environment and transportation committee …council.london.ca/councilarchives/agendas/environment...

s

FROM:

Agenda Item # Page #

MEETING ON NOVEMBER 8,2004

PETER W. STEBLIN, P. ENG. GENERAL MANAGER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND

I r I

I I

ENGINEERING SERVICES AND CITY ENGINEER I

11 TO:

I

CHAIR AND MEMBERS ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

SUBJECT: REGIONAL WATER QUALITY, CAPACITY AND GREEN POWER INITIATIVE STATUS UPDATE 8t DIRECTION

_I

I RECOMMENDATION I That on the recommendation of the General Manager of Environmental & Engineering Services and City Engineer, the following actions be taken with respect to the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives undertaken in partnership with the Joint Boards of Management for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System and the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System:

This information and status update BE RECEIVED

The staff BE AUTHORIZED to prepare the appropriate applications for funding, and that the General Manager of Environmental & Engineering Services and City Engineer BE AUTHORIZED to proceed with such applications

Communication efforts with respect to this project BE ENDORSED, including

(i) Renaming of the project; (ii) (iii) (iv)

Finalization and distribution of a public information brochure; Finalization and distribution of the project newsletter; Arrange for a stakeholder information session.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I’ ‘1

Since the last report on this subject, significant progress has been made with respect to development of the concepts related to this project and background work needed to prepare an application to the senior levels of government. This report provides an update on some of those key activities and seeks direction and support for the next steps. Both Joint Boards have approved a similar report and set of recommendations at their October 28, 2004 meetings.

I BACKGROUND I

At the meeting on December 15, 2003, City of London Council approved in principle the development of a multifaceted project addressing numerous aspects of safe, clean, reliable water supply to a large area of southwestern Ontario. That report outlined the bundling of large capital infrastructure projects anticipated to be required over the next 20 years. One of the key factors behind this initiative was the intention to solicit senior government funding to support the develop men t of the infrastructure,

Included in the recommendations from those meetings was direction to staff to seek letters of support from the respective municipal councils and other stakeholders endorsing this initiative. Numerous resolutions and letters of support have been received and are listed in Appendix A.

(


Finally, staff were directed to solicit further financial support from the Provincial Government by encouraging them to match Federal infrastructure funding. In order to accomplish this, a number of follow-up efforts have been undertaken and will be described later in this report.

Discussion

Over the last number of months numerous initiatives have been underway to further develop this concept and move various elements of the project forward. A number of those activities are discussed below and supporting documents are attached.

Further Development Of Work Plan

The original report outlined the number of project elements as well as preliminary cost estimates and timing anticipated to be in a two-phase program. Further refinement of the phasing, updating of some of the preliminary costing and compilation of the support documentation has taken place. Efforts have been made to inventory background work that may be required to support an application for funding. In addition, some new work has been initiated in order to better position the application or to better understand feasibility and/or future capital and operating costs of specific elements of the proposal. An updated project list and revised proposed phasing are attached as well as individual project sheets as Appendix B.

PublidPrivate Partnership Concept

Included in the original report was a preliminary document outlining the potential public-private partnership with respect to the research, development and training facility. Although the partnership concept was initially discussed with respect to this one aspect, in a project of this size there may be numerous opportunities for this type of relationship. Public-private partnership may make the application for funding more attractive to the senior levels of government, and ultimately may reduce the level of public-sector investment in various components of this project.

In order to assist staff and the other proponents to better understand how this concept may work, the attached discussion document ( Appendix C,) was developed as further background.

Research/Testing/Training Facility Concept

In addition to requiring further development of the public-private partnership concept and potential organizational structure, there have been ongoing efforts, discussions and meetings to evaluate the actual need and markets for such a facility. Discussions have involved industry, educational institutions, and non-government agencies. The interest generated from these discussions has led to third-party funding by the Canadian Water Network and Cres Tech, which is being used to support further feasibility study work currently being undertaken by the key Business Consulting Group and Environment Research Western. Attached as Appendix D, is the Executive Summary on the work element.

Assessment of Lake Huron Plant Infrastructure Capacity (Research Facility)

In order to assist with the feasibility study described above, it has been necessary to initiate a consultant review of the key physical infrastructure systems available at the Lake Huron water treatment plant near Grand Bend. To develop the concept of this site as a potential testing facility, it is necessary to achieve a bettevunderstanding of the capacities available with respect to such issues as electric power, surplus raw water capacity, surplus treated water capacity, drainage and physical space available at the site. Results arising from the study have been provided to the Ivy Business Consulting Group to assist with its work and business case development. The consultant's report is attached as Appendix E.

Preliminary Wind and Biomass Assessment


One of the green power elements identified in the initial proposal suggested that green power from wind generator technology be considered for both of the water supply systems’ water treatment plants as well as the City of London’s W12A landfill site. In order to obtain some baseline information, a consultant was retained to do a preliminary assessment of the sites. In addition, as requested by the Huron Board, a preliminary review with respect to the feasibility of energy from animal waste (biomass) was also included in the assignment. The consultant’s executive summary on the wind initiative is attached as Appendix F. The biomass report is attached as Appendix G. In order to take advantage of existing funding under other programs, an application for Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) funding under the Green Municipal Enabling Funds (GMEF) program has been made for this project. At this time, the Intent to Apply process has been successfully completed.

Communication Initiatives

From the outset, it has been evident that this project is seen by some as both visionary and comprehensive. As important as it is to obtain senior government support, it is equally important to inform the public and generate their enthusiasm and buy-in for the project. Although the original project title was descriptive of the various elements, even those involved with the development of the original concept had used variations of the title. In order to simplify the title, and help build and identity for the project, it is recommended that the name of the project be changed to “HELP Clean Water”. The initials of the HELP banner represent the main proponents; H-Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System, E - Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System and L-City of London of the Project (Huron Elgin London Project Clean Water). In order to further identity the project, it is recommended that the attached logo be used, Appendix H.

As part of the communications outreach, two draft documents are being prepared for review and endorsement at the meeting. The information brochure will be designed to be produced and made available to participating municipalities for distribution to the public. In most cases, it is anticipated that this can be done at little or no cost in association with existing water bills or Hydro bills. The proposed newsletter will be made available to the various partners, both public and private, for information and for further distribution through their municipal offices as they may deem appropriate.

In order to update all current stakeholders as well as provide new information, in particular to other municipalities that may benefit from supporting this initiative, it is proposed that an information session be arranged by staff in late November. Municipal Councillors and their staff would be invited to attend. The meeting will also serve to update stakeholders on the status of the funding application.

It is also intended that much of the same information can be made available electronically on the Joint Boards’ web site and with the appropriate linkages from various municipal sites, including the City’s.

Application Process

As details with respect to the Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund (CSIF) continue to evolve, contact has been made at both the political and staff level with respect to submitting the appropriate documentation and application. Staff have been advised that there is no formal application form for the CSIF process. We are seeking a meeting with both Provincial and Federal staff to discuss the application process.

Much of the information attached to this report will form background to the application, however, some additional documentation of modifications which has already been produced may be required. It is proposed that under the direction of the General Manager of Environmental & Engineering Services and City Engineer, these issues be resolved administratively and the appropriate application finalized and submitted as soon as possible.

J

Conclusion

The HELP Clean Water initiative represents an undertaking that will serve the needs of more than 500,000 people living and working in southwestern Ontario including the City of London. This strategic, multi-year infrastructure program is designed to benefit the entire region


PREPARED BY: RECOMMENDED BY:

&7d?/d24/+w, ? O ) PETER W. STEBLIN, P.ENG. GENERAL MANAGER OF

SERVICES & CITY ENGINEER

PATRICK MCNALLY,v Eng.

CUSTOMER RELATIONS - ENVIRONMENTAL & ENGINEERING

.-

environmentally and economically over the next 30 years. Both Federal and Provincial governments have initiated programs to provide support to municipalities undertaking these types of initiatives. Background efforts and information gathering has now reached the point where both levels of senior government should be formally approached to demonstrate their support for this project.

/Pm Attachments: Appendix “A”

Appendix “B” Appendix “C” Appendix “D” Appendix “E” Appendix “F” Appendix “G” Appendix “H”

cc:

i r .. .. Aaenda Item # Paae #

Primary Water ~ u p p t y System File No. 169-13

To: Chair and Members Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System Joint Board of Management

Chief Ad mini strative Officer From: Peter W. Steblin, P.Eng.

Meeting Date: October 28,2004

Subject: Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiative . Status Update & Direction \

That the following actions be taken with respect to the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives underfaken in partnership with the Joint Board of Management for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System and the City of London:

a) This information and status update BE RECEIVED

b) The staff BE AUTHORIZED to prepare the appropriate applications for funding, and that the Chief Administrative Officer BE AUTHORIZED to proceed with such applications

c) Communication efforts with respect to this project BE ENDORSED, including (i) Renaming of the project (ii)

(iv)

Finalization and distribution of a public information brochure

Arrange for a stakeholder information session ’ . (iii) Finalization and distribution of the project newsletter

t

d) The other lead proponents, the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System and the City of London, BE ENCOURAGED to continue support in this project.

Since the last report on this subject, significant progress has been made with respect to development of the concepts related to this project and background work needed to prepare an application to the senior levels of government. This report provides an update on some of those key activities and seeks direction and support for the next steps.

At their meetings on January 15, 2004, both Joint Boards of Management approved in principle to development of a multifaceted project addressing numerous aspects of safe, clean, reliable water supply to a large area of southwestern Ontario. A similar report had previously been approved by the City of London in December 2003. Those reports outlined the bundling of large capital infrastructure

. .

%-, A Lake Huron

Agenda Item # Page ## mizl Primary Water Supply System

File No. 169-13

projects anticipated to be required over the next 20 years. One of the key factors behind this initiative was the intention to solicit senior government funding to support the development of the infrastructure.

Included in the recommendations from those meetings, was direction to staff to seek letters of support from the respective municipal councils and other stakeholders endorsing this initiative. Numerous resolutions and letters of support have been received and are listed in Appendix A.

Finally staff were directed to solicit further financial support from the Provincial government by encouraging them to match Federal infrastructure funding. In order to accomplish that, a number of follow-up efforts have been undertaken as will be described later in this report.

?

Over the last number of months numerous initiatives have been underway to further develop this concept and move various elements of the project forward. A number of those activities are discussed below and supporting documents are attached.

Further development of work plan The original report outlined the number of project elements as well as prelimhary cost estimates and timing anticipated to be in a two-phase program. Further refinement of the phasing, updating of some of the preliminary costing and compilation of the support documentation has taken place. Efforts have been made to inventory background work that may be required to support an application for funding. In addition some new work has been initiated in order to better position the application or to better understand feasibility and/or future capital and operating cost of specific elements of the proposal. An updated project list and revised proposed phasing are attached, as well as individual project sheets as Appendix 6.

r

Public/private partnership concept Included in the original report was a preliminary document outlining the potential public-private partnership with respect to the research, development and training facility. Although the partnership concept was initially discussed with respect to this one aspect, in a project of this size there may be numerous opportunities for this type of relationship. Public-private partnership may not only make the application for funding more attractive to the senior levels of government, but ultimately it may reduce the level of public-sector investment in various components of this project.

In order to assist staff and the other proponents to better understand how this concept may work, the attached discussion document at Appendix C, was developed as further background.

Research/testing/training facility concept In addition to requiring further development of the public-private partnership concept and potential organizational structure, there have been ongoing efforts, discussions and meetings to evaluate the actual need and markets for such a facility. Discussions have involved industry, educational institutions, and non-government agencies. The interest generated from these discussions has led to third-party funding by the Canadian Water Network and CresTech, which is being used to support further feasibility study work currently been undertaken by the lvey Business Consulting Group and

October 28,2004 Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiative

Lake Huron


Ella Primary Water Supply System

File No. 169-13

Environmental Research Western. Although this report is not yet finalized, it is anticipated that it may be available in Draft at the time of the Joint Board’s meeting for the Joint Board’s information.

Assessment of Lake Huron plant infrastructure capacity (Research Facility) In order to assist with the feasibility study described above, it has been necessary to initiate a consultant review of the key physical infrastructure systems available at the Lake Huron water treatment plant near Grand Bend. To develop the concept of this site as a potential testing facility it is necessary to achieve a better understanding of the capacities available with respect to such issues as electric power, surplus raw water capacity, surplus treated water capacity, drainage and physical space available at the site. Results arising from the study have been provided to the Ivy Business Consulting Group to assist with their work and business case development. The consultant’s report is attached as Appendix D.

Preliminary wind and biomass assessment One of the green power elements identified in the initial proposal suggested that green power from wind generator technology be considered for both of the water supply systems’ water treatment plants as well as the city of London’s W12A landfill site. In order to obtain some baseline information, a consultant was retained to do a preliminary assessment of the sites. In addition as requested by the Huron Board, a preliminary review with respect to the feasibility of energy from animal waste (biomass) was also included in the assignment. The consultant’s report on the wind initiative is not yet finalized, but will be available at the Joint Board’s meeting. The biomass report is attached as Appendix E. In order to take advantage of existing funding programs an application for Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) funding under the Green Municipal Enabling Funds (GMEF) program has been made for this project. At this time the Intent to Apply process has been successfully completed.

Communication initiatives From the outset it has been evident that this project is seen by some as both visionary and comprehensive. As important as it is to obtain senior government support, is equally important to inform the public and generate their enthusiasm and buy in for the project. Although the original project title was descriptive of the various elements, even those involved with the development of the original concept had used variations of the title. In order to simplify the title, and help build an identity for the project, is recommended that the name of the project be changed to “HELP Clean Water”. The initials of the HELP banner represent the main proponents; H -Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System, E - Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System and L- City of London of the Project (Huron Elgin London Project Clean Water). In order to further identify the project, it is recommended that the attached logo be used, Appendix F.

As part of the communications outreach, two draft documents are being prepared for review and endorsement at the Joint Board meeting. The information brochure will be designed to be produced and made available to participating municipalities for distribution to the public. In most cases it is anticipated that this can be done at little or no cost in association with existing water bills or Hydro bills. The proposed newsletter will be made available to the various partners both public and private, for information and for further distribution through their municipal offices as they may deem appropriate.

~~


Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System

Aaenda Item # Paae ##

File No. 169-13

In order to update all current stakeholders as well as provide new information, in particular to other municipalities that may benefit from supporting this initiative, it is proposed that an information session be arranged by Joint Board staff in late November. Municipal Councillors and their staff would be invited to attend, The meeting will also serve to update stakeholders on the status of the funding application.

It is also intended that much of the same information can be made available electronically on the Joint Boards’ web site and with the appropriate linkages from various municipal sites.

Application process As details with respect to the Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund (CSIF) continue to evolve, contact has been made at both the political and staff level with respect to submitting the appropriate documentation and application. Staff have been advised that there is no formal application form for the CSIF process. We are seeking a meeting with both Provincial and Federal staff to discuss the application process.

Much of the information attached to this report will form background to the application, however some additional documentation or modifications to what has already been produced may be required. It is proposed that under the direction of the Joint Board’s Chief Administrative Officer these issues be resolved administratively and the appropriate application finalized and submitted as soon as possible.

This report will also be presented to the Lake Huron Joint Board of Management, as well as a similar report to the City of London in early November.

The HELP Clean Water initiative represents a regional undertaking that will serve the needs of more than 500,000 people living and working in southwestern Ontario. This strategic, multi-year infrastructure program is designed to benefit the entire region environmentally and economically over the next 30 years. Both federal and provincial governments have initiated programs to provide support to municipalities undertaking these types of initiatives. Background efforts and information gathering has now reached the point where both levels of senior government should be formally approached to demonstrate their support for this project.

Report Prepared by: I

Patrick McNally, P. En# Director of Water, En

Customer Relatio n A

Recommended by: h Peter W. Steblin, P.Eng. Chief Adm in istrat ive Officer


Elqin C Area PrlmZi water supply System


File No. 169-13

To: Chair and Members Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System Joint Board of Management

From: Peter W. Steblin, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

Meeting Date: October 28, 2004

Subject: Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiative Status Update & Direction

That the following actions be taken with respect to the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives undertaken in partnership with the Joint Board of Management for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System and the City of London:

a) This information and status update BE RECEIVED

b) The staff BE AUTHORIZED to prepare the appropriate applications for funding, and that the Chief Administrative Officer BE AUTHORIZED to proceed with such applications

c) Communication efforts with respect to this project BE ENDORSED, including (i) Renaming of the project (ii)

(iv)

Finalization and distribution of a public information brochure

Arrange for a stakeholder information session . (iii) Finalization and distribution of the project newsletter

. d) The other lead proponents, the Lake Huron Area Primary Water Supply System and the City of London, BE ENCOURAGED to continue support in this project.

Since the last report on this subject, significant progress has been made with respect to development of the concepts related to this project and background work needed to prepare an application to the senior levels of government. This report provides an update on some of those key activities and seeks direction and support for the next steps.

At their meetings on January 15, 2004, both Joint Boards of Management approvedh principle to development of a multifaceted project addressing numerous aspects of safe, clean, reliable water supply to a large area of southwestern Ontario. A similar report had previously been approved by the City of London in December 2003. Those reports outlined the bundling of large capital infrastructure

. - e.. . . . .. -. " . . . - -C..-- . . * * .. , I - . .-


Elgin Area PrimTiy Water supply System

File No. 169-13

projects anticipated to be required over the next 20 years. One of the key factors behind this initiative was the intention to solicit senior government funding to support the development of the infrastructure.

Included in the recommendations from those meetings, was direction to staff to seek letters of support from the respective municipal councils and other stakeholders endorsing this initiative. Numerous resolutions and letters of support have been received and are listed in Appendix A.

Finally staff were directed to solicit further financial support from the Provincial government by encouraging them to match Federal infrastructure funding. In order to accomplish that, a number of follow-up efforts have been undertaken as will be described later in this report.

Over the last number of months numerous initiatives have been underway to further develop this concept and move various elements of the project forward. A number of those activities are discussed below and supporting documents are attached:

Further development of work plan The original report outlined the number of project elements as well as preliminary cost estimates and timing anticipated to be in a two-phase program. Further refinement of the phasing, updating of some of the preliminary costing and compilation of the support documentation has taken place. Efforts have been made to inventory background work that may be required to support an application for funding. In addition some new work has been initiated in order to better position the application or to better understand feasibility and/or future capital and operating cost of specific elements of the proposal. An updated project list and revised proposed phasing are attached, as well as individual project sheets as Appendix B.

Publidprivate partnership concept Included in the original report was a preliminary document outlining the potential public-private partnership with respect to the research, development and training facility. Although the partnership concept was initially discussed with respect to this one aspect, in a project of this size there may be numerous opportunities for this type of relationship. Public-private partnership may not only make the application for funding more attractive to the senior levels of government, but ultimately it may reduce the level of public-sector investment in various components of this project.

In order to assist staff and the other proponents to better understand how this concept may work, the attached discussion document at Appendix C, was developed as further background.

Researc h/tes ti ng/trai n i ng faci I i ty concept In addition to requiring further development of the public-private partnership concept and potential organizational structure, there have been ongoing efforts, discussions and meetings to evaluate the actual need and markets for such a facility. Discussions have involved industry, educational institutions, and non-government agencies. The interest generated from these discussions has led to third-party funding by the Canadian Water Network and CresTech, which is being used to support further feasibility study work currently been undertaken by the lvey Business Consulting Group and

- . - 3

* . . October 28,2004 Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiative

Aaenda Item # .Pane #

pr izw Water supply system File No. 169-13

Environmental Research Western. Although this report is not yet finalized, it is anticipated that it may be available in Draft at the time of the Joint Board's meeting for the Joint Board's information.

Assessment of Lake Huron plant infrastructure capacity (Research Facility) In order to assist with the feasibility study described above, it has been necessary to initiate a consultant review of the key physical infrastructure systems available at the Lake Huron water treatment plant near Grand Bend. To develop the concept of this site as a potential testing facility it is necessary to achieve a better understanding of the capacities available with respect to such issues as electric power, surplus raw water capacity, surplus treated water capacity, drainage and physical space available at the Gte. Results arising from the study have been provided to the Ivy Business Consulting Group to assist with their work and business case development. The consultant's report is attached as Appendix D.

Preliminary wind and biomass assessment One of the green power elements identified in the initial proposal suggested that green power from wind generator technology be considered for both of the water supply systems' water treatment plants as well as the city of London's W12A landfill site. In order to obtain some baseline information, a consultant was retained to do a preliminary assessment of the sites. In addition as requested by the Huron Board, a preliminary review with respect to the feasibility of energy from animal waste (biomass) was also included in the assignment. The consultant's report on the wind initiative is not yet finalized, but will be available at the Joint Board's meeting. The biomass report is attached as Appendix E. In order to take advantage of existing funding programs an application for Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) funding under the Green Municipal Enabling Funds (GMEF) program has been made for this project. At this time the Intent to Apply process has been successfully completed.

Communication initiatives From the outset it has been evident that this project is seen by some as both visionary and comprehensive. As important as it is to obtain senior government support, is equally important to inform the public and generate their enthusiasm and buy in for the project. Although the original project title was descriptive of the various elements, even those involved with the development of the original concept had used variations of the title. In order to simplify the title, and help byild an identity for the project, is recommended that the name of the project be changed to "HELP Clean Water". The initials of the HELP banner represent the main proponents; H -Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System, E - Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System and L- City of London of the Project (Huron Elgin London Project Clean Water). In order to further identify the project, it is recommended that the attached logo be used, Appendix F.

As part of the communications outreach, two draft documents are being prepared for review and endorsement at the Joint Board meeting. The information brochure will be designed to be produced and made available to participating municipalities for distribution to the public. In most cases it is anticipated that this can be done at little or no cost in association with existing water bills or Hydro bills. The proposed newsletter will be made available to the various partners both public and private, for

. information and for further distribution through their municipal offices as they may deem appropriate.

In order to update all current stakeholders as well as provide new information, in particular to other municipalities that may benefit from supporting this initiative, it is proposed that an information session

... . ,",Z,.% ; zt - 7 ' 3 * r October 28,2004 Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiative

- . ..-

Acrenda Item # Page #

prim& water supply system File No. 169-13

be arranged by Joint Board staff in late November. Municipal Councillors and their staff would be invited to attend, The meeting will also serve to update stakeholders on the status of the funding application.

It is also intended that much of the same information can be made available electronically on the Joint Boards' web site and with the appropriate linkages from various municipal sites.

Application process As details with respect to the Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund (CSIF) continue to evolve, contact has been made at both the political and staff level with respect to submitting the appropriate documentation and application. Staff have been advised that there is no formal application form for the CSIF process. We are seeking a meeting with both Provincial and Federal staff to discuss the application process.

Much of the information attached to this report will form background to the application, however some additional documentation or modifications to what has already been produced may be required. It is proposed that under the direction of the Joint Board's Chief Administrative Officer these issues be resolved administratively and the appropriate application finalized and submitted as soon as possible.

This report will also be presented to the Lake Huron Joint Board of Management, as well as a similar report to the City of London in early November.

The HELP Clean Water initiative represents a regional undertaking that will serve the needs of more than 500,000 people living and working in southwestern Ontario. This strategic, multi-year infrastructure program is designed to benefit the entire region environmentally and economically over the next 30 years. Both federal and provincial governments have initiated programs to provide support to municipalities undertaking these types of initiatives. Background efforts and information gathering has now reached the point where both levels of senior government should be formally approached to demonstrate their support for this project.

Report Prepared by: I

Patrick McNally, P a -

A Customer

Recommended by: ! o o Peter W.' Steblin, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

.I

-- October 28,2004 Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiative

Appendix 'A' Resolutions and Letters of Support

Municipality Date Rec'd Rec'd From Comments

Lake Huron Joint Board Strath roy- I March 16,2004 Angela Toth, Director of

Corporate Services Ross Fisher, Public Works and Property Manager

Endorsed by Council as Very High Priority Endorsed by Council as Top Priority; Want to leave out wording about Rural

Sandra Strang, Clerk

March 25,2004

Infrastructure Fund Endorsed by Council as Top

Bayham April 5, 2004

South Huron

Lucan Biddulph

Huron East

Middlesex Centre

North Middlesex

Ad el a id e- Metcalfe

March I O , 2004

March 5, 2004

March 17,2004

March 19, 2004

March 18,2004

April 6,2004

Ronald Reymer, .

Administrator/Clerk J.R. McLachlan

Sharon McMillan, Manager, Corporate Services and Clerk

Priority Endorsed by Council and Mayor as Priority Council expressed interest into further investigation Endorsed by Council as Top Priority

Shirley Scott, Administrator Sylvia Hammer, AMCT, Administrator-Clerk

~ ~~~~

Endorsed by Council as Top Priority Endorsed by Council

St. Thomas

Central Elgin

January 26, 2004

February 27,

Clerk

John Dewancker, P.Eng, Director Environmental Services Dianne Wilson, Deputy

Priority; Support funding - throuah CSlF

Endorsed by Council; Support funding through CSlF

Endorsed by Council; Support

Malahide 2004 March 5,2004

Clerk R. Millard, C.A.0, Clerk

Tena Michiels, Deputy

. _

funding through CSlF Endorsed by Council as Very High Priority Endorsed by Council as High

Kyle Kruger, C.M.O., Ad m in is tra tor

Michelle Casavecchia, D.P.A.', C.M.O., Director of Corporate Services

Endorsed by Council as Top Priority; Support funding through CSlF Interested in participating in a study to be funded through CSIF

Aylmer April 14,2004 Phyllis Ketchabaw, Clerk

Endorsed by Council in Principle

Appendix 'A' Resolutions and Letters of Support

I Other Letters of

Awnda Item # Paps# .a Support

March 15,2004 Ontario Municipal Water Association

Ontario Water Works Association

M.P. Perth- Middlesex

Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal

Minister of State (Infrastructure)

Dillon Consulting

Earth Tech Canada Ltd

March 10, 2004

January 23, 2004

August 16,2004

May 21,2004

May 27,2004

January 20, 2004

Jerry Klaus, President

Susan Andrews, Chair

Gary Schellenberger, M. P. Perth-Midd lesex

The Hon. David Caplan

The Hon. Andy Scott

Roland Welker, P.Eng, Partner

Robert Andrews, P.Eng., President

Promotes all efforts to ensure that drinking water is safe and affordable; Strongly supports London and the Joint Board of Management in regards to the Regional Water Quality and CaDacitv improvements Supports efforts to protect public health through the delivery of safe, sufficient and sustainable water Strong I y sup ports the development of new, environmentally friendly initiatives ; Applauds London, LHPWSS, and EAPWSS for their leadership Working together with other governments to address the challenges and help improve the quality of life for our people Agrees that investment in water and wastewater infrastructure are critical to the quality of life of Canadians Extremely interested in participating in the proposed Water Quality Treatment Research Centre Would like to formally endorse the initiatives and express their interest in assisting

The Corporation of the Township of

REFER TO NOTED

52 Frank Street, Strathroy, Ontario N7G 2R4 (519) 245-1070 Fax (519) 245-6353

16 March 2004

Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System C/o The City of London P.O. Box 5035 300 Dufferin Ave., Suite 1006 London, Ontario N6A 4L9

Attention: Peter W. Steblin

LEnv. SenricA

File 1

Dear Mr. Steblin:

Re: Regional Water Qualitv and Capacity Improvements

Please be advised that your letter of February 19, 2004 regarding the above-noted was received by Council at its meeting of March 15,2004.

Council approved the following motion.

Moved by Councillors Aarts and Brennan: THA 7: the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power program be endorsed by the Municipality of Strathroy-Caradoc as a very high priority of ihis municipalify, and the Federal Minister of Infrastructure be advised that any funding under ihe Rural Infrasiructure Fund for this municipality can be allocated to the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power program. Carrie d.

Yours truly

Angela Toth Director of Corporate Services Imw ' .

I ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Water Engineering

MUNICIPALITY OF

BLUEWATER BAYFIELD - HAY - HENSAU - STANLEY - ZURICH - 2001

EO. BOX 250,14 MILL AVE., ZURICH, ONTARIO NOM 2TO

March 16,2004

Aoenda Item #

MAYOR: Bill Dowson CLERK-ADMINISTRATOR: Janisse Zimmermn, CMO FINANCE MANAGER Terri Brandon, AMCT PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER: Ross Fisher, C.R.S.S. CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL: Milt Dietrlch, C.B.C.O. FACILITIES MANAGER: Tom Dickins

Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System C/o The City of London P.O. Box 5035 300 Dufferin Avenue Suite 1006 London, Ontario N6A 4L9

Attention: Andrew Henry

email: [email protected]

TELEPHONE: (519) 236-4351 or (519) 565-5212 FAX: (519) 236-4329

1:-1 MAR 1 9 2004

Dear Andrew:

Attached is a motion passed by council on March 15,2004. This motion is different fi-om the one sent out to us. The reason is that by leaving out any wording about the Rural Infrastructure Fund we are still eligible to apply for the rural fixnd ourselves.

Hopefilly this motion helps us all out.

Yours truly,

flm- Ross Fisher, CRSS Public Works and Property Manager

RF: sr

Encl.

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Water Engineering

MAR 2 % 2004 FILE NO. REFER TO NOTED

meetingaoc

MUNICIPALITY OF

March I O , 2004

Agenda kern c

.lal THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTH HURON

322 Main Street South, P.O. Box 759, Exeter, Ontario NOM 1S6

WEBSITE: www . town.sou thhuron. on.ca PHONE: (519) 235-0310 FAX: (519) 235-3304 TOLL FREE: 1-877-204-0747

File: L80/04

Mr. Peter W. Steblin, P. Eng. Chief Administrative Officer Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System c/o The City of London P.O. Box 5035 300 Dufferin Avenue, Suite 1006 LONDON, Ontario N6A 4L9

Dear Peter:

Re: Reqional Water Qualitv and Capacity lmixovements

Your letter of February 19, 2004 regarding the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives program was received and considered by South Huron Council at our March 8, 2004 council meeting. We acknowledge that the proposed program will significantly benefit the Municipality of South Huron and that this level of grant funding exceeds any other grant program available. In this respect, the following resolution endorsing an application to the Federal Government for Infrastructure Canada funding was passed:

MOVED BY: Councillor Oke SECONDED BY: Councillor Armstrong

“THAT the Corporation of the Municipality of South Huron support the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System proposed RegionaI Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiative program application to the Federal Minister for Infrastructure; and further, that this initiative is the top priority of our municipality and any funding under the Rural Infrastructure Fund for South Huron may be allocated to this program.”

D IS POSIT10 N : CARRl ED

Yours truly,

Clerk

ISS

0 1999 TOWNSHIP OF LUCAN BIDDULPH

33351 Richmond Street, P.O. Box 190, Lucan, Ontario NOM 250 Phone (51 9) 227-4491; Fax (5 19) 227-4998; E-mail ([email protected])

I\

N~~~~ 7' @ERE6 Manager of Regional Water Supply Andrew Henry

c/o City of London E. P.O. Bbx 5035 300 Dufferin Avenue, Suite 1006 London, ON N6A4L9

Re: Regional Water Oualitv, CaDacitv and Green Power Program

Dear Mr. Henry:

Please be advised that the Council of the Corporation of the Tomhip of Lucan Biddulph ratified the following motion at their meeting held March lst, 2004:

Moved by Deputy Mayor P. Cuskaneite Seconded by Councillor W. Hall Resolved that Regional Wuter Quality, Capacity and Green Power program be endorsed by the Corporation of the Township of Lucan Biddulph as apriority of this municipality, and the Federal Minister of Infrasftuctute be advised fhat Lucan Biddulph would welcome any funding under the Rural Infrastructure Fund.

The above resolution is in support of the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System proposal under the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives Program.

Ronald TReymer AMCT Administrator - Clerk

.

MAR 2 2 2004

MUNICIPALITY OF HURON EAST P.O. Box 610,72 Main Street South, Seaforth, Ontario NOK 1 WO

Jack McLachlan, Clerk-Administrator jrmclachlan @hutoneast.com Tel: 51 9-527-01 60 Fa: 5 1 0-527-2561

Brad might, Finance Manager

March 17'", 2004.

City of London, 300 Dufferin Avenue, PO Box 5035, London, Ontario. N6A 4L9

Attention: Peter W. Steblin, P. Eng., General Manager & City Engineer, City o & CAO, Lake Huron & Elgin Area Primary Water Supply Systems

RIE: Pipeline Water Supply to South HuronLHensalYSeaforth

We wish to acknowledge receipt of your correspondence dated March 1 Oth, 2004 concerning regional water quality and capacity improvements.

We wish to advise that B. M. Ross & Associates Limited, Consulting Engineers, presented a preliminary design brief on a proposed Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System (LHPWSS) to Seaforth Watermain to the Municipal Council at a regular meeting on March 16th, 2004. .As a result of the information supplied and Council discussion, the following motion was passed. It was dub moved and seconded: That based on the repox? by B. M. Ross & Associates dated March 16*", 2004 concerning an extension of the Lake Huron Public Water System to Seaforth, that the Council of the Municipality of Huron East express its interest in fbrther investigation of the proposal. Carried.

If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact this office.

Yours truly,

Clerk- Administrator. JRM:ja

2/ C.C. A. J. Henry, P. Eng. Mgr. of Regional Water Supply Environmental Engineering Services Regional Water Supply Division

TOWNSHIP OF MIDDLESEX CENTRE

March 19,2004

Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System c/o City of London P.O. Box 5035, City Hall 300 Dufferin Avenue London, ON N6A4L9

Attention: Peter W. Steblin, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

File

Dear Mr. Steblin:

Re: Regional Water Quality and Capacity Improvements

Further to your letter dated February 19,2004 to Paul Mylemans, please be advised the following resolution was passed at the March 17,2004 meeting of Council.

"THAT the Manager, Public Works and Engineering communicate with the Joint Board for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System that the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Program is endorsed by The Corporation of the Township of Middlesex Centre as the top priority of this municipality for the Strategic Infrastructure Fund and one of the municipality's high priorities for the Rural Infrastructure Fund."

Yours vgfi;)truly,

McMillan, AMCT anager, Corporate Services and Clerk

SM:sw C.C. Maureen Looby, Manager, Public Works and I

"1 Water Engineering

Andrew Henry, Manager of Regional Water Supply

10227 Ilderton Road, R.R. #2, Ilderton, Ontario NOM 2AO Phone (5 19) 666-0190 Fax (51 9) 666-027 1 www.middlesexcentre.on.ca "Formerly the Townships of Delaware, Lobo & London"

TOWNSHIP OF MIDDLESEX CENTRE

March 25,2004

Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System c/o City of London P. 0. Box 5035, City Hall 300 Dufferin Avenue London, Ontario N6A 4L9

Attention: Peter W. Steblin, P. Eng. Chief Adm;Lnistrative OfEcer

Dear Mr. Steblin:

Re: Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System, Strathro y-Caradoc Pipeline Project

At the March 1 1,2004 meeting of the Lake Huron Joint Board of Management the potential connecting municipalities were asked to respond by Council resolution identifjling whether they have a firm commitment regarding the use of this new primary system transmission line..

M e r carefirl review the following resolution was passed by Council on March 22,2004.

“THAT Whereas the Municipality of the Township of Middlesex Centre is in the early stages of Environmental Assessment Studies for Kilworth, Komoka and Delaware and do not wish to prejudge their water supply option evaluations; Therefore the Municipality of the Township of Middlesex Centre declines to participate at this time in the Strathroy-Caradoc Pipeline Project.”

We are appreciative of the consideration and time provided to us by Strathroy-Caradoc and the Lake Huron Joint Board.

S aron McMillan, AMCT anager, Corporate Services and Clerk. u

SM:am

C.C. Maureen Looby, Manager, Public Works and Engineering Andrew Henry, Manager of Regional Water Supply

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Water Engineering * 6 2 5 & MAR 3 cf 2004

FILE NO. REFER TO NOTED

10227 Ilderton Road, R.R. #2, Ilderton, Ontario NOM 2A0 Phone (519) 666-0190 Fax (5 19) 666-027 1 www.middlesexcentre.on.ca “Formerly the Townships of Delaware, Lobo & London”

Municipality of North Middlesex P.O. Box 9, Parkhill, Ontario NOM 2K0

Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System . %City of London

Box 5035,300 Dufferin Ave., ‘suite 1006 London, Ontario N6A 4L9

Attention: Andrew Hemy and Pat McNally

Dear Andrew and-Pat:

On behalf of the Council of the Municipality of Nc thank you for attending our March 15 meeting, to address proposed Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Po

Tel.: (5 19) 294-6244 Fax: (5 19) 294-0573

March 18,2004

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Water Engineering

MAR 2 3 2004 &A%O\p

- - you are aware, Council got the intent clarified, and passed the following motion:

“Be it resolved that the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power program under the Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund to be endorsed by the

Municipality of North Middlesex as a top priority for this municipality. ‘‘

Please keep us informed as to the progress you are making. We look forward to meeting with you on this and other relative projects.

Yours truly,

U Shirley. scott Administrator

April 6,2004

SYLVIA E. HAMMER, AM.C.T 2340 EGREMONT DRIVE, R.R. 15 FRAN URBSHOTT, A.M.C.T. ADMINISTRATOR-CLERK STRATHROY, ONTARIO TREASURE WDEPUTY-CLERK

N7G 3H6 ELDON BRYANT (51 9) 247-3687 ROBERT SHOLTANUK, CBCO ROAD SUPERVISOR 1-866-525-8878 CHIEF BUiLDiNG OFFlClAU (51 9) 521 -41 73 FAX. (51 9) 247-341 1 BY-LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER

(51 9) 670-2795

A

The Corporation of the City of London 3 00 Dufferin Avenue P.O. Box 5035 London, Ontario N6A 4L9

ATTENTION: Mr. Peter W. Steblin, P.Eng.

Re: Regional Water Quality and Capacity Improvemer

Dear Sir: 1.1 *. *... . .... - --_.._.

Further to your correspondence of March 10,2004, please be advised that this matter was discussed at a meeting of Council held on Monday, April 5‘h, 2004.

Council is in support of your endeavours with respect to the above noted matter, however this is not a top priority within the mandate of the Council of the Township of Adelaide Metcalfe due to the fact that we have other top priority matters that must be dealt within the very short period of time.

Yours very truly,

Sylvia E. Hammer, AMCT Administrator- Clerk On behalf of Council

JOHN DEWANCKER P.Eng Director, Environmental Services & City Engineer

IVAR ANDERSEN P. Eng., Manager of Operations & Compliance

PETER HEGLER MASc. P.Eng., Manager of Engineering

All correspondence to be addressed to:

P.0 Box 520, City Hall Annex St. Thomas ON N5P 3V7

Telephone: (51 9) 631-1 680 Fax (51 9) 631 -21 30 I I

THE CORPORATION OFTHE CI-

Y

R "

Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System

PO Box 5035,300 Dufferin Avenue, Suite 907 London ON n6A 4L9

c/o The City of London .

- NCU Info?JUS ')7 Attention: Mr. Peter Steblin, P.Enai. CAO EAPWSS

1

Dear Mr. Steblin

RE: Citv of London and the Joint Board of Manaaement fdFtk Lake Huron anc Elain Area Primary water SupDlv Svstems - Reaional Water Qualitv and Capacitv Improvements with Green Power Initiatives

Further to your presentation made on January 15, 2004, to the Joint Board of Management of the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply system in respect to the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives, I am pleased to confirm herewith that the City of St. Thomas Council, at its meeting of January 19,2004, approved the following recommendations:

'THAT: The City of St. Thomas endorse the development of the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives Program, prepared by the Joint Board of Management for the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply system (EAPWSS) in pattnership with the Joint Board of Management for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System and the City of London;

TUAT: The Cjty of St. Thomas confirm its support for the request made by this Partnership for funding assistance, through the Infrastructure Canada - Strategic Infrastructure Fund, for the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power lnitiatives Program;

AND THAT: This resolution by the City of St. Thomas Council be confirmed with the Board of Management for the Elgin Area Primary Wafer Supply System (do Mr. Peter Steblin, CAO).

A certified copy of this resolution is attached herewith for your information and file.

Please contact the undersigned at 631-1680 ext (165) or Alderman Tom Johnston, at 631-5324 if you require any further information in respect to the above.

cc: Alderman Tom Johnston, Vice Chair, Joint Board of Manag

Peter J. Lenck, M.P.A. City Clerk

THE CORPORATION OFTHI! ClTy OF

ST. THOMAS

Office ol’ tlre Clerk P. 0. Box 520. City Hall

SI. Thomas, Ontario N5P 3V7 Telephone: (519) 631-168n Ext.100

Fax: (5191 633-9019

I

I, Peter J. Leack, City Clerk of the Corporation of the City of St. Thomas do

hereby certify that this is a true copy of a resolution passed.by the Council of the

said Corporation on the 19th day of January, 2004

“THAT: The City of St. Thomas endorse the development of the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives Program, prepared by the Joint Board of Management for the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply system (EAPWSS) in partnership with the Joint Board of Management for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System and the City of London;

THAT: The City of St. Thomas confirm its support for the request made by this Partnership for funding assistance, through the Infrastructure Canada - Strategic Infrastructure Fund, for the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green’Power Initiatives Program;

AND THAT: This resolution by the City of St. Thomas Council be confirmed with the Baud of Management for the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System (c/o Mr. Peter Steblin, CAO).

I?. J. Leack, City Clerk

The Corporation of the Municipality of Cen t ra l @in 450 Sunset Drive, 1st Floor, St 1 Ph. 519.631.4860 Fax 519.631.4036

Peter W. Steblin, P. Eng. Chief Administrative Officer Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System c/o The City of London P.O. Box 5035 300 Dufferin Avenue, Suite 1006 London, ON N6A 4L9

Dear Mr. Steblin:

February 2 P 2004

I 1 1 1 Water Engineerina

I I

I &39DB' Fife

Re: Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power lnitia

Please be advised that Council discussed your correspondence with respect to the above noted matter at their meeting dated Thursday, February 26", 2004 and the following resolution was passed:

THAT: The Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Central Elgin endorse the development of the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives Program, prepared by the Joint Board of Management for the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System (EAPWSS) in partnership with the Joint Board of Management for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System and the City of London,

AND THAT: The Municipality of Central Elgin confirm its support for the request made by this Partnership for funding asslstance, through the Infrastructure Canada - Strategic Infrastructure Fund, for the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives Program;

AND FURTHER THAT: This resolution by the Municipality of Central Elgin be confirmed with the Board of Management for the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System (c/o Peter Steblin, CAO). CARRIED.

If you have any questions or comments with respect to this information, please do not hesitate to contact me at the municipal office.

Yours truly, \

Dianne Wilson Deputy Clerk.

C.C. . Lloyd J. Perrin, ,Director of Physical Services

87 John Street South, Aylmer, Ontario NSH 2C3 Telephone: (519) 773-5344

Email: malahide@township,malahide.on.ca Fax: (519) 773-5334

Township of

MALAHIDE www.township.malahide.on.ca

March 5,2004

Elgin Area Primary Water

c/o The City of London, P. 0. Box 5035, 300 Dufferin Avenue, Suite 1006, London, Ontario. N6A 4L9

Supply System,

Attention: Peter W. Steblin

i i Env. Services]

MAR 1 1 2004 ' From G.M.

bYG3 I Deas Sir:

RE: RegionaI Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Initiatives.

Further to your letter of February 12,2004, we wish to advise Malahide Township Council passed the following Resolution on March 4,2004:

THAT the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power program be endorsed by the Township of Malahide as a very high priority of this municipality, and the Federal Minister of Infrastructure be advised that any funding under the Rural Infrastructure Fund for this municipality can be allocated to the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power program.

Please contact our office if we can be of any fUrther assistance herein. We thank you for your assistance with this matter.

Yours very truly,

R. MILLARD, C.A.O,/CLERK

H:\dianaWiana's filesWandy 2004\elgin area water march 5.doc

a

RANDALL R. MILLARD C. A.O.IChk Email: [email protected]

SUSAN E. WILSON TreCrJuCT

Email: treasurer@ township.malahide.on.ca

03/25/2004 12:12 FAX 519

Agenda ... . , .. ... l t ~ m : .. _. 8 Bags d

769 2837 TOWNSHIP OF SOUTHWO m o o 1

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTHWOLD 35663 Fingal line

Fingal, ON NOL 1KO

Phone: (57 9) 769-2070

Email: [email protected] Fax: (519) 769-2037

DATE:

TO:

FROM:

## OF PAGES:

FAX:

March 25,2004

A. J, Henry, P. Eng.

Tena Michiels, Deputy Clerk

2. (including Covering Letter)

661.12355

RE: CERTIFIED RESOLUTION

Following, please find certified resolution passed by Council on March 22, 2004.

Yours truly,

Tena Michiels Deputy Clerk

TOWNSHJP OF SOUTHWOLD 35663 Fingal Line

Fingal, ON NOL ?KO

Phone: (51 9) 769-2010

Ernail: south wul~~twp.southwoid,on.ca Fax: (519) 769-2837

March 25,2004

1, Tena Mi'chiels, Deputy Clerk, hereby certify the following to be a true copy of a resolution passed by t he Council of the Corporation of the Township of Southwold on

March 22,2004:

"THAT this Council endorse the development of a Regional Water

Quality and Capacity Improvement Plan with Green Power Initiatives by the Joint Board of Management for the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System in partnership with the Joint Board of Management for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System and the City of

London;

AND THAT the Township of Southwold confirm that the development

of this plan is a high priority within the Township and support the request made by the Partnership for funding assistance through the Infrastructure Canada - Strategic Infrastructure Fund."

Bayham PO. Box 160,9344 Plank Road, Straffordville, Ontario NOJ 1YO

email: bayhamabayham. on. ca Tel: (519) 866-5521 Fax: (519) 866-3884

April 5,2004

Joint Board of Management Elgin Area Water Supply System c/o City of London P.O. Box 5035 300 Dufferin Avenue, Suite 907 London, ON

Fax No. 661-2355

-1 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

APR 07 2004 N6A 4L9

Attention: Andrew Henry, P. Eng Manager of Operations and Compliance

Dear Sir,

Re: Regional Water Oualitv. Cauacitv. and Green Power Initiatives Proeram

Council for the Municipality of Bayham had opportunity at its meeting April lSt, 2004, to review and consider the Regional Water Quality, Capacity, and Green Power Initiatives Program. Council is in fill support of the Program, and confms that such works to provide for secure and sustainable water supply is a top priority for the Municipality. After considering the information, Council adopted the following resolution at its April lSt, 2004 meeting:

- .

“Repional Water QualiQ. CavaciQ. and Green Power Initiatives Program

That the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham endorse the development of the Regional Water Qualiiy, Capacity, and Green Power Initiatives Program, prepared by the Joint Board of Management for the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System (EAYWSSJ in partnership with the Joint Board of Marragernent for the Luke Hiwon Primary Water Supply System and the City of London; And That the Municipality of Bayham confirm its support for the request made by this Partnership for funding assistance, through the Infrastructure Canada - Strategic Infrastructure Fund, for the Regional Water Quality, Capacity, and Green Power Initiatives Program; And Further That this resolution by the Municipality of Bayham be confirmed with the Board of Management for the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply Sy8tem. ”

Should you require anything fiirther, please do not hesitate to contact me. . .// ”

B .

Corporation of the Municipality of Thmes Centre

File: E08

March 31,2004

Peter W. Steblin, P. Eng. General Manager & City Engineer, City of London & CAO, Lake Huron & Elgin Area Primary Water Supply Sysfems City of London 300 Dufferin Avenue P.O. Box5035 London, ON N6A 4L9

RE:

Dear Mr. Steblin:

REGIONAL WATER QUALITY AND CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS

[email protected]

1 File . t

At its regular meeting held on March 15, 2004, the Council of'.the Municipality of Thames Centre enacted the following resolution regardi bg the proposed Regional Water Quality and Capacity I m prove men ts:

Moved by: H. McCutcheon Seconded. by: R. Harris (Resolution #249-2004)

v

RESOLVED THAT the Municipal Sfaff be requested fo advise. the Cify of London that the Council of fhe Municipality of Thames Centre is interested in participating in a study to be funded thro,ugh the Canada Strategic lnfrasfrucfure Program to outline a regionally-based-Mafer systern/prograrn for pirrposes of ensuring a susfainable high quality water supply that will provide significant long-term benefits to the entire region. Carried.

The Council looks forWard40 working with the City of London and other potential partners to ensure a sustainable high quality water supply for the entire region.

If you require any additional information at this time, please contact either myself at 268-7334, ext. 232 or Chief Administrative Officer William Tigert at 268-7334, ext. 232.

Michelle M. Casavecchia; D,P.A., C.M.O., CMM 111 Director of Corporate SewiceslClerk /mc

c. S. McAuley, Director of Environmental Services

TOWN OF

AYLMER 46 Talbot Street, West, Aylmer, Ontario N5H 1 J7 Office: (519) 773-3164 Fax: (519) 765-1446

Adminstration: Wendell Graves -Administrator Phyllis Ketchabaw - Clerk

April 14,2004.

Fax # 661-2355

Mi. Andrew J. Henry, P. Eng., Manager of Regional Water Supply, Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System, C/o The City of London, P. 0. Box 5035, 300 Dufferin Avenue, LONDON, ON N6A 4L9

Dear Sir:

Please be advised of the following resolution passed by Aylmer Town Council last evening, relative to the development of a Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Program:

‘CThat as per the recommendation of Transportation / Environment / Water Committee, April 8,2004, Council approves in principle, the important and timely initiative of the Elgin Area Primary Water System in partnership with the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System to develop a Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power Program; further

That Aylmer Town Council supports a submission to the Rural Infrastructure Fund for this Program.”

Please advise if additional information is required.

Yours truly, q&t (duLc- C rk Phylli Ketchabaw

. . . ................. .... .,._-. ....l-...-ll......-.......... ........................................................ ...................... .._. ............

365 North Front St. Suite 187

Belleville, ON K8P 5113

@as R. Parker, CMA, Executive Director

Ontario

Association htunicipal Mter

I .

Mr. P. McNally, P.Eng. Director of Water, Environment and Customer Relations City df London 300 Dufferin Ave PO 'Box 5035 London, Ont N6A 4L9

March 15,2004

ENVt RONMENTAL PRO- CUSTOMER RELATIONS

RECEIVED I

The Ontario Municipal Water Association is an advocate 'for public water supply systems owners and customers. The association's members supply water to more than 7,000,000 persons in Ontario. The association promotes all efforts to ensure-.that Ontario's drinking water public has a safe and reliable supply of waief . . a i ;regsonable cost.

The regional water quality and capacity improvements proposed by the City of London in,association with the Lake Huron Primary Supply System and the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System will ensure the ongoing provision of a safe and reliable supply ofwater to the region. As such the Ontario Municipal Water Association strongly supports the City and the Joints Boards of Management in their efforts to implement the proposed water quality and capacity improvements.

Should further support be required please do not hesitate to contact us. \

Yours truly,

. . , . . . * .

Jerry K[au.s ...... . s s : i . . . . . '

. . . . ... . . , . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . - i

- . . . . . . . 1 . .: .). , . . b

.P[esident : .. , ;.

. . . . . . * .. .\: ' . 1 : . . . . - . * . 6 ' . . . 1 .

. . . . . . a . . .

. . , . . . . . .

Telephone: 613-967-0350 Fax: 61 3-967-0690 Email: [email protected] Website: ornwa.org

i'.

Ontario Water Association A Section of A W A

Ontario's Leading Resoi

Wor

Jrce on

'ks

Safe Drinking Wat

Mr. P. McNally, P. Eng. Director - Water, Environment & Customer Relations The Corporation of the City of London 300 Dufferin Avenue P.O. Box 5035 London ON N6A 4L9

ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS & CUSTOMER RELATIONS

Ontario Water Works Association - A Section of A W A (OWWA) is a non-profit scientific and educational association made up of 1300 individuals, businesses, consulting firms, and approximately 70 municipal water providers. The organization is a section of the American Water Works Association ("AWA"), the world's oldest and largest drinking water organization founded in 1881.

'

OWWA supports the work of long time members of our association, such as the City of London, in their efforts to protect public health through the delivery of safe, sufficient and sustainable drinking water in Ontario. OWWA supports best practices in the stewardship of water through sontinuous improvement of technology, science and management, and by influencing government policy.

.

We would wholeheartedly endorse any proposal that furtbers our mission and provides people in Ontario with access to safe sufficient and sustainable drinking water.

since re1 y

Susan A. Andrews Chair

ROOM 368 CONFEDERATION BUILDING OTTAWA, ONTARIO

KIA OA6 TEL (613) 992-6124 FAx:.(613) 998-7902

E-mail: [email protected] .

January 23,2004

Anne Marie DeCicco Mayor City of London 300 Dufferin Avenue PO Box 5035 London, ON N6A 4L9

Mayor DeCicco;

C A N A D A

GARY SCHELLENBLRGER, M.P. PERTH - MIDDLESEX

CONSTITUENCY OFFICE 544 HURON STREET

STRATFORD, ON NSA 5T9 ' TEL: (519) 273-1400

FAX: (519) 273-9045 TOLL-FREE 1-866-303-1400

E-mail: schelgl @parl.gc,ca

I want to thank you for taking the time to send my office a copy of your December 22, 2003 correspondence to the Hon. Andy Scott, Minister of State (Infrastructure) regarding the new initiatives the City of London has talcen to improve its drinlung water.

X strongly support the development of new, environmentally friendly initiatives when dealing with drinking water, and I applaud the City of London, the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System, and the Elgin Area Primary Water'Supply System for their leadership on this matter.

.

If I can ever be of assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office.

Gary Schellenberge AyIu j j M.P. Perth-Middlesex

Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal

Office of the Minister 6th Floor, Mowat Block 900 Bay Street Toronto, Ontario M7A 1L2 Tei.: 416 325-0424 Fax: 416 325-301 3 w.pir.gov.on.ca

Ministere du Renouvellement de I'infrastructure publique

Bureau du rninistre Edifice Mowat, 6' &age 900, rue Bay Toronto (Ontario) M7A 1L2

www.pir.gov.on.ca

T6i. : 416 325-0424 TMc. : 41 6 325-301 3

Mailing Address: Adresse postaie : 6th Floor, Frost Building South 7 Queen's Park Crescent Toronto, Ontario M7A 1Y7

Edifice Frost Sud, 6e 4tage 7 Queen's Park Crescent Toronto (Ontario) M7A 1 Y7

ptUG 1 6 2004 Mr. Harold Usher Chair Lake Huron Water Supply Joint Board Lake Huron Water Supply System c/o The City of London P.O. Box 5035 300 Dufferin Avenue Suite 907 London ON N6A 4L9

Dear Mr. Usher:

Ontarlo

Thank you for your letter of March I, 2004, regarding the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power initiatives that are being undertaken in partnership with the Lake Huron and Elgin Area Primary Water Supply Systems and the City of London, to improve water facilities in your region.

Our government understands the infrastructure challenges faced by Ontario's municipalities. We are working together in partnership with other governments to address these challenges and help improve the quality of life for our people.

The federal government's Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund will target large-scale projects to improve water quality, sewage treatment, waste management and transit. Discussions are undeway between the federal and Ontario governments regarding the potential shared funding priorities for this initiative. Please be assured we will fully consider municipal priorities including regional water improvement initiatives, within the limitations of available funding.

In addition, as you may be aware, on May 6, 2004 we signed a 'Letter of Intent' with our federal partners to develop a $900 million Canada-Ontario Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund (COMRIF). The governments of Canada and Ontario are working closely with the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) to implement the program and ensure that it meets local priorities and needs.

. . ./2

.

- 2-

Through COMRIF, we will invest in small and rural municipalities to support capital projects that help build safe, clean, liveable communities across the province. Applications will be available once the governments of Canada and Ontario sign a final agreement. We will notify eligible municipalities as soon as the program is ready to accept applications,

Furthermore, the 2004 Ontario Budget also announced the creation of the Ontario Strategic lnfrastructure Financing Authority (OSIFA) as a financing vehicle to help renew Ontario’s public infrastructure.

Finally, the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, in cooperation with other government ministries, is developing a long-term water and wastewater infrastructure investment and financing strategy to address capital investment needs in our water systems. As part of this strategy, will be considering the needs of regional water systems across the province.

I appreciate your efforts to keep me informed of these water infrastructure initiatives in your area. Thank you again for writing.

Yours sincerely, 34e--- David Captan

Minister

c. The Honourable John Gerretsen Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing

Her Worship Anne Marie DeCicco Mayor, City of London

Deb Matthews, MPP London North Centre

Khalil Ramal, MPP London - Fanshawe

John Wilkinson, MPP Perth - Middlesex

Minister of State Ministre d'etat '

(Infrastructure) ( I nfr astr uctu re)

Ottawa, Canada K1A OA6

Harry Usher Chair, Lake Huron Supply Joint Board Lake Huron Primary

Water Supply System C/o The City of London P.O. Box 5035

London, Ontario N6A 4L9

. . . .. . -'- 300 Duffiiin Avenue, Suit%-9D7-' . .- .

Bud Polhill Chair, Joint Board of Management Elgin Area Primary

Water Supply System C/o The City of London P.O. BFc(X2 300 Dufferin Aven%e:Suite 907 . Londoh, Ontario N6A 4L9

Dear Messrs. Usher md Polhill:

I wish to thank you for your letter of March 1,2004, concerning the Regional Water Quality, Capacity and Green Power initiatives you are proposing in conjunction with the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System and the City of London.

I agree that investments in water and wastewater infrastructure are critical to the quality of life of Canadians, not only in terms of a healthy environment, but also in respect of ahealthy economy. Indeed, the Govennpent of Canada's commitment to a healthy environment and clean water is underscored by a number of infrastructure fbnding programs, including the Canada Strategic Infiastmcture Fund (CSIF), that support strategic public idkastructure projects such as water and wastewater. We are currently in discussions with the Government of Ontario regarding priorities for the current round of the CSTF; consequently, you may also wish to contact provincial authorities in respect of your proposal.

X would also like to draw your attention to the recent Budget announcement in which the Government of Canada committed to accelerating funding under the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund (MRIF). As a result, the $1 billion MEUF will now be spent over 5 years, instead of 10. In addition, on February 12,2004, I announced the launch of negotiations with each province and territory on new agreements to provide Canadians with better public infrastructure through the MRE. On May 6,2004, my colleagues, the

' Honourable Joe Volpe, Minister of Human Resources'and Skills Development and the Honourable Joe Comuzzi, Minister of State (Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario) announced the signing of a Letter of Intent with the Government of Ontario and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario which outlines the parameters that will de negotiations on a final agreement. I expect that these negotiations will be concluded quickly and that both governments will then be in aposition to implement a joint process to consider specific proposals for municipal infrastructure projects.

. . .2

-.2 -

I would encourage you to visit the Infrastructure Canada web site

Thank you again for writing me regarding these initiatives. As discussed at our

(www.infiastmcture.ec.ca) for more details on this program, as well as on the CSIF.

meeting of February Sth, 2004, I passed your proposal on to my officials for fbrther study in order to determine its applicability under MRIF or CSP.

'Yours sincerely,

Minister of State (Mastructure)

I

May 27,2004

2 7 2004 I f - - J FILE NO.

Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System c/o The City of London P.O. Box 5035 300 Dufferin Street, Suite 907 London, Ontario N6A 4L9

Attention: Mr. Andrew J. Henry, P.Eng. Manager, Regional Water Supply

Water Supply System Research Centre Letter of Support

Dear Mr. Henry:

We are extremely interested in participating in the proposed Water Quality Treatment Research Centre for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System (LHPWSS). The need for this type of facility by the water industry is clearly demonstrated in Ontario and Canada. The Centre would provide a business opportunity for a private and public partnership based on concepts and ideas you have identified and on work currently being conducted at the water treatment plant north of Grand Bend. Dillon is prepared to provide “in kind” services to support the development of the Centre in conjunction with the Joint Board of Management for the LHPWSS.

We look forward to working with you on this exciting opportunity.

Yours sincerely,

DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED

Roland Welker, P.Eng. Partner

RW:vko

DILIXIN CONSU LTI NC

495 Richmond S t ~ c t

bndon, Ontario Canada

NGA 5A9

Mail: Box 426 London, Ontario

Canada

N6A 4W7 Telephone

(517) 438-6172 Fax (5 19) 672-8209

Project E(

,JAN 2 6 2004

I f'l I, *F" I --I-.--... ........ ̂ .---.-I.. .....-.-..-.I-_.......__ __. ______..__._I__

London, Ontario .--_I_ -.-.L---.--.--__

;I,! : ... )" : . ,.: . c . .- .

i January 20,2004

The Corporation of the city Of h - d o n Environmental and Engineering Services Departdent----.---. City Hall, 10* Floor P.O. Box 5035 300 Dufferin Avenue

N6A 4L9

..___..__ _ _ _ -_______

--- ._-...__ .._.._ ._-_

733 15

Attention: Mr. P. Steblin, P.Eng. General Manager EESD and City Engineer

Subject: Regional Water Quality Capacity and Green Power Initiatives December 8*, 2003 Report to London ETC

Dear Sir: * Further to your report submission and presentation at the December 8*, 2003, meeting of the City s Environment and Transportation Committee, and OUT discussions before and after the presentation, we would like to formerly endorse the initiatives you presented and express our interest in assisting to achieve the objectives.

Earth Tech Canada Inc. is a 1,000 person engineering consulting firm and design-build contractor in Canada, with offices across the country from Montreal to Vancouver. Our head office in Markham, and our London Regional office, have served the City of London and Joint Boards of Management for the L&e Huron and Elgin Area Primary Water Supply Systems, and a number of the secondary water systems connected to these, over the past 30 years.

B o 5 . 8 8 G . 7 o 2 2 L-----r 1 i

F a c s i m i l e I

9 0 5 . 8 8 6 . 9 4 9 4 . I

Earth Tech worldwide has some 10,000 personnel and does $1.5 B U.S. annually. We are the No, 1 water consulting firm in North'herica (Engineering News Record 2003). As such, we can provide world class engineering consulting services for the Capital.Infrastructure Development aspects of the program related to water supply, treatment, storage, transmission, emergency power, and green power initiatives involving landfill gas utilization at W12A. Over the years Earth Tech has been involved in each of these aspects for the City of London and/or for each of or both the Joint Boards of Management for the Lake Huron and Elgin Area Water Supply Systems.

Across North America, the benefits of Earth Tech's full service approach to the delivery of water infrastructure projects are measured by success. Earth Tech continues to be selected as a preferred provider by communities across North America including Beverly Hills, California; Newport, Rhode Island; Chicago and Boston (MWRA).

In addition, we have contacts in the wind power industry through one of ow former employees, Mr. Jason VanGeel. Jason is a Senior Sales Engineer with Vestas Canadian Wind Technology, Inc. Vestas is the largest wind turbine manufacturer in the world and is very active in the emerging Ontario wind market, providing technical support for projects in the planning stage, through to equipment supply, installation and maintenance, and has most recently completed three projects along the Lake Huron shoreline between Goderich and the Bruce Peninsula. Vestas is also actively engaged in consultations

A ~ ~ C O INTERNATIONAL LTD. COMPANY

Mr. P. Steblin, P.Eng. The Corporation of the City of London January 20,2004

Project EO 733 15 Page 2

with the Provincial government, including the Ministry of Energy, Environment and Municipal Affairs, and is uniquely experienced with the interconnection of wixid generation to Hydro One systems and municipal utility systems.

In November of 2003, Jason met with the City of London's James Skimming, Tim McKenna and Scott Koshowski. The fundamental aspects of wind generation were discussed, including wind turbine technology, wind resource assessment, and the economic factors related to wind power, particularly in Ontario. As a compliment to. load displacement opportunities at the Grand Bend and Port Stanley facilities, green power marketing initiatives were also suggested.

Earth Tech and Vestas wish ta offer engineering and technical services relative to your needs for this endeavour on either a paid or in-kind basis subject to your needs, any additional or background work required, and Federal and/or Provincial government funding requirements. We make this offer on the understanding that Earth TecWVestas would not be precluded from any subsequent procurement process for any of the program components as a result. We also provide the opportunity to offer construction management with and without risk, and program management services given the scope of this endeavour. This would ensure that you not only have experienced consulting tmgineering/technicd services available to you, but also construction related services to manage this, initiative amongst various stakeholders, even to the extent of taking on the risk and responsibility for constructing any aspect of the infrastructure development program.

We believe our expertise and relationships established, not only in Southwestern Ontario, but also in the development of inter-regional servicing schemes elsewhere in the Province, most notably the $lB York Durham Sewage System would be of benefit in establishing and implementing a new and innovative, regionally-based infrastructure program. Earth Tech helped the Regions of York and Durham establish co-ownership principles and a formal co-ownership agreement as well as capacity utilization principles for the 92 MGD Dufhn Creek Facility. We are currently completing the third expansion of this facility, which we originally designed in the 1970's. Another example of our expertise on inter-regional servicing schemes is our current work on the. implementation of $1OOM in feedermain infrastructure between Peel and York Regions to meet the future water demands of southern York Region from Peel.

Our approach fosters a true partnership amongst stakeholders, while providing. needed flexibility throughout the infrastructure delivery process. Our single source accountability approach could also provide savings on capital cost through alternative infkastructure delivery, and risk reduction, allocation, and elimination.

Given our parent company is Tyco International Ltd., a $36 B Fortune 500 Company with some 250,000 employees in some 200 different companies worldwide, we also provide the opportunity to bring equity to this project to either fund specific aspects of the infrastructure development program, or assist in development of Lake Huron Water Quality Research Facility referenced as part of a public/private partnership initiative. We have significht experience and a successful track record in

E A R T H e T ' E C H

A fqCd IN773NA77ONAL LTD. COMPANY.

Mr. P. Steblin, P.Eng. The Corporation of the City of London January 20,2004

Project EO 73315 Page 3

this regard which includes drinking water facilities elsewhere in Canada, the UK and the U.S. This could also include the testing of products produced by other Tyco Infrastructure companies. This includes ultraviolet disinfection and water treatment membrane equipment currently marketed in East Asia.

We are interested in exploring further potential roles and levels of involvement in this initiative, and assisting in your funding request endeavours. These roles could include lending our support from an equity and/or service perspective. Hopefully marketing and/or other service related benefits would accrue to Earth Tech as a result.

We are available at any time to discuss this further and Iook forward to the opportunity to do so. In the meantime, should you have any questions or require any further information, please feel free to call at anytime.

Very truly yours,

Earth Tech Canada

& i i Robert Anhews, P.Eng. President Earth Tech Canada Inc.

JHEdc

cc: Pat McNally, City of London Andrew Henry, Manager, Chair, Lake Huron WSS Joint Board, Chiir, Elgin Area WSS Joint Board

b John H, Haasen, P.M.P., C.E.T. Western OntarioMiagara Regional Manager and Special Projects Manager

A tqca IMERNA77OhiAL L7D. COMPANY

Appendix 'B' Project List and Project Sheets

Improve the water quality and increase capacity for the Municipality of Strathroy- Caradoc over that of the current ground water wells by connecting to the LHPWSS via a 600 mm diameter transmission main Improve the water quality and increase capacity for the Municipalities of Exeter, Hensall, Seaforth, Glanworth, and others over that of the current ground water supplies by

1 connecting to the primary water supply ' svstems.

~~

/jects - Phase I I Description

Strathroy-Caradoc Connection

Exeter, Hensall, Seaforth, Glanworth, and Other Connections

~ 2007- 2008

ents

Pumping Station pumping station to meet the MOE

and to provide drinking water and water pressure to current customers and future growth

recommended emergency storage capacity 2004 - 2007

I Transmission CaDacitv and Reliabilitv lmlorovements

Provide emergency back up power so that in the event of a power failure a safe, reliable, and secure water source is maintained Provide emergency back up power so that in the event of a power failure a safe, reliable, and secure water source is maintained Provide 3.5 MW of emergency back up power

reliable, and secure water source is maintained

so that in the event of a power failure a safe,

Frame

$20,000,000 2004 - 2006

$35,000,000 2006 - 2007

2006

2o05 - 2006

2005 - 2006

Elgin Area Transmission Main Twinning

Conduct wind power generation feasibility studies at the Lake Huron and Elgin Area

Landfill site. If the feasibility studies prove promising then construction of wind turbines will commence Retrofit and construction of a gas capture and

methane gas into environmentally friendly green power

Water Treatment Facilities and at the W12A

Combustion facility to convert harmful landfill

Increase capacity and operational redundancy by twinning the 18 km length of transmission main with a 1050 mm diameter pipe line and rehabilitate the existing 750 mm diameter transmission main to increase the life exDectancv to 2026

2005 - 2007

2006 - 2008

Water Quality Treatment Research Facility

I , , I I

lcility Expansion and Upgrades Southeast Reservoir and I Construct a 113 ML reservoir and booster I I

Construction of a Water Treatment and Research facility to implement research, operator training, and equipment testing and val id at ion

*Oo5 - $1 5,000,000 2007

nergency Power Capacitl Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station Emergency Power Lake Huron Water Treatment Facility Emergency Power Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility Emergency Power

Power Generation

Methane Gas Capture and Green Power Production at W12A

' ImDrovements

$41,000,000

$1,000,000

$9,000,000

$4,000,000

$6,500,000

$3,000,000

Projects - Phase 2 cost Time Frame Description

I 2010 -

Green Power Initiatives Implementation of Green Power

Implementation of one or more green power initiatives from earlier studies. This project may include producing green power from sources such as wind, landfill gas, and/or biomass.

I $1 0,000,000

1 Transmission Capacity and Reliability Improvements

I redundancy for system reliability

I Main Twinning

I mm diameter transmission main to provide increased capacity and operational

Elgin Residue Management Facility

Lake Huron Residue Management Facility

2010 -’ 1 $55,000,000 201 1

Environmental Standards will require the development of a residue management facility to meet compliance Environmental Standards will require the development of a residue management facility to meet compliance

201 201, - $1 3,000,000

201 O - $1 0,000,000 201 1

, $88,000,000

Projects - Phase 3 cost Time Frame Description

Other Connections

1 HELP 'lean Water I $353,500,000 I cost

$30,000,000 2015 - Improve the water quality and increase capacity for the Municipality of Tillsonburg, and others over that of current ground water well supplies 2017

Elgin Area Water Treatment ' Facility Expansion

Expand the low lift pumping station, flocculation, sedimentation basin, disinfection system, high lift pumping station, and twin the raw water intake. Upgrades to the UV disinfection system will also take dace

$60,000,000 2014 - 2020

Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility Emergency Power Generator

Install 3.5 MW of emergency power supply to meet plant capacity 2020 $4,000,000

2004 - 2006

Project Title Strathroy-Caradoc Transmission Main Connection

Budget Estimate

$20,000,000

Project Description

The Township of Strathroy-Caradoc is currently serviced by a number of wells located just south of the Town of Strathroy. However, due to water quality problems and limited quantity from these aquifers, these wells should be abandoned and a new source of water procured. The proposal for this project will improve the water quality and increase capacity for the Municipality of Strathroy-Caradoc over that of the current ground water wells by connecting to the LHPWSS via a 600 mm diameter transmission main.

I Leadpartner Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System

Partners / Benefiting Municipalities

Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System Municipality of Strathroy-Caradoc

Overview

The Township of Strathroy-Caradoc receives its water from several wells, which, over the past few years, have been experiencing water quality problems. These wells contain water that has very high iron content and is susceptible to contamination. The cost associated with upgrading the wells has been looked at but it was dismissed being that the cost of upgrading was prohibitively high. Secondly, given the location of the aquifer it would virtually impossible to prevent contamination sources from existing. Finally, the quantity of water available from the aquifer was near its peak and would not be able to sustain predicted future growth. The Township undertook a Class EA (Township of Strathroy-Caradoc Class Environmental Assessment for Long Term Water Supply Screening Report, BM Ross April 2004) to determine the new long-term water supply for Strathroy. The Class EA concluded that the best solution was a 600 mm diameter water transmission main connected to the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System. A sustainable water supply system that provides safe, sufficient, reliable, and secure drinking water with dependable quality that satisfies the Provincial Water Quality Standard is essential for every community. Extending service into new areas within the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System will provide these significant overall benefits to this key region of southwestern Ontario. Increased service from the water supply system will reduce the dependency of area communities on highly variable well water supplies, increase their water service capacity to facilitate future growth, stabilize and enhance the quality of their water and significantly improve the reliability of their water supply. Presently the Township is under a Ministry of Environment imposed deadline of December 31 , 2006 to have a new water supply source in place.

Sfrafhmy-Caradoc Transmission Main Connection Revised: October 26,2004

1

Project Year 2006 - 2007

Project Title Exeter, Hensall, Seaforth, Glanworth, and Other Transmission Main Connections

Budget Estimate $35,000,000

Project Description

Exeter, Hensall, Seaforth, and Glanworth all currently obtain their drinking water from ground water wells. Each community has water quality concerns and new provincial regulations and policies are necessitating substantial upgrades. This project will allow these communities to comply with these regulations and policies by improving the water quality and increasing capacity, over that of the current ground water wells, by connecting to the primary water supply system.

Lead Partner Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System


Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System Municipality of South Huron (Exeter, Huron Park) Municipality of Bluewater (Hensall) Huron East (Seaforth) Glanworth (City of London)

The Municipality of South Huron has established, through a Class EA process, that the existing groundwater supplies for Exeter and Huron Park should be replaced with a pipeline connection to the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System (LHPWSS). The community of Hensall, in the Municipality of Bluewater, is experiencing water quality problems with its existing groundwater sources. In addition, significant upgrades to the existing treatment and storage facilities are required to meet new provincial regulations. In Huron East, the community of Seaforth is also facing substantial capital and operating costs to upgrade existing groundwater systems. Similar to Hensall, the need for upgrading is driven by both changes in drinking water regulations and by water quality concerns. The community of Glanworth is experiencing water quality problems with its ground water wells. Changes in drinking water regulations and concerns with the quality are driving the need of securing a new source of drinking water. A sustainable water supply system that provides safe, sufficient, reliable, and secure drinking water with dependable quality that satisfies the Provincial Water Quality Standard is essential for every community. Extending service into new areas will provide these significant overall benefits to this key region of southwestern Ontario. Increased service from the water supply system will reduce the dependency of area communities on highly variable well water supplies, increase their water service capacity to facilitate future growth, stabilize and enhance the quality of their water and significantly improve the reliability of their water supply.

Exefer, Hensall, Seaforth, Glan worth, and Other Transmission Main Connections Revised: October 26,2004

2007 - 2008 I I I 1 I

Budget Estimate

$37,000,000

Elgin Area Primary Water Supply Transmission Main Twinning -1 Project Title r - ~ ~ ~~~

Project Description

The Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility has a rated capacity of 91 MUday but the 750 mm diameter primary transmission main is too small to allow such a flow through it. By twinning the transmission main of the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility the maximum efficiency of the facility wilt be realized and redundancy will be introduced to the system. This project will increase capacity and operational redundancy by twinning the 18 km length of transmission main with a 1050 mm diameter pipe line and rehabilitate the existing 750 rnm diameter transmission main to increase the life expectancy to 2026.

~~

Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System


Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System Town of Aylmer, Township of Bayham, Municipality of Central Elgin, Township of Malahide, City of St. Thomas, Township of Southwold, City of London

Overview

The Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility has the ability to treat and distribute 91 ML of drinking water per day. However, the primary transmission main, which is 750 mm in diameter, can only distribute 80 ML/day. In essence, the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility is not capable of performing at maximum levels. The single line, 750 mm diameter transmission main is close to 40 years old and is in need of some remedial action. As well, by 2014 the treatment facility will need to expand its operations in order to meet the predicted drinking water demands of the region. It is essential that reliable and adequate transmission capacity be in place to convey the water to the customers in a safe, secure, and reliable manner. This project will involve twinning the existing 750 mm transmission main along its entire 18 km length with a new, higher capacity 1050 mm diameter main. To address the issue of aging infrastructure the project will also include the rehabilitation of the existing 750 mm main to increase its life expectancy so that it can be utilized for redundancy in conjunction with the new 1050 rnrn main. Single line transmission mains are a key point of vulnerability in the life line analysis of major water supply systems. Twinning transmission mains in the supply system provides two primary benefits. Dual transmission mains provide increased capacity with reduced total head loss during normal operations and provide essential system redundancy in the event of a key component failure. Providing twinned transmission mains, in conjunction with appropriate interconnection stations, allows the water supply to be routed around failed main sections without significantly affecting total system capacity or supply to the various municipalities. Transmission main redundancy is a key aspect in the overall reliability of water supply systems.

Elgin Area Primary Water Supply Transmission Main Twinning Revised: October 26,2004

" , . . . .. .. , .. . I. . .. . . , " - 4 . . .... ..... , . - . .. . I . ... , . . . . - ." , ".

2004 - 2007 Budget Estimate

$41,000,000

Project Title Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station

Project Description

The City of London and the surrounding area have a shortfall from the Ministry of Environment's recommended 2 day emergency storage supply of water. To meet these guidelines it is proposed that the construction of a 1 13 ML reservoir and booster pumping station takes place to meet the MOE recommended emergency storage capacity and to provide drinking water and water pressure to current customers and future growth.

Lead Partner City of London


City of London Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System, Town of Aylmer, Township of Bayham, Municipality of Central Elgin, Township of Malahide, City of St. Thomas, Township of Southwold

_ _ _ ~

Overview

Slated for construction in 2005, the Southeast Reservoir and Booster Pumping Station will provide a much-needed increase in emergency water supply storage. The design of this reservoir and booster pumping station is proposed to be done in two phases. The first phase calls for a reservoir capacity of 113 ML and pumping capacity to meet the needs of the City of London for the next I O years. Currently, the City of London has a 115 ML shortfall in emergency water supply storage from the Ministry of Environment's recommended two-day emergency supply. By constructing the Southeast Reservoir that shortfall will be reduced to only 2 ML, virtually obtaining a two-day emergency supply of water for the residents of the City of London, for the short term. The second phase takes into consideration the long term view and will see the reservoir capacity double to 226 ML and will provide pumping capacity that will meet the needs of the City of London until 2024. The Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station is a fundamental component of the City of London's system and will have a critical effect on the present operating performance and capacity requirements of the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System. Constructing the reservoir in the early time frame of this regional program allows the Elgin Plant expansion to be deferred until the planned 2014 start by providing daily flow balancing in the overall water supply system. Also, through valve manipulation, it will be possible to back feed the storage capacity of the Southeast Reservoir into the St. Thomas Terminal Reservoir. This will allow for all users connected to the Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System to maintain service in the event of a temporary shutdown or emergency at the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility.

Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station Revised: October 26,2004


Project Title Emergency Backup Power for Southeast Reservoir

Project Description

The City of London and the surrounding area will have a two day emergency storage supply of water as recommended by the Ministry of Environment. In the event of a power failure much of that supply will not be accessible as several of the existing reservoirs do not have backup power. In order to maintain a two day emergency storage supply of drinking water for all scenarios it is recommended to provide emergency back up power at the Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station so that in the event of a power failure a safe, reliable, and secure water source is maintained.



City of London Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System, Town of Aylmer, Township of Bayham, Municipality of Central Elgin, Township of Malahide, City of St. Thomas, Township of Southwold

~ ~-

Overview

Slated for construction in 2005, the Southeast Reservoir and Booster Pumping Station will provide a much needed increase in emergency water supply storage. The initial reservoir capacity of 113 ML will meet the needs of the City of London for the next 10 years and will virtually obtain the two-day emergency supply of water recommended by the MOE for the residents of the City of London. Having the Ministry of Environment's recommended two day emergency storage capacity is one thing, but having the means to deliver that water supply, at all times to those that rely on it, is another. In order to utilize this storage capacity in the event of a power failure the Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station will contain a backup power generator. The generator will be capable of delivering I .25 MW of power, which will be adequate enough for general facility hydro demand and the operation of three pumps in order to deliver enough water to meet the typical average day consumption for the next thirty years.

Emergency Backup Power for Southeast Reservoir Revised: October 26,2004

2005 - 2006

Project Title Lake Huron Water Treatment Facility Emergency Backup Power

Budget Estimate

$9,000,000

Project Description

The Lake Huron Water Treatment Facility currently has 3.6 MW of emergency backup power. However, as new primary water supply connections are made this will not be enough to provide the minimum required amounts of drinking water to its customers. In order to provide safe, sufficient, and reliable drinking water to its customers the need for increased emergency backup power is overdue. Therefore, this proposal will introduce additional emergency back up power so that in the event of a power failure a safe, reliable, and secure water source is maintained.



Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System, Township of Bluewater, Township of South Huron, Township of Lambton Shores, Township of Lucan-Biddulph, Township of Middlesex Centre, Township of North Middlesex, City of London

Overview

The provision of emergency power capacity is one that covers a wide field. Emergency power capacity is a provision that has been undervalued in the past and not until August 2003 was its potential benefit reatized. Currently, the only emergency power supply within the primary water supply system exists at the Lake Huron Water Treatment Facility. In the event of a power failure, the Lake Huron Water Treatment Facility has a 3.6 megawatt marine-diesel generator onsite. However, the generator unit at this facility is undersized and is only capable of providing enough power to operate computer control systems, instrumentation and emergency lighting, as well as pumping capacity limited to I 1 0,000 m3/day (less than '13 of the plant's treatment capacity). Further backup power generation capacity is recommended to address the immediate backup power requirements in order for the plant to continue to function during power loss events. This project will increase backup power generation at the Lake Huron Water Treatment Facility from 3.6 MW to 10 MW, an amount that will be sufficient enough to continue operations full-scale, without interruption or worry to every customer or industry connected to the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System. In order to provide a safe, sufficient, reliable, and secure water supply for all customers it is essential that emergency power capacity be increased. Providing emergency power capacity that is matched to system operating requirements would allow the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System to continue full operation and meet existing and future water supply requirements in the event of a major power outage. The major power outage in August 2003 provided a drastic test of system reliability for system operators throughout the affected area. In anticipation of future catastrophic events, emergency power generators matched to full system capacity should be installed.

Lake Huron Water Treatment Facility Emergency Backup Power - . Revised: October 26, 2004

2005 - 2006

Project Title Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility Emergency Backup Power

Budget Estimate $4,000,0 00

Project Description

The Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility currently has no form of emergency backup power. In t he event of a regional power failure the facility will be rendered non-operational. In order to prove safe, sufficient, and reliable drinking water services to the customers of the region it is required that emergency backup power be provided at the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility. This project will introduce 3.5 MW of emergency back up power so that in the event of a power failure a safe, reliable, and secure water source is maintained.

Lead Partner Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System

Partners I Benefiting Municipalities

Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System Town of Aylmer, Township of Bayham, Municipality of Central Elgin, Township of Malahide, City of St. Thomas, Township of Southwold, City of London

Overview

Emergency power capacity is a provision that has been undervalued in the past and not until August 2003 was its potential benefit realized. Currently there is no source of emergency backup power supply for the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility. In the event of a power failure, the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility will be rendered inoperable. In the event of a regional power failure the only source of water that would be available would be the water that was in the St. Thomas Terminal Reservoir. However, the potential for St. Thomas, London, and the other municipalities of Elgin County drawing from this reservoir would diminish the capacity quickly. With no water, even for emergency fire fighting the consequences could be catastrophic. For this reason backup power generation capacity is recommended to address the immediate backup power requirements in order for the plant to continue to function during power loss events and provide this essential service. This project will introduce backup power generation at the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility in the amount of 3.5 MW. This amount would be sufficient to power all control systems, lighting, and computers of the treatment facility as well as provide the minimum required drinking water to its custom e rs . In order to provide a safe, sufficient, reliable, and secure water supply for all of the customers it is essential that emergency power capacity is introduced to the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility. Providing emergency power capacity that is capable of providing the minimum required supply of drinking water would allow the primary water system to continue operation and meet the water supply requirements in the event of a major power outage.

Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility Emergency Backup Power Revised: October 26,2004

Budget Estimate 2005 - 2007 $6,500,000

1 Project Title Wind Feasibility and Wind Power Generation

I Project Description

The development of wind energy along the shores of Lake Huron and Lake Erie, and at the ’ W12A landfill site would be an effort to help Canada reduce its direct greenhouse gas (GHG) ’ emissions, If all or some of the wind power projects come to fruition then the power they ~ produce will displace other non-renewable, greenhouse gas emitting electricity sources. It is 1 proposed to conduct wind power generation feasibility studies at the Lake Huron and Elgin I Area Water Treatment Facilities and at the W12A Landfill site. If the feasibility studies prove

promising then construction of wind turbines will commence.



City of London, LHPWSS, EAPWSS, City of St. Thomas, Town of Aylmer, Township of Bayham, Municipality of Central Elgin, Townships of Malahide, Southwold, Bluewater, South Huron, Lambton Shores, Lucan-Biddulph, Middlesex Centre, North Middlesex Dillon Consulting, Helimax lhergie

Overview

Using wind power to make electric energy to drive electric pumps is a modern, high technology application of a historic renewable energy source. Erecting wind turbines at the Lake Huron and Elgin Area Water Treatment Facilities and at the W12A Landfill site is a consideration that may benefit a wide spectrum of proponents. If it is feasible to produce wind power at one, some, or all of these sites the environment will benefit from a clean, renewable energy source, and connected customers may benefit from reduced operating costs or additional revenue generated by selling the power back to the grid. Currently, there is little data gathered that will allow for the determination of what sites are feasible locations for wind turbines. However, with proper funding, the necessary prefeasibility study can be undertaken and the proper data gathered. Analysis of this data will then be used to determine if either of the three potential wind power sites has the necessary wind resources to power a wind turbine. By 2007 the reliance on coal fired power generation plants will be drastically reduced. It is imperative that alternate sources of power are located and utilized, no matter what scale they are. Coupling that with the open geographic locations of these three sites creates a good potential for the ability to generate renewable green power in our own backyards. The development of alternative “green power” energy supplies relieves the regions’ dependence on the primary power grid and reduces the emission of environmentally damaging greenhouse gases. Conducting full scale feasibility studies is the only way to find out if wind power generation is an economical and environmental positive. That is why this project has two parts associated with it. The feasibility studies need to be complete and the data interpreted before plans to start constructing wind turbines begin.

Wind Feasibility and Wnd Power Generation Revised: October 26,2004

2006 - 2008

Project Title Methane Gas Capture & Green Power Production at W12A Landfill

Budget Estimate

$3,000,000

Project Description

Methane, a greenhouse gas, is a byproduct of landfill sites. It is harmful to the environment and a waste of resources. By capturing the methane gas the environmental impact of the W12A landfill site will be decreased. Also, using the gas to power generators to produce energy will improve air quality and reduce the reliance on coal fired power facilities. It is proposed to retrofit and construct a gas capture and combustion facility to convert harmful landfill methane gas into environmentally friendly green power.

~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~-

Lead Partner City of London, LHPWSS, EAPWSS


City of London Lake Huron and Elgin Area Primary Water Supply Systems Dillon Consulting Regional benefits from reduced GHG emissions

Overview

Operating landfills are a significant source of methane which is an environmentally damaging "greenhouse" gas. Presently, initiatives are being developed and implemented by the City of London to collect and burn this source of methane gas. A further initiative would be to develop a power and steam co-generation facility at this site to produce energy from the combustion of this harmful gas. Co-generation facilities use the heat of gas combustion to produce steam that drives power turbines. The by-product of steam powered electricity generation is hot water that can be distributed in a secondary loop to industry that requires heat for their operations. By capturing methane gases, this project will reduce the environmental impact of W12A landfill, both locally and at the global level. This project will complement the actions of the Ontario government which wants to reduce greenhouse gases and improve air quality, including phasing out the use of coal to generate electricity by 2007 and making Ontario a leader in the use of energy from renewable sources. During a time when the province is looking for ways to better manage waste and to identify green, renewable sources of energy this project will bring both of these together into one great idea. It will conserve valuable resources and create a cleaner, more vibrant community. This is an example of an innovative, sustainable, and green project that will prove to be leading edge and help protect our environment.

Methane Gas Capture and Green Power Production at W72A Landfill Revised: October 26,2004

2005 - 2007

1 Project Title Lake Huron Water Quality Research and Treatment Centre

Budget Estimate $1 5,000,000

Project Description

A facility that is capable of providing adequate space and resources in order to facilitate research development, system verification and validation testing in the area of water treatment technology is needed to help ensure that a safe, reliable, and secure source of drinking water is sustainable. Local industry and institutions have the means to develop this technology but lack facility space and resources to verify and test them. The construction of a Water Treatment and Research facility to implement research, operator training, and equipment testing and validation is therefore proposed.



City of London, Trojan Technologies Inc., The University of Western Ontario, Fanshawe College, CresTech, Canadian Water Network, and Worldwide benefits

Overview

The Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System (LHPWSS) has facilitated a research partnership regarding drinking water quality treatment methods with Trojan Technologies Inc. of London, Ontario in recent years. The research partnership has assisted Trojan in their development and evaluation of ultraviolet disinfection reactors for use in the drinking water treatment industry worldwide. The research development, system verification and validation testing undertaken to this point has been conducted utilizing temporary modifications at the Lake Huron Plant. Understanding the increased requirements for testing large scale equipment, research, and training (operators, students, etc.) and the potential benefits to the drinking water industry in North America, the Lake Huron Joint Board along with the City of London is evaluating the benefits of constructing two permanent facilities; one at the Lake Huron Plant site that would accommodate further research opportunities, operator training and equipment validation testing, and the other at the Southeast Reservoir and Booster Station which would be used for a Water Treatment Research Centre, Operator training, and a Water Centre of Excellence. Private partners for this endeavor include Trojan Technologies and The University of Western Ontario, and other partners are being pursued. The Lake Huron Water Research Facility and Center of Excellence will be a facility that will allow research and development to discover ways to better the water treatment process. Industries that occupy the facility will be conducting research and development, system verification, and validation testing aimed at reducing the likelihood of contamination, outbreaks, and loss of water supply. The citizens of this region, Ontario, Canada, and even the world will benefit from this facility and they deserve the assurance that their drinking water is as safe as it can be.

Lake Huron Water Quality Research and TEatment Centre Revised: October 26,2004

Project Year

Project Title Implementation of Green Power

Budget Estimate

$1 0,000,000

Project Description

Implementation of one or more green power initiatives such as wind power, bio-mass, and/or landfill gas. Earlier work will have reviewed the feasibility of various green power options such as wind, landfill gas, and bio-mass. This element allows for further implementation based on improved economics, technical feasibility or green power demand. ,

Lead Partner City of London, LHPWSS, EAPWSS


City of London Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System Ag ri cu It u ra I Sector

Overview

It is anticipated that over the duration of this project issues will change, technology will be developed, economics will be enhanced and other unknowns currently identified will be resolved with respect to some of the preliminary green power feasibility reports. During the same period it is anticipated that electrical costs will continue to rise and the demand for renewable energy will increase. To allow for such eventual changes including such things as a more detailed business case and market justification for energy from bio-mass, greater landfill gas yields or more economical wind power generation, this project allows for the detailed assessment and consultation required as lead up to the design, construction and operation of innovative green power facilities. Green power initiatives will further support green house gas (GHG) emission reductions across the region of southwestern Ontario.

Implementation of Green Power Revised: October 26,2004

Phase No. 121 Project Year 2010 - 2011


Project Title Lake Huron Primary Water Supply Transmission Main Twinning

Project Description

Twinning the remainder of the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply Transmission Main will introduce a 100% redundancy with respect to primary distribution. As well, it will allow for increased transmission capacity and reduce internal water pressures on the system. This project will twin the remaining 27 km of the 48 km 1200 mm diameter transmission main to provide increased capacity and operational redundancy for system reliability.



Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System, Township of Bluewater, Township of South Huron, Township of Lambton Shores, Township of Lucan-Biddulph, Township of Middlesex Centre, Township of North Middlesex, City of London

Overview

Currently, the Lake Huron Primary Transmission Main has 21 km out of 48 km twinned. However, if there is a pipe failure in the non-twinned 27 km length of transmission main then more than half of the 500,000 people in this region would have little to no supply of drinking water. Also, with the addition of new municipal connections to the primary transmission main the operating pressures are increasing and approaching maximum limits. The higher demands, and increasing pressures will be straining the system and could cause any weak links to fail. Twinning the remaining 27 km will increase transmission capacity and will decrease operating pressure. Not only will total redundancy be introduced, but the life expectancy will be increased due to less strain being put on the entire system. The 27 km portion of transmission main that has yet to be twinned will be twinned with a new 1200 mm diameter main. This project should be implemented over several years starting in 2010. Twinning transmission mains in the supply system provides two primary benefits to the primary water system operations. Dual transmission mains provide increased capacity with reduced total head loss during normal operations and provide essential system redundancy in the event of a key component failure. Providing twined transmission mains, in conjunction with appropriate interconnection stations, allows the water supply to be routed around failed main sections without significantly affecting total system capacity or supply to the various municipalities. Transmission main redundancy is a key aspect in the overall reliability of water supply systems. Given that only 44% of this system is twinned it is essential that the remainder of the system be twinned in order to fully maximize the benefit of a twinned system.

Lake Huron Primary Water Supply Transmission Main Twinning Revised: October 26,2004


Project Year l l 2010 - 201 I Phase No.

2

Project Title EAPWSS Residue Management Facility

Project Description

Evolving environmental operating standards require the need for an onsite residue management facility to be constructed to handle the waste by-products associated with water treatment facilities. These Environmental Standards will require the development of a residue management facility at the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility to meet compliance.



EAPWSS, LHPWSS, City of London, City of St. Thomas, Town of Aylmer, Township of Bayham, Municipality of Central Elgin, Townships of Malahide, Southwold, Bluewater, South Huron, Lambton Shores, Lucan-Biddulph, Middlesex Centre, North Middlesex

Overview

When the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility was constructed it was not a requirement to provide for a residue management facility to handle waste by-products. It was standard practice to discharge the waste back to the source water. However, with increased concern with environmental damage, pollution, and due diligence the introduction of new operating standards and regulations are now in place to prevent such practices from occurring. The need to install a residue management facility to address the treatment of residue materials created during the water treatment (sedimentation) and filtration (filter backwashing) processes has arrived. The Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility is no longer in compliance with current regulations and is operating under a variance permit. In order to show due diligence in regard to meeting these regulatory requirements, the residue management facility should be completed by 201 1. Protecting the environment is very important on everyone’s list of priorities. By reducing the amount of untreated waste being directed into the limited amount of source water we have benefits everyone, not just the people of this region. Constructing a residue management facility at the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility is an important step in protecting, maintaining, and sustaining our valuable water resources.

EA P WSS Residue Management Facility Revised: October 26,2004

Project Year

Project Title LHPWSS Residue Management Facility


Project Description

Evolving environmental operating standards require the need for an onsite residue management facility to be constructed to handle the waste by-products associated with water treatment facilities. These Environmental Standards will require the development of a residue management facility at the Lake Huron Water Treatment Facility to meet compliance.


I 1


LHPWSS, EAPWSS, City of London, City of St. Thomas, Town of Aylmer, Township of Bayham, Municipality of Central Elgin, Townships of Malahide, Southwold, Bluewater, South Huron, Lambton Shores, Lucan-Biddulph, Middlesex Centre, North Middlesex

~~~

Overview

When the Lake Huron Water Treatment Facility was constructed it was not a requirement to provide for a residue management facility to handle waste by-products. It was standard practice to discharge the waste back to the source water. However, with increased concern with environmental damage, pollution, and due diligence the introduction of new operating standards and regulations are now in place to prevent such practices from occurring. The need to install a residue management facility to address the treatment of residue materials created during the water treatment (sedimentation) and filtration (filter backwashing) processes has arrived. The Lake Huron Water Treatment Facility is no longer in compliance with current regulations and is operating under a variance permit. In order to show due diligence in regard to meeting these regulatory requirements, the residue management facility should be completed by 201 I. Protecting the environment is very important on everyone’s list of priorities. By reducing the amount of untreated waste being directed at the limited amount of source water we have benefits everyone, not just the people of this region. Constructing a residue management facility at the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility is an important step in protecting, maintaining, and sustaining our valuable water resources.

LHPWSS Residue Management Facility Revised: October 26,2004

2015 - 2017

Project Title Other Transmission Main Connections


I Project Description

Various communities have expressed interest in connecting to the primary water supply system, one being Tillsonburg. The community of Tillsonburg is currently serviced by an independent community well system. Tillsonburg has expressed interest in connecting to the primary water supply system in order to realize the benefits associated with this regional system, Improving water quality and increasing capacity for the Municipality of Tillsonburg over that of the current ground water wells would be one of the outcomes of this project.



Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System Town of Tillsonburg

Overview

The feasibility and costs of extending service to various communities in this region is currently under investigation. Extending service to the community of Tillsonburg is being investigated and is in the early stages. The community has expressed interest in being connected to achieve the benefits realized from utilizing a regional water supply over an independent community supply. Preliminary estimates for service extension and distribution system improvements that would be required are about $20 million. The connection to Tillsonburg could be better accommodated in the third phase of the regional program and could be implemented after 2015, but could be advanced sooner if the community was strongly interested in advancing this time frame. The additional cost associated with this project accounts for connections to other small communities in the area. A sustainable water supply system that provides a safe, sufficient, reliable, and secure drinking water supply with dependable quality that satisfies the Provincial Water Quality Standard is essential for every community. Extending service into new areas will provide these significant overall benefits to this key region of southwestern Ontario. Increased service from the water supply system will reduce the dependency of area communities on highly variable well water supplies, increase their water service capacity to facilitate future growth, stabilize and enhance the quality of their water and significantly improve the reliability of their water supply.

Other Transmission Main Connections Revised: October 26,2004

. . -----

Project Year I I PhaseNo. Budget Estimate $60,000,000 3

Project Title Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility Expansion

Project Description

By 2014 it is estimated that the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility will have reached its maximum capacity. In order to maintain a sustainable safe, secure, and reliable drinking water supply the facility will need to expand to meet the regional needs. This project will expand the low lift pumping station, flocculation, sedimentation basin, disinfection system, high lift pumping station, and twin the raw water intake. Upgrades to the UV disinfection system will also take place.



Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System, Town of Aylmer, Town of Tillsonburg, Township of Bayham, Municipality of Central Elgin, Township of Malahide, City of St. Thomas, Township of Southwold, City of London

It is anticipated that the capacity of the Elgin Plant will need to be doubled from the current capacity of 91 ML/day to 182 ML/day to meet system demand. The expansion and upgrade project, as detailed in the Elgin Area Water Master Plan Update 2003, includes:

Expansion of the low lift pumping station Twinning the raw water transmission main Expansion of the treatment components including increased capacity for the low lift pumping station, twinning of the raw water main into the treatment plant, additional flocculation, sedimentation and disinfection capacity, improvements to the high lift pumping systems, and additional enhancement to the Ultraviolet (UV) disinfection system.

It is estimated that the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility is required to be commissioned by 201 1 for a “high” demand growth scenario, by 2013 for a “medium” demand growth, and 2014 for a “low” demand growth scenario. It is believed that the expansion of the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility can coincide with the “low” demand scenario if the reserve capacity of the Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station is utilized by filling it during off peak hours and drawing from it during peak hours. Currently the limited supply of safe, clean, and reliable drinking water is sufficient to last to about 2014. However, after that it is predicted that drinking water may be in short supply. Expansion of the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility will create an abundant supply of safe, clean, secure, and reliable drinking water for this important economic region of Southwestern Ontario.

Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility Expansion Revised: October 26,2004

1 Phase No. 1 1 Budget Estimate Project Year

Project Title Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility Emergency Backup Power

3

Project Description

The Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility will only have 3.5 MW of emergency backup power after the planned expansion. This amount will be insufficient to fully power the facility in the event of a power failure. In order to provide safe, sufficient, and reliable drinking water to its customers the need for backup power that is capable of providing emergency power capacity that is matched to system operating requirements is required. Therefore, it is proposed to install 3.5 MW of emergency power supply to meet plant capacity.

2020 $4,000,000



Elgin Area Primary Water Supply System, Town of Aylmer, Town of Tillsonburg, Township of Bayham, Municipality of Central Elgin, Township of Malahide, City of St. Thomas, Township of Southwold, City of London

Overview t

The provision of emergency power capacity is one that covers a wide field. Emergency power capacity is a provision that has been undervalued in the past and not until August 2003 was its potential benefit realized. Currently there is no source of emergency backup power supply for the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility, in the near future there will be 3.5 MW of emergency backup power, and this proposed project will provide another 3.5 MW of emergency backup power. After the expansion of the Elgin Area Water Treatment Facility is complete the emergency backup power capacity will fall short of being able to provide power capacity that is matched to system operating requirements. In order to provide a safe, sufficient, reliable, and secure water supply for all of the customers it is essential that emergency power capacity is increased. Providing emergency power capacity that is matched to system operating requirements would allow the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System to continue full operation and meet existing and future water supply requirements in the event of a major power outage. The major power outage in August 2003 provided a drastic test of system reliability for system operators throughout the affected area. Had the power outage continued into several days, as was initially anticipated, customers served by the primary water systems would have had to address water shortage problems. In anticipation of future catastrophic events, emergency power generators should be installed at key facilities with capacity that is matched to full system operating requirements.

€/gin Area Water Treatment Facility Emergency Backup Power Revised: October 26.2004

APPENDIX C

Public Private Partnership Proposal ' I Options Water Treatment Research, Training and Validation Facility

Joint Board of Water Management For The Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System

The City of London and Private Sector Partners

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Joint Board of Water Management for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System and the City of London are considering a PubWPrivate Partnership (P3) to develop a Water Treatment Research, Training and Validation Facility. This emerging partnership strategy may involve numerous public and private stakeholders in the development and operation of research facilities that could benefit water quality standards and treatment technology throughout the entire Province of Ontario and even Canada wide. These water research facilities are being considered in conjunction with the development of a Regional Water Quality and Capacity Improvements with Green Power Initiatives program.

This unique P3 proposal will provide a major contribution in four significant areas, not only to the region but the entire Province of Ontario. The work program of the P3 will contribute to maintaining a high quality water supply for all the municipalities serviced by the Joint Board of Water Management. Combined with the focus of the regional project on alternate energy sources, the overall efficiency of the water system will be enhanced, while mitigating the impact on the environment. Providing equipment testing, research and demonstratiodtraining facilities will contribute globally to more effective water treatment technology, while contributing to the economic development of southwestern Ontario. Having facilities to support hands on training of water plant operations personnel will strengthen the effectiveness of water supplies throughout the province and potentially across Canada.

Many different types of PubliclPrivate Partnership agreements have been utilized to undertake a broad spectrum of infrastructure projects. Typically P3 projects provide increased social benefits to the community through enhanced opportunities for the development of capital funding and an equitable distribution of risk between the public and private sector partners. The roles and responsibilities of the partners are often based on their specific fields of expertise that are combined to produce an increased team synergy. Working as a team the partnership is able to reach outcomes that neither partner could achieve individually.

A wide variety of potential P3 options were considered through this review. Recognizing the diversity, strengths and assets that the potential partners bring to the partnership a number of P3 opportunities exist at various phases of this project. In the initial desigdbuild phase, it is hoped that senior level of government will play a key role in financing the project. Some costs could be borne by the City/Joint Board alone or perhaps in another partnership with a private sector proponent. The City/Joint Board also has the facility construction expertise necessary to define and construct the facilities to suit the operational needs established by the diverse user groups. A final P3 opportunity exists by considering an existing or new non-profit society could readily be the arms length operator that would coordinate the water treatment research, training and equipment validation testing. The operator could coordinate facility use for the multiple stakeholders and establish appropriate users rates that would support the operation of the facilities and repay the capital cost over a twenty-year initial lease period. The operating society

i Page 2 of 13 ,

could establish a user interest panel that would address facility programs needs of the facility users.

1 and the on going

The proposed P3 solutions for the development of a Water Treatment Research, Training and Validation facility has already developed considerable interest from a number of significant parties that are well positioned to make positive contributions towards this unique project. Utilizing a Public/Private Partnership that draws from the strengths of its partners and is operated for the social benefit of society as well as its participants appears to be an obvious solution to create this research facility.

Considering the potential impact this PubliclPrivate partnership project could have on the future of drinking water quality standards and treatment technologies in Canada and throughout the world, the Joint Board of Water Management is strongly advised to pursue this unique opportunity further towards its completion.

OBJECTIVES OF REVIEW

This review will provide a synopsis of Public/Private Partnership (P3) agreements and their applicability to a Water Treatment Research, Training and Validation Facility being proposed by the Joint Board of Water Management with other public and private sector stakeholders. The review will include:

. . An overview of a suggested Public/ Private Partnership model Factors that affect the success of P3 agreements An evaluation of the proposed alternative for the Water Treatment Research, Training and Validation Facility project P3 agreement

PROJECT OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND

Overview

The Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System (LHPWSS) has facilitated research and development of water treatment technologies with Trojan Technologies Inc. of London in recent years. This research partnership has assisted Trojan in their development and evaluation of ultraviolet disinfection reactors for use in the drinking water treatment industry worldwide. The developmental research, performance improvement testing and system validation undertaken to date was conducted utilizing temporary modifications at the Lake Huron water treatment plant. Understanding the requirements for testing larger scale equipment and the potential benefits to the drinking water industry in North America, the Joint Board is evaluating the benefits of constructing a permanent facility at the Lake Huron water treatment plant. This facility would accommodate further research opportunities with Trojan and other stakeholders, operator training and equipment validation testing. As well, the planned construction of a new reservoir and pumping station by the City of London could provide further opportunity for facility development that could be used more readily by the University of Western Ontario and other educational institutions as well as others for research programs, operator training and small scale validation programs.

of 13

Facility Development

Trojan Technologies have approached the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System and its Administering Municipality, the City of London, in the anticipation of further developing this research partnership. Trojan Technologies is currently looking for access to raw water pumped at rates between 150 ML and 230 ML per day for long and short term testing of ultraviolet treatment systems. The Lake Huron water treatment plant has a rated pumping capacity to facilitate this level of testing, and can be accommodated within the existing limits of the water taking permit and Certificate of Approval. Space and power availability, however, may restrict the proponents’ ability to undertake this increased capacity of testing within the existing facility.

At the present time there are no testing facilities with this proposed capacity available in North America. This facility would position Southwestern Ontario to become a centre of excellence for drinking water disinfection methods worldwide. Testing of this nature is presently being undertaken at facilities in Europe.

To further facilitate this emerging initiative, this review will examine the potential alternatives for development of an effective Public/Private Partnership agreement that will benefit all of the interested stakeholders.

An independent research facility located on the Lake Huron water treatment plant site, with associated power system improvements and process modifications, has an estimated project cost of $5 to $10 million range. More detailed facility cost estimates are presently being developed. The research facility could be constructed and owned by the Joint Board and the facilities would be leased to various industry proponents as required for their research, development and equipment validation testing. Considering the number of potential partners interested in pursuing some form of P3 agreement and the diverse set of strengths they bring, there are a series of potential options for this project. There would also be an opportunity to use a facility of this nature and the adjacent water treatment facility for the development of treatment technology training programs that would benefit the water industry not only in Ontario, but also throughout North America.

Funding Options

This project is proposed as a component of a twenty-year program developed to address regional water quality and capacity improvements for the regions water supply under the Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund. The improvements program includes components of Green Power Initiatives that will enhance the sustainability of these works and reduce the production of green house gases in the southwestern Ontario region.

Presently a number of funding support options are available to assist in the development of this proposed facility. This project will be submitted to the new Strategic Infrastructure Fund administered by Infrastructure Canada for major projects with a minimum threshold value of $75 million. However, through Infrastructure Canada and the Province of Ontario there are two other grant programs that are also well suited to this project - the “Prosperity Partnership Fund” and the “Green Municipal Investment Fund.” These other funding sources should be pursued in parallel with the major grant funding applications.

The Provincial Prosperity Partnership Fund is particularly well suited to this proposal as it requires the participation of a “Public Partner” and it must be led by a “Not for Profit” project

of 13

leader. The City of London, as the Administering Municipality of the Joint Board of Management is qualified for the public partner and project. leader role and the interested water treatment technology companies are qualified to fulfill the public partner role. Benefiting stakeholders may contribute to this project in a financial, in-kind or other contributory manner.

The best possible outcome for this project would see 113 of the funding coming from the Federal Government, 1/3 of the funding coming from the Provincial Government and 1/3 of the funding being developed by the public and private partners. The City of London and the Joint Board of Water Management could make a portion of their contribution through the lease of their lands assets and by providing project management resources through the construction phase of the project. Alternatively, the City and Joint Board could provide capital funding that would be repaid through the user fees for the facilities over some reasonable period of the initial lease. Other private and public sector partners could contribute to the agreement with capital or in kind contributions that would benefit the success of the project.

Benefiting St a ke holders

The proposed research development and validation testing facility has the potential to benefit a broad spectrum of stakeholders affected by the ongoing evolution of drinking water regulations, water treatment technologies, and water quality challenges in Ontario and across Canada. With the research facility adjoining the water treatment plant, there is a significant opportunity to incorporate an integrated water operator training facility that could benefit all water systems and communities in Ontario. Training opportunities span from practical operator training needs supporting all municipal water suppliers and groups such as the Ontario Association of Certified Engineering Technicians and Technologist, to university and college programs in partnership with UWO, Fanshawe College and other institutions. The facility might also be a site for testing, optimizing and validating disinfection and treatment technologies that involve multiple disinfectants such as UV followed by chlorine/chloramines or chlorine dioxide, UV/peroxide, Reverse Osmosis, ozone, etc. As such, the facility could be a valuable contribution to projects with this type of objective.

Possible stakeholders that have indicated their support or wish to participate and contribute to the development and utilization of the research facility could be:

National Water Research Institute (NWRI) at Burlington, Ontario Canadian Water Network (CWN) at University of Waterloo Clean Water Legacy Network at University of Western Ontario Walkerton Water Centre of Excellence Water Treatment Advisory Network (WTAN) Ontario Municipal Water Association (OMWA) Ontario Water Works Association (OWWA) CRESTech Health Canada Environment Canada Trojan Technologies Inc. Ontario Ministry of the Environment

of 13

DISCUSSION

WHAT IS A PUBLWPRIVATE PARTNERSHIP (P3)?

A Public-Private Partnership is a co-operative venture for the provision of infrastructure or services, built on the expertise of each partner that best meets clearly defined needs, through the most appropriate allocation of resources, risks, and rewards. Typically, in a public private partnership, the public sector maintains an oversight and quality assessment role while the private sector is more closely involved in actually delivery of the service or project. The growing success of P3's appears to realize that each project is as unique as the partners that are involved.

Many different types of Public/Private Partnership agreements have been utilized to undertake a broad spectrum of infrastructure projects. Typically P3 projects provide increased social benefits to the community through enhanced opportunities for the development of capital funding and an equitable distribution of risk between the public and private sector partners. The roles and responsibilities of the partners are often based on their specific fields of expertise that are combined to produce an increased team synergy. Working as a team, the partnership is able to reach outcomes that neither partner could achieve individually.

Clearly there are a variety of P3 Agreement models that see a diverse group of partners accept responsibility and risk for the success of the project undertaken. This project with its broad. interest of public and private sector partners seems to be an excellent candidate that is worthy of more consideration. While a project of this nature appears beyond the normal day to day mandate of the Joint Board it seems appropriate to continue to investigate the different models that would lead to the success of this program. In fact considering the potential impact this project could have in the regional economy and water treatment standards world wide it seems incumbent that the participants complete a review of the potential implementation strategies.

.

Public-Private Partnerships can be categorized based on the extent of public and private sector involvement and the degree of risk allocation between the two. All partnerships have a unique riskheward allocation. Public-private partnerships can take many forms. An overview of the types of P3 agreements and their application, and the reasons to consider undertaking a P3 agreement are presented in Appendix A.

FACTORS THAT AFFECT P3 SUCCESS

There are many critical components of any successful Public-Private Partnership (P3). While there is not a set formula or an absolute infallible technique in crafting a successful P3, each of these key elements are involved in varying degrees.

= Political Leadership: A successful partnership can only result if there is commitment from "the top". The most senior public administrative and elected officials must be willing to be actively involved in supporting the concept of P3's and take a leadership role in the development of a partnership. A well-informed political leader can play a critical role in minimizing misperceptions about the value to the public of an effectively developed partnership. Equally important, there should be a solid foundation for the implementation of each partnership.

of 13

m Public Sector Involvement: Once a partnership has been established, the public-sector must remain actively involved in the project or program. On-going monitoring of the performance of the partnership and active participation is important in assuring its success. Periodic monitoring could be done on a daily, weekly, monthly or quarterly basis for different aspects of each partnership (the frequency is often defined in the business plan and/or agreement).

. A Well Thought Out Plan: All parties must understand what is expected of the partnership before hand. A carefully developed plan (often done with the assistance of an outside expert in this field) will substantially increase the probability of success of the partnership. This plan most often will take the form of an extensive, detailed agreement, clearly describing the responsibilities of both the public and private partners. In addition to attempting to foresee areas of respective responsibilities, a good plan or agreement will include a clearly defined method of dispute resolution.

m Communication with Stakeholders: More people will be affected by a partnership than just the public officials and the private- sector partner. Affected employees, the portions of the public receiving the service, the media, applicable labor unions and relevant interest groups will all have opinions, and frequently significant misconceptions about a partnership and its value. It is important to communicate openly and candidly with these stakeholders to minimize potential resistance to establishing and maintaining a partnership.

. Selecting the Right Partnership Agreement: The “lowest bid” is not always the best choice for selecting a partner. The “best value” in a partner is critical in a long-term relationship and is central to a successful partnership. A candidate’s experience in the specific area of partnership being considered is an important factor in identifying the right partner.

INTEREST SHOWN TO DATE

Understanding the potentially significant impact the proposed Water Treatment Research, Training and Validation facility could have in regard to the Canadian, and possibly global standards for water quality and system operations, it is recommended that a relatively unique solution be considered for this project. The potentially significant nature of this project has already attracted the interest of a diverse group of influential private and public sector partners despite its limited time in public review.

Initially this project was driven by the interest and previous work with Trojan Technologies Inc. of London and the administrative staff at the City of London. However, since initial public discussions regarding this project began six months ago, many other influential parties expressed interest in participating in the Public/Private Partnership agreement that would construct, maintain and operate this important .facility. Recent meetings with the potential partners have further defined the needs of the facility users and have clarified the depths and strengths of the organizations coming to the table.

Presently, CRESTech - a division of the Ontario Centres of Excellence Inc., the University of Western Ontario and the Canadian Water Network have expressed interest in building a partnership of multiple universities, colleges and private companies that would collaborate with

of 13

*_111

the City of London to build this unique world-class facility. A primary objective of the partnership would be a focus on ensuring that Ontario, and southwestern Ontario in particular, becomes a world leader in the area of water treatment technology, research and water system operator training standards .

RECOMMENDED PARTNERSHIP OPTION

While there are many forms of PubliclPrivate Partnerships not all forms of P3 are suited to any specific project. P3 agreements are not a new idea, but clearly more one that has grown in popularity in recent years. As P3 agreements have become more popular, the form and make up of the partnering agreements have also evolved to best satisfy the needs of the project at hand and the desired outcomes for the partners involved. Each new P3 agreement needs to evaluate the desired outcome for the project being considered and the strengths of the partners willing to participate to achieve the objectives.

Recommended P3 Solution for this Opportunity

Following consideration of the alternatives and the assets available to the public partner, there exists at least two P3 partnership opportunities suited to this project. The first phase would be contingent on establishing successful partnership with both the Federal and Provincial governments to assist with funding of the design and construction. Assuming 1/3rd funding from each senior level of government, the City/Joint Board could partner with the private sector for the balance of the financing or services related to construction. The City of London and Joint Board staff would provide the facility construction expertise to define and construct the facilities at possibly two locations. Part of the City/Joint Board contribution would be land and access to required services. If a private partner is involved with the financing in the first phase, then appropriate consideration will have to be given to return on investment during the operating life of the project.

The second phase would involve the operation of the facilities to provide access to all interested users. Based on the inherent importance of these facilities and the impact of their ongoing operations it is considered a significant point that the operational objectives of this project remain vested in the public trust. As well, considering that a key function of the facility will be validation testing of water quality treatment equipment, it is in the best interest of the private sector partners wanting to conduct equipment validation testing, that they be at arms length from the day to day operation of the facility.

Considering the possible complexity of the P3 agreement, a good solution for the involvement of the multiple partners would be to utilize an either an existing Non-Profit society or consider the formation of a new Non-Profit society that would be responsible for the coordination and operation of the water research and testing facilities. The selected Non-Profit Society could continue to raise funds for the operation and maintenance of the facilities by leasing the facilities to interested users and by providing operator-training programs at a reasonable cost. The Non- Profit Society would balance the time needs of the various parties, help coordinate research objectives of the various universities and colleges and most importantly monitor the social benefit objective to implement programs that would maximize the return to the community from this project. The operator would coordinate the use of the facility and charge appropriate access fees to cover the operational costs and repay the initial capital investment.

of 13

The Non-Profit Society would then maintain and operate the facility under a contract lease agreement and provide a coordinating role in the use of the facility by the numerous potential users. Typically, the original lease agreement would be in the 20 year range which would allow the partnership to recover a reasonable return on the capital investment through user charges for the facilities.

At the end of the initial lease period the facilities would become vested with the Joint Boards of Water Management and the City of London. At that time they could then consider whether to assume operating responsibility for the facilities, to continue operations with the non-profit society, or award a new contract lease arrangement with other parties that may be interested.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The proposed PubWPrivate Partnership for the development of a Water Treatment Research, Training and Validation Facility has the potential for significant impact in regard to the standards for water quality and water treatment equipment in Canada, and worldwide. The project will most likely have significant economic benefits for southwestern Ontario and could well establish new standards for water system operator training in Canada.

Understanding the potential involvement of numerous public and private sector stakeholders it is strongly recommended that a Public/Private Partnership agreement be pursued. Based on the possible participants and the assets they bring to the agreement it is recommended that a two- phase P3 approach be taken. The City of London and Joint Board staff could coordinate the design and construction phase for the facilities. Then a non-profit society could be formed that would be responsible to operate and maintain the facility and coordinate the multiple objectives of the facility users. The Non-Profit society could be steered by a user interest panel or some form of board of control. The society would raise funds to operate and maintain the facility as well as to repay the original capital investment through the collection of user fees. Typically, the original lease agreement for the facilities would be in the twenty-year time frame.

At the conclusion of the initial lease the facilities would be vested in the Joint Board and City of London, based on their respective contributions to the facilities at the inception of the agreement. At that time the parties could choose to assume operation of the facilities, continue the lease agreement with the non-profit society, or seek a new contractual opportunity with other interested parties.

of 13

APPENDIX A

A CONSIDERATION OF P3 AGREEMENTS AND THEIR APPLICATION

TYPES OF P3 AGREEMENT AND THEIR APPLICATION

. Build/Operate/Transfer (BOT) or Build/Transfer/Operate (BTO)

The private partner builds a facility to the specifications agreed to by the public agency, operates the facility for a specified time period under a contract or franchise agreement with the agency, and then transfers the facility to the agency at the end of the specified period of time. In most cases, the private partner will also provide some, or all, of the financing for the facility, so the length of the contract or franchise must be sufficient to enable the private partner to realize a reasonable return on its investment through user charges.

At the end of the franchise period, the public partner can assume operating responsibility for the facility, contract the operations to the original franchise holder, or award a new contract or franchise to a new private partner. The BTO model is similar to the BOT model except that the transfer to the public owner takes place at the time that construction is completed, rather than at the end of the franchise period.

. Contract Services

Operations and Maintenance

A public partner (federal, state, or local government agency or authority) contracts with a private partner to provide and/or maintain a specific service. Under the private operation and maintenance option, the public partner retains ownership and overall management of the public facility or system.

Operations, Maintenance & Management

Public partner (federal, provincial, or municipal government agency or authority) contracts with a private partner to operate, maintain, and manage a facility or system proving a service. Under this contract option, the public partner retains ownership of the public facility or system, but the private party may invest its own.capita1 in the facility or system. Any private investment is carefully calculated in relation to its contributions to operational efficiencies and savings over the term of the contract. Generally, the longer the contract term, the greater the opportunity for increased private investment because there is more time available in which to recoup any investment and earn a reasonable return. Many local governments use this contractual partnership to provide wastewater treatment services.

Page I O of 13

Design-Build (DB) A DB is when the private partner provides both design and construction of a project to the public agency. This type of partnership can reduce time, save money, provide stronger guarantees and allocate additional project risk to the private sector. It also reduces conflict by having a single entity responsible to the public owner for the design and construction. The public sector partner owns the assets and has the responsibility for the operation and maintenance.

Des i g n -6 u i Id -M ai n t a i n ( D B M) A DBM is similar to a DB except the maintenance of the facility, for some period of time, becomes the responsibility of the private sector partner. The benefits are similar to the DB with maintenance risk being allocated to the private sector partner and the guarantee expanded to include maintenance. The public sector partner owns and operates the assets.

Design-Build-Operate (DBO) A single contract is awarded for the design, construction, and operation of a capital improvement. Title to the facility remains with the public sector unless the project is a design/build/operate/transfer or design/build/own/operate project. The DBO method of contracting is contrary to the separated and sequential approach ordinarily used in the United States by both the public and private sectors. This method involves one contract for design with an architect or engineer, followed by a different contract with a builder for project construction, followed by the owner's taking over the project and operating it.

'

A simple design-build approach creates a single point of responsibility for design and construction and can speed project completion by facilitating the overlap of the design and construction phases of the project. On a public project, the operations phase is normally handled by the public sector under a separate operations and maintenance agreement. Combining all three phases into a DBO approach maintains the continuity of private sector involvement and can facilitate private-sector financing of public projects supported by user fees generated during the operations phase.

Developer Finance The private party finances the construction or expansion of a public facility in exchange for the right to build residential housing, commercial stores, and/or industrial facilities at the site. The private developer contributes capital and may operate the facility under the oversight of the government. The developer gains the right to use the facility and may receive future income from user fees.

While developers may in rare cases build a facility, more typically they are charged a fee or required to purchase capacity in an existing facility. This payment is used to expand or upgrade the facility. Developer financing arrangements are often called capacity credits, impact fees, or extractions. Developer financing may be voluntary or involuntary depending on the specific local circumstances.

LeaselDevelopIOperate (LDO) or BuildlDeveloplOperate (BDO) Under these partnerships arrangements, the private party leases or buys an existing facility from a public agency; invests its own capital to renovate, modernize, and/or expand the facility; and then operates it under a contract with the public agency. A number of different types of municipal transit facilities have been leased and developed under LDO and BDO arranaements.

of 13

Lease/Purchase A lease/purchase is an installment-purchase contract. Under this model, the private sector finances and builds a new facility, which it then leases to a public agency. The public agency makes scheduled lease payments to the private party. The public agency accrues equity in the facility with each payment. At the end of the lease term, the public agency owns the facility or purchases it at the cost of any remaining unpaid balance in the lease.

Under this arrangement, either the public agency or the private developer may operate the facility during the term of the lease. Leaselpurchase arrangements have been used by the General Services Administration for building federal office buildings and by a number of states to build prisons and other correctional facilities.

= Sale/Leaseback This is a financial arrangement in which the owner of a facility sells it to another entity, and subsequently leases it back from the new owner. Both public and private entities may enter into a sale/leaseback arrangements for a variety of reasons. An innovative application of the sale/leaseback technique is the sale of a public facility to a public or private holding company for the purposes of limiting governmental liability under certain statues. Under this arrangement, the government that sold the facility leases it back and continues to operate it.

. Tax-Exempt Lease A public partner finances capital assets or facilities by borrowing funds from a private investor or financial institution. The private partner generally acquires title to the asset, but then transfers it to the public partner either at the beginning or end of the lease term. The portion of the lease payment used to pay interest on the capital investment is tax exempt under provincial and federal laws. Tax-exempt leases have been used to finance a wide variety of capital assets, ranging from computers to telecommunication systems and municipal vehicle fleets.

Turnkey A public agency contracts with a private investorhendor to design and build a complete facility in accordance with specified performance standards and criteria agreed to between the agency and the vendor. The private developer commits to build the facility for a fixed price and absorbs the construction risk of meeting that price commitment. Generally, in a turnkey transaction, the private partners use fast-track construction techniques (such as design-build) and are not bound by traditional public sector procurement regulations. This combination often enables the private partner to complete the facility in significantly less time and for less cost than could be accomplished under traditional construction techniques.

In a turnkey transaction, financing and ownership of the facility can rest with either the public or private partner. For example, the public agency might provide the financing, with the attendant costs and risks. Alternatively, the private party might provide the financing capital, generally in exchange for a long-term contract to operate the facility.

of 13

WHY CONSIDER P3 AGREEMENT?

In today's economy, governments must foster competitive environments to attract citizens and businesses. Like business, government is increasingly working in an interdependent universe of activity. Governments are looking for innovative solutions that involve collaboration with other jurisdictions and the private and not for profit sectors.

Faced with many competing demands and limited resources, governments are increasingly focused on higher-order tasks that set longer-term outcomes. This does not mean that challenges related to issues such as infrastructure and the delivery of services are unimportant. Rather, governments are using alternative means of delivering services, or delegating them to appropriate non-government partners.

Partnerships between the public sector and private companies for the financing, design, build, ongoing maintenance of infrastructure and delivery of associated services are one means of meeting the need for modern, efficient infrastructure and for reliable cost effective delivery of public services. Public private partnerships should not be considered a 'silver bullet' remedy, however they can offer innovative and competitive solutions when:

Value for money is demonstrated Risk is allocated to the partner best able to manage and mitigate it Processes are open, fair and transparent.

Clearly, there are roles for both the public and private sectors. The challenge is to determine the optimum mixture of public and private resources that will lead to the optimum method of providing public services at acceptable levels of quality and cost. To do so it is necessary to determine whether the government can manage the risks associated with a particular Public Service at a lower cost than the private sector.

Application of public-private partnerships to various types of government services:

Many services provided by government could benefit from bringing the strengths of the private and public sectors together. Public-private partnerships may be less suitable for government services to which access cannot be restricted. This may include services with "public good" characteristics, including bylaw enforcement, environment protection and social services. They may also be less suitable for essential services such as policing, fire protection and other emergency services. Government officials and public groups tend to be more receptive to the provision of more specialized recreation facilities, solid and liquid waste management or utilities through public-private partnerships. Many aspects of service delivery lend themselves to public-private partnership, including: project designs, project management, construction and procurement, financing, operations and management, maintenance, marketing of services and communications.

of 13

When to partner with the private sector?

Governments can consider partnerships with the private sector where any of the following circumstances exist: 0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

the service or project cannot be provided with the financial resources or expertise of the govern men t a Ion e a private partner would increase the quality or level of service from that which the government could provide on its own a private partner would allow the service or project to be implemented sooner than if only the government were involved there is support from the users of the service for the involvement of a private partner there is an opportunity for competition among prospective private partners there are no regulatory or legislative prohibitions to involving a private partner in the provision of services or a project the output of the service can be measured and priced easily the cost of the service or project can be recovered through the implementation of user fees the project or service provides an opportunity for innovation there is a track record of partnerships between government and the private sector, and there are opportunities to foster economic development

Recognizing that many of these conditions exist for this opportunity a Public/Private Partnership may well be a very effective solution for the implementation of these facilities.

Finally, it is important to understand that the benefits of privatization may be wide ranging. The potential benefits include cost savings, assumption of risk by a partner more capable of dealing with them, improved service levels, enhanced revenues, more efficient implementation, and wider economic benefits such as exportable expertise and most significantly the benefits to society achieved through partnership.

I

Collip Building Room 208 me University of Weetern OWO London, Ontario Canada N6A 587 EMmnmeml -m W e

I v 51 9.661 -2570 f 519.661.4022

Feasibility Study - 26 October 2004 1

Ontario

Robert Bailey

Robert KIassen

Bark Moncrieff

Study Funded by: - . !

i CRESTeckq Ontario Centres of Excellence ! Toronto, Ontario

Dan Shru tjsole

Department of Geogmphy I

Canadian Water Network : Waterloo, Ontario

J

I .

. .

-c : I

" 1

Southwestern Ontario WaePCentre Feasibility Study

Environmental Research Western (ERW) at The University of Western Ontario ( U W ) conducted a feasibility study of a proposed Southwestern Ontario WaterCentre (SwovvC). SWOWC would be designed and managed to enable:

I ) Testing: Large-scale testing of drinking water treatment technology and processes.

2) Tmining: On-site and distance education of personnel for the operqtion and management of drinking water treatment technology and processes, as well as training for research and development of new technology and processes.

3) Research and development R&D concerned with engineering as well as the natural and human & management dimensions of drinking water treatment and distribution.

The competitive landscape and market potential for the centre were assessed by assembling available information and interviewing key players in each of these three areas.

With respect to the competitive landscape, we found that:

,

Testing: There are very few testing facilities in the world, and none in Canada, that are able to carry out largescale testing of water treatment technology and processes;

Training: The requirements for training programs in Ontario and Canada are evolving rapidly. Presently, there are a number of regional training programs but few distance education programs and a gap in curriculum development in keeping with recent legislation;

Research and development. There are several examples internationally of largely contract research collaborations among industry, government and academic scientists at institutions partly or wholly GOnCemed with water quality and quantity issues. There are few such facilities in Canada, and no large-scale operations such as the one proposed.

With respect to the marketpotenfial, we found that:

Testing: There is a clear, international need for large scale testing facilities, such that existing facilities have (undefined) waiting lists of users and seller's market pricing.

Training: There is a clear and growing need for training opiortunities both specifically targeted to large scale facilities and also more generally for evolving standards of training at multiple scales.

.

- Research and develophent: Opportunities for significant R&D activity at the facility will depend on the integration of industry (to help define specific objectives and partially fund), government (to help define specific objectives and partially fund), and academia (to help define objectives and be principal investigators).

I

I I I__- ---- . . L-

In addition to an evaluation of the competitive landscape and market potential of SWOWC, we also considered a Governance and Operafion model for the WaterCentre based on evaluations of and discussions with other, similar institutions world wide, as well as carekrl consideration of the regional, national, and international contexl of the WaterCentre.

Our final recommendations from the Southwestern Ontario WaterCentre feasibility study are:

2)

. 3)

4)

Testing: There is sufficient opportunity in the marketplace for successfuI/establishment of a large- scale centre.for testing of new water treatment technology and processes. The precision of a business plan for this aspect of the facilrty would depend on i) competitive pricing relative to already existing testing centres, ii) the true nature of the backlog of potential clients waiting to use other facilities. WE RECOMMEND IMMEDIATELY MOVING FORWARD WTH SPEClFIC PROPOSALS FOR FUNDING OF TNE TESTING COMPONENT OF THE WATERCENTRE.

Training: There is an opportunity for successful development of training at several levels, from regional to international, associated with the WaterCentre. Although the large-scale centre would . be integral to some aspects of the training (e.g. the "laboratory" for training either operators or deyelopers of such large-scale facilities), we recommend that the physical plant for training classes and development of distance learning be in London on the UWO or Fanshawe College campus. It is important to integrate this training plan with that of the Walkerton Clean Water Centre (Appendix 6), as well as recent legislation regarding training in Ontario and the broader North American environment. WE RECOMMEND ESTABLISHING A SUB-COMMITTEE OF THE WATERCENTRE STEERING COMMlTTzE TO INTERFACE W r H THE ONTARIO IM"IS7RY OF TEE ENWRONMENT, THE WALKERTON CLEAN WATER CENTRE, FANSHAWE COLLEGE, AND UWO TO DEVELOP A PROPOSAL FOR WATERCENTRE TRAINING FACIUTIES RASED AT W O OR FANSHAWE COLLEGE,

Research and Development As in the case of training, we see an opportunity for development of

approach to this would be to use the physical plant of the WaterCentre in combination with analytical, other laboratory, and seminar/oftice facilities on the UWO or Fanshawe College campus in conjunction with the Training component of the WaterCentre. It is important to integrate this R&D plan with the priorities that have been developed through recent consultation among members of the Canadian Water Network in Waterloo, Ontario, as well as the R&D priorities and activities of the Walkerton Clean Water Centre (Appendix 6). WE RECOMMEND

INT&RFACE WITH THE CANADIAN WATER N W O R K , THE WALKERTON CLEAN , WATER CENTRE, AND UWO TO DEVELOP A 'PROPOSAL FOR WATERCENTRE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENTFAClUTlES BASED AT UWO OR FANSHAWE COLLEGE.

I !

an internationally significant R&D program associated with the WaterCentre. m e most successful 1

1

I 1

ESTABLISHING A SUB-COMMIT7EE OF THE WATERCENTRE STEERING COMMTEE TO

Governance and Operation ofthe WaterCentre: The WaterCentre will have a management team ! that includes a Plant Manager, who will oversee day to day operations, and an Executive Director who will be responsible for liaison wi? (i) industry using the WaterCentre as a testing facility and (ii) communication with Environmental Training and R&D Directors based at the UWO or Fanshawe College campus. A Board of Directors will determine the strategic direction of the WaterCentre, and it will include representatives from industry, government, academia, and interface groups such as the Canadian Water Network and the Walkerton Clean Water Centre. We advise certification by IS014001 environmental standards for the WaterCentre to maximize marketability in a national and international contexts. WE RECOMMEND ESTABLISHING A SUB-COMM'ITEE OF THE WA~FCENTRE SEERING COMMITEE TO DEVELOP A DETAILED GOVERNANCE AND OPERAnONS STRUCTURE FOR THE WATERCENTRE, WITH ADHERENCE TO IS014007 ENWRONMENTAL STANDARQS.

. 4 '

2

5) NEXTSTEPS: _ -

I.

11.

Ill.

IV.

Clear articulation of Watercentre resource requirements, both physical plant and operational (e.g. electric power, drainage)

Business plan development, including estimates of capital and operating costs, revenues

\

Identification of all relevant funding sources, beginning the process of applying for such funds, and establishing a clear time line for the three components of the Watercentre to became operational

Establishment of a governance and operating structure for the Watercentre

~ ~~ ~

\

In spring of 2004, discussions among the City of London, Trojan Technologies Inc., Environmental Research Western at The University of Western Ontario (ERW), CRESTech-OCE, and the Canadian Water Network (hereafter this group will be referred to as the "WaterCentre Steering Committee") began on the idea of a P3 (PubliWrivate Partnership). The central concept was a facility that would enable testing of new water treatment technologies and processes, zYaining of users and developers of the technology, and research and development of issues around water safety and security. Many possibilities were discussed , including a facility associated with the proposed Southeast Reservoir and Pump Station in London, and/or a facility associated with the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System (LHPVVSS).

This study was proposed (Appendix I) and undertaken by ERW to assess the feasibility of the proposed SouthWestem Ontario WaterCentre (SWOWC). It is not a business plan, but kther an evaluation of both the competitive landscape that such a facility would be a part of, and the market opportunities available. A primary consideration in this study has been the Walkerton Clean Water Centre, and the recently announced mandate and priorities of this organization (Appendix 6). As well, with respect to research and development, we looked carefully at the priorities of the Canadian Water Network. Our assessment of SWOWC's feasibility depended very much on the successful integration of this'facillty's goals and objectives with those of the Walkerton Clean Water Centre and the Canadian Water Netw'ijrk. I

. .

Although relationships among the three aspects of the proposed WaterCentre were established early in discussions of the WaterCentre Steering Committee, we decided to research the competitive landscape and market opportunities of the testing, training, and research & development aspects of the WaterCentre separately. This step was followed by an integration of the findings from each aspect in the synthesis report, and include a brief consideration of governance and operational models for the WaterCentre as a whole.

The strategy for each component of the study was similar (see Appendix 2). Consultants (Ivey Bhness Consulting Group, IE Solutions) began by characterizing the competitive landscape (competitive analysis). Comparable facilities in testing, training and research were identified by either the consultants or members of the WaterCentre Steering Committee. They then researched these facilities both with review of available information and by in-depth interviews with key people at the targeted facilities. Facilities included other Canadian organizations as well as those in the United

3 L

States, Mexico, Europe, and Australia. In addition to a sense of what comparable facilities (potential competiiors) are doing, suggestions from them about what strategies are important for the success of such a facility were noted.

With respect to market opportunities (customer analysis), consuftants (Ivey Business Consulting Group, IE Solutions) identified potential users of the WaterCenWs testing, training, and research & development aspects by consultation with the WaterCentre Steering Committee as well as their own research. Each potential user was 'asked about customer preference, the decision-making process, and perceived gaps in current service offerings. They were also asked about the requirements of the potential user, as well as their willingness to pay and willingness to travel to use such a facility. 2 ' The research into both the competitive landscape and market potential of the proposed WaterCentre was synthesized into a set of recommendations, some more or less unmodified from our consultant's report (Appendix 2), some resulting from our synthesis and discussion of this report and other

* I considerations. 1

Finally, a recommended governance and operations model for the proposed WaterCentre was developed from our discussion of the consultant's comments on this issue (Appendix 2). We also identified the critical next steps in the development of the SouthWestym Ontario WaterCentre. -

On October I", 2004, a draft of this synthesis report was circulated to members of the WaterCentre Steering Committee for comments. Suggested revisions to the report were incorporated prior to a final report on the study in late October.

.

We targeted six organizations for testing, six for research & development, and eight for training. In all cases, Canadian and international organizations weie contacted (see Appendix 2, p.8).

The main competiiors in testing were identified as Carollo Engineers and HydroQual Inc. The WaterCentre would present credible competition to both of these facilities in terms of available scale and input water quality. Useful inforhation from a proposed, but not constructed, test facility was obtained from the American Water Works Sewice Company (Appendix 2, p.19).

among industry, government, and academia was heard from successful ventures similar to the

i i

\

. In research and development, a clear and consistent message about a carefully planned collaboration

proposed Wate8entre. These ranged from the National Water Research Institute of Environment Canada to the lntemational Center for Water Technology in Fresno, California, to the Australian Water Quality Centre. There seemed to be virtually no substantive cornpetition in R&D at physical plants such as the WaterCentre we are contemplating, so projected competition in that sense is minimal.

With training, there are a number of small and medium scale training facilities for water operators, and a significant market gap in curriculum development and delivery with new regulations continually coming "down the pipe". W~ regard to training in the specific context of the operation or development of large-scale water treatment facilities, there is essentially no competition.

I

4

1 I

For testing,. we found the greatest potential for the WaterCentre would be from water treatment technology companies Such as Trojan Technologies, and Engineering Consulting Firms that cany out tests on behalf of clients; Less interest was displayed by smaller scale equipment manufacturers, such as valve and 'pipe manufacturers.

In research and development, we concluded from our interviews with relevant research groups that the "market" per se would come from integration of the facility with an on campus analytical and office facility at UWO or Fanshawe College. There was little interest in actually locating research laboratories on site at the Lake Huron facility, and much value attached to integration of R&D within an academic

/

' .

. context.

With training, there is a significant market opportunity, particularly in the extension of training from operation and development of large-scale treatment facilities to a more general training program in water treatment technology and processes. This would be best integratedwith the Fanshawe College

Walkerton Clean Water Centre training facilities.

L

\ or UWO campus, perhaps integrated into the campus facilities proposed for research, as well as the

We feel that this study represents a promising "end of the beginning" of this ideal opportunity for a P3 (PublidPrivate Partnership). Beyond the specific recommendations below, we have champions of this project in three key sectors. Trojan Technologies Inc. has emerged as a clear proponent from the industry context, the City of London has a Strong interest in combining this project with their other strategies of improving water safety and security, and Environmental Research Western at UWO will keep the R&D arm of the project relevant and significant at a national and'intemational level. In addition, the Canadian Water Network has indicated a willingness to discuss how the WaterCentre can be incorporated into its research mandate.

Our specific recommendations on the testing, training, research & development, governance, and ,- V '

next steps of the WaterCentre are: ' 2'

J

1) Testing: There is sufficient opportunity in the marketplace for successful establishment of a large- scale centre for testing of new water treatment technology and processes. The precision of a business plan for this aspect of the facility would depend on i ) competitive pricing relative to already existing . testing centres, ii) the true nature of the backlog of potential clients waiting to use other facilities. WE RECOMMEND IMMEDIATELY MOWNG FORWARD WITH SPECIFIC PROPOSALS FOR FUNDING OF THE TESTING COMPONENT OF THE WATERCENTRE.

2) . Training: There is an opportunity for successful development of training at several levels, from regional to international, associated with the WaterCentre. Although the large-scale centre would be integral to some aspects of the training (e.g. the "laboratory" for training either operators or developers of such large-scale facilities), we recommend that the physical plant for training classes and development of distance learning be in London on the UWO or Fanshawe College campus. It is important to integrate this training plan with that of the Walkerton Clean Water Centre (Appendix 6), as well as recent legislation regarding training in Ontario and the broader North American environment.

COMMlT.€E To INTERFACE WITH THE ONTARIO MNISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT, THE

5

WE RECOMMEND ESTABUSHING A SUB-COMMIVEE OF THE WATERCENTRE STEERING

i- c

3)

I \

J

WALKERTON CLEAN WATER CENTRE, FANSHAWE COU€GE, AND UWO TO DEVEfOP A PROPOSAL FOR WATERCENTRE TRAINING FACILITES BASED AT UWO OR FANSHA WE COLLEGE.

Research and Development As in the case of training, we see an opportunity for development of an internationally significant R&D program associated with the WaterCentre. The most successful approach to this would be to use the physical plant of the WaterCentre in combination with analytical, other .laboratory, and seminarloffice facilities on the UVvO or Fanshawe College campus in conjunction with the training component of the WaterCentre. It is important to integrate this R&D plan with the prio@eS that have been developed through recent consultation among members of the Canadian Water Network in Waterloo, Ontario, as well as the R&D priorities and activities of the Walkerton Clean Water Centre (Appendix 6). WE RECOMMEND ESTABUSHING A SUB- COMMll7EE OF THE WATERCENTRE SEERING COMMTTEE TO INTERFACE wI7H THE CANADIAN WATER NETWORK, THE WALKERTON CLEAN WATER CENTRE, AND UWO TO DEVELOP A PROPOSAL FOR WATERCENTRE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT FACIf/i7ES BASEDAT UWO OR FANSHAWE COLLEGE.

Governance and Operafjon of the WaferCenfre: The WaterCentre will have a management team that includes a Plant Manager, who will oversee day to day operations, and an Executive Director who to be responsible for liaison with (i) industry using the WaterCentre 8s a testing facility and communication with Environmental Training and R&D Directors based at the UWO or Fanshawe College campus. A Board of Directors will determine the strategic direction of the WaterCentre, and it will include representatives from industry, government, academia, and interface groups such as the Canadian Water Network and the Walkerton Clean Water Centre. WE RECOMMEND

DEVELOP A DETAILED GOVERNANCE AND OPERA77ONS STRUCTURE FOR THE WATERCENTRE.

ESTABLISHING A SUB-COMlWTTEE OF THE WATERCENTRE STE&RING COMMTTEE TO

NEXT STEPS: . .

1.

II.

111.

IV.

Clear articulation of WaterCentre resource requirements, both physical plant and operational (e.g. electric power, drainage) '

Business plan development, including estimates of capitol and operating costs, revenues

Identification of all relevant funding sources, beginning the process of applying for such fhnds

\

Establishment of a governance and operating structure for the WaterCentre

/

I

We appreciate Holly Sanderson's continual assistance in the planning, execution, and completion of this study. Paul Dugsin and Greg Weiler have provided ample input from the UWO perspective. Linda Gowman, Stephen Moran, and Pat McNally were very helpful at many stages of the project. Michael Barr and his team at the lvey Business Consulting Group were very responsive to our research needs in a very timely manner.

6

I

Introduction

The City of London, Trojan Technologies, and Environmental Research Western at The University of Western Ontario (ERWNW) have partnered to plan a large-scale facility for the testing, training, andw- researching of leading edge water treatment technology and processes. Preliminary discussions have concluded that physical plants at both the Grand Bend water intake site ahd a new reservoir in the City of London will compose the WaterCentre. The WaterCentre will be unique nationally and internationally, providing opportunities for many industries to test new water treatment technology and processes, a context for the training of operators and managers of large-scale water treatment plants, and a globally unique environment for social science, engineering, and natural science research in water treatment.

Identified Needs

Although all partners have a sense of the importance and timeliness of the project, there is a lack of clear knowledge of the potential testing, training, and research markets for the WaterCentre. A better definition of how such a facility would operate is also needed.

7 Proposed Feasibility Study

We will carry out an intensive (16 week) feasibility and operational study of the proposed, large-scale testinghraininghesearch facility. For each aspect, we will:

0

identify the existing, available resources in Ontario, Canada, and, as relevant, internationally; determine through intenn'ew and focus groups the potential uses of the proposed facility, and their needs and level of financial commitment to such a faciltty; and write an operational plan that proposes to the partners how the facility would be managed and operated in conducting and integrating each of the three components -testing, training, and research.

Personnel

Principal Investigator Professor Robert Bailey (ERWNWO)

WorkGroupl: Potential and Operation of Testing FacilO Leader. Professor Robert Klassen (Ivey Business School, UWO)

WorkGmup2: Potential and Opemffon of Tminjng Facilijl Leader: Professor Bany Moncneff (Environmental Technology Program, Fanshawe College)

WorkGroup3: Pofential and Operation of Research Facility

c

3 Leader Professor Dan Shrubsole (Department of Geography, UWO)

Each of the three WorkGroups will make extensive use of the lvey Business Consulting Group'for background research, intewiew and focus group contacts and assembry of preliminary reports.

c-

Key Contacts

The successful completion of this project requires extensive communication and consultation with several key contacts including:

0

0

i L

7

Linda Gowman, Bill Cairns urojan Technologies) Peter Steblin, Pat McNally (City of London) Greg Weiier, Paul Dugsin (The University of Western Ontario) Mark Servos, Bernadette Conant (Canadian Water Network) Stephen Moran (CRESTech OCE Inc.)

' Initial contact with these individuals . . has been made and they are generally supportive of the concept of the Watercentre.

Timeline and Deliverables for Feasibility Study i

The Project Leaders (Bailey, Shrubsole, Klassen, Moncrieff) will meet to establish the formal workplan by 25 June 2004 The Testing; Training, and Research Workgroups will commence background research on 28 June 2004 *

The Project LeaderS will assemble sub-reports and raw data from the Workgroups by 15 September 2004. A report from the feasibility study will be presented to a-meeting of the WaterCentre partners by 15

1 October 2004.

Budget for Feasibility Study

Overall Project Management Testing Workgroup Training Workgroup Res ea rc h Workgroup UWO Overhead (@ 30% direct costs)

. TOTAL

Submitted by:

Dr. Robert Bailey (ERW/UWO) 9 June 2004

Environmental Research Western Collip Building Room 208 The University of Westem Ontario London ON N6A 587 [email protected] voice 51 9.661 21 I 1 x81319 fax 51 9.661.4022

$2,000 $1 2,000. $1 2,000 $1 2,000 $1 1,400

$49,400

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

APPENDIX E . . . .~

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

Research and Training Centre

Physical Facility Conceptual Report October 7, 2004


04-3 3 52

Submitted by

Dillo n Consul tin g

Limited

Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System Research and Training Centre

Physical Facility


Conceptual Report October 2004

'-0 DILLON CONSULTING

Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System Research and Training Centre Physical Facility Conceptual Report

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

The City of London, in cooperation with the Joint Board of Management for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System, has taken a leadership role for a Public/Private partnership initiative, which could see the development of a Research and Training Centre at the Lake Huron Water Treatment Plant (WTP) site. Previous reports to the Environment and Transportation Committee of the City of London (December 8,2003 and June 7,2004) describe the initiative and prospective private partners.

Dillon Consulting Limited was retained, in June 2004, by the Manager of Regional Water Supply for the City of London (the administering municipality for the Joint Board), to prepare a conceptual report for the physical facility. The intent of the study was to identify potential opportunities for use of the existing WTP available capacity, provide a conceptual design for the facility and provide a capital cost estimate based on the parmeters as defined by the Administering Municipality and potential private sector partners.

We gratefully acknowledge the contributions in leadership of Mr. Peter Steblin, Mr. Pat McNally and Mr. Andrew Henry in promoting the initiative. We also wish to acknowledge Mr. Tim McKenna and Mr. Scott Koshowski of the City of the London and Mr. John Stuart and Mr. Gary Maxwell of America Water Services Canada Corporation in providing the technical information which forms the basis for this report.

1.2 Potential Uses for the Centre

The Research and Training Centre has several possible uses. It is envisaged as a world-class facility, which would provide research opportunities fi-om bench-scale, to pilot-scale through to hll-scale testing and validation of water treatment equipment. The centre would have the capability of drawing significant quantities of raw water from Lake Huron at various flow rates for a multitude of research programs.

The centre could also provide the opportunity to establish an Ontario training centre having considerable learning opportunities available, including one of the largest treatment plants in the province. The centre would provide the opportunities for classroom training, practical hands-on training with demonstration equipment or even operator apprenticeship at the Lake Huron Water Treatment Plant.

It is conceivable that this facility would align itself with the Walkerton Water Centre of Excellence, whereby the Walkerton Centre focuses on small water supply system training and the Lake Huron facility would focus on larger scale systems.

There is also a strong interest among post-secondary learning institutions to promote either pure or applied research at the university level or operator training through the cornunity college level.

Dillon Consulting Limited - October 7, 2004 -Project Nkmber: 04-3352 Page 1

Lake Htiron Primary Water Supply System Research and Training Centre Physical Facility Conceptual Report

1.3 Location of Site

The proposed site is located immediately south of the Lake Huron WTP, between Highway 21 and the Lake Huron shoreline. The centre is proposed to be located on the south west comer of the site currently occupied by roads serving the Port Blake Conservation Area (on property owned by the Joint Boards of Management for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System). The photo below is looking west, towards the lake, fiom the Conservation Area access road.

Dillon Consulting Limited - October 7, 2004 -Project Number: 04-3352 Page 2

Lake Htrron Primary Water Supply System Research and Training Centre Physical Facility Conceptual Report

2. BUILDING FEATURES

Refer to Figure 1 for a layout of the research and training centre on lands adjoining the Lake Huron Water Treatment Plant (WTP). The building was located on the site taking into consideration: direct access and visibility from Highway 2 1, fbture water treatment plant expansion, a fu&e residue management plant, piping arrangement fiom the low lift pumping station, proximity to the electrical substation, separation fi-om residential areas, hture expansion opportunities, and a pleasing setting.

2.1 General Layout

Figure 2 is a conceptual layout of the building modules. The building layout is designed and oriented to locate the research modules toward the north side of the plant in closest proximity to the water supply and drain piping with room for potential expansion to the west; and to concentrate the convention, training and office components toward the south side.

The main entrance is situated to be visible from Highway 2 1 and provides convenient parking for facility users. It is sheltered from prevailing winds and protected by a canopy. The entrance leads past the administrative offices and reception area to a large hall which will serve the functions of assembling and waiting areas, exhibition space, and trade show displays. It will feature natural light from a large skylight running the length of the hall and views toward Lake Huron. It will incorporate a prominent water feature like a waterfall against one wall. The Facility Manager’s office is located adjacent to the administration area.

The conference room and training room open to the hall and are separated by a movable wall, which allows both rooms to be combined for large events or lectures. A storage room for chairs and tables is conveniently located off the training room. The training and conference rooms will be equipped with video projectors and black out curtains. Continuous windows along the west side provide spectacular views of the Lake Huron shoreline.

There are four private offices envisaged for facility partners located along the east side of the hall. A lunch room for staff and public washrooms are also accessed from the main hall. All public facilities will be barrier free accessible.

The research modules are located on the north side of the building, separated from the public side by a set of double doors that can be secured with an electromagnetic lock. Three sizes of researchhest modules are planned, with considerable flexibility built in to easily modi@ space allocation. Wide corridors and double doors provide access to the smaller research and test modules. These connect to the main receiving dock area, which will be provided with a dock leveler, depressed loading dock, large overhead door, and a monorail system to assist in the unloading of equipment onto wheeled carts.

Dillon Consulting Limited - October 7, 2004 - Project Nzrmber: 04-3352 - Page3


The large test module will include an overhead door directly off the receiving dock and overhead traveling crane. The high ceiling height will allow the construction of a mezzanine for electrical equipment off the floor.

The roofs of the building modules will be constructed at various levels to provide the necessary height in the large test module and lower roofs for the smaller test modules and office / entrance area.

The main electrical room, with rooms for two standby power generators and the main mechanical room are also located adjacent to the receiving dock.

Staff change rooms will include locker space, showers and washroom facilities located in close proximity to the researchhest ‘modules.

Rooms for a central computer network server, janitor and water heaters next to the washrooms complete the space requirements.

Expansion of the facility to the west can readily be accommodated by extending the main corridor and the test modules. Some of the smaller research modules may be converted to offices, if the need arises.

2.2 Occupancy Assumptions

A program for each space was developed to capture the optimum requirements and features for the various areas of the facility. Refer to Table 1 for proposed program space allocation. For each hnctional area, the occupant load, approximate area, ceiling or clear height, fmishes, lighting, and special features are summarized.

2.3 Materials of.Construction

The exterior building treatment will be designed to harmonize with the adjacent structures. Materials for the exterior will include pre-cast concrete wall panels, tinted curtain wall glazing with sunscreen protection, aluminum canopies and signage. The volume of the large test module will be clad with pre-finished metal siding. The design allows for attractive landscaped areas adjacent to the main entrance and in Eront of the offices.

The building has essentially two zones - one to serve the more public training, education, convention, exhibition, and office environment, and the second to service the research modules with their associated service rooms and material handling areas.

Finishes in the main hall / exhibition space will include a ceramic tile or stained concrete floor, generous areas

~~

Dillon Consulting Limited - October 7, 2004 -Project Number: 04-3352 Page 4


of exposed sandblasted concrete walls and paneled areas of natural wood, illuminated with natural light from the skylight above. The ceiling will be suspended acoustic panels framed in wood beams.

A prominent water feature will be located directly opposite the main entrance and could include a cascade of water over a floor to ceiling natural stone rock face or fountain. Alternatively, a space for educational displays of water treatment technology may be provided.

Offices and the training / conference rooms will be carpeted with painted drywall finishes and a suspended acoustic tiled ceiling. A movable wall supported from a recessed ceiling track will fold against the wall and provide acoustic as well as visual separation between the two spaces. Washrooms and the staff change rooms and locker areas will have ceramic tiled floors and walls with drywall ceilings. The lunch room’will have sheet ,

vinyl flooring, painted drywall surfaces and a suspended acoustic tiled ceiling with recessed fluorescent lighting. A counter and cabinets will be provided with space for a refrigerator, microwave and sink.

The partitions within the research modules, corridors and service rooms will be constructed of concrete block which will be painted. Floors will be sealed concrete and ceilings will be suspended acoustic tiles with recessed fluorescent lighting.

The large test module will have exposed steel structure and suspended light fixtures. The mezzanine will be constructed of a steel superstructure with a concrete floor supported by steel deck.

Doors in the office and conference areas will be stained natural veneer in aluminum frmes. Other areas will have painted hollow metal doors and frames. Overhead doors will be insulated and equipped with powered operators. Automatic door openers will be provided at the main entrance doors.

2.4 Flexibility and Expansion Provisions

The facility is located on the site to allow future expansion of the existing water treatment plant as well as the Test and Research Modules. An additional two research modules are provided beyond the stated needs for short term flexibility. Interior partitions will not be load bearing, allowing several cells to be combined should it be required.

The conference room and training room can be separated by a movable wall which provides acoustic and visual separation to allow simultaneous use of the two rooms. The Lunch rooa can also serve as a staging area for catered events. ,

Dillon Consulting Limited.- October 7, 2004 - Project Number: 04-3352 Page 5


Pump . No. Manufacturer

1 Johnston

3. HYDRAULIC FEATURES

Flow TDH Motor Pump Curve MLld (L/s) (4 Available? 100 (1157) 15.3 350

One of the major attractions of locating the researchhest centre at the Lake Huron WTP is the readily available supply of raw water with turbidity generally less than 1 NTU. This provides the opportunity to undertake full- scale demonstration or validation testing of water treatment equipment.

4 5 6

When dealing with such large quantities of water, disposal or recycle of the water can also present a significant handling challenge. The Lake Huron WTP also has significant waste drain capacity, and because of its close proximity to Lake Huron, has a readily available receiver, assuming return streams are of acceptable quality.

Goulds 97 (1123) 15.3 350 Yes Peerless 92 (1065) 15.3 350 Worthington 60 (694) 15.3 225 Yes

The following sections of the report summarize engineering assessments that were undertaken to quanti% the available capacity in both the raw water supply and wastewater drain. Where capacities were found to less than a target value of 300 ML/d, potential options to increase the mount available were briefly identified.

3.1 Raw Water Capability

The Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System is supplied fiom Lake Huron through an 1800 rnm diameter CPP intake pipe. The existing Low Lift Pumping Station (PS) consists of six single-stage vertical turbine pumps. The capacities provided by the operations staff of American Water Services Canada Corp. (AWSCC) are as follows:

I 2 I Flowserve I SO(926) I 15.3 1 350 I 1 3 I Goulds I 97(1123) I 15.3 I 350 I Yes

The Low Lift PS is considered to be the only connection point in the plant which can supply raw water to the new proposed test facility without significant structural or process piping changes to the Water Treatment Plant.

Based on the information provided by AWSCC, system curves were plotted for the existing system from the

Low Lift to the flocculation tanks and to the proposed TestResearch Facility. Typical catalogue pump curves were modified to take into account the headloss across each pump discharge piping up to the common discharge line (1500 rnm diameter).

Dillon Consulting Limited - October 7, 2004 - Project Number: 04-3352 Page 6


’ 3.

4.

For the Low Lift System Curve to the flocculation tanks, the P&ID for the plant has been used as the basis for calculation of headloss through the system. For the TestResearch Facility, most of the headloss occurs through the proposed 750mm flow control valve. The minimum and maximum static heads are based on the Lake Levels taken fi-om the plant drawings, flocculation tank levels and assumed height (6 metres above grade) for the test facility piping.

System Demands in 2003 (ML/d) 256 157

Available Raw Water (Mud) 84 183

Currently, the Water Treatment Plant delivers an average day demand of 157 MWd (with a maximum day of 256 MWd). Based on the current system hydraulics, the available capacities to the researchhest facility are shown below.

WATER SUPPLY I Maximum I Average

1. I Permit to Take Water / Intake Capacity (ML/d) 1 454

2. I Finn Capacity of Low Lift Pumps (ML/d) I 340

As seen in Figure 3, the average demand can be easily met by running the two larger pumps (P4/P5) or a combination of one large (P4) and one small pump (P6) in parallel. Since the two larger pumps are equipped with variable frequency drives (VFD), it is recommended that these pumps be used to maintain the WTP feed to provide flows paced to system demand. The smaller pump (P6) cannot be easily used to supply the test facility since it is on the northern side of the low lift discharge.

The remaining pumps (two or three larger) can be used to supply the test facility. Based on the pump combinations, the expected flows available to the test facility range fi-om 1 15 ML/d to 2 10 ML/d. The three southern pumps (P 1 to P3) can be easily connected through a common discharge line to feed the new research station. A 1200 mm line will be fitted with a control valve with capabilities to maintain a constant flow and/or pressure to the test facility. Higher flow rates can be accommodated with pump modifications, which might include an additional bowl to the vertical turbine assembly, new motor and possibly a VFD. Optional upgrade costs have been included in the cost estimates to accommodate higher flow rates.

The test facilities will also provide the capability to recirculate flows. A 1000 m3 underground water storage tank will be provided with three (one standby) vertical turbine pumps. Each pump will be rated for 23 ML/d @ 16m TDH.

Dillon Consulting Limited - October 7, 2004 - Project Number: 04-33.52 Page 7


1.

2.

3.2 Drain Capability

Capacity of Drain (ML/d) 178

Backwash Rate (ML/d) 46 92

Presently, all of the plant effluent (particularly the backwash water) is discharged to the lake through a 1050 mm diameter drain. Typically two backwash pumps (45.8 M u d each) are run for about 20 minutes.

A simplified model of the plant drain was created using XP-SWMM EXTRAN. Since the drain is connected to the clearwell through the overflow without any backflow prevention, the maximum head allowed in the drain was limited to 183.80 m, so as to keep it below the clearwell overflow (1 86.10 m). Based on these levels, the hydraulic capacity of the drain is assessed at approximately 178 ML/d.

Based on two backwash pumps running simultaneously, the drain capacity available to the research facility is approximately 86 ML/d. This is considerably lower than the expected discharge (1 15 to 21 0 MLJd) fiom the test facility.

1 DRAXNAGE I Maximum I Average I

3. 1 Drain Capacity Available (ML/d) I 132 I 86 I Options to increase the drain capacity available to the test and research facility include the construction of an additional drain to Lake Huron or construction of a backwash equalization tank. Flows in excess of 170 Mud, could only be accommodated by construction of a new drain to the lake. Optional upgrade costs have been included in the cost estimates to accommodate higher flow rates.

Dillon Conslilting Limited - October 7, 2004 -Project Number: 04-33.52 Page 8


4. ANCILLIARY SYSTEMS

4-1 Existing WTP Electrical System

The existing electrical system of Lake Huron WTP is comprised of normal and stand-by power.

4.1.1 Normal Power Distribution System

An overhead 115 kV transmission line from the Ontario Hydro One distribution grid provides power to the Lake Huron WTP. A 1 15 kW4.16 kV substation with two 6/8 MVA oil-filled transformers is located south of the main building. This substation is connected to the main switchboardelectrical room of the plant by means of 4.16 kV underground cables. The main electrical room is located at the southwest corner of the main building and distributes power to various parts of the plant, mainly the high lift and low lift pumps.

We have been advised that normal power is being used to its maximum capacity &d there is no spare capacity to feed to new proposed facility.

4.1.2 Stand-by Power

The generator building is located south of the main WTP building. This building can accommodate two 3.5 MYA diesel generators, one of which is installed and provides stand-by power to partial plant loads. Installation of the second generator has been scheduled for 2006. Other options for proiriding stand-by power are being reviewed and considered by the Joint Board.

We have been advised that at loss of normal power, existing available stand-by power can feed less than half of the main electrical loads and consequently there is no extra capacity to provide emergency power to the proposed research and training facility.

4-2 Research and Training Centre Conceptual Electrical Systems

4.2.1 Normal Power

A new service fiom the existing local power grid will be the source for normal power of the new facility. An underground duct structure will connect a pad mounted 27.6 kV/600V transformer to the existing overhead line on Highway 21. Switchgear, rated at 600V, will distribute power to different electrical loads within the researchkest facility. A 600V/480V, 600 kVA transformer will provide 480V power as well for equipment designated for industrial or USA deliveries.

Electrical load of the new facility is estimated to be approximately 1200 kW.

Dillon Constilting Limited - October 7, 2004 -Project Number: 04-3352 Page 9


Refer to electrical sketch E-1 for conceptual details of the facilities power supply.

4.2.2 Stand-by Power

Stand-by power will be provided for emergency lighting, fEe alarm system, heating system and other necessary loads. A diesel generator will be the source for emergency power. Stand-by power is not provided for process equipment other than for monitoring of valve position, flow and pressure.

Required stand-by capacity is estimated based on building area, as follows:

2500 m2 x 40 W/ m2 = 100 kW

Refer to electrical sketch E-1 for proposed interconnection details.

4.2.3 50 Hertz Power

A 21 0 kW capacity has been requested for research experiments with 50 Hertz (Hz) power. A 21 0 kW, 50 Hz diesel generator will be used to provide 50 Hz power. There is also the potential to provide 50 H z power through the use of an inverter. Preliminary costing for 50 Hz power is based on a diesel unit, which is assumed to be conservative from an equipment and building space perspective.

4.3 Building Systems

4.3.1 Power

Lighting, general purpose electrical outlets and mechanical equipment are major electrical loads of the new facility. In industrial areas, high bay fmtures with metal halide lamps and in office areas fluorescent fixtures and lamps will be the main source of lighting.

Branch circuit 120/208 distribution panels will be located at centers of load to provide power to lighting, receptacles and miscellaneous electrical loads.

600V normal and emergency MCCs will provide power to the main mechanical heating and cooling units.

4.3.2 Security and Communication Systems

Fire alarm system, telephone system and data system are major required systems. Paging, security (door access) and CCTV are among the systems that need to be assessed at future stages. A main data hub with a fiber-optic connection will link the centre worldwide.

Dillon Consulting Limited - October 7, 2004 - Project Number: 04-3352 Page 10


4.3.3 Heating and Ventilation Systems

Heating and ventilation requirements have been identified in Table 1, as previously referenced in Section 2. Generally, only office areas will be air-conditioned.

Special provisions for heat rejection are required in some of the test modules, where electrical equipment may generate significant additional load.

4.3.4 Green Building Opportunities

Several opportunities exist to incorporate “green building” enhancements. Life cycle cost estimates would be prepared in the next phase of design to determine if more sophisticated building systems are warranted and/or desirable to further promote protection of the environment.

Dillon Consulting Limited - October 7, 2004 - Project Number: 04-3352 Page I I


5. COST ESTIMATES

The cost estimates presented in this report represent an “opinion of probable costs” based on assumptions made by the study in discussion with potential project partners. Cost estimates are assumed to be conservative, since not all building and process systems have been fully defmed and are presented at a conceptual level of detail.

Building costs have been estimated based on typical building area unit costs for facilities of this type of construction as described in Section 2. Process requirements include external and internal piping, valves and in-line flow measurement devices, and are based on a preliminary take-off and typical pricing per item. Additional piping and special equipment requirements are the responsibility of the researchltesting partner. Cost sharing of the common materials within the facility and the amenities within each test module would be reviewed to establish an appropriate participation cost.

Power costs and optional upgrade costs are based on scaled costs for similar systems taken &om recent projects in Southwestern Ontario. Finn quotations have not been requested of suppliers or contractors.

Cost estimates are summarized as follows:

Site, Building and Architectural Process Mechanical Power and I&C Hydraulic Upgrade Options

$ 4.1 million $ 1.7 million $ 0.7 million $ 2.4 million

SUBTOTAL $ 8.9 million Contingency at 20% $ 1.8 million Engineering Studies, Design and CA 15% $ 1.3 million TOTAL PROBABLE COST $12 million

The total probable cost without the hydraulic upgrade costs and some reduction in building size, since the full scope of testing is not feasible at lower flow rates, is expected to be approximately $7.0 million.

Dillon Consulting Limited - October 7, 2004 - Project Number: 04-3352 Page I2


6. RECOMMENDATIONS TO MOVE FORWARD

We recommend that the Joint Board of Management for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System consider the following steps to move the project forward, with respect to the physical facility:

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Confirm space and amenity requirements for potential partners (partner interest is being solicited as a separate undertaking) Confirm power availability along Highway 2 1 Undertake field tests to validate capacities of low lift pumps and confum potential to modify existing units for higher flow rates Undertake field tests to validate capacity of existing drain, particularly during backwash events Defrne extent of surface drainage discharging to the plant drain and estimate typical storm water contribution Investigate septic bed relocation requirements in areas where there is a conflict with the proposed building location Confirm geotechnical conditions in proximity to the Lake Huron bluff Prepare a more detailed material take-off, including supplier and contractor quotations to refine the “opinion of probable” cost Discuss the potential impact of the new buildings, road access and parking requirements on the Port Blake Conservation Area (day park) with the operating authority and investigate other possible building locations and orientation Prepare life cycle cost estimates for “Green Building” enhancements.

Dillon Constilting Limited - October 7, 2004 - Project Number: 04-3352 Page 13

APPENDIX F

Wind Pre-Feasibility Sttzdy The Civ ofLondun and the Jdint Boards of Munagernent

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In May 2004, the City o f London, in piwtnmhip with the Elgin Area and L4ke Huron Joint Boards of Managanent retained Dillon C6multing Limited and Helimax Energy to undertake a pre-fbasibility study of ?he viability of a wind project at 3 speoific sites. The terms of reference for this study were outlined in DilIbn’s fetter dated May 28,2004.

In July 2004, the study team initiated a review of the following sites:

* Elgin Area Water Treatment Plant .- W12ALandfill

Lake Huron Water Treatment Plant

The proponents have indicated that the three (3) sites are to be considered individually in terms oftheir potential for wind power generation. One o f the principal objectives of the study for the water treatment plants was to assess the feasibility of reducing the electrical demand korn the power grid.

Wind energy potential for each site has been assessed using existing meteorological data fiom various sources (reference section 3 of this report). Site visits were conducted by the team members to assess topography features that may affect the wind resource and address environmental and technical considerations at each site.

Preliminary Assessment of Wind Resources:

Environment Canada (EC) station data wa$ used from 4 area stations situated in proximity to the sites under study. For the Huron and Elgin sites, station8 close to the shoreline were chosen since they best represented wind flows over the lakes. EC station data from the London Airport was used for the W12A Landfill Site.

The prevaiIing winds in the region come firom the western and southwestern sectors. A strong southwestern wind component is expected at the Elgin site and a north-south component at the Huron site is expected due to canalising effects of the wind aIong the coasts. .

Based on Emironment Canada data, higher wind speeds are observed in the winter months as opposed ta summer months. Summer wind speeds recorded at the stations are 30 to 40% lower .than the highest observed wind speeds. An: analysis of low resolution modelled meteorological data indicates that the highest wind speeds occur above Lake Erie and decrease as one proceeds inshore towards the City of London. Our analysis a1so suggests that the high wind speeds evident an the northern sectiun of the east coast of Lake Huron are not apparent on the southern section af the coast, The higher elevation of

Dillon Conmlting Limited Page I

Wind Pre-Feasibility Study The Ci@ ofLondon and the Joint Boar& ofMunugernent

the W 12A Landfill Site could act to compress wind flows and increase wind speeds at this inland site.

The Elgin site is expected to have the highest average annual wind speeds of the thee sites ranging between 6-5-7.0 d s . The Huron and Landfill sites are more likely to experience wind speeds o f 5.5-6.5 m/s and 5-0-6.5 mls respectively.

Indhidual Site Assessments:

The following provides an overview of the three sites under cornideration with respect to the potential for sitiag wind turbines, connection to the electrical grid, site accesslfoundation issues, and environmental constraints.

Access conditions to each of the sites appear to be quite reasonable. It is, however, recommended that B detailed analysis of the capability of the rads and bridges be performed along the preferred delivery routes to ensure they are compatible with a size and weight o f the wind turbine components.

Elpin Site:

As a general comment, this site’s exposure to the prevailing winds h m Lake Brie is excellent. There me few obstacles-and the: site has a low stlrface roughness. We would anticipate that a feasibility study could confirm a wind regime of 6.5-7.0 mls. The usable land area adjacent to the WTP is approximately It square km or 250 acres along the Lake Erie shoreline if one considers the domain to include the two land lots adjacent to the WTP. The most suitable area for siting one or more wind turbines is approximately 200 m no& o f the cliffs. This may, however, require the acquisition of land easements due to the narrowness of the land holding.

The existing electrical supply to this site is provided fkom the Edgewm Transformer Station which is approximately 15 km fkom the site. The maximum load for the Elgin Area. WTP is approximately 4.5 megawatts. A wind turbine located at the ’top of the cliff near Lake Erie could be connected by short lines into the 4160 volt system or the 27.6 kV system “behind the meters”.

The depth of the water at the shoreline is inadequate to allow direct delivery af turbine components, It would be necessary to use Port Stanley to deliver the turbine components by water and then transport them by roadway t6 the: site.

The site’s soil and geological conditions are not expected to present my significant desigdconstruction issues.

Dillon Consulting Limited Page 2

Wind Pre-Feasibility Study The City of London and the Joint Bourds of Munugement

W12 A Landfill Site:

This site is a large tract of land situated east of White Oak Road, There is a relatively ff at terrain to the west of the existing landfill area. The ridge along the west side of .the domain presents the best siting option for wind turbines considedrig its good exposure to westerly prevailing winds, the wind speed regime at this site could range &om 5.0-6.5 m/S.

The residence adjacent to the landfill site represents 8 constraint. I€ this constraint is mitigated, the site could accommodate one or mare wind turbine generators (WTG) in a row along White Oak Road, This would provide a site electrical capacity of 2-6 megawatts. It should be noted, however, that the recommmded wind turbine siting8 could adversely impact planned landfill operations. This woutd have to be researched firther to quantify my impacts on the landfill .operation if further studies were to proceed.

The power usage at this site is quite low and it is currently supplied by a single phase distribution circuit fiom the London Hydra Substation # 98 on Dingman Road. It is likely that wind turbines would have to be connected via a 27.6 kV circuit back to the Hydro One Transformer Station (TS). This TS is approximately 8 km fbm the landfill site and would result in zi significant capital cost for. the connection to the electrical grid. We are aware, however, that the City does have plans to construct a 2-3 megawatt biogas utilization plant. Slight oversizing of the connecting lines could accommodate the addition of site wind turbines at a nomina1 cost.

Since the landfill site itself is not in close proximity to either Lake Erie or Lake Huron, major components would have to be delivered via 8 port on Lake Erie and then transferred to the site by roadway.

There would not be any significant desigrdcanstruction issues associated with a wind turbine installation othor than the faot that there is limited space at the crest of the ridge on which to accommodate the wind turbines.

Huron Site:

The study team assessed the viability of a 2-5 megawatt wind energy project for this site. Site visits, however, confirmed that this is a highly populated area md 8s such, setbacks

Dillon CoatsuliSng Limited Page 3

Wind Pre-FeusibiZip Study The City of London and the Joint Boards of Management

would be. required &om the residential community which could conflict with the siting of a wind turbine. As well, the dose proximity of the site to the residential areas will probably require a noise impact study to deterrhine if noise output levels will be accept&le.

The site’s wind speed regime could range from 5.5-6.5 m/s. The significant concentration of structures in the area adversely impacts the wind regime and causes turbulence which effectively reduces wind speeds.

The site’s electrical supply is provided by a single 1 15 kV wood pole line, The average plant load is 4.4 megawatts and has a backup diesel generator that can snpply critical loads and limited pumping capacity. In view o€the limited land mxi associated with this site, it is likely that a wind turbine would have to be located in Port Blake Conservation Area (next to the WTP). A wind turbine could be connected by short lines to the 4160 volts system “behind the meters” at the water treatment plant.

Similar to the Elgin Area WTP, the water depth along the Lake Huron shoreline is inadequate to deliver wind tufbine components directly to the site. It would %re necessary to use the deep water port at daich to transfer &om a ship to land transporters.

The site’s soil and geological conditims are such that the study team does not anticipate any significant designlconstruction issues associated with the placement of a wind turbine generator on the site,

Potential for Electricity Cost Savrhgs:

An analysis has been undertaken to determine a) estimated annual electrical consumption at each o f the three sites and b) projected potential electricity savings with the installation of wind turbine generators.

As noted in Section 3.3 of this report, the mean surface wind speed data has been modelled at a low resolution and should, therefore, not be taken as a definite reference. The estimated electricity savings cited in the study provides only general indication based on the data available at this time, These saving projections would be adjusted to a more accurate level based on the wind resource analysis that would be undertaken in a project feasibility study. As a general comment, the greatest cost-saving potential is realized at the two water treatment plants.

The estimated annual electrical mnsumptiod costs at the Elgin Area WTP are approximately $877,000, With the installation of a single turbine in the range of 2 megawatts, there is potential for up to 50% reduction in power consumption from the grid.

Dillon Consulting Limited Page 4

Wind Pre-Feasi bilitv Sttidy The City of London &td t i e Joint Boards of Mattagentent

The study team does not foresee an opportunityfor significant mduction in power consumption h m the grid at the WUA Lmdfill Site under current conditions. The output from any wind turbine at this site would far exceed the current low level of consumption at the landfill site and would likely have to be transmitted to the riemest grid connection point and sold into the wholesale spot market. We are, however, aware that the City of London is considexing a bia-gas operation at this site. If that project proceeds first, it would need a new grid connection which would then become available far the fibre wind turbines output.

The Lake Huron WTP has an amud power usage that is approximately three times that of the Elgin WTP which would translate into an annual estimated electricity cost of$2,4 million, Since it is anticipated that only one. wind turbine would be feasible at this location, the potential reduction of electricity consumption would likely be up to 20%.

For my of the specified WTG sites, a more detailed study would be required to develop accurate electrical cost savings. The following factors would have to be reviewed in more detail:

Available wind energy resource based on climatologically adjusted site-specific wind data Capital cost estimates ofthe complete wind power installation including power grid connections Operating costs of the wind turbines Funding available fiom various sources to offset capital and operating costs Future electricity price forecasts Potential savings in commodity, transmission, distribution and other market related charges arising OM the operation of a wind turbine on site

ConclusionsfRecommendations/Next Steps:

The results of our analysis indicates that the Elgin Site has a wind regime which could make a wind energy project viable. It is recommended that the proponents (Le. the City of London and the Joint Boards) proceed to make 8 compIete financial application under the FCM Green Municipal Fund program. The municipality has already been invited to submit a financial proposal for the FCM's consideration. in 50% FCM funding for the prefeasibility md feasibility s $350,000. We fi3rther recommend that the proponents initiate a wind feasibility study far this site. The deliverables for a feasibility study are summarized in Section 7,O.

It is assumed that the City of London and the Joint Boards of Management will be entering into budget deliberations in the near fbture. If the proponents wish to proceed with the feasibility study, appropriate funding levels should be identified (if fiulding authority approval needs to be secured) as part of the budget process. As well, steps

Dillon Constrlt'ing Lirrrited Page 5

! "'"l.\,h,/

Wind Pre-Feusibility Study 0) D I W N coNAu LTING The City of London and the Joint Bourds of Management

should be taken to secure any required temporary Iand easements for the installation of wind monitoring tower@) at the Elgin site.

If this site is to be given serious consideration for wind turbine installation, it will be necessary to address the potential impacts on the bird migratiun route at Hawk Cliff. This could be undemken part afthe feasibility study.

Preliminary analysis indicates that the W12A Landfilt Site has a less wind resource potential than the Elgin site; however, it does have available usable land for siting wind turbine generators. The decisiun to proceed with a feasibility study may be influenced by several intangibles (such as a potential environmental greenpower statement etc.), It is assumed that the substantial costs to connect to the electrical grid would be assessed against the proposed bio-gas plant. As such, we recommend that my furthm wind study for this site be subject to a plan to proceed with the biogas plant. There may be tin economy of scale benefits associated with the installation of up to 3 wind turbine generators at this site.

The Huron Site, as well, has less wind resource potential (estimated 5-6 d s ) compared to the Elgin WTP site. This site is bordered by more development arid as such, conceivably there will be greater community impacts with a wind turbine generator siting at the plant itself or in the adjacent conservation area. Also, them is physical space for only one turbine at this location and, the potential energy savings by off-setting power fiom the grid are miaimal. There may be, however, other reasons to consider a wind turbine at this location, such as a desire by the community to demonstrate a commitment for a sustainable future. The Grand Bend community is already a tourist attraction which could be enhanced with the installation of a wind turbine generator in the Port Blake Conservation Area. It should be noted that there was no contact with the community or the Conservation Authority in this regard. We recommend that preliminary public comment be solicited regarding a possible wind turbine on this site, as well as discussions with the Conservation Authority. If favourable, then we recommend consideration be given to the purchase of wind data fkom anearby wind monitoring tower owned by a wind development company. The analysis of this data would confirm the strength of the wind resource at the WTP site.

Table 1.1 provides a comparative summary of the 3 sites reviewed by our study team. In order to facilitate comparison, we have assumd a range of capacity factors for each site, iderttified the potential number of wind turbine generators and other site related factors, such as su~ace roughness, residential and environmental impacts etc. The table also. provides a range o€ capital and opesating costs based on projected net energy yields far each site. This data has been used to develop an extremely preliminary indicatiun of costsKWH. It shouId ba noted that the calculations have been developed for comparative purposes only based on our prefeasibilijy analysis and should not be assumed as definitive in terms of site specific wind speeds, capacity factors, capital and

D i I h Consulting Limited Paged ,

''"'".h.w/

Wind Pre-Feasibility Study 0 The City of London und the Joint Boards of Management DILLxlN

GONSLILTtNG

operating costs etc. It is necessary to proceed through the hasibility study stage to more accurately quantify site specific wind energy potentid at hub height and associated capital and operating costs for. turbine installation(s).

Dillon Consulling Limited Page 7

I

Y)

9 a

Y s n

I * * * * *

. . . ~ . . . - - - - -

APPENDIX G

September 17,2004

Mr. A. L Henry, Manager of Regional Water Supply Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System c/o The City uf London 300 Dufferin Avenue, P.U. Box 5035 London, Ontario N6A 4L9

Dear Mr. Henry:

The following letter report is an exploratory assessment of the potentia1 for energy generation ffom livestock manure and other biomass, and incorporates a discussion of the specific issues that need to be considered during a feasibility study to determine the technical and economic viability of the technology.

INTRODUCTION

Due to concerns with environmental impact and the need for developing renewable energy resources, it is becoming increasingly cornon in many industrialized countries for animal inanures asjd other organic wastes to be utilized as a fuel for methclne production. In many European countries centralized facilities cdect mcmure and organic wastes, and digest them in anaerobic digesters to produce methane for power and heat production. The digested manure is returned to farmers for land application. In addition to the energy production, the process benefits the environment by reducing the organic load and the potential: for organic pollution, eliminating odours and destroying pathogenic organisms contained in the manure, A large part of the revenue for these digesters comes from tlie tippiirg fees, which are charged for accepting food processing and restaaraiit wastes. Digestion Iielps to conserve the nutrients in manure by making them inore stable and available for plant growth. It also helps to close the rrutrient cycle by returning more nutrients to crop production.

To assess the feasibiiity ofa similar approach for the Lake Huron Primary Water Supply System, the following key issues were identified in the proposed work plan:

* Site selection and compatibility with water pumping and other uses - the most feasible location is close to the manure supply - power is chmper to triinsport than manure Expected energy yield based un projected manure resource Importance of utilizing all of the energy produced - 113 of the energy from methane generetion produced as dectricity, 2/13 as heat - best to locate dose to a user of waste heat The benefits of bringing in additional organic waste into the process Discussion of the economics of manure energy and the key factors affecting economic success Opportunities for by-product sales

DZLIDN CONSU LTlNC

2 City of London September 17, 2004

Anticipated capital required and expected payback periods Risk factors afid how to determine eady on whether the initiative is economically viable.

SIT0 SELECTION

Due ta the potential for contamination and for offensive odours, a biomasdinanure energy project may not be compatible with a water pumping station, While proper engineering can ensure the security of water supply, associated odours may create the perception that the water supply may be compromised by a manure energy plant in close proxlmity to the pumping station.

Because it is relatively inexpensive to transmit electxicity, a manure energy plant can be located anywhere there is good access to the power grid, preferably close to the source of manure, The feasibility of eylergy extmcrion froin Iivestock manure is largely dependant on the volume, quality and proximity of manure to the generating plant, Animal manui’es, while a rich source of organic material, am mostly water, typically in the order of 90 to 95%. It is expensive tu transpofl water, as the water in manure does not contribute to ciiergy yield, Furtlimnor: any extracted water can present a waste disposal problem once digested maaure is dewatered.

Aiiotlier factor affecting the economics of manure energy is the ability to capture and utilize as much of the energy contained in manure as possible, When methane gas is burned for power production only about one third of the energy in the methane is actually converted to electrical powet, the rest is converted to heat. Some of this heat is required to maintain temperatures in the digester, but most of this heat is available to be captured and used. To maximize revenues and efficiency, generating facilities need to be located reasonably close to a compatible heat consumer who can utilize the excess heat.

In selecting the site, in addition to sources of manure and access to the power grid, it is also important to consider the local erivironmental impact of transparting manure to a centralized facility. If the some of production is sufficiently close, manure transport can be more efficient and have less impact if it is pumped. In general the receiving facilities of most centralized digesters are enclosed and protected from the elements. This not only reduces the potential for impacting neighbours, but also helps to control the process and protect operating equipment from the elements.

ENERGY YIELD

Energy yield is closely tied to the quantity and quality of manure that is available. Huron County is one o f the most concentrated areas of livestock production in Otrtaria According to statistics f3om 1996 there wee more than 2.6 million cubic metres of manure produced in the county, Based on fairly conservative estimates this is sufficient manure to supply a 16 MW power plant. Figure 1 depicts the manure production ia Southem Ontario by county.

i

3 CiO of London September I 7,2004

.,, ,.,,.,, _., ._, . ,, , ____.,. ,. -,--, , . : ...__ *_. ._.,-..-..I .._-,_--.. -..._ ., . ..... ‘. _. ..” .... , . . ..., ....... ...... “ .- .-r -.. _ _

I

~-

Ftgure I: Manure Praciuction is SoutItcm Ontario try county’

Together with nearby Perth County, Huron County is one af the province’s tap two counties in terms of manure production. The 1996 manure production statistics for the top ten counties are repoi-tecl in Table 1 M o w . With manure production for Hurorr County and nearby counties reported in Table 2.

Table 1 : The Top Ten Ontario Counties for Manure Production ( I 996)

Area Name Total Total Manure Livestock Litres Per Year,

Units - 1996 I946 Pert11 206,276 2,677,624,758 H w n 21 1,885 2,655,390,972 Wellington 1 &4,269 2,010,148,995 Oxford 1 42, I 63 1,847,841,941 Bruce 145,747 1,78 1,053,606 Middlesex 131,211 1,595,898,267

’ The Management of Manure in Ontario With Respect to Water Quality, by Gass, MichaeI, Kimberly S. Rollins, Kenneth McEwan, J. Ralph Shaw, and Helen bmmers-Helps. A refmeed background report comtnissioned by the Honourable Justice O’Conner of the “Watkerton Inquiry”, Oavernment of Ontario

I

4 City of London September 17,2004

Waterloo Grey Lambton Simcoe

1 17,94 1 1,520,997,435 f 25,039 1,399,306,909 95,254 lY2O4,O57,248 86,320 1,012,43 1,897

-

Table 2: Manure Production in Huron and nearby Counties (1996)

Huron County 2,655,3390,972 15,853 Poultry 148,243,786 3,382 Cattle 1,126,735,984 5,463 Swine I ,3 80,411,203 7,008

Pert11 County 2,677,624,758 15,274 Poultry 107,673,664 2,457 cattle 1,001,036,699 4,853 Swine 1,568,914,394 7,964

kliddlcsex County 1,595,898,267 10,094

Poultry 12 1,4O9,8 1 I 2,770 Cattle 705,560,111 3,42 1 Swine 3,903

Lambton County 7,265 Poultry 70,042,836 1,598 Cattle 392,105,411 1,90 1 Swine 741,909,OO 1 3,766

Good statistics are available far manure production on a township by township basis with separate manure production figures for poultry, swine and cattle.

Based on 42.5 kWh/m3 for cattle, 44.5 k W m 3 for swine and 200 kWh/m3 for poulw

5 City of London September 17,2004

22,695 Poultry 90,340 Cattle 98,851 Swine

Figure 2: Manure prodtiction by township in Huron County’

Energy yield and output from digestion can be improved with the addition QF other high- energy organic wastes.. Fats, oils and grease (FOG) wastes ate the highest in energy. Up to one third of the waste processed in a digester caii be FOG without negatively affecting the digestion process. European experiences indicate that this level of FOG addition, can effectively double energy output.

tt is important that any organic inaterial that is added to a digester cnii be readily digested and is rich in energy.

ECONOMIC FACTORS

“lie economics o f ariaembic digestion are closely tied to the scale of the operation. In general unless there are substantial other benefits such enviromental issues, 1.5 MW is generally the minimum sized operation that can be jus based on the economics of power generation. The quantity of manure required to genetate this much power depends on a number of factors, but can mnge from 100 to 256 tomes per day.

The Management of Manure in Ontario with Respect to Water Qual by Gom, Michael, Kimberly S. Rollins, Kenneth McEwan, J, Ralph Shaw, and Helen Lammors-Helps, A refereed background report commissioned by the Honourable Justice O’Conner of the “Walkerton Irrquiry”, Government af Ontario

6 City of London September i7, 2004

Manure QualZQ

The single greatest determinant of the econoinics of power production is the quantity and quality of manure. Manure quality is almost as important as quantity. Qnality, as defined by the volatile solids content of the manure, wit1 vary with the. type of livestock, feed quality and with the production systm. Even Within a single category of fivestock, manure quality can vary substantidy. Manure fieshness i s also an important factor. Manure can lose volatile solids fairly rapidly. Ideally it is best to obtain manure while it is still warm. Once manure cools dom, a lot of heat has to be expended to bring it back to a suitable temperature for digestion. This heat has to be supplied from waste heat recovered from power generation or f h m burning biogas.

Water Content

Adequate water content is required fm proper digestion. Ideally manures should have a solids content af 10-1 2%. Any inore solids than this and the maimre will be difficult to mix, any less than this and the energy yield per cubic metre of digester will decrease,

Because water is such a significant component of manure, it can also present sane af the greatest challenges to manure handling and processing. If the water is extracted from manure to reduce the cost of transport or digestion, then it will require some farm of treatinelit before it can be discharged. (eg, rapid memb the impact of solids content an digester volume for a

Water content can have an eve0 greater impact on transportation costs, Figure 4 illustrates the cost of transporting manure, expressed as a cost per a kilowatt-haw of power produced. Over longer distances the cost of transport manure with a high water content can easily exceed the vaiue of electricity that is genera

--

7

September f 7,2004 Of tQ?tdOR

(R e

a

Y

3 0

1 0

-

Digester Volume (m') vs. Solids Content

1.600

1.400

1.200

1.000

000

600

400

200

. . 3% d% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% IO% 11% 12%

Solids Content

Figure 3: Effect of Solids Corrteiit 011 Digester Size4

' Based on three tomes of manure per day on a dry weight basis and a retention time of 15 days

,

8 City qf London September 17,2004

-3% -4%

5% -646 -7% -a%

I

-9% 1

-1 0% -11% * . . . , I . “12%

L

Cost of Manure Transport per kWht of Power Praduced

0.14

0.1 2

0.10

8 0.06

0.04

0.02

0.00 - 1 2 3 4 b 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Distance (km)

Figure 4: Mnnurc Transport Costs by Distances based on the Soiids Content

Co-Digestion

Co-digestion or the combined digestion of manure and other organic wastes is commonly practiced in Europe. Food procmsing wastes, restaurant wastes and Fats oils and grease (FOG) arc commonly added to manure. In addition to tipping fees, the added material usually provides a substantial boost to energy production and helps to improve the digestion process. Septage, dead stock arid organic municipal solid wastes can also be added to digesters. One of problems with adding non-agrkultural waste materiafs is that in our regulatory climate such additions will trigger the need to obtain a C of A for the digester, and may, in fact, trigger the requirement for C of A‘s for the application of digested material to agricultufal lands. Currently the regulations would not require a C of A for a digester processing only animal manure, or for the appfication to farmland. The way the regulatiom are applied, as soan any noa agricultural source material is added, a C of A would be required,

In Europe, them is much more emphasis on the quality of the material rather than its source. There are a number of categories of organic wastes based on their quality. Each category of wastes has specific guidelines for their use, with a wide range of alternatives. In Ontario, we tend to work with a pasdfail approach where the material either passes or fails. If the source of material is agricuItura1 then there are very few restricticms for land application. However as soon as .non-agricultural organic wastes are added the entire

I

r I

9 Ci& of London September ‘I 7,200;4

batch of material is considered to be non-agricultural organic waste, which must cotlfom with the regulations for applying non-agricultural organic wastes.

The addition of some organic wastes, such as dead stock, will Rquim proper pre- processing to ensure that the digester can readily accept the wastes. While dead stock is a good feedstock and can add substantially to the energy output, dead stock needs to be brokendown before it can be added to a digester.

Roughly two thirds of the enera used to produce power from biogas will be heat. Biogas can be burned directly for heating. Most gas-fired equipment is able to handle biogas directly with only minor changes to the equipment. The most efficient use of biogas is to burn it for power production and to then recover the heat, The recovered heat can be used for heating process water, space heating or for drying. From an economic perspective, it is beneficial if the heat is required year round. ]in our climate it is not difficult to find uses for heat during the winter months, but it can be di€€icuIt to find customers for heat during the summer months.

B y-Prodtl cts

In general, digested manure and urganie wastes are disposed by appticatiod on agricul turd land. There have been some fairly successful businesses developed based on processing digested manure into other products, It is fairly straightforward to extnct undigested fibre from digested manure. The fibre hns been used as a superidr animal bedding material, mulch and soil suppfemcnts, etc, Fibre extracted from digested manure is relatively pathogen free and represents a truly green and renewable replacement for harvesting peat moss, which results in the destruction of wetlands.

Digested manure is superior to raw manure fur fertilizer. The nutrients ate less volatile and more available to plants. Unlike raw manure, digested manure can be applied to crops throughout the plant production cycle without risk of crop damage or burning. Unlike commercial fertilizers tJmt am synthetically produced .or mined, digated manure contains organic matter, which will help build-up soil organic conrmt. It is an excellent fertilizer,

CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTED PAYBACK

The capital costs for anaerobic digestion vary with size, the technology supplier, pre- processing and post processing requirements.

Where they are economically justified anaerobic digesters have paybacks in the order of 5 to IO years, Their capital costs are fairly sensitive to the scafe of the opetation, with the cast per cubic metre dropping substantially with increasing size. Much of the cost of piping, controls and monitoring equipment does not change substantially with increasing size. The cost of the digester decreases on a per unit basis with increasing size. The heat

io City of London September I7,2004

loss from digesters, which needs to be replaced with waste heat, will also decrease QII a unit basis with increased size.

For comparison purposes the cost of a 100 tonne per day capacity diges’ter can range from $2.5 to 7.5 million, The cost can varies substantially based on the pre-treatment requirements and what fhrther processing is required.

RISK FACTORS

There are a number of factors that may negatively impact the success of a manure based energy production facility. In this day and age of Bovine Spongifonn Encephalopathy (BSE) and other threats to livestock health, bio-security i s an important considmation. Collecting and processing manure in centralized facilities can introduce the risk of disease transfer. However, behuse of the ability to Contrd the time and tempemture of digestion, an excellent pathogen kill can be achieved. Trials with low temperature digesters have shown that even with low temperatures where pasteurization does nat occur, very good pathogen kill rates can be achieved. One of the prime methods for ensuring bio-security, i s to break the p a t b a y between livestock to livestock transfer of pathogens, which results when animal products are fed back to other animals. Organic wastes processed in a digester do not rerenter the food supply as livestock fed but nre used for crop production.

The construction af a fiiaiiurc energy facility requires substantial capita1 investment. To reduce the risk to investors it is criticaf to obtain long-ter’m commitments tbr an adequate supply of inaiiure of sufficient quality to ensure power generation. Whik there is no cost for the fuel, the “security of supply” can be an issue. Many farmers may be unwilling ta enter in long-term agreements if they restrict their ability to make future mairageirmt decisions. In addition to providing sufficient quantities of manure, it is also important that manure from any ariiifials receiving unusual treatments or medications is tested prim

negative impact on the micro-organisms in a digester, It will also be important to monitor the quality of any organic wastes that ate added to the digester, or to limit how much is added if the quality is undetermined.

to being added to 8 digester. Some antibiotics and anti-microbial sanitizers can a

One of chief benefits of manure-based energy production is that unlike fossil fie1 fired power plants, the cost of fie1 is essentially fiee and not sensitive to fluctuations in world energy prices. In fact increasing energy prices generally improve the economic outlook for mafiure based power and heat gerremtion.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on world experience, anaerobic dipsti611 is a reiatively mature technology. However in the North American context, with current energy pfces it appears to only make ecoilomic sense in special situations where there is an abundant supply of raw manure and a good demand for the heat produced as a by-product of pawer genedon. Due to the concentration of manure production in Huron and Perth Counties, them would

l i City qf London September 17, 2004

appear to be substantial potential for a manure energy facility. However due to issues of p&ception, the need forcentral locatlon, and the need for ti consumer of the waste heat; the water treatment plant does not present a good location for a biomass energy project.

Yours sincerely,

DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED

Gintas Kamaitis, P.Eng, Project Engineer Diilon Consulting Limited

t

APPENDIX H

HURON ELGIN LONDON PROJECT

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

environment and transportation committee …council.london.ca/councilarchives/agendas/environment...

Documents