Agenda packet — Economic Development Committee, September 11, 2023

- 1 -
9/11/2023 4:00:00 PM
www.modestogov.com
AGENDA
City of Modesto

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE / COUNCIL

WORKSHOP
Room 2001-40 Del Puerto Room
Tenth Street Place, 1010 10th Street
Modesto, California
Monday, September 11, 2023 at 4:00 PM
Roll Call: Sue Zwahlen, Chair
Chris Ricci, Vice-Chair
Eric Alvarez, Member
Alternates: David Wright, Nick Bavaro, Rosa Escutia-Braaton, Jeremiah Williams “Wordly” can translate into 25+ different languages! To access written translation during the meeting, please scan the QR Code or click this link https://attend.wordly.ai/join/RJDY-6364.
"Wordly" puede traducir a más de 25 idiomas diferentes! Para acceder a la traducción durante la reunión, por favor escanee el código QR o haga clic en el enlace https://attend.wordly.ai/join/RJDY-6364.

THIS MEETING WILL BE PHYSICALLY OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND BY ZOOM

VIDEO CONFERENCING AND TELEPHONE
Effective March 1, 2023, if a technical issue arises with Zoom or the phone dial-in option, the Committee meeting will continue unless the meeting is being held pursuant to the provisions of Assembly Bill 2449. Alternative viewing options are listed below and the meeting is physically open to the public.

You may observe a livestream of the meeting at http://media.modestogov.com. You may also participate in the meeting as indicated below.
- 1 -
9/11/2023
- 2 -
9/11/2023 4:00:00 PM

PARTICIPATING IN CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS
As a courtesy, the City of Modesto is providing alternatives to view Council Committee meetings and provide public comments. If you wish to make either a general public comment or to comment on a specific agenda item, you may use one of the following options:

SUBMITTING COMMENTS BY E-MAIL
Written comments may be submitted via email to: [email protected] (include Agenda Item Number in the subject line). All comments will be shared with the Committee Members and placed in the record, but will not be read aloud during the meeting. Written comments must be received two hours before the meeting.

VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION BY ZOOM VIDEO

CONFERENCING AND TELEPHONE
Joining the Committee meeting via Zoom
The City of Modesto is now offering the ability to view and participate in Committee meetings via telephonic conferencing via “Zoom” video conferencing computer technology. The meeting may be accessed through the use of Zoom using the following options:
 Enter the following link into an Internet Browser
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86945970570,
 Enter the following link into an Internet Browser https://zoom.us/ and using the Webinar ID 869 4597 0570
 Passcode 84326
To use Zoom, please visit: https://zoom.us/ and either sign-up for a free Zoom account or continue as a guest. Once you have downloaded the app onto your mobile device, joined from your web browser, or downloaded the Zoom software on your computer you will be ready for the upcoming Committee meeting.

Joining the Committee meeting via Telephone
If you don’t have a smart phone or computer to access the meeting via Zoom, you can participate by phone, by calling 1-877-853-5257 (Toll Free) or 1-888-475-4499 (Toll Free) and enter the Webinar ID 869 4597 0570 Passcode 84326
Providing Public Comment on Zoom and by Telephone
The Committee Chairman will request public comment during the Public Comment periods on the meeting agendas and during each Regular Calendar Item on the Committee Agenda. Once the Chairman has announced the public comment period, please do one of the following.

USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE APP:
 Click on the “Raise Hand” feature in the webinar controls. This will notify City staff that you have raised your hand.
- 2 -
9/11/2023
- 3 -
9/11/2023 4:00:00 PM
 City staff will unmute your microphone when it is your turn to provide public comment.
 A prompt will appear to confirm you would like to be unmuted and then you will have three minutes to provide public comment.
 Once your public comment has ended, you will be muted again.

USING A REGULAR PHONE (not using a computer or smart phone APP):
 Dial *9 (star 9), this will notify City staff that you have “raised your hand” for public comment.
 City staff will unmute your microphone when it is your turn to provide public comment.
 You will hear “you are unmuted” and then you will have three minutes to provide public comment.
 Once your public comment has ended, you will be muted again.  If your phone is unmuted, and you are unable to be heard, the host may ask that you Dial *6 to toggle mute on/off in Zoom.

Additional Zoom resources/support
Please visit Zoom’s website support page on helpful tips to prepare for the meeting:
https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/categories/201146643
Council has not delegated directive or final approval authority to the Committees. Committee actions are recommendations to the full City Council, not final decisions on an issue. This meeting is also noticed as a City Council workshop.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Please refer to special public comment instructions above.

Three-minute time limit per speaker.

Only interested persons in the audience may present these matters. Under State law, Committee Members may respond to matters being presented under this item only as follows:
a. Briefly respond to statements made or questions raised. b. Ask a question for clarification.
c. Provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information. d. Request staff to report back at a subsequent meeting. e. Finally, a Committee Member or the Committee itself may take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda.

CONSENT ITEMS – ROLL CALL VOTE REQUIRED:

Information concerning the consent items listed below has been forwarded to each Committee Member prior to this meeting for study. Unless some member of the audience or Committee Member has a question concerning an item and asks that it be withdrawn from the consent list, the Committee approves the items at one time. The action taken by the Committee in approving consent items is set forth in the explanation of this individual item. - 3 -
9/11/2023
- 4 -
9/11/2023 4:00:00 PM
Any and all of the following agenda items are subject to action by the Modesto City Council.

This Agenda is on file at the Modesto-Stanislaus Library Reference Room, 1500 I Street, Modesto, in the City Clerk’s Office, Sixth Floor, 10th Street Place, and is available on the City’s Web site at www.modestogov.com.

In accordance with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) of 1990, the Fair Employment & Housing Act (“FEHA”), the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (as amended), Government Code section 11135 and other applicable codes, the City of Modesto (“City”) will not discriminate against individuals on the basis of disability in the City’s services, programs, or activities. For more information, please visit the City of Modesto website at https://www.modestogov.com/865/Americans-with-Disabilities-Act-ADA In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk (209) 577-5396. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.

CONSENT
An item may be removed from consent and discussed at the request of an audience member or committee member.

Consent

1. Consider a Second Amendment to an Agreement with Harris & Associates to provide Community Facilities Districts Engineering Services, for a revised Agreement total amount not to exceed $350,000 and forwarding to Council for approval. (Funding Source: Various Community Facilities Districts and Developer Deposits)  Motion recommending a Second Amendment to an Agreement with Harris & Associates to provide Community Facilities Districts Engineering Services, increasing the Agreement amount by $100,000 from $250,000 to a revised amount not to exceed $350,000 and forwarding to Council for approval.

CED; Peter Ibrahim, 209-577-5211, [email protected] Consent

2. Consider the First Amendment for On-Call Plumbing Services with Champion Industrial Contractors, Inc., Modesto, CA to a revised total amount of $432,370 through the Term of the Agreement and forwarding to Council for approval. (Funding Source: General Fund, Utility Funds, Centre Plaza, Golf Fund and Building Services Fund)
 Motion recommending the First Amendment for On-Call Plumbing Services with Champion Industrial Contractors, Inc., Modesto, CA to increase the Agreement amount by $86,250 to a revised total amount of $432,370 through the Term of the Agreement, extending the Term Date from November 6, 2023, to May 5, 2024, and forwarding to Council for approval.

FINANCE DEPARTMENT; Dianne Love, 209-571-5164, [email protected] - 4 -
9/11/2023
- 5 -
9/11/2023 4:00:00 PM

NEW BUSINESS

3. Consider the proposed plan and recommendations from HDR Engineering, Inc., of Folsom, CA to expand and improve the existing City of Modesto Compost Facility at 7001 Jennings Road and forwarding to Council for approval. (Funding Source:

Compost Facility Improvement Fund)
 Consider recommending the proposed plan and recommendations from HDR Engineering, Inc. of Folsom, CA to expand and improve the existing City of Modesto Compost Facility at 7001 Jennings Road and forwarding to Council for approval.

PUBLIC WORKS; Rosene Nguyen, 209-577-5453, [email protected]

ADJOURNMENT
Posted pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2 on the bulletin board at Tenth Street Place on at by
date time signature
- 5 -
9/11/2023

CITY OF MODESTO

COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT
DATE OF MEETING:

September 11, 2023
Date: August 21, 2023
TO: Economic Development Committee
Sue Zwahlen, Chair
Chris Ricci, Vice-Chair
Eric Alvarez, Member
THROUGH: Joseph P. Lopez, City Manager
FROM: Jessica Hill, Director of Community and Economic Development SUBJECT: Second Amendment with Harris & Associates for Community Facilities Districts Engineering Services
CONTACT: Peter Ibrahim, Infrastructure Financing Program Supervisor [email protected], 209-577-5211
DESCRIPTION:

Consider a Second Amendment to an Agreement with Harris & Associates to provide Community Facilities Districts Engineering Services, for a revised Agreement total amount not to exceed $350,000 and forwarding to Council for approval. (Funding Source: Various Community Facilities Districts and Developer Deposits)
STRATEGIC PLAN ELEMENT:

The recommended action supports the City of Modesto’s 2020-2025 Strategic Plan Initiative, Goal D: Provide safe, efficient, and reliable infrastructure through proactive community investment, maintenance and sustainability efforts.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Modesto’s Community Facilities Districts (CFDs) are created to provide a funding and reimbursement mechanism for public facilities and/or services for various Specific Plan areas. CFDs are established to ensure that new development projects do not solely become the responsibility of the City’s General Fund and to ensure the long-term maintenance and aesthetic quality of each neighborhood.

In 1982, the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (Act) was adopted by the State of California as a method for financing infrastructure improvements and services associated with new developments. The Act allows infrastructure improvements and services to be funded through a special tax paid by property owners.
#1..
- 6 -
Economic Development Committee, September 11, 2023
Second Amendment with Harris & Associates for Community Facilities Districts Engineering Services

Page 2 of 3 ends

DISCUSSION:

On September 13, 2021, the City of Modesto, under the approval authority of the City Manager pursuant to Modesto Municipal Code section 8-3.102, entered into an agreement with Harris & Associates to assist with Community Facilities Districts Engineering Services. for an amount not to exceed $45,000.

Harris & Associates prepared cost estimates and improvement plans for infrastructure needs, and other tasks related to land development engineering following the execution of the agreement. A subsequent first amendment to the original agreement was deemed necessary to implement the recommended improvements for Community Facilities District projects throughout the City. On November 23, 2021, by Resolution No. 2021-448, City Council approved the First Amendment to the agreement with Harris & Associates for an amount not to exceed $250,000.

Harris & Associates is currently assisting the City on several projects including Tivoli, proposed development in Fairview Village #2, the Claus Road Corridor Study, and a variety of technical services related to engineering and infrastructure assessment/maintenance.

Some of the additional areas and needs include:
 Tivoli Voluntary Land Dedication Program (VLDP) Assistance  CFD Formation - Fairview Village #2
 CFD Formation - Village One Triangle
 Woodglen East
 CFD Formation & Infrastructure Financing Plan/Facilities Master Plan – Tivoli North  Various annexations in existing CFDs - facilities cost estimate reviews In accordance with Modesto Municipal Code 8-3.204(a), Exceptions for Formal Bidding Requirements, this agreement is for professional services, and, therefore, exempt from the bid requirement; however, staff initially conducted an informal RFP process and recommends approval of the amendment with Harris & Associates.

FISCAL IMPACT:

To continue with current projects in the pipeline, the City requires a Second Amendment increasing the Agreement amount by $100,000 from $250,000 to a new total of $350,000.

Funding sources include developer deposits and from the City’s respective Community Facilities Districts. There is no impact to the general fund.

RECOMMENDED COMMITTEE ACTION:

Staff Recommendations:

Motion recommending a Second Amendment to an Agreement with Harris & Associates to provide Community Facilities Districts Engineering Services, increasing the Agreement amount by $100,000 from $250,000 to a revised amount not to exceed $350,000 and forwarding to Council for approval.
#1..
- 7 -
Economic Development Committee, September 11, 2023
Second Amendment with Harris & Associates for Community Facilities Districts Engineering Services

Page 3 of 3 ends

Approved by:

Jessica Hill, Interim Director of Community and
Economic Development
Joseph P. Lopez, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Second Amendment to Agreement

2. Second Amendment - Scope and Budget

3. Executed First Amendment to Agreement

4. Executed Agreement
#1..
- 8 -
-1

SECOND AMENDMENT

TO STANDARD AGREEMENT

FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT, made and entered into in the City of Modesto, State of California, this _ day of , 2023, (“Effective Date”) by and between the CITY OF MODESTO, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "City", and Harris & Associates, and as, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant".

This Second Amendment is made with regard to the following recitals:

A. The City and Consultant entered into a standard agreement for professional services dated September 13, 2021 to provide engineering services and assess infrastructure in the City’s Assessment (“ADs” and Community Facilities Districts (“CFDs) (the “AGREEMENT”).

B. The City and Consultant executed the first amendment professional services dated November 23, 2021.

C. Consultant represents that it is qualified, willing and able to provide the services to prepare document(s) for such services.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of this SECOND AMENDMENT, and the mutual promises, covenants, and stipulations hereinafter contained, the parties agree as follows:
#1..
- 9 -
-2

1. COMPENSATION.

Section 3, “Compensation”, of the AGREEMENT is amended to increase the total compensation for Consultant by $100,000 for a total amount of not to exceed $350,000, and to read in its entirety as follows:
“Consultant agrees to accept a sum not to exceed $350,000 as full remuneration for performing all services and furnishing all staff and materials called for in Exhibit "A" and for performance by Consultant of all of its duties and obligations under this Agreement.”

2. EFFECT OF AMENDMENT.

Except as modified and amended by this SECOND AMENDMENT to the AGREEMENT, all other provisions of the AGREEMENT shall remain unchanged and in full force and
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Modesto, a municipal corporation, , by Resolution number 2023-XX, has authorized the execution of this Amendment for Consultant Services by its City Manager and attestation by its City Clerk on the day of , 2023, and Harris & Associates has caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the Effective Date.
#1..
- 10 -

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF MODESTO

PROFESSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEER CONSULTANT

SCOPE OF WORK
Harris & Associates will provide services to the City of Modesto associated with the:
 Review and assess needed/existing infrastructure in the City’s assessment districts and Mello-Roos (Community Facilities Districts – CFDs) districts  Review and evaluate proposed CFD annexations and formations  Prepare and review cost estimates and construction/improvement plans for needed infrastructure
 Draft engineering conditions for new development including subdivisions, site plans, etc.  Review and evaluate actions necessary to acquire rights of way and easements  Review complex land development maps including tentative and final maps  Monitor CFD rates and revenue to remaining infrastructure required  Track subdivision, development and reimbursement agreements  Meet and liaise with applicants and developers
#1..
- 11 -

CITY OF MODESTO

PROFESSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEER CONSULTANT
BUDGET & FEE SCHEDULE*
Project Team Member Project Role Hourly Rate
Alison Bouley, PE Principal-in-Charge $280
Megan Quinn, MBA Project Director $240
Tamorah Bryant, PE Senior Project Manager $250
Dennis Anderson Senior Consultant $260
Connie Fife Project Manager $185
Anna Tan-Gatue, PE Senior Project Engineer $200
Joel Nagamine, PE Senior Project Engineer $165
Adam Marston Senior Analyst $170
Arn Richland Senior Analyst $140
Alexa Ludke Project Analyst $130
*Budget and fees not to exceed $350,000
#1..
- 12 -
-1

FIRST AMENDMENT

TO STANDARD AGREEMENT

FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT, made and entered into in the City of Modesto, State of California, this _ day of , 2021 , (“Effective Date”) by and between the CITY OF MODESTO, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "City", and Harris & Associates, and as, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant".

This First Amendment is made with regard to the following recitals:

B. The City desires to expand the scope of services of the AGREEMENT to perform additional evaluation of the City’s engineering services.

C. Consultant represents that it is qualified, willing and able to provide the services to prepare document(s) for such services.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of this FIRST AMENDMENT, and the mutual promises, covenants, and stipulations hereinafter contained, the parties agree as follows:

#1..
- 13 -
-2

1. COMPENSATION.

Section 3, “Compensation”, of the AGREEMENT is amended to increase the total compensation for Consultant by $205,000 for a total amount of not to exceed $250,000, and to read in its entirety as follows:
“Consultant agrees to accept a sum not to exceed $250,000 as full remuneration for performing all services and furnishing all staff and materials called for in Exhibit "A" and for performance by Consultant of all of its duties and obligations under this Agreement.”

2. EFFECT OF AMENDMENT.

Except as modified and amended by this FIRST AMENDMENT to the AGREEMENT, all other provisions of the AGREEMENT shall remain unchanged and in full force and
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Modesto, a municipal corporation, has authorized the execution of this Amendment for Consultant Services in duplicate by its City Manager and attestation by its City Clerk on the day of , 20 , and Harris & Associates has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in duplicate as of the Effective Date.

#1..
- 14 -

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF MODESTO

PROFSSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEER CONSULTANT

SCOPE OF WORK
Harris & Associates will provide services to the City of Modesto associated with the:
• Review and assess needed/existing infrastructure in the City’s assessment districts and Mello-Roos (Community Facilities Districts – CFDs) districts • Review and evaluate proposed CFD annexations and formations • Prepare and review cost estimates and construction/improvement plans for needed infrastructure
• Draft engineering conditions for new development including subdivisions, site plans, etc. • Review and evaluation actions necessary to acquire rights of way and easements • Review complex land development maps including tentative and final maps • Monitor CFD rates and revenue to remaining infrastructure required • Track subdivision, development and reimbursement agreements • Meet and liaise with applicants and developers

#1..
- 15 -

CITY OF MODESTO

PROFSSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEER CONSULTANT
BUDGET & FEE SCHEDULE*
Project Team Member Project Role Hourly Rate
Alison Bouley, PE Director/Project Manager $260
Andrew MacDonald, PE, PMP Senior Project Engineer $240
Megan Quinn, MBA Deputy Project Manager $210
Nick Kral, MBA Senior Analyst $200
Diana Garrett, PE, PMP, QCM-C Senior Project Engineer $200 Anna Tan-Gatue, PE Senior Project Engineer $175
Joel Nagamine, PE Project Engineer $155
Adam Marston Senior Analyst $155
Arn Selorio Project Analyst $135
Alexa Ludke Project Analyst $125
*Budget and Fees not to exceed $250,000

#1..
- 16 -

CITY OF MODESTO,
a municipal corporation
BY: ____________________________
JOSEPH P. LOPEZ, City Manager
ATTEST:
(Seal)
BY: ____________________________
DANA SANCHEZ, Interim City Clerk

CONSULTANT,
________________________________
BY: ____________________________
By _____________________________
Name Title
BY: ____________________________
By _____________________________
Name Title
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

BY: ____________________________
JOSE M. SANCHEZ, City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

BY: ____________________________
CHRISTINA D. ALGER
Director of Human Resources (Risk)
Consultant’s Federal ID # ___________
* Corporations - signature of two (2) officers
required or one (1) officer plus corporate seal.

Partnership - signature of a partner required Sole
Proprietorship - signature of proprietor
required

#1..
- 17 -

CITY OF MODESTO

COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE OF MEETING:

November 23, 2021
Date: November 17, 2021
TO: Mayor and Council
THROUGH: Joseph P. Lopez, City Manager
FROM: Jaylen French, Director of Community and Economic Development SUBJECT: First Amendment with Harris & Associates for Community Facilities Districts Engineering Services
CONTACT: Jessica Hill, Community Development Manager,
[email protected], (209) 577-5321
DESCRIPTION:

Consider approving the First Amendment to an Agreement with Harris & Associates to provide engineering services for the City’s Assessment and Community Facilities Districts (CFDs), increasing the agreement amount by $205,000 from $45,000 to a new total of $250,000. (Funding Source: Various Community Facilities Districts and Developer Deposits) STRATEGIC PLAN ELEMENT:

The recommended action supports the City of Modesto’s 2020-2025 Strategic Plan focus to provide safe, efficient, and reliable infrastructure through proactive community investment, maintenance and sustainability efforts.

BACKGROUND:

DISCUSSION:

Based on the critical need to meet the demands of the unprecedented levels of new development, on July 14, 2021, the City released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) soliciting

#1..
- 18 -
City Council, November 23, 2021
First Amendment with Harris & Associates for Community Facilities Districts Engineering Services

Page 2 of 3 ends

qualifications from experienced public sector consulting firms and/or individuals, with demonstrated understanding and familiarity in CFDs, special assessment districts, to provide engineering services and infrastructure assessment.

The RFQ solicitation yielded one response, and after a thorough interdepartmental review of the proposal, the City selected Harris & Associates because of their demonstrated experience in facilities planning and infrastructure financing, cost of scope, and overall familiarity with the subject matter. Furthermore, Harris assisted the City on several projects in the past including Village One, Tivoli, Kiernan Business Park, and Fairview Village and has an underlying understanding of the City.

Under the City Manager’s authority, the City entered into an agreement with Harris & Associates on September 13, 2021, for a not to exceed amount of $45,000. Their duties also include evaluating proposed CFD formations and annexations, preparing cost estimates and improvement plans for needed infrastructure, and other duties related to land development engineering.

Since this time, there has been multiple developers who have expressed interest in developing in other areas in the City, which would require the work of Harris and Associates. Some of those areas and needs include:
 Tentative map review
 Tivoli Voluntary Land Dedication Program (VLDP) Assistance  Acquisition and Shortfall Agreements
 CFD Formation - Fairview Village
 CFD Formation - Village One Triangle
 CFD Formation & Infrastructure Financing Plan/Facilities Master Plan - Tivoli North  Various annexations in existing CFDs - facilities cost estimate reviews Additionally, the Community and Economic Development Department is experiencing staff vacancy issues and does not have capacity to perform these functions.

In accordance with Modesto Municipal Code 8-3.204(a), Exceptions for Formal Bidding Requirements, this agreement is for professional services, and, therefore, exempt from the bid requirement; however, staff initially conducted an informal RFP process and recommends approval of the amendment with Harris & Associates.

FISCAL IMPACT:

To continue this project to implement the recommended improvements, the City requires a First Amendment to the agreement increasing the agreement amount by $205,000 from $45,000 to a total of $250,000.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:

This item has not been reviewed by Committee.

#1..
- 19 -
City Council, November 23, 2021
First Amendment with Harris & Associates for Community Facilities Districts Engineering Services

Page 3 of 3 ends

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Resolution approving a First Amendment to an Agreement with Harris & Associates to provide engineering services for the City’s Assessment and Community Facilities Districts, increasing the agreement amount by $205,000 from $45,000 to a total of $250,000, and authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to negotiate and execute the amendment.

Approved by:

Jaylen French, Director of Community
Joseph P. Lopez, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. First Amendment to Agreement with Harris & Associates

3. Exhibit to First Amendment – Scope and Budget

4. Executed Agreement with Harris & Associates

#1..
- 20 -
11/23/2021/CED/JHill/Item 6 1 2021-448

MODESTO CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-448

RESOLUTION APPROVING A FIRST AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT

WITH HARRIS & ASSOCIATES TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE CITY’S ASSESSMENT AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS INCREASING THE AGREEMENT AMOUNT BY $205,000 FROM $45,000 TO A TOTAL OF $250,000, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS

DESIGNEE TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE THE AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Modesto’s Community Facilities Districts are created to provide a funding and reimbursement mechanism for public facilities and/or services for various Specific Plan areas, and
WHEREAS, Community Facilities Districts are the preferred method of financing infrastructure because no finding of special benefit for each parcel is required, and WHEREAS, Under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, a Community Facility District may be used to purchase, construct, expand, rehabilitate or acquire public improvements, or provide public services, and WHEREAS, in an effort to meet the demands of the unprecedented levels of new development, on July 14, 2021, the City released a Request for Qualifications soliciting qualifications from qualified public sector consulting firms and/or individuals, with demonstrated experience in Community Facilities Districts, special assessment districts, to provide engineering services and infrastructure assessment, and WHEREAS, after a thorough interdepartmental review of the proposal, the City selected Harris & Associates because of their demonstrated experience in facilities planning and infrastructure financing, cost of scope, and overall familiarity, and WHEREAS, under the City Manager’s authority, the City entered into an agreement with Harris & Associates on September 13, 2021 for a not to exceed amount

#1..
- 21 -
11/23/2021/CED/JHill/Item 6 2 2021-448
of $45,000, evaluate proposed district formations and annexations, preparing cost estimates and improvement plans for needed infrastructure, and other duties related to land development engineering, and
WHEREAS, based on these findings, the City recommends moving forward with an amendment to the agreement with Harris & Associates to continue engineering services as they relate to the City’s Assessment and Community Facilities Districts, and WHEREAS, the Municipal Code generally requires contracts over $50,000 to comply with formal bidding procedures. This agreement is for professional services and is therefore exempt from the public bidding requirement pursuant to Modesto Municipal Code section 8-3.204(a), and
WHEREAS, to continue this project to implement the recommended improvements, the City requires a First Amendment to the agreement increasing the agreement amount by $205,000 from $45,000 for a total of $250,000.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Modesto that it hereby approving a first amendment to an agreement with Harris & Associates to provide engineering services for the City’s Assessment and Community Facilities Districts, increasing the agreement amount by $205,000 from $45,000 for a total of $250,000.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Modesto that it hereby authorizes the City Manager, or his designee to negotiate and execute the amendment, in a form approved by the City Attorney.

#1..
- 22 -
#1..
- 23 -
#1..
- 24 -

#1..
- 25 -
#1..
- 26 -
#1..
- 27 -
#1..
- 28 -
#1..
- 29 -
#1..
- 30 -
#1..
- 31 -
#1..
- 32 -
#1..
- 33 -
#1..
- 34 -
#1..
- 35 -
#1..
- 36 -
#1..
- 37 -
#1..
- 38 -
#1..
- 39 -
#1..
- 40 -
#1..
- 41 -
#1..
- 42 -
#1..
- 43 -
#1..
- 44 -
#1..
- 45 -
#1..
- 46 -
#1..
- 47 -
#1..
- 48 -
#1..
- 49 -
#1..
- 50 -
#1..
- 51 -
#1..
- 52 -
#1..
- 53 -
#1..
- 54 -
#1..
- 55 -
#1..
- 56 -
#1..
- 57 -
#1..
- 58 -
#1..
- 59 -
#1..
- 60 -
#1..
- 61 -
#1..
- 62 -
#1..
- 63 -
#1..
- 64 -
#1..
- 65 -
#1..
- 66 -
#1..
- 67 -

CITY OF MODESTO

COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT
DATE OF MEETING:

September 11, 2023
Date: August 15, 2023
TO: Economic Development Committee
Sue Zwahlen, Chair
Chris Ricci, Vice-Chair
Eric Alvarez, Member

THROUGH: Joseph P. Lopez, City Manager
FROM: DeAnna Christensen, Director of Finance
SUBJECT: First Amendment – On-Call Plumbing Services
CONTACT: Dianne Love, Purchasing Manager, [email protected], 209-571-5164
DESCRIPTION:

Consider the First Amendment for On-Call Plumbing Services with Champion Industrial Contractors, Inc., Modesto, CA to a revised total amount of $432,370 through the Term of the Agreement and forwarding to Council for approval. (Funding Source: General Fund, Utility Funds, Centre Plaza, Golf Fund and Building Services Fund)
STRATEGIC PLAN ELEMENT:

These items support the City of Modesto 2020-2025 Strategic Plan Focus of Governance and Service Delivery under goal H: Achieve Financial Sustainability.

BACKGROUND:

The City has a need for on-call plumbing services at city properties on an “as needed” basis.

Utilities, Parks, Police and Fire Departments, as well as Building Services, use on-call plumbing services. This citywide contract will be for residential and commercial plumbing repairs, addressing issues that arise from city-related construction and maintenance events. The contract will include parts and components and will be charged at the Contractor’s landed cost, less any earned discounts, plus a 10% mark up and labor costs.

On November 6, 2018, under Resolution 2018-496, Council approved the Award of Bid for the furnishing of on-call plumbing services for City property with Champion Industrial Contractors Inc., Modesto, CA, for a two-year agreement with three one-year extension options for an annual cost not to exceed $68,000 and a total amount not to exceed $361,089 over five years. This agreement is scheduled to expire on November 5, 2023.
#2..
- 68 -
Economic Development Committee, September 11, 2023
First Amendment – On-Call Plumbing Services

Page 2 of 3 ends

DISCUSSION:

With the aging and the challenges with the deferred maintenance for City’s facilities, there has been an increase of the use of on-call plumbing services. A fair amount of these unanticipated plumbing services was from underground failures (Fire Stations, Modesto Police Department Station, John Thurman Field and Centre Plaza). In the last couple months huge increase in theft of backflow devices ranging from $3,000 - $4,000 has triggered the need for these services. In addition, with staff turnover in the Building Services Division it has triggered a need to utilizing the plumbing services to ensure we have adequate coverage for these types of services.

City staff is currently working on a Facility Condition Assessment which will allow the City to plan for the deferred maintenance priorities needed to address maintenance services and avoid these unexpected maintenance services needed. The Purchasing Division is currently working with City departments to facilitate a new formal bid or options for utilizing a cooperative agreement for these services which is why an additional six-month extension is needed to allow for additional time for the completion of this process. In preparation of awarding a new agreement should be completed by the end of the first quarter of 2024 and extending this current agreement until May 2024 will provide sufficient time for the necessary approvals needed for the new agreement.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Sufficient funds are budgeted in Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-24 to cover this cost for this amendment.

Below is a five-year spending history for on-call plumbing services:

Period Amount
Year 1 $ 59,416
Year 2 $ 67,132
Year 3 $ 54,737
Year 4 $ 63,087
Year 5 $ 65,337
Total $ 309,709
The proposed increase of $86,250 will be funded through the current FY 2023-24 budget and allocated amongst the various funds listed below.

Fund
Increase
Agreement
Amount
General Fund $ 39,272
Water Fund $ 23,446
Wastewater Fund $ 605
Golf Fund $ 3,185
Centre Plaza $ 9,927
Building Services $ 9,815
Total $ 86,250
RECOMMENDED COMMITTEE ACTION:

Staff Recommendations:

Motion recommending the First Amendment for On-Call Plumbing Services with Champion Industrial Contractors, Inc., Modesto, CA to increase the Agreement amount by $86,250 to a #2..
- 69 -
Economic Development Committee, September 11, 2023
First Amendment – On-Call Plumbing Services

Page 3 of 3 ends

revised total amount of $432,370 through the Term of the Agreement, extending the Term Date from November 6, 2023, to May 5, 2024, and forwarding to Council for approval.

Approved by:

DeAnna Christensen, Director of Finance
Joseph P. Lopez, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Amendment

2. Original Agreement
#2..
- 70 -
1 FIRST AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT

FOR ON-CALL PLUMBING SERVICES
This FIRST AMENDMENT to the PURCHASE AGREEMENT, made and entered into in the City of Modesto, State of California, this _______ day of __________________, 2023, by and between the City of Modesto, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter called CITY, and CHAMPION INDUSTRIAL, MODESTO, CA hereinafter collectively referred to as CONTRACTOR.

This FIRST AMENDMENT to the PURCHASE AGREEMENT is made with reference to the following recitals:

A. A PURCHASE AGREEMENT NO. 149016, hereinafter referred to as “AGREEMENT” was entered into by and between CITY and CONTRACTOR on the 6TH day of November 2018 for on-call plumbing services, on an as needed basis.

B. CITY and CONTRACTOR desire to amend the AGREEMENT by extending the termination date from November 5, 2023, to, May 5, 2024, adding a six-month extension option.

C. CITY and CONTRACTOR desire to amend the AGREEMENT to increase the compensation paid for services amount by $86,250 for a revised total amount to not exceed $432,370 over the term of the AGREEMENT.

D. CITY and CONTRACTOR desire to amend the AGREEMENT the afterhours hourly rate from $154.57 to $180.51.

E. All other provisions of the AGREEMENT shall remain in effect.

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto mutually agree to the following:

1. The First Paragraph shall be amended to include the following:

Year 6: November 6, 2023, to May 5, 2024
#2..
- 71 -
2 2. The AGREEMENT is hereby amended to increase the maximum compensation paid for services amount by $86,250 for a revised total amount not exceed $432,370 over the term of the AGREEMENT.

3. The AGREEMENT is hereby amended to increase the afterhours hourly rate to $180.51.

4. Except as modified and amended by this FIRST AMENDMENT to the PURCHASE AGREEMENT, all other provisions of the AGREEMENT shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY OF MODESTO, a Municipal Corporation, has authorized the execution of this FIRST AMENDMENT to the PURCHASE AGREEMENT by its Director of Finance on the ______ day of __________________, 2023, and CHAMPION INDUSTRIAL has caused this FIRST AMENDMENT to the PURCHASE AGREEMENT to be duly executed.
#2..
- 72 -
#2..
- 73 -
#2..
- 74 -
#2..
- 75 -
#2..
- 76 -
#2..
- 77 -

CITY OF MODESTO

COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT
DATE OF MEETING:

September 11, 2021
Date: August 20, 2023
TO: Economic Development Committee
Sue Zwahlen, Chair
Chris Ricci, Vice-Chair
Eric Alvarez, Member
THROUGH: Joseph P. Lopez, City Manager
FROM: Bill Sandhu, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Feasibility study results and recommendations at the City of Modesto Compost Facility
CONTACT: Rosene Nguyen, Integrated Waste Program Manager, [email protected], 209-577-5453
DESCRIPTION:

Consider the proposed plan and recommendations from HDR Engineering, Inc., of Folsom, CA to expand and improve the existing City of Modesto Compost Facility at 7001 Jennings Road and forwarding to Council for approval. (Funding Source: Compost Facility Improvement Fund) STRATEGIC PLAN ELEMENT:

The recommended action supports the City’s Strategic Plan Area of Focus: Quality of Life, “Engage partners across the community to ensure the safety, resilience, and attractiveness of Modesto,” Goal A: “Improve community safety and quality of life through a combination of prevention and intervention efforts that address safety and its underlying issues,” Strategy 6:

Motivate and encourage staff and community members to identify and mitigate blight issues and Goal B: “Increase pride in Modesto’s diverse neighborhoods and business districts through beautification efforts and by investing in community assets and amenities,” Strategy 3: Evaluate current waste removal and city beautification policies and procedures.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Modesto owns and operates the Modesto Co-Compost Facility (Compost Facility) at 7001 Jennings Road, located adjacent to the City’s wastewater treatment plant. The Compost Facility currently employs a turned windrow operational method of composting and is permitted to receive and process green waste, small quantities of food waste, and biosolids (which the City ceased receiving several years ago). The Compost Facility began operation in January 1997 to comply with Assembly Bill (AB) 939’s fifty percent (50%) waste diversion requirement. #3..
- 78 -
Economic Development Committee, September 11, 2023
Feasibility study results and recommendations at the City of Modesto Compost Facility

Page 2 of 4 ends

The Compost Facility’s primary, state-mandated purpose is to process the City’s yard waste, paper waste, and food waste materials into a reusable soil amendment product (compost), thus diverting these materials from the landfill and lowering the City’s disposal rate. A secondary purpose of the facility is to then market and sell the finished compost to farmers, landscapers, and backyard gardeners; this helps keep the facility financially sustainable. Compost is also donated to community gardens and landscape projects, parks, schools, churches, and has been used in City projects. Annually, the facility receives approximately 50,000 tons of raw compostable waste material and processes it into about 25,000 tons of compost.

In September 2016, Governor Brown signed the Short-Lived Climate Pollution Reduction Act Senate Bill (SB 1383) into law, establishing statewide targets to reduce organic waste to landfill by seventy-five percent (75%) and recover twenty percent (20%) of edible food waste for human consumption by 2025.1 CalRecycle finalized the SB 1383 regulations in November 2020.To be capable of accepting food waste at the quantities anticipated under SB 1383, the Compost Facility will need to undergo a permit modification which will necessitate other improvements.

On December 6, 2022, by Resolution No. 2022-466, Council approved an agreement with HDR Engineering, Inc. to conduct a Feasibility Study for the City’s Compost Facility.

DISCUSSION:

The purpose of the Compost Facility Feasibility Study is to explore the viability of an improved and expanded Compost Facility that will help the City achieve SB 1383’s mandated organic waste diversion goals. Further, both the regional air district (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Rule (SJVAPCD) 4566) and the regional water board (General Waste Discharge Requirements for Composting Operations, Order WQ 2020-0012—DWQ) require improvements to the heavy equipment operations, working surfaces, and material processing operation to protect the air and groundwater quality, respectively. These two regulatory permitting agencies and the SB1383 legislation require the City to undertake substantial infrastructure, site electrifications, labor, and heavy equipment improvements to maintain the Compost Facility.

HDR Engineering, Inc. evaluated the facility’s ability to comply with CalRecycle, SB 1383, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, and the regional water board requirements and met with City staff to evaluate key considerations in the future of the facility. They examined the following major factors:
 Increase feedstock to approximately 100,000 tons per year, which will accommodate the additional material collected in compliance with SB 1383.  Address size and site design, equipment, and staffing limitations to accommodate additional material, sorting, and compliant processing methods.  Comply with regulations that limit the use of diesel-powered grinding equipment.  Review current permits and provide a gap analysis on those that would be required under the expansion; and,
 Provide alternative and expanded sources of revenue.
1 https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp
#3..
- 79 -
Economic Development Committee, September 11, 2023
Feasibility study results and recommendations at the City of Modesto Compost Facility

Page 3 of 4 ends

HDR developed recommendations that address the City’s ability to achieve the targeted organic waste diversion goals in a sustainable, economical, and practical manner. They provided the following major recommendations:
 Implement an additional aerated static pile composting system to supplement the current windrow processing.
 Revise franchise agreements, preform a waste flow control assessment, and coordinate with franchised haulers on current organics tonnage availability, guarantees, and quality as necessary, based on the findings of the organics flow assessment and tonnage availability.
 Further refine the conceptual design based on feedstock, drainage, and site electrification considerations to prepare Basis of Design document for full design.  Prepare construction ready drawings for vendor procurement and construction.  Verify with SJVAPCD the applicability and requirements for transitioning the facility equipment to all-electric.
 Obtain more guidance from Turlock Irrigation District (TID) about the electrification application process.
 Increase staffing and start training facility staff now to prepare for the facility expansion.  Start permitting discussion with City Planning Department, SJVAPCD, CalRecycle, and the water board.
 Prepare and release Request for Proposals for vendor procurement and construction services after obtaining the necessary permit approvals.  Perform a rate study to evaluate increasing the facility tipping fees.  Inquire and obtain additional third-party certifications for compost product; and  Assign City staff to develop a marketing plan for compost to satisfy local jurisdiction’s procurement needs.

FISCAL IMPACT:

On June 14, 2022, by Resolution No. 2022-4276, Council approved the addition of Compost Facility Improvement fees to the residential and commercial solid waste rates. The anticipated cost to implement the recommendations of approximately $26,050,000 will be absorbed within the current Compost Facility Improvement (4896-56035) Fund. Due to the anticipated cost, this project will be completed in three different phases, over the next five to ten years, depending on available funds and on actual feedstock quantities.

Table 1: Estimated Cost and Throughput per Project Phase Phase Est. Cost (1)
Facility
Total (TPY)
Turned
Windrow (TPY)
Aerated
Static Pile

Page 4 of 4 ends

CEQA/NEPA REQUIREMENTS:

An Environmental review might be required due to the facility expansion and improvements.

CEQA process which is anticipated to be a Mitigated Negative Declaration to increase acreage from 30 to minimum 46 acres, and clarify feedstock types, specifically the variety of food waste sources.

RECOMMENDED COMMITTEE ACTION:

Staff Recommendations:

Consider recommending the proposed plan and recommendations from HDR Engineering, Inc. of Folsom, CA to expand and improve the existing City of Modesto Compost Facility at 7001 Jennings Road and forwarding to Council for approval.

Approved by:

Bill Sandhu, Public Works Director
Joseph P. Lopez, City Manager
Attachment:

1. Compost Feasibility Study
#3..
- 81 -
Compost Facility
Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Modesto, California
August 15, 2023
#3..
- 82 -
#3..
- 83 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
June 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Table of Contents © 2023, City of Modesto Page – i
Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Feedstock Quantities and Quality ................................................................................ 1

1.2 Preliminary Conceptual Site Design............................................................................. 1

1.2.1 Option 1: Pipe-on-Grade ASP............................................................................... 2

1.2.2 Option 2: Subgrade ASP....................................................................................... 2

1.2.3 Option 3: Subgrade ASP (Active) and Windrow (Curing) ...................................... 2

1.2.4 Preferred Option ................................................................................................... 3

1.3 Heavy Equipment and Site Electrification Needs ......................................................... 3

1.4 Staffing ........................................................................................................................ 3

1.5 Regulatory Permit Revisions........................................................................................ 4

1.5.1 California Environmental Quality Act..................................................................... 4

1.5.2 CalRecycle/Report of Composting Site Information............................................... 5

1.5.3 Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board/Waste Discharge Requirements ..................................................................................................................... 5

1.5.4 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Permits ...................................... 5

1.5.5 Estimated Permitting Schedule ............................................................................. 5

1.6 Planning Level Cost Estimate ...................................................................................... 6

1.7 Compost Vendor Engagement..................................................................................... 7

1.8 New Sources of Revenue ............................................................................................ 7

1.9 Recommendations and Next Steps.............................................................................. 8 Short Term (1-2 years)........................................................................................................ 8 Moderate Term (3-5 years) ................................................................................................. 9 Long Term (5+ years) ......................................................................................................... 9

2. Feedstock Quantities and Quality ......................................................................................10

3. Preliminary Conceptual Site Design...................................................................................11

3.1 Option 1: Pipe-on-Grade ASP.....................................................................................12

3.2 Option 2: Subgrade ASP.............................................................................................12

3.3 Option 3: Subgrade ASP (Active) and Windrow (Curing).............................................12

3.4 Preferred Option .........................................................................................................17

3.4.1 Project Phasing.........................................................................................................17

4. Heavy Equipment and Site Electrification Needs................................................................23 #3..
- 84 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Table of Contents August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Page – ii © 2023, City of Modesto

5. Staffing ..............................................................................................................................24

6. Regulatory Permit Revisions..............................................................................................25

6.1 California Environmental Quality Act...........................................................................26

6.2 CalRecycle/Report of Composting Site Information.....................................................26

6.3 Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board/ Waste Discharge Requirements 27 6.4 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution District Permits.........................................................27

6.5 Summary ....................................................................................................................27

6.5.1 California Environmental Quality Act....................................................................27

6.5.2 CalRecycle/Report of Composting Site Information..............................................27

6.5.3 Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board/ Waste Discharge Requirements ....................................................................................................................27

6.5.4 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District ..................................................28

6.5.5 Estimated Permitting Schedule ............................................................................28

7. Planning Level Capital Cost Estimate ................................................................................28

8. Compost System Vendor Engagement ..............................................................................32

8.1 ASP Composting System Estimates ...........................................................................32

8.2 Processing Equipment Estimates................................................................................33

9. New Sources of Revenue ..................................................................................................34

9.1 Third-Party Compost Certifications .............................................................................34

9.2 Procurement ...............................................................................................................35

9.3 Bagging ......................................................................................................................36

9.4 Mulch Markets ............................................................................................................36

9.5 Facility Tip Fees..........................................................................................................36

10. Recommendation and Next Steps......................................................................................38

10.1 Feedstock ...................................................................................................................38

10.2 Design ........................................................................................................................39

10.3 Electrification ..............................................................................................................39

10.4 Staffing .......................................................................................................................39

10.5 Permitting ...................................................................................................................40

10.6 Vendor Engagement...................................................................................................41

10.7 New Sources of Revenue ...........................................................................................41

10.8 Recommendation Phasing and Cost...........................................................................42 Short Term (1-2 years).......................................................................................................42 #3..
- 85 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Table of Contents © 2023, City of Modesto Page – iii
Moderate Term (3-5 years) ................................................................................................43 Long Term (5+ years) ........................................................................................................43 Tables
Table 1. Estimated Compost Facility Expansion Staffing............................................................ 4 Table 2. City of Modesto Compost Facility Expansion Engineer's Estimate................................ 6 Table 3. Short-Term Recommendations..................................................................................... 8 Table 4. Moderate-Term Recommendations .............................................................................. 9 Table 5. Long-Term Recommendations ..................................................................................... 9 Table 6. City of Modesto Co-Composting Facility Inbound Tonnages .......................................10 Table 7. City of Modesto SB 1383 Potential Feedstocks ...........................................................10 Table 8. Estimated Cost and Throughput per Project Phase.....................................................17 Table 9. Estimated Compost Facility Expansion Staffing...........................................................25 Table 10. Existing Compost Facility Permit Summary ...............................................................26 Table 11. City of Modesto Compost Facility Expansion Engineer's Estimate.............................29 Table 12. Detailed Engineer's Estimate Breakdown ..................................................................30 Table 13. ASP Compost System Estimates ..............................................................................33 Table 14. Processing Equipment Cost Estimates......................................................................34 Table 15. SB 1383 Procurement Estimated Requirements (100% Compost) ............................35 Table 16. SB 1383 Infrastructure and Market Analysis Tipping Fees ........................................37 Table 17. Short-Term Recommendations..................................................................................42 Table 18. Moderate-Term Recommendations ...........................................................................43 Table 19. Long-Term Recommendations ..................................................................................43 Figures
Figure 1. Option 1 - ASP Pipe-on-Grade...................................................................................14 Figure 2. Option 2 - ASP Subgrade...........................................................................................15 Figure 3. Option 3 - ASP Subgrade (Active) with Windrow (Curing) ..........................................16 Figure 4. Preferred Option with WDR Considerations ...............................................................18 Figure 5. Preferred Option 3 – Phase 1.....................................................................................19 Figure 6. Preferred Option 3 – Phase 2.....................................................................................20 Figure 7. Preferred Option 3 – Phase 3 Full-Build Out ..............................................................21 Appendices
Appendix A Feedstock Assessment
Appendix B Site Electrification Technical Memo
Appendix C Permitting Gap Analysis Technical Memo
Appendix D Vendor Quotes
#3..
- 86 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Table of Contents August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Page – iv © 2023, City of Modesto
Page left blank
#3..
- 87 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Executive Summary © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 1

1. Executive Summary
The purpose of this Compost Facility Feasibility Study (Compost Study) is to explore the viability of an improved and expanded compost facility to help the City of Modesto (City) achieve Senate Bill 1383’s (SB 1383) mandated food waste diversion goals. SB 1383, or the Short-Lived Climate Pollutants (SLCP) law, sets a goal of reducing statewide methane emissions by 40- percent by targeting two sectors: 1) dairy and livestock manure, and 2) organic waste landfill disposal. This goal mandates a 50-percent reduction in organic waste disposal by 2020 and 75- percent reduction by 2025, based on the 2014 organic waste disposal baseline. CalRecycle finalized the SLCP regulations text in November 2020 and the regulation took effect on January 1, 2022.

The City currently owns and operates the Modesto Co-Compost Facility (Compost Facility or facility) at 7001 Jennings Road, located adjacent to the City’s wastewater treatment plant. The Compost Facility currently employs a ‘turned windrow’ method of composting. The Compost Facility is currently permitted to receive and process green waste, small quantities of food waste and biosolids (the City ceased receiving biosolids several years ago). To be capable of accepting food waste at the quantities anticipated in SB 1383, the Compost Facility will need to acquire new and/or modified permits which will necessitate other improvements. HDR’s approach in evaluating the facility’s ability to meet these requirements was an interactive process with the City to walk through key considerations to meet these organic waste diversion goals and plan for the infrastructure improvements to the City’s existing Compost Facility to handle the increased organic feedstocks expected to be collected as part of SB 1383. The primary focus of this Compost Study is on the City’s ability to achieve the targeted organic waste diversion goals in a sustainable, economical, and practical manner through expanding their existing Compost Facility.

1.1 Feedstock Quantities and Quality
The Compost Facility currently processes, on average, about 50,000 tons per year of sourceseparated organic materials and as noted above, is permitted to compost a variety of organic materials including some food wastes, green wastes, and biosolids. Using the current turned windrow method of composting, the facility is at or very close to its operational capacity based on the current windrow composting system, processing equipment, and staffing. Based on the projected increase of organics as a result of SB 1383, the Compost Facility will need to be able to receive and compost approximately 33,000 additional tons of organics per year. In addition, there is potential for the facility to receive 15,000 tons per year of other organics from sources such as the City Forestry Division or industrial processors. This equates to a throughput of approximately 98,000 tons per year. For the purposes of this report, this capacity was rounded up and sized for a throughput of 100,000 tons per year.

1.2 Preliminary Conceptual Site Design
The City identified that two additional areas could be added to the facility: 1) an approximately

8.5 acre area known as the eastern buffer zone along Jennings Road, and 2) an approximately #3..
- 88 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Executive Summary Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 2 © 2023, City of Modesto

3.5 acre area directly south of the existing product storage area. To increase the facility throughput with limited additional acreage, doubling the turned windrow system was not a feasible option, so the team looked at three aerated static pile (ASP) composting system options. ASP systems have several advantages over the use of traditional windrow composting, the most notable being a much smaller area required as compared to turned windrow. These advantages are explained in more detail in Section 3, Preliminary Conceptual Site Design.

Based on the size and location of the available expansion areas, HDR sized the ASP system for the eastern buffer zone, and identified additional storage capacity near the existing storage area.

Due to the potential increase in non-compostable contamination (e.g., plastics), all options include a conceptual building for receiving and pre-processing incoming material to remove contaminants and prepare the feedstock for the composting system. Based on the anticipated tonnage at full build-out of 100,000 tons per year, HDR performed preliminary sizing to estimate the necessary pre-processing building to be 20,000 square feet. This assessment assumed that not all material will need to be processed through the building (e.g., clean green material). This includes space for administrative purposes and maintenance services.

HDR explored developing the site using the following optional technologies/operational methods:

1.2.1 Option 1: Pipe-on-Grade ASP
The pipe-on-grade ASP composting system utilizes positive or negative aeration through a series of pipes that are laid on the working surfaces. No sub-grade excavation or piping is required. The main advantage of this setup is no concrete paving is required and the system can operate on compacted soil, thereby reducing capital costs. However, this system has increased operational costs due to the manual placement and removal of the pipes prior to and after the compost pile formation.

1.2.2 Option 2: Subgrade ASP
The subgrade ASP composting system is comprised of piping installed below grade either in trenches or sparger floors to aerate the compost pile. The main advantages and disadvantages of this system are the opposite of Option 1: there is a higher capital cost, but lower on-going operational cost.

1.2.3 Option 3: Subgrade ASP (Active) and Windrow (Curing) This option comprises of using the existing windrow system for curing, while only adding an ASP system where necessary to reduce the Pathogen Free Reduction Process (PFRP) phase, or active composting phase. The active phase of composting is where most of the biological decomposition occurs and is responsible for roughly 90% of the emissions associated with the composting process. By utilizing the ASP system for the active phase, the facility would significantly reduce its potential emissions, including odors. By continuing the use of windrow composting for the curing phase, the facility would reduce additional capital costs associated with a larger ASP system.
#3..
- 89 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Executive Summary © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 3

1.2.4 Preferred Option
Option three offered several advantages to the facility including utilizing the existing windrow composting pad, reducing the footprint of the ASP system, and increasing available acreage for compost product storage. The City selected option three as their preferred option.

1.3 Heavy Equipment and Site Electrification Needs
It is anticipated the continued use of diesel-powered grinding equipment will become a limiting regulatory factor when meeting the increased feedstock throughput levels. HDR coordinated with the Turlock Irrigation District (TID) to assess the capability of upgrading the facility to meet forecasted electrical demand requirements. Per TID, there are two voltage options available:
12kV or 480V. Please see Appendix B for the Site Electrification Memo and Section 4 below for a more detailed summary.

From the equipment list, the 1,000HP grinder load at 480V (1,204A), is a large load and is the main consideration for choosing a service voltage level. The existing service at the site is a 400A, single phase system that has a service voltage of 240V line-to-line and 120V line-toneutral. This service is not large enough to support the anticipated loads from the improvement recommendations, which are estimated to be 2,500A.

HDR concluded the grinder is the only piece of electrical equipment that is large enough to consider implementing medium voltage (MV) equipment. MV equipment is typically larger, more expensive, and requires special training to maintain and operate. The rest of the anticipated equipment will be powered from 480V, such as the electric trommel screen, densimetric table, and series of conveyors as identified by the City as necessary to support the facility. The grinder will also not need to run all the time. For these reasons, HDR recommends proceeding with the 480V service and the required variable frequency drive (VFD) for starting the grinder. This VFD requirement is per TID: “We (TID) are able to handle the load as long as they proceed with installing a VFD.” HDR interprets this statement as TID will require the use of a VFD on the grinder motor if the City proceeds with a 480V service.

1.4 Staffing
Based on discussions with the Operator to understand the existing facility staff, the following table shows the expected increase in staff to operate the expanded facility. HDR estimates a significant increase in staffing over status quo operations. Part of this is due to increased volumes, but also increased complexity of the operation (accepting and processing food waste, an ASP compost operation, electric processing equipment, etc.). Historically, the Site Manager managed compost sales, which is acceptable at lower volumes, but with increased volumes of feedstock, a full-time compost salesperson will be needed. Most of the increase in staffing is for equipment operators, reflecting the increase in feedstock and required processing. Composting involves significant material handling, and the acceptance and processing of food scraps requires an urgency that did not exist with green material only – food waste needs to be managed rapidly to ensure incoming food scraps are placed into an active composting situation so as not to create an odor issue. Similarly, the ASP composting system needs to have process #3..
- 90 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Executive Summary Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 4 © 2023, City of Modesto
parameters maximized for efficient composting and must be filled and emptied on a regular basis so as not to create bottlenecks.

For the purposes of this Compost Study, it is assumed that the material receiving and preprocessing building will be equipped with an organics depackager, or similar organics preprocessing equipment, and a manual sort line to remove contaminants from the organics waste stream. The receiving building staff identified below would be necessary to meet the labor demands of this indoor material receiving and pre-processing equipment.

Table 1. Estimated Compost Facility Expansion Staffing
Title/Position Current Staffing Future Staffing
Site Manager 1 1
Site Supervisor 1 1
Equipment Operators 4 8 to 10
Receiving Building - 2 to 4
Receiving Building – Sort Line(1)
- 10 to 14
Maintenance Workers 2 6
Compost Sales(2)
- 1
(1) Number of employees may vary with equipment choices. (2) Compost Sales position might be less than full-time.

1.5 Regulatory Permit Revisions
HDR reviewed the Compost Facility’s permit-related documents to develop a permitting gap analysis on the permit revisions or acquisitions that would be required for the facility to expand and modify its operations as depicted on the preferred concept design plan. This analysis assumed that the expanded facility would process a total of 100,000 tons per year (existing 50,000 tons per year with 50,000 tons per year expansion) of green and food waste through a positive ASP sub-grade composting system constructed in the eastern buffer zone for the active phase, followed by a windrow composting system for the curing phase on the existing composting pad. In addition, the construction and use of a pre-processing building with a maintenance shop is included in this scenario. This configuration would necessitate approximately 46 acres.

The conclusions of the gap analysis are summarized below.

1.5.1 California Environmental Quality Act
Based on the prior California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents and HDR’s understanding of the existing operations, the facility would be able to utilize an ASP composting system; however, the prior Negative Declaration (ND) with the Addendum limits the facility footprint to 30 acres, which does not appear to include the eastern buffer zone. There is also ambiguity about the types of feedstocks allowed to be accepted at the facility. Therefore, HDR anticipates a new Initial Study (IS) and subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is most likely required to expand the facility footprint, clarify feedstocks, and evaluate impacts from the construction of the ASP concrete pad and pre-processing building. The MND may include special studies. Typically, projects of this size and scope are subject to performing air quality #3..
- 91 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Executive Summary © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 5
assessments and traffic studies, although additional studies may be required based on sitespecific components such as biological resources, hydrology, and utilities.

1.5.2 CalRecycle/Report of Composting Site Information
The existing Compostable Materials Handling Facility Permit (CMHFP) has excess tonnage and acreage available. However, since the throughput capacity of the facility needs to be increased, this would require a permit revision. This would require an update to the Report of Composting Site Information (RCSI) to include a description of the new composting system and operating and maintenance procedures so that the document matches the operation. Since the facility has a full Solid Waste Facility Permit, it is anticipated the materials receiving and pre-processing building could be included in this permit revision and not require a separate permit.

1.5.3 Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board/Waste Discharge Requirements
If the facility were to utilize the eastern buffer zone and additional product storage area, then additional drainage controls and improvements to the working surfaces would need to be included as part of the design. Based on the current issues of non-compliance for the Compost Facility’s working surfaces and drainage design, HDR’s recommendation is to correct these issues with the proposed expansion in mind. In all scenarios, the General Order Waste Discharge Requirements (General WDR) Technical Report would need to be updated to incorporate any changes to the working surfaces, drainage containment systems, and drainage conveyances.

1.5.4 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Permits The ASP composting system would be identified as a new permit unit from the perspective of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and would need to go through the standard permitting process. This permit may also require a revision of the windrow composting permit to reduce the daily and/or annual tonnage. The ASP air permit most likely would trigger offsets and may bring the facility into Title V status.

1.5.5 Estimated Permitting Schedule
The following is an approximate schedule of permit revisions and/or acquisitions based on HDR’s understanding of the project and experience with these permits:

Most Probable Scenario
- CEQA IS/MND 180 days – 2 years
- CMHFP Permit Revision 180– 270 days
- General WDR Update(1) 180 – 270 days
- Air Permit(2) 365 days – 2 years
(1) This does not include the time required for the design and construction of meeting the working surface and/or drainage design requirements of the General WDR that would be required to be submitted in the General WDR Technical Report update.
(2) This is the time required to be issued an Authority to Construct (ATC). After the ATC is issued, the facility may be constructed and operated, but must prove compliance with its potential to emit through emissions source testing prior to being issued a Permit to Operate (PTO). #3..
- 92 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Executive Summary Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 6 © 2023, City of Modesto

1.6 Planning Level Cost Estimate
HDR prepared a preliminary engineer’s estimate of Option 3, the preferred option, to better understand the cost for the facility expansion. Key components in addition to the ASP composting system include the 20,000 square foot receiving building and pre-processing equipment. This estimate was prepared independent of engaging compost equipment vendors which is discussed in Section 1.7 below. Please see Section 7 of this Compost Study for a detailed cost breakdown.

Table 2. City of Modesto Compost Facility Expansion Engineer's Estimate Capital Cost Estimate Summary City of Modesto Compost
I. SITE ACQUISITION $0
II. SITEWORK $793,383
III. BUILDING $5,704,500
IV. ASP COMPOSTING SYSTEM - COMPOST SYSTEM $1,835,100
IV. ASP COMPOSTING SYSTEM - SITEWORK $3,284,000
V. SUPPORT FEATURES $0
VI. EQUIPMENT $2,400,000
VII. DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS $916,000
VIII. SITE ELECTRIFICATION $2,792,000
SUBTOTAL $17,724,983
Contingency 25% $4,431,246
Engineering & Design 8% $1,417,999
Permitting 3% $531,750
Construction Inspection 10% $1,772,498
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $25,878,476
Capital Cost Annual Debt Service $2,842,000
Annual Tonnage 100,000
CAPITAL COST PER TON $28.42

ASSUMPTIONS

1. No sales tax is included. Assumed facility is tax exempt.

2. Project is built on native soil.

3. No import soil.

4. Assume no construction of new stormwater/drainage ditches/catch basins.

5. Assumed no demolition required for this project.

6. No costs are included for scales, scoreboards, and digital displays. Assumed existing.

7. No costs are included for furniture, furnishings, or miscellaneous building equipment.

8. The construction costs are used for budgeting and planning purposes only.

9. Annual Debt Service financing assumptions: Capital debt (years) 15 Interest rates 7%

10. Cost per ton calculated from the estimated throughput.

11. Mobile equipment replacement funds to be included in annual O&M costs. #3..
- 93 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Executive Summary © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 7

1.7 Compost Vendor Engagement
HDR reached out to three ASP compost vendors and two equipment providers to obtain quotes to further anticipate capital costs associated with the proposed facility expansion. The ASP compost vendor responses indicate the ASP facility expansion equipment costs are estimated to be between $1,700,000 and $4,300,000. This total cost does not include any construction costs such as concrete paving, pre-processing equipment, the costs associated with the electrical upgrade, an electric grinder, or building or drainage improvements necessary for operations, maintenance, or admin activities. This cost also does not include a price contingency, engineering design services, permitting, or construction inspection as contained in HDR’s engineer’s estimate. Please see Section 8 for a detailed breakdown of costs by vendor, and Appendix D for copies of vendors quotes.

1.8 New Sources of Revenue
The Compost Facility makes most of its revenue, as is typical for composting facilities in California, through the tipping fees (the price that generators pay to unload organic materials at the facility). The City’s tipping fees have not kept pace with the market, nor the costs to properly operate and maintain the facility. The tipping fees in the City’s franchise agreements with their haulers will likely have to be increased over time to help cover the costs of the facility expansion and ongoing operating and maintenance costs. In addition, the City may want to consider the following potential value-added services to help generate revenue from the back end of the compost manufacturing process.
• Third-Party Compost Certifications. A number of third-party compost certifications exist in California to provide customer assurance and to simplify the compost purchasing experience. These include participating in the California Department of Food & Agriculture Organic Material Input (CDFA - OIM) program, the Organic Material Review Institute’s Compost Approval Program and the US Composting Council’s Seal of Testing Assurance Program.
• Procurement. While experience with SB 1383 procurement is still evolving, the City has an opportunity to be the source of compost (and/or mulch) to a number of its surrounding cities and the unincorporated parts of Stanislaus County. Providing compost and/or mulch to fulfill jurisdiction procurement requirements is something the City may want to invest in.
• Bagging. HDR concludes there is no need to employ a bagging operation when two very large ones exist within a reasonable hauling distance. In the past, the City has sold finished compost to one of these companies. Bagging compost can provide convenience to the user and a high unit price for the compost, but is not commonly done at scale by municipal operations. HDR understands that the City has applied for grant funds to purchase a bagger. Should the rant be successful, we recommend the City retain a contractor to help navigate the complex California Department of Food and Agriculture registration and licensing process.
#3..
- 94 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Executive Summary Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 8 © 2023, City of Modesto
• Mulch Markets. SB 1383 procurement allows the use of mulch from a permitted facility and mulch is also used in landscaping and agriculture. Colorizing mulch would require additional processing equipment not included in cost estimates here, but even screened, uncolored mulch has a market among landscapers and some agricultural uses. • Facility Tip Fees. As part of this Compost Study, City staff collected greenwaste tip fees from numerous facilities across the state that ranged from $21 to $175 per ton of greenwaste, with an average tip fee of about $68 per ton. The CalRecycle’s April 2019 SB 1383 Infrastructure and Market Analysis (CalRecycle Analysis) found that the average tipping fee per ton for food scraps falls between $52 to $61 per ton, with a range from $26 to $121 per ton. The City’s current tipping fees at the facility are $43.25 per ton for local City residents, and $85.37 per ton for non-City residents. Based on the CalRecycle Analysis and City collected data, there is ample opportunity for the City to increase their tipping fees and increase this revenue stream.

1.9 Recommendations and Next Steps
Based on the findings of this report, our team has identified the following recommendations and next steps to move the City forward in the expansion of their composting facility. These recommendations do not include construction costs or on-going compliance for the Composting Facility and facility expansion.

Short Term (1-2 years)
For planning purposes, the combined anticipated cost for the items below most likely will fall within the $450,000 to $750,000 range. Most of this cost will be dedicated to the design and permitting of the improvements. Most of the City staff time will be to resolve the feedstock issues and participate in/manage the permitting process. The upper range includes a contingency for unforeseen challenges that may come up in this initial phase of planning.

Table 3. Short-Term Recommendations
Category Recommendation
Feedstock Coordinate with franchised haulers on current organics tonnage availability, guarantees, and quality
Feedstock Perform a waste flow control assessment to understand the City’s SB 1383 implementation and schedule
Feedstock Revise franchise agreements as necessary based on the findings of the organics flow assessment and tonnage availability
Design Further refine the conceptual design based on feedstock, drainage, and site electrification considerations to prepare Basis of Design document for full design
Vendor
Engagement
After design refinement, reach out to vendors to obtain updated costs and phase approach considerations
Design Prepare construction ready drawings for vendor procurement and construction
Permitting Discuss CEQA/Land Use with City Planning Department to better understand CEQA pathway for facility expansion
#3..
- 95 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Executive Summary © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 9
Permitting Start CEQA process with City Planning Department and obtain CEQA approvals
Permitting Discuss air permitting process, offset requirements, and Title V applicability with the SJVAPCD
Permitting Discuss Waste Discharge Requirements permit Notice of Violations and corrective action timeline and requirements.

Moderate Term (3-5 years)
For planning purposes, the combined anticipated cost for the items below most likely will fall within the $150,000 to $250,000 range. Similar to the short-term efforts above, the majority of these costs will be in the permitting and engineering related to electrification tasks.

Table 4. Moderate-Term Recommendations
Category Recommendation
Staffing Start training facility staff to prepare for the facility expansion.

New Sources of
Revenue
Perform a rate study to evaluate increasing the facility tipping fees Electrification Verify with SJVAPCD the applicability and requirements for transitioning the facility equipment to all-electric
Electrification Obtain more guidance from TID about the electrification application process.

Permitting Start permitting process with SJVAPCD and obtain ATC permits Permitting Discuss Solid Waste Facility Permit/RCSI revision with the Local Enforcement Agency
Permitting Start permitting process with Local Enforcement Agency and obtain Solid Waste Facility Permit revision or modification
Permitting Discuss Waste Discharge Requirements permit revision with the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
Permitting Start permitting process with Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and obtain applicable wastewater and stormwater permits Vendor
Engagement
Prepare and release Request for Proposals for vendor procurement and construction services after obtaining the necessary permit approvals, or may occur concurrently depending on anticipated approvals.

Long Term (5+ years)
For planning purposes, the combined anticipated cost for the items below most likely will fall within the $40,000 to $80,000 range.

Table 5. Long-Term Recommendations
Category Recommendation
New Sources of
Revenue
Assign City staff to develop a marketing plan for compost to satisfy local jurisdiction’s procurement needs. This could involve developing a strategy to serve the County’s jurisdictions as well as satisfying Modesto’s procurement needs.

New Sources of
Revenue
Inquire and obtain additional third-party certifications for product. #3..
- 96 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 2 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 10

2. Feedstock Quantities and Quality
The purpose of this feedstock assessment is to assess the current throughput capability so as to understand the future expansion needs of the City’s Compost Facility. The expansion of the Compost Facility is driven by the need to accommodate the growing volume of organics waste generated in Modesto and help City businesses and residents comply with SB 1383. The complete feedstock assessment is located in Appendix A.

The first step in this assessment was to evaluate the City’s current feedstock throughput at the Co-Composting Facility. HDR evaluated the past four years of inbound tonnage reports to estimate the existing capacity of the facility. Based on information provided by the City, the annual throughputs in tons per year (TPY) and estimated tons per day (TPD) is shown in Table

6. This shows the facility handles on average roughly 50,000 tons per year of organics materials.

Table 6. City of Modesto Co-Composting Facility Inbound Tonnages Year Inbound TPY Inbound TPD(1)
2019 50,565 194
2020 56,847 219
2021 42,235 162
2022 47,071 181
Average 49,180 189
(1) This assumes the facility operates five days per week 52 weeks of the year.

Based on CalRecycle’s 2014 Waste Composition Study, the City has approximately 44,000 tons of organic waste comingled with their municipal waste stream. Per SB 1383, the City is mandated to achieve 75% organic waste diversion, which equates to approximately 33,000 tons per year of organics that are currently being landfilled.

Table 7. City of Modesto SB 1383 Potential Feedstocks
City of Modesto
Organic
Feedstocks
Residential Commercial Both
Streams
Estimated
Recovery
Forecasted
Organics to be
Recovered
Food Waste 13,577 20,067 33,644 75% 25,233
Paper Bags 179 288 467 75% 350
Cardboard 1,455 2,232 3,687 75% 2,765
Leaves, Grass,
Pruning’s, Trimmings,
Branches, and
Stumps
2,671 3,383 6,054 75% 4,541
Total Tons 17,882 25,970 43,852 75% 32,889
#3..
- 97 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 3 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 11
Several additional organic feedstock providers in addition to the SB 1383 mandate were identified, specifically the industrial food processors located within Stanislaus County and the City’s Forestry Division. These are estimated to amount to at least 15,000 tons per year based on discussions with the Forestry Division for the City’s 2023 CalRecycle Organics Grant application.

For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that the facility expansion would be sized to process an additional 50,000 tons per year, or roughly doubling the existing facility’s throughput to 100,000 tons per year.

3.Preliminary Conceptual Site Design
To increase the existing facility’s throughput to process an additional 50,000 tons per year, the team settled on use of an ASP composting system based on a number of advantages it has over expanding the current windrow composting system:
• Smaller operational footprint
• Shorter retention times
• Advanced, Best Available Control Technology (BACT), air emissions and odor controls which are anticipated to be required by the SJVAPCD.

In general, an ASP composting system forces aeration through the compost pile, either through positive aeration through a compost cap or cover place on the compost pile or through negative aeration pulling air from the compost pile to a biofilter. Both a positive ASP and negative ASP composting system have been shown to achieve at least 80 percent volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions and ammonia emissions reduction through the use of the compost cap, cover, or biofilter. Average active-phase retention times are 30 days and another 30 days is required for curing (if aerated), totaling approximately 60 days to produce stabilized compost. As a comparison, windrow composting can require over 90 days.

There are two main types of ASP systems: 1) pipe-on-grade and 2) subgrade. 1) For a pipe-on-grade ASP system, two HDPE pipes are at grade under each compost heap, and each heap has a blower to provide air to or remove air from the composting material. The compost heap is formed by first placing composted overs or woodchips on the pipes to protect the pipe integrity and help facilitate airflow and minimize clogging.

Next the feedstock is placed directly on the pipes. The compost heap remains on the aeration pipes for the entire active phase, with no turning of the piles. After the active phase is completed, the pipes are removed (extracted by pulling from beneath the pile) and the pile turned to begin the curing phase.
2) For a subgrade ASP system, trenches or sparger floors are installed beneath the surface in the concrete/working pad. The compost pile is formed by placing the feedstock directly on the trenches or sparger floor. A manifold is typically configured to provide air to/from blowers located adjacent to the pile(s). After the active phase, the pile is turned and placed into the curing phase.
#3..
- 98 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 3 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 12 © 2023, City of Modesto
The ASP process is generally the same for a pipe-on-grade or subgrade ASP system, but there are two main differences in design considerations:

1. Pipe-on-grade ASP systems typically have lower capital costs than subgrade ASP system as the subgrade requires concrete paving and a leachate collection system.

2. Pipe-on-grade ASP systems typically have higher operational costs due to the placement and removal of the HDPE aeration pipes prior to and after pile formation.

The team evaluated three options for the City to consider. For the purposes of this Compost Study, only positive ASP systems were considered to reduce the space required for a biofilter.

As stated, due to the potential increase in contamination in the organic waste stream, the team included a 20,000 square foot building for the associated material receiving, pre-processing, and support activities. This conceptual design assumes some of the organic feedstocks will not need to be received and pre-processed through the receiving building, such as the clean green waste that is currently received and processed at the facility outdoors. The team included space for an organics depackager and manual sort line inside the building to remove contamination from the organic feedstock, as well as 1,500 square feet for maintenance activities and 500 square feet for administrative services. This building is included in all scenarios.

3.1 Option 1: Pipe-on-Grade ASP
As shown in Figure 1, to process a total 50,000 additional tons per year, the site would need approximately 27 active phase piles and 22 curing phase piles that could hold roughly 340 cubic yards per pile. Utilizing all available acreage for the expansion, an additional 14,000 cubic yards would be stored on-site.

3.2 Option 2: Subgrade ASP
Due to the concrete working pad and walls between each compost heap, the subgrade ASP system could handle the 50,000 tons per year expansion in a smaller footprint. As shown in Figure 2, it would require approximately 18 active phase piles and 20 curing phase piles, holding about 520 cubic yards per heap. This would free up additional acreage for compost product storage, allowing the facility to store an additional 21,000 cubic yards of compost product on-site.

3.3 Option 3: Subgrade ASP (Active) and Windrow (Curing) Options 1 and 2 assume that the facility’s existing windrow composting operation will maintain its current operations, and only the new tonnage will be processed through the ASP system.

Option 3 considers placing all 100,000 tons per year through the ASP system for the activephase only, then using the existing windrow operation for the curing phase. This significantly reduces the acreage required for the windrow composting area, and allows the facility the capacity to store over 50,000 cubic yards of compost product. Only the ASP subgrade system was evaluated for this option, as the City preferred the reduced operational costs and activities compared to the pipe-on-grade system. Figure 3 shows this option of combined ASP subgrade and windrow composting systems. This option also allowed for additional storm water ponds, although those were not sized in this part of the conceptual design. #3..
- 99 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 3 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 13
Page Left Blank
#3..
- 100 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 3 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 14
Figure 1. Option 1 - ASP Pipe-on-Grade
#3..
- 101 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 3 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 15
Figure 2. Option 2 - ASP Subgrade
#3..
- 102 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 3 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 16 © 2023, City of Modesto
Figure 3. Option 3 - ASP Subgrade (Active) with Windrow (Curing) #3..
- 103 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
June 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 3
© 2023, City of Modesto Page – 17

3.4 Preferred Option
Due to the additional operational costs and activities associated with the pipe-on-grade ASP system, the City preferred the use of a subgrade ASP system. This option has the following advantages over the existing windrow composting system, and other options presented as part of this Compost Study:
• Reduced operational costs due to subgrade aeration and leachate collection system compared to pipe-on-grade ASP system;
• Reduced footprint required for proposed tonnage compared to windrow composting; • Increased throughput and reduced retention time compared to windrow composting; • Decreased air emissions as compared to windrow composting due to use of BACT ASP composting system; and
• Maximize use of existing windrow composting system by incorporating into the design.

HDR performed a high-level assessment of the necessary improvements the facility would need to incorporate to comply with the General WDR based on existing operations and the recent Notices of Violation. The conceptual layout is included in Figure 4. This included the addition of two impermeable ponds designed to detain run-off from the 25-year, 24-hour storm event as required by the General WDR. Both ponds would connect to existing storm drains at the facility through supporting conveyance systems. Upgrades to the existing storm drain pipes may be required to meet the General WDR requirements. In addition, working surfaces would be improved to have a minimum of 12-inch compacted soil layer and have a hydraulic conductivity of 1.0 x 10-5 cm/s and the detention ponds will be constructed to meet the General Order Tier II requirements.

3.4.1 Project Phasing
While the facility expansion was sized for 100,000 tons per year throughput capacity, HDR recommends phasing the project based on actual feedstock quantities which may require a ramp-up period. Figures 5, 6, and 7 show an example of phasing the project into three phases as tonnage increases over time. While the receiving building could be added at any point during the phasing, HDR anticipates it will not be necessary until Phase 3 with the facility at full buildout.

Table 8. Estimated Cost and Throughput per Project Phase Phase Est. Cost(1) Facility
Total (TPY)
Turned
Windrow (TPY)

ASP (TPY)
1 $20,450,000 70,000 20,000 50,000
2 $3,850,000 70,000 - 70,000
3 $1,750,000 100,000 - 100,000
(1) Cost per phase by vary based on phasing of permitting and design. Project could upload all design and permitting in Phase 1 which would increase Phase 1 to roughly $20,900,000. #3..
- 104 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 3 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 18
Figure 4. Preferred Option with WDR Considerations
#3..
- 105 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 3 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 19
Figure 5. Preferred Option 3 – Phase 1
#3..
- 106 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 3 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 20 © 2023, City of Modesto
Figure 6. Preferred Option 3 – Phase 2
#3..
- 107 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 3 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 21
Figure 7. Preferred Option 3 – Phase 3 Full-Build Out
#3..
- 108 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 3 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 22 © 2023, City of Modesto
Page Left Blank
#3..
- 109 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 4 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 23

4. Heavy Equipment and Site Electrification
Needs
Please see Appendix B for the complete Site Electrification Technical Memo, as the following is an abbreviated version. The facility provided the following future equipment list. For items with no specific electrical capacity, it is assumed these items fall within the 25 to 100 horsepower (HP) each.

1. Computer controlled material monitoring office (aeration, temperature, moisture control, etc.) – 120V Loads

2. Aerated composting bays – 50-100kVA

3. 1,000HP wood grinder

4. 350HP trommel screen

5. Stand alone or equipment attached vacuums, wind shifters, hurrikan or hurrifex, etc. (for light plastics) – 50-100kVA

6. Densimetric table and attached screening processes – 120V Loads

7. Additional conveyors and stacking systems and material processing machines to manage stockpiles, overs, and contamination – 50-100kVA

8. Charging bays for electric powered vehicles and miscellaneous equipment – 100-200kVA

9. Dedicated 1,000 gallon fueling station – 25 HP Pump

10. Dedicated 4,000 gallon water tank refilling station – 25 HP Pump

11. Dedicated heavy equipment wash pad – 120V Loads

12. Dedicated conveyor belt system and/or hopper to load semi-trucks with compost – 120V Loads

13. Dedicated conveyor belt system and/or hopper to load one cubic yard into the back of customer trucks and trailer – 120V Loads

14. Tailwater pump – 120V Loads

15. Aeration system for stormwater retention pond – 25 HP Pump

16. It should be noted that the equipment list given did not have sizes for the majority of the equipment and educated guesses have been made for the electrical equipment sizes.

From the equipment list, the 1,000HP grinder load at 480V (1,204A) is a large load and is the main consideration for choosing a service voltage level. The existing service at the site is a 400A, single phase system that has a service voltage of 240V line-to-line and 120V line-toneutral. This service is not large enough to support the anticipated loads from the improvement recommendations, which are estimated to be 2,500A. There are four options for providing power for the additional equipment loads as described in Appendix B. Each option requires various electrical equipment additions, upgrades, or considerations as outlined in Appendix B.

The following is a summary of the total costs associated with the necessary electrical upgrades for the proposed site equipment. Note the equipment costs are the equipment associated with the electrical upgrades, not the proposed facility or site improvements:
#3..
- 110 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 5 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 24 © 2023, City of Modesto
• Total estimate equipment costs: $980,000
• Electrical installation costs: $250,000
• TID Fees $61,624
Total estimated costs @480V: $1,291,624
@12kV: $1,614,530
This high-level estimated cost is for 480V service level. Add 25% for additional costs of equipment and complexity of going with 12kV service.

The longest estimated lead time for the equipment is 82 weeks for the upgraded switchboard.

Other equipment lead times vary from 30 to 60 weeks and could be managed to fall within the 82 weeks for the switchboard.

HDR concluded the grinder is the only piece of electrical equipment that is large enough to consider implementing MV equipment. MV equipment is typically larger, more expensive, and requires special training to maintain and operate. The rest of the anticipated equipment will be powered from 480V. The grinder will also not need to run all the time. For these reasons, HDR recommends proceeding with the 480V service and the required VFD for starting the grinder.

This VFD requirement is per TID: “We (TID) are able to handle the load as long as they proceed with installing a VFD.” HDR interprets this statement as TID’s preference that if the City proceed with a 480V service from TID, which necessitated the use of a VFD on the grinder motor.

5. Staffing
Current staffing
The Compost Facility currently operates 5 days per week, for one 10-hour shift per day, and occasional weekend over time work. Staff includes four equipment operators, two maintenance workers, one field operations/crew leader and a site supervisor. On average one day per week is for equipment service and maintenance.

Future Staffing
Eventually the City’s facility may roughly double in annual throughput. While the ASP system may reduce labor costs on a ton for ton basis from windrowing (due to less labor required for turning windrows, there will still be an overall increase in required labor, especially if the City takes on the task of removing contamination from incoming feedstocks. This will include managing the feedstock receiving area, contaminant removal, and staffing the facility, managing the de-packaging equipment, sort line, and additional maintenance. Switching some operations from ASP from windrow should reduce facility monitoring somewhat – for example the Process to Further Reduce Pathogens (PFRP). The PFRP process is a time/temperature process which takes a minimum of 15 days (and usually more for windrow operations but can be achieved in three days using the ASP process. Manual windrow temperature monitoring can also be reduced vis the use of radio-frequency (or other remote sensing) temperature recording technology used in many ASP systems.
#3..
- 111 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 6 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 25 © 2023, City of Modesto
The expanded Compost Facility will require an overall General Manager, a Site Supervisor (Operations Manager) and may require 8 full-time equipment operators. Switching from windrows to ASP and windrows should reduce labor, but the tonnage may be doubling, and while the ASP system will require less labor than windrows, the facility will have to be more productive to assure site capacity is maintained. There will also be additional labor associated with contaminant removal at the front-end. For the purposes of this Compost Study, it is assumed that the material receiving and pre-processing building will be equipped with an organics depackager, or similar organics pre-processing equipment and a manual sort line to remove contaminates from the organics waste stream. We have also added a compost salesperson, which has always been a part of the Site Manager’s job, but at 100,000 tons per year, this will require additional staffing. Again, as more compost will be manufactured, appropriate sales will be need to move the material off-site faster.

Table 9. Estimated Compost Facility Expansion Staffing
Title/Position Current Staffing Future Staffing
Site Manager 1 1
Site Supervisor 1 1
Equipment Operators 4 8 to 10
Receiving Building - 2 to 4
Receiving Building – Sort Line(1)
- 10 to 14
Maintenance Workers 2 6
Compost Sales(2)
- 1
(1) Number of employees may vary with equipment choices. (2) Compost Sales position might be less than full-time.

6. Regulatory Permit Revisions
HDR reviewed the City’s Compost Facility’s permit related documents to develop a permitting gap analysis on the required permit revisions or acquisitions that would be required for the facility to expand and modify its operations as depicted on the preferred concept design plan.

Please see Appendix C for the complete technical memo. This analysis was based on the assumption that the composting expansion would entail a total of 100,000 tons per year (existing 50,000 tons per year with 50,000 tons per year expansion) of green and food waste composting through a positive ASP sub-grade composting system constructed in the eastern buffer zone for the active phase followed by a windrow composting system for the curing phase on the existing composting pad. In addition, the construction and use of a pre-processing building with a maintenance shop is included in this scenario. The entire design covers approximately 46 acres.

The following documents were part of this review:
• 1995 Negative Declaration (SCH No. 94112036) Initial Study and Findings • 1997 Addendum to Negative Declaration
#3..
- 112 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 6 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 26 © 2023, City of Modesto
• 2017 Notice of Applicability General Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) for Composting Operations (General WDR)
• 2021 CMHFP (SWIS 50-AA-0018) with July 2020 RCSI and August 2020 Odor Impact Minimization Plan (OIMP)
• The following air permits from SJVAPCD: N-3993-3-0; N-3993-5-0; N-7827-1-0; N-7827- 2-1; N-7827-3-1; M-7827-4-0
The table below summarizes the findings of each permit’s limitations. The following sections summarize the key findings of each permit analysis.

Table 10. Existing Compost Facility Permit Summary
CEQA RCSI WDR Air Permits
Tonnage
(daily)
200 TPD (min)
500 TPD (max)
500 TPD 250 TPD (avg)
500 TPD (max)
500 TPD
Tonnage
(annual)
130,000 TPY 130,000 TPY 65,000 TPY (avg)
130,000 TPY (max)
130,000 TPY
Acreage 30 acres (max) 50 acres (max) 65 acres (max)
35 acres (min)
No limit
Note:

TPD = tons per day
TPY = tons per year

6.1 California Environmental Quality Act
Based on the data provided, the following key determinations were concluded:
• The Compost Facility is permitted to process 500 tons per day, or 130,000 tons per year of biosolids, green materials, manures, and food processing wastes on 30 acres via windrow compost or other types of composting technologies. • The proposed project would be required to undergo a CEQA process which is anticipated to be a Mitigated Negative Declaration to increase acreage from 30 to minimum 46 acres, and clarify feedstock types, specifically the variety of food waste sources.

6.2 CalRecycle/Report of Composting Site Information
After reviewing the facility’s permit and associated RCSI and OIMP, the following was determined with respect to the proposed facility expansion:
• Proposed project would require preparation and submittal revised versions of the RCSI, the OIMP and the Solid Waste Facility Permit. To increase the on-site capacity of the site, traffic allowances, and any changes in operations hours (in addition to adding a description of the ASP composting system).
• Obtaining a permit revision would require compliance with CEQA, therefore the permit revision could not be issued until the CEQA review is complete. #3..
- 113 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 6 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 27

6.3 Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board/ Waste Discharge Requirements
This review only included review of the facility’s latest permit documents and does not include review nor response to any issued Notices of Violations, although these have been incorporated in other areas of the Compost Study. The following key determinations were concluded:
• Update General WDR Technical Report to include ASP Composting System, and operational acreage.
• Existing groundwater monitoring wells do not include the buffer zone, therefore an additional monitoring well may need to be installed if the operational area does not comply with the General WDR working surface requirements. • The existing drainage system for the site is designed for the 100-year 24-hour storm event; the buffer zone appears to not be included in these calculations, therefore would need adequate drainage control for the 100-year 24-hour storm event.

6.4 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution District Permits
After reviewing the facility’s current air permits, the following was determined for consideration of the proposed facility expansion:
• The proposed project would need a new permit unit to include the ASP system. This may trigger a revision to the open windrow permit to reduce the daily and/or annual maximum tonnages.
• The installation of the ASP system would most likely require emission offsets, and may trigger a review of the facility to meet Title V status.

6.5 Summary

6.5.1 California Environmental Quality Act
Based on the most recent CEQA documents and our understanding of the current operations, the facility would be able to utilize an ASP composting system, however the prior Negative Declaration with the Addendum limits the facility footprint to 30 acres which does not appear to include the eastern buffer zone. There is also ambiguity about the types of feedstocks allowed to be accepted at the facility. Therefore, an Initial Study (IS) and subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) will most likely be required to expand the facility footprint, clarify feedstocks, and evaluate impacts from the construction of the ASP concrete pad and pre-processing building.

6.5.2 CalRecycle/Report of Composting Site Information
The existing CMHFP has excess tonnage and acreage available. However, since the on-site capacity of the facility needs to be increased, this would require a permit revision.

6.5.3 Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board/ Waste Discharge Requirements
If the facility were to utilize the buffer zone, then additional drainage controls and improvements to the working surfaces would need to be included as part of the design. Alternatively, if the #3..
- 114 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 9 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 28
facility were to install the ASP system within the current footprint already designed for the 100- year 24-hour storm event and with the appropriate monitoring wells, then potentially no additional design considerations would be required. In either scenario, the General WDR Technical Report would need to be updated.

6.5.4 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District The ASP composting system would require a new PTO from SJVAPCD’s perspective and would need to go through the standard permitting process. This permit may also require a revision of the windrow composting permit to reduce the daily and/or annual tonnage. The ASP air permit could trigger emission reduction credits (offsets), and *may result in the facility being considered a “Major Facility“ under Title V.

6.5.5 Estimated Permitting Schedule
The following is an approximate schedule of permit revisions and/or acquisitions based on our understanding of the project and experience with these permits:

Most Probable Scenario
- CEQA IS/MND 180 days – 2 years
- CMHFP RFI Revision 180– 270 days
- General WDR Update (1) 180 – 270 days
- Air Permit (2) 365 days – 2 years
(1) This does not include the time required for the design and construction of meeting the working surface and/or drainage design requirements of the General WDR that would be required to be submitted in the General WDR Technical Report update. (2) This is the time required to be issued an ATC. After the ATC is issued, the facility may be constructed and operated, but must prove compliance with its potential to emit through emissions source testing prior to being issued a PTO.

7. Planning Level Capital Cost Estimate
Utilizing the preferred option as identified in Section 3, HDR prepare an engineer’s estimate to better understand the capital costs associated with the proposed facility expansion. Key components in addition to the ASP composting system include the 20,000 square foot receiving building, a source-separated organics depackager, and a manual sort line. Other components include considerations to address the RWQCB drainage concerns and the site electrification cost. Table 11 includes the summary of the estimate, and Table 12 includes the detailed breakdown of each cost.
#3..
- 115 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 9 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 29
Table 11. City of Modesto Compost Facility Expansion Engineer's Estimate Capital Cost Estimate Summary City of Modesto
Compost
I. SITE ACQUISITION $0
II. SITEWORK $793,383
III. BUILDING $5,704,500
IV. ASP COMPOSTING SYSTEM -
COMPOST SYSTEM $1,835,100
IV. ASP COMPOSTING SYSTEM -
SITEWORK $3,284,000
V. SUPPORT FEATURES $0
VI. EQUIPMENT $2,400,000
VII. DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS $916,000
VIII. SITE ELECTRIFICATION $2,792,000
SUBTOTAL $17,724,983
Contingency
25 % $4,431,246
Engineering & Design 8% $1,417,999
Permitting 3% $531,750
Construction Inspection
10 % $1,772,498
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $25,878,476
Capital Cost Annual Debt Service $2,842,000
Annual Tonnage 100,000
CAPITAL COST PER TON $28.42

ASSUMPTIONS

1. No sales tax is included. Assumed facility is tax exempt.

2. Project is built on native soil.

3. No import soil.

4. Assume no construction of new stormwater/drainage ditches/catch basins.

5. Assumed no demolition required for this project.

6. No costs are included for scales, scoreboards, and digital displays. Assumed existing.

7. No costs are included for furniture, furnishings, or miscellaneous building equipment.

8. The construction costs are used for budgeting and planning purposes only.

9. Annual Debt Service financing assumptions: Capital debt (years) 15 Interest rates 7%

10. Cost per ton calculated from the estimated throughput.

11. Mobile equipment replacement funds to be included in annual O&M costs. #3..
- 116 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 9 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 30 © 2023, City of Modesto
Table 12. Detailed Engineer's Estimate Breakdown
I. SITE ACQUISITION
Item Unit Price Units Quantity Item Cost
Land $0.00 Acre 5.5 $0
Subtotal I $0
II. SITEWORK
Item Unit Price Units Quantity Item Cost
General
Mobilization 10% LS - 10% of Work - $381,033
Erosion Control/Maintenance 2% LS - 2% of Work - $76,207 Field Survey, Meetings, Sched, Reports, Submittals, QC 3% LS - 3% of Work - $114,310 General Subtotal $571,550
Grading and Compaction
Geotech $75,000 LS 1 $75,000
Earthwork $8 CY 17,747 $141,973
Grade Site to Formation $3 SY 26,620 $79,860
Final Site Clean-up $5,000 LS 1 $5,000
Grading Subtotal $221,833
Subtotal II $793,383
III. BUILDING
Item Unit Price Units Quantity Item Cost
Pre-engineered Building $75 SF 20,000 $1,500,000
Roll-up Doors $20,000 EA 3 $60,000
New Asphalt Pavement (Building Apron) $6 SF 8,250 $49,500 Building Foundation $750 CY 370 $277,500
Building Tipping Floor $750 CY 370 $277,500
Mechanical & Fire Protection $35 SF 20,000 $700,000
Electrical Systems $30 SF 20,000 $600,000
Load-out scales $200,000 EA 1 $200,000
Ventilation system $5 SF 20,000 $100,000
Biofilter $40,000 LS 1 $40,000
Utilities $350,000 LS 1 $350,000
Yard Lighting and Wiring $5,000 EA 5 $25,000
Maintenance Shop 1/2 Ton Overhead Crane w/ Hoist $50,000 EA 1 $50,000 Office/Admin Area Walls, Finishes, etc. $50 SF 1,500 $75,000 Depackager Improvements $900,000 LS 1 $900,000
Sort Line Improvements $500,000 LS 1 $500,000
Subtotal III $5,704,500
$/SF $285
#3..
- 117 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 9 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 31
IV. ASP COMPOSTING SYSTEM
Item Unit Price Units Quantity Item Cost
Compost System
Equipment
Blower Fans $15,000 EA 35 $525,000
Aeration Ducting $250 per 100 ft 70 $17,500
Flexible Duct Connectors $350 EA 70 $24,500
Zone Damper Assemblies $600 EA 35 $21,000
Temperature Probes and System Sensors $750 EA 35 $26,250 Irrigation System $1.50 SF 130,000 $195,000
Trench Drain Covers $1,000 EA 70 $70,000
Control System (hardware, software, sensors, probes) $500,000 LS 1 $500,000 Control Shed $150,000 EA 1 $150,000
Equipment Subtotal $1,529,250
System Installation & Start-up 20%
LS - 20% of System
Cost - $305,850
Compost System Subtotal $1,835,100
Sitework and Utilities
New Concrete Pavement (ASP Compost System) $20 SF 130,000 $2,600,000 New Concrete Pavement (ASP Apron) $16 SF 24,000 $384,000 Utilities (Electrical) $100,000 LS 1 $100,000
Leachate Collection System $200,000 LS 1 $200,000
Equipment Subtotal $3,284,000
Subtotal III $5,119,100
V. SUPPORT FEATURES
Item Unit Price Units Quantity Item Cost
Subtotal III $0
VI. EQUIPMENT
Item Unit Price Units Quantity Item Cost
Front End Loader - New $500,000 EA 1 $500,000
Depackager $900,000 EA 1 $900,000
Sort Line $1,000,000 EA 1 $1,000,000
Subtotal V $2,400,000
VII. DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS
Item Unit Price Units Quantity Item Cost
Stormwater Ponds $400,000 per acre 2.1 $840,000
Storm Drain Improvements $80 per liner foot 700 $56,000 Misc Improvements/Features $20,000 LS 1 $20,000
Subtotal VII $916,000
#3..
- 118 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 9 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 32 © 2023, City of Modesto
VIII. SITE ELECTRIFICATION
Item Unit Price Units Quantity Item Cost
Turlock Irrigation District Fees $1,291,624 LS 1 $1,292,000 Electric Grinder $1,000,000 EA 1 $1,000,000
Electric Screen $500,000 EA 1 $500,000
Subtotal VII $2,792,000

8. Compost System Vendor Engagement
Based on the preferred preliminary conceptual site design plan (Figure 3), HDR outreached to several equipment vendors for the composting system and pre-processing equipment. HDR outreached to the following companies:

ASP Composting System Vendors:
- Engineered Compost Systems (ECS)
- Sustainable Generation (SG)
- Green Mountain Technologies (GMT)
Processing Equipment Vendors:
- Olympic Equipment
- EcoVerse
The following is a brief summary of the equipment costs obtained. Please see Appendix D for copies of the received quotes.

8.1 ASP Composting System Estimates
The budgetary estimate provided by ECS proposes an ASP compost system that features high air flow positive aeration and automated controls. The two options ECS presented offered one with just a primary (active) processing system with a throughput of 100,000 tons per year; Option 2 has primary (active-ASP) and secondary (curing-windrow) processing system having a throughput of 100,000 tons per year and 68,828 tons per year, respectively. Option 2 is comprised of nine active phase compost piles featuring high air flow aeration and automated controls. The rational for the decreased throughput through the secondary phase is due to volume reduction which occurs during the active phase.

Sustainable Generation (SG) proposed three options: Scenario #1 at 65,000 tons with an ASP active phase and windrow curing phase; Scenario #2 with 100,000 tons with an ASP active phase and windrow curing phase; and Scenario #3 with 100,000 tons through ASP for both active and curing. Scenario #2, the City’s preferred option, is comprised of a 12 SG Bunker System with GORE covers that have an on-floor aeration system, SG compost control system, plug and play ready electrical and network connections, and a cover fastening system. The proposal includes a cover handling machine specific for the GORE cover, and the SG #3..
- 119 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 9 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 33
SmartStart Service package which includes an installation guide, pre-design/preconstruction/pre-installation meetings, commissioning & start-up services, and training.

GMT proposed a 28-zone covered ASP composting system that is equipped with reverse aeration and biofiltration for odor control with a throughput capacity up to 100,000 tons per year.

If the City decides to use an ASP system for curing, GMT included an add-on option for an additional 14 ASP compost heaps for curing. It is important to note that the varying number of compost heaps relates to the dimensions proposed by each vendor. Details of these dimensions are included in Appendix D.

Table 13. ASP Compost System Estimates
Vendor ASP Cost
ECS Option 1 $2,550,000
Option 2 $1,750,000
SG Scenario 1 $2,000,000
Scenario 2 $3,000,000
Scenario 3 $4,300,000
GMT Active ASP $1,700,000
Curing ASP $750,000

8.2 Processing Equipment Estimates
Olympic Wire and Equipment Inc. provided an estimate for a THOR Turbo-Separator, an organics de-packaging equipment, that would be expected to operate up to 10 hours a day, 5 days a week with an expected operational output up to 120 tons per day with the organic material readily available to be sent to composting.

Ecoverse proposed two different pieces of organics de-packaging equipment (HS-55 Depackaging System, HS-90 De-packaging System) that both have a dry organic discharge system and dual wet-dry discharge system available and minor operating differences other than functional electrical details. Operationally, both systems have:
o A stationary frame with the anti-vibrational Silent-block device o A feed compartment with a 7 cu.yd hopper
o Vertical Mill compartment with a high-speed shaft
o Packaging extraction compartment auger
o Double water feeding system to accept water from the gris and other sources such as leachate recovery
Ecoverse also provided a quote for a fully-electric grinder, the Doppstadt DW 306 CERON, as identified in the City’s potential future equipment list for the facility.

While no formal quotes were collected for the electric screen or densimetric table, the following high level estimates were collected. These are costs for equipment only and do not include the electrical hookup, or varying feed system and discharge system designs:
#3..
- 120 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 9 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 34 © 2023, City of Modesto
- Electric mobile trommel screen roughly costs $415,000 - Electric stationary trommel screen roughly costs $500,000 - Densimetric separator (table) roughly costs $1,000,000 Table 14. Processing Equipment Cost Estimates
Equipment Services Cost
THOR Product/Services $ 983,335
Tiger HS-55
Dry Organic Discharge System $ 61,289
Dual Wet-Dry Organic Discharge System $ 141,788
System Cost $ 584,910
Tiger HS-90
Dry Organic Discharge System $ 61,289
Dual Wet-Dry Organic Discharge System $ 141,788
System Cost $ 665,888
Electric
Grinder System Cost $1,052,030

9. New Sources of Revenue
The Compost Facility makes most of its revenue, as is typical for composting facilities in California, through the tipping fees (the price that generators pay to unload organic materials at the facility). The City’s tipping fees have not kept pace with the market, nor the costs to properly operate and maintain the facility. The tipping fees (in the City’s franchise agreements with their haulers) will likely have to be increased over time to help cover the costs of the facility expansion, and ongoing operating and maintenance costs. In addition, the City may want to consider a number of potential value-added services to help generate revenue from the back end of the compost manufacturing process.

9.1 Third-Party Compost Certifications
A number of third-party compost certifications exist in California to provide customer assurance and to simplify the compost purchasing experience. These include participating in the California Department of Food & Agriculture Organic Material Input (CDFA – OIM) program, the Organic Material Review Institute’s (OMRI) Compost Approval Program and the US Composting Council’s Seal of Testing Assurance Program (STA).

California Department of Food and Agriculture, Organic Input Material Program (CDFA).

The CDFA OIM program started as a response to unscrupulous liquid fertilizer manufacturers who were selling inorganic nitrogen under the guise of organic. In response, CDFA developed the mandatory OIM program. Any manufacturer of soil amendments or agricultural minerals needs to obtain a CDFA Fertilizer license and register each product making a claim of suitability for organic production. By participating in the CDFA OIM program the City will be able to access certified organic farm markets, which are some of the fastest growing and higher-paying markets for compost. Though not necessarily common in Stanislaus County, participation in organic certification schemes like CDFA – OIM and OMRI (see below) are seen by many conventional growers as a ”good-housekeeping“ seal of approval. Conventional growers may request these #3..
- 121 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 9 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 35
certifications even if they do not grow certified organic. Licensing and registration of a label is mandatory if the City is going to sell (or represent) that the facility’s compost is organic.

Organic Material Review Institute (OMRI). OMRI was developed as an international reviewer of input materials for certified organic production. While registration with OMRI is voluntary, their program is well-known and respected within the organic growing community. Participation in OMRI’s program is voluntary, but if the City wants to sell to certified organic growers, they are required to participate in the CDFA OIM program. OMRI is voluntary, but is much better known among growers.

US Composting Council Seal of Testing Assurance (STA). The STA program is a national quality assurance program managed by the US Composting Council. The STA was developed as a means of providing customer assurance in compost quality and testing. Participants pay an annual fee and participate in a testing and disclosure program. The STA program appeals more to landscapers and horticultural users of compost. Participation in the program requires submittal of regular analytical testing results (already required by Title 14 regulations) and disclosure of those results and providing directions for use to potential customers. Many of the larger composters in CA participate in the STA program.

9.2 Procurement
SB 1383 regulations require the City of Modesto (as well as its surrounding cities and the Unincorporated County) to procure Recovered Organic Products (including compost and mulch). The compost procurement target is based on a figure of 0.08 tons of compost per resident. The CalRecycle estimated Procurement targets for the City of Modesto and its neighboring cities are shown in Table 15.

Table 15. SB 1383 Procurement Estimated Requirements (100% Compost) Jurisdiction 1/1/2021
Population
2023 Goal
(tons) (30%)
2024 Goal
(tons) (65%)
2025 Goal
(tons) (100%)
Ceres 48,901 978 2,543 3,912
Hughson 7,303 175 380 584
Modesto 219,294 3,053 11,403 17,544
Newman 11,962 287 622 957
Oakdale 23,237 558 1,208 1,859
Patterson 23,304 559 1,212 1,864
Riverbank 25,189 6,705 1,310 2,015
Turlock 74,820 1,796 3,891 5,986
Waterford 8,944 215 465 716
Unincorporated County 113,014 2,712 5,877 9,041
TOTAL 17,038 28,911 44,478
Compost estimates from CalRecycle 2022 Procurement calculator (https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/procurement/recoveredorganicwasteproducts/ Accessed 6/5/2023)
#3..
- 122 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 9 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 36 © 2023, City of Modesto
While experience with SB 1383 procurement is still evolving, the City has an opportunity to be the source of compost (and/or mulch) to a number of its surrounding cities and the unincorporated parts of Stanislaus County. The required annual volumes of potentially procured compost are significant. Based on CalRecycle estimates of current SB 1383 requirements, this could eventually require almost 44,500 tons (roughly 90,000 cubic yards) of compost. Not all jurisdictions are going to choose 100 percent compost for their procurement needs, and other sources of materials exist in the county, but providing compost and/or mulch to fulfill jurisdictions procurement requirements is something the City may want to invest in.

9.3 Bagging
The vast majority of compost made in CA is sold in bulk. Some compost is sold in bags at big box stores, but that is an incredibly competitive volume-based business. Two large soil amendment companies operate large bagging operations to the North and East of the city’s facility. Kelloggs Garden Products in Lockeford (about 50 miles to the North and East) and Scotts in Linden (about 40 miles to the North). Should the City identify bagged products as a worthwhile market to enter, these two companies could be approached to provide contract bagging. HDR concludes there is no need to employ a bagging operation when two very large ones exist within a reasonable hauling distance. In the past the City has sold finished compost to one of these companies. Bagging compost can provide convenience to the user and a high unit price for the compost but is not commonly done at scale by municipal operations.

9.4 Mulch Markets
As volumes of feedstock continue to grow, the City may consider developing markets for mulch (colored, or uncolored) as a way to diversify its product line and take pressure off of the compost system. SB 1383 procurement allows the use of mulch from a permitted facility and mulch is also used in landscaping and agriculture. Colorizing mulch would require additional processing equipment not included in cost estimates here, but even screened, uncolored mulch has a market among landscapers and some agricultural uses. A simple, add-on colorizing system could cost less than $30,000; but a more sophisticated stand-alone version (part of a trommel screen or similar system can cost between $100,000 and $250,000.

9.5 Facility Tip Fees
In February 2022, the City engaged R3 to study SB 1383 Collection Program and Compliance Options.
1 This document evaluated three major collection options for the City. The document concluded that, in addition to raising rates (regardless of the options chosen by the City, for two or three containers and options for frequency of collection), that the franchise agreements would need to be amended with the City’s two haulers (Gilton Solid Waste Management and Bertolotti Disposal). R3 estimated that residential rates would increase between $11.05 and $20.90 per resident per month, and 30% to 56% for commercial customers.

R3 also estimated $8.8 million in facility improvements at the City’s Compost Facility. R3’s estimate only included improvements to the compost site surface and some modest equipment 1 Final Draft Report “SB 1383 Collection and Compliance Options”, R3, February 20922 #3..
- 123 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 9 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 37
purchases, and not a facility expansion as evaluated in this Compost Study. R3’s estimate to improve the compost site is included as a line item in their final estimates of increase to residential and commercial rates (and is roughly half of the estimate in this report, largely owing to the addition of a processing building, not contemplated in the R3 Report).

As part of this Compost Study, City staff collected green waste tip fees from numerous facilities across the state that ranged from $21 to $175 per ton of green waste, with an average tip fee of about $68 per ton. The activities at these sites vary from transfer, composting, and disposal, however it is important to note these tip fees are only for green waste. The following table is from CalRecycle’s April 2019 SB 1383 Infrastructure and Market Analysis (CalRecycle Analysis) which shows that the average tipping fee per ton for food scarps falls between $52 to $61 per ton, with a range from $26 to $121 per ton. The City’s current tipping fees at the facility are $43.25 per ton for local City residents, and $85.37 per ton for non-City residents. Based on the CalRecycle Analysis and City collected data, there is ample opportunity for the City to increase their tipping fees and increase this revenue stream.

Table 16. SB 1383 Infrastructure and Market Analysis Tipping Fees Feedstock Adjusted Tipping Fee Range
(per ton)
Adjusted Average Tipping
Fee (per ton)
Green Material $2 - $64 $38
Wood Waste $15 - $69 $38
Construction Wood $25 - $121 $54
Manure $5 - $121 $46
Grape Pomace $20 - $44 $30
Cannery Waste $26 - $44 $33
Other Ag Waste $26 - $44 $34
Food Scraps – Residential $26 - $85 $52
Food Scraps – Commercial $26 - $121 $61
Food Scraps – Other $26 - $75 $52
Across California jurisdictions are wrestling with the various responsibilities under SB 1383, aspirational legislation which requires significant changes in what is collected and how it is processed. The implementation of SB 1383 will affect how every Californian uses and pays for solid waste services. Many things are unknown, but for certain, most jurisdictions will be required to take more control of how franchise agreements are written and what services franchise haulers perform. Both the R3 Report and this Compost Study acknowledge that the demands of SB 1383 will require the City to amend their current franchise agreements to allow for greater control and cost certainty moving forward, as well as review their existing facility tipping fees as a potential for increased revenue.
#3..
- 124 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 10 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 38 © 2023, City of Modesto

10. Recommendation and Next Steps
Based on the findings of this Compost Study, the City has an opportunity to expand their existing composting facility to double the capacity and meet the requirements of SB 1383’s organic waste diversion mandates. It should be noted that although the facility has the ability to double its capacity, more data is needed to clarify the available quantity and quality of organic feedstocks. Depending on the confirmed feedstocks, it may be more practical to adopt a phased expansion approach and only build out the necessary capacity needed in the near term versus over sizing the facility based on forecasted future tonnages. The main permits that need further discussion with the regulators are identifying the CEQA/land use pathway, and assessing the anticipated emissions to better understand the air permitting implications of the proposed expansion. The following list provides the team’s recommendations and next steps to move this expansion project forward in its evaluation, design, and development. These recommendations do not include reference to facility expansion construction or on-going operations.

10.1 Feedstock

1. Coordinate with franchised haulers on current organics tonnage availability, guarantees, and quality.

The Compost Facility currently receives organic materials from two contracted haulers, Bertolotti Disposal services (Bertolotti) and Gilton Solid Waste Management Inc. (Gilton). Gilton has provided over 50% of the facility’s compost feedstocks over the last six years. Recently, Gilton has been providing less organic materials to the Compost Facility, and through discussions with the City is considering expanding or modifying their Resource Recovery Facility in Modesto. It is imperative that the City discuss with both Bertolotti, but especially Gilton, on the anticipated increased organic materials that will come to the Compost Facility as part of the SB 1383 program implementation. In addition to the quantity of materials, the City should discuss with its haulers the quality of material that will be delivered, particularly if it is pre-processed to remove contaminants prior to arrival. Gilton also applied for a Grant from CalRecycle, 2 asking for
$9,979,000 to build a “state of the art” composting facility processing 171,000 tons of organic material. HDR has not reviewed the grant application, which as of the date of this report has been submitted, but has not been scored or awarded. CalRecycle Grant awards are likely to be made public in October 2023. It is critical the City determine what organic feedstocks are available to the City if Gilton’s project were to be awarded.

2. Perform a waste flow control assessment to understand the City’s SB 1383 implementation and schedule.

It is unclear the City’s control over the flow of organic waste that is generated within the City and collected by its contracted haulers. HDR recommends that the City evaluate methods to gain control over its waste stream, or identify means that will guarantee the current and projected organic materials are delivered to the Compost Facility. 2 Organics Grant Program Cycle 7, Fiscal Years 2021–22 and 2022–23 Submitted Application Listing, CalRecycle.
#3..
- 125 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 10 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 39

3. Revise franchise agreements as necessary based on the findings of the organics flow assessment and tonnage availability.

Both current franchise agreements are over 15 years old, and may require an update or amendment to cover the implementation of SB 1383. Depending on the discussions with the haulers, and the City’s ability to control the organic waste flow will impact the revisions necessary to these agreements. This may also impact the costs paid to the haulers, or received by the City at the Compost Facility.

10.2 Design

4. Further refine the conceptual design based on feedstock, drainage, and site electrification considerations to prepare Basis of Design document for full design.

While the preferred option has been designed to a conceptual level, consideration for some of the components brought to our attention during this Compost Study require further refinement.

Particularly with respect to the quantity and quality of feedstock, the site’s overall stormwater and wastewater management, and the potential site electrification.

5. Prepare construction ready drawings for vendor procurement and construction.

After obtaining the Basis of Design document, the project can move into full design to produce construction ready drawings to be used by the selected vendor and/or contractor. Typically the selected vendor will help produce conceptual-level drawings of the ASP composting system and assist in the preparation of construction drawings.

10.3 Electrification

6. Verify with SJVAPCD the applicability and requirements for transitioning the facility equipment to all-electric.

Through discussions with the City, the need for transitioning the facility equipment to all-electric is a result of the facility expansion potentially triggering Title V and requiring all equipment be equipped with BACT. There are a limited number of composting facilities that have been required to use all-electric equipment. The City should discuss the likelihood of this requirement, and the timeline associated with the transition to better understand the potential implications.

7. Obtain more guidance from TID about the electrification application process.

Initial discussions with and guidance from TID about the electrification application process have been obtained through this Compost Study. The next step in starting the process is selecting the appropriate power upgrade/modification and working with TID to begin the application process.

10.4 Staffing

8. Start training facility staff now to prepare for the facility expansion.

To best prepare for the potential facility expansion, it is recommended to start training staff now to improve operational efficiency, recognize equipment maintenance needs, and identify existing staffing training or experience gaps. In addition, the manufacturer (vendor) of the ASP composting system should provide training specific to running the ASP system. The US Composting Council, through its Composting Research and Education Foundation runs a 5-day Compost Operator Training Course, which is offered annually in California. #3..
- 126 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 10 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 40 © 2023, City of Modesto
(https://www.compostfoundation.org/Education/COTC). The Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA) also offers a three-day Manager of Compost Operations Course that is offered periodically through the National or local SWANA Chapters. The week-long CREF Course costs ($1,425 USCC Members) or $1735 for non-members. The SWANA Course can be taken as an E-Course for $843 (SWANA Members) or $1373 (non-Members) The in-person course varies by location (and National vs. Chapter pricing)

10.5 Permitting

9. Discuss CEQA/Land Use with City Planning Department to better understand CEQA pathway for facility expansion.

The first step of the permitting process will be through the City Planning Department to initiate the necessary CEQA review. Starting discussions early will help to identify any special studies or other considerations that are required based on the project scope. This will also aid in understanding the project timeline, which is largely dictated by the duration of the CEQA review.

10. Start CEQA permitting process with City Planning Department and obtain CEQA approvals.

After the CEQA pathway has been determined, HDR recommends to start this process as early as possible as it typically has one of the longest permitting lead times. Other construction and operational permits depend on obtaining the appropriate CEQA approval.

11. Discuss air permitting process, offset requirements, and Title V applicability with SJVAPCD.

SJVAPCD is one of the most stringent air districts in the state, and one of only two who have adopted specific rules pertaining to composting facilities. Since this is an existing facility with grandfathered air permits, HDR recommends starting discussions with SJVAPCD as early as possible to identify the applicability of offsets and Title V. These two components could be costly and lead to a longer permit review time.

12. Start permitting process with SJVAPCD and obtain Authority to Construct Permits.

Similar to the CEQA approval, obtaining air permits typically have a long lead time. It is recommended to start this process as early as possible, however, the permits approval is contingent on obtaining the CEQA approval.

13. Discuss Solid Waste Facility Permit/RCSI revision with the Local Enforcement Agency.

Although no potential obstacles were identified with the facility’s existing Solid Waste Facility Permit/RCSI revision, it is a best practice to engage regulators early in the development process to minimize delays and add transparency.

14. Start permitting process with Local Enforcement Agency and obtain Solid Waste Facility Permit revision or modification.

After obtaining the CEQA approval, the project should move to revise its Solid Waste Facility Permit.
#3..
- 127 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 10 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 41

15. Discuss Waste Discharge Requirements permit Notice of Violations and corrective action timeline and requirements.

HDR recommends addressing the recent Notice of Violations with the Waste Discharge Requirement permit to bring the facility into compliance. Components of this Compost Study may be used to facilitate and guide these discussions, and propose a compliance schedule.

16. Discuss Waste Discharge Requirements permit revision with the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB).

For this permit, additional drainage calculations, drawings, and specifications will be required to comply with the Waste Discharge Requirements. HDR recommendations discussing these requirements with the CVRWQCB to ensure the future design of the facility complies with this permit.

17. Start permitting process with CVRWQCB and obtain applicable wastewater and stormwater permits.

After obtaining the CEQA approval, the project should move to update its Waste Discharge Requirements Technical Report to incorporate the proposed project.

10.6 Vendor Engagement

18. After the conceptual design refinement, reach out to vendors to obtain updated costs and phase approach considerations.

Vendors may have reduced capital costs as a result of adopting a phased expansion. Compost pile dimensions varied between each proposal, and as the project design gets more refined this could also impact costs.

19. Prepare and release Request for Proposals for vendor procurement and construction services after obtaining the necessary permit approvals, or may occur concurrently depending on anticipated approvals.

As the project permitting and design progresses, the City should release a Request for Proposals (RFP) for vendors to competitively bid on the project. Vendors should include ASP compost system vendors, who typically will collaborate with a construction contractor to build out the facility. There may potentially be a separate bid or outreach to equipment vendors for other specialized equipment (e.g., depackager, electric grinder, electric screen, and densimetric table). The ASP compost system vendor may or may not be experienced in electrical facility upgrades, which may be required for the facility if it moves to use an electric grinder. This would result in an additional RFP for contractors who provide this service.

10.7 New Sources of Revenue

20. Assign City staff to develop a marketing plan for compost to satisfy local jurisdiction’s procurement needs. This could involve developing a strategy to serve the County’s jurisdictions as well as satisfying Modesto’s procurement needs.

To help increase revenue from compost product sales, the team recommends to have one dedicated staff (full-time or part-time) to develop and implement a marketing plan. With the passage of SB 1383, the City along with all jurisdictions within the County are required to #3..
- 128 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
Section 10 Compost Facility Feasibility Study August 2023 Page – 42 © 2023, City of Modesto
procure products from organic materials. If the City is able to tap into this market, then it would be a stable source of revenue.

21. Perform a rate study to evaluate increasing the facility tipping fees It is our understanding that the Compost Facility charges below market rate tipping fees. While this may be applicable for the current operations, the proposed expansion most likely will result in an increase in tipping fees to account for the increased capital and operational costs. Having a better understanding of the future tipping fee will allow the City to evaluate its competitiveness in the organic materials processing market.

22. Inquire and obtain additional third-party certifications for compost product Obtaining third-party certifications will lead to expanded markets as some agricultural producers and compost users seek specific product quality.

10.8 Recommendation Phasing and Cost
These recommendations can be broken into short-term (1-2 years), moderate-term (3-5 years), and long-term (5+ years) as follows.

Short Term (1-2 years)
For planning purposes, the combined anticipated cost for the items below most likely will fall within the $450,000 to $750,000 range. Most of this cost will be dedicated to the design and permitting of the improvements. Most of the City staff time will be to resolve the feedstock issues and participate/manage the permitting process. The upper range includes a contingency for unforeseen challenges that may come up in this initial phase of planning.

Table 17. Short-Term Recommendations
Category Recommendation
Feedstock Coordinate with franchised haulers on current organics tonnage availability, guarantees, and quality
Feedstock Perform a waste flow control assessment to understand the City’s SB 1383 implementation and schedule
Feedstock Revise franchise agreements as necessary based on the findings of the organics flow assessment and tonnage availability
Design Further refine the conceptual design based on feedstock, drainage, and site electrification considerations to prepare Basis of Design document for full design
Vendor
Engagement
After design refinement, reach out to vendors to obtain updated costs and phase approach considerations
Design Prepare construction ready drawings for vendor procurement and construction
Permitting Discuss CEQA/Land Use with City Planning Department to better understand CEQA pathway for facility expansion
Permitting Start CEQA permitting process with City Planning Department and obtain CEQA approvals
Permitting Discuss air permitting process, offset requirements, and Title V applicability with the SJVAPCD
Permitting Discuss Waste Discharge Requirements permit Notice of Violations and corrective action timeline and requirements.
#3..
- 129 -
Compost Facility Feasibility Study
City of Modesto
August 2023 Compost Facility Feasibility Study Section 10 © 2023, City of Modesto Page – 43
Moderate Term (3-5 years)
For planning purposes, the combined anticipated cost for the items below most likely will fall within the $150,000 to $250,000 range. Similar to the short-term efforts above, the majority of these costs will be in the permitting and engineering related to electrification tasks.

Table 18. Moderate-Term Recommendations
Category Recommendation
Staffing Start training facility staff to prepare for the facility expansion.

Long Term (5+ years)
For planning purposes, the combined anticipated cost for the items below most likely will fall within the $40,000 to $80,000 range.

Table 19. Long-Term Recommendations
Category Recommendation
New Sources of
Revenue
Assign City staff to develop a marketing plan for compost to satisfy local jurisdiction’s procurement needs. This could involve developing a strategy to serve the County’s jurisdictions as well as satisfying Modesto’s procurement needs.

New Sources of
Revenue
Inquire and obtain additional third-party certifications for product. #3..
- 130 -

APPENDIX A

FEEDSTOCK ASSESSMENT
#3..
- 131 -
Memo
Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2023
Project: Compost Facility Feasibility Study
To: Rosene Nguyen, City of Modesto
From: Cindy Liles, HDR, Inc.

Tim Raibley, HDR, Inc.

Subject: Task #2 – Feedstock Assessment

1. Introduction
The purpose of this feedstock assessment is to present an analysis to understand the expansion needs of the City of Modesto’s (City) existing Co-Composting Facility located at 7001 Jennings Road in Modesto, California. The expansion of the composting facility is driven by the need to accommodate the growing volume of organic waste generated in Modesto and help City businesses and residents comply with Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383).

2. Existing Facility Conditions
This section describes the current operational capacity and feedstocks utilized at the City’s CoComposting Facility.

2.1 Feedstock
The first step in this assessment was to evaluate the City’s current feedstock throughput at the CoComposting Facility. HDR evaluated the past four years of inbound tonnage reports to estimate the existing capacity of the facility. Based on information provided by the City, the annual throughputs in tons per year (TPY) and estimated tons per day (TPD) are shown in Table 1. This shows the facility handles on average 50,000 TPY of organics materials.

According to their website, the Co-Composting Facility currently accepts organic wastes such as food waste, paper, cardboard, grass clippings, leaves, brush, and tree trimmings. The facility categorizes the waste exiting the facility into four different categories: Brokering/Transporting, End Use, Solid Waste for Disposal, and Recycling/ Composting. Table 2 shows the descriptions of these outbound categories and associated businesses.

It is important to understand the outgoing product markets to understand the quantity of inbound feedstock being converted into compost and compost products. According to data sent from the City to CalRecycle, an annual average of roughly 28,000 tons of compost left the facility and was sent to other businesses or applied as fertilizer in Stanislaus County. Typically, less than one percent of materials leaving the facility were landfilled. This shows that roughly 56% of the inbound feedstock is converted to compost product. The outflow data is tabulated in Table 3. #3..
- 132 -
City of Modesto | Technical Memorandum
Feedstock Assessment – August 2023
P a g e 2 | 4
Table 1. City of Modesto Co-Composting Facility Inbound Tonnages Year Inbound TPY Inbound TPD1
2019 50,565 194
2020 56,847 219
2021 42,235 162
2022 47,071 181
Average 49,180 189
1This assumes the facility operates five days per week, 52 weeks of the year.

Table 2. Co-Composting Facility Outflow Destinations
Co-Composting
Facility Outflow Uses
Description Organization/ Site
Brokering/Transporting Compost is sent to another
business or facility
• Hilmar Ready Mix Rock and
Nursery
End Use Compost is applied to land
as fertilizer
• Stanislaus County
Solid Waste for
Disposal
Processing residuals are
sent to a transfer station or
landfill
• Bertolitti Disposal Inc.
• Stanislaus County Fink
Road Landfill
Recycling/Composting Compost is sent to a
processor or business
• California Soils Inc.
• Silva & Sons LLC
• Valley Dairy Supply Inc.
• Hilmar Ready Mix Rockery
and Nursery
Table 3. City of Modesto Co-Composting Facility Outflow Tonnages Year Outflow TPY
20191 14,631
2020 39,058
2021 26,541
20222 30,439
Average 27,667
1Quarter 1 and 2 missing from CalRecycle data. Total outflow tonnages were estimated using quarter 3 and 4 data. 2Quarter 4 data missing from CalRecycle data. Total outflow tonnages were estimated using quarter 1, 2, and 3 data.

3.Projected Future Organic Waste
This section details the potential sources of additional organic feedstock for the City as a result of SB 1383.
#3..
- 133 -
City of Modesto | Technical Memorandum
Feedstock Assessment – August 2023
P a g e 3 | 4

3.1 CalRecycle Waste Characterzation Tool
Periodic waste characterization studies are conducted statewide in California to better estimate the type and quantities of waste entering the waste steam. The CalRecycle Waste Characterization Tool from CalRecycle was used to estimate possible diversion amounts to comply with SB 1383. The Tool utilizes data from the statewide 2014 Waste Composition Study along with population and employment data from the City of Modesto to estimate quantities of waste in the waste stream. This is consistent with the requirements of SB 1383, which bases the organic waste disposal reduction requirements on the 2014 organic waste disposal baseline.

The most dominant organic materials in the municipal solid waste stream that could be diverted were food (25.5%), and yard and wood waste including leaves, grass, prunings, trimmings, and branches and stumps (5%). Since these organic materials are accepted by the City’s CoComposting facility, they could be diverted from landfills to meet the 75 percent diversion requirements of SB 1383.

A summary of the organic waste streams available in the City based on the CalRecycle Tool is shown in Table 4. Residential totals include both single-family and multi-family residences in the area as consistent with the CalRecycle 2014 Waste Composition Study. Commercial data from the Tool utilizes data from disposed tons, curbside recycling and curbside organics programs tonnages, but for the purposes of this assessment Table 4 utilizes only disposed tons. Disposed tons is used because the purpose of SB 1383 is to divert the organic waste from landfills and to organics management programs.

Table 4. City of Modesto Potential Feedstocks (TPY)
City of
Modesto
Organic
Feedstocks
Residential Commercial Both
Streams
Estimated
Recovery
Recovered
Organics
Food Waste 13,577 20,067 33,644 75% 25,233
Paper Bags 179 288 467 75% 350
Cardboard 1,455 2,232 3,687 75% 2,765
Leaves, Grass,
Prunings,
Trimmings,
Branches, and
Stumps
2,671 3,383 6,054 75% 4,541
Total Tons 17,882 25,970 43,852 75% 32,889
In addition to the existing tonnage processed at the City of Modesto Co-Composting Facility, the data from CalRecycle shows that there is an additional roughly 44,000 tons of potential organic waste from the City that could be captured to better serve the community. Per the mandated 75-percent recovery #3..
- 134 -
City of Modesto | Technical Memorandum
Feedstock Assessment – August 2023
P a g e 4 | 4
of organic materials per SB 1383, the City is required to divert an additional 32,889 tons of organic materials from the municipal solid waste stream.

3.2 Industrial Food Processors
Several businesses within the Stanislaus County may be viable sources of organic feedstock.

The following potential food processing plants within the County were identified to be:
• Stanislaus Food Products
• Campfire Meats
• Sunopta Aseptic
• Nulaid Food Inc.
• Beeler Industries Inc.
• Rizo Lopez Food Inc.

If the City could secure any of these processors, then this could contribute additional organic feedstock to the City organics project and divert these food scraps from landfilling activities. The biggest obstacle the City would face in utilizing these feedstocks is de-packaging the material and removing non-digestible material.

3.3 City of Modesto Forestry Division
Based on conversations with the City’s Forestry Division with respect to the City’s 2023 CalRecycle Organics Grant application, the Forestry Division estimates an additional 15,000 tons of green waste per year will go to the composting facility. This estimate was listed on the Feedstock Certification form submitted with the City’s grant application.

4. Conclusion
This analysis revealed that the Modesto community offers significant potential for sourcing additional feedstock to accommodate the projected increase of organics as a result of SB 1383.

The purpose of this expansion would be to add an additional roughly 33,000 TPY capacity to the current operations of 50,000 TPY at the City’s Co-Composting Facility for a total throughput of roughly 83,000 TPY. In addition to this, there are opportunities to partner with nearby industrial food processing plants or the City’s Forest Division to secure additional feedstock. For the purposes of this Study, the facility expansion will be rounded up and sized for up to 100,000 TPY.

This would roughly double the existing facility’s throughput.

Expanding the facility will better serve the City of Modesto and allow the area to comply with SB 1383, reduce greenhouse gas emissions by diverting organics from landfills, and enhance organics handling in the area.
#3..
- 135 -

APPENDIX B

SITE ELECTRIFICATION TECHNICAL
MEMO
#3..
- 136 -
Memo
Date: Friday, May 26, 2023
Project: City of Modesto Compost Facility Feasibility Study To: Rosene Salmo, Integrated Waste Program Manager, City of Modesto From: Robb McComb, PE, HDR Engineering, Sr. Electrical Engineer Subject: Task #5 – Modesto Project Electrical Estimate

1. Introduction
The purpose of this memo is to evaluate the site electrification needs for the proposed anticipated equipment loads. HDR coordinated with the Turlock Irrigation District (TID) on the proposed electrical upgrades and equipment needs. Per TID, there are two voltage options available: 12kV or 480V. At a voltage of 12kV, a stepdown transformer would be required for the majority of the plant loads.

2.Electrical Limits
The facility provided the following future equipment list. For items with no specific electrical capacity, it is assumed these items fall within the 25 to 100 horsepower (HP) each.

1. Computer controlled material monitoring office (aeration, temperature, moisture control, etc.) – 120V Loads

2. Aerated composting bays – 50-100kVA

3. 1,000HP wood grinder

4. 350HP trommel screen

5. Stand alone or equipment attached vacuums, wind shifters, hurrikan or hurrifex, etc. (for light plastics) – 50-100kVA

6. Densimetric table and attached screening processes – 120V Loads

7. Additional conveyors and stacking systems and material processing machines to manage stockpiles, overs, and contamination – 50-100kVA

8. Charging bays for electric powered vehicles and miscellaneous equipment – 100- 200kVA

9. Dedicated 1,000 gallon fueling station – 25 HP Pump

10. Dedicated 4,000 gallon water tank refilling station – 25 HP Pump

11. Dedicated heavy equipment wash pad – 120V Loads

12. Dedicated conveyor belt system and/or hopper to load semi-trucks with compost – 120V Loads

13. Dedicated conveyor belt system and/or hopper to load one cubic yard into the back of customer trucks and trailer – 120V Loads

14. Tailwater pump – 120V Loads
#3..
- 137 -

15. Aeration system for stormwater retention pond – 25 HP Pump

16. It should be noted that the equipment list given did not have sizes for the majority of the equipment and educated guesses have been made for the electrical equipment sizes.

From the equipment list, the 1,000HP grinder load at 480V (1,204A), is a large load and is the main consideration for choosing a service voltage level. The existing service at the site is a 400A, single phase system that has a service voltage of 240V line-to-line and 120V line-to-neutral. This service is not large enough to support the anticipated loads from the improvement recommendations, which are estimated to be 2,500A. There are four options for providing power for the additional equipment loads:

1. 480V three-phase. At this voltage level, it is recommended that the Facility be upgraded to a 3,000A, 480V, three-phase system. The grinder alone at 480V, three-phase, will require 1,204A. Typical ratings for low voltage switchgear and switchboards at 480V are 2,000, 2,500 and 3,000A. All the other anticipated larger loads would be powered at 480V, three-phase, and be powered from the switchboard or a Motor Control Center (MCC). A 240/120V panelboard would be provided for lighting and instrumentation loads.

2. The 1,000HP motor could be powered at 4,160V, three-phase. At this voltage, the amperage draw for the motor would be 139A. This would be classified as medium voltage equipment (MV) and is generally larger and more expensive. MV also requires special training for electricians. The main issue with this voltage level, is that TID does not offer service voltage at 4,160V. Therefore, we would need to install a customer owned step-down transformer from 12kV to 4,160V to power the grinder. We would then need to step-down the voltage again, with another transformer for 480V power. The 480V loads would then be powered similar to what was described in option #1. The 4,160V switchboard would provide power to the grinder and a feeder breaker to the 480V step-down transformer. The grinder would require a MV soft starter or MV VFD.

3. Another option would be to power the 1,000HP grinder at 12kV. This is the standard voltage provided by TID. The service equipment and grinder starter would be considered MV equipment, and is larger, more expensive and takes special training for operators and electricians. We would need to check with the grinder manufacturer to see if they make the grinder at 12kV voltage. At 12kV, we would still need to provide a 480V step-down transformer for the remainder of the loads, similar to option #1.

4. With option #1, 480V, we could install a step-up transformer, from 480V to 5kV to provide power to the 1,000HP grinder. The maintenance of the grinder would still require specialized training as mentioned in option #3. The main service level would still be 480V.
#3..
- 138 -
Another item to consider is if a standby generator may be required or warranted. A MV generator is larger and more expensive than a 480V generator and would require specialized training for the maintenance department.

3.Improvement Recommendations
Item #1: Utility Transformer

ITEM DESCRIPTION
Regardless of the voltage level, a 480V oil-filled transformer will need to be installed. A new, larger utility transformer would be required for the anticipated loads as demonstrated in Table 1, for a 480V, three-phase voltage level. The estimated utility transformer would be between 2.0MVA and 2.5MVA. A 45 kVA, dry-type transformer, would be installed for 208/120v loads, including lighting, receptacles, and instruments.

A slightly smaller 480V, three-phase transformer would be required for Options #2 and #3.

Its size would depend ultimately on the anticipated loads. For this write-up, I would anticipate the transformer to still be around 2.0MVA.

Table 1. ESTIMATED ELECTRICAL LOAD

RECOMMENDATIONS
• Estimated 2.0 – 2.5MVA Utility or customer owned transformer. • A 45kVA dry-type transformer

HIGH LEVEL ESTIMATED COST AND LEAD TIMES
• Utility transformer 2.5MVA: $150,000; 35 weeks depending on the utility.

ESTIMATED ELECTRICAL LOAD
Client: Modesto
Project:

Location
Project Number: Number
Date: 15-May-23
Load Description Equip Tag HP KVA KW AMPS
Power
Factor Volts Phase
Coincident
Demand
Connected
kVA Load
Demand
KVA Load
MCC-D1 480 3
Wood Grinder 1000 480 3 1.0 1,000.0 1,000.0
Trommel Screen 350 480 3 1.0 344.2 344.2
Aerated Bays 100 480 3 1.0 100.0 100.0
Vaccums/wind sifters/hurrikan 100 480 3 1.0 100.0 100.0 Conveyors/stacking system 100 480 3 1.0 100.0 100.0
EV Chargers 200 480 3 1.0 200.0 200.0
Fuleing station 25 480 3 1.0 28.3 28.3
Pumps aeration system 25 480 3 1.0 28.3 28.3
480v transformer for 120v 45 480 3 1.0 45.0 45.0
Misc 100 480 3 1.0 100.0 100.0
Subtotal KVA 2,045.7 2,045.7
Subtotal AMPS 2,460.6 2,460.6

SUMMARY TABLE
System 3 Phase Voltage 480
Connected KVA
Connected Amps
Demand KVA
Demand Amps 2,460.6
2,045.7
2,460.6
2,045.7
#3..
- 139 -
• Dry Type Transformer 45kva: $2,500; 30 weeks.

Item #2: Meter/Main Switchboard

ITEM DESCRIPTION
A 3,000A switchboard with a pull section, utility metering section, and 3,000A main breaker, would be installed in a conditioned electrical room. This switchboard would provide power to all of the 480V equipment. Other equipment would be fed from smaller circuit breakers that feed out of the switchboard or an additional motor control center (MCC). • A 1,600A circuit breaker will be installed in the switchboard to feed the VFD for the grinder. Per TID, only a 1,000HP motor can be installed at 480V with a VFD. The inrush current to start the grinder would be too large for TID if started with a soft starter or across the line starter. If the VFD installed outdoors, the switchboard would require an AC unit.
• A 600A circuit breaker will be installed in the switchboard to feed the Trommel screen. • Circuit breakers for EV chargers would be installed in the MCC or Switchboard. • All other feeder breakers would be installed in the switchboard or MCC For MV (5kV to 12kV) a 1,200A switchgear would be provided for to power the Grinder and step-down transformer.

HIGH LEVEL ESTIMATED COST AND LEAD TIMES
• 3,000A 480V switchboard, Eaton: $250,000; 82 weeks
• 1,200 480V MCC: $100,000; 60 weeks
• 480V Power Flex 700 VFD for grinder: $150,000; 40 weeks • 480V Power Flex 700 VFD for Trommel Screen: $75,000; 40 weeks • 1,200A, 4,160V switchboard, Eaton: $500,000; 82 weeks Item #3: Panelboard

ITEM DESCRIPTION
Most of the proposed loads would have vendor control panels that will be fed from the switchboard or MCC. The recommended equipment would be a 225A, 208/120v three phase panelboard.

RECOMMENDATIONS
• If SCADA is needed, then a 72” wide PLC panel would be installed to house the PLC and components for the PLC and SCADA control, and communications. • If installed outside, all panels would be NEMA 3R. AC units would be required for the PLC and VFDs.
• If installed inside a building, electrical room would need to be conditioned to below 100 degrees.
#3..
- 140 -
• For operator comfort, operating room would be below 90 degrees. Additional HVAC not included in costs or load estimates.

HIGH LEVEL ESTIMATED COST AND LEAD TIMES
• 208/120v panelboard: $2,500; 52 weeks.
• SCADA and Programming: $250,000; 30+weeks.

4. TID Fees
Appendix A contains sketches showing requirements for TID to provide power to the Facility.

These were provided by TID. The sketches assume where the meter panel would go and the location of the TID transformer pad, which can be adjusted as needed. Adjustments, however, may cause a change in fees.

The TID fees for the 12kV primary metering option is $33,231.

The TID fees for the 277/480V metering option is $61,624.

5.Summary
The following is a summary of the total costs associated with the necessary electrical upgrades for the proposed site equipment. Note the equipment costs are the equipment associated with the electrical upgrades, not the proposed facility or site improvements:
• Total estimate equipment costs: $980,000
• Electrical installation costs: $250,000
• TID Fees $61,624
Total estimated costs @480V: $1,291,624
@12kV: $1,614,530
This high-level estimated cost is for 480V service level. Add 25% for additional costs of equipment and complexity of going with 12kV service.

The longest estimated lead time for the equipment is 82 weeks for the upgraded switchboard.

Other equipment lead times vary from 30 to 60 weeks and could be managed to fall within the 82 weeks for the switchboard.

6.Conclusion
The grinder is the only piece of electrical equipment that is large enough to consider going MV.

MV equipment is typically larger, more expensive, and requires special training to maintain and operate. The rest of the anticipated equipment will be powered from 480V. The grinder will also not run all the time. For these reasons, HDR would recommend going with a 480V service and the required VFD for starting the grinder. This VFD requirement is per TID: “We (TID) are able to handle the load as long as they proceed with installing a VFD.” This means that if the City goes with a 480V service from TID, the Facility must install a VFD on the grinder. #3..
- 141 -

APPENDIX A
Turlock Irrigation District
City of Modesto Co-Composting
Facility Electrical Drawings
#3..
- 142 -
Existing TID 12 kV
overhead lines
TID to disconnect
underground
service and remove
existing
transformer ????.

Existing underground
low volage cable and
conduit. Cable to be
removed ?????
Existing TID pole
Customer to supply and install 4" sch 40 PVC conduit
in 59" deep trench between existing pole and transformer pad as per 30571, 35300 and 35201.

Customer to supply and install 105" X 112"
transformer pad with barrier post as per
TID standards 2017 or 35101, 35054
and 35151.

Existing customer's
400 amp 120/240 V
1 Ø meter panel to
be removed?????.

Customer's 3000 ??? Amp 277/480 Volt 3Ø panel.

Submit panel drawings for approval prior to
manufacturing.

Contact TID trench inspector for preconstruction meeting, for pole conduit riser location, prior to backfilling trenches and to schedule mandrel test.

Contact TID trench inspector by going to TID webpage
at www.tid.org/power/electrical-inspection-request/
Customer to supply and install (6) - 1000 per
phase and (2) 1000 mcm underground 600V
cable per neutral in (6) 5" schedule 40 PVC
conduits between transformer pad and meter
panel in 36" deep trench.

See TID standards 30571, 34750 sheet 4 of 5,
35201 and 2202.

TID to:

Install 3 - 1/0 underground
25 kV primary cables.
7001

JENNINGS RD
±
JOB # WORK ORDER #
X X
BY
DATE
MAP
POLE
Stan Carlson
3/16/2023 X
X
NAME

ADDRESS
City of Modesto Compost Area 277/480 Volt Option
7001 Jennings Rd
Modesto
TID Fees: $61,624 Sheet X of X
#3..
- 143 -
Existing TID 12 kV
overhead lines
TID to:

Install 12 kV riser
switch at existing pole
Custom er's new 1200 ? a m p
12,000 volt th ree ph a se m eter
pa nel a s per TID Specifica tions
51081
Subm it pa nel dra w ings for
a pprova l prior to m a nufa cturing.

Existing custom er's
400 a m p 120/240 V
1 Ø m eter pa nel to
be rem oved?????.

TID to disconnect
underground
service and remove
existing
transformer ????.

TID to:

Install 3 - 1100 mcm underground
25 kV primary cables.

Custom er to supply a nd insta ll
6” PVC electrica l conduit in
59” deep trench betw een
existing pole a nd prim a ry
m etering ca binet.

Existing underground
low volage cable and
conduit. Cable to be
removed ?????
7001

JENNINGS RD
±
JOB # WOR K OR DER #
X X
BY
DATE
MAP
POLE
Stan Carlson
3/16/2023 X
X
NAME

ADDR ESS
City of Modesto Compost Area Primary Metering Option
7001 Jennings Rd
Modesto
TID Fees: $33,231 Sh eet X of X
#3..
- 144 -

APPENDIX C

PERMITTING GAP ANALYSIS

TECHNICAL MEMO
#3..
- 145 -
Memo
Date: Friday, August 04, 2023
Project: City of Modesto Compost Facility Feasibility Study To: Rosene Salmo, City of Modesto, Integrated Waste Program Manager From: Cindy Liles, HDR, Project Manager
Tim Raibley, HDR, Principal-in-Charge
Matt Cotton, IWMC, Compost Expert
Subject: Task #7 – Modesto Composting Facility Permitting Gap Analysis HDR has reviewed the City of Modesto’s (City) Composting Facility’s (Facility) permit related documents to develop the following permitting gap analysis on the required permit revisions or acquisitions that would be required for the facility to expand and modify its operations as depicted on the preferred concept design plan. This analysis assumes that the expanded facility would process a total of 100,000 tons per year (TPY) green and food waste through a positive, aerated static pile (ASP) sub-grade composting system constructed in the eastern buffer zone for the active phase followed by a windrow composting system for the curing phase on the existing composting pad. In addition, the construction and use of a pre-processing building with a maintenance shop is included in this scenario. The entire design covers approximately 46 acres. This memo includes our review, assumptions, and determinations.

The following documents were part of this review:
• 1995 Negative Declaration (SCH No. 94112036) Initial Study and Findings • 1997 Addendum to Negative Declaration
• 2017 Notice of Applicability General Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) for Composting Operations (General WDR)
• 2021 Compostable Materials Handling Facility Permit (SWIS 50-AA-0018) with July 2020 Report of Composting Site Information (RCSI) and August 2020 Odor Impact Minimization Plan (OIMP)
• The following air permits from San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD): N-3993-3-0; N-3993-5-0; N-7827-1-0; N-7827-2-1; N-7827-3-1; M-7827-4-0 Table 1. Existing Compost Facility Permit Summary
Note: TPD = tons per day; TPY = tons per year
CEQA RCSI WDR Air Permits
Tonnage
(daily)
200 TPD (min)
500 TPD (max)
500 TPD 250 TPD (avg)
500 TPD (max)
500 TPD
Tonnage
(annual)
130,000 TPY 130,000 TPY 65,000 TPY (avg)
130,000 TPY (max)
130,000 TPY
Acreage 30 acres (max) 50 acres (max) 65 acres (max)
35 acres (min)
No limit
#3..
- 146 -
Modesto Composting Facility Permitting Gap Analysis
August 2023
2 California Environmental Quality Act
The Facility has gone through the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process twice.

The first time was in 1995 to establish the biosolids composting operation through a Negative Declaration (ND). Then in 1997, an addendum to the ND (Addendum) increased the facility acreage, and clarified traffic, compost feedstock, and tonnage.

The 1995 Initial Study and Findings includes the option for “other type of co-composting facility” and makes references to other types of composting processes than solely windrow composting.

This implies that the 1995 ND allows for other types of composting technologies, such as an ASP composting system. The 1995 ND identifies feedstocks as including biosolids, yard trimmings, leaves, wood chips, rice hulls, and other dry materials, but makes no reference to food wastes. No tonnage amounts are discussed except the estimated 20 to 40 truck trips per day.

The 1997 Addendum established the following:
- Confirmed traffic counts of up to 30-40 vehicles are consistent with the ND; - Increased acreage from 15 to 30 acres;
- Permitted daily peak capacity of 500 TPD or 130,000 TPY; and - Clarified feedstocks could include manures, food processing wastes, or green wastes from other communities.

The total acreage for the parcel is 51.18 acres and is part of a 2,900-acre site owned by the City. Since the site was already permitted for wastewater treatment and land application of effluent and biosolids, with no nearby sensitive receptors, it was determined increasing the acreage from 15 to 30 acres would not change the finding of no significant impact. The preferred design selected by the City would need to increase this acreage to at least 46 acres to encompass the entire design. Since the addendum allowed the facility to double its acreage with no findings of significant impact, it is assumed that this may be the same pathway for increasing the acreage from 30 to 46 acres. However, typically when a facility proposes to expand the size of its operation, additional environmental review will be required. For a project of this size, the next CEQA process would most likely be in the form of an Initial Study (IS) followed by a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). It should be noted that the original location of the facility on the site as approved in this Addendum is a different location than where the facility currently sits. Although this further implies that the facility will be able to utilize additional acreage from the site through another addendum of its 1995 ND, because the ND is outdated (over 10 years old) and the location of the facility has moved, this most likely will trigger the need for an IS/MND. It should also be noted that, depending upon the impacts discovered in the IS, and/or public opposition to the project, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) could also be required.

Specifically with regards to feedstocks, there is no mention of “food processing wastes” except in the December 19, 1996, Council Meeting Agenda (Agenda) that clarifies this is the intent of the addendum. The Agenda goes on to reference the permitting process from the California Integrated Waste Management Board (now referred to as CalRecycle) and the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, which implies at the time of this addendum there were other, detailed documents associated with the application that may include this information. #3..
- 147 -
Modesto Composting Facility Permitting Gap Analysis
August 2023
3 Within the Addendum, the same reference to “food processing wastes” clearly states that only “plant waste from food processing wastes” would be accepted at the facility. Although the facility is currently accepting food wastes from a variety of sources, per the 1995 ND and 1997 Addendum this is not clearly outlined except in the Council Meeting Agenda. This does not sufficiently support that the potential impacts of receiving and composting all types of food waste at the site were adequately evaluated in the ND or Addendum. Therefore, this further supports the need for an IS/MND to move forward with this project.

Lastly, it is important to mention the construction of the ASP system and the pre-processing building are considered major infrastructure projects. These projects require comprehensive planning and design, such as building permits, grading, paving, and erecting structures. The original design of the composting facility did not include complex infrastructure such as these components, therefore also contributes to the requirement of an IS/MND.

ASSUMPTIONS
• The 1995 ND Initial Study and Findings provided is the complete and total package of the 1995 ND.
• The 1997 Addendum provided is the complete and total package of the 1997 Addendum.
• There are no other CEQA documents from City Planning or another regulatory agency.

KEY DETERMINATIONS
• The Facility is permitted to process 500 TPD, or 130,000 TPY of biosolids, green materials, manures, and food processing wastes on 30 acres via windrow compost or other types of composting technologies.
• The proposed project would require a MND to increase acreage from 30 to minimum of 46 acres, and clarify feedstock types, specifically the variety of food waste sources.

CalRecycle / Report of Compost Site Information
The acreage described on page one of the RCSI includes a total of 65 acres that could be used by the site. This is not consistent with the 30 acres approved in the ND Addendum, nor the 50 acres approved as part of the Compostable Materials Handling Facility Permit (CMHFP). This may be because some of the activities described for these areas do not fall under the solid waste authority at this time, such as the buffer zones and area for future expansion.

The RCSI focuses primarily on biosolids and green waste sources, but does include a variety of other materials such as manure, food waste, compostable paper, and food-soiled paper.

The only composting technology described in the RCSI is windrow composting for both composting and co-composting operations. Pile dimensions are listed as approximately 280 feet in length, 15 feet in width, and six to seven feet in height. The total composting and cocomposting process is described to require approximately six to nine months to complete, and the site has storage for approximately 5,000 tons of material plus an additional 10-acre area for storage.
#3..
- 148 -
Modesto Composting Facility Permitting Gap Analysis
August 2023
4 The CMHFP lists on-site capacity at any given time as 43,332 cubic yards. This may be sufficient for only the ASP active and windrow curing areas, but due to the six months of on-site storage capacity this value would need to be revised to accommodate the future throughput tonnages anticipated. Since a key piece of facility information would require an update, this would result in a permit revision.

ASSUMPTIONS
• The CMHFP did state there was a more recent version (June 10, 2021) of the RCSI than what was provided to HDR for review (July 30, 2020). This assumes there were no significant changes between the two versions.

KEY DETERMINATIONS
• The proposed project would require preparation and submittal of a CMHFP revision to increase the on-site capacity of the facility (in addition to adding the ASP composting system).
• Obtaining a permit revision would require compliance with CEQA, therefore the permit revision could not be issued until the CEQA review is complete.

Regional Water Quality Control Board / Waste Discharge
Requirements
The 2017 Notice of Applicability (NOA) for the General WDR contains only a few paragraphs detailing the composting operations, and instead is largely focused on describing the site’s hydrogeological conditions. From this description, the maximum daily (500 TPD) and annual tonnage (130,000 TPY) amounts are consistent with both the CEQA and RCSI. The NOA describes the compost facility has a total of 65 acres with 35 acres of operational surface. To comply with the General WDR, the operational surfaces must meet certain hydraulic conductivity and drainage specifications. Since the facility’s operational surfaces did not meet all General WDR requirements, the facility proposed the installation of groundwater monitoring wells to be completed early 2018. Per the February 2018 Revised Monitoring Well Location Map, it is assumed the monitoring wells were installed in compliance with the General WDR.

Feedstocks listed in the NOA include green waste, residential food waste, food processing industry wastes, manure, and compostable materials. The windrows are described as approximately 280 feet in length, 15 feet wide, and six feet in height which is consistent with the RCSI. The composting process described is traditional windrow composting (i.e., turned a minimum of five times, curing to last for up to two months). The NOA outlines finished compost storage for up to a period of nine months.

ASSUMPTIONS
• A copy of the Technical Report associated with the General WDR for Composting Operations was not provided and is assumed to not contain any information contradicting the information provided in the 2017 NOA. • It is assumed the monitoring wells were installed in compliance with the General WDR requirements and Regional Water Quality Control Board guidance. #3..
- 149 -
Modesto Composting Facility Permitting Gap Analysis
August 2023
5 • Although HDR is aware of on-going compliance issues with the General WDR, these were not included as part of this permitting assessment.

KEY DETERMINATIONS
• Update General WDR Technical Report to include ASP composting system, and operational acreage.
• Existing groundwater monitoring wells do not include the buffer zone, therefore an additional monitoring well may need to be installed if the operational area does not comply with the General WDR working surface requirements. • The existing drainage system for the site is designed for the 100-year 24-hour storm event; the buffer zone appears to not be included in these calculations, therefore would need adequate drainage control for the 100-year 24-hour storm event.

Air District Permits
The facility has two separate Air District Permits, IDs: Facility #N-3993 City of Modesto, Compost FAC, 7001 Jennings Road, Modesto CA 95358; and #N-7827 City of Modesto Composting Facility, PO Box 642, Modesto, CA 95353. The following are the activities that make up each facility ID.

Table 2. Current Air Permits
N-3993 N-7827
N-3993-0-3 Wood Waste
Grinding
N-7827-1-0 Sewage Sludge and Biomass
Composting Operation
N-3993-5-0 Organic Waste
Screening
N-7827-2-1 Green and Food Material
Receiving, Storage, and Mixing
N-7827-3-1 Open Windrow Green and
Food Composting
N-7827-4-0 Finished Compost Loadout
The mobile equipment permits have no tonnage limits or operational hours, therefore appear to be sufficient for the proposed project.

The sewage sludge and biomass composting operation daily (500 TPD) and annual (130,000 TPY) maximum tonnages are consistent with the other permits; in addition, this permit establishes a maximum quantity on-site at any given time of 21,666 TPD for biosolids composting. The green and wood waste receiving, storage, and mixing permit includes the same daily and annual tonnages. The open windrow permit only includes the annual tonnage, but clearly outlines windrow composting as the composting system due to the requirement of three turns during the active phase (ASP systems do not include pile turning).

The finished compost product load out does not limit the on-site tonnage for storage or length of time for storage.

SJVAPCD has a limit of 20,000 pounds of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) emissions per year prior to the requirement of obtaining emissions offsets. The ASP system would need to comply with the district’s Best Available Control Technology (BACT) requirements and achieve #3..
- 150 -
Modesto Composting Facility Permitting Gap Analysis
August 2023
6 at least an 80% reduction from their emissions factor (3.58 pounds of VOC per ton of feedstock throughput). Depending on the level of control, the 100,000 TPY ASP system may or may not be subject to emission offsets. In the event the system does exceed 20,000 pounds of VOCs per year, then the facility would not only trigger offsets but also move the entire facility into Title V status, which is subject to oversight by the Environmental Protection Agency. Emission offsets for facilities who exceed 20,000 pounds of VOCs per year can be $50,000 or more per ton of VOC surplus offsets (compared to $5,000 per ton of VOC normal offsets). Emissions offsets are a one-time payment to offset the impacts of the facility, and are paid prior to issuance of the Authority to Construct (ATC) permit. After the ATC is issued and the facility is built, it will be required to conduct emissions source testing on the BACT permit unit to demonstrate compliance with the emissions factor listed in their ATC (i.e., 3.58 pounds of VOC per ton of feedstock minus the selected control efficiency). This is a high-level summary of emission offsets and their potential implications, such as becoming Title V. The Title V status would apply to the entire facility, not just the ASP composting permit unit.

ASSUMPTIONS
• The facility has two facility ID numbers due to the mobile equipment facility location being “various locations” within the SJVAPCD.

KEY DETERMINATIONS
• The proposed project would need a new permit unit to include the ASP system. This may trigger a revision to the open windrow permit to reduce the daily and/or annual maximum tonnages.
• The installation of the ASP system would most likely require emission offsets, and bring the facility into Title V status.

Summary
CEQA: Based on the provided CEQA documents and our understanding of the existing operations, the facility would be able to utilize an ASP composting system. However, the prior ND with the Addendum limits the facility footprint to 30 acres, which does not appear to include the eastern buffer zone. There is also ambiguity about the types of feedstocks allowed to be accepted at the facility. Therefore, an IS and subsequent MND is most likely required to expand the facility footprint, clarify feedstocks, and evaluate impacts from the construction of the ASP concrete pad and pre-processing building.

CalRecycle: The existing CMHFP has excess tonnage and acreage available. However, since the on-site capacity of the facility needs to be increased, this would require a permit revision.

Regional Water Quality Water Board: If the facility were to utilize the buffer zone, then additional drainage controls and improvements to the working surfaces would need to be included as part of the design. Alternatively, if the facility were to install the ASP system within the current footprint already designed for the 100-year 24-hour storm event and with the appropriate monitoring wells, then potentially no additional design considerations would be required. In either scenario, the General WDR Technical Report would need to be updated. #3..
- 151 -
Modesto Composting Facility Permitting Gap Analysis
August 2023
7 SJVAPCD: The ASP composting system would require a new permit unit from SJVAPCD’s perspective and would need to go through the standard permitting process. This permit may also require a revision of the windrow composting permit to reduce the daily and/or annual tonnage. The ASP air permit most likely would trigger offsets, and bring the facility into Title V status.

The following is an approximate schedule of permit revisions and/or acquisitions based on our understanding of the project and experience with these permits:

SCHEDULE
Most Probable Scenario
• CEQA IS/MND: 180 days – 2 years
• CMHFP RFI Revision : 180– 270 days
• General WDR Update:
(1) 180 – 270 days
• Air Permit:
(2) 365 days – 2 years
(1) This does not include the time required for the design and construction of meeting the working surface and/or drainage design requirements of the General WDR that would be required to be submitted in the General WDR Technical Report update. (2) This is the time required to be issued an ATC. After the ATC is issued, the facility may be constructed and operated, but must prove compliance with its potential to emit through emissions source testing prior to being issued a Permit to Operate (PTO). #3..
- 152 -

APPENDIX D

VENDOR QUOTES

1. Engineered Compost Systems ASP Quote

2. Sustainable Generation ASP Quote

3. Green Mountain Technologies ASP Quote

4. Olympic Equipment Depackaging Equipment Quote

5. Ecoverse Depackaging Equipment Quote

6. Ecoverse Electric Grinder Quote
#3..
- 153 -

BUDGETARY QUOTATION
Client: HDR
Facility: Modesto, CA
By: Baraka Poulin
Date: 8/3/2023
Basis:

Option 1 Option 2:

Sizing (US units) Primary Primary Secondary
Throughput TPY 100,000 100,000 68,828
Throughput (365 d/yr) TPD 274 274 189
Density lb/CY 800 800 800
Aeration Type Positive Positive None
Aeration Floor Type B/G Sparger B/G Sparger None
Pile Arrangement Mass Bed Mass Bed Windrow
Retention Time days 32 14 42
Independent Zones # 20 9 21
Fan Groups # 2 1 2
Zone Width ft 33 33 16
Zone Length ft 120 120 300
Pile Depth ft 8.5 8.5 7.5
Cover Depth ft 1.0 1.0 0.0
Time to Fill Zone days 1.7 1.7 2.0
Total Volume Aerated CY 24,000 10,800 19,950
Mechanical
Aeration Rate - Peak CFM/CY 4.5 4.5 0.0
Fan Power - Installed (total) HP 100 75 0
Fan Energy (Annual) kWh/yr 407,000 283,000 0
Pile Surface Irrigation Automated Automated Automated
Process Area
Paved Area (Process, Mechanical + Apron) ft^2 102,000 45,900 152,500 Cost Estimate
Total ECS Scope of Work ($USD) $ 2,550,000 $ 1,750,000
$/ TPY Capacity (ECS Scope of Supply) $ 26 $ 18
*throughput in US tons
Aerated static pile compost system featuring high air flow aeration and automated controls.

Option 1: 32 days active retention per request.

Option: 2 ECS recommended, two weeks active ( Solvita >5) + six weeks windrow curing (Solvita >7). www.compostsystems.com
#3..
- 154 -
Client: HDR
Date: 8/3/2023
Basis:

Aeration System (Above Grade) Description By
Fans Per ECS Spec ECS
Aeration Ducting Per ECS Spec ECS
Duct Hangers and Supports Per ECS Spec ECS
Zone Damper Assemblies Dampers per ECS Spec, Electric Actuators ECS Irrigation - Control+Distribution Control Valves, Integration to CompTroller, Distribution Hoses, Sprinklers ECS
Irrigation - Water Supply Pipe & Fittings to each zone. OTHERS Electrical Wiring and Conduit OTHERS
Duct & Fan Condensate Drains Pipe & Fittings OTHERS
Aeration Floor System Description By
HDPE Components Fabricated HDPE Pipe & Fittings ECS
Drainage Line: Zones to Sump Pipe & Fittings, Level Maintained Sump OTHERS Drainage Line: Sump to Re-use System Pipe & Fittings OTHERS Control System Description By
CompTroller Hardware & Software Web-based, distributed, ruggedized ECS Fan Drives Variable frequency drives, filters ECS
Process Sensors Temperature, pressure ECS
Temp Probe Holders Mild Steel ECS
Electrical Wiring and Conduit OTHERS
Electrical Service Fan Panel, MCC, Breakers, DCs, Fuse, Filters OTHERS Control Shed Approximately 8x10ft shed OTHERS
Other Description By
System Engineering Technical Submittal, CASP system installation drawings, construction support ECS
Startup
ECS on site commissioning, operator training and
unlimited 1 year remote support. M&E
construction must be complete before ECS visits
the site.

ECS
Freight Includes freight allowance FOB site ECS
Warranty 1yr equipment warranty ECS
Professional Services Permitting, Civil/Structural Design, Construction Management OTHERS
Concrete work Design, Reinforcement, Supply, Installation OTHERS Installation All ECS supplied equipment OTHERS
Surface Water Management Leachate + Stormwater Storage and Distribution, Design and Supply OTHERS
OTHERS=Design and Supply by other team members
Note: ECS deliverables exclude: a lead role in obtaining permits, any professional engineering services required for permits or constructing the facility, construction management, any phase of construction or equipment installation, any equipment not specifically called out above, any local taxes or fees.

ECS SCOPE OF WORK
Aerated static pile compost system featuring high air flow aeration and automated controls.

Option 1: 32 days active retention per request.
www.compostsystems.com
#3..
- 155 -
© 2022 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker™ System, SG Heap™ System, SG Mobile™ System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
Technical Memo
Attention: Cindy Liles Date: August 7, 2023
From: Brian Fuchs, Brett Hoyt, Scott Woods
Purpose: HDR City of Modesto, CA Version 2.0
Project Description: W.L Gore & Associates manufacturer of GORE® Cover with the support of Sustainable Generation (SG) will provide a basic plan and budgetary cost information for the compost portion of the project.

Source Separated Organics (SSO): consisting of residential and commercial food organics material. Household, grocery (supermarket), restaurant and commercial facilities.

Green Waste Organics (GW): consisting of leaf and yard debris, landscaping, clean wood waste (no paint, adhesives or particle / chemical treated wood), ground tree stumps, branches.

#3..
- 156 -
© 2023 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker® System, SG Heap® System, SG Mobile® System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
Scenario #1: 65k Tons with 1 Phase Active Composting 28 Days (revised) Mass Balance Calculations and Assumptions
Assumptions Project Information
Feed Stocks (Organics) SSO, Bulking Materials and Screened Over’s Total Throughput Volume / Year US-ton Cubic Yards @ 925 lbs/ y 3 SSO Requested Design Capacity 65,000 140,540*
Total Design Capacity Proposed 63,267 136,793*
Total Compost Pad Footprint ~1.5 acre including driving space Treatment Time 1 Phase Process – 28 Days
*System sizing based on mixed adjusted cubic volume entering the Phase 1 after sorting, grinding/shredding, mixing and moisture adjustment SG Bunker® System Sizing & Design Capacity
Process Time 4 weeks Active Curing Finishing
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
5 8 8 0 0
Heap Length 164 ft
Heap Width inside wall 25.67 ft

11.5 ft
925 lbs/y3 0.46 US ton/y3
Volume per bunker 1315 y3
Volume on pad (if pad full) 10523 y3
Total Throughput Volume
136793 y3
2631 y3
526 y3
608 US ton
4867 US ton
Actual mix*
63267 US ton
1217 US ton
243 US ton
175 ft
281 ft
49088 sq ft 1.13 acre
11220 sq ft
60308 sq ft 1.38 acre
*Actual Mix is mixed input material entering Phase 1; inclusive of screened overs and added process water to adjust moisture Driving Space
Total Compost Pad
Compost Pad Length
Compost Pad Width
Compost Pad
per day
Foot Print/ Space Required
Total Throughput Tons
per year
per week
Tons per bunker
Tons per pad (if pad full)
per week
per day
Heap Height
Actual Mix*
per year
# of Bunkers
Days per Week Operation
#3..
- 157 -
© 2023 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker® System, SG Heap® System, SG Mobile® System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
Scenario #1: 65k Tons with 1 Phase Active Composting 28 Days The SG Bunker® System solution Budgetary Pricing:

GORE® Cover System Configuration Pricing ($USD)
SG Bunker® System 8 SG Bunker with 8 GORE® Cover
164 ft Length x 27 ft Width x 11.5 ft Height
SG Bunker® System Included
SG SmartStart™ Installation Guide, Pre-Design Support / Construction Support/ Installation
Supervision
Service Package Commissioning, Start Up Services &
Operating Training Module, Ongoing
Technical Support
Included
CWM Powered Cover Winding Machine Included
Total $2,000,000.00 USD
➢ Prices include Shipping delivered to site.
➢ All other Taxes not included payable by Buyer
➢ Tariffs not included, if any payable by Buyer
➢ State and Local Sales Tax payable by Buyer
➢ Subject to Terms and Conditions in the formal Quotation For budgetary purposes only, pricing and configuration are subject to change. Upon agreed equipment configuration and determined scope of work for services, a formal quote will be developed. All information in this budgetary quotation shall be kept confidential and shall not be shared with third parties without the express written approval of Sustainable Generation.

Total Estimated Cost
All costs are in $USD
TOTAL CAPEX: SG Bunker®System with Winder and SG Smartstart™ Services $2,000,000 TOTAL Annual Cost = OPEX $272,587 Years 1-4
TOTAL Annual Cost = OPEX + Annual CAPEX Reserve $369,730 Starting Year 5 Estimated Fully Constructed Cost for SG BUNKER® System only (includes SG CAPEX costs above) $4.0 - $5.0 Million #3..
- 158 -
© 2023 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker® System, SG Heap® System, SG Mobile® System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
Scenario #2: 100k Tons with 1 Phase Active Composting 28 Days Mass Balance Calculations and Assumptions
Assumptions Project Information
Feed Stocks (Organics) SSO, Bulking Materials and Screened Over’s Total Throughput Volume / Year US-ton Cubic Yards @ 925 lbs/ y3 SSO Requested Design Capacity 100,000 216,216*
Total Design Capacity Proposed 94,900 205,189*
Total Compost Pad Footprint ~2.0 acre including driving space Treatment Time 1 Phase Process – 28 Days
*System sizing based on mixed adjusted cubic volume entering the Phase 1 after sorting, grinding/shredding, mixing and moisture adjustment SG Bunker® System Sizing & Design Capacity
Process Time 4 weeks Active Curing Finishing
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
5 12 12 0 0
Heap Length 164 ft
Heap Width inside wall 25.67 ft

11.5 ft
925 lbs/y3 0.46 US ton/y3
Volume per bunker 1315 y3
Volume on pad (if pad full) 15784 y3
Total Throughput Volume
205189 y3
3946 y3
789 y3
608 US ton
7300 US ton
Actual mix*
94900 US ton
1825 US ton
365 US ton
175 ft
417 ft
73004 sq ft 1.68 acre
16687 sq ft
89691 sq ft 2.06 acre
*Actual Mix is mixed input material entering Phase 1; inclusive of screened overs and added process water to adjust moisture Driving Space
Total Compost Pad
Compost Pad Length
Compost Pad Width
Compost Pad
per day
Foot Print/ Space Required
Total Throughput Tons
per year
per week
Tons per bunker
Tons per pad (if pad full)
per week
per day
Heap Height
Actual Mix*
per year
# of Bunkers
Days per Week Operation
#3..
- 159 -
© 2023 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker® System, SG Heap® System, SG Mobile® System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
Scenario #2: 100k Tons with 1 Phase Active Composting 28 Days The SG Bunker® System solution Budgetary Pricing:

GORE® Cover System Configuration Pricing ($USD)
SG Bunker® System 12 SG Bunker with 12 GORE® Cover
164 ft Length x 27 ft Width x 11.5 ft Height
SG Bunker® System Included
SG SmartStart™ Installation Guide, Pre-Design Support / Construction Support/ Installation
Supervision
Service Package Commissioning, Start Up Services &
Operating Training Module, Ongoing
Technical Support
Included
CWM Powered Cover Winding Machine Included
Total $3,000,000.00 USD
➢ Prices include Shipping delivered to site.
➢ All other Taxes not included payable by Buyer
➢ Tariffs not included, if any payable by Buyer
➢ State and Local Sales Tax payable by Buyer
➢ Subject to Terms and Conditions in the formal Quotation For budgetary purposes only, pricing and configuration are subject to change. Upon agreed equipment configuration and determined scope of work for services, a formal quote will be developed. All information in this budgetary quotation shall be kept confidential and shall not be shared with third parties without the express written approval of Sustainable Generation.

Total Estimated Cost
All costs are in $USD
TOTAL CAPEX: SG Bunker®System with Winder and SG Smartstart™ Services $3,000,000 TOTAL Annual Cost = OPEX $385,080 Years 1-4
TOTAL Annual Cost = OPEX + Annual CAPEX Reserve $530,794 Starting Year 5 Estimated Fully Constructed Cost for SG BUNKER® System only (includes SG CAPEX costs above) $6.0 - $8.0 Million #3..
- 160 -
© 2023 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker® System, SG Heap® System, SG Mobile® System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
Scenario #3: 100k Tons with 2 Phase Active & Curing Composting 42 Days Mass Balance Calculations and Assumptions
Assumptions Project Information
Feed Stocks (Organics) SSO, Bulking Materials and Screened Over’s Total Throughput Volume / Year US-ton Cubic Yards @ 925 lbs/ y3 SSO Requested Design Capacity 100,000 216,216*
Total Design Capacity Proposed 94.900 205,189*
Total Compost Pad Footprint ~1.5 acre including driving space Treatment Time 1 Phase Process – 28 Days (or 21 Days)
Treatment Time 2 Phase Process – 14 Days (or 21 Days)
*System sizing based on mixed adjusted cubic volume entering the Phase 1 after sorting, grinding/shredding, mixing and moisture adjustment SG Bunker® System Sizing & Design Capacity
Process Time 6 weeks Active Curing Finishing
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
5 18 9 9 0
Heap Length 164 ft
Heap Width inside wall 25.67 ft

11.5 ft
925 lbs/y3 0.46 US ton/y3
Volume per bunker 1315 y3
Volume on pad (if pad full) 23676 y3
Total Throughput Volume
205189 y3
3946 y3
789 y3
608 US ton
10950 US ton
Actual mix*
94900 US ton
1825 US ton
365 US ton
175 ft
622 ft
108879 sq ft 2.50 acre
24887 sq ft
133766 sq ft 3.07 acre
*Actual Mix is mixed input material entering Phase 1; inclusive of screened overs and added process water to adjust moisture Driving Space
Total Compost Pad
Compost Pad Length
Compost Pad Width
Compost Pad
per day
Foot Print/ Space Required
Total Throughput Tons
per year
per week
Tons per bunker
Tons per pad (if pad full)
per week
per day
Heap Height
Actual Mix*
per year
# of Bunkers
Days per Week Operation
#3..
- 161 -
© 2023 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker® System, SG Heap® System, SG Mobile® System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
Scenario #3: 100k Tons with 2 Phase Active & Curing Composting 42 Days The SG Bunker® System solution Budgetary Pricing:

GORE® Cover System Configuration Pricing ($USD)
SG Bunker® System 18 SG Bunker with 18 GORE® Cover
164 ft Length x 27 ft Width x 11.5 ft Height
SG Bunker® System Included
SG SmartStart™ Installation Guide, Pre-Design Support / Construction Support/ Installation
Supervision
Service Package Commissioning, Start Up Services &
Operating Training Module, Ongoing
Technical Support
Included
CWM Powered Cover Winding Machine Included
Total $4,300,000.00 USD
➢ Prices include Shipping delivered to site.
➢ All other Taxes not included payable by Buyer
➢ Tariffs not included, if any payable by Buyer
➢ State and Local Sales Tax payable by Buyer
➢ Subject to Terms and Conditions in the formal Quotation For budgetary purposes only, pricing and configuration are subject to change. Upon agreed equipment configuration and determined scope of work for services, a formal quote will be developed. All information in this budgetary quotation shall be kept confidential and shall not be shared with third parties without the express written approval of Sustainable Generation.

Total Estimated Cost
All costs are in $USD
TOTAL CAPEX: SG Bunker®System with Winder and SG Smartstart™ Services $4,300,000 TOTAL Annual Cost = OPEX $540,960 Years 1-4
TOTAL Annual Cost = OPEX + Annual CAPEX Reserve $759,531 Starting Year 5 Estimated Fully Constructed Cost for SG BUNKER® System only (includes SG CAPEX costs above) $9.0 - $11.0 Million #3..
- 162 -
© 2023 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker® System, SG Heap® System, SG Mobile® System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
The SG Bunker® System using GORE® COVER is an innovative solution that include:

Equipment and Service Supply Package (details provided in formal quotation) SG Bunker® System Equipment Supply Package
• GORE® Cover
• SG Compost Control system inclusive of software, programing and hardware o Server, PC, Laptop or Mobile Device
o Modes of Operation
▪ Interval Mode
▪ O2 Mode
▪ Manual Mode
▪ Safety Mode
• Temperature Probes
• Oxygen Probes
• Blower
• Aeration System consisting of:
o Polymer Concrete Trench
• Water Trap
• Leachate Collection Pipe
• Perimeter Weight Sealing System or Side Wall Fastening System • Winding Machine type for deployment and retracting the GORE ® Cover. #3..
- 163 -
© 2023 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker® System, SG Heap® System, SG Mobile® System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
SG Scope of Supply of Services
The SG Service (SG SmartStart™ Service Package) includes a high level of interaction between the owners, engineering consultants and the construction company. It is very important that the installation of the GORE® Cover technology and Operating Manual be followed to insure a successful installation and sustainable operation.

Installation Guide: According to Final Agreement
• Drawings, Component Specification, Detail and Installation Guidelines Operations Manual: According to Final Agreement
• SG Bunker® System using GORE® Cover technology
• Cover Winder Machine
Permitting Support Services: According to Final Agreement • Support permitting process with technical information System Design Guidance / Support: As part of the Installation Guide Package • Preliminary Layout and Drawings as defined in the bid document • Layout Drawings to handed over to the Buyer’s Engineer for design and construction Construction Guidance / Support: According to Final Agreement • Pre-Construction Meeting
• Installation Services/ Guidance
o Aeration Trench Installation Support
o Electronics Installation Support
• Portable Winding Machine Installation/Testing/Commissioning • Compost Process Commissioning, Start Up and First Heap Construction • Performance Test
Training for Site Management and Operators: According to Final Agreement • Classroom and On-site training
o Training 1 - at reference site or on-site (up to 3 days) ▪ Site Reference Visits (optional)
o Training 2 – during system check and start-up (up to 3 days) o Training 3 – 12 weeks after commissioning (up to 3 days)

SG Bunker® System Mobile Power Winding Machine
#3..
- 164 -
© 2023 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker® System, SG Heap® System, SG Mobile® System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
Typical Facility and Process Flow including all pertinent steps (see diagram) The overall design includes identifying the optimum layout for the facility and the best usage of available area. It is recommended that the layout of the compost pad be optimized taking into consideration:
• Practicality for the front-end loader to move between the heaps and to and from the pre-treatment to the compost pad and the screening/ storage area.
• Leachate and storm water management.
• Likelihood of expanding the capacity of the facility.

Mix Recipe - Pre-treatment
Feedstock must be adequately prepared for composting in the GORE® Cover system. To be properly prepared, the feedstock must be mixed in the right ratio to obtain:
• A beginning carbon to nitrogen ratio (C: N) of approximately 25-35:1. • A beginning moisture content of approximately 55-65%
• Adequate structure material to optimize the mixed material porosity, sized to approximately 80mm or 3 inch minus shredded green/leaf/yard waste or wood chips. #3..
- 165 -
© 2023 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker® System, SG Heap® System, SG Mobile® System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
Typical Compost Facility Layout and Process Flow Diagram Step 1: Receiving Area / Tipping Building: (supplied by other) The feedstock material will be received inside the Tipping Building where it will be inspected for quality control. Inside the Tip Building the feedstock materials will be mixed to create mix recipe.

Step 2: Mixing / Grinding Equipment: (supplied by other) Step 3: Phase 1: Active / High-Rate Composting – 21 to 28 Days* The composting process begins with a front-end loader moving the material from the mixing area to a heap in the Phase I section to begin the active composting period. Once a heap is built, it is covered, the temperature and oxygen probes are installed and the software is turned on, which then controls the rate of aeration.

Step 4: Phase 2: Maturation / Curing – 14 to 21 Days*
After Phase I, the GORE® Cover is removed from the heap and the compost is moved by front- end loader to a heap in the Phase II area. Once a heap is built, it is covered, the temperature and oxygen probes are installed and the software is turned on, which then controls the rate of aeration.

Step 5: Phase 3: Finishing/ Curing – 14 Days** (optional) NOT PART OF THIS PROPOSAL After Phase II, the compost is moved by front- end loader to a heap in the Phase III area. Once a heap is built, no cover, only the temperature probe is installed and the software is turned on, which then controls the rate of aeration.
#3..
- 166 -
© 2023 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker® System, SG Heap® System, SG Mobile® System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
Step 6: Screening Equipment (supplied by other)
Step 7: Storage: (supplied by other)
Finished compost material can then be screened upon leaving Phase III of the process. Typically, the screened material can be sold directly or placed into storage for additional curing/aging. * Phase 1 Active, Phase 2 Maturation / Curing treatment times are flexible depending on the quality of product being produced and the market that the finished compost is being applied. ** Phase 3 Finishing / Curing treatment is optional and generally used for temperature and moisture management prior to screening and storage. Phases can also be covered.

SG Bunker® System using GORE® Cover
#3..
- 167 -
© 2023 W. L. Gore & Associates GmbH. GORE®
, GORE® Cover and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates.

SG Bunker® System, SG Heap® System, SG Mobile® System, SG SmartStart™ Services are designs and trademark of Sustainable Generation LLC.

Confidential and Proprietary Information
#3..
- 168 -
Prepared For
Cindy Liles
Project Manager - HDR
5/22/2023
This quote valid for 30 days
Lead Time: 4 Months from Payment Receipt
Prepared By
Orion Black-Brown
Director of Operations
Green Mountain Technologies
5350 McDonald Avenue NE
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110

CITY OF MODESTO

ASP EQUIPMENT

PROPOSAL
#3..
- 169 -
2 City of Modesto
ASP Equipment Proposal
5/22/2023

COST ESTIMATE

OPTIONS
Quantity Description Cost
Blowers $600,000
4 Blower Modules w Shipping Container Housings
Concrete Aeration Beams $700,000
14,000 Feet of precast concrete aeration beam
Control System $250,000
1 Main Control Panel
3 Field Control Panels
Probes $50,000
56 Dual-sensor wired compost temperature probes (Two per primary bunker) 2 Free spare single-sensor wired compost temperature probes (one per primary bunker) Commissioning, Training, Support, Design and Warranty $100,000 14 Man days of commissioning and training
1 Construction support and Aeration system assembly drawings 1 Travel expenses
1 Year equipment warranty
1 Year unlimited remote customer support
* Prices are an estimate and may very slightly * $1,700,000 Quantity Description Cost
14,000 Feet - Switch to HDPE Aeration piping -$200,000
1 Curing aeration expansion +$750,000
#3..
- 170 -
3 City of Modesto
ASP Equipment Proposal
5/22/2023

CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT
Green Piles: Primary Aeration (14 day retention)
Brown Piles: Secondary Aeration (14 day retention)
#3..
- 171 -
4 City of Modesto
ASP Equipment Proposal
5/22/2023

CONTRACT ENGAGEMENT
The terms and conditions of GMT’s equipment are provided at the end of the proposal under the heading Terms and Conditions. In the event of a conflict between the terms of this proposal and those outlined under Terms and Conditions, the terms of this proposal shall control. This proposal will remain valid for 30 days.

If the terms of this proposal are acceptable, please sign below and return to GMT. A fully executed copy will be returned to you for your files. If you choose to fax or email a copy of this authorization page, please also return the signed original copy via U.S. Mail.

GMT will provide these services using its reasonable best efforts consistent with the level and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the commercial composting-related engineering and consulting profession currently practicing under similar conditions.

ACCEPTANCE:

This Agreement is accepted by Owner this ____ day of ___________ 2023. _____________________________________
Signature
By: _________________________________
Title: ________________________________
#3..
- 172 -
5 City of Modesto
ASP Equipment Proposal
5/22/2023

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. Payment Terms, Terms of payment are 50% down, 40% upon completion of equipment prior to shipment and 10% net 30 upon commissioning unless otherwise noted in writing. Any past due payments will be subject to a service charge and shall bear interest at the highest rate allowed by law in the State of Washington. Customer agrees to pay all costs including reasonable collection costs, attorney’s fees and expenses related to the enforcement of payment obligations hereunder.

2. Warranties. (a) For the period of one year after delivery of the Product and specified equipment, Seller warrants that the product will be free from defects in workmanship and materials. This warranty is non-transferrable and applicable to the original Buyer only. (b) Seller’s responsibility, and Buyer’s remedy under this warranty, is limited to the repair or replacement, at Seller’s option, of the component(s) that are determined by Seller to be defective. Buyer shall give Seller written notice of the alleged defect within the one-year warranty period. This warranty includes repair or replacement of parts but does not include labor associated with diagnosing, repairing, removing or installing components. (c) Defective components shall be held for Seller’s inspection and/or returned to Seller at Seller’s request. (d) If Seller finds that Product, or any portion of it, is defective due to Seller’s workmanship and materials, Seller shall be responsible for providing Buyer with replacement components, including paying shipping charges associated with the defective component. If Seller finds that Product, or any portion of it, is not defective, Buyer shall be responsible for all costs associated with investigating and repairing or replacing the component, including all shipping charges. (e) This warranty shall in no event apply and shall be null and void and unenforceable if the alleged defect in the Product is the result of 1) abuse or misuse of the Product; or 2) improper operation which is not in accordance with any instructions in any appropriate operations and/or maintenance manual of Seller provided to Buyer; or 3) customary wear and tear of designated wear components, such as: auger flighting, auger shoes, auger bearings and plastic slide blocks. With respect to purchased components such as: electric motors, gearboxes, blowers and proximity switches, GMT makes no warranty whatsoever and buyer shall rely solely upon the existing warranties, if any, for the respective manufacturers thereof. (f) THE WARRANTY SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION IS

EXPRESSLY MADE IN LIEU OF ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, AND SELLER HEREBY EXCLUDES ALL OTHER WRITTEN OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF FITNESS AND MERCHANTABILITY. THIS WARRANTY SHALL NOT BE EXTENDED, ALTERED, OR VARIED EXCEPT BY A WRITTEN INSTRUMENT SIGNED BY SELLER AND BUYER. The remedies provided herein are exclusive and Seller shall have no responsibility with respect to this order for any incidental, consequential or special damages of any kind.

3. Inspection and Acceptance. Products shall be finally inspected and accepted within five business days after their arrival at the Buyer’s facility. Except for warranty claims, all claims whatsoever must be asserted in writing by Buyer within said fiveday period or they are waived and the Product shall be deemed to conform with the terms of this Quotation and any agreed-upon specifications. There shall be no revocation of acceptance. Products may be rejected only for defects which constitute substantial noncompliance of the Products with any agreed-upon specifications, and Buyer’s remedy for lesser defects shall be those provided under the warranty provisions below.

4. Changes. After Buyer signs this Quotation or issues a purchase order, any changes to the Product or its specifications may be made solely upon Seller’s written consent and (a) at a charge which Seller shall determine is sufficient to cover its additional costs and (b) with a change in delivery schedule necessary to cover related delays.

5. Delays. Seller will not be liable for any delay in the performance of orders or contracts, or in the delivery or shipment of goods, or for any damages suffered by Buyer by reason of such delay, if such delay is, directly or indirectly, caused by, or in any manner arises from, fires; floods; accidents; civil unrest; acts of God; war; governmental interference or embargos; #3..
- 173 -
6 City of Modesto
ASP Equipment Proposal
5/22/2023

TERMS AND CONDITIONS
strikes; labor difficulties; shortages of labor, fuel, power, materials, or supplies; transportation delays; or any other cause or causes beyond its control.

6. Taxes. Prices on the specified Products are exclusive of all city, state, and federal excise taxes, including, without limitation, taxes on manufacture, sales, receipts, gross income, occupation, use, and similar taxes. Buyer shall pay all federal, state, and local sales, use, property, excise, or other taxes imposed on or with respect to the sale of Product hereunder, except taxes levied on Seller’s net income. Whenever required, any tax or taxes will be added to Seller’s invoice as a separate charge to be paid by the Buyer.

7. Limitation of Liability. IN NO EVENT SHALL SELLER BE LIABLE FOR ANY CONSEQUENTIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, OR SPECIAL DAMAGES OF ANY KIND WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS SALE. IN NO EVENT SHALL SELLER BE LIABLE

FOR ANY DAMAGES OF ANY KIND IN CONNECTION WITH THE SALE OR USE OF ANY PARTICULAR PRODUCTS SOLD HEREUNDER IN AN AMOUNT GREATER THAN THE PURCHASE PRICE OF THE PRODUCT.

8. Customer Indemnification. Customer shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless GMT and its employees and agents against all sums, costs, liabilities, losses, suits, actions, penalties, fines, interest and other expenses (including reasonable attorney’s fees) that GMT may incur that result from (a) Customer’s ownership, maintenance, transfer, transportation or disposal of the goods sold hereunder, (b) Customer’s use of the goods sold hereunder, (c) Customer’s failure to test the goods or assure itself that the goods are fit for Customer’s intended purpose, (d) any infringement or alleged infringement of the intellectual property rights of others arising from Customer’s specifications, and (e) Customer’s violation or alleged violation of any federal, state, county or local laws or regulations, including without limitation, the laws and regulations governing product safety, labeling, packaging and labor practices.

9. Governing Law. This Sale shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington.

10. Dispute Resolution. Any dispute arising out of, related to, or regarding this sale will be resolved by submission of the dispute to a sole arbitrator. The parties shall attempt to mutually agree on an impartial arbitrator. If the parties cannot agree on an arbitrator within five business days, either party may apply to King County Superior Court for the appointment of an arbitrator by a King County Superior Court Judge. The arbitration proceedings shall be conducted in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) then in effect, except that the arbitration shall not be administered by the AAA. Any judgment upon the arbitrator’s award shall be entered in the Superior Court for King County, and the award shall be final and binding and enforceable under the terms of the Washington Arbitration Act.

The Arbitrator will determine which party is the most prevailing and order the other party to pay the most prevailing party’s arbitration costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees. All costs and fees incurred on appeal shall be awarded to the most prevailing party on appeal. Arbitration costs awarded to the most prevailing party shall include the fees and administrative costs payable to any arbitrator, as well as expert witness fees. Each party shall advance one half of the arbitrator’s initial fee deposit, with the deposit to be awarded as part of the costs of the proceeding to the most prevailing party.

11. Materials Escalation Clause. If, during the performance of this contract, the price of steel significantly increases, through no fault of contractor, the price of steel shall be equitably adjusted by an amount reasonably necessary to cover any such significant price increases. As used herein, a significant price increase shall mean any increase in price exceeding 5% experienced by contractor from the date of the contract signing. Such price increases shall be documented through quotes, invoices, or receipts. Where the delivery of steel is delayed, through no fault of contractor, as a result of the shortage or unavailability of steel, contractor shall not be liable for any additional costs or damages associated with such delay(s). #3..
- 174 -
Company name City of Modesto
Company address 1010 10th Street
Company city/state Modesto, CA 95354
Contact name Rosene Salmo
Contact title Integrated Waste Program Manager
Contact phone (209) 577-5453
Contact email [email protected]
quote number 23-04107
date: 4/11/2023
valid until: Quote valid for 30 days
Sales Manager Steve Jimenez
Prepared for:

PROPOSAL
#3..
- 175 -
City of Modesto
Attn: Rosene Salmo
Thank you for considering Olympic Wire & Equipment for your Organics Waste separation and recycling needs. As the dealer for Scott Equipment’s line of De-Packagers, we are confident that you will be very satisfied with the quality and processing capability of this American Made equipment.

As requested, the following quotation isfor (1) Model Mega THOR Turbo Separator System & Cleansweep.

With nearly 400 Turbo Separatorsystems produced since 1996, we are confident in our design, performance, and durability of the full product line.

Please let me know if you would like any additional information in order to make your purchasing decision. Again, thank you for choosing Scott Equipment Company.

Respectfully,
Steve Jimenez
OlympicWire and Equipment, Inc.
(424) 443-8537
[email protected]
www.foodwasteseparator.com
#3..
- 176 -

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENTS
YOUR PROCESSING REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................. 4 PROPOSAL PRICING SUMMARY ............................................................................................ 5 PROPOSAL FREIGHT TERMS & METHOD.............................................................................. 5 DETAILED SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS ................................................................................... 6 ITEM 1: THOR TURBO SEPARATOR.......................................................................................... 6 ITEM 2: ORGANICS HOPPER, STAND, WORK PLATFORMS........................................................ 7 ITEM 3: TWIN SCREW INFEED CONVEYOR ............................................................................... 8 ITEM 4: 20’ WASTE DISCHARGE CONVEYOR – INCLINED, INLINE ............................................. 9 ITEM 5: 12’ ORGANICS DISCHARGE CONVEYOR - HORIZONTAL...............................................10 ITEM 6: 20’ ORGANICS DISCHARGE CONVEYOR - INCLINED....................................................11 ITEM 7: ENGINEERED CONTROL PANEL ..................................................................................12 ITEM 8: SPARE PARTS KIT......................................................................................................13 ITEM 9: TOOL KIT AND MANUALS ...........................................................................................13 ITEM 10: ONSITE COMMISIONING AND TRAINING...................................................................13 ITEM 11: PRODUCT FLEXIBILITY KIT.......................................................................................14 ITEM 12: TWIN SCREW WET KIT .............................................................................................14 ITEM 13: HD ORGANICS SLURRY PUMP – LSM MODEL 125 ...................................................15 ITEM 14: HOT CLIMATE – AIR CONDITIONING FOR CONTROL CABINET ...................................16 ITEM 15: INSTALLATION, EQUIPMENT RENTAL, TRAINING & POST SALE ADJUSTMENTS .........16 #3..
- 177 -

YOUR PROCESSING REQUIREMENTS

INPUT MATERIAL
SOURCE SEPARATED ORGANICS Type One: MIXED COMMERCIAL
SOURCE SEPARATED ORGANICS Type Two: MIXED RESIDENTIAL
SOURCE SEPARATED ORGANICS Type Three: PRECONSUMER PACKAGED Processing wet or leaking items? YES
Processing cased goods? YES
If yes, largest size of cased good (LxWxH) TBD –
Processing dusty products? NO

ORGANIC OUTPUT MATERIAL
Destination: Animal Nutrition/Compost/AD/Other AD and/or Compost Screen Size – 1st half 1 ¼” [32mm]
Screen size - 2nd half 1” [24mm]
Additional liquid added during processing? TBD

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS
Tons per day (expected) 100-120
Operation hours per day 8-10
Operation days per week 5
Location of installation (facility type) Existing
Min. and max temperature range 32-100F
Voltage/Hz [3phase power] 460
PAINT
Standard colors RAL3000-THOR Red/RAL7002 Umbra Gray
Type Commercial grade primer & enamel paint DFT>4mil.
#3..
- 178 -

PROPOSAL PRICING SUMMARY
Item Qty. Product/Service Price [USD]
1 1 THOR Turbo Separator depackaging machine $802,110
2 1 Organics collection hopper, support stand, work platforms 3 1 Twin Screw infeed conveyor & material hopper w. transition 4 1 Waste Discharge Screw Conveyor - Inclined
5 1 Organics Discharge Screw Conveyor - Horizontal
6 1 Organics Discharge Screw Conveyor - Inclined
7 1 Engineered control panel
8 1 Spare parts kit
9 1 Tool kit and manuals
10 1 Onsite system commissioning and training
11 1 Product flexibility kit
12 1 Twin Screw Wet Kit
13 1 HD Organic Slurry Pump – LSM Peristaltic Hose Pump-280gpm Subtotal $802,110
14 1 NEMA4X Controls upgrade with A/C unit $16,085
15 1 Installation, Equipment Rentals, Training, & Post-Sale Adjustments $38,240 1 Clean Sweep-Organic Slurry/Mash Decontamination System $126,900 Total ***Sales Tax NOT Included $983,335
Estimated Lead Time 23-24 weeks from down payment receipt & signed layout prints

PROPOSAL FREIGHT TERMS & METHOD
Standard Terms FOB Origin – Arlington Minnesota USA 55307 Estimated 1 qty. 53’ step deck Conestoga style covered air ride truck trailer 3 qty. 53’ flatbed Conestoga style covered air ride truck trailer Estimated $39,800
Terms of Payment:
• 60%Deposit due with Purchase Order (“Down Payment”)
• 30% Due prior to shipment of equipment, or notification that equipment isready for shipment. • 10% Net 15 Due after installation and commissioning
ACCEPTED:

(Company/Organization) (Print First Name, Last Name)
(Authorized Signature) (Date)
(Title)

I UNDERSTAND MY SIGNATURE ABOVE CONSTITUTES ACCEPTANCE OF THIS QUOTATION, AND CONVERTS IT TO AN ORDER TO OLYMPIC WIRE AND EQUIPMENT, INC. I UNDERSTAND THAT PAYMENTS ARE DUE UPON THE TERMS ABOVE. MY SIGNATURE ABOVE ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IN THE EVENT OF LITIGATION TO COLLECTTHE PROCEEDS DUE HEREUNDER,THE SIGNED AGREES TO PAY REASONABLE ATTORNEY FEES. (Please Return a Copy of this Purchase Agreement upon Acceptance with Your Purchase Order) #3..
- 179 -

DETAILED SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS
ITEM 1: THOR TURBO SEPARATOR
(THOR During Installation)
Technical information

THOR DEPACKAGING MACHINE
Material of construction 304 stainless steel
Shell thickness 1” thick shell [22.2mm]
Processing chamber 42”D x 120”L [1,067mm x 3,048mm]
Access doors 4 qty. Scott Swing Arm
Replaceable screens 4 qty. 25”W x ¼”T [635mm x 6.4mm]
Rotor diameter 12” [305mm]
Rotor shaft bearings 2 qty. Dodge pillow block bearings Rotor weight 4,568 lbs. [2,072kg]
Paddles 52 qty. Scott Swing Hammers
Drive motor 125HP Premium Efficiency TEFC [93kW]
Drive type Belt: 8 qty. banded
Liquid manifold 6 qty. ball valve w. ¼” supply lines
Combined weight 15,000 lbs. [6,803kg]
#3..
- 180 -
ITEM 2: ORGANICS HOPPER, STAND, WORK PLATFORMS
(Top Left: Vertical Ladder / Top Right: Full Stairs Front / Bottom Left: Ships Ladder / Bottom Right: Full Stairs Rear) Technical information

ORGANICS HOPPER
Material of construction [hopper] 304 stainless steel
Material thickness ¼” thick; formed and continuously welded [6mm] Processing chamber 24 ¼”H x100”L [616mm x 2,540mm]
Access doors 2 qty. flanged, gasketed, bolted

THOR STAND & WORK PLATFORMS
Material of construction [stand] Carbon steel
Stand perimeter & bracing MC8X18.7 channel base [6mm]
Stand legs 6”x6”x51 ¾” x 3/8” square tubing [152 x 152 x 1314mm] Work platform legs 6”x6”x51 ¾” x 3/8” square tubing [152 x 152 x 1314mm] Ladder(s) 2 qty. ship style ladders w. non slip treads
Handrails 1 ½”x1 ½”x1/8” square tube [38 x 38mm]
OPTIONS Full stairs upgrade (ask for details)
Combined weight 5,000 lbs. [2,268kg]
#3..
- 181 -
ITEM 3: TWIN SCREW INFEED CONVEYOR
(Left: Twin Screw with Service Platform w. Ladder / Right: Twin Screw Augers) Technical information
HOPPER
Material of construction [hopper] 304 stainless steel
Material thickness 7ga. [.179”] thick; formed and continuously welded [4.5mm] Hopper dimensions 60” x 126” [1,524mm x 3,048mm]
Hopper capacity 8 cubic yards [6.12m³]
Flared backsplash 24” x 3 sided, flared [609.6mm]
TROUGH
Material of construction [trough] 304 stainless steel
Material thickness .250” trough & covers/ .375”endplates [6.35/9.53mm]

SCREW AUGERS
Material of construction [screws] Primed & epoxy coated carbon steel Material thickness Schedule 40 pipe w. ½” thick flighting [24mm] Screw auger 2 qty. - 240”L x 16”D [6,096mm x 406mm]
Auger shaft bearings 4 qty. - Dodge (or similar) HD flange bearings Drive motor 2 qty. -10HP Premium Efficiency TEFC IP56 [7.5kW x 2] Drive type 2 qty. – 3 belt pulley/cogged BX style
Gear reducer 2 qty. - HD Dodge TA Series (or similar)

SUPPORT STRUCTURE
Material of construction [support(s)] Primed & epoxy coated carbon steel Material dimensions 2” x 2” x .250” square tubing [50 x 50 x 6.35mm]

OPTION- TWIN SCREW WET KIT
2 qty. – Dodge (or similar) pillow block bearings
2 qty. – 3 ring packing gland seal(s)
2 qty. – Removable drip trays
1 qty. – 2HP wet kit screw assembly [1.5kW]
1 qty. – Wet kit collection box, 304SST w. hatch
1 qty. – 3HP Mudsucker pump and hose [2.2kW]
1 qty. – Inlet, THOR transition 3” pipe/cap
Combined weight 12,000 lbs. [5,443kg]
#3..
- 182 -
ITEM 4: 20’ WASTE DISCHARGE CONVEYOR – INCLINED, INLINE (Left: Location of Waste Discharge Conveyor / Right: Example of 2 qty. In-line Waste Discharge Conveyors) Technical information
TROUGH
Material of construction [trough] Carbon steel
Material thickness .1875” trough & covers/ .3125”endplates [4.76/7.94mm] Discharge extension 27” x 40” flared discharge “Mario” box [686 x 1,016mm] Covers 3 qty.- 24”W; .075” (14ga.) [610mm]

SCREW AUGERS
Flighting .4375” flighting, full pitch, helical [11.11mm] Screw auger 1 qty. - 240”L x 24”D (inline) [6,096 x 609mm] Idle end bearing 1 qty. - Dodge (or similar) HD flange bearing Drive motor 1 qty. -5HP Premium Efficiency TEFC IP56 [3.7kW] Drive type 1 qty. – belt, cogged BX style; 25RPM@60hz
Gear reducer 1 qty. - HD Dodge TA Series (or similar)

SUPPORT STRUCTURE
Material of construction [support(s)] Primed & epoxy coated carbon steel Material dimensions 3” x 3” x .250” angle steel [76 x 76 x 6.35mm] Combined weight 3,000 lbs. [1,361kg]
#3..
- 183 -
ITEM 5: 12’ ORGANICS DISCHARGE CONVEYOR - HORIZONTAL
(Left: Horizontal Organics Discharge Conveyor w. Pump Attachment / Right: Location of Horizontal Organics Discharge Conveyor) Technical information
TROUGH
Material of construction [trough] 304 stainless steel
Material thickness .1875” trough & covers/ .3125”endplates [4.76/7.94mm] Discharge extension Custom transition per layout
Covers 1 qty.- 16”W; .075” (14ga.) [406mm]

SCREW AUGER
Flighting .3125” flighting, full pitch, helical [11.11mm] Screw auger 1 qty. - 144”L x 16”D [3,658 x 406mm]
Idle end bearing 1 qty. - Dodge (or similar) HD flange bearing Drive motor 1 qty. -5HP Premium Efficiency TEFC IP56 [3.7kW] Drive type 1 qty. – belt, cogged BX style; 25RPM@60hz
Gear reducer 1 qty. - HD Dodge TA Series (or similar)

SUPPORT STRUCTURE
Material of construction [support(s)] primed & epoxy coated carbon steel Material dimensions 3” x 3” x .250” angle steel [76 x 76 x 6.35mm] Combined weight 1,500 lbs. [680kg]
#3..
- 184 -
ITEM 6: 20’ ORGANICS DISCHARGE CONVEYOR - INCLINED
(The inclined organics conveyor moves organic “cake” to be loaded into receiving bays, trucks, or roll-off containers. / Right: If organics are fluid, there is a connecting flange for pump.) Technical information
TROUGH
Material of construction [trough] 304 stainless steel
Material thickness .1875” trough & covers/ .3125”endplates [4.76/7.94mm] Discharge extension Custom transition per layout TBD
Covers 3 qty.- 16”W; .075” (14ga.) [406mm]

SCREW AUGER
Flighting .3125” flighting, full pitch, helical [11.11mm] Screw auger 1 qty. - 240”L x 16”D [6,096 x 406mm]
Idle end bearing 1 qty. - Dodge (or similar) HD flange bearing Drive motor 1 qty. -5HP Premium Efficiency TEFC IP56 [3.7kW] Drive type 1 qty. – belt, cogged BX style; 25RPM@60hz
Gear reducer 1 qty. - HD Dodge TA Series (or similar)

SUPPORT STRUCTURE
Material of construction [support(s)] Primed & epoxy coated carbon steel Material dimensions 3” x 3” x .250” angle steel [76 x 76 x 6.35mm] Combined weight 2,300 lbs. [1,043kg]
#3..
- 185 -
ITEM 7: ENGINEERED CONTROL PANEL
(Left: Full Cabinet w. Pump and SCADA Ability / Right: Standard Allen Bradley VFD Based Controls w. Simple Relay Logic; UL/C-UL Approved) Technical information

CABINET
Material of construction 304 stainless steel, .104” [2.64mm] [2.64mm] Approximate size 60”H x 60”W x 18”D [1524 x 1524 x 457mm] NEMA/IP Type NEMA4X standard/IP66/IEC 60529 UL/C-UL/CE rated Variable Frequency Drive (VFD) window
kit
Door face access to VFD HIM
Leg kit 4 qty. 12”H [304mm]

CONTROL HARDWARE
Turbo Separator 1 qty. 125HP Allen Bradley PowerFlex VFD w. digital amp meter readout Twin Screw Infeed Conveyor 2 qty. 10HP Allen Bradley PowerFlex VFD(s) w. safe off option Horizontal Organics Conveyor 1 qty. 5HP motor starter
Inclined Organics Conveyor 1 qty. 5HP motor starter
Waste Screw Conveyor 1 qty. 5HP motor starter

OPERATOR INTERFACE & ALERTS
Lockout Main disconnect with pad lockable handle
Display Illuminated push buttons w. green/red run indicator E-stop Illuminated E-Stop mushroom style button
Audible Start button with audible alert
Visual Tower light w. red, red flashing, green
Service 1 qty. analog hour meter
CONTROL OPTIONS Associated Items
Wet Kit Option 1 qty. 2HP & 1 qty. 3HP motor starters SEE ITEM 12 Organics pump Option 1 qty. 15HP motor starter SEE ITEM 13 Wet location Option NEMA4X with fan kit /IP65 SEE ITEM 14 Hot climate Option 1 qty. air conditioner with resized cabinet SEE ITEM 14 Communications/SCADA Option Site specific, ask for details Priced upon request #3..
- 186 -
ITEM 8: SPARE PARTS KIT
Technical information

CONTENTS
THOR paddles, complete 12 qty. - 5˚; 12 qty. - 20˚ Paddle, pin, bushing THOR screens 4 qty. – size TBD Carbon steel
Hold down bars 4 qty. 304 stainless
Supplies 1 carton stuffing box replacement material Oakum/jute ITEM 9: TOOL KIT AND MANUALS
Technical information

CONTENTS
Screen removal Socket, impact/deep 19mm; ½” drive
Open doors Socket, impact/deep 30mm; ½” drive
Paddle removal Socket, impact/short 1 1/8” ; ½” drive
Paddle removal Wrench, flex head socket/open ¾”
Paddle removal Wrench, combo 1 1/8”
Storage Tool bag
Bushing removal kit Porta-Power hydraulic pump-10 ton
Bushing removal kit Hydraulic hose
Bushing removal kit Hydraulic ram head
Bushing removal kit Bushing removal tool
Bushing removal kit Bushing insertion tool
Electronic manuals
ITEM 10: ONSITE COMMISIONING AND TRAINING
Technical information

INCLUDES
Personnel 1 qty. trained Scott Equipment applications
engineer
Includes all travel expenses
Duration Up to 3 days of commissioning services (North
Amer.)
International billed at cost
Purpose one Confirm system is safe and operable Checklist Purpose two Demonstrate how to operate the system Review training manual Purpose three Discuss simple maintenance and troubleshooting Review applications guide #3..
- 187 -
ITEM 11: PRODUCT FLEXIBILITY KIT
Technical information

CONTENTS
THOR paddles, complete 8 qty. - 5˚; 12 qty. - 20˚ Paddle, pin, bushing THOR screens 4 qty. – size TBD Carbon steel
Hold down bars 4 qty. 304 stainless
Supplies 1 carton stuffing box replacement material Oakum/jute ITEM 12: TWIN SCREW WET KIT
(Able to process wet or liquid food items in a traditional inclined screw conveyor.

Provides maximum operation flexibility for processing different types of food waste categories.) Technical information

PUMP MODEL FEATURES
Pump style Peristaltic Hose Pump w. Galvanized Frame
Hose material Neoprene rubber composite
Discharge diameter 2.5” ANSI [63.5mm]
DRIVE
Material of construction 304 stainless steel
Screw type Schedule 40 pipe; ½ pitch; screw auger
Auger dimensions 10”D x 13”L [254 x 330mm]
Drive 1 qty. – 2HP TEFC w. Dodge Quantis RHB (or similar) 1.5kW Combined weight 300 lbs. 136kg
#3..
- 188 -
ITEM 13: HD ORGANICS SLURRY PUMP – LSM MODEL 125
(Left: LSM pump shown with optional controls. / Right: Internal assembly on Model LSM150) Technical information*

PUMP MODEL FEATURES
Pump Style Peristaltic Hose Pump w. Galvanized Frame Click here Internal Hose Diameter 5” 125mm
Dimensions 67”L x 72”H x 50”D [1694mm x 1816mm]
Flanged Connections 5” ANSI B16, 5 class 150# [102mm]
Drive Arrangement 1800 RPM, direct drive 15HP motor 11kW Lubrication Internal, passive – glycerin based for hose Approximate weight 2425 lbs. [1100 kg]

THROUGHPUT
Nominal Flow Rate 280gpm water @26RPM [75 m³/h]
Nominal Pressure 60psi 4 bar
Maximum Pressure 145psi 10 bar
Max. Head 115’ maximum total head [2,921mm]

SPARE PARTS
Spare Hose 1 qty. HD 125mm neoprene rubber composite
*Actual pump & configuration may vary based on site design and requirements.

PUMP PERFORMANCE IS DEPENDANT UPON:

1. PIPING LAYOUT – LONG RADIUS ELBOWS, NO T-STYLE; SWEEPING RADIUS Y-STYLE ; LIMITED DISTANCE TO HP VS %SOLIDS

2. % SOLIDS – THE > THE % SOLIDS, THE LESS DISTANCE IT CAN BE PUMPED. SUSPENDED SOLIDS VS. DILUTED SOLIDS ALSO CAN AFFECT THE FLOW. IF SOLIDS ARE PRIMARILY FAT AND MEAT VS. TOMATO JUICE- PUMPING CAN STALL

3. MAINTENANCE – PROPER OBSERVATION AND MAINTNENANCE OF THE HOSE WILL INCREASE LIFE #3..
- 189 -
ITEM 14: HOT CLIMATE – AIR CONDITIONING FOR CONTROL CABINET (Enviro-Therm® Air Conditioners are designed with an internal closed loop system to provide protection from dust, oil and water.

For indoor and outdoor applications. Rugged, energy efficient, and reliable cooling system.) Technical information

COOLING SYSTEM
Type Closed loop, rotary compressor design
Coils Fin spacing & hydrophobic coating; filterless design External air filter Washable, 8-layer aluminum mesh
Refrigerant type R134a, chlorine free & environmentally harmless Heater Compressor heater for low ambient up to 2000w

CONTROLS
Preset-cool 95˚F; adjustable 68 to 122˚F
Preset-heat 41˚F; adjustable -4 to 122˚F
Temperature differential hysteresis 5.4˚
High temp alarm 131˚F [55˚C]
Interface Digital touchpad [inside enclosure]
Combined weight 133 lbs. [60kg]
ITEM 15: INSTALLATION, EQUIPMENT RENTAL, TRAINING & POST SALE

ADJUSTMENTS

Technical information

INCLUDES
Personnel 3 qty. Olympic Technicians ***Prevailing Wages Apply Includes all travel expenses Duration Up to 4 days of Installation Services CA Locations Purpose one Unload & stage Turbo system Lifting equipment required Purpose two Install and assemble Turbo system Epoxy anchoring of unit Purpose three Test unit, adjustsystem, train staff, and commission Coordinated with Scott Factory Rep
#3..
- 190 -
#3..
- 191 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto - HS-23022A 4323 TIGER DEPACK HS-55 DEPACKAGING
SYSTEM
PROPOSAL No: HS-23022A
PREPARED FOR: City of Modesto
#3..
- 192 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto - HS-23022A 4323

Page 2 ends

EQUIPMENT SOLUTIONS PROPOSAL
Proposal No. HS-23022A Date April 3, 2023
To City of Modesto
1010 10th Street
Modesto, CA 95354
Tiger Depack HS-55 Depackaging System
Dimensions
 Total length: 24’–4”
 Total width: 8’-2”
 Hopper height: 10’ 6”
 Total height: 13’- 6”
 Weight: 22,000 (machine without discharge)
Functional Details
 Separation Shaft Speed: 1,000 rpm
 Feed screw motor: 7.5 kW
 Squeezing group motor: 55 kW
 Dry fraction extraction motor: 2.2 kW
 Auxiliary auger motor: 2.2 kW
Stationary Frame / Chassis and Single Wing Doors
 Legs 4’ (Different sizes can be ordered based on site requirements)  Anti-Vibrational Silent-block device
 The machine is completely made of ST 37 steel 6 mm thick plates for the body (3 mm for inspection doors)
 Dye and paint specially designed to protect the machine from weather and food waste corrosion
 Accessibility to interior of machine from all sides, above and below machine
Feed Compartment
 Feed hopper in stainless steel with one open side for the feeding.  Multi-directional feed auger made of 10 mm black steel  Inspection door
 New removal system of the main feed auger
 Hopper
- Width: 11’-4”
- Depth: 6’-5”
- Loading Height: 10’ – 6”
- Volume: 7 cubic yards
 Second auxiliary auger in hopper to prevent bridging
Vertical Mill Compartment
 3/4” separation screen made from FE S700 iron – additional screen sizes available upon request
 High speed shaft
 Bolt-on, easily replaceable Hardox steel wear paddles  Heavy-duty Hardox steel reinforced shaft
#3..
- 193 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto - HS-23022A 4323

Page 3 ends

Packaging Extraction Compartment
 Packaging extraction auger, equipped with hoisting hooks and hood  Auger capable of multi-directional operation to prevent clogs in compartment Liquids
 Double water feeding system to accept water from the grid and from other source such as a leachate recovery or rainwater source, and a clean-water line for cleaning the mill  Solenoid valve to regulate the process water flow
Electrical / Software
 3 phase 480V (575V Canada)
 Control panel with touch screen
 The control panel can be remote. The choice must be declared at the order.  The necessary wires length must be declared after the order. The price difference will be charged separately after the order.
 Soft starter for 55 kW engine
 Operator panel and Electric panel
 Main Breaker
 Electric cabinet with air-conditioner
 LED light system to signal the rate of process water flow Safety
 CAN bus operating system for maintenance protection
 Safety device for the shaft that prevents any possible damages on the engine and on the belts due to accidental contaminants entrance and/or blocking.
 Rotation sensor for the 55 kW engine
 Magnetic disconnection system mounted on all main doors to shut down all engines in case of accidental doors opening.
 Stairs to enter to the squeezing compartment
 Access to all the mechanical elements by means of wide and comfortable doors so that the personnel can enter and/or operate effectively
 Emergency stop buttons
 Safety and warning labels on all machine sides
Miscellaneous
 LED light system with green, yellow and red colors to signal the operating conditions of the machine  Color RAL 5010, Gentian Blue (custom paint available on request)  Complies with all EC standards
 EC Certificate of conformity
 EC plate with machine serial number
 Noise levels comply with the EU regulations with no need of additional noise abatement equipment – the noise level is measured according to the ISO 3744 directive
 Toolbox
 Central greasing points
 User Manual: (1) electronic and (1) physical copy provided at start-up Connection and Training
 Includes approximately 3-4 days of staff training, electrical connection and water hook-up for the Tiger. #3..
- 194 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto - HS-23022A 4323

Page 4 ends

Available Options
 Dry Organic Discharge System: $61,289.00
 19’ discharge auger to remove and transfer material from collection tank on incline, releasing it 6’ above ground level
 Full hardware and software integration to Tiger Depack and control panel  Dual Wet-Dry Organic Discharge System: $141,788.00
 2-cubic meter collection tank
 Auger in bottom of collection tank to move material to discharge auger or PD pump  19’ discharge auger to remove and transfer material from collection tank on incline, releasing it 6’ above ground level
 Integrated positive displacement (PD) pump to remove and transfer organic fraction from collection tank  Full hardware and software integration to Tiger Depack and control panel Payment Terms: 50% down payment with order, 40% due prior to shipment, 10% due upon delivery.

Delivery Terms: F.O.B. Customer’s Site
Taxes: All local, state and federal taxes are the responsibility of the customer.

Terms / Warranty: 1 year or 1,000 hour machine warranty.

See included Ecoverse General Terms & Conditions of Sale.

I, the undersigned, being authorized to sign on behalf of my company, agree to and authorize the purchase of the above detailed equipment under the noted and included terms & conditions. __________________________________________ _____________________________________ On behalf of City of Modesto Date
Presented and accepted by:
__________________________________________ _____________________________________ On behalf of Ecoverse Date
Notes:

EXCLUSIONS (UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED):

Any offloading, rigging equipment/operators, setting of equipment, installation, or startup.

Any electrical field wiring, power distribution or disconnects. Should electrical installation be required, Ecoverse will provide upon request all required system data for equipment being supplied to customer so that customer can secure this service. However, Ecoverse will not subcontract or otherwise include it in its pricing or scope of supply. Ecoverse will coordinate with customer- secured local electrical subcontractors to perform the service, but pricing of this work Price for Tiger HS-55 Depackaging System $584,910.00
#3..
- 195 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto - HS-23022A 4323

Page 5 ends

will need to be invoiced directly from the subcontractor to the customer and will not be included in Ecoverse's pricing.

Any buildings, building preparations, penetrations, foundations, support structures, alterations to buildings, weatherproofing, covers or enclosures.

Taxes, fees, foreign duties, permits for local, state and/or federal compliance.

Storage charges that may be accrued after equipment is delivered.

Contamination in organic product, in most cases typically is less than 1% by weight and can vary depending on each individual application.

Ecoverse will provide a factory trained service technician to supervise the installation of these units.

NOTE: If installation or system start up is provided, its scope will be as set forth in this document. Installation/startup is based on providing open-shop labor (either Ecoverse employees or its subcontractors) and on an uninterrupted work schedule until system is complete. Interruptions or delays caused by customer or others which necessitate return trips or extended time on site will result in additional charges to the customer. Ecoverse must be allowed unrestricted access to the work area. The customer is responsible for site readiness prior to the arrival of the installation crew/startup technician. Any delays caused by customer failing to have the site in ready condition for installation crew or startup technician may affect the completion date therefore resulting in additional charges to the customer. Once crews or technicians are on site they must be allowed to continue until completed. #3..
- 196 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto - HS-23023A 4323 TIGER DEPACK HS-90 DEPACKAGING
SYSTEM
PROPOSAL No: HS-23023A
PREPARED FOR: City of Modesto
#3..
- 197 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto - HS-23023A 4323

Page 2 ends

EQUIPMENT SOLUTIONS PROPOSAL
Proposal No. HS-23023A Date April 3, 2023
To City of Modesto
1010 10th Street
Modesto, CA 95354
Tiger Depack HS-90 Depackaging System
Dimensions
 Total length: 26’–1”
 Total width: 8’-2”
 Tipping height: 10’- 6”
 Total height: 13’- 6”
 Weight: 26,790 (machine without discharge)
Functional Details
 Separation Shaft Speed: 1,000 rpm
 Feed screw motor: 11 kW
 Squeezing group motor: 75 kW
 Dry fraction extraction motor: 5.5 kW
 Auxiliary auger motor: 2.2 kW
Stationary Frame / Chassis and Single Wing Doors
 Legs 4’ (Different sizes can be ordered based on site requirements)  Anti-Vibrational Silent-block device
 The machine is completely made of ST 37 steel 6 mm thick plates for the body (3 mm for inspection doors)
 Dye and paint specially designed to protect the machine from weather and food waste corrosion
 Accessibility to interior of machine from all sides, above and below machine
Feed Compartment
 Feed hopper in stainless steel with one open side for the feeding.  Multi-directional feed auger made of 10 mm black steel  Inspection door
 New removal system of the main feed auger
 Hopper
- Width: 11’-4”
- Depth: 6’-5”
- Loading Height: 10’ – 8” (customizable)
- Volume: 7 cubic yards
 Second auxiliary auger in hopper to prevent bridging
Vertical Mill Compartment
 3/4” separation screen made from FE S700 iron – additional screen sizes available upon request
 High speed shaft
 Bolt-on, easily replaceable Hardox steel wear paddles  Heavy-duty Hardox steel reinforced shaft
#3..
- 198 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto - HS-23023A 4323

Page 3 ends

Packaging Extraction Compartment
 Packaging extraction auger, equipped with hoisting hooks and hood  Auger capable of multi-directional operation to prevent clogs in compartment Liquids
 Double water feeding system to accept water from the grid and from other source such as a leachate recovery or rainwater source, and a clean-water line for cleaning the mill  Solenoid valve to regulate the process water flow
Electrical / Software
 3 phase 480V (575V Canada)
 Control panel with touch screen
 The control panel can be remote. The choice must be declared at the order.  The necessary wires length must be declared after the order. The price difference will be charged separately after the order.
 Soft starter for 75 kW engine
 Operator panel and Electric panel
 Main Breaker
 Electric cabinet with air-conditioner
 LED light system to signal the rate of process water flow Safety
 CAN bus operating system for maintenance protection
 Safety device for the shaft that prevents any possible damages on the engine and on the belts due to accidental contaminants entrance and/or blocking.
 Rotation sensor for the 55 kW engine
 Magnetic disconnection system mounted on all main doors to shut down all engines in case of accidental doors opening.
 Stairs to enter to the squeezing compartment
 Access to all the mechanical elements by means of wide and comfortable doors so that the personnel can enter and/or operate effectively
 Emergency stop buttons
 Safety and warning labels on all machine sides
Miscellaneous
 LED light system with green, yellow and red colors to signal the operating conditions of the machine  Color RAL 5010, Gentian Blue (custom paint available on request)  Complies with all EC standards
 EC Certificate of conformity
 EC plate with machine serial number
 Noise levels comply with the EU regulations with no need of additional noise abatement equipment – the noise level is measured according to the ISO 3744 directive
 Toolbox
 Central greasing points
 User Manual: (1) electronic and (1) physical copy provided at start-up Connection and Training
 Includes approximately 3-4 days of staff training, electrical connection and water hook-up for the Tiger. #3..
- 199 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto - HS-23023A 4323

Page 4 ends

Delivery Terms: F.O.B. Customer’s Site
Taxes: All local, state and federal taxes are the responsibility of the customer.

Terms / Warranty: 1 year or 1,000 hour machine warranty.

See included Ecoverse General Terms & Conditions of Sale.

EXCLUSIONS (UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED):

Any offloading, rigging equipment/operators, setting of equipment, installation, or startup.

Any electrical field wiring, power distribution or disconnects. Should electrical installation be required, Ecoverse will provide upon request all required system data for equipment being supplied to customer so that customer can secure this service. However, Ecoverse will not subcontract or otherwise include it in its pricing or scope of supply. Ecoverse will coordinate with customer- secured local electrical subcontractors to perform the service, but pricing of this work Price for Tiger HS-90 Depackaging System $665,888.00
#3..
- 200 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto - HS-23023A 4323

Page 5 ends

will need to be invoiced directly from the subcontractor to the customer and will not be included in Ecoverse's pricing.

Any buildings, building preparations, penetrations, foundations, support structures, alterations to buildings, weatherproofing, covers or enclosures.

Taxes, fees, foreign duties, permits for local, state and/or federal compliance.

Storage charges that may be accrued after equipment is delivered.

Contamination in organic product, in most cases typically is less than 1% by weight and can vary depending on each individual application.

Ecoverse will provide a factory trained service technician to supervise the installation of these units.

NOTE: If installation or system start up is provided, its scope will be as set forth in this document. Installation/startup is based on providing open-shop labor (either Ecoverse employees or its subcontractors) and on an uninterrupted work schedule until system is complete. Interruptions or delays caused by customer or others which necessitate return trips or extended time on site will result in additional charges to the customer. Ecoverse must be allowed unrestricted access to the work area. The customer is responsible for site readiness prior to the arrival of the installation crew/startup technician. Any delays caused by customer failing to have the site in ready condition for installation crew or startup technician may affect the completion date therefore resulting in additional charges to the customer. Once crews or technicians are on site they must be allowed to continue until completed. #3..
- 201 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto, CA - ST-23008A 42123 DOPPSTADT DW 306 CERON
PROPOSAL No: ST-23008A
PREPARED FOR: City of Modesto, CA
#3..
- 202 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto, CA - ST-23008A 42123

Page 2 ends

EQUIPMENT SOLUTIONS PROPOSAL
Proposal No. ST-23008A Date April 21, 2023
To City of Modesto, CA
7001 Jennings Road
Modesto CA 95353
Doppstadt DW 306 Ceron Slow-Speed Shredder
General Machine Description
Doppstadt’s DW low speed single-shaft high-torque shredders are highly suitable for the production of biomass and substitute fuels or for use in volume reduction and the processing of household waste, bulky and industrial waste and mixed C&D debris.

It has a very robust steel construction with reinforced fixing points for the drive unit, shredding tools and other components that guarantee stability and a long service life. The design of the machine is such that in the front section the drive unit is located in a space-saving and near dustfree space. The rear section is designed as a feed hopper for the material to be shredded. Further reinforcement protects the side walls of the hopper against impact damage from wheeled loader or excavator buckets. The fixing points for bearing the shredding rotor and comb sieve are also reinforced to sustain the stresses involved on continuous operation.

Large swing doors with gas-filled damping hinges are installed to both sides. They serve as protection against accidents as well as against soiling, but they permit easy and excellent access for maintenance purposes.

Emergency stop switches are fitted at the control panel and on both sides of the shredder ensuring safe machine cut-off in the event of an emergency situation. All hydraulic and main electrical components are made by established manufacturers to ensure high quality and long service life.

Machine Chassis
The static DW 306 Ceron machine frame consists of buckle resistant heavy-duty square tubing.

This resilient framework with enhanced fixing points for the drive unit, shredding tools and other components guarantees strength and long life.

Functional Description (Shredding Process)
The machine is equipped with a programmable logic controller. During the shredding process, the control system strives to maintain the selected revolution speed of the rotor shaft. During this process the nominal current of the AC motor will not be exceeded. If anything tries to block the process or if there is any jamming of the shredding shaft, the shaft stops and reverses for a while to clear the problem. After the block has been cleared the shaft continues turning in its normal working direction.
#3..
- 203 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto, CA - ST-23008A 42123

Page 3 ends

Material Loading
The material to be shredded is fed into the hopper usually by using wheeled loaders, excavators with a suitable bucket or using a feed conveyor. In the bottom half of the hopper the input material is picked up by the teeth on the rotor and is shredded from above through an adjustable hydraulically controlled counter comb sieve. It is possible to influence the output material size by changing the gap between the rotor and comb.

Comb Flap
The comb is robustly mounted with a hydraulic slewing mechanism facilitating access for maintenance purposes and tool change. In addition, this opening panel enables access for cleaning and discharge of foreign bodies. When the flap is open, tools on the shredding rotor and comb can be changed easily while standing in an upright position.

Other advantages include that the teeth on the rotor are fixed using simple bolts and the teeth on the comb are secured by ‘bang in’ wedges. Because of these, tool changes can be carried out without the need for cutting or welding, saving both time and the requirement for any special fire protection.

Rotor Flap
As an addition, a gate style access flap is located on the rotor side too. It can be opened and closed hydraulically and permits easy access for cleaning and maintenance, as well as and for the material discharge. Through this opening the rotor teeth can also be checked and changed quickly.

Hydraulics
A hydraulic pump, located in the engine compartment and driven by an electric motor, supplies the relevant control units for operating specific machine functions.

Hydraulic functions at a glance:
 Opening and closing of the comb access flap
 Opening and closing of the rotor access flap
 Interlocking of comb access flap
 Opening and closing of the shredding comb
 Automatic regulation of cutting-force on the shredding comb (counterforce) In maintenance mode (tool change) the rotor can be turned from both sides using a push-button. For safety reasons this function is can only be enabled with one open access flap.

The planetary gear mechanism is equipped with a circulating oil lubrication system. The system comprises a tank with a capacity of 80 liters, a cooler and a magnetic trap. The trap sifts out any metal parts from the oil to ensure quality in the lubrication system.

Drive Unit 315kW AC
Rated power: 315 kW
Nominal speed: 2000 min-1
Armature voltage: 460V
Armature current: 726A
Field voltage: 340V
#3..
- 204 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto, CA - ST-23008A 42123

Page 4 ends

The DW series single-shaft-shredders are built as direct drive systems. The installed AC main motor with its nominal power of 315kW powers the rotor in line via a flexible coupling and a planetary gear. In comparison with a hydraulically driven system there is less power loss which leads to energy savings of approx. 25% - 30%.

The AC motor is electronically controlled using a rectifier. Through this, the rpm speed of the rotor can be adjusted. Because the main AC motor is controlled in this way the torque remains constant in all adjustable ranges.

The motor capacity is designed to cope with the demands of continuous service in all ranges. The drive unit is electrically controlled and further equipped with a flexible release clutch, which disengages to protect the machine against damage, in case of overload caused by foreign objects in the material.

Shredding Rotor
The shredding rotor with 21 teeth pulls the material to be shredded from above through an adjustable hydraulically controlled counter comb. Additionally, the rotor itself is reinforced with wearing plates which safeguard the rotor’s functionality and increase the lifetime enormously. The Dopp-Lock locking system is a self-locking fixing system for rotor teeth. The bolt only prevents the teeth from getting lost.

Hydraulic Power
Rated power: 7.5kW
Tank: 32 gallons
Rated power oil cooler: 0.55kW
Shredding unit – L Shaft:

Length of rotor: 9’-10”
Diameter of rotor: 24”
Height of tooth: 174mm
Number of teeth: 21 standard
Type of teeth: C shaped trapezoidal
Length of comb: 9-10”
Hydraulic cylinders: 4 + return cylinder
Height of tooth: 174mm
Number of teeth: 21 standard
Speed: Adjustable from 7 – 28 rpm
Comb Adjustment: Includes automatic comb adjust
Limiter – Comb Extension Element
This innovative system combines the advantages of the comb extensions and of the grating basket, to increase the output homogeneity. The single limiter elements are gimbal-mounted and they can avoid disturbing contaminants in all directions. In case of damage they can be replaced individually within a few minutes. The special design of the limiter elements follows the radius of the shredding roller, so that oversize material is led round the shredding roller with a slight pre-tension. The distribution of the single limiter elements is variable at will and it can be adjusted to various shredding tasks.

Frame and Support Legs
The machine substructure helps to adjust the machine height to the installation specifications. They consist of a steel construction where the discharge conveyor can be located, and robust profile tube supports equipped with antivibrating metal beams. They are fixed with the help of sole plates. #3..
- 205 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto, CA - ST-23008A 42123

Page 5 ends

Hopper Extensions
The hopper plates serve to extend the feeding area of the shredder and prevent the material from missing the hopper.

The plates are screwed to the machine and can easily be replaced. In case of special technical requirements, special dimensions can be offered at extra charge.

Discharge Conveyor
Width: 48”
Length: 40’
Control Cabinet Container
Heat and Air Conditioned
Payment Terms: Payment in Full or Approved Financing Prior to Shipment of Machinery.

Delivery Terms: F.O.B. Customer’s Site
Terms / Warranty: 2 year or 2,000 hour machine warranty.

Taxes: The prices quoted do not include any duties or sales, use, excise, value-added or other taxes or charges, unless specifically noted on the proposal form. Such taxes and charges, if applicable, will be added to the prices quoted if required to be paid or collected by Ecoverse.

See included Ecoverse General Terms & Conditions of Sale.

I, the undersigned, being authorized to sign on behalf of my company, agree to and authorize the purchase of the above detailed equipment under the noted and included terms & conditions. __________________________________________ _____________________________________ On behalf of City of Modesto, CA Date
Presented and accepted by:
__________________________________________ _____________________________________ On behalf of Ecoverse Date
Notes:

EXCLUSIONS (UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED):

Any offloading, rigging equipment/operators, setting of equipment, installation or startup.

Any electrical field wiring, power distribution or disconnects. Should electrical installation be required, Ecoverse will provide upon request all required system data for equipment being supplied to customer so that customer can secure this service. However, Price for DW 306 Ceron Slow-Speed Shredder $1,052,030.00 #3..
- 206 -
Ecoverse considers its customer and dealer pricing confidential. Pricing and other information should not be disclosed to persons outside the company or authorized dealers or distributors. Proposal is valid for 30 days from issuance. City of Modesto, CA - ST-23008A 42123

Page 6 ends

Ecoverse will not subcontract or otherwise include it in its pricing or scope of supply. Ecoverse will coordinate with customer- secured local electrical subcontractors to perform the service, but pricing of this work will need to be invoiced directly from the subcontractor to the customer and will not be included in Ecoverse's pricing.

Any buildings, building preparations, penetrations, foundations, support structures, alterations to buildings, weatherproofing, covers or enclosures.

Taxes, fees, foreign duties, permits for local, state and/or federal compliance.

Storage charges that may be accrued after equipment is delivered.

Contamination in organic product, in most cases typically is less than 1% by weight, and can vary depending on each individual application.

Ecoverse will provide a factory trained service technician to supervise the installation of these units.

Economic Development CommitteeSeptember 11, 2023

Economic Development Committee
September 11, 2023