Commentaires

Consulter les commentaires qu'a reçus cet avis par l'entremise du registre. Vous pouvez soit tous les télécharger, soit utiliser la fonction de recherche et de tri ci-dessous.

Certains commentaires ne seront pas affichés en ligne. Apprenez-en davantage sur l'état du commentaire et sur nos politiques relatives aux commentaires et à la protection de la vie privée.

Télécharger les commentaires

Recherche de commentaires

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

54872

Commentaire fait au nom

Individual

Statut du commentaire

Please do not allow Port Colborne Quarries another water removal permit. Pit #1 needs to be allowed to fill in as a passive water location, as was agreed decades ago. The water that runs under Pit #1 is a crucial aquifer and must be protected. Thank you.

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

54969

Commentaire fait au nom

Niagara Water Protection Alliance

Statut du commentaire

This lengthy comment was sent as a letter to relavent employees of MEPC before this ERO posting was published. It differs in content in that names and supporting reference material have been removed. Dear Sir, Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

55053

Commentaire fait au nom

Individual

Statut du commentaire

Port Colborne Quarries (PCQ) has enjoyed a Permit To Take Water (PTTW) for decades. The first pit was mined in the mid 1950's, and the pit extended into the aquifer by the early 1960's. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

55458

Commentaire fait au nom

Individual

Statut du commentaire

I would like to put forth my opposition to the backfill of the Port Colborne quarry. Site address Corner of Chippawa Road & Highway 140 Port Colborne, ON Canada this is against the proposition from 1712028 Ontario Inc. Post Office Box No. 275 Port Colborne, ON L3K 5W1 Canada Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

58030

Commentaire fait au nom

Individual

Statut du commentaire

In my opinion Port Colborne Quarries (PCQ) proposal to renew their Permit to Take Water 7645-AAYS3Y is miss leading and does not reflect a serious effort to protect the quantity and quality of the Highly Vulnerable Aquifer so should be denied. Lire davantage