Implementation of Source Protection Plan Policies Halton-Hamilton - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Implementation of Source Protection Plan Policies

Halton-Hamilton Source Protection Committee Meeting December 8, 2015

The Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change

2

3

Prohibition Risk Management Plans Restricted Land Uses Land Use Planning Approaches Prescribed Instruments

Municipality

Source Protection Plan – Policy Approaches

Province Municipality/Planning Boards Municipality, Conservation Authority Province

• Source Protection Committees are enabled through legislation to use a

variety of policy tools in their source protection plans

• The Province (Ministries) can be named as the implementation body

Legally Binding Non-Legally Binding

Incentive Programs Education and Outreach Other

• Condition Sites
• Water Quantity
• Spills
• Wells

January 1, 2015 MOECC Implementation

Industrial 15 – handling and storage of fuel 16 – handling and storage of DNAPL 17 – handling and storage of an organic solvent Agriculture 1 – waste disposal 2 – sewage 12 – application of road salt 13 – handling and storage of road salt 14 – storage of snow 18 – chemicals used in the de-icing of aircraft Water Quantity 19 – consumptive water taking 20 – activity that reduces the recharge of an aquifer Clean Water Act (General Reg. 287/07) 3 – application of ASM 4 – storage of ASM 5 – management of ASM 6 – application of NASM 7 – handling and storage of NASM 8 – application of commercial fertilizer 9 – handling and storage of commercial fertilizer 10 – application of pesticide 11 – handling and storage of pesticide 21 – livestock grazing

Drinking Water Threat Activities

MOECC

MOECC issues instruments for threat activity * Fuel Storage at Drinking Water Systems Only

4

MOECC MOECC MOECC MOECC MOECC MOECC*

Project Deliverables

Each program area:

• 1. Defined how ministry will interpret SP PI policy
• bjectives in future instrument decisions (for each sub-

threat activity)

• Define any terms and conditions required to manage

significant drinking water threat activity

• 2. Identified criteria and business processes for geo-spatial

screening of prescribed instruments

• 3. Developed a plan to address existing instruments for

significant drinking water threats

5

Deliverable 1: Source Protection PI Policy Analysis

• Waste
• Sewage
• Pesticides
• Hauled Sewage / Bio-solids (NASM)
• PTTW
• Land Use Planning
• Fuel Storage at Drinking Water Systems
• Spills Response

6

MOECC Standard Operating Policy EBR Information Posting

• On April 1, 2015, the ministry posted a summary SOP
• n the EBR to support the ministry’s implementation of

source protection PI policies

• The content of the SOP for ensuring approvals PIs

conform with policies in source protection plans

• The SOP applies on a province-wide basis, to ensure a

consistent approach to implementing source water protection policies.

7

Future waste ECAs:

• If the Policy directive prohibits the significant threat activity in a

source water protection vulnerable area- no ECA will be issued.

• If the Policy directive required to manage the threat activity in

source water protection vulnerable area - current ECA procedures are sufficient.

Existing waste ECAs:

• MOECC identified approximately 50 sites that are located in SP

vulnerable area where there a significant drinking water threat.

• ECAs identified that need to be reviewed and updated.

Waste

Outcomes

8

Sewage – Approvals

Future Sewage ECAs: Require SP Supplementary Report with new ECA applications

• Details on how source protection is considered
• Must outline methods to mitigate threats to drinking water,

emergency/ contingency plans, design requirements etc. Existing Sewage ECAs: Additional operational requirements for existing sewage dischargers

• Contingency planning
• Maintenance and regular inspections

9

Outcomes

Pesticides

Future Pesticide Permits:

• Land extermination pesticide permits (approx. 70-80 per year for forestry, right of way,

aerial agriculture)

• Regional Pesticides Specialists will screen permit applications using mapping tool

SDWT threat activities will require additional protective measures:

• Not issue permit where prohibitive policies apply
• Manage SDWT activities by including appropriate permit conditions such as:
• emergency response measures and spill contingency plans for pesticide

mixing, loading, and handling

• site specific setbacks to watercourses, timing restrictions (including

consideration of weather events), spills/runoff management, or other measures Existing Pesticide Permits: No impacts as permits are issued for short term

10 10

Outcomes

Hauled Sewage/Biosolids

• Significant change to how ECAs are issued by the ministry
• Changes apply to low, moderate and significant drinking water

threats

• Scope of program implementation relatively broad (more land area

subject to new operational policies)

Outcomes

11

Hauled Sewage

Future ECAs for Significant Drinking Water Threats:

• Will not approve the application of untreated hauled sewage on

lands where the activity has been identified as a significant drinking water threat

• Will apply to both new sites and renewal sites

Future ECAs for Low and Moderate Drinking Water Threats:

• More detailed site information required to verify site conditions
• Enhanced operational requirements introduced
• Ensure minimum standards are incorporated into ECAs

Outcomes

12

Biosolids

Future ECAs for Significant Drinking Water Threats:

• Will not approve the application or storage of biosolids if

proposed within 100m of a municipal wellhead

• Will apply to both new sites and renewal sites
• Site specific approach for applications received beyond 100m of

well Future ECAs for Low and Moderate Drinking Water Threats:

• If ECA application received, program lead staff will work with

local staff to determine approach Existing instruments:

• Will be updated as applications come in for renewal

Outcomes

13

PTTW

NOTE:

• Limited water quantity policies at time of this project.
• Ministry initial review of new water quantity policies to determine

impact to PTTW program.

• Work underway to assess how water budget work can be

incorporated into permit conditions may result in future changes to PTTW program and inspection/compliance direction.

Outcomes

14

PTTW

Future PTTWs:

• No new terms and conditions in PTTW
• No prohibition policies

Existing PTTWs:

• No changes

Outcomes

15

Land Use Planning

• Official plans are required to conform with SPP land use policies

and consider vulnerable areas as per the Provincial Policy Statement.

• Ministry planners review Official Plan for SPP conformity as part of

the broader review coordinated by regional planners through the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing one window process

• The ministry is in the process of developing internal processes for

Environmental Assessment and Official Plan reviews

Outcomes

16

Fuel Storage At Drinking Water Systems

• Fuel storage at drinking water systems can be a significant drinking water

threat

• The ministry will require additional terms and conditions in Drinking Water

Permit and Licences to ensure proper storage and handling of fuel at drinking water systems

• Addition terms and conditions include:
• Secondary containment
• Spill/leak detection and spill response procedures
• Collision protection
• Protection of oil lines from physical damage
• The approving Director under Part V of the SDWA will be notifying DWS
• wners of this requirement and DW Permit and Licences will be updated

starting fiscal 2015/16 Outcomes

17

Deliverable 2: New Business Process: Application Screening

• OD completes the preliminary geospatial screening of ECA applications to

determine whether the proposed undertaking is located in a source protection vulnerable area where it could be a significant drinking water threat (SDWT).

• If flagged by OD, SPPB conducts the secondary screening of the

application, including:

• Based on the vulnerability score and threat circumstances, determining

whether it is a SDWT

• If it is a SDWT, determining whether an applicable Source Protection

Plan prescribed instrument policy applies

• Providing OD with the policy outcome – to prohibit or manage

18

Screening Tools: Who is Screening?

• Provincial program areas using the mapping tool to screen

applications:

• Environmental Approvals Branch (MOECC)
• OMAFRA (nutrient management plans)
• Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF)

19

Sewage ECA Example: Manage Policy

20 20

• 1. ECA Application received for the demolition and

reconstruction of the Cana WWTP located in Kingston, Ontario in Cataraqui SPA

• 2. Preliminary SP Screening using Source Protection map

tool indicates: the site is located in a WHPA-A with a vulnerability score of 10

• 3. Secondary Screening

confirms that the combination

• f pathogen circumstances in

the Table of Threats and the location in vulnerable area (WHPA A with a score of 10) are met. Therefore, the undertaking is a SDWT activity.

• 4. Consult applicable SPP to determine policy
• direction. Cataraqui Source Protection Policy# 6.2.13-

CW applies. Since the undertaking is the replacement of existing sewage works or facilities, policy direction is to manage the threat activity by ensuring the design incorporates appropriate risk management measures to protect the source of drinking water.

21 21

• 6. OD documents ECA screening results and

the file is forwarded for technical review

• 7. During the technical review of the proposed sewage

works, the Technical Reviewer refers to the SOP to confirm that the “Design and Operational Requirements”

• f the proposed sewage works have been met to

manage the significant drinking water threat. This is in addition to the current review requirements. For example, design must be accompanied with erosion and sediment control measures to cover all phases of construction

• 5. SPPB communicates to OD that a “manage” policy applies.

Sewage ECA Example: Manage Policy Continued….

Deliverable 3:

Existing Instruments Plan

• SPPs require existing ECAs be addressed within three years of plan

approval

• Ministry is in the process of :
• Identifying existing instruments (screening)
• Determine if issued instruments need to be amended to conform

with SOP Example: Post 1999 Approvals:

• ~ 200 Sewage ECAs identified in vulnerable areas
• screening required to confirm if the activity is a SDWT

Pre-1999 Approvals:

• Information provided via site inspections and file review

22

Additional Action By the MOECC To Implement “Other Non-PI” Source Protection Plan Policies

23

Spills Response

• As of November 2014, every spill reported to the ministry

is geo-spatially accessed to determine if it’s in a source protection vulnerable area

• New spill response procedures developed to assist Spills

Action Centre (SAC) spill response action

• Updated notification protocols to ensure prompt

communication with the affected municipalities, agencies and authorities

• Procedures reviewed on a quarterly basis and updated

accordingly

24

Inspections

• The ministry has prioritized/targeted inspections in

source protection areas:

• 2014/2015: General guidance developed
• 2015/2016:
• Identify sites
• Targeted inspections
• The ministry is incorporating source protection into

inspections protocol and guidance materials guidance

25

Education and Outreach

• Development of an SP Resource E&O Catalogue to

support local implementation (located on the Conservation Ontario website).

• The E&O catalogue includes:
• General SP background, septic's, road salt,

hazardous liquid, agriculture, wells and fuels

26

The Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA)

27

28

Prescribed Instruments under the NMA

• OMAFRA has enhanced approval processes for ministry-issued prescribed

instruments (PI), to ensure that PIs (existing and future) that regulate SDWT activities are identified and reviewed for compliance with SPP policies.

• OMAFRA has reviewed all SPP policies impacting prescribed instruments

under the Nutrient Management Act; including:

• Non-Agricultural Source Material Plans (NASM Plans),
• Nutrient Management Strategies (NMS), and
• Nutrient Management Plans (NMP).
• Policy specifics and mapping information is being used to determine

instrument content requirements, based on the specific instrument location.

29

Prescribed Instruments under the NMA

• Where SDWT policies apply, OMAFRA will identify and review existing PIs

to ensure they contain appropriate conditions.

• OMAFRA will screen all future PI approval applications to determine

location, and where relevant, applications will be required to comply with applicable policies and contain appropriate conditions.

• Where a PI is required under the NMA but not approved by OMAFRA,

OMAFRA will request PIs for submission and assessment on a voluntary basis.

• OMAFRA can only impose conditions on approved PIs.

30

GIS

• OMAFRA will use GIS resources to determine overlap of IPZ’s and

WHPA’s with declared farm units and will assess existing PIs and future PI applications for compliance with local SPP policies.

Enforcement

• MOECC will enforce prescribed instruments that OMAFRA has

approved, to ensure compliance with local SPP policies.

• MOECC has incorporated Source Protection information as ‘risk

criteria’ that will be used to select farms for inspection.

31

Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF)

32

Instruments issued by MNRF

• License: for aggregate extraction on private land
• Wayside Permit: for aggregate extraction on private land where

aggregate to be used by a public authority (MTO/Municipality) for road construction or road maintenance

• Aggregate Permit: for aggregate or topsoil extraction on crown land
• Site Plan: applicants of above permits/license also require an

approved Site Plan which sets out the specific operational and rehabilitation terms and conditions for the operation

33

MNRF Preparing for Implementation

• MNRF is currently working to ensure implementation of, and

compliance with, source protection plan policies for existing and future sites, as applicable

• For existing risks, MNRF has identified all aggregate sites within

WHPA-A and WHPA-B sites across the province and are reviewing their instruments in accordance with the timelines associated within each policy.

–

Current Status: MNRF can work with operators to adjust approval conditions with their consent and could force a change; however, those changes would be subject to hearing provisions in order to implement the policies.

• For future applications, MNRF is using the source protection

information mapping tool for screening, and including terms and conditions surrounding fuel storage in the instrument …cont’d next slide

34

Cont’d… MNRF Preparing for Implementation

ARA is currently under review (Nov 2015) and notice is posted on the EBR (#012-544) to provide new abilities related to source protection policies:

• Proposal: New powers to allow for Regulations to establish new

conditions to automatically apply to existing aggregate sites where source protection plans policies apply (ARA prescribed instrument policies). The proposal also includes new fuel handling and storage conditions that would be established and apply at sites within protection zones.

• MNRF is also conducting an analysis of non-legally binding policies

where they are identified as an implementing body to determine how best to achieve the policy outcomes.

35

Ministry of Government & Consumer Services (MGCS) and The Technical Standards & Safety Authority (TSSA)

36

Ministry of Government & Consumer Services and The Technical Standards & Safety Authority

The Public Safety Branch of the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services is responsible for oversight of the Technical Standards and Safety Authority (TSSA). TSSA administers the 16 regulations of the Technical Standards and Safety Act, including those that speak to the transportation, storage, distribution and use of fuels.

37

Source Protection Policies & MGCS and TSSA

SPP policies ask MGCS to:

• Consider amendments to the following legislation:
• O. Reg. 213/01(Fuel Oil) – I.e. residential fuel oil tanks
• O. Reg. 217/01 (Liquid Fuel) – I.e. gas stations, marinas, card

lock stations

• Fuel Oil Code
• Liquid Fuel Oil Code
• Improve collaboration between MOECC and MGCS – i.e. develop

education and outreach material to support public safety and protect drinking water.

• Integrate source protection mapping into inspection prioritization

and spill response

38

Preparing for Implementation

NOTE:

• All policies directed at MGCS and TSSA are non-legally binding to

implement.

• TSSA is a fee for service, non-profit with responsibilities delegated by

the ministry.

• Work underway by MGCS and TSSA to support implementation of

policies.

• Some policies have been implemented:
• Joint E&O material developed for Fuel Oil and Liquid Fuel posted
• n the Conservation Ontario’s website in 2015

39

Preparing for Implementation Continued…

• The Fuel Oil Code will be amended and take effect on January 1, 2016.

The amendments include new requirements for double bottom or double walled tanks and improved tank foundations for outside residential tanks.

• TSSA has proposed amendments to the Liquid Fuel Handling Code to

address industry concerns and provide greater protection to the environment.

40

Ministry of Transportation (MTO)

4 1

Policy Examples

(signage, salt storage, fuel storage at wayside permit sites)

42

Policies – MTO as Implementing Body

• Signage - MTO should manufacture, install and maintain signs along

Provincial Highways within the WHPA and IPZs.

• Salt – Application, Handling and Storage: BMPs, updating salt

management plans and pilot projects for the application and handling of road salt on provincial roads.

• Fuel Handling and Storage (delegated authority from MNRF under

the ARA) –For wayside permit sites where fuel policies apply. When aggregate to be used by MTO for road construction or road maintenance.

43

44

MTO Preparing for Implementation

• MTO is currently manufacturing vulnerable area road signage. These

policies must be implemented 2 years after the effective date of the plan. (Niagara date - October 1, 2016). MTO Geomatics will work with MOECC GIS specialists to verify geo-locates for signage.

• MTO committed to ensuring salt policy requirements as agreed upon are

satisfied, i.e. salt management plans and best practices. Salt management data will be provided in accordance with the plan policies.

• MTO has implemented some policies well in advance of their

implementation date, such as Emergency Response Planning.

• MTO agreed to enter into dialogue and consider road salt pilot projects

where feasible that balance safety requirements and the environment.

45

MTO Preparing for Implementation

• MTO is currently working to ensure implementation of source protection

plan policies (existing and future).

• MTO has identified that there are no existing wayside permits in vulnerable

areas related to the storage and handling of fuel.

• For future applications, MOECC is working to provide MTO with our

mapping tool (SPEM) for screening, including terms and conditions surrounding fuel storage in wayside pits.

46