Workplan for Comprehensive Review and Update of the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Plan. Per Clean Water Act (2006) - Section 36

Transcription

1 South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region Workplan for Comprehensive Review and Update of the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Plan Per Clean Water Act (2006) - Section 36 November 30,

2 Executive Summary The Section 36 (S. 36) of the Clean Water Act, 2006 is intended to ensure that assessment reports (ARs) and source protection plans (SPPs) undergo a comprehensive review and update on periodic basis. An order was issued under S. 36 of the Clean Water Act to the Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River Source Protection Authority (SPA) by the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change on January 26, The Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River SPA is the lead SPA for the South Georgian Bay - Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region (SPR), which also includes the Nottawasaga Valley SPA and Severn Sound SPA. The S. 36 order issued by the Minister specified that the lead SPA prepare and submit a workplan to the then Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) by November 30, The order required that the workplan include detailed steps for the comprehensive review and update of the AR and SPP, and be developed in consultation with the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Committee (SPC), participating municipalities of the source protection authorities, and the MOECC. The South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe SPR includes 107 municipal drinking water systems, of which 16 are surface water based including both Lake Simcoe and Great Lakes sources, and 91 are groundwater based. First Nations communities within the Source Protection Region are the Chippewas of Georgina Island, the Chippewas of Rama, and Beausoleil First Nation. The South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe SPP was approved by the Minister on January 26, 2015, with an effective date of July 1, SPP policy implementation is well underway, with 136 policies being implemented by implementing bodies, including municipalities, provincial ministries, and SPAs. The first annual progress report was prepared and submitted to MOECC on May 1, This document provides a workplan proposal for a comprehensive review of and update to the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe SPP and the related AR, in accordance with the S. 36 Order. A preliminary analysis was conducted based on the factors specified in the December 2016 Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) bulletin, also utilizing guidance provided in the MECP support information bulletins of October 2017, March 2018, and August The required consultation on the workplan was undertaken per the S. 36 order. This included meetings with member municipalities, MECP, the SPC, and the SPAs, to discuss the proposed workplan and receive feedback. i

3 The proposed review and any necessary updates to the ARs and SPP will represent current and future status of the local scientific information and policy implementation, as it relates to ensuring the protection of municipal drinking water sources per the Clean Water Act, The proposed reviews and updates contained in this workplan are summarized in the Table below. Update Description of Proposed Review and Update No. 1 Assess trend in sodium at Craighurst drinking water system, to determine if Issue exists. Map Issue Contributing Area and review Source Protection Plan to determine if additional policies will be necessary 2 Assess trend in sodium at Warminster drinking water system, to determine if Issue exists. Map Issue Contributing Area and review Source Protection Plan to determine if additional policies will be necessary 3 Assess trend in TCE at Coldwater wells 1 and 2 to determine if Issue has been resolved. Revise mapping of Issue Contributing Area, if appropriate. 4 New wellhead protection area mapping and vulnerability scores for a new groundwater well at the existing Sunderland drinking water system, including assessing if current policies in the plan will be appropriate in the new WHPA or if modifications to the policies will be necessary. 5 Review wellhead protection area mapping in Durham Region 6 Remove well 6 at Cannington Drinking Water system, and revise wellhead protection area mapping 7 Review wellhead protection area mapping for groundwater-based drinking water systems in southern and central Simcoe County 8 Add second well at Maplewood Estates drinking water system and revise wellhead protection area mapping Applicable Document AR for mapping; SPP for policy changes AR for mapping; SPP for policy changes AR for mapping; SPP for policy changes AR for mapping; SPP for policy changes AR AR AR AR Implementer of Relevant SPP Policy TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD N/A TBD TBD ii

4 Update No. Description of Proposed Review and Update Applicable Document Implementer of Relevant SPP Policy 9 Addition of new well at Horseshoe Highlands AR TBD drinking water system and decommissioning of pre-existing 10 Add fourth well to existing Stayner municipal AR TBD drinking water system and revise wellhead protection area mapping 11 Update calculation of percent managed lands AR RMO, MECP, OMAFRA 12 Develop Education and Outreach policies related SPP RMO, SPA to commercial fertilizer application for residential homeowners in vulnerable areas with a vulnerability score of Update livestock density mapping in Churchill drinking water system wellhead protection areas AR RMO, MECP, OMAFRA 14 Review policy WAST(b)-2 policy to determine if SPP RMO situations exist wherein future establishment of waste disposal sites could be managed, rather than prohibited. 15 Revise policy SEWG(a)-2 to include reference to SPP MECP Low Impact Development approaches to stormwater management 16 Revise policy SEWG(c)-4 to establish minimum SPP MUN standards or guidelines for septic system inspections 17 Revise policies SALT(ICA)-1, SALT(ICA)-2 & SPP RMO SNOW(ICA)-1 to expand their area of applicability 18 Revise policy FUEL-3 to improve policy SPP TSSA effectiveness 19 Revise policies DNAPL-1 and DNAPL-2 to clarify SPP RMO what constitutes an incidental volume for personal/domestic use 20 Revise policy DNAPL-2 to assess whether there are SPP RMO situations wherein future handling and storage of DNAPLs could be managed, rather than prohibited 21 Revise policies DEMD-1, DEMD-3 and DEMD-4 to SPP MECP, MUN include reference to New Tecumseth 22 Revise policy RLU-1 to include reference to waste disposal sites SPP Planning Approval Authority iii

5 Update Description of Proposed Review and Update No. 23 Review policies LUP-2 and LUP-3 to determine if additional conditions could be added that would allow the infiltration of clean run-off from rooftops, green spaces, and land uses not associated with the application of road salt. 24 Revise policy LUP-7 to clarify that it only applies with the Issue Contributing Area for nitrates 25 Revise policy LUP-12 and LUP-13 to remove duplicate reference to York in applicable local area column 26 Revise policy LUP-12 to specify that a Geoscientist as defined in the Hydrogeological Assessment definition of a Qualified Person must do the water balance study and water balances should also be subject to a peer review by a Qualified Person 27 Revise policy LUP-12 to replace exemption for single family dwellings with an exemption for development proposals under a minimum size. 28 Assessment of new liquid hydrocarbon pipeline threat 29 Make updates to SPP and AR to reflect changes in Technical Rules that identify above ground fuel storage as a significant drinking water threat in IPZs and WHPA-E scoring 9 or higher 30 Utilize Technical Rule 95.1 to revise vulnerability scoring in the Rope IPZ Applicable Document SPP SPP SPP SPP SPP AR for mapping; SPP for policy changes AR for assessment; SPP for any policies AR Implementer of Relevant SPP Policy Planning Approval Authority Planning Approval Authority Planning Approval Authority Planning Approval Authority Planning Approval Authority TBD RMO, MUN TBD iv

6 Update Description of Proposed Review and Update No. 31 Minor revisions to SPP and AR to reflect changes in the Technical Rules, including Removal of the term dairy from circumstances , 1970 Amendment to the definition of soil, groundwater, and sediment standards Addition of reference to sediment-based contamination in intake protection zones Update maps and text in Assessment Reports to remove reference to vulnerability scoring in SGRAs Revise reference to discharge to Lake Simcoe as a factor in SGRA delineation Remove references to sodium and chloride in the circumstances related to on-site sewage systems and holding tanks. 32 Incorporation of climate change considerations AR SPP 33 Revise references to Tables of Circumstances AR throughout Assessment Report and Source SPP Protection Plan to promote compliance with AODA 34 A review of the nitrate Issue Contributing Area for the Georgian Sands / Lafontaine drinking water system 35 Clarify existence of TCE Drinking Water Issue at Robert St well in Penetanguishene 36 Update Source Protection Plan and Assessment Report as required, to meet forthcoming amendments to the Technical Rules Applicable Document AR SPP AR SPP SPP, AR Implementer of Relevant SPP Policy N/A TBD N/A MECP, RMO, OMAFRA, Planning Approval Authority RMO TBD The overall timeline for completion of all of the proposed updates is December Any revisions to vulnerable area mapping and vulnerability scoring (i.e. proposals 4, 5, 6, and 7) will be led by municipalities within the Source Protection Region. If these updates are provided to SPA staff by 2021, they will be included in the draft submitted to the Minister by December The South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe SPC will complete all other proposed changes with support from Lake Simcoe, Nottawasaga, and Severn Sound SPA staff, and in consultation with MECP, applicable implementing bodies, and municipalities. Consultation may also take place v

7 with persons engaged in significant drinking water threat activities, if the policy changes affect persons engaged in existing significant threat activities. The Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River SPA acknowledges the efforts and support of the Nottawasaga Valley SPA, Severn Sound SPA, South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe SPC, MECP, and municipalities in the preparation of this workplan. The MECP is also thanked for their continued support through capacity funding under the Ontario Drinking Water Source Protection program. vi

8 Table of Contents Executive Summary... i 1. Introduction South Georgian Bay - Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region Source Protection Plan Implementation - Highlights Annual Progress Report - Highlights Workplan Development Preliminary Analysis A: Results of Environmental Monitoring Programs B: Growth and Infrastructure Changes C: Council resolutions D: Policy Effectiveness E: Implementation Challenges F: Technical Rule Changes G: Impacts of Prohibition Policies on the Agricultural Community H: Specific directions in some source protection plan approval letters I: Other local considerations Workplan Consultation Proposed Review and Updates Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update vii

9 3.11. Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Proposed Update Project Management and MECP Support for Updates Conclusion References viii

10 List of Tables Table 1. Water quality concerns raised during public consultation... 5 Table 2. Population change since AR approval Table 3. Projected population change to Table 4. Projected changes in municipal drinking water systems Table 5. Implications of Technical Rule changes for SGBLS SPP Table 6. SGBLS SPP: prohibition policies for agricultural activities outside of a WHPA-A/IPZ Table 7. Municipal drinking water systems where agricultural prohibition policies apply Table 8. Consultation completed as part of workplan development List of Figures Figure 1. The South Georgian Bay - Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region... 2 Figure 2. Sodium concentration in the Craighurst drinking water system Figure 3. Sodium concentration in the Warminster drinking water system Figure 4. TCE Concentration in Coldwater wells 1 and ix

11 1. Introduction Ontario s Clean Water Act helps protect sources of municipal drinking water in order to protect human health and the environment. The Act was created in response to the Report of the Walkerton Inquiry by Justice Dennis R. O Connor, which was released in The inquiry was called in response to E. coli bacteria contamination of the municipal drinking water system in Walkerton, Ontario in May of This contamination was the cause of seven deaths and thousands of residents becoming ill. Justice O Connor emphasized that protecting drinking water at the source is the first step in a multi-barrier approach and an important part of ensuring the health of people, ecosystems, and economies. As O Connor stated in his report, we should never be complacent about drinking water safety. Under the Clean Water Act, local source protection plans (SPPs) were developed containing policies to protect the quality and quantity of our municipal drinking water sources. Assessment reports (ARs) and SPPs must be comprehensively reviewed and updated per section 36 (S. 36) of the Clean Water Act in order to ensure sustained protection of the municipal drinking water sources and for the SPPs to stay current. At the time of SPP approval, a S. 36 order was issued to the Source Protection Authorities (SPAs) and Source Protection Committee (SPC) in the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region from the Minister of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC). The S. 36 order issued by the Minister specified that the lead SPA (Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River Source Protection Authority) prepare and submit a workplan to the then MOECC by November 30, The order required that the workplan include detailed steps for the review and update of the Source Protection Plan and be developed in consultation with the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Committee, the two local SPAs (Nottawasaga Valley and Severn Sound), participating municipalities, and the MOECC. The order also required that the information gained from implementing the SPP and from the first annual progress report (2017) be taken into consideration in preparation of the workplan. 1.1 South Georgian Bay - Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region The South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region contains four watersheds and spans over 10,000 km 2, from the Oak Ridges Moraine in the south to the Canadian Shield in the north. The region contains portions of the Niagara Escarpment, Oak Ridges Moraine, Oro 1

12 Moraine, Peterborough Drumlin Fields, Simcoe Uplands and Lowlands, and the Canadian Shield. The region includes: 4 watersheds (Black and Severn River, Lake Simcoe, Nottawasaga Valley, and Severn Sound) 52 municipalities 3 First Nations communities 107 drinking water systems 275 municipal supply wells 16 municipal surface water intakes More than 50,000 private wells The region is complex and diverse in terms of geology, physiology, population, and development pressures, with many, often conflicting, water uses including drinking water supply, recreation, irrigation, agriculture, commercial and industrial uses, as well as ecosystem needs. Figure 1. The South Georgian Bay - Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region 2

13 1.2 Source Protection Plan Implementation - Highlights The South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Committee included 136 policies in their source protection plan to address 21 prescribed threats, protect sources of drinking water and monitor the progress of policy implementation. Since the source protection plan took effect on July 1, 2015, much has been accomplished. Todate, 27 policies (26%) that address significant drinking water threats have been implemented and 74 (71%) are in the process of being implemented. The remaining three percent are those which are narrowly applicable and which the local Risk Management Official has not yet implemented (such as policy ASM(ICA) -2 which applies within one Issue Contributing Area), or are non-legally binding policies, such as the provision of incentives including stewardship funding. The plan sets out timelines for policy implementation and many of the policies not already implemented have approximately two years for this process to be completed. 1.3 Annual Progress Report - Highlights Ninety-seven percent of the policies in the Source Protection Plan that address significant drinking water threats have been or are being implemented. Approximately 71% of significant drinking water threats that existed at the time of source protection plan approval have been addressed through policy implementation or removed through threats verification. To-date 106 risk management plans (RMPs) have been established, however more remain to be negotiated with landowners by the July 2020 deadline in the Source Protection Plan. Almost all (2,005 of the 2,071) on-site sewage systems have been inspected in accordance with the Ontario Building Code, with very few needed repairs identified. Municipal progress on implementation is also progressing well, with most having the necessary Official Plan policies drafted or approved, and have processes in place to ensure that their dayto-day planning decisions conform to the source protection plan. 3

14 2. Workplan Development The Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River Source Protection Authority has followed the guidance provided in Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) bulletins, in the development of the S. 36 workplan. In December 2016, the MECP produced a bulletin, Overview of Requirements for Assessment Report and Source Protection Plan Amendments under S. 36 of the Clean Water Act. The bulletin indicates that the S. 36 updates are intended to build in new information that advances the understanding of risks to sources of drinking water and incorporates local growth. The three supplemental information bulletins listed below were also used to develop this S. 36 workplan. Municipal Engagement (October 2017) Prohibition of Agricultural Policies Outside of WHPA-A or IPZ-1 (March 2018) Updates to Director Technical Rules and Tables of Drinking Water Threats (Aug 2018). The three main components of the S. 36 process that lead to workplan submission by source protection authorities are: Preliminary analysis including review factors and considerations Consultation for stakeholder engagement Workplan. The workplan development process undertaken by the Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching/Black River SPA is described in detail below. 2.1 Preliminary Analysis An analysis of the scope of needed amendments to the AR and SPP was conducted considering the nine factors specified in the December 2016 MOECC bulletin: Results of environmental monitoring programs Growth and infrastructure changes Council resolutions Policy effectiveness Implementation challenges Technical rule changes Impacts of prohibition policies on the agricultural community Specific directions in some source protection plan approval letters Other local considerations. The evaluation of each of these factors is considered below. 4

15 2.1.1 A: Results of Environmental Monitoring Programs Following the guidance provided by MECP in their guidance documents on the requirements for assessment report and source protection plan amendments under S.36 of the Clean Water Act, and on municipal engagement for the same, the lead and local SPAs undertook a series of municipal consultation meetings, to seek municipal input on the range of issues to be included in plan review (see section 2.2 below). During those meetings, municipalities were asked if there were existing wells or water treatment plants for which municipal staff had concerns about the quality of the raw water resource. As many municipalities identified concerns (as illustrated in the table below), SPA staff opted to seek water quality data for those mentioned, to determine if municipal staff s concerns may indicate the presence of a drinking water issue per the Technical Rules, or simply reflected caution on behalf of staff Table 1. Water quality concerns raised during public consultation Watershed Municipality Drinking Water System Parameter of concern Trend in water quality data Proposed action Lake Simcoe City of Barrie Wells 3A, 11, 12, 14 Sodium, chloride No evidence of declining trend None. ICA will remain in AR Innisfil Stroud well supply Sodium Insufficient data to determine if trend exists, but most recent samples were 38.4 mg/l (Dec 2015) and 40.3 mg/l (Nov 2017) None at this time. Sodium is not anticipated to result in the deterioration of the quality of water in this DWS 5

16 Watershed Municipality Drinking Water System Parameter of concern Trend in water quality data Proposed action Black Severn Orillia Orillia water filtration plant Chloride Significant increasing trend, such that ODWQS is expected to be exceeded by 2112 None at this time. Continue to monitor situation, may need to be considered in future s36 review Nottawasaga Valley Adjala Tosorontio Rosemont Sodium While limited data is available, the most recent sample (January 2018) was 202 mg/l. However, staff from the Ontario Clean Water Agency have confirmed that the sodium is from a natural source, and as such does not meet the test of Technical Rule 115 None. 6

17 Watershed Municipality Drinking Water System Parameter of concern Trend in water quality data Proposed action Nottawasaga Valley Adjala Tosorontio Loretto Heights Sodium Insufficient data to determine if trend exists, but most recent samples were 47.4 mg/l (Jan 2012) and 50.9 mg/l (Jan 2018) None at this time. Sodium is not anticipated to result in the deterioration of the quality of water in this DWS Oro- Medonte Weca Sodium Insufficient data to determine if trend exists, but most recent samples in TW1 were 44.3 mg/l (Jan 2017) and 41.2 mg/l (Jan 2012), and 51.8 mg/l (Jan 2017) and 47.4 mg/l (Jan 2012) in TW2 Craighurst Sodium Significant increasing trend, such that ODWQS is expected to be exceeded by None at this time. Sodium is not anticipated to result in the deterioration of the quality of water in this DWS Include in section 36 review to assess if a sodium issue exists, map ICA, and develop policies if needed 7

18 Watershed Municipality Drinking Water System Parameter of concern Trend in water quality data Proposed action Nottawasaga Valley Mono Cardinal Woods Sodium No statistically significant trend exhibited in data. Most recent sample (Aug 2017) is 52.5 mg/l None. Severn Sound Oro- Medonte Warminster Sodium Significant increasing trend, such that ODWQS is expected to be exceeded by 2031 Include in section 36 review to assess if a sodium issue exists, map ICA, and develop policies if needed Penetanguis hene Robert St well TCE No evidence of declining trend None. Will continue to be described as an Issue in AR Tiny Township Lafontaine Nitrate Evidence of increasing trend None. ICA will remain in AR 8

19 Watershed Municipality Drinking Water System Parameter of concern Trend in water quality data Proposed action Severn Sound Severn Township Coldwater TCE While all three wells in the Coldwater drinking water system remain above the ODWQS for TCE (i.e mg/l), significant decreasing trends are evident in wells 1 and 2. If they remain on their current trajectory, well 1 may fall below the ODWQS by 2030 and Well 2 may fall below within the next five years Include in section 36 review to assess if TCE Issue at well 2 can be removed, and ICA revised. In addition, the Chief Drinking Water Inspector Annual Report was reviewed for any information on exceedances in drinking water quality at municipal drinking water systems in the SGBLS SPR. No exceedances in pathogens were reported which exhibited evidence of frequent fecal contamination or the presence of any specific pathogen. Thus, no pathogen issues were identified as per the direction in the MECP s Draft Issues Evaluation and Threats Inventory (2006). Further, no exceedances of parameters listed in Schedule 1, 2 or 3 of the Ontario Drinking Water Quality Standards or Table 4 of the Technical Support Document for Ontario Drinking Water Standards, Objectives and Guidelines were observed. Thus, no issues as defined by Technical Rule 114 were evident in the Chief Drinking Water Inspector s Annual Report. As such, no additional considerations related to water quality will be included in this work plan. 9

20 2.1.2 B: Growth and Infrastructure Changes The South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Region is one experiencing a rapid pace of growth and development. According to Statistics Canada, population growth since approval of the Assessment Report has increased by approximately 7% since Table 2. Population change since AR approval 2011 Population 2016 Population Simcoe County (excluding Barrie and Orillia) 279, ,050 Barrie 136, ,434 Orillia 30,586 31,166 Dufferin County 56,881 61,735 York Region 1,032,524 1,109,909 Durham Region 608, ,862 Kawartha Lakes 73,214 75,423 Peel Region 1,296,814 1,381,739 Muskoka 58,047 60,599 Haliburton 17,026 18,062 Total Population 3,588,693 3,832,979 Total Estimated Population within SGBLS SPR 459, ,402 Growth is projected to continue in this Region, as directed by the Provincial Growth Plan. The Growth Plan and municipal population projections predict an approximate further 63% increase in population in the SGBLS SPR by

21 Table 3. Projected population change to 2041 Location Simcoe County (excluding Barrie and Orillia) Projected population , , ,000 Barrie 210, , ,000 Orillia 41,000 44,000 46,000 Dufferin County 80,000 81,000 85,000 York Region 1,590,000 1,700,000 1,790,000 Durham Region 970,000 1,080,000 1,190,000 Kawartha Lakes 100, , ,000 Peel Region 1,770,000 1,870,000 1,970,000 Muskoka 71,800 74,300 84,000 Haliburton 20,700 21,420 22,400 Total Population 5,177,000 5,563,000 6,022,000 Total Estimated Population within SGBLS 685, , ,994 No municipalities have identified concerns with being able to provide sufficient water to service their existing population, but many additional municipal drinking water systems (or expansions to existing) were identified through municipal consultation 11

22 Table 4. Projected changes in municipal drinking water systems SPA Municipality Anticipated change to drinking water system Anticipated timeline Proposed action Lake Simcoe Durham Addition of a new well in Sunderland, under a Declaration Order Establishment of permanent replacement well in Sunderland Council resolution passed. Durham Region have received approval to treat the addition of this new well as an Emergency under Reg 205, but has also submitted WHPA delineation and vulnerability assessment for use in SPP updates Environmental Assessment projected to be completed by 2020 Section 34 amendment to be initiated in 2019 Include in Section 36 amendment Well 6 at Cannington has been decommissioned, WHPA to be redelineated 2020 Include in Section 36 amendment Establishment of a new well at Cannington drinking water system Municipal class EA underway for additional water supply to Cannington to replace Well 6 None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment 12

23 SPA Municipality Anticipated change to drinking water system Anticipated timeline Proposed action Lake Simcoe Durham Anticipate needing to add a well to service future growth in Uxbridge Projected by 2031 None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment Kawartha Lakes Potential decommissioning of existing well, and establishment of a replacement well in Woods of Manilla Uncertain. Timing dependent upon growth pressures None at this time. May require future Section 34 amendment Innisfil Town may decommission Innisfil Heights drinking water system at some point in the future, and shift residents to water treatment plant. None at this time. May require future Section 34 amendment Use of Stroud water treatment plant may be revisited in the future None at this time. May require future Section 34 amendment Oro- Medonte Second well at Maplewood estates overlooked in original AR. Include in Section 36 amendment Well#2 at Horseshoe Highlands drinking water system decommissioned ca and replaced with new well #3 Include in Section 36 amendment 13

24 SPA Municipality Anticipated change to drinking water system Anticipated timeline Proposed action Lake Simcoe Ramara Township is considering relocating intake at Lagoon City water treatment plant Uncertain, timing is budget dependent. None at this time. May require future Section 34 amendment York Region is pursuing addition of a well in East Gwillimbury (Green Lane) Council resolution passed. Anticipated submission of application for Drinking Water Works License in 2019 Section 34 amendment to be initiated in 2019 Possible decommissioning of Newmarket Well 14 Possible upon approval of new Green Lane well Section 34 amendment to be initiated in 2019 Region is pursuing twinning of Aurora well #5 Council resolution passed. Anticipated submission of application for Drinking Water Works License in 2019 Section 34 amendment to be initiated in 2019 Black Severn Orillia Anticipate establishing stand-by well at some point in the future, to support projected growth Uncertain. Timing dependent upon growth pressures None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment 14

25 SPA Municipality Anticipated change to drinking water system Anticipated timeline Proposed action Nottawasaga Shelburne Anticipate increasing flow on wells 7 and 8, which may require change to WHPA delineation Uncertain. None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment Peel Region Peel Region is currently reviewing servicing needs, including within Nottawasaga Valley watershed Anticipate completion of study by 2023 None at this time. May require future Section 34 amendment Nottawasaga Adjala Tosorontio Anticipate needing to add an additional well to the Colgan drinking water system, to support future population Uncertain. Timing dependent upon growth pressures None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment Class EA completed for Adjala Tosorontio, which recommended an expansion to Everett Drinking water system Initial screening of potential changes to WHPA boundary currently underway. Anticipate application for Drinking Water licence several years from now None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment Clearview A fourth well was added to the Stayner municipal drinking water system in 2010, but not included in assessment report. Include in Section 36 amendment 15

26 SPA Municipality Anticipated change to drinking water system Anticipated timeline Proposed action Nottawasaga Collingwood Municipality anticipates future needs to expand municipal drinking water system, to support projected population Uncertain. Timing dependent upon growth pressures None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment New Tecumseth Municipality has been approached by an owner of a private drinking water system to assume ownership Uncertain. Request is currently under consideration by municipal Council None at this time. May require future Section 34 amendment New Tecumseth Potential addition of a well in Alliston to service projected future population Engineering investigations underway, anticipate completion of EA by 2019 None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment Wasaga Beach Water Supply system Environmental Assessment completed in Report recommends drilling two wells (in two existing well fields) Anticipated by 2026 None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment Springwater Anticipate needing to expand Midhurst municipal drinking water system to service projected future population Uncertain. Timing dependent upon growth pressures None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment 16

27 SPA Municipality Anticipated change to drinking water system Anticipated timeline Proposed action Severn Sound Midland Existing Sundowner well supply to be added to municipal drinking water system upon resolution of existing TCE issue Uncertain None at this time. May require future Section 34 amendment Oro- Medonte Municipality has been approached by the Braestone estate community to assume ownership of their drinking water system Uncertain. Municipality has made assumption conditional upon upgrades to drinking water system infrastructure None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment Springwater Anticipate establishing a well at Cassel Drive to service community of Hillsdale Uncertain None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment Tiny Potential expansion of Wyevale system to support future needs Uncertain, pending growth pressures None at this time. Anticipate future Section 34 amendment C: Council resolutions No additional Council resolutions have been brought to the attention of SPA staff. No municipalities indicated any plans to include other types of systems in the drinking water source protection process. 17

28 2.1.4 D: Policy Effectiveness A review of the first annual report on plan implementation, as well as consultation with SPA and municipal staff (see section 2.2) raised questions about the effectiveness of the following policies (see Section 3 for more detail): WAST(b)- 2 SEWG(a)- 2 SALT(ICA)-1 SALT(ICA)-2 SNOW(ICA)-1 DNAPL-2 DEMD-1 DEMD-3 DEMD-4 LUP-12 LUP E: Implementation Challenges A review of the first annual report on plan implementation, as well as consultation with SPA and municipal staff (see section 2.2) identified implementation challenges with the following policies (see Section 3 for more detail): SEWG (c) -4 FUEL-3 DNAPL-1&2 LUP-2 LUP-3 LUP F: Technical Rule Changes Since approval of the Source Protection Plan, the Director s Technical Rules have been amended. As directed by Supplemental Bulletin #3 (An overview of requirements for amendments under S36 of the Clean Water Act Updates to Director Technical Rules and Tables of Drinking Water Threats), some changes are mandatory, and some are enabling. These revisions will be made to the AR and SPP as outlined in the table below. 18

29 In addition to the Director s Technical Rules, Ontario Regulation 287/07 was amended to include the establishment and operation of a liquid hydrocarbon pipeline as a prescribed drinking water threat. This amendment may require revision to the plan as well, as described in the table below: Table 5. Implications of Technical Rule changes for SGBLS SPP Technical Rule Ministerial Direction Proposed next step for SGBLS SPP Mandatory changes Liquid hydrocarbon pipelines New threat circumstances were introduced for pipelines regulated under the O.Reg 210/01 under the Technical Standards and Safety Act or that is subject to the National Energy Board Act where the pipeline is above or below ground or is above or underneath a water body. Assess the new prescribed threat per Clean Water Act O. Reg. 287/07 - liquid hydrocarbon pipeline and determine if policies should be added to the SPP. Rules 8(1), 13(5), 80, 81 (Part VII.2) and Tables of Drinking Water Threats Rule 45 Sewage / Septic Systems and Holding Tanks Vulnerability score of Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas (often referred to as SGRAs) - Removal of Part VII.2 - significant groundwater recharge areas, including rules 80 and 81 and the removal of references to vulnerability scoring in significant groundwater recharge areas, including references in the Tables of Drinking Water Threats. Delineation of Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas - The rule explicitly lists the systems that are excluded from the Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas delineation requirement (ie, Great Lakes, Connecting Channels, Lake Simcoe, Lake Nipissing, Lake St Clair or the Ottawa river). Circumstances Removal of sodium and chloride references from the circumstances related to on-site sewage systems and holding tanks. Update maps and text in Assessment Reports to remove reference to vulnerability scoring in SGRAs Amend Assessment Report to remove reference to discharge to Lake Simcoe in the delineation of Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas Revision needed to AR and SPP 19

30 Technical Rule Ministerial Direction Proposed next step for SGBLS SPP Handling and Storage of Fuel Agriculture Threats / Application and Storage of NASM Threats Circumstances for Handling: Threats Circumstances for Storage: Changes to the underlying calculations that determine where above grade handling and storage of fuel can be a significant drinking water threat. Specifically, this change added above grade fuel storage as a significant risk in intake protection zones and WHPA-Es. Circumstances , Removal of the term dairy producer from the circumstances Conditions are met within ten municipal drinking water systems in the SGBLS SPR. Updates will be needed to the Assessment Report. A review of existing policies will be undertaken to ensure that they remain appropriate in the context of new circumstances and threats Removal of reference from Source Protection Plan Enabling provisions Rule 1(1) Rule 1(1) Transport Pathways for surface water The addition of a transport pathway definition for surface water intakes. Soil, Groundwater and Sediment Standards The definition of soil, groundwater and sediment standards were amended to explicitly refer to the drinking water component (i.e. GW1 or S-GW1) relevant in the current Soil, Groundwater and Sediment Standards. The previous definition in the rules did not specify what component of the standards should be used when assessing the presence of a contaminant in a vulnerable area None proposed Minor amendment to ARs to reflect new rules 20

31 Technical Rule Ministerial Direction Proposed next step for SGBLS SPP Rule 1(4) High Water Mark - The addition of a None proposed high water mark definition and alignment with the method described in the document entitled Fish Habitat & Determining the High Water Mark on Lakes, Fact Sheet T-6, published in 2005 by Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Rule 62(2) Setbacks from water bodies - None proposed Rule 65(1b) Rule 68(2b) Rule 70(2b) Amendment of the rules to allow the setback from a water body to be reduced based on local conditions without approval from the Director Rule 72 Transport Pathways - Addition of and Natural Surface Water Features to the Part VI.6 title (currently Transport Pathways ). None proposed Rule 95.1 Rule 114 and other rules where the term monitoring well was mentioned in previous versions of the technical rules Vulnerability scores for Great Lakes and connecting channel drinking water systems - Creation of an exemption to the standard rules related to vulnerability scores for drinking water systems in large water bodies, including the Great Lakes or connecting channels. This exemption allows higher vulnerability scores to be assigned to protection areas around drinking water systems in larger water bodies where local circumstances / information indicate the intake is vulnerable to contamination Monitoring locations for the identification of drinking water issues - Replacing the term monitoring well with monitoring location. Review the vulnerability scoring for the Rope Subdivision water treatment plant. Amendments will include updates to the Assessment Report maps and text, and threats enumeration None proposed 21

32 Technical Rule Ministerial Direction Proposed next step for SGBLS SPP Rule 126 (5) Identification of Conditions (Contaminated Sites) in intake Minor revision to Assessment Reports protection zones - Addition of in an intake protection zone to the rule identifying sediment based contamination as a risk to groundwater. Rule 126 (6) Identification of Conditions (Contaminated Sites) in intake protection zones - Allowing the identification of groundwater based contaminated sites in surface water None proposed Rules 139 (1) and 141(4) Tables of Drinking Water Threats based vulnerable areas. Assessment of Condition (Contaminated Sites) - Addition of a requirement around when a condition site can be identified as a significant drinking water threat under any approach. The amendment limits this to sites where the condition has already contaminated, or has the potential to contaminate, a source of drinking water. Short Names in the Table of Contents of the Tables of Drinking Water Threats - Aligning the nonlegal wording ( short names ) with the legal description. None proposed None proposed 22

33 2.1.7 G: Impacts of Prohibition Policies on the Agricultural Community An assessment of the effectiveness of agricultural prohibition policies in the SGBLS SPP was undertaken by SPA staff, following guidance provided in MECP supplemental bulletin #2 (prohibition of agricultural activities outside WHPA-A or IPZ-1). Briefly, this review included: Identifying individual properties to which prohibition policies apply and determining the impact of that prohibition at the local property level. Determining if local agricultural operators (i.e.: farmers) or risk management officials advised source protection committees or authorities that these policies are negatively affecting agricultural operations Reviewing annual reports, including risk management official reports to determine the impact of these policies on agricultural operations: o What percentage of their cropland came out of service? o What percentage of their livestock was removed from the farm unit? o What percentage of livestock grazing land came out of use? o Other operational impacts? Determining cumulative agricultural impacts as a result of prohibition policies in these areas within your source protection area/region (i.e.: the percentage of agricultural land or farm units removed within the area/region as a result of the prohibition policies). Considering the impact of prohibition policies versus the difference that could be achieved through other policy approaches Assessing if water quality information demonstrates that prohibition is having an impact on water quality, and Assessing if there is evidence that a management approach would be as effective at reducing the risk to source water in the area/region The SGBLS SPP has eleven Prohibition or Prescribed Instrument policies that apply to agricultural activities in areas with a vulnerability score of 10 outside of a WHPA-A or IPZ-1 (Table 6). Five of these policies are concerned with both future and existing activity threats, the remaining six policies only apply to future activities. For the five policies that are concerned with future and existing activity threats, three of them are implemented by the RMO and two of them are implemented by OMARFA/MECP. The six policies regarding future activity threats, three of them are implemented by the RMO and three of them are implemented by OMAFRA/MECP. 23

34 Table 6. SGBLS SPP: prohibition policies for agricultural activities outside of a WHPA-A/IPZ-1 Policy Number ASM (Store)- 2 ASM (Store)- 4 ASM (ICA)-2 ASM (ICA)-4 NASM (App)-4 NASM (H&S)-4 FERT (H&S)-2 FERT (ICA)-2 FERT (ICA)-4 PEST (H&S)-2 Tool Implementer Existing/ Future Pro RMO F PI OMAFRA F Pro RMO E/F PI OMAFRA E/F PI MOE, OMAFRA F PI MOE, OMAFRA F Pro RMO F Pro RMO E/F PI OMAFRA E/F Pro RMO F LSTOCK-1 Pro RMO E/F Policy Text Where the Nutrient Management Act does not require an approval, the future storage of agricultural source material is prohibited where the activity would be a significant drinking water threat. The future storage of agricultural source material is prohibited where the activity would be a significant drinking water threat. Where the Nutrient Management Act does not require an approval, the existing and future storage and application of agricultural source material to land is prohibited where the vulnerability score is 10, and the activities would be a significant drinking water threat. The existing and future storage and application of agricultural source material to land is prohibited where the vulnerability score is 10 and the activities would be a significant drinking water threat. The future application of category 2 and 3 non-agricultural source material is prohibited where the activity would be a significant drinking water threat. Where the future application of category 1 non-agricultural source material to land requires an approval under the Nutrient Management Act or Environmental Protection Act, OMAFRA and/or MOE shall ensure that the Environmental Compliance Approval prohibits the application of category 1 non-agricultural source material within WHPA-A and IPZ-1, and includes appropriate terms and conditions to ensure the activity does not become a significant drinking water threat outside of WHPA-A and IPZ-1. The future handling and storage of category 2 and 3 non-agricultural source material is prohibited where the activity would be a significant drinking water threat. Where the future handling and storage of category 1 nonagricultural source material requires an approval under the Nutrient Management Act or Environmental Protection Act, OMAFRA and/or MOE shall ensure that the Environmental Compliance Approval prohibits the handling and storage of category 1 non-agricultural source material within WHPA-A and IPZ-1, and include appropriate terms and conditions to ensure the activity does not become a significant drinking water threat outside of WHPA-A and IPZ-1. Future handling and storage of commercial fertilizer is prohibited where the activity would be a significant drinking water threat. Where the Nutrient Management Act does not require an approval, the existing and future handling, storage and application of commercial fertilizer is prohibited where the vulnerability score is 10, and the activity is or would be a significant drinking water threat. The existing and future application of commercial fertilizer to land is prohibited where the vulnerability score is 10 and the activities would be a significant drinking water threat. Future handling and storage of pesticides is prohibited where the activity would be a significant drinking water threat. Existing and future livestock grazing, and pasturing is prohibited where the number of animals on the land at any time is sufficient to generate nutrients at an annual rate that is greater than 0.5 nutrient units/acre where the activity is or would be a significant drinking water threat. In total, throughout the region there are fourteen WHPAs dispersed across seven municipalities that are captured within this review. There are no intake protection zones affected. There is ha of agricultural land with a VS=10 outside of a WHPA-A/IPZ-1 where these policies apply. The amount of agricultural land with a VS=10 outside of a WHPA-A/IPZ-1 is relatively minor to that of the total area of the SGBLS SPR which spans over 10,000 km 2. 24

35 Drinking Water Systems (DWS) Ontario Regulation 170/03 annual reports between the years of 2012 to 2017 were obtained for affected systems to assess changes in water quality from the time period pre-policy implementation (before 2015) to post-policy implementation (after 2015). The annual reports were examined to determine if there were any exceedances/trends of inorganic and organic water quality parameters related to agricultural activities. Chemical sampling and testing on treated water is completed at least once every thirty-six months if the system obtains water from a raw water supply that is ground water (Government of Ontario, 2002). In addition, treated water is tested for nitrates and nitrites at least once every three months and for sodium at least once every sixty months (Government of Ontario, 2002). If there were any exceedances of water quality parameters, it was noted which water quality parameter was exceeded, the quantity, and the date it was sampled. In addition, the average rate of change was calculated for parameters that were in exceedance throughout the 2012 to 2017 time period. None of the municipal well supply systems in this exercise have experienced any exceedances of organic water quality parameters noted in the water quality DWS Ont. Reg. 170/03 annual reports (Table 4). In addition, Adjala-Tosorontio, Shelburne, and Kawartha Lakes have not experienced any exceedances of inorganic water quality parameters (Table 4). However, Severn, Brock, Ramara, and East Gwillimbury have experienced exceedances for inorganic parameters of sodium over 20 mg/l (Table 4), however sodium is not a chemical of concern related to any agricultural activity in the Table of Drinking Water Threats. 25

36 Table 7. Municipal drinking water systems where agricultural prohibition policies apply SPA Municipality Municipal Well WHPA Land Use Total Area: VS=10 outside WHPA-A Agri. Land: VS=10 outside WHPA-A Inorganic parameter and rate of change Organic parameters SSEA Severn Coldwater A & B Agriculture/ Wetland Woodland/ Urban ha ha Sodium (+3.7 mg/l/yr) No exceedances NVCA Adjala- Tosorontio Everett Well I-2 Lisle Well I-1,2 A & B A & B Agriculture Residential/ Municipal Park Agriculture/ Residential 5.85 ha 0.43 ha 1.43 ha 0.13 ha No exceedances No exceedances No exceedances No exceedances Shelburne PW5 & PW6 A & B Agriculture/ Rough Land PW3 A & B Agriculture/ Rough Land Residential 7.64 ha 4.14 ha ha 20.2 ha No exceedances No exceedances No exceedances No exceedances Cannington MW2 & MW7 A & B Agriculture/ Rough Land 5.3 ha 4.6 ha Sodium (+1.2 mg/l/yr) No exceedances Cannington MW3 A & B Agriculture/ Residential 15.7 ha 5.3 ha Sodium (+1.2 mg/l/yr) No exceedances Brock Cannington MW4, MW8 & MW6 A & B Agriculture/ Woodland 44.8 ha 24.4 ha Sodium (+1.2 mg/l/yr) No exceedances Sunderland MW1 & MW2 A & B Agriculture/ Woodland Industrial 23.3 ha 3.4 ha Sodium (-0.03 mg/l/yr) No exceedances LSRCA Kawartha Lakes Western Trent A & B Agriculture/ Residential Woodville Well 1 & 2 A & B Agriculture/ Woodland ha ha 65.3 ha 37.8 ha No exceedances No exceedances No exceedances No exceedances Ramara Davy Drive Well 1, 2 & 3 A & B Agriculture/ Woodland Residential 53.8 ha 5.8 ha Sodium (+0.7 mg/l/yr) No exceedances Val Harbour A & B Agriculture/ Woodland 38.7 ha 22.7 ha Sodium (-1.3 mg/l/yr) No exceedances East Gwillimbury Queensville Well 3 & 4 A & B Residential/ Agriculture 2.0 ha 1.07 ha Sodium (+0.3 mg/l/yr) No exceedances 26