Headline News

Annual water report to Orangeville council shares adverse incidents

May 14, 2026   ·   0 Comments

By JAMES MATTHEWS, LOCAL JOURNALISM INITIATIVE REPORTER

Orangeville’s drinking water remained of good quality last year, according to annual testing.

But there were some reported hiccups of which Councillor Joe Andrews took note during council’s May 11 meeting.

The 2025 annual water works report provides a basic description of Orangeville’s water works system, a summary of any adverse water quality incidents (AWQI) between Jan. 1 and Dec. 31, and an overview of the water quality testing results for the reporting period.

The water quality testing results continue to indicate Orangeville’s drinking water is of good quality and regularly meets both the microbiological and chemical health-related standards of the Ontario Drinking Water Quality Standards.

There were 11 AWQIs last year for which notification to the Ministry of Environment, Conservation, and Parks was required.

The actual number of AWQIs should have been seven, but the laboratory reported five individual sodium exceedances to the ministry when only one combined AWQI report should have been made.

Five AWQIs resulted from sodium concentrations greater than 20 mg/L in drinking water samples. Three resulted from localized watermain depressurizations due to operational issues within the distribution system.

Two were caused by arsenic concentrations greater than 10 ug/L in drinking water samples. And one AWQI resulted from the inadvertent, short-term isolation of a UV transmittance analyzer at a water treatment plant.

According to a report to council, staff continue efforts to minimize the occurrence of these incidents through the Drinking Water Quality Management System (DWQMS) review and continual improvement processes.

There were seven non-compliance incidents during the reporting period.

One incident involved the failure to maintain and update water works mapping as required by the Drinking Water Works Permit.

One incident involved failure to provide complete records related to the review of a daily water works compliance report.

A separate incident involved failing to prepare a Form 2 document before undertaking minor modifications at a water treatment plant. Another incident involved failure to provide records confirming disinfection of all parts and equipment used in new or repaired water works. An additional incident involved a short-term failure to monitor UV transmittance at a water treatment plant as required by the Municipal Drinking Water License.

Another incident involved ongoing concerns about staffing levels, resulting in an inability to provide regulatory information and to follow up on non-compliance items in a timely manner.

And one incident involved failure to collect and test for quarterly nitrate and nitrite concentrations at a water treatment plant as required by the regulation.

Tim Thompson, the town’s public works compliance officer for water, said the water works report concerns water quality and testing. The summary report deals with non-compliances and is required to be presented to council.

“Operating our municipal water system is quite a complex operation,” Thompson said. “There’s a lot of moving parts. So there’s almost always going to be some issues cropping up somewhere.”

The five exceedances cited were for sodium in the drinking water system, he said. And that’s misleading because the lab that tested reported the results as five individual incidents.

“Normally it’s reported as one adverse water quality incident, even though there might be multiple samples that exceed the 20 mg/L,” Thompson said.

The non-compliance issues cited in the summary report are mostly paperwork-related operational exercises.

“Sometimes the paperwork just happens to slip through the cracks or is submitted late,” he said, and added that corrective actions are put in place to avoid future incidents.

Readers Comments (0)