from their point of origin to their final destination will be analyzed in written form and in diagrams. A suggested methodology for determining the weight of at least six material categories currently going to landfills will developed. Sloan Vazquez will describe the statistical issues related to conducting a waste composition based on information provided by collection companies and specific generators after reviewing the data and determining its source, how it was assembled, when it was assembled and how representative of the entire waste stream it might be. To estimate the composition of a waste stream, it is important to use a random sampling procedure. Using data that originates from disparate sources, assembled by different parties for different purposes, will not satisfy the random sampling requirements to estimate the mean percentages of the various material categories. Sloan Vazquez has performed numerous municipal solid waste composition studies using well established stratified random sampling procedure. Sub -Task 2.2 —Analyze the economic value of the material currently sent for disposal to area landfills. Based on the waste composition developed, Sloan Vazquez will identify existing or potential uses for the various material categories and determine the economic value of the materials based on available market prices or costs. The material will be analyzed from the following perspectives; • Quantify embedded energy potential for energy -conversion systems. • Quantify the financial value of materials currently in the waste stream that may be diverted to recycling markets and other recovery systems. • Identify missed economic development and job creation opportunities from current disposal practices. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study Appendix 1: Methodology checklist Roles and responsibilities • sampling crew manager —responsible for identifying selected samples, working with Facility staff and the sampling crew, quality control, and compliance with Facility regulations. • sampling crew —responsible for sorting samples. • MRF manager —responsible for coordinating with the sampling crew manager, SBWMA, and drivers. • scale house staff —responsible for identifying selected vehicles, distributing sample placards, and directing drivers towards the sampling area. • tipping floor staff— creating a designated sampling and sorting area, and ensuring segregation of selected loads in that area. • loader opera tor(s)—respo ns ib le for segregating the selected load from other loads in the designated sampling and sorting area. • project manager —responsible for managing the sampling process. • facility manager —responsible for managing day-to-day operations at the Designated Transfer and Processing Facility. • Contractor— responsible for informing the scale house staff of load origin and type and for passing sample placards to the sampling crew manager. ❑ Advanced Preparation ❑ Project Manager ❑ Contact MRF manager ❑ Confirm study dates ❑ Ask MRF managerto update the following employees with the sampling plan: ❑ scale house staff ❑ loader operator(s) ❑ tipping house staff ❑ Contractor ❑ Any other affected staff ❑ Share study quotas ❑ Request expected traffic volumes ❑ Request safety expectations ❑ Schedule safety training ❑ Ask if there are any circumstances that may affect the study (i.e., weather, animals, site construction, etc.) ❑ Obtain safety gear (Appendix 3) ❑ Check safety gear ❑ Obtain sorting equipment (Appendix 3) ❑ Check sorting equipment Develop and print daily sampling quotas (Appendix 2) ❑ Develop and print vehicle selection sheets (Appendix 2) ❑ Print tally sheets (Appendix 2) ❑ Print on "Rite in the Rain" all-weather paper Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (El) 11 of20 to Sampling crew and sampling crew manager ❑ Review material list ❑ Review field forms ❑ Review study requirements ❑ Review unique site requirements ❑ Review quotas ❑ Arrival at Facility ❑ Sampling crew. ❑ Arrive at Facility ahead of schedule ❑ Participate in any required safety training ❑ Don safety gear ❑ Sampling crew manager: ❑ Arrive at Facility ahead of schedule ❑ Reviews logistics and expectations with MRF manager ❑ Participate in any required safety training ❑ Don safety gear ❑ Scale House Coordination ❑ Sampling crew manager: ❑ Explain the basic objective of the study to the scale house staff ❑ Explain the responsibilities of the scale house staff ❑ Explain the needs of the study despite breaks and shift changes ❑ Encourage scale house staff to plan transitions for breaks and shift changes ❑ Provide scale house staff with vehicle selection sheet ❑ Discuss expected vehicle traffic ❑ Ask scale house staff if this is reasonable ❑ Provide scale house staff with sampling placards ❑ Provide scale house staff with sampling crew manager's cell phone number Tipping Floor Coordination ❑ Sampling crew manager: ❑ Designate a designated sampling/sorting area on each tipping floor (2) with input from tipping floor staff and loader operator(s), meeting the following criteria: ❑ sampling crew can see selected loads entering the tipping floor area ❑ Loader operator(s) can visually communicate with sampling crew ❑ Loader operator(s) can safely remove sorted loads ❑ Approximately twenty (20) feet by twenty (20) feet ❑ Explain and walkthrough the sampling process with both the tipping house staff and the loader operator(s) ❑ Explain how trucks with placards are samples ❑ Explain that samples must be dumped in a clean area, separate from other loads (called a designated dumping area) ❑ Explain that the sampling crew manager is responsible for collecting the placard and responsible for identifying the selected cell of the load that the loader operator(s) will sample ❑ Explain that each sample is between one hundred and twenty five (125) and two hundred and twenty five (225) pounds Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (El) 12of20 ❑ Explain that the sampling crew manager will be responsible for guiding the loader operator(s) to the appropriate tarpaulin ❑ Note: Explanation will need to be repeated for each designated sorting area ❑ Sampling crew: ❑ Set up designated sampling sorting area one ❑ Sorting table ❑ Baskets ❑ Digital scale(s) ❑ Set up designated sampling sorting area two ❑ Sorting table ❑ Baskets ❑ Digital scale(s) ❑ Sample Collection ❑ Tipping house staff: ❑ Direct load to a designated dumping area ❑ Sampling crew manager. ❑ Collect placard from Contractor ❑ Direct loader operator(s) to pre -selected sampling cell Direct loader operator(s) to designated tarpaulin ❑ Signal loader operator(s) with tipping instructions ❑ Pull tarp to test for appropriate sample weight ❑ Place placard in the load ❑ Photograph load ❑ Placard should be visible and legible ❑ Wrap and segregate load until ready to sort ❑ Loader operator(s): ❑ Pinch/scoop sample, as directed by the sampling crew manager ❑ Tip sample on designated tarpaulin, as directed by the sampling crew manager Sampling crew: ❑ May assist sampling crew manager at any point ❑ Sample Sorting ❑ Sampling crew: ❑ Move the sample into the designated sampling/sorting area u Sort the sample ❑ Sort Contamination materials into designated baskets ❑ Assist the sampling crew manager with weighing the baskets Assist the sampling crew manager with weighing the remainder material ❑ Sampling crew manager. ❑ Record the sample identification number onto the tally sheet ❑ Assist the sampling crew in moving the sample into the designated sampling/sorting area ❑ Sort the sample ❑ Sort Contamination materials into designated baskets El Weigh Contamination baskets and record weights on the tally sheet ❑ Ensure homogeneity of materials ❑ Weigh remainder material and record weights on the tally sheet ❑ Ensure all Contamination materials are removed Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (El) 13of20 ❑ Sample Disposal ❑ Sampling crew manager and sampling crew: ❑ Dispose of all materials in a designated disposal area ❑ Loader operator(s): ❑ Remove disposed materials when it is safe and convenient ❑ Data Management ❑ Sampling crew manager. Collect vehicle selection sheets from the scale house staff ❑ Review all forms for accuracy and completeness ❑ Vehicle selection sheet(s) ❑ Tally sheet(s) Project Manager ❑ Check all forms for accuracy and completeness ❑ Vehicle selection sheets(s) ❑ Tally sheet(s) ❑ Copy all data forms ❑ Store copies separate from the originals ❑ Download pictures from camera ❑ Provide copies of data for electronic input o Ensure data entry is checked for accuracy Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (El) 14 of 20 Appendix 2: Example Data collection forms Appendix 2 consists of copies of each of the following three (3) data collection forms Collection vehicle selection sheet sampling placard tally sheet Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (E1) 15of20 Figure 2: Example Collection Vehicle selection sheet Vehicle Selection Sheet Sampling Date: June 25, 2009 SBWMA: Contamination Sampling 1" Load Arrives At: 9:00:00 AM Rethinkftstle Notes: Betty working at scale house, helped with sampling before. Truck No. Load No. ETA Sampling Population Sample ID Sample Cell Vehicle Type Number of samples Net Weight (pounds) Notes 2238 1 9:00 CSS - N CSS-1 3 FL 1 1318 1 9:00 RSS -S RSS-1 8 FL 1 1310 1 10:30 CO - E CO-1 4 FL 1 2305 2 12:00 CO-W CO-2 2 FL 1 1227 1 13:00 CSS - E CSS-2 1 FL 1 1313 1 13:00 RO -E RO-1 9 FL 1 1308 1 13:30 CGW -N CGW-1 7 FL 1 2240 1 14:00 CGW -N CGW-2 1 FL 1 2243 2 14:00 RO - W RO-2 7 FL 1 1317 2 15:30 CSS -N CSS-3 2 RO 1 A'9 ,.. _< � ee� "� MuItFS ' aA'� Fn ma'�sys m '3" ��.s [e U "N gg��� p„ �" Imo, E 'F x 4�� �` m emu. „,a �� �� � � OM �� � 1319 2 15,30 CGW -E CGW-3&4 6,13 FL 2 1309 2 15:30 RSS -N RSS-2&3 9,1 FL 2 CONTINGENCYIVIPLESz 1316 1 11:30 RSS - N 7 FL 1 2244 2 11:30 RO - W 14 FL 1 Any Additional Samples or notes? Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (E1) 16of20 Figure 3: Example Sampling placard Date: Jurisdiction: RSS 1 Cell Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (E1) 17of20 Figure 4: Example Tally sheet (South Bayside Waste Management Authority: Contamination Sampling RethinkWaste a:, tarre»sam�eainv auvm DATE: SAMPLE ID: Container 1 Container 2 h Container F 2 Q Container Z Containers Q F Container OContainer] U Container Container 8 Container 10 ' Container 1 Container 2 Container 3 -W.-� Container m Q � Container S ^_qWQ Container 6 U 1m '.�U Container ] Container 8 Container 9 Container 10 SAMPLING POPULATION: SAMPLE WEIGHT: TIME: TRUCK NO.: LOAD NO.: CELL NO.: Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (E1) 18 of 20 Appendix 3: Equipment list Appendix 3 provides a list of equipment necessary for all sampling and sorting activities. Extra safety equipment should be available to ensure the safety of observers or others at the sorting site. Sorting equipment: • approximately twenty (20) identical sorting containers (e.g. laundry baskets or five (5) gallon buckets) • square point shovels • rakes • push brooms • digital scale, battery powered (weigh up to four hundred (400) pounds, accurate to one -tenth (1/10) of a pound) • spare batteries for the scale • fifteen (15) to twenty (20) ten (10) foot by twelve (12) foot or similar size tarps • clipboards • field forms printed on Rite in the Rain paper • permanent markers • mechanical pencils • tape measures • utility knives, scissors • duct tape • ten (10) to fifteen (15) Carts • ten (10) to fifteen (15) plastic receptacles • four (4) metal eight (8) foot by twelve (12) foot tables • one (1) metal work desk with drawer • erasable placards and markers • digital camera with extra flash card • moisture probe • six (6) special pallets with solid tops • three (3) six cubic yard Bins • three (3) three cubic yard Bins Safety equipment: • dust masks (N-95 or better) • safety glasses • hearing protection • steel -toed work boots • puncture resistant gloves • glove liners (latex or nitrile) • leather work gloves • reflective safety vests (Brite Lime) • hard hats • safety/medical kit • fire extinguisher • disinfecting soap, paper towels, antiseptic towels • water • rubber aprons or Tyvek protective garments Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (E1) 19 of 20 Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (Ell) 20 of 20 SloanvazQUEz,LLC TASK 3: Identify at Least Two of the Most Feasible Energy -Conversion Systems or Technologies (CTs) The City of Fort Collins is taking a forward looking approach to the handling of their post -recycled solid waste by evaluating the feasibility of converting the residual waste to renewable electricity or fuel. Many other communities in the U.S. are conducting such studies as landfill space becomes scarcer, disposal costs rise, renewable energy becomes more precious, and other factors, such as global warming, drive waste management from disposal to recovery with new technologies. However, in Fort Collins the landfill still has plenty of life, and the tipping fees are very low, in the $20/ton range. It is likely that the costs of a large CT facility will be much higher than this, at least for the foreseeable future. But there may be opportunities for smaller, more customized CT projects such as digesters for source -separated foodwaste, or CT plants for specific large generators like the breweries that produce a consistent organic waste every day. These applications are less expensive, easier to finance and develop, and may offer a feasible "entry level" project for the City Another possibility would be to divert source -separated organics to a digester at the Drake Water Reclamation Facility. Several communities throughout the U.S. are evaluating or starting up such projects, particularly where there is excess digester capacity. Often these treatment plants are already equipped with engines that burn the digester gas to create electricity or boilers that convert the gas to heat, which can also be a big savings to the project. We believe these smaller, special application technologies should be the focus of this project For this task, the Sloan Vazquez team will conduct the following work: Sub -Task 3.1— Provide a Conversion Technology Overview The team will prepare brief overview of the types of energy recovery technologies including: anaerobic digestion, gasification, and others. The team will pull from their experience on past and ongoing CT projects with the City of Los Angeles, the County of Los Angeles, the City of Paso Robles, the City and County of Santa Barbara, the City of San Diego, and Orange County to develop this overview of technologies. Special attention will be paid to the smaller systems that could fit a niche market in Fort Collins. Sub -Task 3.2 — Provide a list of current CT vendors Based on their most recent work, the team will prepare a table listing all the currently active vendors by technology category. The list will likely include over 100 vendors. The list will highlight those that have made the most progress to date in the U.S. and those that would fit the unique solid waste system and pricing in Fort Collins. Sub -Task 3.3 — Evaluate Preliminary Results of Composition Study Based on the early results of the composition study, the S/V team will look for the best fit with CTs. For example, a wastestream high in wet organics (source -separated foodwaste, yardwaste) is a likely candidate for anaerobic digestion (AD); while a mixed MSW or other waste high in plastics, wood and other relatively dry carbon materials may favor a thermal conversion process. These characterizations Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study 4 Quarterly Contamination Measurement Policies and Procedures March 15, 2011 Purpose The Contamination Measurement Policies and Procedures ("Policies and Procedures' provides additional and clarified policies and procedures necessary to perform the sampling methodology described in AttachmentE-2 Contamination Measurement Methodology: QuarterlyProtoml("E-2'�. The Policies and Procedures document mainly serves to address particular areas of such importance to the affected parties and to the successful completion of the sampling process that they should be agreed upon prior to commencing sampling. This document may be considered a "final draft" for the purposes of the performing the first quarter 2011 sampling. Learnings from the first quarter sampling period may suggest a need to revise this document for subsequent sampling periods. Integrated within this document is the previously approved Sample Selection Protocol content. Route and Sample Cell Selection "Routes, " "Loads"and "Vehicles" In describing the load selection methodology, the term "route" is used in place of "load" as it is the routes that shall be randomly selected for sampling. The first load of each randomly selected route will be purposely chosen for sampling. The process below describes the methodology for randomly selecting a route from a particular material stream for a given day of the week. The Sample Selection Protocol does not refer to collection vehicle numbers associated with the collection routes as vehicle numbers may change due to, for example, scheduling changes and vehicle repairs. Sampling Population Load samples shall be collected from each material stream as described in E-2, Section 1. Each of the E-2 identified materials streams are collected via multiple routes identified by route number. For the purposes of sampling, the route associated with each sampling population will be considered free of any materials that are not a part of the associated sampling population. For example, residential recyclables should not contain any commercial recyclables. Random Route Selection Tool Random selection of routes to be sampled can be achieved via a variety of methods. The method chosen for the Sample Selection Protocol utilizes Microsoft Excel's random number generating function to provide a randomized rank ordering of the routes provided by Recology. Specifically, the Excel RAND and RANK functions are used to generate a sequence of randomly ordered, non -duplicated integers in the range determined by the number of routes in a given list. These numbers are associated with the route numbers for each material type, and are used to determine the selection order of the routes. This randomization function and the resulting selections are presented in the form of a simple Microsoft Excel Workbook ("Randomizer'. To aid in transparency, the formulae used in randomizing selection involve standard Excel functions. No scripting (programming) is used to achieve the results. See Figure 1 for an example format of the resulting selections for one material stream and one day of the week. On March 4, 2011 or ten (10) business days prior to the first sampling period, the Randomizer will be made available, electronically, to Recology and the SBWMA to review and approve the integrity of its random selection formulae. Any necessary revisions will be provided in writing to the contamination sampling contractor within two (2) business days of receipt of the Randomizer. Revisions to the Randomizer will be integrated and a final Randomizer for use in all future sampling periods will be delivered electronically to Recology and the SBWMA for their records. (E2) 1 of 8 Figure 1: Example Format of Route Selection Results Material Type: Residential Recyclables Day: Monday Random Number Selection Order Route # Cell # Alternate Cell # 9049212... 5 1820 6 14 4546872... 2 1821 14 2 6709992... 4 1822 2 9 1132389... 1 1823 9 11 5943212... 3 1824 11 13 Random Route Selection Methodology At least fifteen (15) business days prior to the actual application of the Sample Selection Protocol in any given quarter, Recology will provide to the contamination sampling contractor a current route list in the format set forth in the Randomizer. This list will be used for making route selections using the process identified herein. This route list will contain route numbers organized by material type and, if feasible, will indicate the volume of material collected from the individual jurisdictions associated with each route day. Recology has agreed to explore this and tonnage data will be included with an updated route list if feasible. Upon receipt of the route list, the contamination sampling contractor will populate the Randomizer with the route data. The populated Randomizer will then be delivered to the SBWMA and Recology to ensure accurate integration of the route data. The SBWMA and Recology will have two (2) business days to review the data and provide any necessary revisions to the contamination sampling contractor. After approval of the integrated data, the contamination sampling contractor will execute' the randomization function of the Randomizer once. This step will rank the routes for each day of the sampling period. The highest ranked routes (with one (1) being the highest) will be used to create sampling groups. Table 1 indicates the number of routes in each sampling group and the approximate number of samples to be selected from each group (in parentheses). Routes in each sampling group will be sampled in the order of each collection vehicle's arrival at the facility until the desired number of samples is obtained. If the number of routes associated with a particular sampling population is less than the indicated size of the sampling group, all routes associated with that population will compose the sampling group. In other words, if the ideal sample group size is six (6) but there are only four (4) routes total in the sampling population, then the sample group will comprise four (4) routes. This is the case for the Commercial Organic Materials routes. The method described above helps ensure that circumstances such as communication errors, vehicle failures and simultaneous arrival of selected routes/vehicles will not impact the ability to collect a sufficient number of samples of each material type per day. This method will be used by the contamination sampling contractor to develop its Collection Route Selection Sheet. ' The Randomizer will create a random sample order set every time the user presses the F9 function key. The function key triggers what is called a "volatile" function in Excel, producing a sequence of random numbers, each to a near infinite decimal place. These random numbers are then sorted by value in ascending order using the Microsoft Excel function "RANK." The order changes every time the volatile random number function is activated. Note that activation of the random number function can also be triggered by any alteration to the Excel workbook (e.g., typing in a spreadsheet cell, changing cell sizes, etc.). The sample selection order is therefore randomized by a two step process: a random number generator and a sample ranking according to the value of the random numbers. (E2) 2 of 8 Table I provides the approximate number of routes which will be selected from the ranked ordered routes and sampled for each day of the week. The number of routes selected for sampling on each day will be adjusted as necessary to accommodate for route timing and unforeseen circumstances, and to ensure that the required number of total samples for the sampling period are obtained and sorted. Table 1: Approximate Number of Routes Sampled Per Day by Material ll : r Total Material _ Mon �9Tue�� Weld `Thurs`£ �Fn Samples Bvy ' pffi Ga ^»Ai nA.`£.N.yy_£T § � & Commercial Targeted 6 (3)* 6 (3) 6 (2) 6 (2) 6 (2) 12 Recyclable Materials Commercial Organic 6 (3) 6 (3) 6 (2) 6 (2) 6 (2) 12 Materials Residential Targeted 6 (3) 6 (3) 6 (2) 6 (2) 6 (2) 12 Recyclable Materials Residential Organic 6 (3) 6 (3) 6 (2) 6 (2) 6 (2) 12 Materials 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 Commercial Plant Materials 6 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 Total Samples Each Day 13-14 13-14 9-10 9-10 9-10 54 *"6" refers to the size of the sample group and "(3)" refers to the approximate number of samples to be taken. Random Cell Selection Methodology Using a process similar to that used for route selection, the Randomizer will also be used to select a primary sample cell out of a possible sixteen (16) cells (see cell grid diagram in Figure 1 in E-2 documentation) for association with each route. It is not anticipated that an alternate sample cell will be required; however the Randomizer will generate an alternate cell for each route to provide a contingency. The alternate cell may be required if, for example, the integrity of part of a sample load is impacted by accidental unloading of a separate load onto part of the sample load or if, as suggested in the E-2 (Figure 2) "Example Collection Vehicle Selection Sheet," there may be a need to take multiple samples from a sample load as may be appropriate, if agreed upon during the sampling period by Recology and the SBWMA, to ensure that the desired number of samples are obtained without having to extend the number of days in the sampling period. Observation and Record Keeping If a representative of the SBWMA or Recology wishes to observe the randomization process, this event must be scheduled to take place after integration of Recology-provided route data and at least seven (7) business days in advance of any given sampling period. The observation of the randomization process will take place at the contamination sampling contractor's offices. In order to ensure that the selected routes are not disclosed to the SBWMA and Recology in advance of the sampling period, route numbers will be hidden during the randomization observation process. Observers will be limited to viewing the rank changes and noting the timing of the generation of the PDF. The randomized results will be preserved for audit purposes by saving the Excel workbook and associated worksheets as a PDF file. Considerations Commercial Plant Materials These materials are, in most cases, currently collected on the same routes that collect commercial organics. The fact that commercial organic and commercial plant materials are not collected separately (E2) 3 of 8 under normal operating conditions presents a challenge in conforming to the E-2 protocol. Either a deviation from the E-2 protocol (to allow sampling of 4 streams instead of 5) will be required, or a new sampling protocol involving special collections will need to be developed in order to provide the samples required in E-2. In an effort to conform to E-2 which requires sampling of separate Commercial Organic Materials and Commercial Plant streams, plant material roll -off drop boxes and compactor ("roll -off containers' accounts will be used to select loads for sampling during the first quarter 2011 sampling period. (This approach will be reviewed for effectiveness after the first quarter 2011 sampling period and revised as necessary.). Because many roll -off accounts are serviced "on -call," the associated routes will not be subject to random sampling. Rather, Recology will ensure that six (6) roll -off containers will be available for sampling over the course of the sampling period (i.e., Monday through Friday). In addition, Recology will, to the best of its ability, spread the targeted loads out over the course of the sampling period week. The contamination sampling contractor will still provide randomized sample cells regardless of whether route information is available to include in the Randomizer. In the event that there is no available route information, the contamination sampling contractor will simply use the randomized sample cells associated with the "Selection Order," in the Randomizer. For example, the first plant materials only roll - off container to enter the facility will be identified as number "1" in the selection order and the corresponding sample cell will be used. Routes Using Specialized Trucks for "Hard-to-Service"and "Very-Hard-to-Service"Accounts These routes and their associated smaller capacity collection vehicles are given equal weight in the route selection process. The methodology for sampling and sorting these smaller load sizes, including the size of the cell grid used, will be addressed in the CMQP. The SBWMA and Recology agree to revisit whether or not it makes sense to reduce the number of cells used for the smaller capacity trucks after the Ql sampling period. Jurisdictional Representation in Sample Selections There is potential in a given sampling period for random selection of routes to result in a set of sampled materials which may not be representative of the materials generated by all jurisdictions. This should be balanced over time as more samples are sorted. For the purposes of the Sample Selection Protocol, jurisdictional representation will be observed by the SBWMA over four (4) sampling periods in order to determine if a modification to the Sample Selection Protocol will be required for the following calendar year. "Multi- Tip -Routes The Sample Selection Protocol does not provide a methodology for selecting different loads from "multi - tip" routes —routes which may tip their loads at the Shoreway Environmental Center more than one time a day due to seasonality or other variables. For the purposes of the Protocol, the first load of the day for any given selected route will be targeted for sampling. The Protocol will be assessed after gathering data from four (4) quarterly sampling periods to determine if a protocol modification is needed. "Start Up Helper Routes" Using Relief Drivers Recology identified the Start Up Helper Routes #623, #631, #632, #633, #634, #635 and #636 as commercial recycling accounts. These routes will be included in the route selection process. Incomplete Routes Routes selected for sampling may be interrupted or commingled with other route loads due to: • Collection "coverage" for a disabled collection vehicle by a vehicle from a different route. • A malfunctioning collection vehicle which tips its load before completing most of its route • Driver Illness Recology will immediately inform contamination sampling contractor of route delivery issues. Alternate routes will be selected where necessary. (E2) 4 of 8 Sampling Calendar Section 3 of E-2 indicates that quarterly sampling events will not be scheduled five (5) days immediately before or after Holidays. Quarterly sampling events are also to be completed by the last day of the applicable quarter. To allow for completion of a quarterly sampling event impacted by an act of god, equipment failure or other unforeseen circumstances, the SBWMA and Recology may mutually agree to schedule a sampling event as necessary. Sampling Accuracy The SBWMA and Recology accept that any agreed upon reduction in the number of quarterly samples may impact the statistical confidence levels for any given sampling period. Materials Sorting List The sampling crew will use the Appendix A: Materials Sorting List as a guide in making determinations as to whether particular sample materials are contaminants. Appendix A does not and cannot address all possible encountered materials or combinations of materials. It is a working document which will be refined over successive sampling periods. In instances where Appendix A does not provide an obvious determination as to whether a particular material or combination of materials is a contaminant, the sampling crew will use its best judgment to make that determination unless designated representatives of the SBWMA and Recology are present to make that determination prior to completion of sorting for any given sample. Load/Route Identification Load or route identification for sampling is addressed broadly in E-2. The detailed process for ensuring the identification and "capture" of the randomly selected routes at the scale house or upon entry to the transfer station will be addressed administratively by the MRF and transfer station managers in coordination with the sampling crew manager. It should be noted though that the scale house attendant carries the responsibility of directing selected route drivers not to unload their load unless directed to do so, and for ensuring that information contained in the Collection Route Selection Sheet is not disclosed to collection vehicle drivers. Aside from capturing routes and directing drivers, the scale house attendant will also be responsible for making collection vehicle selection decisions to ensure that sampling quotas as defined in Table 1 are met. This work will involve keeping a record of the numberof routes within each sampling group which have been selected and directed to the designated sampling/sorting area. It will also involve effectively coordinating the timing of sampling the different material types with the sampling crew manager. This is important as the various material types tend to arrive in concentrations at different times of the day and the sampling crew will want to set up and perform its sampling and sorting operations to align with these arrival times. It is expected that this process will be refined during the first quarter 2011 sampling period. Designated Sampling/Sorting Areas and Tipping Floor Coordination Prior to and during each sampling period, the MRF and transfer station managers will create and maintain designated sampling/sorting areas on the MRF and transfer station tipping floors as identified and developed in pre -sampling period consultations and sampling dry runs. It is understood that these areas may need to be modified in subsequent periods after completion of the MRF and transfer station facilities. The level of traffic and limited space in both the MRF and transfer station, in part, resulting from temporary, in -progress construction of these facilities, may in some cases, impact the management of sample loads. For example, sample loads may need to be shifted using a loader to allow for influxes in vehicle traffic and materials. In such cases, best efforts will be made to maintain the integrity of loads as they were originally unloaded from the collection vehicle. Similarly, best efforts will be made to ensure that materials from other loads do not contaminate selected sample loads. (E2) 5 of 8 Limited available space for "stockpiling" multiple sample loads which arrive simultaneously may require selected route drivers to queue and stage their collection vehicles in a designated area until individual loads can be unloaded, sampled and the area cleared for the next load. Failure of drivers to wait as necessary for the sampling crew manager to direct unloading of collection vehicles may result in insufficient sample collection and an extra day(s) of sampling at Recology's expense. Sample Collection Unloading While it is the responsibility (as defined in E-2) of the tipping floor staff to direct drivers to empty their entire truckload of material in an elongated pile on a designated dumping area, the sampling crew manager will need to assume control over this activity, in part, to ensure that the integrity and identity of loads are maintained. Tipping floor staff will be made available in the MRF and the transfer station during the sampling period to provide assistance to the sampling crew manager such as in cases of simultaneous arrival of selected routes. The Sampling Crew Manager will instruct the driver to use his/her knowledge of the type and volume of the load to unload the materials in a form that best approximates the cell grid identified in E-2. For example, the driver will make best efforts to ensure that the load is not long and flat or piled high on itself. Sample Cell Extraction Both the loader and the excavator heavy equipment will be used as available and at the discretion of the sampling crew manager to obtain the most precise cell extractions possible. As witnessed during the sampling dry runs, these "tools" are inherently imprecise. The sampling crew manager and loader operator will make best efforts to extract sample cells in a manner to that most closely adheres to the methodology described in E-2. In situations where using the 16 cell (2w x 2h x 41) grid (as described in E-2: Figure 1) to define a sample cell would not likely produce a sufficient sample cell weight (such as might be the case with a load from a specialized truck used to service hard -to -service accounts), the sampling crew manager, at his/her discretion, will use a modified cell grid. Because randomly selected cell numbers in the range of 1-16 are generated for each randomly selected route, any reduction in the number of cells in the sixteen cell grid requires a methodology for converting the existing random number to an alternate cell number existing in the modified cell grid. Figure 2 is a conversion table for cell grids containing 12 cells (e.g., 2w x 2h x 31), 8 cells and 4 cells. If, for example, an 8 cell grid is required for a particular route's load, but the randomly selected cell for the route is 14, the corresponding cell in an 8 cell grid would be 6. In the case of a 12 cell grid, the numbers 13, 14, 15, and 16 are assigned to top corner, top middle, bottom middle, and bottom comer cell positions in a 12 cell grid. All modified grids will be renumbered in the same format defined graphically in E-2: Figure 1. (E2) 6 of 8 Figure 2: Sample Cell Conversions of Cells i� Modified �U® MMMMM 1 MMMM -11; MEMEM 10 MMMMM93 MEMEM ' $ MEMEM EM MMM ' 6 MOMME s MMUM '.4] ®®E®N D 3' MMUMEHI MEMEM511 Sample Weight Estimating As indicated in E-2, pulling the tarpaulin taught is the basic test to be used to estimate sample weight. This method of estimating is prone to inaccuracies and estimates which may be revealed in final (post sorting) sample weights outside of the 50 pound weight range indicated for the various material types. Other more accurate alternatives for weight estimation have been considered, but have been determined to be too potentially time-consuming and logistically challenging for the purposes of the first quarter 2011 sampling period. The "pull" (or manual lift) method will be used despite the potential for misestimating. Best efforts will be made to err on the side of exceeding the weight range while taking into consideration the additional labor time associated with sorting heavier samples. The sample weight estimating effort will be considered successful if the average weight for all samples within a sampling population falls within the population's established weight range. After the first quarter 2011 sampling period, the actual sample weights will be reviewed to determine if an alternative weight range test should be considered for subsequent sampling periods. If, as a result of a pull test, a sample is determined to be too heavy or too light the following procedure will be used to lighten or increase its weight. As with weight estimation, it is understood by all parties that this procedure is highly subjective and imprecise due to the non-standard and amorphous nature of the materials being sampled. Further, the amount of effort placed into such a procedure must be balanced with the need to expeditiously process and sort a large volume of samples and materials. If a sample is determined to be too heavy, it will be lightened by removing vertical slices from the sample. The sampling crew manager will remove two (2) slices each representing half of the estimated weight to be removed from the sample with the initial slice taken from side of the sample closest to the comer of the tarpaulin to which the tarpaulin's drawstring is attached and the second slice taken from the opposite comer of the tarpaulin. In cases where, for example, a large bag or large object such as a tree limb spans the location in which the slice would be initiated, such objects will not be "sliced into". Instead, the material nearest the corner clock -wise from the initial tarpaulin corner will be sliced. If a load, due to its composition, is inherently difficult to be sliced, material will be pulled off of the pile using an appropriate tool. A second pull test will be performed after the slices are removed. If it is determined that additional material needs to be removed, the procedure described above will be repeated. (E2) 7 of 8 If a sample is determined to be too light, the excavator operator will be instructed to extract additional material from the vicinity of the sample cell. Best efforts will be made to add or remove all material in a slice from the top to bottom, to ensure that both small, heavy, and loose materials and large, light, and bagged materials are added or removed. Only after a the sampling crew manager has informed the loader operator that the necessary amount of material has been extracted for sampling will the loader operator remove the remainder of the load for processing by the facility. The loader operator will then ensure that the designated sample selection area is, to the extent possible, clean and free of materials from the previous sample. (E2) 8 of 8 Appendix A: Materials Sorting List March 18, 2011 The Materials Sorting List is a working document to be used in gaining clarity regarding acceptable materials and contaminants as the definitions provided in the Franchise Agreement do not, in all cases, provide the level of specificity needed to make sorting decisions. The document will ultimately serve the additional purpose of being a training and reference tool for sorters. The organization of the document including the "Yes's" and "No's" side by side helps in understanding (especially for sorters) that there are some subtle differences between certain items in the various categories (e.g., plastics). "Yes's" refer to the items to the left. "No's" refer to the items on the right, except in the Irregular and Combined materials section where the right column is for notes. Green is used to indicate organic materials and blue to indicate recyclable materials. ORGANIC INATERI`ALS, m,� NVNT s, $� �t Acceptable?' Food scraps including: , • Meat including bones Cooking oil • Fish • Vegetables • Fruit, including pits x • Grains s L • Dairy • Egg shells �� ® � m N 15 Paper products soiled with food including: ruk • Coffee filters �`_� �a�a „� • Juice or milk cartons made of poly -coated • Paper cups (e.g., chain store coffee cups) � ; �� paper (i.e., standard milk cartons) • Paper platesLI-f Juice or soy milk type boxes with foil liner • Paper ice cream containers � (e.g., Tetra -Pak) e .: UL � • Paper bags • Paper napkin and paper towels • Tissue paper including used paper '" a • Paper tea bags q^ • Greasy pizza boxes• Waxed cardboard and paper a • Cardboard egg cartons��' U� • Wine corks (made from cork not plastic) �� Plant materials including k �= • Branches and brush , � v � � �� Palm fronds • Tree trimmings Sod YES,pNO • Leaves Cactus • Flowers and floral trimmings Yucca _z • Grass cuttings and weeds ga "Bioplastics" including: � • Biodegradable plastic food service ware Regular plastic trash bags or compostable bags � �" includingcompostable clamshells cups and com p p �° �`� which o not have a BPI -certified logo(These utensils clearly labeled "compostable" or g� large plastic bags containing organics will be "biodegradable" WOOVX SAW Nor �� � opened/broken to sort materials and the bags • Compostable bio plastic bags (must have BPI � � ' A� "��� �. will be considered contaminants. Small bags g certified logo) YE� S„ such as Safeway grocery bags with unknown m ��� w � � � � contents will not be opened and will be considered contaminants in entirety) r Styrofoam or plastic "clam shell" containers '' Utensils which are not clearly labeled "compostable" or "biodegradable." (E3) 1 of 5 Wood pieces (unpainted, untreated) 5 including: Pressure treated and painted wood • Small scraps of lumber Plastic corks • Corks (made from cork bark) Laminated or painted MDF or plywood • Popsicle sticks YES ENO • Chopsticks • Plywood (unpainted, non -laminated) T MOM, • MDF/composite wood (unpainted, non 0AZ sm laminated) Other: �3 � Animal excrement • Pieces of unpainted wallboard (also called 1Wk ' 1 _4 4. Diapers sheetrock and drywall) Brick, concrete, rock, gravel, large quantities of _�- dirt, concrete (If plant materials are combined �.s YES with more than 50% inert materials such as ;NO dirt, the entire amount should be considered inert.) • Liquids and ice Recyclable materials (e.g., glass, aluminum, paper, plastics 1-7) RECYCLAB 3E)MATER3ALS � �� ����� � � � � �.�,fi•. M , w.�.:. Paper including: `� A N` •Office paper e U jay .£ Clumped, wet paper ("wringable", exhibiting • Computer paper free -flowing liquid and drips is considered • Newspaper including inserts and coupons h�a '' contaminated; dampness and sheets of paper • Newspaper in protective delivery bag loosely stuck together is acceptable) • Magazines Paper cups (e.g., coffee cups) • Junk mail Juice, soup or soy milk boxes with foil liners • Catalogs (e.g., Tetra -Pales) • Paperboard • Telephone books (e.g, "Yellow Pages' e • Books • Colored paper= • Construction paper • Packing paper&Tp • Legal pad backings" • Shoe boxes AYES NO q • Envelopes (including those with plastic windows) • Sticky notes • Shredded paper (should be in paper bag labeled "shredded but if in bag, paper" plastic r bag will be opened, removed and considered a contaminant) • wrapping paper (non-metallic) • Paper bags WAx • Department store bags with nylon rope handle • Corrugated cardboard (non -waxed) a �s • Cardboard egg cartons 13 • Cereal and other similar food boxes " • Paper milk and juice cartons (including those with plastic spouts) (E3) 2 of 5 SloanvazQUEz,L« may fall along generator categories. For example, the multi -family stream, if higher in organics, could be a better fit for digestion; whereas the drier commercial waste with more fiber could be better handled by the thermal processes. Material from the breweries could be perfect for AD; from construction and demolition sites for thermal conversion. It will depend on the results of the composition work. Results of the embedded energy potential of the various wastestreams will also be taken into account. Sub -Task 3.4 — Evaluate Capacity Issues Most CT vendors prefer small plants in the 200-300 TPD range, while some favor larger, regional plants in the 500-1,000 TPD range. This will also be considered when the team looks at the different wastestreams, their energy value, the tons per day being disposed, and the impacts of future recycling and composting programs on the total waste available for energy conversion. The team will also take into account the possibility of combined waste from the surrounding communities in a regional approach to the renewable energy plant. This evaluation will of necessity look at the existing stakeholders (the haulers) and their own individual options for diversion or disposal. In other words, we must determine where the feedstock for a CT plant would come from, how much we can expect to attract, and finally at what price. As we mentioned before, there may be specific generators, such as the breweries, that offer unique wastes for an entry level CT project. Most, but not all, of the CTs are modular, and thus can be developed in phases as the need arises for greater capacity. The advantage here is that the plants can be designed small to start, leaving room in the wastestream for more diversion through source reduction, reuse, recycling, or composting. We will also evaluate the potential for using one of the digesters at the Drake Water Reclamation Facility for processing source -separated organics (foodwaste primarily) for conversion to biogas. This biogas can be added to the existing digester gas and fired in the boiler to provide heat for the treatment process and the facility buildings. Sub -Task 3.5 — Evaluate Environmental Factors Different types of technologies carry different environmental impacts. For example, the thermal technologies generally must grapple with air emission issues, whereas digestion technologies face the challenge of composting the digestate. The technologies also face different permitting challenges, although all can be expected to by closely scrutinized through an arduous process. The thermal technologies have a more difficult permitting pathway, as they are more vigorously opposed by some environmental groups than the digestion technologies, which are often perceived as more benign. Sub -Task 3.6 — Evaluate Economic Factors Perhaps the most critical aspect/challenge of CT development in any specific jurisdiction is the current disposal situation (landfill cost and remaining life), as well as the value of the key products, namely renewable electricity or "green' fuel (ethanol, CNG, biomethane, etc.). The s/V team is aware that current landfilling costs in the Fort Collins area are very low fees ($20/ton range), which could be an impediment to CT development. However, this "tipping fee gap" may be closed by higher revenues for renewable power or fuel, but this will need to be studied during this project. Also, a smaller, niche type project.may be more competitive with the landfill, and we will be looking for the best possibilities. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study ty Glass including: ME • Glass bottles and jars (and metal lids) of any UW « '��Q ya • Drinking glasses (made of glass) color including: brown blue clear, and green Rojo Mirrors windows and any glass that is not a (must not contain free flowing liquid or food NOB� bottle or jar clumps)�� "?. ��� ��� �` Light bulbs "e Glass bottles and jars containing free flowing 8 J&�'J�� � s�� �� � liquid or food clumps s Metal including: • Aluminum cans including food and beverage � ` Wire metal banding, chains cables 9, �� �� containers Fb Automotive parts • Aluminum foil and trays (if clean) � ®� Cans and aluminum foil and trays containing • Small pieces of scrap metal weighing less thane Mm TM free flowing liquid or food clumps 10 Ibs (NO chain, cable, wire, banding, hand YES NO2 Lidded paint cans that, as determined by tools, or automotive parts)"shake or weight," have dried or liquid • Steel, tin and bi-metal containers including ® S, residuals (Cans will not be opened.) Q paint cans (if empty and dry)N N' Spray cans that as determined by "shake or • Metal jar lids `� ��' ��' weight," have residual contents (Cans will not • Aerosol spray cans (if empty) WOd W"8 be sprayed.) Plastics including: • Plastic bottles, tubs and other containers :Lj Stryofoam (e.g., Styrofoam egg cartons even if including clam shells stamped with SPI code � �� �ig ���� labeled #6 ' #1 through #7, except black plastic (must not "'A� Black plastic even if labeled 1 7 or PET, HDPE, contain food clumps or be more than 1/4 full �' NNIMTOZ V �N PP with liquid)��®� Any container not indicated as 1 7 but labeled • Plastic bottles, tubs and other containers ����,�� LDPE, PS, or V. (except black plastic) including clam shells note ����� Plastic forks, knives and spoons (cutlery) stamped 1-7 but which clearly can be identified Plastic bags including those used to contain as PET, HDPE, and PP. ��� �� � recyclables • Caps and lids from plastic bottles, tubs and O a m Plastic films (pallet wrap, shrink wrap, bubble other containers whether attached to theg5 �q wrap, food wrappers, etc.) container or not ; Juice pouches YESs� ENO ` • Plastic buckets • Condiment packages • Plastic coffee cup lids�� ���nD �� � � < Plastic milk creamer containers • Strawberry baskets (even if not labeled 1 7 orR�� ® Plastic corks (and any other corks) PET, HDPE or PP) CK Plastic protective seals/wraps for containers p" • Plastic 9 cups" cups includingred "keg and clear Ps ,0ROm� � Plastic drinking straws plastic cocktail cups (if labeled) %a � �e2 • Garden hoses Rubber bands w a a Diapers Rsk U N 00 .a , s • Black plastic flower and nursery pots (colored, �AN labeled are OK) Plastic bottles and containers containing free n flowing liquid or food 9 iq wd clumps t". .� Toys Inert Materials including: OeA- r Ceramics 4V V6 Concrete asphalt stones bricks rocks sand �® etc. (E3) 3 of 5 Other:®�€ Hangers (plastic, metal, or wood) . Automotive parts and products NO • Tires Batteries and cell phones Wood d Household hazardous waste q .�F"rse wfaE m Compostable clamshell, lined with foil and with V Reject all as contaminated mustard packet inside NO Materials in a non -BPI certified yet compostable bag 1'ES Bag should be broken open and sorted Small Safeway plastic grocery bag loosely tied with , ��� Plastic bags obviously meant for compostables will what appears to be various compostables and m 2R E be broken and sorted. Bags such as the one possible non-compostables A z e 1,E described or bags which contain obvious mixed �e ZI6, , contaminants and compostables will be rejected. Clear-bagged paper janitorial products incl uding mgqg Bag will be opened and accepted as long material is what was presumed to be partially spent rolls of not soiled with excrement or combined with toilet paper generated when janitorial staff swap, cleaning products. out partially used rolls for new, large rolls Unopened, bagged loaf of bread ENO Ziplocked bag of uncooked chicken Book Milk cartons stuffed with food scraps NO I Plant with a large root ball composed mostly of dirt v�t Large 8"xI0"x24" block of wood that still fits in toter'YES Candle (paraffin, soy, beeswax) `ENO Bananas with plastic branding banding Poison Oak If encountered a determination will be made whether to reject the load or the sample for a new YES ® load or alternative sample in order to ensure the safety of the sorters. Vegetables with rubber band (broccoli) YES Vegetables with wire band (lettuce) N YTSA Cheesecloth (textile) i'ES Soiled dish towel (textile) _yES � �� &A ce ble?,�i� � Fagg-Handhn k Sortm ueshons ��� RECYCLABLF�MATERIAIS��,�am3m_M� _pU ,��.�.9/ _ ®g,Qs.� Partially -filled glass jars and bottles from��� refrigerator clean -out (e.g., peanut butter jar with ENO clumped residuals and half-filled salad dressing_ bottle) Plastic container with mashed inside of it NOS This is a "composite" material not easily processed. paper Plastic soda bottle capped with residual liquid not z�YES exceeding 1/4of volume of container m. Cardboard covered with packing tape YES Newspaper with paint (used for paint masking) .:! (E3) 4 of 5 Notepad with wire spiral binding , NO; Pasta box with clear plastic window VSoYES .....� Pasta box with residual pasta Greeting cards that may contain audio electronics NO Book with shrink wrap NO Plastic container with obscured/destroyed recycling symbol MIRZ�� Newspaper in plastic delivery bag N0`` Pharmaceuticals in recyclable containers NO Magazine with infused glass (magazine was once wet, but dried, twisted and infused with glass fines) ;. I Cardboard cereal box with plastic bag lining ORA Though cardboard box acceptable, plastic bag is 5,4 not. Entire item will be considered a contaminant. Mostly glass fines commingled with other small During the dry run, for example, the residential recyclable and contaminating fines on the tarp after recyclables sample had 13 Ibs of commingled fines larger items are sorted which were mostly glass but contained various small contaminants. Obvious contaminants will be sorted �NOW, and the remaining fines will be considered �� �- recyclable. (E3) 5 of 5 SloanvazQUEz,LLC EXHIBIT I FIELD FORMS - PLACARDS & TALLY SHEETS Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 2nd Quarter 2011 Date: 6 / -2 [ R 0 J4 9 Ct I Jurisdiction: MAN I DATE: PLACARD I: D. :QCM'TALLY.SH. -Sorted i Sorted Acceptable Cb ntaminent Collected Samples Cart.Total Cart Tare Cart Net Total Tub Tare: Tub Net Total Tub Tare Tub Net Contamination . ... ........ . . .. .... 61- 2, `I art,# 2 . . .... .... arf#-3 Sub -'Total ub.#1 ub 2 31, q 4I 4p jc 6.. ub #3 q ub #,4 ..... ....... ub # 5 . .... .... .......... u.b - - - — - -- --- ----- ------ -- .... .... . . . 7,0 b*# 7 b#8 "I Date: ,Jurisdiction: ALT CELL # 2 No Text Date: Jurisdiction: Ali I-eo ALT CELL # .8 QCM TALLY'S.HEET { —._..L6 I2 2 Collected Samples Cart,Total Cart Tare; CartNet Sorted Acceptable Total. art#'1 art # 2 !Sri 2- art'# 3 -�----�_....---.— ub#1 ub #`2 u b'# 3. 6b.#4 Lib #S Lib #6 ub#7 ubtt8 AL Sorted Contaminent % Tare Tub Net Total Tub Tare Tub Net Contamination Sub Total SloanvAzQUEZ,LLC Sub -Task 3.7 — Identify Most Feasible CT Systems Based on all the above, the team will develop a short list of the most viable types of energy -conversion systems or technologies for deployment in Fort Collins. This list will be reviewed with City staff and a final recommendation made of at least the two best candidates. These finalists will be described in some detail as specified in the RFP including the following: • Description, capital cost, and operating costs • "Scale -ability" • Amount and type of local feedstock • Critical service and feedstock providers • Delivery systems • Permitting Requirements • Funding Options • Quantification of products, including energy, fuels and other by-products • Other considerations • Fit with public policies • Potential opposition These results will all be summarized in the final report, along with the next steps the City should take, if the CT approach looks feasible. TASK 4 Prepare draft report and final report. Sub -Task 4.1— Prepare Draft Report A draft report will be prepared incorporating all the analysis performed. The draft report will be submitted to City Staff for review and commentary. Sub -Task 4.2 — Resolve any Outstanding Issues Address and resolve issues about the Draft Report raised by City Staff, if any. Sub -Task 4.3 — Prepare Final Report The Final Report will be finalized and submitted based upon City Staff review and input. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 6 S > F.Y �¢'S'r � ¢� RCS J �.' r' 1�.lk�l="�,. �itL.1a..•�-_ Dater Jurisdiction:. CELL # 13, No Text Date: d 5, Jurisdiction: f--JAs ?A r,�� All No Text Date: Jurisdiction: 21:7cA;)ocNd i" i ' Z, Date: V, Jurisdiction: 5,4.,j 1446 OF-_w ml 4 -1 "N LIN ALT CELL ff"' 13 jF �d '€ Date: Jurisdiction: f Vet 6cyj Jil ALT CELL., #;3 Re,+-cO X OL'O CM TALL' Y SHEET DATE: PLACARDO.D. # Sorted Sorted Acceptable, Coritaminent Collected.Samples C..a rt Torta I Cart:Tare Cart Net, Total TObTare Tub Net, Total UA Tare f ub Net T Contamination Cart Lj Cart #2 Cart #3 ii Sub -Tots 1 Tub # 1141 Tub,# 2 %4,kI Tub #.4 Tub # 5 Tub 9 6 Tub.# 7 Tub #'S Sub -Total TOTAL ij SloanVAZQUEZ, 1.1 PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE Week Task Description 1 9125/12 2 3 4 S 6 9/29/11 7 8 9 10/17/11 10 11 12 13 11/17/11 1.0 Kick-off Meeting 2.0 Waste Stream Analysis 2.1 Develop a Data -Based Analysis 2.1.1 Correlating Waste Stream by Sector 2.1.2 Represent Waste Stream in Categories 2.1.3 Analysis of Material Inputs & Outputs 2.1.4 Describe any Statistical Issues 2.1.5 Method for Weight of Six Categories 2.2 Analyze Economic Value of Material 3.0 Identify Two Feasible CT 3.1 CT Overview 3.2 List of CT vendors 3.3 Evaluate Composition Study 3.4 Evaluate Capacity Issues 3.5 Evaluate Environmental Issues 3.6 Evaluate Economic Factors 3.7 Identify Most Feasible CT Systems ' 4.0 Prepare Report 4.1 Prepare Draft Report 4.2 City Staff Review & Resolve Issues 4.3 Prepare Final Report Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 11, 2011 Analysis Study Date: 4 , Jurisdiction:- . ;J2 ........... QCM TALLY SHEET DATE: PLACARD I.D. # Sorted Sorted Acceptable Contarhinent % Collected Sam plesf Cart Cart Tare 'Cart Net. Total Tub Tare Tub Net Total Tub Tare Tub Net Contamination c6rt,#,l 27 q. 0 tart # 2 Cart # 3 Ik .Sub-Totall Tub,# 11 . . ....... . .. Tub#2 Tub #.1 Tub # 4 Tub # 5 Tub # 6 . ...................... .. Tub'# 7 Tub # 8 Sub-T6 i tal TOTAL, Date: Jurisdiction:— r i I "Y Date: g4? Jurisdiction: AILT CELL #1 2 No Text t Date;. Jurisdiction: IM t o SloanvazQUEz,LLC 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK DELIVERABLES TASK 1: Determine the composition, weight, and potential value of materials generated in the greater Fort Collins community and currently sent to landfills for disposal. The deliverables for this task will be incorporated into the draft and final report and are as follows: • A data -based analysis of the composition of Fort Collins' Waste Stream using at least five materials categories which shall include vegetative debris/trimmings and food waste (i.e., organics that are high in available Biochemical Oxygen Demand), and which may also include: paper fiber and other recyclable commodities; municipal solid waste; hazardous materials; and, construction and demolition debris. A methodology for correlating individual contributions to the waste stream by at least four distinct generator sectors throughout the entire community (e.g., residential single-family; residential multi -family; educational institutions; and, commercial including breweries, industrial facilities, and construction). • A description of the method for developing and representing the entire community's waste stream in various categories i.e.,: o Residential; o Multifamily; o Educational institutions; o Commercial, segregated by sectors as the budget allows (e.g., industrial, institutional, agricultural, brewing, landscaping, health care, hotels, manufacturing, offices, retail, wholesale, transportation and / or mixed). • A complete written analysis, diagrammatic analyses of material inputs and outputs, and report on material streams. • A description of any statistical issues that arise when using information about trash and recycling volumes documented by collection companies in mandatory reports data and gathering waste characterizations and data from other partners in this project, including at minimum Poudre School District, Larimer County, Colorado State University, O'Dell Brewing Company, and New Belgium Brewing Company. • An Analysis of the economic value of the material currently sent for disposal to area landfills, quantifying embedded energy potential for energy -conversion systems, the financial value of materials currently in the waste stream that may be diverted to recycling markets and other recovery systems, and identifying missed economic development and job creation opportunities from current disposal practices. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 8 No Text Date: 4 /-Zz- Jurisdiction:- MAIN 'KIM I No Text Date:- �o /ZI:71 Jurisdiction:— It'le MAIN,■ ALT CELL # 9 , No Text Date; 4/2,2- Jurisdiction: CELL # 12 No Text Date: Jurisdiction:. 7 6 �-Z---s CELL 7 ALT CELL # 2 t, ;� ;{ Date: &/? Jurisdiction: ALT CELL # 13 ValUL U�, 'eyv S1oanvAzQUEz,1.LC TASK 2: Identify at least two of the most feasible types of energy -conversion systems and/or technologies The deliverables for this task are the following: • Summary of types of CTs • Table listing current CT vendors by technology type, highlighting those having made the most progress in the U.S. to date, and with most application to Fort Collins • Short list of the most feasible types of CTs for Fort Collins • Description of at least the best two types of CTs for Fort Collins • A summary report providing details of the feasibility analysis of CT and recommending steps forward, if the analysis shows CT to be feasible. TASK 3: Report Preparation The deliverables for this task are the following: A preliminary report will be submitted no later than October 17, 2011 and will include: • A summary of methodology used to design and implement the data collection portion of the study; • Distribution of waste tonnages and percentages by sectors; • Waste composition results and preliminary findings for each of the waste sectors; • Description of economic methodology used to calculate commodity values and economic development potential; • Recommendation as to specific streams of discarded material to target for recovery, which shall include vegetative debris/trimmings and food scraps, as well as other viable commodities; • A summary of potential new or advanced energy conversion approaches. The final report will be submitted no later than November 17, 2011. The final report will be comprehensive and describe the analytic procedures, material category definitions, and final waste composition tables. In addition, the final report will identify material categories and sectors with high potential for additional diversion, recovery or reuse. The final report will include the following: • Amount of material discarded as waste from the Fort Collins community each year, by weight; • Amount of the community waste stream that could be diverted towards materials markets or energy conversion; • Specific discards from each generator category that make up potential new diversions or energy resources; • Financial value of materials currently in the waste stream that may be diverted to recycling markets and other recovery systems; • Complete description of two or more new and/or advanced energy -conversion systems that will be most feasible and desirable for the City to consider implementing. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study 9 QCM TALLY SHEET __. ........ _....... . DATEt' —._..... PLACARD I.D.:It _._ ....,._._ .....-- Sorted Sorted. ._ Acceptable .,Contaminent % Collected $afnplo Cartl6tal Cart,Taee Cart Net Total Tu6Tare Tub"Nei Total Tub Tare Tub'NeE 'Contamination cart #1_ ; f` --- - — — ... .-__ -- --_ Cart cart a`s Sub-TUtai # Tub#-1 57,2r t(t Tub.# 2 Tub:#;3eL Tub #4 Tub #.5 j b'# 6 b #'7 b#8 Date: 4::? / �- " Jurisdiction:' 1J ALT CELL # 1.1- QCM TALLY SHEET ATE: kz (i LACARD I.D. 4 Sorted Sorted. Acceptable. Contarni nent %. .Collected Samples Cart Total, Cart Tare. Cart Net Total tub Tare, Tub Net: total ' Tub Tare Tub Net Contamination art # I 70, art # 2 7- art ft 3 Sub-Tdtbl S eb ub #1 +4,7,4- 3�S ............... ub it I Tub# 3 i. Tuiblrllr Tub # 5 Tub # 6 . . . ... . ................ Tub tf 7 Tub # 8 Sub-T6fal TOTAL Date: Jurisdiction: &Ca -In P-.1- r V, CELL # 2 QCM TALLY SHEET DATE: PLACARD I.D. It GP to . ... ... .. - ------ Sorted f Sorted Ii Acceptable Conta6ilnent % Collected Sam- P161s! ftToial Cairt'Tare Cart Net Tub Tare' Tub Net Total tubTwe 'Tub Net Contaniination tart: 0' 1 Cart #-2 Tit" sJ5, 7, CarOO Sub4ajaj .._— t; " 1 _ _ ..___�..—__.__ .__ }..._i____._._. 64# 2 ub,#A ub:# 5 ub #,6 ub,#.7 . ... .......... .. - Ob,#,8 - ------ ------ Sub-Td,tall OTAL Date: Jurisdictiom 0 ,� i; Date! jurisdiction: a } �ti Date: Jurisdiction: 6 ALT CELL'# SloanVAZQUEZ,LLc 3.0 QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE 3.1 SLOAN VAZQUEZ, LLC Sloan Vazquez, LLC is a consulting firm focusing exclusively on municipal solid waste planning and management services, specializing in rate studies, financial feasibility studies, municipal contract analysis, residential and commercial collection operations, and management MRF project development. The firm was founded by Joe Sloan in 2000, and was joined by Enrique Vazquez in 2005 when it was organized as a Limited Liability Company (LLC) under the State of California. Together, the firm's principals have over 40 years of wide ranging expertise and experience in municipal waste management and recycling including; • Revenue Requirement Analysis • Cost of Service Analysis • Rate Adjustment Review & Analysis • Revenue Enhancement Studies • Billing Audits • Routing Audits • Waste Minimization and Sustainability Strategies • Rate Surveys and Comparative Rate Analysis PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Sloan Vazquez provides a wide array of waste management and recycling consulting services for public and private sector clients throughout the United States. Sloan Vazquez offers management services for the planning, development and operation of municipal recycling and solid waste programs and facilities. Municipal Service Management • Define the Scope of Services required by Client • Prepare Operations Proforma • Contract Compliance Management • Rate Adjustment Negotiation • Comparative Rate Surveys • Prepare Request for Proposals • Analysis and Ranking of Proposals • Interview Selected Proposer(s) • Negotiate Final Service Contract General Solid Waste Service Analysis • Collection Operations o Refuse o Recyclables o Green Waste Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study 10 QCM TALLY SHEET DATE: PLACARD I.D.M !A� Sort,e d Sorted. ..... .. Collected, Samples!, Cart Total Cart Tare Cart Net: ;Acceptable Tota I I Tub Tare Tub 't Confaminent Total Tub Tub 70 Contamination Cart # I Cart ff 2 3ut r6 Cart #3 Tub #:I, 0 / 3) 7 Tub,# 2 At, r lei Tub 43 Tdb#4 6 Tub it& Tub #.6 f (Qteef-el Tub # 7 5. (0 NOS& Tub # 8: Sub -Total ITOTAt Wte: Jurisdiction: 2- CELL, # I No Text Date: Jurisdiction: IV Ar CELL # 7, No Text Date: Jurisdiction: 14c/o �112k44-< A �l No Text Date: Jurisdiction:. _Z* CELL # 12 No Text Date: Jurisdiction:— -5 14,114-1cr) SloanVAzQUEz,LLC • Recyclables Processing • Residential Recycling • Commercial Recycling • C&D Recycling • Disposal Options • Solid Waste Transfer • Commodity Market Development Operations Management • Collection Route Analysis • Route Audits • Billing Audits • Revenue Enhancement Methods • Staffing, Personnel Classification & Job Descriptions • Training for Management & Operations Personnel Facility Evaluation & Operation • Recycling Processing Systems (MRF Project Development) • Conveyors, Balers, Screens, Optical sorting systems • Conceptual Facility Design • Bid Analysis & Ranking • Establish Process Capacity and Operating Specifications • Acquisition/Negotiation of systems and/or components • Warranty Management • Start-up Management & Operations & Training • Preventative Maintenance Programs • Rolling Stock • Loaders, Forklifts, Trucks, Trailers • Electrical Control Systems • Operations & Training • Establish Program & Processing System (MRF) Diversion Rates 3.2 CLEMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL Clements Environmental Corporation is an environmental engineering and consulting firm located in Los Angeles, California. The firm specializes in solid waste engineering and management, environmental regulatory compliance, and environmental permitting. Our clientele includes private industry, city and county government agencies, and the Departments of Defense and Energy. Specific expertise includes: integrated solid waste management planning and program implementation; transfer station and Material Recovery Facility planning, permitting, and design; regulatory compliance Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 11 No Text Vate: 0 1 Jurisdiction:— No Text Date: z 13 Jurisdiction: �Zl;rj fqAk CELL #, 13.� ALT CELL # 5 e i� f� Date: Jurisdiction: - QCKTALLY SH1,EET DATE' is PLAWD, I.D. Sorted. Sorfed -- Acceptable -Con taminent Collected SamplesCart Toial Cart Tare Cart Net total % 14 Tub Tare Tub Net Total Tub Tare Tub Net Contamination art #.I. :art # 3 ............. L____ MI Ft )#7 i is Sub=T66 rAL w MWO Date: Jurisdiction: 0 -I N "j - m's-6 Mal ff I - ALT CE L. L # 16 4 A" -_. QCM TALLY SHEET ATE: - LACARb I b. k — Sorted .Sorted Collected Samples - ---- - Cart,Total Cart Tare Acceptable Contami ' nt `cart.Nef: Total �' Tub Tare Tub Net Total -. _ ; Tub Tare Tub Net Contamination in#2 irL# 3 .Sub -Total- Tub #1 t Tub #2 i Tub ;#3 Tub #9' Tub'#5' t` Tub # 6,= , Tub #7 Tub #'8 3, Sub-Tota l TOTAL la j ,4 1 WO MM �M® Datea' )Urisdictiow C� ALT CELL # 9 SloanVAZQUEZ,[.« evaluations; Zero Waste strategic planning; feasibility analysis and business plan preparation; recycling program and composting facility development; and conversion technologies evaluation. Conversion Technology Clements Environmental is very experienced in CT evaluation having participated on the following recent or ongoing CT projects: • County of Orange, CA: summary of CT development in the U.S. and evaluation of feasibility of CT located at County Landfills • City of San Diego, CA: evaluation of overall feasibility of CT and specifically at the Miramar Landfill • County of Los Angeles, CA: evaluation of sites for CT facilities and in particular co -location at existing MRFs, transfer stations, and landfills • City and County of Santa Barbara, CA: evaluation of CT vendors for development of 700 TPD CT facility at the Tajiguas Landfill • City of Paso Robles, CA: feasibility study of CT at the City Landfill • City of San Jose, CA: summary and feasibility of CT for Zero Waste Plan • Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority, CA: assistance to Plasco Energy Group on permitting and development of 1" thermal CT project in California • City of Flathead, MT: overview of CT Solid Waste Management • Integrated Waste Management Planning • AB 939 compliance work: New Base Year Studies, Diversion Studies, Program Planning and Implementation, SB 1066 Extensions • Feasibility Studies, Market Assessments and Economic Analyses • Outreach and Education • Transfer Station and Material Recovery Facility (MRF) Siting, Permitting, and Design • Zero Waste Strategic Planning • Conversion Technology Analysis and Project Development • Recycling Program Design and Implementation • Composting Facility Permitting and Development • Rail Haul Studies and Project Design • Site Search and Assessment Regulatory Compliance/Permitting • Conditional Use Permits / Land Use Permits • Solid Waste, Hazardous Waste, Air, Wastewater Permits • Environmental Impact Documentation • Composting and Recycling Facility Permits Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August IZ 1011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 12 { I" QCM TALLY SHEET DATE:Ll PLACARD I.D. # R R-(Oe. _ Sorted Sorted . Acceptable Contaminent % Col------ ;samples, CartJotal Cart Tare Cart Net' Total Tub Tare , Tub Net Total __..__... Tub Tare, Tub Net Contamination Cart 1# Cart k,2 if 7 Cart#_3,: Sub-Tntl Tub#3 Tub #2 Tub4 3 Z Ire 1 � _ Tub° `4 ff Tub* 5 -------------- 'a Tub:# 6 Tub#7„x Tub #8 Sub -Total TOTAL s Y' Date: In I a Jurisdiction: Tfd- i� :� Date: JurMiction: - r. Z7 J CELL # 13 No Text Date: Jurisdiction'.-. le-) BW4 No Text Date: Juti'sdicti6n: W4, mt No Text Date: Jurisdiction: -7 -7 Ct"Ot-') CELL #14 ALT CELL # 3 I SloanVAZQUEZLLC Municipal Solid Waste Management & Recycling Advisors August 12, 2011 James B. O'Neill II, CPPO, FNIGP Director of Purchasing & Risk Management City of Fort Collins 215 North Mason St., 2"' Floor Fort Collins, CO 80524 RE: Proposal No. 7265 to Provide a Waste Stream Analysis Study Dear Mr. O'Neill: Sloan Vazquez is pleased to present our proposal to the City of Fort Collins to provide a Waste Stream Analysis Study. Sloan Vazquez is uniquely qualified to assist the City of Fort Collins because of our extensive experience in solid waste management and recycling. For this project we are teaming with Clements Environmental who brings specific expertise in conversion technologies evaluation. Together, Sloan Vazquez and Clements Environmental have a long history of providing vital operational analysis and financial management tools to help increase revenues and/or reduce overall costs for both private and public entities. As seasoned waste and recycling professionals we make it an issue to personally deliver on our promise of providing extraordinary operational insights and reliable financial management tools for our clients. We hope to have the privilege of serving your consulting needs and, as such, we hereby declare that we have the personnel, equipment, operational and technical expertise, and financial resources to render the services that are described herein. Additionally, the company is prepared to enter into a contractual relationship to perform services in accordance with the scope of work of this proposal. 18006 Skypark Circle • Suite 205 Irvine, CA 92614 Office:866.241.4533 • FAX.,714.276.0625 infoosloonvozauez.com Sloan`VAZQUEZ,LLC 4.0 LIST OF PROJECT PERSONNEL 4.1 SLOAN VAZQUEZ - PERSONNEL Joe Sloan — Principal As the founder of Sloan Vazquez, Joe Sloan has 25 years of professional experience in the environmental field working for the private and public sectors. He has advised numerous local governmental agencies and municipalities. His credentials and experience are more fully delineated in his resume provided in Appendix A, Professional Resumes. Enrique Vazquez — Principal Mr. Vazquez has vast experience in the management and operations of municipal solid waste collection and has a thorough understanding of all the aspects related to their management including knowledge of cost of service analysis and rate setting and administration concepts and procedures. He has been responsible for the adoption of numerous municipal solid waste and recycling programs from conception and design to implementation. He is an expert the economics related to solid waste programs and specializes in financial modeling and review. Mr. Vazquez has a Bachelor's of Science in Business Administration from the University of Southern California. His resume is provided in Appendix A, Professional Resumes. 4.2 CLEMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL - PERSONNEL Chip Clements, P.E., President Mr. Clements is the founder and president of Clements Environmental Corporation, a full -service solid waste management firm started in 1987. Mr. Clements has worked in the solid waste field for over 35 years. His experience includes both the private and public sectors and covers a full spectrum of facility design and operations, regulatory compliance, feasibility studies, and program development activities. He is expert in the development of solid waste transfer stations and material recovery facilities (MRFs), having consulted on over 20 such projects throughout California. In addition, he has extensive experience in solid waste management, including: advanced technologies, recycling, composting, wastewater treatment and reuse, industrial waste minimization, waste -to -energy plant development, and air pollution control technology. Mr. Clements prepared RENEW LA, a comprehensive, 20-year plan for resource management for the City of Los Angeles, which relies on the use of conversion technologies to gain maximum diversion from the organic waste stream still going to landfill disposal. In completing the plan, Mr. Clements conducted assessments of waste streams, conversion technologies, diversion, costs, environmental impacts, and transportation issues. Larry Miner, AICP, Senior Planner Mr. Miner has over 20 years of professional land use and environmental planning experience in both the public and private sectors. As a professional planner, Mr. Miner brings an in-depth knowledge of land use planning and environmental regulations, as well as the ability to direct an interdisciplinary team of Prepared for the City of fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 13 No Text Date: zz Jurisdiction:: I ASORZIER 4C CELL# 7 DATE - PLACARD, I.D.'#, fee" Coll6cted,Sample's'i 'CartTotal Cart #,I [b Cart #2 C4rt,#:31 Sub -Total TU fi, i Tub # 2 Tub ff 3' # 6 I v CM TALLY SHE Sorted Sorted Acceptable Contaminent % et Total Tub Tare -tub Net Total Tub Tare Tub Net Contamination Date: 6�Z7 Jurisdiction: fi Ci C2ELL # ALT I . No Text Date: Jurisdiction: j?2 CELL # 5 No Text Date: Jurisdiction: Ag- Is 9 0 ; No Text Datb: Jurisdiction: rtg&,xwf CELL # 11 SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC professionals, to each project he undertakes. From initial site design to zoning code compliance and environmental review Mr. Miner has the experience and knowledge to ensure that a project can and will be entitled. Carrie Ferrier, Staff Engineer Mrs. Ferrier has worked in the environmental field for the past ten years. Her experience includes conducting scientific fieldwork, data collection and analysis; permit and report preparation; interacting with state and federal regulation agencies; Phase I Environmental Assessments; and general project management. For Clements Environmental, Mrs. Ferrier specializes in recycling and solid waste management, composting operations, AB 939 programs and plans, conversion technologies, Zero Waste plans, and Greenhouse gas emissions and reduction techniques. Jacque Maddox, Staff Engineer Ms. Maddox has five years experience in the environmental field, now specializing in permitting and development of CT facilities and alternative energy projects. She has worked as a field technician, sampling material and gases at landfills, and also as a design technician on landfill gas recovery systems. Recent work at Clements Environmental includes: development and permitting of an anaerobic digestion project; evaluation of sites for potential CT projects; permitting of 1,500 TPD MRF/transfer station including potential for future CT facilities both biological and thermal. 4.3 REFERENCES 4.3.1 SLOAN VAZQUEZ, LLC - REFERENCES Below is a listing of projects completed or in the process of completing. Client. South Bayside Waste Management Authority (San Carlos, CA) Hilary Gans, General Manager 610 Elm Street, Suite 202 San Carlos, CA 94070 Tel: (650) 802.3507 hgans@rethinkwaste.or> Project: Material Composition Study Performed a composition analysis for residential recycling, commercial recycling, residential organics, commercial organics, and commercial plant material streams. Project: Municipal MRF Testing and Acceptance Services The SBWMA engaged the services of Sloan Vazquez to provide testing and acceptance of the Materials Recovery Facility to ensure conformance with the required specifications. Project: Municipal MRF Services Procurement The SBWMA is a joint powers authority of twelve member agencies in San Mateo County, California. The SBWMA oversees solid waste collection and recycling services to its member agencies. It also Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study 14 QCM TALLY SHEET Sorted Sorted Acceptable Cbntaminent % Collected Samples, Cart Total Cart Tare cart Net Total tub Tare Tub Net, Total TubTare Tub Net Contamination in # 1, I rt # 2 ------------------ Sub-Td I ITO # I I I I I I I I I y g I I Of-3 b #4 bff 5' b ff:6 b 0 7 b #0 Date: 4 q. Jurisdiction:- ALT CELL # 15 WA+C-0 QCM TALLY SHEET IATEI LAcARD l.D; Sorted Sorted Acceptable I -Contaminent Collected Samples. Xarff6tal Cart Tare CartNet Total Tub Tare Tub Net, Total art ft'i art-# 2 .6 m. art# #Z #4 �#6 A-7 Sub -Total TOTAL Ttjb'Net CoPtamination, Date: Jur'isdiction:- e2-4:/C) fLc 4< No Text Date: Z? /9 Jurisdiction:. r-I 6" (6 ?�w 4'e— ;i j�''.: Date: jurisdi-ction:- ALT CELL 14 a, Date: Jurisdiction: U%IrST - ,wjw�� SloanVAzQUEz,LLC oversees the operation of the Shoreway Recycling and Disposal Center that receives approximately 430,000 tons of solid waste and recycling materials per year. SBWMA selected Sloan Vazquez to assist them in the procurement process as they select contractor(s) to provide solid waste and recycling services including the design, acquisition, installation, and operation of their MRF. Sloan Vazquez assisted the SBWMA by providing the analysis and ranking of proposes including financial analysis of their recycling revenue sharing offers. Additional financial assessment where performed for alternative proposals offered by the incumbent proposer. Additionally, Sloan Vazquez assisted the SBWMA in the final selection of a vendor and is now assisting in negotiations and development of the final agreement. Client: City of Santa Monica, CA Kim Braun, Solid Waste Manager 2500 Michigan Ave. Santa Monica, CA 90404 Tel: (310) 458.2223 Kim.braun@SMGOV.net Project: Audit of C&D Facilities The City engaged the services of Sloan Vazquez, LLC to provide audit construction and demolition recycling facilities for compliance with the City's diversion requirements. This project involves obtaining inbound and outbound data from each facility to establish an overall diversion percentage. In addition, each facility is randomly visited for a day of observation and a scheduled meeting to review operational procedures and record keeping methodologies. Our experience in solid waste management and operations was important to City in the selection decision. Project: Operational Review of Solid Waste Division Sloan Vazquez completed the performance of an operational review for the City of Santa Monica's Solid Waste Division. To compete this engagement, Sloan Vazquez personnel reviewed all division operational functions and workflow process for each area; reviewed the scheduling and routing system; reviewed the current GPS system and identified areas for enhanced usage and effectiveness; evaluated the current vehicle fleet, including condition and replacement schedules and repair scheduling and costs based on industry standards; assessed the Household Hazardous Waste function (currently in the Office of Sustainability and the Environment) and determined the proper organizational location and reporting structure for this function. Our experience in solid waste management and operations was important to City in the selection decision. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study is 4 Dates , Jurisdiction: No Text Date: Jurisdiction: SCAMVIS I I 1�1 III "'AIRIVAM i , ml �;. �i;: ,�: :2 Date: Jurisdiction: DATE: PLACARD I.D. It Colletted-Samole1' .-cartypiaI r , — irt # 1 ZI lft,# 2 42, # 3 #. 4 ij it 6 # 7 #8` CM TALLY SHE Acceptablc. I C6ntaminent, % Total I' Tublaee I I Tub: ' -Total I Tub Tare I TubAet I Contamination Date., Juri.§dlct!6n: CELL # 7 ALT CELL # 1,3 No Text Date: Jurisdiction: CELL # 7 SloanvazQUEz,LLC Client. Monterey Regional Waste Management District (Marina, CA) Timothy Flanagan, Assistant General Manager 14201 Del Monte Blvd. PO Box 1670 Marina, CA 93933-1670 Tel: (831) 384.5313 tflanaPan@mrwmd.orP Project: C & D Material Processing and Storage Capacity Study Sloan Vazquez has recently been selected as a part of a team to retrofit this extraordinary facility with new waste processing technology. Initially, Sloan Vazquez is charged with the responsibility to develop cost pro-formas for four (4) distinct construction and demolition waste characterizations and facility requirements. Client. City of Pasadena, CA Carmen Rubio, Program Coordinator II PO Box 7115 Pasadena, CA 91109-9866 Tel: (626) 744.7162 crubio@cityofPasadena.net Project: Municipal Franchise Compliance Audit Since 2006, the City of Pasadena chose Sloan Vazquez to conduct financial and operational audits of the franchise haulers to ensure contract compliance including the proper reporting of diversion and payment of franchise fees. The City of Pasadena operates under a non-exclusive franchise arrangement with multiple haulers to provide for commercial waste and recycling services. Under this arrangement, the City has required each franchised hauler to divert at minimum 50% of the waste it collected or pay the City liquidated damages. As of October 2008, the City increased the diversion requirement to 60% and to 75% Construction and Demolition Waste. Each year, thirteen franchise haulers are randomly selected by the City for auditing. This project involves gathering, reviewing, analyzing financial and operational information from the City and from the hauler. Financial and operational records and documents are reviewed on -site. The process includes among other tasks, reviewing financial statements, general ledger entries, accounts receivable records, disposal records, route configurations, route density, allocation methodologies, etc. The findings and recommendations are documented in a draft report submitted to the City for their review and commentary. A letter is prepared for each hauler notifying them of the results of the audit including any outstanding franchisee fees or liquidated damages owed to the City. Over four years, Sloan Vazquez identified over $180,000 of fees and liquidated damages due to the City. The depth of our actual, hands-on experience in solid waste and recycling collection and processing operations was an important factor in the selection process. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 16 V E: :A RD I'D. ft 'Collect6d Samp[6'. I Cart Total I qrt Tare art.#J aft#Z 4- arttt3, Sub-Tctial jb#1 jb.#.2 ib:.# 3 ib #4 ib#6 M TALLY SHEET Acceptable Contaminent, % Total Tub fare Tub Net Total' Tub Tare Tub Net Contamination =M I SloanvazQUEz,LLC EXHIBIT J SAMPLING PHOTOGRAPHS (Submitted on DVD) Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 2nd Quarter 2011 r WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY MRF and Transfer Station Facility California PREPARED FOR: Disposal Company, Inc. Submitted by: SloanVAZQUEZLLC Municipal Solid Waste & Recycling Advisors 1231 East Dyer Road — Suite 225 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Office: 866.241.4533 Fax: 714.276.0625 info(@s1oanvozquez.com September 20-24, 2010 SloanVAZQUEzLLC Municipal Solid Waste & Recycling Advisors September 29, 2010 RE: Waste Composition Study — MRF & Transfer Station Facility, _, CA Dear Mr. Corona: Sloan Vazquez, LLC is pleased to submit the accompanying Waste Composition Study of solid waste collected and sorted at — Disposal Company's MRF and Transfer Station, in California. The purpose of this study is to identify the types and percentages of materials contained in the collected samples. A photographic record of materials recovered during the sampling process is included herewith on a DVD. In addition to the composition study data, the photos will be useful to equipment manufacturers and process design engineers. Thank you for the opportunity to work with — Disposal Company on this important project. Cordially, JM Sloan President 1231 East Dyer Road • Suite 225 • Santa Ana, CA 92705 Office: 866.241.4533 • FAX: 714.276.0625 • info(dsioanyazauez.com CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ....................................... METHODOLOGY ...................................... COMPOSITE SAMPLE RESULTS ................ COMPOSITE TABULATION & PIE CHARTS Sample #2 — Tabulation .......................... Sample #3 — Tabulation .......................... Sample #4 —Tabulation .......................... Sample #5 —Tabulation .......................... Sample #6 — Tabulation .......................... Sample #7 — Tabulation .......................... Sample #8 — Tabulation .......................... Sample #9 —Tabulation .......................... Sample #10 —Tabulation ........................ Sample #11—Tabulation ........................ Sample #12 —Tabulation ........................ Sample #13 — Tabulation ........................ Sample #14 — Tabulation ........................ Sample #15 —Tabulation ........................ Sample #16 —Tabulation ........................ Sample #17 — Tabulation ........................ Sample #18 — Tabulation ........................ Sample #19 —Tabulation ........................ Sample #20 — Tabulation ........................ Sample #21— Tabulation ........................ Sample #22 — Tabulation ........................ Sample #23 —Tabulation ......................... Sample #24 — Tabulation ......................... Sample #25 — Tabulation ......................... APPENDIX 1— DATA COLLECTION FORM . .......... 1 .......... 1 .......... 2 .......... 3 .......... 9 ........ 10 ........ 11 ........ 12 ........ 13 ........ 14 ........ 15 ........ 16 ........ 17 ........ 18 ........ 19 ........ 20 ........ 21 ........ 22 ........ 23 ........ 24 ........ 25 ........ 26 ........ 27 ........ 28 ........ 29 ........ 30 ........ 31 ........ 32 ....... 33 Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study i September2010 INTRODUCTION — Disposal Company, Inc. commissioned Sloan Vazquez, LLC to conduct a composition study of the typical solid wastes delivered to the Company's MRF/Transfer Station for processing. The purpose of this study is to determine the primary types and percentages of waste materials in the typical solid waste deposited at the facility. The study was conducted during the week of September 20, 2010. The results of the study are provided in this report. AMrir01-016MICYA To obtain a representative sampling, a total of 25 samples were collected and sorted. The samples were randomly collected by wheel loader from an area of the transfer station tipping floor designated for incoming garbage (MSW). The samples were deposited onto a 4' X 8' sorting table. The table top is made of heavy-duty polyethylene plastic lattice with approximately 1 inch square openings. The purpose of the lattice table top is to provide an approximation of the amount of material that would be "lost" and not recovered in most mechanical recovery processes. Please consult APPENDIX A for a listing of the material types. Recovered materials from each sample were photographed and are provided on DVD that is included herewith. A standard form (See Appendix A) was used to record the quantities of the different material types. The net weights were logged. Following completion of the sorting, the data was entered into a Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet. The data is presented in table and chart formats, indicating the quantities and percentages of all material categories and types sorted. The following protocol was uniformly applied throughout the sampling process 1. Randomly collect a total of twenty-five (25) two -hundred (200) pound samples. 2. Sort each sample into pre -determined categories (see Standardized Form — Appendix A). 3. The "Fines' category is represented by materials that fall through the 1 inch mesh of the sort table. All manner of materials including, but not limited to; rocks, dirt, sand, sawdust, food scraps (pickles, olives, chicken bones, etc.) , small glass shards, shotgun shells, syringes, pens, pencils, shredded paper, tissue paper, grass and leaves, bottle caps, etc. The "fines" category was not further characterized by individual material types. 4. Using a digital scale (0.2 lb. increment), weigh each of the separated materials and manually record the weights into the Standardized Form. S. The field data that was collected and recorded onto the Standardized Form was transferred into an Excel Worksheet. 6. After double-checking the data that was transferred from the Standardized Forms to the Excel Worksheets, the data was used to create the tables and charts contained in this report. PreparedforIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 1 September 2010 TABLE OF SAMPLES Date 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 15 16 17 21 22 23 24 25 Total Wt I Shrinkage I Net Wt The total weights and percentage of total waste stream for the individual samples were tabulated and summarized into a Composite Table. The percentage for each material category as a percentage of Recovered Weight was calculated. These results are presented in TABLE -SUMMARY RESULTS. A variance analysis was performed for the Total Waste Stream at 90% confidence intervals. After the composite results, composition tables for each of the 25 samples are presented. Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 2 September 2010 Sloan`VAZQUEZ,LLC COMPOSITE TABULATION & PIE CHARTS SUMMARY RESULTS MATERIAL TOTAL %of Total HIGH LOW MEAN MIXED SAMPLE 5,152.40 100.0% 261.60 171.60 206.1_0_ FINAL WEIGHT 5,094.40 IE 98.9% 259.20 168.20 203.78 Shrinkage 58.00 i 1.1% 5.40 0.20 ' 2.32 1. NEWSPAPER 30.00 0.6% 5.40 _ -_ 1.10 - -5.95 2._000/KRAFT - 148.80 2.9% _ 13.40 0.80 -10.00 3. MIXED FIBER 661.20 13.0% 40.80 26.45 4. PETE 28.80 0.6% 3.00 0.20 _ 1.15 5. HDPE 37.40 -W251.00 0.7% 8.20 0.20 _ 1.50_ 6. #3-7- 4.9% 25.80 4.20 10.04 7. FILM- 195.80 3.8% 35.60 2.80 7.83 8. WOOD WASTE 250.60 1,143.00 4.9% 22.4% 55.00 91.40 - 3.40. 10.02 9. YARD WASTE 10. FOOD WASTE 630.60 12.4% 111.80 420 _45.7_2_ 15.22 11.TEXTILES /FABRICS 171.00 3.4% 24.20 0.40 6.84 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) 255.80 5.0% 48.20 - 10.23 13. GLASS - - 55.00 1.1% _5.20 - 2.20 14.MIXED FERROUS ... --- 156.00 _........ 3.1% _.._.__. 35.00 120 -- 624 15. FERROUS -PROPANE _ 0.0% �0.1% _ - - 16. ALUMINUM UBCS 3.80 0.40 0.15 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS - 2.60 0.1% 1.00 _ -_ 0.10 18. COPPER 0.80 0.0% 0.80 0.03 19. BRASS 0.40 0.0% 0.40 0.02 20. STAINLESS STEAL 720 0.1% 4.80 0.29 21. FINES (< I INCH MATERIALS) 926.40 18.2% 62.10 12.20 37.06 22. ELECTRONICS 74.40 1.5% 22.40 2.98 23. REGULATED HAZARDS 63.80 1.3% 40.60 - 2.55 TOTAL WEIGHT 5,094.40 100.0`Yo 259.20 j 168.20 ` 203.78 Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 3 September 2010 51oanVAZQUEZ,LLC TOTAL WASTE STREAM - VARIANCE ANALYSIS Mean Standard Number of Confidence Interval MATERIAL Composition Deviation Samples Lower Upper 1. NEWSPAPER 0.6% 0.8% 25 0.3% 0.8% 2. OCCIKRAFT 2.9% ... ... ... .... .. 1.9% 25 2.2% ... ...... . .... ...... .. . 1 ... 3.5% . .. ... ... .......... . . .......... 3. MIXED FIBER 13.0% 3.8% 14.3% 4. PETE 0.5% 0.3% 25 ---11.8% 0.5% 0.6% 5. HDPE 0.9% 0.9% 25 0.6% 1.2% 6. #3-7 5.0% 2.2% 25 4.3% 5.7% 7. FILM 3.8% 3.1% 25 2.7% 4.8% 8. WOOD WASTE 4.7% 5.8% 25 2.8% 6.6% 9. YARD WASTE 23.2% 9.4% 25 .... ... . ... 20.1% 26.3% 10. FOOD WASTE 12.1% 10.1% 25 .... ...... -,-, 8.8% . . ....... -- 15.5% --- 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 3.4% 3.1% 25 2.4% 4.5% 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRk 4.8% 5.5% 25 3.0% 6.6% 13. GLASS - --------- 1.1% .. ... ........... - 1 -.1- -.- ........ 0.7% 25 0.8% . ... 1.3% ...... .. . .... . . ............. -- 14. MIXED FERROUS 2.9% 2.7% 25 2.0% 3.8% 15. FERROUS -PROPANE 0.0% 0.0% 25 0.0% 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBCS 0.1% 0.1% 25 0.1% 0.1% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.1% 0.1% 25 0.0% 0.1% 18. COPPER 0.0% 0.1% 25 0.0% 0.0% 19. BRASS ........ . . .. ... . ..... ........ ........ . . 0.0% 0.0% 25 0.0% 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL 0.2% 0.4% 25 0.0% 0.3% 21. FINES ,(< 1 INCH MATERIALS) , 18.0% 6.2% 2.5-1 15.19% 20.0% 22. ELECTRONICS 1.4% 2.5% 25 0.6% 2.2% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS 1.3%1--"--4.7-%, 25 0.0% 2.9% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 4 September2010 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% SloanvAzQuez,LLC 90%Confidence Intervals 1 f 1 1 r I �Q 4~ �Q G Q4, 1 �G 1� �4. 'J Q:` 0h J4 b .9 h Q 5 P y� 3� 4� OG '`WP QP 4�0 Jp P�' Py Py OP y .4 QO aP2 JOG QpJ q4 QPh Qp ~��Jq J� b' +�y p0y pp1' 4.y\4P WQ~y\ .�Pq t p=�Q 2 1 •' ~ °j `2 �' } 4� S O' tiO N tl yep .J.� 02 y1P ti~ tip 4:., 0P Prepared Jor Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study S September 2010 SloanvazQUEz,LLC Client: City of Yuba City, CA Steven C. Kroeger, Assistant City Manager 1201 Civic Center Blvd Yuba City, CA 95993 Tel: (530) 8221.4817 skroeser@ybacity.net Project: Evaluation of Recycling Processing Proposal The City of Yuba City has engaged the services of Sloan Vazquez to evaluate an unsolicited proposal to provide recycling materials processing and collection services. The evaluation will include an evaluation of the proposer's capabilities to provide the offered services, the reasonability of the proposed methodology and equipment, the competiveness and reasonableness of the proposed fee, a review of the proposed agreement. Our experience in solid waste management and operations was important to City in the selection decision. Project: Professional Review of Draft Franchise Agreement The City engaged the services of Sloan Vazquez, LLC (SV) to provide a professional review of their Draft Collection Services Franchise Agreement to ensure consistency with current industry practices and to provide general feedback including identification of any inconsistencies, areas of concern, missed opportunities, etc. Sloan Vazquez provided the City a report indicating areas of concern, recommended alternative language, and provided advice in preparation for negotiation with the City's franchise hauler. Our experience in solid waste management and operations was important to City in the selection decision. Client. City of Berkeley, CA Ken Etherington, Manager of Solid Waste & Recycling 2180 Milvia Street, 3`d Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: (510) 981.6359 KE@berkelev,ca.us Project: Operational Review of Solid Waste Division Sloan Vazquez completed an operational review for the City of Berkeley's Solid Waste Management Division. To complete this engagement, Sloan Vazquez personnel reviewed all division operational functions and workflow process for each area; reviewed the scheduling and routing system; evaluated the current vehicle fleet, including condition and replacement schedules and repair scheduling and costs based on industry standards; assessed the use of outside contractors for curbside collection of recyclable materials and operation of materials processing facilities; assessed the non-exclusive franchise arrangement used by the City to service the commercial sector. Our experience in solid waste management and operations was important to City in the selection decision. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 17 SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC TOTAL WASTE STREAM - %- PIE CHART 23. REGULATED HAZARDS, 22. ELECTRONICS, 1.4% 1 3% 1. NEWSPAPER, 0.6% 2. OCC/KRAFT, 2.9% 20. STAINLESS STEAL, 0.2% 4. PETE, 0.5% 21..fINES i<1�INCH ®wCww's w�a w�'�a�l`' a 17. MIXED NON- � MATERIALS ) w180%�� a�� w� � JBE I ` FERROUS, 0.1% S. HDPE, 0.9% 16. ALUMINUMs UBC'5,0.1% e w ; 14. MIXED FERROUS, 2.9% * `@ 13. GLASS, 1.1% I i 12. INERTS (ROCK, i i CONCRETE, GRAVEL) , 4.8% — 10- 9. yARI) WASTE, 23.2% 11. TEXTILES/ FABRICS, - . - 3.4% I I i Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 6 September1010 SloanVAZQUEz,LLC TOTAL WASTE STREAM - LBS - PIE CHART 23. REGULATED HAZARDS, 22. ELECTRONICS, 74.4� 63.8 NEWSPAPER, 30.0 I1. 20. STAINLESS STEAL, 7.2 ,. e r- 2. OCC/KRAFT, 219.6 18. COPPER, 0.8 _ �,°�`'®� 3EFMRSED F38ERrb6L2 17. MIXED NO a "" a �, .�E. 21.. FINES (<lINCH `€'e 4. PETE, 28.8 FERROUS, 2.6 e 4 MATERIAL$)° 926 s S. HDPE, 37.4 s� 16. ALUMINUM UBC5, 3.8 14. MIXED FERROUS, 156.0' d 13. GLASS, s 118.2 " i 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL), 255.8 i 0 FLiOD WAS 51. - 9. YARD WASTE, 1,143!0 i i I 11. TEXTILES / i j FABRICS, 263.4 i Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 7 September 2010 SloanVAZQUEz,LLC Sample #1- Tabulation Sample 1- Waste Stream - DATA Sample 1 MATERIAL Weight %of Total MIXED SAMPLE 265164 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 259201 99.1% Shrinkage 0.9% 1.NEWSPAPER �0:4d 02% 2. OCC/KRAFT 1 1 % 3. MIXED FIBER S4W2`61 _ 11.7% W 4. PETE ` �:20 w 0.5% ._..._-_ 5. HDPE Or20 0.1 % 6. #3-7 7.80g S,80- 4:2Q 3.0% 1.2% -� 1.6% 7. FILM 8. WOOD WASTE 9. YARD WASTE 91:40 35.3% 10. FOOD WASTE ��4e20- 1.6% 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 12. INERTS ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) ( M, 1:60 1800' 0.6% 6.9% _. . _ 13. GLASS siR.td ryXgg�»s"�wi :tea,1�60 ... .......................... 0.6% d,w•_ a 14. MIXED S FERROU �3500,� 13 5% _ 15. FERROUS PROPANE ----- 0..0% 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S _ d 0:20� va� 0.1 % 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.0% 18. COPPER p 0.0% 0.0% 19. BRASS --- __ .._._ _.... _.__._.._ .. ........ _._...- 20. STAINLESS STE_A_L 0.0% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 20.6% 22. ELECTRONICS �2 0.0% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS 1.20 0.5% TOTAL WEIGHT 25920 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 8 September2010 SloanvAZQUEZ,LLC SAMPLE #2 - TABULATION Sample 2 - Waste Stream - DATA j _ Sam le 2 MATERIAL Weight %ofTotal MIXED SAMPLE 20320' 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 201.20 99.0% Shrinkage 2,00 1.0% 1. NEWSPAPER L60 0.8% 2.000/KRAFT 100= 2St40�s 1.20.,, 0.5% 12.6% 0.6% 3. MIXED FIBER - _ 4. PETE 5. HDPE 1:20` 4.20 4.021 0.6% 6. #3-7 2.1% 2.0% 7. FILM 8. WOOD WASTE 5.20' 6040a 2.6% 30.0% 9. YARD WASTE_ 10. FOOD WASTE 23 60,; 11.7% IL TEXTILES/FABRICS 140 0.7% -. _.. 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE GRAVEL) 1.6% 13. GLASS #3w20 5 20m Si40m ._� 2.6% 4.2% - - 14. MIXED FERROUS _. ---- - ..__...... _..---- 15. FERROUS -PROPANE 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S 040` 0.2% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.0% 0.0% 18. COPPER - 19. BRASS '54 80j 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL _0.0% 27.2% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 22. ELECTRONICS 0.0% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS �� �� 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 201< 0 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 9 September 2010 SloanvAzQUEz,t.i.c SAMPLE #3 -TABULATION SAMPLE 3 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 3 MATERIAL Weight %of Total MIXED SAMPLE _220 001 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 2�16$0 98.5% Shrinkage 31-21 1.5% 1. NEWSPAPER'1R60 0.7% 2. OCC/KRAFT 3e60 1.7% 3. MIXED FIBER 35:40 16.3% 4. PETE 1=, 0.6% 5. HDPE 11 QA,, 0.5% 6.1t3-7 890< 3.9% 7. FILM "� �'6�20� "�� 2.9% - .....-_ 8. WOOD WASTE Y T �3. -- 12.5% 9. YARD WASTE30'213�� 13 9% 10. FOOD WASTE _ _ 32 $0 15.1% 11. TEXTILES /FABRICS.$0' 3.6% --. _ ( K, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) 12.INERTS ROC 90 _. -- 4.5% ___.. _ _ �2.3% 13. GLASS �,"gSAOOA 14. MIXED FERROUS wojo,800 5.0% ..... .- 15. FERROUS PROPANE 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBCS 0.0% - r 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS OAO 0.2% 18. COPPER 19. BRASS i 7� 2'ww N 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL 1 . 0.0% 11. FINES (< 1 INCH MATERIALS) ,r& 's3540g 16.3% 22. ELECTRONICS M 0.0% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS _mn 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 29b;$Q 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 10 September 1010 SloanvAzQUEz,LLC SAMPLE #4 -TABULATION SAMPLE 4- WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 4. MATERIAL Weight %of Total MIXED SAMPLE 197 00� 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 192.aa, 97.7% Shrinkage I;60 2.3% 1. NEWSPAPER_ 0.0% 2. OCC/KRAFT 10,`80= ,32°80 _5.6% 17.0% 0.6% 3. MIXED FIBER 4. PETE1206 5. HDPE 1",00 0.5% 6. #3-7 _ T60� 4.0% 7. FILM -12 6Dmi - 6.5% ..... _....... ... .... ......... 8. WOOD WASTE 17`Q0 8.8% 9. YARD WASTE 34 40e, 17.9% _ 10. FOOD WASTE1360� 7.1% _ -�-- 11. TEXTILES /FABRICS ���6;20 - - 32% 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE GRAVEL) 6OQ 3.1% 13. GLASS gnbl!80� W4x80 0.9% 2.5% 14. MIXED FERROUS 15. FERROUS PROPANE _ _ _ � � � M &Z'S 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBC ,,=��0,40� 0.2% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS W1100_ 0.5% 18. COPPER a- t 0.0% .... _._._._ - ............. 19. BRASSa -,Z 201 41 00 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL _ 0.1 % _ 21.3% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 22. ELECTRONICS�s - --- - --- ----- - 0.0% -- .._ .._ % 13. REGULATED HAZARDS 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 192.901' 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 11 September 2010 SloanVAZQUEz,LLC SAMPLE #5 - TABULATION SAMPLE 5 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 5 MATERIAL Weight '%of Total MIXED SAMPLE 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT _°34,20 99.9% Shrinkage 0,20 0.1% 1. NEWSPAPER 0.0% 2. OCC/KRAFT �'�37.20 1'Ii80 5.0% 3.MIXED FIBER 15.9% 4. PETE �� ;0.60� 0.3% 5. HOPE 0.3% 6. #3-7 13'DO 5.6% 7 FILM 3.7% 8. WOOD WASTE",6.20' _35.60 °37.00 � 13m: 2.6% 9. YARD WASTE 15.2% 15.8% 10. FOOD WASTE 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 5.9% 11 INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) 1.40 0.6% 13 GLASS 2.20 0.9°0 9% 14 MIXED FERROUS93.802 - 16% 15. FERROUS PROPANE ........ 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S � ��0:20� 0.1% 17. MIXED O:ZO 0.1% _NON-FERROUS 18. COPPER ` - 0.0% 19. BRASS .4:80�� "'S1'80a 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL 2.0% 21. FINES (c 1 INCH MATERIALS) 22.1 % _ 22. ELECTRONICS 13.120' 2.2% _... __. .. __...... _ _._.._.. __. _ . 23. REGULATED HAZARDS AP 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 28.420 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 12 September 2010 SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC SAMPLE #6 - TABULATION SAMPLE 6 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 6 MATERIAL i Weight %of Total 06 MIXED SAMPLE :17360s" 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 1�7,2.20 99.2% ', Shrinkage 1.40 0.8% 1. NEWSPAPER - 5.00 19.80 1:40 0.0% 2.9% 2.000/KRAFT 3. MIXED FIBER 11.5% 4. PETE 0.8% 5.HDPE 080= 0.5% 6. tt3-7 SAO' 3.1/ 7. FILM ...._.._ ._.._.__._ .._... 31M0 2.2% B. WOOD WASTE 27:80 34.20 10.20 2.60 16.116 9. YARD WASTE 19.9% 10. FOOD WASTE 5.9% 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS _ - 1.5% 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) _.._._......___...__.._...._ 15.20 8.8% _ 13. GLASS - 2.40 1.4% 14. MIXED FERROUS 2;80 1.6% 15. FERROUS -PROPANE °"- 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S 0.3a' 0.1 % 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.0% 18. COPPER 0.0% 19. BRASS ' 33.40 7.20 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL 0.0% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 19.4% _ 22. ELECTRONICS ~` 4.2% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS - _ 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 17,2.20 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 13 September 2010 SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC SAMPLE #7 -TABULATION SAMPLE 7 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 7 MATERIAL Weight %of Total MIXED SAMPLE 213:40 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 212.60 99.6% Shrinkage 0$04 0.4% 1. NEWSPAPERS 0.0% 2.000/KRAFT &4Wj 4.9% 3.MIXED FIBER 1000 4.7% 4. PETE �2 OOa 0.9% ..-- ._.._.._ -. _.. 5. HDPE1 20 0.6% 6. #3-7 12.1% 7. FILM 3:20 2.4% .. .- - - ...-.. ............. ........_......... ..... ........... 8. WOOD WASTE u`rePo.�RS`CnEm-.-s r �P &60- ........... 4.0% 9.YARD WASTE 11.3% 10. FOOD WASTE s w Qx 26.20 .,_.�.. 12.3% 11. TEXTILES 10.2% ..._/FABRICS21:50 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) � . ��"48°20� 22.7% - --...- .. - .. - ..-. - 13. GLASS MRTXMW 0.8% 14. MIXED FERROUS l%W_ 1801' 0.8% 15. FERROUS PROPANE"" 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBCS 0.0% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS ggggg -,v 0.0% 0.0% 18. COPPER 19. BRASS -� 20. STAINLESS STEAL _0.0% _ 0.0% 21. FINES (< 1 INCH MATERIALS) `20:00 22. ELECTRONICS 6.00 2.8916 23. REGULATED HAZARDS 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 21,2,6,0 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 14 September 2010 SloanVAZQUEz,LLC SAMPLE #8 - TABULATION SAMPLE 8 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 8 MATERIAL Weight %of Total MIXED SAMPLE 21520 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 21 ;8D 99.3% Shrinkage 1,:40 0.7% 1. NEWSPAPER =a 0.0% 2. OCC/KRAFT 4 60 2.2% 3. MIXED FIBER 39`60 I A$ 18.5% _ 0.6Y _ 4. PETE _...._.__._.__ ._..__.. 5. HDPE mp 2OOe 0.9% 6. t13-7 11 Q0E 5.1Y 7. FILM �� I'S 3.7% ._.._ S. WOOD WASTE R Z:60s 3.6% 9. YARD WASTE 5340=s 24.5% 10.FOOD WASTE 7.7Y 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 22� 5§00P 2.3% 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) Y"3i6M 1.7% 13. GLASS AMZQ3 "2 01 1.5% 14. MIXED FERROUS d,.00� 1.9% ---- . _ __.__... _........._.. _ 15. FERROUS -PROPANE p b 5su5s -- 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBCS- A- r -�._K - 01% 0.0% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS � 18. COPPER - 0.0% ................. _... 19. BRASS = 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL Vim_ 5460 F= 0204 0.0% -�25.5% 21. FINES (< 1 INCH MATERIALS) 22. ELECTRONICS 0.1% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 211380. 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 15 September2010 SloanVAzQUEz,LLC Client: City of Oceanside, CA Peter Weiss, City Manager 300 North Coast Highway Oceanside, CA 92054 Tel: (760) 435.3066 PWeiss@ci.oceanside.ca.us Project: Negotiation of Solid Waste & Recycling Agreement The City of Oceanside engaged the services of Sloan Vazquez to negotiate its agreement with its existing solid waste and recycling services provider. Our experience in solid waste management and operations was important to City in the selection decision. Client: City of Los Alamitos, CA Jeffrey L. Steward, City Manager 3191 Katella Ave Los Alamitos CA 90720-5600 Tel: (562) 431.3538 ext 201 4stewart@ci.los-alamitos.ca.us Project: Municipal Solid Waste Procurement Sloan Vazquez oversaw the procurement of solid waste and recycling services for the City of Los Alamitos. Sloan Vazquez has been responsible for development of the RFP, evaluating proposals, qualifying proposers, and assisting the city in the selection of a contractor including the development of the final franchise agreement. Sloan Vazquez was selected because of our industry knowledge and experience. Client: City of Mission Viejo, CA Denise Matson, Environmental Program Administrator 200 Civic Center Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Tel: (949) 470.3010 dmatson@cityofmissionvieio.org Project: Municipal Solid Waste Procurement of Solid Waste Division Sloan Vazquez oversaw the procurement of solid waste and recycling services for the City of Mission Viejo. Sloan Vazquez was responsible for development of the RFP, holding community meetings, evaluating proposals, qualifying proposers, and assisting the city in the selection of a contractor including the development of the final franchise agreement. Sloan Vazquez was selected because of our industry knowledge and experience. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12,2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 18 SloanVAZQUEz,L« SAMPLE #9-TABULATION SAMPLE 9 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 9 MATERIAL Weight %of Total MIXED SAMPLE 489101 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 187.0( 98.8% Shrinkage W, 1.2% 1. NEWSPAPER 767MY41 0.0% 2.000/KRAFT f 10.$0 0.4% 3. MIXED FIBER 168D 14.3% 4.PETE 03 0.1% 5. HDPE s8:20 4.4% 6. #3-7 12.40;¢' 51& 6.6% 2.8% 7. FILM - 8. WOOD WASTE 0:40 - .71401 0.2% 39.3% 9. YARD WASTE 10. FOOD WASTE P s 1,4:40g 7 7% 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 6.3% 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE GRAVEL) _ 2? 1.5% 13. GLASS 0.6% -NNP4IA�iu` 14. MIXED FERROUS 41f80u 1.0% 15. FERROUS PROPANE its 0.0% _ 16.ALUMINUM UBC'S 020 0.1% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS p� 0.0% 18. COPPER 0.0% 19. BRASS p.401 0.2% 20. STAINLESS STEAL I130 0.6% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 2. '"25; 2 13.891 22. ELECTRONICS 0.0% 13. REGULATED HAZARDS 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 18700 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 16 September 2010 SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC SAMPLE #10-TABULATION SAMPLE 10 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 10 MATERIAL Weight %ofTotal MIXED SAMPLE 208.201- 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 2074 - 99.5% Shrinkage M 0.5% 1. NEWSPAPER P S 4Q� 2.6% _ 2.000/KRAFT 00 1580.6' 1-20= 2.4% 7.6% 0.6% 3. MIXED FIBER 4. PETE ........ _... -- 5. HDPE 1.40'10 880" 31.'00- 7% 6.It3-7 4.2% 1.4% _ 7. FILM 8. WOOD WASTE 14.80,: 57:Z0 7.1 % 9. YARD WASTE 27.6% 10. FOOD WASTE 51:ff 25.6% 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 42 00 1.0% -- ...... _..., 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE GRAVEL) g 2 40c 1.2% 13. GLASS _0r80i, 0.4% 1.7% 14. MIXED FERROUS ..._....._._.....360 -- _.___._._....._.. 15. FERROUS -PROPANE '.' 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S 0.20' 080;, = _ 31 80k 0.1 % 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.0% 18. COPPER 0.4% 0.0% -_-_ - _-- 19. BRASS 20. STAINLESS STEAL= 0.0% 15.3% 0.. 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 22. ELECTRONICS 23. REGULATED HAZARDS ._ ..._._.� 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 207.20 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 17 September2010 SloanvAzQUEz,LLC SAMPLE #11 -TABULATION SAMPLE 11- WASTE STREAM - DATA I Sample 11 MATERIAL Weight %of Total MIXED SAMPLE %t71160a 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 1682Q 98.0% Shrinkage 3.4 22.0% 1_NEWSPAPER- '1'80 1.1 % - _._.- - ----_._-- 2. 0CC/KRAFT , , 5:001 ,. 3;. 20.20� 0.80t 3.0% 3. MIXED FIBER 12.0% 4. PETE _ 0.5% ---- .._. 5. HDPE 04640.2% 740 6. #3-7 4.4% 7. FILM 2.80 IJ% B. WOOD WASTE 4.20„ 52:00 14.20 0.60 2.5% 9. YARD WASTE 30.9% 10.FOOD WASTE 8.4% 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 0.4% - 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) ' = ` 0.0% 13. GLASS -1.00 1.6Qi 0.6% 14. MIXED FERROUS -- -- ---_._ .. ..._..._.._._ ......-_.._.._.. 1.0% _...----- 15. FERROUS PROPANE 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S 0:20 ` 0.0% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.1 - 0.0% 18. COPPER 19. BRASS 28.60 ` 11:00 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL 0.0% 21. FINES (< I INCH MATERIALS) 17.0% 22. ELECTRONICS 6.S% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS 16.40 9.8% TOTAL WEIGHT 168.20 100.0% PreparedforIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 18 September 2010 SloanvAZQlJEZ,E.LC SAMPLE #12 -TABULATION SAMPLE 12 - WASTE STREAM - DATA t E Sample 12 MATERIAL Weight %of Total MIXED SAMPLE 19420' 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 1,92A0 98.9% Shrinkage 9 2.20 1.1% 1. NEWSPAPER 2.000/KRAFT 1:40= 6.40 29:60- 0.80 , It20 14.20' 460 6.20 43,60 29.60 6Z0' 2.00 `0.40 13.80 - 26.40 - 5.60 0.7% 3.3% 3.MIXED FIBER IS.4% 4. PETE ----------- ..._....... ..... 5. HDPE 0.4% .. ...._...... _...__.... 0.6% 6. #3-7 7.4% 7. FILM ---.. ....- --_._._.. 8. WOOD WASTE 2.4% 3.2% 9. YARD WASTE 22.7% 10. FOOD WASTE 15.4% 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 3.2% 1.0% 0.2% 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) 13. GLASS 14. MIXED FERROUS . 15. FERROUS -PROPANE 7.2% 0.0% 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBCS 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.0% 18. COPPER 0.0% 0.0% -----..__.._._.... ......... 19. BRASS 20. STAINLESS STEAL 0.0% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 13.8% 2_2. ELECTRONICS _0.0% 2.9% _ 23. REGULATED HAZARDS TOTAL WEIGHT 392.00 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 19 September 2010 SloanvAzQUEz,LLC SAMPLE #13 -TABULATION SAMPLE 13 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Z Sample 13 MATERIAL Weight .%of Total , m 5N166 MIXED SAMPLE 149 193 12 2Qn 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 97.2% Shrinkage 2.8% 1. NEWSPAPER�f01� 0.5% 2. OCC/KRAFT�t1 g� 0� 6.0% ------------ 3. MIXED FIBER � 24.00� 12.8% _ .__�� 4 PETE ���� 0.d0P• 0.2% 5. HDPE 0 Z0 0.1 % 6. t13-7 �a 710 3 7% 7. FILM 4 Q 2.6% 8. WOOD WASTE 2 20 1.2% 9. YARD WASTE 94 25.1% 10. FOOD WASTE 42260 . 12.0% �50� 11.TEXTILES/FABRICS 0.9% 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE GRAVEL) E 0.0% .__ ... _ 13. GLASS &1{?U 0.5% 14. MIXED FERROUS 4'��?� ° 2.6/ - � I5. FERROUS -PROPANE _ 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBCS �� a 0.0% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS s m 0.0% 18. COPPER AJAALOO Z i4 0.0% 19. BRASS 0.0% 20 STAINLESS STEAL e 0.0% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) ,&19201 10.2% �^ 22. ELECTRONICS 23. REGULATED HAZARDST 4Q 601 2�.6% TOTAL WEIGHT 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 20 September2010 SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC SAMPLE #14 -TABULATION SAMPLE 14 - WASTE STREAM - DATA i Sample 14 MATERIAL Weight %of Total MIXED SAMPLE �a wq T215 60 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 98.9% Shrinkage n 1.1% 1. NEWSPAPER I OQ 0.5% 2.000/KRAFT 4.2% 3. MIXED FIBER %0- �� 14.5% 4. PET -------- .......... 5. HOPE �.40 0. 7% 6. JJ3-7 �0 1700 8.0% ___.... 7. FILM e i _._ 1.9% B. WOOD WASTE N 1600 9 YARD WASTE _7.5% 31.5% IO FOOD WASTE 74©g 3.5% - 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 4�20 - 2.0% ._ ,� 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE GRAVEL) 26 t ` 1.7% 13. GLASS2�0� 1 3% 14. MIXED FERROUS 84U; 3.9% 15. FERROUS PROPANE � � 0.0% - _ 16. ALUMINUM UBCS * 020® 0.1% _ o _ 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.0/ W-6 0.0% 18. COPPER A.,%B 19. BRASS 0.0% LIM _ 20. STAINLESS STEAL �` 0.0% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 17.6% 22. ELECTRONICS ®�� m� � e 46ti 0.2% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS TOTAL WEIGHTS 100.0% PreparedforIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 21 September1010 S1oanVAZQUEz,LLC SAMPLE #15 -TABULATION SAMPLE 15 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 15 MATERIAL Weight '%of Total MIXED SAMPLE 1$740 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT'_ 98.8% Shrinkage 2(i 1.2% 1. NEWSPAPER '2`60 1.4% 2. OCC/KRAFT5 80 3.1 % 3.MIXED FIBER 1640y; 8.9% 4. PETE 080; 0.4% 5. HDPE040„ 0.2% 6. #3-7 b B0 3.7% 7 FILM 680; 3 7% 8. WOOD 4.9% -WASTE - ----- 9. YARD WASTE a' 58 80 ' 31.7% 10. FOOD WASTE 2.7% 11. TEXTILES/FA ..... - -..._. 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) 8 60 4.6% 13. GLASS 4i40 2.4% 14. MIXED FERROUS 9 d0 4.9% 15. FERROUS PROPANE m`. 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBCS 0.0% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS ugg- e® 0.0% -�� 18. COPPER HOW m0 0.0% 19. BRASS� 0.0% --- ----- - 20. STAINLESS STEAL a: a Am��IM � _ r N, 0.0% _ _ 21. FINES (< 1 INCH MATERIALS) NtE 37.6W 20.3% 22. ELECTRONICS K wn 2:40 _ 1.3% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 185,.20 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 22 September 2010 SloanVAZQUEz,LLC SAMPLE #16 -TABULATION SAMPLE 16 - WASTE STREAM - DATA I Sample 16 MATERIAL Weight %of Total y. MIXED SAMPLE N�21680� 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT NO,, ��6U, 98.5% Shrinkage 3101 1.5% 1. NEWSPAPER 1:40' 0.7% 2.000/KRAFT -880 40:80 -=3;00 4.1% 3. MIXED FIBER 19.1 % 4. PETE 0.5% 5. HDPE 1<40 _ 0.7% 7. FILM 1260 5.9% _.._....... 8. WOOD WASTE �� ... ................-- 5.5% 9. YARD WASTE_ $ 43 60 20.4% 10. FOOD WASTE 19s80 ° 9.3% 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 1 12Q- 5.2% ----- - _..-- -b 12. INERTS (ROCK_ CONCRETE, GRAVEL) 10403 - -- - - 4.9% 13. GLASS 3`s`00' 4.20' - 1.4% 14. MIXED FERROUS 1.0% IS. FERROUS -PROPANE `- 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBCSOrZO` 0.1% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.1% �w 18. COPPER 00% 19. BRASS 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL 0.0% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 33a20: 300� 15.5% 22. ELECTRONICS,--,.-,------.---. J- _1.4%_ 23. REGULATED HAZARDS - 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT I 213%jQ 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 23 September 2010 SloanVAZQUEz,LLC SAMPLE #17 -TABULATION SAMPLE 17 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 17 MATERIAL Weight %ofTotal MIXED SAMPLE 1&20&,,.'4bN 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 203.60 98.6% W2MO Shrinkage 1.4% 1. NEWSPAPER 0.0% 2.000/KRAFT 3.80 =°_'�35.80: 1:40 1.9% 3. MIXED FIBER 17.6% 4. PETE 0.7% ..- ........-.. .......... 5. HDPE �2100 e. e Is80, 0.9% 6.1t3-7 _ B, 5.4% 7 FIL - .........- ...,... .._ 8. WOOD WASTE „- 2;00 =.36.20` =33:80- 16.80 - ... 1.0% 9. YARD WASTE 17.8% 16.6% 10. FOOD WASTE 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS - 8.3% 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE GRAVEL) 3.20 1.6% 13.GLASS 2:10 1.1% 14. MIXED FERROUS�3 `20 1.6% 15. FERROUS -PROPANE 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S 020 0.1% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% --- -- 18. COPPER ._. - ._............ ...... ...... 19. BRASS "35.00` ' l):40 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL 0.0% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 17.2% 22 ELECTRONICS 0.2% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS a A "1 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 203.60 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 24 September1010 Sloan`VAZQUEz,LLC SAMPLE #18 -TABULATION SAMPLE 18 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 18 MATERIAL Weight %%of Total MIXED SAMPLE1186`60`- 100.09/ FINAL WEIGHT 1'8.4.40 98.8% Shrinkage 2.20 1.2% 1. NEWSPAPER 1.40 0.8% 7.3% 2. OCC/KRAFTw--- 13.40 33.00 1.60 3. MIXED FIBER 17.9% 0.9% 4. PETE 5. HDPE 3 0 i6' 2.0% 6. #3-7 a 448% - W8;80 7. FILM- ....._......... a`660 3.6% _._...._._._... B. WOOD WASTE 10.80 �'. 24,80 ' 44.40 7.80 - 5.9% 9. YARD WASTE 13.4% 10.FOOD WASTE 24.1% _ 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 4.2% 0.0_% - - 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) ----.__. - - - 13. GLASS . '3.60 2.0% 2.8% 14 MIXED FERROUS 15 FERROUS PROPANE` ", 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S ilp yQ10� 0.20' - „ 0.1 % 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.1% 18. COPPER - -- -.._.. --- --- _....... 0.0% ._...... - 19. BRASS - 1.00 18.00 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL 0.5% 21. FINES (< I INCH MATERIALS) 9.8% 22. ELECTRONICS 0.0% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 18.4,A0 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 25 September 2010 SloanVAzQUEz,LLC Client. City of La Mirada, CA Steve Forster, Director of Public Works 15515 Phoebe Avenue La Mirada, CA 90638 Tel: (562) 943.0131 sforster@cityoflamirada.org Project: Municipal Solid Waste Services Procurement The firm was engaged by the City of La Mirada to oversee the procurement of solid waste and recycling services after they determined that the existing franchise agreement needed to be updated. Sloan Vazquez was responsible for development of the RFP, evaluating proposals, qualifying proposers, and assisting the city in the selection of a contractor including the development of the final franchise agreement. Because of our industry knowledge and experience, the City succeeded in significantly upgrading their program services by adding household hazardous waste collection, universal waste collection, cell phones and household batteries collection all while reducing their rates by 10% across the board. We also assisted the City in analyzing and forecasting their franchise fee revenue based on the new contract in a way that allowed them to increase revenues to the City. Client. Brown, Outagamie & Winnebago Counties (Green Bay, WI) Philip Stecker, Director of Solid Waste — Outagamie County 1419 Holland Road Appleton, WI 54911 Tel: (920) 832.1521 SteckePP@co.outagamie.wi.us Project: Municipal MRF Development Services BOW, a Joint Powers Authority of the Brown, Outagamie and Winnebago Counties is developing a 70,000 ton -per -year MRF. Sloan Vazquez was initially engaged by BOW to evaluate the capital and OEM costs for actual projects around the county to help the Counties determine capital and O&M costs for their system. With the help of our study, BOW determined to provide toward the development of a single -stream residential recycling MRF. Sloan Vazquez was subsequently hired to prepare and oversee the procurement of the project equipment and to manage the installation and start-up of the new facility. Sloan Vazquez prepared the RFP and managed the procurement process including evaluating and ranking the proposers, assisting the city in making a final selection and developing the final agreement. Sloan Vazquez also completed the installation and acceptance testing of the equipment to ensure that the equipment performed according to the required specifications. Our firm also developed an RFP for the procurement of labor services for the MRF to assist BOW in the staffing of the facility. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide waste Stream Analysis Study 19 SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC SAMPLE #19 -TABULATION SAMPLE 19 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 19 MATERIAL weight %of Total MIXED SAMPLE �41920_ 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 016001 98.7% Shrinkage 2,8,_ 1.3% 1 NEWSPAPER Qw,"W-10 0.0% 2.000/KRAFT 180� 0.8% 3.MIXED FIBER vj%- 0Y 10.1% 4. PETE --.-.-._..__......._.._._ .. --- 3 00 1.4% --...- 5. HDPE *80r 16:20 35:601 2.2% 7.5% 16.5% 6. N3-7 7. FILM - _.... .._.. 8. WOOD WASTE _ J.26. - 1.0% 1.6% 9. YARD WASTE 10. FOOD WASTE �111 80 51.7% 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS �1s4Q-N 0.6% _ ..... _� 12. INERTS (ROCK CONCRETE, GRAVEL) a _.... _.._.. 0.0% 13.GLASS 0.4% -0$d 14. MIXED FERROUS 1201 0.6% 15. FERROUS -PROPANE 3p at'a4`4.. 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S A.20g 0.1 % 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS v . 0.0% 18. COPPER 0.0% --- ..._..._. _. - -- -- - 19. BRASS _ =_ ..._.... 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL=12 0.0% 21. FLNES (<1 INCH_ MATERIALS) 12.20! 5.6% 22. ELECTRONICS 0.0% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS TOTAL WEIGHT 21640 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 26 September 1010 SttoanvAzQUEZ,LLC SAMPLE #20 - TABULATION SAMPLE 20 - WASTE STREAM - DATA le 20 , MATERIAL Weight of Total MIXED SAMPLE 219,20' 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 217,Q20, 99.1% Shrinkage a O,D- 0.9% 1. NEWSPAPER !�jj 0.0% __-� .___...._� 44 ___ 2.000/KRAFT- 1101 0.6% 3. MIXED FIBER 19380E 70.40-- 9.1% 0.2% 4. PETE 5. HDPE 0.40. .7.60 8.80^ 0.2% 6. #3-7 3.5% 7. FILM -- --- . _._..__._...----------- - 4.1% 8. WOOD WASTE 55:00= 40,00_ 30 00�. 25.3% 18.4% 13.8% 9.YARD WASTE 10. FOOD WASTE 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 2-` Og 1.2% 12. INERTS ROCK, CONCR 6.7% 13. GLASS0;80�. 5t00," 0.4% 2.3% 14. MIXED FERROUS 15. FERROUS -PROPANE OZO 0.0% 0.1% _ 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S �- 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.0% 0.0% __._._._.-_.._._. 18. COPPER 19. BRASS 2900t 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL 0.0% 13.4% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 22. ELECTRONICS 180 0.8% -...__.- .. 23. REGULATED HAZARDS ._._..._ 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 217,.20 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 27 September 2010 SloanvAzQUEZ,LLC SAMPLE #21 -TABULATION SAMPLE 21- WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 21 MATERIAL Weight %of Total MIXED SAMPLE 194;40, 100.0% _ FINAL WEIGHT 1 22.40 99.0% Shrinkage 2:00 1.0% 1. NEWSPAPER 0.0% 2. OCC/KRAFT 2 40' 1.2% 3. MIXED FIBER 24I605 12.8% �W. 4. PETE j� i.40 O 5. HOPE 5%. VOW ......0.. .. 0.5% 6. t13-7 K,0g,9?60� 5.0% 7 FILMar 3 04 1.6% 8 WOOD WASTE 1.1% �20 9.YARD WASTE 6720t 34.9% _. _._ _ b d 10. FOOD WASTE 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 3 3:20-- 5.2% 1.7% 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) A`21^20 11.0% _ _ - 13. GLASS 1401; 0.7% 14. MIXED FERROUS 2.0% 15. FERROUS -PROPANE 0.0% _ -- 16.ALUMINUM UBCS 0:20t 0.1% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS a 20 0.1% 18. COPPER 19. BRASS 33, ,,11 0.0% 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL ZC NO- &IN�� z 0.0% 21. FINES (< 1 INCH MATERIALS) �4�.80� 21.2% 22. ELECTRONICS 010 _ 0.1 -- -- _. H 23. REGULATED HAZARDS Po 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT �9.2.40 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 28 September 1010 SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC SAMPLE #22 -TABULATION SAMPLE 22 - WASTE STREAM - DATA E Sample 22 MATERIAL Weight '', %of Total R._ MIXED SAMPLE =_22380" 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 220.60 98.6% Shrinkage 320 1.4% 1. NEWSPAPER ,1.80 _ . =340 0.8% 1.5% 2. OCC/KRAFT 3. MIXED FIBER 0-, 8.5% 4. PETE080 0.4% -_.- _... ....... 5. HDPE o ....._.._...-._.._. 6. k3-7 1751A 2.4% 7 FILM 0&e � 4;00J �- 1.8% - 8. WOOD WASTE � a 6g40 ...._.-. .._..,. 2.9% 9.YARD WASTE 3120x 14.1% 10.FOOD WASTE g1900r 8.6% 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS - - -- 242q 11.0% 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE GRAVEL) e771566111.3% 13. GLASS Z40' 3,60 1.1 % 14. MIXED FERROUS 1.6% 15. FERROUS -PROPANE - 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S _<_r`a `�= ,020- - . 0.0% 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.1% 18. COPPER - --.. ._._.._... ...-....-. 0.0% 19. BRASS ww, 0.0% 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL ' 21. FINES <1 INCH MATERIALS 22. ELECTRONICS �2 2?�40j 10.2% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS � `� 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 2,2060 1 100.0% Prepared Jar Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 29 September 2010 SloanVAZQUEz,LLC SAMPLE #23 -TABULATION SAMPLE 23 - WASTE STREAM - DATA - Sample 23 MATERIAL Weight I %of Total MIXED SAMPLE 203.60 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT 2,0.1.40 98.9% Shrinkage 2,20 1.1% 1. NEWSPAPER 0.0% 2.000/KRAFT *'-AT .b0� 1.5% 3 MIXED FIBER PO 8.6% 4 PETE 0FQ.60a 0.3% 5. HDPE ,0:60 0.3% 6. #3-7 ;6.40,' 3.2% 3.1% _._. ....__.._ 7.FILM --- -- __.. ..._._... .6.20i B. WOOD WASTE -' 7060: 21.80 0:40 0.0% 9. YARD WASTE 35.1 % 10. FOOD WASTE - 10.8% 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 0.2% 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) '-12:20; 6.1 % 13. GLASS J4Z1.60` 0.0% 14 MIXED FERROUS 0.8% 15 FERROUS PROPANE f 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM U_BC S 0.0% -- � 17. MIXED NON-FERROUS 0.0% 18 COPPER r y 0.0% 19. BRASS 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL _ -_ 0.0% 27.3% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 55.00 5.60 22. ELECTRONICS 2.8% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT 20 440 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 30 September 2010 SloanVAZQUEz,LLC SAMPLE #24- TAB ULATION SAMPLE 24 - WASTE STREAM - DATA 1 - Sample 24 MATERIAL Weight i !%of Total MIXED SAMPLE 205.20 100.09/0 FINAL WEIGHT 204,Q0 99.4% Shrinkage 1.20 0.6% 1. NEWSPAPER 4.40; 2.2% 2.000/KRAFT ;,7.60 3.7% 3. MIXED FIBER - '*33:00. 16.2% - 0.6% ............. _o..- 4. PETE .._.__.- bj��1t2 , -. S. HDPE }. 0.40 ':' 11,80 7:80 0.2% 6. #3-7 5.8% 3.8% _....._.__ . 7. FILM -----... ._....-..-..................-..-.-..._..__._.-...._._...---_..._-_.._._. 8. WOOD WASTE 2.20 25.80 21.20 5.00 1.1 % 9. YARD WASTE 12.6% 10. FOOD WASTE 10.4% 11. TEXTILES/FABRICS 2.5% 12. INERTS (ROCK, CONCRETE, GRAVEL) 30.40 14.9% 13. GLASS 4:80- . `° 7.60' 2.4% 14. MIXED FERROUS 3.7% 15. FERROUS -PROPANE 0 0% - -- -- 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S�-020-0.1 % 17.MIXED NON-FERROUS - =;_; 0.0% 18. COPPER --- .... .._.._ 0% 0 �..... 19. BRASS 38.40 2.20 - 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL 0.0% 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) 18.8% 1.1% - 0.0% 22. ELECTRONICS _ 23. REGULATED HAZARDS TOTAL WEIGHT 204.Q0 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 31 September 1010 SloanvAZQUEZ,LLC SAMPLE #25 - TABULATION SAMPLE 25 - WASTE STREAM - DATA Sample 25 MATERIAL Weight :%of Total MIXED SAMPLE 199.40 100.0% FINAL WEIGHT M9.7,MO 99.2% Shrinkage 1.6U9 0.8% 1. NEWSPAPER 4:20�. 2.1% 2.000/KRAFT 2D20 5.2% 3. MIXED FIBER I1.1% 4. PETE 0.6% 5. HOPE maa 100 0.5% 6. N3-71060 5.4% 7. FILM 900, 4.6% _.. _._ 8. WOOD WASTE 40 0.7% m .d 9. YARD WASTE �38.20 19.3% - _ 00 10. FOOD WASTE i 78 60b 4.3% _ 11.TEXTILES /FABRICS - 220a mm0.6% 12. INERTS (ROCK CONCRETE GRAVEL) �!.A��& 14,00 F 7.1 % - .mLazo'k 13. GLASS 1�40�° 0.7% 14 MIXED FERROUS _ � 15. FERROUS PROPANE 0.0% 16. ALUMINUM UBC'S` 17. MIXED NON-FERRO US 0.0% 18. COPPER b 0.0% 19. BRASSH 0.0% 20. STAINLESS STEAL 0.0% - 21. FINES (<1 INCH MATERIALS) �. 62 20 31.44% 22. ELECTRONICS S40 3.2% 23. REGULATED HAZARDS 0.0% TOTAL WEIGHT M9,Z ti' 100.0% Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 32 September2010 SloanVAZQUEz,LLC APPENDIX 1- DATA COLLECTION FORM Prepared for Disposal Company, Inc. Waste Composition Study 33 September 2010 WEIGHT #1 WEIGHT #2 WEIGHT #3 WEIGHT #4 WEIGHT #5 PAPER NEWSPAPER OCC/KRAFT MIXED FIBER PLASTIC PETE HDPE #3-7 Film ORGANICS WOOD WASTE RUBBER PRODUCTS YARD WASTE FOOD WASTE TEXTILES / FABRICS INERTS ROCK,CONCRETE,BRICK,TILE NON -CONTAINER GLASS CONTAINER GLASS 3-MIX METALS FERROUS- TIN/STEEL CANS FERROUS -OTHER NON-FERROUS- ALUM. UBC'S NON-FERROUS- OTHER FINES < 1.5 inch materials) Dirt, sand, ravel, pencils, pickels SPECIAL ELECTRONICS REGULATED HAZARDS Heritage Fields, LLC The Orange County Great Park Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study December 2005 Prepared by: I I sioa lVAZQUEZLLC Municipal Solid Waste & Recycling Advisors SloanVAzQUEz,L« Orange County C&D Wasteshed Study Client: Orange County Great Park In Southern California, the firm assisted in the development of an overall waste management strategy in the City of Irvine -Orange County Great Park for the project developer, Heritage Fields, LLC (a joint venture of Lennar Corporation and LNR, Inc.) The objective of Sloan Vazquei s work on the project is to develop and oversee contracts for the demolition and recycling of at least 75% (EIR requirement) of the buildings and runways at the former El Toro Marine Corps Air Station. 4.3.2 CLEMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL- REFERENCES Permitting and Development of over 40 MRF/Transfer Stations Clements Environmental is one of the premier transfer station and MRF permitting and development firms in California. Work has been completed or is continuing for several material recovery facilities and transfer stations in San Diego, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, Sacramento, San Bernardino, and San Mateo Counties. The typical design features of these facilities include: a buy-back center, curbside MRF, commercial MRF, wood and yard waste processing, C&D processing, a household hazardous waste depot, and waste transfer to truck or rail. A list of clients is available upon request. Examples of current projects underway include: Permitting and Development - Mid Valley Disposal Client: Mid Valley Disposal Clements is performing all land use and environmental permitting for the 1,500 TPD facility located in Kerman, California. This includes a Conditional Use Permit, Solid Waste Facility Permit, Stormwater Permit, and Spill Control and Contingency Plan. This work involves close interface with Fresno County Planning, the Fresno County Department of Community Health (the LEA), the California Integrated Waste Management Board, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Permitting and Development - 3,000 TPD EcoCentre Facility Client: Tierra Verde Industries Clements performed all land use and environmental permitting for the 3,000 TPD EcoCentre facility located in the Orange County Great Park in Irvine, California. The project included the following activities: clean MRF, commercial MRF, C&D processing, Greenwaste chipping & grinding and composting, a -Waste deconstruction and recycling, a buy-back recycling center, and foodwaste composting via vermiculture. Anaerobic digestion is planned for the future. This permitting work involved close interface with Orange County Planning, the Orange County Health Department, the California Integrated Waste Management Board, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Permitting and Development -1,500 TPD MRF/Transfer Station Client: Advance Disposal Clements is performing all land use and environmental permitting, and site layout for the expansion of an existing 600 TPD facility to a complete 1,500 TPD facility located in Hesperia, CA. The modified facility features a MRF processing system for mixed MSW, as well as greenwaste chipping & grinding, and C&D processing. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 20 Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLEOF CONTENTS......................................................................................................................................I TABLEOF TABLES..........................................................................................................................................iii TABLEOF PICTURES......................................................................................................................................iv EXECUTIVESUMMARY............................................................................................................................ES-i BACKGROUND.............................................................................................................................................. ES-2 Heritage Fields Construction and Demolition Waste.............................................................................. ES-2 AdditionalOpportunities......................................................................................................................... ES-3 Conclusion............................................................................................................................................... ES-4 1.0 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................1 2.0 STUDY METHODOLOGY...................................................................................................................2 3.0 SOLID WASTE INFRASTRUCTURE IN ORANGE COUNTY.......................................................3 3.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS IN ORANGE COUNTY.........................................................................................3 3. L I Waste Importation............................................................................................................................ 4 3.1.2 AB939 Legislation............................................................................................................................ 4 3.1.3 Current & Pending Legislation ofC&D & Organic Materials........................................................ 5 3.1.4 El Toro EIR Demolition Mitigation Measures..................................................................................8 3.2 MATERIALS PROCESSING CAPACITY.....................................................................................................9 3.2.1 Primary Receiver/Processors of Commingled C&D Waste.............................................................. 9 3.2.2 Primary Receiver/Processors of Green Waste Material................................................................. 10 4.0 WASTE GENERATION ANALYSIS.................................................................................................12 4.1 QUANTIFICATION OF WASTE............................................................................................................... 12 4.2 C&D WASTE GENERATION IN ORANGE COUNTY................................................................................ 13 4.2.1 El Toro Demolition Waste.............................................................................................................. 13 4.2.2 Construction Waste......................................................................................................................... 16 4.2.3 Estimate of Costs............................................................................................................................18 4.3 SOURCE SEPARATED ORGANICS GENERATION IN ORANGE COUNTY...................................................21 5.0 ON -SITE PROCESSING ASSESSMENT..........................................................................................23 5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF ON -SITE PROCESSING........................................................................23 5.1.1 C&D Organic Material Volume Reduction.................................................................................... 24 5.1.2 On -Site Material Separation........................................................................................................... 24 5.1.3 Local Reuse.....................................................................................................................................25 6.0 CONCLUSION......................................................................................................................................27 7.0 APPENDICES.......................................................................................................................................28 7.1 APPENDIX A — MODEL ORDINANCES 7.1.1 California Integrated Waste Management Board Model Construction and Demolition Diversion Ordinance 7.1.2 City of La Habra C&D Ordinance 7.1.3 Marin County: C&D Debris Model Ordinance 7.1.4 Rural Alternative Model Ordinance 7.1.5 Sample C&D Ordinance 7.2 APPENDIX B —CITIES WITIi ADOPTED C&D ORDINANCES 7.3 APPENDIX C— TONNAGE CALCULATIONS —ELTORODEMOLITION Sloan Vazquez, LLC i Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 7.4 APPENDIX D—TONNAGE & COSTS CALCULATIONS 7.4. i Demolition & New Construction Waste Tonnage Projections 7.4.2 Transportation & Processing Costs 7.4.3 Heritage Fields Construction & Demolition 7.4.4 Non -Heritage Fields Residential Construction 7.4.5 Organics Transportation & Processing Costs 7.5 APPENDIXE— DEFINITIONS Sloan Vazquez, LLC ii Heritage Fields, LLC r i Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study TABLE OF TABLES TABLE- 3.1-1 ORANGE COUNTY LANDFILLS............................................................................................................3 TABLE 3.2.1-1 ORANGE COUNTY C&D PROCESSING FACILITIES...........................................................................9 TABLE 3.2.2-1 ORANGE COUNTY GREEN WASTE PROCESSING FACILITIES.......................................................... 1 1 TABLE 4.1-1 ESTIMATED CONTRIBUTION OF EACH SECTOR TO CALIFORNIA'S OVERALL DISPOSED WASTE STREAM, 2003.................................................................................................................................12 TABLE 4.2.1-1 LBS/SQ FT BY BUILDING TYPE...................................................................................................... 14 TABLE 4.2.1-2 DEMOLITION WASTE - TOTAL TONS.............................................................................................. 14 TABLE 4.2.2-1 CONSTRUCTION WASTE IN TONS - RESIDENTIAL HE .................................................................... 16 TABLE 4.2.2-2 CONSTRUCTION WASTE IN TONS - INSTITUTIONAL HE ................................................................. 17 TABLE 4.2.2-3 CONSTRUCTION WASTE IN TONS - RESIDENTIAL OC.................................................................... 17 TABLE 4.2.3-1 TRANSPORTATION COSTS PER FACILITY........................................................................................ 18 TABLE 4.2.3-2 PROCESSING FEES PER TON BY FACILITY...................................................................................... 19 TABLE 4.2.3-3 TOTAL COSTS PER TON BY FACILITY.............................................................................................20 TABLE 4.2.34 HERITAGE FIELDS -TOTAL COSTS................................................................................................20 TABLE 4.2.3-5 COSTS OF PROCESSING CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION WASTE...................................................21 Sloan Vazquez, LLC N Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study TABLE OF PICTURES PICTURE 3.1.2-1 RECYCLABLE MATERIAL TO BE RECOVERED FROM A DECONSTRUCTION / DEMOLITION OPERATION FOR AB939 CREDIT...................................................................................................5 PICTURE 3.1.3-1 MIXED METALS, FLOORING, CARPET & FIXTURES RECOVERED FROM C&D A PROCESSING OPERATION................................................................................................................................... 8 PICTURE 4.2.1-1 WOOD RECOVERED FROM A DECONSTRUCTION/DEMOLITION OPERATION ................................ 15 PICTURE 4.2.2-1 MIXED ORGANIC AND C&D RECYCLABLE MATERIALS FROM CONSTRUCTION SITE GRADING OPERATION................................................................................................................................. 16 PICTURE 4.2.3-1 HIGH -SIDE, END -DUMP TRAILER............................................................................................... 19 PICTURE 5.0-1 ON -SITE PROCESSING SCENES.......................................................................................................23 PICTURE 5.1.2-1 MIXED LOAD OF C&D AND ORGANIC MATERIALS READY FOR PROCESSING .............................25 Sloan Vazquez, LLC iv Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The costs associated with handling and processing waste generated by construction and demolition are a significant economic factor for any major development project. Project location, land resources, and local expertise offer opportunities that can be leveraged to yield significant financial return in the form of reduced waste handling costs. Environmental benefits can also result, with reduced impacts to air quality and traffic. Heritage Fields, LLC is in a unique position to capitalize on the opportunities available to provide value to its development program as well as value to the City of Irvine and the Great Park Corporation. Heritage Fields will undertake a major demolition project as existing structures are removed from the site. Additional waste will be generated during construction. Based on the analysis completed for this study, Heritage Fields could save an estimated $7.0 million in waste handling costs from the demolition of structures on the base and the new construction of residential and commercial structures through the use of an on -site waste processing system. Should Heritage Fields chose to establish a "permanent" facility on site that could be used by the company and it's subcontractors, the City of Irvine and other municipalities in the future, an annual benefit to the City of Irvine and ratepayers of $5.2 million would be generated through reduced handling and transport costs. As discussed below, this report makes the following recommendations: 1. Heritage Fields, LLC should develop a waste recovery, processing and recycling strategy as soon as possible. 2. Because of the significant construction and demolition waste volume expected to be generated, Heritage Fields, LLC should identify, with its design staff, the Great Park Corporation and the City of Irvine, the types and quantities of recycling materials that will be available for reuse and markets for the recovered materials. 3. Heritage Fields, LLC should establish an agreement with Tierra Verde Industries to establish a waste processing site on Heritage Fields property. 4. Heritage Fields, LLC should investigate how its waste processing operation can provide services to the Great Park Corporation's contractor responsible for runway deconstruction. Sloan Vazquez, LLC ES-1 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Background The County of Orange operates three active sanitary landfill sites: Bowerman (Irvine), Olinda Alpha (Brea) and Prima•Deshecha (San Juan Capistrano). These landfills are the central source of revenue in the County's bankruptcy recovery program due to their available capacity and the County's willingness to accept imported waste. Currently, approximately one million tons per year of waste is imported into Orange County, mostly via contracts with private waste haulers operating in Los Angeles County. The County's bankruptcy recovery plan assumes a revenue stream generated via waste importation through 2015. As a result of growth and development in Orange County, the landfill system is approaching its permitted capacity. The County has agreed to discontinue importing waste when the disposal capacity is needed by Orange County cities; therefore, the extent to which this requirement can be avoided allows the County to continue with the bankruptcy recovery plan. Based on current data, Olinda Alpha is permitted for 8,000 tons per day, and with current usage rates, is expected to close in 2013. Prima Deshecha is permitted for 4,000 tons per day and is expected to have capacity until 2067. Bowerman, the closest to Heritage Fields, is permitted for 8,500 tons per day and is estimated to close in 2022. The existing capacity will not be able to absorb all of the construction and demolition waste material that will be generated by development of Heritage Fields without a significant adverse financial impact to Orange County municipalities, residents and business. As expected, the County is vitally interested in any and all waste reduction, waste diversion, recycling, and reuse activities that may serve to reduce the immediate and long-term need for Orange County disposal capacity. Heritage Fields Construction and Demolition Waste Based on the findings of a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report, it is estimated that the demolition of structures on the El Toro Marine Corps Base will generate 325,040 tons of demolition debris, exclusive of roadways, underground utilities, and runways. New construction of commercial, institutional and residential structures will generate an estimated 45,111 tons of construction debris. The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) estimates that construction and demolition represents 10.5% of the total waste stream in Orange County, with approximately 194,000 tons disposed of annually (based on 1999 data). Heritage Fields could significantly increase that percentage. The total transportation and handling costs for Heritage Fields' deconstruction material is estimated at $14.5 million, assuming the waste is directed to the Tierra Verde (TVI) facility adjacent to the base which offers the lowest overall processing costs. Transport to an offsite facility will require over 28,150 truck loads to transport the 370,151 tons generated by Heritage Fields development. Sloan Vazquez, LLC ES-2 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study The cost of using other permitted facilities in Orange County would range from $19.5 to $21.5 million, an additional cost of at least $5.0 million. Construction and demolition (C/D) waste is highly recyclable, which presents a valuable opportunity for Heritage Fields, LLC to reduce its waste management costs. Developing and implementing a C/D waste recovery, processing and recycling strategy during planning is necessary in order to maximize the potential financial return. Processing facilities are able to achieve as much as 90% recycling, and either on -site processing or transport to an offsite processing facility could be effective for the volume of waste anticipated. Based on the estimated off -site processing costs identified above, on -site processing will be advantageous to Heritage Fields in two primary ways. First, an on -site facility will dramatically reduce and/or eliminate waste hauling costs. Second, it offers environmental benefits as it reduces the number of truck trips needed to transport the waste offsite, and truck trips needed to return useable materials back to the site, thereby reducing air quality and traffic impacts. As explained below, an on -site facility could be implemented at no cost to Heritage Fields through an arrangement with TVI. Because of the significant volume of construction and demolition waste expected to be generated, Heritage Fields should identify, with its planning staff, the Great Park Corporation and the City of Irvine, the types and quantities of recycling materials that will be available for reuse and/or other markets. As part of its strategy, Heritage Fields should also consider allowing Habitat for Humanity (HFH) to remove items usable in their homebuilding enterprise prior to demolition. This is primarily of social value as HFH efforts, -at best, will reuse less than 1% of the total tonnage. This arrangement should include as much lead time as possible. HFH may find it challenging to move at the pace required by this massive demolition project. Additional Opportunities Beyond the financial effect associated with unnecessary landfill use, State and local regulations regarding landfill use and waste recovery establish the minimum parameters for how waste must be handled. The cities and the County must achieve the waste diversion mandates set forth in the California Integrated. Waste Management Act as they face fines and penalties for non- compliance. Because C/D and green waste materials offer the best, low cost opportunities for waste recovery and recycling, they are routinely targeted by municipal planners. Based on findings of the CIWMB and the Center for Demographic Research (CSU-Fullerton), approximately 290,195 tons of Construction debris would be generated by the construction of 50,000 new homes in Orange County over the next 15 years, exclusive of commercial development and new infrastructure. In addition, approximately 336,000 tons Sloan Vazquez, LLC ES-3 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study of organic materials, primarily green waste are generated and processed annually in Irvine and its environs. Tierra Verde, Inc. has successfully operated on Irvine Company property for many years, and is the only viable local facility offering C/D and organics processing. Due to its proximity, it is also offers the lowest cost for the City of Irvine. Because of land development, TVI's lease was not renewed and TVI is now searching for a new site of approximately 60 acres on which to relocate. Owners have made contact with the Great Park Corporation and are investigating leasing land on Great Park property. This could be financially beneficial to the City due to annual lease revenue, the potential for host fee revenue, and the avoided costs associated with waste transport. Similar benefits could accrue to Heritage Fields, LLC if an arrangement is made for TVI to lease property from Heritage Fields. Should TVI not be successful in securing another local site, the City of Irvine and surrounding communities will feel the cost impact. The organic tonnage currently processed by TVI cannot be readily absorbed by existing facilities in Orange County. Consequently, the material must be transported to more distant organics processors in the Inland Empire and low -desert regions at an added cost of about $5.2 million, which will be borne, by the City of Irvine, its residents and other municipal ratepayers. Heritage Fields and the Great Park will also experience a these costs increases to use more distant processors for organics generated on -site. The finished organic soil amendments needed for application will be shipped back to the Great Park / Heritage Fields for reuse. It will require about 8,000 truck loads at a cost of $2.4 million to transport the needed material back to HF/GP for reuse. TVI's expertise in processing C/D and organics and their experience with local markets for uses of recovered materials will assure a diversion rate of 900/o- 95%. Additionally, TVI's local presence will continue to provide needed organics processing for the area's municipal programs and for the long-term needs of both the Heritage Fields development, the Great Park and the City of Irvine. Conclusion It is in the best interest of Heritage Fields, LLC to begin to develop a strategy to handle the waste that will be generated by demolition and construction. There are opportunities available that could provide significant financial benefit through reduced waste processing costs, shared facilities, and lease revenue. Once Heritage Fields is developed, it will continue to generate green waste that will represent a significant maintenance cost over time. Through the well - planned and well-timed use of resources, Heritage Fields, LLC can create a win - win situation that provides added value to the development, the Great Park and the greater Irvine area. Sloan Vazquez, LLC ES-4 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 1.0 INTRODUCTION Heritage Fields, LLC and the Great Park are on the threshold of a monumental project that will generate an enormous amount of construction and demolition (C&D) and organic waste. Initially, solid waste and recyclables will emanate from the demolition of existing structures and the construction of new facilities, and subsequently, from ongoing operations. Therefore, it is important for Heritage Fields to understand the economic, environmental and political implications surrounding the handling of this solid waste and to address these issues at the inception of this development. The Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department (IWMD) faces many challenges. All California municipalities, including Orange County and its cities are under strict mandates by State regulations to divert waste from landfills. The County's existing landfills are under mounting pressure as the County continues to grow. In an effort to provide for the long-term needs of the County, the IWMD has recently proposed restrictions on the materials allowed at its landfills. Waste handling facilities capable of processing construction / demolition and organic waste are very limited in Orange County and with the pending closure of one major facility in 2006, none of the remaining sites are currently able to assimilate the quantities anticipated from the Heritage Fields and Great Parks development. Introducing the waste originating from the Heritage Fields and Great Park project into the existing waste management infrastructure will add additional strains on the already overloaded system and force the use of more distant facilities. It is imperative that Heritage Fields plan to divert the maximum quantity of waste from being landfilled. Although C&D waste is highly recyclable, additional handling is needed. This service is provided by various types of materials processing facilities. Waste management costs are a function of these two primary factors; transportation and processing/disposal. As a result, the further waste must be hauled away, the more costs will increase. This study will survey the solid waste management options available to Heritage Fields and recommend those that offer the best economic and environmental results while considering the current status of the Orange County waste management infrastructure including its sanitary landfills, transfer stations, and waste processing facilities vis-a-vis the demands that the Heritage Fields project will put on them. With the right solid waste planning, Heritage Fields can minimize the waste destined for landfills, maximize reuse and recycling, build good will with the municipalities and the community, and save millions of dollars. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 1 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 2.0 STUDY METHODOLOGY The findings in this report are based on costs derived from tonnage and time projections. The projections of tonnage emanate from four (4) activities, as follow: • The demolition of structures on the former El Toro Marine Base. • The construction of new structures, by Lennar, at Heritage Fields • The construction of new residential dwellings in Orange County, primarily in the City of Irvine and nearby communities. • The current local processing of organic materials (aka -green waste) from the City of Irvine and nearby communities. The projections of time are based on distance, measured from a central point, to each of Orange County's permitted waste processing sites, and an average rate of speed. • For demolition tonnage the central point was designated as the intersection of Trabuco Road and Sand Canyon. • For construction debris tonnage, the central point was designated as the intersection of Trabuco Road and Sand Canyon. • For organic materials, the central point was designated as the junction of FWY 133 and I-5. • The average rate of speed was designated as 30 MPH. In some cases, known round-trip times were used in lieu of calculations. Finally, the cost calculations commence at the point where materials (demolition debris, construction waste, organic materials) are loaded -on -board, ready for transport to a specified processor. For Example: • An end -dump truck loaded with debris at the site of demolition. • A roll -off box loaded with debris at a new home construction site. • A loaded transfer trailer or green -waste collection vehicle at the end of its route. The costs of structure demolition and green waste collection are beyond the scope of this report. Furthermore, this study does not include the identification or costs of removing hazardous waste nor does it attempt to quantify the demolition waste derived from roadways, underground utilities and runways. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 2 Heritage Fields, LLC SloanvazQUEz,LLC Permitting and Development -1,500 TPD MRF/Transfer Station Client: American Reclamation Clements is performing all land use and environmental permitting, and site layout for -the expansion of an existing greenwaste and C&D processing facility (which Clements also permitted and designed) into a full MRF/transfer station with capability to process both curbside recyclables and mixed commercial MSW. Clements is also overseeing the building architecture and design. Siting Study for New MRF/Transfer Station Client: Waste Management of North County (Oceanside, CA) Clements prepared a comprehensive siting study for a proposed 1,500 TPD MRF/transfer station that included an analysis of over 15 potential sites, a first screening using siting criteria down to six finalist sites, and then a detailed site analysis and ranking of those six. The study resulted in the selection of a good preferred site that was pursued by the client. The project also included cost estimates for construction, MRF equipment, and operations. Development of Conversion Technology Demonstration Project Client: County of Los Angeles (Department of Public Works) Responsible for assessing the feasibility of potential sites for CT projects at several MRF/transfer stations, landfills, and "greenfield" locations throughout the Los Angeles basin and surrounding areas. The project involves the development of detailed siting criteria, the evaluation of sites according to those criteria, and the selection of the preferred sites. Client: P&D Environmental Services/City of Industry Designed and conducted an engineering analysis of the proposed 5,700 ton per day Material Recovery Facility in the City of Industry. Analyzed the facility wasteshed and potential participation, competing facilities, remaining landfill capacity in the region, rail -haul, and project economics. Clements also developed the operations, load checking, contingency, Illness & Injury Prevention, and safety training programs for the facility. Feasibility of Conversion of Prima Deshecha Landfill to Integrated Management Waste Facility Client: County of Orange Integrated Waste Management Department Assessed the feasibility of converting the Prima Deshecha Landfill into an integrated waste management facility by adding a wood grinding and composting operation, a mixed waste processing facility, and a construction and demolition debris recycling operation at the landfill. Work involved characterization of the waste stream, concept design of all facilities, evaluation of facility sites at the landfill, and preparation of facility costs. Solid Waste Management System Acquisition Study Client: County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California. Clements Environmental was the engineering consultant to the Districts in their study of the possible acquisition of the waste management system operated by the County of Orange. A comprehensive due diligence analysis was conducted of the four active landfills, 20 inactive landfills, and planning and Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study 21 Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 3.0 SOLID WASTE INFRASTRUCTURE IN ORANGE COUNTY 3.1 Current Conditions in Orange County The County of Orange Integrated Waste Management Department (IWMD) operates three active sanitary landfill sites; Frank R. Bowerman (FRB), Olinda Alpha and Prima Deshecha. The Olinda Alpha Landfill is located to serve northern Orange County. It also receives waste imported from Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Riverside counties. The FRB Landfill serves the central area of Orange County and receives imported waste from southeastern Los Angeles County. The Prima Deshecha Landfill serves the southern areas of Orange County. It also receives waste imported from cities in northern San Diego County and southern Los Angeles County. Based on current data, Olinda Alpha is permitted for 8,000 tons per day. However, through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City of Brea, it is limited to an annual average of 7,000 tpd. With current usage rates, Olinda Alpha is expected to close in 2013. Bowerman, the closest to Heritage Fields, is permitted for 8,500 tons per day. However, under an agreement with the City of Irvine, the FRB Landfill is currently allowed to accept an annual average of 7,263 tpd and can increase its daily capacity by 1.75% per year until it reaches a maximum of 8,500 tpd. It is estimated to close in 2022. Prima Deshecha is permitted for 4,000 tons per day and is expected to have capacity until 2067. System -wide, the permitted disposal capacity is 20,500 tpd. Table 3.1-1 Orange County Landfills Landfill Permitted TPD Allowed TPD Planned Closure Olinda Alpha 8,000 7,000 2013 Bowerman 8,500 7,263 2022 Prima Deshecha 4,000 4,000 2067 As a result of growth and development in Orange County, the landfill system is approaching its permitted capacity. The existing capacity will not be able to absorb all of the construction and demolition waste material that will be generated by development of Heritage Fields without a significant adverse financial impact to Orange County municipalities, residents and business. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 3 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 3.1.1 Waste Importation Orange County landfills are a central source of revenue in the County's bankruptcy recovery program due to their available capacity and the County's willingness to accept imported waste. Currently, approximately one million tons per year of waste is imported into Orange County, mostly via contracts with private waste haulers operating in Los Angeles County. The County's bankruptcy recovery plan assumes a revenue stream generated via waste importation through 2015. The County has agreed to discontinue importing waste when the disposal capacity is needed by Orange County cities; therefore, the extent to which this requirement can be avoided allows the County to continue with the bankruptcy recovery plan. 3.1.2 AB939 Legislation California's State legislature passed Assembly Bill 939, now known as the California Integrated Waste Management Act (CIWMA), requiring that all cities reduce annual disposal by at least fifty percent (50%). The Act has set waste reduction mandates that carry hefty fines and additional penalties for non- compliance. Because the County has fallen short of the these requirements, it is vitally interested in any and all waste reduction, waste diversion, recycling, and reuse activities that may serve to reduce the immediate and long-term need for Orange County disposal capacity. Recent Orange County Developments Additionally, officials are now considering the implementation of several options in order to avoid receiving a compliance order and fines from the State. In its recent Final Report, the County's Self -Hauled Waste - Landfill Ordinance Committee recommends the imposition of a nineteen dollar ($19.00) per ton surcharge on construction and demolition material, green waste, roofing material, and other materials that are disposed by C&D contractors, roofers, gardeners, and others. Optionally, the Report recommends the outright ban of C&D material and green waste from County landfills. The Board of Supervisors will take action on the Committee's recommendations in February 2006. The adoption of any of the Committee's recommendations will have a major impact upon waste management practices and costs. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 4 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Picture 3.1.2-1 Recyclable Material to be Recovered from a Deconstruction / Demolition Operation for AB939 credit 3.1.3 Current & Pending Legislation of C&D & Organic Materials As municipalities have sought to comply with the waste diversion requirements established by the CIWMA, they have targeted residential curbside recycling and green waste to achieve compliance. More recently, cities are targeting the construction and demolition waste stream by adopting ordinances that require as much as 75% diversion for most C&D projects within their jurisdiction. SB 1374 In 2002 Senate Bill (SB) 1374 was signed into law. It sought to assist municipalities in diverting their C&D waste by adopting a model C&D diversion ordinance for voluntary use by California municipalities. In March 16, 2004, the Sloan Vazquez, LLC 5 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) adopted a model ordinance. Please Consult APPENDIX A for examples of several C&D Ordinances. Additionally, the Public Resource Code (PRC) was amended with additional requirements that are providing the impetus for municipalities to focus on the diversion of C&D materials from landfill disposal. Since 1996, cities have been required to annually report to the CIWMB on their progress in implementing diversion programs to achieve the diversion goals of AB 939. SB1374 now requires a city's annual report to explicitly address progress in implementing C&D waste diversion programs. When deciding whether to impose fines upon a city that has failed to meet the requirements of a compliance order, the CIWMB may now consider the action that a city has taken to encourage or require C&D diversion including the adoption of a C&D ordinance. The list of cities opting for C&D diversion ordinances continues to grow (see APPENDIX B). Most ordinances contain the following features; • Require a specified percentage of waste recovery and diversion for all construction, remodeling or demolition projects. ➢ The requirements are sometimes less stringent for smaller projects. ➢ The project size is determined by project costs and/or square footage. • A deposit is often required expressed in terms of a percent of total costs (3%) and sometimes with a minimum per structure ($5000) that will be reimbursed upon completion of the project if diversion requirements have been met or may be forfeited entirely to the extent that there is a failure to comply. • Reporting requirements at several intervals during the project including an initial waste management plan or assessment indicating the estimated volume or weight of C&D debris by material type to be generated, how much can be feasibly diverted (recovered and recycled), and how much will likely be disposed in a landfill. • Additionally, documentation indicating which vendor or facility was used to recycle the C&D waste is often required. • Penalties for non-compliance or violation expressed in terms of daily fines ranging from $100 to $1000 per day or occurrence. Additional regulatory pressure is mounting on important local waste diversion and recycling programs. Most Orange County cities have implemented Sloan Vazquez, LLC 6 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study residential green waste collection programs that recover a significant amount of the city's overall waste. The major portion of material that is recovered in these programs is processed (chipped, size reduced, and homogenized) and used in the County Landfill system as alternative daily cover (ADC). Sanitary landfills are required to completely cover the waste that is received each day with material that produces specific benefits, including; odor, vermin, and vector control. Environmental groups have advanced legislation that will limit the use of green waste derived ADC. They favor the composting of this material even though it is considerably more costly. Also, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board has recently limited the amount of ADC that can be used during rainy weather. Finally, the OCIWMB is contemplating the reduction and eventual elimination of use of green waste derived ADC at County landfills. With the minimization, or elimination, of local ADC use, there will be a tremendous need for local alternatives. Potential Impacts C&D waste recycling has recently become more important as cities and counties have begun to address it through new regulation. The trend indicates that most California cities will adopt a C&D ordinance very similar to the CWIMB model ordinance. All parties involved in the construction and demolition business whether developers, builders, demolition companies, or remodelers will need to acquire C&D recycling know-how to remain in compliance with the new legislation and regulation. The growing pressure to meet the State's disposal reduction mandates will push the currently permitted facilities beyond their legal and/or technical capabilities for receiving and processing the materials that must be diverted from landfill disposal. If the current recommendations of OC's Landfill Ordinance Committee are adopted, Construction and Demolition contractors, gardeners, and tree trimmers will face immediate, acute shortages of local capacity and, at least, a seventy percent (70%) increase in disposal costs. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 7 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Picture 3.1.3-1 Mixed Metals, Flooring, Carpet & Fixtures Recovered from C&D a Processing Operation 3.1.4 El Toro EIR Demolition Mitigation Measures The final EIR for the Great Park Development in the City of Irvine contains several mitigation measures related to the demolition activities. Primarily, it requires Heritage Fields to prepare a technical study to determine the recyclability of solid waste emanating from the project site. Additionally, a written plan must be submitted to the City and implemented to ensure that 75 percent of all material determined to be recyclable is diverted from landfills by recycling. For waste determined to be inappropriate for recycling, a written plan must be submitted and implemented ensuring that 75% or the maximum amount feasible is diverted from the landfill through other methods that comply with state statutes and regulations. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 8 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Furthermore, the City requires quarterly solid waste tonnage reports accompanied by weight tickets from state -certified disposal, nondisposal, or transformation facilities to demonstrate that solid waste diversion has occurred in accordance with the required mitigation measures and in a manner that is consistent with, and not detrimental to, the efforts of the City of Irvine to comply with A13939. 3.2 Materials Processing Capacity This section will identify the Orange County facilities capable of providing materials processing capacity. These facilities provide the material processing services and the permitted capacity that is needed to maximize the recycling of waste. These types of facilities, including landfills, transfer stations, C&D, green waste, and recycling processors are regulated by the State of California and a Local Enforcement Agency (LEA). Primary factors of Solid Waste Facility permitting are limits regarding the type (i.e. garbage, C&D, green waste, etc.) and amount of material that can be received by the facility. 3.2.1 Primary Receiver/Processors of Commingled C&D Waste There are six sites capable of accepting commingled construction and demolition waste in Orange County as listed in the following table. Though each of the listed sites may receive C&D material, the material may or may not be processed and recycled. The mileage indicated for each facility is the distance that the facility is located from the intersection of Sand Canyon and Trabuco Road. Table 3.2.1-1 Orange County C&D Processing Facilities Name City TPD Miles CR Transfer Stanton 11800 19.8 CVT Recycling Anaheim 6,000 16.3 Gold Coast Recycling Irvine 1,500 2.5 Madison Materials Santa Ana 950 9.7 Rainbow Disposal Huntington Beach 2,800 17.6 Sunset Environmental Irvine 31000 6.9 Sloan Vazquez, LLC 9 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study CR Transfer CR Transfer is located at 11232 Knott Avenue in Stanton, CA. Permitted as a Large Volume Transfer and Processing Facility, it receives mixed municipal solid waste. CR Transfer also operates a chipping and grinding operation at the site. CVT Recycling CVT Recycling is located at the junction of the 57 FWY and the 91 FWY. Permitted as a Large Volume Transfer and Processing Facility, it receives mixed municipal solid waste. CVT Recycling also operates a chipping and grinding operation at the site. Gold Coast Recycling Gold Coast is located on Irvine Boulevard just east of the 133 Fwy. Permitted as a Large Volume Transfer and Processing Facility, it receives organic materials and C&D materials such as wood, concrete, asphalt, drywall, film plastic, light/medium gauge steel, and other metals. Madison Materials Madison Materials is located near downtown Santa Ana at 1035 East Fourth Street, Santa Ana, CA. Permitted as a Large Volume Transfer and Processing Facility, it receives construction/demolition, green materials, inerts and metals. Rainbow Disposal Rainbow Disposal is located 17121 Nichols Street, Huntington Beach, CA. As a Large Volume Transfer and Processing Facility, it receives construction/demolition waste and mixed municipal solid waste. Sunset Environmental Sunset Environmental is located at 16122 Construction Circle East, Irvine, CA. Permitted as a Large Volume Transfer and Processing Facility, it receives construction/demolition and mixed municipal solid waste. Though the facility is permitted to receive C&D material, no processing of the material currently occurs at the site. C&D materials are commingled with other wastes and delivered to a landfill for disposal. 3.2.2 Primary Receiver/Processors of Green Waste Material Currently, there are five primary receiver/processors of green waste materials as listed in the following table. The Mileage indicated for each facility is the distance that the facility is located from the junction of FWY 133 and I-5. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 10 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Table 3.2.2-1 Orange County Green Waste Processing Facilities Name City TPD Miles Baker Canyon Silverado * 13.5 Brea Green Recycling Brea 500 21.2 CVT Recycling Anaheim 6,000 16.3 Tierra Verde Industries Irvine 1,500 2.3 TVI La Pata Greenwaste San Juan Capistrano 500 17.2 Baker Canyon Green Recycling Baker Canyon is located in the East Orange area at 26986 Baker Canyon Road, Silverado, CA. This is a very small site and is limited to receive 12,500* cubic yards per day based on its notification status. The site, owned by the Irvine Company, is likely to be developed in the near future. Brea Green Recycling This site is located at the entrance to Olinda Alpha Landfill, in Brea, consisting of a chipping and grinding operation. Processed material is taken to Olinda Alpha for use as erosion control material and alternative daily cover (ADC) material. CVT Recycling Most of the processed material is transported to the Olinda Alpha Landfill where it is used as erosion control material and as alternative daily cover (ADC). Tierra Verde Industries TVI is located on Irvine Boulevard, just east of 133 FWY and adjacent to the former El Toro Marine Base. Currently, TVI receives about 30,000 tons per month. Each month, about 20,000 tons of green waste are recycled and sold as soil amendment, compost, and erosion control material, and 8,000 tons are used as ADC. About 2,000 tons are chipped and colored to be used as decorative bark and ground cover. TVI — La Pata Greenwaste Owned and operated by Tierra Verde Industries, this site is located just east of Ortega Highway, in San Juan Capistrano. It receives green waste and wood waste that is processed and for use as ADC and erosion control material at the Prima Desecha Landfill. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 11 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 4.0 WASTE GENERATION ANALYSIS What follows is a quantification of the waste projected for the purpose of understanding the impact that the development may have on the local waste handling facilities such as landfill, Materials Recovery Facilities and, composting and recycling sites. 4.1 Quantification of Waste The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) estimated, the tons disposed statewide in 2003 at 40,235,328. The total tons are provided in TABLE 4.1-1 by sector. Table 4.1-1 Estimated Contribution of Each Sector to California's Overall Disposed Waste Stream, 2003 Est. Percentage Est. Tons of Disposed Waste Stream Disposed Statewide Commercial 47.0% 18,924,058 Residential 31.6% 12,721,055 Single-family residential 23.4% 9,403,504 Multifamily residential 8.2% 3,317,551 Self -hauled 21.3% 8,590,215 Commercial self -hauled 17.3% 6,963,322 Residential self -hauled 4.0% 1,626,894 Totals 100.0% 40,235,328 In the same report, the CIWMB identified Orangic Waste as the largest category representing 12.1 million tons or 30% of the overall waste stream by weight. It is followed by Construction & Demolition Waste at 8.7 million tons or 21.7% and Paper at 8.4 million tons or 21%. It is significant to note that of two of these three categories, organics and Construction and Demolition waste, compose 51.7% of the total waste. Statewide Waste Characterization, Integrated Waste Management Board, December 2004 Sloan Vazquez, LLC 12 Heritage Fields, LLC SloanvaZQUEZ,LLC support programs under the County's management. The information was utilized to determine the liability and valuation of the system, for negotiations between the agencies. RENEW LA (20 year Blueprint for Resource Management for the City of Los Angeles) Client: City of Los Angeles, Council District 12 Clements prepared a comprehensive solid waste management plan for the City of Los Angeles for the next 20 years (2005-2025) based on a zero waste concept. This plan included system configurations for residential, commercial, and construction and demolition debris waste streams that combined policies, programs and facilities to attain diversion of over 90%. Assessments of waste streams, conversion technologies, diversion, costs, environmental impacts, and transportation issues were made. This plan serves as the guiding document for the following Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan (SWIRP) that is ongoing. RENEW LA recommended 12 actions by the City Council, eight of which have already been enacted. RENEW LA 5-year Milestone Report Client: City of Los Angeles, Council District 12 Clements prepared the milestone report which highlights all the significant strides the City of Los Angeles has made since the adoption of RENEW LA. Over the past five years, the City has instituted over 25 new source -reduction, recycling, and composting programs that contributed to a total City diversion from landfills of nearly five million tons over that period. Solid Waste Resources Integrated Plan (SWIRP) Phase I and Client: City of Los Angeles, CA As part of a large consulting team, Clements was responsible for developing various aspects of the City's long range strategic plan for solid waste, based on the original plan documented in RENEW LA. One of the key areas of this ongoing work was development of databases of facility information and the evaluation of the need for new or expanded facilities, including transfer stations, MRFs, composting, and Conversion Technologies. The firm played in key role in assessing the cost of all these diversion facilities. Clements also participated in community outreach meetings and City-wide conferences on behalf of the SWIRP team. Long -Term Resource Management Options Client: City of San Diego Clements performed an assessment of conversion technologies for application in San Diego. Performance, costs, environmental impacts and other aspects of these facilities were analyzed in relation to current and planned solid waste and recycling activities by the City. Phase II of the project will provide a status report on the most promising CT projects. Integrated Waste Management Zero Waste Plan Development Client: City of San Jose, CA Clements assisted in the assessment of the state -of -the art of conversion technologies including gasification, pyrolysis, anaerobic digestion, and MSW composting.and analyzed the performance, costs, environmental impacts and other aspects of these facilities. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 22 Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 4.2 C&D Waste Generation in Orange County Quantification of waste is a challenging and difficult task. Historically, it has been more valuable to track the point of destination rather than the point of generation. As a result, there is more reliable documentation for the destination of waste and little information as to its origins. While the quantity of waste disposed at a landfill is readily identifiable, it only represents a portion of total waste generated. Some waste is taken to transformation facilities, some is reused or reapplied on -site, and yet other waste is taken to recycling centers. Quantifying C&D waste can be even more challenging because it varies seasonally and annually based on the local construction and demolition activities. However, because it represents a significant portion of the total waste stream, more effort is being made to identify and quantify this category of waste. In 1999, the CIWMB used statewide waste characterization studies to estimate the type and quantities of waste generated by the cities and counties of California. In that study, the CIWMB estimated that construction and demolition represents 10.5% of the total commercial waste stream in Orange County, with approximately 194,000 tons disposed of annually. This total does not include construction and demolition from the residential waste stream nor the self -haul waste stream. Furthermore, as has been noted, construction and demolition waste is not generated at a constant rate as is typical of residential waste and to a lesser degree, commercial waste. One can be sure that C&D quantities are greater than those estimated in 1999. 4.2.1 El Toro Demolition Waste There is adequate data available to calculate an estimate of demolition waste that will emanate from the razing of existing structures at the former Marine Corps base at El Toro. The structures consist of various types of building including, office space, living quarters, warehouses, maintenance shops, hangars, etc. To calculate the quantity of demolition waste, a complete inventory of all the existing structures, square footage and building type was obtained. A current study2 prepared for the USEPA calculated the quantity of waste produced by the demolition of structure based on building type. For this study, the conversion factors are listed in TABLE 4.2.1-1 have been used. 2 Characterization of Building -Related Construction and Demolition Debris in the United States, US EPA, Franklin & Associates, June 1998. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 13 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Table 4.2.1-1 Lbs/Sq Ft by Building Type Building Type Lbs/Sq Ft Commercial 155 Industrial 152 Office 101 Warehouse 36 Multi -Family 127 Single -Family 111 The buildings at the El Toro base were grouped by a building type to conform with categories used in the above table. The total pounds of waste generated from the demolition of each building was then estimated by multiplying the square footage of each building by the corresponding weight per square foot. The results are summarized in TABLE 4.2.1-2. Table 4.2.1-2 Demolition Waste - Total Tons Building Type Sq FT of Total Tons % of Total Commercial 560,371 9.0% 43,429 13.4% Industrial 967,100 15.5% 73,500 22.6% Office 550,681 8.8% 27,809 8.6% Warehouse 1,635,468 26.2% 29,438 9.1% Multi Family 1,397,492 22.4% 88,741 27.3% Single Family 1,119,328 18.0% 62,123 19.1% TOTAL 6,230,440 100.0% 325,040 100.0% According to the above calculations, the demolition of the all the existing structures currently situated in the El Toro airfield will generate a sum total of 325,040 tons of demolition waste consisting of wood, drywall, roofing material, concrete, metals, rubble, and miscellaneous waste. These totals do not include demolition debris from roadways, underground utilities, and runways. (For details see APPENDIX C - Tonnage Calculations - El Toro). This projected total is a grand sum that does not consider the time period in which the tonnage will be generated. The amount of material that will be produced during a given time period will be determined by the developer's demolition schedule. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 14 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Picture 4.2.1-1 Wood Recovered from a Deconstruction/Demolition Operation Sloan Vazquez, LLC 15 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 4.2.2 Construction Waste Another factor affecting the Orange County solid waste infrastructure will be the construction wastes generated by construction activity both within and in the vicinity of the Great Park/Heritage Fields project. Picture 4.2.2-1 Mixed Organic and C&D Recyclable Materials from Construction Site Grading Operation Heritage Fields / Great Park Construction The construction of residential buildings related to this project alone will generate approximately 20,428 tons of construction waste. As depicted in TABLE 4.2.2-1, these tons were calculated by estimating the total square feet of residential construction multiplied by a factor of 4.382, the standard pounds of construction waste generated per square feet. Table 4.2.2-1 Construction Waste in Tons — Residential HF Residential Units 3,520 Square Feet per Unit x 2,650 Total Square Feet 9,328,682 Lbs per Sq Ft x 4.38 Total Lbs 40,856,640 Total Tons El 20,428 Z ibid Sloan Vazquez, LLC 16 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study An additional 24,683 tons will be generated from the construction of institutional buildings. These calculations were completed in a similar fashion and are provided in TABLE 4.2.2-2. The total square feet of construction were taken from the Orange County Grand Park website. An additional 10,000 were estimated and added to the total to account for debris generated from the construction of needed infrastructure. (Please see 7.4.1 APPENDIX D - Demolition & New Construction Waste Tonnage Projections for details.) Table 4.2.2-2 Construction Waste in Tons — Institutional HF Total Square Feet 7,549,094 Lbs per Sq Ft x 3.89 Total Lbs 29,365,976 Total Tons 14,683 Infrastructure Debris + 10,000 Grand Total Tons 24,683 Orange County Construction Construction waste will also be generated throughout the county from the construction of new residential units. For this study, it is estimated that a total of 50,000 new residential units will be constructed during the next 10 to 15 years. By using an average square footage of 2,650 per unit, a total square footage of 132.5 million is projected. This is multiplied by a factor of 4.38 Ibs per square foot for a total of 290,175 tons of construction waste. Table 4.2.2-3 Construction Waste in Tons — Residential OC Residential Units 50,000 Square Feet per Unit x 2,650 Total Square Feet 132,500,000 Lbs per Sq Ft x 4.38 Total Lbs 580,385,000 Total Tons 290,175 3 Orange County Projects 2004, Center for Demographic Research, Fullerton, CA Sloan Vazquez, LLC 17 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 4.2.3 Estimate of Costs Waste materials generated from construction and demolition require additional handling. Processing is necessary to assure the majority of the material is recycled and that only residual wastes are disposed in a landfill. Waste management costs are driven by two costs factors; namely, transportation and disposal/processing. The waste must be transported to a facility where it will be landfilled or processed for recycling. Transportation Costs The following approach was used to tabulate projected transportation costs. A central point (Trabuco Road and Sand Canyon) in Irvine was established as the waste originating point. The distance of the existing facilities from that central point was obtained. Based on industry standards, the costs to transport the waste from the central point to each of those facilities were calculated. TABLE 4.2.3-1 depicts each processing facility with its costs per ton to transport the material from the central point to its location (See 7.4.2 APPENDIX D - Transportation and Processing Costs for details). Table 4.2.3-1 Transportation Costs per Facility C&D Facility R/T Miles $/Load $/Ton CVT 32.6 $131.50 $7.74 Madison 19.4 $86.00 $5.06 TVI Gold Coast 3.0 $20.00 $1.18 Rainbow 35.2 $125.50 $7.38 CR&R 39.6 $136.50 $8.03 Sunset 13.8 $72.00 $4.24 Typically, high -side, end -dump trailers as pictured in PICTURE 4.2.3-1 are used to receive and transport materials generated by demolition operations. Average vehicle speed was assumed at 30 miles per hour with an average load of 17 tons. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 18 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Picture 4.2.3-1 High -Side, End -Dump Trailer Processing Costs Processing costs are a function of the rates being charged at the facility. While these facilities have a posted gate rate, typically, they are willing to offer a volume rate under certain circumstances. The approximate rates for the relevant facilities are listed in TABLE 4.2.3-2 in the form of a high rate, a low rate and the average rate. Table 4.2.3-2 Processing Fees per Ton by Facility C&D Facility Low $/ton High $/ton AVG $/ton CVT $45.00 $55.00 $50.00 Madison $40.00 $48.00 $44.00 TVI Gold Coast $36.00 $40.00 $38.00 Rainbow $45.00 $55.00 $50.00 CR&R $45.00 $55.00 $50.00 Sunset $45.00 $52.00 $48.50 Sloan Vazquez, LLC 19 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Transportation and Processing Costs The total costs per ton for both transportation and processing for each facility is provided in TABLE 4.2.3-3. Each facility is then compared to the lowest cost facility by indicating the incremental $/ton for using the more expensive facility. Because of its proximity to the development site and lower average processing fees, the TVI Gold Coast facility offers the lowest cost per ton. Table 4.2.3-3 Total Costs per Ton by Facility C&D Facility Process $/ton Trans $/ton Total $/ton $ Diff CVT $50.00 $7.74 $57.74 $18.56 Madison $44.00 $5.06 $49.06 $9.88 TVI Gold Coast $38.00 $1.18 $39.18 $0.00 Rainbow $50.00 $7.38 $57.38 $18.21 CR&R $50.00 $8.03 $58.03 $18.85 Sunset $48.50 $4.24 $52.74 $13.56 Heritage Fields Waste Handling & Transportation Costs The total tons demolition and construction waste emanating from the Heritage Fields / Great Park development have already been calculated in this study under section 4.21 and 4.2.2, respectively. A total 370,151 tons will be removed from the El Toro site consisting of 325,040 tons of demolition waste and 45,111 tons of construction waste. Table 4.2.34 Heritage Fields - Total Costs C&D Facility Demo Tons Construction Tons Total Tons $/ton Total $ Diff CVT 325,040 45,111 370,151 $57.74 $21.4 $6.9 Madison 325,040 45,111 370,151 $49.06 $18.2 $3.7 TVI Gold Coast 325,040 45,111 370,151 $39.18 $14.5 $0.0 Rainbow 325,040 45,111 370,151 $57.38 $21.2 $6.7 CR&R 325,040 45,111 370,151 $58.03 $21.5 $7.0 Sunset 1 325,040 1 45,111 1 370,151 1 $52.74 $19.5 $5.0 Sloan Vazquez, LLC 20 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study When the costs per ton are multiplied by the projected total tonnage, the total costs to transport and process the waste is derived. Table 4.2.3-4 provides the transport and processing costs by facility. As has been previously noted, TVI Gold Coast offers the lowest costs per ton. It will take 28,150 vehicle loads to transport this waste to its selected destination. The total costs related to demolition waste will range from $14.5 million to $21.5 million. The second - lowest cost option, Madison Materials, is not a consistent viable option as the facility regularly reaches its permitted daily capacity. Other Orange County Construction Costs The projection of construction waste from the construction of residential homes through out Orange County totals 290,175 tons. The calculations have been previously provided in Table 4.2.2-3. The costs to transport and process this waste will range from $11.4 million to $16.8 million and it will take approximately 17,000 truck loads. Table 4.2.3-5 Costs of Processing Construction & Demolition Waste Facility Tons $/Ton Total Costs $ Diff CVT 290,175 $57.74 $16.8M $5.4M Madison 290,175 $49.06 $14.2M $2.9M TVIGoldCoast 290,175 $39.18 $11.4M $O.OM Rainbow 290,175 $57.38 $16.7M $5.311 CR&R 290,175 $58.03 $16.8M $5.5M Sunset 290,175 $52.74 $15.3M $3.9M 4.3 Source Separated Organics Generation in Orange County A third category of the waste stream that is relevant to the Heritage Fields and Great Park project is Organics. Organic materials consist of green waste including compostable materials such as leaves and grass, prunings and trimmings, branches and stumps, agricultural crop residues, manures, wood products and sawdust. Food, included in the Organics category, is not of included in this study. Organics is important because there is a limited processing capacity in Orange County and the Heritage Fields / Great Park project will produce and consume a large quantity of organic material. As municipalities have struggled to meet the waste diversion (disposal reduction) mandates imposed by AB939, they have Sloan Vazquez, LLC 21 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study implemented residential green waste collection programs. These programs target household generated green materials such as grass clippings, leaves, plants, pruning, and bundled tree trimmings. Municipalities rely on the diversion achieved through their Green Waste collection programs for AB939 compliance. Though green waste recycling is vital for most California cities, there are very few Green Waste facilities in Orange County. After the recent closure of Brea Green Recycling, located at the base of Olinda Alpha landfill, only Tierra Verde Industries (Irvine) remains as a full service (producing salable finished products) processor of municipal green waste and wood waste. All materials that are not disposed (by definition) but, are diverted to other uses, serve to help municipalities accomplish the state disposal reduction mandates. Typically, green wastes are processed for use as soil amendments, fertilizer, or as an alternative cover material (ADC) for a sanitary landfill. Although some of the material still finds it way to a landfill (ADC), the generator may still receive diversion credit because the processed green waste can be used, in lieu of top -soil, to cover the garbage. There is an immediate need for additional green waste processing capacity throughout OC. Alone, the TVI facility receives about 336,000 tons of organic materials annually, primarily green waste from Irvine and its environs. Currently, it costs approximately $11.3 million to transport and process this material. These costs will increase to about $16.5 million, if these tons must be transported to more distant processing facilities, an increase of $5.2 million. (See 7.4.5 APPENDIX D — Organics Transportation & Processing Costs for details.) The combined effect of TVI's planned closure (Spring 2006) and the imposition of a $19.00 per ton surcharge, or outright ban on the landfill disposal of green waste, will create major financial and material management challenges for Lennar and all other waste generators. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 22 Heritage Fields, LLC SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC This page left intentionally blank. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study Sloan`VAzQUEz,LLC Feasibility Study of Conversion Technology Client: Orange County Integrated Waste Management Clements performed an assessment of the state -of -the art of conversion technologies including gasification, pyrolysis, anaerobic digestion, and MSW composting and analyzed the performance, costs, environmental impacts and other aspects of these facilities. The feasibility of siting a CT project at one of the County's operating landfills was assessed. Integrated Waste Management Planning (AB 939) Clients: Various (see below) Participated in preparation of Solid Waste Generation Studies (SWGS) or Source Reduction and Recycling Elements (SRREs) for select cities and counties in California in compliance with the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939). Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 CLIENT WORK PERFORMED United States Naval Command (19 bases) SWGS Southeast Area Working Group (23 cities) SWGS Butte County and cities (5 cities) SRRE Mono County and Mammoth Lakes SRRE Orange County and cities (30 cities) SWGS City of Los Angeles SWGS City of West Hollywood SWGS City of Santa Monica SWGS Palos Verdes Peninsula Cities (4) SWGS City of El Segundo SWGS Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 23 Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 5.0 ON -SITE PROCESSING ASSESSMENT Because transportation costs are paramount to determining overall waste management costs, the proximity of the waste generator to the processing or disposal site is most important. By using a nearby facility, waste generators reduce the direct costs associated with transportation including; the capital costs of trucks and trailers, labor, fuel, repairs and maintenance, insurance, licenses and permits. Pictured below is a portable C&D processing system that is engineered and manufactured to process materials similar to those expected from the demolition of the El Toro structures. Picture 5.0-1 Portable C&D Processing . C&D Material Ready for Processing Portable C&D Processing System Portable Loader & System In -Feed Materials are dropped into roll -off boxes 5.1 Environmental Benefits of On -Site Processing Measurable environmental benefits will accrue by minimizing the number of transport miles, thereby reducing fossil fuel emissions, traffic congestion, noise Sloan Vazquez, LLC 23 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study pollution, and roadway wear and tear. By processing the demolition, construction, and organic wastes on -site, Heritage Fields will eliminate the transport of approximately 40,000 loads of material to more distant sites. 5.1.1 C&D Organic Material Volume Reduction A standard result of C&D and organics processing is that of volume reduction. Materials undergo a variety of processes including; chipping, grinding, screening, and on -site transfer via conveyor belts and wheel loaders. As a result, the materials are reduced in size and weight (via evaporation). Though it is considered that most of the materials processed on -site may be consumed by on -site uses including; soil amendment, fertilizer, weed abatement, erosion control, decorative bark, and playground cover, the costs and environmental impacts of removing the remaining material will be reduced as a result of on -site processing and volume reduction. 5.1.2 On -Site Material Separation Most of the materials that will be targeted for on -site recovery will be converted to products that may be readily and continuously used by HF and the Great Park. The primary materials are concrete, soils, wood, green waste, gypsum, cellulose fiber (mostly cardboard), and metals. Only the fiber and metals will be baled and shipped to off -site recyclers. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 24 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Picture 5.1.2-1 Mixed Load of C&D and Organic Materials Ready for Processing 5.1.3 Local Reuse After decades of neglect and abuse, soils throughout the entire property are in need of remediation. Organic products can be used for soil aeration, amendment, remediation, erosion control, and enhanced porosity and permeability. The products that may be produced on -site, via the processing of materials generated on -site, provide a perfect opportunity to enact a sustainable development practice and receive an immediate economic benefit. Based upon the planned recreational, residential, and institutional land uses, there will be an immediate and continuous need for soil amendments, fertilizers, ground cover, decorative bark, and erosion control material. The immediate economic and environmental benefits of local processing and reuse are obvious. A rational case cannot be made for transporting the C&D and organic materials to some distant site for processing and then shipping the Sloan Vazquez, LLC 25 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study finished products (organic soil amendments and fertilizers, ground cover, decorative bark, etc.) back to Heritage Fields and the Great Park for the multitude of applications throughout the project area. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 26 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 6.0 CONCLUSION This analysis has identified three major opportunities for cost reduction as it relates directly, and indirectly, to specific solid waste management practices stemming from the development of the Heritage Fields / Great Park project. The opportunities reside in the following waste generating activities: • Building Site Preparation - Demolition and Grading • New Construction - Residential • Organic Materials Management At least 325,040 total tons will be generated by the demolition of structures on the site. By using an on -site processor and TVI's current processing fees, as much as $7.0 million and at least $5.0 million savings will be realized by the developer. 100% of the projected savings will benefit Heritage Fields. Over 290,175 tons of waste will be created by the construction of new homes in Orange County (predominantly South Orange County) during the next decade. This tonnage estimate does not include wastes that will be generated by commercial and infrastructure construction. By using an on -site processor and TVI's current processing fees, as much as $5.5 million and at least $3.9 million total savings will be realized. It is estimated that 16% of the savings will accrue directly to Heritage Fields. An additional 15% to 20% of these savings may be captured by Lennar's other Orange County projects. The remaining benefit will fall to the County of Orange, the City of Irvine and surrounding communities. Currently, over 336,000 tons of organic materials are processed in the City of Irvine, on property that is immediately adjacent to the base. The City of Irvine generates the largest portion of this tonnage. By using an on -site processor, at TVI's current processing fees, green waste generators will save over $5.2 million each year. Of this amount, about 5% to 10% will accrue to Heritage Fields/Lennar. The remaining 90% to 95% of the savings will benefit residents of the City of Irvine., the County of Orange and surrounding communities. Additionally, it is anticipated that the Great Park / Heritage Fields will be able to consume most, if not all, of the organic products that could be produced on -site. Shipping the organic material off -site for processing, only to ship it back to the site for a multitude of uses, is economically and environmentally counter productive. In trucking costs alone, it will cost over $2.4 million annually solely to bring material back to Heritage Fields / Great Park that could have been produced on the site to being with. Sloan Vazquez, LLC 27 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 7.0 APPENDICES Sloan Vazquez, LLC 28 Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & organic Material Market Study 7.1 APPENDIX A — Model Ordinances 7.1.1 California Integrated Waste Management Board Model Construction and Demolition Diversion Ordinance 7.1.2 City of La Habra C&D Ordinance 7.1.3 Marin County: C&D Debris Model Ordinance 7.1.4 Rural Alternative Model Ordinance 7.1.4 Sample C&D Ordinance Sloan Vazquez, LLC Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 7.1.1 California Integrated Waste Management Board Model Construction and Demolition Diversion Ordinance Sloan Vazquez, LLC Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 7.1.2 City of La Habra C&D Ordinance Sloan Vazquez, LLC Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 7.1.3 Marin County: C&D Debris Model Ordinance Sloan Vazquez, LLC Heritage Fields, LLC SloanvaZQUEZ,LLC 5.0 ORGANIZATION CHART/ PROPOSED PROJECT TEAM The Organization Chart of the project team is shown below. Joe Sloan of Sloan Vazquez will act as Project Manager and key contact person on the project. Conversion Technology Chip Clements Jacqueline Maddox Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 City of Fort Collins City Project Manager Susan Gordon Project Manager Joe Sloan Waste Stream Analysis Joe Sloan Enrique Vazquez Report Preparation Enrique Vazquez Joe Sloan Chip Clements Jacqueline Maddox Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 24 Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 7.1.4 Rural Alternative Model Ordinance Rural Counties' Environmental Services Joint Power Authority (ESJPA) Sloan Vazquez, LLC Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 7.1.5 Sample C&D Ordinance Prepared by Rufus C. Young, Jr., Esq. of Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP. Sloan Vazquez, LLC Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 7.2 APPENDIX B - Cities with Adopted C&D Ordinances Atherton: C&D Ordinance Castro Valley. Administrative Provisions for Processing of Construction and Demolition Debris City of,Cotati: C&D Ordinance City of Half Moon Bay. Contractor's Guide to the Construction and Demolition Debris Waste Management. City of La Habra: C&D Ordinance City of Palo Alto: C&D Ordinance City of Oakland: Waste Reduction & Recycling Requirements for Building Permit Applicants City of Sacramento: C&D Ordinance City of San Francisco: C&D Debris Management Ordinance City of San Jose: Construction and Demolition Diversion Deposit Program and Ordinance City of Santa Monica: Ordinance on Construction and Material Waste City of Santa Rosa: C&D Debris Ordinance Contra Costa County: C&D Ordinance and Supporting Information San Mateo County - Unincorporated Area: C&D Ordinance County of Ventura: C&D Ordinance Sloan Vazquez, LLC Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 7.3 APPENDIX C — Tonnage Calculations — El Toro Demolition Derived from: MCAS El Toro Community Reuse Plan: APPENDIX B Facilities Data Sheets Housing Data Sheets And; U.S. EPA Report Number EPA530-11-98-010 CHARACTERIZATION OF BUILDING -RELATED CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS IN THE UNITED STATES Sloan Vazquez, LLC Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 7.4 APPENDIX D — Tonnage & Costs Calculations 7.4.1 Demolition & New Construction Waste Tonnage Projections 7.4.2 Transportation & Processing Costs 7.4.3 Heritage Fields Construction & Demolition 7.4.4 Non -Heritage Fields Residential Construction 7.4.5 Organics Transportation & Processing Costs Sloan Vazquez, LLC Heritage Fields, LLC ... e Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study 7.5 APPENDIX E — Definitions Construction & Demolition Concrete means a hard material made from sand, gravel, aggregate, cement mix, and water. Examples include pieces of building foundations, concrete paving, and cinder blocks. Asphalt Paving means a black or brown, tar -like material mixed with aggregate used as a paving material. Asphalt Roofing means composite shingles and other roofing material made with asphalt. Examples include asphalt shingles and attached roofing tar and tar paper. Lumber means processed wood for building, manufacturing, landscaping, packaging, and processed wood from demolition. Examples include dimensional lumber, lumber cutoffs, engineered wood such as plywood and particleboard, wood scraps, pallets, wood fencing, wood shake roofing, and wood siding. Gypsum Board means interior wall covering made of a sheet of gypsum sandwiched between paper layers. Examples include used or unused, broken or whole sheets of sheetrock, drywall, gypsum board, plasterboard, gypboard, gyproc, and wallboard. Rock, Soil and Fines means rock pieces of any size and soil, dirt, and other matter. Examples include rock, stones, and sand, clay, soil, and other fines. This type also includes non -hazardous contaminated soil. Remainder/Composite Construction & Demolition means construction and demolition material that cannot be put in any other type or subtype. This type may include items from different types combined, which would be very hard to separate. Examples include brick, ceramics, tiles, toilets, sinks, dried paint not attached to other materials, and fiberglass insulation. This type may also include demolition debris that is a mixture of items such as plate glass, wood, tiles, gypsum board, and aluminum scrap. Sloan Vazquez, LLC Heritage Fields, LLC ,% • ' r Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Organic Food: means food material resulting from the processing, storage, preparation, cooking, handling, or consumption of food. This type includes material from industrial, commercial, or residential sources. Examples include discarded meat scraps, dairy products, egg shells, fruit or vegetable peels, and other food items from homes, stores, and restaurants. This type includes grape pomace and other processed residues or material from canneries, wineries, or other industrial sources. "Landscape and Agricultural" includes the four subtypes described below. The subtypes are "Leaves and Grass," "Prunings and Trimmings," "Branches and Stumps," and "Agricultural Crop Residues." Leaves and Grass means plant material, except woody material, from any public or private landscapes. Examples include leaves, grass clippings, sea weed, and plants. This subtype does not include woody material or material from agricultural sources. Prunings and Trimmings means woody plant material up to 4 inches in diameter from any public or private landscape. Examples include prunings, shrubs, and small branches with branch diameters that do not exceed 4 inches. This subtype does not include stumps, tree trunks, or branches exceeding 4 inches in diameter. This subtype does not include material from agricultural sources. Branches and Stumps means woody plant material, branches, and stumps that exceed four inches in diameter from any public or private landscape. Agricultural Crop Residues means plant material from agricultural sources. Examples include orchard and vineyard prunings, vegetable by-products from farming, residual fruits, vegetables, and other crop remains after usable crop is harvested. This subtype does not include processed residues from canneries, wineries, or other industrial sources. "Miscellaneous Organic" includes three subtypes described below. The subtypes are "Manures," "Textiles," and "Carpet." Manures means manure and soiled bedding materials from domestic, farm, or ranch animals. Examples include manure and soiled bedding from animal production operations, racetracks, riding stables, animal hospitals, and other sources. Textiles means items made of thread, yarn, fabric, or cloth. Examples include clothes, fabric trimmings, draperies, and all natural and synthetic cloth fibers. This subtype does not include cloth -covered furniture, mattresses, leather shoes, leather bags, or leather belts. Sloan Vazquez, LLC Heritage Fields, LLC Construction, Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Carpet means flooring applications consisting of various natural or synthetic fibers bonded to some type of backing material. Does not include carpet padding. *NOTE: Previously classified under "Remainder/Composite Organic." Remainder/Composite Organic means organic material that cannot be put in any other type or subtype. This type includes items made mostly of organic materials but combined with other materials. Examples include leather items, cork, hemp rope, garden hoses, rubber items, hair, carpet padding, cigarette butts, diapers, feminine hygiene products, wood products (popsicle sticks and toothpicks), sawdust, and animal feces. Sloan Vazquez, LLC Heritage Fields, LLC SloanvazQUEz,LLC 6.0 AVAILABILITY As long standing consulting firms, both companies know how to manage multiple projects and personnel. All six members of the team have the requisite time available to successfully complete the project. This is particularly true of the principal members of the team: Joe Sloan, Enrique Vazquez, and Chip Clements. Prepared for the City of fort Collins August 12,2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 2S 7.0 ESTIMATED HOURS BY TASK We estimate the man hours per task as follows: Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 TASK HOURS 1. Attend Meetings including Kick-off Meeting 20 2. Conduct Waste Stream Analysis 64 3. Identify Conversion Technologies 104 4. Prepare Draft and Final Report 56 TOTAL HOURS 244 SloanvAzQUEz,LLC Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 26 SloanvazQUEz,LLC 8.0 SCHEDULE OF RATES & COST BY TASK Sloan Vazquez will perform the work as per the scope of work for total fee of Thirty -Nine Thousand Seven- Hundred Eighty Dollars ($39,780). The members of the project team have the following hourly rates: Team Member Hourly Rate Joe Sloan $195.00 Enrique Vazquez $195.00 Chip Clements, P.E. $195.00 Jacque Maddox $95.00 Estimated cost per task is as follows: Task Total Costs 1. Attend Meetings including Kick -Off $3,900 2. Prepare Waste Stream Analysis $12,480 3. Identify Conversion Technologies $14,080 4. Prepare Draft and Final Report $9,320 TOTAL COST $39,780 6 3.0 3111AL -7,* Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study 27 S10anvAZQUEz,1.Lc APPENDIX A - PROFESSIONAL RESUMES Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-1 SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC JOE M. SLOAN Sloan Vazquez, LLC —18006 Skypark Circle Ste. 205 — Irvine, CA 92614 Over the course of his career, Mr. Sloan has directed residential and commercial recycling, municipal contract development, commercial market development, comprehensive recycling programs, solid waste facility development, efficiency studies, rate adjustment process and public policy analysis. Mr. Education Sloan's success in waste management can be attributed to his ability to rally diverse, sometimes adversarial groups of investors, corporate B.S., Political Science, Wyoming University and public leaders, grass roots activists, managers and employees towards the accomplishment of a common goal. Professional Affiliations EXPERIENCE. Southern California Waste Management Forum RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL RECYCLING Southern California Conference on Mr. Sloan designed, implemented and operated residential recycling Environment and Development and green waste programs for many municipalities. He directly Greater Los Angeles Solid Waste managed numerous municipal contracts serving over 3,000,000 Management Association people and 1,000,000 households. Mr. Sloan was responsible for the National Task Force on Progressive program design, equipment selection, cost analysis of collection Environmentalism alternatives, promotion, community education program, detailed California Polytechnic University — Lecturer, Waste Management reporting and evaluation of program performance and, the sale of all Certification recyclable commodities. Mr. Sloan has also prepared city, county and University of southern California— State reports and documentation of recovery and waste diversion for Lecturer, Environmental Engineering regulatory purposes. The following is a partial listing of municipal Graduate Program program development and management: Publications I. Whittier curbside recycling Streamlining the Solid Waste Facility 2, West Covina automated green waste Permitting Process, with Michelle 3. Glendora curbside recycling and green waste Leonard, Pacific Research Institute, 1994 4. Alhambra curbside recycling and green waste Solving the Trash Crisis, The Valley 5. Montebello curbside recycling and green waste Republican, 1992 6. Monterey Park curbside recycling and green waste Progressive Environmentalism, 7. La Mirada automated recycling and green waste National Center for Policy Analysis, 8. Covina automated recycling 1991, contributor 9. San Gabriel curbside recycling Contracting for Municipal Solid Waste Management Services, with Lynn 10. Temple City curbside recycling and green waste Scadett, Reason Foundation 11. South Pasadena backyard recycling and green waste Recycling: Is it always good for the 12. San Marino backyard recycling and green waste environment? Le D6chets, France - 13. Norwalk automated trash, manual recycling -green waste 2004. 14. Bell automated trash, recycling -manual green waste One Way Bottle Leads to Dead End — 15. Lawndale automated trash, recycling -manual green waste Waste News 2005 16. Maywood automated trash, recycling -manual green waste 17. Cudahy automated trash, manual green waste 18. Avalon material recovery facility and compost site 19. L. A. Unincorporated manual recycling and green waste 20. South Gate automated refuse and recycling Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-2 SloanvAzQUEz,L« MUNICIPAL CONTRACT DEVELOPMENT Mr. Sloan managed dozens of municipal contracts. In response to municipalities inviting proposals for comprehensive waste management services, Mr. Sloan developed successful turnkey proposals to thoroughly address the residential, commercial, industrial, recycling and hazardous waste elements of the solid waste stream. COMPREHENSIVE RECYCLING PROGRAM In response to State and Federal waste reduction and recycling mandates, Mr. Sloan developed comprehensive recycling programs for many cities. The Program includes: • The use of Centralized Processing Facility (CPF) • Selected commercial recycling • Yard waste recycling program • Drop-off program (redemption center development) • Residential curbside recycling • Quantification of source reduction and third party recycling SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING FACILITY DEVELOPMENT Mr. Sloan is an expert in conceptual facility design and equipment selection for "clean" and "dirty' material recovery facilities (MRF's) and transfer stations. He has managed zoning, building and solid waste permitting, construction and start-up operation and facilities. Mr. Sloan's facility development projects include: • Concept design, equipment selection, solid waste facility permitting, construction management, start-up management and material marketing for Los Angeles County's largest and most successful MRF. The facility has a design capacity of over 8,000 tons per day. Mr. Sloan recovered and marketed approximately 10,000 tons per month of residential and commercial recyclables, including steel, wood products and organic recyclables. • Concept design, equipment acquisition, operations management and material marketing for recycling, sorting, and plant serving ten Los Angeles County cities and approximately 100,000 households • Project development, equipment selection and acquisitions for a unique recycling and solid waste composting operation on Catalina Island. The Project developed in response to AQMD's requirement to close the solid waste incinerator on the island. • Concept design, financing, equipment acquisition and installation, day-to-day operations management, marketing of all commodities for 200 ton per day single -stream recycling plant, in Wilmington, (L.A. Harbor) CA. • Machinery installation and facility start-up management for 250 ton per day single -stream recycling plant, in Oakland, CA. • Construction management, equipment installation, hiring and training management personnel, start-up operation management including equipment maintenance and safety programs for 500 ton per day single -stream recycling plant in San Jose, CA. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-3 SloanvAzQUEz,LLC • Machinery installation and start-up operations management, including the training of managers and supervisors, and equipment maintenance and safety programs for 300 ton per day single - stream recycling plant in San Diego County, CA. EFFICIENCY STUDIES • Refuse, Recycling and Yard Waste Collection — Mr. Sloan has completed studies to improve routing to reduce the number of vehicles or overtime payroll required to perform services, reduce vehicle down -time and lower maintenance costs, improve worker safety and reduce Workers Compensation and other insurance costs, best use of third party facilities and services (material recovery facilities and transfer stations), reduce disposal costs, maximize recycling commodity sales revenue and improve fuel efficiency. • Solid Waste Facilities — Mr. Sloan designed or modified facilities for greatest productivity. This involved incorporating new technologies and improved machinery including; conveyors, screens, baler, loading systems, etc. He also compared labor and operating cost savings to the cost of capital investment. RATE ADJUSTMENT PROCESS Mr. Sloan prepared and presented rate adjustment proposals to regulatory agencies (city, county, etc.). He negotiated rate adjustment criteria, rate support documentation and presentation to municipal staff and council PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS Mr. Sloan provides analysis of Federal, State and local waste management laws, regulations and pending legislation. He has written issue papers and position statements on public waste management policy and its impact upon local government agencies, industry and individuals. RECYCLABLE COMMODITY SALES Joe has developed market relationships and delivered thousands of tons of commodities recovered through municipal recycling programs to brokers and end -users around the globe. In addition to selling into longstanding markets for newspaper, old corrugated cardboard, mixed paper, office paper, color and white ledger, old computer paper, old magazine, all plastic grades, all container glass, and, ferrous and non-ferrous metals, Mr. Sloan has developed specialty markets for municipal organics and for materials recovered in C&D operations. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study A-4 SloanVAZQUEZ,LLC ENRIQUE VAZQUEZ Sloan Vazquez, LLC —18006 Skypark Circle, Ste. 205 — Irvine, CA 92614 Mr. Vazquez is a broadly experienced municipal solid waste and recycling advisor providing a wide range of consultative services to municipalities. Mr. Vazquez has proven experience in executive decision - making, policy direction, strategic business planning, financial management and labor relations. He is a strategist experienced in developing, presenting, and guiding projects through to closure. He offers excellent interpersonal skills with ability to interact with a range of personalities and styles. Mr. Vazquez is proficient and qualified to provide many services including the following; • Productivity and Improvement Audits, • Operational Performance Review and Assessment, • Financial Modeling and Analysis, • Revenue Requirements Development, • Allocation of Costs, • Cost of Service and Rate Analysis, • Costs/Benefit Analysis, • Benchmarking Analysis, • Routing and Billing Audits, • Fleet Maintenance • Rate Adjustment Review and Assessment • Customer Service Procedures Summary of Qualifications Over the course of his career, Mr. Vazquez has years of experience as a project manager and in all the aspects of municipal waste management including collection, recycling and disposal. Mr. Vazquez has planned, organized and introduced new waste collection and recycling services to numerous municipalities in the Los Angeles County area. With over fifteen years of extensive experience with day- to-day operations, Mr. Vazquez has expertise in the various functions related to waste management as more fully described below. Residential and Commercial Waste Collection Mr. Vazquez's experience spans a wide range of waste collection functions including oversight of drivers and helpers, routing, customer service, dispatch, safety, training, sales and billing. Mr. Vazquez has directly responsible for the introduction of services to new service areas, the transition from manual to automated collection, the introduction of recycling and green waste collection programs, equipment selection, and driver hiring and training. Maintenance Shop Operations and Management Mr. Vazquez is well versed in refuse collection equipment including front-end loaders, rear -end loaders, automated side -loaders, scout trucks, roll -off trucks, automated carts, commercial bins, roll -off and debris boxes, wheel loaders, and forklifts. He is competent with fleet management and operations Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-5 SloanVAZQUEz,LLC Vendor Statement: 1 have read and understand the specifications and requirements for this bid and I agree to comply with such specifications and requirements. I further agree that the method of award is acceptable to my company. 1 also agree to complete PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT with the City of Fort Collins within 30 days of notice of award_ If contract is not completed and signed within 30 days, City reserves the right to cancel and award to the next highest rated firm. FIRM NAME: Sloan Vazquez, LLC ADDRESS:18006 Skypark Circle, Suite 205, Irvine, CA 92614 EMAIL ADDRESS:infoagsioanvazquez. conPHONE: 866-241-4533 BIDDER'S NAME: Joe Sloan SIGNATURE: PRIMARY SERVICES ISSUES CONTACT: Joe Sloan TELEPHONE: 949-553-0620 EMAIL: ioeosloanvazauez.com Fps(: 714-276-0625 CELL: 714-348-6350 EMERGENCY: 714-348-6350 BACKUP: Enrique Vazquez - 626-347-3225 Prepared for the City of fart Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study 91 Sloan`VAzQUEz,LLC maintenance shop functions including staffing with mechanics and welders, repair and maintenance of trucks and equipment, preventative maintenance programs, parts purchasing, parts inventory management (computerized and manual), container repair and management, tire shop operations, truck wash operations, and paint shop operations. Equipment Selection and Procurement Mr. Vazquez is knowledgeable in equipment evaluation and acquisition, including refuse trucks, pick-up trucks, automated containers, bins, recycling equipment, MRF/TS equipment, transfer tractors and trailers. He is experienced in procurement management and procedures and has developed and implemented purchasing procedures for several operating firms. Recycling Programs Mr. Vazquez has overseen the introduction of numerous residential curbside recycling programs including development of promotional materials, conducting community education workshops, container selection and distribution, vehicle selection and acquisition, driver hiring and training, routing and recycling materials processing. Solid Waste Facility Development & Operations Mr. Vazquez designed, sited and operated a curbside recycling processing center with a buyback operation. Subsequently, he provided general oversight of a large volume MRF operation. He has had responsibility over a small island landfill including all operations functions as well as permitting and compliance. Municipal Contract Mr. Vazquez managed dozens of municipal contracts. He has prepared numerous proposals in response to RFPs issued by municipalities; negotiated new contracts and renegotiated existing contracts; served as a liaison to city officials and staff; negotiated rate adjustment criteria, prepared and managed rate adjustment proposals including rate support documentation and presentation to municipal staff and council. Efficiency Studies & Financial Analysis Mr. Vazquez has completed studies to improve operations including routing and rerouting to reduce operating costs; maintenance operations reviews and driver training to reduce vehicle down -time and lower maintenance costs, improve worker safety and reduce workers compensation and other insurance costs. Management Mr. Vazquez has vast experience with human resources and labor relations. He has recruited key personnel, developed employee compensation and benefit programs, including wages, benefits, training, career path development and management trainee programs. He has established communication programs to manage the workforce through times of change due to mergers and integration of workforces, and consolidation of functions. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-6 SloanvazQUEz,LLC Education Mr. Vazquez is a graduate of the University of Southern California having earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration, 1981. Municipal Programs Listing The following is a partial list of municipal programs for which Mr. Vazquez was responsible. Municipality Responsibilities Avalon Residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling; landfill operations, MRF & compost site design. Azusa Residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling & green waste collection. Bell Residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling. Covina Automated residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling & green waste collection. Cudahy Residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling. Glendora Residential & commercial refuse collection; green waste collection. Hawaiian Gardens Automated residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling & green waste collection; AB939 annual reporting. Irwindale Commercial refuse collection. La Mirada Residential & commercial refuse collection, curbside recycling & green waste collection. Los Angeles County Residential & commercial refuse collection & recycling. Maywood Automated residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling & green waste collection; street sweeping. Montebello Residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling, green waste collection. Monterey Park Residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling, green waste collection. Norwalk Automated residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling & green waste collection. Riverside Commercial refuse collection. Rosemead Automated residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling & green waste collection. San Gabriel Automated residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling & green waste collection. San Marino Residential back -yard refuse, recycling & green waste collection; commercial refuse collection. Santa Fe Springs Residential & commercial refuse collection; recycling center operation, curbside recycling processing facility. South El Monte Residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling & green waste collection. South Pasadena Residential back -yard refuse, recycling & green waste collection; commercial refuse collection. Temple City Automated residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling & green waste collection. Whittier Residential refuse collection & curbside collection. West Covina Automated residential & commercial refuse collection; curbside recycling & green waste collection. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12,2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-7 SloanVAZQUEz,LLC Ernest V. (Chip) Clements, I11, P.E. President, Clements Environmental Mr. Clements has worked in the solid waste field for over 30 years. His experience includes both the private and public sectors and covers a full spectrum of facility design and operations, regulatory compliance, feasibility studies, and program development activities. Mr. Clements is the founder and president of Clements Environmental Corporation, a solid waste management firm started in 1987. OVERVIEW OF PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE RENEW LA Plan for City of Los Angeles Mr. Clements was principal consultant and author of the 20-year blueprint for management of solid waste for the City of Los Angeles. The project involved evaluation of the existing system with its recycling, composting, and disposal components; analysis of the role that conversion technologies could play; and development of an overall system scenario to achieve over 90% diversion within 20 years. The plan has since been adopted by the City Council. Transfer Stations and Material Recovery Facilities Managed the permitting and concept design of over 30 facilities ranging from 200 tons per day (TPD) to over 5,000 TPD. These projects range throughout Southern California including locations in the following counties: Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Luis Obispo. Composting Facilities & C&D Processing Managed the permitting and development/expansion of three greenwaste composting operations and two combined C&D process ing/greenwaste composting facilities in Orange and Fresno counties, ranging from 1,500 to 3,000 TPD. Conversion Technologies (CT) Mr. Clements has investigated alternative technologies and visited facilities in the U.S. and Europe over the past five years. He is familiar with the technical, economic and environmental aspects of anaerobic digestion, gasification, mechanical processing, hydrolysis (for ethanol production), and MSW composting. He is also very familiar with waste -to -energy facility development, performance, and economics having worked for Wheelabrator Environmental Systems. Mr. Clements has recently worked on CT projects for Los Angeles County, the City of Los Angeles, the City of San Diego, the City of San Jose, and the City and County of Santa Barbara, as well as several private sector clients. Rail -based Transfer Station Engineering Analysis Managed the design and engineering analysis of the proposed 5,700 ton per day Material Recovery Facility in the City of Industry. Analyzed the facility waste -shed and potential participation, competing facilities, remaining landfill capacity in the region, rail -haul, and project economics. Also developed the operations, load checking, vector control, contingency, Illness Injury & Prevention, and safety training programs for the facility. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study A-8 SloanvazQUEz,LLC AB 939 Programs, Generation Studies, SRREs and HHWEs Managed Clements Environmental's involvement in the following: • Generation studies and SRREs for the 23 cities of the Southeast Area Working Group headed by Norwalk • SRRE base year data revisions for the cities of the West San Gabriel Valley JPA • Annual reports for the cities of: Arcadia, Monrovia, Rosemead, and Temple City • Waste generation and composition studies for the cities of: Redondo Beach, Manhattan Beach, West Hollywood, Santa Monica • SRREs for Mono and Butte Counties Landfill and Transfer Station Operations Responsible for solid waste program handling 2,000 TPD at three landfills and three transfer stations. Managed team of 35 office and field personnel. Key responsibilities included supervision of: engineering design and facilities operation, environmental monitoring, site planning and development, resource recovery, budget preparation, personnel and regulatory liaison. Evaluated the design and operation of the Vandenberg Air Force Base landfill and recycling systems. Including preparation of the landfill's Five -Year Annual Review, and assistance in planning and conducting remedial investigations. Waste Composition Studies Managed waste sampling and composition studies for MRF facilities for Athens Disposal, Calsan Disposal, BFI, and 19 Navy bases. Solid Waste Management System Acquisition Study Mr. Clements was the engineering consultant to the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County in their study of the possible acquisition of the waste management system operated by the County of Orange. A comprehensive due diligence analysis was conducted of the four active landfills, 20 inactive landfills, and planning and support programs under the County's management. The information was utilized to determine the liability and valuation of the system, for negotiations between the agencies. Advanced Integrated Recycling (AIR) Project Analyzed the solid waste marketplace, industry, and players to determine the feasibility of bringing Southern California Edison's AIR technology to the market. The core technology of the AIR project is a fluidized bed gasification of refuse derived fuel to produce a lean low Btu gas. Clements Environmental evaluated the feasibility of combining this core technology with a Material Recovery Facility and shredding system. Landfill and MRF markets were studied, potential opportunities evaluated in the marketplace, and costs were developed for several MRF layouts. Solid Waste Management Planning Managed the development of solid waste plan for the City and Borough of Juneau, Alaska, involving evaluation of recycling and waste -to -energy systems, the development of a new landfill, and alternative sludge disposal techniques including co -combustion. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-9 S/oan`VAzQUEz,LLC Served as Project Manager on a project for Orange County, California, to develop a countywide waste management system involving evaluation of waste quantities and composition, refuse transfer and landfill disposal, resource recovery alternatives, the design of hazardous waste transfer stations, private versus public ownership and operation, institution of gate fees, and financing options. Waste To Energy Responsible for business development on the west coast, primarily waste -to -energy projects in California and Washington. Work included: proposal preparation, economic and market analysis, energy sale contracts, site acquisition, environmental permitting, and management of consultants. PROFESSIONAL HISTORY • Clements Environmental Corporation — President K&G/Clements - President • Clements Engineers - Chief Executive Officer and President • Signal Environmental Systems - Project Manager • Ventura Regional Sanitation District - Principal Civil Engineer/Solid Waste Manager • Symbiosis, Inc. - Founder and President • SCS Engineers - Project Engineer EDUCATION B.S. - Aeronautical Engineering, University of Illinois (High Honors) M.S. - Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS • Registered Professional Civil Engineer (California C-34482) • Southern California Waste Management Forum • California Resource Recovery Association HONORARY AFILIATIONS (University of Illinois) • James Scholar • Honor Societies Phi Kappa Phi Sigma Tau Tau Beta Pi • George Huff Award (Scholarship and Athletics) • USEPA Water Pollution Control Traineeship Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12,2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-10 Sloan`VAzQUEz,t.i.c PAPERS AND PRESENTATIONS "Conversion Technologies", presented to the SCWMF Conference, November, 2003. "Overview of Conversion Technologies", presented to the Southern California Waste Management Forum, May, 2001. "New Age Recycling — Ethanol Production from Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)", presented to San Bernardino County Solid Waste Task Force, November, 1999. "Advanced Technologies for MSW Processing", presented at the SWANA workshop, Marriott Hotel, Irvine, California, September, 1999. "Vermicomposting - A Can of Worms Worth Opening", presented at the SWANA Regional Conference, Harris Ranch, California, May 1998. "Waste -To -Energy: An Alternative to Landfilling", presented at the 1994 Island Waste Management Conference, Nassau, Bahamas, January 1994. "Recycling of Construction and Demolition Material", presented at the Governor's Symposium on Recycling and Recycled Product Procurement, Albuquerque, New Mexico, September 1990. "Hydrologic Impacts of a River Adjacent Landfill, Ventura County, California," presented at the California Water Pollution Control Federation 1985 Annual conference, May 1985 (Co-authors: D.M. Long, D.A. Gardner). "Ventura County Pursues Beneficial Uses of Sludge," Presented at the California Water Pollution Control Federation 1985 Annual Conference, May 1985 (Co-authors: D.M. Long, R.D. Raines). "Resource Recovery in the 21st Century," presented at the ASCE Southern California Section Conference, Pasadena, California, October 1984. "Mass -Bum Technology," presented at the Resource Recovery and Waste Incineration Conference, Washington State Association of Counties, Spokane, Washington, November 1985. Chairman for Waste -to -Energy session at the ASCE Energy Division Conference, Pasadena California, August 1984. "On -Site Remedial Actions at Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites," presented at the Sixth Annual Symposium on Management of Uranium Mill Tailings, Low -Level Waste, and Hazardous Waste, Colorado State University, February 1984 (Co-authors: B.I. Loran) "Conducting a Landfill Gas Migration Investigation," presented at the California Environmental Health Association's 1983 Symposium, Cypress College, Cypress, California, October 1983. "Solid Waste Collection and Transfer in Rural Areas," National Association of Counties Workshop on Rural Solid Waste Management, Tempe, Arizona, April 1981. "Wastewater Reuse as a Conservation Measure," presented at the Governor's Conference on the Drought, Los Angeles, California 1977. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12,2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-11 SloanvazQUEz,LLC Laurence E. Miner, AICP Senior Planner, Clements Environmental Mr. Miner has over 20 years of professional land use and environmental planning experience in both the public and private sectors. As a professional planner, Mr. Miner brings an in-depth knowledge of land use planning and environmental regulations, as well as the ability to direct an interdisciplinary team of professionals, to each project he undertakes. From initial site design to zoning code compliance and environmental review Mr. Miner has the experience and knowledge to insure that a project can and will be entitled. He also has direct experience in the waste management industry having worked for several years for BLT Enterprises, a major developer of MRF/Transfer Stations in California. OVERVIEW OF PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Environmental Impact Reports/ Land Use Entitlements In the public sector Mr. Miner has prepared environmental impact reports for residential and commercial development projects at Environmental Planning Associates, Christopher Joseph and Associates and Impact Sciences, obtained land use entitlements for wireless telecommunications towers at SBA, JM Consulting and independently and obtained land use entitlements such as variances, hillside development permits, grading permits, building permits and street vacations, for residential and commercial development projects, at Spindler Engineering and as an independent consultant. Planning and Real Estate Mr. Miner has worked for the Cities of Lake Elsinore and Santa Monica, California, in both assistant and associate planner positions. Mr. Miner was also responsible for conducting due diligence for real estate transactions and overseeing environmental remediation projects at company owned industrial properties. Material Recovery Facilities, Transfer Stations and Composting At BLT Enterprises, a privately owned solid waste processing and real estate development company, Mr. Miner was responsible for insuring that four transfer stations were in compliance with state and local regulations as well as for permitting expansions at those facilities. At Clements Environmental, Mr. Miner recently worked on solid waste projects including: • Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan (SWIRP): development of a 25 year Master Plan for solid waste management for the City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation, with a focus on landfill assessments, facility needs assessment, interface with local solid waste industry, and conversion technologies. • City Fibers: preparation of temporary solid waste permits for two City Fibers material recycling facilities (MRFs), • Sunset Waste Paper: preparation of Transfer and Processing Report revisions and updates for the inclusion of a Household Hazardous Waste facility at the Sunset Fresno MRF; and updates to the Sunset Fresno and Visalia MRF storm water pollution prevention plans (SWPPPs) • Southern California Disposal: Permits for expansion of the Transfer Station in Santa Monica Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-12 SloanvaZQUEZ,[.[.c • Greener Systems Incorporated: permitting requirements for Greenwaste Composting Facility in Fresno County PROFESSIONAL HISTORY • Clements Environmental Corporation, Los Angeles, CA — Project Engineer • WFI - Zoning Specialist • Yale Partners, Ltd - Project Planner • BLT Enterprises - Environmental Compliance and Land Use Manager • Spindler Engineering Corporation - Senior Planner • D. Garvey Corp. - Zoning/Site Acquisition Project Manager • Lead Tech - Lead Based Paint Inspector • Environmental Planning Associates (Chris Joseph Associates) - Project Manager • City of Santa Monica - Assistant and Associate Planner • United Tape Company - Product Sales • City of Lake Elsinore- Assistant Planner EDUCATION Bachelor of Science in Environmental Studies from the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry and Syracuse University. PROFESSIONAL AFILIATIONS • American Planning Association (APA) • American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) • Certified California Department of Health Services Lead -Related Construction Inspector/Assessor Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-13 SfoanvaZQUEZ,LLC Jacqueline M. Maddox, E.I.T. Staff Engineer, Clements Environmental Ms. Maddox has worked in the environmental field for the past five years. Her experience includes construction observation and quality assurance, data collection and analysis; permit and report preparation for landfills, transfer stations, a materials recycling facilities; design and optimization of landfill gas collections systems; stormwater drainage analyses; interacting with state and federal regulation agencies; and general project management. For Clements Environmental, Ms. Maddox specializes in the development and permitting of Conversion Technology (CT) facilities and alternative energy projects. OVERVIEW OF PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Conversion Technologies (CT) Ms. Maddox has participated on several conversion technology evaluations in California. She is familiar with the technical, permitting and environmental aspects of anaerobic digestion, gasification, and physical processing. Ms. Maddox has recently worked on CT projects for Los Angeles County, the Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority, and the City of San Diego as well as other private sector clients. Material Recovery Facilities, Transfer Stations, and Composting Operations Assisting in all aspects of permitting and development, including preparation of Transfer Processing Reports, Alternate Odor Management Plans, and Stormwater Plans, including the permitting of a 1,500 TPD MRF/Transfer Station in Hesperia, CA Zero Waste Plans Preparation of a Zero Waste Plan for a small business office as part of the Professional Certification in Resource Management course, including surveying building tenants, waste characterization, preparing education materials on Zero Waste and recycling, and researching recycling, composting, and reuse options. PROFESSIONAL HISTORY • Clements Environmental Corporation, Los Angeles, CA —Staff Engineer • Weaver Boos Consultants, Naperville, IL — Staff Engineer EDUCATION • B.S. — Chemical Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana -Champaign, IL • California Resource Recovery Association (CRRA) Professional Certification in Resource Management PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS • Engineer In Training • Women's Environmental Council • California Resource Recovery Association Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 1011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-14 SloanvazQUEz,LLC EXHIBITS - SAMPLES OF SIMILAR WORK PRODUCT The following are samples of similar work completed by Sloan Vazquez. One copy of each is provided with this proposal and PDF versions are provided on the enclosed CD. 1. QUARTERLY CONTAMINATION MEASUREMENT FOR LOADS OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL, ORGANICS MATERIALS & PLANT MATERIALS — 2ND QUARTER 2011 2. WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY, MRF & TRANSFER STATION FACILITY 3. CONSTRUCTION„ DEMOLITION & ORGANIC MATERIAL MARKET STUDY Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study A-15 This page left intentionally blank. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 SloanvazQUEz,LLC Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study Quarterly Contamination Measurement For Loads of Recyclable Materials, Organics Materials & Plant Materials 2nd Quarter — 2011 Presented to: RethinkWaste.Org Submitted by: SloanvAZQUEZLLC Municipal Solid Waste & Recycling Advisors 18006 Skypark Circle —Suite 205 Irvine, CA 92614 Office: 866.241.4533 Fax: 714.276.0625 info@sloanvazquez.com 3,M%�(ar July 1, 2011 SA This page intentionally left blank. SIoanVAZQUEZLLC. Municipal Solid Waste Management & Recycling Advisors July 1, 2011 Cliff Feldman Recycling Programs Coordinator South Bayside Waste Management Authority 610 Elm Street, Suite 202 San Carlos, 94070 Re: Quarterly Contamination Measurement — 2"d Quarter 2011 Dear Mr. Feldman: Sloan Vazquez, LLC is pleased to have assisted the SBWMA with the completion of its 2"d Quarter 2011, Quarterly Contamination Measurement. The results of the contamination measurement are included in our report which is attached hereto. Exhibits A through I are attached as PDF files. Exhibit J: Sampling Photographs, is submitted separately on DVD. Our team assembled at Shoreway on Monday, June 201h, and completed the field reconnaissance and preparation for the sampling process. We met with managers and line supervisors from SBWMA, Recology and South Bay Recycling to confirm the operating procedures and measurement protocols, and the roles and responsibilities of each party during the contamination measurement period. The samples were collected, sorted, analyzed, and recorded commencing on Tuesday, June 21'`, culminating on Monday, June 27`" Thank you for the opportunity to work with SBWMA on this important project. Cordially, 1 Joe Sloan President 18006 Skypark Circle • Suite 205 • Irvine, CA 92614 Office:866.241.4533 0 FAX.714.276.0625 • info@sloanvazauez.com SloanvazQUEz,LLC QUARTERLY CONTAMINATION MEASUREMENT - 2ND QUARTER 2011 PURPOSE Section 6.026 of the Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County (hereinafter "Agreement") establishes the method of determining disincentive payments from Recology to SBWMA when contamination levels exceed the maximum amounts set forth therein. The SBWMA engaged the services of Sloan Vazquez, LLC to conduct the Quarterly Contamination Measurement (QCM) sampling for 2nd quarter of 2011 in accordance with the requirements of the Agreement. This QCM — Q2-2011 report contains the contamination measurements from each of the five (5) designated streams over a five (5) day collection period, Tuesday, June 21st through Monday, June 27`h, 2011. METHODOLOGY The contamination sampling was based upon the methodology described in Attachment E-2 of the Agreement. For the purposes of sampling as documented in this report, Attachment E-2, the Sample Selection Protocol, the Materials Sorting List, and the Policies and Procedures, taken altogether, are described as the Contamination Measurement Protocol (Exhibit H). SAMPLING POPULATIONS The following material streams were sampled for the 20112nd Quarter sampling period: 1) Commercial Recyclables (also "CR") 2) Residential Recyclables (also "RR") 3) Commercial Organics ( also "CO") 4) Residential Organics (also "RO") 5) Commercial Plant (also "CP") Twelve (12) samples were collected and sorted from each of the respective streams with the exception of the Commercial Plant material from which six (6) samples were collected and sorted. The Commercial Plant material samples were collected, as available, from commercial greenwaste roll -off containers in accordance with the Contamination Measurement Protocol. All of the other samples and sample cells were randomly selected using the methodology provided in the Contamination Measurement Protocol. Fifty-four (54) total samples were collected and sorted during the five (5) day period. The daily sampling of routes is set forth in Table 1. Exhibit A contains the Collection Route Selection Sheet of randomized daily routes. Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 2nd Quarter 2011 1 SloanVAzQUEz,L« Table 1— Q2-2011 Routes Sampled by Day and by Material Type Total Tue Wed Thur Fri Mon Samples by Material May 21 May 22 May 23 May 24 May 27 Material Commercial Recyclables 632 631 633 932 632 12 633 938 936 938 935 623 931 Residential Recyclables 848 831 834 837 840 12 843 849 848 859 842 841 841 Commercial Organics 891 953 952 891 953 12 951 951 953 951 952 951 953 Residential Organics 871 862 868 874 887 12 861 873 888 867 871 889 872 Commercial Plant CP-3 6 CP-1 CP-2 CP-4 Roll -Off Loads -not routed CP-5 CP-6 Total Samples Per Day 10 11 10 9 14 54 SAMPLE CELL EXTRACTIONS For each of the fifty-four (54) samples, a skid -steer type of loader equipped with a grapple bucket was used the extract material from the randomly selected cells. The skid -steer loader is agile, fast, and precise piece of equipment that is ideal for performing the sample extraction in accordance with the Sample Selection Protocol. Sloan Vazquez provided the skid -steer and the operator for the QCM. MEASUREMENTS AND CALCULATIONS Gross and Tare weights were recorded for each of the carts and tubs used to collect and weigh the source samples and the contaminants for each sample. The weights were manually recorded on Field Form Tally Sheets and later entered into the final QCM Tally Sheets that are contained in Exhibits C, D, E, F,&G. Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 2v° Quarter 2011 SloanVAZQUEz,LLC For each material type, the average sample weight either fell within or exceeded the desired average weight range indicated in the Contamination Measurement Protocol. See Table 2. Table 2 — Q2-2011 Sample Weight Averages Recommended Weight Material Total Samples Average Weights (Ibs) Range (Ibs) Commercial Recyclable 12 200.2 125-175 Residential Recyclables 12 211.7 175-225 Commercial Organics 12 228.9 125-175 Residential Organics 12 233.5 175-225 Commercial Plants 6 226.2 125-175 OBSERVATION AND MONITORING Representatives from Recology and SBWMA observed the procedures associated with the sample collection and sorting process including: 1) Spotting and tipping of randomly selected loads, 2) Extraction of material from randomly selected cells, 3) Weighing the extracted sample, 4) Sorting of material from selected cells into "contaminant' and "acceptable" categories, 5) Weighing the contaminant fraction, 6) Recording the data into Field Form Tally Sheets Recology and the SBWMA had full access to observe all aspects of the sampling and sorting process during the entire course of the sampling period. Recology, representatives were consulted regarding all "questionable" items recovered from the respective samples. When needed, Appendix A: Materials Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 2n° Quarter 2011 SloanVAzQUEz,LLC Sorting List of ATTACHMENT E-2 was consulted and, in each instance, concurrence was reached between Recology and Sloan Vazquez personnel regarding the disposition of the material. CONTAMINATION SAMPLING RESULTS Exhibits C, D, E, F, & G contain the final record of contamination contained in each sample. The data from those Exhibits is summarized in Table 3. Maximum contamination amounts as set forth in the Agreement are provided for comparison. Table 3 — Q2-2011 Measured and Maximum Allowable Contamination Measured Material Stream Measured Contamination for Q2-2011 Maximum Allowable Contamination Level' Variance for Q2-2011 Commercial Recyclables 10.02% 8.00% 2.02% Residential Recyclables 7.77% 20.00% (12.23%) Commercial Organics 11.05% 10.00% .1.05% Residential Organics 2.90% 5.00% (2.10%) Commercial Plant 1.46% 5.00% (3.54%) ADDITIONAL RECORDS The following referenced items are not attached to this report, but can be obtained from the SBWMA: 1) Exhibit I: SAMPLING PLACARDS AND FIELD SAMPLE TALLY SHEETS 2) Exhibit J: SAMPLING PHOTOGRAPHS. Exhibit J contains digital photographs of extracted contaminants, including unusual or questionable items, and an overall pictorial depiction of the sampling process. 3) The SBWMA Member Agencies Franchise Agreements with Recology San Mateo County. ' As per the SBWMA Member Agencies Franchise Agreements with Recology San Mateo County, Section 6.02E Prepared for RethinkWaste quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 2n° Quarter 1011 S1oanvazQUEz,u-c EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A - RANDOMIZED DAILY ROUTE SELECTION EXHIBIT B - SCALEHOUSE NOTIFICATION FORM - LISTING OF SELECTED ROUTES BY DAY EXHIBIT C - COMMERCIAL RECYCLING CONTAMINATION SUMMARIES & RELATED QCM SAMPLE TALLY SHEETS EXHIBIT D - RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING CONTAMINATION SUMMARIES & RELATED QCM SAMPLE TALLY SHEETS EXHIBIT E - COMMERCIAL ORGANICS CONTAMINATION SUMMARIES & RELATED QCM SAMPLE TALLY SHEETS EXHIBIT F - RESIDENTIAL ORGANICS CONTAMINATION SUMMARIES & RELATED QCM SAMPLE TALLY SHEETS EXHIBIT G - COMMERCIAL PLANT CONTAMINATION SUMMARIES & RELATED QCM SAMPLE TALLY SHEETS EXHIBIT H - CONTAMINATIOIN MEASUREMENT PROTOCOL, E-2, SAMPLE PROTOCOL, POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, & SAMPLING SORTING LIST EXHIBIT I - FIELD FORMS - PLACARDS & TALLY SHEETS EXHIBIT I - SAMPLING PHOTOGRAPHS Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 Intl Quarter 2011 SloanvazQUEz,L« EXHIBIT A RANDOMIZED DAILY ROUTE SELECTION Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 zd Quarter 2011 Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) June 17, 2011 2:44 PM SloanvazQUEz,LLC TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 METHODS & APPROACH.............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Preliminary Schedule.......................................................................................................7 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK DELIVERABLES.................................................................................. 8 3.0 QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE................................................................................ 10 3.1 Sloan Vazquez, LLC........................................................................................................10 3.2 Clements Environmental................................................................................................11 4.0 LIST OF PROJECT PERSONNEL.................................................................................... 13 4.1 Sloan Vazquez — Personnel.............................................................................................13 4.2 Clements Environmental — Personnel.............................................................................13 4.3 References....................................................................................................................14 4.3.1Sloan Vazquez, LLC - References................................................................................................14 4.3.2Clements Environmental - References.......................................................................................20 5.0 ORGANIZATION CHART/ PROPOSED PROJECT TEAM .................................................. 24 6.0 AVAILABILITY............................................................................................................25 7.0 ESTIMATED HOURS BY TASK...................................................................................... 26 8.0 SCHEDULE OF RATES & COST BY TASK........................................................................ 27 APPENDIX A— PROFESSIONAL RESUMES.............................................................................A-1 EXHIBITS —SAMPLES OF SIMILAR WORK PRODUCT...........................................................A-15 1. Quarterly Contamination Measurement for Loads of Recyclable Material, Organics Materials & Plant Materials —2nd Quarter 2011 2. Waste Composition Study, MRF & Transfer Station Facility 3. Construction„ Demolition & Organic Material Market Study Prepared for the City of Fort Collins August 12, 2011 Proposal to Provide Waste Stream Analysis Study iv Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) Time Stamp: June 17, 2011 2:44 PM . ..Jurisdictions n . ..Jurisdictions 2of13 Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) Commercial Organics Monday Jurisdictions Selection Order �,...; Route # Cell # Cell # (Alt) Burl . SM Hills ' � `BEL Sc]PM �� �` FC EPA MPF - l '*� Ath e .RWC NFO 4 951 4 12 FEL 3 952 2 8 FEL 2 953 16 2 FEL a;1' _ 891 2 13 SASL Commercial Plant 7, . ..Jurisdictions Rieidential Organics . .. Jurisdictions e .- 3of13 Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) Time Stamp: June 17, 2011 2:44 PM e• Commercial Recyclables ..Jurisdictions Residential Recyclables 4of13 4of13 Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) Commercial Organics Tuesday Jurisdictions Selection Order Route# Cell# Cell# (Alt) Burl SM Hills BEL SC--- FC EPA , MP L , Ath RWC NFO 3 951 9 2 FEL X =•-2_ _ 952 1 6 FEL - 4 953 10 12 FEL L 1 891 14 12 SASL Commercial Plant .. Residential Organics .. Jurisdictions 5of13 Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) Time Stamp: June 17, 2011 2:44 PM Commercial R6cyclables� • •.Jurisdictions Residential .. Jurisdictions royINM® - 6of13 Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) Commercial Organics Wednesday Jurisdictions Selection Order Route # Cell # ;Cell # r (Alt) Burl SM s 'Hills BEL g k� SC.� '`FC •'��r EPA MP rt L °Ath RWC NFO 3-: 951 13 1 FEL 952 16 6 FEL 953 14 8 FEL 891 8 5 SASL Commercial Plant ..Jurisdictions ResidentialOe4anics .. Jurisdictions 7of13 Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) Time Stamp: June 17, 2011 2:44 PM Commercial . - .. Jurisdictions ..Jurisdictions 8of13 Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) Commercial Organics Thursday Jurisdictions Sion Order Route # Cell # Cell (Alt) ,Burl SM'Hills BE L SC FC, EPA MP L A6 RWC NFO z 3 951 11 13 FEL . 1 952 2 3 FEL 2 953 5 4 FEL rT 4 891 1 3 SASL Commercial Plant ..Jurisdictions Residential Organics .. Jurisdictions 9of13 Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) Time Stamp: June 17, 2011 2:44 PM !y+I! III III' !Jurisdictions .. ,.Jurisdictions • 10 of 13 Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) Commercial yOrganics . Friday Jurisdictions Selection Order Route # Cell #� Cell (Alt) _ `._ Burl SM Hilli�';AFC a EPA W ' �f Ath RWC NFO; 2 - - 951 14 4 FEL 3 - 952 1 11 FEL 4 953 8 16 FEL 1 891 4 3 SASL ..Jurisdictions e ..Jurisdictions 11 of 13 SloanvAzQUEz,LLC This page left intentionally blank. Prepared for the City of fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) Time Stamp: June 17, 2011 2:44 PM Commercial Recyclables� • • r.Jurisdictions m�om�w•w•w•����w•�w•�� . ...Jurisdictions mom©�������w.w.w•�w.� o�mm��w•w.w.w.�����w•� 12 of 13 Collection Route and Sample Cell Randomizer (Collection Route Selection Sheet) Commercial Organics ; ... 2nd Monday Jurisdictions Selection Order Route # Cell # _ Cell # :(Alt) Burl SM ;HMIs � sBE� SC w',FC EPA MP :L " Ath6 RW6 .NF.O 3 951 12 3 FEL 2-'_ < 952 11 1 FEL 953 9 12 FEL 891 12 6 SASL Commercial Plant . .. ResidentialOrganics . .. Jurisdictions 13 of 13 SloanvazQUEz,LLC EXHIBIT B SCALEHOUSE NOTIFICATION FORM Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 fd Quarter 2011 RethinkWaste: Quarterly Contamination Measurement / Collection Vehicle Selection Sheet Q2-2011 Sampling Date: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 Juridiction of Sample Alt Vehicle Number of Route No. Origin ETA ID Cell # Cell # Type Samples Notes 632 CR-1 4 5 REL 1 Sampled 633 CR-3 3 7 REL 1 Sampled 848 RR-1 1 12 SL 1 Sampled 843 RR-2 7 11 SL 1 Sampled 835 RR 3 9 12 SL 1: 891 CO-1 14 12 SASL 1 Sampled 95�2 GO-2 1 6 FEL 1 871 RO-1 15 13 SL 1 Sampled 861 RO-2 11 7 SL 1 Sampled Comm Plant 1 CP-1 8 16 R/O 1 1 Sampled Comm Plant CP-2 8 2'11,121/O 1 CONTINGENCY SAMPLES 4 x s _ env n -• �.6s .pro 6 w .. RM ...: 635 GR-3C 5;'�3=' 841 RR-3C 4 15 SL 1 Sampled 951 CO-2 C 9 2 FEL 1 Sampled 869 RO-2C 9 1 SL 1, Comm; Plant GP-2i 10_ 12� v R/,O 1 RethinkWaste: Quarterly Contamination Measurement / Collection Vehicle Selection Sheet Q2-2011 Date: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 Juridiction of Sample Alt Vehicle Number of Route No. Origin ETA ID Cell # Cell q Type Samples Notes 631 CR-4 7 13 REL 1 Sampled 938 CR-5 6 9 FEL 1 Sampled 831 RR-4 12 10 1 SL 1 ISampled 849 RR-5 3 8 SL 1 Sampled 841 RR-6 8 12 SL 1 Sampled 95r2 G®-3 953 CO-4 14 8 FEL 1 Sampled 862 RO-4 14 3 SL 1 Sampled Comm Plant CP-3 9 15 R/O 1 Sampled Comm Plant CP-4 7 14 Rj, 1 g x R T� ��, s� �a �� l+ ..1-0 w i qli SNea.w Via. W 3@ 623 CR,6C 12 5 REL 1 Sampled 951 CO-4C 13 1 1 FEL 1 1 ISampled 873 RO-4C 7 11 1 SL 1 1 Sampled No Text RethinkWaste: Quarterly Contamination Measurement / Collection Vehicle Selection Sheet Q2-2011 Date: Friday, June 24, 2011 Juridiction of Sample Alt Vehicle Number of Route No. Origin ETA ID Cell # Cell # Type Samples Notes 932 1 CR-9 4 11 FEL 1 Sampled 837 RR-9 1 8 1 16 1 SL 1 ISam 891 CO-8 4 3 SASL 1 ISampled 951 CO-9 14 4 FEL 1 Sampled 874 RO-9 1 11 1 16 1 SL 1 1 938 CR-10C 2 10 FEL 1 Sampled 859 RR-10C 2 9 VHTS 1 Sampled 953 CO-10C 8 16 FEL 1 Sampled 867 RO-9C 6 15 SL 1 Sampled RethinkWaste: Quarterly Contamination Measurement / Collection Vehicle Selection Sheet Q2-2011 Date: Monday, June 27, 2011 Juridiction of Sample Alt Vehicle Number of Route No. Origin ETA ID Cell # Cell # Type Samples Notes 632 CR-11 1 3 REL 1 Sampled 935 CR-12 12 10 FEL 1 Sampled 840 RR-11 4 2 SL 1 Sampled 842 RR-1�2 9 2 SL 1 89i GO-1s1 2 13;� S/�SL 1 953 CO-12 16 2 FEL 1 Sampled 887 RO-10 16 4 HTS 1 Sampled 871 RO-11 1 5 SL 1 Sampled 864 RO-1,2 11 1 SL 1 Comm Plant CP-10 12 10 R/O 1 Sampled Comm Plant CP-11 2 10 R/O 1 Sampled Comm Plant CP-12 14 4 R/O 1 Sampled CONTINGENCYSAMPLES.' 931 CR-12C 8 7 FEL 1 Sampled 842 RR-12C 13 6 SL 1 Sampled 952 CO-12C 2 8 FEL 1 Sampled 872 RO-12C 6 14 SL 1 Sampled Comm Plant CP-12C 7 1 12 R/O 1 ISampled RethinkWaste: Quarterly Contamination Measurement / Collection Vehicle Selection Sheet Q2-2011 Sampling Date: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 Route No. Juridiction of Origin ETA Sample ID Cell # Alt Cell # Vehicle Type Number of Samples Notes 938 CR-13 7 14 FEL 1 633 CR-14 11 7 REL 1 936 CR-15 11 10 FEL 1 858 RR-13 9 10 HTS 1 842 RR-14 14 9 SL 1 859 RR-15 13 5 VHTS 1 953 CO-13 9 12 FEL 1 952 CO-14 11 1 FEL 1 869 RO-13 15 14 SL 1 877 RO-14 6 2 SL 1 Comm Plant CP-13 3 9 R/O 1 Comm Plant CP-14 8 7 R/O 1 623 CR-15c CONTINGENCY SAMPLES 4 13 REL 1 ro �, 844 RR-15c 12 11 SL 1 951 CO-14C 12 3 FEL 1 863 RO-14C 16 12 SL 1 Comm Plant CP-14C 7 1 4 1 R/O 1 SloanvAzQUEz,LLC EXHIBIT C COMMERCIAL RECYCLING CONTAMINATION SUMMARY Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 2nd Quarter 2011 S1oanVAzQUEz,LLC 1.0 METHODS & APPROACH Sloan Vazquez is uniquely qualified to satisfy the City of Fort Collins' objectives and work requirements as identified in the RFP. Not only do we bring our academic and professional economic and financial knowledge and experience, we also possess industry insight gained through many years of "hands-on" experience and direct responsibility for solid waste program design, implementation, and day-to-day management. This comprehensive knowledge of municipal solid waste and recycling collection and processing distinguishes us from other consultants who may be well qualified academically but have little or no experience putting their recommendations into practice and managing them to a successful outcome. Sloan Vazquez has over forty years of experience in planning, implementation, and management of fully integrated municipal solid waste management programs to achieve and exceed the requirements of the State of California and more strenuous local ordinances. The following describes the methodology and approach for conducting the waste stream analysis for the City. Sloan Vazquez will take the following general approach. 1. Planning & Preparation • Kick-off Meeting with City Personnel to review project goals, review plan of action, develop and agree on a specific schedule, introduce key personnel to City personnel. • Identify the availability and sources of information including outside entities such as waste haulers, landfills and other facilities. 2. Conduct the Waste Stream Analysis and Identify Conversion Technology options • Sloan Vazquez will work with the City to contact the waste haulers and landfill operators to obtain information related to waste generation. • Sloan Vazquez personnel will contact and gather additional waste characterizations and data from other partners in this project including, Poudre School District, Larimer County, Colorado State University, O'Dell Brewing Company, and New Belgium Brewing Company. In addition, Sloan Vazquez will perform site visits and visual waste characterizations at these locations. Ongoing communication with City Staff is anticipated throughout the course of completing this project, especially during the data identification and gathering period. As we review tonnage reports, we may need to discuss the quality and consistency of the numbers with City Staff. 3. Prepare Final Report • Prepare Draft Report • Resolve Any Outstanding Issues • Prepare Final Report Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study Commercial Recycling Quarterly Contamination Measurement Summary Sample # Route City • Total Sample Weight 'Total Contaminant Weight % Contaminant Maximum Contaminant Level Delta CR 1 632 Menlo 193.4 6 3.10% 8% -4.90% CR 3 633 Burl 200.6 10.2 5.08% 8% -2.92% CR 4 631 Burl 174.8 12 6.86% 8% -1.14% CR 5 938 Menlo 192.0 22.4 11.67% 8% 3.67% CR 6c 623 San Carlos 189.8 8.2 4.32% 8% -3.68% CR 7 633 Res/Comm 183.6 5.2 2.83% 8% -5.17% CR 8c 936 Red City 170.0 24.8 14.59% 8% 6.59% CR 9 932 Burl 135.6 27.8 20.50% 8% 12.50% CR 10c 938 Menlo 187.2 25.8 13.78% 8% 5.78% CR 11 632 EPA 147.6 8.6 5.83% 8% -2.17% CR 12 935 Red City 286.0 42.8 14.97% 8% 6.97% CR 12c 931 San Carlos 341.4 47 13.77% 8% 5.77% TOTAL 2402.0 "; 240.8 ;r_ 10.02% T>8% 2.02% Average,Wt m"' 2 200t @. 20110.02%; �:. 3 8% SloanvAZQUEz,LLC EXHIBIT D RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING CONTAMINATION SUMMARY Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 2n° Quarter 2011 Residential Recycliing Quarterly Contamination Measurement Summary Sample # Route City Total Sample _ Weight Total 'Contaminant ` Weight ' '' ` ` ` % Contaminant Maximum Contaminant Level Delta RR 1 848 Red City 198.2 20.2 10.19% 20% -9.81% RR 2 843 Red City 225.4 32.4 14.37% 20% -5.63% RR 3c 841 Menlo 190.4 8.8 4.62% 20% -15.38% RR 4 831 Burl 202.8 17.2 8.48% 20% -11.52% RR 5 849 San Mateo 191.2 9.2 4.81% 20% -15.19% RR 6 841 Atherton 214.2 7.8 3.64% 20% -16.36% RR 7 834 San Mateo 210.6 12.4 5.89% 20% -14.11% RR 8 848 Red Shores 152.2 9.22 6.06% 20% -13.94% RR 9 837 Foster 197.0 21.4 10.86% 20% -9.14% RR 10c 859 San Carlos 208.4 8.4 4.03% 20% -15.97% RR 11 840 EPA/Menlo 265.2 13.4 5.05% 20% -14.95% RR 12c 842 Atherton 284.2 37 13.02% 20% -6.98% TOTAL 2539.8, �,. .-197.42 7.77% 20% -1223% Average Wt 3 211.7, . 16.5 7.77%, - 20% _ , "� .. -12:23% SloanvazQUEz,LLC EXHIBIT E COMMERCIAL ORGANICS CONTAMINATION SUMMARY Prepared Jar RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 Intl Quarter 2011 Commercial Organics Quarterly Contamination Measurement Summary Sample # Route City Total Sample Weight Total Contaminant Weight %Contaminant Maximum Contaminant Level Delta CO 891 200.0 8.4 4.2% 10% -5.80% CO 2c 951 San Mateo 183.6 18.4 10.02% 10% 0.02% CO 4 953 SM/Red City 243.6 84.4 34.65% 10% 24.65% CO 4c 951 Burl 181.0 23.4 12.93% 10% 2.93% CO 5 952 Menlo 192.8 10.4 5.39% 10% -4.61% CO 6 953 Red City 218.2 19.6 8.98% 10% -1.02% CO 7 951 San Mateo 228.4 12.6 5.52% 10% -4.48% CO 8 891 SM/Red City 180.4 4 2.22% 10% -7.78% CO 9 951 San Mateo 239.2 46.6 19.48% 10% 9.48% CO10C 953 Menlo 220.6 34.4 15.59% 10% 5.59% CO 12 953 San Mateo 304.4 29 9.53% 10% -0.47% CO12c 952 Menlo 354.0 12.2 3.45% 10% -6.55% TOTAL ,w .'`e m ..,. «. '; Rk:P g, "° 2746 ? , , , '(:`303 4 f e a w « . ; 11.05% b W ,.w 10% a: M'erag a Wt �" 228.9� �,�: 25.3 g11.05% 10% °= 1i05% SloanvAzQUEz,LLC EXHIBIT F RESIDENTIAL ORGANICS RECYCLING SUMMARY Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 a Quarter 2011 Residential Organics Quarterly Contamination Measurement Summarry Sample # Route City Total Sample Weight Total Contaminant Weight % Contaminant Maximum Contaminant Level Delta RO1 871 Menlo 193.8 0.2 0.10% 5% -4.90% RO 2 861 Burl 215.6 8.4 3.90% 5% -1.10% RO 4 862 Hills 218.6 13 5.95% 5% 0.95% RO 4c 873 Red City 241.0 10.2 4.23% 5% -0.77% RO 5 868 Foster 220.2 5.4 2.45% 5% -2.55% RO 6 888 Belmont 203.0 10.2 5.02% 5% 0.02% RO 7 889 Belmont 235.0 3.4 1.45% 5% -3.55% RO 9 874 Red City 192.2 15.6 8.12% 5% 3.12% RO 9c 867 San Mateo 193.8 3 1.55% 5% -3.45% RO10 887 Menlo 345.8 0.6 0.17% 5% -4.83% RO11 871 Menlo 198.6 8.4 4.23% 5% -0.77% RO12c 872 Atherton 344.6 3 0.87% 5% -4.13% „TOTAL -?2802:2:° �: m 81 4 ¢. �� a2:90% 5% ' , : a ... 2:10%3 -Average Wt: , „ ;_ 233.5 6.8'`��" �.2.90% �`�' 5% -2.10% SloanvAzQUEz,LLC EXHIBIT G COMMERCIAL PLANT CONTAMINATION SUMMARY Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 2"' Quarter 2011 Commercial Plant Material Quarterly Contamination Measurement Summary Sample # Route City TotalSample Weight Total Contarhinant Weight % Contaminant Maximum Contaminant Level Delta CP 1 177.4 0 0.00% 5% -5.00% CP 2 Burl 185.8 0 0.00% 5% -5.00% CP 3 San Mateo 228.2 10.8 4.73% 5% -0.27% CP4 Burl 303.0 1 0.33% 5% -4.67% CP 5 Atherton 169.6 1.8 1.06% 5% -3.94% CP 6 Atherton 293.0 6.2 2.12% 5% -2.88% TOTAL '--�-1357.0 19 146% "A Average Wt 226.2 3.3 1.46% S% -3.S4%' S1oanvazQUEz,1.LC EXHIBIT H CONTAMINATION MEASUREMENT PROTOCOL Prepared for RethinkWaste Quarterly Contamination Measurement July 1, 2011 2n° Quarter 2011 9 SloanVAzQUEz,LLC Below are the Tasks required to complete the Scope of Work as identified in the RFP, followed by more detailed approach to be taken by Sloan Vazquez personnel. TASK 1: Attend meetings including kick-off meeting For this task, the Sloan Vazquez team will conduct the following work: The project will begin with a kick-off meeting with City staff to introduce project participants, clarify and agree on project goals, schedule and scope of work. Ongoing communication with City Staff and third parties will be conducted via telephone and email. Up to two additional meetings will be scheduled as necessary. TASK 2: Determine the composition, weight, and potential value of materials generated in the greater Fort Collins community and currently sent to landfills for disposal. For this task, the Sloan Vazquez team will conduct the following work: Sub -Task 2.1— Develop a data -based analysis of the composition of Fort Collins' Waste Stream currently begin landfilled. Sloan Vazquez will discuss and review with City Staff the availability and format of tonnage data. We anticipate that most data consist of reports as submitted by private haulers. Sloan Vazquez is familiar and experienced with these types of reports and can work with the various formats in which they are presented. If needed, the data will be converted into an electronic format for ease of analysis. Using available information about the overall waste composition and existing diversion programs, we will categorize the waste currently being landfilled into at least five categories including, • Vegetative Debris/Trimmings and Food Waste (Organics that are high in Biochemical Oxygen Demand), and which may include: paper fiber and other recyclable commodities; • Municipal Solid Waste; • Hazardous Materials, and • Construction & Demolition Debris. Sloan Vazquez will evaluate the integrity and usefulness of the available tonnage data and using our knowledge and experience will develop a methodology for attributing tonnage to the following generators: • Residential single-family; • Residential multi -family; • Educational institutions; and, • Commercial including breweries, industrial facilities, and construction. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins Proposal to Provide Waste Stream August 12, 2011 Analysis Study r_'%aED]:IJ,1:1ZIn=da Contamination Measurement Methodology: Quarterly Protocol This Attachment presents the methodology for quantifying the Contamination Level in five (5) distinct materials streams Collected by Contractor from the SBWMA Service Area. This Attachment is organized into the following six (6) sections: 1. Objectives —describes the purpose of the methodology. 2. Sampling rationale —presents key sample groupings for the methodology, based on the Agency and material stream. 3. Sampling allocation and calendar —describes the number of samples required to provide a sufficient level of accuracy in findings and outlines a schedule that provides representative and sufficient data to meet quarterly and annual sampling goals. 4. Field procedures —describes sampling activities for each sorting day. 5. Sorting categories —describes the sorting categories. 6. Calculations Appendices 1 through 3 consist of: 1. methodology checklist 2. sample data collection forms 3. equipment list 1. Objectives This methodology is designed to estimate the Contamination Level (as a percentage by weight of the entire load) in an individual load from any of the five (5) materials streams Collected in the SBWMA Service Area as follows: • Commercial Source -Separated and Targeted Recyclable Materials • Commercial Organic Materials Commercial Plant Materials • Single -Family Targeted Recyclable Materials • Single -Family Organic Materials The methodology described herein is also intended to produce consistent and statistically reliable estimates of the Contamination Level for each material stream as a whole. In addition, the methodology is designed to require the minimum necessary organizational time and financial investment. Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (El) 1 of20 2. Sampling rationale Load samples shall be collected from each material stream identified above. The sampling plan considers the SBWMA Service Area as a single source of materials generation. Each materials stream will be considered as separate sampling population. 3. Sampling allocation and calendar A total of twelve (12) samples shall be collected from each materials stream per quarter to achieve the agreed upon desired level of statistical accuracy. Additional samples may be collected in accordance with the last paragraph of this Section 3 and in such cases, all samples taken shall be used to calculate the Measured Contamination Level(s) for that quarter. The specified number of samples are based on the following factors: 1) An analysis of the composition variability among samples that were sorted during waste characterization studies of similar waste streams and programs in other west coast communities. 2) An agreement on the acceptable level of accuracy Table 1 indicates the statistical confidence intervals (error ranges) at the ninety percent (90%) confidence level that are expected to result from characterizing twelve (12) samples per quarter and forty-eight (48) samples per year with respect to each material stream. Table 1: Samples per Load and Results Quarterly samples and Annual samples and results results Estimated Number of Approximate Number of Approximate Material stream sample truckloads o bed' statistical truckloads to beed' statistical weight sa error range sa error range Commercial Source - Separated and 150 Ibs 12 3% 48 1.5% Targeted Recyclable Materials Commercial Organic 200 Ibs 12 8% 48 4% to 5% Materials Commercial 150lbs 12 1% 48 0.5% Plant Materials Single -Family Targeted 150lbs 12 2% 48 1% Recyclable Materials Single -Family Organic 150lbs 12 1% 48 0.5% Materials The error ranges in Table 1 are based on one (1) sample per truckload. Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (E1) 2of20 The error ranges shown above shall be interpreted as follows. When the calculation method described below provides the Measured Contamination Level in a material stream, the estimate will be expressed in terms of percent by weight of the entire material stream. The error range around the estimate reflects a percent by weight of the entire material stream. Thus, if the Measured Contamination Level in a given material stream is five percent (5%), plus or minus one percent (1 %), then ninety percent (90%) confidence that the Contamination Level is between four percent (4%) and six percent (6%) of the total material stream is achieved. The Parties agree that the actual Measured Contamination Level will be the sole determinant of the percentage of Contamination in a load, and of Contractor's compliance with the maximum contamination levels. It is expected that a two (2) person crew can collect, sort, and weigh approximately twelve (12) samples in an eight (8) to ten (10) hour period, assuming a constant supply of samples is available. Therefore, two (2) sorters working approximately five (5) days per quarter will collect and sort the desired number of samples to assess all five (5) material streams, assuming there are enough inbound loads during that time period to provide the desired number of samples. To capture seasonal variations, sampling events will be conducted during each of the the four (4) calendar quarters. In addition, sampling events will not be scheduled five (5) days immediately before or after Holidays. If the Measured Contamination Level for a material stream calculated for one (1) calendar quarter varies by twenty five percent (25%) or more from the Measured Contamination Level calculated for the immediately preceding calendar quarter, Contractor may require the SBWMA to increase the number of samples to be taken in the following quarter (up to twenty four (24) samples) at Contractor's expense. The result of the increased sampling will be used together with the regularly scheduled sampling to establish the Measured Contamination Level for the material stream for that quarter. 4. Field Procedures The field procedures are described in the following nine (9) steps, and shall be followed by the applicable party: Contractor, Operator, SBWMA, or a third party designated by the SBWMA. • Advanced preparation for regularly scheduled testing • Arrival at Facility for regularly scheduled testing • Scale house coordination • Tipping floor coordination Load selection • Sample collection • Sample sorting • Sample disposal • Data management Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (E1) 3of20 Contractor or its representative shall have the right to be present at, observe, and photograph and video all aspects of the sampling process, including without limitation each of the steps listed above or described below. SBWMA shall be solely responsible for all costs incurred in implementing the sampling process and procedures described in this Attachment E-2, other than (i) costs incurred by Contractor in exercising its observation rights set forth in the preceding paragraph, and (ii) the full cost of conducting additional sampling implemented at Contractor's direction under Section 3. The above field procedures or steps are described in more detail following the explanation of roles. Each step is the responsibility of a specific person or group of people as follows: • sampling crew manager —responsible for identifying selected samples, working with Operator and the sampling crew, quality control, and compliance with Facility regulations. • sampling crew —responsible for sorting samples. • MRF manager —responsible for coordinating with the sampling crew manager. • scale house staff —responsible for identifying selected vehicles, distributing sample placards, and directing drivers towards the sampling area. • tipping floor staff —responsible for creating a designated sampling and sorting area, and ensuring segregation of selected loads in that area. loader opera tor(s)—respon sib le for segregating the selected load from other loads in the designated sampling and sorting area. project manager —responsible for managing the sampling process. facility manager —responsible for managing day-to-day operations at the Designated Transfer and Processing Facility • Contractor— responsible for informing the scale house staff of load origin and material stream and for passing sample placards to the sampling crew manager. Advanced preparation for regularly scheduled testing Before each sampling day, the sampling crew managerwill contact the MRF manager and require the MRF manager to remind the scale house staff, tipping floor staff, loader operator(s), Contractor, and all other affected staff of the sampling plan. The project managerwill also require the facility managerto provide the site's safety standards and disclose if any additional safety training will be required on site. In addition, the project managerwill obtain and inspect all safety equipment and all sorting equipment (see list of supplies in Appendix 3), and develop and print all daily sampling quotas, vehicle selection sheets, placards, and tally sheets prior to beginning each sampling event. See Appendix 2 for sample forms. Contractors, SBWMA staff and/or third parties will meet all requirements of and receive formal training in the safety requirements of the Facility. Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (El) 4of20 Arrival at Facility for regularly scheduled testing The sampling crew and sampling crew manager will arrive at the Designated Transfer and Processing Facility prior to the agreed upon start time to participate in any required safety training and to put on all required personal protective equipment. Before the start time, the sampling crew managerwill also cover logistics with the MRF manager, as well as any needs and expectations for the study period (regardless of the amount of advance communication conducted.) Scale house coordination The sampling crew manager will speak with the scale house staff to explain the basic objectives of the study and provide the scale house staff with a copy of the vehicle selection sheet, as well as sampling placards to identify selected loads (see Appendix 2 for examples of field forms.) The sampling crew manager will ensure the scale house staff understands the needs of the study throughout the day, allowing the scale house staff to plan for transitions such as scheduled breaks and shift changes. Additionally, the sampling crew manager will provide the scale house staff with a means of contacting the sampling crew manager throughout the day. The scale house staff is responsible for identifying selected vehicles using the vehicle selection sheet, provided by the sampling crew manager. The scale house staff will also distribute sampling placards to the Contractor. Tipping floor coordination With the input of the MRF manager and the loader operator(s), the sampling crew manager will determine locations for two (2) designated sampling/sorting areas on or near the tipping floors. There will be one designated sampling/sorting area on the Organic Materials tipping floor and one area on the recyclables tipping floor. These sampling/sorting areas will be in a location in which the sampling crew can identify designated loads entering the tipping area, the loader operator(s) can visually communicate with the sampling crew, and the loader operator(s) can safely remove samples after sorting. Once the sampling crew manager has determined.the locations, the sampling crew will set up the designated sampling/sorting areas. The sampling crew manager will then walk through the process of extracting samples from selected loads with both the loader operator(s) and the tipping house staff. Load selection Contractor and SBWMA shall mutually agree on the random numbers table to be used, the process to select random truckloads for sampling, and the process to select specific cells from each truckload for sampling. When a target Collection vehicle arrives at the Designated Transfer and Processing Facility, the scale house staff will confirm the material stream and origin of the load (e.g., Single -Family Targeted Recyclable Materials from the north geographic area). The scale house staff will copy the sample cell number from the Collection vehicle selection form onto the appropriate sample placard and provide the placard to the driver. A cell number represents the location within a load from which a sample will be extracted and is defined by the map in Figure 1. Additionally, the scale house staff will record the load's net weight on the vehicle selection sheet. Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (El) 5 of 20 The scale house staff will instruct the driver to place the placard in a highly visible place at the front of the truck (e.g., on the dashboard), and will direct the driver where to unload. The placard is the signal to the sampling crew that a load selected for sampling has arrived. The placard is marked with a unique sample identification number and additional information used to randomly select cells, identify loads in photographs, and correlate net weights with sample details. Each placard will be coded according to its corresponding material stream and origin (e.g., 'O-S-01' indicates a load of Single - Family Organic Materials from the south geographic area). Sample collection The tipping house staff will direct the driver to empty the entire truckload of material in an elongated pile on a designated dumping area. To the extent possible, this area shall be clean and the unloaded material shall be segregated from other loads on the tipping floor. The location of the unloading area may change during any given day. The sampling crew manager will collect the placard from the Contractor and, once the load is emptied, will assist the loader operator(s) in locating the appropriate cell for the sample, as noted on the sample placard, using the map shown in Figure 1. The map shown in Figure 1 shall always be oriented with cells 1, 2, 9 and 10 representing the material contained in the front of the truck and cells 7, 8, 15 and 16 representing the material contained in the rear of the truck and unloaded first. The loader operator(s) will then extract the material in the selected cell. The sampling crew manager will guide the loader operator(s) to a designated tarpaulin, and will ensure that the proper quantity of material (one -hundred and twenty five (125) to two hundred and twenty five (225) pounds, depending on the material stream) is unloaded on the tarpaulin. A shovel may be used to add material from the bottom of the cell to ensure the sample includes some heavy and small material that the loader bucket failed to collect. Pulling the tarpaulin taught is a basic test used to estimate sample weight. If it is determined that a sample is too heavy it may be lightened by removing vertical slices from the sample. If it is determined that a sample is too light it may be increased by adding more material. It is important to'add or remove all material in the slice from the top to bottom, to ensure that both small, heavy, and loose materials and large, light, and bagged materials are added or removed. Samples can be queued and stored on tarps until sorted, but samples shall be kept separate. The sampling crew manager will place the sample placard on its respective sample for a photograph and, if the sample is not immediately sorted, wrap the sample in its tarpaulin for later sampling. The sampling crew manager will photograph each load individually with the sample placard visible and legible. Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (E1) 6of20 Figure 1: Sixteen (16) Cell Grid Note: Cells 12, 14 and 16 are below cells 4, 6 and 8, respectively Sample sorting The sampling crew managerwill record the sample identification number, as designated by the placard, on the tally form (see Appendix 2 for an example of this form). The sampling crew will move the sample into the designated sampling/sorting area. The sampling crew and the sampling crew manager will sort the Contamination materials, as defined in Section 5, out of the load and into designated sort receptacles. The sampling crew will then weigh the Contamination materials and the sampling crew managerwill record the weights on the tally form. The remainder of the load —all acceptable items —will be put into receptacles, weighed, and recorded by the sampling crew manager on the tally form. The sampling crew manager is responsible for monitoring the homogeneity of material in each receptacle and ensuring the accuracy of the sorting process. For increased efficiency, the sampling crew manager shall be responsible for either pre-programming the scale with the receptacle tare weights, or recording the receptacle tare weights for subtraction later. At the end of each sampling day the sampling crew and sampling crew manager must comply with any Facility directions regarding cleaning the designated sampling/sorting area and storing sampling and sorting supplies. Sample disposal After the weight of all material in each sample is recorded on the tally sheet, the sampling crew and the sampling crew managerwill move the sample to a location where it is safe and convenient for the loader operator(s) to remove. Data management At the end of each sampling day, the sampling crew manager, Contractor and SBWMA shall review all forms for accuracy and completeness to ensure timely resolution of any disputes or issues that may arise. The sampling crew manager will collect the vehicle selection sheets from the scale house staff and ensure that net weights have been recorded for each selected load. Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (El) 7of20 To ensure the vehicle selection and tally forms are not lost before inputting the data into an electronic form, the sampling crew manager will make copies of all completed forms and will keep the copies in a separate place from the originals. The sampling crew manager will ensure a copy of the form is delivered within one (1) day to the person inputting the data into an electronic form. 5. Sorting categories All loads identified for sorting shall be sorted and weighed into the following two (2) categories: 1) Contamination 2) Targeted Recyclable Materials, Source -Separated Targeted Recyclable Materials, Organic Materials, or Plant Materials 6. Calculations Estimates of Contamination and Targeted Recyclable Materials, Source -Separated Targeted Recyclable Materials, Organic Materials, or Plant Materials will be calculated using a method that gives equal weighting or "importance" to each sample within a given stream. Confidence intervals (error ranges) will be calculated based on assumptions of normality in the composition estimates. In the descriptions of calculation methods, the following variables will be used: • i denotes an individual sample. • j denotes the material type. • c; is the weight of the material type j in a sample. • w is the weight of an entire sample. • r; is the composition estimate for material j (r stands for ratio). • a denotes a region of the state (a stands for area). • s denotes a particular sector or subsector of the waste stream. • n denotes the number of samples in the particular group that is being analyzed at that step. Estimating the Composition The following method will be used to estimate the composition of waste belonging to the Commercial Source -Separated and Targeted Recyclable Materials, Commercial Organic Materials, Commercial Plant Materials, Single -Family Targeted Recyclable Materials, and Single -Family Organic Materials streams. For a given stream, the composition estimate denoted by r; represents the ratio of the component's weight to the total weight of all the samples in the stream. This estimate will be derived by summing each component's weight across all of the selected samples belonging to a given stream and dividing by the sum of the total weight of waste for all of the samples in that stream, as shown in the following equation: Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (El) 8of20 (1) where: • c =weight of particular component • w = sum of all. component weights • for i = 1 to n, where n = number of selected samples • for j = 1 to m, where m = number of components For example, the following simplified scenario involves three samples. For the purposes of this example, only the weights of the component carpet are shown. Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Weight (c) of carpet 5 3 4 Total Sample Weight (w) 80 70 90 _ 5+3+4 80+70+90 To find the composition estimate for the component carpet, the weights for that material are added for all selected samples and divided by the total sample weights of those samples. The resulting composition is 0.05, or five percent (5%). In other words, five percent (5%) of the sampled material, by weight, is carpet. This finding is then projected onto the stratum being examined in this step of the analysis. Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (E1) 9of20 The confidence interval for this estimate will be derived in two (2) steps. First, the variance around the estimate will be calculated, accounting for the fact that the ratio included two (2) random variables (the component and total sample weights). The variance of the ratio estimator equation follows: Van(r) )(=2 where: r � 11 �C—rw; I l n (2) (3) (For more information regarding Equation 2, please refer to Sampling Techniques, 3rd Edition by William G. Cochran [John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1977].) Second, precision levels at the 90 percent (90%) confidence level will be calculated for a component's mean as follows: rj ±(z Var(r.)) (4) where z = the value of the z-statistic (1.645) corresponding to a 90 percent (90%) confidence level. Franchise Agreement for Collection Services with Recology San Mateo County Attachment E-2 (El) 10of20