This Web page has been archived on the Web.

Environmental impacts of a waste water servicing project

Petition: No. 185

Issue(s): Biological diversity, environmental assessment, and water

Petitioner(s): Laura Bowman and Sylvia Bowman

Date Received: 15 December 2006

Status: Completed

Summary: This petition concerns the Holland Landing-Queensville Sideroad waste water servicing project, which involves the installation of a trunk sewer line along the edge of a conservation area in Ontario. According to the petitioners, the project proposes the harmful alteration and destruction of fish and migratory bird habitat in an important wetland. The petitioners believe that this proposal should require a permit under the Fisheries Act and should trigger an environmental assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.

Federal Departments Responsible for Reply: Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Transport Canada

Petition

December 6, 2006

Office of the Auditor General of Canada
Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
Attention: Petitions
240 Sparks Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0G6

Telephone: (613) 995-3708 or 1-888-761-5953 (toll free)
Fax: (613) 941-8286
E-mail: petitions@oag-bvg.gc.ca

Dear Commissioner of the Environment,

We are residents of Canada who would like to petition the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Transport Canada and Environment Canada regarding the issuance of permits and the conducting of a Canadian Environmental Assessment Act assessment for the Holland Landing Queensville Sideroad Wastewater Servicing Project under the Fisheries Act and Migratory Birds Convention Act and Transport Canada legislation.

The wastewater-servicing project involves installing a trunk sewer line along the Roger's Reservoir conservation area in East Gwillimbury Ontario. The project is currently undergoing a provincial environmental assessment but no issuance of federal permits has been requested by the proponent and there has not yet been a federal environmental assessment process engaged.

Please accept our petition for your review.

Thank you,

[Original signed by Laura Bowman and Sylvia Bowman]


Holland Landing—Queensville Sideroad Wastewater Servicing Project

Background information

The Holland Landing-Queensville Sideroad Wastewater Servicing Project is a project proposed by the Region of York for summer 2007 and located in the Town of East Gwillimbury, Ontario. The project involves the installation of a trunk sewer line along the edge of Rogers Reservoir, a conservation area under the Ontario Conservation Authorities Act.

Rogers Reservoir is home to fish and migratory birds. The Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority Website reads:

    "Encounter great blue herons, american coots and sora rails at Rogers Reservoir Conservation Area. This 68.3 hectare site is a great place to watch nesting birds, cast a fishing line, and cycle along trails which are part of the Nokiidaa Trail sytem linking the Towns of Aurora, Newmarket and East Gwillimbury."

The project is currently undergoing an Environmental Assessment under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act. As part of this assessment, the proposed route was disclosed and included routes along the edge of the reservoir and the East Holland River as seen below:

The project proposal includes digging a trench 10-30 metres below ground level on the north and east sides of the reservoir from 2nd Concession to Green Lane East. It is unknown exactly how far the trench will be positioned from the edge of the watercourse.

The project also involves the installation of a pumping station at one or more locations along the East Holland River at Rogers Reservoir.

Reason For Petition

The project appears to propose the harmful alteration and destruction of fish and migratory bird habitat in an important wetland. This proposal should require a permit under the Fisheries Act and should trigger the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) process, which is required to be completed as early as possible in the project. The Provincial Assessment has been ongoing for some time, but the proponent has not disclosed the status of its Fisheries Act and CEAA requirements.

The project also has implications for flow in the East Holland River, as the project includes the discharge of groundwater from the trenches, this aspect of the project may also harmfully alter or destroy fish habitat and migratory bird habitat.

In the surrounding area, the project may also alter flow levels in Lake Simcoe, and the Georgian Bay-Lake Huron system because it involves the transfer of groundwater from the Lake Simcoe watershed to the Lake Ontario Watershed via the trunk line south of the project. Flow reductions resulting from the project may also harmfully alter or destroy fish habitat. We are not aware of any groundwater studies establishing that this practice is sustainable in light of low aquifer levels and a lack of sufficient study of groundwater in the Lake Simcoe watershed.

York Region compliance problems persist without adequate scrutiny from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and Environment Canada, despite the potential for serious harm to fish, fish habitat, and migratory bird populations.

Once installed, the pipe is intended to service a series of housing developments in Queensville, East Gwillimbury. These housing developments may impact migratory bird habitat and install storm-water infrastructure that may adversely impact water quality and therefore fish and fish habitat in East Gwillimbury and Lake Simcoe.

A lack of federal scrutiny and oversight is exacerbating the problems in the South Lake Simcoe watershed.

Specific questions

Questions Directed at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO)

  1. Will the Holland Landing Queensville Sideroad wastewater project proposed by York Region be required to obtain permits under the Fisheries Act?
  2. What Fisheries Act permits will be required of the project?
  3. If it is the position of DFO that any Fisheries Act permits are not required, what are the reasons for DFO taking this position?
  4. What correspondence has occurred between DFO and York Region about this project?
  5. What studies of Fish habitat are in the possession of DFO for the Rogers Reservoir and the East Holland River from Green Lane to Yonge St. in the Town of East Gwillimbury?
  6. What existing permits under the Fisheries Act exist in or around the East Holland River between Yonge St. and Green Lane East?

Request:

We request the following

  • The Department of Fisheries and Oceans should require permits for the harmful alteration and destruction of fish habitat for the installation of pipes, discharge of groundwater, and installation of pumping stations next to the East Holland River.
  • These permits should trigger a new environmental assessment under CEAA.
  • York Region should be required to bring all of its existing wastewater infrastructure, including pumping stations and stormwater facilities into compliance with the requirements of the existing Fisheries Act before any such permits should be granted.
  • The Department of Fisheries and Oceans should review the cumulative impact on flow levels in Lake Simcoe and Georgian-Bay Lake Huron of the intra-basin transfer proposed by York Region as they relate to fish habitat.
  • The Department of Fisheries and Oceans should review the cumulative impact of the pipe and the proposed development in Queensville, East Gwillimbury, Ontario on fish habitat.
  • Copies of any information that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has regarding fish habitat in Rogers Reservoir and nearby areas of the East Holland River.

Transport Canada

  1. Will Transport Canada be requiring any permits for the Holland Landing-Queensville Sideroad Wastewater Servicing Project?
  2. If permits will be required what permits?
  3. If no permits will be required, what is the reason for Transport Canada's position?
  4. What specific correspondence has occurred between York Region and Transport Canada regarding the project?

Environment Canada

  1. What information, if any, does Environment Canada possess regarding migratory birds in the Rogers Reservoir?
  2. Is Environment Canada corresponding with York Region regarding impacts on migratory birds in the reservoir? What is the specific content of that correspondence?
  3. Has Environment Canada ever investigated York Region pumping station infrastructure regarding its impact on migratory bird populations?
  4. Does Environment Canada consider the discharge of cold groundwater into a warm wetland the discharge of a substance that is harmful to migratory birds under the Migratory Birds Convention Act? If not, why not?

We request the following

  • Environment Canada should review the cumulative impacts on water levels in the Lake Simcoe and Georgian-Bay Lake Huron system and its implications for migratory birds resulting from this project in the short and long-term.
  • Environment Canada should review the local impacts on migratory bird habitat of the installation of the pipe, and the pumping stations, including but not limited to the discharge of cold water into the wetland on migratory birds.
  • Environment Canada should review the impact of the proposed development in Queensville, East Gwillimbury, Ontario on migratory bird habitat.
  • Copies of any information Environment Canada has on migratory bird habitat in and around Rogers Reservoir and in East Gwillimbury, Ontario.

Federal departments and agencies that need to respond

Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Transport Canada
Environment Canada

Supporting Materials

The Website for the Provincial assessment of the Holland Landing Queensville Sideroad containing the reports upon which this petition is based is at http://hlqs.cenet.ca

The Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority Website is http://www.lsrca.on.ca and contains information about fish and water quality in Roger's Reservoir.

[top of page]

Minister's Response: Environment Canada

16 April 2007

Ms. Laura Bowman and Ms. Sylvia Bowman
York Simcoe Naturalists
18924 2nd Concession, R.R. 1
Newmarket, Ontario
L3Y 4V8

Dear Ms. Laura Bowman and Ms. Sylvia Bowman:

I am pleased to respond to your Environmental Petition no. 185, to the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, regarding Environment Canada's knowledge of, and responsibilities for, the Holland Landing-Queensville Sideroad Wastewater Servicing Project proposed by York Region. Your petition was received by the Department on December 21, 2006.

Enclosed you will find Environment Canada's response to your petition. I understand that the Ministers of Fisheries and Ocean and Transport will be responding separately to questions that fall under their respective mandates.

I appreciate your interest in these important matters, and trust that you will find this information useful.

Sincerely,

[Original signed by John Baird, Minister of the Environment]

John Baird, P.C., M.P.

c.c.:

The Honourable Loyola Hearn, P.C., M.P.
The Honourable Lawrence Cannon, P.C., M.P.
Mr. Ronald C. Thompson, Interim Commissioner of the Environment
and Sustainable Development


Environment Canada's Response to Environmental Petition no. 185,
pursuant to section 22 of the
Auditor General Act,
regarding the potential environmental impacts of the Holland Landing-Queensville Sideroad Wastewater Servicing Project

Question

  1. What information, if any, does Environment Canada possess regarding migratory birds in Rogers Reservoir?

Environment Canada does not have information regarding migratory birds in Rogers Reservoir.

  1. Is Environment Canada corresponding with York Region regarding impacts on migratory birds in the reservoir? What is the specific content of that correspondence?

Prior to the receipt of Petition 185, Environment Canada had no correspondence with York Region regarding the Holland Landing-Queensville Sideroad Wastewater Servicing Project. Environment Canada has since requested detailed information about the project from York Region, including any bird inventories that have been or will be conducted for the project. To date, this information has not yet been received.

  1. Has Environment Canada ever investigated York Region pumping station infrastructure regarding its impact on migratory bird populations?

Environment Canada has not specifically investigated the impacts of York Region's pumping station infrastructure on migratory birds. However, at the request of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Environment Canada participated in a review of the Individual Environmental Assessment for the York Region Long Term Water Supply project. Environment Canada's advice, which was contained in an April 25, 2001 letter to the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, provided York Region with timing restrictions to avoid significant impacts on migratory birds breeding in the project area. The letter also advised of potential impacts on natural wetlands, namely Cherrywood Swamp and Petticoat Creek Swamp, due to site dewatering during excavation. Environment Canada also recommended that York Region verify that water table fluctuations would be minimal, and develop measures to restore any essential wetland functions that might be impaired by the dewatering activities. This review did not raise the specific issue of thermal impacts of groundwater discharge on migratory birds and their habitat

  1. Does Environment Canada consider the discharge of cold groundwater into a warm wetland the discharge of a substance that is harmful to migratory birds under the Migratory Birds Convention Act? If not, why not?

The determination of whether a particular substance discharged into waters frequented by migratory birds is and "harmful to migratory birds" can only be made in the context of a number of important known variables. Some of these include the following:

  • types of bird habitat in the area of the discharge;
  • the species of birds using the water body;
  • the nature of use by the birds (e.g. nesting, feeding, staging);
  • the presence of birds during and after the time of discharge;
  • the characteristics of the receiving water body (e.g. size, temperature, volume of water, circulation); and
  • the nature of the discharge (timing, composition, volume, temperature, rate of discharge, frequency, etc.).

Without this knowledge, Environment Canada is unable to make a determination about whether cold groundwater discharges into Rogers Reservoir may be harmful to migratory birds.

Your Petition no. 185 also makes four requests for specific actions by Environment Canada with regard to this project, namely that:

  1. Environment Canada should review the cumulative impacts on water levels in the Lake Simcoe and Georgian Bay-Lake Huron system and its implications for migratory birds resulting from this project in the short and long-term.

Proposed projects that need the authorization of the federal government are subject to the requirements of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. This ensures that projects are considered in a careful and precautionary manner before federal authorities take action in connection with them.  The Act stipulates that an environmental assessment of a project shall include a consideration of "any cumulative environmental effects that are likely to result from the project in combination with other projects or activities that have been or will be carried out." As there has been no project proposal received by the federal government at this time, it is unknown whether the proposed project will require an authorization by the federal government, and whether the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act applies. 

If requested by York Region in support of the provincial environmental assessment of the Holland Landing-Queensville Sideroad Wastewater Servicing Project, or if requested by any federal authority in support of a review of the project under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, and on receipt of sufficient relevant information, Environment Canada may be able to assist in a review of the cumulative impacts of the project on water levels and the consequential effects on migratory birds.

  1. Environment Canada should review the local impacts on migratory bird habitat of the installation of the pipe, and the pumping stations, including but not limited to the discharge of cold water into the wetland on migratory birds.

If requested by York Region in support of the provincial environmental assessment of the Holland Landing-Queensville Sideroad Wastewater Servicing Project, or if requested by any federal authority in support of a review of the project under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, and on receipt of sufficient relevant information, Environment Canada may be able to assist in a review of project induced local impacts on migratory bird habitat.

  1. Environment Canada should review the impact of the proposed development in Queensville, East Gwillimbury, Ontario on migratory bird habitat.

Environment Canada is unlikely to participate in reviews of urban developments in Ontario, unless some aspect of the development is subject to review under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and those federal authorities responsible for the review specifically request input from Environment Canada. Land use planning and associated consideration for environmentally sensitive areas that provide migratory bird habitat fall under municipal and provincial jurisdictions for land that is not owned or otherwise protected by the Government of Canada.

  1. Copies of any information Environment Canada has on migratory bird habitat in and around Rogers Reservoir and in East Gwillimbury, Ontario.

At this time, Environment Canada does not have information on migratory bird habitat that is specific to the area in and around Rogers Reservoir.

[top of page]

Minister's Response: Fisheries and Oceans Canada

11 April 2007

Ms. Laura Bowman
Ms. Sylvia Bowman
R.R.1
18924 2nd Concession
Newmarket, Ontario
L3Y 4V8

Dear Ms. Laura Bowman and Ms. Sylvia Bowman:

This is in response to your letter of December 6, 2006, expressing your concerns about the potential impacts of the Holland Landing-Queensville Sharon Wastewater Servicing Project (the Project) proposed by York Region. Your letter was forwarded to me on December 21, 2006, by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, as Environmental Petition 185.

The inquiries that you have directed to Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) mainly relate to DFO's mandate for the administration of the fish and fish habitat protection provisions of the Fisheries Act. Subsection 35(1) of the Fisheries Act states that "No person shall carry on any work or undertaking that results in the Harmful Alteration, Disruption or Destruction of fish habitat (HADD) unless authorized by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans pursuant to subsection 35(2)".

It is important to note that DFO's review of development proposals with the potential to cause a HADD of fish habitat is guided by its Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat (1986) (the Policy) and the Habitat Management Program's Standard Operating Policies. The guiding principle of the Policy is "no net loss of productive capacity of fish habitat". If it is determined that it is not possible to avoid a HADD, a decision by DFO to allow the HADD of fish habitat would necessitate the issuance of an authorization pursuant to subsection 35(2) of the Fisheries Act, which is a trigger for an environmental assessment (EA) under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). This means that DFO would be required to ensure that an EA under CEAA is undertaken in relation to a development proposal prior to issuing a Fisheries Act authorization.

Consistent with its mandate and the "no net loss" principle, DFO and Ontario's Conservation Authorities work with developers seeking to have them address potential impacts to fish habitat in accordance with section 35 of the Fisheries Act. As a matter of preference, we seek to avoid a HADD by relocating, redesigning or mitigating the detrimental components of the proposal, and finally where a HADD is unavoidable and acceptable, by compensating for such loss by creating new habitat. Through this DFO and its partners strive to balance unavoidable habitat losses with habitat replacement.

In the context of the proposed Project, DFO has a level III partnership agreement with the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA). This level of partnership enables LSRCA to review projects for impacts to fish habitat on DFO's behalf. If negative impacts cannot be mitigated and the impact to fish habitat is acceptable, LSRCA can also negotiate habitat compensation on DFO's behalf. If impacts to fish habitat can be mitigated the LSRCA would provide advice to a proponent on the appropriate mitigation measures to avoid a HADD of fish habitat.

You have also expressed a concern about the potential for discharge of groundwater into waters frequented by fish. It should be noted that Environment Canada is responsible for the administration of the pollution prevention provisions of the Fisheries Act (section 36) which prohibit the deposit of deleterious substances into fish bearing waters.

A detailed response to the specific questions and requests raised in your petition that pertain to DFO has been prepared and is attached to this letter. Please note that this response addresses those questions directed to DFO or those that pertain to DFO's mandate. I understand that my colleagues the Honourable Ministers of Transport Canada and Environment Canada are also providing you with responses with respect to those questions that pertain to their respective Departments and mandates.

Thank you for providing me this opportunity to respond to your concerns and trust that the answers provided address them.

Sincerely,

[Original signed by Loyola Hearn, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Loyola Hearn, P.C., M.P.

c.c.:

The Honourable Lawrence Cannon, P.C., M.P.
The Honourable John Baird, P.C., M.P.
Mr. Ronald Thompson


Environmental Petition 185—Fisheries and Oceans Response to the Petitioner's Questions

Question 1

Will the Holland Landing Queensville Sideroad wastewater project proposed by York Region be required to obtain permits under the Fisheries Act?

The requirement for authorization under the fish habitat protection provisions of the Fisheries Act has not been determined at this time, as there has been no project proposal submitted to the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA). LSRCA is currently a participant on the stakeholder group for the provincial Environmental Assessment of the project.

Subsection 35(1) of the Fisheries Act prohibits any work or undertaking that will cause a harmful alteration, disruption or destruction (HADD) to fish habitat. Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) may, however, issue subsection 35(2) Fisheries Act authorization to the proponent allowing the HADD. It is not anticipated at this time that a Fisheries Act authorization will be required for works or undertakings in relation to this project. However, should it be determined at the detailed design phase that there would be a HADD of fish habitat that is non-mitigable, LSRCA would refer the project to DFO in accordance with the level III partnership between the two agencies. Otherwise the LRSCA would provide advice to York Region on the appropriate mitigation measures to avoid a HADD of fish habitat.

Question 2

What Fisheries Act permits will be required of the project?

Please see DFO's reponse to Question 1, above.

Question 3

If it is the position of DFO that any Fisheries Act permits are not required, what are the reasons for DFO taking this position?

Again, as noted in the reply to Question 1, above, the requirement for a Fisheries Act subsection 35(2) authorization has not yet been determined for the Holland Landing-Queensville Sideroad Wastewater Project. If it is determined that an authorization under the Fisheries Act would be required for works or undertakings in relation to the proposed Project, the process that this review would follow is described above.

Question 4

What correspondence has occurred between DFO and York Region about this project?

Due to the level III partnership with LSRCA, DFO has not yet been involved in this project review and therefore, DFO has not corresponded directly with the York Region for this particular project proposal.

Question 5

What studies of fish habitat are in the possession of DFO for the Rogers Reservoir and the East Holland River from Green Lane to Yonge St. in the Town of East Gwillimbury?

DFO is not in the possession of any fish habitat studies in the Rogers Reservoir or in the East Holland River in the designated area.

Question 6

What existing permits under the Fisheries Act exist in or around the East Holland River between Yonge St. and Green Lane East?

DFO has reviewed its records, and advises you that subsection 35(2) Fisheries Act authorizations were required with respect to the following files. These files may or may not be located in the immediate area you have identified.

Referral title

Main work category

Watercourse

Location

Stream realignment / channelization

Instream works

Holland River East branch

Township of Newmarket

Road crossing and pond removal

Watercourse crossings

Tributary of East Holland River

Township of East Gwillimbury

Culvert extensions

Watercourse crossings

East Holland River & tributary

Town of Aurora

Road realignment

Instream works

East Holland River

Region of York

Dewatering

Water management

East Holland River tributary

Town of Newmarket, N.E. of Cane Parkway and Mulock Drive

Culvert crossing, stream works

Watercourse crossings

Tributary of East Holland River

Aurora, Fernbrook homes

Culverts

Watercourse crossings

Tributaries of East Holland River

Regional Municipality of York, Proctor and Redfern

Environmental Petition 185—Fisheries and Oceans Response to the Petitioner's Requests

Request 1

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) should require permits for the harmful alteration and destruction of fish habitat for the installation of pipes, discharge of groundwater, and installation of pumping stations next to the East Holland River.

If the LSRCA determines that a harmful alteration, disruption or destruction (HADD) of fish habitat will result from any of the above mentioned project components, DFO may issue a Fisheries Act subsection 35(2) authorization if the HADD is judged acceptable and if an environmental assessment (EA) undertaken pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) concludes that environmental effects are not likely to be significant.

Request 2

These permits should trigger a new environmental assessment under the CEAA.

DFO would have to ensure that an EA pursuant to the CEAA is undertaken prior to issuing a Fisheries Act subsection 35(2) authorization. Subsection 35(2) of the Fisheries Act is as a CEAA trigger included in the Law List Regulations.

Request 3

York Region should be required to bring all of its existing wastewater infrastructure, including pumping stations and stormwater facilities into compliance with the requirements of the existing Fisheries Act before any such permits should be granted.

I want to assure you that DFO is committed to protecting fish and fish habitat. If works and undertakings in relation to York Region's existing wastewater infrastructure results in the unauthorized harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat, DFO will investigate and take appropriate action. At this time DFO is not aware of any such occurrences to indicate that York Region is not in compliance with the fish habitat protection provisions of the Fisheries Act.

Request 4

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans should review the cumulative impact on flow levels in Lake Simcoe and Georgian-Bay Lake Huron of the intra-basin transfer proposed by York Region as they relate to fish habitat.

As mentioned above in DFO's response to your second request, DFO would have to ensure that an EA pursuant to the CEAA is undertaken prior to issuing a Fisheries Act subsection 35(2) authorization. Subsection 16(1)(a) of the CEAA requires that an EA include a consideration of "…and any cumulative environmental effects that are likely to result from the project or activities that have been or will be carried out." Should the intra-basin transfer, or any other component of the proposed project, be part of DFO's scope of project for the purposes of an EA, it would need to consider its cumulative environmental effects on fish habitat.

Request 5

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans should review the cumulative impact of the pipe and the proposed development in Queensville, East Gwillimbury, Ontario on fish habitat.

As mentioned above in DFO's response to your fourth request, DFO would consider the cumulative environmental effects if it were required to conduct an EA under the CEAA in relation to the proposed project.

Request 6

Copies of any information that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has regarding fish habitat in Rogers Reservoir and nearby areas of the East Holland River.

Please see DFO's response to your Question 5, above.

[top of page]

Minister's Response: Transport Canada

16 April 2007

Ms. Laura Bowman and Ms. Sylvia Bowman
18924 2nd Concessions, RR1
Newmarket, Ontario
L3Y 4V8

Dear Mmes. Bowman:

The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development has forwarded to Transport Canada your letter of December 6, 2006, as Petition No. 185 regarding the proposed Holland-Landing-Queensville Sharon Wastewater Servicing project.

Transport Canada has reviewed your petition, which included four questions for our department. A response to these matters is provided below. It is my understanding that other questions contained in your petition will be addressed, where applicable, by the appropriate federal departments.

1.

Will Transport Canada be requiring any permits for the Holland-Landing-Queensville Sideroad Wastewater Servicing project?

To date, Transport Canada has not received any request for approval/permit or any project notification with respect to the proposed Holland-Landing-Queensville Sharon Wastewater Servicing project. Therefore, no determination has been made regarding the department's approval requirements.

2.

If permits will be required what permits?

As noted above, the need for permits or approvals has not yet been determined.

3.

If no permits will be required, what is the reason for Transport Canada's position?

As noted under question 1, Transport Canada has not yet determined whether permits or approvals will be required for this project.

4.

What specific correspondence has occurred between York Region and Transport Canada regarding this project?

We are not aware of any correspondence to date between Transport Canada and York Region, with respect to this project.

Thank you for bringing your concerns to the attention of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. I trust that the foregoing has clarified Transport Canada's involvement in the Holland-Landing-Queensville Sharon Wastewater Servicing project.

Yours truly,

[Original signed by Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Transport Infrastructure and Communities]

The Honourable Lawrence Cannon, P.C., M.P.

c.c.:

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
The Honourable John Baird, Minister of the Environment
The Honourable Loyola Hearn, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans