4. Allow owners to…

4. Allow owners to temporarily employ certain knowledgeable, experienced but non-licensed personnel to operate a wastewater facility to help ensure its continuity of operations in emergency situations.
Owners would only be able to use this power if:
• an emergency is declared under the EMCPA or if Emergency Orders made under the EMCPA have been continued in successor legislation (as set out in situations 2(1) and 2(2) above)
• the nature of that emergency is such that it could adversely affect the operation of the facility and thereby pose a significant risk to human health or the natural environment.

The proposed amendments would allow facility owners to temporarily employ the following types of substitute personnel to operate a wastewater facility so long as certain conditions are met:
• Licensed Engineering Practitioners (e.g. Professional Engineers)
• people that previously held an operator’s licence within the last 5 years (e.g. retired operators)
• Certified Engineering Technologists or Technicians with at least 3 years of experience working in the type of facility to be operated
• managers with at least 5 years of experience working in the type of facility to be operated
• maintenance or technical support personnel who are employed in wastewater facilities and who have at least 5 years of experience relating to the operation of the facility (e.g. millwright, electrician, instrumentation technician, maintenance mechanic, process control technician)
Certified Engineering Technologists or Technicians, managers and maintenance or technical support personnel employed as temporary substitute personnel would need to be trained by a licensed operator, or a person that previously held an operator’s licence within the past 5 years, on the operating duties to be performed.
These temporary substitute personnel would only be able to carry out the responsibilities and duties of an Operator-in-Charge (OIC) or Overall Responsible Operator (ORO) if they are Licensed Engineering Practitioners or people who previously held an operator’s licence of the appropriate type and class (e.g. Class I licence for OIC, Class 3 or higher licence for ORO for a Class 3 facility

City of Toronto, Toronto Water comments:
- We agree with the proposed amendments in this section and have the following specific suggestions:
• In the absence of an ORO/OIC who possess the same class, operators with one class lower than the class of the subsystem should be allowed.

An owner of a facility that uses this power to temporarily employ substitute personnel would be required to:
• notify the ministry director within one day after the first time that substitute personnel are temporarily employed to operate a wastewater facility
• provide a written report to the ministry director within 90 days of the end of the emergency that includes the following for each person temporarily employed to operate a wastewater facility:
o the person’s name
o qualifications for employment as substitute personnel
o the position held while temporarily employed to operate the facility
o summary of operating duties performed (e.g. job description)
o time spent operating the facility
o the person’s level of responsibility (e.g. Operator-in-Charge or Overall Responsible Operator)
o the reasons why employing the person was necessary to ensure the continued operation of the facility

City of Toronto, Toronto Water comments:
- There is a risk to miss this one-day notification deadline, and would recommend to extend it to 14 calendar days instead of one day.

Proposed strike and lock-out related amendments
1. Formalize and clarify the process though which a wastewater facility owner may request the ministry director’s direction to allow a temporary exemption from operator licensing related requirements during a strike or lock-out by:

iii) Adding a step in which the ministry director would provide the wastewater facility owner with a formal notice that signals acceptance or rejection of the submitted strike or lock-out plan.
Currently, as part of the existing process, the ministry director sends a letter to the facility owner in question, to communicate the ministry director’s decision on the submitted strike and lock-out plan. The proposed amendment is intended to clarify and formalize this process.

City of Toronto, Toronto Water comments:
- Toronto Water seeks a clear and reasonable timeline for MECP's acceptance or rejection of the submitted plan.

Other public consultation opportunities
The ministry is seeking comments or concerns on any or all of the proposed regulatory amendments from any interested stakeholders. The following questions highlight areas of interest to the ministry with respect to some of the proposed changes, but interested stakeholders need not limit comments/concerns exclusively to these questions:
1. Are there any other types of issues or challenges faced by owners or operators of wastewater facilities related to emergencies, or the aftermath of emergencies, that you would also want to be addressed through the proposed amendments? If so, please explain the issues and ideas for addressing them, if the proposed amendments would not do so.

City of Toronto, Toronto Water comments:
- Toronto Water proposes to allow remote/wireless technology (i.e. facetime, phone, chat, etc.) to be permitted to be used by a certified operator as a substitute of over-the-shoulder supervision of non-certified personnel during emergency situations.

2. Are there any other types of exceptional situations that should trigger the use of the proposed emergency related provisions by the ministry director, or by the owner of a facility?

City of Toronto, Toronto Water comments:
- Pandemics

2. Questions on Proposed Emergency Related Amendment 4, i.e. Allowing substitute personnel to temporarily operate a facility:
a. Are you supportive of the proposal to allow knowledgeable, non-licensed personnel to temporarily operate a wastewater facility if needed to maintain the safe continuity of operations in an emergency? For example, if a disease outbreak were to cause a critical shortage of licensed operators at a wastewater facility due to illness and quarantine requirements.

b. Do you agree with the proposed list of types of substitute personnel that could be employed to operate a wastewater facility in an emergency? Are there any types of substitute personnel not listed that should be included? Alternatively, are there types of substitute personnel listed that should be removed?

c. Do you agree that the condition requiring a Certified Engineering Technician or Certified Engineering Technologist have at least 3 years’ experience working in a facility is appropriate given the qualifications for these designations?

City of Toronto, Toronto Water comments:
- Yes to 3.a, b, c

d. Do you agree that the condition requiring a manager, or maintenance or technical support personnel, to have at least 5 years’ experience working in a facility is appropriate?

City of Toronto, Toronto Water comments:
- We believe that 4 to 5 years’ experience working in a facility is appropriate.

e. If operators of a wastewater facility work in a unionized setting, is there a possibility that the proposed amendments to permit the use of temporary personnel in an emergency would conflict with any aspect of a collective agreement? If so, would these conflicts prevent owners from readily being able to employ non-licensed substitute personnel temporarily to operate a wastewater facility in an emergency if needed? Please explain.

City of Toronto, Toronto Water comments:
- It doesn't affect the collective agreement. Toronto Water as the operating authority will have the ability to redeploy or hire as necessary to keep operations running. However, we recognize that if the operating authority hires non-union staff it may generate a union response under the collective agreement.

4. Do you agree that the 14-day deadline for the initial submission of the strike-plan is reasonable? If not, should the proposed number of days be increased or decreased?

City of Toronto, Toronto Water comments:
- 14-day period is reasonable