Septage

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=56 BGCOLOR="#666633" TEXT="#080000" bgproperties="fixed" background="00fc8c83.jpg"> <div> Septage</div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" width=160 BGCOLOR="#666633" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <B>INDEX</B></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/"><U><B>Township of Algonquin Highlands</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="mailto:stanhope@county.haliburton.on.ca" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:stanhope@county.haliburton.on.ca"><U><B>Email</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id77_m.htm#eh_comments_on_the_environmental_study" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Septage"><U><B> </B></U></A><A HREF="id77_m.htm#eh_comments_on_the_environmental_study" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Septage"><U><B>EH! comments and Recommen-dations </B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <B> </B><A HREF="id77_m.htm#peer_review_report" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Septage"><U><B>Peer review</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id77_m.htm#survey" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Septage"><U><B>PINE SPRINGS </B></U></A><A HREF="id77_m.htm#survey" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Septage"><U><B>SURVEY</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <B> </B><A HREF="id77_m.htm#report" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Septage"><U><B>Pine Springs Status Report from the township</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id77_m.htm#trouble" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Septage"><U><B> CTV news story</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id77_m.htm#links" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Septage"><U><B> Links</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id77_m.htm#septage" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Septage"><U><B> What is septage?</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id77_m.htm#2003" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Septage"><U><B>Banning the spreading of untreated portable toilet waste.</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <B>For more information</B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFF99" FACE="Arial" ><B> on what's going on in the </B></FONT></div> <div> <B>Pine Springs Septage Lagoon </B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFF99" FACE="Arial" ><B>proposal, </B></FONT></div> <div> <B>E-mail these people:</B></div> <div> <B>Sandy MacKay</B></div> <div> <A HREF="mailto: almackay@cogeco.ca" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto: almackay@cogeco.ca"><U><B>almackay@cog</B></U></A><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#66CCFF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="mailto: almackay@cogeco.ca" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto: almackay@cogeco.ca"><U><B>eco.ca</B></U></A></FONT></div> <div> <B>Vern Zimmerman</B></div> <div> <A HREF="mailto: vzim@zrcinc.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto: vzim@zrcinc.com"><U><B>vzim@zrcinc.com</B></U></A></div> <bR> </td> <td valign="top" height=424 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <B><IMG SRC="2d24d550.gif" border=0 width="77" height="85" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">June 14, 2005   </B><A HREF="#eh_comments_on_the_environmental_study" TITLE="Septage"><U><B>EH! submits comments and recommendations on the Environment Assessment Study</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <B>May 9, 2005 </B><B>  </B><A HREF="http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/pinesprings/index.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/pinespr"><U><B>Notice of Completion for the Environmental Study Report and </B></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/pinesprings/index.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/pinespr"><U><B>Commencement of 30 day review period, </B></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/pinesprings/index.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/pinespr"><U><B>for the Township of Algonquin Highlands Class Environmental Assessment </B></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/pinesprings/index.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/pinespr"><U><B>for a Hauled Sewage Management Strategy for the Township.</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <B> <A NAME="update_on_the_pine_springs_waste_1"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B><FONT SIZE="4" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" ><B>Update on the Pine Springs Waste Disposal site</B></FONT></div> <div> <B>Notice of a very important public meeting</B></div> <bR> <div> From the Township of Algonquin Highlands</div> <bR> <div> <B>The third Public Information Centre for the Class Environmental Assessment for developing a </B></div> <div> <B>Hauled Sewage (Septage) Management System for the Township of Algonquin Highlands will be held at the</B></div> <div> <B>Stanhope Firefighters Hall</B></div> <div> <B>North Shore Road</B></div> <div> <B>Saturday, February 26, 2005</B></div> <div> <B>10:00 am to 12:00 noon</B></div> <div> <B>The two municipally owned sites are the Maple Lake Waste Disposal Site and</B></div> <div> <B>Pine Springs Waste Disposal Site.</B></div> <bR> <div> In October of 2004, the Township of Algonquin Highlands directed its consultants to commence Phase III of the Class Environmental Assessment to identify a Hauled Sewage Management Strategy for the Township. Phase III of a Class Environmental Assessment requires a municipality to identify and evaluate Alternative Design Options and based on the results of the assessment, select a preferred Design Option. Each Design Option is evaluated through an assessment of possible impacts on the natural environment (wetlands, watercourses, groundwater, etc), the social and economic environment (costs to users, costs to municipality, proximity to residences, etc) and infrastructure (existing roads, power grid, etc).</div> <bR> <div> The focus of the meeting will be two-fold: to describe the six (6) Design Options identified by the municipality for the construction of a hauled sewage management facility on municipal land; and, to discuss the selection of one (1) Preferred Design Option.</div> <bR> <div> The six (6) Design Options are comprised of three (3) different secondary treatment systems at two (2) different municipal waste disposal sites. All three secondary treatment Design Options will complement a primary system (settling tank) and subsurface disposal of the treated effluent.</div> <bR> <div> The three treatment systems are (click on the links for more information on these systems):</div> <bR> <div>    1. Waterloo Biofilter®</div> <div>       - www.waterloo-biofilter.com</div> <div>    2. Constructed wetland</div> <div>       - www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/watersheds/cwetlands.html</div> <div>    3. Facultation lagoons</div> <div>       - www.lagoonsonline.com</div> <div>       - www.weblife.org/humanure/chapter5_7.html</div> <bR> <div> The two municipally owned sites are the Maple Lake Waste Disposal Site and Pine Springs Waste Disposal Site.</div> <bR> <div> The Public is invited to attend the Public Information Centre to review the proposed designs and to provide comment, prior to final selection of the Preferred Design Option by Council for the Township of Algonquin Highlands. A questionnaire will be distributed.</div> <bR> <div> Dated at the Township of Algonquin Highlands on the 31st day of January, 2005</div> <bR> <div>     Gerald Bain</div> <div>     Chief Administrative Officer and Clerk</div> <div>     Township of Algonquin Highlands</div> <bR> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> From the Board of Kushog Lake Property Owners Association</div> <bR> <div> <B>KLPOA URGES YOU TO ATTEND THIS IMPORTANT MEETING</B></div> <div> <B>AND VOICE YOUR OPINION!</B></div> <div> <B>CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT</B></div> <div> <B>PHASE III - SELECTION OF PREFERRED DESIGN OPTION</B></div> <div> <B>PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE TO BE HELD ON SAT. FEB. 26, 2005</B></div> <bR> <div> The Township of Algonquin Highlands is holding the third public meeting concerning a hauled sewage (septage) management system for the Township of Algonquin Highlands. The focus of this meeting will be two-fold - but as property owners on Kushog Lake, our first concern is the site selection. The municipality owns two sites: Maple Lake and Pine Springs (which flows into Kushog Lake), and would prefer to choose one of these sites.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Do you want a sewage lagoon constructed near the headwaters of Kushog Lake?</B> This may be your last opportunity to have input into the location of such a facility. As a property owner on Kushog Lake, it is imperative that you attend this meeting to show your interest, ask questions and express your concerns! Let council know that this much needed facility must be built in an appropriate location - outside of the Kushog Lake watershed.</div> <bR> <div> Reeve Eleanor Harrison has made a commitment to KLPOA members that we must be convinced that Kushog Lake will not be endangered by any facility constructed on the Pine Springs site or the site will not be chosen.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Here are some questions which you might want to have answered regarding the Pine Springs site:</B></div> <div> How will property values on and around Kushog Lake be affected by this facility?</div> <div> Why are only properties owned by the municipality being considered?</div> <div> Will there be tertiary treatment of septage for phosphate removal?</div> <div> Can you guarantee that there is no risk of environmental damage to Kushog Lake, one of Haliburton's best lake trout lakes, by locating a lagoon here?</div> <div> Have the groundwaters around Pine Springs been analyzed for all landfill impact indicator parameters, given that there is already a landfill on this site?</div> <div> What potential impacts to surface water quality and air quality have been identified?</div> <div> What further studies will be conducted to ensure that the proposed facility would not have adverse impacts on local water resources?</div> <div> What will be the impact of harmful waste such as chemicals, medications and other unknown pollutants dumped either knowingly or unknowingly into the facility?</div> <div> What concerns has the MOE identified with the Pine Springs site?</div> <div> Why is this site being considered when it has been declared a provincially significant wetland?</div> <bR> <div> Help KLPOA to present your views at the meeting, whether or not you plan to attend. Send us a letter or email either supporting the position which the KLPOA executive has taken in challenging the Pine Springs site for this facility or stating your position, to KLPOA, PO Box 321, Minden ON K0M 2K0, email: <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="mailto:info@kushoglake.org" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:info@kushoglake.org"><U><U>info@kushoglake.org</U></U></A></FONT> before February 25th.</div> <bR> <div> If you cannot attend this meeting, please let Algonquin Highlands Council know your views. Remember that every household member's opinion will be recognized.  Or send an email to: <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="mailto:stanhope@county.haliburton.on.ca" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:stanhope@county.haliburton.on.ca"><U><U>stanhope@county.haliburton.on.ca</U></U></A></FONT></div> <bR> <div> Public opinion is an extremely important part of the Class Environmental Assessment process - Council will have no choice but to listen to us if<B> </B>we<B> make our voices heard. This means YOU!</B></div> <bR> <div> <B><IMG SRC="213d0940.jpg" border=0 width="208" height="148" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></B></div> <div> <B> <A NAME="peer_review_calls_for_detailed"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B><B>Peer review calls for detailed environmental assessment before lagoon is built</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>A Public Meeting  was held Saturday June 12, 2004 at the Stanhope Firefighters Community Hall on North Shore Road north of Carnarvon, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. to discuss this issue.</B></div> <bR> <div> THE FOLLOWING is the first few paragraphs of a peer rview of the Grace & Associates letter to the Township of Algonquin Highlands regarding a proposed septage lagoon near Kushog Lake (and in or adjacent to the Provincially Significant Wetlands of Pine Springs).</div> <bR> <div> "The proposed Hauled Sewage facility at the existing Pine Springs Landfill is a change</div> <div> to the existing approved site activity. This change requires a variety of planning and</div> <div> technical approvals that depend on the existing and proposed activities. As requested,</div> <div> we have completed a planning and hydrogeologic review of the proposed disposal of</div> <div> Hauled Sewage at the Pine Springs Landfill. The focus of this review is the possible</div> <div> adverse impact on Kushog Lake.</div> <bR> <div> We have reviewed the letter of April 16, 2003 from Grace and Associates to the</div> <div> Township of Algonquin Highlands with respect to the approvals required for the</div> <div> proposed sewage lagoon facility. While we concur with Grace and Associates that</div> <div> this facility will likely require an amended Certificate of Approval (C of A) for the</div> <div> Pine Springs landfill under the <I><B>Environmental Protection Act</B></I>, we do not concur that</div> <div> this will be the only approval required. We think that the following additional</div> <div> approvals will also need to be obtained, depending on the circumstances noted:</div> <bR> <div> * An <I><B>Ontario Water Resources Act </B></I>C of A will be required for a new sewage</div> <div> work;</div> <bR> <div> * An <I><B>Environmental Protection Act </B></I>C of A may be required for any air</div> <div> emissions associated with the new sewage work;</div> <bR> <div> * An Official Plan amendment (OPA), Zoning By-law amendment (ZBA) or Site</div> <div> Plan Approval (SPA) under the <I><B>Planning Act </B></I>may be required, depending on</div> <div> the current land use provisions of the County of Haliburton and Township of</div> <div> Algonquin Highlands Official Plans and Zoning By-laws; and, most</div> <div> importantly, </div> <bR> <div> * The proposed sewage lagoon will need to comply with the Schedule 'C'</div> <div> provisions of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Municipal</div> <div> Engineers Association, 2002), as the proponent of the facility is a municipality</div> <div> and their proposed undertaking is of a type listed in Schedule C of that</div> <div> Environmental Assessment.</div> <bR> <div> We have now completed a preliminary review of the hydrogeological assessment</div> <div> report (hereinafter referred to as the Report) entitled: "Hydrogeological and Soil</div> <div> Assessment  Application for Hauled Sewage Lagoon" dated November 2003</div> <div> prepared by Grace & Associates. This letter report provides a brief summary of our</div> <div> comments on the hydrogeological conditions of the proposed site for the lagoon and</div> <div> the surroundings. Comments on the adequacy of the investigations completed by</div> <div> Grace & Associates (November 2003) and potential impacts of the proposed sewage</div> <div> lagoon on the local environment are also included in this report."</div> <div> <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#111111" FACE="Arial" >To read the full review,</FONT><B> <a href="HTMLobj-525/0513black.pdf"><u>Click here.</u> </a>  </B><B></B></div> <bR> <div> <B>The following is from the Township of Algonquin Highlands' website:</B></div> <div> Hauled Sewage Lagoon – May 17, 2004</div> <div> <B>MUNICIPAL REPRESENTATIVES AND MOE STAFF MEET TO LAUNCH CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSSESSMENT FOR HAULED SEWAGE LAGOON </B></div> <div> On Thursday May 13, 2004, <B>Reeve Eleanor Harrison,Members of Council</B> and <B>CAO Gerald Bain</B> of the Township of Algonquin Highlands, met with <B>Ian Parrott,</B><I>Supervisor, Waste-Certificate of Approvals Review Section of the Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch (EAAB) of the Ministry of Environment</I>, and EAAB staff, <B>Mohsen Keyvani</B> (<I> Senior Waste Evaluator)</I> and <B>Andrew Mobberley</B> (<I>Waste Evaluator</I>),together with <B>Gary Muloin </B>(<I>Senior Environmental Officer</I>) of the<I> MOE Peterborough District Office.</I> Representatives of SGS Lakefield Research (<B>Mike Lord</B> – <I>Project Manager</I> and <B>Heather Watson</B> - <I>Senior EnvironmentalPlanner</I>) described the steps to be undertaken during the Class Environmental Assessment of a proposed hauled sewage lagoon for the municipality. Background information regarding the work completed to date towards the location and design of the facility was provided by Grace and Associates (<B>Thomas Grace</B>). Mr. Grace will assist with the technical component of the project. Following the meeting, MOE officials joined Members of Council and the municipality’s consultants for a tour of the Pine Springs facility.</div> <div> Public consultation is fundamental to the Class Environmental Assessment process. A detailed plan for public consultation, and for consultation with other stakeholders, (government ministries, agencies, adjoining municipalities, NGOs, local associations and others) was a large component of the process outlined by SGS Lakefield. </div> <div> In keeping with Council’s commitment to an open and transparent process, the municipality is pleased to announce the date for the Second Public Consultation Event. The event, which is open to all, will be held on Saturday June 12, 2004 at the Stanhope Fire Fighters Community Centre. The event will held between 10:00 am and 2:00 pm, with a brief presentation of new information by SGS Lakefield representatives planned for 10:15 am. Following the presentation, the public will be invited to view information displays and to ask questions of the consultants. Members of Council will also attend, and will be available to discuss the proposal. A Question & Answer period will be offered prior to the conclusion of the meeting. We suggest that you prepare written questions and forward these to the municipality prior to the meeting, to give members of the Study team sufficient opportunity to address technical queries and areas of concern. </div> <div> Further updates on the progress of the project will be provided to members of the community, through the municipal office and will be posted to the “ Pine Springs Lagoon” link on the Township of Algonquin Highlands website at <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U>www.algonquinhighlands.ca</U></FONT></div> <bR> <div> <B>Pine Springs declared</B><B> <A NAME="declared_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B><B> </B></div> <div> <B>Provincially Significant Wetland</B></div> <div> <I><B>What does that mean to the lagoon proposal?</B></I></div> <bR> <div> <I>By Sandy MacKay</I></div> <div> On April 1/04 at 1:15 pm Mr. Paul Heaven addressed Algonquin Highlands Council at chambers on North Shore Road.  In attendance were the Reeve, Eleanor Harrison and three councillors.  As well as yours truly, in the gallery were three KLPOA (Kushog Lake Property Owners' Association) reps although they didn't identify whether they were there representing the association or as individual interested parties.  Also in attendance was Michael Lord representing SGS Lakefield an organization contracted by council to help them with their solid waste disposal issues and most recently with the sewage lagoon proposal.</div> <div>  </div> <div> Paul Heaven's Pine Springs Wetland report was initiated in response to a Haliburton County initiative to map the approximately 16,000 wetlands situated within the county. The Wetlands Mapping Project has been funded by the MNR and administered by the Ducks Unlimited organization.  The field work for the assessment was conducted in August, 2003  and the report, after satisfactory peer review, was approved by the MNR in the last week of March, 2004. </div> <div>  </div> <div> As a result of the Heaven report the Pine Springs Wetland has been designated as "Provincially Significant" hence a more stringent set of standards have to be met by any body wishing to develope in proximity to the wetland's boundary as defined in the report.  The following criteria are involved in making the designation:</div> <div>  </div> <div> 1. Hydrology           250 points</div> <div> 2. Biology               250 points</div> <div> 3. Social function    250 points</div> <div> 4. Special features  250 points</div> <div>  </div> <div> To be evaluated as "Significant" a wetland must score above 600 over all or have a "Special feature score in excess of 200.</div> <div> Pine Springs Wetland score 729 points of 1000 possible overall with a 238 of a possible 250 point score in the Special Feature category.</div> <div>  </div> <div> What this means is this:</div> <div>  </div> <div> a. A sewage lagoon could be set within 120 metres away from the wetland boundary if an environmental assessment study shows it would would have no impact on the wetland..</div> <div> Previously the criteria would be to measure impact at Kushog Lake but now the wetland cannot be used as a buffer if it will be impacted.  Grace and Assoc. have previously alluded frequently to the power of the wetland to soak up any nasty bits left in the effluent discharged from the lagoon.</div> <div>  </div> <div> A copy of the report is available through Paul Heaven (paulheaven@glenside-eco.ca) for a cost of $48.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Pine Springs: what's going on?</B><B> <A NAME="_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B></div> <bR> <div> PINE SPRINGS is the name of a small community on Highway 35 between Halls Lake and Dorset. It is also the name given to a landfill site in the area and, thus, to a proposal for a septage lagoon to be built nearby.</div> <bR> <div> The Township of Algonquin Highlands (one of four townships in Haliburton County) is being proactive in trying to handle "septage" -- the stuff that is pumped out of portable toilets, holding tanks and septic tanks. There are no sewers in this part of cottage country -- a sewer system would be impractical and virtually impossible because the small population of this township is widespread. Time was, septage was pumped out of your backyard and spread over a farmer's field somewhere -- not the best environmental idea, that's for sure, and regulations are changing that will ban this practice.</div> <bR> <div> So, what to do with all that smelly stuff? There are several alternatives, including building a traditional sewage treatment centre, but most of them are expensive and generally out of reach, price-wise, for most municipalities with small tax bases. A common, comparatively inexpensive solution is to build a lagoon. Algonquin Highlands councillors would like to build one near Pine Springs, which is close to, and in the watershed for, Lake Kushog.</div> <bR> <div> Many lake residents, cottagers, environmentalists and those who live downstream from the popular lake, don't want the lagoon built in Lake Kushog's watershed. Suggestions have been made to search for a site that is more suitable for a septage lagoon.</div> <bR> <div> Quiet for a while, this issue seems to be heating up again with renewed interest and energy from the Kushog Lake Property Owners Association and others. In an effort to provide information to anyone who is interested, EH! has devoted this web page to septage. We've got information, a survey, lots of links and some contact numbers. If you have anything you'd like to add, please contace EH! at <A HREF="http://info@environmenthaliburton.ca" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://info@environmenthaliburton.ca"><U>info@environmenthaliburton.ca</U></A></div> <bR> <div> TO SEE THE LETTER EH! SENT TO THE MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT, <A HREF="id51_ministry_.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Letters"><U><B>CLICK HERE.</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> =========================================================================</div> <div> <B>Pine Springs lagoon - status report</B><B> <A NAME="report"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B></div> <bR> <div> <I>From the Township of Algonquin Highlands Web site: </I><A HREF="http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/pinesprings/index.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/pinespr"><U><I>http://www.algonquinhighlands.ca/pinesprings/index.html</I></U></A></div> <bR> <div> The site also has downloadable plans for the proposed lagoon.</div> <bR> <div> Dated October, 2003.</div> <bR> <div> FURTHER TO THE MEETING of Thursday, October 16, 2003 the following is provided an update on the winter storage lagoon application.</div> <bR> <div> The proposed winter storage lagoon was to be a component of the complete application for a sewage</div> <div> treatment and disposal C of A (Certificate of Approval) to address the new legislation which required all land applied sewage wastes to be treated prior to disposal by 2007. Council had stated on several occasions that it was necessary to ensure that the environmental sensitivities of the project be addressed, including appropriate concerns of the cottage associations.</div> <bR> <div> Grace & Associates identified several concerns associated with the complete design and C of A application for the trash tank, two lagoons and disposal trenches. These included:</div> <bR> <div> 1. Insufficient data from the haulers regarding actual hauled volumes. Accurate winter storage</div> <div> volumes are required to design the lagoons to accommodate winter volumes and to allow sufficient</div> <div> retention time for treatment prior to final disposal.</div> <bR> <div> 2. Actual analysis results of the influent and "treated "effluent in the lagoon prior to discharge are</div> <div> required to determine if two lagoon will be sufficient for treatment.</div> <bR> <div> 3. Public involvement and comments of the entire design and concept will be required prior to</div> <div> submitting the C of A application to ensure the stakeholders legitimate concerns are addressed.</div> <bR> <div> 4. Review of the C of A application by MoE District (Peterborough), Region (Kingston) and</div> <div> Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch (Toronto) for compliance with Section 30 of the</div> <div> EPA will require several months. The application would also require the landfill C of A to be</div> <div> revised prior to implementation.</div> <bR> <div> The proposed approach would entail submission of the hydrogeological report, trash tank and one winter</div> <div> storage lagoon with the C of A application for a winter storage lagoon. The approval is to allow for</div> <div> the construction of the winter storage lagoon for the 2003/2004 season.</div> <bR> <div> Once constructed, monitoring and assessment of the site will allow for a more accurate assessment of the</div> <div> winter storage requirements, effluent criteria (influent and effluent) and address some of the major concerns of the stakeholders regarding the volumes, discharge quality, and monitoring. In addition, Grace & Associates proposed to collected representative surface water samples from the watercourse located north of the property boundary.</div> <bR> <div> This information will be used for the complete application requirements for the final sewage treatment and disposal.</div> <bR> <div> Gary Muloin has been contacted to discuss this proposal. It is</div> <div> anticipated that application will be submitted to the MoE report by</div> <div> October 31, 2003 and will be reviewed by MoE Peterborough.</div> <bR> <div> Thomas P. Grace C.E.T., B.Sc.</div> <div> GRACE & ASSOCIATES</div> <div> 16 Glenelg Street East</div> <div> Lindsay, Ontario K9V 1Y6</div> <div> phone (705) 324-5408</div> <div> fax (705) 324-2081</div> <bR> <div> <B>=========================================================================</B></div> <div> <B>Spreading trouble</B><B> <A NAME="trouble"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B></div> <bR> <div> <B><IMG SRC="169a0780.jpg" border=0 width="160" height="120" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">  <IMG SRC="166a0780.jpg" border=0 width="160" height="120" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></B><FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#111111" FACE="Arial" ><B> </B></FONT></div> <div> <B>What was once a sewage lagoon, left; spreading sludge on fields, right.</B></div> <bR> <div> <I><B>Created by CTV.ca News Staff</B></I></div> <div> <I>http://</I><A HREF="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1077898206844_1///?hub=WFive" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/st"><U><I>www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1077898206844_1///?hub=WFive</I></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <B><IMG SRC="165a0780.jpg" border=0 width="160" height="120" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">  Glen Norman</B></div> <bR> <div> SCREENWRITER GLEN NORMAN and his partner Michelle had lived out in the country for more than 20 years. They’re used to the sometimes pungent smells of rural living in Cedarville, Ontario, but one summer morning, they woke up to a smell more awful they anything they were used to.</div> <bR> <div> “You never smelled anything like this before,” Norman says, going on to describe the stench as comparable to “a sewer main that’s split wide open.”</div> <bR> <div> The smell was coming from a farm on the edge of Norman’s property, where, in fact, treated municipal sewage was being spread. Some call it sludge, the makers call it “biosolids” – whatever the name, it’s sewage that has been treated to kill most bacteria and then converted to a semi-liquid form to be spread on farmers’ fields as fertilizer.</div> <bR> <div> The smell from the sludge was so bad that it drove Norman and his partner, Michelle, away from their home for the day. But they were prepared to get used to it. “Our attitude was, if this is something new that’s been discovered and they’ve got this waste and … they’ve learned how to make it safe and they can spread the stuff on the fields, it’s good – then fine, that’s OK. We’ll have to figure out how to live with the smell.”</div> <bR> <div> But in addition to the smell, Norman quickly noticed other effects. “What happens is first thing we suddenly notice is your eyes are bright red. All of the sudden, your eyes start watering and you kind of start sniffling and the back of your throat is feeling … raspy… And that lasts – and again, this is no exaggeration – a solid eight hours.”</div> <bR> <div> Because they live in a rural area, Norman was concerned about the effect of the sludge on their well-water. Within weeks of the spreading, their water tested positive for E-coli. “The water had actually been tested six weeks before the stuff was spread and there was no E-coli at all,” says Norman.</div> <bR> <div> Whether the E-coli contamination was a coincidence or a result of the spreading, Norman says he has all kinds of other health concerns about the sludge. “Everything that’s flushed down the drain is what goes into those holding tanks, so you can’t know from one moment to the other. There’s a lot of big hospitals in Toronto, there’s a lot of facilities.”</div> <bR> <div> Opponents of sludge are worried that everything from medications and chemical solvents to bacteria and elements like arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel and zinc can get into the soil – and into crops and drinking water – even into the air as a result of spreading the sludge.</div> <bR> <div> But the company that hauls the sludge out to the farmland touts it as an environment-friendly solution to waste disposal and say there is no risk from using it. “In the past 30 years, there has never been an adverse effect to the health of humans, animals or crops or the environment when biosolids have been land applied in conformance to guidelines,” says Phil Sidhwa, vice president of Terratec – the company that spread the sludge near Norman’s house.</div> <bR> <div> <IMG SRC="167a0780.jpg" border=0 width="160" height="120" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"> <B> Phil Sidhwa</B></div> <bR> <div> Sidhwa told W-FIVE it is “doubtful” and “unlikely” that Norman’s water was contaminated by the sludge, and insists Terratec is “completely confident … there is absolutely no threat to ground or surface water.”</div> <bR> <div> Government literature is full of reassurances about the safety of sludge, and in Canada, its usage falls under provincial regulations, such as Ontario’s Nutrient Management Act. At sewage treatment plants like the one in Ashbridge’s Bay, Toronto, managers acknowledge that sludge isn’t tested for all toxins, but they say according to the regulations, it’s safe for farmland.</div> <bR> <div> “A lot of people assume because we’re a big city that we have the worst material. When you look at the city of Toronto, we don’t have large industries, we don’t have foundries, we don’t have steel companies. We’ve got predominantly the food and service industries, and also we have got the toughest sewer use bylaw in North America,” says plant manager Mike Price.</div> <bR> <div> “As long as it is treated here and applied according to the ministry regulations, it is not a health hazard, not a problem.”</div> <bR> <div> Critics say those regulations don’t go far enough to protect the health of Canadians and that the rules can be confusing and difficult to enforce. But Price says abiding by ministry standards is the best he can do.</div> <bR> <div> “We certainly don’t have the scientists and the staff to keep double-checking,” he says. “I can’t do the research. I can’t check every single thing. We can only follow the rules and regulations. It’s the same as driving on the road – I follow the Highway Traffic Act (but) it’s not my job – it’s the ministry’s – to make changes to the Highway Traffic Act.”</div> <bR> <div> Meanwhile, families exposed to sludge want better research conducted on its effects. Near Allan and Laurie Eagles’ home in Halton, west of Toronto, Terratec filled a lagoon with more than 12,000 tons of sludge. The Eagles family claim they came down with headaches, nosebleeds, respiratory problems, upset stomachs and other symptoms, as did other residents in the area.</div> <bR> <div> Eventually, Ontario’s Ministry of the Environment ordered the lagoon drained and closed and the symptoms started to subside. Now, the Eagles are suing Halton region and Terratec’s parent company for $2 million – and they are looking for answers as to why they got sick.</div> <bR> <div> “Investigation needs to be done,” says Laurie. “It has to be more than coincidence that all four families on (our) road all suffer from essentially the same illnesses.”</div> <bR> <div> In fact, while no studies have ever proven conclusively that sludge can be harmful, researchers at Cornell University in upstate New York have found a number of common side effects. It’s been dubbed “sludge syndrome,” and symptoms include burning eyes, nosebleeds, headaches, skin and throat irritation and stomach upset.</div> <bR> <div> Ellen Harrison, director of Cornell’s waste management institute, says the link between sludge and illness is tough to prove. But she adds: “While there have not been epidemiological studies, as I’ve been collecting information on these incidents, I have become convinced that there are places and cases where people are getting sick from sludge application.”</div> <bR> <div> <IMG SRC="168a0780.jpg" border=0 width="160" height="120" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"><B>  Ellen Harrison</B></div> <bR> <div> Harrison’s research also turned up evidence of long-term effects on soil: As part of the Cornell study, back in 1978, sludge was spread on part of a field. Twenty-five years later, the area exposed to sludge has practically no worms – a key indicator of soil health. Just metres away, where no sludge was spread, the soil contains a normal amount of worms.</div> <bR> <div> Based on her research, Harrison doesn’t believe current rules provide sufficient protection from sludge. “The rules don’t address a number of the issues that seem to be what may be causing illness. They don’t address airborne issues, they don’t address run-off issues,” she says. “We also don’t have a good handle on what is coming off in the air, so it’s a knowledge gap as well.”</div> <bR> <div> While Harrison isn’t denying that sludge has its benefits, she advises a cautious approach. “What level of proof do we need?” she asks. “Suppose we do these epidemiological studies and we say on the basis of the data we’ve collected … there’s a 60 per cent likelihood that sludge is causing an excess of illnesses in the area. Well, in general, scientists tend to use a level of proof that’s like 90 per cent before they would make a claim in a scientific journal. But from a public health and public policy point of view, I don’t think you need to be 90 per cent sure that somebody is going to get sick before you take action.”</div> <bR> <div> Stephen Best, an environmental activist involved in one local fight against sludge, wants to see more restrictions on spreading. In the Ontario township of Melancthon, he and other residents got a bylaw passed controlling sludge use. Terratec is fighting that bylaw in court, and Best says he’s hoping that not only will the township win, but that the anti-spreading message will have reverberations across the country.</div> <bR> <div> “There are enough questions and enough potential risks that people need to say, ‘Wait a minute. This is something that we don’t want to be experimenting with in our community until you solve the problems, until we know it’s as safe as … any other agricultural fertilizer that you would put on the ground.”</div> <bR> <div> Meanwhile, at Toronto’s sewage treatment plant in Ashbridge’s Bay, Mike Price says spreading sludge on farmland is the best solution yet for the endless flow of waste. “What we’re trying to do is to, if we can, avoid incinerating, which is what we used to do at this plant. We’re trying to avoid land filling because there is useful material in the biosolids. It contains nutrients.”</div> <bR> <div> For her part, Ellen Harrison isn’t opposed to using sludge – she’d just like to wait and see if a better sludge – free of chemicals and bacteria – can be produced.</div> <bR> <div> “What I’d like us to aim for is a situation more akin to what’s going on in many of the European countries where the standards are very strict, where the rate of application is very low. I’d like to see us only applying sanitized sludges where you basically kill the pathogens. I think we could build towards long-term application, but not under the current scenario.”</div> <bR> <div> <I><B>Links:</B></I><I><B> <A NAME="links"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B></I></div> <bR> <div> CTV News</div> <div> <I>http://</I><A HREF="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1077898206844_1///?hub=WFive" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/st"><U><I>www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1077898206844_1///?hub=WFive</I></U></A></div> <bR> <div> Letter from EH! chair to Ministry of Environment regarding Pine Springs lagoon proposal. These are the official comments from EH! and have been forwarded to the MOE, the Township of Algonquin Highlands and other interested parties.</div> <div> <A HREF="id51_ministry_.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Letters"><U>Letters page</U></A></div> <bR> <div> Letter from EH! member to Ministry of Environment regarding Pine Springs lagoon proposal in the Township of Algonquin Highlands, part of Haliburton County.</div> <div> <A HREF="id51_moe.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Letters"><U>Letters page</U></A></div> <bR> <div> Melancthon Citizens Coalition, Shelburne Ont.</div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.melancthon.net/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.melancthon.net/"><U>www.melancthon.net/</U></A></div> <bR> <div> Mississippi Mills Residents Association, Almonte Ont.</div> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.mmra.ca/mmra/Issues/Waste/Sewage_Treatment.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mmra.ca/mmra/Issues/Waste/Sew"><U>www.mmra.ca/mmra/Issues/Waste/Sewage_Treatment.html</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.safewatergroup.org/index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.safewatergroup.org/index.htm"><U>www.safewatergroup.org/index.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/news/2003/080102.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/news/2"><U>www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/news/2003/080102.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.envirodirectory.on.ca/english/index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.envirodirectory.on.ca/english"><U>www.envirodirectory.on.ca/english/index.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.foca.on.ca/Infobase/Environment/Water/waterprotection.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.foca.on.ca/Infobase/Environme"><U>www.foca.on.ca/Infobase/Environment/Water/waterprotection.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/water/spp.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/water/"><U>www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/water/spp.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://w<A HREF="http://ww.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg/ebr/english/index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://ww.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg"><U>ww.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg/ebr/english/index.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.foca.on.ca/Infobase/Environment/Phosphorus/Effects.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.foca.on.ca/Infobase/Environme"><U>www.foca.on.ca/Infobase/Environment/Phosphorus/Effects.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.eco.on.ca/english/index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.eco.on.ca/english/index.htm"><U>www.eco.on.ca/english/index.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/water/sdwa/index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/water/"><U>www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/water/sdwa/index.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/programs/3585e01.htm</div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.foca.on.ca/Infobase/Archives/capacity.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.foca.on.ca/Infobase/Archives/"><U>www.foca.on.ca/Infobase/Archives/capacity.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.foca.on.ca/Infobase/Archives/Propertyval.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.foca.on.ca/Infobase/Archives/"><U>www.foca.on.ca/Infobase/Archives/Propertyval.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.willmsshier.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.willmsshier.com/"><U>www.willmsshier.com/</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.planetfriendly.net/ecoportal.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.planetfriendly.net/ecoportal."><U>www.planetfriendly.net/ecoportal.html</U></A></div> <bR> <div> http://<A HREF="http://www.ecolawinfo.org/bibliographies/general_law.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ecolawinfo.org/bibliographies"><U>www.ecolawinfo.org/bibliographies/general_law.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> =============================================================================</div> <div> <B>What is septage?</B><B> <A NAME="septage"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B></div> <bR> <div> <I>From the Ministry of the Environment web site:</I></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/land/septage/septage.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/land/s"><U>www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/land/septage/septage.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> SEPTAGE, THE INFORMAL TERM FOR HAULED SEWAGE, classifies all matter (liquids and solids) that is pumped out of septic tanks and holding tanks. Such tanks are found on residential, commercial and industrial properties. Septage is raw and untreated, and must not be confused with sewage biosolids, which is the term applied to treated municipal sewage from a sewage treatment plant (STP) that meets specific standards.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Where is septage disposed?</B></div> <bR> <div> Septage is either disposed of at STPs, landfill sites, dewatering trenches and waste stabilization ponds or land applied. The ministry is committed to a phase-out of land application of all untreated septage.</div> <bR> <div> In Northern Ontario, dewatering trenches are the primary means of disposal, often on crown land. As few alternatives are available, the use of trenches for septage management is expected to continue.</div> <div> Where is septage stored?</div> <bR> <div> Septage may be temporarily stored at a ministry approved waste disposal (transfer) site– generally storage lagoons and tanks. These sites are subject to design requirements and operational conditions stipulated in the certificates of approval that the ministry issues to ensure that the surrounding natural environment is not harmed or contaminated.</div> <bR> <div> The certificate of approval for a storage lagoon/tank may be issued by the Ministry District Office, only if its contents are applied to the same property where the lagoon/tank is located. Otherwise, the certificate of approval must be issued by the ministry’s Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch (EAAB).</div> <div> What are the methods of treating Septage?</div> <bR> <div> <B>METHODS OF TREATING SEPTAGE</B></div> <bR> <div> Figure 1. Treatment Options for Hauled Sewage</div> <div> <IMG SRC="14fd0110.gif" border=0 width="464" height="529" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></div> <div> Ontario is reviewing standards used in other jurisdictions and methods of treating septage that are used in other jurisdictions including:</div> <bR> <div>     * Alkaline stabilization</div> <div>     * Composting</div> <div>     * Aquatic wetlands</div> <div>     * Treatment lagoons</div> <div>     * Sewage treatment plants</div> <div>     * Dedicated septage treatment facilities</div> <div>     * Landfill or Incineration</div> <bR> <div> <B>Alkaline Stabilization</B></div> <bR> <div> Alkaline stabilization or liming of septage is not currently practiced in Ontario, although there is some alkaline stabilization of sewage biosolids using a proprietary process.</div> <bR> <div> In this method, lime is added to untreated septage to raise the pH and thereby to reduce pathogens and vector attraction. There are three ways to do this:</div> <bR> <div>    1. Addition of either alkali slurry or dry alkali to a holding tank containing domestic septage that has been discharged; separate mixing facility allows screening of septage and thorough mixing of septage with lime.</div> <div>    2. Additon of lime directly into the pumper truck from the top of the truck via ports or by sucking dry lime into the truck using the vacuum line.</div> <div>    3. Slurrying lime in water and subsequently bleeding the lime slurry into the vacuum draw line at the same time domestic septage is being pumped into the truck.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Liming in Other Jurisdictions</B></div> <bR> <div> Liming is used extensively in other North American jurisdictions and there are well-established programs in Pennsylvania, Vermont, Oregon, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin, other states and in the province of Quebec.</div> <bR> <div> While the United States Environmental Protection Agency requires keeping septage at pH 12 for 30 minutes to meet pathogen reduction requirements, some states such as Vermont require that the pH be kept at 12 for 2 hours.</div> <bR> <div> Figure 2: A schematic of a possible alkaline stabilization process arrangement.</div> <div> <IMG SRC="14e39110.gif" border=0 width="569" height="273" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></div> <div> <B>Composting Septage</B></div> <bR> <div> Although not used in Ontario, dewatering of septage currently takes place in other parts of Canada prior to composting or disposal. One of the constraints is that prior to composting, septage must be dewatered. Unless this is carried out properly, there may be odour problems.</div> <bR> <div> Dewatering is a process of separating the liquid fraction of septage from the solid fraction. A press method is typically used. Several technologies exist for dewatering septage.</div> <bR> <div> Common composting strategies include aerated pile, windrow and vessel. In composting, dewatered septage is mixed with a bulking agent and then aerated mechanically by turning the septage. The dried material can then be used as a soil additive.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Link to Ontario Compost Guidelines:</B></div> <bR> <div>     * <A HREF="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/gp/1749e.pdf" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/gp/174"><U>1749e Interim guidelines for the production and use of aerobic compost in Ontario [PDF]</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <B>Aquatic Wetlands</B><B> <A NAME="wetlands"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B></div> <bR> <div> Aquatic wetlands can be used only for the treatment of septage-derived effluent (e.g., from dewatering) and not for raw septage. In this treatment, plants are used to provide treatment in addition to microbial and physical-chemical processes. Enhancement of lagoon or pond systems can result in more effective treatment and lower odour emissions. Floating plants shield the water from sunlight, reducing the growth of algae and facilitate more consistent Biochemical Oxygen Demand removal and nitrification.</div> <div> <A HREF="id71_plants.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="News"><U>For more on local aquatic wetlands initiatives, click here.</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <B>Stabilization Lagoons</B></div> <bR> <div> Lagoons can either be used for storage or for treatment (stabilization). Storage lagoons are most common in Ontario. In these, septage may be stored prior to being land applied. Storage lagoons do not treat septage.</div> <bR> <div> Stabilization lagoons are designed to treat septage solids. Sizing and application rates must be based on organic and nutrient loading rates and not solely on hydraulic loading rates.</div> <bR> <div> Stabilization lagoons may be suitable for rural areas where large areas of land are available. They are less efficient in winter and will not meet treatment standards if not designed properly.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Treatment at Municipal Sewage Treatment Plants</B></div> <bR> <div> Treatment at municipal Sewage Treatment Plants (STP) can take several different approaches. Septage is added either to the liquid stream unit processes or to the solids stream unit processes in the STP. To be successful, the STP must have adequate capacity to treat the septage without adversely affecting unit processes.</div> <bR> <div> Forty per cent of Ontario’s septage currently goes to sewage treatment plants and treatment lagoons. Some STPs are not designed to accept septage, especially small plants serving populations under 100,000. While an STP provides a high level of treatment, not all municipalities have STPs and even those that do may require modifications to accept septage as the high Biochemical Oxygen Demand of septage may upset the STP. Modifications to STPs can be expensive.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Dedicated Septage Treatment Facility</B></div> <bR> <div> In some geographical areas, septage is pumped-out and hauled to a ‘dedicated’ or ‘independent’ facility for septage treatment. This feature/element usually involves screening, dewatering (i.e. separation of the liquid fraction from the solid fraction), and may involve the treatment of either the separated liquid or solid fraction or both. Treatment of the liquid fraction may involve a constructed wetland system or it could be a package sewage treatment plant that is modified to treat septage.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Incineration</B></div> <bR> <div> Septage must be dewatered before it can be incinerated. Incineration of septage has not been found to be cost effective.</div> <bR> <div> <I>If I haul or store septage, what regulations affect me?</I></div> <bR> <div> If you are involved in transporting, handling and temporary storing of septage, you are subject to regulations pertaining to Part V of the Environmental Protection Act.</div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://http://192.75.156.68/DBLaws/Statutes/English/90e19_e.htm#P826_47167" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://http://192.75.156.68/DBLaws/Statu"><U>Click here to view Part V of the Environmental Protection Act (E-Laws website)</U></A></div> <bR> <div> Septage treatment facilities that discharge to a water source are approved as a sewage works under Section 53 of the Ontario Water Resources Act.</div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/Statutes/English/90o40_e.htm#P1050_100469" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaw"><U>Click here to view Section 53 of the Ontario Water Resources Act (E-Laws website)</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <I>How do I apply for a certificate of approval to haul, treat, land apply, or store septage?</I></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/gp/index.htm#disposal" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/gp/ind"><U>Applications are available on the Ministry of the Environment website.</U></A></div> <bR> <div> For assistance completing the application for approval of a temporary storage facility by the ministry district office, you may consult:</div> <bR> <div>   <A HREF="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/gp/4182e01.pdf" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/gp/418"><U>  * 4182e01 “Guide for Applying for Approval of Hauled Sewage (septage) or Processed Organic Waste (biosolids) Disposal Site”. [PDF]</U></A></div> <bR> <div> For a storage facility that is approved by the EAAB, you may consult:</div> <bR> <div>    <A HREF="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/gp/4183e.pdf" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/gp/418"><U> * 4183e “Guide for Applying for Approval of Waste Disposal Sites”. [PDF]</U></A></div> <bR> <div> A number of technical, environmental and performance criteria are used in the review process of an application prior to granting a certificate of approval. Many of these criteria are site-specific because they are based on the specific local environmental conditions and, as a result, need to be developed by the applicant (generally requiring the use of consulting services), and reviewed by the MOE to ensure an adequate level of environmental protection.</div> <bR> <div> Applications may be posted on the <A HREF="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg/ebr/english/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_re"><U>Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) Registry</U></A>, as they are prescribed instruments under the EBR. Some applications are not subject to the posting requirements of EBR, as they may be eligible for exemptions and exceptions that include:</div> <bR> <div>    1. Decisions made under the Environmental Assessment Act (individual or Class EA’s) or Tribunal;</div> <div>    2. Emergencies;</div> <div>    3. Environmentally insignificant decisions (amendments or revocations);</div> <div>    4. Equivalent public consultation.</div> <bR> <div> All applicants are encouraged to have pre-submission consultation with MOE before submitting an application.</div> <div> Who do I contact if I have more questions pertaining to septage?</div> <bR> <div> You can call the ministry’s Waste Management Policy Branch at 416-325-4440.</div> <bR> <div> To reach the ministry toll-free, you can call the Public Information Centre at 1-800-565-4923.</div> <div> =================================================================</div> <div> <B> August 1, 2003</B><B> <A NAME="2003"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B></div> <div> <B>Fact sheet from the Ontario Ministry of the Environment</B></div> <div> <A HREF="http://http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/news/2003/080102fs.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision"><U>http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/news/2003/080102fs.htm</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <B>Banning the spreading </B></div> <div> <B>of untreated portable toilet waste</B></div> <bR> <div> Phasing Out the Spreading of Septage</div> <bR> <div> Septage is waste from a septic system tank, holding tank or portable toilet. It is called untreated waste because it has not gone through a stabilization process, such as processing at a sewage treatment plant.</div> <bR> <div> The government has committed to phase out all spreading of untreated septage. A proposed phase-out strategy was discussed with stakeholders during consultations on regulations under the Nutrient Management Act earlier this year. Stakeholders have told the government that eliminating the spreading of untreated septage should be implemented in phases to allow sewage treatment plants, waste haulers and their clients to adapt and respond. Land application of untreated septage other than portable toilet waste will be banned through additional regulatory amendments.</div> <bR> <bR> <div> Certificates of Approval</div> <bR> <div> Currently, a Certificate of Approval is required from the Ministry of the Environment for the land application of septage. This applies both to farmland and rural land used exclusively for the purpose of receiving septage.</div> <bR> <div> If septage is spread on farmland, a period of time must pass before the land may be used for farming purposes. The time delay varies from three weeks for harvesting feedcrops for animals to twelve months for harvesting crops for human consumption.</div> <bR> <div> The amended regulation banning the land application of portable toilet waste will supercede existing conditions in Certificates of Approval.</div> <bR> <bR> <div> Organizations and Events That Use Portable Toilets</div> <bR> <div> Portable toilets are common in outdoor and remote workplaces such as construction sites and road construction sites. Portable toilets are also used at cultural and recreational events including county fairs, festivals and outdoor concerts.</div> <bR> <div> All portable toilet waste is classified as septage. Any group or organization that has portable toilets on site must use a licenced waste hauler to dispose of their waste. Clients have the right to demand that a waste hauler produce proof of a licence.</div> <bR> <div> When negotiating a contract, waste haulers may include extra costs associated with the proper disposal of septage at a sewage treatment plant, approved waste disposal site or lagoon.</div> <bR> <bR> <div> Municipal Sewage Treatment Plants</div> <bR> <div> Municipal sewage treatment plants are an acceptable disposal option for untreated portable toilet wastes. The volume of this type of waste is relatively very small and it is unlikely that accepting portable toilet waste will put an excessive strain on a local treatment system.</div> <bR> <div> Municipal sewage treatment plant owners may enter into a contract with waste haulers, or they have the right to refuse untreated portable toilet waste. If waste haulers are unable to make an arrangement with a municipal sewage treatment plant, septage may be disposed of at an approved waste disposal site, trench or lagoon. Waste haulers may choose to use a landfill site or lagoon if using a sewage treatment plant would be prohibitively expensive or time-consuming (e.g. if the nearest plant were several hours’ drive.)</div> <bR> <div> The Ministry of the Environment is also reviewing other treatment options for septage, including dewatering and composting.</div> <bR> <bR> <div> For more information</div> <bR> <div> The Ministry of the Environment issues Certificates of Approval for waste haulers across the province. Ministry officers inspect waste haulers and can charge or fine unlicenced or non-compliant operators. For more information, please contact the Ministry of the Environment’s Public Information Centre at 1-800-565-4923 (Toronto 416-325-4000) or visit the Ministry’s web site at http://<A HREF="http://www.ene.gov.ca." TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ene.gov.ca."><U>www.ene.gov.ca.</U></A></div> <div> ==========================================================================</div> <bR> <div> <B>PINE SPRINGS SURVEY</B><B> <A NAME="survey"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Environment Haliburton! wants to know how you feel about the proposed Pine Springs septage lagoon. </B></div> <bR> <div> <B>The following are just suggested questions you might want to comment on. If you don't want to answer the questions, simply tell us how you feel about the proposal. We'll try and print your answers on this page.</B></div> <bR> <div> 1. Is the Township of Algonquin Highlands doing the right thing by trying to build a lagoon?</div> <div> 2. Is Pine Springs the right place for the lagoon?</div> <div> 3. If your answer to 2. is 'no', then where in the township would you put it?</div> <div> 4. What suggestions do you have regarding what to do with septage?</div> <bR> <div> <B>SEND YOUR COMMENTS TO:</B></div> <div> <B>Pine Springs Poll c/o </B></div> <div> <A HREF="mailto:info@environmenthaliburton.ca" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:info@environmenthaliburton.ca"><U><B>info@environmenthaliburton.ca</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <B>SURVEY RESULTS</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>1. Received March 12, 2004 from Eddie Lehman, Secretary of Algonquin Highlands' Waste Mangement Committee:</B></div> <bR> <div>  In answer to your questions;</div> <div>    1]Algonquin Highlands is doing the right thing by trying to build a sewage lagoon.There aren't</div> <div> many alternatives to disposing of "SEPTAGE" The idea of building a "Sewage Treatment Plant"</div> <div> some where in "Algonquin Highlands" has been studied & the end result shows 1] it is cost prohibitive & 2]where would you put it [most S.T.P. are situated near water] you need water in the treatment process & then you discharge the treated [pure] end result back into a lake/river</div> <div>    2] A sewage lagoon [ if constructed properly] is a very safe & viable method of treating</div> <div> SEPTAGE. One merely needs to go to BRACEBRIDGE or HUNTSVILLE to view their operations</div> <div> to see how effective the treatment process is.</div> <div>    3] A number of different sites were looked at [when the topic of a "sewage lagoon" was first</div> <div> talked about]  Pine Springs was selected to be studied [for a sewage lagoon] for a number of solid</div> <div> [no pun intended] reasons. 1] its remoteness 2]the lands are crown lands 3] the topography of</div> <div> the land is absolutely ideal [now: the arguement put forth against the "lagoon" IS THE MARSHY</div> <div> AREA [that eventually wanders its way to "Kushog Lake"] {in the vicinity of Pine Springs(@ hwy #35)}  NOW; AS HARD AS IT IS TO BELIEVE, THIS MARSHY GROUND IS THE ABSOLUTE</div> <div> BEST SPONGE YOU CAN GET TO ABSORB  THE TREATED LIQUID FROM THE "LAGOON"</div> <div> If you start searching on the web for info about "Sewage Lagoons" ; you will eventually come across articles that talk about absorbtion & perculation rates etc. [they all say the same thing: MARSHY</div> <div> TERRAIN IS GOOD FOR TREATMENT] Having said all this, someone will say::PROVE IT::</div> <div> Now you have a problem,BUT, all the ground testing & scientific data indicates that "Pine Springs"</div> <div> is IDEALLY SUITED.</div> <div>    I have kept pretty close tabs on what is going on at " Pine Springs" & I like what I see. The</div> <div> engineering reports give favorable results. However, I live at Maple Lake [not at Pine Springs]</div> <div> I also have a "holding tank" for my SEWAGE [ so I know, on my own property that there is no</div> <div> contamination for my drinking water supply] The nearest "septic tile" beds are at least 250ft away.</div> <div>    4] What to do with SEPTAGE:: WHO KNOWS:: MAYBE, WE SHOULD ALL GO ON LIQUID</div> <div> DIETS & then we will only generate LIQUID waste. Good idea, but not very practical at all.</div> <bR> <div> -- Eddie Lehman [secretary Algonquin Highlands Waste Management Committee]</div> <div>  Let it be known; I had nothing to do with selecting "Pine Springs".</div> <div> That was done before I appeared on the scene.</div> <div>  I have tried to do my homework on this issue though.</div> <bR> <div> <B>2. PINE SPRINGS IS THE WRONG LOCATION FOR A SEPTIC LAGOON. Received from Vern Zimmerman, a Kushog Lake cottage owner.</B></div> <bR> <div> The Township of Algonquin Highlands must stop the proposed septic lagoon at</div> <div> Pine Springs. In recent weeks, I have collected (with help of friends) more</div> <div> than enough information to allow me to draw the conclusion that the septic</div> <div> lagoon proposed for Pine Springs is simply wrong.</div> <div> As I understand things:</div> <bR> <div> 1/  The Township should be required to undergo a complete Class C</div> <div> Environmental Assessment - as the facility is in fact, much larger (1.5</div> <div> million gallons) than what they had originally proposed. What the Township</div> <div> refers to as a temporary or "test site", is actually an integral part of a</div> <div> much larger facility. For this reason they should be required to submit to</div> <div> the full EA.</div> <bR> <div> 2/ A current government "white paper", that will likely become legislation,</div> <div> says that all levels of government should be made responsible for doing all</div> <div> they can to  "protect ground source water". This lagoon does not serve to</div> <div> protect the water originating at lakes Sherbourne and St.Nora (location of</div> <div> the Frost Centre), the headwaters of the Kushog lake chain.</div> <div> (http://www.cela.ca/media/mr040212.htm)</div> <bR> <div> 3/ There is no current, "bench mark study data" of Lake conditions on</div> <div> Kushog. This information is essential to set a standard for measuring any</div> <div> pollutants that might result from the septic lagoon. Statistics should be</div> <div> taken over a three or four year period prior to the facility being opened,</div> <div> to establish a basis for analytical comparison. We do know that Kushog Lake</div> <div> is already ³stressed² with maximum levels of phosphates, and action must be</div> <div> taken to clean it up as it is!</div> <bR> <div> 4/  The proposed Pine Springs facility is near the headwaters of, and</div> <div> clearly within the Kushog Lake watershed - a lake that flows immediately</div> <div> into a chain of at least 5 lakes, the Gull river system and the Trent river</div> <div> system. Providing water to thousands of people downstream. While the septic</div> <div> lagoon is not supposed to discharge directly (by design it will filter and</div> <div> drain into the lake), what happens if/when there is a problem? There is only</div> <div> one place it can go. And, even if only a "temporary facility" is allowed,</div> <div> the resulting waste deposits could cause problems - even after closure - for</div> <div> years to come.</div> <bR> <div> 5/ A current study by the Haliburton County/MNR indicates that Pine Springs</div> <div> may be part of a 'Provincially significant'  wetland area. This must be</div> <div> confirmed before any decisions are made.</div> <bR> <div> 6/  Simply moving the site a few kilometers "up the road" would place the</div> <div> septic lagoon outside of the Kushog Lake watershed and protect the lake. It</div> <div> is a large wetland area that would act as a sponge, a natural filter.</div> <div> Property there is relatively inexpensive (leasing Crown land could be an</div> <div> option) for the "temporary" facility. While this solution generates concern,</div> <div> it is preferred to a direct threatening of the lake chain. In any case, a</div> <div> better location can certainly be found, and I urge council to pursue this.</div> <bR> <div> 7/  The Township originally submitted only three sites for consideration by</div> <div> the consulting engineers. Specifically, these were the Township owned,</div> <div> landfill site locations. The engineers were NOT asked to locate the most</div> <div> practical and workable site within the Township boundaries  but, rather to</div> <div> review only these locations.</div> <bR> <div> 8/  Using Pine Springs as the lagoon site means that waste will be spread</div> <div> (literally) outside the Algonquin Highlands Township boundary (which is</div> <div> against the whole concept of "responsibly dealing with our own waste". The</div> <div> site would mean septage would be taken to Hindon Hills, outside of our</div> <div> Township. And, drain back into Lake Kushog.</div> <bR> <div> 9/  Surface spreading of septage is to be an integral part of the proposal.</div> <div> That practice has been recognized - by the government - as unacceptable and</div> <div> it will be banned by June 2007. (see the W5 segment "Spreading Trouble" at:</div> <div> ctv.ca )</div> <bR> <div> 10/ There have been insufficient public meetings (one to date) on the</div> <div> proposal. At least two are required, and there should be at least one more</div> <div> in the summer season to permit those most affected, to have adequate input.</div> <bR> <div> And, while no one wants to talk about money--</div> <bR> <div> 11/ Allowing the septic lagoon on Lake Kushog will have a serious negative</div> <div> effect on the price of lake front and area properties. This will result in</div> <div> less tax income for the Township as property owners will apply for</div> <div> appropriate reductions in their assessment values, en mass.</div> <bR> <div> 12/  Spending over $100,000 for the benefit of approximately 400 users,</div> <div> principally by reducing haulage fees, is not fiscally responsible. Everyone</div> <div> will be forced to pay for this project through taxes, and in other ways. An</div> <div> additional factor is that the solution is short-term, as septage spreading</div> <div> is to be banned in 2007. We need to be intelligent and practical, while</div> <div> solving the very real problems of dealing with all forms of waste.</div> <bR> <div> Enough is enough! We demand an Environmental Assessment, a better solution,</div> <div> or at least a more appropriate location. We all have a responsibility to</div> <div> keep our own "backyards" clean!</div> <bR> <div> Sincerely,</div> <div> Vern Zimmerman</div> <div> Kushog Lake</div> <bR> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> <B> <A NAME="eh_comments_on_the_environmental_study"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B><FONT SIZE="4" COLOR="#006633" FACE="Arial" ><B>EH! Comments on the </B></FONT></div> <div> <B>Environmental Study Report for the </B></div> <div> <B>Hauled Sewage Management System for the Township of Algonquin Highlands.</B></div> <bR> <div> Ms Heather Watson </div> <div> SGS Lakefield Research Ltd. </div> <div> Box 4300 </div> <div> Lakefield ON K0L 2H0</div> <bR> <div> June 14, 2005</div> <bR> <div> Re: DRAFT Environmental Study Report Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Hauled Sewage Management System The Corporation of the Township of Algonquin Highlands</div> <bR> <div> Dear Ms. Watson:</div> <bR> <div> Over the past several years, Environment Haliburton! has closely followed the very commendable efforts of the Township of Algonquin Highlands to pro-actively manage septage waste. We are pleased that an environmental assessment of the project is underway and have appreciated the opportunity to participate in the assessment.</div> <bR> <div> While we feel that, on the whole, the assessment has been competently undertaken, we believe more work is needed before an application for a certificate of approval is warranted. Environment Haliburton! has the following concerns regarding the assessment completed to date:</div> <bR> <div> 1.Consultation</div> <div> This project has had a rather complex history. It was first announced as a lagoon at the Pine Springs landfill site. From this, the project became colloquially named the Pine Springs Septage lagoon. The Citizens, both seasonal and permanent, who lived in the vicinity of the Pine Springs landfill site became actively involved in the assessment. However, once it was determined that a Class C environmental assessment study report was required, various other sites were included in the assessment as well as other technologies. Unfortunately the project kept its colloquial name. Residents in the vicinity of the other potential sites were unaware of the expanded focus. Now that the Maple Lake landfill site is recommended, Environment Haliburton! is concerned that the residents have not been adequately consulted or informed. It is our recommendation that:</div> <div> <I><B>An additional consultation and information exchange be held specifically for the permanent and seasonal residents of Maple Lake, Beech Lake, Carnarvon and 12 Mile Lake</B></I><I><B>.</B></I></div> <bR> <div> 2.Traffic</div> <div> In the Environmental Study Report, the impact of traffic was estimated based on annual average number of trips. Annual averaging is not appropriate for "cottage country". With a seasonal population double the permanent population, all systems, including hauling of septage, are in greater use in the high season months. Therefore Environment Haliburton! recommends that:</div> <div> <I><B>Impact of increased traffic be recalculated based on seasonal rather than averaged data.</B></I></div> <bR> <div> 3.Technologies</div> <div> We are concerned with an apparent contradiction in the report. The constructed wetlands option was rejected on the ground that it was both too expensive and required too much space. However in the appendix that space requirement for this option is the least of the three. In addition, as the Waterloo biofilter and Ecofilter options are presented as examples, there is not detailed information on the capital costs or on the cost of monitoring, maintenance and repair. Therefore Environment Haliburton! recommends that:</div> <div> <I><B>Full cost accounting be made of each technology option and presented to the public.</B></I></div> <bR> <div> 4.Design detail</div> <div> The Environmental Study Report recommends adoption of the "advanced treatment system" at the Maple Lake site. No drawings or information is included in the report on the design and layout of the system. Nor is any information given on the disposal of the sludge from the initial settling pond, a feature of each option. Given the findings of a high water table at the site, ponding and wetland pockets and possible expansion of the land fill, the layout of the system, in particular the trenches for disposal of effluent is critical. Therefore Environment Haliburton! recommends that:</div> <div> <I><B>One additional open house/public meeting be held to discuss and review the design and lay-out of the proposed system.</B></I></div> <bR> <div> 5.Wetlands</div> <div> It may be that there are no significant wetlands in the vicinity of the Maple Lake site as no wetland evaluation has yet been undertaken. It is wise to remember that the Pine Spring site was not a provincially significant wetland when the project was first announced. As the County of Haliburton in partnership with, among others, Ducks Unlimited, has been developing a rapid appraisal system for wetlands, Environment Haliburton! recommends that:</div> <div> <I><B>The Maple Lake site be evaluated using the rapid appraisal system under development and the results be released to the public, perhaps through the additional open house. </B></I></div> <bR> <div> 6.Mitigation measures</div> <div> The Environmental Study Report is silent on any mitigation measures that may be needed. The assumption that there will be no impact, particularly based on the limited data made available to the public, is adventurous. Therefore Environment Haliburton! recommends that:</div> <div> <I><B>The impact of the actual system, as designed, on the actual site be re-assessed with particular emphasis on water flows and mitigation measures be developed particularly for contingencies such as spills. This re-assessment should be made available to the public.</B></I></div> <bR> <div> 7.Monitoring</div> <div> The Environmental Study Report does not recommend a monitoring program. As water quality is so important to the people, life and economy of Haliburton County, Environment Haliburton! recommends that:</div> <div> <I><B>A monitoring plan be developed and presented to the public. The plan should include quarterly reports made available to the public either through the Algonquin Highlands website or through the local newspapers.</B></I></div> <bR> <div> Thank you for providing Environment Haliburton! with the opportunity to comment on the Environmental Study Report for the Hauled Sewage Management System for the Township of Algonquin Highlands.</div> <bR> <div> Yours sincerely</div> <bR> <div> Heather Ross      </div> <div> c.c.Ms. Angie Bird, Bruce Hancock, MOE</div> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>