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

120352

Commentaire fait au nom

City of Mississauga

Statut du commentaire

On behalf of the City of Mississauga, please find attached our comments on MECP's proposed amendments to O. Reg. 406/19. The City is generally supportive of most of the proposed changes and would like to present further points for consideration for greater clarity and transparency. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

120651

Commentaire fait au nom

Oxford County Water and Wastewater Services

Statut du commentaire

Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks Environmental Registry of Ontario (ERO) Submission Subject: Response to Enabling greater beneficial reuse of excess soil ERO Number 019-9196 Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

120664

Commentaire fait au nom

Regional Municipality of Niagara

Statut du commentaire

November 20, 2024 Reema Kureishy Environmental Policy Branch Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks 40 St. Clair Avenue West, 10th Floor Toronto, ON M4V 1M2 Dear Ms. Kureishy: RE: ERO 019-9196 Enabling greater beneficial reuse of excess soil: Niagara Region Comments Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

122041

Commentaire fait au nom

Ontario Sewer and Watermain Construction Association (OSWCA)

Statut du commentaire

The Ontario Sewer and Watermain Construction Association (OSWCA) submitted comments welcoming a number of provisions that will help to facilitate the reuse of excess soil excavated from construction sites and infrastructure projects, while also highlighting concerns around the two-year delay on land Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

122043

Commentaire fait au nom

Conservation Ontario

Statut du commentaire

Please find attached Conservation Ontario's comments on "Enabling greater beneficial reuse of excess soil" (ERO 019-9196). Conservation Ontario thanks the Province for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

122045

Commentaire fait au nom

Region of Peel

Statut du commentaire

RE: ERO Registry Number 019-9196 Proposed amendments enabling greater beneficial reuse of excess soil Dear Mr. Lompart: These comments are provided by Peel Region staff, who have reviewed the proposed amendments and appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback to the Province. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

122046

Commentaire fait au nom

Township of Puslinch

Statut du commentaire

The Township of Puslinch is submitting the attached comments with respect to ERO 019-9196, regarding amendments to Ontario Regulation 406/19 (the Excess Soil Regulation) and the Rules for Soil Management and Excess Soil Quality Standards,. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

122048

Commentaire fait au nom

Ontario Federation of Agriculture

Statut du commentaire

On behalf of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, please find attached our submission with respect to the consultation on enabling greater beneficial reuse of excess soil (ERO # 019-9196). Kindest regards, Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

122052

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

Based on current wording of O.Reg. 406/19, it is understood that if any part of the project area is an enhanced investigation area, then the entire project area is treated like an enhanced investigation project area. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

122053

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

Proposed Amendment 6: Please clarify if post-dredging confirmatory sampling of SWMP sediment is required in some fashion in all cases? We propose the QP be given discretion to determine whether additional sampling is necessary based on the in situ results and means and methods of excavation. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

122054

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

Proposed Amendments 4 & 5: Where these proposals relate to large road/highway projects that have a fill requirement or are able to manage their excavated soils between local and similar projects, Dillon sees a benefit to the MECP's proposed flexibility from the current excess soil requirements. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

122055

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

Please consider removing the 25,000m3 limitation on the quantity of material that can be stored at an aggregate reuse depot. In our experience, large projects and/or multiple projects will exceed the 25,000m3 limit in a short period of time. Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

122056

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

We are in support of the MECP's proposal to permit the establishment of aggregate depots that will not require an ECA as this is anticipated to bring the regulation into better alignment with current industry practice to treat engineered aggregate material as a resource while understanding that this Lire davantage

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

122057

Commentaire fait au nom

Dillon Consulting Limited

Statut du commentaire

Obtaining representative sampling results of aggregate materials, where required (i.e. from PCA/APEC) is not possible. Exceedances are expected in this material - where sampling is required, it will generate waste where it would otherwise be suitable for reuse in a similar environment. Lire davantage