Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSkookum Contract Services - 120919 gtellt".- V 1)11 W/( 1.'N 93'98< JEFFERSON COUNTY Sheet I of 1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Change Date: CHANGE ORDER Order No. Ordered by County Engineer under terms of Change Proposed by Agency Contract No. Recycling Services Change proposed by Contractor To: Skookum Educational Programs Skookum Education Programs 4525 Auto Center Way Endorsed by: dba Skookum Contract Services PO Box 5359 ko Firm Name Bremerton,WA 98312 t 1 i 2131 Signatu a Date Title Consent given by Surety:(when required) Project Title: Recycling Services Contract By: Attorney-in-fact Date You are ordered to perform the following described work upon receipt of an approved copy of this change order: Beginning on January 1,2020,the gross monthly payment to the Contractor for recycling services shall increase from$20,553.62 to$30,037.46. The monthly facility lease rate of$958 will continue to be deducted from this amount resulting in a net monthly payment of$29,079.46. An additional$2,000 per month will be added to the above amount upon delivery by the Contractor to the County of an acceptable"Recycling Alternatives Analysis"further described herein. Beginning January 1,2020,the mowing/weed eating services for the closed landfill,septage lagoon area,and surrounding fence line will be cancelled, deleting the additional annual payment of$1,735.50 for these services. County staff will take over these duties. The above contract provisions shall remain in effect until March 31,2021. The Contractor shall provide recycling services for one(1)additional year until March 31,2022. The County will determine the monthly payment for recycling services for this additional year based on the average commodity sales from the previous 12 months compared to the Contractor's expenses from the previous 12 months.The value of the additional year should predict that the Contractor breaks even for the additional period. Payment amount will be determined at least 90 days prior to the contract extension date. The Contractor shall provide auditable expense and revenue reports from the prior 12 months. The County may,at its discretion,offer up to two(2)additional one-year terms for this contract to extend the contract beyond March 31,2022. If the County chooses to extend the contract,the monthly payment for each one-year extension will be negotiated between the County and Contractor at least 90 calendar days prior to the extension. All other provisions of the original contract shall otherwise remain in effect. All work shall otherwise be in accordance with the provisions of the original contract. ORIGINAL CURRENT ESTIMATED ESTIMATED CONTRACT CONTRACT NET CHANGE CONTRACT TOTAL AMOUNT AMOUNT THIS ORDER AFTER CHANGE $1,151,840 $1,151,840 $163,739 $1,315,579.00 ORIGINAL CURRENT CONTRACT TIME NEW CONTRACT CONTRACT TIME CONTRACT TIME CHANGE(Add/Del) TIME 5 Years 5 Years I Year 6 Years APPROVAL F�iF,CQA4lattriffJEO APPROVAL RECO. w• — /V/i S,r�.ri x – �--"—� //,j`)'^l f So/id Waste Manager Date Public Works c ounty Engineer Date APPROVAL RECOMMENDED APPR E ,L Engineering Services;Clanger Date Chair,Je erson County Commissioners Date Aploved a t f only: -e Date: /� 2i r Philip C. Hunsucker,Chief Civil Deputy Prose ting ttorney Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney's Office JEFFERSON COUNTY Contract No. Sheet 2 of 2 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Change Date: CHANGE ORDER ESTIMATE Order No. 1 ESTIMATED ITEM GROUP DESCRIPTION UNIT UNIT ESTIMATED NO. NO. MEASURE PRICE AMOUNT CONTRACT BEFORE CHANGE Fixed Monthly Fee-Year 1 12 $ 18,947.10 $227,365.20 Fixed Monthly Fee-Year 2 12 $ 19,468.15 $233,617.80 Fixed Monthly Fee-Year 3 12 $ 20,003.52 $240,042.24 Fixed Monthly Fee-Year 4 12 $ 20,553.62 $246,643.44 Fixed Monthly Fee-Year 5 12 $ 21,1 18.88 $253,426.56 Monthly Facility Lease 60 $ (958.00) $ . ($57,480.00) Annual Mowing-Year 1 1 $ 1,557.03 $1,557.03 _Annual Mowing-Year 2 1 $ 1,599.85 $1,599.85 Annual Mowing-Year 3 I $ 1,643.85 $1,643.85 Annual Mowing-Year 4 1 $ 1,689.05 $1,689.05 Annual Mowing-Year 5 1 $ 1,735.50 $1,735.50 Net Contract Value $1,151,840.52 CONTRACT AFTER CHANGE Fixed Monthly Fee-Year 1 12 $ 18,947.10 $227,365.20 Fixed Monthly Fee-Year 2 12 $ 19,468.15 $233,617.80 Fixed Monthly Fee-Year 3 12 $ 20,003.52 $240,042.24 Fixed Monthly Fee-Year 4 9 $ 20,553.62 $184,982.58 Fixed Monthly Fee-Year 5 15 $ 30,037.46 $450,561.90 Fixed Monthly Fee-Year 6 12 TBD TBD Contingent Fixed Monthly Fee-Year 5 15 $ 2,000.00 $30,000.00 Monthly Facility Lease 60 $ (958.00) ($57,480.00) Annual Mowing-Year 1 1 $ 1,557.03 $1,557.03 Annual Mowing-Year 2 1 $ 1,599.85 $1,599.85 Annual Mowing-Year 3 1 $ 1,643.85 $1,643.85 Annual Mowing-Year 4 1 $ 1,689.05 $1,689.05 Annual Mowing-Year 5 0 $ 1,735.50 $0.00 Net Contract Value $1,315,579.50 Net Contract Change $163,738.98 =L. ,. . Recycling Alternatives Analysis The Contractor will analyze its processing/transport costs and the recycling commodity markets in order to determine whether there is a more attractive alternative for recycling that will reduce the cost to the County of recycling processing and transport,a stated goal in Part One of the Contract Specifications. The objective is to understand if certain commodities are more of a drag on the recycling contract business model than others and whether a different mix of recyclables would yield higher revenues relative to processing/transport costs. For example, some jurisdictions are now only processing#1 and #2 plastic bottles and jugs due to market conditions,while others are still sorting glass by color. Is this choice based upon a market conditions? The analysis should stay within the confines of the existing collection system composed of unmanned drop-off sites and the curbside 3-bin system; however,the drop boxes and 3 bins could potentially be labelled and used differently than they are currently. The analysis shall be provided in a report which discusses in detail the cost to process and transport to market each individual commodity and the revenue that can reasonably be expected from each individual commodity based upon historical cost data, market research/history, data from various brokers and material recovery facilities,and other available data. Data used shall include source information and shall not be "guess work". Data shall be presented using both the current blend/mix of recyclables and shall also be at the individual commodity level where markets exist. For example, in addition to the analysis of the tin/aluminum/plastic(TAP) market,cost and revenue data should also be provided for just tin,just aluminum, and just certain plastics where there is a market for them. The Contractor should be able to make reasonable estimates of the amount of each individual commodity collected based upon a characterization study of a representative number of bales or other means. The Contractor shall explore whether there are ways to reduce its costs. The Contractor shall present a least two (2) alternatives to the current system and discuss their relative pros and cons. The cost/benefit of each alternative shall be presented. If discussing whether to propose eliminating certain recyclables and thus revenue from the stream,the Contractor shall consider whether there is a corresponding and proportionally larger reduction in operations costs which could be gained. The Contractor shall draw conclusions and make recommendations regarding the recycling mix that provides an acceptable level of recycling services to the community while reducing the burden on the County's solid waste tipping fee to subsidize these services. The Contractor shall include an opinion as to the feasibility of making any changes and discuss challenges to their implementation. .. V L Department of Public Works O Consent Agenda Page 1 of 2 Jefferson County Board of Commissioners Agenda Request To: Board of Commissioners Philip Morley, County Administrator From: Monte Reinders, Public Works Director/County Engineer Agenda Date: December 9, 2019 ` Subject: Change Order - Recycling Services Statement of Issue: This change order to the recycling services contract will increase the monthly payment to the Contractor (Skookum Contract Services) to process and transport recyclable materials. It will add one year to the contract with the option of two additional years. Analysis/Strategic Goals/Pro's Et Con's: The majority of U.S. recyclables have been shipped to and processed in China for the last two decades; however, in 2018, China implemented its National Sword program essentially banning the import of U.S. recyclables, which has thrown the recycling market into a tailspin. The remaining domestic markets for recyclables have become overwhelmed by the quantity of recyclable material causing prices paid for these materials to plummet. A quick internet search for "National Sword" will yield a plethora of articles and videos related to this topic. An example is attached. Communities across the country are dealing with this impact in a variety of ways including cancelling recycling programs altogether, reducing the list of recycling materials accepted, hauling recyclables to landfills, or increasing fees for recycling. Jefferson County's recycling contractor, Skookum Contract Services, has continued to find markets for recyclables; however, the revenue received from these commodities has declined significantly, which has resulted in Skookum operating at a significant loss for over a year. The recycling program has never paid its own way and has always required a fixed monthly fee component derived from the solid waste tipping fee to supplement the revenue from the recycling commodities. This change order will increase the fixed monthly contract fee to allow the Contractor to break even going forward. It adds another year to the contract with the option for two additional years which may allow time for domestic recycling markets to develop and stabilize and for the community to examine its recycling goals and model to determine how to move forward with a recycling program in the future. Department of Public Works O Consent Agenda Page 2 of 2 Fiscal Impact/Cost Benefit Analysis: This change order will increase the net monthly payment to the Contractor from $19,595 to $31,079. This increases the support from the solid waste tipping fee by approximately $6.56 per ton (based on an assumed annual solid waste amount of 21,000 tons). An increase in the solid waste tipping fee will be required in the future to offset this cost if this trend continues with this recycling model. Alternatives to explore going forward could include continuing with the existing model hoping for domestic markets to improve, eliminating recycling altogether, changing or reducing the recycling materials accepted, or implementing a fee for recycling services rather than subsidizing through the solid waste tipping fee. This contract change order will allow time to explore alternatives. Recommendation: Public Works recommends that the Board approve the attached change order with Skookum Contract Services. Department Contact: Tom Boatman, Solid Waste Manager Reviewed By: hip Morlar ounty A.mini ator Date CONTRACT REVIEW FORM PW p /� CONTRACT WITH: Skookum Contract Services TRACKING NO.: �// O7 3 (Contractor/Consultant) ` CONTRACT FOR: Recycling Services - Change Order ' t R`Il 1731/2022 COUNTY DEPARTMENT: Public Works NOV 1 2019 For More Information Contact: Tom Boatman Contact Phone #: x213 JEFFERSON p RETURN TO: Chris Spall RETURN BY: 11/25/19 (Person in Department) (Date) AMOUNT: $163,739 PROCESS: ❑ Exempt from Bid Process ❑ Consultant Selection Process Revenue Solid Waste Fund ❑ Cooperative Purchase Expenditure Solid Waste Fund ❑ Competitive Sealed Bid Matching funds Required N/A ❑ Small Works Roster Source(s) of Matching Funds N/A ❑ Vendor List Bid ❑ RFP or RFQ El Other Step 1: REVIEW BY A M 1 /J� Re -w fi /C ® l( -o Date • -vie -. �� APPROVED FORM ❑ Return!. f• -vision(See Comments) Co ments Step 2: REVIEW BY PROSE U ING ATTORNEY Review by: O•C. / Philip C. Hunsucker Date Reviewed: k ji T Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney APPROVED AS TO FORM Returned for revision(See Comments) Comments .p( ��,.e-d tl!• a/14/19 Step 3: (If required) DEPARTMENT MAKES REVISIONS & RESUBMITS TO RISK MANAGEMENT AND PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Step 4: CONTRACTOR/CONSULTANT SIGNS APPROPRIATE NUMBER OF ORIGINALS Step 5: SUBMIT TO BOCC FOR APPROVAL Submit original Contract(s),Agenda Request,and Contract Review form. Also,please send 2 copies of just the Contract(s)(with the originals)to the BOCC Office. Place"Sign Here"markers on all places the BOCC needs to sign. MUST be in BOCC Office by 4:30 p.m.TUESDAY for the following Monday's agenda. (This form to stay with contract throughout the contract review process.) Episode 341 National Sword Date 02.12.19 Producer Where does your recycling go? In most places in the U.S., you throw it in a bin, and then it gets carted off to be sorted and cleaned at a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF). From there, much of it is shipped off to mills, where bales of paper, glass, aluminum, and plastic are pulped or melted into raw materials. Some of these mills are here in the U.S. And once upon a time, many of them were in China. Since 2001, China was one of the biggest buyers of American recycling. That is, until last year, when China pulled a move that no one saw coming: they stopped buying. Suddenly, a lot of materials that were getting recycled previously weren't anymore. The lists of accepted materials are shrinking in some cities. In some places, certain types of plastic and paper and cardboard simply aren't being collected anymore —they go to landfill or incineration, instead. Even those municipalities that are still collecting recycling are having a hard time finding places to sell it. Instead of making money by selling recyclable materials, they are losing money by paying storage companies to take it. And this isn't just a problem in the United States — Europe, Australia and Canada have been impacted, too. Operation National Sword When China joined the World Trade Organization, they started taking in the most of the world's scrap. The shift coincided with a ramping up of global exports, and China sold wares all around the world in shipping containers. Rather than sending these containers back to China empty, it made sense to fill them with heavy bales of recycling. This made the whole cycle more cost-effective, and it became cheaper to send recycling to China than anywhere else. Cities around the world were able to subsidize their recycling program with the money from selling their waste, while also not having to deal with as much of the process — at least until National Sword. Basically, National Sword was China's ban on foreign recyclables. It banned four categories and 24 types on imports starting in 2018. And National Sword has steadily https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/national-sword/ expanded, banning more recyclables since then, and it could potentially lead to the banning of all incoming recyclable materials by 2020, but that piece isn't entirely clear yet. No one is sure exactly why this shift in policy happened, but some experts point to one particular turning point: a documentary film. by director Wang Jilang is a story of two families, one of which owns this plastic recycling facility while the other family is employed there. The main character is the employee's daughter, who never gets sent to school because she is helping her parents watch her younger siblings and sort through mountains of shredded plastic. The movie provides a grim look at the actual process of breaking down materials, in an informal recycling facility. It shows the families cutting up plastic, melting, soaking it and turning it into asludge —then turning it into hardened pellets. The little girl washes her face in the gray plastic polluted water and eats fish that have choked on bits of plastic. They live and work (and eat and sleep) near a plastic shredding machine, inhaling dust and microparticles that are byproducts of the process. The whole village is enveloped in plastic detritus. And much of this garbage was imported from other countries. The girl cuts out shoes from European catalogues and cleans off dirty Mickey Mouse figures to play with. It's 'rva xx # om , y ,heartbreaking. s'SrF, �t � *., < x ait1' .�E ,iv Y g t lidde 1 a T < < • Truck loaded with plastic on a highway in Shanghai, image by (CC BY SA 3.0) httPs: ible.org/episode/nat Plastic China made the film festival circuit and was even seen in China for a while before the government pulled it from Chinese Internet. Coincidence or causation, National Sword came shortly thereafter. China moved to crack down on informal recycling plants and build newer, better, safer and more efficient recycling systems. Beyond that, the country also shifted focus to recycling internally rather than taking on recyclables from the rest of the world. Nowhere to Throw In the US, where there is no national recycling policy, this shift has thrown the recycling industry for a loop. Different cities and states have tried dealing with China's ban in different ways, including selling to other countries or trying to find domestic markets for various materials. One upside of all of this is a rise in more local recycling infrastructure. Some MRFs are investing in better sorting and cleaning machines, but even that won't be sufficient to tackle this huge and growing waste issue. None of these alternatives, though, will really solve the problem —there are just too many things to recycle and a lot of it is just too dirty. Liquids and foods and oils make it harder to recycle things, many of which end up in landfills or incinerators as a result. Some MRFs are investing in better sorting and cleaning machines, but even that won't be sufficient to tackle this huge and growing waste issue. .13 RE E DUC RECYCLE "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle" image by (CC BY-SA 4.0) https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/national-sword/ Somewhere along the way, key parts of the "reduce, reuse, recycle" mantra got lost. We have lost track of reducing and reusing. Single-use products including straws, bags, cups and bottles are a big part of the problem, as are items made of multiple different materials (particularly ones that are hard to pull back apart, like toothpaste tubes). Consumers can make a difference by buying less, or buying products that can more easily be reused or recycled, but that's only part of the equation. Countries, states and cities need to press producers to design more sustainable products and packaging, and develop more recycling infrastructure. People create pollution and people can stop it, but it has to be done at all levels and steps of the process, starting with better design. Designers can (and should) visit MRFs and mills, to learn how their products and packaging sorts out (or doesn't) and breaks down (or doesn't). They can choose materials that biodegrade or recycle more easily, and design products that break down into recyclable constituent parts. In the end, Operation National Sword could be a wakeup call. But only if producers, consumers, and governments tune in and listen. CREDITS SPECIAL THANKS This episode featured the voices of Kate O'Neill, associate professor in the department of environmental science, policy and management at UC Berkeley; Cole Rosengren, the senior editor of ; Robert Reed, representative of San Francisco Recology; And Matt Wilkins, a biologist and author of in Scientific American. Special thanks to Zoe Heller, the policy director of Calrecycle, Noah Ullman and Randy Hartman of Keep America Beautiful, Liu Hua of Greenpeace China, and to Hillary Predko for sounding the alarm about this problem by sending us her zine, https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/national-sword/