May 14, 2010 - Grand River Conservation Authority

Grand River Water Management Plan Update
STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
Friday, May 14, 2010
The following are the minutes of the Water Management Plan Update Steering Committee
meeting held on Friday, May 14, 2010 at the Grand River Conservation Authority Administration
Centre, 400 Clyde Road, Cambridge, ON.
Present:
Chair: Bill Bardswick - Ministry of the Environment, Western Central Region;
Cynthia Compeau, County of Brant; Scott Duff, OMAFRA; Ken Elder, Centre
Wellington; Paul Emerson, GRCA; Joe Farwell, GRCA; Paul General, Six
Nations of the Grand River; Janet Laird, City of Guelph; John Marsden, EC;
Joe Miedema, Upper Grand; Lorrie Minshall, GRCA; Ian Hagman, MNR; Geoff
Rae, Haldimand County; Thomas Schmidt, Region of Waterloo
Regrets:
Sandra Lawson, City of Brantford
Project Team: A. Davidson, County of Brant; D. Boyd, GRCA; Sandra Cooke, GRCA; James
Etienne, GRCA; Paul Mungar, Haldimand County; Dave Schultz, GRCA;
Rebecca Shortt, OMAFRA; Ian Thornton, MNR
1. Welcome and Introductory Remarks
P. Emerson welcomed attendees.
2. Review of Agenda
The agenda was adopted with no revisions.
3. Minutes of Previous Meeting
There were no questions, comments or revisions. The minutes of January 15, 2010 were
approved as circulated.
4. Update on Progress
Thus far, the Grand River Water Management Plan update initiative has established a
Steering Committee and a Project Team. Both groups have representation from
municipalities, First Nations, provincial government, federal government and the GRCA.
The Steering Committee and Project Team have each completed a Terms of Reference,
and have defined the critical issues in the watershed. The primary purpose of today’s
meeting is to develop the Project Charter.

Minutes of Meeting
GRWMP Update: Steering Committee
May 14, 2010 Page 2
L. Minshall has been appointed as the full time coordinator for the Water Management Plan
update. Lorrie has been with GRCA for over 30 years, most recently as Director of Source
Protection Planning.
5. Project Team Terms of Reference
The Project Team met on March 25 to establish their Terms of Reference and commence a
draft Project Charter.
The mandate of the Project Team is the coordination, development and management of the
Water Management Plan update project. The Roles and Responsibilities, Meeting
Procedures and Governance Structure of the Project Team were reviewed.
It was suggested and agreed upon that the Steering Committee roles, responsibilities and
mandate should be removed from the Project Team Terms of Reference.
Socio-economic considerations such as recreation and tourism from the various components
of the Watershed Management Plan will need to be integrated with the Water Management
Plan outputs.
It will be important to seek feedback from more groups than those represented by the
Steering Committee and Project Team. The communications strategy will identify how to
connect the various stakeholders to this process.
The working groups will require a clear scope to ensure they are focused on the goals of the
plan. It will be the responsibility of the Project Team to ensure the working groups have the
appropriate focus. There will be cross-over between some of the working groups, mutual
members in some groups, and a communications member on each of the working groups.
It was suggested that the Communications Working Group be amended to Communications
and Engagement Working Group.
6. Project Charter
Goals, Objectives and Performance Measures
Goals #6 was added to the goals since the last meeting. Reducing flood damage and flood
risk potential was previously captured under the climate change goal, but has since been
shown as a separate goal.
Goal #1: Improve Water Quality
There was concern with the term "nutrient budget" if the assessment of nutrients will be
based on relative proportion; relative proportion is not the basis of a nutrient budget, as
defined in the agricultural community. Different wording will be considered for "nutrient
budget".

Minutes of Meeting
GRWMP Update: Steering Committee
May 14, 2010 Page 3
Goal #2: Understand/Enhance/Deal with Assimilative Capacity
The wastewater master plans will require review to determine if the planned upgrades can
meet the water quality objectives. Point source and non-point sources reductions will both
need to be assessed to determine their effects. Reviewing the wastewater master plans in
isolation is unlikely to improve the wastewater going into the rivers, as there are non-point
sources and seasonal considerations as well. Combining considerations for non-point source
reductions and the wastewater master plans may provide a more balanced perspective.
It was noted that an identification of costs would assist in setting priorities to ensure benefits
are maximized (i.e. costs of non-point source improvements versus point source upgrades).
There was consensus that considerations of cost should be included in the charter, and
linked to the schedule.
The water quality and assimilative capacity objectives and deliverables will also be linked in
the charter for clarity.
Goal #3: Secure Water Supplies
Water demand management objectives are difficult to do on watershed scale. Each
municipality's water supplies are very different, and the financial implications on the
municipalities could be immense. It was agreed that demand management objectives can be
an assembled set of strategies, with each municipality determining their own strategy.
The Water Management Plan is strongly linked to Source Protection Planning. The technical
leads for Source Protection are also participating in the Water Management Plan update.
The Water Management Plan will need to address water conflicts, but the outputs will be
locally developed and cannot be addressed before 2012.
Goal #4: Lake Erie Objectives
There was concern that the goal to "Act at the watershed level to achieve Bi-National
objectives for Lake Erie" implies that this plan is assuming and committing to the
responsibility to achieve the Lake Erie targets. It was clarified that the Lake Erie LaMP will
have established targets and objectives for the Grand River. These targets will be integrated
with the river targets. The Project Team and Working Groups will advise what we are able to
achieve and establish practical targets.
It was suggested that check boxes be added to the charter to identify whether the goals and
objectives are a "plan" item or a "do" item.
Goal #5: Build resiliency for Climate Change
There were no questions or comments.
Goal #5: Reduce Flood Damage Potential
There were no questions or comments.

Minutes of Meeting
GRWMP Update: Steering Committee
May 14, 2010 Page 4
"In" and "Out" of Scope Items
Current “in” and “out” of scope items were reviewed, noting the list is incomplete and
requires further feedback. The focus should be on items that can be completed in 18 months
or less and that can be funded. It was noted that including the Certificates of Approval in the
"in" scope items has legal limitations.
Municipalities would prefer if general practice targets were in scope for wastewater treatment
plants, such as tertiary treatment, as opposed to specific performance targets, such as
phosphorus outputs. There was caution that a study would not have sufficient weight or
research to support a specific target. L. Minshall clarified that the premise is that any work
required for municipalities will be put forward by the municipality; this is a joint action plan.
From that perspective, we may only be able to go so far. The wording will be revised from
"performance targets" to "performance objectives".
It was suggested that costs would be a good “in” scope item.
The Charter is a live document, and can be amended as we work through this process.
Project Timelines
Working groups will take various lengths of time to form. By September, it is hoped there will
be a draft communication strategy. Stakeholder and the public engagement will be underway
throughout the fall. Any funding for priority investigative work will be required by March 2011.
The public process is implicit in the project timelines. The communications strategy will detail
the public component of the timelines. There will be a Steering Committee meeting in late
June at which time a framework for the communications strategy will be available for review.
By September, the communications strategy should be fairly complete.
In light of sensitivities with the rollout of this plan and a municipal election, the public
meetings will be held after the October election.
Project Costs and Funding Sources
The Ministry of the Environment and the Grand River Conservation Authority are splitting the
cost of a coordinator, and the GRCA has included an annual budget to provide support for
the committees and working groups.
It was noted that the GRCA staff will be able to do some of the work, but not the full breadth
of the work. Any investigative studies are unfunded at this time. More detail and costs for
investigative studies will become available as the working groups develop their work plans.
When the time comes to look for funding for investigative studies, the Steering Committee
will have to discuss prioritization.
The governance structure will be amended to reflect the Assimilative Capacity with the Water
Quality Working Group and to reflect the Climate Change feeding into all of the working
groups.

Minutes of Meeting
GRWMP Update: Steering Committee
May 14, 2010 Page 5
Project Governance, Roles and Responsibilities
The Water Management Plan will be a joint plan whereby each of the members reports back
to their organization.
Each group will need to determine how best to communicate with their organization. The
Terms of Reference and the Charter can be presented, as well as the minutes. Some
councils may want a presentation.
Project Communications
The name of the "annual report" will be changed to “progress report”.
Project Stakeholders
The draft communications and engagement framework will be available in June. It was
suggested that the communications and engagement working group consider a stakeholder
advisory committee; a representative group of stakeholders to bring in early with whom they
can communicate.
It was also determined that a set of key messages and a standard slide deck for introductory
presentations should be established to ensure consistency.
Project Risks, Critical Success Factors
Any comments on the project risks and critical success factors should be provided to Lorrie
Minshall.
7. Early Actions
Mark Anderson provided a presentation regarding a Watershed-wide Wastewater
Optimization Pilot Project.
8. Other Business
None.
9. Suggested Meeting Dates
The next meeting is Tuesday, July 6, 2010 from 9:30 pm – 12:30 pm. Thomas Schmidt will
chair the meeting.
10. Wrap-up and Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 12:05 pm.

Minutes of Meeting
GRWMP Update: Steering Committee
May 14, 2010 Page 6
Action Items:
1. Remove Steering Committee Roles, Responsibilities and
L. Minshall
Mandate from Project Team TOR.
2. Amend Communications Working Group to Communications and L. Minshall
Engagement Working Group.
3. Revise wording for Nutrient Budget (Charter – Goal #1). L. Minshall
4. Amend Charter to include cost estimates and connect estimates L. Minshall
with the schedule.
5. Link Water Quality and Assimilative Capacity L. Minshall
6. Identify securing water supplies as an assembled set of
L. Minshall
strategies.
7. Revise "performance targets" to "performance objectives" ("In" L. Minshall
and "Out" of scope items).
8. Add "Strategy to assess WWTP capabilities and performance" to L. Minshall
"In" Scope.
9. Public meetings to be held after the municipal election (October D. Schultz
25).
10. Amend governance structure to reflect Assimilative Capacity and L. Minshall
Water Quality and to reflect Climate change integration into all of
the working groups.
11. Amend "annual report" to "progress report". L. Minshall
12. As part of the communications and engagement plan develop a
key set of messages and a standard slide deck for introductory
presentations to ensure consistency.
D. Schultz