Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0431.003 2002-2004 J,.1V Oi y,~ _ ~~~iLC.'. Harry Kim Barbara Bell Mayor - Director .aJ... 4 . ri~ 1TE Of.N'.jl! 11,II1xTi'~~1 DE 2I~lIMtt DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 25 Aupuni Stree[, Room 208 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4252 (808) 961-8083 • Fax (808) 961-8086 January 5, 2004 HONORABLE JAMES ARAKAKI ~ ` 1 AND MEMBERS z n z HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL ~ ~ :T. 25 AUPUNI STREET HILO, HI 96720 3 ~ i, SUBJECT: RESOLUTION 136-03 AUTHORIZING MULTI-YEAR CONTRACT I~R ORGANICS DIVERSION We are submitting additional information for your review and in response to your questions received December 31, 2003. If you require clarification or additional information, please call me at 961-8084. Barbara Bell DIItECTOR attachment . Ne. y31. 3 Ref. Tot r!s~e~r L Ref. Do?e - VNtV or ryw Ilarry Kim ~ ~ ~ ~ Barbara Bell Mayor ~r ~:Y:erq.~, Director ~r'.....•:+~ • Os M• ~IT1tIt'~Ty1 II~ ~ZY~1T2T'tt DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 25 Aupuni Street, Room 210 • Hilo, Hawat'i 96720-4252 (808) 961-8083 • Fax (808) 961-8086 January 5, 2004 Background on Resolution 136-03 Authorizing Multi-Year Contract for Organics Diversion Requirement for Greenwaste Diversion Program: Department of Health, Hawaii Administrative Rules Title 11, Chapter 58.1 'Solid Waste Management Control' 11-58.1-65 Soecial solid waste controls. (b) Green wastes. Solid waste disposal facilities shall have in place by December 31, 1994, a plan to ban or require source separation of green waste from entering the disposal facility. The plan shall detail requirements for diversion of seventy- five percent of all commercially generated green waste by December 31, 1995 and fifty percent of all residential green waste by December 31, 1996. If, based on data submitted by the operator as part of the annual report, these diversion rates are not achieved, all commercial green waste shall be banned from the facility by December 31, 1995, and residential green waste by December 31, 1996." • Greenwaste program initiated in 1995 in East Hawaii and expanded to West Hawaii in 1999. • Diversion of greenwaste has grown from approximately 150 tons in 1995 to an estimated 17,700 tons in this fiscal year; approximately 8.6% of the island's total waste stream. • County's current greenwaste diversion program allows for both residential and commercial diversion with no tipping fees. • Before initiation of diversion program, greenwaste was estimated at 10- 13% of the waste stream entering landfill. Reasons to expand greenwaste diversion to "organics diversion" Thirty percent of the waste entering landfill is characterized as "organic" of which approximately 15% is food waste and 9% is clean (untreated) lumber waste. • Expanding to an "organics' diversion program allows for additional diversion from landfill by channeling food waste, untreated lumber and other organics, which can be included in properly processed compost. • Additional diversion of other types of organics will be achieved at no additional cost to the County, as the price agreement will be based solely on the net tonnage of greenwaste diverted at Hilo and Kona. We estimate 15% of food scraps can be diverted. This is 2% of our total waste stream. • The largest and least cost gains in overall diversion can be achieved quickly through "organics' diversion. • Greenwaste is generally not used as fuel stock for incinerators and other types of waste to energy technologies as it is mostly water and must be processed first for that type of use. Reasons to require composting per US Composting Council under its Seal of Testing Assurance program: • Composting produces avalue-added product that is much in demand by our island's diversified agriculture and landscaping industries. • Composting eliminates concerns of spreading invasive weed species and other undesirable alien species including insects, diseases, and vertebrate pests such as coqui frogs, fire ants, and caterpillars. • Requiring US Composting Council's seal ensures a quality product that meets all requirements relating to public health and safety. RFP No. 2036-Process and Timeline • Initially published on March 16, 2003 with initial deadline for responses on April 30, 2003, • Pre-proposal conference held on April 10, 2003, • Questions brought to the floor at the pre-proposal conference were addressed in Addendum No. 1 dated April 25, 2003 and response deadline was extended to June 30, 2003, • Addendum No. 2, dated June 10, 2003, was issued to remind proposers of limitations on disposal of specific types of organic waste when the East Hawaii landfill closes, • An evaluation committee was developed consisting of expertise from within the Department of Environmental Management and from outside sources including the University of Hawaii and an agency that works closely with the U.S.D.A., • The evaluation committee ranked the proposals, requested additional information from the proposers, and conducted reference checks before making a recommendation to the Director, • The Director accepted the recommendations of the evaluation committee and negotiations are in progress with the top choice and proceeding well, • No information about the number of proposals and the specific content of any of the proposals can be made public until the rontract is awarded. 2 Organics Diversion Program Assumptions: Solid Waste generated on island increases by 4% per year. Food waste approximately 15% of island's waste stream. None currently diverted. • Untreated or compostable lumber approximately 9% of waste stream. None currently diverted. Organic materials will be processed into certified compost and provide a local product to offset imports from other islands and mainland. This provides an economic advantage to local landscape and agricultural industries. • Greenwaste must be treated (processed and dried) for use in incineration and must be processed (shredded) for other forms of waste reduction technologies. Required processing drives up the costs of utilizing greenwaste in waste reduction technologies, thus composting is more economical. • Fiscal Year ending 2003, the total island waste stream was 204,000 tons of which 31,000 tons (15.2%) were diverted of which 17,500 tons were greenwaste. Results of approving aMulti-vear contract: Can expect price breaks as incoming raw greenwaste collections increase. • Overall diversion from organics program anticipated to be 13.5%. Costs decline as tonnage increases thus County of Hawaii will receive price breaks. % of greenwaste diverted is expected to remain constant. • Price over term of contract will vary between $40-55/ton. 3 COUNCIL QUESTIONS ORGANICS DIVERSION MULTI-YEAR PRICE CONTRACT QUESTIONS FROM JAMES Y. ARAKAKI, COUNCIL CHAIR 7. Why wasn't the resolution and RFP brought to the council for approval before it went out since the RFP refers to a five-year agreement with an additional five-year option to renew? We began work on this RFP in October, 2002. In working with Dominic Yagong as Chair of the Parks and Environmental Management Committee, then Gary Safarik, there were many communications about what the Department was working on and why. The resolution was not formally brought to the Council before notification because there was very little information that could have been given to you at that time. We knew our hopes only. We had few ideas about what we might find. The Council has consistently deferred issues when there is insufficient information. A Request for Proposals does not require Council approval before public notification. Also, upon discussion with Corporation Counsel, I decided that since the RFP did not promise future year funding, there was certainly no need to introduce the Resolution so early in the process. The RFP states (page 23, Specifications) that "This shall be a price agreement and at all times subject to the availability of funds." And later on page 23, "Agreement renewals shall be subject to the availability and appropriation of funds by the County Council." 2. Why did the Department of Environmental Management decide on a five-year agreement plus five-year administrative renewal option? In researching other operations around the state it became obvious that the County could not offer a fully improved site for any vendor, this being the largest up-front capital expense. For example, Maui County spent approximately $1 Million on a composting site, ultimately for a private company. Our solution was to ask for proposals where a vendor would recoup their significant capital improvements and investments over a per ton cost. In a one-year contract, even renewable, we did not believe we would interest any vendors. We believe 5 years is the shortest time frame for a vendor to recover their costs and for the County to be able to afford afirst-rate composting program. In fact, at the pre-proposal meeting, potential vendors asked if the term could be lengthened to 7 years. 3. Was the chair of the environmental management committee asked to serve on the selection and evaluation committee? If not, why? The Chair of Parks and Environmental Management Committee was kept apprised of the RFP and evaluation efforts. The RFP proposals are technically specific and need to be drafted, as well as evaluated, by people with the necessary expertise. A Solid Waste expert from the Rural Community Assistance Corporation performed free research for the Department, as well as served on the evaluation committee. We also enlisted a volunteer, a Professor Emeritus from the UHH Agriculture program. 4 4. What are the three options proposed? What are the differences? There were not 3 options proposed. Each proposer was required to bid on greenwaste and could propose on the optional items of animal carcasses; fats, oils, & greases; food scraps, gypsum, paper fiber, and biosolids. 5. What will be the cost to the County? We are still negotiating with the best proposer for an exact price. Some variables still exist, mostly around the siting. Other issues are quantity discounts as greenwaste amounts increase each year, and how quickly they can get a composting permit from the State Department of Health. The price-term agreement will be approximately $1.1 million per year or between $40$55/ton of greenwaste. There is no cost to the county for the optional materials diverted and composted. 6. How will it be financed? There are two options for actual revenue. 1) The Solid Waste Fund, with the projected increased revenues of $1,108,157 for FY 04-05; or 2) implement a small tip fee for commercial greenwaste to partially fund the program. At present volumes, projected annual revenues on a commercial greenwaste tip fee are shown below. Setting commercial greenwaste tip fees at 25% of our solid waste tip fee would result in revenues of $181,500 in the next fiscal year. OF SOLID WASTE POSSIBLE TIP FEE IN DOLLARS, BASED ON PROJECTED TIP FEE COMMERCIAL GREENWASTE ISLAND-WIDE Fiscal Year endin 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Ti fee-$/ton $45 $55 $65 $75 $85 ons commercial reenwaste diverted per ear* 12,000 13,200 14,520 15,972 17,569 10% $ 54,000 $ 72,600 $ 94,380 $ 119,790 $ 149,338 15% $ 81,000 $ 108,900 $ 141,570 $ 179,685 $ 224,007 Commercial 20% $ 108,000 $ 145,200 $ 188,760 $ 239,580 $ 298,676 Greenwaste tip fee as % of 25°/ $ 135,000 $ 181,500 $ 235,950 $ 299,475 $ 373,346 Solid Waste Tip Fee 30% $ 162,000 $ 217,800 $ 283,140 $ 359,370 $ 448,015 40% $ 216,000 $ 290,400 $ 377,520 $ 479,160 $ 597,353 50% $ 270,000 $ 363,000 $ 471,900 $ 598,950 $ 746,691 NOTE: Projected annual increase in greenwaste tonnage is based on anticipated 10% growth in greenwaste diversion each year (based on historic increases and greenwaste as a percentage of total the island's waste stream). *Commercial greenwaste is estimated at 60% of total greenwaste collections. 5 Also, we will have substantial cost savings with this program. The composting ingredients are anticipated to include 80% greenwaste, 10% food waste, and 10% compostable wood waste. This will prevent approximately 5,000 tons of food and wood waste from going into the landfills annually. At present volumes, diversion of just the food and wood waste saves us 10 days worth of landfill air space island-wide and will add 2.5% to our overall landfill diversion rate. Food waste is presently 15.5% of our waste, an extremely difficult waste stream to capture, and consumes more volume by weight than other solid waste. The following chart shows potential savings. Food Waste as 10% of compost ingredients Fiscal Years Endin 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 ons of Food Waste Diverted from landfill* 2000 2200 2420 2662 2928 i Fee $/ton $45 $55 $65 $75 $85 County Costs to landfill $ 68.27 $ 87.12 $ 97.02 $ 102.66 $ 102.21 Difference between ip fee and costs to Count $ 23.27 $ 32.12 $ 32.02 $ 27.66 $ 17.21 Reduced costs to he Count $46,540 $ 70,664 $ 77,488 $ 73,631 $ 50,394 * Annual increase in tonnage projected at 10% Wood waste is another of the top 10 components of our waste steam. Approximately 9% of the waste stream is clean lumber (untreated). Following is a chart of savings if only one-half of the clean lumber is diverted from landfill. 6 Compostable wood scraps as 10% of compost ingredients Fiscal Years Endin 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 ons of Compostable oods Scraps diverted rom landfill* 2000 2200 2420 2662 2928 i Fee $/ton $45 $55 $65 $75 $85 Count Costs to landfill $ 68.27 $ 87.12 $ 97.02 $ 102.66 $ 102.21 Difference between tip fee nd costs to Count $ 23.27 $ 32.12 $ 32.02 $ 27.66 $ 17.21 Reduced costs to the Count $ 46,540 $ 70,664 $ 77,488 $ 73,631 $ 50,394 ` Annual increase in tonnage projected at 10% 7. How much of the total waste stream will be diverted by the Organics Diversion and Composting Program? In the first year we project 25,000 tons of organic matter or between 13 and 14% of total solid waste. We expect 4% annual growth in waste island-wide. Greenwaste diversion has grown exponentially in the last decade, so we project an annual increase of 10% for organic waste over the next five years. This fiscal year, through December, greenwaste collections are up 25% over last year. 8. Will the department quantify this diversion into specific measurable numbers for the council/public? Of course. This is a number we track very carefully. In FY 2001-02 total landfill diversion was 13%, in FY 2002-03 it was 15%. Increased diversion has resulted from aggressive scrap metal recycling and significant increases in greenwaste diversion. Continuing with our present greenwaste and scrap metal diversion success, and the addition of community recycling centers this year, we are projecting diversion rates will be about 18-20% for the current Fiscal Year. 9. What is the cost benefit analysis of this program? Cost to County: • $45/ton (long term average with food and wood waste included) Benefits to County: Maintaining good faith effort on State Department of Health regulation that 75 % of all commercial greenwaste and 50% of all residential greenwaste shall be diverted 7 from landfilling. If we do not achieve this, DOH will require us to ban all greenwaste from landfills. HAR, Title 11, DOH, §11-58.1-65. • Foregone landfill costs of approximately $32/ton (actual landfill cost minus tip fee) Benefits to Others: • Economic advantage to agriculture and landscape industry from import substitution • Approximately 15 new jobs, island-wide. $11.47/hour laborers and $13.51/hour for operators/drivers are the statewide rates. HMR employs only 6 people now. 10. What is the cost benefit analysis of a curbside collection program? We understand that Maui County pays $26/house/month for trash only pickup. This is for most of the island, but not all. Approximately 10% of households use transfer stations like ours. They are just starting a separate greenwaste pickup program, in the denser areas, as a pilot project. 11. What is the total capital expenditure to be expended by each vendor? We do not have dollar figures for this. Any successful vendor would be required to finance their site, site improvements (fencing, scales, buildings), equipment costs including tub grinders, and training of new employees. We estimated about $10/ton when we evaluated proposals. 12. How will sludge and greenwaste be reused in each of the proposals? Biosolids were optional organic materials that vendors could propose to divert. Not all proposals addressed the diversion of Biosolids. Biosolids are a by-product that our wastewater treatment plants produce. Biosolids are a more processed product than sludge. 13. What end products are proposed to be introduced? US Composting Council certified compost and nursery blends. These include blends with cinder, sand, animal manure, and decorative mulch. 14. What are the intended target markets and has the Review Committee evaluated the feasibility of these markets? The resorts, large landscapers, and diversified agriculture businesses presently import compost from Oahu and Maui's organics diversion programs. There are many brands of compost, soil amendments, and other soil enhancement products that are imported from the mainland. Target markets have been evaluated as feasible. 8 QUESTIONS FROM LENINGRAD ELARIONOFF, COUNCIL MEMBER 1. What is the goal of the administration in reference to solid waste? To keep as much as possible out of our landfills, island-wide. To use our resources wisely, efficiently and in acost-effective manner. To maximize existing airspace at all landfills. 2. Is the goal to reduce the waste stream by recycling, so the remainder can be shipped across the island to landfill? The immediate goal is to reduce the waste stream by low tech methods including recycling, reuse, education on waste reduction, and by any and all other means. Another near-term goal is to ultimately reduce the waste stream by high tech methods. 3. Is recycling a part of the total answer to the solid waste problem or an effort to pacify a certain segment of the public? Recycling is absolutely a part of the total answer. Landfill costs don't get cheaper as the years go by, and landfills are a huge commitment of resources. 4. Is cross-island trucking of East Hawaii's trash considered a problem or only a solution? Trucking trash from one side of the island to the other is a short-term solution to a much larger problem. I think we all agree that dealing with our solid waste is an issue we must deal with right now. 5. Is it a forgone conclusion that Hilo will not have another landfill? Nothing has been done to foreclose on that solution, therefore that conclusion could be reached. 6. If there is a decision to reduce the waste material through gasification, will the administration consider trucking waste material from a greater amount of collection sites to be processed before hauling it to the West Side landfill? We will consider whatever is the most efficient operation. It would seem if a gasification plant is the long-term solid waste solution, a private company would be running the operation. The County will certainly work together with a private company, as we do with Waste Management at Pu'uanahulu, to find the best solutions for all the people of the island. 9 HISTORIC ANALYSIS OF GREENWASTE DIVERSION PROGRAM Fiscal Year Endin Hilo Kona TotallTons % increase Total Amount/$ 1995 150 15 1996 749 749 400°/ 1997 1,138 1,138 52°/ 1998 1,498 1,498 32°/ 1999 3,063 3,063 105°/ 2000 3,554 2,170 5,72 87°/ 2001 4,864 4,086 8,951 56°/ $ 283,636.11 2002 5,79 6,202 11,99 34°/ $ 384,496.36 2003 7,77 6,392 14,17 18°/ $ 452,836.81 2004* 8,850 8,850 17,70 25°/ $ 630,000.00 2005" 10,00 10,000 20,00 13°/ $ 1,100,000.00 * Estimate based on data from July 1, 2003 thru Dec. 31, 2003 Estimate based on anticipated increased greenwaste/organics diversion and composting versus mulching greenwaste Potential Revenues from a Commercial Greenwaste Tip Fee: A minimum of $181,500 a year, if tip fee is set at 25% of the solid waste tip fee. Potential revenues increase as solid waste tip fee increases. Potential Landfill Operating Savings from including optional organic materials: Food Waste = $70,664 Wood Waste = 70 664 $141,328 Potential Quantified Benefits-Revenues & Landfill Ops Savings: $322,828 Potential Non-Quantified Benefits: Locally made compost product substitutes for imports and reduces cost of business for landscape and agriculture industry. • Certified compost reduces risk of spreading unwanted pests, pathogens and weed species. • Frees up precious air space in island's landfills by eliminating additional organic materials such as food and wood waste and extends landfill life. • Reduces fire risks and labor costs to the County relating to managing mulch piles. • Reduces negative externalities such as fugitive dust and foul odors. 10