METRO VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT ZERO WASTE COMMITTEE

Transcription

1 METRO VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT ZERO WASTE COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING Thursday, July 13, :00 p.m. 2 nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia R E V I S E D A G E N D A 1 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1.1 July 13, 2017 Regular Meeting Agenda That the Zero Waste Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for July 13, 2017 as circulated. 2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES 2.1 May 18, 2017 Regular Meeting Minutes That the Zero Waste Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held May 18, 2017 as circulated. 3. DELEGATIONS 4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF 5.1 Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy Designated Speaker: Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services That the GVS&DD Board approve initiating consultation on the introduction of a Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy. 5.2 Commercial Waste Hauler Licensing Designated Speaker: Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services That the GVS&DD Board approve initiating consultation on licensing commercial waste haulers. 5.3 Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181 Review Designated Speaker: Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services 1 Note: Recommendation is shown under each item, where applicable. August 3, 2017 ZWC - 1

2 Zero Waste Committee Regular Agenda July 13, 2017 Agenda Page 2 of 4 That the GVS&DD Board approve initiating consultation on a review of Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181, 1996, with focus on: material regulated as Recyclable Material; regulated facilities; appeal process; exclusions and exemptions from licensing requirements; licensing process; and licence term. 5.4 Waste-to-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update Designated Speaker: Chris Allan, Director, Solid Waste Operations, Solid Waste Services That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated July 7, 2017, titled Waste-to-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update. 5.5 Status of Sewerage and Drainage District (Solid Waste) Capital Expenditures to April 30, 2017 Designated Speaker: Chris Allan, Director, Solid Waste Operations, Solid Waste Services That the Zero Waste Committee receive for information the report dated July 6, 2017, titled Status of Sewerage and Drainage District (Solid Waste) Capital Expenditures to April 30, Mattress Recycling Update Designated Speaker: Andrew Doi, Environmental Planner, Solid Waste Services That the GVS&DD Board Chair write the Minister of Environment reiterating Metro Vancouver s request for an Extended Producer Responsibility program for mattresses and other bulky furniture. 5.7 Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 Designated Speaker: Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services That the GVS&DD Board: a) approve the following amendments to the 2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw: i. The Recycling Fee for Source-Separated Organic Waste, Green Waste and Clean Wood will be changed to $95 per tonne and the minimum Recycling Fee for such loads will be changed to $10, effective September 1, 2017; and ii. The surcharge threshold for Food Waste will be changed to 25%, effective August 1, b) give first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017; and c) pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, ZWC - 2

3 Zero Waste Committee Regular Agenda July 13, 2017 Agenda Page 3 of Contingency Disposal of Municipal Solid Waste Update Designated Speaker: Sarah Wellman, Senior Engineer, Solid Waste Services That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated July 5, 2017, titled Contingency Disposal of Municipal Solid Waste Update. 5.9 Regional Abandoned Waste Education and Awareness Program Research and Creative Development Designated Speaker: Larina Lopez, Division Manager, Corporate Communications, External Relations That the MVRD Board receive for information the report dated July 5, 2017, titled Regional Abandoned Waste Education and Awareness Program Research and Creative Development. Revised 5.10 Manager s Report Designated Speaker: Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services That the Zero Waste Committee receive for information the report dated July 4, 2017, titled Manager s Report. 6. INFORMATION ITEMS 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS 9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING Note: The Committee must state by resolution the basis under section 90 of the Community Charter on which the meeting is being closed. If a member wishes to add an item, the basis must be included below. That the Zero Waste Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for July 13, 2017 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) <(e)> and <(k)>as follows: 90 (1) A part of the meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if the board or committee considers that the disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district; and (k) negotiations and related discussions respecting the proposed provision of a regional district service that are at their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the board or committee, could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district if they were held in public. ZWC - 3

4 Zero Waste Committee Regular Agenda July 13, 2017 Agenda Page 4 of ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION That the Zero Waste Committee adjourn/conclude its regular meeting July 13, Membership: Brodie, Malcolm (C) Richmond Hodge, Craig (VC) Coquitlam Baldwin, Wayne White Rock Bassam, Roger North Vancouver District Cameron, Craig West Vancouver Corrigan, Derek Burnaby Coté, Jonathan New Westminster Hayne, Bruce Surrey Jackson, Lois Delta Long, Bob Langley Township Reimer, Andrea Vancouver Schaffer, Ted Langley City Washington, Dean Port Coquitlam ZWC - 4

5 2.1 METRO VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT ZERO WASTE COMMITTEE Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Metro Vancouver Regional District (MVRD) Zero Waste Committee held at 1:04 p.m. on Thursday, May 18, 2017 in the 2 nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Mayor Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Vice Chair, Councillor Craig Hodge, Coquitlam Councillor Roger Bassam, North Vancouver District Councillor Craig Cameron, West Vancouver Mayor Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Mayor Jonathan Coté, New Westminster Mayor Lois Jackson, Delta (arrived at 1:05 p.m.) Councillor Bob Long, Langley Township Councillor Andrea Reimer, Vancouver Mayor Ted Schaffer, Langley City Councillor Dean Washington, Port Coquitlam MEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Wayne Baldwin, White Rock Councillor Bruce Hayne, Surrey STAFF PRESENT: Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer Janis Knaupp, Assistant to Regional Committees, Board and Information Services 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1.1 May 18, 2017 Regular Meeting Agenda It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Zero Waste Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for May 18, 2017 as circulated. CARRIED ZWC - 5

6 2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES 2.1 April 6, 2017 Regular Meeting Minutes 3. DELEGATIONS No items presented. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Zero Waste Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held April 6, 2017 as circulated. CARRIED 4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented. 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF 5.1 Award of Contract Resulting from RFP No for Fly Ash Loading, Shuttling, Hauling, and Disposal Report dated May 11, 2017 from Roy Moulder, Division Manager, Purchasing and Risk Management, Financial Services, seeking GVS&DD Board authority to award a contract to Waste Management, Inc. for the provision of fly ash loading, shuttling, hauling and disposal services for fly ash material generated at Metro Vancouver s Waste to Energy Facility. 1:05 p.m. Mayor Jackson arrived at the meeting. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board authorize: a) the award of a contract for the provision of fly ash loading, shuttling, hauling and disposal services for fly ash material generated at Metro Vancouver s Waste-to-Energy Facility to Waste Management, Inc. as a result of RFP No , for an anticipated value up to $15 million (exclusive of taxes) for a term from July 1, 2017 to March 3, 2025; and b) the Commissioner and Corporate Officer to execute the contract. CARRIED 5.2 Waste-to-Energy Facility 2016 Financial Update Report dated May 11, 2017 from Chris Allan, Solid Waste Operations Director, Solid Waste Services, providing the 2016 financial update for the Metro Vancouver Waste to Energy Facility located in Burnaby. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated May 11, 2017, titled Waste-to-Energy Facility 2016 Financial Update. CARRIED ZWC - 6

7 Love Food Hate Waste Campaign Update Report dated May 10, 2017 from Larina Lopez, Corporate Communications Division Manager, External Relations, providing an update on the Love Food Hate Waste Campaign; a behaviour change campaign to reduce household food waste. Members were provided with a presentation on an update to the 2017 Love Food Hate Waste Campaign. Members suggested consideration be given to: exploring ways to increase program impact through social media the impact and use of the terminology wasted food versus food waste compiling information on local government efforts to address food waste the process for identifying potential program partners and if there are economic interests to reduce food waste In response to questions, members were informed about costs versus impact, efforts to explore further grocer partnerships, program costs, licensing, and efforts to work with local farmer markets and post-secondary institutions. Request of Staff Staff was requested to report back to the Zero Waste Committee on: a) Metro Vancouver local government efforts to divert food waste from the waste stream and reduce food waste; and b) increasing social media impact through the 2017 Love Food Hate Waste Campaign. Presentation material titled lovefoodhatewaste.ca is retained with the May 18, 2017 Zero Waste Committee agenda. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the MVRD Board receive for information the report dated May 10, 2017, titled 2017 Love Food Hate Waste Campaign Update. CARRIED 5.4 Manager s Report Report dated May 11, 2017 from Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services, updating the Zero Waste Committee on attendance at 2017 standing committee events, an upcoming study on management of residential construction and demolition material, and on the Committee s 2017 Work Plan. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Zero Waste Committee receive for information the report dated May 11, 2017, titled Manager s Report. CARRIED ZWC - 7

8 6. INFORMATION ITEMS It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Zero Waste Committee receive for information the following Information Items: 6.1 Report dated March 6, 2017 from Andjela Knezevic-Stevanovic, Environmental Management and Quality Control Director, Liquid Waste Services, regarding Board and Utilities Committee consideration of impacts of cigarette butts on aquatic life 6.2 Correspondence dated April 11, 2017 from Mayor Lois Jackson, Corporation of Delta, addressed to Director Malcolm Brodie, Chair of Metro Vancouver s Zero Waste Committee, regarding Vancouver Landfill Technical Liaison Committee Report CARRIED 7. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented. 8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS No items presented. 9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Zero Waste Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for May 18, 2017 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, 90 (1)(e), (g), and (k) as follows: 90 (1) A part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to one or more of the following: (e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if the board or committee considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district; (g) (k) litigation or potential litigation affecting the regional district; and negotiations and related discussions respecting the proposed provision of a regional district service that are at their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the board or committee, could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district if they were held in public. CARRIED ZWC - 8

9 10. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Zero Waste Committee adjourn its regular meeting of May 18, CARRIED (Time: 1:34 p.m.) Janis Knaupp, Assistant to Regional Committees Malcolm Brodie, Chair FINAL ZWC - 9

10 5.1 To: From: Zero Waste Committee Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services Date: July 7, 2017 Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board approve initiating consultation on the introduction of a Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to seek approval to initiate consultation on the introduction of a Generator Levy for Municipal Solid Waste from residential and commercial/institutional sources (Mixed Municipal Solid Waste). BACKGROUND This report describes a proposed Generator Levy as part of an updated regulatory framework in support of implementing the Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP). Implementing a Generator Levy would help ensure that fixed costs for transfer stations and solid waste planning (e.g. waste reduction and recycling planning) are funded by all Mixed Municipal Solid Waste generators in the region whether or not waste from those generators is delivered to the Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver solid waste system. Residents, businesses and institutions within the region are Mixed Municipal Solid Waste generators. The report recommends initiating consultation on the proposed Generator Levy. MIXED MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE GENERATOR LEVY Regulatory Context The Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act (GVS&DD Act), Section 7B empowers the GVS&DD to set fees payable by generators of waste. The GVS&DD Act allows for bylaws requiring waste haulers to collect and remit fees payable by generators to the GVS&DD based on the quantity, volume, type or composition of waste generated. The ISWRMP specifically identifies the implementation of a Generator Levy bylaw (referred to in the ISWRMP as a split fee bylaw) as an ISWRMP implementation tool. Generator Levy Under a Generator Levy, generators pay a fee for Mixed Municipal Solid Waste whether or not the waste is ultimately delivered to Metro Vancouver or City of Vancouver disposal facilities. A Generator Levy would recover the fixed costs of solid waste management planning and transfer stations and encourage source reduction and recycling because it would be volume based. Transfer station fixed costs would be included in the Generator Levy because the transfer station system is available to and benefits all generators. Currently, Tipping Fees at Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver disposal facilities recover both fixed and variable costs for the operation of the regional solid waste system as well as costs for ZWC - 10

11 Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 2 of 3 programs and initiatives to achieve the goals of the ISWRMP. Fixed costs are independent of waste quantities. Variable costs vary with the amount of waste managed. With a new service contract for Metro Vancouver transfer stations, it is now practical to delineate between fixed and variable costs of transfer stations. Under an updated fee structure for Metro Vancouver or City of Vancouver disposal facilities, the Tipping Fee would be made up of two parts: Generator Levy: Fixed costs related to solid waste management planning and transfer stations Transfer station variable costs (e.g. transportation costs) plus disposal costs (Wasteto-Energy Facility plus landfill disposal costs) For any Mixed Municipal Solid Waste delivered to facilities other than Metro Vancouver or City of Vancouver disposal facilities, waste haulers would be required to track and report quantities and remit fees to Metro Vancouver. Waste volumes are typically measured using weigh scales, and thus precise weight data is usually available. The GVS&DD Act allows for other mechanisms to calculate Mixed Municipal Solid Waste volumes in the event scale data is not available. The implementation of Hauler Licensing (the topic of another report being brought forward in parallel for the Board s consideration) would assist in ensuring collection of the Generator Levy. Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy Approval A Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy would be implemented through changes to the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw No. 302, 2016 (Tipping Fee Bylaw), and any new required bylaws. Because the Generator Levy is authorized as a component of the GVS&DD Act, any bylaws implementing the Generator Levy can be approved directly by the GVS&DD Board and do not require approval of the Minister of Environment. Consultation on Waste Generator Levy Metro Vancouver would consult on the proposed Generator Levy with a wide range of interested parties. Potentially interested parties include municipalities, waste management community, businesses, institutions, and others. Key areas for consultation include: components of the regional solid waste system that are appropriately funded through the Generator Levy; cost of each of the components of the regional solid waste system funded through the Generator Levy and consequentially the total amount for the Generator Levy; components of Mixed Municipal Solid Waste that should not be subject to the Generator Levy (e.g. materials with the characteristics of construction and demolition material that are typically managed through construction and demolition facilities); effective and efficient mechanisms for collecting the Generator Levy, and resource requirements for both Metro Vancouver and waste haulers to implement the Generator Levy. Feedback from consultation would be reported to the Board for consideration. ZWC - 11

12 Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 3 of 3 ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board approve initiating consultation on the introduction of a Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy. 2. That the Zero Waste Committee receive for information the report dated July 7, 2017, titled Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy and provide alternate direction to staff. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the Board approves Alternative 1, staff will initiate consultation on the proposed Generator Levy and report back to the Board with consultation feedback and proposed next steps. An initial review of the value of the Generator Levy is approximately $40 per tonne growing to approximately $50 per tonne over the next five years as waste quantities decline and new transfer station infrastructure is added. The value of the Generator Levy will be determined based on a variety of elements including feedback from interested parties on the proposed Generator Levy. The Generator Levy would not impact overall Tipping Fees at Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver disposal facilities. The current fee structure including the Transaction Fee and the weight based variable Tipping Fee structure is expected to continue into the future with a Generator Levy. Generator Levy amounts collected for waste not delivered to Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver disposal facilities would contribute to the fixed costs of the regional system, including solid waste planning activities and programs, to ensure that all generators of waste contribute to these regional costs. If the Board does not approve initiating consultation on a Generator Levy for Mixed Municipal Solid Waste, there will continue to be a risk that waste will exit the regional system and leave a funding gap for fixed costs associated with solid waste planning and programs and fixed costs associated with the regional transfer station system. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The GVS&DD Act provides authorization to implement a Generator Levy. A Generator Levy ensures that fixed costs for activities such as transfer stations and solid waste planning are funded by all Mixed Municipal Solid Waste generators in the region whether or not waste from those generators is delivered to the Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver solid waste system. The Generator Levy would be included in Tipping Fees for any waste delivered to Metro Vancouver or City of Vancouver disposal facilities, and would be remitted by waste haulers to Metro Vancouver for any Mixed Municipal Solid Waste not delivered to Metro Vancouver or City of Vancouver disposal facilities. Staff recommend Alternative 1 that the Board approve initiating consultation on the proposed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy. Feedback from the consultation process along with proposed next steps will be brought back to the Board for consideration ZWC - 12

13 5.2 To: From: Zero Waste Committee Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services Date: July 7, 2017 Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: Commercial Waste Hauler Licensing RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board approve initiating consultation on licensing commercial waste haulers. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to seek approval to initiate consultation on licensing waste haulers. BACKGROUND Consultation on licensing commercial waste haulers is being brought forward for consideration because hauler licensing would allow Metro Vancouver to ensure that recycling systems are available wherever Municipal Solid Waste from residential and commercial/institutional sources (Mixed Municipal Solid Waste) is collected, and assist in the collection of a Generator Levy (the topic of another report being brought forward in parallel for the Board s consideration). Commercial waste haulers collect Mixed Municipal Solid Waste from generators. This report proposes initiating consultation on implementing commercial waste hauler licensing. COMMERCIAL WASTE HAULER LICENSING Regulatory Context Under the British Columbia Environmental Management Act (EMA), Part 3, Section 25, regional districts including the GVS&DD are delegated the authority to create bylaws to regulate the management of Municipal Solid Waste or Recyclable Material for the purpose of implementing and achieving the goals of an approved waste management plan. Section 25 (3)(h) allows for the licensing of haulers through bylaws. Licensing of waste haulers is specifically identified as an initiative in the Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP). Hauler Licensing Multi-family and commercial/institutional waste makes up about 60% of the Mixed Municipal Solid Waste received at Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver disposal facilities. While the regional average recycling rate is 62%, multi-family and commercial/institutional recycling rates are 29% and 42% respectively, indicating a need for further measures to encourage recycling. Although many factors affect recycling rates, access to convenient recycling systems is a key contributor to recycling success. Some communities in the region have implemented mandatory recycling bylaws that compel building owners to provide recycling systems, but enforcing mandatory recycling requirements on generators is resource intensive, and individual municipal requirements result in a patchwork of regulations across the region. There are currently no requirements for haulers to provide or ensure recycling systems are in place in multi-family and commercial/institutional buildings. ZWC - 13

14 Commercial Waste Hauler Licensing Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 2 of 4 In most cases, the collection containers for Recyclable Material and Mixed Municipal Solid Waste are provided by haulers to generators. Sometimes recycling services and consequently recycling containers are provided by a different hauler than the hauler providing Mixed Municipal Solid Waste collection services. Generators sometimes own collection containers (this would most likely occur if a stationary compactor is used). Hauler licensing has been implemented in various jurisdictions as a component of solid waste management plans. A table showing examples of hauler licensing programs in various jurisdictions is included as Attachment 1. Some typical requirements of hauler licensing programs include: provision of recycling systems; record keeping and reporting; vehicle safety and employment standards; payment of fees; and delivery of waste to particular facilities. Hauler licensing results in an open waste management system where any hauler can provide waste collection services subject to complying with regulatory requirements. Metro Vancouver s commercial waste collection landscape is characterized by a relatively small number of haulers picking up the majority of the Mixed Municipal Solid Waste in the region. Metro Vancouver records indicate that only approximately 30 haulers pick up more than 10 tonnes per month of Mixed Municipal Solid Waste. Ten tonnes is approximately the amount that can be hauled in one trip by a garbage truck. On this basis, a licensing requirement for commercial haulers that collect more than 10 tonnes of Mixed Municipal Solid Waste per month would be administratively effective while also ensuring a level playing field for commercial waste haulers. With the exception of licensing, all other waste hauler requirements would apply to commercial haulers collecting less than the licensing threshold amount of Mixed Municipal Solid Waste. Commercial waste hauler licences would require: provision of containers for separately collecting Recyclable Material except where the hauler provides evidence that containers are being provided by either the generator or another waste management service provider; collection of Recyclable Material separately from Mixed Municipal Solid Waste if haulers collect Recyclable Material; record keeping; and payment of applicable fees to Metro Vancouver. Haulers collecting only segregated Recyclable Material or construction and demolition waste would not require licences. ZWC - 14

15 Commercial Waste Hauler Licensing Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 3 of 4 Hauler Licensing Approval Given the authority to create bylaws to license waste haulers is within EMA, a GVS&DD Bylaw that implements a commercial waste hauler licensing program would require approval of the Minister of Environment. Consultation on Hauler Licensing Metro Vancouver would consult on hauler licensing with a wide range of interested parties. Potentially interested parties include municipalities, waste management community, businesses, institutions and others. Key areas for consultation include: hauler licensing Mixed Municipal Solid Waste collection threshold; any appropriate exemptions to hauler licensing requirements (e.g. haulers that collect materials that have characteristics of demolition and construction waste); annual licence fee; licence term; and other possible licence requirements. Feedback from consultation would be reported to the Board for consideration. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board approve initiating consultation on licensing commercial waste haulers. 2. That the Zero Waste Committee receive for information the report dated July 7, 2017, titled Commercial Waste Hauler Licensing and provide alternate direction to staff. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the Board approves Alternative 1, staff will initiate consultation on commercial waste hauler licensing. As part of the consultation process, Metro Vancouver would seek input on hauler licensing fees. Staff expect that a fee in the range of $100 per year would be appropriate to ensure that hauler licensing is not a barrier to entry for waste hauling businesses, and doesn t disadvantage licensed haulers. A new composting permit system implemented by the Province of British Columbia in 2016 for composting facilities includes a $100 per year permit fee. Similar to Metro Vancouver s proposal, small composting facilities do not require a permit. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Multi-family and commercial/institutional waste makes up about 60% of the waste received at Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver solid waste disposal facilities. While the regional average recycling rate is 62%, multi-family and commercial/institutional recycling rates are 29% and 42% respectively, indicating a need for further measures to encourage recycling. Many factors affect recycling rates. However, access to convenient recycling systems is a key contributor to recycling success. EMA Section 25 (3) (h) allows for the licensing of haulers through bylaws to regulate the management of Municipal Solid Waste or Recyclable Material for the purpose of implementing and achieving the goals of an approved waste management plan. Licensing of waste haulers is specifically identified as an initiative in the ISWRMP. Hauler licensing is being brought forward for consideration because hauler licensing will allow Metro Vancouver to ensure recycling systems are in place wherever Mixed Municipal Solid Waste is collected, and will be important in allowing the collection of a Generator Levy. ZWC - 15

16 Commercial Waste Hauler Licensing Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 4 of 4 Staff recommend Alternative 1 that the Board approve initiating consultation on licensing commercial waste haulers. Feedback from consultation along with proposed next steps will be brought back to the Board for consideration. Attachment: Examples of Hauler Licensing Programs in North America ZWC - 16

17 ATTACHMENT Examples of Hauler Licensing Programs in North America JURISDICTION Provide or Incentivize Recycling Systems Record Keeping & Reporting LICENSING REQUIREMENTS Vehicle Safety &Employment Standards Street Sanitation & Traffic Requirements Delivery to Designated Facilities Payment of Fees Portland, OR Austin, TX Arlington, VA * State of Vermont Boulder Cnty, CO Los Angeles, CA Wake County, NC New York City, NY ** Pennsylvania, PA Denver, CO * Baltimore, MD State of Rhode Is. *Reporting of facility delivered to only **Currently requirement for generator, under public consultation to require licensee to recycle. ZWC - 17

18 5.3 To: From: Zero Waste Committee Paul Henderson, General Manager Solid Waste Services Date: July 7, 2017 Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181 Review RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board approve initiating consultation on a review of Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181, 1996, with focus on: material regulated as Recyclable Material; regulated facilities; appeal process; exclusions and exemptions from licensing requirements; licensing process; and licence term. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to seek approval to initiate consultation on the key areas of review of Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181, 1996 (Bylaw 181) and provide the Board with information on key issues related to Bylaw 181. BACKGROUND Bylaw 181 has not been revised since 1996 and requires an update to enhance waste diversion, revise definitions so they are consistent with definitions contained in the Environmental Management Act (EMA), improve cost recovery and ensure equity. This report proposes initiating consultation on a review of Bylaw 181. Following consultation, a draft replacement bylaw will be brought forward to the Board for consideration. BYLAW 181 REVIEW Regulatory Context Under the British Columbia Environmental Management Act (EMA) regional districts including the GVS&DD are delegated the authority to create bylaws to regulate private sector facilities that manage Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material for the purpose of implementing and achieving the goals of an approved waste management plan. Bylaw 181 regulates the management of Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material at private sector facilities in Metro Vancouver through the issuance and enforcement of Solid Waste Licences. Changes to Bylaw 181 require approval of the Minister of Environment. Proposed revisions to Bylaw 181 have been considered by the Board on two occasions in the last number of years. No changes to Bylaw 181 were ultimately made in either case. ZWC - 18

19 Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181 Review Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 2 of 3 Bylaw 181 Review A Solid Waste Licence typically describes: the types and maximum amount of material that can be accepted; the maximum amount of material that can be on site at one time; how the material should be handled and stored; requirements for area maintenance and nuisance controls; requirements for proof of financial security to cover expenses in the case of default by the licence holder; and reporting requirements for materials entering and/or leaving the facility and disposal locations. Compliance with Bylaw 181 and the licence requirements is enforced by Metro Vancouver s Environmental Regulation and Enforcement Division staff to ensure the goals of the Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP) are achieved by supporting maximum waste diversion for the materials processed at licenced facilities in a cost effective and efficient manner. Over the years, a number of issues have been identified that reduce the effectiveness and efficiency of Bylaw 181. Metro Vancouver is proposing to review these issues and recommend potential updates to Bylaw 181. Key areas of review include: material regulated as Recyclable Material; regulated facilities; appeal process; exclusions and exemptions from licensing requirements; licensing process; and licence term. A separate review of source-separated organics processing facility requirements is underway and will be brought to the Board for consideration. Consultation Program Metro Vancouver would consult on updating Bylaw 181 with a wide range of interested parties. Potentially interested parties include municipalities, licensed facilities, waste management community, businesses, institutions, and others. Feedback from consultation would be reported to the Board for consideration. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board approve initiating consultation on a review of Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181, 1996, with focus on: material regulated as Recyclable Material; regulated facilities; appeal process; exclusions and exemptions from licensing requirements; licensing process; and licence term. ZWC - 19

20 Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181 Review Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 3 of 3 2. That the Zero Waste Committee receive for information the report dated July 7, 2017, titled Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181 Review and provide alternate direction to staff. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the GVS&DD Board approves initiating consultation on a Bylaw 181 review, staff will report back to the Board with consultation feedback along with proposed changes to Bylaw 181. Costs to undertake the consultation activities are expected to be minimal beyond staff resources and any costs have been included in the 2017 budget. Enforcement resources required to implement an updated Bylaw 181 are not expected to exceed current requirements. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Metro Vancouver is considering changes to Bylaw 181. Bylaw 181 regulates the management of Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material at private facilities through the issuance and enforcement of Solid Waste Licenses. Licensed private facilities are integral in achieving the goals of the ISWRMP and updating Bylaw 181 will help maximize waste diversion at private facilities in a cost effective and efficient manner. Changes to Bylaw 181 require approval of the Minister of Environment. Staff recommend Alternative 1 that the GVS&DD Board approve initiating consultation on a review of Bylaw 181. Feedback from the consultation process along with proposed next steps will be brought back to the Board for consideration. Attachment Bylaw 181 Review Discussion Paper, dated July ZWC - 20

21 ATTACHMENT Review of Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw 181, 1996, (Bylaw 181) Discussion Paper July 2017 Prepared By: Metro Vancouver Solid Waste Services ZWC - 21

22 Bylaw 181 Review Discussion Paper July 2017 Metro Vancouver is considering changes to the Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District (GVS&DD) Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181 (Bylaw 181), which governs the management of Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material at privately operated facilities. This discussion paper was prepared by Metro Vancouver Solid Waste Services to highlight issues related to the implementation of Bylaw 181 and to seek stakeholder input on potential solutions. The discussion paper describes the key issues related to Bylaw 181 and potential approaches to update Bylaw 181 to support the needs of both current and future facility operators and the goals of Metro Vancouver s Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP). The development of potential approaches was guided by the following objectives: Enhance waste diversion through effective management of Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material in support of the ISWRMP goals; Revise definitions so that they are consistent with definitions contained in the Environmental Management Act (EMA); and Improve cost recovery and provide consistency and clarity. KEY ISSUES 1. Material regulated as Recyclable Material Bylaw 181 currently defines Recyclable Material in a way that diverges from the definition in the EMA, leaving regulatory gaps and inconsistencies in the regulation of Recyclable Material, and facilities that manage Recyclable Material from multiple sources. Accounting for material within a licensed facility is challenging where facility operators claim certain materials within the facility are not subject to regulatory requirements. This can lead to subjective reporting and potential feeavoidance. Potential Approach Revise the definition of Recyclable Material to be consistent with EMA. Under EMA, Recyclable Material includes any material diverted from disposal, not just material from residential, commercial, institutional, demolition, land clearing or construction sources. Require that all Recyclable Material co-managed within a facility that manages Municipal Solid Waste or Recyclable Material from residential, commercial, institutional, demolition, land clearing or construction sources be regulated under the updated Bylaw 181. Facilities that process or handle only agricultural waste or industrial waste would not be regulated under the proposed updated Bylaw. These changes increase fairness and clarity for facilities managing Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclable Material and will help to divert material that may otherwise be disposed in landfills. ZWC - 22

23 2. Regulated Facilities Bylaw 181 lists six specific types of facilities requiring licences. Facility types that were not included when Bylaw 181 was originally adopted such as digesters and bio-gasification plants currently do not require licences even though the material they process is the same as licensed facilities. The ISWRMP targets a reduction in waste going to landfill, through reduction at source, recycling and energy or material recovery. Private sector stakeholders have advocated that Metro Vancouver s regulatory framework provide for the opportunity for the private sector to provide innovative waste management options that enhance waste diversion in the region. The Ministry of Environment s Guide to Solid Waste Management Planning (the Guide) establishes a series of Principles for Solid Waste Management in the Province of British Columbia. Principle 8 is that Level the playing field within regions for private and public solid waste management facilities. Potential Approach In order to ensure that facilities are fairly and clearly regulated, all facilities processing Municipal Solid Waste and Recyclables Materials originating from residential, commercial, institutional, demolition, land clearing or construction sources would be regulated under the updated bylaw. The updated bylaw would continue to include an expanded list of specific types of facilities with unique bylaw requirements, but also allow for a general licence for any other facilities processing materials regulated under the bylaw. The updated bylaw would set objective recovery performance requirements for private facilities receiving Municipal Solid Waste from residential or commercial/institutional sources (Mixed Municipal Solid Waste) excluding construction and demolition materials. The reduction to landfill disposal requirements for private facilities would be set to ensure licensed private facilities processing Mixed Municipal Solid Waste reduce landfill disposal and therefore help achieve the goals of the ISWRMP. The Metro Vancouver solid waste management system currently reduces disposal to landfill by approximately 22% of the regional system Mixed Municipal Solid Waste through energy recovery at the Waste-to- Energy Facility. This is in addition to waste reduction and recycling including waste recycling at Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver disposal facilities. Input on performance requirements for private facilities receiving Mixed Municipal Solid Waste would be sought as part of the consultation process. The bylaw would allow reduction in landfill disposal of Mixed Municipal Solid Waste using any technological means (mixed waste recovery etc.). Any residuals managed at a landfill would be counted as disposal for performance measurement. 3. Appeal Process Various options have been identified to update the Bylaw 181 appeal process, with the goal of aligning the Bylaw 181 appeal process with the process for resolving other disputes related to implementation of the ISWRMP. One of the key considerations in the development of any appeal process is that Metro Vancouver must ultimately be accountable for the decisions that it makes and cannot delegate the authority granted to it under EMA with respect to the content of bylaws or setting the terms and conditions of licences to another body. ZWC - 23

24 Potential Approach Under current Bylaw 181, the decisions of Solid Waste Manager may be appealed to the Commissioner. Options being considered to update this appeal process include: Commissioner Retain current process Advisory Committee of the GVS&DD Board the appeal could be initially considered by a dispute resolution select advisory committee of the GVS&DD Board. The Board would appoint 3 of its members to form the Committee. The Committee would make a recommendation to the GVS&DD Board. Expert Advisory Committee Rather than a committee made up exclusively of GVS&DD Board members, an advisory committee could potentially include non-board members appointed by the Board. The committee could include experts with defined qualifications, and/or include experts from specific industry/non-governmental sectors such as the waste management community. The Committee would make a recommendation to the GVS&DD Board. Decisions made through any updated appeal process will continue to be reviewable through the Judicial Review process. 4. Exclusions and Exemptions from Licensing Requirements Current exclusions listed under Section 2.2 and exemptions from licensing requirements listed in Schedule B need to be reviewed to meet the current and future needs. Potential Changes Changes to existing exclusions and exemptions to licensing requirements may include: Limiting the exemption for charitable organizations, return to retail operations, and GVS&DD member municipal facilities to operations that accept only source-separated Recyclable Material. Exempt Drop off depots that operate under agreement with a Product Stewardship agency that only accept source-separated Recyclable Material. Drop-off depots would not include processing facilities. Modify exemption to require minimal licensing for facilities that accept only asphalt and concrete for the purposes of reprocessing resale and reuse, and brokering facilities that receive exclusively source-separated Recyclable Material, where the owner or operator purchases or otherwise pays valuable consideration for all Recyclable Material received, cleaned, sorted, baled, processed or packaged at the facility. These facilities would only have to submit quarterly data to Metro Vancouver under a modified and streamlined license process. Exempt a composting Facility or Digesting Facility owned or operated by a farmer, if that Composting Facility or Digesting Facility uses Recyclable Material originating solely from one or more farm businesses. ZWC - 24

25 5. Licensing Process Review licensing process to ensure alignment with the ISWRMP. Potential Approach Delegate the issuing of waste management licences to the Metro Vancouver Solid Waste Services General Manager. The Solid Waste Services General Manager would review all applications and issue Solid Waste Licences, Amendments and Variances. Delegating the issuing of licenses to the Solid Waste Services General Manager does not require any change to Bylaw Licence Term To provide authority to update private facilities licence requirements over time, a maximum licence term of five years would be set in the Bylaw, with licences for any currently licensed facilities to expire five years from the date of enactment of the Bylaw unless otherwise provided in an existing licence. 7. Other Changes Consider Bylaw wording changes to improve clarity and support the intended regulation of licensed facilities. Modify bylaw wording to: o Include the option to suspend all or part of a Solid Waste Licence; o Create allowances for market conditions and other extraordinary circumstances for brokering facility requirements o Update recycling credit approach to match current practices; and o Allow application of Security to ensure compliance with the provisions of Bylaw ZWC - 25

26 5.4 To: From: Zero Waste Committee Chris Allan, Director, Solid Waste Operations Date: July 7, 2017 Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: Waste-to-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated July 7, 2017, titled Waste-to- Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update. PURPOSE To provide an overview of the current Waste-to-Energy Facility (WTEF) environmental monitoring program and a summary of 2016 greenhouse gas (GHG) and National Pollutant Release Inventory reporting. BACKGROUND Since 2010 annual environmental performance summaries of the Metro Vancouver Waste-to-Energy Facility have been provided to the Zero Waste Committee for information. This report provides 2016 environmental performance summaries. WTEF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND REPORTING UPDATE Since WTEF operations commenced in 1988, Metro Vancouver has strived to continually reduce emissions through assessment and improvement of operations, plant infrastructure and environmental controls. The WTEF is certified on an annual basis by the International Standards Organization Environmental Standard 14001, an independent review requiring continuous improvement and compliance with all environmental regulations. In addition to satisfying regulatory requirements, WTEF environmental monitoring provides Metro Vancouver with valuable data to assess both existing plant operations and potential capital improvements. The current WTEF environmental monitoring program consists of three key parts: air emissions monitoring from the WTEF stack using both a continuous emission monitoring system and periodic manual stack tests; fly ash and bottom ash monitoring through manual sample collection and laboratory analytical analysis; and ambient air quality monitoring in the vicinity of the WTEF via three stations in Metro Vancouver s ambient monitoring network: T18 Burnaby South, T13 North Delta and T17 Richmond South. To assess regulatory compliance, measurements from the WTEF environmental monitoring program are compared to regulatory limits specified in the 2011 Metro Vancouver Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP). Results are reported in the following ways: monthly compliance reports, which provide a summary of all air emissions monitoring results for each month, are provided to the Ministry of Environment, the City of Burnaby (Burnaby) and the Fraser Health Authority; ZWC - 26

27 Waste-to-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 2 of 5 stack emissions testing results are provided to the Ministry of Environment, Burnaby and Fraser Health Authority four times per year; stack testing for semi-volatile organic compounds are provided to Ministry of Environment, Burnaby and Fraser Health Authority once per year; annual reporting of GHG emissions is provided to both Ministry of Environment and Environment Canada by June 1 of each year; and annual reporting of substances emitted to air and contained in ash transferred for off-site disposal is provided to Environment Canada for National Pollutant Release Inventory reporting by June 1 of each year. The Ministry of Environment finalized an operational certificate for the WTEF on December 15, 2016 that set new regulatory limits for some substances and new reporting requirements. Metro Vancouver is implementing a number of capital projects over the next few years to meet these new regulatory requirements. These projects were approved by the Board in 2013, based on the requirements of the draft operational certificate that was published and submitted to the Ministry of Environment. Environmental Monitoring Program The 2016 WTEF environmental monitoring program consisted of the following: air emissions monitoring - continuous emission monitoring system: o the WTEF is equipped with a real-time flue gas continuous emission monitoring system that measures and records emission parameters at the exit of the air pollution control plant 24 hours per day, 7 days per week using a United States Environmental Protection Agency certified and auditable tracking system. The continuous emission monitoring system tracks the following emissions parameters: sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides (NO x), carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide (CO 2) and opacity. The continuous emission monitoring system also monitors key operational parameters, including furnace temperature, total flue gas flow, flue gas moisture, and flue gas oxygen. Monitoring of operational parameters provides an indication of plant conditions and helps confirm that emissions monitored by manual stack testing are representative of year round conditions. air emissions monitoring periodic manual stack testing: o four tests are conducted annually, one per quarter, in triplicate on each of the three plant lines to monitor for particulate matter, trace metals, total hydrocarbons, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen fluoride, sulphur dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide; and, o single test conducted annually on one boiler (rotating between boilers each year) in triplicate to monitor for semi-volatile organic compounds, including dioxins and furans, chlorobenzenes, chlorophenols, polychlorinated biphenyls, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. fly and bottom ash monitoring analysis of bottom ash and fly ash; and, continuous ambient air quality monitoring results are available on Metro Vancouver website and are reported annually through the Lower Fraser Valley Air Quality Monitoring Report. All air emission related parameters monitored during 2016 were in compliance with the requirements of the ISWRMP. ZWC - 27

28 Waste-to-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 3 of 5 In 2015 Metro Vancouver commissioned a low-no x combustion control process in combination with an upgrade to the existing selective non-catalytic reduction system. Total NO x emissions from the WTEF in 2016 were tonnes, 7% lower than 2015 emissions (218.3 tonnes) and 39% lower than 2014 emissions (331.0 tonnes). A summary of historic annual WTEF emission performance, including 2016 data, is presented graphically in the attachment to this report. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting In mid-2009 the federal and provincial governments each enacted legislation for mandatory reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for facilities with annual emissions above specified thresholds (50,000 and 10,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year, respectively). Based on these thresholds, the WTEF is subject to federal and provincial reporting on both biogenic (renewable) and anthropogenic (manmade or non-renewable) GHG emissions. In accordance with the deadlines, 2016 GHG emissions were reported to the provincial and federal governments on May 31, Greenhouse gas emissions reported to the provincial government are required to be reviewed by an accredited verification body. Metro Vancouver contracted Price Waterhouse Coopers to complete Waste-to-Energy Facility verification services from 2016 to A copy of the verification report was attached to the provincial submittal. Greenhouse gas emissions reported to the federal government on May 31, 2017 were consistent with the values reported to the provincial government. Greenhouse gas emissions from the WTEF are comprised mainly of CO 2 with small amounts of methane and nitrous oxides (the latter two substances have higher global warming potential than CO 2). Total emissions are reported as CO 2 equivalents. Total GHG emissions for 2016 were estimated at 260,114 tonnes. Of these emissions, 45% are anthropogenic CO 2 and 55% are biogenic CO 2. Anthropogenic GHG emissions for 2016 have been estimated at 118,272 tonnes, an increase of 3% from the previous year. This increase is due to increased organics diversion in 2016 relative to Anthropogenic content of the total GHG emissions increased from 42% in 2015 to 45% in 2016 as a result of increased organic diversion and a trend towards plastic packaging rather than glass and other non-fossil based packaging materials. As in past reporting years, the WTEF accounted for less than one percent of all anthropogenic GHG emissions in the region. National Pollutant Release Inventory Reporting The National Pollutant Release Inventory is Canada s legislated, publicly accessible inventory of pollutant releases to air, water and land, as well as disposals and transfers for recycling. The National Pollutant Release Inventory is managed by Environment Canada and currently tracks over 300 substances and groups of substances. Metro Vancouver is required to report WTEF emissions for the preceding calendar year to National Pollutant Release Inventory by June 1 of each year. Environment Canada requires reporting many of the ISWRMP-regulated air emissions to the National Pollutant Release Inventory (e.g., particulate matter, metals, organic compounds and acid gases), and also requires reporting of substances transferred for off-site disposal in fly ash and bottom ash. ZWC - 28

29 Waste-to-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 4 of 5 The following table provides a summary of 2016 National Pollutant Release Inventory reporting. Table 1: 2016 National Pollutant Release Inventory Substance Reporting Summary Substance Stack Emissions Reported Quantity (tonnes) Ash Disposal Nitrogen Oxides N/A Carbon Monoxide 31.1 N/A Sulphur Dioxide N/A Hydrogen Chloride/Hydrochloric Acid 39.4 N/A Aluminum (dust) N/A Arsenic Cadmium Copper Lead Manganese Mercury Phosphorus Zinc Particulate Matter 10μm (1) N/A Particulate Matter 2.5μm (1) N/A Dioxins and Furans (1) N/A N/A Hexachlorobenzene (1) N/A N/A Notes: - The substances listed above are required to be reported to the National Pollutant Release Inventory for the 2016 calendar year with the exception of those marked as (1), which are included for informational purposes only. - All other substances are below the National Pollutant Release Inventory level of quantification and are not required to be reported. - 'N/A' indicates value is either below the level of quantification or below the detection limit. - Ash tonnages reported on a dry basis. WTEF Emissions in a Regional Context Figure 1 compares WTEF emissions to total emissions from all regional sources for two key air contaminants in the Lower Fraser Valley - fine particulate matter and NO x (a key smog forming pollutant). In 2016, the WTEF accounted for only 0.007% of regional fine particulate matter emissions and 0.4% of regional NO x emissions. The NO x Reduction Upgrade project, completed in early 2015, has reduced NO x emissions from 0.9% of the regional total in 2013 to 0.4% in ZWC - 29

30 Waste-to-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 5 of 5 Figure 1: Regional Emissions Distribution (2016) Fine Particulate Matter and Nitrogen Oxides 2016 Lower Fraser Valley Fine Particle Matter (PM2.5) Emissions Sources 2016 Lower Fraser Valley Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Emissions Sources Air / Rail / Marine 4.6% Non-Road Engines 8.1% Road Vehicles 6.9% All Other 19.7% WTEF 0.007% Industrial 23.9% Heating 33.2% Open Burning 3.6% All Other 1.7% Air / Rail / Marine 27.9% Non-Road Engines 13.1% WTEF 0.4% Industrial 13.4% Road Vehicles 31.8% Heating 11.6% Open Burning 0.2% ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This is an information report with no financial implications. Emission reduction projects are included in the Solid Waste Services capital plan. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The WTEF has exceptional environmental performance, and a range of projects have been completed and are underway that continuously improve the environmental performance of the facility. Total NO x emissions in 2016 were 7% lower than 2015 and 39% lower than All other air emission related parameters monitored during 2016 were in compliance with the requirements of the ISWRMP. Anthropogenic GHG emissions increased by 3% over 2015 levels. Attachment: Metro Vancouver Waste-To-Energy Facility Summary of Air and Metals Emissions ZWC - 30

31 Metro Vancouver Waste-To-Energy Facility Summary of Air and Metals Emissions ATTACHMENT Dioxins/Furans 0.6 PCDD/PCDF (ng/dscm) Regulatory Level Particulate Matter Particulate Matter (mg/dscm) Regulatory Level Nitrogen Oxides NOx (mg/dscm) Regulatory Level Carbon Monoxide 60 Regulatory Level 50 CO (mg/dscm) Sulfur Dioxide Regulatory Level SO2 (mg/dscm) ZWC - 31

32 Class 1 Metals (Cd, Hg, Tl) 0.25 Class 1 Metals (mg/dscm) Regulatory Level Class 2 Metals (As, Co, Ni, Se, Te) Class 2 Metals (mg/dscm) Regulatory Level Class 3 Metals (Sb, Pb, Cr, Cu, Mn, V, Zn) 6.00 Class 3 Metals (mg/dscm) Regulatory Level Mercury Regulatory Level Hg (mg/dscm) Cadmium Regulatory Level Cd (mg/dscm) Lead Regulatory Level Pb (mg/dscm) ZWC - 32

33 5.5 To: From: Zero Waste Committee Chris Allan, Director, Solid Waste Operations, Solid Waste Services Date: July 6, 2017 Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: Status of Sewerage and Drainage District (Solid Waste) Capital Expenditures to April 30, 2017 RECOMMENDATION That the Zero Waste Committee receive for information the report dated July 6, 2017, titled Status of Sewerage and Drainage District (Solid Waste) Capital Expenditures to April 30, PURPOSE To report on the status of utilities capital expenditures for the Sewerage and Drainage District (Solid Waste). BACKGROUND The Capital Expenditure reporting process as approved by the Board provides for regular status reports on capital expenditures with interim reports sent to the Zero Waste and Performance and Audit Committees in June/July, October/November and a final year-end report to the Committees and Board in April. This is the first in a series of three reports on capital expenditures for STATUS OF SOLID WASTE CAPITAL PROJECTS Capital projects are generally proceeding on schedule and within budget. Additional details on solid waste capital projects, including projected costs to completion compared to the approved budget, are included in Attachment 1. Attachment 2 highlights the status of key capital projects. Table 1 summarizes information on ongoing and completed projects. The information presented is for total project completion which will generally cover multiple years. Capital project budgets typically include a minimum contingency of 10%. The project variance included in Table 1 is due to the North Shore Transfer Station Reconfiguration project which will be completed under budget. Table 1: Ongoing and Completed Solid Waste Capital Projects Solid Waste Projects Total Projected Project Actuals ACE/ Total Project Budget Projected Variance Ongoing Projects $ 34,500,000 $ 37,000,000 $2,500,000 Completed Projects $0 $ 0 $0 ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented. ZWC - 33

34 Status of Sewerage and Drainage District (Solid Waste) Capital Expenditures to April 30, 2017 Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 2 of 2 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Capital expenditures are funded internally through debt charges. Solid Waste debt is financed short term until the end of the year when the capital position is reviewed to determine if enough debt has been incurred to convert to long term debt through the Municipal Finance Authority or to continue to finance short term. If capital expenditures are less than budgeted for the year, the savings in debt charges create a surplus which by Board policy will be used to reduce future capital debt financing charges through an additional contribution to capital to reduce future debt borrowing requirements. As of the end of 2016, Solid Waste had $24M in debt remaining which will mature by the end of The projects identified in Attachment 1 represent approximately 70 person years of employment and, over their life (development and construction), make up about $6M of the Gross Domestic Product of the region. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Solid Waste capital projects are generally proceeding on schedule and within budget. The Sewerage and Drainage District (Solid Waste) is projecting to be under spent for both ongoing and completed projects to December 31, This is the first of three reports on capital expenditures for Attachments: 1. Sewerage and Drainage District (Solid Waste) Capital Expenditures (Orbit # ) 2. Capital Project Status Information as of April 30, 2017 (Orbit # ) ZWC - 34

35 Sewerage and Drainage District Capital Expenditures Solid Waste As of Apr 30, 2017 Total Projects Total Total Expected 8.8 Project Projected ACE / Projected Percent Year of Project on Program Project ID Project Description Project Location Actuals Project Total Project Project Complete Project Schedule? To-Date Actuals Budget Variance Note Completion (Y/N) On-going Grand Totals 10,895,172 34,500,000 37,000,000 2,500,000 Completed Grand Totals ON-GOING PROJECTS SW Landfills Capital L0029 CLF LFG Upgrades Design Coquitlam 242, , ,000-97% 2017 Y L0033 CLF LFG Upgrade Construction Coquitlam 2,344,136 2,850,000 2,850,000 - (2) 82% 2017 N L0044 CLF LFG Upgrade Phase 2 Coquitlam - 300, ,000 - (2) 0% 2019 N L0049 Coquitlam Landfill Closure Coquitlam 64, , ,000-90% 2017 Y 2,651,818 3,500,000 3,500,000 - SW Transfer Station System Cap L0047 Coq Trans Sta Replacement Coquitlam 590,056 2,400,000 2,400,000-73% 2018 Y L0048 NSTS Reconfiguration North Vancouver 3,539,326 4,500,000 7,000,000 2,500,000 (1) 98% 2017 Y L0056 Surrey SVDO Transfer Station Surrey - 11,000,000 11,000,000-0% 2018 Y 4,129,382 17,900,000 20,400,000 2,500,000 SW Waste to Energy Fac Cap L0045 Scrubber - Design Burnaby 450,000 1,500,000 1,500,000-30% 2018 Y L0050 Soot Blower Replacement Burnaby 588, , ,000-75% 2017 Y L0052 Bottom Ash Processing Burnaby 341,623 6,500,000 6,500,000-10% 2017 Y L0054 WTEF Gas Burner Replacement Burnaby 1,460,321 2,800,000 2,800,000-70% 2018 Y L0055 CEMS Upgrade Construction Burnaby 1,273,535 1,500,000 1,500,000-90% 2017 Y 4,113,971 13,100,000 13,100,000 - Total On-going Projects 10,895,172 34,500,000 37,000,000 2,500,000 COMPLETED PROJECTS Total Completed Projects Notes: (1) Scope of work optimized. (2) For project comments refer to Attachment 2. Attachment 1.xlsx / 2017 April Summary ZWC /20/2017

36 Capital Project Status Information as of April 30, 2017 Major GVS&DD solid waste capital projects are generally proceeding on schedule and within budget. The following capital program exceptions are highlighted: 1) Landfills Program The completion of the Coquitlam Landfill (CLF) Gas Phase Upgrade for the north half of the landfill was completed in April, The scope for any Phase 2 collection system upgrade (for the south half of the landfill) will be determined from an assessment to be completed in A new control room is required and this work is also planned for ZWC - 36

37 5.6 To: From: Zero Waste Committee Andrew Doi, Environmental Planner, Solid Waste Services Date: July 5, 2017 Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: Mattress Recycling Update RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board Chair write the Minister of Environment reiterating Metro Vancouver s request for an Extended Producer Responsibility program for mattresses and other bulky furniture. PURPOSE To provide the Board with an update on mattress recycling in British Columbia and recommend writing to the Minister of Environment to reiterate Metro Vancouver s request for an Extended Producer Responsibility program for mattresses and other bulky furniture. BACKGROUND On June 24, 2016, the GVS&DD Board resolved to write the Minister of Environment requesting that an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program be implemented for mattresses and bulky furniture (see Attachment 1). The Minister of Environment wrote back on November 22, 2016 (see Attachment 2), advising that an EPR program would not be implemented in the short-term because the Ministry of Environment was focused on improving effectiveness of existing programs. Metro Vancouver has completed a study that demonstrates economic and environmental benefits to implementing an EPR program for mattresses and bulky furniture. In addition, a recent fire has again demonstrated that the local recycling industry is fragile. As a result of the fire, Metro Vancouver is incurring additional costs to recycle mattresses delivered to regional transfer stations. The issue of expanding provincial EPR programs to include mattresses and other bulky items also formed a key component of Metro Vancouver s Local Government Matters pre-election campaign where Metro Vancouver asked the main political parties how they would address important regional issues if they were to form government. This report provides an update on mattress recycling in the region, and recommends writing to the Minister of Environment again to reiterate the importance of implementing an EPR program for mattresses and bulky furniture. IMPACTS OF MATTRESS RECYCLING IN METRO VANCOUVER Mattresses have been banned from disposal since In 2016, approximately 165,000 mattresses were collected and recycled within Metro Vancouver. Metro Vancouver s Assessment of Economic and Environmental Impacts of Mattress Recycling study was completed as an extension of the Assessment of Economic and Environmental Impacts of EPR Programs research previously undertaken with the Ministry of Environment. The mattress recycling study leverages the existing impact calculator to estimate the current economic and environmental ZWC - 37

38 Mattress Recycling Update Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 2 of 3 impacts of mattress recycling and also to predict the impacts of a potential new EPR program for mattresses on a province-wide scale. Key findings of the study conclude that, if a province-wide EPR program for mattresses were implemented: Avoided landfilling costs would increase from the current $356K/year in Metro Vancouver to $586K for BC as a whole. Job creation would increase from the current 42 jobs in Metro Vancouver, to 72 provincewide The number of mattress units recycled would increase from 165,000 to 269,000/year Reduction of greenhouse gases would improve from 8,891 to 14,492 tonnes CO 2e/year Municipalities in the region would save at least $500,000 per year assuming mattresses collected by municipalities either through bulky item pick-up or illegal dumping clean-up programs could be dropped off without a fee at a local recycler. The study also considered the impacts of a potential EPR program for bulky furniture, however, a lack of data and comparable EPR programs in other jurisdictions produced limited results. Through an EPR program for mattresses, enhanced collection and processing capacity may provide improved conditions to develop a more comprehensive bulky furniture program in the future. The complete study Assessment of Economic and Environmental Impacts of Mattress Recycling in BC can be found at this URL: Recent Changes in Local Mattress Recycling Market On June 16, 2017, a fire on Mitchell Island occurred at the site of the region s largest mattress recycler, a private business named Pacific Mattress Recyclers. As a result, the Lower Mainland s one remaining recycler of mattresses does not have sufficient recycling capacity to process all of the mattresses collected in the region. Metro Vancouver is shipping mattresses to Arlington Recycling Warehouse in Washington State in the short term. This highlights the urgent need for a provincewide industry-operated EPR program for mattresses. Position of Provincial Political Parties on an EPR Program for Mattresses and Bulky Furniture As part of Metro Vancouver s Local Government Matters pre-election initiative to raise local government issues to provincial political parties, Metro Vancouver sought feedback from each of the major political parties as to whether they supported the implementation of an EPR program for mattresses and other bulky furniture. All three parties committed to work with Metro Vancouver to explore opportunities to enhance and expand EPR programs including considering a program for mattresses and bulky furniture. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board Chair write the Minister of Environment reiterating Metro Vancouver s request for an Extended Producer Responsibility program for mattresses and other bulky furniture. 2. That the Zero Waste Committee receive for information the report dated July 5, 2017, titled Mattress Recycling Update and provide alternative direction to staff. ZWC - 38

39 Mattress Recycling Update Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 3 of 3 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If a province-wide EPR program for mattress were implemented, municipalities should see a reduction in costs for managing illegally dumped mattresses. The implementation approach for a new mattress EPR program cannot be predicted at this time, and it is possible the program may select not to partner with local governments for the collection of mattresses. However, under an EPR program, member municipalities would at least achieve savings from elimination of mattress recycling fees (currently approximately $15/unit) at the point of drop-off, as such fees are not permitted under the B.C. Recycling Regulation. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Mattress Recycling in Metro Vancouver has produced economic benefits (e.g., avoided landfilling costs and jobs created) and environmental benefits (e.g., reduced GHG emissions and energy use). The performance of the mattress recycling network in Metro Vancouver has produced comparable results to the three EPR programs for mattresses in the U.S. If mattresses were included in the B.C. Recycling Regulation, additional economic and environmental benefits could be achieved, along with savings for Metro Vancouver member municipalities. The urgent need for a province-wide EPR program for mattresses is also highlighted by the recent loss of the region s largest mattress recycler due to a fire. The Board asked the major political parties for a mattress EPR program as part of its Local Government Matters pre-election engagement strategy. All political parties committed to work with Metro Vancouver on EPR programs including exploring the potential for a program for mattresses and bulky furniture. Staff recommend Alternative 1 that the GVS&DD Board write to the Minister of Environment reiterating Metro Vancouver s request for the implementation of an EPR program for mattresses and other bulky furniture. Attachments: 1. Correspondence from Chair Greg Moore to Minister Mary Polak re: Mattress and Bulky Furniture Extended Producer Responsibility, dated July 18, 2016 (Orbit # ) 2. Correspondence from Minister Mary Polak to Chair Greg Moore re: BC Extended Producer Responsibility Programs, dated November 22, 2016 (Orbit # ) ZWC - 39

40 ..._~ metrovancouver ~ SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION ATTACHMENT 1 Office of the Chair Tel Fox JUL The Honourable Mary Polak Minister of Environment PO Box 9047, Stn Prov Govt Victoria, BC V8W 9E2 VIA env.minister@gov.bc.ca File: CR Ref: SO 2016 Jun 24 Dear Minister Polak: Re: Mattress and Bulky Furniture Extended Producer Responsibility At its June 24, 2016 regular meeting, the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District ('Metro Vancouver') considered a report on issues related to mattress recycling and disposal in the Metro Vancouver region and adopted the following resolution: That the GVS&DD Board: a) write a letter to the Minister of Environment requesting an amendment to the B.C. Recycling Regulation to require the implementation of an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program for mattresses and other bulky furniture by 2017; and b) copy all municipalities and regional districts in the Province on the letter. The Province of B.C. has been a leader in implementing extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs for a broad range of products, including most recently packaging and printed paper, has improved the management of many products in British Columbia. Responsibility for recycling these products has been shifted from municipalities to producers, convenient systems have been put in place for recycling of materials that may create negative environmental impact, and producers are now considering the full-life cycle impacts of their products by implementing design changes. Building upon the success of current EPR programs, Metro Vancouver believes that it is important to move forward with the implementation of EPR programs for mattresses and bulky furniture. Mattresses and other furniture are specifically identified in the Canadian Council for Ministers of the Environment Canada-Wide Action Plan for EPR as targets for new EPR programs by The Ministry of Environment has previously communicated its intent to implement EPR programs for mattresses and bulky furniture by An estimated 165,000 mattresses are recycled each year in the Metro Vancouver region, of which approximately 60,000 are handled at Metro Vancouver transfer stations. An additional 32,000 mattresses and 59,000 bulky furniture items are picked up by municipalities, either through illegal dumping clean-up programs or large item pick-up programs. Recycling generates significant energy Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada VSH 4G ::._.; Greater Vancouver Regional District Greater Vancouver Water District Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage Disuict Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation ZWC - 40

41 The Honourable Mary Polak, Minister of Environment Mattress and Bulky Furniture Extended Producer Responsibility Page 2 of 2 savings and greenhouse gas benefits, but at significant cost to taxpayers. Metro Vancouver estimates the cost to regional taxpayers of illegal dumping clean-up and bulky items pick-up programs for mattresses and bulky furniture to be as high as $5,000,000 per year. Establishing an EPR program for mattresses and bulky furniture would result in a number of benefits: 1. The cost for collection and recycling of mattresses and bulky furniture would be incorporated into the price of the items rather than being funded by municipal taxpayers. 2. Variability in commodity markets would not impact the potential for recycling mattresses. 3. Mattress production could be changed or alternatively innovative recycling systems could be implemented to manage hard-to-recycle products such as pocket-coil mattresses 4. Mattresses could be recycled by businesses and residents free of charge, reducing the potential for illegal dumping Within the last year or so, new mattress EPR programs have launched in California, Connecticut and Rhode Island. Given a common pool of mattress and bulky furniture brand owners operating in the United States and Canada, this is a key time to begin moving forward to include these product categories in the B.C. Recycling Regulation. We thank you in advance for your consideration of this request. We would be pleased to discuss how we can work together as partners to facilitate the implementation of this and other EPR programs. Please feel free to contact me to discuss further, or have your staff contact Andrew Doi of the Solid Waste Services Department. Yours truly, Greg Moore Chair, Metro Vancouver Board GM/PH/sw cc: All Municipalities and Regional Districts in the Province of BC End: "Mattress Recycling Update" Report to GVS&DD Board dated June 24, 2016 (Doclll793952BJ ZWC - 41

42 Section E 2.3 To: From: Zero Waste Committee Sarah Wellman, Senior Engineer, Solid Waste Services Date: May 26, 2016 Meeting Date: June 9, 2016 Subject: Mattress Recycling Update RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board: a) write a letter to the Minister of Environment requesting an amendment to the B.C. Recycling Regulation to require the implementation of an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program for mattresses and other bulky furniture by 2017; and b) copy all municipalities and regional districts in the Province on the letter. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to update the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District ( Metro Vancouver ) Board on issues related to mattress recycling in the region and seek direction to write the Minister of the Environment to request that the Province implement an EPR program for mattresses and other bulky furniture. BACKGROUND At its April 27, 2012 meeting, the GVS&DD Board adopted the following resolution: That the Board request the Chair to send a letter to the Provincial Government highlighting the importance of implementing an Extended Producer Responsibility program for mattresses and other large furniture items. The Board Chair s letter is attached (Attachment 1) along with the response from the Ministry of Environment (Attachment 2). In 2014, Maple Ridge submitted the following UBCM resolution requesting an EPR program for mattresses: 2014 B97: Maple Ridge WHEREAS the Province is transitioning responsibility for end-of-life management of goods to industry through the use of product stewardship program as governed by the BC Ministry of Environment Recycling Regulation; AND WHEREAS there is currently no product stewardship program for used mattresses and improperly discarded mattresses have to be disposed of by local government at taxpayers expense: ZWC - 42

43 THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that UBCM request the provincial government to require industry to develop a product stewardship program to adequately address end-of-life management of waste mattresses. This resolution was endorsed by UBCM, and received the following response from the Ministry of Environment: The Ministry of Environment supports UBCM s request to include waste mattresses under future product stewardship programs to ensure the costs associated with managing these commonly discarded products are transferred to the producers responsible. In fact, the Ministry has committed to meeting the targets set out in the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment s (CCME) Canada-wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs including those for construction and demolition materials, furniture (including mattresses, hide-a-beds, etc.), textiles, carpets and appliances by BC continues to lead all jurisdictions in this regard. Continued efforts in the Lower Mainland to collect and recycle these items are encouraged as they will not only support waste diversion, but will help establish this industry as a proven entity and inform future consultations regarding the upcoming EPR program for mattresses. An estimated 160,000 to 170,000 mattresses are recycled each year in the Metro Vancouver region, of which approximately 60,000 are handled at Metro Vancouver transfer stations with the remainder delivered directly to the mattress recyclers either by private industry, private pick up services, or by municipalities that offer collection services and/or pick up illegally dumped mattresses. In 2011, the Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw (Tipping Fee Bylaw) was changed to ban mattresses from disposal due to operational impacts and to encourage mattress recycling. Mattresses are received at Metro Vancouver transfer stations for $15 per unit to pay for the cost of recycling the mattresses. Due to challenges recycling pocket coil mattress springs, in 2015, the Tipping Fee Bylaw was amended to provide a $25 discount per tonne at the Waste-to-Energy Facility for loads containing more than 85% metal in recognition of the value of the metal in loads, and also to help reduce costs for mattress recyclers with no recycling alternative for these pocket coil springs. At the September 10, 2015 Zero Waste Committee directed staff to report back to the Committee on: the effectiveness of the mattress surcharge MATTRESS AND OTHER BULKY FURNITURE DISPOSAL AND RECYLCLING The past practice of disposing of mattresses commingled in the waste stream was operationally challenging due to the bulkiness of mattresses, which makes them difficult to handle during waste pickup and transport. Their low density makes them undesirable landfill material, and the springs have a tendency to impact landfill and transfer station equipment (e.g. puncture hydraulic systems). Removal of mattresses from the waste stream has helped reduce maintenance on transfer station and landfill equipment. ZWC - 43

44 The majority of the mattresses collected at transfer stations are recycled. In mattress recycling there are secondary markets for the steel of the innerspring unit, the polyurethane foam, the cover (toppers), the cotton, and the wood. According to the May 2012 CalRecycle Study Mattress and Box Spring Case Study: The Potential Impacts of Extended Producer Responsibility in California on Global Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions, mattress and box spring recycling and component reuse generates significant energy and greenhouse gas benefits. Pocket coils are difficult to recycle, as it is challenging to separate the metal from the fabric. Metro Vancouver is currently accepting pocket coil mattresses at the Waste-to-Energy Facility, and recovers the metal for recycling. Up until recently, there were three private companies in the region recycling over 160,000 mattresses. Metro Vancouver s disposal ban on mattresses has been key in the development of this industry. With declining metal prices mattress recycling companies have faced economic challenges because historically metal was the primary revenue source from recycling mattresses. As of May 2016, one of the recycling companies, Recyc-Mattress, stopped accepting mattresses. Without an EPR program in place for mattresses, the net costs for mattress recycling must be charged to residents, businesses and the public sector dropping off mattresses for recycling. Over the last two years, Metro Vancouver s drop-off costs at the private recycling facilities have increased from $9 to $13 per unit. Metro Vancouver has maintained drop-off fees at $15 at transfer stations despite the increased recycling costs to reduce the potential for illegal dumping. With the temporary closure of Recyc-Mattress, there have been more discarded mattresses than the local capacity for recycling. As a result, Metro Vancouver is temporarily stock-piling some mattresses, and may need to send some mattresses to landfill. This issue highlights the need for an EPR program for mattresses to stabilize the recycling capacity in the region regardless of commodity prices. Other bulky furniture such as couches are recyclable in the same manner as mattresses, and these products are also a challenge from a disposal perspective due to their bulk and the presence of springs. The cost of recycling couches is approximately $30 $45 per unit. If an EPR program for mattresses and bulky furniture was put in place, couches and other bulky furniture could be banned from disposal, dramatically increasing recycling of these products and reducing impacts on the disposal system. Illegal Dumping Illegal dumping is an ongoing concern in the region. It causes environmental, health and social impacts, and is a considerable resource and financial burden on governments, businesses and residents. In particular, municipalities often bear the majority of costs associated with reactively cleaning up and disposing of abandoned waste. Despite the availability of recycling programs provided by Metro Vancouver and the private sector, illegal dumping of mattresses is common in the region. The resident s principal barriers to mattress recycling in the region include: difficulty and cost of transporting mattresses to transfer stations or appropriate recyclers, recycling fee charged when a customer drops off a mattress, and ZWC - 44

45 These barriers contribute to continued incidents of illegal dumping in many member municipalities. An estimated 10,000 mattresses and 16,000 other pieces of large furniture are abandoned each year in the region with an average municipal unit cost for collection of $50 per unit (includes labour, and transportation), which leads to a cost of approximately $1,300,000 per year for member municipalities. Anecdotally, the highest portion of abandoned mattresses occur in urbanized areas with a transient population near apartment complexes or multi-family dwellings. In these areas, many residents do not own vehicles, rely solely on public transportation, or own small vehicles not suitable for transporting large and bulky mattresses. It is uncertain as to the relative impact of recycling fees compared to transportation barriers in determining the number of illegally dumped mattresses. Drop-off revenues for mattresses at Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver transfer stations equal approximately $900,000 per year, and cover most of the cost of recycling these mattresses. Reduction or elimination of these fees is unlikely to eliminate illegal dumping and as such reduction or elimination of fees would result in a net cost. Drop-off fees could be eliminated if an EPR program for mattresses is put in place. Large Item Pick-Up Programs in the Region Many municipalities have implemented large item pick-up programs as a way to reduce incidents of illegal dumping. These programs are generally available only to residences served by municipal garbage collection. There are a combination of various features in member municipalities programs, including the types of materials collected, pick-up limits, housing types serviced, collection frequency, collection fee, etc. Approximately 22,000 mattresses and 43,000 pieces of furniture are picked up through large item pick-up programs each year. EPR Program for Mattresses There is urgent need for an EPR program for mattresses and other bulky furniture in the region. Lack of an EPR program increases the potential for illegal dumping of these items and transfers costs to municipalities that must pick-up illegally dumped items. In many cases municipalities incur additional costs by offering large item pick-up programs at no cost to residents to reduce the potential for illegal dumping. Recent changes to commodity markets have reduced the economic viability of local mattress recycling businesses and may result in the requirement to landfill recyclable mattresses. The Ministry of Environment has previously communicated that they targeted implementing an EPR program for mattresses and bulky furniture by The typical timeframe for EPR programs to be implemented following a change to the Recycling Regulation is approximately 18 months, and as such, even if a change to the Recycling Regulation is made in 2016, it could be 2018 before a program is in place. It is important to highlight to the Ministry of Environment the urgent need to proceed with an EPR program for mattresses and other bulky furniture. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board: a) write a letter to the Minister of Environment requesting an amendment to the B.C. Recycling Regulation to require the implementation of an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program for mattresses and other bulky furniture by 2017; and b) copy all municipalities and regional districts in the Province on the letter. ZWC - 45

46 2. That the Zero Waste Committee receive the report titled Mattress Recycling Update, dated May 26, 2016 for information and provide alternate direction to staff. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the Board approves Alternative 1, correspondence will be sent to the Minister of Environment to advocate for an EPR program for mattresses and other bulky furniture. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION An estimated 160,000 to 170,000 mattresses are recycled each year in the Metro Vancouver region, of which approximately 60,000 are handled at Metro Vancouver transfer stations. Mattress recycling generates significant energy and greenhouse gas benefits, and reduces Metro Vancouver s operational and maintenance costs when compared to disposal. A mattress recycling fee is collected by Metro Vancouver at the transfer stations, and paid to mattress recyclers to help cover the cost of dismantling and recycling mattress components. Many municipalities have developed large item pick-up programs to reduce the incidences and costs associated with illegal dumping. An EPR program for mattresses and bulky furniture is urgently needed, as changes to commodity markets have reduced the economic viability of local recycling businesses and may result in the requirement to landfill potentially recyclable mattresses. Lack of an EPR program increases the potential for illegal dumping of these products and transfers costs to municipalities. There is a need to continue to urge the Minister of Environment to address this ongoing issue and to introduce an EPR program for mattresses and other bulky furniture and therefore staff recommend Alternative 1. Attachments and References: Attachment 1: Letter from Chair Moore to Minister Terry Lake, dated June 19, 2012 Attachment 2: Letter from Minister Terry Lake to Chair Moore, dated December 11, ZWC - 46

47 ATTACHMENT 1 metrov.lncauver Oliw oi :in Cht~V ft.' JZ~2151in 604 <i'si JUI/ Fi:o: CR EPR RT: 3960 The Honourabb T eft'y lake Mlnlstor of EmAronmen1 PO Box 9047, Stn Pruv Go 1t Victoria, BC VIJitV 9 2 Oesr Mini~""ake: - -"\f.~ Re: Act:elitratlon of an Extended Producer Ruponalbility (EPR) Program for Mattreean and Largo Upholstorod Furniture As part of the Canadi3n Coooci! of ~tinisters of the Environment (CCME) Canada.. wfda Action Pl~n for epr. all pro~ncas commiusd to Implementing e Pf'Ogram rol' rt.rnllura, Including maure&see, by the Phase II huge! or The lesdership demonstrated by thei Province, Mslfo Vaooouwr al'ld oltters, hss crea~ a robust rc~-ellng!ndus'!j'y for mattresses o:~nd Iaroe upholstered furniture. \\lith ti'vl:!s processors tocatad In the lower Malnland. With the recent emergence of this locel recycling Industry, Metro Vancouver implemented a ban on the disposal of msttr~$1es at regional dia.poaal facilities in January 2011.,\ $20 par m.a!tmss t&g wat chflf'ood to oovar tha CO,t$ et collection, tral"'sports!ion end procfile&in9. In 2011, over 125,000 nalb&s:se:s WMe recycled into lheif wood, tnetaj, foam, and fibre components, leading to over 70 green job$ added in 1his recyd ifltl sec:or. These va!uabte natural resource8 '"'Eire reused and.'or r~cyc6d thereby avoiding the di3po8al of these materials in landfil~ and the extraction of new natural 1esoorces.. Wl'1ile this initiati te ha& tleen en o ;erwhelmino success from an en'lironmental pe~pec1ive, 1hc comb ina lion of the ban and lhe $20 per unil fee has rest.slted in the unintended consequence of illegal dt.:mping by a minority of iodlvldua!s unwilling to pay a ree ror responatlle management of products a1 the end of the!r useful life. As a result, mun~lpalities Incur.stgnrtleant costs lo responsibtv manage these products. as opposed to the r:;anufac1urera, PfOdu~l's, d ishibutors and retajer$ who do not currently bear the full erwironmental cost to manage tl"efr products. Weast. thai the Ministr) or Environmtml ~rr.end the Recycling Re;Julalion 1o inr:lude m<ttlrcsses and large uphoistoroct tur01ture arret accol&mte.tllo lmpigmontcr:lcn of :his EPR pjogj~m tc Ths requesl 1o accelerate EPR tnp!ementation is exp!icidy staccd in action of ollr tnl~raled Solid 'Waste ard Resource,,.tanegemenl Plan whic:h was approve(! last year. T,'le inrrastruclure s!ld regulatory slructa.he a1ready G.ldsts in tv1etro Vancouver and could be easi'y ex1enccd throo,hout the Prn >.,inc~. ZWC - 47

48 ZWC - 48

49 ATTACHMENT 2 Q.BRITISH COLUMRIA DEL I l 2011 G rp.e, \ f(lc>r~, C:h:lil and Dinxttl!S t- 1etro Va!\COU"Y'et & a:rd 4330 Kingsway num:thy UC VSH 4GS,..--./tlt"~*/ I >car Chair ':f~te'imd f)j~d,. : /. ' n.;:t H you f"'r )\)ur!cncr of June regarding th~ u.:.<elentlion (If <Ul t'xkml<d produ~.:r I'C~JU'!fl:d h:lity {F.PR) progmm f->r mallr<~s <mo:i Jar~e upbd ster<e:d fuw.itme in Bt iish (:(lhun!>i3 (OC). I apok W~t-. f..-.r l h~ de;tty in h!$p(lnding.. A$ YCIU may hew. nc :l~ts re:tr.tl)' ~n ~c;;..'>gnizt.<! lcjt its h!ild~ rs.!up j\cs~f.on t"j\ fj I~ IK hll.'t mono l::pr pto~r'llj'iis tb::.n <!1:.}' ju r i~jc:fic n in CaMel~ :)r<l l<: funrcr n.iwmccd :c wards fill tilling jts f.'-l' n: ~otkm ( :I'Ymc: ' of.\-li nhl~n: uf Rnvimnme l"ll f'unadu-... id~ A..:ti~'m J>llll fcap:i fnr CPR..:\ date for the addljon of mattresses and lar::<.: uphol$1cre\l :'umi ~ur: to th.:. 1-tecy..:linl' Kc:tu l<~ti<m has not J:locn set. at dtis PQint in t mc:. Ministry <If Em ifl mnenl sl<~ff a~ t:wr::utly a-.li\ t'ly cn:ta~c:d (.In t 1~ imrl~m e lllalivu of the pa<:kat!_i u~; ;utd pli.ttd "'lpct ptuju~( c;.ttcg.. tt lmdcr tit Rl!l. d iug, Re ~:ul"tiuu. Fud1-..:.~ pwdu~t ;;l(!diti,':ltl3 1(11he Rc.a:.&lati(tn will he nddres:le\1 in pticrity ~:\1\ll:tt~~. The Mini~hy'~ 20 I 1:'12 - :!013.'14 S.zr. icc Plt.n highli..;ht,; Clur c :mmtinncnt to tl-.c C'A? for EPR. 'IJ)C (;AI,. t.:commcnd:> thnt E:JtR progr,un:; be impkmenftod by 2017 fur cu ~ruetion and dcn~'ll i,i on :t:uteriul,:;, G.anilun:. tmtilts, en.tpets :ln..1 <l?pii:tnce!>. including o:umc-dcp:cting. su b~ro.tt~s. W~ are m3..t:in, e-ve y eftb1 U: meet the~ 2017 lw'~et::. umj I wuulj 1ik.: I (I as<;ur-~you th3tm31ires:~es ~md Lu~c upb..-.lster~:l furni,.we will t~ included in futul'4! di!;cu;:;:ion.~. J would lii:e to acknowl.:d!;c utd <:.:Jn1Jilo:00 l\ 1-:lro VMl:Ouv~J f<:~r ~:<I~JldiH~. ~s d<:~ctunpn.ted itt :l\~110n 1.1.:; untkr ( in:tl 1 <- f the f\:jctn) V ar.:x.\l\'t'l' Int.;- ~ute:j Solid Waste and ~csourcc M:tnugerneot f' l~n. the. C ffer {() piovide. staftiog >upport oo:.t p:trtn~r... iah the M nistty b.) htdp adva1ce EPR in the pro ;in;e. Thit' ollc:r (If su r.r~)r1 Ita.-: th~ f'olt-uti(\1 lo :lssisj ;,: steel' ill~ W:lS:C dh en;ion :u.:tivites in ::, mar11'1~r lhat will uldnmely eeminate was:c or cttcc tivc;l~ rtn~nt'l:e. mftn;.~c it ~sa.. ' -:- < ~"' ~:..:~:a:~cn: Off> :,..,.,,,\ ~. r.r,..,;.,;.,,v,,~~ F,,,., ;-, "' f!,.~. ;,~;..,,,,..;,!><' \'lh' ' X4 T;,,to:.v..: Z>~-"'~!Ill:' F~tuil<: :.?J.':I' U:O: ZWC - 49

50 ZWC - 50

51 ... BRITISH COLUMBIA ATTACHMENT 2 Reference: 302 I 38 NOV 2 Z 2016 Greg Moore, Chair and Directors Metro Vancouver 4330 Kingsway Burnaby BC V5H 408 Dear Chair Moore and Directors: Thank you for your letter of July I 8, 2016, regarding British Columbia's (BC's) extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs and Metro Vancouver's request to include mattresses and bulky furniture as a regulated product category. I apologize for the delay in responding. The Ministry of Environment greatly appreciates your support for the Recycling Regulation framework. This regulation is an important part ofbc's work towards zero waste and supporting a circular economy. BC is a recognized leader for EPR programs in North America with the most extensive series of established programs operating in a well-respected, results-based framework. The ministry intends to continue to be a leader and expand BC's EPR programs as part of our commitment to the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment's Canada-wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility. Furniture, including mattresses and sofas, is a priority product category in the Canada-wide Action Plan for Extended Producer Responsibility; however, this is also currently under review by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. After years of rapid expansion of EPR programs in BC, the ministry is currently focusing on full implementation and continuous improvement of its existing programs before pursuing new EPR programs. As you may be aware, the packaging and printed paper (PPP) program operated by Multi-Material BC is by far the largest and most complex program in the history of EPR programs in BC, and is still to be fully implemented pending further ministry compliance and enforcement efforts on non-compliant PPP producers. Some of our continuous improvement work underway includes: An assessment of performance measures across all EPR programs; Reviewing and developing policy for competition in EPR programs; Developing stronger requirements for non-financial assurance of annual reports for all EPR programs; Enhancing ministry oversight of EPR programs; and Enhancing the ministry's compliance and enforcement efforts Ministry of Environment Office of the Minister Mailing Address: Parliament Buildings Victoria BC V8V 1X4 Telephone: F:acsimile: ZWC - 51

52 -2- It is expected that following completion of much ofthe continuous improvement work, we will be in a better position to identify products of interest for future EPR initiatives. The data related to mattresses and furniture as presented to Metro Vancouver's Zero Waste Committee on June 9, 2016, will be important to understand the magnitude ofthe problem, and I understand that Metro Vancouver is continuing to collect data on mattresses and bulky furniture. Such background research and data gathering is useful when the ministry begins its scoping work on new products to be considered for inclusion in the Regulation. Local government engagement in EPR is paramount to the programs' success. I would like to a~.;k.nuwledge that local government staithave been very supportive and continue to provide the ministry with feedback on continuous improvement efforts for all EPR programs. The ministry will continue to engage with local government as staff continue work to strengthen the current programs and begin to focus on future EPR diversion opportunities. Thank you again for taking the time to write. Sincerely, 17~ Mary Polak Minister ZWC - 52

53 5.7 To: From: Zero Waste Committee Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services Date: July 7, 2017 Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board: a) approve the following amendments to the 2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw: i. The Recycling Fee for Source-Separated Organic Waste, Green Waste and Clean Wood will be changed to $95 per tonne and the minimum Recycling Fee for such loads will be changed to $10, effective September 1, 2017; and ii. The surcharge threshold for Food Waste will be changed to 25%, effective August 1, b) give first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017; and c) pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to recommend changes to the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw No. 302, 2016 (2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw) for the Recycling Fee for Source-Separated Organic Waste, Green Waste and Clean Wood, and the Disposal Ban surcharge threshold for Food Waste. BACKGROUND On October 30, 2016, as part of the 2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw, the Board approved reducing the Food Waste disposal ban surcharge threshold from 25% to 5% effective July 1, Since early 2017, the options for processing organics in the region have reduced and as such lowering the surcharge threshold negatively impacts waste haulers with limited options for recycling Food Waste. This spring the Board resolved to deliver Source-Separated Organic Waste (curbside Green Waste and Food Waste) from the North Shore Transfer Station to an alternate facility for processing rather than Harvest Fraser Richmond Organics Ltd. (Harvest Power). Source-Separated Organic Waste is received at the North Shore Transfer Station from the three North Shore municipalities, Lions Bay and Bowen Island. Metro Vancouver recently received proposals for processing Source-Separated Organic Waste from the North Shore Transfer Station, and Harvest Power has notified Metro Vancouver of a rate increase effective July 15, These changes require a change to the 2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw to adjust fees for Source-Separated Organic Waste, Green Waste and Clean Wood to ensure cost recovery. This report provides an update on organics processing in the region, and proposes changes to the 2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw to return the surcharge threshold for Food Waste to 25%, and increase ZWC - 53

54 Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 2 of 4 recycling fees for Source-Separated Organic Waste, Green Waste and Clean Wood to $95 per tonne with a minimum fee of $10 to recover processing costs for this material. ORGANICS PROCESSING BACKGROUND AND PROPOSED TIPPING FEE BYLAW AMENDMENTS Regional Organics Processing Capacity There are currently two primary processors of Source-Separated Organic Waste in the region; Harvest Power and Enviro-Smart Organics. Other receiving facilities send organics for processing to secondary facilities either within or outside of the region. Both Enviro-Smart Organics and Harvest Power have restricted municipal and commercial customers access to their facilities in recent months. Metro Vancouver s understanding is that the only licensed facilities in the region currently accepting new customers are facilities operated by Revolution Resource Recovery. Revolution Resource Recovery receives organics at its Vancouver and Surrey facilities and transports the organics to a composting facility in the interior along with other processing facilities. The Surrey Biofuel Facility will add approximately 115,000 tonnes per year of new organics processing capacity and is expected to be operating by fall Proposed Recycling Fee Increase for Source-Separated Organic Waste, Green Waste and Clean Wood Due to the increased processing fee at Harvest Power and limited regional organics processing capacity, an increase in the recycling fee is required to cover increased costs associated with receiving organic waste at the transfer stations. The recycling fee for Source-Separated Organic Waste, Green Waste and Clean Wood is proposed to be increased from $67 per tonne with a minimum fee of $6 to $95 per tonne with a minimum fee of $10 at the North Shore, Surrey, Coquitlam, Maple Ridge and Langley Transfer Stations effective September 1. The minimum fee has been historically set at approximately 10% of the per-tonne fee so an increase to $10 is considered appropriate. Proposed Change in Surcharge Threshold for Food Waste Under the 2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw, the disposal ban surcharge threshold for loads containing Food Waste decreased from 25% to 5% on July 1, As a temporary response to reduced local options for processing Food Waste, and in accordance with Section 5.16 of the 2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw, the General Manager of Solid Waste Services reduced the surcharge for Food Waste such that any garbage loads exceeding 5% Food Waste are surcharged 25% of the applicable tipping fee instead of 50% of the tipping fee until September 30, Table 1 shows the number of surcharges issued from March to June 2017 for garbage loads containing over 25% Food Waste, and the number of educational notices provided to customers with garbage loads containing 5% to 25% Food Waste. The number of customers receiving educational notices provides an estimate of the number of additional customers who would receive surcharges if the Food Waste surcharge threshold is reduced to 5%. Based on this information, an average of approximately 15 additional surcharges per month would be expected to be issued to commercial customers. Small vehicle customers are unlikely to receive surcharges because if banned materials are observed in their loads the customers typically place the banned materials in on-site recycling bins. ZWC - 54

55 Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 3 of 4 Table 1. Food Waste Surcharges and Educational Notices from March to June 2017 Month Surcharges Educational Notices (Food Waste > 5%) small vehicle customers March April May June Educational Notices (Food Waste > 5%) large commercial customers ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board: a) approve the following amendments to the 2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw: i. The Recycling Fee for Source-Separated Organic Waste, Green Waste and Clean Wood will be changed to $95 per tonne and the minimum Recycling Fee for such loads will be changed to $10, effective September 1, 2017; and ii. The surcharge threshold for Food Waste will be changed to 25%, effective August 1, 2017; b) give first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017; and c) pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, That the Zero Waste Committee receive for information the report dated July 7, 2017, titled Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 and provide alternate direction to staff. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the Board approves Alternative 1, the 2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw will be changed to increase drop-off rates for Source-Separated Organics, Green Waste and Clean Wood to $95 per tonne with a minimum fee of $10, effective September 1, The Disposal Ban surcharge threshold for Food Waste will be returned to 25% effective August 1, Changing recycling fees for organics at Metro Vancouver transfer stations will ensure users are paying the full cost of managing these materials. Returning the disposal ban surcharge threshold for Food Waste to 25% recognizes that there are limited options for recycling organics in the region in advance of new capacity becoming operational in the next few months. Although the number of loads that are expected to be surcharged if the surcharge threshold is left at 5% is not large, returning the threshold to 25% reduces impacts on haulers that currently have limited recycling options. If the Board chooses not to adjust the organics recycling fees, other regional solid waste system users will subsidize organics management. The cost difference between the current recycling fees and expected organics processing costs equate to approximately $1.5 million per year. If the disposal ban threshold for Food Waste is left at 5%, more haulers will receive disposal ban surcharges with limited organics processing options available. ZWC - 55

56 Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 4 of 4 SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Organics processing capacity in the region has been impacted over the last year, and new capacity is not yet operational. Costs for processing organics are increasing as of mid-july, As a result, recycling fees for Source-Separated Organic Waste, Green Waste and Clean Wood need to be increased to recover costs. There are limited options for processing organics in the region and therefore the recent reduction in the Disposal Ban threshold for Food Waste negatively impacts haulers. Staff recommend Alternative 1, that effective September 1, 2017 recycling fees for Source- Separated Organic Waste, Green Waste and Clean Wood increase to $95 per tonne with a minimum fee of $10, and that effective August 1, 2017 the disposal ban threshold for Food Waste return to 25%. Attachments: 1. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, Blackline version of the proposed Table 3 & 4 compared to the existing Table 3 & 4 from Schedule B in the 2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw ZWC - 56

57 ATTACHMENT 1 GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT AMENDING BYLAW NO. 304, 2017 A Bylaw to Amend the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw No. 302, 2016 WHEREAS: A. The Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Board (the Board ) adopted the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw No. 302, 2016, a Bylaw to establish a scale of fees, levies and charges for services rendered by the GVS&DD and for the use of any of the GVS&DD s waste disposal facilities; and B. The Board wishes to amend the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw No. 302, NOW THEREFORE the Board, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows: 1. The Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw No. 302, 2016 (the Bylaw ) is hereby amended as follows: (a) Section 5.7 of the Bylaw is deleted and replaced with the following: 5.7 Not used. (b) Section 5.8 of the Bylaw is deleted and replaced with the following: 5.8 Every person who disposes of a Load at a Disposal Site that contains Food Waste that exceeds either 25% of the total weight of the Load or 25% of the total volume of the Load must pay a Surcharge in the amounts set out in Table 4 of Schedule B of this Bylaw. (c) Effective as of September 1, 2017, Table 3 of Schedule B of the Bylaw is deleted and replaced with Table 3 of the Schedule to this bylaw. (d) Table 4 of Schedule B of the Bylaw is deleted and replaced with Table 4 of the Schedule to this bylaw. 2. This bylaw may be cited as Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, This bylaw comes into force and takes effect August 1, Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 ZWC - 57 Page 1 of 4

58 READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this day of, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this day of, Greg Moore, Chairperson Chris Plagnol, Corporate Officer Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 ZWC - 58 Page 2 of 4

59 SCHEDULE Table 3 Recycling Fees for materials dropped off in designated Recycling Areas North Shore Transfer Station Surrey Transfer Station Coquitlam Transfer Station Maple Ridge Transfer Station Langley Transfer Station Waste-to-Energy Facility Source-Separated Organic Waste $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum Not accepted. Green Waste $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum Not accepted. Clean Wood $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum. $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum. Not accepted. Gypsum less than ½ tonne $150/tonne, $10 minimum $150/tonne, $10 minimum $150/tonne, $10 minimum $150/tonne, $10 minimum $150/tonne, $10 minimum Not accepted. Mattresses $15 per Mattress $15 per Mattress $15 per Mattress $15 per Mattress $15 per Mattress Not accepted. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 ZWC - 59 Page 3 of 4

60 Table 4 Surcharges Loads containing Recyclable Materials other than Food Waste or Clean Wood that exceeds either 5% of the total weight of the Load or 5% of the total volume of the Load (section 5.5) 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee Loads containing Contaminated Recyclable Paper that exceeds either 5% of the total weight of the Load or 5% of the total volume of the Load (section 5.6) 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee Loads containing Food Waste that exceeds either 25% of the total weight of the Load or 25% of the total volume of the Load (section 5.8) 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee Before June 30, 2017 Loads containing Clean Wood that exceeds either 10% of the total weight of the Load or 10% of the total volume of the Load (section 5.9) 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee From July 1, 2017 Loads containing Clean Wood that exceeds either 5% of the total weight of the Load or 5% of the total volume of the Load (section 5.10) 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee Loads of Source Separated Organic Waste containing more than 0.05% (by wet weight) of any other type of Refuse (section 5.11) $50 per Load Loads containing any Hazardous and Operational Impact Materials or Product Stewardship Materials (section 5.12) $65 per Load plus any remediation or clean-up costs Unsecured Loads (section 5.13) 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee to a maximum of $ Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 ZWC - 60 Page 4 of 4

61 ATTACHMENT 2 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 67 Blackline version of the proposed Table 3 & 4 compared to the existing Table 3 & 4 from Schedule B in the 2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw Source-Separated Organic Waste Green Waste Clean Wood Gypsum less than ½ tonne SCHEDULE Table 3 Recycling Fees for materials dropped off in designated Recycling Areas North Shore Transfer Station $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $150/tonne, $10 minimum Surrey Transfer Station $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum. $150/tonne, $10 minimum Coquitlam Transfer Station $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $150/tonne, $10 minimum Maple Ridge Transfer Station $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $150/tonne, $10 minimum Langley Transfer Station $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum. $150/tonne, $10 minimum Waste-to-Energy Facility Not accepted. Not accepted. Not accepted. Not accepted. Mattresses $15 per Mattress $15 per Mattress $15 per Mattress $15 per Mattress $15 per Mattress Not accepted. Deleted: 67 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 67 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Page 1 of 2 ZWC - 61

62 Table 4 Surcharges Loads containing Recyclable Materials other than Food Waste or Clean Wood that exceeds either 5% of the total weight of the Load or 5% of the total volume of the Load (section 5.5) 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee Loads containing Contaminated Recyclable Paper that exceeds either 5% of the total weight of the Load or 5% of the total volume of the Load (section 5.6) 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee Loads containing Food Waste that exceeds either 25% of the total weight of the Load or 25% of the total volume of the Load (section 5.8) Before June 30, 2017 Loads containing Clean Wood that exceeds either 10% of the total weight of the Load or 10% of the total volume of the Load (section 5.9) 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee Deleted: Before June 30, 2017 Loads containing Food Waste that exceeds either 25% of the total weight of the Load or 25% of the total volume of the Load (section 5.7) Deleted: 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee Deleted: From July 1, 2017 From July 1, 2017 Loads containing Clean Wood that exceeds either 5% of the total weight of the Load or 5% of the total volume of the Load (section 5.10) 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee Loads of Source Separated Organic Waste containing more than 0.05% (by wet weight) of any other type of Refuse (section 5.11) $50 per Load Loads containing any Hazardous and Operational Impact Materials or Product Stewardship Materials (section 5.12) $65 per Load plus any remediation or clean-up costs Unsecured Loads (section 5.13) 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee to a maximum of $50.00 Page 2 of 2 ZWC - 62

63 5.8 To: From: Zero Waste Committee Sarah Wellman, Senior Engineer, Solid Waste Services Date: July 5, 2017 Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: Contingency Disposal of Municipal Solid Waste Update RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated July 5, 2017, titled Contingency Disposal of Municipal Solid Waste Update. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to provide information regarding the contingency disposal of municipal solid waste. BACKGROUND Metro Vancouver stopped shipping waste to the Cache Creek Landfill in July On March 31, 2017, the GVS&DD Board approved initiating a procurement process to establish standing offers for contingency disposal. The report also noted that in advance of putting standing offer agreements in place Metro Vancouver would procure disposal capacity on an interim basis. Metro Vancouver now has two short-term agreements in place to receive waste in excess of what can be managed at the Vancouver Landfill and the Waste-to-Energy Facility. This report provides information on those contracts and an update on the longer term standing offer procurement process. CONTINGENCY DISPOSAL SERVICES RFP was issued in April 2017 for interim supply of contingency disposal services to the three companies that responded to an earlier Request for Information on Contingency Disposal. In May 2017, Metro Vancouver signed a short-term agreement with Waste Management of Canada to dispose of municipal solid waste. Waste is delivered by road to Argo Rail Yard in Seattle, and then by rail to Columbia Ridge Landfill in Oregon on an as-required basis. Another short-term agreement has been signed with Republic Services for the disposal of municipal solid waste at the Roosevelt Regional Landfill in Washington on an as required basis. Waste shipped to Roosevelt Landfill is delivered first to an intermodal facility at Fraser Surrey Docks. Waste from a number of communities in British Columbia is being managed through the Fraser Surrey Docks facility. Metro Vancouver expects total contingency disposal requirements for 2017 to be in the range of 75,000 to 100,000 tonnes of waste. This represents about 10% of the waste requiring disposal in the region. ZWC - 63

64 Contingency Disposal of Municipal Solid Waste Update Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 2 of 2 Ongoing Contingency Disposal Services Metro Vancouver is currently preparing to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to establish Standing Offer Agreements to meet its contingency disposal needs for the next three years. This RFP is expected to be issued in July 2017, with recommendations for contract(s) to be brought to the Board for consideration in the fall. Metro Vancouver expects to contract with two companies to provide the service with minimum quantities of 15,000 tonnes per year of disposal capacity each. Waste quantities beyond 30,000 tonnes would be secured through the Standing Offer Agreements on an as needed basis. Stakeholder Consultation Metro Vancouver consulted with interested parties to obtain feedback on contingency disposal plans. The Ministry of Environment has been provided with Metro Vancouver s consultation plan for contingency disposal. Consultation feedback will be reported to the Board along with recommendations for award of Standing Offer Agreements. ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Funding for contingency disposal has been included in the 2017 budget, and will be included in the 2018 budget. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Now that Metro Vancouver is no longer shipping waste to the Cache Creek Landfill, contingency disposal capacity is required for any waste that cannot be managed at the Vancouver Landfill and Waste-to-Energy Facility. The Board approved initiating a procurement process for securing contingency disposal capacity in March Two companies have now been engaged on a shortterm basis in advance of Standing Offer agreements being in place. The procurement process for Standing Offer Agreements will be initiated shortly, with recommendations for three-year Agreements to be brought back to the Board for consideration. Staff will report back to the Board if the interim agreements require extension ZWC - 64

65 5.9 To: From: Zero Waste Committee Larina Lopez, Division Manager, Corporate Communications External Relations Date: July 5, 2017 Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: Regional Abandoned Waste Education and Awareness Program Research and Creative Development RECOMMENDATION That the MVRD Board receive for information the report dated July 5, 2017, titled Regional Abandoned Waste Education and Awareness Program Research and Creative Development. PURPOSE To provide the MVRD Board with an update on the research and creative development to support a regional abandoned waste education and awareness program, to be conducted in the late summer of BACKGROUND Abandoned waste is a regional issue, with environmental, health and social impacts. The financial burden is also significant; local governments spend around $2.5 million annually to clean up abandoned waste. In response to this issue, the GVS&DD Board adopted the following recommendation at its May 27, 2016 meeting: That the GVS&DD Board receive the report titled "Litter, Abandoned Waste and Escaped Waste Strategy", dated May 10, 2016 and approve the following actions to help reduce abandoned waste, litter and escaped waste: a) incorporate a surcharge for unsecured loads into the proposed 2017 Tipping Fee Bylaw; b) develop requirements to waive tipping fees for volunteer community clean-up events; c) develop an education and awareness program to reduce abandoned waste; d) continue to work with member municipalities to track municipal cleanup costs for abandoned waste; and e) continue to work with member municipalities to facilitate information sharing and collaboration in reducing abandoned waste. This report address item c) the development of an education and awareness program to reduce abandoned waste. REGIONAL ABANDONED WASTE EDUCATION AND AWARENESS PROGRAM 2017 Metro Vancouver, in collaboration with Members, is developing a regional education and awareness program to help reduce instances of abandoned waste, with communications materials and tools based on research conducted with Members and the public. ZWC - 65

66 Regional Abandoned Waste Education and Awareness Program Research and Creative Development Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 2 of 3 Research As a first step in the development of a regional abandoned waste education and awareness program, research, in the form of surveys with Members and the public, was undertaken to better understand and identify regional priorities, public attitudes and behaviour all key considerations to inform the creative direction of a regional program. The 2017 abandoned waste education and awareness program is based on the research findings. Member Survey Highlights Metro Vancouver staff conducted 13 interviews with available Member representatives responsible for solid waste management and communications, between January 24 and March 7, The objective of the interviews were to: determine regional priorities; identify communications needs; and ensure Metro Vancouver s abandoned waste education and awareness program would align with existing and planned Member programs. The Member surveys identified the following key considerations: the most common abandoned waste are large household items; residents, rather than businesses, are responsible for the majority of abandoned waste; the most common areas for abandoned waste are around existing garbage/donation bins and dead-ends/laneways; inconvenience is perceived as the greatest driver for abandon waste, over cost; the general public are the preferred target for an education and awareness program; and messaging should promote Member programs and easy options for legal disposal. A summary of the Member survey results is included as Attachment 1. Public Survey Highlights A public survey was conducted of adult residents representative of Metro Vancouver s five subregions, from April 11 to 21, The objective of the survey was to evaluate public behaviour and attitudes towards disposal of unwanted household items. Specifically, the research answers the following: Where would residents dispose of unwanted household items? Do residents feel illegal dumping is acceptable under certain circumstances? Are residents aware that disposing of unwanted household items in public spaces is not allowed? What might deter residents from illegal dumping? The public surveys identified the following key considerations: many residents (60%) say they would dispose of one or more household items incorrectly; the most common area where residents illegally dispose of waste is next to household garbage or recycling bins; many residents (60%) feel it s their local government s responsibility to keep public spaces clear of unwanted household items; the perceived acceptability of incorrect disposal methods for household items is a key driver; and ZWC - 66

67 Regional Abandoned Waste Education and Awareness Program Research and Creative Development Zero Waste Committee Regular Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 3 of 3 protecting the environment and keeping their community clear of junk resonate as clear benefits to correctly disposing of household items. A summary of the public survey results is included as Attachment 2. Creative Development and Approach Findings from the Member and public survey results informed the development of several creative concepts. The preferred concept was shared with Member representatives responsible for solid waste management and communications, with opportunities for feedback to further determine and refine the creative direction. The creative materials and a social media plan are currently being finalized and will be presented in the form of a PowerPoint to the July 13, 2017 meeting of the Zero Waste Committee. All creative materials and collateral will be made available to Members to share through their own channels. A webpage, with a unique URL promoting options for legal disposal potions in the region, is also being developed by Metro Vancouver to support the program. ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The 2017 regional abandoned waste education and awareness program budget is $80,000 supported under the Zero Waste Communications Program of the 2017 General Government budget, and managed by the External Relations department. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Abandoned waste is a regional issue, with environmental, health and social impacts. The financial burden is also significant; local governments spend around $2.5 million annually to clean up abandoned waste. Metro Vancouver, in collaboration with Members, is developing a regional education and awareness program to help reduce instances of abandoned waste, with communications materials and tools based on research conducted with Members and the public. Key findings from the research has informed the program creative (to be presented to the Committee at its July 13 meeting), encouraging residents to move past their rationalizations for abandoning waste while educating them on legal disposal methods and programs. By the end of July 2017, creative materials and collateral will be promoted across the region through social media, and shared with Members so they can support the campaign through their own channels. Attachments 1. Municipal Survey Summary Report, dated March 7, Public Survey Summary Report, dated June 15, ZWC - 67

68 ATTACHMENT 1 Abandoned waste municipal survey summary report 1 Background and objectives Metro Vancouver is developing a regional education and awareness initiative to help reduce abandoned waste. During the planning phase, it is necessary to coordinate with municipalities to determine regional priorities, identify communications needs and ensure the initiative aligns with existing and planned programs. 2 Survey method Metro Vancouver Corporate Communications (Kris Etches) and Solid Waste (Stephanie Liu) staff conducted phone interviews with 13 municipalities that were available between January 24 and March 7, Municipal representatives responsible for waste management and communications were provided interview questions in advance (see Appendix), to be discussed during the call. Interview responses were tabulated based on common responses and results are presented below. 3 Survey results 3.1 What are the most common illegally dumped materials in your municipality? Mattresses Furniture Drywall Household garbage Electronics C&D waste Tires Green waste Findings are relatively similar across municipalities a mix of residential dumping (majority of items) and C&D/drywall. Several respondents noted that incidents of illegal dumping of drywall have increased in their municipalities over the near term (last six months to year). ZWC - 68

69 3.2 Do you know who is doing the majority of the dumping in your municipality? Majority residential Even distribution Don't know Majority C&D While C&D/contractors were not identified as responsible for the majority of illegal dumping, they were still suspected of being offenders in a significant proportion of cases. Several municipalities noted new trend of illegal dumping by unlicensed waste removal companies (as reported by Burnaby, using long-term U-Haul rentals instead of their own, traceable vehicles). 3.3 What are common areas where you find illegal dumping in your municipality? Around existing garbage/donation bins Dead-ends Laneways Specific 'hot spot' zones Remote areas Green space (incl. ravines, wooded areas) Behind/around rental apartments Empty lots Industrial areas Ditches Parking lots Around transfer stations Findings are relatively similar across municipalities, with many instances occurring near multifamily residential areas and areas with low visibility. While some municipalities had hot spot neighbourhoods and streets, the majority noted no geographic trends. Neighbourhoods with language barriers identified by some municipalities. ZWC - 69

70 3.4 To your knowledge, what are drivers that cause people to illegally dump in your municipality? Inconvenience of dumping legally (incl. driving to/waiting at transfer station/recycling depot) General cost of dumping legally Lack of awareness/understanding of services/programs/options Renters' apathy when moving/lack of storage Changes to tipping fees/materials permitted in waste streams Lack of awareness of cultural norms While multiple drivers were reported, a change in demographics and increased density (often rental) is cited as a root cause, with more residents who lack awareness of how municipal systems operate, and will therefore not undertake extra effort/cost required to properly manage their waste/recycling. When both inconvenience and cost were noted as drivers, inconvenience was the greater driver. 3.5 What negative impacts affect your municipality the most, as a result of illegal dumping? Diversion of municipal resources (cost and staff time) Unsightliness and public perception Environmental concerns Illegal dumping attracts more dumping/illegal activities Health and safety issues Findings are relatively similar across municipalities. Multiple respondents emphasized need to quickly collect abandoned waste, and that many residents were therefore likely unaware of the extent of the issue. Increase in drywall dumping incurs extra costs for hazardous materials training and abatement. ZWC - 70

71 Respondents considered residents perception of illegal dumping; responses are mainly anecdotal/speculative. 3.6 What is your municipality currently doing to combat abandoned waste? Enforcement (bylaws, cameras, signage in 'hot spots') Large item pickup service Community outreach (ambassador and school programs) Free, convenient disposal programs (pop-up & spring cleaning events, vouchers) Awareness campaigns Instructional communications materials ('how to sort' brochures) Community street watch/cleanup programs While the majority of respondent municipalities have illegal dumping bylaws and fines/enforcement mechanisms, convictions are rare. 3.7 Does your municipality have a hotline or online portal for reporting abandoned waste? Residents contact city #/engineering & sanitation depts Online app/service request platform Illegal dumping hotline ZWC - 71

72 3.8 From an educational perspective, what target audience do you feel would be the best focus to reduce illegal dumping in your municipality? General public (make aware of services) Illegal dumping offenders Illegal dumping reporters Renters Construction businesses New immigrants Students/youth Building managers While several respondents indicated illegal dumpers as a preferred target audience, this group was also identified by others as likely unreachable by an education/awareness campaign. City of Vancouver noted that targeting more specific audiences could be helpful, as several municipalities (including themselves) have general awareness campaigns in place or planned. Focusing on specific audience (e.g., new immigrants, renters) noted as possibly effective use of resources, given limited budget. 3.9 What would be an appropriate message for a regional education and awareness program in your municipality? Easy options for legal dumping/promotion of programs Cost implications of dumping Ethic of managing waste responsibly/social norms Community aesthetics Environmental message Increase awareness of what is not appropriate dumping Monitoring/enforcement messaging More affordable to dispose legally than pay fine Report illegal dumping Responses varied, with general support for positive, collaborative messaging that assists and encourages residents. ZWC - 72

73 3.10 What would be an appropriate mechanism for communicating a regional education and awareness program in your municipality? Social media Local newspaper Transit shelters/outdoor Community events/engagement Website Education programs Ads at point of purchase for construction Brochure in building permit package Posters Importance of providing translated materials for ESL audiences emphasized by several municipalities. 4 Next steps The municipal surveys will be supplemented by a sub-regional survey of public attitudes towards illegal dumping and abandoned waste, to provide further direction for the initiative and establish baseline measures. A preliminary timeline of key project activities is provided below. Conduct sub-regional survey (late April to mid-may) Engage creative agency (mid-may) Develop creative concepts (mid-may to late June) Produce communications material (July to August) Make materials available to municipalities (August) Undertake owned and earned media planning (September) ZWC - 73

74 Abandoned Waste Survey Questions for Municipalities In early 2017, Metro Vancouver will begin work on a regional educational initiative to help reduce abandoned waste (relatively large quantities of illegally dumped material). We are coordinating with municipalities to determine regional priorities, identify communications needs, and to ensure this education and awareness initiative aligns with existing and planned municipal programs. This initiative has a budget of $80K in 2017 and $70K in We are flexible on timing of implementation based on what works best for municipalities, but would anticipate starting in late Spring of We recognize that we have collected related information from municipalities in the past, and appreciate your previous input which we have on file for reference. We want to approach this with fresh eyes and ensure we are using up-to-date information to assess the needs for General Info on Illegal Dumping in your Municipality: 1. What are the most commonly illegally dumped materials? 2. Do you know who is doing the majority of dumping? 3. What are common types of areas where you find illegal dumping in your city? 4. To your knowledge, what are the drivers that cause people to illegally dump in your city? 5. What negative impacts affect your municipality the most, as a result of illegal dumping? Municipal Programs: 6. What is your municipality currently doing to combat abandoned waste? (e.g., large item pickup program, educational programs, enforcement). What penalties do you issue for dumping, if any? If not, do you have plans for 2017? 7. What current or previous educational programs for abandoned waste have you found to be the most effective? Any challenges with these programs? 8. Does your municipality have a hotline or online portal for reporting abandoned waste? 9. What funding sources do you utilize to cover the costs of these programs? Communications needs: 10. From an educational perspective, what target audience do you feel would be the most effective in reducing illegal dumping? (i.e. the focus of the initiative could go two different directions.) a. Illegal dumping offenders b. Illegal dumping reporters (public) c. Other audience? d. Education is not the solution if this answer, prompt for what they believe is the solution (e.g. regulatory changes, enforcement, fee changes, etc.) 11. Do you have any thoughts on the appropriate message and mechanism for a regional education and awareness program? Provide examples. 12. The objective with the allocated budget toward abandoned waste education is to provide a consistent region-wide initiative on this topic. Would your municipality use communication tools or resources developed by Metro Vancouver? What factors would determine whether you use Metro Vancouver material on abandoned waste as opposed to only using material developed by your municipality? (e.g. Timing? Message/mechanism? Stick or carrot approach? Aggressive or soft?) ZWC - 74

75 ATTACHMENT 2 Abandoned Waste Survey Presentation A SURVEY OF METRO VANCOUVER RESIDENTS Presented to Metro Vancouver April 2017 ZWC - 75

76 Sampling Areas Sampled Sample size Margin of error Central: Vancouver, Burnaby, New Westminster, Electoral Area A 401 +/- 4.9 North West: West Vancouver, City of North Vancouver, District of North Vancouver, Lions Bay, Bowen Island North East: Anmore, Belcarra, Coquitlam, Maple Ridge, Port Moody, Port Coquitlam, Pitt Meadows 202 +/ /- 5.7 South West: Delta (includes Ladner and Tsawwassen), Richmond, Tsawwassen First Nation 303 +/- 5.7 South East: Township of Langley, City of Langley, Surrey, White Rock 303 +/- 5.7 Total 1,512 Equates to 1,000 n/a +/- 3.1 A note on weighting: At the request of the client, several regions were oversampled to allow reasonable separate analysis of these regions. After weighting of oversampled areas the total sample is representative of a random sample of 1,000 Metro Vancouver residents. 4 ZWC - 76

77 3 ZWC - 77

78 Yes, total Central North West North East South West South East 58% 60% 57% 56% 54% 60% A1. There are several options available to dispose of items your household no longer wants. How would you dispose of these used items? A2. People have different opinions about placing unwanted household items in public spaces such as the street, laneways, parks, or private empty building lots, and commercial or industrial lands. Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. Net responses of : Place in a public space such as on the street or laneway Place in a park or other green space Place next to your own regular household garbage or recycling bins Place in empty building lots, commercial or industrial lands Place next to large commercial or residential garbage bins Place next to an outdoor charity donation bin Base: Total. 4 ZWC - 78

79 Yes, total Central North West North East South West South East 40% 43% 36% 37% 38% 38% A1. There are several options available to dispose of items your household no longer wants. How would you dispose of these used items? A2. People have different opinions about placing unwanted household items in public spaces such as the street, laneways, parks, or private empty building lots, and commercial or industrial lands. Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. Net responses of : Place in a public space such as on the street or laneway Place in a park or other green space Place in empty building lots, commercial or industrial lands Place next to large commercial or residential garbage bins Place next to an outdoor charity donation bin Base: Total. 5 ZWC - 79

80 A1. There are several options available to dispose of items your household no longer wants. How would you dispose of these used items? Place next to your own regular household garbage or recycling bins Place next to an outdoor charity donation bin 17% 39% A2. People have different opinions about placing unwanted household items in public spaces such as the street, laneways, parks, or private empty building lots, and commercial or industrial lands. Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. Place next to large commercial or residential garbage bins Place in a public space such as on the street or laneway Place in empty building lots, commercial or industrial lands Place in a park or other green space 2% 4% 6% 14% Net responses of : Place in a public space such as on the street or laneway Place in a park or other green space Place next to your own regular household garbage or recycling bins Place in empty building lots, commercial or industrial lands Place next to large commercial or residential garbage bins Place next to an outdoor charity donation bin Base: Total. 6 ZWC - 80

81 Used car seat 25% A1. There are several options available to dispose of items your household no longer wants. How would you dispose of these used items? Net responses of : An unwanted sofa Used tires 9% 17% Place in a public space such as on the street or laneway Place in a park or other green space Place next to your own regular household garbage or recycling bins Place in empty building lots, commercial or industrial lands Place next to large commercial or residential garbage bins Place next to an outdoor charity donation bin Base: Total. 7 ZWC - 81

82 Used car seat 16% A1. There are several options available to dispose of items your household no longer wants. How would you dispose of these used items? An unwanted sofa Used tires 5% 11% Net responses of : Place in a public space such as on the street or laneway Place in a park or other green space Place in empty building lots, commercial or industrial lands Place next to large commercial or residential garbage bins Place next to an outdoor charity donation bin Base: Total. 8 ZWC - 82

83 A broken blender Drywall A worn mattress A broken television A broken dishwasher 12% 11% 9% 8% 25% A2. There are several options available to dispose of items your household no longer wants. How would you dispose of these used items? Net responses of : Place in a public space such as on the street or laneway Place in a park or other green space Place next to your own regular household garbage or recycling bins Place in empty building lots, commercial or industrial lands Place next to large commercial or residential garbage bins Place next to an outdoor charity donation bin Base: Total. 9 ZWC - 83

84 A broken blender 6% Drywall A worn mattress A broken television A broken dishwasher 6% 5% 4% 3% A2. There are several options available to dispose of items your household no longer wants. How would you dispose of these used items? Net responses of : Place in a public space such as on the street or laneway Place in a park or other green space Place in empty building lots, commercial or industrial lands Place next to large commercial or residential garbage bins Place next to an outdoor charity donation bin Base: Total. 10 ZWC - 84

85 11 ZWC - 85

86 It is my local government s responsibility to keep these spaces clear of unwanted household items 23% 58% Sometimes people have no choice but to place unwanted household items in these spaces 7% 27% It is okay to place unwanted household items in these spaces because other people will take them 3 18% Placing unwanted household items in these spaces is just another way of recycling It is okay to place unwanted household items in these spaces because it is a common practice 3 2 8% 15% B1. People have different opinions about placing unwanted household items in public spaces such as the street, laneways, parks, or private empty building lots, and commercial or industrial lands. Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. Strongly Somewhat Base: Total. 12 ZWC - 86

87 13 ZWC - 87

88 Place next to your own residential garbage and recycling bins 23% Place next to an outdoor charity donation bin 20% Place next to large commercial or residential garbage bins 9% Place in a public space such as on the street or laneway 5% Place in empty building lots, commercial or industrial lands Place in a park or on other green space 2% 1% C1. To the best of your knowledge, are the following ways to dispose of unwanted household items, such as furniture, appliances, and mattresses, allowed or not allowed in your neighbourhood or municipality? Base: Total. 14 ZWC - 88

89 15 ZWC - 89

90 Overall awareness 45% Central 48% North West 47% North East South West South East 40% 42% 42% C3. Some municipalities may offer options for residents to dispose of unwanted household items, such as a number to call for large item pick-up or designated days where large items can be dropped off at a central location. To the best of your knowledge, does your municipality have large-item pick-up services or junk disposal days? Base: Total. 16 ZWC - 90

91 Recycling centres 96% Landfill 86% Bottle depots for electronics, small appliances or paint 86% Transfer stations 77% Retail stores such as Best Buy, London Drugs, and Staples for electronics and small appliances 48% C4. Prior to this survey, were you aware of the following options to dispose of unwanted household items? Base: Total. 17 ZWC - 91

92 Recycling centre 85% Transfer station 58% Landfill 52% C5. Do you know the location of the nearest? Base: Total. 18 ZWC - 92

93 Recycling centre 81% Transfer station 52% Landfill 39% C6. Have you ever disposed of household items at the following facilities within Metro Vancouver? Base: Total. 19 ZWC - 93

94 Agree 14% 57% Strongly Somewhat Disagree 21% 42% C7a. People have different opinions about disposing unwanted household items at transfer stations, recycling centres, or the landfill. Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. Don't know 2% It is inconvenient to take unwanted household items to these places Base: Total aware of places to legally dispose of unwanted household items. 20 ZWC - 94

95 Agree 13% 45% Strongly Somewhat Disagree 22% 46% C7b. People have different opinions about disposing unwanted household items at transfer stations, recycling centres, or the landfill. Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. Don't know 10% It is too expensive to dispose of unwanted household items at these places Base: Total aware of places to legally dispose of unwanted household items. 21 ZWC - 95

96 Agree 10% 46% Strongly Somewhat Disagree 26% 52% C7c. People have different opinions about disposing unwanted household items at transfer stations, recycling centres, or the landfill. Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. Don't know 3% I don t know what household items can be disposed of at different facilities Base: Total aware of places to legally dispose of unwanted household items. 22 ZWC - 96

97 Daily 15% Several times per week 22% Weekly 15% Several times a month 16% Monthly or less often Never Don t know 3% 4% 26% C8. How often do you notice unwanted household items in public spaces such as the street, laneway, or park, or private empty building lots, commercial or industrial lands near where you live? Base: Total. 23 ZWC - 97

98 Annoying 56% 89% Very Somewhat Not annoying 2 10% Don't know 1% C9. How annoying to you personally is the presence of unwanted household items in public spaces? Base: Total. 24 ZWC - 98

99 25 ZWC - 99

100 Yes, total 24% Central 24% North West 20% North East 22% South West South East 23% 25% D1. In the past year, have you witnessed someone illegally dumping? Base: Total. 26 ZWC - 100

101 Yes, telephone 24% Yes, online 18% Neither 3% Don t know 71% D2. To the best of your knowledge, does your municipality have a telephone number or online application to report illegal dump sites or illegal dumping? Base: Total. 27 ZWC - 101

102 Yes, I reported an illegal dump site 7% Yes, I witnessed someone illegally dumping and reported it 5% No 88% Don t know 2% D3. Have you ever reported an illegal dump site or illegal dumping? Base: Total. 28 ZWC - 102

103 Likely 31% 65% Very Somewhat Unlikely 10% 30% Don't know 6% D4. How likely are you to report illegal dumping you ve witnessed? Base: Total. 29 ZWC - 103

104 Waste of time / hassle / inconvenient I don't know how to report it None of my business / not my problem Fear of retribution No action will be taken It depends if it causes harm / or is in my way I don't want to snitch No other way of disposing Only see it after it has been committed It is like recycling Not sure if illegal / not a big problem Police take too long to respond Sympathize with the dumper Other Don't know 15% 11% 7% 6% 5% 5% 5% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 8% 10% 21% D5. Why are you unlikely to report illegal dumping you ve witnessed? Base: Unlikely to report illegal dumping. 30 ZWC - 104

105 31 ZWC - 105

106 I want to keep my community clear of junk and garbage 82% 96% I want to prevent harm to the environment 75% 93% I would worry about the fine 53% 78% I believe illegal dumping contributes to increases in taxes I would worry about being seen 41% 45% 75% 73% E1. Please rate your agreement with each of these reasons for not placing unwanted household items in public spaces such as the street, laneways, parks, or private empty building lots, and commercial or industrial lands. Strongly Somewhat Base: Total. 32 ZWC - 106

107 33 ZWC - 107

108 Most Metro Vancouver residents say they would dispose of one or more household items incorrectly. Intended disposal behaviour does not vary significantly among the five Metro Vancouver regions. Residents living situation may influence how they would dispose of household items. Those living in apartments or condos are most likely to say they would dispose of household items incorrectly. The perceived acceptability of incorrect disposal methods for household items is key driver. Residents who agree that there are reasons to dispose of unwanted household items in public or private places are most likely to say they would engage in that behaviour. 34 ZWC - 108

109 Ethnic culture may influence how residents dispose of unwanted household items. Residents from other cultures are more likely to perceive incorrect disposal methods as being allowed. Illegal dumping is multi-faceted. While some demographic groups are more likely to say they will illegally dump items, this behaviour is still present among all groups. The are multiple barriers to proper disposal. These include, but are not limited to, knowledge, economic, cultural, and perceived acceptability of abandoning household items in public or private spaces. Protecting the environment and keeping their community clear of junk resonate as clear benefits to correctly disposing of household items. 35 ZWC - 109

110 Justason Market Intelligence Inc. Vancouver Focus ZWC Geoff Bird Geoff@JustasonMI.com JustasonMI.com Howe Street, Vancouver, B.C. Canada V6Z2T