1 / 18

Roll-out Carts

Roll-out Carts. Proactive Replacement Programs. Outline – Proactive Replacement Program. Background What (is proactive replacement)? Why (proactive replacement)? When (to implement proactive replacement)? Issues/Benefits with Proactive Replacement Case Study – City of Los Angeles

ghalib
Download Presentation

Roll-out Carts

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Roll-out Carts Proactive Replacement Programs

  2. Outline – Proactive Replacement Program • Background • What (is proactive replacement)? • Why (proactive replacement)? • When (to implement proactive replacement)? • Issues/Benefits with Proactive Replacement • Case Study – City of Los Angeles • RFP vs. Bid • Cart Specifications

  3. Background - Carts • Roll-out Carts introduced in 1969 • Variety of Programs across the country • Maturity of Cart Programs • Life of Carts - Conditions which affect cart life • Decision point for every City (County)

  4. What (is proactive replacement)? • Systematically replacing roll-out carts throughout City (or area) based on age and condition of carts, as opposed to sporadic daily replacement from residents’ requests • Proactive replacement based on analysis of existing condition of carts in conjunction with previous program rollout • Other Causes of failure?

  5. Why (proactive replacement)? • Threshold of “catastrophic” failure • Choose threshold to determine break even cost analysis. Typically 4% - 5% annual failure • Cost of staff: drivers, phone operators • Cost of equipment: trucks, carts, parts • Distinguish between types of failure: age of carts, trucks, unusual circumstances, etc. • Detriment to Service – Should the burden of repair be placed on the resident? • Residents not sure whether they should call – will they be charged?

  6. Why (proactive replacement)? • Consistency of Carts: Efficiencies, Aesthetics • Better presence within the City • Ideal time to make other changes to the program, re-educate • Safety – residents and drivers

  7. When (implement proactive replacement)? • Break even cost analysis – money talks • Before a change of staff of drivers and operators to handle daily requests • Typically 10 – 15 years after initial cart implementation • Allow time for RFP/Bid, coordinating distribution and retrieval, and citywide announcements

  8. Issues with Proactive Replacement • Up Front Cost – Large capital outlay, although it can be phased in • Assembly and Distribution – Added task of picking up old containers - personnel • Cart for Cart – Resident receives new cart when old cart is turned in • Handling old carts (large scale) – Recycled material, disassembly, washing, grinding, etc. • New Cart “Fever” – Once residents know about new carts, will call for replacement of their damaged cart

  9. Benefits of Proactive Replacement • Overall Cost Savings – Replacement efficiency • Personnel allocation • Re-educate the residents • Consistent Carts and components • Implement new technology – CCIS – asset allocation/database of service calls – GIS – pinpoint problem areas • Audit the City – Much easier during replacement program – determine non-paying residents • Make other changes to system

  10. Case Study: City of L.A. • Background • # of Households: 720,000 • Area: 447 square miles • Residential Collection Trucks: 650 • # of Roll-out Carts: 2.1 million units, 6 manufacturers, 3 cart system – Refuse, Recycling, Yard Waste • Diversion: 45% • Once per week Collection

  11. Case Study: City of L.A. (cont) • Cart Implementation: 1991, 1994, 1997 • Cart Failures – graph

  12. Cart Failure Rate

  13. Case Study: City of L.A. (cont) • Failure exceeded threshold of 5% • Proactive Replacement Program – Phase in new carts by district (6) – replace oldest carts first – 10 to 12 year cycle • One Cart Supplier • Matching Compatibility of Trucks with Carts • Implement CCIS – Bar codes, asset tracking, account tracking, information to improve system • Setup separate facility to assemble, distribute, return old carts, clean, grind

  14. Case Study: City of L.A. (cont) • Inherently conducting audit during distribution and retrieval of carts • Change size of yard waste carts • RFQ and Bid: Competitive price for long term contract

  15. RFP vs. Bid • Every City different – bylaws, charter, rules • City Perspective: • Bid: Detail specifications, lowest responsive bidder • RFP: Program outline, point system, allows options and creativity • If City knows desired specifications and looking for lowest price to meet those specifications, bid is the most effective option • If City is open to different types of options and wants to evaluate bids on several criteria, RFP is best option

  16. RFP vs. Bid • RFP allows flexibility in choosing the vendor that provides the most value • RFP allows City to prioritize or weight parameters • RFP: Do not allow price negotiations • Vendor’s perspective – depends on business model and approach as cart manufacturer • Vendors that offer value package prefer RFP • Vendors with lowest manufacturing costs and limited overhead prefer bids • RFQ

  17. Cart Specifications • Three Ingredients: Design, Processing, Material • Design: Product features – compatibility, safety, user-friendly, aesthetics • Processing: Not only type but equipment technology, processing expertise • Material: Correct material for process and application, Consistency, Additives • Integrity of Cart vendor vs. Integrity of Cart

  18. Cart Specifications (cont) • Suggestions • Understand what is needed/desired in design, processing, and material of cart • Use references (not just supplied by vendor) – understand warranty (procedure), failures, service, lead times, etc. • Parameters of vendor: financial stability, capacity, lawsuits, etc. • Identify and contact resin and additives suppliers • Testing: applicable to your City • Truck Compatibility • If RFP – weight each category

More Related