Promoting a non-starter
This past December, the City of Powell River announced that its $7.2 million grant application to the Union of BC Municipalities Innovations Fund was denied [“Officials pursue co-treatment,” January 4]. Those funds would have been used to facilitate the advancement of the proposed co-treatment project that would see the city and paper mill wastewater treated together at the Catalyst Paper Corporation effluent treatment plant.
Undeterred, city officials have announced they plan to approach the provincial government to ask for funding for the co-treatment proposal. Tests have found that the fecal coliform levels in the combined treated effluent, which would be discharged to the ocean, would be significantly higher than permissible under the Municipal Sewage Regulation. Those regulations stipulate that for discharges to shellfish-bearing waters, the number of fecal coliform organisms at the edge of the initial dilution zone must be less than 14/100 ml and for discharges to recreational use waters, the number of fecal coliform organisms at the edge of the initial dilution zone must be less than 200/100 ml.
Test results produced by the co-treatment process show the fecal coliform count at the initial dilution zone in the receiving waters would be 555 and 2,778 coliform units/100 ml. This discharge into our receiving waters should not be acceptable, yet the proponents of the co-treatment proposal have not committed to, nor recommended, disinfection as a mitigation strategy.
The city’s own consulting engineering firm, Opus Dayton and Knight Ltd., has advised that the mill’s effluent treatment system as currently configured would not function effectively if the mill discontinued operation and the influent wastewater consisted of only domestic wastewater from the city. Simply put, there would not be enough food available to sustain a healthy bacteria population in the large bioreactor. Therefore, reconfiguration and retrofitting of the mill’s wastewater treatment facility to treat city wastewater alone would be necessary in the event of mill closure. The engineers reported this reconfiguration would cost upwards of $8 million.
In actively promoting the co-treatment proposal, council continues to ignore this risk/liability factor.
George Orchiston
Joyce Avenue
Wording for referendum
In light of the fact the Willingdon Watch group has amassed more than 4,500 signatures to date on its petition opposing the construction of a new library at Willingdon Beach (Willingdon South), also known as the old arena site, we feel the time has come to recommend the wording of any referendum that may be forthcoming [“Library design concept goes to public,” March 14].
The number of votes cast in the last City of Powell River and Powell River Regional District elections were 5,016 (4,466 in the city and 550 in the regional district). Total signatures on our petition to date is 4,500.
Our numbers speak for themselves. We feel we have more than enough signatures even at this time to have input into any referendum wording the city mayor and council may put forth, and as such we respectfully request that any wording for a new library at the Willingdon Beach site be a separate question unto itself. The referendum questions should state:
Do you want a new library at Willingdon Beach, also known as Willingdon South (the old arena site)? Yes, No.
If no, do you want a new library at: (pick one) Complex/Barnet Street/et cetera.
Do you want a new library? Yes, No.
Due to the thousands of names on our petition opposing a library at the Willingdon Beach site, the wording of any referendum must keep the Willingdon Beach location separate from all other questions, as vote-splitting on that important issue will not be tolerated.
Elaine Teichgraber
Willingdon Watch
