J

TO:

Agenda Item # Page #

CHAIR AND MEMBERS ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

MEETING ON JUNE 7.2004

FROM:

SUBJECT

PETER W. STEBLIN, P. ENG. GENERAL MANAGER OF ENVIRONMENTAL & ENGINEERING

SERVICES & CITY ENGINEER SOUTHEAST RESERVOIR AND PUMP STATION

VALUE ENGINEERING OUTPUTS

I RECO M MEN DATlO N 1

{ PREVIOUS REPORTS PERTINENT TO THIS MA7TER .

That on the recommendation of the General Manager of Environmental & Engineering Services & City Engineer, the Environmental and Engineering Services Department recommends that the following information BE RECEIVED with respect to the detailed design for the Southeast Reservoir and Pump Station project, it being nbted that the project will move to detailed design on the basis of this report and the related attachments and to especially:

(a) Proceed with the detailed design as optimized through the Value Engineering process, including reservoir storage capacity of 1 13 ML (million litres), noting that the current estimate for the project is $42 million;

(b) Incorporate the recreational and water feature aspects outlined to make the site a destination and give the project a recreational focus versus utilitarian;

(c) Further support ongoing discussions with UWO, Trojan Technologies and other potential publidprivate partnership stakeholders for other project related, and/or Regional Water Quality Initiative related aspects;

(d) Include the Southeast Reservoir and Pump Station as a key Phase 1 element in the application to senior government as part of the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives seeking infrastructure funding in conjunction with the Joint Boards.

Consultant Appointment - Engineerinq Services for Southeast Pumpina Station and Reservoir, Capital, Works Project EW3614 Report to ETC December 8,2003

Reaional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives Report to ETC December 8,2003

New Certificate of Approval -Waterworks Report to ETC March 29,2004.

I BACKGROUND 1 Purpose:

This report has been prepared to update the Committee and City Council on the Value Engineering process undertaken for the project and the outputs to be carried forward for project completion. The intent was to:

0 Confirm the concept recommended for the project which would act as the basis for detailed design and construction;

\

Agenda Item # Page #

Further advance the City’s activities with respect to the Regional Water Quality Initiative and the related funding request;

Obtain Council’s concurrence with respect to further discussions regarding public/private partnership opportunities with the University of Western Ontario and Trojan Technologies regarding a proposed training/testing facility involving this project and/or the Regional Water Quality Initiative, and with the City’s Parks Department and external bike enthusiasts in the City for the BMX pedal bike aspect of the project.

An Executive Summary is attached (Appendix A) outlining the Value Engineering process (undertaken February 23 - 27, 2004) and the related outputs and details with respect to key elements of the project.

Context:

This is an information item to keep the Committee and City Council apprised of the progress of this project, given its large scale nature and its implications to the City; the related opportunities for public/private partnerships; and/or funding opportunities in concert with the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiative.

Discussion:

This project has been identified since the 1994 Dillon Watenvorks Study and is now required to provide adequate storage in the case of a pipeline failure, and the required water pressure to allow the industrial and commercial development to occur in the east and south parts of London. Significant reserves have been accounted for in the Water Reserve Fund in order to implement this project within the overall framework of the City’s financial strategic plan.

A Value Engineering Study was recommended as part of this project as it is an accepted methodology for identifying cost savings and/or quality improvements. The study followed a process designed to find alternate ways to achieve a project‘s necessary and desired functions at the lowest life cycle cost. A multi-disciplinary team of specialists identified the essential project functions, suggested and evaluated alternate ways to achieve them and updated the anticipated construction costs and life cycle costs in the process.

The Executive Summary identifies the benefits accrued to the City by undertaking a Value Engineering exercise for this project. The objectives were to:

Optimize land use and facility layout on the site;

0 Add value to the project by providing amenities for City residents, and turn the focus of the project to a destination (‘lyou want to go to”), versus a utilitarian purpose (“you need to go to”) and to;

0 Maximize potential funding opportunities for this project completed with the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power initiative.

Each of these items has been addressed by the work completed. In addition, synergies,with the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiative have also been identified for inclusion as part of the project, or consideration in concert with other projects relative to the City’s water distribution system and/or the Lake Huron or Elgin Area Primary Water Supply S ys tern s .

The Value Engineering process was successful in reducing not only the estimates for construction costs, but also identifying key operational savings. A summary of potential Value Engineering savings is attached as Appendix “B”. Modification to the pumping station/reservoir structure, as well as a reduction in not only the number but also the capacity of the pumps to be initially installed, was a key element in the $2.67 M reduction in capital costs. Design changes are also expected to produce operational cost savings when compared to preliminary design concepts .

The Value Engineering process, not only reviewed, but where necessary modified some elements. There are cases where different features have been added and are now recommended. Three key examples follow:

Agenda Item # Page ##

One of the options subjected to detailed review was the size and storage capacity of the reservoir. As part of the Water Supply Reliability Study (received by ETC May 13, 2002), it was noted that in the event of an interruption of the Lake Huron supply, emergency water supplied from the existing well systems, the production from the Elgin System and existing reservoir storage would not meet the two-day supply requirement guidelines. The deficit under those conditions is approximately I 15 ML. Construction of the Southeast Reservoir, at the preliminary design volume of 113 ML, will reduce the deficit to approximately 37 ML when it is completed in 2006 after some allowance for growth in the intervening years.

However, the deficit further increases to approximately 74 ML before further storage works (Springbank Reservoir, 2010) are online. The impacts of storage capacity are best demonstrated by way of example compared with the standby volumes required for high summer demands with some allowance for fire flow capacity and diminishing demand once an emergency is declared. Two scenarios are presented in Appendix "C"

The 113 ML capacity is recommended by staff as a reasonable incremental step at closing the current storage deficit. Future works (reservoir capacity, standby supply) will assist in offsetting growth impacts.

A three-prong recreation concept is recommended. The site could contain a BMX pedal bike facility, an expanded natural area as a possible joint venture with the Kettle Creek Conservation Authority and an off-leash dog park. This represents less than 2% ($750,000) of the total project cost but would turn the focus of the project to a place you would go to view and use whatever facilities are available on the site, versus the site being for utility purposes only. In this regard, the preliminary design also includes a proposed water feature (included in the 2% cost), possibly with a wind demonstration element, all of which could be the subject of the next UWO Student Design Competition.

Maintaining the opportunity to facilitate a publiclprivate partnership with interested parties such as the University of Western Ontario and private sector firms such as Trojan Technologies, for a training or testing facility located at this site or at other sites as part of the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiative.

We are pursuing this initiative in our role as the Administering Municipality for the Joint Board at the Lake Huron site; but as the City of London, we are keeping a measure of flexibility in the layout of facilities to utilize the reservoir site as a possible training center, possibly in conjunction with UWO/Fanshawe College or other training partners.

Details with respect to these potential initiatives, if they progress further, could be reviewed with the Committee/Council or the Lake Huron Joint Board on a self-sustaining basis. Minutes from an initial meeting of stakeholders interested in research aspects of the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power project; including possible facilities at the Southeast Reservoir site are attached as Appendix "D"

Should reduction in the Capital costs be required, it has been estimated that a 20 ML reduction in storage capacity would represent a $3 M cost reduction for the project. However, this would result in greater risk in the event of an unexpected water supply emergency.

The number and capacity of pumps planned for installation as part of the contract have been subject to rigorous review. Significant reductions have been made from the configuration proposed in the preliminary design. Further cost reduction may be available by reducing the proposed pump selection; however, this is not recommended due to the increased risks during em erg en cy situ at ions . Summary:

Working from the conceptual design estimates, the Value Engineering process has recommended changes resulting in excess of $2.6 M of savings in 2004 dollars. Allowing for 10% contingency and inflation to 2006 when the facility will be operational plus engineering, it is currently estimated that the budget for this project will be $42 M. This will be reported back as part of the 2005 budget deliberations.

Based on the aforementioned and subject to any change made by Committee or Council, EESD will:

Agenda Item # w

PREPARED BY:

Page #

RWOMMENDED BY: I \

Continue to pursue publidprivate partnerships for the project, specifically and in ’ conjunction with the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiative;

PAT MCNALLY, P. E&. DIRECTOR WATER ENVIRONMENT & CUSTOMER RELATIONS

Incorporate a water feature in the project and continue to discuss this opportunity with UWO for the upcoming Student Design Competition commencing later this year;

PETER W. STEBLIN, P.ENG. GENERAL MANAGER OF ENVIRONMENTAL & ENGINEERING SERVICES & CITY ENGINEER

Implement a bulk water station at the site to address commercial and rural servicing issues in the City’s southeast quadrant;

Include $42 M for this project as part of the City’s 2005 budget deliberations.

Acknowledgements:

This report was prepared by a team consisting of Bob Cooper, John Simon, and the City’s Consulting Engineer, ‘Earth Tech Canada Incorporated. Input to the project was provided by Gregg Barrett and Andrew Macpherson of the Planning Division.

May 18,2004 /It Attachments: Final Value Engineering Report - Executive Summary

George Charles Rick

Summary of Potential Value Engineering Study - Cost Savings George Charles RicWEarth Tech Canada Incorporated

Minutes - Water Treatment Testing/ResearchTTraining Centre April 23,2004, UWO

Supply Interruption Scenarios One and Two

cc John Haasen, Earth Tech Canada Incorporated Parks Planning, City Planning Department

Agenda Item # Page #

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

, I

FINAL VALUE ENGINEERING REPORT

SECTION I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

London needs greater water storage capacity and greater security of its water supply. Breakdowns

of the Lake Huron pipeline in 1983 and 1988 defined this need. Today, the need is more acute

because water pressure in the southeastern portion of the City, and existing reservoir capacity are

inadequate. With continued development, especially to meet industrial development along the 401

and Airport Road corridors, demand for water will continue to grow steadily.

,

.

The City of London retained Earth Tech Canada Inc. to undertake a Value Engineering exercise to

confirm the preliminary design work completed in early 2004, then undertake detailed design in 2004,

and contract administration and construction supervision for the project in 2005/2006. The fkility is *

expected to be operational by the end of 2006. ,

The intent of the Value Engineering exercise was to-review in detail the Class EA, preliminary design

and Class Environmental Assessment (EA) amendment work completed for the project. This work was

first initiated in 1994 (Water Supply Study ESR), when the need for this specific project was first

identified. The most recent pre-design update and EA amendment for this work was completed in

February 2003. The objectives of the Value Engineering exercise were to:

.- --

Reconfirm the need for and intent of the project to ensure the City continues to provide a safe and secure supply of water at the appropriate pressures, flows and quality to meet the City's needs now, and into the future;

Identify design, construction and/or operational efficiencies that could reduce the capital cost for the project, and improve life-cycle costs.

Identify opportunities to add value to the project via amenities (recreation opportunities, passive/active features, technology features or displays, etc.); address other City involved initiatives such as the "Regional Water Quality Capacity and Green Power Initiative" relative to the City's water system and the Lake Huron and Elgin Area Primary Water Supply Systems; and/or Public/Private Partnership (3P) Opportunities with such interested parties as Trojan Technologies and the University of Western Ontario. '

Better position opportunities for federal and/or provincial funding in concert with the above.

Confirm the preliminary design on which detailed design and construction would be based.

Address watet- supply and servicing for City residents in south London urban and rural areas.

E A R T H - B T E C H

George Charles Riek, PE, DEE, CVS Consulting Civil & Value Engineer

1 -?

5/27/2004

Agenda Item # Page #

Earth Tech and its Value Engineering leader Mr. George Riek, Consulting Civil and Value Engineer, led

a team of internal and external experts in all aspects of the project through the USEPA approved Value

Engineering (VE) Job Plan shown by the figure-in the Appendix. The VE exercise resulted in

confirmation of the immediate need and implementation of this project, and the identification of 250

Value Engineering ideas. These were honed down to 18 Value Engineering recommendations that

reduced capital and/or operational costs for the project, and added value to the project and/or the

community. This represents a $2.67 M-capital cost savings and $2.27 M operational cost savings over

20 years. Also included were 66 design suggestions that the VE team provided for incorporation iQto .

the above or into detailed design for the project. Both costs include the value added measures

recommended. These include:

! -

Incorporating active and/or passive recreational features, making the site a destination for City residents, and individuals outside the City;

Provisions to facilitate a PubWPrivate Partnership for training and/or testing facility opportunities with the University of Western Ontario and Trojan Technologies. Costs’fm this item would be a separate 3P initiative specific to this project, or as part of the “Regional Water Quality Initiative”.

The inclusion of a water feature at the facility to promote a theme of green power generation via a win-d turbine demonstration project. The resulting power would be used to Show how City water is supplied, treated and distributed. Discharge would be external to the environment via a naturalized channel to a Stormwater Management facility required for the site, and then on to a woodlot and a waterway tributary to the Kettle Creek. The form and function of this feature will be the subject of the UWO Engineering Design competition to be held during the next school year.

Details for some of the key Value Engineering outputs are as follows:

Positioning the proposed facility to the northwest corner of the site, close to Highbury Avenue as per the figure in the Appendix to take best advantage of topography; integrate both the pump house and reservoir components for capital cost savings; and open up available lands for passive and/or active recreation to the east and south, or make provision for a training/testing facility as part of a publidprivate partnership to the south.

Maintain the base design piping size, design the building shell to address 30-year needs, and stage pumping needs to meet initial, 10-year, 20- year and beyond requirements as per the table for daily peak flows, and emergency conditions if needed. initially a 4 pump arrangement would be installed to provide a peak flow capacity of 95 MLD with 3 pumps running (135 MLD under an emergency with all pumps running, providfed no pumps are out of service). This item alone represents $1.9 M in capital cost savings and $1.9 M in operational savings over 20 years. Before needing to meet an additional flow requirement in I O years, a 5‘h pump would be added when the EAWSS is expanded to provide a peak flow of 123 MLD (1 53 MLD under an emergency with all pumps running and none out of service). A pump cou1d”be added at a cost

. of $200,000 to provide firm capacity for emergency purposes with one pump out of service.

.

E A R T H e T E C H

George Charles Riek, PE, DEE, CVS GCR Consulting Civil & Value Engineer .

5/27/2004

1-2

Agenda Item # Page ##

Year

2001

2007

2014

2024 L

. ..

ADDw MDD PHD Emergency

(H u ro n/Aw a

off I i n e)

Q TDH - Q TDH Q TDH Q TDH

(MLD) (metres) (MLD) (metres) (MLD) (metres) (MLD) (metres)

24.1 40.3 24.1 40.3 24.1 40.3

27 48.6 27 50.7 27 40.3 135.2 56.5

26.0 40.7 52.2 50.7 94.7 55 153.3 61.1

32 48.7 63 51.7 122.9 62,3 166.4 64.7 - - -

This approach allowed pump sizing to be reduced from an emergency capacity of 183 MLD for the base pre-design for the project.

The size of the reservoir was confirmed as part of the base preliminabidesign (I 13 MLj. This was based on the premise of a Lake Huron pipeline break (which actually occurred in 1983 and 1988) and 2 days of storage being available to meet one day of maximum flow (summer), and one day of average flow (after emergency supplies come on line, if available, or conservation measures are imposed).

For this situation the Arva reservoir would be empty in less than one day, with or without the emergency supplies and with the Elgin Area Water Supply System providing maximum capacity. The Spring bank Reservoir would remain available if the proposed Southeast Reservoir capacity available is I 13 ML. Less than 2 days storage would be available at Southeast jf the City's emergency supply well maximum capacity from Elgin, is pJ available, both of which are likely.

The City of London could realize some further capital cost savings in this regard, if added risk is accepted and addressed via management or alternate means in the event of an emergency. This could include a massive power failure as occurred in August 2003 for which the City's water supplies under maximum day and average conditions could only be maintained for 2 days. The Arva reservoir would not be available in this instance. Water would however be supplied directly to the City from the LHPWSS with Springbank only being affected jf Southeast is below the 1 13 ML proposed capacity, and the emergency wells are off line. It is unlikely the City's emergency wells will continue to be available because of new water regulation requirements. If they are, only42 MLD at most would be available and not until the second day of an emergency at the earliest.

Notwithstanding reservoir capacity could be reduced subject to the amount of 'risk and/or resulting service level decrease the City is willing to accept under emergency conditions, the VE and design teams' recommendation is to maintain the 1 13 ML capacity given the City's current storage deficit for two days is 1 I 5 ML.

Incorporating a destination and water engineering focus into the project. This includes a three- pronged passive/active recreation focus involving:

E A R l " @ T E C H

George Charles Riek, PE, DEE, CVS GCR Consulting Civil & Value Engineer

1-3

5/27/2004

Agenda Item # Page # .:2 . .

7 . A BMX pedal bike facility implemented in two-phases. The first phase would be recreational in nature, similar to the City’s skateboard park. The second phase would involve competitive upgrades and a potential public/private partnership opportunity with local bike enthusiasts to sponsor competitive races;

2. An expanded natural area that exists on the site that would be maintained and expanded upon as part of a joint venture with the Kettle Creek Conservatiori’quthority; and

3. An off-leash dog park ,to supplement the City’s only other facility adjacent to the Pottersburg PCP.

The concept plan included in the Appendix shows the above, plus required parking, with washroom and/or meeting room facilities to be provided within the pumphouse. The implementation of Phase I of the reservoir facility, and in the future Phase 2, would still leave sufficient space to the south to include the off-leash park, or eventually facilitate a trainingltesting facility as part of separate 3P discussions currently underway between the City, the. University of Western Ontario and Trojan Technologies. A water engineering feature combining elements of power generation (a wind power demonstration); a water supply, treatment and distribution feature aspect; water provision for park users and/or via a bulk filling water station for commercial users, and to address water quality and/or potential fireyupply issues in rural areas; and a water discharge to a naturalized waterway along the front (Highbury Avenue side) of the property, traveling through the Stormwater Management facility required for the site, and on to a tributary to the Kettle Creek through the naturalized woodlot area to maintain base flow conditions. This “natural pawer to water supply/engineering to human consumptionlnatural use” represents less than 2% of the total project cost and would turn the- . - - focus of the project from a utilitarian project into a recreational project integrated with the facility and into the topography of the site, maximizing the use of this City owned property purchased in 1996 for the project.

. The provision of stand-by power to provide maximum day flows given the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System does not have emergency power in the event of a power outage.

The potential implementation of a wind demonstration project as part of a joint venture with a company specializing in this type of power with the water feature aspect of the project, and in concert with the “Regional Water Quality and Green Power Initiative”.

The table in the Appendix summarizes the various VE recommendation items and identifies the capital

-

and operational costs relative to each for a net capital cost savings of $2.67 M. Comparing this to the

$38 M estimated construction cost for the base design confirmed as part of the VE exercise, represents

a $35.33 M estimated construction cost in 2004 dollars. Allowing for a 10% cantingencyand inflation to

2006 (when the facility is expected to be operational), plus engineering, we recommend the City of

London budget $42 M for this project ($1 M above the amount currently budgeted). L

The Value Engineering outputs will form the basis for detailed design 4f the project for which approval

is requested from EESD personnel, City of London Council, and the various stakeholders involved with

the project. This includes the City Parks Planning Department, and those involved for potential funding

of the Regional Water Quality and Green Initiative, andlor potential 3P partners with the City.

E A R T H a T E C H

George Charles Riek, PE, DEE, CVS cR Consulting Civil & Value Engineer

1-4

512712 004

Agenda Item # Page #

i3 0

8 0 T

e3

0 0

0 CD e3

0-

r

0 0

0 0

m e3

0-

*!

n 0 0 0- 0 ' L D '

0 e3

0 e3

- c 0 0

8 a 2

0 0

0 0

0-

I-- #3

0 e3 0 e3

0 0

8 CD e3 r

6- 9 0

0 lo

(v

a Q

oi - r-m

L

3 Y cz

? m

L i l a 3 - 0 -

0 c3

.. a, (13 4

n c 0 c3

0 (3

Agenda Item # Page #

_. . . . - ._ .

a >y 0 ro b a, C 0 0 U co a, In c 0

w-

+-r

.- L

C a, 0) - 3

3

a, 5 4

0 0 0

a, C 0 a,

>

v-

rr e a -

7 3 w n

L c =-

4

L - ..I

9 .s

v-

w cn

* 0 c3

Y z -

Agenda Item # Page #

_. - . . -. - .. . . ... . . . -. - . . . . ._ . . . . ... . ,

Water Treatment Testing/Research/Training Centre Preliminary DisGussion

April 23,2004 Environmental Research Western Meeting Centre

Rm 208 Collip Building, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada 1 :OO-3:30 p.m.

Participants

The University of Western Ontario Dr. Robert Bailey Director, Environmental Research Western (ERW) Dr. Moncef Nehdi P. Eng., Associate Director (Engineering), ERW Dr. Robert Schincariol P, Eng., Associate Director (Science), ERW Dr. Hugh de Lasa P. Eng., Professor, Dept. of Chemical & Biochemical Engineering Paul Dugsin Director of Research, Faculty of Science Greg Weiler Director of Research Programs, Research Development Services Holly Sanderson Administrative Coordinator, ERW / f l

City of London Peter Steblin General Manager & City Engineer, EnvironmentaVEngineering Services Pat McNally Director, Water, Environment & Customer Relations, EnvironmentaYEngineering Services A. J. Henry Manager, Regional Water Supply, EnvironmentaVEngineering Services, Regional Division John Simon Environmental Services Engineer, Water Engineering, Environment aVEng ineering Services John Haasen Consultant, Spec. Projects Mgr., Earth Tech Canada Inc., Toronto, ON

Linda Gowman V.P. Sqience and Technology, London, ON Bill Cairns Chief Scientist, London, ON

Bernadette Conant Executive Director, Waterloo, ON

Stephen R Moran President and CEO, Toronto, ON

Trojan Technologies Inc.

Canadian Water Network

CREsTech

1. What is the opportunity? Each of the main participants summarized their initial, vision for what this collaboration opportunity represents to them.

City of London - Peter Steblin ,

The City of London is preparing to go before the Federal Government and Province of Ontaio with a 200-300 million dollar capital projects proposal for the City of London and region. One project in the exploratory and development stage is a 40 million dollar, multi-purpose reservoir built within the city on city-owned property. Plans were presented that showed the reservoir would be surrounded with multi-use recreational park land and have public access buildings potentially housing a visitor’s centre and a showcase educational facility. The showcase facility would be an extension of an on-site drinking water testing facility, which has also been considered as part of a proposed Grand Bend facility on Lake Huron. Trojan .Technologies Inc. currently is using the City’s

Agenda Item # Page #

water treatment plant as a testing site andor Grand Bend site. It is proposed that the reservoir site include a research, training and education component in partnership with The University of Western Ontario, to create an innovative environment as a basis for a leading edge water testing, research and technology facility. The City views the proximity of the proposed reservoir project to UWO and Trojan Technologies as advantageous to these partners, but is. open to proposals for other location configurations and the idea of separate but linked facilities throughout its jurisdiction. Water resource management for the region is facilitated by the municipality’s single tier Joint Boards of Management.

Citing public dernaad and clear signals of political will at the federal and provincial level for supporting collaborative clean drinking water projects, the City views this project as a superb opportunity to hrther develop those synergies that exist between itself, local industry and the university, but they have not beendidly developed. Several existing partnership commitments by the City were outlined, demonstrating interest in creating linkages within the local community and participating in publidprivate sector projects that serve and give back to the community in a variety of ways.

hiring program to support one U.W.O. graduate per year participation in guest lectures at U.W.0. U.W.O. summer co-op/ internship program participant Sponsorship of U.W.O. Design Competition

\ Existing infrastructural relationship with Trojan Technologies Inc.

%

Key Functional Requirements

. located on land owned or controlled by the City or the Joint Boards and on large body of water

w world class, multi-purpose and integrated with and have linkages to other City initiatives and projects (eg. Green Power projects, stand by power issues at Erie plant, environmental impact projects)

training facilities for operators

have intrinsic and added social value, serving and giving back to the community

showcase of excellence destination for general interest and conference/ business tours (reservoir proposal)

Trojan Technologies Inc., - Linda Gowman Trojan Technologies Inc., a world leader in U V water treatment technology, has likewise demonstrated interest in creating partnerships and linkages within the community, particularly with The University of Western Ontario and the City of London. It requires a large-scale, multi-tiered testing facility Iocated in a context that is relevant to its needs. This is an excellent opportunity for Canadian engineers to become national and world experts ahead of the game, since there is no .

dedicated research and teaching facility concentrating on this technology.

Key Functional Requirements

Agenda Item # Page #

t

. year round access to a high quality, high flow, clear water supply in the region.

large scale, fill capacity facility geared to testing equipment components and,whole W systems for fbnction and design tolerances

bioassay production capable facility in response to legislative changes and corresponding increased demand fkom regulatory bodies

research and training partnerships with The University of Western Ontario to develop a local corp of HQP and specialists with world class skills

’

The University of Western Ontario - Paul Dugsin and Greg Weiler

position among its global’ peers. The continuing vision of the university is to remain competitive in research for the leading

Key Functional Requirements

facility must provide a unique contexe. for on-going, innovative research

collaborative projects require ‘critical mass’ on their own, be globally competitive and serve a broader vision than individual research interests

project proposals must demonstrate quality partnerships with industry and. leadership among peer academic institutions.

2. How can these concepts be integrated into Functional and Partnership Structures?

Functional Relationships. Partnership Relationships

Testing Municipality

a Training <-> Research Industry <=> Academia

We agreed that the Partnership model goes beyond London, Trojan, and UWO, each of the.present “founding partners”.

Key Functional Requirements emerged in discussion

. must be/have a permanent training facility for - current and future operators and regulators (new equipment, technologies and

regulations)

Agenda Item # Page #

-

-

HQP on improved and new technologies (ongoing need for evaluation and improvement) university students to “fill the big gap” of world class expertise to meet current and future need in the fields of education, pure and applied research and business growth appropriate for demonstrations and consulting classroom, lecture, residency space for visitors on training or research

- -

must “think big” must be first in line to secure the momentum

Alternative concepts of the project to debate:

Final Thoughts

-tight-knit core-periphery model with a unique water treatment facility at the core and ancillary “added value” facilities adnear site

“periphery-core model, consisting of a network of several integrated but dispersed CE facilities acting as nodes of power contributing to the whole (i.e. testing site on L. Huron, research site in London and training facilit&s at Grand Bend)

Canadian Water Network Currently, the way is clear for municipal and regional levels of government to propose sustainable water treatment projects that involve training to the province and Ottawa, given the public perception that leadership is lacking in this area of public policy as demonstrated by the problems in Walkerton, Ontario. It was suggested that the Connecting Water Resources 2004 National Symposium on water issues and opportunities in June 20-22,2004 would be a good place to “test the waters” for this idea and create a buzz before presentation to the province in October, 2004.

Earthtech Canada Inc. In his capacity as both consultant to the City and being part of a Fortune 500 company providing water consulting, project/construction management , Design/Build/Operat e services, and being a manufacturer of a number of water related products, John Haasen suggested that thought be given to what would bring other industry partners in to pay, use, or build such a facility, for the next meeting.

Actions for next meeting The ideas and the elements of the. functional and partnership concepts require hrther development. The following individuals will prepare descriptions of what will be required in the following areas:

Linda Gowman with the City of London- testing facility/design Steve Moran -training (will contact colleges and MOE for existing training programs) .

Bob Bailey - researchleducation Peter Steblin -testing facility design presentation (options which might be considered at both the Reservoir site and the Grand Bend facility)

Agenda Item # Page #

Next Meeting The next meeting is tentatively set for May 28,2004 at 9:OO a.m. at the Upper Thames Conservation. Authority Office. Bob Bailey will make the arrangements and ERW will contact eve one. It was suggested that other potential partnerdplayers be invited to join in the May 28 meeting. These are:

'x

w MOE Municipality of Kincardine Dillon Consulting (Trojan) GAP Consulting (Trojan)

ERW will follow up with these additional invitations.

\

Agenda Item # Page #

A P P E N D I X . " D "

Scenario One - (Example - Pipeline breaks which have occurred in 1983 and 1988)

Current Situation - Lake Huron Pipeline Break

- - anticipate I 8 hour capacity without Southeast Reservoir

MOE recommended guideline - 48 hour capacity

With I 13 ML Southeast Reservoir Constnrction

- - Lake Huron Pipeline Break 2006 - 30-hour capacity

Lake Huron Pipeline Break 201 0 - 24-hour capacity

With 93 ML Southeast Reservoir Constructed

- -

Lake Huron Pipeline Break 2006 - 29-hour capacity Lake Huron Pipeline Break 2010 - e24-hour capacity

Scenario Two - (Example - Power blackout: has occurred in August 2003)

Current Situation - Blackout capacity

- - Approximately 23-hour capacity without Southeast Reservoir

MOE recommended guideline - 48-hour capacity

With 1 13 ML Southeast Reservoir constructed

- - Blackout 2006 - approximately 47-hour capacity

Blackout 2010 - approximately &-hour capacity

With 93 ML Southeast Reservoir constructed

- - Blackout 2006 - approximately 45-hour capacity

Blackout 2010 - approximately 42-hour capacity