The Northern
Review 51 (2021): 105–130 https://doi.org/10.22584/nr51.2021.005
Research Article
Investigating Standards for Small Water and
Wastewater Systems in Northern Canada
Abstract:
Research investigating the potential of standards for the build, operation, and
maintenance phases of small water and wastewater systems in the Canadian North
was conducted to identify opportunities for standards to help ensure safe,
accessible, and high-quality drinking water and sanitation for all northerners.
This involved a review of literature, a survey of northern water system users
and practitioners, and key informant interviews. The study highlights a general
trend of low adaptation to local conditions for standardization documents on
many technical topics in northern Canada. A number of
major themes and corresponding recommendations are subsequently drawn with
respect to potential for standardization efforts. Of these, training and
certification/classification were identified as a key area that has many gaps,
challenges, and potential opportunities with respect to the use of standardized
procedures for small-scale water and wastewater systems. Subsequently, this is
also identified as the area where standardization efforts may have the broadest
social benefit, urgency, as well as potential feasibility.
1.
Introduction
1.1 General
This
article builds upon a comprehensive review of opportunities for standards to
contribute to health, safety, resilience, and environmental protection in
northern Canada (Steenhof 2018) by focusing on access to clean and safe
drinking water and sanitation, and also considering the complementary roles of
training and certification for this topic area.
While
significant investments have been made in water and wastewater infrastructure
in the North, water systems across the region1
have received poor grades in recent years and are generally still below the
Canadian average—especially in Indigenous communities and for systems servicing
smaller communities and population centres
(Ecojustice 2011; Government of Canada 2011; Human Rights Watch 2016). As
communicated to the authors in this research, northerners also expressed
concerns about the quality of wastewater treatment effluents and the risk of
leakage from failing infrastructure.
As
such, in this article we focus on needs specific to small-scale water and
wastewater systems servicing 500 people or fewer. Based on a review of publicly
available information, there are about 500 such systems in Canada’s North (and
thus an upper limit of 25,000 people in terms of the potentially affected population).
This includes publicly owned small systems as well as systems serving the general public that are owned and operated by private
interests.
1.2 Objectives
and Intended Audience
Three
broad objectives motivated the research:
·
to provide an assessment of the
situation regarding standardization of small water/wastewater systems in
Canada’s North, with an overview of standardization documents and their usage;
·
to examine gaps and challenges with
these systems, and;
·
to provide recommendations on where
standardization efforts would best be invested and in what form, particularly
in terms of how standardization documents can be effectively used.
This
article should be of interest to regulators, educators, operators, and related
service providers involved with small-scale water and wastewater systems not
only in northern Canada, but more broadly.
2.
Methodology
2.1 Literature
Review
Preliminary
information was gathered through a literature review, with an emphasis on
identifying gaps and challenges as well as which standardization documents are
used or of relevance. The main sources of information were public authorities’
websites, which were thoroughly examined and cross-referenced.
2.2 Engagement
Exercise
Following
the literature review, an engagement exercise was conducted to survey and then
interview water/wastewater stakeholders active throughout Canada’s North. This
first involved building a contact list of such stakeholders. A survey was sent
to the entire contact list and then key informants were interviewed. A special
effort was made to reach out to and engage with small-scale water and
wastewater operators and stakeholders who self-declared Indigenous identity.
2.2.1 Survey
The
survey developed and employed for this project was meant to:
·
reveal current practices related to
small water/wastewater systems in Canada’s North;
·
generate feedback on gaps and
challenges that had already been identified in order to determine their
relative importance;
·
identify any standardization
document that would not have been rendered by the literature review, with a
broader objective of helping identify the typical usage of such documents, and;
·
identify where/how standardization
could further play a role.
The
specific questions in the survey were informed by the literature review
process. The survey was disseminated through email, and fifty-three recipients
responded. Approximately half of the respondents (twenty-five individuals)
declared that they represented or belonged to a small community in northern
Canada (with an average population size of 388 people). The Yukon was most
represented, with 66% of the respondents (thirty-five individuals). Twelve
respondents came from the Northwest Territories (NWT), leaving approximately
12% to the other jurisdictions, including three individuals from Northern
British Columbia. Twelve respondents declared an Indigenous identity. It is
important to note that the respondents provided significant supplemental
information via general comments through this survey.
2.2.2 Key
Informant Interviews
Targeted
key informant interviews were then conducted to drill down in the information obtained
from the survey and to further inform the recommendations. Specifically, these
interviews were meant to help further inform how standardization documents are
used in the interviewees’ respective territorial/provincial jurisdictions and
communities, and to collect their perspective on gaps and challenges with small
water/wastewater systems in the North. The interviewees were asked to share any
success stories and point out any specific concerns about any aspects of the
water/wastewater system. The interviews provided quality feedback and
information, complemented by generous supplementary comments from the survey.
3.
Current Situation with Small-Scale Water and Wastewater Systems in the Canadian
North
The
following provides an overview of the current situation regarding small-scale
water/wastewater systems in northern Canada, as informed by the review of
literature, the survey, and key informant interviews. Specific details are
provided for the various components of the water/wastewater system (e.g., from
water sourcing to distribution, to water and wastewater testing, certification,
and so on).
The
material in section 3 provides the basis for understanding and identifying
possible needs and opportunities for standardization of water/wastewater systems,
as detailed in sections 4 and 5.
3.1 Water
Sourcing
Water
sourcing varies with the availability and quality of source water. For example,
the Yukon generally has favourable geological
characteristics that provide an abundance of groundwater that can be easily
treated. These conditions consistently produce quality drinking water. Other
northern regions need to rely on surface water bodies (e.g., lakes and rivers)
and groundwater that, generally, have higher organic content. This poses a
specific challenge for disinfection and chlorination. These sources are also
prone to seasonal fluctuation, such as high turbidity in the spring.
Where
groundwater is suspected of potentially being under the direct influence of
surface water, legislation typically prescribes the use of a specific
standardized assessment method. For instance, the Yukon requires the use of an
in-house method (Yukon Government 2006), while Nunavik (Government of Quebec
2001) prescribes another method (i.e., the DRASTIC method; United States Environmental
Protection Agency 1985).
It
is also important to note that collecting water from the land, rather than
using treated tap water, is preferred by many people across northern Canada.
For example, Martin et al. (2007) found that 29% of Nunavik residents drank
untreated raw water from the land. A number of reasons
contributed to this, such as a dislike for the taste of chlorinated water or
that “harvest water” is often viewed as an ancestral practice by many.
Moreover, as heard through this research, many have built a distrust for
drinking delivered water—with this sometimes associated with the perceived risk
of gastrointestinal issues.
3.2 Water
Distribution and Wastewater Collection
Small
water systems in northern Canada often involve trucks delivering drinking water
to residences (i.e., bulk water delivery). The same is true for wastewater
collection. While the operating costs of bulk systems are high due to higher
human resource requirements and truck operation costs, there is also a lower
investment in construction and maintenance, often making it the most economical
solution in the local conditions.
When
there is piping, it is sometimes buried (e.g., Rankin Inlet/Kangiqtiniq),
but above-ground conduits (“utilidors”) also exist. Such utilidor systems are
typically restricted to larger communities (e.g., Inuvik, Norman Wells/Tłegǫ́hłı̨, Iqaluit, Kuujuarapik, Whapmagoostui), but
a notable exception to this is Resolute Bay/Qausuittuq.
3.3 Water and
Wastewater Treatment
Small
water systems across the Canadian North use a variety of treatment processes.
The design of each system and related treatment approach is based on such
criteria as raw water quality, location, required water volume, preference of
consumers, and legal requirements. Many small systems use a treatment train,
starting with basic particle filtration, possibly followed by a variety of
techniques targeting specific water constituents (e.g., ion exchange, activated
carbon, ultraviolet/chlorination/ozone).
Where
a regulation applies, one common requirement for small water systems in the
North is that supplied water must undergo a continuous filtration and
disinfection treatment if it comes from surface water, or from groundwater the
microbiological quality of which is likely to be affected by surface water. The
requirement sometimes extends to all types of raw water. Such primary
disinfection is required before and during the distribution, and secondary
chlorination treatment is also typically required to keep a minimum chlorine
residual throughout the distribution system.2 In exceptional circumstances, regulations
will allow disinfection at point-of-use, foregoing primary and secondary
chlorine treatment. A few communities in the Northwest Territories and Nunavik
use fluoridation. No water system serving the general public
in the Yukon uses fluoridation.
The majority of small
communities in northern Canada rely on passive systems for wastewater
treatment, such as stabilization ponds, lagoons, and treatment wetlands, and,
for the smallest of systems, sometimes a septic field. It is interesting to
note that treatment wetlands, and especially wetland treatment
areas,
seem to be popular in certain regions of the North, especially NWT and Nunavut.
Possible reasons include fewer operational requirements, they are easier to
implement, and they have proven to be effective in the local conditions.
3.4 Operation and
Servicing, Maintenance, and Repair
While
the jurisdictions in the Canadian North have strict enforceable legislation
that establishes requirements for the operation and maintenance (O&M) of
water and wastewater systems, these largely apply to larger systems. Legal
O&M requirements for small systems, rather, tend to be case specific (e.g.,
through water licensing), and in some cases, nil. For example, not all small
systems have legal reporting requirements. The legal requirements are
supplemented by case-specific operational and maintenance manuals such as
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). Where standards and best practices exist
for O&M, the manuals often refer to them in the same way legislation does.
While there are a multitude of best practices, guidance documents, and similar
standardization documents for this subject, few technical standards that would
be specifically applicable to operation, servicing/maintenance, and repair of
components of water and wastewater systems in the conditions of northern Canada
exist (for example, see CSA Group 2017).
Proactive
maintenance of each water and wastewater system component is especially
important with respect to the conditions of the North, particularly the limited
expertise to repair them and logistical challenges to deliver replacement parts
due to climate, remoteness, and isolation. The O&M requirements for the
components of water and wastewater systems typically are those of the private
suppliers. Sometimes there is also a legal provision to keep maintenance
records in the form of a maintenance log (e.g., replacement of media or
filters, replacement of lamps, performance testing, troubleshooting, and
professional service events). Where a regulation applies for on-site water
holding tanks, maintenance, cleaning, and disinfection is typically required at
a minimum set frequency (e.g., once per year).
3.5
Testing and Monitoring
3.5.1 Water
Sampling, Analysis, and Reporting
All
three territories and Nunavik base their water quality requirements on the
“Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality” issued by the federal
government (Health Canada 2020). These standards define the biological,
chemical, physical, and radiological criteria for drinking water to be
considered safe in terms of the presence/absence or concentration of water
constituents (e.g., absence of total coliforms; ≤ 0.1 mg/L trihalomethanes).
Water quality is monitored to manage the risk from hazards that may compromise
public health and safety, and also to ensure it is
within guideline values.
Applicable
regulations also establish requirements for water sampling and analysis,
including the manner of collecting samples, transport, as well as testing
methods and the type of instruments and laboratories to be used. For instance,
there is typically a provision that sampling results, other than spot readings
(e.g., chlorine, turbidity), can only be accepted if the laboratory is
accredited. These requirements are typically based on the “Standard Methods for
Examination of Water and Wastewater” (American Public Health Association 2017).
A variety of other well-established technical standards and standardization
documents exist for specific aspects of testing and monitoring, which are
sometimes referred to in legislation.
Water
licences and other regulatory instruments also often
establish the frequency and sampling location requirements for each parameter
of the water sample, as well as recording and reporting requirements. The
requirements are as diverse as there are pieces of legislation, types and sizes
of facilities, and parameters. Although case-specific best practices and
guidance documents exist for such aspects, technical standards barely exist for
frequency and location of sampling, or for recording and reporting results.
3.5.2 Wastewater
Monitoring
Across
the North, wastewater quality criteria developed by the federal government
currently apply only in the Yukon and only on systems producing at least 100 m3
of wastewater per day (Environment Canada 2015). This volume requirement
excludes most small systems. Where applicable, wastewater quality requirements
are otherwise dictated by the individual water licence,
which is case specific. These often refer to best practices and other related
standardization documents (American Public Health Association 2017). No
technical standard, however, exists for wastewater quality requirements. Where
legislation (including water licence) applies,
sampling must typically be carried out at designated Surveillance Network
Program (SNP) sites throughout the wastewater treatment system. The SNP sites
are specific to each wastewater treatment system and are determined as part of
the water licence.
A
limited number of accredited laboratories exist in Canada’s North. For
instance, public authorities operate laboratories that can analyze the presence
of bacteriological content of drinking water in Whitehorse (Environmental
Health Services), Yellowknife (Taiga), and Kuujjuak
(Ungava Tulattavik Health Centre). Taiga
Environmental Laboratory is also accredited for a wide range of organic and
inorganic chemical analyses on water. No accredited laboratory currently
operates in Nunavut. In Nunavik, accredited labs exist in the northern villages
that can perform bacteriological analysis (Government of Quebec 2001). For all
other analyses, samples must be shipped to private accredited laboratories
located in southern Canada.
3.6
Certification of Water and Wastewater System Practitioners
3.6.1 General
The
territorial and provincial governments across northern Canada are responsible
for establishing and enforcing operator certification requirements. They are
also responsible for recognizing certification and classification agencies. In
turn, a certifying agency may require classification of facilities where
certified operators are currently or will be working. Certification exam
prerequisites (e.g., formal education, work experience, training) and
requirements to maintain a certification (e.g., periodic re-examination,
continuing education, periodic dues) are determined by the certifying agency
and are specific to each certification level.
3.6.2
Requirements for Operators to be Certified and Facilities to be Classified
Where
provincial and territorial legislation exists, operators are typically required
to hold a valid certification for regulated facilities. Although encouraged,
certification is voluntary for operators working at any other water/wastewater
facility, including all wastewater facilities and most small water facilities
across Canada’s North. This also reflects that where there is no wastewater
legislation, there are no requirements for operators.
3.6.3
Certification and Classification
Unless
stated otherwise in legislation, any certifying agency signatory to Canadian
Water and Wastewater Operator Certification Committee’s (CWWOCC) Best Practices
can be recognized (CWWOCC 2014). For instance, the Environmental Operators
Certification Program (EOCP) (EOCP 2018) is active and recognized for certification
of water and wastewater operators and classification of their facilities in the
Yukon. In the NWT, it is the NWT government, through its Municipal and
Community Affairs Department (MACA), that fulfills this role (GNWT 2018). No
certifying/classification agency currently is active or recognized in Nunavut. Similar to the NWT, a governmental agency fulfills the role
in Nunavik—Government of Quebec’s Ministry of Work, Employment and Social
Solidarity (Emploi-Québec 2019). It is worth noting
that in Nunavut, as much as in Nunavik, local public authorities are currently
developing certification abd classification programs
that would apply to their specific jurisdictions.
The
type of training activities that are necessary to prepare for a certification
exam, as well as continuing education activities required to fulfill continuing
education requirements, are typically offered by institutions other than the
legislator, certifying agency, or water/wastewater facility owner. In Canada’s
North, such opportunities are offered by post-secondary academic institutions,
professional associations, private companies, and sometimes by governments.
Some activities are offered in small rural centres or
small communities, and online and web-conferencing options exist. As a mobile
complement, private companies contracted through the Circuit Rider Training
Program of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC) do
provide on-the-job continuing education activities in First Nation communities
(CIRNAC 2020).
4.
Identified Gaps, Challenges, and Potential Needs for Standardization
The
following summarizes feedback received from the survey and key informant
interviews on the gaps, challenges, and potential needs for standardization as
related to small drinking water and wastewater systems in northern Canada. This
is organized around six key themes that emerged from the research.
4.1 Engagement
and Involvement of Indigenous Peoples and Indigenous Perspectives
One
consistent message heard throughout the surveys and interviews was that there
are opportunities to improve the engagement and involvement of Indigenous
Peoples into each phase of the water/wastewater system life cycle. This could
help ensure that the management, design, and types of systems, as well as
related procedures, better reflect both the population being serviced and those
likely to be involved in the O&M of these assets.
For
example, concerns over the federal Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act
have been widespread and consistent since its proposal and adoption, including
that it is inconsistent with a reconciliation approach (Behn
2019; Thornton 2018). While recent international declarations and efforts from
the federal government have recognized human rights to water and sanitation, “It
is not just the violation of rights that is the problem, it is also the removal
of the ability to fulfill First Nations responsibilities as stewards of the
land and water that are at issue as well” (Behn 2019,
10; see
also United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007).
An
example of where respondents indicated that perspectives can be important is
with the basic concept of what “water” and “wastewater” are. As Caleb
Behn explains, “The Assembly of First Nations (AFN),
instructed by Chiefs who are informed on the state of First Nations water and
wastewater infrastructures, operates with the view that water is more than a
commodity or a ‘resource to be managed.’ Rather, water is a sacred relation and
a transcendent gift.” (Behn
2019, 10).
An
example of cultural specificities that respondents underscored is
languages. For example, courses and certification exams are, in most cases,
only available in English, doing little to recognize the languages of the
Indigenous Peoples living in northern Canada. More specifically, one sentiment
heard through the research was that a significant proportion of the Indigenous
community does not like chlorinated water and questioned its potential impact
on health as defined from an Indigenous perspective. Removal of chlorine or
ultraviolet (UV) disinfection in place of chlorination at point of use might be
preferred options. Over and above the development and use of technical standards
for these innovations, adoption of these might require accommodation of current
regulations, which in some cases prescribes blanket chlorination in all
instances.
4.2 Ensuring
Consistent Use and Accessibility to Best Practices
This
study highlighted that numerous guidance documents exist for small water and
wastewater systems across northern Canada. However, users noted some
difficulties in accessing these, as well as possible inconsistencies among
existing guidance documents—for example regarding aspects of tank cleaning,
sampling frequency, and record-keeping and reporting. Also, there are different
approaches to important aspects of managing small water/wastewater systems and
projects (e.g., planning, engagement, risk assessment, decision making). Respondents
also told us that, in some cases, there had been ineffective adaptation or
design of drinking and wastewater systems to respond to local realities. Mohseni illustrated this with the following example: “many
water plants fail because they’re over-designed for local needs or require
complicated technology to operate” (UBC 2018; also see Mohseni
2016).
The
use and referencing of standards has been found to be
well advanced in northern Canada for the design and build phase. Nonetheless,
whereas there might be guidance available for design and build, it was
identified that additional guidance may be needed for the management and
operation of small water/wastewater systems (as defined before, this refers to
those systems servicing 500 people or fewer). While many participants observed
a general trend of low adaptation to local conditions for existing technical
standards, as discussed in Section 4.1, they were clear that solutions for the
North must be based on northern circumstances and encapsulate northerners’
perspectives and knowledge.
4.3 Managing
Challenging Environmental Conditions
There
are a number of challenges with respect to dealing
with the impacts of extreme and changing climate on water/wastewater systems.
For instance, passive wastewater systems can be highly impacted by the quantity
of sunlight received by photosynthetic organisms during long summer days.
Moreover, shipping and handling of water samples can be challenging due to both
geographical and environmental factors. Notably, given the distances and
transportation logistics involved, there are difficulties in accessing
laboratory services in a timely manner for testing time sensitive water samples
across northern Canada. This situation is compounded by extreme cold
temperatures, where samples can be compromised if exposed to freezing
temperatures. This is especially true for bacteriological analysis (e.g.,
coliforms), which is sensitive to freezing. Similarly, there are unique
cold-related health and safety considerations for water/wastewater
practitioners that need to be accounted for since their work can often involve
a significant amount of time in very cold temperatures while performing
maintenance or other detailed tasks. Although not entirely universal, much of
the soil is locked in permafrost (permanently frozen ground), posing major
challenges to construct and build, especially for underground infrastructures
such as water wells, water supply piping, and sewers.
Science
and Indigenous Knowledge both attest to major climatic changes happening in
northern Canada, with these changes happening at a faster rate than southern
regions. Changes include higher temperatures, alteration of precipitation
patterns, an increase in occurrence of extreme climatic events, and permafrost
degradation—with the latter contributing to instances of structural failures in
water and wastewater system components (CSA Group 2017). For example, Norman
Wells, NWT, had to replace its water reservoir in 2008 due to structural cracks
caused by ground settlement (Ripley 2009). The risk is especially high with
components that have been designed to rely on permafrost to maintain their
structure. Recent examples are in Old Crow, Yukon, and Umiujaq,
Nunavik, where permafrost degradation and changes in precipitation patterns
contributed to the failure of wastewater treatment infrastructures, in turn
leading to an increased risk for contamination from wastewater effluents.
Permafrost melt may also alter the composition of source water. For example,
surface water might see an increase in humic acids
and turbidity levels, which subsequently can escalate maintenance costs and
require more chlorine to adequately disinfect water (Ripley 2009).
4.4 Capacity
Building, Training, and Continuing Education
Capacity
building, training, and continuing education are key to ensuring a workforce
that is adequate and capable of designing, building, operating, and maintaining
and servicing water and wastewater systems and infrastructure. While the
feedback received indicated that the level of knowledge and information
contained in the courses currently offered throughout the North is appropriate,
a number of challenges and opportunities for advancement, including costs, a
general lack of local opportunities, and some inconsistency in the capacity
building methods being used, were also noted. For example, respondents felt
that in-class and live virtual training courses can sometimes be “too intense,”
with a lot of theoretical concepts covered while sitting for four to five days
consecutively. Much like what was identified by ECO Canada (Environmental Labour Market Research 2010), respondents were clear that
hands-on and on-the-job training and continuing education were the optimal
methods; unfortunately, however, such opportunities are not always available in
the North and are expensive. The interest to develop cross-training between
roles, communities, and systems that was identified by the Yukon Government
(Yukon Government 2017) was also confirmed in this research.
The
study participants also expressed that local capacity building opportunities
were generally insufficient for the workers to acquire and maintain their
certification, with limited ability to travel long distances or for long
periods of time to attend classes where they were offered. In
particular, these are typically only offered in the largest centres that often are at a great distance and sometimes
require air travel. Online and virtual options are only good in so far as the
attendee already has the necessary skills (e.g., computer proficiency).
Another
key consideration raised was the lack of redundancy and replacement
opportunities when a team member must leave for a few days to attend training
or continuing education. This was identified as critical in smaller teams,
especially when alternative workers lacked certification and operation of the
facility legally required valid certification. It was suggested that
certification of a higher proportion of the team members could contribute to
alleviating this issue, as well as access to temporary, mobile certified
workers. While praising the efforts already imparted (e.g., CIRNAC support for
Yukon Water and Wastewater Operator Program), it was felt that support by
public agencies for capacity building of small water and wastewater operators
was uneven and could be improved across northern Canada.
As
discussed in section 4.1, there may also be language barriers given that
training and continuing education courses are only available in English,
whereas many more languages have official status (e.g., eleven languages in
NWT, four languages in Nunavut, and French and Inuktitut in Nunavik), and even
more Indigenous languages spoken.
4.5 Certification
of Water and Wastewater Practitioners
Participants
acknowledged that certification was often challenging to obtain. Some of the
challenges included costs and insufficient opportunities, especially at the
local level, for the same reasons as mentioned for capacity building in the
previous section. Although online options exist in some cases, an invigilator
must typically be present, and it was found that personnel to fulfill that role
were not always available.
While
participants noted that the three certifying agencies active in the North
strived to follow the Canadian Water and Wastewater Operator Certification
Committee (CWWOCC)’s Best Practices (CWWOCC 2014), their programs vary
considerably, with no inter-jurisdiction transferability. For instance,
although most signatories to CWWOCC’s Best Practices have reciprocity
agreements, there are no reciprocity agreements between certifying agencies
active in Canada’s North. Moreover, although standardized exams seem to be an
avenue of choice for some certifying and classification agencies for systems
servicing more than 500 people, there are currently no standardized exams for
small water or small wastewater operator certification, no more than for bulk
water delivery. This situation is similar to what once prevailed across North
America and which led to the creation of the Association of Boards of Certification
(ABC) (Association of Boards of Certification 2013) and, later, the CWWOCC
(CWWOCC 2014) and the Certification Commission for Environmental Professionals
(C2EP)
(Certification Commission for Environmental Professionals 2018).
Respondents
also reported that a lack of legal requirements for certification effectively
posed a barrier to training and continuing education of operators in that
efforts and costs related to certification are not as evidently justifiable and
warrantable financially. For instance, although encouraged, certification is
voluntary for most small water and wastewater operators working in Canada’s
North. This, in turn, is seen as contributing to the risk imparted to small
water and wastewater systems. By comparison, the legislation in all of Canada’s
southern provinces has a mandatory operator certification requirement, albeit
not always applicable to small operators.
Certification
programs are the result of decades of hard work and consensus-building efforts.
Recognizing the challenges inherent to building and maintaining a personnel
certification program, especially for a sparse population scattered over a
large region, respondents pointed out that not all certifying agencies active
in the North respected the independence criteria as set out by the industry.
Independence is seen as an important tool in ensuring autonomy and impartiality
and in warding against inappropriate influence,
potential conflict of interest, and unintentional self-serving bias, as well as
for controlling the risk imparted to small water and wastewater systems
(Association of Boards of Certification 2013; CWWOCC 2014).
Similar to training and
continuing education, mixed comments were heard regarding the cultural
adaptation of certification schemes, as discussed in section 4.1. In contrast,
participants noted that the certifying agency active and recognized in Nunavik
was somewhat culturally and linguistically flexible, with documents and
communication being available in first languages such as Inuktitut, and usage
languages such as English, over and above the official French language.
4.6 Recruitment,
Retention, and Advancement of Operators
As
previously noted by ECO Canada (Environmental Labour
Market Research 2010) for Canada, by CSA Group (CSA Group 2017) for Canada’s
North, and by the Yukon Government for the Yukon specifically (Yukon Government
2017), respondents reinforced that the recruitment and retention of the
workforce necessary to help operate and maintain water and wastewater systems
can be a major challenge in northern Canada.
It
was particularly emphasized that the region’s remoteness and the smaller labour supply pool to draw from can limit the availability
and attraction of potential operators. This is often exacerbated by competition
for employees from other economic sectors such as mining. Smaller communities
also often lose talent to larger municipalities that offer greater career
growth and better pay.
Respondents
indicated that challenges inherent to capacity building and
certification/classification heavily impacted recruitment, retention, and
advancement. The fact that small-system operators often must cover more tasks
than larger system operators, increases the training, certification, and
continuing education development requirements of each
individual. In addition to these factors, respondents expressed that
requirement for hands-on work experience at a water and wastewater facility
before being hired as an operator can be a challenge in cases where
opportunities for hands-on work experience are limited.
The
compartmentalization and limited harmonization of the three operator certifying
programs active across the Canadian North (see section 4.5 above) was a
major challenge to recruitment, retention, and advancement of the operators in
that it effectively hampered the mobility of skilled trades and the sharing of
knowledge and best practices within northern Canada and beyond. Respondents
also mentioned
that many small water and wastewater practitioners lacked the training in
leadership, communication, and computer skills to enable them to advance in the
workforce, much like that identified by the Yukon Government (Yukon Government
2017).
Respondents
also communicated that, due to formal education levels in the North not always
being on par with the southern reality, community-based recruitment, retention,
and advancement of operators is negatively affected. It was heard that this
education disparity was most critical in small communities. Identified
challenges and barriers to formal education included incompatibilities of
education systems with the lifestyles and living conditions of northerners,
lack of coordination among relevant stakeholders, and other systemic issues.
Similar to what was identified by the Yukon Government (Yukon Government 2017),
participants were insistent that such social challenges as lack of opportunity for
adults to pursue Grade 12 equivalency in the North, and unconventional
limitations to what was recognized as Grade 12 equivalency were
major compounding factors.
Respondents
identified that it would be beneficial to have more mentoring, improved
training and continuing education for junior staff, better formal education
systems, greater clarity over what constitutes high school equivalency, as well
as better succession planning generally, all of which represent standardization
opportunities.
5.
Recommendations
The
following recommendations are based on an analysis of the survey responses and
the feedback from the interviewees, particularly with respect to the identified
gaps, challenges, and potential needs for standardization as detailed above.
Some recommendations call for harmonizing, streamlining, and improving the
usage of existing standardization documents, while others call for the
development of new standards. Where possible, recommendations address the
content in standards and related documents so that these can be effectively
used in small communities.
Nonetheless,
it is emphasized that while this is presented for the North overall, the
situation regarding water and wastewater systems differs significantly from
jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
5.1 Engagement of
Indigenous Nations and Peoples
CSA
Group northern Canada report (CSA Group 2017) identified a
number of fundamental elements of success and best practices for the engagement
of Indigenous and non-Indigenous northerners. Paramount is the need to both
acknowledge and include the variety of perspectives, conceptions, and cultural
and societal specificities of Indigenous Nations and Peoples, as well as to
recognize the value and contribution of Indigenous Knowledge and the related
importance and role of Elders. A number of key aspects
concerning how standards and related instruments (such as guidance) for various
phases of the water and wastewater lifecycle could help support this were also
gathered through the literature review and heard through the engagement process
of this research.
For
instance, promotion of well-established and successful engagement models such
as RÉS’EAU/WaterNET’s “Community Circle” approach
(RÉS’EAU/WaterNET 2018) could do much in advancing
engagement processes. This model has a strong track record in small Indigenous
communities by conducting research and testing on promising new solutions under
real-world conditions, and integrating community feedback
into the refinement process. Such success stories involved, for example, the
implementation of point-of-entry (POE) treatment systems to meet site-specific
needs and the installation of a mobile water treatment unit.
Respondents
also emphasized and reinforced that it is critical to formally recognize the
value of Indigenous Knowledge, as well as cultural and societal specificities,
in any document involving the topic of Indigenous engagement, such as
incorporation of world view, language, history, customs, values, traditional
economic roles, infrastructure, governance, and differences across Indigenous
communities and Peoples. Any effort to develop guidance on this topic area
should also consider the ethics of the decolonization of science as well as the
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada Final Report (Truth and
Reconciliation Commission of Canada 2015), with meaningful consultation and
building respectful relationships in conformity with relevant international
legal frameworks and related documents, such as:
·
the United Nations Declaration on
the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (United Nations 2007);
·
the United Nation Declaration on the
Rights to Water (United Nations 2010), and;
·
the Garma
International Indigenous Water Declaration (United Nations University –
Institute of Advanced Studies Traditional Knowledge Institute 2008).
5.2 Promote and
Facilitate the Use of Existing Standardization Documents
As
identified through the literature review as well as the stakeholder
consultation process, there are many relevant and existing standardization
documents that could be utilized for the purpose of small-scale water and
wastewater systems.
Where
relevant for small systems and with due consideration for local conditions,
efforts should be made to have these referenced within operations and
maintenance manuals (e.g., Standard Operating Procedures) and referenced or
required as part of tendering documents. For instance, there are opportunities
to reference well-established standards in product specifications, procurement
documents, and sourcing requirements to help improve asset management and
accessibility to the parts and equipment used and needed by small water and
wastewater system practitioners in the North.
Efforts
should be made to have these referenced in relevant legislation. One general
attribute of standards is that these can be much more easily updated than
compared to legislation, and also can be used to
complement regulations through the process of “regulation through reference.”
Opportunities exist for First Nation governments to reference such technical
standards as they (re)build their own governance structures and institutions,
such as their unique sets of regulations governing the design, build,
operation, and maintenance of their water and wastewater systems.
Special
efforts should also be made to see that well-established standards are used and
referenced with technical topics for which referencing is not as well-advanced,
such as management (e.g., emergency plans); operations, maintenance and
servicing, and repair (e.g., tank cleaning); and testing and monitoring (e.g.,
reporting and record keeping).
Referencing
standards in tendering documents, legislation, and so on, could help facilitate
accountability and could be used to enforce circumstances where procedures are
not followed. This would require, and benefit from, the involvement of key
stakeholders, notably regulatory authorities that could raise the profile of
any related standard and heighten their potential use and applicability. There
is also the opportunity for standards to provide requirements or
recommendations for record drawings post construction so that designs are
installed to specifications. Some examples of existing standards are provided
in Table 1.
Table
1. Examples of existing standards relevant to small-scale water and wastewater
systems
|
Category |
Name of Standard/Program |
Standards Development Organization |
Year |
|
Certification & Classification |
General Requirements for Bodies Operating
Certification of Persons |
International Organization for Standardization |
2012 |
|
Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies
certifying products, processes, and services |
International Organization for Standardization |
2012 |
|
|
Design & Build |
Ultraviolet Disinfection Systems for Drinking
Water |
American Water Works Association |
2016 |
|
Water Wells |
American Water Works Association |
2015 |
|
|
Wastewater Treatment in Northern Communities
Using Lagoon and Wetland Systems |
Canadian Standards Association |
2018 |
|
|
Drinking Water Treatment Systems |
Canadian Standards Association |
2017 |
|
|
Lab Conformity |
General requirements for the competence of
testing and calibration
of laboratories |
International Organization for Standardization |
2017 |
|
Conformity assessment — Requirements for
accreditation bodies accrediting conformity assessment bodies |
International Organization for Standardization |
2017 |
|
|
Management |
Risk and Resilience Management of Water and
Wastewater Systems |
American Water Works Association |
2013 |
|
Climate change adaptation for wastewater
treatment plants |
Canadian Standards Association |
2018 |
|
|
Activities relating to drinking water and
wastewater services — Guidelines for the management of drinking water utilities
and for the assessment of drinking water services (Adopted) |
Canadian Standards Association |
2014 |
|
|
Technical guide: Performance improvement for
small & medium sized water utilities |
Canadian Standards Association |
2009 |
|
|
Operations, Maintenance/ Servicing & Repair |
Sodium Chloride |
American Water Works Association |
2017 |
|
Disinfecting Water Mains |
American Water Works Association |
2014 |
|
|
Wastewater Treatment Plant Operations and
Management |
American Water Works Association |
2013 |
|
|
Disinfection of Wells |
American Water Works Association |
2013 |
|
|
Testing & Monitoring |
Online Turbidimeter Operation and Maintenance |
American Water Works Association |
2016 |
|
Online Chlorine Analyzer Operation and
Maintenance |
American Water Works Association |
2015 |
|
|
Water Quality Standards (standards development
program) |
International Organization for Standardization |
2019 |
5.3
Mainstreaming Existing Best Practices and Developing New Standards
There is an
opportunity to mainstream existing guidance documents, procedures, and best
practices into new technical standards. A wide variety of best practices and
guidance documents exist as related to water and wastewater systems generally.
These could form the basis for more widely useable and referable standards
specific to small-scale water and wastewater systems in northern Canada. These
could allow for the broader application of best practices, encourage
consistency in approach across these regions, and allow for the use of
standards for reference in tendering documents and in regulation more broadly.
Existing technical standards developed based on southern realities could also
be adapted so that these are more applicable to the North and northern
stakeholders.
Nonetheless,
there are important topics where best practices or similar standardization
documents are limited and could benefit from the development of technical
standards. These include, for example, issuing and rescinding boil water
advisories, assessing groundwater that is under the direct influence of surface
water, freeze prevention in water distribution lines, pharmaceuticals
treatment, point-of-use dechlorination, POE UV treatment,
ozone treatment (pre-distribution and POE), stabilized hydrogen peroxide
treatment (pre-distribution and POE), or remote sensing/monitoring and process
control. Other broader topics include issues related to water delivery truck
technical specifications and O&M more generally.
5.4 Analysis of
Water and Wastewater across Canada’s North
Recognizing
that the presence of laboratories is mostly market-driven, there appears to be
a need to help bolster the analysis of water across the North as per the
quality of both drinking water and wastewater effluents and the operational
integrity of water and wastewater infrastructures. As possible, given things
like financial or staffing constraints, this should be done in collaboration
with public authorities (governments). For instance, there might be an
opportunity for the establishment and support of laboratories accredited for
proficiency, quality assurance, quality control, and accountability according
to already existing laboratory conformity assessment standards or other
standards developed specifically for the topic. This could include the training
of local health practitioners (e.g., at local nursing stations) to perform such
standardized analysis as ColilertTM for
bacteriological content.
5.5 Training,
Certification, and Continuing Education of the Operators
Northerners
involved in this project were clear that there are opportunities to standardize
certification schemes inter-jurisdictionally, making staff transferability
possible, for example, through reciprocity agreements. As mentioned by ABC
(Association of Boards of Certification 2013), “this call for standardization
and collaboration between operator certification programs is not merely for the
sake of uniformity, but also to provide the opportunity for greater assurances
of public health and environmental protection.” Standardization of
certification schemes can also foster synergies between jurisdictions sharing
similarities in terms of governance, culture, geography, and environment. For
instance, standardization of certifying models can bring savings through
economies of scale and by removing redundancy. Most importantly,
standardization of models across the North could give rise to a better
representation of the societal/cultural, environmental, and geographical
specificities of the region in terms of capacity building and certification and
classification. Harmonization could also help recruitment and stimulate
recognition and transferability of operators outside the region.
Standards
exist that can help certifying and classification agencies harmonize their
practices. Basic standards include ABC (Association of Boards of Certification
2013) and CWWOCC (CWWOCC 2014). For instance, the collaborative development and
adoption of standard exams for small water, wastewater, and bulk water delivery
operators could do much for inter-jurisdiction transferability as well as
recruitment, retention, and career advancement. The adoption of a common,
standard, and consistent definition of what constitutes Grade 12 equivalency
could also have a significant impact. The adoption of a standardized
requirement for bulk water delivery operators to attend subject-specific
training and commit to continuing education like other certified water and
wastewater operators could enhance safety and reliability of the systems while
fostering public health. A further elaborated alternative could be for Canada’s
northern stakeholders to call on a common certifying agency active and
recognized in multiple jurisdictions such as EOCP (EOCP 2018) and C2EP
(Certification Commission for Environmental Professionals 2018).
Another
option could be for northerners to develop a cross-jurisdiction certifying
agency specific to the Canadian North. This would require broad stakeholder
representation and a significant commitment. As with other topic areas, this
could be specific to small water and wastewater systems or broader, and while
it could be limited to the typical definition of water and wastewater
operators, it could also be applicable to other legislated and related
professions involved with each lifecycle component of the water and wastewater
systems, and which currently are governed under their own set of certifying
agencies (e.g., laboratory analyst, well driller, and so on). Such a certification
program could also be designed to serve all of
northern Canada or only specific jurisdictions. This could be an opportunity to
better align the qualification process to that of traditional trades such as
Red Seal.
A
better alignment of certification programs with conformity assessment (e.g.,
independence criteria) and quality assurance standards (e.g., continuous
improvement) could do much to alleviate unnecessary systemic risks imparted to
small water and wastewater systems across the North.
Diversity
in capacity-building approaches and topics is essential to fulfill the purpose
of exposing operators to new and rapidly evolving water treatment technologies,
legislation, and health risks. The adoption of common requirements that would
address the specificities of small systems across Canada’s North would,
however, support standardization efforts in certification/classification, while
keeping and respecting the independence of each training and continuing
education institution and the people they cater to. This could also be an
opportunity to better represent the cultural/societal specificities of the
populations living in northern Canada, for instance through licensing under ECO
Canada’s Building Environmental Aboriginal Human Resources program (ECO Canada
2020) or another technical standard developed specifically for the situation.
Other
key factors that should be considered for the success of such potential
standardization projects for training, certification, and continuing education
include:
·
accessibility with respect to cost;
·
consideration of the fact that
acquisition of hands-on working hours can take much longer with small systems
as the work shifts are short and often sporadic;
·
use of a common, standard, and
consistent definition of what constitutes Grade 12 equivalent;
·
provide for the integration of new
operators (e.g., internship) and encourage mentoring/hands-on training;
·
consider current typical level of
formal education (e.g., Grade 12) in the application area;
·
reflect the current and prospective
physical environment realities in the application area;
·
utilize the Multi-Barrier Approach
(source to tap), with emphasis on source water protection; and
·
other factors for the success of
engaging Indigenous Peoples (see section 5.1).
6.
Conclusions
Research
investigating the potential of standards for the build, operation, and
maintenance phases of small water and wastewater systems in northern Canada was
conducted to identify opportunities for standards to help ensure safe,
accessible, and high-quality drinking water and sanitation for all northerners.
A literature review was conducted, followed by an engagement exercise through a
survey and targeted interviews to gather northerners’ perspectives.
Water
governance in the Canadian North is inherently complex. The situation is
rapidly evolving and important pieces of legislation
have been put in place in recent years where high requirements have been
established, especially for larger systems.
Small
water and wastewater systems in northern Canada also differ in many ways from
their southern Canada counterparts. For instance, bulk delivery and collection
systems are more common than in southern Canada, and wastewater is mainly
treated through passive systems including constructed and tundra wetlands. This
study highlights that many existing technical documents do not adequately
reflect the unique climatic and environmental conditions in northern Canada. It
is worth noting that in the North, standardization seems to be more advanced
with drinking water systems compared to wastewater treatment systems, and with
the “design & build” phase of these systems, compared to other lifecycle
phases.
A number of major themes and
corresponding recommendations have been drawn from this research project with
respect to the potential for standardization efforts. This includes the
engagement and involvement of Indigenous Peoples and perspectives; ensuring
consistent use and accessibility to best practices; managing challenging
environmental conditions; capacity building and training and continuing
education; certification of water and wastewater practitioners; and the
recruitment, retention, and advancement of operators.
Of
the themes identified, training and certification/classification were
identified as a key area that has many gaps, challenges, and potential
opportunities with respect to the use of standardized procedures for
small-scale water and wastewater systems. For instance, the lack of
harmonization seems to undermine inter-jurisdiction transferability of skills
and knowledge. Subsequently, this is also identified as the area where
standardization efforts may have the broadest social benefit and urgency, as
well as potential feasibility.
Notes
1.
For the purposes of this article, the Canadian North is defined as
all Canadian geographical areas above the 60th degree of latitude. Reference is
also made in some sections to the Arctic, particularly when speaking of
specific geographical features such as Arctic waters or where existing
regulations or associated government departments use the word Arctic. The
research methodology included engaging both stakeholders physically located in
the North as well as others not necessarily located there but still with
significant experience and knowledge of northern issues.
2.
Primary disinfection kills or inactivates bacteria, viruses, and other
potentially harmful organisms in drinking water, while secondary disinfection
provides longer-lasting water treatment as the water moves through pipes to
consumers (Environmental Protection Agency 2009).
References
American
Public Health Association. 2017. Standard Methods
for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (23rd Ed.). Washington D.C.: American Public Health Association.
Association
of Boards of Certification. 2013. Model Standards
of Operator Certification. Ankeny:
Association of Boards of Certification.
Association
of Boards of Certification. 2014. Reciprocity
Solution for Operator Certification Programs. Ankeny: Association of Boards of Certification.
Behn, C.
2019. “Reconciliation: Drinking Water Reform. What Does Reconciliation Mean for
Safe Water Governance?” Water Canada January/February 2019: 10–14. https://cdn.watercanada.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/22141245/WC104_JanFeb2019_WEB.pdf
Certification
Commission for Environmental Professionals. 2018. Professional
Operator Certification Program.
Association of Board of Certification. Accessed April 10, 2018. http://www.professionaloperator.org/.
CIRNAC.
Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada. 2020. Circuit
Rider Training Program. Accessed
April 9, 2020. https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1313424571273/1313424692733.
CSA
Group. 2017. Canada’s North: Discovering How Standards
Can Contribute to Safety, Sustainability & Economic Growth. Toronto: CSA Group.
CWWOCC.
Canadian Water and Wastewater Operator Certification Committee. 2014. Canadian
Best Practices for Water and Wastewater Operator Certification. Urbandale: Association of Boards of Certification.
ECO
Canada. 2020. Building Environmental Aboriginal Human
Resources (BEAHR). Accessed 10 25,
2020. https://www.eco.ca/beahr/.
Ecojustice.
2011. WaterProof
3: Canada’s Drinking Water Report Card. Vancouver: EcoJustice.
Emploi-Québec.
2019. Wastewater Operator Qualification and Water
System Worker Certification Programs.
Accessed April 9, 2019. http://www.emploiquebec.gouv.qc.ca/citoyens/developper-et-faire-reconnaitre-vos-competences/qualification-professionnelle/qualification-obligatoire/liste-des-certificats/certifications-dans-le-domaine-de-leau-potable/.
Environment
Canada. 2015. Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations
(WSER) (SOR/2012-139) – last amended 2015. Ottawa: Government of Canada.
Environmental
Labour Market Research. 2010. Municipal
Water and Waste Management Labour Market Study;
Planning for Today, Preparing for Tomorrow. Calgary: ECO Canada.
Environmental
Operator Certification Program. 2018. Operator
Certification and Facility Classification Program. Burnaby: Environmental Operator Certification
Program.
Environmental
Operators Certification Program. 2018. Customer
Relationship Management System (CRM). Website. Accessed April 10, 2019. https://crm.eocp.ca/.
Environmental
Protection Agency. 2009. Basic Information
about Drinking Water Disinfection.
Washington D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency.
GNWT.
Government of Northwest Territories. 2018. Water/Wastewater
Certification/Classification Program. Municipal and Community Affairs (MACA). Accessed April 9, 2019. https://www.maca.gov.nt.ca/en/services/drinking-water-operators-corner/training.
Government
of Canada. 2011. National Assessment of First
Nations Water and Wastewater Systems – 2009-2011. Ottawa: Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada.
Government
of Canada. 2013. Safe Drinking Water for First
Nations Act, Statutes of Canada
2013, c. 21. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/s-1.04/index.html.
Government
of Quebec. 2001. Regulation Respecting the Quality
of Drinking Water (RRQDW)/Règlement sur la qualité de l’eau potable [Q-2, r.
40]. Quebec City: Government of
Quebec.
Government
of Quebec. 2001. Regulation Respecting the Quality
of Drinking Water (RRQDW)/Règlement sur la qualité de l’eau potable [Q-2, r.
40]. Under the Environment Quality Act (GQ, 1978). Quebec City: Government of Quebec.
Health
Canada. 2020. Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water
Quality. Ottawa: Government of
Canada.
Human
Rights Watch. 2016. Make it Safe: Canada’s Obligation
to End the First Nations Water Crisis. New York City: Human Rights Watch.
Martin,
D., D. Bélanger, P. Gosselin, J. Brazeau, C. Furgal, and S. Déry. 2007.
“Drinking water and potential threats to human health in Nunavik: adaptation
strategies under climate change conditions.” Arctic
Journal 60 (2): 195–202. http://pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca/arctic/Arctic60-2-195.pdf.
Mohseni,
M. 2016. Improving Drinking Water in Canada’s
First Nations: Time to Embrace Complexity. RÉS’EAU/WaterNet.
RÉS’EAU/WaterNET. 2018. “An NSERC Small Water System Strategic
Network.” Accessed April 9, 2019. http://www.reseauwaternet.ca/list.aspx?gp=8.
Ripley,
S. 2009. “Navigating the Waters of Change: Strengthening the capacity of NWT
Communities to respond to the impacts of climate change on municipal water and
wastewater systems.”
Steenhof,
P. 2018. “Opportunities for Standards to Contribute to Health, Safety,
Resiliency, and Environmental Protection in Canada’s North.” The
Northern Review 48: 33–50. https://doi.org/10.22584/nr48.2018.002.
Thornton,
A. 2018. “Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act: An Unsafe Foundation for
Safe and Sustainable Drinking Water in First Nation Communities.” AFN
Water Symposium. Vancouver,
British Columbia.
Truth
and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. 2015. Truth
and Reconciliation Commission of Canada Final Report . Winnipeg: Truth and Reconciliation Commission of
Canada.
UBC.
University of British Columbia. 2018. “First Nations Lift Water Advisories with
Simple Treatment System.” https://news.ubc.ca/2018/02/14/first-nations-communities-lift-water-advisories-with-simple-treatment-system/
United
Nations. 2010. “The Right to Water.” Accessed April 9, 2019. https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet35en.pdf.
United
Nations. 2007. “United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples.” Accessed April 9, 2019. https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf.
United
Nations University, Institute of Advanced Studies Traditional Knowledge
Institute. 2008. “Garma International Indigenous
Water Declaration. In collaboration with North Australian Indigenous Land and
Sea Management Alliance.” Accessed April 9, 2019. https://www.afn.ca/uploads/files/env/garma-international.pdf.
United
States Environmental Protection Agency. 1985. DRASTIC:
A standardized system for evaluation groundwater pollution potential using
hydrogeologic settings. Washington
D.C.: United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Yukon
Government. 2006. Assessment of well water or
groundwater under the direct influence of surface water (GUDI). Whitehorse: Yukon Government.
Yukon
Government. 2009. Drinking Water Regulations (DWR) –
last amended in 2009. Under the Public Health and Safety Act. Whitehorse: Yukon Government.
Yukon
Government. 2013. Small Drinking Water Systems in
Yukon - Information for Owners and Operators. Whitehorse: Yukon Government.
Yukon
Government. 2017. “Yukon Water and Wastewater Sector Profile Report.” Accessed
November 5, 2020. https://yukon.ca/en/yukon-water-and-wastewater-sector-profile-report.