GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT (GVS&DD) BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Transcription

1 Meeting 6 of 9 GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT (GVS&DD) BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR BOARD MEETING Friday, July 28, :00 A.M. 2 nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia Membership and Votes A G E N D A 1 A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1. July 28, 2017 Regular Meeting Agenda That the GVS&DD Board adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for July 28, 2017 as circulated. B. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES 1. June 23, 2017 Regular Meeting Minutes That the GVS&DD Board adopt the minutes for its regular meeting held June 23, 2017 as circulated. C. DELEGATIONS D. INVITED PRESENTATIONS E. CONSENT AGENDA Note: Directors may adopt in one motion all recommendations appearing on the Consent Agenda or, prior to the vote, request an item be removed from the Consent Agenda for debate or discussion, voting in opposition to a recommendation, or declaring a conflict of interest with an item. 1. UTILITIES COMMITTEE REPORTS 1.1 Effluent Heat Recovery at North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant That the GVS&DD Board: a) direct staff to enter into contract negotiations with Lonsdale Energy Corporation for the sale of effluent heat; and 1 Note: Recommendation is shown under each item, where applicable. July 20, 2017 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 1

2 GVS&DD Board Agenda July 28, 2017 Agenda Page 2 of 4 b) authorize ADApT Consortium to proceed with the effluent heat recovery portion of the NSWWTP project, subject to award of a contract with Lonsdale Energy Corporation for effluent heat sale GVS&DD Environmental Management & Quality Control Annual Report That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated June 7, 2017, titled 2016 GVS&DD Environmental Management & Quality Control Annual Report. 1.3 Staff Appointments as Board-designated Sewage Control Managers and Municipal Sewage Control Officers That the GVS&DD Board: a) appoint the following persons as municipal sewage control officers: i. Donna Hargreaves, Permitting and Enforcement Officer, Metro Vancouver; ii. Maari Hirvi Mayne, Senior Project Engineer, Metro Vancouver; and iii. Thomas Gallos, Environmental Protection Technician, City of Vancouver. b) rescind the appointments of the following persons as deputy sewage control managers: i. Toivo Allas, Metro Vancouver; and ii. David Robertson, City of Vancouver. c) rescind the appointments of the following persons as municipal sewage control officers: i. Terry Sunar, Metro Vancouver; ii. Don Miller, Metro Vancouver; and iii. Francis Yuen, Metro Vancouver. 2. ZERO WASTE COMMITTEE REPORTS 2.1 Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy That the GVS&DD Board approve initiating consultation on the introduction of a Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Generator Levy. 2.2 Commercial Waste Hauler Licensing That the GVS&DD Board approve initiating consultation on licensing commercial waste haulers. 2.3 Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181 Review 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 2

3 GVS&DD Board Agenda July 28, 2017 Agenda Page 3 of Waste-to-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update That the GVS&DD Board: a) receive for information the report dated July 7, 2017, titled Waste-to-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update ; and b) direct staff to forward a copy of the report to all MVRD member jurisdictions. 2.5 Mattress Recycling Update 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. 2.6 Contingency Disposal of Municipal Solid Waste Update That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated July 5, 2017, titled Contingency Disposal of Municipal Solid Waste Update. 3. FINANCE AND INTERGOVERNMENT COMMITTEE REPORTS 3.1 GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review That the GVS&DD Board: a) endorse, in principle, the proposed changes to the Development Cost Charge Program with the rates as presented in Attachment 1 of the report dated June 23, 2017, titled GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review Update ; and b) direct staff to proceed with public and stakeholder consultation as presented in the report dated June 23, 2017, titled GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review Update. F. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA G. REPORTS NOT INCLUDED IN CONSENT AGENDA 1. ZERO WASTE COMMITTEE REPORTS 1.1 Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 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, Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 3

4 GVS&DD Board Agenda July 28, 2017 Agenda Page 4 of 4 H. MOTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN I. OTHER BUSINESS J. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS K. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING Note: The Board 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 GVS&DD Board close its regular meeting scheduled for July 28, 2017 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (e) and (k) as follows: 90 (1) A part of a board 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 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. L. RISE AND REPORT (Items Released from Closed Meeting) M. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION That the GVS&DD Board adjourn/conclude its regular meeting of July 28, Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 4

5 Section B 1 GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held at 9:20 a.m. on Friday, June 23, 2017 in the 2 nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. MEMBERS PRESENT: Port Coquitlam, Chair, Director Greg Moore Vancouver, Vice Chair, Director Raymond Louie Burnaby, Alternate Director Pietro Calendino for Sav Dhaliwal Burnaby, Director Derek Corrigan (arrived at 9:22 a.m.) Burnaby, Director Colleen Jordan Coquitlam, Director Craig Hodge Coquitlam, Director Richard Stewart Delta, Director Lois Jackson Electoral Area A, Director Maria Harris Langley City, Director Rudy Storteboom Langley Township, Director Charlie Fox Langley Township, Director Bob Long New Westminster, Director Jonathan Coté North Vancouver City, Director Darrell Mussatto North Vancouver District, Director Richard Walton Port Moody, Director Mike Clay Richmond, Director Harold Steves Richmond, Alternate Director Bill McNulty Richmond, Alternate Director Bill McNulty for Malcolm Brodie Surrey, Director Tom Gill Surrey, Alternate Director Vera LeFranc for Linda Hepner Surrey, Director Barbara Steele Surrey, Director Judy Villeneuve Surrey, Alternate Director Dave Woods for Bruce Hayne Vancouver, Director Heather Deal Vancouver, Director Kerry Jang Vancouver, Director Geoff Meggs Vancouver, Director Andrea Reimer Vancouver, Alternate Director Elizabeth Ball for Gregor Robertson (arrived at 9:22 a.m.) Vancouver, Director Tim Stevenson West Vancouver, Director Michael Smith White Rock, Director Wayne Baldwin Commissioner Carol Mason (Non-voting member) MEMBERS ABSENT: Maple Ridge, Director Nicole Read Pitt Meadows, Director John Becker STAFF PRESENT: Agata Kosinski, Assistant to Regional Committees, Board and Information Services Chris Plagnol, Corporate Officer Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, June 23, 2017 Page 1 of 5 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 5

6 A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1. June 23, 2017 Regular Meeting Agenda It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for June 23, 2017 as circulated. CARRIED B. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES 1. May 26, 2017 Regular Meeting Minutes C. DELEGATIONS No items presented. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board adopt the minutes for its regular meeting held May 26, 2017 as circulated. CARRIED D. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented. E. CONSENT AGENDA The following item was removed from the Consent Agenda, for consideration under Section F. Items Removed from the Consent Agenda: 1.4 Biennial Report - Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVSDDD Board adopt the recommendations contained in the following items presented in the June 23, 2017 GVSDD Board Consent Agenda: 1.1 Liquid Waste Heat Recovery Policy 1.2 Fraser Sewerage Area Amendment Nordel Way Business Park and th Street, Corporation of Delta 1.3 Fraser Sewerage Area Amendment 2919 and th Street, Surrey CARRIED The items and recommendations referred to above are as follows: 1.1 Liquid Waste Heat Recovery Policy Report dated June 1, 2017 from Jeff Carmichael, Utility Research and Innovation Division Manager, Liquid Waste Services, seeking GVS&DD Board approval of the Liquid Waste Heat Recovery Policy, to replace the existing Sewer Heat Policy. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, June 23, 2017 Page 2 of 5 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 6

7 Recommendation: That the GVS&DD Board approve the Liquid Waste Heat Recovery Policy, which replaces the Sewer Heat Policy, as presented in the report dated June 1, 2017 and titled Liquid Waste Heat Recovery Policy. Adopted on Consent 1.2 Fraser Sewerage Area Amendment Nordel Way Business Park and th Street, Corporation of Delta Report dated May 11, 2017 from Ed von Euw, Senior Engineer, Policy Planning and Analysis, Liquid Waste Services, in response to a request from the Corporation of Delta, seeking GVS&DD Board approval to amend the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the properties in the Nordel Way Business Park and at th Street in Delta as shown on DWG SA-2376 Sheets 91 and 92. Recommendation: That the GVS&DD Board approve an amendment of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include properties located at the Nordel Way Business Park and th Street, Delta as shown on District Drawings SA-2376 Sheets 91 and 92. Adopted on Consent 1.3 Fraser Sewerage Area Amendment 2919 and th Street, Surrey Report dated May 11, 2017 from Mark Wellman, Senior Project Engineer, Policy Planning and Analysis, Liquid Waste Services, in response to a request from the City of Surrey, seeking GVS&DD Board approval to amend the Fraser Sewerage Area to include additional portions of the properties at 2919 and th Street in Surrey. Recommendation: That the GVS&DD Board approve an amendment of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the portions of the properties located at 2919 and th Street, Surrey as shown on District Drawing SA-2376 Sheet 93. Adopted on Consent F. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 1.4 Biennial Report - Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan Report dated June 5, 2017 from Robert Hicks, Senior Engineer, Liquid Waste Services, seeking GVS&DD Board approval of the Biennial Report : Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management: A Liquid Waste Management Plan for the Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District and Member Municipalities, May 2017, for submission to the Province in accordance with the requirements of the Metro Vancouver s Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ILWRMP). 9:22 a.m. Directors Ball and Corrigan arrived at the meeting. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, June 23, 2017 Page 3 of 5 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 7

8 It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board direct staff to: a) submit the Biennial Report , dated May 2017, to the Ministry of Environment in accordance with the requirements of the Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan; and b) post the Biennial Report on the Metro Vancouver website and arrange for the Utilities Committee to receive comments and submissions on the Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan progress, as described in the Biennial Report, at the September 14, 2017 meeting. CARRIED G. REPORTS NOT INCLUDED IN CONSENT AGENDA No items presented. H. MOTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN No items presented. I. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented. J. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS No items presented. K. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board close its regular meeting scheduled for June 23, 2017 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (e) as follows: 90 (1) A part of a board 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 disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district. CARRIED L. RISE AND REPORT (Items Released from Closed Meeting) No items presented. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, June 23, 2017 Page 4 of 5 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 8

9 M. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board adjourn its regular meeting of June 23, CARRIED (Time: 9:23 a.m.) CERTIFIED CORRECT Chris Plagnol, Corporate Officer Greg Moore, Chair FINAL Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, June 23, 2017 Page 5 of 5 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 9

10 Section E 1.1 To: From: Utilities Committee Jeff Carmichael, Division Manager, Utility Research and Innovation, Liquid Waste Services Date: July 6, 2017 Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: Effluent Heat Recovery at North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board: a) direct staff to enter into contract negotiations with Lonsdale Energy Corporation for the sale of effluent heat; and b) authorize ADApT Consortium to proceed with the effluent heat recovery portion of the NSWWTP project, subject to award of a contract with Lonsdale Energy Corporation for effluent heat sale. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to seek GVS&DD Board authorization to proceed with effluent heat recovery as part of the North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant (NSWWTP) project and to seek authorization to negotiate a contract with Lonsdale Energy Corporation for the sale of effluent heat from the NSWWTP that acquires enough greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction credits to make the Liquid Waste utility carbon neutral. BACKGROUND In April 2017, the Design-Build-Finance contract for the NSWWTP was awarded to ADApT Consortium for $525 million. Effluent heat recovery was included in the Design-Build-Finance contract as an optional item. GVS&DD has until October 5, 2017 to exercise the optional item and direct ADApT Consortium to design and construct the effluent heat recovery system. The NSWWTP has the potential to be a net producer of energy by implementing effluent heat recovery. The GVS&DD s Liquid Waste utility has the opportunity to reduce its carbon footprint to zero if GVS&DD commits to effluent heat recovery at NSWWTP. This report brings forward for Board consideration approval of the NSWWTP optional project to design and build an effluent heat recovery system, which would proceed once a contract with the Lonsdale Energy Corporation has been approved by the Board. BUSINESS CASE Effluent heat recovery has the potential to contribute to the goals of the Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan, which directs Metro Vancouver to use liquid waste as a resource and to evaluate opportunities for energy recovery from major wastewater treatment plant projects. Effluent heat recovery contributes to the goals of the NSWWTP project and has been highlighted in the descriptions of the plant that resulted in the federal and provincial governments committing significant funding towards the NSWWTP. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 10

11 Effluent Heat Recovery at North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant Utilities Committee Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 2 of 4 For effluent heat recovery to be financially viable, a nearby customer must be willing to purchase the energy. Lonsdale Energy Corporation (LEC), a district energy provider wholly owned by the City of North Vancouver, was the only respondent to a Request for Qualifications and Interest in Metro Vancouver staff and LEC staff have subsequently been investigating technical and commercial considerations of providing effluent heat from the NSWWTP to LEC s district energy system. Cost Estimates ADApT Consortium provided a guaranteed cost of $13,245,668 to build the effluent heat recovery system within the NSWWTP and a monthly cost of $223,320 for up to 12 months during the performance period, for a total rounded cost of $15,926,000. If the project proceeds, an additional $2,000,000 will be required for BC Hydro infrastructure, for a total GVS&DD investment of $17,926,000. LEC would be required to spend an estimated $3,543,000 to install distribution piping from the NSWWTP to the LEC district energy system to be able to receive the effluent heat. In total, the cost for the project is $21,469,000. Operating costs over the project life would be recovered from LEC. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions It is projected that the effluent heat recovery project will reduce GHG emissions by over 7,000 tonnes per year on average over the 25-year project life. These reductions will be achieved by displacing the use of natural gas in LEC s district energy system. Following the guidelines in the Liquid Waste Heat Recovery Policy (Attachment 1), GHG reductions are proposed to be allocated in proportion to respective contributions to project costs, as indicated in Table 1. An estimated 16 per cent of GHG reductions will be allocated to LEC based on their capital expenditure. BC Hydro has indicated intent to contribute up to $1,000,000 to the effluent heat project in return for GHG emission reduction credits, which amounts to 5 per cent of the GHG reductions. Confirmation of BC Hydro funding is expected by September The remaining 79 per cent of GHG reductions, approximately 5,700 tonnes per year, will be allocated to GVS&DD based on its net capital contribution of $16,926,000. Table 1. Estimated GHG allocation based on contributions to project cost Capital commitment GHG allocation Average annual GHG reduction credits GVS&DD $16,926,000 79% 5,700 tonnes CO 2e/yr LEC $3,543,000 16% 1,200 tonnes CO 2e/yr BC Hydro $1,000,000 5% 300 tonnes CO 2e/yr Carbon Neutral Commitments In the 2010 Corporate Climate Action Plan, Metro Vancouver committed to becoming carbon neutral by reducing corporate emissions, providing renewable energy to other parties to avoid emissions in the region, sequestering carbon, and as a last resort, purchasing or creating offset credits. The anticipated reduction in GHG emissions from Metro Vancouver s existing portfolio of projects is not sufficient to achieve corporate carbon neutrality. New sources of GHG reductions are required. Effluent heat recovery at NSWWTP is the first major GHG reduction project within Metro Vancouver s operations that is ready to be implemented and is cost-effective due to efficiencies of coordination with the construction of the NSWWTP and its proximity to LEC s district energy system. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 11

12 Effluent Heat Recovery at North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant Utilities Committee Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 3 of 4 Metro Vancouver s corporate carbon footprint for all energy and transportation related emissions is approximately 20,000 tonnes CO 2e per year, of which 5,000 tonnes are from the Liquid Waste utility. These emissions are projected to increase after the secondary upgrades of the North Shore and Iona Island Wastewater Treatment Plants. GVS&DD would receive GHG reductions of over 5,000 tonnes per year as soon as the NSWWTP is commissioned by investing in the effluent heat project. This would make the Liquid Waste utility carbon neutral starting in The cost of investing in these GHG reductions is $120/tonne. This cost is lower than the price of $150/tonne established in the Carbon Price Policy (Attachment 2), showing that this is a cost-effective GHG reduction project. Based on the business case analysis, including opportunities to reduce overall GHG emissions in the region, the following alternatives are presented for consideration. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board: a) direct staff to enter into contract negotiations with Lonsdale Energy Corporation for the sale of effluent heat; and b) authorize ADApT Consortium to proceed with the effluent heat recovery portion of the NSWWTP project, subject to award of a contract with Lonsdale Energy Corporation for effluent heat sale. 2. That the GVS&DD Board authorize ADApT Consortium to proceed with the effluent heat recovery portion of the NSWWTP project. 3. That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated July 6, 2017, titled Effluent Heat Recovery at North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant and provide alternate direction. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the Board approves Alternative 1, GVS&DD would commit $17,926,000 for the effluent heat recovery project. Of that, $15,926,000 would be to the ADApT Consortium to build and commission the effluent heat recovery facility, and $2,000,000 for associated BC Hydro infrastructure. These costs would be partially offset by grant contributions from BC Hydro of up to $1,000,000 toward the project. GVS&DD would also acquire associated GHG reduction credits. All operating costs for effluent heat recovery over the life of the project would be recovered from LEC. The NSWWTP project has a total budget of $700 million including contingency and committed funding from the federal and provincial governments of $405 million. The effluent heat recovery project is an optional item that will be added to the NSWWTP project, in addition to the $700 million. However, it is possible that some or all of the cost of the optional effluent heat recovery project may be accommodated within the $700 million NSWWTP budget depending on final outcome on expenditures from the project contingency. If required to support the project, additional funds of up to $17,926,000 will be included within the Financial Plan. The capital expenditure will be contingent on successful negotiation of a contract with Lonsdale Energy Corporation for the sale of effluent heat. The contract would allocate the GHG reduction credits based on respective contributions to project costs. If the recommendation is supported by the Board, the proposed contract with LEC will be presented to the Board for approval at the September Board meeting. The contract must be executed before the October 5, 2017 deadline to exercise the Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 12

13 Effluent Heat Recovery at North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant Utilities Committee Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 4 of 4 optional item for ADApT Consortium to proceed with design and construction of the effluent heat recovery system. If the Board approves Alternative 2, GVS&DD would make a commitment of $17,926,000, less any grant contributions from BC Hydro, to build and commission the effluent heat recovery project without requiring a contract for sale of effluent heat to be in place. The risk exists that no effluent heat contract would be awarded, and consequently that the equipment would never be beneficially used and is not recommended. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION In April 2017, the Design-Build-Finance contract for the NSWWTP was awarded to ADApT Consortium for $525 million. Effluent heat recovery was included in the Design-Build-Finance contract as an optional item. GVS&DD has until October 5, 2017 to exercise the optional item and direct ADApT Consortium to design and construct the effluent heat recovery system. The NSWWTP has the potential to be a net producer of energy by implementing effluent heat recovery. The GVS&DD s Liquid Waste utility has the opportunity to reduce its carbon footprint to zero if the GVS&DD invests in effluent heat recovery at NSWWTP. Metro Vancouver s corporate carbon footprint is approximately 20,000 tonnes per year, of which 5,000 tonnes are from the Liquid Waste utility. Metro Vancouver has committed to becoming carbon neutral and needs new sources of GHG reductions to achieve this commitment. Implementing effluent heat recovery at NSWWTP would result in GHG emission reductions of more than 7,000 tonnes annually. GHG reduction credits from the project will be allocated in proportion to respective contributions to project costs. GVS&DD can achieve carbon neutrality for the Liquid Waste utility starting in 2021 by investing in the NSWWTP effluent heat recovery project. The investment would acquire an annual average of 5,700 tonnes of GHG reductions. The cost of achieving the GHG reductions is $120/tonne which is considered cost-effective. Staff recommend Alternative 1. Attachments 1. Liquid Waste Heat Recovery Policy 2. Carbon Price Policy Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 13

14 ATTACHMENT 1 BOARD POLICY LIQUID WASTE HEAT RECOVERY Effective Date: June 23, 2017 Approved By: GVS&DD Board PURPOSE To enable beneficial use of waste heat and associated greenhouse gas emission reductions from Metro Vancouver s liquid waste system by external parties. DEFINITIONS Waste heat is excess heat that is available from GVS&DD operations, including but not limited to heat from untreated sewage, treated effluent, equipment or processes. Heat user is a third party interested in accessing excess heat from GVS&DD s liquid waste system. A heat user may be a member municipality or other entity. POLICY Metro Vancouver is committed to pursuing strategies and actions that mitigate climate change. Waste heat recovery projects that displace the use of fossil fuels result in a reduction in regional greenhouse gas emissions. Recovering waste heat from the liquid waste system contributes to GVS&DD s Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan goal of using waste as a resource. This policy enables expedient access to waste heat where technically and financially feasible while ensuring that GVS&DD is able to convey and treat wastewater and meet all service objectives. This policy applies to situations where external parties request waste heat from GVS&DD s liquid waste system and to situations where GVS&DD offers waste heat to interested external parties. COLLECTION SYSTEM PROJECTS Allocation of Waste Heat GVS&DD will allocate access to untreated sewage for heat recovery on a first-come first-served basis in response to requests by interested heat users, provided the proposed heat recovery project will not adversely impact GVS&DD services or other established heat recovery projects, as determined by GVS&DD review. If an established heat recovery project that is already in place or approved for development by GVS&DD could be impacted by a proposed new heat recovery project, the established project s heating and/or cooling requirements will have priority. Private entities requesting access to waste heat must provide a letter of support from the host municipality demonstrating support and cooperation including allowance for works within municipal rights of way. Projects that access heat from municipal sewers do not require GVS&DD approval. Ownership and Responsibilities GVS&DD owns a sewerage system and is responsible for sewage in its liquid waste system, including any associated resources such as heat. The boundaries of responsibility for heat recovery equipment and infrastructure are primarily tied to property ownership and will be defined in a contract between (version 1) Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 14 Liquid Waste Heat Recovery Page 1 of 2

15 BOARD POLICY GVS&DD and the heat user. GVS&DD will own and be responsible for the portion of the tie-in up to and including a shut-off valve on both the diversion and return lines. GVS&DD will consider an in-line heat recovery system built directly in a GVS&DD sewer if the system will not impair GVS&DD operations. Cost Recovery GVS&DD will charge the heat user for all costs incurred to establish and maintain access to sewage. The value of sewage will be assessed using business case processes, including consideration of nominal value of sewage, and incorporated into sewage access contracts. Environmental Attributes Benefits associated with greenhouse gas reductions (such as carbon offset credits) and the costs of administering those benefits will be allocated on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with the costs and risks incurred by the parties involved in developing the heat recovery project. TREATMENT PLANT AND OUTFALL PROJECTS Allocation of Waste Heat When GVS&DD identifies waste heat opportunities in wastewater treatment plants and effluent outfalls, GVS&DD will follow competitive processes in offering available waste heat to potential heat users, to ensure fairness and transparency. Ownership and Responsibilities The boundaries of responsibility for heat recovery equipment and infrastructure are primarily tied to property ownership and will be defined in a contract between GVS&DD and the heat user. GVS&DD will own and be responsible for waste heat recovery equipment and related infrastructure installed within its wastewater treatment plants and effluent outfalls, except in cases where ownership by an external party is deemed preferable to the GVS&DD. Cost Recovery Heat recovery projects within wastewater treatment plants and effluent outfalls will require capital investment by GVS&DD and will require ongoing operations and maintenance by GVS&DD. GVS&DD will recover the costs incurred in providing waste heat to external parties over the life of the project. GVS&DD does not seek to profit from the provision of heat. GVS&DD staff will evaluate heat recovery projects using established life cycle cost analysis and options analysis frameworks and will consider each project on a case by case basis. Benefits will include the value of avoided greenhouse gas emissions. A contract with the heat user will be established for each project that assigns the costs and benefits between GVS&DD, the heat user and other funding sources. Environmental Attributes Benefits associated with greenhouse gas reductions (such as carbon offset credits) and the costs of administering those benefits will be allocated on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with the costs and risks incurred by the parties involved in developing the heat recovery project Liquid Waste Heat Recovery Page 2 of 2 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 15

16 BOARD POLICY ATTACHMENT 2 CARBON PRICE Effective Date: June 23, 2017 Approved By: MVRD Board PURPOSE To establish a price on Applicable Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions, and to enable the value of those GHG emissions to be incorporated into Life Cycle Cost Analyses for Metro Vancouver projects or initiatives. The objectives of the Carbon Price Policy are to: Incorporate consideration of climate change mitigation (i.e., GHG emissions reduction) into options analyses for all Metro Vancouver projects or initiatives; and Provide a mechanism to reduce financial risk of increased operating costs associated with rising external carbon taxes over the lifetime of a Metro Vancouver project or initiative. DEFINITIONS Applicable Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions are GHG emissions associated with Metro Vancouver projects or initiatives, in particular GHG emissions related to energy use and utility processes, and GHG emissions reductions (or avoided GHG emissions) related to ecological carbon storage/sequestration. Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 e) is the common metric used to quantify and compare different types of GHG emissions, and is expressed in tonnes. Carbon Price is the total dollar value (including any provincial and federal carbon taxes) assigned by Metro Vancouver to one tonne of CO 2 e. Life Cycle Cost Analysis is the process to establish the net present value of all costs and revenues associated with a Metro Vancouver project or initiative over its expected life. POLICY When undertaking options analysis for a Metro Vancouver project or initiative, the Carbon Price will be used to calculate the value (expressed as a cost) of Applicable GHG Emissions associated with each option. This value will be included in the Life Cycle Cost Analysis for each option. Carbon Price Metro Vancouver will use a total Carbon Price (inclusive of any applicable external carbon taxes) of $150 per tonne of CO 2 e in Life Cycle Cost Analyses. Financial Services, in coordination with the Air Quality and Climate Change Division, will develop and annually review a Carbon Price Schedule. This Carbon Price Schedule will provide the incremental cost per unit of purchased energy (e.g., litres of gasoline, GJ of natural gas), as well as the cost per unit of other Applicable GHGs (e.g., tonne of fugitive methane). The carbon price will be adjusted to account for any changes to provincial and federal carbon taxes, to ensure that the total carbon price per tonne of Applicable GHGs is constant at $150 per tonne of CO 2 e (version 1) Carbon Price Policy Page 1 of 2 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 16

17 BOARD POLICY Application This policy applies to all options analyses that use Life Cycle Cost Analysis for Metro Vancouver projects or initiatives, including (but not limited to): Planning, design, procurement, construction, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning (where applicable) of facilities, vehicles, and equipment owned or operated by Metro Vancouver or by third parties on Metro Vancouver s behalf; Acquisition of park land, where protection of the land by Metro Vancouver results in quantifiable GHG emissions reductions compared to business as usual; and Management of process emissions from Metro Vancouver facilities. The Carbon Price will be used to calculate the value of Applicable GHG Emissions associated with: Energy purchased by Metro Vancouver or by third parties on Metro Vancouver s behalf for the operation of utilities, fleet, and facilities (including natural gas, liquid petroleum products, propane, and electricity); Fugitive methane and nitrous oxide emissions released from wastewater treatment processes and municipal solid waste management processes; Avoided GHG emissions due to the displacement of fossil fuels with energy recovered from Metro Vancouver facilities; Avoided GHG emissions attributable to the protection and/or restoration of park land such as forests and bogs; and Other sources related to Metro Vancouver s activities. Related Document: Carbon Price Schedule ( ) Carbon Price Policy Page 2 of 2 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 17

18 Section E 1.2 To: From: Utilities Committee Andjela Knezevic-Stevanovic, Director, Environmental Management & Quality Control, Liquid Waste Services Date: June 7, 2017 Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: 2016 GVS&DD Environmental Management & Quality Control Annual Report RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated June 7, 2017, titled 2016 GVS&DD Environmental Management & Quality Control Annual Report. PURPOSE To provide the Board with a summary of the 2016 GVS&DD Environmental Management & Quality Control Annual Report. BACKGROUND Annual reporting of GVS&DD Environmental Management & Quality Control is a requirement under the Ministerial conditions of provincial approval of Metro Vancouver s Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ILWRMP). The Executive Summary of the 2016 GVS&DD Environmental Management & Quality Control Annual Report (Attachment 1) summarizes the regulatory and process control information gathered through the various monitoring and risk assessment programs that are in place to meet GVS&DD s commitments under the ILWRMP, including those for: wastewater treatment plant influent, effluent and process streams; operation of the collection system; effluent toxicity testing; receiving and ambient environment quality; and biosolids quality as required by the Organic Matter Recycling Regulation. The 2016 GVS&DD Environmental Management & Quality Control Annual Report will be submitted to the Ministry of Environment. Additionally, it will be made available to the public through Metro Vancouver s web site and through the Metro Vancouver Library. SUMMARY OF RESULTS In order to assess wastewater treatment system performance and reliability, its impact on human health and the environment, and to perform biosolids and environmental quality monitoring, the Environmental Management & Quality Control Division collected about 51,400 samples and performed over 195,000 analyses in Major conclusions are as follows: a) The five wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) treated over 438 billion litres of wastewater in The quantities of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and total suspended solids (TSS) removed were 51,418 tonnes and 54,200 tonnes, respectively. b) The WWTPs consistently complied with Operational Certificate requirements except in four instances as detailed in the Executive Summary. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 18

19 2016 GVS&DD Environmental Management & Quality Control Annual Report Utilities Committee Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 2 of 3 c) About 17,000 tests were performed on biosolids in Metal concentrations in weekly composite samples and fecal coliform counts in biosolids were generally well below the regulatory limits outlined in the Organic Matter Recycling Regulation. d) Ammonia effluent concentrations for all WWTP discharges were below the federal guideline for acute effluent toxicity as defined by the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. e) All wastewater treatment plants passed the required monthly acute toxicity test using Environment Canada test protocols except for four Lions Gate and six Iona Island effluent samples. The observed toxicity in two Lions Gate effluent samples was inconclusive, and the observed toxicity in the other two Lions Gate effluent samples was likely related to low dissolved oxygen and detergents. The six Iona Island samples required oxygen in excess of that specified by the Environment Canada method. f) As part of the characterization of wastewater from all five WWTPs for contaminants of emerging concern, analysis of trace organic and endocrine disrupting substances was initiated in 2014 and continued throughout Analyzed substances include: organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), volatile organic compounds, phenolic compounds, surfactants, polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), hormones and sterols, pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs). Results are used to inform decisions regarding management of these substances, including source control initiatives. g) The bacteriological water quality for primary-contact recreation was met for most bathing beaches during the bathing beach season from May 1 st to September 30 th. The one exception was Wreck Beach - Trail 7 (also known as the Oasis). Swimming advisories were issued by the Health Authorities for seven days in June. For non-bathing beach areas, the monitoring data indicated that False Creek met the working guideline limit for secondary or incidental-contact activities throughout the entire season. h) Site specific water quality objectives and guidelines were met at the boundary of the initial dilution zones (IDZ) for all Metro Vancouver wastewater treatment plants, except for dissolved oxygen and boron. Water dissolved oxygen concentrations were slightly below the guideline at the IDZ boundary and reference area for both the Lions Gate and Iona Island outfalls and these concentrations may be related to regional changes. As well, water boron concentrations were above the corresponding guideline, but lower in the effluent than in the receiving environment where concentrations were consistent with those in Canadian coastal waters. i) Monitoring results of the marine receiving environment for sediments effects around the two primary wastewater treatment plant outfalls were similar to prior years and indicated some changes. Further assessment is expected to clarify whether these changes may be outfall related, are due to regional long-term fluctuations in oceanographic conditions, or are due to a combination of these and other confounding factors. j) Fraser River ambient monitoring program results indicated that the applicable environmental quality objectives and guidelines for water were met. Sediment results mostly met the applicable sediment quality objectives and guidelines, with the exception of several metals and organic parameters. The Burrard Inlet program review concluded that the objectives of the program are being met. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 19

20 2016 GVS&DD Environmental Management & Quality Control Annual Report Utilities Committee Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 3 of 3 ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Preparation of the GVS&DD s Liquid Waste Services Environmental Management & Quality Control Annual Report is included in the GVS&DD annual operating budget. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Annual reporting of GVS&DD Environmental Management & Quality Control is a regulatory requirement under the Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan. This report summarizes the compliance, process control and regional environmental quality information gathered through various monitoring and risk assessment programs that are in place to meet GVS&DD s commitments under the ILWRMP. As illustrated by the 2016 GVS&DD Environmental Management & Quality Control Annual Report, Metro Vancouver s wastewater treatment plants continue to meet performance expectations with respect to reduction of contaminant loadings to the receiving environment and are consistently providing ongoing benefits to the region. Various monitoring programs continue to fulfill their role of confirming that the wastewater treatment plants are operating efficiently and with no adverse effects on human health and the environment. Findings of the environmental monitoring programs indicate that regional liquid waste discharges continue to be effectively managed in a manner that is protective of aquatic life. Attachments GVS&DD EM&QC Annual Report Executive Summary, April 1, 2017 ( ) Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 20

21 ATTACHMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD or the District) operates five wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) in the region. Three of the five plants provide secondary treatment (Annacis Island, Lulu Island and Northwest Langley) and discharge treated effluent into the lower Fraser River. The remaining two wastewater treatment plants (Iona Island and Lions Gate) provide primary treatment and discharge treated effluent to Georgia Strait and First Narrows of Burrard Inlet, respectively. Under the provisions of the Environmental Management Act, the Minister of Environment approved Metro Vancouver s Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ILWRMP, or the Plan) in May The Plan has three goals: protect public health and the environment; use liquid waste as a resource; and effective, affordable and collaborative management. Metro Vancouver manages its liquid waste in accordance with the ILWRMP and WWTP specific operational certificates, issued by the Ministry of Environment in These certificates allow the GVS&DD to discharge treated effluent from its WWTPs to the receiving waters. The District s objective is to maintain ongoing compliance with the operational certificates and by doing so to continue to protect human health and the environment. The federal Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations (WSER) under the Fisheries Act came into effect on July 18, GVS&DD is required to monitor and report effluent monitoring data quarterly. The effluent quality standards as specified in WSER were in force throughout the year. The purpose of this report is to document the performance of the WWTPs in 2016 with respect to effluent quality and protection of human health and the environment, and to demonstrate meeting the regulatory requirements as specified by the operational certificates and WSER. Most of the monitoring, laboratory analytical services and data analyses upon which this report is based were provided by the Environmental Management & Quality Control Division of Liquid Waste Services. Outlined below is an overview of the information collected as a result of Environmental Management & Quality Control s monitoring programs for the wastewater treatment plants, including monitoring for effluent and biosolids quality, and receiving and ambient environment quality. Other programs and projects discussed in this report are in support of ongoing commitments under the ILWRMP or compliance with conditions of the plan approval by the Minister of Environment. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 21

22 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS Operational Certificates The Operational Certificates (OCs) issued on April 23, 2004 by the Ministry of Environment under the provisions of the Environmental Management Act include daily compliance levels for flow and daily loadings for Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) (or Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (cbod), where applicable) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS). The loading parameters listed as maximum daily discharge loadings are used to calculate the annual discharge authorization fees as required by the Permit Fees Regulation and are based on a calendar year. Additional requirements were listed for disinfection of the effluent at all WWTPs except Iona Island, so that fecal coliform water quality objectives for the receiving water body are met at the edge of the initial dilution zone as defined by the Municipal Wastewater Regulation. When chlorine is used for disinfection during bathing season, it must be removed from the effluent before discharge to the receiving waters. In 2016, about 438 billion litres of wastewater were treated at the GVS&DD s five wastewater treatment plants. Of this total, over 227 billion litres received primary treatment (Iona Island and Lions Gate) with the remaining 210 billion litres treated at the three secondary wastewater plants (Annacis Island, Lulu Island and Northwest Langley). Individual treated effluent flows for each wastewater treatment plant and quantities of BOD and suspended solids removed in 2016 are summarized below: 2 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 22

23 Total for 2016 ANNACIS ISLAND IONA ISLAND LIONS GATE LULU ISLAND NW LANGLEY TOTAL Effluent Flow, ML 180, ,002 30,336 25,617 4, ,520 BOD, 30,495 11,251 1,726 6,690 1,257 51,418 Tonnes Removed Suspended Solids, Tonnes Removed 29,574 14,804 3,256 5,394 1,172 54,200 Treatment Plant Performance and Compliance Review The overall performance of the GVRD s five wastewater treatment plants was good. BOD and total suspended solids operational certificate equirements were generally met throughout The following table summarizes the average reduction in BOD and total suspended solids loadings during 2016 for all the plants. Wastewater Treatment Plant % BOD Reduction % TSS Reduction Iona Island * Lions Gate* Annacis Island ** Lulu Island ** Northwest Langley** * Reduction for primary plants expected to be about 30% for BOD and 60% for TSS. ** Reduction for secondary plants expected to be about 90% for both TSS and BOD. 3 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 23

24 In 2016, GVS&DD s WWTPs met operational certificate requirements throughout the year except for 4 cases that can be grouped into 2 categories. Category 1 (1 case) includes results of TSS and BOD concentrations above limits, and disinfection interruption. Probable causes and potential environmental effects were discussed in the table below. Description Plant Date Quantity Discharged Duration Probable Cause* Mitigation Measures* Potential Environmental Effects Disinfection Interruption Annacis June ML 26 minutes BC Hydro power interruption Not Applicable Based on dilution dispersion modelling of downstream concentrations: o The applicable Health Canada Recreational Water Quality Guidelines were predicted to have been met at designated recreation areas. o The applicable BC MOE Water Quality Guidelines were predicted to have been met at known registered water license diversion points. Disinfection Interruption Lions Gate September ML 8.03 minutes BC Hydro power interruption Not Applicable Based on dilution dispersion modelling of downstream concentrations: o The applicable Health Canada Recreational Water Quality Guidelines were predicted to have been met at designated recreation areas. Category 2 (2 cases) were the results of daily discharge loadings for suspended solids or BOD above the maximum load limits. These exceptions typically have no significant environmental effect. Description Plant Date Quantity Discharged Duration Probable Cause* Mitigation Measures* Potential Environmental Effects TSS Loading Northwest Langley January tonnes/day Not Applicable High flow conditions and elevated Total Suspended Solids (TSS) concentration. No remedial action required o Impacts to water quality for recreation and irrigation were not expected. Impacts to aquatic life were not expected. The applicable BC Ministry of Environment TSS Water Quality Objectives for aquatic life protection were expected to have been met in the Fraser River. TSS Loading Annacis November tonnes/day Not Applicable High flow conditions and elevated Total Suspended Solids (TSS) concentration. No remedial action required o Based on dilution dispersion modelling of downstream concentrations the applicable BC MOE Water Quality Objective for TSS was expected to have been met in the Fraser River. 4 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 24

25 A summary of events when the parameters specified by the Operational Certificates for the District s wastewater treatment plants were not met in the last six years is shown in the tables below. The number of non-compliance events is shown against total number of tests or data collected during the period. Iona Island WWTP Operational Certificate ME April 23, 2004 Number of Events OC Requirements Not Met OC Parameter Max. Daily Discharge (Exceeded) Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) 3 (of 103) (of 105) 0 Suspended Solids BOD Daily Loading 1 (of 103) Suspended Solids Daily Loading 2 (of 364) Plant Bypass 1 (of 365) (of 365) 0 0 Lions Gate WWTP Operational Certificate ME April 23, 2004 Number of Events OC Requirements Not Met OC Parameter Max. Daily Discharge (Exceeded) Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) 0 2 (of 102) 1 (of 112) Suspended Solids BOD Daily Loading Suspended Solids Daily Loading (of 360) 0 Chlorine Residual* Disinfection Interruption 0 1 (of 159) (of 157) Fecal Coliform * measured during disinfection season only after dechlorination. 5 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 25

26 Northwest Langley WWTP Operational Certificate ME April 23, 2004 Number of Events OC Requirements Not Met OC Parameter Max. Discharge Rate (Exceeded) Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (cbod) Suspended Solids (of 361) 0 cbod Daily Loading Suspended Solids Daily Loading 3 (of 364) 1 (of 362) 1 (of 365) 3 (of 364) 4 (of 361) 1 (of 366) Chlorine Residual * (of 154) n/a n/a 0 Disinfection Interruption Fecal Coliform * measured during disinfection season only - after dechlorination. 6 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 26

27 Annacis Island WWTP Operational Certificate ME April 23, 2004 Number of Events OC Requirements Not Met OC Parameter Max. Daily Discharge (Exceeded) Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (cbod) Suspended Solids cbod Daily Loading (of 166) 0 0 Suspended Solids Daily Loading (of 365) 0 1 (of 366) Chlorine Residual* 1 (of 234) Disinfection Interruption 0 1 (of 224) (of 216) Fecal Coliform Plant Bypass Secondary Bypass 1 (of 365) Primary Effluent During Secondary Bypass Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) Suspended Solids * measured during disinfection season only after dechlorination. 7 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 27

28 Lulu Island WWTP Operational Certificate ME April 23, 2004 Number of Events OC Requirements Not Met OC Parameter Max. Daily Discharge (Exceeded) Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (cbod) Suspended Solids cbod Daily Loading Suspended Solids Daily Loading Chlorine Residual * Disinfection Interruption (of 215) 1 (of 220) 1 (of 221) 0 Fecal Coliform Plant Bypass 3 (of 365) 1 (of 366) Secondary Bypass 1 (of 365) Primary Effluent During Secondary Bypass Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) Suspended Solids * measured during disinfection season only - after dechlorination. Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ILWRMP) The ILWRMP also commits GVS&DD to operate the secondary wastewater treatment plants to meet the National Performance Standards for effluent specified by the Canada-wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent (CWS-MMWE): Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (cbod) Average 25 mg/l Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Average 25 mg/l 8 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 28

29 A summary of average cbod and TSS concentrations with the averaging period of monthly for Annacis Island and Lulu Island WWTPs and quarterly for Northwest Langley WWTP is shown in the table below. Secondary Plants ANNACIS ISLAND LULU ISLAND NORTHWEST LANGLEY Parameters TSS cbod TSS cbod TSS cbod January February March April May June July August September October November December Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulation (WSER) Quarterly monitoring reports were submitted through Environment and Climate Change Canada s Effluent Regulatory Reporting Information System (ERRIS) in As required by WSER, the effluent monitoring data reported were: number of days that effluent was deposited; total volume of effluent deposited in m 3 ; average cbod in mg/l and the average concentration of suspended solids in mg/l. In addition, secondary treatment plants Annacis Island and Lulu Island were required to report Acute Lethality on a monthly basis and Northwest Langley was required to report Acute Lethality on a quarterly basis. On April 14, 2016 Metro Vancouver received notification from Environment and Climate Change Canada that the treatment plants were eligible to reduce the acute lethality sampling frequency as follows: Annacis Island and Lulu Island WWTPs: Quarterly Northwest Langley WWTP: Annually A summary of events when the WSER specified performance standards for the District s secondary wastewater treatment plants were not met in 2016 is shown the next table. 9 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 29

30 Number of Events WSER Requirements Not Met WSER Parameter Annacis Island WWTP Lulu Island WWTP Northwest Langley WWTP Suspended Solids Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (cbod) Total Residual Chlorine 0 0 0* Acute Lethality *Peracetic acid (PAA) was used as primary disinfectant during disinfection season for Northwest Langley WWTP GVS&DD s primary plants, Iona Island and Lions Gate WWTPs were issued transitional authorizations under WSER on September 5, A summary of events when the parameters specified by the transitional authorizations for the District s primary wastewater treatment plants were not met in 2016 is shown the next table. Transitional Authorization September 05, 2014 Number of Events WSER Requirements Not Met WSER Parameter Iona Island WWTP Lions Gate WWTP Suspended Solids 0 0 Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (cbod) 0 0 BIOSOLIDS MONITORING PROGRAM Process Requirements and Biosolids Management The Organic Matter Recycling Regulation (OMRR) governs the management of biosolids and compost as soil amendments in the Province of British Columbia. Under this regulation, sampling frequencies and criteria values for fecal coliforms and metals as specified for Class A and Class B biosolids are based on several parameters including: type of treatment process (pathogen reduction requirements, vector attraction reduction), the amount of dry solids produced on a monthly basis and the intended use of the 10 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 30

31 material. The GVS&DD s biosolids management program ensures that any biosolids not meeting class specifications are identified, tracked and managed appropriately. Thermophilic digesters at the Annacis Island WWTP consistently meet requirements for pathogen reduction and vector attraction reduction to produce Class A biosolids. The Lulu Island WWTP mesophilic digesters and Lions Gate WWTP thermophilic digesters are operated to produce Class B biosolids. The Iona Island WWTP operates mesophilic digesters which produce digested sludge complying with Class B pathogen levels. At Iona Island WWTP discharges from the digesters are further processed via lagoon stabilization and land-drying to produce a Class B biosolids product with soil-like consistency. These biosolids are currently stockpiled on site with anticipated use in future recycling projects. The Northwest Langley WWTP continues to haul thickened wasted secondary sludge to Annacis Island WWTP. Biosolids Quality About 17,000 tests were performed on biosolids in The results showed that metals concentrations were generally well below the criteria value limits specified by OMRR. Data values produced during 2016 for fecal coliforms in biosolids were within the Class A or Class B criteria for the Annacis Island, Lulu Island and Lions Gate WWTPs. ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS Environmental monitoring programs form a major part of the Metro Vancouver s integrated approach to managing liquid waste. The purpose of monitoring is to characterize the receiving and ambient environmental conditions of relevant water bodies in the region in order to understand the relative contribution and significance of discharges from our regional and municipal systems, determine if the applicable regulatory requirements are being met, and to warn of possible environmental issues. Overflow Quality Monitoring and Risk Assessments Combined Sewer Overflows In 2016, the Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Monitoring Program characterized the overflow water quality for five selected CSO locations: Chilco-Brockton, Macdonald, Manitoba, Heather, and Clark Drive. In addition, the field work for human health and ecological risk assessment with the Clark Drive CSO was completed. Sanitary Sewer Overflows Metro Vancouver maintained automated sampling stations at seven sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) locations in 2016: Cloverdale, Katzie, 225 th Street, Braid Street, Lynn, MacKay and Bellevue. SSOs occurred at two of these stations: Braid, and 225 th St. Samples were collected in order to characterize SSOs during wet weather events, with the goal to inform decisions on potential management options, including collection of data required for design of mitigation infrastructure, if required. Based on monitoring data collected between October 2012 and November 2015, a screening level human health and ecological risk assessment for Braid Street, MacKay and Bellevue SSOs has been completed. In addition, a program review to identify improvement opportunities to the sanitary sewer overflow and associated receiving environment monitoring programs was completed. 11 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 31

32 Whole Effluent Toxicity Monitoring In 2016, all effluent samples from all wastewater treatment plants passed the OC required monthly acute toxicity test using Environment and Climate Change Canada test protocols except for four samples of Lions Gate effluent and six Iona Island effluent samples. For the four samples from the Lions Gate plant, the observed toxicity in two samples was related to detergents. The remaining two Lions Gate samples and the six Iona Island samples required oxygen in excess of that specified by the Environment and Climate Change Canada method. Periodically some chronic toxicity of effluent, as well as some background toxicity in the Fraser River away from the influence of the WWTP discharges was observed. Determining if there is a pattern to the observed variability, and subsequently identifying potential sources of apparent chronic toxicity will require further testing. Ammonia in the effluent is also monitored to determine the potential for an acutely lethal concentration. Effluent ammonia concentrations in all wastewater treatment plants remained below the criteria of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) Threshold Curve and as a result are not expected to cause acute toxicity. WWTP Receiving Environment Quality Metro Vancouver conducted comprehensive monitoring of the receiving environment for its wastewater treatment plant outfalls. In 2016, the monitoring programs included monitoring the boundary of the initial dilution zone (IDZ), and sediment effects surveys. Site specific water quality objectives and guidelines were met at the boundary of the initial dilution zone for all Metro Vancouver wastewater treatment plants, except for dissolved oxygen and boron. Water dissolved oxygen concentrations were slightly below the guideline at the IDZ boundary and reference area for both the Lions Gate and Iona Island outfalls and these concentrations may be related to regional changes. As well, water boron concentrations in the vicinity of these outfalls were above the corresponding guideline, but lower in the effluent than in the receiving environment where concentrations were consistent with those in Canadian coastal waters. Monitoring results of the marine receiving environment for sediments effects around the two primary wastewater treatment plant outfalls were similar to prior years and indicated some changes. Further assessment is expected to clarify whether these changes may be outfall related, are due to regional longterm fluctuations in oceanographic conditions, or are due to a combination of these and other confounding factors. Recreational Water Quality Metro Vancouver monitored the bacteriological quality of recreational waters in the region at 115 sampling sites from 41 locations. Both bathing and non-bathing beaches were monitored. In 2016, the bacteriological water quality for primary-contact recreation was met at bathing beaches during the bathing beach season from May through September, except for Wreck Beach Trail #7 (Oasis). A swimming advisory was issued by the Health Authority for this beach in June. False Creek met the working guideline limit for secondary or incidental-contact activities throughout the 2016 season. 12 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 32

33 Ambient Environment Quality Metro Vancouver conducted ambient monitoring for all of the major water bodies that receive discharges from point and non-point sources in the Metro Vancouver region. In 2016, ambient monitoring programs included assessment of the water quality for the Fraser River, Burrard Inlet, Strait of Georgia and Boundary Bay, assessment of sediments in the Fraser River and Boundary Bay. Work continued on a multiple year program to better understand the dispersal and removal of contaminants in the Strait of Georgia. In addition, a comprehensive review of all components of the ambient monitoring program for Burrard Inlet was completed. In 2016, a long-term plan to monitor water column persistent organic substances in the Strait of Georgia was developed and field work to quantify their bioaccumulation across the food web was initiated. Fraser River ambient monitoring program water quality results indicated that the applicable water quality objectives and guidelines were met. Sediment results mostly met the applicable sediment quality objectives and guidelines, with the exception of several total metals and several organic parameters. The Burrard Inlet program review concluded that the objectives of the program are being met. The findings of the remaining monitoring programs are not yet available. 13 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 33

34 1.0 WASTEWATER TREATMENT MONITORING PROGRAM 1.1 LABORATORY PROGRAMS In 2016, the Environmental Management & Quality Control Division carried out all routine monitoring programs as required by the Ministry of Environment (MOE) and Environment and Climate Change Canada relating to the discharge of primary and secondary treated effluent from the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District s wastewater treatment plants. As specified in the Operational Certificates issued by the MOE in April, 2004 for each treatment plant, the GVS&DD is required to monitor and report data monthly for effluent quality, treated sludge, and receiving waters. The federal Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations (WSER) under the Fisheries Act came into effect on July 18, GVS&DD is required to monitor and report effluent monitoring data quarterly. The effluent quality standards and limits as specified in WSER for the three secondary plants and in the transitional authorizations for the two primary plants were in force throughout the year. Environmental Management & Quality Control (EMQC) Laboratory staff conducted analyses of samples collected on various stages of treatment for process control at each wastewater treatment plant; they also provided analytical services for Residuals Management and Regulation & Enforcement purposes. EMQC laboratory maintained a high level of analytical and technical support for special projects at all wastewater treatment plants. The total number of analyses completed by the laboratory sections for all GVS&DD programs was over 195,000 analyses in Monitoring programs carried out in 2016 provided a comprehensive set of influent and effluent characteristics for each wastewater treatment plant and included all the monitoring requirements specified in the Wastewater Treatment Plant Operational Certificates and WSER. The full set of parameters for influent/effluent monitoring programs are presented in Table 1.1. Parameters indicated with a C are the specific authorized discharge parameters listed in the operational certificate for each treatment plant, whereas parameters indicated with an M are required for monitoring of effluent characteristics. Parameters indicated with a W are required for WSER reporting. Parameters designated R are monitored on a routine basis for wastewater characterization. 14 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 34

35 1.2 MONTHLY REPORTING FOR OPERATIONAL CERTIFICATES In accordance with the Operational Certificate requirements, all routine data reports for each wastewater treatment plant are posted on Metro Vancouver s website and updated on a monthly basis at the following location: QUARTERLY REPORTING FOR WASTEWATER SYSTEMS EFFLUENT REGULATIONS (WSER) As per the Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations (WSER) under the Fisheries Act, the monitoring provisions were in effect through the year. Quarterly monitoring reports were submitted to Environment and Climate Change Canada through electronic Effluent Regulatory Reporting Information System (ERRIS) within 45 days after the end of each quarter. 15 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 35

36 TABLE 1.1: WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT MONITORING PARAMETERS INFLUENT AND EFFLUENT Monitoring Requirements Parameter Test Lab Sample Testing ANNACIS IONA LIONS GATE LULU NW Langley Location Type Frequency OC ME OC ME OC ME OC ME OC ME TKN Chemistry Composite 1/mo R R R R R NO3/N02 N " " Grab 1/mo R R R R R Total Ammonia N*** " " Grab 1/wk M(1/wk) M(2/mo) M(2/mo) M(1/wk) M(1/mo) Total Ammonia N**** " " Composite 3/wk W W W W W(1/wk) Un-ionized Ammonia " " Composite 3/wk W W W W W(1/wk) ph at 15 o C**** WWTP Composite 3/wk W W W W W(1/wk) MBAS Chemistry Grab 1/mo R R R R R SO4 " " Composite 1/mo R R R M M Alkalinity " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Hardness (Total) " " Composite 1/mo M M M M M Total Phosphorous " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Phosphorous " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R LC50 (effluent)***** Grab 1/mo M(1/mo) M(1/mo) M(1/mo) Consultants M(1/mo) M(1/mo) W(1/quarter) W(1/quarter) W(1/year) Oil & Grease Chemistry Grab 1/mo R R R R R Phenol " " Grab 1/mo M M R M M Total Cyanide " " Grab 1/mo R R R R R Total Aluminum " " Composite 1/mo M M M M M Total Arsenic " " Composite 1/mo M M M R M Total Barium " " Composite 1/mo M M M M M Total Boron " " Composite 1/mo M M M M M Total Cadmium " " Composite 1/mo M M M M R Total Cobalt " " Composite 1/mo M R R R M Total Chromium " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Total Copper " " Composite 1/mo M M M M M Total Iron " " Composite 1/mo M M M M M Total Lead " " Composite 1/mo M M M M M Total Manganese " " Composite 1/mo M M R M M Total Mercury " " Composite 1/mo M M R M M Total Molybdenum " " Composite 1/mo M M M M M Total Nickel " " Composite 1/mo M M M M M Total Selenium " " Composite 1/mo M M M R R Total Sliver " " Composite 1/mo M M M M M Total Tin " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Total Zinc " " Composite 1/mo M R M M M Dissolved Aluminum " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Barium " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Boron " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Cadmium " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Cobalt " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Chromium " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Copper " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Iron " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Lead " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Manganese " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Molybdenum " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Nickel " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Selenium " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Silver " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Tin " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R Dissolved Zinc " " Composite 1/mo R R R R R ph WWTP Grab 1 to 5/wk M M M M M BOD** " " Composite 2 to 3/wk - C** C** - - cbod** " " Composite 3/wk C**/W W W C**/W C/W(1/wk) Suspended Solids " " Composite Daily C(5/wk)/W(3/wk) C(5/wk)/W(3/wk) C(5/wk)/W(3/wk) C(5/wk)/W(3/wk) C/W(1/wk) Volatile Suspended Solids " " Composite Daily R R R R R COD** " " Composite 5 d/wk M** M** M** M** R Conductivity " " Composite 5/wk to Daily R R R R R Chloride " " Composite 1/wk R R R R R Residual Chlorine* " " Grab Daily C/W - C/W C/W C/W Dissolved Oxygen " " Grab 1/mo to 5/wk R R R R R Temperature " " Grab 1/mo to 5/wk M M M M M Fecal Coliform (effluent)* Microbiology Grab 1 to 5/wk M(1/wk) - M(1/wk) M(1/wk) M(1/mo) Composite sample are collected over a 24 hour period C = Compliance parameter * During chlorination season only. W = Wastewater System Effluent Regulations (WSER) ** COD is reported five times per week with BOD once per week M = Operational Certificate Monitoring (Effluent) *** Ammonia and ph are done on weekly grabs for all WWTP for CEPA monitoring. R = Routine Monitoring, Influent and Effluent ****Data used to calculate un-ionized ammonia ( ) = Operational Certificate Reporting Requirements ***** WSER Reporting requirements as of April 14, Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 36

37 2.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL (QA/QC) The mission of the Metro Vancouver Laboratory is to provide high quality analytical services to Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities. Analytical services currently include chromatography, spectroscopy, flow injection colorimetry, gravimetry, and titrimetry. The Metro Vancouver Laboratory performs routine tests and quality control tests on a wide range of environmental samples, including water, wastewater, receiving water and solid waste; and provides full analytical reporting for process control. To fulfill this commitment, the Metro Vancouver Laboratory is accredited by the Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation (CALA). The International Standard to which the Metro Vancouver Laboratory is accredited is ISO/IEC 17025:2005 (General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories). Accreditation under ISO/IEC is a demonstration of confidence in the laboratory s technical competence. Accreditation provides formal recognition of the competence of a laboratory to manage and perform specific tests. Furthermore, the accreditation program is based on satisfactory participation in a site assessment plus satisfactory compliance with the CALA Proficiency Testing Requirements for accreditation. The main facilities of the Metro Vancouver Laboratory are: the Chemistry Laboratory section, the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Process Control Laboratory section and Microbiology Laboratory section. The Chemistry Laboratory section, located at the Annacis Island WWTP, performs chemical and physical tests. The WWTP Process Control Laboratory section maintains a laboratory facility at each Wastewater Treatment Plant. These laboratory facilities carry out analyses for regulatory and process control requirements for the five wastewater treatment plants. The Microbiology Laboratory section, located at Lake City Operations Centre, performs bacteriological testing on drinking water, receiving water, wastewater and biosolids samples. In 2016, over 195,000 analyses were performed by the Liquid Waste Services - Environmental Management & Quality Control (LWS-EMQC) Laboratory. This number of analyses encompasses all analytical programs, including Quality Assurance/Quality Control program, carried out by the Liquid Waste Services laboratory sections. The laboratory conducted more than 65,700 tests on QA/QC samples. This represents 28.6% of the total analytical workload. These analyses were part of an on-going QA/QC program to fulfill MV commitment to quality and requirements for accreditation. In order to maintain laboratory accreditation, Metro Vancouver Laboratory is required to undergo a site reassessment every two years where conformance to the standard ISO/IEC is assessed. An assessment based on ISO/IEC covers the overall Quality Management System of the laboratory and assesses the technical competence of the laboratory to conduct specific tests. Following a successful site audit, the CALA Accreditation Council grants accreditation to the laboratory. In September 2015, a team of CALA auditors conducted a site assessment of the LWS-EMQC Laboratory. The auditors concluded that the EMQC Laboratory has met the requirements of ISO/IEC As a result, a panel of the CALA Accreditation Council has given approval to the LWS-EMQC Laboratory for the maintenance of accreditation. 17 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 37

38 During the year 2016, the Metro Vancouver Laboratory participated in the following inter-laboratory analytical performance evaluation/certification programs: The British Columbia Environmental Data Quality Assurance (BCEDQA) Program. Metro Vancouver laboratory has been participating in this program since May The program has been administered by CALA since January The goal of external performance studies is to demonstrate technical competence. In 2016, the MV LWS laboratory achieved an average PT score of 93, and 95% of the PT scores fell within the range of The PT score is normalized to a scale from A PT score of 100 implies a perfect result. Acceptable composite PT scores equal or exceed Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 38

39 Section E 1.3 To: From: Utilities Committee Ray Robb, Division Manager, Environmental Regulation and Enforcement, Legal and Legislative Services Department Date: July 4, 2017 Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: Staff Appointments as Board-designated Sewage Control Managers and Municipal Sewage Control Officers RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board: a) appoint the following persons as municipal sewage control officers: i. Donna Hargreaves, Permitting and Enforcement Officer, Metro Vancouver; ii. Maari Hirvi Mayne, Senior Project Engineer, Metro Vancouver; and iii. Thomas Gallos, Environmental Protection Technician, City of Vancouver. b) rescind the appointments of the following persons as deputy sewage control managers: i. Toivo Allas, Metro Vancouver; and ii. David Robertson, City of Vancouver. c) rescind the appointments of the following persons as municipal sewage control officers: i. Terry Sunar, Metro Vancouver; ii. Don Miller, Metro Vancouver; and iii. Francis Yuen, Metro Vancouver. PURPOSE To appoint and rescind Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver employees as Board-designated sewage control managers and municipal sewage control officers. BACKGROUND Employment status changes for Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver environmental regulatory staff have resulted in a need to update staff appointments to ensure appropriate authority to advance liquid waste management goals. Section 29 of the Environmental Management Act and the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007 grants authority to Boarddesignated sewage control managers and municipal sewage control officers. Role of Municipal Sewage Control Officers Metro Vancouver s Liquid Waste Regulatory Program supports the goals of the Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan through regulation of the discharge of non-domestic wastes to the region s sanitary sewer systems. Municipal sewage control officers may enter property, inspect works, and obtain records and other information to promote compliance with the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Liquid Waste Management bylaws. Metro Vancouver staff is responsible for the administration of the Sewer Use Bylaw within the boundaries of the GVS&DD. Within the City of Vancouver, City staff has historically administered the Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 39

40 Staff Appointments as Board-designated Sewage Control Managers and Municipal Sewage Control Officers Utilities Committee Meeting Date: July 13, 2017 Page 2 of 2 provisions of the Sewer Use Bylaw. This arrangement has been in effect since the Bylaw was first enacted in A formal agreement between Metro Vancouver and the City of Vancouver has been established to ensure that delivery of source control services by the City serves the interests of the GVS&DD. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board: a) appoint the following persons as municipal sewage control officers: i. Donna Hargreaves, Permitting and Enforcement Officer, Metro Vancouver; ii. Maari Hirvi Mayne, Senior Project Engineer, Metro Vancouver; iii. Thomas Gallos, Environmental Protection Technician, City of Vancouver. b) rescind the appointments of the following persons as deputy sewage control managers: i. Toivo Allas, Metro Vancouver; ii. David Robertson, Metro Vancouver. c) rescind the appointments of the following persons as municipal sewage control officers: i. Terry Sunar, Metro Vancouver; ii. Don Miller, Metro Vancouver; iii. Francis Yuen, Metro Vancouver. 2. That the GVS&DD Board refer this report back to staff with instructions. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications or expenditures as the appointments are for existing Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver staff. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Changes in Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver environmental regulatory staff have resulted in a need to update staff appointments. Section 29 of the Environmental Management Act and the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007 grants authority to Board-designated sewage control managers and municipal sewage control officers to advance liquid waste management goals. Staff recommend that the GVS&DD Board adopt Alternative Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 40

41 Section E 2.1 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 41

42 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 42

43 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 43

44 Section E 2.2 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 44

45 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 45

46 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 46

47 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 47

48 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 48

49 Section E 2.3 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 49

50 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 50

51 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 51

52 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 52

53 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 53

54 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 54

55 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 55

56 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 56

57 Section E 2.4 To: From: GVS&DD Board of Directors Zero Waste Committee Date: July 14, 2017 Meeting Date: July 28, Subject: Waste-to-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update ZERO WASTE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board: a) receive for information the report dated July 7, 2017, titled Waste-to-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update ; and b) direct staff to forward a copy of the report to all MVRD member jurisdictions. At its July 13, 2017 meeting, the Zero Waste Committee considered the attached report titled Wasteto-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update, dated July 7, The Committee discussed sharing the report with Metro Vancouver elected officials and subsequently amended the recommendation as presented above in underline style. Attachment: Waste-to-Energy Facility Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, 2016 Update, dated July 7, Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 57

58 ATTACHMENT 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; Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 58

59 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 59

60 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 CO2 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 60

61 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 61

62 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 NOx 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 62

63 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) Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 63

64 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) Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 64

65 Section E 2.5 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 65

66 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 66

67 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 # ) Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 67

68 ..._~ ATTACHMENT 1 metrovancouver ~ SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION Office of the Chair Tel Fox File: CR Ref: SO 2016 Jun 24 JUL The Honourable Mary Polak Minister of Environment PO Box 9047, Stn Prov Govt Victoria, BC V8W 9E2 VIA env.minister@gov.bc.ca 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, Burn aby, BC, Canada VSH 4G ::._.; Greater Vancouver Regional District Greater Vancouver Water District Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage Disuict Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 68

69 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 69

70 ATTACHMENT Section E 2.3 To: Zero Waste Committee From: Sarah Wellman, Senior Engineer, Solid Waste Services Date: May 26, 2016 Subject: Mattress Recycling Update Meeting Date: June 9, 2016 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: Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 70

71 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 71

72 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 72

73 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 73

74 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, Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 74

75 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~. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 75

76 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 76

77 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: Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 77

78 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 78

79 ... ATTACHMENT 2 BRITISH COLUMBIA 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....2 Ministry of Environment Office of the Minister Mailing Address: Parliament Buildings Victoria BC V8V 1X4 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 79 Telephone: F:acsimile:

80 -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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 80

81 Section E 2.6 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 81

82 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 82

83 Section E 3.1 To: From: Finance and Intergovernment Committee Phil Trotzuk, Chief Financial Officer / General Manager, Financial Services Date: June 23, 2017 Meeting Date: July 19, 2017 Subject: GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review Update RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board: a) endorse, in principle, the proposed changes to the Development Cost Charge Program with the rates as presented in Attachment 1 of the report dated June 23, 2017, titled GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review Update ; and b) direct staff to proceed with public and stakeholder consultation as presented in the report dated June 23, 2017, titled GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review Update. PURPOSE To present options and recommendations on the development cost charge (DCC) program rate adjustments for purposes of proceeding with consultation with the Province and community stakeholders. BACKGROUND The GVS&DD DCC program has been under review since In November of 2016 the initial results of the review, including the DCC program policy framework, proposed rate adjustments, and the transition plan for implementation of the program amendments for purposes of consultation was presented to the Utilities Committee and the Finance and Intergovernment Committee. At the November 25, 2016 meeting of the GVS&DD Board, the following motion was passed: That the GVS&DD Board direct staff to proceed with public and stakeholder consultation on the proposed changes to the Development Cost Charge Program following the adoption of the 5-year financial plan in March 2017, and direct staff to report back, prior to the consultation, on phasing of and potential strategies to mitigate the impact of the rate increases. Five year financial plan forecasts and scenarios were presented to the Board at a workshop in February 2017 and will be formally presented in October in conjunction with the 2018 annual budget. This report summarizes the options examined to mitigate the increase in the DCC rates, along with the impact of those options on the liquid waste levy, the overall 5-year financial plan and the household impact. EXISTING DCC RATES DCC rates established by sewer area are per unit for residential and per square foot for nonresidential. The existing DCC rates, in effect since 1997, are as follows: Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 83

84 GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review Update Finance and Intergovernment Regular Committee Meeting Date: July 19, 2017 Page 2 of 5 Sewer Area Single-Family Townhouse Apartment Non-Residential Vancouver $ 944 $ 826 $ 590 $0.443 sq ft Lulu Island $1,077 $ 942 $ 673 $0.505 sq ft North Shore $1,291 $1,129 $ 807 $0.605 sq ft Fraser $1,731 $1,515 $1,082 $0.811 sq ft As these rates were established almost 20 years ago, cost and growth conditions have changed significantly and they will not be sufficient to sustain funding requirements for the growth in the region, particularly in the Fraser Sewerage Area. The chart below illustrates expected DCC reserve balances for the next 10 years with the rates currently in place. PROPOSED DCC RATES A 30 year model was developed which projects the DCC s required to fund the Liquid Waste infrastructure expansion for population growth, in conjunction with the planned development within a given sewer area. This development includes the following types of land use: single-family detached, townhouses, apartments, and non-residential development. The DCC requirements are based on funding long-term debt for the growth related infrastructure expenditures and includes future funding on existing debt as well as funding for projected debt. The proposed DCC rates presented at the November 25 th GVS&DD Board meeting were calculated assuming the requirement of funding the principal portion only on growth related long-term debt based on the current financial model over the next 30 years. The calculated rates are as follows: Sewer Area Single-Family Townhouse Apartment Non-Residential Vancouver $1,811 $1,618 $1,072 $0.93 sq ft Lulu Island $2,214 $1,915 $1,388 $1.05 sq ft North Shore $2,300 $2,076 $1,416 $1.20 sq ft Fraser $5,428 $4,695 $3,530 $2.67 sq ft Attachment 1 illustrates these rates in comparison to the existing rates and also provides the anticipated household impact of the sewer levy for the years 2017 to Also shown is a chart illustrating anticipated DCC reserve balances. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 84

85 GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review Update Finance and Intergovernment Regular Committee Meeting Date: July 19, 2017 Page 3 of 5 These rates represent that best estimate of the funding required for growth related infrastructure and adheres to the principle of growth paying for growth. While these DCC s represent only a very small portion of the cost of new housing, these rates are a significant increase over the existing rates. It is imperative that the DCC rates be reviewed every three to five years in order to adjust for cost increases as necessary and avoid implementing such significant increases in the future. Varying the Assist Factor Initially, the DCC Review Committee recommended a phase-in period of three years due to the significance of the increase in rates, particularly in the Fraser Sewer Area (FSA). Expanding upon this concept, options for varying the assist factor, primarily within the Fraser Sewerage, were analyzed for additional consideration. An outcome of varying the assist factor in the FSA to reduce the DCC rate resulted in the DCC rate aligning more closely with the proposed rates in the other three areas (Vancouver, North Shore, and Lulu Island). However, this change also resulted in the FSA household rate increasing to offset this loss in DCC revenue. Under this option, the FSA household rate would become closer to the household rates in the three other sewer areas, which are higher primarily due to the fact that much of the growth infrastructure in those sewerage areas was constructed prior to the implementation of the DCC program. In three of the four sewerage areas (Vancouver, Lulu Island and North Shore), the majority of the Tier 1 infrastructure (trunk sewer lines, forcemains, interceptors, pump stations) is generally well established and sufficient to meet most growth needs. The bulk of development reflects infill projects that add capacity but do not trigger significant trunk upgrades. In fact, in two of the sewerage areas (North Shore and Lulu Island) there are no Tier 1 infrastructure projects within the planned DCC program. The FSA, however, is unique in that it includes significant growth development which requires the extension of trunk lines, new pump stations, new interceptors, as well as a river crossing. There are over 70 Tier 1 projects in the FSA DCC program. Despite the fact that significant growth is anticipated within this sewer area, the resulting burden on this one portion of the region is comparatively substantial. To illustrate the impact of varying the assist factor, the table below shows DCC rates with a 50% Assist Factor for Tier 1 Projects in the Fraser Sewerage Area. Sewer Area Single-Family Townhouse Apartment Non-Residential Vancouver $1,811 $1,618 $1,072 $0.93 sq ft Lulu Island $2,214 $1,915 $1,388 $1.05 sq ft North Shore $2,300 $2,076 $1,416 $1.20 sq ft Fraser $4,453 $3,852 $2,897 $2.19 sq ft As noted above, although there would be a decrease in the DCC charges for the FSA, there would be a corresponding increase in the levy with an estimated household impact of $6 (3.5% increase over the prior year) to pay for the growth projects not being covered by the DCC s collected. Several options for varying the assist factor were presented to RAAC on May 25 th. The original proposal retaining the 1% assist factor across all four sewerage areas, without any phase in period, was the preferred approach. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 85

86 GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review Update Finance and Intergovernment Regular Committee Meeting Date: July 19, 2017 Page 4 of 5 WAIVER OF DCC S FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING The language for the waiver of DCC s with respect to affordable housing development is under review concurrently by the Housing Policy and Planning group. While it s expected to add clarity and be more effective than the waiver language in the existing bylaw, changes to the waiver language is not expected to materially alter DCC revenue available for funding growth GVS&DD infrastructure projects. CONSULTATION PROCESS The consultation process to date has involved feedback from the regional advisory committees of administrators, engineers, planning and finance. Good feedback was received and there was general support for the policy framework, the initial proposed DCC rates and the transition plan. Next steps in the consultation process include expanded dialogue with the Province, meetings with affected stakeholders including the Urban Development Institute and Greater Vancouver Home Builders Association, regional Boards of Trade and Chambers of Commerce, and the initiation of broad public outreach. The proposed Communications and Engagement process, to be initiated in late August through early November, is outlined as follows: 1. Meetings with stakeholders Host a series of public meetings in each of the four sewerage areas (1 each in Lulu, Vancouver, and North Shore, and 2 in Fraser) at which Metro Vancouver representatives from Finance and Liquid Waste Services will explain the proposed DCC Program and answer questions from the audience. (Late August through October) 2. Dedicated Web Page: Create an online portal that includes detailed information the DCC Program and its anticipated impact on overall development costs. 3. Distribution Lists Distribution of materials through the appropriate Metro Vancouver databases 4. Meeting(s) with the Province of BC Ongoing throughout consultation process. (September through Early November) Further, TransLink is currently in the process of examining the feasibility of DCC funding for certain transportation projects. As it is important to recognize the impact of the cost of regional charges, Metro Vancouver and TransLink have committed to work together, where practical, on joint public consultation. IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE It is expected that the consultation process will wrap up in November, with the results and a new DCC bylaw being brought forward before the end of the year. Staff will consult with municipalities to establish an effective date of bylaw implementation that considers the implications to existing processes and communications materials provided to prospective developers. At this time the effective date is expected to be April 1, Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 86

87 GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review Update Finance and Intergovernment Regular Committee Meeting Date: July 19, 2017 Page 5 of 5 ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board: a) endorse, in principle, the proposed changes to the Development Cost Charge Program with the rates as presented in Attachment 1 of the report dated June 23, 2017, titled GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review Update ; and b) direct staff to proceed with public and stakeholder consultation as presented in the report dated June 23, 2017, titled GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review Update. 2. That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee receive for information the report dated June 23, 2017, titled GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Program Review Update and provide alternate direction. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Alternative 1: If the Finance and Intergovernment Committee approves alternative 1, the report will be forwarded to the GVS&DD Board for approval. The cost of the public and stakeholder engagement and consultation process will be funded through the liquid waste function budget. Details of the DCC sewerage area rate structure, projected household impact and growth projects by sewerage area are included in Attachments 1 and 2. Alternative 2: If the Finance and Intergovernment Committee approves alternative 2, further analysis may be required to determine the resulting financial impacts. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The GVS&DD DCC program has been under review since 2014 and in November 2016 the initial review results were presented to the Utilities Committee and the Finance and Intergovernment Committee. At the direction of the Board, since that time further work has been undertaken to build the proposed DCC rates into Metro Vancouver s long term financial plan which will be considered this fall as part of the 2018 annual budget and five year financial plan process. Although a variety of options were considered in the development of the proposed DCC rate structure, the Board principle that growth pays for growth has guided the recommendations presented in this report. The current proposed DCC rates as detailed in Attachment 1 represent the best estimate of DCC funding required for growth related infrastructure and adheres to the principle of growth paying for growth. It is recommended that the Board approve the recommendations as presented in alternative one, and that staff proceed to consultation with the public and key stakeholders on the proposed DCC rate structure. Attachments: 1. Proposed DCC Rates 2. Growth Projects by Sewerage Area Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 87

88 ATTACHMENT Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 88

89 Growth Projects by Sewerage Area ATTACHMENT 2 Project Estimated Cost Vancouver Sewerage Area Collingwood Trunk Sewer $ 5,090,000 Hastings Sanitary Trunk Sewer 13,300,000 Hastings Sanitary Trunk Sewer No. 2 30,000,000 Hastings-Cassiar Intake Connection 750,000 $ 49,140,000 North Shore Sewerage Area North Vancouver Interceptor - Lynn Branch Pre-build $ 3,500,000 Lulu Island Sewerage Area Lulu Island WWTP Digester No 3 $ 53,300,000 Fraser Sewerage Area AIWWTP Effluent Pump Station $ 61,000,000 AIWWTP Site Construction Layout 600,000 Albert Street Trunk Sewer 4,600,000 Annacis Outfall System 375,000,000 Annacis Stage 5 Expansion Phase 1 & 2 595,500,000 Burnaby Lake North Interceptor Cariboo to Piper Section 41,000,000 Burnaby Lake North Interceptor Phillips to Sperling Section 42,341,163 Burnaby Lake North Interceptor Piper to Philips Section 62,100,000 Burnaby South Slope Interceptor Main Branch 9,500,000 Burnaby South Slope Interceptor West Branch Extension 13,200,000 Cloverdale PS Upgrade 31,100,000 Cloverdale Trunk Sewer Upgrade 28,975,000 Glenbrook Combined Trunk Kingsway Sanitary Section 3,400,000 Golden Ears Forcemain and River Crossing 114,000,000 Golden Ears Pump Station 38,100,000 Langley Pump Station Upgrade 14,300,000 Lozells Sanitary Trunk Golf Course Section 22,150,000 Marshend Pump Station Capacity Upgrade 9,900,000 NLWWTP Ground Improvements Phase A 24,000,000 NLWWTP Ground Improvements Phase B 18,000,000 NLWWTP Liquid Stream Phase A 356,000,000 NLWWTP Liquid Stream Phase B 256,000,000 NLWWTP Solids Handling 126,000,000 North Road Trunk Sewer 7,000,000 North Road Trunk Sewer Phase 2 3,938,000 NSI 104th Ave Extension 6,800,000 NSI Flow Management 39,500,000 NWLWWTP Options 5,000,000 NWLWWTP Phase 1 44,728,793 Port Moody PS Upgrade 9,150,000 Port Moody South Interceptor Upgrade 3,450,000 Queensborough Pump Station Replacement 6,500,000 Rosemary Heights Pressure Sewer Upgrade 10,750,000 Sapperton Forcemain Pump Station Connections 5,500,000 Sapperton Pump Station 76,400,000 South Surrey Interceptor Johnston Section 65,350,000 Sperling PS Increase Pump Capacity 3,000,000 SSI - King George Section - Odor Control Facility (OCF) and Grit Chamber 13,500,000 Stoney Creek Trunk Upgrade 10,200,000 Surrey Central Valley Upgrade 60,800,000 $ 2,618,332,956 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 89

90 Section G 1.1 To: From: GVS&DD Board of Directors Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services Date: July 17, 2017 Meeting Date: July 28, 2017 Subject: Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 ZERO WASTE COMMITTEE 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, 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, At its July 13, 2017 meeting, the Zero Waste Committee considered the attached report titled Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017, dated July 7, 2017 (Attachment 1). The Committee passed the recommendation as presented in the report, and as shown above. The Committee further directed staff to report directly to the Board at its July 28, 2017 meeting with additional information on the Board s resolution related to the Change in Law language in the Harvest contract, the financial implications for North Shore local governments from the proposed Tipping Fee increase, and the history behind the current Regional Organics Strategy and Metro Vancouver s role within this system. Information is provided below which responds to these questions in advance of the Board s consideration of the recommendation presented above. Harvest Contract Change in Applicable Laws As requested by the Zero Waste Committee, below is an excerpt from the Harvest contract related to change in applicable laws : 19.6 At the sole discretion of the Corporation, in response to a written request from the Service provider or on its own initiative, to reflect increases or decreases in the Service Provider s actual cost of performing the Services resulting directly from: a) Changes in Applicable Laws (other than Applicable Laws relating to Labour, employment or safety), or b) A request by the Corporation resulting in a change in the cost of providing the Services, Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 90

91 Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 GVS&DD Board Regular Meeting Date: July 28, 2017 Page 2 of 3 effective on such date as may be determined by the Corporation, provided that the Corporation is reasonably satisfied that the proposed increase or decrease in the Table A rates accurately represents the change in the Service Provider s actual cost of performing the Services (through cost substantiation) and the operation is in full compliance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement. The new Air Quality Permit issued by Metro Vancouver s Environmental Regulation and Enforcement Division in September 2016 constitutes a change to Applicable Laws, and Harvest has provided information substantiating the impacts of the change on its costs. Harvest s request for a rate change advised that in the event the rate change was not agreed to Harvest would stop accepting material as of July 15, Metro Vancouver concluded that the rate change was reasonable and that a delay in implementing the change could impact the ability of Harvest to continue to receive organic material. Financial Implications for North Shore Municipalities As noted above, the Zero Waste Committee members also requested additional information on the anticipated costs for each of the municipalities that deliver source separated organics to the North Shore Transfer Station. The table below presents the estimated monthly incremental cost of the new Source Separated Organics tipping fee to the communities that drop-off at Source Separated Organics the North Shore Transfer Station. The new tipping fee is proposed to be implemented on September 1, Municipality Annual Source Separated Organics (tonnes) Estimated Monthly Increase in Processing Cost District of North Vancouver 8644 $20,000 District of West Vancouver 5107 $12,000 City of North Vancouver 2906 $6,800 Lions Bay 221 $515 Bowen Island 389 $910 Like the model used for municipal solid waste, there is no contract between Metro Vancouver and municipalities for organics processing services. Tipping fees for Source Separate Organics are set through the Tipping Fee Bylaw, and the communities are not obligated to deliver their Source Separated Organics to the North Shore Transfer Station. In addition to North Shore communities, a number of other municipalities are impacted by Harvest price increases or requirements for material to be diverted to other facilities. Regional Organics Strategy At its meeting of September 23, 2011, the GVS&DD Board considered the Regional Organics Strategy and passed the following resolution: That the Board endorse Model 3: the 'hybrid model' for managing organic waste, as outlined in the report dated September 6, 2011, titled "Regional Organics Strategy''. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 91

92 Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 GVS&DD Board Regular Meeting Date: July 28, 2017 Page 3 of 3 Under the hybrid approach approved by the Board in 2011, Metro Vancouver s role is to monitor organics capacity, implement regulatory and financial incentives to encourage source separation and processing of organics, where possible on request of members provide residential organics transfer sites at existing transfer stations on a full-cost recovery basis, but leave the development of organics processing capacity to the private sector and member municipalities. The full 2011 report is provided as Attachment 2. Attachments: 1. Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017, dated July 7, Regional Organics Strategy, dated September 6, Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 92

93 ATTACHMENT 1 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 93

94 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 94

95 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. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 95

96 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 96

97 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 Page 1 of 4 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 97

98 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 Page 2 of 4 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 98

99 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 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. Not accepted. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 304, 2017 Page 3 of 4 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 99

100 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District Page 4 of 4

101 ATTACHMENT 2 Deleted: 67 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 Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 SCHEDULE Deleted: 6 Deleted: 6 Table 3 Recycling Fees for materials dropped off in designated Recycling Areas Deleted: 6 Deleted: 67 North Shore Transfer Station Surrey Transfer Station Coquitlam Transfer Station Maple Ridge Transfer Station Langley Transfer Station Waste-to-Energy Facility Deleted: 67 Deleted: 67 Source-Separated Organic Waste $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum $95/tonne, $10 minimum 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. Not accepted. 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 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 101

102 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 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) 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) Deleted: 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee 50% of the applicable Tipping Fee Deleted: From July 1, 2017 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 $50.00 Page 2 of 2 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 102

103 Att ATTACHMENT 2 Section E -...:..._ '~ metfovancouver _...,~~ H ~ 1.1 Greater Vancouver Regional DI.strict Greater Vancouver Water District O o o U o.. OOO o H A 0 H.. A O O O U o H H 0 0 o o 0 0 U < 4 " Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Otalnage District Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation 4330 Klngsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada VSH 4GB Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 To: Waste Management Committee From: Andrew Marr, Senior Engineer Solid Waste Department Date: September 6, 2011 Subject: Regional Organics Strategy Recommendation: That the Board endorse Model 3: the 'hybrid model' for managing organic waste. 1. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to examine different models for managing organic waste and recommend a model and strategic role for Metro Vancouver. 2. CONTEXT Section of the Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (Plan) calls for Metro Vancouver to work with municipalities to establish new organics processing capacity and divert an additional 265,000 tonnes per annum {TPA) of organic waste generated by homes and businesses away from disposal by For the purpose of this report, organic wastes include the food scraps, yard trimmings, and soiled paper commonly found in municipal solid waste (MSW), but do not include organic wastes from agricultural operations, heavy industry, biomedical or other non-msw sources. Of the organic wastes targeted for future diversion, fully half is generated by businesses in the form of food scraps. A regional organics strategy should define the roles of Metro Vancouver, member municipalities and the private sector in managing organics in the region. A number of objectives were considered in the evaluation of potential strategies, including: diverting organic waste from disposal, securing feedstock to organics processing facilities, securing organics processing capacity and performance, ensuring fair pricing and fair competition, regulatory compliance, guaranteeing end product markets, system stability, geographical and financial equity, community acceptance, possible integration with liquid waste operations, etc. Staff evaluated the merits of potential strategies, and the degree to which Metro Vancouver could and should influence the organics processing industry and private haulers. It became evident that the less risk acceptable in achieving the above objectives, the more public sector control of and involvement in all aspects of the system would be required, and vice Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 103

104 Regional Organics Strategy Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 2 of 5 versa: the more risk that could be tolerated the less public sector control and involvement would be required. Three principal options for managing organics in the region were developed: Model 1: Maximum intervention: full Metro Vancouver ownership of new processing facilities, full regulation of the operation of existing processing facilities, and full control and direction of the flows of the organic waste industry; Model 2: Minimum intervention: the private sector organics processing industry would provide processing capacity, and private haulers would transport organic waste with minimal to zero regulation and influence from Metro Vancouver; Model 3: - Metro Vancouver would implement regulations and economic incentives (primarily a steadily increasing 'price' for the inclusion of organic waste in the regular MSW waste stream) designed to assist in driving increased organic waste diversion by the private sector. The private sector (processors and haulers) would respond to these price signals, allowing entrepreneurial innovation, subject to broad locational and environmental controls exercised either by the region or local municipality. Metro Vancouver would monitor performance against the major objectives, adjust pricing or introduce other regulations as necessary. Commentary on these three models is fleshed out in the 'alternatives' section below. 3. ALTERNATIVES The Board may: a) Endorse a strategy in which Metro Vancouver establishes publicly-owned processing facilities, fully regulates the operation of existing processing facilities, and directs the flows of the organic waste processing industry - the Government Regulated Model. This model would see Metro Vancouver exercising full regulation of the flows, facilities, hauling, processors, and prices of the local organics market. Metro Vancouver would own new processing facilities, determine their location and size, and decide whether they would produce compost or biofuels. Metro Vancouver would fully regulate the operation of all private facilities and haulers, broker organics from the waste producers to designated processing facilities, and set prices. This model would provide a high degree of certainty that the region would have timely and sufficient processing capacity to meet the diversion goals in the Plan, and would minimize the financial risk to new publicly-owned facilities from uncertain markets and competition. However, this model would incur significant financial cost to the public sector, would require considerable time and effort in order to develop the necessary regulatory instruments. Existing private sector operators and haulers in the organic waste processing industry would likely resist and would argue it would hamper innovation due to the high degree of regulation. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 104

105 Regional Organics Strategy Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 3 of 5 b) Endorse a strategy in which Metro Vancouver exercises minimal regulation and influence over the local organics processing industry - Private Sector Controlled Model. This model is essentially the status quo. Historically, Metro Vancouver has had minimal involvement in the siting, design, or ownership of new organics processing capacity, and has had limited involvement in creating regulations or economic incentives to divert organic wastes away from disposal. It has the lowest direct financial and administrative demands on Metro Vancouver and is the least intrusive in terms of regulating the private sector. This model would provide the least amount of certainty that sufficient processing capacity will be established in the region to achieve the Plan's diversion goals, and would provide no additional economic and regulatory incentives for businesses and residents to divert organic wastes. Historically, the private sector interest in organics management has had mixed success and would not meet the goals of the recently adopted plan. There has been a recent upsurge of interest, possibly in anticipation of an organics ban, but the current capacity will be inadequate very shortly. c) Endorse a strategy in which Metro Vancouver implements regulations and economic incentives to drive organic waste diversion by the private sector, monitors local processing capacity, and prepares to enact greater regulation, only if required Hybrid Model. This model would see Metro Vancouver: Implement a disposal ban on organics from single-family homes in 2012, as indicated in the Plan. Sufficient processing capacity already exists for single family organics, and virtually all municipalities will likely have full organics collection for single family residents by the end of Introduce and promote a progressive new surcharge on the garbage tipping fee for waste from businesses and multi-family residences that contains excessive amounts of organics. That surcharge would increase in increments, reaching its full level in 2015, gradually increasing the economic differential between disposal of organics and recycling of organics. This staged process would allow waste producers and facility operators to prepare for and comply with a full ban on commercial organics in The envisaged schedule is a 10% surcharge on the garbage tipping fee in 2012; 20% in 2013; 30% in 2014; and 50% in 2015, although this could be accelerated or slowed down depending on the balance between diversion rates and processing capacity. Implement bylaws (in conjunction with member municipalities) requiring homes and businesses to recycle organics and other materials through authorized facilities. Monitor the supply and demand for regional organics processing capacity. At the end of 2012, if Metro Vancouver assesses that the private sector is not supplying sufficient processing capacity to achieve regional diversion goals, Metro Vancouver may implement more extensive regulatory control, including flow control to pre-authorized facilities, licensing of waste haulers, and implementation of a region-wide organics tipping fee. Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 105

106 Regional Organics Strategy Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2011 Page 4 of 5 Monitor the cost differential between organics processing and garbage disposal. There is currently moderate economic incentive to divert organics, as the costs of composting and biofuel production are both below the cost of garbage disposal and are expected to remain so for the foreseeable future. On request by member municipalities, provide residential ocganics transfer sites at existing transfer stations (where possible) with costs recovered from the specific facility users. The private sector would build the new and expanded facilities that would provide the region with new organics processing capacity. In addition, member municipalities that wish to establish their own processing facilities would be encouraged to do so. This model would have a lower overall financial cost to Metro Vancouver and the private sector would retain the majority of the financial risks. The public sector would monitor and retain the option of increasing its involvement in the local organics processing industry, if needed. Given the potential challenges, costs, and degree of regional intervention, and the uncertainties as to whether the recent upsurge of private sector interest will be continued, at this point the Hybrid Model's approach to managing local organics appears to be the most prudent and pragmatic approach. This approach enables private companies and entrepreneurial municipalities to innovate and develop the full potential of the marketplace. It also allows Metro Vancouver to promote awareness of the 2015 organics ban for all stakeholders and ready itself to implement further regulatory authority if the efforts of private industry are not successful in building a viable and sustainable secondary marketplace for organics. Staff, therefore, recommend alternative (c): the Hybrid Model. 4. CONCLUSION The private sector has, to date, supplied most of the existing organics processing capacity that currently exists in the region. Significant additional capacity will be needed to meet Metro Vancouver's goals of diverting an additional 265,000 tonnes per year of organic waste from disposal by There are three principal options for managing organics in the region: 1) Metro Vancouver establishes publicly-owned processing facilities, fully regulates the operation of existing processing facilities, and directs the flows of the organic waste industry; 2) The private sector organics processing industry continues to provide processing capacity with minimal regulation and influence from Metro Vancouver; and 3) A hybrid model in which Metro Vancouver implements regulations and economic incentives to drive increased organic waste diversion by the private sector, while allowing the private sector to innovate and provide processing capacity. Option 3 appears to provide the best overall balance of assured processing capacity, limited financial risk, and regulation. Under the recommended strategy Metro Vancouver's new regulation would include a ban on single family residential organics in 2012, and the development of new bylaws requiring mandatory separation of organics for recycling by residents and businesses. The new economic incentives would include escalating surcharges on the disposal of garbage Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 106