April 2016 Solid Waste Planning Committee

Data Update and Review

1 POPULATION OVERVIEW

2 Population Overview (1 of 3)

Type Geography Population 2000 Population 2015 Percent change TOTALS 322,895 359,454 11.32%

Type Geography Population 2000 Population 2015 Percent change City Ann Arbor 115,012 118,017 2.61% City Chelsea 4,398 4,934 12.19% City Dexter 2,338 4,911 110.05% City Milan 3,065 3,920 27.90% City Saline 8,034 8,897 10.74% City Ypsilanti 22,362 19,985 -10.63%

3 Population Overview (2 of 3)

Type Geography Population 2000 Population 2015 Percent change Township Ann Arbor 3,763 4,271 13.50% Township Augusta 4,813 6,948 44.36% Township Bridgewater 1,646 1,663 1.03% Township Dexter 5,248 6,905 31.57% Township Freedom 1,562 1,461 -6.47% Township Lima 2,517 3,690 46.60% Township Lodi 5,710 6,238 9.25% Township Lyndon 2,728 2,947 8.03% Township Manchester 1,942 2,603 34.04%

4 Population Overview (3 of 3)

Type Geography Population 2000 Population 2015 Percent change Township Northfield 8,252 8,133 -1.44% Township Pittsfield 29,801 38,309 28.55% Township Salem 5,562 5,724 2.91% Township Saline 1,302 2,057 57.99% Township Scio 13,421 17,050 27.04% Township Sharon 1,678 1,729 3.04% Township Superior 10,740 13,026 21.28% Township Sylvan 2,734 2,896 5.93% Township Webster 5,198 6,405 23.22% Township York 7,392 9,003 21.79% Township Ypsilanti 49,182 55,334 12.51% Village Barton 335 318 -5.07% Village Manchester 2,160 2,080 -3.70% TOTALS 322,895 359,454 11.32%

5 Population Breakdown

Webster Northfield Cumulative % Lyndon Twp Dexter Twp Salem Twp Twp Twp of County Population Dexter A2 Twp Chelsea 33% Barton Hills Superior Sylvan Twp Lima Twp Scio Twp Twp 64% Ann Arbor Ypsi 80% Freedom Pittsfield Sharon Twp Lodi Twp Ypsi Twp 100% Twp Twp

Saline Manchester Manchester Bridgewater Saline Twp York Twp Augusta Twp Twp Twp

Milan

6 Population Change Since 2000

Webster Northfield Lyndon Twp Dexter Twp Salem Twp Twp Twp

Dexter A2 Twp Chelsea Barton Hills Superior Sylvan Twp Lima Twp Scio Twp Twp >10% Ann Arbor growth Ypsi 0-10% Freedom Pittsfield Sharon Twp Lodi Twp Ypsi Twp Twp Twp growth

Saline Negative Manchester growth Manchester Bridgewater Saline Twp York Twp Augusta Twp Twp Twp

Milan

7 Population and Household Estimates

% Change Year 1980 1990 2000 2010 2014 Since 2010

Population 264,748 282,934 332,126 344,791 356,874 3.50%

Households 92,937 104,546 125,327 137,193 137,240 0.03%

Persons per Household 2.85 2.71 2.65 2.51 2.60 3.47%

8 Population Forecast

Washtenaw County Population Forecast 400,000 350,000 300,000 5% growth 3% growth over over 10 years 250,000 10 years +17k residents 200,000 +10k residents 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

From SEMCOG 2040 Forecast

(Published in 2012) 9 Forecast Population Change through 2040

10 EMPLOYMENT OVERVIEW

11 Employment by Major Industry Sectors

Employment by Sector

Government Leisure & Hospitality Private Education & Healthcare Services to Households & Firms Knowledge-based Services Retail Trade Wholesale Trade, Transportation,… Manufacturing Natural Resources, Mining, & Construction - 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 2020 2015 2010

12 Employment Projection through 2030

Total Employment 300,000 250,000 2030, 268,528 200,000 2015, 246,721 150,000 100,000 50,000 - 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

13 Forecast Employment Growth through 2040

14 COUNTY SERVICES PROVIDED

15 Recycling Collection Services

Webster Northfield Lyndon Twp Dexter Twp Salem Twp Twp Twp

Dexter A2 Twp Chelsea Service Type Barton Hills Superior Sylvan Twp Lima Twp Scio Twp Twp City/Contract Ann Arbor Subscription Ypsi Freedom Pittsfield Drop Off Only Sharon Twp Lodi Twp Ypsi Twp Twp Twp

Manchester Saline

Manchester Bridgewater Saline Twp York Twp Augusta Twp Twp Twp

Milan

16 Compost/Yard Waste Collection Services

Webster Northfield Lyndon Twp Dexter Twp Salem Twp Twp Twp

Manchester Saline

Manchester Bridgewater Saline Twp York Twp Augusta Twp Twp Twp

Milan

17 Where does Washtenaw County waste go?

WASTE GENERATED IN WASHTENAW COUNTY BY DESTINATION LANDFILL 0% 3% ADVANCED DISPOSAL ARBOR HILLS 1% WOODLAND MEADOWS RDF-VAN 40% BUREN CARLETON FARMS LANDFILL

56% SAUK TRAIL HILLS LANDFILL

OTHER

Source: MDEQ Annual Reports of Solid Waste Landfilled in Michigan, 2015

18 Where does Washtenaw County landfill volume come from?

WASTE DISPOSED IN WASHTENAW COUNTY BY ORIGIN

10% 0% OAKLAND 3% WAYNE 6% MACOMB 43% LIVINGSTON WASHTENAW INGHAM CANADA 38% GENESEE OHIO

Source: MDEQ Annual Reports of Solid Waste Landfilled in Michigan, 2015

19 Alcona Gratiot Missaukee Where the Trash is Going Alger Hillsdale Monroe Allegan Houghton Montcalm Authorized Imports of Solid Waste Alpena Huron Montmorency Antrim Ingham Muskegon Arenac Ionia Newaygo Baraga Iosco Oakland Barry Iron Oceana Authorized Bay Isabella Ogemaw Importing Exporting Quantity (Annual Benzie Jackson Ontonagon County County Gate CY) Berrien Kalamazoo Osceola Washtenaw Jackson 250,000 Branch Kalkaska Oscoda Washtenaw Kalamazoo 200,000 Calhoun Kent Otsego Cass Keewenaw Ottawa Washtenaw Lenawee 750,000 Charlevoix Lake Presque Isle Washtenaw Livingston 750,000 Cheyboygan Lapeer Roscommon Washtenaw Macomb 1,500,000 Chippewa Leelenau Saginaw Washtenaw Monroe 1,500,000 Clare Lenawee Sanilac Washtenaw Oakland 2,000,000 Clinton Livingston Schoolcraft Washtenaw Wayne 2,000,000 Crawford Luce Shiawasee Delta Macomb St. Clair Dickinson Mackinac St. Joseph Eaton Manistee Tuscola Emmet Marquette Van Buren Genesee Mason Wayne Gladwin Mecosta Wexford Gogebic Menominee Grand Traverse Midland 20 Current Export Volume Authorizations Authorized Quantity Exporting County Importing County (Annual Gate CY) Washtenaw Jackson 250,000 Washtenaw Kalamazoo 200,000 Washtenaw Lenawee 750,000 Washtenaw Livingston 750,000 Washtenaw Macomb 1,500,000 Washtenaw Monroe 1,500,000 Washtenaw Oakland 2,000,000 Washtenaw Wayne 2,000,000 Washtenaw Alcona Up to 100% Washtenaw Alger Up to 100% Washtenaw Allegan Up to 100% Washtenaw Alpena Up to 100% Washtenaw Antrim Up to 100% Washtenaw Arenac Up to 100% Washtenaw Baraga Up to 100% Washtenaw Barry Up to 100% Washtenaw Bay Up to 100% Washtenaw Benzie Up to 100% Washtenaw Berrien Up to 100% Washtenaw Branch Up to 100% Washtenaw Calhoun Up to 100% Washtenaw Cass Up to 100% Washtenaw Charlevoix Up to 100% Washtenaw Cheboygan Up to 100% Washtenaw Chippewa Up to 100% Washtenaw Clare Up to 100% 21 Current Export Volume Authorizations Authorized Quantity Exporting County Importing County (Annual Gate CY) Washtenaw Clinton Up to 100% Washtenaw Crawford Up to 100% Washtenaw Delta Up to 100% Washtenaw Dickinson Up to 100% Washtenaw Eaton Up to 100% Washtenaw Emmet Up to 100% Washtenaw Genesee Up to 100% Washtenaw Gladwin Up to 100% Washtenaw Gogebic Up to 100% Washtenaw Grand Traverse Up to 100% Washtenaw Gratiot Up to 100% Washtenaw Hillsdale Up to 100% Washtenaw Houghton Up to 100% Washtenaw Huron Up to 100% Washtenaw Ingham Up to 100% Washtenaw Ionia Up to 100% Washtenaw Iosco Up to 100% Washtenaw Iron Up to 100% Washtenaw Isabella Up to 100% Washtenaw Kalamazoo Up to 100% Washtenaw Kalkaska Up to 100% Washtenaw Kent Up to 100% Washtenaw Keweenaw Up to 100% Washtenaw Lake Up to 100% Washtenaw Lapeer Up to 100% Washtenaw Leelenau Up to 100% Washtenaw Luce Up to 100% Washtenaw Mackinac Up to 100% Washtenaw Manistee Up to 100% 22 Washtenaw Marquette Up to 100% Current Export Volume Authorizations Authorized Quantity Exporting County Importing County (Annual Gate CY) Washtenaw Mason Up to 100% Washtenaw Mecosta Up to 100% Washtenaw Menominee Up to 100% Washtenaw Midland Up to 100% Washtenaw Missaukee Up to 100% Washtenaw Montcalm Up to 100% Washtenaw Montmorency Up to 100% Washtenaw Muskegon Up to 100% Washtenaw Newaygo Up to 100% Washtenaw Oceana Up to 100% Washtenaw Ogemaw Up to 100% Washtenaw Ontonagon Up to 100% Washtenaw Osceola Up to 100% Washtenaw Oscoda Up to 100% Washtenaw Otsego Up to 100% Washtenaw Ottawa Up to 100% Washtenaw Presque Isle Up to 100% Washtenaw Roscommon Up to 100% Washtenaw Saginaw Up to 100% Washtenaw Salinac Up to 100% Washtenaw Schoolcraft Up to 100% Washtenaw Shiawassee Up to 100% Washtenaw St. Clair Up to 100% Washtenaw St. Joseph Up to 100% Washtenaw Tuscola Up to 100% Washtenaw Van Buren Up to 100% 23 Washtenaw Wexford Up to 100% Where Do Recyclables Go?

Curbside Haulers Curbside Processors Drop-off Vendors Drop-off Processors City of Ypsilanti Ann Arbor MRF Modern Waste Ann Arbor MRF Recycle Ann Arbor Great Lakes Recycling Recycle Ann Arbor Great Lakes Recycling (ReCommunity) Republic Services WWRA Republic Services WWRA Steven’s Disposal Waste Management Waste WWRA Management WWRA

What Type of Recyclables are Accepted

Plastics

Community

Phone Books Phone Cans Aluminum/Tin Waste Food Newspaper Cardboard Magazines Paper Office Boxboard Glass Aluminum Scrap Steel Scrap Plastic (PET) #1 Plastic (HDPE) #2 #3 Plastics#4 Plastics#5 Plastics#6 Plastics#7 Plastics Rigid Bulky Bags Plastic Styrofoam Cartons Textiles Ceramics Oil Motor OilFilters Batteries Auto Batteries Household Goods White Waste Yard Ann Arbor City X Ann Arbor Township X X Barton Hills Chelsea City Dexter City Manchester Village Milan City Pittsfield Township Saline City Sharon Township Superior Township Ypsilanti City Ypsilanti Township Materials accepted during 1999 SWMP 25 Add’l Materials accepted currently Where Does Compost Go?

Curbside Haulers Curbside Processors Drop-off Vendors Drop-off Processors City of Ann Arbor Ann Arbor City of Ann Arbor Arbor Hills City of Dexter Arbor Hills TDF Hauling Republic Services Republic Services City of Dexter Ypsilanti Township Tuthill Farms Waste Management Waste Management Tuthill Farms

26 WASTE GENERATION AND DIVERSION

27 Total Residential Waste Generation – Data Received

3 2.5 2 1.5 2.55 1 2.29 1.93 2.26 0.5 0 City of Ann Arbor City of Saline City of Milan City of Dexter Total Waste Generation (Lbs/Person/Day) Average (Weighted for Population

28 Residential Diversion – Data Received

1200.00

1000.00

800.00 346 307

600.00 204 474 377 440 400.00 818 625 499 200.00 392 418 312 20 178 0.00 40 City of Ann Ypsilanti Twp City of Saline City of Milan City of Dexter Lodi Twp City of Chelsea WWRA - Arbor Combined Recycling Compost Average Curbside Recycling (Weighted for Population) Average Curbside Compost (Weighted for population)

Lbs/HH/Year

29 Residential Waste Generation and Diversion, Modeled

Total Tons Tons Tons Total Percent Count Population Recycled Composted Disposed Generation Diversion

Actual Data 5 191,079 18,214 12,618 44,504 75,336 41%

Modeled/ Mix of Data 23 168,375 10,122 5,614 58,133 73,869 21%

Add’l Bottle Bill Diversion N/A 3,861

Total 28 359,454 32,197 18,232 102,636 153,066 33%

30 Residential Waste and Recycling, Projection

2015 2020 2025 2030

Population (Adj.Forecast) 359,454 362,789 369,044 376,935

Waste Generation (Tons) 153,066 154,486 157,150 160,510

Percent Diversion 33% 33% 33% 33% Baseline Waste Disposed (Tons) 102,636 103,589 105,375 107,628

5% Increase in Diversion 101,044 102,786 104,984

10% Increase in Diversion 95,700 97,350 99,431

31 Commercial Waste and Recycling, Modeled

Generation Rate 2015 Waste (Lbs/Employee Generation Sector 2015 Employees /Day) (Tons) Natural Resources, Mining, & Construction 8,100 8.60 8,707 Manufacturing 13,142 8.60 14,126 Wholesale Trade, Transportation, Warehousing, & Utilities 10,427 7.29 9,499 Retail Trade 19,216 5.55 13,331 Knowledge-based Services 47,507 1.24 7,364 Services to Households & Firms 25,811 8.60 27,744 Private Education & Healthcare 36,036 8.60 38,735 Leisure & Hospitality 19,224 10.69 25,696 Government 67,258 8.60 72,295 Total 246,721 217,496 Diversion 12% (Est) 26,099 Disposed 191,396 32 Commercial Waste and Recycling, Projected

2015 2020 2025 2030

Employment (Forecast) 246,721 252,598 260,024 268,528

Waste Generation (Tons) 217,496 222,529 229,948 238,566

Percent Diversion 12% 12% 12% 12%

Waste Disposed (Tons) 191,396 195,826 202,354 209,938

5% Increase in Diversion 194,491 200,974 208,507

10% Increase in Diversion 191,687 198,077 205,501

33 Landfill Needs – Washtenaw County Only

2015 2020 2025 2030

Residential Waste 102,636 103,589 105,375 107,628

Commercial/Industrial Waste 191,396 195,826 202,354 209,938

Total Waste (Tons) 294,032 299,415 307,729 317,566

Total Waste (CY) 882,097 898,244 923,187 952,699 Total (CY) - 5% Increase in Diversion 886,604 911,281 940,473 Total (CY) - 10% Increase in Diversion 862,160 886,281 914,796

34 SWOT Analysis – Review and Discussion

35 Overview of SWOT Analysis

POSITIVE NEGATIVE

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

INTERNAL

OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

EXTERNAL

36 Target Areas for Review

• Recycling • Commercial Recycling • Solid Waste • Organics • C&D • County Coordinated Programs

37 RECYCLING - STRENGTHS

• Availability of single-stream, curbside service, and use of carts • Comprehensive program – accepts a lot of materials between curbside, and drop-off programs • Good service in urban/suburban areas for single- family • Ann Arbor residents – single-family, multi-family all have recycling • Multiple options available between curbside, drop- off • Chelsea “pay as you throw” trash service encourages recycling

38 RECYCLING - WEAKNESSES • Types of materials accepted are not • City carts showing age, require uniform across the county replacement • Poor measurement of diversion by • Costs – rural is more expensive recycling for curbside service compared to • Competing messaging from urban/suburban service areas different coordinating groups – • Market prices for recyclables public and private • Different level of services • Lack of partnerships available across the county – no • Challenge of materials like plastic consistency bags, glass, and contamination in • Education is challenging, not recycling stream consistent, and could help to • Education improve participation and • Turnover in large rental market recovery; could county help with within county unified website with correct information

39 RECYCLING - OPPORTUNITIES

• People are willing to do the • Participation incentives right thing • More multi-family services • Food waste diversion • C&D • More options for bulky • Governor’s recycling waste and other materials support not collected curbside • Instate markets for • Focus on reduce and reuse materials – plastics, paper • More education, county mill wide • Online information more • More consistent messages accessible • More consistent services • Partnerships

RECYCLING - THREATS

• End markets • Need to change • Commodity prices mindsets, attitudes, • Solid waste millage funds behaviors • Better planning for low could be used more times with MRFs, MRF effectively operators • Cheap landfill rates • governments – then • Lack of municipal when markets are bad, the impact will be funding lessened • Lack of willingness to • Public perception that introduce taxes to recycling should pay support services for itself • Oil Industry

41 COMMERCIAL RECYCLING - STRENGTHS

• An ordinance is strong driver, such as Ann Arbor

42 COMMERCIAL RECYCLING - WEAKNESSES

• No county ordinance • Lack of access to • Limited resources to commercial recycling support commercial services recycling effort from • Challenges within data, staffing, and businesses – employee funding turnover, costs, absentee • Lack of incentives to site managers, contracts entice businesses - they for janitor services do need a carrot not include recycling, • City program is not education enforced, potential yet • Not part of bigger to be realized picture in county

43 COMMERCIAL RECYCLING - OPPORTUNITIES

• Collaboration • Develop resources and • Working with national support commercial operations • Posters/educational materials • Pilots • Partner with county • Work to improve sanitarians to participation and distribute recovery in Ann Arbor • Local case studies • Look at voluntary certifications

44 COMMERCIAL RECYCLING - THREATS

• End markets • High cost of entry – may require initial investments • High contamination • Cost to businesses • Lack of municipal support • One more thing for a business to think about

45 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION & DISPOSAL - STRENGTHS

• Lots of regional landfill capacity • Very accessible and very cheap • Not many!

46 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION & DISPOSAL - WEAKNESSES

• Disposable society • Lack of data to • No clear incentive understand efficiency of programs for waste clean-up days, drop-off diversion station diversion • Reluctance by • Cheap disposal municipalities to switch challenges waste to more efficient single diversion efforts hauler contracts • Too many trucks on the • Too frequent collection road, impacts on of solid waste infrastructure

47 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION & DISPOSAL - OPPORTUNITIES

• Organics collection • Decouple waste • Better data collection haulers and landfill and metrics related to operators diversion cost/benefit • Get recyclables out of • Expanding landfill will trash keep prices low with • Find a way to “require” regional competition recycling from the various trash haulers

48 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION & DISPOSAL - THREATS

• Commodity prices • Too cheap landfills • Lobby to bury organics

49 YARD WASTE & FOOD WASTE - STRENGTHS

• City collection diverts a lot of leaves (Ann Arbor) • City compost site has capacity for growth, well managed (Ann Arbor) • Chelsea compost efforts

50 YARD WASTE & FOOD WASTE - WEAKNESSES

• Limited access to • A2 can be model, if it services can’t work here, then • Lack of infrastructure others will not follow • Food waste not • A2 Compost site – are allowed in stream operations following • No/limited commercial standards programs • County lags behind

51 YARD WASTE & FOOD WASTE - OPPORTUNITIES

• Food waste • Residential • Special events/outdoor festivals • Markets for finish composted • MDOT

52 YARD WASTE & FOOD WASTE - THREATS

• Improper management • Competing interests of compost facilities with landfills that lead to odors, complaints • Similar concerns around residential collection – odors • State, local infrastructure is lacking

53 CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION WASTE - STRENGTHS

• Access via RRA’s DOS, ReUse Center and C&D facility

54 CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION WASTE - WEAKNESSES

• No expectation, requirement, or incentive for diversion • Other RAA options, are there other outlets? • Limited awareness to the value of C&D diversion

55 CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION WASTE - OPPORTUNITIES

• County could adopt an • Training and ordinance to require certification of minimum level of contractors and bldg. recovery on jobs of a operators certain size. • The amount of • More infrastructure material that can be • Expand current options recovered. at DOS, other locations

56 CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION WASTE – THREATS

• Cheap landfill rates • Costs to recover C&D • Lack of understanding of the benefits

57 Outreach Activities

58 Outreach Activities • Draft article about planning process to distribute to LUG – COMPLETE • Overview and where to find more info • Public Feedback Survey - COMPLETE • Infographics - COMPLETE • Visuals to help tell the story of the planning process and progress • Social Media – ONGOING • Leverage county Facebook as method to connect with general public; 2x per month on SWMP Process • Green Media – COMING SOON • Use County resources like radio and video • Meeting Locations around County – IN PROGRESS • Salem Township Hall

59 More on the Survey

Purpose - Provide feedback about services people use - Frequency - Rank importance of programs - Other issues that matter - Demographic information - Drop-off site use - https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/SWPC2016

60 Outreach Activities – Survey Handout

61 Community Updates

62 Arbor Hills Odor Issues

• Early January complaints of noxious odors • February 19th meeting at Northville Twp with DEQ Air Quality and Solid Waste Divisions and approximately 100 citizens • Air Monitoring revealed detectable non-methane hydrocarbon below air quality levels that cause short term or long term health problems but at an irritating level • Notices of violation were given to Advanced Disposal • Additional wells for gas removal system installed • Republic, owner of the gas removal system, Advanced Disposal owner of landfill and Fortistar owner of the gas to energy facility. • Reports and sampling results available on-line in the DEQ Air Quality website

63 County Updates -Waste Diversion Site Feasibility Project • Solid Waste Planning provides an opportunity to identify facilities that will be consistent with the Plan. • Opportunity to identify current programming and potential • programs and siting facilities to be included in the plan • Assess needs and funding for programs to provide waste diversion opportunities at the most economic means • Washtenaw County and City of Ann Arbor partnered to hire consultant to identify where improvements can be made • Current facilities need upgrades • Create partnerships with agencies and local units of government

64 County Updates -Waste Diversion Site Feasibility Project Development of a Conceptual Plan and Design • Develop preliminary design concepts for up to 3 different site configurations, including a comprehensive Drop Off Station (DOS) and satellite facilities. This will include the Identification of operational features and capabilities of facilities; • Identify and evaluate potential sites in the County based on the preliminary design concepts and select a preferred site(s). This will include the determination of alternative solutions to meet the County’s waste diversion needs that are to be provided at the new expanded Drop-Off Station(s), including anticipated future program areas; and • Develop preliminary Capital and Operating Budget and estimate the economic feasibility study and determine the cost benefit analysis and breakpoints for economic sustainability, including but not limited to sources and methods for long-term funding.

65 County Updates -Waste Diversion Site Feasibility Project Stakeholder Participation • Develop a Community Outreach Plan for the stakeholders identified by the County. This plan will define the goals and objectives of the public involvement effort discuss the public involvement techniques and any public participation materials. Coordinated with the SWMPC stakeholder process. • Develop and maintain a project webpage, which will be the primary portal for meaningful public engagement. The purposes of this page will be twofold: (1) to inform the public about the initiative and related details/analysis/considerations, and (2) to furnish the public with an easily accessible forum for providing feedback. • RRS will facilitate four (4) public outreach meetings with key stakeholders as the site selection and conceptual designs are developed and will focus on stakeholders in areas where new or expanded Drop Off Station (DOS) and satellite facilities are proposed. • RRS will provide the Conceptual Plan and information on key development areas in a PowerPoint presentation at four (4) Washtenaw County and City of Ann Arbor meetings, including the Washtenaw County Board of Public Works, Washtenaw County Solid Waste Planning Committee, the County Board of Commissioners and the Ann Arbor City Council. Final Report – Delivered to County and City of Ann Arbor

66 County Updates -Waste Diversion Site Feasibility Project TIMELINE

MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT Task Group 1 PROJECT INITIATION Task 1.1 Kickoff Meeting XX Task Group 2 STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION Task 2.1 Community Outreach Plan XX XX Task 2.2 Stakeholder Feedback XX XX XXXX XX Task 2.3 Project Website XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Task Group 3: CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND REPORT Task 3.1 Conceptual Design XXXX XXXX XX Task 3.2 Existing and New Site Identification Review XX XXXX XXXX Task 3.3: Facility Specifications and Cost Analysis XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Task 3.4 Final Report XX XXXX Task Group 4 PROJECT MANAGEMENT Task 4.1 Management XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X- denotes One Week

67 SWPC Member Updates?

• Relevant projects, updates from your community or organization?

68 Adjourn