AGENDA WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING. Wednesday, May 18, :00 p.m. 2 nd Floor Boardroom 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC

Transcription

1 AGENDA WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING Wednesday, May 18, :00 p.m. 2 nd 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) if you are unable to attend.

2 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY.

3 NOTICE TO THE GVRD WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 1:00 p.m. May 18, nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA A G E N D A 1.1 May 18, 2011 Regular Meeting Agenda Staff Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for May 18, 2011 as circulated. 2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES 2.1 April 13, 2011 Regular Meeting Minutes Staff Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held April 13, 2011 as circulated. 3. DELEGATIONS No Items presented. 4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No Items presented. 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF 5.1 North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrading and Integrated Resource Recovery Designated Speaker: Fred Nenninger, Project Manager, Wastewater Secondary Treatment Upgrades Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the report dated May 9, 2011, titled North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrading and Integrated Resource Recovery Residential Waste Transfer Station in Surrey Designated Speaker: Ken Carrusca, Division Manager, Policy and Planning Department Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report dated May 12, 2011, titled Residential Waste Transfer Station in Surrey. May 12, 2011 WMA - 1

4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting for the Waste-to-Energy Facility (WTEF) Designated Speakers: Roger Quan, Division Manager, Policy and Planning Department Chris Allan, Senior Engineer, Engineering and Construction Department Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the report dated April 15, 2011, titled 2010 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting for the (WTEF). 5.4 Metro Vancouver Environmental Regulatory Bylaw Enforcement Action Resolved September 2010 April 2011 Designated Speaker: Grant McGillivray, Environmental Control Officer, Policy and Planning Department Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the report dated April 4, 2011, titled Metro Vancouver Environmental Regulatory Bylaw Enforcement Action Resolved September 2010 April Proposed Revisions to Fees in GVS&DD Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181 Designated Speakers: Ray Robb, Division Manager, Policy and Planning Department Jeff Gogol, Environmental Regulatory Planner, Policy and Planning Department Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receives for information the report dated April 26, 2011, titled Proposed Revisions to Fees in GVS&DD Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No National Zero Waste Marketing Council Designated Speaker: Heather Schoemaker, Manager, Corporate Relations Department Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the report titled National Zero Waste Marketing Council dated April 26, Material Disposal Bans Update Designated Speaker: Chris Allan, Senior Engineer, Engineering and Construction Department Recommendation: That the Committee receive the report titled Material disposal Bans Update, dated April 20, 2011 for information. 5.8 Manager s Report Designated Speaker: Toivo Allas, Manager, Policy and Planning Department Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the report dated April 28, 2011, titled Manager s Report. WMA - 2

5 6. INFORMATION ITEMS 6.1 Correspondence addressed to Greg Moore, Chair, Waste Management Committee from Terry Lake, Minister of Environment, dated April 14, 2011 regarding Metro Vancouver s Integrated Liquid and Solid Waste Resource Management Plans UBCM Resolutions 7. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented. 8. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING No items presented. 9. ADJOURNMENT Staff Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee conclude its regular meeting of May 18, WMA - 3

6 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY WMA - 4

7 WMA - 5 MINUTES

8 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY WMA - 6

9 2.1 GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Waste Management Committee held at 1:02 p.m. on Wednesday, April 13, 2011 in the 2 nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. PRESENT: 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 (arrived at 1:03 p.m.) Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Director Harold Steves, Richmond Director Joe Trasolini, Port Moody (arrived at 1:16 p.m.) Director Wayne Wright, New Westminster ABSENT: None STAFF: Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Commissioner/Deputy Chief Administrative Officer, Chief Administrative Officer s Department Toivo Allas, Manager, Policy and Planning Department Tim Jervis, Manager, Engineering and Construction Department Paul Lam, Acting Manager, Operations and Maintenance Department Klara Kutakova, Assistant to Regional Committees, Corporate Secretary s Department 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1.1 April 13, 2011 Regular Meeting Agenda It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Waste Management Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for April 13, 2011 as circulated. CARRIED 2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES 2.1 March 9, 2011 Regular Meeting Minutes It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Waste Management Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held March 9, 2011 as circulated. CARRIED Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Waste Management Committee held on Wednesday, April 13, 2011 Page 1 of 6 WMA - 7

10 3. DELEGATIONS No items presented. 4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented. 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF 1:03 p.m. Director MacLean arrived at the meeting. 5.1 North Shore Integrated Resource Recovery Study Fred Nenninger, Regional Utility Division Manager, Policy and Planning Department, provided an overview of the finalized North Shore Integrated Resource Recovery Study. The following was highlighted by the presenter: background leading to the development of the study objectives of the study potential liquid and solid waste resources: o liquid waste: biogas, organic solids (biofuel and nutrients), and low grade heat and phosphorus recovery o solid waste: yard and food waste (biofuel and nutrients), wood waste, and mixed waste-to-energy wastewater scenarios: o a centralized plant with optimized resource recovery o distributed plants with optimized resource recovery key findings: o the centralized plant has the best outcome o maximum opportunity is seen in the community district energy system. The 54-km-long system would run from Maplewood to Ambleside. It would supply heat to 300 commercial and/or residential/high towers and industrial sites a new energy plant at Maplewood, to produce power and heat from organics and wood waste by: o o anaerobic digestion of organics gasification of wood waste (power generated from the syngas would be supplied to BC Hydro grid and heat would be supplied to the community district energy system) o recovery of waste heat from the existing industries distribution of heating demand the need for community fuel switch economics modeling over the 50-year cycle next steps: completion of the wastewater treatment plan upgrade project definition, concept validation, market analysis (potential revenue sources, and new and existing development), exploration of a smaller scale/phased approach (look for the best locations and best mix of solid/liquid waste organics), and exploration of business models. Presentation material dated April 2011, titled North Shore Study Integrated Resource Recovery is retained with the April 13, 2011 Waste Management Committee agenda. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Waste Management Committee held on Wednesday, April 13, 2011 Page 2 of 6 WMA - 8

11 Request of Staff Staff was requested to post the North Shore Integrated Resource Recovery Study on the Board Extranet. 1:16 p.m. Director Trasolini arrived at the meeting. Comments were provided on: the need to phase in and scale down the proposed project the value of the plan; the need to convert all waste into resources and to look at decentralized systems the need to better understand, in terms of cost and scale, the ramifications and implications of the study the need to obtain detailed information on costing, phasing in and integration of the project in the existing system the need to present a strong business case and a viable economic plan prior to moving ahead with the plan The following comments were also provided: the value of the report is in pointing out new technologies. Extract from the report all potentially useful/pertinent information and make it fit in the context of the North Shore consider involving the private sector the Lonsdale Energy Corporation is operating efficiently and provides district energy services in the area the Lonsdale Energy Corporation is being subsidized by other levels of government it would be useful to receive comments from other Metro Vancouver Committees, namely the Environment and Energy Committee and the Finance Committee prior to sending the study to other Metro Vancouver Committees for their comments, explore what is practical, doable and affordable, and what timing should be applied to phasing in some forwarding-thinking ideas presented in the report Concerns were expressed about the following: high costs and the scale of the project (in light of the expenses faced by Metro Vancouver and TransLink, Metro Vancouver is not in a position to proceed with the project at its full-scale) opportunities may be missed if the recommendations/projects in study are not carried out the project would only be viable in a high density area; the proposed (Maplewood and Ambleside) areas are growing slowly and therefore not ideal for the project 54 km of pipes would be expensive to install, and it would take a long time to connect customers to the system Request of Staff Staff was requested to address questions and concerns raised by Committee members at the April 13, 2011 meeting. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Waste Management Committee held on Wednesday, April 13, 2011 Page 3 of 6 WMA - 9

12 5.2 Metro Vancouver 2011 Zero Waste Challenge Conference Report dated April 5, 2011 from Heather Schoemaker, Manager, Corporate Relations Department, and Toivo Allas, Manager, Policy and Planning Department, providing an overview of Metro Vancouver s inaugural Zero Waste Challenge Conference. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the report dated April 5, 2011 titled Metro Vancouver 2011 Zero Waste Challenge Conference. CARRIED 5.3 Interim Report on Single Family Residential Waste and Recycling Report dated April 4, 2011 from Andrew Marr, Senior Engineer, Policy and Planning Department, presenting the annual figures for single-family residential garbage, recycling, and yard waste/food waste data, as requested by the Waste Management Committee. Suggestions were made regarding the following: provide a breakdown of diversion rates for various materials, clarify what services/activities are included in the recycling statistics report on practices that have been put in place by municipalities to achieve their diversion rates Concerns were expressed that the statistics provided to the public do not accurately reflect the diversion achieved by individual municipalities because of different criteria being used by individual municipalities in calculation of/reporting out on their diversion rates; statistics not being shared with municipalities by some private service providers; and/or some operations not being factored in (such as recycling depots). Request of Staff Staff was requested to develop regional criteria/a regional policy on how calculations are made by individual municipalities. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Waste Management Committee receive the report dated April 4, 2011 titled Interim Report on Single Family Residential Waste and Recycling for information. CARRIED 5.4 Regional Residential Waste Drop-Off (RDO) Facility in South Surrey Report dated April 4, 2011 from Ken Carrusca, Integrated Planning Division Manager, Policy and Planning Department, providing an update on the schedule to establish the regional residential drop-off facility in Surrey. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Waste Management Committee held on Wednesday, April 13, 2011 Page 4 of 6 WMA - 10

13 Discussion ensued on: the commitments/understanding between the GV&SDD and the City of Surrey concerning the second transfer station/residential drop off facility in the City of Surrey the reasons for why the service was/is needed in the area (South Surrey) Concerns were expressed about the following: inequity in providing the service across the region wording discrepancies between the resolutions passed by the GVS&DD Board and the City of Surrey concerning the RDO facility in South Surrey Staff was requested to provide a comprehensive report on the history of the issue (including the period prior to the public hearing on the Surrey transfer station, a report that would substantiate that GVS&DD agreed to provide the second residential drop off facility, and contextual information related to its need). It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Waste Management Committee: a) receive this report on the schedule to establish the Regional Residential Waste Drop-Off (RDO) Facility in South Surrey for information; and b) refer the report back to staff for further background information. CARRIED 5.5 Status of District Energy Opportunities at the Waste-to-Energy Facility Report dated April 5, 2011 from Ken Carrusca, Integrated Planning Division Manager, Policy and Planning Department, providing an update on the status of the district energy system being proposed to service the East Fraserlands development in southeast Vancouver, as requested by Committee at its March 9, 2011 meeting. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Waste Management Committee receive for information this report on the opportunities for establishment of district energy systems using heat from the Metro Vancouver Waste-to-Energy Facility in Burnaby. CARRIED 5.6 Status of Utilities Capital Expenditures to December 31, 2010 Report dated March 31, 2011 from Tim Jervis, Manager, Engineering and Construction Department, and Phil Trotzuk, Financial Planning and Operations Division Manager, Finance and Administration Department, reporting on the status of capital expenditures to December 31, It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board receive the report titled Status of Utilities Capital Expenditures to December 31, 2010, dated March 31, 2011 for information. CARRIED Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Waste Management Committee held on Wednesday, April 13, 2011 Page 5 of 6 WMA - 11

14 5.7 Attendance at the Recycling Council of British Columbia s (RCBC) Zero Waste Conference, Whistler, June 8-10, 2011 Report dated April 5, 2011 from Heather Schoemaker, Manager, Corporate Relations Department, seeking Board authorization for a Metro Vancouver Director to attend the RCBC Zero Waste Conference taking place in Whistler June 8-10, It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board authorize the Chair to appoint a Metro Vancouver Director to attend the RCBC Zero Waste Conference, June 8-10, 2011 in Whistler. CARRIED 5.8 Manager s Report Report dated March 22, 2011 from Toivo Allas, Manager, Policy and Planning Department, informing the Committee about new EPR programs starting in 2011 and 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 February 18, 2011, titled Manager s Report. CARRIED 6. INFORMATION ITEMS No items presented. 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 April 13, CARRIED (Time: 2:33 p.m.) Klara Kutakova, Assistant to Regional Committees Greg Moore, Chair FINAL Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Waste Management Committee held on Wednesday, April 13, 2011 Page 6 of 6 WMA - 12

15 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY

16 WMA - 13 REPORTS

17 5.1 Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: May 18, 2011 Environment and Energy Committee Meeting Date: June 14, 2011 To: From: Waste Management Committee Environment and Energy Committee Fred Nenninger, Project Manager, Wastewater Secondary Treatment Upgrades Date: May 9, 2011 Subject: North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrading and Integrated Resource Recovery Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the report dated May 9, 2011, titled North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrading and Integrated Resource Recovery. Environment and Energy Committee Recommendation: That the Environment and Energy Committee receive for information the report dated May 9, 2011, titled North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrading and Integrated Resource Recovery. 1. PURPOSE To update the Committees on next steps related to the upgrading to secondary treatment of the Lions Gate Wastewater Treatment Plant and the further investigations of integrated resource recovery opportunities for the North Shore. 2. CONTEXT Metro Vancouver is currently awaiting the approval by the Minister of Environment of its updated Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan. The Plan as submitted included upgrading the Lions Gate treatment plant to secondary treatment within 10 years subject to the appropriate financial arrangements being in place. The Plan also included pursuing liquid waste resource recovery in the integrated resource recovery context with a commitment to assess each sewerage area using an integrated resource recovery business case model. In adopting the Plan in May 2010, the Board directed staff to include funds in the 2011 budget and future years to complete the work on project definition, land negotiation, preliminary design, detailed design and construction. Staff were directed to include in the future budgets for detailed design and construction the assumption of 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 contribution from Metro Vancouver, the provincial government and the federal government. WMA - 15

18 North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrading and Integrated Resource Recovery Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: May 18, 2011 Environment and Energy Committee Meeting Date: June 14, 2011 Page 2 of 2 In anticipation of the upcoming work related to the upgrading to secondary treatment of both the Lions Gate and Iona Island Plants, a dedicated project team is being put in place. Work will focus on the first phase of the project related to project definition and land negotiation with the priority on the Lions Gate upgrade. In April 2011, work was completed on an initial investigation for the North Shore of integrated resource recovery opportunities available from both the liquid waste and the solid waste systems. This work was undertaken by Fidelis Resource Group and is documented in their report, titled Integrated Resource Recovery Study, Metro Vancouver North Shore Communities March 29, A presentation of the report s findings was provided to the Waste Management Committee at their April 2011 meeting and initial comments from the Committee were received. On moving forward, the immediate next step will be to commence the work on both the Lions Gate treatment plant upgrading and the review and potential phasing of resource recovery opportunities for the North Shore. A series of meetings will be scheduled with the North Shore municipalities to identify the key work tasks that will be undertaken in 2011 and 2012 to progress both the treatment plant project definition work and the integrated resource recovery opportunities. The integrated resource opportunities will be reviewed with the North Shore municipalities for three specific initial local areas in the vicinity of the new wastewater treatment plant, in the vicinity of the Lonsdale Energy Corporation and in the vicinity of the Maplewood industrial area. Market assessments and technical and financial viability will be confirmed to verify the opportunities that should be brought forward for further consideration. 3. ALTERNATIVES None presented. 4. CONCLUSION Work is ready to commence on both the project definition for the secondary treatment upgrading of the Lions Gate Wastewater Treatment Plant and more detailed investigations of the integrated resource recovery opportunities available on the North Shore from both the liquid waste and solid waste systems. The immediate next step involves a series of meetings with the North Shore municipalities to identify the key work tasks for 2011 and 2012 for both the treatment plant upgrading and the resource recovery opportunities WMA - 16

19 5.2 Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: May 18, 2011 To: From: Waste Management Committee Ken Carrusca, Division Manager, Policy and Planning Department Date: May 12, 2011 Subject: Residential Waste Transfer Station in Surrey Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report dated May 12, 2011, titled Residential Waste Transfer Station in Surrey. 1. PURPOSE To provide a history and context of Metro Vancouver s commitment to building a residential waste transfer station in Surrey. 2. CONTEXT The 1995 Solid Waste Management Plan identified the need to build a transfer station in the City of Surrey, largely to replace the services of the closed Port Mann Landfill. The Plan also indicated that a second regional residential drop off facility should be considered. As will become evident, the reason for this need for consideration was related to the objective of ensuring sufficient spatial coverage of the servicing areas, which in turn would relate to the scale and location of the first transfer station to be established. During the initial process of siting the transfer station, a number of possible locations in Newton and Cloverdale were considered. These sites were in central Surrey and if only one transfer station were to be established, then a central Surrey location would optimize the distance to be travelled to service the entire municipality. However, these proposed sites located in central Surrey failed to gain support, and Surrey considered a waste export option. In response the GVS&DD Board established in June 1997, a Special Board Committee to address the issue. In the absence of a Surrey transfer station, garbage had to be trucked across the Fraser River to the Coquitlam transfer station. The increased costs incurred, a dispute over who should bear those costs, an increase in illegal dumping and the political tension over Surrey s proposal to export waste created an atmosphere of extreme urgency, if not crisis. In April 1999, the Board received a report from the Special Committee and authorized staff to consult with the public on the type and number of transfer stations (whether there should be one or two) to serve Surrey. Out of that process, Port Kells emerged as the preferred location for a new transfer station. In a closed meeting, the Board received and approved the Special Committee s recommendation to locate the Surrey Transfer Station at the current site in Port WMA - 17

20 Residential Waste Transfer Station in Surrey Page 2 of 3 Waste Management Committee Date: May18, 2011 Kells. As Port Kells is in the extreme north end of the municipality, the implicit logical inference would have been that a second, residential drop off facility would be required. However, this remained implicit. The focus of discussion was on resolving the Port Kells facility, particularly the transfer of land ownership of the preferred site from Surrey to the GVS&DD which involved further difficult and complex negotiations. The site ownership issues were resolved and in July 2001, the Board received and accepted the City of Surrey s offer to sell the Port Kells site for the establishment of the new transfer station. The City of Surrey agreed to a rezoning process for the site and an independent consultant was retained to try to mediate the financial dispute. On December 10 th, the City of Surrey approved the rezoning and placed several conditions on the establishment of the transfer station, one of which included the GVS&DD s commitment to plan and build the residential drop-off facility, to service the southern parts of Surrey, in the next two to four years. On December 19 th, Mr. Ken Cameron, the then Manager of Policy and Planning who had been leading the process, wrote to Surrey and confirmed the GVS&DD s acceptance of Surrey s conditions. Work could then begin on designing the new transfer station. A status report was drafted in February to update the Solid Waste Committee, including the acceptance of and progress on carrying out the City of Surrey s conditions. In July 2002, the Board endorsed the terms of reference for the establishment of the Surrey Transfer Station Monitoring Committee. These terms of reference set out the acceptance of the five conditions, including the commitment for the residential drop-off facility. In retrospect, it would have been more appropriate for staff to have obtained formal approval of the acceptance of the five conditions prior to sending the acceptance letter on December 19 th, However, it appears this never occurred to staff to do so. Surrey s condition was the logical consequence of the decision to locate the first facility in the extreme north end of the municipality; it was consistent with the 1995 plan and the 1999 report. The only issue would be one of timing and that would be determined in the planning process and the GVS&DD s budget process. Moreover, it was Christmas time when there were no political meetings normally scheduled and there was an urgent need to resolve the crisis and proceed with the Port Kells transfer station, which was the entire focus of attention. The implicit assumption that the commitment to a second facility, a Residential Drop Off facility, was not an issue seemed to be implicitly confirmed by the fact that neither the Solid Waste Committee, who were apprised of the accepted condition at its March meeting, nor the Board, who were apprised four months later, raised any concerns. On October 30, 2009, the GVS&DD Board approved Metro Vancouver s 2010 Budget. In that budget, under the Capital Expenditures Transfer Station System, there was a $4.7 million line item for a Surrey Eco Centre. This was a recasting of what was previously considered the residential drop off facility. A similar recasting was made in the new Integrated Resource and Solid Waste Management Plan. It was this recasting that first raised an issue, almost eight years after the commitment had been made. The apparent inconsistency between the region providing an eco-centre in Surrey and other municipalities providing similar facilities elsewhere raised a host of questions about eco-centres. As a result, Surrey staff indicated that they would be satisfied if the GVS&DD simply satisfied its long standing commitment to a Residential Drop Off facility and Surrey would accept responsibility for any eco-centre aspects. WMA - 18

21 Residential Waste Transfer Station in Surrey Page 3 of 3 Waste Management Committee Date: May18, ALTERNATIVES None presented. 4. CONCLUSION Within the approved 1995 Solid Waste Management Plan, Metro Vancouver committed to building a full-sized transfer station in Surrey to replace a regional landfill that was about to close in that municipality. Metro Vancouver s commitment to the City of Surrey to consider a residential drop-off facility was also identified in the 1995 Solid Waste Management Plan, and was became a condition linked to the establishment of the main transfer station. The commitment was made by staff and it would have been preferable to have first obtained formal approval by the GVS&DD Board. We would certainly do that today. But at the time it appears there was an implicit assumption that such a commitment was consistent with the Board s Solid Waste Management Plan and the urgent priority was to resolve the crisis of there being no transfer station at all. The Solid Waste Management Committee was formally apprised of the situation at the first practical opportunity and the Board indirectly confirmed the commitment in its approval of the Monitoring Committee s terms of reference six months later. The conclusion is that Metro Vancouver committed to build a residential Drop Off facility in Surrey as part of the conditions for resolving the Port Kells transfer station. The commitment was made by staff, perhaps inappropriately, without prior formal approval by the Board. Both the Solid Waste Committee and the Board were informed and tacitly accepted the condition in the months that followed. The commitment was also set out in the terms of reference for the Surrey transfer Monitoring Committee which was formally approved by the Board in July WMA - 19

22 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY WMA - 20

23 5.3 Environment and Energy Committee Meeting Date: May 10, 2011 Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: May 18, 2011 To: From: Environment and Energy Committee Waste Management Committee Roger Quan, Division Manager, Policy and Planning Department Chris Allan, Senior Engineer, Engineering and Construction Department Date: April 15, 2011 Subject: 2010 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting for the Waste-to-Energy Facility (WTEF) Environment and Energy Committee Recommendation: That the Environment and Energy Committee receive for information the report dated April 15, 2011, titled 2010 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting for the Waste-to-Energy Facility (WTEF). Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the report dated April 15, 2011, titled 2010 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting for the (WTEF). 1. PURPOSE To provide an update to the Environment and Energy Committee and also the Waste Management Committee on the recent reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the Metro Vancouver Waste-to-Energy Facility (WTEF), as required under provincial legislation. 2. CONTEXT Greenhouse gas emissions from the WTEF comprise carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), methane (CH 4 ) and nitrous oxide (N 2 O) with the CO 2 responsible for over 95% off the reportable GHG amount. These emissions are reported as carbon dioxide equivalent (eco 2 ). In mid-2009 the federal and provincial governments each enacted legislation for mandatory reporting of greenhouse gas emissions for facilities whose annual emissions exceed specified thresholds. The federal and provincial thresholds have been established at 50,000 and 10,000 tonnes per year, respectively. The federal government had 2009 as the first year requiring reporting and the provincial government implemented 2010 as the first year requiring reporting. WMA - 21

24 2010 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting for the Waste-to-Energy Facility (WTEF) Environment and Energy Committee Meeting Date: May 10, 2011 Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: May 18, 2011 Page 2 of 3 Based on these thresholds, Metro Vancouver s WTEF is subject to reporting to both the federal and provincial governments. The WTEF accounts for less than 1% of all GHG emissions in the region. Industrial sources are a much lower contributor to GHG emissions in the region than they are in the rest of the province. The largest industrial sources of GHG emissions in the region are two cement plants (Lehigh and Lafarge) and the Chevron oil refinery, collectively accounting for 75% of industrial GHGs sources in Metro Vancouver. The WTEF ranks fourth behind these three sources. The Province has developed a manual of prescribed methods to calculate GHG emissions from WTEF and other sources over the last couple of years. Based on the province s methodology, GHG emissions from the WTEF during the 2010 reporting year have been estimated to be 118,937 tonnes. Historically, Metro Vancouver has used a method consistent with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) protocols, which is accepted by the federal government and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). For comparison, the amount resulting from using the IPPC method is 103,347 tonnes (reference Table1). Table 1. Federal and Provincial Reporting for Provincial 2010 Federal CO 2 (carbon dioxide) 112, ,378 CH 4 (methane) 2,093 0 N 2 O (nitrous oxide) 4, Total 118, ,347 Note: All values expressed as tonnes of eco 2 The 2010 provincial value is 15% higher than the 2010 federal value due to the following: the Province has set a specific methodology that estimates the amount of waste combusted based on steam production and boiler design rated heat capacity. That estimated waste quantity is then used in conjunction with a generic default emission factor that calculates GHGs based on the estimated amount of municipal solid waste. In contrast, the method used for federal reporting uses actual data on the amount of waste processed and the composition of the waste, which is collected on a routine basis. The provincial methodology includes estimates of methane, which has a global warming potential twenty-one (21) times higher than CO 2, while the IPCC methodology recognizes negligible methane emissions from a combustion process. The provincial methodology also resulted in a higher emission estimate of N 2 O compared to the IPCC estimate due to the difference in methodologies. On March 31, 2011, in accordance with provincial legislation, Metro Vancouver submitted a report on 2010 emissions from the WTEF based on the estimate of 118,937 tonnes of GHG equivalents described above. However, Metro Vancouver does not agree with several aspects of the provincial methodology and our concerns were relayed to the Ministry of Environment in the attached letter. WMA - 22

25 2010 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting for the Waste-to-Energy Facility (WTEF) Environment and Energy Committee Meeting Date: May 10, 2011 Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: May 18, 2011 Page 3 of 3 Looking ahead, it is expected that the Province in 2012 will use GHG reports from Metro Vancouver and other facilities subject to the Reporting Regulation Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Cap and Trade) Act, as a preparatory step for pending new GHG cap and trade requirements. The GHG reports from all facilities subject to cap and trade (i.e., those emitting more than 10,000 tonnes per year of GHG) will be used to estimate a provincial total and to allocate GHG emission allowances to those facilities. These initial allowances are the basis for emission caps which will become more stringent over time. Currently, the Provincial government is designing its cap and trade system and it is unclear to what extent Metro Vancouver will have to pay for the GHG emission allowances. Potentially, the financial impacts to Metro Vancouver waste system are significant. If the cost of allowances were set at $25 per tonne of eco 2, the cost to Metro Vancouver for the WTEF would be close to $3.0 million. The wastewater treatment plants could also be affected. Staff continue to work with provincial government staff on cap and trade requirements. 3. ALTERNATIVES None presented. 4. SUMMARY The reportable GHG emissions from the Metro WTEF differ between the provincial and federal governments due to differences in prescribed methodologies. This has been documented in a letter sent to the provincial government by Metro Vancouver and was also included in the reporting process. The provincial reporting is part of a preparatory step for a new GHG cap and trade system being developed, which potentially has significant financial implications for Metro Vancouver s waste-to-energy facility and wastewater treatment plants. ATTACHMENT Letter dated March 31, 2011, titled Reporting Regulation Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Cap and Trade) Act from Johnny Carline, Commissioner and Chief Administrative Officer, Metro Vancouver addressed to Cairine MacDonald, Deputy Minister of Environment (Doc. # ) WMA - 23

26 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY WMA - 24

27 WMA - 25

28 WMA - 26

29 5.4 Environment and Energy Committee Meeting Date: May 10, 2011 Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: May 18, 2011 To: From: Environment and Energy Committee Waste Management Committee Grant McGillivray, Environmental Control Officer, Policy and Planning Department Date: April 4, 2011 Subject: Metro Vancouver Environmental Regulatory Bylaw Enforcement Action Resolved September 2010 April 2011 Environment and Energy Committee Recommendation: That the Environment and Energy Committee receive for information the report dated April 4, 2011, titled Metro Vancouver Environmental Regulatory Bylaw Enforcement Action Resolved September 2010 April Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receive for information the report dated April 4, 2011, titled Metro Vancouver Environmental Regulatory Bylaw Enforcement Action Resolved September 2010 April PURPOSE To inform the Environment and Energy, and Waste Management Committees about the resolution of enforcement actions taken by Metro Vancouver Regulatory Programs to promote compliance with Metro Vancouver bylaws that support the Board s Air Quality, Liquid Waste and Solid Waste Management Plans. 2. CONTEXT 2.1 Background The Metro Vancouver Boards have adopted environmental bylaws regarding air emissions, liquid waste discharges to sewer and municipal solid waste and recyclable materials management at private facilities. The bylaws have been enacted to achieve a variety of environmental goals in support of management plans related to air quality, liquid waste and solid waste. 2.2 Prosecutions under the Bylaw Metro Vancouver staff lay charges against a company or individual when the following criteria are met: There is a strong need to send a message of deterrence There is a substantial likelihood of conviction and Enforcement action is in the public interest. WMA - 27

30 Metro Vancouver Environmental Regulatory Bylaw Enforcement Action Resolved September 2010 April 2011 Environment and Energy Committee Meeting Date: May 10, 2011 Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: May 18, 2011 Page 2 of 2 Once charged, it is up to the courts to determine if a suspected offender is guilty and to establish the level of fine if found or deemed guilty. 2.3 Enforcement Actions Resolved The attached list of resolved enforcement actions is provided for the information of the Environment and Energy Committee and the Waste Management Committee. Publishing the list through the committee agendas deters others from violating Metro Vancouver s environmental bylaws. 2.4 Public Access to Compliance Information To further improve regulatory transparency and accountability, Metro Vancouver has also developed a database that allows the public easy access, via the internet, to compliance information regarding environmentally-regulated entities. Emission testing results for permitted air discharges are now available on-line at: Similar reporting capabilities are also planned for liquid waste and solid waste permits and licenses as well as air emissions authorized by regulations instead of permits. This new reporting system replaces reporting that was previously done through a semi-annual non-compliance list. 3. ALTERNATIVES None presented. 4. CONCLUSION To promote regulatory transparency and compliance with environmental bylaws and laws administered by Metro Vancouver, a list of persons or companies whose charges have been resolved in the past eight month period is attached. ATACHMENT Metro Vancouver Environmental Regulatory Bylaw Enforcement Action Resolved September 2010 April 2011 (Doc. # ) WMA - 28

31 5.4 ATTACHMENT Metro Vancouver Environmental Regulatory Bylaw Enforcement Action Resolved September 2010 April 2011 Companies or Persons Date Charged Details Resolution Air Quality Management Bylaw No. 1082, 2008 Lafarge Canada Inc. July 21, No. 9 Road Richmond Company discharged cement dust which settled on cars, boats and other private property causing damage. Charged with three counts under Metro Vancouver bylaws and four counts under the provincial Environmental Management Act. Lafarge entered into a plea agreement with MV to a single charge that Lafarge did allow/cause the discharge of an air contaminant without complying with the terms and conditions of a permit contrary to articles 3 and 13 of GVRD AQ Bylaw No.937, 1999 (paraphrased). On November 19, 2010, a provincial court judge imposed a $125,000 fine, payable to the courts on or before January 7, Metro Vancouver received the fine amount from the courts on January 20, The remaining charges were stayed in provincial court on January 7, BC Ltd Beta Avenue Burnaby May 13, 2008 Unauthorized discharge of 3,810 kg of halon from a faulty fire suppression system in a vacant building. Charged with the following: Discharge of an ozone depleting substance without Metro Vancouver authorization and in contravention of the provincial ozone depleting substance regulation. Case went to trial October The provincial court judge s decision was to dismiss the charges. Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007 No actions to report during this time period. Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaws Nos. 181 and 183 Great West Disposal Inc Avenue Surrey October 10, 2008 Company was charge for operation of a municipal solid waste facility from September 20, 2007 to October 9, 2008 without a required valid and subsisting Metro Vancouver Licence. Negotiated settlement was reached May 18, Company plead guilty and was sentenced to $35,000, payable to the courts on or before November 18 th, Metro Vancouver received the fine amount from the courts on January 10, Page 1 of 1 WMA - 29

32 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY WMA - 30

33 5.5 Waste Management Committee Meeting: May 18, 2011 To: From: Waste Management Committee Ray Robb, Division Manager, Policy and Planning Department Jeff Gogol, Environmental Regulatory Planner, Policy and Planning Department Date: April 26, 2011 Subject: Proposed Revisions to Fees in GVS&DD Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181 Recommendation: That the Waste Management Committee receives for information the report dated April 26, 2011, titled Proposed Revisions to Fees in GVS&DD Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No PURPOSE To advise the Waste Management Committee of consultation planned for proposed changes to the regulatory fees associated with the GVS&DD Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw. 2. CONTEXT Private municipal solid waste (MSW) and recyclable materials management facilities within Metro Vancouver are required to comply with GVS&DD Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181, as amended (the Bylaw ). These facilities include transfer stations, material recovery facilities, composters, storage facilities, waste brokers and a landfill. Staff is proposing additional revisions to the Bylaw to improve cost recovery of the regulatory program and to promote diversion and resource recovery through changes to regulatory fees. The costs of the regulatory program are currently recovered through the following fees: Application Fee o New licence o Amendment Administration Fee Disposal Fee 2.1 License Application and Administration Fees License application and administration fees should be related to Metro Vancouver s costs or level of effort for considering applications and administering licenses. After review of current fees and costs, minor revisions are proposed to Metro Vancouver s Solid Waste License Application and Administration fees as shown in Table 1. WMA - 31

34 Proposed Revisions to Fees in GVS&DD Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181 Waste Management Committee Meeting: May 18, 2011 Page 2 of 3 Table 1 - Solid Waste License Application and Administration Fees Existing Fees Proposed Fees Application Fees New Disposal facilities $5000 Disposal facilities $5000 Other facilities $1000 Other facilities $1500 Amendment Disposal facilities $2500 Other facilities $500 Disposal facilities $2500 Other facilities $750 Annual Administration Fees All facilities $1000 All facilities $ Disposal Fees Metro Vancouver s disposal fee system is intended to recover the balance of regulatory program costs and is also intended to encourage resource recovery of municipal solid waste and recyclable materials. Under the current Bylaw, licensed private facilities pay $3 per tonne for all municipal solid waste that is taken to private landfills licensed by Metro Vancouver or taken to unlicensed facilities. However, Metro Vancouver s draft draft Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan seeks to maximize resource recovery. As per Table 2, increased disposal fees are proposed to fully recover Metro Vancouver solid waste regulatory costs and to promote higher levels of resource recovery. There will continue to be no charge for materials sent to a recycling facility. However, disposal fees at private licensed facilities are proposed to increase. The proposed disposal fee at Metro Vancouver licensed private facilities is designed to match the regional service component of the tipping fee at public (Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver) solid waste disposal facilities authorized through Metro Vancouver s Solid Waste Management Plan. The highest fees are being considered for disposal at facilities that are not part of Metro Vancouver s Solid Waste Management Plan. Table 2 - Solid Waste Disposal Fees Disposal Fee Current Proposed Recycle $0/Tonne $0/Tonne Facility licensed by Metro Vancouver $3/Tonne $6/Tonne Facility licensed by Metro Vancouver $3/Tonne $12/Tonne The increased disposal fees will complement municipal demolition permitting initiatives intended to boost recycling from building demolition. 2.3 Consultation Staff has produced an issue paper to elicit informed comment from interested parties on these potential Bylaw changes. This issue paper has been prepared for use in consultation and is attached for information. Consultation with affected stakeholders, including private solid waste management facilities, is proposed to begin immediately with this report and will be incorporated with discussions of other proposed changes to the Bylaw. Consultation on the Bylaw is expected to conclude in early The issue paper will be posted on the corporate web-site and stakeholders will be contacted referring them to the web-site, where they will be able to download this paper and other WMA - 32

35 Proposed Revisions to Fees in GVS&DD Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181 Waste Management Committee Meeting: May 18, 2011 Page 3 of 3 related information as well as forward any comments regarding the proposed regulatory changes. 3. ALTERNATIVES None presented. 4. CONCLUSION In support of Metro Vancouver s draft Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan goals, staff is planning to consult on proposed changes to the Bylaw to improve resource recovery at private solid waste management facilities. ATTACHMENT: Issue Paper for Proposed Revisions to Metro Vancouver s Solid Waste Regulatory Fees (Doc # ) WMA - 33

36 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY WMA - 34

37 5.5 Attachment Solid Waste Regulatory Program Review Issue Paper for Proposed Revisions to Metro Vancouver s Solid Waste Regulatory Fees Metro Vancouver is considering changes to the Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District (GVS&DD) Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181, 1996 (the Bylaw) which governs the management of municipal solid waste and recyclable materials at privately operated facilities. This issue paper describes Metro Vancouver s proposed revisions to the Solid Waste Regulatory Fees to improve cost recovery and promote further resource recovery to support the goals of Metro Vancouver s draft Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan. Who should read this? This issue paper contains important regulatory information for: operators of private facilities that manage municipal solid waste and recyclable materials; and other interested parties that may be affected by the proposed revisions. What will the revisions do? The proposed revisions are designed to: improve cost recovery for services required to promote compliance with the Bylaw; and promote further diversion of recyclable materials from the disposal stream through the use of monetary incentives. Metro Vancouver would like your feedback A response form for providing comments to Metro Vancouver, as well as further information on updates to the Bylaw and links to related legislation, will be posted on the Metro Vancouver website at: Following review of feedback received during consultation on this issue paper, staff will prepare draft amendments to the relevant sections of the Bylaw for consideration by the GVS&DD Board. To ensure that your comments are taken into consideration during this first phase of consultation, please provide your comments to Metro Vancouver by July 29, WMA - 35