RE: ERO NOTICE #019-0556 –…

RE: ERO NOTICE #019-0556 – PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE AGGREGATE RESOURCES ACT AND ONTARIO REGULATION 244/97

I am writing to provide comments to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) in relation to the proposed changes to the Aggregate Resources Act (ARA) and the general regulation under the ARA (O.Reg.244/97).

In the Environmental Registry notice1 for these wide-ranging proposals, the MNRF states that the changes to the current ARA regime are being proposed in order to “reduce burdens for business while maintaining strong protection for the environment and managing impacts to communities.”
1 See https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/019-0556.

However, it seems the proposed ARA changes reveals that this initiative is unlikely to maintain “strong” environmental protection or result in appropriate management of community impacts. Also, I fundamentally, object to the erroneous characterization of current ARA requirements as burdensome “red tape” that should be cut in order to benefit aggregate producers across Ontario.

Accordingly, for the reasons outlined below, I recommend that the key ARA proposals should not proceed in their current form, and they should instead be withdrawn, deleted or substantially re-written.

The 2017 ECO report identified serious shortcomings in the existing ARA regime and offered recommendations for long overdue reform.
Unfortunately, Ontario’s proposed ARA revisions do not implement the ECO’s recommendations, and instead outline a number of questionable changes, such as:
• revising the application process for aggregate operations that propose to excavate below the water table;
• ousting the application of municipal zoning by-laws relating to the depth of aggregate extraction;
• specifying that municipal zoning on Crown land does not apply to aggregate extraction;
• restricting the ability to impose ARA conditions that require agreements between municipalities and aggregate producers regarding haulage routes;
• streamlining compliance reporting by aggregate operators;
• allowing aggregate operators to “self-file” changes to site plans for unspecified “routine activities”; and
• enabling unspecified “low risk” activities to occur without an ARA licence if regulatory conditions are followed.
In summary, the Ontario government appears poised to revise key provisions in the PPS and the ARA that have traditionally helped to protect communities and the environment. However, the province has not provided any compelling evidence-based justification for these changes.

CONCLUSIONS

For above reasons, it seems that the Ontario government’s proposed changes to the ARA and O.Reg.244/97 fail to address long-standing concerns about the adverse environmental, public health and socio-economic impacts of aggregate extraction. Instead, the proposed changes are clearly aimed at making it easier to establish or expand pits and quarries across Ontario.

Further, in my opinion, the Ontario government has not substantiated the alleged need for its proposals by providing credible, objective and evidence-based justification for these controversial legislative and regulatory changes.

These changes do not constitute sound environmental or land use planning policy, and they virtually guarantee the continuation – if not intensification – of intractable land use disputes over new or expanded aggregate operations and their attendant impacts, particularly in relation to water resources and entire ecosystems.