MSW Management | Portola Valley

By soliciting competitive bids, Portola Valley has taken a big step in implementing a waste diversion program that will significantly reduce both waste going to landfill and waste collection costs. Under a new agreement, the rate of franchised waste diversion rose from about 30% to more than 75%.

Portola Valley is a rural community with a population of approximately 4,600 about 40 mi. south of San Francisco, CA. With its waste management services franchise agreement scheduled to end on June 30, 2002, the Town of Portola Valley hired Environmental Planning Consultants (EPC) of San Jose, CA, in August 2001 to prepare a Request for Proposal (RFP) for collection of garbage, recyclables, and yard trimmings. The RFP was released on September 27, 2001, but because of the holiday season, proposals were not due until January 8, 2002. The town council awarded a new contract on March 27, 2002, and the new services began on July 1, 2002.

EPC began the RFP process by preparing a matrix that described the benefits and disadvantages of a variety of service-related issues. The matrix was provided to the town's decision-makers for review. EPC then met with the town staff and council members to discuss their preferences on each issue before the RFP was prepared. This allows experience gained from past service‹both good and bad‹to guide the form of the contract.

The RFP required bidding contractors to provide the services desired by the town and encouraged contractors to propose alternatives that would provide a higher diversion rate or more efficient service.

Bidders were asked to specify a cost for service at the then-current weekly collection of garbage and every-other-week collection of recyclables and yard trimmings. They were also asked to provide an alternate price for weekly collection of garbage, recyclables, and yard trimmings. This allowed the town to evaluate the benefit of increasing convenience to residents compared with the additional cost for the higher level of service.

Many of the residences in Portola Valley have large lots. The prior franchise agreement provided for backyard collection of garbage for an additional charge, but recyclables were collected only at curbside. Approximately 15% of the residents elected to pay a higher rate to have their garbage collected in their backyards rather than haul it out to the curb. Many of these residents did not participate in the recycling program, however, because they did not want to load their recyclables into their cars to get them to the curbs.

Based on review of contract issues, the town opted to require the collection of recyclables at the same location as garbage to maximize participation in the recycling program and agreed to have the rates reflect that service. Service charges are based on a combination of the amount of garbage set out for collection and the distance the wastes are placed from the point of public access. Each 32-gal. increment of garbage service is charged at the same rate. A 20-gal. mini-can rate is also offered.

EPC drafted the RFPs and the franchise agreement simultaneously, and the two documents were released together. Having the franchise agreement in hand at the time of the proposals allowed bidding contractors to better understand what the municipality expected of them. This reduced the risk to bidders, ultimately leading to lower bids.

Each bidder was required to submit a signed copy of the franchise agreement with its proposal. This allowed the town to negotiate any items but eliminated the need for lengthy negotiations if the town chose to accept the proposal as submitted. Most important, this allowed the town to complete the process more quickly and with less stress.

Three weeks after the release of the RFP, a preproposal conference was held for the town to explain details of the requested services and to answer questions raised by potential proposers. Eight potential proposers attended, and after the conference, EPC prepared written responses to questions concerning both the RFP and the franchise agreement. Proposals were due three weeks later.

EPC, two town staff members and two of the five town council members evaluated the resultant four proposals and made recommendations to the full council on award of the contract.

The town determined that GreenWaste Recovery Inc. of San Jose submitted the most responsive and innovative proposal. In the new program design, residents continue to separate wastes into three categories: garbage, recyclables, and yard trimmings. Garbage continues to be collected manually from 20- or 32-gal. cans provided by the residents. Recyclables are collected from 18-gal. bins supplied by the contractor. Two bins have been provided to each household, and additional bins are available at no charge upon request. Yard trimmings are collected from 32-gal. cans supplied by the residents. Residents may set out unlimited amounts of recyclables and yard trimmings each week at no charge and are charged for collection of all materials based on the amount of garbage they set out.

The list of recyclable materials was expanded from the prior contract and includes all clean paper (e.g., newspaper, white paper, junk mail and catalogs, boxes, and cardboard), all glass (food and beverage containers, plate glass, light bulbs, and other items), all other metal and plastic containers, aseptic containers, aerosol cans, lightweight pieces of scrap metal, all batteries, water-based paint, used motor oil, and automotive oil filters.

Although residents separate their discards into the three streams described above, GreenWaste Recovery collects all of the materials in a single pass using a two-compartment vehicle. All of the recyclables are collected in a single stream, mixing the paper with the beverage containers and other recyclable materials in one compartment. All of the yard trimmings and garbage are collected and mixed together in the other compartment.

When full, or at the end of the route, the collection trucks return to the GreenWaste Recovery processing facility in San Jose. The recyclables are off-loaded and sorted, the contaminants are removed, and the commodity materials are processed for sale. The mixed yard trimmings and garbage are offloaded from the collection vehicles and loaded into transfer trailers for shipment to the Z-Best Compost Facility outside of Gilroy, CA.

At the compost site, the mixed organics are processed to remove contaminants, then they are coarse-shredded and loaded into large plastic tubes (Ag-Bags) for composting. After composting, the material is removed from the plastic bags and screened to remove any remaining contaminants, and the compost is sold.

Commercial collection services mirror the residential collection services but include only two streams: recyclables and garbage. The recyclables are processed with the residential recyclables. All of the materials collected as garbage, including plant trimmings, are processed as compostable materials.

Debris box loads are also taken to the GreenWaste Recovery processing facility, where the loads are sorted to remove wood, scrap metal, gypsum wallboard, and other recyclable materials.

No wastes collected by GreenWaste Recovery are taken to the landfill without first being processed to recover recyclables or produce compost.

The town council adopted an ordinance that requires contractors to recycle at least 50% of construction-and-demolition debris from building projects.

In its bid, the hauler then providing service to the town proposed to lower the residential service rate for its existing services by 7.5%. Another firm proposed an even lower rate for the same weekly garbage and every-other-week recycling service. GreenWaste Recovery proposed weekly collection of both garbage and recyclables for $19.18, 5% less than the prior service rate.

Single-Family Residence, One-Can Curbside Rate (from the rate matrix)
	Prior Contract Price	Lowest-Cost Proposal	New Contractor Rate
Prior agreement	$20.30
Proposed rate for weekly garbage and biweekly recycling	$18.76	$18.28
Proposed rate for weekly garbage and weekly recycling	$27.40	$19.18	$19.18

The town encountered a dilemma in setting rates for residential services. Historically garbage rates have been set to recover the cost for all collection services, with collection of recyclables and greenwaste provided at no additional cost. In this system, residents who recycle all of their containers, paper, and yard trimmings might have had only a 20-gal. garbage can service and, therefore, a very low garbage rate even though they might set out six 32-gal. cans of yard trimmings and unlimited amounts of recyclables every other week.

However, GreenWaste, the new hauler, is collecting and processing only two streams of materials‹recyclables and compostables. So with garbage not a collection category, service rates had to be set on some other basis, such as a flat fee per service recipient or on the volume of all materials set out for collection. Waste management system managers have moved away from the flat fee as a way to encourage residents to reduce wastes, so this option was not considered viable.

If fees in the new system were based on the total volume, the large-volume super-recyclers would have to pay much higher rates. Residents who throw away their discards as garbage but don't generate much in the way of recyclables or plant trimmings would have lower rates. So to maintain the recycling ethic, residents and businesses are still asked to separate garbage from other materials and are charged based solely on the amount of garbage service provided.

The diversion rate for the town was expected to increase from 30% under the prior contract to more than 70% with the new contract. The total diversion rate for the first quarter of service (July 1 to September 30, 2002) was 78%.

GreenWaste Recovery collected 788 tons in the first quarter of service, or an average of 263 tons per month. Of the total, approximately 81.2% (or 640 tons) was collected from residences and businesses, 14.6% (or 115 tons) from debris boxes, and 4.1% (or 33 tons) from the townwide cleanup.

Of the 640 tons collected from residences and businesses, 76% was processed as compostables and 24% as recyclables. Approximately 81% of the compostable materials was diverted from landfill, and 19% was disposed. Approximately 90% of the recyclables was sold for reuse in manufacturing, and less than 10% residue was landfilled.

Of the 115 tons collected in debris boxes (mostly construction and demolition debris) and of the 33 tons recovered at the fall townwide cleanup day, approximately 55% was diverted from landfill.

Town officials believe, however, that it is likely that much of the reported tonnage disposed in the county was inappropriately assigned to the town. The town is continuing discussions with the county and the California Integrated Waste Management Board to resolve this issue, not only for Portola Valley but also for other communities in the state facing the same problem.

In addition to the 841 self-hauled tons reported, 138 tons of plant trimmings were reported as self-hauled to the county landfill (presumably from landscapers) and used as alternative daily cover.

Richard Gertman is principal of Environmental Planning Consultants in San Jose, CA.