Are your municipal staff planning new or modified zero waste programs for a pending RFP? Are you interested in making mid-contract program additions or other changes to enhance diversion? This presentation helps you plan and execute a process to achieve the best results, drawing on the recent experiences of influential California cities such as San Jose, Mountain View, Palo Alto and Daly City, as well as other jurisdictions.
The presentation addresses questions such as:
The recent San Juan Capistrano appellate court opinion calls for designing increasing block rate structures that “correspond to the actual cost of providing service at a given level of usage.” Although this controversial opinion supports tiered rate structures, it has led water agencies to question the basis for their rates. Regardless of the pending legal status of this opinion, it draws attention to the need to set rates that are cost based and not arbitrarily influenced by other policy objectives such as rewarding efficiency and discouraging waste, which heretofore was a common industry practice. This presentation will explain how to evaluate tiered rate structures to determine whether they reflect the cost of service from lowest to highest use.
Methods will be presented for determining the size of each tier (i.e., where the breakpoints are located between tiers) using customer billing data, operational criteria, and water supply availability. The use of bill distribution curves will be explained for identifying natural breakpoints that define levels of service. Methods will also be presented for setting the rate for each tier that reflects the cost of providing service within each tier using cost allocation formulas based on base and peak usage, rather than on qualitative factors. Methods will also be presented for evaluating the price increments between tiers and how the rates for each tier compare with the lowest and average prices.
These methods will be explained within the broader context of a conventional rate study that includes revenue requirement projections and cost of service allocations to each customer class. Typical customer bills will be used to evaluate whether the impact on customers is proportional to the cost of providing service, which has emerged as a key legal requirement. The mathematical definition of proportionality will be presented and methods for gauging whether impacts are proportionate or disproportionate will be provided.
The presentation is designed to provide quantitative tools in a methodical framework that expands the techniques currently available in rate-making manuals and in general use in the industry. These techniques reflect the special needs of setting rates in semi-arid areas like California and Nevada where rates need to be integral with surcharges, penalties, and other restrictions that encourage efficiency and reduce waste during droughts.
The presentation will emphasize the necessity for simplicity, which aids understanding and acceptance and reduces the risk of challenge. The presentation will also provide practical guidance in meeting the legal burden of proof, which was lacking in recent litigation over rates such as San Juan Capistrano and Palmdale. By the end of the presentation, rate analysts and attorneys should be equipped to evaluate whether any changes in tiered rates are advisable and what alternatives are available for making refinements to improve legal defensibility.
Driving diversion of organic materials from landfills is a topic that has been discussed for years, however, developing programs to do so often presents a myriad of financial and operational challenges. With cities, counties and states across the nation embracing the need to increase organics diversion, along with the passing of new legislation in California (mandatory organics collection, and elimination of diversion credits for organics used as landfill cover), the need to develop sustainable organics collection and processing programs is more pressing than ever. The goal of this presentation is to demonstrate that this may be achieved through well-managed procurement processes. This presentation offers a closer look into what drives the economics of organics programs, and ultimately provide a roadmap for developing successful organics collection and processing contracts.
The presentation begins with laying out a broad list of planning factors that any agency developing an organics program should consider, along with a discussion of scoping options (e.g. what is the available or desired timeline? Will the contract include incentives or subsidies? Will there be a pilot area, or other form of phased implementation?). It then provides an overview of various procurement approaches (e.g. negotiate with existing service provider(s), “design-build-operate” a public facility, or a launch competitive RFP) and, considers the process-related and economic factors (including pros/cons) of such options. The presentation discusses the importance, and provides examples of various strategies for stakeholder outreach and education, both leading up to, and throughout the new contract. Finally, the presentation highlights some best practices for implementing and managing the new contract for ongoing success.
The presentation concludes with a look at how all of these factors have come into play in three distinct regions in California.
As California and each of its local agencies move towards 75% Recycling (AB 341) and commercial organics programs take hold (under AB 1826), the current method of funding recycling based on waste disposal will no longer work. If we want to get to zero waste, we must push upstream to create incentives for national and multi-national corporations to redesign and repackage materials to be less wasteful, less toxic, and more recyclable. In addition, to handle the anticipated increase in recycling and organics processing, California needs to develop potentially hundreds of new recycling and organics management facilities to handle the demand. This presentation discusses various options for restructuring funding to support diversion programs and facilities.
Communities throughout the United States are looking for real solutions to the real challenges they face in achieving their state or local mandates for recycling and Zero Waste. This presentation helps local governments, facility operators, haulers, non-profits, and community activists understand the importance of orienting their plans for zero waste around the local context. By applying multi-level PESTLE (Political, Environmental, Social, Technological, Legal, and Economic) analysis, waste characterization analysis, infrastructure assessments, and cost/benefit estimation you can develop a Zero Waste plan that: 1) identifies the most cost-effective policy, program, and facility solutions for your community and capably demonstrates that to decision-makers; 2) prioritizes maximizing the return on existing infrastructure investments over making new ones; 3) clarifies the “business plan” for how the system will be financed; and, 4) recognizes that its success is based on its compatibility with the local context. This presentation describes how different communities around the country are coming up with fundamentally different solutions to achieving our common goal of resource recovery.
Starting in 2010, the Monterey Regional Waste Management District realized the need to plan for the next generation of its recycling system. State legislation and regulatory agencies made clear a statewide 75% recycling goal. In 2014, the District’s debt from its 1996 MRF would be paid off and the MRF would require upgrades. In 2015, the franchise agreements in seven of its member communities would expire.
The key to success was to work regionally to develop a unified vision while respecting the unique character and needs of each community. The District engaged HF&H Consultants to work with the District and member communities to define the goals and the methods for achieving them, including: 1) new infrastructure to support processing of all waste, recycling, organics, and C&D in the region; 2) recovery of energy and fuel products; 3) competitive procurement for franchise collection services; and, 4) a business model that aligns with a future with less waste.
The presentation describes the features of the new system that enable the achievement of the highest levels of material recovery seen anywhere in the U.S. while preserving the value of recyclable and organic commodity. It describes the planning and franchise procurement process and presents the state-of-the-industry infrastructure that will provide the backbone for the next twenty to thirty years of recovery programs.
Communities with zero waste or high diversion goals face a unique challenge when it comes to structuring rates. On the one hand, economic structures that reward recycling and penalize wasting are critical to achieving success. Commonly, this takes the form of charging high prices for disposal in order to subsidize recycling activities. On the other hand, as those economic structures are successful in creating the desired behavior change they undermine the economic viability of the systems that rely on them. As communities achieve and exceed 50% recycling rates, this results in funding more and more of the system costs on a smaller and smaller base (“the Zero Waste Death Spiral”); making the cost to customers higher and more volatile.
Recognizing this risk in light of California’s 75% statewide recycling goal, HF&H and CalRecycle convened a series of workshops throughout California in an effort to educate communities and service providers about the challenges as well as some emerging solutions. These workshops included more than a dozen speakers from communities and companies that are developing their own solutions to the “Death Spiral”. This presentation summarizes and highlights the challenges faced and solutions employed by several communities with recycling goals of 75% or greater.