agenda documents/board... · lakes simcoe and couchiching/black river source protection authority...

AGENDA Source Protection Authority

Meeting No. SPA-01-18 April 27, 2018 - 9:00 a.m.

Location:

Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority 120 Bayview Parkway

Newmarket, ON Tel: 905-895-1281

Source Protection Authority Members: Mayor G. Dawe, Chair York Region (Aurora) Councillor R. Simpson, Vice Chair Town of Innisfil Deputy Mayor/Regional Councillor N. Davison York Region (At Large) Mr. J. Dolan City of Barrie Regional Councillor B. Drew Durham Region (Scugog) Councillor A. Eek York Region (King) Councillor K. Ferdinands York Region (Whitchurch-Stouffville) Councillor P. Ferragine Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury Mayor John Grant Durham Region (Brock) Mayor V. Hackson York Region (East Gwillimbury) Councillor S. Harrison-McIntyre Town of New Tecumseth Councillor P. Kelly District of Muskoka Councillor D. Kerwin York Region (Newmarket) Councillor M. Kyle Township of Algonquin Highlands Councillor S. Macpherson Township of Oro-Medonte Councillor P. Molloy Durham Region (Uxbridge) Mayor M. Quirk York Region (Georgina) Councillor P. Silveira City of Barrie Councillor S. Strangway City of Kawartha Lakes Councillor M. Taylor Township of Severn Councillor S. Valiquette-Thompson City of Orillia No representative Township of Ramara Staff: T. Barnett, Coordinator, BOD/CAO, Project and Services B. Longstaff, General Manager, Integrated Watershed Management B. Thompson, Manager, Integrated Watershed Management M. Walters, Chief Administrative Officer M. Wilson, Source Water Protection Coordinator Guests: L. Dollin, Chair, South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Committee

Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black

River Source Protection Authority

Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River Source Protection Authority Agenda: Meeting No. SPA-01-18 April 27, 2018 of 3

I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS II. DECLARATION OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA (Pages 1-3)

RECOMMENDED: THAT the agenda for the meeting of Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River Source Protection Authority held on April 27, 2018 be approved as presented.

IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

(a) Source Protection Authority (Pages 4-7)

RECOMMENDED: THAT the minutes of the Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River

Source Protection Authority meeting No. SPA-01-17 held March 24, 2017 be approved as circulated.

(b) Source Protection Committee (Pages 8-47)

RECOMMENDED: THAT the minutes of the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source

Protection Committee meetings held on October 18, 2016, March 22, 2017, and October 19, 2017 be received for information.

V. CORRESPONDENCE (Page 48)

The following correspondence items are included in the agenda:

a) February 14, 2018 letter from MOECC RECOMMENDED: THAT Correspondence Item a) included in the agenda be received for

information.

VI. GENERAL UPDATES

(a) SPC Update (Pages 50-51)

Lynn Dollin, Chair, South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Committee will provide an update on the activities of the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe (SGBLS) Source Protection Committee. This report is included in the agenda. RECOMMENDED: THAT the update by Lynn Dollin, Chair, South Georgian Bay Lake

Simcoe Source Protection Committee regarding the activities of the SGBLS Source Protection Committee be received for information.

Page 2 of 65

Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River Source Protection Authority Agenda: Meeting No. SPA-01-18 April 27, 2018 of 3

(b) The First Source Water Protection Annual Report to the Ministry (Pages 52-65)

Mike Wilson, SWP Coordinator/Hydrogeologist, will provide a presentation regarding First Source Water Protection Annual Report to the Ministry. This presentation will be provided at the meeting.

RECOMMENDED: THAT the presentation Mike Wilson, SWP Coordinator/

Hydrogeologist regarding First Source Water Protection Annual Report to the Ministry be received for information.

Staff Report No. 01-18-SPA prepared by Mike Wilson, SWP Coordinator/Hydrogeologist regarding the First Source Water Protection Annual Report to the Ministry is included in the agenda. RECOMMENDED: THAT Staff Report No. 01-18-SPA regarding the first source water

protection annual report to the Ministry be received; and

FURTHER THAT the Annual Report be submitted to the Director of Source Protection (MOECC) to meet the May 1, 2018 deadline.

(c) Update from SPA Staff Bill Thompson, Manager, Integrated Watershed Management, will provide a presentation regarding updates from the Source Protection Authority. This presentation will be provided at the meeting.

RECOMMENDED: THAT the presentation by Bill Thompson, Manager, Integrated

Watershed Management, regarding the updates from the Source Protection Authority be received for information.

VII. OTHER BUSINESS

VIII. ADJOURN

Page 3 of 65

MINUTES Source Protection Authority Meeting SPA-01-17

March 24, 2017 Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority

120 Bayview Parkway, Newmarket, ON

Source Protection Authority Members in attendance: Councillor R. Simpson, Vice Chair Town of Innisfil Regional Councillor/Deputy Mayor N. Davison York Region (At Large) Mr. J. Dolan City of Barrie Councillor A. Eek York Region (King) Councillor K. Ferdinands York Region (Whitchurch-Stouffville) Councillor P. Ferragine Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury Councillor S. Harrison-McIntyre Town of New Tecumseth Councillor D. Kerwin York Region (Newmarket) Councillor S. Macpherson Township of Oro-Medonte Councillor M. Kyle Township of Algonquin Highlands Deputy Mayor P. Molloy Durham Region (Uxbridge) Mayor M. Quirk York Region (Georgina) Councillor M. Taylor Township of Severn Regrets: Ms. D. Bath Durham Region (Brock) Mayor G. Dawe, Chair York Region (Aurora) Regional Councillor B. Drew Durham Region (Scugog) Mayor V. Hackson York Region (East Gwillimbury) Councillor P. Kelly District of Muskoka Councillor P. Silveira City of Barrie Councillor S. Strangway City of Kawartha Lakes Councillor S. Valiquette-Thompson City of Orillia No representative Township of Ramara Guests: L. Dollin, Chair, South Georgina Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Committee Staff: T. Barnett, Coordinator, BOD/CAO, Project and Services B. Longstaff, General Manager, Integrated Watershed Management B. Thompson, Manager, Integrated Watershed Management M. Walters, Chief Administrative Officer M. Wilson, SWP Coordinator/Hydrogeologist

I. WELCOME FROM CHAIR AND INTRODUCTIONS

Vice Chair Simpson, who chaired the meeting, welcomed everyone.

Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black

River Source Protection Authority

of 65

Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River Source Protection Authority Meeting No. SPA-01-17 – March 24, 2017 - Minutes Page 2 of 4

II. DECLARATION OF PECUNIARY INTEREST None identified for the record of this meeting. III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Moved by: S. Macpherson Seconded by: M. Quirk

SPA-01-17 RESOLVED THAT the agenda for the meeting of Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River Source Protection Authority held on March 24, 2017 be approved as presented. CARRIED

IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

(a) Source Protection Authority Moved by: M. Quirk Seconded by: S. Harrison-McIntyre SPA-02-17 RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black

River Source Protection Authority meeting No. SPA-02-16 held September 23, 2016 be approved as circulated. CARRIED

(b) Source Protection Committee

Moved by: A. Eek Seconded by: N. Davison SPA-03-17 RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source

Protection Committee meeting No. SPC-03/2015 held on April 20, 2016 be received for information. CARRIED

V. CORRESPONDENCE

Included in the agenda were two pieces of correspondence; (i) Letter from InnServices Utilities Inc. regarding a notice of discontinuation of use of Goldcrest

DWS wells; and (ii) Letter from The Township of Uxbridge regarding concerns of a large scale fill operation. Moved by: S. Macpherson Seconded by: P. Ferragine

SPA-04-17 RESOLVED THAT Correspondence Items a) and b) included in the agenda be

received for information. CARRIED

VI. GENERAL UPDATES

(a) SPC Update

Lynn Dollin, Chair, South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Committee, provided an update on the activities of the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe (SGBLS) Source Protection

of 65


Committee (SPC) since the last meeting, noting the group is still very engaged. New members have been appointed and an orientation session was held. Other activities include two SPC members being well received as they presented at an international conference on source water protection. The SPC has reviewed proposed changes to the Source Protection Program that form the first phase of the Province’s program review, and a letter of support was submitted to the Province through the EBR posting. The SPC will monitor this program review to ensure concerns of our Source Protection Region are addressed. Chair Dollin reported that by the end of 2017 and annually thereafter, progress reports will be required by all involved in implementation. Moved by: P. Molloy Seconded by: J. Dolan SPA-05-17 RESOLVED THAT the update by Lynn Dollin, Chair, South Georgian Bay Lake

Simcoe Source Protection Committee regarding the activities of the SGBLS Source Protection Committee be received for information. CARRIED

(b) Risk Management Officials’ 2016 Annual Reports

Mike Wilson, SWP Coordinator/Hydrogeologist, provided a presentation regarding the Risk Management Officials’ 2016 Annual Reports. He explained the annual reporting components and progress to date. He noted potential issues, including septic inspections which have not been completed by some municipalities, and the deadline was January 2017. Next steps include ensuring risk management plans are in place, as well as working towards the completion of the mandatory septic inspections. To view this presentation, please click this link: Section 81 Risk Management Official Annual Reporting Moved by: S. Harrison-McIntyre Seconded by: M. Quirk SPA-06-17 RESOLVED THAT the presentation by Mike Wilson, SWP Coordinator

/Hydrogeologist, regarding the Risk Management Officials’ 2016 Annual Reports be received for information. CARRIED

Staff Report No. No. 01-17-SPA prepared by Mike Wilson, SWP Coordinator/Hydrogeologist regarding Risk Management Officials’ 2016 Annual Reports was included in the agenda. Moved by: A. Eek Seconded by: P. Molloy SPA-07-17 RESOLVED THAT Staff Report No. 01-17-SPA which presents a summary of the

2016 Annual Reports from Risk Management Officials be received for information. CARRIED

(c) South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region Update

Bill Thompson, Manager, Integrated Watershed Management, provided a presentation on the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region. He outlined the five year work plan, which included:

of 65

https://www.lsrca.on.ca/Shared%20Documents/board/Section%2081%20Annual%20Reports%20v2_Mar%2024%2017.pdf

https://www.lsrca.on.ca/Shared%20Documents/board/Section%2081%20Annual%20Reports%20v2_Mar%2024%2017.pdf


2016 - Annual reporting framework and tool - SPC membership refresh

- MOECC review of technical criteria and policy framework 2017 - MOECC review of technical criteria and policy framework continues

- Municipal implementation ongoing 2018 - Education and Outreach program to be in place

- First Annual report (May 2018) - Work plan to govern plan review (Oct 2018)

2019 - SPP review and update expected (Section 36) - SPC membership starts to expire

2020 - SPP review and update may continue - Risk management plans to be completed

To view this presentation, please click this link: South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source

Protection Region Update Moved by: S. Harrison-McIntyre Seconded by: P. Ferragine SPA-08-17 RESOLVED THAT the presentation by Bill Thompson, Manager, Integrated

Watershed Management, regarding the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region be received for information. CARRIED

VII. OTHER BUSINESS

VIII. ADJOURN Moved by: S. Macpherson Seconded by: M. Taylor SPA-09-17 RESOLVED THAT the meeting be adjourned @ 10:12 a.m. CARRIED Original to be signed by: Original to be signed by: ________________________________ _________________________________ Councillor Richard Simpson Michael Walters Vice Chair Chief Administrative Officer

of 65

https://www.lsrca.on.ca/Shared%20Documents/board/SPR%20update%20for%20LSCBR%20SPA%20Mar%202017.pdf

https://www.lsrca.on.ca/Shared%20Documents/board/SPR%20update%20for%20LSCBR%20SPA%20Mar%202017.pdf

of 14

MINUTES

Source Protection Committee Meeting No. SPC-02/2016 Meeting No. 2

Four Points by Sheraton Barrie, Collingwood Room 60 Bryne Drive , Barrie, ON

October 18, 2016 1:00 pm – 4:00 pm

MEMBERS:

Lynn Dollin, Chair Municipal Economic/Development Public Sector First Nations

Herb Proudley Colin Elliott Clayton Cameron John Boucher David Ritchie Bob Duncanson Stan Wells John Hemsted Fred Ruf Katie Thompson Colin Nisbet Larry Slomka Kyle Mitchell Rick Newlove Stephanie Hobbs Don Goodyear Ian Chadwick Dianne Corrigan Deb Korolnek

Liaisons

Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit – Karen Kivilahti Nottawasaga Valley Source Protection Authority – Ryan Post Severn Sound Source Protection Authority – Julie Cayley Lakes Simcoe & Couchiching, Black River Source Protection Authority – Ben Longstaff Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change – Elizabeth (Beth) Forrest Staff Bill Thompson Susan Jagminas Keith Sherman Mike Wilson Michelle Adams, minutes Guests Olga Yudina, MOECC Aaron Francis, MOECC Regrets Tom Kurtz Dan Shilling Gayle Wood David Ketcheson

of 65

of 14

I. WELCOME & OPENING REMARKS All were welcomed to the meeting and attendance details were reviewed:

Gayle Wood was unable to attend therefore; Ryan Post is acting as NVCA’s Source Protection Authority (SPA) Liaison for this meeting.

The new SPC members were welcomed Julie Cayley was welcomed and introduced, she is the new General Manager of

Seven Sound Environmental Association. Elizabeth (Beth) Forrest introduced Olga Yudina, and Aaron Francis, from MOECC

who were welcomed as guests. II. DECLARATION OF PECUNIARY INTEREST No pecuniary interests were declared. III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA The agenda was approved as printed and circulated. Moved by: John Hemsted Seconded by: Rick Newlove

RESOLVED: THAT the agenda for the October, 18 2016 meeting of the Source

Protection Committee be approved as presented.

CARRIED BY CONSENSUS

IV. ADOPTION OF MINUTES

Lynn Dollin reviewed the action items from the April 20, 2016 meeting. Items 1 and 2 have not been completed but should be shortly. Items 3, 4 and 5 have been completed. Action item 6 is outstanding although in progress and will be reported on at a later date. For reference the Action items from the April 20, 2016 SPC are listed below.

April 20, 2016 Action Item 1

All presentations provided at today’s SPC meeting will be posted to ourwatershed.ca for reference.

Responsibility Susan Jagminas


Confirm whether the MOECC presentations referred to in the General Program Update can be posted to ourwatershed.ca. If so, they will be posted to ourwatershed.ca and a notice circulated to SPC members.

Responsibility Elizabeth Forrest

of 65

of 14


A presentation from local RMOs on how the implementation of the SPP policies is fairing to date - what we got right and what we got wrong - is to be provided at the next SPC meeting.

Responsibility Don Goodyear


Language around the eligibility criteria for public sector applicants in terms of their residential proximity to the boundaries of the SPR will be drafted and sent to Bill Thompson.

Responsibility Elizabeth Forrest


A reminder to municipalities that the septic re-inspection deadline is January 2017 is to be circulated.

Responsibility Bill Thompson


A discussion on the topics of pesticides and farm applications and PTTW municipal control is to take place and information reported back to the SPC.

Responsibility Ben Longstaff, Lynn Dollin, Bill Thompson and Elizabeth Forrest Moved by: Herb Proudley Seconded by: Dave Ritchie RESOLVED: THAT the minutes of the April 20, 2016 meeting of the Source

Protection Committee, be approved as printed and circulated. CARRIED BY CONSENSUS

V. ANNOUNCEMENTS (a) Activities of the Chair & Committee

A brief update from the recent SPA and internal coordination meetings was provided.

It was stated there had not been a Chairs and Project Managers meeting since the last SPC meeting in April 2016.

It was noted that there had not been much happening other than internal team

meetings.

It was stated the the launch of the Great Lakes Initiative by the Lieutenant Governor (Greatness — The Great Lakes Project) had taken place. It is hoped that this initiative will showcase the Great Lakes and create an image for the Great Lakes similar to that of the Rockies. The aim of the program is to get the public to

of 65

of 14

understand they are close to the world’s largest freshwater resource and to encourage public engagement.

(b) Agricultural Sector Update to the SPC The SPC Agricultural Representatives (Ag Reps) reviewed what activities they have recently undertaken for Source Water:

They have been working with Conservation Ontario on an ad campaign on Source Water and agricultural impacts that will be running in Better Farming Magazine. The Ag Reps were featured in the ad that ran in the September 2016 issue of Better Farming. Upcoming ads include October 2016 the topic will be manure and November 2016 when the topic will be biosolids.

John Hemsted and Colin Elliott have been working with Chitra Gowda from Conservation Ontario and will be attending the “Land. Water. Sources, an International Conference” on Source Water Protection November 1, 2, 3, 2016 in Laval Quebec. John and Colin will be representing Ontario Agriculture. They are looking forward to the conference and learning from people from Europe and the US who will be at the conference.

The Ag Reps thanked Bill Thompson and Ben Longstaff for making the trip to the conference possible

(c) MOECC Update Elizabeth Forrest provided a brief update on the status of MOECC Source Water activities:

Technical rule amendments – recently posted on the EBR for comment. She noted that it was an item in the meeting’s agenda, so offered to answer questions rather than provide a detailed update

Annual Progress Reporting they have been working on setting up the reportables to get an idea of how implementation is going. The reportables have been in draft format for about a year and they are almost ready to send out the final reportables. They are hoping to have them sent out before the next Chairs meeting which is November 9th and 10th 2016.

The annual report on monitoring policies is due February 1, 2017. MOECC are trying a different approach to engage crown ministries earlier and will be providing a standard form for them to complete but it will cater to their individual policies.

MOECC are still working on a program review and moving forward to steady state and the role of the committee is being looked at, as well as how to keep the committee engaged. An update is expected at the Chairs meeting, Bill or Lynn will be able to bring that information back to the committee.

They are in the process of filling the 8 SPC Chair positions that were vacated by the previous chairs retiring or stepping down.

of 65

of 14

The federal government has a mandate to end boil water advisories for First Nations communities within 5 years. The province is playing a part in this initiative, Beth and some colleagues are working on how they can help with source protection in First Nations communities. MOECC has been working to develop training for First Nations, as well as a toolkit of resources. Current information on source water protection is not tailored to First Nations and the goal is to create resources for First Nations to choose from as part of an online resource.

The Indigenous Water Projects Office has been going out to First Nations communities to look at their drinking water systems and provide guidance.

Beth attended a meeting with Tribal Councils in August and the First Nations are excited about source protection and are interested in implementing it.

There were questions asked on how the First Nations program would be funded, it was stated that there will be some provincial funding; but right now it is not known what the funding be. The federal government has committed money to the First Nations source water protection initiative and it is believed each province will be given money for the project. Right now it is unknown how much funding there will be or permitted uses for the funding.

There was a discussion regarding the Grey Sauble Protection Plan. The plan has been approved; it was approved on July 1, 2016 with amendments approved on July 15, 2016.

(d) Other Announcements Ben Longstaff congratulated Lynn Dollin on being elected President of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) at their August meeting. It was also recognized that Lynn will be staying on as Chair of the Southern Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe SPC after accepting Minister Murray’s reappointment. Keith Sherman was congratulated on his retirement by Lynn Dollin. Keith was presented with a framed photo of the committee and thanked for his years of service.

of 65

of 14

VI. DELEGATIONS None. VII. PRESENTATIONS

(a) General Program Updates Bill Thompson provided a brief presentation updating general Source Water Protection program implementation and other activities.

A recap of the ongoing activities was provided. Activities for 2016 include the Annual Reporting framework and tool, SPC membership refresh and the MOECC review of the technical criteria and policy framework.

For 2017 expected activities are the continuation of the MOECC review of the technical criteria and policy framework. A website revamp is in the work plan. The committee will want to review the policy framework and make comments

For 2018 the first Annual Report (Section 46) is due and the work plan to govern plan review (Section 36) will be ready for updates

It is expected that 2019 – 2020 updates and tweaking of the Source Protection Plan will be needed. By 2020 the first Source Protection Plan will be implemented.

The program should arrive at a “steady state” after implementation where source protection is integrated into regular business. At this point the program may need to be streamlined and the amount of work for SPC, SPA and staff will be significantly reduced.

The SPC Refresh is complete. There were seven positions that needed to be replaced on the SPC. Following the process outlined in the regulation for the public and economic positions, the openings were advertised, a selection committee struck and all applicants reviewed with successful candidates short listed and interviewed. The process for replacing the municipal members of the committed was explained.

All new members were welcomed and thanked for attending the morning orientation session.

Support (policy and technical) has continued for the following groups involved in implementation.

RMO Working group chaired by Katie Thompson SPMIF support to municipalities to assist their use of the funding to

further source water. Land Use Planning (LUP) to make sure there is compliance and

consistency. Technical support by Mike Wilson and Ryan Post to help

municipalities changing water systems. Those municipalities have included Shelburne, Lagoon City and York Region.

of 65

of 14

Program awareness is being built using a variety of methods including

An update of brochures for use by RMO’s and municipal staff. Six fact sheets have been developed that are in plain language and allow municipalities to add their log and contact information.

E & O Strategy development which should be rolled out in the last part of 2016.

Farming Community Source Water awareness with advertisements in Better Farming Magazine in conjunction with Conservation Ontario.

There was a discussion regarding if the committee will continue to look at technical

issues like it had done in the past. It was stated that there will be some items for the committee to review for York and Ramara but they are currently only in early stages and not ready to bring to the committee. It was explained that currently there is not the volume of technical items to look at, so instead of having a working group as was done in the past, the items will be presented to the whole SPC.

Fred Ruf inquired as to whether or not the committee has an advocacy role in water taking and stated he would like to see SPC involvement. Lynn Dollin clarified that MOECC does issue permits for water taking for commercial bottling. It was asked if this falls into the scope of the committee as the committee’s scope is vulnerable areas. Beth Forrest stated there are areas with water quantity issues and if there is science to support a problem in an identified area it will be looked at. MOECC is working to ensure appropriate terms and conditions are in commercial contracts for water taking. It was noted that there was a moratorium issued on commercial water taking the day before the SPC meeting (October 17, 2016) due to the water taking in Guelph Eramosa. There was a discussion regarding the scope of the SPC and the scope items initially submitted to the minister. Lynn Dollin offered to reach out to the SPC Chair in the Lake Erie Region to see if there is a threat in the area of Guelph Eramosa that is having the issue with commercial water taking. Beth stated that Lake Erie committee is just starting the water budgets for that area. A discussion took place regarding water taking effects on agriculture and the need to keep ahead of this type of water taking. It was stated that for SPC to be involved, the water taking has to be in a vulnerable or threat area, as that is the framework the committee is supposed to keep within. It was suggested that an ongoing list be kept of areas the committee wishes to expand into and that the items be resubmitted to the minister periodically. It was noted that the issue of water taking had been brought before the committee in the past. Water taking for agricultural irrigation was also brought up as an

of 65

of 14

issue and Dave Ritchie stated that looking at that issue should be on the list of things for the committee to do. A dialogue took place on water taking in general, as well as for the region the SPC covers. Mike Wilson suggested it may be of interest to the committee to have an RMO or SPC member from Guelph Eramosa speak to the SGBLS SPC. It was noted that the policies currently in the Lake Simcoe area don’t prohibit new water taking. Don Goodyear suggested perhaps there should be a standing agenda item on water quantity issues and the committee should hear from the province, RMOs, affected stake holders, farmers and land owners. Looking at water quantity is within the scope of the SPC and it was stated this may give the committee a back door into the water taking issue. Stan Wells concurred with Don Goodyear and stated he thinks the timing is perfect due to the moratorium to send a letter to the minister applauding the initiative with the moratorium. The committee came to a consensus that they would ask staff to draft a letter to express their concern regarding commercial water taking to the minister; they deferred to staff to suggest the best way to approach this. Herb Proudley requested that the letter be carbon copied to all other Source Protection Committees. Lynn Dollin confirmed there was consensus regarding the letter. She reminded the committee members that the moratorium on water taking permits is currently posted on EBR and is open for comments for 45 days.

Action Item 1 Recirculate the letter from July 3, 2014 to the SPC members and have as an item at the next SPC meeting. Review and to have items to be included in the next iteration to Minister Murray. Letter of what is out of scope to be brought to the next SPC meeting with items to be included and deleted.


Action Item 2 A letter to be written on behalf of the committee in support of the moratorium and review of commercial water taking and offering assistance even though it is not in scope.


Action Item 3 Don Goodyear suggested perhaps there should be a standing agenda item on water quantity issues a.

Responsibility Bill Thompson RESOLVED: THAT the updates provided on the above topics by Bill Thompson be

received for information. CARRIED BY CONSENSUS

of 65

of 14

b) Review of Clean Water Act Technical Rules Mike Wilson presented an update on the proposed amendments to the Technical Rules for Assessment Reports. A brief history of the technical rules was provided as well as the reasons for amending the rules. . Discussion occurred around the MOECC proposed changes to fuel storage and handling and how the hazard rating scores have changed. It was noted that in an IPZ / WHPA-E partially below grade and above grade fuel storage due to the changes is now considered to have vulnerability score of 9-10. This change affects fuel tanks from > 2,500L to >=250L, it was stated that the size of a typical home heating oil tank is approximately 900L. It was explained that for below grade fuel storage, such as a gas station, is overseen by TSSA. It was stated that above ground tanks are at risk as they are exposed to the elements, and this was a flaw in the policy that the SPC had previously pointed out to MOECC. It was further noted that the RMOs recently have been looking at fuel storage tanks for backup generators at municipal well site which weren’t considered a threat but now with the change are a threat. It was noted that the changes to the technical rules is currently posted on EBR for comment. Moved by: Larry Slomka Seconded by: Bob Duncanson RESOLVED: THAT the information provided by Mike Wilson be received for

information. AND FURTHER THAT SPA staff be authorized to submit comments to the Environmental Registry, in support of the proposed revisions, and noting our interest in Phase II of the review.


c) RMO Implementation of SPP Policies Don Goodyear presented the York Region RMO role in implementing SPP Policies and lessons learned. Don stated that York Region had won the American Water Works Association, Exemplary Source Water Protection Award for 2016. The criteria for the award are very broad and it was stated that the SPC should be included in the credit for the award. The board reviewing the applications for the award were impressed by the fact that the Ontario system carried source protection through to implementation.

of 65

of 14

YSA – Yonge Street Aquifer

There have been a few changes to the Yonge Street Aquifer system. The region is not seeking new water but they are reallocating a few wells and these changes will result in changes to the well head protection areas. Potential sites were looked at and 7 were eliminated due to source protection concerns. One of the considerations when looking for potential sites was the number of threats the new wells would have created. It was noted the LSRCA have been helpful with understanding the new requirements. The well at Green Lane will have a new WHPA. The Aurora well twinning will create little change to the existing WHPA. An update was given on York Region’s progress with RMPs. It was believed that there were as many as 532 properties with potential threats, however not all properties that were thought to be potential threats turned out to be a threat. So far 52 RMPs have been completed and there are an estimated 90 RMPs left to do. There are 60 properties that still need to be looked at to verify if they are a threat or not. Don stated that York Region is on track to finish all RMPs in the 5 years that were allotted. There may be a need to put more resources into completing them on time. It was noted that there may need to be effort focused on people who were resistant to the RMP process. It was noted that through the RMP process there are a lot of people / businesses that are being good environmental stewards. The common problems found were missing secondary containment for small volumes of DNAPLs, spill response equipment; spill response plans that are not well documents and staff that need more training. York Region has a successful incentive program where they will pay for the implementation costs of needed items identified during the RMP process. For some small items they will pay 100% for a cost up to $800. There is also a portion of larger items that can be funded through the program. An example was given of a dry cleaner changing equipment to more environmentally friendly equipment, that did not use DNAPLS, the business owner received $25,000 to help reduce the threat. Mike Wilson asked if Don/York Region would be willing to communicate the success with their incentive plan to the ministry and how it has helped get RMPs done. Lynn Dollin stated that she would take the information regarding the incentive program to the Chairs’ and PM’s meeting. Don explained that the Region has been implementing containment management plans that are a simplified RMP. The challenges faced working with municipalities were noted as the RMO staff are at York Region and the permit staff work for the nine municipalities. Don explained the challenges they are having as the WHPA-Q is very large and the ground water in Vaughan doesn’t

of 65

of 14

flow north or affect anything to the north. Also noted were the challenges getting York Region planning involved with source water protection. There was a discussion around if York Region has done any RMPs for agriculture, they have done a few. Debbie Korolnek asked if York Region had done outreach to the broader planning community and stated she would like Don to speak to the planners in Simcoe County. Don stated a presentation had been done by colleagues to the Registered Professional Planners and they are happy to speak to any groups that ask. Moved by: John Hemsted Seconded by: Rick Newlove RESOLVED: THAT the information provided by Don Goodyear be received for

information. CARRIED BY CONSENSUS

d) Municipal Implementation of SPP Policies Keith Sherman provided an overview of the implementation of policies in the Midland-Penetanguishene WHPA-Q2 There was discussion around the Q2 area in Penetanguishene and Midland and LUP-12. It was explained that water balance studies need to be completed in Midland due to the development of medium box store complexes. The town requires a study be done, in compliance with LUP-12 but have not required a peer review of the resulting study, as other municipalities have. SSEA suggest that they contract a hydrogeologist to provide that service and the town declined. There was concern expressed as there are multiple studies coming into the town staff due to the development that is occurring, and lack of capacity in the Town to deal with them. The letter that has been drafted to the town commends them on their source protection efforts and recommends they include peer reviews by hydrogeologists. The draft letter to John Skorobohacz, CAO, Town of Midland was reviewed. There was further discussion regarding the size of the developments in question, the cost of a peer review and security deposits paid by developers. The wording of the policy and whether or not it actually states the study must be reviewed by a hydrogeologist was examined. As well, whether or not this falls into the RMO’s scope was discussed. It was also suggested to ask APGO how to word the letter.

of 65

of 14

The following changes to the letter were agreed to by the committee.

To change the wording in the last paragraph from “…include a peer review of these water balances by a qualified Hydrogeologist in order…” to read “…include a peer review of these water balances by a qualified professional in order…”

To delete the last sentence of the last paragraph. To correct the spelling of Lynn Dollin’s last name

Action Item 5 Changes agreed upon by the SPC to be made to the letter to John

Skorobohacz, CAO, Town of Midland Responsibility Keith Sherman

Moved by: Fred Ruf Seconded by: Ian Chadwick RESOLVED: THAT the information provided by Keith Sherman be received for

information. AND FURTHER THAT the Chair be directed to send a letter to Midland Council explaining the intent of Policy LUP-12 and encouraging them to ensure that all water budgets are sufficiently reviewed by qualified persons.


e) Annual Reporting Mike Wilson gave a presentation on the status and progress of the Official Annual Report and Annual Reporting framework. The RMO reporting was explained, as was the Annual Reporting framework. MOECC has proposed 48 questions, 20% of which are optional. Including the questions from the Annual Reporting Working Group and the RMO Annual Report it is expected there will be 100 questions in total. Examples of questions were reviewed. Mike explained the three options for gathering data for reporting and the pros and cons of each one. It was stated that a decision has been made to use a standalone database (Source Protection Annual Reporting, or SPAR) as that will allow SPA staff to email people the questions they need to respond to instead of all the questions. The SPAR database was modelled after the Conservation Ontario Annual Survey. Mike reviewed an example of the forms in the database and reports it will generate. Project timelines were reviewed and it was stated that the SPC will have a report to look at for early 2017. Ben Longstaff stated that the SPC will first see a “dummy” report to look at and see if the format will be usable.

of 65

of 14

There was a discussion regarding the York Region database and if they would be able to import data from their system or if information would need to be reentered manually. It was stated that they should be able to import data. Mike asked the SPC members to think about any real success stories that can be submitted to MOECC with the reporting data. Moved by: Dave Ritchie Seconded by: Dianne Corrigan RESOLVED: THAT the information provided by Mike Wilson on

the Official Annual Report and Annual Reporting framework and progress be received for information.

CARRIED BY CONSENSUS VIII. DETERMINATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION None. IX. ADOPTION OF ITEMS NOT REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION Moved by: John Hemstead Seconded: Clayton Cameron RESOLVED: THAT the recommendations respecting items not requiring separate

discussion be approved, and staff be authorized to take all necessary actions to effect those recommendations.

CARRIED BY CONSENSUS X. CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION None

XI. OTHER BUSINESS Stan Wells asked that the Ag Reps going to Laval be recognized for their relationship with the Agricultural sector and the public. The dates for the next meetings were discussed. Bill Thompson suggested meeting in February 2017 to look at the RMO Annual Reports. Ben Longstaff requested that a few dates be put on hold for upcoming SPC meetings in January, February and March of 2017. Michelle Adams is to send a Timebridge poll to the committee member to determine the upcoming dates.

of 65

of 14

XII. CLOSED SESSION

None for the record of this meeting. XIII. ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn the meeting was moved by Herb Proudley at 4:01 pm.

of 65

of 16

MINUTES


Holly Community Centre, 171 Mapleton Ave., Barrie, ON. March 22, 2017

1:00 pm – 4:00 pm MEMBERS:

Lynn Dollin, Chair Municipal Economic/Development Public Sector First Nations Herb Proudley Colin Elliott Clayton Cameron John Boucher David Ritchie Bob Duncanson Stan Wells John Hemsted Larry Slomka Katie Thompson Ian Chadwick Stephanie Hobbs Kyle Mitchell David Ketcheson Dianne Corrigan Deb Korolnek Tom Kurtz

Liaisons

Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit – Karen Kivilahti Nottawasaga Valley Source Protection Authority – Ryan Post Severn Sound Source Protection Authority – Julie Cayley Lakes Simcoe & Couchiching, Black River Source Protection Authority – none Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change – Elizabeth (Beth) Forrest Staff Bill Thompson Keith Sherman Mike Wilson Michelle Adams, minutes Guests Sam Jassy, MOECC Ann Elmhurst, City of Kawartha Lakes Regrets Dan Shilling Gayle Wood Ben Longstaff Rick Newlove Don Goodyear – Scott Lister attended as his alternate – proxy to Katie Thompson Colin Nisbet – proxy to Dave Ritchie Fred Ruf – proxy to Larry Slomka

of 65

of 16

I. WELCOME & OPENING REMARKS All were welcomed to the meeting and attendance details were reviewed:

Gayle Wood was unable to attend therefore; Ryan Post is acting as NVCA’s Source Protection Authority (SPA) Liaison for this meeting.

Scott Lister attended as Don Goodyear’s alternate. Lynn wished everyone a Happy World Water Day. Elizabeth (Beth) Forrest introduced Sam Jassy from MOECC he was welcomed as

a guest. II. DECLARATION OF PECUNIARY INTEREST No pecuniary interests were declared. III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA The agenda was approved as printed and circulated. Moved by: John Hemsted Seconded by: John Boucher

RESOLVED: THAT the agenda for the March 22, 2017 meeting of the Source




There were corrections to the October 18 2016 minutes, as listed below: Page 6 of the meeting package, item 1. c) should read “…of use of Goldcrest DWS wells.” Page 8 it was noted that Dave Ketcheson was listed as both attending and sending regrets this was amended to show that he was absent from the meeting. Page 12, bullet 5, “There were questions asked on how the First Nations program would be funded, it was stated that there will be some provincial funding; but right now it is not known what the funding be.” This item was corrected to read “There were questions asked on how the First Nations program would be funded, it was stated that there will be some provincial funding; but right now it is not known what the funding will be.”

of 65

of 16

Page 15 Action Item 3, “Don Goodyear suggested perhaps there should be a standing agenda item on water quantity issues a.” This item was amended to read, “Don Goodyear suggested perhaps there should be a standing agenda item on water quantity issues.” Moved by: Stan Wells Seconded by: Dianne Corrigan RESOLVED: THAT the amended minutes of the October 18, 2016 meeting of the

Source Protection Committee, be approved. CARRIED BY CONSENSUS

V. CORRESPONDENCE Please see items IX and XI. VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS (a) MOECC Update Elizabeth Forrest provided a brief update on the status of MOECC Source Water activities: Sam Jassy was introduced he will be working in the approvals branch as program analyst. He will be working on amendments and screening related to Environmental Assessments (EAs) and official plans to make sure they comply with source protection. The upcoming Chairs and PM meeting will be 3 days instead of 2 days to allow for the new Chairs to have an orientation day. There were 8 Chairs that needed to be replaced, 6 have been appointed and they are just waiting for the last 2 appointments. The Chair for Niagara Region stepped down in January 2017 so they are recruiting for that position. MOECC has been consulting with municipalities to gather more information in regards to where the program is headed. Phase 1 revisions to the technical rules have been posted on the Environmental Registry. This represents the simpler changes to the technical framework. The more complicated revisions form Phase 2 which is in pre-consultation and the initial findings are to be posted by the end of 2017. MOECC is working on a Geocortex map which will be more functional and will link to policies. The target for the launch date is March 31, 2017, an announcement will be sent out when it is ready. Reporting was on time this year because they worked with all ministries that were responsible for reporting the Source Protection Branch. Only one ministry reported late

of 65

of 16

and their report has now been received. It was noted that 3 SPAs have to report this year, so the ministry reports were important to have on time. With regards to the MOECC mapping tool it was asked if the parcel issue would be corrected. This is to be confirmed but it is thought errors on the existing maps will be corrected. It was noted that Sue Lo had retired and that Orna Salamon will be filling the role as acting Assistant Deputy Minister/Chief Drinking Water Inspector. (b) Agricultural Sector Update to the SPC The SPC Agricultural Representatives (Ag Reps) reviewed what activities they have recently undertaken for Source Water: A brief overview of the conference in Laval was given by Colin Elliott and John Hemsted. There were people from Europe, the US and Canada in attendance and all were interested in how Ontario had involved the farm community. There was a good exchange of ideas and other presentations. John and Colin were invited to do a presentation at a conference in Boston in May 2017. This year they will be most likely be doing a webcast on Ontario’s drinking water system with Heather Malcolmson and going to Boston in 2018. There were 6 ads in Better Farming magazine the last one was mentioned as it warned farmers buying land to check the Source Protection Plan in their area. Dave Ritchie stated that there will be a source water protection conference in May 2018 in the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Area similar to the conference in Laval. Dave is on the committee and will be reaching out to SPC members to get involved. VII. DELEGATIONS None. VIII. PRESENTATIONS

a) Implementation of SPP Policies Ann Elmhirst provided a presentation on the septic system inspection program in the City of Kawartha Lakes. Background information about the septic system program was

of 65

of 16

provided. Historically the health unit had looked after septic systems and had contracted out the program to a third party. The city launched their program in June of 2014; the municipality had 20,000 properties on septic systems at the time. Kawartha Lakes took a mandatory maintenance assessment approach to their septic inspection program. It was realized after the launch of the program that the source water deadlines for the inspections were October 2016 for the Trent Source Protection Region and January 2017 for the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region. It was explained that the City of Kawartha Lakes has 16 wellhead protection zones, 6 water intake protections zones, 600 sites affected with 193 sites in the SGBLS protection area. Of the 193 sites in the SGBLS protection region, 160 sites were in one subdivision. It was explained that the initial information from the database for properties that needed to be assessed was no longer accurate. The information provided had to be looked at using the City of Kawartha Lakes GIS mapping with the areas overlaid to determine which properties were affected. Once affected properties were identified a check had to be done to see if the property was developed and if it was residential or commercial. This process helped narrow the original list that was over 1000 properties down to about 600 properties. It was explained that although the health unit had handed over their records, there was a gap between when the health unit got out of septic inspections in 2013 and the city took over in 2014. Another challenge that was faced was that although the work was started in 2014 records from the health unit were not received until 2015. Historical records were obtained from the health department which allowed them to get an idea of the age of the sewage systems and the legislated requirements for the older systems. Neighboring municipalities were contacted to see if they had started their inspections and how they were implementing the process. The strategy for implementation was to do research and meetings to gather information, then decide on an implementation plan. It was decided to do the inspections in house using their inspector. The City Kawartha Lakes wanted to ensure that the person speaking to the homeowners could answer questions and had accurate information as there was a lot of misinformation circulating in the community. The City of Kawartha Lakes decided that staff performing septic inspections for the inspections required by the Clean Water Act would have formal training. Kawartha Lakes developed an assessment tool to use as there was no provincial criteria for the inspections, just guidelines. The implementation strategy was presented to council along with information on inspections, sewage systems, locations of the wells that had to be protected and concerns of the home owners. The local paper did an article on the inspections that caused a flurry of phone calls from home owners who were upset, many residents just needed more information and to be educated about the inspection process. A mail out was done to the affected homeowners explaining the inspection process and giving dates of inspections to allow them to schedule appointments. A letter advising what

of 65

of 16

was required of the homeowner was included in the package of information. Numerous phone calls were received and a lot of confusion on the part of homeowners had to be dealt with. A number of information open houses were also held and it was noted they were not well attended. The assessment of the systems was explained, an internal evaluation of that tank and lid were done, if the tank needed to be pumped it was mentioned to the homeowner. A walk over of the septic bed to look for stress points was also done. It was found that for the most part the assessment results were minor, cracked lids, baffle erosion, effluent filters that needed cleaning and tank pump outs. There were only 2 steel tanks that weren’t functioning that required complete replacement. It was noted that the systems were inspected for compliance to the legislation for the time period they were installed and most homeowners thought there were going to be required upgrades which would be expensive. Lessons that were learned included:

Homeowners felt it was unfair as their neighbours weren’t being inspected. Talking to people and taking time to listen helped in most situations. Initial inspections were free a lot of seniors and low income residents are worried

about the cost of the next inspection. The city tried to work with people to make it easy for them comply. Some seniors were concerned about having to excavate the tank for inspection; the

inspector was able to coordinate with people to have some landscapers and people’s grandkids to help with the physical labour.

Grants and loans through the municipality provided owners with a loan that can be paid back through their taxes were taken advantage of by a few people. (These loans can be transferred to a new owner.)

Other incentive programs such as LEAP and the CMHC low income housing program could be mentioned to homeowners in need of assistance.

Things that are working for Kawartha Lakes for the septic inspection program.

Public friendly policies that allow people to still build on their land etc. Assistance programs Educational materials

Areas to improve

The different source protection regions having different policies. Kawartha Lakes is in 2 source protection regions and the difference in policies have

of 65

of 16

made it look like they are not being consistent as one neighborhood has a well in each region and residents talk to each other and are complaining.

A province wide lack of consistent assessment requirements, it was noted that while Kawartha Lakes is doing actual inspections other municipalities are doing a visual inspection only and some are doing phone interviews.

Neighbouring jurisdictions doing different things. Questions It was asked if they had noticed during the inspection program a relation between tank failure and people on chemotherapy. It was noted that none of the properties inspected had anyone on chemotherapy. There has been a system fail due to chemotherapy drugs and the city now asks people to use a holding tank and to pump out the tank once they finish chemotherapy and then add a boost. It was asked if there were a lot of people who had moved out of a more urban area who had no idea they were on septic systems. It was stated that 10-15% had no idea where their septic system was, that they had to help locate it. There were only a handful of residents that didn’t know they were on septic. It was noted there was confusion regarding the technology and people had put pools, gardens or trailer parking on their septic beds. Moved by: Larry Slomka Seconded by: Herb Proudley RESOLVED: THAT the information presented by Ann Elmhirst be

received for information. CARRIED BY CONSENSUS b) Risk Management Official Annual Reporting Mike Wilson presented an update on the status of RMO annual reporting. It was stated that the objective of the annual reporting is to assess if threats to drinking water have been reduced by the implementation of the Source Protection Plan. Secondary goals of the reporting include ensuring the program is effective, providing accountability via public reporting, informing budget requests going forward, to inform decision making regarding the program and implementation, and to make sure the management of drinking water threats is effective.

of 65

of 16

The legislative framework was reviewed with emphasis on Section 81. The role of the SPC in the Annual Reporting was explained. It was noted that the first report is due to the SPA February 1, 2018 and the first annual report is due to MOECC by May 1, 2018. The components of the RMO Annual Report were explained. The SPAR tool was mentioned briefly Ryan Post will be providing a more detailed separate presentation on it. It was explained that the database will save time and users will be able to forward links to sections of the report to various people to inform the report. A progress update was given on the Risk Management Official Status, Risk Management Plans (RMPs), Official Plan Updates, Zoning By-Law Amendments and Septic Inspections. In the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region there are 716 RMPs that are required to be done, currently 76 or 11% have been completed or are in progress. The map of the RMP progress was reviewed. The number of RMPs completed is 57 with an additional 659 to be completed. It was noted that as of this summer the Source Protection Region will be 2 years into the 5 year deadline for RMPs (dealing with existing drinking water threats) to be complete. An update on where the municipalities stand in regards to Official Plan (OP) updates was given. It was noted that most Official Plan updates are in progress but Ramara and the City of Kawartha Lakes had not started their updates. Both of these municipalities have indicated that they have a plan in place to complete their OP amendments. Georgina and Midland have completed their Official Plan updates. Zoning bylaw updates are in progress in most of the municipalities with the exception of Ramara and Kawartha Lakes. The septic inspections are 96% complete, and less than 2.5% of the inspected systems required a major repair. It was noted that a large proportion of the septic systems requiring inspection were located in the City of Kawartha Lakes and Ramara. Whitchurch-Stouffville is 2/3 done and plan to finish their inspections this spring. Aurora only had one septic system that required inspection and that inspection has not been done. It appears that East Gwillimbury has not yet started their mandatory septic inspections and the deadline to complete them (Jan. 2017) has past. Mike Wilson will follow up with East Gwillimbury to determine the status of their inspection program. Ryan Post stated that Clearview has over 2/3 of their septic inspections done and they aim to be completed for Q3 2017, it was noted the deadline for completion was January 2017. All other municipalities in his area have completed their inspections. Keith Sherman stated that the Township of Georgian Bay has a septic inspection program in place.

of 65

of 16

The ministry reporting on Permits to Take Water, Wastewater / Sewage Works ECAs and Nutrient Management Strategies was explained. Numbers for the South Georgina Bay Lake Simcoe area were reviewed. Permits to take water Future Threats – 36 Permits to take water Existing Threats – 1 Wastewater / Sewage Works ECAs – Future Threats -19 Wastewater / Sewage Works ECAs – Existing Threats – 47 Nutrient Management Strategies – Future Threats -1 Nutrient Management Strategies – Existing Threats – 0 Potential issues noted were the rate of completion of RMPs may need to increase; outstanding septic inspections must be completed as soon as possible as the January 2017 deadline has passed. Ongoing challenges with managing all the reporting data must be dealt with and it was noted that this is more work than had been anticipated. Next steps were explained which involves speaking to the RMOs to ensure there is a plan in place to meet the deadline for RMPs. The SPA will be working with the Part 8 sewage system inspectors and building officials who have outstanding mandatory septic inspections to complete. The source water data management SPAR database needs to be fine-tuned, communication with other databases needs to be addressed and 2015 data entered. The RMOs need training on how to use the database and generate reports for their stakeholders. Questions / Comments There was a conversation regarding the SPAR database being able to generate reports. It was stated that the SPAR database will generate reports that can go to the municipalities and that most RMOs are working with their municipality. It was asked if the progress to date information regarding compliance for completion of RMPs, Official Plan updates, septic inspections, etc. needs to go to municipal councils. There was a discussion regarding if the information is being held at the staff level and if council is aware of the mandatory requirements they would eventually be responsible for. It was suggested that perhaps the SPA should provide presentations to councils and prompt them on what needs to be done. It was noted that every council has a representative on the SPA. Whether or not a letter needed to be sent out to municipal councils was examined. It was noted that some councils would want detailed information and others would prefer staff deal with the details. It was stated that SPA updates start on Friday, March 24, 2017 and a conversation should be held there to determine what the SPA wants sent out to municipal councils. Concern was expressed that RMP completion is low. It was asked at what point staff become concerned about the number of completed RMPs. It was stated that in the next

of 65

of 16

few months conversations will take place with the RMOs and they will be asked how they plan to move forward to meet the completion deadline. Mike Wilson stated that the low number of RMPs completed to date is not a major concern at this time but if we don’t see an increase in the rate of RMPs completed over the next year it may be cause for concern. He stated that many Risk Management Officials have a plan in place to complete all required RMPs by the deadline and that we expect many potential threats that would have required a RMP may drop off the to-do list through threats verification work. It was noted that the Chairs and PM meeting will have a presentation on SPAR and it is thought that other SPRs will want to adopt it. Moved by: Dave Ritchie Seconded by: John Hemsted RESOLVED: THAT Staff Report No. 2017-01-01 be received for information.

AND FURTHER THAT reports provided by provincial agencies that have been made available via Dropbox be received for information.

CARRIED BY CONSENSUS c) Section 46 Annual Reporting Bill Thompson’s presentation was deferred until the fall SPC meeting due to the meeting running late. d) General Updates Ryan Post presented general updates on the progress of implementation and other activities being undertaken by Source Protection Authority staff.

The presentation covered the brochure refresh, Source Protection Annual Reporting web tool (SPAR) and fuel storage.

The brochure refresh (front desk materials) was explained along with the process that was undertaken and the staff involved. It was noted that the new brochures are done and available on the website ourwatershed.ca under resources for municipalities. An example was shown and it was explained that the municipality can add their contact information and logo to the brochures. It was noted that there are brochures on fuel storage, septic systems, RMPs, DNAPLS, agricultural threats and drinking source water protection.

The Source Protection Annual Reporting web tool (SPAR) was explained and background information on the reporting it supports was given. It was noted that the questions

of 65

of 16

included in the database are verbatim from the MOECC questions for Part IV reporting. The database also allows for flexibility as questions can be annually reported or only reported one time and the system allows for changes to be made to the questions. The SPAR database allows administrators to send RMOs and municipal staff a link to the section of information they are required to complete. The administrators will be able to see which reports have been completed and sent back. It was noted that the reports that are generated will be much more efficient, especially the RMO reporting where a report will be generated instead of having 52 spreadsheets to sort and summarize. It was explained that the reports will be able to be exported as a spreadsheet. It is expected that the release date for the SPAR database will be November 2017. Upcoming key dates for reporting were reviewed, February 1, 2018 the first annual reports due to the SPAs. From February 2018 to April 2018 the first annual report is due to the SPC for review and comment. May 1, 2018 the first annual report is due to MOECC. It was asked if the RMOs have the opportunity to input information about new threats when using SPAR. It was noted that in the Part IV threats verification new threats could be added. It was further noted that some threats would need to be added to the SPP when it is revised. A brief overview of fuel storage systems was given including the letters that were sent to municipalities by MOECC in August of 2016. It was noted that RMOs had started developing RMPs prior to the letters arriving. There was a discussion regarding TSSA and how to get obtain information for reporting purposes as they had not been responding to requests. It was stated that MOECC has assigned coaches in its branches to deal with different ministries and TSSA. Beth Forrest is the coach for TSSA and it was noted there had recently been staff changes at TSSA and MOECC is in the process of obtaining an updated contact list from TSSA.

Moved by: Ian Chadwick Seconded by: John Boucher RESOLVED: THAT the updates provided by Ryan Post on the above topics be

received for information. CARRIED BY CONSENSUS d) Overview of the MOECC Program Review Bill Thompson provided an overview of MOECC’s Sourcewater Protection Program. The three components of the policy and program revisions, the technical framework, the policy framework and the general program framework were explained.

of 65

of 16

Phase One the technical framework revision has been completed and was explained in detail at the October 18, 2016 SPC meeting. Phase Two of the technical framework revision is currently underway this phase will include issues that are more complicated and require changes to policy or regulations. The revisions and clarifications included in this phase are quantity thresholds for DNAPLS, potentially a new category being added for industrial chemicals including waste oil. Phase Two will also include revisions or clarifications being considered for LID stormwater management, road salt circumstances and pesticide application circumstances. The management of pesticides may be changed to be based on the application volume instead of just the area. New threats are also being considered involving transportation activities that need policies and tools to be managed. Exemptions for rare threats i.e. aircraft de-icing may be included or this type of threat may be able to be managed on a regional basis. The Phase 2 policy framework revisions will help resolve issues that have come up during implementation and inconsistencies that are being found. Items being considered are amending s.61 so RMP exemptions are only provided for instruments which have been approved by the Province. Inclusion of transport pathways is also being looked at. Standardization of PI policies is being considered in order to ensure consistency across the province which may come in the form of a standardized list of PIs that SPC would choose from. Standardized monitoring policies across the province are also being examined. It was noted that most SPRs in their policy had stated that TSSA shall report on… whereas this region had stated it would ask for a report, which may be part of the reason there is difficulty obtaining reporting information from TSSA. The removal of non-legally binding policies directed at provincial ministries is being considered. It was stated that some agencies have 241 different policies directed at them; this may result in the SPRs being given the ability to submit recommendations. The general program framework is being examined and changes being considered. Potential changes include streamlining the approval authority, with authority possibly being delegated to the director instead of the Minister. Consideration is also being given to allowing SPAs to approve plan amendments instead of the minister approving them. Bill reviewed the timelines for implementation and consultation. It was noted that existing vulnerable areas and assessments will remain under the original rules but could be updated when the SPC updates the Source Protection Plan (SPP). It was stated that pre-consultation is underway on water budgets and the delineation of WHPAs. It is expected that formal consultation will start with a discussion paper on EBR in May or June of 2017 with consultations later in the year. It was explained how these program review consultations may impact the SGBLS SPR. There may be significant impact due to new threats, changes to circumstances and new rules for IPZ delineation.

of 65

of 16

Consideration may also be given to updating vulnerable area delineations, vulnerability scores and related policy. Bill Thompson recommended that the Technical Working Group reconvene in order to review and comment on the draft pre-consultation information and then report back to the SPC at the fall meeting. There was a discussion regarding whether the previous members of the Technical Working Group would be interested in participating and if other people would like to be involved. It was clarified that the Technical Working Group would need to meet 2- 3 times between June and November or December. Larry Slomka offered to resume his position as chair of the working group. It was agreed that once the discussion paper comes out for comment it is to be sent to the entire SPC to review and provide comments. It was noted that there are no municipal representatives on the Technical Working Group and they need to have the opportunity to comment. A discussion took place in regards to the Technical Working Group submitting comments to EBR prior to the next SPC meeting. It was agreed that the comments can be shared via email as long as it was not resulting in having to chase people for comments. It was noted that the comments will be sent to the members to review with the caveat that if you don’t respond within a week we will assume you agree with the comments made. It was clarified that once the discussion paper is out it will be circulated to the SPC members to review while the Technical Working Group members are reviewing it, in case a quick turnaround is need for commenting on EBR.

Action Item 1 Members of the SPC were to consider their interest in either sitting on the Technical Working Group again or joining the group as a new member. Decisions to be communicated to Lynn Dollin or Bill Thompson via email in the next week.

Responsibility All members

Action Item 2 Discussion paper on Program policy framework to be circulated to all SPC members once the paper is released by MOECC. Members are asked to review the discussion paper and send any comments Larry Slomka. Larry will compile comments to reply to the EBR posting.

Responsibility All members Moved by: Tom Kurtz Seconded by: Stan Wells RESOLVED: THAT Staff Report No. 2017-03-01 be received for information.

FURTHER THAT the Technical Working Group be directed to review and comment on draft material as it is released during the pre-consultation period.

of 65

of 16

AND FURTHER THAT the Technical Working Group be directed to report back to the Source Protection Committee in advance of submitting comments to the Environmental Registry.

CARRIED BY CONSENSUS d) Municipal Implementation of SPP Policies Keith Sherman provided an overview of the implementation of policies in the Lafontaine ICA. A map showing well locations in the Issue Contributing Area (ICA) was explained. Preliminary testing results from Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) / University of Waterloo were explained. It was noted that the nitrates found by testing were likely from fertilizers and they are not from septic systems, but further analysis is being done. The Integrated Surface model map was shown. It was noted that the recharge areas away from the original boundary were not quite a WHPA-E but contributing to the ground water. Information from the Nitrate Monitoring Study of Agricultural Fields by Andy van Niekirk was provided. It was noted in the study that 9 farmers in the area account for the majority of the fields (52 fields) and their practices were looked at over a 3 year period, a model was used to estimate the nitrogen balance. Best Management Practices (BMPs) were considered to control the nitrogen. All the private septic systems in the area were inspected by the Township of Tiny to see if they were affecting the nitrate load. It was discovered that only 12% of the systems needed follow up work done. Golder Associates draft evaluation assumed that 24-28g/d of nitrates were affecting the groundwater and that the evaluation done in the Lafontaine area revealed that the septic systems were not sufficient to cause the concentrations of nitrates found in the affected wells. Recommendations that came out of the study of the agricultural fields included split applying the nitrogen, keeping something growing at all times, cover crops after harvesting, diversifying the crop rotation to have some crops that don’t need nitrogen, using a Variable Rate Technology (VRT) to optimize fertilizer application and the use of grassed waterways when appropriate. The risk management measures available were reviewed in regards to fertilizer being applied on the affected fields. It was noted that some measures suggested in the RMP are already in place with more to be implemented. The difficulty in putting an RMP in place with 9 operators rotating fields was explained. The RMP that is being put in place will move with the operator with an appendix regarding the fields the operator is working on, which was felt to be a more suitable solution to working with the owners in the area than having 9 RMPs per field.

of 65

of 16

It was noted that this issue will need to be monitored continually as it is a long term problem. Incentive funding is to be explored and EFP related funding from OMAFRA is being looked into. The township will continue to monitor trends. There will be a final summary report for the next assessment report. There was a discussion regarding if the municipality has considered taking the affected wells out of service and using water intakes from the lake due to the nitrate issue. The short term solution the municipality has in place is to blend the water from several water systems to bring the concentration down. It was noted that the drinking water system is safe and the long term plan is to replace the wells with other sources. Moved by: Larry Slomka Seconded by: John Boucher RESOLVED: THAT the information provided by Keith Sherman be received for

information. CARRIED BY CONSENSUS IX. DETERMINATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION

Correspondence

1. b) December 13, 2016 letter from the Town of Midland in regards to the Decision to Waive the Need for Peer Review Water Budgets for Major Developments Located within Wellhead Protection Area Q2.

X. ADOPTION OF ITEMS NOT REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION

Moved by: John Hemstead Seconded: Clayton Cameron RESOLVED: THAT the recommendations respecting items not requiring separate


CARRIED BY CONSENSUS XI. CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION Correspondence

1. b) Concern was expressed regarding letter to Midland regarding peer reviews and the response. It was asked if peer reviews should be included in policy changes. It

of 65

of 16

was decided no further action would be taken at the current time but this will be kept in mind for the upcoming policy reviews.

Action Item 3 This item to be revisited when the SPP policy changes are

considered. Responsibility Bill Thompson

Moved by: Bob Duncanson Seconded: John Boucher RESOLVED: THAT the recommendations respecting items requiring separate



XII. OTHER BUSINESS Debbie Korolnek inquired as to whether or not the SPAs had been consulted about the EBR posting that is closing on May 10, 2017 on hauled sewage and untreated raw sewage being land applied. There was a discussion regarding whether or not this fell under the SPC scope. It was agreed to circulate the posting to the members and if the committee wants to comment they can do so through staff. It was noted that the Rural Ontario comments can also be circulated to the committee.

Action Item 4 The EBR Posting and Rural Ontario comments on untreated sewage being land applied to be circulated to the committee members. Comments to be submitted on behalf of the committee in support of the ban on applying untreated raw sewage after the committee reviews the EBR posting, even if it is not in scope.

Responsibility Bill Thompson XIII. CLOSED SESSION

None for the record of this meeting. XIV. ADJOURNMENT The next meeting of the SPC will take place October 19, 2017 at the Monte Carlo Inn in Barrie. Motion to adjourn the meeting was moved by Clayton Cameron at 4:28 pm.

of 65

MINUTES


Monte Carlo Inn Barrie Suites, 81 Hart Dr., Barrie, ON. October 19, 2017

1:00 pm – 4:00 pm MEMBERS: Lynn Dollin, Chair Municipal Economic/Development Public Sector First Nations Herb Proudley Colin Elliott Clayton Cameron John Boucher David Ritchie (1) Bob Duncanson Kyle Mitchell (1) Ian Chadwick Larry Slomka Don Goodyear (1) David Ketcheson Dianne Corrigan (1) Colin Nisbet Tom Kurtz Fred Ruf

Liaisons Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit – None Nottawasaga Valley Source Protection Authority – Ryan Post Severn Sound Source Protection Authority – Julie Cayley Lakes Simcoe & Couchiching, Black River Source Protection Authority – Bill Thompson Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change – Elizabeth (Beth) Forrest Staff Bill Thompson (acting LSCBR SPA Liaison) Keith Sherman Mike Wilson Jessica Burns, minutes Susan Jagminas Ryan Post Guests Scott Drewette, Barrie Riley Mulligan, Ontario Geological Survey (OGS) Bilal Kidwai MOECC Colin Hall, Durham Region RMO/I Regrets Ben Longstaff Doug Hevenor Rick Newlove Karen Kivilahti Stan Wells Dan Shilling Debbie Korolnek – proxy to Kyle Mitchell John Hemsted – proxy to David Ritchie Stephanie Hobbs – proxy to Dianne Corrigan Katie Thompson – proxy to Don Goodyear for duration of her maternity leave

of 65

I. WELCOME & OPENING REMARKS All were welcomed to the meeting and attendance and the following details were reviewed:

• Ben Longstaff was unable to attend therefore; Bill Thompson is acting LSCBR SPA Liaison;

• Elizabeth (Beth) Forrest introduced Bilal Kidwai from MOECC he was welcomed as a guest.

II. DECLARATION OF PECUNIARY INTEREST No pecuniary interests were declared. III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA The agenda was approved as printed and circulated. Moved by: Herb Proudley Seconded by: John Boucher

RESOLVED: THAT the agenda for the October 19, 2017 meeting of the Source




(a) Source Protection Committee The minutes from the March 22, 2017 SPC meeting were approved as circulated. Moved by: Don Goodyear Seconded by: Dianne Corrigan RESOLVED: THAT the minutes of the March 22, 2017 meeting of the Source

Protection Committee be approved as printed and circulated. CARRIED BY CONSENSUS

(b) Technical Working Group (TWG) Committee The draft minutes for the June 7, 2017 TWG meeting were discussed. This was a challenging meeting with a lot of discussion around a considered change in approach to calculating Percent Managed Lands (PMLs) implications. Bill Thompson drew a diagram illustrating the difference between the methods used to calculate percent managed lands in two successive MOE guidance documents (from Sept and Nov 2009), and how it would affect the implementation of the some SPP policies under specific

of 65

circumstances. It was further noted that Katie Thompson presented at the June 7, 2017 TWG meeting on how this PMLs issue impacts Barrie and was not satisfied that the November 2009 calculation approach to PMLs lands was not adopted for the Barrie area.

Action Item 1 The presentation slides presented at the June 7, 2017 TWG meeting will be posted to ourwatershed.ca

Responsibility Bill Thompson Beth Forrest, MOECC, clarified that it was the intent of the Province that the November 2009 guidance document be used in calculating percent managed lands throughout the province; it is the Province’s recommendation that the November 2009 calculation be used to calculate percent managed lands moving forward and included in all updates. It was agreed that this issue will be further clarified at the next Technical Working Group meeting in early 2018 and that the below recommendation to be amended to reflect this change. RESOLVED: THAT the minutes from the June 7, 2017 meeting of the

Technical Working Group Committee be received for information and FURTHER THAT the PMLs issue be referred back to the Technical Working Group for further discussion and consideration.

Moved by: David Ritchie Seconded by: Don Goodyear

2 opposed: Collin Elliot and Clayton Cameron Concern was expressed around the need to have the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food (OMAF) involved in this percent managed lands issue with the Province, if considerations are being made to revise it. An agricultural expert should be included in those conversations. CARRIED V. CORRESPONDENCE Please see items IX and X. VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Activities of the Chair & Committee Lynn Dollin gave a brief SPC Chair and PM update.

of 65

Currently it is a commonly understood issue in Source Water that SPCs are not engaged enough and this is posing a number of challenges. There is a push do more with SPC members as Champions of the Source Water Program i.e. community outreach and updating Stakeholder groups of the current Source Water goings on. SPC members are asked to share any ideas on how to implement this new level of engagement with PMs and Chairs. Work is being done to plan an international symposium on Source Water likely to be held toward the end of 2018. Lynn Dollin and Dave Ritchie are part of the Steering Committee for this event. The Steering Committee was established by the MOECC and Conservation Ontario. Information on this event will be shared with the SPC as it develops. b) Agricultural Sector Update to the SPC The SPC Agricultural Representatives (Ag Reps) reviewed what activities they have recently undertaken for Source Water. Dave Ritchie and Collin Elliot took part in a Webinar/ Webcast on May 18, 2017 in collaboration with Conservation Ontario. This was a webcast provided to staff of the Environmental Protection Agency in New Hampshire and was well received. They may be looking at hosting another one in fall of 2018 for a broader audience of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) staff across the USA. c) MOECC Update

Elizabeth Forrest provided a brief update on the status of MOECC Source Water Program and activities. They are currently working on a number of items under Source Water Protection:

• They are working to get the new Minister up to speed with Source Water Protection;

• Working to address the Source Protection Plan (SPP) Section 34 amendment – they briefed the Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) on the requested amendment regarding the Shelburne system with the hopes to push up consideration to December 2017;

• They are going through an internal reorganization – they will be moving to the “Policy and Program Division” but there will be no impact on branch staff;

• The Section 36 workplans is a Minister driven review of the SPP and Assessment Report (AR) – they have put guidance out on that already – they are working on an Annual Reporting Database (ARD) as a tool for

of 65

Conservation Authorities (CAs) to ease the process; this ARD will be used internally by the Province first and then rolled out to CAs in 2018-2019;

• They will have a new ADM as of December 2017. VII. DELEGATIONS None. VIII. PRESENTATIONS a) Groundwater Recharge in Simcoe County Riley Mulligan, with the Ontario Geological Survey (OGS), presented on the work done by the OGS and why it is being done. They are working to inform an updated regional geological context for framework on which to launch local scale initiatives. The work area span is currently the County of Simcoe with the outskirts of the greater golden horseshoe being the focus; however, the bedrock geology follows rock and is not bound to a specific area. The OGS is funded by the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines. The data that the OGS is collecting now looks deeper into the geology of the Province; they are using new technologies i.e. looking at metadata. These works are advancing knowledge in the area of new safe and secure clean water sources. The OGS hopes that this updated and expansive data is helpful, accessible and used. How the data from this new geological conceptualization of the region can be incorporated into the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe (SGBLS) Source Protection database was considered. How to compare and update the current information, as well as who will be responsible in overseeing this data update was questioned. Bill noted this is a relevant item under Section 36; uncertainty lies around how we go about getting it done, how long it takes and how it is funded. Beth Forrest, MOECC, noted that if there is information out there that needs to be included in the SPP and there is a strong push, the Province should be informed as they too want to be using the most current information available. Further data needs to be collected in some areas, the OGS will continue to try and retrieve geological data on which there is no current information. In terms of Permit To Take Water (PTTW) applications, the currency of the information that permitting staff and reviewers are referring to was questioned. Beth Forrest, MOECC, assured that should there be a PTTW application in an area that has water quantity stress issues that currency of the data is looked at during the review process.

of 65

Moved by: Larry Slomka Seconded by: David Ketcheson RESOLVED: THAT the information presented by Riley Mulligan on Groundwater

Research in Simcoe County be received for information. CARRIED BY CONSENSUS b) Section 46 Annual Reporting Bill Thompson presented a review of the Sections 46 and 81 that speak to Annual Reporting. He noted that next spring is the deadline for the first formal Annual Report submission to the Minister and that this item will again be addressed at the next SPC meeting (April 2018). It was further noted that some additional questions were added to the original 95 by the Annual Reporting working group. This is a large set of questions being asked to a large set of people and as such, will require a lot of time to compile, read, analyze and synthesize. The SPC will have the chance to review and comment on questions as well as the draft report for submission to the Minister; an additional summary document will be provided to Ministry Staff. It was clarified that the Annual Reporting process for municipalities will be the same as last year; however, there will be some additional new questions. These new questions have likely not been seen by all municipalities. Also, to aid in the Annual Reporting process, the Source Protection Annual Reporting Database will be completed shortly and training will be offered. Moved by: Kyle Mitchell Seconded by: Ian Chadwick RESOLVED: THAT Staff Report No. 2017-02-01 be received for information

AND FURTHER THAT the Source Protection Committee meet between March 1 and April 15 of each year to review and comment on the draft report prior to its May 1 submission to the Province AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to provide the SPC with an overview of other items in Section 46 reports which pertain to deadlines met or missed, issues for consideration in review of the Source Protection Plan, or other items deemed of interest by staff, Chair, or members of the SPC.


of 65

c) Section 36 Plan Review

Bill Thompson provided an overview of the Section 36 Plan Review. A number of items for consideration involved in this process and upcoming for the SPC in 2018 were noted. The group was reminded that Section 36 addresses what in the SPP is working and what should be looked at for possible revision, any minor change to the plan i.e. typos, falls under Section 51, Section 34 is under which more involved changes fall i.e. new understandings of groundwater and that it is under Section 36 where the most comprehensive changes to the plan fall. Bill noted that as the lead CA, LSRCA must prepare and submit a workplan on suggested changes under Section 36 for submission to the Minister at the end of November 2018. It was also noted that Bill would like to have guest speakers i.e. Source Water partners, at a mid-year SPC meeting in 2018. This would allow the SPC to hear about how SPP policies are rolling out on the ground and hear a few case studies may help set the context for the 2018 SPC work. The challenge surrounding uncertainty of funding was addressed. Bill noted that we will be submitting to the Minister of the Environment for Source Water funds; however, the Minister may be new and his or her interest in the Source Water Program will be difficult to gage. Additionally noted was that SPC memberships will be expiring in December 2019, as this may very well coincide with the task of addressing revisions to the SPP policies, this timing may be problematic. Concern was expressed about losing the knowledge, experience and history of current SPC members prior to the completion of this work.

Action Item 2 Will provide a review of SPC membership terms and rules at the next SPC meeting as well as clarify whether the SPC Agricultural Representatives were re-appointed or re-elected to the Committee during the last SPC membership refresh.

Responsibility Bill Thompson and Lynn Dollin In terms of growth plans and land use change, it was noted that the new Natural Heritage Mapping appears to be posing a number of concerns for landowners. It was agreed that what and how this may affect the Land Use Planning (LUP) policy will need to be considered. Moved by: Dianne Corrigan Seconded by: Colin Nisbet RESOLVED: THAT the updates provided by Bill Thompson on the above topics and

the associated Staff Report No. 2017- 02-02 be received for information.

of 65

CARRIED BY CONSENSUS d) Overview of the MOECC Source Water Protection (SWP) Program Review

Beth Forrest provided an update on MOECC’s review of the SWP Program with the primary focus on Technical Changes. They are currently reviewing the technical framework of the program. Some noted elements under consideration were as follows:

• Phase 1 Rule Changes – looking at increasing flexibility to allow for higher vulnerability scores where necessary;

• Water Quality and Quantity – looking at things like surface water, ground water, Well Head Protection Area – E (WHPA E) delineation and transport pathways;

• Threats – working to address gaps and make changes where needed with the aid of Working Groups with a range of expertise on each i.e. revised circumstances for handling and storage of dense non aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs) and organic solvents, sewage works, stormwater management works, waste disposal sites, non-agricultural source material (NASM) and pesticides;

• Water quantity – risk ranking and delineation review of WHPA Q1 and Q2. Discussion occurred around the chemical implications of NASMs in WHPAs and concern around the prohibition of certain agricultural chemicals. The MOECC is currently trying to decide whether such chemicals will be addressed on a chemical class level basis or chemical make-up basis; it was assured that the Standards Development Branch is very much engaged in this issue. Once decided, it will be posted to the EBR and the SPC is welcome to comment, as well as individual SPC members, should they feel the need. Further concern was noted in regards to the current policy prohibition of solvents and DNAPLs in certain circumstances. This is a conservative approach that will result in the prohibition of a number of activities making the policy implications challenging. Whether this may trigger an automatic policy update was discussed. The MOECC is beginning discussions on this issue; as it stands, phased changes are not all mandatory, it is unclear as to whether all will be made mandatory moving forward. Should this change be made the policies will be impacted and may result in necessary policy amendments. The MOECC is looking for necessary recommendations to improve the SPP policies; they want recommendations from a technical standpoint with considerations of the impacts on policy and implementation. Overall cost consideration in regards to any changes made to the current threat categories was next discussed. Should these categories be revised all will need to be reassessed and in the SGBLS region this would be an intensive undertaking. It was agreed that this is an important point to keep in mind. It was reminded that such reviews are necessary in order

of 65

to address the SPC request to update of the Table of Threats. Also noted was that the SWP Program should be operating with the most current information available and as such it is an ever changing program. Further conversations are to be held on this topic, within the MOECC. Moved by: Ian Chadwick Seconded by: Fred Ruf RESOLVED: THAT the information provided by Beth Forrest, MOECC, on the

Source Water Protection Program be received for information. CARRIED BY CONSENSUS e) Education & Outreach (E & O) - Materials Status Update Given time considerations, it was agreed that the Education & Outreach (E & O) – Materials Status Update presentation from Ryan Post be carried over to the agenda for the April 2018 SPC meeting. IX. DETERMINATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION Correspondence

1. d) Letter dated October 3, 2017 from Geoffrey Rether, P.Geo, Ian D. Wilson Associates Limited, to Bill Thompson, Manager, Integrated Watershed Management, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, as notification that Gold Mountain Springs Inc. has submitted an application for a renewal of Permit To Take Water No. 3122-9ZCQRS.

X. ADOPTION OF ITEMS NOT REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION Moved by: Herb Proudley Seconded by: Bob Duncanson RESOLVED: THAT the recommendations respecting items not requiring separate


CARRIED BY CONSENSUS XI. CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION Correspondence

of 65

1. d) It was clarified that since this does not involve a municipal well, it does not need to be presented to the SPC and should not have been included in the list of correspondence.

XII. OTHER BUSINESS Items mentioned under other business included the following:

• If interested in attending the Oak Ridges Moraine Coalition Open House please contact David Ketcheson;

• In two cases in York Region, Don Goodyear was successful in supporting the use of alternative products to DNAPLs by proponents - one of those proponents, a dry cleaning business, won a conservation award;

• Lynn would like any good news SW stories shared in support of SW E & O efforts.

XIII. CLOSED SESSION

None for the record of this meeting. XIV. ADJOURNMENT The next meeting of the SPC will take place April 5, 2018 at the Monte Carlo Inn, Barrie. Motion to adjourn the meeting was moved by Herb Proudley at 3:55pm.

of 65

120 Bayview Parkway Newmarket, ON L3Y 4X1 Tel: 905-895-1281 Fax: 905-853-5881

www.ourwatershed.ca

To: Geoff Dawe, Chair, Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River Source Protection Authority From: Lynn Dollin, Chair, South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Committee CC: Bill Thompson, Manager, Integrated Watershed Management, LSRCA Date: April 20, 2018 Re: Source Protection Committee Update

Chair Dawe and Members: It’s my pleasure to bring you a brief update from the Source Protection Committee since the last Source Protection Authority Board meeting a year ago. Source Protection Committee meetings Since my last report to you, the Source Protection Committee has met three times, where we have heard updates from implementing bodies on progress made to date on implementing the policies in the Source Protection Plan, and from Provincial staff on proposed changes to the technical and regulatory framework of the Source Protection program. You’ll have an opportunity today, as the SPC did earlier this month, to see the results of the first annual report on implementation progress before it is submitted to the Minister. The SPC is very impressed by the amount of work that has been done by municipal staff and others since the plan came into effect in July 2015, and we will be indicating to the Minster that we are satisfied with the current state of progress. Sharing our experiences with an international audience The agricultural representatives on our committee have continued to be leaders in their sector, and share their experiences with Ontario’s source protection program with an international audience. Following a very well-received session at an international conference in Quebec in 2016, our committee members were invited to present, via webinar, on their experience in source water protection with staff from the Environmental Protection Agency in New Hampshire. Response to that webinar was positive as well, and requests continue to come to have them share their experiences with peers throughout Ontario and beyond. Source Protection Plan amendments In February, Minister Ballard approved an amendment to the Source Protection Plan, which revises wellhead protection area boundaries to account for a new well in the Town of Shelburne. An additional amendment to the plan was made to remove the decommissioned Goldcrest system in the Town of Innisfil.

of 65

Updates of this sort will be necessary from time to time to ensure that the Plan remains up-to-date and effectively protects the raw sources of municipal drinking water. Ensuring these updates are completed will require ongoing collaboration between the SPC, SPA, and municipal councils. Source Protection Municipal Implementation Fund When the Source Protection Plans were first coming into effect across the province, the MOECC established a Source Protection Municipal Implementation Fund (SPMIF), which was intended to assist small municipalities in taking on their new obligations. At that time, 41 municipalities in our region received funding totalling nearly $2 million. There have been challenges in utilizing this money, however, due to the initial short time frame that funding was available, and the limited list of eligible activities. This funding program has been extended several times, including most recently to the end of 2018. Those municipalities who have SPMIF funds remaining may wish to look for opportunities to ensure that this money is used locally, and can seek advice from their RMO or SPA staff on how to do so. Looking ahead When Minister Murray approved the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Plan, he tasked the lead Source Protection Authority with submitting a work plan for its review and amendment. That work plan is due in November of this year, and in the coming months, the SPC will be working with staff to assess which technical and policy aspects of the plan remain effective, which need to be revised. Every source protection area and region will be going through a similar exercise, and we anticipate this will make both the Committee and the Board slightly busier in the coming years. Thank you for your time, Lynn Dollin Chair

of 65

Staff Report No: 01-18-SPA Page No: 1 of 4 Agenda Item No: VIb) SPA-01-18

TO: Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River Source Protection Authority FROM: Mike Wilson, P. Geo. – Source Water Protection Coordinator, LSRCA DATE: April 20, 2018 SUBJECT: The First Source Water Protection Annual Report to the Ministry RECOMMENDATION: THAT Staff Report No. 01-18-SPA regarding the first source water

protection annual report to the Ministry be received; and

FURTHER THAT the Annual Report be submitted to the Director of Source Protection (MOECC) to meet the May 1, 2018 deadline.

Purpose of Staff Report: The purpose of this Staff Report No. 01-18-SPA is to provide an overview of the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe source protection plan annual implementation progress report, submitted under Section 46 of the Clean Water Act. Background: The South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Plan has been in effect since July 1, 2015. The Clean Water Act (Section 46) requires that the lead Source Protection Authority report to the Director of Source Protection (MOECC) on the implementation of all policies by May 1st of each year, and that the Source Protection Committee be provided an opportunity to comment on the draft report before its submission (see Source Protection Annual Progress Report - Appendix A.1). A primary objective of monitoring and reporting is to assess if threats to municipal drinking water sources are being reduced through the implementation of the Source Protection Plan policies. This information will help support any future amendments to the Plan and provide accountability and transparency to stakeholders.

of 65


Risk Management Officials have been reporting annually to the local source protection authorities since the Plan came into effect (July 2015); however, this report is the first annual report from all implementing bodies, and spans the period from July 1 2015 to December 31 2017. For the second consecutive year Risk Management Officials (RMOs) and municipal staff in our region used the secure online survey/database known as SPAR (Source Protection Annual Reporting) for annual reporting. In 2017 the MOECC Source Protection Programs Branch developed a similar database for collection and sharing information relating to prescribed instruments used in implementing Plan policies. An analysis of the data submitted using these two databases provides an overview of progress being made in implementing the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Plan. Essential implementation actions such as establishing a Risk Management Office have been completed across the source protection region, Restricted Land Use policies are being implemented, and most municipalities have started preparing risk management plans (RMPs). Ontario ministries have made significant progress reviewing previously issued provincial approvals (prescribed instruments such as Nutrient Management Plans) where they have been identified as a tool in our plan to address existing activities that may pose a risk to sources of drinking water. The reports are also helping identify areas where SPA staff can further assist in supporting implementation efforts, such as: providing educational materials and workshops to municipalities and identifying policies that could be more effective in reducing risk. Issues: At their most recent meeting, the Source Protection Committee reviewed the data provided to Source Protection staff, and identified the following key findings:

96% of the policies that address significant drinking water threats have been or are in the process of being implemented.

Approximately 71% of significant drinking water threats that existed at the time of source protection plan approval have been addressed through policy implementation or removal through threats verification.

106 RMPs have been established across the source protection region. However, the rate of risk management plan establishment will need to increase to complete all required RMPs by the 2020 deadline.

The majority of municipalities in our source protection region have processes in place to ensure that their day-to-day planning decisions conform to our source protection plans.

York Region’s incentive program has clearly demonstrated that funding the cost of implementing risk management measures in RMPs can play an important role in successful and timely RMP negotiations.

of 65


To-date there has been two prohibitions and four RMP required for future activities where

the activity would be a significant drinking water threat. Most future significant threats have been avoided through pre-consultation meetings between the RMO and the proponent.

All local municipalities within the Lake Simcoe Source Protection Authority portion of the York WHPA-Q2 are implementing policy LUP-12 (which requires a water balance study for all major developments) by having all applications peer reviewed by a Hydrogeologist.

97% (2005 of the 2071) of on-site sewage systems have been inspected in accordance with the Ontario Building Code. However, one municipality has not started their septic inspection program as of December 31, 2017.

All municipalities, with the exception of one, submitted their 2017 annual reports to Source Protection Authority staff.

Many RMOs have been focused on threats verification work since the source protection plan came into effect; a logical first step in removing potential significant drinking water threat sites. While some municipalities do not yet have any approved Risk Management Plans in place, some have already established all RMPs needed at this time, and most RMOs have a plan in place to tackle the number of RMPs that are estimated to be required by 2020. The SPA will continue to work with RMOs, particularly those who may have limited time and resources to dedicate to source water protection. This may include: facilitating the sharing of RMP templates, making annual reporting a more efficient process, and providing workshops for certain threat types (such as agricultural threats). The upper tier municipalities and SPA staff will work with Part 8 sewage system inspectors and Chief Building Officials to make it a priority to complete the initial round of required septic inspections. The SPA may be able to facilitate the sharing of information and tactics used by those municipalities that have been successful in getting the required septic inspection completed in a timely fashion. Based on the above, the Source Protection Committee has indicated that it is satisfied with the current rate of progress on plan implementation (see Appendix A.1) Summary & Recommendations: The various implementers of the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Plan have submitted their 2017 annual reports to the Source Protection Authority, as required under the Clean Water Act. The reports show that transition to implementation of policies is currently progressing at a satisfactory rate. Most of the source protection plan policies are progressing in accordance with the timelines specified in the source protection plan.

of 65


It is therefore RECOMMENDED THAT Staff Report No. 01-18-SPA regarding the first source water protection annual report to the Ministry be received; and FURTHER THAT the Annual Report be submitted to the Director of Source Protection (MOECC) to meet the May 1, 2018 deadline. Pre-Submission Review: This Staff Report No. 01-18-SPA has been reviewed by LSRCA’s General Manager, Integrated Watershed Management and the Chief Administrative Officer. Prepared by: Mike Wilson, P. Geo., Source Water Protection Coordinator Original signed by: Original signed by: ______________________________ __________________________________ Ben Longstaff Mike Walters General Manager, Chief Administrative Officer Integrated Watershed Management Attachments: Appendix A.1 – Source Protection Annual Progress Report – South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Plan

of 65

Source Protection Annual Progress ReportSouth Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Region

ourwatershed.ca

Annual Progress Report on Implementation of the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Region Source Protection Plan.

Reporting period | July 1, 2015 - December 31, 2017

APPENDIX A.1

of 65

1

Source Protection Annual Progress Report |

I. Introduction

Place map here

of 65

NancieK

Stamp

2

II. A message from your local Source Protection Committee

Our progress score on achieving source protection plan objectives this reporting period:

P : Progressing Well/On Target – The majority of the source protection plan policies have been implemented and/or are progressing in accordance with the timelines specified in the source protection plan.

S : Satisfactory – Some of the source protection plan policies have been implemented and/or are progressing in accordance with the timelines specified in the source protection plan.

L : Limited progress – A few of source protection plan policies have been implemented and/or are progressing in accordance with the timelines specified in the source protection plan.

of 65

3

III. Our Watershed

To learn more, please read our assessment report(s) and source protection plan(s).

of 65

4

IV. At a Glance: Progress on Source Protection Plan Implementation

1. Source Protection Plan Policies

2. Municipal Progress: Addressing Risks on the Ground

of 65

5

4. Risk Management Plans

3. Septic Inspections

of 65

6

5. Provincial Progress: Addressing Risks on the Ground

6. Source Protection Awareness and Change in Behaviour

of 65

7

7. Source Protection Plan Policies: Summary of Delays

of 65

8

8. Source Water Quality: Monitoring and Actions

of 65

9

10. More from the WatershedTo learn more about our source protection region/area, visit our Homepage.

9. Science-based Assessment Reports: Work Plans

of 65