2013-03-26_PWETC_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Recycling Community Values Attachment A Jan Vanderwall's Jim DeBenedet's 2010 Values 2013 Values 2013 Values Jim DeBenedet's Comments Collection 60 15 60 Clean, quiet 10 5 5 This should be a specification requirement Impact on street (size and weight of trucks) 15 10 15 This is tied to weight of vehicle. Distance to MRF and net efffective recycle weight. Frequency of service 20 15 10 This should be a specification requirement Ease of participation 20 20 15 Very large carts, ie. 60 gal, are a benefit to haulers, not residents. Flexibility of Co- mingling for resident 15 15 10 What we have now, three sort, is best, in my opinion. More materials picked up — plastics 5 15 10 Organics 10 Materials are efficiently recycled (local markets, highest and best use for material) 10 10 20 Rewards for adding value (innovation) 5 5 5 Multi- family service 5 subtotal 100 100 100 Outreach 30 15 15 Voluntary expansion to businesses 10 10 30 Tim Pratt says he can do this without help. Effective education of residents -with measurement 40 40 30 This is tied to weight of vehicle. Distance to MRF and net efffective recycle weight. Community involvement 10 15 10 This should be a specification requirement Annual report on what happens to material 50 15 50 This should be a specification requirement Outreach to non - English speaking communities 10 20 Outreach using electronic communications 10 20 subtotal 100 100 100 Environmental Benefits 10 15 25 Assistance with Zero Waste events 10 30 Tim Pratt says he can do this without help. Reduced carbon footprint 30 10 40 This is tied to weight of vehicle. Distance to MRF and net efffective recycle weight. Environmentally Preferred Purchasing (EPP) 30 20 10 This was always confusing to me. How do we measure it? Local vendor - terminal location 30 25 50 this contributes to reduced carbon footprint subtotal 100 100 100