Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01252011 - D.1RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. ACCEPT report from NewPoint Group in Exhibit A regarding their review of the Base Year Rate Application submitted by Garaventa Enterprises; 2. APPROVE residential and commercial solid waste & recycling collection rate increase of 13.88% for customers in the unincorporated areas served by Garaventa Enterprises (Contractor) under the County’s Franchise Agreement with Garaventa Enterprises ("Franchise Agreement"); 3. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chair of Board of Supervisors to execute Amendment No. 2 to the Franchise Agreement, to add the Ironhouse Unincorporated Area described in Exhibit B; 4. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to execute a third amendment to the Franchise Agreement that extends the term of the Franchise Agreement by a total of 10 years and specifies that the franchise fee will be 7% upon implementation of 3-cart residential recycling collection services, pursuant to the terms of this board order and in a form approved by County Counsel; APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 01/25/2011 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes:See addendum VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Lorna Thomson, 925-335-1231 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: January 25, 2011 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: D. 1 To:Board of Supervisors From:Catherine Kutsuris, Conservation & Development Director Date:January 25, 2011 Contra Costa County Subject:Rate Increase, New Services and Franchise Agreement Extension for Solid Waste Collection in the Unincorporated Areas Served by Garaventa Enterprises 5. APPROVE rate increase of 2% for commercial and light industrial customers to take effect upon implementation of franchise fee increase in conjunction with recommended 3-cart residential rate structure; 6. REQUIRE the Contractor to implement 3-cart residential recycling collection services on or about September 1, 2011; 7. APPROVE recommended 3-cart residential rate structure for customers served by the Contractor under the County's Franchise Agreement which would become effective upon the implementation of 3-cart residential recycling collection services on or about September 1, 2011; RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D) Service Level (Cart Size)* Monthly Rate (Maximum) 20 Gallon $25.00 32 Gallon $31.20 64 Gallon $36.20 95 Gallon $43.05 * Minimum cart sizes specified, actual cart sizes provided to customers may be larger. 8. REQUIRE the Contractor to provide the Director of Conservation and Development (DCD) with monthly reports, beginning August 1, 2011, reflecting the distribution of residential customers by service level in sufficient detail to allow the Director to determine whether or not it is appropriate to request submittal of an additional base year rate application; 9. DIRECT staff, in consultation with the Contractor, to identify potential recommended revisions to the Rate Setting Process and Methodology Manual and any associated changes potentially needed to related terms in the County's Franchise Agreement in order to report back to the Board on or around March 22, 2011; 10. DIRECT staff to consult with the Contractor and study the possible outcomes of including regulation of construction and demolition debris in the Franchise Agreement and report findings to the Board in twelve months; and 11. DIRECT staff to request direction from the Board of Supervisors regarding each County solid waste and recycling collection Franchise Agreement three years before the applicable agreement expires. FISCAL IMPACT: No impact to the County General Fund. The costs for DCD staff time and related consulting services pertaining to these matters would be covered by existing solid waste franchise fees. The additional franchise fee revenue to be derived from the recommended 2% fee increase would help offset the cost of services related to administering the Franchise Agreement. BACKGROUND: The County has a solid waste Franchise Agreement with Garaventa Enterprises (Contractor) for service to the following unincorporated areas: • Bay Point - portion (remainder of Bay Point falls within the area served under the County’s Franchise with Allied Waste) • Bethel Island (contingent upon Amendment No. 2 taking effect incorporating the Ironhouse Unincorporated Area) • Brentwood, unincorporated • Concord, unincorporated • Discovery Bay • Knightsen • Oakley, unincorporated The County’s service area includes portions of Supervisorial Districts III, IV and V. Byron Sanitary District administers its own solid waste collection franchise agreements and regulates the residential rates for the areas within its boundaries. On October 7, 2009, the Board of Supervisors authorized the filing of a Base Year Rate Application two years early at the Contractor's request, due to extenuating circumstances in the economy cited by the Contractor and directed the Conservation and Development Director to concurrently evaluate the restructuring of residential collection services and identify associated rate change recommendations consistent with the approach used for similar restructuring of residential collection services and rates recently approved by the Board in other areas of the unincorporated County. NewPoint Group Review of Garaventa Enterprises Rate Application The County entered into an agreement with NewPoint Group to review the Base Year Rate Change The County entered into an agreement with NewPoint Group to review the Base Year Rate Change Application submitted by the Contractor. The result of NewPoint Group’s review is contained in their report dated January 10, 2011, which is attached as EXHIBIT A. NewPoint Group conducted their review consistent with the applicable provisions of the Rate Setting Manual approved by the County for use in the service area and the recommendations resulting from this review are detailed in the report. The Base Year Rate setting process normally occurs every four years. This process requires that a detailed rate change application be submitted by the Contractor along with the most recent financial audit and supplemental financial and operational information. Using the detailed financial data provided, NewPoint Group reviews several cost categories to determine the appropriate rate adjustment. The major cost categories include: • Direct Labor Costs • Tipping Fees • Corporate and Local General and Administrative Costs • Household Hazardous Waste Program Costs • Trucking and Equipment • Allowable Profit • County’s Franchise Fee Between Base Years, the Contractor is permitted to request Interim Year Rate Adjustments. The Interim Year Rate Review is less rigorous than that carried out in a Base Year. The Interim Year adjustments are calculated based on a weighted increase in controlled and uncontrolled costs, including tipping fees, regulatory charges and Consumer Price Index adjustments. Special extraordinary cost increases are also taken into account. The Contactor is not required to submit audited financial data with the interim year rate application. History of Solid Waste Collection Rate Increases Below is a brief summary of rate increases approved by the County over the past several years in the service area: 2003: Base Year Rate Application Average residential & commercial rate increase of 7.66% and residential rates were standardized. 2004: Interim Year Rate Application Average commercial rate increase of 11.79% (actual increases ranged between 2% - 25% depending on the level of service) and commercial rates were standardized. 2005: Interim Year Rate Application Residential and commercial increase of 3.89% 2006: Interim Year Rate Application Residential and commercial increase of 2.69% 2007: Base Year Rate Application Residential and commercial increase of 6.44% (including Special Extraordinary Costs increase allowance of 1.55% for fuel) Proposed 2011 Solid Waste Collection Rate Increase The Contractor has proposed to increase residential and commercial rates in their unincorporated service area. The Base Year Application submitted by the Contractor requested a rate increase of 21.10%. The NewPoint Group made specific adjustments to costs reflected in the application and, thus, recommends a 13.88% rate increase. The adjustments reflect the reductions in the amount of revenue required to cover allowable costs, profit levels and pass through costs. These adjustments are consistent with the Board's discretion under the Franchise Agreement and with the guidance in the Rate Setting Manual. discretion under the Franchise Agreement and with the guidance in the Rate Setting Manual. The table below summarizes the existing and recommended residential solid waste collection rates. Recommended Base Year Rates for 2011 Service Level Existing Rates Recommended Base Year Rates (13.88% Increase) 20 Gallon $23.34 $26.58 32 Gallon $28.85 $32.85 64 Gallon n/a n/a 96 Gallon*$31.85 $35.85 * Currently, customers who select the 96-gallon cart are provided with company-provided containers and pay a flat rental charge of $3.00 per month (included in rate shown). The 13.88% is not applied toward the $3.00 cart rental charge. The recommended 13.88% increase would also apply to commercial and light industrial customers served by the Contractor under the County’s Franchise Agreement. Franchise Agreement Amendment No. 2 On February 1, 2010, Ironhouse Sanitary District transferred to the City of Oakley the authority to franchise for solid waste and recycling collection for the area in the city. Ironhouse Sanitary District now wants to relinquish its right to provide solid waste collection and disposal services in the unincorporated area of Contra Costa County within its borders ("Ironhouse Unincorporated Area"). County and Ironhouse propose to accomplish this by entering into an agreement to terminate their existing Memorandum of Understanding as well as amending the County's Franchise Agreement with Garaventa Enterprises to include this additional area. Amendment No. 2 has been executed by the Contractor (see Exhibit B). Franchise Agreement Amendment No. 3 Staff recommends extending the term of the Franchise Agreement by 10 years to accommodate longer amortization period for necessary capital investment to enhance the residential recycling services. A minimum of six years would be needed to allow for the 10 year depreciation period assumed in the 3-cart rates proposed for Board approval. The additional four years being recommended is intended to serve as an incentive for the Contractor to proceed with implementing the 3-cart services in 2011. The term would be extended by amending the Franchise Agreement as recommended in #4 above. Although this new amendment is intended to take effect upon execution, the 10 year extension would be revocable by the County if Contractor fails to implement the enhanced residential recycling services as required. The Contractor is expected to implement the enhanced 3-cart recycling services on or about September 1, 2011 (date contingent upon receipt of carts by contractor). Contractor is expected to order sufficient quantity of carts to serve the intended residential customers as directed by the County DCD. The Contractor is expected to place order for residential carts following Board consideration of potential recommended revisions to the Rate Setting Process and Methodology Manual on or around March 22, 2011 (as recommended in #9 above). The County has not increased the franchise fee percentage since initially established at 5% about 10 years ago. Staff is now recommending a 2% franchise fee increase, from 5% to 7%, for services provided by the County related to administering the Franchise Agreement. Recommended 3-Cart Services & Rate Structure The Contractor will provide 95-gallon wheeled carts for customers to place their yard debris in to replace current use of customer supplied bags or containers. Yard debris will continue to be collected curbside for recycling on a bi-weekly schedule. The Contractor will provide customers with 95-gallon wheeled carts for customers to place their mixed recyclables (including bottles, can and paper) for curbside collection to replace the two existing 14 gallon recycling crates. The recycling collection schedule will be changed from weekly to bi-weekly upon implementation of 3-cart services and rates. Contractor will provide all customers with wheeled garbage carts in some cases replacing customer owned cans. Customers will be asked to select the size of their garbage carts and customers which do not elect to choose their cart size will receive the the size of their garbage carts and customers which do not elect to choose their cart size will receive the following cart sizes by default: 20-gallon can and 32-gallon can customers will be provided with wheeled carts roughly equivalent in capacity to their existing cans 96-gallon wheeled cart customers will be provided with 64-gallon wheeled carts There are approximately 75 rural accounts (including a mobile home park which is treated as one account) located in the Marsh Creek Road area which will not be provided with wheeled carts for their yard debris or recyclables due to the exceptional cost of servicing that area with three separate trucks. These customers would be provided with special bags for recycling and yard waste collection that will be serviced by the garbage truck and then sorted for recycling processing at the transfer station. Staff worked with the Contractor to determine a rate structure that would be most likely to support the necessary revenue requirement for the Contractor to provide residences with these new services. The Contractor did not agree with the NewPoint Group recommendation because it used a cost model based on the audited financial statements, which included the City of Oakley. The Contractor provided a proposed rate structure using a cost model based on their assumptions of the costs for service to the unincorporated area only. County staff did not agree with the Contractor's proposal because is was based on cost assumptions that have not been subject to an independent audit. For comparison purposes, the following table includes the current rates, the rates with the 13.88% increase, the 3-cart rates prepared by NewPoint Group, and the 3-cart rates prepared by the Contractor. Service Level Current Rates Base Year Rate Increase of 13.88% NewPoint Group 3-Cart Rates From Final Report Garaventa 3-Cart Rates 20 Gallon $23.34 $26.58 $ 24.95 $ 27.24 32 Gallon $28.85 $32.85 $ 30.20 $ 31.95 64 Gallon $ 35.95 $ 37.40 96 Gallon $31.85*$35.85*$ 40.45 $ 45.00 * Currently, customers who select the 96-gallon cart are provided with company-provided containers and pay a flat rental charge of $3.00 per month (included in rate shown). This $3.00 per month rental charge would no longer be allowed upon implementation of the 3-cart rate structure. The 3-cart residential rates in Recommendation #8 above differ from the rates proposed by NewPoint Group and the rates proposed by the Contractor. The recommended rates are estimated to generate revenue from residential customers that are midway between the revenue requirement calculated by NewPoint Group and the revenue requirement calculated by the Contractor. Tracking & Reporting of Residential Customer Accounts and Revenue Staff will work with the Contractor to ensure that actual residential customer revenue is tracked (including monthly breakdown of customers by cart size and community) so that the data can be used to calculate the actual revenue generated by Board approved rate structure. If approved rate structure is determined to generate excessive residential revenue, County staff would formally request that the Contractor submit a rate application. Review of the Rate Setting Manual The Contractor has suggested changes to the Rate Setting Manual. County staff has reviewed some of these changes and agrees that any changes should make the application process more transparent and easier for the Contractor to complete in an accurate manner. Among potential changes will likely be a delineation of the proposed method for Contractor to segregate cost information for regulated and non-regulated operations. Section 7 of the County's Franchise Agreement requires the Contractor to obtain the County’s written approval of its method of segregating its financial records between County-regulated and non-County regulated operations. The separation of the former Ironhouse Service Area between Oakley and the County increases the signficance of adhering to the Franchise Agreement's requirements. This would predominately relate to subsets of the franchise area where Contractor provides service to County and non-County customers (e.g. Pittsburg/Oakley areas regulated by cities). County staff is prepared to complete this review with the Contractor with the understanding that the Rate Setting Manual is the County's document, which does not require approval or agreement by the Contractor. County staff will report to the Board identifying which suggestions would be inconsistent with existing policy and what if any additional implications such changes would have on the Franchise Agreement. County staff will also consider any other minor administrative changes that do not have implications to rate payers. County staff will report to the Board on this matter on or about March 22. Conduct Construction and Demolition Debris Recovery Study The Contractor believes it would be mutually beneficial if the County considered construction and demolition (C&D) debris to be part of the waste stream which the company has the exclusive right to collect. Staff is recommending that we have a study conducted in order to help determine if granting the Contractor exclusive privilege and duty to collect C&D debris would likely result in greater diversion and convenience, lower costs and more types of C&D materials collected for recycling. Staff estimates this study would cost no more than $25,000. The Contractor would be consulted prior to finalizing a potential scope of work for the C&D study and a draft would be provided for the Contractor's review prior to beginning work on the study. Staff anticipates reporting back to the Board with any relevant findings and recommendations within twelve months. Direction from Board of Supervisors Three Years Prior to Expiration In order to seek direction from the Board regarding whether or not to extend solid waste and recycling collection franchise agreements, staff proposes to return to the Board of Supervisors for direction three years prior to all franchise agreement termination dates. This timeframe should allow adequate time to conduct a Request for Proposal process if that were the desire of the Board, including soliciting and selecting a contractor as well as then completing negotiations with selected contractor. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: CLERK'S ADDENDUM By unanimous vote, APPROVED replacing the published Board Order with a new Board Order with revised recommendations as amended to insert the sentence "The additional franchise fee revenue to be derived from the recommended 2% fee increase would help offset cost of services related to administering the franchise agreement." as the final sentence in the Fiscal Impact section. ACCEPTED report from NewPoint Group regarding their review of the Base Year Rate Application submitted by Garaventa Enterprises; APPROVED residential and commercial solid waste & recycling collection rate increase of 13.88% for customers in the unincorporated areas served by Garaventa Enterprises (Contractor) under the County’s Franchise Agreement with Garaventa Enterprises ("Franchise Agreement"); APPROVED and AUTHORIZED the Chair of Board of Supervisors to execute Amendment No. 2 to the Franchise Agreement, to add the Ironhouse Unincorporated Area described in Exhibit B; APPROVED and AUTHORIZED the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to execute a third amendment to the Franchise Agreement that extends the term of the Franchise Agreement by a total of 10 years, pursuant to the terms of this board order and in a form approved by County Counsel. ATTACHMENTS Report Amendment 2 This report is printed on recycled paper.This report is printed on recycled paper. Proudly serving our clients since 1995 FINAL DRAFT REPORT Review of Garaventa Enterprises 2010 Solid Waste Rate Application and New Three-Cart System for 2011 January 6, 2011 Proudly serving our clients since 1995 This report is printed on recycled paper.This report is printed on recycled paper. FINAL DRAFT REPORT Review of Garaventa Enterprises 2010 Solid Waste Rate Application and New Three-Cart System for 2011 January 6, 2011 January 6, 2011 Ms. Deidra Dingman Conservation Programs Manager Contra Costa County Department of Conservation & Development 651 Pine Street, 4th Floor – North Wing Martinez, California 94553 Regarding: FINAL DRAFT REPORT – Review of Garaventa Enterprises 2010 Solid Waste Rate Application and New Three-Cart System for 2011 Dear Ms. Dingman: NewPoint Group is pleased to present to Contra Costa County (County) our draft report titled, “Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application and New Three-Cart System for 2011.” This final draft report presents results of our review of Garaventa Enterprises 2010 Base Year Rate Application (Application). Our review includes both an evaluation of the 2010 Application, and an assessment of the impact of transitioning to a new three-cart residential collection system in 2011. Our review was conducted in accordance with procedures specified in the County’s Rate Setting Manual (Manual). This report documents the following components of our rate review:  Necessary adjustments to the 2010 Application submitted by Garaventa  A description of the residential collection system before, and after, the proposed new three- cart system would be operational in 2011  Potential increases in diversion levels from the new 2011 three-cart system  New 2011 refuse, curbside recycling, and yardwaste rates, rate structures, and frequency distribution (subscription level) assumptions  A survey of comparative rates of neighboring jurisdictions and within the unincorporated County  An implementation timeline for the new 2011 three-cart system  A summary of a recent customer satisfaction survey of Garaventa services. Garavanta’s transition to a new three-cart residential collection system in 2011 represents a shift in how refuse, curbside recyclables, and yardwaste is accumulated and collected in the County. Garaventa will be challenged to effectively implement the new three-cart system. While there are customer benefits with the expanded three-cart capacity, the reality is that the new three-cart system also increases Garaventa’s overall costs. Ms. Deidra Dingman January 6, 2011 Page 2 This report recommends a new 2011, residential collection rate and rate structure. The proposed 2011 rates are competitive and allow Garaventa to earn a reasonable financial return. These rates are fair to the County and Garaventa in light of the capital investment in new carts, and the associated risks, that Garaventa Enterprises, is undertaking. The County must carefully weigh the potential overall benefits and costs of this 2011 solid waste system change as it involves a shift in the types of containers Garaventa uses for residential collection service. County policy makers must evaluate whether the mostly qualitative residential customer benefits (e.g., increased storage capacity, more container size choices, new carts, and ease of commingling “single stream” recycling), and some County-related benefits (e.g., enhanced street appearance and an increase in overall County diversion levels), are sufficient to offset the incremental County costs of new carts. Should the County policy makers approve the new three-cart system for 2011, following implementation, the County and Garaventa should expect a transitional period of at least a year, or more, characterized by some degree of residential service level instability and increased residential customer inquiries and demands. Finally, County areas served by Garaventa are undergoing a major shift this year, as the City of Oakley will assume franchise responsibilities for the areas formerly falling under the Ironhouse Sanitary District’s jurisdiction. The County should be aware that, following this transition, the revenue and cost structure of the remaining unincorporated areas may change (e.g., for the next base year). * * * * * If you have any questions concerning this final draft report, please contact me at (916) 442-0189, or Mr. Erik Nylund at (916) 442-2456. Thank you for the opportunity to serve Contra Costa County. Very truly yours, James A. Gibson, Ph.D. Director Table of Contents Section Executive Summary ........................................................................ ES-1 Page 1. Introduction and Background of Rate Review .............................. 1-1 A. Background of Review ................................................................................ 1-2 B. Scope of Rate Review ................................................................................. 1-2 C. Regulation of Residential and Commercial Sectors ..................................... 1-4 D. Overview of Rate Application and Rate Request ......................................... 1-4 E. Garaventa Enterprises and Related Companies ........................................... 1-6 F. Rate History ............................................................................................... 1-8 2. Baseline Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection Services ................................................ 2-1 A. Current Refuse Collection Services ............................................................. 2-1 B. Current Curbside Recycling Collection Services ......................................... 2-3 C. Current Yardwaste Collection Services........................................................ 2-7 D. Historical County Diversion Levels ............................................................ 2-8 E. Customer Satisfaction with Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection ...... 2-9 3. Proposed Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Services ................................................................... 3-1 A. Proposed Refuse Collection Services ........................................................... 3-1 B. Proposed Single Stream Cart- Based Curbside Recycling Services ............... 3-2 C. Proposed Yardwaste Program ..................................................................... 3-5 D. Potential for Increases in Diversion ............................................................ 3-6 E. New System Cart Setout ............................................................................ 3-6 F. Projected System Efficiencies ...................................................................... 3-6 4. Review of Rate Application for 2010 ............................................... 4-1 A. Rate Setting Requirements in Franchise Agreement and Rate Setting Manual ................................................................................... 4-1 B. Factors Influencing 2010 Rate Review ........................................................ 4-1 C. NewPoint Group Rate Application Adjustments ........................................ 4-4 D. Components of Residential Rate ................................................................ 4-8 Table of Contents ii Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Section 5. Recommended Rate Change for 2010 .................................................................... 5-1 Page A. Residential Rate Change for 2010 .......................................................................................... 5-1 B. Comparison of Rates and Services to Other Neighboring Jurisdictions .................................. 5-2 6. Recommended Residential Three-Cart System Rate Change for 2011 ............... 6-1 A. Assumptions Used for Recommended 2011 Three-Cart System Rate Structure and Rates........................................................................................................ 6-1 B. Recommended 2010 Rate Structure and Rates Under New Residential Three-Cart System ................................................................................................................ 6-3 C. Recommended Education and Outreach ............................................................................... 6-6 D. Other County Requested Analyses ......................................................................................... 6-6 E. Franchise Agreement Factors ................................................................................................. 6-6 7. Implementation Schedule ......................................................................................... 7-1 A. Three-Cart System Implementation Timeline ....................................................................... 7-1 B. Rate Setting Timeline for 2012 through 2015 ....................................................................... 7-2 Appendix A. Rate Application .......................................................................................................... A-1 Page B. Audited Financial Statements.................................................................................... B-1 C. Customer Satisfaction Survey Results .......................................................................C-1 D. Adjusted Base Year Model ....................................................................................... D-1 E. Comparative Refuse Collection Rates ..................................................................... E-1 F. Comparative Jurisdiction Franchise Extension Terms and Conditions ................ F-1 Executive Summary Executive Summary This report represents NewPoint Group’s review of Garaventa Enterprises (Garaventa’s) 2010 Base Year Rate Application and our assessment of a proposed new three-cart residential collection system for 2011. This executive summary is organized as follows: A. Rate Review Background B. 2010 Rate Review Results and Rate Recommendations C. 2011 Three-Cart Residential System Rate Review Results and Recommendations. A. Rate Review Background 1. Garaventa Rate Application Garaventa submitted its 2010 Base Year Rate Application (Application) on December 9, 2009, requesting an effective 21.10 percent NewPoint Group, Inc. (NewPoint Group) was retained by Contra Costa County (County) to conduct an independent review of Garaventa’s Application. For the review, we used guidelines provided in the County’s Rate Setting Process and Methodology Manual for Residential Solid Waste Charges (Manual). The 1998 Manual provides official framework for how the County reviews rate applications. rate increase. After our initial review of the Application, we adjusted the Application for some minor mathematical errors and Garaventa’s effective rate increase equaled 20.93 percent. Garaventa subsidiary companies, and the unincorporated communities (County areas) they serve, are shown in Table ES-1, on the next page. 2. Garaventa Customer Satisfaction and Collection System Efforts We summarize (in Appendix C) results of a recent customer satisfaction survey conducted by Garaventa for County services areas. In general, Garaventa’s County customers are very satisfied with the refuse, recycling, and yardwaste collection services provided by Garaventa. County customers had a 90 percent satisfaction rating for refuse, recycling, and yardwaste collection services. Garaventa Enterprises, recently invested approximately $15 million in the Mt. Diablo Recycling Center (MDRC), located in Pittsburg, California. This state-of-the- art materials recovery facility (MRF) processes all Garaventa recyclables. Garaventa Enterprises constructed this facility using the most current and advanced sorting equipment and capabilities. Currently, Garaventa uses this MRF to process County area recyclables, both collected in crates at the curb, and from commercial businesses. Executive Summary ES-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Table ES-1 Contra Costa County Garaventa Service Areas and Companies Service Area Company Providing Service 1. Bay Point Pittsburg Disposal and Debris Box Service, Inc. 2. Brentwood Brentwood Disposal Services, Inc. 3. Byron Sanitary District areas Brentwood Disposal Services, Inc. 4. Discovery Bay Discovery Bay Disposal, Inc. 5. Oakley areas Oakley Disposal Service, Inc. 6. North Concord Minor – served by Concord Disposal Service All Areas Delta Debris Box Service Inc. (for debris box service) The County requested that we examine a new three-cart residential collection system that Garaventa may implement in 2011 should the County approve this new program. As part of this new system, County ratepayers would receive a new refuse collection cart (32-, 64-, or 96-gallon), a new 96-gallon recycling cart (for bi-weekly service), and a 96-gallon yardwaste cart (for bi-weekly service). Garaventa would process materials collected from the single stream 96-gallon recycling cart using the new MRF’s full sorting capabilities. 3. Prior Rate Changes The County approved the last rate increase in mid-2008. Recent County rate increases, for Garaventa-served County areas, have been as follows:  2009: 0.00 percent  2008: 6.71 percent  2007: 6.44 percent  2006: 2.69 percent  2005: 3.89 percent. On average, residential rates have increased 3.9 percent per year, since 2005. During this same five-year period, the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Consumer Price Index (CPI) increased by an average of 2.2 percent per year. Garaventa has recently faced a financial challenge with declining collection revenues, increasing operating costs (e.g., labor and tipping fees), and poor recycling markets. As a result, Garaventa companies servicing the County showed a modest net income (before income taxes) of $145,390 in its 2008 audited financial statements.1 4. Garaventa Rate Regulation Garaventa provides collection services to the residential, commercial, and light industrial sectors. The County regulates rates of the residential and commercial sectors using adopted Manual guidelines. In “base years,” the County examines all revenues, costs, and profits of Garaventa’s County regulated activities. The County and Garaventa historically have not attempted to disaggregate costs, by sector, as Garaventa’s operations costs are highly co-mingled. Historically, the County has general applied rate changes to residential rates at the same level as commercial rates. In some years (e.g., 2004), the County approved an increase for commercial rates which was different from the residential rate increase. 5. Survey of Comparative Rates We compared current County rates to rates of the following eleven (11) jurisdictions: 1. City of Antioch 2. City of Clayton 3. City of Concord 4. City of Lafayette 5. City of Martinez 1 This financial statement result does not reflect any adjustments for rate setting purposes. ES-3 Table ES-2 Comparison of Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Area Residential Rates With Eleven (11) Comparative Jurisdictions (May, 2010) Size (gallons) Contra Costa County Rate (Per Customer, Per Month) Average Rate of Eleven (11) Jurisdictions (Per Customer, Per Month) Percent Difference 20 (mini) $23.34 $19.26 +21% 32 28.85 22.43 +29% 96 31.11 54.62 -43% 6. City of Moraga 7. City of Orinda 8. City of Pleasant Hill 9. City of Walnut Creek 10. Contra Costa County (CCCWA areas) 11. Town of Danville.2 Table ES-2, above, shows how current Garaventa County area residential rates compare to the eleven (11) jurisdictions. On a “nominal” comparison basis, Garaventa County area residential rates for the smaller container sizes are well above average, and the Garaventa County area’s residential rate for the 96-gallon container size is substantially below average. Most Garaventa County area customers subscribe to the 96-gallon residential service level. As a result, most Garaventa County area residential revenues come from the 96-gallon customer. Garaventa thus can price its 96-gallon container rate lower than these comparative jurisdictions and still cover its residential revenue requirements. In contrast, for the comparative jurisdictions, most residential revenues are generated from the smaller container sizes. Many of these comparative jurisdictions price their 96-gallon cart rate high to encourage customers to shift to smaller container 2 The County has used these eleven (11) jurisdictions for rate comparisions since the Manual was adopted. sizes. This rate structure difference results in significantly fewer comparative customers at the 96-gallon service level than for the County. As an example, seven (7) of the eleven (11) comparative jurisdictions had just five (5) percent, or less, of their residential customers with 96-gallon service. Most current County bin and debris box rates are relatively close to the average of the eleven (11) comparative jurisdictions. Common bin and debris box percentage rate comparisons are shown below: Bin Service  2 yard/1 per week, -1%  3 yard/1 per week, -7% Debris Box Service  20 yard debris box (per pull), -15%. In general, we caution the County’s use of comparative rates as a basis for setting rates as rates of other different jurisdictions have unique:  Cross-subsidies between sectors  Franchise fees and other services (contained within the rates)  Legacy rate setting practices  Levels of residential, commercial, and industrial business  Profitability levels  Rate structure objectives (e.g., reward waste reduction) Executive Summary ES-4 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application  Frequency distributions by cart size  Rate setting methods  Service levels (e.g., bi-weekly versus weekly yardwaste or recycling collection)  Transfer station and landfill tipping fees (based on the proximity to these facilities). B. 2010 Rate Review Results and Rate Recommendations 1. Projected 2010 Revenue Requirement Shortfall For 2010, we estimated an approximate $1,270,000 revenue shortfall. We determined the following five (5) factors caused this shortfall:  Labor cost increases associated with wage and benefit increases tied to union labor agreements (46.51%  Combined transfer station and landfill “tipping fee” increases from $65 per ton in 2008, to $72.25 per ton in 2010 ( of shortfall) 19.78%  Trucking and equipment cost increases associated with (1) increasing wages and benefits for mechanics and shop laborers, (2) fuel and oil cost increases, and (3) property lease cost increases ( of shortfall). This cost category includes the costs of refuse consolidation, transportation, and landfill disposal 14.86%  County franchise fee increases3 ( of shortfall). This cost category includes the costs of all truck and equipment depreciation, repair and maintenance, parts, fuel, and storage 17.56%  Depreciation and other operating cost increases ( of shortfall) 1.29% 3 As franchise fees are calculated based on a percentage of gross revenues, franchise fees increase as other costs increase. of shortfall). 2. NewPoint Group Review Adjustments Our rate setting adjustments decreased the shortfall requested in Garaventa’s Application by approximately $0.6 million, from $1.9 million to $1.3 million. We made adjustments to the following categories (with the percentage of our adjustment shown in parenthesis):  Decrease in corporate and local general and administrative costs (59 percent reduction)  Decrease in tipping fees (16 percent reduction)  Decrease in operating profits (9 percent reduction)  Increase in residential revenues (7 percent reduction)  Decrease in franchise fees (5 percent reduction)  Decrease in trucking and equipment costs (10 percent reduction)  Increase in direct labor (11 percent increase)  Decrease in depreciation and other operating cost (2 percent reduction)  Increase in Recycled material sales (2 percent reduction)  Decrease in County administrative fee (1 percent reduction). 3. Rate Options for 2010 Based on our review, we determined that a rate increase of 13.88 percent is needed to cover the revenue shortfall for 2010. A 13.88 rate increase if applied across all rates would fully cover the approximately $1,270,000 2010 revenue shortfall. We show the residential rate structure before, and after, this 13.88 percent rate increase in Table ES-3, on the next page. A 13.88 percent residential rate increase would result in 2010 residential rates that range from $3.04 to $4.00 per customer, per month. The most common 96-gallon rate (96 percent of customers) would increase from $31.85 to $35.85 per customer, per month. ES-5 Table ES-3 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Residential Solid Waste Collection Rates With A 13.88 Percent Rate Increase (Per Customer, Per Month) Service Level Current 2009 Rate (Per Customer, Per Month) Recommended 2010 Rate (Per Customer, Per Month) Rate Increase (Per Customer, Per Month) County Areas (Other Than Byron Areas) 20-gallon can $23.34 $26.58 $3.24 32-gallon can $28.85 $32.85 $4.00 96-gallon cart $31.85 $35.85 $4.00 Byron Areas 20-gallon can $21.88 $24.92 $3.04 32-gallon can $26.00 $29.61 $3.61 96-gallon cart $29.00 $32.61 $3.61 Table ES-4 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Estimated 2010 Revenues and Expenses, by Sector (As a Percent of Total Revenues and Expenses)4 Description Residential Commercial Total Revenues 65% 35% 100% Expenses 65% 35% 100% We analyzed residential and commercial revenues and costs for this base year. These data are shown in Table ES-4, above. C. 2011 Three-Cart Residential System Rate Review Results and Rate Recommendations For 2011, we evaluated impacts of an entirely new residential solid waste rate structure in conjunction with a new three-cart collection 4 These revenue and cost percentage figures reflect the pooling of all unincorporated County revenues and costs (i.e., are fully inclusive of the franchise areas of the City of Oakley areas which ultimately will be part of a new City of Oakley franchise in the near term). These figures presume that unincorporated County areas (both non-City of Oakley and City of Oakley) have a similar distribution of revenues and costs. system. The proposed residential three-cart collection system will include:  Refuse collection – customer choice of a 20-gallon mini-can (company provided), 32-gallon cart (company provided), 64-gallon cart (company provided), or 96-gallon cart (company provided)  Curbside recycling collection – a 96-gallon cart (bi-weekly service)  Yardwaste collection – a 96-gallon cart (bi-weekly service). In contrast to the current two 14-gallon crate system, customers will place all curbside recyclables commingled into a 96-gallon cart (called a “single stream” system) provided by the company. In contrast to the current customer- provided can and bag system, the customer will place all yardwaste materials into a 96-gallon cart provided by the company. The single stream curbside recyclable materials will be processed at the new state-of-the-art Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) sort line at the Pittsburg Recycling and Transfer Center (Pittsburg California). Executive Summary ES-6 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Overall, there are benefits and costs of the new collection system. County diversion is expected to increase with the new system. Garaventa anticipates that there will be an eighteen (18) percent increase in curbside recyclables tonnage, and a twenty-five (25) percent increase in yardwaste tonnage. In evaluating the rate impacts of this new system, we carefully considered of a number of important factors, including the:  Price elasticity of different rate structures – This factor refers to how customers respond to different rate structure scenarios, namely the percentage change in quantity demanded as a result of the percentage change in price  Customer transition period – This factor refers to how long it takes before customers come into equilibrium on their cart selections. There likely will be a period of up to one year during which customers continue to shift service levels5  Determination of initial customer refuse cart size preferences – This factor refers to the customers’ initial selection of cart preferences. Garaventa plans to query residential customers, in a three-month period prior to placing its final cart orders (October through December 2010). Based on our review, the new proposed rate structure, and rates, fully reflect new cart capital outlays totaling over $2.1 million, including the purchase of nearly 40,000 new carts for total County area-wide refuse, curbside recycling, and yardwaste services. Rate assumptions included the Company’s proposed ten (10) year amortization period, a 5.0 percent interest rate on the purchase of the carts, and allowed cart costs (with profit) in the rate base. The amortization period proposed by Garaventa would extend nearly six years beyond the term of Garaventa’s current franchise granted by the County. 5 Garaventa agrees to allow customers to shift service levels without restriction as opposed to requiring customers to commit to a service level over some set period of time. Table ES-6 Contra Costa County Assumed Residential Customer Frequency Distribution (Year 2011) Service Level Percent of Customers 20-gallon mini-can 1% 32-gallon cart 34% 64-gallon cart 40% 96-gallon cart 25%6 Total 100% There are some risks associated with the transition to the three-cart system, including:  Customers could, on average, select smaller refuse cart sizes than assumed in the customer preference frequency distribution  There would be no “balancing account,” or another similar mechanism to true-up projected revenues, and/or costs, with actual revenues and costs through 2011  There could be revenue fluctuations and cash flow instability to the company throughout the year, as customers decide on their service levels and migrate to their preferred cart sizes. Our assumed short-term frequency distribution (of the number of customers by rate category) is shown in Table ES-6, above. Our assumptions were based on:  Over 96 percent of current customers have 96-gallon refuse service and we believe that some customers will, at least initially, want to retain their existing refuse cart capacity 6 We believe that this is a conservative estimate for the company, and that it could take longer for County customers to transition from 96-gallon service to a smaller cart size (i.e., the first year result could show a larger number of customers subscribed to the 96-gallon carts). To the degree that it does take longer for customers to migrate to lower container sizes, the company would benefit from a profitability standpoint. ES-7  Consideration of actual frequency distribution data for other jurisdictions in the area following implementation of a three-cart system (City of Rio Vista, City of Concord).7 Under the assumption that the County approved a 13.88 percent rate increase in 2010, in Table ES-7, on the next page, we show that the 2011 residential 7 There is a large amount of uncertainty in determining the frequency distribution. We cannot represent that our assumed frequency distribution will be the actual frequency distribution at the end of 2011. Our assumed frequency distribution is an average, used for revenue generation estimation purposes, relevant only for 2011. The County and Garaventa should carefully reevaluate both the rate structure, and frequency distribution assumptions, at the end of 2011. At that time, with more stability in customer behavior, and actual operating data under the new automated system, customer frequency distributions (number of customers by rate category) should begin to stabilize. rate changes would range from -$2.65 per customer, per month, to +$4.60 per customer, per month. The most common 96-gallon residential rate would increase from $35.85 per customer, per month, to $40.45 per customer, per month, a 12.8 percent increase for an estimated 25 percent of County customers. The remaining estimated 48 percent of County customers would have a rate decrease. Executive Summary ES-8 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Table ES-7 Contra Costa County Residential Rate Structure Before and After 13.88 Recommended Rate Increase for 2011 Three-Cart Residential System (Calendar Year 2011) Service Level Proposed 2010 Rate (Per Customer, Per Month)8 [With A 13.88 Percent Rate Increase] Recommended 2011 Rate (Per Customer, Per Month) Rate Change (Per Customer, Per Month) 20-gallon mini-can $26.58 $24.95 -$1.63 32-gallon cart $32.85 $30.20 -$2.65 64-gallon cart N/A $35.95 N/A 96-gallon cart $35.85 $40.45 +$4.60 8 From Table ES-5, shown for County Areas other than Byron. Section 1 Introduction and Background of Rate Review 1. Introduction and Background of Rate Review On December 8, 2009, Garaventa Enterprises (Garaventa) submitted a 2010 Base Year Rate Change Application (Application) to Contra Costa County (County). Garaventa can submit a Base Year Rate Application every four (4) years in accordance with the County’s 1998 Rate Setting Process and Methodology Manual for Residential Solid Waste Charges (Manual). Garaventa submitted this 2010 Application at a time of unprecedented downturn in the economy. The recent recession caused customers to purchase fewer goods and consequently dispose of less refuse. As customers generated less refuse, they decreased their refuse collection service levels. Garaventa revenues have, in turn, recently declined. A refuse collection company’s costs of operation are largely fixed (e.g., trucks, facilities, overhead). Even though Garaventa revenues have declined, Garaventa costs have not decreased at the same rate. The result is that Garaventa profits recently have fallen below the target profit level specified in the Manual. The Application comes as a time when Garaventa Enterprises has expended significant resources to finance and construct a new Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) sort line at the Pittsburg, California location. Mt. Diablo Recycling processes County recyclables using this MRF sort line. The Application is submitted at a time of minimal inflation, as measured by the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Consumer Price Index (CPI). The annual percentage change in this CPI in 2009 ranged from just 0.10 percent to 2.61 percent.1 Under these complex and mostly unfavorable conditions, in the Application Garaventa has requested a 21.10 percent rate increase for 2010. This large requested rate increase is unprecedented over the past approximately twelve (12) years since the County adopted the Manual. On April 12, 2010, the County retained NewPoint Group to review and analyze the Application. This report documents results of our rate review. The remainder of this introductory section is organized as follows: A. Background of Review B. Scope of Rate Review C. Regulation of Residential and Commercial Sectors D. Overview of Rate Application and Rate Request E. Garaventa Enterprises and Related Companies F. Rate History. 1 Based on year 2009 changes in the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Consumer Price Index (CPI) as follows: February 2008 to February 2009 (+1.16 percent), April 2008 to April 2009 (+0.80 percent), June 2008 to June 2009 (+0.23 percent), August 2008 to August 2009 (+0.17 percent), October 2008 to October 2009 (+0.10 percent), December 2008 to December 2009 (+2.61 percent). 1. Introduction and Background of Rate Review 1-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application A. Background of Review Garaventa has an exclusive franchise with the County to collect, and remove for disposal and recycling, all residential and commercial, and light industrial solid waste, including recyclable materials. Garaventa has a twenty-year franchise with the County, beginning with an effective date of May 9, 1995, and ending May 8, 2015. The County has jurisdiction to regulate collection, removal, and disposal of all solid waste, and the recycling of all materials. Garaventa provides service to the following six (6) geographic areas located within unincorporated Contra Costa County: 1. Bay Point (part of Bay Point) 2. Brentwood 3. Byron Sanitary District areas 4. Discovery Bay 5. Oakley areas 6. North Concord – unincorporated areas Exhibit 1-1, on the next page, shows the refuse collection service areas located within unincorporated Contra Costa County. Garaventa has five (5) subsidiary companies that perform the actual collection activities for the first five (5) service areas, noted above. These companies are:  Brentwood Disposal Services, Inc. (Brentwood, Byron, Knightsen, other rural County areas)  Delta Debris Box Service, Inc.  Discovery Bay Disposal, Inc. (Discovery Bay area)  Oakley Disposal Service, Inc. (Ironhouse Sanitary District area)  Pittsburg Disposal and Debris Box Service, Inc. (Bay Point area). Concord Disposal Service (CDS) performs the refuse collection for the small North Concord area. A total of approximately 30 County customers are serviced by CDS in this area. CDS rates are subject to rate review by the City of Concord and, as a result, the revenues and costs for this small area have not been included in this County rate review. North Concord area rates are set equal to City of Concord rates. Throughout this report, we use “Garaventa” to refer to the five (5) companies that actually provide the collection service. B. Scope of Rate Review For this base year rate review, we followed requirements contained in the County’s Rate Setting Process and Methodology Manual for Residential Solid Waste Charges, September 28, 1998 (Manual). Our review included the following ten (10) tasks: 1. Conduct periodic project status meetings with the County 2. Conduct a detailed review of Garaventa’s Application and Garaventa financial statements 3. Conduct onsite visits and meet with Garaventa management and staff to review the Application, our data requests, and obtain supporting documentation between April and July, 2010 4. Meet with Garaventa during August 2010 to discuss preliminary rate review findings and provide an opportunity for Garaventa to provide additional information or comments on findings 5. Assess current Garaventa operating practices 6. Evaluate changes to Garaventa costs and operations related to potential implementation of a new residential three-cart system 7. Analyze trends in Garaventa revenues and costs 8. Compile rate surveys of comparative jurisdictions 9. Compile franchise extension terms granted for comparative jurisdictions 10. Develop a report, and present findings to the Board of Supervisors. 1-3 Exhibit 1-1 Map of Contra Costa County Refuse Collection Service Areas 1. Introduction and Background of Rate Review 1-4 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application In addition to the information provided in this report, we have supporting workpapers documenting results of our review. We also developed an extensive spreadsheet model which we used to generate our adjustments to the Application. C. Regulation of Residential and Commercial Sectors The County and Garaventa use the Rate Setting Process and Methodology Manual for Residential Solid Waste Charges to set solid waste collection rates. This Manual was developed in 1998. The Manual provides a formal structure for establishing solid waste collection rates. The Manual provides rate change policies, provides application forms, specifies reporting formats, and identifies required supporting documents. The Manual specifies procedures for requesting, reviewing, and adopting rate changes. “Base year” rates are established every four (4) years. In each of the “interim years” between base years, rate changes follow a more streamlined process. Interim adjustments are set based on a composite index, consisting of the change in consumer price index (CPI), change in regulatory and tipping fees, and an adjustment for the County’s franchise fee. The County regulates rates for refuse, curbside recycling, and yardwaste collection. Residential rates are set to cover allowable costs and a reasonable profit to the hauler for providing residential refuse, curbside recycling, and yardwaste collection services. The County conducted its last Base Year rate review in 2007. In accordance with the Rate Manual, the next Base Year review normally would occur in 2011. Under the normal schedule, the County would allow Garaventa Enterprises to submit an Interim Year rate application. However, on July 3, 2009, Garaventa Enterprises submitted a letter to the County requesting that the County allow Garaventa to submit a Base Year rate application. Garaventa indicated that an Interim Year rate application (tied to the CPI) would be insufficient to provide adequate revenues “given the changes that have occurred in the local economy.” This letter also indicated a preference to consider a new residential service restructuring, including automated refuse collection, single stream recycling, and yard waste container pickup. Garaventa requested the County to consider a franchise extension so that the cost of new wheeled carts could be reasonably amortized. The County Board of Supervisors agreed to allow Garaventa to submit a Base Year application. The Board also agreed to consider the new programs and franchise extension request from Garaventa. D. Overview of Rate Application and Rate Request Garaventa submitted their Application on December 8, 2009. We include a copy of their Application in Appendix A. In the Application, Garaventa requested an increase to refuse collection rates of 22.10 percent. Current and requested residential rates are shown in Table 1-1, on the following page. As shown in Table 1-1, current County rates are regionalized (i.e., the same) for the following areas: Bay Point, Brentwood, Discovery Bay, and a portion of Oakley (County areas outside of the Ironhouse Sanitary District). Current County rates are slightly below the regionalized rate for the Byron area and Oakley area (within the Ironhouse Sanitary District). We provide the total number of residential customers for each County area in Table 1-2, on page 1-6. Over one-half of the customers are currently within the Ironhouse Sanitary District service area. Another one-quarter are in the Discovery Bay service area. 1-5 Table I-1 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Current and Garaventa Requested Residential Solid Waste Collection Rates (Per customer, Per month)2 Service Area/Container Size3 Current 2009 Rate per Customer, per Month Requested Rate Change per Customer, per Month 2010 Garaventa Requested Rate per Customer, per Month 1. Bay Point Area (Served by Pittsburg Disposal & Debris Box Service, Inc.) 20-gallon customer-provided can $23.34 $4.91 $28.25 32-gallon customer-provided can $28.85 $6.10 $34.95 96-gallon toter $31.85 $6.10 $37.95 2. Brentwood Area (Served by Brentwood Disposal Service, Inc.) 20-gallon customer-provided can $23.34 $4.91 $28.25 32-gallon customer-provided can $28.85 $6.10 $34.95 96-gallon toter $31.85 $6.10 $37.95 3. Byron Area (Served by Brentwood Disposal Service, Inc.) 20-gallon customer-provided can $21.88 $4.62 $26.50 32-gallon customer-provided can $26.00 $5.50 $31.50 96-gallon toter $29.00 $5.50 $34.50 4. Discovery Bay Area (Served by Discovery Bay Disposal Service, Inc.) 20-gallon customer-provided can $23.34 $4.91 $28.25 32-gallon customer-provided can $28.85 $6.10 $34.95 96-gallon toter $31.85 $6.10 $37.95 5. Oakley Area (Within Ironhouse Sanitary District, Served by Oakley Disposal Service, Inc.) 20-gallon customer-provided can $23.11 $4.89 $28.00 32-gallon customer-provided can $28.11 $5.94 $34.05 96-gallon toter $31.11 $5.94 $37.05 6. Oakley Area (County areas, Served by Oakley Disposal Service, Inc.) 20-gallon customer-provided can $23.34 $4.91 $28.25 32-gallon customer-provided can $28.85 $6.10 $34.95 96-gallon toter $31.85 $6.10 $37.95 2 Includes most of the rate categories in the residential rate structure. Some rates (e.g., extra can service) are not shown in this table. 3 The 96-gallon toter rates include a $3 per month toter rental charge. 1. Introduction and Background of Rate Review 1-6 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Table I-2 County Residential Customers By Garaventa Service Area (Projected 2010) Area Customers Bay Point 2,348 Brentwood 892 Byron 139 Discovery Bay 4,448 Oakley (County, outside Ironhouse) 106 Oakley (Ironhouse Sanitary District) 9,505 Total 17,438 Table I-3 Financial Statement Profit Levels For Each Garaventa Enterprises-Related Company Providing Collection Services to Contra Costa County (Calendar Year Ended December 31, 2008) Company Profit/(Loss) Brentwood Disposal Service, Inc. ($176,774) Delta Debris Box Service, Inc. (190,722) Discovery Bay Disposal, Inc. 230,413 Oakley Disposal Service, Inc. 60,847 Pittsburg Disposal and Debris Box Service, Inc.4 221,626 Total $145,390 Garaventa provided calendar year ended December 31, 2008, audited financial statements for the following five (5) companies:  Brentwood Disposal Service, Inc.  Delta Debris Box Service, Inc.  Discovery Bay Disposal, Inc.  Oakley Disposal Service, Inc.  Pittsburg Disposal and Debris Box Service, Inc. Appendix B includes these audited financial statements. 4 Not audited, but represents the County’s allocated portion of the total Pittsburg Disposal & Debris Box Service, Inc. business. From an audited financial statement perspective, 2008 was not highly profitable for Garaventa.5 For calendar year 2008, Table 1-3, left, shows profit levels (before income taxes) reported by Garaventa on its 2008 audited financial statements. The $145,390 in profit represents a 98 percent operating ratio based on costs of approximately $9.2 million, well above the 90 percent target operating ratio (i.e., at a lower profit level). The Application includes all revenues and expenses of the Ironhouse Sanitary District service area. At the time of this writing, oversight of this franchise was being transferred from the Ironhouse Sanitary District to the City of Oakley.6 The City of Oakley also was finalizing terms of a new franchise agreement. Terms of the new franchise required Oakley Disposal Services to implement a new cart- based residential collection system. This new cart- based system includes a refuse cart (with 32-, 64-, and 96-gallon options, weekly), a 96-gallon recycling cart (bi-weekly service), and a 96-gallon yardwaste cart (bi-weekly service). The services begin in October, 2010. Even with this change in franchise oversight, Garaventa agreed that our rate review scope should fully include the revenues, and costs, of the Ironhouse Sanitary District service area. E. Garaventa Enterprises and Related Companies As background for this review, in Exhibit 1-2 on the next page, we show the relationship of Garaventa to its related companies. Garaventa 5 Profit levels shown on Garaventa audited financial statements do not reflect the County’s treatment of allowable costs, pass- through costs, and non-allowable costs. As part of the County’s rate setting process, the County makes rate setting adjustments to Garaventa revenues and costs in order to set rates charged to County customers. After incorporating County rate setting adjustments, Garaventa “rate setting” profit levels are typically higher than “audited financial statement” profit levels. 6 Effective February 1, 2010, the City of Oakley withdrew from the Regional Agency (a Joint Powers Agreement) which had included Contra Costa County, the City of Oakley, and the Ironhouse Sanitary District. 1-7 Exhibit 1-2 Related Parties to Garaventa Enterprises and Transactions Flow Diagram 1 Not a related party to Garaventa, but rather now owned by Waste Connections. CCWS also takes a small amount of refuse to Vasco Road Landfill, also not a related party to Garaventa, but rather owned by Republic Services (current tipping fee of $31.78 per ton). CCWS takes a small amount of organic materials to Northern Recycling (also not a related party to Garaventa) in Zamora, California (current tipping fee of $18.00 per ton). 2 Includes depreciation; interest; direct labor for repair and maintenance (welders and mechanics); parts; fuel and oil; and overhead. 1. Introduction and Background of Rate Review 1-8 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application companies servicing the County have related-party transactions with the following five (5) companies: Parent Company 1. Garaventa Enterprises Transfer Station and Transportation 2. Contra Costa Waste Services (CCWS) Recyclables Processing 3. Mt. Diablo Recycling Trucking Company 4. SEG Trucking Property Leasing Company 5. Candy Properties. Refuse collected by Garaventa is taken to the Contra Costa Waste Transfer Station in Pittsburg, California. Refuse is consolidated and transported by CCWS to Potrero Hills Landfill in Solano, County, a landfill owned and operated by Waste Connections. Waste Connections is not a related party company to Garaventa. Recyclables collected by Garaventa are taken to the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) for processing. The MRF is operated by Mt. Diablo Recycling. This MRF is collocated in Pittsburg, California with the Contra Costa Waste Transfer Station. Yardwaste collected by Garaventa is taken to the Contra Costa Waste Transfer Station. Yardwaste is consolidated and transported by CCWS to Potrero Hills Landfill in Solano, County, where it is composted by Waste Connections. SEG Trucking leases trucks and equipment to Garaventa companies serving the County. Candy Properties leases office, storage, and yard space to Garaventa companies serving the County. We reviewed transactions between Garaventa companies serving the County, and these related entities, for reasonableness and consistency with County rate setting practices and treatment. Table 1-4 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Residential Solid Waste Collection Rate Changes (1993 to 2009) Year Rate Year Type Approved Rate Change 1. 1999 Interim None 2. 2000 Interim7 +7.7 to 8.5% (new green waste program) 3. 2001 Interim None 4. 20028 Base +7.66% (implemented in 2003) 5. 2003 Interim None 6. 2004 Interim +0.00% residential +11.79% commercial 7. 2005 Interim9 +3.89% 8. 2006 Interim10 +2.69% 9. 2007 Base11 +6.44% 10. 2008 Interim12 +6.71% 11. 2009 Interim None F. Rate History Every four years, the County conducts a Base Year rate review of Garaventa solid waste collection services. Since the County developed the Manual in 1998, the County has conducted two base year rate reviews in 2002 and 2007.13 This 2010 base year review represents the third base year review. Interim years, which occur in each of the three years between base years, follow a simplified approach.14 Rate changes since the Manual’s inception are shown in Table 1-4, above. Garaventa requested, 7 Effective July, 2000. 8 Approved by the Board on December 17, 2002, and implemented in 2003. Rates were regionalized at that time. There was no interim application submitted in 2003. 9 Approved by the Board on April 12, 2005. 10 Approved by the Board in April, 2006. 11 Approved by the Board in May, 2007. 12 Approved by the Board on April 5, 2008. 13 The 2001 base year review was initiated in 2001 and completed in February 2002. 14 Garaventa has the option to submit an interim year rate application. 1-9 and the County approved, rate changes in seven (7) years of the eleven (11) years since the County adopted the Manual in 1998. There was no rate change implemented in 1999, 2001, 2002, and 2009. Residential rates have increased 3.2 percent per year, on an average compounded basis, since 1998. During this same eleven-year period, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increased by 2.7 percent per year, on an average compounded basis. On a program adjusted basis (removing the 2000 rate increase for a new green waste program), residential rates have increased 2.5 percent per year compared to the 2.7 percent per year average for the CPI. 1. Introduction and Background of Rate Review 1-10 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application [This page intentionally left blank.] Section 2 Baseline Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection Services 2. Baseline Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection Services This section describes the current residential collection system in use for the County. The collection system includes the containers, trucks, equipment, and facilities used by Garaventa to collect and handle County residential refuse, recycling, and yardwaste. Container types, collection trucks, and material processing methods are described for refuse, recycling, and yardwaste services. Garaventa currently uses a mix of automated side-loader trucks and semi-automated front-loader trucks for refuse; manual, side- loader trucks for curbside recycling collection; and a mix of semi-automated trucks and rear-loader trucks for yardwaste collection. The section identifies current refuse, recycling, and yardwaste operating metrics for the County. Recyclable materials accepted in the County’s current two crate system are identified. Existing and historical recycling tonnages, and County diversion levels, also are presented. This section provides baseline data for the County to use to measure implementation progress should it adopt the proposed three-cart collection system, including single stream recycling. An understanding of the current collection system is necessary so planned changes to the system can be clearly identified, and future potential efficiencies and cost-savings tracked and quantified. This section also identifies some of the potential operational issues associated with the current system. This section is organized as follows: A. Current Refuse Collection Services B. Current Curbside Recycling Collection Services C. Current Yardwaste Collection Services D. Historical County Diversion Levels E. Customer Satisfaction with Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection. A. Current Refuse Collection Services The County’s current residential refuse collection system design began in the early 1990s. Over the years, Garaventa has taken an operations approach that maximized the longevity of system assets by focusing on ongoing regular maintenance and repair of containers, trucks, and equipment. 2. Baseline Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection Services 2-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Picture 2-1 Current Residential Customer Setout with Customer-provided Can Picture 2-2 Current Residential Customer Setout with 96-gallon Cart 1. Refuse Containers For refuse, County customers can either (1) provide their own 20-gallon mini can, (2) provide their own single can1, or (3) rent a 96-gallon wheeled cart. Refuse collection is weekly. Picture 2-1, above, shows a sample setout with a customer-provided container. A sample setout for 96-gallon wheeled cart service is shown in Picture 2-2, above. 1 Garaventa will accept up to 40 gallons of refuse in the can. Picture 2-3 Automated Side Loader Truck Picture 2-4 Cart Being Lifted by Arm of Side Loader Truck 2. Refuse Collection Vehicles Garaventa collects refuse with some automated side loaders and some three-axel, front loader, “semi-automated” trucks. Automated trucks allow the driver to use an arm located on the side of the truck to lift the carts. The driver does not have to exit the vehicle, but rather operates the arm via a joystick located inside the truck. An example of an automated side loader truck serving the Oakley area is shown in Picture 2-3, above. A picture of the cart being lifted by the arm is shown in Picture 2-4, above. 2-3 For the semi-automated service, the driver exits the truck, places a refuse can, or wheels a refuse cart, onto a “tipper” which is mounted to the side of a larger bin located at the front of the truck. The driver then engages the tipper which lifts the can or cart to deposit the material into this larger bin. When full, the forward bin is raised over the front of the truck cab where the refuse is tipped into the truck body. Automated refuse collection trucks pick up an average up to 600 households per day. Current semi- automated refuse collection trucks pick up, on average, approximately 300 to 450 households per day. For refuse, Garaventa indicates that they have virtually a 100 percent setout rate (i.e., the number of customers putting their container out on a given day). Trucks have a capacity of approximately 30 cubic yards per truck. Trucks make on average between one and two trips, per route, per day to unload collected refuse at the Contra Costa Waste and Transfer facility, located in nearby Pittsburg, California. 3. Refuse Disposal Collection trucks empty refuse on the tipping floor at the Contra Costa Waste and Transfer facility. Refuse is consolidated into transfer trailers and hauled to Potrero Hills Landfill in Solano County. Contra Costa Waste Service (CCWS), the operator of the Contra Costa Waste and Transfer facility, has a disposal agreement with Waste Connections, Inc., the owner/operator of Potrero Hills Landfill. Residential refuse tonnage and the number of residential accounts are shown in Figure 2-1, on the next page. While the number of County accounts has been increasing since 2004, disposal tonnage has declined materially. In 2009, Garaventa collected 25,968 tons of residential refuse. In 2008, each County residential account generated approximately 1.5 tons of refuse per year. This compares with over 1.8 tons of refuse per year in 2004. B. Current Curbside Recycling Collection Services Garaventa County area customers are currently provided two, 14-gallon crates for recycling. The system was implemented in the late 1980s following passage of Assembly Bill 939 (AB 939). Formerly, the two-crate recycling program required County customers to sort recyclable materials into fiber and other materials. With the construction of the Mt. Diablo Recycling Center, and the ability to process single stream recyclables now, County customers do not need to sort recyclable containers into fiber and other materials. County customers can combine their recyclables into each of the two containers. The two crate system does have some obvious limitations. The standard 28 gallon capacity may be limiting for some larger recyclers. Customers must manually lift the crates and carry them to the curb. On rainy days, fiber materials can get water logged making the crates difficult to lift. Also materials can blow away from the crate on windy days. Surplus recyclables (beyond the 28 gallon capacity) may be placed in the refuse container. Garaventa has had ongoing difficulty with theft of recyclables from curbside crates. Materials in crates are easily viewed and accessed. 1. Recycling Crates County customers are provided two, 14-gallon crates, a blue and a white one. Since implementation, the blue crate has been used for fiber materials (cardboard, newspaper, magazines, and mixed paper), and the white crate has been used for commingled plastic, metal, and glass containers and materials. Recently this color-based separating was eliminated. Garaventa also will accept additional bags of recyclables, or bundles of tied cardboard, if they are set out next to the two crates. Blue and white crates are shown in Pictures 2-1 and 2-2. Recycling services are weekly. 2. Baseline Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection Services 2-4 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application 2. Recyclable Materials Accepted Specific materials allowed in the recycling crates include: Fiber Materials  Boxes and packages  Carbonless paper  Cardboard  Catalogs  Chipboard (cereal boxes, shoeboxes)  Construction paper  Copy paper  Coupons  Envelopes with metal clasps  Envelopes with plastic windows  Junk mail  Loose newspaper  Magazines  Manila folders  Newspaper inserts  Paper (colored)  Paper (office)  Paper (white)  Paper bags  Paper packaging (with remnant tape)  Pizza boxes (clean)  Shredded paper (in a plastic bag)  Telephone books. Figure 2-1 Residential Tonnage and Residential Accounts (2004 to 2009)2 2 Residential tonnage includes both refuse and yardwaste. Year 2003 data were not available. 2. Baseline Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection Services 2-5 Other Materials  5-gallon buckets  Aluminum cans  Aluminum foil (clean)  Aluminum pie plates  Colored plastics-HDPE #2  Detergent bottles  Egg cartons (non-Styrofoam™)  Food cans (clean)  Glass bottles  Glass jars  Laundry baskets  Milk jugs  Milk/juice cartons  Narrow neck plastic bottles (#1 & #2)  Paper towel and towel paper tubes  Pet food cans  Plastic bags  Plastic food containers (clean)  Plastic milk/water jugs-HDPE #2  Plastic plant pots  Plastic toys (such as tricycles)  Plastics #1-#7 (California redemption)  Plastics #1-#7 (non-California redemption)  Salad dressing bottles (rinsed)  Shampoo and bleach bottles  Soft covered books  Soft drink bottles-PET #1  Steel cans  Tin cans  Tubs and containers (yogurt, margarine)  Water jugs. Unacceptable materials, or materials that cannot be included in the recycling crates, include the following:  Aerosol cans  Appliances  Batteries  Car parts  CDs or DVDs  Ceramics  Chains  Diapers  Drinking glasses  Electronics  Fabrics  Facial tissue  Food  Garden hoses  Green waste  Hazardous waste  Light bulbs  Liquid  Metal  Paper towels  Plates  Rocks  Ropes  Shoes  Styrofoam™  Toilet paper  Videotapes  Wire  Window glass  Wood. 2. Baseline Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection Services 2-6 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application 3. Recycling Collection Vehicles Garaventa collects recyclables either using front loader trucks or smaller side loader trucks. The front loader operations have been described in prior sections. Garaventa also collects recyclables manually using two-axle, side loader trucks. The driver exits the truck and picks up each crate and empties the material into a three- bin system located on the right side of the truck. The driver operates a control that automatically raises and tips the material from the bins into the body of the truck. The side loader trucks have separate compartments in the truck body to store the recyclables. Drivers currently view recyclable materials in the crates for potential contaminants. If a load is contaminated, the driver will provide a yellow tag to the customers informing them of the contaminated load and also may leave the load. This enforcement mechanism is however seldom required with the current system as most customers understand and follow the crate system requirements. 4. Recycled Materials Processing Curbside recyclables are taken to Garaventa’s Mt. Diablo Recycling Facility, collocated with the Contra Costa Waste and Transfer facility, in Pittsburg, California. Garaventa sells recyclables to Mt. Diablo Paper Stock, a related company.3 Mt. Diablo Paper Stock sorts and prepares materials for transport to a processor or end user. The MDRC includes a 90,000 square foot building; a large open floor staging area; and an advanced, computer driven, materials sort line. Garaventa Enterprises constructed the MDRC using the most current and advanced sorting equipment and capabilities. Features of the new MDRC include:  An education center and facility viewing area 3 Mt. Diablo Paper Stock also is a certified recycling center.  An expansive tipping floor to maximize the efficiency of loading the in-feed conveyer (the location where materials enter the sort line)  A continuous re-run feature which allows for materials to run through the sort line multiple times to maximize sorting and minimize residuals which must be disposed of  A large Harris brand baler (a reputable and well-known manufacturer)  Extensive capabilities for storing baled recyclables  Ten (10) pre-sort stations to fully remove refuse before separation of recyclables  Twenty-three (23) total stations on the sort line. Mt. Diablo Recycling brokers aluminum and plastic materials through Recycle Zone in Fairfield, California. Mt. Diablo Recycling ships paper products, via a broker, to China. Mt. Diablo Recycling delivers glass materials to Strategic Materials, a processor located in San Leandro, California. Materials are emptied from the recycling truck to the tipping floor of a Mt. Diablo Recycling Center (see Picture 2-3, on the next page). Once tipped, a loader pushes the material to the in-feed conveyer. Materials are moved up the conveyor an elevated pre-sort station where non-recyclable materials are removed (Picture 2-4, on the next page). Following a series of mechanical and manual sorting efforts along the sort line, materials are baled with the baler located in the warehouse (see output in Picture 2-5, on the next page). 5. Recycling Tonnage County curbside recycling tonnage has been declining. Between 2006 and 2008, curbside recycling tonnage averaged 3,045 tons per year. However, tonnage declined over this three-year period, by thirteen (13) percent from 3,267 tons in 2006 to 2,828 tons in 2008. 2-7 Picture 2-3 Tipping Floor of the Mt. Diablo Recycling Center (with Sort Line in Background) Picture 2-4 Sorting Stations at the Mt. Diablo Recycling Center C. Current Yardwaste Collection Services Garaventa collects yardwaste bi-weekly in customer-provided containers. Garaventa uses manual collection methods with both front loader and rear loader trucks. Yardwaste collection operations require drivers to regularly lift heavy containers (cans and bags), resulting in more frequent lifting-related injuries. The current yardwaste program began in 2000. Picture 2-5 Curbside Containers After Baling At Mt. Diablo Recycling Center 1. Yardwaste Containers Garaventa County area customers provide their own containers, or bags, which are collected at the curb. Customers can either place two (2), 32- gallon containers or five (5) bags (each bag with a maximum of 32-gallons of materials) at the curb. Customers cannot rent a toter from Garaventa for yardwaste, but must provide their own containers. This service is bi-weekly. This represents a current maximum set out quantity of 160 gallons every other week, or 80 gallons per week. 2. Yardwaste Materials Accepted Specific materials allowed in the yardwaste containers include:  Brush  Cactus 2. Baseline Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection Services 2-8 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application  Flower and flower cuttings  Grass  Garden trimmings  Hay  House plants  Leaves  Pruning  Shrubbery  Straw  Tree trimmings  Tree twigs and branches (6" or less in diameter and 3' or less in length, must be in containers)  Weeds  Wood chips  Yard debris. Unacceptable materials, or materials that cannot be included in the yardwaste containers, include the following:  Fruit  Hazardous waste  Inorganic materials (or recycling materials like plastics, cardboard, paper, etc.)  Large tree trunks and stumps (greater than 6 inches in diameter or more than 3 feet in length)  Plastic bags  Pet waste  Rocks and concrete  Sod and dirt  Solid waste  Wood or treated lumber. 3. Yardwaste Collection Vehicles Garaventa currently removes yardwaste using a three-axel, front loader or rear loader truck. As for refuse, for the front loader, the driver exits the vehicle and either uses the front tipper (for cans) or manually dumps the material into the larger front bin located at the front of the truck. For the rear loader, the driver exits the truck, picks up the cans/bags, and deposits the yardwaste into the open hopper located at the rear end of the truck. The driver operates a control that automatically compacts and pushes the yardwaste into the body of the truck using a hydraulic system. 4. Yardwaste Processing The County’s yardwaste material is taken to the Contra Costa Waste and Transfer facility where it is consolidated and prepared for transport via transfer trailers to Potrero Hills Landfill. At Potrero Hills Landfill the yardwaste material is composted. Recently reported yardwaste tonnage has been declining. Garaventa collected 2,074 yardwaste tons in 2006, 1,826 yardwaste tons in 2007, 1,654 tons in 2008, and 1,738 yardwaste tons in 2009. From 2006 to 2009, yardwaste tonnage decreased sixteen (16) percent. In Table 2-1, on the next page, we summarize truck types and collection methods for each service type. D. Historical County Diversion Levels The County and Garaventa have continuously worked together to meet AB 939 diversion goals. Recent diversion levels are shown in Figure 2-2, on page 2-10. Between 2001 and 2004, the County was slightly below the 50 percent AB 939 goal. In 2005 and 2006, the County exceeded the 50 percent AB 939 goal. In 2007 and 2008, the County easily met the new CalRecycle pounds disposed per day goal requirement (equivalent to the 50 percent diversion objective), on both a per resident, and per employee, basis. 2. Baseline Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection Services 2-9 Table 2-1 Contra Costa County Trucks Used by Garaventa Companies Service Type Truck Type Capacity Method Refuse Front Loader (3-Axle) 30-35 cubic yards Driver exits; moves cart to front of truck; operates small tipping device in front of truck to lift cart into bin; once full front bin is lifted over the top of the truck and contents deposited into body Side Loader – Automated (3-Axle) 31 cubic yards Driver remains in truck; uses joystick to operate arm on side of vehicle; grabs and picks up carts; empties contents into truck body Recycling Side Loader (2-Axle) 15-20 cubic yards Driver exits; manually empties contents of crate into bins on side of vehicle Front Loader (3-Axle) 30-35 cubic yards Driver exits; moves cart to front of truck; operates small tipping device in front of truck to lift cart into bin; once full front bin is lifted over the top of the truck and contents deposited into body Yardwaste Front Loader (3-Axle) 30-35 cubic yards Driver exits; moves cart to front of truck; operates small tipping device in front of truck to lift cart into bin; once full front bin is lifted over the top of the truck and contents deposited into body Rear Loader (3-Axle) 30 cubic yards Driver exits; manually empties container into open rear compartment; once full material is compacted into truck body In 2006, Garaventa collected 3,267 tons of material from the residential curbside recycling program. This is the equivalent of a 1.2 percent contribution to the 2006 diversion rate of 54 percent. In 2006, Garaventa collected 2,074 tons of material from the residential yardwaste program. This is the equivalent of a 0.7 percent contribution to the 2006 diversion rate of 54 percent. In general, the level of diversion from residential curbside recycling and yardwaste is relatively small. However, it is a contributing factor, and is important particularly when the County is seeking to enhance all sources of diversion. E. Customer Satisfaction with Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection County residential customers are very satisfied with refuse, recycling, and yardwaste services. In the 2009 customer satisfaction survey of 284 households, nearly 100 percent of customers responding rated garbage service either excellent, good, or average and 90 percent rated garbage service either excellent or good. Satisfaction ratings for recycling and yardwaste collection services were below refuse collection, but customers were still very satisfied with these services. A total of approximately 86 percent of residents surveyed rated recycling services excellent, good, or average, and approximately 83 percent of residents surveyed rated yardwaste services excellent, good, or average. We summarize results of the 2009 customer satisfaction survey in Appendix C. 2. Baseline Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Collection Services 2-10 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Figure 2-2 Diversion Levels (2001 to 2008) a The annual per capita disposal rate, per resident, was 3.2 pounds per day (PPD), below the 3.9 PPD target. The annual per capita disposal rate, per employee, was 18.4 pounds per day (PPD), below the 21.6 PPD target. b The annual per capita disposal rate, per resident, was 3.1 pounds per day (PPD), below the 3.9 PPD target. The annual per capita disposal rate, per employee, was 18.0 pounds per day (PPD), below the 21.6 PPD target. Section 3 Proposed Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Services 3. Proposed Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Services This section describes the proposed new three-cart system. Should the County and Garaventa agree to terms of the new system, Garaventa will offer the County resident the choice of three refuse cart sizes. Garaventa will introduce a new 96-gallon cart for curbside recycling collection, collected bi-weekly. Garaventa will provide every other week, cart- based, yardwaste collection. As with the previous section, this section is organized by the three types of residential services: refuse, recycling, and yardwaste services. With the new three-cart program, the County will increase its diversion rates from the curbside recycling stream and the additional cart-based yardwaste capacity. Diversion estimates are provided in this section. Garaventa Enterprises has constructed a new state-of-the-art Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) run by Mt. Diablo Recycling in Pittsburg, California. Garaventa will use this MRF to process the County’s single stream recyclables. Use of this facility is discussed in this section. Finally, we provide a discussion of whether or not there will be efficiencies for the new three-cart program. This section is organized as follows: A. Proposed Refuse Collection Services B. Proposed Single Stream Cart-Based Curbside Recycling Services C. Proposed Yardwaste Program D. Potential for Increases in Diversion E. New System Cart Setout F. Projected System Efficiencies. A. Proposed Refuse Collection Services Garaventa will distribute new refuse carts to all County residential customers beginning in 2011. Garaventa will collect these new carts using a mix of front loader and side loader trucks similar to the mix of front and side loader trucks currently used. 1. Refuse Carts Garaventa will purchase and provide County residential customers new wheeled containers (referred to as carts or toters) for refuse. Customers will select one refuse cart from the following four (4) sizes:  20-gallon  32-gallon  64-gallon  96-gallon. 3. Proposed Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Services 3-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application There will no longer be a separate toter rental charge.1 New cart costs will be reflected in rates charged. Most County customers (96 percent) currently rent 96-gallon refuse toters from Garaventa so they are familiar with using a rolled cart for refuse collection. The County will use a tiered rate structure to provide a rate incentive for customers to “downsize” from the current 96-gallon service level to smaller cart sizes. 2. Refuse Collection Vehicles With the fully cart-based refuse collection system, where possible, Garaventa will utilize side loaders to collect the refuse. With side loader vehicles, the driver does not exit the truck and physically pick up or roll the container to the tipper. Instead, the truck has a hydraulic arm (called a gripper) that is used to grab the cart from the curb, tip the cart into the truck, and return the empty cart to the curb. The driver operates the hydraulic arm using a joystick control inside the cab next to the driver’s seat. An example of an automated side-loader truck used by Garaventa is shown in Exhibit 3-1, on the next page. Garaventa is considering alternative fuels for its automated trucks. Garaventa’s current fuel vendor has the capacity to deliver biodiesel fuel. Garaventa is developing a pilot program for biodiesel use. There are two forms of biodiesel, B5 and B20.2 Garaventa is evaluating among other factors, the fuel costs, truck efficiencies (mpg), and truck performance/break down potential, before electing to fully incorporate this fuel source. Garaventa also has indicated it is researching low-sulfur diesel fuel. 3. Refuse Disposal Garaventa will continue to take refuse trucks to the Contra Costa Waste Transfer Station in 1 Current 96-gallon refuse carts are available to customers at a cost of $3.00 per customer, per month. 2 Based on the portion of the fuel that is biodiesel. For example B20 is made up of twenty percent biodiesel. Pittsburg, California. Garaventa will continue to empty truck contents on the tipping floor, consolidate refuse into transfer trailers, and haul the material to Potrero Hills Landfill in Solano County for landfilling. B. Proposed Single Stream Cart-Based Curbside Recycling Services For curbside recycling collection, Garaventa will replace the current two-crate system with a single wheeled 96-gallon cart (bi-weekly service).3 County customers will place all recyclable materials together into the cart. County customers currently do not have to sort their recyclables by material type into either crate. Instead, County customers combine their recyclables into either crate. Thus, the current program is effectively a single stream program. Formerly, County customers sorted specific materials into the two crates (referred to as a “dual stream” or source separated program). County customers will have the convenience of using a wheeled cart. Customers no longer will manually pick up and carry recycling crates to the curb. 1. Recycling Carts Garaventa will purchase and provide County residential customers new 96-gallon wheeled containers (referred to as carts or toters) for recycling. The new 96-gallon cart (bi-weekly service) exceeds the current capacity of the two 14-gallon crate system (weekly service) by 20 gallons per week.4 With this greater recycling capacity, customers can divert recyclable materials that may have previously been disposed of in refuse containers. 3 For those who request alternative recycling capacity, Garaventa will provide an additional 64-gallon cart for $3.00 per customer, per month. 4 Garaventa also will pickup recyclable materials placed in bags next to the crates or cardboard that is tied and bundled. We are not certain as to how many customers exceed the current 28-gallon capacity. 3-3 Exhibit 3-1 Automated Side Loader Truck 3. Proposed Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Services 3-4 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application 2. Recycling Materials Accepted Garaventa will continue to collect all of the recyclable materials currently allowed in the crate recycling containers. We summarize the list of allowable recyclable materials on page 2-4. 3. Recycling Collection Vehicles Garaventa will collect single stream recyclables with three-axel front loader “semi-automated” trucks. The driver will exit the truck and wheel the recycling cart onto a tipper in the front of the truck. The driver will use the tipper to raise and empty the contents of the cart into a larger bin mounted to arms located at the front of the truck. In this way, the driver can view the recyclables for contaminants as the material is tipped.5 When full, the front bin will be raised over the front of the truck cab where recyclables will be tipped into the truck. In the future, Garaventa may want to use automated side loaders for recycling collection. Over time, Garaventa may transition to these side loaders, but initially, Garaventa and the County will like the option to continue to view the material as it is tipped so that contamination may be monitored. With an automated side loader, it is more difficult to identify contamination levels as the carts are directly tipped into the truck. In the future, should Garaventa move toward automated side loader trucks for recyclables collection, Garaventa should consider placing cameras to view cart contents as they are tipped into the automated side loader. 5 Viewing the recyclable materials both prior to tipping, and during the tipping process, will allow Garaventa drivers to tag the customers cart if there is contamination, noting the contamination issue. With repeat offenders, Garaventa drivers also may leave the full recycling cart uncollected, and place a tag on the cart noting the contamination problem. 4. Materials Recovery Facility Sort Line At the MRF, recycling trucks will empty single stream materials on a tipping floor. A loader pushes the materials into a hopper. An inclined conveyor takes the materials from the hopper up to an elevated pre-sort area where laborers (sorters) manually remove refuse, large items (primarily cardboard), and potentially glass bottles, and deposit these items into up to four bunkers located below the sort line. Materials pass through a series of three consecutive separate screens designed to remove old cardboard, old newspaper, and glass. Following the screenings, remaining materials pass through an eddy current separator, and potentially a magnetic separator, where non- ferrous metals are sorted from remaining plastic materials (into aluminum cans and separately scrap metals). Finally, plastics and fines pass through a manual sorting area where laborers (sorters) pick out and separate them into various plastic types (type #1 PET, #2 HDPE, and other plastics). To maximize diversion from the recyclable stream, materials remaining at the end of the sort line, called “residuals,” are returned through the sort line throughout the day as a “continuous sort.” There is a large baler used to continuously bale recyclable materials. In addition to the County, Garaventa uses the MRF sort line to process recyclables from the following other jurisdictions:  City of Concord  City of Pittsburg  City of Rio Vista  City of Vallejo (residuals from Recology Vallejo’s sort line). The County’s single stream curbside program material is weighed when it enters the facility (i.e., inbound). Materials are then combined with materials from other jurisdictions prior to 3-5 entering the MRF sort line. The County receives credit for its proportionate share of the outbound recyclables sent to processors/end users. 5. Single Stream Recycling Program Tonnages One benefit of transitioning from the County’s existing two crate program to a single stream program is the potential for increased recycling tonnage. Garaventa projects curbside recycling tonnage will increase by approximately 18 percent. We believe this expected increase is reasonable as a result of the combination of (1) the additional 20 gallons of recycling capacity in the 96-gallon cart, and (2) the new tiered rate structure which provides an incentive in the form of a lower rate for those customers that recycle more. Other jurisdictions have had relatively large increases in recyclables collected following the transition to a single stream cart-based program. The cities of Concord, Fremont, San Leandro, and Livermore increased curbside recyclable volumes by 15 to 45 percent following a shift from dual to single stream. The cities of Antioch, Benicia, Clayton, Martinez, and Pleasant Hill had a 35 to 40 percent increase in the recycled material collected. Following implementation of single stream recycling, most recycling programs “eventually settle into a 30 percent increase after an initial surge in recycling tonnage.”6 We believe the 18 percent estimate for the County may be conservative in light of the above comparative jurisdiction estimates. However, these other jurisdiction metrics followed shifts to entirely new single stream programs, whereas the County already effectively has a single stream program in place (i.e., even though the County uses two crates). 6 Source: Jerry Powell, editor of Resource Recycling. 6. Single Stream Residual Rates Residuals from a residential single stream recycling program vary between 10 percent and 40 percent of the collected tonnage. For example, the City of Los Angeles’ residual rate went from 10 percent (dual stream) to 25 percent (single stream). In a study of 70 single stream facilities nationwide, the Government Advisory Associate found residue averaged 16.6 percent for single stream programs compared with 6.6 percent for dual stream systems. We expect that with continuous education, the County will be able to minimize its residuals to some extent. However, the County should expect residuals to range from 10 to 20 percent of the single stream residential curbside recycling tonnage. C. Proposed Yardwaste Program In the new system, Garaventa will provide a 96- gallon cart to each County resident for yardwaste service. Garaventa will collect yardwaste using semi-automated front loader trucks. a. Yardwaste Containers For yardwaste, customers will be provided one 96-gallon wheeled cart. For approximately one- half of these customers, Garaventa will use the existing 96-gallon toters currently used for refuse collection (i.e., those in good condition). For the additional one-half of the customers, Garaventa will purchase new 96-gallon toters. Yardwaste toters will be green in color. The County will transition from green refuse toters to green yardwaste toters. b. Yardwaste Collection Vehicles Garaventa will collect residential yardwaste using three-axle semi-automated front loaders. Garaventa will continue to utilize the front loaders currently used for yardwaste collection. 3. Proposed Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Services 3-6 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application c. Yardwaste Processing Garaventa will continue to take the County’s yardwaste to the Contra Costa Recycling Center and Transfer Station where Garaventa will consolidate the material and prepare it for transport via transfer trailers to Potrero Hills Landfill. At Potrero Hills Landfill the material will continue to be composted. Garaventa expects a 25 percent increase in yardwaste tonnage following a shift from customer provided containers to a 96-gallon wheeled cart. We believe this is a reasonable tonnage increase expectation for this new service. D. Potential for Increases in Diversion With an expected 18 percent increase in curbside recyclables and a 25 percent increase in yardwaste, the County will divert an additional 936 tons. This change to expand diversion capacity also enhances the County’s source reduction and recycling programs, a contributing factor considered by CalRecycle in assessing jurisdictional compliance with AB 939. E. New System Cart Setout Customers will place their carts at the curb. A sample of three-cart setout (refuse, recycling, and yardwaste) is shown in Exhibit 3-2, on the next page. The three cart sizes shown are 32-gallon, 96-gallon, and 96-gallon (left to right). Garaventa will continue to provide all refuse service weekly, and recycling and yardwaste services every other week. Carts will be colored blue (refuse), brown (recycling), and green (yardwaste). F. Projected System Efficiencies With the new three-cart system, NewPoint Group does not expect much efficiency savings (in terms of route, driver, or truck usage reductions). There may be some slight savings in terms of avoided disposal costs, but we expect these savings will be minor. In similar jurisdictions, when a hauler has transitioned to a new cart-based recycling program from a crate-based program, the increased materials setout levels, and overall increased participation, by the residential customers, actually increase the time on route. For yardwaste collection, while the drivers may be able to more efficiently collect the 96-gallon toters (as opposed to collecting customer provided cans or bags), this efficiency savings likely will be offset by increased yardwaste volumes and customer participation levels. With the three-cart system, NewPoint Group expects a shift in tonnage from refuse to recycling and yardwaste. As shown in Exhibit 3-3, on page 3-8, the reduction in refuse collection of 468 tons from 35,900 to 35,432 represents fifty (50) percent of the expected increase in diverted material of 936 tons (i.e., recycling tonnage increase of 511 and yardwaste tonnage increase of 425 tons). The remaining 50 percent of diverted material is expected from material not currently placed in the refuse container. 3-7 Exhibit 3-2 Sample Three Cart Setout 3. Proposed Residential Refuse, Recycling, and Yardwaste Services 3-8 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Exhibit 3-3 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Tonnage Before and After Proposed System Change Section 4 Review of Rate Application for 2010 4. Review of Rate Application for 2010 This section provides results of our rate review of Garaventa’s Application for 2010. We identify cost, revenue, and profit factors influencing this year’s review. We also delineate the various cost components that make up the residential rate. For purposes of this review, we determined the revenue requirement shortfall to Garaventa for 2010. This section is organized as follows: A. Rate Setting Requirements in Franchise Agreement and Rate Setting Manual B. Factors Influencing 2010 Rate Review C. NewPoint Group Rate Application Adjustments D. Components of Residential Rate. A. Rate Setting Requirements in Franchise Agreement and Rate Setting Manual Exhibit 4-1, on the following page shows six (6) rate setting policies included in the County’s rate regulation of Garaventa. The second column of this exhibit identifies the policy and the third column identifies how we treated the policy for rate setting purposes in this review. All of these key policies were followed for this 2010 review. B. Factors Influencing 2010 Rate Review Between 2008 and 2010, we projected that total Garaventa costs will increase by approximately 10.6 percent. During this same period, total Garaventa revenues will decrease by approximately 2.8 percent (prior to any rate changes). This 13.47 percent difference between Garaventa total costs, and Garaventa total revenues, leads to an approximately $1,270,000 shortfall for 2010. 1. Costs We analyzed year-to-year changes in costs and compared these changes with changes in the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Consumer Price Index (CPI). We requested explanations from Garaventa for changes in cost categories that exceeded the change in the CPI. The five (5) cost categories, whose change in cost exceeded the CPI, included trucking charges, direct labor costs, tipping fees, franchise fees, and general and administrative costs. In Table 4-1, on page 4-3, we show that five (5) cost factors contributed to the revenue requirement shortfall for 2010. Each of these cost factors is described below. 4. Review of Rate Application for 2010 4-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Exhibit 4-1 Key Rate Setting Policies and Their Treatment in 2010 Garaventa Base Year Rate Review Rate Setting Area Special Rate Setting Policy Treatment in 2010 Projection Year 1. Franchise Fees Set equal to five (5) percent of gross residential, commercial, and recycling revenues. Adjusted to equal $521,754 based on the five (5) percent of gross revenues requirement. 2. General and administrative costs Allowed up to a cap of 13.2 percent of total costs for corporate, regional, and local general and administrative costs, subject to reexamination in the base year. Allowed up to a cap of 12.8 percent of total costs for corporate, regional, and local general and administrative costs, based on updated industry averages (for both publicly traded and privately held companies). 3. Office Rent Allowed with profit (requires three comparable lease rates for office space). Allowed with profit (checked comparable lease rates of office space). 4. Profit Allowed to fluctuate between an operating ratio (OR) of eighty-eight (88) and ninety- two (92) percent. Adjusted to a ninety (90) percent OR in base years. Reset to a ninety (90) percent operating ratio. 5. Tipping Fees Allowed a set amount per ton in the calculation of profit (the amount is established by County policy). Allowed with profit at $45.00 per ton. Amounts over $45.00 per ton were considered a pass-through expense. 6. Trucking Charges A pass-through lease cost (requires three comparable lease rates for trucking charges). No comparable lease rates were available. Reviewed trucking charges in detail and made cost adjustments before allowing trucking leases in rate base. 4-3 Table 4-1 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Components of Revenue Requirement Shortfall (Calendar Year 2010) Factor Percent of Total Shortfall Direct Labor Costs 46.51 Tipping Fees 19.78 Trucking Charges 14.86 Franchise Fees 17.56 Depreciation and Other Operating Costs 1.29 Total 100.00 a. Direct Labor Costs Direct labor cost increases include (1) wage and benefit increases tied to union labor agreements. Wage rates are projected to increase by approximately 4.0 percent each year between 2008 to 2010.1 Additionally, the union agreement requires health and welfare benefit increases of 11 percent in 2009 and 10 percent in 2010. b. Tipping Fees This cost category includes the costs of refuse and yardwaste consolidation, transportation, and disposal or composting. Combined transfer station and landfill “tipping fees” are projected to increase from $65.00 per ton in 2008, to $72.25 per ton in 2010.2 In general, this increase in tipping fees is necessary to offset reductions in disposal volumes. Both the transfer station and landfill operations have large “fixed costs” of operation which are now spread over declining tonnages (due in part to the poor health of the economy), so the tipping fee rate must be increased to offset this declining 1 In accordance with the Agreement between the Teamsters Local 315 and Garaventa Enterprises Inc. for the period of February 29, 2008 through February 28, 2014. 2 The tipping fee charged to all customers at the Contra Costa Waste and Transfer Station as of March 1, 2009, was $72.25 per ton. This tipping fee included a $3.60 per ton facility enhancement component largely designed to cover additional costs of the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) sort line. tonnage. This proposed tipping fee rate represents the same rate charged to self-haul customers, and is competitive with rates of other similar transfer stations in the area. c. Trucking Charges Trucking and equipment cost increases include (1) increasing wages and benefits for mechanics and shop laborers, (2) fuel and oil cost increases, and (3) property lease cost increases. d. Franchise Fees The County charges a franchise fee to Garaventa for the refuse collection franchise. With other increases to the revenue requirement, the franchise fee is expected to increase proportionately. We project an increase in franchise fees paid to the County of $137,492, or from $384,262 in 2008 to $521,754 in 2010. e. Depreciation and Other Operating Costs These costs include depreciation of furniture and office equipment used by Garaventa to support County business. For 2010, we project minor increases from 2008 levels in this minor cost category. 2. Revenues We project changes in residential and commercial revenues to be mixed for 2010. We project residential revenues to increase by $281,713 from 2008 levels (5 percent) and commercial revenues to decrease by $523,368 from 2008 levels (14 percent). We project recycling revenues to decrease $25,316, or 64 percent from 2008 levels. The net impact is an decrease in total revenues from 2008 levels of $266,971 (2.8 percent).3 3 We project this revenue decline even with the 6.5 percent rate increase approved by the County in mid-2008. 4. Review of Rate Application for 2010 4-4 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Figure 4-1 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Projected Percentage of Residential Revenues by Service Level (Calendar Year 2010) On the residential revenue side, Figure 4-1, above, shows the projected 2010 distribution of residential revenues, by service level. Nearly 96 percent of residential revenues are derived from the 96-gallon customer. The remaining 4 percent of revenues come from the various other service levels. 3. Profits Allowable profits are measured by the operating ratio (OR). The operating ratio is defined as allowable expenses divided by the sum of allowable expenses plus allowable profits. Prior to any rate change, we projected that the operating ratio (OR) to Garaventa would be approximately 100 percent for 2010. In accordance with the Manual requirements, because Garaventa would operate outside of the 88 and 92 percent OR range, we reset the 2010 OR to 90 percent. We projected a 90 percent OR would provide 2010 operating profits, to Garaventa, of $558,432. Garaventa has reported a modest net income on its audited financial statements (as shown in Appendix B). For 2008, Garaventa audited financial statement shows a combined net profit (for the five companies), before interest and taxes, of $145,390 on its audited financial statements. As audited financial statements do not reflect the impact of County rate setting adjustments, these results only provide us with estimates of Garaventa allowed profits. C. NewPoint Group Rate Application Adjustments NewPoint Group made several adjustments to Garaventa’s 2010 Application. Detailed adjustment calculations are contained in our supporting work papers. NewPoint Group made adjustments to the Application in the following areas (organized as they are presented in the Application)4: 4 We characterize these adjustments as either minor (less than or equal to $100,000), moderate (greater than $100,000 and less than or equal to $500,000), or major (greater than $500,000). 4-5 Allowable Costs 1. Direct Labor Costs 2. Tipping Fees 3. Corporate and Local General and Administrative Costs 4. Depreciation and Other Operating Costs Allowable Profits 5. Allowable Operating Profit Pass Through Costs 6. County Administrative Fee 7. Trucking and Equipment Costs 8. Franchise Fees Revenues 9. Residential Revenues 10. Recycled Materials Sales. Our adjustments are fully reflected in the $1,270,247 shortfall described in the prior subsection. Without these adjustments, based on Garaventa’s first application submission, the 2010 shortfall would have been approximately $1.9 million. 1. Direct Labor Costs (Minor Adjustment) NewPoint Group confirmed that direct labor costs included the wages for all Garaventa drivers (full-time and part-time), cart delivery personnel, utility support personnel, floaters, and supervisors. We confirmed that direct labor costs reflected the current requirements for Garaventa to serve its collection routes within the County (including costs for refuse, recycling, and yardwaste routes). NewPoint Group developed a direct labor cost model that included the 11 full-time, and 35 part- time (these part-time employees spend time on other business), Garaventa employees required to serve the County. This model included estimated 2010 costs, by employee, for (1) regular pay, (2) overtime pay, (3) vacation pay, (4) holiday pay, (5) sick pay, and (6) benefits (including health and welfare, pension, payroll taxes, and workers compensation). NewPoint Group based direct labor costs on annualized year-to-date 2009 direct labor costs, and adjusted for expected 2010 hourly rates and benefits contained within the Agreement between Teamsters Local 315 and Garaventa Enterprises for the period of 2/29/08 to 2/28/14. 2. Tipping Fees (Moderate Adjustment) For 2010, Garaventa included a tipping fee rate of $75.00 per ton, of which Garaventa projected $50.00, per ton, allowed with profit, and $25.00, per ton, as a pass-through cost. NewPoint Group allowed tipping fees (with profit) of $45.00 per ton, consistent with the Manual requirement, and allowed $27.25, per ton, as a pass-through cost. NewPoint Group recommends that the County continue to use a $45.00, per ton, cap (on tipping fees allowed with profit) based on the fact that $41.33 of the $72.25, per ton, tipping fee is a pass-through cost to Potrero Hills Landfill (and this amount already contains a profit to the landfill company). The $45.00, per ton, with profit cap easily covers the Contra Costa Waste and Transfer (CCWS) $30.92, per ton, amount for consolidation and transportation services. Garaventa projected that refuse and yardwaste tonnage, combined, would decrease from 39,472 in 2008 to 37,600 in 2010. Garaventa projected this two-year decline in disposal tonnage to come from the commercial sector primarily (a 25 percent reduction). Garaventa projected residential refuse tons to increase by 2.1 percent and residential greenwaste tons to increase by 2.8 percent. Garaventa projected commercial refuse tons to remain flat between 2008 and 2010. 4. Review of Rate Application for 2010 4-6 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Table 4-2 General and Administrative Costs as a Percentage of Total Costs For Other Northern California Companies and Publicly Traded Companies Description Weighted Average General and Administrative Costs as a Percentage of Total Costs Years Number of Data Points Northern California Refuse Collection Companies 12.8 Percent 2004 to 2010 38 Publicly-Traded Companies (Refuse Collection) 11.4 Percent 1993 to 2009 132 NewPoint Group agrees with the total combined refuse and yardwaste tonnage projection of 37,600 tons for 2010. NewPoint Group believes refuse tonnage of 37,600 is consistent with annualized year to data 2009 data and represents a reasonable projection for 2010 based on the following factors:  Residential sector growth levels are consistent with modest historical inflation levels  Commercial refuse tons are relatively flat historically (not many significant shifts)  For all refuse collection companies, the commercial sector has experienced a dramatic downward trend in refuse tonnage collected  There does not appear to be any near-term improvement expected in the construction and the housing market, which could keep tonnage generated from these areas low. 3. Corporate and Local General and Administrative Costs (Moderate Adjustment) Garaventa requested general and administrative (G&A) costs equal to $1,638,557 for 2010. This request is equivalent to an approximately 16.6 percent of total expenses (i.e., expenses after our other recommended adjustments). At the time the County developed the Manual in 1998, the County placed a cap on corporate and local general and administrative costs. This cap level was 13.2 percent of total costs (see page 1-16 of the Manual). At that time, the County indicated that it “should continue to examine these [G&A] costs in base years. The County also left open that it should review the cap on G&A during base years to “assure that this cap reflects industry averages.” NewPoint Group reviewed the cap on local general and administrative costs for this base year. In Table 4-2, above, we provide comparative G&A data similar to that originally indentified in Table I- 1 of the Manual. For seven (7) years between 2004 and 2010, for similar refuse collection companies operating in Northern California, we found general and administrative costs as a percent of total costs averaged 12.8 percent. We also show in Table 4-2 that general and administrative costs as a percent of total costs averaged 11.4 percent for publicly-traded companies over the 1993 to 2009 period. NewPoint Group adjusted Garaventa local general and administrative costs based on using a 12.8 percent cap. We believe this is a reasonable cap on Garaventa local general and administrative costs at this time based on the current economic conditions. We also believe the cap is reasonable because the local general and administrative cost category does not reflect accounting for Garaventa general and administrative costs which also are included in the lease rates charged by SEG Trucking (including in the trucking and equipment line item of the Application). Actual Garaventa general and administrative costs are consequently higher than shown in the local general and administrative cost category of the Application. 4-7 4. Depreciation and Other Operating Costs (Minor Adjustment) To determine allowed depreciation and other operating costs for 2010, NewPoint Group reviewed Garaventa general ledger reports showing depreciation for both furniture and fixtures, as well as customer repairs. We found differences between amounts shown on the Application for 2009, and actual 2009 depreciation shown on the general ledger. We allowed Garaventa inflation on the 2009 general ledger depreciation amount. 5. Allowable Operating Profit (Minor Adjustment) Based on the changes to allowable operating costs discussed above, we reduced allowable Garaventa operating profits, as calculated based on a 90 percent operating ratio, by $56,704. With this reduction, NewPoint Group projects Garaventa operating profits of $558,432 for 2010. 6. County Administrative Fee (Minor Adjustment) The application included the County administrative fee of $118,587 for 2010. NewPoint Group reviewed Garaventa provided County administrative fee bills. We found a difference of $3,361 between the amount shown on the Application for 2010, and the actual amount shown on the County administrative fee bill. We allowed the actual amount. 7. Trucking and Equipment Costs (Minor Adjustment) SEG Trucking, a related party to Garaventa, leases all trucks and equipment to Garaventa. SEG Trucking costs include:  Direct labor (mechanics, bin and box repair personnel, and wash and paint personnel)  Depreciation  Fuel and oil  Insurance  Licenses  Rent (from a related party, Candy Properties)  Repair and maintenance  Taxes  Tires  Interest (trucks and baler)  Overhead (office salaries, accounting, security, legal, pension plan, others). SEG Trucking allocates trucking charges to Garaventa by using a lease rate, which is developed for each vehicle type. SEG Trucking prepares a detailed model to “build up” its lease rates, by vehicle type. SEG Trucking allocates its total costs to all Garaventa related companies using these same lease rates. NewPoint Group made our adjustments to this detailed SEG Trucking cost allocation model. For the 2010 projection, NewPoint Group used SEG Trucking lease rates we approved as part of a rate review in another jurisdiction (i.e., City of Concord). For this rate review we conducted a detailed assessment of expenses, and prepared a comprehensive model of SEG expenses, which are included in the SEG Trucking lease rates. We are comfortable that the SEG Trucking lease rates (we approved for the City of Concord) can be applied to the County. 8. Franchise Fees (Minor Adjustment) The application included franchise fees of $551,266 for 2010. This represents five (5) percent of projected gross revenues. With our adjustments, NewPoint Group used franchise fees of $521,754 (equal to five (5) percent of the projected revenue requirement of $10,435,207). 4. Review of Rate Application for 2010 4-8 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Figure 4-2 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Components of Proposed Residential 96-Gallon Rate Calendar Year (2010) 9. Residential Revenues (Minor Adjustment) NewPoint Group increased residential revenues by $46,840 to match the 2010 projection provided in Garaventa’s income statement (estimated based on year-to-date information). 10. Recycled Materials Sales (Minor Adjustment) To project 2010 recycled materials sales, NewPoint Group multiplied estimated 2010 recycled materials tonnage of 2,840, by the $5.00, per ton, payment rate paid by Mt. Diablo Recycling to Garaventa for all County recycled materials. Based on these assumptions, we project recycled materials sales of $14,200 for 2010. D. Components of Residential Rate Several cost components are included in all rates for residential refuse collection service. Using the 96- gallon residential rate as an example, the pie charge in Figure 4-2, above, shows the major components of the 96-gallon residential rate, and the relative costs of each component. For example, tipping fee costs are twenty-six (26) percent of the 96-gallon residential rate. Categories of costs are consolidated into six (6) categories as described below:  Direct Labor includes the salaries, wages, and benefits of all refuse, recycling, and yardwaste collection drivers and helpers.  Profit is any revenue that exceeds total expenses (i.e., allowable costs plus pass- through costs).  Trucking and Equipment Costs includes costs to lease and operate trucks. Lease costs include truck and equipment repair and maintenance, fuel, licenses, and depreciation. 4-9  County Franchise Fees are proposed to be set at $521,754 for 2010. The County uses some of these funds to help develop solid waste programs and to comply with State waste reduction requirements.  General and Administrative Costs includes accounting, office space rental, utilities, office supplies, office equipment deprecation, legal services, insurance, and postage for Garaventa. These costs are identified as “Corporate and Local General and Administrative Costs,” “Depreciation and Other Operating Costs,” and “County Administrative Fees.”  Tipping Fees include all charges for disposal of solid waste at a transfer station or landfill. Tipping fees are identified as either allowed with profit, or as a pass- through cost. While amounts shown in Figure 4-2 are for the 96-gallon rate, other residential rates can be divided into the various cost components with the same relative costs shown for the 96-gallon rate. 4. Review of Rate Application for 2010 4-10 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application [This page intentionally left blank.] Section 5 Recommended Rate Change for 2010 5. Recommended Rate Change for 2010 In the previous section, we provide findings from the review of Garaventa’s 2010 Application. In Exhibit D-1 in Appendix D, we show that the review findings decrease the 2010 revenue requirement by $0.65 million. In this section we provide our recommendations for a rate change. We translate the revenue requirement into the impact on County rates. We also compare proposed new unincorporated County rates with those charged in other similar jurisdictions. This section is organized as follows: A. Residential Rate Change for 2010 B. Comparison of Rates and Services to Other Neighboring Jurisdictions. A. Residential Rate Change for 2010 As summarized in the adjusted base year model (Exhibit D-1), the total projected net shortfall for this 2010 base year is $1,270,247 (line 24). We project 2010 revenues, prior to a rate change, of $9,150,760 [($5,919,725 (residential) + $3,231,035 (commercial)]. Garaventa rates would need to be increased by 13.88 percent ($1,270,247/$9,150,760) to provide Garaventa with the target 90 percent operating ratio for 2010. This assumes a uniform application of the rate increase across all sectors. Residential rates with a 13.88 percent increase, for the most common County rates charged, are summarized in Table 5-1, below. Table 5-1 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Residential Solid Waste Collection Rates With A 13.88 Percent Rate Increase (Per Customer, Per Month) Container Size 2009 Rate Adjustment (of 13.88%) 2010 Rate County Areas (Other Than Byron Areas) 20-Gallon $23.34 $3.24 $26.58 32-Gallon $28.85 $4.00 $32.85 96-Gallon $31.85 $4.00 $35.85 Byron Areas 20-Gallon $21.88 $3.04 $24.92 32-Gallon $26.00 $3.61 $29.61 96-Gallon $29.00 $3.61 $32.61 5. Recommended Rate Change for 2010 5-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Table 5-2 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Estimated 2010 Revenues and Expenses, by Sector (As a Percent of Total Revenues and Expenses)1 Description Residential Commercial Total Revenues 65% 35% 100% Expenses 65% 35% 100% As shown in Table 5-2, left, based on our analysis of revenues and expenses, by sector, we project that, for 2010, Garaventa residential revenues will represent 65 percent of total revenues and Garaventa residential expenses will represent 65 percent of total expenses. Alternatively, Garaventa commercial revenues will represent 35 percent of total revenues, and Garaventa commercial expenses will represent 35 percent of total expenses. B. Comparison of Rates and Services to Other Neighboring Jurisdictions Current 2010 unincorporated County rates were compared with survey data from eleven (11) other jurisdictions. Results of the survey are summarized in Appendix E. Tables E-1 through E-3 show how current 2010 County residential and commercial rates compare to the average of eleven (11) areas surveyed. 1 Based on a sector analysis of over eight (80) percent of Garaventa expenses and all of Graventa revenues. These revenue and cost percentage figures reflect the pooling of all unincorporated County revenues and costs (i.e., are fully inclusive of the franchise areas of the City of Oakley areas which ultimately will be part of a new City of Oakley franchise in the near term). These figures presume that unincorporated County areas (both non-City of Oakley and City of Oakley) have a similar distribution of revenues and costs. Rates for the 96-gallon residential service are approximately 43 percent below the average of these other areas. Other residential rates for smaller can sizes are between 21and 29 percent greater than the average. The fact that the 96-gallon rate is significantly above the average is due to the fact that most of the other jurisdictions surveyed have a variable can rate structure designed to encourage waste reduction practices and recycling through the use of the smaller cart service levels. For these jurisdictions, very few customers have the 96- gallon customers (e.g., less than 5 percent of customers). For the County, virtually all residential customers subscribe to 96-gallon service (96 percent). While rate comparisons are commonly used in public forums to determine whether a jurisdiction’s rates are reasonable, we caution the use of these comparisons to set rates. There are a number of other caveats to using these rate comparisons, which are identified at the bottom of page E-1 of this report. County bin rates are between approximately 1 and 7 percent below the averages of the eleven comparable jurisdictions (Exhibit E-2). County rates for 20-yard debris box service are 15 percent below the average of the eleven comparable jurisdictions (Exhibit E-3). Section 6 Recommended Residential Three-Cart System Rate Change for 2011 6. Recommended Residential Three-Cart System Rate Change for 2011 This section summarizes results of our assessment of County rates under a new residential three-cart system for 2011. We provide the rationale for a recommended residential rate structure and assumed frequency distribution. We compare the residential rate structure, rates, and assumed frequency distribution with the current rate structure, rates, and frequency distribution for the County. There are two important variables that we considered when projecting Garaventa revenues for the new three-cart system. The first was the rate structure, or the rate charged per customer. The second was the number of customers in each rate category, or the frequency distribution Our recommended rate structure, and assumed frequency distribution, are based on our best estimates of how customers will respond to the new three-cart system, and associated rate structure, between implementation in early 2011 and 2012. Our recommendations are meant to capture our best estimate for customer behavior during this period of potential instability and uncertainty. . These two factors are used to estimate residential revenues and were the focus of our analysis. We provide this analysis based on the entire Garaventa-served County area converting to a residential three-cart system. We understand that the City of Oakley areas already are committed to a residential three-cart system and that the City of Oakley will implement a new residential rate structure later this year. We did not assess differences in our recommended rates, provided in this section, with those rates which may have been agreed to between Garaventa and the City of Oakley. The remainder of this section is organized as follows: A. Assumptions Used for Recommended 2011 Three-Cart System Rate Structure and Rates B. Recommended 2011 Rate Structure and Rates Under New Residential Three-Cart System C. Recommended Education and Outreach D. Other Requested County Analyses E. Franchise Agreement Factors. A. Assumptions Used for Recommended 2011 Three-Cart System Rate Structure and Rates While we reviewed and analyzed the new costs associated with the three-cart residential system, we found that the primary focus of our review became what rate structure to recommend, and frequency distribution to assume, for the new three-cart 6. Recommended Residential Three-Cart System Rate Change for 2011 6-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application system. Projecting the rate structure, and frequency distribution, is not an exact science, and we performed a range of sensitivity analyses with these variables. We considered several alternative rate structure/frequency distribution scenarios, and their impacts on Garaventa revenues, before finalizing our recommendations. We carefully considered of a number of factors, including the:  Price elasticity of different rate structures – This factor refers to how customers respond to different rate structure scenarios  Customer transition period – There likely will be a period of up to one year during which customers continue to shift service levels.1 For example, as some customers gain experience with the new system and realize they have greater overall capacity than they do now, they may downsize from a larger to smaller refuse cart  Determination of initial customer refuse cart size preferences – Garaventa plans to survey residential customers, in a three-month period prior to placing its cart order (October through December 2010). It is unlikely that the survey response rate will exceed about 50 percent of customers.2 With 96 percent of existing customers currently using 96-gallon refuse carts, it is challenging to accurately determine which cart size customers will initially select. We used existing customer frequency distribution experience in other County areas and other Garaventa Enterprises served areas following their implementation of three-cart systems. Based on our review, the new rate structure fully reflects the following:  Weekly refuse collection  Bi-weekly recycling collection 1 Garaventa agrees to allow customers to shift service levels without restriction as opposed to requiring customers to commit to a service level over some set period of time. 2 Garaventa Enterprises did a similar mail survey for the City of Rio Vista and received a 40 percent response rate.  Bi-weekly yardwaste collection  New capital outlays totaling over $2.1 million, including the purchase of over 40.000 new carts for refuse, curbside recycling, and yardwaste services  An interest rate of 5.0 percent on the purchase of new carts  A depreciation period of ten (10) years for new cart purchases3  Treatment of the new cart costs as an allowable cost (with profit)  No significant change in disposal costs associated with the new system (refuse volumes are at a low point now, and much of the diverted material is offset by increases in yardwaste which has no net disposal cost savings)  County preferences to retain a legacy mini-can rate (i.e., a Garaventa-provided 20-gallon can service)  A reduction in cost from using bag service for recycling and yardwaste collection for customers on Marsh Creek and Deer Valley ($68,122)  A savings of $7,215 for reduced on-call service  New bag costs for hard-to-serve customers of $8,124  Personal property taxes on new toters of $22,975  Additional costs for labor rate increase in 2011 (a 6 percent increase) of $122,814. Based on our assessment of new costs associated with the residential three-cart system, we estimate new costs of approximately $437,318 for the new service. This new required revenue must come from the residential sector which benefits from the service (not the commercial sector). Based on projected residential revenues of $6,886.416 (with the 13.88 percent residential rate increase 3 This would require an extension of the current franchise agreement term by six (6) years. The current franchise agreement expires in mid-2015 (approximately four (4) years from the 2011 three-cart system implementation). 6-3 recommended in Section 5), residential rates will need to increase by an additional 8.80 percent in 2011 to cover the new three-cart system costs. The resulting total combined effective two-year residential rate increase is 22.68 percent. B. Recommended 2011 Rate Structure and Rates Under New Residential Three-Cart System NewPoint Group’s recommended rate structure is shown in Table 6-1, right. Our recommended rate structure incorporates rates for 20-, 32-, 64-, and 96-gallon services levels. The recommended rate structure is consistent with a goal to encourage customers to generate less refuse, but does not have large differences between the lowest and highest rate that force customers to choose the lowest refuse service level. Though other neighboring jurisdictions employ more extreme variable can rate structures (e.g., where the 64- gallon rate is twice the 32-gallon rate), we did not use this type a rate structure. Such a new rate structure would result in too great a rate shock to many County customers. Also, when customers are forced, through the economics of the rate structure, toward the smallest possible refuse service level, there is the possibility of illegal dumping, already a County concern. Some customers also may place extra refuse into their recycling and yardwaste carts to avoid paying a higher rate. Within the recommended rate structure, there are similar rate differences (i.e., a degree of linearity). For example, the 64-gallon rate is $5.75 per month greater than the 32-gallon rate; and the 96-gallon rate is $4.50 per month greater than the 64-gallon rate. The relatively similar differences between the rates can allow customers to choose the service level that corresponds to their need. Table 6-1 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Recommended Residential Rate Structure with New Three-Cart System4 (Year 2011) Service NPG Recommended (per customer, per month) 20-gallon mini-can $24.95 32-gallon cart $30.20 64-gallon cart $35.95 96-gallon cart $40.45 Table 6-2 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Residential Rates as a Percentage of the 32-Gallon Residential Rate Before and After Three-Cart System Change Service Level Before System Change5 After System Change6 32-gallon 100% 100% 64-gallon N/A 119% 96-gallon 109% 134% Table 6-2, above, shows the differences between rates, as a percentage of the 32-gallon rate, before and after the three-cart system change. After the system change, the spread between the 96-gallon and 32-gallon rate under the new system is much larger than the current spread. This larger difference was not based on a decision to penalize the 96-gallon customer more, under the new rate structure, but rather on the need to generate sufficient revenues from the rate structure to cover the revenue requirement. 4 With ten (10) year cart amortization. 5 With a 32-gallon rate of $32.85 per customer, per month. 6 With a 32-gallon rate of $30.20 per customer, per month. 6. Recommended Residential Three-Cart System Rate Change for 2011 6-4 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Table 6-3 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Assumed Residential Customer Frequency Distribution (Year 2011) Service Percent of Customers 20-gallon mini-can 1% 32-gallon cart 34% 64-gallon cart 40% 96-gallon cart 25% Total 100% Our assumed frequency distribution is shown in Table 6-3, above. This frequency distribution is based on the following factors:  Over 96 percent of current customers have 96-gallon refuse service and we believe that about half of these customers will, at least initially, want to retain their refuse cart capacity  Consideration of actual frequency distribution data for other jurisdictions, in the area, following implementation of a three-cart system (e.g., City of Rio Vista, and City of Concord). We would recommend the County and Garaventa to carefully reevaluate both the rate structure, and frequency distribution assumptions after a one year period (i.e., at the end of 2011). At that time, with more stability in customer behavior, and actual data, the assumptions for the frequency distribution could be very different from the current recommendation. It is important to note that the company has some risks associated with the transition to the three-cart system, including:  Accepting that customers could, on average, select smaller refuse cart sizes than assumed in the frequency distribution  Forgoing a “balancing account,” or another similar mechanism to true up projected revenues, and/or costs, with actual revenues and costs through 2011  Absorbing revenue and cash flow instability. As customers decide on a service level and migrate to different cart sizes, revenues likely could fluctuate during the period from early- to mid-2011. In Table 6-4, on the next page, we compare the recommended residential three-cart system rate structure with the proposed 2010 rate structure discussed in Section 5. For the 32-gallon service, recommended three-cart system rates are 8.07 percent below our recommended 2010 rates (identified in Section 5). The recommended 96-gallon service rate is 12.83 percent above our recommended 2010 rate. As shown in Table 6-5, on the next page, an estimated 65 percent of current customers will see some rate increase in 2011. These customers will see an increase of $4.60 per customer, per month. Alternatively, 35 percent will see a rate decrease, ranging from $1.63 to $5.65 per customer per month. One of the benefits of the new system is the additional capacity customers will have with three new carts. We compared the rate per gallon of estimated capacity before, and after, the three-cart residential system is implemented. In Table 6-6, on the next page, we show that the current rate, per gallon of total capacity (refuse, curbside recycling, and yardwaste), is between $0.23 and $0.33. With the recommended rates, and capacity of the new three-cart system, the rate per gallon of total capacity falls significantly to between $0.21 and $0.24, as shown in Table 6-7, on page 6-7. All categories of County customers ultimately benefit from a lower rate per gallon of capacity. 6-5 Table 6-4 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Recommended Changes to Residential Rate Structure (Year 2011) Service Level 2010 Recommended Rate (With 13.88 Percent Increase) 2011 Recommended Three-Cart System Rate Absolute Difference Percent Difference 20-gallon mini-can $26.58 $24.95 -$1.63 -6.13% 32-gallon cart $32.85 $30.20 -$2.65 -8.07% 64-gallon cart N/A $35.95 N/A N/A 96-gallon cart $35.85 $40.45 +$4.60 +12.83% Table 6-5 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Percentage of Customers with Rate Increase and Rate Decrease (Year 2011) Service Level Current 2009 Frequency Distribution NPG Assumed 2010 Recommended Rate (With 13.88 Percent Increase) 2011 Recommended Rate Estimated Percent Current Customers with Rate Increase Amount of Rate Increase Estimated Percent Current Customers with Rate Decrease Amount of Rate Decrease 20-gallon mini-can 1% 1% $26.58 $24.95 0% N/A 1% -$1.63 32-gallon cart 3% 34% $32.85 $30.20 0% N/A 34% -$2.65 to -$5.65 64-gallon cart 0% 40% N/A $35.95 40% $0.10 N/A N/A 96-gallon cart 96% 25% $35.85 $40.45 25% $4.60 N/A N/A Total 100% 100% 65% 35% Table 6-6 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Weekly Rate per Gallon Of Refuse, Curbside Recycling, and Yardwaste Capacity With Current System (Year 2010) Service Level Rate Per Customer, Per Month Refuse Cart/Can Capacity (gallons) Curbside Recycling Crates Capacity7 (gallons) Yardwaste Can Capacity8 (gallons) Total Estimated Capacity (gallons) Rate Per Customer, Per Month, Per Gallon of Capacity 20-gallon mini-can $26.58 20 28 32-80 80 $0.33 32-gallon can $32.85 40 28 32-80 100 $0.33 96-gallon cart $35.85 96 28 32-80 156 $0.23 7 Equal to two 14-gallon crates. 8 This is an assumed average level of service at two 32-gallon customer provided cans, provided every other week, or 32 gallons per week; or at five bags (each bag with a maximum of 32 gallons of materials), provided every other week, or 80 gallons per week. 6. Recommended Residential Three-Cart System Rate Change for 2011 6-6 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application C. Recommended Education and Outreach Three-cart automated collection service is a significant shift in how services are provided. Jurisdictions that have been successful with implementing new three-cart automated collection services have actively addressed customer/stakeholder concerns throughout the planning process and have worked hard to educate customers prior to implementation. Education is critical, both at the initial roll-out and on an ongoing basis. Exhibit 6-1, on page 6-7, lists various techniques used by these jurisdictions to obtain customer feedback and educate customers prior to implementation. We highly recommend that the County and Garaventa work together to use some of these outreach methods prior to implementation of three-cart service. We recommend that the County work with Garaventa to ensure outreach materials and approach used is consistent with the County’s practice in other franchise hauler areas, and Garaventa prepare draft outreach materials and submit to the County for review, input, and approval. D. Other County Requested Analyses The analyses for the three-cart system, provided in the above subsection, assume a ten (10) year amortization schedule for the new cart purchases. A ten (10) year amortization timeframe would exceed the remaining term of the franchise by approximately six (6) years. The current franchise between the County and Garaventa expires on May 8, 2015. E. Franchise Agreement Factors At the time the County received the Application from Garaventa Enterprises, the company also requested that the County consider an extension of the franchise agreement. The current twenty-year agreement expires on May 8, 2015. There are many factors that the County will want to consider when evaluating a franchise extension. Many of these factors are described in Appendix F. The County is in the process of considering Garaventa’s request for an extension. As identified in Exhibit F-1, many jurisdictions negotiate new terms and conditions as part of an extension. From our perspective, we recommend that the County negotiate some new terms and conditions that have a measureable ratepayer benefit. A franchise extension has tremendous value to the company, and we would expect that the company would be motivated to provide some ratepayer benefits in conjunction with a franchise extension. Now might be an appropriate time to enter into these franchise discussions as Garaventa has proposed new residential three-cart services for 2011, which come at a significant cost to County ratepayers. If the franchise did expire in 2015, we would not recommend that Garaventa invest in new carts for 2011 due to the limited four (4) year period available to amortize this major capital outlay. 6-7 Table 6-7 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Recommended Weekly Rate per Gallon Of Refuse, Curbside Recycling, and Yardwaste Capacity With New Three-Cart System (Year 2011) Service Level Recommended Rate Per Customer, Per Month Refuse Cart Capacity (gallons) Curbside Recycling Cart Capacity (gallons) Yardwaste Cart Capacity (gallons)9 Total Capacity (gallons) Rate Per Customer, Per Month, Per Gallon of Capacity 20-gallon mini-can $24.95 20 48 48 116 $0.22 32-gallon cart $30.20 32 48 48 128 $0.24 64-gallon cart $35.95 64 48 48 160 $0.22 96-gallon cart $40.45 96 48 48 192 $0.21 Exhibit 6-1 Recommendations for New Three-Cart Collection System Outreach and Education Recommendations 1. Provide adequate communications channels to address ongoing questions regarding transition to the three-cart system 2. Develop customer handouts, brochures, or fliers 3. Provide newspaper advertisements 4. Prepare direct mailer to survey customers on refuse cart size preferences 5. Develop new website information (e.g., answers to frequently asked questions) 6. Consider radio and TV public service announcements 7. Consider developing a separate hotline that is staffed 12 hours per day for the first several weeks of the program to assist with customer questions and concerns 8. Provide status in a newsletter 9. Display sample cart set out in various public settings (e.g., malls) 9 This is an assumed average level of service at one 96-gallon cart provided every other week, or 48 gallons per week. 6. Recommended Residential Three-Cart System Rate Change for 2011 6-8 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Garaventa has offered quality service to County customers (as evidenced by the customer satisfaction survey results). Garaventa rates are mixed in terms of how they compare with neighboring jurisdictions, however, taken on an overall basis (for all sectors and service levels), rates do not appear unreasonable. These two factors suggest that a franchise extension is definitely worth considering with Garaventa. The average franchise extension we observe in the waste management industry is approximately eight (8) years. Were the County to decide not to extend the franchise, the County would need to begin a Request for Proposal (RFP) process for a new franchisee at least two years in advance of the expiration, or in 2013. This timeframe is required to effectively develop the RFP, receive bids, select a franchisee, and allow the franchisee transition time. An RFP process does carry significant costs to procure assistance with an RFP, and for County staff time to assist with the process. Section 7 Implementation Schedule 7. Implementation Schedule This section describes the timing for implementation of the new three-cart automated/semi-automated system, and the timing of upcoming rate setting. There are some logistics to work out with an entirely new three-cart system in terms of order and delivery of the three carts for each residential customer, rerouting, and adjusting the truck fleet as needed to serve the County areas. This section is organized as follows: A. Three-Cart System Implementation Timeline B. Rate Setting Timeline for 2012 Through 2015. A. Three-Cart System Implementation Timeline Implementation of the new automated system will occur over an approximately six month, phase-in period. This time period will allow time to order and distribute new refuse and recycling carts.1 Table 7-1, below, shows the expected steps and approximate timing for automation implementation. Table 7-1 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Residential Three-Cart Implementation Timing Milestone Expected Timing 1. Board of Supervisors meeting to review report and consider/approve rate By January 2011 2. Garaventa Enterprises implements new interim rate March 2011 3. Garaventa Enterprises conducts ongoing outreach and education, under the County’s supervision and direction, to inform customers of planned service changes March 2011 to July 2011 4. Garaventa Enterprises places order for new carts and/or trucks March 2011 5. Garaventa Enterprises receives new carts and/or trucks August 2011 6. Garaventa Enterprises delivers carts to residential customers and begins to charge customers the new rate2 August 2011 to December 2011 (target completion date by October 2011, completed no later than December 31, 2011) 1 Garaventa will use half of the existing 96-gallon refuse toters for yardwaste. 2 Garaventa Enterprises will begin to charge County customers the new rate beginning with the date that the customer receives new carts. 7. Implementation Schedule 7-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application The timeline presented in Table 7-1 is relatively aggressive in light of the numerous factors involved in implementing the new system. Delays in cart orders could delay the entire schedule. Garaventa also could have logistics issues in terms of procuring, storing, inventorying, and delivering carts in a timely manner by the target date of October 2011. Garaventa could end up with a longer phase-in period as it implements only portions of the County at a time. There is the possibility that Garaventa could implement the three-cart service for a portion of the County only, but not the entire County, effectively delaying the implementation period well beyond that shown in Table 7-1. While unlikely, Garaventa also could run into too many problems and fail to implement the new three- cart system at all. B. Rate Setting Timeline for 2012 through 2015 There is significant uncertainty associated with the proposed year 2011 rate structure frequency distribution assumptions. It is possible that Garaventa could require an interim year rate increase for 2012 (and this increase also could be for extraordinary circumstances as defined by the Manual on page IV-1). Such a rate increase may be necessary due to the uncertainty as to how much revenue the new rate structure will generate. The County, and ratepayers, should be informed that, in conjunction along with a 2011 rate change, a 2012 rate change also is a possibility. As with any interim year, Garaventa has the option of applying for an interim year rate increase for calendar year 2012. The interim year rate change application is normally due to the County three months in advance of the eventual implementation date. For a January 1, 2012, implementation, Garaventa would normally submit its interim year application by September 30, 2011. Garaventa also will have the option of submitting an interim year rate application for January 1, 2013, and January 1, 2014, implementation. Given that 2011 is effectively a base year (with the new tiered residential rate structure likely implemented in mid 2011), the next base year will be 2015. The Rate Setting Manual requires Garaventa to submit its 2015 base year application by June 30, 2014, for a January 1, 2015, rate implementation. Appendix A Rate Application Appendix A Rate Application This appendix includes the 2010 Base Year Rate Application (Application). In its Application, Garaventa Enterprises requested a 21.10 percent increase. The Application included the following contents:  Cover letter  Six (6) page application, with:  Financial information  Cost summary for year 2009 (2 pages)  Single family residential summary  Operating information  Summary with requested rate change  Income statements (unaudited) for years ended December 31, 2006, 2007, and 2008  Garaventa’s annualized Statement of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2009  Garaventa’s projected Statement of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2010. The Application, as submitted, was consistent with the requirements of the County’s Rate Manual. We verified that the calculations contained in the Application were accurate and that the Application was complete. In the course of performing our review, and to assess data provided in the Application, we submitted various data requests to Garaventa. During our review, we obtained and reviewed the following information and documents:  Amortization schedules (cart and truck purchases)  County debris box usage records (free services to County)  Customer counts  Depreciation schedules  Disposal rate adjustment records  Employee payroll records  Fixed asset schedules  General ledger transactions reports  Health and welfare and workers compensation records  Household hazardous waste reports  Lease agreements  Route maps  Tonnage reports (refuse, recycling, and yardwaste)  Truck and equipment lease schedules  Union labor agreements (Teamsters Local 315). Appendix A. Rate Application A-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application [This page intentionally left blank.] GaraventaEnterprises4080MALLARDDRIVESP.O.BOX5397CONCORD,CALIFORNIA94520(925)689-8390December8,2009Ms.DeidraDingmanContraCostaCountyCommunityDevelopmentDepartment651PineStreet4thFloor—NorthWingMartinez,CA94553RE:RateApplicationDearMs.Dingman:EnclosedistheBaseYearRateApplicationforGaraventaEnterprisesfranchisedareasforunincorporatedContraCostaCountyandIronhouseSanitaryDistrict.TheBaseYearRateApplicationissupportedbyAuditedFinancialStatementsofthoseoperationsforthecalendaryear2008,currentestimatedresultsofcalendaryear2009basedonninemonthsofoperations,andprojected2010results.OurresultingcalculationshowsachangeinthecurrentResidentialandCommercialratesof21.10%.Ameetingwithyou,yourstaff,consultants,BoardcommitteeandIronhouseSanitaryDistrictrepresentativesshouldbescheduledatyourearliestconvenience.Ifyouhaveanyquestions,pleasecallusat(925)689-8390.Sincerely,ClarkColvisCFOCc:EricNylund(w/enclosures)V n n 0)p CD$CD-4 pC z Co 0C ‘1 :3 F C 0 C)03 3 CD 0 DC C C D CCl) DC CCD :3CCIC -U 0 0 0 :3 CD F- :3 0) + CD Cn CD D DC C0 :3 -U C DC Cl):3 11W 11DCCD CD CD DC 0 :3 U-CD CD 0 CD CD :3 CO :310 ;o—0CD°r-0 C)CO3 .° —RDCDC C) D ä3 —F C,) CDCO D C CO CD <0CC CD DC 10 DC CD 0> DC DC0 DC C)0 DC 0) ‘C DC.> CD 30C0 Cr COW C If CD 0) -U CCC Or-CC CD 0 ‘CD CD DCCC 0)0):3— CD CD er CD CDDC CD, CD 0) “C CD, C) -‘C CID F- CD 0) + CD 0 CDI : CDI CC (4 CC (4 :41 (C C CDI (0 N (40 L,3 CD a 0 CD ‘4 C.) 0) Ce D3 D) U-) CD 0) 0 0) CD 0) 0 CD CCC 0—.CD c •C 0 6’ CD 0 0)...DC CD F’) 0) +CD C’)CD F- :3 CD0 F’) + 4, 0) C.) CD CD, (-3 CD (-3 (4 01 -.4 64 CD (0CD 0) CD, (4 —I CD 0) C’) 64 I 0) 41 Cr (C (C CCC N C 44 4.1 Ca U CC.)Ca C.) o C.) CCCI (0 Is) 444, UI (0 IC) •0(0 4,a)..(4 C.)(9(4(9(4C’,:-CO ))-4 Sfl 4 OO1 0a, ‘F: 0 C CD 0 CO (4 ‘.l 0. +(4 0)0’ +-n(4 CD a) 0 .. ‘1 C., Qi’0G)m ---4 00)a))na).0 0 0 .CCC. hCa)C 0) a)‘0 z30>D a) .(0 ,i’0 a),a)a)L 0.CC. (40.....ca .a)00 a)m a) (C.. 3-(0 D z -iia.7)90)C(0 0Ca)(0 .2:- 3 (0 C) 0 U) (4 + C,) (4 + (9C,) + + (4 (‘I .‘gg I o77g-4a); 3 .4 40 a)0 0) 44 -‘ ‘-U a)(1.3.0 0 1 U ‘-000 j - 7 >>‘0-1> 9.0)0’’3‘00)449.03a)•(;a) g.3 Ca)Ø.a) 340 0 O a)’0 a)2Cfl ‘•-BU)=0. a ,(0 30.06 m 440’a) .0 -u -g (UCC.0’a) a)44 a)3 a)C)0 a)9.(U3 (C. a)3 0. > 0. a) C) 0 (4 -I ci I a) a) C, a) CD -D a) v-f. 0 D -4 C.) —p.)—o - C,):U).0)-4.o -‘(4._a CO0010) 44 4044 4’) 4.) 01 CU CUP!‘i’0 0)-CO -C.)-01 C.)CD •CD -,0),‘-40)CU C.)C.)CU 0C,).C0 0-C.4.)--0)(4010 C,)(U (0(0 01 0)430 01-”440030C,)C,)-01-C90)0)CU -40)._a0101W 4 ‘.4O)0)01.CO010 44 4444 44 P..P.C)1 4..—p.)CO CO ‘.J(4 -4-’-C4Q -‘F.)4’)-I0 -99.CO (90)CQ’4-b”4h3CUCO-F.),0F.3-’-lQ.‘.4_a.0)0._I 0CJ1C901--JC,)--.CU,F.)0)CD 0 0)C,)F’)CU 0 (9 0 0 01 C,)-CD -‘.1 -(0 CO 0)01 -(ClO)(40O-0CO-’-C3 4,CO00(4 00)F.30)4,VIC4O_aCOCOOI 04 C ZWa)0 0.< a)0. a)0.3 <a —a) a) (40 -z ContraCostaCoizttyBaseYearRateChangeApplicationSingleFarnyResidentialService43.SingleFattyResidentialRevenue(BseYearfromPage4of6)MultrunhtResidentialService44.NumberofAccounts45.MultiunitResidentialRevenue46.ResidentialRevenue(wloAllowanceforUncollectibleAccounts)(Lines43+45)47.AllowanceforlJncollectibleResidentialAccounts48.TotalResidentialRevenue(Line46-Line47)CommercialandLightIndustrialCanService49.NumberofAccounts50.CommercialandLightIndustrialCanRevenuesCommercialandLightIndustrialBinService51.NumberofAccounts52.CommercialandLightIndustrialBinRevenuesCommercialandLightIndustrialDropBoxService53.NumberofAccounts54.CommercialandLightIndustrialDropBoxRevenues(55.CommercialandLightIndustrialRevenue(wloAllowanceforUncollectibleAccounts)(Lines50÷52+54)56.AllowanceforUncollectibleCommercialandLightIndustrialAccounts57.TotalCommercialandLightIndustrialRevenues(Line55-Line56)CostSummaryforYear2009SectionlX-Revenue-c’.’ActualEstimatedProjectedIHistoricalYearsCurrentYearBaseYearYear1Year2YearSYear4Year5200620072008I2009I201Ô$4,924,167Is5,404,120!$5,638,011I$5,979,520I$5,932,680[II$4,924,167I$5,404,120I$5,638,011I$5.979,5201$5,932,680IIs59,3271$4,924,167$5,404,120$5,638,011$5,979,520I$5,873,353I116110115991105131,235$157,955$229,768$217,437$241,596L279273263278273$1,731,866$1,838,626$1,803,427$1,889,229I$1,858,949304326356331]32952,096,487$1,961,401$1.721,2081.138.510S1,132,490I$3,959,588I$3,957,982$3,754,402$3,245176$3,231,036IIIII$3,959.588I3,957,982I$3,754,402I$3,245,176I3.231,036.58.RecycledMaterialSales$61,391.48I$29,420.73$39,516.94I8”5,927.54)-I59.TotalRevenue(Lines48+57+58)I$8,045.147I$9,391,523Is9,431,930I$9,230,623!$9,104,359I(‘.Year201)9Page3of6 ContraCostaCountyBaseYearRateChangeAppIicatonSingleFamilyResidentialSummarySectionX--SingleFamilyResidentialRevenueProjectedIBaseYear2010SingleFamilyResidentialrevenue(withoutRateChangeinBaseYear)____________________________________CurrentProjected_____________Rate/MonthAccountsTotalOakleyCan/Toter(Ironhouse)T9$28.119138$3,082,430Oakleyextracanwithtoter(Ironhouse)TA$6.880$-Oakleyminican(Ironhouse)T2$23.11100$27,732Oakley40galloncan(Ironhouse)T4$28.11267$90,064OakleyCan/Toter(County)T9$28.85102$35,312Oakleyextracanwithtoter(County)TA$7.120$-OakleyminiCan(County)T2$23.34(0$-Oakley40galloncan(County)T4$28.854$1,385Brentwood(outofCity)Can/ToterT9$28.85853$295,309Brentwood(outofCity)extracanwithtoterTA$7.121$85Brentwood(outofCity)minicanT2$23.346$1,680Brentwood(outofCity)32galloncanT3$28.8532$11,078BryontoterT9$26.00129$40,248ByronextracanwithtoterTA$6.480$-ByronminicanT2$21.882$525Byron32galloncanT3$26.008$2,496DiscoveryBayCan/ToterT9$28.854359$1,509,086DiscoveryBayMiniCanT2$23.3446$12,884DiscoveryBayextracanwithtoterTA$7.124$342DiscoveryBay32galloncanT3$28.8539$13,502Baypoint(PDS)Can/ToterT9$28.852073$717,673Baypoint(PDS)MiniCanT2$23.3458$16,245Baypoint(PDS)extracanwithtoterTA$7.122$171Baypoint(PDS)32galloncanT3$28.85215$74,43360.TotalBaseYearSingleFamilyResidential117,438.001$5,932,680.00IIVear:2009Page4of6 N I’-)C,) C <-<‘<Dl DI0. CD ! CD 0 x 0 0 CD CD CDCDCD 0)0)0)0)0)40 .40)01 00 C)I-0 -0 0 -4’-0 0 o o 0 3 0 CD CD 0 0 CD CD 0 (0 0 CD C)C C z•3 CD C)3 CD CD -3 CD C) ‘CDCDz0)03ZCDInID—-“ D ,o IDCD CD ID In (0CD -o I f N •N CD0)CD CD-4 C.). a:::;:: ;•:: •Cli CD .C0).CCI -4 CDC.)Cli C .. ::::a::::s:::::: *-::: DEl a -‘C 0) N p —I 0 N 4— C.) N 9)... NC.) CD 0 0 C... N‘.4 F° C 0 C.) CD 0 C C --4... 0 0 C p.... 0.. 0.. p C 0 0•. 0.. 0.•. p 0 C CD.... N CD Cli C.) .) p.. Cli.. C.) C C C... L C.) 0 0 C C CC p C 0 CDI. 0) 00 0 0 0o p..., 0,.’ CD.., N 0 0 C...a:: N 0C C.) 0 C.) 04 N :1 0) 0 CD 0)’.’ CD --4 NCD —I CD -.4 I3.. -4 0 CD CD 0.. CD 0C.) 0.’.’ 00 CD CD’.’ a.) V) (D a) I;, a) (D 0a) 0 D NC.) C,) “3 0 C.)C.) CD ‘Q)’.’ 7,4.’. N CD C -4 1%) 07 0 0) M CD CD (Ci C.) C 1’3.’. CCI’.’ DO.. C.) -4 CD -4 0 -4 -4 CD CD -4 CD0) 0) 0.. -4 CO CCC CD.’. -4 CD Cli 0CD CDCD :::: Q “‘7 ‘CD 0) CD 1)1 N0 CD 01 . C) DC .,‘,‘. 0 DI’ 0 HI 01 CD g 0.) 40 -I CD -CD--0)NCCli0)0) I,•.•..1.’.’..1.’.’.C4•.C...C.’ 0..‘-.-.--‘.‘p..’ CD’.’‘i..’.’‘.:CD.’::“‘::: I,) CD 0 0)-4 CD Cli N CD CD :::: L.’ 0•.•‘.‘:::::: C.) —4 00)C.) 1)0 0)000)0)N 9:-:--—::: •0).••L•. ...-a..::: :-4 CI. 0)CD 0 —4 Cli000CD0CCD000 -CD.3 C.) C.) 00 O Co0 C COC CD) CCC 0 0 C.) -4 —4 ‘•O.‘C. —4 C.)-CD 4 C.) -4 CD ConfraCostaCounty,BaseYearRateChangeApplicationUnincorporatedArea:Al!Areas78.RateChangeRequested21.10%I--AbbreviatedRateScheduleIncreasedCurrentRateRateNewAdjustmentsRateOakleyCan/Toter(lronhouse)Oakleyextracanwithtoter(lronhouse)Oakleyminican(Ironhouse)Oakley40galloncan(Ironhouse)OakleyCan/Toter(County)Oakleyextracanwithtoter(County)Oakleyminican(County)Oakley40galloncan(County)Brentwood(outofCity)Can/ToterBrentwood(outofCity)extracanwithtoterBrentwood(outofCity)minicanBrentwood(outofCity)32galloncanBryontoterByronextracanwithtoterByronminicanByron32galloncanDiscoveryBayCan/ToterDiscoveryBayMiniCanDiscoveryBayextracanwithtoterDiscoveryBay32galloncanBaypoint(PDS)Can/ToterBaypoint(PDS)MiniCanBaypoint(PDS)extracanwithtoterBaypoint(PDS)32galloncan79.Multiunitresidential$28.11$34.04$0.01$34.056.888.330.028.3523.1127.990.0128.0028.1134.040.0134.0528.8534.940.0134.957.128.62(0.02)8.6023.3428.26(0.01)28.2528.8534.940.0134.9528.8534.940.0134.957.128.62(0.02)8.6023.3428.26(0.01)28.2528.8534.940.0134.9526.0031.490.0131.506.487.857.8521.68265026.5026.0031.490.0131.5028.8534.94.0.0134.9523.3428.26(0.01)28.257.128.62(0.02)8.6028.8534.940.0134.9528.8534.940.0134.9523.3428.28(0.01)28.257.128.62(0.028.6028.8534.940.0134.95(a)Calculatedratesareroundeduptothenearest$0.05Rateincreaseof21.10%Uwillbeappliedtoallratesineachstructurewitheachrateroundedupordowntothenearest$0.05Tothebestofmyknowledge,thedataandinformationinthisapplicationiscomplete,accurate,andconsistentwiththeinstructionsprovidedbyContraCostaCounty.Name:ClarkColyisTitle:CFOSignature:Date:FiscalYear:2009Page6of6 GaraventaEnterprisesRateApplicationIncomeStatementForyearended1231-2006CServices-ResidentialInCiServices-ResidentialOut0Services-ConiiierciallnCitServices-CommercialOutOfServices-DebrisBoxesServices-DumpFees-GarbageCustomerRefundsServices-ResidentialRecSales-RecyclingSERVICES-RESIDENTIALREQTotalRevenuesOakleyBrentwoodDeltaPittsbargTotalAdjustmentDIsposalServiceDiscowryBayDebrIsTotals-CompaniesDisposalServiceAdforToServiceDisposalDisposalBoxService4,16,17,19(BaypolntiCompaniesAppacationAppticatlon2,517,31714,7991,324,4793,856,595-3,856,5951,087,5724,924,16731,324301,999333,324734,2481,067,572(1,067,572)-900,84953,276212,2541,166,380-1,166,380868,5392,034,91962,450281,257343,708524,831868,539(868,539)-2,096,4872,096,4872,098,4872,096,48733,7923727.12460,95343981,391-61,3913,545,733651,3681,563,8582,096,4877,857,4481,259,5189,116,9649,116,964386,818370,006503,7282,389,15159,136115,131290,8582.4256,30612,5547322,1052,40923,33017,7871,9652,0955,514863,98639,2129.07771,78810,95345626,932181.09955726,512481,099Services-DumpFees-GarbageCustomerRefundsSales-RecyclingTotalRevenuesCostofoperationsDirectLaborLabor-Wages437,404130,320159,121156,664883,509155,3641,038,8731,038,873PayrollTaxes36,26310,90313.46112,57873.20412,78585,99085.990Labor-Health&Welfare85,45425.71332,22025,699169,08525,334194,420194,420Labor-WortcmensComp70,88221,15724,42526,589143,05323,458166,511166,511Labor-Pension48,39512,44619,39317,14197,37413.365110.740110,740Totaldirectlabor678.397200,539248,620238.6701,366,227230,3071.S96,5331,596,533DumpingCosts1,062,100178,257384,495701,7922,326,645193,4272.520.0722,520,072FranchiseFees‘172,07932,73877.734282,55052,729335,279-335,279CountyMminFees(HHWIees)56,2168,63728,59793,4508,964102,414102.414DepreciationandOtherOperatingCostsRepairs-Customer19,2332,22011,50658833,5462,23135,77735,777Depreciation-Fumiture&F1,3461,3461731,5191,51920,5792.22011,50658834,8922,40337,29537,295,/Truckingcosts:Equipment,Maintenance,&Repair1,128,599275,6422.664,7932,664,793GeneralandAdministrativeCostsAdministrativesalaries398,861915,494915,494PayrultTaxes17,9274158341,583PensionPlanExpense3,8319,7349734Accounting28,70675,25075,250Advertising3,34411,231(11,231)-Alarm456476476Amortizalion-Organization---BankCharges!ci-cardprocfees42026,93426,934CollectionsFees(30)2121Contributions1,818(1,818)-Publiceducation11,23111,231Dues&Subscriptions3751831,9571,957Flowers--Freight-Delivery---Ibm-Rental2,5808,8441,2961,29614.01679714,81314,813lnterst-Oeposits397397397(397)-Janitorial2,7972,7972,7972,797LeaseOutsideEquipment3.8402.04016,20022,08091522,99522,995Legal4,2784,2784064,6834,683Licenses-Permits22022010230230LoanFees----MedicalExpenses5811631142871,1441291.2731.273Miscellaneous664:34949OfficesSupplies&Expense9,9351,9082.75114214,7361,62416,36016,360Printing&Postage17,4852,87611,2687631,7263,22434,95034,950Promotional----Rent-Office48,66715,85511.33081,432157,2344,004161,288161,288Repairs&MaintenanceGene1081081,5351.6431,643SalesPromotion---Sponsorships2,5002,5005003,000(3,000)-Taxes-Other8250252518211192192Taxes-PersonalProperty38383638Telephone4,5825613945,5373705,9075,907Travel&Entertainment-Ma1,0526901.7422251.967(1,967)-Utilities1,1409402,0803502,4302,430Totalgeneral&administrative553,742116.791172,710441,7071,284,95074,5611,359,5111,352,328Netincome(loss)fromoperations(125,979)(274,631)270,189210,00279,581421,486501,06851,5082,3716573,46227820237191,400 GaraventaEnterprisesRatePppIicat1onIncomeStatementForyearended12-31-2007venuesServices-ResidentialInCiServices-ResidentialOut0Services-CommercialInCitServices-CommercialOutOfServices-DumpingFees-PubtCustomerRefundsServices-DebrisBoxesSales-RecyclingTotalRevenuesOakleyBreniweodDiscoveryBayDellaDisposalDisposalDisposalDebrisServiceServiceServiceSosServicePltlsburgTolals-CompaniesDisposalService4,16,1719IBaypoint)4,284,0393524021,273,652354003l,96l,0129,0148.254.511TotalAdjustmentAUtotToCompaniesApplicebonApplication4,284,0391,120,0821,273,652516,4991,961,40129,421_____________9,185,09231,270307,60465,447296,3452,834,144“‘799990,39657,65817,5023,944,4991,418,624217,808767,679162,4961,961.4011.961.4011111,502406700,6761,647,935930,5821,120,0825,404,120(1,120,082)-516,4991,790,151(516,499)-1,961,40129.4219,185,092186,375977,975159,9211,137,8981,137,89615,26181,29013,13494,42494,42428,398196.40429,928225,422225.42222,854112,05013,965126,015126,01518,179104,711118,077118,077271,0661,471,519230,3131,701.8331,701,833590,0002,245,094193,8632,439,9572,439,957329,54857,987387,535387,53585,7062.01187,71787,717379,796532,89019.48919,45972672620,18520,185112,5986,2352.03224,2372,3612.849,810CostofOperationSDirectLaborLabor-Wages469,652140,085161,662PayrotlTaxes39,24911,73115,049Labor-Neatth&Welfare98,60030,80137,695l.abor-WorirmensComp53,36816,08019,748Labor-Pension52,91314,27119.348Totaldirectlabor713,783212,968273,702DumpingCosts1,079,336184,580392,148FranchiseFees-196,02744,53668,985CountyAdminFees(HHWfees)56,2161,91027.580DeprecialioncodOtherOperatingCostsRepairs-Customer11,2521,4524,739Depreciation-Furniture&F46811,7201,4524,739Truckingcosts:Rertt-Eqotpmerit1,177,439291,369Generalendadministrativecosts:Administrativesalaries305,10058,496PayrollTaxes17,0132,446PensionPlanExpense3,792758Accounting28,36122,720Advertising4,226234Alarm707AmortizationBankCharges421,—CotleclionsFees(Contributions250PublicEducationDues&Subscriptions189455FlowersFreight-DeliveryIbm-Rental2,5808,644Insurance4,897lnterst-DepositsJanitorial2,700Laundry&uniforms.402LeaseOutsideEquipment5,6804,480Legal35930LegalSettlementUcenses-Permits220MedicalExpenses556318Miscellaneous18OfficesSupplies&Expense5,557312422Postage32,6383,29017,331Printing18,2211,7308,145PromotionalRent-Office49.38515,85511,330Repairs&MaintenanceGene1,064Sponsorships2,5003,500Taxes-OtherTaxes-PersonalProperly9740Telephone4,044552527Travel&Entertainment941100Travel&Entertainment-MeaUtilities1,140Totalgeneral&administrative492,866124,410Netincome(loss)fromoperations273,326.22(158,608.41)316490.68‘:;295,40813,0262,8138,7254,44041,1852.649,81017,4422,01746825817,9102.2752,381,493268,317771,60238,94438,7202,2629,39567184,0433,32311,2628007078741,606225043964418814,0167824,8977631032.70060238,2409244193222091,32256182066,29176653,6293,44328,2342,036158,0024,038‘1,0641066,000688-171385,1233271,04136-1492,1223231,280,40961,4181,2961,2961032005,56020.52041837013881,432810,546610,54640,98240,98210,06610,06687,36687,36612,062(12,052)-79479441,60841,608689(689)-12,06212,06283283214,79814,7965,6605,660103(103)-2,7002,70060260237,16437,1644524522292291,3781.378224224-7,0587,05857,07257,07230,270-30,270162,039162,0391,1701,1706,688(6,688)-17-171381385,4505,4501,077(1,077)-149(149)-2,4452,4451,341,8261,333,1.2k,,556,226,94564,934.48-/982192.074471,05896,328.71-441,831.61-114,39733/‘V’(:CC’r/ FranchiseFeesCountyAdminFees(t-IHWfees)Rent-EquipmentGeneralandAdministrativeCostsAdministrativesalariesTaxes-PayrollPensionAccountingAdvertisingMarmBankcharges&crcardfeesCollectionFees‘-.ContributionsPubliceducationIBMRental,Software&RepaDues&SubscriptionsEmployeefunctionsFuel&OilInterestExpenseInsuranceJanitorialLandscapeandmaintenanceLaundry&lintfomisLegalLicensesMedicalExpenseMiscellaneousOfficeSupplies&ExpenseOutsideServicesPostagePrintingLease.-OutsideEquipmentRent-OfficeRepairs-GeneralSalesPromotionSponsorshipsSuppliesTaxes-OtherTaxes-personalpropertyTelephoneTravel&EntertainmentUtilitiesPayrollDepositChargesTotalGeneral&AdmInistrativeIncome(Loss)FromOperationsArusflnentforToAppacalionApplication111576990,91025475887984133,3211,682,7412,561,691i0,;5980910,968384,262116,9293072,931823,37242,19741,19794,771(10,300)-52828,45815(208)-10,30010,30014,7132,3961,6432,700401142,2282081,116S9,17253,03446,3171,597151,092901(9,434)91271,9521,834(1,789)-1,4711,443,757158,651C0OakleyBrentweodDiscoveryBayDeltaAudftedPittsburgTotalDisposalDisposalDieposalDebrisFleendalDisposalServicsAlServiceServiceServiceBoxServiceStatements(Saypoint)Companies2,977,59850,4351,498,49836,293295,465-1,071,03864,428207,83064,755309,6354,526,530-4,526,5301,111,4805,638,011331,757779,7231,111,480(1,111,480)-1,3.43,296-1,343,296689,8982,033,194374,390315,508689,898(689,898)1,721,2081,721,2081,721,2081,721,20814,372/___________22,421___________36,7942,72339,51739,5174,164,05641719,9631,728,7491,721,2088,333,9761,097,9549.431,9309,431,930-0If..-f--‘?7,(978YL/÷--,-/GaravenaEnterpnsesRateAppkcationpIncomeStaternentiAudittie-outi-1—FortheYearEnded12-31-2008RevenuesServices-ResidentialServices-ResidentialOutServices-CommercialServices-CommercialOutServices-DebrisBoxesServices-ResidentialRecyclingSales-PaperStock___________________________________________________________________TotalRevenues___________________________________________________________________________CostofoperationsOperatingexpenses--Labor-Wages450,063136,636185,242177,164949,105166,6641,115,769Labor-PsyroilTaxes37,12410,97614,86814,29277,26113,65090,910Labor-Health&Wetfare99,32134,47045,68930,595210,07444,683254,758Labor-WorkersCompensationins.35.90011,15014,29014,70576,04511,93987,984Labor-Pension51,60913,78922,96118,352106,71026,610133,321TotalLaborCosts‘674,018207,020283,050255,1071,419,195-263,5461,682,741DumpingCost1,153,959180,510400,704651,5972,386,770174,9212,561,691DepreciationandOtherOperatingCosts--Repairs-Customers3,3025085,5059,31584410,159Depreciation 616_________________________________6161938093,9185085,505-9,931‘1.03710,968206,98034,84986,527328,35655,905384,26269,02813,41030,833113,272‘3657116,9291,321,076339,083507,556585,8022,753,5183194133,072,931---v..,CCr’L(•)323,96856,589110,777296,451787,78535,5823,372/18,6082,3995,98113,18140,1692,02842,1974,3938181,9973,39110,59959911,19736,48525,08520,0729,75591,3973,374.0594,7744,3411,6331,1922,6289,79450610,300510510185281,72018239425,77728,07338628,4581515-15-2082082,5808,8.441,2961,29614,01669714,7131771,4551,6327642,3967867888571,6432,7002,7002,700202202199401142,130142,13098142,2282002008208390613232851,059571,116-667,1467523288,2369379,17231,0923,44515,15643550,1292,90553,03428,4923,11912,14417643,9312,38646,3171,5611,561361,59752,21815,97013,43465,588147,2093,883151,0927907901119018,0008,0001,4.349,4349992550252512521271,901351,936171,9521,515130764,7201131,834-1,3351501,4883031,7891,1401,1403311,471874.228119,983183,628419,5201,397,33957849-1455,187-j;l(L.tt’—fc-129,875(161,970)261,779(190,818)(74,406)221426’147,220---°96-2(4/:’,-f:J../’- Garaventa Entc Rate Appflcatk Annuaflzed Sta...of Operations For the Year Ended 12-31-2009 -4 Thrnuh 6-30-09 I 4 Quarter ended 9-30-02 Oakley Breniwend Olenasery Bay Delta Pittebura Total Oakley llrentwoad Discovery Boy Delta Plttobarg Total Proluoted AuItm.nt Diupoeci Stipend Otipond Deliria Dl.posat Service NI Stipend Oloposal Disposal Debrte Disposal Service All or faa To ServIce Service Service Box Service (Baypoirrt)Companies Service Service Service eon Service (Beypolot)Corspeniec Aenualized Appllcstlon Application Revenues Services-Residential In 1620,526 22131 747,257 -2,389913 835095 10727 385,561 1,231383 4,626,395 1,151,125 5,979520Services-Residential Out 18,914 152,136 401993 573,045 10,148 77,466 202,685 290,289 1,151125 (1,151,125) Servlces-Commerclalln 571,268 37,705 116,522 -725,514 285,624 16,425 55636 357,865 1,444,532 662,137 2,106669 Services -Commercial Out 26,092 148,863 155,664 327,819 15,957 79,040 73,787 168,765 662,137 (682,137) Serviceo-Debris Boxes 800,139 600,139 269,185 269,185 I,I38,510 1,138,510 Services -Residential Recycling ------Salon -Papas Stock ----Total Revenues 2235,819 358,636 863,779 800,139 551,657 4,616,430 1,l47,025 183,857 441,197 269,165 276,472 2,317,536 8,224,699 9,224,599 Cost of operations Direct Labor Labor-Wages 225,296 73,272 99,437 65,866 84,979 54-8,848 129,572 39,818 62,839 33,672 42,489 306,189 1,185,227 1,185,227Labor-Payroll Taxes 16,556 6,187 8,252 5,818 8,951 45,566 9,746 2982 4,708 2,538 3,475 23,451 92,488 92,458Labor-Health &Welfare 51,718 16,332 24,498 16,332 24,760 133,640 28,561 8,186 12,249 8,166 12,380 69,542 272,724 212,724 Labor -Workers Compensatioe Ins.21,266 6,547 9,511 6,227 6,080 49,632 12,078 3,570 5,844 3,163 3,040 27,698 105,024 105 024Labor-Pension 30,918 7,512 12,814 10,484 14,449 78,177 16,125 3,669 8,161 4,982 7,224 38,162 152,501 152501TotalDirectLabor347,757 109,850 154,512 104,527 137,218 853,883 196,104 58,205 91,601 52,521 68,609 467,040 1,787,944 1,187,944 Dumping Cost 632,318 92,303 212,144 272,078 101,006 1,309,848 326,809 45,220 115,096 134,669 71,790 693,565 2,697,017 2,697,017 Depreciation end Other Opereang Costs Repairs-Customers 3,413 2,242 70 58 5,762 8,826 717 3,728 818 14,088 33,959 33,959 DeprecIation 253 ______________________________ 87 340 974 _________________________________ 475 1,449 3,238 3,238 3,666 2,242 70 -145 6,122 9,800 717 3j28 ____________ 1,293 15,537 37,197 37,197 Trucking Costs -Equipment,Maintenance,8 Repair 731,781 237,575 383,678 320,044 201,266 1,954,346 365,891 118,787 161,639 180,022 100,634 927,173 3,706,692 3,708,992 Franchise FeeS 108,409 18,632 45,484 27,377 199,882 58,511 9,135 22,027 13,564 103,237 406,356 408,358 CountyAdminFees(HHWfeas)31,524 1,474 15,824 2,992 51,814 18,972 1,910 8,336 4,187 33,387 118,667 118,587 General and Administrative Costs -Administrative salaries 197,773 35,924 91,480 124,214 19,334 468,785 99,062 16,010 45,502 62,137 14,935 239,646 948,077 948.077 Taxes -Payroll 13,836 2,029 6,248 6,0l6 1,357 29,486 5,475 667 2,345 1,854 785 10,926 51,337 51,337 Penoico Plan Expanse 3,581 876 1,866 1,599 353 5,078 1,505 241 786 344 236 3,115 14,307 14,307 Accounting 17,813 9,005 5,996 1,582 34,396 7,219 10,330 9,688 5,000 2,362 34,599 l03,595 103,595 Advertising l1,099 5,342 7,527 4,843 1,349 30,160 7,864 650 650 1,063 370 10,618 51,395 (5l,395)- Alarm 264 11 275 132 9 141 658 556 Bankcherges 3,597 665 1,840 4,921 600 11,623 1,586 266 933 1,665 478 4,927 21,417 21,477 Colleclisn Fees ------Contdbrrtiuns-Ctrartloble - -187 167 334 (334)- Public education 51,395 51,395 IBM Rental,Softwere&Repair 1,290 4,422 648 648 415 7,423 645 2,211 324 324 316 3,822 15,067 15,067 Dues &Subucilptions 420 400 73 893 95 95 1,083 (1,083)- Non deductable dues ----Educatisnltralelng -----Employee functions 148 49 49 14 260 305 305 871 elI Fuel nod oil ----Insurance 6,008 635 6,644 11,692 l,426 5,965 6,648 2,181 27,912 62,468 62,468 Janitorial 1,925 195 2,120 675 165 830 3,779 3,779 Lawvtry&Unitomis 202 26 230 413 413 1,057 1,057 Lease -Otituide Equipment 450 (42)408 353 353 1,114 1,114 Legal 26,362 -26,382 472 472 27,326 (25,263)2,043 Licenses 120 125 9 254 -254 254 Medical Expense 472 124 163 45 803 90 54 82 226 1,255 1,255 Oft,ce Supplies 8 Expense 903 8 312 225 1,449 831 35 55 25 323 1,269 3,988 3,586 Ositside Services ---Parking ---Postage 20,621 2,307 8,011 215 3,890 35,044 4,765 742 1,895 59 1,530 9,292 53,828 53,628 Printing and reproduction 14,078 4,201 7,821 294 4,930 31,324 3,973 706 4,417 30 1,828 10,755 52,533 52,833 Rent-Office 28,466 8,100 8,523 19,538 2,411 67,351 14,244 4,050 4,410 8,475 1,851 33,030 133,418 133,418 Repairs -General 589 101 690 46 34 80 850 960 Sponsorship 2,020 135 2,155 2,500 445 2,945 8,045-(6,045)- Taxes-Other -551 85 25 25 30 716 1,432 1,432 Telsphone 1,805 190 1,994 2,769 379 3,168 8,331 8,331 Travel 8 Entertainment 80 -80 116 116 313 (313)- Travel 8 Entertainment-Meals 801 288 79 82 97 1,121 259 255 96 600 2,328 (2,328)- Utilities 367 ______________________________ 179 546 ____________________________________________ 179 179 904 904 Total General &Adiliinistrative 354,729 73,418 140,824 182,899 38,117 769,987 166.750 39,769 78,996 98,221 28,981 400,717 1,571,420 1,534,035 Total Enpensas 2,210,152 535.493 932,516 659.547 508,124 5,045,862 1,142,836 273.743 499,626 435,432 289,036 2,640,675 10,327,213 10,289,827 Income (Loss)From Operations 25,637 (176,657)(68,735)1259.408)49,734 1429,432.10)4,18597 190,08807)158,42855)1156,247.23)112,565.95)(323,13564)(1,102,513)(1,065,128) GaraventaEnterprises4RateApplicationProjectedStatementofOperationsFortheYearEnded12-31-20103274,16243,8101510,423--4,828,3954,828,3951,151,1255,979,52038,749306,138--806,2381,151,1251,151,125(1,151,125)1,142,81672,172229,544--1,444,5321,444,532662,1372,106,66954,732301,203--306,202662,137662,137(662,137)1,159,099-1,159,0991,159,0991,159,0994.510,458723,3241,739,9671.159,0991,112,4409,245,2899,245,2899,245,289CostofoperationsDirestLaborLabor-Wages539,018165,641Labor-PayrotTaxes45,81714,079Labor-Health&Welfare126,90036,257Labor-WorkersCompensationIns54,59316,138Labor-Pension65,14614.824___________________________________________________________TotalDirectLabor831,473246,940_________________________________________________1,307,238180,880460,38421,8013,8047,790-1,75235,14735.1472,278---1,0743.3523.352____________24,0793,8047.790-2,82638.49938,499____________GeneralandAdministrativeCostsAdministrativesalaries409,75374,462188,871257,24750,926981,25998I259Taxes-Payroll25,6533,48111,3219,6503,03053,13453,134PensionPlanExpense6,8271.1993,5612,36685414,80814,808Accounting33,38030,70326,26010,3506,528107,221107,221Advertising27,8076,8759.1377,2132,16253,19453,194(53,194)Alarm546---29575575Bankcharges7,0051.2393,8358.5391,61022,22822,228CollectionFees-------Contributions-Charitable----346346346(346)Publiceducation-----53194lBMRental,Softwale&Repair2,6709,1541,3411,3411,08815,59415,594Dues&Subscriptions435611--751,1211,121(1,121)Nondeductabledues-------Education/training-------Employeefunctions153515163215902902Fuelandoil-------Insurance48,4055,90424.69727,5219,031115,557115,557Janitorial3.390---5223,9113E11’Laundry&Uniforms---1,064291,0941,094Lease-OutsideEquipment1,197---(44)1.1531,153Legal27,326----27.32627,326(25,283)Licenses124--12910263263MedicalExpense674-1282792171.2981,298OfficeSuppties&Expense2,654El437529014.1264,126OutsideServices-------Parking-------Postage31,2073,92312,2143467,81555,50555,595Printingandreprodsction22,7955,81117,2393678,47254,68354,683Rent-Office58,97016.76718,25737,7656,328138,088138,088Repairs-General705---175880880Sponsorship7,266---1,0618,3278.327(8,327)Taxes-Other1,1411765252631,4631,483Telephone7,641---9828,6220,622Travel&Entertainment83---241324324(324)Travel&Enterlainment-Meala1,15882682642792,4092,409(2,409)Utilities380---555935935____________TotalGeneral&Administrative729,344161,262317,483364977103,300-1,676,3661,676,366____________TotalExpenses4.454,125V1,017,00’1,941.189V”1.765,2tL,1,065,58(10,256,0*.10,301,662.X____________Income(Loss)FromOperations56,334(293,681)(201,221)(609,182)46859(1,010,712)(1,056,373),)___________VRevenuesServices-ResidentialinServices-ResidentialOutServices-CommercralInServices-CommercialOutServices-ResidentialRecyclingSales-PaperStockTotalRevenuesOakleyBreetweedOteseveryBayDellaPtttwborgTotalPromotedMjupfrnnntDisposalDisposalDebrisDisposalServloeAltorforToServtseServiseSarytewBenSeetsetllaypeinllCempaniesAenoalbodAppffeattenApøoallen260,58032,14954,38626,41624,889388,419DumpingCostDepredationandOtherOperatingCostsRepairs-CustomersDepreciation140,075176,7541,282,0681,282.068-1,282,0681190615,024121,iX.j21,796.36.25754,968308767308,757308,76714,29713,741125,185125,185125,18520,12929.187154175154,l75154,175222,664289.674_______(,j,991,991)>‘(99l,991))(538.676287,1622,774,3392,E2O,000j’2,820,000TrackingCostsEquipment,Maintenance,&Ropair1,267,092381,924645,096FranchiseFeesCountyAdminFees(HHWfees)225,43036,90269,4685,29389,51832,500638,964316,7883,249,8643,249,86454.506406,35611,326118,587406,356118,58735,1473,35238,4993,249,864406,300118,587981,25953,13414,808107,22157522,22853,19415,594902115,5573,9111,0941,1532,0432631,2984,12655,50554.683138,0888801,4838,6229351,638.557E3.853).£1,010,565)-: Appendix B Audited Financial Statements Appendix B Audited Financial Statements This appendix includes calendar year ended December 31, 2008, audited financial statements prepared for the following five (5) companies:  Brentwood Disposal Service, Inc.  Delta Debris Box Service, Inc.  Discovery Bay Disposal, Inc.  Oakley Disposal Service, Inc.  Pittsburg Disposal & Debris Box Service, Inc. These financial statements were prepared by Blanding, Boyer, and Rockwell, LLP, a certified public accounting firm located in Walnut Creek, California. NewPoint Group reconciled the calendar year 2008 audit with the 2008 revenues and expenses provided in Garaventa’s 2010 Application. In Table B-1, below, we show the net income/loss (before income taxes), as identified in the audited financial statements of each company serving the County. Table B-1 Net Income Before Taxes For Garaventa Companies Serving Contra Costa County (Calendar Year 2008) Company Revenues Net income/loss (before income taxes) Audit page reference Brentwood Disposal Service, Inc. $719,963 -$176,774 3 Delta Debris Box Service, Inc. 1,721,209 -$190,722 3 Discovery Bay Disposal, Inc. 1,728,750 $230,413 3 Oakley Disposal Service, Inc. 4,164,058 $60,847 3 Pittsburg Disposal & Debris Box Service, Inc. (BayPoint area only) 1,097,954 $221,626 Unaudited1 Total $9,431,934 $145,390 1 See income statement/audit tie-out for the year ended December 31, 2008 (provided as part of the Application in Appnndix A). The Pittsburg Disposal & Debris Box Service portion is shown as a column in this schedule. Audited financial statements for the entire Pittsburg Disposal & Debris Box Service business are provided in this Appendix B. Appendix B. Audited Financial Statements B-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application [This page intentionally left blank.] BRENTWOODDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.TABLEOFCONTENTSIndependentAuditQr’sReportIFinancialStatementsBalancesheet2Statementofoperationsandaccumulateddeficit3Statementofcashflows.4Notestofinancialstatements5 PUDIC___________—L(-IiiCLI’0INDEPENDENTAUDITOR’SREPORTBoardofDirectorsBrentwoodDisposalService,Inc.Concord,CaliforniaWehaveauditedtheaccompanyingbalancesheetofSrentwoodDisposalService,Inc.(aCaliforniaScorporation),asofDecember31,20GB,andtherelatedstatementsofoperationsandaccumulateddeficitandcashflowsfortheyearthenended.ThesefinancialstatementsaretheresponsibilityoftheCompany’smanagement.Curresponsibilityistoexpressanopiniononthesefinancialstatementsbasedonouraudit.WeconductedourauditinaccordancewithauditingstandardsgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmeri:ca.Thosestandardsrequirethatweplanandperformtheaudittoobtainreasonableassuranceaboutwhetherthefinancialstatementsarefreeofmaterialmisstatement.Anauditincludesexamining,onatestbasis,evidencesupportingtheamountsanddisclosuresinthefinancialstatements.Anauditalsoincludesassessingtheaccountingprinciplesusedandsignificantestimatesmadebymanagement,aswellasevaluatingtheoverallfinancialstatementpresentation.Webelievethatourauditprovidesareasonablebasisforouropinion.Inouropinion,thefinancialstatementsreferredtoabovepresentfairly,inallmaterialrespects,thefinancialpositionofBrentwoodDisposalService,Inc.asofDecember31,2008andtheresultsofitsoperationsariditscashflowsfortheyearthenendedinconformitywithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.ESLU’BBRLLPWalnutCreek,CaliforniaAugust24,2009U—1—:‘,t.’—:k:.—rçCaIr-_r-nC—3E•Jt2,D_ri2.Fz.;.;:$SanFrancisco’WalnutCreek BRENTWOODDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.BALANCESHEETDECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestofinancialstatements)ASSETSCURRENTASSETSCashAccountsreceivablePrepaidexpensesTotalcurrentliabilitiesDUEFROMRELATEDPARTYTotalcurrentassetsS131,013744,970900176,9373,512$180,449UADILITIESANDSTOCKHOLDERDEFICITCURRENTLIABILITIESAccountspayableandaccruedliabilitiesDeterredrevenuesTotalcurrentliabilitiesDUETORELATEDPARTYTotalliabBitiesSTOCKHOLDERDEFICITCommonstockAccumulateddeficitTotalstockholderdeficitTotalliabilitiesandstockholderdeficit$90,6702,25892,9281,519,3531,612,2811,000-(l,432,83L(1,431,832180449-2- BRENTWQODDiSPOSALSERVICE,.INC.STATEMENTOFOPERATIONSANDACCUMULATEDDEFICITFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestofinancialstatements)CREVENUESCommercialrefusecollectionservicesResidentialrefusecollectionservicesTotalrevenuesOPERATINGEXPENSESEquipmentrentalLaborandrelatedWastedisposalFranchisefeesRepairsandmaintenanceTotaloperatingexpensesGROSSLOSSGENERALANDADMINISTRATIVEAdministrativesalariesandrelatedOfficeandadministrationProfessionalfeesTotalgeneralandadministrativeLOSSFROMOPERATIONSINTERESTEXPENSELOSSBEFOREINCOMETAXESPROViSIONFORINCOMETAXESNETLOSSACCUMULATEDDEFICITBeginningofyearEndofyear$374J363345,90071.9,963—7339,083207,021193,92034,849513—775,388(55,423)61,09235,17425085121351(175774)(27,480)(204,254)2.400(206,654)(1,225,176)$(1.432,832)C-3- BRENTWOODDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.STATEMENTOFCASHFLOWSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestofinancialstatements)CASHFLOWSFROMOPERATINGACTIVITIESNetlOSSAdjustmentstoreconcilenetlosstonetcashprovidedbyoperatingactivities(Increase)decreaseinAccountsreceivableDuefromrelatedpartyIncrease(decrease)inAccountspayableandaccruedliabilitiesDeferredrevenuesDuetorelatedpartyNetcashprovidedbyoperatingactivities131,951CASHPLOWSFROMFINANCINGACTIvmESBankoverdraft0137)NETCHANGEINCASHCASH1311814BeginningofyearEndofyearSUPPLEMENTARYCASHFLOWINFORMATION-253S131,067Interestpaidincometaxespaid-4-$27,455$1,6001-$(206,654)(1,836)(312)65,320(328)281,761- BRENTWOODDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSSUMMARYOFOPERATIONSBrentwoodDisposalService,Inc.(Company)isprimarilyengagedinthesolidwastecollectionandrecyclingbusines&TheCompanyprovidesservicesunderexclusiveagreementstounincorporatedareasofEasternContraCostaCountyincludingthetownsofByronandKnightsen,alllocatedinCalifornia.SUMMARYOFSIGNIFICANTACCOUNTINGPOLICIESBasisofpresentation—TheaccompanyingfinancialstatementsarepresentedontheaccrualbasisofaccountinginaccordancewithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.Generally,revenuesarerecognizedwhentheybecomebothmeasurableandavailable1andexpensesarerecognizedwhenanobligationisincurred.liceofestimates—Presentationoffinancialstatements,inconformitywithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica,reuiresmanagementtomakeestimatesandassumptionsthataffectthereportedamountsanddisclosuresinthefinancialstatements.Consequently,actualresultscoulddifferfromtheseestimates.Cash—Forthepurposesofthestatementofcashflows,cashincludesamountsonhandCandamountsondepositatfinancialinstitutions,TheCompanyoccasionallywillhaveamountsondepositatfinancialinstitutionsthatexceedfederallyinsuredlimits.TheCompanybelievesthereisnosignificantriskwithrespecttothesedeposits.Accountsreceivable—Accountsreceivablearestatedattheamountmanagementexpectstocollectfromoutstandingbalances.TheCompanycloselymonitorsoutstandingreceivablesandchargesoffanybalancesthataredeterminedtobeuncollectible.TheCompanyconsidersitsaccountsfullycollectibleatDecember31.2008.Revenues—Revenuesconsistprimarilyofbillingsforthecollection,recyclinganddisposalofsolidwastefromadiversifiedbaseofcustomersincludingresidential,commercialandindustrial.Residentialcustomersmakepaymentsinadvanceforcollectionservices.RevenuesfromthosereceiptsaredeferredandrecognizedastheservicesareperformedLAdvertisingandpromotion—Advertisingandpromotioncoatsareexpensedasincurred.INCOME.TAXESTheCompanyhaselectedtobetaxedundertheprovisionsofSubchapterSoftheInternalRevenueCode.Accordingly,thefinancialstatementsdonotincludeaprovisionforfederalincometaxes.Underthiselection,theCompany’staxableincomeorlosswillbereportableonthestockholdertspersonalincometaxreturn.Statefranchisetaxesareassessedatarateof‘1.5%oftaxableincome.Accordingly,aprovisionforstatefranchisetaxesisincludedintheaccompanyingfinancialstatements,-5- BRENTWOODDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.NOTESTOFINANC1ALSTATEMENTSRETIREMENTPLANSTheCompanymakescontributionstoacollectivelybargained,multiemployardefinedbenefitpensionplan.ContributionsaredeterminedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthenegotiatedlaborcontractortermsoftheplanTheplan’sadministratorsrionotprovidesufficientinformationtoenabletheCompanytodetermineitsshare,ifany,ofplanassetsorunfundedvestedbenefits.RetirementplanexpansefortheyearendedDecember31,2008forthedefinedbenefitpensionplanis$13,789TheCompanyalsohasa401(k)profitsharingplanforthebenefitofitseligibleemployees.Nonunionemployeeswhohavereachedagetwentyandone-halfyearsandhavecompletedoneyearofservicemaybeginelectivedeferrals.TheCompany’scontributiontotheplan,asdeterminedbytheBoardofDirectors,isdiscretionarybutcannotexceedcertainmaximumdefinedlimitations,InordertobeeligibletoreceiveanallocationoftheCompany’scontribution,theemployeemusthavecompletedatleast500hoursofserviceduringtheplanyearandbeanemployeeonthelastdayoftheplanyear.RetirementplanexpensefortheyearendedDecemberSI2008is$816.RETIREEHEALTHCAREBENEFITSInadditiontoprovidingpensionbenefits,theCompanyalsoprovidescertainhealthcarebenefitsforretiredemployeescoveredbytheunionagreement.ThecurrentagreementrequirestheCompanytopay$258permonthformedicalinsurancepremiumsfornon-Medicareeligibleretireesandtheirnon-Medicareeligiblespousesand$25permonthforMedicareeligibleretireesandtheirMedicareeligiblespousesforthedurationofthecontract.SubstantiallyalloftheCompany’semployeesmaybecomeeligibleforthosebenefitsiftheyreachnormalretirementagewhileworkingfortheCompany.Thisandsimilarbenefitsareprovidedforactiveemployees.TheCompanyfundsthebenefitcostonapay-as--you-gobasis,accordingly,therearenoplanassets.Theeffectofthehealthcarecosttrendisnotapplicablebecausethebenefitamountisafixedsumindependentofhealthcarecostchanges,TheCompanyrecognizesthecostofprovidingthesebenefitsbyexpensingtheannualinsurancepremiums.For2008,therearenoeligibleretirees;therefore,thecostofprovidingthosebenefitsfortheyearendedDecember31,2008is$0.FRANCHISEAGREEMENTSTheCompanyenteredintoafranchiseagreementwiththeByronSanitaryDistricttoprovidegarbageservicesinthedistrict,Thefranchisefeeisbasedon5%ofgrosscoilectionsforservicesinthedistrict.TheagreementexpiresinAugust2010.TotalfeesfortheyearendedDecember31,2008are$5,730.-6- BRENTWOODDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.flNOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSFRANCHISEAGREEMENTS(‘continued)TheCompanyalsoenteredintoafranchiseagreementWithContraCostaCountyinMay1995toproviderefusecollectionservicestotheunincorporatedareasofContraCostaCountyadjacenttotheByronSanitaryDistrict.Theagreementprovidesforpaymentstothecountyof5%ofgrosscollectionsforservices.TheagreementexpiresinMay2015.TotalfeesfortheyearendedDecember31,2008are$29119,RELATEDPARTYTRANSACTIONSTheCompanyhasengagedrelatedpartiestoprovideequipment,servicesandfacilitiesforitscollectionservices.Additionally,interestisaccruedonbalancesadvancedfromarelatedparty.TherelatedpartyactivftyisasfollowsfortheyearendedDecember31,2008.Equipmentrental$339,083Refusepreparationandtransferservice180,510Interestexpense21,480Facilitiesandofficespacerental15,970Accountingservices13,860Computerrental8,844$565747TheCompanyleasesequipment,computersandofficespacefromrelatedpartiesundervariousoperatingleases.TheleaseagreementsexpireatvariousdatesthroughMarch201‘1andrequiremonthlypaymentsof$23,676.TheamountofexpenserecognizedundertheseleaseagreementsfortheyearendedDecember31,2008is$363,897.MinimumfutureleasepaymentsundertheseleaseagreementsasofDecember31,2008areasfollows.2009$2787142010267,914201164.7671611.396MALLARE1FINANCIALGROUPTheCompanymaintainsadepositoryrelationshipwith.MallardFinancialGroup(Mallard),arelatedentity.TheCompany’sshareholderisthesoleownerofMallardandhaspersonayguaranteedallrelatedpartyassetsandliabilitiesoftheentity.ThebalanceduetoMallard,presentedasduetorelatedparty,asofDecember31,2008is31,519,353.-7- BRENTWOODDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSCOMMITMENTSANDCONTINGENCIESGuarantees—Uneofcredit—TheCompanyguaranteesalineofcreditonbehalfofentitiesrelatedthroughcommonownership.TheCompany’sassetsarecross-collateralizedwiththeassetsoftheserelatedentitiestosecurethebalancesowedtothebank.Thetotalamountoutstandingonthelineofcreditis$5,000,000atDecember31,2008.Lettersofcredit—TheCompany,aswellasrelatedaffiliates,guaranteeslettersofcreditwithBankofAmerica.ThelettersofcreditaresecuredbytheassetsoftheCompany,aswellasrelatedaffiliates,Theamountavailableunderthelettersofcreditis$36,505,283atDecember312008.NoamountshavebeendrawnagainstthelettersofcreditasofDecember31,2008.Contingentliabilities—Intheordinarycourseofconductingitsbusiness,theCompanymaybeinvolvedinlawsuitsandadministrativeproceedings.Someoftheseproceedingsi-nayresultinfines,penaltiesorjudgmentsbeingassessedagainsttheCompanythat,fromtimetotime,mayhaveanimpactonearnings.Itistheopinionofmanagementthattheaforementionedproceedings,individuallyorintheaggregate)willnothaveamateriallyadverseeffectontheCompanflfinancialpositioftCollectivebargainingagreement—AsignificantportionoftheCompany’semployeesaresubjecttoacollectivebargainingagreementwithTeamstersLocal315,whichwillexpireFebruary28,2014.Environmentalrisk—TherefuseandrecyclingindustriesinwhichtheCompanyoperatesaresubjecttoacertainlevelofenvironmentalrisk.SuchenvironmentalliabilitiescouldhaveamaterialeffectonthefinancialpositionoftheCompanyanditsaffiliates.However,itisnotpossibletoreasonablyestimatetheamountofanyobligationforenvironmentalrernediationthatwouldbematerialtotheCompanyanditsaffiliatesatDecember1,200&Accordingly,theCompanyhasnotaccruedanyliabilityforenvironmentalcontingencies.CONCENTRATIONOFRISKTheCompany’srevenuesarederivedprimarilyfromcustomersintheSanFranciscoBayArea.Assuch,theCompany’srevenueandoperationscanbenegativelyimpactedbytheSanFranciscoBayAreaeconomy.-8- CDISCOVERYBAYDISPOSAL,INC.CFINANCIALSTATEMENTSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2008WITHINDEPENDENTAUDITOR’SREPORTC DELTADEBRiSBOXSERVICE,INC.TABLEOFCONTENTSIndependentAuditor’sReport1FinancialStatementsB&ancesheet2Statementofoperationsandretainedearnings3Statementofcashflows4Notestofinanc[atstatements5 ptCe-rEBlad-irtaLIcINDEPENDENTAUDITOR’SREPORTBoardofDirectorsDeltaDebrisBoxService,Inc.Concord,CaliforniaWehaveauditedtheaccompanyingbalancesheetofDeltaDebrisBoxService,Inc.(aCaliforniaScorporation),asofDecember31,2008,andtherelatedstatementsofoperatbrisandretainedearningsandcashflowsfortheyearthenended.ThesefinancialstatementsaretheresponsibilityoftheCompany’smanagement.Ourresponsibilityistoexpressanopiniononthesefinancialstatementsbasedonouraudit.WeconductedourauditinaccordancewithauditingstandardsgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica,Thosestandardsrequirethatweplanandperformtheaudittoobtainreasonableassuranceaboutwhetherthefinancialstatementsarefreeofmaterialmisstatement.An.auditincludesexamining,onatestbasis,evidencesupportingtheamountsanddisclosuresinthefinancialstatements.Anauditalsoincludesassessingtheaccountingprinciplesusedandsignificantestimatesmadebymanagement,aswellasevaluatingtheoverallfinancialstatementpresentation.WebelievethatourauditprovidesareasonablebasisforouropinionInouropinion,thefinancialstatementsreferredtoabovepresentfairly,inallmaterialrespectsthefinancialpositionofDeltaDebrisBoxService,Inc.asofDecember31,2005andtheresultsofitsoperationsanditscashflowsfortheyearthenendedinconformitywithaccountingprinciplesgeneraHyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.EB.LLPBBRLLPWalnutCreek,CaliforniaAugust24,2009lG;GH—.Car.cr;F!r.i:Nay:-.qr-I.’j’-:rCec.O’dbr-Aa4.‘-1’?ThISt‘a,:::,t:cuaCam•SirFnmr,ieenWalnutCreek DELTADEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.BALANCESHEETDECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestofinancialstatements)ASSETSCURRENTASSETSCash$419,983Accounisreceivable159,213Prepaidexpenses17817Totalcurrentassets597,0t3DUEFROMRELATEDPARTY2,703,506Totalassets$3,300,519LIABILITIESANDSTOCKHOLDEREQUITYCURRENTLIABILITIESAccountspayableandaccruedliabilities$S4090DUETORELATEDPARTY46,028Totalliabilities—130,118STOCKHOLDEREQUITYCommonstock1,000Retainedearnings3,169,401Totalstockho’derequity3,170,401Totalliabilitiesandstockho’derequityS3,300,519-2- -3-313,02472,98523,6609)755-419,424(190122)‘54,674(135848)-773(136,621)3306,022fl3,169,401C$1721,209Zr651,597585,802255r1081,492507228,702DELTADEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.STATEMENTOFOPERATIONSANDRETAINEDEARNINGSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2006(Seenotestofinancialstatements)REVENUESRefusecollectionservicesOPERATINGEXPENSESWastedisposalEquipmentrentalLaborandrelatedTotaloperatingexpensesGROSSPROFITGENERALANDADMINISTRATIVEAdministrationsalariesandrelatedOfficeandadministrationAdvertisingandpromotionProfessionalteesTotalgeneralandadministrativeLOSSFROMOPERATIONSOTHERINCOMEInterestincomeLOSSBEFOREINCOMETAXESPROVISIONFORINCOMETAXESNETLOSSRETAINEDEARNINGSBeginningofyearEndofyearCC DELTADEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.STATEMENTOFCASHFLOWSFORTHEYEARENDEODECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestofinancialstatements)CASHFLOWSFROMOPERATINGACTIVITIESNettoss$(136S21)Adjustmentstoreconcilenetlosstonetcashprovidedbyoperatingactivities(tncrease)decreaseinAccountsreceivable(23784)Prepaidexpanses(15,011)Duefromrelatedparty513,766Increase(decrease)inAccountspayableandaccruedliabihties74997Duetorelatedparty6,574NETCHANGE(NGASH419,915CASHBeginningofyear68Endofyear$419983-4- DELTADEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSMARYOFOPERATIONSDeltaDebrisBoxService,Inc.(Company)isprimarilyengagedinthehaulinganddisposalofrefusecollectedindebrisboxesinContra.CostaCounty,California.SUMMARYQFSIGNIFICANTACCOUNTINGPOLICIESBasisofpresentation—TheaccompanyingfinancialstatementsarepresentedontheaccrualbasisofaccountinginaccordancewithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica,Generally,revenuesarerecognizedwhentheybecamebothmeasurableandavailable,andexpensesarerecognizedwhenanobligationisincurred.Useofestimates—Presentationoffinancialstatements,inconformitywithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofArnenca,requiresmanagementtomakeestimatesandassumptionsthataffectthereportedamountsanddisclosuresinthefinancialstatements.Consequently,actualresultscoulddifferfromtheseestimates.Cash—Forthepurposesofthestatementofcashflows,cashincludesamountsanhandandamountsandepositatfinancialinstitutions.TheCompanyusuallywillhaveamountsondepositatfinancialinstitutionsthatexceedfederallyinsuredlimits.TheCompanybelievesthereisnosignificantriskwithrespecttothesedeposits.Accountsreceivable—Accountsreceivablearestatedattheamountmanagementexpectstocollectfromoutstandingbalances.TheCompanycloselymonitorsoutstandingreceivablesandchargesoffanybalancesthataredeterminedtobeuncollectible.TheCompanyconsidersitsaccountsfullycollectibleatDecember31,2008.Revenues—Revenuesconsistprimarilyofbillingsforthehaulinganddisposalofrefusecollectedindebrisboxes.Advertisingandpromotion—Advertisingandpromotioncostsareexpensedasincurred.INCOMETAXESTheCompanyhaselectedtobetaxedundertheprovisionsofSubchapterSoftheInternalRevenueCode.Accordingly,thefinancialstatementsdonotincludeaprovisionforfederalincometaxes.Underthiselection,.theCompany’staxableincomeorlosswillbereportableontheshareholder’spersonalincometaxreturn.Statefranchisetaxesareassessedatarateof1½%oftaxableincome.Accordingly,aprovisionforstatefranchisetaxesisincludedintheaccompanyingfinancialstatements.C.-5 DISCOVERYBAYDISPOSAL,INC.TABLEOFCONTENTSIndependentAuditor’sReport1FinancialStatementsSalancesheet2Statementofoperationsandretainedearnings3Statementofcashflows4Ntotestofinancialstatements5 rCcrtiiicdJii-<._____‘LIIINDEPENDENTAUDITOR’SREPORTBoardofDirectorsDiscoveryBayDisposal,inc.Concord,CaliforniaWehaveaudftedtheaccompanyingbalancesheetofDiscoveryBayDisposal,Inc.(aCaliforniaScorporation),asofDecember31,2008,andtherelatedstatementsofoperationsandretainedearningsandcashflowsforth.eyearthenended,ThesefinancialstatamentsaretheresponsibilityoftheCompany’smanagement.Ourresponsibilityistoexpressanopiniononthesefinancialstatementsbasedonouraudit.WeconductedourauditinaccordancewithauditingstandardsgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.ThosestandardsrequirethatweplanandperformtheaudittoobtainreasonableassuranceaboutwhetherthefinancialstatementsarefreeofmaterialmisstatementAnauditincludesexamining,onatestbasis,evidencesupportingtheamountsanddisclosuresinthefinancialstatements.Anauditalsoincludesassessingtheaccountingprinciplesusedandsignificantestimatesmadebymanagement,aswellasevaluatingtheoverallfinancialstatementpresentation.Webelievethatourauditprovidesareasonabtebasisforouropinion.Inouropinion,thefinancialstatementsreferredtoabovepresentfairly,inallmaterialrespects,thefinancialpositionofDiscoveryBayDisposal,Inc.asofDecember31,2008andtheresultsofitsoperationsanditscashflowsfortheyearthenendedinconformitywithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.ES?.LU’SBRLLPWalnutCreek,CaliforniaAugust24,2009—1l:II.iiThiraFl:’rTtlZ2(•.C2’3Ejt3jC:,rn,ul‘SsaFranciscoWalnutCreek DISCOVERYBAYDISPOSAL,INC.BALANCESHEETDECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestofinancialstatements)ASSETSCURRENTASSETSCashAccountsreceivablePrepaidexpensesTotalcurrentassetsDUEFROMRELATEDPARTYTotalassets$45422760,806567535,6001,130319$1,665,919LIABILITIESANDSTOCKHOLDEREQUITYCURRENTLiABILITIESAccountspayableandaccruedliabilitiesDeterredrevenuesTotalcurrentliabilitiesDUETORELATEDPARTYTotalliabilitiesSTOCKHOLDEREQUITYCommonstockRetainedearningsTotalstockholderequityTota[liabilitiesandstockholderequity-2-4Cfl‘4’HU,J!330,666-207,23921,305225,5441,0001,436,3751437,375$1,665,919 DISCOVERYBAYDISPOSAL,INC.flSTATEMENTOFOPERATIONSANDRETAINEDEARNINGSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestoflnanciatstatements)REVENUESResidentialrefusecollectionservices31,520,920Commercialrefusecollectionservices—207830Totalrevenues1,728,750OPERATINGEXPENSESEquipmentrental507,558Wastedisposal431537Laborandrelated285047Franchisefees88,527Repairsandmaintenance5,505Totaloperatingexpenses—1,316,172GROSSPROFIT412578GENERALANDADMINISTRATIVEAdministrationsalariesandrelated116758Officeandadministration44143•Professionalfees20072Advertisingand:promotion_____________Totalgeneralandadministrative182165INCOMEFROMOPERATIONS230,413OTHERINCOME(EXPENSE)interestincome2125Otherexpense(203)Totalotherincome(expense)21,092INCOMEBEFOREINCOMETAXES251,505PROVISIONFORINCOMETAXES600NETINCOME250,705RETAINEDEARNINGSBeginningofyear1,185,670Endofyear$1,436,375‘2- DtSCOVERYBAYDISPOSAL,INC.STATEMENTOFCASHFLOWSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestofinancialstatements)CASHFLOWSFROMOPERATINGACTIVITIESNetincome$250,705Adjustmentstoreconcilenetincometonetcashprovidedbyoperatingactivities(Increase)decreaseinAccountsreceivable(7,891)Prepaidexpenses(587)Duefromrelatedparty75,898!ncrease(decrease)inBankoverdraft(1,342)Accountspayableandaccruedliabilities129,007Deferredrevenuesi6I260Duetor&atedparty—(7,843kNETCHANGEINCASH454227CASHBeginningofyearEndofyear5464,227SUPPLEMENTARYCASKFLOWINFORMATIONCashpaidforinterest$203Cashpaidforincometaxes$4736-4- DISCOVERYBAYDISPOSAL,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTS$UMMARYOF..QPERATIONSDiscoveryBayDisposal,inc.(Company)isprimarilyengagedinthesolidwastecollectionandrecyclingbusiness.TheCompanyprovidesservicesunderanexclusiveagreementtotheareaofDiscoveryBayinEasternContraCostaCounty,California.SUMMARYOFSGNIFICANTACCOUNTINGPOLICIESBasisofpresentation—TheaccompanyingfinancialstatementsarepresentedontheaccrualbasisofaccountinginaccordancewithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.Generally,revenuesarerecognizedwhentheybecomebothmeasurableandavaHable,andexpensesarerecognizedwhenanobligationisincurred.Useofestimates—Presentationoffinancialstatements,inconformitywithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica,requiresmanagementtomakeestimatesandassumptionsthataffectthereportedamountsanddisclosuresinthefinancialstatements.Consequently,actualresultscoulddifferfromtheseestimates.Cash—Forthepurposesofthestatementofcashflows,cashincludesamountsonhand(andamountsondepositatfinancialinstitutions.TheCompanyusuallywillhaveamountsondepositatfinancialinstitutionsthatexceedfederallyinsuredlimits..TheCompanybelievesthereisnosignificantriskwithrespecttothesedeposits.Accountsreceivable—Accountsreceivablearestatedattheamountmanagementexpectstocollectfromoutstandingbalances.TheCompanycloselymonitorsoutstandingreceivablesandchargesoffanybalancesthatare.determinedtobeuncollectibie.TheCompanyconsidersitsaccountsfullycollectibleatDecember31,2008.Revenues—Revenuesconsistprimarilyofbillingsforthecollection,recyclinganddisposalofsolidwastefromadiversifiedbaseofcustomersincludingresidential,commercialandindustrial.Residentialcustomersmakepaymentsinadvanceforcollectionservices.Revenuesfrom.thosereceiptsaredeferredandrecognizedastheservicesareperformed.Advertisingandpromotion—Advertisingandpromotioncostsareexpensedasincurred.INCOMETAXESTheCompanyhaselectedtobetaxedundertheprovisionsofSubchapterSoftheIntemalRevenueCode.Accordingly,thefinancialstatementsdonotincludeaprovisionforfederalincometaxes.Underthiselection,theCompany’staxableincomeorlosswillbereportableonthestockholderspersonalincometaxreturn.Statefranchisetaxesareassessedatarateofi’,c%oftaxableincome.Accordingly,aprovisionforstatefranchisetaxesisincludedintheaccompanyingfinancialstatements.(-5- DISCOVERYBAYDISPOSAL,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSRETIREMENTPLANSTheCompanymakescontributionstoacollectivelybargained,multiernployerdefinedbenefitpensionplan.Contributionsaredeterminedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthenegotiatedlaborcontractortermsoftheplan.Theplan’sadministratorsdonotprovidesufficientinformationtoenabletheCompanytodetermineusshare,ifany,ofplanassetsorunfundedvestedbenefits.RetirementplanexpensefortheyearendedDecember31,2008forthedefinedbenefitpensionplanis$22,961.TheCompanyalsohasa401(k)profitsharingplanforthebenefitofitseligibleemployees.Non-unionemployeeswhohavereachedagetwentyandone-halfyearsandhavecompletedoneyearofservicemaybeginelectivedeferrals.TheCompany’scontributiontotheplan,asdeterminedbytheBoardofDirectors,isdiscretionarybutcannotexceedcertainmaximumdefinedlimitations.lnordertobeeligibletoreceiveanallocationoftheCompany’scontribution.theemployeemusthavecompletedatleast500hoursofserviceduringtheplanyearandbeanemployeeanthelastdayoftheplanyear.RetirementplanexpensefortheyearendedDecember31,2008is$1,997.RETIREEHEALThCAREBENEFITSInadditiontoprovidingpensionbenefits,theCompanyalsoprovidescertainhealthcarebenefitsforretiredemployeescoveredbytheunionagreement.ThecurrentagreementrequirestheCompanytopay$258permonthformedicalinsurancepremiumsfornon-Medicareeligibleretireesandtheirnon-Medicareeligiblespousesand$26permonthforMedicareeligibleretireesandtheirMedicareeligiblespousesforthedurationofthecontract.SubstantiallyalloftheCompany’semployeesmaybecameeligibleforthosebenefitsiftheyreachnormalretirementagewhileworkingfortheCompany.Thisandsimilarbenefitsareprovidedforactiveemployees.TheCompanyfundsthebenefitcostonapay-as-you-gobasis,accordingly,therearenoplanassets.Theeffectofthehealthcarecosttrendisnotapplicablebecausethebenefitamountisafixedsumindependentofhealthtarecostchanges.TheCompanyrecognizesthecostofprovidingthesebenefitsbyexpensingtheannualinsurancepremiums.Far2008,therearenoeligibleretirees;therefore,thecostofprovidingthosebenefitsfortheyearended:December31,2008is$0.FRANCHISEAGREEMENTSTheCompanyenteredintoafranchiseagreementwithContraCostaCountyinMay1995toproviderefusecollectionservicestotheunincorporatedareasofContraCostaCounty.Theagreementprovidesforpaymentstothecountyof5%ofgrosscollectionsforservices.TheagreemenlexpiresinMay2015.TotalfeesfortheyearendedDecember31,2006are$86,527.-6- DISCOVERYBAYDISPOSAL,INC.CNOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSRELATEDPARTYTRANSACTIONSTheCompanyhasengagedrelatedpartiestoprovideequipment,servicesandfacilitiesforitscollectionservices.Additionally,interestisaccruedonbalancesadvancedtoarelatedparty.TherelatedpartyactivityisasfollowsfortheyearendedDecember31,2008.ExpensesEquipmentrental$507,555Refusepreparationandtransferservice400,704Facilitiesandofficespacerental131434Accountingservices8,652Computerrental1.296$931.642RevenuesInterestincome$21295TheCompanyleasesequipment,computersandofficespacefromrelatedpartiesunderIariousCoperating[eases.TheleaseagreementsexpireatvariousdatesthroughMarch2011andrequiremonthlypaymentsof$33,291TheamountofexpenserecognizedundertheseleaseagreementsfortheyearendedDecember31,200is$522,286.MinimumfutureleasepaymentsundertheseleaseagreementsasofDecember31,2008areasfollows.20095393,6112010381,8512011-95,139$870.601MALLARD...FINANCIALGROUPTheCompanymaintainsadepositoryrelationshipwithMallardFinancialGroup(Mallard).arelatedentity.TheCompany’sshareholderisthesoleownerofMallardandhaspersonallyguaranteedallrelatedpartyassetsandliabilitiesoftheentity.ThebalanceduefromMallard,presentedasduefromrelatedparty,asofDecember31,2008is$1,130,319.(C-7- DISCOVERYBAYDISPOSAL,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSCOMMITMENTSANDCONTINGENCIESGuarantees—Lineofcredit—TheCompanyguaranteesalineofcreditonbehalfofentitiesrelatedthroughcommonownership.TheCompany’sassetsarecrosscolIateralizedwiththeassetsoftheserelatedentitiestosecurethebalancesowedtothebank.Thetotalamountoutstandingonthelineofcreditis$5,000,000atDecember31,2008.Lettersofcredit—TheCompany,aswellasrelatedaffiliates,guaranteeslettersofcreditwithRankofAmerica.ThelettersofcreditaresecuredbytheassetsoftheCornpanyaswellasrelatedaffiliatesTheamountavailableunderthelettersofcreditis$36,505,283atDecember31,2008.NoamountshavebeendrawnagainstthelettersofcreditasofDecember31,2006.Contingentliabilities—Intheordinarycourseofconductingitsbusiness,theCompanymaybeinvolvedinlawsuitsandadministrativeproceedings.Someoftheseproceedingsmayresultinfines,penaltiesorjudgmentsbeingassessedagainsttheCompanythat,fromtimetotime,mayhaveanimpactonearnings.Itistheopinionofmanagementthattheaforementionedproceedings,individuallyorintheaggregate,willnothave,amateriallyadverseeffectontheCompany’sfinancialposition.Gollectivebargainingagreement—AsignificantportionoftheCompany’semployeesaresubjecttoacollectivebargainingagreementwithTeamstersLocal315,whichwillexpireFebruay2B,2014.Environmentalrisk—TherefuseandrecyclingindustriesinwhichtheCompanyoperatesaresubjecttoacertainlevelofenvironmentalrisk.SuchenvironmentalliabilitiescouldhaveamaterialeffectonthefinancialpositionoftheCompanyanditsaffiliates.However,itisnotpossibletoreasonablyestimatetheamountofanyobligationforenvironmentalremediationthatwouldbematerialtotheCompanyanditsaffiliatesatDecember31,2008.Accordingly,theCompanyhasnotaccruedanyliabilityforenvironmentalcontingencies.CONCENTRATIONOFRISKTheCompany’srevenuesarederivedprimarilyfromcustomersintheSanFranciscoSayArea.Assuch,theCompany’srevenueandoperationscanbenegativelyimpactedbytheSanFranciscoBayAreaeconomy.-6- .;(...:c:••::.S....•V.:t:t4W•ct&ttk$4rb$4tttihet4-i£11:*.9\AM(11*DELTADEBRiSBOXSERVICE,INC.izkC)FINANCIALSTATEMENTSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,WOSWiTHINDEPENDENTAUDITOR’SREPORTC*tsYØpV OAKLEYDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.FINANCIALSTATEMENTSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2008WITHINDEPENDENTAUDITOR’SREPORT) OAKLEYDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.TABLEOFCONTENTSIndependentAuditor’sReportIFinancialStatementsBalancesheet2Statementofoperationsandretainedearnings3Statementofcashflows4NotestolinandatstatementsC t4,_______f54fl-FLjJc_______sLU’INDEPENDENTAUDITOR’SREPORTBoardofDirectorsOakleyDisposalService,IncConcord,CaliforniaWehaveauditedtheaccompanyingbalancesheetofOakleyDisposalService,Inc.(aCaliforniaScorporation),asofDecember31,2008,andtherelatedstatementsofoperationsandretainedearningsandcashflowsfortheyearthenended.ThesefinancialstatementsaretheresponsibilityoftheCompany’smanagement.OurresponsibilityistoexpressanopiniononthesefinancialstatementsbasedonouraudiLWeconductedourauditInaccordancewithauditingstandardsgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.ThosestandardsrequirethatweplanandperformtheaudittoobtainreasonableassuranceaboutwhetherthefinancialstatementsarefreeofmaterialmisstatementAnauditincludesexamining,onatestbasis1evidencesupportingtheamountsanddisclosuresinthefinancialstatements.Anauditalsoincludesassessingtheaccountingprinciplesusedandsignificantestimatesmadebymanagement,aswellasevaluatingtheoverallfinancialstatementpresentation.Webelievethatourauditprovidesareasonablebasisforouropinion.inouropinion,thefinancialstatementsreferredtoabovepresentfairly,inallmaterialrespects,thefinancialpositionofOakleyDisposalService,Inc.asofDecember31,2008andtheresultsofitsoperationsanditscashflowsfortheyearthenendedinconformitywithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.E13.LU’BORLLPWalnutCreek,CaliforniaAugust24,2009—I—E7CF:•CiirnLitt::fCI-D.fCcct.Ch.-nu-ii:L’ç’:ry.f2)S25Dtrc.r:ctnCarrn.21-SatFrsncittn-WnInuLOrcek OAKLEYDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.BALANCESHEETDECEMBER31Z008(Seanotestofinancialstatements)ASSETSCURRENTASSETSCash$547,990Accountsreceivable315.102Totalcurrantassets863,092DUEFROMRELATEDPARTY222,366PROPERTYANDEQUIPMENT,net2,301Totalassets$1,067761LIABILITIESANDSTOCKHOLDEREQUITYCURRENTLIABILITIESAccountspayableandaccruedliabilitiesS227,145Deferredrevenues275254Totalcurrentliabilities502,399DUETORELATEDPARTY10,705Totalliabilities513,104STOCKHOLDEREQUITYcommonstock1,000Retainedearnings573,657Totalstockholderequity--4,67Totalliabilitiesandstockholderequity$1,087,761 OAKLEYDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.f-Em.STATEMENTOFOPERATIONSANDRETAINEDEARNINGSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestofinancialstatei-nents)REVENUESResidentialrefusecollectionservices$3,028265Commercialrefusecollectionservices-1,135,793Totalrevenues4164,058OPERATiNGEXPENSESEquipmentrental1,321,076Wastedisposal1,222,987Laborandrelated674,017Franchisefees•2069S0•Repairsandmaintenance4,092Faciflty1,140Depreciation816Fuel200Totaloperatingexpenses3,431,108-rGROSSPROFIT732,950GENERALANDADMINISTRATIVEAdministrationsalariesandrelated346,969Professionalfees178,615Officeandadministration132,056SponsorshipsBr000Advertisingandpromotion4,341Travelandentertainment1,336Insurance786Totalgeneralandadministrative672,103tINCOMEFROMOPERATIONS60,847INTERESTINCOME6,949INCOMEBEFOREINCOMETAXES67,796PROVISIONFORINCOMETAXES800NETINCOME66,996RETAINEDEARNINGSBeginningofyear506,61-Endofyear$573,667-:3- :OAKLEYDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.STATEMENTOFCASHFLOWSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestofinancialstatements)CASHFLOWSFROMOPERATINGACTIVITIESNetincome$66,996AdjustmentstoreconcilenetincometonetcashprovidedbyoperatingactivitiesDepreciation(Increase)decreaseinAccountsreceivable(25320)Duefromrelatedparty454,922Increase(decrease)inAccountspayabreandaccruedliabilities119655Deferredrevenues6020Duetorelatedparty(72I81Netcashprovidedbyoperatingactivities550,194CASHFLOWSFROMFINANCINGACTIViTIESNetdecreaseinbankcashoverdraft(2424)NETCHANGEINCASH547,770CASHBeginningofyear—220Endofyear$z47gOSUPPLEMENTARYCASHFLOWiNFORMATIONCashpaidforincometaxes$800C-4- OAKLEYDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTS$Li.MMARYOFOPERATIONSOakleyDisposalService,Inc.(Company)isprimarilyengagedinthesolidwastecollectionandrecyclingbusiness.TheCompanyprovidesservicesunderexclusiveagreementstotheIronj-9!isesanaary.-DisflctthatincludestheCityofOakleyandcertainareasofContraCostaCounty,alllocatedinCalifornia.$LLMMARYOFSIGNIFICANTACCOUNTINGPOLICIESBasisofpresentation—TheaccompanyingfinancialstatementsarepresentedontheaccrualbasisofaccountinginaccordancewithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.Generally,revenuesarerecognizedwhentheybecomebothmeasurableandavailable,andexpensesarerecognizedwhenanobga1ionisincurred.Useofestimates—Presentationoffinancialstatements,inconformitywithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica,requiresmanagementtomakeestimatesandassumptionsthataffectthereportedamountsanddisclosuresinthefinancialstatements.Consequently,actualresultscoulddifferfromtheseestimates.Cash—Forthepurposesofthestatementofcashflows,cashincludesamountsonhandandamountsondepositatfinancialinstitutions.TheCompanyusuatlywillhaveamountsondepositatfinancialinstitutionsthatexceedfederallyinsuredlimits.TheCompanybelievesthereisnosignificantriskwithrespecttothesedeposits.Accountsreceivable—Accountsreceivablearestatedattheamountmanagementexpectstocollectfromoutstandingbalances.TheCompanycloselymonitorsoutstandingreceivablesandchargesoffanybalancesthataredeterminedtobeuncollectible.TheCompanyconsidersitsaccountsfullycollectibleatDecember31,2008.Propertyandequipment—PropertyandequipmentarecardedatcostDepreciationiscomputedusingthestraight-lineanddecliningbalancemethods,overtheestimatedusefullivesoftheassets(generally3to39years).Revenues—Revenuesconsistprimarilyofbillingsforthecollection,recyclinganddisposalofsolidwastefromadiversifiedbaseofcustomersincludingresidential,commercialandindustrial.Residentialcustomersmakepaymentsinadvanceforcollectionservices.Revenuesfromthosereceiptsaredeferredandrecognizedastheservicesareperformed.AdvertisingandpromotionAdvertisingandpromotioncostsareexpensedasincurred.PROPERTYANDEQUIPMENTPropertyandequipmentconsistofthefollowingatDecember31,2008.Furnitureandfixtures$13,010Accumulateddepreciation.(10709)$2.301- OAKLEYDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSUCOMETAXESTheCompanyhaselectedtobetaxedundertheprovisionsofSubchapterSoftheInternalRevenueCode.Accordingly,thefinancialstatementsdonotincludeaprovisionforfederalincometaxes.Underthiselection,theCompany’staxableincomeorlosswillbereportableonthestockholder’spersonalincometaxreturn.Statefranchisetaxesareassessedatarateof11,4%oftaxableincome.Accordingly,aprovisionforstatefranchisetaxesisincludedintheaccompanyingfinancialstatements.OPRATlNGLEASETheCompanyleasesabuildingunderanoperatingtease.TheleaseagreementrunsthroughSeptember2010andrequiresmonthlypaymentsof$2,883.MinimumfutureleasepaymentsunderthisleaseagreementasofDecember31,2008areasfollows.2009S34,597201025,947CTheamountofexpenserecognizedunderthisleaseagreementfortheyearendedDecember31,2008is$34,035.RETIREMENTPLANSTheCompanymakescontributionstoacollectivelybargained,niultiemployerdefinedbenefitpensionplan.Contributionsaredeterminedinaccordancewiththepro’isionsofthenegotiatedlaborcontractortermsoftheplan.Theplan’sadministratorsdonotprovidesufficientinformationtoenabletheCompanytodetermineitsshare,ifany,ofplanassetsorunfundedvestedbenefits.RetirementplanexpensefortheyearendedDecember31,2008forthedefinedbenefitpensionplanis$51,609.TheCompanyalsohasa401(k)profitsharingplanforthebenefitofitseligibleemployees.Nonunionemployeeswhohavereachedagetwentyandone-halfyearsandhavecompletedoneyearofservicemaybeginelectivedeferrals.TheCompany’scontributiontotheplan,asdeterminedbytheBoardofDirectors,isdiscretionarybutcannotexceedcertainmaximumdefinedlimitations.InordertobeeligibletoreceiveanallocationoftheCompany’scontribution,theemployeemusthavecompletedatleast500hoursofserviceduringtheplanyearandbeanemployeeontheFastdayoftheplanyear.RetirementplanexpensefortheyearendedDecember31,2008isS4,393.-6- OAKLEYDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSRETIREENEALTHCARESENEFITSInadditiontoprovicflngpensionbenefits,theCompanyalsoprovidescertainhealthcarebenefitsforretiredemployeescoveredbytheunionagreement-ThecurrentagreementrequirestheCompanytopay$258permonthformedicalinsurancepremiumsfornon-Medicareeligibleretireesandtheirnon-Medicareeligiblespousesand$25permonthforMedicareeligibleretireesandtheirMedicareeligiblespousesforthedurationofthecontract.SubstantiallyalloftheCompany’semployeesmaybecomeeligibleforthosebenefitsiftheyreachnormalretirementagewhileworkingfortheCompany.Thisandsimilarbenefitsareprovidedforactiveemployees.TheCompanyfundsthebenefitcostonapay-as-you-gobasis,accordingly,therearenoplanassets.Theeffectofthehealthcarecosttrendisnotapplicablebecausethebenefitamountisafixedsumindependentofhealthcarecostchanges.TheCompanyrecognizesthecostofprovidingthesebenefitsbyexpensingtheannualinsurancepremiums.For2008,therearenoeligibleretirees;therefore,thecostofprovidingthosebenefitsfortheyearendedDecember31,2008isSO.FRANCHISEAGREEMENTSTheCompanyenteredintoafranchiseagreementwithIronhouseSanitaryDistrict(District)inJune1993toproviderefusecollectionservicesintheDistrict.TheagreementprovidesforpaymentstotheDistrictof5%ofgrosscollectionsforservices.TheCompany’srighttoexclusivecontractrunsthroughMay2014,TotalfeesfortheyearendedDecember31,2008are$201928.TheCompanyalsoenteredintoafranchiseagreementwithContraCostaCountyinMay1995toproviderefusecollectionservicestoaportionoftheunincorporatedareasofContraCostaCountyadjacenttotheDistrict.Theagreementprovidesforpaymentstothecountyof5%ofgrosscollectionsforservice&TheagreementexpiresinMay2015.TotalfeesfortheyearendedDecember31,2008are$5,052.RELATEDPARTYTRANSACTIONSTheCompanyhasengagedrelatedpartiestoprovideequipment,servicesandfacilitiesforitscollectionservices.Additionally,interestisaccruedonbalancesadvancedtoarelatedparty.TherelatedpartyactivityisasfollowsfortheyearendedDecember31,200&ExpensesEquipmentrental.$1,321,076Refusepreparationandtransferservice1,153,959Accountingservices19,476Facilitiesandofficespacerental1.8,183Computerrental•.2.580*.L2.515.274RevenuesInterestincome.$6949/-—Recyclingrevenues_________C.5-7- OAKLEYDiSPOSALSERVICE,iNC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSRgATEDPARTYTRANSACTIONSconUnued.iTheCompanyleasesequipment,computersandofficespacefromrelatedpartiesundervariousoperatingleases.TheleaseagreementsexpireatvariousdatesthroughMarch2011andrequiremonthlypaymentsof$101,639.TheamountofexpenserecognizedundertheseteaseagreementsfortheyearendedDecember31,2006is$1,341,839.MinimumfutureleasepaymentsundertheseleaseagreementsasofDecember31,2008areasfollows.2009$1,212,20820101,197,2582011298.677$J.705,173MALLARDFINANCIALGROUPTheCompanymaintainsadepositoryrelationshipwithMallardFinancialGroup(Mallard),arelatedentity.theCompany’sshareholderisthesoleownerofMallardandhaspersonallyguaranteedallrelatedpartyassetsandliabilitiesoftheentity.ThebalanceduefromMallard,Cpresentedasduefromrelatedparty,asofDecember31,2008is$222,368.COMMITMENTSANDCONTINGENCIESGuarantees—Lineofcredit—TheCompanyguaranteesalineofcreditonbehalfofentitiesrelatedthroughcommonownership.TheCompany’sassetsarecross-collateralizedwiththeassetsoftheserelatedentitiestosecurethebalancesowedtothebank.Thetotalamountoutstandingonthelineofcreditis55,000,000atDecember31,2008.Lettersofcredit—TheCompany,aswellasrelatedaffiliates,guaranteeslettersofcreditwithBankofAmerica.ThelettersofcreditaresecuredbytheassetsoftheCompany,aswellasrelatedaffiliates.Theamountavailableunderthelettersofcreditis$36,505,283atDecember31,2008.NoamountshavebeendrawnagainstthelettersofcreditasofDecember31.2008.Contingentliabilities—Intheordinarycourseofconductingitsbusiness,theCompanymaybeinvolvedinlawsuitsandadministrativeproceedings.Someoftheseproceedingsmayresultinfines,penaltiesorjudgmentsbeingassessedagainsttheCompanythat,fromtimetotime.mayhaveanimpactonearnings.Itistheopinionofmanagementthattheaforementionedproceedings,individuallyorintheaggregate,willnothaveamateriallyadverseeffectontheCompany’sfinancialposition.C-6- OAKLEYDISPOSALSERVICE,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSCOMMITMENTSANDCONTINGENCIES(continued,)Collectivebargainingagreüment—AsignificantportionoftheCompanflemployeesaresubjecttoacollectivebargainingagreementwithTeamstersLocal315,whichwillexpireFebruary28.2814.Environmentalrisk—TherefuseandrecyclingindustriesinwhichtheCompanyoperatesaresubjecttoacertainlevelofenvironmentalrisk.SuchenvironmentalliabilitiescouldhaveamaterialeffectonthefinancialpositionoftheCompanyanditsaffiliates.However,itisnotpossibletoreasonablyestimatetheamountofanyobligationforenvironmentalremediationthatwouldbematerialtotheCompanyanditsaffillatesatDecember31.2008.Accordingly,theCompanyhasnotaccruedanyliabilityforenvironmentalcontingencies.VNCENTRATIONOFRISKTheCompansrevenuesarederivedprimarilyfromcustomersintheSanFranciscoBayArea,Assuch,theCompany’srevenueandoperationscanbenegativelyimpactedbytheSanFranciscoBayAreaeconomy.-9.,. BRENTWOODDISPOSALSERVICE,INCCFINANCIALSTATEMENTSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2008WITHINDEPENDENTAUDITOR’SREPORT PITTSBURGDISPOSAL&DEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.FINANCIALSTATEMENTSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2008-WITHINDEPENDENTAUDITOR’SREPORT PITTSBURGDISPOSAL&DEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.flTABLEOFCONTENTSIndependentAuditor’sReport1FinancialStatementsBalancesheet2Statementofoperationsandretainedearnings3Statementofcashflows4Notestofinancialstatements5C INDEPENDENTAUDITOR’SREPORTBoardofDirectorsPittsburgDisposal&DebrisBoxService,Inc.Concord,CaliforniaWehaveauditedtheaccompanyingbalancesheetofPittsburgDisposal&DebrisBoxService,Inc.(aCaliforniaScorporation),asofDecember31,2008,andtherelatedstatementsofoperationsandretainedearningsandcashflowsfortheyearthenended.ThesefinancialstatementsaretheresponsibilityoftheCompany’smanagement.Ourresponsibilityistoexpressanopiniononthesefinancialstatementsbasedonouraudit.WeconductedourauditinaccordancewithauditingstandardsgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.Thosestandardsrequirethatweplanandperformtheaudittoobtainreasonableassuranceaboutwhetherthefinancialstatementsarefreeofmaterialmisstatement.Anauditincludesexamining,onatestbasis,evidencesupportingtheamountsanddisclosuresinthefinancialstatements.Anauditalsoincludesassessingtheaccountingprinciplesusedandsignificantestimatesmadebymanagement,aswellasevaluatingtheoverallfinancialstatementpresentation.Webelievethatourauditprovidesareasonablebasisforouropinion.Inouropinion,thefinancialstatementsreferredtoabovepresentfairly,inallmaterialrespects,thefinancialpositionofPittsburgDisposal&DebrisBoxService,Inc.asofDecember312008andtheresultsofitsoperationsanditscashflowsfortheyearthenendedinconformitywithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.LU’BBRLLPWalnutCreek,CaliforniaAugust24,2009—1—1676NorthCaliforniaBoulevard‘ThirdFloor.WalnutCreek,California94596-4137‘Tel925.9540100.Fax925.954.1068‘www.bbrcpa.comCarmel.SanFrancisco•WalnutCreek PITTSBURGDISPOSAL&DEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.BALANCESHEETDECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestofinancialstatements)ASSETSCURRENTASSETSCashAccountsreceivable$1,209,681801,183$7,274,908$733,532239,964973,49610,0006,291,4126,301,412$7,274,9082,010,8645,255,7638,281TotalcurrentassetsDUEFROMRELATEDPARTYPROPERTYANDEQUIPMENT,netTotalassetsLIABILITIESANDSTOCKHOLDEREQUITYCURRENTLIABILITIESAccountspayableandaccruedliabilitiesDeferredrevenuesTotalcurrentliabilitiesSTOCKHOLDEREQUITYCommonstockRetainedearningsTotalstockholderequityTotalliabilitiesandstockholderequity-2- PITTSBURGDISPOSAL&DEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.STATEMENTOFOPERATIONSANDRETAINEDEARNINGSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestofinancialstatements)REVENUESResidentialrefusecollectionservices$4,397,335Commercialrefusecollectionservices5,281,304Totalrevenues9,678,639OPERATINGEXPENSESWastedisposal2,946,984Equipmentrental2,792,292Laborandrelated1,334,342Franchisefees551,164Repairsandmaintenance15,648Facility5,433Depreciation3,163Totaloperatingexpenses7,649,026‘GROSSPROFIT2,029,613GENERALANDADMINISTRATIVEAdministrationsalariesandrelated626,332Officeandadministration216,824Professionalfees56,902Advertisingandpromotion31,799Travelandentertainment4,960Totalgenera!andadministrative936,817INCOMEFROMOPERATIONS1,092,796OTHERINCOME(EXPENSE)Interestincome98,911Contributions(3,410)Totalotherincome(expense)95,501INCOMEBEFOREINCOMETAXES1,188,297PROVISIONFORINCOMETAXES17,866NETINCOME1,170,431RETAINEDEARNINGSBeginningofyear5,620,981Shareholderdistributions(500,000)Endofyear$6,291,412-3- PITTSBURGDISPOSAL&DEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.STATEMENTOFCASHFLOWSFORTHEYEARENDEDDECEMBER31,2008(Seenotestofinancialstatements)CASHFLOWSFROMOPERATINGACTIVITIESNetincome$1,170,431AdjustmentstoreconcilenetincometonetcashprovidedbyoperatingactivitiesDepreciationandamortization3,163(Increase)decreaseinAccountsreceivable(55,064)Duefromrelatedparty312,947Increase(decrease)inAccountspayableandaccruedexpenses524,591Deferredrevenues(16,421)Duetorelatedparty(229,004)Netcashprovidedbyoperatingactivities1,710,643CASHFLOWSFROMINVESTINGACTIVITIESPurchaseofpropertyandequipment(2,489)CASHFLOWSFROMFINANCINGACTIVITIESShareholderdistributions(500,000)NETCHANGEINCASH1,208,154CASHBeginningofyear1,527Endofyear$1,209,681SUPPLEMENTARYCASHFLOWINFORMATIONCashpaidforincometaxes$35,300-4- PITTSBURGDISPOSAL&DEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSSUMMARYOFOPERATIONSPittsburgDisposal&DebrisBoxService,Inc.(Company)isprimarilyengagedinthesolidwastecollectionandrecyclingbusinessinandaroundtheCityofjttsbutgoperatinguieragreementswiththecityoLPittbwgandContracostaCounty,California.SUMMARYOFSIGNIFICANTACCOUNTINGPOLICIESBasisofpresentation—TheaccompanyingfinancialstatementsarepresentedontheaccrualbasisofaccountinginaccordancewithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.Generally,revenuesarerecognizedwhentheybecomebothmeasurableandavailable,andexpensesarerecognizedwhenanobligationisincurred.Useofestimates—Presentationoffinancialstatements,inconformitywithaccountingprinciplesgenerallyacceptedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica,requiresmanagementtomakeestimatesandassumptionsthataffectthereportedamountsanddisclosuresinthefinancialstatements.Consequently,actualresultscoulddifferfromtheseestimates.Cash—Forthepurposesofthestatementofcashflows,cashincludesamountsonhandandamountsondepositatfinancialinstitutions.TheCompanyusuallywillhaveamountsondepositatfinancialinstitutionsthatexceedfederallyinsuredlimits.TheCompanybelievesthereisnosignificantriskwithrespecttothesedeposits.Accountsreceivable—Accountsreceivablearestatedattheamountmanagementexpectstocollectfromoutstandingbalances.TheCompanycloselymonitorsoutstandingreceivablesandchargesoffanybalancesthataredeterminedtobeuncollectible.TheCompanyconsidersitsaccountsfullycollectibleatDecember31,2008.Propertyandequipment—Propertyandequipmentarecarriedatcost.Depreciationiscomputedutilizingthestraightlineanddecliningbalancemethodsovertheestimatedusefullifeoftheassets(generally3to39years).Revenues—Revenuesconsistprimarilyofbillingsforthecollection,recyclinganddisposalofsolidwastefromadiversifiedbaseofcustomersincludingresidential,commercialandindustrial.Residentialcustomersmakepaymentsinadvanceforcollectionservices.Revenuesfromthosereceiptsaredeferredandrecognizedastheservicesareperformed.Advertisingandpromotion—Advertisingandpromotioncostsareexpensedasincurred.PROPERTYANDEQUIPMENTPropertyandequipmentconsistofthefollowingasofDecember31,2008.Furnitureandfixtures$40,977Accumulateddepreciation(32,696)8.281-5- PITTSBURGDISPOSAL&DEBRISBOXSERVICE,INCNOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSINCOMETAXESTheCompanyhaselectedtobetaxedundertheprovisionsofSubchapterSoftheInternalRevenueCode.Accordingly,thefinancialstatementsdonotincludeaprovisionforfederalincometaxes.Underthiselection,theCompany’staxableincomeorlosswillbereportableonthestockholder’spersonalincometaxreturn.Statefranchisetaxesareassessedatarateof1%%oftaxableincome.Accordingly,aprovisionforstatefranchisetaxesisincludedintheaccompanyingfinancialstatements.OPERATINGLEASETheCompanyleasesabuildingunderanoperatinglease.TheleaseagreementrunsthroughJanuary2012andrequiresmonthlypaymentsof$2,999increasing3.5%annuallyeffectiveFebruary1ofeachyear.MinimumfutureleasepaymentsunderthisleaseagreementasofDecember31,2008areasfollows.2009$37,143201038,447201139,78820123,325$118.703TheamountofexpenserecognizedunderthisleaseagreementfortheyearendedDecember31,2008is$36,965.RETIREMENTPLANSTheCompanymakescontributionstoacollectivelybargained,multiemployerdefinedbenefitpensionplan.Contributionsaredeterminedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthenegotiatedlaborcontractortermsoftheplan.Theplan’sadministratorsdonotprovidesufficientinformationtoenabletheCompanytodetermineitsshare,ifany,ofplanassetsorunfundedvestedbenefits.RetirementplanexpensefortheyearendedDecember31,2008forthedefinedbenefitpensionplanis$102,612.TheCompanyalsohasa401(k)profitsharingplanforthebenefitofitseligibleemployees.Non-unionemployeeswhohavereachedagetwentyandone-halfyearsandhavecompletedoneyearofservicemaybeginelectivedeferrals.TheCompany’scontributiontotheplan,asdeterminedbytheBoardofDirectors,isdiscretionarybutcannotexceedcertainmaximumdefinedlimitations.InordertobeeligibletoreceiveanallocationoftheCompany’scontribution,theemployeemusthavecompletedatleast500hoursofserviceduringtheplanyearandbeanemployeeonthelastdayoftheplanyear.RetirementplanexpensefortheyearendedDecember31,2008is$9,813.-6- PITTSBURGDISPOSAL&DEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSRETIREEHEALTHCAREBENEFITSInadditiontoprovidingpensionbenefits,theCompanyalsoprovidescertainhealthcarebenefitsforretiredemployeescoveredbytheunionagreement.ThecurrentagreementrequirestheCompanytopay$258permonthformedicalinsurancepremiumsfornon-Medicareeligibleretireesandtheirnon-Medicareeligiblespousesand$25permonthforMedicareeligibleretireesandtheirMedicareeligiblespousesforthedurationofthecontract.SubstantiallyalloftheCompany’semployeesmaybecomeeligibleforthosebenefitsiftheyreachnormalretirementagewhileworkingfortheCompany.Thisandsimilarbenefitsareprovidedforactiveemployees.TheCompanyfundsthebenefitcostonapay-as-you-gobasis,accordingly,therearenoplanassets.Theeffectofthehealthcarecosttrendisnotapplicablebecausethebenefitamountisafixedsumindependentofhealthcarecostchanges.TheCompanyrecognizesthecostofprovidingthesebenefitsbyexpensingtheannualinsurancepremiums.For2008,therearenoeligibleretirees;therefore,thecostofprovidingthosebenefitsfortheyearendedDecember31,2008is$0.FRANCHISEAGREEMENTSTheCompanyhasenteredintoafranchiseagreementwiththeCityofPittsburgforthecollectionofrefusewithinthecitylimitswhichexpiresJune30,2017withanoptiontoextendforsevenadditionalyears.TheagreementrequirestheCompanytopaytheCityofPittsburg7%ofgrossresidentialcollectionsand5%ofgrosscommercialcollectionsforserviceswithinthecitylimits.TotalfeesfortheyearendedDecember31,2008are$495,258.TheCompanyalsoenteredintoafranchiseagreementwithContraCostaCountyinMay1995toproviderefusecollectionservicestotheunincorporatedareasofContraCostaCounty.Theagreementprovidesforpaymentstothecountyof5%ofgrosscollectionsforservices.TheagreementexpiresinMay2015.TotalfeesfortheyearendedDecember31,2008are$55,906.RELATEDPARTYTRANSACTIONSTheCompanyhasengagedrelatedpartiestoprovideequipment,servicesandfacilitiesforitscollectionservices.Additionally,interestisaccruedonbalancesadvancedtoarelatedparty.TherelatedpartyactivityisasfollowsfortheyearendedDecember31,2008.ExpensesRefusepreparationandtransferservice$2,943,197Equipmentrental2,792,292Accountingservices34,800Facilitiesandofficespacerental26,675Computerrental11,424$5,808.388RevenuesInterestincome$98,911Recyclingrevenues13,138$112.049-7- PITTSBURGDISPOSAL&DEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSRELATEDPARTYTRANSACTIONS(continued)TheCompanyleasesequipment,computersandofficespacefromrelatedpartiesundervariousoperatingleases.TheleaseagreementsexpireatvariousdatesthroughMarch2011andrequiremonthlypaymentsof$196,479.TheamountofexpenserecognizedundertheseleaseagreementsfortheyearendedDecember31,2008is$2,830,391.MinimumfutureleasepaymentsundertheseleaseagreementsasofDecember31,2008areasfollows.2009$2,347,99320102,328,4732011579,262$5,255,728MALLARDFINANCIALGROUPTheCompanymaintainsadepositoryrelationshipwithMallardFinancialGroup(Mallard),arelatedentity.TheCompany’sshareholderisthesoleownerofMallardandhaspersonallyguaranteedallrelatedpartyassetsandliabilitiesoftheentity.ThebalanceduefromMallard,includedinduefromrelatedparty,asofDecember31,2008is$5,251607.COMMITMENTSANDCONTINGENCIESGuarantees—Lineofcredit—TheCompanyguaranteesalineofcreditonbehalfofentitiesrelatedthroughcommonownership.TheCompany’sassetsarecross-collateralizedwiththeassetsoftheserelatedentitiestosecurethebalancesowedtothebank.Thetotalamountoutstandingonthelineofcreditis$5,000,000atDecember31,2008.Lettersofcredit—TheCompany,aswellasrelatedaffiliates,guaranteeslettersofcreditwithBankofAmerica.ThelettersofcreditaresecuredbytheassetsoftheCompany,aswellasrelatedaffiliates.Theamountavailableunderthelettersofcreditis$36,505,283atDecember31,2008.NoamountshavebeendrawnagainstthelettersofcreditasofDecember31,2008.Contingentliabilities—Intheordinarycourseofconductingitsbusiness,theCompanymaybeinvolvedinlawsuitsandadministrativeproceedings.Someoftheseproceedingsmayresultinfines,penaltiesorjudgmentsbeingassessedagainsttheCompanythat,fromtimetotime,mayhaveanimpactonearnings.Itistheopinionofmanagementthattheaforementionedproceedings,individuallyorintheaggregate,willnothaveamateriallyadverseeffectontheCompany’sfinancialposition.-8- PITTSBURGDISPOSAL&DEBRISBOXSERVICE,INC.NOTESTOFINANCIALSTATEMENTSCOMMITMENTSANDCONTINGENCIES(continued)Collectivebargainingagreement—AsignificantportionoftheCompany’semployeesaresubjecttoacollectivebargainingagreementwithTeamstersLocal315,whichwillexpireFebruary28,2014.EnvironmentalriskTherefuseandrecyclingindustriesinwhichtheCompanyoperatesaresubjecttoacertainlevelofenvironmentalrisk.SuchenvironmentalliabilitiescouldhaveamaterialeffectonthefinancialpositionoftheCompanyanditsaffiliates.However,itisnotpossibletoreasonablyestimatetheamountofanyobligationforenvironmentalremediationthatwouldbematerialtotheCompanyanditsaffiliatesatDecember31,2008.Accordingly,theCompanyhasnotaccruedanyliabilityforenvironmentalcontingencies.CONCENTRATIONOFRISKTheCompany’srevenuesarederivedprimarilyfromcustomersintheSanFranciscoBayArea.Assuch,theCompany’srevenueandoperationscanbenegativelyimpactedbytheSanFranciscoBayAreaeconomy.-9- Appendix C Customer Satisfaction Survey Results Appendix C Customer Satisfaction Survey Results Garaventa Enterprises (Garaventa) conducted a 2009 County customer satisfaction survey of its residential customers. Contra Costa County approved the survey questions. Garaventa mailed the survey on February 6, 2009. The survey covered the following areas:  Garbage service  Customer service  Recycling service  Billing procedures  Yard waste service  New services  Service options  Communications. As shown in Table C-1, on the next page, the survey covered the following four (4) unincorporated County service areas: Unincorporated Area Company 1. Brentwood, Byron, and Knightsen Brentwood Disposal Services 2. Discovery Bay Discovery Bay Disposal 3. Pittsburg and Bay Point Pittsburg Disposal and Debris Box 4. Unincorporated Oakley Oakley Disposal Service. Garaventa sent the survey to 2,531 residential customers, representing 33 percent of County residential customers. Garaventa received 284 responses. The survey had an overall response rate of 11.22 percent. Exhibit C-1, beginning on page C-3, summarizes the survey results by questionnaire area, by rating, and by company. Responses did not vary that much by company. Based on the survey results, Garaventa’s overall customer satisfaction rating was 89.95 percent for all surveyed service areas, including garbage service, recycling service, yard waste service, and other areas (see Exhibit C-1, page C-5).1 Customer satisfaction was highest for garbage collection service and lowest for yardwaste collection service. Customers expressed high satisfaction with both Garaventa customer service, and billing procedures (each above 91 percent). Residential customers were generally informed about services and options (75.81 percent). A little more than half of the residential customers surveyed expressed a desire for new services. These new services generally included battery collection, used oil collection, e-waste collection, and household hazardous waste collection. 1 Customer satisfaction was defined as a rating of excellent, good, or average divided by the total number of ratings. We did not count respondents who had no opinion or those who did not answer the question. Appendix C. Customer Satisfaction Survey Results C-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Table C-1 Garaventa Enterprises 2009 Contra Costa County Customer Satisfaction Survey Response Rate No. Service Area Residential Customers Total Sent to Survey Rate Received Response Rate 1 Brentwood, Byron, and Knightsen 846 280 33% 34 12.14% 2 Discovery Bay 4,441 1,465 33% 183 12.49% 3 Pittsburg and Bay Point 2,317 746 32% 61 8.18% 4 Oakley 103 40 39% 6 15.00% Total 7,707 2,531 33% 284 11.22% C-3 Exhibit C-1 Garaventa 2009 County Customer Satisfaction Survey Results Residential Services Page 1 of 3 Brentwood Disposal Services Basic Services Rating Satisfactory, or Better Poor, or No Answer Total Satisfaction Rate Excellent Good Average Poor No Opinion No Answer Garbage Service 21 11 1 – – 1 34 100.00% Recycling Service 6 11 4 6 3 4 34 77.78% Yard Waste Service 4 7 5 1 14 3 34 94.12% Subtotal 31 29 10 7 17 8 102 90.91% Other Areas2 Rating Yes No No Answer/ No Opinion Total Satisfaction Rate Service Options 24 7 4 34 78.86% Customer Service 17 1 1 19 94.44% Billing Procedures 33 1 – 34 97.06% New Services 16 8 10 34 66.67% Subtotal 90 17 15 121 84.54% Total 160 24 40 223 87.21% Discovery Bay Disposal Basic Services Rating Satisfactory, or Better Poor, or No Answer Total Satisfaction Rate Excellent Good Average Poor No Opinion No Answer Garbage Service 89 70 17 1 1 5 183 99.44% Recycling Service 39 76 29 25 7 7 183 85.21% Yard Waste Service 29 51 23 25 41 14 183 80.47% Subtotal 157 197 69 51 49 26 549 89.24% Other Areas Rating Yes No No Answer/ No Opinion Total Satisfaction Rate Service Options 128 43 12 183 74.85% Customer Service 80 5 – 85 94.12% Billing Procedures 165 6 12 183 96.49% New Services 76 71 36 183 51.70% Subtotal 449 125 60 634 78.22% Total 872 176 135 1,183 83.21% 2 Based on the following general questions: • Service options – Do you fee adequately informed about services and options available to you? • Customer service – If you have tried customer service, were you satisfied with your ability to reach us with a question or problem? • Billing services – Are you satisfied with the accuracy/clarity/convenience of your bill? • New services – Are there new waste and recycling collection services you would like to have made available? Appendix C. Customer Satisfaction Survey Results C-4 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Exhibit C-1 Garaventa 2009 County Customer Satisfaction Survey Results Residential Services (continued) Page 2 of 3 Pittsburg Disposal and Debris Box Basic Services Rating Satisfactory, or Better Poor, or No Answer Total Satisfaction Rate Excellent Good Average Poor No Opinion No Answer Garbage Service 24 27 8 1 1 – 61 98.33% Recycling Service 14 23 12 6 3 3 61 89.09% Yard Waste Service 13 22 10 9 5 2 61 83.33% Subtotal 51 72 30 16 9 5 183 90.53% Other Areas Rating Yes No No Answer/ No Opinion Total Satisfaction Rate Service Options 42 13 6 61 76.47% Customer Service 24 6 – 30 80.00% Billing Procedures 57 4 – 61 93.44% New Services 27 24 10 61 52.94% Subtotal 150 47 16 213 76.17% Total 303 63 30 396 82.80% Oakley Disposal Services Basic Services Rating Satisfactory, or Better Poor, or No Answer Total Satisfaction Rate Excellent Good Average Poor No Opinion No Answer Garbage Service 4 2 – – – – 6 100.00% Recycling Service 3 1 1 – 1 – 6 100.00% Yard Waste Service 2 3 – – – 1 6 100.00% Subtotal 9 6 1 – 1 1 18 100.00% Other Areas Rating Yes No No Answer/ No Opinion Total Satisfaction Rate Service Options 5 1 1 6 81.82% Customer Service 5 – 1 6 100.00% Billing Procedures 6 – – 6 100.00% New Services 1 3 2 6 25.00% Subtotal 17 4 4 24 80.49% Total 33 4 6 42 89.04% C-5 Exhibit C-1 Garaventa 2009 County Customer Satisfaction Survey Results Residential Services (continued) Page 3 of 3 All 4 Companies Basic Services Rating Satisfactory, or Better Poor, or No Answer Total Satisfaction Rate Excellent Good Average Poor No Opinion No Answer Garbage Service 138 110 26 2 2 6 284 99.28% Recycling Service 62 111 46 37 14 14 284 85.55% Yard Waste Service 48 83 38 35 60 20 284 82.84% Total 248 304 110 74 76 40 852 89.95% Other Areas Rating Yes No No Answer/ No Opinion Total Satisfaction Rate Service Options 199 64 22 284 75.81% Customer Service 126 12 2 140 91.30% Billing Procedures 261 11 12 284 95.96% New Services 120 106 58 284 53.10% Total 706 193 94 992 78.58% Overall 1,368 267 210 1,844 83.70% Appendix C. Customer Satisfaction Survey Results C-6 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application [This page intentionally left blank.] Appendix D Adjusted Base Year Model Appendix D Adjusted Base Year Rate Model Exhibit D-1 of this appendix provides the adjusted base year rate model based on NewPoint Group adjustments discussed in Section 4. The model reflected the following general adjustments:1 Revenues  Minor residential revenue increase  Minor recycled material sales revenue increase Allowable Costs/Profits  Minor increase to direct labor  Moderate net decrease to tipping fees (profit allowed and pass through)  Moderate decrease to corporate and local general and administrative costs  Minor decrease to depreciation and other operating costs  Minor decrease to trucking and equipment costs  Minor decrease to allowable operating profit to set operating ratio to 90 percent Pass Through Costs  Minor decrease in franchise fees. We developed a comprehensive Microsoft Excel spreadsheet model which we have in our workpapers, for this rate review, documenting the details for each of these adjustments. 1 Where a minor adjustment is less than or equal to $30,000; a moderate adjustment is above $30,000 and less and or equal to $100,000; and a major adjusmtent is greater than $100,000. Appendix D. Adjusted Base Year Rate Model D-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Exhibit D-1 Base Year 2008 Rate Model With NewPoint Group Adjustments Application Corrected Application NPG Adjustments NPG Adjusted 2010 Section I – Allowable Costs 1. Direct Labor $1,991,991 $1,979,171 $67,729 $2,046,900 2. Tipping Fees (Profit Allowed) 1,880,000 1,880,000 (188,000) 1,692,000 3. Corporate and Local General and Administrative Costs 1,638,557 1,638,558 (374,300) 1,264,258 4. Depreciation and Other Operating Costs 38,499 38,499 (15,766) 22,733 5. Services Provided to County 0 0 0 0 6. Total Allowable Costs (Lines 1+2+3+4+5) $5,549,047 $5,536,228 ($510,337) $5,025,891 Section II – Allowable Operating Profit 7. Operating Ratio 90.0% 90.0% 90.0% 8. Allowable Operating Profit [(Line 6 / 0.90) - Line 6] $616,561 $615,136 ($56,704) $558,432 Section III – Pass Through Costs without Franchise Fees 9. County Administrative Fee $118,587 $118,587 ($3,361) $115,226 10. Trucking and Equipment 3,249,864 3,249,864 (60,561) 3,189,303 11. Tipping Fees (Pass Through) 940,000 940,000 84,600 1,024,600 12. Total Pass Through Costs (without Franchise Fees) (Lines 9+10+11) $4,308,451 $4,308,451 $20,678 $4,329,129 Section IV – Revenue Requirement without Franchise Fee 13. Total Allowable Costs (Line 6) plus Allowable Operating Profits (Line 8) plus Total Pass Through Costs (without Franchise Fees) (Line 12) $10,474,059 $10,459,815 ($546,363) $9,913,453 Section V – Revenue without Rate Change in Base Year 14. Residential Revenues $5,932,680 $5,932,680 $46,840 $5,979,520 15. Less Allowance for uncollectible Residential Accounts (59,327) (59,327) (468) (59,795) Plus Toter Rental 0 0 0 0 16. Total Residential Revenues (without Rate Change in Base Year) $5,873,353 $5,873,353 $46,372 $5,919,725 17. Commercial Revenues $3,231,036 $3,231,035 $0 $3,231,035 18. Less Allowance for uncollectable Commercial Accounts 0 0 0 0 19. Total Commercial Revenues (without rate change in Base Year) $3,231,036 $3,231,035 $0 $3,231,035 20. Recycled Materials Sales $0 $0 $14,200 $14,200 21. Total Revenues (Lines 16+19+20) $9,104,389 $9,104,388 ($468) $9,164,960 Section VI – Net Shortfall (Surplus) 22. Net Shortfall (Surplus) without Franchise Fees (Lines 13-Line 21) $1,369,670 $1,355,427 ($606,934) $748,493 23. Residential and Commercial Franchise Fees (see calc below) $551,266 $550,517 ($28,763) $521,754 24. Net Shortfall (Surplus) with Franchise Fees (Lines 22 + 23) $1,920,936 $1,905,944 ($635,697) $1,270,247 Section VI -- Percent Change in Rates 25. Total Residential and Commercial Revenue Prior to Rate Change (Lines 16+19) $9,104,389 $9,104,388 $46,372 $9,150,760 26. Percent Change in Existing Residential and Commercial Rates (Line 24 / Line 25) 21.10% 20.93% 13.88% Appendix E Comparative Refuse Collection Rates Appendix E Comparative Refuse Collection Rates We compared Garaventa County area refuse collection rates to those of the following eleven (11) jurisdictions: 1. City of Antioch 2. City of Clayton 3. City of Concord 4. City of Lafayette 5. City of Martinez 6. City of Moraga 7. City of Orinda 8. City of Pleasant Hill 9. City of Walnut Creek 10. Contra Costa County (Central Contra Costa Waste Authority (CCCWA) areas) 11. Town of Danville. In Exhibit E-1, on the next page, we compare current Garaventa County area residential rates with the eleven (11) jurisdictions. Garaventa County area residential rates are well above average for the smaller can sizes at twenty-one (21) percent above the 20 gallon comparative rate and twenty-nine (29) percent above the 32-gallon comparative rate. The 96 gallon residential rate is 42 percent below the comparative average. In Exhibit E-2, following Exhibit E-1, we compare current Garaventa County area commercial bin rates with the eleven (11) comparative jurisdictions. For all bin sizes shown, Garaventa County area commercial rates are below the comparative average, ranging from one (1) to seven (7) percent below the average. In Exhibit E-3, following Exhibit E-2, we compare current Garaventa County area 20-yard drop box rates with the eleven (11) comparative jurisdictions. Current Garaventa County area drop box rates are 15 percent below the comparative average. In Exhibit E-4, following Exhibit E-3, we compare current Garaventa County area residential rates with those of other Contra Costa County service providers. For the smaller-sized container service, Garaventa County area rates are well above the average of these other County service providers (19 to 21 percent). For the larger-sized 96- gallon container service, Garaventa County area rates are well below the average of these other County service providers (39 percent). Appendix E. Comparative Refuse Collection Rates E-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application In general, we caution the County’s use of comparative rates as a basis for setting rates. This is because it is difficult to make “apples to apples” comparisons with other jurisdictions. Other jurisdictions may have unique:  Cross-subsidies between sectors  Franchise fees and other services (contained within the rate)  Legacy rate setting practices  Levels of residential, commercial, and industrial business  Profitability levels and targets  Rate structure objectives (e.g., that penalize larger waste generators)  Rate setting processes  Service levels (e.g., bi-weekly versus weekly yardwaste or recycling collection)  Transfer station and landfill tipping fees (based on the proximity to these facilities). E-3 Exhibit E-1 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Comparative Residential Rate Survey (As of May 2010) No. Jurisdiction 20 gallon 32 gallon 64 gallon 96 gallon 1 Antioch1 $23.99 $25.11 $31.49 $36.75 2 Clayton 20.36 21.58 31.64 34.54 3 Concord – 23.00 31.00 38.00 4 Danville 15.48 17.85 35.71 53.56 5 Lafayette 20.44 23.57 47.12 70.69 6 Martinez 19.15 27.45 30.60 64.30 7 Moraga 18.75 21.65 43.30 64.95 8 Orinda 24.28 28.01 56.02 84.03 9 Pleasant Hill 19.58 22.66 30.91 46.36 10 Unincorporated County (CCCSWA) 16.35 18.87 37.73 56.60 11 Walnut Creek 14.19 17.00 33.99 50.99 Average $19.26 $22.43 $37.23 $54.62 Contra Costa County – Garaventa $23.34 $28.85 N/A $31.85 Percent Difference 21% 29% N/A -42% 1 Effective July 1, 2010, the rates will be $20.99, $24.65, $39.80 and $46.75, respectively, for 20-, 32-, 64-, and 96-gallon service. Exhibit E-2 Contra Costa County Garaventa-Served Areas Comparative Bin Service Rate Survey (As of May 2010) No. Jurisdiction 2-yd/1 pickup per week 3-yd/1 pickup per week 1 Antioch $219.57 $330.36 2 Clayton 196.16 264.91 3 Concord 269.00 364.00 4 Danville 246.18 369.27 5 Lafayette 301.90 452.84 6 Martinez 222.11 380.97 7 Moraga 269.35 404.03 8 Orinda 333.16 499.74 9 Pleasant Hill 189.84 284.40 10 Unincorporated County (CCCSWA) 240.59 360.88 11 Walnut Creek 173.17 259.75 Average $ 241.91 $361.01 Contra Costa County – Garaventa $ 239.00 $334.00 Percent Difference -1% -7% Appendix E. Comparative Refuse Collection Rates E-4 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Exhibit E-3 Contra Costa Country Garaventa-Served Areas Comparative Debris Box Rate Survey (As of May 2010) No. Jurisdiction 20 cu. yd. 1 Antioch2 $479.67 2 Clayton 393.98 3 Concord 420.00 4 Danville 582.83 5 Lafayette 609.74 6 Martinez 407.00 7 Moraga 582.84 8 Orinda 645.34 9 Pleasant Hill3 349.83 10 Unincorporated County (CCCSWA) 575.57 11 Walnut Creek 644.43 Average $517.38 Contra Costa County – Garaventa $440.00 Percent Difference -15% 2 Recycling services are mandated with the industrial services. 3 Recycling services are mandated with the industrial services. Exhibit E-4 Comparison of Garaventa County Area Residential Rates With Other County Service Providers (As of July 2010) Service Provider 20 gallon 32 gallon 64 gallon 96 gallon Allied Waste Services – East/Central County $12.15 $15.90 $23.70 $30.75 Richmond Sanitary Service – West County Areas 24.41 29.36 56.31 83.85 Richmond Sanitary Service – Crockett Area 22.44 26.61 46.66 56.69 CCSWA – County 16.35 18.87 37.73 56.60 Garaventa – Ironhouse Sanitary District 23.11 28.11 N/A 31.11 Average $19.69 $23.77 $41.10 $51.80 Garaventa County Areas (Non Ironhouse Sanitary District Areas) $23.34 $28.85 N/A $31.85 Percent Difference 19% 21% -39% Appendix F Comparative Jurisdiction Franchise Extension Terms and Conditions Appendix F Comparative Jurisdiction Franchise Extension Terms and Conditions This appendix provides franchise agreement terms and conditions agreed to as part of franchise agreement extensions for comparative cities and counties in California. In Exhibit F-1, we provide summaries of 31 city and county jurisdiction franchise extensions occurring between 1991 and 2010. For each city or county, we identify the year of the extension, the length of extension, and the general terms and conditions agreed to as part of the extension. Below we summarize the types of franchise extension conditions used by other jurisdictions: Jurisdictional benefit – At ratepayer expense 1. Increase franchise fees 2. Add new programs to increase diversion (so that 50 percent AB 939 goal is met and sustained, e.g., convert more apartments to recycling, single stream recycling, more commercial recycling, food waste recycling) 3. Increase free services to the jurisdiction (e.g., number of drop boxes collected for neighborhood collection program) 4. Provide local litter control 5. Develop recyclable materials transfer facility 6. Provide free disposal at transfer station for city/county vehicles Jurisdictional benefit – At hauler expense 7. Require franchise extension payments 8. Establish diversion penalty payments 9. Provide performance penalties 10. Add franchise re-assignment fees 11. Consolidate existing franchise agreements (and or amendments) into a single, unified franchise agreement Appendix F. Comparative Jurisdiction Franchise Extension Terms and Conditions F-2 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Ratepayer benefit – At hauler expense Rates Stability and Relief 12. Provide rate freezes over specific intervals 13. Provide rate reductions 14. Reduce the current profitability level 15. Provide caps on interim year rate changes (a discounted percent of CPI and an overall CPI cap) 16. Provide long-term caps on tipping fees 17. Conduct rate reviews at the extension point, where if rates not “at market” then deny extension Ratepayer benefit – At hauler expense, if not rate reimbursed Service Changes 18. Increase on-call clean ups (customer identified) 19. Provide new commercial recycling services 20. Shift to weekly yard waste collection (from bi-weekly) 21. Expand single stream-additional material types 22. Use alternative fuel vehicles, and compressed natural gas vehicles Other Changes 23. Develop website or enhance content 24. Develop newsletter 25. Provide credit card and bank bill pay We describe general franchise extension pros and cons for the County in Exhibit F-2, on page F-7. F-3 Exhibit F-1 Other Jurisdiction Franchise Extension Provisions As of July 2010 Page 1 of 4 No. Jurisdiction Year Extension Granted Year Originally Franchise Ended Term of Extension (Years) Year Now Franchise Ends (Ended) Terms of Extension/ New Award Hauler 1 City of Albany 2003 2004 10 2014 Provided free collection from city parks ($36,000/year), and contractor provided green waste bins, and increased franchise fees. Waste Management of Alameda County 2 City of Antioch# 2010 2015 10 2025 Provided community impact payment of $1 million in exchange for the extension; expanded existing services; and increase the on-call pick-up for bulky items from one to two times per calendar year. Allied Waste Services 3 City of Barstow 1996 2007 5 2012 Waived a $2.51 rate increase that was necessary to fund recycling, and froze rates for two years. Desert Disposal Service 4 City of Belmont 2005 2006 4 2010 Entered a 15-year agreement with the South Bayside Waste Management Authority (SBWMA) for disposal at Ox Mountain landfill at "most favored client" rates, which would reduce Belmont's total costs about 7 percent. Made $11.6 million cash payments to SBWMA over a period of three years beginning January 1, 2005. BFI Waste Systems of North America, Inc. 5 City of Concord 2006 2011 (with five year option to 2016) 10 2021 (with five year option to 2026) Required relocation of maintenance facility. Established fixed city franchise fees through 2020. Established free City parks disposal and increased neighborhood cleanup debris boxes. Provided 70 percent of the CPI for interim year adjustments. Established a five (5) percent interim year rate cap. Concord Disposal Service 6 City of El Cerrito 2009 2009 8 2017 No specific new provisions. East Bay Sanitary Company 7 City of Hayward 2006 2007 7 2014 Provided service enhancements including: co-mingled recyclables collection; annual residential clean-up service; free disposal of two cubic yards of self-hauled waste; batteries collection; Christmas tree collection; public litter cans collection; free compost; food waste collection; dirt and debris collection; and biosolids disposal for residential services, and commercial recycling services; and alternative fuel vehicles. Waste Management of Alameda County Appendix F. Comparative Jurisdiction Franchise Extension Terms and Conditions F-4 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Exhibit F-1 Other Jurisdiction Franchise Extension Provisions As of July 2010 (continued) Page 2 of 4 No. Jurisdiction Year Extension Granted Year Originally Franchise Ended Term of Extension (Years) Year Now Franchise Ends (Ended) Terms of Extension/ New Award Hauler 8 City of Healdsburg 2010 2010 10 2015 or 2020 At minimal annual rate increases, provided new services including neighborhood clean-up events, more recycling education programs, Christmas tree disposal, commercial food waste composting, and free tire recycling. Provided one-time contract extension fee of $150,000. Redwood Empire Disposal 9 City of Livermore* 2009 2010 10 2020 To develop an indoor recyclable materials transfer facility in the City to transfer recyclable and compostable material collected from within the City into large trailers for transport to offsite recycling facilities. Minimize rate increases for residential services. Added new compressed natural gas vehicles and new containers. Livermore Sanitation, Inc. 10 City of Manhattan Beach 1998 1999 3 2002 Froze rate adjustments for 1998 and 1999, with a rate adjustment resuming in 2000. Put a specialized collection vehicle, one that is smaller and quieter, in the downtown area. Waste Management 11 City of Manhattan Beach 2002 2002 9 2011 To divert at least 50 percent of the waste stream collected and controlled by Waste Management from landfills. Waste Management 12 City of Martinez 2004 2011 2 2013 Reduced cost of new single stream recycling program by extending the term (equipment depreciated over longer term). Allied Waste Industries, dba PHBD 13 City of Milpitas 2004 2007 10 2017 Waived the cost of the street sweeping program for up to 3 years (an approximately $225,000 annual cost to the General Fund). Allied Waste Industries, dba BFI 14 City of Oceanside# 2010 2012 3 2015 Offered to pay the City at least $1 million a year for five years in exchange for a three-year franchise extension. Waste Management of North County, Inc. 15 City of Piedmont* 2008 2008 10 2018 Provided three new wheeled carts for garbage, recycling, and green waste to each household; and for the first time, provided an option for curbside pick-up services. Richmond Sanitary Services, Inc. F-5 Exhibit F-1 Other Jurisdiction Franchise Extension Provisions As of July 2010 (continued) Page 3 of 4 No. Jurisdiction Year Extension Granted Year Originally Franchise Ended Term of Extension (Years) Year Now Franchise Ends (Ended) Terms of Extension/ New Award Hauler 16 City of Pleasant Hill 2003 2006 9 2015 Restructured franchise agreement entirely, set up a rate setting process, and fixed residential rates for one year. Allied Waste Industries, dba Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal 17 City of Richmond 2003 2003 22 2025 Increased franchise fee from 2.5 to 5.0 percent of gross revenues. City residents get free use of landfill. Republic Waste Services 18 City of San Mateo 2005 2006 4 2010 Provided a total settlement payment of $2.7 million to the City. The settlement payment represented reimbursement of a portion of the landfill disposal fees previously charged to the City. These funds were credited to the City over a four-year period and were used to moderate rate increases. Republic Services (formerly Allied Waste) 19 City of San Rafael 2001 2021 1 2022 No specific new provisions. Marin Sanitary Service 20 City of Santa Rosa 2010 2012 5 (+5 year Option) 2017 Increased franchise fee from 10 to 11 percent; established an additional franchise extension fee of 4.5%, which cannot be passed onto the ratepayer; and provide service enhancements to benefit ratepayers. North Bay Corporation 21 City of Seaside 2003 2010 5 2015 Provided City option to increase citywide clean ups from existing two (2) per year to four (4) per year (at $0.50 per customer, per month, additional cost). Carmel Marina Waste Management 22 City of Stockton 2003 2003 15 (+5 year option) 2018 Created a 10 percent senior rate discount (at age 65); free stickers for extra waste pickup; seasonal leaf collection; enhanced neighborhood cleanup with free bins and boxes for target areas; added televisions, computer monitors, and appliances to curbside collection; provided a best effort requirement to meet 50 percent diversion; established a cap on rate increases; limited interim year adjustments to 50 percent of the CPI and subject to City approval. Stockton Scavenger/ Sunrise Sanitation 23 City of Sunnyvale* 1991 1991 10 2001 Reduced rates by 16 percent. Bay Counties Waste Services Appendix F. Comparative Jurisdiction Franchise Extension Terms and Conditions F-6 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application Exhibit F-1 Other Jurisdiction Franchise Extension Provisions As of July 2010 (continued) Page 4 of 4 No. Jurisdiction Year Extension Granted Year Originally Franchise Ended Term of Extension (Years) Year Now Franchise Ends (Ended) Terms of Extension/ New Award Hauler 24 City of Sunnyvale 1992 2001 3 2004 Changed to OR-based rate setting; purchased new trucks. Bay Counties Waste Services 25 City of Sunnyvale 1996 2004 7 2011 Changed operating ratio (OR) level. Bay Counties Waste Services 26 City of Sunnyvale 2003 2011 7 2018 Changed depreciation schedule to 10 years for rolling stock and containers (from 7 years and 5 years, respectively). Savings with conversion were split 50%/50% to the City/hauler. Bay Counties Waste Services 27 Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority 2004 2005 10 2015 Implemented single stream recycling by 9/1/2004, created minimum diversion tonnage goals, incorporated food waste pickup with yardwaste, required website, pre-set compensation levels in years 1 and 2. Valley Waste Management 28 Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority 2004 2005 10 2015 Pre-set tipping fees over the life of the contract. Pre-set compensation in years 1 and 2 of the contract. Allied Waste Industries 29 Pebble Beach Community Services District 2003 2010 5 2015 Allowed increase of 3.5 percent versus 5.1 percent and implemented single stream recycling. Carmel Marina Waste Management 30 Monterey County 2010 2012 8 2020 Consolidated the two existing franchise agreements (Northeastern and Western Franchise Agreements) into a single, unified franchise agreement that provided economies of scale. Standardized the service package featuring wheeled refuse and recycling carts. USA Waste of California, Inc., dba Carmel Marina Corporation 31 Santa Clara County 2007 2007 7 2014 No specific new provisions. Los Altos Garbage * Franchise re-bid. All of the other examples in this table were negotiations with franchise holders and were not re-bid. # Currently under negotiations. F-7 Exhibit F-2 Franchise Extension Pros and Cons Pros Cons  Maintains continuity of collection services  Takes advantage of hauler’s local knowledge of County streets/operations (e.g., route optimization, customer requirements, and service delivery methods)  If applicable, retains a high quality hauler (in terms of minimal complaints, consistent on-time delivery, other measurable parameters)  Retains rates which may be competitive with other jurisdictions with similar service offerings and objectives  Rewards a current hauler, who may have demonstrated a willingness to implement program changes at affordable costs, with the ability to gage the impact of those changes  Realizes that refuse collection contracts are best served by long-term business partnerships between the County and hauler (due to their capital intensive nature of the business, the high costs of new vehicles/equipment, and the time required to depreciate new purchases)  Recognizes that a formal procurement can be expensive and administratively time-consuming for the County, without a guarantee that all service parameters will be met  Potentially reduces the quality of service if let out to bid (particularly by simply selecting a low bidder), though this may be for a limited timeframe  Restricts potential leverage gained from competition. A formal competitive procurement has the potential to provide benefits to the County, which may include:  A one-time reduction in rates  New programs or changes to existing programs  Guaranteed periods of rate stabilization  Changes to the rate structure (if desired)  If granted with limited benefits realized by the County, potentially fails to recognize that a contract extension has tremendous value to a hauler in terms of future profitability. Many jurisdictions use this value proposition to negotiate some service modifications, or possibly some rate relief. Absent a fair negotiation result, a procurement often becomes the only solution  Limits the time required for a hauler to demonstrate an extension is merited (if granted early in the franchise term)  Requires rebuilding County/hauler relationship. Potentially, results in a new hauler who may not be motivated to work as closely with the County to meet program needs (e.g., in the case where margins already are slim)  Causes displacement of local laborers Appendix F. Comparative Jurisdiction Franchise Extension Terms and Conditions F-8 Review of Garaventa Enterprises Solid Waste Rate Application [This page intentionally left blank.]