THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF PEEL WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Transcription

1 THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF PEEL WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVISED AGENDA WMSAC - 3/2017 DATE: Thursday, June 29, 2017 TIME: LOCATION: 11:00 AM 1:00 PM Regional Council Chamber, 5th Floor Regional Administrative Headquarters 10 Peel Centre Drive, Suite A Brampton, Ontario MEMBERS: F. Dale; A. Groves; J. Innis; J. Kovac; M. Mahoney; M. Palleschi; C. Parrish; K. Ras; R. Starr Chaired by Councillor M. Palleschi or Vice-Chair Councillor J. Innis 1. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. DELEGATIONS 3.1 Sandra Best, Resident, City of Mississauga, and on behalf of the Board of PCC566, Regarding Blue Box Conversion to Carts (See also Communications - Item 5.2) 4. REPORTS 4.1. Mixed Waste Processing Site Visit Update (Oral) Presentation by Councillor Michael Palleschi, Chair, Councillor Jennifer Innis, Vice Chair, Waste Management Strategic Advisory Committee and Norman Lee, Director, Waste Management, Public Works 4.2. Update on the Waste Free Ontario Act and Blue Box Transition Process (See also Communications - Item 5.1) 4.3. Community Recycling Centre Performance Review (For information) 4.4. Bi-weekly, Cart-based Collection Program Update and Curbside Waste Collection Contractor Performance for 2016 (For information)

2 WMSAC - 3/ Thursday, June 29, COMMUNICATIONS 5.1. Association of Municipalities of Ontario Policy Update, dated April 20, 2017, titled Waste Diversion The Blue Box Today and Tomorrow (Receipt recommended) (Referred from the April 27, 2017 Regional Council meeting) (See also Reports Item 4.2) 5.2. Norman Lee, Director, Waste Management, Project/Issue Update dated June 6, 2017, Regarding Bi-weekly Cart-based Collection - Townhouse Conversions (Receipt recommended) (See also Delegations Item 3.1) 6. IN CAMERA MATTERS 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. NEXT MEETING Thursday, September 7, 2017, 11:00 a.m. 1:00 p.m. Regional Administrative Headquarters Council Chamber, 5 th Floor 10 Peel Centre Drive, Suite A Brampton, Ontario 9. ADJOURNMENT

3 -- rpregion Ir of Peel working with you FOR'OFFICE USE ONLY MEETING DATE YYVY!MM/DD MEETING NAME 2017/06129 WMSAC REQUESTDATE YYYY!MM/DD 2017/06/27 NAME OF INDIVIDUAL(S) Sandra Best Request for Delegation Attention: Regional Clerk Regional Municipality of Peel 10 Peel Centre Drive, Suite A Brampton, ON L6T4B9 Phone: ext Fax: council@peelregion.ca -.. -"-~ - '.._-_ _._ ~ , POSITION/TITLE NAME OF ORGANIZATION : Resident, City of Mississauga On behalf of the Board of PCC566 TELEPHONE NUMBER EXTENSION FAX NUMBER _ _.._- -_.. _-_ _ _ _ _ ----,----.._- - --~ '-'-~ _----- NAME OF INDIVIDUAL(S) -- -, '---_ - --_-_ _._-, POSITION/TITLE ,NAME OF ORGANIZATION _._----_ -- -_ ,- -_ TELEPHONE NUMBER EXTENSION FAX NUMBER REASON(S)FOR DELEGATION REQUEST(SUBJECTMATTER TO BE DISCUSSED), Blue box conversion to carts I AM SUBMITTING A FORMAL PRESENTATION TO ACCOMPANY MY DELEGATION IF YES, PLEASE ADVISE OF THE FORMAT OF YOUR PRESENTATION (ie POWERPOINT) o YES ~ NO Note: Delegates are requested to provide an electronic copy of all background material! presentations to the Clerk's Division at least seven (7) business days prior to the meeting date so that it can be included with the agenda package. In accordance with Procedure By-law , as amended, delegates appearing before Regional Council or Committee are requested to limit their remarks to 5 minutes and 10 minutes respectively (approximately 5/10 slides). Delegates should make every effort to ensure their presentation material is prepared in an accessible format. Once the above information is received in the Clerk's Division, you will be contacted by Legislative Services staff to confirm your placement on the appropriate agenda. Thank you. Notice with Respect to the Collection of Personal Information (Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act) Personalinformationcontained on this form is authorized undersection IV-4of the Regionof Peel Procedure By-law as amended,for the purposeof contacting individuals and/or organizations requesting an opportunity to appear as a delegation before Regional Councilor a Committee of Council. The DelegationRequestForm will be published in its entirety with the publicagenda.the ProcedureBy-law is a requirementof Section 238(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended. Please note that all meetings are open to the public except where permitted to be closed to the public under legislatedauthority. All Regional Council meetings are audio broadcast via the internet and will be video broadcast on the local cable television network where video files will be posted and available for viewing subsequent to those rneetinqs, Questionsabout collection may be directed to the Manager of LegislativeServices,10 Peel Centre Drive,Suite A, 5th floor, Brampton, ON L6T 4B9, (905) ext V /04

4 4.1-1 Mixed Waste Processing Site Visit Update Waste Management Strategic Advisory Committee June 29, 2017 Norman Lee Director, Waste Management Region of Peel 1

5 Today s Presentation Background / Context Purpose of Site Visits Findings 2

6 4.1-3 Mixed Waste Processing - Background / Context Regional Council Resolution % 3Rs Diversion by 2034 MWP objectives: achieve additional diversion by applying MWP to Peel's garbage to recover recyclables, organics and fuel for industry 75% 3Rs Diversion Workplan (April 6, 2017) New programs to reduce waste generation New Programs to recycle materials (textiles, mattresses, New policies to encourage better participation in existing programs MWP Approach - Garbage audits + MWP research - Local MWP test/trial with Canada Fibers - Staff site visits to North America and Europe MWP facilities - Request for Expression of Interest for Peel's MWP Approach - Cement industry engagement - Councillors MWP Tour Fall 2017: Report to WMSAC on MWP Feasibility Study 3

7 4.1-4 Mixed Waste Processing Visit - Purpose of Visits Visiting existing Mixed Waste Processing (MWP) facilities support staff and Council to answer if a MWP approach would help Peel achieve its 75 percent 3Rs diversion target: Understand the current state of the technology Understand regulatory, economic and social context Understand alignment with province s regulatory framework Understand potential to contribute to Peel s 3Rs target Learn lessons for successful project implementation 4

8 4.1-5 Findings - Regulatory Context EU Landfill Directive Goal is to minimize disposal of unprocessed waste not 3Rs diversion All activities to avoid landfill disposal are supported (e.g. EFW) Landfill Tax Significant driver in UK Supports investment in waste processing infrastructure Access to Energy Markets Electricity SRF / RDF RNG Different product quality specifications and permitted uses 5

9 4.1-6 Findings - Contract Structures Many MWP facilities are publicly-owned European market open to all types of contract models Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) model most common in Europe, with some long term private financing Public agency usually provides land and guaranteed material supply Typical contract terms include: Performance requirements (e.g. recyclables recovery, overall diversion) Project Company responsible for managing all outputs Balanced incentives: positive (e.g. revenue sharing) and negative (penalties) needed to motivate performance improvements 6

10 Findings Technical Process Flow Diagram Pre-Processing Recyclables Recovery Organics Recovery Fuel Production Urban Compatibility 7

11 Findings - Technical Mixed Waste Processing Process Flow Diagram Recovery of Recyclables Recyclables Market Output Tipping Floor Bag Opening Primary Separation Fuel Production Residue Final Disposal RDF SRF EFW: On or off-site Industry (coal substitute) Facility Separated Organics Organics Processing Biogas Digestate Compost Electricity: on-site and grid Agriculture or Remediation 8

12 4.1-9 Findings - Technical Pre-Processing Pre-processing Facilities use bag openers or coarse shredding to remove materials from bags. Gentle bag opening maximizes the recovery of recyclables, minimizes crosscontamination and is used when performance requires high recovery rates for recyclables. Shredding used to increase energy content of RDF by maximizing separation of organics. Pre-processed garbage 9

13 Findings - Technical Recyclables Recovery of Recyclables Recovered recyclables typically accounts for 10% or less of input material (3WAYSTE recovers 12%) Focus on recovering high value products (metals and plastics) With advanced technology, recovery rates of 80% or higher can be achieved for specific recyclables Recovered products are of marketable quality Fibre is usually incorporated into SRF or RDF Recovered Mixed Plastics (HDPE, PP & PET) Recovered Aluminum Containers 10

14 Findings - Technical Organics Recovery Organics Recovery Facility separated organics (FSO) typically accounts for 30 percent or more of the input material FSO can be processed by composting or anaerobic digestion (AD) AD produces biogas at a rate comparable to source separated organics (SSO) generation of renewable energy is possible Generation of electricity to power facility with excess to the grid is the most common use of biogas Compost Anaerobic Digestion Tanks 11

15 Findings - Technical Organics Recovery Organics Recovery FSO has more contamination than SSO Technologies can remove most of the contaminants and the compost or AD digestate products typically meet the quality requirements for the intended end uses However, European compost quality standards and markets tolerate more contamination that is allowed or accepted in Ontario Ability of MWP to produce marketable organic products still needs to be proven in Ontario Plastic and glass removal are key Facility Separated Organics (FSO) Finished Screened Compost 12

16 Findings - Technical - Fuel Two main fuel products are Refuse Derived Fuel and Solid Recovered Fuel Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) Garbage with organics removed to increase energy content Market is mass burn EFW, on-site or external, some European EFW facilities have excess capacity Most European MWP facilities produce RDF Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) 13

17 Findings - Technical - Fuel Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF) Materials separated from garbage to create a product with consistent quality meeting market specifications Primary market is coal replacement in cement industry SRF quality requirements of the European cement plants likely to be less restrictive than quality requirements of Ontario plants Ability to produce marketable SRF must be proven in Ontario Low chlorine and moisture content are key Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF) 14

18 Findings - Communications & Public Engagement Source separation is needed even with Mixed Waste Processing Separation of glass, better quality recyclables and organics Education, Convenience and Enforcement are key All three are needed School age children primary focus for public outreach Need age appropriate and engaging materials for children (e.g. video games) Residents want to know what happens after waste leaves the curb Need easily understood materials (e.g. videos) 15

19 Findings Urban Compatibility Compatibility of Facilities with Neighbours Large MWP facilities (100,000 tonnes per year or more) can operate successfully in urban areas Technologies used to control nuisances (noise, odour) are proven and are in use at waste and facilities in Ontario Key is focusing on nuisance prevention in design and operations Ecoparc 3, Barcelona, Spain Milton Keynes Waste Recovery Park, Milton Keynes, UK 16

20 Other Key Learnings for MWP Make MWP facility part of an integrated waste management site Enables efficient movement of materials Build everything at once Delayed project phases are at risk of cancellation Integrate planning of waste collection and processing systems Decisions need to be coordinated Planning is key Difficult and expensive to change once built Rendering of Milton Keynes Waste Recovery Park 17

21 Questions 18

22 4.2-1 REPORT Meeting Date: Waste Management Strategic Advisory Committee DATE: June 20, 2017 REPORT TITLE: FROM: UPDATE ON THE WASTE FREE ONTARIO ACT AND BLUE BOX TRANSITION PROCESS Janette Smith, Commissioner of Public Works RECOMMENDATION That the approach and actions outlined in the report of the Commissioner of Public Works, titled, Update on the Waste Free Ontario Act and Blue Box Transition Process be approved. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS The Waste-Free Ontario Act, which includes the Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act and the Waste Diversion Transition Act came into effect on November 30, The accompanying Strategy for a Waste-Free Ontario: Building a Circular Economy was finalized and came into effect in February The Strategy shows that the Blue Box program will be transitioned to full producer responsibility by Transition may, however, happen earlier or later than shown in the strategy. The benefit of early transition is that 100 percent of the costs of the Blue Box program would be covered by producers rather than the 50 percent the Region currently receives. This could result in savings to Peel s taxpayers of up to approximately $10 million per year. The Region and other municipalities are therefore exploring ways to accelerate the transition of the Blue Box program to full Producer responsibility including through an amendment to the existing Blue Box Program Plan. As the Region continues to collaborate on the transition of the Blue Box program (and other Waste Diversion programs) to full producer responsibility, its effort will be enhanced by working cooperatively with other Ontario municipalities. The Region and other municipalities are therefore exploring various governance models to allow municipalities to work cooperatively to advance the municipal position.

23 4.2-2 UPDATE ON THE WASTE FREE ONTARIO ACT AND BLUE BOX TRANSITION PROCESS DISCUSSION The purpose of this report is: To provide an update on the Province of Ontario s recently passed Waste-Free Ontario Act and efforts that are underway to accelerate the transition of the Blue Box Program to full producer responsibility. To seek Regional Council approval of staff s approach to working with the Province, other municipalities and stakeholders in order to ensure that Peel staff can continue to influence the development of regulations and other instruments under the Waste- Free Ontario Act and the transition of the Blue Box Program to full producer responsibility. 1. Background Prior to November 30, 2016 waste diversion programs in Ontario were governed by the Waste Diversion Act. Under that legislation the net cost of the Blue Box program was to be shared equally (more or less) between municipalities and producers. On November 30, 2016, the Waste-Free Ontario Act, which includes the Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act and the Waste Diversion Transition Act came into effect. This legislation allows the Blue Box program (and other waste diversion programs) to be transitioned to full producer responsibility. Peel staff were engaged in the process to develop the legislation and Peel provided comments on the draft legislation in January 2016 (Resolution ). In February 2017, the accompanying Strategy for a Waste-Free Ontario: Building a Circular Economy was finalized and came into effect. The strategy shows the Blue Box program being transitioned to full producer responsibility in Peel staff were engaged in the process to develop the strategy and Peel provided comments on the draft strategy in January 2017 (Resolution ). Table 1 below provides the anticipated timeline for key tasks that the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) has or intends to take to implement requirements of the Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act. Table 1 - Anticipated timeline for key tasks by the MOECC Year Implementation Action 2016 Waste-Free Ontario Act is promulgated (complete) Establish the Resource Productivity and Recovery Authority (complete) 2017 Begin development of Organics Action Plan (underway) Develop and consult on Industrial, Commercial and Institutional 3Rs regulations under Environmental Protection Act Begin Transition of Used Tires Program - Ontario Tire Stewardship (underway) Develop and consult on First Provincial Policy Statement (expected to address food and organic wastes) 2018 Develop and consult on first disposal bans (e.g. food waste, existing designated materials) Begin implementation of Organics Action Plan Begin implementing first Provincial Policy Statement Begin designating new materials under producer responsibility regulations/ - 2 -

24 4.2-3 UPDATE ON THE WASTE FREE ONTARIO ACT AND BLUE BOX TRANSITION PROCESS Year Implementation Action Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act Complete transition of the Used Tires Program 2019 Begin implementing amended 3Rs Regulations 2020 Designate additional materials under Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act Complete transition of existing waste diversion programs across Ontario (Except Blue Box Program Plan) 2021 Begin Implementing disposal bans on designated materials First Ministry review of Waste-Free Ontario Act / Strategy 2022 Complete Transition of Blue Box Program Plan 2. The Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act Regulations under the Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act will designate materials (such as paper and packaging, used tires, etc.) and will define the service standards for full producer responsibility programs (ie: recovery rates, convenience levels, etc.). As indicated above, the provincial strategy shows the transition of the Blue Box program to full producer responsibility being complete by What this means is a new regulation for paper and packaging will be in place and the existing Blue Box program will be wound down by that date. Once the new regulation is established, the Region will have little influence over how producers meet their requirements. Staff intends to continue to participate in stakeholder groups and consultations with the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change to provide input on behalf of the Region and to ensure the new paper and packaging regulation (and other regulations and instruments) developed under the Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act provide the fairest possible outcome for the Region s residents. 3. The Waste Diversion Transition Act The Waste Diversion Transition Act allows for existing waste diversion programs (including the Blue Box program) to operate seamlessly until new regulations are in place under the Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act. The Waste Diversion Transition Act also empowers the Minister to make changes to the existing waste diversion programs (including the Blue Box program). As time advances towards the provincial election in 2018, action on transitioning the Blue Box program becomes critical to avoid further unpredictable delays. Partial transition (or perhaps even full transition) of the Blue Box program to full producer responsibility may be possible earlier than 2022 through an amendment to the existing Blue Box Program Plan under the provisions of the Waste Diversion Transition Act. Region staff, in cooperation other Ontario municipalities, are therefore working with the Ministry, Producers, and other stakeholders in an effort to accelerate the Blue Box transition using the powers given to the Minister under the Waste Diversion Transition Act. Under this approach, municipalities and producers would agree on overarching principles related to the Blue Box program transition and some key standards for a revised Blue Box program. Principles and standards could include things like recovery targets by material type, accessibility and service levels for residents, and a commitment that existing service levels be maintained during the transition. Developing these common principles is a key first - 3 -

25 4.2-4 UPDATE ON THE WASTE FREE ONTARIO ACT AND BLUE BOX TRANSITION PROCESS step to working with producers to transition the Blue Box Program sooner than the date targeted by the Ministry. If municipalities and producers can reach agreement of these items, the groups we would jointly ask the Minister (likely by mid fall 2017) to issue a formal request to amend the Blue Box Program Plan. If this approach is adopted, the actual transition of Blue Box program to full producer responsibility could begin as early as 2018 and happen over time as collection and processing contracts expire. Some municipalities may be able to transition before the end of their contracts depending on the assignment and termination language in their existing contracts. Staff will continue to work cooperatively with the Ministry, other municipalities and producers on the early transition of the Blue Box program such that full producer responsibility for paper and packaging can be established quickly, and municipal costs for this program can be significantly reduced or eliminated. 4. Joint Municipal Efforts As the Region and other municipalities continue to engage in the development of regulations and the transition of the Blue Box program, our effort could be enhanced by working cooperatively in a formal partnership. Producers of designated Blue Box wastes are currently represented nationally by the Canadian Steward Services Alliance and provincially by Stewardship Ontario. These wellresourced organizations allow producers to conduct research and develop unified positions that are in the interest of producers. Municipalities lack a similarly cohesive entity to conduct research and further the municipal position. The Region and other municipalities, together with advice and support from the Regional Public Works Commissioners of Ontario and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario are exploring various governance models including: a joint municipal board a joint municipal corporation a comprehensive governance agreement Resources (staff and money) to support this entity would be drawn from the Region and from the other municipalities. This pooling of resources would allow for each municipality to benefit from more work being done for less money than if we each did it separately. Staff will report back with the recommended approach and secure Council approval for the Region to participate in any formal Municipal partnership. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no immediate financial implications resulting from this report. The future impacts of the regulations, policy statements, and other instruments established under the new Provincial legislation are yet to be determined

26 4.2-5 UPDATE ON THE WASTE FREE ONTARIO ACT AND BLUE BOX TRANSITION PROCESS CONCLUSION Implementation of new programs and policies under the Resource Recovery Circular Economy Act and the transition of existing waste diversion programs under the Waste Diversion Transition Act will occur over several years. The Region of Peel's draft 75 percent strategy aligns with the goals and principles of the new provincial waste management framework and the Region of Peel is well positioned to demonstrate continued leadership in resource recovery and the adoption of a circular economy. Peel staff will maintain collaborative efforts with the Province, other municipalities and waste management stakeholders to advance waste reduction opportunities and advocate on behalf of all residents, businesses and organizations in the Region of Peel. Janette Smith, Commissioner of Public Works Approved for Submission: D. Szwarc, Chief Administrative Officer For further information regarding this report, please contact Norman Lee, Director Waste Management, extension 4703, norman.lee@peelregion.ca. Reviewed in workflow by: Legal Services - 5 -

27 4.3-1 REPORT Meeting Date: Waste Management Strategic Advisory Committee For Information DATE: June 16, 2017 REPORT TITLE: FROM: COMMUNITY RECYCLING CENTRE PERFORMANCE REVIEW Janette Smith, Commissioner of Public Works OBJECTIVE To inform Regional Council on the performance of the Community Recycling Centres including the Heart Lake Community Recycling Centre operated by a private contractor. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS Peel Region has six community recycling centres (CRC) where residents can drop off recyclables and waste. Five are operated by Regional staff. The Heart Lake Community Recycling Centre is operated by a private contractor under contract to the Region. The Heart Lake contractor is meeting its contractual obligations and providing good service to its customers. Key Performance Indicators for customer service, safety and environmental compliance are comparable across all CRCs. Heart Lake s operating cost is reasonable for a CRC of its size and usage. Its operating cost per hour is, however, higher than Peel s other CRCs. The Heart Lake operating agreement allows for the operator to suggest cost saving changes for consideration by the Region. Staff will continue to engage the contractor in discussions of possible cost saving ideas. Major changes to the operating approach (public or private) for the Region of Peel s system of CRCs are not recommended at this time. Staff will report back ahead of the end of the current Heart Lake operating agreement with a recommended approach for operating the Heart Lake CRC following the end of the agreement. Given the existing capacity at Fewster and Heart Lake CRCs, the addition of another CRC is not recommended at this time. Staff will, however, continue the annual conservation day in the Clarkson area. In light of the recently enacted Waste Free Ontario Act; Council s 75 percent 3Rs diversion target; and, the resulting need to divert more materials, staff will include money in the 2018 budget submission to conduct a comprehensive review of services offered at Peel s CRCs to determine which materials should be accepted at which CRCs.

28 4.3-2 COMMUNITY RECYCLING CENTRE PERFORMANCE REVIEW DISCUSSION 1. Background The Region of Peel operates a network of Community Recycling Centres where residents can drop off waste and recyclables. Five out of Peel s six CRCs (Bolton, Brampton, Battleford, Caledon and Fewster) are operated by Region of Peel staff. Securing a private contractor to operate and maintain the sixth CRC (Heart Lake) allows for a comparison between the two operational models. Bolton CRC, opened in 1999 and serves Bolton. Brampton CRC, opened in 2002 and serves east Brampton. Battleford CRC, opened in 2004 and serves west Mississauga. Caledon CRC, opened in 2007 and serves northern Caledon. Fewster, opened in 2008 and serves east Mississauga. Heart Lake, opened in December 2014 and serves northwest Brampton and southwest Caledon. The Heart Lake Community Recycling Centre ( Heart Lake ) was constructed in 2014 to take pressure off the Brampton CRC and serve the growing community in northwest Brampton. In the 2013 Budget approval process, Regional Council directed staff to undertake a tender process to secure a third party vendor to operate and maintain Heart Lake in order to compare public and private sector Community Recycling Centre (CRC) operations. It was also decided at that time that the decision to develop a seventh CRC would be deferred until the impact Heart Lake had on overall usage and capacity were better understood. On September 8, 2014, Document T for the Operation and Maintenance of the Heart Lake Community Recycling Centre was awarded to Tuff Recycling and Supply Inc. (Tuff) for a five-year term and, in December 2014, Tuff began operating Heart Lake. Two key objectives of Heart Lake were to: 1. Take pressure off the Brampton CRC and serve the growing community in North West Brampton. 2. Provide a private sector comparator to better assess the efficiency of Peel s publicly operated CRCs. 2. CRC Usage and System Capacity For the first two years of operation, the usage of Heart Lake is following a trend typical of a new CRC. It is anticipated that the rate of increase in the usage of Heart Lake will be relatively robust due to the fact that it serves northwest Brampton and southwest Caledon which are currently undergoing significant growth. Monthly CRC usage for 2015 and 2016 is shown in the graph below

29 4.3-3 COMMUNITY RECYCLING CENTRE PERFORMANCE REVIEW The three pie charts below show: Heart Lake accounted for 11 percent of the total visits at approximately 92,000 visits out of a total of 798,000 visits for all CRCs for 2015 and Heart Lake accounted for 8 percent of the total tonnage received at CRCs at approximately 10,500 tonnes out of a total of 128,000 tonnes received at all of the CRCs for 2015 and Heart Lake accounted for approximately 11 percent of the total CRC revenues at $1.5 million out of a total of $13 million for all CRCs for 2015 and

30 4.3-4 COMMUNITY RECYCLING CENTRE PERFORMANCE REVIEW CRC usage data from 2015 and 2016 show that: Heart Lake was used by an average of 46,000 customers per year Approximately 5,000 of these customers had previously used Battleford CRC and over 10,000 had previously used Brampton CRC This suggests that Heart Lake was effective in redistributing CRC users in Brampton, which helped relieve the operational burden on the Brampton CRC. Usage data also shows that Fewster and Heart Lake have capacity to serve significantly more customers. A seventh CRC is therefore not needed or recommended at this time. 3. Performance Comparison Customer Service CRC customer surveys allows for a comparison between individual CRCs to gain a better understanding of the level of client satisfaction. The survey was conducted in May 2016 using stand up electronic devices (tablets) that were set up at all six CRCs in conjunction with the face to face survey conducted in June and August The surveys provided the following information on the level of customer satisfaction with the Peel s CRCs, including the privately operated Heart Lake: Customer interaction 99 percent of Heart Lake customers indicated that staff is friendly, courteous and provided proper attention to customers the same as with other CRCs operated by the Region of Peel. Staff treated me in a friendly, courteous manner (All CRCs Excluding HL) 2016 Heart Lake CRC Only % Favourable % Neutral % Unfavourable Signage and instructions 93 percent of Heart Lake customers indicated that it was easy to follow signs and instructions as compared to 98 percent for other CRCs operated by the Region of Peel

31 4.3-5 COMMUNITY RECYCLING CENTRE PERFORMANCE REVIEW It was easy to follow signs and instructions (All CRCs Excluding HL) 2016 Heart Lake CRC Only % Favourable % Neutral % Unfavourable Condition of facility 99 percent of Heart Lake customers indicated that the facility was maintained in a clean and organized manner the same as with other CRCs operated by the Region of Peel. The facility is maintained well (All CRCs Excluding HL) 2016 Heart Lake CRC Only % Favourable % Neutral % Unfavourable Overall, how satisfied were you with your service experience? 2016 (All CRCs Excluding HL) 2016 Heart Lake CRC Only % Favourable % Neutral % Unfavourable The surveys indicate that there are no significant findings that would indicate that in-house or contracted operation is better at providing customer service. The key findings are as follows: CRC users are extremely satisfied with the services and have overwhelmingly positive ratings for all CRCs; There is no difference in satisfaction levels between the different CRC locations; - 5 -

32 4.3-6 COMMUNITY RECYCLING CENTRE PERFORMANCE REVIEW Health and Safety For 2015 and 2016, there were no documented or reported health and safety violations that resulted in Ministry of Labour investigation or compliance orders for Heart Lake or the five CRCs operated by the Region of Peel. Environmental Compliance There are no documented or reported Environmental Compliance Approval violations issued by the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change for Heart Lake or the five CRCs operated by the Region of Peel. Operating Cost The methodology for cost comparison considered direct operating costs of similar size facilities operated by the Region of Peel (Battleford, Brampton and Fewster CRCs) and the Heart Lake CRC, operated by Tuff. The Bolton and Caledon CRCs were not included in the operating cost comparison as both have smaller scale operations and different operating hours. Operating costs vary based on size, design, operating hours and usage. Each of Peel s CRCs is unique so an apples to apples comparison is difficult and any comparison needs to be carefully interpreted. The biggest driver of operating costs is the number of operating hours per week since there is a direct and strong correlation between total operating hours and total staffing cost. Another driver is tonnage since higher tonnage requires more frequent emptying of bins. Given that Heart Lake CRC is new, its usage and tonnage are low so the cost per tonne is high. As usage and tonnage increase at Heart Lake, its operating cost per tonne will drop. The best comparator is therefore cost per operating hour. Finally, caution needs to be taken in comparing the operating costs of any of Peel s CRCs to the operating costs of Fewster, as Fewster has a relatively high percentage of industrial, commercial and institutional customers who deliver a higher tonnage per visit than residential customers. During the past two years, the average annual operating cost for Heart Lake was approximately $2.86 million. The tables below provide the annual operating cost, the operating cost per hour and the operating cost per tonne for Heart Lake and the three similar size CRCs operated by the Region of Peel for the period - January 2015 to December

33 4.3-7 COMMUNITY RECYCLING CENTRE PERFORMANCE REVIEW CRC Operating Cost per Hour CRC Average Annual Operating Cost (Millions) Average Annual Operating Hours Operating Cost per Hour Battleford CRC $ ,210 $ 943 Brampton CRC $ ,210 $ 897 Fewster CRC $ ,935 $ 804 Heart Lake CRC - Tuff $ ,935 $ 976 CRC CRC Operating Cost per Tonne Average Annual Operating Cost (Millions) Average Annual Operating Tonnes Operating Cost per Tonne Battleford $ ,717 $ 193 Brampton $ ,480 $ 175 Fewster $ ,949 $ 158 Heart Lake - Year 1 $ ,823 $ 594 Heart Lake - Year 2 $ ,590 $ 435 The financial information suggests that while the overall annual operating cost of Heart Lake is comparable to the overall annual operating cost of CRCs operated by the Region the hourly operating cost of Heart Lake is slightly higher. For the reasons described above, the operating cost per tonne for Heart Lake is significantly higher. These cost differences are expected to narrow as usage and tonnage increase at Heart Lake. Staff will continue to monitor costs as the number of visitors and operations change over the next number of years. Staff will also continue to look for opportunities to lower operating costs at all CRCs, including the Heart Lake CRC. The Heart Lake operating agreement allows the operator to suggest cost saving ideas to the Region for consideration. Staff will continue to engage the contractor in such discussions. 4. Internal Audit of Heart Lake Contract Management In October 2016, Internal Audit initiated an audit to determine if effective contract management controls were in place to oversee the contractor s performance at the Heart Lake CRC. The contract review, discussed at the February 2, 2017, Audit and Risk Committee, identified the following key observations: Management and staff has implemented formalized practices related to invoice review and monitoring, which are effective; There is an opportunity to strengthen controls in the contract by developing a formal structure for the role of the Contract Administrator; and - 7 -

34 4.3-8 COMMUNITY RECYCLING CENTRE PERFORMANCE REVIEW There is opportunity to implement formal processes to effectively oversee other reporting and monitoring requirements (other than invoicing) of the contract. As a result of the audit, staff are formalizing a Contract Administrator role that will develop metrics for the oversight of contractor performance to be monitored and reported on a regular basis, including into the monthly meetings between staff and Tuff. 5. Community Recycling Centre Service Offerings Residents of Peel can drop off waste and a variety of reusable and recyclable items at Peel s CRCs. Given the recently enacted Waste Free Ontario Act and Council s new 75 percent 3Rs target, new materials, including mattresses, carpets, furniture and textiles could be considered for collection at CRCs, but only if there is sufficient space. Staff will therefore include money in the 2018 budget submission to conduct a comprehensive review of services offered at Peel s CRCs to determine which materials should be accepted at which CRCs. 6. Next Steps Based on the results of the first two years of operations (2015 and 2016) since the opening of the Heart Lake CRC, staff will be taking the following approach: No changes will be made how Peel s CRCs are operated (i.e. public or private) at this time; Staff will report back ahead of the end of the current Heart Lake operating agreement with a recommended approach for operating the Heart Lake CRC following the end of the agreement; Given the existing capacity at the Heart Lake and Fewster CRC, a seventh CRC will not be considered at this time. Staff will, however, continue the annual conservation day in the Clarkson area; Staff will conduct a comprehensive review of services offered at Peel s CRCs to determine which materials should be accepted at which CRCs to support Council s 75 percent diversion target. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The operations and maintenance contract for the Heart Lake CRC is currently in the third year of its five year contract term. The annual cost of the contract is included in the annual Waste Management operating budget. The 2018 capital budget submission will include, for Council s consideration: Removal of the capital project for construction of the Clarkson CRC ($22.58 Million) A new capital project to conduct a comprehensive review of current and proposed service offerings at Peel s CRCs

35 4.3-9 COMMUNITY RECYCLING CENTRE PERFORMANCE REVIEW CONCLUSION Development of the Heart Lake CRC appears to have met the Region s objective of taking pressure off the Brampton CRC while serving the growing community of northwest Brampton. For the first two years of Heart Lake s operation (2015 and 2016), there are no significant findings that would indicate that in-house or contracted operation is better in one way or another. Staff will report back prior to the end of the current Heart Lake operating agreement with a recommended approach for operating the Heart Lake CRC following the end of the agreement. Janette Smith, Commissioner of Public Works Approved for Submission: D. Szwarc, Chief Administrative Officer For further information regarding this report, please contact Norman Lee, Director Waste Management, extension 4703, norman.lee@peelregion.ca. Reviewed in workflow by: Financial Support Unit - 9 -

36 4.4-1 REPORT Meeting Date: Waste Management Strategic Advisory Committee For Information DATE: June 15, 2017 REPORT TITLE: FROM: BI-WEEKLY, CART-BASED COLLECTION PROGRAM UPDATE AND CURBSIDE WASTE COLLECTION CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE FOR 2016 Janette Smith, Commissioner of Public Works OBJECTIVE To inform Regional Council of the bi-weekly, cart-based waste collection program performance for 2016; and, the curbside waste collection contractors performance during their first year of providing service under the new waste collection contracts. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS As outlined in this report the implementation of the bi-weekly, cart-based collection program in 2016 has been successful in realizing the anticipated objectives of the new collection program. The switch to bi-weekly garbage collection had the intended effect of reducing the amount of waste sent to landfill, increasing participation in the Green Bin organics program from 35 percent to 68 percent, doubling the amount of Green Bin organic material collected, and increasing Peel s overall diversion rate from 45 percent to 50 percent. However, it also resulted in slightly higher contamination rates (3 percent increase) in the Blue Box program. Taking all waste collection services into account, there was a total collection cost saving of approximately $7.5 million in 2016 under the new collection programs and collection contracts compared to the previous year ($8.6 million savings after liquidated damages). There has been a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the shift from dieselfueled waste collection vehicles to compressed natural gas - powered vehicles and reduction in fleet size. The shift from the old program s manually-collected receptacles to the new program s automated cart-based program reduces or eliminates repetitive lifting and worker injuries. There has been a reduction in windblown litter. The occurrences of late times-off-of-the-road and missed collections generally decreased over time since the commencement of the new contracts, with the exception of particular events that impacted collection service such as yard waste collection start-up, the spring season s first nice weekend in April, and the May and September garbage exemption periods, all which resulted in heavier tonnages at the curb for collection.

37 4.4-2 BI-WEEKLY, CART-BASED COLLECTION PROGRAM UPDATE AND CURBSIDE COLLECTION CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE 2016 DISCUSSION 1. Background In 2013, Regional Council endorsed plans to adopt a bi-weekly, cart-based collection program with the commencement of the new curbside waste collection contracts in On January 4, 2016, Emterra Environmental (Emterra) and Progressive Waste Solutions Canada Inc. (Progressive) began curbside waste collection services within the Region of Peel under the new bi-weekly cart-based waste collection program. Map 1: Collection Zones - 2 -

38 4.4-3 BI-WEEKLY, CART-BASED COLLECTION PROGRAM UPDATE AND CURBSIDE COLLECTION CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE Bi-weekly, Cart-based Collection Program Performance The objectives of the new bi-weekly collection program include: Increased diversion/resource recovery (including increased organics participation); Reduced collection costs; Reduced greenhouse gas emissions; Reduced worker injuries; and, Reduced windblown litter. The following sections outline how the implementation of bi-weekly, cart-based collection program has been successful in realizing these objectives. a. Increased Organics Participation Green bin participation amongst curbside customers increased from 35 percent in 2015 to 68 percent in 2016 with the introduction of bi-weekly collection. b. Increased Diversion/Resource Recovery There was an overall increase in diversion from 45 percent in 2015 to 50 percent in 2016, which ultimately reduced the amount of waste sent to landfill. Staff originally estimated that up to 21,000 additional tonnes of Green Bin organics would be collected under the bi-weekly garbage collection program. In the first year of the new program, over 30,000 additional organics tonnes were actually collected. The considerable increase in organic tonnes collected in 2016 is largely due to an increase in participation in the organics program from 35 percent to 68 percent. The amount of Blue Box recycling collected in 2016 was slightly higher (3 percent) than the amount collected in Yard waste tonnage was lower in 2016 due to the remarkably dry yard waste season. As a result residents placed less yard waste out at the curb, despite the extended yard waste season implemented by the Region under the new 2016 bi-weekly collection program, which included an additional two weeks of collection in both the Spring and Fall plus two additional days of yard waste collection in rural areas of Caledon. Table 1: Total tonnages collected, by waste stream vs comparison Garbage Recycling Organics Yard Waste 2015 total tonnes 188,910 84,044 30,339 41, total tonnes 146,675 85,873 60,799 36,520 Change from 2015 to 2016 (tonnes) -42,235 1,829 30,460-5,364 Change from 2015 to 2016 (%) -22% 2% 100% -13% - 3 -

39 4.4-4 BI-WEEKLY, CART-BASED COLLECTION PROGRAM UPDATE AND CURBSIDE COLLECTION CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE 2016 Table 2 below shows the same information on a per-household base. Table 2: Total Kg per household by waste stream 2015 vs comparison Yard Garbage Recycling Organics Waste 2015 Kg / household / year Kg / household / year Change from 2015 to 2016 Kg Change from 2015 to 2016 (%) -22% 2% 100% -13% c. Reduced Collection Costs A collection cost analysis using cost per tonne and cost per household measurements is provided in Table 3 below. The cost per tonne was determined by dividing the total payments to the contractors in 2016 by the total tonnes collected in 2016, by contractor. The cost per household was determined by dividing the total payments to the contractors in 2016 by the approximate number of households serviced by each contractor. Table 3: 2016 collection costs Contractor Households collected Tonnes Collected Collection Cost Estimated Cost Per Household Emterra 211, ,650 $23.6 Million $112 Progressive 116, ,346 $14.0 Million $121 Total/Average 327, ,996 $37.6 Million $115 The collection costs differ between the collection contractors due to differences the unit prices bid by each contractor for each waste stream collected. The cost per tonne bid by Emterra is lower than that bid by Progressive. The total collection cost for Emterra is higher than Progressive as Emterra services approximately two thirds of the Region s curbside collected households. Taking all waste collection services (including curbside and multi-residential collections) into account, there was a total collection cost saving of approximately $7.5 million in 2016 compared to 2015 ($8.6 million savings after liquidated damages). d. Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions Compared to the former weekly, manual collection program, in 2016, there was a fleet reduction by up to 13 vehicles deployed daily, which helps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by having fewer trucks on the road. This, combined with the shift from dieselfueled waste collection vehicles to compressed natural gas -powered vehicles resulted in an estimated 5,420 fewer tonnes eco 2, or approximately 30 percent less greenhouse gas emissions than if the equivalent amount of diesel had been used

40 4.4-5 BI-WEEKLY, CART-BASED COLLECTION PROGRAM UPDATE AND CURBSIDE COLLECTION CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE 2016 e. Reduced Worker Injuries The new collection program requires the collection contractors to use fully-automated or semi-automated collection vehicles to empty the carts. These trucks are equipped with either a mechanical arm or a mechanical tipper. The shift from the old program s manually-collected receptacles to the new program s automated cart-based program reduces or eliminates repetitive lifting that may result in worker injuries. In 2015, under the previous collection contract, 25 injuries were reported by the collection contractor. In 2016, the collection contractors reported 10 injuries on automated trucks. To date, in 2017, there appears to be a downward trend in the number of injuries

41 4.4-6 BI-WEEKLY, CART-BASED COLLECTION PROGRAM UPDATE AND CURBSIDE COLLECTION CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE 2016 f. Reduced Windblown Litter Based on feedback received from Regional and Local Municipal staff and residents and as shown in the photo below, there has been a reduction in windblown litter and improved streetscape aesthetics. g. Blue Box Contamination One challenge with the new cart system is that the amount of contamination in the Blue Box is higher. Overall Blue Box contamination rates have increased by 3 percent in 2016 as compared to Staff will modify communications and enforcement to lower contamination. 3. Collection Contractor Performance Since the commencement of the bi-weekly cart-based collection program and new curbside waste collection contracts on January 4, 2016, Regional staff has been monitoring the performance of the Region s new waste collection contractors, Emterra and Progressive. Contract performance measurements known as key performance indicators (KPIs) are used to measure and monitor risk and non-compliance, and help the Region to take necessary corrective action with the contractors to promote service improvement. The following sections provide summaries of the contractors performance since the start-up of the new collection contracts using KPIs as the basis of measurement. a. Same Day Completion Rate Same day complete rate is a KPI that identifies whether or not the contractor collected all materials on the scheduled day of collection. Graph 1 below shows the percentage of collection days in 2016 where the contractors serviced 100 percent of their collection area (green) and the percentage of collection days where they did not (red). While the percentage shown in red is greater than 50 percent for both contractors it needs to be interpreted with caution because a day where - 6 -

42 4.4-7 BI-WEEKLY, CART-BASED COLLECTION PROGRAM UPDATE AND CURBSIDE COLLECTION CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE 2016 even a single truck does not complete it route is put on the red side of the graph. They do show, however, that Progressive achieved more days with 100 percent collection than Emterra. The graphs in section 3b of this report are a better indicator of overall performance. Graph 1: Percent of collection days in 2016 where contractor did not service 100% of collection area Emterra (N) Emterra (SW) Progressive (SE) Legend Missed collections- contractor did not service 100% of collection area No missed collections- contractor serviced 100% of collection area b. Times-Off-Road The contractually required vehicle time-off-the-road (identified as the last collection stop for each vehicle) is 6:00 p.m. Graph 2 below shows the percent of vehicles that did not complete collection by 6:00 p.m. in 2016, based on monthly average off-road times. Graph 2: Percent of vehicles that did not complete collection by 6:00 p.m

43 4.4-8 BI-WEEKLY, CART-BASED COLLECTION PROGRAM UPDATE AND CURBSIDE COLLECTION CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE 2016 Graph 3 below shows a breakdown of the average times-off-road during 2016 in hourly increments. Graph 3: Vehicle times-off-road by hour An analysis of the times-off-road showed the following: An improvement between January to February after the first month of the new biweekly, cart-based collection program s start-up. The start-up of yard waste collection in March (and associated re-deployment of vehicles) Emterra had fewer trucks off the road by 6:00 p.m. In April and May, due to heavier tonnage periods of yard waste and garbage set out at the curb as earlier mentioned, both Emterra and Progressive had fewer trucks off of the road by 6:00 p.m. In June, as the contractors stabilized their operations and tonnages set out for collection dropped, there was an improvement in how many trucks were off the road by 6:00 p.m. In July, there was a noticeable decrease in the trucks collecting past 6:00 p.m., which is mainly due to a lighter season for yard waste tonnages. The garbage exemption period in September contributed to an increase in the number of trucks completing collection after 6:00 p.m. In November, Emterra experienced later collection times during the second and third week of the month during their two heaviest yard waste collection weeks in the fall. Although the majority of vehicles completed collection by 6:00 p.m., there were still notable late and missed collections occurring past 6:00 p.m., particularly in Emterra s North and Southwest collection zones

44 4.4-9 BI-WEEKLY, CART-BASED COLLECTION PROGRAM UPDATE AND CURBSIDE COLLECTION CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE 2016 There is a general declining trend in the occurrences of late and missed collections, showing improvement towards same day collection completion, but late vehicle times off of the road is still an issue which has been identified as an area of improvement. 4. Liquidated Damages If the contractor fails to perform the services in accordance with the requirements of the contract, the contractor has to pay liquidated damages to the Region. These particular contracts include a number of performance measures with a specified liquidated damages amount for each infraction. Liquidated damages have been paid by Emterra and Progressive as set out in the contract for missed and late collections. In 2016, a total of $1,033,850 in liquidated damages was collected from Emterra and $101,600 was collected from Progressive. Regional staff continues to monitor missed and late collections to ensure the contractors are working towards continuous improvement with the ultimate goal of providing sameday waste collection services to Peel s residents. 5. Next Steps The collection contractors are working to improve service levels by implementing some of the following tactics: Additional resourcing during peak tonnage periods (trucks and staff). Incentives for Route Managers to improve service levels within the area that they are responsible for. Progressive disciplinary actions with operators and Route Managers that are the cause of repeated late and/or missed collections, and any other service level issues. A collection day change (from Tuesday to Monday) for approximately 7,000 households serviced by Emterra in Mississauga, Ward 10, at the end of April 2017, to better balance the number of households serviced per collection day

45 BI-WEEKLY, CART-BASED COLLECTION PROGRAM UPDATE AND CURBSIDE COLLECTION CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE 2016 CONCLUSION The switch to bi-weekly cart based collection in January 2016 satisfied the Region s objectives of increasing diversion, lowering greenhouse gas emissions and lowing costs. Both contractors have improved their performance over the first year of operations. Staff continues to closely monitor the performance of both collection contractors and participates in frequent meetings and discussions with the contractors management teams to improve daily operations to work towards continuous improvement. Janette Smith, Commissioner of Public Works Approved for Submission: D. Szwarc, Chief Administrative Officer For further information regarding this report, please contact Norman Lee, Director Waste Management, extension 4703, norman.lee@peelregion.ca. Reviewed in workflow by: Financial Support Unit

46 5.1-1 Region of Peel APPROVED AT REGIONAL COUNCIL April 27, Association of Municipalities of Ontario Policy Update, dated April 20, 2017, titled Waste Diversion The Blue Box Today and Tomorrow Referred to the Waste Management Strategic Advisory Committee

47 5.1-2 Waste Diversion The Blue Box Today and Tomorrow April 20, 2017 Implementation is underway to the Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act (RRCEA). In particular, municipal governments will be transitioning from the current Blue Box program, which is run by municipalities and co-funded by producers, to an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) regime that requires producers to cover all end-of-life costs for waste. Eventually, producers will be fully responsible for meeting recovery targets for designated products and packaging. The municipal role in this system will be evolving. AMO s Board has resolved that the municipal governments best interest is to move the Blue Box to full producer funding sooner rather than later. The Ministry of Environment and Climate Change is asked to initiate the transition for the Blue Box program this year, with completion to the RRCEA by January The AMO Board also directed staff to engage with its municipal partners Regional Public Works Commissioners of Ontario (RPWCO), the Municipal Waste Association (MWA) and the City of Toronto, to create a municipal waste management entity. The transition and the future work for municipal governments within the new waste management framework requires a high degree of policy and implementation planning involving all the partners. Work on developing this entity has just begun. In the interim, staff will continue to coordinate stakeholder work through use of existing funding from the Continuous Improvement Fund. This arrangement was approved by the Resource Productivity and Recovery Authority (formerly Waste Diversion Ontario). We need to know more about significant post-transition issues such as diversion targets, geographic coverage requirements, and what materials will be designated. Until then, our municipal waste diversion programs will continue to provide the convenient, reliable waste services that residents depend on. Municipal governments may be approached by producers to provide post-transition collection and/or processing services for designated materials. We caution that it is too early for Councils to make informed decisions without having the rules of the road defined through Regulations Steward Obligation We should know the value of the 2017 Steward Obligation by the end of May or early June. This payment recovers costs related to 2015 Blue Box services. The first 2017 quarterly payment to municipalities is expected around June 30, REFERRAL TO RECOMMENDED DIRECTION REQUIRED P RECEIPT RECOMMENDED 200 University Ave., Suite 801 Toronto ON M5H 3C6 Canada Tel: Fax: Toll-Free in Ontario: amo@amo.on.ca

48 5.1-3 The Steward Obligation process has been arduous in recent years. AMO continues to press for a funding that is based on actual Blue Box costs. This past March, the AMO President, Lynn Dollin, wrote to MOECC Minister Murray asking that the 2017 Steward Obligation be set using the Arbitrator s method. This would allow municipalities to receive 50% of their Blue Box net costs, as was done in 2014 and She further said that if the Authority was going to use the flawed 2016 formula-based method, then municipalities would seek 52.5% of the formula, which would allow us to recover our full share. AMO and City of Toronto staff also made this request directly to the Resource Productivity and Recovery Authority Board on April 11, Resolving this ongoing conflict would allow everyone to focus on the RRCEA transition and full producer responsibility for the end-of-life costs of designated materials and packaging. AMO Contact: Dave Gordon, Senior Advisor, dgordon@amo.on.ca, ext University Ave., Suite 801 Toronto ON M5H 3C6 Canada Tel: Fax: Toll-Free in Ontario: amo@amo.on.ca 2

49 5.2-1 June 6, 2017 Waste Management Bi-weekly Cart-based Collection Townhouse Conversions This project update provides Regional Councillors with an update on the progress to date on converting bag-based townhouse locations to cart-based collection and the process for converting additional townhouses going forward. Background At the start of the collection contracts in 2016, staff identified approximately 675 locations (mainly curbside townhouse complexes with on-site collection), comprised of 33,000 residential units that would be initially on a bi-weekly bag-based garbage and recycling collection service instead of carts. In addition, another 90 locations, comprised of 5,400 residential units, were identified to remain on a weekly bag-based collection service due to the common collection locations. Collection restriction criteria which included limited storage and/or set-out space, and/or shared access or private (narrowed) roadways were used to identify properties to initially remain on bag-based collection. At that time, staff indicated that these locations would be considered for cart collection once the initial wave of single family homes had their carts. On December 8th, 2016 a Project/Issues Updated on Townhouse (TH) Conversions was received by Council advising that staff would be moving forward with converting locations from bag-based collection to cart-based collection, starting with locations that had requested carts over the past year. Staff had a goal of converting a minimum of 50%, or approximately 19,000 TH units, to cart-based collection by the end of This increases collection efficiencies and works towards a standardized level of service for all residents in Peel regardless of where they live. Work to Date Staff set a goal of 2,500 units per quarter in order to meet the goal of converting 19,000 TH units from bag-based collection to cart-based collection by the end of Since initiating the process, 3,550 units have been converted to the end of the first quarter of Of the approximately 675 bi-weekly TH locations comprised of 33,000 units, staff have converted 116 TH locations made up of 5,919 units to date. This is approximately 18% of the available bi-weekly locations, or approximately 31% of our overall goal. While converting the 5,919 units, property managers (PM) and residents alike have had the same concerns with size/storage of carts as was seen during the initial single family roll-out between January V /03

50 (cart selection) and January 2016 (program launch). They have also been concerned with the short time period between when they were advised their collection service was going to change, and when the cart-based program would start. When concerns were brought up, staff worked with a number of stakeholders including, PMs, Presidents of the Condo Corporations and/or members of Council to address these concerns on a case by case basis. Some of these concerns were addressed by: extending the cart selection timeframe scheduling the collection of old containers providing yard waste (YW) stickers to re-purpose old containers for YW collection this now includes blue boxes promoting existing exemption periods to allow residents time to prepare for cart storage offering troubleshooting a residents homes for cart storage and placement scheduling an open house which included: old container drop off; cart selection; and, an opportunity to speak with staff and understand the process. As a result of the concerns that have been raised, staff have updated the cart conversion process to incorporated the learnings from location of TH to the next. Some of these updates include: contacting the PM at least four weeks prior to the information being delivered to residents homes advising of the changes followed by: an electronic copy of the print material (Appendix I) and the important dates to the PM s of the effected complexes increasing the time for cart selection from two weeks to three weeks increasing the time from the cart selection date to the delivery of the carts from two weeks to three weeks providing an electronic copy of all of the print material and important dates to the affected Councillors (Regional/City/Town) contacting the affected Councillors administrative staff to ensure they received the material and to answer any questions. For the full listing of locations that have been converted to date, please see Appendix II. Next Steps Staff continue to identify locations that can be converted from bags to carts, either through resident outreach, contact with PMs or identifying locations with similar characteristics to those that have already been converted. Staff have updated the requirements to move to cart-based collection, this involves ensuring adequate set out space for carts and access for semi/fully automated collection vehicles on the internal roadways. Staff have currently identified 153 more locations, comprised of approximately 9,037 units that are scheduled to be converted before the end of Staff have conducted site visits and confirmed that

51 5.2-3 these locations meet the updated cart-based collections requirements and are in the process of contacting the PMs to advise of the upcoming collection changes. With these additional locations anticipated to be converted by the end of the year, staff will have converted 79% of the 19,000 unit goal and will work towards exceeding the 50% by the end of A full listing of addresses that are scheduled to be converted to cart-based collection can be found in Appendix III with the anticipated conversion timelines and tentative dates for reference. Over the next year staff will continue to: review each of the remaining locations on bag-based collection to determine if they meet the updated collection requirements for cart-based collection create a schedule to identify which locations will be converted to carts communicate with Councillors (Regional/City/Town) on the locations scheduled to move to cartsbased collection providing the important dates and a digital copy of the print material work with stakeholders to address any concerns that may arise If you have any questions, please contact me directly at x4703 or by at norman.lee@peelregion.ca Norman Lee, Director Waste Management CC: D. Szwarc, CAO J. Smith, Commissioner Public Works

52 5.2-4 Bi-weekly Cart-based Collection Townhouse Conversions Appendix I Sample Print Material