While it is not “set in stone”, it is being recommended that Wallaceburg receive its drinking water from Chatham.
Dozens of people attended a public meeting at the UAW Hall in Wallaceburg, hosted by the Chatham-Kent Public Utilities Commission (PUC) and the hired consultants for the Wallaceburg and Area Water Supply System Municipal Class EA, Stantec Consulting Ltd.
After presenting in detail a series of options, which included rehabilitating the current Wallaceburg Water Treatment Plant, Stantec’s “preferred alternative” was connecting to the Chatham water supply, which gets its water from Lake Erie.
“There is still more work that has to be done with regards to that decision, so we have to look at routing and do that work,” said Tom Kissner, general manager of the Chatham-Kent PUC. “Right now, we’ve gone through the process, the Class EA process, and that is the outcome of that Class EA process. Really the preferred alternative is to connect to the Chatham system.”
Kissner added: “Certainly, people have the ability to comment and those comments will come into play, but the evaluation that we’ve gone through for the Class EA… and the outcome of the evaluation is a preferred solution and that really is the preferred solution.”
Stantec outlined the financial impact of each alternative, with upgrading the Wallaceburg Treatment Plant costing approximately $3.4 million in the short term for capital costs to rehabilitate the existing facility.
However, Stantec said staying with the Wallaceburg option, the long-term forecast of 40 years would see it costing upwards to $67.2 million.
Stantec’s preferred option of connecting to the Chatham drinking water system would cost more in the short term for capital cost, approximately $11.9 million to $20.3 million, depending on which of the four design solutions are chosen.
The projected 40-year financial outlook ranges from $37.5 million to $41.2 million.
Stantec officials said another alternative of connecting to the Lambton water system, would require “significant” upgrades in order to be a viable option.
Wallaceburg Coun. Jeff Wesley, who had sat as the chair of the PUC during the last term of council, said he disagreed the recommendation.
“I am here to represent the community, but I also have family here, I have grand kids, friends and family and I have yet to hear anybody, during the election campaign or leading up to this, telling me they prefer a Lake Erie solution,” he said. “I’ve heard it from no one.”
Wesley added: “That should be a pretty simple answer and resolution to the issue. When you look at the cost, forget the 40-year cost, you can work anything you want into that. Look at the near term cost and the 20-year cost… it’s competitive. I make the argument, if you stay with what we have here and you make the local improvements, we’ll actually be better off financially.”
Wesley said in terms of the quality of water, people can look at the “Motor City” for a clear indication.
“I think the easiest thing to say when you talk about a Lake Huron supply as opposed to a Lake Erie supply, just ask yourself one question… why does Detroit, that is situated on the Detroit River at the cusp of Lake Erie, why do they get their water from Lake Huron,” Wesley said. “It isn’t because they wanted to go all those extra miles and out a pipeline to Lake Huron. They went there because of the quality of the water. That is all we are saying here.”
Wesley added: “I don’t want to trash Lake Erie too much, but everyone knows the history of Lake Erie. It has had the phosphate problems over the years, it has the algae problems now, that sort of thing.”
Wesley said he “hopes” the decision is not already made.
“It better not be done,” he said. “What was the point of tonight then, if it’s done then don’t bother asking anybody what they think. If I get put back on the PUC, the one thing I’ll be sharing with the PUC is that I’ve not heard from anybody in Wallaceburg, including tonight who supports the Lake Erie option. I’ll make the case the best I can. Obviously, if there are citizens out there that are concerned about it, they should make their voices heard too.”
A man in the audience asked if he gathered “every man, woman and child” in Wallaceburg in support of rehabilitating the Wallaceburg Treatment Plant, would it have any effect on the PUC’s decision.
Kissner said while the PUC could support any options they wanted, the Ministry of Environment has the final approvals, adding they will generally agree with the findings of the EA.
If the PUC decided to go against the EAs preferred option, “I don’t think the MOE would support it,” Kissner said.
During the meeting, several people expressed their concern about the blue-green algae issue that was prevalent in Lake Erie last summer, and how this could effect Wallaceburg drinking water.
“Our treatment processes that are currently in place are designed to treat raw water quality of Lake Erie quality,” Kissner said. “When you talk about blue-green algae during the summer months, we do extra sampling. We look at micro systems, which is an indicator of blue-green algae and one of the concerns with blue-green algae. We do the extra sampling and we’ve not detected it in the raw water that is coming into the Chatham Water Treatment plant.”
Kissner added: “Even if it were detected our treatment systems that are currently in place would remove that micro system.”
Stantec stated that a third and final public meeting will take place before the report is finalized.
However, Kissner said it is not known when.
“It could take weeks, it could take months,” he said.
Stantec officials stated further comments are being accepted from the public until December 12.
Contact one of these two individuals with your comments:
Andrew Galloway
Engineering Technologist, Water/Wastewater
Chatham-Kent Public Utilities Commission
Tel: 519-436-0119 ext. 313
Email: andrewga@chatham-kent.ca
or
Michele Oxlade
Environmental Coordinator
Stantec Consulting Ltd.
Tel: 519-675-6652
Email: michele.oxlade@stantec.com
Watch for more on this story in the Sydenham Current.
