South Bruce Peninsula Crier: January 2007

Where we have been and a direction for the future

WHERE WE HAVE BEEN
and a
DIRECTION FOR THE
FUTURE
Town of South Bruce Peninsula

Water and Sewer Meeting
January 30, 2007
Regional Sewer and Water
History and Review of
Previous Studies
Water and sewer has
been a topic of interest
for over 35 years in
Sauble Beach and more
recently, in the outlying
areas including Hepworth
Ground and Surface Water Quality
Study along the Bruce County
Shoreline (Ontario Water Resources
Commission, 1969)

The report issued the following recommendation
regarding water supply and sewage treatment services
for the Sauble Beach area: "Existing and future
development in the urban areas; i.e. Sauble Beach,
should be provided with communal water and sewage
treatment facilities. Treated Lake Huron water should be
used as the source of water supply."

Reference: Environmental Study Report
March 2001
Sauble Beach Area Conceptual Brief
Proposed Provincial Sanitary Sewage
Treatment and Collector Facilities
Township of Amabel (Gamsby and
Mannerow Limited, 1973)

The study examined the feasibility of providing complete
sewage works facilities to service the built-up areas of
Sauble Beach. Possible health hazards and potential
loss of tourist trade were identified as key concerns. A
high ground water table and heavily loaded soils in
densely populated section of the beach did not permit
adequate residency within the soil mantle, the report
claimed. In problem areas, it was recommended that
sanitary sewers be considered.
Continued...
The study examined options for sewage collection,
treatment facilities, pumping stations and trunk sewers.
The conceptual brief proposed that sewage from all
developed and vacant lots be collected by a sewer
collection system draining into a simple trunk sewer
along the lakefront with a service of lift stations to convey
the sewage along the length of the service area. Waste
stabilization ponds were proposed means of sewage
treatment with a design retention time of 30 days under
maximum daily flows. A revised sewage conceptual
design brief in 1974 outlined continuous discharge to
Lake Huron through a diffuser outfall instead of effluent
disposal by spray irrigation as indicated in the original
brief.
Reference: Environmental Study Report
March 2001
Sauble Beach Area Conceptual Brief
Proposed Provincial Water Treatment
Works and Distribution System
Township of Amabel (Gamsby and
Mannerow Limited, 1973)

The study examined the feasibility of providing water
treatment and storage facilities and a water distribution
system to serve the built-up areas of Sauble Beach. The
report indicated that lots were very small and the area so
densely populated that it is impossible, without
conflicting with local regulation, to locate both septic tank
tile beds and water supply on the same lot. Water
samples taken from drilled wells indicated that the water
was generally high in mineral content due to the nature
of the bedrock.
Continued...
Water wells in the area have a very low recovery rate
and a great deal of storage would have to be provided to
meet peak demands. The source of water proposed was
from Lake Huron with an intake located north of the
mouth of the Sauble River, where the lake bottom is
bedrock. A complete water treatment plant was
proposed using parallel units to facilitate partial
shutdown during low demand periods. Substantial
storage was proposed to ease peak demands, provide
fire flows and provide temporary supply during
emergency plant shutdown.

Reference: Environmental Study Report
March 2001
Sauble Beach Sewage System
Preliminary Report to the Township of
Amabel (MacLaren Engineers, 1984)

The study was initiated because of concerns that many
of the properties in the commercial core were of
insufficient size to permit conventional septic tank/tile
bed systems and that the bathing water quality along the
beach may be deteriorating. The importance of Sauble
Beach as a prime summer recreation and the increasing
number of seasonal cottage conversions to permanent
residences was acknowledged.

Continued...
An analysis and review of water quality data revealed no
positive connection between the beach water quality and
existing private sewage disposal systems. The report
outlined proposed service areas, alternative collection
and treatment systems. A preliminary cost estimate for
Phase 1 construction activities (to service the existing
commercial core along Main St. from Lake Huron to D-
Line, plus private campgrounds), with sewage collection
via lower pressure sewers to stabilization ponds for
treatment and direct discharge to Lake Huron, was over
$5.3 million (1984 dollars, not including land and legal
costs).

Reference: Environmental Study Report
March 2001
Groundwater Supply Study Sauble
Beach, Township of Amabel
(Conestoga-Rovers & Associates, 1993)

The study was initiated in response to reported
interference due to pumping of a commercial well during
1988. Computer modelling was used to evaluate the
impact of groundwater extraction resulting from the
existing, approved and proposed development. In order
to maintain adequate and potable supplies of
groundwater to existing and approved developments
within the study area, the report concluded that it would
be necessary to regulate where future development can
occur.

Continued...
Development within specified recharge areas should be
discouraged and limited to minor infilling to provide an
adequate supply of potable water to down gradient well
users. A long-term monitoring program was
recommended to monitor regional groundwater levels.

Reference: Environmental Study Report
March 2001
EA and Funding Assistance for
Water/Sewage, Sauble and Hepworth
Evidence of Failure limits on community economic development;
limits on property owners improvement to and enjoyment of their
properties; increased need for MOE approved disposal site for pump
outs of holding tanks; inability to meet housing needs of residents
Defined Problem Area within Amabel Township municipal
boundaries, community physically and socially identified as Sauble
Beach; specific problem area in business core and older residential
portion which are higher density and undersized lots for private
servicing; area defined by: centered around Main St and Sauble
Falls Parkway, bounded by 6th Street and Bannister Drive south of
County Road No. 8, 3rd Street and Lindsay Street north of County
Road No. 8 (see map on next slide)
Existing Services Problem Area existing water supply and sewage
disposal systems are private/individuals with one exception; one
communal water distribution system which supplies water to 30
residential parcels (27 connections); current demand is for
commercial and multiple residential rather than industrial uses

Continued...
Reference: Fenco MacLaren, July 1994
Executive Study Environmental
Study Report
In 1995, the Township of Amabel and Village of
Hepworth jointly agreed to undertake a water and
sewage works study for the community of Sauble Beach
and the Village of Hepworth (Ministry of the Environment
Project No. 51-0063-01). RV Anderson Associates
Limited was retained to collect and analyze water data,
examine existing problems/opportunities and consider
water and sanitary sewage servicing concepts in
accordance with the Municipal Engineers Association
Class Environmental Assessment for Municipal Water
and Wastewater Projects. A Phase 1 and 2 report was
issued in 1997 for public review.

Continued...
Following the amalgamation of the Township of Amabel,
Township of Albemarle, Town of Wiarton and Village of
Hepworth as the Town of South Bruce Peninsula, RV
Anderson Associates Limited was asked to carry out the
next steps (Phase 3 and 4) of the water and sewage
works study. The purpose of Phase 3 was to examine
alternative methods (design concepts) of implementing
the preferred municipal water and wastewater servicing
solutions, considering existing environmental conditions,
public consultation, anticipated impacts and mitigation
measures. This document was completed and
submitted to the MOE in June 2001.

Reference: RVA Water and Sewage
Works Study, 2001
Addendum #1 to the Sauble
Beach/Hepworth Water and Sewage
Works Study
The addendum contains details of the revised sewage works
extending from Sauble Beach to include Hepworth. The
recommended solution involves a sewage collection system in
Hepworth and transmission line along County Road 8 to the
proposed Wastewater Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) near Sauble
Beach.
The recommended works for Hepworth and vicinity would include
7,900m of 200mm diameter gravity flow sewers in Hepworth, lift
station, pumping station located east of the Sauble River, and
5000m of forcemain. This wastewater servicing component would
be added to the previously identified collector sewers and low-lift
pumping station in Sauble Beach, forcemain and proposed WPCP
(with an increase in size of 674m3/day to a revised ultimate capacity
of 10,310m3/day). The total estimated capital costs are $39,800.00.
Assuming costs are shared among all lots in Hepworth and Sauble
Beach, as well as properties along County Road 8, the estimated
cost per connection would be approximately $9,300.00.
Reference: RVA Letter, October 31, 2003
In 2003 a joint document was prepared by South
Bruce Peninsula, Arran Elderslie and Brockton
to investigate a Bruce County water system.
The plan considered approximately 10,000
connections throughout the three municipalities
and a price of $131,000,000.00. No further
action ever came from the report and the
municipalities decided to update their own water
systems individually.
2006 Addendum #2 Class EA
Water and Sewage Study
This document was prepared by Henderson Paddon and
Associates. The intent of Addendum #2 was to refresh
the 2001 EA completed by RV Anderson (MOE
requirement to refresh EA every 5 years) and to finalize
site selections for sewage treatment facility.
This document is available on the Town of South Bruce
Peninsula website www.southbrucepeninsula.com
Our most recent estimate for the preferred water supply
alternative is $31.67 million and the preferred
wastewater system is $46.8 million
Approximately $7,000 per water connection and $11,000
per sewer connection
Recent Water Quality Data
At the request of the MOE, the Town of
South Bruce Peninsula agreed to take
samples of ditch water in Sauble Beach
These ditches were being tested by Henderson
Paddon to determine the potential impact of
communal water supply on existing septic beds.
The samples were tested for E. Coli, Total
Coliform, Background Count, and Heterotrophic
Plate Count (HPC). These samples are relevant
because the water in running ditches can be
assumed to be similar to the water contained in
shallow groundwaters nearby. The water in
these wells is essentially surface water
contained in the sand above denser material
below. If the nearby surface water is highly
contaminated, the water in the shallow aquifer is
likely to be contaminated as well.

Continued...
Table 4.1 shows the results of this examination
of the ditch water for Sauble Beach. It can be
seen in this table that all of the ditches sampled
have elevated levels of E.Coli and Total
Coliform. None of the samples have E.Coli less
than 10 cfu/100mL or Total Coliform less than
1,470 cfu/100mL. The maximum E.Coli level
sampled is 700 cfu/100mL, and the maximum
Total Coliform sample is 26,000 cfu/100mL.
These levels are extremely high given that there
is no other obvious source of these
contaminants other than surrounding septic
beds.
Continued...
The results of the ditch samples are considered
unsafe in several respects. If these samples
were taken at a public beach, the beach would
be posted (or closed) for having E.Coli levels
greater than 100 cfu/100mL. This would
indicate that there was a risk of being affected
with minor skin, eye, ear, nose and throat
infections and stomach disorders, and
swimmimg would be discouraged. It may be
assumed that if the water is unsafe to swim in,
then it is also unsafe to bathe in. Obviously,
none of these water samples meet the Ontario
Drinking Water Standards, and would require
significant treatment to disinfect the water in
order to drink it.
Continued...
Reference: HPA Addendum 2
June 2006
In Closing...
For several decades the former Township
of Amabel and now the Town of South
Bruce Peninsula have continually
attempted to obtain funding to provide
municipal services to Sauble Beach and
the surrounding area. It is apparent that
the issue is complex, controversial and
has a substantial financial impact.
In Closing...
Currently the Town has completed the
Environmental Assessment and submitted
the document to the MOE and the public
for comment.

From this process we have received three
Part Two bump up orders or appeals to
the process and or document.
In Closing...
The Town staff and our engineers will
meet with the appellants in an attempt to
clearly understand and respond to the
concerns they have listed.

Prior to meeting with the concerned
parties, Town staff and our consultants
wish to confirm Council's position on
providing sewer and water services to
Sauble Beach.
Thank You
Bill Jones
Manager of Public Works

Realize Your Dream of Owning a Home

REALIZE YOUR DREAM OF OWNING A HOME

Are you currently renting and dreaming of owning a home, but you don't
have the down payment in the bank?

The County of Bruce is participating in the Canada-Ontario Affordable
Housing Program. (AHP)

The AHP has committed more than $28 million to make homeownership
affordable for low and moderate-income households across Ontario.

The Homeownership program provides up to 5 percent in down-payment
assistance to eligible applicants to assist them in purchasing a home.

Applicants must be renting, be at least 18 years old, have a gross
household income at or below $52,000 and be eligible for financing from a
financial institution. The selling price of the home must be at or below
$172,500.

Information sessions will be held at 7:00 p.m. on Monday February 19th at
the South Bruce Peninsula municipal office at 315 George Street Wiarton or
at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday February 21stat the Council Chambers of the
County of Bruce administration building at 30 Park Street Walkerton.

For more information please contact the County of Bruce Housing Division
at 519-396-3439 or 1-800-265-3022 or visit our website at brucecounty.on.ca
for more details.

Canada @ Ontario -

Potential Expansion of Water and Sewer Servicing

Potential Expansion of Water and
Sewer Servicing

for the former
Town of Wiarton
Objectives
The Town of South Bruce Peninsula
commissioned the Potential Expansion of
Water and Sewer Servicing Study to
prepare cost estimates for potential
expansion of the water and sewer
servicing areas within the former Town of
Wiarton
Objectives
Various portions of the Town have
previously been identified as possible
candidates for expansion of water and
sewer servicing. These areas are largely
in the northwest, west and southwest
portions of the former Town of Wiarton.
Objectives
Particularly in the west and northwest,
further expansion of water and sewer in
this area have been hindered by relatively
high costs due to extensive bedrock
conditions, and in some cases,
challenging topography to install gravity
sewers. In part, the topography challenge
has been overcome with a proposed new
sewage pumping station at the west end of
Elm Street.
Objectives
In all cases, it is assumed that watermains
and sewers would be installed under the
same contract at the same time for all
streets. As such, watermain costs have
been reduced in that the majority of the
restoration costs, if appropriate for an
urban street section, have been included
in the sanitary sewer costs and not
"doubled up" in the watermain costs.
Objectives
The Potential Expansion of Water and
Sewer Servicing Report has been partly
based on previous studies, including the
former Schedule C Class Environmental
Assessment completed for the former
Town of Wiarton to identify options for
expansion of watermain and sewers in
select areas of the Town.
Cost Estimate
Cost estimates for proposed watermain
and sanitary sewer expansions are
included in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.

In preparing the cost estimates, a
significant premium for rock excavation
was included for watermain and sewer
installation for the areas north of George
Street.
Cost Estimate
For areas south of George Street, a lower
premium for rock excavation was also
included.

The Tables include 12% for engineering,
13% for contingencies, and an additional
5% for the contractor's insurance,
bonding, mobilization, etc.
Conclusion
The Potential Expansion of Water and
Sewer Servicing report summarizes
possible expansion of water and sewer
services for the Town of Wiarton and
provides and approximate cost estimate
toward these services. All pipeline sizes
are subject to modest revision based on
final design. Costs in all cases do not
include costs on private property to install
individual water or sewer services.
Water Metering
Conservation and Accountability

What are some of the benefits of installing water meters in a
municipality?
Pay for only the water you use.
Track your water use.
Detect leaks in your water system.
Decreased water consumption.

Pay for only the water you use
Meters allow you to pay only for the water you use. If there are less
than four people in your household and you use water wisely, you
will likely see a decrease on your water bill after a meter is installed.

Track your water use
Meters also allow you to track your water use so you can determine
if new appliances, fixtures or habit changes are affecting your water
bills.
Detect Leaks in Your Water System

Decreased water consumption
Environment Canada has shown that once meters are installed in a
municipality, water consumption decreases from 18-25%. This means
that less drinking water needs to be treated and less wastewater is sent
to the wastewater treatment plant for treatment.
Meters are a regular reminder of our water consumption and people who
are aware are more likely to change their water habits with little or no
effort.
Report Recommendations

The following is an excerpt from
the Water Strategy Expert Panel's
report, Watertight: The case for
change in Ontario's water and
wastewater sector.
The Needed Reforms

The Panel believes that a wide range of
changes to the water sector will be needed to
meet the challenges ahead. We have focused
on the following reforms to ensure that systems
are sustainable and rates reasonable:
Systems must look to their customers
for financial sustainability.
Consumers should pay the full cost of the services they
consume, which will require full metering. This will help
to ensure that systems are not overbuilt, conservation is
encouraged and nature is respected. With full-cost
recovery and improved economies of scale, most water
systems in Ontario will be able to rely on their customer
base to maintain and operate their assets over the long
term. Only where systems are shown to be
unsustainable should the Province provide subsidies,
and in those cases it should act as trustee of the assets
until the system can be made sustainable.
For More Information

Watertight: The case for change in
Ontario's water and wastewater sector is
available at the Panel's website
www.waterpanel.ontario.ca.
Water Metering Financial Impact
· As of 2007 the Wiarton Water Treatment Facility
is paid for. Water consumers have been paying
approx $187,000 every year since 1994. This
fee was built into the bi-monthly water bills.
· The Town now has the ability to provide water
meters to it consumers without charging an
additional fee. Simply put, we will use the funds
currently being collected to pay the water plant
off to pay for water metering over the next 3 to 4
years.
· The low bid for the installation of water meters
and a fixed network reading solution for Wiarton
was $ 520,000
Fixed Network Technology
· Fixed Network technology consists of a remote
reading device (installed at each house beside
the meter), a transmitter, and receiving station
(computer at Town Hall)
· This technology allows water meter readings to
be sent directly to Town Hall 4 times per day,
allows for immediate notification for leak
detection and eliminates the need to hire a
meter reader.
Backflow Prevention
· Along with the installation of water meters is the
installation of backflow preventions devices in
each home, business and institution. Backflow
prevention devices prevent any water or
substance from leaving the house or business
and re-entering the water supply. Backflow
prevention devices are required on all new
buildings under the Ontario Building Code.
Tendering Process
· In December 2006 four water metering companies
submitted proposals to install water meters, backflow
preventers and a fixed network meter reading solution.
· On January 8, 2007 Town Council approved the
following recommendation:
That the Town of South Bruce Peninsula notify Canadian
Water Services (CWS) that they ranked first upon review
of all water metering proposals for the installation of
water meters and a fixed network meter reading solution
for the Town of Wiarton. And furthermore, subject to a
successful review of the project on January 30th 2007
council authorizes the preparation of a contract by the
municipal solicitor with CWS.

RFP Municipal Law Enforcement and Animal Control

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF SOUTH BRUCE PENINSULA
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT & ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES

The Corporation of the Town of South Bruce Peninsula is seeking proposals for the
services of an experienced contractor to undertake the provision of Municipal Law
Enforcement and Animal Control Services

Detailed requirements to assist contractors in the response to the RFP are available on the
Town of South Bruce Peninsula website www.southbrucepeninsula.com

All inquiries regarding this RFP must be directed to Malcolm McIntosh, CAO.

Proposals must be returned in a sealed envelope clearly marked "Proposal Municipal
Law Enforcement and Animal Control Services" addressed to:

Town of South Bruce Peninsula
Attention: Malcolm McIntosh
315 George Street, PO Box 310
Wiarton ON N0H 2T0
519-534-1400

Proposals must be received at the Clerk's Department no later than on February 23, 2007.
The Town of South Bruce Peninsula reserves the right not to accept the lowest or any
proposal.
THE CORPORATION OF THE
TOWN OF SOUTH BRUCE PENINSULA

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
&
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES

CLOSING DATE: February 23, 2007
TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART 1 GENERAL CONDITIONS

1.1 Introduction..................................................................... 3
1.2 Intent............................................................................. 3
1.3 Definition of Terms............................................................ 3
1.4 Schedule of Events............................................................ 4
1.5 Questions and Responses...................................................... 4
1.6 Submission of Proposals....................................................... 5
1.7 Pricing............................................................................ 5
1.8 Fee Schedule..................................................................... 5
1.9 Negotiations..................................................................... 6
1.10 Contract........................................................................... 6
1.11 Supplemental Terms and Conditions........................................ 6
1.12 Location of Work............................................................... 6
1.13 Confidentiality.................................................................. 7
1.14 Compliance with By-laws and Laws........................................ 7
1.15 Submission Preparation Costs................................................ 8
1.16 Publicity......................................................................... 8

PART 2 SPECIFIC CONDITIONS

2.1 Range and Services.............................................................. 8
2.2 Facilities Provided ............................................................... 9

PART 3 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Respondents Submission Information....................................... 9
3.2 Communication and Authorizing Officer................................... 10
3.3 Evaluation of Submissions.................................................... 10
3.4 Evaluation Criteria............................................................. 10
3.5 Errors and Omissions.......................................................... 12
3.6 Award and Rejection Rights.................................................. 12
3.7 Award Conditions.............................................................. 12
3.8 Materials Supplied by Town.................................................. 12
3.9 Insurance Requirements....................................................... 13
3.10 Not Liable....................................................................... 13
3.11 Litigation........................................................................ 13
3.12 Notification of Outcome...................................................... 13
3.13 Respondent's Covenant....................................................... 14
PART 1 GENERAL CONDITIONS

1.1 Introduction

The Town of South Bruce Peninsula in Bruce County is a municipality of
approximately 8,050 permanent residents located on the shores of Lake Huron.
Incorporated in 1999, the Town of South Bruce Peninsula includes the former
municipalities of Albemarle, Amabel, Hepworth and Wiarton. Currently the
Town contracts out the municipal law enforcement and animal control functions
to a private party.

The Town is vitally interested in obtaining updated quotations on the provision of
municipal law enforcement /animal control. To this end, the Council has
approved the issuance of a Request for Proposal for interested parties to respond
to.

We urge you to carefully read all documentation contained in this package, and
require you to respond to all sections.

1.2 Intent

The Town of South Bruce Peninsula is inviting proposals for contracted services
to provide municipal by-law enforcement and animal control services in
accordance with the municipal requirements. It is the intent of any information
given in this document enable the Council to select an appropriate service
provider.

This document is intended to assist respondents in preparing their submission to
satisfy the stated requirements.

Definition of Terms

"Closing Date" the date and time after which the submission will not be
accepted, regardless of the postal cancel date.

"Conflict of Interest" an unfair advantage over other respondents during the
procurement process, thereby rendering the process non-competitive and unfair;
activities, relationships or contracts that would render a respondent unable or
potentially unable to perform the duties and obligations required of a consultant
under the terms of the RFP; or activities, relationships or contracts that impair or
potentially impair the preferred respondent's judgment in performing the services.

"MFIPPA" the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy
Act.
"Town of South Bruce Peninsula" defined as the Corporation of the Town of
South Bruce Peninsula, within the County of Bruce.
"Preferred Respondent" the respondent whose submission most closely meets
the requirements as determined by the Town of South Bruce Peninsula in its
absolute discretion.

"RFP" request for proposal.

"Respondent" the company or individual(s) who has issued a submission.

"Submission" the respondent's written reply to this RFP.

"Time of Day" unless suffixed with am or pm, time stated in the RFP are based
on a 12 hour clock, local time.

1.3 Schedule of Events

RFP issue date.................................................... January , 2007.
Proposal submission deadline.................................. February 23, 2007
Interviews for selected consultants............................ March , 2007
Award of contract................................................ March 31, 2007
Final Report to Council........................................ March 26, 2007

If deemed necessary to conduct interviews with selected respondents, they will be
scheduled for

1.4 Questions and Responses

The Town of South Bruce Peninsula contact, for the purpose of this project shall
be:

Malcolm McIntosh, CAO 519-534-1400 ext 122 fax 519-534-4976
e-mail: cao@bmts.com

Responses to questions raised by potential respondents will be promptly
communicated via facsimile in the form of an addendum and all respondents will
receive a copy of the response.

Should revisions become necessary to any part of the RFP, the revisions will be
provided to all potential respondents. The respondents must acknowledge receipt
of such revisions promptly and in writing via facsimile. If revisions are necessary
after the closing date, respondents will then have an opportunity to make relevant
modifications to the submission.

The Town of South Bruce Peninsula assumes no responsibility or liability arising
from information obtained in a manner other than as prescribed in this RFP.
1.5 Submission of Proposals

Respondents are responsible for the proper delivery of their submission. Requests
for extensions of time will not be granted. Any submissions or modifications and
additions to the submissions received after the closing date and time will not be
considered and will be returned to the respondent. No facsimile or electronically
submitted responses to the RFP will be accepted.

The respondents will make the following documents available to the Town:
· Six bound copies of the draft project report
· Six bound copies of the final project report
· One electronic copy of all reports in Microsoft Word, on a CD Rom
· All materials used or produced by the respondent in the undertaking of this
project

Malcolm McIntosh, CAO
Town of South Bruce Peninsula
315 George Street, PO Box 310
Wiarton ON N0H 2T0

NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 23, 2007 @ 4:30 PM LOCAL TIME

Respondents must also ensure that all submissions clearly indicate "Proposal
Municipal Law Enforcement/Animal Control" on external packaging. In
addition, when making inquiries, be sure to quote the "RFP" reference.

1.6 Pricing/Budget

The budget to be provided by the respondents shall be set for this project.

All quotations must be in Canadian dollars. All applicable taxes must be shown
separately.

1.7 Fee Schedule

· Total upset fee to be all inclusive for the provision of the services as
identified.
· Total estimated disbursements to be included in total upset fee
· Disbursements include but not limited to travel, communications, required
for the services
· GST to be shown extra
· Proponents must indicate detailed hourly rates for additional services for
all contracted employees
1.8 Negotiations

The Town may initiate negotiations with the preferred respondent prior to issuing
an award. This option rests solely with the Town.

The Town reserves the right to add terms and conditions during negotiations.
These terms and conditions will be within the scope of the RFP and will not affect
the proposal evaluations. Upward price negotiation will not be permitted.

The Town may terminate negotiations if the preferred respondent:

· Fails to provide information required to begin negotiations in a timely
manner
· Fails to negotiate in good faith
· Indicates it cannot perform the services within the available budget
· Cannot come to terms with the Town after a good faith effort

If negotiations are terminated, the Town may then recommend award to or
negotiate with another respondent or conduct a subsequent RFP process.

1.9 Contract

Selection of the preferred respondent does not oblige the Town of South Bruce
Peninsula to negotiate or execute an agreement with that respondent. The Town
reserves the right not to award the contract to any or all responders.

The preferred respondent must be prepared to enter an agreement based on the
contents of its submission and the RFP. The Town of South Bruce Peninsula
reserves the right to negotiate details of any contract and to make the necessary
changes or substitution within the general scope of the contract.

1.10 Supplemental Terms and Conditions

Supplemental terms and conditions may be accepted at the Town's discretion,
provided the respondent identifies said provisions explicitly in its proposal.
Provisions that conflict with those contained in the RFP or diminish the Town's
rights under any resulting agreement will be considered null and void. The Town
is not responsible for identifying conflicting supplemental terms and conditions.

1.11 Location of Work

The preferred respondent will perform most of the services at its offices.
Provision of the services will also likely involve site investigations. When
performing these services and investigations, the preferred respondent shall:

· Ensure the safety of both the public and staff involved in the activity
· Obtain prior approval to gain access to any property if required
· Be responsible for all related activities
· Adhere to constraints imposed by the Town's contact for this RFP
· Comply with all appropriate legislation and Town by-laws related to
occupational health and safety

1.12 Confidentiality

All requirements and information obtained by a respondent in connection with the
RFP are the property of the Town of South Bruce Peninsula and it's departments,
agencies, boards, and commissions and must be treated as confidential and not
used for any purpose other than for replying to this RFP and for the fulfillment of
any contract.

All documentation and correspondence which a respondent delivers to the Town
of South Bruce Peninsula or its designated agent for carrying out the services
contracted within this RFP, is retained by the Town of South Bruce Peninsula and
is subject to the terms of the MFIPPA.

If a respondent believes any part of its submission reveals any trade secret of the
respondent, any intellectual property right of the respondent, scientific, technical,
commercial, financial or labour relations information, or any other similar secret
right of information belonging to the respondent, and if the respondent wishes the
Town of South Bruce Peninsula to attempt to preserve the confidentiality of the
trade secret, intellectual property rights or information, then these matters must be
clearly designated as confidential.

The respondents are informed that certain information respecting the privacy of
individuals and proprietary information regarding the security of municipal
operations cannot and will not be released to anyone other than the respondent
that has been engaged.

All requests for access to the submitted RFP's will be subject to a formal review
pursuant to Section 10(1) of the MFIPPA and representation will be sought prior
to disclosure of any third party information.

1.13 Compliance With Purchasing By-Laws and Laws

The respondent shall comply with all applicable laws relating to the RFP, the
submission and any contract resulting there from. Specifically, the RFP is issued,
received, evaluated, accepted, and processed in accordance with the Town's
purchasing by-law and related procedures. By submitting a proposal, the
respondent agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions of the by-law and any
amendments thereto. Copies of the by-law can be provided upon request.
1.14 Submission Preparation Costs

The Town of South Bruce Peninsula will not be responsible for any costs incurred
by a respondent in preparing, submitting, presenting, arranging site visits, nor for
any other costs which are incurred relating to the submission.

1.15 Publicity

The respondent and its affiliates shall not release for publication, any information
in connection with the RFP or contract without prior written permission from the
Town of South Bruce Peninsula.

PART 2 SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED

2.1 Range and Services

The respondent will provide information in accordance with this RFP in regard to
the following services:

2.1.1 The Contractor will be responsible for the enforcement of:

Property Standards Littering By-laws
Property Maintenance Beach By-laws
Noise By-law Animal Control
Traffic By-law Parking By-laws

And other by-laws as assigned.

2.1.2 The By-law Officer will also assist other departments within the municipality in
the preparation of charges and prosecution.

2.1.3 By-law Officers will lay charges where necessary and prosecute minor cases in
court. No cases maybe prosecuted without the consent of the Clerk.

2.1.4 By-law Officer will also act an Animal Control officer and/or oversee the contract
of Animal Control Officer.

2.1.5 Contractor will be responsible for the minor repairs of parking meters. Also the
collection of meter money, sorting, wrapping, and making deposits of said money.

2.1.6 The Contractor acknowledges that the paid parking program will require
considerable time commitment, especially during the summer months of July and
August
2.1.7 Contractor will provide their own vehicle, which shall be plainly marked
"Municipal Law Enforcement" and carry not less than one million dollars liability
insurance.
2.1.8 The Contractor shall provide 24 hour per day service 7 days a week.

2.1.9 The contractor shall provide their own two way radio system and cell phone, but
may hook up to the municipality's two-way system at no charge to the Contractor.

2.1.10 The Contractor will supply all of their own uniforms and any other equipment
needed to perform said duties.

2.1.11 The Contractor shall supply all hours as needed by the municipality. These hours
may be adjusted from time to time.

2.2 Facilities Provided

The municipality will provide:

2.2.1 Office space for repair of parking meters and storage of files.

2.2.2 Letterhead paper, envelopes, stamps, use of copier and all other office supplies
necessary to carry out enforcement. Also, ticket books for the issuing of parking
tickets.

2.2.3 Municipality to supply one pager unit

2.2.4 The use of paralegal or lawyer to prosecute a case after it has been approved by
Clerk. Municipality to pay all legal bills.

2.2.5 The municipality will provide educational opportunities subject to the approval of
Council.

PART 3 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Respondent's Submission Information

All respondents must include the following in their proposals:
· The background of the firm or consortium indicating similar services
provided to municipalities.
· Identify all employees who will be retained by the service provider to
provide the services.
· Identification of the individual who will act as the designated liaison
· A description of the service providers experience in carrying out the
required services including what staff resources will be required, when
they will be required, and what information is to be provided.
· A detailed cost estimate for each service to be provided. The proposal will
include a table showing the per diem rates for all services provided where
required. The overall study costs for the services shall be an upset limit.
· The respondent is requested to provide at least two references including
contact name and phone number
· A list of past work undertaken in the Town of South Bruce Peninsula
· The respondent should identify the individual who would be responsible to
provide overall management of the contract.

3.2 Communication and Authorizing Officer

The respondent must identify an individual who will be responsible for all
communications with the Town of South Bruce Peninsula or its designated
agent(s), respecting the submission.

The respondent must also indicate the individual(s) that are authorized to
negotiate, sign, and enter into a purchase order or contract on behalf of the
respondent with respect to the submission.

3.3 Evaluation of Submissions

To facilitate evaluation, respondents are required to prepare their submissions in
accordance with the requirements of the RFP both in terms of form and content.

The Town of South Bruce Peninsula or its designated agent(s) will not use any
single criterion in evaluating the RFP. Among the criteria however, will be
technical qualifications and financial options. Neither the lowest priced, nor any
submission shall necessarily be accepted.

The Town of South Bruce Peninsula reserves the right to request formal
presentation from the respondent or to meet the respondent to obtain clarification
of the proposal.

The respondent whose submission in the absolute discretion of the Town of South
Bruce Peninsula best meets the requirements of the RFP will be designated as the
preferred respondent. No obligation arises until a signed agreement to engage in
consulting services, based on the accepted submission, is executed.

All qualifying submissions become the property of the Town of South Bruce
Peninsula on the closing date and will not be returned. Only late submissions will
be returned unopened.

3.4 Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation and ranking will be based on the respondent's response to the
requested information in all parts of this RFP. The criteria may be weighted in
accordance with their anticipated importance and relevance to the Town's
operations and business objectives. In order to rate the degree of criteria
compliance, many factors will be taken into account including but not limited to
work plan and time chart, references, financial terms, and conditions.

The criteria conformance per submission will be rated based on values from 1 to 4
as follows:

1. Poor
2. Fair
3. Good
4. Excellent

Multiplying the rating value by the criteria weight and adding the individual
results as shown under Stage 1 below, will calculate a total score. The staff and
Committee will recommend award of a contract to the respondent, if any, who
best satisfies the objectives of the Town of South Bruce Peninsula subject to the
necessary corporate approval as per Stage 3 below.

Stage 1 Review and Assessment of Submissions

Rating

Evaluation Criteria Weight Value

· RPF Requirements
- the degree of compliance with all technical or submission
requirements noted in this RFP as outlined in Part 3 (25 points
rated 1 to 4)
· Related Experience
- the degree to which the respondents services as outlined in the
submission are in line with the Town's objectives as outlined in
this RFP (25 points rated 1 to 4)
- the degree to which the respondents experience meets the
requirements of the Town (25 points rated 1 to 4)
· Financial Criteria
- the degree to which the financial terms and conditions being
proposed are satisfactory to the Town of South Bruce Peninsula
(25 points rated 1 to 4)
Total Points minimum 100, maximum 400

Stage 2 Select Preferred Respondent

As stated, an interview may be required with select respondents. If this occurs,
the respondents selected for interview will be contracted and scheduled a
presentation time.
Stage 3 Award of Contract by Town of South Bruce Peninsula

3.5 Errors and Omissions

The respondent has the responsibility to notify the Town of South Bruce
Peninsula or its designated agent(s) for the purposes of this RFP in writing of any
ambiguity, divergence, error, omission, oversight, or contradiction contained in
the RFP as it is discovered and to request any instructions, decisions or discretion
which may be required in preparing the submission prior to the closing of the
RFP.

3.6 Award and Rejection Rights

The Town of South Bruce Peninsula reserves the right to:
· Reject any or all submissions. Any submissions not containing sufficient
information in the view of the Town or its designated agent to permit a
through analysis may be rejected
· Issue an award in whole or in part of this RFP
· Verify the validity of the information supplied and to reject any
submission where the contents appear to be incorrect or inaccurate in the
estimation of the Town or its designated agent(s)
· Refrain from making an award if it is in its best interest
· Cancel the award if the preferred respondent is determined to have a
conflict of interest

Submissions not conforming to the requirements of the RFP may not be
considered. The Town of South Bruce Peninsula reserves the right at any time to
waive any of the requirements of the RFP. Responses which are unsupported by
the information requested in the RFP document or not complying therewith, may
not be considered. Revisions received orally, by telephone, telegraph, facsimile
or other means after the specified closing time and date will not be accepted or
considered.

3.7 Award Conditions

The award of this contract is subject to Council approval and budgetary
limitations.

The award of this contract is subject to satisfactory reference checks on previous
projects.

3.8 Material Supplies by the Town

Reference material may be supplied as required.
3.9 Insurance Requirements

The preferred respondent must submit a completed "Certificate of Insurance
Form" before the Town will execute the agreement. Insurance coverage must be
satisfactory to the Town as prescribed in the standard form of agreement. Failure
to provide and maintain such coverage is a material breach and grounds for
withdrawal of the award or termination of the agreement.

3.10 Not Liable

The Town will not be liable for any costs, expenses, loss or damage incurred,
sustained, or suffered by any respondent prior to or subsequent to or by reason of
the acceptance or non acceptance by the Town of any proposal or cancellation of
the RFP. This includes any costs associated with the preparation, submittal,
presentation, and or evaluation of a proposal or for negotiations related to the
award or the agreement, whether the respondent is successful or unsuccessful.

3.11 Litigation

It is the policy of the Town of South Bruce Peninsula that contracts for the supply
of labour and materials, work, or services will not be awarded to any bidder who
is a party to litigation with the Town, or directly or indirectly including by
common ownership or control or otherwise is related to a party to litigation with
the Town, or intends to use a subcontractor in respect of this contract who is a
party to litigation with the Town, or who directly or indirectly including by
common ownership or control or otherwise is related to a party to litigation with
the Town.

For the purposes of this section, the phrase, "party to litigation with the Town"
includes cases in which the bidder or prospective bidder or any of the parties
named above have advised the Town in writing of their intention to commence
litigation or have commenced or have advised the Town of their intention to
commence an arbitral proceeding against the Town.

Bids from any bidder in any of the above circumstances shall be rejected as
informal, irregular, and noncompliant.

3.12 Notification of Outcome

The successful respondent will be notified by telephone with subsequent written
confirmation sent to the address identified in the submission. All other
respondents who made a submission within the allowed time will be notified in
writing of the outcome of this RFP.
3.13 Respondents Covenant

Submitted by: ______________________________________________________

(Company Name)

Address: _________________________________________________________

Telephone: _____________________ Fax: ____________________________

The undersigned bidder hereby offers to the Corporation of the Town of South
Bruce Peninsula, 315 George Street, PO Box 310, Wiarton, Ontario N0H 2T0,
their services for the purposes of this RFP.

The respondent covenants and agrees that this RFP is valid for acceptance for a
period of 90 (ninety) days from the last date and time fixed for receipt of the RFP
submission and that the Town of South Bruce Peninsula may at any time within
the said period accept this RFP whether notice of acceptance of another RFP has
been given out or not.

Pursuant to and in compliance with the RFP, the undersigned having become
thoroughly familiar with the specifications, terms and conditions contained
herein, hereby offers to begin service provision as specified in their submission as
agreed to with the Town.

Signed by:
(Authorized signing officer)

________________________ _________________________
Signature Print Name

Witness:

________________________ _________________________
Signature Print Name

Dated at ____________________ this ___________day of _________________,
2007.

Town of South Bruce Peninsula, RFP
Closing:

Upgrading Sauble Beach/Area Existing Water Systems

Upgrading Sauble
Beach and Area
Existing Water
Systems
Introduction and Background
The Town of South Bruce Peninsula owns
and operates eleven small waterworks in
the Sauble Beach, Chesley Lake and
Oliphant areas. In the Sauble Beach area,
there are eight waterworks, namely
Robins, Fedy, Forbes, Trask, Thomson,
Winburk, Gremik and Huron Woods.
Fiddlehead & Cammidge and Collins are
in Oliphant and Foreman water system in
Chesley Lake
Background
In 2000, the Province of Ontario promulgated Drinking
Water Protection Regulation 459/00, which has now
been replaced with Regulation 170.03. The Engineer's
Reports for all eleven water works were prepared and
submitted to the MOE in 2001. Based on the findings of
the Engineer's Reports, the MOE issued Consolidated
Certificates of Approval which outlined the capital
upgrades required for each waterworks to meet the
requirements of the Regulation. Based on these
Consolidated Certificates of Approval, the Town of South
Bruce Peninsula submitted applications to Ontario Small
Town and Rural Development Infrastructure Program
(OSTAR) for a Provincial grant to upgrade all eleven
waterworks, including the seven waterworks in the
Sauble Beach area.
Background
The Town of South Bruce Peninsula initiated a
Class Environmental Assessment to determine
the most appropriate alternative to meet the
requirements of the Regulation for all eleven
waterworks. A preliminary information package
comprising of the problem definition and
preliminary alternative solutions was prepared
and mailed to the water consumers of these
waterworks. This information package was also
advertised in the local newspaper.
Background
To confirm the adequacy and suitability of
the water supply (for the preferred
alternatives) in the Sauble Beach and
Oliphant area water systems, a
hydrogeological investigation was initiated
after the preliminary information package
was issued.
Background
A public meeting was held on October 12, 2002
where information was presented relating to the
problem definition and alternative solutions for
all eleven water systems. The preferred
alternative was to combine the seven
waterworks in the Sauble Beach area, namely
Robins, Fedy, Forbes, Trask, Thomson, Winburk
and Gremik and be serviced by a centrally-
located water supply and treatment works
hereinafter called the "Amabel-Sauble
Waterworks".
Background
It was also proposed to combine the Fiddlehead
and the Cammidge and Collins waterworks into
one common water supply and treatment works,
hereinafter called the "Oliphant Waterworks".
The Huron Woods and Foreman waterworks
were identified to remain as "stand alone"
waterworks. The Amabel-Sauble Waterworks
and the Oliphant Area Water System were
identified as Schedule C activities under the
Municipal Class Environmental Assessment
whereas upgrades to the Huron Woods and
Foreman Waterworks were identified as
Schedule B activities.
Background
The information presented at the public meeting for the
Amabel-Sauble School Waterworks and the Oliphant
Area Water System was compiled after public comments
were received. A report entitled "Phase I and Phase II
Class Environmental Assessment Report for Upgrading
Nine Water Supply Systems in Sauble/Oliphant Area",
February 2003 was prepared and circulated to
government agencies. The Council of South Bruce
Peninsula selected the preferred alternative (as identified
at the public meeting) for the Sauble Beach and Oliphant
Area Waterworks and passed a resolution on June 9,
2003 after giving due consideration to public comments.
Background
The selection of the preferred alternative commenced
the beginning of the Phase III assessment of the
Oliphant Area Water System and the Amabel-Sauble
School Waterworks. The Phase III assessments for the
two water systems were undertaken concurrently as two
separate projects. The alternative design concepts for
the preferred alternative were prepared and the
information was presented to the public on October 4,
2003, a mandatory Phase III public open house. At this
public open house, alternative design concepts for the
Amabel-Sauble School Waterworks and the Oliphant
Area Water System were presented. South Bruce
Peninsula is considering the preferred alternative as
identified in the October 4, 2003 Phase III public open
house, for complying with the Regulation requirements
for Robins, Fedy, Forbes, Trask, Thomson, Winburk and
Gremik.
Cost Per Water Customer Estimates
In keeping with current policy of the
municipality, the capital cost for up-grading
of all eleven water systems in the Chesley
area and Oliphant and Sauble Beach area
waterworks will be shared equally by all
existing and vacant lot owners on the
eleven water systems. The operation and
maintenance cost will be shared by all
existing water customers of the eleven
water systems.
Cost of Preferred Alternative Based on
Existing (Vacant and Non-Vacant Lots)

CAPITAL COST

Total eligible capital cost for Oliphant Area Water System, Sauble Area $8,820,000
Water System, Foreman #8 Water System Upgrade and Huron Woods #7
Water System Upgrade

Cost after OSTAR Subsidy at 67% $2,998,800

Cost per lot (512 lots) (vacant or non-vacant) $5,664