Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
INFORMATION
BULLETIN
Issue No. 10 April 2012
B. CALLANDER
CEO
CONTENTS PAGE
Item Page No.
RRF Update Report 3
Communications and Education Report 10
MWAC Minutes – 20 February 2013 16
RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY UPDATE REPORT
File No: WST/13-02
Appendix(s): Nil
Date: 11 April 2013
Prepared by: Gunther Hoppe, Director Corporate Services This report presents a summary of activities that have taken place in the reporting period covering 12 February 2013 to 11 April 2013. ONGOING MATTERS Composter Structural Issues BioVision is still of the view that it is likely that the composters will be replaced in the 1st quarter of 2015 as opposed to late 2013 as previously advised. The consequence of this to the Mindarie Regional Council (MRC) is that the work will occur in the 2014/2015 financial year, and as a result, the 2013/2014 financial year will be a normal year with an anticipated 100,000 tonnes of waste being processed. The 2014/2015 financial year will be the year in which the Resource Recovery Facility (RRF) will experience availability disruptions associated with the composter repairs. OPERATIONAL INFORMATION Waste Delivery Waste Delivery Summary for Reporting Period
MONTH SCHEDULED TONNES DELIVERED TONNES DIFFERENCE TONNES
February 2013 8,000 7,728 - 272
March 2013 6,400 6,954 554 For the Contract Year to date (16/07/2012 to 15/07/2013), being the 4th Contract Year since commencement, the RRF is 1,245 tonnes behind schedule. For the Financial Year to date (01/07/2012 to 30/06/2013), the RRF is 1,059 tonnes behind schedule. In summary, the RRF is operating as anticipated in the Resource Recovery Facility Agreement (RRFA), with average availability of 100.0% over the past 12 months. On a monthly basis, Additional Tonnes (those tonnes greater than the monthly scheduled tonnes) only incur the Variable Operating Cost charge, but not the Capital Cost or Fixed Operating Cost charges. Unavailable Tonnes (those tonnes less than the monthly scheduled tonnes) are not paid for unless:
• Within the Contract Year there is a positive balance of Additional Tonnes, these Additional Tonnes can be off-set against the Unavailable Tonnes. In this case,
Page 3
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
11,000
Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13
Tonn
age
Months
Monthly Waste Delivery - Previous Six Months
Scheduled Tonnes Actual Tonnes
the off-set Additional Tonnes incur the full gate fee cost less the Variable Operating Cost (which has already been paid on the Additional Tonnes); or
• If the RRF Availability for a month is less than 92% of the monthly Scheduled Tonnes and there are no accumulated Additional Tonnes remaining to be off-set, then the MRC is required to pay the Capital Cost on all Unavailable Tonnes up to 92% of the monthly Scheduled Tonnes.
At the end of the Contract Year, if 100,000 tonnes of waste have been delivered to the RRF then the above “overs and unders” system should balance out. Waste Diversion Waste Diversion for the past six months (October 2012 to March 2013) has been 48.1% with a Waste Diversion Target of 51.3%. That is 1,490 tonnes more residue being produced than anticipated for the six month period. This is largely in line with historic patterns experienced at this time of year. Operational Activities During March, there was a one week planned shutdown to carry out essential plant maintenance. This included further non-destructive testing on the composters to assess any changes to the cracks.
Community Complaints Community Complaints Summary for the Reporting Period Date Complaint From Outcome 12/03/2013 Odour Golf Course Normal Biofilter odour The graphs below provide data up to 31 March 2013. Graph No. 1 – Monthly Waste Delivery – Previous Six Months
Page 4
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13
Tonn
age
Months
Waste Delivery & Diversion - Previous Six Months
Scheduled Tonnes
Actual Tonnes
Waste Diversion
70%
80%
90%
100%
110%
120%
130%
140%
Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13
Avai
labi
lity
Months
Monthly Availability - Previous Six Months
Availability (Monthly)
$150 $160 $170 $180 $190 $200 $210 $220 $230 $240 $250
Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13
Cos
t/Ton
ne D
eliv
ered
Months
Monthly Cost/Tonne Delivered (incl. Compost Cost) - Previous Six Months
Cost/Tonne Delivered
Graph No. 2 – Waste Delivery & Diversion – Previous Six Months Graph No. 3 – Monthly Availability – Previous Six Months Graph No. 4 – Monthly Cost/tonne Delivered (incl. Compost Cost) – Previous Six Months
Page 5
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13
Tonn
age
of W
aste
Div
erte
d
Months
Waste Diversion From Landfill - Previous Six Months
Waste Diversion
Graph No. 5 – Waste Diversion from Landfill – Previous Six Months Performance Indicators KPI’s as per the RRFA are as follows:
Table No. 1 – KPI Summary (to 31 March 2013) KPI Target Previous
6 Months Feb Mar
Availability 95%* 99% 97% 109%
Environmental Standard - Number of Breaches
0 0 0 0
Waste Diversion 51.3% 48.1% 42.5% 46.4% Quality of Compost - Number of Breaches** 0 2 0 0 Quantity of Recyclable Packaging *** 0.80% 0% 0% 0% Health and Safety - Number of LTI’s 0 0 0 0 Community Acceptance - Number of Complaints ****
0 0 0 0
Project Culture - PAG Chairperson Score 100 100 100 100 * The Target Availability during the Initial Operating Period is to achieve an Availability of greater than 95% over a six-month period. ** The compost standard within the RRFA is currently under review. A separate report has been included dealing with the compost KPI breaches. *** KPI suspended pending new recycler **** Numerous complaints relating to a single event are treated as a single complaint. Biofilter odour is not registered as a complaint as this is seen as a normal operating odour condition.
Page 6
Waste Diversion The average waste diversion for the past six months (October 2012 to March 2013) has been 48.1%.
Project Advisory Group (PAG) as at 11 April 2013 MRC Representatives: BioVision Representatives: Cr Laura Gray Craig Barker Brian Callander (CEO) Nial Stock Alan Turner Apologies: Chairperson: Gunther Hoppe Mike Wadsworth Visitors: Ian Watkins Frank Sciarrone The PAG recently met on 10 April 2013. Items dealt with by the group include:
• Contract Variations • Composter Structural Issues • BioVision Monthly Report/Update • Compost Marketing and Compost Quality • Residue management • Insurance
Copies of the meeting minutes are distributed to the Strategic Working Group members and all MRC Councillors. Community Engagement The MRC community engagement program continues to be managed via the Community Engagement and Advisory Group (CEAG). The group last met on 20 March 2013 at the MRC for a stakeholder workshop as the MRC goes through the process of defining its strategic direction.
47.0%
48.0%
49.0%
50.0%
51.0%
52.0%
53.0%
54.0%
55.0%
Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13
Waste Diversion Previous 6 months
Actual Waste Diversion
Waste Diversion Target
Rolling 6 month diversion Rate
Page 7
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Operational Expenditure The Project Operational Summary below sets out the 2012/13 facility operating budget against which operational costs are tracked throughout the year. Project Operational Costs Summary for 2012/2013 Financial Year – as at 28 February 2013.
Page 8
Member Council Deed of Guarantee The table below indicates the fluctuation in member Council potential liabilities under the Member Council Deed of Guarantee throughout the duration of the RRFA. Deed of Guarantee Annual Value Change
Termination Payment for MRC Default
Council ShareholdingYear 1
16/07/2009Year 2
16/07/2010Year 3
16/07/2011Year 5
16/07/2014Year 10
16/07/2019Year 15
16/07/2024Year 19
16/07/2028Stirling 33.33% 29,422,667 29,099,000 28,832,000 27,880,667 23,521,000 15,497,667 6,007,000 Joondalup 16.67% 14,711,333 14,549,000 14,416,000 13,940,333 11,760,500 7,748,833 3,003,500 Wanneroo 16.67% 14,711,333 14,549,000 14,416,000 13,940,333 11,760,500 7,748,833 3,003,500 Perth 8.33% 7,355,667 7,275,000 7,208,000 6,970,167 5,880,250 3,874,417 1,501,750 Cambridge 8.33% 7,355,667 7,275,000 7,208,000 6,970,167 5,880,250 3,874,417 1,501,750 Vincent 8.33% 7,355,667 7,275,000 7,208,000 6,970,167 5,880,250 3,874,417 1,501,750 Victoria Park 8.33% 7,355,667 7,275,000 7,208,000 6,970,167 5,880,250 3,874,417 1,501,750 Total 100.00% 88,268,000$ 87,297,000$ 86,495,000$ 83,642,000$ 70,563,000$ 46,493,000$ 18,021,000$
Termination Payment for Forced Majeure
ShareholdingYear 1
16/07/2009Year 2
16/07/2010Year 3
16/07/2011Year 5
16/07/2014Year 10
16/07/2019Year 15
16/07/2024Year 19
16/07/2028Stirling 33.33% 25,811,000 25,545,000 25,206,000 24,159,333 19,708,333 12,008,000 1,666,667 Joondalup 16.67% 12,905,500 12,773,000 12,603,000 12,079,667 9,854,167 6,004,000 833,333 Wanneroo 16.67% 12,905,500 12,773,000 12,603,000 12,079,667 9,854,167 6,004,000 833,333 Perth 8.33% 6,452,750 6,386,000 6,301,000 6,039,833 4,927,083 3,002,000 416,667 Cambridge 8.33% 6,452,750 6,386,000 6,301,000 6,039,833 4,927,083 3,002,000 416,667 Vincent 8.33% 6,452,750 6,386,000 6,301,000 6,039,833 4,927,083 3,002,000 416,667 Victoria Park 8.33% 6,452,750 6,386,000 6,301,000 6,039,833 4,927,083 3,002,000 416,667 Total 100.00% 77,433,000$ 76,636,000$ 75,617,000$ 72,478,000$ 59,125,000$ 36,024,000$ 5,000,000$
Page 9
COMMUNICATIONS AND EDUCATION REPORT
File No: WST/178
Appendix(s): Nil
Date: April 2013
Responsible Officer: Geoff Atkinson Communication and Education Report – February - March 2013 In this period of time we see the holiday season come to an end and things really start cranking up. Schools start working out their programs and begin booking tours and visits. Although there are not a lot of actual tours and visits taking place in these months the festival season is still in full swing with the Roaming Recycler display out most weekends. The education team also look at repairs and improvements that can be made to the displays and activities plus also developing new ones. This ensures that everything stays fresh. The following are some of the key activities and happenings that occurred during the February - March 2013 reporting period. Tours Only fourteen tours have taken place this year. These involved:
• 10 tours of Tamala Park and Ed Centre • 4 of both facilities, RRF and Tamala Park
Cambridge, 1
Joondalup, 1
Perth, 0
Stirling, 1
Victoria Park, 0
Vincent, 0
Wanneroo, 7
Other/Mixed, 4
No of Tours By Council (Total 14) January - March 2013
Page 10
Tours of the MRC facilities continue to be very well received. Feedback indicates a high level of satisfaction, with the tours being considered very worthwhile. Participants indicating that they would return or would advise others to come on tour. The Roaming Recycler Waste Education Display The Roaming Recycler continued to be an important way that MRC assists Member Councils to deliver waste messages, attending numerous community events throughout the year.
ROAMING RECYCLER EVENTS Jan
- March
No Days
Out Cambridge 1 Joondalup 5 Perth 1 Stirling 0 Victoria Park 1
Vincent 9 Wanneroo 0 Other (Perth
Zoo) 1 TOTAL 18
As an important tool to engage with the community, new displays were continued to be developed to keep the Roaming Recycler fresh, there is always something different to see and do. Many of the display items include reused and recycled materials to keep within the theme of the display. These displays help promote and explain the different bin systems within the Region and different ways the community can reduce, reuse, recycle and dispose wisely. Many of the displays at events were supported by Captain Recycle, MRC’s 3metre puppet made of recyclables. This is an eye-catching feature and always draws a crowd.
Page 11
A new banner to be used on displays has been produced. “Talking about Rubbish” was chosen as the slogan to clearly indicate what the display was all about. This banner also has the ability to be branded in different ways with Member Council, MRC and Earth Carers logos able to be mixed and matched on the banner. Battery Program Batteries from school and community bins continued to be collected in large numbers. As this report was written a weekly battery collection of over 500kgs was made, so an impressive April tally is to be expected. Importantly most of these batteries previously would have gone into the household green top wheelie-bin then to the RRF and the chemicals contained within ultimately into the compost. This is a good result. Unfortunately the batteries are still being stockpiled at Tamala Park awaiting shipment to the recycler.
Page 12
Cambridge, 305.5
Joondalup, 332.5
Perth, 84
Vic Park, 193.5
Vincent, 133
Wanneroo, 241.5
Batteries Collected from Community Collection Bins by Council
March 2013 (Total = 1290 Kg)
Cambridge
Joondalup
Perth
Vic Park
Vincent
Wanneroo
589.
50
374.
00
414.
00
484.
50
532.
50
813.
50
365.
00 51
8.50
0.00
947.
50
499.
50
834.
00
376.
5 471.
5
367.
5
595.
5
289.
0
282.
1
549.
1
475.
5 533.
5
482.
0
304.
0
442.
5
289.
00 40
7.00
594.
00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
600.00
700.00
800.00
900.00
1000.00
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
MRC Community & School Battery Collection by Month in 2011 to 2013 (kg)
2011Com&Sch
Page 13
Earth Carers The Earth Carers program remains strong promoting a ‘living with less waste’ ethos. Participants in the course are often passionate people and are surprised to learn how much is involved in the waste industry – its more than just a case of placing your bin on the verge. They go on a steep learning curve over 5 sessions that starts at the City of Wanneroo’s Depot where they discover that not all rubbish trucks are the same, visits to waste facilities and through discussions focussing on many aspects of the reduce, reuse, recycle and dispose wisely message. A training course has just been completed with another 19 people graduating. The Earth Carers have set up a Facebook page, Earth Carers North, and with limited publicity has already acquired 91 Likes. Other Activities Some of the activities MRC’ Education team were involved in were:
• Cash for Containers an initiative that gained interest late in the year was continually promoted during this period. The MRC has been keeping councils informed on this issue and has been promoting the work of WALGA’s publicity campaign/event to promote a Cash for Containers scheme. .
• Garage Sale Trial. This is another initiative gaining interest both here in WA and internationally (London).To encourage participation the Waste Authority is sponsoring the event to be held in Spring 2013 and a variable participation fee, depending on the size of the council, has been devised. MRC has through WESSG has updated councils on this initiative.
• Provision of banners for the City of Vincent’s Household Hazardous Day.
• The Federal Government Product Stewardship Scheme (TV/Computers) has also been launched in WA with the impending turning off of the analogue TV signal in April 2013. The MRC has been working with Member Councils to create interest in holding free drop off events for TV/Computer recycling over the first 6 months of 2013.
Page 14
• Tamala Park in conjunction with TechCollect held special event weekends in February and March to promote free e-waste drop offs. Over 1,300 televisions alone were collected in this period. The City of Joondalup and the Town of Cambridge will be holding ‘events’ in April.
• Waste Education Strategic Steering Group (WESSG) meetings were held at the end of each month. These continue to be an important forum for exchanging ideas and keeping everyone updated on happenings associated with waste within the Member Councils.
• WMAA-WA’s Waste Education Working Group, in which MRC is involved, met every month discussing wider waste issues and providing networking opportunities. This included: the Waste Display at the Perth Royal Show; HHW program; TV/Computers Stewardship Scheme roll out; Garage Sale Trail; Cash 4 Cans; Waste Authority funding opportunities, sharing of resources and discussion of other waste education related topics
• Meetings with the Community Engagement and Advisory Group (CEAG) continue to occur to discuss community issues in relation to the RRF. The group being particularly interested in the quality of the compost being produced and how the design of the facility has contributed to this.
Page 15
Municipal Waste Advisory Council
Unconfirmed Minutes
5 pm – MWAC Meeting Wednesday 20 February 2013
Level 1 Boardroom, Local Government House
15 Altona Street, WEST PERTH, WA 6005
Page 16
2
CONTENTS 1 PROCEDURAL MATTERS 4 2 MATTERS ARISING 4 3 MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING 4 3.1 Confirmation of the Previous MWAC Minutes 4 3.2 Business Arising from the Previous MWAC Minutes 4 4 DECISION ITEMS 6 4.1 Metropolitan Local Government Review*** 6 4.2 Draft Planning Strategy 7 4.3 Research Paper: End-of-Life Tyre Management*** 8 5 DISCUSSION ITEMS 9 5.1 Waste Education 9 5.2 Waste & Recycle Conference 10 5.3 Construction & Demolition Waste Recycling*** 11 5.4 Household Hazardous Waste – update 12 5.5 Mattresses 14 5.6 TV’s and Computers Product Stewardship 14 5.7 Cash for Containers 15 5.8 Non-Biodegradable Plastic Bags - Update 15 5.9 MWAC Waste to Energy Paper – update 15 5.10 Waste Authority Business Plan 15 5.11 Liveable Neighbourhoods 16 5.12 Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act Review 16 5.13 Metropolitan Mayors Forum 16 6 REPORTS 17 6.1 Regional Delegates Report 17 6.2 Working Groups/Committee Reports 18 6.3 Correspondence 19 7 OTHER GENERAL BUSINESS 19 8 NEXT MEETING 19
Page 17
3
ATTENDANCE:
Mayor Hon. Alannah MacTiernan (Vincent) Mindarie Regional Council Chair
Mayor Don Ennis (Town of Narrogin) WALGA State Council Deputy Chair
Cr Julie Brown (Gosnells) WALGA State Council
Cr Wally Barrett (Murray) WALGA State Council
Cr Greg Campbell (Harvey) Bunbury Harvey Regional Council
Cr Graham Pittaway (Bayswater) Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
Cr Ron Ashplant City of Greater Geraldton Cr Jeff Munn (Armadale) Rivers Regional Council
Cr Robert Willis (Melville) Southern Metropolitan Regional Council
Mr Mark Wong City of Greater Geraldton OAG Chair
Mr Brian Callander Mindarie Regional Council OAG Deputy
Mr Brian Jones Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council
Mr Alex Sheridan Rivers Regional Council
Mr Brendan Doherty Southern Metropolitan Regional Council
Mr Sebastian Camillo (Gingin) Non-Metropolitan Local Government
Mr Peter Hoar (Joondalup) Metropolitan Local Government
Mr Bernie Burnett (Canning) Metropolitan Local Government
Ms Rebecca Brown Municipal Waste Advisory Council
Ms Heather Squire Municipal Waste Advisory Council
Ms Ariane Katscherian Municipal Waste Advisory Council
Ms Vanessa Fernandez Municipal Waste Advisory Council
Mr Mark Batty WA Local Government Association
Cr Ron Hoffman FORC Representative Observer
APOLOGIES
Cr Doug Thompson (Fremantle) WALGA State Council
Ms Shelley Cocks (East Fremantle) Metropolitan Local Government
Ms Suzanne Ward Mid West Regional Council
Mayor Troy Pickard WALGA President Observer
Page 18
4
1 PROCEDURAL MATTERS 1.1 MWAC Minutes Tabled at WALGA State Council The Minutes of the Municipal Waste Advisory Council meeting held 19 December were noted at the WA Local Government Association State Council meeting on 6 March 2013.
2 MATTERS ARISING
3 MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
3.1 Confirmation of the Previous MWAC Minutes
MUNICIPAL WASTE ADVISORY COUNCIL MOTION (CR BARRETT/ CR WILLIS) The Minutes of the meeting of the Municipal Waste Advisory Council held on 24 October 2012, as amended, were confirmed as a true and accurate record of the proceedings.
3.2 Business Arising from the Previous MWAC Minutes
A Issue June MWAC item 4.2 Draft E-Waste Collection Standard
Action 1. A request was made for feedback on the submission from Standards Australia; this will be provided to MWAC once received.
Timeframe Status The Standards have now been released and are being analysed by MWAC Staff to determine their impact on the sector.
B Issue October MWAC Item 3.2 HHW
Action 1. MWAC requested further information on the HHW Program, including the rationale behind Temporary Collection Days.
2. A presentation at the December meeting on the HHW Program
Timeframe Status 1. Complete 2. Complete
C Issue October MWAC Decision Item 4.1 Methodology for EPR
Action 1. Using the endorsed methodology undertake a survey of Local Governments to identify priority products.
2. Provide information to State and Federal Government
Timeframe Status 1. Complete, see item 4.2
2. Information will be used in ongoing advocacy .
D Issue October MWAC Decision Item 4.2 Strategic Partnership Funding
Action That the Municipal Waste Advisory Council endorse: 1. Correspondence to the Waste Authority and Environment Minister strongly
expressing concern regarding the decision to reduce funding; 2. A Carbon Copy of the Environment Ministers correspondence being sent to
the Minister for Local Government; 3. Option 3 as the approach to revising the MWAC Budget 2012/13; 4. Correspondence to Regional Councils seeking support for Option 3; and 5. Bringing this matter to the attention of State Council.
Timeframe Status 1. Complete 2. Complete 3. Complete
Page 19
5
4. Complete 5. Complete
E Issue October MWAC Decision Item 4.4 MWAC and OAG meeting dates 2013
Action 1. MWAC Staff to report back if changing the proposed meeting dates would be possible.
2. Provide the final meeting dates for 2013.
Timeframe Status 1. Complete 2. Complete
F Issue October MWAC Item 8.1 Waste & Recycle Conference
Action 1. MWAC Staff to provide further information on the Waste & Recycle Conference
Timeframe Status 1. Complete
G Issue December MWAC Item 4.1 Submission on Asbestos Guidelines for C&D
Action 1. Provide a report to the February MWAC meeting on the degree to which C&D waste is currently being used by Main Roads and Local Government.
Timeframe Status 1. Complete – see Discussion Item 5.3
H Issue December MWAC Item 4.3 Priority Products for EPR
Action 1. More information be provided to the February MWAC Meeting on the roll out of the National TV and Computer Product Stewardship Scheme and the current activity on Mattresses.
2. More information be provided on the characteristics of products which make them suitable for Product Stewardship.
Timeframe Status 1. Complete, see Information Item 6.3
2. In progress
I Issue December MWAC Item 4.4 Local Government Waste Education – Metro
Action 1. Notes the Report on Metropolitan Recycling Waste Education. 2. Endorse the pursuit of funding from the Waste Authority to increase the
consistency and penetration of waste educations messaging. 3. Engage with Local Government regarding the waste education messages
used. 4. Investigate the reasons and potential solutions for inconsistent education
messages (e.g. contractual). 5. Investigate the materials which have a lower recycling rate as a potential
focus for education
Timeframe Status 1. Complete. 2. See Item 5.1. 3. In progress 4. In progress 5. In progress
J Issue December MWAC Item 4.5 MWAC Strategic Plan Report
Action 1. Include a clear link to the Strategic Plan KPI’s in Agenda Items.
Timeframe Status 1. Complete.
Page 20
6
4 DECISION ITEMS
4.1 Metropolitan Local Government Review***
MUNICIPAL WASTE ADVISORY COUNCIL MOTION (CR BROWN/CR BARRETT) That the Municipal Waste Advisory Council endorse the amended draft MWAC Submission on the Metropolitan Local Government Review Panel’s Final Report.
In Brief
A draft MWAC Submission on the Final Report of the Metropolitan Local Government Review was developed, based on previous Submission made by MWAC and WALGA;
The draft Submission focuses on Recommendations 6 and 11 of the Report; and
MWAC discussed the Submission and made amendments to the wording of one of the recommendations to increase its clarity and to some of the points in the Submission relating to Local Government trading enterprises, non-metropolitan implications and the current role of Regional Councils.
Relevance to Strategic / Business Plan:
Key Results Area: Advocacy o Strategy: 1.2 Making comment on relevant policy, programs legislation and regulation. o KPI 1: Key recommendations and advocacy activities are incorporated and influence Government
policy, programs, legislation and regulation. o KPI 3: Respond to all relevant State/Federal waste specific policy, programs, legislation and
regulation
Policy Implications: N/A
Budgetary Implications: N/A Actions/Advocacy Activity
That MWAC State Council members strongly represent MWAC when the Submission is discussed at the State Council meeting on Wednesday 6 March.
Background The Final Report of the Metropolitan Local Government Review Panel was released in October 2012. The opportunity to comment closes on Friday 5 April. The Report can be accessed from http://metroreform.dlg.wa.gov.au/FinalReport.aspx. The key recommendations that relate specifically to waste management are:
Recommendation 6: The State Government consider the management of waste treatment and disposal at a metropolitan-wide scale either be undertaken by a State authority or through a partnership with local government.
Recommendation 11: The existing Regional Local Governments in the metropolitan area be dissolved, their provisions in the Local Government Act 1995 be repealed for the metropolitan area and a transitional plan for dissolving the existing bodies in the metropolitan area be developed.
Comment MWAC has developed a draft Submission based on the previous Submissions to the Panel. The Submission will again be separate to the WALGA Submission. After endorsement by MWAC, the Submission will be tabled at the WALGA State Council meeting on Wednesday 6 March. The draft Submission has been discussed by the OAG and amendments made. The draft Submission recommends:
There is a need for greater leadership and support by the State Government in developing and funding the infrastructure required for managing waste. The State Government needs to establish its waste management credibility by immediately restoring full hypothecation of the Landfill Levy for waste and committing to the Sustainable Waste Hierarchy.
The number of Regional Councils should be based on shared objectives, and binding commitments with compulsory membership for the purposes of waste management treatment and disposal. These Regional Councils should be identified using an evidence based approach considering geographic location, tonnages of material and transport routes.
Page 21
7
Attached pg 1: MWAC Submission on the Metropolitan Local Government Review Panel’s Final Report
Discussion at the Municipal Waste Advisory Council meeting MWAC discussed the Submission and endorsed changes to Recommendation 1 for improved clarity. The issue of flexibility for Local Governments, in relation to governance, was emphasised; this included the need for Regional Subsidiaries and Council Controlled Organisation models. Changes to Section 3.7, relating to the implications for non-metropolitan areas, were endorsed; the change emphasised MWAC non-metropolitan member concerns relating to accessing benefits and support. Minor changes were made to the section on the current role of Regional Councils.
4.2 Draft Planning Strategy
MUNICIPAL WASTE ADVISORY COUNCIL MOTION (CR WILLIS / CR ASHPLANT) That the Municipal Waste Advisory Council endorse the inclusion of comments on Waste Management in the WALGA Submission on the State Planning Strategy.
In Brief A draft State Planning Strategy has been released – waste management considerations have been
included in the document;
Initial comments have been developed, and were presented to MWAC for endorsement;
These comments will be included in the WALGA Submission; and
FORC will present at the next MWAC meeting on their Infrastructure Paper.
Relevance to Strategic / Business Plan: Key Results Area: Advocacy
o Strategy: 1.2 Making comment on relevant policy, programs legislation and regulation. o KPI 1: Key recommendations and advocacy activities are incorporated and influence Government
policy, programs, legislation and regulation. o KPI 3: Respond to all relevant State/Federal waste specific policy, programs, legislation and
regulation
Policy Implications: N/A
Budgetary Implications: N/A Actions/Advocacy Activity That MWAC notes the positive change to the Department of Planning’s approach, the inclusion of waste management in the process. FORC will present at the next MWAC meeting on their infrastructure Paper.
Background On 19 December 2012, the Minister for Planning launched the draft State Planning Strategy for public consultation until 29 March 2013. This Strategy presents a vision for Western Australia to 2050 and beyond based on a framework of planning principles, strategic goals and State strategic directions.
Comment WALGA will be submitting comments on behalf of the sector. It is proposed that the comments below will be incorporated into the WALGA Submission: WALGA welcomes the inclusion of waste management considerations in the State Planning Strategy (SPS), and is particularly impressed by the references to reducing overall consumption in line with the Sustainable Waste Management Hierarchy. While Local Government understands the importance of long term planning, immediate action and targets are needed in this area to achieve an integrated waste management system in the next 10 years. There are a number of projects that could assist in achieving these Outcomes; these include the Strategic Waste Infrastructure Planning Project (Waste Authority) and the work compiled by the Core Consultative Committee.
Page 22
8
WALGA suggests that the area encompassing the coastal plain and other sensitive areas (mentioned pg. 57 of the SPS), is incorporated into figure 27. This will ensure that the messages in the text and map are aligned. It is hoped that a visual representation of areas where future putrescible landfills are not to be located, will assist decision makers in ensuring that the population of Western Australia has access to required services (including access to sufficient landfill space). WALGA also suggests that the definitions for Material Recovery Facilities and Resource Recovery Facilities are included, as well as a description of the various technology types. Section 9 refers to the challenges associated with regulating development in remote settlements. It should be noted that there are significant challenges associated with managing waste in an environmentally sound manner in remote settlements.
Discussion at the Municipal Waste Advisory Council meeting MWAC discussed the comments focusing on the intent of the inclusion of the Coastal Plain in the map, it was clarified that the point was to ensure that it was very clear what areas would not be considered for landfills. The FORC representative indicated that the Forum had put together a Paper on Infrastructure and offered to present at the next MWAC meeting. This paper will be circulated to MWAC.
4.3 Research Paper: End of Life Tyre Management***
MUNICIPAL WASTE ADVISORY COUNCIL MOTION (CR MUNN/ MAYOR ENNIS) That the Municipal Waste Advisory Council:
1. Endorse the Research Paper into Tyre Management in Australia; and 2. Continue Advocacy for the introduction of Extended Producer Responsibility for Tyres.
In Brief In response to MWAC’s request, a Paper on Tyre Management in Australia was developed and presented
at the December MWAC meeting; and
Changes have been made to the Paper based on this discussion. The Paper was put forward for endorsement.
Relevance to Strategic / Business Plan: Key Results Area: Information Exchange
o Strategy: 4.3 Undertake research into key issues identified by MWAC, with a view to developing discussion papers, positions papers or Policy Statements.
o KPI11: Report to MWAC on Submissions, Policies and Papers produced.
Policy Implications: N/A
Budgetary Implications: N/A Actions/Advocacy Activity MWAC has previously identified tyres as a priority for Product Stewardship. It is suggested that ongoing advocacy include:
Engaging with the roll out of the Voluntary Scheme for Tyres;
Clearly identifying the deficiencies with the Voluntary approach; and
Advocating at a State / Federal Level for a co-regulatory / mandatory approach to Product Stewardship for tyres
Review the scheme with a survey prior to the expiration of the two year trial.
Background At the MWAC meeting in August 2012, MWAC requested that a Research Paper be developed identifying the issues associated with managing end-of-life tyres. To date, both OAG and MWAC have considered the Paper and provided input.
Comment Key findings include:
- The data on the final destination for used tyres in Australia is poor; - Local Governments are experiencing challenges with illegal dumping and managing tyres at end of life; - Managing tyres in the non-metropolitan area is problematic in both a practical and financial sense; and
Page 23
9
- A mandatory or co-regulatory Extended Producer Responsibility national scheme should be pursued for the management of used tyres.
Attached pg 8: Research Paper: End-of-life Tyre Management in Australia
Discussion at the Municipal Waste Advisory Council meeting MWAC agreed to include a note in the Paper regarding issues with conveyer belt management in the non-metropolitan areas, as these may be similar to tyre management concerns. There was some discussion on the Environmental Protection Act and the burden of proof required for prosecutions. Further information will be provided to MWAC on this issue at the next meeting. The importance of reviewing the impact of the Voluntary Tyre Product Stewardship Scheme, prior to the end of the 2 year initial period was also raised. MWAC will undertake a review of the Scheme in future to determine its impact.
5 DISCUSSION ITEMS / PRESENTATIONS
5.1 Waste Education
In Brief
In December, MWAC endorsed the pursuit of funding from the Waste Authority to increase the consistency and penetration of waste educations messaging.
Funding opportunities exist under the current Waste Authority Business Plan ‘5.4 Engagement in Action’.
Office of the Waste Authority have indicated they would welcome submissions for funding from Local Government under this Program area; and
Funding is available to build on existing Local Government activities, which has the potential to increase recovery and is measurable.
For Discussion - Methods for engaging with Local Government to maximise uptake of this funding.
Background Following discussions with Office of the Waste Authority staff it is clear that the Authority is very keen to provide significant funding this financial year from the ‘Engagement in Action’ section of the Waste Authority’s Business Plan. For activities to be considered favourably the following broad parameters would be important:
Builds on existing Local Government education commitments - the funding should not replace any existing commitments but should amplify what is already in place or has already been committed to;
Is in some way measurable – increased tonnages, reduced contamination;
Works towards the Targets in the Waste Strategy; and
Supports broadly consistent messages around existing source separation activities and involvement by individuals in making a difference.
An example of the type of project would be to increase the frequency, size or delivery mechanism (eg adding radio to existing media) of messaging regarding contamination in the kerbside bin and using contamination rates from the MRF as a measure of effectiveness / increased tonnages recycled. Options for funding activity in the current financial year will be preferred although programs that start in the current financial year and continue into the next would also be considered favourably. In relation to promoting this opportunity it is suggested that MWAC facilitate meeting between Waste Education Officers and OWA staff to identify key areas for increased promotion and clearly outline opportunities.
Discussion at the Municipal Waste Advisory Council meeting There was minimal discussion on this item.
Page 24
10
5.2 Waste & Recycle Conference
In Brief The Waste & Recycle Conference is the only waste focused Conference in WA, it has been running for over
15 years and attracts 300 – 400 attendees every year (from Local, State and Federal Government, the waste industry and the community).
The Conference is a joint venture between WALGA, Department of Environment and Conservation and the Waste Management Association of Australia.
For discussion - How can MWAC engage in the Conference development? - How can the Conference be made more attractive to Elected Members, while not detracting significantly
from other attendees? - How can we increase attendees at the Conference?
Background A presentation was provided at the meeting outlining the Conference feedback from 2012 and the focus and direction of the Conference in 2013. The Conference is organised by a small Committee with 2 representatives from each of the organisations, the Conference employs a professional event organiser (Keynote Conferences). The Conference has several purposes, including:
o To provide networking opportunities, between those working in government and the waste industry (metro and non-metro);
o Showcase new technology and best practice; o Provide information; o Provide opportunities for discussion of current and emerging issues; o Promote the waste industry and increase its’ profile; and o Provide an event which meets the needs of a diverse audience.
Currently the Conference attracts between 300 – 400 attendees, in 2012 attendees were from the following sectors:
2% Community
7% Local Government Elected Members
10% Government
16% Other (e.g. academic institutions)
25% Waste Industry
41% Local Government Officers Feedback provided by MWAC previously, such as the need to focus on Extended Producer Responsibility and ensure high quality papers are presented in a fashion which allow maximum information in the shorted time, has been taken on board by the Conference Committee representatives (Sebastian Camillo and the MWAC Executive Officer).
Discussion at the Municipal Waste Advisory Council meeting MWAC discussed this item in detail and presented many ideas and options for the Conference. These include:
Concern was expressed about the low number of Elected Members attending the event and the need to investigate why this was the case;
The need to ensure the people making the decisions in Local Government are well informed;
Frequency of the Conference – holding the event every 2 years was proposed;
Location of the Conference – investigation into alternative venues to Fremantle was requested as it was considered this could affect who was attending;
Having the Conference vary in length and format;
Needing to ensure the event was a substantial one where learning could occur;
The need for Local Government Elected Members to be trained/educated in waste management – the value of the Conference in educating Elected Members and potential for holding Waste 101 sessions after the October Local Government elections;
The display area was too crowded;
Was the Conference delivering value for money
Page 25
11
Format of the sessions o More in depth, longer sessions, fewer quality speakers; o Have a debate format; o Panel sessions;
Compare event with others which are only held every 2 years;
How to make the Conference better for everyone; Recycling Expo was not well promoted or attended, should be more accessible and well advertised;
Look at Roads Forum format for achieving outcomes;
It may be cost prohibitive for non-metro attendees;
WALGA Conference in August, quite close to Waste & Recycle Conference – this could provide an opportunity to market the Waste & Recycle Conference;
Ideas for topics to discuss at the Conference: o Traditional suburban bin systems not working in Multi-Unit Dwellings; o Different bin systems (1, 2 or 3 bins); and
There are other models for professional development, not just Conferences. Actions:
Independent survey of those not attending the Conference (Elected Members), focusing on why they are not attending and what would make them more likely to attend;
Investigation into alternative venues;
Circulate issues raised to MWAC and request further suggestions, speakers and feedback;
Convene a meeting of the Strategic Waste & Recycle Conference Group and the MWAC Chair to discuss format and timing of the Conference.
5.3 Construction & Demolition Waste Recycling***
In Brief MWAC requested an update into the situation regarding the use of Construction & Demolition material in
roads by both Local Government and Main Roads; and
A survey of Local Government has been undertaken and correspondence has been sent to Main Roads requesting an update.
For discussion - What opportunities are there for MWAC to promote the use of C&D materials in roads to Local Government
and assist in addressing some of the concerns with its use?
Background Following discussion at the December MWAC meeting regarding the use of C&D material, correspondence was sent to Main Roads requesting an update and Local Governments were surveyed to find out whether they were using the product. A Report outlining the outcomes of the survey is attached. The survey gathered responses from 42 Local Governments and Regional Councils. Of these, 15 Local Governments (10 Metro, 4 Non-Metro and 1 Regional Council) indicated they used C&D materials. The main barriers identified in using C&D material was cost, quality standard and insufficient volume of materials.
The Main Roads response indicates a willingness to use C&D material and some investment in research and auditing to ensure that material is of appropriate quality. Main Roads are not, however, currently using any C&D material.
Attached pg 22: WA Local Government Use of Recycled Construction and Demolition Materials
Discussion at the Municipal Waste Advisory Council meeting MWAC discussed hosting a workshop to address the barriers to the use of C&D identified in the Report. Speakers at the workshop could include Local Governments (metro/non-metro) who have used C&D material, the Preferred Suppliers of C&D material, the Department of Environment and Conservation and Main Roads. This workshop would be for elected members and officers and will be developed in the coming months. This will be a significant workshop for MWAC to host and a good facilitator and venue will be needed.
Page 26
12
5.4 Household Hazardous Waste – update
Figure 1: Materials collected through the HHW Program, October -December 2012 (by weight).
Page 27
13
Figure 2: Materials collected through the HHW Program, October - December 2012 (by cost of recycling/disposal, not including GST). The HHW Program has been involved in a wide range of activities such as scheduling seven fully funded Temporary Collection Days, finalizing packaging to ensure transport of currently stockpiled batteries for recycling and commissioning an independent audit for 12 out of 14 Permanent HHW Facilities. Temporary Collection Days There are seven of Temporary Collection Days; three in non-metro regions and four in the metro region. MWAC members are welcome to attend any one of these days. The days are as follows:
Time and Date Local Government
Location Address
Saturday, 23 February 2013, 9.00am to 1.00pm
Busselton Busselton Waste Transfer Station 39 Rendezvous Rd, Vasse, WA 6280
Sunday, 24 March 2013, 9:00am to 1:00pm Vincent
Community Centre Loftus Street Carpark, 99 Loftus Street, Leederville, WA 6007
Saturday, 6 April 2013, 9:00am to 1:00pm Mosman Park
Tom Perrott Reserve Carpark McCabe St j/w Beagle St, Mosman Park, WA
Saturday, 20 April 2013, 9:00am to 1:00pm
Kalgoorlie-Boulder
Yarri Rd Refuse Facility Yarri Rd, Kalgoorlie WA 6430
Saturday, 4 May 2013, 9:00am to 1:00pm
Swan Junction Great Northern Highway and Bishop Road, Middle Swan
Paint - water based, $113,168.20, 55%
Paint - solvent based, including resins and
adhesives, $33,144.40, 16%
Gas cylinders - propane,
$20,976.00, 10%
Fluroescent tubes and light fittings*, $6,584.60, 3%
Pesticides - non Schedule X, $13,135.50,
6%
Flammable liquids - hydrocarbons and fuels,
$7,203.00, 4%
General household chemical e.g. cleaners,
$4,299.75, 2%
Inorganic oxidising agents e.g. pool
chlorine, $2,224.40, 1%
Acids (excludes hydrofluoric acid),
$1,255.80, 1% Aerosols, flammable -
paint and lacquers, $2,264.40, 1%
Alkali, $201.00, 0% Other , $886.55, 1%
Page 28
14
6056
Saturday, 18 May 2013, 9:00am to 1:00pm Gosnells
Gosnells Emergency Operations Centre Staff Car Park, 1 Canning Park Avenue, Maddington WA 6109
Saturday, 8 June 2013, 9:00am to 1:00pm
Broome Works and Parks Depot, 15 Farrell St, Broome, WA 6725
Hazards versus Cost Paint makes up a major component of the cost of disposal. Solvent and water based paints are relatively low toxicity and relatively cheap to dispose of. It is the high volume of material in the last quarter which makes it expensive to dispose. For example paint costs $1.64/kg to dispose of, however 86,375kg of solvent and water based was collected opposed to a more expensive product to dispose of such as Pesticide – Schedule X, which costs $42.36/kg but only 10kg was collected. The cost of disposing of a product in $/kg can be dependent on the toxicity of the product and the ability to dispose of it easily. For example, solvent and water based paints, gas cylinders and flammable liquids have a lower toxicity than other products and therefore cost approximately between $1.10 – $1.70/kg. Materials such as cyanides and arsenic based products which are potential more toxic are more expensive, which are approximately $12 - 15/kg. Pesticides – Schedule X can be more toxic and therefore harder to dispose of and there for is the most expensive at $42.36/kg. Process for MWAC input Process for MWAC to provide input into the HHW Advisory Committee – the suggested approach is as follows:
o Prior to HHW Advisory Committee meeting, the key points that will be on the Agenda will be circulated to MWAC, either through the MWAC Agenda process or out of session if the HHW Advisory Committee is meeting is not close to an MWAC meeting;
o MWAC can provide comment on the items and further information will be provided by the MWAC Executive Officer; and
o A report back to MWAC on the Advisory Council meeting will be provided either through the MWAC Agenda process or out of session if the HHW Advisory Committee is meeting is not close to an MWAC meeting.
One item on the Agenda at the next meeting will be education in relation to HHW – this was requested (and discussed) at the December MWAC meeting.
5.5 Mattresses
Further information has been requested from DEC on the progress of their mattress project. It is anticipated the Waste Authority commissioned report will be released soon.
5.6 TV’s and Computers Product Stewardship
The TV’s and Computers Product Stewardship Scheme is a national initiative under the Product Stewardship Act 2011. The Liable Parties (TV and computer importers/manufacturers) have to a certain recovery rate (increasing over time) for the products covered by the Scheme. The Liable Parties also have to ensure that there is sufficient coverage of the entire nation. The Liable Parties deliver these obligations through Product Stewardship Arrangements.
Coverage – by the end of 2013, the Product Stewardship Arrangements have to have 6 access points in Metropolitan Perth, 3 in ‘Inner Regional’, 6 ‘Outer Regional’ and 9 in ‘Remote’. This means that there will be access to recycling in the following areas (they may not be located directly in the Local Government areas however):
Inner Regional (Mandurah, Bunbury and Busselton)
Outer Regional (Albany, Geraldton, Kalgoorlie-Boulder, Majimup, Margaret River and Narrogin)
Remote (Broome, Carnavon, Derby, Esperance, Karratha, Kununarra, Newman, Port Hedland and Tom Price).
Recycling rates – for the 2012/13 financial year, the Arrangements have to deliver a recycling rate of 30%. This increases over time to 80% by 2021/2.
Page 29
15
WALGA has appointed 2 Arrangements to be Preferred Suppliers for the Scheme in WA – both of these Arrangements have to deliver the same outcomes i.e. 6 access points in Perth etc. The net result will be at least 12 recycling points in Perth and good coverage of recycling in the other areas.
WALGA is still awaiting one of the Preferred Suppliers to complete the contract. Once this is complete, further information will be provided to Local Governments on engaging with the Arrangements. Some have already commenced engagement.
MWAC will host an information session on Friday 22 March focusing on the roll out of the TV’s and Computers Product Stewardship Scheme and including the Preferred Suppliers.
5.7 Cash for Containers***
The Cash for Containers Campaign has continued, with promotion of the online action and the hard copy
petition. A report on the outcomes of the events, online action and hard copy petitions was tabled at the MWAC meeting.
Next steps for the campaign are currently being developed.
Attached pg 30: Report for Cash for Containers Advocacy Campaign February 2013
5.8 Non-Biodegradable Plastic Bags - Update
As of 30 January 2013, the City of Fremantle became the first Local Government in WA to ban retailers
from issuing single–use non–biodegradable plastic bags, via the Plastic Bag Reduction Local Law 2012. Under this Local Law, alternative bags (biodegradable bags or bags above a certain thickness) may be offered to customers, but retailers that do this are required to charge a minimum of 10 cents per bag. The new law will be phased in over six months, as well as a community education campaign.
The Local Law will have to be agreed to by the Joint Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation.
The South Australian Government is yet to release the report detailing the outcomes of the state wide plastic bag ban.
A report detailing the outcomes of the ACT plastic bag ban (effective 1 November 1 2011), has been released. The ban outlawed single use polyethylene bags with a thickness less than 35 microns. The findings demonstrate a general support for the initiative, with:
• 84% of shoppers now taking reusable bags "always or most of the time" when they go shopping; • When asked if they would like the ban to be overturned, 70% of the survey respondents disagreed.
Furthermore, 94% of primary shoppers indicated they would like all plastic bags to be biodegradable; and
• There has been a 41% reduction in the volume of disposable plastic bags distributed in the ACT.
5.9 MWAC Waste to Energy Paper – update
MWAC is awaiting the release of the Waste Authority/EPA review of Waste to Energy Technologies and
regulatory processes for various jurisdictions prior to developing a Discussion Paper on this topic.
To view the presentation at the industry event on 5 December, visit: http://www.zerowaste.wa.gov.au/media/files/documents/WtE_presentation_Dec_2012.pdf
The State Government is yet to release their response to the review.
5.10 Waste Authority Business Plan
The MWAC Executive Officer met with Office of the Waste Authority (OWA) staff to discuss the Waste Authority Business Plan and how the various activities in the Plan would be delivered. OWA staff indicated most projects would be delivered by a mix of OWA/DEC staff and outside consultants/parties as required for each project.
If further specific information is required it was suggested that correspondence be sent to the Waste Authority.
Page 30
16
5.11 Liveable Neighbourhoods
The Department of Planning (DoP) has initiated a review of the Western Australian Planning Commission’s (WAPC) Liveable Neighbourhoods (“LN”) and related planning policies.
The wide range of matters addressed in LN are complex and technical in nature, therefore the Department of Planning (DoP) is seeking early advice from WALGA about the issues that Local Government considers should inform the scope of the review. The LN review is to take place in stages, the first being the identification and capture of all broad LN review matters/issues. To help capture the issues, the DoP has prepared a draft table that identifies:
o What works? – Aspects of LN that has performed well to date. o What can be improved? – Areas that need to be improved to enhance performance. o What hasn’t worked? – Areas that have failed and need comprehensive review & re-work. o What’s missing? – Matters & issues which are currently not included in LN and should be.
Waste management is mentioned in the Utilities section as one of the missing considerations: o Consideration to broader utilities / services such as sustainable energy and waste industries. o Remove land use planning requirements that prevent alternative infrastructure delivery systems
which promote sustainability not limited to cogeneration, waste management.
5.12 Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act Review
As per the legislative requirements, a review of the Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2007 will
occur this year.
DEC, as an initial consultation step, attended the Officers Advisory Group meeting to gather information on the current issues with the WARR and WARR Levy Acts.
Issues raised included: o Long timeframes for development and approval of documents, such as the State Waste Strategy and
the Business Plan; o Some sections of the Act have never been used; o Lack of Proforma Waste Local Laws; o Limited scope for the Act – C&D and C&I not covered/responsibility assigned; o No independent Waste Authority; and o Landfill Levy Regulations.
The process for the Review is; o The Review will commence with a discussion paper, with amendments to the Acts at a later date;
Scope of review limited to the WARR and WARRL Acts and Regulations; o Review process starts 1 July 2013 and must be completed by 30 June 2014; and o Review consultation tentatively planned for July-September 2013.
5.13 Metropolitan Mayors Forum
Metropolitan Mayors met in January to discuss a range of issues of concern for Local Government, these
included waste management.
Mayors were reminded about the role of MWAC and it was stressed that anything the Mayors Forum wanted researched or examined would be done via reference to MWAC.
There was wide ranging discussion including on topics such as: o The diversity of recycling systems across the metropolitan area and the potential to streamline these; o The impact of waste collection on the transport system; o Alternative Waste Treatment; o The lack of consideration of waste management in land development decisions; o The Waste Levy; and o The State’s role in waste management.
Discussion at the Municipal Waste Advisory Council meeting The Executive Manager, Environment and Waste highlighted the outcomes of the meeting, and emphasised that this was not a decision making forum. However the Mayors have recommended that a paper be developed on waste management. The MWAC Chair is on the forum and will be able to provide more information to the next Forum meeting.
Page 31
17
6 REPORTS
6.1 Regional Delegates Report
1. Chairs Report 2. Country Reports 3. Bunbury Harvey Regional Council (BHRC) 4. Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council (EMRC) 5. City of Greater Geraldton (CoGG)
6. Mid West Regional Council 7. Mindarie Regional Council (MRC)
Development of the Mindarie Regional Council’s Strategic Community Plan is progressing well and is on track to be adopted mid-year.
Tenders are about to be sought for the supply and installation of clay lining for Stage 2 Phase 3 of the Tamala Park landfill.
A tip face resource recovery trial has taken place with excellent results. Since October 2012 37 tonnes of mattresses and 212 tonnes of metal have been picked from the member council bulk waste dropped at the site. Apart from increased recycling of these products there is a saving of landfill airspace.
City of Stirling’s withdrawal from the MRC is still pending.
Under the new Federal Government Product Stewardship Scheme for e-waste (TV/computers) the MRC have signed with ANZRP to have them collect e-waste from the Tamala Park site. Over 200 tonnes of e-waste is collected each year at the site.
8. Rivers Regional Council (RRC)
Strategic Community Plan about to commence with completion due end June 2013
Council resolved not the Tender in the recent Pheonix Energy ‘Request to Tender’
Thermal processes (previously excluded) can now be considered by the RRC
Working on a Tender for the ‘Procurement of Recourse Recovery Services’. All going well will be going to Tender in early April
Finalising some ‘changes’ to our Establishment Agreement prior to going to Tender. Draft with Member Councils.
9. Southern Metropolitan Regional Council (SMRC)
Waste Composting Facility - Amended Licence Update o Ministers Appeal Determination - On 13 December 2012 the Hon Bill Marmion MLA, Minister for
Environment issued a Minister’s Appeal Determination in response to seven appeals lodged in May 2012.
o A copy of the Minister’s Appeal Determination can be found at: http://portal.appealsconvenor.wa.gov.au/pls/portal/docs/page/oac/admin_content/decision_summaries/2012/027-033-12%20ministers%20appeal%20determination_13dec12.pdf
o The Appeals Convenor’s Report to the Minister can be found at www.appealsconvenor.wa.gov.au or via the SMRC website www.smrc.com.au .
Page 32
18
o The licence will now be further amended to reflect the Ministers Appeal Determination requiring DEC to improve elements of the licence in particular around public reporting and management of complaints.
Reacceptance of Municipal Solid Waste o As a precautionary measure the SMRC voluntarily suspended taking waste from 15 December
2012 due to circumstances beyond its control in finalising the humidifier work. All six humidifiers have now been installed and commissioned with further work being undertaken to optimise the new system to achieve effective and efficient management and ensure ongoing compliance with the conditions of licence.
o It is anticipated that the licence will be amended to reflect the Minister’s Determination to not only require a report to the DEC confirming that the humidifiers have been constructed as designed, but also a further requirement to provide a testing regime, monitoring and management reports that will require approval of the DEC prior to waste being received into the facility.
o There will also be a requirement to initially limit the volume of waste processed at the facility and a ramping up schedule to the licenced capacity will need to be provided to and approved by the DEC.
o The amended licence to operate is expected to be issued in mid-February 2013.
Carbon Credits Generated by AWT through the Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI) o Since the introduction of the CFI in September 2011 SMRC has been working with other AWT
operators around Australia to develop and have approved a methodology for determination of carbon credits generated by AWT such as waste composting facilities.
o The methodology has now been enacted as law: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L00161 o The legislation “Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) (Diversion of Legacy Waste to an
Alternative Waste Treatment Facility) Methodology Determination 2013” will enable SMRC and other eligible AWT operators to sell carbon credits generated during the two year period of July 2010 to June 2012.
o SMRC expects to be in position to market these carbon credits by May 2013.
Strategic Plan Review o SMRC is currently undertaking a review of its Strategic Community Plan and Corporate Business
Plan though workshops with stakeholders. He review is expected to be completed by March 2013
10. Western Metropolitan Regional Council (WMRC) Currently recruiting a Chief Executive Officer.
Construction of the DiCOM waste processing system is now complete and will commence commissioning imminently. This is almost a year behind schedule and is now expected to reach full scale operations in late 2013.
Signed TV & Computer Product Stewardship Agreement with DHL for Brockway Transfer Station.
11. Forum of Regional Councils (FoRC)
The FORC representative highlighted the publicity campaign that was underway and the aforementioned Report on municipal waste infrastructure.
6.2 Working Groups/Committee Reports
1. Waste Management Association of Australia (WA) Representative: MWAC Executive Officer The Executive Officer was unable to attend the most recent WMAA meeting, but will provide an update based on the Minutes if necessary.
2. Australian Packaging Covenant (APC)
Delegates/Nominees: MWAC Executive Officer The Australian Packaging Covenant Council has not met since the last MWAC Meeting. As part of MWAC’s commitment to the Covenant, the promotion of the Packaging Complaints Line has commenced – this includes MWAC staff submitting complaints about specific packaging on behalf of the sector.
3. National Waste Policy Working Groups
Delegates/Nominees: MWAC Executive Officer and MWAC Policy Coordinator The Executive Officer is a representative of ALGA on three working groups relating to the National Waste Policy (Markets & Standards, Landfill, Reducing hazards and risk). The Markets and Standards Working Group have met
Page 33
19
to discuss the Work Plan for the coming year; key focuses will include the integration of Green Procurement into Government processes.
4. Electrical, Utilities and Public Administration Training Council – Waste Industry Working
Group Delegates/Nominees: MWAC Executive Officer This Group has not met since the last MWAC meeting.
5. Regional Investment Plan Assessment Group
Delegates/Nominees: MWAC Executive Officer, Ms Rebecca Goodwin, Mr Mark Wong This Group does not meet, but assesses the projects put forward as part of the RIP Program. Several projects have been assessed since the previous MWAC meeting.
6. HHW Program Advisory Committee
Delegates/Nominees: Mr Peter Hoar This group has not met since the previous MWAC meeting.
7. State Waste Planning Infrastructure Project Delegates/Nominees: Mr Brian Calendar Mr Calendar provided a brief update on the progress of the Committee to date.
6.3 Correspondence
The Municipal Waste Advisory Council correspondence report from 20 December 2012 to 20 February 2013 was tabled at the meeting.
MUNICIPAL WASTE ADVISORY COUNCIL MOTION (CR WILLIS/CR CAMPBELL) That the Municipal Waste Advisory Council correspondence report from 20 December 2012 to 20 February 2013 be received.
7 OTHER GENERAL BUSINESS The meeting closed at 7.10pm.
8 NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the Municipal Waste Advisory Council will be held at Local Government House, Boardroom at 4:00pm on Wednesday 24 April 2013.
Page 34
