APPENDIX ‘G’
Record of Public Consultation
APPENDIX ‘G-1’
Notices & Stakeholder Mailing List
TOWNSHIP OF ADJALA-TOSORONTIO
SCHEDULE C’ CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
EVERETT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SURFACE WATER OUTFALL
NOTICE OF STUDY COMMENCEMENT
The Township of Adjala-Tosorontio is undertaking a Schedule ‘C’ Class Environmental Assessment
for the design of a surface water outfall to the Pine River for the proposed Everett Wastewater
Treatment Plant (WWTP). Any required upgrades to the WWTP to facilitate the surface water
discharge, including activities such as capacity improvements will also fall under the scope of this
Schedule ‘C’ Class EA.
The Schedule ‘C’ Class EA process is to be completed in accordance with the requirements of the
Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) process (October 2000, as amended in
2012) and the Municipal Engineers Association (MEA) guidelines. As part of the Schedule ‘C’ Class
EA process, the Class EA would complete Phases 3 & 4 of the process (preferred solution design
concepts and Environmental Study Reporting respectively) in order to allow for implementation of
the final phase discharge option for the WWTP to the Pine River.
Public Consultation is vital to the success of this study. We want to ensure that anyone interested in
this project has the opportunity to provide input. Therefore, various forms of public consultation will
take place over the course of this study to receive public input and comments. A Public Information
Centre (PIC) will be held to present alternative servicing strategies and receive public input. Notice
of the PIC will be published in advance of the meeting. At the completion of the planning process,
the Environmental Study Report and the project file for this Schedule ‘C’ project will be filed for
public review.
Project updates and notices will be posted on the Township’s website (www.townshipadjtos.on.ca) to
inform the public of the Environmental Study Report’s progress. Residents and interested parties are
encouraged to regularly visit the website to find out more about the Study.
If you have any questions or concerns, and/or would like to be added to the study mailing list, please
contact one of the study representatives listed below.
Jim Hartman, P.Eng., Senior Associate
Consultant Project Manager
Greenland Consulting Engineers
120 Hume Street
Collingwood, Ontario L9Y 1V5
Tel: 705-444-8805
Fax: 705-444-5482
Email: jhartman@grnland.com
Jim Moss, Public Works
Superintendent
Township of Adjala-Tosorontio
7855 Sideroad 30, R.R. #1
Alliston, ON L9R1V1
Tel: (705) 434-5055
Fax: (705) 434-5051
Email: jmoss@townshipadjtos.on.ca
Comments and information regarding this Municipal Class Environmental Assessment are being
collected in accordance with the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
With the exception of personal information, all comments received will become a part of the public
record. For further information please contact the Township.
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ADJALA-TOSORONTIO
NOTICE OF PARTICULARS AND PUBLIC ACCESS
Under the Ontario Environmental Assessment (EA) Act for:
SCHEDULE ‘C’ CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
(EVERETT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SURFACE WATER OUTFALL)
SYNOPSIS: Public consultation for the Everett Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
Surface Water Outfall Schedule ‘C’ Class EA.
TAKE NOTICE that the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Adjala-Tosorontio will
hold an Open House/Public Information Centre for a Schedule ‘C’ Class EA for a WWTP
Surface Water Outfall to the Pine River under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act on:
THURSDAY MAY 29, 2014
The Open House/Public Information Centre is scheduled to run from 4:00 pm to 7:00 pm. in the
Public Room, with a Question and Answer Period starting at 6:00 in the Council Chambers at
7855 30th Sideroad Adjala.
AN EXPLANATION of the Purpose and Effect of the proposed Surface Water Outfall Class EA, and a
key map showing the location of the lands to be serviced by the WWTP, accompany this notice.
ANY PERSON MAY ATTEND the Open House/Public Information Centre and/or submit written or verbal
comments regarding the Surface Water Outfall Schedule ‘C’ Class EA. Comments will be received at
this Open House/Public Information Centre under the Class EA process.
INFORMATION relating to the proposed Surface Water Outfall Schedule ‘C’ Class EA is available from
the Public Works Department (Jim Moss - jmoss@townshipadjtos.on.ca) during regular office hours
(8:30am to 4:30pm), 7855 Sideroad 30, R.R. #1, Alliston, Ontario, L9R 1V1, Telephone (705) 434-5055.
IF YOU WISH TO MAKE COMMENTS or have any questions following the Open House, please contact
the Public Works Department (as noted above) by June 5, 2014. Comments and information are being
collected in accordance with the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. With
the exception of personal information, all comments received will become part of the public record.
NOTICE OF FUTURE PUBLIC MEETINGS and additional information will be mailed to area property
owners, advertised in the Thursday Herald, and posted on the Township website at
www.townshipadjtos.on.ca.
Dated at the Township of Adjala-Tosorontio this 12th day of May, 2014.
In 2012, The Township of Adjala-Tosorontio completed comprehensive planning policies for future
development of the lands identified in Everett as shown in the key plan below. As part of this process a
Master Servicing Plan (MSP) was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment (Class EA) process.
The MSP identified long term preferred infrastructure solutions for Water, Wastewater, Drainage and
Transportation servicing for the growth anticipated in the proposed Everett Secondary Plan. The MSP
was completed as a Schedule ‘B’ project under the Environmental Assessment Act which included
development of phasing for infrastructure projects and associated additional studies for preferred
solution as part of the MSP. The MSP identified a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) with a surface
outfall to the Pine River as the preferred strategy to service the wastewater treatment needs of Everett,
now and in the future.
13
D5
TY RD
N RD 6
COUN
ESSIO
YR
CONC
UNT
CO
CE S
13
CON
SIO N
Conceptual designs for the preferred solution
will also be developed and summarized in the
form of a comprehensive Environmental Study
Report (ESR).
TY RD
COUN
As part of the Surface Water Outfall Schedule
‘C’ Class EA process, alternative outfall
locations, servicing alignments and treatment
technologies will be explored and assessed on
the basis of their respective impacts to the
social and natural environments, technical
merits and economic viability to arrive at a
comprehensive preferred wastewater treatment
and effluent discharge solution.
RD 4
Based on the foregoing work plan, this study will meet the requirements for Schedule ‘C’ Projects, and
Phases 3 and 4 of the Environmental Assessment Process.
Public consultation will take place over the course of this Project to receive public input and comments.
The Public Information Centre (PIC) will be held to present the evaluation of wastewater treatment and
disposal design concepts. At the completion of the EA process, the project file for this Schedule ‘C’
project will be filed for public review.
Public Consultation is vital to the success of this Study. We want to ensure that anyone interested
in the project has the opportunity to get involved and provide input.
PUBLIC NOTICE
TOWNSHIP OF ADJALA-TOSORONTIO
EVERETT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT AND SURFACE WATER OUTFALL
SCHEDULE ‘C’ CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT – ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
BACKGROUND
The Township of Adjala-Tosorontio (Township) has completed a
Schedule ‘C’ Class Environmental Assessment (EA) to assess
options for a new wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and surface
water outfall design in the Community of Everett.
This
Environmental Study Report (ESR) summarizes the work
completed in support of this project and serves as the milestone for
completion of Phase 4 of the Class EA process.
PROBLEM AND OPPORTUNITY STATEMENT
The Objective of the Everett Wastewater Treatment Plant & Surface
Water Outfall Schedule ‘C’ Class Environmental Assessment (EA)
is to identify and select a preferred alternative Design Concept for
the proposed Everett Wastewater Treatment Plant for service to the
existing community and proposed development in the Everett
servicing area which minimizes impacts to both the natural and
social environments, is both technically feasible and economically
sensible and which can be implemented either as part of a new
facility or as a retrofit to an existing sub-surface facility within the
community.
PROCESS
This Study has been undertaken in accordance with the
requirements for Schedule ‘C’ Projects under Section 4.2 of the
Municipal Class EA document which is approved under the Ontario
Environmental Assessment Act, and will satisfy Phases 3 and 4 of
the Class EA planning process.
The preferred design Concept includes a new Membrane
Bioreactor WWTP located in the north east area of Everett with
surface water outfall to the Pine River west of County Road 13 at
the northern edge of Everett.
A Public Information Centre (PIC) was held on May 29th, 2014.
Phase 3 involves the identifying alternative methods for carrying out
the project and public consultation for the preferred conceptual
design. Phase 4 includes preparation of an Environmental Study
Report that is filed for public review. If no significant impacts are
identified and no requests for a Part II order are received, Schedule
‘C’ projects are then approved and may proceed to Phase 5:
Implementation.
PUBLIC COMMENT INVITED
By this notice the Public is invited to comment on the Schedule ‘C’
Class EA to assess options for a WWTP and surface water outfall
design in the Community of Everett. This Class EA, which
documents the design process undertaken and the conclusions
reached, will be on public record for 30 calendar days in
accordance with Municipal Class EA Document.
The Project Information file will be available for review between
Friday September 12 and Monday October 13, 2014 at the
following location:
Address:
Township of Adjala-Tosorontio
7855 30th Sideroad, R.R. #1
Alliston, ON L9R 1V1
Hours:
8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m.
Monday – Friday
Offices of the Township Clerk
and Planning & Development
Services
Electronic versions of the documents will also be available on the
Township website: http://www.adjtos.ca/
CONTACT INFORMATION
After reading the Class EA Master Servicing Plan Study
Report, interested persons with additional questions or
concerns should provide written comments to the
municipality within 30 calendar days of this Notice.
Comments should be addressed to:
Jim Moss, Public Works Superintendent,
jmoss@townshipadjtos.on.ca
Telephone (705) 434-5055
Township of Adjala-Tosorontio
If major concerns arise regarding this project, which
cannot be resolved through discussions with the
municipality, a person or party may request that the
Minister of the Environment make an order for the project
to comply with Part II of the Environmental Assessment
Act (referred to as a Part II Order), before proceeding to
Phase 5, implementation.
Requests must be received by the Minister at the address
below within 30 calendar days of this Notice.
Minister of the Environment
135 St. Clair Avenue West, 10th floor
Toronto, ON M4V 1P5
In addition, a copy of the request must also be sent to the
Township Clerk.
If there is no “request” received by October 13, 2014, the
Everett wastewater treatment plant and surface water
outfall expansion Schedule ‘C’ Class Environmental
Assessment will be implemented and will proceed as
presented in the planning documentation.
Information will be collected in accordance with the
Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
With the exception of personal information, all comments
will become part of the public record.
This notice issued at the Township of Adjala-Tosorontio
on September 12th, 2014.
Jim Moss, Public Works Superintendent
Township of Adjala-Tosorontio
7855 30th Sideroad, R.R. #1
Alliston, ON L9R1V1
(705) 434-5055
Fax: (705) 434-5051
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
Attn: David Parks
Director of Planning
Administration Building
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario L0L 1X0
NOTTAWASAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION
AUTHORITY
Attn: Chris Hibberd
Director of Planning
8195 Line 8
Utopia, Ontario L0M 1T0
HYDRO ONE
Attention: Zone 2 Scheduling
Planning
40 Olympic Drive
Dundas ON L9H 7P5
Jim Arnott
Planning
Enbridge Distribution Asset Management
4th Floor
P.O. Box 650
Scarborough ON M1K 5E3
SIMCOE MUSKOKA CATHOLIC DISTRICT
SCHOOL BOARD
Attn: Kristin Dibble- Pechkovsky
46 Alliance Blvd
Barrie, Ontario L4M 5K3
BELL CANADA
Attn: John La Chapelle
Planner and Manager
Right-of-Way Control Centre
100 Borough Drive, Floor 5 BLUE
Toronto, ON M1P 4W2
Mr. Albert Aazouz
Planning Manager
Conseil scolaire de district catholique Centre-Sud
110 Drewry Avenue
North York, ON M2M 1C8
Métis Consultation Unit
Méis Nation of Ontario Head Office
500 Old St. Patrick Street, Unit D
Ottawa, Ontario K1N 9G4
ONTARIO POWER GENERATION INC.
Attn: The Executive Vice President
Law and Development
700 University Avenue
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1X6
Simcoe County District School Board
Education Centre
Attn: Holly Spacek
Senior Planner
11170 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario L0L 1X0
Dan Bodnaruk
Canada Post Delivery Planner
200 -5210 Bradco Blvd
Mississauga, Ontario
L4W 1G7
REGION OF PEEL
Attn: Carol Ried, Regional Clerk
10 Peel Centre Drive
Suite A and B
Brampton, Ontario L6T 4B9
COUNTY OF DUFFERIN
Attn: Pam Hillock, Clerk
51 Zina Street
Orangeville, Ontario L9W 1E5
TOWN OF NEW TECUMSETH
Attn: Cheryl McCarrol, Clerk/Manager of Admin
10 Welllington St. E
P.O. Box 910
Allliston ON L9R 1A1
Mr. Larry Clay
Regional Director
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
Municipal Services Office – Central Ontario
777 Bay Street, 2nd Floor
Toronto ON M5G 2E5
TOWNSHIP OF MULMUR
Attn: Terry Horner
CAO/Clerk
758070 2ND LINE E., (TERRA NOVA)
RR # 2
LISLE ON L0M 1M0
TOWN OF MONO
Attn: Mark C. Early
Director of Planning
347209 Mono Centre Road
RR 1
Orangeville ON L9W 2Y8
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
Attn: Quentin Hanchard
Senior Manager
5 Shoreham Drive
Downsview ON M3N 1S4
MTO - Central Region
Corridor Management Office
7th Floor, Building D
1201 Wilson Avenue
Downsview ON M3M 1J8
TOWNSHIP OF ESSA
Attn: Colleen Healey
Manager of Planning and Development
5786 County Road 21
Utopia ON L0M 1T0
CLEARVIEW TOWNSHIP
Attn: Bob Campbell
Clerk
217 Gideon Street
Stayner ON L0M 1S0
Mr. Harm Vandeveen
Rogers Cable
1 Sperling Drive
Barrie, ON L4M 6K9
CANADIAN FORCES BASE BORDEN
Attn: Base Construction Engineering
P.O. Box 1000 Stn Main
Borden, Ontario L0M 1C0
MINISTRY OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND
HOUSING
Municipal Services Office – Central Ontario
Attn: Alejandra Gonzalez
Planner
2nd Floor , 777 Bay Street
Toronto ON M5G 2E5
MRS. SANDRA KUNKEL
46 PINE PARK BLVD
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. GORD HARVEY
7962 MAIN ST
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. DARREN SMITH
14 COLUMBUS LANE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. DOUGLAS YEAMAN
6110 COUNTY ROAD 13
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MS. GLADYS JACQUES
78 MOORE AVENUE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. RICHARD STEPHENS
MRS. JENNIFER STEPHENS
21 GROHAL DRIVE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MRS. BARB PEARCE
52 PINE PARK BLVD
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
WARREN WAYNE
WARREN CINDY
WARREN THOMAS
48 MOORE AVENUE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. ROB HAIDNER
22 WALES AVENUE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MS. ANGELA PETHERICK
6189 COUNTY ROAD 13
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. JAMES BLACKLAWS
8621 20 SIDEROAD
LORETTO ON L0G 1L0
MR. KEN GILMOUR
MRS. MARY-LOU GILMOUR
5 GROHAL DRIVE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. JOHN TOLLES
MRS. CLAUDETTE TOLLES
46 MOORE AVENUE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. JEFF ARMSTRONG
11 BURBANK CIRCLE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. PETER KUNKEL
46 PINE PARK BLVD
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. JOHN MCILRAVEY
MRS. LAURA MCILRAVEY
25 WALES AVENUE NORTH
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. ROB DERMOTT
221 YOUNG STREET
ALLLISTON ON L9R 1V1
MR. MAURO SANTIN
6900 CON RD 4
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MS. ELIZABETH WADDINGTON
5445 CON RD 6
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. MICHAEL HILLMAN
15 GROHAL DRIVE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MS. JUDY BAZINET
10 GROHAL DRIVE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. GARY KOSTER
5639 COUNTY ROAD 13
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MS. B. A. HUMPHRIES
10 DEKKER STREET
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MRS. ELEANOR INCE
13 GROHAL DRIVE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MRS. TRUDY MCLELLAN
5860 CON RD 4
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. DAN CHIASSON
MS. MAUREEN GRAVES
6202 CON RD 4
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. G. CIESLIK
24 WOODLAND HEIGHTS DRIVE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. SCOTT THOMPSON
8236 MAIN STREET WEST
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. HOLGER BROCHERT
6237 COUNTY ROAD 13
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. JAMES FORSTER
5445 CON RD 6
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MRS. BONNIE DERMOTT
221 YOUNG STREET
ALLLISTON ON L9R 1V1
MRS. S. CIESLIK
24 WOODLAND HEIGHTS DRIVE
EVERETT ON L0M 1J0
MR. BRIAN CAMIRAND
8 DEKKER STREET
EVERETT ON L0M1J0
Mr. James O'Mara, Director
Ministry of Environment
Environmental Assessment & Approvals
Branch
2 St. Clair Avenue West
Floor 12A
Toronto, ON M4V 1L5
Mr. Graham Findlay
Ministry of Natural Resources
District Office
2284 Nursery Road
Midhurst, ON LOL 1XO
Ms. Wendy Cornet, Manager
Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs
Consultation Unit
160 Bloor Street East
Suite 900
Toronto. ON M7A 2E6
Mr. Mark Aitken, CAO
County of Sirncoe
Administration Centre
1110 Highway #26
Midhurst, ON LOL 1XO
Ms Cindy Latendresse, Referrals Coordinator
Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Ontario Great Lakes Office, Burlington
District Office
P.O. Box 85060
3027 Harvester Road, Suite 304
Burlington ON L7R 4K3
Mr. David Few
Simcoe County District School Board
Education Centre
1170 Highway #26
Midhurst, ON LOL 1XO
Ms. Debbie Korolnek
General Manager of Engineering, Planning
and Environment
County of Simcoe
Administration Centre
1110 Highway #26
Midhurst, ON LOL 1XO
Mr. Andrew Jamieson, Water Management
Engineer
Ministry of Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs
6484 Wellington Road
Unit #10
Elora, ON N0B1S0
Mr. Gary Molnar,
Ministry of Tourism & Recreation
Simcoe Regional Office
2284 Nursery Road
Midhurst, ON LOL lXO
Ms. Sonya Pritchard, CAO
County of Dufferin
51 Zina Street
Orangeville, ON L9W 1E5
Ms. Cindy Hood, District Manager
Ministry of Environment
Barrie District Office
54 Cedar Pointe Drive
Unit 1201
Barrie, ON L4N 5R7
Ms. Paula Kulpa, Team Lead
Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport
Land Use Planning
401 Bay Street
Suite 1700
Toronto, ON M7A 0A7
Ms. Allison Berman, Regional Subject Expert
Ministry of Indian & Northern Affairs Canada
Consultation and Accommodation Unit
300 Sparks
Ottawa, ON K1A 0H4
Mr. Colin Bonnell
Bell Canada
136 Bayfield Street
Floor 12
Barrie, ON L4M 3Bl
Ms. Joanna MacDermid
Hydro One
West Central Zone Scheduling
40 Olympic Drive
Dundas ON L9H 7P5
Tanzeel Merchant
Manager; Growth Planning and Analysis
Ontario Growth Secretariat
Ministry of Infrastructure
777 Bay Street, 4th Floor, Suite 425
Toronto ON M5G 2E5
Dr. Charles Gardner, Chief Medical Officer
Simcoe County District Health Unit
15 Sperling Drive
Barrie, ON L4M 6K9
Mr. John Taylor, Senior Planner
Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing
Municipal Services Office -Central Ontario
777 Bay Street
14th floor
Toronto, ON M5G 2E5
Ministry of Economic Development And Trade
2284 Nursery Road
Midhurst, ON LOL 1XO
Ms. Terri Caron, CAO
Town of New Tecumseth
10 Wellington Street East
Alliston, ON L9R 1A1
Ms. Chunmei Liu
Environmental Resource Planner & EA
Coordinator
Ministry of Environment
Central Region Office
5775 Yonge Street
9th Floor
Toronto, ON M2M 4J1
Ontario Provincial Police
Huronia District
1000 River Road West
Wasaga Beach ON L9Z2K8
Mr. Richard Saunders, Director
Corporate Policy and Management Branch,
Ontario
Native Affairs Secretariat
720 Bay Street
4th Floor
Toronto, ON M5G 2K1
Enbridge Gas
Records Department
500 Consumers Road
North York, ON M2J 1P8 Mr. Wayne Wilson
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
8195 Concession 8
Utopia, ON LOM 1T0
Dr. R. Griffiths, Env. Assess. Coordinator
Ministry of Environment
London Regional Office
733 Exeter Road
London, ON N6E 1L3
Mr. Jim Ritter, Engineer
Ministry of Agriculture Food & Rural Affairs
R.R.#3, 95 Dundas St.
Brighton, ON KOK 1HO
Ms. Kathy Woeller, Dirstrict Planner
Ministry of Natural Resources
2284 Nursery Road
Midhurst, ON LOL 1XO
Simcoe County Paramedic Services
Administration Centre
1110 Highway #26
Midhurst, ON LOL 1XO
Mr. John Companion
Simcoe County Housing Corporation
136 Bayfield Street
4th Floor
Barrie, ON L4M 3B1
Mr. David Szwarc, CAO
Region of Peel
10 Peel Centre Drive
Suite A, 5th Floor, Room 504
Brampton, ON L6T 4B9
Tim Haldenby, MScPIm MCIP, RPP
Team Lead, Planning Projects
Municipal Services Office – Central
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
777 Bay Street, 2nd Floor
Toronto ON M5G 2E5
Mr. Peter Dorton, Project Manager
Ministry of Transportation
Corridor Management (Central)
1201 Wilson Avenue
7th Floor
Downsview ON M3M 1J8
Mr. Greg Murphy, CAO
Township of Essa
5786 County Rd 21
Utopia ON L0M 1T0
APPENDIX ‘G-2’
Public Presentation Materials and Handouts
panel
title
EA
Process
Everett Wastewater Treatment Plant Schedule “C” Class Environmental Assessment
This Schedule “C” Environmental Assessment is being prepared in accordance
with the requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Class
EA) process.
As part of this Schedule “C” Environmental Assessment, Design Concepts will
be evaluated, selected, and recommended for implementation.
Everett Community WWTP EA
Schedule “A/A+” Projects

Considered minor operation and maintenance activities and are
selected for pre-approval without requirements for further
assessment.

These projects are typically limited in scale and present minimal
impacts to the surrounding environment.

Schedule A+ projects require that the public be advised prior to
project implementation.
Schedule “B” Projects

Generally include improvements and minor expansions to existing
facilities where there is potential for some environmental impacts.

These projects require screening of alternatives for their environmental
impacts and completion of Phases 1 and 2 of the Class EA planning
process.

Provided no significant impacts are identified, Schedule “B” projects
are approved and may proceed directly to Phase 5.
Schedule “C” Projects

These projects have the potential for significant environmental effects
and therefore must proceed under full planning and documentation
procedures.

Requires that an Environmental Study Report be prepared and filed for
review by the public and review agencies.

Generally consist of construction of new facilities and major expansions
to existing facilities (e.g. new Wastewater Treatment Plant with surface
water discharge).
WE ARE
HERE
Figure 1- Municipal Class EA Planning and Design Process
This study will fulfill Phases 3 and 4 of the Class EA Process, satisfying the
requirements for Schedule ‘C’ projects
panel
title
Background
Review
Summary of Master Servicing Plan (MSP) Recommended Preferred Alternative
Population and Land-Use Projections
•
•
•
•
•
Existing Residential Population :1,929 Persons
Projected Future Residential Population: 9,444 Persons
Future Commercial Land Use Area: 10.3 ha (EP = 943 Persons)
Future Institutional Land Use Area: 13.6 ha (EP = 282 Persons)
Total Projected Equivalent Population (EP): 10,669 Persons
Existing Sewage Systems
• No sanitary trunk sewer network currently exists within the Community of Everett. The
majority of Everett has individual septic systems with tile beds.
• The only area in Everett with existing municipal sanitary service is the New Horizons
Subdivision which includes a Subsurface Discharge Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP),
with high operating and maintenance costs.
• The proposed R&M Homes Subdivision Draft Plan includes provisions for an initial
subsurface discharge WWTP with initial capacity for an Equivalent Population (EP) of
approximately 800 persons (300 Units).
Everett Community WWTP EA
OPTION WWT-9
OPTION WWC-B
Everett Sanitary Master Servicing Plan (MSP) Solution
The recommended preferred Sanitary Servicing Master Plan for the Everett included the
following general characteristics:
• Approximately 1,400m of gravity trunk sewer as shown in OPTION WWC-B, ranging in
diameter from 375mm to 525mm, with its main spine along Wales Ave. and discharging
at a new SPS in the R&M Homes Subdivision.
• One (1) subsurface discharge WWTP, located to the north east of the proposed R&M
Homes Development with room for future expansion to a surface water discharge
facility.
• Future expansion of the treatment facility should also include an effluent pump and
forcemain which discharges treated effluent to the Pine River, as shown in Option WWT-9
• Technical studies indicate expansion to a surface water discharge solution should occur
once the serviced population exceeds 800 persons (300 units).
A Master Servicing Plan for Everett was completed in 2013, which resulted in a
preferred servicing strategy for transportation, stormwater, water and wastewater
panel
title
Background
Review
Assimilative Capacity, Effluent Requirements & Phasing
Pine River Assimilative Capacity Study
• An Assimilative Capacity Study was completed by Greenland Consulting Engineers for
the Pine River to determine if capacity to accept treated wastewater effluent for the
proposed ultimate build-out population of Everett exists within the water course.
• The Study found that a Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) with treatment capacity
for a population of approximately10,000 will not cause conditions downstream to
exceed Provincial Water Quality Objectives under the conditions evaluated.
• In spite of the apparent capacity within the Pine River for additional nutrient loading,
it was recommended through the MSP that additional measures be taken to ensure
effluent quality is as high as possible. As such, a phosphorous concentration objective
of 0.05 mg/L for treated WWTP effluent has been used in assessment of design
concepts for the proposed Surface Water Outfall WWTP.
Everett Community WWTP EA
• Recommended Effluent Quality Parameters for The Everett WWTP were developed as
part of this EA and are presented below:
Effluent Requirements
Parameter
Compliance Limit
Design Objective
TP (mg/L)
0.1
0.051
Total Ammonia (mg/L)
1.8
1.82
TSS (mg/L)
10
53
BOD (mg/L)
10
53
Total Fecal Coliform (CFU/100 mL)
200
2004
WWTP Class EA Development Phasing
• WWTP to be Constructed in Four (4)
Phases
• Ultimate Servicing Capacity for an
Equivalent Population of 10,669
persons
Other Relevant Background Information
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Hydrogeological Report
Archaeological Report
Natural Environment Study
Existing Conditions Water & Wastewater
Servicing Studies
Natural Hazards Study
Pre-Development Drainage Study
Traffic and Transportation Study
Existing Draft Plans
Township of Adjala-Tosorontio & County
of Simcoe “As-Constructed” Drawings
The Community of Everett Master
Servicing Plan (MSP) Class EA
Note:
1) Recommended by the Everett Secondary Plan Master Servicing Plan (November 2012)
2) Used by the Pine River Assimilative Capacity Study (December 2012)
3) Proposed by the R&M for the in-process R&M WWTP
4) ECA limit at the nearby Angus WWTP.
The background information provided was used to develop and
evaluate WWTP Design Concepts
panel
title
Evaluation Criteria
As part of the final solution selection process, both for the Everett MSP and the current WWTP & Surface
Water Outfall Schedule ‘C’ Class EA “short listed” alternative solutions and concept designs were ranked
against one another in relative terms for each of the evaluation criteria presented below.
Natural Environment Impacts:
•
Impacts of the option to vegetation, wildlife & the Natural Environment; and
•
Surface/groundwater quality and quantity implications;
Social / Cultural Environment Impacts:
•
Land Use & Archaeological Considerations;
•
Traffic impacts & interruption to residents; and
•
Visual landscape/aesthetic impacts of the option.
Everett Community WWTP EA
Technical/Operational Considerations:
•
Difficulty to construct or implement the Option relative to other alternatives; and
•
Operation & Maintenance Efficiency.
Economic Impacts:
•
Capital/construction costs;
•
Long term/operation & maintenance cost burden; and
•
Payment structure, cost recovery options for Municipality, Phasing Flexibility.
Design concept options were ranked using a colour coded system for each of the above criteria, where
“green” represented the most preferred concept, “yellow” criteria represented less preferred concepts
and criteria in “red” represented the least preferred concept.
The option which received the most “green” rankings became the recommended preferred design
concept for each Design Concept Category (i.e. Wastewater Treatment, Site Plan, Forcemain Alignment
etc.)
The criteria listed above were used to evaluate WWTP Design Concepts
title
Detailed panel
Evaluation
Everett Community WWTP EA
Wastewater Treatment Plant Location
As part of the Everett MSP Class EA Process, two (2) locations, shown below as Option 8 & Option 9, were shortlisted and
evaluated in detail. Review of the MSP evaluation process indicates a number of advantages to Option 9:
•
•
•
Preliminary investigations and concept designs being completed as part of the draft plan process result in
less cost;
Less impact to the natural environment including forested areas; and,
Least potential impact to the existing community and future development areas from the perspective of
noise and odour due to the direction of prevailing winds relative to the plant.
WWTP Locations were Evaluated as part of the MSP
title
Detailed panel
Evaluation
Everett Community WWTP EA
Short Listed Wastewater Process Design Strategies – Concept WWT-1 & WWT-2
Extended Aeration + Two
Stage Filtration (WWT-1)
Extended Aeration +
Membrane Filtration (WWT-2)
Shortlisted Concepts Were Evaluated in Detail to Arrive at the
Preferred Design Concept
title
Detailed panel
Evaluation
Everett Community WWTP EA
Short Listed Wastewater Process Design Strategies – Concept WWT-3 & WWT-4
SBR + Two Stage
Filtration (WWT-3)
SBR + Membrane
Filtration (WWT-4)
Shortlisted Concepts Were Evaluated in Detail to Arrive at the
Preferred Design Concept
title
Detailed panel
Evaluation
Everett Community WWTP EA
Short Listed Wastewater Process Design Strategies – Concept WWT-5
Membrane Bio
Reactor (WWT-5)
Shortlisted Concepts Were Evaluated in Detail to Arrive at the
Preferred Design Concept
title
Detailed panel
Evaluation
Short List Evaluation of Wastewater Process Design Strategies
Liquid Treatment Strategies & Rankings
Design Strategy WWP-1
Extended Aeration + Two Stage Filtration
Option WWP-2
Extended Aeration + Membrane Filtration
Option WWP-3
SBR + Two Stage Filtration
Option WWP-4
SBR + Membrane Filtration
Option WWP-5
Membrane Bioreactor (MBR)
Moderate energy consumption
High energy consumption due to membrane
operation
Moderate energy consumption
High energy consumption due to membrane
operation
High energy consumption due to membrane
operation
Energy Consumption
Impact on receiving water
It could produce good quality effluent
Membrane could provide high quality effluent
It could produce good quality effluent
Membrane could provide high quality effluent
Membrane could provide high quality effluent
Groundwater quality implications
It would require high volume of excavation and
dewatering
It would require high volume of excavation and
dewatering
It would require high volume of excavation and
dewatering
It would require high volume of excavation and
dewatering
It would require low volume of excavation and
dewatering
Evaluation Criteria
Natural Environment Impacts
Natural Environment Overall Rating
Social / Cultural Environment Impacts
Noise and Odour
Traffic impacts & interruption to residents
It would create moderate level of noise and odour It would create moderate level of noise and odour It would create moderate level of noise and odour It would create moderate level of noise and odour It would create moderate level of noise and odour
The main traffic resulted from liquid treatment is
chemical delivery for phosphorous removal
The main traffic resulted from liquid treatment is
chemical delivery for phosphorous removal
The main traffic resulted from liquid treatment is
chemical delivery for phosphorous removal
The main traffic resulted from liquid treatment is
chemical delivery for phosphorous removal
The main traffic resulted from liquid treatment is
chemical delivery for phosphorous removal and
membrane cleaning
Social / Cultural Environment Overall Rating
Technical/Operational Considerations
Everett Community WWTP EA
Performance reliability, robustness
and resilience
Operation & Maintenance Requirements and
Complexity
Future Proofing and Flexibility
It would be able to produce effluent meeting the It would be able to produce effluent meeting the It would be able to produce effluent meeting the
It would produce effluent with quality meeting and
objectives. However, the system is sensitive to
objectives. However, the system is sensitive to
objectives. However, the system is sensitive to It would be able to produce effluent meeting the
beyond the objectives. It is more resilient to load
secondary clarifier performance. Adding septage secondary clarifier performance. Adding septage flow variations and ability to settle sludge. Adding objectives. However, the system is sensitive to
variations. Flow variations could be addressed
into the treatment process could significantly
into the treatment process could significantly
septage into the treatment process could
flow variations and sludge settlability.
with additional membrane units.
impact the clarifier performance.
impact the clarifier performance.
significantly impact the clarification performance.
It would require operations on secondary and
tertiary processes.
It would require operations on secondary and
tertiary processes.
It would require operations on secondary and
tertiary processes.
It would require operations on secondary and
tertiary processes.
It would be difficult to meet more stringent effluent It would be able to meet more stringent effluent It would be difficult to meet more stringent effluent It would be able to meet more stringent effluent
phosphorous limits. It has moderate level of
phosphorous limits. It has moderate level of
phosphorous limits. It has moderate level of
phosphorous limits. It has moderate level of
flexibility for future expansion due to large
flexibility for future expansion due to large
flexibility for future expansion due to largest
flexibility for future expansion due to large
footprint requirements.
footprint requirements.
footprint requirements.
footprint requirements.
It would only require operations on one system
(MBR) to meet the required water quality.
It would be able to meet more stringent effluent
phosphorous limits. It has high level of flexibility
for future expansion due to moderate footprint
requirements.
Technical/Operational Considerations Rating
Economic Impacts
Capital/construction costs
It has moderate capital cost
It has the highest capital cost
Largest Footprint - Moderate to high capital cost
It has the highest capital cost
It has the lowest capital cost
Long term/operation & maintenance cost burden
It has low long term O&M cost
It has high long term O&M cost
It has low long term O&M cost
It has high long term O&M cost
It has moderate long term O&M Cost
Life Cycle Cost (including revenue potential from
septage treatment)
High Life Cycle Cost
Highest Life Cycle Cost
Similar Life Cycle Cost to WWP-1
Similar Life Cycle Cost to WWP-2
Moderate Life Cycle Costs
Economic Ranking
Overall Ranking:
Legend
Less Preferred
Most Preferred
Shortlisted Concepts Were Evaluated in Detail to Arrive at the
Preferred Design Concept
Least Preferred
panel
title
Conclusion & Next
Steps
Everett Community WWTP EA
Membrane Bioreactor (MBR)
WWTP Cost Assessment
Design Strategy WWP-5
Extended Aeration (with Tertiary
Filtration) WWTP Cost Assessment
Design Strategy WWP-1
Estimated Total Maintenance &
Operational Costs (2014 $)
$13 - $15 Million
Estimated Capital Cost (2014 $)
$26 - $28 Million
Estimated Capital Cost (2014 $)
$31 - $34 Million
Estimated 20 Year Life Cycle Cost
$39 - $43 Million
Estimated 20 Year Life Cycle Cost
$43 - $48 Million
Estimated Total Maintenance & Operational
$12 - $14 Million
Costs (2014 $)
A Final Design Concept will be Prepared Following Public and
Agency Consultations
title
Detailed panel
Evaluation
Everett Community WWTP EA
Short Listed WWTP Site Plan Design Concepts
Concept SP-1
• Proposed Design by R&M Homes
• MBR Plant Expansion to the North
of Office/Blower and Solids Storage
• Solids Storage Located East of
Office/Blower
Concept SP-2
• MBR Plant Expansion to the South
of Office/Blower and Solids Storage
• Solids Storage East of &
Connected to Office/Blower
Building
Concept SP-3
• MBR Plant Expansion to the South
of Office/Blower and Solids Storage
• Office/Blower Building Located East
of Solids Storage Building &
Separated by Parking Lot / Buffer
Zone
Shortlisted Concepts Were Evaluated in Detail to Arrive at the
Preferred Design Concept
title
Detailed panel
Evaluation
Short List Evaluation of Site Plan Design Concepts
Concept SP-1
Evaluation Criteria
R&M Homes Proposed WWTP Configuration Treatment Expansion to North of Admin Building
Concept SP-2
Concept SP-3
Buffer Between Equipment & Admin Buildings Connected Equipment & Admin Buildings - Headworks
& Treatment Train Expansion to South of Admin
Headworks & Treatment Train Expansion to South of
Building
Admin Building
Natural Environment Impacts
Impacts of the option to vegetation, wildlife & the
Natural Environment
Shorter Ring Road than SP-3
Shorter Ring Road than SP-3
Surface/groundwater & Air quality implications
Construction Dewatering could be required. Office
Building downwind of Headworks
Construction Dewatering could be required. More
stringent indoor air quality requirements.
Longer ring road, but potential to offset with additional
Landscaping
Construction Dewatering could be required. Best
Option with respect to indoor air quality
Natural Environment Overall Rating
Social / Cultural Environment Impacts
Land Use & Archaeological Considerations
(Including First Nations)
No significant Issues – Provides 100 m separation from No significant Issues – Provides 100 m separation from No significant Issues – Provides 100 m separation from
nearest residential property (Barzo)
nearest residential property (Barzo)
nearest residential property (Barzo)
Noise & Odour Considerations
No Significant Impacts (with adequate mitigation)
No Significant Impacts (with adequate mitigation)
No Significant Impacts (with adequate mitigation)
Visual landscape/Aesthetic impacts
No Significant Impacts (with adequate mitigation)
No Significant Impacts (with adequate mitigation)
No Significant Impacts (with adequate mitigation)
Social / Cultural Environment Overall Rating
Everett Community WWTP EA
Technical/Operational Considerations
Expansion to north will require additional measures to
Difficulty to construct or implement the Option relative
maintain air quality due to prevailing winds. Separate
to other alternatives
foundations for Admin / Equipment Buildings
Operation & Maintenance Efficiency
Similar for all options.
Single foundation for Admin / Equipment Buildings
connected building will be more complicated
mechanically.
Similar for all options.
Least difficult option to construct from an indoor air
quality perspective. Multiple foundations.
Similar for all options.
Technical/Operational Considerations Rating
Economic Impacts
Capital/construction costs
Higher excavation costs due to number of buildings.
Lower excavation costs due to number of buildings.
Higher ring road & excavation costs
Long term/operation & maintenance cost burden
Similar for all options.
Similar for all options.
Payment structure, cost recovery options for
Municipality, Phasing Flexibility
Expansion to south is preferable from a phasing
perspective. Re-use of R&M Facilities is possible.
Expansion to south is preferable from a phasing
perspective. Re-use of R&M Facilities more difficult.
Similar for all options.
Expansion to south is preferable from a phasing
perspective. Re-use of Proposed R&M Facilities is
possible.
Economic Ranking
Overall Ranking:
Less Preferred
Most Preferred
Shortlisted Concepts Were Evaluated in Detail to Arrive at the
Preferred Design Concept
Least Preferred
title
Detailed panel
Evaluation
Forcemain Routing Design Concepts & Short List Evaluation
Evaluation Criteria
Concept FM – 3 (A & B)
Forcemain From R&M Homes WWTP via
R&M Homes future subdivision & CR 13.
Concept FM - 4
Forcemain From R&M Homes WWTP via Barzo
Lands future subdivision & CR 13.
Natural Environment Impacts
Impacts of the option to vegetation, wildlife &
the Natural Environment
Discharge pipe would need to be constructed
in existing Environmental Setback. Mitigation Same discharge pipe impacts as Concept FM 3.
Measures will be required.
Surface/groundwater quality implications
Less dewatering as there are no watercourse
crossings.
Less dewatering as there are no watercourse
crossings.
Concept FM-3
Natural Environment Overall Rating
Social / Cultural Environment Impacts
Land Use & Archaeological Considerations
(Including First Nations)
Alignment will require a Stage 2 Archeological Alignment will require a Stage 2 Archeological
Assessment. Easement required for FM.
Assessment. Easement required for FM.
Traffic impacts & interruption to residents
Construction impacts limited to County Road
13
Construction impacts on County Road 13,
slightly less than FM - 1 due to shorter length.
Visual landscape/Aesthetic impacts
Minimal visual impact.
Minimal visual impact.
Moderate Forcemain depth but requires the
longest run of pipe. This option follows the
approved draft plan road layout for the R&M
Homes Subdivision.
Moderate Forcemain depth, requires less pipe
length than Concept FM – 3, but follows an
unapproved subdivision plan within the Barzo
Lands.
Single SPS will require regular maintenance.
Single SPS will require regular maintenance.
Capital Costs of Forcemain is expected to be
approximately $400,000
Capital Costs of Forcemain are expected to be
slightly greater than $400,000.
Social / Cultural Environment Overall Rating
Everett Community WWTP EA
Technical/Operational Considerations
Difficulty to construct or implement the Option
relative to other alternatives
Operation & Maintenance Efficiency
Concept FM-4
Technical/Operational Considerations Rating
Economic Impacts
Capital/construction costs
Lowest maintenance cost due to single SPS
Long term/operation & maintenance cost burden
and shallower sewers.
Flexible recovery as alignment allows for
Payment structure, cost recovery options for
installation in approved R&M Homes draft
Municipality, Phasing Flexibility
plan of subdivision lands.
Similar maintenance costs as Concept FM - 3
Less flexible as alignment is located within
lands without an approved draft plan of
subdivision.
Economic Ranking
Less Preferred
Most Preferred
Overall Ranking:
Shortlisted Concepts Were Evaluated in Detail to Arrive at the
Preferred Design Concept
Least Preferred
panel
title
Conclusion & Next
Steps
Everett Community WWTP EA
Summary of Recommended
Design Concepts
The recommended overall preferred design
concept for the Everett WWTP and Outfall
includes the following Preferred Concepts for
WWTP Location, Wastewater Process Design, Site
Plan Design & Forcemain Alignment & Outfall
Location respectively:
• WWTP to be located north-east of R&M Homes
Subdivision (Option WWT-9 as per the Everett
Secondary Plan MSP);
• Wastewater Treatment & Process to be MBR
with no primary clarification and offsite disposal
of solids (Design Strategy WWP-5);
• WWTP Site Plan to include buffer between
Office and Equipment Room with Headworks &
MBR to the South (Design Concept SP-3);
• Forcemain Alignment shall go west through the
R&M Homes property, Outfall Design Concept
FM-3 with Mitigation Option B (effluent
polishing) to be investigated at the detailed
design stage.
A Final Design Concept will be Prepared Following Public and
Agency Consultations
panel
title
Conclusion & Next
Steps
Everett Community WWTP EA
Potential Impact
Mitigation Strategy
• Investigation of Concept FM-3B - Discharge treated effluent to a rehabilitated gravel pit
west of County Road 13
Surface Water Quality & • Nutrient offsetting and downstream monitoring of nutrient loading are proposed
Monitoring of Effluent • Proposed WWTP effluent objective is 0.05mg/L for Total Phosphorus, approximately
From WWTP
half of the allowable discharge within the Pine River Assimilative capacity
• The Certificate of Approval for the WWTP will require, that effluent quality is monitored
and effluent limits and objectives are achieved
• Outlet pipe alignment to be located within existing road right of way until pipe reaches
Infringement on
northern boundary of natural areas west of County Road 13
Environmental Protection
• Outlet to go through former quarry lands to minimize impacts to environmental/hazard
and Hazard Setback Areas
areas
What is Mitigation?
• Additional Considerations which
help to further reduce
environmental impacts
• Example: Architectural design for
the Creemore WWTP was made to
blend into the rural landscape
Creemore WWTP
• Engineering & Landscape design for WWTP Site and FM Alignment to be designed to
Stormwater Management
match existing drainage patterns and in accordance with Township and NVCA
& Drainage
Requirements
Removal of Trees &
Vegetation
Residential Impacts
(Noise, Odour & Visual
Impacts)
• Recommended Solution minimizes impacts to existing vegetation
• Restore Construction areas with native species
• WWTP Architectural Design should compliment surrounding community (e.g. Creemore
"Barn" WWTP)
• Detailed WWTP Landscape design should include screening (i.e. berms, trees and other
plantings)
• Detailed WWTP Site Plan design should include adequate buffers for noise and odour
Source: www.canadianconsultingengineer.com
A Final Design Concept will be Prepared Following Public and
Agency Consultations
panel
title
Conclusion & Next
Steps
Potential Impact
Mitigation Strategy
Sediment &
Erosion Control
Disturbance to
Trees & Vegetation
• Sedimentation and erosion control strategies will be developed for each individual site prior to construction.
Traffic
Temporary Impacts
(e.g. dust, noise & vibration)
• Recommended Solution minimizes impacts to existing vegetation
• Construction areas to be restored with native species
• Consultation with Ministry of Transportation, County of Simcoe, local utilities and school boards may be required
prior to or during construction.
• Affected Property Owners will be notified in advance of construction schedule and duration.
• Construction activities will be limited to day-light hours to minimize impacts to residents.
• Dust and storm water controls to be implemented during construction.
Everett Community WWTP EA
Next Steps
• Conduct Agency and Public Consultations on the Recommended Preferred Design Concepts (this Open House);
• Incorporate PIC and Agency comments into the Final Design Concept Selection;
• Develop Implement Strategy preferred Design Concept
• Finalize the Environmental Study Report (ESR) and Publish Notice of Study Completion (Estimated Timing: July 2014); and,
• Place the ESR and Class EA Summary Report on public review and comment for a period of 30 days.
If no Part II Order Requests are received during the ESR 30 day review period , the Class EA would be concluded and the
project would proceed to the implementation stage following the 30 day review period.
A Final Design Concept will be Prepared Following Public and
Agency Consultations
The Township of
Adjala-Tosorontio
Everett Wastewater Treatment Plant
Schedule “C” Class Environmental Assessment
Public Information Centre No.1
May 29, 2014
Welcome Message from the Project Team
Tonight’s event is an opportunity for you to hear about and offer input on the Everett Waste Water
Treatment Plant (WWTP) Schedule “C” Class Environmental Assessment that is currently being
conducted by the Township of Adjala-Tosorontio.
This Public Open House handout will help you to navigate the evening’s activities. This handout
contains:
 Project Background & Key Contacts:
 Evaluation Criteria Used to Develop Design Concepts;
 Detailed Evaluation Tables for Design Concepts;
 Summary of the Recommended Preferred Concepts; and,
 Tear-off Comments Sheets (to be returned to the Township by June 12, 2014).
What are we doing this evening?
Our goals for this evening are:
 Explain the basis and need for the study;
 Describe the work done to date and share our findings;
 Discuss our decision-making framework;
 Present the Recommended Preferred Design Concepts for the Study Area; and,
 Hear your opinions and your input on the recommended concepts.
Input that is received tonight will be carefully considered as we finalize the recommended preferred
design concepts for the Everett WWTP Schedule “C” Class Environmental Assessment for
consideration by the Township of Adjala-Tosorontio.
A final comment...
Each participant brings valuable opinions, experiences and suggestions. You are not expected to
be an expert on wastewater or municipal infrastructure. The project team will guide the
discussions. We are interested in your perspective. We would like to hear from everyone. We
hope this handout will help you to participate fully today.
Thank you for your time and input!
Everett WWTP EA
|
Greenland International Consulting Ltd.
Project Background...
Everett WWTP Schedule “C” Class Environmental Assessment
The Schedule “C” Class Environmental Assessment is being prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) process. Phases 1 and
2 of the Municipal Class EA were completed as part of the Everett Master Servicing Plan. This part
of the EA process will meet the requirements for Phases 3 and 4. Schedule “C” projects identified
in the Master Plan included the Everett WWTP and Surface Water Outfall to the Pine River.
Schedule “C” projects must proceed with Phases 3 and 4 (ESR) of the Class EA process prior to
progressing to implementation (Phase 5). Upon completion this project can proceed to Phase 5.
Municipal Class EA Planning and Design Process
Everett WWTP EA
|
Greenland International Consulting Ltd.
Alternative Design Concepts for the Preferred Solution
Based on Review of the MSP for the Everett Secondary Plan Area, alternative Design
Concepts were developed and evaluated for the Community of Everett WWTP Class EA.
The Objective of the Everett WWTP Schedule “C” Class EA is to identify and select a
preferred Design Concept for the Everett WWTP and Surface Water Outfall which
minimizes impacts to both the natural and social environments and is both technically
feasible and economically sensible.
Public Consultation
The public is being consulted through one (1) public information centre (PIC). This formal
PIC presents the study recommendations. The PIC is being advertised in the local media
and circulated to our stakeholders list.
Project Timing
This study is scheduled to be completed in the summer of
2014, culminating in the filing of the Environmental Study Report (ESR) and the
subsequent filing of a Notice of Completion for a 30-day public review period.
Project Team…
The Township of Adjala-Tosorontio:
Mr. Jim Moss
Public Works Superintendent
jmoss@townshipadjtos.on.ca
Ph: 705-434-5055
Everett WWTP EA
|
Engineering Consulting Firm:
Mr. Jim Hartman, P.Eng.,
Senior Associate
Greenland International Consulting Ltd.
jhartman@grnland.com
Ph: 705-444-8805 ext. 254
Greenland International Consulting Ltd.
Recommended Design Concepts
Everett WWTP EA
|
Greenland International Consulting Ltd.
Thank you for your participation today! If you have any questions, comments or outstanding
concerns as we move forward, please contact:
Engineering Consulting Firm:
The Township of Adjala-Tosorontio
Mr. Jim Moss
Public Works Superintendent
7855 Sideroad 30, R.R. #1, Alliston,
Ontario, L9R 1V1,
Mr. Jim Hartman, P.Eng.,
Greenland International Consulting Ltd.
Senior Associate
120 Hume Street
Collingwood, Ontario L9Y 1V5
Phone: (705) 434-5055
Fax: (705) 434-5051
Email: jmoss@townshipadjtos.on.ca
Phone 705.444.8805
Fax 705.444.5482
Email: jhartman@grnland.com
Copies of the presentation and poster boards from tonight’s Public Information Centre
(PIC) will soon be available on the township’s website at: http://www.townshipadjtos.on.ca/
Please complete the following comment sheet and return it at
the end of the event or send your comments to Jim Moss by no
later than June 12, 2014.
Mr. Jim Moss
Public Works Superintendent
7855 Sideroad 30, R.R. #1, Alliston,
Ontario, L9R 1V1,
Phone: (705) 434-5055
Fax: (705) 434-5051
Email: jmoss@townshipadjtos.on.ca
Personal information and opinions are collected under the authority of the Municipal Freedom of Information
& Protection of Privacy Act. With the exception of personal data, information may be made available for
public disclosure.
Everett WWTP EA
|
Greenland International Consulting Ltd.
Everett WWTP Schedule “C” Class Environmental Assessment
Comment Sheet
Return to Township of Adjala-Tosorontio, 7855 Sideroad 30, R.R. #1, Alliston,
Ontario, L9R 1V1, no later than June 12, 2014.
Do you have any other comments? Do you need any additional information to assist you
to participate in this process?
Everett WWTP EA
|
Greenland International Consulting Ltd.
APPENDIX ‘G-3’
Received Comments & PIC Attendance Sheet
November 22, 2013
Mr. Jim Hartman, P.Eng.
Senior Associate
Consultant Project Manager
Greenland Consulting Engineers
120 Hume Street
Collingwood ON L9Y 1V5
Dear Mr. Hartman,
Re:
Everett Wastewater Treatment Plant Surface Water Outfall
Everett, Township of Adjala - Tosorontio , Ontario
Region of Peel staff have reviewed your Notice of Study Commencement and
related documents for the above noted project and we are pleased to advise that
we have no objections to the approval of the proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant
Surface Water outfall to the Pine River. Furthermore the Region of Peel does
not require conditions of approval.
The Region relies on the environmental expertise of the Nottawasaga Valley
Conservation Authority (NVCA) staff for the review of the above noted study and
their potential impacts on the natural environment. The Region of Peel planning
staff therefore, request that comments from the NVCA are considered and
incorporated in the study appropriately.
I trust this information is of assistance. Please call me directly at 905-791-7800, ext.
4366 if you have any questions or if you require any further information from
Region of Peel regarding this matter.
Yours truly,
Ed Amaya
Planning Intern
Development Services, Public Works
Regional Municipality of Peel
Public Works
10 Peel Centre Drive, Suite A, Brampton, ON L6T 4B9
Telephone: 905-791-7800 / www.peelregion.ca
~ Conse;~ation
for The Living City'
CFN 48640.15
December 16, 2013
BY E-MAIL ONLY(jmoss@townshipadjtos.on.ca)
Jim Moss
Township of Adjala-Tosorontio
7855 Sideroad 30, R.R. #1
Alliston, ON L9R 1V1
Dear Mr. Moss:
Re:
Response to Notice of Study Commencement
Everett Wastewater Treatment Plant Surface Water Outfall
Municipal Class Environmental Assessment - Schedule C
Township of Adjala-Tosorontio; County of Simcoe
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff received the Notice of Study Commencement for the
above noted Environmental Assessment (EA) on November 8, 2013. The study area associated with this EA is
not within TRCA's jurisdiction. Please contact the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority at 705.424.1479
for further information and remove TRCA staff from the project mailing list.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at extension 5717 orat slingertat@trca.on.ca.
Sincerely,
Sha
in
Senior Plan er, Environmental Assessment
Planning and Development
.
BY E-MAIL
cc:
Greenland Consulting:
TRCA:
Jim Hartman (jhartman@grnland.com)
Beth Williston, Senior Manager, Environmental Assessment
.689$
Tel.
Member of Consen'alion
Planning
On/ario
.
I
lnfo@trca.on.ca-I
www.trca.on.ca
S Shoreham
Planning
Drive, Downsview,
ON M3N 1 S4
May 29, 2014
Mr. Jim Moss
Public Works Department
Township of Adjala-Tosorontio
7855 Sideroad 30, R.R #1
Alliston, ON L9R 1V1
Dear Mr. Moss,
Re:
Everett Wastewater Treatment Plant Surface Water Outfall
Everett, Township of Adjala - Tosorontio , Ontario
Region of Peel staff have reviewed your related documents for the above noted
project and we are pleased to advise that we have no objections to the approval of
the proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant Surface Water outfall to the Pine River.
Furthermore the Region of Peel does not require conditions of approval.
The Region relies on the environmental expertise of the Nottawasaga Valley
Conservation Authority (NVCA) staff for the review of the above noted study and
their potential impacts on the natural environment. The Region of Peel planning
staff therefore, request that comments from the NVCA are considered and
incorporated in the study appropriately.
I trust this information is of assistance. Please call me directly at 905-791-7800, ext.
4366 if you have any questions or if you require any further information from
Region of Peel regarding this matter.
Yours truly,
Ed Amaya
Planning Intern
Development Services, Public Works
Regional Municipality of Peel
Public Works
10 Peel Centre Drive, Suite A, Brampton, ON L6T 4B9
Telephone: 905-791-7800 / www.peelregion.ca
Josh Maitland
To:
Subject:
Jim Hartman
RE: Everett WWTP EA and R&M Homes WWTP
From: Chris Hibberd [mailto:chibberd@nvca.on.ca]
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 2:32 PM
To: Jim Moss
Cc: ewargel@townshipadjtos.on.ca; Jim Hartman; Dave Featherstone; Tom Reeve
Subject: Everett WWTP EA and R&M Homes WWTP
Hi Jim: Further to our letter the we emailed this morning on the Everett WWTP EA and as per our email below , NVCA staff still have outstanding comments on the R & M Homes proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant/facility including finalizing the limits of development. In the event that the Class EA is proceeding in advance of the R & M homes the EA should look to address the pertinent matters. Regards, Chris Chris Hibberd, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority John Hix Conservation Administrative Centre, 8195 Concession 8th Line, Utopia ON L0M 1T0 P: (705) 424-1479 Ext. 229, email: chibberd@nvca.on.ca This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or redistribution is prohibited. If you are
not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the original message. From: Chris Hibberd
Sent: March-11-14 8:36 AM
To: Jim Moss
Subject: FW: R&M Sanitary Report Compiled Jim: See below for our last comments on R& M Homes sanitary. Regards, Chris Chris Hibberd, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority John Hix Conservation Administrative Centre, 8195 Concession 8th Line, Utopia ON L0M 1T0 P: (705) 424-1479 Ext. 229, email: chibberd@nvca.on.ca This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or redistribution is prohibited. If you are
not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the original message. 1
From: Chris Hibberd
Sent: January-17-14 1:01 PM
To: 'Jim Hosick'
Cc: Dave Featherstone; Ryan Post; Glenn Switzer; Tom Reeve; 'Brian Goodreid'
Subject: FW: R&M Sanitary Report Compiled Dear Jim: In response to the Township’s request for comments, NVCA staff completed a review of Pearson
Engineering Ltd.’s November 25, 2013 letter report entitled “R & M Homes ... Design Flow and
STP Information” and we offer the following: Natural Hazards: 1. The drawing provided with the letter report shows the NVCA regulated line with respect to
flooding. Please note that this is not an engineered floodline but a best estimation as to the
extent to where flooding could potentially be a concern. Based on this information the
treatment plant is located outside the estimated floodplain. We understood that that
applicant would be providing further engineering details confirming this was the case. Please
clarify. Natural Heritage: 2. The two easternmost beds encroach to within 15 metres (m) of the wetland boundary (even
less in some areas) which is not consistent with our 30 m buffer outlined in our current
guidelines. NVCA staff are concerned that seasonally high water table within the forested
buffer area may force the proponent to introduce fill (and associated slopes) that may
increase the proposed footprint beyond that shown in the Pearson drawings. The Pearson
report does not provide any rationale in support of a lesser buffer. Since this buffer is fully
forested NVCA staff requests that the proposal be designed to maintain the 30 m buffer. Typically, we have only considered a lesser buffer based on the following circumstances:  averaging of the buffers within the proposal study area;  where a net enhancement can be achieved such as restoration plantings within
narrower buffers that are currently in non-natural cover (existing agricultural fields
next to a wetland); and/or  where some type of habitat offsetting can be provided. In addition to the above, even with sufficient rationale addressing the above mentioned a
minmum buffer width (15 m) is required for the development. 3. NVCA staff are concerned about the encroachment of the proposed beds toward the wetland
boundary and the potential impacts of the effluent plume on the nearby amphibian breeding
habitat in the south trough. Please provide additional assessment of potential impacts on
proximal amphibian breeding habitat for the latest proposal. Hydrogeology: 4. The design flow (litres per captia per day) is listed at 340L/c/d. Please provide clarification on
how these numbers were generated. 2
5. The elevation change from the road allowance (236 m ) to the creek (232 m) is 4 m. The
trough located south of the septic beds is approximately 1 m deep. No statement is provided
on the depth to the water table at this site. However the water table elevation is assumed to
be less than 4 m below surface (with the creek representing the water table elevation).
Further, the wetland boundary is listed at the elevation of 234.0 m and is assumed to be
influenced by groundwater discharge. If this is the case, the depth to water table would be
shallower then 4 mbgs- most likely 2 m. The consultant should have borehole-based
information on the depth to water table in this area in support of the application. In
addition, please provide further details that address the overall impact/area influenced of the
proposed works. 6. In addition, we expect that the local groundwater flow paths to follow the broad topography
and that the groundwater flow path #1 should encapsulate the area south of the delineated
southern boundary of ground water path #1. Given the close proximity of the shallow trough
adjacent to the proposed tile bed locations, there may be very localized ground water
movement to the south. However, the overall impact/area influenced on this is questionable
and has not defined by Pearson. NVCA staff are unclear on the differentiation between the
two groundwater flow paths delineated and seek additional clarification on this. In order for NVCA staff to further review the latest proposed sanitary disposal works we request
that the applicant provide further details addressing the above comments. In addition to the
above, please note that the sanitary treatment facility is located within an area regulated by the
NVCA pursuant to Ontario Regulation 172/06. Permit approval from the NVCA is required prior
to any commencing development within a regulated area. In this regard, the design details
should show that proposed works are located outside of any natural hazards and environmental
features (e.g. wetlands) as well as not adversely impacting on the adjacent the environmental
features. Also, we wish to remind the applicant that NVCA’s review fees for the subdivision application
remain outstanding and should be address at the earliest opportunity. Please feel free to contact the undersigned should you have any questions regarding the above
comments. Regards, Chris Chris Hibberd, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority John Hix Conservation Administrative Centre, 8195 Concession 8th Line, Utopia ON L0M 1T0 P: (705) 424-1479 Ext. 229, email: chibberd@nvca.on.ca This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure or redistribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
the sender and destroy all copies of the original message. 3
Josh Maitland
To:
Cc:
Subject:
'Zirger, Rosi (MTCS)'
'Jim Moss'; Jim Hartman; 'Holly Martelle'
RE: Everett WWTP Schedule 'C' Class EA - DRAFT ESR for Review & Comment
From: Josh Maitland Sent: September‐09‐14 11:58 AM To: 'Zirger, Rosi (MTCS)' Cc: 'Jim Moss'; Jim Hartman; 'Holly Martelle' Subject: RE: Everett WWTP Schedule 'C' Class EA ‐ DRAFT ESR for Review & Comment Good morning Rosi, Please note that by way of this response we acknowledge the comments received from MTCS and updates to the ESR will be made to reflect these comments. Specifically, an Archaeological background info section will be added to the body of the ESR with other comments being addressed in the revised Archaeological update report by TMHC (including specifics with regards to Stage 2 requirements along various sections of the forcemain alignments). We note that the mapping concerns raised by MTCS stem from an incorrect study area figure used in the body of the DRAFT ESR (Figure 1‐1) – this figure has been updated to include the WWTP site and FM alignments which were in fact part of the study area for this Class EA, and will be reflected in the final ESR. Thank you for your input throughout this process. Sincerely, Josh Maitland, P.Eng. Project Engineer (705) 444 8805 Ex. 263 This communication is intended only for the party to whom it is addressed, and may contain information which is privileged or confidential. Any other
delivery, distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited and is not a waiver of privilege or confidentiality. If you have received this e-mail
message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return electronic mail and delete this e-mail message.
Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. GREENLAND accepts no liability for any damage caused
by any virus transmitted by this email.
1
From: Zirger, Rosi (MTCS) [mailto:Rosi.Zirger@ontario.ca] Sent: August‐22‐14 11:31 AM To: Josh Maitland Subject: RE: Everett WWTP Schedule 'C' Class EA ‐ DRAFT ESR for Review & Comment Project: Everett WWTP – Schedule C Class EA
Location: Township of Adjala-Tosorontio
MTCS File: 0000440
Dear Mr. Maitland
Thank you for sending us the DRAFT Environmental Assessment Report (ESR) for review and comment in advance of
issuing the Final Notice of Study Completion.
The Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport’s (MTCS) interest in this class EA project relates to its mandate of conserving,
protecting and preserving Ontario’s cultural heritage, including archaeological resources, built heritage resources, and
cultural heritage landscapes. MTCS has reviewed:
 Draft ESR dated July 2014 prepared by Greenland
 Appendix B to Draft ESR: Update of Status of Archaeological Concerns for Everett Secondary Plan and Master
Services Class EA dated May 23, 2014 (Revised) by Timmins Martelle Heritage Consultants
We have the following comments and recommendations regarding these reports as they relate to the Everett WWTP EA:
Summary of EA Project
The purpose of this EA is to identify and evaluate design options for a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and surface
water outfall design in the Community of Everett. As part of the Class EA process environmental impacts of the alternatives
are considered in the overall selection of the preferred solution.
The preferred design concept includes:
 Construction of a WWTP to be located north-east of R&M Homes Subdivision (Option WWT-9 of Everett Secondary
Pan MSP)

Construction of Forcemain Alignment south along Concession Road 6 and west through the R&M Homes property
to County Road 13, then north along County Road 13 and west to the ultimate discharge location at the Pine River.
MTCS comment
1.
The draft ESR states that as part of the Class EA process “environmental impacts are considered” (page 2). In
regard to archaeology, Appendix B provides a summary of previously completed archaeological assessments. However,
the ESR itself does not mention archaeology. Generally an ESR would include a section summarizing existing or base
conditions, the studies undertaken and the outcomes of the technical studies. The ESR should also clearly articulate the
measures being proposed to mitigate potential impacts. In this case, it appears that further archaeological assessment
(Stage 2 etc.) is required. The archaeological assessments should be completed as early as possible, but prior to the
completion of detail design, to properly inform EA planning decisions.
2.
The final page of Appendix B (page 12?) is a map that illustrates the Proposed Forcemain Routes on a Map of
Archeological Potential (ASI 201).
a. The project area indicated on Archeological Potential map is not the same as the EA Study Area shown in Figure
1.1 of the Draft ESR. The portion of land extending to the east on which the WWTP and Sewage Pump Station
are to be constructed is not included in the EA study area. Please clarify the EA study area and revised the ESR
mapping as necessary.
2
b. The boundaries of the project area indicated on Archeological Potential map are also not consistent with the
Stage 1 archaeological assessment report (PIF P047-374-2012) prepared by ASI and filed with this Ministry. If
the portion extending east of Concession Road 6 is included in a different archaeological assessment report,
please indicate the appropriate PIF number.
3.
In addition we suggest that that you consider including additional mapping in the ESR. For example, Section 10 –
Summary of Preferred Design Concept provides a written description of the locations and alignments chosen. However,
only the map attached to Appendix B that illustrates the actual locations.
Meanwhile, we would appreciate being kept informed of the manner in which the Ministry’s input has been considered,
and we look forward to receiving the final ESR when it is issued. Please feel free to email or telephone me as necessary. I would be pleased to have further discussion with you. Sincerely Rosi Zirger Heritage Planner Ministry of Tourism, Culture & Sport Culture Division | Programs & Services Branch | Culture Services Unit 401 Bay Street, Suite 1700 Toronto, Ontario M7A 0A7 Tel. 416.314.7159 | Fax 416.314.7175| E‐mail: rosi.zirger@ontario.ca From: Josh Maitland [mailto:jmaitland@grnland.com]
Sent: August 12, 2014 2:04 PM
To: Liu, Chunmei (ENE); Brad Hoover; Chris Hibberd; Zirger, Rosi (MTCS)
Cc: Jim Moss; 'Eric Wargel'; Jim Hartman
Subject: Everett WWTP Schedule 'C' Class EA - DRAFT ESR for Review & Comment To all, Please find through the following link, a digital (.pdf) copy of the DRAFT Environmental Study Report (ESR) for the Everett WWTP Surface Water Outfall Schedule ‘C’ Class Environmental Assessment: https://www.dropbox.com/s/x6z1rblpplllqiq/Everett%20WWTP%20DRAFT%20ESR%20%26%20Appendices.zip Where requested, a hard‐copies of these documents have been forwarded to your attention. This DRAFT ESR document has been circulated to you in advance of the official Notice of Completion (NOC) and 30‐day public review period due to your expressed interest and involvement in the project to date. We are confident that the DRAFT ESR addresses all comments received to date via agency pre‐consultation and public consultation completed over the course of this project. It is our intention to finalize the ESR and issue the NOC on or about September 8th, 2014. We value your input and would respectfully request that any comments regarding the contents of this DRAFT ESR be provided to Jim Hartman (jhartman@grnland.com) or the undersigned at your earliest convenience and prior to September 8th, 2014. Thank‐you. 3
Sincerely, Josh Maitland, P.Eng. Project Engineer (705) 444 8805 Ex. 263 This communication is intended only for the party to whom it is addressed, and may contain information which is privileged or confidential. Any other
delivery, distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited and is not a waiver of privilege or confidentiality. If you have received this e-mail
message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return electronic mail and delete this e-mail message. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. GREENLAND accepts no liability for any damage caused
by any virus transmitted by this email. 4
Josh Maitland
To:
Subject:
Josh Maitland
RE: adjala-Tosorontio pine river assessment
From: brian camirand [mailto:debcamirand@rogers.com]
Sent: Friday, November 29, 2013 3:57 PM
To: Jim Hartman
Subject: adjala-Tosorontio pine river assessment I would to be added to the mailing list for the Adjala‐Tosorontio environmental assessment for the pine river. Mail can be sent to this email or Brian Camirand 8 Dekker Street Everett Ont. L0M1J0 Thank you 1
Josh Maitland
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Jim Moss; Jim Hartman
'Eric Wargel'; Gail Greer
RE: Everett WWTP Membrane Option
Jim, We acknowledge the enclosed comments and they shall be included in the public record as part of the project file, along with this correspondence. In addition, we propose that OCWA be engaged as part of the design team/steering committee for the WWTP at the implementation stage of the process (i.e. detailed design and approvals) Sincerely, Josh Maitland, P.Eng. Project Engineer (705) 444 8805 Ex. 263 This communication is intended only for the party to whom it is addressed, and may contain information which is privileged or confidential. Any other
delivery, distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited and is not a waiver of privilege or confidentiality. If you have received this e-mail
message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return electronic mail and delete this e-mail message.
Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. GREENLAND accepts no liability for any damage caused
by any virus transmitted by this email.
From: Jim Moss [mailto:jmoss@adjtos.ca] Sent: July‐28‐14 11:22 AM To: Jim Hartman Cc: Josh Maitland; 'Eric Wargel'; Gail Greer Subject: FW: Everett WWTP Membrane Option Hi Jim and Josh. Brad from OCWA just sent this over to me as part of the research that he has been doing. Thanks. Jim Moss
1
Public Works Superintendent
jmoss@adjtos.ca
Township of Adjala-Tosorontio
7855 Sideroad 30, RR#1
Alliston,On L9R-1V1
Ph: 705-434-5055
Fx: 705-434-5051 From: Brad Hoover [mailto:BHoover@ocwa.com] Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 10:04 AM To: Jim Moss (jmoss@adjtos.ca) Subject: FW: Everett WWTP Membrane Option Hi Jim, He is a quote that I have received from Metcon for an MBR plant in Everett. Regards, Brad From: David Howes [mailto:DavidH@metconeng.com]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 8:49 AM
To: Brad Hoover
Cc: Donald Gadsden; Prabal Ray
Subject: Everett WWTP Membrane Option
Good morning Brad. For your information I have attached a data sheet and preliminary layout for a Flat Plate
style of membrane which is specifically designed for Watewater.
The ballpark price is $4.5M including Major equipment Control Panel, Membrane units, blowers, diffusers,
permeate pumps, WAS pumps, Alum dosing system and chemical dosing system, Transport and Start-up.
Excluding installation, interconnecting piping & wiring and lifting devise.
I realize this is expensive, however there are several advantages to using flat plate membranes over hollow
fibre.
As discussed earlier, using a convention plant or SBR followed by a disk filter will be much less expensive and
will accomplish similar results.
Sincerely,
David Howes
Regional Sales Manager
Metcon Sales & Engineering Ltd.
15 Connie Crescent, Unit 3
Concord, Ontario L4K 1L3
T: 905.738.2355 x 243
F: 905.738.5520
E: DavidH@metconeng.com
W: http://www.metconeng.com
“Follow” us on Twitter
2
“Like” us on Facebook
“Link” with us on Linked In
This message, including any attachments, is privileged and intended only for the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed. This message
may contain information which is privileged, proprietary, confidential or personal. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination,
copying or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately and permanently delete this e-mail message, including any attachments.
From: Brad Hoover [mailto:BHoover@ocwa.com]
Sent: July-15-14 1:23 PM
To: David Howes
Subject: RE: Shelburne
Thanks Dave From: David Howes [mailto:DavidH@metconeng.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 1:19 PM
To: Brad Hoover
Subject: RE: Shelburne
Thanks Brad. We are working on the quote for the MBR and will have it ready soon. In addition I do
have some feedback from Ashbrook as follows:
They recommend an SBR followed by disk filter; it would have the best chance
of meeting the tough limits for P. The key would be achieving some
biological P removal coupled with good chemical precipitation and solids
removal.
The MBR has minimal advantage over an SBR/Iso-Disc option and would cost a
lot more in capital and opex. The P concentration in the solids would be
approximately 1%. The MBR would produce an effluent with nearly 0 mg/L
effluent TSS and the SBR/Iso-Disc would achieve less than 4 mg/L
(approximately 0.04 mg/L P). This 0.04 mg/L represents the advantage of the
MBR. The Engineer/Owner/Regulator has to determine whether this minor amount
of P removal is worth going to very expensive MBR option.
Thanks!
Dave
David Howes
Regional Sales Manager
Metcon Sales & Engineering Ltd.
15 Connie Crescent, Unit 3
Concord, Ontario L4K 1L3
3
T: 905.738.2355 x 243
F: 905.738.5520
E: DavidH@metconeng.com
W: http://www.metconeng.com
“Follow” us on Twitter
“Like” us on Facebook
“Link” with us on Linked In
This message, including any attachments, is privileged and intended only for the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed. This
message may contain information which is privileged, proprietary, confidential or personal. If you are not the intended recipient, any
dissemination, copying or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete this e-mail message, including any attachments.
From: Brad Hoover [mailto:BHoover@ocwa.com]
Sent: July-14-14 4:30 PM
To: David Howes
Subject: RE: Shelburne
Hi Dave, They didn’t have a peak flow listed, but it’s usually twice the daily flow. Regards, Brad From: David Howes [mailto:DavidH@metconeng.com]
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 3:05 PM
To: Brad Hoover
Subject: RE: Shelburne
Hello Brad. Can you confirm an approx peak flow per below? Should I use 2x for our budget
estimate?
David Howes
Regional Sales Manager
Metcon Sales & Engineering Ltd.
15 Connie Crescent, Unit 3
Concord, Ontario L4K 1L3
T: 905.738.2355 x 243
F: 905.738.5520
E: DavidH@metconeng.com
W: http://www.metconeng.com
“Follow” us on Twitter
“Like” us on Facebook
“Link” with us on Linked In
4
This message, including any attachments, is privileged and intended only for the person(s) or entity to which it is
addressed. This message may contain information which is privileged, proprietary, confidential or personal. If you are not
the intended recipient, any dissemination, copying or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete this e-mail message,
including any attachments.
From: Brad Hoover [mailto:BHoover@ocwa.com]
Sent: July-04-14 3:23 PM
To: David Howes
Subject: RE: Shelburne
Thanks Dave, Here are the limits that the new plant would be looking at. Parameter Compliance Design Objective Proposed Influent Water Quality TP (mg/L) 0.1 0.05 6 Total Ammonia (mg/L) 1.8 1.8 (TKN) 36 TSS (mg/L) 10 5 204 BOD (mg/L) 10 5 284 Total e coli (CFU/100 mL) 200 200 The proposed plant will have a design flow rating of 3.63 ML/day. I know that the total phosphorous is the issues that the plant will be dealing with. The consulting engineers have recommend an MBR plant but they are stating that is it the cheapest solution to build, operate and maintain. I don’t agree with their conclusion and were hoping to see if you can let me know if disk filters would be capable of removing phosphorous to this level. Regards, Brad From: David Howes [mailto:DavidH@metconeng.com]
Sent: Friday, July 04, 2014 2:08 PM
To: Brad Hoover
Subject: Shelburne
5
Hello Brad. Please see attached. Note that Shelburne had some pretty low influent
numbers, however the disk filter demonstrated that the removal rates were very close to
that of the more expensive Sand Filter.
Sincerely,
Dave
David Howes
Regional Sales Manager
Metcon Sales & Engineering Ltd.
15 Connie Crescent, Unit 3
Concord, Ontario L4K 1L3
T: 905.738.2355 x 243
F: 905.738.5520
E: DavidH@metconeng.com
W: http://www.metconeng.com
“Follow” us on Twitter
“Like” us on Facebook
“Link” with us on Linked In
This message, including any attachments, is privileged and intended only for the person(s) or entity to which it
is addressed. This message may contain information which is privileged, proprietary, confidential or personal. If
you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, copying or disclosure of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and
permanently delete this e-mail message, including any attachments.
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
6
BIO-CEL ® XL
World‘s largest submerged BIO-CEL ® MBR module
for biological wastewater treatment
MICRODYN-NADIR GmbH
Kasteler Straße 45
65203 Wiesbaden / Germany
Tel. + 49 611 962 6001
info@microdyn-nadir.de
www.microdyn-nadir.com
BIO-CEL ®
XL
Largest submerged BIO-CEL® MBR module
for biological wastewater treatment
Membrane and operation data (1)
BIO-CEL ® XL
Membrane area
1,900 m 2
Nom. MWCO
150 kDa
Pore size
0.04 μm
Permissible particle size
in sludge
2 mm
Maximum airflow rate (Vn) (2)
665 m 3 /h
Max. content
suspended solids (SS)
12 g/l
Max. trans membrane
pressure during filtration
400 mbar
Max. trans membrane
pressure during backwash
150 mbar
Max. operating/
storage temperature
40° C
Since 2005 MICRODYN-NADIR offers the only product for MBR
processes which combines the advantages of hollow fibers and
plate and frame modules without displaying their particular
disadvantages – the BIO-CEL®. Up until 2014 the BIO-CEL® has
been available with a membrane area of 10, 50, 100 and 400 m2.
Min. operating/
storage temperature
5° C
pH range
2 - 11
Chlorine resistance
500 000 ppmh
Length
2800 mm
The increasing acceptance of the MBR technology worldwide not
only results in growth of the MBR market but also in an increase
in large scale projects with more than 10,000 m3/d inflow to the
MBR plant. In order to address these demands, MICRODYN-NADIR
has developed the BIO-CEL® XL module especially for large scale
applications with a total inflow to the MBR plant of > 2,000 m3/d
of wastewater to be treated.
Width
2100 mm
Height (membrane- and
d iffusor unit)
2650 mm
Required ground clearance
750 mm
Connection aeration
Special flange, Adapter
(DIN, ANSI; …) as required
Connection permeate
Special flange, Adapter
(DIN, ANSI; …) as required
Dry weight
2500 kg
Wet weight
3500 kg
Maximum load
11000 kg
Submerged modules have proven to be state-of-the-art technology when talking about MBR processes.
The BIO-CEL® XL module has a total membrane area of 1,900 m2.
The housing and connections of the BIO-CEL® XL are made of
stainless steel. The operating method is in accordance to the
smaller types of the BIO-CEL® module.
First successful operation experiences of the BIO-CEL® XL in a
municipal plant are available since August 2013.
ADVAN TA G E S
Material data
»cost efficient
»high flux
»low energy demand
»simple installation
»backwashable
»reliable in operation
»fine bubble aeration
»high packing density
»self-healing membrane sheets
W W W . M I C R O D Y N - N A D I R . C O M
BIO-CEL ® XL
Housing
Stainless Steel 1.4571
Piping
Polyvinyl chloride (PVC)
Connections
Stainless Steel 1.4571
Membrane
Polyether sulfone (PES)
Drainage
Polyester
Sealings
EPDM
Diffusor
PP/EPDM
Note: (1) Nominal values.
(2) Vn is the volume flow rate at standard conditions according to DIN ISO 2533:1979-12