March 22, 2012MUNICIPALITY OF WEST ELGIN
AGENDA
COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 22, 2012
Council Chambers, West Elgin Municipal Building
DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
DELEGATIONS:
10:00 a.m. Intech Clean Energy — Rodney Solar Farm
1:30 p.m. WESA — 2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report, Landfill Site
(C7a, C7b, C7c)
2:00 p.m. Budget — Arena, Roads (C7b)
PLANNING: (B1 -B5)
(See also D1 & D2)
1.* Report re: Secondary Plan - Port Glasgow
2.* Report re: Surplus Railway Lands — Thompsons Limited
3. Verbal Report re: Bianco rezoning (see 01)
4. Verbal report re: County of Elgin Official Plan
5. Verbal report re: second residential units
REPORTS: (C1 -C7)
1. ROADS
a) *Report re: Parking on Furnival Road
b) *Report re: Furnival Road Paved Shoulder
March 22/12 Page 2
2. RECREATION
a) *Report re: Renovations at Recreation Centre
3. BUILDING
4. WATER
a) Tenders for Port Glasgow Trailer Park - Sanitary Sewer Replacement
b) *West Elgin Distribution System --- 2011 Annual Summary Report
c) *West Elgin Distribution System — 2011 Report under O.Reg. 170/03
5. DRAINS
a) Drainage Apportionment — Wilton Drain No. 2 (Parezanovic Farms)
b) Drainage Apportionment — Coffey Drain (Parezanovic Farms)
c) Drainage Apportionment — Wismer Drain (Slaats)
d) Drainage Petition — Crandall Drain
e) Drainage Petition — Dymock / Aldred Drain
6. WEST ELGIN PRIMARY SYSTEM
7. ADMINISTRATION
a) *WESA - 2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report — Landfill Site
b) *WESA — 2012 Site Monitoring and Operations Proposal
c) *WESA — Waste Audit Work Plan Proposal
d) *Draft Budget — West Elgin Arena, Roads Department
e) *Report re: Garbage and Recycling Collection Rates
f) *Report re: Criminal Background CheckNunerable Sector Screening
March 22/12 Page 3
CORRESPONDENCE: (D1 -D6)
1.* Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing — By -law No. 2012 -11 (Bianco)
2.* Ministry of Natural Resources — Wetlands Mapping
3.* Harvesters Baptist Church — request for exemption for site plan approval
4. WESS 60th Reunion — request to waive fees for use of arena
5.* Ministry of Environment — Transition of Accreditation Bodies under Municipal Drinking
Water Licensing Program
6.* Canadian General Standards Board — Transition of CGSB Accreditation Program
BY -LAWS:
By -law No. 2012 -23 Authorize agreement for use of municipal land (155 Furnival Road)
OTHER BUSINESS: (El)
1. Closed session -- litigation
*information enclosed
CONFIRMING BY -LAW
ADJOURNMENT
NEXT MEETINGS
April 12, 2012
April 24, 2012
April 26, 2012
Council
11:30 a.m. — Public Meeting — Proposed Street Name Change
(McPherson Road)
Tri County Management Committee, 7:00 p.m.
Council
19 March, 2012
MEMORANDUM
#0318/2155
TO: Members of Council
Municipality of West Elgin
FROM: Ted Halwa
RE: Secondary Plan — Port Glasgow - Municipality of West Elgin — Preliminary Report
1. Background: The notion of a secondary plan for Port Glasgow arose following the
adoption of the West Elgin Official Plan in February 2008 during the subsequent approval
process conducted by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH). As a means
to address a number of issues raised by MMAH to a relatively large mixed -use
development proposed by Seaside Waterfront Developments Inc. (Seaside) adjacent to the
existing developed area of Port Glasgow, modifications to Section 7.5 of the Official Plan
dealing specifically with Port Glasgow were considered by West Elgin and MMAH.
Essentially, the modification being contemplated by MMAH was the requirement for a
secondary plan that would address certain specific issues where large scale development
was being proposed in Port Glasgow. The secondary plan would take the form of an
amendment to the Official Plan and its preparation and approval would precede any
approval of a specific development application.
While the need for a secondary was argued as well as whether it should be a document
approved by Council or a document adopted by Council and subsequently approved by
MMAH, the Ministry ultimately approved the Official Plan subject to a number of
modifications including the requirement for a secondary plan for Port Glasgow as an
amendment to the Official Plan (thereby, requiring the approval of the Ministry). Council
elected not to further oppose the modification to Section 7.5 (an action which would have
�"1��ni I �'I�.✓ iirFiJ
17
Secondary Plan — Terms of Reference
Port Glasgow
Municipality of West Elgin
19 March, 2012
page 2
#0318/2155
required the intervention of the Ontario Municipal Board) although the modification was
subsequently appealed by Seaside to the OMB.
In an attempt to resolve the issue without a hearing of the OMB, a pre - hearing and
subsequent discussions on a `without prejudice' basis, have been held by representatives
of MMAH, West Elgin and Seaside. These discussions included the possibility of an
agreement by all parties on the preparation of a secondary plan for Port Glasgow.
At the same time these discussions were being held, discussions were also ongoing
between Seaside and West Elgin and Seaside and MMAH regarding the identification and
disposal of surplus lands along Havens Lake Road (HLR); issues arising from applications
submitted by Seaside to MMAH for the approval of a draft plan of subdivision and a
common elements plan of condominium; and issues arising from an application for rezoning
to West Elgin for a mixed use commercial residential block on the east side of HLR just
north of the Port Glasgow Marina. These matters raised additional issues which were
arguably best resolved on an integrated and comprehensive basis which a secondary plan
could provide the framework for as opposed to the ad hoc singular basis on they were
being considered.
In considering the Application for an Amendment to the Zoning By -law by Seaside for the
afore -noted commercial development, Council adopted the following resolution on 23
February 2012:
That the Application for an Amendment to the Zoning By -law by Seaside Waterfronts Inc.
to change the zoning of part of Lot 6, Concession XIV in the former Township of
Aldborough, from the `site - specific' Agricultural (A 1 -20) Zone to a 'site - specific' Tourist
Commercial (TC -3) Zone be deferred pending the preparation and approval of a
secondary plan for the settlement area of Port Glasgow as outlined herein and that the
Planner be directed to report further on the scope, content, cost (including financing),
timing and preparation of such a plan.
The remainder of this report proceeds from Council's directions set out in the resolution.
Secondary Plan — Terms of Reference
Port Glasgow
Municipality of West Elgin
19 March, 2012
page 3
#0318/2155
2. Purpose of the Secondary Plan: to provide a context or framework for the character and
form of the settlement area of Port Glasgow against which changes in use and the
development and redevelopment of individual parcels would be evaluated and future
decisions made with respect to municipal infrastructure and facilities to ensure consistency
with a vision, goals, objectives and policies and effectively integrated and compatible with
existing and future development.
3. Study Area: the settlement area being Lot 6 and Lot 7, Con XIV — as per West Elgin Official
Plan (refer attached).
4. Scope:
a) Design Population and Demographic Characteristics;
b) Natural Heritage & Cultural Heritage;
c) Lands subject to Natural Hazards;
d) Density, Type, Designation and Arrangement of Uses;
e) Lands for Public Use;
f) Urban Design Principles and Features;
g) Servicing Needs /Requirements;
h) Vehicular Needs and Circulation;
i) Pedestrian Needs and Circulation;
j) Viewing Planes and Vantage Points.
5. Specific Issues for the Secondary Plan to Address:
a) location, limits and character of the `town centre' (or centres);
b) location and form of future development along HLR;
c) ultimate desired cross section and required road allowance of HLR;
d) need for a dedicated lane on HLR for vehicles hauling boats;
e) enhancement and access to lakefront views;
f) amount and location of parking to meet future demands;
Secondary Plan — Terms of Reference
Port Glasgow
Municipality of West Elgin
19 March, 2012
page 4
9)
h)
i)
j)
k)
impact of a potential expansion of the Port Glasgow Marina;
optimum locations for STP and SWM facility;
design guidelines for new development and public improvements;
traffic and pedestrian circulation system;
municipal services and facilities required to service design population.
6. Level of Detail: to be determined.
7. Areas of Expertise:
a) land use planning;
b) urban design;
c) transportation planning;
d) civil engineering;
e) environmental planning.
8. Outputs:
a) vision statement;
b) goals and objectives;
c) policies;
d) guidelines;
e) plans and drawings.
9. Public Engagement:
#0395/2955
a) public meetings — minimum of three — one at the beginning of the process to
explain what is being done and to ensure all pertinent issues are being
addressed; one mid -way to present findings and scenarios /options /solutions being
considered and one near the end to present recommended plan (statutory);
,J'.: n! i Iu' Ity
IPir. 'ne s Inc
Secondary Plan — Terms of Reference
Port Glasgow
Municipality of West Elgin
19 March, 2012
page 5
b) meetings with key stakeholders;
c) social media.
10. Agency Consultation:
a) Provincial Ministries (coordinated by MMAH);
b) Lower Thames Valley Conservation Authority;
c) County of Elgin.
11. Estimated Cost: to be determined.
12. Time Frame: April — November 2012.
(original signed by)
Ted L. Halwa MCIP, RPP
#0318/2155
• LASG •
1 1 • - NED ROAD ALLOWANC
ALE 1:5 OW
"Ft
0
Community
1�.
fanners Inc
19 March, 2012
MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of Council
Municipality of West Elgin
FROM: Ted L. Halwa
SUBJ: Surplus Railway Lands — Thompsons Limited
#000812148
We have undertaken preliminary research with respect to a request by Thompsons Limited to convey to
the Municipality a portion of its former railway lands which it previously acquired from CSX for the purpose
of maintaining rail access to its facilities in West Elgin. The lands are no longer used or needed for these
purposes. The former railway lands acquired by Thompsons extend from west of Blacks Road to just east
of the Village of Rodney. Thompsons have interest from at least two property owners (i.e. Kieraszewicz
and Schweitzer) to acquire segments of the railway corridor which abut their lands. The approval of the
Elgin County LDC to sever these lands and consolidate them with the abutting properties would be
required.
The former railway lands in West Elgin comprise two separate and distinct corridors. The northerly
corridor was under the ownership of CN /CP when it was conveyed to Orford Sand & Gravel for the
purposes of extracting the rail bed. It has since been conveyed to the Municipality of Chatham -Kent for
the primary purpose of a future electric power transmission line. A secondary purpose is the
establishment of a recreation trail in Chatham -Kent which would continue into Essex County. Generally,
the corridor has a width of 30 metres (100 ft). The southerly corridor which was under the ownership of
CSX (and still is to some extent) was sold, in part, to Thompsons as noted above. Generally, it comprises
a width of 76 metres (250 ft).
Based on our research to date, there are a number of recreation trails that have been established along
former railway corridors in Ontario. Ownership appears to vary widely ranging from municipalities,
conservation authorities and not- for - profit organizations. The Ontario Trails Council (OTC), which
oversees the trail system in the Province, evidently has more specific information with respect to
ownership and maintenance. We have requested this information from OTC.
Surplus Railway bands - Thompsons
Municipality of West Elgin
19 March, 2012
page 2
#0008/2148
The former railway lands in West Elgin are somewhat unique given the fact that they constitute two
parallel corridors, resulting in a generous combined width (107 m or 350 ft) of lands potentially available
for trail purposes. Use of the CN /CP corridor in Chatham -Kent appears will be restricted to non - motorized
recreational purposes. While there are significant issues in accommodating motorized vehicles (e.g.
ATV's, trail bikes, snowmobiles), there may be an opportunity to do so on the former CSX corridor.
Otherwise, acquiring the CSX corridor for passive recreational purposes may be an unnecessary
duplication if the CN /CP corridor is destined for these purposes.
In addition to the actual use to which the railway corridor acquired by Thompsons but no longer required
could be put, other issues which need to be addressed include related development and maintenance
costs, administration, access (a limitation of the Thompson proposal), fencing obligations, compatibility
with neighbouring uses, liability and loss of tax revenue. Ms. Bryant has researched the relevant
provisions under the Line Fences Act and will report her findings to Council directly.
In order to further assess the proposal by Thompsons Limited and prior to formulating a recommendation
to Council for its consideration, additional research is required on the issues cited herein.
(original signed by)
Ted L. Halwa, MCIP, RPP
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
4aunicfpaIff of
C Ca)
rot lagitt
COUNCIL OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF WEST ELGIN
NORMA BRYANT, CLERK
PAUL VAN VAERENBERGH, ROAD SUPERINTENDENT
MARCH 22, 2012
PARKING ON FURNIVAL ROAD
RECOMMENDATION:
1. THAT no changes be made to the County of Elgin's parking by-
law EG -1.
2. THAT a white line to indicate the "travelled" portion of the road be
painted on both sides of Furnival Road south of the tracks after
reconstruction.
INTRODUCTION:
A ratepayer has requested Council review parking on Furnival Road north and
south of the village core.
BACKGROUND:
County of Elgin By -law No. EG1, as amended, regulates parking and traffic on
county roads. There are no parking restrictions on Furnival Road.
DISCUSSION:
The pavement width on Furnival Road is not adequate for parking on both sides
of the road plus two lanes of traffic. This is further exasperated when the 401
EDR is in place, with trucks using Furnival Road to go to Talbot Line. The issue
was brought forward when a vehicle was exiting a driveway on Furnival Road
(south of the former railway tracks) where a vehicle was parked on the other side
of the road.
Furnival Road is a county road. A standard lane width is 3.25 metres and a
standard parking stall width is 3.0 metres.
Existing
North of Queen St 10.0 m.
South of tracks 8.3 m.
Lane
3.5 m.
3.5 m.
*Total width required if parking on one side.
Lane
3.5 m.
3.5 m.
Parking
3.0 m.
3.0 m.
*Total
10.0 m.
10.0 m.
22413 Hoskins Line, Box 490, Rodney, Ontario NOL 200 Tel: (519) 785 -0560 Fax: (519) 785 -0644
The minimum width with parking on one side is 10.0 metres. North of Queen
Street, the width of Furnival Road would accommodate parking on one side.
South of the tracks, the width of Furnival is inadequate to provide parking on
either side.
Under the Highway Traffic Act, it is the individual's responsibility not to park on
the travelled portion of a road. However, without visual marking on the street,
some individuals would probably not realize they were parking on the "travelled"
portion of the road.
Authority for parking by -laws has been delegated to municipalities under the
Municipal Act which is another route we could follow. After discussion with the
County, it has been suggested that after reconstruction of Furnival Road, a white
line could be drawn along Furnival Road to indicate the "travelled" portion of the
road.
In 2012, Furnival Road will be reconstructed south of the tracks and the white
line could be painted after completion. North of Queen Street, the width of
Furnival Road could accommodate parking on one side. It is suggested that after
reconstruction of Furnival Road in this area, Council make a decision that could
allow parking.
Respectfully submitted
Norma I. Bryant
Clerk
frv/
Paul . n Vaerenbergh
Road Superintendent
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT
c r (6)
COUNCIL OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF WEST ELGIN
PAUL VAN VAERENBERGH C.R.S.I., ROADS SUPERINTENDENT
MARCH 22, 2012
FURNIVAL ROAD PAVED SHOULDER
RECOMMENDATION: That a decision be made by Council whether to fund the
construction of a 2 -meter paved shoulder the east and west sides of County
Road 103 ( Fumival Road) from Pioneer Line to Aldborough Public School.
INTRODUCTION: Through resolution of Council the Roads Superintendent was
instructed to enter into negotiations with County Engineering to include a 2 -meter
paved shoulder on the west and east sides of Fumival Road during repaving of
county road 103 which is scheduled for summer of 2012.
DISCUSSION: During an onsite meeting with County engineering it was
discovered that a decision was already made by County council that any
additional pavement requested by a Municipality is to be funded by that
Municipality. The cost estimate for the additional asphalt is approx. $ 17,000.00
with the exact total to be determined after tendering. This can be part of the
Rodney sidewalk budget.
Staff Report for West Elgin Municipal Council
Date: March 22 2012
To: West Elgin Municipal Council
From: West Elgin Recreation Superintendent Jeff Slater
Subject: Closure of the Recreation Center
Discussion:
In order to complete the necessary upgrades to the West Elgin Recreation Center the
Recreation Superintendent has requested that the Recreation Center be closed for the month
of June.
The nature of the repairs, replacing the side walk at entrance to the Recreation Center,
remodelling both washrooms, replacing the windows at the front of the Recreation center, and
general painting of some areas within the recreation center would be completed easier, more
efficiently, and safer if the facility was closed for a certain period of time.
Closing the Recreation Center for the month of June will impact the fewest number of users,
and allow for the final touch ups if necessary before any major events.
Time is becoming of the essence as we will have to tender out most of the work to be
completed, and if we can contact contractors now before they start lining up work for the
summer we should be able to have the work completed in June.
Therefore the Recreation Superintendent respectfully requests Council's permission to close
the West Elgin Recreation Center for the month of June 2012 to facilitate the necessary repairs
to the facility.
West Elgin Recreation Superintendent
Jeff Slater
March 19 2012.
_)S
c LK.b)
MUNICIPALITY OPWE-ST ELGIN
RECEIVED
AAR 2012
ANNUAL SUMMARY REPORT
FOR THE
WEST ELGIN DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
2011
Prepared for members of Municipality of West Elgin
Council
By: Mike Kalita, Water Superintendent
March 14, 2012
Table of Contents
Section
Number
1
Contents
Overview
Page
Number
1
2
3
4
Compliance with Regulations
Schedule 22 -2 (2)(a) List the requirements of the act, the
regulations, the systems approval, drinking water works
permit, municipal drinking water licence, and any orders
applicable to the system that were not met at any time during
the period covered by the report.
Corrective Actions
Schedule 22 -2 (2)(b) For each requirement referred to in
section 2 that was not met, specify the duration of the failure
and the measures that were taken to correct the failure.
Flow Summary
Schedule 22 -2(3)
1.A summary of the quantities and flow rates of the water
supplied during the period covered by the report, including
monthly average and maximum daily flows.
2.A comparison of the summary referred to in paragraph 1 to
the rated capacity and flow rates approved in the systems
approval, drinking water works permit or municipal drinking
water licence, or if the system is receiving all of its water from
another system under an agreement pursuant to subsection
5(4), to the flow rates specified in the written agreement.
1
2
3
Section 1: Overview
This report is a summary of water quality information for the West Elgin Distribution
System, published in accordance with Schedule 22 of Ontario's Drinking Water
Regulation for the reporting period of January 1,2011 to December 31,2011.The West
Elgin Distribution System is categorized as a Large Municipal Residential Water System.
Although we have the same waterworks number (260091117) as the West Elgin Water
Treatment Plant, this is a separate report for the Distribution System.
The West Elgin Distribution System operates according to the Municipal Drinking Water
Licence 043- 101(Issue 1:July 27, 2009; Issue 2:June 4 2010) and Drinking Water Works
Permit 043- 201(Issue 1:July 24,2009; Issue 2 June 4,2010).
Section 2: Compliance
The West Elgin Distribution System was maintained and operated in such that drinking
water supplied to customers throughout the distribution System satisfied Ontario
Drinking Water Quality Standards. However, some of the requirements of the
Regulations were not met as identified in the MOE inspection report.
Our routine inspection was conducted on February 18th, 2011 and no Ministry of the
Environment Provincial Officers Orders issued. Of the three non - compliances identified
in this report, only the one pertaining to the Distribution System will be covered in this
report. The non - compliance with Regulatory Requirements and Actions Required for the
Distribution System as appeared on the Inspection Report is listed on the following
pages.
NON COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND ACTIONS REQUIRED
This section provides a summary of all non - compliance with regulatory requirements identified
during the inspection period, as well as actions required to address these issues. Further details
pertaining to these items can be found in the body of the inspection report.
1.All changes to the system registration information were not provided within ten(10)
days of the change.
During the review of the Drinking Water Information System Profile, it was observed that some
information was inaccurate. More specifically, the Owners Contact Person Details for Owner
Alternative Contact and 7x24 Contact Person Details were outdated.
Action Required:
The owner /operating authority updated the DWIS profile as per O. Reg. 170/03 S. 10.1. and
submitted the correct information to the Ministry of the Environment on March 8, 2011. No
further action is required.
SECTION 3 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
The non - compliance identified in the MOE Inspection Report was addressed in an
orderly fashion, and corrected information was sent to Mr Barry Moncreiff on March the
8th 2011. No other corrective actions were required.
SECTION 40 FLOW SUMMARY
There are no requirements listed in the permit or licence as to flow rates or capacities in
our Distribution System. The West Elgin Distribution has adequate flows to meet current
demands without issue , and can still meet demands for future growth.
:/•1*-"
t» Ontario Drinking- Water Systems Regulation 0. Reg. 170103
OPTIONAL ANNUAL REPORT TEMPLATE
Drinking -Water System Number:
Drinking -Water System Name:
Drinking -Water System Owner:
Drinking -Water System Category:
Period being reported:
260091117
West Elgin Distribution System
Municipality of West Elgin
Large Municipal Residential
Janl -Dec31 /2011
Complete if your Cate2ory is Large Municipal
Residential or Small Municipal Residential
Does your Drinking -Water System serve
more than 10,000 people? Yes [ ] No [X]
Is your annual report available to the public
at no charge on a web site on the Internet?
Yes [ ] No f X]
Location where Summary Report required
under O. Reg. 170/03 Schedule 22 will be
available for inspection.
West Elgin Municipal Office
22413 Hoskins Line
Rodney, ON
NOL 2C0
Complete for all other Categories.
Number of Designated Facilities served:
Did you provide a copy of your annual
report to all Designated Facilities you
serve?
Yes [ ] No [ ]
Number of Interested Authorities you
report to:
Did you provide a copy of your annual
report to all Interested Authorities you
report to for each Designated Facility?
Yes[ ] No[ ]
Note: For the following tables below, additional rows or columns may be added or an
appendix may be attached to the report
List all Drinking -Water Systems (if any), which receive all of their drinking water from
our system:
Drinking Water System Name
Drinking Water System Number
Southwest Middlesex Distribution System
260005502
Did you provide a copy of your annual report to all Drinking -Water System owners that
are connected to you and to whom you provide all of its drinking water?
Yes [X] No [ ]
Drinking Water Systems Regulations
(PIBS 4435e01) February 2008
Page 1 of 5
'X Ontario Drinking -Water Systems Regulation
Reg. 170/03
Indicate how you notified system users that your annual report is available, and is free of
charge.
1 1 Public access/notice via the web
[X] Public accesslnotice via Government Office
[ ] Public access /notice via a newspaper
[X] Public access /notice via Public Request
[ ] Public access /notice via a Public Library
[ ] Public access /notice via other method
Describe your Drinking -Water System
We receive our water from the West Elgin Water Treatment Plant, which is operated
by the Ontario Clean Water Agency. It serves the towns of Rodney and West Lorne and
rural areas of West Elgin. The distribution system is operated by the municipality of
West Elgin. It consists of approx 160km of watermain, 195 fire hydrants, 19 sampling
stations, Rodney elevated storage tank, 40 chambers for metering, air release, and
draining, and 6 automatic flashers. West Elgin Distribution System has approx 1800
metered customers.
List all water treatment chemicals used over this reporting period
No chemicals are added to the distribution system.
Were any significant expenses incurred to?
[ ] Install required equipment
[ X ] Repair required equipment
[ ] Replace required equipment
Please provide a brief description and a breakdown of monetary expenses incurred
There was approx $5000 spent on watermain repairs.
Provide details on the notices submitted in accordance with subsection 18(1) of the Safe
Drinking -Water Act or section 16 -4 of Schedule 16 of O.Reg.170 /03 and reported to
Spills Action Centre
Incident
Date
Parameter
Result
Unit of
Measure
Corrective Action
Corrective
Action Date
N/A
Drinking Water Systems Regulations
(FIBS 4435e01) February 2008
Page 2 of 5
� o
® Drinking -Water Systems Regulation O. Reg. 170/03
Microbiological testing done under the Schedule 10, 11 or 12 of Regulation 170/03,
durin this renortins: period.
Operational testing done under Schedule 7, 8 or 9 of Regulation 170/03 during the
period covered by this Annual Report.
Number
of
Samples
Range of E.Coli
Or Fecal
Results
(min #) -(max #)
Range of Total
Coliform
Results
(min #) -(max #)
Number
of HPC
Samples
Range of HPC
Results
(min #) -(max #)
Raw
N/A
0.16 -1.85
N/A
Treated
N/A
Distribution
208
0 -0
0 -0
52
<10-330
Operational testing done under Schedule 7, 8 or 9 of Regulation 170/03 during the
period covered by this Annual Report.
NOTE: For continuous
monitors use 8760 as the
number of samples.
NOTE: Record the unit of measure if it is not milligrams per litre.
Summary of additional testing and sampling carried out in accordance with the
requirement of an approval, order or other legal instrument.
Date of legal instrument
issued
Number of
Grab
Samples
Range of Results
(min #) -(max #)
Chlorine(Rodney
Tower)
8760
0.15 -1.70
Chlorine(distribut
ion grab samples)
364
0.16 -1.85
NOTE: For continuous
monitors use 8760 as the
number of samples.
NOTE: Record the unit of measure if it is not milligrams per litre.
Summary of additional testing and sampling carried out in accordance with the
requirement of an approval, order or other legal instrument.
Date of legal instrument
issued
Parameter
Date Sampled
Result
Unit of Measure
N/A
Distribution
N/A
Summary of lead testing under Schedule 15.1 during this reporting period
(applicable to the following drinking water systems; large municipal residential systems, small
municipal residential systems, and non - municipal near -round residential systems)
Location Type
Number of
Samples
Range of Lead
Results
(min #) — (max #)
Number of
Exceedances
_Plumbing
N/A
Distribution
N/A
Summary of Organic parameters sampled during this reporting period or the most
recent sample results
Drinking Water Systems Regulations
(PIBS 4435e01) February 2008
Page 3 of 5
j,r Ontario Drinking-Water Systems Regulation O. Reg. 170103
Parameter
Sample
Date
Result
Value
Unit of
Measure
Exeeedance
THM
Jan 31
84
ug/L
none
(NOTE: show latest annual average)
May 3
66
81
July 25
July 25
81
Oct 31
THM's
Oct 31
73
Annual Average
List any Inorganic or Organic parameter(s) that exceeded half the standard prescribed
in Schedule 2 of Ontario Drinking Water Quality Standards.
Parameter
Result Value
Unit of Measure
Date of Sample
THM's
84
ug/L
Jan 31
66
May 3
81
July 25
73
Oct 31
THM's
76
ug/L
Annual Average
Drinking Water Systems Regulations Page 4 of 5
(PISS 4435e01) February 2008
DRAFT
2011 ANNUAL SITE MONITORING
AND
OPERATIONS REPORT
WEST ELGIN LANDFILL SITE
MUNICIPALITY OF WEST ELGIN
RODNEY, ONTARIO
Prepared for:
Municipality of West Elgin
THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF WEST ELGIN
22413 Hoskins Line, Box 490
Rodney, ON NOL 2C0
Prepared by:
ill WESA
A Better Environment For Business
WESA Inc.
171 Victoria Street North
Kitchener, ON N2H 5C5
Project No. W- B4718 -09
March 2012
Ref: W54718-09 2011 Annual repd March 2012.doc
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 LIMITING CONDITIONS 1
1.2 BACKGROUND AND SITE UP -DATE 2
1.3 SITE SENSITIVITY AND COMPARISON CRITERIA 4
2. 2011 ENVIRONMENTAL MONTORING PROGRAM 5
2.1 METHODOLOGY 5
2.1.1 Groundwater Monitoring Program 5
2.1.2 Methane Vapour Monitoring 6
2.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 6
2.2.1 Site Geology 6
2.2.2 Hydrogeology 7
2.2.3 Methane Vapour Concentrations 9
2.2.4 Groundwater Quality 9
2.2.4.1 Background Groundwater Chemistry and Reasonable Use Calculations 10
2.2.4.2 Leachate Indicator Parameters 10
2.2.5 Site Groundwater Quality 12
2.3 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL LEACHATE IMPACTS ON WETLAND 15
2.3.1 Quality Assessment and Quality Control (QA /QC) 16
2.3.1.1 Summary 16
3. ANNUAL OPERATIONS REPORT 17
3.1 HISTORICAL SITE OPERATIONS 17
3.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 18
3.3 WASTE DISPOSAL 19
3.4 FINAL CONTOURS AND SITE CAPACITY 21
3.5 2011 SITE OPERATIONS 22
3.6 CHANGES TO OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES AND INFRASTRUCTURE 22
4. RECOMMENDATIONS 23
4.1 ANNUAL SITE MONITORING AND REPORTING 23
4.2 ANNUAL OPERATIONS REPORT 23
5. CONTAMINANT ATTENUATION ZONE 24
6. REFERENCES 27
Table 1:
Table 2:
Table 3:
Table 4:
LIST OF TABLES
Groundwater Elevation Data
Methane Vapour Data
Groundwater Geochemistry Data - General and Elemental Metals Scan
Groundwater Geochemistry Data - Volatile Organic Compound Data
�1 WESA
A IknerImlmnmenI Tor Ruin ms
Page i
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Figure 3:
Figure 4:
Figure 5:
Figure 6:
Figure 7:
Figure 8:
Figure 9:
Figure 10:
Figure 11:
Figure 12:
Figure 13:
LIST OF FIGURES
Site Location Map
Site Plan with Air Photo
Site Plan
Location of Cross Sections
Cross Section A -A'
Cross Section B -B'
Groundwater Elevations and Flow Directions May 2011
Groundwater Elevations and Flow Directions November 2011
Groundwater Chemistry May 2011
Groundwater Chemistry November 2011
Final Contours
Revised Landfill Layout
Extent of Contaminant Attenuation Zone (CAZ)
LIST OF APPENDICES
(Appendix A, 8, E, F Not included in Draft Report)
Appendix A: Certificate of Approval
Appendix B: Borehole Logs
Appendix C: Monitoring Well UTM Coordinates
Appendix D: Time - Series Plots for Monitoring Wells
Appendix E: Laboratory Reports of Groundwater Chemical Analyses
Appendix F: Landfill Inspection Forms
Appendix G: Competent Environmental Practitioner Checklists
ill WESA
A Bever FirdronnienA iar Itminess
Page ii
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
1. INTRODUCTION
WESA Inc. (WESA) was retained by The Corporation of the Municipality of West Elgin
(Municipality of West Elgin) to complete the 2011 annual site monitoring and operations for the
West Elgin Landfill site (the site) located near Rodney, Ontario (Figure 1). The monitoring
program consisted of semi- annual (Spring and Fall) monitoring of the site groundwater quality. It
should be noted that "the site" is defined as the study area as a whole (as noted in Figure 2) and
incorporates both on -site (property currently owned by the Municipality of West Elgin) and off -
site components.
The Municipality of West Elgin currently operates the West Elgin Landfill site under the Ministry
of the Environment (MOE) Amended Provisional Certificate of Approval (C of A) for Waste
Disposal Site No. A051101 dated December 21n, 2005 (MOE, 2005) provided in Appendix A of
this report.
Please note that in 2010, the MOE released the Technical Guidance Document entitled
"Monitoring and Reporting for Waste Disposal Sites, Groundwater and Surface Water"
(November 2010) (MOE, 2010). This document provides a recommended table of contents and
contents for annual monitoring reports as well as a checklist to be completed and signed by a
Competent Environmental Practitioner (CEP) as defined in the November 2010 document. The
contents of previous West Elgin Landfill site monitoring reports have been reviewed and
approved by the MOE historically and therefore the structure of this report has not changed. A
brief assessment of any gaps identified in the monitoring report versus the November 2010
document has been conducted in order to assess necessary changes, if any that can be applied in
the next reporting period (i.e. 2012 report). In general, the necessary changes reflect the structure
or lay out of the information and not the information itself.
Although not a requirement as per the CofA, WESA has supplied the checklist (CEP) as an
appendix to this report as discussed below.
1.1 LIMITING CONDITIONS
The conclusions presented in this report represent our professional opinion and are based
upon the work described in this report and any limiting conditions in the terms of
reference, scope of work, or conditions noted herein.
ill WESA
A Belzer Y.mfmnment Far10.tdnem
Page 1
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
The findings presented in this report are based on conditions observed at the specified
dates and locations, and on the analysis of samples for the specified parameters. Unless
otherwise stated, the findings cannot be extended to previous or future site conditions,
portions of the site that were not investigated directly, or types of analysis not
performed.
WESA makes no warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of the information
provided by others, or of conclusions and recommendations predicated on the accuracy
of that information.
Nothing in this report is intended to constitute or provide a legal opinion. WESA makes
no representation as to compliance with environmental laws, rules, regulations or
policies established by regulatory agencies.
This report has been prepared for Municipality of West Elgin and the Ontario Ministry of the
Environment. Any use a third party makes of this report, any reliance on the report, or
decisions based upon the report, are the responsibility of those third parties unless
authorization is received from WESA in writing. WESA accepts no responsibility for any
loss or damages suffered by any unauthorized third party as a result of decisions made or
actions taken based on this report.
1.2 BACKGROUND AND SITE UP -DATE
WESA was retained by the Municipality of West Elgin in 2006 to prepare an environmental
monitoring, and design and operational plans for the site (WESA, 2006). The work components
were completed to fulfill the requirements of the site C of A.
In response to recommendations provided by WESA in the Hydrogeological Investigation and
Design and Operations Report (WESA, 2006) and to the MOE in their comments on the report
(MOE, 2007a and b), WESA was retained by the Municipality of West Elgin to complete a
subsurface investigation and leachate delineation study for the site (WESA, 2007b). The
subsurface investigation and leachate delineation study allowed for delineation of leachate
impacts down - gradient of the landfill (off- site). The study concluded that impacts to groundwater
were identified beyond the property boundaries (off -site) and therefore the site was out of
compliance with the Reasonable Use Guideline (RUL) (B -7) (MOEE, 1994).
ill WESA
A ikner Ennlronni nl For liaLnrAs
Page 2
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
The need for the establishment of a Contaminant Attenuation Zone (CAZ) was identified. Details
pertaining to the CAZ and additional information are provided in Section 5 of this report.
The following actions have been taken by the Municipality of West Elgin, to date, to establish the
recommended CAZ to the south (50 m):
• In the spring of 2009 the municipality hired Contract Land Services to negotiate with Mr.
Crane, the property owner to the south. The purpose was to purchase his property to
fulfill the requirements of the CAZ as recommended by WESA (WESA, 2007).
• From April to June, 2009 Contract Land Services negotiated with Mr. Crane.
• Mr. Crane did not accept any offer presented to him during the negotiations.
• Mr. Crane proposed a purchase price and conditions.
• On June 19th, 2009 a proposal from Mr. Crane was presented to Council. Council did not
accept this offer.
• No further action was taken at that time.
• Donald Prendergast, acting on behalf of Mr. Crane, wrote the Municipality on August
10th, 2010 attaching two real estate opinions on the value of the land. No action was
directed.
• September 29th, 2010 Mr, Prendergast again wrote the Municipality requesting a response
to his correspondence.
• October 21St, 2010 correspondence was sent to Mr. Prendergast advising that Council
agreed that the Municipality was not going to purchase the subjects lands at the quoted
price.
• Upon request from the MOE, the actions and time lines detailed above were
communicated to the MOE in a letter from the Municipality on November 12th, 2010. No
response has been received at this time.
• On January 14th, 2011 a subsequent letter was received by the Municipality of West Elgin
from Donald Prendergast, acting on behalf of Mr. Crane requesting further action on the
issue. The letter details Mr. Crane's request to have the Municipality undertake an
environmental cleanup at the Municipalities' expense and restore his property to a
marketable state or purchase the contaminated lands at market value.
• As of the writing of this report, the Purchase of Sale has been agreed upon by both
parties. Actions to complete the sale are in progress.
Actions to establish the recommended CAZ to the southeast (30 m) have been limited to initial
conversations with the property owner. WESA provided a letter to the MOE (addressed to Ms.
Sybil Kyba dated November 6th, 2009 (WESA, 2009c)) outlining additional information
pertaining to the need for a CAZ to the southeast.
MI WESA
A Better Fni9mnmont For BustnrO,
Page 3
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
A response was provided by the MOE pertaining to this issue in an e-mail from Mr. John
McGlynn on March 18th, 2010. The response noted that the most down - gradient well (MW11)
within the proposed 30 m CAZ to the east of the site, will exceed the RUL; thus, the site would
still be out of compliance with RUL guidelines east of the landfill.
To determine compliance to the southeast, an additional monitoring well was installed down -
gradient of MW11 (Figure 2). The down - gradient well (MW15) was installed as a drive -point
piezometer within a Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW). It should be noted that there is a
notable topographic relief between the location of MW11 and MW15. Direction to install MW15
within the PSW was provided by the MOE (WESA, 2010a). Analytical data from MW15 was used
to determine the extent of the leachate impacts down - gradient of the landfill in a southeasterly
direction.
Through the monitoring of the site over time (semi - annually since 2006) it has been noted that
due to mounding effects there is the potential for a small component of groundwater flow to be
directed towards MW1 (Figure 3). Background water quality on -site has historically been
evaluated on the conditions at MW1. It was therefore determined that MW1 may not be fully
representative of background conditions for the site (WESA, 2009c).
Waste has continued to be placed closer to MW1 which may account for the presence of
indicator parameters. A new background well (MW14) was installed at the site in May 2010
(Figure 2). The new well was installed in response to MOE comments stating that historic
background well (MW1) is not removed from the effects of the landfill and is therefore not
suitable as a background well. RULs have been calculated for the landfill site using analytical data
from data collected at MW14 in 2010.
In addition, the landfill site was re- surveyed in spring 2010. It should be noted that all reference
elevations for the site, including borehole elevations, monitoring well elevations and cross
sections have been updated based an the spring 2010 landfill re- survey.
1.3 SITE SENSITIVITY AND COMPARISON CRITERIA
The RUL Guideline was established by the MOE to determine the reasonable use of groundwater
on properties adjacent to sources of contaminants (such as a waste disposal site). The guideline
allows the determination of acceptable levels of various contaminants that may potentially
migrate from a waste disposal site.
ill WESA
A Boner End onnseni Par Bucinecc
Page 4
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
The limits are calculated considering the natural background quality of groundwater existing and
potential reasonable uses of groundwater in the area. The RULs were calculated using data
collected up to, and including, the 2010 results for the site groundwater and Ontario Drinking
Water Standard, Objectives and Guidelines (ODWS) (MOE, 2006) and will be used to assess the
landfill impacts at this site. With the drilling of MW14 in May 2010, conditions at this location
were concluded to be more representative of background groundwater conditions and therefore
RULs for the site have been recalculated and the tables modified to reflect the change. The
previous RULs were calculated using analytical results from MW1. The background concentrations
used are the values obtained from the 2010 sampling events at MW14 (WESA, 2010).
Analytical results are compared to RUL and /or ODWS and /or background conditions where no
RUL has been established.
2. 2011 ENVIRONMENTAL MONTOR1NG PROGRAM
The methods and results of the 2011 environmental monitoring program (Spring and Fall) are
presented below.
2.1 METHODOLOGY
2.1.1 Groundwater Monitoring Program
The groundwater monitoring programs were conducted on May 16th (Spring) and November 2nd
(Fall), 2011. Water levels were obtained from each monitoring well to calculate groundwater
elevations and flow directions. Locations of the monitoring wells are detailed in Figure 2. All
borehole logs / monitoring well construction logs are provided in Appendix B. A CPS survey was
conducted in 2010 and the data was used to calculate groundwater elevations and flow
direction. The elevations and UTM coordinates for all monitoring wells are included in Appendix
C.
Samples collected were analysed for a series of inorganic parameters (including metals and
chloride) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The Iist of parameters includes, but is not
limited to, the leachate indicator parameters previously established (WESA, 2006) and also
dissolved organic carbon (DOC) as requested by the MOE in their letter dated December 3=d,
2008 (MOE, 2008). All parameters were analyzed to confirm the appropriate indicators.
id WESA
A Beuer F,nNronmem Far BUSIneffi
Page 5
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
All monitoring wells were developed prior to sampling by purging a minimum of three well
volumes or until the well was dry three times. The wells were then sampled using dedicated
Waterra inertial lift foot valves and polyethylene tubing.
Clean, disposable nitrile gloves were worn when sampling. Inorganic parameter and metal
samples were collected in sealed, laboratory provided bottles. Depending on the parameters
analyzed, the appropriate preservative was placed in the bottle by the lab. Care was taken in the
field to limit cross contamination of preservative and loss of preservative during sampling. In
addition, metal samples were field filtered using a 0.45 lam filter. VOC samples were collected in
three, 40mL glass vials with Teflon septa. All samples were stored at approximately 4 °C during
shipment to the laboratory.
Chain of Custody forms accompanied the samples from the field to the laboratory and until
chemical results were presented to WESA. All groundwater samples were submitted to ALS
Laboratories (ALS) of Waterloo, Ontario.
2.1.2 Methane Vapour Monitoring
Methane concentrations were measured using a portable Eagle® combustible gas monitor
calibrated for methane with a multi -gas methane sensor at all groundwater monitoring locations
at the same time as the groundwater elevation measurements. Methane readings in parts per
million methane, % LEL (% of Lower Explosive Limit) and % methane were measured within the
riser pipe at each location.
2.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
2.2.1 Site Geology
The surficial geology in the area of the site is classified into three units. The upper unit is a
lacustrine deep water deposit consisting of sand, silt and day till. These are underlain by
lacustrine shallow water deposits consisting of gravel and sand.
The gravel and sand unit in the area overlies a well laminated to massive clayey silt till. Drift
thickness of the gravel and and units are upwards of 10 m in the area (P.Map, 1973).
WESA
A Eimer Environment For [iu rineAs
Page 6
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
Observations during drilling programs (excluding the boreholes completed in the landfill
material) (WESA, 2006) identified an overlying till unit present across the area. A gravel /sand,
gravel or sand unit that was up to 2.5 m thick was beneath the till and overlying a clay unit. In
places throughout the landfill, some or all the units overlying the day had been removed and
replaced with landfill material.
Boreholes were not advanced more than 2 m into the clay and therefore the full depth of the
clay is not known. Based on MOE wells records for the area the clay extends to the top of
bedrock that is approximately 55 to 70 m below ground surface (bgs).
The distribution of units can be seen in two cross sections that were constructed north- south and
east — west across the site. The location of the cross sections is outlined in Figure 4, and the cross
sections are included as Figures 5 and 6. The additional off -site investigation confirms the geology
in the area (WESA, 2007b).
The bedrock geology in the subject area is described as an inter - bedded limestone and shale with
fossilliferous zones. Bedrock in the area is part of the Dundee formation and is Middle Devonian
in age (P.2544).
2.2.2 Hydrogeology
Historical hydrogeological information for the area suggests that the direction of regional
groundwater flow is generally from the northwest to the southeast towards Lake Erie (Chapman
and Putnam, 1984).
Shallow groundwater flow has been characterized by wells completed within the landfill material
or the native sand and gravel units (with the exception of MW2D). Monitoring well MW2D is
completed within the clay layer that underlies the landfill and is therefore not part of the shallow
groundwater flow system.
Based on the historical site operations as a former sand and gravel pit, it was determined during
the initial hydrogeological investigation on -site where areas of native sand and gravel remained.
These areas were identified along the property boundaries as preferential pathways for leachate
migration (WESA, 2006). The areas were confirmed in 2007 to continue off -site (WESA, 2007a
and b).
il WESA
A Reiter Vmironmrm for IkAdneot
Page 7
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
The results of the initial hydrogeological investigation (WESA, 2006) concluded that the hydraulic
conductivity of the sand and gravel unit (1.0 x 10-3 m /s) is two orders of magnitude higher than
that of the landfill material (1.5 x 10.5 m /s) tested and therefore could act as a preferential
pathway for leachate impacted groundwater to migrate off -site. The clay that is present around
the area has a measured hydraulic conductivity (1.0 x 10.8 m /s) that is two to three orders of
magnitude less than the overlaying units and therefore will help to restrict water and leachate
movement.
Spring 2011
Static groundwater elevation data collected on May 16th, 2011 for the monitoring well network is
summarized in Table 1.
Based on the new survey data collected in 2010, the groundwater within the shallow flow
ranged between 217.44 and 218.94 masl. Groundwater flow was generally towards the
east /southeast.
The high in groundwater flow was located at MW1, completed in native material in the western
portion of the site and the low was located in MWI5, located just off site to the east. A
groundwater elevation map indicating the groundwater flow patterns is shown in Figure 7.
A horizontal gradient of 0.006 was present across the landfill towards the southeast and is
consistent with historical observations (WESA, 2007a, 2008, 2009a, 2010a, and 2011). Vertical
flow between the landfill material, measured in MW2 and clay unit, measured in MW2D was
downward at a gradient of 0.08.
Fall 2011
Static groundwater elevation data collected on November 2 ^d, 2011 is summarized in Table 1.
Based on the new survey data collected in 2010, the groundwater within the shallow flow
ranged between 217.34 and 219.03 masl in the Fall of 2011. Groundwater flow was generally
towards the east. A mound (an area where water levels are elevated above the immediate
surrounding area) in the groundwater table was located along the western property boundary
between MW5 and MW1. The mound causes a component of the groundwater flow in the
southwestern corner of the site to flow towards the south (away from MW5 towards MW10),
which has been seen historically.
WESA
A &Mier Envtmnmem S'nr1Sudne ,
Page 8
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
The high in the groundwater flow was located in MW5, completed in the native material in the
southern portion of the site and the low was in MW15 located just off site to the northeast. A
groundwater elevation map indicating the groundwater flow patterns is shown in Figure 8.
A horizontal gradient of 0.008 was present across the landfill towards the southeast and is
consistent with historical observations (WESA, 2007a, 2008, 2009a, 2010a, and 2011). Vertical
flow between the landfill material, measured in MW2 and clay unit, measured in MW2D was
downward at a gradient of 0.31.
2.2.3 Methane Vapour Concentrations
Methane vapour survey results from each monitoring location are presented in Table 2, along
with an indication of whether the well screen was saturated or not during the time of survey.
Methane concentrations were measured at concentrations below the range detectable by % LEL
at all well locations during the Spring sampling event, with the exception of MW5. The vapour
reading at MW5 displayed >100% LEL, consisting of 9% methane by volume. This is consistent
with historical vapour measurements. The well screen was saturated in MW5 at the time the
monitoring was completed.
During the Fall sampling event methane concentrations were measured at 89% LEL in MW5 with
a 0.5% by volume methane concentration. The well screen was saturated in MW5 at the time
the monitoring was completed.
The highest methane readings were noted in wells located within or below landfill material
(MW2 and MW2D) or in close proximity to historical and /or current land filling operations
(MW4 and MW5).
2.2.4 Groundwater Quality
Groundwater quality results are discussed based on background groundwater chemistry and
leachate characterization. The groundwater quality within the shallow flow and the clay unit are
summarized in Table 3 with RUL and the background groundwater quality established for the
site. The parameters that exceeded the RUL and /or background have been highlighted. As
mentioned earlier in Section 1.3 of this report, new RULs were calculated from groundwater
chemistry data obtained from the new background monitoring well (MW14) at the site.
WESA
A Beare Pmlmnment far Ruin ex,
Page 9
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
Table 4 presents the VOC data. Groundwater chemistry results showing leachate indicator
parameters that exceed the RUL can also be seen in Figures 9 and 10 for the Spring and Fall,
respectively. As well, Appendix D provides time - series plots of leachate indicator parameters for
all monitoring wells (please note that the plots are not at the same scale).
Complete analytical results are presented in the original laboratory certificates of analyses
provided in Appendix E.
2.2.4.1 Background Groundwater Chemistry and Reasonable Use Calculations
The groundwater quality at the site was compared to calculated RUL values based on the
background conditions on -site, as measured in MW14 and the ODWS. Calculated RUL values and
ODWS are listed in Table 3. The current RULs have been calculated using the data from MW14
from two sampling events conducted in May and November 2010.
2.2.4.2 Leachate Indicator Parameters
Historically, leachate has been characterized by high concentrations of:
• Ammonia, alkalinity, arsenic, chloride, DOC, iron and sodium (WESA, 2006)
In 2007, the additional investigations and the historical analytical results were reviewed and the
list of leachate indicator parameters re- assessed. The off -site groundwater quality, the natural
features located off -site (wetlands) and the surrounding properties' current and historical
operations were used in this review. Based on this information DOC and iron are not believed to
be solely representative of leachate impacts originating from the landfill and therefore were
removed from the definitive leachate indicator parameters and were not used to delineate
leachate impacts off -site. However, as requested by the MOE in their letter dated December 3rd,
2008 (MOE, 2008), DOC has been added to the leachate impact parameter list.
The landfill is positioned adjacent to a series of wetlands (northwest property boundary) and
provincially significant wetlands (east property boundary). As a result of the wetlands in close
proximity to the landfill and the groundwater monitoring wells, the DOC reported in the wells
could be attributed to secondary sources and not just from leachate.
�i WESA
A Eimer Rn,ironmen[ F'or iimsFnraa
Page 10
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
In addition, deforestation activities have occurred on the property adjacent to the southwestern
property boundary (MW9). Deforestation could also attribute elevated DOC within the
groundwater (MW9). Further evaluation of DOC concentrations are required to determine if
DOC is in fact indicative of leachate impacts at this landfill.
Iron concentrations are variable across the site. Higher concentrations have been noted in down -
gradient wells (MW3, MW10 and MW11) than in wells completed within the landfill material
(MW2) and wells with known leachate impacts (MW6 and MW7). In addition iron has been
noted in background well MWI4. Given this trend iron concentrations cannot be fully attributed
to landfill activities but may be signs of localized impacts due to metal storage on -site. On its
own iron is not representative of leachate impacts but in conjunction with other parameters, such
as chloride, it can be an indicator for leachate impacts.
Organic Nitrogen concentrations are often used to assess the impacts of leachate and are
sometimes preferred over just using ammonia concentrations for groundwater. The concentration
of Organic Nitrogen is based on a calculation using the concentrations of ammonia and TKN
reported in a sample. Organic Nitrogen will be used in conjunction with ammonia to assess
leachate impacts.
Based on the information presented above, a revised list of leachate indicator parameters has
been prepared. The revised parameter list is believed to be representative of leachate impacts
associated with the site.
• Ammonia/ Organic Nitrogen, alkalinity, arsenic, chloride, DOC, iron, and sodium
The leachate indicator parameters are used to assess the quality of groundwater and will be used
to monitor changes in groundwater chemistry at each sampling location. It should be noted that
although certain parameters (i.e. iron) are leachate indicator parameters for the site, they often
occur naturally (Le. at non- impacted wells) at concentrations above RUL and /or ODWS.
Therefore, concentrations of leachate indicator parameters are compared to background
concentrations to assess leachate impact.
Upon comparison of the groundwater chemistry at one or more monitoring locations to
calculated RULs, ODWS and background conditions several parameters exceed the set value.
Although exceedences were noted, the parameters are not considered leachate indicator
parameters for this site. The parameters include colour, hardness, TDS, fluoride, sulphate, boron,
and manganese.
ill WESA
A Heuer En,imneni Far HuJnrsc
Page 11
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
As discussed in previous reports (WESA 2006, 2007a and b), the natural occurrence of these
parameters provide evidence that they are not necessarily indicative of leachate impact. A
discussion with respect to TDS, manganese, sulphate and boron parameters within the
groundwater is provided below for completeness, as per MOE request (MOE, 2009a).
It is recognized that chloride represents the most mobile of the contaminant indicator parameters
encountered and would be expected to be the first contaminant indicator parameter to reach a
monitoring location if leachate migration was occurring. Concentrations of chloride will be
monitored closely to evaluate the migration of leachate impacts off site.
2.25 Site Groundwater Quality
The analytical results observed during the monitoring events are, in general, consistent with those
historically observed and reported for the site.
The following table summarizes exceedences of the RUL for the established leachate indicator
parameters for the 2011 sampling events:
ill WESA
A Etter Environment For Rndnenc
Page 12
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report
West Elgin Landfill Site
DRAFT
Summary of RUL Exceedances
Well Location
Well
Flow
Regime
Spring RUL'
Exceedances
Fall RUL Exceedances
Up- gradient
MWI
Shallow
Ammonia and Alkalinity
Alkalinity
Leachate
MW2
Shallow
Ammonia, Alkalinity,
Chloride, DOC, Arsenic,
Iron and Sodium
Ammonia, Alkalinity, DOC,
and Iron
Down - gradient -
East
MW3
Shallow
Ammonia, Alkalinity,
DOC and Iron
Ammonia, Alkalinity, DOC,
Arsenic, and Iron
Down- gradient --
Southeast
MW4
Shallow
Ammonia, Alkalinity,
DOC and Iron
Ammonia, Chloride,
Alkalinity, DOC and Iron
Down - gradient-
Southwest
MW5
Shallow
Ammonia, Alkalinity and
Iron
Ammonia, Alkalinity, DOC,
and Iron
Down - gradient —
South, off -site
MW6
Shallow
Ammonia, Chloride,
Alkalinity, DOC and Iron
Ammonia, Alkalinity, DOC
and Iron
Down gradient
East
MW7
Shallow
Ammonia, Chloride,
Alkalinity, DOC and
Sodium
Ammonia, Chloride,
Alkalinity, DOC and
Sodium
Down - gradient —
East, off -site
MW8
Shallow
Ammonia, Alkalinity and
DOC
Ammonia, Alkalinity and
DOC
Down - gradient —
South, off -site
MW4
Shallow
Ammonia
Ammonia
Down - gradient —
West, off -site
MW10
Shallow
None
None
Down - gradient —
East, off -site
MW11
Shallow
Ammonia, Alkalinity and
DOC
Ammonia, Chloride,
Alkalinity, DOC, and
Sodium
Down - gradient —
East, off -site
MW12
Shallow
None
None
Leachate - Clay
MW2D
Deep
Ammonia and DOC
Ammonia and DOC
Background
MW14
Shallow
None
Iron
Down - gradient —
East, off -site
MW15
Shallow
Ammonia, Alkalinity and
DOC
Ammonia, Chloride,
Alkalinity and DOC
Please note that there is no RUL for the leachate parameter ammonia: therefore ammonia is compared to average value calculated
in the background well.
ill WESA
A Bencr EnLironinelll Fnr ll ]idneu
Page 13
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
The concentration of ammonia was compared to background levels as measured in MWI4. The
results were above the background levels in all wells, with the exception of MW10, MW12 and
MW14 in the Spring. The results were above the background levels in all wells, with the
exception of MW1, MW10, MW12 and MWI4 in the Fall.
The following general trends with respect to the leachate indictor parameters and additional
parameters TDS, manganese, sulphate and boron were noted;
• Leachate indicator parameters have exhibited an increasing trend in 2011 in monitors
MW4, MW5, and MW7, however concentrations do not exceed historic maximums for
any of these parameters, except for chloride at MW4, ammonia at MW5, and alkalinity
in MW7. The level of alkalinity in MW1 exhibited an increase in the fall of 2011.
• The sulphate concentrations exceeded the RUL in MW1 and MW2 (spring only).
Concentrations in these wells appear relatively stable with respect to historic sampling
events. Concentrations of TDS were above the RUL for monitoring locations MW1,
MW2, MW2D (spring only), MW3, MW4, MW5, MW6, MW7, MW8, MW9 (fall only),
MW11, MW12, MWI4 (Spring only) and MW15. For those locations at which TDS
exceeded the RUL for only one of the sampling events, it is noted that TDS exceeded the
background for the other event. This is similar to historic sampling events;
• Boron concentrations were below the RUL at each location monitored in 2011;
• In the Spring and Fall, manganese concentrations exceeded the RUL in MW2, MW3,
MW4, MW5, MW6, MW7, and MW11. Concentrations also exceeded the RUL in the Fall
in MW8, MW9 and MW15.
Monitoring well MW2D, located within the landfill material was completed within the clay to
see the effects of the landfill activities on the clay layer. The RUL was exceeded for leachate
indicator parameter DOC and ammonia in Spring and Fall 2011. As in the background well
(MWI4) concentrations of these parameters are not necessarily indicative of leachate impacts. It
should be noted however that due to the thickness of the day unit beneath the landfill (55 to
70 m based on MOE well records) and the tested hydraulic conductivity (see Section 2.2.2), the
leachate impact, if identified at this location would be restricted to the upper clay and it is
unlikely that leachate impact would extend to deeper aquifers.
The results of the VOC analyses had concentrations of all parameters measured below the ODWS
in Spring and Fall 2011. A few parameters were detected above the laboratory detection limit but
below the ODWS and followed historical trends. Benzene was noted in MW4 in Spring 2011 and
MW5 in Spring and Fall 2011. Benzene has been noted in MW4 and MW5 since May 2006.
WESA
A Reiter Kmironmeni y'nr S.kineae
Page 14
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
Chlorobenzene was noted in MW5 as was noted historically. These parameters will continue to
be monitored to assess their impacts on the site.
2.3 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL LEACHATE IMPACTS ON WETLAND
MW15 was installed as a drive -point piezometer into the adjacent wetland to assess the potential
impacts of the leachate on the wetland. Up- gradient groundwater monitoring well MW11 has
notable leachate impacts (exccedences of the RUL for Ammonia, Alkalinity and DOC). A
substantial topographic relief (decrease by — 5m) is noted between ground surface at MW11 and
MW15.
Water levels in MW15, and therefore within the wetland, are within range of those seen in the
groundwater monitoring wells on -site and therefore are representative of groundwater
discharging conditions within the wetland at the time monitoring was completed. In addition to
water level data, the consistent concentration of hardness within the background groundwater
(MW14) and wetland (MW15) also confirms groundwater discharging conditions.
To assess any impacts, the water quality sample collected from MW15 in Spring and Fall 2011 was
compared to background groundwater quality and leachate characteristics for the site. The
sample had high concentrations of ammonia, chloride (Fall only), alkalinity and DOC (above the
site RUL) as well as concentrations of sodium above background groundwater concentrations and
low concentrations of chloride, sulphate and nitrate (Spring only).
The presence of chloride above the RUL within the water sample collected from MW15 in Fall
2011 indicates that leachate is reaching the wetland. Background groundwater concentrations of
chloride (4 mg/L at MW14) were reported but no notable other possible sources of chloride (no
road salt, septic systems etc.) were identified and therefore there are low levels of naturally
occurring chloride in the groundwater on -site. Concentration of chloride in MW11 was reported
at 236 mg/L in Fall 2010 and 136 mg/L of chloride was reported in MW15. Chloride is
conservative and therefore is not remediated or attenuated along the groundwater flow path.
The reduced concentration at MW15 can be attributed to dilution within the wetland.
Within the wetland, high levels of DOC can be attributed to rotting plant matter and not a direct
result of leachate. High ammonia concentrations are indicative of anaerobic activity within the
wetland that is further supported by low sulphate, low nitrate and high iron concentrations.
WESA
A Reeler Pinironmenl Por Rusinces
Page 15
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
In comparing concentration trends between MW15 and up- gradient well MW11 the following is
noted; ammonia is higher in MW15 than MW11, sulphate is much lower in MW15 than MW11
and iron higher in MW15 than MW11 (below laboratory detection limits).
As noted above some dilution of leachate reaching the wetland is occurring but based on
chloride concentrations the dilution is not sufficient to reach RUL conditions. The water chemistry
in the wetland (MW15) is indicative of an anaerobic reducing system with enhanced de-
nitrification potential /conditions and therefore acts to provide natural treatment of leachate.
2.3.1 Quality Assessment and Quality Control (QA/QC)
For QA /QC purposes, a duplicate field sample was collected for the general chemistry
parameters, metals and VOCs from MW5 in the spring and a field blank was collected for VOCs
in the fall. The analytical results indicated good correlation between samples (Table 3 and 4).
2.3.1.1 Summary
Based on the concentration trends of the leachate indicator parameters (as seen in the
concentration versus time graphs provided in Appendix D) trends can be noted and conclusions
made with respect to the leachate characterization for the site.
. Historic groundwater flow has indicated that at times a mound is present within the landfill area
that results in a component of groundwater flow to the south, southwest. This is reflected in the
trends in concentration over time at MW4 and MW5. Overall groundwater flow, however, is to
the east and southeast to the topographic low where a wetland is located. The former
background location MW1 indicates that there may be minor leachate impacts at this location.
Evidence is noted based on the increase in chloride concentrations in Spring 2009 as well as other
parameter concentrations at this location. The MW1 data indicates that concentrations of other
indicator parameters have fluctuated since that time, however have remained relatively stable or
within historic ranges.
MW14 was installed as a new background well in May 2010. The data for MW14 indicates that
indicator parameter concentrations are relatively stable and low in comparison to the other
monitors. Concentration levels in MW9 (down - gradient and off -site to the south) and MW10
(down- gradient and off -site to the west) have similar trends to that seen in the background well
with concentrations of chloride well below the RUL and no leachate impacts noted. The wells
located down- gradient and to the east (MW7 (on- site), MW8, MW11, and MW12) again all show
similar concentration trends over time to each other.
WESA
h Heuer Emironmem For Hudnm
Page 16
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
MW15 located down - gradient to the east and off -site, only has 3 sets of data to interpret. It
appears that chloride concentrations are increasing, however further monitoring is warranted.
The monitoring welt locations have various degrees of leachate impact with impacts at MW7,
MW8 and MW11 and no impacts at MW12, with the exception of a DOC exceedance in Fall
2009. Concentration trends in the remaining wells, MW3 and MW6 do not follow the groups of
trends at other locations but show leachate impacts.
The down - gradient boundary wells that are currently used to assess compliance with the
reasonable use policy include MW3, MW4 and MW7. Based on the Reasonable Use Guideline,
the wells used to assess compliance must be located on -site and therefore until the CAZ for the
site can be established (as per the steps detailed above) off -site wells (MW6, MW8, MW9,
MW11, MW12 and MW15) cannot be used to assess the compliance of the site with the
Guideline. Exceedances of RULs for leachate indicator parameters were noted in the compliance
wells (MW3, MW4 and MW7) and therefore the site is currently not in compliance with the
Reasonable Use Guideline at the property boundaries. In addition, off -site impacts were noted
with exceedances of RULs for leachate indicator parameters reported in off -site down- gradient
wells (MW6, MW8, MW11 and MW15).
Based on the actions detailed in Section 1.1 steps are being taken to establish a CAZ for the site.
Once the CAZ has been established for the site, adjustments to the reasonable use assessment will
be made and a contingency plan put in place to ensure compliance with the reasonable use
policy.
3. ANNUAL OPERATIONS REPORT
3.1 HISTORICAL SITE OPERATIONS
The West Elgin Landfill site has been in operation since 1971. A Provisional Certificate of
Approval (A051101) was first issued in 1971 and reissued in 1972, 1973, 1974, and 1976. On July
16th, 1980 the MOE reissued a Provisional Certificate of Approval (C of A) to the Village of
Rodney.
The MOE issued an amendment to the C of A on December 21nd, 2005 (Appendix A). A
Hydrogeological Investigation and Design and Operations Report was completed by WESA and
submitted to the Director of the MOE for approval on September 1ct, 2006 (WESA, 2006).
WESA
A Elmer F.n,irnnmenl Fm famine .
Page 17
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
3.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The West Elgin Landfill site is owned by the Municipality of West Elgin, and operated and
maintained under contract from the Municipality by a company operated by Mr. Sam Kirschner.
The site is located on Lot E3, Concession 7 former Township of Aldborough, West Elgin
Municipality, County of Elgin (Figure 1).
The landfill services the entire Municipality of West Elgin. The population served is
approximately 5,500 which is estimated to increase to approximately 6,000 during the summer
months.
Adjacent land uses to the site include a low lying wood lot, wetlands and agricultural fields to the
northwest, an aggregate (sand and gravel pit) to the northeast, a wood lot and low Tying
wetlands to the southeast, and land consisting of grasses, shrubs and trees to the southwest.
General topography, surface water drainage, and the hydrogeological assessment of the site are
included in Section 2 of this report.
There is one access road entering the site from the northwest at Downie Line. The gate across the
access road is locked whenever the landfill is closed or the attendant is not present.
The site is bounded at each property boundary by natural forest and marshlands that deters
illegal access to the site. A temporary access road is maintained to access the active landfill area.
This road will be modified accordingly as waste disposal proceeds.
There is one attendant building on -site that is constructed on grade. There are no utilities
(electricity, gas, water, sanitary sewers, or phone) to the site. The site operator has a cell phone
in case of emergencies.
Existing signs include an entrance sign and signs denoting bins for recyclable material. As per
Condition 16 of the Amended C of A, the entrance sign states the owner's name and hours of
operation, the operator's name, the Provisional Certificate of Approval No., the type of waste
accepted, and a contact telephone number to call with complaints or in the event of an
emergency.
Landfill operating hours are from Sam to 5pm on Wednesday and Friday, and 9am to 4 pm on
Saturday. From December to March the operating hours change to 10am to 5pm on Wednesday
and Friday, and 9am to 4 pm on Saturday.
WESA
A Netter pn ironmenl For Nis6nm
Page 18
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
Waste disposal records are kept at the local municipal offices. The Municipality of West Elgin
maintains a record of daily site operations, a record of complaints, a record of site inspections,
and a record of unacceptable waste as per Conditions 25 through 28 of the C of A, at the local
municipal offices.
During the environmental monitoring events, WESA completes a landfill inspection and
maintenance record to determine if any adjustments are required for the operation of the West
Elgin Landfill. The completed inspection records for Spring and Fall 2011 are included in
Appendix F.
The inspections noted the following:
• metal can recycling area was overflowing in May 2011 — action taken to remove
excessive quantities in time for the following inspection in November 2011
• fence repair required in the vicinity of MW6
• labels required for tin, metal, and asphalt piles
• MW2D riser pipe requires fixing — to be completed in 2012
3.3 WASTE DISPOSAL
The West Elgin Landfill site is currently licensed for the disposal of domestic and commercial
waste.
No waste surveys were conducted in 2011, however surveys conducted in 2007 and 2008
identify the source of the waste and recyclable materials, and the number of bags disposed each
day. All surveys conducted have consistently confirmed the types of wastes and recyclables
collected at the West Elgin Landfill.
In May 2007, WESA conducted a one -day waste audit to provide an approximate average
weight per bag of waste, as well as per car, truck, and van load accepted at the West Elgin
Landfill. In addition, the number of bags of waste collected from residential versus commercial
sources was counted during the survey.
Based on the May 2007 waste survey, the assumed average weight per bag is 5 kg and the
assumed number of bags per car, truck, and van is 3.4, 3.2, and 3.4, respectively. The measured
weight for pick -up runs from the residential areas has also been used to calculate the total
amount of waste coming into the landfill.
ill WESA
A Better Fntimnmenl For liusintm
Page 19
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
As part of the daily records, the Municipality tracks the number of cars, trucks, and vans entering
the facility to drop off waste. In addition, they also track the pick -ups from local residential
communities and trailer parks. Based on the average weight per bag, per car, per truck and per
van, as well as the total brought in for commercial and residential pick -ups, the total waste
brought for deposit in the West Elgin Landfill in 2011 was approximately 540 tonnes.
Domestic waste represents greater than an estimated 90% of the waste entering the landfill. The
domestic waste was delivered by commercial hauler or individual drop -off and is typically
comprised of the following:
• Mixed household garbage
• Plastic
• Glass
• Aluminum and tin cans
• Scrap metal
• Roof shingles
• Newspapers
Large items such as discarded appliances, furniture, and mattresses, are collected by the haulers or
delivered to the waste disposal site for recycling, re -use or deposition at the landfill. Clean wood
and brush are collected in a pile to the west of the approved waste limits and burned.
Commercial waste represents less than an estimated 1% of the waste generated in the
municipality. Commercial waste is delivered by commercial hauler and includes:
• Paper and cardboard
• Restaurant kitchen waste
• Scrap metal
• Plastics
Based on the information supplied to WESA by the Municipality, the West Elgin Landfill recycled
a combined estimated average total of 175 tonnes of material in 2011. The Municipality diverted
approximately 32.4% of the total material the landfill received in 2011.
The following is a breakdown of the recycled material received at the site, on an average annual
basis (average calculated from estimated quantities of recyclables in 2004 through 2011):
• Scrap metal, 77.2 tonnes
111i WESA
A Heuer Froiron moot For Rudne&e
Page 20
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
• Glass, 22.3 tonnes
• Paper, 23.3 tonnes
• Plastic, 35.3 tonnes
• Aluminum and steel cans, 13.3 tonnes
• Cardboard, 13.1 tonnes
3.4 FINAL CONTOURS AND SITE CAPACITY
The final contours plan is shown in Figure 10. The Municipality of West Elgin has placed cement
blocks to delineate the limit of the landfill in adherence to Figure 11. The final contours are based
on the local topography of the site and the estimated footprint area of 1.42 hectares. All side
slopes will be constructed to a maximum 25% grade. The crown of the landfill will be
constructed to a minimum 5% grade to promote surface water runoff.
In 1984, MOE staff estimated the site capacity to be 100,600 m3 (MOE 2003). Prior to this time,
the site did not have an approved capacity. Based on the final contours plan included in this
report as up -dated based on the 2010 survey data, the total site capacity is 106,110 m3.
Using this site capacity and based on the May 2010 contours at the site, the estimated quantity of
in -place waste in December 2011 was 80,829 m3.
Based on an estimated annual waste input rate of 365 tonnes, a compaction density of 0.5
tonne /m3 and a waste to cover ratio of 4:1, the annual air space utilization rate for the site is
calculated to be 911 m3 /annum. Using the estimated quantity of in -place waste, calculated
utilization rates, and a projected annual population (ie., waste) growth rate of 0.5% over the
next 25 years, the estimated life of the landfill is 26 years from December 2011 (that is, until
December 2036). The estimated remaining site capacity as of December 2011 is 25,280.23 m3. In
2010 it was suggested that the estimate remaining site capacity could extend longer, however in
2011 the quantity of waste input into the landfill increased from the 2010 quantity.
Note that any estimate of remaining site life is highly sensitive to variations in waste
characteristics, waste generation rates, cover material utilization, waste compaction and recycling
efforts. The above projection of site life should therefore be interpreted as a rough estimate only,
and should be reviewed annually against actual changes in the landfill volumes.
ill WESA
A ISetler Fe,imnmen[ For Bohm;
Page 21
2011 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report DRAFT
West Elgin Landfill Site
3.5 2011 SITE OPERATIONS
The Hydrogeological Investigation and Design and Operations Report prepared by WESA
(WESA, 2006) provides a detailed phased development plan for landfill operations over the site
life.
In 2010, day was placed on the edge of the laneway as final cover, however no other final cover
has been placed on the landfill foot print. Interim cover is placed over the active face on a
weekly basis. All locations that are not part of the active face should be covered with 300 mm of
intermediate cover material as discussed in the WESA 2006 report. The Municipality has placed
cement blocks to visually delineate the 30 m buffer area so that the site operator can place waste
to the edge of the design area without extending into the buffer area.
As per Condition 18 of the Amended C of A, cover or suitable alternative must be placed over
the entire active face at the end of every operating week. In 2011, daily soil cover was placed on
the active face at the end of each operating day.
The Hydrogeological Investigation and Design and Operations Report prepared by WESA
(WESA, 2006) outlines the requirement for active face operations at the landfill. The active face
should be kept to a maximum width of 10 m wide. The height of the active face should be the
shorter of 1.5 m or the distance to the final waste contour. Site inspections in 2011 indicate that
the active face is within the 10 m width requirement and the height is less than the 1.5 m
recommendation. Site inspection forms are provided in Appendix F.
The natural surface water drainage at the site is controlled by the low topographic relief. There
are no on -site drains and little evidence of surface water ponding or channels identified during
WESA's site visits. The landfill is situated on a local topographic high and therefore surface water
run -off has not been a problem.
According to the site operator, the site did not have concerns associated with litter, noise, dust,
odour, or vectors in 2011. The site currently maintains a record of complaints received about the
site or any environmental emergency situations that occur at the site at the local municipal
offices. There were no complaints in the log for 2011.
3.6 CHANGES TO OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
There were no changes to operational procedures or infrastructure.
WESA
A Bolter Pnttmnnsea l For @Lsinexs
Page 22
WESA
A Better Environment For Business
7c1)k
WESA Inc,
171 Victoria Street North
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2H 5C5
Tel: 519 -742 -6685 Fax: 519 -742 -9810
Ernail: wesakw @wesa,ca www.wesa.ca
March 15th, 2012
Project No. W- B4718 -00 -12
Mrs. Norma Bryant
The Corporation of the Municipality of West Elgin
22413 Hoskins Line, Box 490
Rodney, ON NOL 2C0
Re: West Elgin Landfill 2012 Site Monitoring and Operations Proposal
Dear Mrs. Bryant:
WESA Inc. (WESA) is pleased to provide a work plan and cost estimate to complete the 2012 site
monitoring program at the West Elgin Landfill Site. The work plan was developed based on
recommendations provided in the 2006 Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report for the
West Elgin Landfill Site prepared by WESA in April 2007 and requirements set out by the Ministry
of the Environment (MOE) in Certificate of Approval (C of A) Number A051101 for the site dated
December 2P, 2005.
The work plan and costs may be subject to change if and when comments are received from the
MOE with respect to the 2011 report Annual Site Monitoring and Operations Report due to the
MOE in April 2012.
The work plan is further described below.
WORK PLAN
Task 1 - Spring 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program
Task 2 - Interim Assessment of Monitoring Results
Task 3 - Fall 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program
Task 4 - Interim Assessment of Monitoring Results
Task 5 - Annual Analysis and Reporting
Task 6 - Meeting Attendance
Gatineau • Kingston • Kitchener • Montreal • Ottawa • San Salvador • Sudbury • Toronto • Yellowknife
West Elgin Landfill 2012 Site Monitoring and Operations Proposal Page 2
Task 1 and 3 - Spring and Fall 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program
The on -site groundwater monitoring network is composed of fifteen (15) monitoring wells and
one (1) stand point well in the adjacent wetland. Groundwater sampling in the Spring and Fall
2012 will take place in accordance with the bi- annual sampling schedule for the site as outlined in
the table below. (It should be noted that there is no MW13 on- site).
Well
Sampling Frequency
Analytical Parameters
All monitoring wells (MWT, MW2, MW2D,
MW3, MW4, MW5, MW6, MW7, MW8,
MW9, MW10, MW11, MW12, MW 14, MW
15) + QA /QC
(1 duplicate for general chemistry and metals
parameters and trip blank for VOC)
Bi- annually
(Spring and Fall)
General Chemistry and
Metals, and VOC
Groundwater elevations will be calculated at each location to confirm the direction of
groundwater flow. A minimum of three well volumes will be purged or the well will be purged
three times dry prior to sampling. Water samples will be collected from each location and
submitted for analyses to ALS Laboratory Group of Waterloo, Ontario.
Samples will be analyzed for general chemistry parameters (Alkalinity, Ammonia, Colour,
Conductivity, DOC, pH, TDS, Turbidity, Nitrate, Nitrite, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)
Phosphorus, Sulfate, Chloride, Fluoride, Anion/ Cation Sum, Hardness, Ion Balance, Langelier
Index and Saturation pH), a general metals scan (Al, Sb, As, Ba, Be, Bi, B, Cd, Ca, Cr, Co, Cu, Fe,
Pb, Mg, Mn, Mo, Ni, P, K, Se, Si, Ag, Na, Sr, TI, Sn, Ti, W, U, V, Zn, Zr), and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs).
One field duplicate sample (analyzed for general chemistry parameters and metals) and a trip
blank sample (analyzed for VOC) will be collected for Quality Assurance and Quality Control
(QA /QC) purposes.
As part of the 2013 monitoring program, methane concentrations will also be measured in the
Spring and Fall of 2012 at the groundwater monitoring locations. The measurements will be
taken concurrently with the groundwater elevation measurements using a portable Eagle®
combustible gas monitor calibrated for methane with a Multi -gas methane sensor.
West Elgin Landfill 2012 Site Monitoring and Operations Proposal Page 3
Tasks 2 and 4 - Interim Assessment of Monitoring Results
Following the Spring and Fall sampling events, the groundwater data will be added to the site
chemistry database and reviewed. A letter summarizing the results of the groundwater
monitoring and highlighting any anomalies will be prepared. The need for additional monitoring
events and potential changes to analytical parameters and monitoring frequencies will be re-
evaluated at that time.
Task 5 - Annual Analysis and Reporting
In accordance with the C of A, a report on the development and operation of the site, including
the monitoring program, will be submitted to the MOE by April 30, 2013 based on the
information collected in 2012.
This report will present the findings of the two preceding monitoring events (Spring and Fall
2012) and will make recommendations for any additional work or actions that may be required
during subsequent monitoring periods.
Based on the assessment of the results from the previous monitoring period as well as historical
data, recommendations will be made for on -going site monitoring with respect to the number of
locations, frequency of monitoring and the necessary geochemical parameters for analyses. Any
recommended modifications to subsequent monitoring programs will be presented to the
Municipality of West Elgin and the MOE for their approval prior to modifying future programs.
Please note that in 2010, the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) released the Technical
Guidance Document entitled "Monitoring and Reporting for Waste Disposal Sites, Groundwater
and Surface Water" (November 2010). This document provides a recommended table of
contents and contents for annual monitoring reports as well as a checklist to be completed and
signed by a Competent Environmental Practitioner (CEP) as defined in the November 2010
document. The contents of previous West Elgin Landfill site monitoring reports have been
reviewed and approved by the MOE historically and therefore the structure of the 2011 report
was not changed. A brief assessment of any gaps identified in the monitoring report versus the
November 2010 document was conducted in order to assess necessary changes, if any, that can
be applied in the next reporting period (i.e. 2012 report). Although not a requirement as per the
CofA, WESA supplied the CEP checklist as an appendix to the 2011 report. The cost below reflect
those which we see necessary to adjust the report to the new technical guidance document.
www.wesa ca
West Elgin Landfill 2012 Site Monitoring and Operations Proposal Page 4
Task 6 - Meeting Attendance
WESA personnel look forward to continuing to work closely with the Municipality of West Elgin
and its Municipal Council. Presentation of annual reports, project updates and the resolution of
issues over the course of the project will be addressed through meetings with WESA and the
Municipality of West Elgin. One meeting a year has been assumed for budget purposes.
PROJECT SCHEDULE AND COST
WESA personnel are available to begin work immediately upon proposal review and acceptance
by The Municipality of West Elgin. Our estimate of costs for carrying this proposed work plan is
provided below in Table 1.
Table 1
Project Costs
Disbursements
Task
Description
Professional
Fees
Expenses
Laboratory
Expenses
Totals
1 & 3
Environmental Monitoring
$7,125
$1,945
$8,930
$18,000
2 & 4
Interim Assessment of
Monitoring Results
$2,700
$0
$0
$2,700
5
Annual Analysis and Reporting
$3,425
$100
$0
$3,525
Meeting Attendance & Project
Management
$4,125
$200
$0
$4,325
Totals
$17,375
$2,245
$8,930
$28,550
The estimated total upset budget for this project is $28,550. WESA will not exceed this budget
without prior approval from The Municipality of West Elgin. This budget includes all professional
fees and disbursements, but does not include the HST.
www.wesa.ca
West Elgin Landfill 2012 Site Monitoring and Operations Proposal Page 5
CONFIDENTIALITY
All information, data, material, etc. gathered as a part of this study shall be treated as confidential
and shall only be discussed with The Municipality of West Elgin unless otherwise directed.
No contacts will be made to any third party without your full knowledge and approval. The
contents of this proposal are considered confidential information, and as such is to be kept strictly
confidential and shall not be disclosed in any form whatsoever to any other person, entity or
corporation, without the prior express written permission of WESA.
CLOSING
If the terms of this proposed work plan are agreeable to you, please sign one copy of the
proposal in the knowledge that this constitutes a legal contract between WESA and The
Municipality of West Elgin. We are prepared to start work upon receipt of the signed proposal
from The Municipality of West Elgin.
Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this work plan and cost estimate for the 2012 site
monitoring program.
If you have any questions, or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to
contact the undersigned at (519) 742 -6685 x218.
Sincerely,
WESA Inc.
AM
S'rana Scholes, B.A.Sc., P.Geo.
Project Manager/ Engineer
Encl.
Ref; W8471842 2012 Proposal March 2012. cloc
R; w w R w e s a M c a
Macdon d, M.Sc., P.Geo.
Principal /Senior Hydrogeologist
1111 WESA
A Better Environment For lousiness
Cl(c)
WESA Inc.
171 Victoria Street North
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2H 5C5
Tel: 519-742-6685 Fax: 519.742 -9810
Email: wesakwewesa,ca www.wesa.ca
March 15, 2012
Project No. W- 64718 -00 -13
Mrs. Norma Bryant
The Corporation of the Municipality of West Elgin
22413 Hoskins Line, Box 490
Rodney, ON NOL 2C0
Re: West Elgin Landfill 2012 Waste Audit Report and Work Plan Proposal
Dear Mrs. Bryant:
WESA Inc. (WESA) is pleased to provide a work plan and cost estimate to complete a Waste
Audit for the West Elgin Landfill. The work plan was developed based on recommendations
provided in the 2011 Waste Recycling Plan prepared by WESA Inc. in November 2011. The
purpose of the waste audit will be to confirm the current recyclable diversion waste for the
Landfill and identify the amount of recyclable material not currently being diverted.
The following is a brief description of our proposed approach and estimated costs for the service.
PROJECT DETAILS
INITIAL CONSULTATION AND SETUP
The first step in conducting the waste audit will be the collection of background data. To limit
travel time, it is anticipated that some of this information can be collected remotely, with the
balance obtained during the morning of the first day of the audit. Background data will include
confirming and updating current waste management practices, products and operations at the
West Elgin Landfill (some of this can be obtained from previous reports). Information from the
waste collection contractors and recyclable collection contractors will be requested, and will be
used in the estimation of annual waste generation numbers. The final phase of the setup period
will be scheduling the waste sorting and examination phase of the study. This phase will estimate
the amounts of recyclable materials found in the garbage, to set a baseline for increased
diversion.
Gatineau • Kingston • Kitchener • Montreal • Ottawa • San Salvador • Sudbury • Toronto • Yellowknife
West Elgin Landfill 2012 Waste Audit Report and Work Plan Proposal Page 2
WASTE AUDIT METHODOLOGY
Two audit events will take place in order to collect a representative amount of information. One
will take place in the summer and one in the winter months.
Waste and recyclable bags taken to the landfill while the landfill is in operation, on a specified
day, will be randomly opened and the materials will be sorted, categorized, weighed and
recorded as follows:
• Every 5th bag from general domestic waste will be opened sorted and categorized
(le: from single axle vehicles)
Every 3rd truck (multiple axle vehicles) will have its contents unloaded in a specific location, that
is separated but close to the normal waste disposal area. Care will be taken to record the origin
of the vehicle and that the same trucks are not being singled out unnecessarily.
The audit will separately sort and categorize material picked up and designated as recycling and
material picked up and designated as waste. This separation will be necessary in order to
calculate an existing waste diversion rate and a potential waste diversion rate.
The audit will involve sorting the waste into various categories, and then weighing each category
as the day progresses. The waste categories will include paper (newsprint, phonebooks,
corrugated cardboard), metals (aluminum, steel and mixed metal), plastics ( #1, 2 and 4) and
Glass.
A landfill staff member and a student intern from WESA will undertake this work.
ON SITE ACTIVITIES
It is estimated that it will take one person approximately one day to sample, sort and weigh the
waste arriving at the landfill, on both occasions.
WESA will provide one waste sorter on site to conduct the sorting of wastes; however, for
familiarity of wastes and efficiency of sorting, it is suggested that the municipality of West Elgin
provide one of their own staff to assist with the sorting of the waste. A calibrated weigh scale is
also required - if the municipality cannot supply a weigh scale, then WESA will supply one.
www.wesa.ca
West Elgin Landfill 2012 Waste Audit Report and Work Plan Proposal Page 3
Materials segregated from the waste stream for recycling will be weighed and sorted during the
audit and the data compared with data provided by the various waste disposal companies.
DATA ASSESSMENT AND REPORTING
The waste sorting data will be compiled and estimates made of the annual waste generated. This
information will be used to complete the waste audit summary. The waste audit conducted by
WESA will address the following: the amount, nature and composition of the waste; the amount
of recyclable material currently being picked up as a separate waste stream and the amount of
recyclable material currently being disposed of in the waste stream. Prior to finalizing the waste
audit data, WESA will provide the draft data to the municipality staff to discuss the results and
identify any irregularities in the data.
The waste audit results will be used to update your existing waste reduction work plan. The
waste audit will highlight the landfills major waste categories, allowing the municipality to review
and tweak waste diversion efforts on the major contributors to their waste stream, thereby
permitting a more cost effective approach to waste reduction.
In WESA experience, the quantitative data generated by a waste audit can provide excellent
justification for recommendations related to behavioural, procedural or process changes that
would result in improved the quality and quality of the waste disposed of in the landfill , as well
as potentially long -term waste management cost savings.
COST ESTIMATE
Based on the scope of work presented above, WESA has prepared a cost estimate for the
completion of the waste audits and waste reduction work plans, assuming that one WESA staff
member will be on -site to conduct the audit with another staff member provided by the
Muncipality.
Task
professional
Fees
Expenses
Totals
Waste audit and reports
$3,410
$700
$4,110
Note:
This quotation is exclusive of all applicable taxes.
West Elgin Landfill 2012 Waste Audit Report and Work Plan Proposal Page 4
This quotation is on an estimated fee basis for work in accordance with the above scope of work
and estimate of hours. The final fee will be based on actual hours worked and costs, and is not
expected to exceed the estimated maximum above. However, should these amounts prove to be
insufficient, the municipality will be approached for discussion and approval before further work
is completed.
SCHEDULE
WESA staff are available with two to three weeks notice to undertake the waste audit and waste
reduction workplan project. It is recommended that the audit be performed in March and in
July.
CONFIDENTIALITY
All information, data, material, etc. gathered as a part of this proposal shall be treated as
confidential and shall only be discussed with municipality of West Elgin unless otherwise directed.
AU queries on the project from the public, news media, etc. will be referred to municipality of
West Elgin. No contacts will be made to any third party without the full knowledge and
approval of the client.
The contents of this proposal are considered confidential information, and as such is to be kept
strictly confidential and shall not be disclosed in any form whatsoever to any other person, entity
or Corporation, without the prior express written permission of WESA. The addressee further
agrees that they shall make no reproductions, copies or other facsimiles of said information,
except as required for their own internal use, without the prior written permission of WESA.
www.wesa.ca
West Elgin Landfill 2012 Waste Audit Report and Work Plan Proposal Page 5
Thank you again for this opportunity to provide you with a proposal. We would welcome the
opportunity to continue our work relationship with municipality of West Elgin. Please feel free to
call the undersigned if you have any questions at (519) 742 -6685 x218.
Sincerely,
WESA Inc.
S`rana Scholes, B.A.Sc., P.Eng.
Project Engineer
Encl.
Ref W84718 -13 Waste Audit Proposal March 2012.docx
www.wesa.ca
Lianne Sinclair, P.Eng., EP(CEA)
Senior Management Systems Consultant
-19E-
WEST ELGIN ARENA
2012 BUDGET
2011 BUDGET
REVENUE
2011 ACTUAL 2012 BUDGET
Ice Rental $ 150,000 $ 186,664.35 $ 185,000
Facility Rental $ 1,000 $ 385.00 $ 1,000
Sign Rental $ 2,000 $ 1,950.00 $ 2,000
Food Booth $ 4,500 $ 5,432.96 $ 5,000
Public Skating $ 5,000 $ 1,473.67 $ 2,000
Skate Sharpening $ 3,000 $ 2,337.62 $ 3,000
Vending Machine $ 1,000 $ 1,017.83 $ 1,000
Donations /miscellaneous $ $ 40.00 $
Socan Revenue $ $ $
Special Fundraising $ $ $
TOTAL REVENUE $ 166,500 $ 199,301.43 $ 199,000
EXPENSES
Salaries -Full Time $ 95,000 $ 87,554.97 $ 95,000
Salaries -Part Time $ 15,000 $ 29,158.56 $ 28,000
CPP- Employer Share $ 1,000 $ 1,183.72 $ 1,000
UIC- Employer Share $ 700 $ 708.89 $ 700
Employer Health Tax $ 500 $ 554.69 $ 500
WCB $ 500 $ 611.59 $ 500
Clothing Allowance $ 650 $ 202.62 $ 650
Mileage $ 100 $ $ 100
Education and Training $ 2,000 $ - $ 2,000
Board Member Per Diem $ 2,500 $ 2,250.00 $ 2,500
Bookkeeping fees $ 2,400 $ 2,400.00 $ 2,400
Legal Fees $ - $ $ -
Insurance $ 13,000 $ 13,537.80 $ 14,000
Auditors Fees /Expenses $ - $ $ -
Membership Dues $ 500 $ 468.17 $ 500
Office Supplies & Misc $ 1,200 $ 291.47 $ 500
Advertising & Promotion $ 1,200 $ 668.80 $ 1,200
Telephone $ 3,500 $ 3,205.02 $ 3,500
Safety Supplies and Materials $ 2,500 $ 1,150.67 $ 2,500
Bad Debts $ $ 75.00 $ -
Hydro/water $ 55,000 $ 79,880.66 $ 85,000
Union Gas $ 10,000 $ 7,335.77 $ 9,000
Food Booth Maintenance $ 2,000 $ 814.23 $ 2,000
Building Maintenance $ 25,000 $ 27,060.57 $ 25,000
Cleaning Supplies $ 4,000 $ 3,696.38 $ 4,000
Refridgeration System Main. $ 10,000 $ 9,758.16 $ 10,000
Tools & New Equipment $ 500 $ 21.38 $ 500
Parking Lot Maintenance $ 2,500 $ 1,423.01 $ 2,500
-19F-
Equipment maintenance $ 5,000 $ 4,846.15 $ 5,000
Equipment Fuel $ 25 $ $
Special Fundraising Expense $ - $ $
Winter Program Expenses $ 1,500 $ 161.38 $ 500
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 257,775 $ 279,019.66 $ 299,050
SURPLUS(DEFICIT) $ - $ - $ -
NET SURPLUSI(DEFICIT) $ (91,275) $ (79,718.23) $ (100,050)
WEST ELGIN SHARE $ (56,444) $ (49,297.75) $ (61,871)
DUTTON /DUNWICH SHARE $ (34,831) $ (30,420.48) $ (38,179)
$ (91,275) $ (79,718.23) $ (100,050)
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES /REVENUE
(EXPENSED SEPARATELY)
Front door replacement $ 6,500 $ $ 6,500
Public address system $ 5,000 $ $ 5,000
Concession fire system $ 5,000 $ 3,094.00 $
M. H. storage room(1/2 cost) $ 5,000 $ 7,913.09 $
Less WLMH 50% $ $ (3,956.55)
Resurfacer $ $ $ 75,000
TOTAL CAPITAL $ 21,500 $ 7,050.54 $ 86,500
WEST ELGIN SHARE $ 13,296 $ 4,360.05 $ 53,492
DUTTON /DUNWICH SHARE $ 8,204 $ 2,690.49 $ 33,008
$ 21,500 $ 7,050.54 $ 86,500
GRAND TOTALS - OPERATIONS & CAPITAL:
WEST ELGIN
DUTTONIDUNWICH
CALCULATION FOR DEFICIT:
WEST ELGIN -FIRST 20% +52.3%
DUTTONIDUNWICH - 47.7%
13- Mar -12
$ 69,740
$ 43,035
$ 53,657.80
$ 33,110.97
The 2012 Budget does not include depreciation as per the Public Sector Accounting
Board requirements.
$ 115,363
$ 71,187
-14-
WEST ELGIN ROADS
2011 2011 2012
BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET
MAINTENANCE
A BRIDGES & CULVERTS $ 20,000 $ 7,965 $ 30,000
(includes video /flushing program)
B -1 GRASS MOWING /SPRAYING $ 4,000 $ 7,545 $ 4,000
B -2 BRUSHING $ 20,000 $ 17,890 $ 40,000
B -3 DITCHING $ 12,000 $ 14,899 $ 20,000
B -4 CATCH BASINS $ 5,000 $ 3,279 $ 5,000
B -5 DEBRIS /LITTER PICK -UP $ 2,000 $ 1,046 $ 1,500
C -1 PATCHING HARDTOP $ 10,000 $ 2,703 $ 10,000
C -2 SWEEPING /CLEANING $ 2,000 $ - $ 2,000
C -3 SHOULDER MAINTENANCE $ 2,000 $ - $ 2,000
C -4 RESURFACING $ 8,000 $ 3,928 $ 8,000
D -2 GRADING & SCARIFYING $ 4,000 $ 4,754 $ 4,000
D -3 DUST LAYER $ 140,000 $ 99,566 $ 140,000
D -5 GRAVEL RESURFACING $ 280,000 $ 274,920 $ 280,000
E -1 SNOW PLOWING & REMOVAL $ 15,000 $ 5,385 $ 15,000
E -2 SANDING & SALTING $ 25,000 $ 19,152 $ 25,000
F SAFETY DEVICES $ • 8,000 $ 8,653 $ 8,000
G -1 DRAIN REPAIRS * ** $ 55,000 $ 20,438 $ 52,700
K MISCELLANEOUS WORK - CTY /OTHERS $ - $ 29,110 $
J MAINTENANCE OVERHEAD $ 80,000 $ 87,827 $ 85,000
TOTAL MAINTENANCE $ 692,000 $ 609,060 $ 732,200
CONSTRUCTIIONIEQUIPMENT
TRACTOR BUY BACK $ 6,000 $ 9,057 $ 8,000
BUILDING /STORAGE SHED MAINTENANCE $ 6,000 $ 2,015 $ 6,000
KEARNS PIT REHAB /FENCING /MINING /MORTAGE $ 40,000 $ 24,498 $ 70,000
YARD PAVING $ 10,000 $ - $ 10,000
EQUIPMENT $ 10,000 $ 14,246 $ 325,500
WEST LORNE PAVING $ 40,000 $ 88,302 $ -
RODNEY PAVING $ 40,000 $ 38,848 $
QUEEN ST PAVING - GRAHAM TO KERR $ - $ $ 80,000
BRIDGE & CULVERT ON GOING MAINT. $ 20,000 $ $ 20,000
FURNIVAL RD PAVED SHOULDER - PIONEER TO SCHOOL
(UNDER SIDEWALK BUDGET)
14 -A
2011 2011 2012
BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET
BLACKS RD RECONSTRUCTION $ 95,000 $ 99,778 $ 95,000
MARSH LINE /KERR UPGRADING(FED Gas Tax monies) $ 159,622 $ 215,615 $ 108,088
GREY LINE AT KERR- CULVERT $ 80,000 $ - $ 80,000
CULVERT REPLACEMENT - SILVER CLAY(under maint) $ 12,000 $ $
QUEEN ST E /SILVER SURFACE TREATMENT $ 56,000 $ 69,605 $
C44 REPAIR $ 12,000 $ - $ 12,000
COMPUTERS (2) $ - $ $ 5,000
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION $ 586,622 $ 561,964 $ 819,588
LABOUR & BENEFITS $ 675,000 $ 672,168 $ 690,000
EQUIPMENT $ 125,000 $ 72,477 $ 66,500
FUEL $ 125,000 $ 137,001 $ 125,000
ROAD RESERVE $ 65,000 $ 65,000 $ -
TOTAL EXPENDITURE $ 2,268,622 $ 2,117,670 $2,433,288
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
GRADER #1 $ 5,000 $ 9,366 $ 10,000
SWEEPER $ 500 $ - $ 500
. TRUCK #7 $ 46,500 $ 5,033 $ 6,500
TRUCK #8 -10 $ 5,500 $ 5,394 $ 5,500
TRUCK #9 -10 $ 2,000 $ 4,803 $ 2,000
TRUCK #11 $ 2,000 $ 5,380 $ 2,000
TRUCK #12 -09 $ 5,500 $ 6,239 $ 5,500
TRUCK #17 $ 6,500 $ 12,562 $ 6,500
TRACTOR #5 $ 1,000 $ 2,028 $ 1,000
LOADER #6 $ 2,000 $ 2,149 $ 4,000
LOADER #18 $ 2,000 $ 1,559 $ 2,000
BACKHOE #10 -09 $ 2,000 $ 2,407 $ 2,000
MOWERS $ 22,000 $ 379 $ 500
GRADER #2 $ 10,000 $ 7,005 $ 10,000
TRAILER $ 1,000 $ 383 $ 500
PICKUP #1 $ 6,500 $ 3,663 $ 3,000
PICKUP #3 $ 3,000 $ 2,165 $ 3,000
PICKUP#4 -11 $ 1,000 $ 985 $ 1 ,000
PICKUP #15 $ 1,000 $ 977 $ 1,000
TOTAL EQUIPMENT EXPENSE $ 125,000 $ 72,477 $ 66,500
-14B-
** *DRAINAGE EXPENSE
2011 2011 2012
BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET
MAINTENANCE $ 10,000 $ $ 10,000
MISC TILE REPAIRS $ 10,000 $ 12,347 $ 10,000
MCKENZIE DRAIN $ 29,000 $ $ 17,000
SEGEDIN DRAIN $ - $ 67 $ -
LUNN DRAIN $ $ 7,545 $ -
DANBY DRAIN $ 5,000 $ - $ 5,700
WIEHLE DRAIN $ 1,000 $ 479 $
HOOKAWAY DRAIN $ $ $ 1,500
WILLSIE DRAIN $ $ $ 1,400
AXFORD DRAIN $ $ $ 3,100
MORDEN DRAIN $ $ $ 4,000
TOTAL DRAINAGE EXPENSE $ 55,000 $ 20,438 $ 52,700
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE:
GENERAL $ 20,000 $ 14,966 $ 20,000
COUNTY REVENUE $ 12,500 $ 44,729 $ 2,500
PROV ONTARIO - SJS $ 1,000 $ 1,618 $ 1,000
FEDERAL GAS TAX MONIES $ 164,081 $ 164,081 $ 164,081
UNFINANCED CAPITAL OPERATIONS(FGT) EXP 11 $ 4,459 -$ 51,534 $ 55,993
TRANSFER FROM RESERVES $ - $ - $ 105,000
NET TO LEVY ON TAXES $ 2,075,500 $ 1,840,742 $2,196,700
2012 EXPENDITURE INCREASE 5.8%
The 2012 Budget does not include depreciation as per the Public Sector Accounting Board
requirements.
SUMMARY OF RESERVES
RESERVES:
ROADS
COUNTY
-14C-
DEC 31/10 ADDED USED DEC 31111
2011 2011
$ 319,702 $ 65,000 $ - $ 384,702
$ 4,951 $ - $ 4,951 $
DEC 31/11 ADDED USED DEC 31/12
2012 2012
RESERVES:
ROADS $ 384,702 $ - $ 105,000 $ 279,702
COUNTY $ - $ - $ - $
COUNTY ROADS SUMMARY
REVENUE
EXPENSE
SURPLUS
TRANSFER TO /FROM RESERVE
2011 2011 2012
BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET
$ 393,520
$ 155,000
$
$ 393,520 $ 417,944
$ 199,962 $ 155,000
$ $
-$ 4,951
NOTE: ANY SURPLUS TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THE COUNTY EQUIPMENT /HOUSING
RESERVE.
-14D-
WEST ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
5 YEAR REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT PLAN
YEAR EQUIPMENT
EST COST
ANNUAL
TOTAL
2012 WASH BAY $ 200,000
TRUCK #7(PAINT,BODY,BOX) $ 40,000
PICKUP #1 (PAINT, BODY) $ 4,500
LAND PURCHASE $ 30,000
BH #10 - CLAW BUCKET $ 5,000
TRUCK #11 $ 46,000 $ 325,500
2013 TRUCK #17 $ 235,000 $ 235,000
2014 GRADER #2 $ 330,000 $ 330,000
2015 PU TRUCK #1 & 3,LOADER #6 $ 220,000 $ 220,000
2016 PU TRUCK #15, TRUCK #12 $ 270,000 $ 270,000
NOTE: PRICE ESTIMATES WITHOUT TRADE AND TAXES
EQUIPMENT PURCHASES
ESTIMATE ACTUAL
2011 DISC MOWERS (2) $ 20,000
2011 TRACTOR BUY BACK $ 8,000
$ 14,246
$ 9,057
-14E-
WEST ELGIN ROAD DEPARTMENT
CAPITAL WORKS PROJECTS
2012 PROJECTS:
Blacks Road ongoing
Yard paving
Building /storage shed maintenance
Gas Tax monies - finance balance UFCO in 2012
Gas Tax monies - Kerr Road, McoII, Grey
C44 culvert erosion repair
Grey Line at Kerr Rd culvert replacement/erosion repair
Queen Street (Graham to Kerr(edge creep repair)
Kearns Pit
Bridge & culvert maintenance as per Engineers Report (2012) ongoing repairs
FUTURE CAPITAL PROJECTS:
Queen St reconstruction west of Graham
Gas Tax monies - Kerr Road
Hoskins Line repaving
Centre Street - Rodney - repaving 2013
Surface treatment program
Bridge & culvert maintenance as per Engineers Report (2012) ongoing repairs
Sidewalks in West Lorne(Main Street -Ridge to Graham - north /south) - CIP
COUNTY ROADS PROJECTS:
Rail road tracks east of West Lorne on Pioneer - run off area
Cooperative maintenance programs.
The above projects are completed using our own staff but out of the County
budget.
-14F-
MUNICIPALITY OF WEST ELGIN
COUNTY OF ELGIN ROAD REPORT
AS AT DECEMBER 31, 2011
2011 2011
BUDGET ACTUAL BALANCE
BRIDGES & CULVERTS
A Bridges & culverts $ 16,125 $ 19,361 $ (3,236)
ROADSIDE MAINTENANCE
B -1 Grass mowing & Weed spraying
8 -2 Brushing, Tree Trimming & removal
B -3 Ditching
B -4 Catchbasins, Curb & Gutter Cleaning
8-5 Debris & litter pickup
TOTAL ROADSIDE MAINTENANCE
$ 52,000
$ 12,278
$ 35,360
$ 10,873
$ 7,290
$ 2,712
$ 68,513
$ (16,513)
HARDTOP MAINTENANCE
C -1 Patching & spray patching $ 23,914
C -2 Sweeping, flushing, cleaning $ 9,270
C -3 Shoulder Maintenance - grading $ 26,734
patching, washouts, dust layer
C -4 Resurfacing $ 3,281
TOTAL HARDTOP MAINTENANCE $ 61,092 $ 63,199 $ (2,107)
LOOSETOP MAINTENANCE
D -1 Patching & washouts $ -
D-2 Grading & scarifying $
D -3 Dust Layer $ -
D-4 Prime or priming $ -
D-5 Gravel resurfacing $
TOTAL LOOSE TOP MAINTENANCE $ $ $
WINTER CONTROL
E -1 Snow plowing & removal $ 30,752
E -2 Sanding & salting $ 90,437
E -3 Snow plowing & sanding & salting $ 46,574
E-4 Winter standby & patrol $ 41,197
TOTAL WINTER CONTROL $ 194,200 $ 208,960 $ (14,760)
SAFTEY DEVICES
F Safety devices, signs, guiderails $ 44,359 $ 61,200 $ (16,841)
SUB TOTAL - MAINTENANCE $ 367,776 $ 421,233 $ (53,457)
OVERHEAD - 7% $ 25,744 $ 29,486 $ (3,742)
TOTAL MAINTENANCE AND OVERHEAD $ 393,520 $ 450,719 $ (57,199)
RECONSTRUCTION:
KERR /MCOLL /GRAY /BEATTIE ROADS
KERR /MCCOLL /GRAY ROADS
REVENUE:
2010/2011 GAS TAX ALLOCATION
UNFINANCED CAPITAL FOR YEAR
UFCO BALANCE DEC 31.10/11
FINANCED DURING YEAR
TOTAL UFCO DEC 31.11
-14G-
GAS TAX ALLOCATION
2011 2011 2012
BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET
$159,622 $ 215,614.56 $ -
$ - $ $108,088
$164,081 $ 164,080.58 $164,081
$ - $ 55,992.58 $ -
$ - $ 55,992.58 $ -
$ 4,459 $ 4,458.60 $ 55,993
$ - $ 55, 992.58 $ -
2012 GAS TAX ALLOCATION $164,081 $ 164,081
BALANCE TO EXPENSE -$ 159,622 $ -
FUTURE BUDGETS:
2013 GAS TAX ALLOCATION $164,081
axxtir'rpttli#v of
C-7(e)
tot Alin
TO: COUNCIL OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF WEST ELGIN
FROM: JOANNE GROCH, ADMINISTRATOR/TREASURER
DATE: MARCH 19, 2012
RE: GARBAGE AND RECYCLING COLLECTION RATES
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT the rates for Rodney Garbage and Recycling collections and the West
Lorne Garbage and Recycling collections be calculated using the tax ratios
established by the County and that a special levy tax rate be charged for each
village for the residential, multi - residential and commercial classes.
INTRODUCTION:
Council has requested a report on the charges for garbage and recycling
collections as to how they are levied for the Municipality (Village of Rodney and
the Village of West Lorne). The purpose of this report is to outline the present
system for charging for garbage and recycling collections in each of the Villages
and to look at alternatives.
BACKGROUND:
RURAL AREAS:
The only area outside of the Villages having municipal collections is Evandale
and they are charged the same rate as the West Lorne residents. All other
residents in the former "Township" area either take their refuse to the landfill site
or they contract with a private collector.
RODNEY:
The rates for Rodney Garbage and Recycling Collection are currently based on
an equal tax rate on all assessable properties within the residential, commercial,
industrial and farm classes. There is no weighted assessment used and
therefore all classes pay the same rate. Exempt properties (e.g. churches,
schools) are not assessed and do not pay for collections. The Aldborough Public
School does not have collection from the municipality and arranges for its own
collections. There are no collections for industrial properties and farm classes
22413 Hoskins Line, Box 490, Rodney, Ontario NOL 200 Tel: (519) 785 -0560 Fax: (519) 785 -0644
even though they are paying for it. Some commercial properties or multi unit
properties pay the contractor for bins if required.
The actual costs for collections are monitored against the revenue received from
taxes and the surplus or deficit is carried forward from year to year. At the end of
2010 there was a surplus of $15,413 which can be used to offset increases in
future years.
WEST LORNE:
The rates for West Lorne Garbage and Recycling collection are currently based
on a per unit charge — residential charge is $115.00, commercial charge is
$143.75. The charges are levied as a local improvement charge on the final tax
billing. There is no adjustment for partial year service. Information for the
charges on 591 properties is taken from the assessment roll and is reviewed
periodically. This has to be done manually and is time consuming to make sure
all properties are included.
There is no charge for churches and farm properties. The schools arrange for
their collections separately. There are no industrial collections. Some
commercial properties or multi unit properties pay the contractor for bins if
required.
The actual costs for collections are monitored against the revenue received from
taxes and the surplus or deficit is carried forward from year to year. At the end of
2010 there was a surplus of $ 18,020 which can be used to offset increases in
future years.
DISCUSSION:
Section 326 of the Municipal Act, 2001 gives the authority to a municipality to
identify a special service and designate the area in which property owners
receive the service and determine the method of apportioning the costs for the
special service. For example the costs can be levied as charge against
properties as is done now in West Lorne or it can be charged as a rate on all
rateable property as is done in Rodney.
All municipal services, county services, education costs are levied as rates on
assessable properties on the final municipal tax billing. Garbage and recycling
collections are municipal services and therefore should be levied as a rate on
the final tax billing. Each village would have its own rate based on the cost for
the service. This will treat all property owners in the municipality the same for
municipal services.
2
I have attached a comparison on Page 4 of residential properties and
commercial properties in Rodney and West Lorne between 2011 and 2012 using
a tax levy based on weighted assessment. As there are no collections for the
industrial and farm classes I have not included them in the calculation. In
Rodney as there is an increase of assessment, there is a slight decrease in
residential rates even though the individual assessments have increased. On the
commercial properties there is an increase due to the use of the tax ratios in the
calculation. On an assessment of 127,000 In West Lorne residential properties
would pay $115.00. Those assessed over 127,000 will be paying more and
those under 127,000 will be paying Tess depending on the assessment.
a-L-6A
Joanne Groch, B.A., AMCT
Administrator/Treasurer
3
COMPARISON OF CHARGES BETWEEN 2011 AND PROPOSED 2012
NOTE: PROPOSED RATE WAS CALCULATED USING 2012 ASSESSMENT
WITH 2011 COSTS.
* *PROPOSED RATE — NO INDUSTRIAL, PIPELINE OR FARM ASSESSMENT
RODNEY:
2012
2011 CHARGES ASST /CLASS PROPOSED RATE **
TAX RATE
$ 95.51 2011- 125,500 RT
2012 -130,000 RT $91.13
$199.38 2011 — 262,000 RT
2012 — 271,000 RT $189.98
$226.59 2011 — 297,750 CT
2012 — 298,000 CT $342.10
$155.24 2011 — 204,000 CT
2012 - 205,000 CT $235.34
WEST LORNE:
2011 CHARGES
FLAT RATE
$287.50 2 comm.
$632.50 3 res +2 comm.
$115.00 RES
$115.00 RES
2012
ASST/CLASS PROPOSED RATE **
238,000 CT $352.89
58,500 CT $ 86.74
42,500 RT $ 38.48
TOTAL $125.22
150,000 RT $135.81
127,000 RT $115.00
4
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Tlyeffautricipaiitg of
(7 (-1)
rot Pgitt
COUNCIL OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF WEST ELGIN
NORMA BRYANT, CLERK
MARCH 22, 2012
CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK / VULNERABLE SECTOR
SCREENING
RECOMMENDATION:
1. THAT West Elgin share in the costs of advertising this service.
2. THAT a notice be placed on the municipal website.
INTRODUCTION:
In the past the OPP have attended their detachment office in Dutton /Dunwich
every Tuesday to perform criminal record checks. Dutton /Dunwich was advised
that this function would no longer be provided and those needing this check
would have to go to St. Thomas detachment office.
DISCUSSION:
Dutton /Dunwich requested the OPP to revisit this issue. Although not part of the
mandate of the administrative assistants, one has agreed to attend at the
Dutton /Dunwich detachment office once a month. She will be at the detachment
office from 8:00 a.m. to 4 p.m. on the following dates:
Friday April 20th
Friday May 18th
Friday June 15th
Monday July 30th
Friday August 17th
Friday October 19th
Friday November 16th
Friday December 21st
This is a valuable service for West Elgin residents as well. The cost for a normal
criminal record check (work related) is $25.00 and there is no charge for
volunteers. Dutton /Dunwich has asked if West Elgin would share in the costs of
advertising in the Chronicle.
Respectfully submitted
Norma I. Bryant
Clerk
22413 Hoskins line, Box 490, Rodney, Ontario NOL 200 Tel: (519) 785 -0560 Fax: (519) 785 -0644
Ministry of
Municipal Affairs
and Housing
Municipal Services Office -
Weste rn
659 Exeter Road, Zoe Floor
London ON N6E 1L3
Tel. (519) 873 -4020
Toll Free 1- 800- 265 -4736
Fax (519) 873 -4018
February 28, 2012
Ms. Norma Bryant, Clerk
Municipality of West Elgin
22413 Hoskins Line
P. O. Box 490
Rodney, ON, NOL 2C0
Ministere des
Affaires municipales
et du Logement
Bureau des services aux municipalites -
region de I'Ouest
659, rue Exeter, 2e etage
London ON N6E 1 L3
Tel. (519) 873 -4020
Sans frais 1 800 265 -4736
Telec (519) 873 -4018
D
L,X Ontario
Subject: Notice of Passing of a Zoning By -law Amendment
By -law no. 2012 -11
Walter Bianco, 23573 Gray Line
Part of Lot 11, Concession X1V (Aldborough Township)
Municipality of West Elgin
IIMICIPALITV OF WEST NI-0114
_ Pec {v
AR 9 2 2012
Dear Ms. Bryant:
Thank you for forwarding the notice of passing for the above noted application. The subject
lands are located on the shore of Lake Erie on the south side of Gray Line and are re -zoned
from the Agricultural (A1) Zone to the Lakeshore Residential (LR) Zone with a holding (`H'
symbol). The zoning by -law amendment will permit three lots to be used for residential
purposes. The related consent application was conditionally approved by the County of Elgin
Land Division Committee under application # E 65/11.
As communicated in our letter dated December 9, 2011, (attached) it is noted that the lands are
located in the "Lakeshore Area" designation and a portion of the subject lands are shown as
"Woodlands" on Schedule B, Map 2 and Figure 7, Map 2 in the Municipality of West Elgin
Official Plan.
The applicable policies would include, among others:
• Section 3.3.7, "Woodlands, ANSI's and Valleylands ";
• Section 3.3.8, "Meaning of Development and Site Alteration "; and,
• Section 3.3.9 "Impact of Development Site Alteration ".
Of note is Section 3.3.7 of the Official Plan which states:
"Development and site alteration shall only be permitted in significant woodlands,
significant ANSI's and significant valleylands where it is demonstrated that there will be
no negative impact on the natural heritage feature or on its ecological functions."
Determination of "no negative impact" is through an Environmental Impact Study, as set out in
Section 3.3.9 of the Official Plan.
In the absence of the appropriate analysis which the Environmental Impact Study would
provide, it is not clear how the decision of the Municipality to re -zone the lands to permit
residential uses conforms with the applicable policies of the Official Plan.
2
The West Elgin Official Plan policies implement the Provincial Policy Statement, particularly
Section 2.1 (Natural Heritage). Municipal Council must have regard to matters of provincial
interest as outlined in Section 2 of the Planning Act, and must be consistent with the Provincial
Policy Statement 2005 (PPS) when exercising their land use planning authority under the
Planning Act.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 519 -873 -4031 or by e -mail at
Tammie. Ryall[}ontario.ca
Yours truly,
Tammie Ryafl, MCIP, RPP
Planner
Copy: Amanda McCloskey, MNR, Aylmer District Office
Val Towsley, LTVCA
Ted Haiwa, Community Planners
Susan Galloway, County of Elgin
Ministry of
Municipal Affairs
and Housing
Municipal Services Office -
Western
659 Exeter Road, 2ntl Floor
London ON N6E 1L3
Tel. (519) 873 -4020
Toil Free 1 -800- 265 -4736
Fax (519) 873 -4018
December 9, 2011
Ms. Norma Bryant, Clerk
Municipality of West Elgin
22413 Hoskins Line
P. O. Box 490
Rodney, ON, NOL 2C0
iill[nistere des
Affaires municipales
et du Logement
Bureau des services aux municipafites -
region de I'Ouest
659, rue Exeter, 2e etage
London ON N6E 1L3 •
Tel. (519) 8734020
Sans frais 1 800 265 -4736
Teiec (519) 873 -4018
t"-- Ontario
FZLE COPS
Subject: Notice of Public Meeting
Zoning By -law Amendment
Walter Bianco
23573 Gray Line
Part of Lot 11, Concession X1 V (Aldborough Township)
Municipality of West Elgin
Dear Ms. Bryant
Thank you for forwarding the notice of the public meeting for the above noted application. The
subject lands are located on the shore of Lake Erie on the south side of Gray Line and are
proposed to be re -zoned from the Agricultural (A1) Zone to the Lakeshore Residential (LR)
Zone. The proposed zoning by -law amendment will permit three lots to be used for residential
purposes. The related consent application was conditionally approved by the County of Elgin
Land Division Committee under application # E 65/11.
We have reviewed the proposal and provide the following comments for consideration. It is
noted that the lands are located in the "Lakeshore Area" designation and a portion of the subject
lands are shown as "Woodlands" on Schedule B, Map 2 and Figure 7, Map2 in the Municipality
of West Elgin Official Plan. As such, the Municipality should consider how this proposed zoning
change would conform with the applicable policies of the Official Plan. The applicable policies
would include, among others: Section 3.3.7, "Woodlands, ANSI's and Valleylands ", Section
3.3.8, "Meaning of Development and Site Alteration" and Section 3.3.9 "impact of Development
Site Alteration". Of note is Section 3.3.7 of the Official Plan which states:
"Development and site alteration shall only be permitted in significant woodlands,
significant ANSI's and significant valleylands where it is demonstrated that there will be
no negative impact on the natural heritage feature or on its ecological functions."
The Ministry circulated the Notice of the Public Meeting to the Ministry of Natural Resources for
review of natural heritage interests. The following information is provided for the subject
property. "SC" stands for species of concem and "END" stands for endangered.
Species at Risk
An initial screening of the property has revealed several known occurrences in the lands
surrounding the project site. These occurrences are:
2
Hooded Warbler (SC)
Purple Twayblade (End)
Broad Beech Fern (SC)
Yellow- breasted Chat (SC)
Acadian Flycatcher (End)
Woodland Vole (SC)
American Badger (END)
Significant Woodland
There appears to be a woodlot that is approximately 2ha on the subject property. As well, the
property falls within 120m of two woodlands which are approximately 20ha (also along the Lake
Erie Shoreline) and 30ha (across the road).
Significant Wetlands
There are no Provincially Significant Wetlands on or adjacent to the site. However, there are
unevaluated wetlands within the woodlot surrounding the project site.
Significant Wildlife Habitat
Significant wildlife habitat (SWH) may be present within the study area. Please note that SWH
is to be considered separately from species at risk habitat. The province has not been surveyed
comprehensively for SWH, and MNR data relies on observers to report sightings and activity,
Please consult the Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide, (OMNR, 2000). Significant
wildlife habitat is identified by planning authorities using the criteria and processes recommend
in the Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (OMNR, 2000).
Conclusion
Due to the need to address the natural heritage policies of the Official Plan, and the comments
from the Ministry of Natural Resources, this Ministry recommends that the impact of the
proposed land use change on the natural heritage features on and adjacent to the subject lands
should be reviewed prior to passing the zoning by -law amendment.
This Ministry and the Ministry of Natural Resources are available to answer any questions or
provide clarification. Please contact me at 519- 873 -4031 or by e-mail at
Tammie. Ryall(a�ontario.ca
Yours truly,
Tammie Ryall, MCIP, RPP
Planner
Copy: Amanda McCloskey, MNR, Aylmer District Office •
Val Towsley, LTVCA
Ted Halwe, Community Planners
Susan Galloway, County of Elgin
Ministry of
Natural Resources
615 John Street North
Aylmer ON N5H 258
Tel: 519- 773 -4750
Fax: 519- 773 -9014
February 28, 2012
Ministere des
Richesses naturelles
615, rue John Nord
Aylmer ON N5H 2S8
Tel: 519 - 773 -4750
Teiec: 519- 773 -9014
Norma Bryant, Clerk
Municipality of West Elgin
P.O. Box 490, 22413 Hoskins Line
Rodney, ON NOL 2C0
Dear Norma Bryant:
eil
S 249 /
�r Ontario
SUBJECT: Data Sets: Update
Wetlands,
Regional Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI)
Aggregate Operations (Pits and Quarries)
The Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) strives to provide current and accurate information on
natural heritage features and natural resources to planning authorities, relevant agencies and
the general public. This letter is to notify you that there have been updates to wetlands, regional
ANSI and licenced aggregate operations within Aylmer District.
The Provincial Policy Statement 2005 (PPS) provides long -term protection for natural heritage
features and natural resources. The MNR advocates that natural heritage systems planning will
contribute to meeting the policies set out in the PPS. The MNR recommends an official plan
amendment is undertaken to reflect the updated natural heritage features and areas information
as well as the natural resource information included in this notification.
Wetlands
MNR recently updated existing wetland files and evaluated new wetlands under the Ontario
Wetland Evaluation System, 3rd edition. The results of this work have been reflected in the
updated Wetland Unit Layer. The wetland layer contains valuable information that supports your
planning, engineering and environmental services departments. The attached table lists
updated and newly evaluated wetlands.
To be consistent with policies 2.1.3(b), 2.1.3(c), 2.1.4(a) and 2.1.6 of the PPS, planning
authorities shall protect wetlands by:
• not permitting development and site alteration in significant wetlands in Ecoregions 5E,
6E and 7E and in significant coastal wetlands along all of the Great Lakes, their
connecting channels and certain portions of their tributaries; and
• not permitting development and site alteration on adjacent lands unless their ecological
functions have been evaluated and it is demonstrated that there will be no negative
impacts on the significant wetland or significant coastal wetland feature or its ecological
function.
Page 1 of 2
The MNR is the custodian of all wetland evaluation files. If you are interested in receiving a
copy of a wetland evaluation file please contact me at amanda.mccloskevCaontario.ca.
Regional ANSIs
MNR recently updated the regional ANSI files. ANSIs play an important role in the protection of
Ontario's natural heritage, since they best represent the full spectrum of biological communities,
natural landforms and environments across Ontario outside of provincial parks and
conservation reserves. The best representative sites that do not occur within natural parks,
provincial parks, or conservation resources are considered to be provincially significant ANSIs.
Regional ANSIs provide the next best representation. The attached table lists recently mapped
regional ANSI. The updated Regional ANSI information will be reflected in the ANSI Layer.
Active Aggregate Licences
Aggregate licence boundaries have been updated to ensure they geographically represent
licenced areas under the Aggregate Resources Act. This update also includes the addition of
the licenced boundary of newly licenced sites. The updated information can be found in the
Aggregate Site Authorized Layer.
Information Access
Land Information Ontario (LIO) manages geographic information for use in maps and Geographic
Information Systems (GIS). LIO has a web - accessible data warehouse that contains more than 250
different layers of geographic data (including the layers referenced above). The data ranges from
the location of underground wells to satellite imagery.
Please download the above referenced data from LIO warehouse at
http: Ilwww .applio.irc.gov.on.callids. If you have problems accessing this warehouse please
contact LIO support at 705 -755 -1878 or by email at lio @ontario.ca or Dean Kebbel at (519)
773 -4714 or dean.kebbel(ontario.ca. Please ensure all staff are accessing this most current
information in their daily work.
Yours truly,
a_nficcubei
�„
Amanda McCloskey
District Planner, Aylmer District
Email: Amanda.mccloskey @ontario.ca
Attachments: 2011 Summary for 2012 Mailout
C.C.
Tammie RyaII, MAH
Valerie Towsley, LTVCA
Steve Evans, County of Elgin
Mark McDonald, County of Elgin
Page 2 of 2
2012 Annual Summary
ANSI Name
Township
County
Elgin
Significance
Regional
Regional
Regional
Eagle Woodlots
Mun of West Elgin
North Rodney Woodlots
Mun of West Elgin
Elgin
West Lorne Tract
Mun of West Elgin
Elgin
`�^ �:� t iii �.��.� �� -a
L m - 2
BAPTIST C
To Whom It May Concern,
umcLnAurr. wtrar c! ge
,R 9 5 2012
Harvesters Baptist Camp .DB
22663 Johnston Line
Rodney, ON NOL 2C0
March 5, 2012
This letter is a request for the council to issue an exemption to a sight plan requirement
for our camp to build replacement, portable, over -flow sleeping accommodations. This
year, our camp was shut down by the fire department and we lost one dormitory. We
would like to put up accommodations this year that are portable and that we can modify
in the future for a more permanent plan. We need to put up twelve cabins. These
accommodations will be a twelve foot by sixteen foot cabin with eight beds each. These
buildings will have no foundation, plumbing or electrical service. They will have one
door and one window each. The sole purpose of these buildings is to allow us to sleep
campers this year while we take more time to look at the future sight planning of our
camp. We appreciate your consideration in this manner. If you require any further
information from us, please contact us at the numbers provided.
Michael Holmes
519 -639 -0985
Mike Wood
519- 494 -2109
Ministry of Ministere de
the Environment I'Environnement
Drinking Water Management Division de la gestion de la qualite de
Division I'eau potable
14`" floor
135 St. Clair Avenue West
Toronto ON M4V 1P5
March 6, 2012
140 stage
135, avenue St, Clair Ouest
Toronto (Ontario) M4V 1P5
D5'
t Ontario
9IlA�CiPAU f1FgV�Bi LGjN
RECeV D
MM 0 7 7012
To all owners and operating authorities of municipal drinking water systems:
Re: Transition of Accreditation Bodies under the Municipal Drinking Water Licensing
Program.
I am writing to thank you for your ongoing participation in the ministry's municipal licensing
program for drinking water systems and to provide you with an update on the program.
As you may know, all municipal drinking water systems have now received licences. Now
that we have reached this significant milestone, the ministry is reviewing and updating the
accreditation framework.
As part of this work, the ministry will be transitioning accreditation bodies over the next few
months. We will be working very closely with the Canadian General Standards Board during
this transition to ensure that it happens as seamlessly as possible for all involved.
We will be providing additional information and opportunities for dialogue as we move
forward. Please be assured of our continued support and guidance throughout this process.
The ministry will advise you as soon as new accreditation bodies have been designated
under the Safe Drinking Water Act, 2002.
In the interim, if you have any additional questions about the transition, please contact Paul
Nieweglowski, Deputy Chief Drinking Water Inspector /Director, Drinking Water Management
Division at 416 -314 -1977 or paul.nieweglowski@ontario.ca.
Regards,
John Stager
Chief Drinking Water Inspector / Assistant Deputy Minister
Drinking Water Management Division
1921 (2009101)
Gouvernement
Fes`- du Canada
Office des normes
generates du Canada
Place du Portage iN — 6131
Gatineau (Quebec)
K1A 0S5
Gouvernment
of Canada
Canadian General
Standards Board
Place du Portage 111 — 6B1
Gatineau, Quebec
K1A 0S5
Wednesday, March 07, 2012
MUlIcIPALory ovWt`srEL3N
MAN 0 2012
Owners and Operating Authorities
Municipal Drinking Water Systems of Ontario
Re: Termination of CGSB Accreditation Program — Operating Authorities of Municipal
Drinking Water Systems of Ontario
Dear Client,
This letter is to advise you that the Canadian General Standard Board (CGSB) has been informed
by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) that they will be transitioning to a new
accreditation body (or bodies) over the next few months. We have been and will continue to work
closely with the MOE to achieve an orderly winding down of our services and to help them
transition your file to a new accreditation body.
As a result of this upcoming change to the program, please note the following:
CGSB is not planning to conduct any new audits, but will ensure MOE is aware of the
status of your file.
CGSB will continue to work with you on Corrective Action Responses (CARs) to resolve
as many as possible before the termination of our program. This will help the new
accreditation body more easily take over your file and issue its own certificate of
accreditation.
CGSB will transfer all files to the MOE upon or before the termination of our program.
During the transition you are expected to continue to meet your accreditation obligations, and
required to notify CGSB of any changes to your quality management system (see section 6.5 of
Program Handbook), since we will have to assess these to keep your accreditation in effect until
program termination. The outcome of that assessment will determine what actions or decisions
need to be taken.
We will be providing you with information on any steps you need to take following the termination
of our services, and ask that you contact MOE directly for any questions related to the review of
the accreditation framework.
CGSB remains committed to its clients and welcomes any questions on your file, as well as any
suggestions you may have to make this transition easier. We thank you for your continued
support and cooperation over that last few years and hope that we can be of service to you in the
future.
Regards,
Begonia Lojk
Acting Director CGSB
(819)956 -0383 begonia.loik c(D•tpsgc- pwasc.gc.ca
c.c. John Stager, Chief Drinking Water Inspector, ADM, Drinking Water Management Division,
Ministry of the Environment
Canada
Experience and excellence
Experience et excellence 009GC