AECOM Report 1.Dot

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

AECOM Report 1.Dot DRAFT Comprehensive Study Report Pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act for the proposed 407 East Transportation Corridor (October, 2010) Prepared by: AECOM 300 – 300 Town Centre Boulevard 905 477 8400 tel Markham, ON, Canada L3R 5Z6 905 477 1456 fax www.aecom.com Project Number: 60117936 Date: October, 2010 AECOM Ontario Ministry of Transportation DRAFT Comprehensive Study Report Pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act for the proposed 407 East Transportation Corridor (October, 2010) Executive Summary ES.1 Background The Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) is proposing the construction and operation of the 407 East Transportation Corridor project, an extension of the existing 407 transportation corridor from its current terminus at Brock Road in Pickering to Highway 35/115 in Clarington, including two north-south links connecting Highway 401 to the proposed extension of 407, one in West Durham (Whitby) and the other in East Durham (Clarington). The transportation corridor includes a highway component and a transitway component (i.e. a dedicated corridor for transit). The MTO is the project proponent for the 407 East Transportation Corridor Project (the Project). ES.2 Purpose of this Draft Comprehensive Study Report The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEA Agency) has delegated the preparation of this draft Comprehensive Study report, and certain procedural aspects of public participation in its development, to the MTO. The purpose of this draft Comprehensive Study report is to provide, from the proponent’s perspective, the information, analysis and conclusions relevant to an eventual determination by the federal Minister of Environment on the likely significance of adverse environmental effects from the project. Guidelines provided by the CEA Agency have identified the scope of the project, the scope of the assessment, and the factors to be considered in order for the Comprehensive Study report to comply with requirements under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEA Act). ES.3 Structure of the Report – Sections 7 and 8 For the reasons explained below, this draft Comprehensive Study report was prepared after the conclusion and approval of the provincial environmental assessment. As a result, the comprehensive study report findings reflect the benefit of substantial input to the technical documentation from agencies, Aboriginal groups and the public. For each environmental component in section 7, the report contains a description of the approach taken; likely effects and mitigation; residual effects; government and public comments on the technical documentation; and how these have been addressed, to date. Section 8 provides the analysis and conclusions on the likely significance of these effects. ES.4 Comprehensive Study Type of Environmental Assessment The CEA Act applies to federal authorities when they contemplate certain actions or decisions in relation to a project that would enable it to proceed in whole or in part. Under section 5 of the CEA Act, a federal environmental assessment may be required when a federal authority (FA): • is the proponent; • provides financial assistance to a proponent; • sells, leases or otherwise disposes of land; or • issues a permit, licence, or any other approval as prescribed in the Law List Regulations under the Act. A federal authority that proposes to undertake one of the above actions, and is required to ensure that an environmental assessment is conducted under the Act, is referred to as a responsible authority (RA). As per Section 5 of the CEA Act: i AECOM Ontario Ministry of Transportation DRAFT Comprehensive Study Report Pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act for the proposed 407 East Transportation Corridor (October, 2010) • Transport Canada’s role as a RA under the CEA Act arises from its consideration of MTO’s use of a small amount of Federal property in the vicinity of Brock Road and Highway 7. • Fisheries and Ocean’s role as a RA arises from the anticipated requirement for authorizations under section 35(2) of the Fisheries Act for 27 individual watercourse crossings. Pursuant to the amendments to the CEA Act that came into force in July 2010 the CEA Agency is responsible for conducting the comprehensive study for the Project. The CEA Agency is also the Federal EA Coordinator (FEAC), ensuring that federal authorities fulfill their obligations under the CEA Act in a timely manner, and to the extent applicable facilitating the coordination of the federal EA process with the requirements of the Province. The Minister of Environment receives the final Comprehensive Study report and the public comments received during the public participation phases. Once all necessary information has been provided and the concerns are addressed, the Minister issues an EA decision statement that includes: • the Minister’s opinion as to whether, taking into account the implementation of any mitigation measures the Minister considers appropriate, the project is, or is not, likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects, • and any mitigation measures or follow-up program that the Minister considers appropriate. The Minister then refers the project back to the RAs for a decision on their course of action. ES.5 Consultation and Public Participation The CEA Agency ensures consultation is carried out with the public and also consults directly with Aboriginal groups. The required public participation for this comprehensive study involves at least three opportunities: • initial opportunity to comment on the project and the conduct of the comprehensive study; • opportunity to participate in the draft comprehensive study (delegated process, timing and content to be determined by the Agency); and • facilitation of public access to the final comprehensive study report and an opportunity to file comments on it. The first of these opportunities, comments on the Comprehensive Study Guidelines document commenced on July 19 and was completed on August 20. The current consultation on this draft Comprehensive Study report constitutes the second opportunity. The third opportunity is the comment period on the final Comprehensive Study report. For each of these opportunities, information notifying the public of the opportunity to comment is filed on the CEAR Internet website at www.ceaa.gc.ca. Individuals and groups who have indicated an interest in the project at earlier phases are also being notified directly of these opportunities. The CEA Agency also administers the Participant Funding Program (PFP) to support participation in the EA. An independent Funding Review Committee (FRC) was established to review applications for funding under the PFP and to recommend the allocation of up to a total of $25,000 in participant funding assistance. In this case, four recipients have received funds under the PFP. In addition to these formal participation opportunities, individuals and groups may comment on the project or the environmental assessment at any time while it is under way. ES.6 Existing Conditions The MTO described the existing environmental conditions for 14 environmental components are described in Section 6 of this report. The components are as follows: 1. Air quality and climate (including the consideration of climate change); ii AECOM Ontario Ministry of Transportation DRAFT Comprehensive Study Report Pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act for the proposed 407 East Transportation Corridor (October, 2010) 2. Noise and Vibration (including the consideration of noise sensitive areas); 3. Surface and subsurface geology and soils (including the consideration of valley slopes, landforms and erosion); 4. Groundwater (including the consideration of groundwater quality and quantity, and the location and condition of drinking water wells); 5. Surface water (including the consideration of surface water quality and quantity); 6. Vegetation and vegetation communities; 7. Wetlands; 8. Fish and fish habitat (including the consideration of sediments characteristics); 9. Wildlife and wildlife habitat (including the consideration of wildlife movement corridors, specialized/sensitive habitats and their use by migratory birds); 10. Species at Risk (i.e., Federal (COSEWIC) and Provincial Species at Risk); 11. Socio-economic Environment (including the consideration of agriculture, community and neighbourhood characteristics, adjacent and nearby land uses); 12. Cultural Environment; 13. Current use of lands and resources by Aboriginal People; and 14. Contaminated Sites and Waste Management. ES.7 Project Effects on the Environment, Mitigation Measures and Significance The environmental effects of the “Alternative Means” of carrying out the Project were assessed by MTO on the basis of a preliminary design. Numerous technically and economically feasible route alternatives were considered and assessed by MTO in a systematic manner. This was accomplished through the identification and screening of a “long list” of route alternatives, and detailed evaluation of a “short-list” of route alternatives. The “short-list” of alternative routes was subject to a detailed net effects analysis and a comparison of the relative advantages and disadvantages of each alternative in the context of the following five factor areas: • Natural Environment; • Social Environment; • Land Use/Economic Environment; • Cultural Environment; and • Technical Considerations. In some cases, a large number of alternatives were examined to ensure specific environmental constraints
Recommended publications
  • PICKERING AIRPORT DRAFT PLAN the Planning and Economic Development Committee Recommends the Following: 1. the Deputation by Stev
    Report No. 4 of the Planning and Economic Development Committee Regional Council Meeting of April 21, 2005 7 PICKERING AIRPORT DRAFT PLAN The Planning and Economic Development Committee recommends the following: 1. The deputation by Steve Shaw, Vice-President, Corporate Affairs and Communications, Greater Toronto Airport Authority be received; and 2. The recommendations contained in the following report, March 10, 2005, from the Commissioner of Planning and Development Services be adopted: 1. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that: 1. Regional staff continue to work with Durham Region and Greater Toronto Airports Authority staff to study and coordinate transportation and servicing impacts of the proposed Pickering airport. 2. Staff submit a subsequent report commenting further on the issues set out in Section 4 of this report at a future meeting of Planning Committee. 3. The Regional Clerk forward a copy of this report to the Greater Toronto Airport Authority, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Region of Durham, Transport Canada, Town of Markham, and Town of Whitchurh-Stouffville. 2. PURPOSE This report highlights the contents of the Draft Plan for the proposed Pickering airport released by the Greater Toronto Airport Authority (GTAA) in November 2004. The report also identifies York Region’s issues with respect to Growth Management resulting from recent Provincial forecasts, the Provincial Greenbelt Plan, and the need to ensure transportation and servicing infrastructure is in place to serve approved planned growth in both York and Durham Regions. 3. BACKGROUND The Pickering Airport lands consist of approximately 7,530 ha (18,600 acres) located within the City of Pickering, Town of Markham and Township of Uxbridge (see Attachment No.
    [Show full text]
  • Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (“Enbridge”) Line 9B Reversal and Line 9 Capacity Expansion Project (“Project”) Application
    Line 9B Reversal and Line 9 Capacity Expansion Project Enbridge Revised Response to Durham Citizens Lobby for Environmental Awareness and Responsibility Inc. File OF-Fac-Oil-E101-2012-10 02 Page 1 of 3 Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (“Enbridge”) Line 9B Reversal and Line 9 Capacity Expansion Project (“Project”) Application under section 58 and Part IV (“Application”) of the National Energy Board Act OH-002-2013 File OF-Fac-Oil-E101-2012-10 02 Enbridge Revised Response to Durham Citizens Lobby for Environmental Awareness & Responsibility Inc. (“DurhamCLEAR”) Information Request No. 1 The potential Environmental and socio-economic effects of the proposed project, including the potential effects of malfunctions or accidents that may occur and any cumulative environmental effects that are likely to result from the proposed project 4.b.iiR Request: (b) Durham Region extends for approximately 40 kilometers along the North shore of Lake Ontario. Line 9 runs across the full width of the region and in so doing crosses numerous rivers and streams that flow into the lake. Please provide for each of the following rivers and streams: ii) Time that it would take for oil from a spill to reach Lake Ontario from the time it first reached the water at maximum flow rate. Note that Line 9 crosses 2, 3, or more branches of each of these, all of which have individual flows and individual potential for spreading an oil leak Petticoat creek Duffins Creek Carruthers Creek Lynde Creek Pringle Creek Corbett Creek Oshawa Creek Harmony Creek Farewell Creek Black Creek Tooley Creek Darlington Creek Bowmanville Creek Line 9B Reversal and Line 9 Capacity Expansion Project Enbridge Revised Response to Durham Citizens Lobby for Environmental Awareness and Responsibility Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • 127 Spring 2017
    Newcastle Village and District Historical Society Newsletter Spring 2017 - Issue # 127 PRESIDENT’S REPORT e are beyond the middle of May, so let’s hope we will be blessed with more pleasant weather and higher tem- peratures ! On an unhappy note, we just received word from the Federal Government that our application for a grant has, W for the second year in a row, been denied. This, despite encouraging words from Federal bureaucrats, after the denial last year, that we should apply once again. Reasons for the denial are not provided so the whole thing remains a mystery – this in the face of a lot of work in preparing our applications with great precision and exhausting detail in each of the two years. The grant would have enabled your Society, working with Durham College, to electronically capture our records ( histori- cal letters, agreements, wills, photos, and so on ), then to make our data more readily available to scholars, students and the general public. We will, of course, soldier on and explore other options to fund this worthwhile project, including the possibility of finding corporate sponsors. And, while other Government grant opportunities will be looked at, we will attempt, as far as possi- ble, to seek some assurance that any other applications have a reasonable chance of success and not simply serve as a “make work” projects for bureaucrats. Our plans are moving ahead for HERITAGE DAY, an event created and hosted by your Society. It will be held in the main hall of the Newcastle Community Hall from 10AM until 3PM on June 25, 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rouge Uncovered: Community Participation, Urban Agriculture and Power Dynamics in the Creation of Canada’S First National Urban Park
    The Rouge Uncovered: Community Participation, Urban Agriculture and Power Dynamics in the Creation of Canada’s first National Urban Park by Jina Gill, B.A. (Hons.) A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of Geography and Planning University of Toronto © Copyright by Jina Gill 2017 The Rouge Uncovered: Community Participation, Urban Agriculture and Power Dynamics in the creation of Canada’s first National Urban Park Jina Gill Master of Arts Department of Geography and Planning University of Toronto 2017 Abstract Local food production has been a defining goal of a healthy and resilient food system. In 2011 the Canadian government and Parks Canada committed to creating Canada’s first national urban park. The space in which land is used to undertake conservation efforts and develop sustainable farming is often associated with inequalities of larger society; whereby hegemonic practices of inclusion and exclusion are produced and/or reinforced. By employing an Environmental Justice framework this thesis investigates if and how small-scale farmers and community members have been included in the creation of the park, and how power, particularly in relation to the axis of difference, influences green space planning, local farming and sustainability in the Greater Toronto Area. Findings show extreme contention between farmers and environmentalists over productive parkland use and definitions of ecological integrity. This research also discloses the need for a more inclusive approach to community participation processes in green space planning and management. ii Acknowledgments I would like to extend my sincerest thanks to my supervisor, Dr. Sarah Wakefield.
    [Show full text]
  • Crash Landing: Citizens, the State and Protest Against Federal Airport Development, 1968- 1976
    Crash Landing: Citizens, The State and Protest Against Federal Airport Development, 1968- 1976 ii Crash Landing: Citizens, The State and Protest Against Federal Airport Development, 1968- 1976 By Michael Rowan, B.A., M.A. Supervisor: Dr. Ken Cruikshank Committee Members: Dr. Richard Harris, Dr. John Weaver, Dr. Penny Bryden A thesis submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy McMaster University © Copyright by Michael Rowan, January 2019. iii McMaster University DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (2018) Hamilton, Ontario (History) TITLE: Crash Landing: Citizens, The State and Protest Against Federal Airport Development, 1968-1976 AUTHOR: Michael Rowan, B.A. (York University), M.A. (York University) PROFESSOR: Ken Cruikshank NUMBER OF PAGES 206 iv Abstract During the 1960s both the federal and provincial governments continued to take on new and larger responsibilities. During this same time period citizens began to mobilize and challenge the state on a number of social issues including race, gender, labour, urban sprawl and the environment. Citizens believed that not only did they have the right to challenge the authority of government in planning public policy, but they also had a right to participate in the decision- making process as much as any bureaucrat, expert, or elected official. In planning airports in Pickering, Ste. Scholastique and Sea Island, the federal government was opposed by citizen groups in each of these three cases. Citizens believed their voices were not being heard and that government officials did not respect them. As a result, they disrupted the meticulously laid out plans of elected officials and policy planners by drawing on evidence and expert advice.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the Greater Toronto Airports Authority “Needs Assessment Study - Pickering Lands” Implications for General Aviation in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
    Review of the Greater Toronto Airports Authority “Needs Assessment Study - Pickering Lands” Implications for General Aviation in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Ontario Prepared By: Prepared For: CANADIAN OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION September, 2011 Review of the Greater Toronto Airports Authority “Needs Assessment Study - Pickering Lands” Implications for General Aviation in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Ontario Prepared By: Prepared For: Malone Given Parsons Ltd. Canadian Owners and Pilots Association 140 Renfrew Drive, Suite 201 71 Bank St, 7th Floor Markham, Ontario Ottawa, Ontario L3R 6B3 K1P 5N2 In Association With: AeroCan Aviation Specialists Inc. 7 Kingfisher Cove Way Markham Ontario L6E 1B4 September 2011 11-2033 REVIEW OF THE GREATER TORONTO AIRPORTS AUTHORITY “NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY - PICKERING LANDS” TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................... V 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................... 1 1.1 General Aviation Defined .......................................................... 3 1.2 Limitations of the General Aviation System in Toronto ........... 3 2.0 THE FUTURE DEMAND FOR GENERAL AVIATION IN THE GTA ................................................................ 5 2.1 The Air System Capacity for General Aviation ........................ 5 2.2 Current and Future Capacity ..................................................... 6 2.3 Interview Results .......................................................................... 8 John C. Munro Hamilton International
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Highways Program
    Southern Highways Program 2017-2021 Ministry of Transportation TABLE OF CONTENTS SOUTHERN REGIONAL MAP ..................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 2 SOUTHERN EXPANSION 2017 – 2021 ....................................................................... 3 SOUTHERN REHABILITATION 2017 – 2021 ............................................................... 8 PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE .................................................................................. 49 SOUTHERN REGIONAL MAP 1 SOUTHERN HIGHWAYS PROGRAM 2017-2021 INTRODUCTION Creating Jobs and Building a Stronger Ontario In 2017/18, the Ontario government will be investing more than $2.5 billion to repair and expand provincial highways and bridges. This includes almost $1.9 billion for Southern Ontario creating or sustaining approximately 13,300 direct and indirect jobs. Improving Ontario's transportation network is part of the government’s plan to strengthen the economy. 2017/18 Planned Accomplishments Southern Ontario 407 East Other Projects Total (Phase 2A) New highways (lane kms) 29 21 50 New bridges 10 10 Highways rehabilitated 317 317 (centreline kms) Bridges 121 121 rehabilitated The timing of projects in the following lists is subject to change based on funding, planning, design, environmental approval, property acquisition, and construction requirements. 2 SOUTHERN EXPANSION 2017 – 2021 WEST ONTARIO EXPANSION 2017-2021†
    [Show full text]
  • November 2017 NEWSLETTER
    November 2017 NEWSLETTER “A national organization dedicated to promoting the viability of Regional and Community Airports across Canada” www.rcacc.ca RCAC MEMBER AIRPORT PROFILE: Vernon Regional Airport (CYVK), BC JJul Initially, the airport was located south of the city at the Vernon Army Cadet Camp. The camp parade square and baseball field now occupy the exact spot. During the second war, general aviation was grounded by the Federal Government. The airport was taken over by the military for training. When the war ended, the airport was relocated to the farmlands of Okanagan Landing. The airport was a grass field approximately half the length it is today. Jj The Vernon Flying Club was the sole tenant of the airport during the late forties and early fifties. There were only four aircraft based on the field. The 1,200′ X 12′ runway was eventually paved. The two-inch thick pavement was laid over four inches of gravel. The city hangar was built during the early 1950’s, and airport usage grew during the 60’s and 70’s. The strong economy of the 1970’s saw close to eighty aircraft located on the field. Operation then was a regional district function. The runway (07-25) had been extended westward onto Indian Reserve property giving 2200 feet, but it was still only twelve feet wide. The airport remained basically unchanged until 1988 when the present runway was built. The Flying Club and Okanagan Aviation were the primary forces behind this development. And when the city limits were expanded to include Okanagan Landing, the airport fell under the authority of the City of Vernon.
    [Show full text]
  • Realjobsnow-FINAL
    Better still... Real Jobs Now! Response to “Jets & Jobs: Summary of Findings from the Targeted Stakeholder Consultations by the Independent Advisor on the Economic Development of the Pickering Lands” January 1, 2017 1 General Observations What did the consultations glean? Very little that wasn’t already known. For those familiar with the Pickering airport file, this should come as no surprise. The same words, arguments, concerns, conflicting opinions, misconceptions, hopes, and aspirations can be found, in an unbroken thread, in headlines, articles, letters to editors, council resolutions, reports, and interviews spanning the entire 44 years (and counting) since the 1972 airport announcement. Why the report at all, then? The Harper government was on the cusp of calling an election and clearly believed the appearance of action on the airport file could be useful to the campaign. The original Pickering plan, after all, dates all the way back to the tenure of Trudeau père. Transport Canada was tasked with commissioning two studies – a needs analysis (begun this year by KPMG and not due to be completed until 2018) and a “what if ?” stakeholder consultation, essentially an opinion-gathering exercise on potential uses for the remaining Lands. “Jets & Jobs” is the result. It’s important to note that while the needs analysis is just the latest in a series of similar studies, the “potential uses” consultation was unique. It’s also important to note that it was announced as an independent undertaking. But “independent” – exempt from external control or support [OED] – was a bit of a misnomer. The Independent Advisor was selected and appointed by Transport Canada, briefed by Transport Canada, paid by Transport Canada; Transport Canada wrote the background notes, drafted the discussion questionnaire, drew up the list of stakeholders to interview; Transport Canada provided the meeting rooms and the note-taker, reviewed the draft report, and (we can be sure) intervened in its contents before release of the final version.
    [Show full text]
  • Calibration and Sensitivity Analysis Notes
    Forward ii Earth Science Information Systems Thursday, January 22, 2009 Gayle SooChan, P.Geo. Director – Groundwater Resources Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority 100 Whiting Avenue Oshawa, Ontario L1H 3T3 RE: Tier 1 Water Budget Study of the Watersheds in the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Area Dear Gayle: We have reviewed the additional peer review comments and have made revisions to the text and figures of the report to address the concerns raised. We are pleased to provide this final copy of the Tier 1 assessment of the surface water and groundwater balance within the CLOCA area watersheds. We trust this final report meets with your satisfaction. We would like to thank you for the opportunity to work on this project. If you have any questions, please call. Yours truly Earthfx Inc Dirk Kassenaar, M.Sc., P.Eng. E.J. Wexler, M.Sc., M.S.E., P.Eng. Subsequent to revisions completed by Earthfx Inc stated above, this report was further revised in November 2009 to incorporate comments provided by the CTC Source Protection Committee. The final revisions include the finalized Significant Groundwater Recharge mapping and reference changes to reflect requirements in the provincial Director’s Rules versus the earlier released guidelines. 3363 Yonge St., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4N 2M6 T: 416.410.4260 F: 416.481.6026 www.earthfx.com CLOCA Tier 1 Water Budget Report January, 2009 Table of Contents 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................10 2 INTRODUCTION
    [Show full text]
  • Opportunities to Grow Southern Ontario's Fruit
    Plant the Seeds: Opportunities to Grow Southern Ontario’s Fruit & Vegetable Sector JRG Consulting Group Greenbelt Foundation Occasional Papers March 2020 Copyright © 2020 Greenbelt Foundation All Rights Reserved Greenbelt Foundation 661 Yonge Street, Suite 500 Toronto, Ontario M4Y 1Z9 Canada Tel (416) 960-0001 Fax (416) 960-0030 [email protected] www.greenbelt.ca ISSN 1912-4171 Greenbelt Foundation Occasional Paper Series (Print) ISSN 1912-418X Greenbelt Foundation Occasional Paper Series (Online) The Greenbelt Foundation is committed to promoting awareness and education about Ontario’s Greenbelt. To this end we occasionally publish research and general interest papers that explore our three program areas: viable agriculture and viticulture; vibrant rural communities; and, a restored and protected natural environment. Plant the Seeds: Opportunities to Grow Southern Ontario’s Fruit & Vegetable Sector Prepared by JRG Consulting Group ISBN 978-1-927075-16-6 The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors only and do not necessarily represent the views of the Greenbelt Foundation, their Officers or Directors. We have done our best to confirm that all facts and figures are accurate. However, we do not retain liability for any errors or misrepresentations. Acknowledgments The Greenbelt Foundation would like to thank the members of our Advisory Committee for their valuable input and insight: Alison Robertson, Erin Atchison, Janet Horner, Jason Bent, and Stephen Duff. Titles in the Greenbelt Foundation Occasional Paper
    [Show full text]
  • Pickering Airport Study Why Invest in Pickering?
    Regional Municipality of Durham Pickering Airport Study Why Invest in Pickering? Prepared by: AECOM Canada Ltd. 300 Water Street Whitby, ON L1N 9J2 Canada T: 905 668 9363 F: 905 668 0221 www.aecom.com Date: May 30, 2018 Project #: 60562615 Statement of Qualifications and Limitations The attached Report (the “Report”) has been prepared by AECOM Canada Ltd. (“AECOM”) for the benefit of the Client (“Client”) in accordance with the agreement between AECOM and Client, including the scope of work detailed therein (the “Agreement”). The information, data, recommendations and conclusions contained in the Report (collectively, the “Information”): . is subject to the scope, schedule, and other constraints and limitations in the Agreement and the qualifications contained in the Report (the “Limitations”); . represents AECOM’s professional judgement in light of the Limitations and industry standards for the preparation of similar reports; . may be based on information provided to AECOM which has not been independently verified; . has not been updated since the date of issuance of the Report and its accuracy is limited to the time period and circumstances in which it was collected, processed, made or issued; . must be read as a whole and sections thereof should not be read out of such context; . was prepared for the specific purposes described in the Report and the Agreement; and . in the case of subsurface, environmental or geotechnical conditions, may be based on limited testing and on the assumption that such conditions are uniform and not variable either geographically or over time. AECOM shall be entitled to rely upon the accuracy and completeness of information that was provided to it and has no obligation to update such information.
    [Show full text]