metro vancouver regional district · 2014-08-20 · agenda greater vancouver sewerage and drainage...

AGENDA

GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT

Regular Meeting

Friday, July 18, 2008 9:00 a.m.

2nd Floor Boardroom

4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia

Please advise Kelly Weilbacher at (604) 432-6250 if you are unable to attend.

Chair Lois Jackson, Delta Vice Chair Peter Ladner, Vancouver Director Kurt Alberts, Langley Township Director Suzanne Anton, Vancouver Director Elizabeth Ball, Vancouver Director Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Director Kim Capri, Vancouver Director Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Director Sav Dhaliwal, Burnaby Director Judy Dueck, Maple Ridge Director Judy Forster, White Rock Director Gary Gibson, Electoral Area A Director Pamela Goldsmith-Jones, West Vancouver Director Linda Hepner, Surrey Director Marvin Hunt, Surrey Director Colleen Jordan, Burnaby

Director Don MacLean, Pitt Meadows Director Gayle Martin, Langley City Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Director Mae Reid, Coquitlam Director Barbara Steele, Surrey Director Tim Stevenson, Vancouver Director Harold Steves, Richmond Director Sam Sullivan, Vancouver Director Joe Trasolini, Port Moody Director Richard Walton, North Vancouver District Director Dianne Watts, Surrey Director Maxine Wilson, Coquitlam Director Michael Wright, Port Coquitlam Director Wayne Wright, New Westminster Commissioner, J. Carline*

* Non-voting member.

This page left blank intentionally.

July 9, 2008

NOTICE TO THE GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE

DISTRICT BOARD You are requested to attend a Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors on Friday, July 18, 2008 at 9:00 a.m. in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia.

A G E N D A A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1. July 18, 2008 Regular Meeting Agenda Staff Recommendation: That the Board adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for July 18, 2008 as circulated.

B. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

1. June 27, 2008 Regular Meeting Minutes Staff Recommendation: That the Board adopt the minutes for its regular meeting held June 27, 2008 as circulated.

C. DELEGATIONS

No items presented.

D. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented.

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. WASTE MANAGEMENT REPORTS 1.1 Strategy for Updating the Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation

Program Results Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Board receive the report titled Strategy for Updating the Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results dated June 12, 2008 for information.

Section A 1

SDD - 1

1.2 Strategy for Updating the Solid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Board receive the report titled Strategy for Updating the Solid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results dated June 12, 2008 for information.

1.3 GVS&DD/Wastech Comprehensive Agreement – 2007 Financial Results Waste Management Committee and Finance Committee Recommendation: That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated June 13, 2008 titled “GVS&DD/Wastech Comprehensive Agreement – 2007 Financial Results”.

1.4 Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 16th Avenue and 52nd

Street, Corporation of Delta Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Board approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the area located west of 52nd Street along 16th Avenue in the Corporation of Delta as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 36 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 16th Avenue and 52nd Street, Corporation of Delta”.

1.5 Powell River Regional District - Waste Disposal Agreement Renewal

Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Board authorize the Commissioner to: a) Renew the existing GVS&DD/Powell River Regional District Agreement for

Waste Disposal at Cache Creek under the existing terms and conditions for a one year term expiring December 31, 2009, subject to the necessary approvals being obtained by the Powell River Regional District from the Thompson Nicola Regional District and the Village of Cache Creek; and

b) Carry out any amendments to other agreements as necessary to effect the above.

1.6 Solid and Liquid Waste Management Plans Reference Panels: Amendment

to the Terms of Reference Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Board amend the Terms of Reference for the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Plans Reference Panels to extend their mandate until the draft plans are submitted to the Metro Vancouver Board for final approval.

1.7 Metro Vancouver’s Solid Waste Management Planning

Waste Management Committee Recommendations: That the Board direct staff to issue a non-binding call for an Expressions of Interest (EOI) inquiring as to the current availability of existing solid waste disposal/ processing options in the United States, and to carry out public consultation on the options identified as a result. That the Board approve the distribution of the attached letter to all member municipalities in order to seek out their interest in supplying information on potential areas or sites which they would make available and where waste-to-energy could be integrated into existing land use or proposed land development, giving particular attention to the available synergies of coupling to existing or proposed district energy systems.

SDD - 2

F. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA G. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF NOT INCLUDED IN CONSENT AGENDA

No items presented. H. MOTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

No items presented.

I. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented.

J. 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. Staff Recommendation: That the Board close its regular meeting scheduled for July 18, 2008 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (e) and 90 (1) (g) 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;”

(g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the regional district.”

K. ADJOURNMENT Staff Recommendation: That the Board conclude its regular meeting of July 18, 2008.

SDD - 3


SDD - 4

MINUTES

SDD - 5


SDD - 6

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, June 27, 2008 Page 1 of 3

GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held at 9:11 a.m. on Friday, June 27, 2008 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Director Lois Jackson, Delta Vice Chair, Director Peter Ladner, Vancouver Director Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Director Kim Capri, Vancouver Alternate Director George Chow, Vancouver for Suzanne Anton Alternate Director Mike Clay, Port Moody for Joe Trasolini Director Sav Dhaliwal, Burnaby Director Judy Dueck, Maple Ridge Director Judy Forster. White Rock Director Gary Gibson, Electoral Area A Director Linda Hepner, Surrey Alternate Director Judy Higginbotham, Surrey for Dianne Watts Director Marvin Hunt, Surrey Alternate Director Dan Johnston, Burnaby for Derek Corrigan Alternate Director Mel Kositsky, Langley

Township for Kurt Alberts

Alternate Director Barrie Lynch, Coquitlam for Maxine Wilson

Director Don MacLean, Pitt Meadows Director Gayle Martin, Langley City Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Director Mae Reid, Coquitlam Director Barbara Steele, Surrey Director Tim Stevenson, Vancouver Director Harold Steves, Richmond Director Sam Sullivan, Vancouver (arrived at

9:11 a.m.) Director Richard Walton, North Vancouver

District Director Michael Wright, Port Coquitlam Director Wayne Wright, New Westminster Commissioner Johnny Carline*

MEMBERS ABSENT: Director Elizabeth Ball, Vancouver Director Pamela Goldsmith-Jones, West Vancouver

Director Colleen Jordan, Burnaby

STAFF PRESENT: Paulette Vetleson, Corporate Secretary, Corporate Secretary’s Department

Marla Minichiello, Assistant to Regional Committees, Corporate Secretary’s Department

A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1. June 27, 2008 Regular Meeting Agenda

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for June 27, 2008 as circulated.

CARRIED * Non-voting member.

SDD - 7

SECTION B 1


B. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

1. May 23, 2008 Regular Meeting Minutes

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board adopt the minutes for its regular meeting held May 23, 2008 as circulated.

CARRIED C. DELEGATIONS

No items presented.

D. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented.

E. CONSENT AGENDA

9:11 a.m.

Director Sullivan arrived at the meeting

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board adopt the recommendation contained in the following items presented in the June 27, 2008 GVS&DD Consent Agenda: 1.1 Delegations’ Executive Summaries Presented at Committee – June 2008

CARRIED The item and recommendation referred to above is as follows: 1.1 Delegations’ Executive Summaries Presented at Committee – June 2008

Report dated June 18, 2008 from Kelly Weilbacher, Assistant to the Corporate Secretary, Corporate Secretary’s Department, providing for information Delegations’ Executive Summaries Presented at Committee – June 2008”. Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report dated June 18, 2008, titled “Delegations’ Executive Summaries Presented at Committee – June 2008”.

Adopted on Consent

F. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA No items presented.

G. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF NOT INCLUDED IN CONSENT

AGENDA No items presented.

H. MOTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN No items presented.

SDD - 8


I. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented.

J. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board close its regular meeting scheduled for June 27, 2008 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (e) as follows: “90 (1) A part of a board meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or

improvements, if the board or committee considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district.”

CARRIED

K. ADJOURNMENT

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board conclude its regular meeting of June 27, 2008.

CARRIED (Time: 9:11 a.m)

CERTIFIED CORRECT

Paulette A. Vetleson, Corporate Secretary

Lois E. Jackson, Chair

004639084 FINAL

SDD - 9


SDD - 10

CONSENT AGENDA

SDD - 11


SDD - 12

004641666

Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: July 9, 2008

To: Waste Management Committee From: Marie Griggs, Public Involvement Division Manager Engineering and Construction Department Date: June 12, 2008 Subject: Strategy for Updating the Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation

Program Results

Recommendation: That the Board receive the report titled Strategy for Updating the Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results dated June 12, 2008 for information. 1. PURPOSE This report summarizes the consultation program and the input received on the proposed strategies for updating the Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP) between March 6 and May 30, 2008. The LWMP was concurrently reviewed with the strategies for updating the Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP) under the framework of the Sustainable Region Initiative (SRI). This approach is consistent with the concurrent review in 2005 of the Drinking Water Management Plan, Air Quality Management Plan and Regional Parks and Greenways Plan. Consultation results for the SWMP are the subject of a separate report contained in this agenda. Sections 2.1 to 2.3 outline the overall consultation program for both plans. References to some specific LWMP activities are contained in Sections 2.3.2 and 2.3.5. A summary of the input received on the LWMP is contained in Section 2.4. 2. CONTEXT On February 29, 2008 the GVS&DD Board approved a consultation program to review strategies contained in two discussion documents for updating the Liquid and Solid Waste Management Plans. The documents presented key issues, opportunities, and actions to improve upon the existing plans. This initial phase of consultation on the plans fulfills Metro Vancouver’s commitment to consult with residents and its member municipalities on major initiatives and plans. In addition, in order to meet Provincial regulatory requirements for updating these plans a summary of the recently completed process on the strategies and all future consultation activities on the draft plans will be submitted to the Province for review.

Section E 1.1

SDD - 13

Strategy for Updating the Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee – July 9, 2008 Page 2 of 9

004641666

Following receipt of the draft Liquid and Solid Waste Management Plans by the Waste Management Committee and GVS&DD Board, Metro Vancouver will initiate a further consultation process on those draft documents. The following sections provide an overview of the results of the concurrent consultation program on the strategies to update both the LWMP and the SWMP. 2.1 Objectives The LWMP and SWMP strategy consultation program was implemented with the following objectives:

• inform Metro Vancouver residents about the issues and options under review within the LWMP and SWMP, and the links among plans under the Sustainable Region Initiative (SRI)

• inform member municipalities, public and key interest groups about the opportunity to comment on the goals, and strategies for the plans

• provide a variety of methods for submitting comments • document and summarize all input for consideration in developing the draft LWMP

and SWMP, and • provide a summary of input and activities in a consultation report.

2.2 Program Overview The consultation program was structured to encourage residents, municipal elected officials and their staff, First Nations, business representatives, and interest groups to participate and provide input. The deadline for input on the strategies was originally May 23, but was extended to May 30, 2008 to accommodate participants following the ninth public meeting which was added at the request of Delta Council. While consultation with other government agencies was initiated during this consultation period it did not form a significant component of the process. It is expected that once the draft plans are ready for consultation, more substantial input will be forthcoming from other government agencies and jurisdictions. The next section of this report provides further details regarding individual program components. 2.3 Components 2.3.1 Public Meetings Nine public meetings attended by approximately 350 participants were held throughout the region between April 8 and May 21, 2008 to gather input on the LWMP and SWMP strategies. Participants at the meetings included residents, political representatives, and representatives of business, community, environmental and recreational organizations, and students and academics. At these evening meetings opening remarks were made by an elected official from the host municipality, followed by a two-part agenda with presentations on both the LWMP and the SWMP. Each presentation was followed by opportunities for public questions and input using the feedback form as a discussion guide. At the end of each meeting a member of Metro Vancouver’s Waste Management Committee made closing remarks and summarized

SDD - 14

Strategy for Updating the Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee – July 9, 2008

Page 3 of 9

004641666

some of the key issues and comments raised. The dates and locations of the meeting series are summarized in the table in Section 2.3.2. 2.3.2 Municipal Consultation The municipal consultation program for the LWMP and SWMP consisted of workshops for elected officials and their staff held during the day on the same date and for the most part at the same venue as the public meetings, and meetings with technical subcommittees. Approximately 100 municipal representatives attended the workshops. At the initiation of the consultation program correspondence was sent to Mayors and Councils of member municipalities informing them about the public meeting schedule and the opportunity to provide input via the municipal workshops. Information was also sent separately to members of the Regional Administrators Advisory Committee (RAAC), Regional Engineers Advisory Committee (REAC) and their liquid and solid waste sub-committees, and municipal waste reduction coordinators. In addition to the municipal workshops, presentations were made separately to councils and a series of technical sub-committee meetings took place. Several of the meetings took place outside this consultation reporting period; however they have been listed here to document the work of the committees. The following is a summary of the meeting activities in 2008:

• Presentations on the LWMP and SWMP to City of Langley Council (April 7), New Westminster Council (April 7)

• REAC briefed on the potential actions and commitments contained in the strategy documents (February 8, March 7, April 4, May 23, June 20)

• REAC Liquid Waste Sub-committee provided input on the draft LWMP (January 17, February 21, April 3, May 6, May 15, June 3, June 19)

• Sewerage Area Technical Committees: Vancouver (February 14, April 4); Fraser (February 26, April 9); North Shore (February 27, April 2)

• Meeting with New Westminster technical staff (April 29). The following chart summarizes the public meeting and municipal workshop series: Public Meetings and Municipal Workshops Locations/Geographic Areas Note: Italics denote meeting location

Date (2008)

North Delta, North Surrey April 8 Richmond, Tsawwassen, Ladner April 15 Burnaby, New Westminster April 17 City of North Vancouver, District of North Vancouver,

West Vancouver, Lions Bay, Bowen Island April 22

Vancouver, Electoral Area A April 23 Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, Anmore, Belcarra April 29 Maple Ridge, Pitt Meadows April 30 Langley City/Langley Township, South Surrey, White Rock May 6 Delta May 21

2.3.3 Reference Panels

SDD - 15


004641666

Two Reference Panels were formed with the approval of the Waste Management Committee and GVS&DD Board to provide additional input during the consultation process for the LWMP and SWMP strategy and draft plan reviews. Each panel includes nine (9) representatives residing or working in Metro Vancouver, with three individuals in each of the following categories: residents or representatives of non-governmental organizations; technical experts in the field of liquid waste and solid waste management or related fields; and representatives of industry that can provide input into the practical impacts of implementing each of the management plans. Three meetings (May 8, 14 and 29) of each panel took place for members to receive presentations on aspects of the strategies and to discuss the information in more detail. At two of the meetings the panels met together briefly to discuss linkages between the plans and to share their perspectives on waste management. At the May 29th meeting, each panel selected their representatives to speak to the Waste Management Committee as per the approved Terms of Reference. Representatives will speak to the Committee on July 9 as invited delegations to provide feedback on the strategies. Due to the extended timeframe for consultation on the draft plans, it is recommended in another report in this agenda that the consultation period in the Terms of Reference be amended from “April to June 2008” to a statement that indicates completion of consultation on the draft plans. 2.3.4 First Nations During this consultation period letters were sent to affected First Nations bands and councils offering to provide presentations or other appropriate opportunities for receiving input on the LWMP and SWMP strategies. These letters were followed up by phone calls and registered letters. One presentation was made at a meeting with the Tsawwassen First Nation. 2.3.5 Additional Consultation Activities Additional consultation activities during this phase included a presentation at a meeting of the Medical Health Officers (MHOs) on April 7, 2008 regarding both the LWMP and SWMP strategies. The MHOs were also informed through correspondence about the public meetings and municipal workshops, and were invited to provide feedback on the strategies. Discussions on the LWMP also occurred at the following meetings in 2008:

• Stormwater Interagency Liaison Group (technical committee mandated under the LWMP) (March 13);

• Environmental Monitoring Committee (technical committee mandated under the LWMP) (January 17, February 21, April 17, June 19);

• Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Program (BIEAP) – Fraser River Estuary Management Program (FREMP) (March 11, April 15);

• Ministry of Environment, Surrey office (to provide updates on progress to develop both plans) (March 18, April 28, June 13).

2.3.6 Supporting Communication Activities The following activities supported the consultation program and encouraged public participation and input:

SDD - 16


Page 5 of 9

004641666

• placement of advertisements in local community and ethnic newspapers with details of the times and locations of the public meetings and other opportunities to provide input

• distribution of public meeting invitation flyers to individuals and organizations on the LWMP and SWMP databases via email and mail (approximately 1,400)

• materials posted on the Metro Vancouver Web site and links to member municipality web sites: advertisements, copies of the strategy documents, information about the Reference Panels, communication materials, on-line survey and feedback form

• posters/rack cards provided at six Metro Vancouver transfer stations • posters placed at three local Earth Day events, EPIC 2008 (Sustainable Living Expo) • receipt of correspondence via fax, email, letter or feedback forms • media relations support.

Deadlines for receipt of input for both strategy documents were included in all communication activities supporting the consultation process. 2.4 Consultation Input A summary of issues and comments raised on the LWMP strategies through public meetings and correspondence, municipal workshops, and Reference Panel meetings, and Metro Vancouver’s responses to the input is contained in Attachments 1-3. It should be noted that the LWMP Reference Panel reviewed the issues and comments summarizing their meetings prior to the table being finalized. Metro Vancouver received 63 feedback forms, 16 pieces of correspondence (email/fax/letter) and verbal input on the LWMP during the public meetings. Documentation of all written input and communication activities entitled Consultation on the Strategy for Updating the Liquid Waste Management Plan – Report on Activities and Feedback March 6 – May 30, 2008 (Volume 1 and Volume 2) is available in from the Metro Vancouver Information Centre by calling 604-432-6200. Portions of this document may also be viewed at www.metrovancouver.org/managementplans. The following sections provide an overview of key themes arising from input received during this phase of consultation on the LWMP. The Waste Management Committee will receive a separate report from the LWMP Reference Panel on the results of their deliberations. 2.4.1 Public Meetings and Correspondence The following common themes regarding the strategies to update the LWMP emerged during the public meetings and through correspondence: Strengthen the source control program: Several participants highlighted the need for increased public education regarding the impacts of particular substances on the sewer system and environment. Other respondents supported increased education for industrial dischargers and implementing more Codes of Practice. Many participants were concerned that there is insufficient monitoring and enforcement of the Sewer Use Bylaw and suggested more resources should be made available. While some participants preferred hefty fines for noncompliance, others suggested that incentives for compliance with the Sewer Use Bylaw would be more effective. Support for Drinking Water Management Plan water conservation measures:

SDD - 17


004641666

Several participants noted the need to increase public education programs regarding water conservation and promotion of water-saving fixtures such as low flush toilets and low flow showers to reduce liquid waste volumes at source. Although it is outside the direct scope of the LWMP, the benefits and drawbacks of water metering were also frequently discussed. Support for stormwater/rainwater management practices: Participants strongly supported the adoption of a variety of stormwater/rainwater management techniques by residents and businesses across the region including permeable paving, roof gardens, rain barrels, and bioswales. It was suggested that Metro Vancouver could provide education and support for these practices and publish a list of best management practices. Some support for materials and energy recovery opportunities: Participants were supportive of materials and energy recovery opportunities provided a full cost-benefit analysis of options is completed and available for review prior to implementation. Sewer heat recovery, biodiesel/biogas production and methane capture were identified as options for exploration. Respondents also encouraged Metro Vancouver to explore opportunities for partnership and integration with other systems for the purpose of revenue generation. Support for greywater systems: Some participants recommended providing more public information about greywater use, and exploring opportunities for system development. Barriers to residential system implementation were also discussed. Accelerate the schedules for sewer separation: Some participants were concerned that the timeline for sewer separation is too long and several supported a tax increase to accelerate the current schedule. Some participants suggested that the cost for an accelerated timeline should be borne by users in the areas still requiring separation while others suggested that alternatives to direct taxation such as private-public partnerships be explored. Upgrading liquid waste treatment to secondary in Vancouver and on the North Shore is widely supported although more information is required in order to provide feedback on whether to accelerate or change the current timelines: Several respondents indicated support for an increase to secondary treatment for the Vancouver and North Shore wastewater treatment plants as soon as possible, with many favouring completion of both upgrades by 2020. Other participants wanted more information such as the costs and benefits associated with different level of treatments, and the impacts of costs on taxpayers, municipalities and the region as a whole in order to provide feedback on whether the current schedule for upgrade of each plant should be changed. Respondents also queried whether Metro Vancouver would receive financial assistance from senior governments to complete the upgrades, and whether new technologies were being reviewed for potential environmental and financial benefits. Several participants queried long-term plans to manage the increased biosolids that will result from upgrades to secondary treatment. 2.4.2 Municipal Workshops The following section summarizes common themes regarding the strategies to update the LWMP that emerged from the municipal workshops. In addition to these workshops, input was received from municipal technical staff and some agencies on the strategies and draft

SDD - 18


Page 7 of 9

004641666

plan. The dates of those meetings have been noted in Sections 2.3.2 and 2.3.5 of this report. A comprehensive evaluation of the financial implications of the proposals in the strategy document in conjunction with other regional spending priorities is essential: Numerous participants in the workshops indicated that the cost implications of the strategies needed to be provided in more detail in order for municipalities to support the directions in the plan. Secondly, the costs and the impact on the taxpayers needed to be analyzed in concert with other regional priorities such as water treatment, solid waste management and transportation infrastructure. The timeline for updating the management plan is too ambitious: At several of the workshops participants indicated that the timeframe for updating the plan was too ambitious considering the interest in reviewing cost implications and other impacts of some of the potential actions suggested for municipalities in the strategies. Cooperative efforts between Metro Vancouver and member municipalities to strengthen source control supported: Clarification regarding Metro Vancouver’s approach to enforcement of source control was requested by numerous participants. Further information was requested on existing Metro Vancouver Codes of Practice and others that are expected to be implemented in the future. A municipal ticketing system was suggested as an option for strengthening source controls. A coordinated effort between Metro Vancouver and municipalities was supported to reduce the overall environmental impact of the liquid waste discharges. Determining the most appropriate delivery mechanism for Bylaw enforcement required further study and discussion. The need for outreach to educate residents and businesses about impacts on the environment and infrastructure from contaminants in the system was emphasized. Municipalities continue to support water conservation measures: Benefits of reducing liquid waste volumes through water conservation measures were discussed and supported by participants. It was recognized that conservation programs such as water metering and sprinkling restrictions were primarily the responsibility of individual municipalities. The cost implications of improving sewer asset management programs are significant: While most participants understood the rationale for improving the condition and increasing the inspection of municipal sewer assets, the associated cost burden of the actions in the strategies were considered significant. Participants expressed an interest in investigating such mechanisms as a funding reserve for the replacement of assets, or a declining rate structure such that as municipalities make sewer improvements, their rates would decline. Implementing wet weather cost allocations needs further review and discussion: Changing from cost allocations based on dry weather to cost allocations based on wet weather was seen as penalizing by municipalities which continue to invest in eliminating combined sewers and by municipalities that need to invest in their sewer systems to improve them. It was suggested that it would be better to provide incentives. Comments were mixed on whether wet weather allocations would be more equitable across the region or specific to each sewerage area. Managing the condition of sewer connections on private property is currently a significant challenge:

SDD - 19


004641666

While the cost and operational impacts of leaky private sewers on the municipal and regional sewer systems was acknowledged, the municipal participants indicated that they were unclear regarding what options are available to impose repair of sewer connections on private property. Metro Vancouver indicated that other jurisdictions have enacted bylaws to require inspections and repair of private sewer connections when buildings are sold as a means reducing cost impacts to municipal sewers. Participants agreed that this area required further investigation and discussion. Support for continued work on stormwater management, some municipalities may not meet the deadline for completion of their plans: Some participants expressed concerns about their ability to meet the current 2014 completion date for Integrated Stormwater Management Plans (ISMPs) due to time and financial constraints. In addition, mechanisms for including innovative stormwater practices in development plans were supported. It was suggested that Metro Vancouver continue to work with municipalities to facilitate the establishment of performance criteria for site-level rainwater management systems. Business cases for specific materials and energy recovery opportunities are required before their implementation: Municipalities are supportive of energy and material recovery if cost-benefit analysis is undertaken before committing to any specific option. Additional information would aid the development of municipal water reuse opportunities: Participants asked questions regarding the availability of new technologies for greywater use and if there were barriers associated with its acceptance by local health authorities. There was support for Metro Vancouver and municipalities working with senior governments regarding amendments to plumbing codes to enable water reuse in a number of commercial applications and potentially in households. Clarification regarding the rationale for potential timing of secondary treatment for Vancouver and North Shore Sewerage Areas is needed: Participants requested scientific documentation supporting the rationale for selecting a preferred timing scenario over another. Some participants requested clarification on the rationale that would have the North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) take priority over the Vancouver (Iona) WWTP. Some participants stated that if a site is secured for the North Shore, Metro Vancouver should begin planning for that site as soon as possible. Participants noted that actions in the plan with assigned dates will become legal requirements if approved by the Minister of Environment. Cost implications of the secondary treatment upgrades for municipalities and ratepayers need to be further defined: A detailed risk analysis of the different options for timing of the secondary treatment upgrades was requested. Some participants asked Metro Vancouver to lobby senior government for cost-sharing of the secondary treatment facilities. Caution was expressed that Metro Vancouver should not pursue timing the upgrades on a schedule that does not match the interests of potential senior government funding partners. More details regarding the per household tax impacts of the secondary upgrades were requested in the context of other significant regional costs including drinking water treatment, transportation, solid waste management and other infrastructure upgrades. 3. ALTERNATIVES None provided.

SDD - 20


Page 9 of 9

004641666

CONCLUSION In February, 2008 the Waste Management Committee and GVS&DD Board approved proceeding with a consultation program to support the concurrent review of the strategies for updating the Solid Waste and Liquid Waste Management Plans. This report outlines the components of the consultation program which occurred between March and May of 2008 for both plans, and then details the specific activities and feedback that pertain to the LWMP. The consultation process provided opportunities for residents, member municipalities, First Nations, interest groups, and businesses to provide input on the draft strategies in preparation for developing the draft management plans. Attachments: 1. Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP) Strategy Consultation – Public Input: Issues,

Comments and Metro Vancouver Responses dated June 12, 2008. 2. Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP) Strategy Consultation – Municipal Input: Issues,

Comments and Metro Vancouver Responses dated June 12, 2008. 3. Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP) Strategy Consultation – LWMP Reference Panel:

Issues, Comments and Metro Vancouver Responses dated June 12, 2008.

SDD - 21


SDD - 22

Liqu

id W

aste

Man

agem

ent P

lan

(LW

MP)

Str

ateg

y C

onsu

ltatio

n Pu

blic

Inpu

t Is

sues

, Com

men

ts a

nd M

etro

Van

couv

er R

espo

nses

– J

une

12, 2

008

Atta

chm

ent 1

Sour

ce

Issu

e/C

omm

ent

Met

ro V

anco

uver

(MV)

Res

pons

e 1.

Liq

uid

Was

te M

anag

emen

t App

roac

h 1

Is th

e re

view

of t

he p

revi

ous

plan

on

the

web

site

? Th

e ex

istin

g pl

an is

ava

ilabl

e on

the

MV

web

site

. 2

Is M

etro

Van

couv

er re

view

ing

2002

– 2

005,

how

will

it b

e re

porte

d up

on?

Bie

nnia

l pro

gres

s re

ports

are

ava

ilabl

e.

3 Is

the

defin

ition

of g

reyw

ater

as

“non

-haz

ardo

us

was

tew

ater

” cor

rect

? If

prop

erly

trea

ted,

gre

ywat

er c

an b

e no

n-ha

zard

ous

was

tew

ater

. 4

Has

Met

ro V

anco

uver

con

side

red

usin

g gr

eyw

ater

at t

he

hous

ehol

d sc

ale

(irrig

atio

n et

c.)?

Th

ere

is a

lot o

f int

eres

t in

this

are

a in

term

s of

mul

ti-fa

mily

bui

ldin

gs. T

here

are

pilo

t pro

ject

s in

this

regi

on a

nd

acro

ss C

anad

a w

orki

ng o

n th

is.

Bar

riers

incl

ude

acce

ptan

ce b

y he

alth

aut

horit

ies

and

havi

ng a

sys

tem

in

plac

e th

at in

clud

es in

spec

tion,

and

long

term

mai

nten

ance

to

ens

ure

corr

ect f

unct

iona

lity.

5

How

is “t

ertia

ry tr

eatm

ent”

defin

ed?

Any

trea

tmen

t bey

ond

seco

ndar

y. It

is o

ften

impl

emen

ted

as a

nut

rient

rem

oval

pro

cess

that

is u

sed

to p

rote

ct th

e en

viro

nmen

t fro

m a

lgal

blo

oms

whi

ch a

re ty

pica

l for

lake

s.

6 E

duca

tion

is c

ritic

al to

the

succ

ess

of a

n up

date

d LW

MP

. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

7

Met

ro V

anco

uver

stil

l has

a lo

ng w

ay to

go

to a

hav

e a

truly

effe

ctiv

e Li

quid

Was

te M

anag

emen

t Pro

gram

. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

8

Pub

lic

Wor

ksho

ps

Exe

rcis

e th

e pr

ecau

tiona

ry p

rinci

ple

whe

n it

com

es to

m

anag

ing

liqui

d w

aste

. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

9 P

rovi

de d

irect

ives

for

busi

ness

and

hom

eow

ners

abo

ut

prod

ucts

that

are

goi

ng d

own

drai

ns a

s w

ell a

s th

eir

effe

cts

(pub

lic e

duca

tion)

.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

Mat

eria

ls a

re a

vaila

ble.

10

Hig

her l

evel

s of

gov

ernm

ent s

houl

d be

lobb

ied

to b

an

dang

erou

s pr

oduc

ts w

hich

cou

ld g

o in

to s

ewer

s.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

11

Mov

es s

houl

d be

mad

e to

ada

pt a

nd a

ppro

ve

prog

ress

ive

build

ing

tech

niqu

es s

uch

as c

ompo

stin

g to

ilets

, gre

ywat

er re

cycl

ing,

rain

wat

er c

iste

rns

and

barr

els,

bio

swal

es a

nd p

erm

eabl

e pa

ving

.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

12

Mun

icip

aliti

es s

houl

d on

ly x

eris

cape

thei

r gar

dens

, whi

le

enco

urag

ing

resi

dent

s to

do

the

sam

e.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

13

Hum

an h

ealth

and

env

ironm

enta

l im

pact

sho

uld

be

prio

ritie

s in

the

Liqu

id W

aste

Man

agem

ent A

ppro

ach.

C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

Th

ese

are

MV

’s p

riorit

ies.

14

Pub

lic F

eedb

ack

Form

s P

ublic

Fee

dbac

k Fo

rms

The

prio

ritie

s of

the

Liqu

id W

aste

Man

agem

ent P

lan

mus

t be

dec

ided

upo

n ba

sed

on th

e im

pact

eac

h op

tion

has

on

the

impr

ovem

ent i

n liq

uid

man

agem

ent.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

SDD - 23

Liqu

id W

aste

Man

agem

ent P

lan

(LW

MP

) Stra

tegy

Con

sulta

tion

Pub

lic In

put

Issu

es, C

omm

ents

and

Met

ro V

anco

uver

Res

pons

es –

Jun

e 12

, 200

8

Pag

e 2

of 3

0

So

urce

Is

sue/

Com

men

t M

etro

Van

couv

er (M

V) R

espo

nse

15

Cap

italiz

e on

Van

couv

er’s

nat

ural

adv

anta

ges.

C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

16

A

ll si

x ar

eas

of li

quid

was

te m

anag

emen

t nee

d to

be

addr

esse

d in

ord

er to

impr

ove

the

envi

ronm

ent a

nd

heal

th s

tand

ards

in M

etro

Van

couv

er.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

17

Mak

e pu

blic

edu

catio

n a

prio

rity

in re

gard

to li

quid

was

te.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

18

Dam

the

Fras

er R

iver

at H

ells

Gat

e. T

his

wou

ld e

nsur

e th

e Lo

wer

Mai

nlan

d w

aste

sup

ply,

ele

ctric

pow

er, f

lood

co

ntro

l and

enh

ance

sal

mon

mig

ratio

n.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

19

Con

side

r usi

ng “z

eew

eed”

to c

reat

e a

sew

er s

ludg

e co

ncen

tratio

n an

d ge

nera

te c

ash

flow

. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

20

Con

duct

mor

e re

sear

ch b

efor

e th

e pl

ans

for u

pdat

ing

are

final

ized

. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

21

Dis

clos

e th

e fu

ll co

st o

f dis

char

ge.

This

is b

eing

dev

elop

ed.

22

Iden

tify

and

publ

ish

the

top

12 m

ost e

ffici

ent l

iqui

d an

d so

lid w

aste

faci

litie

s w

orld

wid

e to

pro

vide

a p

oint

of

com

paris

on.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

23

Pro

vide

an

idea

of t

he tr

ue c

osts

and

oth

er e

xist

ing

optio

ns b

efor

e th

e pu

blic

can

be

expe

cted

to d

ecid

e.

This

is b

eing

dev

elop

ed.

24

Mov

e aw

ay fr

om c

entra

lized

meg

a w

ater

trea

tmen

t pla

nts

and

mor

e to

war

ds d

ecen

traliz

ed tr

eatm

ent s

yste

ms

for

the

purp

ose

of jo

b cr

eatio

n.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

25

Mak

e re

sour

ce re

cove

ry fr

om w

aste

(was

tew

ater

for

heat

ing

etc.

) a p

riorit

y.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

26

Mak

e m

inim

al p

ollu

tion

(e.g

. Ter

tiary

trea

tmen

t of l

iqui

d w

aste

) a p

riorit

y.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

27

Exp

end

effo

rt on

out

reac

h pr

ogra

ms

rega

rdin

g liq

uid

was

te m

anag

emen

t. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

28

The

deve

lopm

ent o

f a re

gion

al “r

epor

t car

d” e

very

two

year

s on

Liq

uid

Was

te M

anag

emen

t wou

ld b

e he

lpfu

l. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

A

bie

nnia

l pro

gres

s re

port

is c

urre

ntly

pre

pare

d.

29

Be

will

ing

to tr

y ne

w a

nd s

mal

ler s

cale

sol

utio

ns to

liqu

id

was

te m

anag

emen

t ins

tead

of f

ocus

ing

on th

e sa

me

big

solu

tions

.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

30

Pub

lic

Cor

resp

onde

nce

It w

ould

be

mor

e us

eful

to s

ee th

e co

st e

stim

ate

grap

h ex

tend

ed a

noth

er 2

0 ye

ars.

C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

SDD - 24

Liqu

id W

aste

Man

agem

ent P

lan

(LW

MP

) Stra

tegy

Con

sulta

tion

Pub

lic In

put

Issu

es, C

omm

ents

and

Met

ro V

anco

uver

Res

pons

es –

Jun

e 12

, 200

8

Pag

e 3

of 3

0

Sour

ce

Issu

e/C

omm

ent

Met

ro V

anco

uver

(MV)

Res

pons

e 2.

Liq

uid

Was

te R

educ

tion

31

Whe

re c

an th

e pu

blic

lear

n m

ore

abou

t prio

rity

actio

ns fo

r st

reng

then

ing

sour

ce c

ontro

l?

Ther

e is

info

rmat

ion

on th

e M

etro

Van

couv

er w

ebsi

te a

nd

on th

e w

ebsi

tes

of m

any

indi

vidu

al m

unic

ipal

ities

. Als

o,

Met

ro V

anco

uver

has

a s

choo

ls e

duca

tion

prog

ram

to

teac

h ch

ildre

n an

d te

ache

rs a

bout

thin

gs to

avo

id p

uttin

g do

wn

the

drai

n.

32

Wha

t are

Met

ro V

anco

uver

’s p

lans

for e

xten

ding

sou

rce

cont

rol e

duca

tion

for i

ndiv

idua

l hom

eow

ners

? M

V h

as a

pro

gram

but

enc

oura

ges

feed

back

on

how

it

coul

d be

exp

ande

d.

33

Add

ress

the

fact

that

peo

ple

need

a g

reat

er

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

the

prod

ucts

they

use

and

pro

vide

them

w

ith le

ss to

xic

alte

rnat

ives

.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

34

Look

at w

ays

to c

hang

e th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t whi

le

educ

atin

g th

e pu

blic

on

how

exp

ensi

ve th

is li

fest

yle

is.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

35

Is p

erm

eabl

e pa

ving

bei

ng lo

oked

at o

r tes

ted

by M

etro

V

anco

uver

? U

nder

the

curr

ent L

WM

P th

ere

is a

sto

rmw

ater

in

tera

genc

y gr

oup

that

spe

nt ti

me

in th

e fir

st fi

ve y

ears

re

sear

chin

g an

d lo

okin

g at

bes

t pra

ctic

es, i

nclu

ding

pe

rmea

ble

pave

men

ts a

nd h

ow th

ey c

an b

e ap

plie

d.

Thes

e ar

e be

ing

cons

ider

ed a

nd im

plem

ente

d by

som

e m

unic

ipal

ities

in th

eir s

torm

wat

er m

anag

emen

t pla

ns.

36

How

will

Met

ro V

anco

uver

add

ress

trea

ted

wat

er b

eing

us

ed fo

r pur

pose

s su

ch a

s la

wn

wat

erin

g?

MV

is s

uppo

rtive

of w

ater

re-u

se/re

cycl

ing

and

prog

ram

s su

ch a

s ra

in b

arre

ls th

at h

elp

offs

et u

se o

f drin

king

wat

er.

37

Wha

t has

Met

ro V

anco

uver

don

e to

redu

ce th

e am

ount

of

chem

ical

s go

ing

dow

n dr

ains

? M

V re

gula

tes

disc

harg

e of

cer

tain

che

mic

als

unde

r the

S

ewer

Use

Byl

aw a

nd c

oord

inat

es e

duca

tion

and

outre

ach

prog

ram

s fo

r bus

ines

ses

and

resi

dent

s.

38

Doe

s M

etro

Van

couv

er g

auge

the

diffe

renc

e be

twee

n th

e am

ount

of c

onta

min

ants

in 1

992

and

now

? M

V e

valu

ates

con

tam

inan

t tre

nds

and

deve

lops

initi

ativ

es

for c

onta

min

ant r

educ

tion

acco

rdin

gly.

39

Is

Met

ro V

anco

uver

ask

ing

all b

usin

esse

s w

hat t

hey

are

doin

g w

ith th

eir l

iqui

d w

aste

and

wha

t will

be

foun

d in

th

eir p

lant

s?

MV

regu

late

s an

d m

onito

rs ta

rget

ed la

rge

disc

harg

es.

40

Inte

nsify

sou

rce

cont

rol t

o en

sure

the

publ

ic u

nder

stan

ds

that

wha

t the

y pu

t dow

n th

e dr

ain

has

an im

pact

. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

41

Ado

pt b

road

er e

duca

tion

prac

tices

for t

he m

anag

emen

t of

liqui

d w

aste

. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

42

Ado

pt s

trong

er a

nd b

road

er c

odes

of p

ract

ice

for t

he

man

agem

ent o

f liq

uid

was

te.

Cod

es o

f Pra

ctic

es a

re c

ontin

ually

dev

elop

ed a

nd

impl

emen

ted

as re

quire

d.

43

Pub

lic

Wor

ksho

ps

Rei

nfor

ce th

at w

ater

is a

com

mod

ity.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

SDD - 25

Liqu

id W

aste

Man

agem

ent P

lan

(LW

MP

) Stra

tegy

Con

sulta

tion

Pub

lic In

put

Issu

es, C

omm

ents

and

Met

ro V

anco

uver

Res

pons

es –

Jun

e 12

, 200

8

Pag

e 4

of 3

0

Sour

ce

Issu

e/C

omm

ent

Met

ro V

anco

uver

(MV)

Res

pons

e 44

M

eter

ing

of li

quid

was

te s

houl

d be

impl

emen

ted

for a

ll ne

w a

nd re

nova

ted

build

ings

. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

45

Ban

gar

bura

tors

. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

46

Th

ere

shou

ld b

e re

gula

r mon

itorin

g of

con

tam

inan

ts a

t va

ryin

g lo

catio

ns in

the

sew

er s

truct

ure

so th

at re

gula

tion

brea

ches

can

be

trace

d ba

ck to

the

sour

ce.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

47

If M

etro

Van

couv

er im

plem

ents

wat

er m

eter

ing,

cos

ts

shou

ld b

e le

ss if

less

of t

he re

sour

ce is

use

d.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

48

Som

e bu

sine

sses

are

pol

lutin

g be

caus

e th

ey a

re

unaw

are,

une

duca

ted

on th

e is

sue

of li

quid

was

te, a

nd

do n

ot k

now

who

to tu

rn to

for h

elp.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

49

Som

e bu

sine

sses

/gro

ups

do th

ings

whi

ch th

ey s

houl

d no

t, du

e to

lack

of e

nfor

cem

ent.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

50

Bus

ines

ses

don’

t hav

e th

e re

sour

ces

to h

andl

e ne

w ru

les

and

regu

latio

ns, t

hey

need

hel

p.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

51

Focu

s on

edu

catio

n ra

ther

than

wat

er m

eter

ing;

wat

er

met

erin

g is

too

expe

nsiv

e.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

52

New

dev

elop

men

t mus

t bea

r the

full

cost

of t

he w

aste

it

crea

tes.

C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

53

Can

was

te w

ater

be

clea

ned

or fi

ltere

d en

ough

to b

e us

ed a

gain

? Y

es, b

ut it

is e

xpen

sive

.

54

Pub

lic F

eedb

ack

Form

s

Sew

age

shou

ld b

e vi

ewed

as

a re

sour

ce.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

55

Cha

rge

resi

denc

es a

nd b

usin

esse

s fo

r the

am

ount

of

treat

ed w

ater

that

is u

sed.

C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

56

Impl

emen

t a s

econ

d pi

pe fo

r gar

bura

tors

so

that

was

te

can

be u

sed

for c

ompo

st a

nd n

ot e

nd u

p in

the

sew

age

syst

em.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

57

Focu

s on

gre

ywat

er d

iver

sion

and

re-u

se in

ord

er to

de

crea

se li

quid

was

te.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

58

Pub

lic

Cor

resp

onde

nce

Sup

ply

gran

ts to

indi

vidu

als

who

are

will

ing

to s

et-u

p an

d us

e sm

all s

cale

gre

ywat

er s

yste

ms.

M

V c

anno

t pro

vide

gra

nts

for p

rivat

e sy

stem

s.

2.1

Impr

ovin

g th

e Se

wer

Use

Byl

aw (S

ourc

e C

ontr

ol)

59

Pub

lic

Wor

ksho

ps

App

ly th

e m

ultip

le d

isci

plin

e ap

proa

ch o

f New

Yor

k,

whe

re c

onta

min

ants

wer

e re

duce

d by

95%

at p

lant

s th

at

oper

ate

on a

slu

dge

proc

ess.

If w

e ar

e us

ing

a tri

ckle

pr

oces

s th

at m

eans

that

tonn

es o

f pol

luta

nts

are

bein

g

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

SDD - 26

Liqu

id W

aste

Man

agem

ent P

lan

(LW

MP

) Stra

tegy

Con

sulta

tion

Pub

lic In

put

Issu

es, C

omm

ents

and

Met

ro V

anco

uver

Res

pons

es –

Jun

e 12

, 200

8

Pag

e 5

of 3

0

So

urce

Is

sue/

Com

men

t M

etro

Van

couv

er (M

V) R

espo

nse

pum

ped

into

the

Fras

er R

iver

: nee

d to

get

this

und

er

cont

rol.

60

Pro

vide

ince

ntiv

es, s

uch

as c

ertif

icat

ion

and

reco

gniti

on,

for b

usin

esse

s w

ith g

ood

beha

viou

r. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

61

Focu

s on

pub

lic o

utre

ach

in o

rder

to s

treng

then

sou

rce

cont

rol.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

62

Pro

vide

info

rmat

ion

to th

e pu

blic

rega

rdin

g w

hat w

orks

in

othe

r mun

icip

aliti

es a

nd h

ow th

ese

prac

tices

cou

ld b

e ap

plic

able

in M

etro

Van

couv

er.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

63

Wou

ld M

etro

Van

couv

er c

onsi

der p

ayin

g fo

r toi

lets

and

sh

ower

s as

a c

heap

er u

pgra

de p

roce

ss?

Ther

e ar

e m

any

mun

icip

aliti

es th

at h

ave

reba

te

prog

ram

s fo

r toi

lets

. 64

Is

the

curr

ent s

yste

m a

dequ

ate

for o

ur p

opul

atio

n or

are

w

e go

ing

to re

ach

capa

city

? Th

e w

aste

wat

er s

yste

ms

have

bee

n bu

ilt to

kee

p pa

ce

with

the

regi

on a

s it

grow

s an

d th

ey c

ontin

ue to

as

MV

m

oves

from

2 to

3 m

illio

n pe

ople

- pa

rticu

larly

inte

rcep

tor

sew

ers

whi

ch a

re b

uilt

for 5

0-pl

us y

ears

. 65

H

as M

etro

Van

couv

er lo

oked

into

coo

rdin

atin

g re

gula

tions

with

hig

her l

evel

s of

gov

ernm

ent r

elat

ive

to

toxi

c cl

eani

ng a

gent

s?

For p

rodu

cts

asso

ciat

ed w

ith c

lean

ing,

MV

relie

s pr

imar

ily o

n th

e ro

le o

f fed

eral

gov

ernm

ent a

nd th

e E

nviro

nmen

tal P

rote

ctio

n A

ct, w

hich

exa

min

es

subs

tanc

es th

at a

re u

sed

in p

rodu

cts

in C

anad

a, a

nd

scie

ntifi

cally

det

erm

ines

whi

ch c

hem

ical

s ar

e su

itabl

e fo

r us

e in

this

cou

ntry

. 66

G

iven

the

fede

ral g

over

nmen

t’s re

luct

ance

in a

ddre

ssin

g en

viro

nmen

tal c

once

rns,

sho

uld

we

rely

on

the

[U.S

.] E

nviro

nmen

tal P

rote

ctio

n A

genc

y?

The

Can

adia

n E

nviro

nmen

tal P

rote

ctio

n A

ct’s

list

of

‘toxi

c ite

ms’

con

tinue

s to

gro

w. U

nder

the

exis

ting

plan

, M

V h

as a

n E

nviro

nmen

tal M

onito

ring

Com

mitt

ee w

hich

in

clud

es re

gula

tors

and

sci

entis

ts. O

ne o

f the

act

ions

in

the

plan

indi

cate

s th

at if

any

thin

g is

iden

tifie

d th

at s

houl

d be

con

side

red

by th

e fe

dera

l gov

ernm

ent f

or in

clus

ion

on

the

‘toxi

c lis

t,’ M

etro

Van

couv

er w

ill b

ring

it fo

rwar

d.

67

Pro

vide

mor

e sp

ecifi

c in

form

atio

n ab

out p

ollu

tant

s.

This

dat

a is

ava

ilabl

e.

68

Pro

vide

a s

umm

ary

of li

quid

sub

stan

ces

that

are

har

mfu

l an

d ho

w th

ey im

pact

the

envi

ronm

ent/w

ildlif

e.

This

dat

a is

ava

ilabl

e.

69

Can

sou

rce

cont

rol a

mou

nts

be e

nhan

ced

by b

ette

r en

forc

emen

t?

One

of t

he a

ctio

ns fo

cuse

s on

incr

ease

d m

onito

ring,

en

forc

emen

t and

pro

secu

tion.

70

Pub

lic

Wor

ksho

ps

Wha

t inc

entiv

es is

Met

ro V

anco

uver

offe

ring

to

enco

urag

e pe

ople

to b

e pr

oact

ive

agai

nst d

owns

tream

po

llutin

g?

MV

ope

rate

s a

fines

and

pen

altie

s sy

stem

for n

on-

dom

estic

dis

char

ge.

SDD - 27

Liqu

id W

aste

Man

agem

ent P

lan

(LW

MP

) Stra

tegy

Con

sulta

tion

Pub

lic In

put

Issu

es, C

omm

ents

and

Met

ro V

anco

uver

Res

pons

es –

Jun

e 12

, 200

8

Pag

e 6

of 3

0

So

urce

Is

sue/

Com

men

t M

etro

Van

couv

er (M

V) R

espo

nse

71

Wha

t kin

d of

regu

lato

ry e

nfor

cem

ent i

s ta

king

pla

ce

toda

y?

The

indu

strie

s ar

e pe

rmitt

ed s

o th

ere

is a

reco

rdin

g sy

stem

in p

lace

for m

onito

ring

and

audi

ting.

Met

ro

Van

couv

er a

nd th

e C

ity o

f Van

couv

er b

oth

do th

is.

72

Wha

t is

indu

stry

doi

ng in

rega

rd to

sou

rce

cont

rol r

elat

ive

to c

odes

of p

ract

ice

and

byla

w e

nfor

cem

ent?

M

V c

ontin

ually

eva

luat

es th

e di

scha

rge

from

indu

stry

to

ensu

re c

ompl

ianc

e.

73

Will

Met

ro V

anco

uver

be

mak

ing

effo

rts to

ens

ure

that

pr

oduc

ts, s

uch

as c

lean

ing

prod

ucts

that

go

into

the

sew

er s

yste

m, a

re e

nviro

nmen

tally

saf

e?

Env

ironm

ent C

anad

a is

cha

rged

with

look

ing

at

chem

ical

s us

ed in

pro

duct

s so

ld in

Can

ada.

The

y m

ake

deci

sion

s re

gard

ing

whi

ch s

houl

d be

allo

wed

or b

anne

d.

74

If th

e up

date

s to

the

LWM

P a

re to

be

effe

ctiv

e, a

t som

e po

int t

he s

ourc

e of

the

prob

lem

s, in

dust

ry fo

r exa

mpl

e,

need

to ta

ke re

spon

sibi

lity.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

75

Wha

t is

Met

ro V

anco

uver

doi

ng o

n w

aste

man

agem

ent

enfo

rcem

ent?

Ref

eren

ced

an in

cide

nt o

f bar

rels

of o

il be

ing

dum

ped

into

sew

er s

yste

m in

Abb

otsf

ord

with

littl

e re

perc

ussi

on to

per

petra

tor.

MV

con

tinue

s to

mon

itor a

nd e

nfor

ce in

dust

rial

disc

harg

es to

ens

ure

com

plia

nce.

76

Wha

t is

incl

uded

in th

e in

itiat

ive

abou

t usi

ng d

ry c

lean

ing

solv

ents

and

find

ing

an a

ltern

ativ

e to

thei

r use

? A

Cod

e of

Pra

ctic

e is

in p

lace

for t

he d

ry c

lean

ing

sect

or.

77

Ther

e is

a la

ck o

f dep

ots

for l

acqu

ers,

thin

ners

, fue

ls a

nd

othe

r har

d ch

emic

als;

flus

hing

sho

uld

not b

e th

e so

lutio

n.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

78

Met

ro V

anco

uver

sho

uld

crea

te m

ore

“Eco

-Pol

ice.

’

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

79

Pub

lic

Wor

ksho

ps

Met

ro V

anco

uver

mus

t pre

ssur

e m

anuf

actu

rers

not

to

incl

ude

dang

erou

s ch

emic

als

in th

eir p

rodu

cts.

C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

80

Edu

catin

g th

e pu

blic

sho

uld

be a

prio

rity

in re

gard

to

sour

ce c

ontro

l. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

81

Sew

age

byla

w re

gula

tion

enfo

rcem

ent m

ust b

e ac

com

pani

ed b

y th

e cr

eatio

n of

sto

rm d

rain

byl

aws

and

mon

itorin

g or

it is

a s

impl

e m

atte

r of c

hang

ing

disc

harg

e pi

pe h

ook-

ups.

Mun

icip

aliti

es h

ave

byla

ws

regu

latin

g th

eir s

torm

sew

ers.

82

Fine

s fo

r bre

akin

g th

e by

law

mus

t be

high

eno

ugh

to b

e a

dete

rren

t. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

83

Reg

ulat

ions

mus

t be

enfo

rced

.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

84

Be

clea

r abo

ut w

hat c

itize

ns s

houl

d do

with

was

te th

at

shou

ld n

ot g

o in

to th

e se

wer

s.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

85

Pub

lic F

eedb

ack

Form

s

Div

ert g

rey

wat

er fo

r filt

ratio

n an

d re

-use

at t

he s

ourc

e an

d by

resi

dent

s an

d bu

sine

sses

. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

SDD - 28

Liqu

id W

aste

Man

agem

ent P

lan

(LW

MP

) Stra

tegy

Con

sulta

tion

Pub

lic In

put

Issu

es, C

omm

ents

and

Met

ro V

anco

uver

Res

pons

es –

Jun

e 12

, 200

8

Pag

e 7

of 3

0

So

urce

Is

sue/

Com

men

t M

etro

Van

couv

er (M

V) R

espo

nse

86

Pas

s by

law

s to

redu

ce a

t-the

-sou

rce

prob

lem

s .

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

87

Cre

ate

mod

els

for s

olut

ions

at t

he s

ourc

e .

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

88

New

liqu

id w

aste

trea

tmen

ts, t

o ta

ke p

lace

at t

he n

ew

and

exis

ting

sour

ce, s

houl

d be

pla

nned

.

Com

men

t not

ed, t

o be

eva

luat

ed w

ithin

pla

n pr

epar

atio

n.

2.2

Red

ucin

g Th

e A

mou

nt o

f Liq

uid

Was

te

Th

e im

pact

of t

he D

rinki

ng W

ater

Man

agem

ent P

lan’

s (D

WM

P) c

onse

rvat

ion

mea

sure

s

Red

ucin

g se

wag

e vo

lum

es w

ith s

ewer

mai

nten

ance

89

W

ould

Met

ro V

anco

uver

con

side

r a s

yste

m w

here

ho

uses

are

bui

lt w

ith m

eter

s fo

r wat

er c

omin

g in

and

out

, co

mpl

ete

with

gre

ywat

er fi

ltrat

ion

syst

ems

so g

reyw

ater

ca

n be

use

d by

that

hou

seho

ld?

Gre

y w

ater

sys

tem

s ar

e of

inte

rest

. B

arrie

rs in

clud

e st

anda

rds

for s

yste

ms

and

they

lack

regu

lato

ry a

nd

heal

th s

yste

ms.

The

re is

wor

k an

d ef

fort

goin

g in

to th

ese

syst

ems.

90

H

ow w

ill M

etro

Van

couv

er a

ddre

ss th

e di

ffere

nce

in

usag

e be

twee

n a

sing

le p

erso

n ho

useh

old

and

a m

ultip

le

pers

on h

ouse

hold

?

Out

side

MV

juris

dict

ion.

Thi

s is

a m

unic

ipal

re

spon

sibi

lity.

91

In s

uppo

rt of

pay

ing

for w

ater

con

sum

ptio

n; th

is w

ould

pr

omot

e pu

blic

aw

aren

ess

of u

sage

. C

omm

ent n

oted

, to

be e

valu

ated

with

in p

lan

prep

arat

ion.

92

Is M

etro

Van

couv

er c

onsi

derin

g di

verti

ng g

reyw

ater

for

cosm

etic

pur

pose

s su

ch a

s ga

rden

ing?

Th

ere

are

pilo

t pro

ject

s be

ing

done

on

a on

e-on

metro vancouver regional district · 2014-08-20 · agenda greater vancouver sewerage and drainage...

Documents