HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/18/2015 (3) SpecialCallINDIAN RIVER COUNTY
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
BOARD MEMORANDUM
Date: March 11, 2015
To: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
From: Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility ServicescvAc Leo V6
Prepared By: Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director, Solid Waste Disposal District •Th•
Subject: Summary of Results for RFP No. 2015023 Solid Waste and Recyclables Collection
Services, Input on Policy Decisions and Recommendations for Award
DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS:
The Indian River County (IRC) Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) is responsible for providing for the
collection, transportation, and disposal services for regulated solid waste in Unincorporated Indian River
County as well as recycling services throughout Indian River County. Currently, these services are
provided through exclusive residential and non-exclusive commercial Franchise Agreements with
Republic Services of Florida, L.P. d/b/a Treasure Coast Refuse and Waste Management Inc. of Florida.
These franchise agreements expire on September 30, 2015.
On December 16, 2014, the SWDD Board approved the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the
Solid Waste & Recyclables Collection Services (RFP#2015023). On March 3, 2015, the SWDD Board
approved staff recommendation to provide a summary presentation only with no voting by the Board
on Tuesday, March 17, 2015 and scheduled a Special Call Meeting for 9:00 am on Wednesday, March
18, 2015 to obtain public input and award RFP#2015023. On March 3, 2015, the SWDD Board also
approved distribution of 45,000 "Decision Time!" notices (see Attachment 1) to residents at the
Customer Convenience Centers, through the franchised haulers, and at various County offices. Several
printed and radio outlets were engaged to spread the message of the important solid waste and recycling
decisions being made as part of the RFP process.
The purpose of this agenda item is to provide the SWDD Board and the public with a summary of the
RFP process, the various service options that were considered, input on the various policy decisions that
need to be made and recommendations for award of RFP#2015023 with an overall goal to provide a high
level of service for the solid waste and recycling services at the lowest possible cost to our residents
while increasing recycling in Indian River County.
This process aligns with the approved 2014 Solid Waste Master Plan and the SWDD Board's commitment
to increase recycling participation to reach the Florida Legislature's goal of achieving 75% recycling by
the year 2020. Indian River County's 2013 published recycling rate was 37% which triggered a letter from
SWDD Agenda - Summary of Results for RFP, Input on Policy Decisions and Recommendations for Award Page 1
1
the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) requesting a plan by July 1, 2015 on what
IRC is doing and how it plans to achieve the state goal of 75% by 2020. The policy decisions by the SWDD
Board in awarding this RFP will shape our response to the FDEP.
ANALYSIS:
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE:
Historically, Indian River County has grown from a very rural community to an urban developed
community. In terms of solid waste services, we have gone from "dump" sites to a modern
engineered/permitted landfill. As far back as 1959, we have records that a franchise for solid waste
collection was issued in Indian River County where it is estimated that we had a population of
approximately 25,000. Per the latest census data, the population of Indian River County is 140,955 as of
April 1, 2014. This is approximately an 82% increase in 55 years. During this time, we have closed six (6)
"dump" sites and replaced five (5) of them with Customer Convenience Centers (CCC). In terms of future
disposal space, currently we have capacity at our landfill through 2058 at the current disposal and
recycling rate; however, through better recycling diversion, we have an opportunity to extend the
capacity through 2101 if we reach the State of Florida recycling goal of 75% by the year 2020.
EXISTING SERVICE:
In terms of our existing solid waste and recycling franchised collection service, the SWDD Board has two
exclusive service areas for the following: 1) subscription residential solid waste, yard waste, and bulk
waste collection within Unincorporated IRC; 2) universal dual -stream recycling collection throughout IRC
via interlocal agreements with the five municipalities; 3) an exclusive right to compete for commercial
solid waste collection service as well as Construction and Demolition (C&D) debris collection service in
containers 15 cubic yards and greater in size within Unincorporated IRC. All of the services listed above
are exclusive to the franchise haulers in order to obtain the lowest price for our residents. To provide an
opportunity for smaller haulers, the collection of C&D debris in containers less than 15 cubic yards is a
non-exclusive right to SWDD approved service providers within Unincorporated IRC.
RFP SERVICE OPTIONS:
Per SWDD Board approval in December 2014, the RFP was structured to modify the current system
slightly in that both residential and commercial services areas would be exclusive to a specific franchise
service area (North or South). In addition, at the request of the City of Fellsmere, they were added to the
North Solid Waste Franchise Area with a provision that their inclusion is subject to approval by their City
Council.
The various service options under consideration have an overall goal of continuing to move Indian River
County forward in an environmentally and economically sound manner while providing a high level
service for our residents.
Proposers were asked to provide pricing for several different residential service options as listed below.
The term "2-1-1" represents twice -a -week garbage service, once -a -week yard waste service and once -a -
week recycling service. Similarly; "1-1-1" represents once -a -week garbage service, once -a -week yard
waste service and once -a -week recycling service.
• Service Option #1A — 2-1-1 manual collection, subscription basis
SWDD Agenda - Summary of Results for RFP, Input on Policy Decisions and Recommendations for Award Page 2
2
• Service Option #1B — 2-1-1 manual collection, universal in the Urban Service Area (USA),
subscription outside of the USA
• Service Option #2A — 2-1-1 carted collection, subscription basis
• Service Option #2B — 2-1-1 carted collection, universal in the USA, subscription outside of USA
• Service Option #3A —1-1-1 carted collection, subscription basis
• Service Option #3B —1-1-1 carted collection, universal in the USA, subscription outside of USA
Proposers were also asked to provide pricing for the following curbside recycling service options:
• Dual -stream bins
• Single -stream carts
In addition, proposers were asked to provide the unit price discount they would offer if the SWDD
purchased the carts. In order to obtain best prices for our residents, proposers were asked to provide
pricing to service the North Service Area, the South Service Area, or a combined One Service Area.
Similarly, proposers were asked to provide pricing for exclusive commercial service in the North Service
Area, the South Service Area, or a combined One Service Area. C&D collection service using containers
15 cubic yards and greater in size is also included in the commercial service area.
EVALUATION CRITERIA:
The Selection Review Committee was comprised of the Utilities Director, the Budget Director and the SWDD
Managing Director. The following table provides the RFP evaluation criteria:
Evaluation Criteria
Maximum Evaluation Points
Qualifications and References
15
Technical Proposal
15
Participation Growth Strategy
5
Financial Proposal
65
Total Points Possible
100
Per the RFP, the Selection Review Committee was responsible for reviewing only the first three criteria
while the Purchasing Manager was responsible for reviewing the fourth criteria. Specific details about
each criteria is presented below.
QUALIFICATION AND REFERENCES:
This criteria evaluated each proposal in terms of recent company experience, personnel, references,
transition experience, non-performance history and overall financial capability to provide the services
requested in the RFP. There was a total limit of 30 pages with a maximum of 15 points available for this
criteria.
TECHNICAL PROPOSAL:
This criteria evaluated each proposal in terms of their method of collection, level of automation, and
how materials would be handled following collection. In addition, this criteria requested transition and
SWDD Agenda - Summary of Results for RFP, Input on Policy Decisions and Recommendations for Award Page 3
3
customer service plan, asset management and Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) based service
approach as well as the associated reports. Finally, this criteria requested an organization chart and to
see if they had any exceptions to the draft franchise agreement that was included in the RFP. There was
a total limit of 20 pages with a maximum of 15 points available for this criteria.
PARTICIPATION GROWTH STRATEGY:
This criteria evaluated each proposal on their approach to helping us achieve the 75% recycling goal as
well as to help us increase residential subscription service in the Unincorporated IRC. There was a total
limit of 10 pages with a maximum of 5 points available for this criteria.
FINANCIAL PROPOSAL:
The RFP process included the submittal of an excel spreadsheet that was created by our RFP consultant,
Kessler Consulting, to establish an apple -to -apple response for all of the service options included in the
RFP. The Purchasing Manager utilized the excel spreadsheet submitted by each RFP respondent to
financially rank each firm based on a maximum of 65 points available for this criteria.
RFP RESULTS:
Advertising Date: January 6, 2015
RFP Opening Date: February 20, 2015
Demandstar Broadcast to: 756 Subscribers
Specification Requested by: 34 Firms
Attendees to Mandatory Pre-bid: 23 individuals (representing 8 prospective firms and the general public/press)
Replies: 4 Firms (Advanced Disposal Services, Republic Services of Florida, Waste
Management Inc. of Florida, and Waste Pro of Florida)
RFP PROTEST:
A few days prior to the date established for acceptance of proposals, WCA Waste Corporation submitted a
letter of protest, requesting the names, addresses, service level and monthly billing information for all
commercial customers in each franchise area, as well as an extension to the RFP while this data was
obtained. SWDD does not have access to this level of detailed information on commercial accounts, and
does not contractually require it be provided, but had requested it from the existing franchisees in late 2014
and again after the RFP was issued. In the RFP and following addenda, proposers were provided the
commercial data available to SWDD, as well as estimated commercial customer counts in the realigned
franchise areas. After conferring with SWDD staff and the office of the County Attorney, the Purchasing
Manager determined SWDD could not provide the requested data, denied the protest and informed WCA
of their right to appeal within seven days. RFPs were accepted as scheduled at which time WCA submitted
a statement of "No Bid" and did not file a notice to appeal.
On March 6, 2015, Republic Services submitted a protest because the scoring and ranking tabulation
released at the conclusion of the Selection Review Committee meeting showed only the total points
assessed by each member of the selection committee, and did not break out the points by individual
evaluation criteria. The protest alleged SWDD failed to comply with the scoring criteria as stated in the RFP
and that the Committee members arbitrarily reached their total scores for each firm. They also protested
the technical scoring criteria, weight and applicability across the varied service options. After conferring
with SWDD and the office of the County Attorney, the Purchasing Manager determined the scoring in both
SWDD Agenda - Summary of Results for RFP, Input on Policy Decisions and Recommendations for Award Page 4
4
matters was executed in compliance with the RFP, and provided the evaluation forms completed by the
committee members prior to the Selection Review Committee meeting, showing points per criteria, to each
respondent. On March 10, 2015, Republic was notified of the denial of their protest and their right to appeal
before the Board, if a written notice of intent to appeal is made.
TOTAL RANKINGS:
Per the RFP, members of the Selection Review Committee independently evaluated and scored each
proposal on the technical criteria. On February 27, 2015, the Selection Review Committee met with the
Purchasing Manager and scores from each committee member were combined to calculate an average
point value for each firm. This average technical score was then added to the financial scores calculated
for each service option by the Purchasing Manager per the formula outlined in the RFP, and a ranking
for each service option anticipated for consideration was identified. The final rankings of the selection
review committee are provided as Attachment 2.
Waste Management is the top ranked proposer for 46 out of the 54 service options scored, whereas
Waste Pro is the top ranked proposer for the other 8 service options scored. Overall, Waste Management
and Waste Pro are the two top ranked proposers for all service options scored for RFP#2015023.
RFP SERVICE OPTIONS:
Per SWDD Board approval in December 2014, the RFP was structured to modify the current system
slightly in that both residential and commercial services areas would be exclusive to a specific franchise
service area (North or South). In addition, at the request of the City of Fellsmere, they were added to the
North Solid Waste Franchise Area with a provision that their inclusion is subject to approval by their City
Council.
The various service options under consideration have an overall goal of continuing to move Indian River
County forward in an environmentally and economically sound manner while providing a high level
service for our residents. The following discussion focuses on the key decisions to be made by the Board.
For most service options, the overall cost of service is lower if a single vendor services both Service Areas.
However, for comparison purposes, this discussion provides pricing for a single service area (service by
the top-ranked vendor) and for two service areas (serviced by the first and second ranked vendors).
For most service options, the unit cost of garbage/yard waste/bulk waste collection decreases, but the
cost of recycling, whether with dual -stream bins or single -stream carts, increases. This increase reflects
the fact that as the SWDD strives to increase recycling participation, the level of effort required by the
collection service providers will also need to increase. For single stream options, the need to purchase
new carts further increases this cost. While staff anticipates that single stream recycling will increase
participation and helps move SWDD toward the goal of 75 in 5, this comes at an increased cost. The
single stream (carted) option results in a cost/lost revenue impact of over $600,000/year compared to
the status quo. This will require an increase of over 11% in the residential SWDD assessment.
To evaluate the multiple residential service options outlined above, staff utilized the current rate
structure as a baseline for comparison purposes. However, it should be noted that commercial service
costs are likely underestimated since certain service fees are currently negotiated between the service
provider and the customers and were, therefore, not included in this analysis.
SWDD Agenda - Summary of Results for RFP, Input on Policy Decisions and Recommendations for Award Page 5
5
The table below compares current service fees with the prices proposed by the top-ranked vendors for
the same service level (2-1-1 manual collection with dual -stream recycling bins). This is essentially a
"status quo" service option.
RFP SERVICE OPTION #1A: Subscription, 2-1-1, dual -stream bins
CURRENT
% Change over Current
24`14‘(..
One Service
Area
Waste
Management
North Service
Area
Waste
Management
South
Service Area
Waste Pro
2x� Nk
0 1 D '
One
Service
Area
waste
Management
North
Service
Area
waste
Management
South
Service
Area
waste Pro
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste
$11.68
$11.88
512.32
514.98
-22%
-21%
-18%
Monthly Single Family Recycling
$2.28
$2.28
$1.80
$1.78
28%
28%
1%
Commercial Garbage ($/Cubic Yard)
$4.73
$4.73
$5.95
$5.12
-8%
-8%
16%
Total Est. Annual Cost/Service Area
58,004,851
$3,999,426
$4,206,781
Total Est. Annual Cost
58,004,851
58,206,208
$8,367,779
-4%
-2%
1. Manual versus Carted Collection
The industry trend is toward carted solid waste collection. Utilizing carts is more efficient and reduces
worker injuries. Likewise, the industry trend is toward carted collection of single -stream recyclables. In
addition to the reasons above, utilizing single -stream carts also results in increased recycling
participation and collection of greater quantities of recyclables. Tonnage increases of 50-100 percent
have been realized by some communities.
As demonstrated in the table below, pricing for carted solid waste collection ranged from a savings of
$0.50 per unit (Waste Management) to an additional cost of $1.30 per unit (Waste Pro) over pricing for
manual solid waste collection. The pricing for carted single -stream recycling ranges from an increase of
$0.27 (Waste Management) to $1.31 (Waste Pro) over pricing for dual -stream recycling bins.
RFP SERVICE OPTION #2A: Subscription, 2-1-1, single -stream carts
CURRENT
% Change over Current
2x1 0'
r#,`
<
One Service
Area
Waste
Management
North Service
Area
Waste,waste
Management
South
Service Area
Waste Pt °
24
D� D '
One
Service
Area
^�nAe^t^n
North
Service
Area
waste
South
Service
Area
w�,
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste
$11.18
$11.38
513.92
$14.98
-25%
-24%
-7%
Monthly Single Family Recycling
$2.55
$2.55
$3.11
$1.78
43%
43%
75%
Commercial Garbage ($/Cubic Yard)
54.73
$4.73
$5.95
55.12
-8%
-8%
16%
Total Est. Annual Cost/Service Area
58,134,547
54,062,931
54,991,077
Total Est. Annual Cost
58,134,547
59,054,008
58,367,779
-3%
8%
2. 2-1-1 versus 1-1-1
Another service option that improves efficiency and creates an incentive for recycling is converting from
the current twice -a -week solid waste pick-up to a once -a -week garbage pick-up. This change not only
encourages recycling, but also reduces truck traffic, greenhouse gas emissions, and service fees. The 1-
SWDD Agenda - Summary of Results for RFP, Input on Policy Decisions and Recommendations for Award Page 6
6
1-1 service is a norm throughout the United States and is becoming very common in Florida (over 4
million users). As demonstrated in the table below, pricing for weekly carted garbage collection was
$1.50 (Waste Management) to $3.33 (Waste Pro) less than pricing for twice -per -week carted garbage
collection.
RFP SERVICE OPTION #3A: Subscription, 1-1-1, single -stream carts
CURRENT
% Change over Current
1)(iv* "
One Service
Area
Waste
Management
North Service
Area
Waste
Management
South
Service Area
Waste Pro
2x� Nk
..
�' ( i1
One
Service
Area
Waste
Management
North
Service
Area
Waste
Management
South
Service
Area
Waste An
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste
$9.68
$9.88
$10.59
514.98
-35%
-34%
-29%
Monthly Single Family Recycling
52.55
$2.55
$3.11
$1.78
43%
43%
75%
Commercial Garbage ($/Cubic Yard)
$4.73
$4.73
$5.95
$5.12
-8%
-8%
16%
Total Est. Annual Cost/Service Area
$7,812,833
$3,903,397
54,631,037
$5.12
-8%
-8%
16%
Total Est. Annual Cost
57,812,833
$8,534,435
$8,367,779
-7%
2%
3. Subscription versus Universal Collection
Each service option included the potential to transition from the current subscription collection program
to universal collection within the USA and subscription service within the remainder of unincorporated
IRC. Residents within the USA would automatically receive service and the cost for this service would be
included as part of the annual solid waste assessment fee in their tax bill (initially direct billing by vendor,
then tax bill beginning in 2016). Many cities and counties throughout Florida have universal collection
including the City of Vero Beach, the Town of Indian River Shores, the Town of Orchid as well as
Unincorporated Brevard and Unincorporated St. Lucie County have universal collection.
This option factors in the growing population within the USA and offers a hybrid approach to increase
services and reduce rates for the majority of our residents. As demonstrated in the tables below, pricing
for universal service ranged from a savings of $1.95 (Waste Management) to $3.00 (Waste Pro) over
pricing for a solely subscription -based program. Of the two top ranked firms, Waste Management chose
to include higher pricing for customers in the subscription portion of this hybrid system, whereas the
Waste Pro maintained the same pricing in the USA and non -USA areas.
RFP SERVICE OPTION #2B: Unlversal/Subscription, 2-1-1, single -stream carts
CURRENT
% Change over Current
2xlwk
II
One Service
Area
Waste
Management
North Service
Area
Waste
Management
South
Service Area
Waste PID
24%/4\`'
'm
1 a'i
One
Service
Area
waste
Moment
North
Service
Area
Waste
Management
South
Service
Area
roost -
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste - Universal
59.23
$9.38
$10.92
-38%
-37%
-27%
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste - Subscription
515.23
15.38
510.92
514.98
2%
3%
-27%
Monthly Single Family Recycling
$2.55
52.55
53.11
51.78
43%
43%
75%
Commercial Garbage ($/Cubic Yard)
$4.73
$4.73
$5.95
$5.12
-8%
-8%
16%
Total Est. Annual Cost/Service Area
$11,269,794
55,605,712
56,825,863
Total Est. Annual Cost
511,269,794
512,431,575
$8,367,779
NA
NA
SWDD Agenda - Summary of Results for RFP, Input on Policy Decisions and Recommendations for Award Page 7
7
RFP SERVICE OPTION #3B: Universal/Subscription, 1-1-1, single -stream carts
1 CURRENT
4
96 Change over Current
1.)(1v*., _ ^
One Service
Area
Waste
Management
North Service
Area
Waste
Management
South
Service Area
Waste Pro
2xI Nk
IMO
One
Service
Area
Waste
Management
North
Service
Area
Waste
Management
South
Service
Area
Waste °'°
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste - Universal
$7.73
$7.88
$7.59
-6296
-48%
-47%
-4996
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste - Subscription
$13.73
13.88
$7.59
$14.98
-8%
-7%
-49%
Monthly Single Family Recycling
$2.55
$2.55
$3.11
$1.78
43%
4396
7596
Commercial Garbage ($/Cubic Yard)
$4.73
$4.73
$5.95
$5.12
-896
-896
16%
Total Est. Annual Cost/Service Area
$10,371,306
55,165,990
$5,807,403
Total Est. Annual Cost
(includes est. cost of carts)
Total Est. Annual Cost
$10,371,306
510,973,393
$8,367,779
NA
NA
This option also has the potential to affect the level of need for customer convenience centers (CCCs) in
the future. If selected by the Board, SWDD staff would continue to evaluate the use of the CCCs to
determine whether their usage warranted a reduction in service hours and/or services. This could reduce
the SWDD assessment rate to potentially offset the increase in cost to residents who do not currently
have subscription service.
4. Cart Purchase
Depending on the service option selected by the Board, it may be beneficial for SWDD to purchase solid
waste and recycling carts instead of the franchisee(s). In most cases, it does not benefit SWDD (and the
SWDD ratepayers) to purchase the carts. SWDD should only consider the purchase of carts if Service
Option 3B (One Service Area) is selected. It should be noted that the estimated cost to purchase the carts
is over $7 million. The discount provided by the first ranked vendor in this scenario results in a break-
even period of under 3 years, well before the end of the 7 -year franchise agreement.
RFP SERVICE OPTION #3B: Universal/Subscription, 1-1-1, single -stream carts
(County purchases carts)
L_CURRENT
2414‘(One
ry 8
96 Change over Current
1xIWk .rte
e..
One Service
Area
Pro
North Service
Area
WasWaste
Management
South
Service Area
Waste Pm
Service
Area
waste aroWaste
North
Service
Area
Management
South
Service
Area
waste aro
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste - Universal
$5.76
$7.43
$5.99
-6296
-5096
-6096
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste - Subscription
55.76
13.43
$5.99
$14.98
-6296
-1096
-6096
Monthly Single Family Recycling
$1.75
$2.10
51.80
$1.78
-2%
1896
196
Commercial Garbage ($/Cubic Yard)
$5.95
$4.73
$5.95
$5.12
1696
-896
16%
Total Est. Annual Cost/Senrice Area
$9,228,866
$4,834,873
$4,706,748
Total Est. Annual Cost
(includes est. cost of carts)
$10,197,595
$10,510,351
$8,367,779
NA
NA
SWDD Agenda - Summary of Results for RFP, Input on Policy Decisions and Recommendations for Award Page 8
8
STAFF INPUT ON POLICY DECISIONS:
Staff is providing the following input on policy decisions that need to be considered by the SWDD Board.
These recommendations are in line with the Board approved 2014 Solid Waste Master Plan to increase
participation and recycling services throughout Indian River County.
1. Carted Single -Stream Recycling — Staff recommends switching to single -stream recycling
throughout IRC as it offers a convenient, user-friendly option to our residents to increase
participation and maximize recycling rates. Depending on the service option selected, there is an
increase in costs compared to the current dual -stream bin program; however, the single -stream
rates offered by the top ranked firms is within range from surrounding communities that have
switched to single stream recycling. Also, there is demonstrated data from these communities
that both participation and recycling rates go up with single -stream recycling.
2. Carted Solid Waste Collection — Staff recommends switching to carted solid waste collection in
Unincorporated Indian River County. This is an independent decision regardless of subscription
or universal service. From the perspective of the resident,, it provides a more efficient service
where it eliminates the current service sticker program and eliminates their need to purchase
garbage cans. The industry trend is toward carted solid waste collection as it reduces worker
injuries and allows for automation of service.
3. One Service Area — From the perspective of maximizing savings to our residents, staff
recommends switching to a One Service Area franchise. There are communities that are in similar
size that have a single service provider.
4. Once -A -Week Garbage—Similar to above, staff recommends switching to Once -A -Week Garbage
service to maximize savings and increase recycling. Again, this is a norm in the United States a
growing trend in many communities in Florida.
5. Subscription or on Annual Tax Bill — As the results of the RFP demonstrate, Universal Collection
service offers the maximum reduction in costs for all of the residents within the Urban Service
Area of Unincorporated Indian River County. Therefore, staff recommends Universal collection
within the Urban Service Area while maintaining subscription service outside the USA and include
this cost as part of the SWDD assessment on the annual tax bill.
6. Cart Purchase — The decision on who should purchase carts depends on the service option
selected. In the RFP, a discount was provided by each firm if the SWDD would purchase all of the
carts. Staff has analyzed this discount and determined that the SWDD should only consider the
purchase of carts if Service Option 3B (One Service Area) is selected. For all other service options
presented, it is not financially beneficial for SWDD to purchase the carts.
7. Customer Convenience Centers — At this time, staff recommends no changes to the CCC's.
Depending on the option selected, staff will continue to evaluate the use of the CCCs to
determine whether their usage warrants a reduction in service hours and/or services which could
help reduce the annual service assessment to all residents of Indian River County.
SWDD Agenda - Summary of Results for RFP, Input on Policy Decisions and Recommendations for Award Page 9
9
FUNDING:
The funding for solid waste and recycling collection is provided through a combination of SWDD
assessments and individual subscription customer payments directly to the franchised haulers. This will
vary based on the service options selected.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends switching to 1) single -stream recycling throughout IRC, 2) carted solid waste collection
in Unincorporated Indian River County, 3) a One Service Area franchise, 4) Once -A -Week Garbage
service, and 5) universal collection inside the Urban Service Area and maintaining subscription service
outside the USA. Staff also recommends no changes to the CCC's currently. Finally, the SWDD should
only consider the purchase of carts if Service Option 3B (One Service Area) is selected.
If the Board supports the policy decisions recommended by staff above, then staff recommends that the
Board award the franchise agreement to Waste Pro as the top ranked proposer. It is important to note
that if the Board makes a different policy decision, then the top ranked proposer may vary. For example,
Waste Management is the top ranked proposer for 46 out of the 54 service options whereas Waste Pro
is the top ranked proposer for the other 8 service options.
In the event the Board chooses to award two franchise service areas, staff recommends award to the
two top ranked proposers, Waste Management and Waste Pro.
Based on the final award of RFP#2015023, staff will bring a final Franchise Agreement(s) to the Board for
execution at a future meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Decision Time Invites
2. Final Selection Review Committee Rankings
APPROVED FOR AGENDA:
By:�i
A. Baird, County Administrator
Date
Indian River Co.
Approved
Date
Administration
-"'
3112-1)5
SWDD Director
V$
-31112 `
Budget
3/2_15
Legal
3 1� \J
Purchasing
3 )
SWDD Finance
LIAA (r
"3ItZ\1S
SWDD Agenda - Summary of Results for RFP, Input on Policy Decisions and Recommendations for Award Page 10
10
WHAT: Garbage & Recycling Options
WHEN: March 18, 2015; TIME: 9:00 AM
0,
0,
1)
Q120
C
'a 0o
•� e -I
CO I
C
O .a
1 Ec5
4C c
U
E
O
a
0
V
River County currently has
a 37% recycling rate and we need
Dual -Stream vs. Single Stream Recycling?
One Service Area or Two Service Areas?
Once -A -Week or Twice -A -Week Garbage?
Florida goal of 75%.
TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE A
CV
I`
In
L u1
°0) 0 0
c L
r`' V N
r'. +u `1H N
i O C n
mu
V c ft
OJ iv* CO
IT c C L 0
u, a, 0 a)
3 t0
_d
Q 1:1-
1 Lcc, =
C
a`E
, ��
� 7 +O+ , co
°= w E
0 = V 0 .°
a. > c
.L U a)
"rom E. 4
vU 8
1 L
41 O
LL
a•-1 N M 4 L 6 to
FFERENCE!
Or visit www.ircwaste.com
11
Scores - Criteria 1-3
RFP 2015023 - Solid Waste and Recyclables Collection
Page 1
12
Advanced Disposal
Republic Services
Waste Management
Waste Pro
Committee Member
Criteria
,Multiplier Awarded
Score (Multiplier *
Max Points)
Multiplier Awarded
Score (Multiplier *
Max Points)
Multiplier Awarded
Score (Multiplier *
Max Points)
Multiplier Awarded
Score (Multiplier *
Max Points)
Jason Brown
Qualifications and References (15 points)
(service transition history, non-performance
history, financial capability)
0.8
12
1.0
15
1.0
15
0.8
12
Technical Proposal (15 points)
(collection services, transition plan and
customer service, service verification and asset
management system, information
management, organization, exceptions)
0.6
9
0.8
12
0.8
12
1.0
15
Participation Growth Strategy (5 points)
(goals and efforts toward 75 in 5 and
increasing residential subscription service)
0.8
4
0.4
2
0.8
4
1.0
5
Total (max 35)
25
29
31
32
Vincent Burke
Qualifications and References (15 points)
(service transition history, non-performance
history, financial capability)
0.8
12
0.8
12
1.0
15
0.8
12
Technical Proposal (15 points)
(collection services, transition plan and
customer service, service verification and asset
management system, information
management, organization, exceptions)
0.8
12
0.8
12
1.0
15
1.0
15
Participation Growth Strategy (5 points)
(goals and efforts toward 75 in 5 and
increasing residential subscription service)
0.6
3
0.8
4
0.8
4
1.0
5
Total (max 35)
27
28
34
32
Himanshu Mehta
Qualifications and References (15 points)
(service transition history, non-performance
history, financial capability)
0.6
9
0.8
12
0.8
12
0.8
12
Technical Proposal (15 points)
(collection services, transition plan and
customer service, service verification and asset
management system, information
management, organization, exceptions)
0.6
9
0.6
9
0.8
12
1.0
15
Participation Growth Strategy (5 points)
(goals and efforts toward 75 in 5 and
increasing residential subscription services)
0.6
3
0.4
2
1.0
5
1.0
5
Total (max 35)
21
23
29
32
Total Points
73
80
94
96
Average Score
24.33
26.67
31.33
32.00
Page 1
12
Scores - North Franchise Area
RFP 2015023 - Solid Waste and Recyclables Collection
Page 2
13
Financial Score
Total Score
Ranking
14.33
26.67
31.33
32.00
ADS
REP
WM
WP
ADS
REP
WM
WP ADS
REP
WM
WP
4 38
SO81A-Subscription Only Manual 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins
30.48
60.44
65.00
58.58
54.81
87.11
96.33
90.58
3
2
11,38
50818 - Universal/Subscription Manual 2-1-
1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins
39.37
56.32
65.00
61.29
63.71
82.98
96.33
93.29
3
2
15,38
Service Option #2A - Subscription Only
Carted 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
31.45
53.55
65.00
55.67
55.78
80.21
96.33
87.67
3
2
15,23,
38
Service Option 82A - Subscription Only
Carted 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins; County-
provided Roll Carts
31.84
53.94
65.00
57.10
56.17
80.61
96.33
89.10
3
2
15,41
Service Option KA - Subscription Only
Carted 2-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
30.71
46.68
65.00
50.91
55.04
73.34
96.33
_
82.91
3
2
15,23,
41,42
Service Option 826 - Subscription Only
Carted 2-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts; County -
provided Roll Carts
32.23
47.88
65.00
55.89
56.57
74.55
96.33
87 89
3
2
22,38
Service Option 82B -
Universal/Subscription Carted 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
38.06
50.59
65.00
55.35
62-39
77.26
96.33
87.35
3
-
2
22,23,
38
Service Option 828 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins; County-
provided Roll Carts
39.42
51.23
65.00
58.26
63.76
77.89
96.33
90.26 -
3
2
22 41
Service Option 828 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 2-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
37.11
46.01
65.00
51.86
61.44
72.67
96.33
83.86
3
_-- _
2
22,23,
41,42
Service Option 820 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 2-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts; County -
provided Roll Carts
40.02
47.09
65.00
57 36
64 35
73.76
96.33
89.36
3
2
27,38
Service Option 836 - Subscription Only
Carted 1-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
34.19
56.34
65.00
58.64
58.52
83.00
96.33
90.64
3
2
27,35,
38
Service Option 83A - Subscription Only
Carted 1-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins; County -
provided Roll Carts
34.81
56.83
65.00
60 35
59 14
83.49
96.33
92.35
3
2
27,41
Service Option 83A - Subscription Only
Carted 1-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
33.20
48.45
65.00
53.11
57.53
75.12
96.33
85.11
3
2
27,35,
41.42
Service Option 836- Subscription Only
Carted 1-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts; County -
provided Roll Carts
35.38
49 94
65.00
59 02
59 71
76 61
96.33
91.02
3
_
2
34,38
Service Option 838 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 1-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
37.36
54.22
65.00
61.76
61.70
80.89
96.33
93.76
3
2
34,35,
38
Service Option 83B -
Universal/Subscription Carted 1-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins; County -
provided Roll Carts
38 47
54.32
64.05
65 00
62.81
80 99
95 38
97.00
3
2
34 41
Service Option 83B -
Universal/Subscription Carted 1-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
36.39
48.52
65.00
56.97
60.72
75.19
96.33
88.97 -
3
2
34,35,
41,42
Service Option 83B -
Universal/Subscription Carted 1-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts; County -
provided Roll Carts
39,67
50 04
65.00
64.86
64.00
76.71
96.33
96.86
3
2
Page 2
13
Scores - South Franchise Area
RFP 2015023 - Solid Waste and Recyclables Collection
Page 3
14
Financial Score
Total Score
Ranking
24.33
26.67
31.33
32.00
ADS
REP
WM
WP
ADS
REP
WM
WP ADS
REP
WM
WP
4 38
SO#1A - Subscription Only Manual 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins
29.54
62.10
65.00
61.88
53.88
88.77
96.33
93.88
3
2
11,38
SO#IB - Universal/Subscription Manual 2-1-
1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins
38.48
57 48
65.00
64.31
62 81
84.14
96.33
96.31
3
2
15,38
Service Option 42A - Subscription Only
Carted 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
30.50
55.12
65.00
58.72
54.83
81.79
96.33
90.72
3
- - ---
2
15,23,
38
Service Option #2A- Subscription Only
Carted 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins; County -
provided Roll Carts
30.85
55.54
65-00
60.38
55.19
82.21
96.33
92.38
3
2
15,41
Service Option #2A - Subscription Only
Carted 2-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
30.41
47.73
65.00
53.09
54.74
74.39
96.33
85.09
3
2
15,23,
41,42
Service Option 42A - Subscription Only
Carted 2-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts; County -
provided Roll Carts
31.95
49.01
65.00
58.99
56.28
75.68
96.33
90 99
3
- -----
2
22 38
Service Option 426 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
37.13
50.34
65.00
57.80
61.46
77.00
96.33
89.80
3
2
22,23,
38
Service Option #2B -
Universal/Subscription Carted 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins; County -
provided Roll Carts
38.45
50.94
65.00
61 18
62 79
77.61
96.33
93.18
3
2
2241
Service Option 428 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 2-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
36.87
45.75
65.00
53.77
61.20
72.41
96.33
85.77
3
2
22,23,
41,42
Service Option #2B -
Universal/Subscription Carted 2-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts; County -
provided Roll Carts
39 85
46.76
65.00
60.16
64 18
73 43
96.33
92.16
3
2
27,38
Service Option 83A - Subscription Only
Carted 1-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
32.92
55.60
65.00
61.09
57.25
82.27
96.33
93.09
3
2
27,35,
38
Service Option #3A - Subscription Only
Carted 1-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins; County-
provided Roll Carts
33 48
56.05
65.00
63.02
57.82
82.72
96.33
95.02 -
3
_
2
27 41
Service Option #3A - Subscription Only
Carted 1-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
32.73
47.78
65.00
54.72
57.07
74.45
96.33
86.72
3
2
27,35,
41,42
Service Option 430 - Subscription Only
Carted 1-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts; County -
provided Roll Carts
34.92
49.14
65.00
61.50
59.26
75.80
96.33
93.50 -
3
_
2
34,38
Service Option 438 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 1-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
36.17
53.10
65.00
63.40
60.50
79.77
96.33
95.40
3
2
34,35,
3S
Service Option #3B -
Universal/Subscription Carted 1-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins; County -
provided Roll Carts
36.06
5147
62.05
65.00
60.39
78.14
93.39
97.00 .
3
2
34,41
Service Option 436 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 1-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
35.92
47.56
65.00
58.07
60.25
74.23
96.33
90.07
3
2
34,35,
41,42
Service Option 436 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 1-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts; County -
provided Roll Carts
38.15
47 55
63 20
65.00
62 49
74 22
94.54
97.00
3
2
Page 3
14
Scores - Both Areas
RFP 2015023 - Solid Waste and Recyclables Collection
Page 4
15
Financial Score
Total Score Ranking
24.33
26.67
31.33
32.00
ADS
REP
WM
WP
ADS
REP
WM
WP ADS REP
WM
WP
4 38
SO61A -Subscription Only Manual 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins
31.82
62.92
65.00
61.82
56.15
89.59
96.33
93.82 3
11,38
SO61B - Universal/Subscription Manual 2-1-
1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins
42.39
60.38
65 00
64 51
66 72
8704
96 33
96.51 3
2
15,38
Service Option tt2A - Subscription Only
Carted 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
33.60
57.93
65.00
58.67
57.93
84 60
96.33
90.67 3
2
15,23,
38
Service Option tt2A - Subscription Only
Carted 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins; County -
provided Roll Carts
34.11
58.43
65.00
60.40
58.44
85.09
96.33
92 40 3
2
15,41
Service Option #2A - Subscription Only
Carted 2-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
34.11
52.32
65.00
53.19
58.44
78.98
96.33
85.19 3
2
15,23,
41.42
Service Option tt2A - Subscription Only
Carted 2-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts; County -
provided Roll Carts
36.62
54.18
65.00
5913
60.95
80.85
96.33
-
91.13 3
2
22 3E
Service Option 828 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
40.00
52.18
65.00
58.25
64.34
78.85
96.33
90.25 3
2
22,23,
38
Service Option 626 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 2-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins; County -
provided Roll Carts
41.72
52.87
65.00
61 79
66.05
79 53
96.33
93.79 3
-_
2
22 41
Service Option 82B -
Universal/Subscription Carted 2-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
40.36
48.87
65.00
54.25
64.70
75.54
96.33
86.25 3
2
22,23,
41.42
Service Option 628 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 2-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts; County -
provided Roll Carts
44.57
50.23
65.00
60.85
68.90
76.89
96.33
92 85
-
__
_
2
2738
Service Option 63A - Subscription Only
Carted 1-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
36.59
56.85
65.00
61.55
60.93
83.52
96.33
93.55 3
27,35,
38
Service Option 838 - Subscription Only
Carted 1-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins; County -
provided Roll Carts
37.36
57.33
65.00
63 57
61.69
84 00
96.33
95.57 3
-.
2
27,41
Service Option #3A - Subscription Only
Carted 1-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
37.13
51.26
65.00
55.25
61.46
77.92
96.33
87.25 3
2
27,35,
41,42
Service Option tt3A - Subscription Only
Carted 1-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts; County -
provided Roll Carts
40.64
53.06
65.00
62 18
64.97
79.72
96.33
94.18 3
2
34,38
Service Option 836 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 1-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
39.39
54.16
65.00
64.42
63.72
80.83
96.33
96.42 .. 3
2
_
34,35,
38
Service Option 838 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 1-1-1
Dual Stream Recyclables in Bins; County -
provided Roll Carts
38.78
51.53
60.87
65.00
63.11
78 20
92.20
97.00 3
2
34,41
Service Option 636 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 1-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts;
Franchisee -provided Roll Carts
39.78
50.28
65.00
59.04
64.12
76.95
96.33
91.0 4 3
-
2
34,35,
41,42
Service Option 638 -
Universal/Subscription Carted 1-1-1
Single Stream Recyclables in Carts; County -
provided Roll Carts
42 37
49.47
61.89
65.00
66.70
76.14
93 22
97.00 3
2
Page 4
15
I
DECISION TIME!
M
N
O
.C1 O
fa N
>, a
a) cc
12 (A
V LL
V
1•5
ra
2.2
u
cu
O
V
V
■
ifFa
3
0
O
O
0
Ln
N
w
L
co(r)a)
O
0
11
oZS
(1)
C!)
a)
~ w cin z
//nn, //A��\ //As\
o_
U A A A A LL
cL
E
c
..
F
EN
0 0
Recommendations for Award
N
11
E
FDEP Director of the Waste Management Division letter dated December 23, 2104:
'� bb1 0 p cu� c' c-
0 E ;-4 ct — ci)
,- .74 (-it° e a) ICI) +-) ;-1
v) -E ›, c..) lr) p +-)
• ' '__' U L/1 . '"''
a'8 4) (1) 7J cc -4 U E 0
�
C:1 -,U >-, 75, 're' 846
kr)
b1
O N • r+
*i p p C�
�N/-4 0 •
`It o�C)O'
cu ,c -6.,
urNrcJ
UP_ .-
W
�..,
iCt
Q4J "-qc�3
• °'
CZ: rz4 c+'zi
� -2 • 4) 0 ; ;ciz$
cAu
Ct
ti) 71 -
cd
• UN • 0
19
4� c
cu 3-
oo E a
Q� �' o
Vm a,
42
.1
1—
IJ-
> Cie
Contract Start
Contract Award
N
W
U
oC �
cu
H
(0 >
L \
O (1)
L
O
U
C
L
I 0
(T
'< -t' Q
W VJ
• - c U_
O
c '4=3
co no.
O so -0
c
(f) 03
• •
0
c -P
. c U (0 >
.�
L
D CU U
n E Ln
.... E ,
A
0) CU
U
L U
, —
O
CU %,i, -
(De _i_) v)
EE2cL L..
co cu o a)
LU Q _i_J
.�
-Jo 0_
� O S-
-I-1 .I -J • -
i_Jr
Q •L L
4J
C
•— O
� U
U -0
X c
W c0
•
containers < 15
• Universa
to
to
a)
:am
cu
in
Im.t
U
C
f0
L
um
w
via
tn
ro
mo10
i
O
z
a)
(n : >ma)
cc a)
0Q4_,
-o co
E 1;
a)
-o
ro
U .-
L
Itn I 1M (L)
va _.c
el. = E a_ 4-)
12 Z
cu
Q c o u
ra
LL
4 c
c O
O .0 O O >
L O 01
•U (n D CIO CD-
•
•
co
�3
U)
tsn
A41 Hill
Ay Oar
FEC
RAILROAD
AV 0 NZ9
z
I
........ I
0
0
0
uID
1-
A 1 IN fl 00
1 ! I
1, 1
,/.
H
._,
1
to
N
00
00
0!4
2
;4
z
Recycle Franchise Areas
.c _c
0 0
Z CO
L
Municipal Boundaries
aq
& Commercia
(North, South or a combined One Service Area)
L
V
(1)
d)
cn
c
0
L
co
0
•
.
c a)
.-
V
co
Q roAAA
Manual or Carted
Twice -a -week or Once -a -week
Subscription or Universal in Urban Service Area and Subscription
oC (.9
• • •
` V
ro
.5
Q)
E
ca
a
1
a)
V
cn
in non -Urban
service remains the same
c
0
4J
0
0
7 Years with One 3 -year Renewa
. .
• •
0
1-1
a5
— Franchisee -purchased
— County -purchased
CU
a--)
Li 0)
ca C
c0 V
D >.
1 0
O O
1_ 1..n L.
O M O
4-
1.... 4—
0
Oc O
r3 n -W O 03
CD CL CD
O I
Ln Ln1 Loal 1
• •
— Option for 35/95 -gallon upon request
0
1-1
With Radio Frequency Identification
• •
Residentia
3
X as
3
3
3
X to
41-1 Z
3
3
X�
A
cuV
-1
X fa
N �
(13
X fa
Z
X L
N
34-1
xL
N
nom
Subscription
Subscription
Subscription
CO
N
CO
N
M
co
M
in
4J
C
■ O
a�
na1471 da
z
mi
W
Evaluation Criteria
Qualifications and References
Technical Proposal
Participation Growth Strategy
To
0
a.
O
L
0
(v
.0
C
(a
c
Total Points Possible
L
E
(1)L
IW(/L?
'5 0
cu c
FA DG .—
VI
I�
W = _ 1-1
O
rges
O.
khu
ru u
(/) a.+
E
O
V
Waste Pro
N
m
N
m
N
m
-
rn
V
N
M
Waste
Management
r --i
m
d-
M
Cr)
N
d-
Cal
M
M
_
M
Republic
Services
cV
0
c
N
Advanced
Disposal
eV
CV
N
r -
M
M
N
Selection Review
Committee Member
Jason Brown
Vincent Burke
Himanshu Mehta
TOTAL
MO
C13
CV
Q
Arksitios
y41
�7j
019
tr.
74
14
8
8
- A
III MIMI MI
1111011111111111111111111111311111111EMINIPAIMISMEMINI
Iloonummu auguggiumma
INPRI 11111110111
nu u u m
11t1 11 1 1
1 I
t
1
all
,;•
11111111REINIMMWMESO MINUmElis
ICIMEIT:Mai.11;LiZ L2
111111,11.11111111
LiMMEMUMNIMMUM111.111111110113
1IMIIIIMINEHIMMINE11110111111
108111111110101111111111111111111111111111
IIIMMIUMIUMUMUUMIUMIN
MOUUM111111110111111111111111111111:10
iiipl !film
im -.um mann
1
:
•
; 1
1±1
111L,
1
15
.111
1 .1,
I
o 5
1
a
11
if
11:1
1;
111
a
„1
30
L
0
V
1/40
Town of Indian River
w
0
Republic Services
71
00
AA_
Not Available
0
c
0
.0
0
9
00
City of Sebastian
County / City / Town
Waste Management
Service Provider
Type of Service
(-NJ
kr)
zt-
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste - Universal
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste - Subscription
00
03
Monthly Single Family Recycling
1-r•
Commercial Garbage ($/Cubic Yard)
Sarasota County
Waste Management
CO
CNI
06
Qn
Included in above rate
Not Available
c
0
4,
0)
bO2
•
e.4
N-{
0)
0
0)
ro
0
C0
-SD
Not Available
E
4- co
o
co
al
4-
c
a)
cu
bp
c
(13
2
<-+1
-0
0)
0
co
0)
0
-0
Waste Management
•
00
0
Q0
ri
Included in above rate
Not Available
e-4
,24
$5.50 (includes disposal)
c
0
0
:$
as
tn
JE
I— (a
ti) 3
W (/)
Ci. To
L
a)
u- >
IJ. Q
W
D
a)
• 2 top-ranked vendors:
V)
O
cu
ro
cu
ro
"V) V
O CU
oC oC
• •
fees - depends on vendor
• Commercia
contract cost
for current service
33
no
LL&M
O
a
m
v
gq
lEi
E
w
L
1
1-Z
1
T-1
N
LL > O
W
V
z
% Change over Current
CU 0
44., U (0 d
n -Z v a
N V)
o
oo
0
t.o
u1
0,
u1
0
N
a) v
-c u co ;;
aJ ao
o ,
Z a) Q b
V1 p
o
-
(NI
28%
00
00
Z
CD W
0) U (0 a
c .E02 a o
O a Q e
N b
N
00
N
0000
00
VI-
c
1—
Z
W
ce
1
c0
031°�°
4
a-1
tr)
ev
�+
111
in
u1
0,
u1
$8,367,779
.i
RFP SERVICE OPTION #1A: Subscription, 2-1-1, dual -stream bins
v
Uo
N N
O
0..M
+�..
ti
N
.--i
O
co
,--i
u1
0,
u1
$4,206,781
$8,206,208
QJ
U
t <r
o
z
z
a a
�;
0
oo
,
00
01
$3,999,426
Q
°'
U
cn
v06.tn-
c
0
0ri
w
cs CI)
a
00
VI-
0o
N
m
r•-•
00 in
o
oci
VI
00
'Ci'
O
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste
Monthly Single Family Recycling
Commercial Garbage ($/Cubic Yard)
Total Est. Annual Cost/Service Area
Total Est. Annual Cost
3
--;—<-
c-4 N
e waste solutions
N
35
.41
CI
1-0
CP s
Va) .�
V
ce
= O
V
0. CU
a) (C/
L i
4,1
03
c
c
O
c
(B
c
cI
UI CI.�
U n
(13 03
L Q
O4)
V) V)
(0 CO
U
E c
e Stream Rec
�I H H
(f)1 • •
0
O
(0
E
U (�
• •
•
N
4-+
0
E
c)
4-0Q
s
4-0
•E
L
>� • r
V c
47- L
O O
5.
> O
O U
L
Q -0
E O
• •
E
(0
O
Qc
L O
U
—
.L
0 >
ft) d)
C U
(1)
J W U)
• • •
s_
e -stream carts
% Change over Current
�'
m
vi
v_
N
Q
.--I
m
01
Cil
ut
o
r+.
0
to
h
0
l0
<-4
Z
v
In CU
O
CO
-c
Z
v
u
in
n3
Q
};
C
v
E
a
o
N
43%
0
m
ce
CU
c
O
aJ
U
CU
w
Q
a
o
v
o
a
in
N
43%
00\0
a
M
F—
LLI
-
co
a?
$8,367,779
RFP SERVICE OPTION #2A: Subscription, 2-1-1, single -stream carts
a)
u
V1 (13a
Q
�o
O
a
a
61
.--I
m
01
Cil
ut
$4,991,077
0
O
d
O
cn
v
u
cn 22
OCs
Z
Z
v
In CU
r-1
m
N
4}
-4n-
as
Q
C
O
Z
a 0)
Cs
`-'
Li)
ry
CO
4.
m
ce
$8,134,547
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste
Monthly Single Family Recycling
Commercial Garbage ($/Cubic Yard)
Total Est. Annual Cost/Service Area
Total Est. Annual Cost
0
T.0
0
c
N
37
Increase/
(Decrease)
N
CO
N
N
LO1--1
-EA-
O
O
N
Ln
N
-E
Cr)
k.0
O
cri
In
00
-EA--
($108,000)
M
t.0
O
Ln
N
VI -
Waste
Management
O
M
N
$180,000
O
CO
N
$108,000
o
M
N
r-1
C)
NI
N
{/}
r-1
Ln
O
N
-EA-
M
7t -
al
,-1
Current
Contract
$1,198,167
$1,198,167
N
Lp
M
M
Ln
Ln
O
O
N
Lin
co-
O
Less Recycling Revenue
Sub -Total
Less Material Not Landfilled
Net Cost
4J
0
U
d"
CA
N01,-1
N
1-1
-EA--
00
,-1
•
0
0
O
Ct
,- I
Current SWDD
Assessment
Proposed SWDD
Assessment
Increase
% Increase
M
N
0
147icu
O
0.!
V0)
1.4 •
1,!.1
ro
1 �
cu
L
• Encourages
• Lower cost
• Less fue
Industry Trend toward 1-1-1:
ion Florida residents
More than 4.6
•
CU Im•
/Il
ri
ro
c1-1
CU N
L U)
4J
V z
o 0
a)
teo
> ,-1
,, o
E
a
L
O
U L)
•
1991) to Key West
N
39
Change over Current
a)o
—c u cv a`
n LN a,
(!1 ) Q 0
V)
0
61
N
(n
0
lD
0
in
M
0
M
M
00
0
09
0
O
RFP SERVICE OPTION #3A: Subscription, 1-1-1, single -stream carts
CU
Li
(n (0
El_)
-cam, `1
o
u')
o
o)
a..
p
in
O
.11
V).
if)
01.-i
t!}
m
O
ti).
$8,534,435
0)
U
v
= Q
o
z
ti
0)
a
a
(n.
th
th
$3,903,397
ro
a)
<
u
cn
0)
c
0
a)
y
i3
E
cu
C71
a
oo
(.0t11
61
VI -v)-
in
N
on
r--.nj
c}'
m
o0
00
I--;
to
$7,812,833
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste
Monthly Single Family Recycling
Commercial Garbage ($/Cubic Yard)
Total Est. Annual Cost/Service Area
Total Est. Annual Cost
innovative waste soluti
Ln
N
O >
1.zi E s_0co .a.), V
)4-
'V in 0
C >4
(i) 0
a) >
= au
cp
E .� L c
�+ 0 .
�V
ot
, V
V � v 0
� ja
L
Ce 3
C CU
C -I- - )
Cn
(0 .
(l)-:-� L
2
c c :
a 2 0 a) 0
L V -0 (1)
a) > a) (1),_ rov)
4-/ NE -0
in = >
RI orc5 V
2
L o c
Zo_ 4--) I—I
• •
• Lower cost
4-
0
��a)
V1
D
a)
-o
01
. >
V [0
co 0
- I--�
C
V 4-
(1)
a)
J
•
• Potentia
U
U
U
Service fee in universal area added to solid waste
assessment. Vendor would bill in subscription area.
N
L
(I)
4.•
u
V
E
caw
.1rL
;;
1
Universa
% Change over Current
N
OQ
N
o
(`-•
N
h
N
LSI
l0
rnO
00
Ili'
eZE
Z
a)
-c u @
O v
z N Q
N
.Q) t'_
a at
2
0
r
m
0
m
CO
d
CO
N
r--
tri
Up
"'
v
QJ V ro
c ? iJ
v Q°
v
,v, E
O cu
0
co
m
°
N
0
f 1
0
�
rn
cri
4.0
N
,-I-
.-1
Q
Zcn
RFP SERVICE OPTION #2B:
Universal/Subscription, 2-1-1, single -stream carts
cu
u
VI to
.� Q
o
tn
Ln 22
I:3
G7
n
a,
O
n
r -I
M
01
rnO
00
Ili'
$12,431,575
o
r13
G)
Z
:
v
u1CU E
v
oo
m
oo
r -I
Ln
in
m
r,
N
r--
tri
Up
"'
co
v
d
u
tat
c
0
,r
v
n, E
a a,
Z
0
m
UNl
N
i!'}
to
N
'�'
m
d
�./?
rn
cri
4.0
N
,-I-
.-1
$11,269,794
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste - Universal
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste - Subscription
Monthly Single Family Recycling
Commercial Garbage ($/Cubic Yard)
i Total Est. Annual Cost/Service Area
Total Est. Annual Cost
N
L
V
E
raw
4.•(i) %
M �
W �
M �
Z�
O1-1�
a
W
O
W O
CLU. .a
W
(i) -g(/)
ca
Change over Current
0
U @\
a
t0 N Q
61
\
01
c1
0
Ln
r,
0
lD
< -1
r'-1
rri
vs)-
icC
z
a)
u `° ° E
O O
o �n d o
o
o
(�
m
co
00
CO
4"--:rsl
c
C)cu
v Eo
0 N > QJ O
< 4
in
Lfl
0
co
0
m
.r
0
00
..t
Z
innovative waste solutions
RFP SERVICE OPTION #3B:
Universal/Subscription, 1-1-1, single -stream carts
_v
In v
'
_..cQ
=
vol
0
Rte.al
4J
in
N
t11
al
Ln
r�
v)
< -1
r'-1
rri
vs)-
Xizt-
al
Ln
tooo
m
O
r`
o
LP
{.4
$10,973,393
CI
U
N
t Q
O
z
c
4,
4�CO
1
eu
a a
00
CO
4"--:rsl
CO
in
Lfl
CO
4
o
al
Crl
t"
ro
Q
CU
cn
C
0
a o
cr) kb
a al
a
r)-1
r-,
n
t
LLrl
N
r-•
4
4.0m
,-�
r`
m
o
$10,371,306
3
eyro
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste - Universal
Monthly Garbage/Yard Waste - Subscription
Monthly Single Family Recycling
Commercial Garbage ($/Cubic Yard)
Total Est. Annual Cost/Service Area
Total Est. Annual Cost
00
N
q3
Change over Current
v
U
Z
,Q
0
o
.�
r
0
O
(ID
o'8°-
0
w
o
‘-1
'
w
.-I
4
Z
0J
-�-+ U
Z aJ
V)
CU
N
Q
C
w
v,u,
4
b
o
O
Lr)
0
O
c -i
0
0
W
r -i
t/)
CU
C.1 U
O CU
Cil
CO
QJ
Q
O
a.
a
C
5
o
N
CD
0
N
CD
0
N
0
\
CD
'Cr
Z
I-
Z
$14.98
01
N.
r.
W
�N-i
CC
r -i
t/)
Lri
tr)
CD
M
.74
c
O
South Service
O
00
.-i
to
00
cY
h
CD-
(2)
h
th
North Service
Management
Cr)
to
m
cr.)
1-4
to
t/t
m
03
d-
m
00
Cr -
to
One Service Area
0
Qj
h
Lrl
t/1
tD
00
00'
N
N
Cal
ih
0
0
cn
QJ
ro
-t3
>
QJ
00
ra
-2
L7
a
c
0
2
4y
0
_
3
a
3
3
3
3
3
a
73
.0M
1_ N
E 4
ifs
EO
V
M
N
4
-EA-
m
N
4
iPr
M
N
4
ifs
m
N
d'
-IA
M
N
4
-EA-
LA
01
Ln
-0-
w
~S C co
N
>. O
C E in-
O�
o -
0
1/1
N
in
LA
in
LA
in
in
in
LA
in
N
-UV
01 1
C
2
�, x
EJ ri
G)
OG
1 x wk
Carted
1 x wk
Carted
1 x wk
Carted
l x wk
Carted
Y 'G
;
x a
.-4 0
l x wk
Carted
tC t
C Cm
71 E
iE}
ce
t0
iPr
'1
�
N
ca
L0
in-
m
N
-EA-O
up
N
a)
co
.0 x mc
COL.
N f
c0
2xwk
Manual
2 x wk
Carted
2 x wk
Carted
l x wk
Carted
1 x wk
Carted
l x wk
Carted
Billing
Subscription
Universal
(USA)
Subscription
(Outside USA)
Subscription
Universal
(USA)
Subscription
(Outside USA)
Subscription
Universal
(USA)
Subscription
(Outside USA)
Universal
(USA)
Subscription
(Outside USA)
O C
fl' .a-1
L.ni
�0
COri
CO
N
CZ
m
CO
m
CO V
M
innovative waste solutions
O
Staff recommends:
Single Stream Recycling with Carts throughout IRC
Carted Garbage Collection in Unincorporated IRC
One Service Area
Once -A -Week Garbage Service
-o
r
(o
Q
V_
°) '>
U L
�>
L()
O
U) C
ro
(0 1-
D D
L
c O
U
47)0 •-c
U d)
N( )
o
Uo
(OQ
(f)
1._ 1_
U
>21
C J
D
W
U
•>
L
a)
c
0
DO
M
c
0
Q
0
cU
U
N
4J
L
U
a)
ro
_c -0
U co
L
U
0_ N
>•%
a)
0 .u)
c
N
o E
Z :,4:7;
N M d- Lc; I�
Y
ro
o
(n 1-
C 0-
0
._
CO (I)
C
Q)
E O
0
V d)
L E
a)
4
(n Q
L(no 2�
Q c
Q
L O
t4 -
s_
-L O C
L
0 a3 S-
m> CL
C
O ()
4- C C
H �J 4--3
L -'1
V/ 0 0
CZW a)
LC
03)
c szu
o
V \ fo
(0 Q L
4-- 1-
<
Q Q) a)
th ti))
LO
Qc O O (
L. 4a 4-) -w )
Q L L
L Q Q 0
Q)V)Q
v) ocu
H V LL LL L
N
� L
O Q
O (1)
1—
L.)
V ((!)
. � 0
O O—
V) O
▪ CL
cV -0
L
a)
4-�
4- C
R
co
a)
O
cn
O �
V 0
L D C
Opo
a
_C -C
V
.i
i
C O
To 3
• 01
tit
InonimmmO C3
o ;
iJ
L >
• a
Toi
tos
N
M
L17
H
H
DECISION
lil4 III,
t.
u
M
1
FLORA
pQ01EC11ON
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
BOB MARTINEZ CENTER
2600 BLAIRSTONE ROAD
TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-2400
RICK SCOTT
GOVERNOR
CARLOS LOPEZ-CANTERA
LT. GOVERNOR
CLIFFORD D. WILSON III
INTERIM SECRETARY
TO: Solid Waste Directors of Large Counties (over 100,000 population)
FROM: Jorge R. Caspary, P.G., Director, Division of Waste Management "p`` 'a .
RE: Request for Development and Submittal of County Recycling Program Plans
(Limited Counties Only)
DATE: December 23, 2014
In 2008, the Florida Legislature set a statewide municipal solid waste (MSW) recycling goal of
75 percent by the year 2020. In 2010, the Legislature further directed that the goal be primarily
applied to counties with a population of greater than 100,000. In addition, the Legislature set
these interim recycling goals for those counties:
Calendar Year
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
Interim Recycling Goal
40%
50%
60%
70%
75%
Section 403.706(2)(d), Florida Statutes (F.S.), states that if a county does not achieve an interim
recycling goal, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) "may direct the
county to develop a plan to expand recycling programs to existing commercial and multifamily
dwellings, including, but not limited to, apartment complexes." In addition to the above changes,
in Chapter 2010-143, Laws of Florida, the Legislature also introduced s. 403.706(2)(b), F.S.,
directing that counties implement a program for recycling construction and demolition debris as
part of their efforts to attain the recycling goals noted above.
The purpose of this memorandum is to designate those large counties that are directed to submit
a plan (your recycling program plan) to expand or otherwise implement their recycling programs
to attain the recycling goals established under s. 403.706(2), F.S. These plans will provide the
DEP with valuable information and input during the upcoming year. If the statewide recycling
rate for 2014 is less than 50 percent, then the DEP will be able to incorporate your information in
the report to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives that
would be due prior to the 2016 legislative session pursuant to s. 403.706(2)(e), F.S.
Attached are two tables showing the 2012 and 2013 recycling rates of all of the large counties
(i.e., with populations greater than 100,000). Based on this data, we are requesting the following:
• Counties who did not reach and maintain at least the 40 percent interim goal, based on their
2012 and 2013 calendar year recycling rates, are requested to submit your recycling program
www. dep. state. fl. us
5o
Request for Development and Submittal of County Recycling Program Plans
December 23, 2014
Page 2 of 2
plan to the DEP by July 1, 2015. We are not requesting a submittal of the plan for counties
that did not reach the 40 percent interim goal in 2012, but did reach the goal in 2013.
Consequently, the following counties must submit a plan: Bay, Citrus, Clay, Escambia,
Hernando, Indian River, Lake, Okaloosa, Osceola, Polk, St. Johns, Santa Rosa and Sumter.
• For any large county that does not meet the upcoming interim goal of 50 percent for the 2014
calendar year data (due to DEP on April 1, 2015), we are requesting submittal of your county
recycling program plan by Oct. 1, 2015. The October 1, 2015, request does not apply to any
county that submits their county recycling program plan based on their 2012 and 2013
recycling rates.
At a minimum, the county recycling program plans should include:
• Summary of the services and materials for which you offer recycling such as newspaper,
aluminum cans, steel cans, glass, plastic bottles, cardboard, office paper and yard trash;
• Analysis of the percentage of the county's MSW generated by the commercial, multifamily,
and residential single family sectors;
• Analysis of any existing recycling programs for the commercial and multifamily sectors,
including estimated customer participation rates and recycling rates for each of those sectors;
• Description of the county's implementation, including any planned changes, for your
program for recycling construction and demolition debris;
• Description of efforts or opportunities to encourage recycling of yard trash, and other organic
materials or mechanically treated solid waste, into compost or mulch that may be made
available for agricultural and other acceptable uses;
• Strategy (including general timeframes) for expanding your county's recycling programs, or
for creating new programs if needed, as part of your county's efforts to achieve the statewide
recycling goals set forth in s. 403.706(2), F.S.; and
• Discussion of any additional steps, initiatives and any anticipated challenges the county
foresees would be critical for implementing your strategies to achieve the next interim
recycling goal of 60 percent in 2016, and ultimately statewide goal of 75 percent by the end
of 2020.
As a reminder, please note that the rule establishing the method for determining the county's
recycling rates in Rule 62-716.480, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), became effective Dec.
17, 2013. This rule establishes the criteria and types of materials for consistently determining
each county's recycling rate. Also, please note that for purposes of the requested plan, the term
"commercial" includes governmental and institutional establishments.
For those counties that are directed to submit their plans, we look forward to receiving your input
and perspective. We appreciate the opportunity these plans will create for use to work together
in identifying and supporting strategies for meeting the statewide recycling goals. Please email
your plan to Shannan Reynolds (Shannan.Reynolds(2 dep.state.fl.us) by the dates indicated. In
the meantime, please contact Shannan for any questions or comments, either by email, or via
phone at 850-245-8716.
JC/rh
www. dep.state.. 1. us
51
Counties Over 100,000 Population (2012)
(in descending population)
Shading = counties whose Total Recycling Credits were under 40%.
(1)
County
(2)
Population
(3)
Traditional
Recycling
Credits
(4)
Total Recycling
Credits
Miami -Dade
2,551,290
30%
43%
Broward
1,771,099
37%
60%
Palm Beach
1,335,415
32%
54%
Hillsborough
1,256,118
40%
69%
Orange
1,175,941
41%
41%
Pinellas
920,381
33%
63%
Duval
869,729
42%
47%
Lee
638,029
44%
74%
Polk
606,888
30%
37%
Brevard
545,625
48%
48%
Volusia
497,145
35%
43%
Pasco
468,562
24%
62%
Seminole
428,104
31%
39%
Sarasota
383,664
47%
47%
Marion
332,989
36%
45%
Manatee
330,302
32%
40%
Collier
329,849
45%
51%
Lake
299,677
13%
35%
Escambia
299,511
39%
45%
Osceola
280,866
11%
11%
St. Lucie
280,355
44%
44%
Leon
277,670
43%
45%
Alachua
246,770
55%
55%
St. Johns
196,071
16%
16%
Clay
192,071
25%
25%
Okaloosa
187,280
15%
18%
Hernando
173,104
24%
24%
Bay
169,392
12%
13%
Charlotte
163,357
31%
39%
Santa Rosa
155,390
24%
24%
Martin
147,203
54%
75%
Citrus
140,761
25%
25%
Indian River
139,446
37%
37%
Sumter
100,198
13%
17%
State
19,074,434
35%
48%
(1) 2012 Governor's Office Population
(2) Includes renewable energy recycling credit.
sa
Counties Over 100,000 Population (2013)
(in descending population)
Shading = counties whose Total Recycling Credits were under 40%.
(1)
County
(2)
Population
(3)
Traditional
Recycling
Credits
(4)
Total Recycling
Credits
Miami -Dade
2,582,375
29%
41%
Broward
1,784,715
46%
60%
Palm Beach
1,345,652
39%
56%
Hillsborough
1,276,410
43%
73%
Orange
1,202,978
47%
47%
Pinellas
926,610
34%
65%
Duval
876,075
45%
49%
Lee
643,367
46%
70%
Polk
613,950
25%
29%
Brevard
548,424
52%
54%
Volusia
498,978
34%
43%
Pasco
473,566
36%
67%
Seminole
431,074
44%
48%
Sarasota
385,292
57%
57%
Marion
335,008
40%
48%
Manatee
333,880
48%
51%
Collier
333,663
54%
60%
Lake
303,317
15%
33%
Escambia
301,120
30%
35%
Osceola
288,361
25%
25%
St. Lucie
281,151
42%
43%
Leon
278,377
45%
47%
Alachua
248,002
54%
54%
St. Johns
201,541
16%
16%
Clay
192,843
27%
27%
Okaloosa
188,349
23%
26%
Hernando
173,808
25%
25%
Bay
169,866
24%
37%
Charlotte
163,679
41%
45%
Santa Rosa
157,317
17%
17%
Martin
148,077
54%
56%
Citrus
140,519
33%
33%
Indian River
139,586
34%
37%
Sumter
105,104
21%
24%
State
19,259,543
38%
49%
(1) 2013 Governor's Office Population
(2) Includes renewable energy recycling credit.
53
Once Weekly Garbage Collection
Population: University of FI Bureau of Economic and
Business Research (April 1, 2014)
Population
County (uninc. county)
Alachua 100,380
Charlotte 146,980
Clay 179,853
Columbia 55,263
Duval/Jacksonville 846,421
Escambia 249,515
Jackson 32,258
Lake 157,950
Lee 361,890
Leon 95,508
Osceola 191,514
Polk 385,924
Putnam 57,706
Sarasota 248,619
St. Johns 187,002
Volusia 115,057
City
Avon Park
Bartow
Cape Coral
Deltona
Ft. Myers
Gainesville
Haines City
Kissimmee
Lake Wales
Lakeland
Live Oak
Minneola (partial)
Mulberry
North Port
Palm Bay
Pensacola
St. Cloud
Sarasota
Tallahassee
Titusville
West Melbourne
TOTAL 3,411,840
TOTAL
Population
9,513
17,812
163,599
86,360
69,437
125,661
21,956
64,365
14,830
100,728
6,850
10,062
3,750
60,295
105,815
52,758
39,674
52,584
185,784
44,077
19,834
1,255,744
TOTAL 4,667,584
Florida Jurisdictions with ix Week Collection
kessler consulting, inc. 54
w.
The Southeast's Fastest Growin
a
E
0
0
a)
c
N NMI
-
U
V
0)
Ce
MO
C
co
a)
u)
ca
.70
0
co
no
a)
c
0
a)
co
L
a.
-6
a)
co
CO
a
.� L co
Po
O
LL te
• •
Revenues
ion Annua
.0_
V
c
z
2
a
0
N
C
CU
a)
L
0
Sv
otim
H0
.0
• Serving over 2,000,000 Residences
• Serving over 35,000 Businesses
d
c
...
co
73
Er.o
u.
w
O
O
i
d
Cl)2
co
■ Alabama
co
D)
0
a)
0
.
. MEM
Om
CL
• II MUM0
0
E
.
CU
. E
0
as
0
irL
O
Z
■
RS
C
South Caro
■
■ Louisiana
■ Tennessee
a)
■
. cas
—
To
w as
11."'Owc2
INC L
0 (/)
V
(/)c
>pI—(n sg;
_c p
.=.3.r.)
•
Service Transition History
•
Non -Performance History
.
co
0
a)
ccs
Q
0
co
0
0
L
V
G)
G)
co
O o
i
V
as co
Q)
O V3
CO ▪ .4-=
Q 'i.
' V t1
0
0- (/)
• • •
m
L
O
LL
4-
0
O
L
IL
O
L
CL
CL
i
m
_O
LL
A
U)
U)
i U)
� M
O7 00
to �
E
E O
O
LO
O ti
LO 00
N d'
00 w
N 0
v
V co
L
.� a.
J �
O
tib U
Vice President
L
a
w
as (13
2 g
O
._ cn
as • .5 o
o o(-s.
a) .0
-CO
a')
C � S. O
0)
•
•
a)
E
0)
0
0
W 414
i1
W
s c
V �
CO O
>+U
CD a)
a)
ao)
nstructiona
a�
2
Educationa
•
U
Z
W
DC
w
0
W
w
1—
w
w
This is a portion of the plan already submitted by
Waste Pro. It pays to think ahead!
Weekly Transition Team Meetings
Progress Meetings With County Staff
Order Equipment Trucks
Design of Mailers and Advertising
Customer Notification Mailers Etc. Sent Out
Order Required Containers
Begin Routing
Complete Routing
'Submit Routes and Maps to County Staff
Check on Equipment Delivery Status
(Hire and Train Driver/Helpers
.-i
N
m
d'
to
LD
N
00
Q1
O
,-i
This is a portion of the plan already submitted by
Waste Pro. It pays to think ahead!
ransition-Recommendations
nIgll
82 z2Zi
.1012
peg r" oA
gzQs �n
E1t
"ot •Lgs
utlats
z4,3 jEg5Et
.z"s1 tlE
ni' E DOW
E§2hEtz W4;
tE
i
4.6
7!
E
0
c
O
O
9-
8 c
'43'372 28
2 gl
13 1.0
!p4£ act v
u�„mb�m� H
Wove
�E
h fE�
2,5,f3 9
� -f2
Y. fy..l OPI.....t
n -;
34 4
a
2
2
_ F
cm
c
■ IIMMI
13
>i%0
a)
W
1
>%
a)
au
L
CO
2O
T i ; 0 co
s.. .c
ca =
a. •— o
✓ >I
d' = .. (.)
as 0 a)
o ce o.) 01
u) c:,
o Lo v) ci) >% >,
c). m _a c) 0
2 11 o
a w
c u_ I1I;; u)co as — — >
. c __
2
c) a) 4 E •v's
a.
CL) Ct a) m o a
u) il- ee 20cn
ca
T-N(Nei c1'
(03
Residentia
Waste Pro will create an Indian River
based incentive
no cost to Indian
8
E
Waste Pro.
011
Qo a)
o
E
U) 4-1
o
•— 0000-
-�-�
L o >C, a co O
0 u
V V N o D
m o C
�oo�>
_ ,7C3
•-CY
U
n/ �nWrY
z
CD
Cto i (a Ca
g
■— O U)
L
W U)
0 73
• U 0 •
IX (7) 0
• _co O D
>cn _c O _ -t
(13
CD 0
o)� N U U
U (a
>, 0) " a) U
N
N N > 0 N
>, Q O > i
O c >U)( E
ct
M -0 O O N
O
L
M
Q
0
1
.-I
(0
W
co
E
c
O
oE
O
O
ID
ca
E
O
0
Q)
co0
0
c
a)
E
0
N
7
0
Waste Pro will additiona
ool and unit
containers at swimm
V
A
V
a)
Ce
ommercia
Waste Pro will have customer service
67
c
v) O
O O z-,
(a
> (a as
o N
viE. c
a) 0 > -DCG,U
(D ca 73 -c > 2=�7a
W u N >, 06 QV ((0
To E+ . ca
TCO N O 0 O
O (a O ai U (a
S a) a) n/ ,,- w.
._ ......,
c U (a >, c E 4) -a 0
li >, � U
L N .4....N -4—(a Q
vo
- p N ra N E co
..i=U (a t '`'' ca L (a c
LL 2-o = lQ D U %4E
rrt RS T n rn rn Z. U L
c
I G)
0)
ra
to
ti5
+g
as
0 %I#O .O
'1,11.7•
%.„,
at co0
Strategy includes:
Excellence of Service
O N
O a- O
0)4-- _r
O
0
:t,co .o
0)U o
a)
0 C- c�
O O
E
O
U N
4-0
a)
L cn —
Co �� O
nW
W
a)
a) U
�
O
L
U I.. ^^-
m
O M
n Q
U U
M U
U) J
U)
(6
-> N
O n -
U .�
ML-
L
a)
a) E
O
N U
m O
_O O N
U L E
L
O O O
E 0)o
O cn C
N O O
O 0)
m N
O
U O
L
N0 O
m
E
W L
O O
qo
Additiona
O _
; ,_
:ill
L. c ,as •--
a)
> 8
R c (I) LLI
_ O i
ii� 13 0
C�
N
>ito w
= 0
E O O
w4'd E . • 0
.4-.v .O
(f) = R) (an)
4.7.
as o Z . : = =
Vo- 0 0 0
= 0 co
CD
0
ca
C
L11
cE
a
✓ 8
O
a `H
4o LV
c� ca
J
a) (5
J
0)_1
(13 L
c
N
O
> O O
20 a) c6
o
= •5 N O o
r,s C
O W
C oa)°
L U.IE vzs>4 McRS
N CO
(13 oki .4 a)
N 2 7:, >
o m o
O03a . . N
o -a
C _.W L
V aS a'o O ..
css�
O a) 5
o m ° S
V��~u)N
LO tti
.._
,,,-,
u) ..
O ' CD CO
= al) -c E
O .N m
O
c•- 0
c CD
E
CCl)
a.
•QU)
x
4+ m
JO
(1)
V
E
s
N O
N
c
<
i
N
Pesticides
-r<
w
0
g
(1) o
a� V
L
._
c
ce
o E
C o
O
:-
RSV)
o
o c�
ca
•
v
o
I -IMF
ntl
W
V
O
O
tr)
Ea) 0
on
c c
00 03
0.
E
� O
4-)U
VI -+
V
O
J
THINK GREEN:
76
nN
W
V
O
O
Ea) 0O
OP
CO a
E
W O
� �
C
V
O
• Environmental Commitment
• •
• Value -Added Service at
the Lowest Cost
3
THINK GREEN.
4
2
4
4
X
i—
1
O .i..)'
•1-) c t/ �
= -0 a)
a) O 'N E
On- •^ C =
a) 73 O V
t/) C 2O
_.
a) o 4_) E • L)
L_
i 05 o
= 4-) = NI E
� Cu' E
a) o `�
o O 0
c ra on -o
5 ms
EoLis 0 a,,-,
4) 0-
on. N o Q .0
a 00 2 c 5 0-
5
(15
a o"
-,Z E E E E -
O a,
Q
o
4) V O4_, 'i
o
tf
n
. 0t7. O c -
CCS tin v O c M i
O . . • •
Z a) 71-
cuE
ro
.6J
co
E
E
0
U
a)
c
0
c
0
im
0
°'
.
u
a)
0
q g
Natural Gas -Fueled
-o
N
N
N
L
Q
E
oU
U
L
LI
'1--J i
4–)
• Z C
1/41.1
kV ki)
O O
4— O U C-
C 'r'
03 M N
V N > L
•c c
O O O-
ocs cc)
ms DQ
t/) - `;
.}- .J
O Q) O -0
Z4) o
4-- 0▪ N
U a) O
o C ozs
O O O on
ON N O O
CD
00
a)
• U c)
O ..OD . .
U N
Reduces 86% of air particulates
.
Multi-million dollar
investment in Indian
N
L
cu
t5
.
c
-6-) 0
•U
U
4-)�+- N
a
Z c
O U c
U.-
O Z ._
>
• Multi-million dollar economic
THINK GREEN
1-
2 2
U
W
W
MS
CL a
E 3 z
E
W
N
3
-1-
'79
'79
O
+075,1
>' t
C o
'47.5
rcs
..'
U
o_ O
U
O
V 4-)
,„o
L._
ocs .E
0 •
• •
• GPS -based Routing
U
▪ C
•
▪ b• —
r- a
ra
.}..) 4-
C O
� N
N
U >
OCS
N W
•
V I
3
Z
w
w
c
1
z_
W
a
2
W
3
�0
WM Community Focus
• Waste Watch
0
0
.�
>• U 0
Urcs _a
r••••u on
� •
O la)
C
Non
> V) .0
V) C
C L Q) --J ••r
ro N
c L >
0_ ra
J •ro o 76
v k ▪ -
N N O
C M fl U ..-
= _CI= •:5
05 O ) 0
.J N v) a. Z
watch program
.6J
E
E
0
V
on
4)
rcs•
O
O
0
N
Over $1.2M in monetary
•
donations in Florida in 2014
Thousands in in-kind donations
•
z
w
W
g
ocs
-6-) .,
` V 0 ,0 �
Q.
C on
O Q °'
. E E •�
115
U
V V
O
co in
v^
El
m$ v, `f' u. ,-,
O V
-c; -4 i, �6
-- .0 •$ J .
C on
ozs E _c v)(1) EO
0 U pm) Q 00
111-25 u _ooV
. -O - N
171 c
4) c O- ° 2'
W 4 O
O V 6-7
>-0
__ N > 0 mi
•••-- 00 >. --
c u L-- •,.
4_,
= >.% 7:ic ,,,-
Vi = ,� W
E a, o E ..-
CC 1
V Q 0 R Q
E z .� V 3 �-
Q 01.111
a
0 3
THINK GREEN.
0
N
6
rcs
0
.�
V
L)
111
E
E
0
V
no
W
on
rcs
V^
���
WI E
V
CL E
0
a
v,
0
0_
a,
03
a)
•
4)
rcs
4-
0
W
a.
DC
L J
Z
W
.
continuously monitor progress toward "75 in 5" goal
X
5
a
A
Green Sheet
Siogle Stream Recycling
Commercial and Roltott
1 Diversion Trend
id
missimsammomi a ry
miumaummaumman
4
2
u
1111111111111111.111111111
a
z
0
MINIM 2
1111111111111111.1111111111111.1
LL
p
0
1111111111111111111111111111111111W VIM= 0
x x 8 K
2 ry O O
THINK GREEN
3ry
W
W
Q
z
Q
W
H
4
CO
�3
O
On
00
r
E
O
O
V
(0
O
V
0
N
E
O V
O
O C
N
LC1 N
(:•7
_ A
O V
N 1J
E
L • (s
4- V
4_, On
O
C
o U
o
V V
-c
or) L-
D C -o
O c
O �
_o
On
C (0
on
• O
o
V
�
O
OV
00
N C
C
r (0
O E
03
c
E
E
O
V
03
L
4- N
O i
>.%+
V
V on
c c
N >'
E
QJ
o
_c -O
c
(0
O 4)
N On
M
..Q
M 03
r
O O
On
(0
On
O
c
0
V
S.-
0:3 (0
Q)
CO
c
E N
o
c V
O C
Cs V
Cr L
V
0)
r �
• c
N (0
HIUMEet:i i
rn
211
n�
W
c
OZS -I_J
a_ m0
O
0 V
.v) -o u
=,,
a)
4...., 4_,au ms
c v) > Q)
"(2 >
a) D 0
E Ft. c
(0 4--)
v)
4) -E) °'
on
N - 0
05 >, r
0
C
a) ozs
(I) V a CV)
(Z5 4) a) -0
0
•1
0
a) cis
V0-
co W
.115 o D
C• •
THINK GREEN.
I-
2
W
Q
a
a
2
W
1-
H
Q
3
0
1S s
W
)c
- o
_ v
lV •� >
a) 4_) 4u
.4..) ozu co v)
V1 •; _c
C� = � i
v) rcs▪ ocs
"0 ozs
o o Q)
c to
0 V ^,
tin -0 c 1 W
>, 4) .c
V .o
D 4-) L i._
0 CU c :_7-o •
> = c a; v
ozs
V L. o w 1o
V ••
rd
43 2 4-) C
ow 'V cvN
OZ 0
DC , Ce o >.% OnC
•-
C Ti) 05 CI C ▪ (I) (1)
OZ >1 "15 E = v)
:6
V C cn V cin cin
C ce0
• • • •
Z
W
w
6
z_
1-
1-
2
-
1-
2
W
W
Q
2
a
5W
1-
a
3
^_
W
CO 05
03 (1)
on
(LS rcs JO
on
W o I
VI ) (3 )
rili U •▪ '
L- On
C
O t5
V) U O
4 ) 4-) cV)
.
O , >
•
O > (C3 o
tf o
on 0_ .,_,
DCL_
ms
D U
cCS
• r- U 0
73 Q� 22V
z
w
W
C
z_
N
.co.
Os O
(`• N---
�? M
c o qi d'
11 11 11
sil.2 0
L-
�- (Ci V
U
U 4U cn -0
E-
6▪ -+ W
v) CL. CL 5
, .1
_Ca)
i
L_ = = N 3
= 0 (ti C
CL U = D
81
O
0
-0a)
�V
on
•
..
Service billed on tax bill
Service not billed on tax bill
Unsure/undecided
THINK GREEN:'
=
4U
N
Cri
•-
0
c
0
U
>.%
a)
>
L.
1.. =
4) N
> on
62 cFre u
(1/4, >,u
L
c 8eLi
= a)
O 0-
N
10 a)
E
O .1
3 0
u L
'^ O
N a)
Q. O
u a)
CL CI
a) a'
O
riZS� a--�
fCS - O
on O
a) Q.
• u
= 0-
u a,
-o on
co rci
O on
>• di c..
2 a)
r; 0
0
OLfirel
o
0
11 11 11 11
cu � V
a 3 '>
3 L "
L.. lib, v)
la)
CI vi
a) a)
E c 13
L5
O o u
o
O 1- z
Unsure/undecided
THINK GREEN:'
v
Ril
O
W
c
CW
� V
4)
c
a--) a)
N
al W
>
c
O
7 V
0 E
O
v, e
>.% = y... o
-1-J V M N
CNI
c
0 0
L. = a) gi,
4) N _c
...,
ocs
> on CD .-
.� Ncc5
ce .c = 0,-)
4-
-C1) O O
'a V 2 O
tneL ,,, ce ,,,
m: La ›- zcu O
c
Unsure/undecided
z
LU
ICI
z_
90
•
0
>ccs
_cH
HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
1225 MAIN STREET — SEBASTIAN, FL 32958
PHONE 772-388-8200 — FAX 772-581-0149
jgriffin(i cityofsebastian.org — vovw.citvofsebastian.org
MEMORANDUM
TO: All Interested Parties
RE: Letter of Professional Recommendation
DATE: 01 May 2014
RECEIVED AT IRC -BCC
Mar'h IR,A06
Date
Rem #
By.geflnc 0041r l)
Deputy Clerk
It is with great pleasure that I write a letter of professional recommendation for Waste
Management Inc. of Florida for solid waste, recycling, yard waste, and related services.
Waste Management has provided exceptional service to the residents, and businesses, of
the City of Sebastian for more than a decade. In summer of 2013, the Sebastian City
Council unanimously voted to renew the City's contract with Waste Management. Waste
Management has consistently provided Sebastian's residents and businesses with
exceptional service, innovative new technologies that have enhanced service, and an
unwavering willingness to go the extra mile to serve our community.
As part of our renewal agreement, the City elected to install Waste Management's
"BigBelly" solar compactors in our parks. In just a few months, we clearly see their
value in both capacity to handle garbage and recycling in our parks and in cost savings to
our city.
Additionally, in 2013, Waste Management launched its proprietary "Waste Watch"
program in our City, in conjunction with the Sebastian Police Department. Through this
program, Waste Management's drivers serve as an extra set of eyes and ears for our
police and emergency authorities to help keep our community safe. Waste Management
provided this value-added service at no extra charge to the City.
It's innovation and impeccable service that makes Waste Management the leader in the
environmental services industry. And, it's these qualities that will reinforce the City of
Sebastan's trusted partnership with Waste Management for many years to come.
Joseph Griffin
City Manager
BREVAR
HI,BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FLORIDA'S SPACE COAST
DISTRICT 4 COMMISSION OFFICE
2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, #C-214
Viera, FL 32940-6698
May 2, 2014
Waste Management Inc. of Florida
7382 Talona Drive
West Melbourne, FL 32904
Re: Letter of Professional Recommendation
To Whom it May Concern:
T: 321 633-2044
F: 321 633-2121
As Chair of the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners, I am pleased to write a letter of
professional recommendation for Waste Management Inc. of Florida for solid waste, recycling, yard
waste, and related services.
Waste Management has provided exceptional service to the residents and businesses of Brevard
County for more than four decades. During that time, the company and its professional staff have
more than proven their commitment to the County by providing outstanding service, engaging our
communities with new innovative technology to aid in our environmental sustainability, and offering
tremendous support to charitable, community, and civic organizations. In the interest of transparency,
the Board elected to place the contract out for proposals in 2012. In 2013, the Board once again
voiced its support for Waste Management and voted to renew the County's contract with Waste
Management.
Once again, Waste Management has proven that it is the leader in the environmental services
industry. As part of our renewal, the company committed to convert its fleet to clean -burning,
environmentally friendly compressed natural gas -fueled trucks, which are now operational in our
County. Construction is underway on the Brevard County Waste Management/Single Stream
Recyclers Materials Recovery Facility, a state-of-the-art recycling processing center. This high tech
facility is on track to be operational in September 2014, bringing with it 50 new jobs at full
employment, a $12 million capital investment, and an annual economic impact of over $4 million.
And, if that were not enough, Waste Management more than proved its efficiency and leadership in
transitioning nearly 99,000 households in unincorporated Brevard County in 2013 to automated solid
waste and recycling cart service.
Innovation. Impeccable service. Unwavering community support. All of these words describe Waste
Management and serve as the backbone of a longstanding relationship with Brevard County that will
be solid for many years to come.
goiA)A<:
Hon. Mary Bolin Lewis
Chair, Brevard County Board of County Commissioners
93
City of Melbourne
900 E Stravitnidge Avenue • Nirlbuortic. F132901 • (321) 727-2900 • Fax (321) 953.'3207
February 20. 2012
To Whom it May Concern:
The City of Melbourne. with a population of 76.068, k situated in East Central Florida and
known as the ”Space Coot,- Wc arc a diverse. thriving community with established residential
communities and a strong commercial and industrial base, including large c-mployers such as
Harris Corporation's world headquarters, Northrop Grumman, Embraer, General Etwrie and
Rockwell Collins.
Waste Management has provided franchised solid waste collection services for the City for
several decades with positive results thnnighout that time. As regulatory and market
environments changed, Waste !Management successfully expanded their collection processes to
meet the circumstances, including the separate collection of yard waste and recycling in the
)090's and the transition to single -stream recycling in 2006.
Our current contract with Waste Management was issued in 2005 and a renewal was successfully
negotiated in 2010. 1114 contract included a transition to automated cart collection for both solid
waste and single -stream recycling. inhich4weurred in late 2010. rhe transition to the new carts
and equipment was smooth and Waste !Management's local team worked well with City staff to
address any issues as they arose.
Waste Management has been responsive to our residents. staff and proactive in their
communication. It is a professional relationship that is appreciated by the City.
Sincerely,
Ralph F Reigelsporger
Public Works & t !tallies Director
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Internet www melbtenntilnrids ori • &Mill. persennelAmelbourneflortdcorg
qLf
CITY OF
INDIAN HARBOUR BEACH
Waste Management
Attention: George Geletko
7382 Talona Drive
W. Melbourne, FL 32904
Dear George:
Florida
October 8, 2013
2055 SOUTH PATRICK DRIVE
INDIAN HARBOUR REACH, FLORIDA 32937
PHONE (3211 773.3181
FAX (1211 773.5000
This letter is being written to apprise you of a situation 1 personally experienced
regarding one of your special Waste Management employees. 1 recently had a
large tree taken down and removed from my property. Since it was so large,
several days after the fact there was still much residue left in my yard (limbs, roots,
etc.) which 1 was endeavoring to carry out to the curb for stacking prior to calling
for a pickup. During these efforts, [ noticed your yard -waste vehicle in the
neighborhood and walked up and engaged the driver/operator in conversation. 1
explained to him what 1 had done and that 1 was piling up the debris at the time,
but had not as yet called for a pickup. 1 asked him whether he would be able to
please pick it up since he was already in the neighborhood.
The gentleman at first hesitated (and I believed I could read his mind as he was
contemplating whether to follow his work schedule or agree to oblige this one
resident's request.) He then proceeded to pull his truck up to my curb and picked
up my pile of vegetation. 1 thanked him and asked his name; and he advised me
that, "They call me G-man." 1 told him how much 1 appreciated his assistance, and
then handed him my card and told him, "This might not be the last time you hear
of this." 1 had not mentioned prior to that that 1 am the Mayor of Indian Harbour
Beach, and I know first-hand of the wonderful customer service you have been
providing for our residents for so many years.
Please pass on to this gentleman's supervisor how impressed I was with his
demeanor and his assistance - and I thank you for providing my City with such
excellent service!
Sicerely,
Iayor
ti\
9s
BREVARD ZOO,.
"Wildlife Conservation through Education and Participation"
April 17, 2014
To Whom It May Concern:
Brevard Zoo is a private, not-for-profit institution serving the people and environment of
Central Florida. We are a regional attraction, hosting over 400,000 guests annually and
supporting a wide array of education and conservation programs. Waste Management has
been a critical, long-term partner of the Zoo, helping to meet our waste disposal needs in an
environmentally sensitive way. We rely on their conscientious and dependable service for a
variety of hauling needs.
Waste Management is also a generous supporter and partner in a new initiative. With their
help, we are about to build a next generation, aerated compost system which will be effective
on our limited footprint. This project will stop over 200 tons of animal waste from going to the
landfill on an annual basis and will create valuable compost that we can use on the Zoo
grounds. Waste Management is also playing a key role in the establishment of an oyster shell
stockpiling system that will support oyster restoration efforts across the state.
We are proud to call Waste Management a Corporate Partner.
Sincerely,
Keith Winsten
Executive Director
��v1Mio0 s
bF'alLBT LOBSTL
Orlando's
Closed Beeches
8225 N. Wickham Rd. Melbourne, FL 32940-7924
(321) 254-WILD(9453) • Fax (321) 259-5966
http: 'www.brevardzoo.org
ASSOCIATION
OF 7.00'3 ,
HONOR A MERICA
From the desk of:
Mr. John Tice
Executive Director
Honor America Inc.
1601 Oak Street
Melbourne, FL 32901
(321) 727-1776
CoachTice@HonorAmerica.org
May 1,2014
Re: Letter of Professional Recommendation
To Whom it May Concern:
As the Executive Director of the Liberty Bell Memorial Museum and Honor America, I see how
important it is that we look to future of our nation so our children and grandchildren are afforded
the same opportunities that we enjoy today. It is for this reason that I am pleased to provide this
letter of professional recommendation for Waste Management.
For decades, Waste Management has been a frontrunner in innovative new technologies that
help to preserve our environment. It is so very encouraging to witness this work directly in our
communities — specifically, Waste Management's efforts to promote single stream recycling and
educate residents on proper recycling techniques, as well as the introduction of clean -burning,
environmentally friendly compressed natural gas -fueled trucks.
The pioneering, environmentally -focused programs that Waste Management develops proves to
me that this company just doesn't SAY "think green," but, rather, it actually DOES "think
green!" I truly believe that the work Waste Management does is nothing short of amazing, and I
look forward to many more years of innovation from this great company.
Sincerely,
John Tice
Executive Director
R(1
Board of Directors
Ozella Bowles
Brigid Carr
Jo Compton
Ronald Cook
Tom Daley
Robert Day
Yvonne Dingman
Bill Ellis
Stephen Ellis
Virginia Gaylor
Judge Jack Griesbaum
Chris Hilderbrand
Barbara Hoagland
Martha Kirby
Jack Kirschenbaum
Heather Lewis
Shirley Lynn
Jack Masson
Joe Matheny
Lisa Moody
Britta Moore
Kendall Moore
Bill Nichols
John Porter
Rocky Randels
Loren Rapport
Dina Reider Hicks
Arleen Rice
Jack Rood
Jay Schenck
Delores Spearman
Robert Springer
Nancy Thompson
Elizabeth Tobin
Jim Alley
Jennifer Wilster
Kristie Worley
Milo Zonka
Executive Director
Tony Sasso
1620Adamson Road
Cocoa, FL 32926
321-631-0501
Fax 321-631-2840
www. keepbrevardbeaultfid. com
May 22, 2014
To whom it may concern;
Keep Brevard Beautiful (KBB), one of the top performing Keep America
Beautiful affiliates in the USA, is happy to provide this letter
recommendation for Waste Management (WM).
As Executive Director of KBB, 1 see first hand the multitude of ways WM is
committed to our communities. Their dedication to service and
professionalism is equaled by their deep engagement to our future
generations by promoting and practicing sustainability. It was, in large part,
due to WM's efforts that KBB initiated Brevard County's, first ever, "Annual
Sustainability Awards Program" and they continue to support KBB's Trash
Bash, Coastal Cleanup and so many of our other community programs and
events. They have played a key role in our ability to dramatically increase
recycling to meet goals directed by State and local agencies.
Waste Management has been a long term partner with KBB, providing
environmentally responsible waste disposal and recycling. I have personally
visited their single stream facilities and as an engineer and someone who
deeply cares about our rivers, oceans and beaches, I was pleasantly
impressed.
WM's decades long pioneering of technology and corporate commitment to
real, personal service and outstanding community engagement make me
proud to have them as a partner to keep Brevard beautiful!
Kind regards,
Keep Brevard Beautiful
Executive Director
THE GREATER
2014 OFFICERS &
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
excautanSanunittes
Dr. JeffMonteLeon
Chairman
Tarllyn Fazekas
Chair Elect
Nancy Domonousky
Treasurer
Puneet Kapur (PK)
Secretary
Olivia Gladnick
Vice Chair
Joe Raley
Vice Chair
George Geletko
Vice Chair
Danny Timothy
Immediate Past Chair
Victoria Northrup
President & CEO
Directors
Lynda Weatherman
Howard Tipton
Javier Molinares
Cindy Forstall
Rob Wilson
Darryl Gilbert
Josh Zaradona
Kathryn Reid
Vicki Mays
Accountant
Ross Whitley, Berman Hopkins
EN-Otftciq
Bon/lyn Wi/banks, Malabar
Richard Ennis, Melbourne Intl Airport
Sue Hann, Palm Bay
Nick Tsamouta/es, Palm Bay
Dr. Ethel Newman, BCC
Police Chief Doug Muldoon, Palm Bay
Scott Morgan, W Melbourne
Ray Grady, Founder
Trustees
Health First
Waste Management
Florida Tech
FP&L
Intersil
Wellcare
City of Palm Bay
GREATER PALM BAY CHANIIIE:R OF' COMMERCE
4100 Dixie Highway NE Palm Bay, FL 32905
Phone (321) 951-9998 • Fax (321) 473-8904
www.greaterpalm baychamber.coin
OF COMMERCE
May 1, 2014
To Whom It May Concern:
Please accept this letter of recommendation and as a testimonial for the
relationship that we have enjoyed with Waste Management over the past
twenty-four years.
Waste Management's director of Government Affairs, Mr. George Geletko,
has sat on our board of directors for a number of years and served as chairman
of the board in 2010. This was a pinnacle year for our chamber as under his
direction, as we began moving our organization on a new course to better serve
the community and small businesses. In addition, he took on the role of
Chairman for the Government Affairs and Committee of 100 committees. His
depth of knowledge and experience has been appreciated on numerous
occasions.
The company has shown their unwavering support of our chamber through
financial means by elevating to the Trustee level ensuring that we were able to
meet our fiscal obligations, along with additional sponsorships for our events.
We could always count on them to help support all of our events and activities
and efforts.
Their years of dedicated service to the Palm Bay Chamber has generated
influence and maintained stability. Having their presence at our board meetings
and events impresses our newcomers to the area who open businesses and join
our chamber and we are so proud to showcase their logo on our Trustee Leader
Board, on our stationery and in all of our public relations efforts.
We feel truly honored to have such an esteemed and respectable company part
of this organization. If I can answer any specific questions regarding our
excellent relationship with Waste Management, please do not hesitate to
contact me directly.
With regards,
victoria Northrup
Victoria Northrup
President & CEO
Greater Palm Bay Chamber of Commerce
99
WASTE MANAGEMENT
RECEIVED AT IHC-IICC ilii ti irtir`t
(Y101ANC).
Date
Item #
® By' %Id"
Deputy Cle
Indian River County Solid Waste and Recyclables Service Survey
Telephone survey dates: March 16-17, 2015
Sample size: 2,479 respondents via telephone throughout entire
unincorporated Indian River County
Survey conducted by: Net Research Services, Washington, D.C.
Survey Results:
1. Do you support having the County purchase garbage and recycling carts, or
do you support having the garbage hauler purchase the carts for residents?
County purchases the carts = 10.11%
Hauler purchases the carts = 46.59%
Unsure/undecided = 43.30%
2. Do you support garbage service being billed on your property tax bill?
Service billed on tax bill = 24.29%
Service not billed on tax bill = 54.68%
Unsure/undecided = 21.03%
3. If you had curbside garbage pickup service, would you prefer garbage
pickup one time per week or two times per week?
One time per week = 35.04%
Two times per week = 53.90%
No curbside service = 5.03%
Unsure/undecided = 6.03%
4. Do you use the County Customer Convenience Centers to dispose of
garbage?
Yes, I use the CCC = 62.31%
No, I do not use the CCC = 37.02%
Unsure/undecided = 0.67%
Waste Management Inc. of Florida, 4415 77th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960
www.WM.com
1—
m
3
4t
,v
.
,
W
19
N
It
Mij
Brevard County Recycling Tonnage Report 2012-2014 j
t+
LO
c
W
Q
AJ
co
VI
141.78
i
d 3
5.
w c
3
6226.451
N
p
r
UY
I 779.78
Cardboard
r-+
r
W
N
W
-
p
M
!s
lel+co
r
a+
W
Colored
HDPE
N
v
CCLD
N
OP
w
'
N
CO
w
Contamination
VI
t-+
°°
is
_JJ
Lt.*
.,J
W
Q.
Gi
OJ
tn
w
4
.3
L1
V
9707.54
r
w
511
CO
Mixed Paper
W
co
C-1
h-,
kr,
t
CSD
Natural
HDPE
1
r
N
uJ
Q
r
,J
I
N.
t'°
LP
1~'..
Newspaper
r -J
N
a
N
9
U.S
N
co
.UUJ
m
LP
LP
IP
-
a-. LD
P°
r
N
-
w
ry
a
V
212.67
Steel Cans
1
gr",
p
?
1
to
r
N
w
1
"'J
• 44
N
y
1
60
S
XI
epipeweap slaea weaaus
y increased its diversion rate:
ci•
(r'
O
▪ m
�.
• 3
N
O
CD CM
< -5
co
0 O
O Cr
rf �
0
3
O 3
O
W Q
✓ r
N
O
O: 3
N
O �
N
/yam
VQ O
V
This chart, generated from ENSP1RESM, depicts Brevard County's
z
.
O
O
CD
;I)
3
fDz
74
/0(
Florida's Space Coast
BR'/ARD
All BOARD OF COUNTY COM
ISSIONERS
•
1_11A 0 15
(1/ �Daat
Item # T fit'
n
By L 1. 1 11
eputy lerk
72 ud e Fran Jamieson
Viera, Florida 32940
ay
(32 .) 633 200
vardcounty',us
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, July 09, 2014
Brevard County Recycling Rate Exceeds Milestone Goal Set for 2014
BREVARD COUNTY, Fla. -- Brevard County has reached a goal of 52 percent recycling, exceeding the 2014 recycling goal set by tt
state Legislature. The recycling rate puts Brevard County in the top 5 Florida counties with a traditional recycling rate of 50
percent or higher.
According to the latest recycling data (2013) released by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida's official
recycling rate is now 49 percent, up one percent from last year. This represents a substantial increase in the amount of solid
waste recycled — from 9.7 million tons in 2012 to 11.8 million tons in 2013.
"We have exceeded the goal for 2014 and will continue to work hard to meet further recycling goals" said Hillary Arena, Recyclii
Coordinator for Brevard County Solid Waste Management Department. "We need to reach out to our commercial businesses to
'step up to the plate' and help us achieve the ultimate goal of recycling 75 percent by 2020."
Residents are encouraged to recycle at home and to find out what recycling efforts are underway at their local schools, their
workplace and their community groups. DEP continues to promote its Recycling Recognition Program and is working to raise
awareness and interest.
"Thank you" to the citizens of Brevard County, said Euripides Rodriguez, director of the Brevard County Solid Waste Managemei
Department. "We thank them for their efforts and help in achieving this goal; we could not do it without them."
The top 10 counties based on traditional recycling rates are:
1. Sarasota, 58 percent
2. Alachua, Martin, Collier, 54 percent (three-way tie)
5. Brevard, 52 percent
6. Manatee, 48 percent
7. Orange, 47 percent
8. Lee, 46 percent
9. Duval, Leon, 45 percent (tie)
To see the complete Solid Waste Management Report, visit
http://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/FLDEP/bulletins/cl5acd">2013 FDEP Recycling Report.
100--
2013 TRANSITION HEADLINES 2014
43
y u p
jY
t Y G
5
Pe 8
CLy 6
as
8.41
� a c
2 t t3
,w_
-'o
t up�
C 0 G
: ofd Hd € a
g),)� 0.0 kHH
5
0.0
Civ 'j=
a 11
Of !HI
lb
103
Q
.1w y
M
ZQ
QW
W°)
CC
Of'
0 cd
Cs) "No
w c:14 ct
mal cio 4=
.. c!
4 v: —
z
ct: :
..
cm.
Pc: w
*0
Treasure Coast Refuse
ui
i
w
'it
ca
ai..
Environmenta
Q- 0
OV 0,,V (a
o 0 -O •-
O . O V12
Q i 4— fp
Cn fl 4—
O 0 8 o
fo
'� „ = 0 .o
ci 2 .4 -0
i = O
Q)1/4L) O � �
. —i • 2 7, _ = I� S
o a• -J a) c
(1) . �. ( .�
Vo0Eu
• 0 .167) g17
_ ) '>
(0 c o
r V > a)
customers.
in the NYSE
a)
-o
ru
05
CA
National Capabiliti
39 states and
I0(o
Our Business Today Nationwide
revenue
W V
15 CD CO
CO 0
N 01 O CO 0 i
40 M M CCOO
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
cn
trz
190 operating
■ ■
■
Ib)
Florida Operations
825 Drivers
105 Roll -off Trucks
•
583 Residential Trucks
co
a)
0)
co
E
cu
(1)
>cc
, -0
7-1
-J
-CI)
=
0
C
- 0
L f
-0 •
C •
co a)
-I >
•
E
4 Transfer Facilities
3 Material Recovery Facilities
•
0
0
109
V
:I 0 -06W
z cc co
aWle Zi ..
CC a) .—
;t"► > t•) co
_
OA m E '
CO O oca
c�
.i J
2 p � v �
ca 2 . O
Sustainability Solutions in Florida
■
4E.
0
L
a)
O
✓ O
O 00
0 L!7
■
1001
t)
.i
ca ( O
W .4—
WCD
W e C
P14 C =
.-
0. W ci,
O v El
O > _ O
ti 0
._ N
L
N
N O w .—
Cl) "4.7;a. R:
4D RU X0 411E). .
.v = a) 0
as
w .—._w a)
.o>.. '•
m..
u) 00 c =
_ = Ri
4.• 0) 2 E a.
c co x co
w w -o (,)
LI: To co c
CC V3
al
VCU
13 C.)
V E
• -
4D C
CU
as
-0 E -0 E c .
m al, = 4= •—
Ct. > O. 0 s... 13
CD 0 CD 45 m 2"
ce a) ce cts O 0
■ ■ ■
Qualifications and References
((D
Technical Proposa
O t•
RS CD
cn .2 v E
V CD la CO
u z -
._ to i
tam.c cu o. To
as
plz:p 2.cn
w
v •• a-
_.
a) a) 5; 2
C.) 0
✓ c — c w cts
>< a)LL m .c i
a) 'ice p—`�'
CD U w 0)
._ CI L ) wjE s
i -.c
w x --
O cu r3. TZ. -0 •....
•— c a)
CD w 73
_C 1- a)
a)
a) a) Li L-
._
v) u) 1.61 -c a) m
_ co — o-
0 as w .c
I- C) (.4. a) L.
L. •,.. o -a a) 0
= .0 03 ▪ 'P Ci .—
is
v
w +ca o �a 2s
O oCv = a3
111
0 _4...
.IW a) _ m
ca IL ILW •2 4wa L nswf
1411 CI) CD
L. orr= afa 0
Ci =O 3 L_
i L a m u. E
L- C L O A O
O
� v v � O •—
>% cm c 8w i i � t
�) •—a -0 cs.) ni w
v •- MC ._ •-
O >1% /I 0
.-4, 2 CD (n c
s.. 0 E
, as
ta uu o
c4 a(0 U _ 0
a 0
;awl 68 a:$ • O 5
•� • V .. i)14 p 0)
e c -0 O
;• o. u, > gi 2 (i. 2
Ci: E c co a) 4a) co
•,_ .. ...c -,,S 6 1:2 w =
0) LO _ .- O O(i) . ,
c) -.5 !.**:- 6 ni C> Q. 0 C CD
Niall) C RS C
o a) — •— —2:-* .
3 .—
A.
a
ii iii
E
tc�
Vs-)
U
CIO
0..yCC :Ea
ca
eb
ca
E
OC
•mi
-0040 mil
P
4,0C C)
.
L
■
ca.)
River Beautifu
ndian River County Chamber of Commerce
Q
co
cu
U
.c
m
cc
(1)
ca
O
0
ndian River County
ndian River County
1 (3
0
cov0.14
la g)
CC Zi E
Rep = -°a
OA o co
L cc =
z
O t/) '_
L.., = >i .1L
O O >,
4•0 3 N 0. - ++
+. —
Cw CI CCClio 4— v C
01) co L u)
=CD co
.—
+� C - V N
N = Q
CU 2 N =tQ
7.•Gi L
O OL E L. •-0�
z 0 = ca -
.mil >,O .4
Cr cu V 2 O
O GD
;No C4
C? ;aim y v . O
;O
cr11
; cm O -
E
c.f) .E.: c 0)
Pm" vit
V . .
0 L m CD
:i 0
We have the day-to-day working experience with your residents
Our managing staff knows your managers and their expectations
and manage the
ndian River County
)L1
15