Regional District of Central Okanagan
Draft Biosolids Management
Plan
WRWWTP Stakeholder Select Committee
November 19, 2015
Outline for Today
Project background
Regulatory framework & possible changes
Process & stakeholder meeting
Overview - Biosolids Management Plan (BMP)
Goals
Regular and Major milestones
Criteria for decision-making
Unforeseen events
Consultation, communication, education
Research collaboration (e.g. UBCO)
Background & Plan Objectives
BMP Terms of Reference
Will guide governance, decision-making, and operational and financial planning
20-year plan
Process-focused: not intended to evaluate and recommend disposal/reuse options
But will include schedule & framework for periodic
technical & financial reviews/option analyses
A tool for Risk Management
BMP Scope
Not intended to evaluate and recommend process or disposal/reuse options (e.g. composting)
Outline process that should be followed to ensure RDCO is identifying and implementing most cost effective and sustainable solution
“Living document” – periodic updates
Similar to a Quality or Environmental Management System (QMS/EMS)
Regulatory Framework & Possible Changes
Organic Matter Recycling Regulation
OMRR (2002) regulates:
Quality of biosolids – Class A or B based on metals,
pathogens, and foreign matter content
Treatment of biosolids – to reduce pathogens and
vector attraction
Land Application Plans (LAP)– prepared by
Qualified Professionals
Composting Facility Requirements, record
keeping, sampling
Companion guidelines (part of regulation)
Update started in 2011
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 2015 Technical Working Group and Advisory Council
Technical Working Group conducting a scientific review of biosolids (in progress)
Develop monitoring and testing regime
Review effectiveness of LAPs
Review biosolids effects on wildlife
Assess potential impacts on FN Aboriginal Title and Rights
Principals Table directing - Nicola Valley First Nations participating since October 8
Advisory Council supporting
BMP Development Process & Issues
BMP Development Process
1. Background review
2. Drafted “Issues Report”
3. Facilitated stakeholder workshop - October 16
4. Draft plan development
5. Stakeholder Select Committee
6. Draft BMP Report
7. Final BMP Report
8. Additional presentations to councils & committees
Overview of Issues Regulatory, technical, and financial
• The regulatory environment for biosolids management in B.C. is evolving.
• The science and engineering of biosolids management is progressing.
• There is some uncertainty in the future costs of biosolids programs because of shifting regulatory framework, new science, and potential public concerns.
Overview of Issues Soil, water, and air quality – environment and human health concerns
• Although beneficial to soils if applied according to
agronomic rates, over-applying or poor application
methods can compromise soil quality.
• Poor application practices could result in the
movement of contaminants to groundwater or
surface water.
• Concerns about the effects of pathogens and ESOCs
on human health.
• Odour and dust can be a nuisance and/or health
hazard.
Overview of Issues Wildlife and domestic animals
Although livestock is addressed in OMRR and guidelines, the public has concerns about potential effects on wildlife
Overview of Issues Socio-community
• “Yuck factor” and a lack of meaningful consultation and education contributes to negative public opinion.
• Imbalance between who benefits and who bears the costs (i.e. generators vs. receivers). Low awareness of social benefit to agriculture in B.C. Interior.
• Concerns may cause people to avoid traditional foods & medicines.
Overview of Issues: Other Socio-community
• There can be a lack of public confidence in biosolids management consultants and contractors.
• Multi-stakeholder interest in Crown land affects feasibility of biosolids beneficial use options.
• As population increases and waste treatment processes improve, the amount of biosolids will increase and the number of suitable local land application sites will decrease.
BMP General Principles
BMP General Principles (Draft)
Consistent with Regional Growth Strategy & other higher-level plans
Specific to WRWWTP
process & local issues
First seek opportunities
to manage biosolids
within the boundaries of
RDCO
A living document that
will be updated every 3-
5 years
RDCO will collaborate with the university research community Comply with regulations and aim to meet best practices Anticipate challenges Manage risk (economic, social, environmental, legal, & reputation)
Recommended Milestones
Purpose of BMP Milestones
Anticipate problems and identify solutions
Manage costs
Ensure regulatory compliance
Stay current with “state of the art” technology and environment/health research
Enable Partner, stakeholder & public communication
Due diligence
Annual (“Minor”) Milestones
Semi-annual sampling for ESOCs
Rationale: Value in obtaining site-specific data to
reflect unique process; anticipate questions
Review emerging issues & potential risks
Rationale: Minimize potential for unforeseen events
with financial, social or environmental implications
Regulatory review and update operating plans
Rationale: Minimize potential for unforeseen events
with financial, social or environmental implications
Annual (“Minor”) Milestones (cont.)
Training & professional development
Rationale: Stay current; update team skills
(technical, communication, risk management, etc.)
Review higher-level plans (e.g. OCPs)
Rationale: Two-way communication with planning
department to ensure consistency
Review communication strategy
Rationale: Stay current with issues & risks (Strategy
is Major Milestone)
Annual (“Minor”) Milestones (cont.)
Operational contract review
Rationale: Routine contract management plus
regulatory compliance & due diligence
Report to community (Web site & Open House)
Rationale: Increase transparency and enable
community “ownership”; education
Report to RDCO Board
Rationale: Routine program management & Directors’
due diligence
Major Milestones
Review of Biosolids
Management Options
Rationale: Identify “best
option in face of change
Triple Bottom Line
decision-making
framework
Community engagement
Service Area Population &
Land Use Update
Rationale: Re-forecast
biosolids volumes; anticipate
quality issues
Major Milestones (Cont.)
3. High Value Contracts:
RFP or Renewal
Rationale: Optimize
ratepayer value; Take
advantage of new systems;
adjust to new rules & issues
4. Communications
Strategy (2016)
Rationale: Augment existing
WWTP communications with
biosolids information;
transparency & education
Major Milestones (Cont.)
3. Periodic Independent
Audit
Rationale: Value for $$;
process optimization; “fresh
set of eyes”
4. Review/Renew
Research Partnerships
Rationale: Enables system
improvements; helps build
community trust
Estimated Level-of-Effort
Regular Milestones
About 18-20 person-days per year
Major Milestones
Average about 24-28 person-days per year
Option Review is the potential big ticket item
Recommended Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation Criteria – General Framework
• “Triple Bottom Line” (TBL) approach recommended
to Structured Decision Making
Social
Economic
Environmental (including human health)
• Uncertainty or Risk should also be brought in to
adjust the initial TBL outcome
• Formally apply to Major Milestone decisions, but
guide others
Triple Bottom Line
Used for sustainability
planning since 1990s
(incl. RDCO)
Examples & guidelines
are available
Effective at choosing
option best suited to
local circumstance
Help to “advance overall
sustainability of
wastewater operations”
TBL in Practice
• Type of Multi-Criteria Analysis → Select 2+ sub-
criteria under each of Economic, Social &
Environment
• “Simple is Best”
• Benefits from structured “workshop” process with
mix of technical specialists & stakeholders
• Document process for transparency
• Information collected to support decisions
• Weighting & Trade-Offs
Biosolids Sub-Criteria Examples
Economic
Capital costs
O&M costs
Property values
Social
Odour potential
Truck traffic
Land tenure
Loss of use of land
Environmental
Greenhouse gas
emissions
Beneficial re-use value
Water quality
Questions
Extra slides (backup)
Triple Bottom Line (TBL) provides
a “perspective” or “lens” in which
to make decisions
The TBL + Risk “Framework” is one example of a specific framework, incorporating particular methodologies, for structured decision-making in a context of sustainability
Risk
It explicitly accounts for
risk attributes of different
ideas or actions, as well as
TBL attributes
Risk Factor Examples
Financial
Operational
Environmental
Regulatory change
Human Health
Reputation
Political