WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING · 5.1 Single Family Residential Waste and Recycling -...

AGENDA

WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

1:00 p.m. 2nd Floor Boardroom

4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC

Committee Members: Chair, Director Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam Vice Chair, Director Heather Deal, Vancouver Councillor Mary-Wade Anderson, White Rock Director Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Director Ernie Daykin, Maple Ridge Director Pamela Goldsmith-Jones, West Vancouver Councillor Scott Hamilton, Delta Director Linda Hepner, Surrey Director Don MacLean, Pitt Meadows Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Director Harold Steves, Richmond Director Joe Trasolini, Port Moody Director Wayne Wright, New Westminster

Please advise Alison Hilkewich at (604) 432-6368 if you are unable to attend.

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY.

NOTICE TO THE GVRD WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

1:00 p.m. September 14, 2011

2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia.

A G E N D A 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 September 14, 2011 Regular Meeting Agenda Staff Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for September 14, 2011as circulated.

2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

2.1 July 13, 2011 Regular Meeting Minutes Staff Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held July 13, 2011 as circulated.

3. DELEGATIONS

3.1 Corinne Atwood CAE, Executive Director BC Bottle Depot Association

3.2 Mr. Stephens

Partnership for Water Sustainability in British 3.3 Craig Wisehart, Program Director

Electronics Stewardship Association of BC 4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No Items presented. 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF

5.1 Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan – Conditions of

Approval Designated Speaker: Dennis Ranahan, Division Manager Solid Waste Department

Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive the report titled “Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan – Conditions of Approval”, dated August 17, 2011 for information.

WMA - 3

September 6, 2011

5.2 Regional Organics Strategy

Designated Speaker: Andrew Marr, Senior Engineer Solid Waste Department

Recommendation: That the Board endorse Model 3: the ‘hybrid model’ for managing organic waste.

5.3 Waste Composition Monitoring and Diversion Rates Designated Speaker: Andrew Marr, Senior Engineer Solid Waste Department Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive this report entitled Waste Composition Monitoring and Diversion Rates for information.

5.4 Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24330 Fraser Highway, Township of Langley

Designated Speaker: Mike Stringer, Senior Engineer Utility Planning Department

Recommendation: That the Board reject the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the Langley Grove Estates mobile home park at 24330 Fraser Highway, Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 24 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24330 Fraser Highway, Township of Langley”. 5.5 Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007 – Staff Appointments

Designated Speaker: Ray Robb, Regulation & Enforcement Division Manager Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks Department

Recommendation: That the Board, pursuant to the Environmental Management Act and Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007, appoint Scott Brown and Sukhjeet (Sonny) Johal as Officers.

5.6 Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw – Staff Appointments

Designated Speaker: Ray Robb, Regulation & Enforcement Division Manager Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks Department

Recommendation: That the Board, pursuant to the Environmental Management Act and Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw 181, 1996 as amended by Bylaw 183, 1996, appoint Scott Brown and Sukhjeet (Sonny) Johal as Officers.

5.7 Manager’s Report Designated Speaker: Toivo Allas, Manager Utility Planning Department

Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the report dated September 1, 2011, titled “Manager’s Report”.

WMA - 4

September 6, 2011

6. INFORMATION ITEMS 6.1 Metro Vancouver Tour of Recycling & Energy Recovery Facilities in

October 2011.

7. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented.

8. ADJOURNMENT Staff Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee conclude its regular meeting of September 14, 2011.

WMA - 5

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY

WMA - 6

MINUTES

WMA - 7


WMA - 8

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Waste Management Committee held on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 Page 1 of 5

GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Waste Management Committee held at 1:03 p.m. on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. PRESENT: Chair, Director Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam Vice Chair, Director Heather Deal, Vancouver (arrived at 1:06 p.m.) Councillor Mary-Wade Anderson, White Rock Director Ernie Daykin, Maple Ridge Director Pamela Goldsmith-Jones, West Vancouver Councillor Scott Hamilton, Delta Director Linda Hepner, Surrey Director Don MacLean, Pitt Meadows Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Director Joe Trasolini, Port Moody Director Wayne Wright, New Westminster ABSENT: Director Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Director Harold Steves, Richmond STAFF: Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Commissioner/Deputy Chief Administrative Officer, Chief

Administrative Officer’s Department Toivo Allas, Manager, Policy and Planning Department Doug Humphris, Manager, Operations and Maintenance Department Tim Jervis, Manager, Engineering and Construction Department Klara Kutakova, Assistant to Regional Committees, Board Secretariat and Corporate

Information Department 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 July 13, 2011 Regular Meeting Agenda It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Waste Management Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for July 13, 2011 as circulated.

CARRIED 2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

2.1 June 8, 2011 Regular Meeting Minutes It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Waste Management Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held June 8, 2011 as circulated.

CARRIED

2.1

WMA - 9


3. DELEGATIONS No Items presented.

4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No Items presented. 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF

5.1 Single Family Residential Waste and Recycling - First Quarter 2011

Report dated June 21, 2011 from Andrew Marr, Senior Engineer, Policy and Planning Department, responding to a Committee request for estimated single-family residential garbage, recycling, and yard waste/food waste data for the first quarter of 2011.

1:06 p.m. Director Deal arrived at the meeting.

Discussion ensued on: • Information sharing among elected officials on innovations and best

municipal practices as related to residential waste and recycling • Concerns around the current reporting practice related to greenwaste in

winter/early spring season when no greenwaste is produced • The importance of tracking of municipal waste and greenwaste

contamination Request of Staff Staff was requested to work with the Waste Management Committee Chair on how to provide to elected officials the information on best municipal practices related to residential waste and recycling.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Waste Management Committee receive reports on municipal Single-Family Residential solid waste and recycling data on an annual basis.

CARRIED

5.2 Future of the Region Sustainability Dialogue and Post-Dialogue Forum: Zero Waste Challenge - Accelerating Multi-Family Waste Diversion Report dated June 29, 2011 from Heather Schoemaker, Manager, and Simon Cumming, External and Intergovernmental Relations Division Manager, Corporate Relations Department, providing information on the four regional Future of the Region Sustainability Dialogues and one Post-Dialogue Forum hosted by Metro Vancouver on the “Zero Waste Challenge – Accelerating Multi-family Waste Diversion”. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board: a) Request municipal recycling waste reduction coordinators to consider

recommendations on solutions for multi-family space requirements as outlined in Attachment 1; and

WMA - 10


b) Direct staff to form a stakeholder group as identified in the dialogue and post-dialogue series, to consider actions to: 1. Streamline the regulatory process and ensure policies and regulations

at different levels are consistent; and 2. Showcase model multi-family projects and work with stakeholders

(e.g., strata associations and building managers, Condominium Homeowners Association, builders, and local governments) to develop customized education and outreach materials for this sector.

CARRIED

5.3 Future of the Region Sustainability Dialogue and Post-Dialogue Forum: Zero Waste Challenge - Accelerating Construction and Demolition Waste Diversion Report dated June 29, 2011 from Heather Schoemaker, Manager, and Simon Cumming, External and Intergovernmental Relations Division Manager, Corporate Relations Department, providing information on the four regional Future of the Region Sustainability Dialogues and one Post-Dialogue Forum hosted by Metro Vancouver on the “Zero Waste Challenge – Accelerating Construction and Demolition Waste Diversion”. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board: a) Request municipal recycling waste reduction coordinators to consider

recommendations on solutions for accelerating construction and demolition waste diversion outlined in Attachment 1; and

b) Direct staff to form a stakeholder group as identified in the dialogue and post-dialogue series to consider actions to: 1. Encourage Market Shifts through the creation of a one-stop online

inventory of materials to help connect buyers to sellers. 2. Develop strategies and actions to enhance and streamline bylaws,

zoning and building codes to better allow for alternative building designs.

3. Expand education and outreach to offer training at the site level and develop public information materials and focused communication strategies that target broad audiences and are consistent and integrated with collection systems.

CARRIED Director Trasolini absent at the vote.

5.4 Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 5900 Block 272 Street,

Township of Langley Report dated June 22, 2011 from Mike Stringer, Senior Engineer, Policy and Planning Department, responding to a request from the Township of Langley for Board approval to amend the Fraser Sewerage Area boundary. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the properties described as Sec 8, TWP 14, NWD Parcel 1 RP15620, Suburban Block A (RP5080), Part SW1/4, except Plan 85898 (Road) and Sec 8, TWP 14, NWD Parcel A (RP5080), Part SW1/4, except Plan PCL1-RP 15620, Part in LMP 51701 in the Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-

WMA - 11


2376, Sheet 66 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 5900 block 272 Street, Township of Langley”.


5.5 2010 Quality Control Annual Report for GVS&DD

Report dated June 1, 2011 from Theresa Gregonia, Superintendent of WWTP Laboratories, and Stan Bertold, Superintendent of Environmental Monitoring, Operations and Maintenance Department, providing a summary of the 2010 Quality Control Annual Report for the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report titled “2010 Quality Control Annual Report for GVS&DD”.


5.6 Manager’s Report

Report dated June 24, 2011 from Toivo Allas, Manager, Policy and Planning Department, providing an update on the 2011 Waste Management Committee workplan. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the report dated June 24, 2011, titled “Manager’s Report”.

CARRIED

6. INFORMATION ITEMS 6.1 City of Richmond – Report 2010: Towards Excellence in Recycling and

Solid Waste Management – Staff Report Report dated May 26, 2011 from David Weber, Director, City Clerk’s Office, City of Richmond, to Greg Moore, Waste Management Committee, forwarding to Metro Vancouver the City of Richmond’s report titled “Report 2010: Towards Excellence in Recycling and Solid Waste Management”.

6.2 The Regional Municipalities of Durham and York: News Release 29 June 2011 News release dated June 29, 2011 from the Regional Municipalities of Durham and York, announcing that the Ontario Ministry of Environment has issued a certificate of approval for the Durham/York energy-from-waste facility on June 28, 2011.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the following: 6.1 City of Richmond – Report 2010: Towards Excellence in Recycling and Solid

Waste Management – Staff Report; and 6.2 The Regional Municipalities of Durham and York: News Release dated

29 June 2011 CARRIED

WMA - 12


7. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented.

8. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING No items presented.

9. ADJOURNMENT It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Waste Management Committee conclude its regular meeting of July 13, 2011.

CARRIED (Time: 1:15 p.m.)

___________________________ _____________________________ Klara Kutakova, Greg Moore, Chair Assistant to Regional Committees 5288646 FINAL

WMA - 13


WMA - 14

DELEGATIONS

WMA - 15


WMA - 16

1

July, 2011 Dear Metro Vancouver Waste Committee I submit this letter to request your support to submit an emergency resolution to the Union of BC Municipalities at the September 2011 conference to have all milk containers included into the BC deposit system. The resolution must be submitted by noon September 23rd 2011 Representatives of the BC Bottle Depot Association met with Minister of Environment the Honourable Terry Lake and senior Ministry of Environment staff who confirmed that the Ministry of Environment plans to include milk containers under the newly approved Packaging Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) product category by Order in Council May 19th 2011 without public consultation. Senior Ministry of Environment staff indicated that milk containers included in the packaging EPR program will be recovered only through blue box programs at the request of manufacturers in the industry. The Ministry of Environment supports and promotes industry lead stewardship programs. However, industry represents ands lobbies for what is best for manufacturers in the industry. This back to blue box stewardship approach to waste management in BC will set precedence for the current and ongoing beverage industry campaign in North America to have all used beverage containers collected solely through blue box programs. This will be the beginning of the end of the used beverage container recycling deposit system as we know it today and bring us back to the days of used beverage containers littering our environment. The milk industry’s argument for not putting a deposit on milk containers is that a deposit on milk containers will hurt families. The reality is that the deposit system rewards individuals who recycle. Only those who do not return their containers for recycling forfeit the deposit. Families and individuals of all income levels currently purchase fruit and vegetable juice, soft drinks and water in deposit bearing containers and additionally pay non refundable container recycling fees, advanced disposal fees or environmental handling fees on other goods under EPR stewardship such as a TV of up to $31.75 Currently in British Columbia Encorp Pacific (Canada) manages a voluntary milk container program for the dairy industry. No financial incentives are in place to entice the consumer to return the containers to depots. The recovery rates posted by Encorp are less than 10%. By contrast containers captured under the deposit system also operated by Encorp reached recovery rates of over 79.5% in 2010. Combined, Canadian deposit systems have a total recovery rate of 83%, while non‐deposit systems have a total recovery rate of 41%, The Province of Alberta increased the level of its deposits from 5‐cents to 10‐cents, and 20‐cents to 25‐cents on November 1, 2008. After only 11 months, the Province reported an increase in total recovery rate of 5 points, from 76% to 81%. In November 2009, Alberta became the first jurisdiction in North America to introduce a deposit on all milk and liquid cream beverage containers. The deposits are 10‐cents for containers under 1 litre and 25‐cents for containers over one litre.

BC Bottle Depot Association 9850 King George Blvd., Surrey, V3T 4Y3 Phone: 604-930-0003 Fax: 604-930-0060

Email [email protected]

3.1

WMA - 17

2

Since the implementation of deposits on milk, according to Alberta Environment, the rate of recycled cartons grew from 22.5% to 61% and the rate of plastic jugs from 61% to 71%. The Alberta Dairy Council reports that new deposits have not had an impact on sales. Milk containers were included in the Alberta deposit system in 2009 and municipal recyclers saw a significant drop in curb side collection volume but also a sizable drop in recycling costs. What municipalities also received was a significant increase in revenue by returning the containers to a depot. For example: there are approximately 16,000 HDPE milk jugs per baled tonne and if sold on the open commodity market would fetch approximately $400. The municipality then must deduct the cost of collecting the jugs curb side. At 25 cents returned deposit per milk jug, a tonne of milk containers would realise $4,000 revenue for the municipality. The types of plastics and cartons used for milk are identical to many of the beverage containers currently used to hold other beverages and can be recycled in the same manner. As the deposit system is already in place in BC and the faltering voluntary milk program is already operated by Encorp, the collection of milk containers under the current used beverage container deposit system could be implemented within weeks. The deposit system provides thousands of jobs province-wide and much needed financial resources to charities and other public service groups through bottle drives. The deposit system rewards persons of challenged financial means by improving their circumstances through pay for work performed retrieving the containers. The deposit system is a win-win situation for everyone and is the best choice to remove garbage from the waste streams and improve our environment. The most accurate way to determine recovery rates is by comparing return rates against sales rates. This is already being done for all other used beverage containers. The same approach can be used to calculate recovery rates on milk containers. Allowing the milk containers to be collected only curb side will mean inaccurate recovery rates as the materials will be co mingled with other plastics and not reconciled with sales figures. Discussions with the Minister of Environment indicated that the EPR plan for packaging that includes milk containers could be amended if further information can be provided that:

1) Families will not be adversely affected by paying the deposit estimated to be 25 cents for a gallon jug to match Alberta’s deposit rates. The milk industry estimates that 6 jugs per month (24 litres) are sold to each household in BC.

2) Impact of increased recovery rates to the environment. Metro Vancouver Waste Committee Support for BCBDA’s Initiative On May 18th 2011 the BC Bottle Depot Association received unanimous support from the Metro Vancouver Waste Committee. The Metro Vancouver Waste Committee has sent a letter of support to Minister Lake requesting all milk containers be including under the beverage container stewardship plan and be included in the deposit system. The Ministry of Environment has now approved the Metro Vancouver Waste Plan and it is imperative that the issue of milk containers in to the deposit system be addressed. Yours truly

Corinne Atwood CAE Executive Director BC Bottle Depot Association

WMA - 18

Water Balance Model for British Columbia

1

DATE: September 2, 2011

TO: Metro Vancouver Waste Management Committee

FROM: Kim A Stephens, M.Eng., P.Eng., Executive Director

SUBJECT: INTEGRATED LIQUID WASTE & RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN Regional Commitments and Minister’s Conditions for ISMPs

Purpose of Presentation: Request a $50,000 cash contribution by Metro Vancouver. This is a one-time request.

This financial support will help fund the next phase of evolution and enhancement of the Water Balance Model. Note: The not-for-profit Partnership is the legal entity for the model.

In turn, this scenario modelling and decision support tool will help Metro Vancouver and members fulfil your ISMP commitments. Note: ISMP is the acronym for Integrated Stormwater Management Plans.

The Region Has Committed to Protecting Watershed Health: The commitments by Metro Vancouver and member municipalities to develop ISMPs and implement on-site rainwater management are spelled out in Clauses 1.1.12, 1.1.20, 1.1.21, 3.4.7 and 3.5.9 of the region’s Integrated Liquid Waste & Resource Management Plan.

When he approved the Plan in May, the Minister of Environment imposed additional requirements to protect watershed and stream health, for example: the region is required to develop a coordinated program to monitor, assess and report on implementation and effectiveness of ISMPs.

In November, the Partnership is piloting a 2-day course for local government practitioners on how to implement the ‘ISMP Course Correction’ in Metro Vancouver and develop ‘Watershed Blueprints’. Note: The course theme is “Achieve More With Less” because municipalities have many competing priorities and everyone is challenged to do more with less, and get it done.

Water Balance Model Links Built and Natural Environments: Originally developed to meet the ISMP needs of Metro Vancouver municipalities, use of the Water Balance Model informs decisions about a community’s ‘water footprint’. Launched by an inter-governmental partnership at UBCM in 2003, this web-based tool is unique:

bridges engineering and planning; links development sites to the stream and the watershed; and enables science-based performance targets to be established.

The Water Balance Model helps local governments create a vision of the watershed future. It enables planners and engineers to design communities so that they have no net impact on stream environments.

WMA - 19

ahilkewi

Text Box

3.2

2

Vision for the Water Balance Model Express: While it has a Metro Vancouver genesis, the Water Balance Model has become “British Columbia’s tool”. Also, use of the Water Balance Model extends beyond the boundaries of British Columbia.

Ongoing evolution and enhancement of the Water Balance Model is driven by the community of users and funded by government. Since 2002, over $1.5 million in cash and in-kind contributions have been invested in development to expand the capabilities of the tool, for example: federal financial support provided via the Regional Adaptation Collaboratives program has made it possible to develop “Version 2.1”.

Release of Version 2.1 on a new platform complete with a rebuilt website in November will provide an operating environment that supports user communities that range from highly experienced experts to enthusiastic newcomers. Three launch buttons will correspond to three common investigation scenarios:

WBM for the Watershed – this is the scale where watershed behaviour and stream erosion prevention is analyzed for achievability of performance targets and protection of stream health.

WBM for the Neighbourhood – this is the scale where the combined performance of on-lot rainfall capture measures and community detention ponds is analyzed for effectiveness.

WBM Express for Homeowners – this is the single family lot scale, and is especially relevant to house replacement scenarios that create opportunities to ‘do it right’ the second time.

The $50,000 that we are requesting from Metro Vancouver will enable the Partnership to bring the vision for the WBM Express to fruition: homeowners will be able to type in their address, access a version of the WBM that has pre-set values (for climate, land use), select and apply from a suite of source controls for rainfall capture, run scenarios, and print a report. This capability will help municipal front counter staff.

The ultimate target actually audience goes well beyond homeowners. The Partnership sees the WBM Express as a vehicle to connect with builders, developers, consultants, real estate agents and students/educators. This will help municipalities fulfil Clauses 1.1.20/21 for on-site rainwater management.

The WBM Express will open the door to an array of educational opportunities. It will be a resource for developers and others to help the public understand the effect of their choices and decisions on the natural environment. It could be incorporated into the curricula for high school and post-secondary institutions. This will help municipalities fulfil Clause 3.4.7 for ISMPs and Clause 3.5.9 for reporting out.

The total budget for the next phase of work in 2012 is $315,000. About the Partnership: Incorporated as a not-for-profit society, the Partnership had its genesis in a Metro Vancouver technical committee (i.e. SILG). It is the legal entity for the Water Balance Model and the Water Bucket website.

The Partnership is the hub for a provincial ‘convening for action’ network in the local government setting. The majority of Metro Vancouver municipalities are charter members.

The Partnership was responsible for Beyond the Guidebook 2010: Implementing a New Culture for Urban Watershed Protection and Restoration in British Columbia. This guidance document tells the stories of the champions in local government who are leading change and implementing green infrastructure.

Links to Online Resources:

www.waterbucket.ca and www.waterbalance.ca and http://watersustainabilitybc.blogspot.com/

Peer-Based Learning Will Help Local Governments Implement ‘Watershed Blueprints’ in BC http://www.waterbucket.ca/cfa/sites/wbccfa/documents/media/526.pdf

WMA - 20

The following is a summary of the presentation to be made by the Electronics Stewardship Association of BC at the following meeting:

Committee: Waste Management Committee When: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 at 1:00 p.m. Where: 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC

Topics to be covered:

• Overview of the Association o Background

Membership o Purpose

Diversion of End of Life Electronics from Landfill Environmentally responsible Practices

o Program Expansions o Collection network

Depots Collection events

• Audit of the Recycling Stream o Purpose o Audit Standards o Audit Process

• Program Accomplishment o Measurements o Phase II launch

• Next steps o Phase IV expansion o Harmonization

Local with other Stewards Nationally with other Provincial Programs

3.3

WMA - 21


WMA - 22

REPORTS

WMA - 23


WMA - 24

Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011

To: Waste Management Committee From: Dennis Ranahan, Division Manager Solid Waste Department Date: August 17, 2011 Subject: Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan – Conditions of

Approval Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive the report titled “Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan – Conditions of Approval”, dated August 17, 2011 for information. 1. PURPOSE To describe the conditions that the Minister of Environment imposed on Metro Vancouver in his approval of the Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP). 2. CONTEXT On August 30, 2010, Metro Vancouver submitted the ISWRMP to the Minister of Environment for approval. A summary of endorsements confirming each member municipality’s commitment to the plan was submitted on March 23, 2011. In a letter dated July 22, 2011 (Attached), Minister Terry Lake confirmed the approval of the plan subject to a number of conditions. These conditions, expected timelines and staff strategy for complying with the conditions, are listed below:

1. Metro Vancouver must ensure that any new facility or modification to an existing facility follow the appropriate process for authorization. Any new in-province waste-to-energy facility or landfill must comply with the Environmental Assessment Act. A process was identified in the ISWRMP and has been supplemented in the conditions of approval. Metro Vancouver will follow the guidelines and regulations that are in place for authorizing new waste management facilities.

2. Metro Vancouver must ensure that the competitive processes for establishing or

upgrading any waste-to-energy or landfill capacity as identified in the ISWRMP consider, in an equal and fair manner, the full range of in and out of region options and must provide a consultation plan on the selected options. Metro Vancouver staff is developing a procurement process for establishing additional waste-to-energy capacity which involves an independent reviewer.

3. Metro Vancouver must consult with the Fraser Valley Regional District (FVRD) with

respect to air quality concerns before constructing or expanding in-region waste-to-

5.1

WMA - 25

Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan – Conditions of Approval Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 2 of 3

energy capacity. The consultation must include the establishment of a working group with the FVRD to recommend emission standards, monitoring program, and mitigation measures, to be established within one year of the decision to pursue an in-region facility. The Minister’s requirements establishes a process which Metro Vancouver will comply with to establish additional waste-to-energy capacity.

4. Metro Vancouver’s WTE facility in Burnaby will operate under the conditions set in

Appendix A of the ISWRMP until December 31, 2013 after which an operational certificate may apply. Metro Vancouver staff will co-operate with Ministry staff in developing the required operational certificates.

5. Metro Vancouver will work with the Ministry, member municipalities and others to

identify active and closed municipal landfills located within Metro Vancouver by December 31, 2012, determine their closure status by December 31, 2013, ensure closure plans are in place by December 31, 2016 and submit a status report in 2017. Metro Vancouver will work with all relevant parties to identify and assess the status of landfills within the area of Metro Vancouver within the time frames identified.

6. Metro Vancouver shall ensure that methane gas from solid waste facilities can be

used as an alternative fuel in addition to generating electricity or heat. As new technologies to recover energy are developed and proven, Metro Vancouver will duly consider the production of alternate fuels, the generation of heat, the generation of electricity, or any combination of these from landfill gas.

7. Metro Vancouver and member municipalities may participate in approved EPR

programs on a voluntary and independently agreed to basis. Metro Vancouver and some municipalities have worked with existing industry product stewardship groups on this basis and will continue to do so.

8. Metro Vancouver must establish a dispute resolution procedure for plan

implementation by October 22, 2011. A dispute resolution procedure has been drafted by Metro Vancouver staff and will be reviewed with the Ministry’s Regional Manager before October 22, 2011.

9. Metro Vancouver must establish a plan monitoring advisory committee or suitable

alternative to foster public involvement during plan implementation. Terms of Reference for this Committee must be provided to the Ministry by September 22, 2011.

WMA - 26

Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan – Conditions of Approval Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011

Page 3 of 3

Staff, in consultation with the Ministry’s Regional Manager, is currently drafting the structure, make-up and terms of reference for an overarching Integrated Utility Management Advisory Committee and subcommittees. The Terms of Reference will be reviewed with the Regional Manager prior to September 22, 2011, and will be subsequently brought to the Waste Management Committee for consideration.

10. Metro Vancouver must submit to the Ministry bi-annual progress reports beginning in

2013, a 5-year performance review and a full plan review after 10 years. The reporting commitments identified in the ISWRMP have been supplemented with specific dates in the conditions of approval. These specific dates for reporting will be followed.

11. Metro Vancouver must include in the 5-year performance review details regarding

the recovery and/or disposal of the nominal 30 percent residuals identified in the plan. This data is developed each year and will be reported as required.

3. ALTERNATIVES None provided. 4. CONCLUSION In approving the ISWRMP, the Minister of Environment imposed a number of conditions which will enhance the effectiveness and transparency of the plan. Metro Vancouver is committed to addressing these conditions. ATTACHMENT: Letter dated July 22, 2011 from Terry Lake, Minister of Environment to Lois Jackson, Chair Metro Vancouver Board. 5380962

WMA - 27

WMA - 28

JBAIRD

Rectangle

ahilkewi

Rectangle

WMA - 29

WMA - 30

WMA - 31


WMA - 32

Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 To: Waste Management Committee From: Andrew Marr, Senior Engineer

Solid Waste Department Date: September 6, 2011 Subject: Regional Organics Strategy Recommendation: That the Board endorse Model 3: the ‘hybrid model’ for managing organic waste. 1. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to examine different models for managing organic waste and recommend a model and strategic role for Metro Vancouver. 2. CONTEXT Section 2.6.2 of the Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (Plan) calls for Metro Vancouver to work with municipalities to establish new organics processing capacity and divert an additional 265,000 tonnes per annum (TPA) of organic waste generated by homes and businesses away from disposal by 2015. For the purpose of this report, organic wastes include the food scraps, yard trimmings, and soiled paper commonly found in municipal solid waste (MSW), but do not include organic wastes from agricultural operations, heavy industry, biomedical or other non-MSW sources. Of the organic wastes targeted for future diversion, fully half is generated by businesses in the form of food scraps. A regional organics strategy should define the roles of Metro Vancouver, member municipalities and the private sector in managing organics in the region. A number of objectives were considered in the evaluation of potential strategies, including: diverting organic waste from disposal, securing feedstock to organics processing facilities, securing organics processing capacity and performance, ensuring fair pricing and fair competition, regulatory compliance, guaranteeing end product markets, system stability, geographical and financial equity, community acceptance, possible integration with liquid waste operations, etc. Staff evaluated the merits of potential strategies, and the degree to which Metro Vancouver could and should influence the organics processing industry and private haulers. It became evident that the less risk acceptable in achieving the above objectives, the more public sector control of and involvement in all aspects of the system would be required, and vice versa: the more risk that could be tolerated the less public sector control and involvement would be required.

5.2

WMA - 33

Regional Organics Strategy Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 2 of 5 Three principal options for managing organics in the region were developed: Model 1: Maximum intervention: full Metro Vancouver ownership of new processing facilities, full regulation of the operation of existing processing facilities, and full control and direction of the flows of the organic waste industry; Model 2: Minimum intervention: the private sector organics processing industry would provide processing capacity, and private haulers would transport organic waste with minimal to zero regulation and influence from Metro Vancouver; Model 3: - Metro Vancouver would implement regulations and economic incentives (primarily a steadily increasing ‘price’ for the inclusion of organic waste in the regular MSW waste stream) designed to assist in driving increased organic waste diversion by the private sector. The private sector (processors and haulers) would respond to these price signals, allowing entrepreneurial innovation, subject to broad locational and environmental controls exercised either by the region or local municipality. Metro Vancouver would monitor performance against the major objectives, adjust pricing or introduce other regulations as necessary. Commentary on these three models is fleshed out in the ‘alternatives’ section below. 3. ALTERNATIVES The Board may:

a) Endorse a strategy in which Metro Vancouver establishes publicly-owned processing facilities, fully regulates the operation of existing processing facilities, and directs the flows of the organic waste processing industry – the Government Regulated Model.

This model would see Metro Vancouver exercising full regulation of the flows, facilities, hauling, processors, and prices of the local organics market. Metro Vancouver would own new processing facilities, determine their location and size, and decide whether they would produce compost or biofuels. Metro Vancouver would fully regulate the operation of all private facilities and haulers, broker organics from the waste producers to designated processing facilities, and set prices. This model would provide a high degree of certainty that the region would have timely and sufficient processing capacity to meet the diversion goals in the Plan, and would minimize the financial risk to new publicly-owned facilities from uncertain markets and competition. However, this model would incur significant financial cost to the public sector, would require considerable time and effort in order to develop the necessary regulatory instruments. Existing private sector operators and haulers in the organic waste processing industry would likely resist and would argue it would hamper innovation due to the high degree of regulation.

WMA - 34

Regional Organics Strategy Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 3 of 5

b) Endorse a strategy in which Metro Vancouver exercises minimal regulation and influence over the local organics processing industry – Private Sector Controlled Model. This model is essentially the status quo. Historically, Metro Vancouver has had minimal involvement in the siting, design, or ownership of new organics processing capacity, and has had limited involvement in creating regulations or economic incentives to divert organic wastes away from disposal. It has the lowest direct financial and administrative demands on Metro Vancouver and is the least intrusive in terms of regulating the private sector. This model would provide the least amount of certainty that sufficient processing capacity will be established in the region to achieve the Plan’s diversion goals, and would provide no additional economic and regulatory incentives for businesses and residents to divert organic wastes. Historically, the private sector interest in organics management has had mixed success and would not meet the goals of the recently adopted plan. There has been a recent upsurge of interest, possibly in anticipation of an organics ban, but the current capacity will be inadequate very shortly.

c) Endorse a strategy in which Metro Vancouver implements regulations and economic incentives to drive organic waste diversion by the private sector, monitors local processing capacity, and prepares to enact greater regulation, only if required – Hybrid Model. This model would see Metro Vancouver: • Implement a disposal ban on organics from single-family homes in 2012, as

indicated in the Plan. Sufficient processing capacity already exists for single family organics, and virtually all municipalities will likely have full organics collection for single family residents by the end of 2012.

• Introduce and promote a progressive new surcharge on the garbage tipping fee for waste from businesses and multi-family residences that contains excessive amounts of organics. That surcharge would increase in increments, reaching its full level in 2015, gradually increasing the economic differential between disposal of organics and recycling of organics. This staged process would allow waste producers and facility operators to prepare for and comply with a full ban on commercial organics in 2015. The envisaged schedule is a 10% surcharge on the garbage tipping fee in 2012; 20% in 2013; 30% in 2014; and 50% in 2015, although this could be accelerated or slowed down depending on the balance between diversion rates and processing capacity.

• Implement bylaws (in conjunction with member municipalities) requiring homes and businesses to recycle organics and other materials through authorized facilities.

• Monitor the supply and demand for regional organics processing capacity. At the end of 2012, if Metro Vancouver assesses that the private sector is not supplying sufficient processing capacity to achieve regional diversion goals, Metro Vancouver may implement more extensive regulatory control, including flow control to pre-authorized facilities, licensing of waste haulers, and implementation of a region-wide organics tipping fee.

WMA - 35

Regional Organics Strategy Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 4 of 5

• Monitor the cost differential between organics processing and garbage disposal. There is currently moderate economic incentive to divert organics, as the costs of composting and biofuel production are both below the cost of garbage disposal and are expected to remain so for the foreseeable future.

• On request by member municipalities, provide residential organics transfer sites at existing transfer stations (where possible) with costs recovered from the specific facility users.

The private sector would build the new and expanded facilities that would provide the region with new organics processing capacity. In addition, member municipalities that wish to establish their own processing facilities would be encouraged to do so. This model would have a lower overall financial cost to Metro Vancouver and the private sector would retain the majority of the financial risks. The public sector would monitor and retain the option of increasing its involvement in the local organics processing industry, if needed.

Given the potential challenges, costs, and degree of regional intervention, and the uncertainties as to whether the recent upsurge of private sector interest will be continued, at this point the Hybrid Model’s approach to managing local organics appears to be the most prudent and pragmatic approach. This approach enables private companies and entrepreneurial municipalities to innovate and develop the full potential of the marketplace. It also allows Metro Vancouver to promote awareness of the 2015 organics ban for all stakeholders and ready itself to implement further regulatory authority if the efforts of private industry are not successful in building a viable and sustainable secondary marketplace for organics. Staff, therefore, recommend alternative (c): the Hybrid Model. 4. CONCLUSION The private sector has, to date, supplied most of the existing organics processing capacity that currently exists in the region. Significant additional capacity will be needed to meet Metro Vancouver’s goals of diverting an additional 265,000 tonnes per year of organic waste from disposal by 2015. There are three principal options for managing organics in the region: 1) Metro Vancouver establishes publicly-owned processing facilities, fully regulates the operation of existing processing facilities, and directs the flows of the organic waste industry; 2) The private sector organics processing industry continues to provide processing capacity with minimal regulation and influence from Metro Vancouver; and 3) A hybrid model in which Metro Vancouver implements regulations and economic incentives to drive increased organic waste diversion by the private sector, while allowing the private sector to innovate and provide processing capacity. Option 3 appears to provide the best overall balance of assured processing capacity, limited financial risk, and regulation. Under the recommended strategy Metro Vancouver’s new regulation would include a ban on single family residential organics in 2012, and the development of new bylaws requiring mandatory separation of organics for recycling by residents and businesses. The new economic incentives would include escalating surcharges on the disposal of garbage

WMA - 36

Regional Organics Strategy Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 5 of 5 containing organic wastes, along the lines of 10% in 2012, 20% in 2013, 30% in 2014 and 50% in 2015. Metro Vancouver would also continue to develop new regulatory tools to exercise greater regulation of the organics processing industry should ongoing monitoring project a shortfall in local organics processing capacity, and would, in the mean time, communicate the bans and surcharges in a timely way that would allow all parties to properly prepare for these regulatory initiatives. 4737149

WMA - 37


WMA - 38


To: Waste Management Committee From: Andrew Marr Solid Waste Department Date: September 2, 2011 Subject: Waste Composition Monitoring and Diversion Rates Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive this report titled “Waste Composition Monitoring and Diversion Rates”, dated September 2, 2011 for information. 1. PURPOSE To update the Waste Management Committee on the 2010 regional diversion rate, and the status of waste composition monitoring and municipal recycling programs. 2. CONTEXT Regional Diversion Rate Metro Vancouver compiles annual solid waste and recycling information from member municipalities, internal weigh scale records, private recycling facilities and disposal sites, product stewardship organizations, the Provincial government and others. This report provides a summary of that information for calendar 2010. The regional solid waste management system provides services for over 2.3 million residents of Metro Vancouver. Through the combined efforts of municipalities, businesses, and residents in the region in 2010, about 1.7 million tonnes of waste were diverted from disposal. This amounts to about 55% of the material generated in the region by the residential, commercial (ICI) and construction (DLC) sectors. This is slightly less than the 57% diversion in 2009. This was likely due to reduced building activity in 2010, as the recycling of construction and demolition materials is a significant contributor to regional diversion rates. The remaining 1.4 million tonnes of solid waste were managed at transfer stations, waste-to-energy or landfill facilities, and the City of Vancouver or the private sector. Attachment 1 provides the 2010 annual summary table for solid waste and recyclables. The detailed set of Recycling and Solid Waste Management 2010 statistics will be posted to the Metro Vancouver website.

5.3

WMA - 39

Waste Composition Monitoring and Diversion Rates Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011

Page 2 of 3 Waste Composition Monitoring In 2010, Metro Vancouver completed its annual monitoring program analyzing the composition of the waste stream. This work was completed on a quarterly basis for the single family residential, the commercial and the drop-off (self-haul) sectors. Demolition, Landclearing and Construction (DLC) wastes were not included as these are managed at private facilities. The composition of the waste from these non-DLC sectors has remained fairly constant when compared to the 2007 and 2009 results. Food scraps and wood are the largest material categories in the waste stream. Food waste has decreased overall, likely as a result of collection programs being introduced by more municipalities and businesses. Discarded wood waste was higher in 2010 than in 2009, but since the majority of disposed wood tends to be in the DLC waste stream, this may not be an indication of increased wood waste disposal in the region as a whole. Attachment 2 provides the waste composition from the last two monitoring programs (2009 and 2010). Waste composition monitoring is a ‘snapshot’ in time, and because of natural variation in random sampling, the estimated percentages are less accurate for materials that make up a small portion of the waste stream. For example, Residential Drop-Off (RDO) is only a small portion of the overall waste stream, and the percentage of food waste in RDO waste appeared to increase dramatically from 2009 to 2010. However, this was likely due to the particular loads that were randomly sampled, rather than an actual increase in all RDO loads. Staff are performing a modified version of the monitoring program in 2011, which will include a more detailed measurement of the composition of waste from the multi-family and construction (DLC) sectors. This information is used to measure the success of existing diversion efforts, and to design future initiatives targeting specific materials. A copy of the final 2010 Waste Composition Monitoring report will be posted to the Metro Vancouver website. Municipal Recycling Programs In recent years, municipalities in the region have made improvements to their solid waste and recycling programs. Many have implemented residential food scrap collection programs in conjunction with Metro Vancouver’s regional composting facility. Now, over half of the single family households in the region have municipal food scrap collection services. Other municipalities have started bi-weekly garbage collection as a further incentive to increase recycling and composting. There are also municipalities that are piloting food scraps collection for multi-family residents. Attachment 3 provides an overview of the current municipal solid waste and recycling services by municipality. As requested by the Waste Management Committee at its July 2011 meeting, staff canvassed municipalities regarding reporting of contamination rates in the recycling stream. Municipal staff informed Metro Vancouver that there is insufficient information to determine contamination rates for recyclables and organics by municipality. 3. ALTERNATIVES None presented.

WMA - 40

Waste Composition Monitoring and Diversion Rates Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011

Page 3 of 3 4. CONCLUSION In 2010, about 55% of the total waste generated was diverted from disposal. This is slightly less than the 57% diversion in 2009. This small decline was likely due to reduced building activity in the region, as the recycling of construction and demolition materials is a significant contributor to regional diversion rates. Annual monitoring shows the composition of the waste from the residential, commercial and self-haul sectors has remained fairly constant when compared to the 2007 and 2009 results. Many municipalities have made improvements to their solid waste and recycling systems including: food scraps collection, bi-weekly garbage collection and multi-family food scrap collection pilots. ATTACHMENT 1 Metro Vancouver Recycling and Solid Waste Management 2010 Summary Table (5363546) ATTACHMENT 2 Metro Vancouver 2010 & 2009 Solid Waste Composition Summary Tables (5363547) ATTACHMENT 3 Metro Vancouver 2011 Municipal Solid Waste & Recycling Programs Summary Table (5363549) 5362566

WMA - 41

5363546

ATTACHMENT 1

Metro Vancouver Recycling and Solid Waste Management 2010 Summary Table

2010 Metro Vancouver Recycling and Solid Waste Quantities

Waste Sector Disposed (tonnes)

Recycled (tonnes)

Recycling Rate (%)

Residential 582,300 380,700 40% Single Family (reported)

Population = 1,429,495 377,300 344,500 48% Multi Family (estimated)

Population = 922,001 205,000 36,200 15%

ICI (estimated) 510,900 366,400 42%

DLC (reported) 306,000 798,700 72%

Product Stewardship (reported) 130,800

Total 1,399,300 1,676,500 55%

ICI: Institutional, Commercial, Light-Industrial; DLC: Demolition Land-Clearing & Construction

WMA - 42

5363547

ATTACHMENT 2

Metro Vancouver 2010 & 2009 Solid Waste Composition Summary Tables

2010 Waste Composition SF-RES ICI RDO

Overall (RES, ICI, RDO)

Soiled Paper 4.0% 6.4% 1.2% 4.1%Other Paper 9.2% 11.9% 4.1% 8.7%

Plastic 10.6% 11.7% 5.3% 9.7%Yard & Garden 7.6% 4.3% 3.7% 4.9%

Food Waste 37.8% 18.3% 11.1% 18.6%Wood (Clean + Treated) 3.0% 19.8% 37.0% 22.5%

Non Compostable Organics 4.2% 2.1% 1.8% 2.2%Metals & Glass 4.4% 8.1% 11.9% 6.5%

Building Material 6.1% 8.4% 13.3% 13.8%Electronics & Appliances 1.4% 3.2% 1.6% 1.9%Household Hazardous 1.0% 1.6% 0.4% 0.9%Household Hygiene 9.5% 2.0% 3.6% 4.0%

Bulky Objects 1.2% 2.3% 5.1% 2.0%Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

2009 Waste Composition SF-RES ICI RDO

Overall (RES, ICI, RDO)

Soiled Paper 6.6% 9.3% 0.5% 5.8%Other Paper 9.8% 18.3% 3.8% 11.8%

Plastic 15.0% 12.8% 6.4% 11.0%Yard & Garden 4.1% 3.5% 1.4% 3.6%

Food Waste 35.6% 27.7% 1.8% 21.6%Wood (Clean + Treated) 3.2% 9.0% 40.3% 17.6%

Non Compostable Organics 3.2% 2.9% 0.8% 2.3%Metals & Glass 4.5% 5.5% 8.2% 5.3%

Building Material 5.8% 4.6% 16.2% 11.3%Electronics & Appliances 1.5% 2.9% 3.5% 2.2%Household Hazardous 1.3% 1.3% 0.4% 0.9%Household Hygiene 9.0% 1.2% 0.2% 3.4%

Bulky Objects 0.4% 1.1% 16.5% 3.0%Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

SF-RES: Single Family Residential; ICI: Institutional, Commercial, Light-Industrial; RDO: Residential Drop-Off

WMA - 43

5363549

ATTACHMENT 3 Metro Vancouver 2011 Municipal Solid Waste & Recycling Programs Summary Table

Municipal Food Scraps Collection

Municipality

Municipal Garbage Collection

Municipal Organics Collection

Single Family Residents

Multi-Family Residents

Anmore Weekly

Belcarra Weekly Bowen Island, Electoral B&C Weekly

Burnaby Weekly Weekly

Coquitlam Weekly Weekly

Delta Weekly Bi-weekly

Langley City Weekly Weekly

Langley Township Weekly Weekly

Lions Bay Weekly Weekly

Maple Ridge Not provided

New Westminster Weekly Weekly Pilot

North Vancouver City Weekly Weekly North Vancouver District Weekly Weekly

Pitt Meadows Weekly

Port Coquitlam Bi-weekly Weekly By request

Port Moody Bi-weekly Weekly By request

Richmond Weekly Weekly Pilot

Surrey Weekly Weekly

UBC/UEL Weekly Bi-weekly

Vancouver Weekly Bi-weekly By request

West Vancouver Weekly Weekly

White Rock Weekly Weekly

WMA - 44


To: Waste Management Committee From: Mike Stringer, Senior Engineer

Utility Planning Department Date: August 18, 2011 Subject: Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24330 Fraser Highway,

Township of Langley Recommendation: That the Board reject the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the Langley Grove Estates mobile home park at 24330 Fraser Highway, Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 24 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24330 Fraser Highway, Township of Langley”. 1. PURPOSE This report responds to a request from the Township of Langley for Board approval to amend the Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary. 2. CONTEXT Sewerage and Drainage area boundaries are occasionally amended at the request of a member municipality in accordance with Sections 31 and 32 of the GVS&DD Act. District procedure regarding amendments to sewerage area boundaries requires the examination of financial, technical and operational impacts, land use compliance, effect on service levels, local and community interests and regional interests. The GVS&DD has received a request from the Township of Langley to expand the Fraser Sewerage Area (FSA) boundary to include the existing building footprints within the Langley Grove Estates mobile home park at 24330 Fraser Highway as illustrated on Drawing No. SA-2376, Sheet 24 (Attachment 1). The following summarizes the considerations for this boundary expansion:

• The application was approved by Township of Langley Council on April 11, 2011. • A new municipal sewer has been installed approximately 1 kilometre north of the

parcel in question. Costs associated with any connection to this trunk sewer would be the responsibility of the applicant.

• There will be no financial impact on the GVS&DD. • There will be no significant impact to the service levels provided by the GVS&DD

system. • The onsite sewage treatment system on this property is a private secondary

treatment plant and tile field operating under a permit from the Ministry of Environment. The applicant indicates that the treatment system offers significant operational challenges and requires excessive maintenance. The Ministry of

5.4

WMA - 45

Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24330 Fraser Highway, Township of Langley Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 2 of 3

Environment indicates that the facility is in compliance with the requirements of the permit.

• A variety of wastewater treatment package plants are available to service small areas such as mobile home parks, subdivisions and construction or mining camps.

• This application was submitted prior to the July 29, 2011 adoption of Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy. Under the previous Livable Region Strategic Plan (LRSP) this site was located within the Green Zone, which was intended to preserve natural assets and farm land and to limit urban development pressures on those lands. Under the current Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) the site is located outside of the Urban Containment Boundary, within a small Rural Land Use Designation surrounded by the Agricultural Land Use Designation (consistent with the ALR). The Rural designation generally does not have access to regional sewer services, and is intended to retain existing rural character and land uses that do not require the provision of urban services such as regional sewer treatment. Under both the LRSP and the newly adopted RGS, this area is not intended for future urban development, and the extension of regional sewer services to this site could trigger pressures for additional regional sewer service expansion and urban forms of development.

• Regional Growth Strategy 1.3.1 states that Metro Vancouver’s role is to “Direct the GVS&DD not to extend regional sewer services into Rural areas, except for building footprints in cases where infrastructure is needed to address a public health issue, protect the region’s natural assets, or to service agriculture or agri-industry”. Exceptions to Regional Growth Strategy policies related to sewer service extension have been supported if significant environmental or health issues are demonstrated. However, the British Columbia Ministry of Environment indicates that the facility is in compliance. There are also viable alternative private waste water treatment options available for the current land use.

3. ALTERNATIVES The Board may: a) reject the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the Langley Grove

Estates mobile home park at 24330 Fraser Highway, Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 24 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24330 Fraser Highway, Township of Langley”.

Extending regional sewer services to this site would not be consistent with Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy. The existing sewage treatment system, while it may present operating and maintenance challenges, is in compliance with its Ministry of Environment permit. If the applicant is not satisfied with the existing sewage treatment system, there are a number of other types of on-site treatment systems available.

or b) approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the existing building

footprints within the Langley Grove Estates mobile home park at 24330 Fraser Highway, Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 24 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24330 Fraser Highway, Township of Langley”.

WMA - 46

Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24330 Fraser Highway, Township of Langley Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 3 of 3

Extending regional sewer services to this site would not be consistent with Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy.

4. CONCLUSION The subject property is currently serviced by a sewage system that complies with Ministry of Environment requirements. Other types of treatment are available if the applicant is not happy with the existing system. Extending regional sewer services to this site would not be consistent with Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy. For these reasons, staff recommends alternative a) above - that the application be rejected. Attachment: Drawing No. SA-2376, Sheet 24 5387151

WMA - 47

TOWNSHIPOF LANGLEY

ATTACHMENT 1

WMA - 48


To: Waste Management Committee From: Ray Robb, Regulation & Enforcement Division Manager Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks Department Date: August 17, 2011 Subject: Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No.

299, 2007 – Staff Appointments Recommendation: That the Board, pursuant to the Environmental Management Act and Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007, appoint Scott Brown and Sukhjeet (Sonny) Johal as Officers. 1. PURPOSE To update Metro Vancouver staff appointments under the Environmental Management Act and Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007. 2. CONTEXT Metro Vancouver’s Liquid Waste Regulatory Program supports the goals of the Liquid Waste Management Plan through regulation of the discharge of non-domestic wastes to the regions’ sanitary sewer system. The Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007 delegates authority to Board-designated Officers to advance liquid waste management goals. Municipal Sewage Control Officers may enter property, inspect works, and obtain records and other information to promote compliance with GVS&DD Sewer Use Bylaw and the BC Environmental Management Act. The authority for staff to undertake these compliance promotion activities are derived from their appointment by the Board as Municipal Sewage Control Officers. Recent changes in Metro Vancouver staff have resulted in a need for the Board to update staff appointments pursuant to the Environmental Management Act and GVS&DD Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007. In accordance with Section 29 of the Environmental Management Act, Municipal Sewage Control Officers must be appointed by the Board. 3. ALTERNATIVES None presented.

5.5

WMA - 49

Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007 – Staff Appointments Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 2 of 2

5381610

4. CONCLUSION Recent changes in staff have resulted in a need to appoint new staff under the Environmental Management Act and Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007.

WMA - 50


To: Waste Management Committee From: Ray Robb, Regulation & Enforcement Division Manager Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks Department Date: August 17, 2011 Subject: Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Municipal Solid Waste

and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw – Staff Appointments Recommendation: That the Board, pursuant to the Environmental Management Act and Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw 181, 1996 as amended by Bylaw 183, 1996, appoint Scott Brown and Sukhjeet (Sonny) Johal as Officers. 1. PURPOSE To update staff appointments under the Environmental Management Act and Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw 181, 1996 as amended by Bylaw 183, 1996. 2. CONTEXT Metro Vancouver’s Solid Waste Regulatory Program supports the goals of the Solid Waste Management Plan through regulation of solid waste and recyclable materials management at private facilities. GVS&DD Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Materials Regulatory Bylaws 181 and 183 impose requirements upon the private sector and delegate authority upon Metro Vancouver staff to advance solid waste management goals. Officers may enter property; inspect works; obtain records and other information to promote compliance with the Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District solid waste management bylaws. The authority for staff to undertake these compliance promotion activities are derived from their appointment by the Board as Officers. Recent changes in Metro Vancouver staff have resulted in a need for the Board to appoint new Officers pursuant to the Environmental Management Act and GVS&DD Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Materials Regulatory Bylaw 181, 1996 as amended by Bylaw 183, 1996. In accordance with Section 32 of the Environmental Management Act, Officers must be appointed by the Board.

5.6

WMA - 51

GVS&DD Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw - Staff Appointments Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 2 of 2

5382002

3. ALTERNATIVES None presented. 4. CONCLUSION Recent changes in staff have resulted in a need to appoint new staff under the Environmental Management Act and Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw 181, 1996 as amended by Bylaw 183, 1996.

WMA - 52


To: Waste Management Committee From: Toivo Allas, Manager, Utility Planning Department Date: September 1, 2011 Subject: Manager’s Report Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the report dated September 1, 2011 titled “Manager’s Report”. 1. Solid Waste Regulatory Bylaw Review Following the November 10, 2010, and May 18, 2011 reports to the Waste Management Committee (WMC), the Regulation and Enforcement Division is moving forward with the Solid Waste Regulatory Bylaw Review (SWRBR) Engagement and Consultation Program on the proposed changes to the GVS&DD Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No 181, 1996, as amended. Pre-consultation took place from November 2010 to September 11, 2011. From July 2011 to September 2011, Metro Vancouver staff consulted on potential bylaw changes with Metro Vancouver advisory committees, including the Regional Engineers Advisory Committee (REAC), REAC-Solid Waste Sub-Committee (REAC-SWSC), Municipal Waste Reduction Coordinators (MWRC), and the Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC). Two issue papers were uploaded in August 2011 to the Metro Vancouver website, which can be found in the ‘Bylaws Under Review’ section. The following are the key phases of the subsequent consultation and approval process:

Two workshops are planned, one for municipal staff during the week of October 3, 2011 and one for industry representatives during the week of October 11, 2011. Additional stakeholder workshops could be held in the fall to further guide development of the SWRBR. The Consultation process is expected to conclude by the end of 2011. A report on the consultation findings will be forwarded to Metro Vancouver advisory committees. Staff will aim to submit an amended bylaw with a consultation report to the WMC and the Board by May 2012 for initial approval, and to the Minister of Environment for final approval by June 2012. Board adoption of the bylaw amendment is expected in Fall 2012.

5.7

WMA - 53

Manager’s Report Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 2 of 4 2. Review Status of Metro Vancouver Biofuel Facility in Surrey The City of Surrey will be establishing its own facility to produce biofuel from organic wastes on a municipally-owned site adjacent to the Surrey Transfer Station. This is consistent with the Regional Organics Strategy in which the private sector and/or interested municipalities will build new organics processing capacity. Metro Vancouver will support the Surrey biofuel facility and other new organics processing facilities by setting regulations and economic incentives to increase the diversion of organic wastes away from disposal. 3. Table of 2011 Priorities – Toivo Allas The Attachment to this report is the Waste Management Committee 2011 Workplan (table of priorities) indicating the quarter that the priority will be considered by the Waste Management Committee. Completed items are shown in bold. ATTACHMENT: Waste Management Committee 2011 Workplan

WMA - 54

Manager’s Report Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 3 of 4

Waste Management Committee 2011 Workplan

1st Quarter

Key priorities

• 2011 Committee Priorities • Zero Waste Challenge Communications Plan • Review Status of Metro Vancouver Biofuel Facility in Surrey • Regional Framework for Organics Processing Facilities • Regional Implementation Strategy for Recycling Drop-Off Facilities (Eco-Centers) • 2011 GVS&DD Capital Projects • Preliminary Zero Waste Challenge Strategy (discussion document for

Conference) • Zero Waste Challenge Conference 2nd Quarter

Key priorities

• North Shore Integrated Resource Recovery Study • Regional Data Reporting • Report Back on Minister’s Comments/Approval of the Integrated Liquid

Waste and Resource Management Plan • Report Back on Minister’s Comments/Approval of the Integrated Solid Waste and

Resource Management Plan • Tsawwassen First Nation – GVS&DD Membership • Quality Control Annual Report for GVS&DD • RAAC’s Review of Sewerage Cost Allocation (Tier 1 / Tier 2) • District Energy Opportunities at the Burnaby Waste-to-Energy Facility • Lulu Island WWTP – Microsludge Biomethane Project • Status of Capital Expenditures • Zero Waste Challenge Strategy and Action Plan • Material Disposal Bans Update

ATTACHMENT

WMA - 55

Manager’s Report Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 4 of 4

3rd Quarter

Key priorities

• National Zero Waste Marketing Council Proposal • Proposal to convene a global dialogue on sustainable solid waste management

working through existing international bodies such as United Cities and Local Governments and others.

• Metro Vancouver Smart Phone Application (“App”) for Metro Vancouver Recycles.org

• Integrated Utility Management Advisory Committee Terms of Reference (dependent on approval of Plans by the Minister)

• EPR Program for Packaging – Ministry’s Process (dependent on Minister’s review) • Expand Private Sector Solid Waste Bylaw Scope to Cover More Recyclable

Materials • Waste to Energy Facility – 2010 Financial Update • GVS&DD/Wastech Comprehensive Agreement – 2010 Financial Results 4th Quarter

Key priorities

• Zero Waste Challenge Christmas Campaign • Status of Capital Expenditures • Revise Private Sector Solid Waste Bylaw Fee Schedule to encourage more

resource recovery • Amend Bylaw to Reduce Restaurant and Grease Discharges to Sewer • Opening of the Annacis Wastewater Centre • North Shore Integrated Resource Recovery – Next Steps • 2012 Solid Waste Tipping Fee Bylaw • 2012 Program and Priorities

4978421 WMA - 56

INFORMATION ITEMS

WMA - 57


WMA - 58

Hosted in Partnership with:

Who should attend?

Brand owners, Retailers, Elected Officials & Regulators, Plastics Converters and Others!

Regulations governing the management of packaging and residual waste in British Columbia have dramatically impacted the way businesses and municipalities approach their recycling

WMA - 59

ahilkewi

Text Box

6.1

_____________________ Contact Us Tel. 905.678.7748 Fax. 905.678.0774

and disposal responsibilities. With product stewards accountable for 100% of packaging, diversion targets exceeding 75%, and increasing utilization of energy recovery, it is a time of tremendous challenge and opportunity for brand owners, retailers, plastics converters, and municipalities.

This tour is the opportunity to see how leading-edge technologies utilized in the Lower Mainland– including recycling and solid waste energy recovery facilities - handle waste streams in an environmentally sustainable way while potentially reducing costs and leveraging profitability through partnership. Why Attend?

All attendees will benefit from knowledge gained through this important tour and day-long networking event.

• Product stewards and brand owners can be more effective in their decision-making through better awareness about current and emerging systems/technologies to help manage a very wide spectrum of plastic materials.

• Municipalities will better understand what their role could be as partners and/or service providers in the evolving business of integrated waste management.

• Converters will see operating systems that may inform their go-forward investments in physical infrastructure and define their relationships with product stewards.

• Provincial government officials will witness first hand ‘on the ground’ linkages/impacts between emerging stewardship policies and sustainable economic development, employment and environmentally progressive business operations.

What will you see? Visit #1: Urban Impact Recycling Ltd., A highly automated large scale multi-material recycling facility (MRF) that sorts a full range of plastics and other recyclable materials. Visit # 2: Merlin Plastics Supply Inc. An award-winning plastics reprocessing facility regrinding and repellitizing a broad range of plastics including PE film and PS foam. Visit # 3: Metro Vancouver Energy-from-Waste Facility, An award-winning energy- from-waste plant using residual waste streams to produce clean power.

WMA - 60

Participants will travel by bus.

To join the tour please complete the attached registration form and return to CPIA before September 16th, 2011. Click here for more tour details.

Please call or email if you have questions: Craig Foster, Canadian Plastics Industry Association Craig Foster & Associates T. 604-789-8429 E. [email protected]

5955 Airport Rd., Suite 125, Mississauga, ON L4V 1R9 Tel : 905.678.7748 | Fax: 905.678.0774 | www.plastics.ca

Unsubscribe me from this list Toronto Congress Centre

650 Dixon Road, Toronto, ON

11:30 am Reception followed by awards celebration and lunch

This message is provided in confidence and should not be forwarded to any external third party without authorization. If you have received this message in error, please notify the original sender immediately by telephone or by return email and delete this message along with any attachments.

WMA - 61

ahilkewi

Rectangle


WMA - 62

WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING · 5.1 Single Family Residential Waste and Recycling -...

Documents

Transcript of WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING · 5.1 Single Family Residential Waste and Recycling -...