RFP: Electronic Waste (E-Waste) Collection for Areas Outside the 11-County Metro Area
Spring 2011: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requested proposals for projects to increase household electronic waste (e-waste) collection outside the 11-county metro area (Anoka, Carver, Chisago, Dakota, Hennepin, Isanti, Ramsey, Scott, Sherburne, Washington, and Wright counties), where opportunities for e-waste collection are not easily accessible.
Three awarded projects received $130,000 under this grant round. Grantees are required to match or provide in-kind services equivalent to 25% of the eligible costs for the project.
Cass County received $20,000 for a project running from July 1, 2011, through January 31, 2013. The grant includes forming a partnership to work on e-waste concerns involving the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe and the counties of Cass, Crow Wing and Hubbard. Goals are to obtain better options/pricing for recycling of collected wastes to assure sustainable collection opportunities for area residents, improve recycling opportunities for remote areas of the counties, improve communications with local units of government regarding e-waste issues, and improve public education on e-waste recycling for Cass County and to a lesser extent, other coalition partners.
Project update: Spring 2012. Cass County is continuing their meetings between project managers and partners, conducting site visits, reviewing partner web sites and educational print materials, and obtained a new recycler.
East Central Solid Waste Commission (Mora, Minn.)
The East Central Solid Waste Commission (Mora, Minn.) received $20,190 for a project that ran from July 1 through November 11, 2011. Goals were to collect e-waste from residents in the counties of Mille Lacs, Pine, and Kanabec; to include areas where collection is not readily available; to determine value in providing an ongoing collection in areas beyond ECSWC facilities, to provide education to residents about electronics recycling, and; to collect and recycle electronics in a responsible manner.
Project update: Completed
A total of 72,130 pounds of consumer electronics were recycled through this grant opportunity, far short of the goal of 160,000 pounds. There were 23,360 pounds more electronics recycled during the grant period (July 1 – October 21) compared to the same period in 2010.
Events. The project hosted two e-waste collection events: one at the Wahkon Highway Garage in Mille Lacs County, the other at the Willow River Highway Garage in Pine County. Each of these locations was more than twenty miles from any known electronics collector and were held in mid-September between 3PM – 7PM. Feedback from participant surveys showed that most clients drove less than three miles, televisions were the main item brought in for recycling, and most heard about the program through a flyer. The Willow River collection brought in 730 pounds of electronics and the Wahkon collection brought in 1,935 pounds of electronics. The planning committee felt that these events would have been more successful if they would have been held in the spring when it was warmer. If collection events occur at these sites in the future, then they would go beyond e-waste and also collect appliances and mattresses.
Sites. The on-going collections at the Hinckley transfer station and Mora landfill were more successful. ECSWC has been collecting electronics since 2005 and has significantly lowered the cost since 2005 with the goal of their program that it is user-paid. With this goal, the price for recycling electronics is minimal for customers. Because of the availability of electronics and the low cost, this reduced cost of monitors and televisions with the remainder of electronics being free may not have been as attractive to the residents as in an area where the costs are high.
ECSWC feels that area residents are more aware of electronics recycling than they previously were. The local radio station did a good job with public service messages along with the advertising that was paid for through the grant. Staff received many calls about the program due to the radio advertising, allowing an opportunity to provide additional information about recycling. Many people didn't know that they could not put their televisions in the garbage.
Polk County received $89,700 for a two-year project running from July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2013. The goals are to establish a stable, convenient and cost-effective e-waste collection option in each of Polk County’s neighboring counties: Clearwater, Mahnomen, Norman and Red Lake. The ultimate goal is the establishment of a long-term collection option for not only the residents in these counties, but for those counties themselves.
Project update: Spring 2012. Polk County partners are participating in the collection program, with only Mahnomen holding events so far. Polk County continues to work on their infrastructure, including numerous repairs and modifications to the facility, as well as the equipment and lot itself.
Application deadline: 2:00 p.m. CDT, April 5, 2011.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requested proposals for projects to increase household electronic waste (e-waste) collection outside the 11-county metro area (Anoka, Carver, Chisago, Dakota, Hennepin, Isanti, Ramsey, Scott, Sherburne, Washington, and Wright counties), where opportunities for e-waste collection are not easily accessible.
Goals for this RFP
- Collect and properly recycle e-waste ("covered electronic devices")
- Improve collaboration between counties and registered collectors, recyclers and manufacturers
- Start collection sites and events that will continue activity past this grant period
- Develop proven methods for collection that are new to these areas.
Up to $150,000 is available for projects awarded under this grant. Grantees are required to match or provide in-kind services equivalent to 25% of the eligible costs for the project.
For this RFP, the MPCA seeks applicants that are registered Minnesota local governmental entities (especially counties) outside the 11-county metro area, state agencies; registered collectors; registered recyclers; and registered manufacturers. All proposers must be registered collectors. To register as a collector, go to www.pca.state.mn.us/electronics.March 7, 2011 - E-waste collection
Request the full RFP and ask questions.
- Daniel McLean, Contract Specialist
E-mail: email@example.com (Subject line: “Grants for E-waste Collection CR4368”)
Phone: 651-757-2563 or 800-657-3864
- Responders are encouraged to supply an email address and to receive the RFP application and supporting materials electronically.
- All inquiries, requests for information or clarification, and other communication related to this RFP must be directed to Daniel McLean only, by e-mail or phone, before 2:00 p.m. CDT on March 18, 2011. All questions and answers will be sent to all RFP responders no later than
AprilMarch 29, 2011.
Application deadline: 2:00 p.m. CDT, April 5, 2011
- Late proposals will not be accepted.
- Required: E-mail one electronic copy of the proposal/application to firstname.lastname@example.org – Subject line: "Grants for E-waste Collection CR4368" (Faxed, mailed, and hard-copies will not be accepted.)
This request does not obligate the MPCA to complete the work contemplated in this notice. The MPCA reserves the right to cancel this solicitation. All expenses incurred in responding to this notice are solely the responsibility of the responder.
RFP: Electronic Waste (E-Waste) Collection for Areas Outside the 11-County Metro Area
All inquiries, requests for information or clarification, and other communication related to this RFP must be directed to Daniel McLean only, by e-mail or phone, before 2:00 p.m. CDT on March 18, 2011. All questions and answers will be sent to all RFP responders no later than
April March 29, 2011.
Q1: Can you tell us what entities, if any, have been awarded grant funds from previous year's applications?
A1: Yes, please review Past RFP: February 2010 - E-waste Collection for Areas Outside the 11-County Metro Area
Q2: A processor in Wisconsin is a Minnesota-registered collector. If it applied, would it be considered for this grant?
A2: Yes, applicant just needs to be a Minnesota-registered collector and e-waste is collected from Minnesota households.
Q3: If a group of counties (through a solid waste commission) wish to submit a proposal with more than one e-waste collector (county selects qualified collector), would this be accepted?
A3: Yes, as long as collectors are Minnesota-registered collectors and the applicant identifies the collectors that they would actually be contracting with.
Q4. Will time spent by partnering city , township and other local government entities be eligible under the heading of Eligible Costs, bullet-point six, as professional services?
A4: Time spent by partners is eligible, but MPCA staff will review the tasks and time spent to determine if appropriate.
Q5. If collection-event participation significantly exceeds expectations, can the grant be amended to redirect some of the appropriated funds to address resulting problems?
A5: Yes, funds can be moved from task-to-task with an approved, signed amendment.
Q6. Can the grant be amended after agreement with the MPCA is signed, if the grantee is able to arrange for a more favorable contract with a recycler?
Q7. If a proposed partnering county / LGU is unable to receive official board approval in time to meet the grant deadline , can that letter be submitted as soon as approval is given?
A7: Yes, but applicant should include a letter explaining the issues and the expected board approval date. Final MPCA approval would be contingent upon official board approval.
Q.8. What specific information do you need submitted by March 18, 2011?
A.8. All inquiries, requests for information or clarification, and other communication related to this RFP.
Q8: What specific information do you need submitted by March 18, 2011?
A8: All inquiries, requests for information or clarification, and other communication related to this RFP.
Q9: What is your definition of ‘infrastructure’ as it relates to this RFP?
A9: Please refer to question 10 for clarification on ‘capital costs.’ Please also refer to the eligible and ineligible costs on the RFP.
Q10: Do modifications to a facility and container purchases count as eligible program expenses for funding, or are they capped at 10%?
A10: Modifications to a facility and container purchases fall under capital costs that may not equal more than ten percent (10%) of the Project cost
without prior approval by the State.
Q11: Is the intent of the RFP to subsidize the actual cost to collect, process, transport and recycle the e-waste (which does not seem to be sustainable) or to pay for one-time program costs to create a sustainable program (installation of working surface, upgrade of a facility loading platform, container purchase or lease)?
A11: The intent is to fund a project that will have long-term sustainability and will not require funds from the MPCA
Q12: Is there a hard cap on maximum Grant funding for a specific project?
A12: Yes, $150,000.
Q13: Do you expect all money will be dispersed?
A13: Yes, to eligible applicants, on a reimbursement basis, for actual costs.
Q14: The answer provided (A9) does not answer the question (Q9): ‘Infrastructure’ is not necessarily a ‘capital cost,’ which is why I asked the question.
A14: ‘Capital costs’ is the only term used in the RFP, and it is defined in Eligible Costs.
Q15: The answer, A10, ends with the phrase: "..: not equal more than ten percent (10%) of the Project cost without prior approval by the State." What is the process for posing these questions and/or gaining approval?
A15: This document amends the RFP to remove the phrase: “without prior approval by the State.”
Q16: What is the State's criteria for project evaluation comparing one project request vs: other projects?
A16: The eligibility requirements, criteria, and evaluation process are outlined in Section IV of the RFP.
Q17: If the intent of the grant is to fund sustainable programs that will survive beyond the short-term funding of the grant, the State needs to consider and award to projects that provide for durable goods that will be in place and utilized beyond the scope of the funding: However, the caps and all responses to the questions posed imply it’s a service reimbursement: Services end when the funding ends in all cases: Can someone please address this discrepancy beyond reciting the language questioned?
A17: One of the goals of this RFP was to contribute to the foundation of a sustainable e-waste collection program, where feasible: Other eligible expenses, besides capital expenses, may include outreach activities (Criteria 5): Proposers should express how they intend to continue their Projects beyond reimbursements made during a Grant Contract period (Criteria 3).