waste recycling services ndustrial … · waste & recycling services industrial, commercial and...

WASTE & RECYCLING SERVICES

INDUSTRIAL, COMMERCIAL

AND INSTITUTIONAL

RECYCLING IMPLEMENTATION

STRATEGY February 2015 Allyson Racz B. Sc.

W & R S – Engineering Assistant

City of Lethbridge

P A G E | 2

CONTENTS Background ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3

Targets & Performance Monitoring ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3

Understanding the ICI and C&D sector .................................................................................................................................................................... 5

ICI Waste Characterization .................................................................................................................................................................................. 5

C&D Waste Characterization ............................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Targeted Waste Streams & market development ................................................................................................................................................ 6

Stakeholder consultation ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 6

Stakeholder Engagement Opportunities .............................................................................................................................................................. 6

City’s Role ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 6

Hauler’s Role ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7

Processor’s Role .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 7

Generator’s Role .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 8

City Leadership .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8

Stakeholder Working Groups ............................................................................................................................................................................... 9

Waste Diversion Program Options.......................................................................................................................................................................... 10

Identify Barriers and Motivators ......................................................................................................................................................................... 10

Tiered Approach: ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 10

Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 13

Figures

Figure 1: Sectors of waste generated annually in Lethbridge (Sonnevera 2008) ...................................................................................................... 3

Figure 2: Waste Diversion and per/capita generation for ICI and the C&D sector waste (See Appendix 3 - Targets & Goals) .............................................. 4

Figure 3: Lethbridge ICI waste characteristics, excl. Manufacturing, Agriculture and Mining (City of Lethbridge, 2011) .................................................... 5

Figure 4: Average Alberta C&D Composition (Sonnevera, 2008) ......................................................................................................................... 5

Tables

Table 1: Voluntary, economic and regulatory program details with corresponding diversion estimates. .............................................................................................. 3

Table 2: Target materials in the ICI and C&D sectors. ........................................................................................................................................................................... 6

Table 3: Sector specific ICI categories in Lethbridge. ............................................................................................................................................................................ 8

Table 4: Sector specific stakeholder working groups. ............................................................................................................................................................................ 9

Table 5: Barriers and motivators of stakeholders. ................................................................................................................................................................................ 10

Table 6: Tiered approach of waste diversion program options. ........................................................................................................................................................... 11

Appendices

Appendix 1: ICI Waste Diversion Program Options: Keys to Successful Implementation

Appendix 2: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional, and Construction and Demolition Waste Diversion Stakeholder Engagement Report

Appendix 3: City of Lethbridge Potential Waste Diversion Target Document

Appendix 4: ICI Processor Analysis Report

P A G E | 3

BACKGROUND

The City of Lethbridge plans to implement an Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (ICI) Waste Diversion

Strategy in alignment with City Council’s Strategic Plan. Of the six strategic priorities that were identified by City

Council, Goal #5 takes into account the importance of protecting and preserving our natural environment in

Lethbridge and aims to promote and provide opportunities for

waste diversion. The implementation of the ICI Waste

Diversion Strategy will help achieve this goal by providing

opportunities to divert waste from the ICI sector.

Of the 110,000 tonnes of municipal waste generated annually

in Lethbridge, 23% of the waste is generated by residents,

19% by the Construction & Demolition(C&D) sector and 58%

by the ICI sector (Figure 1). Waste collected from ICI facilities,

such as schools, offices, hospitals, retail and restaurants is categorized separately from C&D waste , as C&D

waste contains significantly different characteristics such as building materials. The high contribution of ICI

waste in Lethbridge likely comes from the heavy concentration of large industrial operators, combined with

Lethbridge as a regional hub that services a wide geographic area (Sonnevera 2008). Based on its significant

contribution to Lethbridge’s waste stream, the ICI Waste Diversion Strategy, through program options, will

promote and provide waste diversion opportunities for the 77% of generated ICI and C&D waste.

In 2008, a Comprehensive Waste Diversion/Waste Prevention Master Plan was completed by Sonnevera

International Corp. to guide the future of waste diversion and to conserve landfill space within the City of

Lethbridge. The plan included all sectors of waste generation, but it was recommended that the ICI sector be a

priority target for waste reduction and diversion initiatives. A range of potential program options were presented,

and included a suite of progressively aggressive options, with corresponding increasing regulatory and

budgetary requirements. Waste reduction and diversion program options can therefore be developed as a

staged approach when broken down into three categories; voluntary, economic and regulatory program options.

Voluntary programs primarily focus on the education and awareness of waste diversion, encouraging

increased engagement and participation. Voluntary programs can reach 10% -30% diversion and are

considered optional in that stakeholders involved decide whether or not to directly participate (Table 1).

Economic programs are more aggressive than voluntary programs in that they provide financial incentive or

disincentive for stakeholder participation. Economic programs generally incorporate infrastructure

enhancements and are similar to voluntary programs

in that they rely on social marketing for effective

implementation reaching 20%-50% diversion. Lastly,

regulatory programs incorporate strong incentives

and would require significant behaviour change from

participants. Regulatory programs, often in the form

of landfill bans, require businesses and the

surrounding community to participate in diversion

programs and can result in 40%-75% diversion.

PROGRAM DETAILS DIVERSION

ESTIMATES

VOLUNTARY Education, awareness, social marketing 10%-30%

ECONOMIC Infrastructure development, program

enhancements, differential tipping

rates

20%-50%

REGULATORY Landfill bans, mandatory recycling 40%-75%

Table 1: Voluntary, economic and regulatory program

details with corresponding diversion estimates.

58% 19%

23%

ICI C&D RESIDENTIAL

Figure 1: Sectors of waste generated annually in

Lethbridge (Sonnevera 2008).

P A G E | 4

Targets & Performance Monitoring

IN ORDER TO MONITOR THE IMPACTS OF A NEW PROGRAM AND TO CONSERVE LANDFILL SPACE, DIVERSION

TARGETS CAN BE DEVELOPED TO HELP TRACK PERFORMANCE OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. Currently, the ICI and

C&D sector generate 820 kg/capita of waste. The Alberta target for residential, ICI and C&D waste is 675 kg/capita/year

for 2013. Diversion targets can be developed by establishing a baseline of waste generation in a given base year,

where decrease in waste generation is measured as increased diversion.

(Base Years kg/capita) – (Current year kg/capita)

(Base year kg/capita)

Waste characterization becomes difficult to measure in the ICI sector due to the high variation of waste generated by

a wide range of businesses. The approach taken above allows for fewer waste streams to be measured and provides

comparable output numbers between baseline and current data. It is assumed that the implementation of diversion

programs will change both the type and amount of waste being sent to the City’s Landfill. Prolonging the life of the

landfill will ensure future disposal capacity for the community and defers the investment required to site a new landfill.

By 2030, diversion efforts could reach 45% compared to 2013 baseline levels (Figure 2). Given that 45% diversion can

be reached by 2030, it is estimated that the life of the landfill could be extended 3 years and save approximately $4

million based on current costs to build landfill capacity at $9.25/t.

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

% D

ivers

ion

tonnes/

capit

a

ICI Diversion Efforts

TOTAL

COMMERCIAL

WASTE (ICI & C&D) (KG/CAPITA)

TOTAL ICI & C&D DIVERSION

[%]

82

0 k

g/ca

pit

a

BASE YEAR

VOLUNTARY PROGRAM

OPTION

ECONOMIC PROGRAM

OPTION

REGULATORY

PROGRAM OPTIONS

460

kg/c

apita

= % diverted

Figure 2: Projected Waste Diversion and per/capita generation for ICI and the C&D sector waste (See Appendix 3 – Waste

Diversion Target.)

P A G E | 5

UNDERSTANDING THE ICI AND C&D SECTOR

ICI Waste Characterizat ion

In order to successfully deliver a diversion

program, it is important first to understand the

type of waste that is generated. As shown in

figure 3, organics constitute as the largest

portion of ICI waste in Lethbridge with an

estimated 31%. The next largest waste stream

is 30% of other waste, with paper and cardboard

following at 21%. Unlike residential and C&D,

ICI waste varies depending on the type of

business. Organics tend to be concentrated

within restaurant and grocery sectors, whereas

the majority of paper and cardboard is

accumulated within an office or retail setting.

Waste diversion programs will need to target

specific materials depending on the relevant

generator.

C&D Waste Characterizat io n

The characterization of C&D waste is even

more challenging because the waste will vary

depending on the stage of construction and

the type of project. Waste that is generated

from a construction site will have different

materials compared to a demolition or

renovation site.

The breakdown of C&D waste shown in figure

4 represents the average Alberta municipality.

Lethbridge C&D waste appears to fall within

this average based on discussions with the

construction industry, material weighed at the

landfill and spot-check waste audits.

31%

7%14%

18%

30%

CITY OF LETHBRIDGE ICI WASTE

CHARACTERISTICS

ORGANICS

PAPER

CARDBOARD

OTHER

RECYCLABLES

OTHER WASTE

8% 5%8%

6%

12%

13%19%

29%

C&D WASTE CHARACTERISTICS

ASPHALT

BRICK

CONCRETE

DRYWALL

METAL

ROOFING

WOOD

OTHER

Figure 3: Lethbridge ICI waste characteristics, excl.

Manufacturing, Agriculture and Mining (City of Lethbridge,

2011).

Figure 4: Average Alberta C&D Composition (Sonnevera, 2008).

P A G E | 6

Targeted Waste Streams & Market Development

BASED ON THE CHARACTERIZATION OF

WASTE, MATERIALS WITH THE HIGHEST

PROPORTION WILL BE TARGETED TO

MAXIMIZE DIVERSION. Target materials

require local markets to be in place and to

have the capacity to receive them. It is also

important to note that market prices will

fluctuate and are dependent on the quality and volume of the material. Already today, there are developed markets

for established recyclable material such as cardboard and paper. Materials that do not have existing markets will

require further investigation. Currently, the City is looking at providing capacity to collect and process C&D material

at the Waste and Recycling Centre and for opportunities to use the aggregate in local construction projects

(Appendix 4 - ICI Processor Analysis Report). Wherever possible, markets for recyclables should be developed

locally to establish the need for the material within the community.

STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

Stakeholder Engagemen t Opportunit ies

SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ICI STRATEGY RELIES ON A NUMBER OF STAKEHOLDERS EACH WITH

THEIR OWN ROLE TO PLAY. A series of stakeholder engagement workshops were held in 2013 inviting representatives

from the C&D and ICI sector, as well as the haulers and processors servicing the community. The objective of the

engagement workshops was to gain feedback from stakeholders regarding diversion programs and to understand the

challenges and opportunities of waste diversion at a business level. The first stakeholder engagement session was

held on June 26, 2013 where a number of diversion program options were presented for discussion and explained in

detail to the stakeholders (See Appendix 2 – Stakeholder Engagement Report). A second stakeholder engagement

session was held on September 12, where information gained from the first session was used to further discuss

program feasibility. During this session, stakeholders were asked to describe in detail their feedback on the City’s role

and key stakeholders’ roles for a successful diversion program.

City’s Role

In the second workshop session all stakeholders agreed it was the City’s responsibility to provide waste diversion

education and communicate program details. Stakeholders felt it is the City’s role to set the direction and bring

credibility to waste diversion initiatives. It was also discussed that the City structure programs in a way that it is

economically viable for industry to participate and allocate resources. Based on the views collected from the

stakeholders, the city’s role is:

Create waste diversion strategy

Promote and facilitate

Establish targets and diversion goals

Develop a comprehensive waste measuring and reporting system & establish a solid baseline

Communicate and keep industry engaged on decisions and program option updates

Promote stakeholder success stories and recognize environmental leaders

Provide a full suite of collection services for our customer base

Continue to provide diversion and processing options at the Waste and Recycling Centre

Facilitate appropriate levels of infrastructure investment to meet the needs of the community

Table 2: Target materials in the ICI and C&D sectors.

SECTOR MATERIALS TO TARGET

ICI Fibre (Cardboard & Paper)

Organics

C&D Building Materials (Wood, drywall, metal,

asphalt shingles and aggregate)

P A G E | 7

Hauler ’s Role

At the time of the first stakeholder engagement workshop, 23 different hauling companies were invited to

participate and provide their feedback on the future of waste diversion from a hauler’s perspective. 14

different hauling stakeholders attended the workshop. This included a number of front load and roll off

haulers, as well as residential and commercial recycling collection providers. Again, participants were asked

their view of the different roles stakeholders would play regarding waste diversion programs. Below

summarizes how stakeholders’ view the role of haulers:

Provide education and promotion of waste diversion options offered through their service to their customers

Ensure their programs are used correctly to decrease the chance of contamination

Provide tracking and performance monitoring information to the City in regards to baseline data collection Ensure the right information is provided Report any issues

In working with the City, haulers will need to report any issues with tracking or performance monitoring in

regards to baseline data collection. The City should have clear objectives and work with haulers on multiple

levels to ensure the right information is being collected. Haulers will also be the source of education for their

clientele by informing them of waste diversion options and initiatives offered through their service. It will be

the role of the hauler to ensure that their customers and employees are using the collection system correctly.

Contamination creates challenges for the processor and affects the quality of the recycled commodity.

Processor’s Role

Local processors play an important role in preparing the material for market. In both stakeholder engagement

sessions, 12 local processors were invited to participate and provide their outlook on the various roles that

should be established for successful diversion. 10 different processors attended the engagement sessions.

This included a number of organics, metal and wood processors, as well as representatives from the fibre

and plastics field. Below provides a summary of how stakeholders’ view the role of processors:

Accept recyclable material for processing and locate available markets

Ensure programs are used correctly to decrease the chance of contamination

Educate employees and clientele of program details and waste diversion options

Stay informed on new technologies and opportunities; work with the City at creating new waste diversion options

for the community

It will be the responsibility of industry to be aware of future changes and actions proposed by the City.

Processors will need to be informed of any policy changes related to waste disposal and diversion. This

provides processors the opportunity to prepare their business for waste diversion programs. Similar to

haulers, processors will play an important role in educating both their own employees and the community.

P A G E | 8

Generator’s Role

ICI generators encompass a number of different organizations and businesses providing a wide range of

services. Over one hundred ICI generators were contacted during the stakeholder engagement period, as

well as the major associations of the Downtown Lethbridge Business Revitalization Zone (BRZ), Industrial

Association of Southern Alberta (IASA), and the Lethbridge Chamber of Commerce. A cross section of

businesses were selected from different sector categories: retail, grocery stores, restaurants, hotels,

healthcare providers, office buildings, property managers, professional firms, recreational facilities,

education, transportation and warehousing service providers. 23 different ICI generators attended the

sessions representing the following:

INSTITUTION SECTOR COMMERCIAL SECTOR INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

University of Lethbridge Restaurants Manufacturing

Lethbridge Community College Grocery Stores Agriculture Processing

School Districts Accommodation Food Processing

Health Region Small, Mid & Large Retail Distributing

Similarly to ICI generators, a number of C&D stakeholders were contacted through various associations

within Lethbridge and included the Canadian Homebuilders’ Association, Lethbridge Construction

Association, and the Lethbridge Chapter of the Urban Development Institute. Over 35 C&D generators were

invited to participate and included roofers, drywallers, home builders, facility owners, developers, demolition

services and renovators. 14 different C&D stakeholders attended the engagement workshops.

Below summarizes the stakeholders’ view of the role of ICI and C&D generators:

Stakeholders share the responsibility of providing accurate data to the City in terms of tracking and performance

monitoring

Ensure the right information is provided Report any issues

Ensure internal staff are aware of any program changes and waste diversion options

Provide communication and education to customers

In some situations stakeholders may be required to sort/separate materials on site Ensure employees are informed of program specifics to mitigate contamination

City Leadership

WITHIN THIS STRATEGY, IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE, AS AN ORGANIZATION, TO LEAD BY

EXAMPLE. This aligns with the City of Lethbridge’s Corporate Environmental Policy which helps to establish

corporate ownership and creates common values within the business community. City Leadership will create

a culture of environmental sustainability. This will be achieved through the continuous improvement,

implementation of best practices, and the integration of green considerations into daily business operations.

Table 3: Sector specific ICI categories in Lethbridge.

Table 3: Sector specific ICI categories in Lethbridge.

P A G E | 9

Stakeholder Working Groups

A KEY COMPONENT OF SUCCESSFUL DIVERSION NOT ONLY LIES IN THE ROLES OF INDIVIDUAL

STAKEHOLDERS, BUT ALSO HOW THOSE STAKEHOLDERS AND THE CITY WILL WORK TOGETHER TO ACHIEVE

SPECIFIED TARGETS AND GOALS. This can be met through the establishment of working groups which provide

a positive component to waste diversion and encourages the distribution of success stories. Stakeholder

working groups require participation from a variety of stakeholders and City of Lethbridge Waste and

Recycling administration staff. This not only allows stakeholders to have a say in the over-all decision making

process, but also highlights their ability to provide their industry knowledge and intuition to develop and create

ownership within the diversion programs under review. Within each working group a champion will be

identified to assist in leadership and help model behaviour within sector specific areas.

Table 4: Sector specific stakeholder working groups.

PROCESSORS HAULERS

WASTE GENERATORS

C&D ICI

STAKEHOLDER ROLES & PARTICIPATION

Assist in the development of a market strategy

Create education package for customers

Stay informed on new technologies and market opportunities

Educate employees on waste diversion programs

Assist in development of market strategy

Create education package for customers

Conduct regular meetings on: Issues of tracking Performance

monitoring Feedback

mechanisms

Involve associations’ executive directors in implementation

Identify champions within the group

Incorporate multiple stakeholder views to provide a diverse outlook

Review and validate implementation plan

Include trade professionals from framing, drywalling and roofing companies

Provide education to staff and customers

Involve associations’ executive directors in implementation

Identify champions within the group

Incorporate multiple stakeholder views to provide a diverse outlook

Review and validate implementation plan

Includes multiple sector specific working groups

Provide education to staff and customers

ASSOCIATIONS INVOLVED

Lethbridge Homebuilders Association

Lethbridge Construction Association

Urban Development Institute

Lethbridge Chamber of Commerce

Industrial Association of Southern Alberta

Downtown Lethbridge Business Revitalization Zone

P A G E | 10

WASTE DIVERSION PROGRAM OPTIONS

Identify Barr iers and Motivators

IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT THERE ARE BARRIERS AND MOTIVATORS TO EACH PROGRAM OPTION. In order to

capture multiple views, stakeholders were asked in the first workshop session to describe in the detail the

current issues and challenges for diversion programs. Below outlines the barriers and motivators for C&D,

ICI, haulers and processors:

STAKEHOLDERS BARRIERS MOTIVATORS

GEN

ERATO

RS

ICI

Cost

Convenience

Lack of knowledge & awareness

Service providers

Corporate mandate

C&

D

HAU

LERS

No processing capacity

Increases cost to customer

Fee for service

Financial incentive

Service differentiation

Market share

PRO

CESSO

RS

No markets for processed product

Market for services

Increase commodity volumes

While the majority of the barriers focused on program cost, there were also a number of business-specific

issues, such as space restriction, or locations that prevented participation in waste diversion programs.

Going forward, it will be important to identify these barriers and motivators when constructing and

implementing new waste diversion programs.

Tiered Approach

Based on the views of stakeholders, voluntary programs options were well supported along with economic

options. In both C&D and ICI consultation sessions, voluntary programs were the highly favoured options.

Voluntary and economic programs provide stakeholders the opportunity to reduce barriers by providing

education, awareness, and assistance for participating stakeholders. Economic program options provide an

incentive to reduce waste as compared to the cost of disposal.

Regulatory options, on the other hand were not as favoured, but were considered important and most

effective at meeting waste diversion targets. Although voluntary options are more widely accepted, they are

not as effective at reducing waste as regulatory and economic options. Voluntary programs can lead to the

development of economic or regulatory programs if the program itself is ineffective or when targets are not

achieved. Educating stakeholders early on during the voluntary phase about the importance of the program

will encourage the success of the program and help mitigate the need for economic and regulatory action.

Table 5: Barriers and motivators of stakeholders.

motivators of stakeholders.

P A G E | 11

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT:

INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT & MARKETING:

BASELINE STUDY: data collection that will be used to track and compare waste diversion into

the future. The baseline study requires a monitoring and reporting system that gathers waste data from key stakeholders. The baseline study would be the initial step of implementat ion and ties into the formation of the stakeholder working groups. Data collection will focus on material tonnages and will require stakeholders to provide accurate data. The City will identify clear objectives for data collection while ensuring the privacy of the stakeholders involved.

PERFORMANCE MONITORING: ongoing data collection that follows the establishment of a

baseline study. Performance monitoring allows for the continuous management and collection of data used for comparing future to baseline data and provides a tracking method for targets and goals. Another aspect of performance monitoring is the ability to identify areas where diversion may not be as successful and if there is a need for further action through the form of economic or regulatory programs.

INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT: identify areas that need development and ensure recycling options

for designated materials prior to the implementation of regulatory programs. This needs to be addressed

early on to ensure processing and market capacity for designated or target materials. Processing facilities and

markets should be developed locally for the collection and processing to reduce the distance the material will travel.

The pyramid below outlines the tiered approach towards waste diversion program options:

Table 6: Tiered approach of waste diversion program options.

P A G E | 12

VOLUNTARY PROGRAMS:

ECONOMIC PROGRAMS:

REGULATORY PROGRAMS:

EDUCATION AND AWARENESS PROGRAM: accomplished through communication tools,

stakeholder working group meetings and other interactive tools to promote waste diversion in the C&D sector. Education and awareness would be conducted throughout to ensure the success of program effectiveness and to encourage stakeholder participation. The program is the key element to supporting voluntary participation in C&D diversion programs and would include announcements of upcoming economic and regulatory initiatives.

WASTE DIVERSION ASSISTANCE: provides technical assistance and information to

businesses interested in waste reduction programs. The program would begin once working groups are established to provide background information and to support current and future waste diversion options in the ICI sector.

WASTE DIVERSION PROMOTION: promotes specific waste reduction activities in the business

community through public acknowledgement of accomplishments and reinforcement of positive behaviours aimed at waste diversion. Ties into Waste Diversion Assistance program and would be carried out as a resource for educating, communicating and marketing waste diversion programs .

DIFFERENTIAL TIPPING FEES & DESIGNATED MATERIALS: following the initial voluntary

education period, differential tipping fees encourage diversion by creating a financial incentive to separate designated materials from the waste load. Differential tipping fees introduce the economic tools to influence behaviour by increasing the cost of disposal for loads containing designated materials. Program implementation would occur if voluntary programs are unsuccessful in reaching diversion targets and goals.

SURCHARGES: introduce a financial disincentive for waste loads containing designated materials. Surcharges place a levy on all waste that contains designated materials, while ensuring

economic viability for materials with diversion options.

MANDATORY RECYCLING/SOURCE SEPARATION: regulation that requires generators to

separate/divert designated materials from the waste stream through recycling alternatives. Mandatory recycling/source separation occurs after differential tipping fees are unsuccessful in reaching diversion targets and goals.

DISPOSAL BANS: regulation that influences behaviour by prohibiting disposal of target

materials. In order to be successful, recycling infrastructure needs to be in place to process banned material. Disposal bans occur after differential tipping fees and surcharges do not result in waste diversion initiatives reaching disposal targets and goals.

**More information provided in Appendix 1 – ICI Waste Diversion Program Options: Keys to Successful Implementation.

P A G E | 13

CONCLUSION

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF KEY ELEMENTS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A SUCCESSFUL WASTE DIVERSION

PROGRAM.

KEYS TO SUCCESS:

Focus on target material:

Fibre & organics in the ICI sector

Wood, drywall, metal, asphalt shingles and aggregate in the C&D sector

Build a performance management system consisting of:

A baseline

Performance targets

Develop a series of stakeholder working groups that fully engage generators, haulers and

processors

Promote success stories

Communicate and keep industry engaged on program details

Create an understanding of the motivators and barriers

Facilitate infrastructure investment to meet the needs of the community

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ICI STRATEGY WILL CONSIST OF A NUMBER OF PHASES. THROUGH THE

IMPLEMENTATION THERE WILL BE A PROGRESSION BEGINNING WITH VOLUNTARY PROGRAMS, FOLLOWED

BY ECONOMIC, WITH REGULATORY OPTIONS IN RESERVE IF THESE SOFTER APPROACHES ARE NOT

SUCCESSFUL IN MEETING DIVERSION GOALS. AS PART OF THIS STRATEGY THE CITY IN COOPERATION WITH

STAKEHOLDERS WOULD COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING TASKS:

PHASE 1 [2015]:

City Leadership

Establish stakeholder working groups: generators, haulers & processors

Develop baseline and performance management system

City’s role – educate, service provider (provide full suite of service), lead by example

PHASE 2 [2016-2018]:

Voluntary options

Education and awareness

Provide waste diversion assistance & promotion

Infrastructure and market development

PHASE 3 [2019-2023]:

Economic options

Update and expand differential tipping fees

Create designated material list

Implement surcharges for mixed loads containing designated material

PHASE 4 [2024-2026]:

Regulatory Options

Mandatory recycling (ICI)

Disposal bans for designated materials

A more detailed schedule is provided below.

P A G E | 14

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026[1 YEAR]

PRELIMINARY

TASKS:• ICI Strategy

completed

• City Leadership

• Presentation to

Environment

Committee

•Identify SH

working groups

•Finalize the role

of the City

• Endorsement of

targets

• Presentation to

Council

[1 YEAR]

BASELINE

STUDY:• Create SH

working groups

• Identify target

C&D material

• Create reporting

and monitoring

system for C&D

waste & recycling

streams

• Collect baseline

data

• Review

diversion targets

and engage SHs

• Provide

incentives to

participate

[2 YEARS]

PERFORMANCE MONITORING:• Review and evaluate data

• Identify successes and improvements

• Recognize differential tipping fees

feasibility

•Refine targets & communicate to SH

Assess the need

for differential

tipping fees

[8 YEARS & ONGOING]



Assess the need

for disposal bans

[3 YEARS]

EDUCATION AND AWARENESS PROGRAM:• Partnership with C&D SH

• Develop master list of processing options & share success

stories

• Communicate diversion targets and goals

• Build, engage and promote education and awareness

package

• Engage haulers Share best practices & success stories;

• Update social marketing practices

•Education and promotion of future differential tipping fees

[3 YEARS]

*DIFFERENTIAL TIPPING FEES & DESIGNATED

MATERIALS:• Implement differential tipping fees

•Identify and designate materials for diversion

•Ensure alternative diversion options for designated materials

• Communicate, educate and promote to all SH

• Update bylaw & develop enforcement program

• Ensure promotion and adequate adoption time for all SH’s

involved

[2 YEARS]

*SURCHARGES:• Implement surcharges for designated

materials

• Identify enforcement issues

[3 YEARS]

*DISPOSAL BANS:• Used when tipping fees don’t achieve diversion target

• Publicize early on to give lead time

• Enforcement at the scale

*As required

[3 YEARS]

INFRASTRUCTURE & MARKET DEVELOPMENT:• Create full inventory of existing processing capacity

• Facilitate market development

• Facilitate development of infrastructure

[3 YEARS]

INFRASTRUCTURE & MARKET DEVELOPMENT:• Infrastructure and processing capacity are in place for diversion

and designated materials

[2 YEARS]

INFRASTRUCTURE & MARKET

DEVELOPMENT:• Ensure local processing & markets for

proposed banned materials in 2024

VOLUNTARY ECONOMIC REGULATORY

C&D SCHEDULE: P

ERFO

RM

AN

CE

MAN

AG

EM

EN

TP

RO

GRAM

OPTIO

NS

DEVELO

PM

EN

T&

MARKETIN

G

AS PART OF THIS STRATEGY THE CITY IN COOPERATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS WOULD COMPLETE THE ABOVE TASKS

MILESTONE

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

P A G E | 15

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026[1 YEAR]

PRELIMINARY

TASKS:• ICI Strategy

completed

• City Leadership

• Presentation to

Environment

Committee

•Identify SH

working groups

•Finalize the role

of the City

• Endorsement of

targets

• Presentation to

Council

[1 YEAR]

BASELINE

STUDY:• Create SH

working groups

• Identify target

ICI material

• Create reporting

and monitoring

system for ICI

waste & recycling

streams

• Collect baseline

data

• Review

diversion targets

and engage SHs

• Provide

incentives to

participate

[2 YEARS]



• Recognize differential tipping fees

feasibility

•Refine targets & communicate to SH

Assess the need

for differential

tipping fees

[8 YEARS & ONGOING]



Assess the need

for disposal bans

[3 YEARS]

WASTE DIVERSION ASSISTANCE:•Provide technical and information assistance to SH

• Understand company’s background and research corporate

mandate regarding diversion

• Develop master list of diversion options & share success

stories

• Partnership with major ICI associations (see Table 4)

[3 YEARS]

*DIFFERENTIAL TIPPING FEES & DESIGNATED

MATERIALS:• Implement differential tipping fees

•Identify and designate materials for diversion

•Ensure alternative diversion options for designated materials

• Communicate, educate and promote to all SH

• Update bylaw & develop enforcement program

• Ensure promotion and adequate adoption time for all SH’s

involved

[2 YEARS]

*SURCHARGES:• Implement surcharges for designated

materials

• Identify enforcement issues

[3 YEARS]

INFRASTRUCTURE & MARKET DEVELOPMENT:• Create full inventory of existing processing capacity

• Facilitate market development

• Facilitate development of infrastructure

[3 YEARS]

INFRASTRUCTURE & MARKET DEVELOPMENT:• Infrastructure and processing capacity are in place for diversion

and designated materials

[2 YEARS]

INFRASTRUCTURE & MARKET

DEVELOPMENT:• Ensure local processing & markets for

proposed banned materials in 2024

VOLUNTARY ECONOMIC REGULATORY

C&D SCHEDULE: P

ERFO

RM

AN

CE

MAN

AG

EM

EN

TP

RO

GRAM

OPTIO

NS

DEVELO

PM

EN

T&

MARKETIN

GICI SCHEDULE:

[1-2 YEARS]

*DISPOSAL BANS:•Publicize early on to give lead

time

• Enforcement at the scale

*As required

[1-2 YEARS]

*MANDATORY

RECYCLING:• Used when differential

tipping fees & surcharges

don’t achieve diversion targets

•Review permit requirements

for recycling capacity

•Develop enforcement

program

•Promote program and

publicize early on to give lead

time

WASTE DIVERSION PROMOTION:• Research best practices from other communities

• Develop recognition programs

• Apply social marketing tools & techniques

• Develop education, communication and marketing package

• Identify champion stakeholders

AS PART OF THIS STRATEGY THE CITY IN COOPERATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS WOULD COMPLETE THE ABOVE TASKSMILESTONE

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

WASTE & RECYCLING SERVICES

ICI WASTE DIVERSION

PROGRAM OPTIONS: KEYS TO SUCCESSFUL

IMPLEMENTATION

January 2015 Allyson Racz B. Sc.

W & R S – Engineering

Assistant

City of Lethbridge

Performance Management

BASELINE STUDY &

PERFORMANCE MONITORING

IDENTIFY AND CREATE A WORKING GROUP FOR ICI, C&D,

PROCESSORS, AND HAULERS WHERE STAKEHOLDERS:

Share the responsibility of providing accurate data for

baseline reporting

Discuss common issues and challenges and identify

potential solutions

IDENTIFY TARGET ICI MATERIALS:

Fibre: Cardboard & Paper

Organics

IDENTIFY TARGET C&D MATERIALS:

Cardboard

Wood & Drywall

Vinyl Siding

Aggregate material

Asphalt Shingles

Other construction material

WORK WITH ALL STAKEHOLDERS THROUGHOUT

DEVELOPMENT TO CAPTURE INFORMATION & COLLECT DATA

AT PROCESSOR & COLLECTION SITES. PROGRAM

REQUIREMENTS:

A monitoring and reporting system that would record &

measure target material tonnage

Performance monitoring will track diversion & disposal

rates

The need for source separated loads

Stakeholders to provide accurate data & make

comparisons to scale house records

The City to have clear objectives & ensure privacy

The City to provide incentives to participate – ex. Waste

audit assistance

Definition: data collection

that will be used to track

and compare waste

diversion into the future.

The baseline study

requires a monitoring and

reporting system that

gathers waste data from

key stakeholders. The

baseline study would be

the initial step of

implementation and ties

into the formation of the

stakeholder working

groups. Data collection will

focus on material

tonnages and will require

stakeholders to provide

accurate data. The

challenge will be collecting

data from a diverse group

of service providers, each

with their own type and

amount of waste. The City

will identify clear

objectives for data

collection while ensuring

the privacy of the

stakeholders involved.

Infrastructure Development & Marketing

INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT

BRIDGE THE GAP BETWEEN WHAT IS CURRENT AND WHAT IS

NEEDED.

CREATE AN INVENTORY OF CURRENT PROCESSING CAPACITY

FOR TARGET MATERIAL(SEE APPENDIX 3 – ICI PROCESSOR

ANALYSIS REPORT):

ICI Target Materials:

Organics or “Green Waste”

Fibre & Plastics C&D Target Materials:

Wood, Drywall, asphalt, shingles, aggregate

CREATE A STAKEHOLDER WORKING GROUP TO:

Enhance processor relationship

DETERMINE THE NEED FOR INCREASED PROCESSING FACILITIES

FOR TARGET MATERIAL:

Explore options for investment & ownership

Explore the potential of private/public partnerships

ASSURE MARKET DEVELOPMENT FOR TARGET MATERIAL TO:

Help stabilize current markets

Introduce the potential for new markets

COLLECTION SERVICE FOR TARGET MATERIAL:

Encourage development for private sector collection services

Provide a full suite of collection services for customers

selecting the City as their waste hauler

USE DIFFERENTIAL TIPPING FEES TO DRIVE INVESTMENT &

STIMULATE FUNDING INTO INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT

USE FUTURE MANDATORY RECYCLING OR FUTURE LANDFILL

BANS TO DRIVE INVESTMENT

Definition: identify

areas that need

development and

ensure recycling

options for

designated materials

prior to the

implementation of

regulatory programs.

Addressed early on to

ensure processing

and market capacity

for designated or

target materials.

Processing facilities

and markets should

be developed locally

for the collection and

processing of target

materials to reduce

the distance the

material will travel.

Voluntary Programs

EDUCATION & AWARENESS

PROGRAM

PROVIDES THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMUNICATE

THE CITY’S:

o Waste & Recycling direction and goals

o Waste diversion goals for the commercial

sector

DEVELOP PARTNERSHIPS WITH HOME BUILDER

ASSOCIATIONS TO BUILD AND PROMOTE AN

EDUCATION AND AWARENESS PROGRAM. THE

EDUCATION AND AWARENESS PACKAGE WILL

INCLUDE:

A master list of processing options for all

recyclable C&D material

Information on how to participate and cost

savings in diversion programs

o Engage haulers in this process

An opportunity to share industry best practices

& success stories in diversion initiatives

Guidelines for safe disposal

Definition: accomplished

through social media,

stakeholder working group

meetings and other

interactive tools to promote

waste diversion in the C&D

sector. Education and

awareness would be

conducted throughout to

ensure the success of

program effectiveness and to

encourage stakeholder

participation. The education

and awareness program is

the key element to

supporting voluntary

participation in C&D

diversion programs and

would include

announcements of upcoming

economic and regulatory

initiatives.

C&

D P

RO

GRAM

WASTE DIVERSION ASSISTANCE

CITY IS A FACILITATOR AND EDUCATOR TO PROMOTE RESPONSIBLE

WASTE PRACTICES

Incorporates social, financial, health and environmental

elements

CITY TO DECIDE ON LEVEL OF ASSISTANCE

CREATE AND PRIORITIZE AN INVENTORY OF BUSINESSES TO TARGET

Understand the company’s background

Do they already have a corporate environmental statement?

DEVELOP GREEN TEAMS AS A TOOL TO BRING TOGETHER BUSINESSES

WORKING TOWARDS THE SAME GOAL

DEVELOP:

Templates, toolkits and resource lists for successful diversion

Safe disposal guidelines and best practices

Opportunities for networking

SET THE EXAMPLE THROUGH THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE CORPORATE

ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEGY

EXPLORE USING WASTE OPERATIONS STAFF TO ASSIST WITH

IMPLEMENTATION

DEVELOP A TOOL FOR BUSINESSES TO ASSESS THEIR WASTE RELATED

DECISIONS TO THE TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE CONCEPT

WASTE DIVERSION PROMOTION

FOLLOW SOCIAL MARKETING PRINCIPLES THROUGHOUT

RESEARCH

Best practices from other communities

What industry does to promote waste diversion

UNDERSTAND THE VALUE STATEMENT FOR THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY

Value = [benefit] – [cost]

What is the cost?

What is the benefit?

DEVELOP THE BUSINESS LOOK

Provide incentives to participate

DEVELOP AN EDUCATION, COMMUNICATION AND MARKETING

PACKAGE:

That provides tools and templates

That delivers a successful diversion program

CAPTURE AND HIGHLIGHT SUCCESS STORIES WITHIN THE BUSINESS

COMMUNITY

Definition:

provides technical

assistance and

information to

businesses

interested in waste

reduction programs.

The program would

begin once working

groups are

established to

provide background

information and to

support current and

future waste

diversion options in

the ICI sector.

Definition: promotes

specific waste reduction

activities in the business

community through

public acknowledgement

of accomplishments and

reinforcement of positive

behaviours aimed at

waste diversion. Ties into

Waste Diversion

Assistance program and

would be carried out as a

resource for educating,

communicating and

marketing waste

diversion programs.

ICI P

RO

GRAM

ICI P

RO

GRAM

Economic Programs

DIFFERENTIAL TIPPING FEES & SURCHARGES

FOR DESIGNATED MATERIALS

[A] DIFFERENTIAL TIPPING FEES FOR DESIGNATED MATERIALS:

Identify designated materials that are suitable for

differential tipping fee implementation

Understand the processing costs for selected materials

Create a discounted rate for designated materials

Understand relationship between cost and benefit for

recycling that designated material

o Value = [benefit] – [cost]

DETERMINE THE SPREAD FOR THE DIFFERENTIAL FEES TO BE

ADEQUATE TO CREATE AN INCENTIVE AND MOTIVATE

PARTICIPATION OF PROCESSORS & HAULERS

SEEK BYLAW APPROVAL FOR CHANGE IN FEE STRUCTURE

May require an increase in the mixed solid waste tipping fee to

allow for the differential fee to provide a cost incentive

Develop protocol for application of new fee structure

[B] SURCHARGES FOR DESIGNATED MATERIALS:

Communicate and educate designated materials to all

stakeholders involved

Create an increased tipping fee for loads containing

designated materials

Assess the enforcement criteria and what role the City will

provide to warrant an effective program

DEVELOP A SCHEDULE THAT CAN BE RESULTS BASED & PROVIDE

ADEQUATE LEAD TIME FOR:

Markets and processing in place

Bylaw changes

Grace period for enforcement

OTHER BENEFITS FOR RECYCLING OR SOURCE SEPARATION

Could include a fast track line at the scale

MOVE TO WEIGHT BASED COLLECTION COSTS

[C] INCREASED DISPOSAL FEES

Create financial incentive

Create a greater spread between materials disposed versus

materials recycled

Definition:

following the initial

voluntary education

period, differential

tipping fees further

encourage

diversion of

designated

materials, where

loads containing

designated

materials have

increased fees at

the scale compared

to loads that are

separated for

diversion.

Differential tipping

fees introduce the

economic tools to

influence

behaviour. Program

implementation

would occur if

Waste Diversion

Assistance and

Promotion

programs are

unsuccessful in

reaching diversion

targets and goals.

Regulatory Programs MANDATORY RECYCLING/SOURCE

SEPARATION

DEVELOP FRAMEWORK OF MANDATORY RECYCLING

Transition period

DEVELOPMENT OF RECYCLING COLLECTION INFRASTRUCTURE

On site recycling containers

Access to recycling stations

Adjust recycling station funding model to share cost of

recycling of ICI

DEVELOP AN ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM

Look at resources for enforcement and build mechanisms to

achieve a level playing field for all stakeholders involved

UPDATE BYLAW

Mandatory requirement

Enforcement provision

REVIEW DEVELOPMENT PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR RECYCLING

CAPACITY

CONFIRM ROLE OF HAULERS TO EDUCATE CUSTOMERS ON

PROGRAM DETAILS AND COST

DEVELOP COMMUNICATION PLAN

Definition:

regulation that

requires generators

to separate/divert

designated

materials from the

waste stream

through recycling

alternatives.

Mandatory

recycling/source

separation occurs

after differential

tipping fees are

unsuccessful in

reaching diversion

targets and goals.

DISPOSAL BANS

REVIEW THE DESIGNATED MATERIAL LIST FOR MEETING

DIVERSION TARGETS

IDENTIFY MATERIALS SUITABLE FOR DISPOSAL BANS

ENSURE AVAILABILITY OF LOCAL PROCESSING & COLLECTION

FOR BANNED MATERIALS BEFORE IMPLEMENTATION

BYLAW REVISION

DEVELOP COMMUNICATION PLAN

PUBLICIZE BAN EARLY ON TO GIVE PLENTY OF LEAD TIME

Stagger implementation dates

Definition: regulation that

influences behaviour by

prohibiting disposal of

target materials. In order to

be successful, recycling

infrastructure needs to be in

place to process banned

material. Disposal bans

occur after differential

tipping fees and surcharges

do not result in waste

diversion initiatives

reaching disposal targets

and goals.

ICI P

RO

GRAM

CITY OF LETHBRIDGE

INDUSTRIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL ANDCONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITIONWASTE DIVERSIONSTAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PROJECT

REPORT

MARCH 2014ISSUED FOR USEEBA FILE: C22503014-01

EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd. operating as EBA, A Tetra Tech CompanyRiverbend Atrium One, 115, 200 Rivercrest Drive SE

Calgary, AB T2C 2X5 CANADAp. 403.203.3355 f. 403.203.3301

This page intentionally left blank.

LETHBRIDGE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PROJECTEBA FILE: C22503014-01 | MARCH 2014 | ISSUED FOR USE

iRPT Stakeholder Engagement Report IFU

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City of Lethbridge (City), Waste & Recycling (W&R) retained EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd. (EBA)1,

to conduct a Stakeholder Engagement Project for the Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional (ICI) and

Construction and Demolition (C&D) sectors. EBA partnered with sonnevera international corp.

(sonnevera) and Ipsos Reid (Ipsos) to complete the stakeholder engagement sessions and analysis.

Stakeholders from the C&D industry, as well as the ICI industry were consulted regarding the

implementation of potential waste diversion programs for the Lethbridge area. A range of voluntary,

economic, and regulatory waste diversion options were presented to the stakeholders. A preliminary

engagement session with the C&D and ICI stakeholders was held on June 26, 2013, with a total of 21

and 33 participants, respectively. The first C&D session involved the discussion of 10 waste diversion

program options, along with the concept of a baseline study, and the first ICI session discussed 13 program

options. The stakeholders were asked to rate their support for each option on a scale of 1 to 10. On average,

the voluntary program options were rated very highly by stakeholders, scoring greater than 5 out of 10.

Economic program options were also well received, with scores greater than 5 out of 10, including

differential tipping fees, which rated the highest amongst the ICI stakeholders. Regulatory program options

were the least supported by stakeholders often receiving scores less than 5 out of 10, especially by the C&D

stakeholders.

Current challenges preventing stakeholders from participating in waste diversion programs were also

recorded in the first session. For both C&D and ICI stakeholders, a lack of incentives, cost implications, and

lack of education were all significant barriers preventing their participation in waste diversion programs.

The final session for the consultation process was held September 12 and had a total of 14 C&D

participants and 23 ICI participants. This session involved a much more in-depth discussion of the top

ranking options from the first session, as well as regulatory program options that may be considered in the

longer term, or have particularly high diversion results. Detail in regards to the stakeholders’ opinions on

program implementation, such as the City’s Role, key stakeholders’ roles, and keys to successful

implementation, were recorded. For any waste diversion program to be successful, it was clear that there

needs to be a working relationship with the City and key stakeholders. Stakeholders felt it was the

responsibility of the City to set environmental goals and initiate the education and awareness of waste

diversion programs to the industry and the public. It is also the responsibility of key stakeholders to

communicate with their internal stakeholders and customers, as well as actively participate in the

programs and share their success stories within the industry.

1 As of January 1, 2014, EBA is now Tetra Tech EBA Inc.


iiRPT Stakeholder Engagement Report IFU

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................................... i

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ........................... 12.1 Process Overview..................................................................................................................................1

2.1.1 Challenges Limiting the Participation of Stakeholders in Construction and Demolition WasteDiversion Programs ..................................................................................................................1

2.1.2 Waste Diversion Construction and Demolition Program Options.............................................22.2 Key Stakeholder Findings......................................................................................................................3

2.2.1 Baseline Study..........................................................................................................................42.2.1.1 Stakeholder’s Opinion on the City’s Role ....................................................................42.2.1.2 Roles of Key Stakeholders ..........................................................................................42.2.1.3 Keys to Successful Program Implementation..............................................................4

2.2.2 Differential Tipping Fees...........................................................................................................42.2.2.1 Stakeholder’s Opinion on the City’s Role ....................................................................42.2.2.2 Roles of Key Stakeholders ..........................................................................................52.2.2.3 Keys to Successful Program Implementation..............................................................5

2.2.3 Develop an Education and Awareness Program for Construction and Demolition Diversion..52.2.3.1 Stakeholder’s Opinion on the City’s Role ....................................................................62.2.3.2 Roles of Key Stakeholders ..........................................................................................62.2.3.3 Keys to Successful Program Implementation..............................................................6

2.2.4 Infrastructure Development Facilities .......................................................................................72.2.4.1 Stakeholder’s Opinion on the City’s Role ....................................................................72.2.4.2 Roles of Key Stakeholders ..........................................................................................72.2.4.3 Keys to Successful Program Implementation..............................................................7

2.2.5 Deposit Refund Program ..........................................................................................................82.2.5.1 Program Feasibility ......................................................................................................82.2.5.2 Keys to Successful Program Implementation..............................................................8

3.0 INDUSTRIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL .......................................................... 83.1 Process Overview..................................................................................................................................8

3.1.1 Challenges Limiting the Participation of Stakeholders in Industrial, Commercial, andInstitutional Waste Diversion Programs....................................................................................9

3.1.2 Waste Diversion Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Program Options...........................93.2 Key Stakeholder Findings....................................................................................................................11

3.2.1 Differential Tipping Fees.........................................................................................................113.2.1.1 Stakeholder’s Opinion on the City’s Role ..................................................................113.2.1.2 Roles of Key Stakeholders ........................................................................................113.2.1.3 Keys to Successful Program Implementation............................................................11


iiiRPT Stakeholder Engagement Report IFU

3.2.2 Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Mandatory Recycling/Source SeparationRequirements .........................................................................................................................113.2.2.1 Stakeholder’s Opinion on the City’s Role ..................................................................123.2.2.2 Roles of Key Stakeholders ........................................................................................123.2.2.3 Keys to Successful Program Implementation............................................................12

3.2.3 Waste Diversion Assistance ...................................................................................................123.2.3.1 Stakeholder’s Opinion on the City’s Role ..................................................................133.2.3.2 Roles of Key Stakeholders ........................................................................................133.2.3.3 Keys to Successful Program Implementation............................................................13

3.2.4 Landfill Bans ...........................................................................................................................133.2.4.1 Feasibility...................................................................................................................133.2.4.2 Materials to Ban.........................................................................................................14

4.0 IMPLEMENTING DIVERSION PROGRAMS.............................................................................. 14

5.0 CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................................ 16

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................................ 17

7.0 CLOSURE....................................................................................................................................... 19

REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................................... 20

FIGURESFigure 1 Construction and Demolition Program Option Ratings ...........................................................................3Figure 2 Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Program Option Ratings .......................................................10

APPENDICESAppendix AAppendix BAppendix C

General ConditionsSession AttendeesEngagement Session Summaries and Table Notes


ivRPT Stakeholder Engagement Report IFU

ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONSAESRD Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource DevelopmentBFI BFI Canada Ltd.C&D Construction and DemolitionBRZ Downtown Lethbridge Business Revitalization ZoneEBA EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd. operating as EBA, A Tetra Tech CompanyEPR Extended Producer ResponsibilityICI Industrial, Commercial, and InstitutionalIpsos Ipsos ReidLEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental DesignMSW Municipal Solid Wastesonnevera sonnevera international corp.City City of LethbridgeW&R Waste and Recycling (City of Lethbridge)WM Waste Management Inc.MRF Materials Recovery FacilityRDN Regional District of Nanaimo


vRPT Stakeholder Engagement Report IFU

LIMITATIONS OF REPORTThis report and its contents are intended for the sole use of the City of Lethbridge and their agents. Tetra Tech EBA Inc. (EBA)does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of any of the data, the analysis, or the recommendations contained orreferenced in the report when the report is used or relied upon by any Party other than The City of Lethbridge or for anyProject other than the proposed development at the subject site. Any such unauthorized use of this report is at the sole risk ofthe user. Use of this report is subject to the terms and conditions stated in EBA’s Services Agreement. EBA’s GeneralConditions are provided in Appendix A of this report.


1RPT Stakeholder Engagement Report IFU

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The City of Lethbridge (City), Waste & Recycling (W&R) retained EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd. (EBA)2,

to conduct a Stakeholder Engagement Project for the Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional (ICI) and

Construction and Demolition (C&D) sectors. EBA partnered with sonnevera international corp.

(sonnevera) and Ipsos Reid (Ipsos) to complete the stakeholder engagement sessions and analysis.

Engagement, or consultation, sessions were conducted for the C&D sector separately from the ICI sector.

This was done in order to have independent industry focuses and accurately gain insight into material

specific diversion programs.

2.0 CONSTRUCTIONAND DEMOLITION STAKEHOLDERENGAGEMENT

2.1 Process Overview

A preliminary engagement session with the C&D stakeholders was held on June 26, 2013 and had a total of

21 participants. The first session involved the discussion of 10 waste diversion program options, including

voluntary, economic, and regulatory options, as well as the concept of a baseline study. Each of these

options was explained in detail to the stakeholders, discussing how they could be implemented in

Lethbridge and how the program would work. The stakeholders were then asked to rate their support for

each option on a scale of 1 to 10.

Along with the ranking of programs, stakeholders were asked to identify the current challenges that limit

them from participating in C&D waste diversion programs.

The final session for the C&D consultation process was held September 12 and had a total of

14 participants. This session involved a much more in-depth discussion on the top ranking options from

the first session. Additionally, regulatory program options that may be considered in the longer term, or

have particularly high diversion results in other municipalities, were also discussed, even if they did not

score highly in the first round of sessions. A more focused discussion on the regulations also provided

insight into stakeholders’ true perceptions of waste diversion-focused regulations. Detail in regards to the

stakeholders’ opinions on program implementation, such as the City’s Role, key stakeholders’ roles, and

keys to successful implementation, were recorded.

A list of participants can be viewed in Appendix B.

2.1.1 Challenges Limiting the Participation of Stakeholders in Construction andDemolition Waste Diversion Programs

A number of challenges that stakeholders reported currently preventing them from participating in waste

diversion programs were discussed in the first session. These challenges range from business-specific

issues such as space restrictions or location (e.g., businesses in malls felt restricted by their disposal and

2 As of January 1, 2014, EBA is now Tetra Tech EBA Inc.



diversion options) to larger scope issues such as a lack of diversion program options and fluctuating

markets. Other factors reported as limiting stakeholders’ ability to divert their waste included:

� Cost of diversion is greater than cost of disposal at the landfill

� Labour costs of source separation

� Inconvenient to divert waste

� Lack of economic benefits/incentives to divert

� Lack of knowledge of programs and options

These barriers to participation in diversion programs will be important to address when developing a C&D

waste diversion program for the City.

2.1.2 Waste Diversion Construction and Demolition Program Options

Waste diversion program options were grouped as either voluntary, economic, or regulatory. Voluntary

programs are those where diversion options are offered, and stakeholders can choose whether or not they

participate, without direct repercussions. Economic programs include programs that involve a financial

incentive or disincentive to participate in the program. For example, the City could have tax breaks or

financial incentives for businesses that build a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)

certified building or implement internal diversion programs. Regulatory programs are generally the last

resort for municipalities, requiring businesses and/or the public to participate in waste diversion. These

programs are usually implemented to try to achieve diversion goals that are not being met by less

aggressive measures.

Figure displays all the waste diversion program options that were discussed with the stakeholders during

the first session. Each option was rated by the stakeholders and given an overall average score out of 10,

based on how supportive they were of the option.



Figure 1: Construction and Demolition Program Option Ratings

As shown in Figure 1, the voluntary program options generally received higher scores from the

stakeholders, especially compared to the regulatory options. All voluntary options received scores higher

than 5 out of 10 and the highest scoring voluntary program option was “develop an educational and

awareness program for C&D diversion”. The economic program options also scored relatively high with

differential tipping fees receiving the highest overall score of 8 out of 10. The highest scoring regulatory

option was mandatory waste audits and waste diversion plans with a score of 4.7 out of 10. The regulatory

option of a municipal deposit-refund program had the lowest overall score with 3.4 out of 10.

2.2 Key Stakeholder Findings

Key features of the feedback from stakeholders during the consultation sessions are outlined by program

option below.



2.2.1 Baseline Study

A baseline study would permit the City to establish a baseline against which to track C&D waste diversion

in the future and allow for the setting of industry standard benchmarks as part of sector goal setting and

evaluation, and involves the establishment of a monitoring and reporting system that will facilitate

gathering of C&D waste data from key stakeholders.

The baseline study received a support ranking of 8 out of 10 from stakeholders during the first session.

Based on this strong support, stakeholders were asked to discuss the program details of the City

conducting a baseline study for the industry.

2.2.1.1 Stakeholder’s Opinion on the City’s Role

Overall, stakeholders were in favour of the City completing a baseline study and felt it was a necessary

initial step in the progression of a city C&D waste diversion program roll-out. They felt the easiest way to

measure and record material tonnages was at the landfill. In order to accurately determine material

weights, session participants felt there would be a need for source separated loads at the landfill scale. This

would permit the recording of each C&Dmaterial while haulers crossed the scale.

Additionally, some stakeholders felt it may be necessary for the City to provide financial support to help

offset the costs associated with increased data collection.

2.2.1.2 Roles of Key Stakeholders

Stakeholders stressed the importance of having all stakeholders participate and share in the responsibility

of providing accurate data to the City for measurement and reporting purposes.

2.2.1.3 Keys to Successful Program Implementation

Successful program implementation is dependent on the City having clear objectives in regards to the use

of the collected data, as well as ensuring the privacy of stakeholders’ business is maintained. Clear

communication by the City in program steps and goals was deemed necessary to ensure stakeholder

participation in the program.

2.2.2 Differential Tipping Fees

A system of differential tipping fees involves having increased fees for loads containing

specified/designated materials. Clean and separated material-specific loads are charged a lower tipping fee

and certain designated materials have higher tipping fees than general Municipal Solid Waste (MSW).

Example C&D materials that would be candidates for designation include drywall, recyclable wood, asphalt

shingles, concrete, etc. Differential tipping fees were seen as an efficient incentive and stakeholders

supported an increase in the difference between general MSW tipping fees and the tipping fee for loads of

specified materials. This was the highest scoring diversion program option from the first session, receiving

a score of 8 out of 10.


Most session participants agreed that the City’s role involves a combination of setting the direction,

educating the stakeholders and public, and acting as an enforcement agency. These ideas specifically



include the City setting the differential tipping fee amounts and developing communication programs to

ensure stakeholders are aware and informed on the tipping fee rules and rates.

Additionally, it was suggested that the City partner with private industry to provide processing facilities for

materials that are given higher tipping fees. This will provide more opportunities for stakeholders to divert

materials and avoid higher tipping fees. This suggests stakeholders feel having differential tipping fees and

increased processing facilities go hand in hand.


With the implementation of differential tipping fees, stakeholders feel one of their primary roles would be

to actively and accurately communicate with their own internal staff and associated outside individuals

regarding program details. This would help in delivering education throughout the industry if the directly

affected stakeholders, such as haulers and processors, inform their own employees and clientele of the

program.

To achieve higher diversion through the use of differential tipping fees enforcement, stakeholders are

aware they will need to begin separating their C&D materials on site. Although there are some difficulties

with this, as stated by many participants, such as small sites with not enough room for multiple bins and a

general lack of employee knowledge on the materials and process, stakeholders felt this was the key to

having a successful program that creates results.


Participants suggested that collaboration, education, and partnerships would be keys to successful

implementation. Some people did express concern about the currently limited markets available for certain

materials, stating that the Lethbridge area will need processing facilities for materials imposed with higher

tipping fees. Stakeholders feel it is crucial to have accessible markets and processing facilities for materials

that are being tagged with higher disposal rates to help avoid illegal dumping.

If this program were to be rolled out, stakeholders expected that there would need to be a staggered

implementation process, allowing for a grace period (after sufficient education and communication) and

that the City would assist with enforcement.

Another critical component to creating an impact on waste reduction using differential tipping fees was to

set differential rates that are large enough to offset the extra costs to builders of having to separate

materials on site.

2.2.3 Develop an Education and Awareness Program for Construction and DemolitionDiversion

Developing an education and awareness program for C&D diversion would serve to promote waste

diversion in the commercial building sector. Options include developing and disseminating a list of

recyclers and successful case studies to the City and C&D industry.

The importance of education and communication was established in the first session, with it receiving the

second highest rating (7.9) alongside differential tipping fees. Therefore, a specific program focused on

raising education and awareness was targeted for discussion with the stakeholders.




As stated throughout the entire session, stakeholders firmly believe that the City’s role is to educate and

facilitate relationships. They suggested that the City is a neutral party that brings credibility to the overall

process. With regard to relationships, the idea of the City partnering with home builders to promote the

programs and provide education on diversion options was well received by most stakeholders. This

relationship could encourage and facilitate the source separation of materials on construction sites while

also building communication in the industry.

Education of not only the industry stakeholders, but also of the public was seen as an important role of the

City. Although it would be inappropriate for the stakeholders to shift the entire responsibility of waste

reduction to the customer, stakeholders did suggest the consumer could often make better decisions and

have a fairly significant role in changing the industry’s waste disposal habits.

A large part of awareness was seen as promotion of best practices. Stakeholders felt that the City needs to

be promoting more success stories within the C&D industry, thereby encouraging others to make changes

in their business. Promotion of best practices could also encourage waste reduction to become more the

norm, by delivering a social impact on the workings of the industry.

A simple, but important role the stakeholders felt the City should be playing, is being the creator of

environmental goals for the community. Having focused waste reduction goals for the industry and

community was seen as an important first step for the City.


As a partner in C&D initiatives, stakeholders said that they should have a shared role in the development of

a campaign, in addition to working with their own partners to promote the information. As mentioned in

the previous section, stakeholders felt the City needs to promote and share industry success stories, along

with educating and sharing information with the industry and public. However, the stakeholders also

shared that they feel this is also partially their responsibility. In fact, they suggested they need to enhance

the communication of waste diversion initiatives within their own businesses and share success stories

within the C&D community and to clients.

In particular, it was suggested that associations be charged with the task of promoting waste reduction

initiatives and to inform their members of environmental issues and opportunities.


As previously stated, stakeholders feel that successful program implementation is dependent on the

relationships between the City and the stakeholders, and the stakeholders and their employees and

clientele. Communication of ideas and information is essential for the success of education and awareness

within the industry.

Specific ideas that stakeholders felt would aid in the development of an educational and awareness

program are:

� Develop a master list of processing options for all readily recyclable materials

� Provide a general understanding of the cost savings related to diversion for businesses



� Communicate the need for separate bins on site for different stages of construction

� Develop a communication group to send out industry-specific messages on waste reduction and to

develop waste reduction targets/goals

� Link an educational component on waste reduction to all building permits

� Partner with the Home Builders Association to help promote waste reduction awareness

� Have The City display waste projections and targets to help raise awareness

2.2.4 Infrastructure Development Facilities

The need for increased infrastructure was mentioned early on in the consultation process and it had mixed

reviews in regards to public and private sector operation. In the first session, this program option received

a rating score of 6.9 from the stakeholders. Subsequently, more insight into this program development was

gained.


There were differing views and opinions in regards to the role of the City (collection versus processing).

For some, they believe the entire industry should be serviced by private sector solutions, and they do not

believe that the local government should play a role. For others, they see that the City is a key and reliable

service provider.

Despite the differing views of the stakeholders about the City’s role when it comes to collection and

processing, the importance of reliable markets was generally stressed by industry members. Stakeholders

felt the City could be helping to develop more markets and help stabilize current markets. With increased

markets and less volatility, there would be reduced risk for stakeholders, especially for processors.

Regardless of which view stakeholders took in regards to the City’s role in collection and processing, all felt

there was a need for increased processing facilities for materials.

Potentially, for the City to avoid the private versus public sector argument, it was suggested the City

stimulate funding and market creation by implementing incentives and disincentives. Consequently, the

private sector will be eager to take on the collection and processing of an established and marketable

commodity.


Similar to the feedback gained on the City’s role, many of the stakeholders spoke of private sector solutions

to collection and processing facilities. For instance, with the development of incentives or disincentives,

they feel the private sector will respond and build the needed additional local infrastructure. Therefore, the

main role of building and operating infrastructure was given to that of the processor stakeholders.


The general consensus among stakeholders is that if the City establishes additional waste diversion

programs, steadier markets will be generated in the area for recycled materials. This in turn will lead to

private industry jumping at the opportunity to provide a collection and processing service for the



materials. Therefore, stakeholders believe it is the relationship between the City and private industry that

will provide for a successful implementation of infrastructure in the area.

2.2.5 Deposit Refund Program

If the City were to introduce a deposit refund program for C&D projects, a deposit would accompany C&D

project permit applications. Upon completion of the project, a refund would be given based on diversion

performance. This approach is modeled after a previously proposed provincial program that did not

proceed for political reasons.

Even though the deposit-refund program was not widely accepted as an appropriate waste diversion

program for the Lethbridge area in the first session (received a score of 3.4/10), more feedback was

warranted to gain specifics from stakeholders on the feasibility of the program in the future and specific

stakeholder concerns.

2.2.5.1 Program Feasibility

This particular option was met with two polarized perspectives; some participants believed that this

measure could be successful in holding the C&D sector accountable, while others said the government

should not be involved in this type of heavy handed regulation. There was a general consensus that the

administration of this type of program could be costly and burdensome for the City.

Stakeholders commented on a variety of positive elements to implementing a deposit refund program. For

instance, a program of this nature was seen as “forcing the hand of the sector” to take part in waste

reduction. Furthermore, the stakeholders would be forced to recognize true material disposal costs and

potential recyclable values, and the program would establish a sense of equality amongst homebuilders

and likely aid in the development of a consistent market for all common C&Dmaterials.

There will always be resistance to regulation, especially amongst the private sector, creating common

opposition within the industry to a heavily regulated program such as that of a deposit-refund program.


If the City did choose to enforce a deposit-refund program, stakeholders feel the industry would need to be

fully educated on the program details and understand the reasoning and goals behind the City’s

implementation decision. Also, since the program will involve increased administration on the City and the

stakeholders’ part, a digital, and perhaps online system was suggested for recording and tracking the

details required. This would help simplify the process for industry stakeholders and the City, making the

programmore appealing for participation.

3.0 INDUSTRIAL,COMMERCIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL

3.1 Process Overview

The first of two ICI stakeholder engagement sessions was held June 26, 2013 and had a total of

33 participants. The first sessions involved two different groups, generators and associations separately

and then processors and haulers together. The stakeholder groups were separated for the first consultation



sessions to gain industry sector-specific feedback, without outside influence. The first sessions involved the

discussion of 13 different waste diversion program approaches, including voluntary, economic, and

regulatory options. As with the initial C&D session, stakeholders ranked each program option on a scale of

1 to 10 based on how supportive they were of the option. Along with the ranking of programs, stakeholders

were asked to identify the current challenges that limit them from participating in ICI waste diversion

programs.

The final session for the ICI consultation process was held September 12 and had a total of 23 participants.

This session involved the discussion of specific program details for the top ranking program options

resulting from the first session. All stakeholders were consulted in one session and the details of the City’s

Role, the key stakeholders’ roles, and the keys to successful implementation, were recorded.

A list of participants can be viewed in Appendix B.

3.1.1 Challenges Limiting the Participation of Stakeholders in Industrial, Commercial,and Institutional Waste Diversion Programs

The challenges identified by stakeholders which prevent them from participating in waste diversion

programs included lack of services for specific materials, such as organics, the additional costs of diversion

programs, and space limitations, especially for downtown businesses. Additional limiting factors recorded

from the first session were as follows:

� Lack of knowledge of staff and customers

� The inconvenience and time requirements to have staff sort material for recycling

� Lack of awareness of programs and recycling options

� Not enough incentives for businesses to take the time to divert waste

These barriers will need to be considered in the design of a final ICI waste diversion program for the city of

Lethbridge, and should specifically be addressed in a social marketing campaign.

3.1.2 Waste Diversion Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Program Options

Figure 2 displays all the waste diversion program options that were discussed with the ICI stakeholders

during the first session. As with the C&D session, each program option was rated by the stakeholders and

given an overall average score out of 10 based on their support for the option.



Figure 2: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Program Option Ratings

As displayed in Figure 2, there were a variety of voluntary, economic, and regulatory options that scored

very high amongst the ICI stakeholders. As with the C&D stakeholders, the ICI stakeholders ranked

differential tipping fees as the highest program option with a score of 7.9 out of 10. ICI mandatory

recycling/source separation requirements was a close second, receiving a score of 7.8. All voluntary

options received high scores, with all the options scoring higher than 5. Out of all the options, the lowest

scoring was franchise waste system, a regulatory option, receiving a score of 4.0.

It is noteworthy to mention that stakeholders ranked the program option waste diversion promotion very

highly with a score of 7.3. This is particularly interesting for the City since they already have a similar

program labelled the “Lethbridge Green List”. Each year individuals, organizations and businesses are

nominated to the “Lethbridge Green List” for taking action to better the environment. Therefore, this high

ranking demonstrates that the stakeholders are supportive of programs such as the “Lethbridge Green List”

and would perhaps favour expanding the promotion the City is currently doing.



3.2 Key Stakeholder Findings

3.2.1 Differential Tipping Fees

As with the C&D stakeholders, differential tipping fees were discussed in detail as a potential waste

diversion approach for implementation in the ICI industry. Differential tipping fees was the highest rated

program option by stakeholders, receiving an average score of 7.9 out of 10.


The most mentioned role for the City by stakeholders was that of providing waste diversion education and

communicating program details. For instance, general information on materials with differential tipping

fees and how these materials can be diverted from the waste stream.

Additionally, stakeholders felt it was important for the City to structure the program and its fees to make it

economically viable for industry to spend the time and money to source separate the materials in

preparation for hauling to the landfill.

The City would also need to take on the role of consistently enforcing the rates at the landfill and

sufficiently advertising the program details.


ICI stakeholders agreed that they too need to play a role in both educating their business partners,

employees, and clients, in order to develop this type of program. Specifically, it was expected the haulers

would be assigned the task of educating customers and demonstrate the cost implications of not

participating in source separation.


Stakeholders stated that communication and education would be the foundation to successful

implementation of differential tipping fees. They believe that there needs to be a sufficient difference

between the rates for comingled waste and source separated materials in order to make it worthwhile for

stakeholders to participate, thus making the program successful.

Generally, stakeholders preferred a grace period upon implementation, to allow participants time to work

out start-up issues. They also advised encouraging sorting stations on site to permit easy separation.

To ensure successful implementation, stakeholders emphasized the importance of having established

markets for designated materials and for the City to provide consistent and fair enforcement at the landfill.

3.2.2 Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Mandatory Recycling/Source SeparationRequirements

A mandatory recycling/source separation program for the ICI sector would require businesses to

participate in recycling and/or divert designated materials through a recycling program. Mandatory

recycling or source separation places a regulatory requirement on business to participate in diversion

programs as part of their daily operations. This requirement may take the form of physical diversion

infrastructure, including separate collection containers, or proof of material diversion.



Second to differential tipping fees, a mandatory recycling/source separation program for the ICI sector

received a score of 7.8 out of 10 from stakeholders in the first session.


In terms of a mandatory ICI recycling program, the majority of the stakeholders described the City’s role as

a facilitator, educator, and responsible for enforcement of the program. In addition to promoting education

and awareness about the program overall, they would like to see the City expand its information to ensure

that it covers cost implications as well.

Stakeholders suggested if the City were to require recycling in the ICI industry, the City should provide the

required infrastructure for sorting and collecting of the material. For instance, stakeholders would require

additional bins and drop-off locations for the different material streams. Even though this was firstly

announced by stakeholders as a role of the City, they did interject later to state that this could be done in

conjunction with the private industry.


As with all of the other key measures, stakeholders spoke to their shared responsibility and ownership to

ensure that their staff and associates comply with the program. They believe that they have an important

role to support and ensure compliance amongst their partners, in addition to educating their customers.

Also, in regards to education, the haulers were once again assigned the task of educating their customers on

program details, costs and to monitor compliance.


Providing stakeholders with lead time to prepare facilities, collection, and processes; in addition to the City

providing adequate information and education related to program costs, are seen to be key elements to

making this program successful. Additional elements that were seen as critical to ensuring a successful

program roll-out were:

� Making it cost effective for generators to sort material

� Create a level playing field for all businesses – no exceptions to enforcement

� Need enhanced waste collection or on-site storage for the downtown core

Another note of particular interest is that stakeholders felt this type of regulation would be seen more

positively from stakeholders if it was also to be enforced on the residential and C&D sectors.

3.2.3 Waste Diversion Assistance

A waste diversion assistance program would involve providing technical and information assistance to

companies that want to implement waste diversion programs. This can be helpful to businesses that may

not have the technical knowledge or capacity to investigate diversion opportunities.

Waste diversion assistance was generally received as a favourable program option, with the following

specific comments from stakeholders. In the first session waste diversion assistance scored 7.6 out of 10.




Participants see The City’s role for this program as the educator and facilitator. They would like to see the

City provide resources, including contacts for sector businesses and information on how to become

involved in the assistance program. While some participants were concerned about the cost to taxpayers if

the City took on the role of providing assistance to businesses, most agreed that it would generally be an

effective support mechanism to their businesses.

As a part of the assistance program, stakeholders stated they would value a public list, composed by the

City, of consultants, industry providers, haulers, and processors. This lends itself to the City also aiding in

the development of partnerships between stakeholders.

Additional components of the program that were suggested by stakeholders for the City to take on were

website and information sharing, personalized waste diversion program implementation for businesses,

and evaluation services for businesses currently having diversion programs in place.


Participants expressed that they share a role in the communication with internal and external staff and

with the public. They feel that they could contribute to an assistance program by sharing their success

stories and ideas with the City and other businesses. Stakeholders can aid the City by setting an example for

other businesses to follow. Likewise, stakeholders could engage their customers and the public using the

information they have received from the assistance program, continuing the education cycle. This

specifically applies to haulers, who have a direct ability to educate the generators.

Additionally, stakeholders feel they would need to provide feedback on the quality of assistance being

received from the program in order for the City to maintain up-to-date and informative program content.


Clear communication, realistic offerings and support, in addition to promoting sector buy-in are all seen as

key elements to successfully implementing this program. If the City can manage to create partnerships

between stakeholders through the use of contact lists, current information, and success stories,

stakeholders believe the waste assistance programwill be a success.

3.2.4 Landfill Bans

Landfill bans would prohibit the disposal of certain material streams at the City landfill, with the standard

enforcement mechanism being the rejection of loads containing banned material.

As the ultimate example of disposal regulation, landfill bans were discussed in detail with ICI stakeholders

to gain an understanding of their support of the program (7 out of 10) from the first session.

3.2.4.1 Feasibility

While stakeholders are not in unanimous agreement that landfill bans are the right direction for the City to

pursue, most stated that there are tangible environmental benefits; reducing waste going directly to

landfills and increasing recycling of materials that can be diverted. Some stakeholders expressed concerns

with the potential for illegal dumping and the management/enforcement by the City to prevent dumping



on private property. In addition, some said that if local facilities are not able to handle banned materials,

they would incur significant costs to redirect the materials to another location. However, as with incentives

and disincentives, regulations can also help spur the creation of new and additional markets for materials

that are directed to be diverted.

3.2.4.2 Materials to Ban

When stakeholders were asked to provide a list of materials that are candidates for a ban, the following

materials were mentioned:

� Harmful substances (toxic) – due to general environmental concern, stakeholders felt all harmful

substances should be banned from landfill;

� Organics – with organics making up a significant portion of the ICI waste stream and its ability to

produce methane gas, stakeholders felt it made sense to ban the material from landfill;

� Electronics – stakeholders felt there were already so many program options available for the recycling

of these products that a ban would be appropriate;

� All beverage containers and any material with a deposit or eco-fees associated with it – stakeholders

felt the deposits/fees signifies a established recycling program for these materials which means there

is no excuse for these materials to end up in the landfill;

� Cardboard and paper – makes up the largest portion of the ICI waste stream and is readily recyclable.

Therefore, stakeholders feel there is no reason for it being disposed in landfill; and

� Metal – as a material with strong markets, metal is a strong candidate for a landfill ban.

4.0 IMPLEMENTING DIVERSION PROGRAMS

In designing a waste diversion program for the City, potential program elements need to be assessed based

on cost and effectiveness at reducing waste.

Waste diversion programs are typically divided into three categories: voluntary program options, economic

program options, and regulatory program options. To build support and participation from stakeholders, it

is recommended to use a graduated approach to program implementation, beginning with voluntary

options, followed by economic, and then regulatory measures if waste diversion targets are not being met.

Voluntary options generally have lower diversion estimates, ranging from 10% to 30%, followed by

economic program options at 20% to 50% diversion, with regulatory diversion programs topping diversion

estimates at 40% to 75%. However, it is considered best practice to begin with voluntary and economic

program options to engage the community and sector stakeholders, rather than immediately introducing

regulations, which can produce public resistance, and require enforcement. Regulatory measures can then

be more readily defended, and are more likely to be embraced by the community, if less punitive options

have not met program goals.

Deciding on program options most suited to municipalities often comes down to a cost/benefit analysis.

For instance, some voluntary program options are not as costly to implement, but may not be as effective at

reducing waste. Waste diversion programs that can increase waste diversion in the ICI sector are shown in



Table 1, with their corresponding estimated implementation costs and waste diversion percentages

(sonnevera 2008).

Table 1: Details with Estimated Diversion Percentages and Costs of Industrial, Commercial, andInstitutional Waste Diversion Program Options (sonnevera 2008)

Program Option ProgramType Details

EstimatedWaste Diversion

Percentages

EstimatedImplementation/Processor Cost

Promoting GreenProcurement Within the

ICI SectorVoluntary Education to encourage green

procurement within the ICI sector. 0% - 5% $100,000 - $200,000

City Establishes aGreen Procurement

ProgramVoluntary City adopts green procurement

policy and practices. 1% - 2% <$100,000

Waste Audit and WasteReduction PlanRequirements

RegulatoryCity requires businesses toconduct waste audits and developwaste reduction plans.

5% - 25% $100,000 - $200,000

Waste ReductionCertification Program Voluntary

Businesses can receivecertification if they achievespecified waste reduction/diversiontargets.

5% - 10% <$100,000

Waste DiversionAssistance Program Voluntary

City offers technical andinformation assistance tocompanies that want to implementwaste diversion program.

5% - 25% <$100,000

Mandatory Diversion atSpecial Events Regulatory

Organizers of special eventsrequired to offer waste diversionservices during the event.

1% - 2% <$100,000

Waste DiversionPromotional Programs Voluntary

Targeted waste diversionprograms developed for specificICI sectors, such as schools andoffice buildings.

5% - 25% $100,000 - $500,000

Landfill Bans Regulatory Designated materials are bannedfrom entering the landfill. 25% - 75% $100,000 - $200,000

Haulers Submit AnnualWaste and Recycling

Reports

Voluntary orRegulatory

Haulers required to submit wasteand recycling reports as part ofbusiness operating permit.

0% <$25,000

Differential TippingFees Economic

Higher tipping fees are applied toloads of waste containingdesignated recyclables andcompostable materials.

10% - 50% $100,000 - $200,000

Mandatory Recyclingand/or Source

SeparationRequirements

Regulatory

Businesses must participate inrecycling and/or must divertdesignated materials through arecycling program.

25% - 75% $200,000 - $300,000

ICI Yard WasteProgram

Voluntary,economic,

or regulatory

City or private sector developscommercial yard waste facility. 0% - 2% $100,000 - $500,000

Food Waste CollectionProgram

Voluntary,economic,

or regulatory

City or private sector provides foodwaste collection to businesses. 5% - 10% $100,000 - $1,000,000



As shown in Table 1, there are a variety of program choices with different predicted effectiveness and

implementation costs. Voluntary options, such as “waste diversion promotional programs” and “waste

diversion assistance programs”, are generally more widely accepted amongst stakeholders and can be quite

effective at increasing waste diversion if implemented using social marketing techniques. Economic

program options provide incentives to stakeholders and can receive resistance during implementation, but

are often seen as fair and effective ways at encouraging waste diversion in the industry, as long as

considerations such as level playing field are maintained. Regulations have associated enforcement costs to

municipalities, but are normally the most effective at increasing waste diversion, and results can be

maximized through social marketing techniques and consistent enforcement.

5.0 CONCLUSIONS

A variety of waste diversion program options were discussed with C&D and ICI stakeholders in a series of

consultation sessions. Overall, voluntary program options were well supported along with economic

options. Regulatory approaches were not always as favourably received by stakeholders.

There are a variety of barriers and challenges that limit stakeholders’ involvement in waste diversion

programs. For both C&D and the ICI stakeholders, a lack of incentives, cost implications, and lack of

education were significant barriers. Consequently, economic waste diversion programs, such as differential

tipping fees, generally received support from stakeholders. Additionally, voluntary programs were the

highest rated program options in both the C&D and ICI consultation sessions. Voluntary and economic

programs help to reduce barriers by providing education, awareness, and assistance, along with an

incentive for stakeholders to participate in diversion programs.

For any waste diversion program to be successful, stakeholders feel there is a need to have a good working

relationship, with clear communication, between the City and key stakeholders. Stakeholders felt it was the

responsibility of the City to set environmental goals and initiate the education and awareness of waste

diversion programs to the industry and the public. At the same time, it is the responsibility of key

stakeholders to communicate with their internal stakeholders and customers, as well as actively participate

in the programs and share their success stories within the industry.

A baseline study was well received by stakeholders and considered a fundamental first step in creating any

kind of waste diversion strategy and ultimately tracking progress towards diversion goals.

Differential tipping fees were widely supported by both C&D and ICI stakeholders, being the highest rated

economic program option, and the highest rated option overall amongst the ICI stakeholders. Stakeholders

did prefer to have a grace period to allow for preparation upon implementation of the program.

Developing an education and awareness program is considered essential and well supported by the

stakeholders. Communication of goals and program details, along with the City partnering with

associations, were key elements to successful implementation.

There are mixed opinions on the role of the City and key stakeholders in regards to infrastructure

development. It is recognized by stakeholders that increased infrastructure, especially processing, needs to

be developed for certain materials, but the exact role of public versus private ownership and operation is



still up for debate. Either way, the importance of having a good relationship between the City and private

industry was stressed.

ICI mandatory recycling/source separation was well received amongst stakeholders as long as the program

details were well communicated by the City. Additionally, it was expected the haulers would play a large

role in educating the generators and there were concerns over having enhanced waste collection and on-

site storage for businesses in the downtown core.

Waste diversion assistance was rated highly and valued by stakeholders as a good way of promoting waste

diversion programs and educating the industry on program options. Providing clear, concise, and up-to-

date information would be a requirement of the City according to the stakeholders.

Regulatory options, such as a deposit-refund program and landfill bans, were not as favourably received as

voluntary and economic, but stakeholders did admit they see benefits to the programs, which are likely the

most effective at meeting ambitious waste diversion targets. Stakeholders did express their concerns

regarding some regulatory programs being administratively taxing and potentially difficult to enforce. In

regards to landfill bans, stakeholders did suggest that certain materials should be banned, especially those

associated with deposit or eco-fees, such as beverage containers, and any potentially harmful substances.

In designing a waste diversion program for the City, potential program elements need to be assessed based

on cost and effectiveness at reducing waste. The introduction of waste diversion programs can stimulate

the processing industry and create markets for specific recyclable materials. Voluntary programs are

widely accepted by stakeholders, but generally are not as effective at reducing waste when compared to

economic and regulatory approaches. With the introduction of economic program options, stakeholders are

provided with incentives to reduce their waste generation, thus increasing waste diversion. Regulatory

program options are usually the most effective at increasing waste diversion, but can be costly due to

enforcement and program logistics.

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

It is important that the City research potential mitigation options for the barriers identified by

stakeholders. Removal of these barriers will promote waste diversion and lead to successful program

implementation. Once the City has identified programs to overcome the identified barriers, it can promote

these programs and help educate the ICI industry with a waste diversion assistance program. Having

one-on-one face time with industry stakeholders will be very effective at educating individual industry

members.

The City has numerous roles to play when it comes to implementing waste diversion programs. For

instance, it is recommended that the City create a waste diversion strategy for the C&D and ICI industries,

with targets and diversion goals. As part of this strategy, development of a comprehensive waste

measurement and reporting system should also be developed, to allow for accurate tracking of waste

diversion and disposal, starting with a solid baseline on which to track performance.

Due to the stakeholders reinforcing their involvement and shared responsibility in regards to waste

diversion programs, it is essential for the City to maintain communication with the stakeholders and keep

the industry engaged on decisions and program option updates. It is recommended that the City continue



to conduct consultations with stakeholders, including approaches such as diversion program-specific focus

groups. Another recommended role for the City is to continue to promote stakeholder success stories and

recognize businesses that are acting as environmental leaders. The City will also need to be prepared to act

as the enforcer for any regulatory programs that are implemented.

With regards to the progression of implementation of certain waste diversion programs, it is recommended

to begin with voluntary programs, followed by economic, with regulatory options in reserve if these softer

approaches are not successful in meeting diversion goals. Voluntary programs are often widely accepted

among stakeholders and encourage environmental awareness. Although the implementation of voluntary

options often results in support from stakeholders, they are usually not as effective at reducing waste when

compared to economic and regulatory approaches. Therefore, economic programs are a good second step,

providing incentives for stakeholders, and ultimately resulting in increased waste diversion. Regulatory

options are recommended to be introduced when voluntary and economic options are not achieving the

desired waste diversion targets.

Specifically, it is recommended that the ICI and C&D diversion programs begin with a targeted education

campaign, supported by a waste diversion assistance program introduced by the City. This voluntary

approach can be followed by a more aggressive system of differential tipping fees on an expanded group of

materials, to be implemented within approximately six months of its announcement. If these approaches do

not achieve the waste reduction targets, landfill bans and mandatory recycling can be introduced, with

advance notice of at least one year prior to implementation.

Another recommendation is to enhance the relationship with industry associations and have them play a

significant role in educating their members and promoting waste diversion program options. Example

associations could be the Home Builders Association and the Downtown Lethbridge Business Revitalization

Zone (BRZ).



7.0 CLOSURE

We trust this report meets your present requirements. If you have any questions or comments, please

contact the undersigned.

Respectfully submitted,

Tetra Tech EBA Inc.

Prepared by: Prepared by:

Lindsay Seidel-Wassenaar, E.I.T. Jamie Duncan

Environmental Engineer Vice President

Environment Practice Ipsos Reid

Direct Line: 403.294.7385

[email protected]

Reviewed by: Reviewed by:

Christina Seidel Mandi Parker, P.Ag.

Chief Executive Officer Director of Projects

sonnevera international corp. Environment Practice

Direct Line: 403.843.6563 Direct Line: 403.329.9009 x224

[email protected] [email protected]

/dlm



REFERENCES

City of Lethbridge 2012. Waste & Recycling Business Plan 2012-2014.

sonnevera international corp. 2008. City of Lethbridge Comprehensive Waste Diversion / Waste PreventionMaster Plan. May 22, 2008.


RPT Stakeholder Engagement Report IFU

APPENDIX AGENERAL CONDITIONS

General Conditions - Geo-environmental Report.docx

GENERAL CONDITIONS

GEO-ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTThis report incorporates and is subject to these “General Conditions”.

1.0 USE OF REPORT AND OWNERSHIP

This report pertains to a specific site, a specific development, and aspecific scope of work. It is not applicable to any other sites, norshould it be relied upon for types of development other than thoseto which it refers. Any variation from the site or proposeddevelopment would necessitate a supplementary investigation andassessment.

This report and the assessments and recommendations containedin it are intended for the sole use of EBA’s client. EBA does notaccept any responsibility for the accuracy of any of the data, theanalysis or the recommendations contained or referenced in thereport when the report is used or relied upon by any party otherthan EBA’s Client unless otherwise authorized in writing by EBA.Any unauthorized use of the report is at the sole risk of the user.

This report is subject to copyright and shall not be reproduced eitherwholly or in part without the prior, written permission of EBA.Additional copies of the report, if required, may be obtained uponrequest.

2.0 ALTERNATE REPORT FORMAT

Where EBA submits both electronic file and hard copy versions ofreports, drawings and other project-related documents anddeliverables (collectively termed EBA’s instruments of professionalservice), only the signed and/or sealed versions shall be consideredfinal and legally binding. The original signed and/or sealed versionarchived by EBA shall be deemed to be the original for the Project.

Both electronic file and hard copy versions of EBA’s instruments ofprofessional service shall not, under any circumstances, no matterwho owns or uses them, be altered by any party except EBA. TheClient warrants that EBA’s instruments of professional service willbe used only and exactly as submitted by EBA.

Electronic files submitted by EBA have been prepared andsubmitted using specific software and hardware systems. EBAmakes no representation about the compatibility of these files withthe Client’s current or future software and hardware systems.

3.0 NOTIFICATION OF AUTHORITIES

In certain instances, the discovery of hazardous substances orconditions and materials may require that regulatory agencies andother persons be informed and the client agrees that notification tosuch bodies or persons as required may be done by EBA in itsreasonably exercised discretion.

4.0 INFORMATION PROVIDED TO EBA BY OTHERS

During the performance of the work and the preparation of thereport, EBA may rely on information provided by persons other thanthe Client. While EBA endeavours to verify the accuracy of suchinformation when instructed to do so by the Client, EBA accepts noresponsibility for the accuracy or the reliability of such informationwhich may affect the report.



APPENDIX BSESSION ATTENDEES

FILE: C22503014-01 | MARCH 2014 | ISSUED FOR USE

ICI Stakeholders (Generators) FirstName

LastName Email Address

Attended1st

Session

Attended2nd

Session

1 Downtown Lethbridge Business Revitalization Zone (BRZ) David [email protected] 12 Industrial Association of Southern Alberta (IASA) Chris Spearman [email protected] Lethbridge Chamber of Commerce Stephanie Palechek [email protected] Wal-mart (north)5 Wal-mart (south)6 Costco Kevin Baker [email protected] Canadian Tire (south side) [email protected] Canadian Tire (north side) Barry Ferguson [email protected] Home Depot Jace Moon [email protected]

10 Home Hardware Geoffrey Brayne11 Totem (Rona) Dean Scherger [email protected] Sears Home Centre (south Mayor Mcgrath) Alex Dawson [email protected] Brick Frank Yee [email protected] London Drugs Chris Mabie 115 London Drugs Greg Whelpley [email protected] 1 116 The Dollar Store (south) Mostasa Hassan17 Shoppers Drug Mart (north) Hyder Mohammed18 Shoppers Drug Mart (south) Kimberlee Westphald 119 Shoppers Drug Mart (west) Clayton Braun [email protected] Shoppers Drug Mart (south) Dorothy Kitt21 Staples Trish Nicholson 122 Ashleys Furniture Sydney Ieffle23 Leon's Furniture Jordan Visser [email protected] 124 Visions Electronics Patrick Barker25 Princess Auto Lisa Plausteiner [email protected] Peavey Mart Doug Cole [email protected] King of Trade Hunter Heggie 128 Nicholai Judy Dormaar29 Anna Banana [email protected] Suzzane & Jennies31 Carline Muffler Mark Switzer [email protected] Bad Apple Hair Salon Bad Apple Salon Staff [email protected] Stubb's Pharmacy Shannon Kooy34 Design Lighting [email protected] Warwick Printing Dave Warwick36 Flair Travel Pat Johnson [email protected] Petland Allan Draper38 Safeway (west) Dave Sawchuck39 Safeway (north) Doug Elliot40 Safeway (south) Harry Forefett41 Save-on (west) Colin Dixon42 Save-on (north) Mark Shipton [email protected] 1 143 Superstore Don [email protected] Sobey's (north) Parrish Hanelt45 Sobey's (south) Dallas and Harty46 Urban Grocer Cheryl Meheden 147 London Road Market David Gurr 1 148 London Road Market Duane Gurr 1 149 Dairy Queen (west) Jane50 Dairy Queen (north) Pravin Patel51 Dairy Queen (south) Destiny Welcer52 Luigi's Panos Kollias53 Round Street Bonnie Greenshields54 Esquires Kathy MacPherson [email protected] 155 Light House Ryan Squire56 Mocha Cabana Marcel Ohno [email protected]; [email protected] 157 Tony Roma's [email protected] Ric's Grille Jonas Taleon [email protected] The Keg Amanda Knelsen60 Moxie's Peter McGarry [email protected] Average Joe's Rob Mereska62 Tim Hortons (Tim owns a couple) Tim Streisel [email protected] 163 Mr. Mikes Greg Wornstaff64 Regent Restaurant Wayne Qwan65 Guesthouse [email protected] Park Place Mall Maurice Pirness [email protected] 167 Park Place Mall Todd Beck [email protected] Park Place Mall Kevin Brees [email protected] Centre Village Mall Karen Romolliwa [email protected] Lethbridge Centre Dan 1 171 Provincial Bldg72 Service Canada (federal gov't bldg) Amanda Herman [email protected] Professional Building [email protected] Southland Terrace Gerry Varzari75 Chancery Court Gerry Varzari76 Paramount Bldg Ken Harvie77 BraeMore Management Warren Lyckman [email protected]; braemore@ 1 178 Lethbridge Housing Authority Bernice79 Coast Hotel Curtis Burton [email protected] Lethbridge Lodge [email protected] Holiday Inn Express [email protected] Hampton Inn Craig Usher83 Holiday Inn Dwayne Stratton [email protected] Ramada Brian Um85 Comfort Inn Eliza Weiderspick86 Econo Lodge Alois Scherer [email protected] MPE Engineering [email protected] Pollack & Company Frances Terlesky [email protected] 189 Huckvale Wilde Harvie Maclennan Cam Maclennan90 Scotia Bank Dennis Hatt91 Stringam-Denecky Stephen Mogdan92 King Electric93 Earthlings 194 Stantec Mark Bellany95 Casino Lethbridge Attila Madarasz [email protected] YMCA Jason Shriner97 Lethbridge Exhibition Bryan [email protected] Chinook Health Region/Regional Hospital Ryan Thomson99 Chinook Health Region/Regional Hospital Ed Saacedra

100 Green Acres Naomi Plausteiner [email protected] Family Medical Centre [email protected] Dr. Fong Dr. Fong103 Able Dentis Group Connie Hanson [email protected] Campbell Clinic Diane Graham105 Haig Clinic106 Radiology Associates Darallel Steed [email protected] 1 1107 St. Michaels Health Care *ST. MICHAELS HOUSING?* Jim Riedlhuber108 Green Acres Animal hospital [email protected] Eecol Electric Cam Newman [email protected] McKay Bros Farm Implement Steven Dyck [email protected] Williams Moving Did not want invitation112 H&R Transport Attention: Director113 Silver Automotive [email protected] Acklands-Grainger Greg Mitchell115 Emco AB Heating & Plumbing Supplies Sherilyn Stroud116 University of Lethbridge Laurel Corbiere [email protected] Lethbridge Community College Peter Leclaire [email protected] School District 51 Bob McMann [email protected] 1119 Holy Spirit District Chris Smeaton [email protected] Interfaith Food Bank Danielle McIntyre [email protected] 1121 Living Lethbridge Magazine Jenn Schmidt-Rempel [email protected] 1

14 16

Appendix B: Complete Session Participation Summary

Generators

Total

Complete Session Participation Summary



APPENDIX CENGAGEMENT SESSION SUMMARIES AND TABLE NOTES

City of LethbridgeStakeholder Engagement - C&D Session Report

Ipsos© 2013 Ipsos. All rights reserved. Contains Ipsos' Confidential and Proprietary information and may not be disclosed or reproducedwithout the prior written consent of Ipsos.

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY _________________________________________________ 1KEY FINDINGS ________________________________________________________ 2CHALLENGES _________________________________________________________ 3PROGRAM OPTIONS ___________________________________________________ 4Baseline Study _________________________________________________________ 4

VOLUNTARY MEASURES _______________________________________________ 6Green Building Certificate Program _________________________________________ 6Develop an Education and Awareness program for C&D diversion _________________ 7Infrastructure Development________________________________________________ 8

ECONOMIC MEASURES_________________________________________________ 9Incentives for Green Design _______________________________________________ 9Differential tipping fees __________________________________________________ 10

REGULATORY MEASURES _____________________________________________ 11Mandatory Waste Diversion Plans _________________________________________ 11Municipal Deposit-Refund Program ________________________________________ 12

Disposal Bans_________________________________________________________ 13

OTHER PROGRAMMING MEASURES _____________________________________ 14ROLE OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE ____________________________________ 14WRAP-UP____________________________________________________________ 15


1Ipsos© 2013 Ipsos. All rights reserved. Contains Ipsos' Confidential and Proprietary information and may not be disclosed or reproducedwithout the prior written consent of Ipsos.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Ideation Session ReportThe following is the detailed output immediately following a series of engagement sessionswith stakeholders of the Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Sector (ICI) for WasteManagement and Construction and Demolition Sector (C&D) in the city of Lethbridge.

Three engagement sessions were held for four groups of stakeholders: one session was heldfor stakeholders of the C&D sector, one for Generators and one for Processors and Haulers.

The sessions were held on June 25, 2013 at the Community Arts Centre (CASA). Consistingof approximately 15-20 members of each stakeholder community, each session lasted closeto 2 hours in length.

The first part of the C&D stakeholder engagement sessions was an overview of the City of�� implement a C&D waste diversion strategy in the 2014-2017 businesscycle, and the role of the C&D sector in helping the City achieve these goals. The first partalso provided an overview of the current situation in waste diversion for the C&D sector.

Following this overview, the several potential program options for managing waste diversionin the C&D sector, including Voluntary Measures, Economic Measures, and RegulatoryMeasures were presented to the stakeholder group.

The latter part of the session allowed each individual participant to express their views oneach of the program options and also provide feedback on overall challenges and risksassociated with waste diversion in the sector as a whole and with each of the programoptions presented.

The following is a real-time report of the C&D Engagement Session, which shows theactual responses of participants across key questions covered.

Final reports will be submitted through the City of Lethbridge in the coming weeks upon thecompletion of the engagement strategy & process.



CHALLENGES

What challenges limit you from participating in C&D waste reduction and diversion programs?

No. Idea

1. Cost

2. Labour costs, Site supervision. Labour costs to separate on site

3. Time

4. bad behaviors by businesses and end users

5. flexibility

6. Cost: 1. Costs of site supervision. Time to separate waste on site costs more

7. Waste storage

8. Not on site to monitor behaviors

9. Convenience

10. Convenience

11. Space / storage

12. Space limitations for bins on site

13. Facilities to store materials are limited

14. Lack of space to sort at construction site

15. What is the benefit to the business? tax breaks? etc.

16. Sorting issues

17. Lack of understanding of services or programs

18. Cost labor storage; ease of collection

19. Availability of service provider

20. Hand sorting

21. Limited infrastructure for compactors

22. Programs aren't available for all commodities



23. Knowledge of ideas pertaining to actual programs available

PROGRAM OPTIONS

Baseline StudyIn order to improve data recording, a baseline study could be conducted in collaboration with the Provincialgovernment and industry

On a scale of 1-10 with 1 being very opposed and 10 being very supportive, how supportive would you say youare of this program approach?

HIGH/LOW REPORT

Rating Criteria: Rating Criteria

Rank Idea High Low Avg.

Scale: (1) Very Opposed (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Very Supportive

1. Promote waste diversion in the commercial sector through: Recognition of

progressive businesses and Waste Reduction Certification.

10 4 8

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION REPORT


Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Technical and information assistance to companies

that want to implement waste diversion programs

0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 4 2



What data would you, as a stakeholder, be willing to share?

No. Idea

1. As a contractor we would be able to tell you what percentages of waste we are generating

2. Projected waste and recycling stream volumes

3. What we are doing today to manage waste what we would ideally like to see happen

4. Current costs (direct and indirect), types of waste, volumes

5. As a stakeholder we would be willing to share all avenues of cost generation, waste generation, waste

compilation, and human resources

6. UofL everything west can everything

7. Tonnage and commodity information

8. Types of waste generated, it is difficult to measure volumes of various wastes so data would be high level

information only with little detail

9. Due to confidentiality, the type of data and level of detail we are permitted to reveal will be limited



VOLUNTARY MEASURES

Green Building Certificate ProgramPromotes programs that promote energy/water conservation and waste reduction/diversion


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Green Building Certificate Program: Promote programs that promote

energy/water conservation and waste reduction /diversion.

10 2 6.6



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Green Building Certificate Program: Promote

programs that promote energy/water conservation and

waste reduction /diversion.

0 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 1 2



Develop an Education and Awareness program for C&D diversionDevelop and disseminate a list of recyclers and successful case studies to The City and C&D industry


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. DEVELOP AN EDUCATION AND AWARENESS PROGRAM FOR C&D

DIVERSION: Develop and disseminate a list of recyclers and successful case

studies to The City and C&D industry

10 5 7.9



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. DEVELOP AN EDUCATION AND AWARENESS

PROGRAM FOR C&D DIVERSION: Develop and

disseminate a list of recyclers and successful case

studies to The City and C&D industry

0 0 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 4



Infrastructure DevelopmentCity establishes collection facilities for certain materialsEstablish increased collection, transfer and processing facilities for C&D waste


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Infrastructure Development: City establishes collection facilities for certain

materials

10 3 6.9

2. Infrastructure Development: Establish increased collection, transfer, and

processing facilities for C&D waste

8 2 5.2



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Infrastructure Development: City establishes collection

facilities for certain materials

0 0 1 0 3 0 1 3 0 2

2. Infrastructure Development: Establish increased

collection, transfer, and processing facilities for C&D

waste

0 1 1 1 3 0 1 2 0 0



ECONOMIC MEASURES

Incentives for Green DesignPromotes programs that promote energy/water conservation and waste reduction/diversion


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Incentives for Green Design: Buildings or developments with green design

receive incentives, such as reduced permitting fees. (E.G LEED)

9 3 5.5



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Incentives for Green Design: Buildings or

developments with green design receive incentives,

such as reduced permitting fees. (E.G LEED)

0 0 1 2 3 0 3 0 2 0



Differential tipping feesClean and separated material specific loads are charged a lower tipping fee


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Differential Tipping Fees: Clean and separated material specific loads are

charged a lower tipping fee. Certain designated materials have higher tipping

fees than general MSW

10 5 8.0



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Differential Tipping Fees: Clean and separated

material specific loads are charged a lower tipping fee.

Certain designated materials have higher tipping fees

than general MSW

0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 5



REGULATORY MEASURES

Mandatory Waste Diversion PlansStandardized Material Recovery Plan would be required by the City as part of building/development permitapplication


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Mandatory Recycling/Source Separation Requirements: Standardized Material

Recovery Plan would be required by the City as part of building/development

permit application

10 2 4.7



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Mandatory Recycling/Source Separation

Requirements: Standardized Material Recovery Plan

would be required by the City as part of

building/development permit application

0 2 5 0 1 0 0 1 1 1



Municipal Deposit-Refund ProgramDevelopment of a municipal deposit refund program for C&D projects


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Municipal Deposit-Refund Program: Development of a municipal deposit-

refund program for C&D projects

9 1 3.4



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Municipal Deposit-Refund Program: Development of a

municipal deposit-refund program for C&D projects

3 3 2 0 1 0 0 1 1 0



Disposal BansMaterials with well-established diversion opportunities are banned from disposal at the landfill


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Disposal Bans: Materials with well-established diversion opportunities are

banned from disposal at the landfill

10 2 4.6



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Disposal Bans: Materials with well-established

diversion opportunities are banned from disposal at

the landfill

0 3 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 1



OTHER PROGRAMMING MEASURESAre there other program options that you would recommend or consider?

No. Idea

1. MRF

2. focus group specific to the canadian home builders association should be done because of their unique needs

3. increase landfill fees for comingled loads

4. Recycling program consultation.

5. City sorts at landfill

6. Make business accountable for recycling items such as Tim Horton's coffee grinds can be used right away in

gardens and on trees throughout the city

7. find places to take the recycleables or develope their own processing means for reuse.

ROLE OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGEWhich of the following roles would you like to see the City assume in advancing waste reduction in the C&Dsector?

No. Items

Times

Selected

1. Promote and Facilitate 9 (90%)

2. Service Provider - Collection Services 5 (50%)

3. Service Provider - Processor Services (MRF, Composting Facility, etc.) 3 (30%)

4. Service Provider - Both 2 (20%)

5. Data Storage and Collection 6 (60%)

6. Introduce Financial Incentives / Disincentives 6 (60%)

7. Introduce Regulations - Require Waste Diversion 3 (30%)

8 Introduce Regulations - Provide Level Playing Field 5(50%)



WRAP-UPDo you feel this session allowed you to provide feedback to the City of Lethbridge?

No. Items

Times

Selected

1. Yes 6 (55%)

2. No 4 (36%)

3. Somewhat 1 (9%)

Please provide us with a brief explanation about the previous question, or any other feedback you would like toleave with us.

No. Idea

1. The session was interactive and at the right level of depth for where the topic is at. I noticed that there was only 1

builder in the room so a better effort at engaging the builders in this would be good

2. Good interaction

3. More issues could have been asked about. It was veRy difficult to hear/understand responses. acoustics were

terrible

4. Two to three collection stations for business' only for compost, wood, drywall that is serviced like the new public

recycling stations. At time of drop off get a service ticket with weights and what it would have cost for landfill

rates. Also a discount on your next regular landfill drop off? Thank you

5. City to look for diversion of numerous materials , look for centers to work with the City on diversion

6. none

7. Did not address some of my industry specific issues

8. We feel that the private sector haulers are well positioned to evolve hauling services to meet customer needs in

this area

9. In all cases the cost effectiveness has to be considered

City of LethbridgeICI Stakeholder Engagement � Generators Session Report


��

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY _________________________________________________ 1KEY FINDINGS ________________________________________________________ 2CHALLENGES _________________________________________________________ 3PROGRAM OPTIONS ___________________________________________________ 5VOLUNTARY MEASURES _______________________________________________ 5

Waste Diversion Assistance_____________________________________________ 5Waste Exchange Program ______________________________________________ 6Waste Diversion Promotion _____________________________________________ 7Food Redirection _____________________________________________________ 8Recycling/ Organics Collection __________________________________________ 9Zero Waste Special Events ____________________________________________ 10ICI Working Group on Waste Diversion ___________________________________ 11

ECONOMIC MEASURES________________________________________________ 12Disposal Surcharges � Dedicated Landfill Levy_____________________________ 12Differential Tipping Fees ______________________________________________ 13

REGULATORY MEASURES _____________________________________________ 14ICI Mandatory Recycling/ Source Separation Requirements ___________________ 14Landfill Bans _______________________________________________________ 15Franchise Waste System ______________________________________________ 16Private Sector Requirement to Supply Recycling Services ____________________ 17Mandatory Waste Audits and Waste Diversion Plans ________________________ 18

OTHER PROGRAMMING MEASURES _____________________________________ 19ROLE OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE ____________________________________ 19WRAP-UP____________________________________________________________ 20



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Ideation Session Report Summary

The following is the detailed output immediately following a series of engagement sessionswith stakeholders of the Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Sector (ICI) for WasteManagement and Construction and Demolition Sector (C&D) in the city of Lethbridge.

Two engagement sessions were held with three groups of stakeholders: one session forGenerators; and one session for Processors and Haulers. A third engagement session wasalso held with stakeholders of the Construction and Demolition (C&D) sector.


The first part of the ICI stakeholder engagement sessions was an overview of the City of�� implement an ICI waste diversion strategy in the 2014-2017 businesscycle, and the role of the ICI sector in helping the City achieve these goals. The first part alsoprovided an overview of the current situation in waste diversion for the ICI sector, includingwaste composition and waste generation by industry type.

Following this overview, the several potential program options for managing waste diversionin the ICI sector, including Voluntary Measures, Economic Measures, and RegulatoryMeasures were presented to each stakeholder group.


The following is a real-time report of the Generators Engagement Session, whichshows the actual responses of participants across key questions covered.




CHALLENGESWhat challenges limit you from participating in C&D waste reduction and diversion programs?

No. Idea

1. Lack of services specific to organics

2. Mall has own recycling program, so we are confined to that.

3. Organic waste

4. Cost

5. Organics

6. Cost

7. Cost of programming is restrictive because we have such small volume of recyclables, therefore we use the

public bins

8. Lack of available metal recycling

9. Location to dump

10. Do not know who picks up materials

11. Buy in from staff

12. There are no bins for cardboard paper and glass in the downtown area for businesses. This is too expensive for

me so my staff and I bring all the items to the depots

13. Space for containers for separation is limited

14. Space limitations for stockpiling recyclables

15. Separation of waste, time constraints

16. Finding a supplier to handle the volume of organic waste. we have tried moving grounds to greenhouses but

overrun them

17. The cost factor is too high

18. Availability of recycling facilities

19. Cost of investment in capital equipment to separate different materials

20. Plastics recycling

21. Lack of incentive



22. Is there an opportunity to sell the organic waste i.e potting soil

23. Weather issues with wet products freezing in bins creating issues for dumping

24. Cost of comprehensive recycling program

25. What about toners from printers, these are getting harder to recycle, it takes too long to bring them into a retail

area, we need someone to pick up materials with just a phone call

26. If recyclable bins were placed in the back alleys for businesses to use more businesses would participate.

Organic recycling would be used more

27. No available location to bring plastic and Styrofoam waste efficiently

28. The type waste (health)



PROGRAM OPTIONS

VOLUNTARY MEASURES

Waste Diversion AssistanceTechnical and Information assistance to companies that want to implement waste diversion programs


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Technical and information assistance to companies that want to implement

waste diversion programs

10 1 8.1



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Technical and information assistance to companies

that want to implement waste diversion programs

1 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 1 6



Waste Exchange ProgramCity Materials Exchange � online waste exchange system


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. City Materials Exchange online waste exchange system 10 2 5.5



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. City Materials Exchange online waste exchange

system

0 3 3 0 1 0 2 1 1 2



Waste Diversion Promotion

Promote waste diversion in the commercial sector� Recognition of progressive businesses� Waste reduction certification

� Businesses become certified if they achieve a specified level of diversion� May be associated with the specific rewards or privileges


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Promote waste diversion in the commercial sector through: Recognition of

progressive businesses and Waste Reduction Certification.

10 4 7.4



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Promote waste diversion in the commercial sector

through: Recognition of progressive businesses and

Waste Reduction Certification.

0 0 0 1 2 2 1 3 1 3



Food RedirectionExcess food from restaurants and grocery distributors redirected to food bank/shelters. Already initiative byLethbridge Food Bank and Interfaith Food Bank


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Excess food from restaurants and grocery distributors redirected to food bank/

shelters. Already initiated by Lethbridge Food Bank and Interfaith Food Bank

10 6 8.4



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Excess food from restaurants and grocery distributors

redirected to food bank/ shelters. Already initiated by

Lethbridge Food Bank and Interfaith Food Bank

0 0 0 0 0 1 3 3 2 4



Recycling/ Organics CollectionMunicipality provides collection of recyclables or organics to local businesses. Builds on residential recyclingprogram


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Municipality provides collection of recyclables or organics to local businesses.

Builds on residential recycling program

10 4 8



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Municipality provides collection of recyclables or

organics to local businesses. Builds on residential

recycling program

0 0 0 1 1 1 1 3 2 4



Zero Waste Special EventsAs part of permit, special events required to implement waste diversion measures. Can be initiated on avoluntary basis. City Leadership


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. As part of permit, special events required to implement waste diversion

measures. Can be initiated on a voluntary basis. City leadership

10 2 5.6



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. As part of permit, special events required to implement

waste diversion measures. Can be initiated on a

voluntary basis. City leadership

0 2 1 0 4 2 2 0 0 2



ICI Working Group on Waste DiversionICI Working Group to discuss/resolve common issues and challenges to waste diversion


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. ICI Working Group to discuss/resolve common issues and challenges to waste

diversion

10 2 6.5



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. ICI Working Group to discuss/resolve common issues

and challenges to waste diversion

0 2 1 0 1 2 2 1 1 3



ECONOMIC MEASURES

Disposal Surcharges � Dedicated Landfill LevyLevy placed on ICI waste entering landfill


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Disposal Surcharges - Dedicated Landfill Levy: Levy placed on ICI waste

entering City landfill

8 1 3.9



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Disposal Surcharges - Dedicated Landfill Levy: Levy

placed on ICI waste entering City landfill

2 2 4 0 2 0 1 2 0 0



Differential Tipping FeesIncreased fees for loads containing specified materials


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Differential Tipping Fees: Increased fees for loads containing specified

materials

10 3 7.5



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Differential Tipping Fees: Increased fees for loads

containing specified materials

0 0 1 0 1 0 3 4 3 1



REGULATORY MEASURES

ICI Mandatory Recycling/ Source Separation RequirementsBusinesses must participate in recycling and/or divert designated materials through a recycling program


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. ICI Mandatory Recycling/Source Separation Requirements: Businesses must

participate in recycling and/or must divert designated materials through a

recycling program

10 4 7.3



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. ICI Mandatory Recycling/Source Separation

Requirements: Businesses must participate in

recycling and/or must divert designated materials

through a recycling program

0 0 0 2 0 2 2 4 1 2



Landfill BansLoads rejected if containing specific materials


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Landfill Bans: Loads rejected if containing specific materials 10 2 7.4



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Landfill Bans: Loads rejected if containing specific

materials

0 1 1 0 0 1 2 4 1 3



Franchise Waste SystemCity franchises waste collection services in ICI sector. Addresses issue of control over ICI waste stream. Canstipulate waste diversion targets


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Franchise Waste System: City franchises waste collection services in ICI

sector. Addresses issue of control over ICI waste stream. Can stipulate waste

diversion targets

10 1 4



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Franchise Waste System: City franchises waste

collection services in ICI sector. Addresses issue of

control over ICI waste stream. Can stipulate waste

diversion targets

2 0 6 0 3 0 1 0 0 1



Private Sector Requirement to Supply Recycling ServicesWaste haulers must also provide recycling services


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Private Sector Requirement to Supply Recycling Services: Waste Haulers must

also provide recycling services

8 2 5.6



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Private Sector Requirement to Supply Recycling

Services: Waste Haulers must also provide recycling

services

0 1 3 0 2 0 4 3 0 0



Mandatory Waste Audits and Waste Diversion PlansBusinesses required to complete a waste audit and document waste diversion plans. Requires technicalassistance to comply.


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Mandatory Waste Audits and Waste Diversion Plans: Businesses required to

complete a waste audit and document waste diversion plans. Requires

technical assistance to comply

8 1 4.3



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Mandatory Waste Audits and Waste Diversion Plans:

Businesses required to complete a waste audit and

document waste diversion plans. Requires technical

assistance to comply

2 2 3 0 1 2 0 3 0 0



OTHER PROGRAMMING MEASURESAre there any other program options that you would recommend or consider?

No. Idea

1. Composting ideas

2. Initiate toner recycling

3. Focus on those areas where there are currently gaps in services

4. Reduce organic waste costs

5. Find a practical solution for those businesses in the downtown where bin space is an issue

6. Organic waste diversion and cost less than regular landfill

7. Downtown drop off areas

8. City's role and the cost they will pass onto businesses. City should not be able to monopolize in this area

9. I would like to see development of value added products from organic waste. Biodigestors, soil enhancement.

The sole end production could help remove costs and generate revenue for the provider

10. �� !��"�� ##$� �� "�� "��

recycling in downtown. The current initiative helps homeless and business.

ROLE OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGEWhich of the following roles would you like to see the City assume in advancing waste reduction in the ICIsector (Select all that apply)

No. Items

Times

Selected










8 Introduce Regulations - Provide Level Playing Field 6 (60%)


No. Items

Times

Selected

1. Yes 8 (89%)

2. No 0 (0%)

3. Somewhat 1 (11%)


No. Ideas

1. There are many variables that would cause responses to go one way or the other. Hard to have effective

ranking questions

2. More should be done with recycling in businesses. Freecycle for the products people need to get rid of.

Make a business out of it. Pay small fee or advertising to keep it up and running

City of LethbridgeICI Stakeholder Engagement � Processors and Haulers Session Report


TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY _________________________________________________ 1KEY FINDINGS ________________________________________________________ 2CHALLENGES _________________________________________________________ 3PROGRAM OPTIONS ___________________________________________________ 4VOLUNTARY MEASURES _______________________________________________ 4

Waste Diversion Assistance_____________________________________________ 4Waste Exchange Program ______________________________________________ 5Waste Diversion Promotion _____________________________________________ 6Food Redirection _____________________________________________________ 7Recycling/ Organics Collection __________________________________________ 8Zero Waste Special Events _____________________________________________ 9

ICI Working Group on Waste Diversion ___________________________________ 10

ECONOMIC MEASURES________________________________________________ 11Disposal Surcharges � Dedicated Landfill Levy_____________________________ 11Differential Tipping Fees ______________________________________________ 12

REGULATORY MEASURES _____________________________________________ 13ICI Mandatory Recycling/ Source Separation Requirements ___________________ 13Landfill Bans _______________________________________________________ 14Franchise Waste System ______________________________________________ 15Private Sector Requirement to Supply Recycling Services ____________________ 16

Mandatory Waste Audits and Waste Diversion Plans _________________________ 17

ROLE OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE ____________________________________ 18WRAP-UP____________________________________________________________ 18



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Ideation Session Report Summary

The following is the detailed output immediately following a series of engagement sessionswith stakeholders of the Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Sector (ICI) for WasteManagement and Construction and Demolition Sector (C&D) in the city of Lethbridge.

Two engagement sessions were held with three groups of stakeholders: one session forGenerators; and one session for Processors and Haulers. A third engagement session wasalso held with stakeholders of the Construction and Demolition (C&D) sector.


The first part of the ICI stakeholder engagement sessions was an overview of the City of�� implement an ICI waste diversion strategy in the 2014-2017 businesscycle, and the role of the ICI sector in helping the City achieve these goals. The first part alsoprovided an overview of the current situation in waste diversion for the ICI sector, includingwaste composition and waste generation by industry type.

Following this overview, the several potential program options for managing waste diversionin the ICI sector, including Voluntary Measures, Economic Measures, and RegulatoryMeasures were presented to each stakeholder group.


The following is a real-time report of the Processors and Haulers Engagement Session,which shows the actual responses of participants across key questions covered.




CHALLENGES

What challenges limit you from participating in C&D waste reduction and diversion programs?

No. Idea

1. Need for processing facilities

2. Customer demand

3. Costs, infrastructure, program management

4. Customer commitment

5. Clean organic feedstock as organic processors

6. Infrastructure, cost

7. So much easier to throw stuff away rather than recycle it.

8. There are no proper programs in place

9. MONEY

10. Collect organic in separate bins or containers

11. Policy around regulatory challenges. capital cost intense burden on private capital

12. No sorting facility for load

13. Cost, convenience

14. real incentives / disincentives for waste diversion



PROGRAM OPTIONS

VOLUNTARY MEASURES

Waste Diversion AssistanceTechnical and Information assistance to companies that want to implement waste diversion programs


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Waste Diversion Assistance: Technical and information assistance to

companies that want to implement waste diversion programs

10 3 7



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Waste Diversion Assistance: Technical and information

assistance to companies that want to implement waste

diversion programs

0 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 1 1



Waste Exchange ProgramCity Materials Exchange � online waste exchange system


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Waste Exchange Program: City Materials Exchange online waste exchange

system

7 2 5.2



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Waste Exchange Program: City Materials Exchange

online waste exchange system

0 1 0 3 1 0 4 0 0 0



Waste Diversion PromotionPromote waste diversion in the commercial sector

� Recognition of progressive businesses� Waste reduction certification

� Businesses become certified if they achieve a specified level of diversion� May be associated with the specific rewards or privileges


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Waste Diversion Promotion: Promote waste diversion in the commercial sector

through: Recognition of progressive businesses and Waste Reduction

Certification.

9 3 7.1



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Waste Diversion Promotion: Promote waste diversion

in the commercial sector through: Recognition of

progressive businesses and Waste Reduction

Certification.

0 0 1 0 1 5 2 5 4 0



Food RedirectionExcess food from restaurants and grocery distributors redirected to food bank/shelters. Already initiative byLethbridge Food Bank and Interfaith Food Bank


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Excess food from restaurants and grocery distributors redirected to food bank/

shelters. Already initiated by Lethbridge Food Bank and Interfaith Food Bank

10 3 7.9



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Excess food from restaurants and grocery distributors

redirected to food bank/ shelters. Already initiated by

Lethbridge Food Bank and Interfaith Food Bank

0 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 2 5



Recycling/ Organics CollectionMunicipality provides collection of recyclables or organics to local businesses. Builds on residential recyclingprogram


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Municipality provides collection of recyclables or organics to local businesses.

Builds on residential recycling program

10 1 5.6



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Municipality provides collection of recyclables or

organics to local businesses. Builds on residential

recycling program

2 1 1 0 1 1 2 1 1 2



Zero Waste Special EventsAs part of permit, special events required to implement waste diversion measures. Can be initiated on avoluntary basis. City Leadership


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. As part of permit, special events required to implement waste diversion

measures. Can be initiated on a voluntary basis. City leadership

9 4 6.9



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. As part of permit, special events required to implement

waste diversion measures. Can be initiated on a

voluntary basis. City leadership

0 0 0 1 0 4 2 4 1 0



ICI Working Group on Waste DiversionICI Working Group to discuss/resolve common issues and challenges to waste diversion


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. ICI Working Group to discuss/resolve common issues and challenges to waste

diversion

9 5 6.4



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. ICI Working Group to discuss/resolve common issues

and challenges to waste diversion

0 0 0 0 3 4 3 1 1 0



ECONOMIC MEASURES

Disposal Surcharges � Dedicated Landfill LevyLevy placed on ICI waste entering landfill


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Disposal Surcharges - Dedicated Landfill Levy: Levy placed on ICI waste

entering City landfill

9 3 6.8



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Disposal Surcharges - Dedicated Landfill Levy: Levy

placed on ICI waste entering City landfill

0 0 1 0 2 1 2 5 1 0



Differential Tipping FeesIncreased fees for loads containing specified materials


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Differential Tipping Fees: Increased fees for loads containing specified

materials

10 3 8.2



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Differential Tipping Fees: Increased fees for loads

containing specified materials

0 0 1 0 0 0 2 4 1 4



REGULATORY MEASURES

ICI Mandatory Recycling/ Source Separation RequirementsBusinesses must participate in recycling and/or divert designated materials through a recycling program


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. ICI Mandatory Recycling/Source Separation Requirements: Businesses must

participate in recycling and/or must divert designated materials through a

recycling program

10 6 8.3



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. ICI Mandatory Recycling/Source Separation

Requirements: Businesses must participate in

recycling and/or must divert designated materials

through a recycling program

0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 1 5



Landfill BansLoads rejected if containing specific materials


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Landfill Bans: Loads rejected if containing specific materials 10 1 6.6



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Landfill Bans: Loads rejected if containing specific

materials

2 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 3 2



Franchise Waste SystemCity franchises waste collection services in ICI sector. Addresses issue of control over ICI waste stream. Canstipulate waste diversion targets


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Franchise Waste System: City franchises waste collection services in ICI

sector. Addresses issue of control over ICI waste stream. Can stipulate waste

diversion targets

9 1 4



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Franchise Waste System: City franchises waste

collection services in ICI sector. Addresses issue of

control over ICI waste stream. Can stipulate waste

diversion targets

3 2 2 0 2 0 0 2 1 0



Private Sector Requirement to Supply Recycling ServicesWaste haulers must also provide recycling services


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Private Sector Requirement to Supply Recycling Services: Waste Haulers must

also provide recycling services

10 1 5.8



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Private Sector Requirement to Supply Recycling

Services: Waste Haulers must also provide recycling

services

1 0 2 1 3 0 2 0 1 2



Mandatory Waste Audits and Waste Diversion PlansBusinesses required to complete a waste audit and document waste diversion plans. Requires technicalassistance to comply.


HIGH/LOW REPORT




1. Mandatory Waste Audits and Waste Diversion Plans: Businesses required to

complete a waste audit and document waste diversion plans. Requires

technical assistance to comply

10 2 5.8



Rank Idea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


1. Mandatory Waste Audits and Waste Diversion Plans:

Businesses required to complete a waste audit and

document waste diversion plans. Requires technical

assistance to comply

0 1 0 3 2 2 1 1 1 1



ROLE OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGEWhich of the following roles would you like to see the City assume in advancing waste reduction in the ICIsector (Select all that apply)

No. Items

Times

Selected








8 Introduce Regulations - Provide Level Playing Field 7 (58%)


No. Items

Times

Selected

1. Yes 10 (91%)

2. No 0 (0%)

3. Somewhat 1 (9%)


No. Idea

1. As a residential recycler it was not as informative as I hoped. But for the commercial end it was great

2. Need to work out many details. Would rather talk about residential (our society). Over representation of big

�� !�� !� �!��



information from focus group.

3. As a future organic waste processor it was great to be part of the conversation. Thank you!

Waste Diversion Public Engagement

Appendix

Construction & Demolition Sector – Detailed Notes from Discussions

Table #1 8:00 am

Baseline

Questions:

1. Best way to get value?2. City’s Role?3. Key Stakeholders’ Roles?4. Keys to Successful Implementation?

1. Numbers from the processor & generator2. Facilitator most trustworthy

� Customer permission� Privacy challenges� Needs to be bigger� # than individual� Doc. Confidentiality for competitive info� Maybe repeat all together by just material type, not by hauler� Competition challenges� Additional time compile� Benchmark based on extrapolation� Using AB total� #s may not be accurate� Not necessarily tracking today� Use other examples for jurisdictions for credibility


Differential Tipping Fees

Questions:

1. City’s Role?2. Key Stakeholders’ Roles?3. Keys to Successful Implementation?

1. Regular enforcer. Educator – broad scope2. Regulator and enforcer to the customer. Educator – different costs.3. Grace Period. Enforcement. Diversion opportunities.

� Some customers will pay increased feeCity(enforce)�Hauler�Customer

Educational & Awareness Program

Questions:


1. .� City to educate Haulers – Haulers to educate customers� Distinguish between acceptable and non-acceptable items� Develop a communication group – to send the message out & develop goals� Develop message, provide links� Establish relationship with home builders� City’s logo used for credibility and home builder logo

2. .� Home Builders Association to partner with the City� Pass on information to contractors and hold them accountable� Need to ensure contractors/customers know why

3. .� Consistent message between City & Hauler

i. Develop a master list of options of each materialii. Provide general understandings on the relative cost

� Bins for different stages of construction

� City logo important + credibility + partner orgs to bolster coll. Approach� Comnis need to reach all generators + tools to help with consistency


Infrastructure Development Facilities

Questions:


1. .� To become a default provider for both collection & processing� Find private partner to develop facilities

2. .3. .

� Requires a capital for development, which will need a return� Services to be provided by the private sector� Ensure market & develop private sector services as a result of the city diff. tipping fees

1. City can create markets with � diff. tipping fees!

Deposit Refund Program

Questions:


1. Positives� Establishes equality amongst home builders� Incentives do it� Become aware of the total amount of waste generated.

i. Define measurements/tonnage – helps to establish a consistent market2. Negatives

� People don’t want to be regulated� A lot of people work – both administratively & for generators

3. To be successful?� Address the big generators� Need consistent markets


Table #2 8:00 am

Baseline

Questions:


1. Sorted loads vs. mixed – measured at landfill / scale2. Education around separation of materials – how to manage onsite – bins. Identify financial

information to commercial and residential stakeholders3. Support and participate in process discussions2. Landfill nearly only option for C&D materials


Questions:


1. City Role:� Partner with private to provide processing facilities for materials.� “Has to take leap.”� Contractors decide line of where tipping fees need to be.

2. .� Regulations! “Right thing to do.” Compare to speeding fines & tickets.� “Everyone’s problem.” Need fines.� Need to circle back with generators about $1 to make source sep.� Behavior change needs to happen with generators.

3. If bans: need processing facility for the material


Educational & Awareness Program

Questions:


1. .� Clear goals� Limitations define opportunity� Confirm audience: generator, hauler, general public� Good time to get word out! Examples: Hospital – LEED Silver project

2. .� Communicate� Hauler – support & promote the strategy� Education

i. Visually represent wasteii. Target audience = Everyone

3. .� Shock & awe (quantity); consequences� Linked to permit office (e.g. root house, build a deck) – discount if plan; turnaround time� Projections of waste

Infrastructure Development

Questions:


1. .� Recene material� City currently has only facility� City process – Private sector collect� Collection + processing directly linked� Markets volatile � risk high � small volumes � needs city facilitation

2. .� Processing capacity creates market � can drive collection� Processors do something meaningful with material� End markets volatile � city needs to be creative + “de-risk” for private companies.

3. .



Questions:


3. Complex vs. other suggested options1. .

� City builds an easy, digital system for tracking – no additional work for stakeholders� • City – make it simple for stakeholders � digital system� • Ach. Goals?� • $ needs to “define skin in the game”� • Need to better understand tools required to make successful� • Builders put resp. for tracking diversion – challenge

Table #2 8:00 am

Baseline

Questions:


1. .� Consider sorting options for C&D waste� Work with builders to pre-sort material� Collect baseline data at the collection site� Work with haulers to identify waste loads at the W&R Centre (overhead truck scales)� Establish a relationship between collectors & generators

2. .� Selling the project & deliver baseline study

3. .� Stakeholder “buy-in” & be willing to share data (cooperation)� Pilot study funding to offset costs for study participants.

4. .� Goal – What do you want to obtain?� Needs to be worthwhile



Questions:

1. City’s Role2. Key Stakeholders’ Roles3. Keys to Successful Implementation

1. .� Direction & set goals based on diversion of certain materials� Set rates at the disposal site� Cooperation from council� Public engagement & participation (develop communication)

2. .� Communication� Additional sorting before disposal & secure bins� Collectors to develop different ways of collecting to assist generators

3. .� Other stakeholders in agreement� Balance rates� Set rates based on incentives of the stakeholder (ex. Consider cost to the builders)� Education� Surcharges to fund additional operation requirements to fund generators & facilities to offset

costs.� Disposal bans

i. May not meet the same goals as tipping feesii. Too difficult � who will enforce?iii. Too pre-mature at this pointiv. Have to define the exceptions

4. Differential fees more positive � bans encourage rogue behavior


Educational / Awareness Programs

Questions:


1. .� The City is primarily responsible for this role, in particular the public at large� Role for city to educate public at large� Costs associated with separation

2. .� They are also responsible to ensure their members are aware – i.e. Construction Association� Effectiveness of education long-term � need shorter term results

3. .� Also need to tie it in with other tools – i.e. enforcement� Enforcement does work, but it needs to be communicated – awareness� Everyone needs to change – individuals & businesses

Gaps in Infrastructure

Questions:


1. City’s Role – Collection � could be done by the private sector. Processing – private sector.2. In Recycling’s Processing all of the stakeholders have roles3. Collection


Questions:



1. Positives - it diverts waste2. Negatives

� Can’t be one business who is responsible� Administrative/cost of tracking� Mixed loads is an issue

3. How to make successful� Needs to be community based – everyone pays

Industrial, Commercial, and Industrial [ICI] Sector – Detailed Notes from TableDiscussions

ICI Table #1 10:30 am


Questions:


� Fees differential needs to� Will need someone to inspect the loads� More incentive to recycle� Bs will need to separate� Education will be key� Will be hard to differentiate where loads come from� City’s Role� Education� Provide Alternatives/Assistance� Make more convenient� Provide incentives/rewards for businesses doing thing in a positive way� PPI will need a grace period.


Rewards Program

� Stakeholder’s� Cost of Space are a challenge� What needs to happen� Grace period� Alternatives/Options/Assistance� Education/Make it easy

Landfill Bans

Questions:

1. Why would landfill bans be a good step for the City?2. How and when should bans be implemented?3. What materials would you suggest be banned?

� Who will monitor it?� Education� Options� Make easy� No place for organics� Stat with paper, metals, cardboard plastic� Introduce in steps with a grace period� Community approach-bs in 1 area have centralized recycled

Mandatory Program

Questions:



� City� Haul it� Education� Make easier for processor/enforcement� Stakeholders� Make easier for processors/pre-sort� Check bins for contaminants/enforcement� Education Assistance – Person to evaluate & help businesses to accomplish goals.� Monitoring/Tracking� Rewards

Waste Diversion Assistance

Questions:


1. Cities RoleProvide guidance, info., education, options, facilitating, evaluate

2. Key stakeholders RoleOptions/EducationHave an open mind with diversionProvide feedback critical for programs (needs, etc.)Leadership

3. Keys to successful implementationCommunication, partnerships, goalsLost/priceRealistic offerings for service (and reliable service)

Waste Diversion Promotion

Questions:



� Pushing promotion out to public/customer-net goal generate business� “Best of the best” – but concerns about judging� Public may not be there in terms of making decisions based on business behavior

Idea overall

� Conflicting msg w/ bans/fees – “new way of doing business� Who gets the incentive? Gen. w/hauler? Both?� How do you judge? Audit? Diverse businesses� Those who divert will keep doing it – not a carrot to get on board� Business practice for those who do it.� Good for business top

Food Redirection

Questions:


� Need more info on volumes (org) vs food for re-direction for strategy� Who & how decision made for “human consumption (food bank) – brand ties to product quality� Refridge� Good s. act not good enough for business protection� Food banks have strong systems today for connections/collections and transfer goods to other

charities as well� Food processing – fresh- dated food cannot be directed to FB� NEED OPP TO PROCESS THIS WASTE WITHIN CITY OR ELSEWHERE� FB has partners for some organics diversion� Need facility in City or City programs



Questions:



� Determine what will have charges and how much $� Communication

o Goalso Advertisingo What does it costo Consistent messageo Information

� Policy & relationship w providers & waste mgmt. companies� Consistent collection across City!� Everyone on same page for sorting

Stakeholders role

� Determine costs & logistics of participation� Sorting & increased duties� Look for financial benefits/cost� Refunds/revenue source� Recycling

Implementation

� Incentives� Cost effective� Price differential� Price differential business + volume dependent� Need to communicate what taxes pay for?

Landfill Bans

Questions:



� Why good?� Environmental benefit� Recycling diverted� Private industry opportunities� Why not?� Cost – where does it go� Illegal dumping� Difficult to enforce� Difficult for smaller volumes� Materials?� Recyclables� Harmful substances (toxic)� Organics� Bio-medical� Electronics (so many program options available for diversion)� Any deposit/eco fees programs bottles etc.

Source Separation Requirements

Questions:


� City’s roleo -policy goals/direction/targetso Create optionso Enforcemento Provide recycling binso Communication – what’s in it for uso Incentive/cost benefit

� Stakeholders Roleo Operations/processo Make it easyo Weigh benefitso Implement into policy

� Keys to successo Clear guidance – targets, costso Streamline & make easyo Transfer of labouro Need incentive



Questions:


� Education, communication� Offer list of consultants/industry providers/haulers/destinations� -Hub� Seek out the information provide information back� Sharing of information between City and Businesses� easy/simple� Economic senses� Buy-in� Incentives� Worried about cost implications� Who is going to take this on (cost)?� Form connections between generators & haulers/processors



Questions:


� Structure the economics – keep it simple� Sorting/hauling services/processing� Communication, education, economic sense� -cost cannot be more than the benefit� May evolve into bans, long term if necessary


Landfill Bans

Questions:


� Not in favour of bans� Fine system?� Will promote illegal dumping� See above� Anything recyclable� Focus on high volume and easy groups first� Increase – convenience� Recycling bins at business� Determine regulation� Enforcement� Determined what is recyclable� Follow the rules� Hauler provides solutions� What is the focus?� Flexible� Efficient� Economics have to work


Questions:



� City’s roleo Regulationso Communication/educationo Policy & optionso Who? Options of providers, options for private sourcingo How?o Partnerships? Create connectionso Website & information sharingo Evaluation implementation assistance

� Stakeholders Roleo Advocacy/leadershipo Set the example – communicate benefitso Communicate & share ideaso Haulers/service providers educate & offer optionso Implementationo Programs in place & availableo Easy & cost effective


o Let city do bylaws, private do the talkingo City’s roles it to give informationo Educationo Upload info. to website/directoryo Self-registration on a city website who/which business is greeno Being neutral to businesses which are hauling


Questions:



1. City’s roleo Enforcement/set Rates/Feeso Education of stakeholders & public at largeo Could legislate fees charged by private facilities

2. Key stakeholders roleso Education of staffo Haulers/facilities educate customers

3. Keys to successful Implementationo Communications/educationo Sorting station on sites or resort/enforcement/staffo Level playing field resivs ICIo Make recycling easier to doo Need to ensure real diversion options are in place 1sto Enforcement/stop cheaters

4. Consider other incentives fast track line for recyclers, make things easy.

Landfill Bans

Questions:


1. Why would bans be goodo Gets recyclable material out of landfillo People are used to following ruleso How to sort is a challenge (space/money)

2. How/when should bans be implementedo As soon as a suitable alternative processer is available.o Education of customers/generators should happen first, grace period on implementation

3. What materials should be bannedo Cardboard, paper, metal, Styrofoam, hazardous materialo ? Who pays the additional cost-generators?


ICI Mandatory Recycling/Source Separation Requirements

Questions:


1. City’s Roleo Investigate options/infrastructureo Could provide infrastructure to support private facilitieso Regulator/enforcemento Broad education on program/goalso Educate value of recycling & costs

2. Key stake holders roleso Private businesses could provide facilitieso Haulers educate customers/enforce complianceo Haulers can provide customer specific education

3. Keys to successful implementationo Adequate lad time to prepare facilities, processeso Needs to be feasible $ for service generatoro Need a level playing fieldo Need advanced waste collection/onsite storage for downtown coreo WoWould be positive if after implemented for ICI resi mandatory recycling followed

1

City of Lethbridge Potential Waste Diversion Target Document

December

2014

[This documents describes performance tracking approaches, current Lethbridge waste diversion activities and proposed waste diversion and per capita disposal targets.]

Juliane Ruck Waste and Recycling Engineer, P.Eng. City of Lethbridge

City of Lethbridge Potential Waste Diversion Target Document December 2014

Page 2

Table of Contents

1 Background .......................................................................................................................................................... 3

1.1 Performance of Other Municipalities .......................................................................................................... 3

2 Performance Tracking Approaches ....................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Percentage Diversion Approach .................................................................................................................. 4

2.2 Kg/capita Disposed Approach...................................................................................................................... 5

2.3 Current Program Performance Tracking Efforts in Lethbridge ..................................................................... 6

2.3.1 Residential Sector Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 6

2.3.2 ICI Sector Characteristics ......................................................................................................................... 8

2.3.3 C&D Sector Characteristics ..................................................................................................................... 9

3 Proposed Waste and Diversion Targets for Lethbridge ....................................................................................... 10

3.1 Development of Realistic Waste Diversion Targets ................................................................................... 10

3.2 Modeling Diversion Potential .................................................................................................................... 11

3.2.1 Proposed Residential Waste Diversion Goals ........................................................................................ 11

3.2.2 Proposed ICI and C&D Waste Diversion Goals ....................................................................................... 14

3.2.3 Proposed Overall System Performance Target ...................................................................................... 16

4 Next Steps .......................................................................................................................................................... 17


Page 3

BACKGROUND

Across Canada, diversion efforts have had different drivers. Commonly, municipalities are faced with a critical

shortage of landfill space and/ or residents have growing concerns about the best management of natural

resources. In April 1989, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment ‐ agreed that targets and

schedules for waste minimization be established, including a fifty percent (50%) reduction in waste generation

by the year 2000 (FCM, 2004). Provincial regulations have followed this first initiative. Alberta Environment, for

example, established a waste disposal target of 2013/14 – 675 kg/ capita, 2014/15 – 662 kg/ capita, 2015/2016

– 648 kg/ capita in their current business plan.

1.1 PERFORMANCE OF OTHER MUNICIPALITIES

Over the last couple of years, municipalities throughout Canada have developed waste reduction targets and

goals. Table 1 provides a brief overview of goals set by western Canadian municipalities:

Table 1: Western Canadian Waste Diversion Targets Overview

Municipality Population Res Target(s) System Targets

Calgary 1,120,225 80% of waste from the landfills by 2020

Edmonton 960,015 90% residential diversion from landfill by 2013

Red Deer 90,564 increase residential diversion rate to20% by 2015; 30% by 2020; 50% by 2035

Kamloops 85,678 50% of waste from the landfill by 2020; 85% by 2050

Regina 193,100 40% of waste from the landfill by 2015; 60% by 2020


Page 4

The overall per capita waste generation rate for Lethbridge in 2012 was 1,150 kg. This includes residential

waste, ICI waste and C&D waste. Per capita waste generation rates have been fairly stable since 2011 and

could be used as a baseline for performance comparison in the future.

2 PERFORMANCE TRACKING APPROACHES

The difficulty with any target is continuous monitoring of its performance. Waste is a very diverse material,

waste generators have different behaviors and waste management infrastructure varies from municipality to

municipality. The three R’s – Reduce, Reuse, Recycle – have to be accounted for in the calculations. Tonnages of

reduction and reuse are hard to obtain or to estimate. The following two procedures are used across Canada

and the United States to track diversion in the residential and commercial waste sector.

2.1 PERCENTAGE DIVERSION APPROACH

The typical approach to calculate diversion is to use diverted waste divided by generated material.

________(Tonnes diverted)_______

(Tonnes diverted + Tonnes disposed)

The formula above assumes that all tonnage data for “Tonnes diverted” is available, including items diverted

through the deposit system, on‐property management (e.g. grass cycling, backyard composting), and reuse of

materials. Also, a clear definition of what materials are included as diverted materials is needed (e.g scrap metal

and concrete) to compare jurisdictions realistically.

The percentage diversion calculation approach is used in the Canadian General Accepted Principle (GAP)

protocol. The GAP protocol was developed in 1999/2000 by a national multi‐stakeholder committee to track

waste diversion in Canada. Today, it is seldom used to its full extent and there is limited protocol information

available. A modified GAP approach is currently used to calculate diversion in the Ontario residential sector and

Regional Districts in British Columbia.

Advantages of the Percentage Diversion Approach are:

Provides good information on program performance (e.g. recycling, composting)

Easy to understand for the public and decision makers

= % diverted


Page 5

A municipality traditionally has a good handle on tonnage records of disposed and diverted materials for the

residential sector. However, the majority of Material Recovery Facilities (MRF’s) for the sorting of recyclables

are privately owned and it is difficult to access tonnage data. Also, often the commercial sector utilizes direct

backhaul options for diverted materials and does not utilize local MRFs . Some jurisdictions, like the Regional

District of Nanaimo, have implemented Waste Stream Management Licensing By‐Laws to obtain the data from

private companies.

2.2 KG/CAPITA DISPOSED APPROACH

The second approach is a baseline approach, where a baseline of waste generation gets established in a base

year and decrease in waste generation is measured as increased diversion. This process accounts also for waste

prevention or re‐use.



This approach is currently used in a California wide regulated reporting system and has the following

advantages:

Easy to measure if disposal tonnage information is available

Increased simplicity

Diversion percentage is not artificially increased through inclusion of heavy materials such as concrete

and asphalt

There are fewer waste stream numbers to measure and to keep track of which should result in more

comparable output numbers

Incorporates impact of waste reduction

The State of California started to track diversion information in 1989. A 50 percent diversion and reporting

requirement is regulated in the Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939). In 2007, California switched from

a Percentage Diversion Approach to the per capita approach. The goal was to change the emphasis from an

estimated diversion measurement number to using an actual disposal measurement number as a factor.

California reports per capita generation and per employee generation data. The employee waste generation

rate allows accounting for commercial sector growth in urban centers.

= % diverted


Page 6

With either approach it is important to assure waste flow within the monitored region and to not allow

materials (waste or recyclables) to be transported from the generator to locations outside of the region.

2.3 CURRENT PROGRAM PERFORMANCE TRACKING EFFORTS IN LETHBRIDGE

The City of Lethbridge tracks tonnage of waste disposed off in the City owned landfill and residential materials

diverted. According to the City’s records approximately 110,000 tonnes of municipal type waste are generated

annually within the City. On average, 23% of the waste is generated by residents, 58 % by the ICI (Industrial,

Commercial and Institutional) sector and 19% by the Construction and Demolition sector.

Figure 1: Breakdown of Lethbridge Waste Sources (Sonnevera, 2008)

In addition to waste generated by Lethbridge residents, businesses and the construction industry, the Waste

and Recycling Centre (WRC) has some regional customers that utilize the disposal facility.

2.3.1 RESIDENTIAL SECTOR CHARACTERISTICS

The City is the sole provider of residential waste collection. Residential dwellings are serviced weekly by

fully automated or semi‐automated curbside service. The City also services an estimated 15% of the

commercial sector. The remainder of the commercial sector is serviced by private contractors.

Currently, residential waste diversion activities in Lethbridge include:

Recycling drop‐off depots,

HHW, paint, and e‐waste collection at the Waste and Recycling Centre,

Two Yard Waste drop‐off sites,

Comment [11]: This is fluctuating and there is some uncertainty about correctness and scale records ICI versus C&D and the MF waste component b/c it is part of commercial loads. I think it is more 30% res, 30% C&D and 40% ICI but need better data to see trends.


Page 7

Fall leaf collection,

Promotion of backyard composting, and

Christmas tree recycling.

The City of Lethbridge collects tonnage information about all programs listed above and calculates

approximate diversion percentages based on the formula diverted waste divided by generated material.

Figure 2: Residential (City of Lethbridge 2010/2011 data)

In 2012, approximately 20% of residential waste was diverted from the landfill, with the recycling depot

system contributing with ~10% to the diversion and all the other programs contributing by another 10%.

Residential Waste Characteristics

Paper

Cardboard

Other Recyclables

Waste Organics

Tonnage Percentage

Organics 11,750 47%

Paper 1,750 7%

Cardboard 1,500 6%

Other

Recyclables

3000 12%

Waste 7,000 28%

Total 25,000 100%


Page 8

2.3.2 ICI SECTOR CHARACTERISTICS

The characterization of the commercial waste stream is important to initiate and facilitate realistic commercial

diversion programs and to monitor their impact. ICI waste characterization is more difficult because of the high

variations of waste materials generated by different businesses. To decrease sample variation, Waste and

Recycling Services (WRS) categorized ICI customer into sectors. Waste characteristics are more consistent in

each sector. The following sectors were analyzed and sampled during City of Lethbridge Waste audits:

Category Included in Category

Retail Wholesale, Retail

Office Information, Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, Rental, Professional, Scientific and Technical Services, Management of Companies, Public Administration

Institutional Educational Services, Arts, Entertainment and Recreation

Healthcare & Social Assistance

Medical or Social Assistance Services

Accommodation & Food Short‐term lodging and restaurants

Other Utilities, transportation, other services (e.g. repairs, personal care, laundry services etc)

The waste characteristics of all the sectors were weighted according to their dominance in Lethbridge

based on number of employees working in each sector. An overall ICI waste chart was generated. The

waste characteristics are comparable to results from the City of Red Deer and the City of Leduc.

Figure 3: Lethbridge ICI waste characteristics, excl. Manufacturing, Agriculture and Mining (City of Lethbridge, 2011)

Paper

CardboardOther Recyclables

Other Waste

Organics

Tonnage Percentage

Organics 15,500 31%

Paper 3,500 7%

Cardboard 7,000 14%

Other

Recyclables

9,000 18%

Waste 15,000 30%

Total 50,000 100%

City of Lethbridge ICI Waste Characteristics

~60,000 tonnes annually


Page 9

2.3.3 C&D SECTOR CHARACTERISTICS

A characterization of the Construction and Demolition sector (C&D) is even more difficult because

construction projects and the generated waste vary significantly according to stage of construction and

type of project (construction, renovation, demolition).

The Province of Alberta has done a lot of work to characterize C&D sector waste. Based on discussion

with the construction industry, material arriving at the landfill and spot‐check waste audits, Lethbridge

C&D waste appears to fall within the Provincial average and characterization.

Figure 4: Average Alberta C&D Composition (Sonnevera, 2008)

Asphalt

Brick

Concrete

Drywall

Metal

Roofing

Wood

Other

Tonnage Percentage

Asphalt 1,900 8%

Brick 1,200 5%

Concrete 1,900 8%

Drywall 1,500 6%

Metal 2,900 12%

Roofing 3,100 13%

Wood 4,500 19%

Other 7,000 29%

Total 24,000 100%


Page 10

3 PROPOSED WASTE AND DIVERSION TARGETS FOR LETHBRIDGE

On July 5th, 2010 City Council adopted the Municipal Development Plan/Integrated Community

Sustainability Plan (MDP/ICSP) which provides a framework for Council and the community on how to

develop and grow the City over the next 40 years. The plan identifies principles, goals and policies to

guide future decisions. The following policies were listed regarding waste management:

1) Conserve natural resources within the City by: exploring methods to reduce waste, identifying

methods to reuse and recycle products that are currently identified as waste.

2) Identify the largest sources of waste and create programs to better manage waste.1

Since, City Council has utilized the framework of the ICSP/ MDP to establish their strategic priorities

for 2014‐2018. Strategic Goal Number 5 states that City Council will take a leadership role in the

protection and preservation of our natural environment in Lethbridge. 2014 Council’s Strategic Plan

Goal #5: Protection and Preservation of Natural Environment lists the following actions:

1) Investigate the implementation of curbside recycling

2) Implement the ICI waste diversion strategy

3) Explore options for resource conservation initiatives to reduce our environmental footprint.

3.1 DEVELOPMENT OF REALISTIC WASTE DIVERSION TARGETS

In light of the ICSP/ MDP goals, Council’s Strategic Plan and the provincial waste generation targets, waste

reduction goals for the City of Lethbridge should be established to measure the City’s progress in

achieving better waste diversion. Waste diversion goals have to:

Encourage the community to greater waste reduction through additional diversion programs,

policy and strategy planning and implementation,

1 Municipal Development Plan/Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (MDP/ICSP) page 5, City of Lethbridge, Bylaw #5650,

July 2010


Page 11

Avoid unnecessary financial burden or side effects (e.g. costly transports of materials to distant

markets which would create additional GHG effects), and

Be realistic, measurable and achievable, based on the City’s waste characteristics and available,

local infrastructure. 2

3.2 MODELING DIVERSION POTENTIAL

Common practice in developing diversion goals and targets is to gain a good understanding of the existing

waste management system, material flows, and available infrastructure and cost implications for all

sectors. Different policies and enforcement strategies can impact waste diversion significantly.

The following assumptions were made when modeling Lethbridge’s waste diversion potential:

Population growth according to the Planning and Developments medium growth scenario with increase of 1.6% in 2014 and diminishing every 5 years by 0.1% starting 2020

Residential material growth by 0.5%, ICI material by 0.5% and C&D material by 0.5% per year over the next 15 years.

Maintain current diversion efforts by residential, ICI and C&D sector until first program change.

ICI program changes according to the proposed ICI Implementation strategy

Current residential, ICI and C&D waste characteristics stay constant

3.2.1 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL WASTE DIVERSION GOALS

Considered program changes for modeling of the residential sector included:

The full operation of three recycling stations with yard waste components in 2015,

Full scale implementation of a curbside recycling program in 2017, and

2 Solid Waste as a Resource Guide for Sustainable Communities. FCM, March 2004


Page 12

Full scale organics curbside collection in 2021, allowing grass and some yard waste disposal in the

cart.

The residential program options above follow typical program implementation timelines observed in

other Alberta municipalities over the last 10 years. If program implementation is delayed or not pursued

diversion would stall and level out at the previous stage, i.e. curbside recycling program can only achieve

approximately 35% diversion because of the amount of recyclable material available in the material

stream.

Figure 5: Residential Diversion Potential 2012‐2030

Successful diversion program implementation will significantly change the waste stream and amount of

residential waste disposed off in the City’s landfill. By 2021, residential diversion could reach 50%. By

2030 the residential sector in Lethbridge can reach a state where only 40% of today’s per capita waste is

landfilled.


Page 13

Figure 6: Waste Diversion and per capita generation for the residential waste

Proposed residential targets would be:

Time 2012 2018 2021 2030

Residential Diversion 18% 37% 50% 65%

Residential Per Capita Waste Generation

0.327 t/ capita 0.235 t/capita 0.183 t/capita 0.136 t/capita

The City of Lethbridge would continue to track residential disposal and diversion tonnages to calculate

diversion percentage and benchmark the overall system performance with the kg/capita approach. For

the residential sector an overall target of 50% diversion by 2021 is considered realistic and reasonable.


Page 14

3.2.2 PROPOSED ICI AND C&D WASTE DIVERSION GOALS

ICI and C&D sector diversion is more difficult and the City of Lethbridge does not have access to all

available tonnage data. Therefore, the “kg/ Capita Disposed Approach” would be used to track

performance:

Kg/capita Disposed Approach



Since 2011, total tonnage of waste disposed from both sectors has been fairly stable at 800 kg/ capita and

could be used as a baseline.

Modest program changes for modeling the ICI and C&D sector waste were assumed with program

changes as proposed in the ICI and C&D strategy and related potential diversion effects. Proposed major

program changes and associated timelines are:

2015 Phase 1: Baseline Study and Performance Management,

Infrastructure Development and Marketing, City Leadership and

Stakeholder Working Groups

2016 Phase II: Voluntary Program Options

2019 Phase III: Economic Program Options

2024 Phase IV: Regulatory Program Options

= % diverted


Page 15

Figure 7: Modeled ICI and C&D sector diversion potential kg/capita basis

Successful diversion program implementation will change the waste stream and amount of waste

disposed off in the City’s landfill. By 2019 ICI and C&D diversion could reach 20% and by 2030 45%.

To account for commercial growth, diversion performance should also be tracked on a kg/employee basis

for the City of Lethbridge. Statistics Canada surveys Lethbridge employers every 5 years about the

number of employees working for them. A kg/per employee waste generated baseline for Lethbridge can

be established for 2011 with 1,285 kg/employee and performance can be compared every 5 years to per

capita performance.

Proposed ICI and C&D waste targets on kg/capita basis would be:

Time 2013 2019 2029

ICI and C&D Diversion 0% (baseline) 20% 45%

ICI and C&D Per Capita Waste Generation

800 kg/ capita 639 kg/capita 460 kg/capita

Additionally, waste audits will be performed to spot check changes in waste composition to verify

diversion efforts.


Page 16

3.2.3 PROPOSED OVERALL SYSTEM PERFORMANCE TARGET

Overall system performance can be monitored by tracking the total amount of waste generated within

City boundaries from all sectors (residential, ICI and C&D) based on a 2012 baseline.

Figure 8: Overall Lethbridge Waste Diversion Potential

Overall system waste targets on kg/capita basis related to program implementation and program effects

would be:

1,150 kg/cap 1,110 kg/cap 600 kg/cap

Voluntary

Blue Cart Res Programs

ICI & C&D

Programs

Green Cart

Economic Regulatory

850 kg/cap 760 kg/cap

Res

ICI & C&D

2012 2016 2019 2024 2030


Page 17

4 NEXT STEPS

To assure accurate performance tracking, the following steps should be taken:

Gain better understanding on how other communities track their performance and if it is

comparable

Refine waste acceptance protocol at the landfill with emphasis on origin (City, ICI,C&D or

residential)

Continue measurement of residential program tonnages with emphasis on actual diverted

tonnages (e.g. not just MRF in‐bound material, report out‐bound material) and better estimating

procedures for residential on‐site material management (e.g. backyard compost, bottle recycling)

Develop written protocols, templates and procedures to track data (e.g. Scale house Software

templates)

Investigate options to track weight of material (disposed, diverted) by scaling it at the curb

Benchmark results with other communities

Verify tonnage performance and community context with other performance tracking tools

Regularly reporting on progress


Page 18

References:

Solid Waste Diversion Calculator for British Columbia – Draft Guidance and Implementation

Manual, Kelleher Environmental for the BC Ministry of Environment, March 2010

Clark County Solid Waste Management Plan 2000, Chapter 15, Waste Monitoring and

Performance Measurement

Solid Waste as a Resource Guide for Sustainable Communities, Federation of Canadian

Municipalities, March 2004

WRAP, 2010 Improving the performance of waste diversion schemes – A good practice guide to

monitoring and evaluation (WRAP project EVA092‐000) Report prepared by Resource Futures an

WRAP, Banbury, WRAP

Municipal Development Plan/Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (MDP/ICSP) page 5, City

of Lethbridge, Bylaw #5650, July 2010

Municipal webpages:

Calgary:

http://www.calgary.ca/UEP/ESM/Pages/State‐of‐the‐Environment/Land/Waste‐and‐waste‐

diversion.aspx

Edmonton:

http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/documents/Discussion_Paper_10_Sustainable_Wast

e_Management.pdf

Red Deer:

http://www.reddeer.ca/media/reddeerca/city‐services/garbage‐and‐recycling/Waste‐

Management‐Master‐Plan‐‐‐Final‐April‐2013.pdf

Kamloops:

http://www.kamloops.ca/environment/pdfs/plan/solidwaste.pdf

Regina

http://www.regina.ca/opencms/export/sites/regina.ca/.media/committee_agendas/city_council/03‐22‐

2010/cr10‐26.pdf

ICI Processor Analysis Report

The City of Lethbridge

November 2013Issued for UseEBA File: C22503014

EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd. operating as EBA, A Tetra Tech Company 442 - 10 Street North

Lethbridge, AB T1H 2C7 CANADA p. 403.329.9009 f. 403.328.8817

This page intentionally left blank.

ICI PROCESSOR ANALYSIS REPORT EBA FILE: C22503014-01 | NOVEMBER 22, 2013 | ISSUED FOR USE

iCity of Lethbridge ICI and CandD Processor Analysis Report.docx

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This processor analysis report summarizes the current Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional (ICI) and

Construction and Demolition (C&D) waste diversion processing options and capacity that are available

within the Lethbridge area. Options for meeting future processing needs of the ICI and C&D sectors are

also identified based on the ability for expansion of current processing facilities along with the predicted

diversion potential of developing processors in the area.

This processor analysis report summarizes current ICI and C&D diversion processors, specifically focusing

on plastic and fibre, organics, and C&D materials. Materials accepted and yearly tonnages are reported for

the processing facilities.

To determine the potential for increased waste diversion, current capacities and room for expansion were

analyzed for the current facilities. Additionally, there are processors in the midst of starting up and others

looking to build facilities. Consequently, there is significant capacity in the area for the processing of

organics, recycling, and C&D materials. Specifically, with the anticipated development of anaerobic

digestion facilities in the area and the ability for expansion for current composting businesses, there is

expected to be more than sufficient capacity for all organics collected through a municipal diversion

program, as long as quality standards can be met. In regards to recycling, with the BFI Material Recovery

Facility looking to expand, increased recycling material tonnages will be welcomed. Finding markets for

C&D materials presents a slightly more difficult task. Although, currently the Waste & Recycling (W&R)

Centre has ample space for increased collection of wood, concrete, asphalt shingles, and other materials.

With sufficient collection capabilities, securing processors and markets for material-specific items, such as

asphalt shingles, will need further investigation.

The W&R Centre, owned by the City of Lethbridge and operated by BFI Canada Ltd., currently serves as a

collection and processing facility for certain C&D materials and yard and garden waste. There is potential

for expanding the collection and processing facilities at the W&R Centre, but there will be a need for other

processors for some specific items such as asphalt shingles.

Implementation of waste diversion programs will be necessary to initiate increased collection of specific

recyclable materials. There are a variety of diversion program elements with varying degrees of

effectiveness and cost. Voluntary program options are generally well received by stakeholders but may not

result in the desired rates of diversion. Economic options serve as incentives to stimulate increased

diversion, while regulatory options are often the most effective but require direct intervention and

enforcement on the part of the municipality.


iiCity of Lethbridge ICI and CandD Processor Analysis Report.docx

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................................... i

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 CURRENT ICI AND C&D PROCESSING .................................................................................... 2

2.1 Waste and Recycling Centre .................................................................................................................32.2 Fibre, Plastic, and Mixed Recyclables ...................................................................................................42.3 Organics Processing..............................................................................................................................42.4 Construction and Demolition Processing...............................................................................................5

2.4.1 Deconstruction Projects............................................................................................................62.5 Metal Processing ...................................................................................................................................6

3.0 FUTURE PROCESSING OPTIONS IN THE LETHBRIDGE AREA .......................................... 73.1 Expansion of Plastic and Fibre Recycling .............................................................................................73.2 Expansion of Organics Processing........................................................................................................7

3.2.1 Anaerobic Digestion..................................................................................................................83.3 Expansion of Construction & Demolition Processing Capacity ...........................................................10

4.0 COMMODITY GENERATION AND CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING .................................. 11

4.1 Details and Cost of Expanded Diversion Capacity ..............................................................................12

5.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................ 13

5.1 Plastic and Fibre ..................................................................................................................................135.2 Organics...............................................................................................................................................135.3 Construction and Demolition................................................................................................................13

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................ 14

6.1 Public Versus Private Opportunities ....................................................................................................146.2 Waste Diversion Programs ..................................................................................................................14

7.0 CLOSURE ....................................................................................................................................... 16

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 17


iiiCity of Lethbridge ICI and CandD Processor Analysis Report.docx

TABLES Table 1: ICI and C&D Diversion Processing Options......................................................................................2Table 2: Current Processing, Estimated Generation, and Expected Future Capacity for ICI and C&D

Commodities ........................................................................................................................................11Table 3: Estimated Processing Facility and Private Processing Costs.........................................................12

FIGURES Figure 1: Lethbridge Waste Composition (2008) ............................................................................................1Figure 2: Windrows for composting at the Waste & Recycling Centre ...........................................................4Figure 3: Concrete Storage Pile at the Waste & Recycling Centre ...............................................................5Figure 4: Asphalt Storage Pile at the Waste & Recycling Centre ...................................................................5Figure 5: Wood Pile at the Waste & Recycling Centre ...................................................................................5Figure 6: Anaerobic Digesters at Lethbridge Biogas LP Facility.....................................................................8Figure 7: System Generators at Lethbridge Biogas LP Facility ......................................................................8Figure 8: Average Alberta ICI Waste Composition (sonnevera 2008)..........................................................11Figure 9: Average Alberta C&D Waste Composition (sonnevera 2008).......................................................11

APPENDICES Appendix A Geo-Environmental Report - General Conditions


ivCity of Lethbridge ICI and CandD Processor Analysis Report.docx

ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS AESRD Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource DevelopmentBFI BFI Canada Ltd. C&D Construction and DemolitionEBA EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd. operating as EBA, A Tetra Tech CompanyEPR Extended Producer ResponsibilityICI Industrial, Commercial, and InstitutionalMSW Municipal Solid Waste MRF Material Recovery Facilitysonnevera sonnevera international corp.City City of LethbridgeW&R Waste and Recycling (City of Lethbridge)WM Waste Management Inc.MRF Materials Recovery FacilityRDN The Regional District of Nanaimo


vCity of Lethbridge ICI and CandD Processor Analysis Report.docx

LIMITATIONS OF REPORTThis report and its contents are intended for the sole use of the City of Lethbridge and their agents. EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd. does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of any of the data, the analysis, or the recommendationscontained or referenced in the report when the report is used or relied upon by any Party other than the City of Lethbridge, or for any Project other than the proposed development at the subject site. Any such unauthorized use of this report is at the sole risk of the user. Use of this report is subject to the terms and conditions stated in EBA’s Services Agreement. EBA’s General Conditions are provided in Appendix A of this report.


1City of Lethbridge ICI and CandD Processor Analysis Report.docx

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The City of Lethbridge (City), Waste & Recycling (W&R), retained EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd.

operating as EBA, A Tetra Tech Company (EBA) to conduct an analysis of the Industrial, Commercial, and

Institutional (ICI) and Construction and Demolition (C&D) processors in the Lethbridge area. EBA

partnered with sonnevera international corp. (sonnevera) to conduct processor interviews and

assessments of ICI and C&D industries in the area.

According to sonnevera (2008), ICI and C&D waste make up nearly 77% of the waste stream in Lethbridge,

as seen in Figure 1. This is a substantial amount of the waste stream; hence the attention needed on waste

diversion programs in these sectors.

Using Lethbridge’s waste composition, as seen in Figure 1, ICI and C&D waste equate to over 84,000 tonnes

of the 112,000 tonnes landfilled in Lethbridge, showing potential for large volumes of both ICI and C&D

material to be diverted.

Figure 1: Lethbridge Waste Composition (2008)

58% 23%

19%

ICI Residential C&D



2.0 CURRENT ICI AND C&D PROCESSING

Lethbridge has a number of processors in the area that are currently accepting ICI and C&D waste.

Businesses in Lethbridge have a variety of options from disposal at the W&R Centre to different diversion

options such as composting or recycling. Table 1 shows a list of current processors in the Lethbridge area.

Table 1: ICI and C&D Diversion Processing Options

Processor Location Technology Materials Collected and/or Accepted

Material Marketed

Capacity or Desire for Processing

Expansion?

Lethbridge W&R Centre

Approx. 7 km north of 26 Avenue N,

Lethbridge

� Landfill� Windrows for

organics� Wood stock

pile

� General Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)

� Yard and Garden Waste

� Recyclable Wood� Asphalt, concrete,

aggregate� Drywall

� Landfill MSW� Bale MSW on

windy days

� Room for additional compost (windrows)

� Room for increased wood collection and chipping

BFI 703 - 32 Street N, Lethbridge

� Recycling Materials Recovery Facility (MRF)

� Hand sorting

� Recycling

� Newsprint� Mixed paper� Mixed plastic

(#1-7)

� Interested in expanding MRF

Waste Management

2230 - 39 Street N, Lethbridge

� Collection

� Cardboard� Collection from city

depots (goes to BFI MRF)

� None to date

� Interested in collection expansion

� Possibly interested in processing demand warrants

Kuhn Composting

Office: 3719 – 2Avenue N, Lethbridge

� Collection of compost

� One compost pad

� Compost turner

� Yard waste � Compost � May have some

capacity for food waste

Lethbridge Biogas LP

4456 - 8 Avenue N, Lethbridge

� Anaerobic digestion

� Liquid manure (dairy)� Food/solid organic

waste

� Energy� Clean

compost product

� Need increased feedstock

� Capacity and interest in food waste

CKP Farms Ltd./Grow the Energy Circle

Ltd.

Coaldale, Alberta� Building

anaerobic digester

� Liquid manure� Food/solid organic

waste� Energy

� Not yet built. Will be in need of feedstock once construction complete



Table 1: ICI and C&D Diversion Processing Options

Processor Location Technology Materials Collected and/or Accepted

Material Marketed

Capacity or Desire for Processing

Expansion?

McNally Contractors

Ltd. (division of Volker Stevin)

4155 - 6 Avenue N, Lethbridge

� Crushing concrete

� Clean Concrete (no rebar)

� Asphalt

� Crushed concrete used in non-city spec work as road base

� Asphalt milling reused

� Asphalt chunks used in aggregate

� Additional capacity especially if theCity is willing to modify the specifications to permit higher percentages of reused crushed concrete

� Willing to accept materials from other sources

Tollestrup 806 - 2 Avenue S, Lethbridge

� Crushing concrete

� Crushing asphalt

� Clean Concrete� Asphalt

� Reuse own material

� Mostly private reuse

Lafarge530 – 9 Avenue N,

Lethbridge� Concrete � Clean concrete

� Reuse own material

� Sell recycled concrete for private commercial use

� Mostly private reuse

Marshall Metals Scrap Recycling Ltd.

RR 8 Stn Main Site 40 Comp 8, Lethbridge

� Scrap metal recycling

� Metal � Recycled metal

� Desires additionalmaterial for processing

National Salvage Ltd.

206 - 33 Street N, Lethbridge

� Scrap metal recycling

� Metal (from City W&R Centre)

� Recycled metal

� Desires additionalmaterial for processing

Western MetalRecycling

4010 – 2 AvenueN, Lethbridge

� Scrap metal � Metals (ferrous and non-ferrous)

� Recycled metal

� Desires increased material for processing

2.1 Waste and Recycling Centre

According to the City of Lethbridge Waste & Recycling Business Plan (2012-2014) and Business Summary

reports, approximately 112,000 tonnes of solid waste, 3,600 tonnes of organic waste, 5,500 tonnes of C&D

waste, 425 tonnes of white goods, 500 tonnes of materials from Product Stewardship Programs such oil,

paint, and tires, and 50 tonnes of mixed recyclables are collected annually at the W&R Centre.



2.2 Fibre, Plastic, and Mixed Recyclables

BFI Canada Ltd. (BFI) is the sole recycling processor for plastic and fibre in the City. Currently, the BFI

Material Recovery Facility (MRF) located in Lethbridge processes 1,500 tonnes/month, and has about

1,000 subscriptions with private recycling haulers, businesses, and residents in the City. The MRF has a

single baler and all sorting is done manually.

Waste Management (WM) has a relatively small presence in the City’s ICI sector, but earlier this year, WM

won the bid to collect the material from the three new City drop-off depots. The material collected at these

depots includes the basic recyclables such as cardboard, paper, glass, and plastic. This material is

subsequently taken to the BFI MRF for processing. WM does also have their own processing building in

Lethbridge as they used to act as a processor up to the year 2002. At this point in time, they do not make

use of it as it is more economical for them to solely act as a hauler and deliver the material to BFI for

processing.

2.3 Organics Processing

“Green waste”, also known as yard and garden waste, is collected at the W&R Centre for a tipping fee of

$28.25/tonne, (half the general MSW tipping fee of $56.50), where it is composted in windrows

(City 2013). The turning of the windrows is contracted out to Kuhn Composting. Currently, green waste is

being dropped off by residents, as well as some ICI customers such as landscapers. Customers are

permitted to drop green waste off in paper bags, but must de-bag all material in plastic bags. Additional

removal of contaminants, mostly plastic, is routinely conducted by landfill staff after the windrows are

turned. When the organics have been processed and curing is complete, the compost end product is used

by the City in landscaping and parks applications.

Figure 2: Windrows for composting at the Waste & Recycling Centre

Biosolids from the wastewater treatment plant are currently land applied; and are therefore, not needed to

be considered in the City’s composting process.

Kuhn Composting, that provides windrow turning services to the City, also collects limited amounts of yard

and garden waste from smaller businesses in the City. Kuhn serves as the collector and hauler for yard and

garden waste, having their own collection vehicles and composting pad near Picture Butte. The composting

pad is located beside a feedlot where the manure and organic material are composted together. Kuhn

composts the organic material in windrows, selling the final product for $40/tonne, or $19/tonne in bulk

(farmers are the most popular customer for the bulk stream).



2.4 Construction and Demolition Processing

The City W&R Centre, operated by BFI, is the only known site that accepts C&D material for recycling.

Wood, asphalt, and concrete, are all collected and stored at the landfill for processing. These materials in

storage can be viewed in Figure 3 through Figure 5. Asphalt, concrete, and wood are charged a reduced

tipping fee of $28.25, again half of the general MSW tipping fee.

Additionally, for special projects, such as LEED certified construction projects, the City W&R Centre has

also provided a separate bin for drywall collection. This drywall was collected and processed by Bio-Cycle,

a drywall recycling company, in DeWinton, Alberta. Due to the higher costs of processing, the drywall was

tagged with the same tipping fee as MSW, $56.50.

Figure 3: Concrete Storage Pile at the

Waste & Recycling Centre

Figure 4: Asphalt Storage Pile at the Waste & Recycling Centre

Figure 5: Wood Pile at the Waste & Recycling Centre

On average, the City collects about 3,000 tonnes/year of wood at the W&R Centre, with about 1,200 tonnes

being green waste (branches, brush, and trees) and the remaining 1,800 being white wood (pallets, lumber,

etc.). BFI, the landfill operator, hires a contractor to chip the wood waste for it to be shipped to British

Columbia (BC), where the City has a working agreement with a forestry company that has a wood waste

deficit and needs to replace material consumed in their burn units.

The City contracts out the grinding of the concrete for re-use in construction projects, such as an aggregate

for sub-bases. Similarly, asphalt is used in the construction of all-weather roads right on site at the landfill.



Asphalt shingles have not been processed for recycling due to the contamination in loads and the lack of

accessible markets. Therefore, asphalt shingles are currently being used for slope and face cover to offset

the need for large amounts of dirt and soil. The tipping fee for shingles is also charged as a reduced fee at

$28.25/tonne.

There are a variety of C&D materials that are assigned a “C&D tipping fee” at the equivalent price of MSW,

$56.50. These materials include insulation, drywall, renovation materials (e.g., tiles, electrical materials,

doors, windows, partitions, ceiling tiles, carpeting, plumbing fixtures), non-recyclable concrete, and soil

mixed with waste.

McNally Contractors Inc. (McNally), an independent division of Volker Stevin Highways Ltd., currently

reuses concrete, asphalt millings, and asphalt chunks. The majority of the reused material is sourced from

their own projects, but they also accept material from outside sources at a tipping fee of $50/truck which

usually equates to about $5/tonne. McNally is currently processing between 70,000 and 80,000 tonnes of

concrete which is reused in non-City specification work as road base. With regards to asphalt, they are

processing about 20,000 tonnes, which they crush and mix with aggregate in road base.

Due to the strong markets, the majority of the private processors of concrete, aggregate, and metal have

tipping fees that are lower than that of the W&R Centre to encourage generators and haulers to bring the

material to them.

Recently, the City’s W&R Centre has become a thermostat collection point for the “Switch the Stat”

program, that serves as Canada’s only residential and commercial thermostat recovery program. This is an

industry stewardship program that accepts mercury-containing electronic and mechanical thermostats,

preventing them from ending up in landfills.

2.4.1 Deconstruction Projects

Facility Services with the City diverted 7,178 tonnes of C&D material over four years with the

implementation of the Environmental Deconstruction Initiative, where buildings were systematically

deconstructed rather than simply being demolished. The deconstruction projects ranged from having 55%

to over 93% diversion of building waste.

2.5 Metal Processing

Clean, source separated metal is also taken at the landfill for the reduced tipping fee of $28.25 and is

processed by a scrap metal recycler, usually National Salvage or Marshall Metals Scrap Recycling Ltd. Over

the course of the year, about 400-500 tonnes of recyclable metal are collected at the landfill. Currently the

metal processors in the Lethbridge area are serving, if not exceeding, the demand. For instance, Marshall

Metals Scrap Recycling Ltd. and National Salvage easily serve the demand for processing from the W&R

Centre. The large processing capacities in the area are likely a result of the strong North American markets

for recycled metal.



3.0 FUTURE PROCESSING OPTIONS IN THE LETHBRIDGE AREA

3.1 Expansion of Plastic and Fibre Recycling

BFI is already in the process of expanding their Lethbridge MRF and is very interested in processing

increased volumes of plastic and fibre. BFI is hoping to expand the footprint of the MRF to handle more

volume and automate the system by the year 2014, when it anticipates it will have nearly four times the

capacity (6,000 tonnes/month).

Although WM has a relatively small presence in the City, the company is interested in expanding collection

of recyclables and potentially organics. The corporate focus of WM is to increase recycling, including

organic material. However, at this time, WM does not feel the City has the demand for two recycling

processing facilities. Therefore, WM is focusing on increasing its collection in the City, rather than

competing with BFI to process the material. Specifically, WM sees opportunity in the ICI sector, since there

is significant room for growth in diversion of all readily recyclable streams. If WM were to begin collecting

organics, it would need access to a facility to process the material.

The baler located at the landfill to bale the MSW on windy days could also potentially be used to bale

recyclables if an expanded facility were developed on the site.

3.2 Expansion of Organics Processing

The landfill is currently accepting green waste from limited industry landscapers and has significant room

for expansion of its composting site. The W&R Centre is registered with Alberta Environment as a Class II

composting facility that is certified to accept less than 20,000 tonnes of organic material. Therefore, there

would be no anticipated hurdles to adding food waste to the current organics processing system of

windrows, unless the generated tonnes exceeded the current permitted level of 20,000 tonnes. A Class I

composting facility permit would then need to be obtained which would involve increased monitoring and

permits. Unfortunately, the design specifications of the W&R Centre’s current composting pad are not

sufficient for the current Code of Practice for Class I facilities. However, Alberta Environment and

Sustainable Resource Development (AESRD) have suggested the possibility of the City obtaining a

temporary waiver for a food composting pilot program.

As with the recycling industry, it is expected the area will have increased organics processing capabilities

with the start-up of anaerobic digesters in and around the City. With the introduction of anaerobic

digesters in the area, there appears to be potential for increased collection and diversion of food waste

from Lethbridge businesses. However, the disposal tipping fees for the anaerobic digester facilities have

not yet been established. The owners and operators of the anaerobic digesters anticipate their tipping fees

to be slightly less than the W&R Centre fees. Therefore, due to the uncertainty of the disposal fees, it

cannot be predicted with any certainty if this will result in an economically viable option.



3.2.1 Anaerobic Digestion

Anaerobic digestion involves the use of microorganisms, in the absence of oxygen, to break down organic

material to produce biogas and a solid residual. The biogas mainly consists of methane and carbon dioxide

and can be readily used to generate energy. The biogas acts very similarly to natural gas to power

generators and return electricity to the electricity grid. The solid residual from the process can be land

applied or composted, serving as a soil amendment. (US EPA 2013)

Lethbridge Biogas LP is operating an anaerobic digestion system with three large digesters. Photographs of

the newly constructed system are shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7.

Figure 6: Anaerobic Digesters at Lethbridge

Biogas LP FacilityFigure 7: System Generators at Lethbridge

Biogas LP Facility

Currently, the generators in the system are running solely on natural gas to produce electricity which they

sell to the grid during times of significant energy demand. Once their system is fully operational with the

three digesters, additional solid organic content will be required to mix with dairy manure to produce the

optimized feedstock for the system. Lethbridge Biogas LP’s desired feedstock would consist of

approximately 50% liquid manure, 25% solid organic waste such as food scraps, 15% hydrolysed animal

by-products, and 10% other such as whey, seed oil, or waste grain. In order to meet the desired 10% Total

Solids content, it is expected that they will require about 30 tonnes/day1 of solid organic waste. Due to the

large farming industry in southern Alberta, Lethbridge Biogas LP does not expect to have a shortage of

liquid manure to use as feedstock. However, they are searching for consistent and clean solid organic

waste streams. A municipal organics stream or residual stream from a manufacturing plant that produces

food products, such as McCain Foods, has been identified as potential suitable solid feedstock. However,

there is the potential concern of contamination within the waste stream decreasing the effectiveness and

operational efficiency of the plant if a municipal organics waste stream were to be used. To encourage the

availability of feedstock, Lethbridge Biogas LP is planning to charge tipping fees that are slightly lower than

the City’s landfill fees.

CKP Farms Ltd./Grow the Energy Circle Ltd. is also in the midst of designing and constructing an anaerobic

digester near Chin, Alberta, which is east of Coaldale, 27 km east of Lethbridge. CKP Farms Ltd. farms is

about 12,000 acres and harvests, on average, about 25,000 potatoes each year. The anaerobic digester was

the technology of choice to deal with the excess waste from their potato farming operation. Pathogens

from culled potatoes are destroyed through the anaerobic digestion process and the system generates a

1 Volume of 60 m3/day was converted to weight (tonnes) using the standard solid food waste density of 500 kg/m3.



readily compostable solid residual. With the system, the solid residual can be used as compost and land

applied without the threat of spreading disease. CKP Farms Ltd. has an anticipated supplier of liquid

manure from the Taber area, but would require additional solid organic material to supplement this

feedstock. CKP Farms Ltd. is conveniently located across the road from the McCain Foods factory, where

tonnes of potato scraps are generated.

CKP Farms Ltd. is looking at being operational in the year of 2014 and would require about 30 tonnes/day

of solid organic feedstock. It is anticipated that the potato scraps from McCain Foods, as well as the

potential of onion scraps, will serve as the majority of the solid organic feedstock, but there is opportunity

to include organics from other sources as well, as long as contamination is minimal. As with Lethbridge

Biogas LP, in order to make it economical for feedstock suppliers, they plan to charge a slightly lower

tipping fee than the Lethbridge W&R Centre.

CKP Farms Ltd. has been working closely with Lethbridge Biogas LP on issues of design, and it is expected

they will continue to work in conjunction with each other through the implementation phase.

There has been concern expressed by some processors in regards to the demand for large volumes of liquid

manure for the anaerobic digesters. For instance, many farmers in the area use the manure for direct land

application, serving as a potential threat to the feedstock for the new and proposed anaerobic digesters.

This may result in strong competition for liquid manure feedstocks.

Although there are smaller volume organics processing options available, their current capacity would not

be adequate to handle the volumes if an ICI organics diversion program was initiated. There is a significant

opportunity with the anaerobic digesters looking for solid food waste, but there is a risk of contamination

with an ICI organics diversion system. The digesters have indicated they require very minimal

contamination in the solid organic waste stream, so an ICI organics diversion program would need to be

implemented with a strong emphasis on promotion and education, along with monitoring and possible

regulations, to ensure a clean feedstock for the digesters.

Based on discussions with the operators, the digesters will require about 30 tonnes of solid organic

material daily, which equates to nearly 11,000 tonnes a year. Based on ICI composting programs in other

similar communities, this is a much larger demand than what the City could generate from their own ICI

organics diversion program. For example, The Regional District of Nanaimo (RDN), with a population of

146,000, diverted 4,170 tonnes of organic waste to their composting facility in 2006 (FCM 2009). It is

particularly noteworthy that the RDN banned organics from their landfill, resulting in a substantial increase

in diversion. Therefore, with Lethbridge’s population being about 89,000 and no organic landfill ban, it is

predicted the solid waste demand from the anaerobic digesters would be more than sufficient to take all

the material generated by an ICI organics diversion program. There will also be continued demand from

current composting businesses such as Kuhn Composting, as well as the City’s composting site, that will

require organic material. Therefore, if all the proposed capacity materializes, it is likely that the organics

processing market demand may be quite competitive if an organics diversion program was implemented.



3.3 Expansion of Construction & Demolition Processing Capacity

There is significant room for diversion program expansion for certain C&D materials. For instance,

currently asphalt shingles are being used as daily cover at the landfill when there are a variety of re-use

options for the material. For example, shredded asphalt shingles can be used as gravel dust suppression,

hot patch road repairs, an admixture to asphalt and cement, and mixed with an aggregate to serve as a

material to build up roads and/or nature trails (Alberta Construction Magazine 2007).

Recently, McNally gained permission from the City’s Transportation Group to use recycled crushed

concrete in road base as a trial element to a project. Other municipalities, such as The City of Edmonton,

permits and encourages the use of recycled aggregate in projects for asphalt street rehabilitation projects,

concrete sidewalk replacement programs, asphalt and concrete roadways, excavations from building

demolition, and other private projects such as parking lot construction etc. (City of Edmonton 2011).

McNally has expressed interest in taking outside material as they feel they would have the capacity to reuse

more material if increased recycled aggregate content was permitted in City projects.

Due to the variety of processors in the C&D industry, the most convenient and efficient option for collection

may be for the W&R Centre to expand their C&D collection site and have individual processors/contractors

collect the material. There is significant room at the W&R Centre for the collection and storage of increased

volumes of materials, but a processor must be available on a timely basis. The City is currently in the

middle of designing a new pad at the W&R Centre that will serve as a location for ICI and C&D customers to

drop off their source separated material. The site will consist of an all-weather pad, bunkers, and signage,

and will be located southeast of the composting pad. Most aggregate collection will be moved to this site,

along with the large wood pile. Additional bins and/or bunkers will be installed for cardboard, drywall,

and scrap metal. The site is expected to be completed in 2014.

Increased volumes of clean and recyclable wood could easily be collected at the City W&R Centre, but it will

require further processing equipment and increased staff to maintain the program and chip the wood.

Currently there is limited drywall collection at the W&R Centre, but there are future plans to expand their

collection by introducing a “drywall bin” for ICI and residential customers. Bio-Cycle is the current

processor of the drywall material, but the volumes are minimal.

There is currently a small volume of asphalt shingles being collected, but there is a lack of processing

options for the material in the area. Further research into a processing option for this material should be

conducted to provide viable diversion options for this material. To this end, a feasibility study should be

completed on the costs and benefits of using asphalt shingles as slope and face cover versus collecting and

processing the material for recycling. For example, the shingles may be reused for local construction

projects. If a study of this nature were to be completed, it would be necessary to consider the full life-cycle

cost of recycling asphalt shingles for the community.



4.0 COMMODITY GENERATION AND CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING

Using the Alberta ICI and C&D Waste Characteristics from sonnevera’s Master Plan (2008), the potential

generation of certain commodities can be estimated. The referenced Alberta ICI and C&D waste

composition graphs are shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9, respectively.

Figure 8: Average Alberta ICI Waste Composition (sonnevera 2008)

Figure 9: Average Alberta C&D Waste Composition (sonnevera 2008)

Using the calculated estimated annual tonnages, 60,000 tonnes of ICI and 24,000 tonnes of C&D, in

conjunction with these figures, the estimated generation in tonnes is able to be presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Current Processing, Estimated Generation, and Expected Future Capacity for ICI and C&D Commodities

Material/Commodity Current ProcessingCapacity (tonnes)

Estimated ICI and C&D Generation (tonnes)

Expected Future Processing Capacity (tonnes)

Wood 3,000 (W&R Centre) 4,500 3,000Organics 900 (W&R Centre) 9,200 (ICI only) 10,000

Metal 50,000 (private) 2,900 Unlimited in private marketRecyclables 1,500 (BFI) 6,000 42,700

Aggregate (concrete, brick, asphalt) 70,000 (private) 6,500 70,000 +Drywall N/A 1,500 1,500



Upon review of the table above, all of the ICI and C&D generation has the ability to be processed using

current or expected future processing options, with the exception of wood. In order to meet the needs for

wood processing, the W&R Centre would need to expand their processing or partner with additional

private businesses looking for chipped wood material.

4.1 Details and Cost of Expanded Diversion Capacity

With markets for recyclable material growing, private industry is often burdening the capital costs of new

technology and facilities. For example, recycled metal has large markets across North America and the

private industry is continuously looking for additional material. Consequently, metal received at the W&R

Centre is collected for no charge because the private metal recyclers are able to make a profit from the

recycled material after processing.

For recycled materials with smaller markets and for which there is a need for increased diversion, the City

may have to cover the initial diversion program costs. This may include facility design and/or construction.

Although, industry incentives can be a very powerful tool and spur markets, thus creating private business

opportunities. Therefore, diversion programs and regulations, such as differential tipping fees, can initiate

significant change in disposal methods and increase the recycling of ICI and C&D material. This has the

potential to naturally shift the responsibility of facility capital costs from the City to private industry.

Using the “estimated additional ICI and C&D generation” figures from the previous section, costs have been

estimated for improving current technology and/or constructing new facilities to permit the processing of

the additional material. Table 3 presents high order estimates of these processing facility and private

processing costs.

Table 3: Estimated Processing Facility and Private Processing Costs

StreamEstimated Additional

ICI and C&D Generation (tonnes)

Technology/Facility Estimated Facility or Technology Cost

Approximate Private Processing Cost

Wood 4,500� Tub grinder � $40,000-$200,000 (Apollo

Equipment)� $30/tonne (W&R

Centre)Organics 9,200 (ICI only)

� Composting pad

� Composting pad: $50,000(1,000 tonnes per year) -$700,000 (15,000 tonnes per year) (AESRD 2012)

� $55/tonne (estimation fromLethbridge Biogas LP)

Metal 2,900� Private industry � N/A (Burdened by private

industry)� Free of charge

Recyclables 6,000 � MRF capable of sorting commingled materials

� Capital Cost: $2,500,00 –$5,000,000

� Operating Cost: $2,000,000(Tennessee 2003)

� $65-75/tonne(Tennessee 2003)

Aggregate (concrete, brick,

asphalt)

6,500� Crushing � N/A (Burdened by private

industry)

� Clean: $5/tonne (quote from McNally)

Drywall 1,500 � Grinding and land application (Bio-Cycle)

� N/A (Burdened by private industry)

� $40/tonne (quote from Bio-Cycle)



5.0 CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the Lethbridge area has a number of processing options for ICI waste diversion. It is anticipated

the current processors will need time to expand and adapt, but with the development of further ICI waste

diversion programs, it is anticipated that processing gaps will be filled. The City’s W&R Centre can also

serve as a collection site for materials, either permanently, or until specific processors have capacity for

increased volumes. As demand for diversion of ICI and C&D materials increases, private industry will start

to play a larger role.

5.1 Plastic and Fibre

With the presence of two large hauler/processors in the City, it is predicted the processing capacity will

grow with demand. If an ICI recycling diversion program was implemented along with increased

promotion and education, it is believed the existing haulers and processors will expand to meet the

required volume demands. With BFI’s anticipated expansion, there will be substantial capacity for future

plastic and fibre recycling. The City will not likely need to take much action, other than encouraging and

promoting increased recycling in the area. If reports of expansion plans are accurate, BFI should be able to

easily handle the collection and processing of Lethbridge plastic and fibre. Additionally, WM will be

available to expand its collection services if the volumes are economically viable. Having another hauler

and/or processor will also help spur competition in the industry.

5.2 Organics

Similar to plastic and fibre, there are several processing options for organics. New anaerobic technology

being developed in the area offers significant capacity, although the economics of this processing option is

less solidified than established traditional composting options. However, the composting processors

currently operating in the area lack capacity for potential material volumes. The W&R Centre could serve

as a good central location for increased volumes of organics until anaerobic technology is fully operational

or additional composting processors develop in the area. Therefore, there appears to be sufficient

processing options to handle the material that would result from an ICI organics diversion program.

5.3 Construction and Demolition

The W&R Centre has the potential to expand its C&D collection site to include collection of additional C&D

materials, serving as a convenient location for the ICI industry to drop off their C&D waste material.

Furthermore, the City can arrange with contractors/processors to collect the materials from their

collection site.

The private sector currently provides sufficient processing for aggregate and metal. These materials are

readily recyclable and for the most part the recycled material has very strong markets locally.



6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Public Versus Private Opportunities

It is recommended that the City continue with the collection of materials for diversion (metal, wood, leaves,

branches, and grass) at its W&R Centre. It would not be desirable to decrease the program diversion

options and the landfill serves as a convenient location for many businesses. As programs develop, this

gives the City the option to fill the material collection and processing gaps and help spur the

implementation of additional waste diversion options.

At the same time, it may be advantageous for the City to help promote waste diversion through private

companies. With marketable materials, there are likely to be private companies wanting to make a

business of recycling. However, it is likely the businesses and ICI generators will need guidance on how to

effectively participate in available programs. If the City can encourage and incent waste diversion, this can

result in a win-win situation, where diversion increases, and private business flourishes.

6.2 Waste Diversion Programs

With the anticipated capacity for organics and plastic and fibre processing, it is recommended that waste

diversion programs focused on recycling and organics collection are further researched and implemented.

Traditionally, voluntary program options are implemented initially to encourage participation of

stakeholders, but it will likely be required in the future to implement regulatory approaches to meet

potential waste diversion targets for organics and plastic and fibre.

With the introduction of waste diversion programs for these materials, it is expected processors will

expand their current facilities and development of new facilities will be initiated. For example, smaller

composting companies are expected to help fill the gaps in the current market and take increased yard and

garden material and perhaps even expand to accepting food scraps. The anaerobic digestion technology

will also be looking for solid organic feedstock, creating another market for diverted food scraps. While

these processors develop, it would be beneficial for the City to upgrade their windrow composting system

to be able to collect increased volumes and potentially food scraps. This would involve discussions with

AESRD on obtaining a temporary waiver for a food scraps composting pilot program on their current

composting pad.

With the introduction of voluntary, economic, and regulatory diversion programs focused on plastic and

fibre waste diversion, the current MRF is expected to expand and the market for hauling recyclable

material will grow. This gap will quickly be filled by WM and/or BFI along with smaller private hauling

companies.

Further research is required on potential markets for C&D materials. Due to smaller volumes of material, a

cost benefit analysis will need to be conducted on each material to determine whether or not recycling is

economically feasible. C&D material recycling is a growing market and often there are large demands for

specific materials due to the high costs and environmental effects from creating virgin materials such as

asphalt shingles and concrete. For example, used asphalt shingles are readily recyclable and have markets

in the construction industry in the province. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze each material individually

and connect with processors in southern Alberta and/or the USA to determine the benefits to recycling



specific C&D materials. The W&R Centre serves as a convenient location for stakeholders to drop off their

C&D materials. It is recommended the City keep providing this service while the C&D markets are

developing.

Whether it is C&D material recycling or organics processing, markets can be generated and encouraged

with the implementation of waste diversion programs. Voluntary programs stimulate the community’s

participation in waste diversion programs, but economic and regulatory program approaches will create

processing markets and enable high waste diversion goals to be met.



7.0 CLOSURE

We trust this report meets your present requirements. Should you have any questions or comments,

please contact the undersigned at your convenience.

Respectfully submitted,

EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd.

Prepared by: Reviewed by:

Lindsay Seidel-Wassenaar, E.I.T. Christina Seidel

Environmental Engineer sonnevera international corp.

Waste Management CEO

Direct Line: 403.723.1542 Direct Line: 403.843.6563

[email protected] [email protected]

Reviewed by:

Mandi Parker, P.Ag.

Director of Projects

Infrastructure & Development

Direct Line: 403.329.9009 x224

[email protected]

/llm/tlp



REFERENCES

Alberta Construction Magazine 2007. Recycling Asphalt Shingles – Discarded roofing material gets second life in new applications. Accessed July 2013. Available at: http://www.albertaconstruction

magazine. com/articles.asp?ID=422

Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development 2012. Leaf and Yard Waste Diversion Strategy Feasibility Study. Final Report. August, 2010.

A. Salsabili, M. Aghajani Mir, S.Saheri, and Noor Ezlin Ahmand Basri 2010. Comprehensive Characteristics of the Muncipal Solid Waste Generated in the Faculty of Engineering, UKM. World Academy of Science,

Engineering and Technology 46

City of Edmonton 2011. Recycled Aggregate and Geosynthetic Study. Hugh Donovan, P.Eng. Construction

Services Engineer, Engineering Services Section, Transportation Services.

City of Lethbridge 2013. Landfill Rates – 2013 Rates. Accessed July, 2013. Available at:

http://www.lethbridge.ca/living-here/my-home/Waste-Recycling/Pages/Tipping-Rates.aspx

City of Lethbridge 2011. Technical Briefing – Curbside Diversion Options.

City of Lethbridge 2012. Waste & Recycling Business Plan 2012-2014.

Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) 2009. Getting to 50% and Beyond: Waste Diversion Success Stories from Canadian Municipalities. Accessed August 2013. Available at: http://www.fcm.ca

/Documents/tools/GMF/Getting_to_50_percent_en.pdf

Recycling Marketing Cooperation for Tennessee, “Material Recovery Facility Handbook”, 2003

sonnevera international corp. 2008. City of Lethbridge Comprehensive Waste Diversion / Waste Prevention Master Plan. May 22, 2008.

US EPA, 2013. Organics: Anaerobic Digestion. Accessed July, 2013. Available at: http://www.epa.gov

/region9/organics/ad/


City of Lethbridge ICI and CandD Processor Analysis Report.docx

APPENDIX A GEO-ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT - GENERAL CONDITIONS

General Conditions - Geo-environmental Report.docx

GENERAL CONDITIONS

GEO-ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTThis report incorporates and is subject to these “General Conditions”.

1.0 USE OF REPORT AND OWNERSHIP

This report pertains to a specific site, a specific development, and aspecific scope of work. It is not applicable to any other sites, norshould it be relied upon for types of development other than thoseto which it refers. Any variation from the site or proposeddevelopment would necessitate a supplementary investigation andassessment.

This report and the assessments and recommendations containedin it are intended for the sole use of EBA’s client. EBA does notaccept any responsibility for the accuracy of any of the data, theanalysis or the recommendations contained or referenced in thereport when the report is used or relied upon by any party otherthan EBA’s Client unless otherwise authorized in writing by EBA.Any unauthorized use of the report is at the sole risk of the user.

This report is subject to copyright and shall not be reproduced eitherwholly or in part without the prior, written permission of EBA.Additional copies of the report, if required, may be obtained uponrequest.

2.0 ALTERNATE REPORT FORMAT

Where EBA submits both electronic file and hard copy versions ofreports, drawings and other project-related documents anddeliverables (collectively termed EBA’s instruments of professionalservice), only the signed and/or sealed versions shall be consideredfinal and legally binding. The original signed and/or sealed versionarchived by EBA shall be deemed to be the original for the Project.

Both electronic file and hard copy versions of EBA’s instruments ofprofessional service shall not, under any circumstances, no matterwho owns or uses them, be altered by any party except EBA. TheClient warrants that EBA’s instruments of professional service willbe used only and exactly as submitted by EBA.

Electronic files submitted by EBA have been prepared andsubmitted using specific software and hardware systems. EBAmakes no representation about the compatibility of these files withthe Client’s current or future software and hardware systems.

3.0 NOTIFICATION OF AUTHORITIES

In certain instances, the discovery of hazardous substances orconditions and materials may require that regulatory agencies andother persons be informed and the client agrees that notification tosuch bodies or persons as required may be done by EBA in itsreasonably exercised discretion.

4.0 INFORMATION PROVIDED TO EBA BY OTHERS

During the performance of the work and the preparation of thereport, EBA may rely on information provided by persons other thanthe Client. While EBA endeavours to verify the accuracy of suchinformation when instructed to do so by the Client, EBA accepts noresponsibility for the accuracy or the reliability of such informationwhich may affect the report.