Dr Shaun Peck's presentation to the CRD Core Area Liquid Waste Management Committee January 12th 2011.
The best of the New Year to you. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you again.
I will address agenda items # 5 Inflow and Infiltration, # 6 Budget for the Liquid Waste Planning and item # 7 Letter from Environment Minister Murray Coell.
Speaking to the Inflow and Infiltration report (Agenda #5). I am glad to see that the outcome being sought is mentioned. So often reports deal with just the process. The purpose of I and I is to prevent (mostly) water from getting into sewer pipes so that the pipes will not be overloaded with the resultant sewer overflows to the beaches around the coast. The other outcome that can be achieved is a reduced size of any future land based sewage treatment plant because plants are designed based on the volume of water to be processed. (Sewage is 99.97% water). It appears from this report that at 12 sites monitored (35% of 34 sites) there has been a decrease in I and I measured which is good news.
I found it of interest that there are estimated to be 2100 KM of sewer pipes in the Core Area and that 40% of the pipes are on private land – connected to houses and other private property.
I would have liked to see an estimate as to how much I and I occurs on private land or whether in fact the significant I and I is mainly into the larger collecting system maintained by the CRD and the Municipalities.
Before embarking on this proposed education program one should ask- how effective is the proposed education program expected to be? Will there be any way of evaluating it? Is it nice to do or cost-effective? Can the outcome be measured? These questions should be asked because in developing public education or promotion programs often money is spent and no one knows at the end whether it was cost-effective. Did it produce the desired effect? After all if it does result in a significant reduction then there will be a reduction in the size of any sewage treatment plant that might be needed in the future.
Why is there not any reference in the I and I report to the elimination of combined sewer and storm drain pipes as occurs in the Uplands area of Oak Bay and perhaps other parts of the Core Area? My understanding is that this is major source of unnecessary rain water getting into sewer pipes but the report does not mention this. It certainly will have a positive impact on the outcomes desired if it is eliminated.
Speaking to the Budget (Agenda #6). The report shows that to date from 2006 the CRD has spent $15.7 Million on planning and $6.7 Million on land acquisition. I have the following points for your consideration in discussing this report.
What is the reason for the $3,230,112 not being received? This must be either the Federal or Provincial contribution to the second Loan Authorization by-law of $10 Million, for which as I recall, there was a multipage comprehensive three government agreement for cost sharing. I have always wondered whether the second $12 Million Loan authorization by law was going to be cost shared. It appears from this report that this will not be occurring. Could this be clarified? I do realize that neither the Province nor the Federal Government will cost share land costs.
It is good news that there does not appear to be any need for a further loan authorization by-law at this time for what are called capital costs. These so called capital costs are in fact costs for planning for capital expenditure rather than costs of capital. Although I understand it is acceptable accounting practice, it does seem odd that planning costs are amortized over time rather than paying for them up front. It might be more accurate and helpful to label them capital planning costs.
Speaking to Agenda item #7 I am pleased to see that Minister Coell has allowed the deferral of the audit of the Liquid Waste Management Plan Amendment 8 until March 31st 2012. This includes reference to the public having “meaningful input into the implementation of the plan” and “an independent audit on the commitments contained in the plan”. As a member of the public and a taxpayer this is welcomed.
For my last half minute I would like to speak on an unrelated subject. To those members of you who are on the CRD Board I urge you, this afternoon, to pass the Capital Regional District Bylaw No. 3711, “Capital Regional District Tanning Facility Regulations Bylaw No. 1, 2010”. By passing this Bylaw you will be providing public health leadership, as you have done in the past with other public health issues such as the hazards of tobacco smoke. This new bylaw will prevent some young people from developing skin cancer.
Thank you,
Dr Shaun Peck, Public Health Consultant
Member of Responsible Sewage Treatment Victoria www.rstv.ca
Board member of the Association for Responsible and Environmentally Sustainable Sewage Treatment. www.aresst.ca