2015 spring conference: implementation of core assessment
TRANSCRIPT
March 26, 2015
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
The Study (in perspective):
On site for 3-4 days
Only a brief snapshot in time
The “experts”
Wet weather not observed
Board impressions
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
Implementation Plan
Monthly Planning Meeting
Determined action items
Strategic Planning Meeting
Identified impact and effort
Selected high impact with minimal effort.
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
Equipment Utilization
• 85%-90% fully utilized?• Scrapers (keep for
future bulk excavation?)
• Backup equipment (public vs. private)
Difference of Opinion
85%
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
Large Dozers
• Use D7/D8 size machines• Wet-weather operations
Difference of Opinion
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
Soil Hauling
• Only need 1 scraper• Questioned use of Low ground pressure
methodology• Dedicated haul
road
Different View Point
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
Waste Screening
• Risk• Solar powered
spotter station
Different View Point
8
Spotter Station
Note: trim to 2:00 to end
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
Phase 1: High Impact, Minimal Effort
Spotter Station
Reduced Loader Fleet
Downsize Dozers
Small Dozer for Cover Placement
Rubble Management
Pancake Filling
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
Haul & Cover Soil Once a Week vs. Daily
11
Pancake Operations
Note: trim from 2:00 to end
1,138
1,493
1,529
1,456
1,316
1,2351,249
1,403
1,459
1,362
1,562
1,358 1,353
1,654
1,560
1,495
1,405
1,812
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
1,600
1,700
1,800
1,900
Sep-07 Sep-08 Sep-09 Sep-10 Sep-11 Sep-12 Sep-13 Sep-14 Sep-15
COMPACTION TRENDS
1,413
1,350 lbs/cy Target
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
Range of Savings
1,350
1,812
1,520
-
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
Previous Dec. 2014 Projection
Airspace (lbs./cubic yard)
Annual Expense $2.7M $1.8M $2.4MSavings/Ton $1.49 $0.49
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
The Results
Increases capacity, extends life of landfill
Delay next cell development by one year
Savings/Ton$4.40
1.49 0.49
2015 20192018
Mar 2052 Jan 2057 May 2063
NOTE: Cell Development = $5MThis additional airspace = $11.M
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
Phase 2: High Impact, Higher Effort
Update Cell Development Plan
Create Soil Management Plan
More Productive Meetings
Key Performance Indicators• QlikView• Maintenance Software• Fuel Management System• Field Data Collection
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
Return on Investment
47 days
Core Assessment$41,000
Tarping Equipment$78,200
METRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GOMETRO WASTE AUTHORITY: WE KNOW WHERE IT SHOULD GO
“$338 Million”