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

77034

Commentaire fait au nom

Ontario Sewer and Watermain Construction Association

Statut du commentaire

OSCWA has been involved with the MECP and other stakeholder organizations in promoting the environmentally responsible and beneficial reuse of excess soils in Ontario for over a decade. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77104

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

The ESQSs for Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 are too low and have resulted in a significant amount of soil to be managed as waste. The Table 3.1 ICC ESQS for PHC F2 is 26 ug/g, while the Table 3 SCS for PHC F2 is 230 ug/g, which is almost 10 times higher. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77207

Commentaire fait au nom

Individual

Statut du commentaire

The proposal to eliminate Section 14 from Regulation 406/19 is problematic. Project Leaders as defined in the Regulations are not required to have competencies in determining whether or not a site is potentially contaminated. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77235

Commentaire fait au nom

LDS Consultants Inc.

Statut du commentaire

Please find the attached letter, outlining our comments. Rebecca A. Walker, P.Eng., QP(ESA) Principal, Geotechnical Services LDS Consultants Inc. 2323 Trafalgar Street London, Ontario N5V 0E1 Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77335

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Ltd

Statut du commentaire

Please see below for the following comments: - We are in support of the soil storage capacity amendment proposed for dry soils. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77364

Commentaire fait au nom

Individual

Statut du commentaire

Section 14 needs to be strengthened rather than revoked. All excess soil types need to undergo a risk analysis not matter the origin. See attached document. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77399

Commentaire fait au nom

Individual

Statut du commentaire

December 3, 2022 To Whom It May Concern: Re: ERO 019-6240 --Amendments to Certain Requirements Under the Excess Soil Regulation Removing reuse planning requirements from low-risk projects Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77436

Commentaire fait au nom

Individual

Statut du commentaire

The Government of Ontario Proposed Excess Soil Management Policy Framework document, recognizes that Conservation Authorities (in addition to Municipalities) are a main permitting body for soil receiving sites through regulations made under section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77494

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

On large infrastructure tunnelling projects, the current liquid soils (including solidifided liquid soils) storage capacity limits within a project area pose a major constraint due to the significant volumes of soil generated over a short period of time. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77500

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

Regulatory requirements are posing material assessment constraints for rock that will become excess soil through crushing during removal on large infrastructure projects. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77502

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

Requirements of Registry reporting should match the scope of the project. For both large-scale or small projects, the required reporting is not practical and is significantly onerous (assessment of past uses for many kms and properties does not add value to the projects). Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77504

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

For consideration by the Ministry, although we are aware that it is not the Ministry's intention to require sampling on all projects, the Regulation as written (including the onus on reuse receivers to set and comply with ESQS), requires sampling for the majority of projects generating excess soils, Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77507

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

Under Sections B,2.(3)14-16 with respect to Sampling and Analysis Plan requirements, "Soil" is the referenced term when setting out the minimum sampling parameters, as well as the in-situ and stockpile sampling requirements. The terms "Excess Soil" or "Crushed Rock" are omitted from these sections. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77509

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

When existing asphalt and a proportion of the underlying aggregate are removed from a road during a reconstruction project and sent to a recycler, it is unclear what the requirements are under the Regulation for sampling the aggregate portion of this material, which to our understanding is excess so Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

77512

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

Through the practical implementation of the excess soils requirements, it has been demonstrated that a significant amount of excess soils generated on typical construction/development projects are being classified as "waste", based on exceedances of applicable ESQSs, including the Table 3 small volu Lire davantage