STAGE ONE (DRAFT) Planning Document
Stakeholder Meeting on additional issues

Works & Emergency Services

"SWM-MEP" Stakeholder Meeting
Metro Hall, Room 314
March 1, 1999

Draft Meeting Notes/Issues List

Attendance:

Meeting Format

Presentations were given outlining the some additional issues that the City project team was seeking feedback on before proceeding with the project. These issues included the introduction of third party haulers for disposal contracts, as well as muncicipal participation on the hauling component. There were also presentations regarding tonnage quantities and contract timeframes, the city as a preferred customer and/or revenue sharing opportunities, and contracting for IC&I waste only.

After the presentations, a question and answer session took place where a number of concerns were raised by stakeholders. It should be noted that identical information was distributed (presentation overheads, summary notes from past consultations) at this meeting and the one which took place on February 25, 1999.

Questions/Concerns/Issues Raised

The issues raised have been categorized in order to facilitate responses.

Waste Diversion

• How much money has been invested into the Dufferin Material Recovery Facility (MRF) pilot? What percentage of waste will go to landfill after being processed at the MRF?
• If the waste diversion rate is higher than expected, will there be enough methane gas to run the power plant at the landfill?
• The effort to maximize diversion over the planning period was applauded.
• Many questions were asked regarding the experience of the Guelph wet/dry facility.
• Does the City have the resources to support the 75% waste diversion rate?
• All waste, including apartment waste, should be sorted in the MRF before going to disposal.
• Will this process require that participating GTA regions meet Toronto diversion targets?
• Will the volume of contracted waste change over the 20 years span with the improvement of the waste diversion program?
• Does the City have the same enthusiasm in finding MRF plants as finding landfill options?
• Is the City equally interested in MRF private/public revenue sharing partnerships?
• What is the cost per tonne to process at MRF?
• Does the bidding process for disposal companies include the diversion component?
• The disposal price the City receives, the site location, and the bidding process for disposal effectively influence province-wide standards for disposal and diversion. If diversion rates are low, a ripple effect will affect the rest of Ontario.
• The fixed quantities over 20 years should only consider residue left after 80% diversion.
• The City shouldnt consider disposal before certain diversion rates are in place. The reports submitted to the Works & Utilities Committee on Mar 24, 1999 should include a diversion plan, time-line, target and budget; and along with other reports.
• The fixed quantity in the contract will undermine diversion.
• Can materials not currently diverted be diverted using new technologies?
• Toronto should look at a two-stream waste system because it would be easier and therefore more residents would participate.
• Research and development should be a part of Torontos waste diversion planning.

Haulage

• How does the City compare/handle bidders on environmental grounds? How will this work if haulage and disposal are de-linked?
• Will there be a full environmental analysis on haulage? This needs to be clearly explained.
• There could be a large price difference between haul technologies.
• How heavily will price be factored in if haulage and disposal are de-linked?
• Will there be a separate RFP for disposal and haulage?
• Some participants felt that de-linking haulage and disposal was a positive step in this process.
• When will the proposal for haul be called?

Quantities and Timeframes

• Adding a 10 year & 15 year tables would give more opportunities to bidders.
• Locking in to long term contracts could eliminate savings which could otherwise be benefit to the City.
• A long term 20-year contract would give the City a better price in the long run.
• Table 3.4 caps waste diversion.

Preferred Customer

• Wont the "preferred customer" condition drive costs up? Is the City willing to share in the losses if prices do rise?
• Toronto as a preferred customer will set provincial price standards and freeze prices for others.
• Economic and environmental factors should be included in the preferred customer equation.
• there is a conflict between tonnage ranges and the preferred customer clause. If the City doesnt supply the highest tonnage in a range to that facility, the operator is not allowed to sell surplus space for profit.

Contracting for ICI Waste only

• If IC&I contractors are allowed to take unsorted loads to transfer stations, the City will miss much of the recycling materials that can generate revenue. This waste should go through a MRF first.
• How practical is it for the City to contract for separate ICI flow?
• Is IC&I waste still IC&I waste once it goes through the City transfer station?
• IC&I waste should not be accepted at the transfer stations, as the City will be competing directly with operators who currently run recycling plants.

General Comments

• Stakeholders should be notified when staff reports regarding this process are available prior to Committee and Council meetings.
• Reports need to clearly show how feedback during consultation efforts influenced this process.
• How does this project link with the work of the Environmental Task Force?
• What effect will the Memorandum of Understanding between GTA municipalities have on this process? When?
• How will amalgamation affect the demographics of future waste?
• Are the regions open to public-private partnership options?
• Has Toronto looked for all certified landfill capacity across Ontario? It was felt that smaller facilities would be more acceptable.
• How does the short listing process work? What factors are considered in selecting a proponent? This process should consider prosecutions/non-compliance over the past 5 years.
• There are a number of sites being developed in Ontario solely based on a chance at taking Torontos waste. The reality is that Toronto is subsidizing waste prices and setting provincial policy/standards.