To: Zero Waste Committee From: Paul Henderson, General Manager Solid Waste Services Date: May 29, 2013 Meeting Date: June 6, 2013 Subject: Review of Mixed Waste Material Recovery Facilities RECOMMENDATION That the Zero Waste Committee receive the report dated May 29, 2013 titled “Review of Mixed Waste Material Recovery Facilities” for information. PURPOSE To update the Zero Waste Committee on a staff review of mixed waste processing facilities in the United States. BACKGROUND There are a range of methods used across North America to process residual residential and institutional, commercial and industrial (ICI) waste. This report is being brought to the Zero Waste Committee to update the committee on a staff review of mixed waste material recovery facilities (MWMRF) through information collected on recent visits to a number of these facilities. (a) Material Recovery Facilities There are three general categories of material recovery facilities (MRFs):

• ‘clean MRFs’ which take in co-mingled recyclable materials which have been kept separate from garbage at the source.

• ‘mixed waste material recovery facilities’ which take in mixed municipal solid waste and recover materials from the waste.

• ‘hybrid MRFs’ which may take in several different lines, some of which may be source separated recyclables, and/or mixed municipal solid wastes.

In this review, any MRF processing mixed residential and ICI waste is described as a MWMRF for simplicity. MRFs are widely used for construction and demolition material recovery. This is because construction and demolition materials are well suited for mechanical separation. A 2009 inventory by Government Advisory Associates identified about 55 MWMRFs in the US. Staff have been able to confirm about half of the MWMRFs identified in 2009 are still processing mixed waste. Many of the facilities still operating have reduced the proportion of mixed waste they take. (b) Metro Vancouver Integrated Solid Waste and Resources Management Plan The Metro Vancouver Integrated Solid Waste and Resources Management Plan (ISWRMP) forms the basis for solid waste planning for the region. Under the 5R international waste management hierarchy, MWMRFs are considered recovery as materials are recovered from the waste stream. The ISWRMP repeatedly emphasizes the preference for recycling over recovery. For example:

5.2

• Resource Management Principles – the internationally recognized 5Rs hierarchy on which the ISWRMP is based establishes that recycling at the source (the 3rd R) is preferable to recovery of materials from the waste stream (the 4th

• Public Health Principles - “Emphasis on upstream preventative solutions as opposed to downstream problem management.”

R).

• Goal 2 (Maximize Reuse, Recycling and Material Recovery) reiterates the hierarchy that reuse is preferable to recycling which is preferable to material recovery. The vast majority of actions listed under Goal 2 are reuse and recycling initiatives.

• Strategy 2.6 Target organics for recycling and energy recovery – “Food waste comprises 21% of waste disposed. This, along with yard and garden waste and some paper and paperboard, can be composted together in a source separated stream to produce a beneficial and marketable product which includes compost and bio-fuel.”

• Strategy 2.9 Target multi-family and industrial, commercial and institutional (ICI) sectors to improve diversion rates: “Metro Vancouver will develop bylaws to require recycling in all multi-family and commercial buildings and complexes. Municipalities will work with Metro Vancouver to implement recycling in multi-family and commercial buildings.”

• Financial Implications – “Pricing will be established so that the most expensive choice for residents and businesses will be to place materials in garbage cans and dumpsters for disposal.”

The overarching theme of the ISWRMP is “front of pipe” solutions for reducing the amount of waste generated and maximizing diversion. For example, the National Zero Waste Council is a collaboration of public and private stakeholders working together to minimize the amount of waste generated. DISCUSSION (a) Toured MWMRF Overview Staff from Metro Vancouver and the City of Vancouver visited four MWMRFs in California during the week of April 22, 2013. Staff also toured a mixed waste composting facility, Z-Best Composting Facility, that received organics from three of the four facilities. The facilities:

• Processed a full range of residential and ICI waste: o Sunny Vale SMaRT Station and Western Placer Waste Management Authority

Material Recovery Facility: Single family, multi-family and ICI o Greenwaste Recovery, San Jose: Multi-family waste o Newby Island Resource Recovery Park, San Jose: ICI waste

• Three of the four facilities also had source separated processing lines within the same plants. In two of the plants, mixed waste materials (typically plastic containers and/or paper) were combined with the same source separated materials during the process, making accounting for recovery challenging.

• The facilities each processed in the range of 150,000 to 250,000 tonnes per year of mixed waste.

• Collection systems in the communities included:

o The Sunnyvale SMaRT Station received waste after source separation systems in all sectors, but these systems were voluntary in the ICI and multi-family sectors, and thus not in all generation locations

o Newby Island processed two-stream ICI waste: wet and dry, with source separated material (primarily cardboard) collected from some businesses

o Western Placer processed all residential and ICI waste with effectively no source separation programs (except yard trimmings). Western Placer communities refer to their waste management strategy as “One Big Bin”.

• For all communities served by the facilities, mixed waste processing was to some extent an alternative to source separation programs.

(b) Governance For all MWMRFs visited, waste delivered to the MWMRFs was collected through franchised collection programs, ie. designated commercial haulers collected all multi-family and ICI garbage, and in some cases recyclables. Republic Services (Newby Island) both collected and processed the waste. These franchised collection systems provided full control over collection systems and ensured all waste was delivered to the MWMRFs. (c) Technology The plants visited had all had significant upgrades since 2007, and although systems were more complex than plants constructed during the 1990s, the facilities appeared to rely on equipment and technology that has been available for many years. While the facilities employ automated systems, the primary mechanism of recovering recyclables was manual sorting at all four facilities. Organics were typically removed with trommel and disk screens. (d) Recycling Rates Of the facilities visited, only the Sunnyvale SMaRT Station reported detailed recovery rates. The other operators provided anecdotal information on recovery rates. A facility overview is provided as an attachment for the SMaRT Station. The material recovery breakdown is as follows: Sunnyvale California SMaRT Station Reported Recovery Rates Material Recovery Concrete, soil, yard trimmings and wood 5.7% Organics 4.3% Fibre, plastic, glass and metal 4.5% Total 14.5% The SMaRT Station organics are sent to Z-Best Composting. An additional 20% of the SMaRT Station incoming material is separated as organics, but is landfilled because Z-Best Composting no longer receives the organic material due to increases in material delivery from other facilities and limited processing capacity at Z-Best Composting.

The SMaRT Station received construction and demolition waste in addition to ICI and residential, which was hand sorted in a floor sort prior to processing in the MWMRF. The concrete, soil, yard trimmings and wood appeared to be removed during that hand sort rather in the MWMRF. As noted in the table, only 4.5% of incoming material was recovered as traditional residential and ICI recyclables (fibre, plastic, glass and metal). Reported recovery rates of traditional recyclables ranged from 10% - 15% reported at Greenwaste, to 25% reported at Western Placer. Newby Island staff reported approximately 20% recovery of traditional recyclables from the dry line. This was in spite of dry waste being rich in paper and cardboard. The wet line which was reported to process about the same amount of material as the dry line appeared to recover nominal traditional recyclables. When asked, the operator did not communicate the amount of recyclables recovered from the wet line, but suggested 65-70% overall recovery rates for the MWMRF. It would appear from the facilities visited that the maximum achievable recovery rate for traditional recyclables from MWMRFs is in the range of 10-15%. Reported recovery rates higher than this depend on removing organics out of the waste stream used as either alternative daily cover or processed Z-Best Composting. (e) Landfilled Recyclable Materials All of the visited MWMRF facility operators reported landfilling materials that were potentially recyclable due to increased quality standards in China. Rejection of North American and European recyclables has been recently reported in the Metro Vancouver media. China is increasingly rejecting recycled materials that do not meet quality standards. It is uncertain how long this situation will be in place. One facility reported landfilling approximately an additional 10,000 tonnes per year of fibre due to increased quality standards. This would represent approximately 20% of all of the reported recycling for the facility. Another facility reported that the only way they could market fibre recovered from the mixed waste was by blending it with source separated materials, given the odour and low quality of the mixed waste fibre. A third facility was landfilling the output of a fibre line that was intended to be a product, and thus was baled prior to landfilling. Operators also reported landfilling plastic containers. (f) Mixed Waste Composting Facilities The trade journal BioCycle reported only 16 mixed MSW composting facilities in the United States in 2005. By 2011, only 10 remained (including Z-Best Composting), one of which was converting to refuse-derived fuel production. In comparison, the Composting Council of Canada reports over 200 source separated composting facilities in Canada alone. Mixed waste composting facility operators have found it challenging to produce a product that is usable outside of a landfill environment. Mixed waste compost contaminants typically include small pieces of plastic and glass which are very difficult to separate from compost and make the product aesthetically problematic. Even in agricultural applications, mixed waste compost is not

desirable because the plastic and glass stay in fields for years, well after the organic material degrades. Metro Vancouver staff visited Z-Best Composting. The composting facility operator estimated about 10% recovered recyclables, 30% moisture loss, 30% saleable compost and 30% residual. To staff’s knowledge, no detailed operating data are publicly available for the facility. (g) Operating Cost Three of the four visited MWMRFs provided only anecdotal cost information. The Sunnyvale SMaRT Station reported $21 million per year cost net of recycling revenues to process 181,000 tons of mixed waste (about $116 per US ton, or $130 per metric tonne). This included operating the MWMRF plus remote landfill disposal of residuals. Reported net costs include costs and revenues from source separated recyclables processed at the same facility in a separate processing line. The source separated recycling line would likely result in net revenues, reducing the reported cost of the MWMRF. (h) Metro Vancouver Context All of the MWMRFs visited by Metro Vancouver staff have been developed through community based decisions for management of municipal solid waste. In each case, mixed waste is directed to the facilities through franchising or another waste flow management tool. The Metro Vancouver Board could decide to implement mixed waste material recovery at existing or future Regional Facilities to supplement source diversion programs. For organics in particular, given the quantity of organics in the waste stream, and given the challenges of source separation programs in sectors such as multi-family, there may be opportunities to recover additional organics from the waste stream. If on the other hand, MWMRFs are developed directly by the private sector outside of the Metro Vancouver residual disposal system, the following conditions would need to be in place for the operation of the MWMRFs to be economic:

- The private sector operators would need to be able to at their option collect a combination of waste and recyclables in a single collection container (“one big bin” approach) to increase convenience for generators and reduce collection costs.

- Either organics would need to be stripped out for management at mixed waste composting facilities and/or all residuals would need to be disposed of in a lower cost disposal system.

These conditions for success of MWMRFs are inconsistent with the ISWRMP:

- Allowing a “one big bin” approach would conflict with source separation efforts and change waste collection competition dynamics as companies operating or using MWMRFs would have different operating requirement than companies using Regional Facilities where material bans and prohibitions require source separation.

- Private sector facilities cheaply disposing of residuals, thus undercutting the Regional Facilities, would reduce incentive to recycle and reduce Metro Vancouver’s ability to ensure cost –effective, equitable solid waste services for the region.

A “one big bin” approach would disadvantage local recyclers that depend on a requirement to separate at source, e.g. organics processors such as Harvest Power, Envirosmart, Earth Renu and others. ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented CONCLUSION Staff from Metro Vancouver and the City of Vancouver visited mixed waste processing facilities in California in late April 2013 to examine their governance, operation, and performance. Mixed waste processing facilities visited were found to be high cost and recover limited recyclables. Facilitating the development of private sector MWMRFs in Metro Vancouver would be inconsistent with the ISWRMP and disadvantage local recyclers that depend on source separated materials.

Attachments and References: Attachment - Sunnyvale SMaRT Station Facility Overview (Orbit #7157170) 7332829

SMaRT Station® Annual Report 2011-2012

Innovative Solutions to Challenges of SMaRT “Fines” GlassThe SMaRT Station houses two massive rotating trommels that serve many purposes during the sorting of material moving through the recovery process. As sharp blades tear open garbage bags to spill and sort their contents, two differently-sized holes inside the trommels allow specific recyclable materials to fall through to conveyors for further sorting: nine-inch holes allow plastic and metal containers to fall through; four-inch holes allow for separation of organic food scraps, leaves and dirt. Unfortunately, broken glass also falls through the holes as a result of being tumbled around inside the trommels.

The glass is problematic to the organic portion of the sorted material, called 2-inch minus fines, due to the inability of composters to find markets for the material once it is composted. Currently, Z-Best in Gilroy has agreed to take 500 tons of the compostable material generated at the SMaRT Station, but will not take the additional 1,900 tons that are available. SMaRT Station staff have been exploring innovative solutions to remove glass from the organics. X-ray technology, for example, identifies dense particles, then uses air blowers to blow off the contaminants. Air-gravity separator equipment uses vibration and pressurized air to separate heavier impurities from the rest of the material. This method is typically used in agricultural settings to remove rocks from peanuts, coffee beans, corn or other food grains.

While the solution to the glass challenge will definitely benefit both the SMaRT partners and SMaRT operator by helping increase diversion goals, it will also pave the way for other material recovery facilities in the region, and around the country, that are faced with the same glass contamination issue.

Mountain View, Palo Altoand Sunnyvale

A SMaRT Partnership

Mike SartorPublic Works Director

City of Palo Alto

Michael A. FullerPublic Works Director City of Mountain View

John StufflebeanEnvironmental Services Director

City of Sunnyvale

MRF Fines from trommel separation.

Costs, Revenues and Diversion, 2011-2012

Financial Summary of Costs and Revenues

Mtn. View Palo Alto† Sunnyvale Totals

City Population 74,066 61,200 141,099 276,365

Cost Sharing Percentage 32% 18% 50%

COSTS (in thousands)

Operating costs $4,251 $2,301 $6,550 $13,102

Landfill Fees and Taxes $2,973 $2,572 $5,609 $11,154

Yardwaste Recycling costs $206 $139 $465 $810

Capital Replacement Fund $44 $40 $105 $189

Host Fees to General Fund $216 $118 $324 $658

Total Costs $7,690 $5,170 $13,053 $25,913

REVENUES

MRF Recovered Recycling Revenues $264 $134 $406 $804

Source Separated Recycling Revenues $1,373 $0 $1,962 $3,335

Public Haul Fees collected $191 $105 $295 $591

Total Revenues $1,828 $239 $2,663 $4,730

NET COSTS $5,862 $4,931 $10,390 $21,183

SMaRT Station Diversion Summary

(in tons) Mtn. View Palo Alto Sunnyvale Totals

City Population 74,066 61,200 141,099 276,365

MSW* delivered to SMaRT Station 55,059 27,843 84,868 167,770

MSW Public haul 1,426 1,922 10,618 13,966

Total MSW Delivered to SMaRT 56,485 29,765 95,486 181,736

MSW disposed at landfill 48,332 25,403 81,637 155,372

MSW material diverted from the landfill at the SMaRT Station

8,153 4,362 13,849 26,364

Yard trimmings brought to SMaRT Station 6,424 4,337 14,544 25,305

Recyclables brought to SMaRT Station 8,752 0 10,627 19,379

Total Delivered 71,661 34,102 120,657 226,420

Total amount of material delivered to the SMaRT Station and diverted from the landfill

23,329 8,699 39,020 71,048

† Palo Alto disposed 2,218 MSW tons at the Palo Alto Landfill during 2011-12. Palo Alto began delivering yard trimmings to SMaRT Station in April 2012.

* MSW = Municipal Solid Waste

Recyclables baled for markets.

Marketing Success

Recyclables are diverted from both MSW and curbside collection programs. Revenue from both totalled $1.8 million in 2011.

Materials Diverted from MSW

11% Concrete and Dirt

4% Aluminum, Glass, Plastic

28% Wood and Yard Trimmings

8% Scrap Metal

30% MRF Fines*

14% Mixed Paper/Newspaper

5% Corrugated Cardboard

Materials Marketed from Curbside Collection

46% Mixed Paper

5% Newspaper

0% Aluminum Cans

16% Glass

4% Plastic

2% Tin Cans

27% Corrugated Cardboard

SMaRT Station All Materials Marketed

8% Aluminum, Glass, Plastic

18% Mixed Paper/Newspaper

2% Scrap Metal

49% Yard Trimmings

9% Corrugated Cardboard

1% Wood

4% Concrete and Dirt

9% MRF Fines*

* MRF fines are mostly organic material, smaller than two inches, that have fallen through the trommel screens.

Partners in Leadership 2011–2012

CITY OF SUNNYVALE

Mayor Tony Spitaleri

Vice Mayor David Whittum

Councilmember Christopher Moylan

Councilmember Jim Griffith

Councilmember Pat Meyering

Councilmember Tara Martin-Milius

CouncilmemberJim Davis

City Manager Gary Luebbers

CITY OF PALO ALTO

Mayor Yiaway Yeh

Vice Mayor Gregory Scharff

Councilmember Patrick Burt

Councilmember Karen Holman

Councilmember Larry Klein

Councilmember Gail A. Price

Councilmember Sid Espinosa

Councilmember Greg Schmid

Councilmember Nancy Shepherd

City Manager James Keene

CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW

Mayor R. Michael Kasperzak, Jr.

Vice Mayor John Inks

Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga

Councilmember Ronit Bryant

Councilmember John Inks

Councilmember Jac Siegel

Councilmember Tom Means

City Manager Daniel H. Rich

A partnership of the cities of Mountain View, Palo Alto and Sunnyvale Operated by Bay Counties Waste Services.

Printed on recycled paper 01/2013

Cover-Your-Load Campaign Gets ResultsBeginning in December 2011, Sunnyvale Solid Waste and Water Pollution Prevention staff implemented an anti-litter campaign requiring drivers who haul waste materials to the SMaRT Station to cover their loads, or pay a fee of $15 and receive a tarp for future use. The fee was authorized by the Sunnyvale City Council with the goal of increasing compliance with the state law that requires loads to be covered. The primary intent of tarping loads is to reduce roadside litter, which often finds its way into storm drains or blows directly into the Bay, threatening the health and safety of marine life. Littered items on roadways also cause collisions, even fatalities, when drivers swerve to avoid them.

Of the 1,502 vehicles that entered the SMaRT Station at the programs’s inception, 229 drivers were assessed the $15 fee and given a tarp, indicating 84.8 percent of customers were in compliance at the start of the campaign. One hundred fifty-nine drivers paid fees and got tarps among the 3,247 Sunnyvale residents who took advantage of no-cost dumping at the SMaRT Station during Extra Dumping Weekends in March and April, indicating that compliance rates had risen to 95.1 percent. Following the event, untarped loads have declined steadily to a mere 0.05 percent. As of September 2012, 99.5 percent of public haul customers are entering the facility with covered loads. Roadways in the vicinity of the SMaRT Station are cleaner and the chances of litter entering the Bay are reduced.

SMaRT Tarping Program Compliance

25.0%

0

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

SMaRT Tarping Program Compliance

Prior Dec-11 Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12

84.8%

94.5% 96.5% 96.5% 96.1% 99.1% 99.5%

SMaRT Station Highlights

Tarped open bed vehicles and trailers entering the SMaRT Station.

RD:RLT

4/28111

1 ARTICLE 18. DIVERSION STANDARDS

2 18.1 Diversion Standards.

3 • The minimum Residential Yard Trimmings (“YT”) diversion standard is ninety-4 five percent (95%);

5 • The minimum Multi Family Dwelling (“MFD”) Residential Solid Waste (“RSW”)6 diversion standard is seventy percent (70%);

7 • The minimum Single Family Dwelling (“SFD”) Neighborhood Clean-Up8 (‘NCU”) diversion standard is seventy-five percent (75%), with a target to9 achieve ninety percent (90%);

10 • The minimum City Facility processing diversion standard is seventy percent11 (70%);

12 • The minimum Public Litter Container (“PLC”) diversion standard is seventy13 percent (70%).

14 • Should the CITY exercise the option to Process SFD RSW as described in15 Section 9.4, CONTRACTOR shall commit to a seventy percent (70%)16 diversion standard with a six-month ramp-up period after start-up to achieve17 the diversion standard.

18 18.2 Yard Trimmings Diversion Standard Calculation.

19 18.2.1 Annual Diversion Standard.

20 Beginning January 1, 2011, CONTRACTOR shall achieve a YT21 diversion rate of not less than ninety five percent (95%) per calendar year in22 CONTRACTORs Service Districts.

23 18.2.2 Annual Calculation.

24 The YT diversion rate will be calculated on a calendar year basis25 beginning January 1,2011, as the tons of YTcollected less the tons of YT26 Processing Residue divided by the tons of YT collected in the applicable calendar27 year:

VT Dwerston RateTons of VT collected

28 18 2 3 Calculation of Yard Thmmtns ProcessinQ Residue Tonnage.

29 CITY and CONTRACTOR acknowledge that YT collected pursuant to30 this Agreement may be commingled at the Compostable Waste Processing31 Facility (“CWPF”) or at the Composting Facility after such YT has been32 separately weighed upon delivery, and that this necessitates there be a33 methodology for calculating the tonnage of YT Processing Residue that will be34 attributable to such YT. Therefore, unless and until the City Representative and

80SJ (,reenWste Recovery Aqrøement 2’llO 21 ADA doc OreenWaie Recovery nc

RD:RLT4/28/11

1 CONTRACTOR agree in writing on an alternative methodology, for the purposes2 of calculating the YT diversion rate, the tons of YT Processing Residue will be3 determined as follows:

4 • First, there shall be determined the fraction of the materials5 delivered to the CWPF and the Composting Facility that represents6 YT attributable to CITY pursuant to this Agreement. This fraction7 (the ClTY Fraction”) shall be determined by adding the tons of8 CITY’s YT delivered directly to the CWPF and the tons of CITY’s YT9 delivered directly to the Composting Facility, and dividing that sum

10 by the total tons of YT (from all sources) delivered to both facilities.11 The CITY Fraction shall be truncated to four (4) decimal places.

12 • Second, there shall be determined the total tonnage of Residue13 generated at the CWPF and the Composting Facility.

14 • Third, the total tonnage of Residue shall be multiplied by the CITY15 Fraction. That product shall be the tonnage of YT Processing16 Residue used in the calculation of the YT diversion rate as set forth17 in Section 18.2.2 above.

18 • Example: If (a) the tons of YT collected pursuant to this19 Agreement was 1,000 tons delivered directly to the CWPF and20 500 tons delivered directly to the Composting Facility, (b) the21 total tons of material delivered to the CWPF was 1,200 and the22 total tons delivered to the Composting Facility was 2,000, and23 (C) the Residue generated at the CWPF was 28 tons and at the24 Composting Facility was 36 tons, then the YT Processing25 Residue would be 30 tons.

26 [(1,000 + 500)/(1,200 + 2,000)] x (28 + 36) = 30

27 18.2.4 Alternate Capacity Facility.

28 In the event CONTRACTOR delivers YT collected pursuant to this29 Agreement to an alternate facility as provided in Section 9.11, CONTRACTOR30 shall report to CITY all tonnages for the alternate facility as determined by the31 City Representative as necessary for the calculation of the YT diversion rate. If32 CONTRACTOR does not provide such tonnages. CITY may, at its option, not33 include that tonnage in the calculation of the YT diversion rate or may substitute34 alternative data that in the sole opinion of CITYs Director of Environmental35 Services is representative of the missing data.

36 18.2.5 Failure to Meet Minimum Requirement.

37 CONTRACTOR’s failure to meet the minimum diversion requirement38 may result in the termination of this Agreement or the imposition of administrative

- 81SJ-Gwe’Wase Re.oery Aweernerz 2O’O?l ADA bc Cb’enwaste Rcover rc

RD:RLT4/28/1 1

1 charges as provided in Article 20 (Quality of Performance of Contractor”) of this2 Agreement.

3 18.3 Multi Family Dwelling Residential Solid Waste Diversion Standards.

4 CONTRACTOR shall achieve a minimum 70% annual diversion rate from5 processing RSW from MFD Service Units. The failure to meet the diversion6 requirement, however, shall not be subject to administrative charges in Section 20.4 of7 this Agreement.

8 18.3.1 Calculation of Multi Family Dwelling Residential Solid Waste Diversion9 E.

10 The diversion rate for the MFD RSW shall be calculated as the total11 tons of RSW which are collected from MFD Service Units delivered to the CWPF12 less the sum of the Residue from the processing of the material, divided by the13 total tons of RSW which is collected from MFD Service Units. The tons of14 Residue attributable to the processing of this material shall be calculated based15 on an audit performed in accordance with Section 18.3.2.

16 18.3.2 Audit of Multi Family Dwelling Residential Solid Waste Diversion Rate.

17 CONTRACTOR shall perform semi-annual audits of the program and18 coordinate the audits with the City Representative as to dates and volume of19 material with a minimum volume of 40 tons for each audit. The data from the20 audits shall be used to calculate Residue rates at the CWPF and Composting21 Facility. The data from each subsequent audit is cumulative in that the new audit22 tons shall be added to the tons from previous audits to determine the new23 Residue rate. The audits shall be performed in accordance with the procedures24 set forth in Exhibit 8 (“MFD Residential Solid Waste Processing Plan”).

25 18.4 Neighborhood Clean-Up Diversion Standard.

26 18.4.1 Diversion Standard.

27 Beginning January 1,2011, CONTRACTOR shall achieve a diversion28 rate of not less than seventy five percent (75%) per calendar year in29 CONTRACTOR’s Service Districts.

30 CONTRACTOR will cooperate with CITY and GreenTeam of San Jose31 in the increased diversion of material collected through GreenTeam’s NCU32 events in Service District 8 CONTRACTOR will make a reasonable effort to33 increase diversion of NCU materials by sorting all rubbish bins, to achieve a34 diversion target of 90%.

35 18.42 Single Family Dwelling Neighborhood Clean-Up Services Diversion36 Rata.

37 The SFD NCU Services diversion rate for SFD Districts A and C is the38 rate of diversion for materials collected through the SFD NCU Service. The

- 82 -

,J GrøeiWte Recovry Agreement 2O1O21 DA ‘bc GreenWaste Recove nc

RD:RLT4/28/11

I diversion rate does not include materials collected from Targeted CleanUp

2 (“TCU”) Service unless the material is first processed at the CWPF.

3 CONTRACTOR may request that the materials collected from TCU Service be

4 added to the tons of materials collected in calculating the NCU diversion rate.

NCU Diversion Rate Tons of NCU materials collected — Tons NCU ResidueTons of NCU materials collected

5 18.4.3 Failure to Meet Minimum Requirement.

6 CONTRACTOR’s failure to meet the minimum diversion requirement

7 may result in the imposition of administrative charges as provided in Section

8 20.4.

9 18.5 Public Litter Container Diversion Standard.

10 18.5.1 Diversion Standard.

11 Beginning January 1, 2011, CONTRACTOR shall achieve a diversion

12 rate of not less than seventy percent (70%) per calendar year in

13 CONTRACTOR’s Service Districts. Residue landfilled shall not exceed 30%.

14 18.5.2 Calculation of Public Litter Container Diversion Rate.

15 CITY acknowledges the difficulty and accuracy in performing a specific

16 material calculation for PLC. Therefore the diversion rate for MFD shall be

17 applied to the PLC. However, CITY retains the right to require CONTRACTOR to

18 perform a diversion calculation audit specific to this service at any time but no

19 more than twice per year.

20 18.6 City Facility Diversion Standard.

21 18.6.1 Diversion Standard.

22 CONTRACTOR shall achieve a minimum 70% diversion rate from

23 processing City Facility Solid Waste. Residue landfilled shall not exceed 30%.

24 18.6.2 Calculation of City Facility Solid Waste Diversion Rate.

25 The diversion rate for City Facility Solid Waste (“CFSW”) shall be

26 calculated twice per year as the total tons of CFSW delivered to the CWPF less

27 the sum of the Residue from the processing of the material, divided by the total

28 tons of CFSW which is delivered from City Facilities. The tons of Residue

29 attributable to the processing of this material shall be calculated based on the

30 percentage derived from the Audit of MFD RSW as described in Exhibit 8 (MFD

31 Residential Solid Waste Processing Plane).

City Facility [CFSW Tpns to CWPF — (CFSW CWPF Residue Tons + CFSW Composting Facility Residue TJ

Diversion = CFSW Tons delivered to CWPF

- 83CSJ-GreenWste Recoveni Agreemore 2010-21 AD dec GreecWse Recovery. nc

GW

RD

ata

Sum

mar

y08

-09

MI

08-0

9A

#210

-11

MI

10-1

1A

#211

-12

Ml

11-1

2A

#211

-12

A#3

12-1

3A

#11

Aud

itD

ate

9/13

/08

2/21

/09

8/28

/10

9/8/

1081

11/1

18/

13/1

14/

24/1

212

/6/1

2T

ons

del

iver

edto

GW

R54.8

855.2

762.0

446

.01

54.1

242.9

951.8

04Q

57

Sort

edre

cycl

able

s11

.96

12.4

313

,79

14.5

011

.81

8.74

11.6

5•8

.G

WR

resI

due

7.38

6.94

7.77

4.99

4.99

6.3

54.6

2C

ompo

stfe

edst

ockd

ever

edto

Z..B

est

32.9

034.0

038.0

623.1

035.0

227.2

233.0

834.8

2T

otal

sort

ed52

.24

34.0

059.6

242.6

051.8

242

.31

49.3

548.1

3G

WR

lost

tons*

2.64

1.90

2.42

3.41

2.30

0.6

82.

450.

541L

oss

as%

oft

ota

l4.

8%3.

4%3.

9%7.

4%4.

2%1.

6%47%

1.1%

Lresid

ue

rate

13.4

%12

.6%

12.5

%10

.8%

9.2%

14.8

%8.

9%10

.0%

Z-B

estD

ata

Sum

mar

yS

cree

nin

gD

ate

1/15

/09

7/31

/09

3/4/

113/

4/11

1/26

/12

1/26

/12

12/1

9/12

Z-B

est

Resi

due

5.92

7.98

13.6

55.

049.3

46.

364.6

8-

Tot

alS

cree

ned

Com

post

30.7

916

.38

24.4

118

.06

25.6

82086

28.4

034.8

2T

onsd

eliv

ered

from

GW

R32.9

034.0

038.0

623.1

035.0

227

.22

33.0

834.8

2T

onss

tart

ingat

Z-B

est

32.0

733

.96

38.0

623.1

035.0

227

.22

33.0

834.8

2Z

-Bes

tlo

stto

ns*

0,83

0.04

--

--

-L

oss

asa

%oft

ota

l2.

5%0.

1%0.

0%0.

0%0.

0%0.

0%0.

0%0.0

%Z

-Bes

tres

iduer

ate

10.8

%14

.4%

22.0

%11

.0%

17.3

%14,8

%9%

ooj

Div

ersi

onC

alcu

lati

onT

otal

tons

coll

ecte

dan

dde

live

red

toG

WR

54.8

855

.27

62.0

446

.01

54.1

242.9

951

8048.6

7L

ess

sum

ofre

sidu

efr

ompr

oces

sing

GW

RR

esdue

7.38

6.94

7.77

4.99

4.99

6.35

4.62

4.87

Z-B

estR

esid

ue

5.92

7.98

13.6

55.

049.

346.3

64.6

8-

Tot

alR

esid

ue

13.3

014

.92

21.4

210

.03

14.3

312

.71

9.30

4.87

Div

ided

byto

tal

tons

coll

ecte

d75

.8%

73.0

%65

.5%

78.2

%73

.5%

70.4

%82

.0%

90.0

%

Res

idue

Rat

esG

WR

Res

idue

Rat

e13

.4%

12.6

%12

.5%

10.8

%9.

2%14

8%8.

9%10.0

%Z

-Bes

tRes

idue

Rat

e10

.8%

14.4

%22

.0%

11.0

%17

.3%

14.8

%9.

0%00%

.

[R

sidue

Rat

eII

24.2

%27

.0%

34.5

%21

.8%

26.5

%29

.6%

18.0

%10

.0%

1C

um

ula

tive

Div

ersi

on

Cal

cula

tion

Tota

Itonsc

oll

ecte

dan

ddeI

iver

edtc

54.8

811

0.15

172.

1921

8.20

272.

3231

5.31

367.

1141578

Les

ssu

mof

resi

due

from

pro

cess

ing

GW

RR

esid

ue

7.38

14.3

222

.09

27.0

832

.07

38.4

243

.04

47.9

1Z

-Bes

tRes

idue

5.92

13.9

027

.55

32.5

941

.93

48.2

952

.97

52.9

7T

ota

iRes

idue

13.3

028

.22

49.6

459

.67

74.0

086

.71

96.0

110

0.88

Div

ided

byto

taLto

nsco

llec

ted

T58%

74.4

%71

.2%

72.7

%72

.8%

72.5

%73

.8%

75

[iativeR

eiie

Rat

esG

WR

Res

idueR

ate

13.4

%13

.0%

12,8

%12

.4%

11.8

%12

.2%

11.7

%11

.5%

Z-B

est

Res

idue

Rat

e10

.5%

12.6

%16

.0%

14.9

%15

.4%

153%

14.4

%12

.7%

pal

Res

idue

Rat

e___

____

____

24.2

%25

.6%

28.8

%27

.3%

27.2

%27

.5%

26.2

%24

.3%

“The

Ple

aR

ecycl

able

21.8

%22

.5%

22.2

%31

.5%

21.8

%20

.3%

22.5

%17

.3%

Res

idue

24.2

%27

.0%

34.5

%21

.8%

26.5

%29

.6%

18.0

%10

.0%

Org

anlc

s54

.0%

50.5

%43

.3%

46.7

%51

.7%

50.1

%59

.6%

72.6

%JL

______

100.

0%10

0.0%

100.

0%10

0.0%

100.

0%100.0

%100.0

%10

0.0%

GW

RA

udit

SM3)

51)

ZB

..t

Scr

osm

ng

Ill $

OS

Gro

sslb

sT

are

lbs

Net

lbs

Tons

Pct

Note

s

Tons

Del

iver

edto

GW

RH

Mo

bse

rved

sort

atG

WR

,H

M&

LMo

bse

rved

sort

atZ

-Bes

tL

oad

1780

40

39080

38

96

01

94

8tr

ail

er#

1004(f

rom

GT

tru

ck

s42

o7

an

d#

60

7:R

tel4

an

d4

)L

oad

273

220

39,5

00

33,7

20

16.8

6tr

aile

r#

10

05

(fro

mG

Ttr

uck

s#

60

6an

d#214,

Rte

3an

d8)

Loa

d3

76880

39,8

00

37,0

80

18

54

trai

ler

#1002

(fro

mG

Ttr

ucks

#217

and

#608;

Rte

5an

d9)

Tot

al

_______

__

__

228,

140

118,

380

109,

760

54.8

8

çrt

ed

Rec

ycl

able

sR

igid

Pla

stic

172

01,

180

17

80

0.89

7%fr

omha

nd/f

loor

pre-

sort

;to

1oic

1d’

vo’o

htof

Ibnl

‘HD

PE

natu

ral

280

0.14

1%1

bale

HD

PE

coto

r98

0820

160

0.0

81%

from

bunk

erP

ET

#1bo

ttle

s1

120

900

720

0.3

63%

from

bunk

er;

tota

lad

ds

wei

ahtoil

h&e

1bal

e:ca

lled

#2

-7bo

ttle

s,bu

tlo

ok

edm

ore

like

mix

edco

nta

iner

s,no

t tu

st2-7

bott

les

980

0.49

4%bo

ttle

sP

last

icfil

m3

,58

01.

7915

%2

bal

esM

ixed

alum

inum

1260

1,22

040

0.0

20%

aero

sol

cans

,fo

odtr

ays.

pet

food

Met

al1,8

60

1,24

052

00.

313%

from

hand

/flo

orpre

-sort

Met

alca

ns

18

00

1,38

0420

0.21

2%A

lum

inum

980

860

120

0.0

61%

nogla

ssw

asw

eig

hed

;th

ere

was

n’t

muc

hor

iten

ds

upin

the

com

po

stG

lass

--

--

0%S

cree

ns

will

be

inst

alle

dat

GW

R(S

pri

ng

09?)

Woo

dJY

T’41

080

32,4

60

8,6

20

4.31

36%

stum

p,lo

g,m

isc.

woo

d:)r

Mix

edpa

per

2,38

01.

1910

%2

bal

es‘C

CC

3.90

01.

9516

%3

bal

esO

ther

-m

ixed

cont

aine

rs1

180

860

320

0.1

61%

alum

inum

,#1-7

mix

;th

isg

ets

sort

edag

ain

HH

W-

-0%

CR

Ts

--

0%2

CR

Isw

ere

set

asid

e,bu

tno

tw

eighed

Bat

teri

es-

-0%

jota

l—

,_

519

80

40,9

2023

,920

11,9

6—

MR

FM

anag

erre

port

edad

d’l

200

lbs

ofpl

asti

cfo

rre

cycl

ing

rem

oved

afte

rw

eigh

ing,

but

that

isno

tac

counte

dfo

rh

ere.

2C

RT

’sal

sono

tac

cou

nte

dfo

rIG

WR

Res

idue

_____

-44440

29,6

8014

,760

7.38

here

.

Co

mp

ost

Fee

dst

ock

Del

iver

edto

ZB

est

Loa

d1

49660

31,5

00

18,1

60

9.08

bldg

#1gar

bag

efe

edst

ock;

roll-

off t

oZ

-Bes

tL

oad

27

7.4

00

29,7

60

47,6

40

23.8

2bl

dg#2

fIne

s:tr

aile

rto

Z-B

est

‘Tot

al

___________

127,

060

61,2

6065

,800

32.9

0

Wifbum

ma

To

ns

deli

vere

dto

GW

R109,7

60

5488

Sort

edre

cyd

able

s23.9

20

11.9

622

.9%

GW

Rre

sidue

14.7

607.

3814

.1%

IZO

.atiS

4.m

imM

yR

esid

ual

Ton

sL

oad

1L

oad

2Z

-Bes

tR

esid

ue

‘Com

post

Ton

sL

oad

1L

oad2

Tot

alS

cree

ned

Com

post

Ton

sde

live

red

from

GW

RT

ons

star

ting

atZ

-Bes

t‘.

B”s

tkst

tons

”L

oss

asa

%of

tota

lZ

43es

tre

sidue

rate

5iv

ers

f on

Cal

cula

tlán

Tot

alto

nsco

flec

ted

and

deli

vere

dto

GW

RL

ess

sum

ofre

sidu

efr

ompr

oces

sing

GW

RR

esid

ueZ

-Bes

tR

esid

ueT

otal

Res

idue

Div

ided

byto

tal

tons

coll

ecte

d

FRes

idue

Rat

esG

WR

Res

idue

Rat

eZ

Bes

tR

esid

ueR

ate

Tot

alR

esid

ue

Rat

e

TheP

leR

ecyc

labl

eR

esid

ue

Org

anT

otal

Wöata

Sum

ma

-__

Ton

sde

live

red

toG

WR

-62

.04

Sor

ted

recy

clab

les

27574

13.7

923

.1%

IGW

Rre

sidue

15,5

407.

7713

.0%

Com

post

feed

stock

deli

vere

dto

ZB

est

76,1

2038

.06

63.8

%T

otal

sort

ed11

9,23

459

.62

100.

0%G

WR

ost

tons”

119,2

31

2”2

Los

sas

%of

tota

l3.

9%,G

WR

resi

due

rate

12.5

%

c,ii

hts

into

ns

1757

12.7

04.

8721

.48

12.7

08.

7839

.05

25.4

013

.65

13.6

5

Tot

also

rted

equal

sto

tal

ofR

ecyc

labl

es,

Res

idue

,Z

-Bes

t.M

RF

wei

ght

toss

equa

ls“T

otal

into

MR

F”m

inus

‘“To

tal

sort

ed”

Los

sas

%of

tota

leq

ual

s“M

RF

wei

ght

loss

”di

vide

dby

“Tot

alin

toM

RF”

Z-B

est

sort

obse

rved

byLM

&L

W

didn

’tw

eigh

this

mat

enal

,on

lyw

eigh

edre

sidue

24.4

138

.06

38.0

6

0.0%

22.0

%

62.0

4

7.77

13.6

521

.42

65.5

%

12.5

%22

.0%

34.5

%

13.7

921

.42

26.8

362

.04

22.2

%34

.5%

43.3

%B

ydefu

tin

clud

esto

ns

100,

0%

“Pos

sibl

eis

sues

lead

ing

tolo

stto

ns:

stor

edta

rew

eigh

tsin

corr

ect,

moi

stur

elo

ss,u

nacc

ount

edre

cycl

able

s

Sort

edR

ecycl

abie

sR

igid

Pla

stic

HD

PE

natu

ral

HO

PE

colo

rPE

T#1

bott

les

.#27

bott

les

Pla

stic

film

Mix

edal

urrn

num

Met

alM

etal

can

sA

lum

inum

Gla

ssW

ood/

VT

Mix

edp

aper

0CC

Oth

er-

cell

phones

HH

WC

RT

sU

nbal

edIr

es

Fin

dsB

ulky

Item

sB

atte

ries

Total

__

__

__

__

12,7

2012

,480

1224

012

,000

12.2

4032

,740

30,3

6012120

13,3

8037

.080

1,64

00.

8224

00.

1224

00.

1276

00.

381140

0.57

3,58

01.

7910

00.

053.

080

1.54

1,60

00.

8040

0.02

1.32

00.

667,

400

3.70

2120

1.06

3,16

01.

586

190.

01

150.

0174

00.

3720

00.

1060

0,03

120

0.06

27,5

7413

.79

jtons

Del

iver

edto

GW

RL

oad

I-

10.5

7L

oad

2-

8.64

Loa

d3

-10

.35

Loa

d4

-8.

90L

oad

5-

13.1

7L

oad

6-

10.4

1T

ota

l

_____

__

__

_

--

62.0

4

.so

rtobse

rved

byLi

.!an

dL

WG

TT

ruck

#R

oute

PUD

ayD

ate

207

14T

hurs

day

8/2

6/2

01

021

82

Thu

rsda

y6/2

6/2

010

219

11T

hurs

day

6/2

6/2

010

269

5T

hurs

day

8/2

6/2

010

605

13T

hurs

day

8/2

6/2

010

607

4T

hurs

day

6’26

1201

0b

ecam

e6

1.4

6by

the

tim

eof

sort

-M

oist

ure

Loss

12,1

4029

,660

28,7

6012

,080

12,0

6029

,680

12.0

20

12,2

0012

,360

6% 1% 1% 3%ba

les

4%ba

les

13%

2b

ale

s+lo

ose

0%un

bale

d11

% 6% 0% 5%27

% 8% 11%

2b

ales

0%ew

aste

-phones

,co

mp

ute

rs,

elec

tron

ics

0% 0%1

CR

T3% 1%

6T

ires

0% 0%m

attr

esse

s0%

24

12,7

60

12,2

6012

A80

200,4

04

185,

446

GW

RR

esid

ue5

30,0

2015

,540

77

7

Tht

also

rted

GW

Ros

tto

ns”

Loss

as%(

tota

lG

WR

resi

due

rate

““T

hePi

e’”

Rec

ycl

able

Res

idue

Org

anic

sT

otal

106,

742

53.3

73,

798

1oo

55.2

7

6.94

7.98

14.9

273

.0%

12.4

322

.5%

1492

27.0

%27

.92

50.5

%B

yde

’aut

tnc

ftid

esos

tton

s55

.27

100.

0%

100.

0%T

otal

sort

edeq

ual

sto

tal

ofR

ecyc

labl

es,

Res

idue

,Z

-Bes

t.M

RF

wei

ght

loss

equa

ls“T

otal

into

MR

F”m

inus

“Tot

also

rted

”3.

4%L

oss

as%

ofto

tal

equal

s“M

RF

wei

ght

loss

”di

vide

dby

“Tot

alin

toM

RF”

—12

.6%

bS

um

ma

Res

idua

lT

ons

Loa

d1

20.7

812

.80

7.98

2-B

est

Res

idue

20.7

812

.80

7.98

Com

post

Ton

sL

oad

122

,67

12.8

09.

87L

oad

219

.31

12.8

06.

51T

otal

Scr

eened

Com

post

41.9

825

.60

16.3

8T

ons

deli

vere

dfr

omG

WR

34.0

0T

ons

star

ting

atZ

Bes

t33

.96

L-B

est

ost

tons

’L

oss

asa

%of

tota

lLz

-Bes

tre

sidu

era

te14

.4%

enaIcuo1

Tot

alto

nsco

llec

ted

and

deli

vere

dto

GW

RL

ess

sum

ofre

sidue

from

pro

cess

ng

GW

RR

esid

ue

Z”B

est

Res

idue

Tot

alR

esid

ue

Dni

ided

byto

tal

tons

coll

ecte

d

No

fini

shed

com

post

was

added

asa

bulk

ing

agen

t.

Per

emai

lfr

omG

reg

Rya

non

8/5/

09to

Cec

ilia

GW

RR

esid

ueR

ate

Z-B

est

Res

idue

Rat

eT

otal

Res

idue

Rat

e

12.6

%14

.4%

27.0

%

“Pos

sibl

eis

sues

lead

ing

tolo

stto

nsst

ored

tare

wei

ghts

inco

rrec

t,m

oist

ure

loss

,un

acco

unte

dre

cycl

able

sor

com

post

feed

stoc

k,sc

ale

fluct

uatio

ns

GW

RR

esi

due

[tom

post

Feedst

ock

Del

iver

edto

ZB

est

Loa

d1

Itru

ck#119

Loa

d2

truc

k#9

60[T

otal

______

________________________________

[wD

ata

Su

mm

ary

Ton

sdeh

ver

edto

GW

R55

.27

Sor

ted

recy

ctab

les

12.4

3G

WR

resi

due

6.94

Com

post

feed

sto

ckde

hver

edto

Z-B

est

34.0

0

To

ns

Del

iver

edto

GW

RL

oad

IL

oad

2L

oad

3L

oad

4T

ota

l

__

__

__

__

_

86,8

0070

.540

54.8

0047.1

20

259

.26

0

39,7

6038

.420

34,8

8035

,660

I 48

.72

0

47

,04

032

,120

19,9

2011

,460

110.

540

23.5

216

.06

9.96

5.73

55.2

7

trai

ler

#GT

O2

(fro

mG

Ttr

ucks

#218

and

#6

05

;R

te2

and

13)

trai

ler

#GT

O1

(fro

mG

Ttr

ucks

#215

and

#6

04

;R

to1

and

7)fr

ont

load

er#G

T21

9(f

rom

Rte

11)

fron

t load

er#G

T6O

1(f

rom

Rte

12)

Sort

edR

ecycl

abie

sR

igid

Pla

stic

HD

PE

natu

ral

HD

PE

colo

rP

ET

#1bo

ttle

s#2

-7bo

ttle

sP

last

icfil

mM

ixed

alum

inum

Met

alM

etal

cans

Alu

min

umG

lass

Woo

dIY

TM

ixed

pap

erC

CC

Oth

er-

cell

phones

HH

WC

RT

sB

atte

ries

To

tal

1,20

00.

605%

2bal

es20

00.

101%

1ba

te1,

040

820

220

0.11

1%66

00.

333%

1ba

le1,

460

0.73

6%1

bale

3,66

01.

8315

%2

bal

es48

044

040

0.02

0%32

,580

28,8

603,

720

1.86

15%

..0%

1.32

01.

240

800.

040%

218

01,

020

1,16

00.

585%

35.9

8029

,840

6,14

03.

0725

%2

,92

01.

4612

%3,

400

1.70

14%

2bal

es2

0.00

0%-

-0%

--

0%-

0%j

73

,58

062

,220

24,8

6212

.43

43.7

80

29.9

0013

.880

6.94

78.9

8032

,320

46

,66

023

.33

64,4

404

3,1

00

21,3

4010

.67

143,

420

75

,42

068

,000

34.0

0

110,

540

24,8

6213

.880

68

,00

0

23.3

%13

.0%

63.7

%

Com

post

feed

stoc

kde

live

red

to2-

Bes

tT

otal

sort

ed‘;t

Ions

”L

oss

as%

ofto

tal

GW

Rre

sidu

era

te

tD

aS

um

ma

Res

idua

lT

ons

Loa

dI

Load

22-B

est

Res

Idue

Tot

alS

cree

ned

Com

post

Ton

sde

liver

edfr

omG

WR

Ton

sst

artin

gat

Z-B

est

-Bec

osl

tons

”L

oss

asa

%of

tota

l2-

Bes

tre

sidu

era

te

[Ui&

øn

aic

uIa

ton

——

____

Tot

alto

nsco

llec

ted

and

deli

vere

dto

GW

RL

ess

sum

ofre

sidu

efr

ompr

oces

sing

GW

RR

esid

ue

ZB

est

Res

idue

Tot

alR

esid

ueD

ivid

edby

tota

lton

sco

llec

ted

“T

he

Pie

”R

ecycl

able

Res

idue

Org

anic

sT

otal

65,8

0010

4,48

05,

250

30.7

932

.90

32.0

71,

660

083

54.8

8

7.38

5.92

13.3

0

11.9

613

.30

29.6

254

.88

2.5%

10.8

%

75.8

%

21.8

%24

.2%

54.0

%B

yde

faul

tin

clud

eslo

stio

ns10

0.0%

15.9

712

.64

3.33

15.2

312

.64

2.59

31.2

025

.28

5.92

32.9

063

.0%

52.2

410

0.0%

Tot

also

rted

equa

lsto

tal

ofR

ecyc

labl

es,

Res

idue

,Z

-Bes

t.0

64M

RF

wei

ght

loss

equa

ls“T

otal

into

MR

F”m

inus

“Tot

also

rted

”4.

8%L

oss

as%

ofto

tal

equa

ls“M

RF

wei

ght

loss

”di

vide

dby

“Tot

alin

toM

RF”

13.4

%

12C

Yof

fini

shed

com

post

was

added

asa

bulk

ing

agen

t,th

usfi

nal

#of

com

post

tons

isor

ityan

ecdo

taH

yus

eful

.

Res

idue

Rat

esG

WR

Res

idue

Rat

eZ

-Bes

tR

esid

ueR

ate

Tot

alR

esid

ue

Rat

e

13.4

%10

.8%

242%

“Pos

sibl

eis

sues

lead

ing

tolo

stto

ns:

stor

edta

rew

eigh

tsin

corr

ect,

moi

stur

elo

ss,

unac

coun

ted

recy

clab

les

orco

mpo

stfe

edst

ock,

scal

ett

uctu

abon

s

Gra

ndT

otal

44,7

05.0

340

,267

.92

43,4

63.0

247

,837

.84

51,7

74.9

647

,916

.80

46,5

00.8

447

,873

,56

42,5

41.1

449

,560

.28

48,9

93.6

850

,475

.13

Sum

ofS

umO

fcq

Col

umn

Lab

els

Row

Lab

els

4090

940

940

4096

941

000

4103

041

061

4109

141

122

4115

341

183

4121

4A

DC

155994

1,9

265

32,3

01.1

42

,06

6.9

92

,19

1.0

32.6

3280

2,54

752

2,4

72

.62

2,0

65

.89

1.9

50

32

164592

App

lian

ce‘2

05

4733

4080

43.9

549

.35

61.4

34

9.5

04823

5310

5003

4620

EW

ast

e1270

1349

11.0

413

.71

12.2

014

.66

11.9

011

.72

10

97

10.9

7980

Gre

enw

aste

397

928

3,32

032

3,4

97.5

05,6

68.8

35,

940

734,4

76

844,

045.

514

,15

7.3

93,

858

364,6

44.9

05,

229

71In

erts

733

1173593

798.1

31,1

9652

1,45

7.76

1.3

64

08

1,19

1.86

1,46

1.24

1,09

014

1,61

4.28

105455

Mix

edw

aste

dir

ect

toLF

166

720

1,45

7.86

139829

1,46

5.65

1,58

3.68

1,58

6.15

1,75

5.49

1.5

5988

1,4

07

59

1,94

2.46

152580

Mix

ectw

aste

toM

RF

2076

36218,9

13

4020,2

88.6

121,5

51.9

623,5

27.5

122

,311

8321,3

83

79

21

,91

584

19,6

68.2

821,9

28.9

222

252

54R

esid

ue

1356

85511,6

73

6512,7

49.6

013,3

90.2

814,2

03.4

112,9

30.6

112,7

12.5

013,0

96.9

611,7

84.9

01

3,7

70

37

150

00

.76

Slu

dge

I8

3J

181,

581

721,

667.

581,6

8924

2,0

25

.98

1,7

08.8

52

,09

7.5

62

,46

5.3

31

939.

912,

883.

411.

597

16S

Sal

um

inum

017

0.21

0.00

0.56

0.00

0.11

SSca

rdb

oar

d2f

55

136873

45740

436.2

941

9.07

399.6

234203

321,

1934897

42047

37666

46263

SS

gla

ss227

189

193

178

1.99

1.59

243

1.66

1.59

148

16.1

23.

02S

Sm

isc.

recy

clab

les

1394

294

346

673

23.4

922

.63

3.86

326

0.62

5.90

205

134

SSm

ixed

pap

er12

7612

1815

.34

541

19.2

115

.26

2.21

26.6

02.

302

7.1

613

.21

2664

SS

new

spap

er59

8370

.73

86.7

46361

84.7

879

.82

86.0

182

.36

79.8

174

.48

8903

106.

23S

Spla

stic

318

379

246

3.39

3.44

3.72

386

4.04

373

342

2.72

299

SS

stee

l574

427

2.18

19.7

06.

104.

794.

709.

5520.0

99.

702.

111033

Tir

es582

813

4.57

11.7

313

.12

9.78

6.47

9.80

5.25

8.76

583

558

Woo

dw

aste

181

3612

4.86

136.

2620

187

212

32291.7

825

3.65

225.

9019

9.54

21325

123

5114

016

4124

4(b

lank

1,4

82

.64

45

.15

949

7,1

2584

847

651,

436

4921.7

7830

1518220

180

845

(bla

nk)

Gra

ndT

otal

24

,84

334

58

7.1

014

264

55

,94

52

11354324

18

.78

65

42

56

.28

458

16

0,0

63

7923.2

95

371

054

60

8.5

737

7590

2217828

963

4340

74

9926

9484

230

425

S61

,910

.20

DA

TEIN

By

Mon

jbl

ackbO

Xr1jm

c]1

Novem

ber

AD

C16

4592

Novem

ber

Ap

pli

ance

46.2

Novem

ber

EW

aste

9,79

5N

ovem

ber

Gre

enw

aste

5229

.714

25N

ovem

ber

lner

ts10

5454

6125

Novem

ber

Mix

edw

aste

dire

ctto

LF15

25.8

No

vem

ber

Mix

edw

aste

toM

RF22

252.

539

Novem

ber

Res

idu

e15

000.

76N

ovem

ber

Slu

dge

1597

.16

Novem

ber

SSca

rdboar

d37

6.66

No

vem

ber

55gl

ass

16.1

2N

ov

emb

erSS

mis

c,re

cycl

able

s2.

05N

ovem

ber

55m

ixed

pape

r13

.21

Novem

ber

55new

spap

er89

.03

No

vem

ber

SSp

last

ic2.

72N

ov

emb

er55

stee

l2.

11N

ov

emb

erT

ires

5.83

4N

ov

emb

erW

ood

was

te12

3.51

2D

ecem

ber

AIX

1482

.64

Dec

emb

erA

pp

lian

ce45

.15

Dec

ember

EW

aste

9.48

75D

ecem

ber

Gre

enw

aste

7125

.837

5D

ecem

ber

Iner

ts84

7,65

3375

Dec

ember

Mix

edw

aste

dire

ctto

LF14

36.4

9D

ecem

ber

Mix

edw

aste

toM

RF

2177

8.29

8D

ecem

ber

Res

idue

1518

2.2

Dec

ember

Slu

dge

1808

45D

ecem

ber

SS

card

boar

d46

2.63

Dec

emb

er55

glas

s3.

02D

ecem

ber

SSm

isc,

recy

clab

les

1.34

Dec

ember

55m

ixed

pape

r26

.64

Dec

ember

SSnew

spap

er10

6.23

Dec

ember

SSp

ast

c2.

99D

ecem

ber

SSS

tee’

10.3

3D

ecem

ber

Tir

es5.

58D

ecem

ber

Woo

dw

aste

140.

162

inbo

und

Mat

eria

ls

J’v

Feb

ruar

yM

arch

Apnl

May

June

iu1y

Au

gu

stS

epte

rnD

erO

cto

be

No

xem

ber

Decem

ber

App

lian

ce52

.05

47.3

340

.80

43.9

549

.35

61.4

349

.50

48.2

353

.10

50.0

346

.20

45.1

558

7.10

1275

1349

11.0

413

.71

12.2

014

.66

11.9

011

,72

10.9

710

.97

980

349

142

64G

reen

wast

e3,

979

283

32

032

3,4

97,5

05668.8

35,9

40.7

34,4

76.8

44,0

45.5

14,1

57.3

93,8

58,3

64,6

44.9

05229,7

17

,12

58

455,9

45.2

1In

erts

731

1173

5.93

798.

131,

196.

521,

457.

761,3

64.0

81,1

91.8

61,

461.

241,0

90.1

41,6

14.2

81.

054

55847.6

513,5

43,2

4M

ixC

dw

ast

edrr

ec

toIF

2,6

67

20

1,4

5786

1,3

98.2

91,4

65.6

51,5

83.6

81,5

86.1

51,1

55.4

91,5

59.8

81.4

0759

1,9

42.4

61,5

25.8

01,4

36.4

918,7

8654

Mxed

wast

eto

MR

F19,6

4681

17

,92

4.3

019,3

43.3

420,3

84.2

022225.3

420,7

90.9

320,1

05.8

420,6

75.9

018,4

36.4

720,7

23.8

921,1

92.4

82

0,1

20

01

242,1

69.5

1S

ludge

1,8

30.1

81,

581.

721,5

67.5

81,

689.

242,0

25.9

81,

708.

852,0

9756

2,4

65.3

31,9

39.9

12,8

83.4

11,5

97.1

61,8

08.4

523,2

95

3755

alu

min

um

000

0.1

70.

000.

210.0

00.

560.0

00.0

00.1

10.0

00.0

00.0

01.

05IS

card

bo

ard

255

5236

8.73

457.4

043

6.29

419.0

739

9.62

342.

03321.1

934

8,97

420,4

7376.6

6462.6

34

,60

8.5

7S

Igla

ss2.?

?1.

89193

1,78

1.99

1.59

2.43

1.66

1.59

1.48

16.1

23.

0237

.75

ISm

isc.

recy

clab

ies

1394

294

346

6.7

323

.49

22.6

33.

863.

260.

625.9

02.0

51.

3490

.22

ISm

ixed

paper

2276

12.1

815

.34

5.41

19.2

115

.26

2.21

26.6

02.3

027

1613

.21

26.6

417

8,28

ISnew

spaper

5983

70.7

386

.74

63.6

184

.78

79.8

286

.01

82.3

679

.81

74.4

889

0310

6.23

963

4355

pla

stic

318

379

2.45

3,39

3,44

3.72

3.86

4.0

43,

733,4

22,

722.

9940.7

455

steel

S‘7

44.

272.

1819

.70

6.10

4.7

94.7

09.

552009

970

211

10.3

399.2

6T

ees

513

38.

134.

5721

.73

13.1

29.

786.

479.8

05.

258

76583

558

0413

4W

ood

wast

e18

136

124

8613

6.26

201.

8721

2.12

291.7

825

3.6S

225.9

0199.5

4213.2

512

3.51

140.

162,3

04.2

5T

ota

lIn

bo

un

d28,4

59.7

32

56

78

.64

27,4

67.0

231212.8

134,0

78.3

638,8

32.3

029,9

62.8

731,0

64.0

427,4

58.5

432,6

34.5

631,2

86.9

43

2,7

52

.00

36

2,8

88

.00

Buri

edM

ate

rials

Mix

edw

ast

ed

irect

to16

1,66

720

1,45

7.86

1,39

8.29

1,46

5.65

1,5

83.6

81,5

86.1

51,7

55.4

91,5

59.8

81,4

07.5

91,9

42.4

61,5

25.8

01,4

3649

18.7

8654

Res

idue

13,5

6895

11,6

7365

12,7

49.6

013,3

90.2

814,2

03.4

112,9

30.6

112,7

12.5

013,0

96.9

611784.9

013,7

70.3

715,0

00.7

615

,182

20160,0

63.7

9S

ludge

1,83

013

31,

581.

721,

667.

581,

689.

242,0

25.9

81,

708.

852,0

97.5

62,4

65.3

31939.9

12,8

83.4

11,5

97,1

61,8

0835

23

,29

5.3

7T

ota

lB

uri

ed1

7,0

65

.93

14

71

3.2

313,8

13.4

716,5

45.1

717,8

13.0

716,2

25.6

116,5

65.5

517,1

22.1

715,1

32.4

018,5

96.2

41

8,1

23

.72

18,4

27.1

4202145.7

0R

ecover

yR

ates

Fac

ilit

yW

ide

Rec

over

yR

ate

40.0

%42

,7%

42.4

%47

.0%

47.7

%47

.4%

64.7

%44

,9%

44.9

%43

,0%

421%

437%

44,3

%M

RF

Rec

over

yR

ate

479%

50.3

%49

.5%

53.1

%54

.2%

53.6

%52

.9%

53.3

%52

.8%

52.6

%47

.7%

502%

51,6

%M

ixed

Was

teR

ecover

yR

ate

30.9

%34

9%34

.1%

34.3

%36

.1%

37.8

%36

.8%

367%

36.1

%33

.6%

29.2

%26

.7%

39%

Saa

mm

ary

ofR

ecov

ered

Mat

eria

lsfr

om

Mix

edW

ast

eS

tream

AD

S.

2,0

16

89

7,3

0941

2,6

20.6

02

,54

L7

5.

—2O

98—

-—34644-_

2,4

4532

,.

.21

.1L

4.

.‘.4

,745

60

,.

28

,79

6.8

5

Alu

min

um

Can

s23

8718

1125

.71

18.7

426

.33

24.5

528

.02

27.9

02

99

014

.49

21.6

01

89

627

811

Aiu

n,i

num

Scr

ap1123

10.2

811

.79

11,2

77.

721

47

710

.74

18.3

313

.93

1463

1173

14.0

115

149

(rdboard

493

1948

566

421.

63513.0

6511.4

8457.9

0529.3

357

5.54

473.0

6510.0

446

388

408.1

65,

831

83C

arpet

S’

36

99

76.4

081.3

411

4.18

48.5

512

8.88

108.

9683

.02

78.3

411

220

6414

92669

CR

T1

3,

18.6

513

.80

10.5

739

.79

32.8

02

.32

23.3

317

.07

22.9

11645

16.7

4229.1

51.

Was

te35

611

7847

,09

38.9

958

.23

61.2

045.7

657

.03

44.0

852

7831

.70

15.5

9569.5

8F

ilm

Pla

stic

I17

2.06

670

1.70

26(

12.9

02.

601

513

803

40

5.5

03.

0034

.67

Gla

ss35

8276

7049

.73

90.1

377

.02

65.2

960.7

35

84

872

.32

8658

121

4716

6.84

1,02

2.11

HD

PEC

olo

red

443r

,44

3352

.29

48.2

854

1644

.61

46.9

952

.79

45.2

75062

4395

40

29

569

92H

OPE

Nat

ura

l41

9347

1348,0

044

.59

4659

41,2

744.2

246

.88

41.2

146

2943.1

440

2153

052

—-‘

‘‘

“7’6

’r3—

3482_..

._,3

O2

-24

‘-348.6

?-

-468.6

9.3

.93.

10-

378.0

3379.6

3289.3

636

170

29

99

8234.3

34.

044

04M

ixed

Pla

stic

(larg

e10

073

125

9612

567

134.

0117464

15

74

816209

146.

5212

8.97

14991

128

5010

183

1,63

630

Mx

edP

last

icsm

all

56

42

4834

62.6

671

.38

8403

7271

68.6

872

.11.

66.7

262

3949.2

751

7677645

Mix

edP

aper

s4&

535

39

04

54

63

2504.3

065

502

698.8

158

3.91

496.

3235

188

409

7741

387

317.

S5

6,0

53.3

8N

ew

spaper

I”4

9717

2.06

195.

30233.9

018

8.29

161.

0217

0.58

232.9

918

7.02

23078

228

1620049

2.3

8556

PET

Pls

tc10

369

199

5212

2.09

109.

2113

3.76

118,

8012

4.69

138.

5311

482

11640

103.9

997

721,

398

22M

isc

Rec

ycl

able

s2084

18.3

521

9110

.83

19.7

610

.34

22.5

822

.81

1980

1292

18.4

39

58208.1

5S

teel

71305

689

5970

0.18

737.

7377

8,94

814.

52765,0

4783.4

070

6,71

76862

682.4

257

334

8,7

17,6

7W

ood

Was

te1,

3r1

3’1,

266.

491,2

8846

1,23

2.88

1,3

41.6

61,

643.

561,8

58,7

11,5

3091

1,4

49.9

81,

834

131,

334

131.4

1371

17,5

46,5

9

6,1

59

.57

6.41

433

6,7

38.5

76,7

89,3

17,6

14.0

47,2

78.1

47,7

19.2

17

,43

4.2

96,5

20.6

57

,28

1.5

26,

249.

81.

5,5

23.8

5

-21(4O

)

Z1-fl.

‘i

.(J,u

jS

’