Porterville City Council
August 29, 2023

City of Porterville, CA | SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SYSTEM OPERATIOAL REVIEW| FINAL Report Recommendations:

Y. Consolidate all existing formal and informal policies and procedures, which are to serve as the Division’s current policies and procedures.

Z. Identify the Top 10 polices and procedure needs and draft policy and procedures.

AA. Develop comprehensive policies and procedures with expected standards of performance for safety, customer service, productivity, and other important areas of focus, including pre- and post-trip inspection procedures.

16. Drivers Linger Around the Yard When Not Monitored
Prior to beginning their routes, drivers were observed operating at different speeds following each morning meeting. Some drivers would immediately head to their trucks and leave while others would linger, get coffee, converse with other drivers, or otherwise kill time. All drivers should be productive when on Division time, unless they are on a break, and there should be an established structuring (standard operating procedure) for the morning dispatch and rollout process that gets vehicles on route, quickly and efficiently following required pre-trip inspections and any other driver dispatch requirements.

Recommendations:

BB. Re-establish expectations and introduce organized morning launches. Drivers must be informed that they need to be ready to work at their respective start times. The drivers should leave as a group to begin their pre-trips and all drivers should leave the yard in a timely and efficient manner. The Division should also review the end of the day posttrip process and establish similar driver expectations for post-trip inspections, as these inspections are much more difficult to supervise due to varying route end times.

17. Lack of Time Clocks
Refuse drivers manually fill in their time sheets daily, and essentially operate on an honor system. The Supervisor spends hours a week manually calculating and verifying driver hours before submitting them to management for review and subsequent approval. The use of time clocks, which is an industry best practice, will reduce human error and improve the efficiency of all staff currently involved in the manual maintenance of time sheets. Time clocks also track vacation, sick time, and other accrued hours. If time clocks are implemented, the Division will have to add rules and regulations regarding time clock usage to its policies and procedures.

Recommendations:

CC. The Division should consider the use of time clocks, which is an industry best practice.

18. Assessment of the Number of Missed Pick-Ups and Missed Pick-Up Policy12 A Missed Pick Up (MPU) is determined when a customer calls in and does not take responsibility for the miss, essentially placing the blame on the driver. MPUs that are reported 12 Customers who call in misses are questioned, even if it is their first time. If it is suspected that the miss was actually a late out, drivers will monitor the home going forward and call in if a can is not Operational
Review
City of Porterville, CA | SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SYSTEM OPERATIONAL REVIEW | FINAL Report

by 11:30 am will typically be collected the same day and those that are reported after 11:30 am will be recovered the following day. One major issue with this specific to the Division that most other collection operations do not face is that commodities rotate by day of the week, which leads to contamination of loads when service of a commodity is provided on a day that that commodity is not being collected (i.e.: collecting trash on a green waste day). Return fees (fees applied to cover the costs of returning to service a missed collection) for collecting MPUs (whether at the fault of the driver or customer) are not applied consistently. The current return fee of $10 is well below the actual cost of service, which is typically on the order of $50 or more per return service provided.

The Division estimates that each residential route (solid waste, recycling and organics) spends an average of 15-20 minutes per day servicing MPU’s.

Waste Management Inc. has a standard of less than one missed pickup per 1,250 customers, which it measures and evaluates on a weekly and monthly basis.

Note: The Residential Rate Schedule currently offers a “Special Rate” for return services collection at a rate of $10.00. We suggest this rate be reviewed. It has been our experience that the cost to provide an extra residential pickup (i.e., return to collect a can that was not placed out for collection at the time the route passed that account), is on the order of at least five times that cost (i.e., $50.00).

Recommendations:

DD. Adopt WM’s MPU minimum standard of one (1) MPU per 1,250 accounts.

EE. Track and report MPUs daily.

FF. Supervisor(s) review daily any MPUs that occurred the day prior and root cause the issue via discussions with drivers and/or customers. The purpose is to prevent future misses by determining the root cause and adjusting accordingly.

19. The Division Realizes the Value of Performance Benchmarking but Does Not Currently have the Resources Necessary to Implement a Broad-Based Program Division management clearly understands the value of performance benchmarking and has been tracking certain data in support of managing by metrics (M&M). However, the lack of adequate management support staff (e.g., a dedicated Management Analyst) limits the Division’s ability to put in place and sustain an effective management by metrics program.

Effective performance measures help an organization understand, manage and improve performance – “That which is not measured is not managed.” Specifically, performance measures can help the Division determine:
 How well the Division is performing;
 If it is meeting its goals;
out, and a record of the call is entered into the Division’s database, which timestamps it. If the customer then calls in saying that their can was missed it is explained to them that it was recorded that the can was not out and that there is a $10 charge to come back. It is not unusual for the Division to do a couple of return services before applying the fee.

Operational
Review

City of Porterville, CA | SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SYSTEM OPERATIOAL REVIEW| FINAL Report  If customers are satisfied; and
 Where improvement is needed.

Performance measures should be designed to measure both:
 Effectiveness – How well the Division is achieving its objectives, such as:
o Productivity / coverage – the number of customers served; o Accomplishments – the overall outcome or achievement of a program or service; and
o Quality – the proportion of services provided without error, the ratio of complaints to total services provided, and the proportion of services produced at a specified standard.
 Efficiency – How well the Division is using its resources, such as:
o Per unit costs;
o Cycle time;
o Response time;
o Backlog;
o Per unit full time equivalents;
o Staffing ratios; and
o Back up vehicle ratios.

When developing, reviewing and updating performance benchmarks, the Division should consider the following guidelines:
 Link performance to specific documented operating objectives;  Start with a few measures and use as few as possible;  Assign responsibility and accountability for tracking and reporting data to specific staff;
 Track and report current data (e.g., monthly, quarterly, annual) as well as historical trends and make that information available to all staff through postings, meetings and training activities; and
 Use the measures in a positive manner, and not to find fault with employees.

Recommendations:

GG. Hire Administrative Analyst who reports to the Field Services Superintendent (or Field Services Manager)
HH. Expand current Management by Metrics efforts focusing on the following four (4) Initial M&M Operational Standards:13

1. Vehicle Load Weights
13 Consideration should also be given to tracking Vehicle Idle Times, and Travel Speeds as part of an M&M program.

Operational
Review
City of Porterville, CA | SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SYSTEM OPERATIONAL REVIEW | FINAL Report

2. Missed Pickups

3. TRIR, DART, VARR and HARR rates

4. Pre- and Post-Trip Inspections
7 Same Day Service
As discussed above, the Division provides weekly collection of residential trash, recyclables, and green waste Monday through Friday. The City is divided into four (4) zones with collection services for each of the three commodities scheduled for different days within each collection zone. Under this type of “districted” system routes are distributed throughout the City on any given day.

The industry standard is to provide all residential collection services on the same day, with routes typically “sweeping” across the service area over the course of one week. A sweeping system is the most common type of system used and has a number of benefits including allowing for more efficient route support to cover open routes, or assist with heavy workloads since all routes are in the same area. Similarly, supervision of routes is more efficient with all routes in the same area. Residents may also find that placing all cans out for service at the same time on one day preferrable to having to place separate containers out for service on three separate days.

As part of our review, R3 was asked to assess the potential for switching from the current multiple day collection service to same day residential service. Management reported that is not opposed to switching to same day service but there are related issues and concerns, including that on street parking and tight cul-de-sacs may make it difficult for three (3) containers to be positioned so that the collection vehicles have direct access to the containers for collection.

Management considers switching to single day service to be a significant operational challenge, and it is, and management is appropriately cautious. With that said, same day service appears feasible based on our limited review, however, it may require a separate route for hard to service accounts (e.g., those in tight cul-de-sac’s), and will require sufficient planning, public education and outreach, and most importantly sufficient resources for the Division to undertake such a change.

Routing of residential solid waste collection vehicles using a “same day service” - “sweep” system rather than a “districted” system involves the following three separate tasks:

1. Breaking the total weekly system workload into daily collection areas (Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday);14

2. Breaking each of those daily collection areas into individual route areas; and 14 The weekly refuse workload is typically used to develop the five daily service areas, with recycling and green waste workloads and routes then incorporated into each daily service area, with adjustments as necessary and appropriate.

Operational
Review

City of Porterville, CA | SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SYSTEM OPERATIOAL REVIEW| FINAL Report

3. Routing each collection vehicle within its assigned route area (i.e., establishing the vehicle travel path).

The first two tasks can be completed effectively with ArcGIS (formerly ArcView), but require that all residential accounts be identified on an ArcGIS residential solid waste data layer. Once that has been done the basic process is to draw a polygon around the City to document the total number of residential accounts and containers (the weekly residential account workload). The City can then be broken up into the five daily collection areas by trial and error.

This is done by simply drawing polygons around different areas of the City, along major thoroughfares or collector streets to the extent possible, that contain approximately 20 percent of the weekly residential workload to establish the five individual daily collection areas.15 Once the daily collection areas have been established, the individual route areas can be designed following a similar process with the daily workload distributed among each of the daily routes, with each route designed to have a relatively similar number of accounts, all other factors the same. Peak season workloads for green waste can be handled by adding helper routes, similar to the existing “tail-end” routes, or by actually developing a separate routing system for peak season that incorporates additional assigned routes.

Before the Division can effectively reroute the residential collection system, however, it will need to develop an accurate ArcGIS residential solid waste data layer, which R3 understands it does not currently have. We suggest that developing that capability should be a primary short-term objective of the Division.

C:\Users\wschoen\OneDrive - R3\R3 Shared\+Projects\Porterville - Operations Review and Rate Model - 120035\Task 2 - Operations Review\Report - Operational Review\Porterville - Operations Review FINAL REPORT 081122.docx 15 Service area characteristics, the distance from the landfill, and areas of future growth should all be considered in designing the size and location of the various daily collection areas. \\192.168.2.9\R3_Shared\+Projects\Porterville ‐ Operations Review and Rate Model\Reports\Operational Review\Attachments\Appendix A ‐ Overweight Vehicle Policy ‐ 011721.docx 2/27/2021 5:50 PM

Overweight Vehicle Policy

1. Drivers are not to exceed the maximum legal weight for the vehicle being operated. If unsure of the weight limit for a vehicle, see a Supervisor.

Note: We  suggest  the  City  consider  prominently  displayed  the legal  payload weight in  the same place on every vehicle.

2. All  commercial  and  residential  routes  will  have  documented  cut‐off  points,  clearly  indicating where  the  driver  is  to  make  a  disposal  trip  during  standard  conditions.  In  addition,  all commercial and residential routes will have documented “rain” cut‐off points, clearly indicating where  disposal  trips are  required during wet weather or any other  conditions  that may  cause normal weights of containers to escalate.

Note:  A  refuse  driver  may  not  change  cut  off  points  and/or  reduce  disposal  trips  without specific verbal authorization  from a Supervisor. A violation of  this procedure will result in a verbal warning.

3. Supervisors will print refuse driver vehicle weights daily, regardless of whether there were any overweights. Supervisors will then review and sign the above reports daily, and file them by date for  easy  reference  [This  step  is  taken  to  document  that  Supervisors  have  reviewed  vehicle weights on a daily basis].

4. For each overweight incident:
 The refuse driver will immediately contact dispatch/Supervisor and inform them of the overweight  incident  (i.e.,  Drivers  are  to  confirm  that  their  loads  are  not  overweight upon receiving  the weight  ticket at  the  facility scale house, and report any overweight loads to dispatch/Supervisor before leaving the facility).  Supervisor  and  Driver  will  generate  an  Overweight  Load  Incident  Review  form.

Completed  forms  will  be  filed  by  driver  name  for  easy  reference.  The  focus  of  these sessions is improvement, not discipline.
 For permanent roll off accounts, a customer service representative or a Supervisor will communicate to the customer the necessary adjustments needed to ensure compliance.  If  the  refuse  driver  was  properly  following  the  cut  off  points  and/or  action  plan,  the Supervisor and driver will review the error and make adjustments accordingly. However, if  the  refuse  driver was  not  following  the  cut  off  points and/or  corrective action  plan, the following rules failure counseling process will be followed:
o 1st Offense: Discussion/Coaching
o 2nd Offense: Documented Verbal Warning
o 3rd Offense: Documented Written Warning
o 4th Offense: Final Written Warning & 3‐Day Suspension o 5th Offense: 5‐Day Suspension and/or Dismissal
Rules failures must be of the same rule and occur within a rolling 12‐month period.

Attachment A
\\192.168.2.9\R3_Shared\+Projects\Porterville ‐ Operations Review and Rate Model\Reports\Operational Review\Attachments\Appendix A ‐ Overweight Vehicle Policy ‐ 011721.docx 2/27/2021 5:50 PM

Note:   It is important to note that the above processes are a minimum, and the Solid Waste Supervisor has  the  ability  to  elevate/accelerate  the  process  based  on  the  level  of  negligence,  employee’s lack of improvement, failure of multiple rules, etc. The Solid Waste Supervisor should consult the Field Services Superintendent to ensure consistency and process integrity.

Attachment A

Overweight Load Incident Review
Date: _______________     Route: _________________
Truck #: _______________     Driver:_________________
Commercial:       Trash    Recycling  Organics
Residential:      Trash    Recycling  Green Waste
Roll Off
Maximum Load Capacity:  _________ tons      Previous Violations:

Load #1 ______ tons          Date: ___________
Load #2 ______ tons          Date: ___________
Load #3 ______ tons          Date: ___________
Load #4 ______ tons          Date: ___________
Was the cut‐off point followed? ___________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Driver Explanation:  _____________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ What would have prevented this overweight?  _______________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Lead Worker comments, including next actions taken: _________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Counseling Action:    None          Verbal          Written          Final Written          Dismissal Driver Signature: ___________________________________________    Date: _______ Lead Worker Signature: ______________________________________    Date: _______ Attachment A

Solid Waste Equipment Operator Safety Training Process
September 18, 2014 Tony Miano
A strong safety program is key to the City of Phoenix, AZ’s success in preventing. Since 2000, the Public Works Department has made it a priority to assist SWEOs prevent accidents and be more safety conscious during day‐to‐day operations.

Since 2000 the City of Phoenix, AZ Public Works Department, Solid Waste Field Services Division has used a  comprehensive  hiring  and  training  process  to  ensure  that  all  Solid  Waste  Equipment  Operators (SWEO) \follow the established guidelines for driving and collection of refuse and recycling for the City of Phoenix.

This  safety  training  program  gives each  SWEO  the  knowledge  to  safely  drive and  operate  solid waste equipment. This proven safety training program has decreased accidents from 8.1 accidents per 100,000 miles  driven  in  2,000  to  0.89  accidents  per  100,000 miles  driven  in  2012.   Concurrently,  annual miles driven, customer base and employees increased by 50 percent over the same period.

As part of the Public Works Department safety training program, the Solid Waste Division prides itself in obtaining high customer satisfaction ratings while driving and operating in a safe manner on city streets.

This safety training program consists of the following six elements. #1:   The Hiring Process
Hiring is a four‐step process:

1. It starts with  the  review of applications by a Human Resources Analyst who  reviews all of  the applications for minimum qualifying application standards set by the Public Works Department.

For example, an important requirement for applicants is to have an adequate amount of heavy equipment driving experience.

2. If  an  applicant  is  qualified  at  the  application  stage  then  they  will  be  invited  to  participate  in a driving  skills  assessment test,  which  requires  them  to  safely  and  effectively  maneuver  an obstacle course in a garbage truck while being timed.

3. If  the applicant  successfully maneuvers  through  the  obstacle  course without  hitting  too many obstacles,  they  will  be  invited  to  participate  in  the interview  process where  they  will  be interviewed by a panel of four supervisory staff from within and outside the solid waste field.

4. The  final  criteria  before  being  selected  to  become  a  SWEO  for  the  City  of  Phoenix  is  for  the applicant  to  take  and  score  high  enough  on  a personnel  selection  inventory  (PSI) assessment, which is administered manually or electronically by solid waste staff, which is helpful in identifying customer service and safety‐oriented employees.
#2   Basic Training Camp
After successfully going through the four‐steps of the hiring process, the newly hired SWEO will report to the City of Phoenix Employee Driver Training Academy (EDTA) for three weeks of classroom and course training. The new class of SWEOs will be trained on the State of Arizona CDL requirements, the City of Phoenix policies and procedures, and basic operations of all solid waste equipment on the training course.

During  the  three‐week  training  period,  SWEOs will  be evaluated on  driving  skills  by  the  training  Solid Waste Foreman. Based on their evaluation, the Foreman will decide if a new SWEO needs further course training beyond the three weeks before sending them to the field office for route training.  We offer one additional week of training if they do not graduate from the academy at that time they will fail probation and are relieved of their duties.  We had employees needing extra training, but we never had anyone fail probation at week four of the process.

Attachment B

#3  Field Training
The  first  step  in  the  field  training  is  to  assign  the  new  SWEO  to  an  authorized  training  SWEO.  The authorized SWEO is one who has been authorized to train after undergoing “train the trainer” training in how to properly train the new SWEO. A new SWEO will generally train with his peer (training SWEO) for two to three weeks on the operation of equipment and route collection. The trainer and trainee will sign off on a training log, which tracks the new SWEO’s progress. After the new SWEO reaches the point where they have progressed to completing 80 percent of the route, then his new Foreman and Superintendent will sign off that the SWEO is ready to go out on a route alone.

The second step in field training is to assign the new SWEO to a training route after being signed off by trainer  and  management  staff.  The  SWEO  is  on  probation  for  the  first  year  and  is  evaluated  on performance  at  the  three‐  and  six‐month  periods.  This  evaluation  period  is  most  crucial  to  properly evaluate the new SWEO’s progress and offer them whatever assistance is needed in order to improve.

The  Foreman,  Solid Waste  Supervisor  and  Superintendent  review  the  new  SWEO’s  evaluation  closely before signing off on their three‐ and six‐month evaluations. #4  Refresher Training (Tailgate Meetings)
Training for all SWEOs is an ongoing process in which they get weekly “tailgate meeting” training on the division’s safety program. The Public Works Department also has a Safety Section with dedicated Safety Analysts who provide training when requested. In addition, the division has a safety committee, which meets quarterly to discuss employee safety concerns.
#5  Post‐Accident Training—Accident Reduction Training (ART) After any accident where a SWEO in involved, the incident is investigated thoroughly by the Foreman and an accident report is created and presented to the SWEO for review and signature. After the SWEO has signed the accident report or responded in writing and after careful consideration by management staff, the  accident  will  be  ruled  either  chargeable  or  non‐chargeable.  In  the  case  of  a  chargeable  vehicular accident,  the SWEO is sent  to Accident Reduction Training  to be evaluated and  re‐trained on accident prevention.
#6  Performance Standards and Accountability
City of Phoenix SWEOs are held to strict performance standards and safety is a prime concern. SWEOs are rated on their performance standards yearly as part of their annual performance evaluation. SWEOs are held accountable  for any  reported garbage misses on  their routes, garbage spills, staff complaints and fluid spills.

In addition, SWEOs are held accountable  for any chargeable or preventable accidents.  A strong safety program is key to the department’s success in preventing accidents and since the year 2000, the Public Works Department has made it a priority to assist SWEOs prevent accidents and be more safety conscious during day‐to‐day operations. Industrial accidents have also been of concern to the City of Phoenix and by providing personal protection equipment to staff, injury accidents have also decreased.

Finally, no safety program would be successful if not for the constant follow‐up and reminders that SWEOs are given daily to make they are conducting proper pre and post trip inspections. The City of Phoenix pre‐ and post‐trip program consists of random pre‐trip inspections, which occur weekly as well as quarterly random safety inspections of safety equipment. In addition, pre‐trip testing occurs at the time of each SWEO’s yearly performance evaluation.

Tony Miano has 33 years in the solid waste industry, with 28 plus years with the City of Phoenix, AZ retiring as Public Works Assistant Director (Acting). Most recently, he holds a position as Public Works, Solid Waste Manager for the City of Tempe, AZ. Tony also maintains active membership in the American Public Works Association (APWA), and is the Past President of SWANA’s Arizona Chapter. He can be reached at (480) 350‐8051 or via e‐mail at [email protected].

Attachment B
Attachment C
Attachment C
Attachment C
1 3456789
1011
12131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748

B CD E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R
Processing / Transfer / Landfill Site
Hours Minutes Hours Minutes Hours Minutes
Total Time per Day 10.00 600 10.00 600 10.00 600
Lunch (Unpaid)(confirm) 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0
Breaks (@ 10 minutes) 3 0.50 30 3 0.50 30 3 0.50 30
Pre/post trip requirements 0.50 30 0.67 40 0.67 40
Travel time to route 0.17 10 0.17 10 0.17 10
Round Trip (Load 1) 45 0.75 45 35 0.58 35 35 0.58 35Round Trip (Load 2) 0.75 45 0.58 35 0.58 35Round Trip (Load 3) 0.75 45 Return for Late Set-Out/Missed Carts 0.25 15 0.25 15 0.25 15 Total Time Available for Collection 6.33 380 7.25 435 7.25 435 Percent Productive Time On Route 63% 73% 73%
Collection Time per Cart (seconds) 12 12 12
Travel Time per Cart (seconds) 12 14 14
Average Service Time per Cart (seconds) 24.0 26.0 26.0
Carts per Minute (includes additional carts) 2.5 2.3 2.3 TARGET ROUTE PRODUCTIVITY STANDARD (Carts/Route/Day) 950 1,004 1,004 Current Estimate
Tons per Year 24,765 12,965 3,855
Total Number of Accounts 14,516 14,516 14,516
Average Participation 100% 55% 41%
Average Participating Accounts 14,516 8,031 6,023
Average Weight per Account (pounds) 40.0 40.0
Average Weight per Setout (pounds) 65.6 34.4 10.2
Legal Payload / Max Packed 9.8 tons 9.8 tons 5.0 tons
19,500 lbs. 19,500 lbs. 10,000 lbs.

Accounts per Load 297 568 979
Number of Loads 3.20 1.77 1.03
City of Porterville

TARGET PRODUCTIVITY ANALYSIS

SOLID WASTE GREEN WASTE RECYCLING
4x10 4x10 4x10
Site Name Site Name Site Name
\\192.168.2.9\R3_Shared\+Projects\Porterville - Operations Review and Rate Model\Task 2 - Operations Review\Porterville Target Productivity Analysis 030721.xlsx / Porterville Attachment D
6 789

B CD E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R

TARGET PRODUCTIVITY ANALYSIS

SOLID WASTE GREEN WASTE RECYCLING
4x10 4x10 4x10
49505152535455565758596061626364656667686970717273748687888990919293949596979899 100101102103

ROUND TRIP TIME
Solid Waste Green Waste Recycling
Drive Time to Facility 15 Drive Time to Facility 10 Drive Time to Facility 10 Time at Facility 15 Time at Facility 10 Time at Facility 10 Drive Time Back to Route 15 Drive Time Back to Route 15 Drive Time Back to Route 15 Total Round Trip Time (minutes) 45 Total Round Trip Time (minutes) 35 Total Round Trip Time (minutes) 35

ADDITIONAL CART SERVICE TIME
Solid Waste Green Waste Recycling
Additional Cart Service Time 12.0 12.0 12.0
Overall Average Service Time per Cart 24.0 26.0 26.0
Carts per Minute 2.5 2.3 2.3
Solid Waste Green Waste Recycling
Number of Weekly Accounts 14,516 14,516 14,516
Number of Collection Days per Week 2 2 2
Number of Accounts per Day Systemwide 7,258 7,258 7,258 Participation Rate 100% 55% 41%
Number of Carts per Day (Subtotal) 7,258 4,015 3,012
% of Accounts with an Additional Cart 0% 0% 0%
Additional Carts - Participation Rate 100% 100% 100%
Number of Additional Carts per Day (Subtotal) - - -
Number of Carts Collected per Day (Systemwide Total) 7,258 4,015 3,012 Target Route Productivity Standard (Carts/Route/Day) 950 1,004 1,004 Number of Required Routes per Day 7.6 4.0 3.0
Actual Number 7.0 4.0 3.0

NUMBER OF ROUTES REQUIRED
\\192.168.2.9\R3_Shared\+Projects\Porterville - Operations Review and Rate Model\Task 2 - Operations Review\Porterville Target Productivity Analysis 030721.xlsx / Porterville Attachment D
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment Technology Review
DRAFT REPORT
Prepared by:
3002 Dow Avenue, Suite 116, Tustin, CA  92780
Office: 866.241.4533
[email protected]  ∙  www.sloanvazquez.com
Contact: Enrique Vazquez
[email protected]
March 9, 2021
Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | i

1. TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 1

2.  INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 7

2.2  Project Purpose ............................................................................................................................. 7

2.3  Project Approach .......................................................................................................................... 7

3.  BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................................... 8

4.  EVALUATION OF OPERTIONS SYSTEMS ................................................................................................. 9

4.1  RFID Tag Identification ................................................................................................................ 10

4.1.1  Current Container Operations ............................................................................................ 10

4.1.2  Potential Uses and Benefits of RFID Tags ........................................................................... 11

4.1.3  Practical Considerations ...................................................................................................... 11

4.2  On‐Board interior/exterior camera monitoring system ............................................................. 12

4.2.1  Current On‐Board Interior/Exterior Camera Monitoring System ....................................... 13

4.2.2  Practical Considerations ...................................................................................................... 13

4.3  On‐Board Truck Scales ................................................................................................................ 13

4.3.1  Current ................................................................................................................................ 14

4.3.2  Practical Considerations ...................................................................................................... 14

4.4  Upgraded Field Communications ................................................................................................ 14

4.4.1  Current Field Communications ........................................................................................... 15

4.4.2  Practical Considerations ...................................................................................................... 15

4.5  Integrated CRM System .............................................................................................................. 15

4.5.1  Current ................................................................................................................................ 16

4.5.2  Practical Considerations ...................................................................................................... 16

4.6  On‐Board DeviceS ....................................................................................................................... 18

4.6.1  Current ................................................................................................................................ 18

4.6.2  Practical Considerations ...................................................................................................... 18

5.  TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT EXAMPLES ................................................................................................... 19

5.2.1  CRM Systems ....................................................................................................................... 19

5.2.2  RFID Tags ............................................................................................................................. 22

6.  Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................................... 23 Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | ii

6.2  Integrated Customer Relationship Manager .............................................................................. 23

6.2.1  CRM Observations ............................................................................................................... 23

6.2.2  Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 24

6.3  RFID Tags ..................................................................................................................................... 24

6.3.1  Considerations .................................................................................................................... 24

6.3.2  Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 24 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 – Typical Solid Waste Operation Workflow Diagram ...................................................................... 9 Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Porterville retained the services of a consultant team led by R3 Consulting, including Sloan Vazquez McAfee (SVM), to assist with conducting an evaluation of the costs, efficiency and effectiveness  of  several  operations  systems  technology  enhancements  and  to  provide recommendations  whether  the  systems  would  be  cost  effective  and  beneficial  to  the  City  of Porterville’s solid waste operation.

The City identified the following technology enhancements for review and evaluation.  An RFID Tag Identification System
 On‐Board Interior/Exterior Camera Monitoring System,
 On‐Board Truck Scales,
 Upgraded Field Communications, and
In addition, because they are at the center of the technologies available to solid waste collection, the following two technology enhancements have been reviewed.  Integrated Customer Relationship Management System
 On‐Board Devices (Tablets/Computers)
Integrated Customer Relationship Manager (CRM)
Common practice for solid waste operations is for the customer service center to be equipped with an industry‐specific customer relationship manager (CRM) software system. The use of an industry‐specific CRM has become essential for efficient and cost‐effective solid waste operations. In order to consistently deliver quality, value‐driven customer service, it is critical for an operation to have a well‐ designed and functional system that ensures customer service information is accurate, current and accessible on‐demand.

Findings:
 Porterville’s solid waste operation lacks an effective integrated customer service relationship manager (CRM).
 Customer Service and related functions can be greatly improved by procuring an industry‐ specific CRM to process customer requests, complaints, and inquiries.  Introducing a new CRM will require advance planning and on‐going coordination, including selecting the best system, meeting the requirements for conversion, creating the CRM database, and training staff.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 2
 It is important to note that technology alone cannot resolve problems. Projects of this magnitude will fail without an internal champion to provide leadership. The process must be led internally by a capable and committed supporter of the new CRM.  An additional benefit to managing the introduction of a new system is that it can become a catalyst for change. The process affords management an opportunity to review, assess, and challenge the status quo and redefine the entire workflow to improve efficiencies and quality of service.

Recommendations:
 SVM recommends the City develop and put out an RFP for an integrated customer relationship manager/billing system to include on‐board device technology and functionality.  Proposers must include the main customer service/billing platform and on‐board devices separately for the City’s consideration.
 The RFP should invite providers of on‐board technology such as FleetMind and RouteWare.  Proposers with customer service/billings systems must include the option to integrate with at minimum FleetMind and RouteWare.

On‐Board Devices (Tablets/Computers)
On‐board devices are essentially extensions of the CRM system. In effect, it is a device mounted inside the collection vehicle networked to communicate remotely with the CRM system.

Findings:
 With the proliferation of smaller devices such as laptops, workbooks, tablets and even telephones, the functionality of device access has expanded the opportunities for efficiency gains and service quality improvements.
 While using these devices mounted in a collection vehicle may at times be too expensive or ambitious, the more practical uses for this technology are in route supervision, container pick‐ up and delivery, bulky item collection, and route and billing auditing.  The City does not currently use on‐board devices due to a lack of an integrated CRM.  The use of mobile devices such as tablets for these functions would complement other efforts to reduce inefficiency and increase cost‐effectiveness and customer value.  To introduce On‐Board Devices, the solid waste operation must either also acquire a CRM system or choose a standalone product from a vendor such as FleetMind or SmartWare.

Recommendations:
 Should the City proceed with a CRM system, the City should also consider adopting on‐board devices.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 3
RFID Tag Identification
RFID tags are radio frequency identification devices embedded onto containers. In a solid waste operation, the application of RFID tags offers the potential to improve container management and tracking. Because containers represent a significant capital investment, it is important to manage and track this important asset in a reliable and effective manner.  Alternatively, Bar Code labels can be used to improve container inventory management but offer less functionality than RFID tags. Bar Code labels are attached to containers as a sticker.

Findings:
 The main areas in which container management can benefit from RFID tags are 1) Container Inventory & Tracking, and 2) Service Verification.
 Bar Code labels are more limited than RFIDs Tags in that they will likely get dirty and unreadable requiring special cleaning products to help keep the label clean.  Bar Code labels can be useful when used by container maintenance staff with handheld scanners. However, they do not work with sensors mounted on vehicles.  Porterville has not purchased RFID equipped containers.  Existing residential containers would need to be equipped with RFID tags or replaced with RFID equipped containers to benefit from RFID tag technology.  The cost to tag existing carts with RFID’s can range from $10.00 to $15.00 per cart.  Any option that does not equip every container, or at least the majority of them, with an RFID tag would result in a less effective system.
 Converting to RFID tags is most efficient and cost‐effective with the acquisition of new containers.
 To introduce RFID tags, the solid waste operation must either also acquire a CRM system or choose a standalone product from vendors such as FleetMind or SmartWare.

Recommendations:
 A more practical solution is to consider the service of FleetGenius by using their aGenda software. It can be implemented as a stand‐alone program with smartphones and/or tablets.

Although the program can be used for any type of delivery and pickup, it has been customized to address the needs of the solid waste container management environment. Since it is based on a monthly subscription, it is easy to implement and does not require a large up‐front investment. In addition to container management, the program can be used for scheduling bulky item pickups, temporary container, including and roll‐off boxes.

On‐Board Interior/Exterior Camera Monitoring System
The primary application for on‐board cameras has been to improve safety.  More recent innovations include front view and interior view cameras that can record continuously, or that can engage upon Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 4
sensing the force of an impact. The recorded information can become useful to safety personnel for accident investigation and to determine the cause of the incident.

Another application for cameras is to capture service‐related conditions such as over‐filled containers, obstacles blocking containers or containers not set out for collection and thus preventing service delivery, and damaged containers needing repairs including graffiti removal. Most on‐board tablets have the capacity to connect with the truck mounted cameras for picture taking and transmission to the central CRM/Billing system.

Findings:
 Almost all of Porterville’s collection vehicles are equipped with Lytx event recorders that capture the driver and provide a front view.
 Most vehicles are equipped with a 2‐camera system; one for the hopper area and a back‐up camera provided by Safety Vision and multiple other manufacturers.  The Lytx system provides web access to real‐time fleet tracking and to recordings of previous periods for managerial review.
 The Lytx system allows for GPS tracking of vehicles, capturing evidence during accidents, and critical incidents for use in safety training or compliance.  To maximize the benefit from the use of systems such as Lytx requires an intentional effort to assign staff and provide training to perform new tasks. However, the benefits from these technologies are derived from reviewing recorded events, evaluating what occurred, and using these as learning opportunities to improve safety.
 While the Lytx system provides useful tools, the system is currently underutilized due to lack of training and recent changes in personnel.

Recommendations:
 Maximize the benefits of the Lytx system by formalizing tasks, integrating into a job description and training staff to use the Lytx system.

On‐Board Truck Scales
On‐board scales are truck mounted scales that detect the weight of the truck while in operation. The two reasons for on‐board scales are 1) to comply with gross vehicle weight limitations, and 2) to maximize payloads.  Knowing the weight of a truck is indispensable to complying with maximum weight limits imposed by laws. Maximizing payloads is just as important.

Supervisors rely on weight tickets to determine if routes are “right sized” to maximize payloads and to avoid overloading trucks. The problem is that this information is received after the fact. On‐board scales are intended to remedy this problem by taking the guessing out and ensuring that trucks are not loaded beyond the legal limit but not underloaded as well.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 5
Findings:
 Procuring and installing on‐board scales can range between $15,000 to $20,000 per truck.  Because of the heavy demands placed on them in while loading trucks, on‐board scales are high maintenance and are often out‐of‐order.
 Maintenance personnel do not consider them a high priority when it comes to repairing them.  To justify these expenditures would require a focused effort to use the on‐board scales to maximize payloads that could result in a reduction in number of trucks and personnel needed to provide collection service.
 The Porterville operation does not currently equip its fleet with on‐board scales.

Recommendations:
 SVM does not recommend the installation of on‐board scales to the City’s solid waste operation fleet.
 The City could equip one or two trucks with on‐board scales and use them to test routes. Also, scales can be mounted on a scout truck for checking the weight of containers at specific accounts. This would allow supervision to better assess the load factors of each route and to identify customers with excessive weight needs.

Upgraded Field Communications
The ability to communicate with field staff such as route supervisors and drivers is indispensable to providing quality and timely solid waste service. Traditionally, solid waste operations have used two‐way radios for communications with a dispatcher functioning as the central base. There are some limitations with signal perimeter range or coverage and with “black spots” or “dead zones”.

Findings:
 Porterville operation uses a two‐way radio system with a base in the office as the primary means of communication with the drivers.
 When out of range, drivers use their personal cell phones as a secondary means of communication to call the office landline.
 Due to the practicality of mobile phones, field personnel and office staff have relied on using personal mobile phones.
 Mobile phones allow for texting, taking and transmitting pictures, and private conversations, which allow for faster resolution of problems.
 While the supervisor is provided a work cell phone, drivers depend on their personal cell phones.
 Solid waste operations have adapted by continuing the use of radio service when available, and by migrating to push‐to‐talk systems or to the use of cellular phones.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 6
 A notable trend is the reduction in oral communication by use of on‐board devices to communicate with the customer service system in real time.  This advancement is not viable without a dedicated CRM system.

Recommendations:
 Provide drivers with cell phones.
 Introduce on‐board devices to allow for transmission of routine service‐related information in real time.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 7

2. INTRODUCTION

2.2 PROJECT PURPOSE
The purpose of this task is to evaluate the costs, efficiency and effectiveness of several operations systems technology enhancements (technology enhancements) and to provide recommendations whether the systems would be cost‐effective and beneficial to the City of Porterville’s solid waste operation.

The City identified the following technology enhancements for review and evaluation.  An RFID Tag Identification System
 On‐Board Interior/Exterior Camera Monitoring System,
 On‐Board Truck Scales,
 Upgraded Field Communications, and
In addition, because they are at the center of the technologies available to solid waste collection, the following two technology enhancements have been reviewed.  Integrated Customer Relationship Management System
 On‐Board Devices (Tablets/Computers)

2.3 PROJECT APPROACH
The technology enhancements evaluation was initiated with a kick‐off meeting on August 4, 2020.

Concurrently, an information request was submitted to gather additional information regarding the operations. A site visit was conducted on October 21st and 22, 2020 to gain an overview of the current operations, conduct interviews with key personnel, supervisors and staff, request specific information, conduct observation of the customer service center, ask questions, and record issues and events that were deemed relevant to achieve the goals of this evaluation.

During this visit Team Member, Enrique Vazquez of Sloan Vazquez McAfee (SVM) met with and interviewed the following City staff;
 Richard Tree, Field Services Manager
 Jose Lopez, Field Services Supervisor,
 Bertha Yarbrough, Clerical Assistant II.

The purpose of these meetings and interviews was to get a comprehensive understanding of the City’s solid waste operation and to assess the systems and practices being used to perform customer service, billing, container tracking and inventory management, and field communications.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 8
Subsequent to the site visit, Mr. Vazquez researched and met with vendors who offered industry‐ specific products to evaluate the functionalities and features of each product and to determine their suitability to the City’s solid waste operations’ needs.

3. BACKGROUND
The City’s solid waste operation is a typical municipal solid waste department. Its primary purpose is to remove the City’s solid waste and dispose of it safely and in a timely manner. The main organizational functions within such an operation include;
 Collection Operations: Responsible for equipment and personnel required to collect and dispose of solid waste and recycling materials;
 Fleet Maintenance: Responsible for the mechanical upkeep of the vehicles and equipment;  Container Management: Responsible for maintaining, delivering and tracking containers;  Customer Service: Responsible for handling inquiries and services request from customers;  Billing: Responsible for the timely production and distribution of invoices and billing statements, receipt and posting of payments.

For most solid waste operations, the customer service center is the communication nexus with its customers. Hence, the organization and management of the customer service center is vital to the delivery of efficient and consistent quality service.

Calls into the Customer Service Center fall into the following general categories:
 Establish new service,
 Request additional service,
 Amend existing service (such as cart or bin exchanges),  File a service complaint,
 Billing, and
 General questions.

At its basic level, a solid waste operation directs the personnel and equipment to collect and dispose of solid waste and recycling materials. The other functions serve as support functions that can be organizationally directed by the solid waste collection operation or can be provided by other departments and / or outsourced to vendors.

The general workflow for a solid waste operation is depicted, at a high level, from customer calls to billing, in Figure 1 – Typical Solid Waste Operation Workflow Diagram.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 9
FIGURE 1 – TYPICAL SOLID WASTE OPERATION WORKFLOW DIAGRAM In the City of Porterville, solid waste operation includes responsibility for container management, and customer service. Fleet maintenance is provided by the fleet maintenance department which is also responsible for all the City’s vehicles. Billing is provided by the Finance Department, the City’s water billing system using the Incode Utility Billing System1 .

4. EVALUATION OF OPERTIONS SYSTEMS
A major consideration identified by the City when evaluating the operations systems was their compatibility and potential for integration so that “everything works together” as efficiently and seamlessly as possible. Determining the compatibility and integration capacity of an operations system 1 Incode is a software product by Tyler Technologies for municipal utility billing functions.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 10 requires both the evaluation and understanding of the technology itself and, the organizational structure in which it will operate.

Common practice for solid waste operations is for the customer service center to be equipped with an industry‐specific customer relationship manager (CRM) software system. The use of an industry‐specific CRM has become essential for efficient and cost‐effective solid waste operations. In order to consistently deliver quality, value‐driven customer service, it is critical for an operation to have a well‐ designed and functional system that ensures customer service information is accurate, current and accessible on‐demand.

It is important to note that Porterville’s solid waste operation does not use a unified CRM system for managing the workflow related to services rendered to their solid waste customers. In fact, the solid waste operation does not perform its customer service functions through a centralized customer service call center. To perform routine administrative functions and for workflow management, staff uses emails to communicate and excel worksheets for recording and tracking requirements.

The following sections will address the specific technology enhancements identified by the SWD for potential benefits to the SWD solid waste operation.

4.1 RFID TAG IDENTIFICATION
RFID tags are radio frequency identification devices embedded onto containers. In a solid waste operation, the application of RFID tags offers the potential to improve container management and tracking. Because containers represent a significant capital investment, it is important to manage and track this important asset in a reliable and effective manner.  Alternatively, Bar Code labels can be used to improve container inventory management but offer less functionality than RFID tags. Bar Code labels are attached to containers as a sticker.

4.1.1 CURRENT CONTAINER OPERATIONS
The operation is not staffed with a designated work crew to perform the container management functions of receiving, delivering, retrieving, maintaining (washing, welding, painting, etc.) of containers.

These container management functions are performed by several drivers who are also welders. These tasks are completed upon completion of their route collection assignment. Because this is a secondary assignment to these work crews, container functions are not completed in a timely manner.

The City does not keep an official container inventory. Service requests are generated by office staff. The driver loads delivery truck based on the number of service requests. Upon container delivery, the driver hand writes the serial numbers and returns the service requests to office staff for entry into an Excel database. The Excel table is updated with the current location of each container when 1) containers are delivered to a customer site, 2) containers are retrieved from a customer site and returned to the city facilities for storage, and 3) containers are retired from service. The information is maintained and updated by office staff.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 11 City staff is uncertain as to how many containers are equipped with bar code labels. However, residential carts purchased after 2016 are equipped with bar code labels. The bar code labels are not used for tracking and inventory purposes at this time. No containers are equipped with RFID tags.

4.1.2 POTENTIAL USES AND BENEFITS OF RFID TAGS
With either RFID tags or Bar Code labels, container tracking can be more accurate and reliable because each container can be associated with a specific location, either at a customer location or at the storage yard in inventory. RFID tags pr Bar Code labels can be read electronically with a scanning device. This offers various ways to automate and improve container management efficiency.

The main areas in which container management can benefit from RFID tags are  Container Inventory & Tracking, and
 Service Verification.

Bar Code labels are more limited than RFID Tags in that they will likely get dirty and unreadable requiring special cleaning products to help keep the label clean. Bar Code labels can be useful when used by container maintenance staff with handheld scanners. However, they do not work with sensors mounted on vehicles.

4.1.2.1 CONTAINER INVENTORY & TRACKING
Newly purchased containers can be received into inventory using a handheld scanner to quickly record the serial number into an electronic file. When delivering containers to a customer, staff can scan the RFID tag or Bar Code label and assign the container to the customer location while at the same time, removing it from the City yard inventory list. Likewise, when removing containers from customer locations, the containers is scanned, identified and received into the City yard inventory. Containers that have been moved, misplaced, or stolen can be identified, retrieved and assigned to the proper location.

4.1.2.2 SERVICE VERIFICATION
On the collection route, route trucks can be equipped with on‐board devices that integrate various operational functions including software and scanners that can read and associate container serial numbers with service locations. This can be used to verify that containers have been serviced. The information can be transmitted to update the CRM system in real‐time so that customer service personnel can avail themselves of the most current information. Bar Code labels are impractical for service verification due to its tendency to become dirty and requiring cleaning. Driver’s primary job is to empty containers efficiently. Pausing to clean bar codes would cause excessive delays.

4.1.3 PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
If the reason for using RFID tags is container inventory and tracking, the first step is to ensure that all containers are equipped with an RFID tags. Residential carts can be purchased with embedded RFID tags at no significant additional cost. Hence, it is most efficient and cost‐effective to convert to RFID tags Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 12 concurrent with the acquisition of new containers. Porterville has not purchased RFID equipped containers. Existing residential containers would need to be equipped with RFID tags or replaced with RFID equipped containers to benefit from RFID tag technology. Any option that does not equip every container, or at least the majority of them, with an RFID tag would result in a less effective system.

When considering RFID technology, an important consideration is the costs for installing RFID tags onto the containers. The process of installing RFID on existing carts is challenging and labor intensive because crews have to be deployed into the field to locate and install the RFID tags. To ensure maximum tagging, more than one cycle through a route is required, since not all carts are located in the first round. Even so, it is never certain that every cart can be located and tagged. The cost to tag existing carts with RFID’s can range from $10.00 to $15.00 per cart.

The timing for replacing containers with RFID tags requires planning as well. The introduction of RFID tags may require the installation of equipment on the vehicles as well as the embedding of RFID tags on the containers. As previously stated, embedding RFID tags unto existing containers can be costly.

Alternatively, the City’s solid waste operation could improve container tracking by adopting handheld scanners for use by container management crews.

If the reason for using RFID tags is service verification, then an on‐board device will be required. In actual application, RFID tags have been found to be most reliable when used with residential carts. A frequent complaint from operations using RFID tags for service verification is that truck mounted scanners fail to read RFID tags at 100% and their ability to read RFID tags deteriorate over time. There is virtually no application of RFID tags with commercial bins. For this reason, most on‐board computer systems are equipped to detect the container lifting cycle as an alternative method for service verification. Other systems use both RFID and lifting motion.

4.2 ON‐BOARD INTERIOR/EXTERIOR CAMERA MONITORING SYSTEM Cameras have become ubiquitous in the solid waste industry. The primary application has been to improve safety with the adoption of “back‐up cameras” or rear‐mounted cameras that provide a rear view as the driver travels in reverse. Back‐up cameras engage automatically when the truck is shifted into reverse. As technology has advanced and the price of cameras has declined, solid waste operations have begun using multi‐camera systems to provide the driver with a rear view and side views, for greater all‐around visibility during operations.

More recent innovations include front view and interior view cameras that can record continuously, or that can engage upon sensing the force of an impact. The sensitivity for engaging can be set by the user.

These cameras are intended to engage as rapidly as possible whenever the vehicle is involved in an accident. The recorded information can become useful to safety personnel for accident investigation and to determine the cause of the incident.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 13 Another application for cameras is to capture service‐related conditions such as over‐filled containers, obstacles blocking containers or containers not set out for collection and thus preventing service delivery, and damaged containers needing repairs including graffiti removal. Most on‐board tablets have the capacity to connect with the truck mounted cameras for picture taking and transmission to the central CRM/Billing system.

4.2.1 CURRENT ON‐BOARD INTERIOR/EXTERIOR CAMERA MONITORING SYSTEM Almost all of Porterville’s collection vehicles are equipped with Lytx event recorders that capture the driver and provide a front view.  In addition, most vehicles are equipped with a 2‐camera system; one for the hopper area and a back‐up camera provided by Safety Vision and multiple other manufacturers.

The Lytx system also provides web access to real‐time fleet tracking and to recordings of previous periods for managerial review. The Lytx system allows for GPS tracking of vehicles, capturing evidence during accidents, and critical incidents for use in safety training or compliance.

While the Lytx system provides useful tools, the system is currently underutilized due to lack of training and recent changes in personnel.

4.2.2 PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
To maximize the benefit from the use of systems such as Lytx requires an intentional effort to assign staff and provide training to perform new tasks. A common mistake when adopting camera and systems is to simply install the technology and expect an automatic improvement. However, the benefits from these technologies are derived from reviewing recorded events, evaluating what occurred, and using these as learning opportunities to improve safety. Supervisors can benefit from these technologies with the proper training.

4.3 ON‐BOARD TRUCK SCALES
On‐board scales are truck mounted scales that detect the weight of the truck while in operation. The two reasons for on‐board scales are 1) to comply with gross vehicle weight limitations, and 2) to maximize payloads. Knowing the weight of a truck is indispensable to complying with maximum weight limits imposed by laws. In other industries, the load of the vehicle can be calculated based on the product that is loaded onto the truck. In a solid waste operation, the solid waste is being loaded at each stop and the driver cannot be certain as to the weight of the truck. Maximizing payloads is just as important. Solid waste collection vehicles are capital intensive. It is prudent to maximize the productivity of each truck by ensuring that every trip is carrying as close to its maximum capacity as possible.

Traditionally, solid waste operators have relied on the judgment of experienced drivers to correctly determine the weight of their truck. Solid waste collection vehicles are typically weighed at the disposal facility. The weight tickets have been the primary source of weight information for operations management. These provide supervision with the ability to determine if routes are “right sized” to maximize payloads and to avoid overloading trucks. The problem is that this information is received Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 14 after the fact. On‐board scales are intended to remedy this problem by taking the guessing out and ensuring that trucks are not loaded beyond the legal limit but not underloaded as well.

4.3.1 CURRENT
The Porterville operation does not currently equip its fleet with on‐board scales.

4.3.2 PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
On‐board scales have been in use for several decades. Yet, the general consensus from frontline supervision is that they “don’t work”. Because of the heavy demands placed on them in while loading trucks, on‐board scales are high maintenance and are often out‐of‐order. Maintenance personnel do not consider them a high priority when it comes to repairing them.  Depending on the specific product, the cost to procure and install on‐board scales can range between $15,000 to $20,000 per truck. There is also an increase in truck maintenance costs.

To justify these expenditures would require a focused effort to use the on‐board scales to maximize payloads that could result in a reduction in number of trucks and personnel needed to provide collection service.  In consideration of these factors, SVM does not recommend the installation of on‐board scales to the City’s solid waste operation fleet.

However, the City could equip one or two trucks with on‐board scales and use them to test routes. Also, scales can be mounted on a scout truck for checking the weight of containers at specific accounts. This would allow supervision to better assess the load factors of each route and to identify customers with excessive weight needs.

4.4 UPGRADED FIELD COMMUNICATIONS
The ability to communicate with field staff such as route supervisors and drivers is indispensable to providing quality and timely solid waste service. Traditionally, solid waste operations have used two‐way radios for communications with a dispatcher functioning as the central base. The technology has been generally reliable and practical. There are some limitations. Perhaps the most important is signal perimeter range or coverage. When the signal perimeter is exceeded communication will be out‐of‐ range. Another problem with two‐way radio communication is “black spots” or “dead zones”. These are areas where the two‐way radio service is blocked due to obstacles impeding radio transmission including the topographical features of the terrain. This is similar to the lack of signal on a cellular telephone.

With changes in the communication field, solid waste operations have adapted by continuing the use of radio service when available, and by migrating to push‐to‐talk systems or to the use of cellular phones.

One of the challenges with the use of cellular phones is managing phone usage and associated costs.

Besides legitimate usage there is also the potential for abuse by using the phone for personal communication. Increases in usage can result in significant additional costs for the service. This is often Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 15 mitigated by limiting the functionality of the phone service. For example, the phones may be “locked‐ out” of texting pictures. However, this also locks out legitimate uses that can enhance service quality such as when a driver can use the cellular phone to take and transmit a picture of an over‐filled container.

4.4.1 CURRENT FIELD COMMUNICATIONS
Porterville operation uses a two‐way radio system with a base in the office as the primary means of communication with the drivers. When out of range, drivers use their personal cell phones as a secondary means of communication to call the office landline. Also, reception tends to be spotty and at times unreliable.  Due to the practicality of mobile phones, field personnel and office staff have relied on using personal mobile phones. Mobile phones allow for texting, taking and transmitting pictures, and private conversations, which allow for faster resolution of problems. While the supervisor is provided a work cell phone, drivers depend on their personal cell phones.

4.4.2 PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
With the rapid changes in the communication field, solid waste operations have adapted by continuing the use of radio service when available, and by migrating to push‐to‐talk systems or to the use of cellular phones. One of the challenges with the use of cellular phones is managing the phone usage and associated costs. Besides legitimate usage there is also the potential for abuse by using the phone for personal communication. Increases in usage can result in significant additional costs for the service. This is often mitigated by limiting the functionality of the phone service. For example, the phones may be “locked‐out” of texting pictures. However, this also locks out legitimate uses that can enhance service quality such as when a driver can use the cellular phone to take and transmit a picture of an over‐filled containers.

One notable trend is the reduction in oral communication by use of on‐board devices which communicate with the customer service system in real time. Many of the routine messages are programmed into the on‐board device so that the driver only has to touch a selection and the message is uploaded into the central CRM system making the message instantly available and visible to other personnel, such as customer service representatives or route supervisors. This advancement is not viable without a dedicated CRM system.

4.5 INTEGRATED CRM SYSTEM
The customer service center is the central point of communication. In a solid waste operation, the activities performed to deliver service are practically invisible to the customer. Their relationship with the solid waste provider is the receipt of their bill, their interaction with customer service, and occasionally, interaction with drivers or field supervisors. Therefore, it is important to have a well‐ designed and functional system that ensures that customer service information is current and accessible on‐demand, in order to render quality customer service.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 16 The development of Integrated Customer Relationship Management Systems (CRM) is perhaps the single most important technology development to benefit the solid waste industry. The original billing systems used in this industry were considered to serve this function, but with advances in technology, it evolved into a customer service platform. These advancements allowed solid waste operations to use a single central database to maintain customer account information for billing and logging customer inquiries and complaints. This customer service platform contained vital information for the delivery of services including customer subscription levels, service days, service frequency, billing and account status information, accounts receivables, routing, container location and tracking, and other pertinent customer specific metrics and information.

Today’s CRM systems function as a hub or nexus whereby staff in various roles within solid waste operations communicate and manage workflow. Several products have been designed to address the unique functions and needs of a typical collection services operation. Many vendors for these products are embracing and incorporating the latest developments in technology to bring the benefits of the digital conversion to the solid waste industry. In fact, most technological enhancements in solid waste have been developed to integrate and interact with the CRM.

Until very recently, most CRM vendors were teaming with vendors of other technologies such as on‐ board tablets, RFID tags, etc. to be able to offer a complete solution to the customer. Now most CRM vendors have partnered, acquired, or merged with providers of other technologies allowing them to provide a complete solution. Other vendors have designed interfaces with generically available android or windows tablets or iOS i‐Pads to serve as mobile devices.

4.5.1 CURRENT
The Porterville operation does not currently use an industry specific solid waste CRM system. Billing is provided through the Incode Utility Billing System. Specific service charges information is maintained in a legacy system developed in‐house by a previous employee. To perform routine administrative functions and workflow management, the City’s solid waste operation relies on a combination of disconnected tools, service requests, emails, excel worksheets and printouts.

The lack of a CRM system that can serve as a central hub to manage workflow communications is therefore a significant limitation for the City’s solid waste operation. In addition, the best technological enhancements available to the solid waste industry have been designed to integrate with a CRM system.

Without an industry‐specific CRM, the alternatives for technology enhancements to improve workflow efficiencies are significantly limited and the City’s solid waste operation’s goal to have “everything work together” will be more challenging.

4.5.2 PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
With the introduction of a CRM, there are several issues that must be addressed and decided. The most important is regarding the billing function. After these functional issues are thoroughly vetted and Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 17 priorities established, the system conversion process will require extensive planning and coordination (which is typical to implement any software conversion).

4.5.2.1 BILLING FUNCTION
The functionality of customer billing is the first and perhaps most important issue in consideration of adopting a CRM. Since all of the CRM products are integrated, they include a complete billing function.

Therefore, any of the new industry‐specific CRM products available could replace entirely the billing function provided by the Incode Utility Billing System. The challenge is the City’s use of Incode for both solid waste operations and water, since Incode is used for water bills and solid waste operations customer’s accounts producing a combined water and solid waste billing statement.

With the implementation of a new CRM, the solid waste operation must decide how it wants to bill its customers. A new CRM will accommodate the solid waste operation generating bills solely for solid waste collection service, and Incode can continue to separately bill for water service. If the City decides to continue producing a single invoice for both services, the solution is to continue using Incode for billing and to use the CRM for operations management. Several of the CRM vendors have extensive experience creating interfaces to integrate their systems with a separate municipal billing system.

It is SVM’s experience that this integration is feasible and Incode could continue to be used for billing.

However, the CRM products reviewed are capable of generating stand‐alone customer bills which offer several attributes to the City’s solid waste operation, including:
 Consolidating all of the solid waste operation’s functions in‐house and providing autonomy as an enterprise operation;
 Proving customers with a stand‐alone solid waste collection services centric bill that is not associated with water service;
 Obtaining complete control over the frequency and types of inserts included with bills;  Allowing the flexibility to include extensive messaging in bills and begin to use bills as a key customer service tool to educate customers about the necessity to recycle and reduce waste (e.g., include information on new and existing services, program participation guidelines, or a diversion graph or chart similar to the water usage history chart included currently). and,  Providing the opportunity to significantly expand the billing line items listed and include explanations as desired.

4.5.2.2 CONVERSION PLANNING & COORDINATION
Introducing a new CRM will require advance planning and on‐going coordination. The process includes selecting the product that best meets the City’s needs and procuring assistance from Incode to provide the technical analysis and technical support to ensure a seamless system interface between Incode and the new CRM. Additional steps include defining the requirements for conversion, creating the CRM database, and training staff.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 18 Although CRM vendors provide many of these services, the City’s role cannot be understated. It is important to note that technology alone cannot resolve problems. Projects of this magnitude will fail without an internal champion to provide leadership. The process must be led internally by a capable and committed supporter of the new CRM. One benefit to managing the introduction of a new system is that it can become a catalyst for change. The process affords management an opportunity to review, assess, and challenge the status quo and redefine the entire workflow of the operation to improve efficiencies and quality of service.

4.6 ON‐BOARD DEVICES
On‐board devices are essentially extensions of the CRM system. In effect, it is a device mounted inside the collection vehicle networked to communicate remotely with the CRM system. The availability of on‐ board devices emerged with the advent and proliferation of portable computers. This technology application developed somewhat independently from the more established CRM system. Because it was costly and its effectiveness was limited by the reliability of communication technology, solid waste operations were slow to adopt on‐board devices. Presently, due to customer expectations and because of the rapid enhancements in digital and wireless communication technology, there has been an increasing interest to integrate on‐board devices with CRM systems such that they function interactively and seamlessly.

In addition, with the proliferation of smaller devices such as laptops, workbooks, tablets and even telephones, the functionality of device access has expanded the opportunities for efficiency gains and service quality improvements. While using these devices mounted in a collection vehicle may at times be too expensive or ambitious, the more practical uses for this technology are in route supervision, container pick‐up and delivery, bulky item collection, and route and billing auditing. If the solid waste operation chooses to implement a CRM system, the use of mobile devices such as tablets for these functions would complement other efforts to reduce inefficiency and increase cost‐effectiveness and customer value.

4.6.1 CURRENT
The City does not currently use on‐board devices due to a lack of an integrated CRM.

4.6.2 PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
The effectiveness of on‐board devices continues to depend on the reliability of the communication link with the server where the CRM system is housed. When communication is lost, the on‐board device cannot retrieve and display updated information for the driver to act upon. And information captured in the field cannot be transmitted to the CRM system for updating. When this occurs too frequently or for extended periods of time, drivers often choose to abandon using the on‐board device and run their routes the old‐fashion way, by memory. Therefore, it is important to choose a system that has designed a work‐around for this eventuality and will continue to function reliably.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 19

5. TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT EXAMPLES

5.2.1 CRM SYSTEMS
Several specialized CRMs have been developed to provide for the unique functions of a solid waste operation. These CRMs integrate customer service functions with collection operations, container management, billing, and route management.

The following products provide the functionality to significantly improve Porterville’s solid waste operation’s workflow process.
 AMCS by AMCS
Website: https://www.amcsgroup.com
Link: Solid Waste & Recycling Software, Route Planning Solutions | AMCS Group  Encore by Core Computing Solutions
Website:  www.ccscorp.com/coreHome.html
Link: Home CORE | Routeware Inc. | Complete waste management software suite (ccscorp.com)  Soft‐Pak by Soft‐Pak Software Solutions
Website: https://soft‐pak.com/soft‐pak
Link: Waste Hauler Software For Solid Waste Trash Haulers ‐ Soft‐Pak (soft‐pak.com)  FleetMind Solutions Inc
Website: https://www.fleetmind.com
Link: FleetMind delivers the best fleet management solution for solid waste  RouteWare
Website: https://routeware.com/product‐features
Link: PRODUCT FEATURES | Fleet Management & Automation | Routeware All of these CRM systems offer excellent and reliable service, support, and training. They are available to run on servers housed on‐site or on a cloud‐based host application. They are well‐designed systems that integrate the customer service functions with field operations, container management, billing, and route management. They provide for functions such as processing service requests; keeping a history of service; complaint logging and follow‐up; work order processing; on‐call service dispatching; accurate billing of permanent and temporary services; on‐going interactive communication with field operations; data gathering for management by metrics, and safety; report generation; and various other essential and ancillary functions.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 20 Both AMCS and Soft‐Pak are capable of serving very large operations and have extensive experience with municipal operations. EnCore is capable of serving small and medium sized operations.

Furthermore, EnCore has been recently acquired by RouteWare, Inc. giving it more functionality and potentially placing it at the same level as AMCS and Soft‐Pak.

Except for FleetMind, the other vendors all offer a CRM/Billing system as their core product. FleetMind offers on‐board devices with comprehensive capabilities and the ability to interface with most CRM/Billing systems on the market. Until recently, most CRM/Billing systems did not offer their own on‐ board device solution. They partnered with vendors, such as FleetMind, who specialize specifically with the on‐board device technology. The CRM/Billing vendors prefer to use their own on‐board technology.

However, AMCS and Soft‐Pak specifically note their system’s integration with FleetMind.  EnCore provides the software and functionality to interface with Android based devices such as a Samsung tablet, but they do not sell the devices. However, with its acquisition by RouteWare, Encore now offers expanded functions comparable to those provided by FleetMind.

The main capabilities of these systems are summarized in Table 1 – CRM/Billing System Comparison.

TABLE 1 – CRM/BILLING SYSTEM COMPARISON
Features  ACMS  EnCore  Soft‐Pak
Customer Service System  Yes  Yes  Yes
Billing  Yes  Yes  Yes
Customer Web Portal  Yes  Yes  Yes
On‐Board Device  Ruggedized portable
tablet, or i‐Pads.

Cust. Responsible for
data plan.

Android tablets.

Provides software
and functionality,
Cust. responsible for
all hardware & data
plan.

Android tablets.

Provides software
and functionality,
Cust. responsible for
all hardware & data
plan.

Service Verification  RFID  Lifting Cycle
Detection
RFID
Camera Integration  Yes  Uses tablet camera  Yes
Cloud Based “Hosted” Option  Yes  Yes  Yes
Client Server  Micro Soft Windows;
City to purchase and
install server.

Micro Soft Windows;
City to purchase and
install server.

IBM iSeries.  City to
purchase and install.

Best for fleets >200
Vehicles.

FleetMind Integration  Yes  Yes  Yes
RouteWare Integration  Yes  Yes  YEs
Any one of these products would provide a complete solution to the City’s solid waste operation’s current CRM requirements. Where they differ most, is in the technological enhancements, such as on‐ board devices, RFID tags, etc.  For this reason, the evaluation of one company specializing with on‐board Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 21 devices was also reviewed. This will afford the solid waste operation an opportunity to select one vendor for their CRM and a separate vendor for on‐devices computers, should it be determined to be a better solution.

Should the solid waste operation opt to procure a customer service system, it will incur both an initial capital expenditure for the acquisition of the hardware and software required by the system, and recurring operating costs related to the maintenance of the system and operation of the customer service and billing functions.

The costs associated with the purchase, installation and operation of a system are summarized in Table 2 – CRM System Costs Estimates. The specific costs will vary depending on several considerations such as whether the system will be purchased, operated using in‐house servers or cloud‐based based, who will plan and manage the transitional costs and other such specific factors.

These cost estimates in low and high ranges for planning and budgetary purposes. Based on this research, the City can purchase a CRM system that is designed specifically for a solid waste operation for a one‐time cost of between $80,000 to $100,000 and recurring annual fees of between $30,000 and $60,000. These estimates are based on 10 users.

The costs for on‐board devices range from $25,000 to $200,000 and are based on equipping 23 vehicles with on‐board devices. The price range is primarily explainable on whether the vendor proposes the use of readily available tablets such as Samsung or i‐Pads or a specialized ruggedized computer with monitor as the main unit.

TABLE 2 – CRM SYSTEM COSTS ESTIMATES
COST – LOW  COST – HIGH
One Time
Cost
Recurring
Cost
One Time
Cost
Recurring
Cost

CRM/Billing System*  $80,000 $30,000 $100,000  60,000
On‐Board Tablets**  $25,000 $6,000 $200,000  50,000
GRAND TOTAL  $114,000 $36,000 $300,000  $110,000
Note:   Cost estimates are based on 10 users and 23 vehicles. *  Includes project management, software installation, office support, and training. **  The price variation is due to choice of device; Samsung tablets versus specialized, ruggedized computer with monitor.

If the solid waste operation opts to use a vendor such as FleetMind for on‐board devices, it would cost approximately $200,000 for the on‐board devices alone. Although the price is comparatively higher than the other options presented, their system is credibly better designed for the solid waste environment than Samsung tablets or i‐Pads. If the solid waste operation selects a vendor for the CRM software that offers Samsung tablets or i‐Pads, the solid waste operation has the option to select a FleetMind on‐ Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 22 board device instead. Or the solid waste operation may choose a combination with the Samsung tablets and/or i‐Pads assigned to roll‐off trucks drivers, supervisors, and container delivery personnel.

5.2.2 RFID TAGS
To implement RFID tag technology will require 1) all containers to be equipped with an embedded RFID tag, and 2) a system of hardware and software with which to scan the tags and record them into a database. The container tagging was addressed in section 3.1.

The primary application for reading container tags is provided through on‐board devices that integrate scanning, GPS, and customer database to identify the location of any container that is being serviced and to record that a specific customer has been provided service.

Because the City’s solid waste operation does not currently have an industry specific CRM, the available options for using RFID tags is limited. Considering that procuring a CRM system and associated on‐board devices will run into several hundred thousand dollars, procuring a CRM solely for container management and tracking would likely be economically impractical.

An alternative product is aGenda, a cloud‐based software product with GPS tracking features. It was designed specifically for the container management industry.  aGenda functions as an iOS or Android phone or tablet application.  The software is intuitive and easy for the operator to use.  It is designed to track any task‐oriented process.

This product is offered by FleetGenius, LLC, a container management company that provides various container management services to solid waste operations. aGenda is used to track driver route activity for all customers including residential and commercial service requests, bulky item pickups, special events and route audits.

On a daily basis, an excel file can be uploaded to the route optimization feature (optional) with all transactions (service requests) for the day. The service requests are routed and sorted by driver so that each driver has a balanced workload. The completed routed files are then uploaded into aGenda.

All service requests are dispatched to the driver’s device.  The service requests are displayed on the driver’s tasks list in real time through the Agenda web portal. The service request details include the customer account number, address, service codes, service notes, driver notes, GPS coordinates, and any photos the driver took before or after the transaction was completed.

If the transaction was not completed for some reason, that information will be displayed on the task list and on the task report. Solid waste operation staff will have access to this information at any time through the aGenda web portal.
aGenda is offered on a subscription basis at a monthly of approximately $100 per driver and a$2,500 start‐up cost. The devices are not included.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 23 Contact information for aGenda is provided below.

Name:     FleetGenius LLC
Contact:    Jim Philipps, Chief Commercial Officer
Cell Phone    619‐726‐2140
Email:    jim@fleetgenius,con
Website: www.fleetgenius.com
Link:    Home | FleetGenius | United States

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The solid waste operation expressed an interest in understanding the potential benefits of introducing certain technology enhancements to the existing solid waste operation. After review of the solid waste operation’s current operational practices and use of existing systems and technologies, the following are conclusions and recommendations have been reached.

6.2 INTEGRATED CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP MANAGER
The use of an industry‐specific CRM in solid waste operations has become essential. The City’s solid waste operation current systems do not provide the functionality to manage the workflow in a streamlined and efficient manner. The most serious deficiency is the inability to manage workorders, and customer inquiries and complaints, electronically.

Today’s CRMs provide the functionality to manage workorders electronically from cradle to grave. The lack of a CRM system that can serve as a central hub to manage workflow communications is therefore a significant limitation for the solid waste operation. With a new CRM, the City may choose to bill separately for water service and solid waste services using Incode to produce the water service statement and the new CRM to bill for solid waste services.

6.2.1 CRM OBSERVATIONS
 The CRM products reviewed are capable of generating stand‐alone customer bills.  Introducing a new CRM will require advance planning and on‐going coordination, including selecting the best system, meeting the requirements for conversion, creating the CRM database, and training staff.
 It is important to note that technology alone cannot resolve problems. Projects of this magnitude will fail without an internal champion to provide leadership. The process must be led internally by a capable and committed supporter of the new CRM.  An additional benefit to managing the introduction of a new system is that it can become a catalyst for change. The process affords management an opportunity to review, assess, and challenge the status quo and redefine the entire workflow to improve efficiencies and quality of service.

Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 24

6.2.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
 SVM recommends the City develop and put out an RFP for an integrated customer relationship manager/billing system to include on‐board device technology and functionality.  Proposers must include the main customer service/billing platform and on‐board devices separately for the City’s consideration.
 The RFP should invite providers of on‐board technology such as FleetMind and RouteWare.  Proposers with customer service/billings systems must include the option to integrate with at minimum FleetMind and RouteWare.

6.3 RFID TAGS
RFID technology offers the potential to improve container management and service verification. The solid waste operation’s container management staff do not currently use RFID tags to manage their container inventory. All service requests are tracked manually. To take full advantage of RFID Tags, most systems have been developed around on‐board devices that have been integrated with a CRM system.

6.3.1 CONSIDERATIONS
 Using RFID tags for container inventory and tracking will require all containers to be equipped with an RFID tags.
 Any option that does not equip every container, or at least the majority of them, with an RFID tag would result in a less effective system.
 The cost to tag existing carts with RFID’s can range from $10.00 to $15.00 per cart.  Using RFID tags is service verification will require an on‐board device.  In actual application, RFID tags have been found to be most reliable when used with residential carts. Even so, the consensus of vendors and users is that truck‐mounted scanners can fail to read RFID tags and deteriorate over time.
 There is virtually no application of RFID tags with commercial bins.  The solid waste operation does not currently use RFID tags and it is unlikely that their application would result in any notable benefit for collection operations due to insufficient support systems.
 Should the solid waste operation introduce a new CRM, use of RFID tags for container management such as inventory management, container delivery and pick up, will not only be feasible, but could be of great benefit.
 Using RFID for service verification would also require on‐board tablets on the collection vehicles.

6.3.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
 A more practical solution is to consider the service of FleetGenius by using their aGenda software. It can be implemented as a stand‐alone program with smartphones and/or tablets.

Although the program can be used for any type of delivery and pickup, it has been customized to address the needs of the solid waste container management environment. Since it is based Attachment E
City of Porterville
Operational Assessment ‐ Technology Review    Page | 25 on a monthly subscription, it is easy to implement and does not require a large up‐front investment. In addition to container management, the program can be used for scheduling bulky item pickups, temporary container, including and roll‐off boxes.

Attachment E
1512 Eureka Road, Suite 220, Roseville, CA 95661 | p 916.782.7821 | f 916.782.7824 | www.r3cgi.com September 20, 2021
Mr. Michael Knight
Public Works Director
City of Porterville
555 N. Prospect Street
Porterville, CA 93257
Subject: Analysis of Outsourcing the City’s Municipal Solid Waste Operations Dear Mr. Knight:

R3 Consulting Group, Inc. (R3) was engaged by the City of Porterville (City) to evaluate the potential for outsourcing the Field Services Division’s (Division) municipal solid waste collection operations to the private sector. This Letter Report provides the results of our analysis.

Project Objectives

1. Project the costs related to recommended improvements to the Division’s current municipal collection system to bring operations in line with industry standards, and to comply with SB 1383 (Short-Lived Climate Pollutants; Organic Waste Reductions), and the associated impact on the City’s current solid waste rates;

2. Project current costs in the Division’s solid waste budget that would not go away if the City were to outsource the Division’s solid waste operations to the private sector, and the associated franchise fee that would be required to cover those costs;

3. Assess the potential rate impact associated with outsourcing of the Division’s solid waste operations;

4. Assess the regional market and the potential interest in an exclusive City residential and commercial solid waste collection franchise if the City were to decide to outsource the Division’s operations;

5. Compare the advantages and disadvantages associated with municipal and outsourced operations; and

6. Provide recommendations for contractor requirements related to displaced City employees, should Division operations be outsourced.

Summary Findings
The City is at a point where it is reasonable to consider if it wants to continue to provide municipal collection services or outsource those operations. If it wishes to maintain municipal operations there needs to be investment of both staff and other resources. A rate increase on the order of 50%-60% 1 is
projected to be required to support Division operations that are consistent with industry standards, and provide the resources needed to comply with SB 1383. If the City decides to outsource operations it is projected that it would need to receive annual contractor payments of $1.1 million to cover existing Division budgeted expenses covered through the solid waste rates that would not go away. 1 A 60% projected rate increase assumes a single one-time rate increase over the 5-year planning period, effective January 1, 2022, while a 50% rate increase assumes additional 3% annual rate adjustments over the 5-year planning period starting in FY 23-24.

Mr. Michael Knight
September 20, 2021

A 50% rate increase would bring the City’s residential rate up to $26.78 per month. If this rate is used as the benchmark for assessing the financial impact of outsourcing, and with consideration for current private hauler rates within the region, it is certainly possible, but not guaranteed that outsourcing could result in a net financial benefit to the City and its ratepayers.

The analysis presented in this report is intended to help support the City’s decision as to whether or not to outsource the Division’s operations. As part of that consideration, the City may wish to informally explore interest in a potential exclusive franchise with private sector haulers in the region, which may help to inform the City’s decision.

Findings
Findings are presented below with respect to both maintaining municipal operations and outsourcing those operations.

Maintain Municipal Operations

1. Advantage of Municipal Operations
Perhaps the greatest advantage of the City maintaining municipal collection operations is the direct control the City has over its solid waste management system, including customer service. With that total control however also comes total responsibility for the safety, and operational, financial, and regulatory compliance aspects of those services. Additionally, with municipal operations the City does not have to manage a contract with a private sector operator.

2. Assessment of Current Operations
As discussed in our Solid Waste Operational Review report, the Division is doing a good job with available resources; however, those resources are not adequate to support an operation that is in line with industry standards for safety, customer service, and operational performance. If the Division is to operate to industry standards not only is a significant investment needed, but there needs to be a revamping of how the Division’s operations and services are structured, operated, and managed. City management, and current and future City Councils need to fully support that effort by providing the necessary operational and financial resources. In addition to the additional resources needed to support industry standard operations, the City also needs to comply with SB 1383. That will require, among other things, expanded residential and commercial organics collection services. The costs associated with resources to support industry standard operations and to comply with SB 1383 are discussed below under items 3 and 4.

3. Resources to Support Industry Standard Operations
The Rate Modeling that was conducted as part of this engagement accounted for $425,000 in onetime costs and $538,000 in annual costs related to operational improvements, including one (1) additional supervisor and one (1) additional route, including truck and driver, a data analyst, and $100,000 for operational consulting / support services. Table 1 provides an accounting of those costs.

Mr. Michael Knight
September 20, 2021

Table 1
High-Level Cost Estimates - Operational Improvements

4. Resources Needed to Comply with SB 1383
SB 1383 represents the most sweeping solid waste management legislation in 30 years. The City will need to enhance its residential and commercial collection systems to provide for the collection of organic material, including food waste from all residential accounts, and the collection of organic material and recyclable materials from all commercial accounts by January 1, 2022.2 The City will also need to meet other SB 1383 requirements, including public education and outreach, additional reporting requirements, regulatory monitoring and enforcement, providing for edible food waste recovery capacity, and procurement of recovered organic waste products. An additional $1.2 million in annual expenses is projected to be necessary to comply with SB 1383. Those costs include two (2) additional commercial routes (one for organics and one for recyclable materials), an SB 1383 Program Coordinator, and an SB 1383 dedicated Code Enforcement Officer. Table 2 provides an accounting of estimated City costs to comply with SB 1383.
2 Commercial businesses may be granted a waiver to comply with some or all of the organic waste collection service requirements if the commercial business generates minimal amounts of organic materials or lacks adequate space for organic waste containers.

One-Time Ongoing
One (1) Supervisor $80,000
One (1) Route (Truck-Driver-O&M) $150,000
Overtime Savings -$42,000
One (1) Data Analyst $90,000
Develop/Implement Safety Program $50,000 $50,000
CRM Billing System $100,000 $60,000
On-Board Tablets $200,000 $50,000
Route Realignment/Rebalance $75,000 $0
Operational Consulting Services $100,000
Totals $425,000 $538,000
Required Resource
Cost
Mr. Michael Knight
September 20, 2021

Table 2
High-Level Costs Estimates - SB 1383 Compliance

5. Required Rate Increases
The City has not increased solid waste rates since 2006 and its residential rate is among the lowest, if not the lowest in the region for the services provided. To effectively fund the operational improvements necessary to support industry standard operations, SB 1383 compliance costs, and other Division costs over the next five years, a rate increase on the order of 50-60%3is projected to be required on January 1. 2022.

A 50% rate increase would increase the current residential rate from $17.85 per month to $26.78 per month; a monthly increase of $8.93. The resulting 90-gallon residential rate of $26.78 falls with the range of comparative rates in the region and we suggest that it represents an appropriate benchmark against which to assess the financial impact of outsourcing. To the extent, if any, that the private sector could provide industry standard services at residential and commercial rates below those resulting from a 50% rate increase, after accounting for the $1.1 million in budgeted Division costs that would not go away if those services were outsourced,4 and the estimated $239,000 in SB 1383 compliance costs that would remain, there could be a net financial benefit to the City and its ratepayers from outsourcing.

6. Comparison of City Rates to Regional Rates
The City has not increased residential rates since July 1, 2006. Table 3 below provides a comparison of the City’s residential rates to the surveyed jurisdictions. As shown, the City’s current residential rates are the 3 A 60% projected rate increase assumes a single one-time rate increase over the 5-year planning period, while a 50% rate increase assumes additional 3% annual rate adjustments over the 5-year planning period starting in FY 23-24.
4 See Item #2 Costs that Do Not Go Away, under Outsource Municipal Operations below.

Outsourced
Operations
One-Time Ongoing Ongoing
Organics Processing $520,000
Procurement Requirements $25,000 $56,000 $56,000
SB 1383 Program Coordinator $95,000
One (1) Code Enforcement Officer $83,000 $83,000
One (1) Organics Route (truck-driver-O&M) $150,000
One (1) Recycling Route (truck-driver-O&M) $150,000
Organics Processing $52,000
Edible Food Waste Recovery $20,000 $100,000 $100,000
One (1) Code Enforcement Officer covered above covered above Totals $45,000 $1,206,000 $239,000
Required Resource
Commercial
Residential
Cost
Municipal Operations
Mr. Michael Knight
September 20, 2021

lowest of the jurisdictions surveyed. A 50% rate increase would result in a residential rate that is still more than $1.00 (4%) lower than the average rate of the jurisdictions surveyed. Note that it is expected that some of the rates for the other jurisdictions shown in Table 3 will need to be increased for inflation and to provide funding for SB 1383 requirements, which would make the City’s rate more favorable in comparison.

Table 3
Residential Rate Survey
Jurisdiction County Population Hauler Effective Date Curbside Recycling Green Waste
Monthly
Rate
(1)
Porterville Tulare 59,655 Municipal 7/1/2006 Weekly Weekly 17.85 $ Exeter Tulare 11,030 Mid-Valley 1/1/2020 Weekly Weekly 21.26 $ Farmersville Tulare 11,399 Mid-Valley 2020 Weekly Weekly 22.63 $ Madera Madera 65,415 Mid Valley 7/1/2013 Weekly Weekly 23.22 $ Visalia Tulare 138,649 Municipal 7/2/2013 Weekly Weekly 23.85 $ Woodlake Tulare 7,773 Mid-Valley 1/1/2019 Weekly Weekly 24.45 $ Hanford Kings 59,349 Municipal 7/1/2018 Weekly Weekly 25.20 $ Tulare Tulare 67,834 Municipal 7/1/2020 Bi-Weekly Bi-Weekly 25.30 $ Fresno Fresno 545,769 Municipal 7/1/2021 Weekly Weekly 25.35 $ Bakersfield Kern 392,756 Municipal 7/1/2016 Weekly Weekly 25.49 $ Lindsay Tulare 13,154 Mid-Valley 7/1/2020 Weekly Weekly 25.79 $ Chowchilla Madera 18,196 Mid Valley 7/1/2020 Weekly Weekly 26.63 $ Sanger Fresno 27,185 Mid Valley 2011-2012 Weekly Weekly 27.57 $ Coalinga Fresno 17,199 Mid Valley 7/1/2019 Weekly Weekly 28.01 $ Selma Fresno 24,436 WMI 2013-2014 Weekly Weekly 28.60 $ Dinuba Tulare 25,994 Pena 7/1/2018 Weekly Weekly 29.53 $ Clovis Fresno 119,175 Allied 7/1/2020 Weekly Weekly 35.17 $ Reedley Fresno 25,917 Municipal 4/1/2020 Weekly Weekly 37.89 $ Merced Merced 88,120 Municipal 7/1/2020 Weekly Weekly 44.49 $ $ 27.80
$ 17.85
$ (9.95)
-56%
Porterville SB 1383 Rate @ 50.0% $ 26.78
$ (1.03)
-4%
Porterville SB 1383 Rate vs. Average Rate
(1) The City's month rate incluces street sweeping. Some of the comparative rates incude and others do not include
street sweeping.

Porterville Rate vs. Average
Average
Porterville Rate
Mr. Michael Knight
September 20, 2021

Outsource Municipal Operations

1. Municipal Versus Outsourced Operations in California Of the more than 500 incorporated cities and counties in California, the vast majority contract with the private sector for some or all solid waste management services through exclusive and/or non-exclusive franchise systems. There are currently less than 50 municipal operated solid waste management collection systems in California, many in the central valley. With outsourced operations the City would have reduced regulatory compliance, and staff management responsibilities, and any future pension liability would be eliminated, but it would need to manage a private sector contractor and would not have direct control over customer service and other aspects of the collection operations.

2. Costs That Do Not Go Away
If the City were to outsource the Division’s operations to the private sector many but not all of the Division’s budgeted expenses would go away. Working with City staff, a review was conducted to determine which of the Division’s budgeted costs would be eliminated if the Division’s operations were outsourced, and which would remain. That analysis is provided in Attachment 1.

As shown, it is projected that approximately $783,000 of annual budgeted expenses would not go away if the Division’s operations were outsourced, plus an additional $337,000 in “Franchise Fee” expenses that are used to fund street maintenance costs; offsetting the cost impact that the Division’s vehicles have on the City’s streets.5 Those costs total $1.1 million in annual Division expenses that would not go away if those services were outsourced to the private sector. It is expected that if the City were to outsource operations it would need receive an associated annual net payment from the private sector contractor to offset those costs. As currently projected, this would require a net franchise fee on the order of 14%. The City’s projected cost of $239,000 for SB 1383 compliance costs that would remain with the City would also need to be funded through the rates to make the City whole.

The analysis presented in Attachment 1 assumes that the following costs would remain if the Division’s collection services were outsourced.
 All City management staff positions that have portions of their costs allocated to the Division;  The Division’s Field Services Superintendent and Clerical Assistant II and Clerical Assistant III positions;6
 Street sweeping expenses;
 Graffiti removal expenses; and
 All budgeted vehicle maintenance expenses related to Fleet Services overhead costs and mechanic staffing costs, with the exception of approximately $93,000. While this cost would remain with the City, Fleet Services reported that it is currently understaffed with respect to mechanics and that it is appropriate to continue to internally fund this cost, versus offsetting with a solid waste franchise fee. For purposes of our analysis we have not assume any fleet maintenance costs as part of the total budgeted Division costs that would remain with outsourcing.
5 It is common to receive this type of funding from a franchised hauler in the form of a “refuse vehicle street maintenance impact fee”.
6 It is assumed these positions would remain and have responsibility for managing the private sector operator franchise agreement and required services, among other things.

Mr. Michael Knight
September 20, 2021

In addition to the above expenses, any existing Division pension liability would not go away if the Division’s operations were outsourced.

Assuming a 50% rate increase; the extent to which the private sector could provide SB 1383 compliance operations in line with industry standard operations at rates below the City’s adjusted rates, after accounting for City budgeted costs that would not go away, and that portion of SB 1383 compliance costs that would remain with the City (e.g., enforcement, and procurement costs), there would be an economic benefit to the City and its rate payers.

3. Competitiveness of Regional Market Place
Waste Management, Mid Valley Disposal, Pena’s Disposal, Miramonte Sanitation,7 South TulareRichgrove,8 and Tule Trash are all licensed to provide services in the unincorporated Tulare County. The City’s collection franchise is a valuable commodity, and while there are no guarantees, if the City decided to outsource its residential collection system it could receive multiple proposals. We suggest the City contact Waste Management, Mid Valley Disposal and Pena’s Disposal, and potentially other haulers (e.g., Republic Services) to understand their potential interest in submitting a proposal for the Division’s operations if the City were to issue a request for proposal for those services.

Benefits of outsourcing municipal operations include the ability to place many of the responsibilities for complying with AB 341, AB 1826 and SB 1383 requirements on the contracted hauler. In addition, outsourcing removes any future pension liability the City might otherwise incur.

The “value” of the City’s franchise to the private sector depends in part on the length of the contract term (e.g. 10, 15 or 20 years) will longer contract terms potentially providing the opportunities for better deals.

Including exclusive roll-off services would also increase the value of a City franchise to the private sector.9 Table 4 below provides the projected value of the City’s municipal collection system over a 10 and 20- year period based on the Division’s 2021 budget revenues, escalated by three percent (3%) annually. As shown, over a 10-year term, starting in 2022, the residential system is projected to generate $119 million in revenues. Over a 20-year term total revenues are projected at $279 million.

4. Potential Financial Benefits and Impact on Rates
If the City were to outsource the Division’s operations, at a minimum, it would need to receive fees (franchise fee and potentially other fees) from the contractor sufficient to cover the cost of the Division’s budgeted expenses that would not go away, and it’s SB 1383 compliance costs. To the extent those costs can be covered, and the City can obtain additional financial payments/benefits without having to increase the rates above the benchmark rates after the projected 50% required rate increase, there would be a net financial benefit to the ratepayers. Alternatively, if the private sector could provide the required franchise fee revenues necessary to offset those expenses that would not go away and the City’s SB 1383 compliance costs, and the rates could be decreased, there would be a net financial benefit to the 7 Serves Reedley, Sanger, Orange Cove and mountain areas. 8 Serves Northern Kern County and Southern Tulare County, including the communities of Delano, Richgrove, Earlimart and certain surrounding cities in Kern and Tulare County. 9 If space were available at the City’s corporation yard for the franchised hauler’s operations that would also potentially increase the attractiveness and competitiveness of a procurement process, as entities would not have to have or find a local site from which to operate.

Mr. Michael Knight
September 20, 2021

ratepayers. What if any financial benefit might result from outsourcing of solid waste collection services cannot be known without issuing a request for proposals.

Table 4
Projected Gross Value of City Operations

5. Displaced Employees
Any consideration of outsourcing needs to consider the impact on Division staff whose positions would be eliminated. If the City were to outsource the Division’s operations, we recommend it require the selected contract to offer employment to all qualified displaced City employees, provide medical and dental coverage and a matching 401K retirement program, maintain the former City employees’ seniority levels, and honor all existing prescheduled vacation time. The City of San Bernardino’s transition from municipal to private operations included an average contractor payment of $6,900 to transitioning employees. The City of Hemet’s outsourcing process provided a $1,000 retention bonus paid by the selected contractor to all displaced employees that met a minimum term of employment with the selected contractor.
* * * * * * *
Fiscal Year Annual
Revenue
Number of
Years
Cumulative
Value
22-23 10,384,970 $ 1 10,384,970 $
23-24 10,696,519 $ 2 21,081,489 $
24-25 11,017,415 $ 3 32,098,904 $
25-26 11,347,937 $ 4 43,446,841 $
26-27 11,688,375 $ 5 55,135,216 $
27-28 12,039,026 $ 6 67,174,243 $
29-30 12,400,197 $ 7 79,574,440 $
30-31 12,772,203 $ 8 92,346,643 $
31-32 13,155,369 $ 9 105,502,012 $
32-33 13,550,030 $ 10 119,052,043 $
33-34 13,956,531 $ 11 133,008,574 $
34-35 14,375,227 $ 12 147,383,801 $
35-36 14,806,484 $ 13 162,190,285 $
36-37 15,250,679 $ 14 177,440,964 $
37-38 15,708,199 $ 15 193,149,163 $
38-39 16,179,445 $ 16 209,328,608 $
39-40 16,664,828 $ 17 225,993,436 $
40-41 17,164,773 $ 18 243,158,209 $
41-42 17,679,716 $ 19 260,837,925 $
42-43 18,210,108 $ 20 279,048,033 $
Mr. Michael Knight
September 20, 2021

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City. Should you have any questions regarding our proposal or need any additional information, please contact me by phone at (916) 782-7821 or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
R3 CONSULTING GROUP
William Schoen | Project Director
Attachment
1 Costs That Do Not Go Away
R:\+Projects\Porterville - Operations Review and Rate Model - 120035\Task 6 - Outsourcing\Letter Report Porterville - Collection System Outsourcing Analysis 092021.docx




































































% ' ( ) *+
/dzK&WKZd
Zs/>>

^K>/t^d
Zd
DK
>
&zϮϬͲϮϭ

džƉĞŶƐĞ>ŝŶĞ/ƚĞŵ WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ
ƵĚŐĞƚ ŽƐƚƐ
ůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞĚ ŽƐƚƐZĞŵĂŝŶŝŶŐ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞ&ĞĞƐ
^ĂůĂƌŝĞƐ͕ZĞŐƵůĂƌ ϴϲϰ͕ϳϵϲ Ψ ϴϲϰ͕ϳϵϲ Ψ ϰϮϰ͕ϴϭϵ Ψ  ^ĂůĂƌŝĞƐ͕WĂƌƚͲƚŝŵĞ ϱ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϱ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ^ĂůĂƌŝĞƐͲKǀĞƌƚŝŵĞ ϴϬ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϴϬ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ĂƌůůŽǁĂŶĐĞ ϰ͕ϴϬϬ Ψ ϰ͕ϴϬϬ Ψ ĞŶĞĨŝƚƐ ϱϯϵ͕ϯϰϰ Ψ ϱϯϵ͕ϯϰϰ Ψ
sĞŚŝĐůĞDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ ϴϮϱ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϴϮϱ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ƵŝůĚŝŶŐͬ'ƌŽƵŶĚƐDĂŝŶƚ ϲ͕ϱϳϬ Ψ ϲ͕ϱϳϬ Ψ ŽŵƉƵƚĞƌ
ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚDĂŝŶƚ ϱ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϱ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ KƚŚĞƌ
ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚDĂŝŶƚ ϭϵϲ͕ϳϰϬ Ψ ϭϵϲ͕ϳϰϬ Ψ WƌŝŶƚŝŶŐͬŽƉLJŝŶŐ ϭϮ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϭϮ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ WƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůͬdĞŵƉ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞ ϭ͕ϯϲϴ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϭ͕ϯϲϴ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ZĞŶƚŽĨWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJΘ
ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚ Ϯ͕ϰϬϬ Ψ Ϯ͕ϰϬϬ Ψ ĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝǀĞ
džƉĞŶƐĞ ϱϱϲ͕ϰϬϬ Ψ ϱϱϲ͕ϰϬϬ Ψ 
KĨĨŝĐĞͬŽŵƉƵƚĞƌ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƐ ϰ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϰ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ DĂŝŶƚĂŶĚZĞƉĂŝƌDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ Ϯϱ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ Ϯϱ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ dŽŽůƐͬ
ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚ;ƵŶĚĞƌΨϭ͕ϬϬϬͿ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ DĞĞƚŝŶŐ
džƉĞŶƐĞ ϮϬϬ Ψ ϮϬϬ Ψ hƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐ Ϯϭ͕Ϯϰϭ Ψ Ϯϭ͕Ϯϰϭ Ψ hŶŝĨŽƌŵůůŽǁĂŶĐĞ ϭϭ͕ϴϮϭ Ψ ϭϭ͕ϴϮϭ Ψ dƌĂŝŶŝŶŐ
džƉĞŶƐĞ Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ WƵďůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶĂŶĚƵĞƐ Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ WŽƐƚĂŐĞ ϯϭ͕ϱϬϬ Ψ ϯϭ͕ϱϬϬ Ψ
/ŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞ͕>ŝĂďŝůŝƚLJ ϰϮ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϰϮ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ KƚŚĞƌ
džƉĞŶƐĞ ϯϬ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϯϬ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ
&ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞ&ĞĞ Ϯϰϵ͕ϱϰϱ Ψ Ϯϰϵ͕ϱϰϱ Ψ Ϯϰϵ͕ϱϰϱ Ψ KƚŚĞƌDĂĐŚͬ
ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚ Ͳ Ψ Ͳ Ψ Ψ ϰ͕ϴϴϲ͕ϯϱϳ ϰ͕ϴϴϲ͕ϯϱϳ Ψ ϰϮϰ͕ϴϭϵ Ψ Ϯϰϵ͕ϱϰϱ Ψ &zϮϬͲϮϭ

džƉĞŶƐĞ>ŝŶĞ/ƚĞŵ WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ
ƵĚŐĞƚ ŽƐƚƐ
ůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞĚ ŽƐƚƐ
ZĞŵĂŝŶŝŶŐ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞ&ĞĞƐ
^ĂůĂƌŝĞƐ͕ZĞŐƵůĂƌ ϭϯϲ͕ϭϰϭ Ψ ϭϯϲ͕ϭϰϭ Ψ ^ĂůĂƌŝĞƐ͕KǀĞƌƚŝŵĞ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ĞŶĞĨŝƚƐ ϳϮ͕ϰϵϴ Ψ ϳϮ͕ϰϵϴ Ψ sĞŚŝĐůĞDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ ϯϮϲ͕ϰϬϬ Ψ ϯϮϲ͕ϰϬϬ Ψ KƚŚĞƌ
ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚDĂŝŶƚ ϵϲ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϵϲ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ WƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůͬdĞŵƉ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ ϯϮϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϯϮϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ DĂŝŶƚĂŶĚZĞƉĂŝƌDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ hŶŝĨŽƌŵůůŽǁĂŶĐĞ Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ /ŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞ͕>ŝĂďŝůŝƚLJ ϭϯ͕ϴϬϬ Ψ ϭϯ͕ϴϬϬ Ψ KƚŚĞƌ
džƉĞŶƐĞ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞ&ĞĞ ϴϯ͕ϭϴϭ Ψ ϴϯ͕ϭϴϭ Ψ ϴϯ͕ϭϴϭ Ψ Ψ ϭ͕Ϭϱϰ͕ϬϮϬ ϭ͕Ϭϱϰ͕ϬϮϬ Ψ Ͳ Ψ ϴϯ͕ϭϴϭ Ψ &zϮϬͲϮϭ

džƉĞŶƐĞ>ŝŶĞ/ƚĞŵ WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ
ƵĚŐĞƚ ŽƐƚƐ
ůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞĚ ŽƐƚƐ
ZĞŵĂŝŶŝŶŐ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞ&ĞĞƐ
^ĂůĂƌŝĞƐ͕ZĞŐƵůĂƌ ϲϰ͕ϳϵϵ Ψ ϲϰ͕ϳϵϵ Ψ ^ĂůĂƌŝĞƐ͕KǀĞƌƚŝŵĞ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ĞŶĞĨŝƚƐ ϯϴ͕ϮϮϴ Ψ ϯϴ͕ϮϮϴ Ψ sĞŚŝĐůĞDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ ϭϰϮ͕ϱϬϬ Ψ ϭϰϮ͕ϱϬϬ Ψ KƚŚĞƌ
ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚDĂŝŶƚ ϮϬϬ Ψ ϮϬϬ Ψ WƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůͬdĞŵƉ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ DĂŝŶƚĂŶĚZĞƉĂŝƌDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ hŶŝĨŽƌŵůůŽǁĂŶĐĞ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ /ŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞ͕>ŝĂďŝůŝƚLJ ϱϬϬ Ψ ϱϬϬ Ψ KƚŚĞƌ
džƉĞŶƐĞ ϭϬϬ Ψ ϭϬϬ Ψ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞ&ĞĞ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ  ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ Ψ Ͳ Ϯϱϭ͕ϯϮϳ Ψ ϮϱϬ͕ϯϮϳ Ψ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ KƵƚƐŽƵƌĐĞĚKƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ
KƵƚƐŽƵƌĐĞĚKƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ
Z
&h^
K>>
d/KEE/^WK^>
dKd>
yW
E^

KƵƚƐŽƵƌĐĞĚKƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ
'Z

Et^d

dKd>
yW
E^

^dZ

d^t

W/E'
dKd>
yW
E^

ͰͰϭϵϮ͘ϭϲϴ͘Ϯ͘ϵͰZϯͺ^ŚĂƌĞĚͰнWƌŽũĞĐƚƐͰWŽƌƚĞƌǀŝůůĞͲKƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐZĞǀŝĞǁĂŶĚZĂƚĞDŽĚĞůͲϭϮϬϬϯϱͰdĂƐŬϱͲ&ŝŶĂŶĐŝĂůDŽĚĞůͰWŽƌƚĞƌǀŝůůĞKƵƚƐŽƵƌĐŝŶŐŶĂůLJƐŝƐϬϯϮϯϮϭ͘džůƐdžͬdĂďůĞͲKƵƚƐŽƵƌĐĞĚ džƉĞŶƐĞƐ
ϭŽĨϮ
Attachment 1

























































% ' ( ) *+
&zϮϬͲϮϭ

džƉĞŶƐĞ>ŝŶĞ/ƚĞŵ WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ
ƵĚŐĞƚ ŽƐƚƐ
ůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞĚ ŽƐƚƐZĞŵĂŝŶŝŶŐ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞ&ĞĞƐ
^ĂůĂƌŝĞƐ͕ZĞŐƵůĂƌ ϴϵ͕ϲϵϬ Ψ ϴϵ͕ϲϵϬ Ψ ^ĂůĂƌŝĞƐ͕KǀĞƌƚŝŵĞ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϭ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ĞŶĞĨŝƚƐ ϰϲ͕ϯϲϲ Ψ ϰϲ͕ϯϲϲ Ψ sĞŚŝĐůĞDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ ϭϲϯ͕ϵϲϱ Ψ ϭϲϯ͕ϵϲϱ Ψ KƚŚĞƌ
ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚDĂŝŶƚ ϲϬ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϲϬ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ WƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůͬdĞŵƉ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ ϭϱϲ͕ϯϬϬ Ψ ϭϱϲ͕ϯϬϬ Ψ ĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝǀĞ
džƉĞŶƐĞ ϯ͕ϭϮϯ Ψ ϯ͕ϭϮϯ Ψ hŶŝĨŽƌŵůůŽǁĂŶĐĞ ϯϱϬ Ψ ϯϱϬ Ψ KƚŚĞƌ
džƉĞŶƐĞ Ͳ Ψ Ͳ Ψ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞ&ĞĞ Ϯ͕ϵϱϳ Ψ Ϯ͕ϵϱϳ Ψ Ϯ͕ϵϱϳ Ψ Ψ ϱϮϯ͕ϳϱϭ ϱϮϯ͕ϳϱϭ Ψ Ͳ Ψ Ϯ͕ϵϱϳ Ψ &zϮϬͲϮϭ

džƉĞŶƐĞ>ŝŶĞ/ƚĞŵ WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ
ƵĚŐĞƚ ŽƐƚƐ
ůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞĚ ŽƐƚƐZĞŵĂŝŶŝŶŐ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞ&ĞĞƐ
^ĂůĂƌŝĞƐ͕ZĞŐƵůĂƌ ϭϯϮ͕ϴϵϭ Ψ ϭϯϮ͕ϴϵϭ Ψ ^ĂůĂƌŝĞƐ͕KǀĞƌƚŝŵĞ Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ĞŶĞĨŝƚƐ ϳϭ͕Ϭϵϰ Ψ ϳϭ͕Ϭϵϰ Ψ sĞŚŝĐůĞDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ ϭϮϱ͕ϭϰϭ Ψ ϭϮϱ͕ϭϰϭ Ψ KƚŚĞƌ
ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚDĂŝŶƚ ϮϬϬ Ψ ϮϬϬ Ψ WƌŝŶƚŝŶŐͬŽƉLJŝŶŐ ϯϬϬ Ψ ϯϬϬ Ψ WƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůͬdĞŵƉ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ ϴϬ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϴϬ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ KĨĨŝĐĞͬŽŵƉƵƚĞƌ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƐ ϰϬϬ Ψ ϰϬϬ Ψ DĂŝŶƚĂŶĚZĞƉĂŝƌDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ ϱϬϬ Ψ ϱϬϬ Ψ WŽƐƚĂŐĞ ϭϬϬ Ψ ϭϬϬ Ψ KƚŚĞƌ
džƉĞŶƐĞ ϭ͕ϮϬϬ Ψ ϭ͕ϮϬϬ Ψ Ψ ϰϭϯ͕ϴϮϲ ϰϭϯ͕ϴϮϲ Ψ Ͳ Ψ Ͳ Ψ &zϮϬͲϮϭ

džƉĞŶƐĞ>ŝŶĞ/ƚĞŵ WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ
ƵĚŐĞƚ ŽƐƚƐ
ůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞĚ ŽƐƚƐ
ZĞŵĂŝŶŝŶŐ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞ&ĞĞƐ
^ĂůĂƌŝĞƐ͕ZĞŐƵůĂƌ Ϯϭ͕ϳϴϬ Ψ Ϯϭ͕ϳϴϬ Ψ ĞŶĞĨŝƚƐ ϭϮ͕ϳϴϱ Ψ ΨϭϮ͕ϳϴϱ
sĞŚŝĐůĞDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ƵŝůĚŝŶŐͬ'ƌŽƵŶĚƐDĂŝŶƚ Ͳ Ψ Ͳ Ψ KƚŚĞƌ
ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚDĂŝŶƚ ϮϱϬ Ψ ϮϱϬ Ψ WƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůͬdĞŵƉ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ ϲϴ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ ϲϴ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ KĨĨŝĐĞĂŶĚŽŵƉƵƚĞƌ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƐ Ͳ Ψ Ͳ Ψ DĂŝŶƚĂŶĚZĞƉĂŝƌDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ Ϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψ /ŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞ͕>ŝĂďŝůŝƚLJ ϵϬϬ Ψ ϵϬϬ Ψ KƚŚĞƌ
džƉĞŶƐĞ ϮϬϬ Ψ ϮϬϬ Ψ Ψ Ͳ ϭϬϳ͕ϵϭϱ Ψ ϭϬϳ͕ϵϭϱ Ψ Ͳ Ψ ƵĚŐĞƚĞĚ
ŽƐƚƐ ŽƐƚƐ
ůŝŵŝŶĂƚĞĚ ŽƐƚƐZĞŵĂŝŶŝŶŐ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞ&ĞĞƐ dŽƚĂůZĞŵĂŝŶŝŶŐ &zϮϬͲϮϭƵĚŐĞƚ ϳ͕Ϯϯϳ͕ϭϵϲ Ψ ϲ͕ϰϱϰ͕ϭϯϱ Ψ Ψ ϯϯϲ͕ϲϴϯ ϳϴϯ͕Ϭϲϭ Ψ ϭ͕ϭϭϵ͕ϳϰϰ Ψ KƵƚƐŽƵƌĐĞĚKƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ
KƵƚƐŽƵƌĐĞĚKƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ
'Z&&/d/Z
DKs> KƵƚƐŽƵƌĐĞĚKƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ
dKd>
yW
E^

hZ^/
Z
z>>
^K>>
d/KE
dKd>
yW
E^

Z
z>>
t^d

dKd>
yW
E^

ͰͰϭϵϮ͘ϭϲϴ͘Ϯ͘ϵͰZϯͺ^ŚĂƌĞĚͰнWƌŽũĞĐƚƐͰWŽƌƚĞƌǀŝůůĞͲKƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐZĞǀŝĞǁĂŶĚZĂƚĞDŽĚĞůͲϭϮϬϬϯϱͰdĂƐŬϱͲ&ŝŶĂŶĐŝĂůDŽĚĞůͰWŽƌƚĞƌǀŝůůĞKƵƚƐŽƵƌĐŝŶŐŶĂůLJƐŝƐϬϯϮϯϮϭ͘džůƐdžͬdĂďůĞͲKƵƚƐŽƵƌĐĞĚ džƉĞŶƐĞƐ
ϮŽĨϮ
Attachment 1