5-Year Business Plan - 2013-14 to 2017-18 - Halifax Regional ...

Halifax Water 

Five‐Year Business Plan 

2013‐14 to 2017‐18 

Approved by the Halifax Water Board 

November 29, 2012

Blank Page

HALIFAX WATER 



Glossary 

AM Asset Management 

AWWA American Water Works Association 

BMPs Best Management Practices 

BOD5 Biochemical Oxygen Demand [5 Day Period] 

BPF Biosolids Processing Facility 

CBOD Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand 

CCC Capital Cost Contribution 

CCME Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment 

CCS Customer Care and Service 

CCTV Closed Circuit Television 

CEU Continuing Education Unit 

CFIA Canadian Food Inspection Agency 

CIP Capital Infrastructure Program 

COSS Cost of Service Study 

CSIF Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund 

CSO Combined Sewer Overflow 

CUPE Canadian Union of Public Employees 

EM Environmental Management 

EP Environmental Protection 

ERA Environmental Risk Assessment 

FCM Federation of Canadian Municipalities 

GTU Green Thermal Utility 

HIAA Halifax International Airport Authority 

HHSP Halifax Harbour Solutions Project 

HRM Halifax Regional Municipality 

I&I Inflow & Infiltration 

ICI Industrial, Commercial & Institutional 

IFRS International Financial Reporting Standards 

IRS Internal Responsibility System 

IS Information Systems 

IWA International Water Association 

JOHSC Joint Occupation Health & Safety Committee 

m3 Cubic Metre 

MRIF Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund 

NGO Non‐Government Organization 

NSE Nova Scotia Environment 

NSERC Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council 

NSPI Nova Scotia Power Incorporated 

NSUARB Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board 

PI Plant Information 

P2 Pollution Prevention 

RAM‐W Risk Assessment Methodology for Water 

RFP Request for Proposal 

‐ i ‐

HALIFAX WATER 



RTU Remote Terminal Unit 

RWWFP Regional Wastewater Functional Plan. 

SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition 

SIR Stormwater Inflow Reduction 

SOP Standard Operating Procedure 

SSO Sanitary Sewer Overflow 

TRC Total Residual Chlorine 

TSS Total Suspended Solids 

UV Ultraviolet 

WEF Water Environment Federation 

WRF Water Research Foundation 

WSC Wastewater and Stormwater Collection 

WWM Wastewater Management 

WWTF Wastewater Treatment Facility 

WQMP Water Quality Master Plan 

‐ ii ‐

HALIFAX WATER 



Table of Contents 

Glossary .......................................................................................................................................................................... i 

Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................................................... iii 

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. 1 

2. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 3 

3. CURRENT RATE STRUCTURES .................................................................................................................. 4 

3.1 Urban Core & Satellite Systems ...................................................................................................... 4 

3.2 Airport/Aerotech System ................................................................................................................. 5 

4. COST OF SERVICE/RATE DESIGN ............................................................................................................ 6 

5. WASTEWATER SYSTEMS EFFLUENT REGULATIONS ................................................................. 10 

6. FINANCIAL PROGRAMS & PRO FORMA BUDGETS ........................................................................ 11 

6.1 Capital Program ................................................................................................................................. 11 

6.1.1 Asset Management & A Vision to Sustainable Infrastructure .................... 11 

6.1.2 Five‐Year Capital Budget – General Overview .................................................. 15 

6.1.3 Major Projects ................................................................................................................. 16 

6.1.4 Integrated Resource Plan .......................................................................................... 24 

6.2 Five‐Year Operating Budgets ....................................................................................................... 28 

6.3 Debt Strategy ....................................................................................................................................... 31 

6.4 Alternative Revenue Streams ....................................................................................................... 35 

7. ENERGY MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................................... 36 

7.1 Energy Management Program ..................................................................................................... 36 

7.2 Renewable‐Energy Generation ................................................................................................... 38 

7.2.1 Wind Energy .................................................................................................................... 38 

‐ iii ‐

HALIFAX WATER 



7.2.2 Hydrokinetic Turbines ................................................................................................ 40 

7.3 Energy Recovery ................................................................................................................................ 40 

7.3.1 Energy from Biomass/Biosolids ............................................................................. 41 

7.3.2 Wastewater Effluent Heat Recovery ..................................................................... 42 

7.3.3 Bio‐Gas CHP Energy Utilization .............................................................................. 43 

8. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT ............................................................................................................... 43 

8.1 Organizational Cultural‐Change Process ................................................................................ 43 

8.2 Succession Planning ......................................................................................................................... 45 

8.3 Water Quality Master Plan ............................................................................................................ 46 

8.4 Environmental Management System – ISO 14001 Expansion ....................................... 47 

8.5 Wet Weather Flow Management ................................................................................................ 48 

9. SAFETY & SECURITY ................................................................................................................................... 52 

9.1 Corporate Security Program......................................................................................................... 52 

9.2 Occupational Health & Safety Programs ................................................................................. 54 

10. BUSINESS RISKS & MITIGATION STRATEGIES ............................................................................... 57 

10.1 Conservation .................................................................................................................................. 57 

10.2 Nova Scotia Environment [NSE] Regulatory Compliance .......................................... 58 

10.3 CCME Wastewater Strategy and WSER Regulations .................................................... 59 

10.4 Pension Fund Solvency .............................................................................................................. 60 

10.5 Regional Plan Update ................................................................................................................. 61 

10.6 Development Pressures/Obligations .................................................................................. 63 

10.7 Biosolids ........................................................................................................................................... 64 

10.8 Leachate Treatment .................................................................................................................... 66 

‐ iv ‐

HALIFAX WATER 



10.9 Harbour Solutions Project Assets ......................................................................................... 68 

10.10 Aerotech and Small Wastewater Treatment Facilities ................................................ 68 

10.11 Energy Costs ................................................................................................................................... 72 

10.12 External Funding .......................................................................................................................... 74 

11. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RATE APPLICATIONS ......................................................................... 75 

11.1 Urban Core, Airport/Aerotech, and Satellite Systems ................................................. 75 

APPENDICES 

A. Mission, Vision & Corporate Balanced Scorecard 

B. Organizational Chart 

C. Water and Wastewater Service Districts and Supporting Infrastructure 

D. Approved Capital Budget – 2012‐13 

E. Projected Capital Budgets for 2013‐14 to 2017‐18 

F. Projected Operating Statements – Consolidated [2013‐14 to 2017‐18] 

G. Water Quality Master Plan – Version 2 

H. CCME Municipal Wastewater Effluent Implementation Plan 

I. Wastewater Treatment Facilities [WWTF] Compliance Plan 

‐ v ‐

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

HALIFAX WATER 



Several initiatives have just been completed that will provide a framework for long‐range 

plans for Halifax Water: the Cost of Service/Rate Design Methodology; the Integrated 

Resource Plan; and the Debt Strategy. This framework will serve as a touch stone for 

future operating and capital budgets and rate applications as indicated in Figure 1.1. 

Figure 1.1 – Business Plan Framework 

As directed by the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board, a Cost of Service/Rate Design 

hearing was held on November 21, 2011 after a settlement agreement was reached 

between formal interveners and Halifax Water. The NSUARB approved the settlement 

agreement which recognized that future rate structures should conform to best practices 

identified by the American Waterworks Association [AWWA] and the Water Environment 

Federation [WEF]. One of the related directives coming out of the NSUARB Decision was to 

compile a cost of service/rate design manual through a consultative process with 

stakeholders to serve as the basis for future rate applications. This exercise was 

successfully completed in 2012 and the manual was filed with the NSUARB on October 31, 

2012. 

As part of the NSUARB Rate Decision of December 17, 2010, Halifax Water was directed to 

complete an Integrated Resource Plan [IRP] to guide the capital investments of the utility 

over the next 30 years, and to compile a Debt Strategy to ensure the most efficient 

approach for capital funding. After a consultative process involving stakeholders and 

guidance from the Tellus Institute, a consultant hired by the NSUARB, the IRP was filed 

with the NSUARB on October 31, 2012. The IRP projects capital expenditures of $2,579 

million [NPV] over a thirty year period as follows: $1,385 million for asset renewal; $598 

million for growth; and $595 million for environmental compliance. Although much of the 

1

HALIFAX WATER 



funding for water projects is in place as part of the current rate structure, wastewater and 

stormwater projects will require significant funding increases to reach sustainable levels. 

The Debt Strategy indicates the utility should base an efficient capital funding structure on 

a maximum debt service ratio of 35% and a debt to equity ratio of 40 to 60 %. The Debt 

Strategy will be filed with the NSUARB in January, 2013 after Halifax Water has the 

opportunity to brief the Mayor of HRM, as its adoption may impact the credit rating of HRM 

and the Province. 

This five‐year business plan is being developed to support the January 2013 rate 

application to cover the 2013/14 and 2014/15 fiscal years. As directed by the NSUARB, 

the January 2013 rate application will consider consolidation of the Urban Core/Satellite 

systems and the Airport/Aerotech system into one rate base, and provide information in 

support of a holistic asset management and financial plan for Halifax Water. Several 

challenges, mainly of a capital nature, will garner the attention of the utility over the next 

five years, namely: 

 

 

 

 

Impact of Significant Current and Imminent Capital Projects – There is a need to 

accommodate new debt payments and depreciation for the Eastern Passage 

Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF), the Operations and Administration facilities 

at Cowie Hill, the Aerotech Wastewater Treatment Facility expansion, the Pockwock 

transmission main renewal along Dunbrack Street and Kearney Lake Road, and the 

Beechville‐ Lakeside‐Timberlea pipeline to transfer sewage to the Halifax sewer shed. 

Future Capital Demands – The current water, wastewater and stormwater rates are 

insufficient to meet the capital needs for sustainable infrastructure as identified in the 

IRP. The IRP acknowledges that wastewater and stormwater assets have been grossly 

underfunded historically. Institutional capacity will have to increase over the term of 

this Business Plan in order to deliver the expected capital projects. 

New Environmental Regulations – Increased operating expenses will be incurred by 

Halifax Water as it conforms to wastewater regulations recently entrenched in the 

federal Fisheries Act related to the CCME municipal wastewater effluent strategy 

Increasing Energy and Chemical Costs – electricity and chemical costs will continue to 

increase at a rate higher than inflation 

Over the next five years, Halifax Water will likely file three rate applications [including the 

January 2013 application] for a single rate base [Urban Core/Satellite systems and 

Airport/Aerotech system]. Overall revenues will need to increase by 45% to 50% over the 

five‐year period with the primary focus on the capital needs of wastewater and stormwater 

assets. Halifax Water is not alone in its quest for more sustainable funding. Unfortunately, 

wastewater and stormwater assets have been underfunded throughout North America, and 

other municipalities/utilities have made, or are making, inroads to increase rates. In 

Canada, the cities of Toronto and Ottawa, and EPCOR in Edmonton are well on their way to 

2

HALIFAX WATER 



sustainable funding through increased rates. The projected rate increases associated with 

this business plan have been viewed in the context of customer affordability in relation to 

median household income [an industry benchmark] with proposed rates less than 2% of 

median household income. Where low income households experience difficulty with 

affordability, the utility is proposing to continue with the H20 [Help to Others] program to 

support these customers, with funding from unregulated activities. 

Some other initiatives such as the Bedford West CCC Implementation will occur within the 

span of the five‐year plan and will be structured to be cost neutral to ratepayers, but there 

will be cash flow implications. Related to this theme will be the utility’s reliance on an 

expanded regional development charge to ensure that growth pays for itself. A formal 

review of a revised regional development charge was carried out in the fall of 2012 with 

completion anticipated in 2013, in conformance with a directive of the NSUARB. 

2. INTRODUCTION 

In accordance with sound management principles, Halifax Water is updating its five year 

business plan for the 2013/14 to 2017/18 period to incorporate up to date information to 

guide its activities over the long‐term. Recent milestones have been achieved with the 

completion of the Cost of Service/Rate Design Manual, Integrated Resource Plan [IRP], and 

related Debt Strategy to establish a framework for future infrastructure investments and 

rate applications. In addition, more certainty has been brought to bear with respect to 

regulations tied to the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment [CCME] municipal 

wastewater effluent strategy. These regulations have now been entrenched in the federal 

Fisheries Act and amongst other things, dictate national performance standards for the 

treatment of wastewater effluent. With these activities completed, longer‐term 

projections can be made with a higher degree of confidence. 

In recognition that the utility inherited a significant infrastructure deficit from HRM when 

it assumed responsibility for wastewater and stormwater assets in 2007 and new federal 

regulations will create stricter environmental requirements, future rate increases are 

inevitable. These rate increases must be managed to balance rate shock and affordability 

to customers. Other infrastructure investments to facilitate growth will be managed to 

ensure cost neutrality to existing customers. In conformance with the Public Utilities Act, 

all of these collective investments and associated funding must be based on cost causation 

principles and occur within the context of intergenerational equity. 

Although the last five years were particularly challenging for Halifax Water after the 

integration of water, wastewater and stormwater assets in 2007, there are more challenges 

ahead in both the immediate and long term. The biggest challenge will be to further 

convince customers that protection of the environment is critical to our society, and we 

must continue with corrective action to not only upgrade deteriorating infrastructure and 

achieve compliance with regulations but mitigate and adapt to changing climatic 

3

HALIFAX WATER 



conditions. Recent data indicates that climate change is accelerating as evidenced by 

projections of sea level rise, more intense storm events, and changing precipitation 

patterns. 

Within the last year Halifax Water received approval from the NSUARB for rate increase in 

both the Urban Core [including Satellite systems] and Airport/Aerotech systems based on 

current rate structures. With the recent completion of the Cost of Service/Rate Design 

Manual, Halifax Water will be submitting a rate application for the Urban Core to cover a 

two‐year test period based on revised rate structures which are deemed to be fair and 

equitable across the entire rate base. At the direction of the NSUARB, the application will 

also consider the integration of the Airport/Aerotech system with the Urban Core rate 

base. A rate application will be submitted in January of 2013 with a public hearing 

scheduled for April 15 to 19, 2013. 

3. CURRENT RATE STRUCTURES 

Halifax Water currently has two separate rate structures as approved by the NSUARB: 1) 

the Urban Core and Satellite systems; and 2) the Airport/Aerotech system. In the June 28, 

2012 general rate decision for the Airport/Aerotech system [NSUARB‐W‐HRWC‐R‐12[3] 

the NSUARB directed a Rate Application for a combined Urban Core & Airport/Aerotech 

System by January 31, 2013. The existing rate structures are discussed below. The 

proposed combined rate structure is discussed in Section 4 – Cost of Service/Rate Design, 

and in Section 11 – Recommendations for Rate Application. 

3.1 Urban Core & Satellite Systems 

The urban core and satellite systems have had one uniform rate structure for water service 

since May 1, 2006, when the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board rendered a decision to 

harmonize the rate structure. That decision also provided for rate increases on May 1, 

2006, April 1, 2007, and April 1, 2008. In March 2010, Halifax Water submitted a rate 

application to the NSUARB, and in December 2010, the NSUARB rendered a decision for an 

increase in wastewater/stormwater rates that took effect January 2011. In December 

2011, Halifax Water submitted a rate application and the NSUARB approved a rate increase 

effective June 25, 2012. 

The existing rates for water service consist of a base and consumption charge. The base 

charge varies by meter size and ranges from $36.02 per quarter for a 15 mm [5/8”] 

diameter residential meter to $1,558.89 per month for a 250 mm [10”] commercial meter. 

Consumption charges are $0.509 per cubic metre [m 3 ]. The water‐rate structure also 

provides for a fire‐protection charge that is billed annually to the Halifax Regional 

Municipality based on a formula approved by the NSUARB. For 2012/13, this amounts to 

$9,947,644. 

4

HALIFAX WATER 



In 2007, wastewater and stormwater services were transferred to Halifax Water from the 

Halifax Regional Municipality. Associated rates previously levied by HRM were approved 

by the NSUARB in March 2008, which remained in place until the January 2011 rate 

increase. Effective June 25, 2012, these rates were increased to the current level. 

The current wastewater/stormwater rates, like the water rates, are uniform for the urban 

core and satellite systems and incorporate a base charge that varies by meter size and 

consumption as measured by the water meter. The current charges include a base charge 

that varies from $38.05 per quarter for residential customers to $1,902.93 per month for 

the largest commercial customers, and a discharge rate of $1.296 per m 3 . 

For unmetered customers where there is no meter to measure consumption the charge is 

based on the average usage for customers in a similar rate class. Approximately 0.4% of 

water customers are unmetered, and 1.6% of wastewater customers are unmetered. The 

issue of appropriateness of the rate and billing process for unmetered customers was 

raised as part of the Cost of Service/Rate Design hearing in November 2011. The NSUARB 

addressed this issue in their Order dated January 16, 2012 and confirmed that the use of 

averaging in the absence of meters is an accepted ratemaking practice. 

3.2 Airport/Aerotech System 

The NSUARB in its previous decisions on the water and wastewater/stormwater rate 

applications ordered that the Airport/Aerotech water, wastewater, and stormwater 

systems be recognized as stand‐alone systems and have their own rate structure. A rate 

application was heard by the NSUARB, and they issued their decision in November 2008 for 

rates effective December 1, 2008, and April 1, 2009. 

In March 2012 Halifax Water submitted a two year Rate Application for the 

Airport/Aerotech System. The Rate Hearing commenced June 6th and, at the request of 

HRWC, was adjourned until June 7th. This postponement enabled HRWC and the 

Interveners to the Application time to discuss and resolve issues in dispute with respect to 

the Application. On June 6, 2012, HRWC and the Interveners reached a Settlement 

Agreement. 

On June 7th the Rate Hearing reconvened and the Settlement Agreement was approved by 

the NSUARB, with its Order subsequently issued June 11th. Notable outcomes resulting 

from the Order included: 

• HRWC was directed to file a Compliance Filing, to be submitted by June 15, 2012; 

• HRWC was issued a revised timetable of October 31, 2012 with respect to the Cost 

of Service Manual, the Integrated Resource Plan and Debt Study; and 

5

HALIFAX WATER 



• HRWC was directed to file a Rate Application on or before January 31, 2013, with 

consideration given to consolidating both the Urban Core and Airport/Aerotech 

Systems into one rate application. 

On June 28, 2012, the NSUARB issued the decision, approving rate increase for the 

Airport/Aerotech system effective August 1, 2012 and April 1, 2013 respectively. 

The existing charges for water service vary by meter size and ranges from $25.98 per 

month for a 15 mm [5/8”] diameter meter to $507.24 per month for a 100 mm [10”] 

diameter meter. The consumption charge for water service is $1.629 per m 3 . The waterrate 

structure also provides for a fire‐protection charge based on a formula approved by 

the NSUARB. For 2012/13, this amounts to $141,598. 

The rates for wastewater services also consist of a base and consumption charge. The base 

charge varies by meter size and ranges from $13.28 per month for a 15 mm [5/8”] 

diameter meter to $331.90 per month for a 100 mm [10”] diameter meter. The 

consumption charge for wastewater service is $1.833 per m 3 . 

A separate rate for stormwater service was previously levied for customers within the 

Aerotech Business Park based on the calculated impervious surface area of each customer’s 

property. As of November 2011, Stormwater Services are no longer delivered to Aerotech 

Business Park customers by Halifax Water. In early October 2011 after inquiries from 

Halifax Water, Nova Scotia Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal confirmed that the 

stormwater assets in that area were owned by the Province. Accordingly, Halifax Water 

does not have a mandate to provide stormwater services in this area or the authority to 

levy rates or incur expenses related to stormwater for Aerotech customers. All stormwater 

revenues collected were subsequently fully refunded to the 13 stormwater customers of 

the system. 

4. COST OF SERVICE/RATE DESIGN 

As part of the December 2010 rate decision, the NSUARB directed a stand‐alone Cost of 

Service and Rate Design proceeding be conducted prior to the next rate application. The 

current NSUARB Water Utility Accounting and Reporting Handbook pertains to water 

utilities and does not provide guidance with respect to rate design for wastewater or 

stormwater. In May 2011, HWRC submitted an application for approval of a Cost of 

Service/Rate Design, and the hearing was held on November 21, 2011. Prior to the hearing, 

Halifax Water signed a settlement agreement with the Consumer Advocate and Income 

Property Owners’ Association of NS. At the hearing on November 21, 2011, Halifax Water 

recommended that the settlement be approved by the NSUARB. The settlement indicates 

that the parties accept the AWWA and WEF based methodologies for cost of service/rate 

6

HALIFAX WATER 



design, however, outlines some future activities which must occur. A decision by the 

NSUARB was rendered on January 16, 2012 1 

[33] The Board has considered the evidence in the proceeding, including the 

Settlement Agreement and submissions by the parties, and is satisfied that the 

Settlement Agreement is in the public interest. The Board approves the Settlement 

Agreement as filed. 

[34] HRWC, in accordance with the Settlement Agreement, and in collaboration with the 

Interveners, is to prepare a Cost of Service Manual which will be submitted to the Board for 

approval. The Board orders HRWC to complete this manual no later than August 30, 2012 

and provide a schedule to achieve this deadline by January 30, 2012. 

HRWC’s Terms of Reference for development of the Cost‐of‐Service [COS] Manual were 

approved on February 17, 2012. The timeline was altered as a result of the NSUARB 

Decision regarding HRWC’s Airport/Aerotech Rate Application. In this decision, the 

NSUARB directed HRWC to submit a Rate Application for a combined Urban Core & 

Airport/Aerotech System by January 31, 2013. As a result of consideration of the combined 

Urban Core & Airport/Aerotech System, the COS Manual deadline was extended to October 

31, 2012 to permit inclusion of the Airport/Aerotech system. 

The COS Manual was developed through a seven‐step process highlighted by engagement 

with interested parties, including prior rate case interveners and the NSUARB. This 

process is illustrated below and is aligned with the cost allocation processes outlined in 

industry standard manuals of practice: 

1. Data Compilation 

2 

2. Kick-Off 

Review of 

standard 

methods 

3. Budget & 

CIP Format, 

System 

Data 

4. Cost 

Allocation to 

Functions 

5. Cost 


Service 

Characterist 

6. Cost 


Classes & 

Rate Design 

7. Manual 

Document 

Review 

Stakeholder consultation meetings were held on March 7th, May 9th & 10th, and 

September 25, 2012. Feedback from stakeholders has been accepted throughout the 

process, resulting in many changes and improvements in the final product. The COS 

Manual was filed with the NSUARB on October 31, 2012. 

1 NSUARB-W-R-11 2012 NSUARB 9 

7

HALIFAX WATER 



The Cost of Service/Rate Design is based on American Water Works Association/Water 

Environment Federation best practice frameworks. The AWWA/WEF Framework achieves 

a substantial improvement over the existing rate structure in terms of the fairness, 

defensibility, and relationship to costs. Additionally, because cost allocations are tailored 

to reflect system characteristics, the approach is adaptable to changing circumstances. This 

model is more complex than the current rate design in place for HRWC, however it is 

appropriate given the fact that HRWC’s operations are increasingly complex and a cost of 

service and rate design are required that can adapt in response to change, and allocate 

costs in a fair and equitable manner. 

It is important to note that when this framework is implemented a slightly higher 

percentage of HRWC’s revenues will come from volumetric charges versus base charges. 

This sends a pricing signal promoting conservation of water, compliance with regulations, 

and operational efficiency, but places increased pressure on the utility and the NSUARB to 

recognize and respond to trends in declining consumption. 

The proposed Cost of Service/Rate Design methodology does not result in increased 

revenue for Halifax Water, but it does cause shifts in the rates between various types of 

customers and services. It is believed that the Cost of Service/Rate Design will provide a 

solid foundation for future rate applications. 

The new Cost of Service/Rate Design is based on established methodologies from the 

AWWA and WEF in the context of the local and operational characteristics prevalent for 

Halifax Water. 

WATER 

The cost of service/rate design model for water is based on the AWWA framework as it is 

the most defendable from the perspective of cost causation, promotes fairness and equity, 

is widely accepted, and will be adaptable on a go‐forward basis to changes in the way the 

utility operates. There will be a single volumetric charge for water customers based on 

consumption, base charge that will vary by meter size, and a customer charge that will be 

levied to all customers. 

With respect to fire protection, public fire protection costs will be recovered from HRM and 

private fire protection is treated as a separate and distinct additional service. Private fireprotection 

costs are extrapolated from public fire‐protection costs based on the cost of 

serving a single hydrant and recognition of a pipe‐size/capacity relationship. 

WASTEWATER 

The cost of service/rate design model for wastewater is a hybrid WEF framework with 

recognition and allocation of the costs of handling and treating inflow and infiltration [I&I] 

between the volumetric charge and the customer/base charge with 10% of the I&I‐related 

8

HALIFAX WATER 



costs allocated to flow [volumetric charge], 45% to meter‐equivalent charge, and 45% to 

the customer charge. 

This option produces the strongest alignment with actual cost causation and is felt to be the 

most fair and equitable of the models. It acknowledges that some portion of the I&I [10%] 

is related to faulty joints in the network including manholes, which allow flow to enter the 

system regardless of the number of customers connected. The second allocation of I&I to 

the meter‐equivalent charge [45%] relates to the increased water consumed [and 

discharged] by larger‐diameter meters resulting in more flow in the wastewater system 

and requiring larger‐diameter pipes, which increase the risk of leakage due to the 

increased surface area of joints in larger pipes. The final allocation to customer 

connections [45%] relates to leakage that is associated with connections between the 

service pipe and Halifax Water’s collection network, and the potential for the customer to 

discharge other flows from sump pumps and roof drains to the system. 

There will be a single volumetric charge for wastewater customers for discharge, which is 

based on consumption, a base charge that will vary by metre size, and a customer charge 

that will be levied to all customers. The cost of service/ rate design also supports the 

continued use of an extra‐strength surcharge. Under the recommended methodology for 

wastewater, a slightly higher portion of costs are attributed to the extra‐strength surcharge 

than have historically been included due to the inclusion of capital and debt‐servicing costs. 

STORMWATER 

The cost of service rate design for stormwater is based on the principles of the 

AWWA/WEF framework billed as a two‐part charge: a right‐of‐way portion and a sitegenerated 

portion with some exemptions and rebates to recognize properties that do not 

drain into Halifax Water’s system. 

This model recognizes that roughly 29% of the stormwater originates from the street area 

with the remainder [71%] originating from the adjoining properties. This division has been 

used to calculate the portion of the costs relating to each service. Customers who 

discharge directly into the ocean and do not discharge into the Halifax Water system, or 

who can demonstrate they do not discharge into the Halifax Water system can apply for an 

exemption for the site‐generated portion. 

The model is in keeping with the same fundamental principles and cost allocation 

approaches for water and wastewater. Separation of stormwater charges from 

wastewater charges will increase transparency with utility customers, provide more 

adaptability on a go‐forward basis, and best meet the objectives of fair and equitable cost 

allocations. 

9

HALIFAX WATER 



5. WASTEWATER SYSTEMS EFFLUENT REGULATIONS 

The final Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations [WSER] were released in June 2012. 

These regulations, made under the Fisheries Act, implement those aspects of the CCME 

Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent which fall under federal 

jurisdiction, namely the discharge of deleterious substances to fish habitat. The WSER 

defines the following as deleterious substances, and sets national standards for their 

discharge: Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand [CBOD] – 25 mg/L; Total 

Suspended Solids [TSS] – 25 mg/L; Total Residual Chlorine [TRC – for those facilities using 

chlorine for disinfection] – 0.02 mg/L; and Un‐ionized Ammonia – 1.25 mg/L as Nitrogen, 

at 15⁰C ± 1⁰C. 

Wastewater treatment facilities [WWTFs] are authorized to discharge these substances at 

levels below the defined limits, provided that the effluent is not acutely lethal as 

determined by standard toxicity testing. Facilities not in compliance must apply for a 

Transitional Authorization to deposit effluent exceeding those limits. The Authorization 

will be valid for a period of 10, 20 or 30 years, depending on the risk level associated with 

the effluent, as determined by a defined risk ranking system in the WSER. 

Wastewater treatment facilities having effluent which is acutely lethal due to Un‐ionized 

Ammonia must apply for a Temporary Authorization to Deposit Un‐ionized Ammonia. 

Such Authorizations are valid for three years, and may be renewed. Effluent which is 

acutely lethal due to substances other than Un‐ionized Ammonia is not authorized under 

the WSER, and is in contravention of the Fisheries Act. 

Under the WSER, an Identification Report must be submitted by May 15, 2013 for each 

WWTF, documenting various data and information for each WWTF including the location 

of all overflow points. In addition, for those systems which include Combined Sewer 

Overflows [CSOs], a Combined Sewer Overflow Report must be submitted by Feb. 15 of 

each calendar year for the prior year, beginning Feb. 15 of 2014 for the 2013 calendar year. 

The report must document the occurrence, duration and measured or estimated volume of 

each CSO overflow event. Environment Canada has confirmed that hydraulic modeling 

results are acceptable as CSO volume estimates. 

The WSER also requires annual or quarterly [depending on WWTF size] Monitoring 

Reports for each WWTF, documenting the daily effluent volume and the concentrations of 

CBOD, TSS, and Un‐ionized Ammonia. 

As a result of the new data management and analysis workload created by the WSER 

reporting requirements, Environmental Services will require an additional Data Analyst 

position, beginning in the 2013/14 budget year. This position has been identified in the 

2013/14 budget submission. 

10

HALIFAX WATER 



6. FINANCIAL PROGRAMS & PRO FORMA BUDGETS 

6.1 Capital Program 

6.1.1 Asset Management & A Vision to Sustainable Infrastructure 

In early 2011, Halifax Water completed an Asset Management Assessment [AMA]. The 

outcome – referred to as the Asset Management [AM] roadmap – created a plan to 

implement AM activities in a coordinated approach. This critical step for the AM program 

intends to proceed with a strategy based on industry best practices with a goal of ensuring 

there is clear direction prior to making a significant investment [either in technology, 

processes, or capital versus operational spending on assets]. 

The AMA project included a review of current AM practices, policies, systems, tools, and 

data; a comparison of Halifax Water’s current situation to industry best practices for AM 

and identification of the gaps; itemization of the steps necessary to bring Halifax Water to 

industry best‐practices levels; identification of the high‐level timeline and costs to achieve 

the recommended plan; and a report on the findings and recommendations to Halifax 

Water. 

Through a range of workshops, meetings, and interviews with staff, a number of 

recommendations were presented to the Executive team and ultimately to the Halifax 

Water Board for endorsement. These included governance changes and the AM roadmap 

with a series of implementation programs. The AM roadmap includes 22 initiatives to be 

implemented over five years at an approximate cost of $3.3 M [excluding costs associated 

with the GIS Data Program Implementation]. Given the focus on the Integrated Resource 

Plan [IRP] – refer to section 6.1.4 for program details – the asset management roadmap 

implementation was deferred to the latter quarters of the 2012/13 fiscal year. As well, the 

IRP identified the need for a more robust asset renewal program. Significant effort is 

needed to further identify asset inventories, conduct condition assessments, and prioritize 

asset renewal needs. An additional $3.8M over the next 3 years is identified for the asset 

renewal prioritization needs. Going forward, the following priorities are envisioned: 

Implement AM Governance Model 

Review and update the existing organizational design to support effective AM practices. 

Implement concepts and necessary changes in organization [e.g., staffing analysis, 

succession planning, training, and service‐level agreements] to ensure that the right 

structure, number of staff, and appropriate skills/competencies are available to manage 

assets effectively through their lifecycle. Consider introducing corporate governance for 

asset management with decentralized support at the departmental level. 

11

HALIFAX WATER 



Building on the work started in 2012‐13, and in consideration of the findings from Halifax 

Water’s initial IRP, efforts will be made to expand the original plan for the AM Governance 

Model. Tasks related to reviewing current staffing levels, succession planning, training, etc. 

that are necessary to support a range of existing and recommended programs will be 

carried out beyond the AM mandate. Assessing the organizational impact of the proposed 

wet weather planning program [including the inflow & infiltration [I/I] pilot program], 

expanded data collection, flow monitoring, modeling, and asset management programs, 

and the increase in the overall capital program will be vital to successfully implementing 

the recommendations of the IRP. 

External costs – $100,000 

Projected start – 2012‐2013 Quarter 4 

Duration – 9 months 

Develop a Business Process Mapping and Procedure Master Plan 

Document current processes and procedures, identify future needs for 

processes/procedures, and develop a draft prioritized plan for implementation. Develop 

the workflow for creation and upkeep of processes and procedures, and develop 

standardized templates. Establish and maintain a library of policies/procedures and 

standards, and deploy and control all processes and standards over the internet. 

Resulting from the work done on the IRP, a number of areas requiring greater attention to 

business process mapping were identified. This project had a late 2012‐13 start and 

extends into the 2013‐14 fiscal year. Other projects related to business process mapping 

are identified below for the 2013‐14 fiscal year. 




Develop a Technology Master Plan and Integrated Technology Solution 

Develop a corporate‐wide technology master plan with input from each of the departments 

with technologies to support AM requirements/improvement initiatives. Develop an 

overall integrated technology solution [ITS] based on the master plan using an integrated 

architecture to prioritize and implement interfaces on an ongoing basis. 

This task will be undertaken after a review by the IT Steering Committee on the need for a 

full master plan or an internally prepared update to the previous plan with a focus on 

integration opportunities and implementation of key systems. Early discussions are 

leaning for the need to bring in expertise to assist in coordinating an update to the previous 

IT master plan. 

12




HALIFAX WATER 



Select and Implement Additional Core Technology Systems 

Develop functional and technical requirements; identify, select, and implement additional 

enabling core technologies to support AM requirements/improvement initiatives. First 

candidates for implementation include a computerized maintenance management system 

[CMMS], maintaining/upgrading modeling capabilities, an electronic document 

management system [EDMS], project management information system [PMIS], and a 

comprehensive asset register. Costs associated with this program are intended to cover 

detailed front‐end planning efforts related to developing the functional and technical 

requirements, processes that drive the need for a particular software solution, and 

completing benefits analysis for each solution. Separate funding is proposed to cover 

specific software and implementation costs based on system priority. 

External costs – $1,250,000 

Projected start – 2013‐2014 Quarter 1 


Expand & Complete Existing GIS Asset Mapping & Asset Attribute Information 

Expanding the existing GIS to have full coverage of all water, wastewater, and stormwater 

assets in terms of coverage, accuracy, and completeness of asset‐attribute information. 

This will enable enhanced data analysis and improved decision‐making, and vastly improve 

the documented system knowledge. This project is being managed and funded under the 

GIS Data Program Implementation. This is expected to be an ongoing initiative over the 

next several years. 

Review International Financial Reporting Standards Requirements 

As Halifax Water is a municipal government enterprise, it may be mandated by the 

Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants [CICA] to comply with the International 

Financial Reporting Standards [IFRS] with a phased implementation plan. As IFRS may 

require that Halifax Water assets meet the financial policies for asset aggregation rather 

than the current practice of asset pooling, there may be an additional requirement for 

continuity reporting to demonstrate the clear linkage between the asset registry and the 

financial statements. 


Projected start – 2013/14 Quarter 1 


13

HALIFAX WATER 



Enhance Project Delivery/Management Guidelines 

Review current practices for project delivery process, workflow and project management 

guidelines and recommend updates. The objective is for processes, workflows, etc., to 

enable effective coordination and delivery of projects within scope, budget, and schedule, 

and with minimum disruption to operations. This is to be accomplished in conjunction with 

the implementation of a project management information system [PMIS]. This project also 

involves identification of project life cycle control points for the management of time, cost, 

and scope, developing enhanced processes for progress reporting, and development of 

processes for post implementation/post construction reviews. 



Duration – 18 months 

Develop and Implement a Strategic Maintenance Management Program 

Develop a strategic approach to maintenance management that balances reactive and 

proactive work using best‐in‐class maintenance concepts and enabling technologies. This 

project ties well into the process mapping needed for the CMMS noted previously. 




Asset Condition Assessments and Capital Prioritization 

In recognition of the need for enhanced information and data about the water, wastewater, 

and stormwater systems, Halifax Water intends to undertake a series of condition 

assessments for certain asset classes. These condition assessments will identify areas 

requiring asset renewal or intervention, layout a proposed program, and prioritize the 

sequencing of asset renewal projects by asset class. 

External costs – $3,800,000 


Duration – 18 months 

Several of the AM roadmap priorities are multi‐year programs or projects. Emphasis for 

the technology related projects is on the business processes needed to implement them 

successfully. As mentioned previously, the IRP development required a delay in 

14

HALIFAX WATER 



implementing the AM roadmap. The remaining projects/initiatives identified in the AM 

roadmap will be programmed over the fiscal years from 2012‐2013 to 2016‐2017. 

The AM roadmap provides structure for the full implementation stage of the AM program 

and is essential for the program’s long‐term success. Together with the outcomes of the 

IRP, it will help guide Halifax Water in establishing an optimal level of reinvestment to 

ensure asset sustainability well into the future. 

6.1.2 Five‐Year Capital Budget – General Overview 

As part of the utility’s overall mission, the annual capital budget provides funds for the 

acquisition, replacement, or rehabilitation of capital assets. Capital assets include all 

equipment; facilities; and water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure that have an 

asset value that exceeds $5,000 and a useful life that exceeds one year. The capital budget 

funding and subsequent project delivery help ensure that services are provided in a costeffective 

and efficient manner with a focus on long‐term integrity of systems. 

As discussed in Section 6.1.1, the development of the annual and long‐term capital budget 

has its foundation with the Engineering & IS department’s core Asset Management 

program. This program organizes, evaluates, and prioritizes all infrastructures by 

individual asset class. The core asset‐class priorities are reviewed and coordinated with 

staff from Engineering & IS and operations departments to identify the highest‐priority 

projects. These projects are further reviewed with technical staff from the HRM 

Transportation and Public Works group to review integration opportunities with HRM’s 

proposed Streets Program. A detailed overview of the major projects within the proposed 

five‐year capital budget is provided in Section 6.1.3. 

In addition to the core infrastructure projects within the capital budget, employees from all 

departments define annual capital‐equipment requirements to meet their operational 

mandates. These include equipment classes such as fleet, large tools, computer equipment, 

and consumption meters. 

The capital budget is funded from a variety of sources. The core funding is from capitalasset 

depreciation accounts and long‐term debt. This core funding is enhanced with 

regional development charges, external grants, and operating surplus, when available. The 

base funding amount for capital projects from depreciation increases on an annual basis as 

the underlying capital‐asset value increases. 

The historical overall level of capital funding is well below requirements relative to current 

infrastructure deficiencies and projected long‐term sustainable requirements. The required 

increase in capital infrastructure investments is defined in detail within the Integrated 

Resource Plan [IRP] that was filed with the NSUARB in October 2012. An overview of this 

plan is provided in Section 6.1.4. The proposed five year capital budget shows a transition 

from historical spending levels towards the level recommended within the IRP. A 

15

HALIFAX WATER 



transitional period allows for the development of institutional capacity to deliver the 

increased volume of projects, increased funding, and enhanced Asset Management 

protocols to identify and prioritize specific projects. 

With the limited available funds for capital projects, the prioritization process focuses on 

projects with legal and legislative compliance issues and projects with the largest impact 

on maintaining defined levels of service with existing customers. 

The formal infrastructure projects within the capital budget are delivered by the Project 

Management Team within Engineering & IS. The group of project managers and their 

technical staff utilize a standard project management approach to consistently deliver the 

planning, design, construction, and commissioning phases of each project. 

The proposed five year capital budget for 2013/14 to 2017/18 integrates the capital 

requirements of the Airport/Aerotech water and wastewater system into the overall 

Halifax Water capital budget consistent with the proposed integration of the rate structure 

for the Airport/Aerotech customers into the Urban Core rate structure. 

The full five‐year capital budget for the Urban Core system is shown in Appendix E. The 

year‐one [2013/2014] budget has a total project value of $27,107,000 for water, 

$58,361,000 for wastewater, and $3,635,000 for stormwater, with a five‐year total project 

value of $159,170,000 for water, $264,323,000 for wastewater, and $33,373,000 for 

stormwater. The capital budget for the Airport/Aerotech system is identified separately 

and also shown in Appendix E with a total project value of $28,182,000. 

6.1.3 Major Projects 

Stormwater and Wastewater Projects: 

Project: Kearney Lake Trunk Sewer 

Asset Class: Wastewater – Collection System/Structure 

Description: The primary wastewater infrastructure required to facilitate development of 

the Bedford West Subdivision area, is a trunk sewer system from Kearney Run to Kearney 

Lake Road and then to Highway 102 in order to convey wastewater to the Halifax 

sewershed. The proposed project is the first critical component of oversized infrastructure 

required to service Bedford West. The project includes approximately 2500m of 

wastewater force mains, 1200m of wastewater gravity sewers, and two large pumping 

stations. The design phase commenced in 2012. The design will be completed in early 

2013 with construction to follow in 2013 and 2014. The estimated cost for the Kearney 

Lake Trunk Sewer System is $15.2 million [M]. The cost of this project will be allocated to 

the benefitting land owners through the Halifax Water facilitated Bedford West Capital Cost 

Contribution Charge which was recently approved by the NSUARB. 

16

HALIFAX WATER 



Project: Jamieson Street Trunk Sewer Outfall Replacement – Phase 2 Construction 

Asset Class: Wastewater – Trunk Sewers 

Description: The upgrade of this combined sewer overflow [CSO] was divided into two 

separate phases. Phase 1 included the replacement of 300 metres of corrugated steel pipe 

between Windmill Road and a CSO chamber at the bottom of Jamieson Street. This phase 

was completed in 2007. Phase 2 includes the replacement of the remaining existing 

corrugated steel pipe and the extension of the CSO outfall into Halifax Harbour. The total 

project length is approximately 70 metres and includes a 20‐metre section beneath the CN 

right‐of‐way, which will be cased, and a 50‐metre extension. It is anticipated that the pipe 

will be 1600 mm diameter, high‐density polyethylene. The extension of this outfall beyond 

the tidal zone is required to meet functional and regulatory requirements. It is noted that 

the permitting and regulatory approval process for Phase 2 was funded in the 2011/12 

capital budget and is substantially complete. The construction is proposed for 2015/16 at 

a total cost of $1.1 M. 

Project: Northwest Arm Sewer Rehabilitation 

Asset Class: Wastewater – Trunk Sewers 

Description: The 1200 mm diameter Northwest Arm trunk sewer is 4500 metres in length 

and was constructed in the early 1900s. It is generally located between the Northwest Arm 

and buildings along its eastern shore. This sewer conveys wastewater collected in the 

Armdale and Spryfield sewersheds to the new pumping station near the Atlantic School of 

Theology [AST] for further conveyance to the Halifax WWTF. A considerable length of this 

sewer was constructed of clay blocks that were mortared together. Replacement of this 

sewer using traditional open‐excavation methods is not practical due to its location in 

narrow easements along the back of residential properties. However, further investigation 

revealed that this sewer is an excellent candidate for internal structural lining. This 

practical technology utilizes access to the pipe via existing manholes and avoids the costly 

and difficult excavation of traditional methods. In 2006, a condition inspection was 

undertaken that identified the system needed to be renewed. In 2009, a pilot project was 

undertaken, and 450 metres were successfully lined at a cost of $1.3 M. 

The remainder of the Northwest Arm trunk sewer requires rehabilitation, and to utilize 

internal structural lining, this work needs to be undertaken before the pipe deteriorates to 

a point that is not conducive to this technology. Phase 2 of the rehabilitation is planned for 

2014/15 to 2016/17 at a cost of $4.4 M, with the balance to be completed after 2017/18 at 

an estimated cost of $11M. 

17

HALIFAX WATER 



Project: Wanda Lane Sanitary Sewer Replacement 

Asset Class: Wastewater – Collection System 

Description: This capital works project is an integrated project involving HRM, local 

residents, and Halifax Water. The proposed work scope includes street reconstruction, new 

sidewalk, bridge replacement on Tobin Drive, walkway bridge replacement, Ellenvale Run 

channel upgrades, new sanitary sewer, conversion of the old sanitary sewer to a clear 

water or deep storm sewer, and watermain renewal. Construction is expected to take place 

between 2014/15 and 2015/16 at an estimated cost of $2.2 M. 

Project: Bayers Lake Forcemain Upgrade and Twinning 

Asset Class: Wastewater – Forcemains 

Description: The wastewater generated in Bayers Lake and Ragged Lake Business Parks is 

conveyed to the Halifax wastewater system via the Bayers Lake pumping station and 

forcemain system. This system was constructed in the mid‐1980s with one 300 mm 

diameter ductile iron forcemain. The forcemain is 1.2 km in length. The ultimate build out 

of this pumping station was to include the addition of a second 350 mm diameter 

forcemain. The increased pumping capacity and forcemain construction would be 

coordinated to meet actual demand from these parks. 

On two occasions in 2011, Halifax Water had to undertake emergency repair of the 300 mm 

diameter forcemain. Inspection of the removed section of pipe revealed that the pipe wall 

thickness at the pipe overt had been reduced to approximately 55% of its original 

thickness. It is believed that this is a result of hydrogen sulphide gas and that the entire 

pipe system is in a similar condition, and thus, pipe breaks are expected to continue. 

This existing forcemain either requires rehabilitation or replacement. It is now also the 

appropriate time to install the second forcemain to provide increased system capacity and 

system redundancy. The design phase is currently in progress and construction is expected 

to take place in 2013/14 to 2014/15 at an estimated cost of $3.16 M. 

Project: Lakeside Pumping Station – Diversion to the Halifax Sewershed 

Asset Class: Wastewater – Structures 

Description: The Beechville‐Lakeside‐Timberlea [BLT] WWTF was commissioned in 

1982, with a capacity of one million gallons per day [1 MGD] and the original intent was to 

increase the facility’s capacity as required to provide service to the ultimate flow generated 

from the lands within the prescribed boundary. The wastewater flow is now approaching 

the 1 MGD capacity. The BLT WWTF Environmental Risk Assessment and the BLT Area 

Wastewater Servicing Options – Concept Development Studies were completed in 2011 

and 2012 respectively. Based on the results of these studies and the Regional Wastewater 

Functional Plan, Halifax Water has determined that the phased diversion of wastewater 

18

HALIFAX WATER 



from the BLT sewershed toward the Halifax system is the preferred approach for 

addressing the wastewater capacity issue in this sewershed. The design phase of the 

project has commenced and it is expected that construction will be undertaken in 2013 and 

2014 at an estimated cost of $12M. The project scope will include the following major 

components: upgrade of both the Lakeside and the Bayers Lake pumping stations; the 

construction of approximately 3 km of forcemain system; and the upgrade of 

approximately 1 km of gravity sewer main system. This work will be coordinated with the 

Bayers Lake Forcemain Upgrade and Twinning project, noted above. 

Project: Russell Lake PS Upgrade 


Description: This capital works project is being funded through the CCC program for the 

Russell Lake West area of Dartmouth. The existing pumping station building is at the end of 

its service life and needs to be replaced. Included in the work scope is the installation of a 

back‐up power system and associated mechanical and electrical equipment. Construction 

is expected to take place in 2014/15 and 2015/16 at an estimated cost of $2 M. 

Project: Bedford PS Rehabilitation 


Description: The Bedford Pumping Station is located at the Mill Cove Wastewater 

Treatment Facility site. The station is over 40 years old, and deterioration is particularly 

evident within the mechanical and electrical components. The majority of the parts in 

service date back to the original installation. The station requires a complete rehabilitation 

that would include the installation of three variable‐frequency drive pumps, back‐up 

power, system flow meters, an automated bar screen, and related work. Construction is 

expected to take place in 2015/16 and 2016/17 for a total estimated project cost of $3.5 M. 

Project: Eastern Passage WWTF Design Build Upgrade 

Asset Class: Wastewater – Treatment Facility 

Description: The existing facility is at the end of its service life and is out of compliance on 

a regular basis. This capital works project involves the replacement, expansion, and 

upgrade of the Eastern Passage Wastewater Treatment Facility to a secondary level of 

treatment consistent with new CCME regulations. Construction of this $61 M project 

commenced in November 2011 and is expected to be complete by December 2013. 

19

HALIFAX WATER 



Project: Mill Cove WWTF UV Upgrade 


Description: The UV disinfection system at Mill Cove, installed in 1996, is nearing the end 

of its useful life and is in need of replacement. The system is the last of its kind in North 

America, and it is expected that parts availability may become an issue in the coming years. 

Installation of a new system will help to ensure that the Mill Cove facility remains 

compliant on a consistent basis. Additionally, it is anticipated that significant energy 

savings will be realized with a new, more modern UV disinfection system. Construction is 

expected to take place in 2016/17 at an estimated cost of $1.075 M. 

Project: Belmont WWTF Decommissioning 


Description: The existing small wastewater treatment facility is at the end of its service 

life. This proposed capital works project involves the replacement of an existing facility 

with a new pumping station and forcemain. The new pumping station will transfer the 

flows to the newly expanded and upgraded Eastern Passage Wastewater Treatment 

Facility, once completed. Construction is expected to begin in 2016/17 and the total 

estimated project cost is estimated to be $1.9 M. 

Project: Aerotech WWTF Upgrade – Design/Construction 


Description: The Aerotech WWTF treats wastewater from the Halifax Stanfield 

International Airport [HSIA], Aerotech Business Park, and from private septage haulers. 

The WWTF also dewaters sludge generated by wastewater treatment facilities operated by 


Sludge and septage comprise two significant side streams being treated by the WWTF, and 

the quality and quantity of each are quite variable. The presence of these side streams, and 

on‐going development within HSIA and Aerotech Park have continued to increase the loads 

to the WWTF. 

The Aerotech WWTF is experiencing difficulties in meeting the stipulated effluent 

discharge objectives and is near its design capacity. Further growth is projected within 

HSIA and Aerotech Park, and in order to accommodate the anticipated increase in 

wastewater, the WWTF will need upgrades to improve performance and increase capacity. 

Halifax Water engaged a consultant in 2011 to undertake an Environmental Risk 

Assessment [ERA] for the WWTF in accordance with the Canadian Council of Ministers of 

the Environment [CCME] Municipal Wastewater Effluent Strategy. The ERA will identify 

20

HALIFAX WATER 



environmental quality objectives and performance targets that the WWTF will need to 

meet. The study will be completed by the end of 2012. 

As of October 2012, the procurement process is underway to engage a consultant to 

commence preliminary design activities for the Aerotech WWTF Upgrade. Completion of 

the preliminary design activities will provide the necessary background to advance to the 

detailed design and construction phases. Currently the project cost for 2013 to 2016 is 

estimated to be $19.75 M and construction is expected to occur in 2014/15 and 2015/16. 

Project: Corporate GIS Data Plan 

Asset Class: Water/Wastewater/Stormwater – Information Technology 

Description: A recent strategic goal of the organization is to complete the data update in 

the Geographic Information System [GIS] over the next five years. This current year of this 

plan involves 3 projects, [1] Burnside, [2] Lakeside/Timberlea and [3] Sewer Service 

Lateral application. The first two projects will complete the water and sewer GIS data 

updating for these areas and is expected to be completed in the 3 rd quarter of 2013. The 3 rd 

project includes an application/database to house the approximately 80,000 sewer lateral 

records including the data entry of these records. This project is scheduled for completion 

by the 2 nd quarter of 2014. Future data update projects will be prioritized in subsequent 

years. 

Water Capital Projects: 

Pockwock Transmission Main 

The Pockwock Transmission Main was commissioned in 1977 as part of the new water 

system to supply the City of Halifax, Town of Bedford, and western area of Halifax County. 

The transmission main was constructed using concrete pressure pipe and varied in size 

from 1,800 mm to 1,200 mm in diameter. The transmission main travels overland from the 

J.D. Kline Water Supply Plant to the intersection of Hammonds Plains Road and Kearney 

Lake Road, where it then follows Kearney Lake Road and Dunbrack Street to the Main 

control chamber in Fairview. The transmission main is a critical part of the water system 

serving the greater Halifax area. 

Halifax Water has experienced issues with regard to the quality of the concrete pressure 

pipe installed as part of this project. Over the years, there have been several catastrophic 

breaks that have caused significant damage to the surrounding area and a requirement to 

engage back‐up supplies from Chain Lake and Dartmouth. 

Various projects have been completed to mitigate the risk of further breaks. In 2001, the 

transmission main was twinned from the northwest end of Kearney Lake to Highway 102. 

In 2010, Phase I of the Dunbrack Transmission Main Sliplining Project was completed, 

21

HALIFAX WATER 



which included sliplining a 1.5 km section of the transmission main with steel pipe 

between Highway 102 and Ross Street. In 2012, a second phase [1.6 km] of the Sliplining 

Project was completed on Dunbrack Street from Ross St to Lacewood Drive. 

Several more projects have been planned to rehabilitate the transmission main in the near 

future as follows: 

Project: Transmission Main Replacement – Kearney Lake Road; Kearney Lake to 

Hammonds Plains Road 

Asset Class: Water – Transmission Main 

Description: This project involves replacing the transmission main along the Kearney 

Lake Road adjacent to the future Bedford West area. This work needs to be completed prior 

to the start of development to reduce the risk of damage to the concrete pressure pipe as a 

result of blasting activities associated with site development. This work will be carried out 

in two phases: 

Kearney Lake to Bluewater Road – 1730 metres, $11,700,000 

Bluewater Road to Hammonds Plains Road – 1630 metres, $8,000,000 

The first phase, from Kearney Lake to Bluewater Road, is scheduled to be carried out in 

2013/14 in conjunction with the Bedford West development timeframe. 

The second phase is a longer‐term priority and is contingent on the build‐out rate of the 

Bedford West development. 

Project: Lucasville Transmission Main 


Description: Halifax Water is working to construct a new 600 mm diameter transmission 

main from the Pockwock Transmission Main to the Sackville‐Beaverbank area to help 

address emergency back‐up water supply capacity/redundancy. This new main would be 

roughly parallel to the Lucasville Road. It is anticipated that this transmission main will 

generally be installed through cost sharing/over sizing of mains in new development areas. 

The total overall cost estimate for this project is $5.9 M. Construction is expected to begin 

in 2014 and extend over approximately 8 years as development opportunities progress. 

The majority of the Lucasville Transmission Main Project is anticipated to be constructed 

within the timeframe of the five year business plan [2013/14 to 2017/18] and includes 

$1.05M in net costs for cost‐sharing with developers in this area. 

22

HALIFAX WATER 



Project: Bedford Supply Transmission Main Replacement Phase III 


Description: The project involves the replacement/rehabilitation of the existing 750mm 

transmission main along the Hammonds Plains Road and the Highway 102 corridor to the 

Meadowbrook Reservoir Control chamber. This is the primary supply main to the Bedford 

and Sackville areas. The existing concrete pressure pipe is under very high pressure and 

has had a number of leaks and failures in recent years. The consequences of failure in this 

area are very high. Portions of this transmission main have already been replaced as part 

of the recent Hammonds Plains Road widening improvements. The section of transmission 

to be replaced in Phase III is approximately 1000 meters long. The main to be replaced is 

located along Hammonds Plains Road near the signalized Hwy 102 off‐ramp intersection 

and along the east side of Hwy 102 to the reservoir site. 

Timing for this project is anticipated to correspond with NSTIR intersection improvements 

within the next five years. The estimated cost of the project is approximately $2.5 M. 

In anticipation of this, the design work is slated to begin in the 2014/2015 budget year. 

Project: J.D. Kline Water Supply Plant 

Asset Class: Water – Treatment Facilities 

Description: The J.D. Kline Water Supply Plant was commissioned in 1977 to service the 

City of Halifax, Town of Bedford, and parts of Halifax County. Due to the age of the facility, 

process equipment is nearing the end of its useful life. As well, certain treatment 

technologies from 30 years ago no longer meet current standards. 

Chlorination System Replacement 

The existing gas chlorination system is original to the facility. It has reached the end of its 

useful life and needs to be replaced to ensure effective and safe operation. In March 2012, 

Halifax Water hired CBCL Ltd. to evaluate three different replacement chlorination options 

for the facility: gas chlorine, bulk delivered sodium hypochlorite and on‐site generation of 

sodium hypochlorite. As a result of this evaluation, CBCL recommended that Halifax Water 

select gas chlorination as the preferred disinfection option based on capital cost, chemical 

cost, energy cost and familiarity with the technology. The next phase of the project will be 

to initiate the detailed design for a new gas chlorination system at the facility. 

It is estimated that design and construction of a new chlorination system will cost 

$925,000. Construction is anticipated to be undertaken in 2013/14. 

23

HALIFAX WATER 



Flocculation Upgrades 

Flocculation at this plant is achieved using hydraulic mixing, where the flow gently 

meanders through a series of baffled basins. Through investigations, as a part of Halifax 

Water’s research program, it was discovered that the existing flocculation basins are not 

adequately mixing the water. A consultant’s report recommended that mechanical mixers 

be installed in each of the 24 mixing tanks to improve the process. This project is expected 

to take place from 2014/15 to 2015/16 at an estimated cost of $2.55 M. 

Aluminum Reduction in the Process Wastewater 

The process wastewater at the J.D. Kline Water Supply Plant has high levels of aluminum 

due to the nature of the chemical used for coagulation. Process wastewater from the facility 

is directed to a series of lagoons behind the facility. The majority of the solids settle out 

while the liquid portion is discharged and flows overland to Hamilton Pond and ultimately 

into Little Pockwock Lake. Monitoring at the outlet of Hamilton Pond shows that aluminum 

levels exceed recommended guidelines and Nova Scotia Environment has requested a plan 

to deal with the elevated levels of aluminum. 

Prior to submitting a plan to Nova Scotia Environment, a concept‐level study was 

undertaken, and it was determined that either an engineered wetland or mechanicalseparation 

technology would be suitable to reduce aluminum levels. A pre‐design study is 

now under way investigating these options. Based on the results of the pre‐design study, 

the best option will be selected for design and construction. It is estimated that a solution 

will cost $2.7 M. and the project will be undertaken in 2015/16. 

6.1.4 Integrated Resource Plan 

In response to the NSUARB Decision of December 2010, Halifax Water undertook a project 

to develop an Integrated Resource Plan [IRP]. The IRP involved developing a 

comprehensive long‐term planning framework and conducting scenario analysis to identify 

and prioritize future capital and operational programs needed to deliver water, 

wastewater, and stormwater services. The long‐term capital‐investment requirements also 

considered environmental, societal, and financial risks and constraints, and examined both 

supply‐side and demand‐side management options and challenges. The IRP was completed 

and submitted to the NSUARB on October 31, 2012. The resulting IRP provides a long‐term 

plan outlining the revenue requirements to support the capital investments needed and 

informs Halifax Water on future rate applications. 

The IRP focused on providing the following elements: 

 

Capital and additional O&M costs to meet the program and project requirements of 

the Recommended IRP for the 30‐year planning period from 2013 to 2043 

24

HALIFAX WATER 



 

 

 

Development of an overall planning framework integrating the IRP into Halifax 

Water’s business processes 

Identification of institutional constraints required to implement the Recommended 

IRP 

Recommendations for additions and refinements of Halifax Water’s Levels of Service 

[LOS] to facilitate the measurement of program success. 

The IRP was a unique project for Halifax Water. It was the first long‐term, comprehensive 

planning project undertaken by Halifax Water as a combined water, wastewater and 

stormwater utility. The IRP involved collaboration with the NSUARB through their 

external consulting team led by the Tellus Institute and it involved consultation with 

interested stakeholders. The Tellus team was involved directly in the process in terms of 

providing feedback and occasionally guidance in the preparation of the IRP. Five formal 

points of consultation with stakeholders were built into the project plan. As well, Halifax 

Water’s contracted IRP consulting team led by Genivar took the initiative to meet with 

stakeholders one on one to identify their issues and concerns. 

Stakeholder consultation points [technical conferences] beyond the one‐on‐one meetings 

included: 

Terms of Reference March 2011 

Assumptions & Plan Considerations October 2011 

Resource Plans & Sensitivities December 2011 

Resource Plan Analysis March 2012 

Presentation of Draft IRP June 2012 

The IRP was developed to incorporate three strategic drivers: Regulatory Compliance, 

Asset Renewal, and Growth. A series of objectives related to each of these drivers was used 

to identify a range of capital investment needs for the water, wastewater, and stormwater 

infrastructure over the next 30 years. Projects and programs were reviewed to allocate the 

proportion of the benefits to each of the objectives/drivers. 

The Regulatory Compliance driver covered projects/programs needed to address both 

current compliance issues [i.e. facilities for which Halifax Water is not compliant with 

current permits to operate or legislation] and to future compliance issues [i.e. 

requirements resulting from imminent or emerging legislation]. 

The Asset Renewal driver covered projects/programs aimed at a sustainable approach to 

asset renewal and replacement. Asset Renewal requirements recognized the historical 

underfunding in some asset classes and evaluated the risk of continuing at the same level of 

reinvestment in the future. 

The Growth driver covered projects/programs aimed at providing regional level 

infrastructure to support growth and in managing flow allocations to optimize system 

capacity. 

25

HALIFAX WATER 



The total 30‐year net present value [NPV] for the recommended plan inclusive of capital 

and O&M costs is $2,579 million. As indicated in Figure 6.1, asset renewal expenditures 

represent approximately 54% of the overall IRP; growth and regulatory compliance 

expenditures represent approximately 23% each. Of this $2,579 million, the breakdown by 

asset class is: $1,855 million for wastewater; $615 million for water; and $108 million for 

stormwater. 

Figure 6.1 – IRP Costs by Driver – Total 30‐Year NPV = $2,579 Million 

The recommended IRP informed Halifax Water regarding a number of short‐term 

implementation projects [3 year – 2013/14 to 2015/16] and the long‐term investment 

plan [30 years to 2042/43]. Coming out of the IRP, early programs and projects from the 

short‐term plan were incorporated into Halifax Water’s five‐year business, operating, and 

capital plans. For the purposes of practical implementation of the IRP recommendations 

and to align with the previous five‐year plan, Halifax Water has ramped up Year 1 

[2013/14] and Year 2 [2014/15] projected expenditures to phase in to the IRP Year 3 

[2015/16] program. This acknowledges that a significant amount of effort continues to be 

needed to operationalize the recommendations of the IRP including the need to assess the 

utilities’ ability to deliver the plan in its entirety on the schedule recommended. As a result, 

Halifax Water intends to undertake an institutional capacity assessment to review the full 

26

HALIFAX WATER 



suite of Halifax Water programs [both existing and proposed], the resources available, the 

organizational structure, project delivery methods, and necessary tools and systems to 

ensure the successful implementation of the recommended IRP. 

This initial IRP provides the framework for future IRPs. Integrated resource planning is a 

dynamic process. Like other master‐planning initiatives, the IRP needs to be updated at 

regular intervals. Ideally, IRP planning will be tied very closely to other master‐planning 

initiatives such as HRM’s Regional Plan [RP] update, as illustrated in Figure 6.2. This initial 

IRP is expected to be updated in three to five years. Thereafter, the updates are expected to 

be undertaken on a five‐year cycle such that they are coincident with HRM’s regional 

planning process and updates. 

Figure 6.2 – Strategic Master Planning Framework 

Revenue Planning 

Five-Year Business 

Plan 

Integrated 

Resource Plan 

HRM 

Regional 

Plan 

Master Plans, Programs 

and Annual Asset 

Renewal 

Provincial 

Regulations 

and Policies 

Halifax Water will need to use an adaptive management approach to respond to changing 

regulations, realization of projected growth estimates, and new information about asset 

condition and performance. Therefore, the recommended IRP should be considered the 

first step in an on‐going and evolving process of continuous improvement and strategic 

long‐term planning. 

The IRP and the ongoing AM roadmap implementation are important projects for 

establishing Halifax Water’s optimal level of asset reinvestment over the long term. These 

initiatives will assist in creating a sustainable asset‐renewal program to ensure Halifax 

Water’s assets are maintained within the principle of intergenerational equity, being 

mindful of financial constraints. 

27

HALIFAX WATER 



6.2 Five‐Year Operating Budgets 

Budgets have been developed to cover the period from 2013/14 to 2017/18, as shown in 

Appendix F. The operating budgets reveal that rate increases will be required to maintain 

current levels of service, deliver projects already in progress or approved, meet changing 

environmental requirements, and generate more capital funding from operating budgets to 

meet infrastructure investment demands. 

Some of the primary operating budget drivers and assumptions are: 

REVENUES 

 

Consumption will continue to decrease at 1.5% per year following past trends, as 

illustrated in Figure 6.3. This phenomenon is consistent with the experience of 

other North American water utilities. 

Figure 6.3 – Metered Consumption 

Metered Consumption History ‐ m3 

46,000,000 

44,000,000 

42,000,000 

40,000,000 

38,000,000 

36,000,000 

34,000,000 

32,000,000 

2001/2002 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 

Budget 43,099,99 43,099,99 43,099,99 43,099,99 41,498,28 41,083,30 40,672,47 40,265,74 39,863,09 38,978,95 39,177,49 

Actual 43,244,100 43,231,98 42,635,188 42,013,52 41,220,04 40,176,851 40,414,055 38,695,646 38,824,219 37,782,016 36,980,486 

Budget Actual Linear (Actual) 

Average decrease ‐1.5% 

Median ‐1.7% 

Total Decrease since 2001/02 14% 

 

938 or roughly 1% new customer connections are projected each year. 

28

HALIFAX WATER 



 

Revenues from unregulated business activities are increasingly important to 

mitigate future revenue requirements from rates. These are described in more 

detail in Section 6.4. Unregulated revenues will be used to fund unregulated 

expenses and generate additional unregulated revenues for the benefit of the rate 

base. 

EXPENSES 

Halifax Water’s Five Year Operating Budget is shown on an accrual basis for 2013/14 

forward, to provide better information for decision making and be reflective of best 

practice for budgeting. There are accrued amounts regarding debt servicing, and liability 

for future employee benefits [pension] as calculated under CICA Handbook Section 3461 

that for rate making purposes, will not be included in the revenue requirements. 

The utility faces pressure associated with growth, asset renewal, and compliance with 

regulatory requirements, as described in the Integrated Resource Plan. 

The largest components of Halifax Water’s consolidated operating budgets are salaries & 

benefits, electricity, debt servicing, depreciation, and chemical costs. 

Salaries and Benefits ‐ Reasonable provisions for salary increase have been provided for in 

the Five Year Plan, based on collective agreements for CUPE Locals 227 and 1431, and 

market information for non‐union compensation. The annual salary increase allowance is 

2%, with an additional allowance made to address the impact of step increases within 

salary bands or reclassification of positions; and increases in benefits. 

Electricity – Budgets were established based on an assumption of electricity, fuel, oil and 

natural gas rate increases in each specific year. The impact of these increases is expected 

to be partially offset by the formal Energy Management Program initiated in 2011/12 [see 

Section 7]. The projected increases are shown in table 10.2: 

Electricity – 8.3% in year 1, and 10% in years 2, 3, 4, and 5 

Furnace Oil – 10% in years 1 and 2, and with CPI in years 3, 4 and 5 

Natural Gas – 5.3% in year 1, 3.5% in year 2, and with CPI in years 3, 4 and 5 

Debt Financing – New debt payments are budgeted to support the five‐year capital projects 

and include significant projects such as the Eastern Passage Wastewater Treatment 

Facility, a new Operations and Administration building expansion at Cowie Hill, and the 

Aerotech WWTF upgrade. Over the course of the next five years, debt payments are 

projected to increase significantly. The amount and timing of the increases will be 

determined by timing of the completion of the projects and the financing rates and options 

available. It is estimated total debt servicing may double by 2017/18, increasing to $45.7 

M by 2017/18 [see Table 6.2]. The level of debt will ultimately depend upon the funding 

29

HALIFAX WATER 



strategy recommended through the Debt Study as the most efficient and effective funding 

mechanism for capital. The debt servicing projections referenced above are based upon 

the status quo. 

Depreciation ‐ As Halifax Water’s assets and future capital budgets increase so do 

depreciation expenses. Depreciation is an integral funding source to support rehabilitation 

of the existing infrastructure as well as new infrastructure and upgrades to meet future 

capital requirements necessitated by both servicing demands and changing environmental 

regulation. Over the course of the next five years, the depreciation expense is projected to 

increase from $14.3 M in 2012/13 to $26.6 M by 2017/18. 

Chemical Costs – Chemicals are tendered annually in January for optimal pricing. Chemical 

cost increases of 5% are anticipated for 2013/14. Long range chemical prices are difficult 

to predict due to the volatility of the market which is closely linked with energy prices and 

fluctuations in supply and demand. 

Energy and Electricity cost assumptions are described in Table 10.2 within the Energy 

Management section of the Business Plan. 

On a consolidated basis, the projected five‐year operating budgets are shown in Table 6.1. 

Over the next five years, operating expenses are projected to increase from $85 M in 

2012/13 to $115.3 M, in 2017/18, or 35.6%, while operating revenues are projected to 

have a slight decrease due to declining consumption. Non‐operating revenues are 

projected to increase by 1.4%, however, non‐operating expenses may more than double 

due to increased debt‐servicing costs, unless the financing strategy ultimately 

recommended results in lower reliance on debt. For example, implementation of a 

Regional Development Charge would result in capital projects driven by growth being 

funded to a larger extent through development charges. This would result in reduced debt 

financing. 

Table 6.1 – Pro Forma Income Summary 

Actual Projection 

Budget 

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 

Operating Revenue $ 98,828,000 $ 105,375,000 $ 106,870,000 $ 105,566,000 $ 105,343,000 $ 105,122,000 $ 104,900,000 

Operating Expenses $ 77,244,000 $ 85,008,000 $ 96,328,000 $ 100,377,000 $ 108,194,000 $ 112,026,000 $ 115,365,000 

Operating Profit (Loss) $ 21,584,000 $ 20,367,000 $ 10,542,000 $ 5,189,000 $ (2,851,000) $ (6,904,000) $ (10,465,000) 

Non Operating Revenue $ 2,596,000 $ 2,968,000 $ 2,957,000 $ 3,002,000 $ 3,007,000 $ 3,009,000 $ 3,010,000 

Non Operating Expenditures $ 25,173,000 $ 26,917,000 $ 27,095,000 $ 33,310,000 $ 36,566,000 $ 43,930,000 $ 51,679,000 

Net Surplus (Deficit) $ (993,000) $ (3,582,000) $ (13,596,000) $ (25,119,000) $ (36,410,000) $ (47,825,000) $ (59,134,000) 

Percentage Increase in Revenue to cover Deficit 12.7% 

Incremental Percentage increase in Operating Revenue 11.1% 10.8% 21.7% 21.8% 

Note: These are consolidated numbers including both Urban Core & Satellite Systems, and 

Airport /Aerotech Systems; regulated and un‐regulated activities. The revenue increases 

30

HALIFAX WATER 



required do not represent revenue requirements for future rate applications for regulated 

activities. 

Significant rate increases will be required to maintain or enhance the existing level of 

service and comply with stricter environmental regulations. Based on figures presented in 

Table 6.1, significant revenue increases are required over the next five years. Halifax Water 

will not be able to deliver the requirements for growth, asset renewal and compliance 

identified in the Integrated Resource Plan without significant revenue increases. 

As of March 31, 2012 Halifax Water had an accumulated operating surplus of $3.2 million. 

There is a projected $3.5M loss for 2012/13 as at October 31, 2012. These facts, combined 

with the forecasted future losses may create a cumulative operating deficit by 2013/14 

unless rates are increased. Projections for 2012/13 are based on expected normal weather 

patterns. Should the 2013 winter weather be similar to the weather in 2012, the operating 

deficit could be less. 

It is important to note that as new and more current information becomes available, fiveyear 

projections will change. The five year plan is sensitive to changes in interest rates, 

availability of infrastructure funding, and any changes in development charges. 

6.3 Debt Strategy 

On December 17, 2010, the NSUARB rendered a decision on an application by Halifax 

Water. The application included a capital‐debt policy that the NSUARB was not prepared to 

approve stating it did not accept that the 30/70 debt‐to‐ equity ratio included in the debt 

policy was necessarily the most efficient. The NSUARB directed Halifax Water to undertake 

a complete study examining an efficient capital structure, the policies of other utilities, its 

longer‐term capital needs, and opinions that would result in an efficient funding 

mechanism that is fair to present and future ratepayers. 

Halifax Water recognizes the importance of a debt strategy. Debt impacts the operating 

budget and, therefore, the future rate requirements in several ways: 

1. Increased debt payments need to be accommodated through rates. 

2. Increased depreciation as the capital program grows needs to be accommodated 

through rates. 

3. Operating costs of new capital needs to be accommodated through rates. 

4. Capital requirements not funded by debt will increase the requirement of capital 

from operating funding through rates. 

31

HALIFAX WATER 



The terms of reference for the debt study were approved by the NSUARB; they included 

best‐practice research and comparison to public sector and private sector utilities, and 

were to focus on determining the most efficient capital structure for Halifax Water. 

Halifax Water is a unique entity from several perspectives as it is: 

 

 

 

 

A body corporate utility created under a separate provincial act with all its shares 

deemed to be owned by HRM. 

The first and only regulated water, wastewater, and stormwater utility in Canada 

A government business enterprise from an accounting perspective 

The largest water resources utility in Nova Scotia and the second largest utility in 

Nova Scotia 

In recognition of its municipal and provincial relationships, the Municipal Finance 

Corporation [MFC], Halifax Regional Municipality, and Service Nova Scotia Municipal 

Relations are important stakeholders in finalizing the debt study and related debt strategy. 

The existing Capital Borrowing Guidelines for Municipal Units in Nova Scotia state that “a 

municipality’s existing and projected debt service costs [excluding those related to selfsupporting 

utilities] should not exceed 30% of property tax and other own‐source 

revenues.” As self‐supporting utilities are excluded from these guidelines, there has been 

no guidance for utilities such as Halifax Water to follow. In August 2011, Service Nova 

Scotia Municipal Relations confirmed that a debt‐service ratio of 30% would generally be 

an appropriate measure for a self‐supporting utility such as Halifax Water. 

In December 2011 the MFC increased the unguaranteed debt cap for Halifax Water from 

$35 M to $70 M to reflect the fact that the asset base and revenues of the organization have 

roughly doubled with the addition of wastewater and stormwater services. 

On March 11, 2011 the NSUARB approved the Terms of Reference for the Debt Study and 

Halifax Water engaged the services of Mark Gilbert, Ph.D., to carry out the work. 

The study focuses on the four areas identified in the Board Order and concludes with a 

recommendation for an efficient funding mechanism that is fair to present and future 

ratepayers. The context for the recommendation is one that applies to a local government 

enterprise providing water, wastewater, and storm water services in Nova Scotia. 

The review of best practice covers eight information sources ranging from professional 

association manuals, practices, and publications to rating agency methodologies and 

reports. The information relevant to capital structure and debt limits for water / 

wastewater utilities and local governments is summarized. 

32

HALIFAX WATER 



The best practice review suggests “a municipally owned water, wastewater and 

stormwater utility providing service in its home municipality should select a capital 

structure and debt limits that reflect a focus on enhancing rate affordability and stability. 

These enhancements are subject to the factors and constraints, which include senior 

government legislation and regulation that influence and restrict the municipality’s debt 

policy. The two most appropriate financial criteria used in determining and evaluating 

capital structure and debt limits for a municipality and its enterprises are ones that 

measure debt service charges to annual operating revenues and total outstanding debt to 

either annual revenues or the property tax base. It is also useful to use an indicator that 

relates debt to the community’s ability to pay and the link between debt and taxable 

property is a suitable indicator.” 2 

Using the final Integrated Resource Plan as approved by the HRWC Board on September 28, 

2012, several combinations of financing alternatives were examined using a robust 

financial model developed by the MFC, and modified by Halifax Water staff to be more 

reflective of the utility’s requirements. 

The financing alternatives were evaluated using three general principles: 

1. Rate stability and affordability 

2. Halifax Water long term financial sustainability 

3. Intergenerational equity 

The debt strategy report concludes that some appropriate ratios for Halifax Water to utilize 

are: 

1. Target Debt Service Ratio of 35% 

2. Target Debt/Equity Ratio of 40%/60% 

In essence, the two targets will serve as a framework for Halifax Water’s strategy when 

considering future use of debt. 

Additionally, the report addresses the issue of affordability and refers to a study conducted 

by the National Consumer Center for the AWWA Research Foundation. The study, while 

primarily focused on affordability of water charges, also addresses the affordability of 

wastewater charges. In the report, affordability of user charges is stated to be 2% of 

average user, median income households each for water and wastewater; i.e. 4% for both 

utility services [Saunders et al. 1998]. The manual also refers to a range of 2.3% to 3% of 

median household income for combined water – wastewater bills used by the Ohio Public 

Works Commission in 1999. As standards have become more stringent since the Saunders 

study was undertaken, the 4% could now be viewed as the lower end of the affordability 

range. 

2 Study of an efficient funding mechanism for Halifax Regional Water Commission Mark Gilbert, Phd October 2012 

33

HALIFAX WATER 



It is important to note that Halifax Water’s debt strategy must be acceptable to the Halifax 

Regional Municipality recognizing that the financial performance and outstanding debt of 

Halifax Water is incorporated in HRM’s financial statements and credit rating although it 

does not have any actual impact on HRM’s cost of borrowing. 

Submission of the Debt Strategy to the NSUARB does not result in any immediate changes 

to Halifax Water’s budget or rates. The Debt Strategy will however be a document that 

supports future budgets, business plans, and rate applications. 

The actual financial strategies that staff will recommend to finance future infrastructure 

requirements will be consistent with the recommendations from the Debt Strategy, but will 

be reviewed and updated on an annual basis to reflect changes in key assumptions such as: 

1. Interest Rates 

2. Availability of Federal/Provincial Infrastructure Funding 

3. Approval and implementation of a Regional Development Charge 

4. Financial Constraints posed by rates and affordability issues 

There are natural constraints in place that restrict the use of debt, such as the ability to 

absorb operating costs of new capital, annual operating budget pressures caused by 

increased debt servicing and depreciation, and rate shock sensitivity around increasing 

rates. The impact of Halifax Water debt on HRM debt limits and policies as well as the 

current MFC requirement that HRM guarantee most of Halifax Water’s debt is also a 

consideration in the development of an efficient capital structure. 

As noted in Table 6.2, long‐term debt is projected to increase from $182 M at March 31, 

2013, to $433 M by March 31, 2018. It is estimated total debt servicing will increase from 

$21.9 M in 2012/13 to $45.7 M by 2017/18. The Debt‐Service Ratio is projected to be 21% 

as at March 31, 2013. 

Table 6.2 – Projected Debt Levels Under Existing Rates 

Halifax Water Debt Projection 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 

Total Debt Servicing $ 21,993,256 $ 22,712,819 $ 28,456,892 $ 31,658,103 $ 38,545,569 $ 45,741,158 

Total Debt Outstanding $ 182,557,458 $ 232,033,551 $ 258,126,008 $ 321,560,410 $ 388,811,836 $ 432,982,935 

Debt Service Ratio 21% 21% 27% 30% 37% 44% 

Projected Operating Revenue * $ 105,375,000 $106,870,000 $105,566,000 $105,343,000 $105,122,000 $104,900,000 

* does not include rate increases 

Debt Service Ratio = [Total Debt Servicing/Total Operating Revenues] 

34

HALIFAX WATER 



6.4 Alternative Revenue Streams 

Halifax Water has had success generating alternative revenues aside from user fees on both 

the regulated and unregulated side of the business. On the regulated side, Halifax Water 

has entered into agreements for the sale of land deemed to be no longer used or useful for 

utility purposes. These include tracts of land around Geizer Hill in Halifax [outside of the 

Chain Lake watershed boundary], land near the Larry Uteck Interchange in the Bedford 

West area, and lands in the Montague area of Dartmouth outside the Lake Major watershed 

boundary. With the approval of the NSUARB, revenue from these land sales has been used 

as a source of funds for capital projects related to the delivery of water services in 

recognition that the land was originally purchased with water‐rate base funds. As much of 

the surplus land has been sold, this will not be a significant source of funds in the future 

with current reserves at $2.0 million. A purchase and sale agreement is also in place for 

the sale of a parcel at Geizer Hill just outside the Chain Lake watershed for a price of $2.7 

million. The sale is subject to the approval of a development agreement and as such has 

not been included as a funding source for capital projects at this time. 

Notwithstanding limitations for generating revenue from the regulated side of the business, 

there has and will continue to be opportunities from the unregulated side of the business. 

Currently, Halifax Water generates revenue from third‐party contracts for water and 

wastewater treatment. For 2012/13, these include projected fees of $785,200 for contract 

revenue for the treatment of leachate at Mill Cove and operation of the leachate treatment 

facility at the Highway 101 landfill, and $400,000 in sludge tipping revenue at the Aerotech 

facility. On the Water Services side, there is a contract with the Mirror Group to operate a 

water treatment plant at the Otter Lake landfill which will generate $16,015 in 2012/13. 

Other contracts are currently in place for operation of small wastewater systems in HRM 

recreational centres and the Twin Oaks nursing home in Musquodoboit Harbour. Annual 

revenues from these activities is estimated at $42,625. 

Halifax Water also generates revenue for the lease of land for telecommunications facilities 

throughout HRM in recognition that reservoir sites are located on higher elevations that 

afford more direct line of site for telemetry. In conjunction with these leases, Halifax Water 

installs telecommunications equipment on these facilities for its own needs for the ultimate 

benefit of the water, wastewater, and stormwater rate base. As Halifax Water continues to 

expand the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition [SCADA] system in accordance with 

its master plan, further opportunities for leases and hosting of Halifax Water equipment 

will be realized. Current annual revenues from leases and rental of property are 

approximately $150,000. 

In recognition of Halifax Water’s expertise in water‐loss control, the utility offers a wide 

range of related services to generate revenue. These range from leak‐detection services for 

Halifax Water customers and other municipalities to consulting services under contract to 

engineering firms and municipalities. There is great potential to expand these services to 

35

HALIFAX WATER 



generate additional revenue and, at the same time, provide professional development 

opportunities for staff. Revenues for these services range from approximately $25,000 to 

$50,000 per year. 

Halifax Water also recognizes that its assets can be leveraged to bring in revenue from 

energy generation. This includes projects to generate electricity from wind turbines and 

control chambers where water pressure is reduced. Both of these initiatives are being 

explored for interface with the Nova Scotia Department of Energy’s Community Feed‐In 

Tariff [COMFIT] program, which provides preferential rates to feed electricity into Nova 

Scotia Power Incorporated’s [NSPI] distribution grid. Halifax Water has received COMFIT 

certificates for two wind turbine projects but the related projects are on hold pending 

further review from the Nova Scotia Dept. of Energy. Through efforts of Halifax Water staff, 

a Ministerial Directive was issued through the Dept. of Energy in 2012 to approve the 

recovery of renewable energy within water distribution systems at “run‐of‐the –river” 

rates. To that end, Halifax Water has recently received two COMFIT certificates for the 

installation of hydrokinetic turbines in the Orchard and Lucasville control chambers. The 

projected net revenues are in the current business plan. These projects are expected to 

have a positive overall financial impact as unregulated activity. These projects have been 

structured to ensure they are compliant with the Public Utilities Act with the recognition 

that regulated activities cannot subsidize the unregulated side of the business. 

In partnership with HRM, Halifax Water has also studied the potential for a green thermal 

utility whereby energy can be extracted from the heat in sewage and delivered through a 

local pipe distribution system in the vicinity of treatment facilities. The impending study 

for the redevelopment of the Cogswell interchange in Halifax will provide an opportunity to 

advance this concept since the Halifax WWTF is adjacent to the Cogswell interchange. No 

allowances have been made in the current business plan to realize revenues as the projects 

are currently in the concept stages. 

In an effort to be open and transparent to stakeholders including the NSUARB, Halifax 

Water inserted a schedule in its 2011/12 financial statements to disclose revenue and 

expenses associated with unregulated business. It is the intention of Halifax Water that the 

net gains from these activities would ultimately go to the benefit of the rate base. In 

2011/12, Halifax Water realized net revenues from unregulated activities of $1.2 million 

which were all allocated to the rate base thus impacting rates in a positive way. The five 

year budget for unregulated activities is shown in Appendix F, page 6 of 6. 

7. ENERGY MANAGEMENT 

7.1 Energy Management Program 

Through its Energy Management Program, Halifax Water is committed to creating and 

ensuring an ongoing focus on sustainability and energy efficiency throughout all operating 

36

HALIFAX WATER 



areas. This program defines the goals, objectives, accountabilities, and structure for 

activities related to sustainability and responsible energy use. 

In support of this new program, Halifax Water’s Energy Management Policy defines longerterm 

goals and commits Halifax Water to the principles of responsible energy management 

including reducing dependence on fossil fuels through energy conservation and best 

practices; identifying and implementing cost‐effective energy‐reduction initiatives 

throughout our operations; developing alternative and renewable forms of energy from 

utility assets; and reducing pollution by increasing the usage of energy supplied from 

sources that are less greenhouse gas intensive. 

Program Structure 

The Energy Management Program consists of the Manager, Energy Efficiency reporting to 

the Energy Management Steering Committee [EMSC]. The EMSC comprises the Directors of 

Engineering & IS, Water Operations and Wastewater/Stormwater Operations, and the 

Manager, Energy Efficiency. The chair of the EMSC is the Director of Engineering & IS. 

Reporting to the EMSC on a monthly basis, the Manager, Energy Efficiency is responsible 

for the creation and implementation of the corporate Energy Management Action Plan 

[EMAP] and any other activities defined by the EMSC. Reporting typically consists of 

progress reports on the energy‐related activities of Halifax Water including details of 

energy consumption, key performance indicators, and progress on energy projects and 

other related activities. 

It is believed that this program will be self‐sustaining financially using ongoing savings 

gained through energy reduction and generation projects to fund operating expenses and 

program initiatives. 

Energy Management Action Plan 

The EMAP includes details of energy‐management activities that will be developed and 

undertaken by Halifax Water each year. Key activities contained in the action plan include: 

• Delegation of the responsibility for achieving energy goals; 

• Assignment of team members as required to meet goals; 

• Development of an employee‐awareness strategy to facilitate energy savings at 

work and home; 

• Establishment of an energy accounting system that allows for collection, monitoring, 

and reporting of all data on energy‐consuming assets, energy consumption, energy 

costs, energy savings, and key performance indicators; 

• Preparation of energy audits on all facilities on a priority basis; 

37

HALIFAX WATER 



• Implementation of identified energy projects based on sound financial principles; 

• Benchmarking of Halifax Water’s facilities and establishment of annual energyreduction 

targets; 

• Identification of funding requirements for the EMAP; 

• Refinement of contract and purchasing policies to incorporate energy‐efficient 

practices; and 

• Development of renewable energy generation projects. 

One of the main tools used in any energy‐management program is the energy audit. This 

can range from a quick, low‐level scoping audit to a complex, detailed investment‐level 

audit. To date, mid‐level audits are being completed for the three Harbour Solutions 

WWTFs: Mill Cove WWTF, J.D. Kline WSP, and Lake Major WSP, and Bennery Lake WSP. 

These audits will endeavor to identify potential energy‐reduction projects, will provide 

enough detail to allow a base‐level indication of feasibility and project complexity, and will 

allow the identification and prioritization of projects with the most potential for success 

and savings to be included in capital budgets over the next five to ten years. 

From these mid‐level audits, a significant number of energy‐reduction opportunities have 

been identified thus far. These opportunities have the potential to generate significant 

energy and financial savings in the future. A preliminary list of opportunities identified to 

date along with an estimate of their implementation status, potential savings, cost benefits, 

and environmental benefits has been compiled. 

7.2 Renewable‐Energy Generation 

Halifax Water has also identified renewable energy as an important way of offsetting 

energy costs and increasing revenue that will move the utility closer towards net‐zero 

energy consumption and significantly contribute to greenhouse gas reductions in the 

region. 

To date, two key project areas have been identified: renewable energy and energy recovery 

from both water and wastewater systems. 

7.2.1 Wind Energy 

Halifax Water’s land assets, namely the Pockwock and Lake Major Watershed areas, have 

potential wind profiles to be used as a renewable energy source. Halifax Water seeks to 

leverage its available assets to reduce operating expenses and provide greater value to its 

stakeholders and customers. As such, Halifax Water is exploring wind‐energy development 

opportunities in both of these areas. 

38

HALIFAX WATER 



The Pockwock watershed comprises 5,661 hectares of land surrounding Pockwock Lake 

and has a significant wind regime. The project identified for this area consists of up to five, 

2.3 MW wind turbines sited on lands located around the J.D. Kline WSP and outside of the 

watershed lands. The Lake Major watershed comprises 6,944 hectares of land surrounding 

Lake Major and Long Lake. The project identified for this area consists of two initiatives: 

one comprising five, 2.3 MW wind turbines and sited west of Lake Major on watershed 

lands and another comprising one 2.3 MW wind turbine and sited east of Long Lake on 

watershed lands. These wind‐energy projects have the potential to generate an estimated 

50 GWh/year of electrical energy, an amount equivalent to approximately 84% of all of 

Halifax Water’s current electrical energy consumption. In financial terms, under the newly 

implemented COMFIT program, these wind‐energy projects have the potential to generate 

an estimated $6.6M in annual electrical energy revenue resulting in an estimated net 

present value of $36.0M over the +20‐year life of the projects. 

To date, applications for all three projects have been submitted to the Nova Scotia 

Department of Energy for approval under their COMFIT program. For the two Lake Major 

projects, both of these projects have received COMFIT approval from the NS Department of 

Energy [DOE]. To date, research has been completed to allow Halifax Water to better 

understand the impact on the existing woods road, which runs through the Lake Major 

watershed, of any roadway or wind turbine site construction. Early stage community 

consultation has started with meetings being held with the Lake Major Watershed Advisory 

Board and a Distribution System Impact Study [DSIS] has also been completed by Nova 

Scotia Power. Next steps in the Lake Major project implementation process will include the 

evaluation of the potential impact to the watershed and water quality and deciding 

whether to proceed or not. If the project should proceed, next steps would then include 

project partnership identification, continued Aboriginal and local community engagement, 

site‐based wind resource data collection, and various environmental impact assessment 

activities. 

For the Pockwock project, the COMFIT application has been submitted to DOE. Due to a 

competitive COMFIT application on the same distribution zone as the Pockwock project, 

Halifax Water is in discussions with the competitive party to determine how a common 

application and wind development project can be structured for mutual benefit to both 

parties. COMFIT approval for the Pockwock project is expected once partnership details 

have been finalized and submitted to DOE. Other progress has been made, including the onsite 

erection of a meteorological [MET]tower to begin wind resource data collection, and 

the completion of various site based studies, including avian studies, bat studies, flora and 

fauna studies, area surveys, and special places/archeological studies, all in anticipation of 

receiving COMFIT approval. Once approval has been received, next steps in the projectimplementation 

process will include the completion of a DSIS by NSPI, Aboriginal and local 

community engagement, continued site‐based wind‐resource data collection, and an 

environmental impact assessment. Ideally, project construction and commissioning will be 

completed in the 2014/15 timeframe. 

39

HALIFAX WATER 



7.2.2 Hydrokinetic Turbines 

An opportunity has been identified to use inline turbines to recover energy from the water 

supply system in place of pressure‐reducing valves [PRVs], widely used by water utilities to 

reduce higher incoming pressure from a water line to a lower pressure more suitable for 

downstream distribution and customer use. While PRVs release energy to reduce pressure, 

they do not perform any useful work with that energy. Inline hydrokinetic turbines can be 

used to both reduce line pressure and recover energy and convert it to electrical energy 

that can then be used elsewhere. 

Halifax Water has investigated two potential projects for the installation of inline 

hydrokinetic turbines – one at the Orchard Control Chamber in Bedford, and one at the 

Lucasville PRV Chamber in Middle Sackville. These projects have the potential to generate 

an estimated 325 MWh of electrical energy on an annual basis. In financial terms, under the 

newly implemented COMFIT program, these projects could generate an estimated $45,000 

in annual electrical energy revenue over the +20 year life of the projects. Halifax Water has 

requested and received approval from DOE to allow these types of projects to be 

considered equivalent to run‐of‐river hydro under the provincial COMFIT program. 

Subsequently, Halifax Water submitted COMFIT applications for these projects and has 

received COMFIT certificates for both. 

Both projects are considered research and development projects for this relatively new and 

innovative application of an existing technology. As such, the Orchard project has received 

funding approval from the Water Research Foundation’s [WRF] Tailored Collaboration 

Program, a program which enables WRF utility subscribers to partner with the WRF on 

research, and funding from Nova Scotia Department of Environment. The Lucasville 

project involves the development and application of a smaller, “plug & play” style system, 

utilizing technology that is being developed in partnership with Rentricity Inc., a New York 

based developer of small hydrokinetic turbine systems, and Xylem, a global leader in the 

development of water and wastewater pumps and pump control systems. 

7.3 Energy Recovery 

Energy recovery from process or waste streams is recognized as one of the biggest 

opportunities available to society today. Recoverable energy is everywhere – in solid 

municipal/residential waste streams, industrial by‐products, and water and wastewater 

streams. Halifax Water has significant recoverable energy resources available in both its 

water and wastewater streams. Specifically, as noted in the previous section, inline 

hydrokinetic turbines can be used in place of pressure reducing valves [PRVs] to recover 

energy from water distribution systems. In the wastewater system, energy can be 

recovered from the waste sludge produced by wastewater treatment facilities, heat 

exchangers and highly efficient industrial heat pumps can be used to transfer energy from 

40

HALIFAX WATER 



one system to another, energy that can be supplied for heating or removed for cooling, and 

bio‐gas can be produced to fuel a combined heat and power [CHP] system to generate 

electrical energy and heat from the combustion process that can then be used for treatment 

process or building heat. 

7.3.1 Energy from Biomass/Biosolids 

In April 2010, the Government of Nova Scotia released its Renewable Electricity Plan to 

support and encourage increased development of renewable energy resources for 

electricity generation. The plan sets out a detailed path for the province to gradually move 

away from traditional energy sources to energy sources that are more local, clean, secure 

and sustainable. 

In accordance with corporate policy, Halifax Water is focused on energy conservation, 

efficiency improvement, and renewable energy generation strategies to meet its long term 

energy, environmental and financial goals. Energy from biosolids is one type of renewable 

and sustainable energy that is readily available from Halifax Water’s wastewater treatment 

facilities, as well as other municipalities. 

Halifax Water currently supplies over 35,000 tonnes per year of partially de‐watered 

sewage sludge to its Aerotech Bio‐Solids Processing Facility [BPF]. Currently, this sludge is 

turned into a soil amendment that can be used as fertilizer for topsoil manufacturing, sod 

growing, horticulture, and land reclamation. An opportunity exists to use both biomass and 

biosolids as an energy source to produce both electricity and heat by modifying the existing 

BPF located in Aerotech Park near the Halifax Stanfield International Airport. 

A recent peer review, commissioned by Halifax Water and presented to Halifax Regional 

Council in November 2011, suggested that Halifax Water review other options for biosolids 

management. The use of both biomass and biosolids as a renewable energy source is 

another affordable, clean, alternative process that can help Halifax Water manage its 

biosolids program in a sustainable manner. This approach also aligns with the “Canada‐ 

Wide Approach for the Management of Wastewater Biosolids” approved by CCME in 

October, 2012 

Halifax Water has submitted an application for the development, installation, 

commissioning and operation of a biomass and biosolids [N‐Viro Fuel®] fired 2.8 MW 

Cogeneration facility, the purpose of which will be to generate and supply electrical energy 

under the Community Feed‐In Tariff [COMFIT] program and heat to the adjacent BPF. 

The heat generated by the N‐Viro Fuel® would be used to dry the biosolids processed at 

the existing BPF and other organic waste [i.e. biomass]. The electrical energy generated 

would be sold to the electrical grid under the COMFIT program. This renewable energy 

would eventually offset the electricity and natural gas currently used at the BPF. It is 

expected the project would eliminate the use of over 725,000 cubic metres/year of natural 

41

HALIFAX WATER 



gas, worth $200,000annually, produce over 20 million kWh/year of electrical energy, and 

offset approximately $3,500,000 of electrical energy costs per year. 

7.3.2 Wastewater Effluent Heat Recovery 

The volume of wastewater effluent flowing out of wastewater treatment facilities is 

immense. The capacity of water to store energy in the form of heat is also immense. This 

combination presents a real and readily available resource for an efficient, cost‐effective 

heat sync that can be used, at a minimum, to provide or remove energy to and from 

wastewater treatment facilities, or to the local community at large. 

The potential exists to dramatically reduce the amount of energy purchased and used for 

heating in at least three of the largest wastewater treatment facilities belonging to Halifax 

Water. The power available and cost savings potential is summarized in Table 7.1. 

Table 7.1 – Wastewater Effluent Heat‐Recovery Potential 

Facility 

Annual 

Flow 

[m 3 /yr] 

Available 

Power 

Capacity (1) 

[MW] 

Required 

Heat 

Energy (3) 

[MW] 

% of 

Available 

Capacity 

Annual 

Heating 

Costs (3) 

[$] 

Halifax WWTF 38,565,000 61.5 0.6 1.0% $85,000 

Dartmouth WWTF 21,095,000 33.6 0.4 1.4% $65,000 

Herring Cove 

WWTF 

4,500,000 7.2 0.3 5.2% $140,000 

Totals 64,160,000 102.3 1.4 9.2% $305,000 

1) Total available power based on an average effluent temperature of 12°C. 

2) Mill Cove uses recovered bio‐gas as its primary energy source. 

3) Based on 2011/12 usage and cost data. 

Halifax Water has initiated studies at the three Harbour Solutions plants to determine and 

understand the technical and financial challenges associated with these types of energyrecovery 

systems, and then implement the projects that make sense from an energy 

efficiency and financial perspective. The current HRM study to assess the development 

potential for the Cogswell Street Interchange area will also provide a real opportunity to 

assess the potential for a green thermal utility in partnership with HRM. 

42

7.3.3 Bio‐Gas CHP Energy Utilization 

HALIFAX WATER 



Halifax Water’s Mill Cove WWTF is classed as a secondary treatment plant that utilizes a 

mesophilic anaerobic bio‐digestion process to reduce sludge volumes and generate bio‐gas 

in the form of methane that is then burned to provide process heat to support the digestion 

process and space heating for facility buildings. On average, this process generates over 

650 m 3 /day of methane gas. Currently, and on an annual basis, roughly 55% of this gas is 

used for process and building heat and 45% is sent to a flare stack to be burned. 

The opportunity exists to optimize and maximize gas production levels at the Mill Cove 

plant and install a Combined Heat and Power [CHP] system to utilize this renewable energy 

to produce both electricity and heat. It is envisioned this system will burn 100% of the biogas 

produced to generate electricity and capture heat from the exhaust gases to provide the 

required process and building heat throughout the year. It is possible that enough electrical 

and heat energy can be generated on‐site to provide 100% of the electrical and heat 

demand of the Mill Cove facility. 

Halifax Water will seek to determine and understand the technical and financial challenges 

associated with these types of systems and determine project feasibility from an energyefficiency 

and financial perspective. 

8. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT 

8.1 Organizational Cultural‐Change Process 

Mergers and acquisitions have always created opportunities and challenges for 

organizations, and Halifax Water is no different in that respect. With the water, 

wastewater, and stormwater merger of 2007, Halifax Water brought staff together with 

different values, work practices, and demographics. It is the utility’s obligation to nurture 

and foster a renewed culture of accountability, innovation, teamwork, and collective 

purpose. Many activities have commenced or have been completed to reinforce this 

objective including preparation of a revised mission, vision, and corporate balanced 

scorecard [see Appendix A]; consolidation of policies; negotiation of new collective 

agreements; implementation of a formal continuous‐improvement program; and 

consolidation of administration and operational facilities. 

With regard to its unionized workforce, Halifax Water previously operated under two 

collective agreements for its outside workforce: one to cover water services and one to 

cover wastewater/stormwater services. In 2012, the utility successfully completed 

collective bargaining with CUPE Local 227 to integrate its outside workers into one 

collective agreement which will go a long way to put all outside workers on a level playing 

field and entrench management’s right to direct the work force. As for the inside 

workforce, Halifax Water also negotiated a new collective agreement with CUPE Local 1431 

43

HALIFAX WATER 



to ensure a consistent approach to labour/management relations. With the completion of 

collective bargaining, a more stable labour/management relationship has emerged to 

support a new workforce culture. The current union contracts expire on October 31, 2013 

and bargaining is expected to commence in the fall of 2013. 

It should be recognized that Halifax Water, like other employers, operates with staff from 

four distinct demographic groups: Veterans; Baby Boomers; Generation X; and Generation 

Y. In recognition that these groups bring varied values to the organization, different 

approaches are necessary to motivate staff to pursue corporate objectives. It is also 

recognized that employment of visible minorities and immigrants brings diversity to the 

organization reflecting the communities served by the utility, and efforts have been made 

to attract these individuals to consider a career with Halifax Water. 

As mentioned above, Halifax Water has initiated a formal continuous‐improvement 

program coming from participation in the AWWA/WEF QualServe Program. 3 A steering 

committee has been formed to discuss improvements and make recommendations to 

Halifax Water management. A common thread in the initiatives is fostering 

interdepartmental relationships that if harnessed can lead to breakthrough results. 

Historically, this approach has had success with the water‐loss control program as a 

shining example. It is anticipated that the organization can also rally around 

environmental‐compliance objectives, asset renewal, energy management, and control of 

wet weather flows as strategic initiatives that will necessitate teamwork, adoption of best 

practices and innovation. Linked to success will be enhanced communication within 

Halifax Water and with external stakeholders and customers. 

In addition to achieving operational efficiency and effectiveness, synergy is reinforced 

when staff are physically in contact with one another. Halifax Water has a facilitiesconsolidation 

plan that will see the expansion of the administration building at Cowie Hill 

in 2013 to house the Finance and Customer Service, Engineering & IS, and Environmental 

Services departments. The facilities plan also includes the construction of combined water 

and wastewater operations depots with a new building at Cowie Hill to serve the west 

region, an expansion of the Woodside facility to serve the east region, and construction of a 

new building in Sackville to serve the central region. The operations depot at Cowie Hill 

has recently been completed, and it is anticipated that the other facilities will be 

constructed near the end of the five‐year timeframe. Construction of the Operations depot 

in the Central region is tied to the timing of a new highway to connect Bedford with the 

Burnside Industrial Park. Halifax Water has reached an agreement with NS Transportation 

and Infrastructure Renewal to sell utility property housing wastewater/stormwater 

operations at Mann St. in Bedford to facilitate the highway expansion. 

3 The QualServe Program is sponsored by the American Water Works Association and the Water Environment 

Federation, and is designed to help water, wastewater, and stormwater utilities improve performance. 

44

HALIFAX WATER 



Recognizing that measurement of performance can drive improvement, Halifax Water 

continues to track performance through a Corporate Balanced Scorecard recently updated 

to include measures across all services. In an effort to take this to the next step, Halifax 

Water is proposing to join the National Water and Wastewater Benchmarking Initiative 

[NWWBI] facilitated through AECOM. The NWWBI began in 1997 and now includes over 

45 Canadian utilities who take a very structured approach to metric and process 

benchmarking. The NWWBI approach has garnered international recognition as a best 

practice and Halifax Water believes it will foster a stronger continuous improvement 

culture within the utility. The 2013/14 and 2014/15 operations budgets contain an 

annual expense of $65,000 to participate in the national program. This action also 

conforms to one of the NSUARB’s direction in its recent decision on the Urban Core rate 

application. 

8.2 Succession Planning 

Succession planning continues to be important for Halifax Water given the number of 

impending and potential retirements, and our desire to attract and retain leaders. A formal 

succession‐planning process began in 2009 to ensure continuity of leadership and identify 

qualified successors for key positions within the workplace. 

The initial steps included a review of Halifax Water’s senior management positions that 

included the general manager, director, superintendent, and manager positions. The 

process is ongoing and includes the identification of core leadership attributes, highpotential 

employees, and gaps in our existing pool of talent. To make this successful, it is 

important to align corporate needs with the development goals of the individual, and that 

they receive the training and experience necessary to take on more responsibility in the 

organization. 

The planning has recently extended beyond the key senior positions to include first‐level 

supervisors as well as positions requiring specialized knowledge. To that effect, a 

supervisor competency training program is currently being developed with expected 

delivery during the 2013/14 fiscal period. This multi‐session training program is aimed at 

developing key supervisory competencies needed to lead and manage a work team more 

effectively and efficiently. The leadership abilities developed through this program, in 

addition to mentoring, experiential and formal learning initiatives, will ensure Halifax 

Water has a pool of high‐potential successors for the more senior roles in the organization. 

Where necessary, there is a planned overlap of the new hire with the retiring employee. 

This can lead to a smoother transition and often offers a positive experience for the 

organization, the retiring employee, and the new hire. The format can vary to allow a 

tailored approach to meet the specific challenges and immediate needs. 

45

8.3 Water Quality Master Plan 

HALIFAX WATER 



April 1, 2012, marked the end of the fifth and final year of the initial term of the Halifax 

Water/Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada [NSERC] Industrial 

Research Chair and Water Quality Master Plan [WQMP] research program. Recognizing 

this as a critical point in the research program, Halifax Water staff recently evaluated the 

overall progress and outcomes of the program and developed a second version of the 

WQMP [WQMP V2] that included updated water‐quality goals and redefined strategic 

objectives to guide the utility throughout the next phase of research. The detailed WQMP 

V2 is contained in Appendix G. Several key objectives focusing on improved water quality 

in the distribution system are already well underway. The monitoring of natural organic 

matter removal within the treatment plants paired with a distribution system disinfection 

by‐product monitoring program will enable Halifax Water to make critical decisions on 

where to focus disinfection byproduct [DBP] mitigation efforts to attain the utility’s 

internal goals for THMs and HAAs. Additionally, the lead service line replacement and 

residential sampling programs are in their second year and continue to grow each year. 

These programs have enabled Halifax Water to take a proactive stance on managing health 

risks of lead in drinking water and promoting public awareness of this public health issue. 

The WQMP has been a key tool in establishing water‐quality goals and setting a baseline for 

monitoring progress toward these goals. There has been much success in completing a 

number of the tasks to achieve goals, and Halifax Water has already adopted some process 

operational changes and is currently investing in some capital upgrades as a direct result of 

research findings. In the same manner, as expected, a number of WQMP research tasks 

have been identified, through either internal or external research, as being no longer 

necessary or suitable for implementation at Halifax Water facilities. Although the overall 

water‐quality goals identified in the WQMP remain on the priority list for Halifax Water, 

there are other water‐quality objectives that the utility has identified as being significant to 

improving or strengthening water‐quality management and performance within the utility. 

These objectives and accompanying research tasks are included in the revised research 

plan to keep Halifax Water at the forefront in its delivery of high‐quality water. 

Substantial efforts will be placed on shifting the focus of Halifax Water’s strategic planning 

partially away from long‐term water‐quality goals and more towards what can be done to 

support treatment plant operations and improve water quality from a day‐to‐day 

perspective. To date, the research program has focused on optimized treatment processes 

for the J.D. Kline water supply plant. Although several tasks will remain focused on 

improvements for this facility, several research requirements have been identified in other 

treatment facilities to address operational challenges and treatment issues. Research 

efforts will also be focused on adapting a more proactive approach to monitoring and 

optimizing both treatment operations and treated water quality, and on efforts towards 

monitoring and understanding distribution water quality and performance. Finally, 

substantial efforts will be made to implement sustainable processes and optimize energy 

demands during the implementation of all research findings. 

46

HALIFAX WATER 



The construction of the pilot water treatment plant in 2007, as the primary infrastructure 

and experimental resource of the research program, has also been fundamental to the 

success of the research program to date. Since much of the research tasks focus on process 

improvements, the use of a pilot plant has provided great benefit for coagulation, mixing, 

and filtration studies. Research results have already identified the short‐comings of using 

bench‐scale results as a primary research tool for process optimization studies. In the 

spring of 2012, the pilot plant was upgraded to allow investigations into the use of 

engineered biological filtration as a means to improve natural organic matter removal and 

the subsequent mitigation of disinfection by‐products. This technology is currently at the 

forefront of water research in North America and Halifax Water’s participation in this 

research program shows the utility’s commitment to research in innovative water 

treatment technologies. 

Halifax Water has also recently evaluated the benefits and overall success of the research 

agreement with Dr. Graham Gagnon of Dalhousie University to execute the research tasks 

in the WQMP. The overall progress and research findings are evidence that the research 

program with Dalhousie University is achieving its intended goals, not the least of which is 

providing improved water quality and reduced treatment costs for Halifax Water 

customers. In addition to significant research contributions, Halifax Water has identified 

several other invaluable benefits that accompany this research partnership including: 

significant training and educational impacts for both students and Halifax Water staff; 

several opportunities to participate in high‐profile international research collaborations; 

access to a network of international leaders in drinking water research; recognition of 

Halifax Water and Dalhousie University as a centre for excellence in drinking water quality 

and research; and, finally, access to a skilled research team to carry out projects that arise 

in response to imminent needs outside our initial research path. To that end, Halifax Water 

has committed to renewing the research contract with Dalhousie University for a five‐year 

period at a contribution of $139,000 per year. In 2012, Dr. Gagnon’s proposal for a renewal 

of the Halifax Water/ NSERC Industrial Research Chair was approved The extension of the 

research program for another five years will coincide with the duration of the Research 

Chair and ensure that the matching funds from NSERC are fully utilized. 

8.4 Environmental Management System – ISO 14001 Expansion 

ISO 14001 is an international standard for an environmental management system [EMS]. 

The benefit of implementing an EMS is that it drives a process of continual improvement 

towards meeting defined environmental goals and objectives. Regulatory compliance 

becomes one of the defined primary goals, and standard processes are put in place to 

identify non‐compliance issues and direct improvements through documented standard 

operating procedures. 

Water Services have an EMS program in place and have registered the Pockwock Lake, 

Lake Major, and Bennery Lake facilities to ISO 14001. Halifax Water is proposing to expand 

47

HALIFAX WATER 



the EMS program to initially include wastewater services and eventually to include all 

aspects of corporate operations such as fleet and building management, purchasing, 

contract services, and Occupational Health & Safety. 

As a first step in implementing ISO 14001 for wastewater, Halifax Water will adopt a 

sewershed approach and will begin with one selected wastewater facility and associated 

sewershed. During the 2012/13 fiscal year, an appropriate software package for EMS 

management will be selected and purchased. Such software allows tracking of all EMSrelated 

documents, and all required actions and follow‐ups including assignment of due 

dates and responsibilities. Also during 12/13, Halifax Water engaged the services of 

Duerden & Keane Environmental Ltd. to assist with the design and creation of the internal 

components of the Wastewater EMS program, drawing on the experience gained from the 

Water Services program. The consultant will assist in completing the initial EMS stages 

such as defining the scope, identifying the environmental aspects of the operation, 

determining the goals and specific objectives, and providing guidance on writing the 

standard operating procedures required to achieve the defined objectives. They will also 

provide advice on the appropriate software package to assist in managing all aspects of the 

EMS program and related occupational health and safety activities. 

An additional internal staff position will be required to implement and manage the 

corporate ISO program with an EMS Coordinator proposed for the 2014/15 fiscal year. 

Over time, additional wastewater treatment facilities and associated sewershed 

components such as pumping stations, holding tanks, and collection system sewers will be 

incorporated until all wastewater facilities are included and registered. 

8.5 Wet Weather Flow Management 

Background 

Wet weather flows are the most serious regulatory and operational problem in Halifax 

Water’s wastewater system. These flows cause a multitude of problems for Halifax Water, 

customers and the general public, during and after rainfall events: 

 

 

Wastewater overflows into freshwater and marine water bodies. There are 

approximately 100 wet weather overflow locations related to the wastewater and 

combined sewer collection system, mostly at CSOs and pumping stations but some at 

manholes. 

Impacts on wastewater treatment facilities. High wet weather flows cause washout of 

the treatment process at some facilities, resulting in under‐treatment of the 

wastewater. Also, at some treatment facilities, portions of the high flows are required to 

bypass some or all of the treatment processes. Both of these conditions result in 

increased risk to public health, greater impacts on the receiving environment, and 

48

HALIFAX WATER 



regulatory violations. Further, at some facilities, the impact and the type of treatment 

process is such that it can take weeks for the bacteria and the process to re‐establish 

itself, so that the facility is able to return to its normal operational status. 

 

 

Surcharging of the wastewater collection system, resulting in wastewater back‐ups into 

buildings, especially basements. These back‐ups are a burden for property owners in 

various ways: risk to their health; cleanup costs; inconvenience; possible increased 

insurance rates; and possible inability to get insurance coverage. 

Usurping of valuable system capacity which was intended to be used for growth and 

development. 

Increased operational costs. One significant cost is related to power for the 180 

pumping stations and 15 wastewater treatment facilities for which Halifax Water is 

responsible. Another is staff costs, including overtime, related to responding to various 

aspects of wet weather events, including wastewater overflows, treatment facility 

impacts, system upgrades to accommodate wet weather flows, customer compliance, 

customer complaints, insurance claims, and others. 

It should be noted that the extent and severity of the problems listed above are typically 

greater for the more severe rainfall events, and less so for minor events. 

To provide some context to the magnitude of the wet weather flow problem, during typical 

storm events, peak flows can increase in the order of five to ten times the normal flow, and 

more. Also, Halifax Water staff have analyzed flow patterns within the sewersheds with 

separate sewers [as compared to combined sewers, which were designed to accept 

stormwater], and determined that on average, approximately 35% of the total flow in the 

wastewater system is stormwater. The actual number may be greater than this, in that the 

analysis does not account for all the volumes of overflow, some of which are not currently 

being measured. Capital budgets have and will continue to contain funds for flow 

monitoring to ensure better system understanding. 

The sources of high wet weather flow in a wastewater system are derived from infiltration 

and inflow [I&I], which is the entry of stormwater, including groundwater, into the 

wastewater system. There are two fundamental approaches to managing wet weather 

flows to reduce or eliminate the negative impacts described above. One is to eliminate I&I 

at the source before it enters the wastewater system. The second is to manage the wet 

weather flow in the system by constructing larger infrastructure and by developing and 

utilizing operational improvements. 

There are advantages and disadvantages to each approach. Reducing I&I at source is a very 

difficult and time‐consuming process. It can be a short term solution in small sewersheds, 

but in most sewersheds, it is a long term solution. However, this approach tends to be more 

sustainable in that the life‐cycle costs may be lower, and the wastewater system does not 

49

HALIFAX WATER 



have to handle the high wet weather flows through the various components of the system – 

pipes, pumping stations, storage facilities and wastewater treatment facilities. 

The second approach can be implemented more quickly and with more certainty of 

success, but the costs – capital and operating – tend to be greater. Larger infrastructure is 

required to transport, store and treat the large wet weather flows, and because the flows 

are not reduced, the operating costs are also greater. 

Current Programs 

Halifax Water currently considers both approaches noted above when addressing wet 

weather flow problems in individual sewersheds. One or the other approach, or both, may 

be utilized. Knowing how much I&I is entering the wastewater system, and the source of 

this I&I, is critical to success in all elements of a wet weather flow management program. 

Halifax Water uses a number of tools to assist in this front‐end part of the program: flow 

measuring [both temporary and permanent]; smoke testing; closed‐circuit television 

inspection; dye testing; and visual inspection. Also, a network of rain gauges is being 

installed to capture better rainfall information to correlate rainfall intensity and duration 

with wastewater overflow events. 

There are two basic categories of I&I, each requiring a different solution‐set. One is I&I 

directly into the wastewater collection system through defects in the pipes, manholes and 

other system components. This category of I&I tends to be a problem in older systems 

which have not been maintained as it has aged. This category of I&I is the direct 

responsibility of Halifax Water to resolve. Sometimes the approach is to repair identified 

sources of I&I on an operational basis, by sealing manholes, repairing pipes and joints, and 

possibly replacing shorter sections of pipe. However, at some point, older systems have 

deteriorated to the point that operational repairs are no longer feasible or cost‐effective. In 

this case, the system must be replaced as a capital project. 

The second category is I&I directed into the system by private property owners. The 

discharge of stormwater and groundwater into the wastewater system is prohibited by the 

HRM Charter and is regulated by the Rules and Regulations of Halifax Water. Halifax Water 

has developed a program, called the Stormwater Inflow Reduction [SIR] Program, to locate 

such discharges, and to administer and enforce the legislation and regulations with respect 

to such discharges. Pursuant to the Rules and Regulations, the cost to rectify such 

discharges is the full responsibility of the customer. 

The program started at Halifax Water in 2009, with the initial focus being residential 

sewersheds. In 2012, the SIR Program shifted primary focus from residential properties to 

industrial, commercial and institutional [ICI] properties. The ICI properties are often large 

and have significant areas of hard surfaces [e.g. rooftops, driveways and parking lots] 

generating high stormwater runoff. One ICI property can sometimes generate stormwater 

50

HALIFAX WATER 



I&I into the wastewater system equal to hundreds of residential properties. 

The long term success of the SIR program may depend on the ability to get customers to 

dispose of stormwater correctly without the intervention of Halifax Water. Educating 

property owners, contractors, real estate agents, home inspectors and other stakeholders 

in the proper methods of handling stormwater and wastewater is critical. Efforts to educate 

and inform customers regarding the correct way to dispose of stormwater will continue, in 

partnership with HRM, the Insurance Bureau of Canada, and local NGOs. 

Within HRM, the areas which tend to have high contributions of I&I from private properties 

are those areas which have no deep storm sewer. The most sustainable manner of draining 

private properties is by gravity, which for homes with basements requires a deep storm 

sewer. The development standards in some areas of HRM in the 1960s, 70s and early 80s 

did not require a deep storm sewer, and it is those areas where high rates of I&I are 

common. With this in mind, Halifax Water developed a policy in 2009 to install such storm 

sewers on an equal cost share basis with HRM and the local property owners. The policy 

was approved by the Halifax Water Board and forwarded to HRM for their review. HRM has 

not approved the policy to date, but appear to be on a path to respond to the cost‐share 

policy in the near future. Any cost sharing from Halifax Water for deep storm sewers is 

also subject to the approval of the NSUARB. 

Halifax Water’s annual Capital Budget typically contains projects which either directly or 

indirectly provide for improved wet weather flow management. For example, any facility 

expansion or upgrade will be designed and constructed so as to reduce wet weather 

overflows and reduce impacts on wastewater treatment facilities. Further, replacement of 

wastewater sewers due to age will have the effect of reducing I&I into the system. 

The wet weather flow problems suffered by Halifax Water are not unique. In fact, such 

problems are common across North America, especially in older cities with aging 

infrastructure. A number of jurisdictions in Canada and the USA have embarked on 20 and 

30 year wet weather flow reduction programs. 

Future Initiatives 

As described above, Halifax Water has programs and practices in place to address I&I 

problems and to improve the management of wet weather flows within the wastewater 

system. However, Halifax Water staff are in the process of developing a more 

comprehensive and proactive approach to this issue. The wet weather flow problem is a 

complex one, involving a broad range of different solutions. A more comprehensive, 

planned approach is required, including dedicated and specialized resources. A steering 

committee has been put in place, comprised of the General Manager and senior staff of four 

key departments – Wastewater and Stormwater Services, Water Services, Environmental 

Services, and Engineering and IS. This committee will be developing a strategy, and 

identifying key resource needs, during the second half of 2012/13. 

51

HALIFAX WATER 



Some specific activities that are being considered or will be implemented are: 

 

 

 

 

 

Search for world‐class expertise to assist in developing a Wet Weather Flow 

Management Strategy. 

The application of trenchless technologies is a mechanism which could help in carrying 

out timely repairs of old, leaking wastewater mains and laterals. The local marketplace 

may not have historically had enough projects to attract contractors for this line of 

work, but Halifax Water will be identifying candidate projects to attract contractors to 

apply this technology to I&I reduction efforts. 

Expansion of the permanent flow monitoring network and acquisition of additional 

portable flow measuring equipment will be achieved through the capital budget. 

Additional monitoring points will be installed at key pumping stations over time and 

connected to the PI system. The use of technology such as wireless download and the 

connection of additional monitoring points to PI will increase efficiency in identifying 

problem areas while enhancing the safety of staff. 

Linking compliance testing to the sale of a property may be an effective and sustainable 

way to eliminate illegal [stormwater] connections from the wastewater system. 

Property owners are motivated to have their property comply, plus have access to 

financing to pay for repairs if needed. A program will be developed to have compliance 

testing done in conjunction with the sale of a property or the creation of a new service 

account. 

Measuring of wastewater overflows, consistent with the CCME municipal wastewater 

effluent strategy and related regulations. 

9. SAFETY & SECURITY 

9.1 Corporate Security Program 

Halifax Water’s Security Program is based on enterprise assets protection and is designed 

to protect three types of assets: people, property, and information. It also considers 

intangible assets such as the organization’s reputation, relationships, and creditworthiness. 

The program has been developed to take an all‐hazards approach, be it from natural, 

intentional, or accidental hazards, when reviewing risks to the organization. 

52

HALIFAX WATER 



Halifax Water uses the three basic elements of a physical security system to protect its 

assets to ensure it accomplishes its mission. 

Protection: The protection element is the physical barrier that delays the 

determined adversary and the opportunist in accomplishing their goals. Halifax 

Water uses barriers such as building fabric, fences, doors, door hardware, and 

containers to protect its assets. 

Detection: The detection element indicates and may also verify an actual or 

attempted overt or covert penetration. Halifax Water uses intrusion alarms, access 

control systems, CCTV, guards, and patrols to protect its assets. 

Response: This element is the reaction to an attempted or actual penetration. 

Halifax Water uses guard forces and police forces to protect its assets. 

Halifax Water uses two sources of information it gathers through use of consultants when 

designing an effective security system that assists the organization in completing its 

mission. 

Vulnerability Assessments 

In 2003, Halifax Water completed a risk assessment for Water Services using the Risk 

Assessment Methodology for Water [RAM‐W] developed by Sandia National Laboratories. 

The outcome of this project assisted the organization in developing a list of critical assets 

for water and allowed us to direct our resources to improve our security readiness and 

meet our mission objectives. 

In 2009, the same methodology [RAM‐W] was used to define critical assets in Wastewater 

Services and provide a roadmap for security improvements. 

In 2013/14, Halifax Water will be completing this exercise again for water, wastewater and 

stormwater infrastructure using the Risk Analysis and Management for Critical Asset 

Protection [RAMCAP] developed by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers [ASME]. 

RAMCAP is a process for analyzing and managing the risks associated with malevolent 

attacks and naturally occurring hazards against critical infrastructure. It will provide a 

consistent, efficient, and technically sound methodology to identify, analyze, quantify and 

communicate the level of risk and resilience, and the benefits of risk reduction and 

resilience enhancement. It will also document a process for identifying security 

vulnerabilities, consequences, and incident likelihood and provides methods to evaluate 

the options for reducing these elements of risk. 

As Halifax Water did in 2003 and 2009, selected employees will be trained in the RAMCAP 

process and complete an integrated assessment of water, wastewater and stormwater 

assets. 

53

HALIFAX WATER 



Security Consultation 

Halifax Water employs the service of security consultants who review each facility 

identified in the Vulnerability Assessments. The security consultants evaluate the 

administrative and organizational security, personnel security, physical security, and 

technical security measures followed by each facility and determine if they meet 

comparable institution standards, and are commensurate with current threats. The 

consultants also identify practices and procedures that may reduce the security of each 

facility and recommends cost‐effective corrective measures to provide an acceptable level 

of security based on the three basic elements of a physical security system: protection; 

detection; and response. 

Security Budget 

Operational and capital funding is required for a range of security‐related initiatives and 

upgrades. The proposed capital budget is $200,000 for 2012/13, and $250,000 for each of 

the four years following. Due to the sensitive nature of the projects, details are not 

provided in this document. 

Emergency Response Planning 

As safe and reliable drinking water, sanitation and environmental protection are vital to 

the sustainability of communities with Halifax Regional Municipality [HRM], Halifax Water 

realizes that the documentation of an Emergency Response Plan [ERP] is an essential part 

of managing a drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater utility. 

The purpose of the ERP is to establish an organizational structure and procedures for 

response to water and wastewater/stormwater incidents in HRM. It assigns the roles and 

responsibilities for the implementation of the plan during an emergency following the 

Incident Command System [ICS] model. The preparation and exercising of an Emergency 

Response Plan can save lives, reduce risk to public health, enhance system security, 

minimize property damage and lesson liability. 

Halifax Water has trained employees involved in emergency response and will maintain 

readiness by regular training including the conduct of tabletop exercises. 

9.2 Occupational Health & Safety Programs 

Halifax Water’s Occupational Health and Safety Program is based on the Internal 

Responsibility System [IRS], which is the foundation of the Nova Scotia Occupational Health 

and Safety Act. The IRS is an internal system that gives everyone direct responsibility for 

health and safety in the way that best fits with what they do. 

54

HALIFAX WATER 



The Safety and Security division of Environmental Services has principal duties and 

responsibility as part of the IRS as follows: 

1. Assist in formulating and supervising the execution of the HRWC’s general 

safety/loss control policy and assist management to fulfill, to the greatest degree 

possible, its responsibilities for safety. 

2. Co‐ordinate and/or provide safety training to staff in an effort to prevent accidents, 

minimize losses, increase productivity and efficiency, and ensure compliance with 

safety legislation and policies. 

3. Conduct safety audits in the workplace to identify safety hazards and recommend 

control measures. 

4. Assist in the development and maintenance of a system of accident investigation, 

reporting, and follow‐up. 

5. Provide program education for on and off the job safety. 

6. Act as resource to the Joint Occupational Health and Safety Committee [JOHSC]. 

7. Carry out a continuous analysis and evaluation of services rendered. 

8. Maintain liaison with federal, provincial, and local safety organizations by taking 

part in the activities and services of these groups. 

Halifax Water has established and maintains an Occupational Health and Safety Program in 

consultation with the Joint Occupational Health and Safety Committee. The Safety and 

Security division has identified the following policies and initiatives that require updating 

and will work with the JOHSC and the organization at the departmental level in 

implementing these over the next five years. 

Incident Reporting Policy 

A standardized procedure is currently being developed across the organization including 

the development of a computerized system for documentation of safety‐related incidents 

and near‐misses. 

Corporate Safety Training Policy 

Halifax Water is ensuring all staff receives effective safety‐related training. The Safety and 

Security division is working with the Human Resources department identifying training 

related to staff health and safety. A more comprehensive training program has been 

developed, and better tracking and scheduling will be instituted. 

55

HALIFAX WATER 



Trench Safety Policy 

Trench safety is critical to Halifax Water and its staff given that much of our infrastructure 

is located underground. The current program manual has been updated and standardized 

across the organization. 

Respiratory‐Protection Policy 

This policy is related to equipment such as self‐contained breathing apparatus, supplied air 

respirators, and half‐mask chemical and dust respirators. A number of activities are 

contemplated: the current program manual will be updated; equipment will be 

standardized, inspected, and certified; and all users of the equipment will be fit tested. 

Hearing‐Conservation Policy 

A number of activities are contemplated. The procedures will be updated, hearingprotection 

equipment will be standardized across the organization, annual testing will be 

made available to all employees, and all noise hazards will be identified and labeled at all 

Halifax Water facilities. 

Traffic Control Related to Short‐Term Work in Streets 

Many activities carried out in the street by Halifax Water staff are short term in nature such 

as locating infrastructure; conducting inspections of manhole and catch basins; taking 

wastewater and stormwater samples from manholes; and turning water valves. A code of 

practice for use by all staff is currently being developed in consultation with the regulatory 

authority, Nova Scotia Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal. 

Contractor‐Safety Policy 

Halifax Water uses the services of contractors on many different fronts when conducting 

business. This policy has been updated to ensure contractors understand their 

responsibilities when conducting work for Halifax Water. It includes a pre‐qualification 

process, monitoring guidelines, and associated documentation. 

Ongoing review of Halifax Water’s Safety Program and communicating this to all staff will 

further assist with developing a World Class safety culture. 

56

HALIFAX WATER 



10. BUSINESS RISKS & MITIGATION STRATEGIES 

There are many challenges and opportunities in front of Halifax Water and many more to 

come as society becomes more aware of the importance of preserving the environment. In 

recognition of this reality, Halifax Water intentionally elevated the environment to the 

same level as the customer in its service delivery and entrenched this approach in its 

mission statement. The path to sustainability for wastewater and stormwater is, however, 

a difficult journey. The level of investment will require significant increases in funding 

levels that can only come from external funding programs [federal or provincial] and/or 

the rate base. With external programs being unpredictable and indeterminate, base 

funding is more appropriately secured through the rate structure. 

To that end, Halifax Water will be submitting a rate application for the Urban Core/Satellite 

systems in January 2013 to cover the 2013/14 and 2014/15 fiscal years to align with the 

Cost of Service /Rate Design methodology, approved by the NSUARB. As recently directed 

by the NSUARB, Halifax Water will include the Airport/Aerotech system in the rate 

application for consideration of consolidation. The rate application is necessary to secure 

funding to cover projected operating costs and continue to address the utility’s wastewater 

and stormwater infrastructure deficit and increase capacity for growth. The latter is 

particularly true for the Airport/Aerotech wastewater system, which must be expanded to 

service the growth of the Stanfield Halifax International Airport. The utility will also be 

pursuing a major capital project to facilitate growth with the transfer of wastewater from 

the Beechville/Lakeside/Timberlea sewer shed to the Halifax sewer shed. The associated 

rate increases will need to be balanced with fair allocation across the rate base and the 

ability of the customer to adjust to the new reality of full cost recovery for renewal of 

infrastructure and protection of the environment. It is recognized that not all customers 

view protection of the environment as important and Halifax Water will have to increase 

communication and education to customers on this topic. 

10.1 Conservation 

Halifax Water will continue to promote water conservation as it is a sustainable practice 

that will benefit the utility, customers, and the environment in the long run. The promotion 

of water conservation will be carried out through direct education and partnerships with 

HRM and other non‐governmental organizations [NGOs], which have proven successful in 

the past. The environmental stewardship benefits of conservation do, however, have a 

financial side effect for the utility. 

Halifax Water has recorded steady decreases in water consumption and expect the trend to 

continue for quite some time. As detailed in Section 6.2, a projected decrease of 1.5% in 

consumption per year is incorporated in the five year business plan. The continued 

downward trend is attributed to customers responding to increasing water and 

wastewater rates, incorporation of water‐efficient fixtures and appliances, and a general 

57

HALIFAX WATER 



environmental awareness. If conservation results in a greater decrease in metered sales, 

the operational revenue projected in the business plan will not be achieved. 

In an effort to mitigate financial impacts from conservation effects, Halifax Water has 

established a wastewater rate structure similar to its water rate structure. In this manner, 

a base charge is tied to customer meter size to recover fixed costs, and a second charge is 

based on consumption to reflect variable costs. Additionally, the introduction of a separate 

storm water charge based on impervious area versus water consumption will help further 

mitigate the financial impacts from conservation. 

10.2 Nova Scotia Environment [NSE] Regulatory Compliance 

Wastewater 

A compliance plan [Appendix I] has been developed and updated for each of the Halifax 

Water wastewater treatment facilities [WWTFs]. The plan outlines the recent performance 

of each facility in relation to current Nova Scotia Environment [NSE] discharge limits and 

CCME/WSER requirements. The plan also indicates anticipated enhancements or upgrades 

required for each facility presently non‐compliant, with estimated timeframes. Further 

work will be required to define the required capital, operating changes, or upgrades to the 

various facilities, and to develop accurate cost estimates for the required work, which will 

become part of future capital budgets. 

Halifax Water meets and communicates regularly with NSE staff, with the objective of 

achieving consensus on priorities. Regulatory compliance plans are being updated on a 

continual basis through consultation with NSE. 

Funding for capital improvements required for a number of the treatment facilities has 

already been approved, or has been included in the Five‐Year Capital Budget, namely: 

Aerotech [upgrade and expansion], Belmont [decommissioning], Eastern Passage [upgrade 

and expansion in progress], Beechville‐Lakeside‐Timberlea [upgrade], Lockview‐ 

MacPherson [optimization], and Wellington [replacement WWTF constructed and 

commissioned]. The Frame WWTF is currently included within years 6 to 10 of the Capital 

Budget. 

Halifax Water intends to utilize operational improvements to achieve compliance for three 

other facilities – Halifax, Dartmouth and North Preston. However, high soluble BOD inputs 

and prolonged periods of dry weather may pose a compliance challenge for the Halifax 

facility. 

58

HALIFAX WATER 



Water 

With the recent construction of membrane filtration facilities for three small water 

systems: Collins Park, Middle Musquodoboit, and Bomont, Halifax Water will remain in 

compliance with current provincial drinking‐water regulations. In recognition that all 

water‐treatment facilities comply with provincial regulations, maintenance of existing 

programs and execution of the WQMP will ensure continued compliance. The future focus 

for the combined utility will be to upgrade and enhance wastewater facilities to ensure 

environmental compliance. 

System Assessments 

Halifax Water is committed to supplying safe and clean water and effective wastewater 

collection and treatment. In support of these goals, Halifax Water undertakes assessments 

of all water and wastewater systems, in conformance with NS Environment [NSE] 

regulations. 

It is a regulatory requirement that Water System Assessments be completed every 

five years. Water System Assessment Reports are currently being compiled and will 

be submitted to NSE by April 1, 2013. Assessments of municipal drinking water systems 

are conducted to evaluate the capability of the system to consistently and reliably deliver 

an adequate quantity of safe drinking water; to verify compliance with regulatory 

requirements; and provide preliminary costs and timelines to address any identified 

deficiencies and/or concerns. 

Wastewater Systems Assessments [similar to water system assessments] are currently not 

a regulatory requirement. However, Halifax Water regularly tests and reports to NSE 

regarding the performance of some components of the wastewater system for conformance 

with regulatory requirements. Additionally, Halifax Water completes wet weather flow 

studies on parts of the wastewater system. These studies are similar to system assessments 

but are not as comprehensive. 

10.3 CCME Wastewater Strategy and WSER Regulations 

On February 14, 2009, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment adopted a 

national strategy for the management of municipal wastewater. The strategy advocates a 

risk‐based approach to management of wastewater effluent whereby requirements are 

based on environmental and health‐risk assessments that are to be carried out for all 

treatment facilities. However, the strategy also includes a prescriptive approach with a 

requirement for a uniform minimum standard for all effluent equivalent to secondary 

treatment. Halifax Water’s inland treatment facilities that discharge to fresh water already 

provide secondary or better treatment, as does the Mill Cove facility in Bedford. 

Construction of the Eastern Passage WWTF is under way with an upgrade from a primary 

59

HALIFAX WATER 



to secondary treatment level, but the three Halifax Harbour Solutions Project [HHSP] 

facilities are advanced primary. Upgrading to secondary level is required for the HHSP 

facilities under the WSER, with estimated capital costs in the order of $425 M. The upgrade 

deadlines will likely be 20 years for Halifax and Dartmouth, and Herring Cove, based on 

risk assessment rankings and the findings of the IRP. 

A more immediate operational/regulatory issue with Halifax Water’s wastewater system is 

wet weather flow and resultant overflows into the environment as detailed in Section 8.5. 

Many of the sewers in HRM are combined, built many decades ago with many greater than 

100 years in age. Combined sewers have not been permitted in HRM since the early sixties, 

but even the older, separate sanitary sewers experience very significant I&I problems. 

Of the approximately 180 wastewater pumping stations owned by Halifax Water, some 40 

experience regular overflows. Many of these overflows go to inland receiving waters and, 

as such, represent higher environmental and health risks than marine discharge of primary 

treated effluent. As an initial step, a program is underway to provide sensors to detect 

overflow conditions and estimate volumes for the sanitary sewer overflows. Much of the 

capital and operating budgets have been allocated to mitigate these wet weather flow 

problems based on a priority‐ranking process. It is preferred that resources be allocated 

based on risk and assessed priority, rather than on the basis of a national standard [the 

CCME/WSER] that does not consider local conditions. Identification of funding 

mechanisms and cost‐sharing arrangements with senior levels of government will be 

critical now that the WSER regulations are in force. 

To align with the CCME strategy, staff have developed and updated a plan [Appendix H] to 

ensure compliance with the WSER. 

10.4 Pension Fund Solvency 

The Halifax Water Commission Employees’ Pension Plan originated in 1972, has 308 

participating members, and is a defined‐benefit pension plan. After amalgamation of the 

municipal water utilities in 1996, the Halifax Water Commission pension plan was 

amended and restated effective June 1, 1998. In the intervening years from 1998 to 2008, 

eight amendments were made to the plan to maintain and/or improve benefits or to meet 

regulatory requirements. The plan text has been consolidated as of January 1, 2011, to 

include these amendments, and the consolidated plan rules were approved by the Halifax 

Water Board in June of 2011. 

The Halifax Water Employees’ Pension Plan and Nova Scotia Pension Benefits Act require 

that an actuarial valuation is carried out every three years. An actuarial evaluation was 

conducted as at January1, 2011 [See Table 10.1] and confirms deterioration in the plan’s 

financial position, as anticipated with the going concern deficit increasing from $3.9 M to 

$14.4 M. Consequently, the Halifax Water Board approved an increase in the contribution 

60

HALIFAX WATER 



rate effective July 1, 2011, from 9.5% to 10.47%, and the required minimum annual special 

payments will increase from $445,100 to $1,528,500. On a positive note, however, there is 

no solvency deficit and an election for solvency relief is not required at this time. 

Table 10.1 – Pension Plan Actuarial Results 

Jan. 1, 2008 Jan. 1, 2011 

Going Concern Surplus/[Deficit] ($3,898,200) ($14,387,000) 

Solvency Surplus/[Deficit] $392,400 $3,342,800 

Minimum Total Additional Special 

*$445,100 $1,528,500 

Payments 

Employee Contribution Rate 9.44%, or $904,800 10.47%, or $1,731,600 

Total Employer Contribution 

[including current service cost & 

special payments] 

14.82% of payroll, or 

$1,420,400 

20.26% of payroll, or 

$3,352,800 

*$445,100 was the required Minimum Total Additional Special Payment; however Halifax Water was actually 

contributing a slightly higher amount of $592,500. 

10.5 Regional Plan Update 

In 2006, HRM Regional Council approved the Regional Plan, which provides guidance on 

continued and future development in HRM to 2026. As part of the approved plan, HRM 

committed to undertaking a review every five years to keep the plan current and address 

necessary adjustments resulting from market changes and other unanticipated external 

factors. The first five‐year year review was approved to commence on October 4, 2011 by 

Regional Council with an anticipated completion by September 2013 [initially September 

2012] for suburban and rural areas, with the Regional Centre policies being implemented 

by 2015. 

The October 4, 2011 report contains a section on the scope of the Regional Plan. Below is 

an excerpt from the Plan’s deliverables that require Halifax Water to dedicate staff time and 

resources to the various steering committees: 

a) Policy direction for sustainable suburban and rural community design; optimizing 

existing services and promoting standards for low impact “green” design. 

b) Policy direction for improved suburban and rural community design; improve 

design standards for sustainable [green], more functional communities. 

61

HALIFAX WATER 



c) Policy review for Open Space subdivision standards; Open Space designs may 

include extension to central water systems. 

d) Review “Visioning” Program for Growth Centers; evaluation of the impact and 

ability to extend central services. 

e) Review growth potential and central servicing for Growth Centre’s; evaluation of the 

impact and ability to extend central services. 

f) Policy direction for improved rural road standards; review of the rural ditch 

standards. 

g) Policy direction for expansion of CCC program; coordination of water and 

wastewater CCC’s in master planning areas with HRM. 

h) Potential Business Park expansion; evaluation of the impact and ability to extend 

central services. 

i) Regional Centre is a focus of the Regional Plan review; evaluation of the impact and 


j) Policy direction for underground utilities [subdivision bylaw amendment]; 

amendments to the subdivision bylaw are required to reflect changes in ownership 

of wastewater infrastructure. 

k) Review central servicing of rural growth centres; evaluation of the impact and 


l) Wastewater Management Districts [maintenance]; HRM is seeking participation 

from Halifax Water in establishment and/or operation of wastewater management 

districts. 

m) Policy enabling creation of new Regional Centre MPS & LUB [Centre Plan]; 

participation to ensure appropriate policies are in place relating to system 

capacities with the redevelopment of lands within the Regional Centre. 

Along with some of the initiatives above, the Regional Plan will provide a review of service 

boundaries. A key deliverable identified in the 2006 Plan, to assist both Halifax Water and 

HRM staff in evaluating the costs associated with some of the identified growth centres, is 

the Regional Wastewater Functional Plan [RWWFP]. At a master planning level, it will 

identify system constraints and begin to develop a costing model to determine cost of 

wastewater servicing in various areas. It may also identify areas where system upgrades 

are not feasible [financially or regulatory] and should no longer be considered for growth 

at the anticipated density. The RWWFP will be a valuable tool in evaluating the ability to 

consider extensions to service boundaries. With the transfer of wastewater assets in 2007, 

Halifax Water assumed the lead role in the development of the RWWFP, which is expected 

to be completed in November 2012. 

The completion of the RWWFP and the IRP have allowed staff to review the concepts of the 

proposed Availability Charge in relation to the growth anticipated under the Regional Plan. 

Staff are now proposing a Regional Development Charge to replace the current Regional 

62

HALIFAX WATER 



Charges [Sewer Redevelopment Charge, Trunk Sewer Charge and Regional Wastewater 

Capital Cost Contribution], that will ensure regional infrastructure has been sized 

adequately for growth. The proposed development and intensification of the Regional 

Centre will influence the structure and implementation of the proposed Availability or 

Regional Development Charge. 

HRM proposes to establish “opportunity sites” within the Regional Centre so densities can 

be established and needs associated with both Regional and Local Master Infrastructure 

can be estimated, managed, and planned within the capital‐budgeting process. The 

increased growth within Greenfield areas can be managed more effectively amongst HRM 

and the respective land owners. However, the increased growth in the Brownfield areas of 

the Regional Centre is proving more challenging. The intentions of the land owners within 

these opportunity sites are not as predictable, as such, the timing and financial model for 

upgrades within established corridors cannot be implemented with ease or certainty. 

This “to be established” growth through densification increases the risk to Halifax Water as 

it manages the timing and scope of upgrades to the Regional Centre infrastructure. With 

clarity around the growth in the Regional Centre, Halifax Water can develop the 

appropriate funding strategy and “right size” the proposed Regional Development Charge 

that will support growth‐related infrastructure requirements. 

10.6 Development Pressures/Obligations 

HRM, and thus Halifax Water, faces the potential for a strong continued growth pattern. 

The projected growth will provide challenges for existing infrastructure and require proper 

planning and phasing for new infrastructure. 

There are a number of developments that will ultimately contribute flow to the Bedford 

Highway and Duffus Street wastewater collection systems. The main areas include Bedford 

West, Mainland North [including the Motherhouse lands near Mount St. Vincent 

University], Bayers Lake lands, and two future‐growth areas known as Sandy Lake and 

Suzie Lake. Ultimate upgrade to these regional wastewater facilities is in the planning 

stages. The CCC Charge for the Bedford West Master Plan was approved by the NSUARB in 

September 2012 and Halifax Water has taken the lead on the design and construction of the 

Kearney Lake Trunk Sewer which will provide the primary wastewater service to the 

Master Plan Area. 

The proposed development of the Brunello and Lovett Lake lands within the Beechville, 

Lakeside, Timberlea area continues to demand a solution to the system capacity 

constraints at the Beechville‐Lakeside‐Timberlea treatment facility. Pending direction from 

NSE, Halifax Water will provide the new wastewater capacity via a piped system to the 

Halifax sewershed. Halifax Water has engaged a Consultant to commence detailed design of 

the piped solution with construction anticipated in the 2014/15 fiscal year. 

63

HALIFAX WATER 



The Halifax International Airport Authority [HIAA] has developed a master plan for the 

ongoing growth anticipated with the “Gateway” initiative. The ability to manage the 

expected discharge created by this growth is uncertain within the current environmental 

regulations [see Section 10.8 for more detail on the required infrastructure]. In addition to 

the growth at the HSIA, HRM still has undeveloped lands within the Aerotech Business Park 

that they would like to develop as fully serviced lots. Until the results of the environmental 

risk assessment of the receiving waters and further consultation with Nova Scotia 

Environment are completed, the ultimate servicing solution remains unclear. Halifax 

Water has recently released an RFP for a consultant to review current plant performance, 

evaluate options for the treatment of side stream effluent and conduct a pre‐design for the 

potential expansion and upgrade of the Aerotech WWTF. 

With the recent announcement of the Irving national shipbuilding contract, the overall rate 

of development is expected to increase. This may create a higher demand on the 

Engineering Approvals division within Engineering & IS and accelerate the development of 

the master plan areas and associated upgrades to regional infrastructure. 

These growth scenarios highlight the urgency in finalizing an appropriate Regional 

Development Charge as part of the Cost of Service/Rate Design Methodology, establishing 

the costs that can be attributed to new development, and developing a financial model and 

capital plan for upgrading regional infrastructure. 

In addition, the anticipated regional growth may accelerate the discussion on the addition 

of lands to the HRM serviceable boundary. Currently the lands in the Port Wallace area of 

Dartmouth are the subject of some preliminary watershed studies and appear to be the 

candidate for next consideration. Also in this discussion are the lands in the Suzie Lake and 

Sandy Lake areas [watershed study to commence this coming year]. In advance of any new 

development in these areas, Halifax Water would complete an infrastructure master plan 

and develop area‐specific Capital Cost Contribution charges. 

In April 2012, Halifax Water took over the review of the public storm systems from HRM. 

This will allow more direct input and inspection into the donated assets constructed by 

developers. 

10.7 Biosolids 

Biosolids are produced from sludge received from Halifax Water’s wastewater treatment 

facilities. The Harbour Solutions facilities have onsite dewatering; the sludge is dewatered 

and transported to the Biosolids Processing Facility [BPF] at the Aerotech Park. The 

upgrade of Eastern Passage WWTF is underway; this facility will also have on site 

dewatering of sludge. In an effort to reduce Ammonia loading on the Aerotech WWTF; 

some of the sludge from Mill Cove WWTF is currently being dewatered at Herring Cove 

64

HALIFAX WATER 



WWTF and the sludge from Eastern Passage WWTF is being dewatered at Dartmouth 

WWTF. This operational practice is also cost efficient because it avoids trucking high water 

content sludge to Aerotech. HW intends to expand the sludge diversion from Aerotech 

WWTF and dewater the maximum amount of sludge within the close proximity of a WWTF 

that generates the sludge. The sludge from the remainder of the facilities is transported in 

liquid/slurry form to a central dewatering facility that is a part of the Aerotech Wastewater 

Treatment facility. Once dewatered, this sludge is transferred to the BPF. 

The BPF is operated by a private contractor, N‐Viro Systems Canada LP, who has overall 

responsibility for operating the facility to produce a soil amendment in conformance with 

Canadian Food Inspection Agency [CFIA] regulations and further market the product for 

beneficial use. The sludge from Harbour Solutions facilities are transported by Seaboard 

Liquid Carriers Limited using specialty trailers whereas the sludge from all other facilities 

are transported by Halifax Water resources. The contract agreements with N‐Viro and 

Seaboard are in effect until November 2019 and October 2016, respectively. The contracts 

allow for fee adjustments based on a formula that takes into account various input costs to 

operate the BPF. 

Transportation Contract 

There are minimal business risks with this contract since there are several other trucking 

companies that can provide this service as Halifax Water will own the specialty trailers at 

the end of the current contact. HW has begun negotiations with Seaboard to truck 

dewatered sludge from Eastern Passage to the BPF at Aerotech Park. The contract may be 

amended to include transportation of this dewatered sludge. 

Biosolids Processing 

The beneficial use of biosolids has been a controversial issue for decades in the province of 

Nova Scotia and around the world. There are unsubstantiated claims from various sources 

that land application of biosolids is unsafe. However, the scientific research has proven 

that the land application is safe and biosolids are a resource that should not be wasted. 

The Guidelines for Land Application and Storage of Municipal Biosolids in Nova Scotia from 

Nova Scotia Environment govern Halifax Water operations. However, Halifax Water is 

faced with the risk of federal, provincial, or municipal authorities either changing the 

guidelines under public pressure or recommending other alternative technologies to 

dispose of biosolids. The Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment [CCME] has 

also launched an initiative to study the use of biosolids. The CCME Ministers approved the 

Canada‐wide Approach for the Management of Wastewater Biosolids on October 11, 2012. 

The Approach encourages the beneficial use and sound management of biosolids. 

Beneficial uses include high‐temperature lime‐stabilization of biosolids for land 

application, such as the N‐Viro process currently used by Halifax Water. Nothing in the 

65

HALIFAX WATER 



CCME Approach suggests that any change will be required in current biosolids management 

practices in Nova Scotia, which emphasizes beneficial use. However, the acceptance of the 

product by the public and the agricultural community continues to be a challenge. 

Since the facility operation contract is up for renewal in 2019, Halifax Water will have to 

decide towards the later years of this business plan whether to operate the facility utilizing 

its own resources or to continue operation through a private contractor. Halifax Water is 

also exploring the concept of a biosolids/biomass fired cogeneration plant adjacent to the 

existing BPF in conjunction with the provincial COMFIT program [See Section 7.3.1] 

Halifax Water has undertaken several steps to ensure the continued safe practice of land 

application of biosolids: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Halifax Water completed an independent peer review of its operations and practices 

in 2011. This review concluded that the practice is safe and the BPF is being 

operated in a professional manner. 

Halifax Water will enhance monitoring controls and promote industry best practices 

for land application during the span of this business plan. 

The operating contractor has employed a trained agronomist to liaise with farmers 

to provide them with information and guidance for land application of biosolids. 

Halifax Water has developed information brochures and provides regular 

information through its website to educate stakeholders. 

Halifax Water works closely with N‐Viro, HRM and Nova Scotia Environment to 

educate members of the public. 

Halifax Water will continue to stay abreast of emerging research and technology to 

further enhance the beneficial use of biosolids. Halifax Water is affiliated with 

several organizations responding to a recent request for proposals from the 

Canadian Water Network to conduct research on substances of emerging concern. 

10.8 Leachate Treatment 

Treatment of Otter Lake landfill leachate at Mill Cove emanated from the original 

agreement between Mirror Nova Scotia and the Halifax Regional Municipality that 

contractually bound HRM to assume responsibility for treating leachates from the landfill. 

Mill Cove, the largest facility at the time, was the logical choice for receiving and treating 

the liquid. The Beechville‐Lakeside‐Timberlea WWTF was approved by the NSE as an 

alternate location for the first few years. 

66

HALIFAX WATER 



Leachate production at the landfill is affected by the application of daily cover, rainfall, 

establishment of new cells, etc. Accordingly, deliveries of leachate are directly proportional 

to rainfall amounts and can sometimes be 24 hrs/day for multiple days resulting in 

overtime costs for plant coverage. Deliveries arrive via 9000‐gallon tanker trucks; leachate 

is deposited directly into a manhole on site that flows by gravity to the onsite Bedford 

pump station where it is mixed with wastewater from Bedford before being conveyed to 

the plant. Costs are recovered on a quarterly basis at a rate of 2.88 cents per gallon. 

Occasionally [once or twice a year] an unknown component of the leachate causes a 

cloudiness in the effluent resulting in periods of higher‐than‐normal fecal counts. This 

issue typically does not cause the plant to be out of compliance but decreases the plant 

buffer should there be any other issues that may impact the effluent quality. 

The Otter Lake leachate imparts color to plant effluent that causes a decrease in 

transmittance and, accordingly, an increase in the UV light output required to achieve 

disinfection. It is difficult to quantify, but it is safe to assume an increase in power 

consumption. A replacement of the current UV system will be required within the next 

three years and the color issue may have an impact on the size and cost of the new system. 

The organic strength of the liquid leachate ranges from 149‐706 mg/L BOD with the bulk of 

the samples being in the lower part of that range. Assuming a median value of 300, the 

population equivalent of the material based on 2010 volumes equates to a population 

equivalent of 610 people. 

Receipt of the leachate during rainfall events results in increased truck traffic and traffic at 

all hours of the night in a residential area. The number of noise complaints is increasing 

and may continue considering the high‐end dense development in the immediate vicinity of 

the plant. 

The imminent CCME regulations may have an impact on the continuous acceptance of this 

liquid since the plant may have to free up some capacity to reduce the number of sanitary 

and combined sewer overflows in these sewersheds. 

The above issues will remain as long as Halifax Water continues to receive and treat the 

leachate. Possible mitigation measures available are: 

 

 

Halifax Water could advise HRM that we will no longer be offering the service and 

that they will need to make alternative arrangements; this may have implications on 

the HRM contract with the landfill contract operator. 

HRM Solid Waste is currently in talks with NSE for permission to use the Leachate 

Treatment Facilities at the Highway 101 Landfill. This facility is owned by HRM and 

operated by Halifax Water and is the preferred approach for treatment of Otter Lake 

landfill leachate. Halifax Water will work cooperatively with HRM with a target of 

successful diversion within the timeframe of this business plan. 

67

HALIFAX WATER 



10.9 Harbour Solutions Project Assets 

The Halifax Harbour Solutions Project [HHSP] is comprised of three advanced primary 

wastewater treatment facilities: Halifax WWTF; Dartmouth WWTF; and Herring Cove 

WWTF. The 3 year warranty with the general contractor for these WWTFs expires in 2013, 

and initiatives are underway for further optimization over the course of the next couple of 

years. 

The fine bar screens, at all three facilities were supplied with 10 mm bar spacing. This 

system is currently being modified so that the bar spacing openings for the main duty 

screen is reduced from 10 mm to 5 mm, resulting in better capture of screenings, and less 

negative impact to the Densadeg process and to the Ultraviolet [UV] disinfection system. 

Associated changes to the SCADA system to support these modifications will be 

implemented in early 2013/14. The process chemical dosing rates are being examined, 

and different dosages/concentrations are being tested. As well, alternative suppliers of 

process chemicals have been sourced and testing begins in early 2013/14. If the results are 

successful, there is great potential for long term savings. 

The UV systems in all three facilities, which accounts for the vast majority of the power 

consumption, are currently flow based. Staff are currently running a trial with a UV 

transmittance system, which if successful, will be tied into the control system for the UV 

system, resulting in power savings during times of low flow and low effluent turbidity. At 

the Halifax plant, a variable frequency drive for a third raw water pump was recently 

installed for better flow control for optimal treatment performance. The current design of 

the odour control system [OCS] for each treatment facility does not allow for servicing of 

main components of the OCS without shutting down the entire odour control system. Over 

the course of the next 1 – 3 years, bypass ductwork and the necessary control dampers will 

be installed on this system to provide the option of keeping main OCS components in 

operation while other components are being serviced. Manually manipulated stop logs in 

some process areas are being replaced with automatic penstocks. This will give operations 

staff better control over various systems such as the upflow clarifiers and the UV systems, 

during times of low flow rates, and will result in cost savings over the long term. 

10.10 Aerotech and Small Wastewater Treatment Facilities 

Aerotech WWTF 

The existing Aerotech WWTF has a nominal average hydraulic capacity of 1,360 m3/day 

and a maximum capacity of approximately 2,080 m3/day. The plant is approaching its 

design limit during dry weather and is challenged in handling peak wet weather flows. It is 

estimated that plant overflows occur about once or twice per month on average. Overflow 

durations can be as long as a few days in succession during significant precipitation events. 

68

HALIFAX WATER 



With the exception of ammonia, the loads applied to the WWTF are normally below the 

design loads. The ammonia loads currently exceed the design limits some 20 to 30% of the 

time. Recent effluent quality data generally indicate that the plant is substantially out of 

compliance with respect to ammonia. Halifax Water staff have recently taken action to 

reduce extraneous effluent loading including treatment of Mill Cove sludge at Herring Cove 

and treatment of Eastern Passage sludge at Dartmouth to improve overall plant 

performance. New regulations under the Fisheries Act will lead to even more stringent 

effluent quality standards in the near future, which will further exacerbate plant 

performance. An environmental risk assessment of the receiving waters is nearing 

completion in preparation for a future upgrade and expansion. 

The Aerotech Servicing Study completed in July 2008 provided growth projections for the 

Airport and Aerotech Park serviced area over a 25‐year planning horizon. The anticipated 

wastewater production from the tributary area was estimated to average 3,000 m3/day by 

2033. The report identified potential expansion and upgrading options for the WWTF 

capable of meeting existing and anticipated more stringent effluent requirements. The 

upgrade to the Aerotech WWTF is currently proposed for 2013/14 and 2014/15 at a 

concept level cost estimate of $21M. The final project cost will be developed in conjunction 

with the project preliminary design. External funding opportunities will be sought in 

conjunction with the preliminary design which will establish the total net cost to Halifax 

Water and impact on the rate structure. 

In addition to regular capital project requirements within the wastewater system, a major 

lagoon dredging and sludge dewatering project is proposed for 2013/14. 

The Aerotech WWTF receives over 50% of the flow from the HSIA which is owned and 

operated by HIAA. The related collection system was in poor condition and a significant 

contributor of I&I. HIAA has been active in 2011 and 2012 to renew wastewater collection 

assets and Halifax Water will continue to work with HIAA to improve system performance. 

The plant also serves the Aerotech Business Park owned by HRM. HRM has committed to 

limit additional development to mitigate further compliance problems until the Aerotech 

plant is upgraded and expanded. 

As recommended in a consultant report, the side streams that contribute to the Aerotech 

WWTF are being investigated with options to divert them to alternative locations to reduce 

the loading on the plant. A comprehensive accounting of the side streams was performed 

in 2012/13 and a significant effort was made to decrease side streams by diverting sludge 

normally dewatered at the Aerotech WWTF to Harbour Solutions WWTFs. In May of 2012, 

Halifax Water informed septage haulers that their discharge volumes are capped at 

2011/12 levels until a more permanent solution is found for treatment of additional 

volumes. 

Staff is investigating various strategies to optimize operations to bring the facility into 

compliance in the short term until such time as the treatment plant can be expanded. The 

Aerotech Lagoon will be utilized to further equalize flows and thus reduce peak hydraulic 

69

HALIFAX WATER 



loading on the plant which will result in reduction of overflows to the receiving water. This 

effort will also ensure that the plant receives consistent flows thus enabling the plant to 

treat effluent in a steady state which will help in improving compliance. The system will be 

fully automated and functional by early 2013/2104. Staff are also paying special attention 

to ammonia reduction at this facility to enable it to perform up to its design capacity. This 

optimization exercise will complement an efficient upgrade and expansion strategy. 

Lockview MacPherson WWTF 

The Lockview MacPherson WWTF is located in Fall River and was constructed in 1994. It 

has a treatment capacity of 454 m 3 / day and serves both residential and commercial 

customers. The existing treatment plant processes include grit removal, extended aeration, 

secondary clarification, filtration, and ultraviolet disinfection. 

The treatment facility currently experiences problems with the biological process due to 

excessive flow after heavy rainfall events. There are also ongoing operational and 

maintenance issues related to the surge tank configuration, the extended aeration process 

and its ability to address organic loading, and the ultraviolet disinfection system 

surcharging during heavy storm events resulting in the installation of a chlorinated by‐pass 

system. An assessment was conducted in 2012 that included specific recommendations to 

address these ongoing issues at this facility. Some operational changes are currently being 

made by staff while a closer analysis of the sewershed flow regime is being conducted. This 

assessment should be completed by the end of 2012/13. Halifax Water staff, with the 

assistance of an expert consultant, will continue to optimize this facility over the next two 

years. The objective is to bring this facility fully into compliance, without the need for a 

major upgrade, by the end of 2014/15. 

Frame WWTF 

Funding is currently in place to construct a new access driveway, construct a new effluent 

outfall pipe and undertake replacement of minor components of the existing wastewater 

treatment facility. This work is expected to be completed in 2013. An Environmental Risk 

Assessment [ERA] of this facility is currently in progress. The outcome of this ERA will 

provide the necessary criteria in order to undertake a full replacement of this treatment 

facility. The design/construction of the facility replacement is expected to proceed in 

2014/15 and 2015/16 for an estimated cost of $3.3M. 

Springfield Lake WWTF 

A recent capital works project was carried out which saw the twinning of a section of force 

main to alleviate wet weather surcharges which necessitated ongoing intervention by 

wastewater collections staff. Further efforts will be made to reduce wet weather I&I to 

improve conveyance with implementation of the SIR program to reduce extraneous 

70

HALIFAX WATER 



stormwater. Long term plans envision a future connection to the Sackville trunk sewer, 

subject to system improvements to reduce I&I in the Sackville System. 

Uplands WWTF 

There is no planned capital work at this facility during the next five years. 

Wellington WWTF 

The replacement of the Wellington WWTF is currently funded and nearing completion to 

treat effluent to the new regulations associated with the CCME Strategy. There is no other 

planned capital work for this facility during the next five years. 

Middle Musquodoboit WWTF 

There is no planned capital work at this facility during the next five years. 

North Preston WWTF 

The North Preston facility was originally constructed in 1988 as a rotating biological 

contractor [RBC] plant; in 2007, the facility was upgraded and expanded, with a change to 

sequence batch reactor [SBR] technology complete with UV disinfection and tertiary 

wetland treatment. In 2010, a new headworks building was added to provide screening of 

the influent flow. The facility has worked very well but still has a few challenges; they are 

listed below along with the mitigation strategies: 

The facility is required under its permit to attain a minimum pH of 6.5 in the effluent. In the 

past, it was difficult to consistently meet this requirement as the facility design did not 

incorporate any means of pH control. Equipment for pH control was installed recently by 

Halifax Water staff and results to date are very promising. 

Design average daily flow at the North Preston facility is 680 m 3 /day, and plant records for 

2011 to the end of October indicate an average daily flow of 917 m 3 /day. The data suggests 

that I&I is the source of excess flows. Plant performance data is relatively good given the 

high flows but would be better if influent flow rates were brought more in line with plant 

design. 

The influent pump station conveying flow to the plant has been modified to increase the 

flow capacity of its pumps. The capacity increase has caused a surcharge on the line feeding 

the plant headworks resulting in unscreened wastewater entering the SBR feed tank. The 

screenings then accumulate in the SBR tankage necessitating unit shutdowns for cleaning. 

Staff are evaluating the hydraulic grade line to determine if sufficient head exists to allow 

71

HALIFAX WATER 



an increase in height of the overflow weir. If sufficient head does not exist, the pumping 

rates may need to be lowered and/or a variable frequency drive [VFD] added. 

Other than noted above, there is no planned capital work at this facility during the next five 

years. 

10.11 Energy Costs 

Through its Energy Management Program, Halifax Water has committed to creating and 

ensuring an ongoing focus on sustainability and energy efficiency throughout the utility, 

including Water and Wastewater operations. This new program serves to define the goals, 

objectives, accountabilities, and structure for activities related to sustainability and 

responsible energy use. 

The Water and Wastewater/Stormwater departments operating budgets are significantly 

impacted by energy costs which are expected to increase over the life of this business plan 

and beyond. 

Table 10.2 provides projected energy costs over the next five years: 

Table 10.2 ‐ Projected Energy Cost Increases & Budget Impacts 

Year Electricity Natural Gas Fuel Oil 

Water 

Budget 

Impact ($) 

Wastewater 

Budget 

Impact ($) 

Total 

Budget 

Impact ($) 

2013/14 8.3% 5.3% 10% $177,000 $352,000 $529,000 

2014/15 10% 3.5% 10% $230,000 $450,000 $680,000 

2015/16 10% CPI CPI $240,000 $476,000 $716,000 

2016/17 10% CPI CPI $265,000 $523,000 $788,000 

2017/18 10% CPI CPI $290,000 $575,000 $865,000 

A CPI Factor of 2% has been used to calculate the above projected budget impacts. 

The Energy Management Action Plan identifies energy‐reduction targets for Water and 

Wastewater Operations over a five‐year planning period. Targets will be reviewed each 

year and adjusted for future years based on the previous year’s performance, future year’s 

operating and capital budget constraints, and anticipated energy price increases. 

Water and Wastewater Operation’s energy‐reduction targets over the next five years are 

outlined in Table 10.3: 

72

HALIFAX WATER 



Table 10.3 ‐ Energy Reduction Targets 

Year 

Water Operations 

Projected Savings 

Energy 

Reduction 

Target 

Energy 

Savings 

(kWh) 

Wastewater Operations 

Projected Savings 

Energy 

Energy 

Reduction 

Savings 

Target 

(kWh) 

2013/14 2.0% 450,000 2.0% 895,000 

2014/15 2.0% 440,000 2.0% 880,000 

2015/16 2.0% 435,000 2.0% 860,000 

2016/17 2.0% 425,000 2.0% 845,000 

2017/18 2.0% 417,000 2.0% 825,000 

Presently the five‐year Business Plan operating budgets do not incorporate the energy 

reduction targets outlined in Table 10.3. As future electricity rates become known with 

greater certainty and the energy savings of various initiatives are measured, budgets will 

be adjusted on an annual basis. The projected savings shown above are also contingent on 

the availability of human and capital resources as approved in the annual operating and 

capital budgets. As capital budgets are approved, actual energy savings may need to be 

adjusted on an annual basis. 

To date, a number of potential energy‐management opportunities [EMOs] have been 

identified through low to mid‐level energy audits in a number of facilities. 

For Water Operations, EMOs include HVAC system upgrades; retro‐commissioning of PRVstation 

HVAC systems; lighting retrofits; reactive power correction; variable frequencydrive 

upgrades; pumping system performance upgrades; and new construction design 

review for energy efficiency. 

For Wastewater Operations, EMOs include effluent stream heat recovery; retrocommissioning 

of pumping station HVAC systems; UV disinfection system upgrades; 

lighting retrofits; reactive power correction; variable frequency drive upgrades; and new 

construction design review for energy efficiency. 

A number of these EMOs have been successfully implemented, and some have been 

partially funded through Efficiency Nova Scotia’s various programs. 

A number of new construction projects are also being evaluated for energy efficiency 

improvements. Projects include the new Eastern Passage Wastewater Treatment Facility 

[area classification/HVAC improvements, lighting upgrades, and improved aeration 

blowers and their associated control systems], the Bedford West Trunk Sewer and 

Pumping Station Upgrade [pump system efficiency improvements, area 

73

HALIFAX WATER 



classification/HVAC improvements, lighting, VFDs, motors, etc.] , and the Lakeside/Bayers 

Lake PS Upgrade [pump system efficiency improvements, area classification/HVAC 

improvements, lighting, VFDs, motors, etc.]. Energy efficiency is now an integral part of the 

overall project evaluation and design process, ensuring cost effective, economical efficiency 

improvements at the design and construction phase of a given project. 

A number of Halifax Water’s standard design specifications have also been reviewed to 

ensure energy efficiency is taken into account in any future new construction activities 

[e.g., wastewater pumping stations, booster stations, treatment plants]. 

10.12 External Funding 

The Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund and Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund are now 

closed, as are economic stimulus programs. The only financial support available from the 

senior levels of government is currently the Gas Tax Fund program. Water, wastewater, 

and stormwater projects are eligible for this funding; however, the Halifax Regional 

Municipality also faces pressing infrastructure challenges and, from a policy perspective, is 

allocating Gas Tax Fund money to municipal projects with the expectation that water, 

wastewater, and stormwater projects should be funded by the residents receiving the 

services, i.e., through rates. 

There is P3 funding available under the Build Canada program, but only feasible for very 

large projects and is more appropriate in an unregulated environment. Halifax Water does 

not have projects within the five year capital plan that would be suitable candidates. 

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities and its Big City Mayor’s Caucus are actively 

advocating for future infrastructure programs dedicated to addressing costs driven by 

regulations associated with the CCME municipal wastewater effluent strategy. The Halifax 

Regional Municipality and Halifax Water are working together to support these activities 

through provision of data. It is anticipated the 2013 Federal Budget may contain 

infrastructure funding announcements. Halifax Water has identified the Aerotech 

Wastewater Treatment Facility Upgrade as the top candidate for potential infrastructure 

financing if a program is available. This would reduce the debt financing requirement for 

this project which would reduce projected debt servicing in the final years of the five year 

plan. 

74

HALIFAX WATER 



11. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RATE APPLICATIONS 

11.1 Urban Core, Airport/Aerotech, and Satellite Systems 

In recognition that Halifax Water incurred an operating loss in 2011/12 and is projecting a 

loss in 2012/13, and the years 2013/14 to 2017/18, the two year rate application that will 

be filed with the NSUARB in January 2013 will need to address the following objectives. 

1) Providing sufficient operating revenue for the 2013/14 and 2014/15 fiscal years 

to cover the operating and non‐operating costs for water, wastewater, and 

stormwater services as contained in the Business Plan 

2) Providing sufficient operating revenue to accommodate increasing depreciation. 

3) Provide rate stability to commence delivery of the Integrated Resource Plan to 

address the infrastructure deficit and regulatory compliance issues facing the 

utility. 

4) The Business Plan and rate application include an annual increase in customer 

base of 938 customer connections divided between domestic, industrial, 

commercial, multi‐residential and institutional based on the average increase over 

the past few years. 

5) A 1.5% reduction in the annual volume of water sold, recognizing conservation 

more than offsets the volume increases due to new customers. 

The proposed application will be the first made under the new cost of service/ rate design, 

and will be for a consolidated system that includes the Aerotech/Airport, Urban Core & 

Satellite Systems. 

Recommendations for the proposed Rate Application will be presented to the HRWC Board 

in December 2012. 

75

Appendix A 

Mission, Vision & Corporate Balanced Scorecard

Blank Page

Our Mission: 

“To provide world class services 

for our customers and our environment” 

Our Vision: 

• We will provide our customers with high quality water, wastewater, 

and stormwater services. 

• Through adoption of best practices, we will place the highest value on 

public health, customer service, fiscal responsibility, workplace safety 

and security, asset management, regulatory compliance, and 

stewardship of the environment. 

• We will fully engage employees through teamwork, innovation, and 

professional development.

Blank Page

Measuring Performance 

through a Corporate Balanced 

Scorecard 

Presented to Halifax Water Board, 

May 31, 2012 

Background of Corporate Balanced Scorecard 

• HRWC embarked on a Continuous Improvement Program in 

1999 

• In 2000, HRWC looking for methodology to measure 

organizational performance that was meaningful 

• Introduced to concept of Corporate Balanced Scorecard 

[CBS] through association with Bridgeport Hydraulics, 

Connecticut 

• HRWC Board approved CBS in 2001 and Organizational 

Award Program on March 28, 2002 

• CBS ensured all employees focused on strategic outcomes 

• After the wastewater merger on August 1/07, recognition that 

CBS should be expanded to include wastewater/stormwater 

performance measures and opportunity to recalibrate water 

measures 

www.halifaxwater.ca 2 

1

The Process 

• In late fall 2007, struck a steering committee and 

selected a group of forty employees to review the utility 

mission, vision and develop expanded scorecard 

• Good cross section of employees representing all 

departments, all levels, union and management [front 

line to General Manager] 

• Three steering committee meetings and two staff 

workshops held with facilitation by an outside 

consultant, Jack Duffy 


The Process 

• Developed a new mission statement which had to 

change as a result of the merger in 2007 

• Identified critical success factors [CSFs] in support of 

the new mission 

• Developed organizational indicators [OIs] to measure 

performance 

• Received approval of the revised CBS from the Halifax 

Water Board and a revised organizational award 

program on March 6, 2008 [annual approval] 


2

The Mission of Halifax Water 

“To provide world 

class services for 

our customers and 

our environment” 


The Vision of Halifax Water 

• We will provide our customers with high quality water, 

wastewater, and stormwater services. 

• Through adoption of best practices, we will place the 

highest value on public health, customer service, fiscal 

responsibility, workplace safety and security, asset 

management, regulatory compliance, and stewardship 

of the environment. 

• We will fully engage employees through teamwork, 

innovation, and professional development. 


3

Critical Success Factors 

• High Quality Drinking Water 

• Service Excellence 

• Responsible Financial Management 

• Effective Asset Management 

• Workplace Safety and Security 

• Regulatory Compliance 

• Environmental Stewardship 

• Motivated and Satisfied Employees 


Organizational Indicators 

• Organizational Indicators (OI’s) are the measures of our 

performance within each CSF and provide the definition 

and detail to best understand them. The OI’s are 

organizational, not individual measures. 

• The OI’s provide both a detailed clarification of the CSF 

and allow a target or goal for performance to be 

established and tracked. 


4

Organizational Performance Award Program 

• Based on a subset [12] of our strategic OI’s which are 

the most objective. 

• Program pays for itself by meeting operating expense 

to revenue ratio target; ratio is reduced from approved 

budget to accommodate the award program potential. 

• It is not a given; a threshold of 7.0 in scoring must be 

reached in a given year. 

• To be eligible for the award, employees must work a 

minimum of nine months during the fiscal year [April 1 st 

to March 31 st ] 


The CBS Targets for 2012/13 Fiscal Year 

• Organizational Indicators with a star are tied to the 

Award Program 

www.hrwc.ca 10 

5

CSF: High Quality Drinking Water 

• Organizational Indicators: 

• Adherence with 5 objectives from the Water Quality Master 

Plan for all water systems; we must own system for one year 

to include results [target of 90% adherence] 

• Bacteriological tests [Monthly target of 99.3% free of Total 

Coliform] 

• Customer satisfaction about water quality [Target of 85% 

rating water quality as good to excellent] 


CSF: Service Excellence 


• External customer survey about service [Target of 90% 

satisfied or very satisfied with service] 

• Service outages of water [Target of 200 connection hours / 

1000 customers] 

• Service outages of wastewater [Target of10 connection hours / 

1000 customers]. (N.B. the clock starts after we know it is our 

system) 

• Average call wait time over the year [Target of 70 seconds] 


6

CSF: Responsible Financial Management 


• Operating Expense/Revenue ratio [Target of 0.812 from 

approved 2012/13 budget] 

• Annual Cost per connection [$404 per connection-Water]; 

target is 3% less than 2012/13 budget 

• Annual Cost per connection [$650 per connection -Wastewater 

and Stormwater]; target is 3% less than 2012/13 budget 


CSF: Effective Asset Management 


• Target leakage allowance of 185 litres per service connection 

per day [IWA performance measure] 

• Inflow and Infiltration [I&I]; Target of 250 inspections of private 

property in relation to discharge of stormwater into the 

wastewater system [SIR Program] 

• Reduction of CSO and SSO events per year [CCME MWES 

parameter] Note: The inventory of CSO and SSO locations 

has been compiled; 2012/13 will see further inroads with 

instrumentation and targets will be established in the future 

• % of budgeted projects completed within water distribution and 

wastewater collection systems [Target of 90% completed 

based on 10.229 million for 2012/13] 

www.halifaxwater.ca 14 

7

CSF: Workplace Safety & Security 


• # of NS labour infractions resulting in a written order [Target of 

zero with maximum of 2 per year] 

• lost time accidents [# of accidents resulting in lost time per 100 

employees [Target of 3 per 100 employees] 

• # of traffic accidents per 1,000,000 km [Target of 4 with 

maximum of 5] 

• Employees are retrained or recertified before due date [Target 

maximum of 100% with minimum of 90%] 

• Supervisors complete weekly or bi-weekly Safety Talks [Target 

maximum of 95% with minimum of 85%] 


CSF: Regulatory Compliance 


• # of public health and environmental regulatory infractions 

resulting in a written order. [Target of zero with maximum of 2 

per year] 

• % of samples taken at all Halifax Water WWTFs complying 

with the NSE discharge limit for all parameters. [Target of 85% 

compliance] 

• Percentage of water supply plants meeting product regulations 

of their permits; we must own system for one year to include 

as a measure. [Target of 100% compliance] 


8

Environmental Stewardship 

• Organizational Indicators 

• Target of 400 ICI properties in HRM inspected by Pollution 

Prevention [P2] section per year 

• Energy management [kwh]; Target of 1.5% reduction from 

base levels for water and wastewater projects 

• Bio-solid residuals handling; Percentage of sludge meeting 

solids concentration target [Target of 96 % of samples meet a 

minimum solids concentration of: HHSP 25%, Aerotech 

Dewatering Facility 18%] 


CSF: Motivated and Satisfied Employees 


• # of arbitrations divided by total # of grievances. [Target of 0 

Arbitrations] 

• % of jobs filled from within HW (excluding entry level jobs). 

[Target of 80%] 

• Employee satisfaction survey [Target of A- rating from 

internal survey; benchmark of B established in 2009]. 

• Average number of days of absenteeism. [Target of < 6 days] 

www.halifaxwater.ca 18 

9

Summary 

• The track record of the CBS at Halifax Water has been very 

positive; it has made us a better utility. 

• The CBS process continues to be an inclusive and 

consensus building exercise for employees. 

• Staff obtains Board approval of the Organizational Award 

Program on an annual basis 

• Organizational Award Program funding is available by 

meeting the Operating Expense to Revenue Ratio Target. 

• The Organizational Award Program is not a given; the 

organization must score at least 7.0 to have an award. 

• Financial targets are consistent with approved annual 

operating budget. 


10

Appendix B 

Organizational Chart

Blank Page

COMMISSIONER 

Richard Butts 

COMMISSIONER 

David Hendsbee 

COMMISSIONER 

Vacant 

COMMISSIONER 

Mayor Mike Savage 

CHAIR 

Colleen Purcell 

VICE CHAIR 

Russell Walker 

COMMISSIONER 

Rick Paynter 

COMMISSIONER 

Tony Charles 

COMMUNICATIONS & 

PR COORDINATOR 

James Campbell 

490-4604 

GENERAL MANAGER 

Carl Yates 

490-4840 

ADMIN ASSISTANT II 

Sandy Hood 

490-6207 

DIRECTOR 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 

John Sheppard 

490-6958 

DIRECTOR 

ENGINEERING & INFORMATION 

SERVICES 

Jamie Hannam 

490-4804 

DIRECTOR 

WASTEWATER & STORMWATER 

SERVICES 

Susheel Arora 

490-6254 

DIRECTOR 

WATER SERVICES 

Reid Campbell 

490-4877 

DIRECTOR 

HUMAN RESOURCES 

Eric Rowley 

490-6930 

DIRECTOR 

FINANCE & CUSTOMER SERVICE 

Cathie O’Toole 

490-3572 

ADMIN ASSISTANT 

Jeannie Fraser 

490-6950 

MANAGER REGULATORY 

COMPLIANCE 

Tony Blouin 

490-1814 

MANAGER POLLUTION 

PREVENTION 

John Sibbald 

490-5527 

MANAGER 

ENVIRONMENTAL 

ENGINEERING 

Charles Lloyd 

490-6942 

MANAGER SAFETY AND 

SECURITY 

Pat Bellemare 

490-6104 

OFFICE ASSISTANT 

Monica St.Croix 

490-6210 

MANAGER, WATER 

INFRASTRUCTURE, 

ENGINEERING 

Tom Gorman 

490-4176 

MANAGER, WASTEWATER/ 

STORMWATER 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

ENGINEERING 

WEST/CENTRAL 

David Ellis 

490-6716 

MANAGER ASSET 

MANAGEMENT 

WASTEWATER/ 

STORMWATER 

Val Williams 

490-6946 

MANAGER, WASTEWATER/ 

STORMWATER 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

ENGINEERING 

EAST 

Ian Guppy 

490-5212 


Nola Button 

490-6204 


Melissa White 

490-4271 

WEST REGION 

SUPERINTENDENT 

Ken MacDonald 

490-4107 

EAST REGION 


Sheldon Parsons 

490-1781 

CENTRAL REGION 


Danny Patey 

490-2004 

FLEET MAINTENANCE & 

BUILDINGS SUPERVISOR 

Peter White 

490-5919 

TREATMENT FACILITIES 


Rick Reid 

832-5875 


Carol White 

832-8631 

HALIFAX HARBOUR 

SOLUTIONS FACILITIES 


Rory MacNeil 

490-1881 

SUPERINTENDENT, 

WATER SUPPLY PLANTS 

Garry Oxner 

869-4303 

LAKE MAJOR PLANT 

SUPERVISOR 

Colin Waddell 

435-8300 

WATERSHED MANAGER 

Barry Geddes 

869-4304 

WEST DISTRIBUTION 

OPERATIONS 


Barry McMullin 

490-6102 

TECHNICAL SERVICES 

SUPERVISOR 

Graham MacDonald 

869-4338 


Karen Gardiner 

490-4835 

OFFICE ASSISTANT II 

Trish Simms* 

Trish Jodrey 

490-4098 

WATER QUALITY 

MANAGER 

Alisha Knowles 

869-0171 

J.D. KLINE PLANT 

SUPERVISOR 

Peter Flinn 

835-2628 

CENTRAL DISTRIBUTION 

OPERATIONS SENIOR 

SUPERVISOR 

Tim Burbine 

869-4341 

EAST / BENNERY 

DISTRIBUTION 

OPERATIONS 


Peter Jensen 

490-4975 

HR COORDINATOR 

Rochelle Bellemare 

490-4807 


Lorna Skinner 

490-6208 

MANAGER OF 

CUSTOMER SERVICE & 

METERING 

Debby Leonard 

490-4995 

CONTROLLER 

Cheryl Little 

490-6937 

JAMES SPURR 

Corporate Legal Counsel 

490-6101 

MANAGER, ENGINEERING 

APPROVALS 

Kenda MacKenzie 

490-5029 

ENGINEERING 

INFORMATION MANAGER 

Harold MacNeil 

490-6234 

INFORMATION SERVICES 

MANAGER 

Dayalan Pillay 

490-6921 

Updated: December 2012 

MANAGER ENERGY 

EFFICIENCY 

Jeffrey Knapp 

490-5736

Appendix C 

Water and Wastewater Service Districts 

and Supporting Infrastructure

Blank Page

Appendix D 

Approved Capital Budget 

2012‐13

Blank Page

HALIFAX WATER 

Capital Budget 2012/13 

Summary 

Asset Category 

Project Costs 

Water - Transmission -- T O T A L $7,413,000 

Water - Distribution -- T O T A L $4,163,000 

Water - Structures -- T O T A L $4,410,000 

Water - Treatment Facilities -- T O T A L $542,000 

Water - Energy -- T O T A L $450,000 

Water - Fleet -- T O T A L $250,000 

Water - IT -- T O T A L $974,000 

Water - Security -- T O T A L $50,000 

Water - Equipment -- T O T A L $65,000 

TOTAL - Water $18,317,000 

Wastewater - Trunk Sewers -- T O T A L $1,350,000 

Wastewater - Collection System -- T O T A L $1,828,000 

Wastewater - Forcemains -- T O T A L $2,320,000 

Wastewater Structures -- T O T A L $5,783,000 

Wastewater - Treatment Facility -- T O T A L $26,834,000 

Wastewater - Energy -- T O T A L $1,100,000 

Page 1 of 12

HALIFAX WATER 


Summary 

Asset Category 

Project Costs 

Wastewater - Fleet -- T O T A L $1,000,000 

Wastewater - IT -- T O T A L $1,244,000 

Wastewater - Security -- T O T A L $150,000 

Wastewater - Equipment -- T O T A L $109,000 

TOTAL - Wastewater $41,718,000 

Stormwater - Pipes -- T O T A L $1,438,000 

Stormwater - Culverts -- T O T A L $455,000 

TOTAL - Stormwater $1,893,000 

Aerotech- Wastewater -- T O T A L $285,000 

Aerotech- Water -- T O T A L $250,000 

TOTAL - Aerotech $535,000 

G R A N D T O T A L $62,463,000 

Page 2 of 12

HALIFAX WATER 


Water 

Schedule 1 

Project Name 

Project Cost 

Water - Transmission 

Bedford South CCC - Nine Mile Drive Extension $35,000 

Bedford South Transmission Main Oversizing - Non CCC $40,000 

Bedford West CCC - Various Phases $10,000 

Twin Brooks Phase 2 Transmission Main Oversizing - Non CCC $110,000 

Governor's Brook Phase 3 Oversizing $65,000 

Integrated Resource Plan (50/50 split W/WW) $165,000 

Asset Management Implementation Program (1/3 split W/WW/SW) $88,000 

Dunbrack Transmission Main Sliplining Phase 2 $6,900,000 

Water - Transmission -- T O T A L $7,413,000 

Water - Distribution 

Chandler Drive $284,000 

Waverley Road Bridge Water Main Replacement $75,000 

Lawnsdale Drive Water Main Renewal (Integrated) $373,000 

Pine Street Water Main Renewal (Integrated) $433,000 

Mountain Drive Water Main Renewal (Integrated) $198,000 

Carver St Service Lateral Relocation $56,000 

Bayers Rd Water Main Renewal (Integrated) $315,000 

Kingfisher Crescent Water Main Renewal (Integrated) $222,000 

Page 3 of 12

HALIFAX WATER 


Water 

Schedule 1 

Project Name 

Project Cost 

CNR Bridge @ Quinpool Road (integrated) $81,000 

Plateau Cr Water Main Renewal (Integrated) $419,000 

Willow Street Water Main Renewal (Integrated) $125,000 

Pleasant Street $167,000 

~ Valves $50,000 

~ Hydrants $75,000 

~ Service Lines $240,000 

~ Meter Program $1,050,000 

~ Denotes Blanket approval 

Water - Distribution -- T O T A L $4,163,000 

Water - Structures 

CSE Retrofit - Arkerley Reservoir Chamber $35,000 

Cowie Hill Road Extension $250,000 

Cowie Hill Facility - Furniture $125,000 

Cowie Hill Operations Facility $4,000,000 

Water - Structures -- T O T A L $4,410,000 

Page 4 of 12

HALIFAX WATER 


Water 

Schedule 1 

Project Name 

Project Cost 

Water - Treatment Facilities 

Miller Lake Small System - Extension of Well Supply Line $250,000 

J D Kline - Chemical Feed Pump Replacement Program $120,000 

J D Kline - Chlorination System Replacement Design $100,000 

Lake Major WSP - Control Room Renovations $14,000 

Lake Major WSP - Lime System Upgrade $38,000 

Lake Major WSP - Ventilation in Motor Control Room $20,000 

Water - Treatment Facilities -- T O T A L $542,000 

Water - Energy 

Heat Recovery Study and Upgrade $300,000 

JD Kline - Raw Water Supply Pump Energy Study $50,000 

PRV Energy Recovery Pilot Project - Orchard Central Chamber $100,000 

Water - Energy -- T O T A L $450,000 

Water - Fleet 

~ Fleet Upgrade Program $250,000 

Water - Fleet -- T O T A L $250,000 

Page 5 of 12

HALIFAX WATER 


Water 

Schedule 1 

Project Name 

Project Cost 

Water - IT 

~ Desktop Computer Replacement Program (50/50 split W/WW) $130,000 

SCADA Control System Upgrades $50,000 

SCADA Master Plan Implementation (50/50 split W/WW) $594,000 

~ Network Infrastructure Upgrades (50/50 split W/WW) $100,000 

IT Program $50,000 

Computerized Maintenance Management System (50/50 split W/WW) $50,000 

Water - IT -- T O T A L $974,000 

Water - Security 

Security Upgrade Program $50,000 

Water - Security -- T O T A L $50,000 

Water - Equipment 

~ Survey Equipment (50/50 split W/WW) $10,000 

~ Power Meter/Data Logger (50/50 split W/WW) $5,000 

~ Scissor-Lift Equipment - Lake Major WSP $20,000 

~ Miscellaneous Equipment Replacement $30,000 

Water - Equipment -- T O T A L $65,000 

GRAND TOTAL - WATER $18,317,000 

Page 6 of 12

HALIFAX WATER 


Wastewater 

Schedule 2 

Project Name 

Project Cost 

Wastewater - Trunk Sewers 

CN Quinpool Bridge Structure - Replacement of 450mm Combined Sewer $100,000 

Bedford West (CCC) $1,250,000 

Wastewater - Trunk Sewers - -- T O T A L $1,350,000 

Wastewater - Collection System 

Integrated Wastewater Projects - Program $1,250,000 

Integrated Resource Plan (50/50 split W/WW) $165,000 

Springfield Lake Collection Upgrade $150,000 

Outfall Elimination Program $100,000 


Grit Management Facility $60,000 

Bedford West Collection System (CCC) $15,000 

Wastewater - Collection System -- T O T A L $1,828,000 

Wastewater - Forcemains 

Bayers Lake Forcemain Upgrade & Twinning $2,160,000 

Cathodic Protection Program (Various Locations) $150,000 

Bedford West - FM Design to redirect WW (Holyhock PS) from Mill Cove to Halifax $10,000 

Wastewater - Forcemains -- T O T A L $2,320,000 

Page 7 of 12

HALIFAX WATER 


Wastewater 

Schedule 2 

Project Name 

Project Cost 

Wastewater - Structures 

Wastewater Pumping Station Upgrade Program - West Region $133,000 

Wastewater Pumping Station Upgrade Program - East Region $125,000 

Wastewater Pumping Station Upgrade Program - Central Region $100,000 

Quigley's Corner Pump Replacement and PS Upgrade $300,000 

Balcome Drive PS $750,000 

Cowie Hill Road Extension $250,000 

Cowie Hill Facility - Furniture $125,000 

Cowie Hill Operations Facility $4,000,000 

Wastewater Structures -- T O T A L $5,783,000 

Wastewater - Treatment Facility 

Eastern Passage WWTF Design Build Upgrade $20,000,000 

Beechville, Lakeside, Timberlea WWTF Upgrade $5,000,000 

Lockview-MacPherson WWTF - Tertiary Upgrade $150,000 

Wastewater Treatment Facilities Upgrades (Various Locations) $135,000 

- Mill Cove WWTF $50,000 

- Uplands Park WWTF $50,000 

- Halifax WWTF $290,000 

- Dartmouth WWTF $180,000 

Page 8 of 12

HALIFAX WATER 


Wastewater 

Schedule 2 

Project Name 

Project Cost 

HHSP Deficiency Management $500,000 

N-viro Facility - Upgrade Program $359,000 

Frame WWTF Replacement $100,000 

Dartmouth HHSP ARV's $20,000 

Wastewater - Treatment Facility -- T O T A L $26,834,000 

Wastewater - Energy 

Roach's Pond PS HVAC Study/Upgrade $250,000 

DWWTF Heat Recovery System Study $50,000 

HCWWTF Heat Recovery System Study $50,000 

Herring Cove WWTF - Ventilation Air Heat Recovery $600,000 

Mill Cove WWTF - Reactive Power Correction $50,000 

Mill Cove WWTF - Lighting Upgrades $100,000 

Wastewater - Energy -- T O T A L $1,100,000 

Wastewater - Fleet 

~ Fleet Upgrade Program $1,000,000 

Wastewater - Fleet -- T O T A L $1,000,000 

Wastewater - IT 

~ Network Infrastructure Upgrades (50/50 split W/WW) $100,000 

~ Desktop Computer Replacement Program (50/50 split W/WW) $130,000 

Page 9 of 12

HALIFAX WATER 


Wastewater 

Schedule 2 

Project Name 

Project Cost 

SCADA Master Plan Implementation (50/50 split W/WW) $594,000 

GIS Migration & Development $250,000 

IT Program $50,000 

Computerized Maintenance Management System (50/50 split W/WW) $50,000 

EMS Software $70,000 

Wastewater - IT -- T O T A L $1,244,000 

Wastewater - Security 

Security Upgrade Program $150,000 

Wastewater - Security -- T O T A L $150,000 

Wastewater - Equipment 

~ Survey Equipment (50/50 split W/WW) $15,000 

~ Asphalt Roller $15,000 

~ Tri-axel Trailer $30,000 

~ Power Meter/Data Logger (50/50 split W/WW) $5,000 

~ SIR Program Flow Meters $44,000 

Wastewater - Equipment -- T O T A L $109,000 

GRAND TOTAL - WASTEWATER $41,718,000 

Page 10 of 12

HALIFAX WATER 


Stormwater 

Schedule 3 

Project Name 

Project Cost 

Stormwater - Pipes 

Integrated Stormwater Projects - Program $500,000 

Drainage Remediation Program Surveys/Studies $50,000 

Deep Storm Sewer Installation Program $800,000 


Stormwater - Pipes -- T O T A L $1,438,000 

Stormwater - Culverts/Ditches 

Leeward Avenue - Ditch Regrading and Rock Breaking $70,000 

Lucasville Road Culverts Replacements $180,000 

Diana Drive Stormwater Modifications $50,000 

Spruce Grove Court to Daisy Drive - Drainage Swale $50,000 

561 Herring Cove Road, Culvert Replacement $105,000 

Stormwater - Culverts/Ditches -- T O T A L $455,000 

GRAND TOTAL - STORMWATER $1,893,000 

Page 11 of 12

HALIFAX WATER 


Aerotech 

Schedule 4 

Project Name 

Project Cost 

Wastewater 

Aerotech Wastewater Treatment Facility Upgrade - Detailed Design $250,000 

Aerotech Wastewater Treatment Facility Upgrades $35,000 

Wastewater -- T O T A L $285,000 

Water 

Water Treatment Plant Upgrades $140,000 

Distribution System Upgrades $110,000 

Water -- T O T A L $250,000 

GRAND TOTAL - AEROTECH $535,000 

Page 12 of 12

Appendix E 

Projected Capital Budgets for 

2013‐14 to 2017‐18

Blank Page

Five Year Capital Budget 

All $ in 000's 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 

2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 

Sub Total 

to Y5 

Y1 

Stormwater / Wastewater / Water Budget Summary 

Stormwater - Pipes $1,913 $5,429 $3,473 $8,408 $7,495 $26,718 

Stormwater - Culverts/Ditches $811 $825 $500 $500 $663 $3,299 

Stormwater - Structures $231 $575 $0 $0 $0 $0 

Stormwater - Fleet $249 $201 $245 $212 $202 $1,109 

Stormwater - IT $431 $331 $323 $198 $158 $1,441 

Sub Total - Stormwater $3,635 $7,361 $4,541 $9,318 $8,518 $33,373 

Wastewater - Trunk Sewers $200 $150 $3,805 $6,545 $10,445 $21,145 

Wastewater - Collection System $5,595 $7,199 $14,201 $14,752 $11,865 $53,613 

Wastewater - Forcemains $1,843 $625 $240 $1,222 $3,573 $7,503 

Wastewater - Structures $12,879 $10,456 $20,525 $13,999 $15,785 $73,644 

Wastewater - Treatment Facilities $34,211 $4,588 $9,583 $22,651 $20,050 $91,082 

Wastewater - Energy $840 $1,340 $590 $590 $590 $3,950 

Wastewater - Fleet $994 $804 $980 $846 $806 $4,430 

Wastewater - IT $1,449 $2,378 $1,694 $992 $732 $7,245 

Wastewater - Security $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $1,000 

Wastewater - Equipment $150 $135 $135 $145 $145 $710 

Sub Total - Wastewater $58,361 $27,875 $51,953 $61,942 $64,192 $264,323 

Sub Total - Stormwater and Wastewater $61,996 $35,236 $56,494 $71,260 $72,710 $297,696 

Water - Land $15 $215 $215 $15 $215 $675 

Water - Transmission $12,305 $1,214 $9,806 $19,093 $11,621 $54,039 

Water - Distribution $5,855 $6,890 $8,272 $8,272 $8,298 $37,587 

Water - Structures $3,925 $1,485 $7,551 $8,456 $8,409 $29,826 

Water - Treatment Facilities $2,275 $2,395 $10,912 $7,398 $622 $23,603 

Water - Energy $740 $550 $440 $440 $440 $2,610 

Water - Fleet $252 $457 $424 $507 $699 $2,339 

Water - IT $1,630 $2,459 $1,767 $1,190 $890 $7,936 

Water - Security $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $250 

Water - Equipment $60 $60 $76 $59 $50 $305 

Sub Total - Water $27,107 $15,775 $39,514 $45,480 $31,294 $159,170 

TOTALS - Stormwater / Wastewater / Water $89,103 $51,011 $96,008 $116,740 $104,003 $456,866 

Page 1 of 15

Five Year Capital Budget - Stormwater Projects 


Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 

Y1 to Y5 

Stormwater - Pipes 

I/I Reduction Program HRM $300 $400 $500 $500 $1,700 

Climate Change Adaptation Program HRM $0 $200 $250 $250 $700 

Stormwater Quality Compliance Needs Assessment HRM $0 $75 $75 $75 $75 $300 

New storm sewers for I/I Reduction within prioritized 

sewersheds. 

Land acquisition & Management Program (split 

50W/40WW/10SW) 

Central $690 $4,635 $5,417 $10,742 

HRM $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $15 

Integrated Stormwater Projects - Program HRM $525 $575 $575 $600 $600 $2,875 

Drainage Remediation Program Surveys/Studies HRM $50 $200 $250 $300 $300 $1,100 

Deep Storm Sewer Installation Program HRM $800 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $4,800 

Asset Management Implementation Program (split 

50W/40WW/10SW) 

HRM $90 $90 $90 $60 $330 

Elizabeth Street Storm Sewer Replacement East $45 $45 

Acadia Mill Drive/Salmon River Terrace Storm Sewer 

Rehabilitation 

Crestfield Avenue (Uplands Phase 3) - Deep Storm 

Sewer Installation 

West $100 $100 

Central $720 $720 

Pinehill Drive Embankment Protection Central $166 $166 

Sullivan's Pond Storm Sewer System Replacement East $2,000 $2,000 

Integrated Resource Plan (split 50W/40WW/10SW) HRM $40 $40 $80 

Ivylea Crescent - New Storm Sewer West $645 $645 

Raymond Street, Phase 2 - Storm Sewer Rehabilitation East $300 $300 

Winston Drive Stormwater Cross-Connection - Churchill 

Estates, Herring Cove 

West $100 $100 

$0 

Stormwater - Pipes -- T O T A L S $1,913 $5,429 $3,473 $8,408 $7,495 $26,718 

Stormwater - Culverts/Ditches 

Stormwater Culverts/Ditches HRM $325 $325 $0 $0 $163 $813 

Culvert Replacement Program HRM $500 $500 $500 $500 $2,000 

Wilson Drive & Highway 2 - Culvert Replacement Central $149 $149 

Sackville Drive (West of Hamilton) - Culvert Replacement 

(no civic provided) 

Civic # 43 Deepwood Drive, Hammonds Plains - Culvert 

replacement 

Central $137 $137 

Central $100 $100 

Inverness Avenue - Culvert Replacement West $100 $100 

Stormwater - Culverts/Ditches -- T O T A L S $811 $825 $500 $500 $663 $3,299 

Page 2 of 15

Five Year Capital Budget - Stormwater Projects 


Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 


Stormwater - Structures 

Idlewylde Road Storm Sewer Outlet/Embankment 

Stabilization 

West $0 $200 $200 

Stormwater Structure Replacement Program HRM $150 $150 $300 

Clement Street Berm - Rehabilitation of Stormwater 

Control System 

East & Central Operations Facility Review (split 

50W/40WW/10SW) 

East $75 $225 $300 

East / 

Central 

$6 $6 

$0 

Stormwater - Structures -- T O T A L S $231 $575 $0 $0 $0 $806 

Stormwater - Fleet 

Fleet Upgrade Program HRM $249 $201 $245 $212 $202 $1,109 

$0 

Stormwater - Fleet -- T O T A L S $249 $201 $245 $212 $202 $1,109 

Stormwater - IT 

Lateral Card Database Conversion Project 

(50WW/50SW) 

GIS Data Program Implementation (split 

50W/40WW/10SW) 

Desktop Computer Replacement Program (split 

50W/40WW/10SW) 

Network Infrastructure Upgrades (split 

50W/40WW/10SW) 

HRM $125 $125 $125 $375 

HRM $45 $60 $60 $60 $60 $285 

HRM $16 $16 $18 $18 $18 $86 

HRM $20 $0 $20 $20 $20 $80 

Corporate IT Program (split 50W/40WW/10SW) HRM $0 $0 $20 $20 $20 $60 

Computerized Maintenance Management System (split 

50W/40WW/10SW) 

Document Management System (split 

50W/40WW/10SW) 

HRM $80 $80 $80 $80 $40 $360 

HRM $40 $10 $50 

IT Disaster Recovery Site (split 50W/40WW/10SW) HRM $10 $30 $40 

Multimedia Devices (split 50W/40WW/10SW) HRM $30 $10 $40 

Corporate GIS Data Plan - Project 4 (Bedford Main Area 

P-8) (split 50W/40WW/10SW) 

HRM $45 $45 

SAP HR Self Serve Phase 1 (split 50W/40WW/10SW) HRM $20 $20 

$0 

Stormwater - IT -- T O T A L S $431 $331 $323 $198 $158 $1,441 

TOTALS - Stormwater $3,635 $7,361 $4,541 $9,318 $8,518 $33,373 

Page 3 of 15

Five Year Capital Budget - Wastewater Projects 


Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 


Wastewater - Trunk Sewers 

Wastewater Sewers & Trunk Sewers HRM $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,000 $6,000 

Diversion Sewer from Mill Cove WWTF to Halifax, 

along Bedford waterfront to Bedford Hwy tunnel (MC7) 

Central / 

West 

$605 $2,722 $2,722 $6,049 

Localized improvments to Bedford Sackville Trunk 

Sewer sections - diameters range between 525 mm 

and 1200 mm over 4.44 km (MC4) 

CN Quinpool Bridge Structure - Replacement of 450mm 

Combined Sewer 

Central $1,723 $1,723 $3,446 

West $100 $100 

Kearney Lake (Bedford West) CCC West $50 $50 

Northwest Arm Sewer Rehabilitation West $50 $150 $2,100 $2,100 $4,400 

Jamieson Street Trunk Sewer Outfall Replacement - 

Phase 2 - Construction 

East $1,100 $1,100 

$0 

Wastewater - Trunk Sewers - -- T O T A L S $200 $150 $3,805 $6,545 $10,445 $21,145 

Wastewater - Collection System 

Wastewater Sewers & Trunk Sewers HRM $745 $745 $420 $0 $100 $2,010 

Wet Weather Management Planning Program HRM $250 $250 $250 $500 $500 $1,750 

I/I Reduction Program (HA8) West $0 $640 $2,880 $1,725 $5,245 

I/I Reduction Program (HC6) West $0 $320 $1,440 $1,440 $3,200 

Gravity sewer from Little Albro Lake to Jamieson St PS 

(DA1) 

450mm surface water sewer from Fenwick St to Old 

Ferry Rd PS with the addition of Maynard St (DA2) 

East $0 $376 $1,693 $1,694 $3,763 

East $301 $1,355 $1,355 $3,010 

I/I Reduction Program (DA9) East $0 $320 $1,440 $1,440 $3,200 

I/I Reduction within Eastern Passage Drainage Area 

(EP1) 

Sewer twinning along existing roads - Albro 

Lake/Slayter St to Ferry St PS (DA3) 

East $0 $208 $936 $936 $2,080 

East $948 $0 $4,266 $5,214 

General I/I reduction program allowance (MC8) Central $160 $720 $720 $1,600 

Diversion Sewer from Springfield to Bedford Sackville 

Trunk Sewer (SP3) 

Gravity sewer from St Margarets Bay Rd to Armdale Rd 

PS (HA4) 

Central $112 $505 $505 $1,123 

West $611 $611 $1,222 

I/I Reduction Program - manhole sealing (MC1) Central $48 $48 


50W/40WW/10SW) 


50W/40WW/10SW) 

HRM $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $60 

HRM $360 $360 $360 $240 $1,320 

Integrated Wastewater Projects - Program HRM $1,000 $1,050 $1,100 $1,500 $1,500 $6,150 

Outfall Elimination Program HRM $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

Overflow Monitoring Program HRM $200 $250 $250 $250 $250 $1,200 

Page 4 of 15



Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 


Sewer Lining Program HRM $50 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $4,050 

Grit Management Facility HRM $60 $60 

Intercolonial Street Sewer Separation (potential 

integration with DND Willow Park Project) 

Mabou Avenue Sewer Replacement (cost currently 

shown includes watermain replacement) 

Quigley's Corner PS Sewershed - Sanitary Sewer 

Rehab 

West $590 $590 

West $300 $300 

East $2,000 $2,000 

Alder Crescent WW Collection System Replacement Central $0 $550 $550 

Springfield Lake Collection Upgrade Central $250 $250 $500 

Wanda Lane Sanitary Sewer Replacement East $1,000 $1,200 $2,200 

Bedford South CCC Central $10 $10 $20 

Bedford West Collection System CCC West $0 $25 $25 $25 $25 $100 

Portland Hills Collection System CCC East $18 $70 $88 


Russell Lake West Collection System CCC East $165 $165 

Kempt Road Sewer Replacement West $475 $475 

$0 

Wastewater - Collection System -- T O T A L S $5,595 $7,199 $14,201 $14,752 $11,865 $53,613 

Wastewater - Forcemains 

Wastewater Forcemains HRM $0 $0 $240 $0 $2,951 $3,191 

500mm Wastewater forcemain from Mill Cove WWTF 

to Mill Cove Diversion Sewer (MC6) 

Central $338 $338 $677 

825mm Ø Ferry Rd forcemain for 900l/s (DA7) East $283 $283 $567 

Bayers Lake Forcemain Upgrade & Twinning West $1,000 $1,000 

MacPherson Forcemain Replacement and twinning Central $443 $443 

Beaver Crescent PS - Forcemain Replacement East $300 $300 

Stuart Harris Drive PS - Forcemain Replacement East $100 $100 

Shore Drive Golf Links - Forcemain Replacement and 

Twinning 

Central $625 $625 

Forcemain Replacement Program HRM $600 $600 

$0 

Wastewater - Forcemains -- T O T A L S $1,843 $625 $240 $1,222 $3,573 $7,503 

Page 5 of 15



Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 


Wastewater - Structures 

Wastewater Pumping Stations HRM $400 $2,000 $8,410 $1,899 $14,000 $26,709 

Storage Facility #1 at Glendale/Old Beaver Bank Road 

(upstream of Bedford Sackville Trunk Sewer) (MC2) 

New wastewater pumping station at Mill Cove WWTF 

for diversion to Halifax (MC5) 

Upgrade of Ferry Rd PS by 807 L/s to provide total 

capacity of 900 L/s (existing PS has 93 L/s) (DA6) 

Wastewater Pumping Station Upgrade Program - 

Various Locations 

Central $0 $1,920 $8,640 $8,640 $19,200 

Central $317 $317 $634 

East $968 $968 $1,937 

HRM $550 $400 $550 $500 $2,000 

West Region West $60 $60 

East Region East $125 $125 

Central Region Central $75 $75 

Lakeside Pumping Station - Diversion to the Halifax 

Sewershed 

West $7,000 $4,911 $11,911 

Mowat Crescent PS - Back-up Power Supply Central $25 $75 $400 $500 

Colpitt Lake PS Elimination West $720 $720 

Bedford PS Rehabilitation (at Mill Cove WWTF) Central $750 $1,375 $1,375 $3,500 

Russell Lake PS Upgrade East $1,000 $1,000 $2,000 

Roach's Pond Grit Building rehab West $250 $250 

Cowie Hill Operations Facility HRM $3,700 $3,700 


50W/40WW/10SW) 

East / 

Central 

$24 $24 

East Region Operation Facility - Design East $300 $300 

$0 

Wastewater Structures -- T O T A L S $12,879 $10,456 $20,525 $13,999 $15,785 $73,644 

Wastewater - Treatment Facility 

Wastewater Treatment Facilities HRM $400 $2,000 $4,681 $17,774 $16,432 $41,287 

Bio-Solids Processing Facility Expansion HRM $120 $120 

Dartmouth WWTF - Characterize effluent UVT and 

assess capacity of the existing disinfection system. 

Upgrade UV disinfection system. 

Uplands Park WWTF - To ensure continued 

compliance with treatment requirements: 

- Construct flow splitter boxes and reconfigure trickling 

filter and clarifier influent piping to improve flow splits; 

and 

- Replace mechanical equipment associated with the 

existing trickling filters (distribution arms, effluent 

collection system). 

Lockview-MacPherson WWTF - Modifications to 

secondary clarifiers, such as installing baffles and 

replacing the sludge / scum collection equipment, to 

improve performance. 

East $448 $448 $1,792 $1,792 $4,480 

Central $293 $293 

Central $240 $240 

Page 6 of 15



Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 


Middle Musquodoboit WWTF - Provide additional 

equalization storage volume to attenuate peak flows to 

the downstream treatment process and/or provide a 

bypass line around the mechanical plant discharging to 

the polishing pond to protect the treatment process and 

ensure continued compliance with treatment 

requirements. 

Central $120 $120 

Lockview-MacPherson WWTF - UV system upgrade. Central $112 $112 

Lockview-MacPherson WWTF - Modifications to 

equalization tank pumping and/or increase equalization 

tank volume to reduce magnitude of peak flows to 

downstream treatment processes. 

Halifax WWTF - Conduct treatability study, optimize 

coagulant dosages, polymer dosages, and sludge 

pumping to improve performance of DensaDeg during 

high flows. 

Dartmouth WWTF - Conduct treatability study, optimize 

coagulant dosages, polymer dosages, and sludge 

pumping to improve performance of DensaDeg during 

high flows. 

Herring Cove WWTF - Optimize coagulant dosages, 

polymer dosages, and sludge pumping to improve 

performance of DensaDeg process during high flows. 

North Preston WWTF - Install an autosampler to collect 

samples of engineered wetland effluent to determine 

actual effluent loadings applied to the receiver, 

Whynder Lake. 

North Preston WWTF - Conduct a detailed biological 

treatment capacity assessment to evaluate the ability of 

the current process to provide consistent nitrification (to 

be completed after upgrades to the alkalinity addition 

system). 

North Preston WWTF - Provide additional alkalinity 

addition to supplement the existing caustic soda 

addition system and/or utilize a different chemical for 

alkalinity addition (Project underway). 

Central $102 $102 

West $98 $98 

East $98 $98 

West $46 $46 

East $37 $37 

East $33 $33 

East $29 $29 

Eastern Passage WWTF Design Build Upgrade East $32,300 $32,300 

Beechville, Lakeville, Timberlea WWTF Upgrade West $0 $0 $0 

Lockview-MacPherson WWTF - Tertiary Upgrade Central $100 $100 

Wastewater Treatment Facilities Upgrades (Various 

Locations) 

HRM $250 $250 $250 $250 $1,000 

- Middle Musquodoboit WWTF Central $10 $10 

HHSP Upgrade Program HRM $250 $250 $250 $250 $1,000 

- Halifax WWTF West $187 $187 

- Dartmouth WWTF East $118 $118 

- Herring Cove WWTF West $118 $118 

N-viro Facility - Upgrade Program HRM $63 $77 $29 $169 

Wastewater Treatment Facilities - Backup Power 

Program (Various Locations) 

HRM $150 $278 $428 

Plant Optimization Audit Program HRM $125 $125 $125 $375 

Page 7 of 15



Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 


Mill Cove WWTF Emergency Overflow Outfall Pipe 

replacement 

Central $100 $860 $960 

Mill Cove WWTF Vacuum Swing Absorption Central $550 $400 $950 

Frame WWTF Replacement Central $300 $3,000 $3,300 

Bellmont WWTF decommissioning East $400 $1,500 $1,900 

Mill Cove WWTF UV Upgrade Central $1,075 $1,075 

Wastewater - Treatment Facility -- T O T A L S $34,211 $4,588 $9,583 $22,651 $20,050 $91,082 

Wastewater - Energy 

Energy Management Plan Update HRM $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $200 

Halifax WWTF - UV Trans Monitoring & Control Central $50 $50 

Dartmouth WWTF - UV Trans Monitoring & Control East $50 $50 

Herring Cove WWTF - UV Trans Monitoring & Control West $50 $50 

Various PS - HVAC Retro-commissioning HRM $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $750 

Various PS - Reactive Power Correction HRM $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $750 

Various - WWTF Energy Efficiency Upgrades HRM $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $1,250 

Mill Cove WWTF - Bio-Gas CHP - Study Central $100 $100 

Mill Cove WWTF - Bio-Gas CHP - Installation Central $750 $750 

$0 

Wastewater - Energy -- T O T A L S $840 $1,340 $590 $590 $590 $3,950 

Wastewater - Fleet 

Fleet Upgrade Program HRM $994 $804 $980 $846 $806 $4,430 

$0 

Wastewater - Fleet -- T O T A L S $994 $804 $980 $846 $806 $4,430 

Wastewater - IT 

SCADA Control System Enhancements HRM $100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $500 

SCADA Master Plan Update (50/50 allocation W/WW) HRM $100 $100 

Lateral Card Database Conversion Project 

(50WW/50SW) 


50W/40WW/10SW) 

Desktop Computer Replacement Program (split 

50W/40WW/10SW) 


50W/40WW/10SW) 

HRM $125 $125 $125 $375 

HRM $180 $240 $240 $240 $240 $1,140 

HRM $64 $64 $72 $72 $72 $344 

HRM $80 $0 $80 $80 $80 $320 

Page 8 of 15



Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 




50W/40WW/10SW) 


50W/40WW/10SW) 

HRM $320 $320 $320 $320 $160 $1,440 

HRM $160 $40 $200 



Corporate GIS Data Plan - Project 4 (Bedford Main 

Area P-8) (split 50W/40WW/10SW) 

SCADA Master Plan Implementation (50/50 split 

W/WW) 

HRM $180 $180 

HRM $0 $1,329 $677 $2,006 


$0 

Wastewater - IT -- T O T A L S $1,449 $2,378 $1,694 $992 $732 $7,245 

Wastewater - Security 

Security Upgrade Program HRM $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $1,000 

$0 

Wastewater - Security -- T O T A L S $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $1,000 

Wastewater - Equipment 

SIR Program Flow Meters and Related Equipment HRM $75 $75 $75 $75 $75 $375 

` Asphalt Roller West $15 $15 

` Tri-axel Trailer West $30 $30 

` Trailer and Walk behind Asphalt Saw East $30 $30 

Miscellaneous Equipment Replacement HRM $0 $60 $60 $70 $70 $260 

Wastewater - Equipment -- T O T A L S $150 $135 $135 $145 $145 $710 

TOTALS - Wastewater $58,361 $27,875 $51,953 $61,942 $64,192 $264,323 

Page 9 of 15

Five Year Capital Budget - Water Projects 


Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 


Water - Land 


50W/40WW/10SW) 

HRM $15 $15 $15 $15 $15 $75 

Watershed Land Acquisition HRM $0 $200 $200 $200 $600 

$0 

Water - Land -- T O T A L S $15 $215 $215 $15 $215 $675 

Water - Transmission 

Water Transmission Mains HRM $0 $0 $6,037 $13,780 $0 $19,817 

Pockwock Transmission Main Replacement Kearney 

Lake Road (Bluewater Road to Ham-Kearney 

Connector) (W2) 

North End Feeder Tunnel 36" Transmission Main 

Rehab (W3) 

West $0 $611 $611 $2,446 $3,668 

West $0 $292 $292 $1,169 $1,754 

Bedford Connector 30" Replacement - Phase 3 (C1) Central $248 $248 $991 $991 $2,477 

Burnside - Bedford Connector Transmission Main 

Extension of 600mm Main on Glendale Dr. to HWY 102 

(E9) 

East $202 $202 $807 $807 $2,017 

Port Wallace Transmission Main - Phase 1 (E3) East $0 $590 $590 $2,361 $3,541 

Lucasville Road Transmission Main - Phase 1 (includes 

beaverbank Reinforcement) (C4) 

Central $0 $894 $894 $3,577 $5,365 

Pockwock Transmission Main Replacement Kearney 

Lake Road (Twin Culverts to Bluewater Road) (W1) 

West $11,700 $11,700 

Governor's Brook Phase 3 Oversizing West $70 $70 

Bedford South CCC Central $25 $25 $330 $380 

Bedford West CCC - Various Phases Central $30 $30 $30 $30 $20 $140 

Morris (Russell) Lake Estates CCC East $25 $15 $40 

Lakeside Timberlea CCC West $5 $5 $2 $2 $14 

Northgate CCC Central $5 $5 


50W/40WW/10SW) 

HRM $450 $450 $450 $300 $1,650 

Critical Trans Main Valve Replacement Program West $250 $250 $250 $250 $1,000 


$0 

Water - Transmission -- T O T A L S $12,305 $1,214 $9,806 $19,093 $11,621 $54,039 

Water - Distribution 

Water Distribution Mains HRM $0 $0 $2,782 $2,782 $2,323 $7,887 

Water Meters HRM $0 $0 $0 $0 $446 $446 

Water Valves HRM $0 $0 $0 $0 $39 $39 

Water Distribution - Main Renewal Program HRM $4,000 $5,000 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $19,800 

Cathodic Protection Program HRM $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $1,500 

~ Valves HRM $125 $125 $125 $125 $125 $625 

~ Hydrants HRM $75 $75 $75 $75 $75 $375 

~ Service Lines HRM $240 $240 $240 $240 $240 $1,200 

Page 10 of 15



Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 


~ Meter Program HRM $1,100 $1,150 $1,150 $1,150 $1,150 $5,700 

Automated Flushing System East $15 $15 

$0 

Water - Distribution -- T O T A L S $5,855 $6,890 $8,272 $8,272 $8,298 $37,587 

Water - Structures 

Water Pumping Stations HRM $0 $200 $4,005 $3,005 $220 $7,431 

Water Pumping Stations - Aerotech HRM $0 $0 $785 $785 $0 $1,571 

Water PRVs HRM $0 $200 $576 $576 $800 $2,152 

Herring Cove Reservoir * West $425 $425 $1,700 $1,700 $4,250 

Bedford South Reservoir * West $1,100 $1,100 $4,400 $6,600 

Lake Major Dam Replacement in 2017 East $210 $210 $839 $839 $2,097 

Water Efficiency Program HRM $100 $100 $100 $100 $400 

Chambers and Pumping Stations HRm $250 $250 $250 $250 $1,000 


50W/40WW/10SW) 

CSE - Chlorine - Chamber Storage/Relocation. 

Various Locations 

East / 

Central 

$30 $30 

HRM $50 $50 

CSE - BroadholmeChamber Entrance Retorfit West $27 $27 

Prince Albert Road PRV - Small PRV installation East $11 $11 

Replace Ross Valves - various locations Central $16 $16 

Highway #7 Booster Station Upgrades Central $55 $55 

North Preston Reservoir Mixing System East $36 $36 

Cowie Hill Operations Facility HRM $3,700 $3,700 

DMA Program HRM $100 $100 $100 $100 $400 

* Majority funding from non-capital source 

$0 

Water - Structures -- T O T A L S $3,925 $1,485 $7,551 $8,456 $8,409 $29,826 

Water - Treatment Facilities 

Pockwock and Lake Major Treatment Facilities HRM $0 $0 $6,292 $6,543 $0 $12,835 

Small Water Treatment Facilities HRM $0 $0 $135 $135 $122 $393 

Water Quality Master Plan (WQMP) Periodic Updates HRM $100 $100 

JD Kline WSP Upgrade Program 

JD Kline Fume hood replacement 

JD Kline Caustic Soda pipe/pumping replacement 

JD Kline Backwash pump motor replacement 

JD Kline Drying bed expansion/upgrade 

J D Kline - Replacement program for Filter Valve 

Actuators 

West / 

Central 

West / 

Central 

West / 

Central 

West / 

Central 

West / 

Central 

West / 

Central 

$300 $300 $300 $300 $1,200 

$50 $50 

$50 $50 

$425 $425 

$100 $100 

$45 $45 $45 $135 

Page 11 of 15



Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 


J D Kline - Chemical Feed Pump Replacement 

Program 

J D Kline - Chlorination System Replacement 

J D Kline - Replace Valve Actuators at the Pumping 

Station 

J D Kline - Mechanical Mixers in the Mixing Tanks 

J D Kline - Entrance Road Paving Renewal 

J D Kline - Removal of Aluminium in the process 

wastewater 

J D Kline - Parking Lot Resurfacing 

West / 

Central 

West / 

Central 

West / 

Central 

West / 

Central 

West / 

Central 

West / 

Central 

West / 

Central 

$120 $120 $120 $120 $480 

$925 $925 

$95 $95 

$1,550 $1,000 $2,550 

$85 $85 

$2,700 $2,700 

$120 $120 

Lake Major WSP Upgrade program East $50 $50 $50 $50 $200 

Lake Major safety ladder and walkways for Mixer unit East $15 $15 

Laker Major dehumidifier system for Low Lift Building East $15 $15 

Non-Urban Core WSP Upgrade program HRM $150 $150 $150 $150 $600 

Miller Lake S.S. storage tank liner installation Central $5 $5 

Miller Lake S.S. land purchase- extension of water line, 

access road and power supply 

Lake Lamont emergency supply intake gate valve 

replacement 

Central $500 $500 

East $25 $25 

Water - Treatment Facilities -- T O T A L S $2,275 $2,395 $10,912 $7,398 $622 $23,603 

Water - Energy 

Energy Management Plan Update HRM $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $200 

JD Kline - Heat Recovery Study and Upgrade W/C $300 $300 

JD Kline - Industrial Process Pumps Upgrade W/C $110 $110 

Various - Chamber HVAC Retro-commissioning HRM $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $750 

Various - WSP Energy Reduction Upgrades HRM $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $1,250 

$0 

Water - Energy -- T O T A L S $740 $550 $440 $440 $440 $2,610 

Water - Fleet 

~ Fleet Upgrade Program HRM $252 $457 $424 $507 $699 $2,339 

$0 

Water - Fleet -- T O T A L S $252 $457 $424 $507 $699 $2,339 

Water - IT 

SCADA Control System Enhancements HRM $100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $500 

SCADA Master Plan Update (50/50 allocation W/WW) HRM $100 $100 


50W/40WW/10SW) 

~ Desktop Computer Replacement Program (split 

50W/40WW/10SW) 


50W/40WW/10SW) 

HRM $225 $300 $300 $300 $300 $1,425 

HRM $80 $80 $90 $90 $90 $430 

HRM $100 $0 $100 $100 $100 $400 


Page 12 of 15



Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 



50W/40WW/10SW) 


50W/40WW/10SW) 

HRM $400 $400 $400 $400 $200 $1,800 

HRM $200 $50 $250 



Corporate GIS Data Plan - Project 4 (Bedford Main 

Area P-8) (split 50W/40WW/10SW) 

SCADA Master Plan Implementation (50/50 split 

W/WW) 

HRM $225 $225 

HRM $0 $1,329 $677 $2,006 


$0 

Water - IT -- T O T A L S $1,630 $2,459 $1,767 $1,190 $890 $7,936 

Water - Security 

Security Upgrade Program HRM $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $250 

$0 

Water - Security -- T O T A L S $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $250 

Water - Equipment 

Miscellaneous Equipment Replacement HRM $20 $60 $60 $0 $50 $190 

` Survey software upgrade HRM $10 $10 

` Travel - Vacuum Trailer Central $21 $21 

` Shell Cutters HRM $9 $9 

` Diesel Plate Compactor HRM $16 $16 

` Small Hydro Vac for valve box maintenance HRM $25 $25 

` Large tapping machine c/w electric operator and 4" to 

12" cutters 

HRM $34 $34 

~ Denotes Blanket Approval Requests 

Water - Equipment -- T O T A L S $60 $60 $76 $59 $50 $305 

TOTALS - Water $27,107 $15,775 $39,514 $45,480 $31,294 $159,170 

Page 13 of 15

Five Year Capital Budget - Aerotech/Airport System 


Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 


Aerotech / Airport Budget Summary 

Stormwater $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

Wastewater $1,156 $8,906 $10,583 $346 $177 $21,168 

Water $675 $185 $2,894 $2,894 $367 $7,015 

TOTALS - Aerotech / Airport Summary $1,831 $9,091 $13,476 $3,240 $544 $28,182 

Page 14 of 15

Five Year Capital Budget - Aerotech/Airport System Projects 


Project Name 

Region 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 


Sub Total 


Stormwater 

$0 

$0 

Stormwater -- T O T A L S $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

Wastewater 

Airport/Aerotech WW Pumping Stations Bennery $156 $156 $156 $156 $25 $649 

Airport/Aerotech WW Treatment Facilities Bennery $0 $0 $389 $190 $0 $579 

Implement an operational control strategy to slowly 

add the Aerotech lagoon effluent to the mechanical 

treatment plant to avoid slug loads of high TKN/TAN 

influent during wet weather events. 

Bennery $152 $152 

Aerotech WWTF Upgrade - Design/Construction Bennery $1,000 $8,750 $10,000 $19,750 

Aerotech WWTF Upgrades Bennery $0 $0 $38 $0 $38 

$0 

Wastewater -- T O T A L S $1,156 $8,906 $10,583 $346 $177 $21,168 

Water 

Airport/Aerotech Water Treatment Facilities Bennery $0 $0 $2,061 $2,061 $367 $4,490 

Bennery Lake WSP - Future Process Improvements 

(from 2008 Aerotech Servicing Study) 

Bennery Lake WTP miscellaneous upgrades relating 

to process optimization study 

Bennery Lake WSP - Future Process Improvements 

(from 2008 Aerotech Servicing Study) 

Bennery $185 $833 $833 $1,850 

Bennery $200 $200 

Bennery $0 

Bennery - Lighting Upgrades East $75 $75 

Bennery - HVAC Study + Upgrade East $400 $400 

Water -- T O T A L S $675 $185 $2,894 $2,894 $367 $7,015 

$0 

Page 15 of 15

Blank Page

Appendix F 

Projected Operating Statements ‐ Consolidated 

2013‐14 to 2017‐18

Blank Page

HALIFAX WATER 

CONSOLIDATED SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED REVENUES & EXPENDITURES 

APRIL 1, 2012 to MARCH 31, 2018 

7-Jan-2013 

Page 1 of 6 

APR 1/11 APR 1/12 APR 1/13 APR 1/14 APR 1/15 APR 1/16 APR 1/17 

MAR 31/12 MAR 31/13 MAR 31/14 MAR 31/15 MAR 31/16 MAR 31/17 MAR 31/18 

ACTUAL FORECAST 1 BUDGET BUSINSS PLAN BUSINSS PLAN BUSINSS PLAN BUSINSS PLAN 

DESCRIPTION '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 

OPERATING REVENUES $98,828 $105,375 $106,870 $105,566 $105,343 $105,122 $104,900 

OPERATING EXPENDITURES $77,244 $85,008 $96,328 $100,377 $108,194 $112,026 $115,365 

OPERATING PROFIT $21,584 $20,367 $10,542 $5,189 ($2,851) ($6,904) ($10,465) 

FINANCIAL REVENUES (NON-OPERATING) 

INVESTMENT INCOME $402 $700 $660 $660 $660 $660 $660 

PNS FUNDING HHSP DEBT $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 

MISCELLANEOUS $194 $268 $297 $342 $347 $349 $350 

$2,596 $2,968 $2,957 $3,002 $3,007 $3,009 $3,010 

FINANCIAL EXPENDITURES (NON-OPERATING) 

LONG TERM DEBT INTEREST $8,100 $8,137 $7,112 $9,935 $10,899 $13,726 $16,797 

LONG TERM DEBT PRINCIPAL $13,066 $14,719 $15,601 $18,522 $20,760 $24,820 $28,944 

AMORTIZATION DEBT DISCOUNT $63 $91 $133 $183 $241 $319 $390 

DIVIDEND/GRANT IN LIEU OF TAXES $3,944 $3,971 $4,249 $4,671 $4,667 $5,066 $5,548 

$25,173 $26,917 $27,095 $33,310 $36,566 $43,930 $51,679 

NET PROFIT (LOSS) AVAILABLE FOR 

CAPITAL EXPENDITURES ($993) ($3,582) ($13,596) ($25,120) ($36,409) ($47,825) ($59,134) 

Adjustments: 

Debt Servicing $1,144 $1,799 $0 

Section 3461 Pension $2,400 $2,400 $2,400 

NET PROFIT (LOSS) IN CALCULATING THE REVENUE 

REQUIREMENT FOR RATE APPLICATION PURPOSES ($38) ($9,397) ($22,720) 

1 - Forecast projections updated as at October 31, 2012. 

G:\FINANCE\Budgets\2013_2014\Corporate\Financial Statements\5 Year Business Plan 2013-18.xlsx

HALIFAX WATER 

ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES - WATER OPERATIONS 



Page 2 of 6 




DESCRIPTION '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 

REVENUES 

METERED SALES $30,562 $32,526 $32,796 $32,481 $32,488 $32,497 $32,508 

FIRE PROTECTION $9,502 $9,843 $9,948 $9,948 $9,948 $9,948 $9,948 

PRIVATE FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES $366 $367 $374 $379 $384 $389 $394 

BULK WATER STATIONS $264 $218 $243 $243 $243 $243 $243 

CUSTOMER LATE PAY./COLLECTION FEES $206 $249 $228 $226 $227 $227 $227 

MISCELLANEOUS $155 $134 $149 $149 $150 $151 $152 

$41,055 $43,337 $43,738 $43,427 $43,440 $43,456 $43,473 

EXPENDITURES 

WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT $5,788 $6,436 $6,772 $7,082 $7,469 $7,628 $7,791 

TRANSMISSION & DISTRIBUTION $6,995 $7,871 $8,972 $9,058 $9,850 $10,153 $10,448 

SMALL SYSTEMS (incl. Contract Systems) $810 $759 $686 $649 $673 $687 $701 

TECHNICAL SERVICES (SCADA) $840 $940 $813 $868 $908 $930 $949 

ENGINEERING & INFORMATION SERVICES $2,958 $3,240 $3,519 $3,730 $3,850 $3,927 $4,006 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES $627 $618 $708 $720 $741 $756 $771 

CUSTOMER SERVICE $1,697 $1,774 $1,876 $1,901 $1,967 $2,006 $2,046 

ADMINISTRATION & PENSION $3,627 $4,486 $4,738 $4,758 $4,939 $5,038 $5,139 

DEPRECIATION $6,458 $6,816 $7,605 $8,416 $9,177 $9,782 $10,293 

$29,800 $32,940 $35,688 $37,182 $39,576 $40,907 $42,144 

OPERATING PROFIT $11,255 $10,397 $8,050 $6,245 $3,864 $2,549 $1,329 



MISCELLANEOUS $107 $189 $216 $259 $264 $265 $265 

$308 $539 $546 $589 $594 $595 $595 



LONG TERM DEBT PRINCIPAL $4,904 $5,213 $5,648 $6,737 $8,450 $10,123 $11,896 

AMORTIZATION DEBT DISCOUNT $51 $54 $67 $80 $101 $134 $163 


$11,371 $11,637 $12,068 $14,129 $16,642 $19,800 $23,557 


CAPITAL EXPENDITURES $192 ($701) ($3,472) ($7,295) ($12,183) ($16,657) ($21,633) 

1 - Forecast projections updated as at October 31, 2012.

HALIFAX WATER 

ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES - WASTEWATER OPERATIONS 



Page 3 of 6 




DESCRIPTION '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 

REVENUES 

METERED SALES 2 $49,041 $53,002 $53,802 $52,923 $52,709 $52,498 $52,291 

WASTEWATER OVERSTRENGTH AGREEMENTS $165 $204 $180 $180 $180 $180 $180 

LEACHATE $324 $339 $352 $355 $367 $375 $375 

CONTRACT REVENUE $483 $160 $86 $86 $86 $86 $86 

AEROTECH SEPTAGE TIPPING FEES $747 $600 $715 $715 $715 $715 $715 

CUSTOMER LATE PAY./COLLECTION FEES $129 $160 $148 $146 $145 $145 $144 


$50,992 $54,593 $55,411 $54,533 $54,330 $54,126 $53,919 

EXPENDITURES 

WASTEWATER COLLECTION $9,781 $9,460 $10,129 $10,443 $10,868 $11,083 $11,302 

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS $14,865 $14,635 $16,269 $16,768 $18,651 $19,016 $19,390 

SMALL SYSTEMS $885 $971 $996 $1,018 $1,070 $1,092 $1,114 

DEWATERING FACILITY/ SLUDGE MGM'T $352 $473 $1,298 $707 $920 $998 $1,076 

LEACHATE CONTRACT $279 $305 $312 $321 $337 $344 $352 

TECHNICAL SERVICES (SCADA) $786 $821 $1,096 $1,150 $1,186 $1,209 $1,234 

ENGINEERING & INFORMATION SERVICES $2,401 $2,793 $3,114 $3,322 $3,434 $3,503 $3,573 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES $1,152 $1,216 $1,339 $1,374 $1,419 $1,448 $1,477 

CUSTOMER SERVICE $1,356 $1,418 $1,499 $1,520 $1,572 $1,603 $1,635 


DEPRECIATION $4,890 $7,519 $10,417 $12,020 $13,356 $14,589 $15,445 

$39,646 $43,196 $50,255 $52,445 $56,761 $58,911 $60,704 

OPERATING PROFIT $11,346 $11,397 $5,156 $2,088 ($2,431) ($4,785) ($6,785) 



PNS FUNDING HHSP DEBT $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 


$2,288 $2,429 $2,411 $2,412 $2,413 $2,414 $2,415 


LONG TERM DEBT INTEREST $5,181 $5,278 $4,603 $6,791 $6,942 $8,583 $9,463 


AMORTIZATION DEBT DISCOUNT $12 $37 $67 $102 $140 $185 $227 

$12,726 $14,151 $13,941 $17,881 $18,529 $22,407 $24,760 


CAPITAL EXPENDITURES $908 ($325) ($6,374) ($13,381) ($18,547) ($24,778) ($29,131) 


2 - Stormwater Operations does not have a separate base or consumption rate for billing purposes under the NSUARB. Metered 

sales revenues for Stormwater are allocated internally for financial statement presentation from Wastewater Operations at a rate of 

9.8%. The Rate Application being submitted to the NSUARB in 2013 does provide for separate Stormwater Rates based on the 

new Cost of Service Manual ordered by the NSUARB, which was submitted October/2012.

HALIFAX WATER 

ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES - STORMWATER OPERATIONS 



Page 4 of 6 




DESCRIPTION '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 

REVENUES 

METERED SALES 2 $5,343 $5,741 $5,865 $5,770 $5,746 $5,723 $5,701 

CUSTOMER LATE PAY./COLLECTION FEES $12 $18 $16 $16 $16 $16 $16 

MISCELLANEOUS $74 $143 $93 $93 $93 $93 $93 

$5,429 $5,902 $5,975 $5,879 $5,855 $5,833 $5,810 

EXPENDITURES 

STORMWATER COLLECTION $4,441 $5,180 $5,875 $5,988 $6,175 $6,310 $6,448 


ENGINEERING & INFORMATION SERVICES $455 $572 $638 $680 $703 $717 $732 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES $510 $560 $612 $631 $653 $667 $680 

CUSTOMER SERVICE $278 $290 $307 $311 $322 $328 $335 

ADMINISTRATION & PENSION $594 $734 $776 $779 $809 $825 $841 

DEPRECIATION $0 $0 $426 $589 $745 $859 $927 

$6,278 $7,336 $8,668 $9,015 $9,444 $9,743 $10,000 

OPERATING PROFIT ($849) ($1,434) ($2,693) ($3,136) ($3,588) ($3,911) ($4,190) 


LONG TERM DEBT INTEREST $412 $386 $356 $459 $491 $626 $1,348 

LONG TERM DEBT PRINCIPAL $587 $585 $585 $699 $765 $960 $1,880 


$999 $971 $941 $1,157 $1,256 $1,587 $3,228 


CAPITAL EXPENDITURES ($1,848) ($2,404) ($3,634) ($4,293) ($4,844) ($5,497) ($7,418) 


2 - Stormwater Operations does not have a separate base or consumption rate for billing purposes under the NSUARB. Metered 

sales revenues for Stormwater are allocated internally for financial statement presentation from Wastewater Operations at a rate 

of 9.8%. The Rate Application being submitted to the NSUARB in 2013 does provide for separate Stormwater Rates based on 

the new Cost of Service Manual ordered by the NSUARB, which was submitted October/2012.

HALIFAX WATER 

ESTIMATED REVENUES & EXPENDITURES - AIRPORT/ AEROTECH OPERATIONS 



Page 5 of 6 



DESCRIPTION ACTUAL FORECAST 1 BUDGET BUSINSS PLAN BUSINSS PLAN BUSINSS PLAN BUSINSS PLAN 

AIRPORT/ AEROTECH WATER OPERATIONS 

REVENUES 

METERED SALES $536,752 $569,517 $627,525 $610,491 $605,814 $601,184 $596,601 

FIRE PROTECTION $141,598 $156,259 $183,123 $192,890 $192,890 $192,890 $192,890 

OTHER CONNECTION CHARGE $5,179 $4,982 $5,410 $5,410 $5,410 $5,410 $5,410 

CUSTOMER LATE PAY./COLLECTION FEES $1,035 $500 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 

$684,564 $731,258 $817,058 $809,791 $805,114 $800,484 $795,901 

EXPENDITURES 

PLANT OPERATIONS $541,363 $529,583 $611,041 $615,996 $643,695 $657,054 $670,718 

PUMPING STATIONS $20,142 $27,930 $29,307 $29,942 $31,539 $32,213 $32,904 

TRANSMISSION & DISTRIBUTION $87,128 $94,400 $115,296 $113,187 $185,599 $203,438 $221,983 





DEPRECIATION $42,569 $44,376 $50,160 $48,160 $48,160 $48,160 $48,160 

$698,978 $705,407 $815,598 $817,259 $919,318 $951,396 $984,506 

OPERATING PROFIT ($14,414) $25,851 $1,460 ($7,469) ($114,204) ($150,912) ($188,605) 




AMORTIZATION DEBT DISC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

$53,348 $86,777 $83,630 $81,546 $79,392 $77,168 $74,874 


CAPITAL EXPENDITURES - WATER OPERATIONS ($67,762) ($60,926) ($82,170) ($89,015) ($193,596) ($228,080) ($263,479) 

AIRPORT/ AEROTECH WASTEWATER OPERATIONS 

REVENUES 

METERED SALES $528,485 $554,238 $624,137 $612,556 $607,367 $602,231 $597,145 

CUSTOMER LATE PAY./COLLECTION FEES $1,465 $500 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 

DEWATERING FACILITY/ SLUDGE LAGOON $97,850 $182,255 $209,673 $209,673 $209,673 $209,673 $209,673 

AIRLINE EFFLUENT $39,780 $74,284 $94,283 $94,283 $94,283 $94,283 $94,283 

$667,580 $811,277 $929,093 $917,512 $912,324 $907,187 $902,101 

EXPENDITURES 

TREATMENT PLANT 733,244 $712,982 $769,572 $782,990 $1,355,360 $1,372,773 $1,390,609 

COLLECTION SYSTEM $53,802 $61,214 $60,902 $63,618 $67,158 $68,593 $70,065 



ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES $1,278 $1,104 $1,215 $1,247 $1,289 $1,314 $1,341 



DEPRECIATION $26,321 $48,070 $62,200 $62,200 $62,200 $62,200 $62,200 

$819,941 $830,226 $901,222 $917,524 $1,493,739 $1,512,768 $1,532,261 

OPERATING PROFIT ($152,361) ($18,949) $27,872 ($11) ($581,416) ($605,582) ($630,159) 


LONG TERM DEBT INTEREST $10,900 $40,004 $18,417 $17,558 $16,664 $15,725 $14,742 



$23,881 $71,170 $62,247 $61,388 $60,494 $59,555 $58,572 


CAPITAL EXPENDITURES - WASTEWATER OPERATIONS ($176,242) ($90,119) ($34,375) ($61,399) ($641,910) ($665,137) ($688,731) 

AIRPORT/ AEROTECH STORMWATER OPERATIONS 

REVENUES 

AREA CHARGES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

CUSTOMER LATE PAY./COLLECTION FEES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

EXPENDITURES 

COLLECTION SYSTEM $587 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

ENGINEERING & INFORMATION SERVICES $134 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 


CUSTOMER SERVICE $105 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

ADMINISTRATION & PENSION $242 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

$1,297 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 


CAPITAL EXPENDITURES - STORMWATER OPERATIONS ($1,297) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 


CAPITAL EXPENDITURES - COMBINED OPERATIONS ($245,301) ($151,045) ($116,545) ($150,414) ($835,505) ($893,216) ($952,211) 


HALIFAX WATER 

ESTIMATED REVENUES & EXPENDITURES, SEGREGATED BY REGULATED AND UNREGULATED ACTIVITIES 



Page 6 of 6 

REGULATED ACTIVITIES 




DESCRIPTION '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 '000 

REVENUES 

METERED SALES $84,946 $91,269 $92,464 $91,174 $90,943 $90,719 $90,500 

FIRE PROTECTION $9,502 $9,843 $9,948 $9,948 $9,948 $9,948 $9,948 

PRIVATE FIRE PROTECTION $366 $367 $374 $379 $384 $389 $394 

AIRPORT AEROTECH SYSTEM $1,215 $1,286 $1,442 $1,423 $1,413 $1,404 $1,394 

OTHER OPERATING REVENUE $1,071 $1,233 $1,164 $1,160 $1,160 $1,159 $1,159 

$97,100 $103,998 $105,392 $104,084 $103,848 $103,619 $103,395 

EXPENDITURES 

WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT $5,788 $6,436 $6,772 $7,082 $7,469 $7,628 $7,791 

TRANSMISSION & DISTRIBUTION $6,995 $7,871 $8,972 $9,058 $9,850 $10,153 $10,448 

WASTEWATER & STORMWATER COLLECTION $14,189 $14,640 $16,004 $16,431 $17,043 $17,393 $17,750 

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS $14,865 $14,635 $16,269 $16,768 $18,651 $19,016 $19,390 

SMALL SYSTEMS $1,681 $1,721 $1,668 $1,653 $1,729 $1,765 $1,800 

SCADA, CONTROL & PUMPING $1,626 $1,761 $1,942 $2,053 $2,130 $2,176 $2,221 

ENGINEERING & INFORMATION SERVICES $5,814 $6,605 $7,272 $7,733 $7,988 $8,148 $8,310 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES $2,289 $2,394 $2,659 $2,725 $2,814 $2,871 $2,928 



DEPRECIATION $11,348 $14,335 $18,448 $21,026 $23,278 $25,230 $26,664 

AIRPORT AEROTECH SYSTEM $1,519 $1,536 $1,717 $1,735 $2,413 $2,464 $2,517 

$76,564 $84,221 $94,650 $99,281 $106,868 $110,615 $113,868 

OPERATING PROFIT $20,535 $19,777 $10,741 $4,803 ($3,020) ($6,996) ($10,472) 



MISCELLANEOUS $2,045 $2,162 $2,075 $2,075 $2,075 $2,075 $2,075 

$2,447 $2,862 $2,735 $2,735 $2,735 $2,735 $2,735 



LONG TERM DEBT PRINCIPAL $13,066 $14,719 $15,601 $18,522 $20,760 $24,820 $28,944 

AMORTIZATION DEBT DISCOUNT $63 $91 $133 $183 $241 $319 $390 


$25,173 $26,917 $27,095 $33,310 $36,566 $43,930 $51,679 


CAPITAL EXPENDITURES - REGULATED ACTIVITIES ($2,191) ($4,278) ($13,619) ($25,772) ($36,851) ($48,191) ($59,416) 

UNREGULATED ACTIVITIES 

REVENUES 

AEROTECH SEPTAGE TIPPING FEES $747 $600 $715 $715 $715 $715 $715 

LEACHATE $324 $339 $352 $355 $367 $375 $375 

CONTRACT REVENUE $483 $160 $86 $86 $86 $86 $86 

DEWATERING FACILITY/ SLUDGE LAGOON $98 $182 $210 $210 $210 $210 $210 

AIRLINE EFFLUENT $40 $74 $94 $94 $94 $94 $94 

ENERGY PROJECTS $0 $0 $22 $45 $45 $45 $45 


$1,728 $1,377 $1,499 $1,525 $1,539 $1,547 $1,548 

EXPENDITURES 

WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT $14 $9 $14 $14 $14 $14 $15 

WASTEWATER TREATMENT $664 $778 $1,609 $1,027 $1,257 $1,342 $1,428 

ENERGY PROJECTS $0 $0 $9 $19 $19 $19 $19 

SPONSORSHIPS & DONATIONS $0 $0 $55 $55 $55 $55 $55 

$678 $787 $1,687 $1,115 $1,345 $1,430 $1,516 

OPERATING PROFIT $1,049 $590 ($188) $410 $194 $117 $32 


MISCELLANEOUS $149 $106 $209 $241 $246 $248 $249 


CAPITAL EXPENDITURES - UNREGULATED ACTIVITIES $1,198 $696 $22 $651 $440 $365 $281 


CAPITAL EXPENDITURES - COMBINED ACTIVITIES ($993) ($3,582) ($13,597) ($25,121) ($36,410) ($47,826) ($59,135) 


Appendix G 

Water Quality Master Plan – Version 2

Blank Page

WATER QUALITY 

MASTER PLAN 

Version 2.0 

Prepared by: 

Alisha Knowles, B.Eng., EIT, PhD 

Water Quality Manager 

May 2011 

1

Water Quality Master Plan 

May 2011 

Page 2 

Introduction 

Halifax Water has consistently produced drinking water that has safeguarded public health and 

achieved regulatory compliance, despite the challenges that occur as regulations become more 

stringent, infrastructure ages and once current technologies are eclipsed by more modern ones 

designed to meet the new regulatory environment.. One important tool Halifax Water uses 

iswater quality strategic planning which is formally executed through a Water Quality Master 

Plan (WQMP). Water quality master planning describes the process whereby a water utility 

assesses the public’s expectations for water quality and the direction of water quality regulations 

and trends, sets corresponding water quality goals and then plans for necessary capital or 

operational improvements. One of the major benefits of implementing a WQMP is the 

opportunity to be compliant with new regulations before they are introduced. 

In 2006, Halifax Water completed its first formal Water Quality Master Plan (WQMP) document 

to be used as a roadmap to make sure we continue to provide the best quality water for the 

foreseeable future. This plan was designed to set goals for water quality that exceed regulatory 

requirements and to set a path for Halifax Water to achieve those goals while treating water at an 

optimal cost. The WQMP focused on upgrades and investigations concerning the JD Kline 

Water Treatment Plant; Halifax Water’s most mature treatment facility. The research plan 

proposed to achieve these goals focused on optimization projects that would result in 

improvements with a low capital or operating cost. Therefore, improvements to the existing 

plant processes were evaluated before alternative treatment technologies were considered, thus, 

avoiding tens of millions of dollars in unnecessary capital and operating expenditures. Water 

quality master planning and the associated research activities ensures that Halifax Water remains 

proactive in developing organizational action plans for regulatory compliance and establishing 

budget priorities based on sound research supporting Halifax Water’s strategic plan and 

corporate water quality objectives. 

Although the WQMP identified several potential strategies for upgrading the JD Kline facility, a 

central item prior to implementing any strategy or technological solution was to implement a 

long-term research program and a plan for executing the research plan. In 2007, Halifax Water 

entered into a 3-year research agreement, valued at $400,000, with Dr. Graham Gagnon of 

Dalhousie University to execute the research tasks as described in the WQMP research plan. 

Based on Halifax Water’s commitment to fund a research agreement with Dalhousie University, 

Dr. Gagnon was awarded a prestigious 5-year NSERC Industrial Research Chair in water quality 

and treatment, matching Halifax Water’s funding contribution. Since many of the research tasks 

focused on process improvements at the JD Kline facility, in the summer of 2007, Halifax Water 

constructed a pilot water treatment plant, valued at $600,000, at this facility to be used as an 

investigative tool in the implementation of this research program. In the fall of 2007, the 

research team commissioned the pilot plant and has been conducting research at the facility since 

that time. In 2009, Halifax Water extended the research agreement for an additional 2 years to 

take advantage of additional NSERC funding, and to fully complete the initial phase of the 

research program. The pilot plant and research collaboration with Dalhousie presented a unique 

opportunity for Halifax Water to develop effective treatment solutions for their facilities to meet 

2


May 2011 

Page 3 

future demands and regulations. As an extension of this research partnership, Halifax Water is 

making an annual contribution of $70,000 over seven years to Dr. Gagnon’s new, state of the art 

Clean Water Laboratory at Dalhousie University and return is receiving access to laboratory 

facilities and staff. In addition to matching the research agreement contribution of Halifax 

Water, NSERC also matches our laboratory contribution. 

The WQMP has been a key tool in establishing water quality goals and setting a baseline for 

monitoring progress toward these goals. In the original WQMP, a number of tasks were 

identified in the research plan as a means of achieving such goals. There has been much success 

in completing a number of these tasks and Halifax Water has already adopted some process 

operational changes and is currently investing in some capital upgrades as a direct result of 

research conducted as part of this program. In the same manner, as expected, a number of 

WQMP research tasks that were included in the previous plan have been identified, through 

either internal or external research, as being no longer necessary or suitable for implementation 

at Halifax Water facilities. 

April 1, 2011, marked the beginning of the fifth, and final, year of the initial term of the NSERC 

Research Chair and WQMP research program. Based on almost 5 years of progress and lessons 

learned during the implementation of the original WQMP, Halifax Water has reached a in the 

research program and has recently evaluated the overall progress and outcomes of the program 

and developed a new WQMP that’s includes updated water quality goals and redefined research 

tasks to guide the utility throughout the next phase of research. In doing so, Halifax Water 

assessed the needs of its water treatment facilities, the effectiveness of its current water quality 

monitoring programs and current trends in water quality regulations and research. To that end, 

several new research tasks have been added to the revised research plan to re-focus and update 

the direction and required outcomes of the WQMP. WQMP V2 has been developed based on the 

assumption that a 5-year research agreement will be renewed with Dalhousie University and they 

will conduct the experiments described in the research plan. 

This document will present the overall research accomplishments resulting from WQMP V1 and 

direct implications of this research to Halifax Water. In addition, a revised WQMP, WQMP V2, 

will be presented which will outline the overall direction of the research program, new water 

quality goals and outline the tasks identified to achieve these goals. This document also outlines 

the WQMP V2 implementation and execution plan and the structure of the research team, key 

support staff and associated committees. 

Research Accomplishments 

JD Kline Water Treatment Plant Research 

To date, the focus of research being conducted under the Research Chair has largely been on 

upgrades and investigations concerning the JD Kline Water Treatment Plant. Research tasks 

focused on addressing research needs at this facility to ensure that the plant will be able to 

maintain treatment performance in an increasingly volatile regulatory regime, despite the 

advancing age of this facility. Research tasks were completed largely by the Dalhousie Research 

3


May 2011 

Page 4 

Team with support from treatment plant operations staff. All research projects completed to date 

are building on our understanding of the JD Kline treatment process and are serving to improve 

the performance and adaptability of the treatment plant. 

Key research tasks completed to date under the Research Chair are listed below along with their 

overall impact to Halifax Water operations. 

1. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling determined that the flocculation tanks at the 

JD Kline plant are not optimized for contaminant removal and that increased efficiencies can 

be sought; a direct result of a dated design and the plant not achieving design flow rates in 

the hydraulic flocculators. The identification of short-circuiting and inadequate mixing 

regimes within these tanks has presented the opportunity to make mixing and coagulation 

improvements, including the addition of mechanical flocculation. This research project has 

had direct and immediate impact on Halifax Water’s flocculation process step. It has led the 

utility to conduct a pre-design study to determine the cost and energy implications of 

installing mechanical flocculators. The results from the pre-design study will provide 

Halifax Water with a budget envelope for estimating capital and operational costs associated 

with mechanical flocculation. Assuming that this capital project goes forward, Dr. Gagnon’s 

team will conduct a mixing study to estimate the impact of mixing rates of fluid and particle 

flow under different mixing conditions. This research finding and the proposed installation 

of mechanical flocculators has presented the team with a window of opportunity for major 

advancements toward achieving target water quality goals, such as improved particle removal 

and disinfection by-product reductions, and providing additional operational control and 

improvements. 

2. An investigation of alternate coagulants was completed to optimize the removal of particles, 

natural organic matter and subsequent disinfection by-product formation reductions at the JD 

Kline treatment plant. Research completed to date has found that alternate coagulants are not 

a viable option for achieving increased NOM removal without comprising filtration 

performance at this direct filtration facility. In addition, the alternate coagulants evaluated 

did not provide any significant potential for improved particle removal at this facility. 

Nevertheless, it was identified that the pilot plant treatment process produces water quality 

with lower DBP formation potential than the full scale plant, highlighting the superior 

performance of mechanical mixing, as opposed to hydraulic flocculation. Due to the mixing 

benefits associated with mechanical flocculation in the pilot plant, aluminum sulfate 

coagulation in the pilot plant was achieving lower disinfection by-product formation 

potentials than the full scale plant. This enhanced performance suggests that aluminum 

sulfate coagulation can be optimized for improved performance once the mixing 

inefficiencies are addressed in the full-scale plant. Aluminum sulfate coagulation and 

mechanical mixing optimization studies are included as research tasks in the revised WQMP. 

3. A study was completed to investigate the role a coagulant change would have in causing a 

significant effect with respect to lead leaching in drinking water. Both residual particulate 

4


May 2011 

Page 5 

iron and aluminum concentrations and chloride to sulfate mass ratio (CSMR) levels 

following coagulation were found to be significant factors contributing to lead release in 

galvanic settings following coagulation changeovers. The results of this study highlight the 

importance of evaluating downstream impacts of seemingly innocuous changes in coagulant 

type or dosage to obtain optimal coagulation performance, particularly when partial 

replacements are considered. 

4. A QMRA study was completed using the Cryptosporidium, Giardia and E.coli source water 

monitoring results that were obtained through a separate WQMP internal research task. The 

QMRA work demonstrated that the JD Kline plant is capable of meeting acceptable risk 

levels, even considering worst case initial conditions, based on assuming worst case initial 

values for these contaminants in the watershed. 

5. Naural organic matter characterization was completed on both the raw and treated water at 

the JD Kline facility. This work provided a clear picture of the seasonal impacts of organic 

matter content in the watershed and the overall performance of the treatment process in terms 

of removing specific organic fractions. This work will be used to guide the coagulation 

optimization tasks included in the revised research plan including alum coagulation 

optimization, a pre-chlorination evaluation and the potential of biological filtration. 

6. Dalhousie University supported a regulatory research task driven by the absence of filter-towaste 

at the Pockwock treatment plant, which is considered non-compliant under the 

Province of Nova Scotia’s Drinking Water Strategy. As part of Halifax Water’s plan to 

achieve compliance, Nova Scotia Environment (NSE) required Halifax Water to evaluate 

alternative means of managing filter ripening and to conduct microbial risk analysis. Based 

on both pilot and full scale studies, it was concluded that filter resting is indeed reducing 

risks associated with particle breakthrough during filter ripening sequences and should be 

continued as an operational alternative for the Pockwock treatment facility. Microbial 

sampling of Cryptosporidium, Giardia and E.coli during filter ripening events provided 

further evidence there is no microbial risks associated with the absence of filter-to-waste 

capabilities at this facility. 

System-wide Source Water, Treatment and Distribution Water Quality Tasks 

In addition to the JDKWSP research tasks, there were several tasks directed towards establishing 

water quality monitoring programs to track performance towards specific water quality goals set 

forth by Halifax Water in the original WQMP. All of the tasks associated with the 

implementation of advanced water quality monitoring programs have been either successfully 

completed or implemented as regular monitoring programs by the utility. Interestingly, some of 

the programs have either become regulatory requirements or are on the radar of local regulators, 

since the completion of the WQMP. Details of the following monitoring programs that have 

been adopted by Halifax Water as a result of water quality master planning can be found in 

Appendix A: 

5


May 2011 

Page 6 

1. EPA Source Water Monitoring for Crypto/Giardia 

2. Source Water Monitoring Programs 

3. International Water Treatment Alliance (IWTA) Program for Filtration Performance 

4. Chlorine Residual Profiling 

5. EPA Initial Distribution System Evaluation (IDSE) 

6. Real Time CT Monitoring 

Water Quality Master Plan Direction 

Overall Direction 

Although the overall water quality goals identified in the original WQMP remain on the priority 

list of Halifax Water, there are other water quality objectives that the utility has identified as 

being significant to improving or strengthening water quality management and performance 

within the utility. Substantial efforts will be placed on shifting the focus of Halifax Water’s 

strategic planning partially away from long term WQ goals more towards what can be done to 

support treatment plant operations and improve water quality from a day to day perspective. To 

date, the research program has focused on optimized treatment processes for the JDKWSP. 

Although several tasks will remain focused on improvements for the JDKWSP, several research 

requirements have been identified in other Halifax Water treatment facilities to address 

operational challenges and treatment issues. 

In addition, research efforts will also be focused on adapting a more pro-active approach to 

monitoring and optimizing both treatment operations and water quality and focusing efforts 

towards monitoring and understanding distribution water quality and performance. Finally, 

substantial efforts will be made to implement sustainable processes and optimize energy 

demands during the implementation of all research findings. 

Water Quality and Treatment 

Operational and Water Quality Goals. Although effluent water quality at each treatment 

facility consistently meets regulatory requirements, Halifax Water has set progressive internal 

water quality goals that go above and beyond regulatory requirements. Halifax Water has 

identified a significant opportunity for the optimization of day to day operations and is, therefore, 

interested in taking internal goal setting one step further and setting progressive operational and 

performance goals at each treatment facility for individual treatment processes (i.e.; filter 

backwash and operational goals, coagulation operational goals and set-points, etc). These goals 

would aid in shifting some of the focus off of the overall quality of the end product and working 

to optimize individual process operations and intermittent water quality. Another direct benefit 

of setting process specific goals is the opportunity to develop action levels that will act as 

triggers for operational responses to avoid potential non-compliance events. These goals need to 

remain simple and realistic and will only be achievable with appropriate operational commitment 

and changes. 

Advocating and Training. A major component of implementing operational goals within 

treatment facilities will be building the required commitment and support of operations staff 

6


May 2011 

Page 7 

within each facility. Therefore, a large component of this program will be implementing internal 

training programs for operations staff to ensure they understand their responsibilities in 

achieving these goals, but most importantly, to ensure that have the adequate education and 

resources to do this. Training will be focused on increasing operator capabilities to generate, 

interpret and manage water quality information and how they can directly apply this information 

towards achieving the water quality targets for their specific utility. Instilling a water quality 

culture based on continuous improvement and optimization will ensure we move away from 

complacent operations towards pro-active operations driven by optimization and performance 

goals. 

Water Quality Performance Monitoring. In order for plant optimization efforts to be effective, 

a performance baseline will need to be established by means of implementing a water quality and 

treatment performance monitoring program at each facility. Substantial amounts of operational 

and water quality data are generated and recorded on a continuous basis, however this 

information is not currently being used to its full potential. Currently, facilities are generating 

volumes of data to satisfy regulatory goals but little effort is focused on interpreting that data and 

using it to optimize and monitor treatment plant operations and water quality objectives. This 

information needs to be organized and analyzed in a manner that will make it “actionable” 

information that can be used as an indication of plant performance, to guide plant operations and 

identify optimization opportunities. Adapting a pro-active approach to both water quality 

monitoring and operations will ensure water quality information is not just collected, but is being 

actively organized and assessed to both monitor overall water quality performance and identify 

potential non-compliance events well before they occur. 

Distribution System Water Quality 

Historically, within Halifax Water and the water industry as a whole, distribution system water 

quality has received less attention than treatment process operations and performance. Recently, 

there has been an increased focus on possible risk factors to public health associated with 

distribution systems, a good example of this is the recent attention being focused the health risks 

associated with lead pipe in the distribution systems and the lack of understanding of the 

appropriate methods to replace such materials without presenting additional health risks to 

people directly affected by replacement efforts. In light of the increasingly stringent regulations 

surrounding distribution water quality and to remain loyal to the multi-barrier approach to water 

quality management, Halifax Water will direct efforts towards actively monitoring and assessing 

both distribution system water quality and physical integrity and understanding the 

interrelationships between the two. Establishing a baseline of distribution water quality, 

hydraulic and integrity information will allow for the utility to integrate water quality and 

hydraulic goals into the operation of the distribution system and focus attention on identifying 

and mitigating areas that are a high risk for contamination or sensitive to significant effluent 

quality fluctuations. The results of the monitoring program will be used to improve distribution 

system practices and implement another layer of protection to public health. 

7


May 2011 

Page 8 

Research Opportunities identified through WQMP Outcomes 

There have been several research tasks identified as a direct outcome of research projects 

conducted in response to the tasks outlined in the original WQMP. In particular, the Alternate 

Coagulant Studies and Mixing and Flocculation Studies have shown that inadequate mixing is 

negatively impacting treatment performance. These tasks clearly identified the overall direction 

of key treatment optimization tasks to achieve improved particle and DBP removal at the 

JDKWSP. Differences in DBP formation potential between the full-scale plant and pilot plant 

are indicative that upgrading to mechanical mixing in the full-scale could indeed yield 

substantial DBP reductions in treated water. Therefore, a task in the new research plan will 

evaluate variable mechanical mixing conditions in the pilot plant to identify the optimal mixing 

intensities required to enhance organic matter removal and, subsequently, reduce DBPs at this 

facility while maintain adequate particle removals. As mentioned above, a pilot-scale evaluation 

of the effects of mixing on particle and organic matter removal using the Alum is currently being 

carried out. 

During the Alternate Coagulant Studies task, substantial differences were indentified between 

DBPfps achieved during bench-scale and pilot plant experiments simulating the baseline 

coagulation pH and dosage conditions of the FSP. The key difference between these 

experiments was the absence of pre-chlorination during bench-scale experiments, which is 

currently employed during both pilot-scale and full-scale treatment. If the utility did not depend 

on pre-chlorination for microbial control during filtration at the JDKWSP, there is the potential 

that significant decreases in DBPs could be realized, as eliminating pre-chlorination is an 

effective way to control DBP levels in finished water. Therefore, a new research task has been 

added to evaluate potential DBP reductions that can be achieved through eliminating prechlorination 

practices in the FSP. As part of this investigation, the option of operating 

biologically active filters could also be examined for this facility, which may lead to further 

removal of biodegradable NOM, which are typically recalcitrant to coagulation treatment. If 

biologically active filters are identified as posing too high of a threat to microbial contamination 

at this facility, chlorination could be add to filter backwash water to act as a filter aid for 

microbial control in the filters. 

In addition, many of the broad monitoring programs established through the completion of 

specific WQMP tasks over the past 5 years have established a significant baseline inventory of 

key water quality performance indicators of source water, treatment and distribution water 

quality. This information will be used during future optimization initiatives and to monitor the 

performance of the research tasks ahead. The analysis and understanding of the results of such 

monitoring programs also enables the utility to proactively assess risks and enable for early 

detection of possible non-compliance events. To that end, several other water quality monitoring 

programs are targeted to be developed and implemented during the next phase of this WQMP. 

8


May 2011 

Page 9 

Revised Water Quality Goals 

In the original WQMP, Halifax Water established and adopted internal water quality goals. 

These goals were based on the outcomes of the WQMP study combined with what has been 

achieved by other “best in class” utilities that have adopted similar programs. These goals are 

intended to ensure that Halifax Water not only meets current regulatory requirements, but will be 

well positioned to meet predicted regulatory changes and maintain water quality that well 

exceeds the current regulatory requirements. Though many of these goals remain the same, there 

are some additional goals being added to this version of the WQMP to reflect overall direction 

and focus of the WQMP and to set a standard for the associated research tasks. Many of these 

goals are a product of the utilities commitment to adapting a more proactive approach to water 

quality management, monitoring and optimization. 

Halifax Water has developed both global and specific water quality goals. The global goals are 

very general and are intended to describe the overall objectives of the specific water quality 

goals. The specific goals clearly define measurable objectives associated with priority water 

quality targets identified by Halifax Water. The following global and specific goals will be 

evaluated by the Water Quality before they are formally adopted by the utility. 

Global Goals: 

Compliance 

• Full compliance with Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality. 

• Full permit compliance 

Source Water Quality 

• Proactively protect our source water quality. 

• Monitor source water quality to provide early warning of potential problems. 


• Adapt a pro-active approach to water quality monitoring and operations. 

• Develop indicators of pending non-compliance events. 

• Provide required training to improve operator knowledge of operational, treatment and 

water quality objectives. 

• Actively optimize treatment processes through monitoring and assessing the relationship 

between treatment operations and effluent water quality. 

• Develop facility specific water quality and operational goals. 


• Integrate water quality goals into the operation of the distribution system. 

• Actively monitor and understand water quality and physical integrity in the distribution 

system. 

9


May 2011 

Page 10 

• Identify distribution system contamination vulnerabilities and clearly identify 

communication plans, responsibilities and accountabilities. 

Customer Expectations 

• Maintain customer perception of water quality that exceeds corporate strategic objectives. 

• Incorporate our understanding of customer perspectives when developing overall water 

quality goals. 

Specific Goals: 

Particle/Precursor Removal Goals: These goals describe HRWC’s efforts to optimize the basic 

treatment process to improve particle removal, which is the fundamental pathogen barrier, while 

at the same time also optimizing for TOC removal. 

• 2 to 3 log removal of giardia by filtration 

• 3/4/4 log removal for giardia/viruses/cryptosporidium 

• Individual filter turbidity values


May 2011 

Page 11 

Overall Strategy to Achieve Goals 

Based on the research findings to date and an overview of industry best practices, Halifax Water 

has identified a number of tasks to be carried out to achieve the goals outlined above and to 

address facility specific and system wide operational and treatment challenges that have been 

identified since the initial WQMP was completed. Some tasks will serve to achieve multiple 

goals and others are focused on very specific research tasks pertaining to the optimization if a 

specific treatment process. These tasks take the form of several different types of activities such 

as the following: 

• Pilot scale research studies. 

• Consultant studies. 

• Data collection and surveillance techniques. 

• Long-term monitoring programs. 

• Best practice adoption. 

• Operational changes. 

• Training programs. 

Some tasks we be completed by means of a well-defined research project over a relatively short 

period of time and others, specifically treatment and distribution monitoring and optimization 

programs, will require a significantly larger time commitment. Such programs encompass 

multiple planning, development and implementation stages which may include identifying and 

setting achievable and realistic goals, the development and implementation of monitoring 

programs, baseline performance assessments, operator training programs, and the development 

of optimization plans, to name a few. 

All of the tasks have been organized into the WQMP research plan. This plan recognizes that 

there are inter relationships between the tasks. The research tasks are developed into an 

implementation plan in a logical order, designed to achieve the water quality goals at the least 

overall cost. Tasks that are seen as a priority due to extreme operational problems or pending 

regulatory requirements will be given priority for completion. Tasks that result in less expensive 

plant improvements will be completed first. Also, plant improvements are maximized prior to 

trying to implement operational changes in the distribution system. The intent is to execute the 

implementation plan to the point where the goals are achieved. Since the goals represent a “stateof 

the-art” in water quality, stopping at that point represents achieving maximum benefit at least 

cost. 

Appendix B to this document is a detailed description of each of the tasks identified in the 

implementation plan. This listing and description of tasks is known as the Research Plan. This 

implementation plan is illustrated in Appendix C. The implementation plan is planned to be 

completely executed by 2015. As implementation plan tasks are completed, process changes, 

some resulting in capital projects, will be identified. These modifications will be scheduled as 

resources and financing allow. 

11


May 2011 

Page 12 

Research Plan and Execution 

The overall program will be governed by a steering committee consisting of Halifax Water staff, 

Dalhousie staff, and the owner’s engineer. The steering committee will periodically review 

research projects and progress. The steering committee will meet quarterly to review research 

proposals for upcoming research and the results of previous and ongoing research. At this 

time,Dalhousie will present detailed research results in a seminar format to the steering 

committee and Halifax Water staff that are directly impacted by the particular research tasks. 

Technical reports will be submitted as requested for specific research tasks. 

Sarah Clark, P. Eng., of HDR Engineering, Denver CO, will continue as owner’s engineer for the 

program. Sarah Clark is a water treatment specialist and has previously led a program similar to 

this one for a US utility. 

Depending on the specific research and expertise requirements, individual research tasks will be 

executed either internally by Halifax Water staff or externally by the Dalhousie University 

research team or external consultants, as required. 

Halifax Water Research Team. Tasks that involve the optimization of day-to-day process 

operations or monitoring programs will be completed internally using in-house staff and 

resources. The primary staff members responsible for specific research tasks are clearly 

identified in the implementation plan. 

One key step the utility has taken to solidify its commitment to sound water quality management 

was the recent retainment of a water quality manager. The Water Quality Manager has been 

assigned a leadership role in the provision of high quality drinking water; specifically related to 

treatment, water quality and distribution operations optimization, monitoring and research. This 

person will play a lead role in conducting water quality research, solving water quality, treatment 

and distribution problems, pro-actively monitoring and improving treatment and distribution 

operations and methodologies, and developing, implementing and monitoring water quality 

plans. In addition, Halifax Water has acquired an Energy Efficiency Engineer who will been 

consulted when reviewing recommendations for operational and/or capital improvements that 

have been identified through the tasks set forth in this plan. 

The addition of a Water Quality Manager has afforded the utility the appropriate advocate for the 

development and implementation of water quality strategic plans and research programs. 

However, implementation of these programs will require cooperation and commitment of several 

other stakeholders within the utility structure including the general management, plant managers 

and operations superintendents, distribution superintendents, and all directly impacted operations 

staff. 

A Water Quality Committee is currently in the early stages of development and, once 

established, will serve to actively review the progress of the overall research plan, determine the 

overall progress towards specific water quality goals and will also play a key role in evaluating 

12


May 2011 

Page 13 

the progress and performance of internal research tasks. This committee will also be responsible 

for contributing to the development and approval of operational treatment and distribution goals 

developed as outcomes of internal research tasks that are focused on actively monitoring and 

optimizing treatment and distribution operations. 

Dalhousie Research Team. Tasks that require significant bench and/or pilot-scale research 

experiments, such as individual process optimization projects that are evaluating alternate 

operational techniques or physical or chemical processes will be carried out by the Dalhousie 

Research team. The Dalhousie team will be lead by Dr. Graham Gagnon. Dr. Gagnon is an 

Associate Professor of Civil Engineering and Canada Research Chair in Water Quality and 

Treatment, based at Dalhousie. Dr. Gagnon is a water quality researcher of international 

reputation and has for several years conducted research using HRWC facilities. 

Contracting with Dalhousie has several advantages over Halifax Water conducting the research 

by hiring staff: 

• Research is led by a prominent and skilled researcher. Dr. Gagnon’s stature as a leading 

drinking water researcher in North America has grown since beginning this research 

project and, in part, as a result of the research project. 

• If required, access is available to Dr. Gagnon’s North American wide network of 

researchers and associates. Throughout the current research program, Halifax Water has 

been involved as participants in both national and international research studies that are 

well-aligned with our WQMP goals and have been led by leading researchers in North 

America such as Mark Edwards, Jennifer Clancy, Lisa Raigan, Michelle Prevost and 

more recently 2011 AWWA AP Black Research Award winner Michael Schock. 

• Compared to staffing internally, flexibility is provided to staff up or staff down or use 

staff with different expertise depending on the project demands. Dr. Gagnon has proven 

his capabilities in recruiting highly skilled researchers to participate in the research 

program, all with specific interests in areas of expertise, such as source water protection, 

coagulation chemistry, filtration, microbiology, etc. 

• A strategic relationship with Dalhousie has proven to provide several ongoing benefits to 

Halifax Water such as support with operational or regulatory driven projects outside of 

the research program and the dissemination of Halifax Water research results to the water 

community at several prestigious conferences and workshops. 

• The Dalhousie research team has developed invaluable background experience with 

Halifax Water treatment processes and operations staff throughout this research program 

that will undoubtedly be used as we move forward with the second phase of research. 

• There is a strong history of knowledge transfer between Halifax water staff and graduate 

student researchers. Halifax Water staff has benefited from the day to day interactions 

with the research team and, similarly, the research team has benefited from the daily 

interactions with the Dalhousie research staff. 

• There is a strong potential for the Halifax Water research contribution to be matched 

pending the successful renewal of the Halifax Water/NSERC Industrial Research Chair. 

13


May 2011 

Page 14 

Halifax Water is excited to continue working with the Dalhousie Research Team as this research 

program is carried forward. Benefits of this research partnership have exceeded expectations in 

that Halifax Water staff are benefiting from the day to day interaction with the research team and 

similarly the research team is benefiting from daily interaction with operations staff. Halifax 

Water is extremely pleased with the overall results of the research program that was carried out 

under WQMP V1 and the quality of the work being produced. The overall progress and research 

findings are evidence that the research agreement with Dalhousie University achieved its 

intended goals, not the least of which is providing improved water quality and reduced treatment 

costs for Halifax Water customers. 

Consulting Engineers. As required, Halifax Water will retain a consulting engineering team 

either to carry out a specific research tasks or to complete a third party review and evaluation of 

promising research results and analyze its potential and capability based on the ease, cost and 

risk of implementation at full plant scale. 

Phase II Implementation 

As promising research results are identified, Halifax Water will be in a position to begin 

planning for phase II implementation of these findings. Phase II is the stage where significant 

capital improvements are adopted. Once the scale and scope of optimum candidate projects is 

understood, the capital improvements can be incorporated in Halifax Water’s business planning 

and rate application processing. The Steering Committee and Water Quality Committee will 

determine the appropriate timing for Phase II implementation reviews to occur based on the 

overall research tasks complete and the overall potential for water quality and improvements in 

operational costs. 

In reality there will be a number of recommendations that will be adopted much more quickly. In 

general, research recommendations will be dealt with as follows: 

• Recommendations which offer a process improvement at the expense of only an 

operational or procedural change will be adopted immediately. 

• Recommendations that require only minor capital resource will generally be adopted in 

the next fiscal year. 

• Major capital initiatives will be held for analysis with other candidate projects. The 

optimal project will be selected and the project introduced into Halifax Water’s capital 

planning cycle. 

Any process change or capital improvement will be accepted only after it is demonstrated that 

there is no adverse public health risk, and after necessary approvals are obtained. The intent of 

Phase II is to fully meet the water quality goals and optimize capital and operating costs. 

******* 

14

Appendix A 

15

JD Kline Water Treatment Plant Research 

To date, the focus of the WQMP research program has largely been on upgrades and 

investigations concerning the JD Kline Water Treatment Plant (JDKWSP); Halifax Water’s most 

mature treatment facility. Research tasks focused on addressing research needs at this facility to 

ensure that the JDKWSP will be able to maintain treatment performance in an increasingly 

volatile regulatory regime, despite the advancing age of this facility. Carefully planning for 

future demands and regulatory changes will ensure that the facility is maintained and upgraded in 

a sustainable manner. Optimization tasks were completed largely by the research team with 

support for treatment plant operations staff. The following section outlines the overall findings 

and operational or water quality impacts of tasks that have either been completed or significant 

progress has been made towards the intended objectives: 

Construct Pilot Plant. In the summer of 2007, Halifax Water constructed a pilot-scale treatment 

plant at the JDKWSP to be used as an investigative tool in the implementation of this research 

plan. 

The pilot-scale water treatment plant operates using plant raw water at a design flow of 15 LPM 

and contains two separate treatment trains, capable of duplicating the direct filtration process 

currently operating at the JDKWSP. Two identical treatment trains are being used in the pilot 

study to ensure that the effects of changing raw water characteristics are eliminated by 

continuously operating one side of the plant such that the same finished water quality as the fullscale 

plant (FSP) is continuously achieved The fully automated plant has the flexibility to modify 

process variables such as mixing energy, detention times, overflow rates and filtration rate and 

the capability to extract water samples at any location in the treatment process and to introduce 

coagulated, flocculated or settled water from the existing treatment plant. The pilot plant 

chemical system is capable of storing and feeding currently used chemicals and a wide spectrum 

of potential chemicals over a wide range of dosages. The plant contains inline equipment to 

monitor temperature, pH, turbidity and particle counts at all critical process control points. 

Prove Pilot Plant. Following pilot plant installation, both commissioning and proving processes 

were completed. The commissioning process ensured the plant was installed and operating 

according to design specifications and the proving process served to confirm that equivalent 

intermittent and finished water quality was demonstrated between both the parallel pilot trains 

and the full-scale plant. 

The commissioning process involved a systematic approach designed to ensure that the pilot 

plant performed according to design specifications and satisfies all operational and research 

requirements. Commissioning tasks included equipment calibration, programming adjustments, 

chemical feed modifications and process fine-tuning. Several critical issues, such as lime feed 

and backwash problems, were quickly recognized and recommended solutions were 

subsequently identified and implemented by the research team and Halifax Water support staff. 

The pilot plant was commissioned in the fall of 2007. 

Next, successive proving trials demonstrated equivalence in multiple water quality parameters 

between the parallel pilot trains and between the two treatment scales. The validation process 

successfully demonstrated that the pilot plant has the ability to reproduce full-scale behavior and 

that the results of the pilot research at this facility are in fact real and representative of process 

16

changes that, when implemented at full scale, will successfully optimize the performance of the 

full-scale plant. The proving process was conducted during February through August, 2008. 

Alternate Coagulant Studies. There has been significant activity under this WQMP task which 

investigates alternate coagulants for the removal of particles, natural organic matter (NOM) and 

subsequent disinfection by-product (DBP) formation. Coagulation optimization research 

included extensive bench and pilot testing of alternative coagulants including polyaluminum 

chloride (PACl), aluminum chlorohydrate (ACH) and ferric sulfate using countless combinations 

of coagulation pH and dosages. The plant currently uses aluminum sulfate (alum) for 

coagulation purposes. Results from pilot-testing demonstrated that the optimal conditions for 

NOM control from bench-scale testing are not consistent with optimal filtered water particle 

removal objectives. Consequently, alternate coagulant conditions that looked promising for 

increased NOM removal following bench scale experiments did not perform markedly different 

than the current alum coagulation performance for NOM removal when operating at conditions 

necessary to obtain acceptable filtration performance during pilot operations. Research 

completed to date has found that alternate coagulants are not a viable option for achieving 

increased NOM removal without comprising filtration performance at this direct filtration 

facility. In addition, the alternate coagulants evaluated did not provide any significant potential 

for improved particle removal at this facility. Nevertheless, it was identified that the plot plant 

treatment process produces water quality with reduced DBP formation potential due to the 

differences in mixing regimes between the two scales of treatment. This work supports the 

findings of the mixing studies that were completed on the hydraulic flocculators, as discussed 

under the Mixing and Flocculation Studies progress update. 

Currently, pilot testing is underway to optimize the performance of alum coagulation practices at 

the JDKWSP. The current tests are investigating optimal pH, dosage and mixing conditions to 

be utilized during alum coagulation and determine if optimal performance using the coagulant 

will reduce DBP formation potential. This research task is included in the revised WQMP 

research plan. 

In addition, bench-scale experiments investigated the role a coagulant change would have in 

causing a significant effect with respect to lead leaching in drinking water. Both residual 

particulate iron and aluminum concentrations and chloride to sulfate mas ration (CSMR) levels 

following coagulation were found to be significant factors contributing to lead release in 

galvanic settings. Under multiple treatment conditions, ferric sulfate was consistently the most 

corrosive coagulant tested followed by PACl and Alum. The results of this study highlight the 

importance of evaluating downstream impacts of seemingly innocuous changes in coagulant type 

or dosage to obtain optimal coagulation performance. 

Mixing and Flocculation Studies. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has been used to 

evaluate the mixing regimes currently achieved by the hydraulic flocculation tanks at the 

JDKWSP. It has been determined that the flocculation tanks are not optimized for contaminant 

removal and that increased efficiencies can be sought; a direct result of a dated design and the 

plant not achieving design flow rates in the hydraulic flocculators. The combination of shortcircuiting 

and inadequate mixing regimes within these tanks has presented the opportunity to 

make mixing and coagulation improvements, including the addition of mechanical flocculation 

17

Mechanical/Hydraulic Assessment. As a direct result of the research findings in the Mixing 

and Flocculation Studies task, a consultant evaluation of the existing mixing regimes in the full 

scale process was conducted (HDR, 2010) and resulted in several process modifications to 

improve the overall performance of the plant, including mixing upgrades to the pre-mix tanks, 

flow splitting improvements and the addition of mechanical flocculation capabilities. An RFP 

for the detailed design of the upgrades recommended in this report is the next step towards this 

goal. 

Filter Operational Strategy and Flow Control (Pilot). Backwash procedures are being 

optimized to minimize filter ripening times at JDKWSP. Research completed to date has shown 

that there are minimal microbial risks in current filter ripening practices. However, these 

practices can still be optimized to obtain shorter backwash time and shorter start-up conditions. 

The benefit of these steps would be less water and energy consumption, as well as less 

wastewater to treat from the plant. 

Once pilot research is complete and filter operational recommendations are submitted by the 

research team, the findings will be reviewed by an external consultant to identify operational 

requirements as outlined under the Filter Operational Strategy and Flow Control (Consultant 

Facilitated) task. 

Filter-to-Waste Benefit/Risk Study (NSE). This task was a high priority for Halifax Water 

since the absence of filter-to-waste at the Pockwock treatment plant was considered noncompliant 

under the Province of Nova Scotia’s Drinking Water Strategy requirements that had to 

be met by April 1, 2008. As part of Halifax Water’s plan to achive compliance, Nova Scotia 

Environment (NSE) required Halifax Water to evaluate alternative means of managing filter 

ripening and to conduct microbial risk analysis. 

As part of this research alternative operational means of reducing particle breakthrough and 

associated potential pathogen risks during filter ripening were evaluated. Both filter resting and 

Extended Terminal Subfluidization Wash (ETSW) procedures were evaluated and it was 

concluded that filter resting following a backwash procedure was the preferred approach for 

reducing particle breakthrough during the filter ripening sequence. Filter resting was 

implemented at the JDKWSP in January 2008. In addition to pilot studies, retrospective fullscale 

data comparing filter resting to unrested filter conditions was conducted and concluded that 

that filter resting reduced maximum turbidity values significantly during the filter ripening 

sequence. Based on the statistical analysis of pilot-plant studies and one full year of full scale 

operating data, it was concluded that filter resting is indeed reducing risks associated with 

particle breakthrough during filter ripening sequences and should be continued as an operational 

alternative for the Pockwock treatment faciltity. To further satisfy the requests of NSE, 

Cryptosporidium, Giardia and E.coli samples were monitored during the filter ripening stage at 

the Pockwock plant for one year. The microbial sampling provided further evidence there is no 

microbial risks associated with the absence of filter-to-waste capabilities at this facility. All risk 

assessments required by NSE were submitted to NSE in December 2011. 

Value-added Research. Additional research tasks were completed as part of the Halifax Water 

/NSERC Industrial research Chair held by Dr. Graham Gagnon at Dalhousie University. Three 

of these tasks will have direct impacts to Halifax Water and the overall direction of research at 

18

the JDKWSP. A QMRA study was completed using the results from Cryptosporidium, Giardia 

and E.coli source water monitoring results that were obtained through a WQMP internal research 

task. All microbial cyst data obtained through the EPA Source Water Monitoring for 

Cryto/Giardia research task has been negative for the Pockwock watershed (i.e.; 0 cysts/ 100- 

L). Despite the fact that these cysts were not present, the QMRA modeling work was based on 

assuming initial worst case initial values for these contaminants in the watershed. The QMRA 

work demonstrated that the plant is capable of meeting acceptable risk levels, even considering 

worst case initial conditions. In additional to microbial risk assessments, the research team also 

focused significant research effort on characterizing the organic matter content in the raw and 

treated water at the JDKWSP. Organic matter was characterized in terms of both the chemical 

composition and molecular weight distribution of the organic matter present. This work 

provided a clear picture of the seasonal impacts of organic matter content in the watershed and 

the overall performance of the treatment process in terms of removing specific organic fractions. 

This work will be used to guide the coagulation optimization tasks included in the revised 

research plan. The other significant contribution from Dr. Gagnon’s team, was the evaluation of 

the impacts chloramine and chlorine disinfection practices on lead release from distribution 

plumbing. Overall, chloramines showed a significantly higher corrosion potential based on the 

operating and dosing conditions studied. To that end, the evaluation of chloramines as a 

potential means of reducing DBPS was removed from future research plans. 

System-wide Source Water, Treatment and Distribution Water Quality Tasks 

In addition to the JDKWSP research tasks, there were several tasks directed towards establishing 

water quality monitoring programs to track performance towards specific water quality goals set 

forth by Halifax Water in the original WQMP. All of the tasks associated with the 

implementation of advanced water quality monitoring programs have been either successfully 

completed or implemented as regular monitoring programs by the utility. Interestingly, some of 

the programs have either become regulatory requirements or are on the radar of local regulators, 

since the completion of the WQMP. This highlights one of the main functions of strategic 

planning, which is to be one step ahead of regulatory requirements. Overall progress on 

individual water quality tasks are outlined below: 

EPA Source Water Monitoring for Crypto/Giardia. Halifax Water has adopted the USEPA 

Surface Water Assessment program to assess the microbiological risk of its water systems. This 

program consists of 24 consecutive monthly raw water samples for Giardia and 

Cryptosporidium. This program was initiated in June of 2008 at the JDKWSP and was 

completed in May 2010 with no detections of cryptosporidium or giardia for the duration of the 

program. The Lake Major facility began the surface water assessment program in July 2009 and 

will conclude in June of 2011. In addition, sampling of the Collins Park system commenced in 

June, 2010, with no detections to date. 

Source Water Monitoring Program. Halifax Water submitted risk-based source water 

protection plans to NSE for each of its water systems including Pockwock and Tomahawk 

Lakes, Lake Major and Long Lake, Bennery Lake, Middle Musquodoboit, Collins Park, Five 

Island Lake, Silver Sands, Miller Lake, Chain Lake and Lake Lamont. All of the water quality 

monitoring programs supporting these plans were implemented in 2009. 

19

International Water Treatment Alliance. Halifax Water water completed the IWTA program 

with the objective of evaluating filtration performance at the JD Kline and Lake Major treatment 

plants, and also support optimization and continuous improvement at these treatment facilities. 

As participants in this program, Halifax Water was required to demonstrate that high levels of 

filter performance are being achieved and the capability to maintain these levels long term. The 

filter performance program included continuous online monitoring and the analysis of filtration 

data to demonstrate that individual filters produced filtered water turbidity was less than 0.10- 

NTU 95% of the time, consistent filter performance was being achieved, maximum filtered water 

turbidity was less than 0.3-NTU and to confirm that CT objectives for the removal of giardia and 

viruses are being achieved. Both the JD Kline and Lake Major facilities successfully met all of 

these stringent performance goals and were subsequently awarded the 3-Star Excellence in Water 

Treatment Award in June of 2009. 

Chlorine Residual Profiling. All reservoirs across the distribution system are now equipped 

with a remote chlorine analyzer and chlorine residuals are continuously monitored in Halifax 

Water’s online monitoring data storage system. The results from the analyzers are regularly 

monitored to identify operational and maintenance requirements. 

EPA Initial Distribution System Evaluation (IDSE). In 2008, Halifax Water began a THM 

and HAA monitoring program throughout the distribution system. THMs and HAAs are 

measured quarterly at 19 sampling sites throughout the Halifax Water distribution system. In 

2010, the local running annual average (LRAAs) are below THM and HAA guidelines of 100- 

µg/L and 80-µg/L, with the exception of one sampling site. The North Preston Community 

Center sampling site serviced by the Lake Major Water treatment plant has an LRAA above the 

guideline at 122-µg/L due to rechlorination at the reservoir. Halifax Water will explore means to 

optimize the rechlorination process at this location to lower the THM’s as part of the revised 

WQMP research plan. 

Real Time CT Monitoring. Real time CT monitoring was implemented at the Pockwock and 

Lake Major treatment plants in 2006. Online CT monitoring has allowed for the facilities to 

respond quickly to operational changes or anomalies that require CT to be subsequently adjusted 

to meet regulatory requirements. It has also identified some seasonal time frames in which the 

facilities need to carefully monitor CT trends to ensure regulatory requirements are consistently 

met. In response to numerous incidents involving water-borne contaminants, regulatory 

requirements for evaluating, monitoring and reporting disinfection performance are becoming 

more stringent in the water industry. In response to NSE recently requiring real-time CT 

monitoring in new operating permits, Halifax Water is currently implementing online CT 

monitoring at the Bennery Lake, 5 Island, Miller Lake and Silver Sands small system treatment 

plants. 

20

Appendix B 

21

Water Quality 

Master Plan 

Version 2 

Implementation 

1

HRWC J. Douglas Kline 

Water Quality Master Plan Implementation 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Water Quality and Treatment ..................................................................................................... 3 

Source Water Monitoring for Crypto and Giardia ...................................................................... 4 

Source Water Protection Research .............................................................................................. 5 

Organic Matter Monitoring Program .......................................................................................... 6 

Water Quality/Treatment Performance Monitoring Programs .................................................... 7 

Locational Operational and Water Quality Goals ....................................................................... 8 

Operator Training Program ......................................................................................................... 9 

Filter Monitoring and Optimization Program ........................................................................... 10 

Filter Backwash Optimization and SOPs .................................................................................. 11 

JD Kline Water Supply Plant .................................................................................................... 12 

Flocculation Mechanical Mixing Studies .................................................................................. 13 

Alum Coagulation/Coagulant Aid Optimization ...................................................................... 14 

Chemistry Assessment and Finalization ................................................................................... 15 

Filter Operational Strategy and Flow Control (Pilot)................................................................ 16 

Filter Operational Strategy and Flow Control (Consultant Facilitated) .................................... 17 

Pre-chlorination Evaluation....................................................................................................... 18 

Advanced Pilot Studies ............................................................................................................. 19 

Lake Major Water Supply Plant ............................................................................................... 20 

Coagulation and Upflow Clarification Assessment .................................................................. 21 

Residuals Handling Optimization ............................................................................................. 22 

Bennery Lake Water Supply Plant ........................................................................................... 23 

Process Optimization Study ...................................................................................................... 24 

Distribution System Water Quality ........................................................................................... 25 

Distribution System Water Quality and Integrity Monitoring .................................................. 26 

Disinfection Efficiency and THM/HAA Removal Study ......................................................... 27 

Adopt and Implement New Lead Policy ................................................................................... 28 

Lead Service Line Replacement and Monitoring Program ....................................................... 29 

Implement New Residential Lead Monitoring Program ........................................................... 30 

***** 

2


3

HRWC J.D. Kline Water Quality Master Plan Implementation 

Goal: Global – Source Water Quality 

Task: Source Water Monitoring for Crypto and Giardia 

Description: In 2008, HW adopted the USEPA Surface Water Assessment program to assess the 

microbiological risk of its water systems. This program consists of 24 consecutive monthly raw 

water samples for giardia and cryptosporidium. This program monitoring program will be 

continue until all surface source waters have been monitored for a 2-year period and a 

benchmark to USEPA rules for the appropriate level of particle removal and Cryptosporidium 

inactivation is identified for each treatment system. 

Primary Resource: WQ Inspectors 

Plant Operations Superintendent 

Pre/Post Requisite: There are no prerequisites. 

Schedule: On-going 

Budget: $8,000/year 

4


Goal: Global – Source Water Quality 

Task: Source Water Protection Research 

Description: HW is anticipating participation in a Water Research Foundation (WaterRF) 

Tailored Collaboration pathogen monitoring project with Clancy Environmental to assist Nova 

Scotia Environment with identifying a practical way to identify and evaluate source water risk. 

In addition, HW is anticipating participation in an NSERC funded project to develop and 

validate tools for monitoring and assessing the microbial quality of the Collins Park and Middle 

Musquodoboit source waters. This project will be completed in parallel to and incorporate the 

results of the Source Water Monitoring for Crypto and Giardia task that will be completed for 

both watersheds over the next 3 years. 

Primary Resource: WQ Inspectors 

Plant Operations Superintendent 

Pre/Post Requisite: The NSERC study will be conducted in parallel with the Source Water 

Monitoring for Crypto and Giardia task. 

Schedule: To be determined 

Budget: To be determined 

5


Goal: Global – Treatment Water Quality 

Task: Organic Matter Monitoring Program 

Description: Due to stringent DBP regulations, organic matter removal has become an 

important treatment objective for drinking water plants. Although this is an important treatment 

goal, HW does not currently monitor organic matter removal as an operational objective. To 

develop an inventory of both raw water organic matter concentrations and the organic matter 

removals being achieved at HW facilities, an organics monitoring program will be implemented 

at the JD Kline, Lake Major and Bennery Lake treatment plants. This monitoring program will 

include weekly TOC, DOC and DBPfp and daily UV 254 analysis. This information will be used 

to assess treatment plant performance and be used as a baseline for organic matter removal 

optimization studies. 

Primary Resource: Treatment Plant Operators 

Plant Managers 



Schedule: January 2012 

Budget: On-going cost of staff and supplies. 

In-kind support from Dalhousie Research Lab. 

6


Goal: Global – Water Quality and Treatment 

Task: Water Quality/Treatment Performance Monitoring Programs 

Description: Halifax Water records substantial amounts of operational and water quality data 

on a continuous basis, however this information is not currently being used to its full potential. 

We are currently generating volumes of data to satisfy regulatory goals rather than interpreting 

that data and using it to optimize and monitor treatment plant operations and water quality 

objectives. The goal of this task is to develop a water quality/treatment performance monitoring 

program that will organize and simplify this information making it “actionable” information that 

can be used as an indication of plant performance, to guide plant operations and identify 

optimization opportunities. 





Schedule: Begin developing capability in September 2011 and begin program in May 2012. 

Budget: On-going cost of staff and software. 

7



Task: Locational Operational and Water Quality Goals 

Description: In Version 1 of the WQMP, HW adopted long-term water quality goals to guide 

this research program and subsequent capital improvements at their facilities. As an outcome of 

Version 2, HW intends to develop locational operational and water quality goals for the JD 

Kline, Lake Major, and Bennery Lake treatment facilities. These goals will be developed based 

on anticipated outcomes of the WQMP and will be designed to push ahead of regulatory 

requirements. In addition, “action levels” will be established to trigger operational responses to 

avoid pending non-compliance as a result of unpredicted or particularly challenging treatment 

events. Establishing clear goals and providing technical direction to operational staff to be able 

to meet these goals is also a fundamental outcome of this program. In addition, monitoring 

programs will be designed to track performance of these goals. 


Plant Manager 


Pre/Post Requisite: These goals will be developed and augmented based on research outcomes. 

One full year of monitoring results from the Water Quality/Treatment Performance Monitoring 

Programs is a prerequisite. 

Schedule: Begin developing capability in January 2013. 


8



Task: Operator Training Program 

Description: A formal internal training program will be developed to support the 

implementation of locational water quality goals and monitoring programs and to encourage the 

continued optimization of treatment processes on a daily basis. This training program will 

involve periodic presentations to provide operators with the necessary tools to be successful in 

the proposed monitoring and optimization tasks. Training sessions will focus on specific 

treatment processes, advanced operational techniques, surveillance and maintenance techniques, 

data collection and analysis, etc. HW will aim to have these training sessions accepted as formal 

Continued Education Training (CEU) sessions by NSE. 


Plant Manager 



Schedule: Begin developing capability in January 2013. 


9


Goal: Particle/ Precursor Removal 

Task: Filter Monitoring and Optimization Program 

Description: The main goal of this task is to continually monitor, assess and refine filtration 

performance by implementing filter surveillance techniques, augmenting filter maintenance 

programs, implementing a performance monitoring program and setting facility specific filter 

operational objectives and performance indicators. This task will not only ensure diseasecausing 

organisms are optimally removed from the raw water and aid in reducing and detecting 

possible violations, but it will also serve to minimize operational and maintenance costs and 

optimize filtration operations and performance. This program will aid in increasing operator 

preparedness and reducing operational complacency. 





Schedule: Begin developing capabilities in July 2011 and implement in May 2012. 


10



Task: Filter Backwash Optimization and SOPs 

Description: Appropriate indicators of optimal filter backwashing procedures (i.e. individual 

steps and durations) will be developed along with optimized backwash SOPs for both the 

Bennery Lake and Lake Major WSPs. The main function of filter backwashing is to adequately 

clean the filter media; however it can also influence other phases of filter operations if it is not 

completed optimally. For instance, washing filters for an excessively long period of time can 

actually be detrimental to the backwash procedure and leads to post-backwash turbidity 

breakthrough and longer ripening times. Optimizing the backwash duration will not only yield 

reductions in ripening turbidity and duration, but significant water saving benefits will be 

realized through the reduction of backwash times and spent filter-to-waste volumes. Due to the 

sensitivity of direct filtration operations and the inability to filter-to-waste at the Pockwock 

facility, a separate task was developed for the optimization of filtration operations at that 

facility). 


Plant Water managers 

Plant Supervisors 


Schedule: May 2012 


11

JD Kline Water Supply Plant 

12


Goal: Particle/Precursor Removal 

Task: Flocculation Mechanical Mixing Studies 

Description: Upgrading to mechanical mixers in the flocculation process was identified as a 

potential means of improving NOM and particle removal at the JDKWSP. The combination of 

short-circuiting and inadequate mixing regimes within the flocculation tanks has presented the 

team with a window of opportunity for optimizing contaminant removals within the system 

through mixing optimization studies at the pilot-scale. This pilot work will look at mechanical 

flocculation energy required to achieve optimal filtration performance. 

Primary Resource: Research Team 

Pre/Post Requisite: This research will be completed in collaboration with the Alum 

Coagulation/ Coagulant Aid Optimization task. 

Schedule: 

August - October 2012: Warm weather pilot. 

February - March 2013: Cold weather pilot. 

Budget: This work is part of an initial five year pilot program with a budget of $695,000. 

13



Task: Alum Coagulation/Coagulant Aid Optimization 

Description: Following mechanical flocculation upgrades, the optimization of alum coagulation 

conditions will be required to ensure optimal organic matter and particle removals are being 

achieved. In addition, pilot operations have identified that polymer may not be required 

following mechanical mixing upgrades; therefore, alum coagulation conditions will need to be 

closely evaluated during cold water operations. If a coagulant aid is required, it may be 

necessary to review filter and coagulant aid polymers for improved particle and TOC removal 

performance. Aluminum residuals will need to be evaluated as a secondary objective of this task 

to ensure effluent wastewater regulatory requirements are effectively achieved. 


Pre/Post Requisite: This research will be completed in collaboration with the Flocculation 

Mechanical Mixing Studies. 

Schedule: 

August - October 2012: Warm weather pilot. 

February - March 2013: Cold weather pilot. 


14


Goal: DBP and Particle/Precursor Removal 

Task: Chemistry Assessment and Finalization 

Description: At the conclusion of the pilot studies addressing chemistry, a comprehensive 

review of progress to date will take place. The intent is to review the success of pilot work, its 

applicability for full scale implementation and to determine if any interim findings can be 

implemented full scale. 


Consulting Team 

Pre/Post Requisite: Chemistry pilots should be completed. 

Schedule: 

To be determined 

Budget: 


15



Task: Filter Operational Strategy and Flow Control (Pilot) 

Description: This pilot work will look at operational techniques and strategies that can improve 

particle or TOC removal. It will also look at reducing and/or shortening filter ripening spikes 

through backwash optimization studies. This work can be carried out prior to the optimization of 

coagulation/flocculation/mixing approaches, but will need to be verified once these operational 

conditions are finalized. 


Pre/Post Requisite: Coagulant studies should be completed or this work should be at least 

verified upon completion of those studies. 

Schedule: On -going 


16



Task: Filter Operational Strategy and Flow Control 

(Consultant Facilitated) 

Description: This consultant facilitated work will draw on lessons learned through pilot work 

done to date. The consultant will look at results of previous pilot work for opportunities to 

pursue operational changes. A brainstorming session will be done with plant operators to identify 

opportunities for operations changes such as resting filters flow control etc. The work will also 

look at the possibility of deploying ETSW full scale. 

Primary Resource: Consultant Team 

Pre/Post Requisite: This work will also follow pilot work looking at chemical and mixing 

optimization of coagulation and flocculation processes. 

Schedule: February – June 2012 

Budget: $50,000 

17


Goal: Particle/ Precursor Removal and DBP Goals 

Task: Pre-chlorination Evaluation 

Description: If the JD Kline facility did not depend on pre-chlorination for microbial control in 

their filters, there is the potential that significant decreases in DBPs could be realized, as 

eliminating pre-chlorination is an effective way to control DBP levels in finished water. This tak 

will evaluate potential DBP reductions that can be achieved through eliminating pre-chlorination 

practices at this facility. As part of this investigation, the option of operating biologically active 

filters will also be examined for this facility, which may lead to further removal of biodegradable 

NOM, which are typically recalcitrant to coagulation treatment. If biologically filters are 

identified as posing too high of a threat to microbial contamination at this facility, chlorination 

could be add to filter backwash water to act as a filter aid for microbial control in the filters. 

This study will look at alternative location for pre-chlorination and the risks/benefits of not prechlorinating. 

The study must also consider the relationship between primary disinfection and the 

addition of potassium permanganate for oxidation of manganese. 


Pre/Post Requisite: This work will follow pilot work looking at chemical alternative coagulants. 

Schedule: June– December 2013 


18


Goal: Global 

Task: Advanced Pilot Studies 

Description: Advanced pilot studies refers to the need to pilot performance improvement 

strategies that have a high capital cost such as DAF, membranes and UV. Since HRWC highly 

confident that particle removal goals can be achieved without constructing these process 

improvements, these pilot studies are not described in detail and would only be considered if the 

goals cannot be achieved through plant optimization. 

Primary Resource: Research Team/Consultants 

Pre/Post Requisite: Completion of all pilot work and studies scheduled for up to spring of 2010. 

Schedule: March 2014 and beyond, only if required 

Budget: N/A at this time 

19

Lake Major Water Supply Plant 

20



Task: Coagulation and Upflow Clarification Assessment 

Description: This research task will optimize the coagulation and up-flow clarification 

processes at the Lake Major WSP. This study will identify optimal coagulant/coagulant aid 

dosage and pH conditions to maintain a desirable sludge blanket while optimizing organic matter 

and particle removal. In particular, research efforts will focus on optimizing performance during 

extreme weather operational challenges and will have secondary goals of reduced sludge 

management costs and improved wastewater quality. This research task will identify 

performance indicators to be used by the operators when adjusting pH and dosages in response to 

water quality changes, particularly extreme warm and cold weather periods that are historically 

operationally challenging. 



Pre/Post Requisite: There are no pre-requisites. 

Schedule: 

February - March 2012: Warm Weather Trials 

August - October 2012: Cold Weather Trials 


21


Goal: Waste Treatment Goals 

Task: Residuals Handling Optimization 

Description: This research task will optimize the sludge handling processes at the Lake Major 

WSP by identifying optimal polymer dosages to be added during both the sludge thickening 

treatment stage and for additional sludge drying prior to the centrifuge process. This research 

task will identify performance indicators to be used by the operators when adjusting these 

dosages in response to water quality changes and fluctuations. 


Pre/Post Requisite: Lake Major Coagulation and Upflow Clarification Assessment task will be 

completed prior to this task commencing. 

Schedule: February – June 2013 


22

Bennery Lake Water Supply Plant 

23


Goal: Global - Treatment Water Quality 

Task: Process Optimization Study 

Description: Complete a comprehensive review of the treatment processes at the Bennery Lake 

WSP and develop a comprehensive optimization strategy and recommendations to improve the 

operation of the facility. Process challenges to be directly addressed by this study are floc carryover 

due to poor settling performance, unbalanced hydraulics, undesirably short filter run times, 

consistent manganese removal to meet regulatory requirements, achieving HAA regulatory 

requirements, secondary turbidity spikes and quality issues associated with the daily start-up/ 

shut-down of the plant. 

Primary Resource: Consulting Team 

Pre/Post Requisite: There are no pre-requisites. 

Schedule: 


Budget: $80,000 

24


25


Goal: Global - Distribution System Water Quality 

Task: Distribution System Water Quality and Integrity Monitoring 

Description: Halifax Water has set a goal to develop a comprehensive program to actively 

monitor and assess both distribution system water quality and physical integrity. This 

monitoring program would incorporate a suite of physical, hydraulic and water quality 

parameters at strategically identified sampling points to both identify and reduce the risk of 

contamination events or water quality issues and identify changes in the physical integrity of 

distribution system components. A key requirement of this program is to incorporate monitoring 

parameters that can be measured quickly, inexpensively and (ideally) continuously at multiple 

locations within the treatment system. Halifax Water is currently measuring and recording 

several parameters that can be incorporated into this program; however, the data is not always 

being used to its full potential as far as monitoring, understanding and predicting water quality in 

the distribution system. 

Primary Resource: Engineering Dept Staff (Technician/engineer) 

Water Quality Inspector for field support 



Schedule: Begin developing capability in January 2013 

Budget: Ongoing cost of staff and software. 

26


Goal: DBP Goals 

Task: Disinfection Efficiency and THM/HAA Removal Study 

Description: The disinfection system residual and DBP monitoring initiated through the first 

phase of the WQMP has provided sufficient data to be used in supporting this research task. 

This work will focus on optimizing secondary disinfection to produce a strategy that looks at the 

most effective ways of achieving regulated chlorine residual levels and DBP goals. The strategy 

will look at distribution system strategies such as booster chlorination and reservoir operation 

and mixing as well as assess the need for point of use DBP treatment options, such as reservoir 

aeration or granular activated carbon (GAC) treatment. A particular focus of this task will be 

addressing the high THM levels associated with the North Preston rechlorination station. 

Primary Resource: Engineering Dept Staff (Technician/engineer) 

Water Quality Inspector for field support 



Schedule: Begin developing capability in September 2011. 


27


Goal: Distribution System Water Quality Goals 

Task: Adopt and Implement New Lead Policy 

Description: The new lead policy is composed of three umbrella programs, which have an 

overall goal of maintaining optimal corrosion performance in the distribution system and 

upholding a pro-active approach in protecting public health by reducing the health risks 

associated with exposure to lead in drinking water. The major programs that have been 

enhanced under this new policy are the Residential Sampling Program, Distribution System 

Monitoring Program and a Lead Service Line (LSL) Replacement program. The new program 

affects a number of departments within the commission and will take a significant commitment 

from all stakeholders to ensure it is rolled out in an effective and successful manner. 

Primary Resource: Water Quality Inspectors 

Customer Service Supervisor 

Operations Superintendents 

Superintendent, Plant Operations 



Schedule: May - October 2011 


28



Task: Lead Service Line Replacement and Monitoring Program 

Description: Halifax Water is implementing an aggressive lead service line (LSL) replacement 

and monitoring program which includes new operations and monitoring protocols for planned, 

unexpected and pro-active LSL replacements. Two major components of these programs are (1) 

a public education program to encourage homeowners to replace the private portion of the LSL, 

to enhance awareness of the health risks associated with lead in drinking water and to outline 

protocols to follow to minimize lead exposure for a defined period of time following a LSL 

replacement and (2) an aggressive program to monitor the effects of LSL replacements by testing 

the water in the home for lead concentrations both before and after a lead pipe replacement. 

Primary Resource: Water Quality Inspector 


Operations Superintendents 



Schedule: May - October 2011 


29



Task: Implement New Residential Lead Monitoring Program 

Description: Halifax Water’s current residential sampling program does include an adequate 

indication of the lead concentrations that are representative of residences with lead service lines. 

This new program will follow the two-tier protocol that is recommended in the Health Canada 

guidance document with minor modifications. This program will include the collection of both a 

1 st draw (1-L) and flushed water sample following 6 hours of stagnation. For Tier 1 sampling, 

lead levels will be monitored once per year at 100 homes of which at least 50% of the sites have 

lead service lines. If more than 10% of the sites sampled have lead levels above 0.015-mg/L, 

Tier 2 sampling will be conducted to provide more detailed information about the source of lead 

in that particular home and aid in identifying the best correction action measures to be 

implemented. 

Primary Resource: Water Quality Inspector 




Schedule: May 2011 – December 2011 

Budget: Ongoing cost of staff and software 

30

Blank Page

Appendix H 

CCME Municipal Wastewater Effluent 

Implementation Plan

Blank Page

Halifax Water ‐ Implementation Plan 

CCME Canada‐wide Strategy for the Management of 

Municipal Wastewater Effluent, and 

Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations (WSER) 

Updated October 2012 

Introduction: 

The CCME Canada‐wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent is now in effect 

(as of February, 2009). There are a number of elements of this Strategy that will require action by 

Halifax Water over the 30 year time span defined in the Strategy to achieve compliance. These 

elements are listed below, together with the associated required actions. 

This document will be revised when new information becomes available. This CCME implementation 

plan is related to the Halifax Water Compliance Plan for the Wastewater Treatment facilities (WWTFs), 

which considers both CCME and NSE compliance requirements. 

Plan Elements: 

National Performance Standard (NPS): All treatment facility effluent must conform to the National 

Performance Standard (NPS) of 25mg/L CBOD; 25mg/L TSS; 0.02 mg/L TRC. (CBOD – Carbonaceous 

Biochemical Oxygen Demand, TSS – Total Suspended Solids, TRC – Total Residual Chlorine, for those 

facilities using chlorine disinfection). This standard will require upgrading of four wastewater treatment 

facilities to secondary treatment levels: Eastern Passage, Halifax, Dartmouth and Herring Cove. The 

contract for the Eastern Passage Expansion and Upgrade has been awarded and construction is under 

way. The other three facilities will need to be upgraded in accordance with the schedule in the CCME 

Strategy. These upgrades will require planning, pre‐design and design work, RFP processes and 

contracting. There will be significant capital costs which will be identified as upgrade plans are 

developed, as well as increased operating costs for the upgraded facilities, and for management of the 

additional biosolids generated. 

The final Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations (WSER) were released in June 2012 and are now in 

force. These regulations, made under the Fisheries Act, implement those aspects of the CCME Strategy 

which fall under federal jurisdiction, namely the discharge of deleterious substances to fish habitat. The 

WSER defines the same national discharge standards for CBOD, TSS and TRC as the CCME Strategy, but 

also imposes a standard of 1.25 mg/L for un‐ionized ammonia and requires that effluent not be acutely 

lethal. 

In addition, provincial jurisdictions (Nova Scotia Environment in this province) may impose stricter 

requirements on TSS/BOD/TRC, and on other substances of concern, through site‐specific Effluent 

Discharge Objectives (EDO), and based on the results of the Environmental Risk Assessments (ERA, 

Page | 1

discussed further below). Facilities now using chlorine disinfection will not meet the national TRC 

standard, and will require either de‐chlorination upgrades or conversion to UV disinfection. 

The biosolids processing and dewatering facilities at Aerotech may also need upgrading and/or 

expanded operations to handle the increased load of biosolids generated with increased treatment 

levels. 

WWTF Risk Analysis: The first step in the planning process is to conduct a risk analysis for each facility 

based on criteria defined by CCME, to determine the risk level and associated timeframe for compliance 

(High Risk ‐ 10 years, Medium Risk ‐ 20 years, Low Risk ‐ 30 years). An initial draft of this risk analysis has 

been completed (Schedule A). Results and implications for each of the Halifax Water treatment facilities 

are discussed below. 

Harbour Solutions (Halifax, Dartmouth, Herring Cove) – these facilities were designed as advanced 

primary facilities with discharge objectives for BOD/TSS of 50/40 mg/L, and so are not compliant with 

the NPS. Each will require an upgrade to secondary level. The preliminary risk analysis results indicate 

that Halifax and Dartmouth are both medium risk, and thus must be compliant within 20 years. The 

CCME Strategy specifies that systems with CSO discharges must also consider the risk inherent in the 

CSOs, and if that CSO risk score on a sewershed basis exceeds the risk score for the facility, then both 

CSOs and facility must be compliant within 30 years. The CSO risk analyses for Halifax and Dartmouth 

have been completed. The results indicate that CSO risk may exceed the plant risk for these plants, 

providing 30 years to address both CSO management and plant compliance. Herring Cove is in the low 

risk category, and so must become compliant within 30 years. 

AeroTech – this facility is not CCME compliant due to high BOD/TSS. The risk category is medium, and so 

the timeframe for compliance is 20 years. Further study of options for this facility is required, since 

significant receiving water limitations exist. An ERA has been initiated, which will be completed in 2012. 

Belmont – this small subdivision facility is not CCME compliant due to TRC. This facility is scheduled to 

be decommissioned and connected to the Eastern Passage facility once the expansion and upgrade of 

Eastern Passage is completed. The Belmont decommissioning is currently scheduled to be completed in 

2015. 

Eastern Passage – this facility is not CCME compliant based on BOD/TSS. A contract to expand and 

upgrade to secondary level treatment has been awarded by Halifax Water, which will bring this facility 

into CCME compliance. Construction is ongoing. 

Frame – this small subdivision facility is not CCME compliant due to TRC. The risk category is low, with 

30 years to comply. However, the existing disinfection system is not functioning well, so a conversion to 

UV disinfection is proposed for 2012/13. 

Lakeside‐Timberlea – this facility is not CCME compliant due to high TRC. This facility is currently at the 

maximum capacity allowed by NS Environment due to limited dilution of the treated discharge in the 

receiving waters, and is the subject of further study to examine options for dealing with future growth. 

Reduction of TRC or replacement of chlorine with UV disinfection will form part of these options. This 

facility is in the low risk category, and so has 30 years to become compliant under CCME. An 

Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) as required by CCME has been completed and submitted to NSE. 

Page | 2

Halifax Water has decided to divert some of the sewage from the Lakeside‐Timberlea sewershed into 

the Halifax sewershed, to free up capacity for new development in Lakeside‐Timberlea. This diversion 

project is pending. 

Lockview‐MacPherson (Fall River) – This facility is currently CCME compliant. The Fall River community 

is currently the subject of a planning study for future growth. This study will consider options for future 

sewage treatment to accommodate projected growth, and is ongoing through HRM Community 

Planning. 

Mill Cove –this facility is currently CCME compliant. 

Middle Musquodoboit – this facility is currently CCME compliant. 

North Preston – this facility is currently CCME compliant. 

Springfield Lake – this facility is not CCME compliant due to TRC. An upgrade will need to be planned to 

de‐chlorinate, or to convert to UV disinfection. The risk category is low, with 30 years to comply. 

Steeves (Wellington) – this small subdivision facility is not CCME compliant due to TRC. This facility is in 

the process of being completely replaced. Conversion to UV disinfection is included as part of this 

project. The project is scheduled to be completed by 2013. 

Uplands Park – this small subdivision facility is not CCME compliant due to TRC. An upgrade is planned 

during FY 2010/11 to convert this facility to UV disinfection. The risk category is low, with 30 years to 

comply. 

Wastewater Characterization: The CCME Strategy requires that effluent for all treatment facilities be 

screened for a broad list of parameters (dependant on plant size) which may have impacts on receiving 

waters. This must be done for all facilities, since provincial jurisdictions may decide to impose standards 

beyond the basic national performance standards. A one‐year wastewater characterization must be 

completed for all facilities as part of the Environmental Risk Analysis outlined below. Budget was 

provided during FY 2010/11 and subsequent years for lab analyses. Sampling is conducted by 

Regulatory Compliance staff. Required monitoring includes biological toxicity testing. An initial budget 

estimate for the required sampling at all facilities is approximately $124,000 for chemical analyses. 

Toxicity testing cost (additional $67,000) has been estimated based on limited quotes from the only 

Nova Scotia lab accredited for acute toxicity testing. Chronic toxicity testing is not currently available 

from a local supplier, so samples are sent to AquaTox in Ontaro. Sampling will be scheduled as part of 

the timetable for each of the facility environmental risk analyses, detailed below. Detailed CCME 

Strategy monitoring requirements are provided in Schedule B. Characterization was completed for BLT 

in 2010 and for AeroTech in 2011. Characterization sampling is ongoing for North Preston and 

Springfield, and has been initiated for Halifax, Dartmouth, Herring Cove and Mill Cove. Basic 

characterization for all very small and small (CCME categories) plants was initiated in November 2010, 

and is now complete. 

Receiving Water Environmental Risk Analysis (ERA): Receiving water ERAs must be conducted for all 

facilities, including those in compliance with the national performance standards, since jurisdictions will 

use these analyses to determine if additional standards must be imposed for each effluent discharge. 

Page | 3

The ERA will determine the environmental concentrations of discharged substances outside of the 

defined mixing zone in the receiving waters. Jurisdictions will use these results to determine if any 

discharged substances exceed water quality objectives and therefore require imposition of effluent 

discharge objectives (EDOs) in addition to the national standards. These ERA studies will be carried out 

through consulting contracts, which will require budget allocations over the next several years, and staff 

time to prepare RFPs, evaluate, award and manage contracts. 

An ERA for Eastern Passage was completed as part of the planning for the current upgrade project, 

designed to be compliant with the CCME requirements as they were then understood in draft form, and 

has been accepted by NSE. A study was initiated in FY 2009/10 for the Lakeside‐Timberlea (BLT) facility 

as part of the larger study of options for future sewage loads at this facility. The BLT ERA study is now 

complete and has been submitted to NS Environment. The ERA study for AeroTech WWTF was initiated 

in 2010/11 and will be complete in late 2012. An additional ERA study was awarded in 2010/11 for the 

Fall River, Frame and Wellington WWTFs, due for completion in 2012/13. 

Watershed Monitoring: Within five years, the federal & provincial jurisdictions must define 

requirements for some degree of watershed monitoring for receiving water systems. Such monitoring 

will be budgeted and initiated once the provincial requirements are finalized. 

Reduction at Source (Pollution Prevention): The Strategy includes a Model Sewer Use By‐law for 

consideration by municipalities. The sewer rules and regulations of Halifax Water have been updated to 

reflect any changes required to achieve conformity with the intent of the CCME model by‐law. 

Combined and Sanitary Sewer Overflows (CSO and SSO): The Strategy requires that there be no 

increase in CSO or SSO frequency except as part of an approved management plan (to be defined by the 

province), that there be no dry weather overflows, and that CSOs be screened where feasible. Overflow 

events must be reported for frequency and volume, within three years (by 2012). This will require 

physical upgrades of most CSO/SSO locations (primarily pumping stations) to enable recording of event 

occurrences and durations, and to be able to measure flows or to calculate estimated volumes. SCADA 

system upgrades will also be required to enable recording of data through the PI system. Technical 

Services staff continue work to provide the needed SCADA upgrades, to enable reporting of the SCADA 

data from CSO/SSO locations. 

Equipment needs have been defined. Sensor installations to measure water levels in the wet wells in 

pumping stations were initiated in 2010/11 for an initial set of 18 pump stations through contracted 

services with CBCL and a tender to Black & Macdonald. Wet well water level will allow detection of 

overflow conditions, and will also allow calculation of approximate overflow volumes. The initial project 

was started during FY 2010/11, using capital funds ($240,000) originally allocated for flow measurement 

and sampling at the Halifax CSO points, but available due to the shut‐down of the Halifax facility. These 

funds were used to provide instrumentation for the selected list of priority CSO/SSO locations. Further 

funds for additional locations will be allocated in future years. The Permanent Flow Monitoring budget 

will be used to upgrade CSO location equipment to allow estimation of overflow volumes, based on 

knowledge gained through an initial trial project on the Grove Street CSO in Dartmouth. Environment 

Canada have indicated that modeling estimates will be acceptable for CSO volume reporting, so not all 

CSOs will require new sensors. Four CSO locations will be provided with sensors to verify and calibrate 

the model results. 

Page | 4

CSO/SSO management plans will need to be developed on a sewershed basis under direction from the 

Province (NS Environment). Plans will include provisions to reduce CSO events over time, which will 

require some degree of upgrading of combined sewage collection systems with the objective of reducing 

stormwater inputs or increasing capacity. Reduction and eventual elimination of SSO events over time 

will require upgrades to a large number of pumping stations and/or collection systems to reduce inflow 

and infiltration, increase capacity, provide storage, or other methods to reduce events in frequency 

and/or volume. There will be significant associated capital costs which will be identified as the plans are 

developed. 

Compliance Monitoring: All monitoring required for CCME compliance (regular effluent monitoring, 

wastewater characterization and CSO/SSO monitoring) will be carried out by Environmental Services 

staff of Halifax Water. Analyses will be conducted by accredited outside laboratories. 

Inflow & Infiltration (I&I) Reduction: Ongoing reduction of inflow and infiltration in the public 

collection system, and I&I reduction from private sources, will reduce the base and peak flows within 

the wastewater collection systems. The benefit will be to assist in reducing both the frequency and 

volume of wastewater overflows at SSO locations during rainfall events, and reduce high‐flow impacts 

on treatment plant performance. 

Federal and Provincial Implementation of the Strategy: The final Wastewater Systems Effluent 

Regulations (WSER) were released in June 2012. These regulations, made under the Fisheries Act, 

implement those aspects of the CCME Canada‐wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal 

Wastewater Effluent which fall under federal jurisdiction, namely the discharge of deleterious 

substances to fish habitat. The WSER defines the following as deleterious substances, and sets national 

standards for their discharge: Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (CBOD) – 25 mg/L; Total 

Suspended Solids (TSS) – 25 mg/L; Total Residual Chlorine (TRC – for those facilities using chlorine for 

disinfection) – 0.02 mg/L; and Un‐ionized Ammonia – 1.25 mg/L as Nitrogen, at 15⁰C ± 1⁰C. In addition, 

effluent cannot be acutely toxic. The federal regulations introduce a new parameter in addition to the 

performance standards set by CCME for CBOD, TSS and chlorine. The federal regulations include a 

treated effluent discharge standard for un‐ionized ammonia of 1.25 mg/L . The un‐ionized form of 

ammonia is the form which is toxic to fish, and is calculated based on pH. Sampling conducted to date 

for all Halifax Water WWTFs indicates that all the plants are able to meet this standard. 

These regulations clarify some of the requirements, and will influence further development of business 

plans and budgets for CCME compliance. The province of Nova Scotia has indicated that it will 

implement CCME requirements under their jurisdiction through conditions attached to Approvals issued 

by NS Environment. 

The federal regulations also require initial identification reports, documenting various aspects of 

wastewater treatment facilities and any overflow points (CSOs and SSOs). Facilities not immediately 

compliant with the defined standards must apply for interim approvals to discharge for the time period 

during which they will achieve compliance. 

Halifax Water has raised a number of practical questions with NS Environment regarding various details 

such as CSO/SSO management plans, conduct and timing of ERA studies in relation to facility upgrades, 

etc. NSE is considering these matters, but there are a number of unanswered questions at this point. 

Once resolved, these may affect the details of compliance plans over the next several years. 

Page | 5

CCME Strategy Timelines: 

February 2009: CCME Ministers approve the Strategy. 

February 2010: Initial WWTF Risk Analysis must be completed to determine timeline for compliance for 

those WWTFs which do not meet the NPS (DONE – See Schedule A appended). 

2012: All facilities must monitor for compliance with the NPS parameters (DONE). Public reporting, 

including overflow frequency and volume, must be provided. 

2014: Jurisdictions must determine requirements for receiving water monitoring at a watershed level. 

2016: Facilities not in compliance with NPS will submit action plans including prioritization of actions. 

2016: National standards for CSOs and SSOs must be met, including completion of approved long‐term 

management plans. 

2017: Environmental Risk Assessments will be completed for all facilities, and site‐specific 

Environmental Discharge Objectives will be established by jurisdictions where needed. A one‐year initial 

wastewater characterization will be completed for each WWTF as part of the ERA. 

2019: High risk facilities must be compliant with National Performance Standards. 

2029: Medium risk facilities must be compliant. 

2039: Low risk facilities must be compliant; medium and high risk facilities with CSO risk > facility risk 

must be compliant. 

WSER Timelines: 

January 1, 2013: Monitoring of effluent begins. 

May 15, 2013: WWTF Identification Reports due. 

2013/14 and subsequent years: Quarterly (>17,500 m3/day) or Annual Monitoring Reports due. 

February 15, 2014 and subsequent years: CSO Reports due. 

June 30, 2014: Application for Transitional Authorizations due. 

January 1, 2015: Toxicity testing begins. 

Within 90 days of detecting acute lethality: Application for Temporary Authorization to Deposit Unionized 

Ammonia due. 

Page | 6

CCME TASK LIST & RESPONSIBILITES 

FY 2009/10 (Complete) 

1. SCADA connections to the PI system (ongoing into FY 2011/12 and 12/13). 

2. Calculation of overflow volumes based on water level data. Design work by CBCL includes these 

calculations. 

3. Installation of water level sensors, priority CSO/SSO locations (initiated FY 2009/10, continuing 

FY 2011/12 and 12/13). 

4. ERA Studies. Initiate one ERA study (Lakeside‐Timberlea). 

5. Initial Wastewater Characterizations. Initiate 12‐month sampling for CCME expanded list of 

wastewater effluent parameters – one priority WWTF (Lakeside‐Timberlea). 


1. Installation of water level sensors, additional CSO/SSO locations (ongoing into FY 2011/12 and 

12/13). 

2. Halifax and Dartmouth CSO flow monitoring – prepare Plans. 

3. ERA Studies. Initiate additional ERA studies. (AeroTech) 

4. Initial Wastewater Characterizations. Initiate 12‐month sampling for CCME expanded list of 

wastewater effluent parameters – AeroTech and small plants 

5. Complete WWTF Risk Analysis for systems with CSOs. 


Continue Item #s 1‐5 as per FY 2010/11 plan and budget. 

1. Installation of water level sensors, additional CSO/SSO locations. 

a. Tendering for equipment installation and SCADA connections to Black & Macdonald. 

b. Staff team, Engineering & IS lead – Tony Blouin, Graham MacDonald, Peter Maynard. 

2. Halifax and Dartmouth CSO flow monitoring 

a. Initial test case at Grove Street CSO to prove methodology. 

b. Staff team Environmental Services. 

3. ERA Studies. Initiate additional ERA studies. 

a. External consulting contracts under operating budget allocation – Fall River, Frame & 

Wellington study awarded to Dillon (ongoing 12/13). 

b. Wastewater Operations, Tony Blouin. 

4. Halifax and Dartmouth CSO sampling. 

a. Initial sampling for Halifax negotiated with NSE – review data once several priority 

events sampled. 

b. Pollution Prevention staff, Tony Blouin. 

5. Initial Wastewater Characterizations sampling for CCME expanded list of wastewater effluent 

parameters 

a. North Preston & Springfield initiated. 

b. Internal staff resources for sample collection (Regulatory Compliance), external lab 

analyses. Tony Blouin & Compliance staff. 

Page | 7

FY 2012/13 

1. Complete SSO sensor installations. 

2. Complete Frame‐Wellington‐Fall River ERA. 

3. Initiate Initial Wastewater Characterizations for Halifax, Dartmouth, Herring Cove and Mill Cove. 

FY 2013/14 

1. Sensor installations for selected CSO locations – Ferguson, Sackville and North. 

2. Initiate ERA study for Halifax, Dartmouth, Herring Cove and Mill Cove. 

3. Submit Identification Reports for each WWTF. 

4. Begin WSER monitoring. 

5. Calibrate collection system hydraulic model for CSOs and initiate generation of CSO volume 

estimates based on rainfall data. 

6. Submit initial CSO report and Monitoring reports. 

FY 2014/15 

1. Initiate North Preston‐Springfield ERA study. 

2. Initiate WSER toxicity testing. 

FY 2015/16 

1. Initiate Middle Musquodoboit‐Uplands ERA study. 

Subsequent years 

Provincial requirements for receiving water monitoring at a watershed level will be defined, and will 

introduce additional sampling and analysis tasks, for which appropriate operating budget allocations will 

be provided. 

Long‐Term Tasks 

At appropriate times over the next 20‐30 years (depending on the outcome of the WWTF Risk Analysis 

ratings for WWTFs and CSOs), significant capital plans will need to be created for the following items: 

1. Upgrade the HHSP WWTFs to secondary level treatment 

2. Upgrade any other WWTFs which do not meet the National Performance Standards – this will 

include upgrades to UV disinfection for any facilities presently using chlorine disinfection. 

3. Upgrade wastewater collection systems to eliminate SSO location discharges according to an 

NSE‐approved SSO Management Plan (to be developed). 

4. Upgrade wastewater collection systems to reduce CSO location discharges according to an NSEapproved 

CSO Management Plan (to be developed). 

Page | 8

Schedule A. 

WWTF Risk Assessment 

Years to 

Comply: 

High 

Risk 10 

Medium 

Risk 20 Low Risk 30 

Facility 

Flow 

(m3/day) 

Industrial 

Input? 

Facility 

Size Points 

CBOD5 

(mg/L) 

TSS 

(mg/L) Points TRC Points 

Ammonia 

(mg/L) pH 

Acutely 

Lethal? Points 

Receiving 

Environment 

Category 

Receiving 

Environment 

Special Uses Points 

Eastern 

Passage 16,918 No Medium 15 80 50 26.0 1.81 10 19.3 7.2 No 0 Marine port None 10 61.0 Medium 

Very 

Large 35 50 40 18.0 N/A 0 No 0 Marine port None 10 63.0 Large 35 67 34 20.2 N/A 0 13 6.9 No 0 Marine port None 10 65.2 Halifax 122,000 No Medium 

Very 

Medium 

Dartmouth 56,000 No Herring 

Cove 17,300 No Medium 15 50 40 18.0 N/A 0 No 0 Open marine None 5 38.0 Low 

Mill Cove 28,000 No Large 25 10 13 4.6 N/A 0 19.3 6.8 No 0 

Lakeside- 

Timberlea 4,154 No Medium 15 9 12 4.2 0.24 10 3 6.7 No 0 

AeroTech 1,370 Yes Medium 15 35 49 16.8 N/A 0 35.8 6.8 No 0 

Belmont 181 No 

Frame 80 No 

Lockview- 

Mac- 

Pherson 195 No 

Middle 

Musquodoboit 

134 No 

Total 

Points 

Risk 

Category Comments 

Not CCME compliant - 

upgrade in progress. 


CBOD/TSS 


CBOD/TSS 


CBOD/TSS 

Enclosed bay, 

marine 

estuary None 20 49.6 Low CCME compliant. 

River with 

bulk flow ratio 

> 10 - 99 None 20 49.2 Low 


TRC. 

River with 


< 10 None 25 56.8 Medium Not CCME compliant. 

Very 

Small 5 9 14 4.6 0.46 10 9.8 6.7 No 0 Marine port None 10 29.6 Low 

Very 

Small 5 17 22 7.8 1.44 10 4.5 7 No 0 

Very 

Small 5 4 11 3.0 N/A 0 3 6 No 0 

Very 

Small 5 7 7 2.8 N/A 0 8 7.4 No 0 

North 

Preston 616 No Small 10 4 11 3.0 N/A 0 3 6 No 0 

Springfield 

Lake 518 No Small 10 6 8 2.8 1.04 10 1.8 6.9 No 0 

Steeves 

(Wellingto 

Very 

n) 85 No Small 5 10 17 5.4 1.04 10 3.2 6.6 No 0 

Uplands 

Park 148 No 

Very 

Small 5 20 15 7.0 0.94 10 7.6 6.7 No 0 

River with 


< 10 

Areas used 

for contact 

recreation 

within 500 m 

downstream 25 47.8 Low 


TRC - decommissioning 

planned. 


TRC - upgrade planned. 

Lake, 

Reservoir None 20 28.0 Low CCME compliant. 

River with 


> 10 - 99 None 20 27.8 Low CCME compliant. 

River with 


> 100 None 15 28.0 Low CCME compliant. 

River with 


> 10 - 99 None 20 42.8 Low 

River with 


> 100 None 15 35.4 Low 

River with 


< 10 None 25 47.0 Low 


TRC. 


TRC - upgrade planned. 


TRC - UV upgrade 2010. 

Page | 9

Schedule B. Initial Wastewater Characterization – CCME Requirements 

Wastewater 

Treatment Facility 

(WWTF) Parameter Groups Toxicity 

TRC 1/2 2/3 4‐10 Acute Chronic Cost Facility Size Notes 

AeroTech 0 0 26 4 4 4 $10,016 Medium Industrial input – DONE 

Belmont 365 12 0 0 0 0 $4,574 Very Small 

Eastern Passage 0 0 26 4 4 4 $10,016 Medium DONE 

Exempt – 

decommissioning 

Frame Subdivision 365 12 0 0 0 0 $4,574 Very Small In progress 

Lakeside/Timberlea 365 0 26 4 4 4 $13,666 Medium DONE 

Lockview /Macpherson 0 12 0 0 0 0 $924 Very Small In progress 

Middle Musquodoboit 0 12 0 0 0 0 $924 Very Small In progress 

Mill Cove 0 0 52 4 12 12 $22,684 Large Pending 

North Preston 0 12 0 0 0 0 $924 Very Small In progress 

Springfield Lake 365 12 0 0 4 4 $9,374 Small In progress 

Steeves (Wellington) 365 12 0 0 0 0 $4,574 Very Small In progress 

Uplands Park 365 12 0 0 0 0 $4,574 Very Small In progress 

Dartmouth HHSP 0 0 260 4 12 12 $47,228 Very Large Pending 

Halifax HHSP 0 0 260 4 12 12 $47,228 Very Large Pending 

Herring Cove HHSP 0 0 26 4 4 4 $10,016 Medium Pending 

No. 2190 96 676 28 56 56 $191,296 Total 

Unit 

Price $10 $77 $118 $537 $600 $600 

Total 

Cost $21,900 $7,392 $79,768 $15,036 $33,600 $33,600 $191,296 

$12,753 Average 

NOTES: Toxicity costs are approximate, based on limited available quotes. Chemistry costs for CCME parameter groups are based on Maxxam Labs quotes. 

Parameter group lists attached. TRC = Total Residual Chlorine. 

Page | 10

Parameter Group Details 

Group 1 - General 

Chemistry/Nutrients 

Group 2 – Pathogens 

Group 3 - General 

Chemistry/Nutrients 

Group 4 - Metals 

Total Suspended Solids Metals (Al, Ba, Be, B, Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Fe, Pb, 

Mn, Mo, Ni, Ag, Sr, Tl, Sn, Ti, U, V, Zn, As, 

Sb, Se) 

Carbonaceous BOD Mercury 

Total Residual Chlorine 

Ammonia Group 5 - Organochlorine Pesticides 

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen PCBs + OC Pesticides 

Total Phosphorous 

pH Group 6 - Polycyclic Aromatic 

Hydrocarbons 

PAHs 

E.coli Group 7 - Volatile Organic Compounds 

VOCs 

Fluoride Group 8 - Phenolic Compounds 

Nitrate Chlorophenols 

Nitrate + Nitrite 

Ammonia Group 9 - Surfactants 

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Anionic Surfactants 

Total Phosphorous Non-Ionic Surfactants 

Total Suspended Solids 

Carbonaceous BOD 

Total Residual Chlorine 

Chemical Oxygen Demand 

Total Cyanide 

Page | 11

Blank Page

Appendix I 

Wastewater Treatment Facilities (WWTF) 

Compliance Plan

Blank Page


Wastewater Treatment Facilities (WWTF) Compliance Plan 

October 2012 Q3 UPDATE 

1

Compliance issues identified for 2011 up to the end of Q3 2012. 

AeroTech 

2011/12 Compliance Issues – NSE: TSS, Ammonia CCME: TSS, CBOD 

Compliance performance for TSS and ammonia continues to be problematic. Steps have been taken to 

reduce the ammonia loading on the AeroTech WWTF: diversion of sludge from Mill Cove WWTF, 

diversion of sludge from Eastern Passage to Dartmouth, maintenance of septage loading to the maximum 

of 2011 levels for each hauler, and discontinuing acceptance of “biowater” at AeroTech. In the long term, 

the Eastern Passage upgrade will include dewatering, so that EP sludge will no longer go to AeroTech. In 

addition, a third sand filter has been installed at Aerotech WWTF to improve TSS performance. Halifax 

Water continues to seek other means to reduce ammonia loading, possibly including additional sludge 

diversions. The ongoing ERA study will determine the feasible options for an AeroTech WWTF upgrade 

and/or expansion, including consideration of alternate discharge locations. 

Better management of wet-weather flows is also key to improving performance of this SBR facility. The 

lagoon is now being used to store wet-weather peak volumes, and improvements are being made to better 

manage discharge of water from the lagoon to the WWTF. 

These measures are consistent with the actions proposed in the 2011 Compliance Plan. 

Belmont 

2011/12 Compliance Issues – NSE: CBOD, FC, TSS CCME: (Decommissioning) 

The Belmont WWTF had shown improvements in performance for fecal coliform and TSS. CBOD has 

also improved but continues to be non-compliant for Q1 2012. The Belmont WWTF is still scheduled to 

be de-commissioned, with diversion of flows to the Eastern Passage WWTF by 2015, consistent with the 

2011 Compliance Plan. 

Dartmouth 

2011/12 Compliance Issues - NSE: FC, CBOD (2012) CCME: TSS, CBOD 

The Dartmouth WWTF has lately been compliant with NSE limits for TSS, while CBOD compliance has 

fallen recently (Q2, Q3 2012). Fecal coliform was non-compliant for Q1/Q2 2012. However, corrosion 

in the sensors controlling the UV disinfection system was recently discovered and corrected. Fecal 

coliform performance has subsequently improved and may become compliant in the near term. As a 

relatively new facility, defect correction and operational adjustments continue to be made, consistent with 

the 2011 Compliance Plan. 

A secondary upgrade is required for CCME compliance. 

2

Eastern Passage 

2011/12 Compliance Issues - NSE: CBOD, FC, TSS (2012) CCME: TSS, CBOD 

The Eastern Passage WWTF is currently undergoing a significant secondary upgrade and capacity 

expansion, consistent with the 2011 Compliance Plan. TSS performance has degraded over the past year 

(since Q2 2011) and is now non-compliant. Fecal coliform has improved as predicted in 2011, and has 

been compliant for Q4 2011 and Q1 2012. CBOD continues to be non-compliant. 

The ongoing secondary upgrade will achieve CCME compliance. 

Frame 

2011/12 Compliance Issues – NSE: FC, TSS, CBOD CCME: Chlorine 

During Q3-Q4 2011 and Q1 2012, TSS performance has degraded at Frame WWTF. CBOD performance 

has also degraded during Q4 2011 and Q1 2012 – this may require investigation. However, fecal 

coliform performance was significantly improved for Q1 and Q3 2012. CBOD improved for Q3 2012. 

Installation of a new collection system has been completed. The planned replacement of the WWTF and 

conversion to UV has been deferred. A number of smaller improvements are planned, and the outfall will 

still be relocated from the stream to the lake. 

Halifax 

2011/12 Compliance Issues - NSE: CBOD CCME: TSS, CBOD 

CBOD continues to be non-compliant, although it was compliant for Q4 2011 only. Soluble BOD 

continues to be an issue, although the largest single source is on track to be compliant with discharge 

Rules & Regulations in the near future. This should improve CBOD (total) performance overall. As a 

relatively new facility, defect correction and operational adjustments continue to be made, consistent with 

the 2011 Compliance Plan. 


Herring Cove 

2011/12 Compliance Issues - NSE: None CCME: TSS, CBOD 

The Herring Cove WWTF continues to be compliant with all NSE requirements. The transfer of sludge 

from the Mill Cove WWTF has not impacted performance, consistent with the 2011 Compliance Plan. 


3

Lakeside-Timberlea 

2011/12 Compliance Issues - NSE: TSS, Ammonia CCME: Chlorine 

Performance for ammonia had been compliant for Q4 2011 only, but has reverted to non-compliant for 

Q1 2012. TSS continues to be non-compliant. CBOD, FC, DO and TP continue to be compliant. 

An upgrade to UV disinfection will be required for CCME compliance. 

The Lakeside-Timberlea WWTF was the subject of a recent ERA study, which determined that the 

WWTF could be upgraded and expanded, with a sufficient level of treatment, without adding to loading 

of the Nine-Mile River. NSE has accepted this risk-based approach. A plan is in progress to divert 

approximately 34% of the sewage volume in this sewershed to the Halifax sewershed to reduce loading 

on the lakeside-Timberlea facility. Halifax Water continues to develop options to improve the Lakeside- 

Timberlea facility and achieve NSE compliance. 

Lockview-MacPherson 

2011/12 Compliance Issues - NSE: CBOD, TSS (both improved 2012) CCME: None 

Performance for CBOD has improved since Q2 2011. As a result of optimization of treatment processes, 

performance for TSS improved in 2012, and is now compliant. 

Middle Musquodoboit 

2011/12 Compliance Issues - NSE: None CCME: None 

Although compliant with NSE requirements through 2011, performance for TSS has been variable. TSS 

was below NSE limits for Q2 2011, and again in 2012. 

Mill Cove 


Although performance at the Mill Cove WWTF was good throughout 2010 and 2011, results for TSS and 

fecal coliform had become non-compliant by Q1 2012, and CBOD performance had slipped from 100% 

compliant to approximately 85% compliant. Wastewater Operations staff consider that this has been due 

to the very high-strength compost leachate which had been accepted at Mill Cove WWTF. As a result of 

deteriorating performance, Halifax Water has advised HRM that compost leachate will no longer be 

accepted at Mill Cove as of June 25, 2012. Performance has continued to improve since Q2 2012. 

4

North Preston 

2011/12 Compliance Issues - NSE: pH CCME: None 

pH control continues to be difficult at North Preston WWTF, although performance has improved slightly 

since Q1 2012 to about 75% compliant. 

Springfield Lake 

2011/12 Compliance Issues - NSE: CBOD, FC, TSS CCME: Chlorine 

Although non-compliant though most of 2011, performance at the Springfield WTWF has consistently 

improved since Q2 2011. This is due to the correction of a blockage discovered in one of the treatment 

channels in the WWTF. High wet-weather flows have been an issue in this sewershed, as identified in the 

2011 Compliance Plan. Recent improvements to pump stations and force mains have resulted in 

improved wet-weather performance, and fewer overflow situations even with extreme rains in fall of 

72012. 

Uplands Park 


Performance of the Uplands WWTF has continued to be good. Occasional non-compliance for TSS has 

been noted. 

Wellington 

2011/12 Compliance Issues - NSE: FC, TSS CCME: Chlorine 

The replacement for the Wellington WWTF is currently under construction, consistent with the 2011 

Compliance Plan. Performance continues to be poor for TSS. Fecal coliform has been compliant since 

Q2, 2011. Performance for CBOD had fallen just below NSE requirements for Q1 2012 but has 

improved in Q2 and Q3. The new WWTF is online as of October 2012. 

5

5-Year Business Plan - 2013-14 to 2017-18 - Halifax Regional ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?