Meeting documents

Project:

West of England Waste Management & Planning Strategy

Meeting:

Member Project Board

Date and Time

Thursday 20^th April 2006

Venue

Bradley Stoke Leisure Centre, BS32 9BS

Minutes of Board meeting on 6^th January 2006

No comments

Covered in agenda and discussion below

No

Agenda Item

Action

Resp

1

2

Officer Action: Revise Technology Scenarios table to include 93Optional94 under IVC

SG

2

2

Officer Action: February SCF Seminar report to be circulated as soon as possible

KJH

3

3

For noting: 4Ps to be invited to 27^th June Board

JA

4

3

Officer Action: Overarching briefing/decision template and protocol for use within each UA to be developed

SG/KJH

5

4

Officer Action: Waste Technical advisory support -

Report recommendations were accepted subject to further interim reports to follow as the OBC process progresses and to the expenditure to be approved by each individual authority.

All

6

5

Board Recommendations: Revised Constitutional & Partnering Arrangements: Report recommendations accepted.

Officer Action: To be progressed with EA to continue to lead on production of Partnership Agreement

EA

7

5

Officer Action: Method of cost-sharing between the 4 UAs to be reviewed in the Finance processes for 2007-08

Finance Officers

8

6

Board Recommendations: Project Management Approach and Structure: Report recommendations accepted.

Officer Action: Separate Waste & Planning PIDs to be prepared for 27^th June Board

RL/AD

9

6

Officer Action: Planning Issues and Options paper to be drafted urgently for review by Board

AD

10

6

Officer Action: Planning capacity and resources to be resolved

DT/AD

11

6

Officer Action: Progress with Counsel's advice on the planned Planning process

DS/NB

12

7

Officer Action: Board to be briefed on Communications/ Consultation plans, information, draft publicity materials, Strategic Consultation Forum terms of reference and agenda to during May

KayH/

KJH/

YP

13

8

For noting: Joint letter to be updated and sent

JA

Item

DT explained that, as the main Agenda items were focussed on Waste Management areas, the Project Planning Officers were meeting separately until Agenda Item 5, in order to progress and resolve some of the outstanding issues regarding the joint DPD project plan.

2

Notes from meeting on 6^th January

It was requested that 93Optional94 be included in the Technology Scenarios table under IVC composting

Contact and liaison is ongoing with GOSW regarding consultation and planning process issues

Report on Waste Treatment Systems and Consultation Seminar to be issued soon

Current Defra extension work is taking forward LATS modelling through further work by MEL-RPS to be presented at future meetings

3

4Ps - Pilot project proposals

4Ps were unable to attend the meeting at short notice but had provided the paper for discussion. To be invited to next meeting on 27^th June.

Verbal expression of interest has been given by SE; more formal register of interest to be made but no deadline has been given by 4Ps.

In response to PH's query about the relationship between the Member Project Board and each UA's processes, SE proposed that in future one overarching Briefing/Decision-making document be produced for use by each UA Officers/Members to follow procedures with Executive / Cabinet as necessary.

4

Waste technical advisory support

SG introduced GL and JD from Jacobs Babtie and outlined the content of the paper which had recommendations for approval by the Board. These were accepted subject to further interim reports to follow as the OBC process progresses and to the expenditure to be approved by each individual authority.

Presentations by Graham Longbottom, Jacobs Babtie:

Electronic copies of the presentations (Input/Output contract specification and Procurement options) by GL are available. Key questions for resolving for both areas were included and emphasised by GL.

Discussion points:

A7 Transfer of risk - the norm is for risk to be divided on the basis of which party best able to deal with it, but if greater risk passed to a contractor then the cost will reflect this.

A7 With reference to changes to legislation, the situation will depend on the status at the time - essentially how foreseeable it is.

A7 This joint project begins with the known, identified residual waste after the individual authorities' source-segregated Recycling and Composting activity. Internal arrangements need to ensure activity being maximised by each UA. Options will exist to phase in to existing contracts or place separate contracts and discussions have started with SITA by South Glos, for example.

A7 GL quoted Northern Ireland example where the contract guarantees 80% of the estimated tonnages, with costings provided for the remaining 20%.

A7 Non-municipal waste is a consideration for the Planning DPD - an option might be to specify an oversize facility with the commercial charges for Commercial & Industrial wastes and other LAs' wastes forming part of the Business Plan (and Risk Register).

A7 A Hybrid-type could give a strong message for a preferred method of treatment to achieve the outputs. An Output-type is better unless the UAs are very sure of what method is wanted.

A7 Account of the market must be taken - gasification/EfW is currently the lead preference, particularly as there is no market currently for MBT outputs.

A7 In an output specification, high environmental criteria and limits can be set -priorities need to be decided eg between LATS fines and environmental considerations.

A7 There are a number of parallel work-streams being progressed to reach a position for decisions such as Finance (capital/revenue considerations), Consultation process.

A7 Outline Business Case: There are examples in the 4Ps pack, but it is in essence an audit trail, a document of the process from the problem to procurement, identifying decision stages and foreseeing difficulties and problems to be resolved.

A7 Compact Power has now raised private finance to start the pilot study; the technology is still unproven and will be at least two years for results.

A7 There may also be possibilities for income from the energy sales - and the associated risks might be dealt with through the payment mechanisms. There could be possibilities for links with each UA's increasing street lighting costs.

A7 Member discussions required to confirm trend of political direction is acceptable, following more examination of options.

A7 Time is a key factor and also a package that does not deter potential bidders.

5

Revised Constitutional & Partnering Arrangements

EA's paper prepared in consultation with Waste, Planning and Legal Officers; EA to make further adjustments and produce Partnership Agreement, following discussion as below:

A7 The Member Board has no formal decision-making powers as such; its role is to make recommendations back to each UA.

A7 The informal arrangement needs to make sure the UA budget contributions are equal and that there is confidence in reimbursement when a UA has commissioned consultants.

A7 As the budget is agreed, there is freedom and flexibility to use by delegation to officers.

A7 Method of sharing costs needs clarity and it was agreed that the method of apportionment on an equitable split to allow for size and other differences between the 4 UAs should be looked at during this year as Finance Officers prepare funding/finance reports.

A7 As the Board is not a formal Joint committee, substitution for Members at meetings can be decided by each UA or the group. Non-executives could be acceptable as it is only advisory.

A7 BCC plan to appoint an alternative member onto Board - Cllr Dennis Brown (Executive Member for Transport and Development Control).

A7 A quorum is not strictly needed at this stage but as more formal structures, constitutions and protocols are developed, this can be included.

A7 It was agreed that no meeting should be arranged without at least one Member from each UA able to attend, but that a meeting should go-ahead if there are late withdrawals.

A7 There is no public right to any project documents or to attend meetings; any such requests to be dealt with at the time (under FOI/EIR regs).

A7 PR activity to inform the public and others about the project will be starting soon as the public consultation starts in the Summer.

6

Project Management Approach and Structure

3 recommendations agreed with the detailed PIDs to be brought to the next Board meeting on 27^th June 2006.

Outline of Planning DPD position given by DT in relation to:

A7 process and timetable and liaison with GOSW to ensure coordinated certainty and assurance on the framework, following input and advice from Jacobs Babtie;

A7 issues and options paper to be drafted urgently for review by the Board members prior to the consultation in the summer;

A7 capacity and resources, whether internal or external consultants, to be resolved with other Directors and HoS Planning.

Discussion followed about the relationship between the Waste and Planning processes and in particular the potential timing for a successful waste Planning Application to be made, possibly between Spring 2007 and 2008, once the Preferred Options document is agreed.

Planning applications may be made for other facilities such as for composting by one UA but with support from the others through the emerging joint strategy.

If a UA submits an application, there must be public involvement as per Statements of Community Involvement.

GOSW are advising a pragmatic approach on Core Strategies - it must be ensured that there is no conflict or prejudice caused, rather than an attempt to bring into full synchronicity.

Counsel's advice is being sought, led by BCC Planning Officers, on the elements of risk in the outline process.

Any Planning application by other developers in the meantime would have to be dealt with on its own merit as it occurred. Major developments of this scale will mean developers will be looking for as much certainty as possible of the planning situations, making early applications unlikely.

Planning responsibility to include non-municipal (C&I) waste - a part of the evidence base work by Planners is to bring up-to-date the Environment Agency capacity information provided and identify the estimated gap, in relation to RSW targets.

Under principles of Sustainable Development, the UAs should be trying to deal with as much of the waste generated in the sub-region as possible.

7

Consultation and communications - progress report by YP

Kay Hobday, joint Communications Officer, has drafted a Communications Plan, closely involved with consultation plans. This will need to be consulted on with the Members by briefing and email during May, prior to the Strategic Consultation Forum meeting, next Board meeting and public consultation.

The Members are part of the Strategic Consultation Forum which will guide the process. With Hyder, the appointed Consultation advisors, 3 meetings of the SCF are proposed, at the beginning, middle and end.

A report from the SCF seminar in February will be produced soon.

Members will receive papers on the proposed Terms of Reference for the SCF and outline for the first meeting in advance.

The main basis of the joint Waste and Planning consultation is to present clear, simple information on the waste treatment technology options and site appraisal process, with results to feed into the criteria for selection.

8

Joint letter to Defra/ODPM/GOSW

Some updating is needed to the figures and timescales being quoted. The letter to be sent to the sub-region's MPs as well. Final version to be prepared and circulated to Waste Officers to get each Board Member's signature.

Name

Initials

Position

Cllr Gerry Curran

GC

Executive Member for Sustainability and the Environment

Matthew Smith

MS

Head of Leisure & Amenity Services

Apologies

Carol Tunnard

CT

Waste Services Manager

David Halkyard

DH

Team Leader Environment (Planning)

Kate Hobson

KJH

Project Support Coordinator/Waste Services

Name

Initials

Position

Cllr Gary Hopkins

GH

Executive Member for Sustainable Environment and Neighbourhoods

Cllr Anne White

AW

Executive Member for Economic Development and Regeneration

Apologies

Ian Crawley

IC

Director, Neighbourhood and Housing Services

Apologies

Howard Thomas

HT

Head of Environmental Services, Neighbourhood and Housing Services

Apologies

Steve Gill

SG

Group Manager, Strategic Waste Facilities

Dave Wright

DW

Manager, Waste Disposal Authority

Apologies

Dick Sage

DS

Planning Policy Officer

Apologies

Nikki Broomfield

NB

Planning Policy Officer

Name

Initials

Position

Cllr Deborah Yamanaka

DY

Executive Member for Environment and Community

Cllr John Crockford-Hawley

JCH

Executive Member for Strategic Planning and Transport

Apologies

David Turner

DT

Director of Development and Environment

Michael Reep

MR

Team Leader, Planning Policy

Russell Lane

RL

Principal Waste Management Officer

Allan Davies

AD

Strategic Planner and JSPTU

Name

Initials

Position

Cllr Pat Hockey

PH

Executive Member for Planning, Transportation & Strategic Environment

Cllr Shirley Potts

SP

Executive Member for Communities

Steve Evans

SE

Director of Community Services

Barbara Maksymiw

BM

Head of Planning and Environment

Liz Allison

LA

Principal Planning Officer, Planning and Environment

Yvonne Pearce

YP

Waste Management Manager

Sue Covello

SC

Head of Finance and Admin

Janet Faire

JF

Community Services Finance

Kay Hobday

KH

Joint Communications Officer

Eric Andrews

EA

Partnership Solicitor