The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1993-01-26 - AGENDA REPORTS - COMMERCIAL WASTE AND RECYCLING (2)C It it BUSINESS DATE: SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT: BACKGROUND January 26, 1993 COMMERCIAL WASTE AND RECYCLING COLLECTION OPTIONS Public Works At the regular City Council Meeting of October 13, 1992 Council requested that the City's Integrated Solid Waste Management Committee (ISWMC) evaluate options for the collection of commercial waste and recyclables within the City based on the criteria outlined by Hilton Farnkopf and Hobson. The committee elected to rate the criteria through public participation forums and surveys. Public Participation Forums On November 4, 1992 the committee held a public forum to obtain information from local businesses on the overall level of services they currently receive for the collection of their refuse and recyclables. In addition, City staff presented an overview of the state legislation (AB 939) and Laith Ezzet of Hilton Farnkopf and Hobson presented the various commercial sector waste management options available to the City to achieve the goals mandated by the state. During the forum, business representatives expressed concerns relating to the level, frequency, cost and compliance with environmental regulation including AB 939. Members of the refuse and recycling industries placed a greater emphasis on community impacts and effects on local refuse haulers and recyclers. (See Attachment A.) Hauler Participation On December 9, 1992, the committee invited local haulers and members of the California Disposal Association (CDA) to discuss the strengths, weaknesses and impacts of the waste collection options under consideration. At the meeting a list of common goals were developed. (See attachment B). Survey of Local Businesses During the month of October, approximately 1700 surveys were mailed to local businesses requesting information on their current waste disposal and recycling services and their preference on commercial waste management options. A total of 113 surveys were completed and returned to the City. Of these, approximately 34 percent chose to continue with the existing competitive market for disposal services; 15 percent requested either a franchise, permit or contract; and 51 percent of the respondents did not comment. APPROVED Agendua iw'i'b: Surveys to Cities Telephone surveys were conducted on 33 Los Angeles County cities to determine the trends at which cities similar in size to Santa Clarita are managing the commercial waste stream. The most common method of commercial waste management found in the cities surveyed was a modified permit system with the next being a variation of contracts or franchises (See Attachment C.) INTEGRATED SOLID WASTE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS Overview On November 9, 1992 and December 23, 1992 the committee held meetings to review the comments received from participants at the public forum, the members of the CDA and through the surveys. To meet the goals of AB 939, the committee narrowed the options presented by Hilton, Farnkopf and Hobson (see attachment D) to a modified exclusive permit system for all existing service providers maintaining regularly scheduled service routes for recycling and trash collection. This system was favored since it allows existing haulers to continue servicing the area in a competitive market and at the same time restricts any new hauling companies from conducting waste hauling services within City boundaries. A modified exclusive permit system provides the City with the mechanisms to implement AB 939 programs, to obtain diversion documentation and to establish a revenue source for recycling and source reduction programs. A separate permitting system will be developed for companies that haul recyclables and construction/demolition waste exclusively. The committee's recommendation is based upon a precursory analysis of the City's commerical waste sector needs, and is intended to be used as a framework for City staff to consider during permit negotiations. Administration Administration and monitoring of a modified exclusive permit system by City staff can be either laborious or simplistic, depending on the level of cooperation from the permittees. In either case, permit fees should recover costs for administration. Community Impacts At worst, community environmental impacts through this system will remain at the present level. The number of existing trucks will not increase, since new companies will not be admitted to provide hauling services within the city. At best, existing environmental conditions could improve should some of the existing haulers choose not to renew their permits. The total number of trucks may decrease, thus reducing air and noise pollution and wear and tear on surface streets. Hauler Participation On January 13, 1993 the committee held a follow up meeting with the local haulers and members of the Integrated Solid Waste Management Committee to confirm the common goals and review the modified exclusive permit option and permit conditions. The haulers are receptive to the committee recommendation and are prepared to enter into negotiations with the City. However, it should be noted that the preferred option for the City's three residential haulers is an exclusive commercial franchise with their companies. Conditions of the permit Conditions of the permit would include: • 5 Year term of permit with I annual performance review • Permit fees based on permittees gross revenues or line item fee for AB 939 assessed to all accounts I • Annual percentage base and 'cap for rate adjustments, based on a City rate review analysis • Annual City rate analysis • Unannounced periodic waste audits on permittees by City staff • Permittee will be required to employ a qualified recycling coordinator with basic knowledge of recycling markets and design • Permit to contain specific default provisions • Permittee to establish a volume based rate structure for recyclables and trash approved by the City • Permittee to conduct waste audit and design site specific recycling plans for each client • Develop and implement commercial sector education programs • Annual AB 939 diversion and disposal reports • Permittee to develop a Co-op for common recyclable commodities ie: paper and cardboard • Permittee to maintain performance/cash bonds • Permittee to maintain maximum insurance coverage • Permit will be transferable Enforcement of these permit conditions will enable the City to effectively achieve and monitor AB 939 goals. RECOMMENDATION Direct staff to establish a permit structure incorporating the ISWC recommendation for the collection of regularly scheduled commercial sector waste and recyclables. 2. Direct the Integrated Solid Waste Management Committee to host a public forum to inform businesses of the City's option. Direct staff to notify all regularly scheduled commercial route haulers that the City intends to implement a modified exclusive permit system. Attachments A. Commercial Sector Waste Management Public Forum Minutes B. Common Goals C. City to City Commercial Survey D. Evaluation of Alternative Service Arrangements HI:kg CITY OF SANTA CLARITA Commercial Sector Waste Management Public Forum November 4, 1992 6:30 - 8:30 p.m. The City of Santa Clarita Commercial Sector Waste Management Public Forum began at 6:30 p.m. Participants in the public forum included: Councilwoman, Jo Anne Darcy; Director of Public Works, Jeff Kolin; Solid Waste Coordinator, Hazel Joanes; Public Information Officer, Gail Foy; Art Donnelly; David Ott; Dassi Pintar; Lee Schramling; Gary Johnson; Darrin Randale; Rich Paxman; Steve Banacka; B.J. Atkins; Betty Seldner, Nick Montebon; Andrea Rolston; Charles Caspary; Chip Scholz; Jim Bretthaven; MaryEllen Rapko; Barna Szabo; Laith Ezzet; Perri Jean Schlosser; Nazareth Chobanian; Steve Arklin; Allan Gerber; Dixie Johnson; Dennis Verner. I. General Opening : Director of Public Works, Jeff Kolin began the public forum with an explanation of. AB 939 and an introduction of the Integrated Solid Waste Management Committee and explanation of committee goals. II. Historical Waste Generation Analysis: Solid Waste Coordinator, Hazel Joanes exhibited a slide presentation and reported on: 1990 Waste Generation figures 1990 Waste Stream By Sector 1990 Waste Composition 1990/1992 Comparative Disposal Analysis III. Laith Ezzet, representative of Hilton, Farnkopf, and Hobson reported on various commercial collection options. IV. Director of Public Works, Jeff Kolin outlined the following discussion Workshop Topics: A. Who is your waste disposal service provider? B. What is the term of your current waste disposal contract? C. What factors do you consider when selecting your disposal company? D. What is your current levels of service? E. During the past five years how many different disposal companies have served your business? F. Does your business recycle? G. Are your recyclables collected by your current disposal company? Attachment A H. Are. your recyclables collected by a private recycler? . I. In order of priority, what criteria should the City follow when selecting a waste management option? V. Participant Comments: • Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital would like information from the waste haulers .on minimums for cost efficiency. • They are concerned about disposal regulations they must meet for infectious and hazardous waste. All options must be consistent with current regulations for hazardous and special waste. • Several business requested green waste programs • Chiquita Lzndfrll - is interested in supporting green waste with expansion of their landill. They would like the City's support in obtaining a compost and facility permit • Suggestion to businesses to use mulchers for trimming Dawns • Cal Arts - Concerned about a standard rate's impact/rate increase • Commercial recycling will change the waste stream • Will exclusions affect commercial as it affected residential? • Haulers that are currently providing service and who do not receive a "contract" will have 5 years to phase out their service. VI. Workshop Question Answers: A. Who is your waste disposal service provider? • Blue Barrel • Security Environment Services (SES) • Atlas • Santa Clarita Disposal • Waste Management • AWM (San Fernando Valley Co.) • Rent A Bin 2 B. What is the term of your current waste disposal contract? • Atlas - 60 days • Santa Clarita Disposal - 1 year - 30 day C. What factors do you consider when selecting your disposal company? • Cost • Reliability • Which landfill will be used • Quality of service • Regulatory compliance • Are they a local company? • Frequency and availability of hauler to be there (responsiveness) D. What is your current levels of service? • 6 days/week (Cal Arts) • Larger capacity capability • Trucks well maintained • 6 day/week service (i1NIId MI) • Special servicelpromptness E. During the past five years how many different disposal companies have served your business? One person changed service in the last 5 years due to technology F. Does your business recycle? 5-6 companies are currently recycling G. Are your recyclables collected by your current disposal company? Cal Arts - by Atlas Disposal H. Are your recyclables collected by a private recycler? • Cal Arts White paper, newspaper,- magazines, cans, computer paper, plastic, wood pallets -,composted, grass, cardboard (25%), process is co -mingled. • Rent -A -Bin - Grinds wood for fuel 3 • Sterling Development - Computer paper, cans, plastics (self hauler) • Atkin Environmental Health - Self haulers _- paper, cans • Acoustic Authority - Recycles cardboard • HMNMH - No organized recycling I. In order of priority, what criteria should the City follow when selecting a waste management option? • Convenient commercial recycling • SCV Environmental Recycling Workshop sponsored by the Santa Clarita Chamber of Commerce slated for January 1993. They would like to work -with the City and share information • Santa Clarita Disposal Company - service provider security • Covell concerned with community impacts and using existing and local companies • Gary Johnson (CMS) - Concerns regarding ability to provide education. Disposal for his technology, ability to comply with AB 939, service providers • HN94NM - service level and compliance with regulations • Sterling Development concerns regarding AE939 compliance • Cal Arts concerns regarding community impacts and rates; require AB 939 plan from business • Require AB 939 plan from business VII. Closing Comments: Director of Public Works, Jeff Kolin outlined the City of Santa Clarita Commercial Sector Public Survey sent to all businesses within the City of Santa Clarita and delivered the closing comments to the forum participants. VIII. Adjournment: At 8:30 p.m. Director of Public Works, Jeff Kolin adjourned the Commercial Sector Waste Management Public Forum. F1 COMMON GOALS • Provide recycling programs to commercial business • Provide ongoing education to business on need for and benefits of recycling • Provide flexibility to recycle multiple materials • Provide greenwaste program for commercial accounts • Achieve AB 939 goals • Develop revenue for City to pay AB 939 costs • Opportunity for local haulers to continue to collect trash • Make system easy to monitor and control • Preserve competition • Maintain and hopefully reduce the impacts on our environment (noise, air, traffic, road wear) Attachment B City to City Commercial Survey Of the cities in LA County we polled, there are: 10 with franchises or contracts. The contract time limits range from 3 years to 10 year evergreen. Most of the contracts require city approval of the rates, but some do not. Most of the contracts were put out to bid. 60% .of the contracts/franchises had franchise fees. 11 have modified permit systems. 80% of these systems require city -approved rates. Permit fees, if any, were based on: flat fee (30%)' percentage of revenue (30%) 8 cities have open systems. 2 cities have no commercial activity within their limits. 1 city hauls waste as part of the city function. \iswm\ctreMIt.M Attachment C 1 City of Santa Clarita November 4,1992 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE SERVICE ARRANGEMENTS ' Rating for ft with evaluation criteria' A = Excellent; B = Good; C = Fair Attachment D C Hilton Farnkopf & Hobson 10