I disagree with most of the…

I disagree with most of the proposed changes to O. Reg. 128/03, as a Class IV Water Treatment Operator, a Certified Engineering Technician, a consumer and as a resident of a large municipality in Ontario. The provision to allow non-certified personnel to operate a drinking water subsystem would certainly provide flexibility to subsystem owners and operating authorities in staffing and continuity of operations, but that is the only advantage from my perspective. The disadvantage of a potential drinking water health hazard and significant risk to human health by utilizing non-certified operators (without any responsibility or accountability under the Safe Drinking Water Act) to operate any drinking water subsystem far outweighs the perceived advantage.
Allowing non-certified personnel (regardless of claimed knowledge level) does not satisfy Justice O’Connor’s many recommendations in the Walkerton Inquiry, nor could it guarantee maintaining safe continuity of operations. Non-certified personnel used in an ‘emergency’ could very likely have far reaching consequences on public health and safe drinking water without any ‘person’ having direct responsibility, accountability or even full understanding of the potential impacts of their actions to the drinking water subsystem and safe continuous supply of drinking water. A critical shortage of operators in a drinking water sub-system can be overcome with support from other municipalities, Professional Engineers, and operators across the province or even across Canada if needed. Further, while any ‘emergency’ and resulting decision to request help by way of ‘borrowing’ or ‘contracting’ certified operators from the industry will not be ideal, it at least guarantees that certified operators will be making operational decisions, which by law they will be responsible and accountable for. The responsibility and accountability of certified operators is determined based on the legislated experience, education, training, exams, and certifications that each operator must achieve, according to Reg 128/03, which was written based on Justice O’Connor’s recommendations during the Walkerton Inquiry.
The proposal also references ‘Licenced Engineering Practitioners, Certified Engineering Technicians/Technologists, people that previously held an operator’s certificate within the last 5 years, managers, maintenance, or technical support personnel employed in drinking water subsystems’. These are non-certified personnel and as previously noted, utilizing non-certified personnel as Operators of a drinking water system goes against the very nature and point of O. Reg. 128/03, as well as the Walkerton Inquiry recommendations that came from a horrendous incident in Ontario, which we still see the devastating impact of today. With regards to the proposal that a Certified Engineering Technician/Technologist with 3 years experience based on their qualifications, my comment as a C.Tech is that the qualifications for CET/C.Tech’s are not directly related to drinking water treatment, and while their education will be substantial, that does not guarantee that they will have any knowledge, training or experience with operating a drinking water subsystem. The education requirement for a CET/CTech is college level engineering technician/technologist in a multitude of disciplines, most of which have nothing to do with water or wastewater subsystem operation, water chemistry or treatment/operational theory. Additionally, if non-certified staff with a CET/CTech designation have been working in a subsystem for 3 years then they would likely be considered to have ‘hands on operational experience’ according to the criteria in O.Reg. 128/03 and therefore could obtain an Operator-In-Training (OIT) certification by exam, making them Certified Operators anyway, which would mean that this part of the proposal would be redundant.
Included in the proposal is a provision to allow non-certified personnel, specifically, ‘Licenced Engineering practitioners or people that previously held an operator’s certificate in the past 5 years’, to conduct or supervise drinking water testing. Again, this provision goes against Justice O’Connor’s recommendations summarized in the Walkerton Inquiry in 2001. Additionally, to put this into perspective from a Class 4 Operator with over 20 years of experience, conducting a ‘test’ is the easy part. Conducting a test is very different than being able to do the test with repeatable results, understanding the chemical and physical parameters and conditions that affect the test and the test results, understanding what the test results mean in relation to the water treatment processes in the drinking water subsystem, knowing how to apply the test results to make operational changes to the drinking water subsystem, understanding what the outcome of the changes will be on the subsystem and the culmination of the effect of all. There is an accumulation of years of experience and training incorporated in what seems to be perceived as a ‘basic’ operational duty such as ‘conducting a test’. This operational duty is far from basic. My suggestion regarding this provision in the proposal is to allow Licenced Engineering practitioners, CET/C.Tech’s to conduct the test, with training as is practical and with direct supervision and guidance from an Operator-In-Charge of the subsystem, with the directive that all operational changes are made only by Certified Operators based on current language in O. Reg. 128/03.
With regards to strike/lockout conditions, which is also defined as an ‘emergency’ situation in the proposal, the Owner/Operating Authority could potentially employ non-certified operators to fill in the role of the striking/locked out operators and this action could and would likely result in a detrimental effect on public health and safe drinking water. Perhaps the certified Water and Wastewater Operators in Ontario (and in Canada as a whole) should be collectively included under Emergency or Essential personnel legislation formally, instead of just in ‘name’. Currently, all operators of drinking and wastewater subsystems are being treated as ‘Emergency’ and essential personnel.

These same concerns noted above should also be applied to the proposed changes to the Wastewater operator licencing regulation. We have come far with legislation in efforts to protect our drinking water sources and provide safe drinking water to the people of Ontario and Canada. We have come far with legislation to ensure that Operators are appropriately trained, knowledgeable and properly certified to avoid the disasters of the past and providing a safe continuous supply of drinking water! This proposal takes us backwards. We can always deal with an emergency in the true sense of the word and provide safe drinking water without regression of legislation. Serious consideration must be made before these changes are put through.