SUMMARY REPORT ONTARIO REGULATION

Transcription

1 SUMMARY REPORT Ontario Clean Water Agency Minesing Well Supply System ONTARIO REGULATION 170/03 SCHEDULE 22 WASAGA BEACH DRINKING WATER SYSTEM FOR THE PERIOD: JANUARY 1, 2016 DECEMBER 31, 2016 Prepared for the Corporation of the Town of Wasaga Beach by the Ontario Clean Water Agency

2 SUMMARY REPORTS FOR MUNICIPALITIES Period from: JANUARY 01, 2016 DECEMBER 31, 2016 DRINKING-WATER SYSTEMS REGULATION O. Reg. 170/03, Schedule 22 DRINKING-WATER SYSTEM NAME: WASAGA BEACH DRINKING WATER SYSTEM DRINKING-WATER SYSTEM NUMBER: DRINKING-WATER SYSTEM CATEGORY: LARGE MUNICIPAL RESIDENTIAL DRINKING-WATER WORKS PERMIT #: , issued March 23, 2016 MUNICIPAL DRINKING WATER LICENCE #: , issued March 23, 2016 PERMIT TO TAKE WATER #: VSRRB This report is a summary of water quality information for the Wasaga Beach Drinking Water System, published in accordance with Schedule 22 of Ontario s Drinking Water Systems Regulation for the reporting period of January 1, 2016 to December 31, The Wasaga Beach Drinking Water System is categorized as a Large Municipal Residential Drinking Water System. This report was prepared by The Ontario Clean Water Agency on behalf of The Corporation of the Town of Wasaga Beach. Issues of Non-Compliance The following table lists the requirements of the Act, Regulations, System Approval(s) and any Order that the system failed to meet at any time during this reporting period and the measures taken to correct each failure. Drinking Water Legislation Requirement(s) the System Failed to Meet Duration Corrective Action(s) Status NO ISSUES OF NON-COMPLIANCE TO REPORT FOR THIS REPORTING PERIOD Wasaga Beach Drinking Water System Page 1 of 4

3 Assessment of System Flows and Rates of Water Taking The following table lists the quantities and flow rates of the water supplied during the period covered by this report, including monthly average and maximum daily flows, daily instantaneous peak flow rates and a comparison to the maximum daily volumes and flow rates specified in the system approval: Powerline Rd. WTP January 1 to December 31, 2016 Powerline Total Raw Water (Conveyed to Treatment System) Powerline Treated Water (Conveyed to Distribution System) Average Day Flow (m 3 /day) 4,446 4,409 Maximum Day Flow (m 3 /day) 9,395 9,144 Total Annual Flow (m3) 1,629,045 1,615,343 Average Flow Rate (L/s) - - Daily Instantaneous Peak Flow Rate (L/s) Maximum Daily Volume (m 3 /day) (as specified (PTTW #7365-9VSRRB and Municipal Drinking Water Licence )) Approved Maximum Flow Rate (L/s) (as specified (PTTW #7365-9VSRRB)) % (Average Day/Maximum Daily Volume) % (Maximum Day/Maximum Daily Volume) % (Average Flow Rate/Approved Maximum Flow Rate) % (Peak Flow Rate/ Approved Maximum Flow Rate) 15,707 15, Daily Instantaneous Peak Flow Rate exceedances are due to pump starts and stops and are instantaneous. 2. % (Peak Flow Rate/Approved Maximum Flow Rate) based on 1. Wasaga Beach Drinking Water System Page 2 of 4

4 Jenetta St. WTP January 1 to December 31, 2016 Jenetta Total Raw Water (Conveyed to Treatment System) Jenetta Treated Water (Conveyed to Distribution System) Average Day Flow (m 3 /day) 2,747 2,747 Maximum Day Flow (m 3 /day) 9,888 9,888 Total Annual Flow (m3) 1,003,059 1,003,059 Average Flow Rate (L/s) - - Daily Instantaneous Peak Flow Rate (L/s) Maximum Daily Volume (m 3 /day) (as specified (PTTW #7365-9VSRRB and Municipal Drinking Water Licence )) Approved Maximum Flow Rate (L/s) (as specified (PTTW #7365-9VSRRB and Municipal Drinking Water Licence )) % (Average Day/Maximum Daily Volume) % (Maximum Day/Maximum Daily Volume) % (Average Flow Rate/Approved Maximum Flow Rate) % (Peak Flow Rate/ Approved Maximum Flow Rate) 15,707 15, Daily Instantaneous Peak Flow Rate exceedances are due to pump starts and stops and are instantaneous. 2. % (Peak Flow Rate/Approved Maximum Flow Rate) based on 1. WASAGA BEACH DRINKING WATER SYSTEM January 1 to December 31, 2016 Total Powerline and Jenetta Treated Water (Conveyed to Distribution System) Average Day Flow (m 3 /day) 7,154 Maximum Day Flow (m 3 /day) 16,665 Minimum Day Flow (m3/day) 2,546 Total Annual Flow (m3) 2,618,401 Maximum Daily Volume (m 3 /day) (as specified in the Municipal Drinking Water Licence )) 31,414 % (Average Day/Maximum Daily Volume) 22.8 % (Maximum Day/Maximum Daily Volume) 53.0 Wasaga Beach Drinking Water System Page 3 of 4

5 A review of flow information for the period of January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016 indicates that the total maximum daily raw water volume specified in the Permit to Take Water for the cluster configuration of wells at Powerline Road or Jenetta Street Pumphouses was not exceeded. As well the rated capacity of Powerline Road and Jenetta Street pumphouses as specified in the Municipal Drinking Water Licence was not exceeded on any day in Please refer to Appendix A for more detailed daily treated water flow data. Please refer to Appendix B for Ministry of the Environment Inspection Results for this drinking water system. Wasaga Beach Drinking Water System Page 4 of 4

6 APPENDIX A WASAGA BEACH DRINKING WATER SYSTEM Contents: January 1 to December 31, 2016 Daily Treated Water Flows Comparison to Previous Years

7 Wasaga Beach Well Supply System 2016 Daily Treated Water Flows Flow (m 3 /day) J F M A M J J A S O N D 2016 Treated Water Maximum Volume Allowed as per Municipal Drinking Water Licence #

8 Daily Treated Water Flow Data WASAGA BEACH January Treated Flow (m 3 /d) 4,636 5,789 4,388 4,619 4,180 4,025 4,526 4,317 4,632 4,594 4,418 3,752 4,479 4,380 February Treated Flow (m 3 /d) 4,422 4,415 4,305 3,491 4,412 4,889 4,534 4,112 3,772 4,332 4,394 3,481 5,151 6,146 March Treated Flow (m 3 /d) 4,429 4,247 4,672 4,154 5,066 5,313 4,334 4,712 4,794 5,001 4,837 5,143 4,953 4,451 April Treated Flow (m 3 /d) 3,855 4,294 5,045 4,192 3,888 3,790 4,488 4,293 4,364 4,563 4,682 4,103 4,907 4,225 May Treated Flow (m 3 /d) 5,905 4,532 6,119 5,589 5,301 6,571 6,278 6,536 5,719 7,173 7,340 7,155 5,629 6,666 June Treated Flow (m 3 /d) 11,307 10,023 10,463 11,837 8,449 7,468 7,474 8,255 8,950 10,346 9,298 10,160 9,687 10,987 July Treated Flow (m 3 /d) 11,462 11,900 14,959 14,290 13,826 14,006 12,417 11,330 9,590 12,522 11,838 12,545 13,688 10,657 August Treated Flow (m 3 /d) 16,241 14,835 14,923 15,923 13,834 15,958 15,863 15,256 14,903 15,585 13,841 13,948 9,983 10,129 September Treated Flow (m 3 /d) 10,651 12,406 13,455 14,427 13,745 11,546 7,562 6,907 7,230 8,890 8,249 8,535 8,847 7,986 October Treated Flow (m 3 /d) 5,785 7,097 5,230 6,173 5,516 6,340 5,712 6,692 6,058 6,591 4,317 5,034 4,151 4,962 November Treated Flow (m 3 /d) 3,824 4,533 4,297 3,960 4,827 5,132 4,376 4,602 3,756 3,685 4,766 5,062 5,073 3,755 December Treated Flow (m 3 /d) 4,332 3,669 4,966 4,584 3,458 4,491 4,541 3,818 4,195 4,427 5,058 4,598 3,833 4,313 Average 2016 Maximum 2016 Minimum 2016 Total ,154 16,665 2,546 2,618,401

9 Daily Treated Water Flow Data WASAGA BEACH ,517 5,076 4,932 3,727 4,343 3,712 4,216 4,313 4,633 4,570 4,404 4,257 3,487 4,413 4,301 4,764 4,190 5,272 4,818 4,951 4,765 4,321 5,618 5,253 4,326 4,544 4,460 4,379 4,417 5,069 5,041 4,450 4,078 5,468 4,539 4,321 4,633 5,066 4,570 3,594 4,666 4,389 4,633 4,247 5,012 4,455 4,168 3,786 4,647 4,090 5,625 5,146 4,554 5,078 4,250 4,762 4,144 5,092 5,412 4,104 4,760 4,563 4,770 5,321 5,171 6,126 5,208 6,857 6,746 7,059 9,515 10,686 11,020 12,567 10,088 9,184 7,747 9,358 11,962 12,817 11,540 8,847 10,608 11,088 12,655 15,052 15,455 12,929 13,428 13,214 13,255 14,935 16,665 14,568 9,803 10,439 12,358 14,097 10,712 13,167 12,855 11,894 12,518 13,558 13,313 14,849 16,274 16,103 13,441 14,424 14,595 14,189 15,050 16,588 13,423 10,402 8,390 7,125 9,093 10,793 10,832 10,331 10,410 10,917 11,115 11,424 11,919 12,326 12,990 11,768 11,360 9,590 8,504 8,624 7,666 7,422 7,137 7,475 7,629 7,007 6,984 7,972 7,879 6,490 5,294 6,527 5,878 6,227 5,738 5,452 4,970 4,585 4,841 4,376 4,581 4,995 4,727 4,584 4,108 4,802 4,445 4,141 5,057 4,954 4,917 4,240 4,297 4,089 4,244 4,523 4,878 3,588 6,049 2,546 3,752 4,733 4,542 4,493 4,308 3,868 3,763 4,020 4,044 4,910 5,202 3,552 4,809 4,402 4,712 3,859 5,688 5,113 5,145 4,455 5,541 3,973 5,387 5,541

10 26,000 Wasaga Beach WTP 2014, 2015 and 2016 Total Treated Flows 24,000 22,000 20,000 18,000 Flow (m 3 /day) 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 J F M A M J J A S O N D

11 26,000 Wasaga Beach WTP 2014, 2015, 2016 against 2007 Total Treated Flows 24,000 22,000 20,000 18,000 Flow (m 3 /day) 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 J F M A M J J A S O N D

12 WASAGA BEACH DWS 2007 to 2016 Daily Treated Water Flow Data in m Average 8,569 7,425 6,837 6,380 6,353 6,876 6,250 6,189 6,905 7,154 Maximum 23,989 20,114 15,354 16,336 19,039 18,528 15,579 14,256 16,344 16,665 Minimum 1,479 3,144 2,717 3,019 1,772 2,456 2,649 2,893 1,737 2,546 Total 3,127,648 2,717,463 2,495,449 2,328,829 2,318,676 2,516,513, 2,281,203 2,259,134 2,520,404 2,618,401 It is evident from the information displayed above that Residential Water Meters continues to influence the amount of water used by the residents of Wasaga Beach (16 % reduction from 2007 to 2016). 30,000 Wasaga Beach DWS - Daily Treated Water in m3/day 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 Average Day Maximum Day 5,

13 APPENDIX B ONTARIO MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT Inspection of WASAGA BEACH DRINKING WATER SYSTEM Date: November 07, 2016 Contents: Application of the Methodology used for Measuring Inspection Results Version July 2011 Inspection Summary Rating Record (Reporting Year: ) Final Inspection Rating: 100 %

14 July 2011 APPLICATION OF THE Revised March 2010 RISK METHODOLOGY USED FOR MEASURING MUNICIPAL RESIDENTIAL DRINKING WATER SYSTEM INSPECTION RESULTS The Ministry of the Environment (MOE) has a rigorous and comprehensive inspection program for municipal residential drinking water systems (MRDWS). Its objective is to determine the compliance of MRDWS with requirements under the Safe Drinking Water Act and associated regulations. It is the responsibility of the municipal residential drinking water system owner to ensure their drinking water systems are in compliance with all applicable legal requirements. This document describes the risk rating methodology, which has been applied to the findings of the Ministry s MRDWS inspection results since fiscal year The primary goals of this assessment ontario.ca/drinkingwater PIBS 6797e are to encourage ongoing improvement of these systems and to establish a way to measure this progress. MOE reviews the risk rating methodology every three years to account for legislative and societal changes that affect acceptable risk levels. As a result of the most recent review, the methodology has been modified to present an improved metric for the evaluation of the risk/safety of MRDWS operations. The Ministry s Municipal Residential Drinking Water Inspection Protocol contains up to 14 inspection modules and consists of approximately 120 regulatory questions. Those protocol questions are also linked to definitive guidance that

15 ministry inspectors use when conducting MRDWS inspections. The questions address a wide range of regulatory issues, from administrative procedures to drinking water quality monitoring. Additionally, the inspection protocol contains a number of nonregulatory questions. A team of drinking water specialists in the ministry have assessed each of the inspection protocol regulatory questions to determine the risk (not complying with the regulation) to the delivery of safe drinking water. This assessment was based on established provincial risk assessment principles, with each question receiving a risk rating referred to as the Question Risk Rating. Based on the number of areas where a system is deemed to be non-compliant during the inspection, and the significance of these areas to administrative, environmental, and health consequences, a risk-based inspection rating is calculated by the ministry for each drinking water system. It is important to be aware that an inspection rating that is less than 100 per cent does not mean that the drinking water from the system is unsafe. It shows areas where a system s operation can improve. To that end, the ministry works with owners and operators of systems to make sure they know what they need to do to achieve full compliance. The inspection rating reflects the inspection results of the specific drinking water system for the reporting year. Since the methodology is applied consistently over a period of years, it serves as a comparative measure both provincially and in relation to the individual system. Both the drinking water system and the public are able to track the performance over time, which encourages continuous improvement and allows systems to identify specific areas requiring attention. The ministry s annual inspection program is an important aspect of our drinking water safety net. The ministry and its partners share a common commitment to excellence and we continue to work toward the goal of 100 per cent regulatory compliance. Determining Potential to Compromise the Delivery of Safe Water The risk management approach used for MRDWS is aligned with the Government of Ontario s Risk Management Framework. Risk management is a systematic approach to identifying potential hazards; understanding the likelihood and consequences of the hazards; and taking steps to reduce their risk if necessary and as appropriate. The Risk Management Framework provides a formula to be used in the determination of risk: Every regulatory question in the inspection protocol possesses a likelihood value (L) for an assigned consequence value (C) as described in Table 1 and Table 2. TABLE 1: RISK = LIKELIHOOD CONSEQUENCE (of the consequence) Likelihood of Consequence Occurring Likelihood Value 0% % (Possible but Highly Unlikely) L = % (Unlikely) L = % (Possible) L = % (Likely) L = % (Almost Certain) L = 4 TABLE 2: Consequence Consequence Value Medium Administrative Consequence C = 1 Major Administrative Consequence C = 2 Minor Environmental Consequence C = 3 Minor Health Consequence C = 4 Medium Environmental Consequence C = 5 Major Environmental Consequence C = 6 Medium Health Consequence C = 7 Major Health Consequence C = 8 2 APPLICATION OF RISK METHODOLOGY

16 The consequence values (0 through 8) are selected to align with other risk-based programs and projects currently under development or in use within the ministry as outlined in Table 2. The Question Risk Rating for each regulatory inspection question is derived from an evaluation of every identified consequence and its corresponding likelihood of occurrence: All levels of consequence are evaluated for their potential to occur The Question Risk Rating quantifies the risk of non-compliance of each question relative to the others. Questions with higher values are those with a potentially more significant impact on drinking water safety and a higher likelihood of occurrence. The highest possible value would be 32 (4 8) and the lowest would be 0 (0 1). Table 3 presents a sample question showing the risk rating determination process. Greatest of all the combinations is selected. TABLE 3: Does the Operator in Charge ensure that the equipment and processes are monitored, inspected and evaluated? Risk = Likelihood Consequence C=1 C=2 C=3 C=4 C=5 C=6 C=7 C=8 Medium Administrative Consequence L=4 (Almost Certain) Major Administrative Consequence L=1 (Unlikely Minor Environmental Consequence L=2 (Possible) Minor Health Consequence L=3 (Likely) Medium Environmental Consequence L=3 (Likely) Major Environmental Consequence L=1 (Unlikely Medium Health Consequence L=3 (Likely) Major Health Consequence L=2 (Possible) R=4 R=2 R=6 R=12 R=15 R=6 R=21 R=16 Application of the Methodology to Inspection Results Based on the results of a MRDWS inspection, an overall inspection risk rating is calculated. During an inspection, inspectors answer the questions that relate to regulatory compliance and input their responses as yes, no or not applicable into the Ministry s Laboratory and Waterworks Inspection System (LWIS) database. A no response indicates non-compliance. The maximum number of regulatory questions asked by an inspector varies by: system (i.e., distribution, stand-alone), type of inspection (i.e., focused, detailed), and source type (i.e., groundwater, surface water). The risk ratings of all non-compliant answers are summed and divided by the sum of the risk ratings of all questions asked (maximum question rating). The resulting inspection risk rating (as a percentage) is subtracted from 100 per cent to arrive at the final inspection rating. APPLICATION OF RISK METHODOLOGY 3

17 Application of the Methodology for Public Reporting The individual MRDWS Total Inspection Ratings are published with the ministry s Chief Drinking Water Inspector s Annual Report. Figure 1: Year Over Year Distribution of MRDWS Ratings 700 Figure 1 presents the distribution of MRDWS ratings for a sample of annual inspections. Individual drinking water systems can compare against all the other inspected facilities over a period of inspection years NUMBER OF INSPECTION RATINGS >50% to 80% >80% to 85% >85% to 90% 5% RATING BANDING BY YEAR >90% to 95% >95% to 100% YEAR A YEAR B YEAR C YEAR D YEAR E 100% Rating Reporting Results to MRDWS Owners/Operators A summary of inspection findings for each system is generated in the form of an Inspection Rating Record (IRR). The findings are grouped into the 14 possible modules of the inspection protocol, which would provide the system owner/operator with information on the areas where they need to improve. The 14 modules are: 1. Source 2. Permit to Take Water 3. Capacity Assessment 4. Treatment Processes 5. Process Wastewater 6. Distribution System 7. Operations Manuals 8. Logbooks 9. Contingency and Emergency Planning 10. Consumer Relations 11. Certification and Training 12. Water Quality Monitoring 13. Reporting, Notification and Corrective Actions 14. Other Inspection Findings For further information, please visit 4 APPLICATION OF RISK METHODOLOGY

18

19