Robert Armstrong, Director of Development & Environmental Services. Water Meter Replacement Update

Transcription

1 Date Monday, February 12, 2018 From Subject Report No. DES Robert Armstrong, Director of Development & Environmental Services Water Meter Replacement Update Roll No. N/A Recommendation That Committee of the Whole receive report DES Water Meter Replacement for information purposes. Background This report is supplemental to a previous report presented to Council on December 11, 2017 and in response to a presentation made by Lindy Iverson on January 29, 2018 for Council to consider an opt-out option for the RF meters. Meaford 4 Safe Technologies had connected the local Health Unit to confirm that the Neptune Meters we were installing complied with Safety Code 6 and the City of Toronto s prudent avoidance, being 1% of Safety Code 6. The local Health Unit contacted the Municipality to confirm the model of water meter being utilized and noted that they would be forwarding the information onto Ontario Public Health to receive confirmation. As of February 5 th, there were 73 households remaining who have not registered for the meter replacement. Further, 66 households have selected the alternate meter (radio reads outside). Analysis Public Health Review The following was provided by Ontario Public Health at the request of the local Health Unit: A review of radiofrequency exposure from smart water meters was conducted in response to a request by Robert Hart, Manager at Grey Bruce Health Unit. The review was requested based on resident Report DES Page 1 of 5

2 concerns of RF exposure from a smart wireless water meter system installation in Meaford. This review involves comparison of RF emissions from the smart water meter system to Canada s Safety Code 6 limits for RF exposure. Key Findings Radiofrequency (RF) emissions from the smart meters are in compliance with Safety Code 6 (SC6) limits. Time-averaged power density from the smart meters is 0.002% of SC6 limits. For fixed network messages and standard mobile messages the power density over a pulse was 0.03% and 0.003%, respectively of SC6 limits. Table 1: Smart Meter RF emissions in comparison with Safety Code 6 Type of Emission Fixed Network Message Standard Mobile Message Both Types of Messages Power density over pulse (mw/cm2) Timeaveraged power density (mw/cm2) % of SC6 timeaveraged exposure limit % of SC6 exposure limit for pulses n/a* n/a* As seen in Table 1, time-averaged power density from both fixed network and standard mobile is 0.002% of the SC6 limit for timeaveraged exposure (or 50000x below the SC6 limit). For the pulsed field limit, the fixed network messages are 0.03% of the SC6 limit (or 3000x below the SC6 limit). Standard mobile messages are 0.003% of the pulsed field SC6 limit (or 30000x below the SC6 limit). Opt-out Request As noted, a presentation was made requesting Council provide direction to staff to implement an opt-out option to radio read meters with the understanding that the costs of the opt-out option would be borne by the consumer. The individual had noted a similar program in Picton and also Toronto. Staff researched both these places and note the Picton does not have RF technology. We believe that the resident meant Penticton, BC. With Report DES Page 2 of 5

3 regard to Toronto s system, it was not an opt-out option, but a fee imposed for those that refused to have their meters replaced ($88.05 per visit or $1, per year) We also contacted the Town of Grimsby that went through a similar water meter replacement program. They noted that they do not have an opt-out program. They did note that they have allowed two customers to stay on the old system for as long as they can read the meters, at which time they would need to get them replaced with RF meters. It was also noted that this option was subject to presenting their plight case to the Manager of Public Works and prove that they have removed all other forms of RF technology from their home. In discussions with our Neptune Representative, they noted that they do not have an opt-out program per say, but did note a potential option that could be considered. This would involve replacing the current meter with a new Pro Read receptacle that does not use RF technology and can be read with our newer meter readers. Therefore, they are not subject to the technology challenge that our current meters have. Should Council wish to direct staff to provide this option, we would need to amend the Fees and Charges By-law to establish an appropriate fee to read the meters, further we would need to develop an application that has the owner agreeing to the fee and that, should they sell their property, to pay for the installation of an RF meter prior to the transfer of the lands. It should also be noted that this would only be available to anyone that has not already had their meter replaced. The presenter also noted concerns with the shut-off warning. This is the same warning that has been used on many other Neptune installs throughout the Province and the Municipality has no other trigger to ensure meters can be installed under the current contract. We are confirming the authority with our Solicitor and will confirm at the Committee meeting. Financial Impact Should Council wish to provide the opt-out program, we would recommend a bi-monthly fee of $25.00, to be reviewed annually as part of the fees and charges process. This is based on the charge out rates for staff ($85.00 per hour) and vehicle ($60.00 per hour), with each read being an average of 10 minutes. 10 minutes was used staff don t know if the dwelling will be on our radio read route. The cost of the Pro Read meter does not result in additional costs provided they can be installed under the current Neptune contract. Report DES Page 3 of 5

4 Implications As we have noted, staff do not generally support the implementation of an opt-out program as it is been our intent to provide efficiencies in service and a standard method of collecting water meter data. Having a number of meters under a different system will result in increased staffing for water meter reading, removing them from the other tasks noted in the Service Delivery Report. Further, it come become an administrative challenge when properties change ownership. It would appear that quite a number of municipalities in Ontario have not provided an opt-out option, likely based on the similar info we received from Ontario Public Health that the meters are well below the Safety Code 6 Guidelines. Strategic Priorities This report supports the mission, vision and values of the Municipality of Meaford, as well as the goals and objectives set out in Council s Strategic Priorities , particularly with respect to: Focus on Asset Management A. Invest in the best technologies to ensure the most effective delivery of all services related to tangible assets. Fund Assets Responsibly A. Develop and implement a comprehensive linear asset and general capital asset project schedule to expedite and fund related and similar capital needs. Balance Rehabilitation, Construction, Maintenance A. Adopt and implement a rationalization approach to asset management. B. Evaluate and identify how the existing service levels can be maintained. C. Evaluate and respond to the community s interests and needs for expanded services related to tangible assets. Ensuring Sustainability Social: Foster a Caring Community A. Create a culture of responsiveness to address the diverse needs of residents to the best of our ability. Report DES Page 4 of 5

5 Leading in Municipal Government Drive Continuous Improvement A. Ensure efficiencies are achieved through operational optimization and generating new revenues. Leading in Municipal Government Strengthen Accountability and Compliance A. Ensure responsible financial and risk management. Consultation and Communications Grey Bruce Health Unit Neptune Technologies Other Municipalities (Grimsby and Picton) Senior Management Conclusion It is recommended that Council receive the following information for information purposes. If however, Council wishes to provide for an RF optout option, we would suggest that it be conditional upon an application, with additional fees as suggested in the report. Respectfully Submitted: Robert Armstrong, RPP Director of Development and Environmental Services Reviewed by: Denyse Morrissey, CAO Report DES Page 5 of 5