Government ducks red tape to stop smelly spills

The Government of Nunavut has decided to ignore the territory's own regulatory system and build several sewage lagoons this summer without first acquiring water licences.

Before such projects are built, they're supposed to receive approval from the Nunavut Water Board, an agency funded by the federal government that's intended to insure that the territory's waters are kept clean and free of pollutants.

But Nunavut's Department of Community and Government Services went ahead and issued tenders for the construction of sewage lagoons this summer in Cape Dorset, Kugaaruk, Kugluktuk and Qikiqtarjuaq, using money doled out by the federal government to improve the territory's crumbling infrastructure, without first acquiring the licences.

In the case of Cape Dorset, the GN's decision to move forward with construction drew criticism from the water board, which recommended in an Aug. 8 letter that Indian and Northern Affairs Canada – the arm of the federal government that conducts environmental monitoring for the water board, and may press charges on the board's behalf – take "stern and immediate instant" action against the GN.

It would not be the first time the federal government charged a Nunavut community for a sewage spill. The City of Iqaluit pleaded guilty to such a charge in August 2002 and was fined $100,000 for a series of accidental spills.

Carl McLean, director of INAC's operations in Nunavut, said it's unlikely the GN would be charged, but wouldn't rule out the possibility.

"Right now, at the moment, no, [fines] are not being seriously considered, although that's one of the options," he said.

The GN's decision to fix aging and leaky lagoons without waiting for licences leaves the water board in an awkward position. A public meeting is to be held in Cape Dorset later this month to discuss the merits of the new sewage lagoon's design.

But by then, the lagoon will likely have already been built.

"Admittedly, we should have gone out and gotten a water licence before any construction began," said Shawn Maley, assistant deputy minister of the department of community and government services.

However, the GN faced pressure from another arm of the federal government – the Department of Fisheries and Oceans – to fix the lagoon, Maley said. In March 2002, DFO warned that the Dorset lagoon may be dumping "deleterious" or harmful waste into fish-infested waters, in violation of the same portion of the Fisheries Act that led to Iqaluit's hefty fine.

"We had to do something about it," Maley said. "We were under an order to get the darn thing fixed."

The GN submitted a licence application for Cape Dorset's lagoon about one year before signing a construction contract for the projects, said John Dawe, the GN's director of community infrastructure. In the past, Dawe said that's been ample time to receive a licence.

Maley also claims the lagoon design is uncontroversial and has been tried and tested for several decades in the Arctic, so there is little reason to be concerned.

Various government agencies that commented on the lagoon design seem less sure, and raised plenty of questions over the merit of the design in letters sent to the water board.

Maley insists most of this criticism has been taken into account in the lagoon's present design. For example, INAC called for the lagoon to have an impermeable liner to prevent sewage from seeping into the ground beneath the lagoon, should permafrost melt. Maley said the design now includes a liner.

As well, INAC asked why the designs submitted by the GN had not been signed and sealed by a qualified engineer.

Such signing and stamping of designs is important, as it indicates the engineer stands behind the design, and is willing to assume some liability, should the lagoon fail.

Earlier this year, a former employee of the water board warned in a letter distributed by Dennis Bevington, MP for the Western Arctic, that many municipal projects in Nunavut may lack designs signed by qualified engineers.

But Dawe said final designs are always acquired before a project is built. He said confusion over the signing of documents arises from early designs being submitted to the water board for comment.

Meanwhile, the water board, which has undergone a massive staff turnover in the past year and is likely overwhelmed by the many municipal water licences that expire this autumn, has remained silent about other GN projects built this summer that lack water licenses, such as the sewage lagoon being built in Kugaaruk.

But the last time the water board commented on Kugaaruk's proposed lagoon, in June, it said the design required further review before it was built.

And INAC warned in an Aug. 7 letter that Kugaaruk's lagoon design may include several shortcomings, and that the proposed design may lead to pipes that freeze and crack, resulting in future sewage spills.

However, Dawe and Maley both expressed confidence that the lagoon will be well-designed and a vast improvement over the existing leaky lagoon, which residents fear may be seeping sewage into a nearby river full of fish.

So far, work on Kugaaruk's new lagoon has been limited to tasks that would not require a water licence, such as moving ­gravel, Dawe said.

And Maley said one of his department's project officers has received assurance from the water board that the Kugaaruk lagoon will receive a licence by today.

The new lagoons in Dorset and Kugaaruk both cost slightly more than $4.5 million each. In all, Maley estimates the GN spent $12 million in fixing municipal lagoons across the territory this summer.