California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) 

8th LEA/CIWMB Conference (2005)

2005 Conference Field Trip Evaluation Results

Two field trips were offered as part of the 2005 conference, one to the Frank R. Bowerman landfill and one to Olinda-Alpha and CVT Transfer Station. Conference attendees were asked to complete an evaluation for field trip attended.

Frank R. Bowerman Landfill Field Trip

Did you find your field trip experience to be worthwhile? Please explain why or why not.

Total of 10 “yes” answers, all but one with additional comments. Four additional positive responses with comments. One comment was that unless there is an unusual feature, field trips to SWFs are not necessary. One evaluation with no response.

  • Yes. But a restroom stop between site visits would be a very good idea. CVT Recycling is a very good site to visit. Please add it again so that we can see the new recycling technology facility (autoclave) up and running.
  • Yes. Bowerman Landfill was worthwhile and also the composting field trip. Liked the overview and Q&A with gentleman from Orange County Waste Management.
  • Yes. Especially the World Wide tech new autoclave project. Real full waste conversion potential.
  • Yes. The trip allows for seeing how solid waste activities are handled in other jurisdictions.
  • Yes. Good to get out into the fresh (though smoggy) air. TVI was interesting to me as I have problems with compost sites. (Why is TVI not on this form?)
  • Yes. Always good to see real live SWF.
  • Yes. It was great to see a well run public landfill and composting operation.
  • Yes. Learned how they handle litter during high wind periods.
  • Yes. Very well run landfill with cheap tipping fee.
  • Yes. Good to compare to similar site I have.
  • Large scale sites that are well run are a fascination. Immense scale landslide control was a valuable lesson.
  • Very interesting and informational – and variety – composting, C&D, landfill.
  • Very educational. Keep field trips, as we get to see different applications.
  • Good to see such a large scale landfill, as the ones I inspect are much smaller.
  • While it’s always interesting to see a different SWF, unless there is an unusual feature (design or function), field trips aren’t necessary.
  • No response.

Would you recommend improvement in the coordination of the field trip? If so, what?

Some of the comments are presented in this brief and incomplete overview. One exclusively positive comment. Three “no’s”: two with additional comments. Four suggestions that a megaphone or microphone be used by speakers as it was difficult to hear. Two comments that water or drinks should be provided. One suggestion that there be speakers and/or an overview on the bus. One NA. Four with no response.

  • Seemed to go off without a hitch.
  • No.
  • No. Busses were great!
  • No. Other than provide a portable microphone system for tour leaders.
  • Speakers could not be heard clearly.
  • Too much time standing around chatting.
  • Should provide speaker/operator with something (equipment) to project his/her voice. It was difficult to hear outside with all the equipment operating. Perhaps a bullhorn or mic and amp would suffice. Provide copies of the facilities operating permits.
  • If there are high noise levels at the SWF, a portable loud speaker would be worthwhile.
  • Have speakers on bus to the site. Give us info on what we are going to see.
  • Maybe provide beverages. It was quite warm.
  • Have water available in bus.
  • NA.
  • No response. (4)

How much time should be allotted for field trips?

Eleven respondents, in a variety of ways, like the four hours given to the field trips. Two comments were to change the time allotted. There were two forms with no response.

  • 4 hours is enough.
  • 3-4 hours with restroom visit in there somewhere.
  • Same. (4)
  • One-half day seems to be adequate. (2)
  • It was just right.
  • Time was plenty.
  • Time was fine.
  • The 4 hours worked out fine, though I was worried because of the traffic in the area. Recommend that some one pre-drive route before finalizing plan, at same time as tour, to see what traffic conditions are like.
  • 4+ hours. Maybe lunch at end of a site to promote questions to facility operators.
  • Depends on what/where it is. 2 hours.
  • No response (2)

What types of field trips would you like to see in future years, if any?

The recurring themes are presented in this brief and incomplete overview. Responses received include: two for C&D and two for composting. There were three responses of okay or don’t change anything. There were also five forms that contained no response.

  • More C&D
  • More MRFs, C&D and composting
  • Conversion technologies, food composting/collection
  • Would like to see a field trip to the Mariposa In-Vessel Compost Facility. Disneyland waste/recycling system would have been good. Board members probably could have assisted with their connections.
  • “Ride alongs” with garbage trucks. Third world waste facilities in the Caribbean… Seriously, maybe composting at a winery.
  • I think those chosen were fine.
  • Food waste, biosolid, manure compost facilities.
  • Have alternative on-site training like GIS. Otherwise, hard to say. Depends on what is available.
  • Operations at POTWs. A course/trip on how to turn off cell phones.
  • More of the same.
  • No changes necessary.
  • No response. (5)

Olinda-Alpha Landfill/CVT Hybrid Transfer Station

Did you find your field trip experience to be worthwhile? Please explain why or why not.

The recurring themes are presented in this brief and incomplete overview. There were a total of seven “yes” answers, many with additional comments. Five less than positive responses about the landfill tour. All comments about the MRF tour were positive.

  • Yes. CVT Transfer
  • Yes. World Waste!
  • Yes. Large volume facilities (much larger than I am used to) (and) new technology (World Waste Autoclave System) extremely interesting.
  • Yes. Great to see local permitted site.
  • Yes. It is always good to see other facilities. The CVT transfer station was very impressive. Great tour!
  • Yes. Just seeing how other LEAs enforce state minimum standards – very worthwhile.
  • Very worthwhile, especially the transfer facility.
  • Yes. Hybrid area very energizing and informative. Transfer station good for the rookie LEAs and CIWMB staff. Olinda-Alpha was very dry information-wise. Eliminate tours of basic, non-progressive landfills.
  • The field trip was okay. I feel (there should) have been more interaction and explanations at the Olinda Landfill.
  • The landfill was fairly ordinary. The CVT TS was much more interesting and unique.
  • Landfill was pretty typical. Hard to hear presenter due to being outside and noise from trash vehicles. Should have had a bullhorn or some kind of PA system. More discussion on encroaching development around landfill would have been worthwhile. Similarly at World Waste Technologies construction noise made hearing presentation difficult. I would have gotten more out of it if I could hear about this fascinating, innovative technology. CVT tour was very well organized and presentation in bus was audible. The transfer station and volume of material was really impressive. World Waste was a great concept to see.
  • The MRF tour was very good. Well run. Well thought out. Not so for the Olinda-Alpha Landfill. Did not seem (to) be thought out well. Did not get much out of it.
  • Not the landfill tour. CVT was great!
  • Not really. It seemed like we got to the site, were there only 5-15 minutes and then we were on our way to the next site.

Would you recommend improvement in the coordination of the field trip? If so, what?

The recurring themes are presented in this brief and incomplete overview. Two exclusively positive comments. Four suggestions that a megaphone or microphone be used by speakers as it was difficult to hear. Two comments on problems with logistics. Two comments about starting and/or ending on time. Two with no response.

  • Enjoyed field trip.
  • This one worked out really well.
  • No.
  • Coordination was great! The site operator really needed to have microphone to be able to hear what they were saying. Maybe have smaller groups of people when we get to the site.
  • Yes. The communication with the landfill operator was confusing—wrong directions. Also, the speaker needed a megaphone.
  • More time at site.
  • Someone on the trip needs to be a timekeeper. We lost time when too much was spent viewing certain areas. We were late getting back: 12:25 p.m.
  • Start and finish on time. Assume that presentations are audible. Perhaps there could have been a discussion of the facility(s) during the bus ride, with a sound system to prepare participants for what they were going to see. Do some Q&A while en route or leaving the facility or give brief presentation before going to field trip and debrief afterwards???
  • Nail down the logistics of bus route & parking at landfill. Too many turn-arounds and back tracking. We could not hear the speaker. Make certain all can hear the speaker.
  • More in depth visit to one facility only.
  • NA
  • No response. (3)

How much time should be allotted for field trips?

Eight respondents, in a variety of ways, like the 4 hours given to the field trips. Two respondents thought 3-4 hours should be given to one site. Three comments were to change the time allotted. There was 1 no response.

  • Good. (2)
  • 3-4
  • Same (2)
  • OK as is.
  • Enough time was allotted. Needn’t be any longer.
  • I think the 4 hours was long enough.
  • At least 4 hours.
  • 3 hours is good. Any longer in time then water and restroom breaks become crucial.
  • One-half day but visit only one facility.
  • One site should probably be more time: 3-4 hours.
  • 2 hours plus travel.
  • No response.

What types of field trips would you like to see in future years, if any?

The recurring themes are presented in this brief and incomplete overview. Responses received include: two for alternative or new technologies and two for hybrid facilities. There were also four forms that contained no response.

  • Hybrid facilities (2)
  • Waste-to-energy site
  • HHW sites Transfer station/MRF
  • Recyclers. What happens to plastics, glass, paper, metal that is sorted out and is re-introduced as a new commodity.
  • I suggest maintaining one-half day field trip as a component of the conference. The type of facility will depend on location of the conference. Seeing innovative new technologies is always good.
  • Alternative and emerging technology sites should be a priority in the future. Emphasize challenges and community relations at facility—unique permit conditions and experiences in permitting processes, future plans, etc.
  • Different trips that emphasize other than “haul and bury”.
  • Similar. Would like to revisit CVT once their residual waste processing side is operational.
  • Same
  • No response. (4)
Last updated: July 8, 2005
LEA Conference, http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/LEA/Conference/
Melissa Hoover-Hartwick: Melissa.Hoover-Hartwick@calrecycle.ca.gov (916) 341-6813