J

T O

Agenda Item # Page #

CHAIR AND MEMBERS ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

MEETING ON JULY 9,2007

FROM: PAT McNALLY, P. ENG. DIRECTOR -WATER, ENVIRONMENT & CUSTOMER RELATIONS

I SUBJECT: 1 DRINKING WATER SOURCE PROTECTION: COMMllTEE FORMATION 1

RECOMMENDATION

That, on the recommendation of the Director - Water, Environment & Customer Relations,

a) this report on Drinking Water Source Protection, BE RECEIVED for information, and b) the Environment & Transportation Committee PROVIDE DIRECTION with respect to

possible representation on Source Water Protection Committees.

I1 II il

1 PREVIOUS REPORTS PERTlNENT TO THIS MATTER I1 Report to Environment and Transportation Committee on March 20/06, Agenda Item # I3 - Source Water Protection: Grant Funding Agreement with MOE for Technical Studies.

Report to Environment and Transportation Committee on May 30/05, Agenda Item # I 3 - Update: Drinking Water Source Protection.

Report to Environment and Transportation Committee on July 26/04, Agenda Item #3 - City response to the Environmental Bill of Rights posting concerning the Proposed Drinking Water Source Protection Act.

BACKGROUND

Purpose This report provides information pertaining to the status of the legislation and the proposed process for establishing Committees for Source Water Protection. Many of the details have yet to be released through proposed regulations however it is expected that the City of London will contribute to the creation of up to three Source Water Protection Plans, under the requirements of the new Clean Wafer Act. The Act has been proclaimed and regulations are still outstanding but expected by early July with tight time frames for committee formation. This report is partly in response to a memo sent by Chris Tasker, Source Protection Manager to Jeff Fielding, CEO (see Appendix 1) requesting London to designate a committee member in anticipation of these regulations. Anticipated time frames are also included in Appendix #I.

Context The Clean Wafer Act provides legislative provisions necessary for the development of Source Water Protection Plans. These plans are being proposed across Ontario to better understand, manage and protect drinking water. Drinking water originates from a number of interrelated sources that are all components of the hydrologic cycle, the natural recycling process for the finite resource called water. The abundant supply of fresh water that Ontario residents have historically utilized has been impacted by management decisions and population increases that will continue to impact these resources in the future. These plans are proposed to ensure the continued safety of all water supplies on a Provincial basis. Conservation Authorities will be the lead agency on plan preparation providing scientific, technical and administrative support.

Discussion The City of London is located within two proposed Planning Regions (Thames Sydenham and Lake Erie) for source water protection reflecting the two basins to which our surface water flows. A third Region (Ausable Bayfield Maitland) contains the Lake Huron Regional Water Supply facility in which the City has an interest. City staff resources will therefore be required to monitor the committees of these Planning Regions with the possibility of membership on one or both. City staff may also have a role to play in the various sub-committees yet to be formed. The committees have not yet been formed and are proposed to have a minimum of 5 municipal representatives in a minimum 16 member committee.

-

-

Agenda Item # Page #

nn

P 2

Plan preparation (Le. the process and staffing) at the Conservation Authorities is 100% funded by the Provincial Government. Impact on the City’s resources cannot be determined at this time until more details are available.

City interests are currently expected to focus on possible implications to: Land use planning;

Abandoned wells; and Drinking water.

Pollution control plant / Storm water management;

As noted in the attached memo (see Appendix #I), membership on the Committee can be either an elected official or senior staff. The expectation is that the member will represent the interests of the municipality. In Mr. Tasker’s memo of June 18, 2007, he states in part:

“We have received some inquires as to whether the committee members should be elected officials, staff or others. These options were discussed during our municipal SWP forums and all are options for the municipalities to jointly consider, each option with its own advantages. The work is of a technical nature however the plan will have implications on land use activities in vulnerable areas. ”

.F

At the present time, draft regulations stipulate that existing Conservation Authority Board of Directors may NOT be elected to sit as members of the Source Water Protection Committee. We have submitted comments to EBR (see Appendix #2) requesting that this requirement be changed. The Source Water Protection Committee is expected to sit for a minimum of 5 years,

If the Thames Sydenham Source Water Protection Region is provided with the 22 member committee requested by the Conservation Authorities, the City of London is proposed to have one of seven municipal members. If, however, the regulations direct this Region to have only 16 member committee, the City of London will be required to share a seat with the 5 municipal members. We provided comments previously (see Appendix #3) requesting committee sizes larger than 16 members.

The Chairperson of each Source Water Protection Region will be chosen from respondents to advertisements currently being circulated in area newspapers seeking expressions of interest from suitable candidates, The Minister of the Environment will make the final decision regarding the filling of the chair position.

Council should give consideration to the potential City of London position on the Thames Sydenham Source Water Protection Committee, It should be noted that the Joint Water Boards of the Regional Water Supply System are actively seeking industry positions on the other two Source Water Protection Committees (Lake Erie and Ausable Bayfield Maitland).

Summary The Clean Wafer Act proposes legislative provisions necessary for the development of source protection plans. These plans will be prepared and approved by associated committees. Membership on this committee is currently being sought. The City of London needs to determine who (elected official or staff) should best represent their interests on these committees.

Acknowledgements This report was prepared by Patrick Donnelly, Urban Watershed Program Manager.

F

P

VIRONMENT 8

Agenda Item # Page #

mm 3

Appendix #I - June 18/07 Memo from Chris Tasker, Source Protection Project Manager

Appendix #2 - EBR comment letter of May 9/07 regarding Council Resolution of April 30 regarding the formation of Source Water Protection Committees

Appendix #3 - EBR comment letter of January 31/07 regarding Source Water Protection Committee size and structure

cc: Peter Steblin, P.Eng. -General Manager of EESD and City Engineer Rob Panzer, MCIP, RPP - General Manager of Planning and Development Kevin Bain, City Clerk

y \ShareU\EOlwaJts\walelJhed\i0urCe water prolecl~on\elc repor7 0621 07 doc

* - * APPENDIX 1

,-

Memo to: Municipal Clerks and CAOs Cc: Water System operators and Pianners From: Chris Tasker, Date: Monday, June 18,2007

Re:

Source Protectlon Project Manager Preparation for Source Protection Committee Formation

On April 30, municipalities were asked for comments on our Discussion Paper on Participation in the Drinking Water Source Protection Planning Process (the most recent version is availablp on our web site at the web address in the footer). As very few comments were received, we would suggest that municipalities prepare to jointly nominate members based on the groupings contained in Table 3 of the discussion paper (copy of table is attached). This is, however, contingent on the province accepting our request for a Source Protection Committee (SPC) size of 22 (with 7 municipal) members. Councils should also consider options related to a committee size of 16 (5 municipal members) as proposed in the draft regulations. We are still encouraging comments 011 the discussion paper and will be continuing to revise the paper to contain more description around the committee

#-- formation processes.

We will not be asking for formal nominations for municipal committee members until the regulations come into effect. We are, however, posting ads asking for expressions of interest for the chair and committee members focused on other sector groups. These postings are intended to allow us to generate contact lists to contact interested parties directly when we ask for applications/ nominations. We expect that parts of the act and regulations may come into effect around the end of June. According to the draft regulations, within 30 days of the regulations coming into effect, Source Protection Authorities (Conservation Authorities) will be required to provide notice to the stakeholders asking that they submit nominations for committee members. According to the draft regulations, a letter to municipalities would require municipalities to jointly nominate the municipal members within 45 days. If municipalities cannot jointly nominate the members within that period, the Source Protection Authority would be required to appoint members. The attached anticipated schedule suggests that the formal notification of municipalities would happen around July 9. As you can see from the deadlines contained in the draft regulations and reflected in the attached schedule, it will be important that municipalities are prepared to provide the nominations when requested and have discussed the nominations with the other municipalities that they are grouped with (please refer to the attached table from the discussion'paper). It is important that municipalities come to an agreement so that they may jointly nominate members so that this important decision not be left to the striking committee formed by.the three CAS for committee member appointment. F

* nttp:/ l~.so.rcewerprntect on.on.cal

We have received some inquiries as to whether the committee members should be elected officials, staff or others. These options were discussed during our municipal SWP forums and all are options for the municipalities to jointly consider, each option with its own advantages. The work is of a technical nature however the plan will have implications on land use activities in vulnerable areas. It will be important that municipalities jointly nominate SPC members who are able to best represent the interests ofthe municipalities. It will also be important that the members are able to work effectively with the other members of the committee who will each represent various stakeholder groups and interests in the region.

I hope that this information will assist councils as they prepare to jointly nominate municipal members to the Source Protection Committee. I understand that these draft regulations propose very tight deadlines, so if there are any questions on this process I would encourage you to contact me at 519-451-2800x238 or by email at ta~kerc@thamesriver.on.ca or if you prefer contact your local Conservation Authority.

-- - h:ip w v sot~'cewalerp-oTect'on on cai Page 2 of 5

'. Table 3 Option 2: Municipal Groupings by County/Large City (from Discussion Paper on Participation in the Drinking Water Source Protection Planning Process)

e

F

,-

aeographic Area :hatham-Kent, Essex

.ambton

London Middlesex

Elgin

Oxford

Total: 7 municipal me1

Bunicipaliies :hathamKent issex County .earnington

. .

.akeshore

.arnbton County jarnia Joint Edward 3 Clair 'iyrnpton-Wyoming Znniskillen Petrolia flatwick Brooke-Alvinston Dawn-Euphemia Lambton Shores

Southwest Middlesex Newbury Lucan-Biddulph Elgin County West Elgin Dutton-Dunwich Southwold Oxford County City of Woodstock ingersoll Zorra Southwest Oxford Norwich '' ' ' . East Zorra-Tavistock Blandford-Bienheirn PerthCounty, . . Stratford' St Marys West Perth Perth East Perth South North Perth Huron County.. Huron East - ' '

South Huron iers

6/18/2007 Anticipated Source Protection Committee Formation Process Thames, Sydenham &Region

1 b f 2 .

. _. ... . . -. . - . - . . _ _ _ _ .. . .

committee

Municipal memo update 1

Expressions of 20-Jun-2007 25-Jun-2007 Ads in papers of the region asking for expressions interest Ads

committee be formed with 2,board members from each of the 3 CAS in the region. A follow-Up to the April 30 memo to municipalities asking for comments on the Discussion paper. Will include detail on anticipated schedule.

of interest in committee and chair positions. Those expressing an interest will be notified directly of the due date and process for submitting applications and nominations.

A letter to stakeholder groups, similar to municipal update memo, advising them of the process and expected schedule for committee formation.

14-Jun-2007

Notification of stakeholder groups

22-Jun-2007

Anticipated 1-Jul-2007 This date isassumed as the date that the Regulations regu1atiQns:wiii come into effect. Many of the passing regulatory requirements for this schedule are

dependant on this date.

Finalize discussion 1-Jul-2007 8-Jul-2007 Once regulations are in place the discussion paper paper will be revised to reflect the regulations and include

such details as this schedule, position descriptions, appiicationlnomination requirements, etc.

A further update to municipalities would be sent out subsequent to the regulations coming into effect. This memo would confirm the schedule and advise the municipalities of the date to expect a request for nominations. it would confirm the requirements based on the regulations enacted.

Memo to municipalities update 2

3-Jul-2007

Letter to 9-Jul-2007 Formal letter, as required by the regulations, municipalities requesting municipal nominations and confirming

the deadline for nominations. This letter wiii be sent by registered mail to the clerks of each municipality or through other delivery mechanisms as allowed for in the regulations or guidance.

Municipal 9-Jul-2007 23-Aug-2007 Nomination period as identified in the drafl Nomination Period regulations. This period is determined by the date

of the letter to'municipalities. it is required to be sent (based on the drafl regulations) within 30 days of the regulations coming into effect. The draft regulations require that nominations be submitted,in 45 days and that the SPAforms the committee in 50 days.

Advertise for Chair 6-Jul-2007 12-Jui-2007 Formal ad for chair applications will be piaced in applications daily and weekly papers in the Region. it will also

be placed on our web site with additional details such as position description and application requirements.

611 812007 Anticipated Source Protection Committee Formation Process Thames, Sydenham &Region

Closina date for 19-hi-2007 Ciosina date for aaalications will need to allow ~ I . .

chair applications striking committee to make recommendations to the Minister of the Environment on or about August 1 so that appointments can be made.

As noted above the target date has been requested by the MOE so that recommendations may be considered by the minister.

Submit chair nominations to minister

Post for committee 1-Jui-2007 31-Jul-2007 We will post on our web site a request for applications1 applicationslnominations for the committee nominations

2-Aug-2007

members as soon afler the regulations come into effect as possible. The draft regulation would require that the posting happens within 30 days of the regulation coming into effect.

Ad for committee 31-Jul-2007 31-Jul-2007 Three things need to happen within 30 days of the applications1 regulations coming into effect. The committee nominations must then be formed within 50 days of the last

item. For this reason the ad will placed as close to 30 days from the regulations coming into effect as possible, to maximize the time available for the candidates to apply.

Information 7-Aug-2007 13-Aug-2007 Stakeholder forums have been held with many of meetings the sectors with an interest in Source Protection.

Additional sessions are planned at this time with a more general focus and will allow for additional information and discussions on the committee formation.

21-Aug-2007 The draft regulations require a 21 day posting period. This closing date will allow the striking committee to review the appiicationslnominations and determine which seats will require an interview process for the appointment of the committee member.

required, according to the draft regulations, within 50 days of the later of the posting or advertisement for the positions.

Reports on the committee appointments and chair recommendations would be submitted to the MOE and the 3 CA boards at their September meetings.

19-Sep-2007 A report summarizing the process and results of the committee formation will be posted on the web site and submitted to the MOE.

r

Closing date for committee applications/ nominations

Committee 31-Jui-2007 19-Sep-2007 Committee member appointment would be formation required

Report to CA Boards

Submit Report to MOE

APPENDIX 2

James Scott, Senior Policy Analyst Strategic Policy Branch Ministry of the Environment 135 St. Clair Avenue West, 11 th floor Toronto, Ontario, M4V 1P5

FAX: (416) 314-2976 Dear Mr. Scott:

RE: Comments on the Draft Regulations - Clean Water Act pertaining to the formation of Source Water Protection Committees (EBR Registry # 040-0122)

.This submission is made to the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) on behalf of the City of London regarding the above referenced matter. A copy of the resolution of Council from the April 30, 207 Council Meeting addressing concerns related to the Thames Sydenham Source Protection Region is attached for your reference.

The City is supportive of the underlying principles behind Source Water Protection and the Clean Water Act. However, we reiterate our previous comments of January 31,2007 on the previous discussion paper and our underlying concern with regards to the uncertainty of future implementation costs.

City of London comments are as follows:

r

a) Municipal representation on the Committee. Draft reaulations irnoose a restriction on Conservarion Authoritv 6oa:o Members nor

~I

being eligible to sit on the Source Protection Committees.

Municipalities will have the buik'of the responsibiiityfor implementing source protection plans. The scope of these responsibilities is greaterthan any other stakeholder proposed on the committee. These responsibilities dictate that collectively municipalities should have the majority of members on the committee.

Comment: We request the removal of the restriction on Conservation Authority Board Members sitting on the Source Protection Committees, should s u c h a member be nominated by a municipality or by another sector or group, a n d

Comment: MOE provide flexibility for 51% of the committee include representation from munlcipallties (i.e. a majority).

The geographic situation of London places us in two (2) Source Protection Regions (Thames Sydenham and Lake Erie) as well as having an interest in a third Region

F

b) Size of t he Committees

F

."

r

(Ausable Maitland) which includes Grand Bend where the Lake Huron Water Supply Plant is located. The MOE draft regulations and discussion paper suggests keeping committee numbers to sixteen (16) and municipal reps to five (5) which means that the 34 municipalities that make up the Thames Sydenham are vying for 5 positions. That total number of municipalities is closer to 50 in the Lake Erie region and will be near 25 in the Ausabie Maitland.

Comment: We support the recommendation made by the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority that the Source Protection Committee size be 21 as opposed to the 15 set out in the draft regulation, and

Comment: We support the recommendation made by the Grand RIver Conservation Authority that the Source Protection Committee size be 25 as opposed to 15 set out in the draft regulation, and

Comment: The City of London requests representation on all 3 committees,

c) Regional Water Supply participation in southwestern Ontario. over 6.000 sa. km includina 14 municiDaiities and some .. - 500,000 customers are served with drihking water b'; the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System and the Eigin Area Primary Water Supply System as operated by their respective Joint Board of Management. This regional system is unique to Ontario.

Comment: A representative from the Joint Board of Management should be ensured to sit on both Lake Erie and Ausable Maitland Source Protection Committees. This can be achieved by seeking Source Protection Committee Board Members who share responsibilities on the Joint Boards. Most members of the Joint Boards are a municipal council representative.

The City of London remains concerned with the financial costs of implement the Source Water initiative. We strongly encourage the Ministry to establish implementation funding to assist in these future endeavours.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important initiative.

Sincerely, h

Environmental and Engineering Services Department

Y\Shared\SolWaste\wtershEd~ource Water Protection\Letter response to EBR posting Jan 07.doo

C.C. Pete Stebiin, General Manager and City Engineer Andrew Henry, Regional Water Supply Lorrie Minshall -Source Water Protection (GRCA) Chris Tasker - Source Water Protection (UTRCA) Cathy Brown - Source Water Protection (ABCA)

300 Dufferin Avenue P.O. Box5035 London, ON N6A4LS

London C A N A D A

May 1,2007

James Scott, Senior Policy Analyst Ministry of the Environment Strategic Policy Branch Floor 11,135 St. CiairAvenue West Toronto, ON M4V 1P5

I hereby certify that the Municipal Council, at its session held on April 30, 2007, resolved:

That the following actions be taken with respect to the draft Ontario Regulations underthe Ciean WaferAcf, 2006 pertaining to the formation of Source Protection Committees:

(a) the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority's recommendation that the Source Protection Committee size be 21, as opposed to the 15 set out in the draft regulation, BE SUPPORTED; and

the City of London BE DIRECTED to send notice to the Province, in response to the draft Ontario Regulations under the Clean Wafer Act, 2006 as they relate to ''Source Protection Committees, Number and Appointment of Members", requesting the removal of the restriction on Conservation Authority Board Members sitting on the Source Protection Committee, should such a Member be nominated by a municipality or by another sector or group.

(b)

P-

evin Bain fl City Clerk ' . lhw

cc: Upper Thames River Conservation Authority, clo C. Tasker, Source Protection Project Manager,

Councillor J. L. Baechler Councillor J. P. Bryant P. W. Steblin, General Manager of Environmental & Engineering Services & City Engineer P. McNally, Director of Water, Environment and Customer Relations A. Henry, Manager of Reglonal'Water Supply P. Donnelly, Urban Watershed Program Manager

1424 Clarke Rd. London, ON N5V 569

F

The Corporation of the City of London ORice: 519-661-2500 axt. 0969 Fax 519-661-4892 w:london.ca

.. :

300 Dufferin Avenue P.O. BOX 5035 London, ON N 6 A 4 U

APPENDIX 3

l (

-London C A N A D A

January'31,2007

James Scott, Senior Policy Analyst Strategic Policy Branch Ministry of the Environment 135 St. Clair Avenue West, 11 th floor Toronto, Ontario, M4V 1 P5

Dear Mr. Scott:

RE:

FAX: (416) 314-2976

Comments on the Discussion Paper - Source Water Protection Committee EBR Registry # PA06E0013

This,submisSion is made to the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) on behalf of the City of London regarding the above referenced matter. Due to the short time lines of the EBR posting, these comments have not received Council approval. However, we anticipate Council endorsement in the near future.

The City is supportive of the underlying principles behind Source Water Protection and.the Clean Water Act. However, we reiterate our underlying concern with regards to the uncertainty of future implementation costs.

City of London comments are as follows:

F-

a) MuniciPal representation on the Committee. - W e understand that the model for the Source Water Committee that MOE is proposing comes from France where the watershed based committees are composed of 1/3 federal and state reps; 1/3 municipal reps; and 113 civic society. As our model does not include the federal or provincial representation, it would appear that the ratio proposed is flawed. Municipalities will have the bulk of the responsibility for implementing source protection plans. The scope of these responsibilities is greater than any other stakeholder proposed on the committee. These responsibilities dictate that collectively municipalities should have.the majority of members on the committee.

Comment: We request the MOE to provide 51% of the committe.e representation from municipalities (Le. a majority).

-

?- . , . .

b) Size af the Committees The geographic situation of London places us in two (2) Source Protection Regions (Thames Sydenham and Lake Erie) aswell as having an"interest in.'a third Region (Ausable Maitlandj which includes Grand Bend, where the Lake Huron Water Supply Plant is located. The MOE discussion paper is suggesting keeping committee numbers to sixteen (16) and municipal reps to five (5) which means that the 34 municipalities that make up the Thames Sydenham are vying for 5 positions. 'That total number of

P

?--

municipalities is closer to 50 in the Lake Erie region and will be near 25 in the Ausable Maitland.

Comment: Committees need to have the ability to choose larger numbers (Lake Erie Source Protection is asking for24 members) to reflect the region’s size, and

Comment: The City of London needs representation on all 3 committees.

c) Water Bottling Interests on the Committee Sectoral representation from agricultural, commercial and industrial interests provides approximately 1/3 of the committee structure. As much of our business in providing municipal water is in direct competition with commercial water bottling companies, it would seem strange to have them being represented at the same table.

Comment: Permit commercial bottled water companies to be part of working groups who might provide input to the committee rather than from being part of the committee structure itself.

d) Regional Water Supply participation In southwestern Ontario, over 6,000 sq. km including 14 municipalities and some 500,000 customers are served with drinking wafer by the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System and the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System as operated by their respective Joint Board of Management. This regional system is unique to Ontario.

Comment: A representative from the Joint Board of Management should be ensured to sit on both Lake Erie and Ausable Maitland Source Protection Committees, This can be achieved by seeking Source Protection Committee Boaid Members who share responsibilities on the Joint Boards. Most members of the Joint Boards are a municipal council representative.

The City of London remains concerned with the financial costs of implement the Source Water initiative. We strongly encourage the Ministry to estabhsh implementation funding to assist in these future endeavours.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important initiative.

Sincerely,

” -

Water, Environmental and Engineering Services Department

n C.C. Pete Steblin, General Manager and City Engineer

Andrew Henry, Regional Water Supply Lorrie Minshall - Source Water Protection (GRCA) Chris Tasker - Source Water Protection (UTRCA) Cathy Brown - Source Water Protection (ABCA)