1 - Toronto and Region Conservation Authority

Authority Meeting #11/12Chair:Vice Chair:Members:Gerri Lynn O'ConnorMaria AugimeriJanuary 25, 20139:30 A.M.WESTON ROOM B, BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGEAGENDAAUTHEXBAABPagesMaterial for Consideration at Authority Meetings OnlyMaterial Considered by the Executive Committee Prior to the AuthorityMaterial Considered by the Budget/Audit Advisory Board Prior to the AuthorityAUTH1. MINUTES OF MEETING #10/12, HELD ON JANUARY 4, 2013(Minutes Enclosed Herewith on WHITE)AUTH2.AUTH3.AUTH4.AUTH5.BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTESDISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURETHEREOFDELEGATIONSPRESENTATIONSAUTH5.1A presentation by Laurie Nelson, Senior Manager, Development,Planning and Policy, TRCA in regard to item EX7.1 The Living CityPolicies for Planning and Development in the Watersheds of Toronto andRegion Conservation Authority - DraftAUTH6.CORRESPONDENCE1

AUTH7.SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTIONAUTH7.1 MUD CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT 13AUTH7.2 MEADOWCLIFFE DRIVE SLOPE STABILIZATION PROJECTContract RSD12-181 16AUTH7.3 DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANTS2012 Management Summary and 2013 Management Strategy 18AUTH7.4 ENBRIDGE PIPELINES INC., LINE 9B REVERSAL AND CAPACITYEXPANSION PROJECT 24AUTH7.5TREE TOP ADVENTURE COURSE AND ZIP LINELease of Lands to Treetop Trekking Inc.Report to FollowAUTH8.SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARDAUTH8.1 SUMMARY OF PROCUREMENTSJuly 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012 43AUTH8.2 GOOD NEWS STORIES 57AUTH8.3 IN THE NEWS 60AUTH8.4 WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTESETOBICOKE-MIMICO WATERSHED COALITIONMinutes of Meeting #3/12, held on September 20, 2012Minutes of Meeting #4/12, held on December 13, 2012HUMBER WATERSHED ALLIANCEMinutes of Meeting #4/12, held on December 4, 2012PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN STEERING COMMITTEEMinutes of Meeting #3/12, held on October 4, 20122

BAAB.MATERIAL FROM BUDGET/AUDIT ADVISORY BOARD(No meeting held this month)EX.MATERIAL FROM EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING #11/12, HELD ONJANUARY 11, 2013NEW BUSINESS(Refer to Minutes printed on PINK)NEXT MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #1/13, TO BE HELD ON FEBRUARY 22, 2013,AT 10:30 A.M. IN WESTON ROOM B, BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGEBrian DenneyChief Administrative Officer/jr3

EX.MATERIAL FROM EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING #11/12, HELD ONJANUARY 11, 2013(Refer to Minutes printed on PINK)EX7.SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION(EX7.1 - EX7.3)EX7.1EX7.2EX7.3THE LIVING CITY POLICIES FOR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT INTHE WATERSHEDS OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATIONAUTHORITY - DRAFTPublic and Stakeholder Consultation 702CLAIREVILLE HEIGHTS LIMITEDRequest for a Temporary Licence Agreement to Provide Access forConstructionHumber River WatershedCity of Brampton, Regional Municipality of PeelCFN 48539 708BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGEPhysical Plant Standards Policy 713EX8.SECTION II - ITEMS FOR EXECUTIVE ACTION(EX8.1)EX8.1 ECOENERGY INNOVATION INITIATIVE (ECO II) - RENE 092 720EX9.SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARDEX10. ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06(EX10.1 - EX10.34)PERMIT APPLICATIONS EX10.1 - EX10.8 ARE REGULAR ITEMSCITY OF TORONTO [ETOBICOKE YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL AREA]EX10.11772014 ONTARIO INC.To construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure, site gradeand temporarily or permanently place, dump or remove any material,originating on the site or elsewhere on Lot 7, Plan 83, (36 Park LawnRoad), in the City of Toronto (Etobicoke York Community Council Area),Mimico Creek Watershed as located on the property owned by 1772014Ontario Inc.. The purpose is to develop four levels of undergroundparking, a 36 storey condominium building and regrade and remediatethe upper portion of a disturbed valley slope. 7234

CITY OF TORONTO [NORTH YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL AREA]EX10.211 MISTY CRESCENTTo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure and sitegrade on Lot 34, Plan M1290, (11 Misty Crescent), in the City of Toronto(North York Community Council Area), Don River Watershed. Thepurpose is to replace the existing dwelling with a new two storey dwellingand an in-ground pool. 723CITY OF TORONTO [SCARBOROUGH COMMUNITY COUNCIL AREA]EX10.3EX10.4CITY OF TORONTOTo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure, sitegrade, and temporarily or permanently place, dump or remove anymaterial, originating on the site or elsewhere, at 1005 Brimley Road, inthe City of Toronto (Scarborough Community Council Area), HighlandCreek Watershed, as located on property owned by the City of Toronto.The purpose is to allow for upgrades to an operations yard in ThomsonMemorial Park. Works will involve construction of concrete freestandingwalls and retaining walls. No in-water works are associated with thisproject. 723GLEN ROUGE HOMES (BOYDWOOD) INC.To construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure, site gradeand temporarily or permanently place, dump or remove any material,originating on the site or elsewhere on Lot 2, Concession 2, (), in the Cityof Toronto (Scarborough Community Council Area), Rouge RiverWatershed as located on the property owned by Glen Rouge Homes(Boydwood) Inc.. The purpose is to re-grade the site for purposes ofconstructing a new public roadway and associated infrastructure and toconstruct five new residential dwellings. 724CITY OF TORONTO [TORONTO AND EAST YORK COMMUNITY COUNCILAREA]EX10.5438 LAKE FRONT LANETo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure, change abuilding or structure so that it alters its use or potential use, increases itssize or increases the number of dwelling units, site grade and temporarilyor permanently place, dump or remove any material, originating on thesite or elsewhere on Part Lot N, Plan 1450, (438 Lake Front Lane), in theCity of Toronto (Toronto and East York Community Council Area),Waterfront Watershed. The purpose is to construct a new three storeydwelling with front and rear landscaping and a rear in-ground pool. 7245

CITY OF VAUGHANEX10.681 NOAH CRESCENTTo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure, site gradeand temporarily or permanently place, dump or remove any material,originating on the site or elsewhere on , (81 Noah Crescent), in the City ofVaughan, Humber River Watershed. The purpose is to is to construct aninground pool and covered concrete deck within a Regulated Area of theHumber River watershed at 81 Noah Crescent in the Cityof Vaughan. 724TOWN OF CALEDONEX10.7REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF PEELTo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure andtemporarily or permanently place, dump or remove any material,originating on the site or elsewhere at the Queen Street Bridge locatedover the Main Humber River on Queen Street North, north of King StreetEast, in the Town of Caledon, Humber River Watershed, as located onthe property owned by the Regional Municipality of Peel. The purpose isto rehabilitate an existing bridge over the Main Humber River on QueenStreet North, just north of King Street East. The Redside Dace fisheriestiming window will be applied to the project unless otherwise specified inwriting by the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR). A Letter of Advice willbe written by TRCA staff on behalf of Fisheries and Oceans Canada(DFO). 725TOWNSHIP OF KINGEX10.85400 KING ROADTo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure andtemporarily or permanently place, dump or remove any material,originating on the site or elsewhere on , (5400 King Road), in theTownship of King, Humber River Watershed. The purpose is to constructa cabana within a Regulated Area of the Humber River watershed at5400 King Road in the Township of King. 725PERMIT APPLICATIONS EX10.9 - EX10.16 WERE ERRATA ITEMSTOWN OF RICHMOND HILLEX10.9BAIF DEVELOPMENTS LIMITEDTo interfere with a wetland on Part Lot 69, 70, Concession 1, (YongeStreet and Bloomington Road), in the Town of Richmond Hill, RougeRiver Watershed as located on the property owned by Baif DevelopmentsLimited.The purpose is to undertake works within a TRCA Regulated Area of theRouge River Watershed in order to resolve an outstanding violationpursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06 for unauthorized alterations towetlands and erosion and sedimentation of nearby natural areas. 7266

CITY OF MARKHAMEX10.1010 MILMAR COURTTo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure on Part Lot3, Concession 3, (10 Milmar Court), in the City of Markham, Don RiverWatershed. The purpose is to undertake works within a TRCA RegulatedArea of the Don River Watershed in order to facilitate the construction ofa replacement deck, the conversion of an existing ancillary carport to agarage, and a 91.6 square metre (986 sq. ft.) second storey addition to anexisting single family dwelling on the subject property associated with amunicipal building permit.. 726CITY OF TORONTO [ETOBICOKE YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL AREA]EX10.11CITY OF TORONTOTo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure, sitegrade, and temporarily or permanently place, dump or remove anymaterial, originating on the site or elsewhere, on Lawrence Avenue Westat Black Creek, in the City of Toronto (Etobicoke York Community CouncilArea), Humber River Watershed, as located on property owned by theCity of Toronto and TRCA. The purpose is to rehabilitate an existingbridge structure. Works will involve removal and replacement of theexisting bridge superstructure and deck. These works comply with theFisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) Operational Statement for bridgemaintenance. 726CITY OF TORONTO [NORTH YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL AREA]EX10.1232 HAWKSBURY DRIVETo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure, site gradeand temporarily or permanently place, dump or remove any material,originating on the site or elsewhere on Lot 60, Plan 4847, (32 HawksburyDrive), in the City of Toronto (North York Community Council Area), DonRiver Watershed. The purpose is to construct a two-storey replacementdwelling with rear deck at 32 Hawksbury Drive in Toronto (North YorkCommunity Council Area). 727WITHDRAWNEX10.13 200 NORTHWOOD DRIVETo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure, site gradeand temporarily or permanently place, dump or remove any material,originating on the site or elsewhere on Lot 6, Plan 4940, (200 NorthwoodDrive), in the City of Toronto (North York Community Council Area), DonRiver Watershed. The purpose is to construct a two-storey replacementdwelling with rear deck at 200 Northwood Drive in the City of Toronto(North York Community Council Area). 7277

EX10.14EX10.15216 OWEN BOULEVARDTo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure, site gradeand temporarily or permanently place, dump or remove any material,originating on the site or elsewhere on Lot 11, Plan 3777, (216 OwenBoulevard), in the City of Toronto (North York Community Council Area),Don River Watershed. The purpose is to construct two rear decks,pathways and associated landscaping at 216 Owen Boulevard in the Cityof Toronto (North York Community Council Area). 72742 SENLAC ROADTo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure, site gradeand temporarily or permanently place, dump or remove any material,originating on the site or elsewhere on Lot 8, Plan 2069, (42 SenlacRoad), in the City of Toronto (North York Community Council Area), DonRiver Watershed. The purpose is to construct a two storey replacementdwelling with rear deck at 42 Senlac Road in the City of Toronto (NorthYork Community Council Area). 728CITY OF TORONTO [SCARBOROUGH COMMUNITY COUNCIL AREA]EX10.164 FALLINGBROOK WOODSTo construct, reconstruct, erect or place a building or structure, site gradeand temporarily or permanently place, dump or remove any material,originating on the site or elsewhere on Lot 20, Plan 4304, (4 FallingbrookWoods), in the City of Toronto (Scarborough Community Council Area),Waterfront Watershed. The purpose is to construct a two storeyreplacement dwelling with integral garage and rear patio on the vacant lotof record located at 4 Fallingbrook Woods in the City of Toronto(Scarborough Community Council Area). 728PERMIT APPLICATIONS EX10.17 - EX10.19 ARE PERMISSION FOR ROUTINEINFRASTRUCTURE WORKSCITY OF MISSISSAUGAEX10.17REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF PEELTo undertake sewer and watermain or utility installation or maintenancewithin an existing roadway on Brevik Place and Nuvik Court, just east ofTomken Road and north of Eglinton Avenue East, in the City ofMississauga, Etobicoke Creek Watershed, as located on the propertyowned by the City of Mississauga. The purpose is to replace an existing300 mm diameter watermain on Brevik Place and Nuvik Court with a new300 mm diameter watermain. No in-water works are proposed as a part ofthe project. 7298

CITY OF TORONTO [NORTH YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL AREA]EX10.18EX10.19CITY OF TORONTOTo undertake road/pathway resurfacing or reconstruction at 73 ThorncliffePark Drive, in the City of Toronto (North York Community Council Area),Don River Watershed, as located on property owned by TRCA. Thepurpose is to resurface an asphalt parking lot in E.T. Seton Park. Workswill involve removal of the existing asphalt surface and replacement withnew asphalt. No in-water works are associated with this project. 729ENBRIDGE PIPELINES INC.To undertake borehole investigations at Latitude 43.791669, Longtitude79.379121 - between Bayview Avenue and Leslie Street, north of FinchAvenue, in the City of Toronto (North York Community Council Area), DonRiver Watershed, as located on property owned by Enbridge PipelinesInc. The purpose is to undertake a geotechnical investigations in theFinch hydro corridor between Luton Gate and Pineway Boulevard. Workswill involve drilling eight boreholes on TRCA regulated lands. A Letter ofAdvice will be written by TRCA on behalf of Fisheries and OceansCanada (DFO). No in-water works are associated with this project. 729PERMIT APPLICATIONS EX10.20 - EX10.31 ARE MINOR WORKS LETTER OFAPPROVALCITY OF BRAMPTONEX10.2034 MIDSUMMER DRIVETo construct a ground floor addition or structure greater than 50 sq. m(538 sq. ft) but less than 150 sq. m (1614 sq. ft) on Lot 85, Plan43M-1798, (34 Midsummer Drive), in the City of Brampton, Humber RiverWatershed. 730CITY OF PICKERINGEX10.212312 SOUTHCOTT ROADTo install a swimming pool and undertake minor landscaping involving theplacement, removal or regrading of material of less than 30 cubic metres(equivalent to 3 truckloads) on Lot 7, Plan 40M-2344, (2312 SouthcottRoad), in the City of Pickering, Duffins Creek Watershed. 7309

CITY OF TORONTO [ETOBICOKE YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL AREA]EX10.2228 GRENADIER HEIGHTSTo construct a non-habitable accessory structure up to 50 sq. m (538 sq.ft) and change the use, size, or number of dwelling units of a structure, orundertake work that does not change the footprint of the existing structureon Part Lot 8, Plan M-491, (28 Grenadier Heights), in the City of Toronto(Etobicoke York Community Council Area), Humber River Watershed.730CITY OF TORONTO [NORTH YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL AREA]EX10.23EX10.24EX10.25EX10.26106 GWENDOLEN CRESCENTTo construct a non-habitable accessory structure up to 50 sq. m (538 sq.ft) and change the use, size, or number of dwelling units of a structure, orundertake work that does not change the footprint of the existing structureon Lot 11, Plan 4060, (106 Gwendolen Crescent), in the City of Toronto(North York Community Council Area), Don River Watershed. 73181 EXBURY ROADTo undertake minor landscaping involving the placement, removal orregrading of material of less than 30 cubic metres (equivalent to 3truckloads), construct a ground floor addition up to 50 sq. m (538 sq. ft)and change the use, size, or number of dwelling units of a structure, orundertake work that does not change the footprint of the existing structureon Lot 1130, Plan 4439, (81 Exbury Road), in the City of Toronto (NorthYork Community Council Area), Humber River Watershed. 731214 THREE VALLEYS DRIVETo install a swimming pool and undertake minor landscaping involving theplacement, removal or regrading of material of less than 30 cubic metres(equivalent to 3 truckloads) on , (214 Three Valleys Drive), in the City ofToronto (North York Community Council Area), Don River Watershed.73133 CHRISTINE CRESCENTTo undertake minor landscaping involving the placement, removal orregrading of material of less than 30 cubic metres (equivalent to 3truckloads) and construct a non-habitable accessory structure up to 50sq. m (538 sq. ft) on Lot 55, Plan 4598, (33 Christine Crescent), in theCity of Toronto (North York Community Council Area), Don RiverWatershed. 73210

EX10.2752 KILLDEER CRESCENTTo install a swimming pool, undertake minor landscaping involving theplacement, removal or regrading of material of less than 30 cubic metres(equivalent to 3 truckloads), construct a non-habitable accessorystructure up to 50 sq. m (538 sq. ft) and change the use, size, or numberof dwelling units of a structure, or undertake work that does not changethe footprint of the existing structure on Lot 734, Plan 3111, (52 KilldeerCrescent), in the City of Toronto (North York Community Council Area),Don River Watershed. 732CITY OF TORONTO [SCARBOROUGH COMMUNITY COUNCIL AREA]EX10.2817 SPRINGBANK AVENUETo change the use, size, or number of dwelling units of a structure, orundertake work that does not change the footprint of the existing structureon Lot 37, Plan 975, (17 Springbank Avenue), in the City of Toronto(Scarborough Community Council Area), Waterfront Watershed. 732CITY OF VAUGHANEX10.29EX10.309593 KEELE STREETTo construct a non-habitable accessory structure up to 50 sq. m (538 sq.ft) on Lot 3, Plan 65M2830, (9593 Keele Street), in the City of Vaughan,Don River Watershed. 732280 BALDING BOULEVARDTo install a swimming pool, undertake minor landscaping involving theplacement, removal or regrading of material of less than 30 cubic metres(equivalent to 3 truckloads) and construct a non-habitable accessorystructure up to 50 sq. m (538 sq. ft) on Lot 10, Plan M-1800, (280 BaldingBoulevard), in the City of Vaughan, Humber River Watershed. 733TOWN OF RICHMOND HILLEX10.31130 LACEWOOD DRIVETo construct a non-habitable accessory structure up to 50 sq. m (538 sq.ft) on Part Block 86, Plan 65M-4205, (130 Lacewood Drive), in the Townof Richmond Hill, Rouge River Watershed. 73311

PERMIT APPLICATIONS EX10.32 - EX10.33 ARE MAJOR APPLICATIONSCITY OF BRAMPTONEX10.32EX10.331083131 ONTARIO INC.To site grade on Lot 15, Concession 7, N.D.S., (West of Goreway Driveand South of Countryside Drive), in the City of Brampton, Humber RiverWatershed as located on the property owned by 1083131 OntarioIncorporated. The purpose is to undertake works within a TRCARegulated Area of the Humber River Watershed in order to facilitate theconstruction of a foundation drain collector (FDC) and wetland featureassociated with a residential draft plan of subdivision application. 733SUNDIAL HOMES (CASTLEMORE) LIMITEDTo site grade and alter a watercourse on Lot 15, Concession 7, N.D.S., inthe City of Brampton, Humber River Watershed as located on theproperty owned by Sundial Homes (Castlemore) Limited. The purpose isto undertake earthworks and servicing and the realignment of two (2)tributaries of Salt Creek within a TRCA Regulated Area of the HumberRiver Watershed in order to facilitate the construction of a residential draftplan of subdivision. 734CITY OF TORONTO [NORTH YORK COMMUNITY COUNCIL AREA]EX10.34139 THREE VALLEYS DRIVETo change a building or structure so that it alters its use or potential use,increases its size or increases the number of dwelling units, site gradeand temporarily or permanently place, dump or remove any material,originating on the site or elsewhere on Lot 315, Plan 5112, (139 ThreeValleys Drive), in the City of Toronto (North York Community CouncilArea), Don River Watershed. The purpose is to construct a small frontand rear addition at 139 Three Valleys Drive in Toronto (North YorkCommunity Council Area). 73412

Future additional works will be implemented by TRCA at the request of the City of Toronto on aproject-by-project basis, subject to confirmation of available funding and the receipt of allnecessary permits and approvals.RATIONALEPF&R staff has requested the assistance of TRCA's Restoration Services Division with theimplementation of restoration works in Mud Creek based on TRCA's intimate knowledge of MudCreek through ongoing annual monitoring and several past restoration projects, most recentlyReach 1.The scope of work to be undertaken by TRCA consists of the following general tasks:1. Prepare a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Mud Creek Restoration Project.2. Provide detailed cost estimates for each identified project area (e.g. Reach 5).3. Prepare, issue, award and manage all subcontracts for equipment, materials and servicesrelated to the construction of works.4. Implement the works as per the approved designs.5. Provide financial and other documentation as specified in the MOU.Recognizing that the City of Toronto is funding the implementation of the works, TRCA willadopt the City of Toronto's purchasing policy regarding the use of union and skilled tradeworkers for any subcontracted work.FINANCIAL DETAILSThe preliminary budget for Reach 5 is estimated at $775,000 excluding HST, plus a 10%contingency to be expended by TRCA with permission from the City of Toronto. The cost of theproject is 100% recoverable from the City of Toronto.Report prepared by: Moranne McDonnell, 416-392-9725Emails: mmcdonnell@trca.on.caFor Information contact: Moranne McDonnell, 416-392-9725Emails: mmcdonnell@trca.on.caDate: January 04, 2013Attachments: 114

Attachment 115

TO:FROM:Chair and Members of the AuthorityMeeting #11/12, January 25, 2013Nick Saccone, Director, Restoration ServicesItem AUTH7.2RE: MEADOWCLIFFE DRIVE SLOPE STABILIZATION PROJECTContract RSD12-181____________________________________________________________________________KEY ISSUEAward of Contract RSD12-181 for the supply and delivery of approximately 4,700 tonnes ofarmour stone.RECOMMENDATIONTHAT Contract RSD12-181 for the supply and delivery of approximately 4,700 tonnes of4-6 tonne armour stone to the Meadowcliffe Drive Slope Stabilization Project, in the Cityof Toronto, be awarded to J.C. Rock Limited for a total unit price of $48.48 per tonne anda total cost not to exceed $227,856.00, plus 10% contingency to be expended asauthorized by TRCA staff, plus HST, it being the lowest bid that meets Toronto andRegion Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff cost estimates and specifications;THAT should staff be unable to achieve an acceptable contract with the awardedsupplier, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with theother suppliers that submitted Quotations, beginning with the next lowest bidder meetingTRCA specifications;AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take all necessary actionsto implement the foregoing, including the signing and execution of any documents.BACKGROUNDThe Meadowcliffe Drive Erosion Control Project is located along a portion of the Lake Ontarioshoreline at the base of the Scarborough Bluffs west of Bellamy Ravine, in the City of Toronto.The purpose of the project is to provide long-term shoreline protection to reduce the impacts ofwave energy, stabilize slopes, enhance natural processes and protect the residential propertieson the top of the slope. As a result, risk to public safety and infrastructure will be reduced,passive recreational opportunities will be increased, and aquatic and terrestrial habitatconditions will be improved.The preferred option determined through the Class Environmental Assessment process is ashoreline treatment consisting of a cobble stone beach retained by four headlands, and an earthberm at the east end of the shoreline to provide enhanced erosion protection for the easternmost properties.The armour stone material will be used for the construction of Beach Cell One.16

RATIONALEQuotation packages were sent to 14 suppliers as follows:• Brent Quarries• B-Town Group• CDR Young’s Aggregate Inc.• Dufferin Aggregates• Earthco Soils• Fowler Construction• Glenn Windrem trucking• J.C. Rock Limited• James Dick Construction• Lafarge Aggregates• Miller Group• Nelson Aggregate Co.• R.W. Tomlinson Ltd.• Strada AggregatesTender RSD12-180 was publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo (http://www.biddingo.com/) on December 18, 2012. Request for Tenders were opened on FridayJanuary 4th, 2013 by the Tender Opening Committee with the following results:Contract RSD12-181- Supply and Delivery of Approximately 4,700 Tonnes of4-6 Tonne Armour StoneBIDDERSTOTAL UNIT PRICEPER TONNE(Plus HST)TOTAL VALUE OFCONTRACT(Plus HST)J.C. Rock Limited $48.48 $227,856.00C.D.R. Young’s Aggregates Inc. $49.72 $233,684.00Glenn Windrem Trucking $56.00 $263,200.00Based on the bids received, staff recommends that J.C. Rock Limed be awarded ContractRSD12-181 for the supply and delivery of approximately 4,700 tonnes of 4-6 tonne armourstone for the unit cost of $48.48 per tonne and a total amount not to exceed $227,856.00, plusHST, it being the lowest bid that meets TRCA staff cost estimates and specifications. ContractRSD12-181 is subject to a 10% contingency to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff.FINANCIAL DETAILSFunds are available within account #145-01 from the Toronto Erosion Capital Budget.Report prepared by: Jordan Budway, 416-392-9721Emails: jbudway@trca.on.caFor Information contact: James Dickie, 416-392-9702Emails: jdickie@trca.on.caDate: January 08, 201317

TO:FROM:Chair and Members of the AuthorityMeeting #11/12, January 25, 2013Nick Saccone, Director, Restoration ServicesItem AUTH7.3RE: DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANTS2012 Management Summary and 2013 Management Strategy____________________________________________________________________________KEY ISSUESummary of 2012 management activities and 2013 management strategy for Double-crestedCormorants at Tommy Thompson Park.RECOMMENDATIONTHAT staff be directed to continue to work with the Cormorant Advisory Group to assistToronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) in addressing management concernsregarding colonial waterbirds at Tommy Thompson Park (TTP);THAT staff be directed to work with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, CanadianWildlife Service and any other required regulatory agency to seek approval for the 2013management strategy for colonial waterbirds at TTP;THAT staff be directed to implement the proposed management strategy for 2013;THAT staff be directed to continue to actively participate in local, regional and binationalcommittees/working groups addressing the management and protection of colonialwaterbirds;AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority annually regarding themanagement of Double-crested Cormorants at Tommy Thompson Park.BACKGROUNDTommy Thompson Park is an urban wilderness park located at the foot of Leslie Street in theCity of Toronto. It supports the largest colony of Double-crested Cormorants (DCCO) in theGreat Lakes Region, plus diverse communities of bird, fish, reptile, amphibian, mammal, andvegetation species. It has been formally designated as a globally significant Important BirdArea (IBA) and an Environmentally Significant Area (ESA #120). The Master Plan that guidesthe development of TTP includes the goal of conserving and managing the natural resourcesand environmentally significant areas of the park. While the DCCO colony adds to the diversityof the park and is environmentally significant, there are concerns about the impacts of DCCO ontree health and biodiversity in other areas at TTP.TRCA began a process to ensure the TTP Master Plan goals and objectives were upheld andthe concerns are addressed. TRCA initiated the involvement of stakeholders and the public tocreate a management strategy for DCCO at TTP. The process started in November 2007 withthe establishment of the Cormorant Advisory Group, and lead to the development of the 2008Cormorant Management Strategy which was approved by the TRCA Board in 2008 as perResolution #A110/08:18

THAT staff be directed to continue to work with the Cormorant Advisory Group to assistToronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) in addressing managementconcerns regarding colonial waterbirds at Tommy Thompson Park (TTP);THAT staff be directed to work with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources,Canadian Wildlife Service and any other required regulatory agency to seek approval forthe 2008 management strategy for colonial waterbirds at TTP;THAT staff be directed to implement the proposed management strategy for 2008;THAT staff be directed to continue to actively participate in local, regional and binationalcommittees/working groups addressing the management and protection of colonialwaterbirds;AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority next year regarding themanagement of Double-crested Cormorants at Tommy Thompson Park.Since 2008 TRCA staff has annually sought approval from the Authority to adopt themanagement strategy and has subsequently reported back on the Strategic Approach at theend of the breeding season:• 2009 as per Resolution #A22/09,• 2010 as per Resolution #A23/10,• 2011 as per Resolution #A49/11, and• 2012 as per Resolution #A19/12.The overall goal of the Double-crested Cormorant Strategic Approach, as established by theCormorant Advisory Group in 2007, is to achieve a balance between the continued existence ofa healthy, thriving cormorant colony and the other ecological, educational, scientific andrecreational values of TTP. The objectives of the Strategic Approach are to:• increase public knowledge, awareness, and appreciation of colonial waterbirds;• deter cormorant expansion to Peninsula D;• limit further loss of tree canopy on Peninsulas A, B and C; and• continue research on colonial waterbirds in an urban wilderness context.To achieve the goals and objectives of the Strategic Approach, TRCA employed a suite ofmanagement techniques between 2009 and 2012 that included inactive nest removals,pre-nesting deterrents, active nest removals and post-nesting deterrents. Along with deterrents,TRCA also worked to attract DCCO to nest on the ground by enhancing the ground nestingareas, providing straw for nesting materials, installing DCCO decoys, playing audio of DCCOcourtship calls and limiting disturbance of the ground nesting areas. The “Management ofDouble-crested Cormorants at Tommy Thompson Park 2012 Summary Report” provides detailson management actions and is available upon request.19

Results from annual population counts show an increase in the ground nesting colony and alevelling off in the tree nesting colonies. This data suggested that the management techniquesappear to be effective in meeting the goal and objectives of the Strategic Approach. In 2012TRCA scaled back pre-nesting deterrents on Peninsula B and the core area of Peninsula C totry to determine if ongoing deterrents were required throughout the nesting period or if adaptingpre-nesting deterrents would still be effective in meeting the goal and objectives of the StrategicApproach. Therefore, in 2012 pre-nesting deterrents were only used in targeted areas as perthe adaptive approach, with the exception of active nest removals from healthy trees in targetareas on Peninsulas B and C, as well as ongoing human presence on Peninsula D. As per theStrategic Approach, the active nest removal followed the conservative protocol for estimatingnest age, to avoid removal of nests with eggs older than 10 days.Although identified as a management technique in the 2012 Strategic Approach for PeninsulasB, C and D, the post-breeding deterrents were not undertaken as DCCO did not roost in trees inthese areas.Public knowledge, awareness and appreciation for DCCO at TTP continued with a remotewebcam in the Peninsula B ground nest colony; a blind on Peninsula C with excellent views ofDCCO, Black-crowned Night-Heron (BCNH) and Great Egret (GREG); and staff interpretation ofthe colony at various public events, including a Colonial Waterbird Hike at the TTP Spring BirdFestival, presentations and park tours.In 2012 a total of 11,741 DCCO nests were counted on three of four peninsulas. Thisrepresents a slight increase of 367 nests over the 2011 nest count. The increase in nestnumbers was due solely to ground nesting on Peninsula B which increased 28 percent from2011, where as the tree nesting populations on Peninsulas A, B and C all decreased by 32, 22and 11 percent respectively. Overall, the ground nest population has increased 476 percentsince management efforts began in 2008. This is a positive trend showing that ground nestenhancements are working to help achieve the goal of the continued existence of a healthy,thriving cormorant colony. The significant increase in the number of ground nests means that50 percent of the TTP cormorant colony now nests on the ground, so their nests are notimpacting the tree health.Tree nesting appears to be declining, with overall DCCO population nesting in trees decreasingby 13 percent in 2012. Also in 2012 the number of trees nested in decreased by 11 percent,thereby resulting in no further loss to the forest canopy.Given the continued increase in ground nesting and the decline of tree nesting in 2012 usingreduced deterrents, it appears the adaptive approach employed in 2012 is an effectivemanagement strategy and is also more efficient, as less staff time is required.Overall, the 2012 Management Strategy was successful in meeting the objectives of theStrategic Approach.• while the overall nest numbers have increased in 2012, DCCO were effectively deterredfrom expanding their nesting areas beyond the existing colonies, including ontoPeninsula D;• ground nesting continued to increase and now represents 50 percent of the entire TTPDCCO population;• tree nesting decreased on all three peninsulas;20

• colonial waterbird research continued through the work of York University; and• public knowledge, awareness and appreciation of colonial waterbirds was upheldthrough targeted site interpretation by staff at various park events, formal hikes andtours, as well ground nest colony interpretation using webcam images on the websiteand a viewing blind on Peninsula C.RATIONALEAn extremely high level of concern has been expressed regarding DCCO populations and theirmanagement. Concerns have been raised from both sides, on the one hand calling formanagement and the preservation of forest canopy, and on the other hand for protection of thebirds and their nesting colonies. TRCA has an obligation to manage Tommy Thompson Park asdirected by the Master Plan for Tommy Thompson Park as approved under the EnvironmentalAssessment Act . To meet the intent of the Master Plan, TRCA staff feel that there is a strongrationale for undertaking a strategic approach to the management of Double-crestedCormorants at Tommy Thompson Park.Since November 2007, TRCA has involved stakeholders and the public in assessing the needfor management and developing a strategy for DCCO at TTP. Generally, throughout theprocess there has been agreement that some form of management is appropriate, providingthat the methods are humane to cormorants and do not affect other wildlife.Based on the annual data from the nest counts, adaptive management techniques, includingreduced deterrents, appear to be effective in meeting the goal and objectives of the StrategicApproach. TRCA's strategy continues to receive a high level of support from the CormorantAdvisory Group, the public and TRCA partners. Both the Advisory Group and partners arepromoting TRCA's management approach at other sites throughout the Province of Ontario. Assuch, TRCA will carry out the Strategic Approach developed in 2012 for the 2013 season(Attachment 1 – Table 2).DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONEA suite of techniques will be utilized in an integrated and adaptive approach to achieve the goaland objectives of the 2013 Strategic Approach, which maintains the original goal and objectivesfrom 2008. Attachment 1 – Table 2 provides an overview of the 2013 Strategic Approach.Increase Public Knowledge, Awareness and Appreciation• TRCA website, including images from the remote camera. Improvements will be madeto photo cataloguing so that the technical errors experience in 2012 are not repeated,and photo interpretation will be updated on a regular basis so the public is moreinformed on the status of nesting;• Conduct interpretive tours for school and interest groups, and at TTP special events;• Maintain opportunities to view colonial waterbirds with viewing blinds and platforms;• Present information at conferences and forums; and• Participate in working groups on colonial waterbirds.Inactive Nest Removal• Remove nests from trees on Peninsulas B and C during the winter, prior to the breedingseason.21

Enhanced Ground Nesting• Place natural nests collected during inactive nest removal in ground nesting areas onPeninsulas A and B;• Play auditory breeding calls to attract DCCO to ground nest areas on Peninsula A;• Deploy DCCO decoys on Peninsula A later in the breeding season to attract late,inexperienced DCCO to nest in the ground nest area; and• Erect predator exclosures to improve ground nesting success and colony establishment.Pre-nesting Deterrents• The expansion of tree nesting DCCO beyond the existing colonies on Peninsulas B andC will be prevented. Deterrents within the core of the tree nesting colonies on PeninsulaB and C will not be undertaken;• DCCO will be prevented from nesting on Peninsula D;• Deterrent techniques will remain the same as 2012 and employed on an increasingscale of activity to ensure expansion of the tree nesting area does not occur; and• Staff will monitor the effects deterrent activities have on the DCCO colony as well as onnon-target species.Post-breeding Deterrents• Deterrent activities will take place on Peninsula C and D to reduce loafing; and• Techniques will be the same as 2012 and will be employed on an increasing scale ofactivity.Monitoring, Research and Reporting• Undertake annual nest census for colonial waterbirds in late May;• Conduct modified annual tree health surveys on Peninsulas A, B, C and D in lateAugust;• Continue to collaborate with York University on DCCO research;• Complete annual summary report; and• Meet with Cormorant Advisory Group to review data and discuss the Strategic Approachfor 2014.FINANCIAL DETAILSFunds are identified in the Tommy Thompson Park Interim Management account 210-19 in thePreliminary 2013 Capital Budget from the City of Toronto.Report prepared by: Ralph Toninger, extension 5366; Karen McDonald, extension 5248Emails: rtoninger@trca.on.ca, kmcdonald@trca.on.caFor Information contact: Karen McDonald, extension 5248Emails: kmcdonald@trca.on.caDate: December 05, 2012Attachments: 122

Attachment 1Table 1: 2012 Strategic Approach MatrixPeninsula A Peninsula B Peninsula C Peninsula DInactive Nest Removal(prior to 2012 breeding season) * *Enhanced Ground Nesting * *Pre-nesting Deterrents * * *Post-breeding Deterrents * *Table 2: 2013 Proposed Strategic Approach MatrixPeninsula A Peninsula B Peninsula C Peninsula DInactive Nest Removal(prior to 2013 breeding season) * *Enhanced Ground Nesting * *Pre-nesting Deterrents * * *Post-breeding Deterrents * *23

TO:FROM:Chair and Members of the AuthorityMeeting #11/12, January 25, 2013Deborah Martin-Downs, Director, EcologyItem AUTH7.4RE: ENBRIDGE PIPELINES INC., LINE 9B REVERSAL AND CAPACITYEXPANSION PROJECT____________________________________________________________________________KEY ISSUEReport on Line 9B Reversal Project and general areas of concern for crude oil and its potentialeffect on the environment and drinking water from spills.RECOMMENDATIONTHAT staff be directed to review the requirements for hearing participants for theEnbridge Pipelines Inc., Line 9B Reversal and Line 9 Capacity Expansion Project, whenreleased by the National Energy Board (NEB), seek legal advice, and if time permits,report back to the Authority to seek direction regarding Toronto and RegionConservation Authority (TRCA) participation in the NEB Hearing, including consultationwith affected municipalities on common issues;THAT if timelines do not permit a staff report to the Authority, the TRCA Chair and ChiefExecutive Officer be authorized to provide staff with direction, based on legal advice, asto how to proceed with respect to participation in the NEB Hearing;THAT staff consult with Environment Canada and the Ontario Ministry of theEnvironment and report back regarding common issues in the approval andimplementation process, including emergency response contingency plan;AND FURTHER THAT staff continue to work with Enbridge Pipelines Inc. to ensure thatthey meet TRCA's regulatory requirements in the implementation of its Integrity DigProgram, including the review and issuance of permits for the investigative, maintenanceand repair works within TRCA's regulated area and on TRCA-owned lands.BACKGROUNDAt Authority Meeting #9/12, held on November 30, 2012, Resolution #A229/12 regardingPotential Hazards from Crude Oil Spill was approved.THAT the staff report on the potential hazards from petroleum pipeline spills on GTAwater supplies be received.Subsequent to this meeting, at Executive Committee Meeting #10/12, held on December 7,2012, Resolution #B185/12 was approved as follows:THAT staff provide a supplementary report to Authority item AUTH8.1 - PotentialHazards from Crude Oil Spill from Authority Meeting #9/12, held on November 30,2012 on the specific items outlined in the email dated December 7, 2012 and themotion passed by Toronto Council at its meeting on November 28, 2012;24

THAT TRCA request party status to the proceedings at the National Energy Board priorto the next meeting if timelines require;AND FURTHER THAT TRCA work with City of Toronto and City of Hamilton.As referenced in TRCA resolution 3B185/12, the City of Toronto adopted resolution MM28.22on November 27, 28 and 29 as follows:1. City Council request the City Solicitor to report directly to City Council on thefollowing in connection with the Enbridge Pipelines Inc. submission ofpre-application materials to the National Energy Board for the reversal of thedirection of flow of its pipeline, Line 9B, between Westover (near Hamilton) andMontreal, and to increase the capacity of Line 9:a) The process at the National Energy Board and options for City of Torontoparticipation;b) Available details respecting the integrity of the pipeline, the safe handling ofdiluted bitumen, (“dilbit”) and spill contingency measures; andc) The need for and cost of ex pert witness or council to represent the City ofToronto’s interests.2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to advise the National Energy Board of theCity of Toronto’s intent to preserve all options to participate in the proceedings oncean application has been filed by Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (and subject to the directionof City Council regarding that participation).3. City Council request the City Manager to liaise with staff of the City of Hamilton, orother organizations, with a view to potential cooperation.http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2012.MM28.22Line 9B Reversal and Capacity Expansion ProjectLine 9 is an existing 762 mm (30-inch) diameter pipeline operated by Enbridge Pipelines Inc..(Enbridge). It has a capacity of approximately 240,000 barrels per day (bpd) and extends fromMontreal, Quebec to Sarnia, Ontario. Currently, the pipeline transports light crude oil westwardfrom areas such as the North Sea, West Africa and the Middle East. Enbridge is applying to theNational Energy Board for approval to reverse the flow of the 639 km-long section of Line 9 fromNorth Westover to Montreal (Line 9B), and increase the capacity of the entire Line 9 from Sarniato Montreal to 300,000 bpd as shown on Attachment 1. Enbridge received approval from theNEB for reversal of the line from Sarnia to North Westover in 2012. All Project activities willtake place within existing Enbridge facilities and right-of-way, with the exception of sometemporary workspace required for a new densitometer facility along the right-of-way near NorthWestover Station. The purpose of this project is to respond to requests from eastern Canadianrefineries to have access to the growing and less expensive supplies of light and heavy crudeoil production from western Canada and the U.S. Bakken region. The increased capacity will beachieved through the addition of equipment to inject a drag reducing agent.25

Letters advising of the project were sent to stakeholders, including municipalities andconservation authorities, in May and September 2012.The NEB is an independent federal regulator established in 1959 to promote safety andsecurity, environmental protection and economic efficiency in the Canadian public interest withinthe mandate set by Parliament for the regulation of pipelines, energy development and trade.The Board reports to Parliament through the Minister of Natural Resources. The NEB isestablished under the National Energy Board Act , which sets out the mandate for the NEB. TheAct establishes the NEB's authority in energy projects as well as determining the regulatoryboundaries for making decisions.On November 29, 2012, Enbridge filed an application (# A49446) under section 58 and underPart IV of the National Energy Board Act (NEB Act) asking the Board to approve the Line 9BReversal and Line 9 Capacity Expansion Project, which includes:• the reversal of the 639 km-long segment of Line 9 between North Westover, Ontario andthe Montreal Terminal in Quebec (“Line 9B”);• an increase in the annual capacity of the entire Line 9 from Sarnia, Ontario to Montrealto approximately 47,696 m 3 /day (300,000 bpd); and• a revision to the Line 9 Rules and Regulations Tariff to allow transportation of heavycrude through Line 9 (although light crude will continue to be the major product shipped).Subject to receipt of regulatory approvals, in its application to the NEB, Enbridge advised thatconstruction of the project is scheduled to start in late 2013 and is expected to be completed bymid-2014. Prior to the start of construction, municipal permits will be obtained for the project, aswell as permits from local conservation authorities where works are located within regulatedareas. Detailed information on the application and the process is available on the NEB’s websiteat www.neb-one.gc.ca.Comments have already been submitted by a number of stakeholders to the NEB, including thecities of Toronto and Hamilton. Issues they have raised include:• increased risk of physical and chemical interaction between diluted bitumen and the pipewalls, thus impacting the corrosivity of the pipe and potential breakage or leakage and,therefore, spills;• potential spill effects related to the environment, as well as drinking water supplies; and,• details regarding Enbridge's spill detection and response measures and responsibilitiesin the event of a spill.Following the Council Resolution of November 27-29 MM28.22, the City Solicitor will report backto Toronto City Council at their February 20, 2013 meeting, noting that the primary area ofinterest for municipalities is the integrity of the pipeline, the safe handling of dilbit, andcontingency measures for any spills. TRCA shares these concerns with the City.RATIONALEIn addition, to the concerns raised by City Council, TRCA board member Councillor Glenn DeBaeremaeker, raised the following concerns to TRCA staff, presented below together with staffresponses.26

1) Provide an examination of the specific risks of a spill of diluted bitumen.As shown in the chart below, crude oils contain four general types of hydrocarbons: saturates,aromatics, resins and asphaltics. Light crude oils from conventional sources contain mostlysaturates (e.g., butane, pentane) with some aromatics, while heavy crude contains all fourcomponents in about equal proportions. Line 9B currently carries light crude oil but the Enbridgeproposal, if approved, would allow the shipment of heavy crude oil through the pipeline.Concern has been expressed by the public about the potential of the pipeline to carry dilutedbitumen or dilbit - a product of the oil sands. Because dilbit is considered a type of heavy crudeoil by the petroleum industry, it could be legally carried by Line 9B. However, Enbridge hasconfirmed that there are no plans to ship this material through Line 9 at this time, and that theprimary product transported will be light crude oil.Comparison of Crude Oil and Dilbit Chemistry and CharacteristicsHydrocarbon TypeMolecularWeightToxicityHeavy Crude OilComposition(with DilutedBitumen)Light Crude OilCompositionEnvironmentalReaction(typical)Saturates (e.g., butane, Light Moderate 15 - 25% 70 - 90% vapourize, floatoctane)Aromatics (e.g., benzene,High 15 - 35% 10 - 25% vapourize, floattoluene)Resins (e.g., cuclehexane) Moderate 20 - 45% 3 - 5% float, suspendAsphaltics Heavy Low 10 - 20% 0 - 5% float, suspendChandra Mohan Sinnathambi and Norhusna Mohamad Nor, 2012. Relationship Between SARA Fractions and CrudeOil Fouling. Journal of Applied Sciences, 12: 2479-2483.Hinkle, A; Shin, E.J.; Liberatore, M, Herring, A.M., and Batzle, M., 2008. Correlating the Chemical and PhysicalProperties of a Set of Heavy Oils from around the World . Published by the Colorado School of Mines. Available from:http://crusher.mines.edu/UserFiles/File/CRA/2008/FuelHinkle2007_R_Final%208Mar08.pdfWhen spilled into turbulent water, heavy crude oil, though lighter than water, will easily be drivento the bottom of the bed of the watercourse, mixing with the sediments, and sticking to anylarger pebbles and rocks. As with all hydrocarbon mixtures, most of the spilled product will floaton the surface of the water, and move quickly downstream. The lighter components (i.e.saturates and lighter aromatics such as benzene) will also evaporate, and end up in the air.Light crude oil will behave in a similar manner. Cleanup under these circumstances is bothexpensive and lengthy. Booms and skimmers are used to collect the floating product, whilevacuum methods are often the most effective in cleaning the sediments. Given normal waterlevel fluctuations, submergent, emergent and terrestrial vegetation are usually impacted, alongwith any animals that come into contact with either the floating product, or the contaminatedsediments. Ecosystem effects are usually due to direct hydrocarbon exposure, such as “oiling”of waterfowl. Human health effects are usually the result of inhalation of hydrocarbon vapours,which can lead to headaches and nausea.27

2) Is there evidence that pipelines shipping dilbit could be more likely to spill?There is no evidence that pipelines used to transport dilbit are more likely to spill. AlbertaInnovates – Technology Futures , completed a project for Alberta Innovates – Energy andEnvironment Solutions reviewing the current status on the corrosivity of dilbit in pipelines ascompared to conventional or ‘non-oil sands derived’ crude oil. This review has indicated that thecharacteristics of dilbit are not unique and are comparable to conventional crude oils. Based ona staff review of pipeline engineering reports, pipeline corrosion begins from the outside, andprogresses inwards, since corrosion requires oxygen from the air or groundwater outside thepipeline. The petroleum products actually inhibit oxidation and corrosion of the inside of thepipeline.3) Please include a detailed breakdown of the major chemicals contained in dilutedbitumen, (ie. Benzene, Toluene, n-hexane, etc.) with information on the human andenvironmental effects of these chemicals. Also provide an evaluation of reports onhuman health impacts from the spill and acute and chronic exposure to benzene.Attachment 2 is a table produced by the United States Centre for Disease Control that providesa summary of some of the major chemicals in crude oil along with a summary of the potentialhuman health effects. With specific reference to the Kalamazoo spill, the Michigan Departmentof Community Health conducted a follow-up study and issued its results in a November 2010report titled Acute Effects of the Enbridge Oil Spill . The study was based on four communitysurveys along the affected waterways, 147 health care provider reports on 145 patients and 41calls placed to the poison center. The study identified 320 people and an additional 11 worksiteemployees who reported experiencing adverse health effects. Headache, nausea andrespiratory effects were the most common symptoms reported by exposed individuals. Thereport concluded that these symptoms were consistent with the published literature regardingpotential health effects associated with crude oil exposure, which include irritation to the eyes,nose and throat, as well as dizziness and drowsiness. Contact with the skin and eyes may alsocause irritation or burns. More information on environmental effects are provided with theanswer to Question 1 above, and documented with respect to the Kalamazoo spill, describedwith respect to the answer to Question 4 below.4) Please provide more detail on the impacts of the Kalamazoo spill, including adescription of the nature of environmental degradation and an estimate of how longthe spill is expected to negatively impact the ecosystem.On July 25, 2010, a crude oil spill occurred in Kalamazoo, Michigan. In this instance, a segmentof a 30-inch-diameter pipeline (Line 6B), owned and operated by Enbridge Energy, LimitedPartnership, ruptured in a wetland in Marshall, Michigan. The rupture occurred during the laststages of a planned shutdown and was not discovered or addressed for over 17 hours. The totalrelease was estimated to be 843,444 US gallons of crude oil. The oil saturated the surroundingwetlands and flowed into the Talmadge Creek and the Kalamazoo River. Local residentsself-evacuated from their houses, and the environment was negatively affected. About 320people reported symptoms consistent with crude oil exposure including headache, nausea andrespiratory effects. No fatalities were reported.As mentioned in the November, 2012 TRCA staff report, the Kalamazoo spill had a significanteffect on the local ecosystem. Over 35 km of watercourse and a wetland were impacted, andover 4,000 animals required treatment for oil contamination. The mixing of some of thehydrocarbons with the sediments in the riverbed remains an on-going issue. Over two yearsafter the accident, crews are still removing submerged oil and contaminated soils milesdownstream of the release site.28

5) Provide a breakdown of the financial costs of cleanup with description of who wasliable for these expenses.The total estimated costs for emergency response equipment, resources, personnel, andprofessional and regulatory support in connection with the cleanup of oil discharged from Line6B were about $767 million as of October 31, 2011. Enbridge was liable for all of these costs,which include an estimated $42 million cost for the Federal government’s role in the cleanup.Costs continue to be incurred for monitoring and on-going sediment remediation. These costswill also be the responsibility of Enbridge.6) Provide an assessment of Enbridge's performance with respect to emergencyresponse and cleanup, drawing from the findings of the NTSB (NationalTransportation Safety Board) study into the incident.The Kalamazoo spill was not identified immediately because of two factors. First, the spilloccurred in a remote wetland area and it took time for the spill to be observed by localresidents. Second, the spill occurred during maintenance of the pipeline and the reduced flowreadings in the leak detection sensors were assumed to be related to an air gap (also known asa “column separation”) in the line from the shutdown. Therefore, Enbridge pumped additional oilinto Line 6B during two separate attempts to refill the pipeline. The additional oil put into thepipeline during these restarts represented over 80 percent of the total release.Enbridge’s first responders arrived on the scene just as oil was reaching the Kalamazoo Riverand they were unaware of the scale of the oil release. Much of the initial remedial effortsinvolved the placement of oil containment booms downriver of the floating product. Thesebooms were used to trap the floating and suspended hydrocarbons, but were located severalmiles from the release site. These measures would have been more effective if they had beenplaced closer to the spill site. The large volume of oil that escaped the spill site contributedgreatly to the environmental effects as well as the complexity and cost of the cleanup for thisaccident.In response to the Kalamazoo spill, Enbridge has made numerous changes in how they assess,monitor, control and respond to leaks and spills, as summarized below:Pipeline and Facility Integrity• Re-organized the functional areas that are responsible for pipeline and facility integrity.• Substantially increased pipeline integrity testing and management spending of $150million per year, to over $450 million in each of 2011 and 2012.• Since 2011, performed more than 175 in-line inspections and nearly 3,000 pipelineexcavations and undertook hundreds of internal inspections and thousands ofinvestigative digs.Leak Detection• Established the Pipeline Control Systems and Leak Detection department, doubling thenumber of employees and contractors dedicated to leak detection and pipeline control.• Enhanced procedures for leak detection analysis.• Implemented a Leak Detection Instrumentation Improvement Program to add andupgrade instrumentation across the system.29

Pipeline Control and Control Center Operations• Developed a Control Room Management plan based on the U.S. Code of FederalRegulations and implemented a number of the sections, October 1, 2011; remainingsections were implemented by August 1, 2012.• Revised and enhanced all procedures pertaining to decision making, handling pipelinestartups and shutdowns, leak detection system alarms, communication protocols andsuspected column separations.• Enhanced the organizational structures to better support operators and to manage spanof control and workloads.• Augmented CCO (Control Center Operations) staff, adding training, technical support,engineering and operator positions.• Prior to the accident, Enbridge had started design and construction of a new controlcenter in Edmonton, Alberta. The new center was opened in December 2011 and allowsgreater interaction and support for 7 x 24 hour operations.Emergency Response• Enbridge has committed an additional $50 million to be spent between 2012 and 2013 toimprove equipment, training and overall response capabilities.• Develop better tools and techniques for worst case waterborne spills.• In 2011, a cross-business unit response team was created for large-scale eventsrequiring more resources that a single region could provide.• In 2011, a dedicated Emergency Response group was created in Operation Services forincreased regional support.• Conducting an Emergency Response preparedness assessment to enhance abilities tomore rapidly respond and contain a significant release.7) Please provide more detail regarding the spill risks for TRCA.In the valley and stream corridors of watersheds in TRCA's jurisdiction, there are hundreds ofunderground pipe crossings, including oil and gas pipelines, utilities (such as Bell and hydro),watermains and sewer pipes. Although leaks from corrosion do occur in these pipes, theprimary risk of spills from underground infrastructure in the TRCA jurisdiction is related toerosion of the soil covering the infrastructure, and its resultant structural failure. Whether a spillis of heavy or light crude oil, the environmental effects will be significant and long lasting,particularly since pipeline spills, though infrequent, tend to be larger in magnitude than thetypical fuel releases from trucks or other accidental discharges.30

From an in-stream perspective, the vertical depth of the pipe from the bottom of the watercourseto the top of the pipe must be such that if natural downcutting of the watercourse occurs, therewill be sufficient natural cover to ensure the integrity of the pipe is protected; alternatively theremay be a requirement to construct in-stream erosion protection measures, also with the goal ofensuring that the integrity of the pipe is protected. For pipes that parallel the watercourseswithin the valleys, the horizontal distance of the pipe from the edge of the watercourse to theside of the pipe must be such that if natural streambank erosion occurs, there will be sufficientnatural cover to ensure the integrity of the pipe is protected; alternatively there may be arequirement to construct in-stream erosion protection measures, also with the goal of ensuringthat the integrity of the pipe is protected. For pipes that cross or parallel the valley slopes, thehorizontal distance of the pipe from the edge of the valley wall to the side of the pipe must besuch that if natural valley wall erosion occurs, there will be sufficient natural cover to ensure theintegrity of the pipe is protected; alternatively there may be a requirement to construct valleywall erosion protection measures, also with the goal of ensuring that the integrity of the pipe isprotected.In addition to depth of cover at watercourse crossings, TRCA is also involved in some aspectsof pipeline monitoring and mitigation programs. Pipeline integrity is checked through "tooling",where by "pigs" are remotely run through the pipes and used to check for pipe safety. If thereare construction requirements to fix the pipelines, the proponent may need to access thepipeline from the surface, known as an "integrity dig". When access to the pipe is required fromthe surface, if located in a regulated area, than an Ontario Regulation 166/06 permit will berequired. Technical concerns that will need to be addressed relate to flooding, erosion andconservation of land. In order to satisfy requirements, staff will review any or all of the following,depending of site characteristics:• staging;• storage and access plans;• tree protection and tree removal plans;• cut and balance fill requirements; and• site restoration plans.Enbridge is currently completing a comprehensive Integrity Dig Program of their existing Line 9pipeline to proactively determine any locations at risk of failure and repair the sections before aspill occurs. As required, permits through the TRCA jurisdiction have been issued when thework is located within a regulated area, or if maintenance works are required on sections of thepipe that are located within a regulated area. To date, Ontario Regulation 166/06 permits havebeen issued by TRCA in relation to this pipeline, including both emergency works and long termstabilization permits for locations where the pipe was found to be in an unstable location nearDon River wetlands or across the Rouge River (see Attachment 1). TRCA continues to reviewand approve Enbridge's Integrity Dig projects when they are located within the regulated area.Enbridge has been supportive in these site specific cases in addressing TRCA's regulatoryissues.31

TRCA plays a support role when there is a spill. By Order in Council under the EmergencyManagement and Civil Protection Act, the Ontario Minister of the Environment hasresponsibility for spill and drinking water emergencies. To this end, the Ministry of theEnvironment (MOE) has developed an Emergency Management Program that includes anEmergency Response Plan, a Continuity of Operations Plan and an Emergency OperationsCentre that provides timely services for receiving, assessing and coordinating responses tospills. The ministry’s first level of field response is provided by environmental officers workingout of the ministry’s district or area offices. These service commitments are facilitated by theSpills Action Centre (SAC), whose role is to receive reports of spills and other environmentalmatters and initiate or coordinate a response as required, as well as a province-wide Ministryfield response capacity in MOE’s Operations Division. Further support is provided by a networkof additional resources available from other parts of the Ministry.MOE’s regulatory mandate for spills arises largely out of Part X of the Environmental ProtectionAct , which requires spills to be reported forthwith. Part X also requires the owner of the spilledmaterial, and the person who had control of a material when it was spilled to promptly clean upand restore the environment. MOE ensures that the cleanup and disposal of spilled materials isdone in an environmentally acceptable manner. When those under statutory duties cannot orwill not respond adequately, the Minister has the authority under the Environmental ProtectionAct to order those responsible for the spill to clean up the site. Should they fail to comply withsuch orders the ministry can undertake the cleanup and recover costs. Municipalities oftenprovide containment and cleanup measures for spills to their roadways and drainage systems.Municipalities will also often assist in clean-up of spills outside of their infrastructure where theircapabilities allow or where a responsible party fails to act. There are cost recovery provisionsunder the Environmental Protection Act that allows a municipality to recover the costs resultingfrom their clean-up efforts from the responsible party. For a pipeline spill, both the NEB, and theTransportation Safety Board will also investigate the cause of the spill, emergency responseactions, and document any suggested improvements for the future.The primary responsibility for public health and safety in an emergency resulting from a spill or afire rests with the municipality. In the TRCA jurisdiction, the municipalities (Peel, York, Durhamand Toronto) have primary response duties when there is a spill in the rivers, and deals directlywith MOE. From time to time, TRCA will receive notification of a spill and provides the callerwith Spills Hotline Contact information, or will contact the Hotline directly. TRCA will attend thesite if there are issues related to TRCA's regulation or property, or if MOE or the municipalityrequests technical assistance of TRCA staff in the collection of data related to technical studyrequirements.Over the past decade or more, there have been no spills recorded in the TRCA jurisdictionrelated to a oil or gas pipeline rupture. The majority of spills in the TRCA jurisdiction are relatedto spills from transportation incidents, dumping or illegal releases to the streams or storm sewersystem, or breaks in municipal sewer infrastructure that is located in or near valley and streamcorridors.32

8) Can you assess the ability of the pipeline company to detect small leaks in thepipeline (i.e., 5% of pipeline volume or less)?The assessment of small leaks is best accomplished through the ultrasonic inspection program.Using the Material Balance System (MBS) alone to detect small leaks would likely beineffective. However, given the high pressures involved with this pipeline (766 PSI), it isexpected that small leaks would rapidly lead to a serious rupture, which would be immediatelyidentified by the MBS software.9) Does the recent downsizing of Environment Canada's emergency response unit,shifting coordination to Montreal increase risks in the Toronto region?This is beyond the scope of TRCA staff to address, but no increased risk from this action isexpected, since Enbridge is responsible for any and all spill response associated with itspipelines. Depending on the location and extent of a spill event, it is expected that both federaland provincial regulatory agencies would have a role in ensuring that any required remedialactions are completed.10) Is the integrity of this 37 year old pipeline up to the task of increased pressure; 20%higher volumes than its original design?As with all petroleum pipelines, Line 9B is subject to regular inspections and maintenance. Themaximum operating pressure is approved by the National Energy Board and is currently 766pounds per square inch (PSI), as reported above. The typical operating pressure is much lower(312 PSI), which provides a factor of safety. Although the pipeline capacity will increase, this willbe accomplished by adding a friction reducing agent, not increasing the pressure in the pipeline.There is a slightly elevated risk of a spill based on the volumetric change, but this is anticipatedto be negligible. As noted earlier, Enbridge is undertaking an Integrity Dig Program through theTRCA area to investigate pipe maintenance requirements in advance of this project proceeding.11) What new information would be required to fully evaluate the impact of a dilutedbitumen spill on GTA drinking water intakes?The response to this question was explored more fully in the TRCA report dated November 30,2012 and has been repeated here for efficiency. A number of spill scenarios were modelled aspart of the Lake Ontario Collaborative (LOC) project to determine if certain land-based activitiescould pose a potential drinking water threat to Lake Ontario drinking water supplies. A summaryof this work can be found in the November staff report to Toronto City Council: City SourceWater Protection Plan for City of Toronto Water Treatment Plants (www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/pw/bgrd/backgroundfile-51737.pdf). The modelling wasfunded by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment as part of the Drinking Water SourceProtection program. Any scenario that identified conditions under which a contaminant couldexceed a threshold in the raw water was identified as a significant drinking water threat. One setof scenarios was based on potential spills of petroleum products from pipelines crossingtributaries within the TRCA jurisdiction and at other locations along the north shore of LakeOntario. The predicted impact was a worst case scenario as the LOC modelling did not considerhow any emergency response or mitigation actions would reduce the impacts.33

The LOC spill scenario was based on a spill of gasoline containing 1% benzene and wasselected by the technical working group to represent the greatest risk to drinking water quality.Other petroleum products (such as crude oil) will not mix as readily with water. More of thecrude oil will remain on the water surface or will be deposited on the streambed and isolatedfrom the source of drinking water supplies as compared to gasoline. The model resultspredicted that benzene levels at the intake could be well above the Ontario Drinking WaterStandard. Since the water treatment system is not designed to remove benzene this wasdeemed by the Source Protection Committee to be a significant threat to Lake Ontario drinkingwater supplies. Details regarding the spill scenario are provided in the Assessment Reportprepared under the Clean Water Act, 2006 for TRCA's watersheds. The section of theAssessment Report that documents threats to Lake Ontario drinking water supplies be found at:www.ctcswp.ca/files/TRSPA_Chapter5_Jan2012.pdflink.Although the modelling conducted by the LOC did not include simulations of a crude oil spill, therisk from a crude oil spill, as it relates the benzene, which is its most toxic and solublecomponent, would be similar to that of gasoline.The Source Protection Committee has developed proposed policies to reduce the significantdrinking water threats from potential petroleum product pipelines. These policies focus onreviewing and improving where necessary spill prevention and emergency response plans. Theproposed policies have been submitted to the Minister of the Environment for a decision onapproval and subsequent implementation. The Proposed Source Protection Plan can beviewed or downloaded at:www.ctcswp.ca/files/CTCProposedSourceProtectionPlan_LowRezFINAL.pdf. Policy LO-PIPE-1requests that the Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE) review and recommend necessaryimprovements to existing spill prevention, spill management, risk reduction and contingencyplans.This policy also includes a provision for the MOE, in collaboration with Environment Canada to:• Use the existing 3-Dimensional Hydrodynamic Circulation Model and Water QualitySimulation Model to run proactive simulations of potential spills to predict the extent andduration of contamination and to help determine the parties to be notified in the event ofa spill.• Install permanent instrumentation for real-time monitoring of water currents andchemistry in the nearshore of Lake Ontario for input into the models in (i).• Ensure that the data are available to the municipalities and conservation authorities.• Undertake Lake Ontario nearshore monitoring annually and make the data are availableto the municipalities and conservation authorities.34

12) What is the statistical likelihood of a pipeline failure given current industry averagesfor pipelines of this type and age?Between 2002 and 2009, the average annual volume spilled from liquid hydrocarbon pipelinesin Canada was about two litres per million litres transported. This equals an expected failurerate of 0.0002%, or about 71 litres per year along the length of Line 9B. Another statisticalmeasure of spill risk is the number of spills per km of pipeline. Based on the TransportationSafety Board data, the average number of pipeline spills in Canada between 2006 and 2010was about one event per 2,000 km. Given the 639 km length of Line 9B, the spill risk could beestimated as once every three years along the entire pipeline. However, there has not been asignificant spill associated with any part of Line 9 since its construction. The last pipeline spill inOntario was in September 2001 from Enbridge Line 10, near Binbrook, Ontario, where anestimated 95 cubic metres of crude oil was released. According to the Transportation SafetyBoard report on this spill, "Remedial action response teams contained the spill to two generalareas, a natural swale running perpendicular to the pipeline and the pipeline trench.Approximately 95 cubic metres of crude oil were released, affecting a 0.67-hectare section ofland".DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONEIn terms of a role for TRCA with the Project application to the NEB, TRCA's interests relate toboth our regulatory responsibilities, as well as TRCA;s responsibilities as a majorwatershed-wide landowner in the vicinity of, and immediately downstream of, the Project. In aletter from the NEB to Enbridge, dated December 19, 2012, the NEB advised that it will beholding a public hearing, consisting of written evidence and oral final argument, for this Project,and advised that details will be released in early 2013. The information given at the hearing willbe used to inform the board's decision, by allowing both the company proposing the project, andany other interested people or groups, a chance to provide information on the Project and toprovide input in support of or against a Project. The decision on whether or not to approve aproject on the basis of public interest is the discretion of the NEB. The NEB has advised that thedecision for this project will be made no later than March 19, 2014. If the project is approved,the project schedule noted in the original NEB application may be amended depending on thetiming of NEB approval.At the hearing, the NEB will consider all information that is relevant to the question of whether ornot the application should be approved. Some of the topics that are usually discussed inhearings on applications for a pipeline or power line project include:• the design and safety of the project;• environmental matters;• socioeconomic and land matters;• impact of the project on potentially affected Aboriginal interests;• impact of the project on landowners and other potentially affected stakeholders;• financial responsibility of the applicant;• economic feasibility of the project; and• any public interest that may be affected.35

There are typically three ways that individuals or groups may participate in a hearing:• Write a letter of comment: This method is chosen by interested parties who want toshare their views on a project but not formally participate in a hearing. Letters ofcomment will be taken into consideration during the hearing process. They will not beconsidered sworn evidence and are not subject to questioning. As a result, letters ofcomment may not be given the same weight as sworn evidence in a hearing, althoughthe weight of the letters depends on a number of factors, including the content.• Make an oral statement: Similar to the option to write a letter, this method is chosen byinterested parties who want to share their views but are not considered to beintervenors.• Become an intervenor: An intervenor is someone who has an interest in a proposedproject and would like to formally participate in the hearing, including landowners, arearesidents, government agencies, Aboriginal groups, companies, or any other individualor group. Being an intervenor has financial implications including evidence preparation,legal fees, travel and accommodations, and hiring of expert witnesses to testify, ifnecessary. Intervenors may present evidence, question other witnesses and give finalarguments during the written and oral portions of the hearing. Intervenors can also bequestioned on any evidence they present.The NEB has a Participant Funding Program to support public participation. Eligible recipientsinclude individuals, Aboriginal groups, landowners, incorporated non-industry not-for-profitorganizations, or other interest groups who seek to intervene in the public review process forprojects in which they have a meaningful interest. As noted, the NEB advised that there will notbe an oral evidence portion of the hearing, but only written evidence and oral final argument.Accordingly, it is likely the only two methods of participating in the hearing will be writing a letterof comment or becoming an intervenor. To date, staff has not filed notice of its interest inparticipating in the hearing as the Application to Participate has not been released by the NEB.Staff has advised of its interest, and requested notice be given when the application is available.Staff is prepared to review the Application to Participate when hearing details are released bythe NEB, seek legal advice, seek direction from the Authority or the CEO/Chair as appropriatedepending on timing, and file the necessary paperwork for either intervenor status or a lettersubmission. Staff interests will include both TRCA watershed and environmental matters, aswell as with respect to its interests as a major watershed-wide landowner in the vicinity of, andimmediately downstream of, the Project. The NEB has advised that Participant Funding will bemade available for this proceeding. TRCA will review information on the Participant FundingProgram once it has been made available and if eligible, make the appropriate application.The details of hearing process will be more completely defined in a hearing order to be issuedby the NEB in early 2013. The Board anticipates that its assessment process for the applicationwill include the following steps:1. Hearing Order Issued by the NEB, including a List of Issues2. Public Comments on the List of Issues3. Amendments to List of Issues, if any4. Applications to Participate5. List of Participants released by NEB6. Additional Written Evidence submitted by Enbridge7. Two rounds of Information Requests to Enbridge from the Intervenors8. Second round used to clarify responses from first round, if necessary9. Intervenor Written Evidence36

10.11.12.13.14.Letters of Comment by Interested PartiesInformation Requests from Enbridge to IntervenorsEnbridge’s Reply Evidence submittedOral Final ArgumentBoard Decision (80% of Reasons for Decision are completed by the Board within 12weeks following a public hearing)TRCA staff will:1. Liaise with the staff of the cities of Toronto and Hamilton to identify common issues andareas of concern.2. In consultation with legal counsel, identify the appropriate level of participation, liaise withthe Authority or the CEO and Chair, depending on timing, and complete the application toparticipate at the appropriate time.3. Seek Participant Funding through the NEB's Participant Funding Program, if eligible, oncethe guidelines have been released.4. Continue to work with Enbridge in the implementation if its Integrity Dig Program, includingthe issuance of permits for investigative, maintenance, and repair works within TRCA'sregulated area and TRCA-owned lands.5. Consult with Environment Canada and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment regardingtheir positions and responsibilities in terms of the NEB hearing, as well as projectimplementation.FINANCIAL DETAILS1. Permitting fees as per the TRCA fee schedule are charged for Ontario Regulation 166/06applications related to the Integrity Dig Program.2. Research, writing and meetings related to two board reports, November and January 2013-approximately $5,000 in staff time has been supported through the Planning andDevelopment operating budget.3. Legal fees associated with determining appropriate level of participant action, once theboard guidelines are released are estimated at $5,000 which would be covered by thePlanning and Development operating budget.4. Approximate cost if TRCA chose to participate in the hearing through a letter submission,costs related to the staff time required to prepare the letter would be approximately $5,000to be covered by the Planning and Development operating budget.5. Approximate cost if TRCA chose to participate in the hearing as an intervenor areanticipated to be between $50,000 and $100,000, including:• legal preparation and representation TRCA at the hearing - $25,000 to $50,000;• expert testimony - $10,000 to $25,000;• travel and accommodations if the hearing is in Ottawa or Montreal - $5,000 (the hearingmay be held locally; this has not yet determined);• staff time associated with preparatory materials and meetings - $10,000 to $20,000.37

Staff will investigate if TRCA is eligible to make application to the NEB's Participant FundingProgram for costs. If ineligible, all costs will need to be covered through the Planning andDevelopment operating budget and are not recoverable from fees.Report prepared by: Don Ford, extension 5369 and Beth Williston, extension 5217Emails: dford@trca.on.ca or bwilliston@trca.on.caFor Information contact: Don Ford, extension 5369 and Beth Williston, extension 5217Emails: dford@trca.on.ca or bwilliston@trca.on.caDate: January 15, 2012Attachments: 238

Attachment 139

Attachment 240

TO:FROM:Chair and Members of the AuthorityMeeting #11/12, January 25, 2013Brian Denney, Chief Executive OfficerItem AUTH8.1RE: SUMMARY OF PROCUREMENTSJuly 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012____________________________________________________________________________KEY ISSUEReceipt of the 2012 end of year summary of procurements approved by the Chief AdministrativeOfficer or his designate.RECOMMENDATIONIT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the summary of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority(TRCA) procurements approved by the Chief Administrative Officer or his designate forthe July 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012 period, be received.BACKGROUNDAt Authority Meeting #5/05, held on June 24, 2005, Resolution #A124/05 approved thePurchasing Policy, and resolved, in part, as follows:staff report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board semi-annually with a list of allRequests for Quotations and Requests for Proposals approved by the ChiefAdministrative Officer pursuant to Schedule 'A';Pursuant to the resolution quoted above, the summaries of Requests for Quotations andRequests for Proposals from July 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012, are found in Attachment 2.The report includes approvals of $10,000 or greater, to the maximum allowable limit under thepolicy, approved by the Chief Administrative Officer or his designate.Attachment 1 includes the criteria as to why non-competitive procurement was appropriate forthe particular goods or services procured, as per Section 1.14 of Toronto and RegionConservation Authority's Purchasing Policy.As permitted under the approved policy, the Chief Administrative Officer has designated seniorstaff, generally including director and manager level positions, approval authority for purchasesup to $10,000 (including applicable taxes not recoverable by TRCA).For the information of the members, staff undertook a review of purchases approved by theAuthority and Executive Committee in 2012 (including contingencies). The following is asummary of purchases approved by the Authority and Executive Committee combined (Board)and Chief Administrative Officer/designate in 2012. Attachment 2 is a summary of July toDecember 2012 purchases rather than the full year as the details of the January to June 2012purchases were received by the Authority in July.43

Total 2012 Purchases of Minimum Value of $10,000Board(Plus HST)CAO & Designates(Plus HST)Sole Source $1,733,950.08 $868,988.78Lowest Bid/Competitive $15,506,825.29 $5,911,612.35Not Lowest Bid $0.00 $30,592.50TOTAL $17,240,775.37 $6,811,193.63GRAND TOTAL 2012 $24,051,969.00The total purchases approved for TRCA in 2012 of $10,000 or greater, was approximately $24million, including contingencies, excluding HST, as indicated in the chart above.Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264Email: kstranks@trca.on.caFor Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264Email: kstranks@trca.on.caDate: January 14, 2013Attachments: 244

Attachment 1TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITYPURCHASING POLICYSection 1.14Non - Competitive Procurement ProcessA non-competitive procurement process shall only be used if one or more of the followingconditions apply and a process of negotiation is undertaken to obtain the best value in thecircumstances for the TRCA. Authorized Buyers are authorized to enter into negotiationswithout formal competitive bids, under the following circumstances:1. The goods and services are only available from one source or one supplier by reason of:• A statutory or market based monopoly• A fluctuating market prevents the TRCA from obtaining price protection or owing tomarket conditions, required goods or services are in short supply• Existence of exclusive rights (patent, copyright or licence)• Need for compatibility with goods and services previously acquired and there are noreasonable alternatives, substitutes or accommodations• Need to avoid violating warranties and guarantees where service is required2. An attempt to purchase the required goods and services has been made in good faithusing a competitive method and has failed to identify a successful supplier.3. When the extension or reinstatement of an existing contract would prove mostcost-effective or beneficial. The extension shall not exceed one year.4. The goods and services are required as a result of an emergency, which would notreasonably permit the use of the other methods permitted.5. The required goods and services are to be supplied by a particular vendor or supplierhaving special knowledge, skills, expertise or experience that cannot be provided by anyother supplier.6. Any other sole or single source purchase permitted under the provisions of this policyincluding those noted in Schedule ‘B’.45

Attachment 2REQUESTS FOR QUOTATIONLowest Bid (up to $100,000)Project/Product Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed($)Plus ApplicableTaxesNumber ofQuotationsRequested/Complete BidsReceivedALFRED KUEHNE BOULEVARD STREAM REALIGNMENT AND RESTORATION PROJECTSupply & Delivery of Approximately 1,250 Glenn Windrem Trucking 64,062.50 6/1Tonnes of 500mm - 750mm Round Stone+10% contingencySupply & Delivery of Approximately 1,205 Nelson Aggregate Co. 33,559.25 6/3Tonnes of 100mm - 200mm Round Stone+10% contingencySupply & Delivery of Approximately 881 Tonnes Nelson Aggregate Co. 43,829.75 6/2of 300mm - 600mm Round Stone+10% contingencySupply & Delivery of Approximately 480 Tonnes Nelson Aggregate Co. 12,513.06 6/4of 150mm - 200mm Gabion Stone+10% contingencyBOB HUNTER MEMORIAL PARK TRAIL (YORK REGION SOUTHEAST COLLECTOR)Supply & Delivery of Approximately 3,000 Lafarge North America 46,950.00 3/3Tonnes of Granular A AggregateSupply & Delivery of Approximately 1,000 Lafarge North America 15,800.00 3/3Tonnes of Limestone ScreeningsAlbion Hills & Indian Line Campgrounds Security G4S 20,000.00 3/3ServicesFINNERTY SIDEROAD PARKING LOT (PALGRAVE TRAIL PLAN)Supply and Delivery of Approximately 4,000 James Dick Construction29,800.00 4/3Tonnes of Clean, Engineerable FillLimited+ 10% contingencySupply and Delivery of Approximately 1,000 Franceschini Brothers17,620.00 4/4Tonnes of 50 mm Crusher Run Limestone Aggregates - Lafarge+ 10% contingencySupply and Delivery of Approximately 500 Franceschini Brothers8,810.00 4/4Tonnes of 19 mm Crusher Run Limestone Aggregates - Lafarge+ 10% contingencyInstallation of Helical Piers for Fishing Platform Foundation Supportworks of17,400.00 3/3at Heart Lake Conservation AreaOntario+10% contingencySupply & Delivery of 13, 40-yard Bins for GFL Envrionmental 10,842.00 3/3Demolition of Two Houses at 149 & 173Chesterton Shores, Toronto+2,000.00 contingencyPurchase of 15 Units of Defibrillators Mikey Network 22,500.00 3/3Acoustic Doppler Current Profile with Real-time Hoskin Scientific Limited 80,882.00 2/2Kinematic CapabilitiesDesign of Source Water Protection ApprovedDocumentsArtbase 10,500.00 contractextensionRemoval and Disposal of Existing Fencing, andInstallation of Approximately 800 Metres of PageWire Farm Fence at Nashville RMTCreek Bypass Pumping System Works for theStouffville Flood Control Channel MaintenanceProjectSupply & Delivery of Approximately 1,250Tonnes of 150mm - 450mm Rip-rap to GermanMill Settlers Park Emergency Works ProjectAtlas Fence 19,600.00+2,000.00 contingencyXylem Inc. 11,370.06+9,500.00 contingencyGlenn Windrem Trucking 44,875.00+4,500.00 contingency11/24/35/446

REQUESTS FOR QUOTATIONLowest Bid (up to $100,000)Project/Product Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed($)Plus Applicable TaxesNumber ofQuotationsRequested/Complete BidsReceivedMIMICO WATERFRONT PARK PROJECT (PHASE 2)Supply & Delivery of Approximately 2,000 Cubic FSI Landscape Supply 25,000.00 4/3Metres of Screened Topsoil+2,500.00 contingencyAsphalt Pathway Paving Works Pave - 1 Limited 22,045.00 6/6+4,400.00 contingencySupply & Installation of 450m of Black Chain Leone Fence Company36,632.50 4/2Link Fence & 9 Pedestrian GatesLimited+7,350.00 contingencySupply & Application of TRCA Restoration Mix King Hydroseeding Inc. 10,375.00 4/3Grass Seed Mixed with Terraseed MulchAsphalt Pathway Paving Works Pave - 1 Limited 6,771.01 ContractExtensionBLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGEPrinting 2012 Visitor Guide Warren's Waterless Printing 10,964.00 3/32012 Summer Radio Campaign Rogers Media 17,400.00 3/3Roblin's Mill Exterior Painting John Bell Painting 28,805.00 4/2+10% contingencyCarriage Works Furnace Replacement Canadian Air Technology 10,800.00 3/3+10% contingencyTOMMY THOMPSON PARKSupply & Delivery of Four 2350mm x 1750mm x Acton Precast Concrete17,100.00 4/21900mm Custom Precast Concrete WaterControl Structures to Embayment D Fish &Water Level Control StructureLimited+1,710.00 contingencySupply & Installation of Hydro Service Locationto the Staff BoothDillisado Enterprises 19,900.00+5,500.00 contingency5/4Supply & Delivery of Approximately 840 Tonnesof 19mm Crusher Run Limestone - FrontEntrance Parking LotRe-carpeting of Mezzanine Level at KortrightCentre for ConservationStrada Aggregates 15,540.00+10% contingencySanford and Company 14,500.00+10% contingencyHUMBER RIVER NEAR 60 ANN STREET BANK STABILIZATION PROJECTRental of 1 Operated Hydraulic Excavator, 1Tri-axle Dump Truck & 2 Rubber Tire LoadersTMI Contracting andEquipment90,000.00+7,450.00 contingencySupply and Delivery of Approximately 700 Brock Aggregates 33,250.00Tonnes of 500-850mm Round Stone+3,325.00 contingencySupply and Delivery of Approximately 200 J.C. Rock Limited 10,400.00Tonnes of 2-4 Tonnes Stackable Armour Stone+2,000.00 contingencySupply and Delivery of Approximately 400 Nelson Aggregates Company 9,648.00Tonnes of 150-300mm Gabion Stone+2,000.00 contingencySupply and Delivery of Approximately 300 Brock Aggregates 14,250.00Tonnes of 900-1200mm Round Stone+2,000.00 contingency3/33/310/38/28/58/68/347

REQUESTS FOR QUOTATIONLowest Bid (up to $100,000)Project/Product Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed($)Plus Applicable TaxesAsphalt Pathway Paving Works for Port UnionWaterfront Improvement Project (Phase 2)Pave - 1 Limited 63,675.00+20% contingencyTROUTBROOKE DRIVE SLOPE STABILIATION PROJECTSupply All Labour, Materials & Equipment to T.B.G. Landscape Inc. 15,120.00Complete Detailed Design, Obtain Building+3,000.00 contingencyPermit & Install 3m x 6m BalconyDisposal of Stockpiled Parkland Soils T.B.G. Landscape Inc. 19,948.00+4,000.00 contingencyWILKET CREEK REHABILITATION PROJECT - SITE 3 PHASE 1Creek Bypass Pumping System Works Aqua Tech Pump and Power 54,826.44+16,500.00contingencySupply and Delivery of Approximately 950Tonnes of 250mm-600mm Granite Rip-rapStoneGlenn Windrem Trucking 43,605.00+25% contingencyNumber ofQuotationsRequested/Complete BidsReceivedACQUISITION OF VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT2012 Skid Steer Loader Stewart's Equipment 32,576.00 6/4One New 2013 Midsize Pickup Truck Yorkdale Toyota 25,708.20 15/4Construct Residential Rain GardenQ Gardens Inc. 10,936.86 8/4Demonstration Site at Markham Museum+1,093.69 contingencyNew Computer Equipment, Software Licenses CDW Canada 27,507.04 6/6and Printers for Planning & Enforcement Staff+10% contingencyEight Steel Road Plates for Temporary Clearwater Structures Inc. 21,000.00 5/3Construction Bridge40 Garmin GPSMap 62 Units Radio World Inc. 10,400.00 3/3Printing Source Protection Reports &Swiss Print International 75,000.00 3/3Consultation Materials+ delivery5 Shoreham Drive South Office Insulation Foamit Spray Foam Insulation 20,495.00 4/3ProjectSupply of Labour, Materials & Equipment for Serve Construction Limited 29,379.50 5/3Ashphalt Paving at Maurice J. Breen Park+7,350.00 contingencyAsphalt Repair & Box Culvert Installation at Mopal Construction Limited 10,700.00 4/3Milkman's Lane+10% contingencyConstruction of a Greenhouse at Each of The Green Vision Construction Inc. 33,200.00 8/2Living City Farm at Kortright and the Albion HillsCommunity FarmMaterial & Installation of Livestock Exclusion System Fencing Stalls &9,898.00 3/3Fencing at Donnelly PropertyEquipment+989.80 contingencyReal Estate Appraisal Services for 6 Propertiesin TorontoD. Bottero & AssociatesLimited13,300.00 4/2Replacement of Thermopane Glass Panels atHead OfficeThe New Glass Shop Limited 22,737.00+6,850.00 contingency10/96/35/44/313/37/448

REQUESTS FOR QUOTATIONLowest Bid (up to $100,000)Project/Product Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed($)Plus Applicable TaxesDemolition of 2 Workshops/Garages & Disposalof Debris at 10818 Heart Lake RoadMARIE CURTIS PARK PROJECT (PHASE 2)Supply of Labour, Materials & Equipment forEast Parking & Bike Trail Electrical WorksSupply of Labour, Materials & Equipment forRemoval & Disposal of Stockpiled ContaminatedSoil WorksYork Environmental SolutionsLPPlatinum ElectricalContractors Inc.Four Seasons SiteDevelopment Limited13,750.00+3,500.00 contingencyNumber ofQuotationsRequested/Complete BidsReceived7/486,990.00 Biddingo (15)/8+12,000.00 contingency56,000.00 3/3+14,000.00 contingencyFRENCHMAN'S BAY HARBOUR ENTRANCE PROJECTSupply & Delivery of Approximately 850 Tonnes Glenn Windrem Trucking 44,625.00 10/3of 2-4 Tonne Armour Stone+25% contingencySupply & Delivery of Approximately 200 Tonnes C.D.R. Young's Aggregates10,110.00 10/3of 3-5 Tonne Armour Stone StepsInc.+25% contingencyRental of Temporary Chain Link Fence The Fence People Limited 13,791.00 3/3+2,880.00 contingencyOracle Database Standard Edition (Processor Oracle Canada 12,372.07 3/3Perpetual) and Software Update License &Support (1 Year)ROBINSON CREEK STREAM REALIGNMENT AND RESTORATION PROJECTSupply & Delivery of Erosion Control Measures Terrafix Geosynthetics Inc. 19,303.80 3/3+10% contingencySupply & Delivery of Erosion Control Measures Terrafix Geosynthetics Inc. 4,422.50 contractextensionMEADOWCLIFFE DRIVE EROSION CONTROL (SLOPE STABILIZATION) PROJECTPaving WorksFour Seasons Site11,600.00 3/3Development LimitedSupply and Delivery of Approximately 3,200 Fowler Construction Company87,744.00 13/2Tonnes of 100mm-200mm Cobble Stone Ltd.Supply & Installation of 640m of Farm Fencing & Urban Fence Inc. 10,324.00 7/3Two Gates at Claireville Conservation Area+10% contingencyPALGRAVE FOREST AND WILDLIFE AREASupply of Steel Beams & Webbing forMississauga Steel Mart Inc. 11,914.00 7/3Installation of Bridge Structure+10% contingencySupply & Installation of 710m of Farm Fencing Orangeville Fence 14,910.00 7/3+10% contingencyWEST ETOBICOKE CREEK SOUTH OF BRITANNIA ROAD EAST PROJECTSupply & Delivery of 328.76 Tonnes of150-300mm Rip RapStrada Aggregates 9,862.80 contractextensionSupply & Delivery of 100 Tonnes of 300-500Round StoneGlenn Windrem Trucking 12,060.96 contractextension49

REQUESTS FOR QUOTATIONLowest Bid (up to $100,000)Project/Product Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed($)Plus Applicable TaxesSupply of Labour, Materials and Equipment forConcrete Repairs within Reach 2 of theYonge-York Mills Flood Control ChannelAnnual Heating Maintenance Services at TRCARental Homes in the Markham, Scarborough,Uxbridge and Pickering AreasExterior Painting & Rotten Board Replacementat TRCA Rental Home at 2661 16th Sideroad,AjaxSnow Removal & Sanding at 18620 & 18630Centreville Creek Road, CaledonT.B.G. Landscape Inc. 53,952.66+35,000.00 contingencyTherwood Heating andCooling Ltd.40,800.00+10% contingencyNumber ofQuotationsRequested/Complete BidsReceivedFrontier Group of Companies 2,200.00 contractextensionVette Trucking and Snow11,720.00Removal Ltd.+10% contingencyTOTAL 2,217,919.297/34/27/250

REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALCompetitive Bid (up to $100,000)Project/Product Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed($)Plus ApplicableTaxesPreliminary Concepts & Final Design forChannel Rehabilitation Works for East HumberRiver at Langstaff Road Rehabilitation ProjectGeomorphic Solutions 17,730.00+3,000.00 contingencyNumber ofQuotationsRequested/Complete BidsReceivedPartners in Project Green Strategy Review Innovolve Group 29,870.00 4/3Detailed Design of Bank Restoration Works forHumber River Near 60 Ann Street BankStabilization ProjectGeomorphic Solutions 6,495.00+650.00 contingencycontractextensionSupply of All Labour and Engineering Necessaryto Complete a Structural Assessment andDetailed Design of Concrete Channel Repairsfor Reach 2 of the Yonge-York Mills ChannelDetailed Engineering Design/Costing &Construction Review for Chorley ParkSwitchback TrailDevelopment of Carbon Tracking Software &On-line Registration SystemHydraulic Modelling & Digital Floodline Mappingfor the Little Etobicoke Creek through the Dixie& Dundas SPA & Applewood SPAAECOM Canada Limited 18,630.00+5,000.00 contingencyR.V. Anderson and Associates 47,375.00+5,000.00 contingencyCarbon Counted 11,000.00+4,000.00 contingencyMMM Group Limited 62,800.00+15% contingencyFloodplain Mapping of Rouge River from R.J. Burnside & Associates 21,678.76 3/3Stouffville Road to Bethesda Road, Silver Creek,Toronto, Reesor Creek, Pickering / Uxbridge /Stouffville+10% contingencyEngineering Services to Complete DowntownBrampton Flood Protection Feasibility StudyAMEC Environmental &Infrastructure83,580.00+10,000.00 contingencybiddingo (6invited to bid)/6Structural Assessment of Bridge/Roadway ofAlbion Hills DamThe Sernas Group Inc. (AGHD Company)19,220.00 biddingo (17)/4Detailed Design for Site Drainage System BlackCreek Pioneer Village Entrance RoadImprovement ProjectAcquire Elevation Data to Support Developmentof 1D/2D Hydraulic Model and UpdateEngineered Floodline Mapping for the LittleEtobicoke Creek Tributary Through the Dixie -Dundas and Applewood Special Policy Areas inthe City of Mississauga, and the Lower Humberand the Jane and Wilson SPA in the City ofTorontoSlope Stability Analysis of Brick Works EastSlope TrailDigital Floodline Mapping within the SpringCreek Subwatershed (Etobicoke Creek)Stantec Consulting Limited 19,529.00+5,000.00 contingencyAirborne Imaging 31,740.00 4/2Terraprobe Inc. 19,240.00+10% contingency5/2Baird & Associates 14,807.76 contractextension6/29/45/22/26/54/451

REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALCompetitive Bid (up to $100,000)Project/Product Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed($)Plus ApplicableTaxesMaintenance Needs Assessment for HumberValley Meadows Stormwater Management PondGeomorphic Solutions 17,631.00+3,526.20 contingencyValleywoods Trail Geomorphic Assessment Parish Geomorphic Ltd. 10,620.00Report of a Section of West Etobicoke Creek,+3,000.00 contingencynear Kennedy Road and Mayfield RoadThird Party Facilitator for Amberlea Creek Hardy Stevenson and35,966.50Erosion Control Project Class Environmental Associates+20% contingencyAssessmentTOTAL 527,794.40Number ofQuotationsRequested/Complete BidsReceived11/57/55/152

REQUESTS FOR QUOTATIONLowest Bid Not Accepted (up to $25,000)Project/Product Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed($)Plus ApplicableTaxesRestoration of Fencing Surrounding FishervilleChurch & Townline Cemetary at BCPVByte Construction Limited 17,775.00+10% contingencyTOTAL 19,552.50Number ofQuotationsRequested/Complete BidsReceived3/353

REQUESTS FOR QUOTATIONSole Source (up to $50,000)Project/Product Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed($)Plus ApplicableTaxesStrategic Implementation of Restoration Worksas Part of Pickering Lands Site RestorationOpportunities PlanConsulting Services for Phase 3 ConceptualDesign of Kortright Visitors Centre RetrofitCommunications Services for Greater TorontoArea Agricultural Action Committee Food andFarming Action Plan 2021Sole SourceCriteria(Section 1.14of TRCA'sPurchasingPolicy)Ontario Streams 10,500.00 5Levitt Goodman Architects 10,000.00 5+10% contingencySpearhead Communications 30,000.00 4Troutbrooke Drive Slope Stabilization Project - Nilex Civil Environmental48,567.68 1Supply and Selivery of Materials to Construct an GroupAdditional 293m2 of a Sierrascape RetainingWall Behind Houses at 47, 49 and 51Troutbrooke Drive, TorontoTransport of Canada Geese from GTA Thur & Sons Limited 12,570.00 5WaterfrontSupply of 5 Sutron Flood Monitoring Equipment Hoskin Environmental Limited 45,900.00 1SystemsAudit Steam Systems for 5 Hospitals Spirax Sarco 10,000.00 4Technical Support Towards Development ofClimate Science & Climate Services Proposalsfor Ontario Regional Climate ChangeConsortiumRisk Science International Inc. 10,000.00 5Consultant of Record for Technical Services forMimico Waterfront Park & Port UnionWaterfront ParkInstallation of Portable Bridge in Taylor CreekParkRoyal Rouge Trail Erosion Control ProjectConstruction Inspections and TestingDevelopment Services for Organic Waste toBiomenthane ProjectSupply & Installation of Bird Collision DeterrentWindow FilmInvestigation of Reducing Flood Vulnerability ofAreas within the Lake Wilcox Special PolicyArea and the Humber Flats Neighbourhood,both within the Town of Richmond Hill, beawarded to R.J. Burnside & Associates Limitedfor a total cost not to exceed $25,530.00, plus$2,500.00Shoreplan EngineeringLimited45,700.00 5McPherson-AndrewsContracting13,842.00+1,400.00 contingency4Terraprobe Inc 31,320.00 5+15,660.00 additionalwork if requiredSaskatchewan Research16,900.00 5CouncilConvenience Group Inc. 14,395.00 1R.J. Burnside & AssociatesLimited25,530.00+2,500.00 contingency354

REQUESTS FOR QUOTATIONSole Source (up to $50,000)Project/Product Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed($)Plus ApplicableTaxes3,200 Copies of Natural Curiosity TeacherGuideSole SourceCriteria(Section 1.14of TRCA'sPurchasingPolicy)The Laboratory School at the10,048.00 1Dr. Eric Jackman Institute ofChild Study, University ofTorontoTOTAL 355,832.6855

REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALSole Source (up to $50,000)Project/Product Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed($)Plus Applicable TaxesSole SourceCriteriaCareer Development Training for PAIE Program Allison Hillier 16,000.00 5Completion of Monthly Monitoring Program at Sarafinchin Consulting35,480.00 5441-449 Guildwood ParkwayEngineers+10% contingencyHumber River Inter-Regional Trail & Local Trail SNC-Lavalin Inc. 33,300.00 5Connections at Claireville/West Humber River+3,500.00 contingencyProfessional Archaeological Services of theExisting Harbour Entrance at Frenchman's BayScarlet Janusas Archaeologyand Heritage Consulting andEducation35,051.34+20% contingency5Development of Preliminary Shoreline & SlopeStabilization Alternatives for 1 Midland Avenue,81 & 83 Fishleigh DriveTerraprobe Inc. 37,675.00+8,000.00 contingencyTOTAL 179,564.61556

TO:FROM:Chair and Members of the AuthorityMeeting #11/12, January 25, 2013Brian Denney, Chief Executive OfficerItem AUTH8.2RE: GOOD NEWS STORIES____________________________________________________________________________KEY ISSUEOverview of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority activities from October - December,2012.RECOMMENDATIONIT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the summary of Good News Stories from October -December, 2012 be received.BACKGROUNDAs per Authority direction during 2006, a report covering highlights of Toronto and RegionConservation Authority's (TRCA) activities for the preceding few months is provided to theAuthority every few months. The stories for October - December, 2012 are as follows:October• Ted McMeekin, Minister of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, visited the Black Creek Urban Farmto lend support to urban agriculture and the new partnership between TRCA and EverdaleOrganic Farm and Learning Centre.• Planning and Development concept development application fees can now be paid at theTRCA On-line Store. It is the first in a series of on-line payment options for the planningprocess.• The final phase of the Mimico Waterfront Park was completed October 26th.• Receiving $1 million over 4 years to test solar technologies in Ontario to determine how theyperform.• The CTC Source Protection Plan was submitted to the Minister of the Environment (MOE)on October 22, 2012, meeting legislated timelines.• The Living City Campus at Kortright is now Canada's testing and verification centre forstormwater and renewable energy technologies.• STEP to receive $40,000 to continue stormwater monitoring of the Kortright permeablepavement parking lot.• Port Lands Acceleration Initiative approved by Toronto City Council, including reconfirmationof most findings from Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection ProjectEnvironmental Assessment (DMNP EA). The DMNP EA will undergo amendments to reflectminor changes resulting from the Acceleration Initiative.• Lakeview Waterfront Connection EA Terms of Reference anticipated to be approved byMOE any day, allowing the formal EA to commence around November 1st.• TRCA asked to Chair QUEST Canada's Ontario Caucus - presents TRCA with theopportunity to work with energy related organizations from across the Province of Ontario inmoving the yard sticks on Integrated Community Energy Solutions.• Next phase of Albion Hills Field Centre retrofit was completed ahead of schedule and underbudget.57

• Trails officially opened at Palgrave Forest and Wildlife Area with ceremony and interpretivehike on October 4.• Partners in Project Green hosted another successful Fall Networking Gala on October 11,2012 with 140 business representatives in attendance.• Partners in Project Green's annual fall planting and BBQ event on October 20th, 2012 wasattended by 230 business representatives.November• Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) exhibit, The Working Lives of Chinese CanadianWomen, opened November 1st. The exhibit opening was well attended and the exhibit hasbeen very well received.• Record year for film productions at TRCA facilities with over 30 film productions, many withmultiple visits.• City of Pickering approves the Frenchman's Bay West Master Plan for TRCA lands, andapproved TRCA as Project Manager for the Frenchman's Bay Harbour EntranceReconstruction Project.• The Port Union Waterfront Park is complete and was transferred to the City of Toronto foroperation and maintenance on November 16th.• The Living City Foundation received a $10,000/month grant from Google for advertising.• Reviewed draft 2012 Provincial Policy Statement and a lot of 2010 comments we providedmade it into the current draft, including policies to address climate change, promote use ofgreen infrastructure and more emphasis on using a systems approach to protect andmanage natural heritage and water resources.• Approved for funding from Community Infrastructure Improvement Fund for BCPVgenerator, Claremont Field Centre accessibility upgrades and TRCA facilitiescommunication and technology upgrades.• Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Lake Ontario Assessment Unit with help from TRCAstocked 75 adult walleye into the Toronto Harbour. These fish were tagged to help with theongoing Aquatic Habitat Toronto's acoustic radio tag study tracking multiple species of fishin the harbour to assess TRCA lead habitat enhancements. If favourable results are foundthen up 80,000 could be stocked in the coming year.• TRCA to present stewardship award to the Granite Club for the restoration of their lands onthe Don River corridor, advancing state of the art environmental design and engineering.• Display of photographs highlighting TRCA's work will be at Harbourfront for two years.Menkes is the presenting sponsor.• Armouring of lower Don flood protection landform was completed on time and on budget,allowing for occupancy of the West Don Lands.• Partnering with City of Markham and Markham District Energy to co-host the 2013 Questconference.• Biologists found a new plant record for the TRCA Jurisdiction - gattinger's panic grass(Panicum philadelphicum ssp. gattingeri) was found growing at the Baif wetland in theHumber watershed.• TRCA's Terrestrial Natural Heritage Systems Strategy and data from the RegionalWatershed Monitoring Program was used extensively in a research article in the Journal ofEnvironmental Management that examined urban sprawl and its impact on the GreaterToronto Area between 1985 and 2005. Of particular interest is that the researcherscompleting this study were from Stockholm Sweden and used the GTA as the focus of theirresearch.58

December• Enbridge has committed $60,000 in support of the residential retrofit program marketing anddelivery for all of the Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan (SNAP) projects.• The City of Toronto has granted a LiveGreen grant to the Black Creek Conservation Projectin support of their role and expenses to deliver the Black Creek SNAP residential retrofitprogram, which will help improve stormwater management and urban forest in the area.• Final TRCA approvals have been issued on the first LID (Low Impact Development)Sustainable Community in the City of Vaughan, in TRCA's jurisdiction. This project was theresult of extensive cooperation between developers/consultants, the City of Vaughan,Ministry of the Environment and TRCA. It is hoped that this pilot project will be followed bymany more new sustainable developments in our jurisdiction.• Environment Canada is providing $25,000 to STEP to develop a test protocol for oil gritseparators.• The Climate Consortium for Research Action Integration (a TRCA-York Universitycollaboration) was a partner in the creation of the Youth Climate Report, a film which profiledthe climate change research of professional researchers and junior scholars from aroundthe world. CC-RAI profiled four researchers from York University at the film’s premiere at theUNFCCC’s Climate Change Conference in Doha.• 350 TRCA staff and Authority Members attended the annual Pancake Breakfast, andcollected 320 pounds of food and $1,331.50 for the food bank.• The Mining and Lands Commission upholds TRCA decision for no filling in the EtobicokeCreek floodplain based on staff analysis of cumulative impacts; appeal dismissed and costswill be awarded to the conservation authority.Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264Emails: kstranks@trca.on.caFor Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264Emails: kstranks@trca.on.caDate: January 15, 201359

TO:Chair and Members of the AuthorityMeeting #11/12, January 25, 2013Item AUTH8.3FROM:Catherine MacEwen, Director, Human Resources, Marketing andCommunicationsRE: IN THE NEWS____________________________________________________________________________KEY ISSUEOverview of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority activities, October - December, 2012.RECOMMENDATIONIT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the summary of media coverage from October - December,2012 be received.BACKGROUNDAs per Authority direction during 2006, a report covering highlights of Toronto and RegionConservation Authority's (TRCA) news coverage for the preceding few months is provided to theAuthority every few months. The stories for October - December, 2012 are as follows:Media Coverage HighlightsA search on a news archives database (FP Infomart) for the period from October 1 to December31, 2012 that mentioned TRCA or Black Creek Pioneer Village produced 65 media hits. Thetotal media hits resulted in a total circulation/reach of 11,164,022 with a total ad value of$362,913. These results only reflect a portion of media coverage, since the database does notmonitor online media, event listings, some broadcasts, smaller community papers and tradepublications.In 2012 a total of 345 media hits mentioning TRCA or Black Creek Pioneer Village werereceived. This resulted in a total circulation/audience reach of more than 44,000,000 with an adequivalency of more than $1,500,000. In 2011 there were a total of 288 media hits.The highlights below are examples of noteworthy media coverage received from October -December, 2012.October• The Caledon Enterprise reported story “Multi-use upgrades for Palgrave trail” on October 14th. The story also acknowledged TRCA as the single biggest landowner in Caledon.• Several media outlets reported on TRCA’s opposition to the sale of the Toronto Zoo. Globeand Mail on October 2nd “Conservation Authority that owns the zoo land opposes search fornew owners or operators”; National Post on October 3rd “Proposal from zoo may avert itssale” ; Toronto Star on October 5th “Conservation authority nixes selling or turning zoo overto new operators” and Toronto Sun on October 2nd “Lions & Tigers & Bears!; All of thesecould be yours if you want to buy , lease or rent the Toronto Zoo”.60

• In story “Low impact CVC talk makes a big impact on business community” from October31st Mississauga News, the writer discusses an updated stormwater management criteriadocument prepared by TRCA with input from the Province of Ontario, municipalities andBILD (Building Industry & Land Development Association).• The Richmond Hill Liberal promoted TRCA’s Halloween Hikes in its paper on October 22nd.• In Peterborough this Week on October 12nd published a story “City Leadership needed forlocal greenhouse gas reductions” which mentions the 2010 guide produced by TRCAentitled "Getting to Carbon Neutral- a Guide for Canadian Municipalities”.• The Ajax News Advertiser on October 8th helps to promote Take Pride in Pickering Day aninitiative of OPG (Ontario Power Generation), City of Pickering and TRCA.• Late October brought several media stories about Hurricane Sandy. October 31st OwenSound Sun Times story “Unlike Hurricane Sandy, Hazel came as a deadly surprise”discusses Hurricane Hazel impacts and refers to TRCA’s website devoted to the hurricane’shistory; October 30th Toronto Star story reported “What you can expect when theFrankenstorm hits town” the stories quoted TRCA spokespeople regarding flood riskmanagement and what TRCA was doing in preparation for the storm and informationregarding the flood statement sent out by TRCA.• Toronto Star, October 2nd “Subway names need creativity” reports on naming the newBlack Creek Pioneer Village subway station.• Thanksgiving at Black Creek Pioneer Village is promoted in “Want wine with that turkey?”Toronto Sun, October 8th; “Three Things to do this weekend” Toronto Star, October 5th;• In story “Spooktacular events and family haunts in celebration of Halloween” Toronto Star,October 26th story mentions Black Creek Pioneer Village’s Howling Hootenanny event.• In Toronto Star story “Google sharpens its focus on city” on October 12th mentionsStreetView close-ups of several Toronto sites including Black Creek Pioneer Village.November• Farmer Magazine on November 6th published story “Incubator farms help new crop offarmers get started”. The story discusses the McVean Incubator Farm on land owned byTRCA, and the idea behind the project.• The Scarborough Mirror on November 6th story “Meeting on Morningside Parkimprovements slated” informs readers about TRCA’s “neighborhood greening” projects.• In story “Watch this space for green” Globe and Mail on November 3rd, reports on the LowerDon Greenway Project, collaboration with the City of Toronto and TRCA.• “Grants will help Great Lakes region adapt to climate change” story in Targeted NewsService media on November 19th, discusses how TRCA is helping to make communitiesresilient to climate change.• Pickering Ajax News Advertiser story “Pickering Waterfront Master Plan draws ire fromresident” quotes TRCA spokesperson regarding the need to balance public use withconservation greenspace.• Beach Riverdale Mirror on November 9th story “Leslie Spit upgrades include new structures,shoreline Improvements” discusses partnership between Toronto Waterfront RevitalizationCorporation and TRCA to upgrade Tommy Thompson Park.• Pickering Ajax News Advertisers on November 28th publishes story “Frenchman’s Bayconstruction details revealed in Pickering”.• In Toronto Star story “A place for nature and farmers” on November 26th is about RougeUrban National Park which will be 60% farmland.• Christmas at Black Creek Pioneer Village is written about in the Toronto Star’s “On theAgenda” and in the Globe and Mail's “The week in events” sections.61

• Newstex Media publishes story “Black Creek Continues Historic Beers of Canada Serieswith Dray Horse Ale “on November 7th.December• In “50 Ways to make North York a better place in 2013” the North York Mirror andScarborough Mirror on December 28th includes joining the Don Watershed RegenerationCouncil and the Highland Creek Neighborhood Green Team.• The Caledon Enterprise on December 12th story “TRCA stuck with cleaning up dump”discusses the need for the public to help keep conservation lands clean.• In December 29th story “Planting hope at a school in need” is a column written by MarkCullen regarding Trees for Life initiative that TRCA is a partner of.• Toronto Star on December 15th publishes story “A striking addition to the waterfront”. Thestory discusses the waterfront development that will also incorporate a TRCA park.• December 7th Targeted News Service story “Toronto Public Service exceeds United WayFundraising Goal” lists Toronto organizations including TRCA who helped the City reach itsfundraising goal for United Way.• In Toronto Star story “Elementary teachers to cancel class strips”, discusses the impactschool field cancellations had on several Toronto sites including Black Creek PioneerVillage.• Globe and Mail promoted Christmas at Black Creek Pioneer Village in section “What to do inToronto” and “This week in events" .Report prepared by: Rowena Calpito, extension 5632Emails: rcalpito@trca.on.caFor Information contact: Rowena Calpito, extension 5632Emails: rcalpito@trca.on.caDate: January 10, 201262