Agenda item

Purpose of report:

To seek feedback on the Outline Business Case (OBC) approach for the re-procurement of waste treatment and disposal contracts which are to commence in September 2024.

OUTLINE BUSINESS CASE FOR THE RE-PROCUREMENT OF WASTE TREATMENT & DISPOSAL SERVICES - UPDATE  [Item 6]

Witnesses:

Natalie Bramhall, Cabinet Member for Property & Waste

Carolyn McKenzie, Director of Environment

Alan Horton, Programme Manager

Richard Parkinson, Resources & Circular Economy Group Manager

Key points raised during the discussion:

1.    A Member asked how targets included in the business case were selected and how they compared to other councils. The Cabinet Member for Property & Waste confirmed that targets were drawn from the Surrey Climate Change Strategy 2020 and although no specific benchmarking had taken place, the targets were ambitious.

2.    A Member asked how seriously the in-house option to treat and dispose of Surrey waste had been considered and what research had been undertaken into multiple contracts.  The Cabinet Member for Property & Waste explained that the Council did not have the infrastructure and expertise to carry out all waste treatment requirements such as the disposal of residual waste, the composting of green waste or the recycling of road sweepings and it would not be possible to create a new infrastructure to manage these operations by September 2024. It would be possible to manage some operations around Community Recycling Centres (CRC), waste transfer stations and associated transport operations as well as the operation of food waste as they would be Council owned, however the Council would not have the expertise required for this and would have to rely on transferred staff or buy in. A single contract would result in the contractor having full responsibility; however, it was unlikely that one contractor would provide all services. Disaggregating would result in greater competition and value for money. The Resources & Circular Economy Group Manager confirmed that other councils manage multiple contracts successfully and no difficulties were expected.

3.    A Member asked what work had been done with district and borough councils and any possible efficiencies from working in partnership. The Resources & Circular Economy Group Manager said that contamination was a costly problem for the Council and the greatest savings relate to unifying collection arrangements.   

4.    A Member asked if the carbon footprint of each bid would be balanced against financial savings. A Member asked if the carbon footprint of each bid would be balanced against financial savings. The Cabinet Member for Property & Waste stated that the carbon footprint of the current waste treatment and disposal service had been baselined and that a carbon impact assessment tool would be used to analyse the impact of the various bids when submitted

5.    A Member asked if new contracts might result in extended opening hours for CRCs. The Cabinet Member for Property & Waste explained that current reduced hours were the result of efficiencies from 2015. Pricing options to increase opening hours for the CRCs would be included as part of the re-procurement in addition to the possibility of developing pedestrian access at some locations.

6.    A Member asked if the Council could veto shipping waste material abroad. The Cabinet Member for Property & Waste explained that there were insufficient processing facilities in the UK and to veto the export of material abroad would result in incineration in the UK, significantly impacting cost and carbon impact

7.    The carbon benefits of recycling compared to disposal outweighed the impact of shipping some waste abroad, and in any case, contractors will be subject to UK waste regulations regarding exports.

8.    The Chairman asked if the reported reference to market engagement taking place in February and March 2022 had been completed. The Resources & Circular Economy Group Manager advised that this had been taking place since 2021 and responses to the current round were due to be returned at the end of March 2022 with assessment taking place soon after. The Chairman requested a briefing note on the current round of engagement once this had been assessed. 

9.    The Chairman asked if a disposal facility in Surrey for easily recyclable items had been considered. The Cabinet Member for Property & Waste confirmed that investigations were ongoing into establishing a Materials Recycling Facility (MRF) to sort material into recyclables before being transferred to processing sites throughout the country.

Resolved:

The Select Committee: 

1. Is minded, in principle, to support the multiple-contracts option rather than the continuation of a single provider.

2. Welcomes the good working relationships established with the district and borough councils in Surrey and expects these to be sustained through the contractual processes and beyond.

3. Asks Cabinet Member, as part of the Outline Business Case (OBC) for the re-procurement of Waste treatment and disposal services process and negotiation, to enable the extension of opening hours of Surrey County Council Recycling Centres to cover the entire week; and to develop pedestrian access to recycling facilities. Also, the OBC and the final assessment of bids should also consider and include carbon impact assessments.

4. Requests Service (working with partners) to encourage more joined-up communication and outreach to residents about potential waste contaminations (and how to avoid this) in their weekly bins

5. A short update note about the progress, when the next stage in the process is achieved, to be provided to the Select Committee.