|
March
11, 2004
The Honourable Leona Dombrowsky
Minister of the Environment
2 St. Clair Ave. West
Foor 12A
Toronto, Ontario
M4V 1L5
Dear Minister,
The
Richmond Village Association has asked me to support their
environmental concerns:
Re: rejection of a force main sewer pipe through their
community.
I
rarely seek the assistance of my provincial counterparts on
matters that are primarily ones of local jurisdiction, and
further, in another Council colleague’s ward. However, in this
circumstance, I feel compelled to seek your support in this matter
in the best interests of the health and safety of residents of
Richmond Village.
I
assume your staff will provide you with a complete background
briefing and therefore, limit my comments to you. In June, 2003,
I voted to support the recommendation approving the implementation
of the pipeline alternative for waste water disposal for Munster
Hamlet. My decision was based on the recommendation of the City’s
Environmental Services Committee and the supporting staff report
dated 02 May 2003. I enclose a copy of that report for your
reference. Since voting I have been made aware of new important
information not contained in the staff report. I would have
rejected the recommendation to Council had this important
information been available to me when I voted. The undisclosed
information is set out below:
1.
The proposed route for the pipeline travels within close
proximity to many unprotected private wells providing water for
hundreds of people in the Richmond Village area.
These wells
function in a shallow aquifer. The proposed pipeline is a force
main pumping untreated human waste in this vulnerable area;
…/2
- 2 -
2.
The existing force main now serving the Village of Richmond
has experienced at least two spontaneous ruptures that discharged
untreated sewage into the surrounding ground water.
The discharge
went undetected for a period of weeks if not months.
This
information is contained in a report produced by a City consultant
published subsequent to Council’s decision. The failures,
however, occurred well in advance of that date. I
understand your office will be supplied with this report prepared
by David McManus Engineering Ltd. Please note that the cause of
these failures has not been identified and that remedial action
could not be recommended.
Staff advised Council that the pipeline solution was the most
expedient of the three alternatives considered. The need for
expediency was rationalized on the basis that the City was at
imminent risk of prosecution by your Ministry with the potential
for fines of up to $6 million. I understand that statutory
obligations need to be enforced. However, I believe the
circumstances in this case merit the use of ministerial discretion
to allow for reasonable additional time to implement an
alternative safe treatment facility without the threat of
prosecution.
The City is committed to finding a solution for the Munster Hamlet
treatment facility. The majority of recommendations prepared by
its independent consultants favor an on-site facility. Such a
facility has now been built in my riding at City expense under
Certificate of Approval and with the concurrence of your
Ministry. This option remains the healthier, more cost-effective
and socially acceptable choice.
I believe many of my colleagues
on Council may be willing to reconsider their decision should I be
able to advise them that your Office would extend the City some
indulgence with respect to potential prosecution. I look forward
to hearing from you directly in this regard.
Yours sincerely,
Original signed by
R. Glenn Brooks
(Councillor,
Ward 21, City of Ottawa)
Encl.
|