 |
||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
Guide to the Preparation of Regional Solid Waste Management Plans by Regional Districts — Part II
PURPOSE The purpose of this part of the guide is to provide guidelines for designing and undertaking the Stage 1 and Stage 2 planning studies and for the Stage 3 process of putting the plan into a form which will comply with Part 2.
The recommendations, suggestions and comments in the following sections are intended to provide direction to regional districts in the objectives and content of the planning study for this first stage in the preparation of the actual plan document —the description and evaluation of the existing solid waste management system and identification of major options to be evaluated in detail in Stage 2.
53. Geographical and Organizational Setting This section should include a map or maps at a scale appropriate for showing the area to be covered by the plan; the location, name and level of organization of the various municipalities, electoral areas and communities involved in the plan; and the location and contributing area of the existing solid waste handling and disposal facilities. As noted previously, the plan area may include the entire regional district, or the district and a portion or all of an adjacent regional district, or in special cases, one or more of its sub-regions.
Since the pattern and timing of settlement and other land uses will have a significant effect on solid waste management, this section should include the relevant goals, objectives and policies from the following:
This section should contain a description of the economic base of the plan area, both existing and projected, with particular reference to the existing and projected solid waste generation capacity of specific economic entities and activities. Relevant objectives and policies from existing Economic Development Plans should also be included.
This section should contain a general description of the climate, major landforms, terrain, soils, surface watercourses, groundwater levels, airsheds, vegetation and wildlife, with particular reference to those factors which pose constraints to the siting, economics or operation of solid waste management facilities or programs.
58. Characteristics of Solid Waste Stream (1) A detailed knowledge of the make-up of the regional solid waste stream is fundamental to the 4R management strategy, at both the regional and provincial levels. This section should therefore contain an analysis of the composition of the solid waste stream, both at the baseline date of 1990 and at the current date, by weight and volume, from the following sources of municipal solid waste:
(2) BC Environment is responsible for developing provincial management strategies for the biomedical waste and household hazardous products (HHP) which are generated by households and firms whose waste stream is analyzed under (1). For the sake of the comprehensiveness of the waste stream composition study, biomedical waste and HHP should be included in the analysis to provide information for education programs aimed at reducing the generation of such wastes and to provide the basis for the eventual regional management strategies that may be required to complement the provincial strategies. (3) Projected solid waste generation, based on economic and population projections, and existing generation trends, should also be included. (4) Another class of solid waste that should be analyzed and quantified, if part of the regional solid waste stream, is "hard to dispose of" or "nuisance" solid waste, which includes the following:
(5) Since periodic analyses of waste composition will be a valuable tool for monitoring the effect of the plan and assessing the need for new recycling or recovery facilities, each regional district is encouraged to provide for generating this data itself. The ministry has published a series of reports on this subject, including the "Procedural Manual for Municipal Solid Waste Composition Analysis", which sets out the standard procedure to be followed by any local government undertaking such an analysis. A companion document, "Municipal Solid Waste Composition Studies: Summary Report", provides data on the application of the standard procedure to four typical community solid waste streams in B.C. Local governments without the resources to undertake at least the initial study may adopt the waste composition figures of one of the four analyzed waste streams if the waste generation characteristics and community demographics are sufficiently similar. Copies of these reports were distributed to all local governments to be inserted in the Solid Waste Info Kit binder; additional copies may be ordered through the ministry's regional offices. This section should contain descriptions and analyses of the various significant pathways along which MSW is transported from its point of generation to its end use or ultimate disposal, and the collection methods for each, according but not limited to the following:
(1) This section should contain information about the various methods of processing and disposing of MSW after collection, including the following:
(2) In addition to identifying existing landfill sites, the study should identify the location and environmental status of all closed landfill sites, including historical sites, private landfills, illegal dumps and landfills on federally administered lands which are on sites adjacent to provincially administered lands. (3) Each method identified in (1) should be described and analyzed in terms of, but not limited to the following elements, as applicable:
(1) In terms of the administrative structure, this section should describe any existing or proposed solid waste management bylaws and regulations. Specified area bylaws should be described in terms of population served, location and functions. A listing and brief description of all existing waste management permits should also be included. (2) In terms of financial structure, this section should include total solid waste management system costs, including projected facilities. The funding of each system element should be described, including revenues and cost recovery mechanisms such as general taxation, specified areas, local service areas, user-pay strategies and government grants or loans. Finally, the economic viability of facilities or operations and future financial requirements should be assessed.
(1) The description of the existing solid waste management system should conclude with an identification of regional and local issues that need to be addressed in the RSWMP, and an identification of issues which may or will require the involvement of adjacent jurisdictions or other levels of government for resolution. (2) While waste reduction objectives are common to all regional districts, focussing the planning process on regional issues as well is just as important and can foster ownership of the planning process by plan area residents. The report should contain a set of regional objectives based on the issues identified, and in appropriate categories which facilitate identification of options and development of strategies. (1) This section should contain a brief description of the various major options available or practical at the regional level for achieving regional objectives and for managing the components of the solid waste stream using one or several of the 3Rs plus recovery and residual management. The range of options should reflect all the stages that a material or product passes through from actual use to final disposal. For reduction, reuse and to some extent recycling, detailed identification of options may be deferred to Stage 2 where it may be accomplished in conjunction with detailed evaluation. For recovery, perhaps the only options to be identified at this stage are whether or not to evaluate recovery programs, and, if so, the suitable technologies and timing. (2) Regarding residual management, the study should identify a number of potential landfill and / or incineration sites, based on selection criteria such as the following:
Once the various options have been identified, they should be given a preliminary appraisal, to determine which ones should be recommended for detailed evaluation in Stage 2, and to identify information gaps that should be addressed by the Stage 2 planning studies. The appraisal of options should be based on compliance with the environmental guiding principles and specific criteria which relate to the goals and objectives for the plan. These should include, but not be limited to:
The recommendations, suggestions and comments in this part of the guide are intended to provide direction to regional districts in the design and undertaking of the planning studies for this second stage in the preparation of the plan document - evaluating solid waste management options in detail, assessing the impacts of the preferred options, and recommending which options that should be included in the plan.
The main issue regarding promotional and educational programs is whether or not to supplement existing or proposed provincial or federal programs with programs designed specifically for the plan area. The greatest relevance of such programs will be in the areas of reduction, reuse and recycling. The study should consider the appropriate target audiences for promotional and educational campaigns, and the coordination and phasing of the latter in order to complement management strategies.
(1) The study should determine if there are means available at the regional district or municipal level to reduce the amount of solid waste created and encourage the reuse of materials or products. The reduction and reuse programs listed below should be considered as possible options, and the list is not intended to be exhaustive:
(2) For some of these programs, especially public awareness education and school curricula, the ministry has or may soon have resources and material available which would be useful to local governments implementing these programs. (3) The study should evaluate local waste reduction options and recommend the suitability of each option for the local community and its priority. Viable waste reduction programs should be explored and recommended, including specific reduction goals or targets, means of monitoring the achievement of those goals and targets, projected costs and an education component aimed at all generators of solid waste.
(1) While the above programs can have significant effects, another effective way to promote reduction and reuse is to encourage provincial and federal programs. The plan can influence policies at these levels, and the study should consider which recommendations, based on the solid waste stream characteristics of the plan area, should be made to senior governments. (2) The plan can also encourage product stewardship by the manufacturers of products which enter the waste stream, either directly through local retailers or producers of the product, or indirectly through encouraging action by the provincial or federal government.
68. Solid Waste Stream Targets (1) Based on detailed knowledge of the regional solid waste stream, the study should determine which sources, types or classes of solid waste could be targeted for recycling programs. For example, source could be commercial, class could be paper, and type could include ledger, newsprint or corrugated cardboard. Each of these targets may require a different approach or management strategy, including how soon management efforts should be directed at a particular target. A further explanation of waste targets is included in Section 100. (2) The list of targets for which a strategy should be developed should include the following recyclable materials as defined in the act:
(3) It is important to realize that with respect to this definition, Section 16(2) of the act enables the regional district to control the storage of recyclable material but is not intended to force the regional district to store materials identified on the above list regardless of storage capacity, transportation costs, or availability of markets. However, management strategies for these materials should be included and justified in the plan. (4) For the purpose of determining the full list of materials to be targeted by RSWMP strategies, the generic definition of "recyclable" from section 2 of this guide may be used — "recyclable" refers to a product or substance, after it is no longer usable in its present form, that can be diverted from the solid waste stream through a widely available and economically viable collection, processing and marketing system, and used in the manufacture of a new product. The cost of transporting recyclables to a market is included in the conditions for recyclability, and becomes a determining factor if there is insufficient storage capacity to accumulate materials until unit transportation costs are affordable. (5) The above definition suggests that the target list will differ from region to region and will depend on the local importance of impediments such as low quantity available, cost or difficulty of separation and/or collection; extremely high transportation costs; limited physical or financial access to processing technology; and very unstable and/or limited markets. (6) The list of materials, in addition to those listed above, which are recyclable in some part of British Columbia includes the following:
(7) In late 1994, major impediments to recycling existed for the following "hard to dispose of " or "nuisance" materials:
(8) As well as recommending a list of targets, the study should recommend a process for modifying the list between scheduled plan revisions. If no provisions are specified in the plan for changing the list, any significant changes may require a plan amendment.
(1) The strategies for the RSWMP target list should be based on the following variables:
(2) A major class of solid waste which should be given considerable attention is compostable material, including kitchen scraps, yard and most land clearing debris, some paper, food processing residues, septage and sewage biosolids and some of the wood in demolition and construction debris. This class alone can account for 30 - 35 % by weight of the solid waste stream. Its diversion would simplify management of the remainder, especially regarding its bulk, attractiveness to wildlife, impact of leachate on soil and groundwater quality, and generation of landfill gas. (3) An important strategy that should be part of all RSWMPs is to encourage citizens to become responsible for their own organic wastes through backyard composting. Backyard composting has proven to be one of the most cost effective approaches to waste reduction in the short term and probably will generate long term educational benefits as well. At this level, composting is clearly a reduction strategy. 4) Composting as a recycling strategy will involve a central composting facility. Its primary feedstock should be clean compostables collected from the ICI sector, augmented by collection of separated compostable organic material that for reasons of type, size or volume cannot be composted easily at the household level. Composting technology options range in complexity from open windrows to enclosed in-vessel systems. The ministry (and increasingly the market place as well) encourages the use of clean feedstocks in order to produce the most environmentally beneficial and highest quality product possible. A central facility can be planned to compost a single feedstock such as yard waste or a combination such as wood chips, ICI compostables, and domestic sludge and septage. (5) Recyclables generated by an entire sector are an appropriate subject for a separate management strategy. The ICI sector in particular is one that should be addressed by most if not all plans. This sector generates about 50 % of the MSW stream, its output of waste and recyclables is much more homogeneous in nature than the residential sector, and the number of generators is more manageable. Just as important, generators in this sector are inherently much more responsive to economic instruments such as user-pay programs. (6) Even in areas outside the Lower Mainland and southern Vancouver Island, certain ICI wastes and recyclables such as DLC debris, can have a significant impact on local landfills. Consequently an appropriate strategy for the ICI sector has the potential to achieve a major reduction in waste requiring disposal. The options for such a strategy should definitely include the cooperative purchase or use by adjoining regional districts of equipment such as chippers or shredders for yard waste, demolition wood and land clearing debris. Options for the end use for the processed material include a feedstock for composting or fuel for co-generation facilities. (1) The options to be considered are related to the responsibility for various parts of the strategy. For instance, the recycling operation could be managed and operated by a local government, private firm, community-based non-profit society, or by some combination of those. The most appropriate option may differ according to geographic area or urban/rural character. (2) The options should certainly reflect private sector activities, in keeping with section 21(d)(ii). In most parts of the province, to some degree, private firms operate long-established programs for diverting certain commodities, chiefly metals, from the waste stream. (3) The options for sites or facilities managing recyclable materials or MSW should reflect the authority the regional district will have, once the plan is approved, to specify operating requirements and set and collect fees from the owner or operator of the site or facility. Financial and operational control can be achieved through (a) the regional district's bylaw authority using mechanisms such as recycler and waste stream management licenses, and (b) contracts or some other form of partnership with private firms or municipalities who currently own or operate such facilities. An important issue which should be dealt with whenever a new responsibility arrangement is chosen is the liability for the site up to and beyond the time when responsibility changes. (1) The study should develop and evaluate options for collection of recyclables along each of the pathways analyzed in Stage 1, according to the sources of recyclables and their movement to processing or trans-shipment centres. (2) The major options will be curbside collection versus drop off bins and/or depots, according to targeted recyclables and varying population densities within the plan area. In more densely populated areas, multi-material, curbside collection has been demonstrated to be very effective in achieving high participation and recovery rates. It also promotes environmentally sound lifestyle and attitude changes, largely through convenience to householders and businesses. Drop-off centres are suitable for rural or low density areas, but should also be considered in conjunction with curbside programs, for low density materials such as some plastics and OCC; bulky objects, such as furniture or appliances; and reusable materials. Depending on the way curb-side collection takes place, the quality of the recyclables may be lower than those obtained from a drop-off depot. (3) A growing concern with the costs of curbside collection has put some programs in jeopardy or has induced some jurisdictions to reject curbside collection in favour of depots and/or bins. In order to justify recommending a depot/bin system, which generally has a significantly lower diversion rate than a curbside system, the study should compare the recommended system to a curbside system which is designed to be cost-effective, as suggested in the next paragraphs. (4) Since 'cost-effectiveness' depends on the objectives of the system, a cost-effective curbside collection system is one in which the most appropriate option for each of the following system elements is carefully chosen:
(5) In the past, the 'ideal' curbside collection system included blue boxes with minimal commingling, weekly collection on the same route and day as collection of garbage, limited number of materials accepted, and dedicated collection vehicles with one driver. Recent experience indicates that there is no such thing as an 'ideal' system, although having only one driver appears to be a characteristic of a cost-effective system. (6) Regarding containers, the study should also consider the use of bags or different bins, depending on the kinds of recyclables collected as well as the degree of acceptable commingling. Commingled collection may reduce collection costs but at the expense of higher processing costs or lower quality of recyclables, although certain recyclables may be commingled easier than others. (7) Regarding collection frequency, route and coordination with the refuse collection system, convenience to the householder has been the justification for weekly collection of recyclables on the same day as refuse pickup. However, depending on the time it takes householders to fill a bin and on participation rates, alternate week or bimonthly collection frequency may be successful. Collection routes should be designed according to "macro-routing" principles, such as balancing routes, staff safety in difficult terrain, and minimizing time spent off-route; and to "micro-routing principles, such as reducing driving time and maximizing number of stops per hour. Efficient routes designed with flexibility to respond to generation rates and changes in generation patterns may look completely different than the refuse collection routes. Convenience to householders can be achieved by consistency of collection days, supported by an effective promotion program. (8) A separate fleet for collection of recyclables can indeed be costly. An option which should be explored is co-collection of recyclables and refuse in hybrid trucks, especially in lower-density areas. There is a good argument for an integrated approach of analyzing the collection system for refuse and recyclables together. This is particularly important when volume- or weight-based user-pay systems are to be implemented, since they will change the ratio between the amount of refuse and recyclables collected. The opportunity to take a hard look at the efficiency of the refuse collection system should also be taken. Cost savings effected there can lead to increased funding for collection of recyclables without increasing total collection system costs. (9) The vehicle chosen will also determine crew size or be dependent upon the desired crew size. Experience shows that increasing the number of people on the vehicle may not result in significant increases in the amount that can be collected if most of the time is spent driving from container to container. (10) Collection programs are usually judged financially on a cost per tonne basis, which means that increased efficiency can be achieved by reducing costs or increasing tonnage. The preceding paragraphs have discussed ways to reduce costs. Recent reports indicate that the programs with the lowest cost per tonne are typically those which collected the greatest amount of material per resident. This approach obviously depends on the availability of markets. (11) Finally, the productivity and cost effectiveness of curbside collection programs should be evaluated in the context of the entire system which collects all the materials that the community wishes to recycle. If collection of recyclables is compared to collection of refuse only on a cost per tonne basis, the latter will look more cost-effective as long the tonnage of refuse is greater than that of recyclables. (12) Where an alternative to curbside, multi-material collection is being considered for an area suitable for curbside collection, both the alternative and curbside collection should be evaluated according to the following criteria:
In order to provide the opportunity to recycle to as many plan area residents as possible, two other areas deserve considerable attention — multi-family housing and rural areas,
(1) The study should explore options related to the level of processing to be done for each solid waste target, including equipment, land and labour requirements, and location of processing facilities within the region. Utilization of facilities in another region or sharing major processing equipment should also be evaluated. One option that should be considered by most, if not all regional districts is one or more multi-material recyclable processing centres which can in addition serve as a drop-off centre and marshalling yard for a wider range of materials. (2) Finally, the various means and routes of shipping the recyclables to intermediate or end destinations should be reviewed, recognizing that processing and marketing strategies may predetermine or limit shipping options. The study should identify and document all markets for recyclables, including possible markets for recyclables not handled by existing recyclers, the strengths and weaknesses of those markets; the general demand for recyclables; general and probable future market conditions and the benefits of cooperative marketing associations. The study should recommend the most suitable market for each recyclable, including back-up markets if possible, and pay particular attention to the development of local markets. Local markets will be important for products like compost which will eventually be generated by most communities, and may be the only markets for products such as green glass cullet.
Options to be considered may include the sending of recyclables to or accepting them from adjacent jurisdictions because of geographical factors or the need to achieve economies of scale. Involvement with industry may include:
With regard to other levels of government, the study should examine options available to those governments to facilitate recycling in the region. (1) In order to provide the basis for the evaluation of options for funding and cost recovery mechanisms, the study should estimate the total cost for each of the various options described earlier. (2) The study should examine the options for funding the various components of the recycling system and estimate the amount of income that could be generated from increased landfill tipping fees, and cost recovery mechanisms such as sale of recyclables. Tipping fees for recyclables brought to landfills or resource recycling plants should also be considered, to reflect the fact that there is always a cost to recycling. (3) In addition to exploring the raising of money through general taxation measures, the study should also consider grants and cost-sharing programs available through the provincial and federal governments. However, programs should be designed wherever possible to be sustainable without grants from outside the plan area. The study should examine the most appropriate dates and sequences for introduction of parts of the recycling strategy, including expansion of collection or processing systems to recycle additional solid waste types. The study should also identify any preconditions or precursors that would influence the start of any new phase and any factors that would affect the impact of the phasing schedule. The evaluation of options for recycling should conclude with a determination of the environmental, social and economic impacts of the various options, including intangible as well as tangible impacts. Recovery is an optional element in the process; however, in the more densely populated areas of the province such as the GVRD, waste processing and recovery plants should be considered as a possible way to achieve reduction goals higher than 50%. The study should therefore analyze the feasibility and suitability of recovery facilities in the region, in comparison with management strategies at a higher level of the hierarchy for the specific solid waste type(s), and with regard to the impacts of the recovery facility and those higher level strategies on each other.
(1) If justifiable, the study should look at:
(2) Possible technologies include material recovery systems producing recyclables, compost and/or refuse derived fuel; and incineration, other than simple destruction systems which are only recommended in special circumstances such as remote camps. Markets for certain outputs of recovery facilities, such as steam, should be located fairly close to the facility. Markets for recyclables may be the same, dependent on the quality, as markets already identified for similar material generated by recycling programs. As was done for recycling operations, the study should evaluate the options for which person is responsible for administration, financing and operation of recovery facilities, including joint ownership.
Cooperation with another solid waste management agency can be beneficial, through sharing the high financial cost, taking advantage of economies of scale, and/or responding to geographic proximity factors. Taking advantage of an existing industrial facility may also be possible. The study should therefore carefully examine all possibilities, keeping in mind the rapidly changing technology in resource recovery and more importantly, in the recycling field. As with recycling, the study should estimate the total cost of recovery facilities over their anticipated lifespan. Funding methods should then be examined, along with cost recovery mechanisms such as sale of products or energy and tipping fees. The study should examine the possibilities for using existing facilities. Flexibility in the installation of recovery capacity, through modular design, for example, is desirable in order to respond to changing technology or MSW volume and composition. The environmental, social and economic impacts of recovery options should be examined. In particular, the mutual interaction over time with source separation recycling programs should be assessed, including intangible as well as tangible effects.
The study should estimate the number, size and location of landfill and/or incineration sites required, based on Stage 1 analysis of the life expectancy and integrity of existing sites and on the type and amount of residual MSW that may require disposal under the various options already evaluated. Sites which could fulfil these needs should be selected from the list of potential sites that were identified and given preliminary evaluation in Stage 1. Detailed evaluated in Stage 2 should include, but not be limited to the following:
The study should then recommend the preferred site and backup site(s).
(1) The need for landfills as a component of the local solid waste management plan will have been evaluated in Stage 1 of the planning process. Both existing and new landfills may serve a role in the overall plan. The ministry has introduced new landfill criteria for MSW, the development of which has been in response to the changing values of society and the increased emphasis on protection of the environment. These factors have combined to make the former "Pollution Control Objectives for Municipal Type Discharges in British Columbia" (commonly known as the Red Book) inadequate to fully address current concerns. (2) The purpose of these criteria is to establish minimum siting, design, operational and closure requirements and factors to be considered for all MSW Landfills in British Columbia. These requirements will form the basis of the operational certificates which will replace site permits for MSW landfills, and should be considered in the evaluation of siting and financing options for landfills. (1) The study should evaluate the options for administration, assumption of liability and operation of various disposal system components. With regard to operation of sites and facilities, consideration should be given to the training and certification of operational personnel. (2) With the 1992 amendment of the act, regional districts with an approved plan will be able to control municipal and private landfills, including those accepting only DLC waste, if the regional district decides that doing so is in its interest. The study should explore the options open to the regional district for achieving the desired level of control through waste stream management licenses and partnerships with suitable municipal or private stakeholders. (1) Thermal treatment facilities will normally have been evaluated under recovery options, but there may be situations where thermal treatment of residues to reduce volume and/or toxicity prior to landfilling may be desirable. If so, options related to technology, responsibility for administration and operation, phasing schedule, volume and type of solid waste accepted and location should be evaluated according to:
(2) These options should not include open burning, a practice which will be phased out over time. The study should examine ways to eliminate this practice in regions where it currently occurs, with special consideration given to transfer stations, as noted in the following section.
(1) A major consideration in rural or low-density areas is the replacement of small landfill sites with transfer stations, and the study should review and make use of two reports on this subject "A Review of Rural Waste Management Options", 1990, and "Guidelines for Establishing Transfer Stations", 1994, prepared under contract to and published by BC Environment. (2) Options related to design and location of solid waste transfer stations should be evaluated according, but not necessarily limited to the following:
(3) This study should first determine whether existing or future transfer stations will require an operational certificate or a waste stream management license. The study should then develop and recommend for inclusion in the plan the generic and specific design and operational requirements, utilizing models developed by the ministry if available, which will be incorporated in the appropriate document in the plan implementation stage. (4) Some collection system options are most appropriate in urban areas, and include improvement or modification of existing solid waste collection routes or equipment, particularly in light of reduced volumes as a result of source separation recycling programs. Integration of collection programs for refuse and recyclables should also be considered, along with bylaws and regulations controlling solid waste collection. (5) An important option area that should be considered is volume-based or weight-based user-pay programs for refuse collection. Section 22(2)(b) stresses the importance of user-pay strategies. The simplest form is ensuring that where solid waste management costs are raised by taxation, the actual amount is shown on the tax bill. The next level involves tipping fees at disposal facilities, based on the true cost of such facilities and possibly the funding of recycling programs. The highest level is a slight variation on the last — to charge for the collection of recyclables and refuse at the point of generation and to build in incentives to reduce. At each level, the generator receives more and better information than at the previous level on which to make decisions on the amount and kinds of waste generated. The latter approach has been demonstrated to achieve significant reduction in generated waste wherever it has been implemented. (6) User-pay programs are much easier to introduce in urban areas with fewer unregulated disposal options in the former, and much more acceptable in areas where standard tipping fees are already in place. The fear of unauthorized dumping has usually proved unwarranted, particularly where the user-pay program has been preceded by an effective promotional campaign. However, prohibition on backyard burning should be considered as a complement to user-pay programs, to avoid transferring the problem from the terrestrial to the atmospheric environment. (7) The ministry acknowledges that in many interior regional districts, user-pay programs will have to be introduced one step at a time, using a creative mix of strategies to reflect different population densities and landfill controls. (8) One other issue that may need to be addressed in relation to the collection system is licensing or otherwise controlling waste haulers to ensure that solid waste is hauled to approved facilities. This may be particularly critical where there are sites on federally-administered lands within the plan area that are not under the jurisdiction either of the regional district or the province. As noted earlier, temporary enabling authority to license waste haulers can be provided under the Municipal Act until legislative authority under the WMA is available. Further discussion of this subject may be found in section 111.
The study should examine possibilities for joint operation or cost-sharing of thermal treatment or landfill facilities with industry or other local governments. There may be situations where solid waste generators in one jurisdiction are much closer to a disposal facility in another jurisdiction than to one in their own. As for involvement with other levels of government, provincial programs may be available for the management of certain types of solid waste. In this case, the evaluation should be concerned with the options for collection, storage and possible transportation of such solid waste to the provincial facilities. (1) The study should first estimate the total capital, operating and maintenance cost of residual management facilities over their anticipated lifespan and for the closure and post-closure stages. A model designed under contract to the ministry for determining the true cost of landfills should be utilized. Funding methods should then be examined, along with cost recovery mechanisms such as sale of products or energy and tipping fees. (2) When establishing the true cost of a landfill located on Crown land, the fair market value of the land should be used, even if actual acquisition and operating cost to the landfill operator is nominal. The study should recommend an appropriate schedule for the installation or expansion of residual management capacity. Flexibility should be incorporated into this schedule in order that the regional district may respond to changing technology or solid waste volume and character. The study should estimate the environmental, social and economic impacts of all residual management options and facilities, and describe possible mitigation and amelioration measures if necessary.
(1) Knowledge of the weight and nature of the solid waste requiring disposal is essential, not only for setting priorities for future higher level management strategies, but for evaluating the effectiveness of the plan in meeting its reduction goal. The primary evaluation criterion will be the change in the per capita generation rate of solid waste requiring disposal, expressed in kilograms/person/day. (2) The study should therefore examine options for describing and weighing all solid waste brought to regional disposal sites or facilities, including small, remote sites. In regard to the latter, the study authors should review and make use of the report on this subject prepared under contract to the ministry. In regard to the general description and weighing of solid waste, the study should identify the most appropriate procedure for collecting the MSW tracking information requested by the ministry.
(1) As a result of the 1992 amendment of the act, a regional district with an approved plan may specify operating requirements for, and set and collect fees from the owner or operator of any site or facility, whether public or private, storing or managing municipal solid waste within its territorial boundaries. A regional district wishing to exercise this power should specify in the version of the plan reviewed by the public its intention of doing so and identify the manner in which it will do so. (2) The study should therefore identify the sites and facilities over which the regional district will exercise this control, develop draft operating requirements to be contained in a waste stream management license for each site or facility, and determine the amount and rationale for any fees to be charged. (1) The final report of the Stage 2 study should recommend a set of strategies which address the strategy objectives identified in Part 2. The report should also identify all costs and impacts of the strategies, and determine funding requirements, including any need for financial assistance from the provincial government. The report should also include the rationale for why a particular recommendation was made, and why other alternatives were not chosen or were recommended for deferral in accordance with an implementation schedule. (2) As specified in section 19, the final report should be reviewed in the following order:
(3) Following the review and amendment process described in (2), the regional regional district will submit, in accordance with section 19(c), a final copy of the report to the manager. The cover letter should request for confirmation that the regional district may proceed with the Stage 3 process of translating the report into a plan in accordance with section 29.
The comments in this part of the Guide are | |||