HANSARD

Printed and Published by Nova Scotia Hansard Reporting Services

Ms. Maureen MacDonald (Chair)

Mr.Chuck Porter (Vice-Chairman)

Mr. Patrick Dunn

Mr. Keith Bain

Mr. Graham Steele

Mr. David Wilson (Sackville-Cobequid)

Mr. Keith Colwell

Mr. Leo Glavine

Ms. Diana Whalen

[Ms. Diana Whalen was replaced by Mr. Wayne Gaudet]

WITNESSES

Department of Environment

Ms. Nancy Vanstone, Deputy Minister

Mr. Kim MacNeil

Executive Director of Environmental and Natural Areas Management

Mr. Andrew Murphy, Manager of Air Quality

Mr. Johnny McPherson, Airshed Planner

Mr. Bob Kenney, Solid Waste Resource Analyst

Ms. Kathy Palko, Solid Waste Policy Analyst

In Attendance:

Ms. Charlene Rice

Legislative Committee Clerk

Mr. Jacques Lapointe

Auditor General

Mr. Terry Spicer

Assistant Auditor General

HALIFAX, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 2, 2008

STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

9:00 A.M.

CHAIR

Ms. Maureen MacDonald

VICE-CHAIRMAN

Mr. Chuck Porter

MADAM CHAIR: Good morning, I'd like to call the committee to order, please. Today we have with us witnesses from the Department of Environment and we will begin in the usual fashion with introductions from members and the Auditor General and his staff and witnesses. The floor then will be turned over to the deputy minister for some opening comments, followed by questioning by the members. So, Mr. Wilson.

[The committee members and the witnesses introduced themselves.]

Thank you very much. The floor is now yours, Ms. Vanstone.

MS. NANCY VANSTONE: Well thank you very much, Madam Chair, and good morning to you all. It's a real pleasure to be here today to speak to you about two important programs in the Department of Environment - the electronic waste program and the air quality program.

You've already been introduced to my colleagues who are here with me today to help me in providing information that you are looking for on these programs. These two programs, electronic waste and air quality, are programs that will help us achieve our vision of having one of the cleanest and most sustainable environments in the world by 2020. I'll just take each program in turn and speak to you for a moment about those.

With respect to our E-Waste Program, it's a new program. Nova Scotia is already known for its successful Solid Waste Management Program. We are world leaders in recycling. We have the lowest amount of solid waste disposed of per person across the country and we have committed to further reductions by 2015. Now we're the first province in Atlantic Canada to ban certain electronic products from our landfills - an estimated 4,500 tons of electronic waste will be diverted annually from landfills in the province.

When we set out to design an E-Waste Recycling Program the department consulted with other jurisdictions, with waste management experts and with key stakeholders including the Retail Council of Canada, the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters and the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. There was widespread agreement that the program be a stewardship program with the focus on extended producer responsibility.

The province put in place the regulatory framework to ban certain electronic products from landfills and provided for industry to assume responsibility for the end use and disposal of their products. Nova Scotia's E-Waste Program was developed and implemented by the Atlantic Canada Electronic Stewardship, or ACES. ACES is a not-for-profit industry-led association registered in Nova Scotia. Through a competitive bid process, ACES selected the Resource Recovery Fund Board, or RRFB, as their agent to administer an end-of-life electronic stewardship program here in Nova Scotia. The RRFB was hired by the electronics industry to be the service provider and deliver the program throughout the province.

The E-Waste Program provides for the collection, transportation, consolidation and recycling of unwanted electronics covered by the regulations. The costs of recycling these items will be funded by an environmental handling fee. The fee is determined by industry and applied to the sale of new products. All of the program revenue will be used for the administration, collection, transportation and recycling of those electronics.

An independent third party auditor will audit ACES annually to ensure proper fiscal management of all fees collected by industry for the program. A province-wide drop-off network of more than 30 sites is in place for Nova Scotians to drop off products without charge. E-waste materials will be transported from drop-off sites to a consolidation facility where they will be temporarily stored, sorted and transported off site for processing.

The program began on February 1^st. RRFB is reporting that the program is running smoothly. Startup concerns about depot locations have been properly addressed. I'm proud that Nova Scotia is the first province in Atlantic Canada to have a program for dealing with e-waste and in February, 2009, Nova Scotia will expand the E-Waste Program to include additional electronics, making us national and international leaders in electronic waste recycling.

You've also asked for information about our air quality program, and I'm glad to report that our Air Quality Regulations are working and having an impact. Harmful

emissions in Nova Scotia have reduced significantly, which helps improve air quality. We are on course to meet all of our air quality objectives in the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act. We have met our emission cap goals and we are on track to meet future targets in that legislation.

The goal to have a 25 per cent reduction in sulphur dioxide emissions by 2005 was achieved and by 2010, we will have a 50 per cent reduction in sulphur dioxide from sources existing in 2001. The goal to effect a 20 per cent reduction in emissions of nitrogen oxides from year 2000 levels by 2009 will also be met. We aimed to have a 30 per cent reduction in mercury emissions by 2005 and we met that goal. The next mercury target is to reach a reduction of 70 per cent less than pre-2001 levels by 2010 and that target is on track to be achieved.

We are working on a plan to implement the Canada-wide standards for particulate matter and ozone, which will come into effect by 2010. We set out to achieve a 2 per cent limit on sulphur and heavy fuel oil and we also met that target.

Looking forward, our department is working with the Department of Energy, with Nova Scotia Power and with the federal government, to put in place post-2010 air pollutant reductions. The Department of Energy has been leading work on an energy strategy and a climate change action plan. These plans will include ways to combat climate change and further reduce air pollution in Nova Scotia.

In the last year, we have improved and upgraded our air quality monitoring sites around the province by adding new technology. Eleven sites are operating in collaboration with Environment Canada and this quality data is very important to the success of our program.

Finally, on our air quality program, I'd like to note that we instituted an industrial air emission fee system so that industries pay the cost of our department's air quality program, including the establishment and expansion of the monitoring network.

So thank you for your interest and I look forward, with my colleagues, to your questions.

MADAM CHAIR: Thank you very much. The opening round of questions will be 20 minutes in length, beginning with the NDP caucus. I recognize Mr. Wilson, you have until 9:30 a.m.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for coming before our committee today. I would agree with the deputy minister in her opening statement, she mentioned around leaders in recycling. I think here in Nova Scotia, especially if anybody does any travelling, we recognize how far ahead we are from some

jurisdictions. I think we can attribute that mostly to the uptake by our youth around recycling and education. I think they go home and often educate their parents on ensuring that recycling happens in their household.

The collection and proper disposal of electronic waste is something that the NDP have supported for a long time. In fact, one of our MLAs from Dartmouth East, on October, 2004, introduced legislation banning e-waste from landfills. So it's taken longer than we would have hoped it would have, here in Nova Scotia, but I think it's a great move that the department has made and I think the direction we're going in is a positive one.

The first concern I would like to raise is around the way this plan was rolled out. No matter how good an idea is or how good this initiative is, lead-up work has to be carried out to ensure individuals know what is going to happen when we make changes like this. Just two weeks before this program was to come into effect, there were solid waste managers from municipalities across the province who didn't know how the program was going to be rolled out. We received calls and I believe in some of the media outlets we witnessed some of their concerns. I understand that this program was developed by the Electronics Product Stewardship Canada and carried out by the Resource Recovery Fund Board.

I'd like to know how the department viewed the program or how the program was rolled out. In your view, was it done in the most appropriate way or were there challenges or areas where we could have improved that?

MS. VANSTONE: Well, new programs are always a challenge when we roll them out, but we are very pleased with how this program has rolled out. It has only been in operation for two months and we are not receiving any indications from our inspectors, or from the retailers and participants, in terms of complaints about the program. But you spoke to some important elements of the program and one is communications, that's so important, because this is really about changing people's behaviour.

Communications was considered to be an important part of the plan developed by ACES and RRFB, and they did do some communications. They posted their draft plan last July and received well over 1,000 comments on what they were proposing to do. They provided information to retailers in December. They did have people concerned as they saw February 1^st arriving or looming, but there were ads and the network was in place so that people did know by February 1^st what the fees were and where they were to go to drop off their products.

Communications continues to be a really important part of this program and they have further communications planned. It's also a very important piece of what the department will be watching for as we're monitoring and evaluating the program.

[9:15 a.m.]

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Thank you and I think that's so important, because that can lead to the success of this program, no doubt, as I mentioned how the education aspect of recycling was so important to our youth, so it's an important area.

Last year the Resource Recovery Fund Board and ACES called on those with interest to submit applications to set up collection depots for the electronic waste that is banned from the landfills. Summer Street Industries, which I hope you're aware of, an organization here in Halifax, was favoured to win a bid but was later cut after the organization failed to come to an agreement with the board concerning details around a contract. ACES gave Summer Street Industries 24 hours to sign a contract which was, in my view, an unacceptable amount of time when you're dealing with this type of program. The organization was able to get an extension for a short period of time in order to consult lawyers, but in the end there was no contract between RRFB and ACES.

Another area is the fees and how these fees are collected. Any time a new fee or tax - in our opinion this is a tax - is introduced there will be a push back from people calling on government that it's a money grab. We know there's an important aspect of ensuring that the recovery of funds to provide for the program is there. Recently I read that the fees for TVs have increased or the price of a TV will increase from $15 to $45 per unit. Are you able to tell the committee how much money is expected to be raised through this program and whether this is generating revenue for the province, or is it solely a recovery cost for the program?

MS. VANSTONE: There are a couple of questions there so let me just make sure I get to them all. One of your questions related to the process around contracting with the drop-off centres. Yes, we'd agree that it was a short turnaround in terms of the RRFB trying to get those contracts in place, and specifically with respect to Summer Street Industries and some others it was difficult for them to turn around their response to review the contract and provide comments in time. They did get an extension so that they were able to look at those contracts and provide their comments and make their decision. In terms of the terms of the contract and their own decision on whether or not they wanted to pursue it, that's really with them and with the contract.

This is an industry-led program so we don't see that it would be appropriate for the government to get into changing the terms of the contract. We did speak to them about making sure people had time to review the contract but in terms of the terms of the contract, they issued an RFP and it needed to be a level playing field and a consistent contract with the others who had responded to that proposal call.

In terms of the fees and how they're collected, and a couple of points that you hit on there, this isn't a tax, it's an industry-set fee on a product. What we're trying to do in this

whole approach to recycling is around extended producer responsibilities so that the producers themselves realize that they need to take responsibility for the whole life cycle of the product, and that includes factoring in the cost of the waste management of the product at the end of its useful life, and also that people themselves begin to realize that. If you're buying a laptop, $5 to pay for that laptop to be properly handled, dismantled and recycled is a fee that we, as consumers, need to start realizing that we have to factor that cost into our decisions about the products that we buy. So it's not a tax in terms of the fee.

A couple of things on the amounts. You asked if we knew the amount that would be collected in total for the year. We don't know that yet, we're only two months into the program, but there are controls in place around the collection of those fees. The association is required to have an independent third party do an audit of the fees that they collect. It's set up that those fees are not meant to generate revenues, that the fees are to cover the cost of the recycling program in Nova Scotia. If they determine that they are collecting more fees than the cost of the program, they'll be looking at adjusting that fee and the department will be looking at them doing that as well. If they're not collecting enough money, the fees may be adjusted further.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Is that going to be on an annual basis?

MS. VANSTONE: An annual audit, yes.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): One of the things you did say is about the responsibility of producers, but any time you introduce a fee - or a tax, in my case, but I understand we will have a disagreement on that - the producers are going to pass that on to the consumers, any additional costs. With that and knowing that, one of the things we've seen so often in Nova Scotia is how our tax system is set up and often we're taxed on tax. So with this fee, it's my understanding and my knowledge that the HST is charged to this fee. Has there been any discussion from your department to try to remove the HST being charged to this fee, or tax in my opinion?

MS. VANSTONE: No, you're right, there is a tax attracted by this fee. That's consistent with federal legislation around tax. It's what happens on the service charges around paint and tire fees as well.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): I know that initiative has to come from the government themselves in a policy. One of the things that I read about after the program started, I think it was a couple of days into it, was the fact that the depots would not receive or collect any broken TVs or monitors. Could you tell us what an individual is supposed to do with maybe a damaged piece of electronics like a TV or a monitor and where they are supposed to bring that piece of waste?

MS. VANSTONE: There are guidelines in place that ACES and RRFB have put in place and provided to the handlers at the drop-off depots and to recyclers around what to do if there is a cracked monitor, TV or a smashed one. Those guidelines indicate when they can continue to move it forward into the recycling stream or when it's appropriate for it to go to landfill.

We are not hearing a lot - in fact, I don't think we've heard anything - about smashed monitors or TVs in terms of people trying to avoid dropping it off at one of these centres, but there are guidelines in place because we have a real concern about the safety of the workers handling this material. So we're hopeful that the majority of Nova Scotians will buy into the program and we won't have people deliberately trying to break monitors and TV screens to avoid the drop-off at the depot. With that said, sometimes it will happen just as part of the collection process and there are guidelines in place to decide when it goes to recycling and when it can go to landfill.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): From my understanding, if it is to a point where a TV fell over, you put that in with your regular waste and the regular waste collection will collect that broken TV or monitor?

MS. VANSTONE: Yes. Actually, Bob, do you want to explain in more detail what happens there?

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Kenney.

MR. BOB KENNEY: I can read this but just to summarize it, if it's a cracked monitor it can go through the program but when you get into shards of glass, when you get into occupational health and safety issues, then there's a mechanism that will kick in place to say no, we can't take this through the system. It depends upon that level.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): I actually received one call from a constituent and I had no clue of where I could send this individual. My worst fear is something that municipalities and the province have battled with over the years, which is these illegal waste dumps, especially in rural Nova Scotia and the outskirts of HRM, so I'm glad to see that. Where is that waste going when it's collected? Where do we ship it from or where do the depots ship it to? Where does it end up?

MADAM CHAIR: Ms. Vanstone.

MS. VANSTONE: Right now it's being shipped to a consolidation facility - I believe there are two in the province - and stored. By the summer we will have in place in Nova Scotia at least one processing facility, perhaps two, that will do the dismantling and take apart these materials and various materials will go in different directions in terms of what they are. We'll look at the lead components maybe going to New Brunswick, some of the

precious metals may go to a different place, the plastics, the glass - about 90 per cent of the materials can be recycled, so they'll be going different places to different markets. There is a commitment, a requirement in the program, that none of it is exported to developing countries so that we are managing our wastes in a responsible manner. We're in the process of setting that facility up.

I just wanted to respond to your concern about illegal dumping, because it's an important one and one that we're very concerned about ourselves. That was why this type of program was important for us in terms of how we established a program. It was very important that there be no fee for people in terms of the drop-off, we felt that was critical, so that there was no disincentive for people to recycle these products. To date we have had no reports from our inspectors around the province of illegal dumping of these products. If we do, we'll be responding to those the same as we would any other illegal dumping complaint that we receive.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): You said you have storage areas now, do you ship anything out of the province to Ontario or Quebec currently?

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Kenney.

MR. KENNEY: Not at this time, but they are negotiating contracts for the recycling of the materials.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): I know the deputy minister mentioned - it was one of my next questions - around ensuring this waste doesn't just leave our borders and end up who knows where, and make sure that there are controls in place to ensure that it's properly disposed of. My question now is, we've talked about this program, I think it has been a couple of years in the works, why did we not have a facility up and going to dismantle? Why is there a delay? In my mind, would that not be one of the components of this program to have ready to go on the start date of February 1^st? I'm just wondering why that hasn't happened or why we're not doing that now.

MS. VANSTONE: At the start of the program it takes some time to collect enough material to justify the processing facilities. The most important piece to get in place right at the beginning was the drop-off facilities, the network of over 30 sites, because that's where you'll start to get your materials to justify the establishment of your processing facility. So they're expecting to have that in place later this summer. I think that's quite a good track record for the start-up of the program in terms of what they're doing within the first year of the program.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): So you said there are 30 sites, are they private sites or are they government-owned sites? Do you have a list of where they are? Is

there something you could maybe provide the committee to show where these sites are across the province?

MS. VANSTONE: Yes, we'd be happy to provide it. We have some handouts that we can leave or materials we can make available to you in terms of those sites. How the sites were picked, there was an RFP process, and you referred to it earlier in terms of the selection of those sites. I think there are 33 or 34 of them now. The industry association has made a commitment to add sites if we identify that there is a further requirement. Most of those sites are Enviro-Depots but not all of them. In some cases they are - I think there are some adult learning workshops and some of the municipalities involved, so they're not always the Enviro-Depots.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): And is there something in place to ensure that - my concern would be that collecting this e-waste is similar to how the tire industry collects waste. I mean we need to ensure that the fire departments, whatever communities these sites are in, is there a way of ensuring or monitoring the capacity of these storage sites so that we don't have sites that are beyond being able to control any kind of a fire or some kind of emergency that way? Is there anything in place that you might have that ensures that local authorities, like fire departments, know that all of a sudden now we have a site in your community that potentially could be a risk to the environment if anything happened to that site?

MS. VANSTONE: There are controls around the drop-off sites, because they must enter into a contract and they must follow the guidelines that are put in place for their operations.

With respect to the notification of community fire officials, Bob, can you just speak to that? I'm not sure if that was a requirement or if that's practice.

[9:30 a.m.]

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Kenney.

MR. KENNEY: I can't recall, I'd have to look at the details of their contract when we get hold of it. The bins are quite small, they pick them up quite regularly, so in the Enviro-Depots there's very little that is stored at the sites and they're moved out quite quickly. But the consolidation centres, we can certainly look into what sort of fire precautions they have in place.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): And that's just my history of being in the fire department, knowing that your preplanning, especially for smaller rural communities, is so important. Rural communities depend on the fire service, so I hope that they have the resources and the equipment to handle potential emergencies.

I know I'm running out of time so I just wanted to make a correction. I think I said Summer Street Industries was in Halifax but it's in New Glasgow, so that was my mistake. Thank you.

MADAM CHAIR: Thank you, the time has expired. I now recognize Mr. Colwell for the Liberal caucus. You have until 9:50 a.m.

MR. KEITH COLWELL: Thank you. I want to thank the department for coming today and talking about these two very important topics. First of all, I want to officially report an illegal dumping site. It's on Upper Governor Street, between North and East Preston. The last time the province cleaned it up it was a $140,000 bill, and that's with a lot of volunteer work and labour. That place now has electronic waste in it and all kinds of other things that shouldn't be dumped. I want to make you aware of that, so you do have your first official complaint on record and that complaint won't go away in this location, I'm sure.

I've got a lot of questions around the solid waste electronics. I didn't get a clear answer - when you take a broken monitor, let's say it's a broken monitor with loose glass on it, into the recycling depot and indeed, they refuse to take it, I take it home and put it in the garbage. It's just as dangerous for the garbage pickup gentlemen as it is for the guy at the recycling place, so what do I do with it?

MS. VANSTONE: First off, on the first official complaint, that is important to us and we may be talking to you after this discussion to get further details on that, because we do take that very seriously in terms of illegal dumping, and we will follow up on our inspection program.

With respect to the broken monitor, if someone were to come to a drop-off site with a broken monitor, I don't believe they would be sent home with that monitor. There are a couple of ways that it could be handled. One is, depending on how it fits within the guidelines, they may box it or store it aside and send it to the landfill, or they may put it in a different pile and again, manage it in a way that it isn't harmful to anyone so that it would be picked up for recycling.

MR. COLWELL: Okay. I just want to make sure there's something to do with it because I don't want any more TVs on Upper Governor Street, and that's what's happening now. Some of them aren't even damaged, I'm sure, when they put them there initially and that's all part of education.

I really want to commend the department for putting this program in place. I think it's a very positive program, I think there are some issues around it, which come with sort of a teething process. The issues that I've been hearing are, number one, that the recycling fee is higher than people anticipated - most people don't mind paying it - that's an issue. The fact that they have to pay HST on it is another issue. I would like to get an answer and I know the

Department of Environment can't answer this question but I'd like to know if they could find out from the Department of Finance exactly how much extra income the province is getting on this new HST they're collecting on these fees. That would be a very interesting number to have, if you could possibly put that forward to the Department of Finance and provide us with that information to the committee, when you can. I think it's going to be a reasonably substantial number which taxpayers have to have a burden on.

I also understand that the percentage of recycling has gone down in the province. I've got that from pretty reliable information. Could you comment on that and what is happening?

MS. VANSTONE: A few questions there so I'll just go through each of those. The first one, around the fees being higher than anticipated, the fees that have been placed in Nova Scotia are the same fee levels in the other jurisdictions that have an electronic waste program, that is B.C., Alberta and Saskatchewan. As I indicated, we'll be monitoring that when we see the results of the program audit, to look at whether those fees are sufficient for the cost of the program or whether they exceed the cost of the program and they'll be adjusted accordingly from that. There is an incentive for industry as well, to keep that fee as low as possible.

With respect to the HST, we would be able to provide that information but probably not for some months because we don't have the number yet, in terms of what they're collecting. They are required, on an annual basis, for us to know how many, what fees have been collected in this program and then we would be able to get a calculation through Finance, in terms of your question on HST. So we can follow up on that but it just may be a little time until we have some meaningful information.

In terms of our recycling levels and the changes on those - as probably all of you know, Nova Scotia has done an excellent job on recycling. We achieved our 50 per cent reduction target in 2000 and we are way below the Canadian average; probably about 45 or 50 per cent below the Canadian average.

We've also set a further target for that. In 2015 we want our waste disposal rate to drop to less than 300 kilograms per person per year and that will again continue to make us a leader in waste management.

In recent years we have seen some increases in those rates and that's why we continue to keep pushing on the program. That's why I want to bring more materials in, like the electronics program. We're not the only ones in terms of seeing that increase, and in most cases what it is attributed to is consumer patterns. We're buying more disposable products, we're buying more products new, rather than repairing them - rather than repair the microwave, we buy a new microwave. So that's again getting to the communications point that was mentioned earlier. This is really about changing people's awareness and their

patterns, in terms of the products they buy, how they reuse them and how they treat them when they no longer have a need for them.

MR. COLWELL: Yes, and I think the program in general is really good and that department, I know - it is an initiative that we started when we were in government so I'm pretty partial to the program, needless to say. It is something I think Nova Scotians have really caught on to.

I am a bit disappointed, though, that the Resource Recovery Fund Board hasn't done more to recycle more things. I've always said and I always believe that there's nothing that can't be recycled - nothing. If it's packaged right to start with and if it is worked out right to start with, then we don't need landfills - we really do not need landfills. I don't think the Resource Recovery Fund Board has done nearly enough to accept more and more materials, especially plastics. If there were some simple changes made in the regulations or in laws even that would make the manufacturers identify exactly what the type of plastic was - I used to be in the plastic manufacturing business so all the plastics can be recycled, all of them. They can regrind them, reuse them - that's a pretty simple, easy process but if you don't know what they are, you can't.

Along that line I've got to ask a question - I've asked this question before and never got a satisfactory answer - as someone that's in the plastic manufacturing business has off-cuts of material. The landfill won't take them, RFB won't take them, so what do you do with them?

MS. VANSTONE: Thank you, you've raised some interesting points. In terms of adding more products to our recycling stream and banning them from the landfills, I think that's a very good point and something that we need to do in terms of continuing to remove these products from landfills. We have over 20 products now that we don't allow to go to landfills and we are working with RFB, with the government, with the regional authorities, the municipalities to continue to keep adding to that list of products.

With respect to your specific question around off-cuts of plastics and what can happen with those, I'm going to ask Mr. Kenney if he has any experience with that.

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Kenney.

MR. KENNEY: Yes, we have some experience. Plastics are certainly a challenge and keeping them numbered is an international standard that all countries have difficulty ensuring that occurs, especially materials coming in from Asia, having the number or symbol on it. Specifically your question on cut offs - it would depend upon the type of plastic, it's a supply and demand issue. If there's an industry available that can manage that material, then hopefully you can find a location for that but if not, it become municipal solid waste. At that point in time if there's a significant amount of it, whatever amount it is, you can certainly call

the RRFB and we can help you identify the brokers and the industry people who can point you in the direction of how to manage that material.

MR. COLWELL: The difficulty with that is, I had a friend of mine who was in the manufacturing business. He would cut out pieces and have little pieces left maybe of three or four cubic inches of a Delrin or a polyethylene or another type of plastic. He knew specifically what the plastic was but if you tried to give it to the garbage guys they refused to take it because they were not allowed to, and he couldn't take it to a recycling spot because they wouldn't take it. So here he was with this material, not enough to buy a grinder because he wasn't in the injection moulding business to regrind it and reuse it and not enough to send back to the supplier to get done, so there he was stuck with this material.

It was a shame because this material could easily be recycled but nobody would take it, so what does he do with it? He didn't dump it on Upper Governor Street because he probably didn't know it was there, the location was there but everything else has been there. So what does he do with it? This is a real serious problem. If you are talking about a large manufacturer, they would take the material, regrind it, reuse it, or ship it back to the supplier to be reused again. A small operation that doesn't have the time to do that, number one, or the resources to do it. What will they do with it?

MR. KENNEY: The only thing I can say is to certainly let us know and we will see what we can do. We do know a lot of the industry players in Canada and we can certainly point them in the direction of where they can best likely or more likely manage the material.

Commodity prices, as you know, are increasing every day and that's actually helping the secondary markets, so those conditions change from day to day, so we can certainly see what we can do.

MR. COLWELL: Maybe you're missing my point. I don't disagree with what you're saying but if you have a small manufacturer who has 25 pounds this week of this material, he knows what it is because he has bought this particular material from a plastics supplier and next week he has a different type and the next week he has a different type, what does he do with it? He doesn't have 1,000 pounds of it that he can deal with, then if he had 1,000 pounds maybe you can truck it back to the company and they'll take it and they'll reuse it. But it's the small quantities, what do they do with it? The garbage guy won't take it and rightfully so and he can't ship it back, so what does he do?

MADAM CHAIR: Ms. Vanstone.

MS. VANSTONE: Fortunately, it does end up going into the landfill and not into the illegal dump, but you raise an important point around small amounts of these materials. The challenge is to find markets for those materials so that you actually have a sustainable

program on recycling. We are in a lot of discussions with RRFB, our department and with the regional authorities and we can take this issue to that table for further discussion.

MR. COLWELL: Being in plastic manufacturing before, a lot of these materials can be reground and reused pretty simply if you have a use for them but a lot of people don't, they do part of it. It would be easy to identify this material, package it, identify what it is and then send it to an Enviro-Depot, let them take it and then you could accumulate enough of the material to actually make it worthwhile to ship it to Ontario, or wherever there's a plastics manufacturing facility, but there has been no effort. In the meantime, the regional municipality will not take plastic and if they take it, if the garbage collector takes it, he gets fined by HRM.

Did you realize that the HRM has a gentleman in a car who follows the garbage pickup people around, it's unbelievable, but anyway, they do it to make sure they don't pick up one bag too many or anything they're not supposed to pick up. It seems like a waste of money to me, it's better to have it at the end and penalize the collector if that happens, but this is what's happening. It is a real serious problem and this has been a problem for the last - I identified this problem about eight years ago and nothing has been done to resolve it in eight years. It's a serious issue.

The trouble with these plastics is, if you take this plastic and put it in the landfill it never breaks down, it's there forever. Not only that but this material has value. If it were steel, steel would go right back to the junkyard, they'd take it and away they'd go with it and it's recycled and reused. But the plastics, which we're getting more and more plastics in more and more places in more and more things, it's important that we look after this material. Maybe we need a junkyard for plastics but whatever you need, I think it's something the government has to intervene with and make this easy for small businesses to get rid of this stuff or if someone buys a piece of plastic, they can do something with it.

[9:45 a.m.]

MS. VANSTONE: I think your point about ease and convenience is another critical piece around getting people to participate in these programs and about changing people's patterns. They need to be thinking about these things and it needs to be set up in a way that's convenient for people to take advantage of the programs, so we will look into it further.

MR. COLWELL: Back on the electronic recycling, the recycling, from what I understand now, is being picked up at the different depots and trucked off to a warehouse and being stored. What is it costing every month to store that material?

MS. VANSTONE: I don't know if we have a number on that, Mr. Kenney? Not yet. It has only been two months into the program. The cost of storage would be covered by the fees that are collected on the sale of new products.

MR. COLWELL: I understand that. The problem is the more money you spend on storage, the less money you have to spend on the facility to actually get this material turned into another product that is useful, or at least some revenue from it. So the more time you spend trucking and storing, the less money you have to spend on those fees, and that's a bit of a concern. There has also been some information out of the U.S. on recycling that indicates that there's money to be made at this stuff. There are a lot of precious metals, even the steel in it can be sold and the plastics, if they're properly handled, again, they can be resold. Indeed if this operation was done right, maybe we could reduce the fees at the time of purchase and have a lower cost to people and a company make some money, which I think is important to do in our society. Any comments on that?

MS. VANSTONE: I think that would definitely be the objective of the program. In looking at this program and in the evaluation of it on a regular basis, they'll be looking at efficiencies in terms of how they collect the products that can allow them to reduce the fees. They're going to be looking at the efficiency in terms of how they manufacture the product that might allow them to reduce the recycling costs and reduce the fees, and also in terms of how they develop markets for those elements that come out of these products that would allow them to reduce the fees. Ultimately, we would like to be able to get to something that may not even require those fees as an extra cost.

MR. COLWELL: On a completely different topic - I know it's not on the list today, but it's something that you're well aware of that I'm very keen on - what are you doing with the tires right today?

MS. VANSTONE: The tires are being stored and we have a study underway looking at the most effective use of used tires for Nova Scotia.

MR. COLWELL: Are you looking at the basis of a huge business taking all of the tires or a whole group of smaller businesses that might have diverse products that would do the tires? What kind of direction have you given the Resource Recovery Fund Board in that regard, if any?

MS. VANSTONE: The group that's looking at developing a management strategy for used tires for Nova Scotia includes the RRFB but it also includes the department and other departments of government, so it's not just an RRFB process to look at developing this strategy.

With respect to the details of the strategy, I'm really not able to speak with much information about that. I can certainly get briefed on that and if you want to know more about that, we can come back and speak about the tire management program. I know the timing on the strategy is probably sometime over the next four to eight weeks, in terms of the completion of the work of that committee.

MR. COLWELL: In the meantime - and you may not have this answer today but you could supply it to the committee - what does it cost to truck the tires to the storage facility and what does it cost to store the tires in the storage facility each month?

MS. VANSTONE: I'll take that question back to the department. We can provide you with further information on the cost to truck the tires and the cost of storage.

MR. COLWELL: Yes, that would be greatly appreciated. How much time do I have left?

MADAM CHAIR: You have two minutes.

MR. COLWELL: I want to talk about air monitoring. I believe I heard correctly in your opening statement that the air monitoring is now being paid for by industry, is that correct?

MS. VANSTONE: Yes, that's right.

MR. COLWELL: That's a very positive step forward. Nova Scotia Power has always been a big problem here in Dartmouth - it puts out all kinds of orange gas that seems to make a cloud of pollution over the city. I know when I drive into the city in the morning in the summertime, there's an orange cloud and it just seems to happen to be the same colour that is coming out of the stacks at Nova Scotia Power. Does Nova Scotia Power still monitor themselves?

MS. VANSTONE: We do our own air monitoring program. I assume that Nova Scotia Power also does monitoring of their emissions.

MR. COLWELL: I was always concerned. I know when their stacks emit or had in the past emitted some pretty nasty things, I always wondered why the province hasn't insisted putting their own monitors on those stacks and have them either monitored by departmental staff or by an independent third party and have Nova Scotia Power pay for these. I think it's very important because they are known as one of the worst polluters in North America and it would sure be nice to have some solid baselines that we can rely on, not just numbers they have supplied because numbers are numbers and you can adjust them any way you want. I know some employees that formerly worked there and they said it is pretty crappy stuff they're putting out from time to time when some of those crude oils are burning. Has there been any thought at all about doing that? I think it is essential that we have an independent assessment of this and we know, as Nova Scotians, that at least if there are problems there we know what they are, what the baselines are, and then you can force them to rectify these problems.

MS. VANSTONE: Nova Scotia Power has made a lot of progress in terms of its contribution to reducing emissions and improving air quality. I'm going to just ask Andrew Murphy to give a little more detail about how our inspection program and monitoring relates to what the industry does themselves.

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please. Actually, the time has expired and what I will do is allow Mr. Murphy to answer this question but I want people to be reminded of the time.

MR. ANDREW MURPHY: There's really two levels of monitoring happening. We do our own monitoring across the province to measure ambient air quality across the province, so we do get an indication from our own system. At the same time we also require, where appropriate, industry - including Nova Scotia Power - to self-monitor as well and for them to pay the costs of doing that, so we have two levels of monitoring to allow us to understand the situation.

Secondly, with regard to Tufts Cove, which you mentioned specifically, they've made improvements there in the last number of years. They have added a baghouse, which significantly reduces particular emissions and they've also been burning natural gas there in addition to oil which is a cleaner burning fuel.

MADAM CHAIR: The time has expired for the Liberal caucus. I recognize Mr. Bain for the PC caucus and you have 20 minutes until 10:12 a.m.

MR. KEITH BAIN: Thank you very much for being here this morning. With regard to the E-Waste Program, when it was being set up I'm sure you determined an estimated cost. What would the estimated cost of running the program in Nova Scotia be?

MS. VANSTONE: I don't have a number on the estimated cost. I think we were waiting for the results to come from the first results of what they've been picking up in that program and the results of that audit. I'm just going to ask Mr. MacNeil if there were estimates done on the high level estimates of the program in advance of its starting.

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. MacNeil.

MR. KIM MACNEIL: We don't have those numbers right now but we could certainly talk to the industry about the estimates that they would have arrived at. What we've been told is that they want a few months to be able to see the volume of material that is going to be coming in before they'd be able to make any type of close approximation of what they're going to get.

MR. BAIN: You mentioned that the fee is determined by industry and that the revenue is used for administration, collection, transportation and so on. I guess I have two

questions; is there money set aside for education, communication and that as well, to educate the public on how important the program is?

MS. VANSTONE: Yes, there is. Education and public awareness is part of their plan and they can use some of the funds for that. In fact, we have here, I believe, some copies of some of the materials that they have been provided. For example, the cost of pamphlets that were designed and developed and are required to be distributed by the retailer when people buy new products, so that they understand about the program. The association is working on other public awareness and education initiatives that they can design, in concert with municipalities, the RRFB and others to promote the program.

MR. BAIN: So whatever can be determined by industry, I guess another question is, are the depots getting a fair return on the program?

MS. VANSTONE: Well, that's part of the contract that was set with the RRFB and the drop-off centres. They'll be evaluating those. This is an industry-led program so if the drop-off centres are finding that they're not able to deliver the program under the terms of their expectations under the contract, then that will be a point of further discussion with the RRFB.

MR. BAIN: I guess this might be an unfair question but who would benefit most financially from the program?

MS. VANSTONE: Well, it's designed that the industry association is not benefitting financially from the program. The fees that they collect, in terms of the brand owners, the manufacturers, are designed to be recovered with the cost of the program. So it should be non-profit, no impact for them.

They are to pay a reasonable fee to the drop-off centre so that they can handle the material. People will be looking at those fees over time, as we evaluate how the program rolls out and how people participate in the program, what volumes of material are going through the program, what are their costs in terms of the other elements of the program. It's really not designed that anyone should make money.

On the other hand, we do expect that there should be economic benefit for Nova Scotia and that's why we wanted to have the drop-off centres to be in Nova Scotia and why it's important for us that they put in place the processing facility later in the summer. All in, I think there's an estimate for a net increase of jobs in Nova Scotia of approximately 70 jobs overall, estimated by this program. Those will be new jobs - some of them will be in drop-off centres, some of them would be in the processing facility. They could be in various parts of the program but that is the estimate of direct economic benefit from the program.

MR. BAIN: You've just answered one of my next questions as to how many jobs would be created as a result of it. Concerning the fees, what is the process for fees being transferred from the retailers or the depot or industry, to government? Is there a process that is followed?

MS. VANSTONE: The fees are collected by the retailers at the point of sale and then there is a process in place for them to remit those fees back through to the brand owners. I think it's a fairly detailed process so I'm going to ask Mr. Kenney if he could speak to that, or Ms. Palko.

MADAM CHAIR: Ms. Palko.

MS. KATHY PALKO: Fees are remitted by the brand owners or the distributors of the products, back through to ACES and there's a fund in place with the industry stewardship organization and they are a non-profit organization as well. They're registered under the Societies Act so, again, that's another level of accountability.

MR. BAIN: Thank you. Could you tell me some of the regulations that might be in place. You say that the depots have to sign a contract - what regulations might be in place in that contract?

MS. VANSTONE: The contact would set terms for their collection and for providing that to the consolidation sites. I believe it sets out a fee for them in terms of that. But just before I pass that over, I'll ask Mr. Kenney to speak more about the details of those contracts. I just wanted to explain about the nesting of responsibilities here and the kind of control process we've put in place for this new program. As I mentioned, there is an audit of the fund in terms of the fees that are collected, and there's a requirement that it be done by an independent third-party audit. There's also an audit of the retailers, to make sure that when they collect the fee from the consumer that they are remitting it properly as well, and then there's an evaluation overall of the program. So there is a relationship of responsibilities here in terms of the various roles.

[10:00 a.m.]

Under the regulations the minister has the ability to ask for basically any information he feels he needs in the evaluation of the program, but very specifically in terms of the quantity of materials and the fees collected and the type of work they're doing on the reprocessing, he can ask what the companies are doing in terms of changing their own processes to reduce the cost of recycling. So there is an opportunity for quite a bit of accountability and I think transparency as we move through with this program.

Specifically in terms of requirements placed on the drop-off centres - I think that was your question - I'm just going to ask Mr. Kenney if he has further information on that.

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Kenney.

MR. KENNEY: Sure, just a few details. I don't know them all but there are things like square footage, the covering of a building, hours of operation, your basic contract terms of reference for a depot in general, with some added issues over anything related to any hazards or concerns around e-waste itself.

MR. BAIN: I guess that's probably where I was going. I was thinking more of what Mr. Wilson was talking about, the safe storage because of environmental hazards that would exist, but that would be included in their contacts anyway.

I believe you mentioned earlier on that there's going to be a major site set up this summer, I think for the collection, was that correct? Do you have any indication as to where this site might be, or has that been determined yet?

MS. VANSTONE: No, I don't have information on that. In terms of the process for getting to that facility, there will be at least one, maybe more than one processing facility set up. They have issued a proposal call for responses on developing and running that site. I think that their response is it's closed. It closed in early February and they are in the process of reviewing those proposals and negotiating with their successful candidate.

MR. BAIN: I just have one final question, Madam Chair. I guess in looking at all of the Atlantic Provinces, will Nova Scotia be working with the other provinces to introduce similar e-waste programs in the future?

MS. VANSTONE: Yes, we'd be very interested in doing that and we have had discussions. We have had discussions actually for a couple of years with the other Maritime and Atlantic Provinces in terms of their interest. They are very interested in our program, they are very interested in the whole approach to recycling of e-waste. So we think there are a lot of opportunities for this to expand into other jurisdictions.

The way ACES has set themselves up in terms of the industry-led association, they've also structured themselves in a way that they could expand to be a delivery agent in those other provinces. So we'd like to see that and we're continuing our discussions with them.

MADAM CHAIR: Thank you. I now recognize Mr. Dunn. You have until 10:12 a.m.

MR. PATRICK DUNN: Thank you, Madam Chair, and welcome here this morning. I would hope to express the fact that it must be exciting times in our province to be involved with this type of work and pleased with such a sustainable program that's occurring and the progress we're making. Hopefully we'll continue to be very aggressive in this matter. As Mr. Wilson mentioned earlier this morning, you don't have to travel very far from where we live,

regardless if it's in Canada or the United States, some of the things that are happening are actually appalling with regard to waste management.

I would like to make a comment on what was earlier brought up with Summer Street Industries and indeed it's in New Glasgow, because I've had several meetings with the board of directors before, during this process and since that. The management was very disappointed - and I know you had no control over that - because they were for many, many months looking at an opportunity for the people who they work with in this facility, training and educating the intellectually handicapped, and they thought this might be a chance for some of them to have full-time opportunities to work.

At the time, I guess I'd have to agree with them, they did have inadequate time to look at the contract and I know they received a brief extension but their lawyers, at the same time, felt that it wasn't the right time for them to move into this contract, they were a little uneasy with it, so that was unfortunate. I believe at the time, in my recent discussions with them, that they may not pursue trying to get a site there in the future, which leads me to my question. You mentioned we have a network of 30 sites across the province, how soon will they expand and approximately how many sites are we looking at in the near future?

MS. VANSTONE: We have 34 sites now and have set six months out into the program - so a few more months from now - to undertake a preliminary review with RRFB and ACES in terms of the program and identify whether there are access issues and whether there need to be additional sites. One of the guidelines that was set first, in terms of the density of that network of sites, was that 90 per cent of the rural population, including the towns, were to be within 30 kilometres of a drop-off facility. So the current network does meet that target but that said, it's very important that the program be set up in a way that it's convenient for people so that we encourage them, make it easy for them to change their habits and recycle these products. So we will be looking at that in that first six-month review.

MR. DUNN: And my next question you practically answered there, because my next question was dealing in the areas of the province where people have to travel perhaps to a point too far and they may decide to get rid of their waste in some other manner. So that's encouraging, the 30 kilometres, and hopefully in some areas it will get even shorter. It was also mentioned this morning with regard to the education part of it. Again, my experience in the school system, I was very pleased over the last number of years with the amount of education that was put into our school system, which made a tremendous impact and certainly moved this process along. The owners of these depots, have they had the opportunity - have they been briefed, do they have an education pack that explains all of the objectives of this program?

MS. VANSTONE: Thank you, you raise an excellent point in terms of the education program. It's important that there be education to the retailers involved in this and also to other participants like the depot owners. I'm going to ask Mr. Kenney if he has any further

information on the details of their specific programs with those partners in the system. I just wanted to add one thing that I neglected to mention when we were talking about the network. The target of 90 per cent within 30 kilometres is the target for rural Nova Scotia, and we have that in place. The other element of that was that in urban areas that 75 per cent be within 10 kilometres of a depot, we have met that additional density requirement, as well, for urbanized areas.

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Kenney.

MR. KENNEY: In regard to the depots themselves, yes, there was a training session held for the depot operators to obviously make them familiar with what they had to do. There is ongoing communication with depots, they're always communicating with the RRFB to determine if there are any issues and for the RRFB to solve those issues on an ongoing basis.

MR. DUNN: Just perhaps one last question. We were dealing with fees collected and industry driven and so on. The depots in Nova Scotia, do they collect the same percentage of profit as depots would in Ontario or Quebec?

MS. VANSTONE: The other jurisdictions that have this program are B.C., Alberta and Saskatchewan, so I'm not aware of the fees that are collected by the depots in that area. I'm not sure if Mr. Kenney knows the depot fees in the jurisdictions that have a similar program.

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Kenney.

MR. KENNEY: I don't have the specifics in front of me but if I recall, I remember reading them and they were almost identical, or certainly well within the range of less than 5 per cent or something like that, but I can get those for you.

MR. DUNN: Thank you, Madam Chair.

MADAM CHAIR: There is a little time remaining, but I will now recognize Mr. Wilson from the NDP caucus. The next round of questions will be 12 minutes per caucus. The floor is yours.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): I was going to use my second round to ask questions around air monitoring, but I'm compelled to go back to a question that was asked by Mr. Bain earlier which concerns me. As a member of the Public Accounts Committee our mandate is to look at government programs to ensure that the spending of taxpayers' money is done appropriately, and it was around the deputy minister's response of not knowing the estimated cost of this program. I'm concerned that as a deputy minister you don't know that or don't have that or weren't given the estimated costs of this program. Is

it something that you can get for us or is it something that just was not on the top of your head? Was that the correct answer, that you don't know the estimated costs of this program?

MS. VANSTONE: When we were developing the program we would have had access to talking to some of the other jurisdictions that had experience in this in terms of how the program worked in those jurisdictions, and also it's the same industry association that has been involved in Alberta, Saskatchewan and B.C. I think in fairness we could have had an estimate around generally that the program is cost recovery with the fees at this level and we've taken the same number of fees. What we can't say now is what we think the cost is going to be over this year until we monitor the take-up and the number of new electronic products that are in that category that are purchased by Nova Scotians, and we also see how many Nova Scotians bring products to these drop-off depots. It's very hard to estimate that.

We assume that many people have these things in their basements and they've had them there for many years wondering what they should be doing with their old computer or an old monitor. But also these aren't products that are like beverage containers, you're not replacing them on the same kind of schedule and disposing of them in the same way. For us to step very far into making estimates, we really want to see what the experience is over those initial months. Even when we do the six-month review we could be providing estimates at that time in terms of what the experience has been over the six months and we may be able to make some projections on that basis.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Thank you. I hope in being transparent and open that those estimates might be released so that the public knows what the cost will be for this program. What will happen to any surplus collected by the fee - or the tax, in my opinion - on these devices? If there's a surplus at the end of the year, what will happen to those surpluses?

MS. VANSTONE: Since it's set up to be cost recovery, I think they would be needing to come to us with a plan that says, those surpluses are going to be reinvested to reduce the fees or to do something that improves the nature of that program and reduces the overall cost of the program.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): So hopefully that will be in the year-end review of this program.

MS. VANSTONE: When we get the audit, yes.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): What will happen if there's a cost overrun - who will pay for that if there's a cost overrun for this program?

MS. VANSTONE: I think they'll be coming back with wanting an adjustment of the fees and since it is an industry fee, they would then be looking at how they can adjust the fee or reduce their costs to make sure that they don't have an overrun on the cost of this program.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Will that be something that will be included in that year-end report?

MS. VANSTONE: Yes, there's an audit report required and there's also an annual report to be done by the RRFB on their evaluation of the program. We would be happy to provide those reports. The only limitation on distribution of those reports may be if there is proprietary industry information in them.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Thank you. I'll go to air monitoring and I think my questions will be to Mr. Murphy. I want to welcome you here, a former schoolmate of mine. Maybe I should ask you the questions in French since we both attended Honours French in high school. My first question is, how many individuals work directly in air quality monitoring? Is that being directed to the deputy?

MS. VANSTONE: I can start and then when you get technical we'll refer it to Mr. Murphy. There are 10 staff members in that program.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): How many air quality monitoring sites does your department have across the province? I don't know if you mentioned that in your original comments.

[10:15 a.m.]

MS. VANSTONE: We have 11 sites that we operate with Environment Canada.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Are you looking at maybe increasing the number of sites in the province or could we benefit from an increase in the number of sites throughout the province?

MS. VANSTONE: Yes, we would be looking at continuing to improve that network in terms of this year and future years. We also did quite a bit to improve it in the year just past, so this would be one that would be appropriate for Mr. Murphy to speak a little bit about what we've done recently in terms of that program and what we're looking at in the future.

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Murphy.

MR. MURPHY: We've greatly modernized that program in the last three, four, five years. We've taken steps to install essentially the latest technology that's used across the

country to ensure that we're consistent with the way that air quality is monitored in other jurisdictions. As far as if we would like to have additional sites, absolutely, the more sites you have obviously the better picture that you have. Of course, cost is an element of that as well, but certainly we are looking to both continue to improve the sites we have and also look for additional sites where we can.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Are you looking at an increase in this year's budget to try to implement some of these changes that would improve the monitoring?

MADAM CHAIR: Ms. Vanstone.

MS. VANSTONE: The fees that we have currently set for this program generate a little over $1 million, that's about the cost of the program. We have no plans for a significant change on those fees this year. We did increase them last year, I believe, to allow us to increase the program.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): What industrial sites are directly monitored by your department? I know you answered a few questions earlier, or is that under the self-regulating or self-monitoring? Do you actually regulate or monitor certain industrial sites here in Nova Scotia?

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Murphy.

MR. MURPHY: No, we don't monitor industrial sites directly. Where appropriate we require industry to monitor their own sites. Our network is meant to give a picture of general ambient air quality across the province.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): When your department receives a complaint about bad air or say fly-ash problems that we've heard about at the Trenton Generating Station, and I know even a colleague of mine, the member for Cape Breton Nova, has seen and witnessed in his community of Whitney Pier, a soot or black ash on cars and on houses, what steps are taken to deal with a complaint like that? Quickly - I know it's probably a long process.

MADAM CHAIR: Ms. Vanstone.

MS. VANSTONE: All of the complaints are followed up by our regional office and our inspectors. We have over 60 inspectors around the province who respond to those complaints. Specifically with respect to Trenton, as you're probably aware, Nova Scotia Power is in the process of installing a baghouse there that will have a significant improvement on the air quality around that site. We've had very few complaints recently on that site, I think one in the last fiscal year, but we do respond to all complaints that we receive on air quality.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): When would you consider the complaint dealt with? At what stage do you say okay, we're done - is it just a notification of the company or the industry? When do you decide, as a department, that okay, we've dealt with that complaint?

MS. VANSTONE: We have a variety of ways in which we respond to complaints. The first is to identify the risk associated with that complaint and then decide on the appropriate response to that risk. We work very hard with industry and with communities in terms of trying to help them get to compliance, to remove the issue. That's our first and foremost objective in all of our programs, to achieve compliance, so we will work with them on that.

In some cases if those efforts aren't having success, we will escalate and use additional tools that we have in terms of ministerial orders, moving up the scale in terms of achieving compliance.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): People here in Nova Scotia have a perception that we have clean air. We hear that from tourists and many Nova Scotians. We know, and it was in some of the material received, that there's a definite link between air pollution and the increase in hospital visits. As a former paramedic, I've witnessed it first-hand, especially on those hot days when you know there's more pollution in the air, you have an increase in calls, especially in Nova Scotia with the high rate of asthma and those related illnesses.

What hot spots do we have here in Nova Scotia and how does our air quality measure up to other Canadian cities?

MS. VANSTONE: We do have good air in Nova Scotia and we're fortunate about that. With respect to how we measure up to other cities, the standards that have been put in place for large census, metropolitan areas, we have met those standards in Halifax and Sydney.

The places where we have a challenge in terms of our air quality and sometimes see events tend to be in the Annapolis Valley and southwestern Nova Scotia. When those events occur they are largely because of emissions that are coming from other jurisdictions and we experience those in Nova Scotia. But we're seeing real improvements in that as well. Already we can identify improvements in the monitoring results we're getting in the Annapolis Valley, for example, and we can attribute those improvements to reductions that are happening in Ohio. So as more jurisdictions take more aggressive actions themselves on reducing air pollutants, we benefit in Nova Scotia. That's also why it's really important for us in Nova Scotia to have the regulations that we have put in place, not just for our own air quality but also to demonstrate to others that this is what we want to see other jurisdictions do.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Okay, and I know I have a few seconds so my last question is, in light of the Auditor General's Report, do you feel that you have enough staff to deal with monitoring and compliance?

MS. VANSTONE: Yes, I do. The Auditor General's Report provided us with some useful suggestions in terms of improving on how we implement our policies and procedures. It was supportive of the policies and procedures we've put in place, but identified areas like information technology, improvements on record keeping. We will be following up on those over the next two years, as you may have seen in our response to the Auditor General's Report.

MADAM CHAIR: Order, the time has expired for the NDP caucus. I recognize Mr. Gaudet for the Liberal caucus. You have 12 minutes, until 10:33 a.m.

MR. WAYNE GAUDET: Thank you, Madam Chair. First of all I'd like to congratulate the department for having taken the leadership, especially as we've heard here this morning in Atlantic Canada to be the first one to lead off with this electronic recycling program.

Deputy, in your opening comments you've indicated that we've had consultations with other jurisdictions and you've mentioned a number of provinces, especially in western Canada, that already have an e-waste program. I'm just wondering, with those consultations, what kinds of challenges other provinces face, what kinds of difficulties these provinces face, how expensive are we talking about in order to bring forward an electronic program here in Nova Scotia? So I'll start off with those, please.

MS. VANSTONE. Thank you. The first jurisdiction to put this in place was Alberta, I believe, and so that certainly is one of the jurisdictions that we wanted to talk to in terms of their experience and their challenges.

I know some of the elements we see in the program in Nova Scotia, and part of the reason why we're sitting here two months into the implementation of that program and seeing very little non-compliance with the program - we had a very smooth rollout with retailers - is because of the experience that the industry association had from those other jurisdictions and they were able to bring that to what they developed for Nova Scotia.

Specifically with respect to lessons out of Alberta, I'm going to ask Mr. Kenney if, from his research, or maybe Ms. Palko, from your research in the design of this program, what did you hear about the experience in Alberta?

MADAM CHAIR: Ms. Palko.

MS. PALKO: Thank you. I agree with Nancy, first of all, the experiences in the other jurisdictions were really helpful in ensuring that ACES developed a quality program, so that really aided in helping things run smoothly and so on.

A few things that we have learned, one is that - and this is actually happening this Friday, ACES is going to be meeting with a stakeholder advisory group that has been set up, which is represented by environmental groups in Nova Scotia and computers for schools, municipalities and so on. They'll be discussing the development of a reuse standard and this is something that's being developed in other programs and that we're going to be working with the other provinces to try to encourage.

The program, it is clear in the communications that the program is intended for end-of-life products but ACES, and us as well, want to ensure that all of the reuse opportunities are taken advantage of.

MR. GAUDET: We heard that retailers collect handling fees on the sale of new products. I'm just curious, when has the electronics industry here in Nova Scotia started or decided to add the handling fee to the sale of new products? Was it February 1^st?

MS. VANSTONE: Yes, the new environmental handling fee went in place February 1^st, the same date that these products were banned from the landfill.

MR. GAUDET: I'm just curious, I have an old black and white TV, it's probably - maybe I should save it for a collector's item but I'm just curious, in terms of all the electronic materials and products that were sold prior to February 1^st, the fact that there was no handling fee collected on those, is technically the system looking at handling or covering or picking up the costs for anything that was sold prior to that, is that how it works?

MS. VANSTONE: Yes, and that was an important element in the design of the program, because one of the things that we didn't want to have happen is that there would be orphan products that if it was just companies collecting their own products and taking them back, if that was the design of our producer responsibility program, then you would technically have some products, the old black and white TV that had been in the basement for 10 or 15 years, maybe that brand was no longer in business and you wouldn't have anyone collecting that.

The program was designed that all of the electronic waste, including what you've been having in your homes for many years, can all be brought to one of those depots around the province and are left there at no charge to the consumer. That was a really important element of the program and something that industry agreed to in terms of the design.

MR. GAUDET: Deputy, in your opening comments you talked about an independent audit done by a third party to ensure that all fees collected by the industry are turned over.

Does that mean that all sellers of electronic products in Nova Scotia will be audited? Does it mean that the department will ensure that all retailers are subject to remit this money, this handling fee, this tax - whatever you want to call it - over to ACES, who are looking after the program. I'm just curious in terms of the audit, is the department looking at sending someone over to make sure that all handling fees that have been collected are turned over?

MS. VANSTONE: The requirement is for all retailers who want to sell products on the list of items that are banned, they have to register in this program and they have to be compliant with the regulations, as do brand owners who want to bring these products into Nova Scotia or if they assemble them in Nova Scotia. So the audit will be done of the brand owners in terms of the collection, and the retailers, as I understand it, will be part of that overall audit. It's not an audit being done by the government, it's an audit being done by ACES, the industry association, but they will be required to provide that audit information to the province. There is also a requirement for an audit of recyclers in terms of their element of the program and a specific audit of the fund itself.

MR. GAUDET: I'm just curious, does the department have a projection in terms of how much they anticipate will be collected in the run of a year with these handling fees, any projection numbers?

[10:30 a.m.]

MS. VANSTONE: No, we don't. We're waiting to see the initial take-up in the first six months.

MR. GAUDET: Deputy, going back to your introduction this morning, you talked about Phase II of the program being introduced in February 2009. I'm just curious, what is the department looking at bringing on line in 2009?

MS. VANSTONE: Those items were identified in the regulations and they include phones, stereos, DVD players, wireless communication devices, and it was identified that these are not products that were being recycled in some of the other jurisdictions, so there was another year added to develop the program for these additional products.

MR. GAUDET: I'm just thinking here, in the past where companies basically have replaced their computers, a lot of the computers were turned over to the schools, home and schools. With this electronic program, I suspect many companies will turn their old electronic material, software and so forth, over to these depots or collection agencies. I'm just curious, in terms of helping out schools, is there something built into this program to help our schools across the province?

MS. VANSTONE: Yes, that's a very important issue, and Ms. Palko spoke to it a little bit in terms of making sure that what we're doing is still encouraging and facilitating

the reuse of electronic products that are not at the end of their life. They may be at the end of the individual consumer's life, they want to get something new, but they still have a useful purpose. It's a really key element in terms of the stakeholder advisory committee that was referenced. That has environmental groups on it, it has a computers-for-schools group on it, and they are actively working now and making sure that all opportunities for these computers to be reused will be pursued over the course of the program.

MR. GAUDET: Madam Chair, I know my time is coming to an end. I'm just curious, I know we've only been up and running for the last two months, but I'm quite sure the department has probably gone around and checked with our collection centres. Have there been any problems identified? Has the participation been successful up to this point? I'm just curious how the program has been seen by the general public.

MS. VANSTONE: The feedback we're getting to date is that the program is being very well received. First off in terms of the public, there is a real interest by Nova Scotians across the province to do what they can to improve our environment and so there's significant interest in taking up opportunities that allow them to recycle more. We've had very good feedback on the overall concept of the program and people pleased that it's in place.

We haven't received complaints from the retailers that I'm aware of, and I don't believe we've had complaints directed to the department from the depots. Mr. Kenney, is that correct?

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Kenney.

MR KENNEY: I'm not aware of any of those complaints. I just want to add one quick thing about Computers for Schools, for example. I sit on the board for Computers for Schools and they will continue to get their computers from the military, they have those contacts in place. Actually, it's going to save them money because they didn't purchase the original computers, now they don't have to pay for the disposal of those computers, so it's a benefit to that organization.

MR. GAUDET: Thank you, Madam Chair.

MADAM CHAIR: Order, the time has expired for the Liberal caucus. I recognize Mr. Dunn for the PC caucus. You have 12 minutes, until 10:45 a.m.

MR. DUNN: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a few questions on air quality. You mentioned earlier that in consultation with Environment Canada, you have 11 sites and so on. Who in particular determines where these sites are located in Nova Scotia?

MADAM CHAIR: Ms. Vanstone.

MS. VANSTONE: That is quite a technical process in terms of deciding where the right geography is for those sites. So I'm going to ask Mr. McPherson, our Airshed Planner, if he could respond to that question.

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. McPherson.

MR. JOHNNY MCPHERSON: We've had an ambient air monitoring program in place in the province probably since the 1970s. Back to that time sites were selected jointly with Environment Canada, as well, to allow best coverage of the province. Of course, over that period of decades the focus has changed a bit and working with Environment Canada, and also looking at our own needs here, in ensuring that we had total coverage of the province in regard to unique airsheds in the province and sites were selected on that basis.

There are also programs such as the Air Quality Index that need to address populated areas, so we ensure that we have adequate monitoring in larger populated centres. We also recognize that in some of the rural areas there are special interests, like in the Valley, for example, where we need adequate monitoring. Each site is, I guess, a unique determination on where it's established based on a variety of factors.

MR. DUNN: When I think of 11 sites, and that may be adequate, it just seems like there should be more. I'm thinking of industrial areas of our province and so on, and certainly in Pictou County with the plants that are there, like Maritime Steel and Foundries, a pulp and paper plant, a generating plant in Trenton, I feel like we could have 11 sites just in that county alone monitoring air pollution.

With regard to the Trenton Generating Plant, you mentioned you had one complaint in the last fiscal year. I've certainly had more than one complaint. We're all familiar with the Hillside-Trenton Environmental Watch group. They're very active and have been using the media - they've been protesting, they've been contacting the environmental office and so on with regard to the black deposits coming from the Nova Scotia Trenton facility. Again, over the last few decades I certainly have witnessed that black ash over clothes on the line, cars, schools and so on, and not just in the immediate area of the plant but a considerable distance away, depending on the wind on that particular day when the stuff is blowing out of the stack.

Knowing that, I guess the question that I would like to have some sort of answer to is, how much pressure is exerted on Nova Scotia Power? I know they're involved in a new baghouse and so on, and they are going to be spending millions of dollars to make their facility a better facility with regard to air pollution. But just how much pressure is placed on NSP to use other methods to reduce air pollution, or are we limited as to how much pressure we can place on them? I know major investments, anything they do to change, but we know they have to change. Again, I guess just some comment on that particular question.

MS. VANSTONE: I'll just go back to conclude comments that you were making about the density of the air monitoring network, in terms of 11 sites, that it doesn't seem like maybe it would be sufficient. We would certainly extend an invitation to you and any members of this committee if you would like to have a tour of our air monitoring network and see how we operate that network and the kind of data we collect and how we use that. We'd really welcome your interest in that network.

With respect to Trenton, the department has been working with them on the installation of the baghouse technology, and that is proven technology and should have a very significant impact on the capture of the ash emitted from that site.

The department also has other approvals with Nova Scotia Power and specifically with Trenton. We have a couple of industrial approvals with that site and our Environmental Monitoring and Compliance division, the local office there, does work directly with Nova Scotia Power in terms of those approvals and any revisions and updates to the approvals.

With respect to looking at other technologies, perhaps, and other approaches that Nova Scotia Power could potentially use, I'm just going to ask Mr. Murphy if he could talk about some of the discussions with Nova Scotia Power.

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Murphy.

MR. MURPHY: Sure, I could speak to that. We're having discussions with Nova Scotia Power, not just about Trenton but also about broader issues with regard to their entire fleet. Both the province and Nova Scotia Power share the goals of reducing air emissions and we have some fairly significant goals in our Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act that relate to both air pollution and climate change.

We've been involved in discussions with Nova Scotia Power about finding ways to reduce their emissions, both in terms of the goals that we have to 2010 but also longer term goals that we have to 2020. So we continue to have those discussions, as well as discussions with the federal government to link with some of their initiatives.

MR. DUNN: Thank you. You may have touched on this - if you have, I'll just get you to expand a bit - how much of our air quality problems are linked to our reliance on burning coal in Nova Scotia?

MADAM CHAIR: Ms. Vanstone.

MS. VANSTONE: Burning coal is an important part in terms of our air quality in the province and we are doing work to reduce our reliance on coal. That's very important for us, it's important in terms of our ability to meet the goals set in the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act.

There are many ways that we are working on that. One of the most important ones, and in some respects one of the simplest ones, is reducing consumption - the less energy we consume, the less we have to burn coal to produce energy. So that work is very important, the work that's being done by Conserve Nova Scotia and the targets that we have put in place on that, the work on demand-side management with Nova Scotia Power to look at actually reducing the consumption of energy.

We also have targets on moving to more renewable energy, again to take us off of the reliance on coal. You're probably familiar with the target that has been set in the legislation to achieve almost 20 per cent of our energy supply from renewable resources by 2013. We are working on that in terms of investment in in-stream tidal, wind and looking at those options for us to reduce our reliance on and consumption of coal.

MR. DUNN: With regard to clean air, you mentioned earlier about the standards in some of the bigger cities in the country and again, maybe a general comment on this question, just how clean is the air we breathe in Nova Scotia, compared with any other province in Canada?

MS. VANSTONE: We're very fortunate here in terms of our air quality but again, I'm going to ask Mr. Murphy to give you maybe a better sense of how we compare with other jurisdictions.

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Murphy.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you. We have air quality ambient standards that we have in place in our regulations. We compare our ambient levels to those standards, and those standards are equivalent to what you would see across the country.

In general, the air in Nova Scotia is quite good and compares favourably to other jurisdictions. We don't experience the great number and significant smog days that you would see in some of the larger cities, we just don't get that in Nova Scotia. It's not to say that we don't occasionally have degraded air, we do, but not at all to the extent in some of the larger cities.

MR. DUNN: Perhaps one last question. How does the air emission fee system work? I think in your opening comments you mentioned about industries paying the cost, but just a couple of comments perhaps on how this system works.

MADAM CHAIR: Ms. Vanstone.

MS. VANSTONE: The fee requires companies that emit over a certain amount, I think it's 30 tons per year, to provide the fee. There's an amount per ton in terms of how it's calculated. So there are about 30 companies in Nova Scotia that contribute to those fees. The

bulk of the fees come from Nova Scotia Power, but there are other companies involved in this program.

We generated from those fees a little over $1 million last year, $1.1 million through those fees last year, and it goes directly to our air quality program.

[10:45 a.m.]

MR. DUNN: Thank you, Madam Chair.

MADAM CHAIR: The time for questions has now expired. We would invite the deputy minister to make some concluding comments, if you wish, at this time. Ms. Vanstone.

MS. VANSTONE: Thank you very much for the opportunity. I'd just like to close by saying it was a real privilege for us to have an opportunity to come and speak to you about these two programs. Both of them are very important to us in terms of that goal around clean and green and our vision for 2020. We're very pleased with these programs. The air quality one is a more long-standing program that we've been developing over the last several years. The E-Waste Program, as we've talked about, has just come into being in the last couple of months, so that's a program that we're going to be looking forward to over the next few years as we grow that program and we expand the number of products with that program.

I'd like to thank you for your attention and your interest in these important programs. I'd like to encourage you, if you want to know more about the programs, I extend an invitation to have a tour of our air monitoring network. As well, we'd be happy, as the program develops, to set up something similar if people wanted a tour of the E-Waste Program, we'd be very pleased to provide that information. So I'd like to thank you very much for your interest today.

MADAM CHAIR: Thank you and on behalf of the committee, I'd like to thank you and your staff for being here today. There were a number of questions and information to be provided to the committee, and the clerk will be in contact with you to follow up on that information. So again, thank you very much.

At this time I'd like to table correspondence for members of the committee. It's following up from our meeting with the Resource Recovery Fund Board. A motion had been raised with respect to the application of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act applying to the board. The clerk had written on my behalf to the minister and we have received a response. So we'll table that for the information of members of the committee.

The subcommittee met following last week's Public Accounts Committee meeting but there is nothing to report back to the committee. The next meeting of the Public Accounts

Committee will be in two weeks time, when we will have the Department of Justice here with respect to Correctional Services.

At this point we stand adjourned, thank you.

[The committee adjourned at 10:48 a.m.]