The Green Path For Dallas' Trash Memo

Memorandum
DATE:
September 23, 2011 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
TO:
SUBJECT:
Information Regarding the Green Path for Dallas Trash

Please find attached the following information: The June 1st, June 15th, and September 7th Green Path for Dallas Trash briefings, the answers to questions from the September 7th Green Path for Dallas Trash briefing, and a fact book related to the Citys proposed resource flow control ordinance and resource recovery system. These documents provide information concerning the following subjects/issues: History of Garbage Collection Benefits of Resource Flow Control and a Resource Recovery System Fiscal Impacts Other Cities Operations Environmental Issues Primary Land Uses Near Landfill Waste Types Waste Volumes Financial Impact to Customers Steps for Implementation
Should you have any other questions, please contact me.
Ryan S. Evans Assistant City Manager

CC: Tom Perkins, City Attorney Rosa Rios, Acting City Secretary Craig Kinton, City Auditor Judge Victor Lander Mary K. Suhm, City Manager A.C. Gonzalez, Assistant City Manager Jill A. Jordan, P.E., Assistant City Manager Forest E. Turner, Assistant City Manager Joey Zapata, Interim Assistant City Manager Jeanne Chipperfield, Chief Financial Officer Frank Librio, Public Information Officer Helena Stevens-Thompson, Assistant to the City Manager
The Green Path from Trash to Treasure

Briefing to City Council
1
June 1, 2011
This page intentionally left blank
Briefing contents
Dallas green initiatives Broaden our green policies into waste
Treating our trash as a valued resource Making beneficial use and reuse of our solid waste resources Preparing for new technology to replace landfilling
Proposed ordinance for Council consideration
Dallas is a green city

Council policies promote sustainability Our Green Accomplishments
Dallas was the first city in nation with citywide ISO 14001 certification (environmental standards) We use 40% renewable power
$5.3m saved in energy costs
Our fleet is 38% alternative-fueled Water usage is down 35% since 1998 Recycling is up 136% since FY07
Revenues of $2.5m in FY10
Landfill gas fuels 25,000 homes each year

Over $1.6m in royalties annually
4

Value gained by maintaining sustainable focus
Cleaner environment Dallas as recognized leader People and businesses want to be here New revenue sources and savings
Prudent resource management
The Evolving Story of Waste:
The Past
1900 1925 1950 1975 2000 2025
~ 30 years ago States passed laws requiring disposal facilities to be engineered, controlled, and monitored. Federal authorities standardized waste rules nationwide. ~ 50 years ago Industrialization and urbanization forced communities to adopt specific plans for disposal
~ 20 years ago EPA modified federal regulations via Subtitle D (1991) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 creating standards still in place today.
> 100 years ago Rural populations typically disposed waste in a ditch out back on their own property or in small community dumps
The Present
1900 1925 1950 1975 2000 2025
~ 20 years ago
EPA modified federal regulations via Subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 creating standards still in place today.
Landfill Biotechnology Franchising the Haulers Landfill Gas recovery Neighborhood Recycling Backyard Composting
~ 30 years ago
States (including Texas) passed laws requiring disposal facilities to be engineered, controlled, and monitored. Federal authorities standardized waste rules nationwide.
~ 50 years ago
Industrialization and urbanization forced communities to adopt specific plans for disposal
> 100 years ago

Rural populations typically disposed waste in a ditch out back on their own property or in small community dumps
The Future
1900 1925 1950 1975 2000 2025
Landfill Biotechnology Franchising the Haulers
~ 20 years ago
EPA modified federal regulations via Subtitle D (1991) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 creating standards still in place today.
Landfill Gas recovery Neighborhood Recycling Backyard Composting
~ 30 years ago
Upcoming innovations:
Advanced Waste Diversion Waste-to-Electricity Waste-to-Fleet-Fuel Zero-Waste Policies more in development 8
~ 50 years ago
> 100 years ago

How Dallas manages its waste

Waste service is a fundamental City function
Protection of public health and environment are paramount
Staying at the forefront of industry practices Citys facility (McCommas Bluff) at cutting edge
nationally-recognized for green initiatives harvesting gas for re-use alternate-fueled vehicles diverting re-usable items

There are alternatives to our waste service practices
Keep all services in-house and city-operated
City could collect BOTH residential and business City could own and operate landfill and transfer sites City could manage recycling, composting facilities, and special wastes
Privatize some or all services above Preserve facility space Franchise waste haulers
Use single-stream recycling in carts, bag, bins, drop-off sites Exclude non-Dallas waste from the landfill Utilize waste-compaction equipment; employ biotechnology practices Allow only one franchisee for all of city waste collection Issue multiple franchises, as open market policy
10

Approaches that Dallas has explored:
Privatize the waste collection ?
City collects all single-family residences
Tried privatizing in late 1980s failed to meet customers needs City service ranks in Top 5 in the 2009 Dallas Community Survey In case of contractor failure (i.e., poor service, contract dispute), City must rapidly rebuild staff and equipment to meet its obligations
All business (including multi-family) are privatized, currently 189 private solid waste haulers are franchised Considered issuing just one exclusive franchise
Harmful to the open market eliminates 188 Dallas hauling firms

11

Alternatives that Dallas has considered: Privatize the landfill, NO!
Huge city asset
Secure, stable depository for decades to come Value is more than $1billion over its life and increasing
Privatize certain functions, Yes!

Equipment repair, construction projects, environmental monitoring
12

Alternatives that Dallas has considered: Recycle select materials or all
Selected single-stream recycling in blue roll carts Privatized the sorting and processing Progressively adding more to the recyclable list Expanded E-wastes and household hazardous materials Multi-family recycling through drop-off and pilot programs
Dallas choices for managing the waste stream look beyond the immediate benefits and consider the long-term value to the community
13
The future
More changes coming and fast Stronger focus on sustainability Trash is seen as a valued resource Emerging technologies are creating alternative uses
Energy Fuels Reusable products
Each waste item has value Landfills become obsolete
14
Were ready
Already keeping pace with progressive practices Heres three ways ..
Promotes recycling and reuse of resources
136,250 tons diverted FY10 Old pavement Tree limbs & brush Scrap tires
15
Were ready
Already keeping pace with progressive practices
Applies biotechnology practices
Accelerates trash decomposition
Creates additional waste space
16
Were ready
Generates green energy from landfill gas
Protective of air quality Provides fuel sufficient to heat 25,000 homes each year FY10 royalty of $1.6m
17
Preparing for the future

Landfill has an ample capacity
Current life is 45 years remaining Additional 47 years* available bringing the total to 92years
Technology (now and future) will make good use of the resource stream and leave landfill space unused
* Biotechnology = 10 years New landfill space = 37 years
18
Landfill will take on new meaning

Become Resource Recovery Facilities
Materials arrive are sorted, and baled Baled materials marketed and sold Some items will be processed in the facility to become a renewable energy source
19

Use facility as a storage vault
Todays wastes are future resources
Capture and store these resources now Later, recover and use as new technologies evolve Future value may be quite extraordinary
20

Make good use of the vault
Stockpile todays resources we have the space Hold for future uses, such as:
Waste-to-electricity projects Waste-to-fuel facilities Advanced recycling / re-use opportunities
Simple to do:
Half of Dallas resource stream is flowing OUT of the city dont let it go ! Use ordinance authority to direct all Dallas waste resources to McCommas Bluff/Bachman Transfer Station
21
Republic Farmers Branch WMT DFW Landfill
Heres where our resources go now
Bachman Transfer Station/future Waste-toEnergy Facility
McCommas Bluff Landfill

10.5 mi
WMT - Skyline Landfill
22
New Resource Control Ordinance

also called waste flow control ordinance
Adopting a Resource Control ordinance means that all who collect waste within Dallas must use city facilities (i.e., McCommas Bluff landfill,
transfer sites)
About half of these resources are going to landfills OUTSIDE of Dallas New ordinance redirects the resources from haulers from 1.0m tons per year to 1.9m tons/year We have the obligation to manage our solid waste materials
Protecting the public health and the environment Maximizing all city assets to community benefit getting the recycling and energy value from the waste resource
U.S. Supreme Court reinforced this in a 2007 decision

23
Financial Impacts
Operational
$5m in first year, decreasing to $3m per year thereafter Needed for:
equipment, manpower, infrastructure improvements, environmental monitoring, TCEQ permit changes, legal
Revenue
850,000 more tons annually nearly double current rate Equates to $18m in additional annual revenue
(or $15m with a Jan 2012 start date)
Net financial impact = $13m to $15m annually

24
How other cities direct the waste

Two primary methods - each has benefits and
challenges that may appeal or deter various communities
Waste flow control ordinance Exclusive franchise agreement
25

Waste Control ordinance:
In Texas: El Paso passed ordinance in 2010
to be implemented in FY13
Nationally:

Jacksonville, FL Seattle, WA Palm Beach Co, FL Snomish County, WA San Jose, CA
Urbana, IL, Portland, OR (metro) Lancaster County, PA. Franklin Co, OH
Exclusive franchise agreements:

Arlington, Grand Prairie, NTMWD, College Station Allows only one hauler eliminating all others In meetings with staff, haulers voice strong opposition with this concept
26
Options to consider
Continue with current approach
Others capitalize on Dallas resources City then less able to implement new technologies
Take control of our useful resources

By pursuing an exclusive franchise
Does gain control over resources Eliminates 188 waste haulers in Dallas open market
OR
Adopt new Resource Control ordinance
27
Summary
Waste is a valuable resource Great opportunities emerging to turn trash into energy and fuel City can capitalize on the resources for both immediate and long-term benefit Or leave it to others to utilize them
28
Recommendation
Proceed with:
Completing resource control ordinance for Council review Anticipate a 2012 implementation date
Prepare the affected community

Continue meeting with solid waste haulers and stakeholders Collaborate to resolve concerns
Prepare facility to accept new resources

29
APPENDIX
Supplementary Information
A-1
Resource Control Ordinance:

Basic Points
All solid waste generated within city limits must be disposed at city owned or operated facilities Director has the authority to designate disposal sites
Includes landfill and transfer stations
Haulers commit offense if they deposit anywhere else City (via SAN director) may curtail, temporarily suspend, or permanently halt any disposal violators of the ordinance Effective date of ordinance will allow for haulers to resolve contract matters with customers
A-2
Industrys view of the future

April 2011 Green Brainstorms conference
Fortune teamed up with its program partnersThe Nature Conservancy, NRDC, and the Environmental Defense Fundto gather "the smartest people we know" in sustainability from business, government, and NGOs. This session focused on the key emerging environmental trends as well as innovative ways that companies can drive sustainability-based transformational change initiatives. LAGUNA NIGUEL, CALIF. - At the Fortune: GREEN Brainstorm kickoff Monday, Waste Management (WM) CEO David Steiner brought an intriguing case to light: Increasingly, waste companies are finding more and more valuable uses for our garbage. Steiner says that with the additional value that WM is able to pull from ordinary household trash over its competitors, one day consumers may just get paid for their waste. If we can extract $100 to $200 of value out of a ton of material, we can start paying the customers, he says. It is a once-in-a lifetime opportunity. Four years
ago years ago, you wouldnt have heard those words come out of my mouth
Hear all of the conference on: http://www.fortuneconferences.com/brainstormgreen/
A-3

From the New York Times, April 12, 2010:
Europe Finds Clean Energy in Trash, but U.S. Lags
With all these innovations, Denmark now regards garbage as a clean alternative fuel rather than a smelly, unsightly problem. And the incinerators, known as waste-to-energy plants, have acquired considerable cachet as communities like Horsholm vie to have them built
A-4

MSW Management magazine June 2006
The Time Has Come For Conversion Technologies

For as long as civilizations have generated solid wastes, the accepted disposal method has been landfillingdespite advancements in technology and environmental impacts to air and water. In Europe and Japan, new processes for treating MSW, called conversion technologies, are being widely implemented. Many of these facilities are in operation, and others are under construction. Conversion technologies use advanced thermal, biological, or chemical processes to convert the carbon-based portion of the MSW stream into useful products, including electricity, renewable or green fuels, or chemicals. Conversion Technologies 101 Conversion technologies (CTs) include a wide range of processes that can be categorized into thermal, biological, and chemical technologies (some approaches involve combinations of these). Thermal CTs are well developed overseas, and include gasification, pyrolysis, and subsets of these, such as plasma gasification and processes that combine gasification and pyrolysis. Pyrolysis is the thermal degradation of organic materials, using an indirect source of heat at 7501,650 degrees F in the absence of oxygen, to produce a synthetic gas, leaving behind a carbon char. Gasification is the thermal conversion of organic materials, using direct heat at 1,400-2,500 degrees F with a limited supply of oxygen, producing a syngas.
A-5
A-6
35
Follow-Up Information
to the June 1 Briefing
Briefing to City Council June 15, 2011
1 1
Topics of Discussion from the June 1, 2011 Briefing

(1) Long-Term Vision for Resource Flow Control (2) Surrounding area (3) Truck traffic (4) Air quality and litter (5) Financial summary (6) Other issues (7) Short-term and Long-term benefits
(1) Long-Term Vision for Resource Flow Control

Critical step to initiating green energy production from city resources
Dallas resource stream becomes attractive to entrepreneurs of waste-to-energy technologies Steps up schedule to build Resource Recovery facilities across the city
No longer 20 years away but can start in next 2-5 years Can use all transfer sites and landfill Creates jobs, manages our resources, secures our own energy Provides excellent base for environmental curricula at Dallas campuses
Broadly extends Dallas green profile

State-of-the-art technology puts Dallas at leading edge of green practices nationally Ultimately, eliminates need for landfilling
3
Resource Recovery Facility in Bad Marienberg, Germany
Resource Recovery Facility in Roseville, CA
(2) Surrounding Area

Primary land uses near landfill:
Floodplain Freeway right-of-way EcoPark future center for education and for
resource reuse facilities
Various commercial and industrial uses
Secondary land use

16 residences* within a mile of landfill
10 are directly adjacent to landfill access road
* Figures are based on review of active utility accounts and visual survey of area within 1-mile radius 6
(3) Truck traffic

All trucks affected by ordinance are already operating in Dallas - no new truck trips are created Haulers (not currently using city landfill) will alter routes to start using city facilities
May change traffic count on freeways but only one-tenth of 1%
Current traffic at city facilities:

2,000 truck-trips daily at McCommas - with capacity for twice that amount 550 truck-trips daily at Bachman - with capacity for twice that amount
Projected traffic changes under new ordinance

86 trucks (that use non-city landfills) will now go to McCommas and Bachman Equals 760* truck-trips (or 380 round-trips) as each truck makes 4-5 roundtrips daily 70 trucks are projected to use McCommas (for 620 trips) 16 trucks are projected to use Bachman (for 140 trips)
* 380 round-trips (or 760 single trips) are based on 3,125 tons/day (= 900,000 tons per year) being hauled at a rate of 7-10 tons per truck load 9
10
11
(4) Air Quality and Litter

Air quality is regional concern
All vehicles affected by the ordinance are already operating in the region none are added or eliminated
No change in vehicle emissions

All 760 truck trips are and will continue to operate within the north Texas air quality region Hauling distances should be unchanged on balance
Two city facilities will be available to all waste haulers Haul distances from anywhere in city will be 15 miles or less
McCommas Bluff to the south-southeast Bachman Transfer to the northwest
Haulers may change their routing some will decrease distances slightly, some will increase slightly
12
(4) Air Quality and Litter, contd

Wind-blown litter
City code requires all haulers to secure their loads to prevent litter, particulates, or spills from escaping the vehicle. Penalties for failing to do so are specified in code. Haulers utilize enclosed trash hoppers, sealed containers and removable tarps as securing methods. Landfill and transfer sites use litter crews daily to pick up any errant litter along the roadways within two miles from the sites No history of chronic litter problems from trash vehicles
13
Sealed and tarped trucks at landfill Litter crews on roadways near landfill and transfer sites
14
(5) Financial Summary

Budget Detail: Resource Flow Control
REVENUES
Current Landfill Revenue
Full Year Incoming tons R1) Contract Hauler Tons R2) Non-contract hauler tons 390,001 $ 472,776 $ (12-month) Revenue 7,344,137 $ 10,164,680 $ Partial Year (9-month) Revenue 5,508,103 7,623,510
TOTAL Current Revenue Tons New Revenue

Added funds from Resource Flow Control ordinance
862,777 $
17,508,817
13,131,612
900,000
18,807,104 $
14,105,328
15
(5) Financial Summary, contd

EXPENSES
Full Year (12-month) E1) Landfill Ops Labor (with benefits, OT, misc) Supplies (fuel, parts, communications) Services (eq. maint., TCEQ fee, debt service for waste cells) Subtotal 1: E2) Transfer Ops Labor Operation of transfer trucks Purchase/payment on trucks Additonal heavy equipment Subtotal 2: E3) Misc Field Enforcement Audit Management Subtotal 3: Units 20 $ $ $ $ Expenses 1,001,281 $ 1,689,901 $ 1,096,123 $ 3,787,305 $ Partial Year (9-month) Expenses 750,961 1,436,416 931,705 3,119,081
9 5 5
$ $ $ $ $
432,456 301,901 232,875 54,855 1,022,087
$ $ $ $ $
324,342 226,425 232,875 54,855 838,497
$ $ $
109,200 $ 65,000 $ 174,200 $
81,900 65,000 146,900
TOTAL Expenses (related to ordinance)
4,983,592
4,104,479
NET Revenue (after Expenses):

16
$ 13,823,512
$ 10,000,849
(6) Other issues

Use of one transfer site only
Additional waste resource stream can be readily handled with McCommas and Bachman
Bachman has capacity to double its incoming stream Other transfer sites are smaller; sized for use by citys residential collection trucks
Both sites are easily accessible from highway (not side streets) making them desirable to haulers for quick turnaround
Hours of operation
Current hours will meet new demand
Landfill: Mon-Fri. 5:00am to 8:00pm Sat .. 6:00am to 4:00pm Sun .. closed Bachman: Mon-Sat 7:30 am 5:00pm Sun . closed
17
(6) Other issues, contd

Financial impact to business customers
No changes likely on balance McCommas gate fee to remain competitive with DFW market
Good for Dallas business customers
Competitive nature of hauling business

Ordinance will level the playing field for all haulers who dont own a landfill Hauling services from one provider to another are typically within 5% of each other Hauler with out-of-city landfill may tend to increase fees to Dallas customer who may then seek (and find) a lower-priced competitor
Option to increase franchise fee

Franchise fee required to be based on cost to maintain infrastructure Haulers effect on infrastructure does not currently warrant a fee increase Any franchise fee increase is a cost borne by the Dallas business customer
18
(7) Short and Long-Term Benefits

Short term: Years 1 to 2
10-20 new jobs at landfill, transfer sites Secure the control of the resource stream
Increased diversion of brush waste New revenue stream to General Fund
Storage of waste/resources at landfill until needed Initiate pilots of Resource Recovery Facilities at McCommas and Bachman
Divert 20% of waste stream to expanded recycling capabilities Add revenue-share from expanded recycling Create 100 new jobs
Mid-term: Years 2 to 5
Start new educational curricula with area campuses for ecological studies Determine ideal waste-to-energy option and strategy to implement Fully-implemented Resource Recovery Facilities CITYWIDE
Divert ALL of waste stream into green energy generation Virtually eliminate need for landfill disposal Mine old waste from landfill deposits as feedstock to Resource Recovery facilities
Long-term: Years 5 to 20
19
Create up 500 new jobs across city Expand educational opportunities for green energyrelated curricula Partially offset citys expenses for green fuels, renewable electricity, recycled resources Generate green revenue from savings or sales of recovered resource products Fuel Sanitations fleet with gas generated from landfill Create new use for no-longer-needed landfill acreage
SUMMARY
Landfill has ample life capacity Levels the playing field for waste haulers Cost to Dallas businesses unchanged Freeway traffic changes no more than one-tenth of 1% 16 residences within 1-mile of landfill, with 10 homes close enough to see traffic changes Multiple benefits on short- and long-term
Supports production of bio-fuels, green energy, and product reuse Creates an estimated 500 jobs over long-term Simplifies residents waste disposal with a ONE-cart, singlestream system Encourages new environmental curricula for Dallas campuses Ends needs for landfill can find new use for this property
20
Further Questions?
21
Appendix A
Excerpt from City Code
Chapter 18, Section 45 Securing of Waste-Hauling Vehicles
22
SEC. 18-45. (a) (1)
REQUIREMENTS FOR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION VEHICLES.
Any vehicle used for transporting dry solid waste material within the city must: be fitted with a substantial, tight-fitting enclosure that is free of any cracks or breaks and that
has side boards and head boards of not less than 24 inches in height and a tail board of not less than 18 inches in height, to prevent waste material from being scattered or thrown onto the streets; (2) (3) (b) be equipped with a closely fitting cover that must be used to prevent the escape of loose be equipped with any other equipment required to comply with all applicable federal and material or effluvia; and state motor vehicle safety standards. Any vehicle used for transporting wet solid waste material within the city must: (1) be fitted with a substantial, tight-fitting enclosure, with the deck, sides, and ends of the bed
constructed of sheet steel so that the vehicle may be easily cleaned and with the sides not less than 24 inches high and the tail board not less than 18 inches high; (2) (3) (4) (5) have a tight-fitting cover to prevent spillage; when carrying cans to transport wet solid waste material, use only cans equipped with tightnot have any drain holes in the sides of the vehicle and must have any drain holes in the be equipped with any other equipment required to comply with all applicable federal and
fitting lids and holding chains so that the cans will not turn over and spill; deck of the vehicle capped to prevent spillage or leakage; and state motor vehicle safety standards. (Ord. Nos. 14219; 21058; 26480; 26608)
23
Appendix B
Draft Ordinance for Resource Flow Control
24
25
26
27
Appendix C
Briefing of 06/01/11
28

Briefing to City Council
1
June 1, 2011
This page intentionally left blank
Briefing contents
Dallas green initiatives Broaden our green policies into waste
Treating our trash as a valued resource Making beneficial use and reuse of our solid waste resources Preparing for new technology to replace landfilling
Proposed ordinance for Council consideration

Council policies promote sustainability Our Green Accomplishments
Dallas was the first city in nation with citywide ISO 14001 certification (environmental standards) We use 40% renewable power
$5.3m saved in energy costs
Our fleet is 38% alternative-fueled Water usage is down 35% since 1998 Recycling is up 136% since FY07
Revenues of $2.5m in FY10
Landfill gas fuels 25,000 homes each year

Over $1.6m in royalties annually
4

Value gained by maintaining sustainable focus
Cleaner environment Dallas as recognized leader People and businesses want to be here New revenue sources and savings
Prudent resource management
The Past
1900 1925 1950 1975 2000 2025
~ 30 years ago States passed laws requiring disposal facilities to be engineered, controlled, and monitored. Federal authorities standardized waste rules nationwide. ~ 50 years ago Industrialization and urbanization forced communities to adopt specific plans for disposal
~ 20 years ago EPA modified federal regulations via Subtitle D (1991) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 creating standards still in place today.
> 100 years ago Rural populations typically disposed waste in a ditch out back on their own property or in small community dumps
The Present
1900 1925 1950 1975 2000 2025
~ 20 years ago
EPA modified federal regulations via Subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 creating standards still in place today.
Landfill Biotechnology Franchising the Haulers Landfill Gas recovery Neighborhood Recycling Backyard Composting
~ 30 years ago
~ 50 years ago
> 100 years ago

The Future
1900 1925 1950 1975 2000 2025
Landfill Biotechnology Franchising the Haulers
~ 20 years ago
EPA modified federal regulations via Subtitle D (1991) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 creating standards still in place today.
Landfill Gas recovery Neighborhood Recycling Backyard Composting
~ 30 years ago
Upcoming innovations:
Advanced Waste Diversion Waste-to-Electricity Waste-to-Fleet-Fuel Zero-Waste Policies more in development 8
~ 50 years ago
> 100 years ago


Waste service is a fundamental City function
Protection of public health and environment are paramount
Staying at the forefront of industry practices Citys facility (McCommas Bluff) at cutting edge
nationally-recognized for green initiatives harvesting gas for re-use alternate-fueled vehicles diverting re-usable items

There are alternatives to our waste service practices
Keep all services in-house and city-operated
City could collect BOTH residential and business City could own and operate landfill and transfer sites City could manage recycling, composting facilities, and special wastes
Privatize some or all services above Preserve facility space Franchise waste haulers
Use single-stream recycling in carts, bag, bins, drop-off sites Exclude non-Dallas waste from the landfill Utilize waste-compaction equipment; employ biotechnology practices Allow only one franchisee for all of city waste collection Issue multiple franchises, as open market policy
10

Approaches that Dallas has explored:
Privatize the waste collection ?
City collects all single-family residences
Tried privatizing in late 1980s failed to meet customers needs City service ranks in Top 5 in the 2009 Dallas Community Survey In case of contractor failure (i.e., poor service, contract dispute), City must rapidly rebuild staff and equipment to meet its obligations
All business (including multi-family) are privatized, currently 189 private solid waste haulers are franchised Considered issuing just one exclusive franchise
Harmful to the open market eliminates 188 Dallas hauling firms

11

Alternatives that Dallas has considered: Privatize the landfill, NO!
Huge city asset
Secure, stable depository for decades to come Value is more than $1billion over its life and increasing
Privatize certain functions, Yes!

Equipment repair, construction projects, environmental monitoring
12

Alternatives that Dallas has considered: Recycle select materials or all
Selected single-stream recycling in blue roll carts Privatized the sorting and processing Progressively adding more to the recyclable list Expanded E-wastes and household hazardous materials Multi-family recycling through drop-off and pilot programs
Dallas choices for managing the waste stream look beyond the immediate benefits and consider the long-term value to the community
13
The future
More changes coming and fast Stronger focus on sustainability Trash is seen as a valued resource Emerging technologies are creating alternative uses
Energy Fuels Reusable products
Each waste item has value Landfills become obsolete
14
Were ready
Already keeping pace with progressive practices Heres three ways ..
Promotes recycling and reuse of resources
136,250 tons diverted FY10 Old pavement Tree limbs & brush Scrap tires
15
Were ready
Applies biotechnology practices
Accelerates trash decomposition
Creates additional waste space
16
Were ready
Generates green energy from landfill gas
Protective of air quality Provides fuel sufficient to heat 25,000 homes each year FY10 royalty of $1.6m
17

Landfill has an ample capacity
Current life is 45 years remaining Additional 47 years* available bringing the total to 92years
Technology (now and future) will make good use of the resource stream and leave landfill space unused
* Biotechnology = 10 years New landfill space = 37 years
18
Landfill will take on new meaning

Become Resource Recovery Facilities
Materials arrive are sorted, and baled Baled materials marketed and sold Some items will be processed in the facility to become a renewable energy source
19

Use facility as a storage vault
Todays wastes are future resources
Capture and store these resources now Later, recover and use as new technologies evolve Future value may be quite extraordinary
20

Make good use of the vault
Stockpile todays resources we have the space Hold for future uses, such as:
Waste-to-electricity projects Waste-to-fuel facilities Advanced recycling / re-use opportunities
Simple to do:
Half of Dallas resource stream is flowing OUT of the city dont let it go ! Use ordinance authority to direct all Dallas waste resources to McCommas Bluff/Bachman Transfer Station
21
Republic Farmers Branch WMT DFW Landfill
Heres where our resources go now
Bachman Transfer Station/future Waste-toEnergy Facility

10.5 mi
WMT - Skyline Landfill
22
New Resource Control Ordinance

also called waste flow control ordinance
Adopting a Resource Control ordinance means that all who collect waste within Dallas must use city facilities (i.e., McCommas Bluff landfill,
transfer sites)
About half of these resources are going to landfills OUTSIDE of Dallas New ordinance redirects the resources from haulers from 1.0m tons per year to 1.9m tons/year We have the obligation to manage our solid waste materials
Protecting the public health and the environment Maximizing all city assets to community benefit getting the recycling and energy value from the waste resource
U.S. Supreme Court reinforced this in a 2007 decision

23
Financial Impacts
Operational
$5m in first year, decreasing to $3m per year thereafter Needed for:
equipment, manpower, infrastructure improvements, environmental monitoring, TCEQ permit changes, legal
Revenue
850,000 more tons annually nearly double current rate Equates to $18m in additional annual revenue
(or $15m with a Jan 2012 start date)
Net financial impact = $13m to $15m annually

24

Two primary methods - each has benefits and
challenges that may appeal or deter various communities
Waste flow control ordinance Exclusive franchise agreement
25

Waste Control ordinance:
In Texas: El Paso passed ordinance in 2010
to be implemented in FY13
Nationally:

Jacksonville, FL Seattle, WA Palm Beach Co, FL Snomish County, WA San Jose, CA
Urbana, IL, Portland, OR (metro) Lancaster County, PA. Franklin Co, OH
Exclusive franchise agreements:

Arlington, Grand Prairie, NTMWD, College Station Allows only one hauler eliminating all others In meetings with staff, haulers voice strong opposition with this concept
26
Options to consider
Continue with current approach
Others capitalize on Dallas resources City then less able to implement new technologies
Take control of our useful resources

By pursuing an exclusive franchise
Does gain control over resources Eliminates 188 waste haulers in Dallas open market
OR
Adopt new Resource Control ordinance
27
Summary
Waste is a valuable resource Great opportunities emerging to turn trash into energy and fuel City can capitalize on the resources for both immediate and long-term benefit Or leave it to others to utilize them
28
Recommendation
Proceed with:
Completing resource control ordinance for Council review Anticipate a 2012 implementation date
Prepare the affected community

Continue meeting with solid waste haulers and stakeholders Collaborate to resolve concerns
Prepare facility to accept new resources

29
APPENDIX
Supplementary Information
A-1
Resource Control Ordinance:

Basic Points
All solid waste generated within city limits must be disposed at city owned or operated facilities Director has the authority to designate disposal sites
Includes landfill and transfer stations
Haulers commit offense if they deposit anywhere else City (via SAN director) may curtail, temporarily suspend, or permanently halt any disposal violators of the ordinance Effective date of ordinance will allow for haulers to resolve contract matters with customers
A-2

April 2011 Green Brainstorms conference
Fortune teamed up with its program partnersThe Nature Conservancy, NRDC, and the Environmental Defense Fundto gather "the smartest people we know" in sustainability from business, government, and NGOs. This session focused on the key emerging environmental trends as well as innovative ways that companies can drive sustainability-based transformational change initiatives. LAGUNA NIGUEL, CALIF. - At the Fortune: GREEN Brainstorm kickoff Monday, Waste Management (WM) CEO David Steiner brought an intriguing case to light: Increasingly, waste companies are finding more and more valuable uses for our garbage. Steiner says that with the additional value that WM is able to pull from ordinary household trash over its competitors, one day consumers may just get paid for their waste. If we can extract $100 to $200 of value out of a ton of material, we can start paying the customers, he says. It is a once-in-a lifetime opportunity. Four years
ago years ago, you wouldnt have heard those words come out of my mouth
Hear all of the conference on: http://www.fortuneconferences.com/brainstormgreen/
A-3

From the New York Times, April 12, 2010:
Europe Finds Clean Energy in Trash, but U.S. Lags
With all these innovations, Denmark now regards garbage as a clean alternative fuel rather than a smelly, unsightly problem. And the incinerators, known as waste-to-energy plants, have acquired considerable cachet as communities like Horsholm vie to have them built
A-4

MSW Management magazine June 2006
The Time Has Come For Conversion Technologies

For as long as civilizations have generated solid wastes, the accepted disposal method has been landfillingdespite advancements in technology and environmental impacts to air and water. In Europe and Japan, new processes for treating MSW, called conversion technologies, are being widely implemented. Many of these facilities are in operation, and others are under construction. Conversion technologies use advanced thermal, biological, or chemical processes to convert the carbon-based portion of the MSW stream into useful products, including electricity, renewable or green fuels, or chemicals. Conversion Technologies 101 Conversion technologies (CTs) include a wide range of processes that can be categorized into thermal, biological, and chemical technologies (some approaches involve combinations of these). Thermal CTs are well developed overseas, and include gasification, pyrolysis, and subsets of these, such as plasma gasification and processes that combine gasification and pyrolysis. Pyrolysis is the thermal degradation of organic materials, using an indirect source of heat at 7501,650 degrees F in the absence of oxygen, to produce a synthetic gas, leaving behind a carbon char. Gasification is the thermal conversion of organic materials, using direct heat at 1,400-2,500 degrees F with a limited supply of oxygen, producing a syngas.
A-5
A-6
35
The Green Path for Dallas Trash

Briefing to City Council September 7, 2011
1 1
PURPOSE of Briefing
Review the steps-to-date on the topic Resource Flow Control Advise Council of input from community meetings Describe possible scenario to stimulate investment in South East Oak Cliff (SEOC) Recommend proceeding with ordinance and establishment of SEOC stimulus fund
Steps-to-date
Council budget workshops in FY10 and FY11
Brainstorming ideas included waste flow control Council requested for further information to evaluate
Two Council briefings in June 2011

June 1 and June 15 Synopsis of each to follow in todays briefing
Follow-up meetings
Community meetings Discussions with Dallas businesses and institutions City Manager meeting with waste industry representatives State and Federal environmental regulators: EPA and TCEQ
Steps-to-date: June briefings

Dallas green initiatives are numerous and far-reaching
Green fleet, water conservation, renewable power, recycling First city with city-wide ISO 14001 certification (environmental standards)
Broaden green policies further into waste handling

Progress to date:
Household recycling under OneDAY Dallas (multi-family recycling through many drop-off sites) Landfill recycles scrap tires, tree limbs, old pavements Landfill accelerates waste decomposition, producing renewable gas source
More to come

New technologies: Waste has many second life uses
Energy - conversion of waste to gas or electricity Fuel - conversion of waste to synthetic fuels Reuse - sorting of waste into many more recyclable products
Each waste item has value

Current recycling efforts divert 10% -25% of waste from landfill New technologies can divert 65% - 95% from landfill Each second use benefits environment Each second use has monetary value
Landfills may become obsolete

as waste becomes valued resource

Make use of these resources Dallas landfill can be storage vault
Todays wastes are future resources Capture and store them now Plan and build a system to recover these resources Then, divert all waste to Resource Recovery facilities and even retrieve previously buried resources for their value Future value may be quite extraordinary

Designing & Building a Resource Recovery system
Requires a steady stream of incoming waste / resources Resource Flow Control ordinance will secure a steady stream With a dedicated and reliable waste stream established, Dallas can attract private investors to build a Resource Recovery system
What is a Resource Recovery system ?

A synchronized set of facilities to accept waste and recover all usable material replacing existing waste transfer stations and the landfill Where?
First site for facility: McCommas Bluff Landfill Subsequent sites: selected to accommodate short hauling distances
Examples of existing Resource Recovery Facilities
City of Dallas
Disposal Facilities
Resource Recovery Facility (Germany)
0.8 mile
Aerial view of Roseville, CA Facilities

10
Inside the
Resource Recovery Facility in Roseville, CA
11
and Resource Recovery Facility
Future Cal State campus expansion
Future Business Park New SFR
12

Multiple benefits from Resource Recovery facilities
Replaces landfill and transfer stations with Recovery Sites
Transforms waste industry into CLEAN recovery plants Ultimately, eliminates need for landfilling
Creates jobs (about 100 jobs per facility; approx. 500 jobs total) Provides a green energy source for City use Good management of resources
State-of-the-art technology puts Dallas at leading edge of green practices nationally
Establishes an excellent base for environmental curricula at Dallas campuses
13
Steps-to-date:
Community Meetings
June 28 at Paul Quinn College
Open meeting drew 250-300 from community Q & A session
at Paul Quinn College
July 14
Brainstorming session on needs for South East Oak Cliff (SEOC) community with Paul Quinn team and city staff
at Tommie Allen Recreation Center
Aug 4

14
Arranged by City with direction from DMPT Atkins Attended by 24 community representatives and city staff Representatives from community organizations reviewed Councils briefings and discussed opportunities for economic development and investment Community wants to see funds used for neighborhood development
Steps-to-date:
Meetings, continued
Aug 11
at City Managers office
Waste industry representatives voice concerns with concept They promise to provide information to substantiate their concerns
at Landfill Administrative Offices
Aug 29
NAACP representative toured landfill and asked questions about effects of Resource Flow Control on surrounding neighborhoods
Sep 1 at City Hall

EPA coordinates meeting with City staff, TCEQ, and NAACP NAACP inquiring about assessing possible health effects from truck traffic Will continue discussions
15
Steps-to-date:
Talking with Dallas businesses

Waste haulers
Individual franchised haulers Group meetings with national solid waste professional organizations
Dallas businesses
Apartment Association of Greater Dallas DISD Hotel Association of North Texas Greater Dallas Restaurant Association
Others
Regulatory agencies (EPA, TCEQ) Recycling entities Media interests
16
Steps-to-date:
What the community is saying

Residents in South East Oak Cliff
Want assurances that neighborhoods will not be adversely impacted (traffic, air quality, image) Want to see re-investment that will improve and grow their neighborhoods Seek dedicated funding and ability to advise on how to use funds
Waste haulers
Some are worried that they will lose business to their own out-of-city landfills (Appendix B) Some expect to see increase in cost of their service Prefer freedom to select the disposal location of their choice Some haulers support the Citys green initiatives and see no adverse effect in their operations
Dallas businesses
Want to know if they will see any significant increase in cost of their service and how much Strongly oppose the cost increase that others have proposed via hiking the Franchise Fees Want to maintain competition among waste haulers (rather than exclusive hauler for all of city)
Others
Strongly supportive of policy to recycle / re-use in place of landfilling Seek assurances to minimize any negative environmental impact (i.e.; air quality)
17
Moving Forward, continued

Establish an Economic Stimulus entity for the South East Oak Cliff neighborhoods near landfill
-- Create a City fund dedicated to development projects that bring positive economic impact to communities near the landfill -- Utilize input from community advisory panel for fund usage
Key features Vision and Planning

Identify communitys needs and how they want their neighborhoods to look in the long-term May benefit from input of professional planner
Governance / Advisory Group

Community representatives to give critical input to formation and structure of the Advisory group Community to establish its own vision and goals City to provide collaborative support, as needed, with executive leadership from Office of Economic Development
18

Key features of SEOC Economic Stimulus, continued Operating Policies
Develop policies by the Advisory Group on use of funds Set procedures for reporting to Council Source of funding: New commercial tons to landfill
Resource Flow Control ordinance will generate an estimated 850-900k tons of waste SEOC fund to be 6% of new revenue, not-to-exceed $1m / year New revenue from disposal fee* = $17.4m to $18.5m SEOC Fund = 6% of new revenue = $1.0m First year of new ordinance may yield a fraction of estimated new tons; Citys revenues and SEOC fund will be proportionately lower in first year *
uses an average disposal fee of $20.50/ton, based on posted gate rate and contracted rates
19

Key features of SEOC Economic Stimulus, continued Geographical bounds
Center on the neighborhoods and features within a to-be-determined distance from landfill entrance Select boundaries with input from community and city departments
Project Types
Focus on development and re-development strategies Example projects: Retail structures, medical facilities, transportation, etc.
Recognize (and capitalize on) other initiatives

Educational corridor Simpson Stuart / Camp Wisdom Support from private foundations
20
Next Steps
Two agenda items for concurrent approval:
Ordinance for resource flow control
Approve Sept 28, 2011 for start date of January 2, 2012
Council Resolution to establish South East Oak Cliff (SEOC) Economic Stimulus Fund
City staff to work with community to:
- establish policies - develop action plans
Submit draft operating plan for review in November 2011 SEOC Advisory Group to be operational Q1 2012
21
Looking Forward into FY12

SEOC Economic Stimulus Fund
City staff to team up with community to:
- establish policies and procedures and operating parameters for the fund - develop goals strategies and action plans for utilization of invested funds
Submit operating plan for Council concurrence in FY12 SEOC Economic Stimulus is funded starting in FY13, based on funds accrued in previous FY Funding continues for 20-year period
Initiate plans for Resource Recovery System

Further examine range of technologies suitable for full-scale Resource Recovery operations Coordinate with regulatory agencies on facility siting requirements Issue requests for qualifications (in FY12) and proposals to partner with city in designing and implementing
22
DISCUSSION ?
23
Appendix A: Questions Voiced about Resource Flow Control
24
Truck Traffic
No significant change in citywide traffic counts All trucks affected by ordinance are already operating in Dallas - no new truck trips are created Some haulers will alter routes to use city facilities
Decreases miles for some; increases for others
Projected traffic changes under new ordinance

86 trucks (that now use other landfills) will go to McCommas and Bachman Equals 380 round-trips daily (each truck makes 4-5 round-trips) 70 trucks are projected to use McCommas (for 620 trips) 16 trucks are projected to use Bachman (for 140 trips)
25
26
27
Air Quality
Air quality is regional concern
All vehicles affected by the ordinance are already operating in the region none are added or eliminated
No change in vehicle emissions

All trucks are and will continue to operate within the north Texas air quality region Hauling distances should be unchanged on balance
Two city facilities will be available to all waste haulers Haul distances from anywhere in city will be 15 miles or less
McCommas Bluff to the south-southeast Bachman Transfer to the northwest
Haulers may change their routing some will decrease distances slightly, some will increase slightly
28
Air Quality
Air quality monitoring on-going at Landfill
TCEQ has issued an air permit to Landfill to meet air quality standards Stringent regulatory requirements to measure / report:
Methane Particulates

Non-methane volatile organics Other
Also, monthly monitoring at 300 gas wells for volatiles, nitrogen, and oxygen
All reports to TCEQ; full compliance maintained

Annual reports from 2001 to now
Air monitoring - Regionally

Four monitoring points at:
3049 Morrell Dallas Executive Airport Love Field Dallas Convention Center
29
Litter
Wind-blown litter
City code requires all haulers to secure their loads to prevent litter, particulates, or spills from escaping the vehicle. Penalties for failing to do so are specified in code. Haulers utilize enclosed trash hoppers, sealed containers and removable tarps as securing methods. Landfill and transfer sites use litter crews daily to pick up any errant litter along the roadways within two miles from the sites No history of chronic litter problems from trash vehicles
30
Sealed and tarped trucks at landfill Litter crews on roadways near landfill and transfer sites
31
Other issues
Use of one transfer site only
Additional waste resource stream can be readily handled with McCommas and Bachman
Bachman has capacity to double its incoming stream Other transfer sites are smaller; sized for use by citys residential collection trucks
Both sites are easily accessible from highway (not side streets) making them desirable to haulers for quick turnaround
Hours of operation
Current hours will meet new demand
Landfill: Mon-Fri. 5:00am to 8:00pm Sat .. 6:00am to 4:00pm Sun .. closed Bachman: Mon-Sat 7:30 am 5:00pm Sun . closed
32
Other issues, contd

Financial impact to business customers
No changes likely on balance McCommas gate fee to remain competitive with DFW market
Good for Dallas business customers
Competitive nature of hauling business

Ordinance will level the playing field for all haulers who dont own a landfill Hauling services from one provider to another are typically within 5% of each other Hauler with out-of-city landfill may tend to increase fees to Dallas customer who may then seek (and find) a lower-priced competitor
Option to increase franchise fee

Franchise fee required to be based on cost to maintain infrastructure Haulers effect on infrastructure does not currently warrant a fee increase Any franchise fee increase is a cost borne by the Dallas business customer
33
Appendix B:
Other major landfill owners preparing for Resource Recovery facilities
34
Waste management: Not just trash anymore Eying its future, Houston company focusing more on turning what it collects into energy
By BRETT CLANTON HOUSTON CHRONICLE Sunday 08/21/2011 Houston Chronicle, Section Business, Page 1, 3 STAR Edition
By any measure, Waste Management is a giant in the U.S. garbage collection and recycling business, but its future may lie in a different service: turning trash into energy. That helps explain why the Houston company recently has been boosting investments in technologies that can convert much of what goes in the landfill into fuels, electricity and other energy products. While those investments are still relatively small for a firm that collected $12.5 billion in revenue last year and 100 million tons of trash, they highlight a shift in the way the country's biggest garbage hauler views its business as well as waste itself. "In my mind, it's pretty simple why we're doing it: If we don't figure it out, somebody is, and they'll take the waste away from us. If we lose the waste, we've certainly lost the business," said Carl Rush, vice president of the company's organic growth group, the chief vehicle for its energy investments. The shift in thinking comes at a time when U.S. landfill collections are hitting a plateau as Americans recycle more, consumer products makers reduce packaging and many large corporations adopt "zero waste" goals.
35
Appendix C:
Draft Ordinance for Resource Flow Control
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Memorandum
DATE
September 16, 2011 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Answers to questions from the September 7 The Green Path for Dallas Trash briefing On September 7th, City Council heard the briefing: The Green Path for Dallas Trash. In the discussion after the briefing, Councilmembers raised several topics requiring follow-up information. This memo addresses those topics. 1) What types of wastes are accepted at the McCommas Bluff Landfill? The landfill has been permitted to accept non-hazardous solid waste and has accepted only non-hazardous waste since opening in 1980. Residential waste and waste of commercial origin compose the vast majority of material accepted at the landfill, with a small percentage of industry waste. Because of the multi-layered waste screening methods used at the site, hazardous waste can be readily detected (whenever any are presented) and removed from the site. 2) Provide more information on the Resource Recovery facility in Roseville, CA. The Western Placer County Landfill was permitted in 1978 as a regional facility for the western portion of Placer County, including the cities of Roseville, Lincoln and Rocklin. As a 230-acre site, it was intended to serve the needs of the population for 50 years. Californias waste minimization legislation in 1990 (SB 939) required all jurisdictions to reduce landfilling of waste by 50% by 2000. Accordingly, the county waste authority began planning for their Materials Recovery Facility (or MRF) in 1992 with the intent to use county bonds to build the estimated $20m structure and to partner with a private operator (Nortech) for a 7- to 11-year period. Prior to issuance of the bonds, the waste authority recognized the necessity of setting up Flow Control agreements with all public parties within their jurisdiction to provide security for the bonds to be issued and did so. The facility opened in 1995 and has been successful at diverting about 50% of the waste stream, allowing the waste authority to pay off the bond debt early. In 2005, the waste authority built a $26m expansion to the facility (using cash reserves), and renewed their agreement with Nortech as the operator, who added another $6m in improvements. The authority also renewed the Flow Control agreements with the public parties within its jurisdiction. The authority is now considering ways to further reduce the landfilling to 10% or less of the waste stream. 3) Other entities who use Flow Control Roseville is not alone in utilizing Flow Control as a mechanism to meet the environmental, regulatory, and business requirements of their solid waste utility. Attached is a list of other cities and jurisdictions that preceded and followed Roseville. Some did so because advancing methods of managing the waste required significant financial investment in the waste handling systems (such as building waste-to-energy plants or enacting single-stream recycling). Some jurisdictions were motivated or mandated to implement environmental policies that required tighter oversight and direction of the disposal of the waste stream. Still others found that direct control of the waste stream fostered better revenues and operational practices within their cities or jurisdictions.
TO
SUBJECT
Council Memo: Follow-Up to The Green Path for Dallas Trash September 16, 2011 Page 2 of 6
Whatever the particular reason, jurisdictions have found that, since the 2007 Supreme Court decision, enacting Flow Control is a reasonable and defensible method to meet their publics solid waste needs. 4) The link between Flow Control and establishing a Resource Recovery system As the attached examples demonstrate, providing a secure and reliable waste stream (and the associated revenue stream) has been critical to public governments ability to fund their operations whether those include disposal facilities or waste diversion facilities, or both. In some cases, the entity sought the Flow Control mechanism after heading down the path to invest in a large capital project, only to find that the project needed Flow Control to establish sufficient security for the investment before building the project. The capital project was often delayed by months or years, as the public entity effected Flow Control. In other cases (such as Roseville), the public leaders anticipated the value of securing the waste stream, and enacted Flow Control in advance of issuing RFPs, investing in designs, and commencing construction of major projects. In Dallas case, the value of the waste resources that are generated within the city is apparent in the market pricing for recycled goods, in the need for alternate energy sources, and in the demand for green fuel options. Dallas can benefit from the example of others by assuring that it claims all the resources that are legally within its jurisdiction. Months or years may pass between the time that Flow Control is enacted and the time that Dallas can build its Resource Recovery facilities. In that time period, millions of tons of waste resources will be draining out of Dallas without Flow Control to prevent it. Thats millions of tons that can be placed in the landfill for possible reclaiming in years to come. Further, the revenues from Flow Control in that time period may be used to improve the current disposal operations, enhance environmental programs, and plan and design the Resource Recovery system. 5) Can Dallas begin Resource Recovery without a Flow Control ordinance in place? Yes though there are compelling reasons to put the ordinance first. Dallas McCommas Bluff Landfill received about 1.4m tons of waste in FY10 a sufficient volume to initiate one or more Resource Recovery plants. But the volume is unreliable, and changes in the flow of waste, from month-to-month and from year-to-year, have been documented to vary widely (decreasing by as much as 50% from a high month over a short period).
Tons Received (monthly) McCommas Bluff Landfill

200,000 180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000
Oct-00 Jan-01 Apr-01 Jul-01 Oct-01 Jan-02 Apr-02 Jul-02 Oct-02 Jan-03 Apr-03 Jul-03 Oct-03 Jan-04 Apr-04 Jul-04 Oct-04 Jan-05 Apr-05 Jul-05 Oct-05 Jan-06 Apr-06 Jul-06 Oct-06 Jan-07 Apr-07 Jul-07 Oct-07 Jan-08 Apr-08 Jul-08 Oct-08 Jan-09 Apr-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Jan-10 Apr-10 Jul-10 Oct-10 Jan-11 Apr-11 Jul-11
The plan for building a Resource Recovery system envisions facilities throughout the city not one or two at the landfill but locating the facilities strategically to minimize hauling distance, reducing vehicle emissions, and saving on fuel and manpower usage. In order to plan for a system of facilities to recover the majority of waste and reuse it beneficially establishing a reliable and steady stream of waste flow to these facilities is essential. More persuasive, though, is that Dallas is perfectly positioned to maximize the benefits of Flow Control, with few if any drawbacks. First, Dallas owns and operates a very large landfill with an enviable amount of unused capacity. The landfill can be used to bring in and store the additional waste stream, while planning for Resource Recovery facilities. Many other cities dont have that advantage. Houston, San Antonio, and New York City, as examples, are pursuing new technology to more wisely divert their waste streams but, lacking their own disposal facility, are unable to pass Flow Control until the Resource Recovery Facility (or other options) are constructed. Second - Dallas waste stream is rich with recoverable materials effectively guaranteeing that a large majority of it can be reclaimed for beneficial reuse and at premium market prices. In Europe, on the other hand, household and business recycling are so far advanced that the waste stream heading to landfills or to recovery facilities is lacking in many of the easily recovered materials (paper, plastic, organics). The quality of our waste stream will greatly aid in attracting private investment in the construction and operation of a Resource Recovery System allowing capital investments to be paid off sooner, as the Roseville site did. Third - A Resource Recovery System will provide recycling to a population in the city that is underserved in this arena: multi-family residences and commercial businesses. These two groups (served by private solid waste haulers) have frequently asked the City to develop a means for them to recycle at the same level as single-family residents (SFR). The Citys many Drop-Off sites afford them a modest opportunity to recycle the same materials as their SFR counterparts, but requires an extra effort on their part. Resource Recovery facilities will allow for them to recycle all that SFRs can without imposing any changes to their current disposal habits or to their contracted waste haulers. Lastly - Dallas system of waste transfer sites and landfill provides an in-place model of where to best locate Resource Recovery facilities as they now serve the residential and business waste needs. Replacing each of these waste sites with waste recovery sites means that Dallas will significantly reduce the vehicle emissions associated with waste hauling to distant disposal facilities, will save on usage of fuel, manpower, and equipment, and will provide positive economic benefit to each area of the city in which a facility is located.
6) Steps to proceed with a Resource Recovery System for Dallas

The proposed sequence of actions is briefly described below. Sep 28, 2011 Enact a Resource Flow Control ordinance to guarantee a reliable waste flow of resources to the future Resource Recovery System. Sep Dec 2011 Communicate the ordinance requirements to the solid waste haulers and business community and prepare the citys solid waste facilities for the acceptance of additional waste. Jan 2, 2012 Implementation date for the ordinance. Begin increased waste acceptance at the McCommas Bluff Landfill and Bachman (Northwest) Transfer site. Jan Jul 2012 Conduct a thorough waste characterization study on the volume and types of waste received, as preparation for design of Resource Recovery facilities. Continue to study all technologies and systems, nationally and internationally, that utilize high levels of waste diversion, reuse and energy development.
"Dallas - Together, we do it better!"
Aug 2012 Issue a Request for Qualifications to design / build / operate one or more Resource Recovery facilities as a system across the city. Aug Nov 2012 Review and interview candidates, identifying the best-qualified. Specify funding and permitting requirements to build and to operate. Dec 2012 Issue a Request for Proposals to the top-qualified candidates. Jan Mar 2013 Vet the proposals through the Citys Solid Waste Advisory Committee and select the proposal best-suited to Citys goals. Negotiate the scope of work, solidify the planning and funding mechanisms, and recommend action to City Council. June 2013 Begin design and construction of the Resource Recovery System over subsequent years.
7) Steps to establishing the South East Oak Cliff (SEOC) economic stimulus
The proposed sequence of actions is briefly described below. Sep 28, 2011 Council action to establish the South East Oak Cliff economic stimulus fund. Oct Dec 2011 Define community goals and governance structure. Feb 2012 City Council approval of SEOC organizational structure. Mar Sep 2012 SEOC meets and begins organizational planning, identifying economic development projects, and prioritizing future steps. Oct 2012 First deposit of funds to SEOC from incremental year of revenue generation. Oct 2013 Second deposit of funds to SEOC from full year of revenue generation; SEOC/City to initiate development projects. With the follow-up information provided, Council may be prepared to consider the Resource Flow Control agenda item on September 28, 2011 as paired with the resolution for establishing the South East Oak Cliff Economic Stimulus Fund. Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
Ryan S. Evans Assistant City Manager

Attachments C: Mary K. Suhm, City Manager Rosa Rios, Acting City Secretary Thomas P. Perkins, Jr., City Attorney Craig Kinton, City Auditor Judge C. Victor Lander, Administrative Judge A.C. Gonzalez, First Assistant City Manager Jill A. Jordan, P.E., Assistant City Manager Forest E. Turner, Assistant City Manager Joey Zapata, Interim Assistant City Manager Jeanne Chipperfield, Chief Financial Officer Mary Nix, Director, Sanitation Services Helena Stevens-Thompson, Assistant to the City Manager
"Dallas - Together, we do it better!"
Examples of Jurisdiction Using Solid Waste Flow Control

LOCALITY 1. El Paso, TX FLOW CONTROL MECHANISM Ordinance passed in 2010 NOTES Council passed ordinance to promote improved environmental practices, assure proper disposal of the citys wastes, allow for proper closure of one of its two landfills, and efficient operation of the remaining landfill site. Delayed effective date until 2012 provides City with time to prepare the landfill sites and allows largest private waste hauler (with competing landfill) time to rebalance operations. Each of these cities are members of the North Texas Municipal Water District and contract with the District for solid waste disposal, which requires that ALL of the cities waste be transported to the Districts facilities. In turn, each city franchises their haulers, and requires the hauler to take all waste to the Districts sites. Arlington has issued only ONE solid waste hauler franchise (to Republic Waste Services). The franchise agreement requires Republic to use the Arlington landfill. Revenues are used to operate the site and to meet General Fund needs. Grand Prairie has issued only ONE solid waste hauler franchise (to Republic Waste Services). The franchise agreement requires Republic to use the Grand Prairie landfill. Revenues are used to operate the site and to meet General Fund needs. Implemented to establish bond security for financing of Materials Recovery Facility. Second bond issuance in 2002 required renewal of flow control agreements. Seattle closed its landfill in 1990. Enacted Flow Control to allow city to enter into a 30-year disposal contract with Waste Management to use their landfill. Seattle also operates 2 transfer stations. They report that neither the volume of waste flow nor the disposal costs changed significantly with use of Flow Control. Updated 2011, providing for use of solid waste transfer, yard waste and disposal facilities by haulers and generators in the jurisdiction. County requires recycling at all construction sites. Uses long-term contract with Republic Waste to transfer waste by rail-haul. Fees pay for operation of sites and for capital investments. They report that Flow Control has had no measurable effect on
2.
Cities of Plano, Richardson, Allen, McKinney, Frisco, TX
Franchise Agreements with Solid Waste Haulers (for over 20 years)
3.
Arlington, TX
Use of exclusive franchise agreement (for over 20 years)
4.
Grand Prairie, TX
Use of exclusive franchise agreement (for over 20 years)
5.
Western Placer Waste Management Authority, Roseville, CA Seattle, WA
Ordinances of 1992 and 2005
6.
Ordinance of 1990; supported by state law.
7.
Snohomish County, WA
County Code Chapters 7.35 and 7.41 in 1985; updated in 2011
Page 5 of 6
Examples of Jurisdiction Using Solid Waste Flow Control

LOCALITY FLOW CONTROL MECHANISM the disposal costs. 8. Jacksonville, FL Ordinance. Passed in 1990; supplements franchise agreements which require that commercial waste must be taken to the city landfill. City-owned landfill with private operator. Waste collected by city crews and private haulers. NOTES
9.
Lancaster County, PA
Ordinance in 1987.
Solid waste authority is financed by the fees generated at the authoritys two landfills and transfer site. Revenues cover cost of operations, as well as Resource Recovery facility (waste-to-energy), landfill gas plant, and Household Hazardous Waste facility. No tip fees rather, the County assesses funds as a line item on property tax bill for residential and commercial solid waste disposal and collection. County landfill and Countys three transfer sites are designated disposal sites.
10. Palm Beach County, FL 11. Franklin County, OH
Palm Beach County Solid Waste Act District Rules 1-2008 through 18-2008
12. Portland, OR (Metro)
General state law
Portland Metro has solid waste disposal authority only (not collection). Rather than enforcing flow control, Portland assesses fees from the haulers and then haulers are free to use any disposal facility they choose. The fees cover the cost of landfill (operated by private party Waste Mgmt) and two city-owned and operated transfer sites. Private haulers pass through the fee cost to their customers.
Page 6 of 6
FACT BOOK
THE CITYS PROPOSED
RESOURCE FLOW CONTROL ORDINANCE

AND
RESOURCE RECOVERY SYSTEM
CONTENTS
WHAT IS RESOURCE FLOW CONTROL? WHAT IS A RESOURCE RECOVERY SYSTEM? THE VALUE OF MCCOMMAS BLUFF LANDFILL
Basic Information and Regulation Types of Waste Fiscal Impact
3 4 5
NEARBY NEIGHBORHOODS
Demographic Profile Traffic
PUBLICLY-STATED CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS

Aesthetics Environmental Traffic Operational
13
Created by d.mcclelland Created on 9/23/2011 11:24:00 AM
WHAT IS RESOURCE FLOW CONTROL?

Resource Flow Control (often, simply called flow control) is a legal process supported by U.S. Supreme Court rulings that lets cities decide where garbage is taken for processing, treatment, or disposal. In Dallas, Resource Flow Control may be effected by passing a City ordinance amending Chapters 2 and 18 of the City Code. Under Dallas proposed ordinance, all garbage generated within Dallas would be taken to the Dallas-owned McCommas Bluff Landfill, not to landfills outside the city limits. City-owned transfer stations may also be used as destinations for the waste.
WHAT IS A RESOURCE RECOVERY SYSTEM?

A resource recovery system is a series of sites or facilities constructed to house and sort collected waste. Rather than disposing of waste by burying in a landfill, a resource recovery system allows for each waste material to serve a second purpose such as re-use as a new or recycled material, distilling the waste into fuel, or converting it directly into energy. In a resource recovery facility, the waste materials are sorted by size and type. Each material (such as a steel can, glass bottle, cardboard box, or food waste) may have multiple second uses. The operator of the resource recovery facility identifies what end uses are marketable which may vary from week-to-week and from year-to-year - and processes the materials to optimize their second use benefits. Many waste materials will be simply sorted and baled into transportable commodities for sale on the open market. Other materials may be segregated as feedstock for an adjacent composting facility in-site. Others will be shredded and ground into smaller bits, and fed into waste-to-energy units that will produce electricity or synthetic fuels (biodiesel) or refuse-derived-fuel nuggets each of which has direct use for the City or may be marketed for use by others. Building a resource recovery system of facilities requires significant planning, resources and capital. As a public entity, any decision on establishing resource recovery facilities in Dallas will involve public input and close adherence to applicable purchasing and legal regulations. While private partnership for some or all of the efforts may be possible, the City has made no decision at this time on the means to moving forward. Resource flow control is a critical component of the Citys proposal for a resource recovery system because such an ordinance establishes a reliable and sizable waste stream on which the Resource Recovery facilities will depend. Further, once such a reliable waste stream is established, private investors are more willing to step forward to
underwrite large capital projects for a Resource Recovery System possibly relieving the financial burden on the Dallas taxpayer.
THE VALUE OF MCCOMMAS BLUFF LANDFILL

BASIC INFORMATION AND REGULATION ALL LANDFILLS In 1991, the US EPA changed the way ALL landfills in the country are operated making them safer and far more protective of the environment. EPA issued a very lengthy and stringent set of rules that called Subtitle D of the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). It required that all landfills: be lined with a double-liner system collect all moisture from within and dispose of it properly be capped with a double-layered capping system collect any gas from the waste and manage it safely create a fund to pay for any costs associated with closing the landfill and/or addressing environmental issues prepare regular reports of compliance to the local authority many additional requirements So rigorous were these new Subtitle D rules that 75% of the nations landfills closed within 2 years of their publication. In Texas, 800 landfills dropped to less than 200 landfill that exist today. Only those landfill owners willing to manage the waste in a highly protective fashion maintained their sites. The Citys McCommas Bluff Landfill is one such site.

The McCommas Bluff Landfill is a 2,000-acre site permitted and monitored by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to assure that operations are environmentally protective of local health and safety. The landfill is subject to regular and unscheduled TCEQ inspections. The landfill staff makes frequent reports to TCEQ on the quality of its groundwater, storm water, air quality, and landfill gas. The City reports quarterly to the TCEQ on the amount of waste accepted, recycled, and buried verifying that all waste accepted is
non-hazardous. The landfill operates in compliance with all permitted uses. The McCommas Bluff Landfill is an award-winning, professionally engineered and built, highly regulated site. It is in no way a dump. As the only landfill in the State of Texas to achieve ISO certification for its management and a U.S. Conference of Mayors Green City Award for beneficial re-use of landfill gas, McCommas Bluff is a valuable environmental asset for the city of Dallas. The landfill operates 15 hours each workday (5 a.m.-8 p.m.) though it is permitted to be open 24-hours per day. Its open from 6 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Saturday; it is closed on Sundays and on Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Years Day. The Landfill has 45 years of unused space (or capacity) - even after operating for 30 years. It was designed to be a long-term solution to Dallas waste needs. Under a Resource Flow Control ordinance, the Landfill can continue to provide long-term benefit acting as a storage locker for waste, while the City prepares and builds a Resource Recovery System. AND, as the Resource Recovery System recycles and reuses more and more of the waste, the need for the Landfill diminishes until it may be closed, decades ahead of the current timeframe. TYPES OF WASTE EPA categorizes two types of waste: municipal solid waste (MSW) and hazardous waste. Industrial waste (from businesses and manufacturing) can either be hazardous or non-hazardous. ONLY municipal solid waste and non-hazardous industrial waste are accepted at McCommas Bluff. McCommas Bluff is not permitted to accept, nor does it accept, hazardous industrial waste.
FISCAL IMPACT Each year the landfill contributes approximately $12M-$17M in revenue to the Citys general fund in support of city operations. With Resource Flow Control, an additional $14M net could be added (see Figure 1.1), for a total general fund contribution of $28M-$31M per year once the plan is fully implemented. This revenue may be used to address city expenses, at the direction of City Council.
Figure 1.1

EXPENSES
Full Year (12-month) E1) Landfill Ops Labor (with benefits, OT, misc) Supplies (fuel, parts, communications) Services (eq. maint., TCEQ fee, debt service for waste cells) Subtotal 1: E2) Transfer Ops Labor Operation of transfer trucks Purchase/payment on trucks Additonal heavy equipment Subtotal 2: E3) Misc Field Enforcement Audit Management Subtotal 3: Units 20 $ $ $ $ Expenses 890,415 $ 1,689,901 $ 1,321,569 $ 3,901,885 $ Partial Year (9-month) Expenses 667,811 1,436,416 1,123,334 3,227,561
9 5 5
$ $ $ $ $
432,456 301,901 232,875 54,855 1,022,087
$ $ $ $ $
324,342 226,425 232,875 54,855 838,497
$ $ $
109,200 $ 65,000 $ 174,200 $
81,900 65,000 146,900
TOTAL Expenses (related to ordinance) New Revenue

Added funds from Resource Flow Control ordinance 900,000
5,098,171
4,212,958
18,807,104
14,105,328
NET Revenue (after Expenses):

$ 13,708,933
8
$ 9,892,370
NEARBY NEIGHBORHOODS
Only one street, Bermuda Rd with 16 addresses (ten are occupied) is close to the landfill. All other residential development is in excess of one mile. The residents on Bermuda Rd. have indicated no opposition to the landfills operations of the past 30 years, and have expressed no concern related to Resource Flow Control. Other properties close to the landfill are zoned for industrial, light industrial, warehouse, and rural uses and are located in Census tract 202. The Trinity River Forest, Trinity River Audubon Center, and the EcoBusiness Park office building are the landfills closest neighbors. At a distance of over a mile to the west are five neighborhoods and 11 registered crime watch groups. (See Figure 1.2, below) These areas are located in U.S. Census tracts 202, 87.01, 114.01, 87.05 and 167.01. Approximately 20,461 people live in the neighborhoods. Of this number, 89% are Black, 8% are Hispanic and 1% are White compared with the City overall which is 29% White, 25% Black and 42% Hispanic. The largest of the neighborhoods is Highland Hills. The Highland Hills neighborhood and the other crime watches are separated from the landfill by two transportation barriers (state highway 310 and Interstate I-45), as well as the Five-Mile Creek waterway and flood plain. Other demographics: On the average, residents are slightly older than in other areas of the city (34.82 years vs. 31.8 years). 39.89% of those who work are below federal poverty income levels compared with 21.8% citywide. There are 7,121 occupied housing units in the area.
Figure 1.2 The Neighborhoods Closest to McCommas Bluff. The landfill is designated by the green dump truck. Paul Quinn College is marked by the gold star. (Source: City of Dallas Neighborhood Mapping Data, 2011)
10
TRAFFIC
State highway 310 serves industrial and light industrial businesses in the south to- southeastern portion of Dallas. Interstate 45 serves as the major arterial to all traffic headed for Houston and the Gulf Coast. Interstate 35 serves as the major arterial to all traffic headed to San Antonio. Interstate 20 and 635 serve as the major arterials to traffic headed to south Dallas County and East Texas. On an average day: 860,000 daily trips are made on these arterials (Texas Department of Transportation traffic flow data). See Figure 1.3.
Under Resource Flow Control, these roads will see less than 1% change in traffic flow. The City estimates
that an additional 310 to 379 daily trips (or between 620 and 758 daily round trips) per day would be added to the existing traffic. This represents a possible increase of 0.08% to the average daily traffic traveling along I-35, I-45, I-20/635 and Hwy 310 although all of these trucks are already on city streets now. Resource Flow Control would simply change the direction of some trucks routes. Under flow control, less than 1 truck per minute would be added to the existing traffic (0.68 to 0.84 trucks per minute) along these roadways.
11
Figure 1.3 Daily Traffic Flow Map (Traffic flow data source: Texas Department of Transportation Flow Data, 2011; map compiled by Dallas Sanitation staff.
12
COMMONLY-STATED CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS

Aesthetics
1. The landfill just by being there has kept developers from bringing retail and other development to southern Dallas. No. Developers have stated that they are not interested in investing primarily because they do not believe there are enough people living there to support their development (density). Other reasons cited have included: Low per-capita income (the residents dont make enough money) Geographical constraints to infrastructure (hilly terrain, open waterways) Crime Developers have shown that they will invest in areas where there are landfills, IF there is a higher density and a higher per capita income than exists in southeastern Dallas. One regional example of such development near landfills can be found in Lewisville, Texas, where homes exceeding $500k in value are within a mile of the landfill and retail developments abound. In fact, three landfills are within close proximity to each other - and the development along I-35 and State Highway 121 continues to grow in both retail and housing development in the last decade. In Ft. Worth, some of the wealthiest homeowners (including the Bass family) live within a mile of the Westside Landfill.
13
2. How much extra trash will come to McCommas under Resource Flow Control? The landfill currently accepts 1.4 million tons per year. Resource Flow Control will add 0.85m tons bringing the total annual amount to 2.25 million tons per year. The Landfill has more than enough space to manager this additional volume. And the landfills permit with TCEQ allows for this amount (or more) to accommodate commercial customers needs. 3. More trash will mean more litter to our neighborhoods. Not at all ! The landfill staff are now (and will continue to be) obliged to make sure that all trucks entering the landfill are properly tarped or contained to prevent blowing litter from affecting the roadways leading to the landfill. Further, landfill staff make daily litter collection trips to pick up any litter that has escaped the trucks on the roads within a mile from the landfill.
14
Environmental
1. Does McCommas Bluff accept hazardous waste? No. ONLY municipal solid waste and non-hazardous industrial waste are accepted at McCommas Bluff. McCommas Bluff is not permitted to accept, nor does it accept, hazardous industrial waste. 2. Has the city studied the air quality at McCommas Bluff? No. The Landfill monitors for any emission of landfill gas from either the waste or the gas collection wells and does this monitoring every three months. TCEQ has not required air monitoring at McCommas Bluff for over five years. They monitor air quality at the regional level and Dallas has 4 sites within 10-15 miles of the landfill. 3. Has the city studied the air quality in the neighborhoods closest to McCommas Bluff? No. This is because the TCEQ monitors air quality on a regional, not a local level. However, there are four regional air quality monitoring stations within 10 miles of the neighborhoods closest to McCommas Bluff. They are located at: 3049 Morrell adjacent to DWUs Central Water Plant Dallas Executive Airport Dallas Love Field Airport Dallas Convention Center 4. Does the city know how much extra emissions would be caused by the extra trucks going to McCommas Bluff under flow control? No it is a very small change in the traffic flow. The city estimates that less than one extra truck per minute would be added to the normal traffic
15
on the roadways leading to McCommas Bluff. Given this very small quantity, neither the EPA nor the TCEQ has deemed a study to be needed nor has the city seen cause to measure or project the resulting emission. The City WILL continue to operate the site within the strict regulations of the Subtitle D rules, which are designed to be protective of human health and the environment.
16
Traffic
1. How many trucks currently use McCommas Bluff? The city counts truck trips instead of trucks. Counting truck trips is a more accurate way to report the number of vehicles traveling along the roadways to and from McCommas Bluff. Also, trucks making multiple trips are counted more than once since they use the roadway more than once. Most trucks make multiple runs in one day (up to 4 or 5 depending on the hauler). There are 190 commercial waste haulers with permits to use the citys landfill. Between these haulers and the citys own waste collection fleet, there are about 1,200 truck trips per day at the landfill. 2. How many extra trucks will be needed under flow control? Under Resource Flow Control, the city estimates that there would be an additional 360 daily truck trips on the roadways leading to the landfill. All of these trucks are already operating within Dallas and many of these trucks now drive PAST THE LANDFILL, in order to access a landfill further south. This additional traffic represents less than one extra truck per minute to the average highway traffic traveling along the roadways leading to McCommas Bluff.
17
Operational / Business
1. Is the city going to expand McCommas? No. The citys current landfill permit with TCEQ is more than sufficient to accommodate the additional 850,000 tons of garbage each year. The landfill has ample space. 2. Where is the garbage that goes to McCommas Bluff coming from? And why does the City want to bring it all to McCommas Bluff? Currently, garbage that is brought to McCommas Bluff Landfill comes from all over the City of Dallas - and from several nearby suburb cities such as Desoto, Sunnyvale Lancaster. Some of it comes from households; other is from apartments and businesses. We call these two types of waste: residential and commercial. Currently all of Dallas residential garbage and half of Dallas commercial garbage is now taken to McCommas Bluff by the City of Dallas and private haulers. About half of the remaining commercial garbage goes to landfills outside of the City of Dallas. Under the citys Resource Flow Control and Resource Recovery System plan, all of the commercial garbage would be taken to McCommas Bluff. Doing so would help make the citys proposal for a Resource Recovery System of facilities a more reliable prospect and more attractive to private investors.
18
3. There is no benefit to the neighborhoods from this ordinance. Neighborhoods closest to McCommas Bluff have every probability of gaining multiple benefits: a) City is offering to set up a South East Oak Cliff fund to promote economic re-development in the area. The fund will be created by revenue directly resulting from Resource Flow Control and would be aimed at projects that the residents and local business interests have requested -- such as healthy grocery stores, retail outlet and service businesses. City Council will assure that the neighborhoods have direct input to the projects and planning from the fund which is estimated to produce $1m annually for 20 years. b) With neighborhood input, City Council can require that any proposal for Resource Recovery Facilities include adopt good neighbor practices such as hiring local workers, supporting local nonprofits, and serving as resources for local nonprofit or educational organizations. c) Council may also require that any proposal for Resource Recovery Facilities include sponsorship of the area colleges in the form of scholarships, internships and use of the facility as a classroom laboratory for environmental practices. d) Future revenues from Resource Recovery Facilities may be structured to require infrastructure improvements in the vicinity of their locations. e) Early closure of the landfill, coupled with new retail and business development, will serve to brighten the image of South East Oak Cliff - stimulating further positive development and real estate value. 4. Is the city really going to close McCommas? Yes. Eventually all landfills fill up with garbage and then, disposal stops. Under the citys flow control and resource recovery system proposal, the city could stop burying all of its garbage and close McCommas Bluff to major landfilling operations about 30 years earlier than planned.
19
5. Who will operate the Resource Recovery Facilities? Until the Dallas City Council approves the plan for resource flow control and the establishment of a resource recovery system, the operator has yet to be determined. If the City Council approves the concept, city staff would issue a Request for Qualifications and Proposals for the establishment and operation of the resource recovery facilities. Depending on the results of the RFQ and RFP, staff would make a recommendation for City Council approval. The recommendation could be for either: The establishment of public facilities; The establishment of private facilities; or The establishment of a public/private partnership for facilities 6. Who regulates McCommas Bluff Landfill? The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) regulates McCommas Bluff Landfill. Under the State of Texas Charter, cities are responsible for designating where and how municipal solid waste is collected, processed and disposed. The TCEQ is given regulatory authority by the EPA to enforce the provisions of applicable federal laws dealing with landfills and environmental quality. The EPA does not directly regulate McCommas Bluff Landfill, but the landfill is accountable to the TCEQ for not violating federal law set by the EPA and for meeting the provisions of its permits which are issued by the TCEQ.
20
7. Flow control will increase the cost to businesses for garbage collection. No, theres no reason for that. There are 190 waste-hauling companies that are franchised to collect garbage in Dallas. If any one hauler increases their fees, the business customer may choose to use another service provider. A survey of businesses within blocks of each (see map, next page) other and using varying haulers demonstrates that the cost for service is NOT dependent on the landfill used. For example, Waste Managements (WMs) customers in north Dallas pay more than a 30% variance in their rates despite the fact that all the waste goes to the same WM landfill.
Survey of Waste Hauler Rates -- north Dallas vs. southern Dallas

Monthly Cost per Hauler Volume Cost per unit (as of 06/11) (in cubic Month volume yards) North Dallas Preston/ Walnut Hill Waste Mgmt Harry Hines/ Royal Republic Shady Trail/ Walnut Hill Republic Shady Trail/ Walnut Hill Republic Harry Hines/ Lombardy Waste Mgmt 10720 Preston Road, 1012 IESI 10720 Preston Road, 1013 IESI 10720 Preston Road, 1014 IESI 6025 Royal Lane Bluebonnet 6073 Forest Lane IESI Average "per CY" rate 103.9 34.6 26.0 26.0 26.0 69.3 69.3 69.3 155.9 103.9 $390 $150 $100 $124 $70 $330 $330 $330 $380 $250 $3.75 $4.33 $3.85 $4.77 $2.69 $4.76 $4.76 $4.76 $2.44 $2.41 $3.85 Variance from avg
-3% 12% 0% 24% -30% 24% 24% 24% -37% -38%
North Dallas hauling rates: Rates vary widely - even within same hauler and same neighborhood
Yards per Cost per Cost per Month Month Yard Southern Dallas 3403 S Lancaster 4735 S Lancaster 4831 S Lancaster 4903 S Lancaster Average "per CY" rate Waste Mgmt Waste Mgmt Bluebonnet CWD 69.3 69.3 52.0 52.0 $248 $220 $180 $186 $3.58 $3.18 $3.46 $3.59 $3.45 4% -8% 0% 4% Southern Dallas hauling rates: Rates very similar - even with haulers using McCommas, or landfill 12 miles south
North Dallas hauling rates are 12% higher (on average) than southern Dallas rates. Rates set on both cost-of-service and "what the market will bear." 21
In southern Dallas, all customer rates are within 3-4% of each other despite the fact that Waste Management hauls their customers waste right past the McCommas site to their own landfill another 10-12 miles south. On the other hand, CWD and Bluebonnet, who use the McCommas site for their southern Dallas clients, would be able to step in to haul Waste Managements customers if WM decided to increase their rates. And Dallass landfill is competitively priced compared to area landfills:
Site Name
McCommas Bluff Landfill WM Skyline Landfill in Ferris WM DFW Landfill in Lewisville Republic Camelot Landfill in Farmers Branch Posted Gate Rate (per ton) $ $ $ $ 21.50 29.00 30.00 26.50
1
Contract Rate $ $ $ $
18.16 20.30 21.00 18.55
1 Dallas' gate rate is as posted. Other sites' rates are based on their volumetric rates (by cubic yards), as converted to tons, and do not include the "additional fees for fuel surcharge and environmental fee."
2
Dallas' contract rate is based on City Code, Chapter 18. Other sites' contract rate is calculated as 30% less than gate rate - based on 8/31/11 NSWMA letter to Mayor Rawlings.
In fact, some business customers may see a decrease in their hauling fees such as those located in the Downtown area or south of that if their current hauler is using a non-City facility. The haul distance for those customers will decrease and the amount of the Franchise Fee assessed for waste going to McCommas is also less. Some customers in far north Dallas may see an increase on the order of 10% - at least until the competitive nature of the business decreases the costs to be more in line with current pricing. For some haulers, re-routing of their current daily patterns (an exercise that haulers regularly conduct) will be needed to optimize their expenses.
22
The City facilities (landfill and transfer station) can also accommodate the waste haulers preferred hours of operation. Currently, these sites operate 6 days a week and are open from early in the morning to evening. However, should waste haulers demonstrate the need for late night operations, both sites are permitted to operate 24-hours-per-day. Site personnel will coordinate with haulers to determine their needs and adjust hours to best suit the needs. As an example, one hauler currently requires Sunday use of the landfill during the period of the State Fair (Sept and Oct), for several hours and staff has provided for the hauler to use the landfill at those times for the past several years.
23
24
8. The city will increase its landfill fees after Resource Flow Control passes and there is no alternative disposal location allowed. The City has NO plans to increase the tipping fee it charges at McCommas Bluff. Unlike at privately owned landfills, any future recommendations regarding the tipping fee would be discussed in open Dallas City Council meetings and would include considerable public input before the City Council made a decision either supporting or opposing the recommendation. 9. Is the city creating a monopoly by requiring that all garbage be taken to McCommas Bluff Landfill? Absolutely not. The City of Dallas has the exclusive rightsor utility authority-- under the Texas Charter to determine where and how municipal solid waste is collected, processed and disposed. Although the city has in the past allowed garbage to be disposed of at privately owned landfills, Dallas is well within its rights and within state law to exercise utility authority in this regard. The exercising of utility rights is not a monopoly. It is not unusual for cities to direct not only where waste is disposed (through flow control ordinances such as Dallas is proposing), but also which haulers are allowed to collect waste (through exclusive franchise agreements). In some local cities such as Arlington and Grand Prairie, there is only one waste hauler that is allowed to collect garbage in the city. Dallas has 190 haulers which promotes competitive pricing for the hauling service.
25
10. The City overstates the tons that Resource Flow Control will deliver and understates the expenses theyll incur. City staff members have provided Council with the basis for their projections on tonnage, revenues, and expenses. The tonnage estimate uses the waste haulers own annual reports of the revenues from their hauling business with a conservative conversion from revenue dollars to tons hauled. Because these reports (Franchise Fee assessments) are audited and verified, the projected calculation on 900,000 tons is reasonable. Further, the figure is corroborated when staff members use the TCEQ annual reports for the past several years from other competing landfills, plus the population served for each site, to identify that approximately 850,000 to 900,000 tons of waste are hauled from Dallas to other landfills outside of Dallas. The anticipated expenses are itemized in the June 15 briefing to Council. In NSWMAs 8/31/11 letter to the Mayor, they identify significant equipment purchases ($6m of equipment) that is either: - already on-site at McCommas, or - has been accounted for in the staffs expense estimated - is not needed for the expected volume of waste.
26

The Green Path For Dallas' Trash Memo

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Green Path For Dallas' Trash Memo

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Memorandum

Information Regarding the Green Path for Dallas Trash

Should you have any other questions, please contact me.

Ryan S. Evans Assistant City Manager

The Green Path from Trash to Treasure

This page intentionally left blank

Proposed ordinance for Council consideration

Dallas is a green city

Landfill gas fuels 25,000 homes each year

Dallas is a green city

Prudent resource management

The Evolving Story of Waste:

The Evolving Story of Waste:

> 100 years ago

The Evolving Story of Waste:

Landfill Gas recovery Neighborhood Recycling Backyard Composting

> 100 years ago

How Dallas manages its waste

How Dallas manages its waste

How Dallas manages its waste

Harmful to the open market eliminates 188 Dallas hauling firms

How Dallas manages its waste

Privatize certain functions, Yes!

How Dallas manages its waste

Each waste item has value Landfills become obsolete

Creates additional waste space

Preparing for the future

* Biotechnology = 10 years New landfill space = 37 years

Landfill will take on new meaning

Preparing for the future

Preparing for the future

Republic Farmers Branch WMT DFW Landfill

Heres where our resources go now

Bachman Transfer Station/future Waste-toEnergy Facility

McCommas Bluff Landfill

WMT - Skyline Landfill

New Resource Control Ordinance

U.S. Supreme Court reinforced this in a 2007 decision

Net financial impact = $13m to $15m annually

How other cities direct the waste

Waste flow control ordinance Exclusive franchise agreement

How other cities direct the waste

Jacksonville, FL Seattle, WA Palm Beach Co, FL Snomish County, WA San Jose, CA

Urbana, IL, Portland, OR (metro) Lancaster County, PA. Franklin Co, OH

Exclusive franchise agreements:

Take control of our useful resources

Prepare the affected community

Prepare facility to accept new resources

Resource Control Ordinance:

Industrys view of the future

Hear all of the conference on: http://www.fortuneconferences.com/brainstormgreen/

Industrys view of the future

Industrys view of the future

The Time Has Come For Conversion Technologies

The Green Path from Trash to Treasure

Topics of Discussion from the June 1, 2011 Briefing

(1) Long-Term Vision for Resource Flow Control

Broadly extends Dallas green profile

Resource Recovery Facility in Bad Marienberg, Germany

Resource Recovery Facility in Roseville, CA

(2) Surrounding Area

Various commercial and industrial uses