little current lagoon ea addendum final - townofnemi.on.ca · town of northeastern manitoulin and...

July 10, 2018

Little Current Lagoon Capacity Expansion

Schedule C Class Environmental Assessment

Environmental Study Report (ESR) Addendum

Introduction

The Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands (Town) is proposing to undertake

upgrades to the Little Current sewage treatment lagoons to provide increased treatment

capacity and improved effluent quality. The environmental study report for the project was

completed by Stantec Consulting Ltd. and placed on public record in January 2011; however,

project implementation was delayed due to funding constraints. Since that time, flows to the

sewage system have continued to increase and the system is now operating at an estimated

45% over its original design capacity. In 2017, The Greer Galloway Group was engaged to

complete the detailed design and tendering for the first phase of the lagoon expansion.

Updated sewage flow projections, and revised effluent criteria developed in conjunction with

the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC), combined with higher than

anticipated costs due to challenging site conditions, have resulted in changes to the design

concept presented in the ESR to accomplish the preferred solution. The purpose of this

addendum is to document the proposed design changes and discuss any potential

environmental implications relative to those presented in the original environmental study

report.

Existing Lagoon

The existing 3‐cell facultative lagoon system serving the community of Little Current is designed

to treat average daily sewage flows of 927 m3/day, discharging seasonally in spring and fall

(over discharge periods of 3 to 4 weeks) through a municipal drainage ditch that flows through

pasture lands for approximately 3 km before entering Strawberry Creek and ultimately

Strawberry Channel of Lake Huron. Sanitary flows over the past 5 years (1,344 m3/day on

average) have exceeded this capacity, leading to earlier than anticipated spring discharges.

Updated Design Flow

An updated design flow target of 1,500 m3/day was established based on recent sanitary flows

(1,344 m3/day average over the past 5 years) and population statistics. This is 36% higher than

the 1,100 m3/day design flow specified in the ESR, despite a similar population growth

assumption of 11 persons per year over the next 20 years. Detailed calculations are contained

in Technical Memorandum #1 (see Appendix A).

Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands 2 Little Current Lagoon Capacity Expansion Class EA ‐ Addendum to ESR

July 10, 2018

Revised Effluent Criteria

Based on input provided by the MOECC, revised effluent criteria (presented in Table 1 below)

were developed for the Little Current Lagoon.

Since the lagoon effluent is discharged through a municipal ditch that flows over pasture land

where it is exposed to waste products from grazing cattle before it reaches Strawberry Creek, it

was agreed that the more stringent effluent requirements recommended in the ESR are not

necessary and standard F‐5 guidelines are sufficient (refer to Jan. 12, 2018 memo from MOECC

Surface Water Specialist in Appendix B). The ammonia and toxicity testing requirements were

also removed.

Effluent Parameter Design

Objectives Compliance

Limits Compliance Monitoring

cBOD5 (mg/L) 20.0 25.0 Monthly, grab or composite

Total Suspended Solids - TSS (mg/L) 20.0 25.0 Monthly, grab or composite

Total Phosphorus (mg/L) 0.75 1.0 Monthly, grab or composite

Total Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/L)

Summer (Jun 1 to Oct 31) Winter (Nov 1 to May 31)

Not Required

Not Required

E. Coli (CFU/100 mL) Not Required Not Required

Table 1 Proposed Effluent Criteria

Preferred Solution and Review of Design Concepts in ESR

The environmental study report identified the need for lagoon upgrades to provide increased

treatment capacity for future growth and development, and to meet MOECC effluent quality

standards.

The preferred solution was to “Upgrade Existing Lagoons with New Technology to Increase

Capacity”. The ESR presented the following two preferred design concepts, suggesting that the

final selection be made during the detailed design phase based on a more detailed cost

analysis. Both concepts involve utilizing the existing lagoon cells with additional treatment

processes, discharging effluent to the existing drainage channel over an extended discharge

period.

1. Intermittent Sand Filtration (ISF) ‐ ISF Technology involves intermittent application of

lagoon effluent onto the surface of a sand filter bed to provide increased ammonia

removal and effluent polishing through a combination of physical straining and

biochemical processes. An ISF system would allow effluent to be discharged over an

extended period of 6 months (typically April ‐ October) when temperatures are warm

enough to permit effective operation. An additional lagoon cell would need to be


July 10, 2018

constructed on the adjacent Town land to provide 6 months storage capacity for the

winter months when the system would not be operational. This option was pursued

initially since it provided the opportunity for phased implementation to obtain an

immediate benefit from increased storage capacity while deferring the cost of the ISF to

a future upgrade. However, preliminary investigations and geotechnical work revealed

that the costs related to this approach would be significantly higher than originally

expected given the increased design flows and challenging site conditions.

2. Submerged Attached Growth Reactor (SAGR) ‐ SAGR systems are primarily used for

ammonia removal and feature aerated coarse gravel beds that provide an environment

for target bacteria to reside. Unlike ISF, SAGR systems operate effectively in cold

temperatures, allowing continuous effluent discharge year‐round. According to the ESR,

this option would involve modifications to existing lagoon cells (e.g. reconfiguring flows

and adding mechanical aeration) as well as construction of new SAGR cells downstream

of the existing cells, possibly expanding onto the adjacent land. Given that the revised

effluent criteria do not include ammonia requirements, a SAGR system may no longer

be required (refer to supporting email correspondence with MOECC in Appendix B).

Proposed Design

Based on the updated design flows, effluent criteria and additional information obtained during

the design phase, both preferred design concepts (ISF and SAGR) were determined to be cost‐

prohibitive. A new design concept was developed to implement the preferred solution in a

more cost‐effective manner. It retains the following previously accepted features of the ISF/

SAGR designs:

Utilizes existing lagoon cells (ISF, SAGR)

Continuous discharge of treated effluent (SAGR)

Construction of an additional cell on adjacent Town land west of the existing lagoon (ISF,

SAGR)

Continuous chemical addition system for enhanced phosphorus removal (ISF, SAGR)

New utility building to house blowers for mechanical aeration (SAGR)

The existing three facultative lagoon cells will continue to be utilized for cBOD and TSS removal.

To support the change from seasonal to continuous discharge, several modifications and

enhancements are also proposed:

The existing flow path through the lagoon will be reconfigured by modifying interconnecting

pipes to promote series flow through the system during normal operations while providing

flexibility to bypass cells for maintenance. Baffle curtains will also be added to individual cells to

minimize short‐circuiting.


July 10, 2018

A new chemical feed system and bulk storage tank will be added to provide continuous ferric

sulfate dosing between lagoon Cells 1 and 2 for enhanced phosphorous removal.

A new, smaller post‐aeration polishing cell will be added downstream of the existing lagoon

cells for removal of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) that forms under ice cover during cold temperatures.

This additional treatment reduces the potential for odour problems associated with continuous

effluent discharge during winter. A new utility building will be constructed to house the blowers

required for aeration as well as the pumping equipment for the chemical feed system.

Additional details concerning the proposed design are provided in Appendix C.

Environmental Impacts

Environmental impacts of the proposed design are generally similar to those presented in the

ESR.

Reconfiguring the existing lagoons for continuous effluent discharge reduces the potential for

downstream flooding during wet weather and benefits downstream environments. Additional

treatment for removal of hydrogen sulfide reduces the potential for odour problems during

winter operations.

The proposed design allows for increased treatment capacity with a reduced footprint and less

land disturbance than the ISF system previously accepted as a preferred design. Temporary

impacts during construction are also expected to be reduced since the new design requires

significantly less excavation to construct the smaller post‐aeration cell. Standard mitigating

measures outlined in the ESR will apply.

The new design concept accomplishes the preferred solution, providing increased treatment

capacity for future growth while meeting effluent requirements established in conjunction with

the MOECC. Estimated construction costs for the new design are significantly lower than those

presented in the ESR ($1.0M ‐1.5M compared with $2.4M ‐ $3.5M) despite the fact that the

design flows have increased by more than 35%.

Public and Agency Consultation

The Municipal Class Environmental Assessment process (October 2000, as amended) for

Schedule C projects requires that any project modifications which occur after the filing of the

Environmental Study Report be reviewed and documented in an addendum to the ESR

describing the circumstances necessitating the change, the environmental implications of the

change, and mitigating measures for any negative environmental effects.

As noted previously, extensive additional consultation was undertaken with the MOECC

regarding effluent requirements and enhanced treatment options to develop the basis for the


July 10, 2018

new proposed design, which accomplishes the preferred solution documented in the ESR with

no anticipated additional environmental impacts.

The project contact list and record of correspondence is contained in Appendix D.

Notice of Filing of Addendum

The Notice of Filing of Addendum was published on July 10, 2018 on the Town of Northeastern

Manitoulin and the Islands website and also in local newspapers. This Addendum is now

available for the required 30‐day comment period. Only the changes proposed in the

addendum are available for review.

Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands Little Current Lagoon Capacity Expansion Class EA ‐ Addendum to ESR

July 10, 2018

APPENDIX A: Technical Memorandum #1 ‐ Updated Flow Projections

1620 Wallbridge Loyalist Road

R.R. #5

Belleville, Ontario

K8N 4Z5

Telephone

(613) 966-3068

Facsimile (613) 966-3087

E-mail

[email protected]

C O N S U L T I N G

E N G I N E E R S

G R E E R

G A L L O W A Y

April 4th, 2018 Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands (NEMI) 14 Water Street East PO Box 608 Little Current, Ontario P0P 1K0 Attn: Dave Williamson, CAO Re: Little Current Lagoon Expansion Technical Memorandum # 1 GGG Project#: 17-3-7636 Mr. Williamson, As part of the Environmental Study Report (ESR) for the Little Current Lagoon Expansion, this Technical Memorandum (TM) is presented to outline updated flow projection requirements. Background: The population of the Town of NEMI recorded by Statistics Canada during the 2016 Census is 2712 people. The most populous community is Little Current with population of 1558 as of the 2016 Census. The remaining population is distributed throughout the rural areas and small communities including islands in Lake Huron. There are no major industries in the community of Little Current, but the community serves as a support services centre for NEMI. Little Current is home to municipal and federal government services, a hospital and long-term healthcare facility, financial services, police services, school board offices, a primary school and various commercial services. Wastewater treatment at Little Current is a 3-cell lagoon system located at rural address 277 Highway 540, District of Manitoulin. Facultative lagoons have provided the community of Little Current with sanitary treatment for more than thirty years. Operation of the system is authorized under the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) Provisional Certificate of Approval. Objectives and guidelines for the quality of discharged treated effluent are set out for the treatment system by the MOECC. The Little Current water treatment plant (WTP) draws its raw water from the North Channel in Lake Huron. The treated water is distributed to the community of Little Current. Ontario Clean Water Agency (OCWA) operators state the average production of finished drinking water is 1000 m3/day to mostly residential consumers. Large volume non-residential consumers include the local hospital and the Coldwater Fisheries Inc. fish processing and packaging plant.


R.R. #5

Belleville, Ontario

K8N 4Z5

Telephone

(613) 966-3068

Facsimile (613) 966-3087

E-mail

[email protected]

C O N S U L T I N G

E N G I N E E R S

G R E E R

G A L L O W A Y

The existing system has a 180-day storage capacity of 166,860 m3 and a design average daily raw sewage flow rating of 927 m3/day, which is currently at 45 percent overcapacity. As such, the wastewater treatment facility is currently operating beyond its design hydraulic capacity. In addition, Little Current requires treatment capacity to accommodate future growth.

Forecasted Population & Sewage Flows The forecasted sewage flows for Little Current were estimated based on historical and current sewage flow rates, as well as current and forecasted population growth. Based on the current operating conditions, the system can benefit from an increased capacity to accommodate further growth in community and infrastructure, and to avoid potential lagoon overflows or out-of-season discharges that can negatively impact the nearby environment.

An examination of sixty-month flow data found the average daily flow to be 1344 m3/day – approximately 45% beyond the current rated capacity (see Appendix A for monthly flows by year). Please note that the December 2016 flow data was significantly low and is considered to be a flow meter error. Therefore, a five-year average was calculated to replace the anomaly.

• (1338 + 1328 + 1484 + 1178 + 1391) ÷ 5 = 1344 m3/day The current serviced population was established by using 2016 Census data gathered from Statistics Canada. Based on the 2010 ESR, population will grow by 11 persons per year (5 lots per year; 2.2 persons per lot). The flow per capita per day (including infiltration) as of 2017 was then established by dividing the existing average daily flow rate by 2016 Census population plus the growth of 11 persons per the 2010 ESR.

• (1344 m3/day) ÷ 1558 + 11 people = 857 L/capita/day The per capita per day calculation rate is considered high compared to standard average high ranges of 450 L/capita/day according to the 2008 MOECC Design Guidelines for Sewage Works. Such high volumes of raw sewage per capita can indicate high extraneous infiltration (I&I) in the collection system at Little Current. Significant work has been undertaken by the Town to correct this issue of the years, however the flows continue to exceed averages for the province. Although the Town will continue with an I&I program, they must provide hydraulic capacity to treat the flows they continue to experience. Based on the 2010 ESR, population will grow by 11 persons per year (5 lots per year; 2.2 persons per lot). By leveraging the 2016 Census data and the 2010 ESR growth ratio, we can presume that the total population of Little Current will be 1789 by 2037.

• 1569 + (11 persons x 20 years) = 1789 people Based on the 2010 growth ratio, using 2016 Census data with a 20-year growth horizon, and updated with the current average daily flow per capita, the capacity requirement is calculated below:

• 1789 people x 857 L/capita/day = 1533 m3/d


R.R. #5

Belleville, Ontario

K8N 4Z5

Telephone

(613) 966-3068

Facsimile (613) 966-3087

E-mail

[email protected]

C O N S U L T I N G

E N G I N E E R S

G R E E R

G A L L O W A Y

Conclusion/Discussion At the recent sixty-month average flow rate of 1344 m3/day, the Little Current sewage lagoons treatment system is at 45 percent overcapacity and requires immediate expansion of treatment capacity to meet near-term base growth in serviced areas of the community. Upgrading the existing lagoons due to the current overcapacity of the treatment system, it is recommended that the target design flow should be considered to 1500 m3/day. This will provide sufficient capacity to treat current flows as well as providing capacity for modest future population growth. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact the undersigned. Best regards, THE GREER GALLOWAY GROUP INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS

Tony Guerrera, P.Eng. Senior Project Manager


R.R. #5

Belleville, Ontario

K8N 4Z5

Telephone

(613) 966-3068

C O N S U L T I N G

E N G I N E E R S

G R E E R

G A L L O W A Y

APPENDIX A

Table 1: Little Current Flows (m3)

Month/Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Average

January 34,331 35,103 51,228 32,886 35,801 37,870

February 32,157 26,344 26,314 39,984 41,863 33,332

March 59,817 31,972 90,442 76,026 60,455 63,742

April 76,465 85,137 68,114 48,267 66,382 68,873

May 46,878 56,232 50,098 32,509 47,900 46,723

June 36,432 26,615 42,648 25,466 33,696 32,971

July 29,678 29,725 28,242 26,969 39,797 30,882

August 29,339 31,642 28,249 28,353 36,736 30,864

September 33,029 36,810 28,313 26,382 21,516 29,210

October 30,285 46,951 28,119 26,576 33,554 33,097

November 48,820 45,622 44,430 28,121 51,522 43,703

December 30,980 32,616 55,638 38,332 38,370 39,188

Totals 488,211 484,769 541,835 429,871 507,591 490,455

Annual ADF 1,338 1,328 1,484 1,178 1,391 1,344


July 10, 2018

APPENDIX B: MOECC Correspondence

Re: Proposed Effluent Criteria

Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change 199 Larch Street Suite 1201 Sudbury ON P3E 5P9 Tel.: (705) 564-3205 Fax: (705) 564-4180

Ministère de l’Environnement et de l’Action en matière de changement climatique 199, rue Larch Bureau 1201 Sudbury ON P3E 5P9 Tél. : (705) 564-3205 Téléc.: (705) 564-4180

January 12th 2018 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Parise Drolet, Senior Environmental Officer, Sudbury District FROM: Rod Sein, Surface Water Specialist, Northern Region RE: Little Current Lagoons Proposed Effluent Criteria This memo addresses the December 22, 2017 letter from Tony Guerrera, Greer Galloway Consulting Engineers regarding the proposed effluent criteria for the Little Current Wastewater Lagoons. We all met on November 2nd to discuss what is expected regarding the upgrade of the lagoons. It was proposed that the lagoons change from seasonal discharge to continuous discharge as an option for handling both current insufficient capacity and future increased flow rates. In addition, options for enhanced treatment of the effluent were discussed. Background The existing the cell lagoon system currently discharges to the environment on a seasonal basis (spring/fall). Insufficient capacity has resulted in earlier than anticipated discharges. This and concern over future capacity requirements dictated the need for, and the completion of, a Class Environmental Assessment (completed 2010). The EA recommended upgrading the existing lagoons with new technology in order to meet future expansion. During the EA process (2009-2010) I provided surface water support for the file and worked closely with the previous consultant (Stantec). I have visited the site on numerous occasions. Receiving waters The effluent from the lagoon system discharges into a municipal drain system that was constructed in the 1960’s to convey lagoon drainage. Thus, it is not a natural surface water feature. The drainage ditch system flows south of the lagoon, crosses Morpeth

1

side road, follows ditches on the west side of highway 6 then crosses through un-fenced pasture land. The effluent eventually enters Strawberry Creek, a distance of approximately 3km from the lagoon, prior to discharging to the Strawberry Channel, Lake Huron. Strawberry Creek represents the first downstream natural surface water body. As the effluent travels from the lagoons, it is exposed to waste products (urine, faecal matter) from the cattle that graze within the pasture land. I walked the entire length of the discharge path through the pasture land and observed fresh waste material directly within the flow-path of the lagoon discharge. The effluent leaving the lagoon system will be negatively impacted by flowing through the pasture land. Therefore, limits more stringent than F-5 guidelines are not necessary. The following comments address the letter.

1. I agree with the effluent design objectives and compliance limits as presented for cBOD5, TSS and TP (20/25 mg/L, 20/25 mg/L and 0.75/1.0 mg/L), respectively. These values represent average concentrations based on a monthly sampling frequency of the final effluent.

2. Ammonia, E.coli and toxicity testing of the effluent are not required since the effluent flow path follows:

a. a municipal drainage ditch system and not a natural surface water body, and,

b. the effluent will become highly contaminated by animal waste generated nutrients (phosphorus/nitrogen), solids and E.coli within the pasture land flow-path prior to entering Strawberry Creek.

Rod Sein

RS/rs/

2


R.R. #5

Belleville, Ontario

K8N 4Z5

Telephone

(613) 966-3068

Facsimile (613) 966-3087

E-mail

[email protected]

December 22, 2017

Ministry of Environment and Climate Change

Sudbury District Office

Suite 1201

199 Larch Street

Sudbury, Ontario

P3E 5P9.

Attention: Parise Drolet

Drinking Water Inspector

Re: Little Current Wastewater Lagoon Upgrade

Proposed Effluent Limits and Sampling

GGG Project No. 1737636

Ms. Drolet,

Please find attached a summary of work to date on the Little Current Wastewater

Treatment Lagoon upgrades. I have tried to incorporate the items discussed in our

November 2nd meeting, with a phase approach. The first phase for us is to establish

effluent criteria, so that we can select a process that will meet the criteria. The

summary includes our proposed effluent criteria, as well as a proposed sampling

regime, for consideration and comment by the Ministry. I have addressed this letter

to you as my primary point of contact, but I believe the review would be led by

Rod Sein (Surface Water Specialist), and I trust you will forward the

correspondence to him.

If you have any questions or concerns, please contact us.

Best Regards,

THE GREER GALLOWAY GROUP INC.

CONSULTING ENGINEERS

Tony Guerrera, P. Eng.

Senior Project Manager

Little Current Wastewater Treatment Expansion

4.3.1 Introduction

The Town of NEMI conducted a Schedule C Class Environmental Assessment (EA) for the

Little Current Lagoon system in 2010 in order to review options to expand the capacity of the

wastewater treatment system. The existing system consists of a three-cell facultative lagoon with

seasonal discharges, in the spring and in the fall. The future capacity requirement was

determined to be 1100 m3/day. The preferred solution was identified as “Upgrade Existing

Lagoons with New Technology to Increase Capacity”. The Environmental Study Report (ESR)

recommends that the final decision be further evaluated at the time of detailed design. Two of the

options reviewed in detail were:

1. Intermittent Sand Filtration (ISF). This would involve a six month discharge period,

between April and October. This discharge was to outlet to the same drainage channel as

the existing lagoons. Additional lagoon capacity would be required to provide six months

of storage for the cold months when the ISF was not in operation. Continuous Alum

addition would take place at the final pumping station in order to provide chemical

precipitation of the phosphorus.

2. Submerged Aquatic Growth Reactor (SAGR). This would be a continuous discharge

system, to the existing drainage channel. Continuous Alum addition would take place at

the final pumping station in order to provide chemical precipitation of the phosphorus.

As part of the Class EA, a three-season receiving water assessment was undertaken to effluent

water channels downstream of the lagoons and support proposed new effluent limits. The

lagoons discharge to a municipal drain, which travels more than three kilometres through pasture

land before joining up with Strawberry Creek and ultimately Strawberry channel.

Effluent limits were proposed as detailed in Table 1 below.

Table 1 Recommended Design Objectives and Compliance Limits 2010 Class EA

Parameter Objective Limit

cBOD5 10 mg/l 15 mg/l

Total Suspended Solids 10 mg/l 15 mg/l

Total Phosphorus 0.75 mg/l 1.0 mg/l

Total NH3 Winter 5.0 mg/l 10.0 mg/l

Total NH3 Summer 1.5 mg/l 3.0 mg/l

E.Coli 200 cfu/100ml NA

Dissolved Oxygen 5.0 mg/l NA

The total estimated cost for each option (2010 dollars) was $3.5M. The Town has been trying to

secure funding to construct the upgrades since that time, but has not been successful to

date. During this time, and despite efforts to reduce Inflow and infiltrations, flows to the sanitary

system have continued to rise. There is insufficient capacity to store winter flows, and a result

early lagoon discharges have been occurring most springs.

Recent Work:

In order to address concerns with early spring discharges with the Little Current Wastewater

treatment lagoons, the Town, in consultation with the MOECC, considered potentially pursuing

the ISF / additional lagoon option as its preferred design. In order to allow time to fund the

project, the plan was to build additional retention capacity for winter storage in the near-term,

followed by the implementation of an ISF system in the future. No additional treatment capacity

would be granted by the MOECC until the future ISF system was constructed. The fourth lagoon

would simply provide additional retention capacity so that the existing rated capacity could be

properly treated.

The Town undertook a design for the forth lagoon cell. Flows over the past 7 years since the

original ESR was filed were reviewed. A geotechnical investigation, preliminary design, and cost

estimate was completed. Due to a number of factors (size, rock elevation, liner requirements), the

cost estimate for the lagoon portion only far exceeds the initial budget estimate for the entire

treatment system upgrades recommended in the Class EA.

The Town then reviewed the SAGR option to treat flow from the lagoons, which would be

reconfigured to discharge continuously to the receiving stream (via the SAGR). The capacity

would need to be increased from the 1100 m3/day outlined in the Class EA to approximately

1500 m3/day. This would require an addendum to the Class EA, assuming there were no

significant changes to the proposed solution.

At the request of the Town, the MOECC facilitated a meeting at their Sudbury office on

November 2nd, 2017. The purpose of the meeting was to review the status of the original Class

EA, receiving stream analysis, proposed effluent limits, and to update the MOECC on the recent

design work.

Meeting Review:

Those present at the meeting included:

Marnie Managhan (Water Supervisor MOECC)

Parise Drolet (Water Inspector MOECC)

Rod Sein (Surface Water Specialist MOECC)

Anneleis Eckert (Environmental Assessment Coordinator, MOECC)

Tony Guerrera (Greer Galloway Consulting Engineer)

Dave Williamson (CAO Town of NEMI)

Teleconference;

Deborah Sinclair (Hutchinson Environmental Consultants)

Frederick Lam (EAB wastewater engineer MOECC)

During the meeting the MOECC concurred that an additional assimilative capacity study for this

system would not be required, as there is no sensitive receiver downstream. The discharge is to a

municipal drain. Because the catchment area of the drain encompasses an agricultural area,

imposing strict effluent limits as proposed in the 2010 ESR document would be redundant and

would not positively impact the receiver.

It was determined that effluent quality from a standard operating lagoon should be acceptable in

this location. A limit of 25 mg/L BOD, 25 mg/L TSS, and 1.0 mg/L of Total Phosphorus was

discussed. Ammonia and toxicity testing would not be required. A SAGR system may not

necessarily be required. Some treatment will be required to address the concern of discharging

under ice cover.

As a result of the meeting, the consultant is to propose the following:

1) Proposed Effluent Limits;

2) Sampling Frequency;

3) The proposed flow capacity and justification showing a 20 to 25-year growth horizon;

4) A proposed method for revisions to the original Class EA, citing the Municipal Class EA

process;

5) Finalize the preferred design for the treatment process;

6) After any alterations to the Class EA have been completed, consultation requirements

have been met, and the Class EA has been finalized, the project would be able to move to

detailed design and tendering. The intent is to tender in 2018.

This report will address items one and two as listed above, and will be submitted to the Ministry

(Northern Technical Support) for review, comment, and concurrence. Item three will be

completed as a separate technical memorandum and included with the addendum to the Class

EA. Item four will be addressed under separate cover and submitted to the Ministry for there

information. Item five will be completed in the form of a treatment process report once effluent

criteria have been approved, and will be submitted to the Ministry (Norther Technical Support)

for review. The Class EA addendum can then be finalized.

Item 1: Effluent Limits and Effluent Objectives

The revised treatment capacity is to be approximately 1500 cubic metres per day (average day flow). The

recommended Little Current compliance limits and effluent objectives are shown in the Table 2 below.

Table 2 Recommended Design Objectives and Compliance Limits

Effluent Parameter Design Objectives Compliance Limits

cBOD5 (mg/L) 20.0 25.0

Total Suspended Solids (mg/L) 20.0 25.0

Total Phosphorus (mg/L) 0.75 1.0

Total Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/L)

Summer (Jun 1 to Oct 31)

Winter (Nov 1 to May 31)

Not Required

Not Required

E. Coli (CFU/100 mL) Not Required Not Required

It should be noted that quarterly toxicity testing will not be required.

Item 2: Sampling Requirements

Sampling is proposed in Tables 3 and 4 below.

Table 3 Recommended Raw Sewage Monitoring

Parameter Frequency

cBOD5 (mg/L) Quarterly, Grab

Total Suspended Solids (mg/L) Quarterly, Grab

Total Phosphorus (mg/L) Quarterly, Grab

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/L) Quarterly, Grab

Table 4 Recommended Effluent Monitoring Criteria

Parameter Frequency Type

cBOD5 (mg/L) Monthly Grab or Composite

Total Suspended Solids

(mg/L)

Monthly Grab or Composite

Total Phosphorus

(mg/L)


Total Ammonia

Nitrogen (mg/L)


pH, Temperature Monthly Grab or Composite

E.Coli (cfu/100ml) Monthly Grab or Composite

From: Drolet, Parise (MOECC) <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 3:43 PM To: Tony Guerrera <[email protected]>; Managhan, Marnie (MOECC) <[email protected]>; Sein, Rod (MOECC) <[email protected]>; Eckert, Anneleis (MOECC) <[email protected]>; David Williamson <[email protected]>; Lam, Frederick (MOECC) <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Proposed Effluent Limits Little Current Good afternoon, Please find attached SW comments for the Technical Memorandum that outlined the proposed effluent limits for the Little Current Wastewater Treatment Lagoon Upgrade. Please let me know if you have questions or would like to discuss the comments.

Parise Drolet 705-564-2780 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Tony Guerrera [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: December-22-17 12:23 PM To: Drolet, Parise (MOECC); Managhan, Marnie (MOECC); Sein, Rod (MOECC); Eckert, Anneleis (MOECC); David Williamson; Lam, Frederick (MOECC) Subject: Proposed Effluent Limits Little Current Parise, Please find attached out Technical Memorandum outlining the proposed effluent limits for the Little Current Wastewater Treatment Lagoon Upgrade, for review and comment by the MOECC Northern Region Technical support team. To all, Merry Christmas and have a nice holiday. Thank you, Tony Guerrera, P.Eng.

1620 Wallbridge Loyalist Road, Belleville ON K8N 4Z5 Tel: (613) 966-3068 ext. 335; Fax: (613) 966-3087 Web Site: www.greergalloway.com E-Mail: [email protected] This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete this email and its contents from your system and refrain from using, distributing or copying this email. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

From: Drolet, Parise (MOECC) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, November 10, 2017 9:28 AM To: Tony Guerrera <[email protected]>; Managhan, Marnie (MOECC) <[email protected]>; Sein, Rod (MOECC) <[email protected]>; Eckert, Anneleis (MOECC) <[email protected]>; David Williamson <[email protected]>; Deborah Sinclair <[email protected]>; Lam, Frederick (MOECC) <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Little Current Lagoon meeting November 2, 2017 Thanks Tony, You are correct in saying that toxicity testing or ammonia limits would not apply, as the municipal drain is already impacted by the pasture land. If there is no ammonia limit or toxicity concern, then a SAGR may not be required. See comments in Blue. Thanks,

Parise 705-564-2780 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Tony Guerrera [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: November-06-17 4:56 PM To: Drolet, Parise (MOECC); Managhan, Marnie (MOECC); Sein, Rod (MOECC); Eckert, Anneleis (MOECC); David Williamson; Deborah Sinclair; Lam, Frederick (MOECC) Subject: RE: Little Current Lagoon meeting November 2, 2017 Thanks Parise, I have added a few comments in Red. Thank you for facilitating the meeting and we look forward to proceeding with a technical memo to the Town and the MOECC with proposed effluent limits, sampling requirements, and a Class EA modification proposal. Tony Guerrera, P.Eng.

1620 Wallbridge Loyalist Road, Belleville ON K8N 4Z5 Tel: (613) 966-3068 ext. 335; Fax: (613) 966-3087 Web Site: www.greergalloway.com E-Mail: [email protected] This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete this email and its contents from your system and refrain from using, distributing or copying this email. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

From: Drolet, Parise (MOECC) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 06, 2017 4:38 PM To: Managhan, Marnie (MOECC) <[email protected]>; Sein, Rod (MOECC) <[email protected]>; Eckert, Anneleis (MOECC) <[email protected]>; Tony Guerrera <[email protected]>; David Williamson <[email protected]>; Deborah Sinclair <[email protected]>; Lam, Frederick (MOECC) <[email protected]> Subject: Little Current Lagoon meeting November 2, 2017 Further to our meet on Thursday November 2nd, 2017 meeting I thought I’d summarised what was discussed. Present; Marnie Managhan (Water Supervisor MOECC) Parise Drolet (Water Inspector MOECC) Rod Sein (Surface Water Specialist MOECC) Anneleis Eckert (Environmental Assessment Coordinator, MOECC) Tony Guerrera (Greer Galloway Consulting Engineer) Dave Williamson (CAO township of NEMI) Teleconference; Deborah Sinclair (Hutchinson Environmental Consultants) Frederick Lam (EAB wastewater engineer MOECC)

Rod (SW Specialist) has over 10 years of involvement with this file and is very familiar with the site and the adjacent properties.

The lagoon discharges to a municipal ditch that flows pass pasture land where livestock have access to the ditch and water prior to reaching Strawberry Creek.

An assimilative capacity study is not required because there is no sensitive receiver downstream‐the discharge is to a municipal drain.

The guidelines should be used to determine the effluent limits. BOD 25 mg/L, TSS 25mg/L and Phosphorus 1.0 mg/L.

Although there is no sensitive receiver and there’s an intermittent flow, the effluent should be non‐toxic, and would require additional treatment (aeration/ SAGR). I thought it was later determined that toxicity testing or ammonia limits would not apply, as the municipal drain is already impacted by the pasture land and treating for ammonia would not accomplish anything by the time the discharge reached Strawberry Creek. If there is no ammonia limit or toxicity concern, then a SAGR may not be required. ‐ Although there is no sensitive receiver and there’s an intermittent flow, the effluent should be non‐toxic, and would may require additional treatment (aeration and or SAGR).

‐ The proposal is a continuous discharge lagoon, therefore additional treatment is required undoubtedly in the winter months. Yes I believe this was to address the “discharge under ice” concern (hydrogen sulphide build up). Potentially aerating a portion of the lagoon train. We will need to establish the goal / target, if any. I did speak with my process fellow after the meeting, and he thought of something that I did not consider. With a lagoon, algae blooms can be a concern, particularly in the summer months. Algae can show up in the TSS results if we are doing a continuous discharge. I will consider this and may have some additional questions here regarding the MOECC’s position on algae affecting TSS on a lagoon discharge.

Deb Sinclair signed off from the teleconference. She was involved in the gather information and guidance to complete an assimilative capacity study or a dry ditch study. It was determined that neither of these studies are required.

The flow capacity is required to be increase to 15 000 m3/day. (Typo – 1500 m3/day) This is based on a projection flow of 25 years.

The Class EA may be required to be resubmitted or an addenda provision may apply. This depends on what was originally submitted in 2010 and what the final design and capacity will be.

Tony will be submitting another project design which will summarise the need to increase the flow capacity, additional treatment (SAGR/Aeration)effluent limits, sampling schedule, amendments to the Class EA (if any) within the next 3 months.

Parise will submit a Field Alert to update the existing ECA. The township is continuing to put forward efforts to try and reduce access flows to the

lagoon. Storm water discharges have been addressed, there are still some private residents that have their sumps/gutters connected to the sanitary system.

Although Frederick assisted in the meeting, he may not be the engineer assigned to the file, and documentation request is subject to change.

Parise Drolet Drinking Water Inspector Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Safe Drinking Water Branch Sudbury District Office 705-564-2780


July 10, 2018

APPENDIX C: Proposed Design Basis

(June 2018, J.L. Richards)

Little Current Lagoon Expansion Design Basis – FINAL

June 2018

Prepared for:

THE GREER GALLOWAY GROUP INC. 1620 Wallbridge-Loyalist Road

Belleville, ON K8N 4Z5

Prepared by:

J.L. RICHARDS & ASSOCIATES LIMITED 864 Lady Ellen Place Ottawa, ON K1Z 5M2

Tel: 613-728-3571 Fax: 613-728-6012

JLR No.: 28047-000.1

Design Basis – FINAL Little Current Lagoon Expansion

J.L. Richards & Associates Limited June 2018 JLR No.: 28047-000.1 -i-

Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ............................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Lagoon Overview ................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Design Influent Flow Rates .................................................................................... 2 1.4 Design Influent Concentrations .............................................................................. 2 1.5 Proposed Effluent Criteria ...................................................................................... 2

2.0 Design Concept ................................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Overview ................................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Facultative Lagoons ............................................................................................... 3 2.3 Ferric Sulfate Feed System ................................................................................... 4 2.4 Post-Aeration Polishing Cell .................................................................................. 4 2.5 Piping and Valve Modifications and Cell Configuration ......................................... 5

3.0 Cost Estimate .................................................................................................................... 5 4.0 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 5

List of Appendices Appendix A Existing and Proposed Site Plan Appendix B Ferric Sulfate Dosing Calculations Appendix C Class D Opinion of Probable Construction Costs


J.L. Richards & Associates Limited June 2018 JLR No.: 28047-000.1 -1-

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Background

Greer Galloway was retained by the Town of Northeastern Manotulin and the Islands (NEMI) to complete the detailed design of a new lagoon cell for the Little Current Lagoon. The new lagoon cell was to be constructed as part of a phased implementation of the preferred option to increase capacity of the system as determined through a Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) completed by Stantec (Stantec, 2010). During design of the new lagoon cell it became evident that influent sewage flows were higher than estimated during the Class EA and that constructing the cell was going to be technically challenging and cost excessive. In light of these challenges, further consultation with the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) led to the development of revised effluent criteria based on a continuous discharge operation (i.e. versus the current seasonal discharge operation). The MOECC has indicated that some form of enhanced treatment should be provided in consideration of the change of operation and Greer Galloway requested that J.L. Richards and Associates Limited (JLR) develop a design basis in support of the preparation of a Class EA amendment.

1.2 Lagoon Overview

The Little Current Sewage Lagoon (Current ECA No. 2249-89XRBU) consists of a three cell facultative lagoon treatment system. Wastewater is pumped from the main sewage pumping station, located at 5 Water Street, and directed to Cell no. 1 and from there it flows to Cell no. 2 and Cell no. 3. All cells currently operate on a fill and draw basis and discharge of the treated contents occurs twice per year in the spring and in the fall. Ferric sulphate is batch dosed directly into the lagoon cell for phosphorus removal prior to the discharge periods. No other type of treatment is currently provided. Treated effluent is discharged in the spring and fall into an approximately 7 km long ditch that passes though agricultural land and ultimately leads to Strawberry Channel of Lake Huron. Treated effluent can be discharged from Cells no. 2 or 3. The ECA does not provide a rated capacity for the site, however, design documents upon which the ECA was based on provide a rated capacity of 927 m3/day. A site plan is provided in Appendix ‘A’. A summary of the cell size and configuration from the Class EA (Stantec, 2010) is provided in Table 1. The total operating volume is estimated to be 166,854 m3. A study conducted in support of re-rating the lagoon reported the total operating volume as 168,524 m3 (Martin, 1990). For the purposes of this report the more conservative volume reported by Stantec has been used.

Table 1: Little Current Lagoon Characteristics from ESR (Stantec, 2010)

Cell Function Area (ha)

Design Depth (m)

Usable Depth (m)

Usable Volume (m3)

1 Treatment 4.05 1.52 1.521 61,600 2 Treatment/Storage 4.49 1.67 1.521 68,293 3 Treatment/Storage 2.43 1.97 1.521 36,960

Total 166,854



1.3 Design Influent Flow Rates

The proposed rated capacity of the lagoon is 1,500 m3/d based on flow projections provided by Geer Galloway. This is based on current measured flows and 20-year growth projection for the community of Little Current. The design basis is summarized in Table 2.

Table 2: Design Influent Flows

Parameter

Design Flow

Notes

Annual Average Day Flow (AAF) 1500 m3/d Based in 20 year growth projections.

1.4 Design Influent Concentrations

Stantec (2010) used MOECC design guidelines for typical per capita loading to establish raw wastewater concentrations. The concentrations developed by Stantec were compared to the last three years of influent sampling results and appear to be generally a reasonable estimation of typical influent quality at the Little Current lagoon. For preliminary design purposes, however, the average influent concentrations for the past 3 years have been assumed. Where actual data is not available the concentrations from the Stantec (2010) ESR report have been assumed. The design influent characteristics are highlighted in Table 3.

Table 3 Design Influent Concentration and Loading

Parameter Average Concentration

2010 (mg/L)

Average Concentration 2014 to 2017

(mg/L)

Design Concentration

(mg/L)

Design Loading

(kg/d)

cBOD5 140 172 172 258 Total Suspended Solids 170 130 130 195 Total Phosphorous 5.6 3.1 3.1 4.65 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 32 -- 32 48 Alkalinity (mg of CaCO3/L) 71 -- 71 106.5 Temperature (deg. C) 8 – 23 -- 8 - 23 n/a

1.5 Proposed Effluent Criteria

The proposed treated effluent quality requirements are summarized in Table 4 below. These criterion were developed in consultation with MOECC (letter dated January 12, 2018). It was determined that, due to the negative impact adjacent pasture lands have on effluent quality leaving the lagoon system, limits more stringent than F-5 guidelines are not necessary. Per direction from MOECC, ammonia, E. coli and toxicity testing of the effluent are not required since the effluent flow path follows: (1) a municipal drainage ditch system and not a natural surface water body, and (2) the effluent will become contaminated by animal waste generated nutrients (phosphorus/nitrogen), solids and E. coli within the pasture land flow-path prior to entering Strawberry Creek.



Table 4 Proposed Effluent Criteria (MOECC letter dated Jan. 12, 2018)

Parameter Objectives Compliance Limits

Basis of Determining Compliance

cBOD5 (mg/L) 20.0 25.0 Monthly, grab or composite Total Suspended Solids (mg/L) 20.0 25.0 Monthly, grab or composite Total Phosphorous (mg/L) 0.75 1.0 Monthly, grab or composite Total Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/L) Not required Not required E. Coli (CFU/100mL) Not required Not required Non-acutely lethal effluent Not required Not required

2.0 Design Concept

2.1 Overview

The proposed treatment for the Little Current Lagoon consists of four components:

- Facultative lagoons for cBOD and TSS removal (existing); - Continuous ferric sulfate addition for phosphorus removal (new); - Post-aeration polishing cell for hydrogen sulphide (H2S) removal (new); - Baffle curtains, valve and piping modifications to support process modifications (new).

2.2 Facultative Lagoons

The MOECC Design Guidelines recommend that the average BOD5 loading to a facultative lagoon be 22 kg/(ha*d) or less. The BOD5 loading under various cell loading scenarios is summarized in Table 5 below:

Table 5 BOD5 Loading and Detention Time for Various Cell Configurations

Design Flow Cells Loaded Total Area (ha) BOD5 Loading (kg/(ha*d))

Detention Time (days)

Annual Average Flow (AAF) 1500 m3/day

1 & 2 8.54 30 86 1 & 3 6.48 40 66 2 & 3 6.92 37 70

1, 2, & 3 10.97 24 110 All three lagoon cells are required to achieve the BOD5 loading rate recommended by the MOECC. If only two cells are in service during maintenance activities, the BOD5 loading exceeds the MOECC guideline. It is, however, generally accepted that under these circumstances, the maximum BOD5 loading rate can be exceeded. BOD5 removal performance increases during warm weather months and any required maintenance can be done during these months. Based on a capacity assessment conducted by the MOECC (1990) the design hydraulic detention time for the continuous discharge lagoon was 180 days. The MOECC guideline does not provide a minimum detention time for continuous discharge lagoons, however, the duration of the cold weather period (i.e. lagoon contents < 5 deg. C) provides a reasonable guide. This would typically be between December 1 to March 15 (103 days), and a detention time of 110 days is sufficient.



2.3 Ferric Sulfate Feed System

As part of the newly proposed continuous discharge operation, a ferric sulfate (Fe2(SO4)3) feed system is proposed with dosage between Cell No. 2 and Cell. No 3. As noted previously, the proposed lagoon flow rate is to be 1500 m3/day, and the anticipated phosphate concentration in the influent is 5.6 mg/L as P. This concentration is considered conservative, as natural phosphorus removal will occur in cell No. 1 and cell No. 2 particularly during the warmer summer-fall treatment periods. The ferric sulfate solution currently used by the plant operator is 60% Fe2(SO4)3 (12% Fe3+) with a specific gravity of approximately 1.5 kg/L. The specific dosage required for the modified plant will need to be adjusted based on actual phosphorus concentration and jar testing may be required to determine the optimum dosing. On average, however, 100 L of ferric sulfate solution is expected to be required per day to achieve the effluent objective of 0.75 mg/L (refer to Appendix ‘B’ for calculations). Operators currently apply a 20% factor of safety to the dosage, which results in a dosage of 120 L per day. The ferric feed system will generally consist of a bulk storage tank, metering pumps, and discharge piping. Operations staff have indicated that the bulk delivery of solution is 9000 L, which equates to approximately 2.5 months of storage (75 days). Due to the size of the tank, the bulk storage tank is proposed to be installed outside of the blower building and design will need to incorporate provisions for full spill containment. To avoid freezing in the winter months, heat tracing and insulation will be required for the tank and chemical feed lines.

2.4 Post-Aeration Polishing Cell

With cold winter temperatures causing ice to form on the surface of the lagoon cells, the formation of hydrogen sulphide (H2S) under the ice cover will occur through the water column. As a result, continuous (winter) discharge of effluent could result in toxicity and odour problems. To mitigate this issue, a post-aeration cell with the objective to remove hydrogen sulphide (H2S) is proposed. Based on MOECC design guidelines, the cell should have a depth of 3 to 4 m; have a L/W ratio of 4:1 and provide at least 24 hours retention time. The required cell size is relatively small to achieve a 4:1 L/W ratio, however, the retention time could be achieved with a cell 4m deep (water operating depth 3.5) that is 50 m x 50 m at the top of the berm. A shallower cell could also be used and the size adjusted to maintain the 24 hour retention time. The exact shape and depth of the cell can be further refined during detailed design. Oxygen should be supplied to satisfy both the oxygen demand for BOD5 (or 1.2 kg O2/kg cBOD5) and H2S oxidation (1.0 kg O2/kg H2S). Table 6 summarize the oxygen requirements for BOD5 and H2S removal.

Table 6 Oxygen Requirements for H2S Removal

Parameter Concentration Loading O2 Required Effluent BOD5 20 mg/L 30 kg/day 36 Effluent H2S 20 mg/L 30 kg/day 30 Total 66 kg O2/ day

Influent diffusion should be provided to equalize the loading across the influent end of the post-aeration cell and a static tube air system should be provided. The blowers will be housed in a new chemical pumping/blower building, and will operate on an as needed basis.



2.5 Baffle Curtains, Piping and Valve Modifications and Cell Configuration

The current flow pattern through the lagoon system will be modified. The current flow pattern allows the sewage to enter Cell 1 or Cell 2. Under the normal operating mode, the flow enters Cell 1 and is then split in two to Cell 2 and Cell 3. To move from seasonal discharge to continuous discharge, it will be important to implement a configuration that promotes series flow through the lagoon system while minimizing short-circuiting. To achieve these objectives, we are proposing a new configuration as well as the installation of curtains in the lagoons. New interconnecting pipes with valves will also need to be installed to provide operational flexibility and allow the possibility to put any lagoon out of service for maintenance. Figure 1 illustrates the proposed cell configuration, the position of the curtains and piping and valve modifications. With the modifications, the following flow patterns will be possible:

• Normal flow pattern: Cell 1 to Cell 2 to Cell 3 • Alternate flow pattern No. 1: Cell 1 to Cell 2 (Cell 3 out of service) • Alternate flow pattern No. 2: Cell 1 to Cell 3 (Cell 2 out of service) • Alternate flow pattern No. 3: Cell 3 only (Cell 1 and 2 out of service)

The post-aeration cell will be constructed downstream of the lagoon system. A new 300 mm diameter pipe installed along the southern edge of Cell 3 will allow the flow to go from Lagoon 2 to the post-aeration lagoon, while by-passing Cell 3. Ferric sulfate will be dosed in the effluent pipe connecting Cell 1 and Cell 2. Additional consideration may need to given to chemical diffusion and mixing at the injection point during detailed design.

3.0 Cost Estimate

An Opinion of Probable Construction Costs (OPCC) with a Class ‘D’ (Concept Design) level of accuracy was developed for each of the new requirements. The OPCC was developed based on a combination of unit cost analysis format (i.e. cost per m2) and element cost analysis format (i.e. cost per item). In certain instances, allowances have been made to account for design elements that have yet to be fully developed; these allowances are based on past experience on similar projects and professional judgment. The Class D (Concept Design) OPCC developed for the proposed construction is $876,000 (excluding HST). The full cost breakdown is provided in Appendix ‘C’.

4.0 Conclusion

This Report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Town of NEMI, for the stated purpose, for the named facility. Its discussions and conclusions are summary in nature and cannot be properly used, interpreted or extended to other purposes without a detailed understanding and discussions with the client as to its mandated purpose, scope and limitations. This report was prepared for the sole benefit and use of the Town of NEMI and may not be used or relied on by any other party without the express written consent of J.L. Richards & Associates Limited.


Appendix ‘A’ Existing and Proposed Site Plan

TP-3TP-3

TP-2TP-2

TP-4TP-4 TP-1TP-1

TP-10TP-10

TP-5TP-5

TP-6TP-6 TP-7TP-7 TP-8TP-8

TP-9TP-9

SAN FM

EX

SAN FMEX

SAN FM EX SAN FM EX SAN FM EX SAN FM EX SAN FM EX

WV

WV

WVWV

WVWV

WVWV

WV WV

WELLWELL

UTIL OH EX UTIL OH EX UTIL OH EX UTIL OH EX UTIL OH EX UTIL OH EX UTIL OH EXUTIL OH EX

UTIL OH EXUTIL OH EX

UTIL OH EXUTIL OH EX

UTIL OH EX

UTIL OH EX

UTIL OH EX

UTIL OH EX

UTIL OH EX

UTIL OH EX

UTIL

OHEX

UTIL

OHEX

UTIL

OHEX

NEW ROAD TO BE BUILTON TOP OF THE BERM.

TO BE ABANDONED

CELL 2

CELL 1

CELL 3

FERRIC SULPHATEDOSING POINT

MATCH NEW LAGOONCONSTRUCTIONWITH EX LAGOON

NEW POST-AERATION CELLSIDE SLOPE: 3:1TOTAL DEPTH: 4mWATER DEPTH: 3.5mWIDTH: 26mLENGTH: 26mTOTAL AREA: 0.24 haTOTAL VOLUME: 5740m³WATER VOLUME: 4636m³RETENTION TIME AT 1500 m³/d: 24 hours

NEW WATERLEVEL CONTROL

CHAMBEREXISTINGDISCHARGE DITCH

NEW BLOWER BUILDINGAPPROXIMATE DIMENSIONS:

6X6m. FERRIC SULFATETANK INSTALLED

OUTSIDE

300Ø

300Ø

MH

MH MH

TO BE ABANDONNED

NEW 150Ø PIPEAND VALVE

NEW 150Ø PIPEAND VALVE

300Ø300Ø

CURTAIN ANCHOR PIPE (TYP.)TWO (2) PER CURTAIN

PROPOSEDBAFFLE (TYP.)

DIFFUSER

EXISTING DITCHTO BE MODIFIED

MH

MH

NEW ROAD TO BE BUILTON TOP OF THE BERM.

www.jlrichards.ca

SCALE:

This drawing is copyright protected and may not be reproduced or

used for purposes other than execution of the described work without

the express written consent of J.L. Richards & Associates Limited.

DRAWING:

PROJECT:

PROFESSIONAL STAMP PROJECT NORTH

DRAWING #:

CHECKED:

DRAWN:

DESIGN:

PLO

T D

AT

E:

File Location: J:\28000\28047-000.1 - Little C

urrent Lagoon P

rocess\3-JLR

D

WG

\1-C

ivil\28047 Lagoon.dw

g

June 7, 2018 4:59:16 P

M

No. ISSUE / REVISION DD/MM/YY

CLIENT:

CONSULTANT:

CONSULTANT:

JLR #:

VERIFY SHEET SIZE AND SCALES. BAR TO THE

RIGHT IS 25mm IF THIS IS A FULL SIZE DRAWING.

25mm0

SITE WORKS

C01

1:1,500

CT

KTK

28047

LITTLE CURRENT SEWAGE

LAGOON UPGRADES

LITTLE CURRENT, ONTARIO

POTENTIAL FLOW CONFIGURATIONS

1. NORMAL FLOW: CELL 1 TO CELL 2 TO CELL 32. ALTERNATE PATTERN No.1: CELL 1 TO CELL 2 (CELL 3 OUT OF SERVICE)3. ALTERNATE PATTERN No.2: CELL 1 TO CELL 3 (CELL 2 OUT OF SERVICE)4. ALTERNATE PATTERN No.3: CELL 3 ONLY (CELL 1 AND 2 OUT OF SERVICE)

AutoCAD SHX Text

10

AutoCAD SHX Text

B.H.

AutoCAD SHX Text

7

AutoCAD SHX Text

B.H.

AutoCAD SHX Text

6

AutoCAD SHX Text

B.H.

AutoCAD SHX Text

5

AutoCAD SHX Text

B.H.

AutoCAD SHX Text

9

AutoCAD SHX Text

B.H.

AutoCAD SHX Text

8

AutoCAD SHX Text

B.H.

AutoCAD SHX Text

4

AutoCAD SHX Text

B.H.

AutoCAD SHX Text

1

AutoCAD SHX Text

B.H.

AutoCAD SHX Text

2

AutoCAD SHX Text

B.H.

AutoCAD SHX Text

3

AutoCAD SHX Text

B.H.

http://www.jlrichards.ca

AutoCAD SHX Text

0

AutoCAD SHX Text

ISSUED FOR FINAL REPORT

AutoCAD SHX Text

08/06/18


Appendix ‘B’ Ferric Sulfate Dosing Calculations


Ferric Sulfate Design Calculations Ferric sulfate solution strength = 60 percent Density of ferric sulfate solution = 1.5 kg/L Molecular Weight of Fe = 55.85 Molecular weight of Fe2(SO4)3 = 399.88 Influent P concentration = 3.1 mg/L Target P concentration in effluent = 0.75 mg/L

1. Determine the weight of iron (Fe) available per litre of liquid ferric sulfate. a. The weight of iron (Fe2(SO4)3) available per litre of ferric sulfate solution is:

(Fe2(SO4)3) = 0.6*1.5kg/L = 0.9 kg/L

b. The weight of the Fe per litre of ferric sulfate solution is: Fe/L = (Fe2(SO4)3)/L * mol. weight of Fe / mol. weight of (Fe2(SO4)3) = (0.9 kg/L) * (55.85/399.88) = 0.126 kg/L

2. Determine the target weight of Fe required per unit weight of P

a. Dosage = 2.0 mole Fe (Fedose) per 1.0 mole P (Pini) to remove 98% 1

b. Iron Required = 2* (Fedose/Pini) = 2 * (55.85/30.97) = 3.61 kg Fe/ kg P

3. Determine the amount of ferric sulfate solution required per kg P to be removed. a. Ferric sulfate dose = (3.61 kg Fe/ 1 kg P) * (L ferric solution/0.126 kg Fe)

= 28.65 L ferric solution/kg P

4. Determine the amount of ferric sulfate solution required per day. a. Ferric sulfate solution per day

= (1,500,000 L/d)*(3.1 mg/L–0.75 mg/L)/(1x106 mg/kg)*28.65 L solution/d = 100 L ferric sulfate solution/day

1 From Nutrient Control Design Manual, Environmental Protection Agency, 2010


Appendix ‘C’ Class D Opinion of Probable Costs


Discipline Item Cost (2018 $)

1.0 - Civil 1.1 - Construction of a new post-aeration cell including excavation, backfilling and final grading

$150,000

1.2 – Supply and installation of new curtains in the existing lagoons including the anchors

$200,000

1.3 – Supply and installation of new lagoon interconnecting 300 mm diameter pipes with valves

$30,000

1.4 – Supply and installation of new 300 mm diameter pipes with valves and manholes from Cell 2 to the new post-aeration lagoon to the water level control chamber

$50,000

1.5 – Construction of a new water level control chamber $15,000 1.6 – Extension of the existing access road to the new blower building

$30,000

1.7 - Supply and installation of heat traced chemical dosing line and diffusing system

$20,000

Sub-total 1.0 - Civil $495,000 2.0 - Building 2.1 – Excavation and backfilling $5,000

2.2 - Supply and installation of a new steel prefabricated building

$50,000

2.3 – Construction of new concrete foundations $10,000 2.4 – Construction of a new slab on grade $5,000

Sub-total 2.0 - Building $70,000 3.0 – Mechanical (Process)

3.1 - Supply and installation of two (2) new blowers complete with piping and valves

$40,000

3.2 – Supply and installation of new static tube aerators inside the post-aeration cell complete with piping and valves

$50,000

3.3 – Supply and installation of a new chemical storage tank complete with a concrete base

$15,000

3.4 – Supply and installation of two (2) new metering pumps complete with piping and accessories

$5,000

Sub-total 3.0 – Mechanical (Process) $110,000 4.0 – Mechanical (Building)

4.1 - Supply and installation of a new ventilation system inside the building $5,000

Sub-total 4.0 – Mechanical (Building) $5,000 5.0 – Electrical 5.1 – Power supply to the building $5,000 5.2 - Supply and installation of electrical components including

main electrical entrance, splitters, 600 Vac distribution & MCC $40,000

5.3 - Power supply to the blowers $2,000 5.4 - Lighting and heating $3,000

Sub-total 5.0 - Electrical $50,000 6.0 – Instrumentation and control

6.1 - Supply and installation of a control system for the automatic operation of the metering pumps and new telemetry system

$5,000

Sub-total 6.0 – Instrumentation and Control $5,000 Total 1.0 to 6.0 $730,000

Contingencies (20%) $146,000 Grand total $876,000

www.jlrichards.ca

JLR Logo is a Registered Trademark ® 2009, all rights are reserved

Ottawa 864 Lady Ellen Place Ottawa ON Canada K1Z 5M2 Tel: 613 728-3571 [email protected]

Kingston 203-863 Princess Street Kingston ON Canada K7L 5N4 Tel: 613 544-1424 [email protected]

Sudbury 314 Countryside Drive Sudbury ON Canada P3E 6G2 Tel: 705 522-8174 [email protected]

Timmins 201-150 Algonquin Blvd. East Timmins ON Canada P4N 1A7 Tel: 705 360-1899 [email protected]

North Bay 200-175 Progress Road North Bay ON Canada P1A 0B8 Tel: 705 495-7597 [email protected]

Hawkesbury 326 Bertha Street Hawkesbury ON Canada K6A 2A8 Tel: 613 632-0287 [email protected]

Guelph 107-450 Speedvale Ave. West Guelph ON Canada N1H 7Y6 Tel: 519 763-0713 [email protected]


July 10, 2018

APPENDIX D: Public Notices and Stakeholder Correspondence

MOECC Correspondence re: Proposed Design

Notice of Filing of Addendum

Project Contact List (updated from original ESR)

From: Drolet, Parise (MOECC) <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2018 11:44 AM To: Tony Guerrera <[email protected]> Subject: FW: Proposed Class EA process for Little Current Good morning Tony, The ministry does not have any concerns with the proposed process. Please carry on with the Notice of Amendment.

Parise 705-564-2780 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Tony Guerrera [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: June-15-18 1:54 PM To: Drolet, Parise (MOECC) Cc: Wainio, Shelley (MOECC); Dave Williamson; Sein, Rod (MOECC) Subject: RE: Proposed Class EA process for Little Current Hi Parise Please find attached the technical memorandum for the proposed process (preferred design) for the Little Current Lagoon upgrade project. I will send the revised growth / flow forecast to back up the proposed 1500 m3/day flow rate under separate email. Once the MOECC has a chance to review, if acceptable, we will compile a project file report and prepare a Notice of Amendment to the Class EA. Shelly, I trust you will forward to the appropriate personnel if I have missed anyone. Please let me know if you have any questions or if I have missed anything. Thank you, Tony Guerrera, P.Eng.

1620 Wallbridge Loyalist Road, Belleville ON K8N 4Z5 Tel: (613) 966-3068 ext. 335; Fax: (613) 966-3087 Web Site: www.greergalloway.com E-Mail: [email protected] This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete this email and its contents from your system and refrain from using, distributing or copying this email. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands NOTICE OF FILING OF ADDENDUM

Little Current Sewage Treatment System Upgrades Class Environmental Assessment

The Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands (Town) is proposing to undertake upgrades to the Little Current sewage system. These upgrades will improve the quality of treated effluent, improve the quality of receiving water environments and increase the capacity of the treatment system to support long-term growth and development in the community of Little Current. The project was planned in accordance with the requirements for a Schedule “C” Municipal Class Environmental Assessment. The Environmental Study Report (ESR) issued January 2011 recommended upgrading the existing lagoons with new technology to increase treatment capacity. Final selection of the preferred design concept was deferred to the preliminary design phase. An Addendum to the ESR is now available containing details of the preferred treatment process based on updated design flows and effluent criteria. Please note that only the changes proposed in the Addendum are open for review. The Addendum is available for review on the Town website. For more information or to provide written comments please email the following project contact by August 9, 2018: Tony Guerrera, P.Eng. (email: [email protected]) The Greer Galloway Group Inc. 1620 Wallbridge-Loyalist Road Belleville, ON K8N 4Z5 Telephone: (613) 966-3068 Fax: (613) 966-3087 If concerns regarding the project changes covered by this Addendum arise that cannot be resolved in discussion with the Town, a person/party may request that the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change make an order for the project to comply with Part II of the Environmental Assessment Act (referred to as a “Part II Order”), which would elevate the level of assessment and require the Town to undertake additional consultation. Requests for a Part II Order must be received by the Minister (address below) by August 9, 2018. Copies of this request must also be sent to: the Director, Environmental Assessment and Permissions Branch (address below), the project contact listed above, and the Town clerk (address below). Honourable Rod Phillips Director, Environmental Assessment and Permissions Branch Minister of Environment, Conservation and Parks Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks 77 Wellesley St. W. 11th Floor 135 St. Clair Ave. West, 1st floor Toronto, ON M7A 2T5 Toronto, ON. M4V 1P5 Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands 14 Water Street East, PO Box 608 Little Current, ON P0P 1K0 If there are no Part II Order requests received by August 9, 2018, the Town will proceed with design and construction of the upgrades as presented in the planning documentation. This notice issued July 10, 2018. Under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and the Environmental Assessment Act, unless otherwise stated in the submission, any personal information such as name, address, telephone number and property location included in a submission will become part of the public record files for this project and will be released, if requested, to any person.

Little Current Lagoon Expansion Class EA Addendum Contact List 1 of 4

Contact Address

Crown‐ Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada Comprehensive Claims Branch

Mr. Guy Morin, Policy Analyst

10 Wellington St, Gatineau, QC K1A 0H4

Crown‐Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada Specific Claims Branch

Mr. Lyle Henderson Research Manager

10 Wellington St, Gatineau, QC K1A 0H4

Crown‐Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada Litigation Management and Resolution Branch

Mr. Roy Franklin Director

10 Wellington St, Gatineau, QC. K1A 0H4

Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada Environmental Unit

Ms. Miranda Lesperance, Environmental Officer

25 St. Clair Avenue, 8th Floor, Toronto, ON M4T 1M2

Transport Canada Marine Safety, Navigable Waters Protection

Ms. Suzanne Shea Navigable Water Protection Officer

100 S Front St, Sarnia, ON N7T 2M4

Transport Canada Marine Safety, Navigable Waters Protection

Mr. Rick Thomas Navigable Water Protection Officer

28 Waubeek St, Parry Sound, ON P2A 1B9

Department of Fisheries and Oceans Southern Ontario District – Burlington Office

Ms. Cindy Latendresse Project Coordinator

867 Lakeshore Rd, Burlington, ON L7S 1A1

Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks Northern Region

Shelley Wainio EA Coordinator

199 Larch St, Suite 1201, Sudbury, ON P3E 5P9

Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks Sudbury District Office

Parise Drolet Sr. Environmental Officer


Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks Sudbury District Office

Rod Sein Surface Water Specialist


Ministry of Natural Resources Espanola Area Office

148 Fleming St, Espanola, ON P5E 1R8

Ministry of Natural Resources Sudbury District

Wayne Selinger Management Biologist

3767 Hwy 69 S., Suite 5, Sudbury, ON P3G 1E7

Ministry of Natural Resources Sudbury District

Ross Hart, District Manager

3767 Hwy 69 S., Suite 5, Sudbury, ON P3G 1E7

Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport Heritage Program Unit

Katherine Kirzati Re: File 165500606

401 Bay St Toronto, ON M7A 0A7

Ontario Provincial Police Little Current Detachment

Kevin Webb, Staff Sergeant

12 Campbell St E, Little Current, ON P0P 1k0

Ministry of Transportation Northeastern Region

John Fraser Manager of Engineering

447 McKeown Ave, Suite 301, North Bay, ON P1B 9S9

Ministry of Transportation Northeastern Region Environmental Planning

447 McKeown Ave, Suite 301, North Bay, ON P1B 9S9


Ministry of Transportation Sudbury Northeastern Region

Lise Taylor Corridor Management Officer

447 McKeown Ave., North Bay, ON P1B 9S9

MPP Algoma Manitoulin

Michael Mantha 18 Mary Walk Elliot Lake, ON P5A 2A1

Union of Ontario Indians Office of the Grand Council

1 Migzii Miikan, P.O Box 771 North Bay, ON P1B 8J8

Aundeck‐Omni‐Kaning First Nation Ojibways of Sucker Creek

Chief Patsy Corbiere R.R.#1, Comp. 21, Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

M’Chigeeng First Nation West Bay

Chief Linda Debassige 53 Hwy 551, P.O. Box 333 M’Chigeeng, ON P0P 1G0

Zhiibaahaasing First Nation Cockburn

Chief Irene Sagon Kells 36 Sagon Rd. Zhiibaahaasing, ON P0P 1X0

Sheshegwaning First Nation

Chief Dean Roy (Binesiwabi)

1079 A, Sheshgwaning Rd Sheshgwaning, ON P0P 1X0

Sheguiandah First Nation

Chief Andrew Aguonie

P.O. Box 101 Sheguiandah, ON P0P 1W0

Wikwemikong Unceded First Nation

Chief Duke Peltier P.O. Box 112, 19A Complex Dr, Wikwemikong, ON P0P 2J0

Whitefish River First Nation

Chief Franklin Paibomsai 17‐A Rainbow Ridge Road Birch Island, ON P0P 1A0

Sudbury Métis Council

260 Alder St S, Sudbury, ON P3C 5P4

Sagamik Anishnawbek First Nation

Chief Paul Eshkakogan 4007 Espaniel St P.O. Box 610 Massey, ON P0P 1P0

Serpent River First Nation

Chief Elaine Johnston 195 Village Rd, Cutler, ON P0P 1B0

Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands (NEMI)

Dave Williamson, CAO

14 Water St E, P.O. Box 608 Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands (NEMI)

Pam Cress, Clerk

14 Water St E, P.O. Box 608 Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

Municipality of Central Manitoulin

Ruth Frawley CAO / Clerk

P.O. Box 187, 6020 Hwy 542 Mindemoya, ON P0P 1S0

Township of Tehkummah

Municipal Building, 456 Hwy 542A Tehkummah, ON P0P 2C0

Township of Assiginack

Jeremy Rody Clerk

P.O. Box 238, 156 Arthur St, Manitowaning, ON P0P 1N0

Municipality of Billings

Kathy McDonald Clerk Treasurer

15 Old Mill Rd, P.O. Box 34 Kagawong, ON P0P 1J0


Town of Gore Bay Municipal Office

Annette Clarke CAO & Clerk

15 Water St Gore Bay, ON P0P 1H0

Municipality of Gordon/Barrie Island

Carrie Lewis Clerk – Treasurer

29 Noble Sideroad, PO Box 80 Gore Bay, ON P0P 1H0

Township of Burpee and Mills

Bonnie Bailey Clerk – Treasurer

8 Bailey Line Road, RR1 Evansville, ON P0P 1E0

Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands Volunteer Fire Department

Fire Chief P.O. Box 608, 14 Water St. E Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

The Manitoulin Health Centre

Derek Graham CEO

11 Meredith St. W, Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

Manitoulin‐Sudbury EMS Manitoulin‐Sudbury DSSAB

Robert Smith Director of Paramedic Services

210 Mead Blvd, Espanola, ON P5E 1R9

Rainbow District Schoolboard

Norm Blaseg Director of Education

408 Wembley Dr, Sudbury, ON P3E 1P2

Sudbury Catholic District School Board

Joanne Benard Director of Education

165 D’Youville St, Sudbury, ON P3C 5E7

Little Current – Howland Museum

Curator 10862 Hwy 6, Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

The Manitoulin Tourism Association

General Manager 70 Meredith St. E, Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

LaCloche Manitoulin Business Assistance Corporation

Mary Nelder General Manager

30 Meredith St, Gore Bay, ON P0P 1H0

Sudbury Student Services Consortium Transportation Services

Renee Boucher Executive Director

199 Travers St, Sudbury, ON P3C 3K2

Property Owners ‐ Laidley R.R. #1 Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

Mr. Nick Savelli 379 Highway 540, R.R.#1 Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

Anglican Synod of Algoma Anglican Cemetery on Hwy 540

P.O. Box 1168 Sault Ste. Marie, ON P6A 5N7

Wayne & Joyce Reynolds 4869 Lafontaine St, Hammer, ON P3P 1J9

Mr. Martin Howard R.R #1 Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

Joseph Noel & Ann McGaughey c/o Marshal Stephen

24 Water St, Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

Hydro One Networks Inc. Assessment and Taxation

P.O. Box 4, Markham, ON L3R 5Z5


Brendan Burnett & David Cote 9097 Hwy 6, Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

Wayne & Abelina Kuchta P.O. Box 815, Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

Mr. Ernest Schaffernicht Airport Rd, Apt 304 North Bay, ON P1B 8X1

Charles & Marie Lumley R.R. #1, Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

Mr. Calvin McGaughey P.O. Box 264, Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

Mr. John McGaughey P.O. Box 722, Little Current, ON P0P 1K0

Mr. John Nowak 300 Stoneybrook Dr, Kitchener, ON N2M 4M2

William, Seeta & Daneshwar Narine 118 Huntingwood Ave, Dundas, ON L9H 6X5

Raymond & Ellen Haughland 852 Bricker St, SS3 Port Elgin, ON N0H 2C3

Narman, Marian, William, & James Hevel 11319 Black Walnut Ct. Washington, MI 48094

Duncan & Elizabeth Beiler 2985 Mexico Rd, Milton, PA 17847

Mr. Daniel Anderson 6035 Voyageur Dr, Orleans, ON K1C 2P5

Ms. Mary Anglin 11 Carl Shepway, North York, ON M2J 1X3

Thomas, Gary & Edward Ferguson 6 Gill Cres, Onaping, ON P0M 2R0

Potts 221 Helen St, Midland, MI 48640

little current lagoon ea addendum final - townofnemi.on.ca · town of northeastern manitoulin and...

Documents