2015 spring conference: implementation of core assessment

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”