Pac Next Leadership Council Meeting Minutes

PAC NEXT LEADERSHIP COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Held in conjunction with Co-Chair meeting April 23, 2013, 1:00 pm – 4:00 pm Toronto Congress Centre, Mississauga, ON

Kraft Foods Gavinder Bhatia yes PAC NEXT Alan Blake yes Maple Leaf Foods Parbinder Cheeman yes Nestle Canada Inc. Angela Dennis yes PAC Jim Downham yes Sobeys, Inc Frances Gamache yes Coca-Cola Ltd Jennifer Httinger-Sloan yes Tetra Pak Mustan Lalani yes Cascades Boxboard Group Louis Lemaire yes Guy McGuffin Guy McGuffin yes PAC NEXT Rachel Morier yes Strategic AdvantEdge Richard Pileski yes Loblaw Companies Limited Ena Popic yes Target Kim Rapagna yes Walmart Chris West yes yes- Product Stewardship Institute Scott Cassel phone yes- Procter & Gamble Inc. Keith Fanta phone yes- Greenblue Adam Gendell phone yes- Cascades Recovery Inc Dan Lantz phone yes- Costco Luc Lortie phone yes- MGM Management Mark McKenney phone yes- O-I Ryan Modlin phone yes- Dow Chemical Erica Ocampo phone yes- Éco Entreprises Québec Marina Pietrosel phone yes- County of Wellington Das Soligo phone Bemis Dave Carruthers no Schawk Bob Cockerill no Tetra Pak Elisabeth Comere no Fitzpatrick McDonald's Jeff Stilwell no Ice River Springs Ryan Labbe no Regional Municipality of Peel Norman Lee no Cascades Recovery Inc Al Metauro no Tim Hortons Inc Carol Patterson no TerraCycle Inc. Tom Szaky no Maple Leaf Foods Anne Tennier no Rona Inc Thierry Trempe no O-I Usman Valiante no Guelph FT Center Carol Zweep no 0.0 CALL TO ORDER Mr. Alan Blake and Ms. Kim Rapagna welcomed everyone in the room and on the phone to this joint Leadership Council / Co-Chair meeting.

1.0 INTRODUCTION Mr. Alan Blake requested approval of the last council meeting minutes. Mr. Guy McGuffin moved and Ms. Rapagna seconded approval. CARRIED

2.0 SUSTAINABLE PACKAGING DESIGN GUIDE

Mr. Adam Gendell introduced the beta version of the Sustainable Packaging Design Guide (SPDG) web platform via Adobe Connect. The SPDG will feature a primary example ie. Beverage container to be carried throughout the stages of the guide. Links to real examples will be added that use data. The SPDG plans to incorporate information from other committee work such as the EPR summaries.

In response to a request for user interactivity, Mr. Gendell hopes that more features/widgets such as the slide graph tool will be used in other areas of the SPDG that will allow the user to experiment with different packaging attributes e.g. cube utilization. Mr. Luc Lortie commented, “Give me the answer” as a general impression to make a case for sustainable packaging, in which an upfront sell sheet/executive summary using a general product as an example for company executives would be useful. The SPDG provides much useful background information and compliments GPPS and ISO. A select audience should be in mind for use of the SPDG.

Mr. Gendell stated that they are performing further testing. Beta testing involved 20 participating companies and 45 testers to date with more welcome. Testing will seek to answer: Is the flow of information good? Can functions be used in a better, more user-friendly way (e.g. scrolling, hover links for preview pane)? Getting correct links is critical. Mr. Gendell stated that a glossary of definitions is currently in development. The SPDG will need further application to Canada to make it applicable for North America. SPDG should be considered a “work in progress”.

The SPDG team is planning for a "soft" launch for members only in May to allow time to populate with case studies and address feedback from beta testing. Feedback using survey via surveymonkey.com requested for May 2nd. The Leadership Council agreed that a detailed scope of work and timeline for LC is a priority need.

It was suggested to assess a need for disclaimers to provide caution and/or explanation regarding material neutrality, package application, information inclusion/exclusion (e.g. labeling claims excluded due to focus on physical package), etc. Mr. Jim Downham proposed the idea of Design to Reduce Food Waste as possible next phase for the SPDG.

Mr. Gendell and Mr. Blake re-iterated request case studies that provides before and after comparisons. Link to beta SPDG website and feedback questionnaire to be distributed.

3.0 PAC NEXT PROJECTS – ADDRESSING CHALLENGES

Ms. Rachel Morier requested Co-Chairs to discuss challenges and needs to fulfill their committee's 2013 objectives as a means to strategize how objectives can be accomplished.

Sustainable Innovation Committee- Ms. Ena Popic reviewed committee objectives and suggested to get more feedback on the decision trees. Recommendation was made to run another workshop or a webinar to gather feedback and/or plan a joint meeting with the System Optimization/SPDG team. The Systems Optimization team is sought to help with decision trees for other end-of-life scenarios. The decision tree for PET was reviewed at the November

2 5th, 2012 workshop and will be published. It was agreed to plan to use content of the decision trees as a tool for the next phase of SPDG.

Consumer Engagement Committee – Mr. Keith Fanta discussed current committee progress regarding the questionnaire to municipalities when introducing new materials to a recycling program. The committee sought perspectives from brand owners to understand their experience with consumer communication. The focus for consumers is more impactful at end-of-life rather than point-of-purchase, therefore, the goal is to try and make consumers less confused regarding what is and is not recyclable. The committee seeks to identify the best-known methods for communication.

Material Optimization Committee- Mr. McGuffin discussed objectives of the committee to address the issue of labels and adhesives of PET thermoforms. The challenge with the APR Protocol is another “chicken and egg” scenario regarding the supply and demand of APR approved labels – there are a limited amount of approved labels and few requests from brand owners to endorse the protocol. The committee is in the process of making a recommendation similar to RCC press release that will be put as a request for motion from the LC.

Mr. McGuffin also discussed opportunity for PAC NEXT to be involved with the NAPCOR/APR working group that endorses the APR protocol on full shrink labels. Since the CPIA/SO/CIF flexible films final report will soon be released, the committee will look into recommending a pilot program for films and possibly connect with FMI/FPA/Beer Store/CPIA/SO. The committee will work to identify more re- processors, including paper mills, to join PACNEXT and materials team.

Policy Harmonization Committee – Mr. Scott Cassel stated that the committee’s progress remains to refine a list of KPIs and to field test the KPIs through selected programs. However, the challenge is getting dedicated resources to help complete the work, not finding the right expertise. It was proposed to look into funding opportunities and possibly electing another Co-Chair to assist with the project.

There was a comment that “best practices” would be a better term to use than “harmonization” in order to increase likeliness of stakeholder ‘buy in’ and consensus. In order to develop a consensus for the comparison the EPR programs, the committee will need to know how to compare them first and then how to develop best practices from data. It was suggested to use existing data to publish report on the 11 EPR programs. Jim/Alan/Kim/Angela will explore what other support can be offered to get EPR Best Practices summary.

Systems Optimization Committee- Mr. Dan Lantz discussed the decision to drop the comparison of costs between Ontario and Quebec due to too many variables with different data sets. The committee will work using first principles basis as scope must look beyond ON and QC. They will look at single vs. dual streams. Mr. Lantz suggested a different strategy of linking systems and material groups to focus on indentifying end markets for specific material types. Ideally, the issue could be resolved in a similar manner when thermoforms were standardized for grocery retailers. Mr. Lantz asked for more processors, extruders, smelters, WtE, etc. to be at the table. PAC NEXT will check into further resources.

Mr. Lantz raised the issue of materials and acceptance in a constant state of flux, e.g. it is more difficult to ship China due to stricter policies on bales acceptance. This affects PE markets since coloured films is considered a contaminant and films also have to be mixed for recovery (heat is an issue).

4.0 PAC NEXT - NEXT STEPS

Mr. Blake addressed current PAC NEXT membership and strategies to bring increased awareness, including support for webinars. PAC NEXT will be launching a new folder structure on Box.com

3 . PAC NEXT will also be sending an online survey to the general PAC community to assess their insights and interests in packaging sustainability.

Mr. Blake indicated that PAC NEXT is looking at different LCA tools and opportunities that it might provide members. EEQ will share report on their comparison of LCA tools. The general PAC survey will also be used to assess member needs for LCA. A draft of the questionnaire will be shared for feedback.

5.0 OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Jim Downham reminded all to register and spread the news on the Packaging Optimization Summit on May 15, at the PACKEX trade show at the Toronto Congress Centre. Sign-up for the Summit and seminars!!

Meeting concluded at 4:00 pm.

Next meeting: TBA?

Submitted by:

Rachel Morier, PAC NEXT Alan Blake, PAC NEXT Lisa Abraham, PAC