Meeting 5 of 8 GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND … · 2015. 11. 27. · 1.1 Region-wide On-site Stormwater Management Baseline Report dated September 22, 2015 from Robert Hicks, Senior

November 19, 2015

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

REGULAR BOARD MEETING Friday, November 27, 2015

9:00 A.M. 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia

Membership and Votes

A G E N D A1

A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1. November 27, 2015 Regular Meeting AgendaThat the GVS&DD Board adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled forNovember 27, 2015 as circulated.

B. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

1. October 30, 2015 Regular Meeting MinutesThat the GVS&DD Board adopt the minutes for its regular meeting heldOctober 30, 2015 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 Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant – Quarterly Report That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report titled “Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant – Quarterly Report” dated October 29, 2015.

1 Note: Recommendation is shown under each item, where applicable.

Meeting 5 of 8

Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District - 1

http://www.metrovancouver.org/boards/membership/board-members/Pages/GVSDD.aspx

GVS&DD Board Agenda November 27, 2015 Agenda Page 2 of 3

1.2 Liquid Waste Public Outreach Program – Residential Grease Pilot Behaviour Change Project Update That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report titled “Liquid Waste Public Outreach Program – Residential Grease Pilot Behaviour Change Project Update”, dated October 15, 2015.

2. ZERO WASTE COMMITTEE REPORTS

2.1 Transfer Station Operation and Maintenance Services Procurement That the GVS&DD Board approve the evaluation criteria and weighting for the following transfer station operations Requests for Proposals: Surrey and North Shore Transfer Stations: Experience and Reputation (30%); Technical (30%); Financial and Commercial (40%); and Langley and Maple Ridge Transfer Stations: Qualifications (30%); Technical (30%); Financial and Commercial (40%).

2.2 2015 Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan Biennial Report That the GVS&DD Board approve the submission of the 2015 Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan Biennial Report to the Ministry of Environment.

2.3 Update on Waste-to-Energy Facility Operational Certificate Progress That the GVS&DD Board receive the report dated November 5, 2015 titled, “Update on Waste-to-Energy Facility Operational Certificate Progress” for information.

2.4 Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline Update That the GVS&DD Board receive for information Metro Vancouver’s comments on the BC Ministry of Environment’s Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline – Intentions Paper for submission to the Ministry of Environment.

F. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA

G. REPORTS NOT INCLUDED IN CONSENT AGENDA

1. UTILITIES COMMITTEE REPORT

1.1 GVS&DD Fermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294 and Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 295 1. That the GVS&DD Board:

a) Give first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Sewerage andDrainage District Fermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294, 2015; and

b) Pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Fermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294, 2015.

2. That the GVS&DD Board:a) Give, first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Sewerage and

Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 295, 2015; andb) Pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District

Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 295, 2015.


GVS&DD Board Agenda November 27, 2015 Agenda Page 3 of 3

2. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER REPORTS

2.1 GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 292, 2015 That the GVS&DD Board: a) Pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District

Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 292, 2015.b) Direct the Corporate Officer to forward a certified copy of Greater Vancouver

Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No.292, 2015 to the Local Government Infrastructure and Finance Branch.

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 November 27, 2015 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (e) and (j) 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

(j) information that is prohibited, or information that if it were presented in a document would be prohibited, from disclosure under section 21 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.”

L. RISE AND REPORT (Items Released from Closed Meeting)

M. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION That the GVS&DD Board adjourn/conclude its regular meeting of November 27, 2015.


Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, October 30, 2015 Page 1 of 5

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 10:02 a.m. on Friday, October 30, 2015 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia.

MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Director Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam Vice Chair, Director Raymond Louie, Vancouver Director Wayne Baldwin, White Rock (arrived at 10:03 a.m.) Director Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Alternate Director Adriane Carr, Vancouver for Kerry Jang Director Mike Clay, Port Moody Director Jonathan Coté, New Westminster Director Heather Deal, Vancouver Director Sav Dhaliwal, Burnaby (departed at 10:14 a.m.) Alternate Director Jack Froese, Langley Township for Charlie Fox Director Maria Harris, Electoral Area A Director Bruce Hayne, Surrey Director Craig Hodge, Coquitlam Director Lois Jackson, Delta Director Colleen Jordan, Burnaby Alternate Director Vera LeFranc, Surrey for Linda Hepner Director Bob Long, Langley Township (arrived at 10:03 a.m.) Director Mary Martin, Surrey Alternate Director Linda McPhail, Richmond for Harold Steves Director Geoff Meggs, Vancouver (departed at 10:13 a.m.) Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Director Nicole Read, Maple Ridge Director Gregor Robertson, Vancouver (departed at 10:16 a.m.) Director Michael Smith, West Vancouver Director Barbara Steele, Surrey Director Tim Stevenson, Vancouver (arrived at 10:07 a.m.) Director Richard Stewart, Coquitlam Director Rudy Storteboom, Langley City Director Judy Villeneuve, Surrey Director Richard Walton, North Vancouver District Commissioner Carol Mason*

MEMBERS ABSENT: Director John Becker, Pitt Meadows Director Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Director Andrea Reimer, Vancouver

* Non-voting member.

Section B 1



STAFF PRESENT: Deanna Manojlovic, Assistant to Regional Committees, Board and Information Services, Legal

and Legislative Services Chris Plagnol, Director, Board and Information Services/Corporate Officer, Legal and Legislative

Services A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1. October 30, 2015 Regular Meeting Agenda

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for October 30, 2015 as circulated.

CARRIED

B. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

1. October 9, 2015 Regular Meeting Minutes It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board adopt the minutes for its regular meeting held October 9, 2015 as circulated.

CARRIED C. DELEGATIONS No items presented. D. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented. 10:03 a.m. Directors Baldwin and Long arrived at the meeting. E. CONSENT AGENDA

The following items were removed from the Consent Agenda, in the following order, for consideration under Section F. Items Removed from the Consent Agenda: 3.1 2016 GVS&DD Budgets – Liquid Waste and Solid Waste 2.2 Food Scraps Campaign Update It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board adopt the recommendations contained in the following items presented in the October 30, 2015 GVS&DD Board Consent Agenda: 1.1 Region-wide On-site Stormwater Management Baseline 2.1 Update on Extended Producer Responsibility Programs

CARRIED



The items and recommendations referred to above are as follows:

1.1 Region-wide On-site Stormwater Management Baseline Report dated September 22, 2015 from Robert Hicks, Senior Engineer, Policy Planning and Analysis, Liquid Waste Services, seeking approval to consult with stakeholders, including homebuilder and relevant industries on the proposed criteria and supporting implementation options for a region‐wide baseline for on‐site stormwater management.

Recommendation: That the GVS&DD Board direct staff to consult with stakeholders on the proposed criteria and implementation options for a region-wide baseline for on-site stormwater management as presented in the report titled “Region-wide On-site Stormwater Management Baseline” dated September 22, 2015.

Adopted on Consent

2.1 Update on Extended Producer Responsibility Programs Report dated September 30, 2015 from Andrew Doi, Environmental Planner, Solid Waste Services, informing about the results of the 2014 Annual Reports published by all of the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Programs.

Recommendation: That the GVS&DD Board receive the report dated September 30, 2015, titled “Update on Extended Producer Responsibility Programs” for information.

Adopted on Consent

F. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA Items removed from the Consent Agenda were considered in numerical order.

2.2 Food Scraps Campaign Update Report dated September 28, 2015 from Larina Lopez, Division Manager, Corporate Communications, External Relations, updating the GVS&DD Board on the next phase of the food scraps campaign in support of the Organics Disposal Ban and increasing food scraps recycling.

10:07 a.m. Director Stevenson arrived at the meeting.

Members were provided with a presentation on the next phase of the food scraps campaign highlighting: marketing; the four new characters; campaign elements; performance measurement; and shared artwork resources.

Members offered comments about addressing the issue of compostable bags in a future campaign and working with schools to promote the campaign.

Presentation titled “Food Scraps Campaign” is retained with the October 30, 2015 GVS&DD Board meeting agenda.



10:13 a.m. Director Meggs departed the meeting. 10:14 a.m. Director Dhaliwal departed the meeting.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board receive the report dated September 28, 2015, titled “Food Scraps Campaign Update” for information.

CARRIED

3.1 2016 GVS&DD Budgets – Liquid Waste and Solid Waste Report dated October 20, 2015 from Phil Trotzuk, Chief Financial Officer, seeking approval of the 2016 Revenue and Expenditure Budgets, and use of Reserves and Capital Expenditures for GVS&DD Solid and Liquid waste functions.

10:16 a.m. Director Robertson departed the meeting. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board approve the 2016 Revenue and Expenditure Budgets, use of Reserves, and Capital Expenditures as shown in the following schedules: A1 Revenue and Expenditure Summary A4 2016 Budget - Proposed Application of Reserves B6 GVS&DD Liquid Waste 2016 Budget B8-B11 GVS&DD Liquid Waste 2016 Capital Programs & Project Details B12 GVS&DD Solid Waste 2016 Budget B14 GVS&DD Solid Waste 2016 Capital Programs & Project Details B15 GVS&DD Solid Waste 2016 Wastech Services Capital Plan

CARRIED Alternate Director Carr absent at the vote.

G. REPORTS NOT INCLUDED IN CONSENT AGENDA

1.1 2016 Tipping Fee Bylaw Report dated October 1, 2015 from Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services, proposing an updated “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw No. 293, 2015” to be implemented January 1, 2016. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw No. 293, 2015”.

CARRIED Director Clay voted in the negative.



It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw No. 293, 2015”.

CARRIED Director Clay voted in the negative.

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

No items presented. L. RISE AND REPORT (Items Released from Closed Meeting) No items presented. M. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board conclude its regular meeting of October 30, 2015.

CARRIED (Time: 10:17 a.m.)

CERTIFIED CORRECT

Chris Plagnol, Corporate Officer

Greg Moore, Chair

12135188 FINAL


Section E 1.1

To: Utilities Committee From: Fred Nenninger, Director, Policy Planning and Analysis Date: October 29, 2015 Meeting Date: November 12, 2015 Subject: Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant – Quarterly Report

RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report titled “Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant – Quarterly Report” dated October 29, 2015.

PURPOSE To update the Board on the work underway for the Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant (LGSWWTP) project. BACKGROUND In accordance with the Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan approved by the BC Minister of Environment in 2011, the Lions Gate Plant is required to be upgraded to secondary treatment by December 31, 2020. The Board authorized funds in 2011 and subsequent budgets to proceed with the initial work. PROJECT STATUS Work is proceeding with the preparation of the procurement documents for the design‐build‐finance contract of the LGSWWTP. An information webinar was held for parties interested in the project on July 28, 2015. Over 100 interested parties participated in the webinar. The Request for Qualifications for the purpose of shortlisting pre‐qualified proponents for the project was released on September 28, 2015 and is scheduled to close on December 17, 2015. This is the first step of the procurement process. The Request for Proposals for the design‐build‐finance contract is scheduled to be issued to the shortlisted proponents in March 2016 in order to meet the regulatory timeline to complete the secondary treatment upgrade. The final award of the contract is anticipated in early 2017. Project Funding Update At the Board’s direction, Metro Vancouver formally applied for P3 Canada funding in June 2015 as part of Round 7 of P3 Canada’s intake. On October 29th Metro Vancouver received notification from P3 Canada that, following their review of the Round 7 intake applications, the Lions Gate Secondary Treatment Plant project was not screened‐in to the program for further consideration (Attachment 1). P3 Canada confirmed that their program priority is to fund full P3 projects that include long‐term operation and maintenance as part of the contract. This decision renders the New Building Canada Fund the only funding program available to the project. Given this decision, Metro Vancouver will follow up with the Province on the funding application previously submitted for the project for consideration under the New Building Canada Fund.


Metro Vancouver received a letter from BC Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development Peter Fassbender, dated September 3, 2015, that acknowledged a previous Metro Vancouver letter addressed to Minister Stone and confirmed that the Lions Gate Project is recognized as “provincially significant”. Minister Fassbender also indicated that his senior staff will continue to work with relevant ministries “in identifying appropriate funding mechanisms”. Metro Vancouver is working with staff in Minister Fassbender’s office to secure a meeting with the Minister to update him on the Lions Gate project. Metro Vancouver met with Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Todd Stone on September 21 during the UBCM Convention in Vancouver to update him on the Lions Gate Project. Metro Vancouver staff also met with senior officials from the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure and the Ministry of Environment to brief them on the current status of the Lions Gate project. With the Federal election now over, Metro Vancouver will soon be requesting meetings with the new North Shore MPs and appropriate federal Ministers to pursue funding for the Lions Gate project. Engagement and Consultation Program Update The engagement and consultation program for the Design and Construction phase focuses on community integration, traffic and construction impacts, and education and awareness opportunities. Metro Vancouver hosted a booth at Norgate Community Day (August 15) to continue to build the relationship between Metro Vancouver and the community. The Metro Vancouver Board approved the Lions Gate Public Advisory Committee membership in July and the inaugural meeting was held on September 24 with next meetings planned on a monthly basis through to February 2016. A project update was given to the North Shore Waterfront Liaison Group (Sept 22). Metro Vancouver staff continue ongoing discussions with affected First Nations. ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Project initiation is proceeding in accordance with the current schedule and within the $20M budget approved by the Board in 2011 for the initial project work. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION A Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was issued on September 28, 2015 and is scheduled to close on December 17 for the purpose of pre‐qualifying proponents. This is the first step in the procurement process. The Request for Proposal for the design‐build‐finance contract is scheduled for issue in March 2016 in order to meet the regulatory timeline to complete the secondary upgrade project. P3 Canada recently notified Metro Vancouver that the Lions Gate Secondary Treatment Plant project has not been screened‐in to their program. Given this decision Metro Vancouver will follow up with the Province on the application previously submitted for the project for consideration under the New Building Canada Fund. With the Federal election now over, Metro Vancouver will soon be requesting meetings with the new North Shore MPs and appropriate federal Ministers to pursue funding for the Lions Gate project.


The Lions Gate Public Advisory Committee for the design and construction phase has been established. The engagement and consultation program for this fall focuses on providing an update on the project and opportunity for public input into community integration and mitigation planning for construction as well as education and awareness opportunities. Attachment

1. Letter from PPP Canada dated October 21, 2015 re: Application to Round Seven of the P3 Canada Fund ‐ Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant

11886860


Attachment


Section E 1.2

To: Utilities Committee From: Larina Lopez, Corporate Communications Division Manager, External Relations

Department Date: October 15, 2015 Meeting Date: November 12, 2015 Subject: Liquid Waste Public Outreach Program – Residential Grease Pilot Behaviour Change

Project Update

RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report titled “Liquid Waste Public Outreach Program – Residential Grease Pilot Behaviour Change Project Update”, dated October 15, 2015.

PURPOSE To provide an update to the Committee and the GVS&DD Board on the residential grease pilot behaviour change project in the City of Surrey to reduce the disposal by residents of grease into the sewer system. BACKGROUND Metro Vancouver’s Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan, approved by the Minister of Environment in 2011, as well as the Liquid Waste strategic direction in the Board Strategic Plan, requires the development and implementation of targeted outreach initiatives to support liquid waste source control programs to protect the environment and human health. Metro Vancouver and many of its municipalities are experiencing ongoing sewer maintenance problems because of the incorrect disposal of grease (including fats and oils). Grease hardens in sewers, resulting in clogged sewers and sewage overflows into the environment. Metro Vancouver and its municipalities spend an estimated $2 million every year to deal with these issues. The main sources of grease in sewers are residences and commercial kitchens (restaurants). Metro Vancouver is conducting a pilot project in collaboration with the City of Surrey to test approaches to convince residents to put grease in their green bins, instead of sinks or toilets. The City of Surrey was selected for this pilot because it has:

a regular program to remove grease in problem areas the ability to measure grease build‐up over time staff who are supporting the project a curbside organics collection program that accepts grease

Findings from this pilot will be used to develop a regional grease campaign for 2016. Metro Vancouver is also working with the BC Restaurant and Food Association (BCRFA) to develop approaches for the restaurant sector for 2016.


RESIDENTIAL GREASE PILOT BEHAVIOUR CHANGE PROJECT UPDATE The grease pilot behaviour change project will be launched in the City of Surrey on November 2, 2015 and will run until December 14. The campaign will target all of the City of Surrey, but will have an increased presence in two sub‐areas where measurement will take place. These sub‐areas are: 60th to 72nd Avenue and from 125th to 136th St (north Surrey) and 2) south of 32nd Ave, west of 140th St (south Surrey, mainly Ocean Park and Crescent Beach). The City of Surrey will measure grease build‐up in selected pipes in these two sub‐areas over the next year. Because grease builds up slowly in most areas, a longer measuring time is needed to be able to establish trends. Grease build‐up will be measured by filming the inside of pipes, to compare build‐up before and after the pilot. A post‐awareness survey of residents will be done in early December to get a more immediate sense of pilot project results. Creative materials The pilot project materials have been developed around the “Grease Clogs Pipes” concept, with the call to action to “Wipe it. Green bin it.” The concept shows a frying pan filled with grease, with one of four emojis drawn into the grease to evoke the emotion/expression that can result from clogged pipes). During development, various materials were tested in focus groups and it became clear that a simple message resonated most with the audience. The focus groups showed that many people were unaware that grease can be disposed of in green bins in most municipalities. Collaboration with City of Surrey Metro Vancouver staff have been working with the City of Surrey communications and engineering staff on this pilot project. The City of Surrey will be responsible for measuring grease build‐up in pipes in the project sub‐areas and are making their communications channels available for the project. Vikram Vij, a local restaurant owner, has also collaborated with Metro Vancouver and the City of Surrey to film a public service announcement for the pilot. Communications channels Metro Vancouver will be using a variety of channels to reach residents with grease messaging throughout Surrey. These include bus shelters, geo‐targeted online ads, various social media channels, newspaper inserts (including in South Asian media). A whiteboard video and public service announcement on grease will be viewable on YouTube. The City of Surrey is also making its communications channels available, including bus shelters and social media. Since it is difficult to reach people in their kitchens where grease disposal is taking place, the campaign will instead try to reach people in areas related to food preparation and /or purchasing. The “Grease Clogs Pipes” creative will be placed on grocery bars in stores and discussions are currently underway with a retail partner to do outreach in their grocery stores. A limited amount of “Wipe it. Green Bin it.” pot scrapers, will also be distributed at strategic locations, allowing the opportunity for conversations with residents about the issue and how they can prevent it. Evaluation The pilot project’s success will be evaluated based on the reduction of grease in the sewers in the two sub‐areas and a post‐campaign survey of residents. Metro Vancouver staff will also track website traffic, media coverage and social media activity to assess the number of people receiving information on how to properly dispose of grease.


ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Expenditures for the grease pilot project are $130,000 (including costs incurred for the development of creative materials, the whiteboard video, focus groups, targeted media buy, and post awareness surveys). SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The disposal of grease down the sinks and toilets can cause serious problems for the sewer system, including clogged sewers and sewage overflows into the environment. Metro Vancouver and the City of Surrey are collaborating on a behaviour change pilot to test approaches to this problem. The information from this pilot project will be used to adjust and improve regional approaches as part of a 2016 campaign focusing on residential grease. In addition, two commercial behaviour change pilots will be undertaken and supported by the Liquid Waste Sustainable Innovation Fund.


To: GVS&DD Board of Directors From: Zero Waste Committee Date: November 17, 2015 Meeting Date: November 27, 2015 Subject: Transfer Station Operation and Maintenance Services Procurement

ZERO WASTE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board approve the evaluation criteria and weighting for the following transfer station operations Requests for Proposals: Surrey and North Shore Transfer Stations: Experience and Reputation (30%); Technical (30%); Financial and Commercial (40%); and Langley and Maple Ridge Transfer Stations: Qualifications (30%); Technical (30%); Financial and Commercial (40%). At its November 12, 2015 meeting, the Zero Waste Committee considered the attached report titled “Transfer Station Operation and Maintenance Services Procurement”, dated November 3, 2015. The Committee subsequently amended the recommendation as presented above in underline. Attachment: “Transfer Station Operation and Maintenance Services Procurement”, dated November 3, 2015. 12249534

Section E 2.1


To: Zero Waste Committee From: Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services Date: November 3, 2015 Meeting Date: November 12, 2015 Subject: Transfer Station Operation and Maintenance Services Procurement

RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board approve the evaluation criteria and weighting for the following transfer station operations Requests for Proposals: Surrey and North Shore Transfer Stations: Technical (40%); Financial and Commercial (60%); and Langley and Maple Ridge Transfer Stations: Qualifications (30%); Technical (30%); Financial and Commercial (40%). PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to update the Board on the procurement process for transfer station operations and seek Board approval of the evaluation criteria and weighting for the transfer station Requests for Proposals. BACKGROUND The operation of Metro Vancouver’s transfer station system is currently contracted to Wastech Services Ltd. and SSG Holdings Ltd. Both contracts will expire on December 31, 2016. Services are being procured through competitive processes designed to ensure value for money, effective operations and open competition. On July 15th a Request for Qualifications (RFQ No. 15‐132) was issued to invite interested parties to submit statements of qualifications with respect to the provision of services for the operation and maintenance of the Surrey and North Shore Transfer Stations. The RFQ closed on August 27th. Responses were received from the following eight companies listed in alphabetical order:

1. Cascades Recovery Inc. 2. Covanta Burnaby Renewable Energy, ULC 3. Emterra Environmental (Halton Recycling Ltd.) 4. MCL Waste Systems & Environmental Inc. 5. Miller Waste Systems Inc. 6. SENA Waste Services Inc. 7. SSG Holdings Ltd. 8. Wastech Services Ltd.

The responses were evaluated by a committee to prequalify a shortlist of five proponents to respond to the Request for Proposals for the operation and maintenance of the Surrey and North Shore Transfer Stations. The RFQ included a provision to add the Coquitlam Transfer Station to the scope of the procurement process at a later date. A decision on Coquitlam is expected to be made

ATTACHMENT


in advance of issuing the RFP. The key evaluation criteria in the RFQ included experience of company, experience of personnel, legislative compliance, regulatory compliance and references. Completion of a Conflict of Interest form was also a requirement. COMPETITIVE SELECTION PROCESS Shortlisted Proponents for Surrey and North Shore Transfer Stations The proponents shortlisted by the evaluation committee to respond to a Request for Proposals to operate and maintain the Surrey and North Shore Transfer Stations listed in alphabetical order are:

1. Covanta Burnaby Renewable Energy, ULC 2. Emterra Environmental (Halton Recycling Ltd.) 3. Miller Waste Systems Inc. 4. SSG Holdings Ltd. 5. Wastech Services Ltd.

The Request for Proposals is expected to be issued in late 2015. RFP for Langley and Maple Ridge Transfer Stations An additional Request for Proposals for Langley and Maple Ridge Transfer Stations will be issued at the same time. A prequalification stage was not required for the Langley and Maple Ridge Transfer Stations because the scale and complexity of those transfer stations is less than Surrey and North Shore. It is anticipated that operating and maintenance services contracts resulting from both procurement processes will be in place by June 2016, with operations commencing on January 2, 2017. Transfer Station Operating Hours Metro Vancouver’s transfer stations have a range of operating hours as a result of historic arrangements made for individual facilities. As part of the current procurement process there is a benefit in standardizing transfer station operating hours where practical. The attached tables show both the current hours and the hours that will be included in the transfer station Requests for Proposals. The tables have been shared with REAC Solid Waste Sub‐Committee for comment. Any required adjustments to operating hours can be made in advance of finalizing the transfer station operating contracts. Evaluation Criteria for the Surrey and North Shore Request for Proposals (RFP) The following evaluation criteria is proposed to evaluate responses to the RFP for the operation and maintenance of the Surrey and North Shore Transfer Stations. These criteria reflect technical and financial requirements. Financial and Commercial elements of the proponents’ proposals will be assessed relatively high given all of the proponents have been prequalified. Technical (40%):

Structure and composition of the operations team of personnel Start‐up plan Operations and maintenance methodology


Financial and Commercial (60%):

Pricing, including total estimated annual cost Financial capability, including confirmation that the proponent has the ability to meet

specified insurance and bonding requirements Acceptance of, or requested changes to, the draft contract attached to the RFP

Evaluation Criteria for the Langley and Maple Ridge Request for Proposals The following evaluation criteria is proposed for the operation and maintenance of the Langley and Maple Ridge Transfer Stations. Since no pre‐qualification process was undertaken for these transfer stations (as discussed above) corporate and staff experience is included in the evaluation criteria. Qualifications (30%):

Experience of proponent Experience of proponent’s personnel Legislative and regulatory compliance References

Technical (30%):

Structure and composition of the operations team of personnel Start‐up plan Operations and maintenance methodology

Financial and Commercial (40%):

Pricing, including total estimated annual cost Financial capability, including confirmation that the proponent has the ability to meet

specified insurance and bonding requirements Acceptance of, or requested changes to, the draft contract attached to the RFP

Expected Project Schedule and Activities/Process

RFPs issued in late 2015 RFPs close in second quarter of 2016 Report to Board for approval to award contract in the second quarter of 2016 Contractors commence operations on January 2, 2017

ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board approve the evaluation criteria and weighting for the following

transfer station operations Requests for Proposals: Surrey and North Shore Transfer Stations: Technical (40%); Financial and Commercial (60%); and Langley and Maple Ridge Transfer Stations: Qualifications (30%); Technical (30%); Financial and Commercial (40%).

2. That the GVS&DD Board receive the report dated November 3, 2015 titled, “Transfer Station Operation and Maintenance Services Procurement” for information and provide alternate direction to staff.


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the Board approves Alternative 1 and Metro Vancouver issues the two RFPs, staff will report back to the Board for authorization to award contracts in the second quarter of 2016. The contracts have an estimated total annual value of approximately $10M. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION This report provides the Board with an update on the prequalification process for the operation and maintenance of the Surrey and North Shore Transfer Stations and seeks Board approval of the proposed evaluation criteria for the two proposed Request for Proposals (including Langley/Maple Ridge RFP). Staff recommend that the Board approve the evaluation criteria and weighting. Metro Vancouver will then proceed with issuance of the two RFPs and report back to the Board for approval to award the contracts spring 2016. Attachments and References: Attachment: Transfer Station Operating Hours 12046670


Transfer Station Operating Hours Site Type M ‐F S ‐ S Stats Closures Coquitlam Transfer Station

Public 6:30am ‐ 5pm 8am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 5pm Dec 25 and Jan 1

Commercial 5:30am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 5pm Dec 25 and Jan 1 Surrey Transfer Station Public 8am ‐ 5pm 8am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 5pm Dec 25 and Jan 1 Commercial 6:30am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 5pm Dec 25 and Jan 1 North Shore Transfer Station

Public 8am ‐ 7pm 8am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 5pm Dec 25 and Jan 1

April 1 ‐ Oct 31 Commercial 6:30am ‐ 7pm 8am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 5pm Dec 25 and Jan 1 Public 8am ‐ 7pm 8am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 5pm Dec 25 and Jan 1

Nov 1 ‐ March 31 Commercial 6:30am ‐ 5pm 8am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 5pm Dec 25 and Jan 1 Public 8am‐5pm 8am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 5pm Dec 25 and Jan 1

Langley Transfer Station

Public 8am ‐ 5pm 8am ‐ 5pm closed all stat holidays

Maple Ridge Transfer Station

Public 8am ‐ 7pm (Tu ‐ W) 8am – 5pm (M, Th, F)

8am ‐ 5pm closed all stat holidays

Proposed Transfer Station Operating Hours beginning in 2017 Site Season M ‐F Saturday Sunday Stats* Surrey, and North Shore Transfer Stations

Apr 1 ‐ Sept 30 5:30am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 6pm 9am ‐ 5pm 9am ‐ 5pm

Oct 1 ‐ March 31 5:30am ‐ 5pm 8am ‐ 5pm 9am ‐ 5pm 9am ‐ 5pm Langley and Maple Ridge Transfer Stations**

Apr 1 ‐ Sept 30 8am ‐ 6pm 8am ‐ 6pm 9am ‐ 5pm 9am ‐ 5pm

Oct 1 ‐ March 31 8am ‐ 5pm 8am ‐ 5pm 9am ‐ 5pm 9am ‐ 5pm * All facilities will be closed December 25th and January 1st ** Maple Ridge Transfer Station stat holiday hours are under discussion with the District of Maple Ridge

ATTACHMENT


To: Zero Waste Committee From: Andrew Marr, Director of Solid Waste Planning, Solid Waste Services Date: November 3, 2015 Meeting Date: November 12, 2015 Subject: 2015 Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan Biennial Report RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board approve the submission of the 2015 Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan Biennial Report to the Ministry of Environment.

PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to seek authorization to submit the 2015 Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan Biennial Report to the Ministry of Environment. BACKGROUND The Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP) identifies actions for Metro Vancouver, member municipalities, and senior levels of government. As outlined in the Minister of Environment’s letter of July 22, 2011 approving the ISWRMP, Metro Vancouver must submit a progress report on implementation of the ISWRMP every second year. The first ISWRMP Biennial report was submitted to the Ministry of Environment in 2013. BIENNIAL REPORT FORMAT The ISWRMP Biennial Progress report (attached) comprises three sections:

Summary ‐ A high level summary of the key activities for each of the main strategies in the ISWRMP, and of the main ISWRMP performance measures.

Detailed ISWRMP Actions – A complete listing of all strategies and actions in the ISWRMP, with the current status of implementation for each individual action.

Detailed ISWRMP Performance Measures – Complete information on the performance measures in the ISWRMP, including estimated wastes disposed and materials recycled for the Metro Vancouver region, energy and greenhouse gases.

REPORT HIGHLIGHTS Selected highlights of the ISWRMP Biennial Progress report include:

Formation of the National Zero Waste Council and working groups to reduce waste through redesign of products, packaging, and policies and the sharing of educational resources.

Stakeholder engagement and industry consultation leading to the implementation of the Organics Disposal Ban that came into effect January 1, 2015.

Stakeholder engagement and consultation leading to the implementation of the Clean Wood Disposal Ban that came into effect on January 1, 2015.

Community‐based social marketing pilots in multi‐family homes, and a multi‐family recycling and organics diversion tool kit for property managers.

Section E 2.2


Broad advertising and social media campaigns, such as the Christmas “Create Memories not Garbage” campaign, and Organics “Food isn’t Garbage” campaign.

Creation of a local Love Food Hate Waste website and campaign based on the successful program in the UK, which promotes residential food waste reduction.

Feasibility studies and trials for salvaging and reusing materials at transfer stations, and to explore incentives for increasing recycling.

Working group with stakeholders to improve disposal ban effectiveness. Coordination of implementation of Packaging and Printed Paper stewardship for single family

residences through MMBC, and testing of recycling systems for public spaces. Coordination of member municipalities’ input in implementing EPR for Packaging and Printed

Paper as it expands to the Multi‐Family Residential, and ICI sectors. Tracking and evaluation of regional waste flows, composition, and recycling markets. Technical assistance to municipalities that introduced demolition recycling requirements. Designated spaces at regional transfer stations for drop‐off of clean wood for recycling. Development of a strategy for implementation and funding of dedicated recycling services at

regional transfer stations. Ongoing regulatory program conducting about 350 inspections of 49 private licensed solid

waste facilities (brokers, composters, material recovery facilities, and one landfill), that managed about 290,000 tonnes of organics and 600,000 tonnes of recyclables in 2014.

Investigation of district energy opportunities for the existing waste‐to‐energy facility. Continued regulatory compliance, residuals management, and improved environmental

performance at the existing waste‐to‐energy facility. New waste‐to‐energy capacity development.

In calendar 2014:

Waste generation per capita fluctuates from year to year but overall has declined from its high of 1.6 tonnes per capita in 2007 to 1.36 tonnes per capita.

The waste diversion rate increased to 61%, its highest rate ever, and up slightly from 60% in 2013.

The per capita disposal rate dropped to 0.53 tonnes per capita, its lowest rate ever, down from 0.55 tonnes per capita in 2013.

Stakeholder Feedback The Biennial report incorporates feedback given by REAC Solid Waste Sub‐Committee members. A copy of the report will also be circulated to a database of stakeholders when the November 12, 2015 Zero Waste Committee agenda is published. Stakeholder feedback will be included with the Biennial report submission to the Ministry of Environment. That feedback will be summarized and reported to the Zero Waste Committee at its next meeting and considered when developing the 2016 Zero Waste Committee work plan. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board approve the submission of the 2015 Integrated Solid Waste and Resource

Management Plan Biennial Report to the Ministry of Environment. 2. That the Zero Waste Committee receive the 2015 Integrated Solid Waste and Resource

Management Plan Biennial Report for information and provide alternate direction with respect to finalizing the report.


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Metro Vancouver’s ISWRMP initiatives are implemented through the annual Solid Waste Services budget. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION In his approval of the Integrated Solid Waste and Resources Management Plan, the Minister of Environment required that Metro Vancouver submit an implementation progress report every second year. The first ISWRMP Biennial Report was submitted in 2013. The second ISWRMP Biennial Report is provided for the Board’s consideration prior to submitting to the Ministry of Environment. Attachments and References: Attachment: 2015 Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan Biennial Report 12074377


Biennial Progress ReportIntegrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan

November 201

PHOTO GOES HERE

ATTACHMENT


5 | P a g e

This page intentionally left blank

12168492


6 | P a g e

Contents

I. Summary ‐ A high level summary of the key activities for each of the main strategies in the ISWRMP, and of the main ISWRMP performance measures..............................................................................Page 1

II. Detailed ISWRMP Actions – A complete listing of all actions in the ISWRMP, with the current status of implementation for each action...................................................................................Page 11

III. Detailed ISWRMP Performance Measures – Complete information on the performance measures in the ISWRMP, including estimated wastes disposed and recycled for the Metro Vancouver region...................................................................................Page 41


7 | P a g e

This page intentionally left blank


1 | P a g e

I. SUMMARY The following section is a high level summary of

(a) The key activities within each of the main strategies in the ISWRMP (b) The main performance measures in the ISWRMP


I SUMMARY OF ISWRMP STRATEGIES AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES

2 | P a g e

(a) Summary of ISWRMP Strategies Strategy 1.1 Advocate that senior governments transfer additional waste management responsibilities to producers and consumers

The National Zero Waste Council was formed by Metro Vancouver in collaboration with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities in 2013. With a vision of a Canada united in the achievement of zero waste, now and for future generations, and a mission to act collaboratively with businesses, government and the community, at the national and international level, as an agent of change for waste prevention and reduction in the design, production and use of goods, the Council is a leadership initiative calling for national action and systemic change to address waste generation – its focus upstream on waste prevention and reduction. Much of the Council’s work is accomplished through working groups focused on waste prevention issues. Current working groups include: National Communications Campaigns, Product Design and Packaging, Food, and the Circular Economy. Each working group brings together governments, businesses, and NGOs to pursue initiatives that drive and promote reduction and prevention of waste at the source, through redesign of products, packaging, and policies and the sharing of educational resources. A key advisor to the Council is the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). Metro Vancouver collaborated with the Ministry of Environment on its “Assessment of Economic and Environmental Impacts of Extended Producer Responsibility Programs in BC” in 2014. The results of the study are being used as a framework on developing a strategy on improving the performance of EPR programs in BC and a joint follow‐up study is planned for completion in early 2016. In addition, Metro Vancouver continues to participate in CCME initiatives through Ministry of Environment staff, in advisory groups for most of the major EPR programs, and in the BC Product Stewardship Council.

Strategy 1.2 Reduce or eliminate materials entering the solid waste system which hinder or limit the opportunities to achieve reuse, recycling, or energy recovery, or that may exacerbate environmental impacts of disposed residuals

Metro Vancouver conducted extensive stakeholder engagement and industry consultation during 2013 and 2014 to increase awareness, obtain feedback, and determine the operation details for the Organics Disposal Ban which came into effect January 1, 2015. This included targeted engagement with key industries such as food retailers, restaurants, hotels, schools, property managers, health facilities, and broad public meetings and workshops to consider a range of options such as the types and definitions of materials to be banned, enforcement methods, timelines, and initiatives to help residents and businesses make the transition. A similar engagement process was carried out for a ban on the disposal of clean wood that also came into effect on January 1, 2015.



3 | P a g e

Strategy 1.3 Provide information and education on options to reduce waste

Metro Vancouver carried out community‐based social marketing pilots in multi‐family homes, and completed its multi‐family recycling and organics diversion tool kit for property managers. The toolkit is in use by public and private property managers. To increase organics diversion Metro Vancouver also: convened workshops specifically to assist school districts, conducted pilots and developed new resource materials for businesses, and worked directly with business associations and individual businesses as case studies. Metro Vancouver continues to develop and implements broad behaviour change advertising and social media campaigns, such as the Christmas, “Create Memories not Garbage” campaign, and Organics “Food isn’t Garbage” campaigns. Metro Vancouver has also implemented a local Love Food Hate Waste campaign based on the successful program in the UK. The campaign and website promotes residential food waste reduction through better buying, storage, preparation and use of food.

Strategy 2.1 Increase the opportunities for reuse Metro Vancouver conducted a feasibility study and trial for salvaging and reusing materials at its transfer stations, and identified financial and operational barriers. Work continues on finding opportunities to safely and cost‐effectively remove and reuse materials from wastes delivered to regional facilities.

Strategy 2.2 Increase the effectiveness of existing recycling programs Key recent activities under this strategy have included:

Implementation of the regional disposal bans on organics (food) and clean wood Regional outreach and communication to support the new disposal bans, including

business and housing associations, web‐based resources such as the multi‐family recycling toolkit, NGOs and in particular collaboration with Member Municipalities.

Additional inspectors to enforce regional disposal bans at regional facilities Working group with stakeholders to improve the effectiveness of disposal bans Engagement with stakeholders to explore incentives for disposal ban compliance Coordinated work with Multi‐Materials BC and others to test recycling systems for

public spaces Continued tracking and evaluation of regional waste flows and recycling activities

Strategy 2.3 Provide opportunities to increase private sector recycling Key recent activities under this strategy include:

Working with Multi‐Materials BC on packaging and printed paper stewardship for residences and public spaces



4 | P a g e

Continuing efforts through the National Zero Waste Council to address challenges with upstream recycling markets

Continuing to encourage adoption of municipal construction specifications including recycled content

Reviewed municipal zoning bylaws to identify barriers and opportunities to promote siting of private recycling facilities.

Metro Vancouver also continued its regulatory program that conducted about 350 inspections to oversee 49 private licensed solid waste facilities in 2014: 26 Brokering Facilities, 6 Composting Facilities, 16 Material Recovery Facilities, and 1 Landfill. That year, approximately 290,000 tonnes of organics and 600,000 tonnes of recyclables (e.g. cardboard, paper, plastics, glass, metal, wood, drywall, mattresses, furniture, carpet, film plastics, electronics) were managed by those facilities.

Strategy 2.4 Target demolition, land clearing and construction (DLC) sector for increased reuse and recycling

Key recent activities under this strategy include:

Providing technical assistance to municipalities that introduced demolition recycling requirements, based on a sample municipal bylaw previously developed by Metro Vancouver

Adding designated spaces at regional transfer stations for drop‐off of clean wood for recycling

Completion of research into future needs for construction and demolition waste processing infrastructure, waste flows and the issue of illegal application of demolition waste on farmlands

Strategy 2.5 Reduce paper and paperboard being disposed

Key recent activities under this strategy include: Coordinating member municipalities’ implementation of BC’s new Extended

Producer Responsibility (EPR) program for Packaging and Printed Papers (PPP) within the Single‐Family Residential sector

Continuing to coordinate member municipalities’ input and participation in implementing EPR for PPP as it expands to the Multi‐Family Residential, and Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (ICI) sectors.

Inclusion of paper waste recycling options in the multi‐family recycling toolkit Ongoing community‐based social marketing for neighborhoods and schools Ongoing regional and municipal public education for waste reduction and recycling

Strategy 2.6 Target organics for recycling and energy recovery

Key recent activities under this strategy include: Implementation in 2015 of a new regional Organics Disposal Ban, based on extensive

consultation with stakeholders and industry working groups.



5 | P a g e

Support for the new Organics Disposal Ban through targeted online, telephone, and printed materials which include the ‘Food Isn’t Garbage’ campaign, and the ‘Love Food Hate Waste web‐based campaign and direct collaboration with Member Municipalities.

Regional permitting with respect to odour control at facilities processing organics.

Strategy 2.7 Target wood for reuse, recycle, and energy recovery Key recent activities under this strategy include:

Implementation in 2015 of a new regional disposal ban on Clean Wood, based on consultation with stakeholders and industry working groups.

Research in collaboration with industry and academia into new uses and markets for wood waste.

Strategy 2.8 Target plastic for increased recycling


Coordinating member municipalities’ implementation of BC’s new Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program for Packaging and Printed Papers (PPP) within the Single‐Family Residential sector.


Strategy 2.9 Target multi‐family and industrial, commercial and institutional (ICI) sectors to improve diversion rates



Working with haulers and other stakeholders on a potential incentive program to improve recycling rates.

Working with municipalities to update specifications and standards for recycling space and access in Multi‐Family and ICI buildings, including the launch of the on‐line multi‐family recycling toolkit.

Strategy 2.10 Develop contingency plans for the loss of recycling markets


Monitoring of regional recycling activities and flows. Research into new and alternative markets for key recycled materials.

Strategy 2.11 Integrated Utility Management Advisory Committee



6 | P a g e

In 2015, Metro Vancouver obtained Ministry approval to separate the monitoring of the solid and liquid waste utilities’ respective regional Plans. Implementation of the ISWRMP will be publicly reviewed by the GVS&DD’s Zero Waste Committee.

Strategy 3.1 Use waste‐to‐energy to provide electricity and district heating

Key recent activities under this strategy include: Investigation of district energy opportunities for the existing facility. Continued regulatory compliance and management of all residuals, and

improvement of environmental performance at the existing facility. Continued assessment and planning for new waste‐to‐energy capacity as needed.

Strategy 3.2 Recover energy from other solid waste management facilities


Landfill gas collection upgrades at the Vancouver Landfill by the City of Vancouver. Ongoing optimization of the Metro Vancouver waste‐to‐energy facility. Cache Creek landfill gas utilization.

Strategy 3.3 Utilize non‐recyclable material as fuel


Reduction of the tipping fee for mattress recycling residuals at the Waste‐to‐Energy Facility to encourage their deliver, and recycling of their high metal content.

Strategy 4.1 Utilize the Vancouver Landfill as a disposal site


Optimization of waste flows in coordination with other regional disposal facilities. Coordination through a Tri‐Partite (Metro Vancouver, City of Vancouver, and

Corporation of Delta) Technical Committee. Strategy 4.2 Ensure a disposal site is available for DLC waste

Key recent activities under this strategy include: Ongoing monitoring of regional flows of waste and recyclable materials, and regional

DLC waste disposal capacity.

Strategy 4.3 Establish contingency disposal sites Key recent activities under this strategy include:

Ongoing monitoring of regional flows of waste and recyclable materials, and regional municipal waste disposal capacity.



7 | P a g e

Planning for a 2016 procurement process for contingency disposal capacity.



8 | P a g e

(b) Summary of ISWRMP Performance Measures For calendar 2014, overall waste diversion in the region has increased to 61%, up slightly from the overall 2013 diversion rate of 60%:

Recycled and Diverted

61%

2,040,280 tonnes

Disposal & Waste to Energy

39%

1,303,191 tonnes

METRO VANCOUVER RECYCLING & SOLID WASTE TOTALS 2014



9 | P a g e

These figures take into account the best estimates of tonnages of waste disposed outside of the regional waste system. The 2014 waste diversion by individual sectors is illustrated in the figure below. Note: After consulting with key stewards, Metro Vancouver allocated materials from this region that were collected and recycled through Extended Producer Responsibility programs to the commercial, single family residential, and multi‐family residential sectors. In past years, EPR materials were reported as if they were a separate “sector”, which underestimated diversion rates ‐ particularly for the residential sectors.

The following chart illustrates progress in per capita waste generation, recycling and disposal:



10 | P a g e

Goal 1 ‐ Minimize waste generation.

As shown in the chart above, the amount of waste generated per capita fluctuates significantly but overall has declined over the long term.

Goal 2 ‐ Maximize reuse, recycling and material recovery. The chart above shows that over the period from 2010 to 2014, the overall diversion (recycling) rate has increased from 55% to 61%. Metro Vancouver's reduced its per capita disposal rate from 2010 to 2014 levels by ~12% from (from 0.60 to 0.53 tonnes per capita per year). This takes into account all MSW, including DLC and estimated wastes disposed outside of the regional system.

Goal 3 ‐ Recover energy from the waste stream after material recycling. In recent years, Metro Vancouver lost major users of energy when Norampac and Catalyst closed their operations. Metro Vancouver continues to seek alternate beneficial uses of steam and landfill gas produced by its facilities, including district energy systems. Despite the loss in beneficial use customers, the Metro Vancouver solid waste system has reduced its net CO2e emissions by 27% (2010‐2014). This is due mostly to reductions in landfill gas emissions.

Goal 4 ‐ Dispose of all remaining waste in landfill after material recycling and energy recovery.


11 | P a g e

II. DETAILED ISWRMP ACTIONS The following section is a complete listing of all actions in the ISWRMP, with the current status of implementation for each action.


II DETAILED ISWRMP ACTIONS

12 | P a g e

Strategy 1.1: Advocate that senior governments transfer additional waste management responsibilities to producers and consumers

ISWRMP Strategy and Actions Current Status of Key Strategies and Actions in the ISWRMP

1.1.1 MV Will: Advocate that senior governments progressively move towards the prohibition of the manufacture and distribution of non‐ essential, non‐recyclable materials and products. 1.1.2 MV Will: Advocate that senior governments prohibit the manufacture and distribution of non‐recyclable packaging.

The National Zero Waste Council, a leadership initiative bringing together businesses, government and the community and calling for national action to address waste prevention, was launched in 2013. Its membership has grown over this period and now includes five of Canada’s largest metropolitan regions – Toronto, Halifax, Edmonton, Montreal alongside Metro Vancouver ‐ other municipal and provincial governments; businesses and business associations from across the country as well as key stakeholders from the community sector. The work of the Council, including important advocacy work, is carried out primarily by the Council’s working groups. Four working groups currently exist focused on: National Communications Campaigns, Product, Design and Packaging, Food, and the Circular Economy. For example, the Food Working Group has been advocating for tax incentives to be created to encourage producers to donate their edible products to food banks.

1.1.3 MV Will: Strongly advocate for EPR programs to reduce waste disposal through implementation of design‐for‐environment principles, and best management practices that focus on waste reduction, reuse, and recycling. Offer staffing support for and partnership with Ministry of Environment to help accelerate EPR.

The study titled “Assessment of Economic and Environmental Impacts of Extended Producer Responsibility Programs in BC” was completed in 2014 and has been made available to stakeholders on the website. Interest in the study has emerged from throughout the country. The results of the study are being used as a framework on developing a strategy on improving the performance of EPR programs in BC.

1.1.4 MV Will: Work with other municipalities and regions across BC, Canada, and internationally, to advocate for more development by senior governments in encouraging and developing incentives, including regulation, that promote design of products with an emphasis on reuse and recycling (cradle‐to‐cradle design).

This action is primarily covered under 1.1.1 which is Metro Vancouver’s support for and participation in the National Zero Waste Council. See also actions 1.1.2 and 1.3.3.

1.1.5 MV Will: Participate on federal EPR initiatives such as the Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment (CCME) Extended Producer Responsibility Task Force, to develop national guidelines for sustainable packaging.

This action is primarily covered under 1.1.3 which is the joint EPR work between the Ministry of Environment and Metro Vancouver. Participation in CCME initiatives is carried out through Ministry of Environment staff who are the official participants in these processes.



13 | P a g e

1.1.6 MV Will: Participate on industry stewardship advisory committees.

Metro Vancouver provides ongoing input and participation in a number of advisory groups, including: Multi‐Material BC, Major Appliance Recycling Roundtable, Electronic Products Recycling Association, and Tire Stewardship BC.

1.1.7 MV Will: Participate on the BC Product Stewardship Council to assist in evaluating existing and developing new EPR programs.

Metro Vancouver has completed a two‐year term as co‐chair of the BC Product Stewardship Council and continues to participate in regular meetings.

1.1.8 MV Will: Waste projections will consider future trends in population, generation, and management, including EPR.

Solid waste generation and disposal forecasts have been updated as part of the annual performance tracking process. Modelling has been expanded to support decision making on financial sustainability differential tipping fee structures and the inclusion of waste leaving the Metro Vancouver system. Work on solid waste projections is ongoing and continues to help the region to proactively address future solid waste management opportunities.

1.1.9 Municipalities Will: Partner with Metro Vancouver in support of actions 1.1.1 through 1.1.8

This action is ongoing and consists of collaborating on EPR actions 1.1.1 through 1.1.8 with member municipalities through the REAC Solid Waste Sub‐committee. A significant amount of effort has been on participating in the planning for and implementation of the MMBC program for residential packaging and printed paper.

1.1.10 Other Governments & Agencies Will: Ministry of Environment to accelerate EPR program development and implementation. 1.1.11 Other Governments & Agencies Will: Include Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities in the negotiations with producers regarding future EPR programs to ensure that appropriate consideration is given to the existing convenient curb‐side collection systems.

These actions are ongoing and a collaborative effort between Metro Vancouver, member municipalities and the Ministry in support of EPR actions 1.1.1 through 1.1.5.

1.1.12 Other Governments & Agencies Will: Ensure that the waste recovered under EPR programs will be properly managed in the region and that such materials will not be exported without adequate knowledge of and control over its eventual disposition.

This is a fundamental principle included in all discussions and negotiations with industry, member municipalities and the Ministry of Environment in EPR actions 1.1.1 through 1.1.11



14 | P a g e

Strategy 1.2: Reduce or eliminate materials entering the solid waste system which hinder or limit the opportunities to achieve reuse, recycling, or energy recovery, or that may exacerbate environmental impacts of disposed residuals


1.2.1 MV Will: Work with facility operators, local municipalities and the recycling industry to introduce material bans after alternatives are identified and suitable public information programs.

Public Outreach and Information Programs are primarily covered by the actions in strategy 1.3 to develop and deliver a community‐based behaviour change program. Formal consultation on the implementation of the new Organics Disposal Ban took place in 2014, based on pre‐consultation engagement with large organics waste producers (grocers, restaurants, hotels and their associations, schools, property managers, health facilities and small‐to‐medium enterprises) during 2012 and 2013, which served to inform businesses, review concerns, and gather input for a ban on the disposal of organics. The objectives of the engagement and consultation program were to provide information and receive input on the specifics of the Organics Disposal Ban, including:

The types and definitions of organic materials to be included; Potential enforcement mechanisms, thresholds and penalties; Implementation timelines; and Transition initiatives to help residents and businesses comply

with the disposal ban. A smaller, but similar stakeholder engagement process (including workshops with industry and surveys at Metro Vancouver disposal sites) was carried out for a ban on the disposal of clean wood. The Organics Disposal Ban, and the Clean Wood Disposal Ban were officially launched on January 1, 2015 with 6 months educational period. Enforcement of the Ban began on July 1, 2015. The success of the Organics and Clean Wood disposal bans, and the potential for new disposal bans in the future will depend in large part on the amount of waste disposed outside of the regional system, bypassing ban inspectors at regional waste facilities.



15 | P a g e

Strategy 1.3: Provide information and education on options to reduce waste


1.3.1 MV Will: Develop and deliver a community‐ based social marketing program to inform and educate citizens on waste education opportunities including schools. (a) Target a minimum of 70% diversion goal by 2015 over all sectors and an aspirational goal of 80% by 2020 to be featured in communication materials.

Metro Vancouver has carried out community‐based social marketing pilots in multi‐family homes in order to develop best practices in reducing waste and improving recycling practices. From this work, it has developed a multi‐family recycling tool kit for property managers that includes both blue box and food scraps information. The tool kit has been shared with municipalities and is being promoted to property management organizations.

School Districts have been engaged on food scraps recycling to facilitate peer‐to‐peer learning, and share approaches to developing and initiating district‐wide food scraps recycling programs.

Metro Vancouver develops behaviour change advertising and social media campaigns: Christmas “Create Memories not Garbage”, and Organics “Food isn’t Garbage” campaigns. These are targeted at citizens across the region, and public opinion surveys show that, in the case of Christmas up to 49% of residents are aware of the campaigns and have taken some steps to reduce their waste and in the case of organics, 32%. The food waste campaigns are focussed on behaviour change and aimed to both improve citizens’ participation in food waste recycling, and to reduce contamination of the compost stream.

Metro Vancouver has developed and implemented a Love Food Hate Waste campaign based on the successful program developed in the UK. This waste reduction campaign aims to reduce the waste of food by addressing the barriers that lead to over‐purchasing, improper storage, confusion around “best before” dates, and the reluctance to use leftovers.

1.3.2 MV Will: Develop and deliver a community‐based social marketing business education plan, including business guides and other outreach programs to inform and educate businesses on waste reduction opportunities.

Metro Vancouver conducted pilot programs and developed new resource guides on food scraps reduction and recycling for businesses.

Informed 1200 small businesses directly on the food scraps regulation through a program to recruit small businesses for a pilot study on food scraps recycling.

Informed small business through their Business Improvement Areas (BIAs), Chambers of Commerce and Associations.

Worked directly with 12 food businesses (bakery, restaurant and grocer) to initiate food scraps recycling, and capture their experiences to develop case studies as a demonstration to others.

1.3.3 MV Will: Develop a national zero waste marketing council so that cities across Canada can pool resources and develop common messaging, with national impact, on the need to reduce waste, resulting in informed and educated citizens on waste reduction opportunities.

This action is fulfilled under 1.1.1 which is Metro Vancouver’s formation of and support for the National Zero Waste Council. The National Zero Waste Council includes in its mandate the sharing of public education and communications resources, with a working group specifically dedicated to that purpose.

1.3.4 Municipalities Will: Partner with and assist Metro Vancouver in the development and delivery of

This is an ongoing collaborative relationship between Metro Vancouver and the member municipalities coordinated through the REAC Solid Waste Sub‐committee, as well as the Municipal Waste Reduction



16 | P a g e

public and business information and education programs.

Coordinators, the Municipal Communications Coordinators and other municipal staff, involving the joint development and distribution of information and materials that support all public education strategies and actions of the ISWRMP.

(a) After suitable public information programs, expand disposal bans to include materials encompassed by new EPR programs and material for which new recycling markets are developed.

Regional outreach and communication activities supporting awareness of bans are primarily covered under action 1.3.4 which is ongoing collaboration between Metro Vancouver and the member municipalities.

Public information programs support the 2015 Disposal Ban additions: food scraps and clean wood.



17 | P a g e

Strategy 2.1: Increase the opportunities for reuse


2.1.1 MV Will: Investigate financial and regulatory barriers which prevent or discourage the reuse of materials.

Metro Vancouver conducted a feasibility study and trial of material salvage and reuse at its transfer stations, identified financial and market barriers, and expanded material salvage and reuse opportunities at many of its transfer stations. The results of the material salvage and reuse trial revealed limitations in acceptable materials that can be readily resold through salvaged material retailers. Work will continue on identifying opportunities to reuse items in need of repair and exploring facilitated material exchange networks.

2.1.2 MV Will: Investigate the effectiveness and adequacy of existing material exchange networks. 2.1.3 MV Will: Bring forward appropriate measures which respond to the findings of 2.1.1 and 2.1.2. 2.1.4 MV Will: Enhance partnerships with the Province, industry, academia and community groups to research and develop solutions to overcome barriers to reuse and recycling and new opportunities to re‐engineer recycled material.

Metro Vancouver conducted a feasibility study and trial of material salvage and reuse at its transfer stations, identified financial and market barriers, and expanded material salvage and reuse opportunities at many of its transfer stations. Metro Vancouver in collaboration with post‐secondary institutions, member municipalities, and private industry has convened a Solid Waste Research Collaborative to facilitate the identification and championing of applied research that enhances the region’s understanding and minimization of solid waste. The Collaborative is helping facilitate research projects on compostable foodware, value‐added wood products made of recycled wood waste, and removing barriers to multi‐family food scraps recycling.

2.1.5 Municipalities Will: Work with Metro Vancouver to give effect to Strategy 2.1.

Municipal collaboration with Metro Vancouver in actions 2.1.1 through 2.1.4 is coordinated through the REAC Solid Waste Sub‐committee, Municipal Waste Reduction Coordinators Committee and other municipal staff on an ongoing basis.



18 | P a g e

Strategy 2.2: Increase the effectiveness of existing recycling programs


2.2.1 MV Will: Implement disposal bans on materials that limit opportunities to achieve reuse, recycling, or energy recovery. (a) Work with facility operators, local municipalities, senior governments and the recycling industry to determine the impact and source of components of the waste stream, the consequence and feasibility of banning materials with the most negative impacts and the most suitable recycling options for those materials.

This action is primarily covered under action 1.2.1 which is the 2012‐2014 stakeholder consultation, and the 2015 implementation of a ban on the disposal of organics and clean wood.

(b) Expand the monitoring and enforcement of disposal bans and enhance with effective communications to raise awareness of the bans.

Regional outreach and communication activities supporting awareness of bans are primarily covered under action 1.3.4 which is ongoing collaboration between Metro Vancouver and the member municipalities. Additional Disposal Ban inspectors have been added over the last several years, and Metro Vancouver continues to evaluate options to prevent waste from bypassing regional disposal bans.

(c) Analyze the effectiveness of disposal bans and possible alternative enforcement models including enforcement at source.

Through 2014 and 2015 Metro Vancouver has been working with a Disposal Ban Effectiveness Working Group of haulers, recyclers and other stakeholders to develop enhanced and alternative methods to streamline, communicate, and improve the effectiveness of disposal bans. In addition, Metro Vancouver staff continue to examine ban enforcement methods used elsewhere, including less punitive methods such as providing incentives for ban compliance and continue to look for opportunities to work with member municipalities in enforcement of ban at source.

(d) After suitable public information programs, expand disposal bans to include materials encompassed by new EPR programs and material for which new recycling markets are developed.

Regional outreach and communication activities supporting awareness of bans are primarily covered under action 1.3.4 which is ongoing collaboration between Metro Vancouver and the member municipalities.

2.2.2 MV Will: Provide ongoing information for businesses and residents of recycling opportunities.

Metro Vancouver is working with business and housing associations to share information and resources about recycling opportunities, particularly organic wastes in light of the new organics disposal ban. Metro Vancouver offers resource materials such as How‐to Guides and Case Studies, and presentations as requested.

(a) Continue and upgrade a regional web‐based source of information on recycling opportunities for businesses and residents.

MetroVancouverRecycles.org and the WeRecycle app are continually updated to ensure all data is accurate.

(b) Keep municipalities fully informed as to recycling collection

This is an ongoing activity between Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities which is facilitated through the REAC Solid Waste Sub‐



19 | P a g e

and drop‐off facilities and changes to policies and facilities.

committee and other municipal staff. This includes annual surveys and compilation of municipal waste and recycling services.

(c) Provide outreach services. This is primarily covered under strategy 1.3.(d) Work with other information sources to achieve maximum harmonization possible.

Worked with municipalities, MMBC and universities to test and develop common streetscape recycling bins that have been specifically designed to make recycling more intuitive. They have been tested and shown to improve recycling rates and reduce contamination. The new bins are currently being manufactured.

Worked with member municipalities to develop for example: Consistent messaging and vocabulary on the food scraps and

clean wood bans. Agree to and promote a consistent colour scheme for public

recycling facilities and receptacles. Provide recommendations to Business Associations on

messaging and responses to common questions to encourage consistency.

Provide similar information to NGOs operating recycling hotlines

Engage with private and NGO interests in discussion on consistent messaging, icons and colour schemes for recycling programs.

2.2.3 MV Will: Increase the efficiency and consistency of recycling collection services across the region.

This is primarily covered under action 2.2.2(b) which is the ongoing activity between Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities facilitated through the REAC Solid Waste Sub‐committee and other municipal staff. Demand for private sector recycling collection service continues to increase as a result of new disposal bans, such as the Organics Disposal Ban.

(a) Work with municipalities to review materials accepted for recycling from residential and ICI sources

This is primarily covered under action 2.2.2(b) which is the ongoing activity between Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities facilitated through the REAC Solid Waste Sub‐committee and other municipal staff. The MMBC program for residential packaging and printed paper developed a standardized list of acceptable recycling material which has been adopted by many, but not all, member municipalities. As a result, ongoing coordination activities continue.

(b) In collaboration with municipalities, undertake a business case review of the residential and ICI waste and recycling collection services over the region to determine and implement the appropriate level of consistency between municipalities. Where appropriate, Metro Vancouver will develop model policies or bylaws to assist municipalities in achieving consistency.

This is primarily covered under action 2.2.2(b) which is the ongoing activity between Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities facilitated through the REAC Solid Waste Sub‐committee and other municipal staff. To a large degree, this has been supplanted by Provincial regulations mandating that packaging and printed paper, which makes up most of the material in residential recycling programs, be part of an EPR program to be administered by MMBC and potentially other EPR stewards.

(c) Analyze the effectiveness of pricing strategies and other economic instruments to encourage additional recycling.

This is an ongoing task involving the continuous tracking and evaluation of regional waste flows, recycling activity and tonnages, regional tipping fees, disposal ban surcharges, and other economic instruments including Metro Vancouver and member municipalities’ input into the structure of EPR programs. Metro Vancouver is also providing partial funding and



20 | P a g e

technical review for a 2015 update to the Ministry of Environment’s EPR Economic and Environmental Impacts Study.

2.2.4 MV Will: Establish Eco‐Centres. (a) Establish a stakeholder and municipal work group to determine the scope, terms and conditions and the relationship to existing and planned EPR programs and municipal recycling depots for participating municipalities and industries. (b) Develop the model of Eco‐Centres to include numerous, small scale, one‐stop‐drop centres for recycling and small quantity drop‐off disposal. (c) With municipalities, determine the terms and conditions for participating municipalities and industries and develop appropriate business cases.

Metro Vancouver established a working group of member municipal staff to develop a draft business model for funding and operating regional Eco‐Centres. That draft business model was based on a proposed rebate system which would offset prior municipal investment in their own recycling depots, and provide an additional incentive for increased public recycling infrastructure. However, that business model became less viable with the rejection of the region’s proposed waste flow management bylaw in late 2014. As directed by the GVS&DD board on September 18, 2015, the alternative business model will be that Metro Vancouver will provide dedicated recycling services at transfer stations when requested by, and funded by the communities served by the transfer station.

(d) After determining terms and conditions, establish the first Eco‐Centre in Surrey to replace commitment for residential drop off facility in the 1995 Plan. (e) Progressively expand the Eco‐Centre system across the region as municipal business cases determine.

Metro Vancouver continues to work with the City of Surrey on identification of a suitable site for a new Surrey Residential Drop‐off facility. City of Surrey will secure the appropriate site and work with Metro Vancouver in the rezoning process.

2.2.5 MV Will: Promote recycling at festivals and events. (a) Develop a Zero Waste toolkit for festivals and events. (b) Continue to work with municipalities, EPR groups and local community groups to implement waste minimization and recycling at community festivals and events, including conferences and tradeshows. (c) Provide outreach services.

Metro Vancouver has developed resource materials for public event recycling, including Zero Waste Stations (signage and bins for public event recycling). Many of these activities are coordinated through action 1.3.4 which is an ongoing collaborative relationship between Metro Vancouver and the member municipalities coordinated through the REAC Solid Waste Sub‐committee and other municipal staff involving the joint development and sharing of information and materials that support all public education strategies and actions of the ISWRMP. The Zero Waste Stations have since been donated to two local non‐profit groups (Ridge Meadows Recycling Society and the Tzu Chi Society which maintain the stations and lend them out for use by others.

2.2.6 MV Will: Work with school districts and individual schools to promote waste reduction and recycling. (a) Develop instructional programs that encourage waste reduction and recycling both within the schools and at home.

Metro Vancouver K‐12 School & Youth Leadership Programs promote waste reduction awareness and actions in schools and communities. K‐12 students, high school youth leaders, K‐12 teachers, school districts, and partners in sustainability education are targeted through the following core and ongoing activities: i) Delivery of teacher professional development workshops to support integration of 4R’s and sustainability through K‐12 curriculum; ii) Delivery of youth leadership programs, including action planning workshops, leadership clinics and symposiums to inspire, equip and support Metro Vancouver high school youth leaders to influence waste reduction and sustainability initiatives in school



21 | P a g e

communities, and; iii) Development of materials to support and enhance of solid waste management facility tours for school audiences. In addition, Metro Vancouver worked with its member municipalities and local school districts to hold a series of workshops in 2014 to assist school districts in preparing for the Organics Disposal Ban.

2.2.7 Municipalities Will: Work with Metro Vancouver on actions designed to:

(a) Implement effective disposal bans for collection of municipal waste at source. (b) Inform businesses and residents of recycling opportunities. (c) Increase the efficiency and consistency of recycling collection services over the region.

a); (b); (c) This is primarily covered under action 2.2.2(b) which is the ongoing activity between Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities facilitated through the REAC Solid Waste Sub‐committee and other municipal staff.

(d) Establish Eco‐Centres This is primarily covered under 2.2.4 which is the development of an Eco‐Centres Business Model.

(e) Promote recycling at community events and festivals.

This is primarily covered under action 2.2.5 which is the development of resource materials for public event recycling.

(f) Work with school districts and individual schools to promote waste reduction and recycling.

This is primarily covered under action 2.2.6 which consists of the Metro Vancouver K‐12 School & Youth Leadership Programs which promote waste reduction awareness and actions in schools and communities.



22 | P a g e

Strategy 2.3: Provide opportunities to increase private sector recycling


2.3.1 MV Will: Facilitate the siting of private sector recycling activities. (a) Review the GVS&DD Solid Waste Regulatory Bylaw to facilitate the siting of municipal solid waste facilities that meet municipal bylaws.

Following the Ministry’s decision on the proposed revisions to the Solid Waste Regulatory Bylaw, Metro Vancouver is assessing options for the implementation of higher recycling targets within a financially sustainable public and private sector solid waste management network. Private recycling facilities continue to be licensed under the current Solid Waste Regulatory Bylaw. Metro Vancouver is continuing to work with municipalities to enhance this process.

2.3.2 MV Will: Foster research and market development for recycled materials. (a) Evaluate a business case for a regional scale recycling service delivery model. (b) Review desirability, feasibility and opportunity for establishing a non‐profit organization to facilitate the development of recycling businesses and markets, along the lines of the ‘London Remade’ model in the U.K. (c) Subject to the results of 2.3.2 (a) and (b), establish a regional role in processing and marketing of recycled materials, a land acquisition strategy for required recycling facilities, and enhanced policy‐based initiatives to promote local recycled content in consumer goods.

To a large degree, this action has been supplanted by the new Provincial regulations mandating that residential recycling programs (and eventually ICI recycling programs) for packaging and printed papers be part of an EPR program to be administered by industry. The National Zero Waste Council was launched in October 2013.The Council works as a national level advocacy group to address upstream recycling market challenges. Metro Vancouver continues to work with member municipalities on a regional model for collection of household recyclables. Metro Vancouver also encourages development of local construction specifications including recycled content where appropriate.

2.3.3 Municipalities Will: Facilitate the siting of private sector recycling activities.

(a) Review zoning bylaws to remove unnecessary impediments to and encourage recycling and material recovery activities in appropriately zoned areas.

Metro Vancouver staff has reviewed municipal zoning bylaws and interviewed municipal planners and other municipal staff to identify barriers and opportunities to promote the siting of private recycling facilities. Recommendations will be brought forward to municipal planning and solid waste management advisory committees.

2.3.4 Municipalities Will: Work with Metro Vancouver on the evaluation of regional scale recycling facilities and development of recycling markets.

To a large degree, this action has been supplanted by the Multi‐Material BC Packaging and Printed Paper Program which has assumed responsibility for the collection of recyclable materials from residents. Green By Nature, a consortium which has contracted services to MMBC, recently began operation of a new recycling facility to manage materials collected from throughout the province. Green By Nature also sells collected materials to end‐markets, both domestically and internationally.

2.3.5 Actions Requested of Other Governments and Agencies. Provincial and Federal Governments to identify and establish minimum post‐consumer recycled content requirements for consumer goods.

The Provincial government has, to some degree, incorporated this concept within several of its recovery rate requirements for EPR programs. In addition, EPR programs are now required to report on the ‘end‐fate’ (e.g., reuse, recycling, recovery or garbage) of all their collected materials.



23 | P a g e

Strategy 2.4: Target demolition, land clearing and construction (DLC) sector for increased reuse and recycling


2.4.1 MV Will: In collaboration with municipalities and industry groups, develop a process to require DLC recycling at construction/demolition sites.

Metro Vancouver provided technical assistance to four municipalities that introduced demolition recycling requirements in pilot or full‐scale programs. Metro Vancouver continues to enable information‐sharing between member municipalities about the successes and challenges of demolition recycling requirements.

2.4.2 MV Will: Implement waste reduction strategies directed toward diverting DLC waste from disposal while supporting opportunities for beneficial use. (a) Encourage the role of building supply retailers and producers in the collection of DLC material for recycling. (b) Provide areas for separated recyclable DLC materials at Eco‐Centres and at transfer stations as they are upgraded.

Metro Vancouver has provided space at most existing regional facilities for the drop‐off of clean wood for recycling. Metro Vancouver added space to drop off reusable DLC materials in most existing facilities, and is including infrastructure for reuse and recycling of DLC materials in the design of new facilities.

2.4.3 MV Will: Review existing DLC recycling and processing capacity, project future needs and develop a strategy to address any identified gaps.

Metro Vancouver conducted a study to identify future needs for DLC processing infrastructure, which included recommendations for a strategy to support the introduction of more sophisticated DLC processing infrastructure. Metro Vancouver also assessed regional DLC waste flows, tendencies, and emerging illegal application of material that can contain DLC materials on farmland.

2.4.4 Municipalities Will: Work with Metro Vancouver to develop a process to require DLC recycling at construction/demolition sites. (a) Review municipal DLC permitting processes with a view to requiring waste management plans as a condition of such permits. (b) Review the desirability and feasibility of deposit systems or other financial incentives to increase enforcement of DLC waste management plans.

This is primarily covered under 2.4.1 which is the development and implementation of the sample municipal bylaw for mandatory DLC recycling.



24 | P a g e

Strategy 2.5: Reduce paper and paperboard being disposed


2.5.1 MV Will: In collaboration with municipalities, businesses and non‐profit organizations, conduct pilot programs to determine the most effective method of reducing unwanted junk mail and other publications and act accordingly on the results. 2.5.2 MV Will: Promote reduced paper use and increase paper recycling opportunities in the community and businesses.

Pilot work in multi‐family homes is complete and integrated into the multi‐family tool kit to reduce paper, specifically opting out of delivery of unwanted addressed junk mail and phone books, as well as the delivery of overly large numbers of free newspapers.

(a) Carry out a community‐based social marketing campaign to determine and overcome barriers to reducing the use of and increasing the recycling of paper in schools and community facilities.

This is largely covered under actions in 1.3.1 and 2.2.6 which involve carrying out community‐based social marketing programs for neighborhoods and schools to promote waste reduction and increase recycling.

(b) Carry out a targeted outreach campaign to business to determine and overcome barriers to reducing the use of and increasing the recycling of paper.

Supported by actions under 2.2.2.

2.5.3 Municipalities Will: Collaborate with Metro Vancouver in junk mail reduction pilot programs and community‐based social marketing programs in community facilities.

This is largely covered under action 1.3.4 which is an ongoing collaborative relationship between Metro Vancouver and the member municipalities coordinated through the REAC Solid Waste Sub‐committee and other municipal staff involving the joint development and sharing of information and materials that support all public education strategies and actions of the ISWRMP.



25 | P a g e

Strategy 2.6: Target organics for recycling and energy recovery


2.6.1 MV Will: Evaluate options for processing and utilization of organics with biosolids and other utility residuals.

Metro Vancouver evaluated a wide range of different concepts to integrate the replacement of the Lions Gate Wastewater Treatment Plant with new community spaces, commercial ventures, environmental features, and opportunities to co‐manage solid wastes such as source‐separated organics. Results of the business casing indicated that the cost of co‐processing large amounts of source‐separated organics together with wastewater residuals such as biosolids would be cost‐prohibitive. However, a limited amount and types of select source‐separated organics continue to be processed in a pilot plant at suitable existing wastewater treatment facilities operated by Metro Vancouver.

2.6.2 MV Will: Divert organics from the waste stream. (a) Establish additional organics processing facilities.

In 2011, the Metro Vancouver Board approved a Regional Organics Strategy which stipulated that provision of composting and biofuel production capacity would be left to the private sector and to individual member municipalities, unless they were unable to maintain an adequate level of service. Metro Vancouver continually monitors the regional capacity for processing organics and is evaluating options for stimulating further private sector investment should it become necessary. At this time, regional action is unnecessary given the potential for expanded processing capacity at local private sector facilities, combined with the current construction of a new organics processing facility to be built and operated by Orgaworld Canada under a Public‐Private Partnership with the City of Surrey.

i) establish a system for monitoring emissions from organics processing facilities including bioaerosols.

Under provincial legislation, Metro Vancouver has the delegated authority for air pollution control and air quality management in the region. Metro Vancouver has issued permits that include requirements for the management of odour and other air emissions, as well as monitoring and assessment, and is evaluating other regulatory options for managing emissions from organics processing facilities.

(b) Determine which paper and paperboard products are suitable for processing at an organics management facility.

Metro Vancouver convened a Foodware and Food‐Soiled Paper Task Group to identify potential issues and solutions regarding food‐soiled paper and the compostable foodware value chain. The Group explored the complexity of the food‐soiled paper value chain identified key challenges and recommendations for moving forward.

As a result of Task Group recommendations, Metro Vancouver is now engaged with the Product Design & Packaging Working Group of the National Zero Waste Council, whose current focus is to simplify compostable product design and increase transparency in the marketplace around recyclable and compostable packaging.



26 | P a g e

(c) In collaboration with municipalities, develop and implement a work plan for the diversion of organic waste, including food waste from:

i) single family residences ii) multi‐family residences iii) ICI sector

Under an ongoing collaborative relationship between Metro Vancouver and the member municipalities, Metro Vancouver supports residents of single family homes through online searchable information focussed on mobile applications, establishing and promoting a hotline, and providing translated educational materials into additional languages. Metro Vancouver supports residents of multi‐family homes through convening property managers, capturing experiences for case studies, engaging member municipalities on their pilot multi‐family programs to share learning, developing and promoting resources such as the Multi‐Family Recycling Toolkit to help improve recycling in their buildings, including food scraps. The Food isn’t Garbage campaign informs and encourages all groups to recycle organic materials. The Love Food Hate Waste campaign focusses on food waste reduction. Work with the ICI sector is outlined in 1.3.2

(d) Develop and implement supporting communication programs for 2.6.2 (c).

Metro Vancouver has conducted ICI audience research, best practice pilots with local sports teams (Vancouver Whitecaps at Swangard Stadium, Vancouver Canucks), delivered waste reduction and recycling information at ICI trade shows, and has developed an organic waste diversion guide for restaurants, and new web‐based resources for ICI businesses. See also action 1.3.4

(e) Ban all compostable organics allowed in residential green bins from disposal to landfills and all forms of waste‐to‐energy, except anaerobic digestion.

This is primarily covered under 1.2.1 which is Metro Vancouver’s implementation of the disposal ban for organics. See also actions 2.2.1, 2.6.2, and 2.7.5

2.6.3 Municipalities Will: In collaboration with Metro Vancouver, develop and implement a work plan, including appropriate communication programs for the diversion of organic waste from:

i) single family residences, ii) multi‐family residences, iii) the ICI sector

This is primarily covered under 1.3.4 which is ongoing collaboration between Metro Vancouver and the member municipalities for joint development and sharing of information and materials See also action 2.6.2(c)

(a) Municipalities will divert organics from the waste stream to a Metro Vancouver or alternative licensed organics processing facility. (b) Municipalities will report the tonnage of diverted organic waste to Metro Vancouver in the event that organics are delivered to licensed non‐regional processing facilities.

More than 95% of all the single family homes in Metro Vancouver receive organics recycling services from their respective municipalities. Many of the member municipalities also provide service to multi‐family residences, and some offer or are piloting services to schools and businesses. All municipalities are providing tonnage information to Metro Vancouver.



27 | P a g e

Strategy 2.7: Target wood for reuse, recycle, and energy recovery


2.7.1 MV Will: Encourage reuse of wood. (a) Examine and, where feasible, implement incentives for reuse and remove barriers to reuse of wood waste.

Metro Vancouver has encouraged the salvage and reuse of wood on its own corporate demolition projects. When feasible Metro Vancouver specifies targets for DLC materials reuse/salvage in its tender documents. This is helping to inform ways to implement regional incentive that would require salvage and reuse of wood. This is also covered under 2.1.1 which is Metro Vancouver’s research into higher uses for wood waste. See also actions 2.1.4, and 2.4.2(a)

(b) Develop and implement information and education programs on the reuse and effective recycling of wood and other DLC waste.

This is primarily covered under 1.3.4 which is ongoing collaboration between Metro Vancouver and the member municipalities for the joint development and sharing of information and materials.

2.7.2 MV Will: Collect wood for reuse, recycling, and energy recovery at regional transfer stations and Eco‐Centres.

This is primarily covered under 2.4.2 which is Metro Vancouver’s provision of space at most existing and future regional facilities for collection of clean wood and reusable building materials.

2.7.3 MV Will: Encourage highest and best use for wood following waste management hierarchy in the following priority: (a) Reuse wood for comparable structural and non‐structural applications. (b) Recycle wood fibre into other fibre based products. (c) Compost wood with other organic materials. (d) Digest wood to produce biofuels. (e) Process wood as a fuel for energy production.

Metro Vancouver aims to support the diversification of wood waste usage. Current actions include:

1. Directing the clean wood waste collected at Regional facilities to recycling and composting, augmented by the Clean Wood Disposal Ban.

2. Engaging the Centre for Advanced Wood Processing at UBC in a research project to identify value‐added uses for wood waste collected at public and private regional facilities. The research is focused on developing potentially commercially‐viable wood products that could use a portion of the wood waste generated by the region.

3. Starting market and technical research into using wood waste for district heating applications, in order to identify technical and market barriers that public and private entities experience.

2.7.4 MV Will: Pass by‐laws as required to support highest and best use of wood as outlined in 2.7.3. 2.7.5 MV Will: Ban all wood from landfill disposal.

Metro Vancouver introduced a Clean Wood Disposal Ban at regional facilities on January 1, 2015.

2.7.6 Other Governments & Agencies Will: Provincial Government to expand the inclusion of the reuse of wood in building codes.

This Provincial action may be incorporated into potential future EPR for construction materials or into the “greening” of the BC Building Code.



28 | P a g e

Strategy 2.8: Target plastics for increased recycling


2.8.1 MV Will: Expand the recycling of plastics in the residential and commercial sectors. (a) Establish a standard for municipal programs for collection of plastics based on market strength.

This initiative has been supplanted by the new Provincial regulations mandating that single family residential recycling programs (and eventually multifamily recycling, public spaces recycling, and ICI recycling programs) for packaging and printed papers be part of an EPR program to be administered by industry. Metro Vancouver continues to provide input, on behalf of our member municipalities, to the industry stewards on the development and implementation of their stewardship plans.

(b) In cooperation with retail partners and municipalities, undertake social marketing pilot programs to reduce the use of disposable take‐out food and beverage packaging including plastic and other disposable bags.

This is primarily covered under actions1.3.2 and 1.3.4 which involve the collaboration of member municipalities with Metro Vancouver to develop and deliver programs and education for businesses on waste reduction opportunities.

2.8.2 Municipalities Will: Work with Metro Vancouver on programs to reduce the use of disposable take‐out food and beverage packaging including plastic and other disposable bags.


2.8.3 Other Governments & Agencies Will: The Provincial Government to develop EPR programs for all plastics that provide incentives for alternatives to non‐recyclable plastics. 2.8.4 Other Governments & Agencies Will: The Provincial and Federal Governments to require all plastic material sold in BC to have a material code identifying its composition.




29 | P a g e

Strategy 2.9: Target multi‐family and industrial, commercial and institutional (ICI) sectors to improve diversion rates


2.9.1 MV Will: Develop bylaws to require recycling in all multi‐family and commercial buildings and complexes. (a) Develop a model bylaw and enforcement model to require recycling in multi‐family and commercial buildings.

Metro Vancouver continues to work with member municipalities to implement regulatory measures to increase recycling in the MF and ICI sector. In 2014, Metro Vancouver commissioned a study to research recycling incentives targeted at the apartments and businesses. Based on the findings of the study, Metro Vancouver has started consultations with haulers and municipalities to explore the feasibility of a hauler incentive program that would provide an incentive for complying with recycling requirements. Depending on the outcomes of the workshops and consultations, Metro Vancouver plans to pilot potential options late 2015 to early 2016 with haulers and municipalities. To expand on the existing mandatory recycling space and construction and demolition, Metro Vancouver is also planning workshops with member municipalities to share regulatory measures to increase MF and ICI recycling through existing and planned municipal regulatory measures such as business license requirements.

(b) Create an advisory service for recycling programs for multifamily and commercial buildings.

This is largely covered under actions 1.3.1 and 1.3.4 which involves the collaboration of member municipalities with Metro Vancouver to develop and deliver community‐based marketing programs to inform and educate citizens on waste reduction opportunities. In addition, Metro Vancouver co‐founded (with UBC) a municipal waste Research Collaborative to identify and carry out waste‐related research in the region. An offshoot of that collaborative is a Multi‐Family Organics Diversion Working Group.

2.9.2 Municipalities Will: Work with Metro Vancouver to implement recycling in multi‐family and commercial buildings.

This is largely covered under actions 1.3.1 and 1.3.4 which involves the collaboration of member municipalities with Metro Vancouver to develop and deliver community‐based marketing programs to inform and educate citizens on waste reduction opportunities.

2.9.3 Other Govt’s & Agencies Will: The Provincial Government to modify the BC Building Code to require that space be provided for recycling collection, sorting and pick‐up in multi‐family residential and commercial buildings.

Under action 2.9.1, Metro Vancouver updated the technical specifications for recycling storage space and access to reflect changes to collection services resulting from MMBC’s program. Several municipalities have adapted the technical specifications to their needs and implemented them as part of development permit requirements. The Provincial government may choose to include that specification in a revision to the Provincial Building Code.



30 | P a g e

Strategy 2.10: Develop contingency plans for the loss of recycling markets


2.10.1 MV Will: Manage diverted materials in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Management Act and regulations in that material will not be disposed unless all feasible opportunities for higher uses of the materials have been taken. 2.10.2 Municipalities Will: Manage diverted materials in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Management Act and regulations in that material will not be disposed unless all feasible opportunities for higher uses of the materials have been taken.

Compliance with applicable regulations is an ongoing responsibility with all actions associated with the ISWRMP. As described in actions 2.1.1 and 2.3.2, Metro Vancouver is engaged in various activities to improve markets for key recycled materials, especially compost and reusable building materials.



31 | P a g e

Strategy 2.11: Integrated Utility Management Advisory Committee


2.11.1 MV Will: Establish a new overarching committee, the Integrated Utility Management Advisory Committee (IUMAC), to advise Metro Vancouver on plan implementation, particularly from the perspectives of integrated planning and resource recovery across utility systems.

Metro Vancouver found it challenging to maintain an IUMAC of the form originally envisioned in the 2010 ISWRMP. In particular, it was difficult to recruit sufficient potential committee members who had professional and personal interests in both utilities of solid waste and liquid waste. In 2015, Metro Vancouver obtained Ministry approval to modify its approach and separate the monitoring of the solid and liquid waste utilities’ Plans. The implementation of the ISWRMP will be reviewed and critiqued by our Zero Waste Committee, a functional committee of the GVS&DD Board. As reports to the Zero Waste Committee and Board are public, their review can and will be supplemented by public input.



32 | P a g e

Strategy 3.1: Use waste‐to‐energy to provide electricity and district heating


3.1.1 MV Will: Continue use of existing waste‐to‐energy facility in Burnaby. (a) Subject to the limitations established in the section titled “Flow Control”, use the facility at its current usage and capacity of 280,000 tonnes per year to recover available energy in the waste remaining after recycling for district energy and electricity generation.

Continue to investigate opportunities for connecting the waste‐to‐energy facility to (a) district energy system(s):

Meetings on a staff level with the City of Burnaby and the City of Vancouver to discuss opportunities

Answered City of Burnaby staff questions with respect to providing district energy to the new development adjacent to the waste‐to‐energy facility

Hired Consultants to conduct a pre‐feasibility technical/financial study (completion in fall 2015) of the broad range of potential customers in both Burnaby and Vancouver for the short‐ and long‐term. Next steps will be based on the results of this study.

Continue to work with WTEF facility operator to maximize electricity generation from the facility: Finalized a new EPA with BC Hydro for electricity sales over the

next 12 years Completed a 5‐year overhaul of the turbo generator during an

unplanned outage to repair a damaged turbine blade.

(b) Continue to meet the monitoring and emission requirements in Appendix A. (c) Continue to improve environmental performance of the facility with improved technologies and monitor performance to ensure compliance with applicable legislation and regulations.

In 2013 the existing Facility was in full compliance with the standards set out in the ISWRMP (Appendix A).

In 2014 the Facility had two one hour CO exceedances, the maximum CO value was 60.1 mg/m3 and 57.2 mg/m3; the CO limit is 55 mg/m3. The Facility was in full compliance with all other standards set out in the ISWRMP.

Year to date 2015, the Facility is in full compliance with the standards set out in the ISWRMP.

Per the ISWRMP, compliance summaries are reported monthly to the Ministry of Environment.

Metro Vancouver is working with the Ministry of Environment to establish an Operational Certificate for the existing Waste to Energy Facility; this Certificate incorporates the emission objectives outlined in the Ministry’s 2011 Policy “Guideline for Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste Combustion”.

Metro Vancouver has completed a NOx reduction project resulting in a 53% reduction in NOx emissions. NOx emissions now meet the guideline proposed in the draft Operational Certificate.

Metro Vancouver has proceeded with preliminary engineering of an Acid Gas Reduction Project to ensure the facility can meet the lower acid gas limits as outlined in the proposed Operational Certificate. Preliminary work related to the upgrade of the existing WTEF auxiliary gas burners has also commenced. Once installed, the upgraded



33 | P a g e

(d) Operating performance will continue to be reported on a regular and timely basis and will also be available on the Metro Vancouver web site. (e) The waste‐to‐energy facility in Burnaby will comply with applicable legislation and operating contracts may include penalties for any violations of performance criteria.

burners will enable the WTEF to maintain better combustion zone temperatures and enhance CO emissions control.

Operating performance is reported to Ministry of Environment, Coastal Health and City of Burnaby on a monthly basis. Emission data is posted on Metro Vancouver’s website quarterly following receipt of manual stack test results.

Metro Vancouver will submit an Internet Publication Plan to the Ministry for approval within 6 months of the issuance of the proposed Operational Certificate.

Metro Vancouver’s Waste to Energy facility in Burnaby continues to comply with all legislation.

3.1.2 MV Will: Expand the use of waste‐to‐energy. (a) Establish up to 500,000 tonnes per year of new waste‐to‐energy capacity within the region in one or more facilities. (b) Ensure implementation of new waste‐to‐energy capacity maximizes energy recovery for use in district heating, production of alternative fuels, industrial applications and electricity generation.

The required capacity will be determined before the RFP is issued.

Evaluation criteria for the New WTE RFP will include an analysis of the proposed energy balance of the facility and opportunities to maximize energy recovery

(c) Monitor trends in waste reduction, recycling and waste flows and implement additional waste‐to‐energy capacity if, and only if, justified on the basis of these trends.

Waste flows and trends are monitored on a regular basis by Metro Vancouver as a component of action 1.1.8, the results of which are used for forecasting system needs and adjustments.

(d) Scale any additional waste‐to‐energy capacity so that total waste‐to‐energy capacity in the region does not exceed the most probable minimum waste flow projected over the economic life of those facilities.

The required capacity for new WTE continues to be monitored and will be chosen by the GVS&DD Board prior to moving forward on the procurement process for a new facility.

(e) Operating performance will be reported on a regular and timely basis and will also be available on the Metro Vancouver web site. Any new waste‐to‐energy facility will comply with applicable legislation and operating contracts may include penalties for any violations of performance criteria.

New Waste to Energy Capacity is in the planning stage. Therefore no operating performance is available.



34 | P a g e

3.1.3 MV Will: Locate new waste‐to‐energy capacity within the Region on the basis of: site availability; suitability of site for providing district heating from recovered energy; potential for site to optimize network of transfer stations; results of local screening level impact assessment and triple bottom line analysis; and results of community consultation process for each potential site.

Once the Potential Site Identification process is complete, Metro Vancouver will report on short‐listed potential sites, equally considering in and out‐of‐region sites.

3.1.4 MV Will: Ensure that new waste‐to‐energy facilities are designed to maximize the environmental, financial and social benefits of facilities. (a) Evaluate cost/benefits of proposed new facilities over their lifetime, including construction, commissioning, operation and maintenance, future retrofits and decommissioning impacts, and ownership structure.

An updated, comprehensive business case will be completed prior to issuing the RFP.

(b) Conduct an environmental impact assessment of a waste‐to‐energy facility(ies), based on applicable provincial and federal government requirements, including an assessment of human health risk acceptable to the applicable health authority.

An Environmental Impact Assessment will be done prior to final award(s)

(c) Evaluation criteria will include: cost; use of best available commercial technology; air emission and health impacts; GHG emissions; alignment with sustainability principles; electricity, district heating and alternative fuel production; beneficial use of ash; metals recovery; potential local job creation; and opportunities for research and education.

Evaluation criteria for the New WTE RFP will include cost; use of best available commercial technology; air emission and health impacts; GHG emissions; alignment with sustainability principles; electricity, district heating and alternative fuel production; beneficial use of ash; metals recovery; potential local job creation; and opportunities for research and education.

3.1.5 MV Will: Recover metals, ash or other residues from new and existing waste‐to‐energy facilities for beneficial use. (a) Work with regulatory agencies to identify and remove barriers to beneficial use of ash.

The City of Vancouver and Metro Vancouver funded an occupational exposure assessment and human health risk assessment for bottom ash management at the Vancouver landfill. The report assumed the bottom ash is being handled as a beneficial use product and not as it is currently handled (stockpiled and landfilled). The report concluded the exposure to chemicals of potential concern in bottom ash are unlikely to pose adverse health effects for workers at the landfill. Recommendations were provided to further minimize worker exposures to airborne particulate, including metals.

(b) Maximize metal recovery from the waste stream after recycling.

Metro Vancouver is considering a Non‐Ferrous Recovery Project to increase the existing recovery of ferrous metal content from the bottom ash (e.g. iron and steel) and add the recovery of the non‐ferrous metal component (e.g. aluminum and copper). The detailed design phase of the Non‐Ferrous Recovery Project is now complete. Metro Vancouver will review the costs with Metro



35 | P a g e

Vancouver’s Board to determine whether to proceed with construction of this project.

(c) Process bottom and fly ash to generate products for beneficial use. (d) Use processed bottom and fly ash beneficially for highest value applications available.

Beneficial reuse projects are on hold at this time. Beneficial reuse projects require Ministry of Environment assessment and approval in order to proceed.

(e) If beneficial use of a residue is not reasonably available, dispose of the residue in accordance with applicable legislation.

Fly ash is currently being disposed of at Willow Creek Landfill outside of Hinton, AB under a three year RFP contract award in accordance with applicable legislation. Bottom ash is currently being disposed at Vancouver Landfill in accordance with applicable legislation.

3.1.6 MV Will: Recover energy from regional utility materials that cannot be recycled, including liquid waste and water utilities. (a) Recover energy from drinking water treatment processes, such as organic filter media that cannot be recycled. (b) Use waste‐to‐energy to process grit and screenings from wastewater treatment for beneficial uses, where appropriate. (c) Use reclaimed water from wastewater treatment plants in waste‐to‐energy steam generation or district heating, if viable.

Responsibility for Action 3.1.6 has been transferred to Liquid Waste Services, Residuals Management. This has been reported under separate cover to the ministry in Metro Vancouver’s Biennial Report for its Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan.



36 | P a g e

Strategy 3.2: Recover energy from other solid waste management facilities


3.2.1 Municipalities (City of Vancouver) Will: Recover landfill gas from Vancouver Landfill and strive to maximize the beneficial use of the recovered gas.

Additional gas upgrades in Phase 3 West were completed in summer of 2014. Filling in Phase 3 South East started in 2014 and progressive closure is expected to be completed in 2017, including landfill gas upgrades. Collection efficiency averaged 60% during 2014 and is targeted to reach 65% by the end of 2015. LFG Utilization: Village FarmsClean Energy (VFCE) met their contracted utilization requirements for June, with 61% of the collected LFG going to the hot houses. Fortis BC is continuing work on their preliminary design and cost estimate. Stakeholder meetings between the City and Fortis staff are ongoing.



37 | P a g e

Strategy 3.3: Utilize non‐recyclable material as fuel


3.3.1 MV Will: Direct recoverable loads of combustible material received at transfer stations to public or private energy recovery facilities.

Identifying and separating of individual transfer loads of high calorific value for WTEF, is not feasible. The waste is blended during the loading process. The tipping fee for mattress recycling residuals at the Waste‐to‐Energy Facility was reduced to encourage their delivery and the recycling of their high metal content.

3.3.2 Municipalities (City of Vancouver) Will: Collaborate with Metro Vancouver in ensuring action 3.3.1 is carried out at solid waste management facilities operated by the City of Vancouver.

At present this is not feasible but will be taken into consideration in future operational designs and changes.

3.3.3 Other Governments and Agencies Will: Provincial Government to develop material and energy requirements for existing and future stewardship programs to use the non‐recyclable portion of returned material as fuel rather than landfilling.

See actions 1.1.10 through 1.1.12 related to EPR program development by the Province.



38 | P a g e

Strategy 4.1: Utilize the Vancouver Landfill as a disposal site


4.1.1 MV Will: Use the Vancouver Landfill to dispose of any remaining waste not directed to waste‐to‐energy facilities. (a) Metro Vancouver will work with the City of Vancouver and Corporation of Delta to reduce the quantity of waste going to the Vancouver Landfill to a maximum of 100,000 tonnes annually, exclusive of waste‐to‐energy residuals, by 2020. Should these reductions not be achieved because overall waste flows exceed the combined capacity of disposal options, Metro Vancouver will evaluate cost effective alternatives and if appropriate seek an amendment to this Plan to expand waste‐to‐energy capacity to further reduce waste flows to the Vancouver Landfill.

Waste flow allocation to the Vancouver Landfill has been optimized in conjunction with the other two waste disposal locations (Cache Creek Landfill and WTEF) with respect to system flows and finances.

(b) Monitor the Vancouver Landfill to ensure compliance.

The City of Vancouver generates an annual landfill report which includes monitoring data, to meet OC requirements for submittal to MOE.

4.1.2 MV Will: Report annually on the remaining capacity of the waste management system and prior to the closure of Vancouver Landfill, reassess the region’s waste‐to‐energy and disposal options.

The 2014 annual solid waste summary report includes an update on the estimated remaining disposal capacity in the region’s waste management system. In 2014, the annual permitted disposal capacity of the solid waste system includes: ~280,000 t (WTEF); 750,000 t (Vancouver LF) and 500,000 (Cache Creek Landfill). Remaining capacity at Vancouver Landfill exceeds 10 million tonnes. Remaining capacity at the Cache Creek Landfill is approximately 400,000 – 500,000 tonnes. Metro Vancouver will stop shipping waste to Cache Creek at the end of 2016.

4.1.3 Municipalities (City of Vancouver & Delta) Will: Work with Metro Vancouver to accommodate residual waste flows at the Vancouver Landfill.

This is being done in accordance with actions 4.1.1(a) and (b) and facilitated through the Tri‐Partite Technical Committee in accordance with the conditions set out in the Tri‐Partite Agreement.

4.1.4 Municipalities (City of Vancouver & Delta) Will: Where limits in the Operational Certificate, contracts, agreements and regulations appear to conflict with the Plan, review the particular provisions in good faith with the Province, Metro Vancouver and any other involved party to determine if there is a solution acceptable to all affected parties.

This is being facilitated through the Tri‐Partite Technical Committee in accordance with the conditions set out in the Tri‐Partite Agreement.



39 | P a g e

Strategy 4.2: Ensure a disposal site is available for DLC waste


4.2.1 MV Will: Assess long‐term disposal of demolition, land clearing, and construction (DLC) waste remaining after recycling in collaboration with the private sector, neighbouring regional districts and First Nations communities.

This is primarily covered under 2.4.3 which is Metro Vancouver’s ongoing monitoring of the regional flows and recycling and disposal capacity of DLC wastes. See also action 1.1.8

4.2.2 MV Will: Identify disposal sites for DLC waste remaining after recycling that will be available when existing disposal facilities reach their capacity.

This is primarily covered under 2.4.3 which is Metro Vancouver’s ongoing monitoring of the regional flows and recycling and disposal capacity of DLC wastes.



40 | P a g e

Strategy 4.3: Establish contingency disposal sites


4.3.1 MV Will: Ensure adequate landfill capacity for: (a) non‐combustible and non‐recyclable material; and (b) municipal solid waste in excess of waste‐to‐energy and in‐region landfill capacity (including allowances for variability in waste flows and short‐term operational disruption), and non‐recyclable ash.

If required, a competitive procurement process to secure contingency disposal capacity will begin in 2016.

4.3.2 MV Will: If sufficient waste‐to‐energy or in‐region landfill capacity is not available, this Plan explicitly permits Metro Vancouver to seek, through an appropriate procurement process, the best available out‐of‐region landfill(s) for the disposal of remaining waste, subject to that facility having appropriate permits, from the local permitting jurisdiction in which it is located, to accept such waste. (a) Categories of evaluation for a contingency landfill will include, but not necessarily be limited to cost, air emissions, GHG emissions, energy benefit and, where appropriate, completion of a satisfactory human health impact assessment. (b) Monitor contingency disposal site(s) for performance and compliance.

Metro Vancouver continues to monitor waste flow projections and remaining disposal capacity and will take into consideration environmental, social and economic factors when determining alternative disposal sites when and if deemed necessary.


III DETAILED ISWRMP PERFORMANCE MEASURES

41 | P a g e

III. DETAILED ISWRMP PERFORMANCE MEASURES The following section reports on the official performance measures in the ISWRMP, including estimated wastes disposed and recycled for the Metro Vancouver region in calendar 2014.



42 | P a g e

2014 RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE

Garbage and recycling from single family residences are collected mostly in dedicated vehicles by municipalities; therefore, single family residential garbage and recycling percentages have a reasonably high degree of certainty. However, garbage from multi‐family residences is usually mixed with garbage from industrial, commercial, and institutional (ICI) businesses, as they are typically collected in the same vehicles. As a result, multi‐family residential garbage and recycling percentages are less certain. Furthermore, with the 2014 implementation of EPR for Packaging and Printed Papers, it has become more difficult to identify EPR tonnages of recyclables attributable to multi‐family residences. For the calendar year of 2014, the multi‐family residential recycling rate was estimated to be about 24% (including EPR recyclables).

Additionally, Metro Vancouver estimates that approximately 100,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste from commercial generators and multi‐family residential buildings were exported from the region to disposal in 2014. These generators are served by private haulers, who deliver the waste to a transfer facility in Abbotsford. This out‐of‐region disposal estimate was believed to be insignificant prior to 2012. Waste export is significant and has been increasing up to the reporting period, it is therefore included in the ICI and multi‐family sectors’ 2014 disposal totals. The ISWRMP (the Plan) contemplates options for regional waste flow management to ensure all material generated in the region is managed under the goals of the Plan. Metro Vancouver’s effort to implement a waste flow management bylaw was approved by the Board in 2013, but subsequently rejected by the Province in October of 2014. The impact on Metro Vancouver’s ability to implement the ISWRMP are being evaluated.

The following table presents recycling and solid waste quantities for each sector. In 2014, Metro Vancouver has estimated a distribution of EPR recycling tonnages to the single family, multi‐family and commercial sectors. Appendix 1 includes a similar table with a comparison of the previous year.

Recycling and solid waste management may be categorized into three sectors: Residential; Light‐Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional (ICI); and Demolition, Land‐clearing, and Construction (DLC).

In 2014, 2,040,280 tonnes of materials were recycled and diverted from disposal in Metro Vancouver. This amounts to 61% of the waste materials generated in the region. A remaining 1,303,191 tonnes of municipal solid waste were disposed of.

Metro Vancouver Recycling & Solid Waste totals: 2014



43 | P a g e

Table 1: 2014 Metro Vancouver Recycling and Solid Waste Quantities

WASTE SECTOR DISPOSED

(tonnes)

RECYCLED

(tonnes)

RECYCLING

RATE3 (%)

DISPOSED

(tonnes/ capita)

DISPOSED

(tonnes/ HH)

Residential 517,191 553,409 51% 0.22 0.57

Single Family (reported1) Population4 = 1,494,336

292,787 482,090 61% 0.20 0.66

Multi-Family (estimated2) Population4 = 970,696

194,404 71,320 24% 0.23 0.41

Multi-Family (estimated out of region5)

30,000

ICI (estimated) Employees4 = 1,291,490

322,328 298,461 43% 0.16 0.42

ICI (estimated out of region5) 70,000

DLC (reported) 393,672 1,188,409 75% 0.16 0.42

TOTAL 1,303,191 2,040,280 61% 0.53 1.40

METRO VANCOUVER’S RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Metro Vancouver’s integrated recycling and solid waste management system provides service to the residents and businesses of 24 local authorities and 23 First Nations communities (1 Treaty Territory and 22 Indian Reserves). Waste from the City of Abbotsford is received at the Matsqui Transfer Station (closed November 1, 2015) and waste from Thompson‐Nicola Regional District, the Village of Cache Creek, and the

Notes:

1 Reported tonnes of disposed and recycled waste are obtained from municipal reports, private recycling and processing facility records, landfill records, or product stewardship association records. This includes “Residential Droop-off” tonnages.

2 Estimated tonnes of disposed waste are based on per capita multi-family disposal rates and the total transfer station weigh scale reports for ‘Commercial’ waste. A calculated portion of that total is then attributed to each sector. Multi-family recycling is reported by municipalities and combined with estimated ‘Residential Drop-Off’ tonnages. 3 The Total Recycling Rate includes the Product Stewardship tonnages. The recycling rates for individual Sectors also include Product Stewardship tonnages, based on estimates of the relative contributions to Product Stewardship tonnages from single family homes (54%), multi-family homes (36%), and businesses (10%) with the exception of MMBC tonnages that are 100% allocated to the single family sector.

4 Population and Housing figures are based on 2014 projections provided by Metro Vancouver’s Regional Planning Department.

5Out-of-region disposal estimates based on scale record analysis and FVRD tonnage reports. Split between industrial, commercial, and institutional, and multi-family, based on per capita multi-family disposal estimate and population.



44 | P a g e

Village of Ashcroft is delivered to the Cache Creek Landfill, but is not tabulated in the Metro Vancouver Recycling and Solid Waste Quantities.

Recycling

Municipalities historically have provided recycling services for the single family residential sector, and some parts of the multi‐family residential and ICI sectors. In 2014, a private sector industry stewardship organization Multi‐Materials BC (MMBC) assumed responsibility for recycling Packaging and Printed Papers from single family homes, as legislated by the Province. Most multi‐family residential, ICI, and DLC recyclables are managed by the private sector (although industry stewardship program will take over for multi‐family residences and ICI businesses in the coming years). The following table presents the quantities and types of recyclables collected in 2014. In this table, EPR Programs recyclables have been presented separately instead of allocating to residential and ICI sectors. There is a notable shift in the amount of recycling (~57,000 t) from the residential sector now in the EPR column.

Table 2: Estimated Quantities of Materials Recycled in Metro Vancouver in 2014

Disposed Waste

Residential and ICI waste disposal is handled through the regional solid waste management system. In 2014, the Regional Facilities consisted of:

seven transfer stations the Vancouver Landfill, Cache Creek Landfill, and the Waste‐to‐Energy Facility in Burnaby.

All municipal solid waste delivered to the disposal facilities (landfills and waste‐to‐energy) is accounted in Metro Vancouver’s disposal rate (including DLC and material disposed out of region). The current per capita disposal rate in the region is 0.53 tonnes per person per year.

MATERIAL TYPERESIDENTIAL

(tonnes)

ICI

(tonnes)

DLC

(tonnes)

EPR PROGRAMS

(tonnes)

TOTAL

(tonnes)

Asphalt ‐ ‐ 162,019 ‐ 162,019 Batteries ‐ ‐ ‐ 10,278 10,278 Concrete ‐ ‐ 482,310 ‐ 482,310 Electronic & Electrical Equipment ‐ 189 ‐ 26,160 26,349 Fibre 28,944 196,785 29,075 57,071 311,874 Glass 24,399 4,702 ‐ 55,355 84,457 Gypsum 6,398 2,439 70,723 ‐ 79,560 HHW ‐ ‐ ‐ 20,990 20,990 Metal 22,498 18,305 26,437 11,994 79,233 Other ‐ ‐ 10,980 6 10,986 Plastic 15,658 5,879 ‐ 10,069 31,606 Textiles ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Tires ‐ ‐ ‐ 13,170 13,170 Wood 2,970 15,664 406,865 ‐ 425,499 Yard & Food 260,684 41,264 ‐ ‐ 301,948

TOTAL 361,549 285,227 1,188,409 205,094 2,040,280



45 | P a g e

DLC waste is handled separately from the regional solid waste management system and is disposed at either a private landfill, the Vancouver Landfill or at one of several other landfills that are not under Metro Vancouver jurisdiction. In 2014, the Residential, ICI, and DLC sectors in Metro Vancouver disposed of a total of 1,303,191 tonnes of waste to the regional system and private disposal facilities.

In 2014, Metro Vancouver residents, businesses and industry achieved an overall recycling or diversion rate of 61%. Figures 1 and 2, below, show changes in the regional diversion rate from all waste sectors; and the total per capita generation, disposal and recycling rates for the region since 1994, respectively. Table 3 shows Metro Vancouver’s regional waste and recycling figures. Table 4 highlights the single family residential recycling and solid waste figures.

Figure 1: Regional Diversion Rate for Waste from All Sectors



46 | P a g e

Figure 2: Total Waste Generation, Disposal and Recycling Rates per Capita

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Diversion Rate

Year



47 | P a g e

Table 3: Metro Vancouver Regional Solid Waste and Recycling Figures

Table 4: Single Family Residential Solid Waste and Recycling Figures

YEARREGIONAL

POPULATION

REGIONAL

HOUSEHOLDS

TOTAL

GENERATED

(tonnes)

TOTAL

RECYCLED

(tonnes)

TOTAL

DISPOSED

(tonnes)

RECYCLING

RATE

(%)

GENERATION

RATE

(tonnes/capita)

DISPOSAL

RATE

(tonnes/capita)

DISPOSAL

RATE

(tonnes/HH)

1994 1,732,567 2,663,581 1,025,921 1,680,750 39% 1.54 0.97 1995 1,784,656 2,561,858 1,032,095 1,529,763 40% 1.44 0.86 1996 1,906,492 2,419,323 1,058,441 1,360,882 44% 1.27 0.71 1997 1,954,523 2,589,044 1,131,958 1,457,086 44% 1.32 0.75 1998 1,984,743 2,609,913 1,261,680 1,348,233 48% 1.31 0.68 1999 2,013,201 2,618,538 1,151,130 1,467,408 44% 1.30 0.73 2000 2,041,399 2,657,076 1,183,611 1,473,465 45% 1.30 0.72 2001 2,073,662 2,851,208 1,418,489 1,432,719 50% 1.37 0.69 2002 2,102,244 2,903,894 1,470,445 1,433,449 51% 1.38 0.68 2003 2,128,965 2,775,455 1,414,390 1,361,065 51% 1.30 0.64 2004 2,153,998 3,072,702 1,595,999 1,476,703 52% 1.43 0.69 2005 2,188,573 3,245,796 1,701,414 1,544,382 52% 1.48 0.71 2006 2,218,026 817,040 3,434,617 1,794,613 1,640,004 52% 1.55 0.74 2.01 2007 2,251,887 831,909 3,598,142 1,980,751 1,617,391 55% 1.60 0.72 1.94 2008 2,273,095 847,299 3,366,123 1,866,892 1,499,231 55% 1.48 0.66 1.77 2009 2,314,163 865,017 3,374,840 1,922,840 1,452,001 57% 1.46 0.63 1.68 2010 2,351,496 879,874 3,075,392 1,676,117 1,399,275 55% 1.31 0.60 1.59 2011 2,395,520 891,340 3,188,348 1,817,446 1,370,902 57% 1.33 0.57 1.54 2012 2,408,559 903,827 3,228,305 1,871,339 1,356,966 58% 1.34 0.56 1.50 2013 2,430,305 920,375 3,348,498 2,020,114 1,328,384 60% 1.38 0.55 1.44 2014 2,465,031 939,212 3,343,471 2,040,280 1,303,191 61% 1.36 0.53 1.39



48 | P a g e

(1) Includes distributed EPR Recyclables.

YEAR

SINGLE

FAMILY

RESIDENTIAL

POPULATION

SINGLE

FAMILY

RESIDENTIAL

HOUSEHOLDS

SECTOR

GENERATED

(tonnes)

SECTOR

RECYCLED

(tonnes)(1)

SECTOR

DISPOSED

(tonnes)

SECTOR

RECYCLING

RATE

(%)

SECTOR

GENERATION

RATE

(tonnes/capita)

SECTOR

DISPOSAL

RATE

(tonnes/capita)

SECTOR

DISPOSAL

RATE

(tonnes/HH)

2006 1,389,809 428,045 778,629 336,577 442,052 43% 0.56 0.32 1.03 2007 1,399,185 434,163 783,878 352,455 431,423 45% 0.56 0.31 0.99 2008 1,409,040 439,041 741,783 324,093 417,690 44% 0.53 0.30 0.95 2009 1,419,442 443,894 749,536 330,294 419,242 44% 0.53 0.30 0.94 2010 1,429,495 447,932 721,746 344,450 377,296 48% 0.50 0.26 0.84 2011 1,440,334 453,000 732,112 363,594 368,518 50% 0.51 0.26 0.81 2012 1,476,411 456,815 784,196 439,077 345,118 56% 0.53 0.23 0.76 2013 1,484,766 462,170 761,169 456,822 304,347 60% 0.51 0.20 0.66 2014 1,494,336 464,955 774,877 482,090 292,787 62% 0.52 0.20 0.63



49 | P a g e

Performance Measures

Metro Vancouver has developed an accounting table for tracking the performance of the regional solid waste management system. Annually, solid waste and recycling data from multiple sources is gathered, tabulated and analyzed in order to provide the most accurate picture of the region's solid waste and recyclables management system. The full description and table presenting the performance measures can be found in Appendix 2 of this report.

Acknowledgements

Metro Vancouver acknowledges the contributions of its member municipalities, EPR Product Stewardship Associations, and the many private recycling and processing facilities for the data used to complete this report.



50 | P a g e

Appendix 1 – Metro Vancouver Recycling and Solid Waste Quantities 2013 and 2014

WASTE SECTOR

DISPOSED (tonnes) (1)

RECYCLED (tonnes)

DIVERSION RATE (%) (2)

2013 2014 %

change 2013 2014

% change

2013 2014 %

change

Residential tonnes

521,851

517,191 -1%

539,720

553,409 3%

51% 52% 1% tonnes/capita

0.21

0.21 -2%

0.22

0.22 1%

Single Family (reported)

tonnes 304,347 292,787 -4% 456,822 482,090 6% 60% 62% 2%

Multi Family (estimated)

tonnes 217,504 224,404 3% 82,898 71,320 -14% 28% 24% -4%

ICI (estimated)

tonnes

414,191 392,328 -5%

263,267

298,461

13% 39% 43% 4%

tonnes/capita

0.17

0.16 -7%

0.11

0.12 12%

Residential+ICI tonnes/HH

1.02

0.97 -5%

0.87

0.91 4%

DLC (reported)

tonnes

392,342 393,672 0%

1,217,127

1,188,409

-2% 76% 75% -1%

Total

tonnes

1,328,384

1,303,191 -2%

2,020,114

2,040,280

1%

60% 61% 1% tonnes/capita

0.55 0.53 -3%

0.83

0.83

0%

tonnes/HH

1.44 1.39 -4%

2.19

2.17

-1%

(1) Includes 100,000t delivered to Abbotsford by private haulers (30,000t MF and 70,000t ICI waste). (2) Including EPR recyclables allocation of 205,094 t (All MMBC tonnes (~56,000) allocated to SF‐RES).

Year Single Family Multi Family Total

Population Households Population Households Population Households

2013 1,484,766 462,170 945,539 458,205 2,430,305 920,375

2014 1,494,336 464,955 970,696 474,257 2,465,031 939,212



51 | P a g e

Appendix 2 – 2014 ISWRMP Performance Measures Summary

Metro Vancouver Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan Performance Measures Metro Vancouver has developed an accounting table for tracking the performance of the regional solid waste management system. Annually, solid waste and recycling data from multiple sources is gathered, tabulated and analyzed in order to provide the most accurate picture of the region's solid waste and recyclables management system. Performance measures for monitoring progress in achieving the specific goals of the ISWRMP are presented in the table below: Goal 1 ‐ Minimize waste generation. Under this goal, the table shows the solid waste generation quantities in metric tonnes for the various sectors (Residential, ICI and DLC) from 2008 until 2014. The amount of waste generated per capita has declined over the long term and particularly since 2007. In addition, this section presents the performance of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs and their effect on the waste generated in the region. As more programs have come online, the quantity of materials recycled by EPR stewards has increased slightly over the last 5 years. The reduction of these materials disposed and generated may indicate both an increased awareness of the importance of reducing consumption and improved packaging designs in regards to weight and recyclability. Any impact of the new EPR program for Packaging and Printed Paper on product packaging designs may be evident in future years. Goal 2 ‐ Maximize reuse, recycling and material recovery. The ISWRMP specifically identifies diversion rate and per capita generation rates as overarching performance indicators of the solid waste and recyclables management system. The overall diversion rate has increased from 55% to 61% from 2008 to 2014 and the per capita disposal rate of all waste streams (including DLC) has dropped to 0.53 tonnes per capita. The per capita generation rate fluctuates somewhat but overall has decreased from its high of 1.60 tonnes per capita in 2007 to 1.36 tonnes per capita in 2014. Goal 3 ‐ Recover energy from the waste stream after material recycling. This section of the table describes the use of energy recovery and greenhouse gas emissions from the solid waste management system in 3 sections. The first section describes the energy produced (in gigajoules) from the Metro Vancouver Regional Disposal Facilities1 and delivered to end users for beneficial use. This includes electricity and steam from the waste to energy facility and landfill gas delivered to end users from the landfill facilities. In 2012, Metro Vancouver lost two major users of energy when Norampac and Catalyst closed their operations in Burnaby and Coquitlam. Metro Vancouver continues to seek alternate beneficial uses of steam and landfill gas produced by its facilities, including district energy systems. The second section indicates the energy generated (in gigajoules) by the various facilities that could potentially be directed to beneficial use. The Metro Vancouver waste‐to‐energy facility in Burnaby has potential steam energy available for use since Norampac has closed. However, the quantity of low grade heat energy available in the form of steam is unknown as much of this energy is reused within the plant operations or lost through the condensing process. Metro Vancouver is currently evaluating the use of this low grade heat as district heating. The energy potential of the landfill facilities in this section represents gigajoules of energy from landfill gas that is simply flared and not put to beneficial use. The third section of the table indicates the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions balance for the solid waste facilities. It shows the metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) emitted from the facilities as well as the emissions avoided from beneficial use (as described in the first section of Goal 3). The net emission for each facility is then displayed in tonnes of CO2e. The Metro Vancouver solid waste system has reduced its net CO2e emissions by 27% (2010‐2014) despite the loss in beneficial use customers in 2011 and 2012. Goal 4 ‐ Dispose of all remaining waste in landfill after material recycling and energy recovery.

1 Regional Disposal Facilities include: Metro Vancouver Waste‐to‐Energy facility in Burnaby, Vancouver Landfill, Closed Coquitlam Landfill and Cache Creek Landfill.



52 | P a g e

This section displays the per capita disposal rate (metric tonnes per capita) of treated and untreated waste for disposal to landfill. These quantities include the disposal of bottom ash, fly ash and all untreated garbage. The Metro Vancouver region has significantly reduced the amount of material per capita it has sent to landfill disposal between 2010 and 2014 (from 0.33 to 0.25 tonnes per capita – 26% reduction). Metro Vancouver conducts regular audits on the waste stream going to disposal in order to identify materials that typically end up in waste stream that can potentially be recycled and to inform its education and engagement campaigns, operational activities and regulatory efforts based on the findings of the audit. Metro Vancouver acknowledges the efforts of the region's member municipalities, the private sector, EPR Product Stewardship Associations and the British Columbia Ministry of Environment for their contributions in achieving the goals of the Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan.


Metro Vancouver Detailed Recycling and Solid Waste Performance Measures

Goal Progress Measure

Progress Detail

GOAL 1 Minimize waste generation

Waste generation measures

Waste generated by sector

(tonnes) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Average / Change2010-2014

Waste generation quantities for all sectors tracked year-over-year and on a rolling five-year basis

Residential (Single and Multi-

Family) 962,953 973,394 1,077,776 1,061,571 1,070,600 1,029,259

ICI (Institutional, Commercial and

Light Industrial) 818,789 676,021 709,131 677,458 690,789 714,438

DLC (Demolition, Land-clearing and

Construction) 1,104,794 1,409,987 1,441,399 1,609,469 1,582,082 1,429,546

Total generated 3,075,392 3,188,348 3,228,305 3,348,498 3,343,471 3,236,803

Total generated per capita 1.31 1.33 1.34 1.38 1.36 1.34

Increase of product stewardship initiatives by senior governments to more than two initiatives every three years

New product stewardship initiatives

by year 2 3 3 0 1 9

Monitor performance of EPR programs to ensure shift in responsibility from public to private sector achieves a reduction in total waste generated

Waste diverted through EPR

programs (tonnes) 130,384 128,946 124,048 128,224 205,094 57%

Est. EPR materials disposed in

waste stream(1) (tonnes) 27,500 28,900 28,800 25,700 109,100 297%

Est. EPR materials generated

(tonnes) 157,900 157,800 152,800 153,900 314,200 99%

% EPR materials generated diverted 83% 82% 81% 83% 65% -17%


54 | P a g e

GOAL 2 Maximize reuse, recycling, and material recovery

Diversion measures

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Change2010-2014

Overall diversion rate tracked year-over-year

Overall diversion rate 55% 57% 58% 60% 61% 6%

Disposal rate per capita tracked year-over year (MSW + DLC).

Tonnes per-capita disposed 0.60 0.57 0.56 0.55 0.53 -12%

Diversion rate per-capita tracked year-over-year

Tonnes per-capita diverted 0.71 0.76 0.73 0.83 0.83 16%

Tracking of material recycling tonnage

Material recycled (tonnes) 1,676,117 1,817,446 1,871,339 2,020,114 2,040,280 22%

Monitor performance of EPR programs to ensure shift in responsibility from public to private sector achieves an increase in material reused, recycled, and recovered

Material capture through EPR programs (tonnes)

130,384 128,946 124,048 128,224 205,094 57%

GOAL 3 Recover

energy from the waste

stream after material

recycling

Energy measures

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Change2010-2014

Energy produced from solid waste and beneficially used in gigajoules (GJ).

Total material sent to waste-to-energy facility (Tonnes)

MV-WTEF (tonnes waste disposed)

284,458

281,139

281,260

280,138

275,260

n/a

Energy Purchased ( Gigajoules )

MV-WTEF (BC Hydro Electricity)

73,751

72,951

74,526

78,017

77,524

5%

MV-WTEF (Fortis Natural Gas)

20,103

13,375

16,306

12,544

11,317

-44%

Energy Produced and Delivered to End Users ( Gigajoules )

MV-WTEF (Electricity)

505,198

500,881

600,292

637,885

537,110

6%

MV-WTEF (Steam to Norampac)

685,054

623,798

-

-

-

-100%


55 | P a g e

Cache Creek LF (LFG)

-

-

-

n/a

Coquitlam LF (LFG to Catalyst)

16,452

11,597

-

-

-

-100%

Vancouver LF (LFG to Maxim/VF

Clean Energy) (2)

629,820

587,712

389,430

584,302

749,353 19%

Total

1,836,524

1,723,988

989,722

1,222,187

1,286,463

-30%

Energy produced from solid waste and not beneficially used in gigajoules (GJ).

Energy Produced but Not Used ( Gigajoules )

MV-WTEF (low grade heat loss) Future district heating systems may make use of unused low grade heat.

Cache Creek LF (LFG flared)

212,823

349,635

386,100

450,684

512,655

141%

Coquitlam LF (LFG flared) 0

5,564

16,187

16,200

14,248

n/a

Vancouver LF (LFG flared)

254,757

148,890

622,661

507,533

456,064

79%

Total

467,580

504,089

1,024,947

974,417

982,967

110%

Total Greenhouse gases emitted and avoided tracked year-over-year in metric tonnes (t) of CO2E (Biogenic component of waste only)

Carbon Dioxide equivalents emitted and avoided ( t CO2E )

MV-WTEF - Emitted(5)

119,790

118,069

120,766

115,120

108,708

-9%

MV-WTEF (Electricity)(2)

(3,508)

(3,478)

(4,169)

(2,333)

(1,488)

-58%

MV-WTEF (Heat from Steam)(3)

(45,146)

(41,109)

-

-

-

-100%

MV-WTEF - Net

71,136

73,482

116,597

112,788

107,221

51%

Cache Creek LF - Emitted(4)

137,899

107,292

95,667

65,674

45,749

-67%

Cache Creek LF (Avoided)

-

-

-

-

-

n/a

Cache Creek LF - Net

137,899

107,292

95,667

65,674

45,749

-67%

Coquitlam LF - Emitted(4) 17,295 15,355 14,093 12,705 12,302 -29%

Coquitlam LF (LFG to Boilers)(3) (813) (573)

-

-

-

-100%

Coquitlam LF - Net 16,481 14781 14,093 12,705 12,302 -25%


56 | P a g e

Vancouver LF - Emitted(4)

510,472

580,543

472,382

404,259

383,348

-25%

Vancouver LF (LFG to Maxim/VF

Clean Energy)(2)

(31,151)

(29,068)

(19,261)

(28,900)

(37,063) 19%

Vancouver LF - Net

479,321

551,474

453,121

375,359

346,285

-28%

Total Emitted

785,456

821,259

702,908

597,758

550,108

-30%

Total Avoided

(80,619)

(74,229)

(23,430)

(31,232)

(38,551)

-52%

Total Net Emissions

704,838

747,029

679,478

566,526

511,557

-27%

GOAL 4 Dispose of

all remaining waste in landfill,

after material

recycling and energy

recovery

Disposal measures

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Change2010-2014

Quantity of treated and untreated waste per capita going to landfill is tracked year-over-year

Waste landfilled per capita (tonnes)

0.33 0.30 0.30 0.26 0.25 -26%

Metro Vancouver will carry out periodic waste composition audits

Years waste composition audits carried out

yes yes yes yes yes n/a

Notes: (1) Based on Metro Vancouver Waste Composition monitoring of products in EPR programs at the end of the particular year. 2014 includes packaging and printed paper as EPR products.

(2) Emission reduction calculated based on avoided hydro electricity generation.

(3) Emission reduction calculated based on avoided natural gas use.

(4) LFG emissions based on publically reported numbers, and account for the current methane Global Warming Potential (GWP) of 25, and a flare destruction efficiency of 98%. Methane oxidation in the landfill cover is not included.

(5) WTEF emissions for 2012 have been calculated using an improved methodology based on a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) and stack test data; emissions from 2010-2011 have been backcast to align with new method.

12168492


Section E 2.3

To: Zero Waste Committee From: Chris Allan, Lead Senior Engineer, Solid Waste Services Date: November 5, 2015 Meeting Date: November 12, 2015 Subject: Update on Waste‐to‐Energy Facility Operational Certificate Progress

RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board receive the report dated November 5, 2015 titled, “Update on Waste‐to‐Energy Facility Operational Certificate Progress” for information.

PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to update the Board on the progress of developing an Operational Certificate for the Metro Vancouver Waste‐to‐Energy Facility (WTEF). BACKGROUND The WTEF operates in accordance with performance and emissions requirements set forth in the Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP), which was approved by the Minister of Environment in July 2011. The Minister of Environment’s letter approving the ISWRMP noted that an Operational Certificate would be developed for the WTEF. The Ministry’s intention to issue an Operational Certificate was advertised in local newspapers in November 2013, including an invitation to comment on the draft Operational Certificate. Comments could be submitted to the Ministry of Environment for 30 days following publication of the notice of intent to issue an Operational Certificate. Metro Vancouver forwarded the draft Operational Certificate directly to Fraser Valley Regional District for their information and comment. At the end of the 30 day period, the Ministry of Environment had received comments on the draft Operational Certificate from individuals/organizations listed below. Metro Vancouver staff reviewed all of the comments and forwarded responses to the Ministry of Environment for their consideration. ISSUANCE OF FINAL DRAFT OPERATIONAL CERTIFICATE Following their review of stakeholder comments, the Ministry of Environment issued a final draft Operational Certificate (see attached) for the WTEF on October 7, 2015. The final draft Operational Certificate was distributed to Metro Vancouver and the stakeholders that had provided comments on the earlier draft Operational Certificate. The Ministry of Environment has provided a period of 30 days from the issuance of the final draft Operational Certificate for the stakeholders to submit any final comments. The stakeholders who have been provided the final draft Operational Certificate are as follows:

• Fraser Valley Regional District • District of Hope • Harrison Hot Springs


• District of Kent • City of Abbotsford • Mr. John Vissers, Chair, Abbotsford Environmental Advisory Committee • Mr. Mike Goold, Referrals Manager, People of the River • Burke Mountain Naturalists • Ms. Susan Maxwell, Zero Waste BC • Recycling Council of British Columbia • Matsqui First Nation

Highlights of the final draft Operational Certificate include:

• Dates to meet specific emissions requirements. These dates correspond to completion of a number of capital projects that were approved, in principle, by the Board in May 2013. Funding for work on the projects is included in the 2016 proposed Solid Waste Services budget. Key projects identified in the Operational Certificate (with estimated completion dates provided in parentheses) include:

o NOx Emissions Reduction Project (completed spring 2015) o Standby Electrical Power Replacement Project (2016) o Natural Gas Burner Replacement Project (2017) o Continuous Emissions Monitoring System (CEMS) Upgrade Project (2017) o Acid Gas (SO2 and HCl) Reduction Project (2021)

• Additional plans and reports for submission to the Ministry of Environment including, but not

limited to: o Internet Publication Plan within six months of issuing the Operational Certificate to

display facility operational and emissions data on a publicly‐accessible website o Fly Ash and Bottom Ash Plans within eight months of issuing the Operational

Certificate o Contaminant Deposition Evaluation report within 18 months of issuing the

Operational Certificate o Start‐up/Shut‐down Evaluation report with 24 months from the issuance of the

Operational Certificate

• Procedures for approving new wastes for acceptance at the facility. In addition to ensuring the new wastes do not conflict with any regulation, these procedures require undertaking characterization of the waste and a demonstration trial, including comprehensive air emissions, fly ash and bottom ash monitoring.

NEXT STEPS At the end of the 30 day comment period, the Ministry of Environment will consider any stakeholder comments. Once the Ministry of Environment has considered all comments and feedback, they may issue a final Operational Certificate for the facility. ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented.


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications associated with this report. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The WTEF operates under the conditions set forth in the ISWRMP, which was approved by the Minister of Environment in July 2011. The approval states that the Ministry of Environment may issue an Operational Certificate, which will establish new requirements for the WTEF. The Ministry of Environment posted a notice of intent to issue an Operational Certificate in November 2013, and invited comments through the notice. The Ministry of Environment received stakeholder comments on the draft Operational Certificate and requested that Metro Vancouver provide responses to these comments. Following the Ministry of Environment’s review of stakeholder comments and Metro Vancouver responses, the Ministry of Environment issued a final draft Operational Certificate for the WTEF on October 7, 2015. The Ministry of Environment has provided a period of 30 days from the issuance of the final draft Operational Certificate for the stakeholders to submit any final comments, after which, the Ministry may issue a final Operational Certificate. Attachments and References: Attachment: Final Draft Operational Certificate 12080004


Ministry of Environment Environmental Protection Division

2nd Floor, 10470 - 152 Street Surrey, BC V3R 0Y3

Coast Telephone: (604) 582-5200 Facsimile: (604) 584-9751

[sign]CurrentDate Tracking Number: 313291 [sign]TrackingNumber

Authorization Number: 107051

REGISTERED MAIL

GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT 4330 KINGSWAY BURNABY, BC V5H 4G8

Dear Operational Certificate Holder:

Enclosed is Operational Certificate 107051 issued under the provisions of the Environmental Management Act. Your attention is respectfully directed to the terms and conditions outlined in the operational certificate.

The OC requires the development of plans for the acceptance of the Director which may affect current procedures and operations. Until such times as these plans are developed, current or better practices and protocols are to remain in effect.

Please be aware that the following documents are required for submission or publication by the specified dates set forth in the operational certificate, including:

• An Internet Publication Plan within 6 months of the issuance of this OperationalCertificate

• A plan for, and example of, the proposed contents of the Monthly Report within 6months of the issuance of this Operational Certificate, and Monthly Reportsconforming to this plan within 45 days following each month end thereafter

• A plan for the proposed contents of the Annual Report within 6 months of theissuance of this Operational Certificate, and Annual Reports conforming to thisplan by March 31 thereafter

• A Fly Ash Management Plan within 8 months of the issuance of this OperationalCertificate

• A Bottom Ash Management Plan within 8 months of the issuance of thisOperational Certificate

• A Contaminant Transport and Fate Evaluation report within 18 months from theissuance of this Operational Certificate

• A Start Up / Shut Down Evaluation report within 24 months from the issuance ofthis Operational Certificate

• An Action Plan for Review of Environmental Performance of the Burnaby Waste toEnergy Facility to be updated at least each 5 years from issuance of thisOperational Certificate

ATTACHMENT


107051 page 2 Date: {[sign]CurrentDate}

• Emergency Response Plan to be updated annually • Environmental Management System to be updated annually • Quarterly source testing reports within 45 days of the testing • Annual source testing reports within 90 days of the testing

This Operational Certificate does not authorize entry upon, crossing over, or use for any purpose of private or Crown lands or works, unless and except as authorized by the owner of such lands or works. The responsibility for obtaining such authority rests with the Operational Certificate Holder. It is also the responsibility of the Operational Certificate Holder to ensure that all activities conducted under this authorization are carried out with regard to the rights of third parties, and comply with other applicable legislation that may be in force. This decision may be appealed to the Environmental Appeal Board in accordance with Part 8 of the Environmental Management Act. An appeal must be delivered within 30 days from the date that notice of this decision is given. For further information, please contact the Environmental Appeal Board at (250) 387-3464. Administration of this Operational Certificate will be carried out by staff from the Authorizations - South region. Plans, data and reports pertinent to the Operational Certificate are to be submitted to the Director, Environmental Management, at Ministry of Environment, Regional Operations, Authorizations - South, 2nd Floor, 10470 - 152 Street, Surrey, BC V3R 0Y3. Yours truly, [sign]image:SigningAuthoritySignatureId [sign]SignatureBlockFirstLine Director’s Delegate, Environmental Management Act Enclosure cc: Environment Canada


{[sign]DateLabel} {[sign]WILastUpdated} {[sign]AmendmentText}

{[sign]image:SigningAuthoritySignatureId} {[sign]SignatureBlockFirstLine} for Director, Environmental Management Act Coast

Page 1 of 22 Operational Certificate Number: 107051

MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT

OPERATIONAL CERTIFICATE

107051

Under the Provisions of the Environmental Management Act and

In accordance with the Approved Greater Vancouver Regional District Solid Waste Management Plan

GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT

4330 KINGSWAY BURNABY, BC

V5H 4G8 is authorized to discharge contaminants to the air from a waste to energy facility located at 5150 Riverbend Drive, Burnaby, British Columbia, subject to the terms and conditions listed below. Contravention of any of these conditions is a violation of the Environmental Management Act and may lead to prosecution. 1. AUTHORIZED DISCHARGES

1.1 Mass Burn Incinerator/Boilers This section applies to the discharge of air contaminants from three separate

Mass Burn Incinerators/Boilers from a common support stack containing three individual flues. The site reference number for this discharge is E300670.

1.1.1 The maximum combined rate of discharge is 72 cubic metres per second,

resulting from the combustion of a maximum of 310,000 tonnes per year (moist weight as received) of waste.

1.1.2 The authorized discharge period is continuous.

1.1.3 The characteristics of the discharge must be equivalent to or better than:


PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

Environmental Protection




Parameter Units(1)

Interim Discharge

Limits(2)(3)

Discharge Limits(3)

ResponseLimits(4)

24-hr average(5)

4-hr average(6)

1-hr average

24-hr average(5)

Approved Test

Method(7) 1/2-hr

average(8) Total Particulate Matter(9)

mg/dscm - - - - 9 -

Opacity

% - - 5 - - 5

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

mg/dscm - 55 - 50 - 100

Hydrogen Chloride (HCl)

mg/dscm - - 55(10) 10 - 60

Hydrogen Fluoride (HF)

mg/dscm - - - - 1.0 -

Sulphur Dioxide (SO2)

mg/dscm 200 - - 50 - 190

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

mg/dscm 350 - - 190 - 350

Total Hydrocarbons (THC)

mg/dscm - - Manual Stack

Test limit of 40(11)

10 - 20

Total Dioxins and Furans (as PCDD/F TEQ)(12)

ng/dscm - - - - 0.08 -

Cadmium (Cd)

μg/dscm - - - - 7 -

Mercury (Hg)(13) μg/dscm - - - - 20 - Sum of Lead (Pb), Arsenic (As), Chromium (Cr)

μg/dscm - - - - 64 -

Chlorophenols

μg/dscm - - - - 1 -

Chlorobenzenes

μg/dscm - - - - 1 -







Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)

μg/dscm - - - - 5 -

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)

μg/dscm - - - - 1 -

1. dscm = dry standard cubic metre, corrected to 11% oxygen 2. Interim Discharge Limits will apply until and including the following dates, at which point the

Discharge Limits and Response Limits will apply: a. Opacity – December 31, 2017 b. CO – December 31, 2016 (Discharge Limit) and December 31, 2017 (Response Limit) c. HCl – December 31, 2021 (Discharge and Response Limits) d. SO2 – December 31, 2021 (Discharge and Response Limits) e. NOx – December 31, 2017 (Response Limit) f. THC – December 31, 2017 (Discharge and Response Limits)

3. Discharge Limits are the criteria for compliance determination of each discharge parameter listed in the column, subject to Note 2 above.

4. Response limits are the threshold requiring the Operational Certificate Holder to take immediate action to bring down the discharge levels to the applicable discharge limits specified in this section. The response limits are expressed as ½ hour (block) average values measured by approved continuous emission monitors. The Operational Certificate Holder is required to demonstrate the response action(s) implemented by record keeping.

5. Interim Discharge Limits are daily average values, calculated as the arithmetic average of valid continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) data. Discharge Limits are 24 hour (daily block) averages.

6. Calculated as the arithmetic average of 4 hours of data from a CEMS. 7. Determined by a test method approved by the Director. A single manual stack test result is

the average of a minimum of three test runs. 8. Calculated as the arithmetic average of ½ hour block of data from a CEMS. 9. Total particulate matter (filterable portion only) is determined by EPA Test Method 5 or an

alternative method approved by the Director. 10. Continuous monitoring of SO2 will be used as a surrogate for emission monitoring of acid gases,

such as HCl and HF. 11. Monitored as total hydrocarbons (measured as methane). 12. PCDD (polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins) & PCDF (polychlorinated dibenzofurans) will be

expressed in dioxin toxicity equivalent value (dioxin TEQ) as defined in the Hazardous Waste Regulation.

13. Mercury determined by EPA Test Method 29 or an alternative method approved by the Director. 1.1.4 The authorized works are a refuse bunker, three mass burn

incinerators/boilers each equipped with an independent feed chute, integrated furnace/boiler, Covanta Low NOx System, selective non-catalytic NOx reduction system, lime scrubber, activated carbon injection







system and three baghouses, fans, heaters, ash handling and treatment systems, turbo generator, air cooled condenser or steam vent, a common support stack (with three individual flues), and related appurtenances approximately located as shown on the attached Site Plan.

1.1.5 The authorized works must be complete and in operation while

discharging.

1.1.6 The location of the facilities from which the discharge originates and the point of discharge is Lot 1, District Lot 167, Group 1, New Westminster District, Plan 72187.

1.1.7 A furnace temperature of 980 degrees Celsius must be maintained for a

minimum residence time of one second when unburned solid waste is present in a combustion chamber. The secondary combustion zone temperature for each incinerator unit must be monitored and reported for compliance purposes based on a minimum one-hour average reference temperature of 800 degrees Celsius, which correlates to a combustion zone temperature of 980 degrees Celsius.

1.1.8 The Operational Certificate Holder must ensure that under no

circumstances solid waste is continued to be fed to an incinerator/boiler when an authorized parameter response limit is exceeded for a period of more than 4 hours uninterrupted per parameter per unit; moreover, the cumulative duration of operation in such conditions over one calendar year must be less than 60 hours per parameter per unit.

1.1.9 The Operational Certificate Holder will continuously monitor additional

discharge parameters including, but not limited to, volumetric flowrate, oxygen, and carbon dioxide in the flue gases for operational and emissions reporting purposes.

1.2 Closed-Circuit Cooling Tower This section applies to the discharge of air contaminants from a Closed-Circuit

Cooling Tower. The site reference number for this discharge is E300671.

1.2.1 The maximum rate of discharge is 70 m3/s.








1.2.3 The characteristics of the discharge must be equivalent to or better than typical air discharge from a closed-circuit cooling tower including water vapour and mist containing dissolved minerals naturally present in water and water conditioning additives for pH and algae growth control.

1.2.4 The authorized works are a closed-circuit cooling tower, exhaust vents,

and related appurtenances approximately located as shown on the attached Site Plan.


discharging.

1.2.6 The location of the facilities from which the discharge originates and the point of discharge is the same as Section 1.1.6 above.

1.3 Lime Silo This section applies to the discharge of air contaminants from a Lime Silo. The

site reference number for this discharge is E300672.

1.3.1 The maximum rate of discharge is 1.0 m3/s.

1.3.2 The authorized discharge period is intermittent.

1.3.3 The characteristics of the discharge must be equivalent to or better than: Total particulate matter,

maximum (estimated): 0.012 tonnes per year

1.3.4 The authorized works are a lime silo, a dust collector, and related appurtenances approximately located as shown on the attached Site Plan.


discharging.


1.4 Activated Carbon Silo This section applies to the discharge of air contaminants from an Activated







Carbon Silo. The site reference number for this discharge is E300673.


1.4.2 The authorized discharge period is intermittent.



1.4.4 The authorized works are an activated carbon silo, a filter vent, and related appurtenances approximately located as shown on the attached Site Plan.


discharging.


1.5 Fly Ash Silo This section applies to the discharge of air contaminants from a Fly Ash Silo.

The site reference number for this discharge is E300674.





1.5.4 The authorized works are a fly ash silo, dust collector, and related appurtenances approximately located as shown on the attached Site Plan.


discharging.

1.5.6 The location of the facilities from which the discharge originates and the







point of discharge is the same as Section 1.1.6 above.

1.6 Emergency Power Generator This section applies to the discharge of air contaminants from a standby

Emergency Power Generator. The site reference number for this discharge is E300675.


1.6.2 The authorized discharge period is limited to necessary emergency and

maintenance operation.

1.6.3 The characteristics of the discharge must be equivalent to or better than typical emissions from an emergency power generator utilizing low sulphur diesel fuel.

1.6.4 The authorized works are a standby emergency power generator and

related appurtenances approximately located as shown on the attached Site Plan.


discharging.


2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Maintenance of Works and Emergency Procedures The authorized works must be inspected regularly and maintained in good

working order. In the event of an emergency or condition beyond the control of the Operational Certificate Holder which prevents effective operation of the authorized works or leads to an unauthorized discharge, the Operational Certificate Holder must take appropriate remedial action and notify the Director immediately. The Director may reduce or suspend operations to protect the environment until the authorized works have been restored and/or corrective steps taken to prevent unauthorized discharges.







2.2 Bypasses Any bypass of the authorized works is prohibited unless the approval of the

Director is obtained and confirmed in writing.

2.3 Plans - Works Plans and specifications of the works authorized in Sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4,

1.5, and 1.6 must be submitted to the Director upon request. For any material modifications to the authorized works, a qualified professional must certify that the works have been constructed in accordance with the certified design before discharge commences.

2.4 Process Modifications The Director must be notified prior to implementing material changes to any

process that adversely affects the quality and/or quantity of the discharge from the facility to a material extent. Despite notification under this section, permitted levels must not be exceeded.

2.5 Noncompliance Response and Reporting Unless otherwise instructed in writing by the Director, the Operational

Certificate Holder must immediately notify the Director or designate of any non-compliance with the requirements of this Operational Certificate and take appropriate remedial action.

Written reporting of non-compliance events must be included in the monthly

reports and must include, but not necessarily be limited to:

• all relevant test results, operational data, etc. related to the noncompliance; • an explanation of the most probable cause(s) of the noncompliance; and • remedial action planned and/or taken to prevent similar noncompliance(s) in

the future. A summary of non-compliance events for the calendar year must be included in

the annual reports.

2.6 General Notification Any notifications to the Director or designate must be by email, and







accompanied by phone (currently Surrey regional office, 604-582-5200) for incidents that occur during normal business hours (typically Monday to Friday, between 08:30 and 16:30). Email acknowledgement or personal phone contact with ministry staff is required for notification to be considered to have occurred.

2.7 Standard Conditions For the administration of this Operational Certificate all gaseous volumes must

be converted to standard conditions of 293.15 K and 101.325 kPa with zero percent moisture and 11% oxygen.

2.8 Authorized Fuels and Wastes The authorized wastes for the Mass Burn Incinerators/Boilers are municipal

solid waste authorized by an Approved waste management plan pursuant to Section 24 of the Environmental Management Act and any wastes authorized prior to January 1, 2015. Natural gas may be used as an auxiliary fuel as required.

Other wastes may be authorized as fuel subject to management of the waste not

conflicting with any regulation. Such wastes may be approved or prohibited in writing by the Director, or approved pursuant to the following protocol:

1. Prior to usage of the proposed waste, submit written notification to the

Director identifying the proposed material. A report must accompany this notification which must contain the following: a. records detailing analyses and written descriptions establishing the

composition, source, and quality of the proposed waste; b. proposed feed rate of the waste in tonnes per hour with a maximum daily

feed quantity; and c. documentation supporting that disposal of the proposed waste does not

conflict with requirements of any regulation. 2. No earlier than ten business days after submitting the report required by (1)

above, the Operational Certificate Holder must conduct a demonstration trial utilizing the proposed waste at the maximum proposed feed rate. The demonstration trial must meet the following requirements: a. site storage and handling of the proposed waste must be conducted in

such a manner so as to effectively control fugitive emissions; b. the duration of the demonstration trial must be a maximum of 96 hours; c. emissions monitoring must be conducted to determine the concentration







of the parameters listed in Section 1.1.3. Emissions monitoring results must show that processing of the proposed waste does not cause a statistically significant increase in emissions concentrations for the parameters listed in Section 1.1.3;

d. fly ash and bottom ash monitoring must be conducted to determine the concentrations of the parameters included in the fly ash and bottom ash management plans. Fly ash and bottom ash monitoring results must show that processing the proposed waste does not cause statistically significant increase in concentrations of parameters listed in fly ash and bottom ash management plans; and

e. following completion of the trial, all information collected during the trial including all field data, calculations, operating parameters, measurements, etc., must be submitted to the Director. The submission must include a thorough evaluation of the trial data in a report prepared by a qualified professional.

The Director may at any time request additional information if warranted for the protection of human health or the environment.

If following 60 days of submission of all requested information to the Director, the Director has not prohibited the disposal of the proposed waste, the Operational Certificate Holder may commence utilization of the proposed waste up to the maximum tested feed rate.

2.9 Waste Handling and Storage Waste must be protected against weather elements to prevent pollution from

leachate, odour, litter, or dust emissions during handling and storage. The Operational Certificate Holder must implement necessary housekeeping

procedures to eliminate sources and potential sources of attraction for vermin and vectors.

Waste delivered to the facility by truck must be discharged directly into the

refuse bunker. Waste loads delivered to the facility by truck may be periodically discharged onto a dedicated paved area adjacent to the refuse bunker to facilitate waste load inspections and waste audits.

Unloading and storage of bulk waste delivered by trucks must be managed in an

area with appropriate ventilation and odour control.







2.10 Future Recycling or Beneficial Use

The Director may require an evaluation of the potential to: • recycle or beneficially use certain residues from the combustion process; or • re-use, recycle, or recover certain resources.

2.11 Fugitive Emission Control Fugitive odour, particulate, etc. emissions created within the facility must be

suppressed. If air quality becomes a concern, the Director may require additional control measures on emission sources.

2.12 Ash Management

2.12.1 Fly ash and bottom ash must be managed and disposed of at a facility acceptable to the Director, or beneficially used as acceptable to the Director. Recoverable materials such as ferrous metal pieces should be recovered from bottom ash.

2.12.2 A Fly Ash Management Plan must be submitted within 8 months of the

issuance of this Operational Certificate. The Fly Ash Management Plan must be acceptable to the Director and may be amended in writing by the Director. The Fly Ash Management Plan must include proposed sampling and analytical protocols, sampling frequency, results interpretation process, protocols for interpreting anomalous data, and other related information. Fly ash management must be conducted according to the Fly Ash Management Plan.

2.12.3 A Bottom Ash Management Plan must be submitted within 8 months of

the issuance of this Operational Certificate. The Bottom Ash Management Plan must be acceptable to the Director and may be amended in writing by the Director. The Bottom Ash Management Plan must include proposed sampling and analytical protocols, sampling frequency, results interpretation process, protocols for interpreting anomalous data, and other related information. Bottom ash management must be conducted according to the Bottom Ash Management Plan.

2.13 Action Plan Review and Update







The Operational Certificate Holder must conduct a review acceptable to the Director of an Action Plan for Review of Environmental Performance of the Metro Vancouver Waste to Energy Facility (Action Plan) to assess current environmental technology using principles outlined in the ministry Determining Best Achievable Technology Standards policy. The Action Plan must be reviewed and updated at least each 5 years from issuance of this Operational Certificate. Actions recommended as part of each review must be incorporated into the Action Plan.

2.14 Environmental Management System The Operational Certificate Holder must ensure that an Environmental

Management System (EMS) equivalent to or exceeding ISO 14001 continues to be implemented to ensure continual environmental improvement and compliance with discharge requirements through the use of effective operating procedures, training, and maintenance practices. This system must include: operating the equipment within its designed capabilities; preventing occurrences of abnormal operating conditions in all areas of the facility; and enhancing the capabilities to manage or mitigate/correct such abnormal operating conditions for the protection of the environment and human health. The Operational Certificate Holder must ensure the EMS is updated annually and available for inspection or submission upon request.

2.15 Emergency Response Plan The Operational Certificate Holder must ensure that an Emergency Response

Plan is maintained that describes the procedures to be taken to prevent or mitigate any spills, unauthorized discharge of contaminants to the air, or deposit of deleterious substance to the receiving environment. The Emergency Response Plan must be immediately implemented if there is a discharge/deposit, or any risk of a discharge/deposit, of a deleterious substance to the receiving environment. The Operational Certificate Holder must ensure that the Emergency Response Plan is updated annually and kept available for inspection.

2.16 Start Up / Shut Down Evaluation The Operational Certificate Holder must undertake an Evaluation of emissions

that occur during facility start up and shut down events. The Evaluation should







characterize contaminant emissions through emissions monitoring and any other relevant sources of information to quantify and assess emissions occurring during start up and shut down conditions relative to the approved limits prescribed by this Operational Certificate. The Evaluation must be completed and a report acceptable to the Director submitted within 24 months from the issuance of this Operational Certificate.

2.17 Contaminant Deposition Evaluation The Operational Certificate Holder must undertake an evaluation of the

potential surface deposition of contaminants from the operation of the facility. The Evaluation must include: • an assessment of the existing regional air quality monitoring network and

program to confirm its appropriateness and effectiveness in assessing potential impacts from facility emissions;

• characterization of contaminant emissions through literature review, computer modelling, or sampling and any other relevant sources of information to determine potential environmental and health effects; and

• where warranted, requirements for sampling or evaluation of receptors such as soil, vegetation, surface water, etc.

The Evaluation must be completed and a report acceptable to the Director submitted within 18 months from the issuance of this Operational Certificate.

3. MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Waste and Ash Monitoring In a manner acceptable to the Director, the Operational Certificate Holder must

ensure the following are monitored and recorded:

3.1.1 Record measured weight of waste received, waste processed, and natural gas burned per day, per month, and per year.

3.1.2 Record estimated bulk weight (and estimated % moisture) of treated bottom ash and treated fly ash destined for disposal or beneficial use per month and per year.







3.2 Spill Reporting All spills to the environment (as defined in the Spill Reporting Regulation) must

be reported immediately in accordance with the Spill Reporting Regulation. Notification must be via the Provincial Emergency Program, currently at 1-800-663-3456.

3.3 Discharge Monitoring for Section 1.1 The Operational Certificate Holder must ensure the discharge is monitored as

follows:

Parameter for Stack E300670 Sampling and Analysis Frequency1 Rate of Discharge2, m3/s Continuous & Four times per year Total Particulate Matter, mg/m3 Four times per year Opacity3, % Continuous3,4 & record one minute

average values for inspections Oxygen6, % of dry air Continuous3,4 & record ½ hr average

values for concentration adjustments Carbon Monoxide (CO) , mg/m3 Continuous3,4 & record ½ hr and 24 hour

average values Hydrogen Chloride (HCl), mg/m3 Continuous3,4 & record ½ hr and 24 hour

average values Hydrogen Fluoride (HF), mg/m3 Four times per year

Sulphur Dioxide (SO2), mg/m3 Continuous3,4 & record ½ hr and 24 hour average values

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), mg/m3 Continuous3,4 & record ½ hr and 24 hour average values

Total Hydrocarbons (THC), mg/m3 Continuous3,4 & record ½ hr and 24 hour average values

PCDD & PCDF TEQ, pg/ m3 Annually5 Total Mercury, mg/m3 Four times per year Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), mg/m3 Annually5 Chlorophenols, mg/m3 Annually5 Chlorobenzene, mg/m3 Annually5 Lead, mg/m3 Four times per year Arsenic, mg/m3 Four times per year Cadmium, mg/m3 Four times per year Chromium, mg/m3 Four times per year Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) , mg/m3

Annually5

1. For those parameters with continuous monitoring requirements, compliance with Section







1.1 discharge requirements must be verified with continuous monitoring data (with a QA/QC program satisfactory to the Director) collected during normal operating periods, excluding start up and shut down periods described in Section 3.6. Other than instrument errors, all collected data admissible under a QA/QC program must be recorded and reported. The Director may amend the above monitoring requirements when the Operational Certificate Holder is able to demonstrate to the Director that an alternative compliance monitoring method/requirement is equal to or better than the above requirements.

2. The rate of flue gas discharge must be adjusted to dry standard conditions. The rate of flue gas discharge must be reported as daily average values, calculated as the arithmetic average of valid CEMS data.

3. The required data capture rate for (CEMS) specified above must be 90% of the operating hours per quarter and 95% of the operating hours per annum. The monthly CEMS compliance data report must include % up time for CEMS. The statistic must be extended to annual reports.

4. The CEMS data (½ hour and 24 hour averages) for the above parameters must include maximum, minimum and average for the day, month and year and % of time out of compliance. The specified CEMS data may not be available for all parameters prior to December 31, 2015.

5. Monitoring conducted once per year on one incinerator/boiler.

3.4 Emission Control Device Record Keeping The Operational Certificate Holder must ensure performance records are

maintained for all emission control devices in conjunction with manufacturer specifications. The records must include inspection and maintenance records, amounts of reagents such as lime, carbon, ammonia, phosphoric acid, etc. used, and frequency and duration of any period when an emission control device is not fully operational, along with appropriate description of each malfunction, and the corrective measure(s) taken in each case.

3.5 Secondary Combustion Zone Temperature Monitoring Requirements In a manner acceptable to the Director, the Operational Certificate Holder must

ensure the secondary combustion zone temperature (or equivalent surrogate temperature) is monitored and recorded continuously in degrees Celsius at a suitable location in the secondary combustion zone of the incinerator.

3.6 Start Up and Shut Down Period The start up and shut down period for the incinerator/boilers must be no more







than five (5) hours each. During this period, emission data recorded by CEMS may be excluded from regulatory emission calculations. Start up periods may exclude times when the auxiliary burners are in service but waste has not yet been introduced into the boiler. The start up period commences when the feed chute damper is open and waste is charged to the stoker. The start up period will be deemed to be over when the boiler steam flow is greater than 30 tonnes per hour for at least 15 minutes but in any case not longer than five hours. After the start up period, all air emission discharge requirements specified in Section 1.1 are applicable even during periods when feed rates are being adjusted for any reasons other than start up or shut down. Auxiliary burner(s) must be used during start-up, shutdown, upset conditions, and at any other times as necessary to maintain the secondary combustion zone temperature. The shut down period commences when the feed chute damper is closed and waste is no longer being charged to the stoker. The shut down period will be deemed to be over when the feed chute damper is closed and the auxiliary gas burners are shut down.

The Director may amend the exclusion of CEMS emission data based upon a

review of discharge data and actual start up and shut down operations of the incinerator/boilers.

3.7 Modification of Monitoring Requirements and/or Treatment Works Based on monitoring results and any other pertinent information obtained in

connection with the discharges, the Director may amend the monitoring requirements, and/or require the Operational Certificate Holder to take additional measures, and/or provide additional treatment works to reduce the impact on the environment and human health from discharges to the receiving environment.

3.8 Sampling Location and Techniques All sampling and monitoring locations, techniques, and equipment must be

acceptable to the Director. Sampling and monitoring data, including the stack flow rate, must be accompanied by process data relevant to the operation of the source of the emissions and the performance of the pollution abatement equipment involved in the testing. Discrete stack sampling must be done under actual operating conditions when the Operational Certificate Holder is able to properly document that these conditions represent a period of normal operation. The following parameters must be reported for the test period:







a) boiler steam production expressed as kg/h or kJ/h; b) boiler secondary combustion zone temperature or an appropriate surrogate

expressed in degrees Celsius; and c) the estimated rates of waste and fuels, as-fired into the boiler during each

compliance test period.

3.9 Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems Continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) must be installed, operated,

and maintained according to applicable standards. The Operational Certificate Holder must record and maintain for each CEMS information including: performance range, specifications, and calibration data; availability (expressed as a monthly percentage of facility operating hours); maintenance and calibration work performed; and results of any independent audits and responses to such audits.

3.10 Sampling and Analytical Procedures Sampling is to be carried out in accordance with the procedures described in the

"British Columbia Field Sampling Manual for Continuous Monitoring and the Collection of Air, Air-Emission, Water, Wastewater, Soil, Sediment, and Biological Samples, 2003 Edition (Permittee)", or most recent edition, or by suitable alternative procedures as authorized by the Director.

Analyses are to be carried out in accordance with procedures described in the

"British Columbia Laboratory Manual (2009 Permittee Edition)", or the most recent edition, or by suitable alternative procedures as authorized by the Director.

Copies of the above manuals are currently available on the Ministry web page at

www.env.gov.bc.ca/epd/wamr/labsys/lab_meth_manual.html.

3.11 Reporting Requirements

3.11.1 Source Testing Reporting The Operational Certificate Holder must submit a report in electronic

format to the Director, within 60 days of the completion of the actual source testing, with the exception of testing for chlorophenols, chlorobenzenes, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, hydrocarbons,







polychlorinated biphenyls, and/or total dioxins and furans, in which case source testing results must be submitted within 90 days of the actual source testing. In addition to the contaminants specified in Section 3.3, the Operational Certificate Holder must report all individual metals that are part of the metals analytical methodology.

3.11.2 Monthly Report The Operational Certificate Holder will publish a Monthly Report and

notify the Director of the publication within 45 days following each month end. The Monthly Report should include, for example:

• CEMS data tabulations; • CEMS performance data; • identification and responses to discharge contaminant exceedances

and response limits; • instances of the combustion temperature falling below the required

minimum, and responses; • identification and any responses to start up, shut down, process upset,

bypass, and emergency/spill events; and • any complaints received and responses.

A detailed plan for, and example of, the proposed contents of the Monthly Report identifying and illustrating the minimum information to be included must be submitted to the Director within 6 months of the issuance of this Operational Certificate. The plan for the Monthly Report must be acceptable to and may be amended in writing by the Director, and will be implemented by the Operational Certificate Holder.

3.11.3 Annual Report The Operational Certificate Holder will publish an Annual Report for the preceding calendar year and notify the Director of the publication by March 31 of each year. The Annual Report should include, for example:

• summaries, in general, of information contained in the Monthly

Reports; • summaries of CEMS and manual stack test emissions data; • CEMS calibration data; • summaries/interpretation of compliance and complaints information; • overview of plant performance;







• operational information such as quantities of waste processed, estimated amounts of fly ash and bottom ash or other residues generated and their processing or disposal method;

• summary of operation, performance, and maintenance of emissions control devices; and

• evaluation of monitoring programs.

A detailed plan for the proposed contents of the Annual Report identifying the minimum information to be included must be submitted to the Director within 6 months of the issuance of this Operational Certificate. The plan for the Annual Report must be acceptable to and may be amended in writing by the Director, and will be implemented by the Operational Certificate Holder.

3.11.4 Internet Publication Plan

A public internet website must be established for the facility that should include, for example:

• summaries of CEMS and manual stack test emissions data; • summaries of fly ash and bottom ash analytical data; • compliance and complaints information; • relevant operational and incident information; and • relevant additional information such as reports, documents, plans,

links, etc. concerning the facility.

An Internet Publication Plan for the website must be submitted to the Director within 6 months of the issuance of this Operational Certificate. The plan should identify the minimum information and required timelines, retention, etc. for publication and should consider the interests of the public, agencies, and concerned stakeholders. The plan must be acceptable to and may be amended in writing by the Director, and will be implemented by the Operational Certificate Holder.

3.11.5 Stakeholder Comments The Operational Certificate Holder must record and consider all stakeholder comments on the publication of operational data and the content, structure, and publication of reports, plans, etc. The comments and Operational Certificate Holder's response will be included in publically available content.







3.11.6 Record Keeping Requirements

Maintain all records including emission testing results, data of analysis, reports, and continuous emission results and calibration records for continuous monitors required under this Operational Certificate for a minimum of seven years and as long as reasonably practical.













LOCATION MAP


To: Zero Waste Committee From: Marcel Pitre, Division Manager, Solid Waste Services Date: November 3, 2015 Meeting Date: November 12, 2015 Subject: Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline Update

RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board receive for information Metro Vancouver’s comments on the BC Ministry of Environment’s Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline – Intentions Paper for submission to the Ministry of Environment.

PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to inform the Zero Waste Committee of the Ministry of Environment’s process in updating the Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline, and to provide Metro Vancouver’s comments (Attachment 1) on the Intentions Paper (Attachment 2) for review prior to them being submitted to the Ministry of Environment by their deadline of November 15, 2015. BACKGROUND The Ministry of Environment announced in May, 2015 that it would be updating the Guideline for preparation of regional solid waste management plans. The Guideline, prepared in 1994, outlines the process for regional districts to develop, implement and report performance of a solid waste management plan. Metro Vancouver staff have participated in several webinars discussing the process to update the Guideline, and received the attached intentions paper in September 2015. The intentions paper references the guiding principles developed by Marvin Hunt, MLA Surrey‐Panorama Ridge, as part of his review of Metro Vancouver’s Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan in connection with the rejection of Bylaw 280 by the Province in October of 2014. The intentions paper outlines initiatives for streamlining the approval process to reduce the amount of resources needed to review and approve plans. In addition the updated Guideline will specify new consultation and performance review measures. The Ministry of Environment also recommends a set of new waste reduction and regulatory targets for 2020. The Province recommends a target per capita disposal rate of 350 kg per person by 2020 and a requirement that at least 75% of the population be under an organics disposal ban of some form. COMMENTS ON INTENTIONS PAPER Metro Vancouver staff have reviewed the Ministry of Environment’s Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline – Intentions Paper (Attachment 2). Metro Vancouver staff from various divisions have prepared and coordinated comments on the intentions paper (Attachment 1). These comments have been shared with member municipalities through the REAC‐Solid Waste

Section E 2.4


Subcommittee. Metro Vancouver have invited municipal staff to also provide comments on the intentions paper either directly or through this submission. Key Metro Vancouver comments include:

Support for the Ministry’s changes to the Guideline not resulting in legislative changes or applying to existing plans.

Support for the Ministry’s approach of modifying the Guideline to be more results focussed with less emphasis on the Ministry’s participation in the planning process.

Per capita disposal targets may not be the most appropriate measure of success for individual regional district solid waste management plans, and other possible measures/targets should be identified.

Without waste flow control, per capita disposal targets may have little meaning as measured disposal within a regional district may not correlate with actual disposal.

The Guiding Principle of managing tipping fees to encourage diversion is challenging to achieve without waste flow control.

Any attempts to recover organics from mixed garbage must not undermine source separation.

Regional districts should not need to rely on disposal bans in adjacent regional districts to encourage diversion, and any waste flow between Regional Districts should be specifically included in each regional district’s solid waste plan.

In setting criteria for public and private facilities, the Guideline should differentiate between recycling and disposal facilities.

Metro Vancouver’s comments will be submitted to the Ministry of Environment by November 15, 2015 as required for the review process. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board receive for information Metro Vancouver’s comments on the BC

Ministry of Environment’s Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline – Intentions Paper for submission to the Ministry of Environment.

2. That the Zero Waste Committee receive the report dated November 3, 2015 titled, “Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline Update” for information and provide alternate direction to staff.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The Ministry of Environment is updating the Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline, and have released an intentions paper for comment. Metro Vancouver staff have prepared the attached comments for submission to the Ministry of Environment by November 15, 2015. Attachments and References: Attachment 1: Metro Vancouver Comments on Ministry of Environment’s Solid Waste Management

Planning Guideline: Information Update ‐ Intentions Paper Attachment 2: Ministry of Environment Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline – Intentions

Paper 12142480


October 27, 2015

METRO VANCOUVER COMMENTS ON MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT’S SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANNING GUIDLINE: INFORMATION UPDATE – INTENTIONS PAPER

General Comments Metro Vancouver welcomes the opportunity to comment on changes to the Ministry of Environment’s Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline (Guideline). Metro Vancouver supports the Ministry of Environment’s decision to review the Guideline and allow opportunities for input through the Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline – Intentions Paper (Intentions Paper), webinars and meetings.

Section 1: Scope of proposed updates Metro Vancouver supports that the review process will not result in legislative changes.

Section 2: Regional district planning and updating process Metro Vancouver supports that the updated Guideline will not apply to existing plans. Metro Vancouver supports the timelines, planning and updating process proposed in the Intentions Paper. The use of templates will simplify the process for Regional Districts around the Province.

Section 3: Ministry of Environment role in the plan development and implementation Metro Vancouver supports that the Ministry’s focus in plan development will be on specifying Ministry requirements and expected results with less emphasis on direct Ministry participation in the planning process. Metro Vancouver’s hope is that Ministry resources will continue to be available to support solid waste management planning processes when required.

Section 4: Targets The Intentions Paper references two provincial targets to help define regional targets: 350 kg/capita disposal and 75% of the province’s population under an organic disposal target.

Metro Vancouver recommends that the Guideline be explicit that achieving these specific targets will not be requirements for individual regional district plans. There are a number of factors that affect per capita disposal that need to be considered for each regional district. For example:

Per capita disposal is impacted by local industry, tourism, population demographics etc.

If regional districts do not have waste flow control, waste will move between regional

districts and into other jurisdictions making per capita disposal calculations irrelevant. Our

understanding is that per capita disposal statistics reported in a number of communities

in the province are impacted by waste export out of those communities

Metro Vancouver suggests that additional possible targets be identified in the Guideline including as examples per capita waste generation, per capita diversion, and per capita organics recycling. These targets may be more relevant than per capita disposal for a specific community.

ATTACHMENT 1


12077858

Section 5: Plan Principles Metro Vancouver supports the concepts identified in principles 5.1 and 5.2: 1 – 3 that the primary focus of solid waste management planning is to develop goals, targets and strategies in a collaborative way with stakeholders aimed at shifting to a Zero Waste society maximizing waste diversion while minimizing the amount of garbage generated in the first place. Metro Vancouver agrees that this approach will not only deliver environment benefits but also social and environmental benefits. Unless referenced below, Metro Vancouver supports the principles as outlined in the Intentions Paper.

Principle 5: Manage tipping fees

In many regional districts, if waste flow mechanisms are not put in place, Regional Districtswill have limited ability to set tipping fees as waste will flow to low cost private sector transferstations either inside or outside of the regional district. In many jurisdictions without wasteflow control, the public subsidizes small vehicle disposal costs to ensure moderate tippingfees.

Principle 6: Separate Organics and Recyclables out of the garbage wherever practical

Recommend changing title to: Source separate organics and recyclables out of the garbagewherever practical. The Provincial 5Rs Hierarchy includes recycling as the 3rd R. Options thatattempt recover organics and recyclables from garbage should only be considered when allother options have been exhausted, and should never be considered if there is the potentialthat attempting to recover organics and recyclables from garbage may undermine sourceseparation efforts.

Principle 7: Establish and enforce disposal bans

Regional districts should not need to rely on disposal bans applied in adjacent regionaldistricts to encourage source separation. The implementation of disposal bans in one regionaldistrict is done based on local practicality and may not align with neighbouring regionaldistricts operating different systems.

Principle 8: Collaborate with neighbouring regional districts wherever practical

Metro Vancouver supports collaboration with neighbouring regional districts. Any flow ofwaste between regional districts should explicitly be included in regional district’s solid wastemanagement plans, and any flow of waste between regional districts should be based onmutual agreement of the regional districts.

Principle 10: Level playing field within regions for both private and public solid waste

management facilities

Private sector recycling facilities should be encouraged in regional districts across theProvince. The Guideline should differentiate between recycling facilities and disposal facilitiesgiven that the provision of disposal facilities is a core public service, and that planning andfinancing of these facilities requires some level of certainty with respect to future waste flowsand revenues. Control of disposal facilities is also an important lever to encourage wastediversion through the implementation of disposal bans and setting of tipping fees.


Changes are coming to British Columbia’s solid waste management planning process

Ministry of Environment–Clean Communities–2015

September 2015

ATTACHMENT 2 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANNING GUIDELINE

Information Update–Intentions Paper

INTRODUCTION

The Ministry of Environment (the ministry) will be updating the guideline for

preparation of regional solid waste management plans. The guideline outlines

the process for regional districts to develop and coordinate a solid waste

management plan. A solid waste management plan also acts as a blueprint

for reducing disposal of municipal solid waste.

In May 2015, the Provincial government announced commencement of this

project to update the planning guideline. The announcement also included six

recommended principles for the future of solid waste in BC, building on MLA

Marvin Hunt’s review of solid waste diversion. These principles are incorpor-

ated and discussed in a section addressing guiding principles in the proposed

updates (page 5 and 6 of this paper).

This paper outlines the ministry’s intentions for updating the guideline and

describes opportunities to comment on those intentions before work to

update the guideline commences. The ministry is consulting with regional

districts and other stakeholders, as well as providing opportunities for public

comment. The ministry expects to implement a revised guideline in 2016.

The ministry’s objectives for the updated guideline are to:

Provide a results-based focus for solid waste management planning

Provide increased clarity regarding ministry requirements

Streamline the planning process and increase efficiency

Provide flexibility in the planning process

Maintain protection of public interest

This intentions paper includes:

Background information related to the guideline and ministry targets

Details regarding the ministry’s proposed updates to the guideline:

1. Scope of proposed updates

2. Regional district planning and updating process

3. Ministry of Environment role in plan development and implementation

4. Targets

5. Plan principles

6. Public accountability mechanisms

7. Plan content

8. Compliance

Links and information on providing comment to the ministry

Key Points

Solid waste management planning remains important in B.C.–updating the guideline builds on a strong foundation

The 20-year old guideline needs modernizing to reflect the current solid waste management landscape and the experience of regional districts and partners in the sector

Updating the guideline should support the ministry’s service plan targets for municipal solid waste

A new guideline will:

» Increase clarity regarding ministry requirements and expected end results

» Include templates as much as possible for ease and consistency

» Update the principles which guide the formation of policies and strategies contained in plans and any implementation bylaws

» Recommend that plans be renewed every ten years and considered a living document with a process outlined for incorporating changes within the ten-year timeframe

» Encourage regular reporting on plan implementation

» Define consultation outcomes and promote best practices

» Emphasize cross-regional opportunities, sector partnerships and linkages to industry product stewardship programs

Comments should be provided by November 15, 2015. See the ministry’s municipal waste management plans website


http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/waste-management/garbage/garbage/guideswmplan.pdf

https://news.gov.bc.ca/stories/changes-coming-to-solid-waste-management-planning-process

https://news.gov.bc.ca/stories/changes-coming-to-solid-waste-management-planning-process

http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/waste-management/garbage/municipal-waste-management-plans


Solid Waste Management Planning Guideline–Intentions Paper


Page | 2

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The current guideline has been in place since 1994. It was

developed to provide guidance for regional districts on

legislative requirements for solid waste management

planning.

Key legislation and role of the guideline

The BC Environmental Management Act (EMA) includes

provisions in Part 3 that require regional districts to

develop a solid waste management plan, and to consult

on the development and content of the plan. Under the

EMA, the Minister of Environment (Minister) must be

satisfied that adequate consultation has occurred, and

may approve all or part of a solid waste management

plan or amendment to a plan.

Provisions in the guideline are not mandatory require-

ments for regional districts to follow but recommended

practices. The guideline provides advice to aid in plan

development that is consistent with legislative

requirements. It reflects ministry expectations

regarding plans and desirable outcomes, defined by

provincial targets and principles.

The need for change

Solid waste management planning continues to remain

relevant and important in BC. Yet because the guideline

was written more than twenty years ago, there is a

need for housekeeping updates to bring currency to the

document. For example, the guideline references old

legislation such as the Waste Management Act and

Municipal Act and has no reference to the EMA’s

Recycling Regulation.

During this time, regional districts have gained experi-

ence and expertise in preparing and renewing plans,

and are asking the ministry for updates to the guideline

to reflect current planning and consultation best prac-

tices. The guideline is often seen as overly prescriptive–

for example, there are 22 potential points of involve-

ment for provincial government staff in the planning

process that may no longer be warranted.

In addition, the landscape for solid waste management

has changed considerably. The list of industry

stewarded products has continued to expand, and the

roles and responsibilities for the management of those

products has changed. Expertise within the waste

management sector has grown, along with

technological improvements and commercial

opportunities associated with diversion and

recycling/reuse.

Consultation and communication methods have also

transformed in recent decades with increased use of

mobile devices and online connectivity, prompting

changes in consultation best practices among

government and stakeholders.

Ministry service plan targets

Updates to the planning guideline should support the

ministry’s service plan targets for municipal solid waste.

The ministry has set two provincial goals to reach by

2020:

Lower the municipal solid waste disposal rate from

570 to 350 kilograms per person

Have 75% of BC’s population covered by organic

waste disposal restrictions

PROPOSED UPDATES

1. Scope of proposed updates

The proposed updates focus on the planning process

itself (rather than implementation of plans) and the role

of regional districts and ministry staff throughout this

process. New guiding principles and targets are being

proposed by the ministry to update the high level

direction set by the Province for municipal solid waste

management.

At this time, the ministry is not proposing or seeking

comment on updates that would require legislative

changes–any changes to the guideline will be within the




Page | 3

framework of the EMA. The liquid waste management

planning guideline is also not being updated at this

time.

Waste management policy issues that might surface

through consultation may not be resolved in this guideline

update, but can inform separate policy work of the

ministry. This guideline update will also not address

technology/facility standards.

2. Regional district planning and updating process

Note that the updated guideline would only apply to

regional districts amending their plan following

implementation of the guideline. Existing plans are not

impacted by the updates.

2.1. The planning process

A solid waste management plan aims to set long-term

waste management goals and commitments in a region,

so that short-term operational planning can be

anticipated within this approved framework.

The three-stage process for developing a plan described

in part 4 of the current guideline assumes that plan

development occurs from scratch rather than building

on existing plans. While some analysis of the waste

management system and programming options

described in this part of the guideline will remain valid,

the new guideline would reflect that amendments to an

existing plan may not require three distinct stages, and

ministry reviews may be reduced along the way.

2.2. Plan timeframe

The current guideline directs regional districts to plan

for at least a ten-year timeframe (section 26), to set out

a time horizon for commitments (section 30), and to

review their plans every five years (section 36.2). The

ministry is proposing to clarify these provisions with the

following information:

The timeframe of ten years for the plans and the

setting out of a time horizon for commitments is

still valid.

The five-year review should consider the

implementation status, as well as the plan’s

effectiveness in meeting targets and commitments.

This review could involve a third party to evaluate

the plan’s effectiveness, provide recommended

updates if warranted, and share the findings and

recommendations publically.

The plan should be renewed every ten years to

ensure that a plan reflects the current municipal

solid waste landscape and that the regional district

can anticipate the task of renewing their plan within

their other planning cycles. The renewal process

should involve a full public consultation process and

plan approval by the ministry.

2.3. Plan updates

There are numerous reasons why a regional district may

want to update components of their plan. The five-year

effectiveness review may result in recommendations to

update programs and strategies to better meet commit-

ments and targets. A change in annual disposal trends

may signal a need to revisit the plan’s programs and

strategies. Facility and infrastructure changes may be

desired. Depending on the nature of the change, these

may require plan updates, or an update to operational

certificates following EMA 2(28).

Recognizing that plans contain operational details as well

as higher level goals, the ministry would like to provide

for an easier way for regional districts to update plans

within the ten year timeframe. The ministry is proposing

that the guideline include provisions for a plan to be a

living document–by enabling regional districts to include

particular information in schedules to the plan with a

description of the process for updating the schedules

over the life of the plan without resorting to an update

of the full plan. Topics and information for inclusion in

schedules could include:

List of facilities and/or sites for solid waste manage-

ment (e.g., storage, processing, disposal)

Cost information (e.g., capital and operating costs

for plan implementation)




Page | 4

Plan programs and strategies

Industry product stewardship programs operating in

the region

Processes identified in the plan for updating the

schedules would vary depending on the potential impact

of the updates being contemplated–for example, an

update may warrant simple public notification or full

consultation. It may be appropriate to provide an

analysis of impacts to adjacent regional districts and/or

other stakeholders, and to show support from adjacent

regional districts. Following an appropriate process for

engaging stakeholders, regional districts could seek

ministry approval for the updated schedule, rather than

the whole plan. Note that any changes made through up-

dates within the life of the plan should not contradict

ministry policies.

3. Ministry of Environment role in plan development and implementation

3.1. Plan development–interactions with the ministry

Over the past several years, the ministry’s role in solid

waste management planning has changed–reflecting

increased capacity of regional districts and stakeholders

in the waste management sector. The ministry is

proposing to update the guideline to reflect this reality.

The guideline could provide increased clarity regarding

ministry requirements and expected end results.

Reducing process uncertainty would serve to reduce

instances where regional districts need to seek

clarification or approval from the ministry for planning

activities that meet the desired end result.

The ministry is proposing a streamlined process and role

for involvement of the ministry in the planning process.

In most cases, ministry staff would no longer participate

on planning committees and would not need to review

or approve interim steps in the process. A plan checklist/

summary document could be submitted to the ministry

along with the plan, consultation report, and approval

request letter. This document, submitted and certified

under signature of a regional district corporate officer,

could follow a specified template describing how the

plan and planning process meet the ministry’s desired

results and requirements, as the primary source of infor-

mation in verifying that the plan complies with relevant

legislation, the guideline and related ministry policy.

The guideline will reflect that the ministry would be less

involved in contributing technical guidance through the

planning process. Ministry staff may be involved in a

planning process at specific points when there is a need

(as is currently the case). Many regional districts have

gained experience and expertise in this area and will not

be greatly affected by this shift. The ministry recognizes

that some regional districts may require additional

professional reliance and support.

3.2. Plan implementation–interactions with the ministry

The ministry is not proposing any changes to the guide-

line with respect to the ministry’s interactions with

regional districts in plan implementation. The ministry

will continue to consider and issue operational

certificates and permits following current legislative

provisions. The Minister will continue to consider

regional district bylaws related to the plan that require

approval under the EMA. The ministry will continue to

collect waste disposal information supplied by each

regional district annually and will report out on disposal

trends through Environmental Reporting BC and the

ministry’s annual service plan report.

4. Targets

Setting targets helps to define the vision that a region

wants to work toward. Ideally, everything in the plan

should support movement towards those targets.

Achieving regional targets requires collaboration from

all stakeholders.

Section 98 of the guideline describes high level

provincial waste reduction targets that are now

outdated. However, these targets are generally seen as

a beneficial tool for regional districts to drive action in


http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/soe/

http://bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/Annual_Reports/2014_2015/pdf/ministry/env.pdf



Page | 5

their region. The current provincial targets set out in the

ministry’s service plan are 350 kg/capita disposal and

75% of the province’s population under an organic

waste disposal restriction by 2020. The ministry intends

to update the guideline for currency, and to include

additional direction that regional districts should set

local targets and address how these align with, or vary

from, provincial targets.

The guideline could also reference other targets that a

regional district might set, such as contamination rates,

residential food waste reduction, landfill restrictions for

wood waste, restrictions of other materials (such as

industry stewarded products) and/or greenhouse gas

(GHG) reduction. To provide clarity and currency for

regional districts, the ministry’s service plan targets

could be referenced directly in the guideline or included

as a schedule to the guideline.

5. Plan principles

Sections 8.2 and 16 of the guideline describe consulta-

tion principles and environmental guiding principles

with direction for regional districts to adopt these or

equivalent principles along with regional objectives in

their plans. The ministry proposes to recommend

updated principles which guide the consultation process

as well as the formation of policies and strategies

contained in the plan and any implementation bylaws.

Regional districts could adopt principles equivalent to

those in the updated guideline or justify other principles

that fit their unique situation.

5.1. Consultation principles

The ministry is proposing the following consultation

principles, building on direction in the existing guideline

(section 8):

Stakeholder involvement begins at the design stage

of the consultation process

The consultation process engages a cross-section of

the stakeholder group that may include waste and

recycling service providers, product stewardship

agencies, local environmental groups and recycling

organizations, residents within the plan’s region,

engineering and/or planning departments of the

regional district’s member municipalities, First

Nations within or adjacent to the plan area, local

business groups and ratepayers organizations,

consumer groups, unions, large commercial and

institutional solid waste generators, and local

school districts

Stakeholders are provided with effective and timely

notice of consultation opportunities

Stakeholders are able to determine the implications

to their interest by reading the wording in the

document that is the subject of the consultation

Stakeholders are provided with sufficient time to

respond to draft documents

Proceedings and results of activities that are part of

the consultation process are properly documented

and available for public review so that stakeholders

are able to see how the plan will or will not address

their comments or issues

5.2. Environmental guiding principles

The ministry is proposing the following environmental

guiding principles, building on direction in the existing

guideline (section 16) and the guiding principles

recommended in MLA Marvin Hunt’s recent review of

solid waste diversion in BC:

1. Promote zero waste approaches Encourage a shift in thinking from waste as a residual

requiring disposal to waste as a resource that can be

utilized in closed loop systems. Zero waste is an

approach that generates jobs, stimulates economic

development, and maximizes efficient use of materials

and energy.

2. Promote the 3 R’s (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle) Elevating the importance of the first 3 R’s in the 5 R1

hierarchy is consistent with zero waste approaches.

Waste management strategies should be prioritized as

1 The 5 R hierarchy prioritizes reduction, then reuse and recycling, then material or energy recovery, and after all other options are exhausted, residual management.




Page | 6

follows: 1) reduce as much as possible the amount or

toxicity of materials that enter the solid waste stream

through the use of closed loop systems and prevention

practices; 2) facilitate reuse of materials as many times

as possible before they enter the solid waste stream; and

3) facilitate recycling of as much material as possible.

3. Maximize beneficial use of waste materials and manage residuals appropriately

Technology and best practices will continue to develop.

After measures to maximize the first 3 R’s (reduce, re-

use, recycle) have been utilized, waste management

strategies can be prioritized as follows: 4) recover as

much energy and/or material from the solid waste

stream as possible through the application of technol-

ogy; and 5) provide safe and effective residual manage-

ment to the remaining solid waste stream.

4. Support polluter and user-pay approaches Responsibility for the management of products is

shifted from general taxpayers to producers and users.

This shift in responsibility can be supported through the

provision of market-based incentives, disposal restric-

tions on industry stewarded products, zoning to support

eco-depots, and support for re-use and remanufactur-

ing businesses. Education and behaviour change

strategies aimed at consumers and businesses will help

foster further waste reduction, re-use and recycling.

5. Manage tipping fees Tipping fees should be structured to encourage diversion

and recycling opportunities, while avoiding unintended

consequences such as illegal dumping.

6. Separate organics and recyclables out of the garbage wherever practical

Maintaining a system to separate organics and recycl-

ables out of garbage at the source will provide clean

feedstock of greater economic value and potential end

product use to the recycling industry while reinforcing

behaviour to reduce, reuse, and recycle. The unique

conditions in each regional district will influence the

practicality of this approach.

7. Establish and enforce disposal bans

Disposal restrictions support diversion and a viable re-

use and recycling sector. Consistent application of dis-

posal restrictions by regional districts will help to ensure

success.

8. Collaborate with neighbouring regional districts wherever practical

Regional districts working towards sharing major

facilities for use by those within or outside regional

district boundaries, and establishing consistent

approaches where possible (e.g., disposal restrictions),

will support the most efficient and effective overall

municipal solid waste system.

9. Develop collaborative partnerships with stakeholders to achieve regional targets set in plans

Strengthen partnerships with stakeholders to achieve

regional targets. All waste and recycling service

providers, industry product stewards, and waste

generators are key stakeholders in achieving these

targets–cooperative efforts will optimize successful

outcomes.

10. Level playing field within regions for both private and public solid waste management facilities

Solid waste management facilities within a given region

should be subject to similar requirements. A consistent

set of criteria should be used to evaluate the waste

management solutions proposed by private sector as

those proposed by a regional district or municipality.

(Criteria may include, but are not limited to, meeting or

exceeding environmental standards, alignment with

zero waste approaches, cost factors and maintaining

waste management as a public service.)

6. Public accountability mechanisms

6.1. Advisory committees

The guideline currently includes provision for public,

technical and monitoring advisory committees (sections

8-12). “Reasonable efforts” should be made by regional

districts to seek and invite stakeholder groups that

reflect public, private sector and government interests.

Regional districts with a small population and/or limited




Page | 7

staff capacity could choose to establish a single encom-

passing advisory committee or use an established

environment committee as long as appropriate

stakeholder representation is included.

Committees advise the regional district on matters

pertaining to waste management planning at all stages

of the planning process, including but not limited to the

development of environmental guiding principles, terms

of reference for any planning studies, the design and

implementation of the public review and consultation

process, and terms of reference for the plan monitoring

advisory committee.

The ministry is not proposing changes to the current guideline with respect to advisory committees, apart from emphasizing efficient committee formation. Ministry review of the committee’s design for the public review and consultation process would not be neces-sary in most cases. To support regional districts, the ministry will develop template documents with terms of reference for the different types of committees, for adaptation specific to the needs of each regional district.

6.2. Public consultation

Effective public consultation is an essential element of the

planning process. As well as appropriately scaled advisory

committees, consultation is required at key stages in the

process. Accountability as to the adequacy of consultation

is a legislated requirement under the EMA Part 3(27).

The ministry is proposing that the updated guideline will

focus on the outcomes related to consultation rather

than the consultation methods.

One desired outcome is that community members and

all impacted stakeholders are aware of the planning

process and of opportunities to participate and/or pro-

vide input. The ministry could include in the guideline

some consultation best practices–such as a minimum

standard of notice to be provided at key stages in the

planning process through advertisements in local news-

papers for two consecutive weeks, and through online

and direct notification methods. However, a regional

district would have flexibility on how to solicit meaning-

ful input from stakeholders during the planning period.

A second key outcome that will be emphasized is that

the consultation process is transparent, with commun-

ity members able to see the results of consultation and

how their concerns were addressed. The ministry will

develop a consultation report template for use by

regional districts to document the consultation tools

used, stakeholder participation, analysis of issues raised

and how those issues will be addressed in the plan.

A third key outcome is that regional districts can

demonstrate accountability to the legislative require-

ments for consultation. The plan checklist / summary

document submitted to the ministry when plan

approval is sought (see section 3.1 of this intentions

paper) could include certification from a regional

district corporate officer to demonstrate that adequate

consultation took place.

6.3. Reporting

Reporting is important because it helps keep the plan a

living document with currency for both regional district

boards and for the public. The current guideline (section

36) suggests annual reporting to the ministry regional

manager. The ministry is proposing updating guidance

for reporting as follows:

1. Annual reporting to the ministry of waste disposal

information via the ministry’s municipal solid waste

disposal calculator2

2. Suggested annual or biannual reporting to the

regional district board (and public) on topics

determined to be of interest and relevance in the

region. These may include but are not limited to:

Programs delivered each year and how they

support the first 3R’s of the ministry’s 5R

hierarchy

2 The municipal solid waste disposal calculator collects uniform,

transparent, and accurate waste disposal data at the regional district level across BC




Page | 8

How the plan contributes towards economic

development, with emphasis on the reuse

and recycling sectors

Any challenges or opportunities identified

within the waste management system

Monitoring data for closed sites

Compliance activities

Landfill gas capture and reuse

Spills, leaks and leachate collected at facilities

Wildlife interactions and control measures

As well, the ministry is proposing that the five-year plan

review results in a public report describing the regional

district’s progress towards their commitments and

targets, the plan’s effectiveness in meeting those

targets, and any recommendations for updates to the

plan.

7. Plan content

The ministry’s proposed updates to the guideline focus

on the planning process. Much of the plan content

described in the current guideline (section 29) remains

valid. The following additional content pieces are

proposed:

Including closure and monitoring information for

facilities and sites that have previously been a part

of the waste management system

Preparing an analysis of efficiency/consistency

opportunities with neighbouring regional districts

and any options that will be pursued (i.e., a descrip-

tion of the participation with any other local

government in the sharing of programs and

facilities)

Listing industry product stewardship programs

operating in the plan area, strategies for how the

regional district interacts with these programs, and

a description of how these programs contribute to

the achievement of targets/objectives

Broadening section 29(g) to include a description of

measures that key stakeholders within the plan

area have agreed to undertake to implement the

plan (existing provision only asks for commitments

from member municipalities and First Nations)

8. Compliance

No new ministry compliance activities are proposed, but

the guideline will describe compliance avenues that are

available. Under EMA section 120(11), it is an offence to

contravene an approved waste management plan.

Administrative monetary penalties (as per EMA’s

Administrative Penalties Regulation) may be used in

cases where a clear violation of the terms and

conditions of the plan occurs. The ministry’s compliance

policy will be followed for facilities with authorizations

under the EMA. The guideline will also highlight

provisions in EMA that provide authority for regional

districts to enforce aspects of their plans.

The guideline could include the suggestion that regional

districts identify options to promote compliance with

the plan and develop a compliance strategy. Reporting

commitments could be a component of the compliance

strategy.




Page | 9

PROVIDING COMMENT

The ministry welcomes comments on the information and proposals outlined in this intentions paper. The

ministry has prepared a comment form, which is posted on the ministry’s municipal waste management

plans website. Those interested are invited to submit comments to the ministry using the comment form,

or by separate submission if desired.

If you have any questions or comments please email: [email protected]

Completed response forms or submissions may be submitted using the online form or as an attached file

to this email address, or by mail to: PO Box 28159 Westshore RPO Victoria B.C. V9B 6K8

Comments should be submitted by: November 15, 2015

All submissions will be treated with confidentiality by ministry staff and contractors when preparing

consultation reports. Please note, however, that comments you provide and information that identifies

you as the source of those comments may be publicly available if a Freedom of Information request is

made under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

Thank you for your time and comments.




mailto:[email protected]

To: Utilities Committee

From: Jeff Gogol, Environmental Regulatory Planner, Policy, Planning and Analysis, Liquid Waste Services

Date: October 26, 2015 Meeting Date: November 12, 2015

Subject: GVS&DD Fermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294 and Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 295

RECOMMENDATION 1. That the GVS&DD Board:

a) Give first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage DistrictFermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294, 2015; and

b) Pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District FermentationOperations Bylaw No. 294, 2015.

2. That the GVS&DD Board:a) Give, first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District

Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 295, 2015; andb) Pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use

Amending Bylaw No. 295, 2015.

PURPOSE This report recommends the adoption of Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Fermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294, 2015 and consequential amendments to the GVS&DD Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007 (GVS&DD Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 295, 2015). The fermentation operations bylaw is necessary to better regulate the discharge of wastewater from fermentation operations such as craft breweries, wineries, and distilleries which currently are not regulated through a permit.

BACKGROUND Metro Vancouver collects and treats domestic and non‐domestic liquid wastes in accordance with the Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan authorized by the Minister of Environment. The regulatory program for non‐domestic liquid waste is governed by GVS&DD Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299 (the “Sewer Use Bylaw”). The Sewer Use Bylaw establishes a regulatory framework to allow non‐domestic liquid waste from industrial, commercial and institutional sources to be discharged to the sewer. The main objectives of the Sewer Use Bylaw are to:

protect the public, sewer workers, municipal and District infrastructure, and wastewatertreatment processes and

protect the environment by improving the quality of biosolids and wastewater treatmentplant effluents.

Section G 1.1


The regulatory framework under the Sewer Use Bylaw developed by Metro Vancouver is intended to be fair, effective and efficient. In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the number of operations that ferment fruits, grains and other material to produce alcoholic beverages. Although producers have some processes in place to remove organic matter, initial inspections of some of these facilities indicated that there is a significant amount of suspended solids and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) discharged to sewer. Monitoring results indicated that the amount of total suspended solids and BOD exceeded the restricted waste criteria specified in the Bylaw. As well, the discharge pH from these operations was outside the range specified in the Bylaw which could promote sewer odor and corrosion and impact workers health and safety. To address these discharges, Metro Vancouver is proposing to regulate fermentation operations discharging less than 300 m3 in a 30‐day period through the sector‐specific GVS&DD Fermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294, 2015 (the “Bylaw”). PROPOSED FERMENTATION OPERATIONS BYLAW REQUIREMENTS The discharge of spent grains and waste yeast can stress the operation of the collection and treatment systems, more significantly at the primary treatment plants. The proposed Bylaw sets out standards to better manage the discharge from these operations. The proposed Bylaw includes:

prohibitions on the discharge of spent grains and fruits; limits for fine suspended solids; installation of a sampling point; requirements to monitor and treat wastewater pH; management of the discharge of off‐spec product; and requirements to pay administration and treatment fees.

Sampling Point Installation To ensure Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver regulatory staff have accurate knowledge of wastewater quality to verify compliance with this Bylaw, a wastewater sampling point must be installed by each fermentation operation. Effective July 1, 2016, all fermentation operations are required to install a suitable sampling point that can be accessed during operating hours. The location of the wastewater sampling point must be downstream of all process and treatment equipment and upstream of any domestic waste sources. Solids Management All fermentation operations would be prohibited from discharging spent grains and fruit effective on the date of adoption of the bylaw. At present, some operations recover this material for use as animal feed for farmers. Effective January 1, 2017, all operations will be required to meet a Total Suspended Solids limit of 1,200 mg/L. This delayed implementation schedule is to allow each operation time to determine the works and/or procedures that best suit their specific operation. Compliance with this limit will be determined through sampling conducted by Metro Vancouver and City of Vancouver regulatory staff. pH Monitoring and Treatment


Cleaning and sterilizing activities for fermentation operations can impact the pH levels of their wastewater discharge. Each operation would be required to monitor and record wastewater pH at least once on the days that cleaning and sterilizing activities occur. The pH level must be measured immediately after the sample is collected using an onsite pH meter. pH monitoring should begin once the sampling point is installed, to determine whether the wastewater complies with the Sewer Use Bylaw range of 5.5 to 10.5. By October 31, 2016, all operations would be required to submit a pH Characterization Report showing three months’ worth of daily pH results. If the Characterization Report shows an operation is discharging wastewater with a pH outside the 5.5 to 10.5 range they would be required to submit a Compliance Plan to Metro Vancouver or City of Vancouver regulatory staff by January 31, 2017. The Compliance Plan would detail the works and/or procedures the operator will undertake to treat the wastewater. Wastewater pH levels for all operations must be in compliance effective July 1, 2017. Timeline of Bylaw Requirements The following table outlines the requirements in the Bylaw and the dates associated with these requirements. Date Requirements

Adoption by GVS&DD Board November 27, 2015

No discharge of spent grain or fruit Notification requirement for discharge of off‐spec waste Begin record keeping

July 1, 2016 Installation of a sampling point Begin sampling of wastewater for pH. This is an ongoing

requirement October 31, 2016 Submission of a pH Characterization Report to the Sewage

Control Manager for pH results collected between July 1 and September 30, 2016

January 1, 2017 Must meet the 1,200 mg/L Total Suspended Solids limit January 31, 2017 Submission of a compliance plan report detailing how the

fermentation operation will meet the pH limit July 1, 2017 Must meet the Bylaw pH limit (pH between 5.5 and 10.5)

Regulatory and Treatment Fees Metro Vancouver’s Sewer Use Bylaw was developed to recover the regulatory and administrative costs directly from the users whenever feasible. For the Fermentation Operations Bylaw, operators would be required to pay an annual administration fee of $200 to Metro Vancouver, or the City of Vancouver for operations located in Vancouver, to cover the cost of staffing, sampling and analysis to administer and enforce the Bylaw. Invoices for the fees will be sent to operators between January 1 and June 30 every year and payable upon receipt. Treatment fees are designed to recover the costs of conveying and treating wastewater from fermentation operations. All fermentation operations would be required to pay an annual fee for treatment based on their previous year’s annual production. Treatment fees will be invoiced within the first six months of each calendar year beginning in 2016. Metro Vancouver will determine the appropriate fee category based on BC Liquor Distribution Branch records for existing operations or an operator’s records if it is a new operation.


Disposal of Off‐Spec Product Off‐spec product, defined as any product intended to be made into beer, cider, wine, spirits, or any other similar alcoholic drink made from fermentation that does not meet the fermentation operation’s quality standard for consumption, is very high in (BOD). To manage this impact, the Bylaw incorporates the following reporting/authorization structure:

Off‐spec product over 100 litres and under 2,000 litres per day: Operators would be required to notify Metro Vancouver or the City of Vancouver of the discharge by phone or email on the day of discharge. No response would be required from Metro Vancouver or the City of Vancouver. The operator would be required to record the date, time and volume of off‐spec product.

Off‐spec product over 2,000 litres per day: Operators would be required to contact Metro Vancouver or the City of Vancouver by phone or email and obtain authorization before discharging to the sewer. The operator would be required to record the date, time and volume of off‐spec product.

This reporting/authorization structure has been developed to protect wastewater treatment plant operations from the impact of high BOD loads discharged to sewer. The Bylaws GVS&DD Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007 is the overarching Bylaw that regulates the non‐domestic discharge of wastewater to the sewer. It includes the general prohibitions and requirements for all commercial operations and the powers available to Metro Vancouver to maintain compliance. GVS&DD Fermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294, 2015 details specific prohibitions and requirements for the fermentation sector. This Bylaw is sector‐specific and includes requirements that differ from those specified in the Sewer Use Bylaw. GVS&DD Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 295, 2015 includes amendments to the Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299 to harmonize the Sewer Use Bylaw and the Fermentation Operations Bylaw. These amendments are required to ensure specific powers in the Sewer Use Bylaw are conferred to the Fermentation Operations Bylaw such as reporting requirements and the ability to issue Discharge Abatement Orders. CONSULTATION From summer 2014 to fall 2015, Metro Vancouver consulted with fermentation operators and other industry representatives on the development of the Bylaw. Metro Vancouver carried out the following consultation activities:

Toured four fermentation operations to learn more about the current practice of the industry on managing wastewater;

Developed a dedicated web page to house information about the Bylaw and produced a video explaining the rationale for the Bylaw;

Surveyed stakeholders regarding how they would like to be consulted by requesting input on consultation format and meeting time;

Metro Vancouver gathered feedback on the proposed requirements primarily through two industry meetings (December 3, 2014 and May 14, 2015) and two online surveys;


Provided stakeholders with document in May 2015 outlining how the proposed requirements changed based on their feedback (Attachment 3);

Metro Vancouver and the City of Vancouver presented their respective bylaw and conservation initiative on a panel at The Business of Craft Beer in May 2015; and

Metro Vancouver staff gathered feedback on the Implementation Guide in October 2015 to ensure that the bylaw requirements are clear to stakeholders.

The consultation process was carried out in close cooperation with representatives from the City of Vancouver, who are involved in regulation and enforcement of the Sewer Use Bylaw within the City’s boundaries. Metro Vancouver also collaborated with the City of Vancouver to ensure alignment with their promotion of water conservation. A complete list of meetings and surveys with stakeholders is included in Attachment 4. Based on stakeholder input, Metro Vancouver staff simplified and streamlined bylaw requirements, added additional time for operators to comply with requirements, amended the fee structure and committed to developing an Implementation Guide to support compliance. More information on changes made to the requirements is included in Attachment 5. Metro Vancouver sent a final survey on the consultation process to stakeholders in spring 2015. Five responses were received, and in general the feedback on the consultation process was positive. Metro Vancouver staff continue to work with stakeholders during the finalization of the Implementation Guide, a plain‐language document that will support operators in understanding the bylaw requirements and timing. ALTERNATIVES

1. That the GVS&DD Board: a) Give first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District

Fermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294, 2015; and b) Pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Fermentation

Operations Bylaw No. 294, 2015. That the GVS&DD Board: a) Give, first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District

Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 295, 2015; and b) Pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use

Amending Bylaw No. 295, 2015.

2. That the Utilities Committee receive the report for information and provide alternate direction to staff.


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There will be a cost to fermentation operations to comply with this bylaw depending on the size and complexity of the operation. To accommodate this, Metro Vancouver is recommending a phased approach to bylaw implementation. The specific costs in the Bylaw also depend on the type of fermentation operation as well as its size. All fermentation operations are required to pay an annual fee of $200 to recover the costs of regulating the Bylaw. In addition, annual treatment fees range from $100 for distilleries to $3500 for large breweries, wineries or cider manufacturers that are not regulated by a site‐specific Waste Discharge Permit. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Strategy 1.1 of the Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan seeks to enhance the effectiveness of regional wastewater treatment plants by minimizing liquid wastes at their source. To better regulate the discharge of wastewater from fermentation operations, staff are proposing a regulatory bylaw containing requirements for both solids and pH management. Extensive consultation was conducted with fermentation operators and other industry representatives to develop a bylaw that will regulate the discharge of solids from this sector. Attachments:

1. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Fermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294, 2015

2. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 295, 2015 3. Information Sheet ‐ Proposed Bylaw for Fermentation Operations (May 14, 2015 stakeholder

meeting) 4. Consultation Activities Summary Table 5. Summary of Changes to Requirements Based on Stakeholder Input

12045206


12140624

GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT

Fermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294, 2015

Whereas:

A. The Environmental Management Act of British Columbia and the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act authorize the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (the “District”) to make bylaws respecting the direct or indirect discharge of wastes into any sewer or drain connected to a sewage facility operated by the District;

B. The Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act authorizes the District to set fees payable by persons who discharge liquid waste into any work, service or plant of the District for conveying, disposing of, or treating liquid waste, and into any work, service, or plant connected thereto;

C. Fermentation operations produce waste that, when discharged or discarded into sewers or drains, may obstruct the flow of, or interfere with the operation and performance of sewer and sewage facilities; and

D. It is deemed desirable to regulate the discharge of waste from fermentation operations into

sewers or sewage facilities.

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District in an open meeting duly assembled enacts as follows:

Citation

1. For citation purposes, the name of this bylaw is the “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Fermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294, 2015” (“this Bylaw”).

Definitions

2. For ease of reference, words that are italicized in this Bylaw are defined terms. In this Bylaw:

“drain” means any pipe, conduit, channel, or other similar plumbing equipment used to convey wastewater;

Attachment 1


12140624

“fermentation equipment” means any tank, barrel, container, hose, pump, valve, or other similar vessel, equipment, or device used in the process of brewing, distilling, blending, flavouring, or fermenting fruits, vegetables, or grains to produce beer, cider, wine, spirits, or any other similar alcoholic drink;

“fermentation operation” means any premises, except residential premises, at which a person brews, distills, or ferments fruits, vegetables, or grains to produce beer, cider, wine, spirits, or any other similar alcoholic drink made from fermentation, including brew pubs, cottage breweries, micro-breweries, U-brews, U-vins, wineries, and distilleries;

“off-spec product” means any product intended to be made into beer, cider, wine, spirits, or any other similar alcoholic drink made from fermentation, which does not meet the owner or operator’s quality standard for consumption; and

“operator” means any person who has management or control, directly or indirectly, of a fermentation operation, but does not include a person who has management or control of a fermentation operation that discharges high volume discharge into a sewer or sewage facility in compliance with a valid and subsisting waste discharge permit or order authorizing such high volume discharge;

“owner” means any person who owns or has any interest in a fermentation operation, but does not include a person who owns or has an interest in a fermentation operation that discharges high volume discharge into a sewer or sewage facility in compliance with a valid and subsisting waste discharge permit or order authorizing such high volume discharge; and,

“Sewer Use Bylaw” means Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007.

3. Terms that are italicized but not defined in this Bylaw have the same meaning given to those terms in the Sewer Use Bylaw or incorporated by reference into the Sewer Use Bylaw.

4. References in this Bylaw to an enactment, including the Sewer Use Bylaw, include the enactment as it may be amended or replaced from time to time.

Part 1 – Application

5. Every owner or operator who discharges, or allows or causes to be discharged, directly or

indirectly, wastewater from a fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility must comply with this Bylaw.


12140624

Part 2 – Restrictions

6. No owner or operator shall discharge, or allow or cause to be discharged, directly or indirectly, wastewater from a fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility if the wastewater contains any of the following:

(a) high volume discharge;

(b) restricted waste;

(c) storm water;

(d) prohibited waste;

(e) uncontaminated water;

(f) groundwater;

(g) trucked waste;

(h) any substance, whether gaseous, liquid, or solid, that may cause damage to a sewer or sewage facility by corrosion;

(i) any substance, whether gaseous, liquid, or solid, in a concentration or quantity that may cause interference with the proper operation of a sewer or sewage facility;

(j) any substance, whether gaseous, liquid, or solid, in a concentration or quantity that may injure or is capable of injuring the health of any person, property or life form;

(k) any substance, whether gaseous, liquid, or solid, in a concentration or quantity that is or may become a safety hazard to persons who operate or maintain a sewer or sewage facility; or

(l) any substance, whether gaseous, liquid, or solid, used to dilute non-domestic waste, including water.

7. Notwithstanding subsection 6(b), until December 31, 2016, an owner or operator may discharge, or allow or cause the discharge from a fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility of wastewater that contains one or more of the following, in any concentration:

(a) biochemical oxygen demand (BOD); or

(b) total suspended solids (TSS).

8. Notwithstanding subsection 6(b), effective January 1, 2017, an owner or operator may discharge, or allow or cause the discharge from a fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility of wastewater that contains one of more of the following:

(a) biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), in any concentration; or


12140624

(b) total suspended solids (TSS), up to a maximum concentration of 1,200 mg/L.

9. Notwithstanding subsection 6(b), until June 30, 2017, an owner or operator may discharge, or allow or cause the discharge from a fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility of wastewater that contains the following:

(a) pH waste.

10. An owner or operator shall not discharge, or allow or cause to be discharged off-spec product from a fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility unless the off-spec product is in an amount:

(a) less than 100 litres each day;

(b) equal to or greater than 100 litres but less than 2,000 litres each day and, prior to the discharge, the person notifies an officer or the Sewage Control Manager of the proposed discharge; or

(c) equal to or greater than 2,000 litres each day and, prior to the discharge, the owner or operator:

i. submits a request to an officer or the Sewage Control Manager to discharge such off-spec product; and

ii. the Sewage Control Manager approves the proposed discharge.

Part 3 – Sampling Point, pH Monitoring, and Treatment

11. Effective July 1, 2016, every owner or operator who discharges, or allows or causes the discharge of wastewater from a fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility shall have a sampling point on the premises that is:

(a) downstream from all fermentation equipment;

(b) downstream from any equipment or device for treating wastewater;

(c) upstream from any points where domestic waste is discharged; and

(d) vertically perpendicular to and on top of the pipe, if the sampling point is part of a pipe or other similar plumbing equipment.

12. The sampling point required under section 11 shall be readily and easily accessible at all times

to perform monitoring, sampling, and for the purposes of ensuring compliance with this Bylaw and the Sewer Use Bylaw.


12140624

13. Effective July 1, 2016, every owner or operator who discharges, or allows or causes the

discharge of wastewater from a fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility shall, if cleaning and sterilization activities of fermentation equipment are performed at that fermentation operation:

(a) collect a sample of wastewater from the sampling point referred to in section 11 at least once each day on days when cleaning and sterilization activities are in progress; and

(b) measure the pH of the sample immediately after its collection.

14. Subject to section 16, every owner or operator required under section 13 to collect and measure for pH shall submit, by no later than October 31, 2016, a pH characterization report to the Sewage Control Manager describing the results of the pH samples collected up to September 30, 2016.

15. Subject to section 16, if any wastewater samples collected under section 13 have a pH lower than 5.5 or higher than 10.5, then the owner or operator of that fermentation operation shall submit a written plan by January 31, 2017 to the Sewage Control Manager describing the actions the owner or operator will undertake at the fermentation operation to treat the wastewater for pH to comply with this Bylaw.

16. Sections 14 and 15 of this Bylaw do not apply to an owner or operator who commences operation of a fermentation operation on or after October 1, 2016.

Part 5 – Record Keeping 17. Every owner or operator who discharges, or allows or causes the discharge of wastewater from

a fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility shall keep and maintain on the premises a written record of the:

(a) total hectolitres (hl) produced each calendar month of beer, cider, wine, spirits, or any other

similar alcoholic drink made from fermentation on the premises;

(b) dates, times, and volumes of off-spec product discharged under section 10, if any; and

(c) dates, times, and results of the pH sampling required under section 13.


12140624

18. Every owner or operator who discharges, or allows or causes the discharge of wastewater from a fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility shall: (a) keep the written records required under section 17 for at least two years after the year in

which the record was first made; and

(b) make such records available for inspection by an officer or the Sewage Control Manager upon request.

Part 6 – Fees

19. Every owner or operator who discharges, or allows or causes the discharge of wastewater from

a fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility shall pay an annual administration fee of $200 in respect of that fermentation operation by the date specified in an invoice as follows:

(a) to the District, if the District issues the invoice; or

(b) to the City of Vancouver, if the fermentation operation is located wholly within the municipal boundaries of the City of Vancouver and the City of Vancouver issues the invoice.

20. Every owner or operator who discharges, or allows or causes the discharge of wastewater from

a fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility shall pay to the District an annual treatment fee set out in this Bylaw in respect of that fermentation operation, by the date specified in an invoice issued by the District.

21. The annual treatment fee referred to in section 20 is the amount specified in Column 3 of Table 1 for the type of alcoholic drink made at the fermentation operation in Column 1 of Table 1 based on the sum total in hectolitres (hl) of annual production opposite in Column 2 of Table 1. Table 1

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Type of drink Annual Production

(hl) Annual Treatment Fee

Beer, cider, and wine 0 – 1000 $ 250 1001 – 2000 $ 750 2001 – 3000 $ 1250 3001 – 4000 $ 1750 4001 – 5000 $ 2250 5001 – 6000 $ 2750

> 6000 $ 3500 Spirit All $ 100


12140624

22. An owner or operator who discharges, or allows or causes the discharge of wastewater from a

fermentation operation that produces both: (a) a spirit; and

(b) beer, cider, or wine,

at the same fermentation operation is exempt from payment of the annual treatment fee in respect of the spirit.

23. If an owner or operator fails to pay the fees required under this Bylaw in respect of a

fermentation operation, then the owner or operator shall not discharge, or allow or cause to be discharged wastewater from that fermentation operation into a sewer or sewage facility until the fees have been fully paid.

Part 7 – Powers and Offences 24. An officer or the Sewage Control Manager may require anything related to the discharge of

wastewater from a fermentation operation to be operated, used, set in motion, or opened under conditions specified by the officer or Sewage Control Manager, including with respect to any fermentation equipment that is being inspected.

25. If the Sewage Control Manager determines that a person has contravened or is contravening this Bylaw or the Sewer Use Bylaw, the Sewage Control Manager may issue an order requiring a person to do anything the Sewage Control Manager considers necessary to stop the contravention or prevent another contravention.

26. Any person who contravenes any provision of this Bylaw commits an offence and is liable to a fine not exceeding $10,000.

27. If an offence under this Bylaw continues for more than one day, separate fines, each not exceeding the maximum fine for that offence, may be imposed for each day the offence continues.

Part 8 – General Conditions

28. If any portion of this Bylaw is held to be ultra vires, illegal, invalid, or unenforceable in any way,

in whole or in part, by a court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not invalidate or void the remainder of the Bylaw. The portion so held to be ultra vires, illegal, invalid, or unenforceable shall be deemed to be reduced in scope so as to be valid and


12140624

enforceable, or in the alternative to have been stricken therefrom with the same force and effect as if such parts had never been included in this Bylaw.

29. Nothing in this Bylaw is intended to conflict with the Environmental Management Act. A conflict does not exist solely because further restrictions or conditions are imposed by this Bylaw or the Sewer Use Bylaw.

30. Words importing the singular number include the plural number and vice versa.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME THIS __________ DAY OF ____________________, 2015. PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED THIS __________ DAY OF ____________________, 2015.

_________________________

Greg Moore Chair

_________________________ Chris Plagnol Corporate Officer


Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 295, 2015 Page 1 of 2

GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT SEWER USE

AMENDING BYLAW NO. 295, 2015

A Bylaw to Amend “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District

Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007”

WHEREAS the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District has

adopted “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007” to

manage the direct or indirect discharge of non-domestic waste to any sewers and drains connected

to Sewage Facility operated by the District;

AND WHEREAS the Board of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District wishes to amend

“Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007”;

NOW THEREFORE the Board of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District, in open

meeting assembled, enacts as follows:

1. “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007” is

hereby amended as follows:

(a) In section 2.1 by adding the following definition:

“Fermentation Operations Bylaw” means the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage

Fermentation Operations Bylaw No. 294, 2015;

(b) In section 5.2 by replacing section 5.2 with the following:

Nothing prohibits the discharge of Waste specified in section 5.1 provided the person is

also in compliance with this Bylaw, the Grease Interceptor Bylaw, the Fermentation

Operations Bylaw, a valid and subsisting Waste Discharge Permit, a Trucked Waste

Authorization, an Order, or a Code of Practice.

(c) In section 5.8 by adding the phrase “, the Fermentation Operations Bylaw,” after the

words “Grease Interceptor Bylaw” and before the words “or this bylaw”;

(d) in section 6.1 by adding the phrase “, the Fermentation Operations Bylaw,” after the

words “Grease Interceptor Bylaw” and before the words “a Waste Discharge Permit”;

(e) in section 9.1 by adding the phrase “, the Fermentation Operations Bylaw,” after the

words “under this Bylaw” and before the words “and the Grease Interceptor Bylaw”;

Attachment 2


Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 295, 2015 Page 2 of 2

(f) in section 10.2 by adding the phrase “, the Fermentation Operations Bylaw,” after the

words “Grease Interceptor Bylaw” and before the words “a Waste Discharge Permit”;

2. This Bylaw shall be cited as “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use

Amending Bylaw No. 295, 2015”.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME THIS __________ DAY OF ____________________, 2015.

PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED THIS __________ DAY OF ____________________, 2015.

_________________________

Greg Moore Chair

_________________________ Chris Plagnol Corporate Officer


Metro Vancouver is proposing a bylaw to reduce and prevent spent grains, fruit and yeast from smaller fermentation operations from going down the drain.

The bylaw would apply to any business using yeast to produce alcoholic beverages and discharging up to 300m3 (300,000L) of wastewater into the sewer within 30 days, including brew pubs, cottage breweries, micro-breweries, vint-on-premises, wineries, distilleries and u-brews.

Ensuring waste from fermentation operations is managed responsiblyCurrently, spent grains, fruit and yeast from fermentation operations are entering and stressing the sewer system. The bylaw will require fermentation operations to remove solids from wastewater and monitor and control the pH of cleaning and sterilization water.

Metro Vancouver is supporting these operations to find practical and cost-effective solutions for managing this waste.

Supporting fermentation operations to comply with the bylaw Metro Vancouver is designing a bylaw that is easy to understand and reflects the unique conditions of these operations. The bylaw will be a set of standards these operations need to meet; it is being designed so there are multiple ways of achieving the standards, depending on the businesses’ unique situation.

The bylaw would be implemented in phases, giving these businesses time to adjust their operations to come into compliance. See the Proposed Implementation Timeline on pages 4-5.

An Implementation Guide is being developed to describe each bylaw requirement. The Metro Vancouver website will provide additional supporting resources and an Officer is available to answer any questions at 604-432-6200.

Metro Vancouver is working closely with stakeholder groups throughout bylaw development to ensure the requirements are fair, practical and achievable.

PROPOSED BYLAW FOR FERMENTATION OPERATIONS

May 2015

Attachment 3


PAGE 2

Revised Fermentation Operations Bylaw RequirementsThis bylaw would apply to any business using yeast to produce alcoholic beverages and discharging up to 300m3 (300 000 L) of wastewater into the sewer within 30 days, including: brew pubs, cottage breweries, micro-breweries, vint-on-premises, wineries, distilleries and u-brews. Requirement 1: Remove solids

When coarse solids like spent grains and fruit, and fine solids suspended in water, like yeast, enter the sewer it stresses the system and costs money to maintain and repair.

This requirement will ensure both coarse and suspended solids are removed from wastewater.

Initial RequirementThe proposed bylaw would use the existing 600 mg/L limit for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) set out in the current Metro Vancouver Sewer Use Bylaw.

Updated Requirementa) The discharge of coarse spent grains or fruit pulp to

the sewer will be prohibited on the date the bylaw is enacted.

b) The maximum concentration of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) shall not exceed 1,200 mg/L

• All operations must comply with this limit no later than twelve (12) months after the proposed bylaw is enacted

Rationale for ChangesThe initial requirement did not specifically address the need to remove coarse solids from wastewater.

To manage the concentration of yeast in wastewater, we are proposing an increase in the maximum TSS limit since operations employing best practices for this sector usually have TSS concentrations between 600 to 800 mg/L. The 1,200 mg/L limit is achievable using best practices and/or adequate wastewater treatment.


PAGE 3

Requirement 2: Install a monitoring point To ensure operators and regulatory staff have accurate knowledge of wastewater quality, they must be able to access wastewater for sampling purposes. A wastewater monitoring point must be located downstream of all treatment.

Initial RequirementA proper monitoring point, to monitor pH and TSS, is required to confirm compliance with the proposed requirements of this bylaw as well as the Sewer Use Bylaw. The monitoring point would provide access to the wastewater prior to mixing with the fermentation operation’s domestic waste.

Metro Vancouver is proposing that a suitable monitoring point would be a sampling point downstream of all process waste that is representative of the final discharge to the sewer.

Updated RequirementA suitable monitoring point that can be accessed during operating hours shall be installed no later than six (6) months after the adoption of this bylaw. A suitable monitoring point would be downstream of all process waste where the sampled wastewater is representative of the final discharge to the sewer.

Rationale for ChangesThe proposed change is to allow operators additional time to install a monitoring point if one is not already in place.

Requirement 3: Monitor and treat wastewater pH Cleaning and sterilizing activities for fermentation operations can impact the pH levels of wastewater which can damage pipes and can cause chemical imbalances that may be dangerous for workers in the sewer.

This requirement will ensure wastewater is tested regularly and adjusted to meet appropriate pH levels.

Initial RequirementMetro Vancouver is proposing that wastewater from cleaning and sterilizing activities be tested for pH and adjusted to meet the Sewer Use Bylaw requirement for pH between 5.5 and 10.5 prior to discharging to the sewer.

Updated RequirementEach operation is required to monitor and record the pH from the monitoring point at a minimum of once per day during cleaning and sterilizing activities. The pH level should be measured immediately onsite using a pH meter.

pH monitoring should begin once the monitoring point is installed, to determine whether the wastewater complies with the Sewer Use Bylaw range of 5.5 and 10.5.

Nine (9) months after bylaw enactment, all operations would be required to submit a pH Characterization Report using the form provided by Metro Vancouver, showing their daily pH results.

If the Characterization Report shows an operation is discharging wastewater with a pH outside the 5.5 and 10.5 range they will be required to submit a Compliance Plan to Metro Vancouver or City of Vancouver regulatory staff by twelve (12) months after bylaw enactment. The

continued on page 4

Fermentation Equipment

Treatment Equipment

Monitoring Point

Washrooms Sewer

Monitoring point to be provided downstream of all process wastewater


Requirement: Metro Vancouver enacts the bylaw 1 - 6 months 6 - 9 months 9 - 12 months 12 - 18 months After 18 months

1. Remove solids Discharge of coarse solids prohibited

Max. concentration of TSS must not exceed 1,200 mg/l by 12 months after bylaw enacted

Requirement is ongoing Requirement is ongoing

2. Install a monitoring pointSuitable monitoring point must be installed no later than 6 months after bylaw enacted

Requirement is ongoing Requirement is ongoing Requirement is ongoing Requirement is ongoing

3. Monitor and treat wastewater pH

Monitor wastewater pH at least once per day

At 9 months, all operators submit pH Characterization Report to MV

If pH is out of compliance, operator submits Compliance Plan by 12 months

Wastewater pH must be in compliance by 18 months after bylaw enacted

Requirement is ongoing

4. Keep records Record hl/month Record hl/month and daily pH testing dates, times and results Requirement is ongoing Requirement is ongoing Requirement is ongoing

5. Pay regulatory fees Fee will be invoiced within first 6 months after bylaw enacted Requirement is ongoing

6. Pay treatment feesFee will be invoiced within the first 6 months of each calendar year beginning in 2016

Requirement is ongoing

7. Off-spec product Obtain permission to discharge off-spec from regulatory staff Requirement is ongoing Requirement is ongoing Requirement is ongoing Requirement is ongoing Requirement is ongoing

PAGE 4 PAGE 5

Proposed Implementation Timeline

Compliance Plan would detail the works and/or procedures the operator will undertake to treat the wastewater to fall within the pH range.

Wastewater pH levels for all operations must be in compliance eighteen (18) months after the adoption of the bylaw.

Rationale for ChangesThe proposed changes are to allow operators the time to monitor the pH of their wastewater and determine the treatment methods that best suit their operations.

Requirement 3, continued Requirement 4: Keep records Records are required so regulatory staff can confirm operators are complying with the bylaw when they inspect the facility. Records can also assist operators understand their wastewater quality over time.

Initial RequirementThe following processes would require record keeping to comply with the proposed bylaw:

• Method of removing solids

• Hectolitres (hl) of product being produced

• Treatment of kettle wastewater and kettle washwater

• Method of treatment to remove yeast residue

• Method of pH measurement

• Dates and results of pH testing

Metro Vancouver is proposing that the records be kept at the facility and available for inspection for a minimum two-year period.

Updated RequirementOperators would be required to keep the following records:

• Hectolitres (hl) of product being produced per calendar month

• Dates, times and results of pH testing

Operators would begin recording monthly hl of product as soon as the bylaw is enacted. Record keeping of daily pH testing must begin no later than six (6) months after bylaw enactment.

Metro Vancouver is proposing records be kept at the facility and available for inspection for a minimum two-year period.

Rationale for ChangesMetro Vancouver has streamlined the reporting requirements.

Requirement 5: Pay regulatory fees

Initial RequirementTo recover the costs to regulate fermentation operations under this bylaw, an annual administration fee of $200 is being proposed.

The regulatory fees will be invoiced within the first six (6) months after the enactment of the bylaw and annually thereafter.

Updated RequirementNo revisions

Rationale for ChangesThis fee is designed to recover the costs of inspection, sampling and analysis costs and is consistent with the direction Metro Vancouver is going with other sector-specific bylaws.


PAGE 6

Requirement 6: Pay treatment fees

Initial RequirementCost recovery for treatment will be based on estimates of the discharge volume and quality derived from the amount of product produced and industry discharge quality standards. The same method would be used for distilleries and wineries based on their production data and industry standards.

Updated RequirementAll fermentation operations would be required to pay an annual amount for treatment fees based on their annual production of product. The proposed annual fees are summarized in the fee table (see sidebard, at right).

Treatment fees will be invoiced within the first 6 months of each calendar year beginning in 2016.

Metro Vancouver will determine the appropriate fee category based on BC Liquor Distribution Branch records or an operator’s records if it is a new facility.

Rationale for ChangesThe fee structure has been simplified.

These charges are required to recover the costs of treating wastewater from fermentation operations. Fermentation operations are unique in their higher concentration of suspended solids despite onsite treatment. This is why it is necessary to charge a treatment fee. Any fermentation operation of any size pays treatment fees, either through a bylaw or a permit.

The significantly lower volume of wastewater produced annually by distilleries is reflected in the proposed fee.

METRO VANCOUVER TREATMENT FEE TABLE

(Note: Municipal Sanitary Sewer Fees are not included in these fees)

BREWERIES & WINERIESProduction (hl) Annual Treatment Fees

0 – 500 $ 250

501 – 1000 $ 375

1001 – 1500 $ 625

1501 - 2000 $ 875

2001 - 2500 $ 1,125

2501 - 3000 $ 1,375

3001 - 3500 $ 1,625

> 3500 $ 2,000

DISTILLERIES

An annual $100 treatment fee would be charged to distilleries.

For operations with mixed production (e.g. brewery and distillery at one site), the treatment fees will be based on the product with the larger production in litres.


PAGE 7

Requirement 7: Authorized discharge of off‑spec product

Initial RequirementNone

Updated RequirementPrior to the discharge of off-spec product to sewer, the operator would be required to contact Metro Vancouver or City of Vancouver regulatory staff to authorize the discharge of this material to sewer.

Rationale for ChangesOff-spec product (bad batches) is very high in Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) which can negatively impact the region’s wastewater treatment plants. Regulatory staff will determine whether the discharge is appropriate and if there are specific requirements for discharging the off-spec product.


CONTACT US Metro Vancouver Information Centre: 604-432-6200 (Monday to Friday from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm)

Website:For additional information on this project, or to sign up for project updates, please visit www.metrovancouver.org and search: “Fermentation Operations Bylaw.”

Email: [email protected] (please include ”Fermentation Operations Bylaw” in the subject line)

Engaging with stakeholders throughout bylaw development and implementationMetro Vancouver and the City of Vancouver have been meeting face-to-face with brewers, distillers and vintners at their place of business to understand their operations and perspectives.

A stakeholder workshop was held in December 2014 with 30 brewers, distillers, vintners from across the region to present the proposed requirements and listen to their feedback. Metro Vancouver also conducted an online survey to obtain input from stakeholders unable to attend the workshop.

As a result of stakeholder feedback, Metro Vancouver has revised the initial requirements to ensure they are fair, practical and achievable while safeguarding the treatment system.

A second stakeholder workshop is taking place May 14, 2015 to present the revised requirements and receive final input before presenting the proposed bylaw to the Metro Vancouver Board for approval late 2015.

Metro Vancouver welcomes comments on the proposed requirements and is available to discuss the bylaw with stakeholders by phone: 604-432-6200 or by email: [email protected].

PAGE 8


Consultation Activities Summary Table

Consultation Activities Summary Table for Fermentation Operations Bylaw

Date Audience Activity Subject Supporting Materials

August 20 2014

Parallel 49 Brewery, Vancouver

Site Tour Discussed current practices, informed of bylaw and asked about preferred timing and format for consultation

Fermentation Operations Issue Paper

August 20 2014

Central City Brewery, Surrey



September 2014

Industry Stakeholders

Created website and video

Presented proposed requirements and rationale for regulation, consultation timeline, and Issue Paper on dedicated web page

Web page

Video

September 11 2014

R&B Brewery, Vancouver



September 11 2014

REAC Liquid Waste Sub Committee (LWSC)

Presentation Presented consultation schedule and proposed bylaw requirements

Presentation

October 2014

Fermentation Operations

Survey Asked for input on preferred meeting time and format

Web page

October 3 2014

Liberty Distillery, Vancouver



October 9 2014

BC Craft Brewers Guild

Meeting Discussed Fermentation Operations and role of Guild

Attachment 4


http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/liquid-waste/consultations/fermentation-operations/Pages/default.aspx


December 3 2014

Industry Stakeholders (30 attendees)

Stakeholder Meeting #1

Present proposed requirements and receive input

Presentation slides

Feedback Form

Meeting Summary

December 2014 – January 2015

Industry Stakeholders (13 responses received)

Online Survey Input on proposed requirements – content parallel to Stakeholder Meeting #1

Online Survey

March 18 2015

BC Craft Brewers Guild

Meeting Update on bylaw development process and coordination with City of Vancouver water conservation initiative

n/a

May 14 2015

Industry Stakeholders (13 attendees)

Stakeholder Meeting #2

Present revised requirements and receive input

Presentation

Fact Sheet

Meeting Summary

What We Heard Dec – Jan Consultation Summary

May-June 2015

Industry Stakeholders (6 responses received)

Online Surveys

Input on revised requirements – content parallel to Stakeholder Meeting #2

Process survey asking respondents to provide comment on consultation process

Online Surveys



May 28 2015

Stakeholders Business of Craft Beer event at Craft Beer Week

Presenting proposed requirements in conjunction with City of Vancouver, who also presented on water conservation best practices

June 18 2015

REAC – LWSC Presentation Presented consultation results and revised bylaw requirements

Presentation

September 4 2015

REAC Presentation at REAC meeting

Provided a presentation to update REAC members on the bylaw in advance of moving forward to Utilities Committee

Presentation

September 18 2015

Regional Planning Advisory Committee (RPAC)

Presentation at RPAC meeting

Per a request from REAC, informed RPAC about the bylaw and the need for municipal staff to make new fermentation operators aware of the requirements

Presentation

October 21 2015

Focus group (7 fermentation operators)

Review of Implementation Guide

Review to ensure Guide clearly articulates the bylaw requirements in plain language

Implementation Guide

12051594


Summary of Changes to Requirements Based on Stakeholder Input

Over the course of the engagement process (summer 2014 to fall 2015) the proposed bylaw requirements evolved based on stakeholder input and ongoing analysis by Metro Vancouver staff. As a result of stakeholder feedback, Metro Vancouver revised the initial requirements to ensure they are fair, practical and achievable while safeguarding the treatment system.

Changes made to the bylaw based on stakeholder input include:

• Streamlined requirements for record keeping;• Added additional time for operators to monitor and adjust practices;• Simplification of the fee structure;• Staging the requirements for operators to contact Metro Vancouver in advance of releasing off-

spec discharge into the sewer system; and• Committed to provide support to stakeholders to implement the requirements through an

Implementation Guide.

A more detailed description of how the requirements changed as a result of stakeholder input is presented below.

Requirement 1: Remove solids

Initial Requirement

The proposed Bylaw would use the existing 600 mg/L limit for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) set out in the current Metro Vancouver Sewer Use Bylaw.

Stakeholder Input

Stakeholders identified that the standard contained in the Sewer Use Bylaw may be challenging to meet in existing breweries. Stakeholders also requested guidance on best practices and successful examples meeting these requirements.

Metro Vancouver conducted further analysis of industry practice and determined that operations employing best practices for this sector usually have TSS concentrations between 600 to 800 mg/L. Staff determined a level that would meet the needs of the sewer system while also ensuring that a wide range of solutions could be employed by industry, and amended the initial requirement to 1,200 mg/L. This level should be achievable using best practices and/or adequate wastewater treatment, and is already met or exceeded by many operators.

Attachment 5


Updated Requirement

The maximum concentration of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) shall not exceed 1,200 mg/L. All operations must comply with this limit no later than twelve months after the proposed bylaw is enacted. The proposed compliance date is now January 1, 2017.

The discharge of coarse spent grains or fruit pulp to the sewer will be prohibited on the date the bylaw is enacted.

Requirement 2: Install a sampling point

Initial Requirement

A proper sampling point, to monitor pH and TSS, is required to confirm compliance with the proposed requirements of this bylaw as well as the Sewer Use Bylaw. The sampling point would provide access to the wastewater prior to mixing with the fermentation operation’s domestic waste.

Metro Vancouver is proposing that a suitable sampling point would be downstream of all process waste that is representative of the final discharge to the sewer.

Stakeholder Input

Stakeholders requested additional time to install a sampling point if one is not already in place. Many breweries identified that this requirement is easier to meet during the time of construction and can be more challenging as a retrofit for existing breweries.

Stakeholders also requested specific guidance on the sampling point location. An explanatory diagram has been added to the Implementation Guide.

The proposed compliance date for installation of the sampling point is now July 1, 2016.

Updated Requirement

A sampling point that can be accessed during operating hours shall be installed no later than six months after the adoption of this bylaw. A suitable monitoring point would be downstream of all process waste where the sampled wastewater is representative of the final discharge to the sewer.

Requirement 3: Monitor and treat wastewater pH

Initial Requirement

Wastewater from cleaning and sterilizing activities must be tested for pH and adjusted to meet the Sewer Use Bylaw requirement for pH between 5.5 and 10.5 prior to discharging to the sewer.


Stakeholder Input

Stakeholders identified that they each have different processes in place and require lead time to determine the treatment methods that best suit their operations.

Updated Requirement

Each operation is required to monitor and record the pH from the monitoring point at a minimum of once per day on the days that cleaning and sterilizing activities take place. The pH level should be measured immediately onsite using a pH meter.

Monitoring of pH should begin once the monitoring point is installed to determine whether the wastewater complies with the Sewer Use Bylaw range of 5.5 and 10.5.

Nine months after bylaw enactment, all operations would be required to submit a pH Characterization Report using the form provided by Metro Vancouver, showing their daily pH results. The date for the submission of the pH Characterization Report is October 31, 2016.

If the Characterization Report shows an operation is discharging wastewater with a pH outside the 5.5 and 10.5 range they will be required to submit a Compliance Plan to Metro Vancouver or City of Vancouver regulatory staff by twelve months after bylaw enactment. The Compliance Plan would detail the works and/or procedures the operator will undertake to treat the wastewater to fall within the pH range. The date for the submission of the Compliance Plan is January 31, 2017.

Wastewater pH levels for all operations must be in compliance eighteen months after the adoption of the bylaw. The pH compliance date is July 1, 2017.

Requirement 4: Keep records

Initial Requirement

The following processes would require record keeping to comply with the proposed bylaw:

• Method of removing solids • Hectolitres (hl) of product being produced • Treatment of kettle wastewater and kettle washwater • Method of treatment to remove yeast residue • Method of pH measurement • Dates and results of pH testing

Metro Vancouver is proposing that the records be kept at the facility and available for inspection for a minimum two-year period.


Stakeholder Input

Operators requested a simplified record keeping process and streamlined the reporting requirements. Where feasible, Metro Vancouver will use data already provided by operators to other government agencies (BC Liquor Distribution Branch or Canada Revenue Agency). A standardized form will also be provided to operators to further simplify record keeping and will be provided on Metro Vancouver’s website.

Updated Requirement

Operators would be required to keep the following records:

• Hectolitres (hl) of product being produced per calendar month• Dates, times and results of pH testing

Operators would begin recording monthly hl of product as soon as the bylaw is enacted. Record keeping of daily pH testing must begin no later than six months after bylaw enactment. The date to begin pH record keeping is July 1, 2016.

Metro Vancouver is proposing records be kept at the facility and available for inspection for a minimum two- year period.

Requirement 5: Pay regulatory fees

Initial Requirement

To recover the costs to regulate fermentation operations under this bylaw, an annual administration fee of $200 is being proposed.

The regulatory fees will be invoiced within the first six months after the enactment of the bylaw and annually thereafter.

Stakeholder Input

Some stakeholders wanted assurance that they are not being unfairly charged when compared to other sectors, such as restaurants. Others requested that costs be recovered through other means (e.g. general tax revenue) and others responded that the fee level appeared reasonable.

Metro Vancouver responded that this fee is designed to recover the costs of inspection, sampling and analysis costs and is consistent with the direction Metro Vancouver is going with other sector-specific bylaws.

Updated Requirement

Clarification on the rationale was provided to stakeholders. No revisions were made to this requirement.


Requirement 6: Pay treatment fees

Initial Requirement

Cost recovery for treatment will be based on estimates of the discharge volume and quality derived from the amount of product produced and industry discharge quality standards. The same method would be used for distilleries and wineries based on their production data and industry standards.

Treatment fees were proposed to be calculated based on a formula and would be different for each business.

Stakeholder Input

Stakeholders requested that if industry performs better than expected that this would be tracked and that fee calculations would be lowered accordingly. Metro Vancouver committed to reviewing the fees once several years of data is available.

Stakeholders identified that the formula-based approach seemed complicated. Metro Vancouver categorized fees into groups (ranges) based on volumes produced rather than requiring a fee calculation for each facility. The calculated fees are presented in Figure 1 below.

Distilleries also identified that they produce a significantly lower volume of wastewater than breweries. This is reflected in the proposed fee.

Updated Requirement

All fermentation operations are be required to pay an annual amount for treatment fees based on their annual production of product. The proposed annual fees are summarized in the fee table.

Treatment fees will be invoiced within the first six months of each calendar year beginning in 2016.

Metro Vancouver will determine the appropriate fee category based on BC Liquor Distribution Branch records or an operator’s records if it is a new facility.


Figure 1 - Treatment Fee Table

Requirement 7: Authorized discharge of off-spec product

Initial Requirement

A requirement for obtaining permission to discharge off-spec product was not proposed initially.

Proposed Requirement

Prior to the discharge of off-spec product to sewer, the operator would be required to contact Metro Vancouver or City of Vancouver regulatory staff to authorize the discharge of any off-spec product to the sewer.

Rationale for Adding this Requirement

Off-spec product “bad batches” is very high in Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) which can negatively impact the region’s wastewater treatment plants. In situations where the system is stressed, Metro Vancouver staff can recommend specific requirements related to volume and timing of the release for off-spec discharge that will reduce the risk to the sewer system.


Stakeholder Input

In general there are few “bad batches”. Stakeholders requested a mechanism to provide direction on how to dispose of bad batches that is timely and efficient. In response, Metro Vancouver developed a stepped process where smaller volumes can be discharged immediately and reported afterwards.

Updated Requirement

Based on feedback on Requirement 7, Metro Vancouver looked at how this requirement could be streamlined for operators. Metro Vancouver is proposing the following requirements with respect to the disposal of off-spec product:

• Off-spec over 100 litres and under 2,000 litres per day: notify Metro Vancouver or the Cityof Vancouver by phone or email and discharge. No response is required from MetroVancouver or the City of Vancouver. Record the date, time and volume of off-spec in theappropriate section of the Monthly Reporting Form.

• Off-spec over 2,000 litres per day: contact Metro Vancouver or the City of Vancouver byphone or email and obtain authorization before discharging to the sewer. Record the date,time and volume of off-spec in the appropriate section of the Monthly Reporting Form.Metro Vancouver/City of Vancouver will typically respond to your notification within one totwo business days.

These requirements allow operators to immediately discharge smaller batches while protecting the integrity of the sewer system. In practice, operators may also choose to split the release of a batch to the sewer over multiple days.

Implementation Guide

Based on interest from stakeholders, Metro Vancouver has also developed an Implementation Guide describing the bylaw requirements for stakeholders. The guide will be made available through Metro Vancouver’s website and will be sent to stakeholders at the end of November 2015.

12156121


12250129

To: GVS&DD Board of Directors From: Chris Plagnol, Corporate Officer, Board and Information Services Date: November 12, 2015 Meeting Date: November 27, 2015 Subject: GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 292, 2015

RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board: a) Pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost

Charge Amending Bylaw No. 292, 2015. b) Direct the Corporate Officer to forward a certified copy of Greater Vancouver Sewerage and

Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 292, 2015 to the Local Government Infrastructure and Finance Branch.

PURPOSE To seek final adoption of Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 292, 2015 to amend Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010. BACKGROUND At its September 18, 2015 meeting, the GVS&DD Board amended its previously decided resolution of May 15, 2015 regarding the effective date of GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014 by striking the phrase “October 1, 2015”, and replacing it with the phrase “45 calendar days after Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 292, 2015 is finally adopted by the Board”. The Board then resolved to give three readings to Bylaw 292 and to forward the Bylaw to the Inspector of Municipalities for statutory approval. Statutory approval of the Bylaw was given on November 5, 2015 and the Board may now consider final adoption of the Bylaw. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 292, 2015 makes amendments to definitions and clarifies that Bylaw 254 does not apply to secondary suites and laneway houses. This provides certainty to building permit applicants and ensures consistent application across the region. The revision of the effective date will ensure that the exemptions for secondary suites and laneway houses provided for by Amending Bylaw 292 are in full effect when municipalities are to start collecting under the new provisions which comes into effect 45 calendar days after the adoption of Amending Bylaw 292 which is January 11, 2016. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage

District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 292, 2015.

Section G 2.1


2. The GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated November 12, 2015, titled “GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 292, 2015”.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Development cost charges pay for growth‐related GVS&DD capital projects. The current GVS&DD DCC Bylaw sets out rates for both residential and commercial developments in each sewerage area. Approval of the amending bylaw in Alternative 1 as presented would ensure that the application of regional DCCs to secondary suites and laneway houses is consistent across the region, although not necessarily consistent with every municipality’s DCC bylaw. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The proposed amending bylaw was considered by the Board at its September 18, 2015 meeting where it was given three readings, and subsequently given statutory approval by the Inspector of Municipalities. Once the Amending Bylaw is adopted, the new definitions in Bylaw 254 will come into effect in 45 days with an effective date of January 11, 2016. It is recommended that the Board approve Alternative 1. Attachments: 1. Statutory Approval dated November 5, 2015 2. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw

No. 292, 2015 3. Report dated November 7, 2014 titled “GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No.

286, 2014”


12250129

ATTACHMENT 1


12250129

ATTACHMENT 2


12250129


12250129

To: GVS&DD Board of Directors From: Chris Plagnol, Director, Board and Information Services, Legal and Legislative

Services/Corporate Officer Date: November 7, 2014 Meeting Date: November 28, 2014 Subject: GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014

RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014.

PURPOSE To seek final adoption of Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014 (the Bylaw) being a bylaw to provide the GVS&DD Board with a summary of housekeeping amendments to the GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 (the “GVS&DD DCC Bylaw”). BACKGROUND At its July 25, 2014 meeting, the GVS&DD Board resolved to give three readings to the Bylaw and to forward it to the Inspector of Municipalities for statutory approval. Statutory approval of the Bylaw was given on November 5, 2014 and the Board may now consider final adoption of the Bylaw. DISCUSSION Under the Local Government Act for municipalities, and under the GVS&DD Act for GVS&DD, every person who obtains approval of a subdivision or a building permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of a building or structure must pay DCC’s. Both the Local Government Act and GVS&DD Act include exemptions from the payment of DCC’s in specific circumstances, such as when the value of the work is less than $50,000.

In 2004, the Province of British Columbia amended the Local Government Act to remove the statutory exemption that applied if the development involved the issuance of a building permit for the construction, alteration or extension of a residential building containing fewer than four self‐contained dwelling units. Similarly, the Province amended the GVS&DD Act in 2006.

Since 2004, some member municipalities have amended or adopted new DCC bylaws to remove the exemption as it pertains to municipal DCCs. To update the GVS&DD DCC Bylaw, amendments have been made to be consistent with that direction and deleting the exemption concerning building permits issued for the construction of fewer than 4 dwelling units from the GVS&DD DCC Bylaw.

Amendments have also been made to certain defined terms in the GVS&DD DCC Bylaw. The main changes are to the definitions of “Apartment Residential Use”, “Townhouse Residential Use”, and

ATTACHMENT 3


Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014

Page 7 of 2

“Single Family Residential Use” (this term now proposed to be called “Dwelling Residential Use”) to facilitate the collection of DCC’s for all types of developments and numbers of dwelling units.

ALTERNATIVES

1. That the GVS&DD Board pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014.

2. That the GVS&DD Board reject final reading of Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The amendments to the existing bylaw will ensure that the DCC’s are collected as the program intends. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The Bylaw has been given statutory approval by the Inspector of Municipalities, and as recommended in alternative one, can now be considered for final adoption. Attachments: 1. Statutory Approval 2. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw

No. 286, 2014


12250129

ATTACHMENT 1



Page 1 of 3

GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT AMENDING BYLAW NO. 286, 2014

A Bylaw to Amend “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010”.

WHEREAS:

A. The Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District has adopted “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010”, a bylaw imposing development cost charges on every person who obtains approval of a subdivision or a building permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of a building or structure from a Member Municipality; and

B. The Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District wishes to amend the “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010”.

NOW THEREFORE the Board of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:

1. The “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010” is amended by:

(a) deleting the definitions of “Apartment Residential Use”, “Single Family Residential Use”, and “Townhouse Residential Use” in their entirety from section 3.1, inserting the following definitions each in their correct alphabetical order, and re‐lettering the definitions in section 3.1 accordingly:

“Apartment Dwelling Unit” means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that consists or may consist of two or more storeys and contains or may contain four or more Dwelling Units, whereby the building or structure has a principal exterior entrance used in common for access to the Dwelling Units. Apartment Dwelling Unit does not include Dwelling Units that are Townhouse Dwelling Units;

“Residential Dwelling Unit” means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that contains or may contain up to three Dwelling Units; “Townhouse Dwelling Unit” means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that contains or may contain four or more Dwelling Units, whereby each Dwelling Unit has a direct exterior entrance;

(b) deleting the definitions of the following terms in section 3.1 in their entirety and replacing them with the following definitions:

“Dwelling Unit” means one or more rooms comprising a self‐contained unit that is used or intended to be used for living and sleeping purposes and for which are provided cooking facilities, or the facilities for installation of

ATTACHMENT 2



Page 2 of 3

cooking facilities, and one or more bathrooms having a sink or wash‐basin, a water closet, and a shower or bath;

“Subdivision” includes a division of land into two or more Parcels, whether by plan, apt descriptive words or otherwise under the Land Title Act or the Strata Property Act, the consolidation of two or more Parcels of land, and phased strata plans;

(c) deleting the terms “Apartment Residential Use”, “Single Family Residential Use”, and “Townhouse Residential Use”, and replacing them with the terms “Apartment Dwelling Unit”, “Residential Dwelling Unit”, and “Townhouse Dwelling Unit”, respectively, in the definition of “Combination Development” in subsection 3.1(c);

(d) deleting the terms “Apartment Residential Use”, “Single Family Residential Use”, and “Townhouse Residential Use”, and replacing them with the terms “Apartment Dwelling Unit”, “Residential Dwelling Unit”, and “Townhouse Dwelling Unit”, respectively, in the definition of “Non‐Residential Use” in subsection 3.1(u);

(e) deleting the terms “Apartment Residential Use”, “Single Family Residential Use”, and “Townhouse Residential Use”, and replacing them with the terms “Apartment Dwelling Unit”, “Residential Dwelling Unit”, and “Townhouse Dwelling Unit”, respectively, in the definition of “Residential Use” in subsection 3.1(cc) as renumbered;

(f) adding the following as section 4.1.1 immediately after section 4.1:

No Exemption. Without limiting the generality of section 4.1, a Building Permit in section 4.1(b) includes a permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of any building or structure that will, after the construction, alteration, or extension, contain one or more Dwelling Units and be put to no other use than the Residential Use in those Dwelling Units.

(g) deleting subsection 4.2(e) in its entirety;

(h) deleting the terms “Apartment Residential Use”, “Single Family Residential Use”, and “Townhouse Residential Use”, and replacing them with the terms “Apartment Dwelling Unit”, “Residential Dwelling Unit”, and “Townhouse Dwelling Unit”, respectively, in section 4.5; and

(i) deleting the terms “Single Family Residential Use”, “Townhouse Residential Use”, and “Apartment Residential Use”, and replacing them with the terms “Residential Dwelling Unit”, “Townhouse Dwelling Unit”, and “Apartment Dwelling Unit”, respectively, under the heading “Description” in section 1 of each of Schedule A, B, C, and D attached to the “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010”.



Page 3 of 3

2. This bylaw shall be cited as "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014”.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this ___25__ day of ___July___ 2014. APPROVED BY THE INSPECTOR OF MUNICIPALITIES this ___5___ day of ___November___ 2014. PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this _____ day of ________ 2014. Greg Moore, Chair Chris Plagnol, Corporate Officer


Documents

Meeting 5 of 8 GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND … · 2015. 11. 27. · 1.1 Region-wide On-site Stormwater Management Baseline Report dated September 22, 2015 from Robert Hicks, Senior