The magazine of Professional Engineers Ontario | Fall 2026
A PROFESSION in MOTION
•Advancing CPD •Reforming elections •Funding the future
Goodbye PEAK. Hello CPD. PEO is making continuing professional development easier to understand and complete. Starting in 2027, the PEAK program will transition to a streamlined CPD program that helps licence holders maintain and build their professional knowledge and skills. The updated program offers greater flexibility in how you meet your requirements, with a focus on the learning and development activities that matter most to your practice.
Less complexity. More flexibility. Same commitment to professional excellence. Learn more on page 22.
CONTENTS
Fall 2026 / Volume 47, No. 4
Features 22 Building Better Learning The renewed continuing professional development program brings clearer requirements, streamlined deadlines and greater flexibility for licence holders. By Leslie Sinclair
36 What Happens Next? PEO’s new regulatory transformation office is helping turn complex initiatives into practical improvements for applicants and licence holders. By Leslie Sinclair
20
Departments 5
EDITOR’S NOTE
18 BULLETIN BOARD
7
CEO/REGISTRAR’S REPORT
9
CHAPTER MATTERS
19 PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE Beyond “It Meets Code”
10 NEWS Licence Fees to Change Beginning in 2027; PEO Examines Code of Ethics to Reflect Evolving Practice; PEO to Move to Full CPD Enforcement in 2027; Early Themes Emerge From Professional Engineers Act Consultations; New Exam Exemptions Coming for Some International Applicants; Order of Honour Ceremony Celebrates Engineering Service; Learning Leadership and Impact Take Centre Stage
20 PROFILE From Research to Reality 27 GAZETTE 40 GOVERNANCE A New Approach to Council Nominations 42 2027 COUNCIL ELECTIONS CALL FOR CANDIDATES, NOMINATION AND VOTING PROCEDURES AND ELECTION COMMUNICATIONS PROCEDURES 51 IN COUNCIL Council Approves Three-Phase Licence Fee Update 52 IN MEMORIAM 54 MINUTES OF THE 104TH ANNUAL BUSINESS MEETING 58 PROFESSIONAL DIRECTORY
www.peo.on.ca
Engineering Dimensions
3
MASTHEAD
EXECUTIVE STAFF CEO/registrar Jennifer Quaglietta, P.Eng., MBA, ICD.D
Managing editor Nicole Axworthy Senior graphic designer Cindy Reichle Senior writer Leslie Sinclair Contributors Jane Mustac, P.Eng. David Silverberg Engineering Dimensions (ISSN 0227-5147) is published quarterly by P rofessional Engineers Ontario and d istributed to all PEO licence holders. Engineering Dimensions publishes articles on regulatory business and professional topics of interest to the professional engineer. The magazine’s content does not necessarily reflect the opinion or policy of PEO Council, nor does PEO assume any responsibility for unsolicited manuscripts and art. All material is copyright. Permission to reprint editorial copy or graphics should be requested from the editor. Approximately $5 from each membership fee is allocated to Engineering Dimensions and is non-deductible. Canada Publications Mail Product Sales Agreement No. 40063309. Printed in Canada by Wellington Printworks Inc. ADVERTISING SALES Finally Content Vice president, media sales Laura Maurice laura.maurice@finallycontent.com 647-394-5567 CONNECT WITH US Online: engineeringdimensions.ca Email: editor@peo.on.ca
Vice president, regulatory operations and deputy registrar Stephanie Holko, MBA, P.Eng., ICD.D
Vice president, corporate affairs and chief legal officer Dan Abrahams, LLB Vice president, operational excellence Arun Dixit, P.Eng. Vice president, regulatory strategy and governance Marina Solakhyan
PEO COUNCIL Officers Chair Rachel Prudhomme, BEng, MSc, P.Eng., BPHE President Leila Notash, PhD, P.Eng., FEC president@peo.on.ca Past president Fred Saghezchi, MASc, P.Eng., FEC President-elect Sardar Asif Khan, PhD, MBA, P.Eng., FEC, PMP Vice president (appointed) Paula R. Klink, PhD, P.Eng., FEC Executive Member Shahandeh Hannah Ehtemam, P.Eng.
Councillors Councillors-at-large Sean Decloux, MEng, MBA, P.Eng., PMP Shahandeh Hannah Ehtemam, P.Eng. Paula R. Klink, PhD, P.Eng., FEC Eastern Region councillors Susan Jingmiao Shi, MEng, P.Eng. Tim Kirkby, P.Eng., FEC East Central Region councillors Nanda Layos Lwin, P.Eng., FEC Tom Granat, MBA, P.Eng., P.E. Northern Region councillors Luc Roberge, P.Eng., FEC Ahmed Elshaer, PhD, P.Eng. Western Region councillors Susan MacFarlane, MSc, PhD, P.Eng. Vicki Hilborn, MASc, P.Eng. West Central Region councillors Ravinder Panesar, P.Eng., FEC Pappur Shankar, P.Eng., FEC Lieutenant governor-in-council appointees Cosimo Casale, P.Eng. Freddy Cowen, P.Eng. Andrew Dryland, C.E.T. Lorraine Fraser, PhD, MBA, MEng, P.Eng., FEC Paul Mandel, MBA, CPA, CA Shelly Markel, JD, MBA, ICD.D Andrew Naassan, P.Eng. Rachel Prudhomme, BEng, MSc, P.Eng. BPHE Uditha Senaratne, P.Eng., FEC Scott Schelske, P.Eng., FEC Sherlock Sung, BASc Joseph Zenobio Engineers Canada Directors Arjan Arenja, MBA, P.Eng., ICD.D Christopher Chahine, P.Eng., PMP Nick Colucci, MBA, P.Eng., FEC Lorne Cutler, MBA, P.Eng. Marisa Sterling, P.Eng., FEC
TO UPDATE YOUR SUBSCRIPTION All licence holders and engineering interns registered with Professional Engineers Ontario receive Engineering Dimensions in print or digital form. Subscription preferences can be updated in the PEO portal at secure.peo.on.ca. Other subscription requests can be made to editor@peo.on.ca.
www.peo.on.ca The office of Professional Engineers Ontario in the City of Toronto is situated on the traditional territory of many nations, including the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat peoples.
4
Engineering Dimensions
Fall 2026
EDITOR’S NOTE
engineeringdimensions.ca
Built to Adapt
One of the things I enjoy most about working on Engineering Dimensions is seeing how engineers respond when the world around them changes. Some changes arrive gradually. Others seem to gather momentum all at once. New technologies emerge, expectations shift and long-established practices are reconsidered. Through it all, the profession continues to evolve while remaining grounded in its commitment to public safety, professional judgment and service to society. That sense of movement runs through many of the stories in this issue. Our cover story examines PEO’s renewed Continuing Professional Development (CPD) program (“Building Better Learning,” p. 22). As engineering practice becomes increasingly specialized and complex, maintaining competence is not a one-time achievement but an ongoing responsibility. The feature explores how the program is designed to help licence holders identify learning needs, pursue meaningful professional development and continue growing throughout their careers. Change is also shaping how PEO approaches governance. Readers will find coverage of the regulator’s updated Council nomination process (“A New Approach to Council Nominations,” p. 40). Beginning with the 2027 call for candidates (p. 42), prospective candidates will participate in a competency-based nomination process that focuses on how their skills, experience
www.peo.on.ca
and knowledge could support Council’s regulatory and strategic responsibilities. This issue also takes a closer look at Council’s recent approval of a phased fee update (p. 10). The story examines the factors behind the decision and the role funding plays in sustaining PEO’s legislative, operational and modernization priorities. Turning change into action is another theme running through this issue. PEO’s new regulatory transformation office is profiled in “What Happens Next?” (p. 36). The office was created to help bridge the gap between policy development and implementation, ensuring major regulatory changes are translated into practical, effective outcomes for licence holders, applicants and the public. Together, these stories reflect the ongoing work of ensuring the profession remains strong, relevant and ready for the future. I hope this issue provides insight into how PEO and the profession are working to meet that challenge. e
Nicole Axworthy MANAGING EDITOR
ON THE COVER
The magazine of Professional Engineers Ontario | Fall 2026
A PROFESSION in MOTION
•Advancing CPD •Reforming elections •Funding the future
Change is a constant in engineering. This issue looks at how the profession is responding, through renewed approaches to professional development, evolving governance practices and initiatives designed to strengthen regulation for the future.
LET US KNOW To protect the public, PEO investigates all complaints about unlicensed individuals or companies, and unprofessional, inadequate or incompetent engineers. If you have concerns about the work of an engineer, fill out a Complaint Form found on PEO’s website and email it to complaints@peo.on.ca. If you suspect a person or company is practising engineering without a licence, contact PEO’s enforcement hotline at 800-339-3716, ext. 1444, or by email at enforcement@peo.on.ca.
Engineering Dimensions
5
Discover preferred rates.
PEO members could save on home and car insurance with TD Insurance.
T learn more or to get a quote visit To tdinsurance.com/<partner page> tdinsurance.com/ peo
FPO
The TD Insurance Meloche Monnex program is underwritten by SECURITY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY. It is distributed by Meloche Monnex Insurance and Financial Services, Inc. in Quebec, by Meloche Monnex Financial Services Inc. inNATIONAL> Ontario and by TD Insurance Direct Agency Inc. in the rest of Canada. Our address: 50 Place <SECURITY <PRIMMUM> Crémazie, 12th Floor, Montréal, Québec H2P 1B6. Due to provincial legislation, this Car and Recreational Insurance program is not offered in British Columbia, Manitoba ® or Saskatchewan. All trademarks are property of their respective owners. The TD logo and other TD trademarks are the property of The Toronto-Dominion Bank or its subsidiaries. 2022-23307-7027_GI National
CEO/REGISTRAR’S REPORT
engineeringdimensions.ca
A Commitment to Continuous Improvement
Throughout my career, I have learned that strong organizations are never static. They continually evaluate how they are performing, consider what the future may require and make deliberate decisions to ensure they remain effective in a changing environment. The same is true for PEO. As Ontario’s engineering regulator, we must be prepared for today’s challenges as well as the opportunities and expectations that lie ahead. The profession continues to evolve. Technology is reshaping engineering practice, public expectations are growing and regulators are increasingly expected to demonstrate transparency, accountability and responsiveness. Responding to these changes is not about change for its own sake. It is about ensuring PEO remains well positioned to fulfill its mandate and serve the public interest. That requires ongoing reflection, a willingness to improve and a commitment to strengthening the organization over time. This commitment is reflected in a number of initiatives currently underway across PEO. While these efforts span different areas of the organization, they share a common objective: enhancing our effectiveness as a regulator and maintaining public confidence in the profession. Recent work has included implementing the renewed continuing professional development program, advancing improvements to the licensure process, reviewing the Professional Engineers Act and Code of Ethics and supporting enhancements at the Council level. Our 2026–2030 Strategic Plan provides a framework for this work. Its three pillars, effective and relevant regulation, governance advancement and organizational excellence, recognize that sustaining a strong and trusted regulator requires a holistic
www.peo.on.ca
approach. Strong regulatory programs must be supported by sound governance, capable people and effective systems and processes. Some of these initiatives will be visible to licence holders through changes to programs and services. Others will take place behind the scenes, strengthening the foundation on which PEO operates. Together, they are helping ensure the organization remains responsive, resilient and equipped to meet the evolving needs of both the profession and the public. WORKING TOGETHER Meaningful improvement takes time. It also requires listening and learning. The perspectives of licence holders, volunteers, partners and members of the public help us better understand the impact of our decisions and identify opportunities to enhance the way we serve our stakeholders. Communication is an important part of that process. As our work progresses, we remain committed to sharing updates, explaining the rationale behind key initiatives and being transparent about what we are learning along the way. At its core, this work is about ensuring PEO remains ready for the future while staying firmly grounded in its mandate. The organization has been entrusted with an important responsibility: regulating the practice of professional engineering and governing the profession in Ontario so the public interest may be served and protected. Meeting that responsibility requires us to look beyond immediate priorities and consider how today’s decisions will support the profession and the public in the years ahead. While we cannot predict every challenge the future may bring, we can ensure PEO is prepared to respond thoughtfully and effectively. I am encouraged by the progress we are making and grateful to PEO’s staff, Council, volunteers and licence holders for their ongoing contributions. e
Jennifer Quaglietta, P.Eng., MBA, ICD.D CEO/REGISTRAR
Engineering Dimensions
7
“Being recognized by the Foundation lifted financial stress and inspired me to keep challenging myself, now I’m pursuing a PhD in Electrical and Computer Engineering.” Vanessa Hoang Toronto Metropolitan University Undergraduate Scholarship Recipient & Gold Medalist
Invest in the next generation of engineers. Every donation to the Ontario Professional Engineers Foundation for Education funds scholarships that transform students’ lives. Your support empowers the next generation of engineering students who will go on to shape the future.
A scholarship can change a life. Help us change more. www.engineersfoundation.ca
Scan to learn more:
CHAPTERMATTERS GRAND RIVER CHAPTER
LONDON CHAPTER
Industry Insights
Bridge Builders
PEO’s Grand River Chapter recently organized two technical facility tours to connect local licence holders and engineering interns with real-world applications of high-precision engineering. In July, the chapter led a group of 36 participants at the Bruce Power nuclear site in Tiverton, ON. The visit focused on the rigorous safety protocols, risk management frameworks and regulatory standards governed by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Attendees gained insight into the essential role professional engineers play in maintaining the safety, reliability and long-term performance of major clean energy infrastructure. In August, 30 participants visited the Elmira head office of Tri-Mach Group, a leading multi-trade solutions provider specializing in sanitary equipment and precision fabrication. The tour highlighted their engineering hub and patent-pending Ever-Kleen Vertical Conveyor series, offering an in-depth look at sanitary design standards used in food, beverage and pharmaceutical processing. Participants observed how engineers navigate complex industry regulations and safety standards to ensure operational integrity and public protection in food safety manufacturing. Both events fostered strong technical dialogue and provided valuable networking and learning opportunities for attendees at all career stages. Through these immersive facility visits, the Grand River Chapter continues to promote professional excellence, regulatory awareness and engagement within the local engineering community.
Licence holders and engineering interns are invited to participate in PEO chapters events. Find more information about your local chapter at www.peo.on.ca/chapters.
www.peo.on.ca
PEO’s London Chapter hosted a Popsicle Stick Bridge-Building Competition at White Oaks Public School, providing grades 7 and 8 students with a hands-on introduction to engineering design and problem-solving. Students designed and constructed their own popsicle stick bridges in advance of the event. During the competition, each bridge was tested using a compression testing rig to determine the load it could withstand. The wide variety of bridge configurations demonstrated how different engineering approaches can be used to address the same design challenge. The event also featured members of the Western Engineering Steel Bridge Team, who provided a live steel bridge assembly demonstration. This helped connect the students’ small-scale designs with engineering principles applied to larger, realworld structures. The event brought together London Chapter volunteers, students, teachers and Western Engineering students. It supported PEO’s public-interest mandate by promoting engineering awareness, demonstrating the role of professional engineering in society and encouraging students to learn more about the profession.
SHOWCASE YOUR
CHAPTER’S IMPACT Chapter Matters features regulatory-focused events and initiatives led by PEO’s 36 chapters to highlight how chapters are advancing PEO’s public-protection mandate and supporting the regulator’s work in communities across the province. Submissions can be up to 250 words and should include an overview, regulatory relevance, summary of key stakeholders/participants and the key outcomes. Send submissions to chapters@peo.on.ca with Chapter Matters in the subject line. All submissions are subject to editorial review.
Engineering Dimensions
9
NEWS
Licence Fees to Change Beginning in 2027 The fee update will help ensure PEO has the resources needed to strengthen regulatory oversight and protect the public. By Leslie Sinclair
Like many organizations, PEO has experienced financial pressures driven by inflation and rising operating costs. However, the regulator’s responsibilities have expanded alongside these pressures as Ontario’s engineering profession continues to grow.
PEO Council has approved a three-phase licence fee update to support the regulator’s long-term sustainability and continued investment in public protection. Approved at Council’s October 2 meeting, the update reflects increasing regulatory demands, growth in the profession and rising operating costs since PEO last adjusted its fees in 2019. The annual P.Eng. fee will increase by $66 in 2027, followed by increases of $10 in 2030 and $11 in 2031. The P.Eng. fee remission will increase by $17 in 2027, with additional increases of $4 in 2030 and $3 in 2031. Annual fees for certificates of authorization, engineering intern enrolment, consulting engineer designations, and temporary and limited licences will also be adjusted. Application, examination and registration fees for the P.Eng., limited licence and certificate of authorization will remain unchanged.
INVESTING IN THE FUTURE Looking ahead, PEO is advancing several initiatives that will shape the future of engineering regulation in Ontario, including a comprehensive review of the Professional Engineers Act and its regulations, implementation of the renewed CPD program, the launch of a modernized Engineering Intern program and reforms to the Council elections process. These initiatives are identified as key priorities under PEO’s strategic and operational plans. PEO is also reviewing standards and guidelines, working to enhance confidence in its regulatory effectiveness and continuing to improve the systems, processes and tools that support licensure, compliance, investigations and enforcement activities. These efforts are intended to help ensure the regulator remains accountable and responsive while continuing to fulfill its public protection mandate.
SUPPORTING REGULATION IN A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT The fee update comes after a period of significant change for the regulator. Since 2019, PEO has introduced mandatory continuing professional development (CPD) requirements, advanced interprovincial labour mobility and modernized its licensure processes to comply with the Fair Access to Regulated Professions and Compulsory Trades Act. At the same time, PEO has experienced growing activity across its regulatory functions. The organization has seen increases in licence applications, examinations, complaints, investigations and unlicensed practice enforcement activities, placing additional demands on the people, processes and systems that support public protection.
10
Engineering Dimensions
Fall 2026
NEWS
engineeringdimensions.ca
PEO Examines Code of Ethics to Reflect Evolving Practice Stakeholder consultations revealed support for clearer expectations and practical guidance for engineers. By Leslie Sinclair
PEO is conducting a comprehensive review of its Code of Ethics, which sets out the ethical responsibilities of licence holders, to ensure it reflects the realities of modern engineering practice and provides clearer expectations for ethical decision-making. Directed by Council last fall, the review is examining how the code can better support licence holders in meeting evolving expectations around accountability, professionalism and the public impact of their work while remaining aligned with PEO’s public-interest mandate. “The public’s expectations of the profession, as well as the profession’s expectations for each other, has evolved,” says Sarah Robicheau, PEO’s policy manager, noting that the Code of Ethics has not been updated since the 1980s. “Certainly, there are some elements of professionalism and professional ethics that endure the test of time, but a lot has changed in terms of our understanding of what constitutes ethical conduct.” STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Earlier this year, PEO surveyed licence holders, engineering employers and municipalities to better understand how the current code is used, where it provides value and where additional clarity or guidance may be needed. The regulator also met with its advisory groups, including the Strategic Stakeholder Advisory Group, Employer Advisory Group and Engineering Student Advisory Group, as well as community organizations such as EngiQueers Canada, Black Engineers of Canada, the Canadian Coalition of Women in Engineering, Science and Technology and the Canadian Environmental Law Association. The consultations explored how a modern Code of Ethics should address issues such as public engagement, shared accountability on complex projects, inclusion and accessibility, environmental stewardship and the ethical use of artificial intelligence. They also examined which obligations are unique to engineers and how those responsibilities can be reflected in a way that is meaningful and practical for licence holders. “We got a lot of feedback from licence holders that they found the current code unclear in terms of setting specific expectations for them or helping them decide how to behave in challenging situations,” Robicheau says.
www.peo.on.ca
At the same time, stakeholders expressed strong support for foundational principles such as prioritizing public safety, health and welfare; practising competently and diligently; acting with integrity, honesty, fairness and objectivity; and upholding the honour, dignity and reputation of the profession. PEO also heard a desire for clearer obligations, stronger accountability and more practical guidance on applying ethical principles in day-to-day practice. NEXT STEPS A proposed Code of Ethics is expected to be presented to Council by the end of this year for endorsement in principle. PEO will then continue consulting with stakeholders throughout 2027 as it refines the proposed framework. At the same time, the regulator is developing guidance materials to support interpretation and application of the code in practice. Together, the code and accompanying guidance are intended to provide clearer expectations for professional conduct while helping engineers navigate complex ethical situations. PEO expects to submit a final draft of the code to the Ministry of the Attorney General by the end of 2027.
Engineering Dimensions
11
NEWS
PEO to Move to Full CPD Enforcement in 2027 After a phased rollout, PEO is expanding enforcement of mandatory continuing professional development requirements. By Leslie Sinclair
Beginning in early 2027, PEO will suspend the licences of professional engineers and limited licence holders who were required to participate in the mandatory Practice Evaluation and Knowledge (PEAK) program in 2026 but did not complete all their 2026 requirements by December 31, 2026. The change marks PEO’s transition from phased implementation to full enforcement of its continuing professional development (CPD) requirements. “Continuous learning is fundamental to professional practice and an essential responsibility for every member of the profession,” says Mike Rusek, PEO’s director of regulatory compliance. “Most professional engineers undertake continuous learning routinely as part of their practice. For them, the mandatory program has not required a significant change from what they were already doing.” PEO launched the mandatory PEAK program in 2023. In November 2025, it applied the first suspensions to a small, randomly selected group of licence holders who had not met their program requirements. Another limited-scale round of suspensions occurred in June 2026. These pilot groups allowed PEO to test its systems and procedures, resolve identified issues and refine its communications and support before expanding enforcement to all licence holders required to complete CPD. With the pilot phase complete, PEO will apply the suspension process consistently to all licence holders required to complete CPD. “Going forward, there will be no more pilot groups,” Rusek says. “Suspensions will apply to everyone who is required to complete CPD.” The change means the annual deadline will operate as an enforceable requirement rather than a program target. Licence holders who have not completed their 2026 CPD requirements by December 31, 2026, will receive a letter from PEO in early 2027 outlining the suspension process and the steps required to reinstate their licence if one is imposed against them. Licence holders can avoid suspension by completing all assigned 2026 CPD requirements by December 31, 2026, and confirming that their completion status is recorded in PEO’s online system.
WHAT A LICENCE SUSPENSION MEANS FOR YOUR PRACTICE Unless exempt, all professional engineers and limited licence holders must complete their assigned CPD requirements each year to maintain their licence. If your licence is suspended, you cannot: • Practise professional engineering; • Use your seal or take responsibility for engineering work, including work done under your supervision; • Be associated with a certificate of authorization under section 47 of Regulation 941; or • Hold a consulting engineer designation. A suspension will remain permanently recorded on PEO’s public directory, even after the licence is reinstated. Practising while suspended can result in serious penalties, including the permanent revocation of your licence.
FROM PEAK TO CPD In January, the PEAK program will be renamed the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) program (see “Building Better Learning,” p. 22). Updates to individual program elements will be implemented in phases during 2027 and 2028. The changes reflect a renewed focus on lifelong learning and professional growth throughout an engineer’s career, while preserving the program’s core objective: helping licence holders maintain and enhance the knowledge, skills and judgment needed to practise competently and protect the public.
12
Engineering Dimensions
Fall 2026
NEWS
engineeringdimensions.ca
Early Themes Emerge From Professional Engineers Act Consultations Stakeholder feedback reinforces the central role of public protection while identifying areas for regulatory modernization. By Leslie Sinclair
After a summer of province-wide stakeholder consultations, PEO is beginning to distill what it heard during the first phase of its review of the Professional Engineers Act (PEA), identifying themes that will help inform potential changes to the legislation. The consultation process included an online survey of licence holders and other stakeholders, 21 indepth virtual interviews and a series of focus groups involving professional associations, public-interest groups, government representatives, university leaders, students and PEO advisory groups. “The legislative review is asking a fundamental question: What does it mean to protect the public interest through effective and relevant legislation? The answer lies in creating rules that protect the public while also being fair, accessible, meaningful and relevant to the engineering community,” says Sarah Robicheau, PEO’s policy manager. EMERGING THEMES The consultations explored how stakeholders view the public-interest purpose of engineering regulation and PEO’s role and identity. They also examined perceived gaps and emerging pressures in the regulatory framework, including the scope of practice, licensure, entity regulation and emerging areas of engineering practice. Another objective was to assess whether PEO’s governance and regulatory model is aligned with its public protection mandate and future needs. Although the review remains in its early stages, several themes have begun to emerge. Public interest remains central One of the clearest themes was the central importance of the public interest. Across the survey, interviews and focus groups, participants most often described engineering as a public-interest profession grounded in safety, competence, ethics and accountability. Survey respondents consistently emphasized that public-interest obligations are foundational to professional identity, while interview and focus group participants generally said the safeguarding language in the PEA remains relevant and meaningful.
“A very high percentage of individuals said it was extremely or very important to their understanding of themselves as professional engineers,” Robicheau says. Participants viewed the references to life, health, public welfare and the environment as closely connected to the fundamental reasons engineering is regulated. The survey also identified public interest and public safety, as well as strong competence and licensing standards, as the leading priorities for the legislative review. PEO’s regulatory identity could be clearer The consultations also raised questions about how clearly PEO’s identity as a regulator is understood and expressed. Although PEO was generally understood to be a regulator, some interview and focus group participants said it continues to display elements of its former association-style model and is not always seen as consistently operating through a regulatory lens. These observations arose most often in discussions about chapters, volunteer structures and social functions. Survey findings presented a more nuanced picture. Licence holders were more likely to say that PEO balances professional and public interests than prioritizes professional interests, while some said its approach depends on the issue. continued on next page TreeByLaw_PEOad4x3_26405_f.pdf
1
2026-08-20
7:24 AM
Thinking of removing a tree?
Trees 15 cm or larger on private property require a permit. mississauga.ca/treepermits
www.peo.on.ca
Engineering Dimensions
13
NEWS
Modern practice is creating pressure points Respondents were generally positive about the PEA’s current definition of the practice of engineering, but many identified “grey areas” or gaps in how it captures software, artificial intelligence and other emerging fields. Most survey respondents said the definition does somewhat or very well at capturing modern engineering disciplines and activities, although 37 per cent did not share that view. Digital and technology-enabled fields emerged from the interviews and focus groups as particular pressure points for the current definition. Participants noted that public risk increasingly extends beyond the traditional built environment, with software, data systems and automated tools potentially affecting safety, fairness, access, privacy and security. They also emphasized risk, rather than a specific engineering discipline, as a key consideration in determining what work should be restricted to licence holders. Governance reform drew interest Governance was another area of discussion, although the findings indicate that licence holders are generally less familiar with PEO’s governance processes than with its broader regulatory role. When asked what was most in need of change, survey respondents identified governance as frequently as several other issues rather than singling it out as the leading priority. Forty-eight per cent of survey respondents agreed that PEO should be open to changing how councillors are selected, although nearly half were neutral or unsure, reflecting lower familiarity or
engagement with governance. Some interview and focus group participants supported a smaller, more competency-based Council, with one employer group describing the current Council as too large and cumbersome. Some also expressed concern that the existing structure can encourage a constituency mindset rather than an approach that prioritizes the public interest. The research identified other matters for further consideration, including licensure reform, complaints and enforcement processes and the possibility of stronger entity regulation. Views on entity regulation were mixed, while perspectives on licensure reflected a desire to balance fairness and modernization with rigorous standards and continued public confidence. A STRATEGIC PRIORITY Completing a comprehensive review of the PEA is a defining initiative of PEO’s 2026–2030 Strategic Plan, marking the first thorough evaluation of the legislation since the 1980s. The legislation has been updated over time but has never undergone a full, strategic overhaul. With modernization identified as a strategic priority, the review is an opportunity to consider how changes in engineering practice, technology, society and public expectations should be reflected in the PEA. THE ROAD AHEAD Council met in October for an in-depth discussion on the legislative review, which will inform the development of a multi-year roadmap outlining the issues to be addressed, phases of the process and approach to potential reforms. The work will begin with broad, overarching topics before moving into more specific areas, such as licensing criteria and complaints processes. Engagement with stakeholders, licence holders and PEO staff will continue through 2027 to ensure a wide range of perspectives are reflected in the review as it moves forward.
New Exam Exemptions Coming for Some International Applicants The change will apply to applicants whose four-year engineering degrees are recognized under the Washington Accord. By Leslie Sinclair
Starting on November 1, internationally trained applicants seeking a P.Eng. licence may no longer need to write technical exams if they hold a four-year bachelor’s degree in engineering recognized under the Washington Accord. The Washington Accord is an international agreement among 25 jurisdictions that recognizes the substantial equivalency of certain accredited engineering degree programs. By recognizing these accredited programs, PEO can rely on established international accreditation systems when assessing academic qualifications rather than requiring additional exams.
14
Engineering Dimensions
“PEO Council has determined that applicants from Washington Accord–recognized programs are low risk and can be exempted from exams,” says José Vera, P.Eng., PEO’s senior director of licensing. Determining eligibility can be challenging because there is no single global list of Washington Accord–accredited programs. Instead, each signatory jurisdiction maintains its own list, and accreditation recognition depends on the year that jurisdiction joined the accord, Vera explains.
Fall 2026
NEWS
engineeringdimensions.ca
REQUESTING AN EXEMPTION Applicants can determine whether their degree is accredited under the accord by consulting PEO’s list of Washington Accord–accredited programs on its website at www.peo.on.ca/apply/become-professionalengineer/washington-accord-accredited-degrees. A program is considered accredited under the Washington Accord if the university or college and program name appear in the list as recognized under the Washington Accord and an applicant’s degree was issued in that country’s signatory year or later. Applicants who believe their degree qualifies for an exemption will be required to submit a World Education Services assessment or academic transcript so PEO can verify that the program is accredited under the Washington Accord. Exemptions will be granted only after PEO confirms eligibility. Applicants whose engineering degree is not accredited under the Washington Accord will continue to be required to complete PEO’s technical exam program. TOWARD BETTER ACCESS All applicants for a P.Eng. licence must meet specific academic requirements for licensure. Applicants with a bachelor’s degree from a Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board–accredited program satisfy this requirement automatically. Internationally trained applicants must meet additional criteria, including completing and passing four confirmatory exams. The new exemption is the latest in a series of measures aimed at improving access to licensure while maintaining professional standards and protecting the public. Earlier this year, PEO introduced its good performance policy, which allows applicants who achieve at least 65 per cent on each of the first two technical exams in their initial exam sitting to receive waivers from the remaining two exams (see “Breaking Down Barriers,” Engineering Dimensions, Summer 2026, p. 40).
WHAT IS THE WASHINGTON ACCORD?
Established in 1989, the Washington Accord is an international agreement among organizations responsible for accrediting undergraduate engineering programs. The accord provides a framework for recognizing accredited engineering degrees as substantially equivalent across participating jurisdictions. This helps support the mobility of engineering graduates by enabling regulators and licensing bodies to rely on one another’s accreditation systems when assessing academic qualifications.
www.peo.on.ca
Order of Honour Ceremony Celebrates Engineering Service PEO recognized eight distinguished volunteers whose contributions have left a lasting mark on engineering regulation and practice. By Leslie Sinclair
PEO celebrated eight exceptional volunteers at a black-tie Order of Honour (OOH) ceremony on October 2 at the Hilton Mississauga/Meadowvale Hotel. The annual event recognizes volunteers whose dedication and leadership help PEO protect the public and regulate Ontario’s engineering profession. The OOH honours exceptional volunteer service in four categories: Member (10+ years of substantial contribution), Officer (15+ years of leadership), Companion (20+ years of profound influence) and Honorary Member (extraordinary contributions from non-licence holders). All inductees are selected through a transparent process designed to uphold fairness, equity, diversity and inclusion. “Our mandate is protecting the public, and that focus on the public good is mirrored in the long tradition of service in our profession,” PEO CEO/ Registrar Jennifer Quaglietta, MBA, P.Eng., ICD.D, told attendees via a pre-recorded video, adding that 2026 honourees have elevated the practice of engineering and built public trust. 2026 INDUCTEES Officers James Kin Wah Lee, PhD, P.Eng., FEC, has contributed 19 years of service to PEO. He served on Council as a lieutenant-governor appointee and supported the Academic Requirements (ARC), Discipline and Legislation committees, including service as chair and vice-chair of ARC. A Kingston Chapter volunteer for 16 years, he mentored Queen’s University engineering and judged engineering outreach competitions for elementary students. Iretomiwa Olukiyesi, P.Eng., FEC, has served the profession for over 17 years, including as lieutenant governor appointee on Council. As a London Chapter volunteer, she served as Government Liaison Program (GLP) member and chair as well as chapter secretary, education outreach member and women in engineering event co-chair. Since co-founding Black Engineers of Canada in 2020, she has advanced mentorship, advocacy and opportunities for Black engineers across Canada. continued on next page
Engineering Dimensions
15
NEWS
Inductees of the 2026 Order of Honour are (from left to right) John Ireland, P.Eng., FEC, Qadira C. Jackson, BA, BSW, LLB, Tahir Shafiq, MBA, P.Eng., FEC, John St. Marseille, MSc (Eng), P.Geo., P.Eng., FEC, James Kin Wah Lee, PhD, P.Eng., FEC, Iretomiwa Olukiyesi, P.Eng., FEC, Zlatko Joseph Podrebarac, P.Eng., PMP, FEC, and Philip Lasek, P.Eng., FEC.
Members A cornerstone of the Lambton Chapter for 26 years, Philip Lasek, P.Eng., FEC, has served as chair, vice chair, GLP delegate, certificate coordinator and secretary. He strengthened member engagement with PEO’s regulatory role, mentored new and aspiring licence holders and fostered a culture of teamwork and professional growth. He filled essential roles during staffing shortages, recruited volunteers, championed STEM outreach and helped establish an academic-technology-engineering hub with Western Sarnia-Lambton Research Park. For 25 years, John Ireland, P.Eng., FEC, has served the Thousand Islands Chapter in numerous executive and committee roles. He codeveloped PEO’s first portable popsicle-stick bridge testing platform, helped create a National Engineering Month program that reaches more than 1000 students annually and led a community outreach project for the centennial of the Sons of Martha cairn and first Calling of an Engineer ceremony. He is a dedicated advocate for inclusion in engineering. In 16 years of service, Zlatko Joseph Podrebarac, P.Eng., PMP, FEC, has held numerous Ottawa Chapter leadership roles and contributed to key committees focused on licensure, innovation and inclusion. He led initiatives supporting entrepreneurship, collaborated with the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers and Engineers Canada and introduced governance, succession planning and director-training practices that strengthened teamwork and improved the chapter’s overall effectiveness. Tahir Shafiq, MBA, P.Eng., FEC, has devoted more than 28 years to volunteer service with PEO and the profession. Since 1997, he has served on the Experience Requirements Committee, helping evaluate licensure applicants and uphold professional standards. He has mentored engineering interns and internationally trained professionals, and for more than 20 years has represented PEO on Engineers Canada’s Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board accreditation teams. John St. Marseille, MSc (Eng), P.Geo., P.Eng., FEC, has dedicated more than 30 years to the Upper Canada Chapter, serving in leadership roles including chair, vice-chair and secretary. As treasurer, he
16
Engineering Dimensions
was key in managing chapter finances, including guiding the transition to PEO’s centralized financial system. He helped shape the chapter’s identity, organized professional events and championed youth outreach initiatives, inclusion and engagement in engineering. Honorary Member Qadira C. Jackson, BA, BSW, LLB, made invaluable contributions to PEO governance after joining Council as a lieutenant governor appointee in 2016. She contributed to several committees, served as complaints review councillor and strengthened decision-making on complex regulatory, procedural and legislative matters. While on the Human Resources Committee, she advanced equity initiatives, including work that shaped PEO’s Anti-Racism and Equity Code.
Fall 2026
NEWS
engineeringdimensions.ca
Learning, Leadership and Impact Take Centre Stage PEO’s third Volunteer Symposium reinforced the vital role volunteers play in advancing PEO’s mandate. By Leslie Sinclair
PEO welcomed more than 150 attendees to its third annual Volunteer Symposium on October 3 at the Hilton Mississauga/Meadowvale Hotel for a day of inspiration, learning and networking. The event celebrated the contributions of over 900 volunteers who support PEO’s regulatory mandate and offered opportunities for professional development and collaboration. The symposium followed a PEO Council meeting (see p. 51) and the annual Order of Honour (OOH) ceremony (see p. 15), which paid tribute to eight long-serving volunteers for their exceptional contributions to the profession and PEO. “With your help, PEO is changing to meet the moment,” said PEO CEO/Registrar Jennifer Quaglietta, MBA, P.Eng., ICD.D, addressing attendees through a pre-recorded video. “To each and every one of you, our more than 900 volunteers, thank you for your time, your energy and your passion. Thank you for helping PEO keep people safe.” The Hall of Fame presentation, hosted by Annette Bergeron, MBA, P.Eng., FEC, shone a spotlight on volunteers whose dedication has helped shape PEO over the years. Those marking milestones of five, 10, 15, 20 and 25 years of service were honoured with commemorative pins, recognizing the commitment that forms the foundation of PEO’s work. Each group also had the opportunity for a commemorative photo with PEO Council President Leila Notash, PhD, P.Eng., FEC, and PEO Director of Volunteer Engagement James Schembri. David Boroto, P.Eng., CEO of Engineers Without Borders Canada, gave a keynote address, offering his perspective on how engineers can drive meaningful change and contribute to a more equitable and sustainable world. In break-out sessions, participants explored timely issues on a range of topics such as: • Using a “customer’s customer” lens to make the public impact of volunteers’ work and decision-making visible and measurable; • Examining forces reshaping engineering and strategies to strengthen the profession’s value; • Principled approaches to modern professional regulation amid rapid change;
www.peo.on.ca
Left: Keynote speaker David Boroto, P.Eng., CEO of Engineers Without Borders Canada, shared his perspective on how engineers can drive meaningful change. Right: PEO President Leila Notash, PhD, P.Eng., FEC, and Director of Volunteer Engagement James Schembri at the 2026 Volunteer Symposium.
• • •
Restoring shared progress in volunteer governance and decisionmaking; How the Registration Committee upholds public safety and fairness; and Engineering, reconciliation and the role of PEO volunteers.
More than a day of learning and networking, the symposium was a reminder that while engineering serves the public, it is also a community that grows stronger when volunteers who are committed to supporting PEO’s regulatory mandate come together to learn, connect and inspire one another.
Engineering Dimensions
17
BULLETIN BOARD
READ The Impossible Factory: The Remarkable True Story of Kelly Johnson and the Lockheed Skunk Works, America’s Innovation Machine, by Josh Dean, 2026: The true story of Kelly Johnson and Lockheed Martin’s “Skunk Works,” the innovation hub responsible for some of the most impressive aircraft of the 20th century, including the Lockheed U-2, SR-71 Blackbird and F-117 Nighthawk. Mega Builds: Ten Colossal Construction Projects That Will Change Our World, by Fred Mills, 2026: Written by the founder of The B1M, a video channel about construction, Mega Builds delves into 10 world-transforming engineering projects, such as Saudia Arabia’s 170-kilometre smart city known as The Line, Japan’s levitating railway and France’s quest for limitless energy. The book also explores the economic, environmental and societal stakes of building at unprecedented scale. Communication by Design: An Engineer’s Guide to Sharing Your Research, by Jack W. Baker, 2026: The aim of the book is to help engineers and researchers apply systematic design thinking to writing presentations, papers and proposals. Drawing on two decades of experience mentoring researchers at Stanford University, Baker introduces a fivestage, audience-focused process for communicating complex ideas clearly, persuasively and effectively across academic and professional settings.
18
Engineering Dimensions
The following events may have an in-person and/or online component. See individual websites for details.
ATTEND OCTOBER 27–28 Ottawa | Association of Consulting Engineering Companies National Leadership Conference https://acec.ca/events/national_ leadership_conference/index.html
NOVEMBER 2 Virtual | Strategic Writing: Mastering Proposals and Reports https://apps.egbc.ca/event?id=92097831D6F7-45B6-8A8E-C75C94634F3D
NOVEMBER 4–6 Niagara Falls | Tesla Energy Future Conference https://www.teslaric.org/events
NOVEMBER 19 Virtual | Licensure 101: Make 2027 the Year You Get Licensed https://pathwaytoengineering.ca/ events/licensure-101-make-2027-yearyou-get-licensed
DECEMBER 7 Virtual | Writing Mastery: Improve Your Writing Through AI Tools https://apps.egbc.ca/event?id=17F1D5487293-40D7-AFA9-B80E9D06D06F
LISTEN Pave it Black The United States-based National Asphalt Pavement Association’s official podcast explores the people, challenges and innovations shaping the asphalt industry. Since 2020, hosts Richard Willis and Brett Williams have featured conversations with experts and industry veterans, offering insights into the technologies and ideas driving the field forward today. https://open.spotify.com/ show/6qcyLwb39sngY6SagwdcSB The Engineers Collective This podcast delivers global news and interviews on all aspects of infrastructure, hosted by the United Kingdom’s New Civil Engineer magazine. It explores industry trends, major projects and career insights for civil engineers, with recent episodes covering engineering in Antarctica, dam failure risk and the 200th anniversary of the Menai Suspension Bridge. https://open.spotify.com/ show/2R9fipPVT01XjH3fR7lwoI
WATCH
DECEMBER 9 Virtual | Transportation Engineering Symposium https://otc.org/transportationengineering-symposium/
DECEMBER 15 Virtual | Crafting Your CBA Stories https://members.ospe.on.ca/event/ competency-based-assessment-cbaworkshop-2-7/
Fatal Engineering This docuseries reveals the human mistakes, design shortcomings and unexpected events that led to catastrophic engineering events. Episodes explore tragedies ranging from plane crashes and bridge collapses to nuclear disasters, roller coaster accidents, dam failures and skyscraper collapses. https://www.primevideo.com/detail/ Fatal-Engineering/0LO5EODK7XI1Y EY7Q8VYPYWQ70
Fall 2026
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
engineeringdimensions.ca
Beyond “It Meets Code” Professional judgment means looking beyond the minimum requirements of a code. By Jane Mustac, P.Eng.
Codes and standards establish minimum requirements for safety, accessibility and functionality. They provide a baseline that protects the public and promotes consistency across projects. In that sense, they set the floor, not the ceiling. When engineers identify alternatives that could materially improve a project, even when those alternatives are not required by a code or standard, the question is not simply whether the enhancement must be implemented. It is whether the engineer should bring the option forward so decision makers understand its potential benefits, limitations and trade-offs. Professional judgment plays a vital role in these situations. Engineers should recognize when decision makers ought to be aware of opportunities to improve safety, accessibility, resilience, lifecycle performance or environmental outcomes. Doing so helps ensure decisions are made with a clear understanding of the consequences, even when budget, scope or schedule constraints ultimately limit what is adopted. BEYOND COMPLIANCE “It meets code.” These three words can end an engineering discussion remarkably quickly. And sometimes they should. Engineers cannot and should not overdesign every project simply because something better might be possible. Codes and standards establish minimum requirements intended to protect the public and provide a reasonable framework for design. But what happens when an engineer identifies an opportunity to do better? Engineering decisions are made within real-world constraints, including budgets, schedules, procurement requirements, client objectives and employer direction. Engineers may not control the final decision, but they remain accountable for ensuring their professional advice clearly explains material risks, reasonable alternatives and the implications of proceeding with or without an improvement. A PRACTICAL EXAMPLE Consider a typical intersection reconstruction project. The design satisfies all applicable requirements: vehicle movements function properly, pedestrian crossings meet accessibility standards, traffic signals comply with requirements and drainage is accommodated. The project is fully code compliant. During design, however, the engineer identifies several opportunities for improvement. A pedes-
www.peo.on.ca
trian crossing could be shortened by adjusting the geometry. A curb radius could be reduced to create a more direct route. A cycling connection could continue through the intersection instead of ending before it. Additional landscaping could provide shade and improve stormwater management. None of these changes is essential to achieve compliance. Yet together they could make the intersection safer, more accessible, more resilient and more environmentally responsible for decades to come. A reasonable question follows: Why spend more? At that point, the central issue is no longer whether the design complies. It is whether the engineer has a responsibility to make the potential improvement visible. INFORMING THE DECISION There is an important distinction between making a decision and informing a decision. When engineers present a reasonable alternative, they are not necessarily recommending that it be adopted regardless of cost or circumstance. They are providing information that allows decision makers to make an informed choice. This is where professional engineering extends beyond the application of standards. A code identifies what must be done. Professional judgment considers what should be done while considering risks, consequences, trade-offs and opportunities. The profession’s Code of Ethics requires engineers to regard their duty to public welfare as paramount. That obligation extends beyond simply confirming compliance with minimum requirements. It includes exercising objective, competent judgment about the information decision makers need to understand the impacts of their choices. THE VALUE OF PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT This distinction becomes increasingly important as engineers address challenges related to climate change, accessibility, demographic shifts, public health, active transportation and environmental sustainability. Stopping at the minimum is often defensible. Budget, schedule and applicable standards may all support that decision. What may be harder to defend is never presenting a meaningful improvement simply because the code did not require it. That is the difference between two important questions: Does it meet code? And what could we achieve, at a reasonable cost, if we applied professional judgment rather than simply stopping at the minimum? The expectation is not that every project exceeds every standard. Rather, engineers should identify meaningful opportunities, communicate them clearly to the appropriate decision makers, document their advice and respect the limits of their authority. Codes and standards establish the minimum acceptable outcome. Professional judgment helps determine whether the public could reasonably be served by something better. e Jane Mustac, P.Eng., is PEO’s manager, practice advisory services.
Engineering Dimensions
19
PROFILE
From Research to Reality After a life-altering accident, Alex Mihailidis gained a new perspective on the challenge of ensuring engineering innovation reaches the people who need it most. By David Silverberg
In September 2019, Alex Mihailidis, PhD, P.Eng., was helping his then-eight-year-old son off the ledge of a rock cliff near Bancroft, ON, when he lost his footing. His son scrambled to safety, but the rock face gave way beneath Mihailidis, sending him tumbling 30 feet to the ground. He suffered a spinal cord injury that led to years of rehabilitation and mental health struggles. The experience taught him patience and selfcompassion. It also changed how he thinks about engineering innovation and its impact, reinforcing his belief that Canada can do more to translate research and technology into practical solutions that reach policymakers, clinicians and the public. Mihailidis, a University of Toronto professor in the department of occupational science and occupational therapy and founding scientific director of AGE-WELL, Canada’s technology and aging network, carried that perspective with him into rehab at Lyndhurst Centre in Toronto. Soon after arriving, a physiotherapist wheeled him down a hallway and noticed his face on the wall. As a research chair at Toronto Rehab’s KITE Research Institute, Mihailidis had led numerous studies at Lyndhurst. “She told me, ‘Wow, that’s you, isn’t it? I didn’t even realize we do research here,’” Mihailidis recalls. “The lesson I took from that is that engineers and researchers need to do a better job at translating the work we’re doing.” DESIGNING FOR INDEPENDENCE Mihailidis connected that moment to his goal for the technologies he develops for older adults and caregivers. For more than 30 years, his work has focused on the design and implementation of innovation that support Canada’s growing senior population. He also works on robotic engineering projects for the rehab sector. “Developing the technology is one thing, but it has to end up in the real world,” he says. “And if clinicians and the healthcare system at large aren’t adopting our products, then they’re not going to go anywhere.” Knowledge translation and ensuring his projects are accessible are core to Mihailidis’s ethos. He continues to work on his COACH ecosystem, an AI-
20
Engineering Dimensions
based computer vision system platform to guide seniors with dementia through daily tasks, such as hand washing. Its various iterations have been tested on mobile robots to assist seniors in and around the house. Another version of this project outfits a home with “digital Post-It notes” that use cameras to detect if someone has fallen. He has also dabbled with accelerometers connected to wearable devices.
Fall 2026
PROFILE
engineeringdimensions.ca
“Our society has to move beyond the current state of fall detection, which is a bracelet someone wears, but most [seniors] never wear it and leave it on their nightstand,” he notes. Layering AI into next-gen products is what he’s most focused on today. “Fall prediction is the Holy Grail now,” Mihailidis says. “There’s new generative AI tech being applied to predict what can happen based on past behaviour.” He has also developed robotic technologies for stroke recovery that can help people regain strength in their arms and upper body while also allowing them to track their progression. His products have yet to be commercialized, which doesn’t deter Mihailidis. He’s still tinkering with ideas of how to make the technologies available to as many clinicians as possible. “If I wanted to be in the business of making money, I wouldn’t be an academic,” he says with a laugh. BEYOND THE LAB In this era of AgeTech, as seniors-focused technology is dubbed, researchers and engineers must adapt to an increasingly knowledgeable demographic. “Today, seniors are tech-savvy and fully expect that technology will be part of their lives and healthcare journey in some way,” Mihailidis says. Older Canadians are poised to comprise a massive segment of our population pie. The 2021 Statistics Canada Census found that Canadians aged 85 and older represent one of the fastest-growing brackets, numbering more than 861,000 and expected to triple over the next 25 years. Canada is well-regarded for its research into technologies adapted for seniors, but Mihailidis says we do a poor job of translating that tech into real products and services. “In regions such as Singapore, Hong Kong and most of Europe, they have significant funding programs that help researchers translate their products,” he points out. Bridging the gap between research and go-to-market products motivated him to join not-for-profit organization Talent Innovation Canada as chief strategy officer. His goal, along with the organization’s model, is to pair “outstanding and smart students with companies in Canada, in order to retain talent here,” Mihailidis says. “This role matches my interests and what I want to do, and it really is an exciting new initiative for me,” he adds. e
www.peo.on.ca
INCONVERSATION... with Alex Mihailidis Why engineering? I was that kid in school who loved understanding how things work. I remember taking things apart to figure out how they were made. I wanted to see what kind of impact I could have with that kind of curiosity. How do you serve the public? I want to ensure the public is aware of the options available to them, and I want to make sure they’re aware of which technologies could work for them, what might not. This all goes back to focusing on the wellness and happiness of the general public, especially older adults. Most valuable non-technical skill? Working with other disciplines. It’s what I’ve done in my career, whether I work with therapists or doctors or business leaders. Engineering doesn’t work in a bubble. We can’t be isolated from other people. Biggest misconception about your work? That all we do is sit in front of a computer and program, and that we just want to build really cool stuff and not care about where it’s going. In my lab, it’s all about the user at the end of the day. We don’t just build cool stuff but technologies that people want. What are you learning now? As I move into what I’m considering the final phase of my career, at least in academia and research, I’m learning how to shut out the noise around me and focus on the signals. And that signal is helping older people and training the best people are going take over this field.
Engineering Dimensions
21
Building Better
LEARNING
PEO’s redesigned Continuing Professional Development program brings clearer requirements, streamlined deadlines and greater flexibility for licence holders.
ENGINEERING KNOWLEDGE
doesn’t stand still. Nor do the expectations placed on the professional engineers responsible for applying it. To help ensure licence holders continue to develop their skills throughout their careers, PEO is introducing a new approach to its mandatory Continuing Professional Development (CPD) program. The redesigned program builds on the foundation of PEO’s existing Practice Evaluation and Knowledge (PEAK) program while introducing changes intended to simplify participation, enhance flexibility and strengthen support for lifelong learning. The goal is to help licence holders maintain the knowledge, skills, integrity and professionalism needed throughout their careers while reinforcing public confidence in the profession. “In the spirit of continuous improvement, we have been monitoring the program and identified opportunities to streamline it while maintaining our public-safety-first approach,” says Arden Heerah, P.Eng., PEO’s manager of professional development initiatives. “The goal is to
22
Engineering Dimensions
make it more practical to administer, but more importantly, easier for engineers to comply with and find value in.” Supported by PEO’s new regulatory transformation office (see p. 36), the program’s development has involved extensive policy research, stakeholder consultations and proposed regulatory changes. The enhanced program is expected to roll out in two phases in 2027 and 2028, although the exact timeline depends on amendments to Ontario Regulation 941 under the Professional Engineers Act (see “Anticipated Rollout Timeline,” p. 24). The heart of the program remains the same, Heerah says, even as its core components evolve. Feedback from thousands of licence holders indicated strong appreciation for the Professional
Fall 2026
By Leslie Sinclair
Practice Module, which helps participants stay current on regulatory topics, ethics and professionalism, as well as its flexible, self-paced online format (see “Thousands Weigh in as PEO Reviews CPD Program,” Engineering Dimensions, Winter 2026, p. 8). “That’s why nothing is changing about the module,” Heerah says. “We want to keep the module simple but meaningful,” he adds, emphasizing its focus on public safety and providing practical information that engineers can readily apply in their professional practice. Here’s how the program will look once fully implemented in 2028. A NEW NAME One visible change is the program’s new name. The PEAK program will become the Continuing Professional Development program, a title that more clearly reflects its purpose and aligns with terminology used by many other Canadian regulators. A NEW LEARNING PLAN A new Learning Plan will replace the current Practice Evaluation. Licence holders will complete a guided self-assessment to help identify what learning needs and professional development goals are relevant to their practice. It will also help licence holders choose learning activities that meaningfully support their professional development.
www.peo.on.ca
“They will be prompted to reflect on their workplace and their risks,” says Heerah. “The objective is for them to identify gaps in their knowledge, what they want to learn based on their reflection on how they practise and the program’s competency categories. Then, they identify activities that will help them accomplish that. The ultimate goal is to help them plan their CPD activities.” CONSISTENT HOURS, FLEXIBLE CATEGORIES In contrast to the existing program, in which licence holders receive a personalized CPD target of up to 30 hours based on their Practice Evaluation, the fully implemented CPD framework will require licence holders to complete a standard 12 hours of professional development annually, equivalent to about one hour per month. The program will also move away from PEAK’s 80/20 framework. Under the current model, 80 per cent of a licence holder’s required learning must come from activities focused on technical and regulatory topics, while the remaining 20 per cent
Engineering Dimensions
23
A key distinction: In 2027, the current practice-status-based participation model remains in place. In 2028, all licence holders will be expected to complete the full CPD program unless they qualify for an exemption.
Anticipated Rollout Timeline PEO expects to introduce the updated CPD program in two phases beginning in 2027, with full implementation anticipated in 2028.
PHASE 1: JANUARY 2027 New program framework introduced The first phase combines elements of PEAK and the updated CPD program. The current practice-status-based participation model remains in place. Practising licence holders will continue to complete the full program, while non-practising licence holders may continue to opt in voluntarily to the CPD-hours component. PEO plans to: • Change the program name; • Require all licence holders to complete a Practice Declaration; • Replace the Practice Evaluation with a Learning Plan, and the CPD Report with a Learning Activity Report; • Introduce new competency categories for CPD activities;
could be made up of supplementary areas such as leadership, communications and project management. Feedback gathered through consultations showed that the program needed to better support licence holders’ diverse career paths and stages. This was a key factor in PEO’s decision to replace the 80/20 framework with a broader competency-based approach that gives licence holders greater flexibility to pursue learning relevant to their practice and professional responsibilities. Under the renewed program, licence holders will be able to choose learning activities across six broad competency categories: technical competence; communication; project and financial management; team effectiveness; professional accountability; and social, economic and environmental sustainability. This approach recognizes that professional competence extends beyond technical expertise alone. At the end of the CPD year, licence holders will complete a reflection as part of their Learning Activity Report detailing what activities they undertook and what they learned from them. EXPANDING PARTICIPATION Another significant change is a simplified and more consistent approach to participation. Under the existing PEAK program, all participating licence holders are required to complete the Practice Evaluation and the Professional Practice Module, while only practising licence holders
24
Engineering Dimensions
• Establish a minimum annual requirement of 12 CPD hours for licence holders who are subject to CPD hours; and • Establish a single year-end deadline for all program requirements. PHASE 2: JANUARY 2028 Full program implementation The second phase is expected to introduce the program’s new participation model and additional reporting requirements. PEO plans to: • Require all licence holders, regardless of practice status, to complete the full program; • Introduce broader, principles-based exemptions that include equity and compassionate considerations; • Expand the Learning Activity Report to allow licence holders to reflect on how their CPD activities contributed to their ongoing competence and professional growth; and • Align the program deadline with licence holders’ annual fee payment date.
are assigned CPD hours. Non-practising licence holders could also voluntarily opt in to CPD hours if they choose the “eligible to practise” licence status. Once the renewed program is fully implemented, all participating licence holders, regardless of their practice status, will be required to complete the full program, including 12 hours of CPD each year. The change reflects Ontario’s licensing framework, in which all licence holders retain the authority to practise engineering. While some jurisdictions have separate categories for individuals who hold the P.Eng. title but do not have the right to practise, Ontario’s approach is different. As a result, PEO believes a common set of CPD requirements helps ensure a consistent approach to maintaining professional competence across the profession. The change also reflects PEO’s view that learning and professional growth are ongoing responsibilities throughout an engineer’s career. At the same time, the program recognizes that licence holders’ circumstances can vary, and exemptions will be available in certain situations. Individuals in their first year of licensure and those
Fall 2026
The updated CPD program will be implemented in phases. Some changes take effect in 2027, while others are expected to be introduced in 2028. See the rollout timeline on page 24.
enrolled in the fee remission program will automatically receive an exemption. In addition, licence holders will be able to apply for an exemption in a given CPD year where PEO is legally required to provide one, such as an accommodation under the Human Rights Code. Exemptions may also be granted on a case-by-case basis for compassionate reasons, such as extended serious illness or extended parental leave. In the future, PEO may also offer extensions to CPD-related deadlines in appropriate cases rather than a full exemption from that year’s requirements. To reduce duplication, engineering regulators across Canada are working toward a nationally harmonized approach to CPD. Under the proposed framework, engineers who are licensed in more than one Canadian jurisdiction would only need to meet the CPD requirements of their home regulator. Those requirements would be recognized by other participating regulators, including PEO. Engineers who transfer their licence to Ontario through labour mobility would also be exempt from Ontario’s CPD requirements if they have already met the requirements of the jurisdiction they came from.
CPD Program Components The revised CPD program will include three annual requirements for licence holders: 1. Complete a Learning Plan; 2. Complete the Professional Practice Module; and 3. Complete 12 hours of eligible CPD activities and report them through the Learning Activity Report.
A SINGLE DEADLINE To simplify deadlines for licence holders, the revised program will introduce a single year-end annual deadline. The PEAK program used a stepped deadline, with the Practice Evaluation and the Professional Practice Module due on January 31 and the Continuing Professional Development Report due on December 31. This approach allowed licence holders to learn their personalized CPD hour target when they submitted their Practice Evaluation, giving them the remainder of the year to complete their CPD activities. Because the updated program no longer uses personalized CPD hour targets, a single deadline for all program components makes the process simpler and more straightforward. “It’s part of PEO’s ongoing modernization efforts, which includes future-proofing the CPD program with a deadline that makes sense for all the other PEO processes,” Heerah says. continued on next page
www.peo.on.ca
Engineering Dimensions
25
PREPARING FOR LAUNCH PEO is developing processes to implement the program while awaiting regulatory and legislative amendments from the Ministry of the Attorney General. Staff are also enhancing CPD guidance, tools and educational resources to support licence holders as the program evolves. For professional engineers, maintaining competence is an ongoing responsibility. By providing greater flexibility and a clearer framework for professional learning, PEO’s renewed CPD program supports licence
holders in meeting that responsibility while reinforcing public confidence in the profession. “It shows the public that both the regulator and practitioners put public safety first in everything they do,” says Heerah. e
How Compliance Will Work PEO’s renewed CPD program will include monitoring and audit processes to help ensure the program remains fair, consistent and effective. These processes may include verifying report submissions, requesting supporting documentation and reviewing learning activities to confirm they meet program requirements. As with the current program, licence holders who do not meet CPD requirements may be subject to administrative suspension until outstanding requirements are completed. An engineer whose licence has been suspended is prohibited from practising engineering, including being the engineer responsible for a certificate of authorization. A note indicating the suspension will appear permanently in PEO’s online directory. Practising while under suspension could result in serious penalties, up to and including monetary fines and the permanent revocation of a licence. A proposed regulatory change would also allow licences that have remained continuously suspended for two years due to unresolved CPD non-compliance to be cancelled through an administrative process without a hearing, ensuring that suspended licences do not remain inactive indefinitely.
26
Engineering Dimensions
Fall 2026
GAZETTE
engineeringdimensions.ca
Amended Decision and Reasons In the matter of a hearing under the Professional Engineers Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.28; and in the matter of a complaint regarding the conduct of MYLES KEW SWIFT, P.ENG., and DARRYL BRIAN BASIL HENRY TWYNSTRA, P.ENG., members of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario, and CENTRIC ENGINEERING CORPORATION, a holder of a Certificate of Authorization.
INTRODUCTION 1.
This matter came before a Panel of the Discipline Committee of Professional Engineers Ontario (“PEO”) on June 1, 2026.
2.
2.
The matters giving rise to this proceeding were the subject of a complaint made to PEO. The complaint was considered by the Complaints Committee and investigated. Following its review of the complaint and the investigation materials, the Complaints Committee referred the allegations to the Discipline Committee for hearing.
3.
3.
PEO was represented by Ms. Leah Price and Mr. Justin Gattesco. The Respondents, Mr. Myles Kew Swift, P.Eng. (“Swift”), Mr. Darryl Brian Basil Henry Twynstra, P.Eng. (“Twynstra”), and Centric Engineering Corporation (“Centric”), were represented by Mr. Rohit Kumar.
4.
5.
At the outset of the hearing, counsel advised the Panel that the parties had entered into an Agreed Statement of Facts dated May 26, 2026, and a Joint Submission as to Penalty and Costs dated May 26, 2026. The hearing proceeded on an uncontested basis. The Respondents admitted the allegations of professional misconduct and accepted the facts set out in the Agreed Statement of Facts. The Panel received and considered the Agreed Statement of Facts, the Joint Submission as to Penalty and Costs, the Thornton Tomasetti report incorporated by reference into the Agreed Statement of Facts, the submissions of counsel, and the advice of Independent Legal Counsel.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS 6.
The parties filed an Agreed Statement of Facts dated May 26, 2026. The Panel has considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and accepts the facts contained therein. 1.
At all material times, Swift and Twynstra were professional engineers licensed under the Act and employed by Centric.
www.peo.on.ca
9.
At all material times, Centric held a Certificate of Authorization naming Twynstra as an individual accepting professional responsibility for engineering services provided under the C of A. On November 8, 2017, Centric submitted a proposal to provide structural engineering services for the con- struction of a condominium at 11-15 Cannon Street West, Hamilton (“Property”), which would become “Jamesville Lofts Residential and Commercial Condominium” (“Building”). Centric’s scope of work included the provision of structural design drawings and specifications, fabrication drawing review, construction review during the work, and supplemental instruction documents. Centric’s proposal was executed by Ron Gilyana, project owner and director of Property owner Areacor Inc. (“Areacor”) on January 8, 2018. The city issued the Building Permit for the project on May 8, 2019. Centric subsequently issued a “Issued for Construction” drawing set signed and sealed by Swift on July 22, 2019. In early 2019, Areacor retained Fusioncorp Developments Inc. (“Fusioncorp”) as the general contractor for the Building. Fusioncorp requested that Centric revisit its design to reduce structural costs and make the project more financially viable. On August 12, 2020, Centric issued a “Re-Issued for Construction” drawing set (the “August 12th Drawings”), which incorporated various changes, including those requested by Fusioncorp, as well as Centric’s own Site Instructions for addressing construction deficiencies up to date. The August 12th Drawings contained the following key deficiencies: (1) improperly designed steel beam corbels; (2) inadequate grouting instructions in respect of column bracing; (3) two inadequately sized level two steel beams; (4) three undersized footings; and (5) they failed to provide diaphragm and collector connection forces. The designed structure, if built in accordance with the August 12th Drawings, would not have been OBC-compliant. Through a combination of Site Review Reports and Supplementary Site Instructions issued by Centric throughout 20202021, Centric issued further instructions in respect of grouting for column bracing and the precast construction sequence to prevent torsional failure as part of the site review and instruction process that it was actively engaged in. In issuing the August 12th Drawings, Centric and Swift failed to comply with the following applicable standards: a. CSA S16-14 (section 13.8.2) due to the over stressed beams; b. CSA S16-14 (section 13.3.1) due to the inadequate grouting instructions in respect of column bracing;
Engineering Dimensions
27
GAZETTE
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
28
c. CSA23.3-14 (sections 12.6.2 and 11.5) failure to provide diaphragm and collector connection forces; and d. 2012 OBC section 4.2.4.1(5) due to the inadequate footing sizes. In or around June 2021, Fusioncorp identified deficiencies with the Building. Fusioncorp requested surveys from Ashenhurst Nouwens & Associates to investigate the deficiencies. In early November 2021, Centric received the results of “Slab Edge” and “Location of Column” surveys by Ashenhurst Nouwens & Associates Inc. Centric’s preliminary review of the surveys prompted it to issue a stop work letter dated November 17, 2021, to the other parties involved in the design and construction of the Building. On December 9, 2021, the City issued an order to comply letter blocking off access to the Building. A Receiver was subsequently appointed over Areacor’s assets. On June 6, 2022, Centric issued a letter to the Receiver detailing the structural deficiencies with the Building for the purposes of construction remediation costing. This letter was provided to the Receiver to ensure that any purchaser of Areacor’s assets would be fully informed about the status of the Building’s construction and deficiencies. In October 2022, Marbelle Group Inc. (“Marbelle”) purchased Areacor’s assets and changed the general contractor to Whidden Construction Group. On November 11, 2022, Centric entered an agreement with Marbelle to complete the investigation of the deficiencies and provide structural engineering services for the Building, including the preparation of a remedial drawing set, which it issued on March 30, 2023. This remedial drawing set addressed the deficiencies in the August 12th drawings in connection with the steel corbel detail and the Level 2 Beams and also addressed several construction deficiencies. PEO retained Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. (“TTI”) to provide an independent expert opinion about the actions and conduct of the Respondents in this matter. TTI issued a report dated January 29, 2025, which was signed and sealed by Christopher Minerva, P.Eng. (the “Expert Report”). It concluded that the August 12th Drawings were deficient, as outlined in paragraphs 7 and 9, above. Attached as Schedule “A” is a redacted copy of the Expert Report. Attached as Schedule “B” is a copy of the email from TTI dated January 30, 2026, containing additional comments from TTI. Solely for the purposes of these proceedings, and without prejudice to any other proceedings, the Respondents accept as correct the findings, opinions and conclusions in the Expert Report, as redacted. The Respondents admit that the August 12th Drawings were deficient.
Engineering Dimensions
16. The Respondents accordingly admit that they failed to maintain the standards that a reasonable and prudent practitioner would maintain in the circumstances, and that they failed to make reasonable provision for complying with applicable standards and codes. 17. The Respondents cooperated fully with PEO’s investigation into this matter. The Respondents have no prior Discipline Committee history. 18. As outlined in the paragraphs above, Centric made efforts to rectify the deficiencies after they were discovered, including by addressing the corbel and steel beams in the remedial drawing set, and providing supplemental instruction on the grouting and temporary bracing to Fusioncorp during construction. 19. By reason of the aforesaid, the Parties agree that the Respondents are guilty of professional misconduct as follows: a. Negligence, amounting to professional misconduct, as defined by sections 72(1) and 72(2)(a) of Regulation 941: b. Failing to make reasonable provision for complying with applicable standards and codes, amounting to professional misconduct as defined by section 72(2)(d) of Regulation 941; and c. Conduct relevant to the practice of professional engineering that would reasonably be regarded as unprofessional, amounting to professional misconduct as defined by section 72(2)(j) of Regulation 941.
MEMBER’S/HOLDER’S POSITION 7.
The Respondents admitted the allegations of professional misconduct set out in the Notice of Hearing and the Agreed Statement of Facts.
8.
Before accepting those admissions, the Panel conducted a plea inquiry.
9.
Swift and Twynstra confirmed that they had reviewed the Agreed Statement of Facts and the Joint Submission as to Penalty and Costs with counsel. They confirmed that they understood the nature of the allegations, the consequences of admitting those allegations, and the penalties jointly proposed by the parties.
10. The Respondents further confirmed that they had received independent legal advice and that their admissions were voluntary. 11. Independent Legal Counsel advised the Panel that it should be satisfied that the admissions were informed and voluntary and that the agreed facts supported the findings sought by the parties. 12. Having considered the admissions made by the Respondents and the advice of Independent Legal Counsel, the
Fall 2026
GAZETTE
engineeringdimensions.ca
Panel was satisfied that the admissions were informed, voluntary, and unequivocal. The Panel therefore accepted the Respondents’ admissions.
DECISION 13. The Panel accepts the admissions contained in the Agreed Statement of Facts and finds that Swift, Twynstra, and Centric committed professional misconduct as alleged.
NEGLIGENCE 20. The first allegation is negligence amounting to professional misconduct. 21. The deficiencies identified in this matter were not limited to a single design issue or isolated calculation error. They affected multiple aspects of the structural system, including beam design, structural stability, load transfer, connection detailing, and foundation design. The parties agreed that the structure would not have complied with the Ontario Building Code if it had been constructed solely in accordance with the August 12 Drawings.
14. The Panel’s reasons follow.
REASONS FOR DECISION 15. The Respondents admitted the allegations of professional misconduct contained in the Agreed Statement of Facts. Although the allegations were admitted, the Panel was still required to consider the Agreed Statement of Facts and be satisfied that the admitted facts supported the findings of professional misconduct sought by the parties. 16. The Panel has reviewed the Agreed Statement of Facts, including the Thornton Tomasetti report incorporated by reference into that document, together with the submissions of counsel and the admissions made by the Respondents during the plea inquiry. 17. The parties agreed that the August 12 Drawings contained five significant deficiencies: improperly designed steel beam corbels, inadequate grouting requirements relating to column bracing, inadequately sized Level 2 steel beams, undersized footings, and a failure to provide diaphragm and collector connection forces. The parties further agreed that, if constructed solely in accordance with those drawings, the structure would not have complied with the Ontario Building Code. 18. The Respondents also accepted as correct the findings, opinions, and conclusions contained in the Thornton Tomasetti report. That report concluded that the August 12 Drawings contained significant deficiencies affecting important structural elements of the building and identified failures to comply with applicable engineering standards and Ontario Building Code requirements.
22. The Panel accepts the Respondents’ admission that the August 12 Drawings were deficient and that they failed to maintain the standards that a reasonable and prudent practitioner would have maintained in the circumstances. Drawings issued for construction are intended to be relied upon by owners, contractors, municipalities, and other professionals. The deficiencies identified in this matter were significant and affected important structural elements of the project. 23. The Panel is satisfied that the admitted facts support the allegation of negligence and therefore finds that the Respondents committed professional misconduct under sections 72(1) and 72(2)(a) of Regulation 941.
FAILURE TO MAKE REASONABLE PROVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND CODES 24. The second allegation concerns the Respondents’ obligation to make reasonable provision for compliance with applicable standards and code requirements. 25. The parties agreed that the August 12 Drawings failed to comply with applicable engineering standards and Ontario Building Code requirements. The Thornton Tomasetti report identified deficiencies relating to structural steel design, bracing requirements, foundation elements, and the transfer of structural loads throughout the structure. The report also identified specific failures to comply with applicable standards and code provisions. 26. This allegation is supported directly by the agreed facts. The parties admitted that the August 12 Drawings did not comply with applicable standards and code requirements and further admitted that the Respondents failed to make reasonable provision for compliance with those requirements. 27. The Panel is satisfied that the admitted facts support this allegation and therefore finds that the Respondents committed professional misconduct under section 72(2)(d) of Regulation 941.
19. Those admissions form the foundation for the Panel’s findings.
www.peo.on.ca
Engineering Dimensions
29
GAZETTE
CONDUCT RELEVANT TO THE PRACTICE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING THAT WOULD REASONABLE BE REGARDED AS UNPROFESSIONAL 28. The final allegation concerns conduct relevant to the practice of professional engineering that would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as unprofessional. 29. The conduct underlying this allegation is the same conduct addressed above. The August 12 Drawings contained multiple significant deficiencies affecting important structural components of the building. Those deficiencies required additional investigation, remedial engineering work, supplemental site instructions, and ultimately the issuance of a stop-work letter after concerns regarding the structure emerged. 30. The Panel recognizes that the Respondents subsequently undertook significant efforts to address the deficiencies once they were identified. The agreed facts establish that Centric issued supplemental instructions, undertook additional review, issued a stop-work letter, cooperated with the receiver, and prepared remedial drawings intended to address the identified issues. The Respondents also cooperated fully with PEO’s investigation and have no prior discipline history. 31. Those factors are relevant to penalty. They do not, however, alter the admitted facts that give rise to these findings. 32. The Panel is satisfied that members of the profession would reasonably regard the conduct admitted by the Respondents as unprofessional. The admitted conduct represented a significant departure from the standards expected of professional engineers engaged in structural design work. 33. The Panel therefore finds that the Respondents committed professional misconduct under section 72(2)(j) of Regulation 941.
CONCLUSION ON PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT 34. For these reasons, the Panel accepts the admissions contained in the Agreed Statement of Facts and finds that Swift, Twynstra, and Centric committed professional misconduct as alleged.
JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY AND COSTS 35. Following the Panel’s findings of professional misconduct, counsel advised that the parties had entered into a Joint Submission as to Penalty and Costs dated May 26, 2026. 36. The Joint Submission provided that Swift, Twynstra, and Centric would each be reprimanded and that the fact of
30
Engineering Dimensions
the reprimand would be recorded on the Register for an unlimited period of time. 37. The parties further proposed that Swift’s licence be suspended for a period of eight weeks commencing June 25, 2026, and that Centric’s Certificate of Authorization be suspended for a period of two weeks commencing June 25, 2026. 38. The Joint Submission also required Swift to successfully complete the Advanced Structural Design (07STR8-516-CIV) Path Examination and required Twynstra to successfully complete five specified educational courses relating to structural steel design, structural stability, and foundation design. 39. In addition, the parties proposed supervision requirements that would apply if the educational requirements were not completed. Under those provisions, Swift and Twynstra would be prohibited from practising professional engineering except under the direct supervision of another professional engineer who would assume professional responsibility for and sign and seal engineering documents prepared by them. Those restrictions would be suspended for twelve months from the date of the Panel’s decision and would be suspended indefinitely upon successful completion of the required examination or courses. 40. The parties further proposed publication of the findings and Order with reference to the names of the Respondents and agreed that there should be no order as to costs.
PENALTY SUBMISSIONS 41. PEO submitted that the proposed penalties appropriately address the objectives of professional discipline, including public protection, specific deterrence, general deterrence, rehabilitation, and maintenance of public confidence in the engineering profession. 42. Counsel for PEO reviewed the aggravating and mitigating factors present in this matter. PEO submitted that the misconduct was serious. The August 12 Drawings contained five significant deficiencies affecting important structural elements of the building. The parties agreed that the structure would not have complied with the Ontario Building Code if constructed solely in accordance with those drawings. PEO submitted that those are serious matters warranting a significant disciplinary response. 43. At the same time, PEO acknowledged a number of mitigating factors. The Respondents had no prior discipline history. They cooperated fully with PEO’s investigation. They accepted responsibility through the Agreed Statement of Facts and entered into the Joint Submission as to Penalty and Costs. PEO also acknowledged the remedial
Fall 2026
GAZETTE
engineeringdimensions.ca
efforts undertaken after the deficiencies were identified, including the issuance of supplemental instructions, additional engineering review, remedial design work, and the stopwork letter issued by Centric. 44. PEO submitted that the educational requirements imposed upon Swift and Twynstra were selected because they directly address the deficiencies identified in this matter. PEO emphasized that those requirements are intended not only to protect the public but also to provide meaningful rehabilitation. 45. PEO further submitted that publication, reprimands, suspensions, educational requirements, and supervision provisions collectively advance the objectives of general deterrence and specific deterrence while maintaining public confidence in the profession. 46. In support of the Joint Submission, PEO referred the Panel to the decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. AnthonyCook and the Divisional Court in Bradley v. Ontario College of Teachers. PEO submitted that the applicable test establishes a high threshold for rejecting a joint submission and that discipline panels should not engage in impermissible tinkering with a jointly proposed disposition. 47. PEO also referred the Panel to the Discipline Committee decisions in Jones and Kessler and Sanderman Corporation. PEO submitted that those decisions demonstrate that suspensions, educational requirements, supervision provisions, publication, and reprimands are recognized disciplinary responses in matters involving significant structural engineering deficiencies and failures to comply with applicable standards and code requirements. 48. Counsel for the Respondents submitted that the Joint Submission should be accepted. 49. The Respondents acknowledged the seriousness of the deficiencies identified in the Agreed Statement of Facts but emphasized the significant remedial measures undertaken after those deficiencies were discovered. Counsel referred to the supplemental site instructions, remedial engineering work, stop-work letter, cooperation with the receiver, and the preparation of remedial drawings intended to address the identified concerns.
www.peo.on.ca
50. The Respondents further emphasized that no collapse occurred, no injuries resulted, and no property damage was caused. Counsel submitted that those circumstances distinguish this matter from some of the authorities relied upon by PEO and are relevant considerations when assessing the appropriateness of the proposed disposition. 51. The Respondents also relied upon their cooperation with PEO’s investigation, the absence of prior discipline history, and their acceptance of responsibility through the Agreed Statement of Facts and Joint Submission. 52. Independent Legal Counsel advised the Panel that its role was not to determine the penalty that it might independently impose. Rather, the Panel’s task was to determine whether the Joint Submission, considered as a whole, should be accepted or rejected. 53. Independent Legal Counsel advised that the governing principles are set out in Anthony-Cook and were adopted by the Divisional Court in Bradley. Independent Legal Counsel reminded the Panel that joint submissions play an important role in the administration of justice and should not be rejected lightly. 54. Independent Legal Counsel further advised that, if the Panel had concerns that could lead it to reject the Joint Submission, the parties should be given an opportunity to address those concerns before any final decision was made.
ANALYSIS OF THE JOINT SUBMISSION 55. The Panel accepts the legal principles articulated in the authorities relied upon by PEO and has considered the Joint Submission as to Penalty and Costs in accordance with those principles. 56. The Supreme Court of Canada in Anthony-Cook and the Divisional Court in Bradley confirmed that joint submissions play an important role in the administration of justice and should not be rejected lightly. The applicable test is whether the proposed disposition would bring the administration of justice into disrepute or would otherwise be contrary to the public interest. The threshold for rejection is intentionally high. 57. The Panel has considered the Joint Submission as a whole, together with the Agreed Statement of Facts, the submissions of counsel, and the authorities provided by the parties. 58. The misconduct in this matter is serious. The Respondents admitted that drawings issued for construction contained multiple significant deficiencies affecting important structural elements of the building. They further admitted that the August 12 Drawings failed to comply with applicable engineering standards and Ontario Building Code requirements and that the structure would not have complied with the Ontario Building Code if constructed solely in accordance with those drawings. 59. At the same time, the Panel accepts that there are significant mitigating factors. The Respondents cooperated fully with PEO’s
Engineering Dimensions
31
GAZETTE
investigation, entered into a comprehensive Agreed Statement of Facts, accepted responsibility for their conduct, and undertook substantial remedial efforts after the deficiencies were identified. The Respondents also have no prior discipline history. Further, no collapse occurred, no injuries resulted, and no property damage was caused. 60. The Panel is satisfied that the proposed disposition appropriately addresses the objectives of professional discipline. The suspensions, publication requirements, reprimands, educational requirements, and supervision provisions collectively promote public protection, specific deterrence, general deterrence, rehabilitation, and maintenance of public confidence in the engineering profession. 61. The Panel is particularly satisfied that the educational requirements imposed upon Swift and Twynstra directly address the technical deficiencies identified in this matter. The required examination and courses provide a meaningful rehabilitative component to the proposed disposition and reduce the likelihood of similar issues arising in the future. 62. The Panel has also considered the decisions in Jones and Kessler and Sanderman Corporation. While each case turns on its own facts, those decisions demonstrate that suspensions, educational requirements, supervision provisions, publication, and reprimands are recognized disciplinary responses in matters involving significant structural engineering deficiencies and failures to comply with applicable standards and code requirements. 63. Having regard to the applicable legal principles, the Agreed Statement of Facts, the submissions of counsel, and the Joint Submission as a whole, the Panel is satisfied that the proposed disposition falls within the range of outcomes that can reasonably be accepted in the public interest. 64. The Panel therefore accepts the Joint Submission as to Penalty and Costs in its entirety.
REPRIMAND 65. The Panel retired to deliberate and consider the Agreed Statement of Facts, the admissions of the Respondents, the submissions of counsel, the authorities relied upon by the parties, and the advice of Independent Legal Counsel. 66. Following its deliberations, the Panel returned to the hearing and advised the parties that it had accepted the Joint Submission as to Penalty and Costs. The Chair delivered an oral reprimand on behalf of the Panel.
32
Engineering Dimensions
67. In delivering the reprimand, the Panel reminded the Respondents that they had been found guilty of professional misconduct for negligence, failure to make reasonable provision for compliance with applicable statutes, regulations, standards, codes, by-laws, and rules, and conduct relevant to the practice of professional engineering that would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as unprofessional. 68. The Panel noted that the misconduct arose from the August 12, 2020, drawings, which contained significant deficiencies, including improperly designed steel beam corbels, inadequate grouting instructions, inadequately sized Level 2 steel beams, undersized footings, and the failure to provide diaphragm and collector connection forces. 69. The Panel emphasized that professional engineers are expected to conduct themselves in a manner that is honourable, professional, and becoming of the profession, to abide by the laws, rules, guidelines, and requirements applicable to the practice of professional engineering, and to comply with the standards expected of the profession. 70. Of particular concern to the Panel was the impact that this conduct has on public confidence in the profession and its ability to govern itself. The Panel noted that failures to adhere to the standards of practice expected of professional engineers place clients at risk, affect public confidence in the profession, and undermine the trust that forms the foundation of the relationship between professional engineers and the public. 71. The Panel reminded the Respondents that the right to practise professional engineering is a privilege, not a right. That privilege exists because professional engineers agree to uphold rigorous standards of competence, professionalism, and ethical conduct. The Panel further observed that professional misconduct damages both individual professional reputations and the reputation of the profession as a whole. 72. At the same time, the Panel expressed its satisfaction that the educational requirements and remedial measures contained in the Order would assist the Respondents in addressing the deficiencies identified in this matter and would support their continued safe practice of professional engineering in Ontario. 73. Finally, the Panel cautioned the Respondents that, while the penalties imposed in this matter were fair and appropriate in the circumstances, future findings of professional misconduct could result in more significant disciplinary consequences. The Panel expressed its expectation that the Respondents would not appear before a Discipline Committee again for similar conduct.
Fall 2026
GAZETTE
engineeringdimensions.ca
ORDER
CONCLUSION
74. Having found that Swift, Twynstra, and Centric committed professional misconduct, and having accepted the Joint Submission as to Penalty and Costs, the Panel orders as follows: 1. Swift, Twynstra, and Centric are reprimanded, and the fact of the reprimands shall be recorded on the Register for an unlimited period of time. 2. Swift’s licence is suspended for a period of eight weeks commencing June 25, 2026. 3. Centric’s Certificate of Authorization is suspended for a period of two weeks commencing June 25, 2026. 4. Swift shall successfully complete the Advanced Structural Design (07STR8-5-16-CIV) Path Examination. 5. A restriction shall be imposed upon Swift’s licence prohibiting him from practising professional engineering except under the direct supervision of another professional engineer who shall assume professional responsibility for and sign and seal every final drawing, report, or other engineering document prepared by Swift. This restriction shall be suspended for a period of twelve months from the date of this Decision. If Swift successfully completes the required examination, the restriction shall be suspended indefinitely. 6. Twynstra shall successfully complete the following educational requirements: a. Advanced Design and Behaviour of Structural Steel Structures; b. Structural Steel Connections Design, Detailing and Specifications; c. Structural Design for Lateral Loads and Stability; d. Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Shallow Foundations; and e. Design of Shallow Foundations. 7. A restriction shall be imposed upon Twynstra’s licence prohibiting him from practising professional engineering except under the direct supervision of another professional engineer who shall assume professional responsibility for and sign and seal every final drawing, report, or other engineering document prepared by Twynstra. This restriction shall be suspended for a period of twelve months from the date of this Decision. If Twynstra successfully completes the required educational requirements, the restriction shall be suspended indefinitely. 8. The findings and Order of the Discipline Committee shall be published with reference to the names of the Respondents. 9. There shall be no order as to costs.
75. For the reasons set out above, the Panel finds that Myles Kew Swift, P.Eng., Darryl Brian Basil Henry Twynstra, P.Eng., and Centric Engineering Corporation committed professional misconduct as admitted in the Agreed Statement of Facts.
www.peo.on.ca
76. The Panel accepts the Joint Submission as to Penalty and Costs and makes the Order set out in this Decision. 77. The Panel is satisfied that the penalties imposed appropriately address the seriousness of the misconduct while advancing the objectives of professional discipline, including public protection, rehabilitation, deterrence, and the maintenance of public confidence in the engineering profession. Warren Turnbull signed this Decision and Reasons as Chair of, and on behalf of, the members of the Discipline Panel: Rainer Arocena, P.Eng., and Daniel Boyer.
Engineering Dimensions
33
GAZETTE
Hamilton firm fined $7,500 for unauthorized use of professional engineer’s seal The Ontario Court of Justice has fined a Hamilton firm $7,500 for applying a facsimile of a professional engineer’s seal without the engineer’s knowledge or consent. In October 2024, Grandville Construction Limited, affixed an engineer’s seal to several pages of a permit application and submitted it to the City of Hamilton in connection with a residential deck project. The engineer whose seal was used did not authorize the use of the seal. A complaint was made to Professional Engineers Ontario (PEO), which investigated and laid charges under the Professional Engineers Act (PEA). On July 16, 2026, Grandville Construction pleaded guilty to one count of breaching section 40(3)(b) of the PEA. The firm’s director, Harjinder Singh Sandhu, also pleaded guilty to breaching section 40(5) of the PEA in connection with this conduct. Grandville Construction was ordered to pay a $7,500 fine. The director received a suspended sentence and placed on probation for a period of one year. Hanna Plummer, legal counsel, regulatory compliance, represented PEO in this matter. PEO would like to thank the victim engineer and the City of Hamilton for their diligence and co-operation in its investigation. As the regulator of professional engineering in Ontario, PEO reminds the public that the unauthorized use or forgery of a professional engineer’s seal on construction or design drawings is a quasicriminal offence under the PEA. Such conduct may also result in criminal charges under the Criminal Code of Canada.
34
Engineering Dimensions
Consumers of engineering services are also advised to exercise caution ensuring any engineer they engage through a freelance website is a legitimate engineer located in Ontario and directly reachable through channels beyond a freelance website. PEO administers the PEA to serve and protect the public interest by licensing Ontario’s more than 98,000 professional engineers and engineering firms. Professional engineers can be identified by the “P.Eng.” designation following their names. Members of the public can verify a professional engineer or engineering firm by searching PEO’s public directories at peo.on.ca/directory. Concerns about unlicensed individuals or unauthorized firms may be reported to PEO’s enforcement team via enforcement@peo.on.ca.
Fall 2026
DID YOU KNOW ENGINEERING DIMENSIONS IS AVAILABLE IN BOTH PRINT AND DIGITAL FORMATS?
To choose your preferred edition, log in to the PEO portal through PEO’s website and select either the print or digital version of Engineering Dimensions under the Profile tab. If no preference is selected, you will receive the digital edition. While you’re in the portal, take a moment to confirm that your email and mailing address are up to date to ensure you don’t miss an issue.
What Happens Next?
By
36
Engineering Dimensions
Les l
ie Sin cla i
r
Fall 2026
Regulatory change doesn’t end with Council approval. PEO’s new regulatory transformation office is helping turn complex initiatives into practical improvements for applicants and licence holders.
W
hen PEO announces a new initiative, licence holders usually only see the final product: a revised licensure requirement, an updated policy or a new or enhanced program. What’s less visible is the extensive work required to turn an idea into an operational reality. Delivering regulatory change often requires coordinating policy development, legislative amendments, operational planning and stakeholder engagement across multiple departments. To help manage this work, PEO established the regulatory transformation office. Led by Adeilton Ribeiro, P.Eng., director of regulatory transformation, the office helps guide major Council-directed initiatives from concept to implementation, ensuring efforts are aligned across the organization. Currently, the office is overseeing the development of PEO’s updated Continuing Professional Development (CPD) and Engineering Intern (EIT) programs (see “From Concept to Launch,” p. 39) while also supporting the early stages of PEO’s review of the Professional Engineers Act (see p. 13).
www.peo.on.ca
Ultimately, the goal is to ensure that regulatory initiatives are supported by the processes, tools and guidance needed to make them work in practice. BRIDGING THE GAP Ribeiro calls this work “bridging the gap” because modern regulatory initiatives rarely involve a simple change. One regulatory change can affect legislation, policies, procedures, guidance materials, digital systems, communications, training and stakeholder engagement. New programs often require contributions from multiple departments, each responsible for a different piece of the delivery process. Historically, policy development and implementation have often occurred in separate phases. Policy teams would research an issue, consult stakeholders and develop recommendations for Council. Once Council provided direction, responsibility would shift to operational teams to determine how the initiative would be implemented across the organization. “The idea of regulatory transformation is to work with policy as their research takes place, providing operational insights along the way,” Ribeiro explains. “When the initiative is ready to launch, we
Engineering Dimensions
37
While much of the regulatory transformation team’s work happens behind the scenes, its impact is intended to be visible in the experience of applicants and licence holders by helping create a smoother and more predictable regulatory journey.
have already been working on the operational requirements and preparing for the rollout.” Rather than waiting until a policy has been approved to begin implementation planning, the regulatory transformation office helps bring operational considerations into projects much earlier. By involving key departments throughout the development process, potential changes can be identified and addressed before a project reaches the delivery stage. The forthcoming EIT and CPD programs are examples of initiatives that involve significant planning and coordination across the organization. While policy staff focus on research, consultation and program design, operational teams must consider how new processes, tools and resources will eventually be rolled out and supported. WHY EFFECTIVE DELIVERY MATTERS While much of the regulatory transformation team’s work happens behind the scenes, its impact is intended to be visible in the experience of applicants and licence holders by helping create a smoother and more predictable regulatory journey. Its intended results are clearer guidance, better access to information, well-supported processes and fewer delays when new programs or requirements are introduced. Creating that experience is ultimately how regulatory initiatives deliver value. Whether the goal is to improve access to licensure, support competence or strengthen oversight, outcomes depend not only on policy decisions but also on how effectively those decisions are implemented. New programs and requirements are more likely to succeed when they are supported by the operational infrastructure needed to put them into practice. “Efficiency comes when the policy team works with operational insight and the operations teams stay in the loop on what’s happening on the Council and policy side, so they’re prepared to roll things out,” Ribeiro explains.
38
Engineering Dimensions
The creation of the regulatory transformation office also closely aligns with PEO’s 2026–2030 Strategic Plan. “Organizational excellence is one of the key priorities in our strategic plan,” Ribeiro says. To support that goal, PEO is leveraging technology, process design and cross-functional collaboration to strengthen service delivery, improve resiliency and enhance operational effectiveness. Ribeiro describes regulatory transformation as “the enabler that connects all the pieces.” By bringing together people, processes, technology and strategy, the office helps turn regulatory decisions into operational reality. For applicants and licence holders, that means regulatory changes can be introduced with greater clarity, consistency and readiness, helping ensure initiatives achieve their intended outcomes while supporting PEO’s publicprotection mandate. e
Fall 2026
Where regulatory transformation fits POLICY & REGULATORY DIRECTION • Council Decisions • Policy Development • Research • Legislative Change
REGULATORY TRANSFORMATION OFFICE Translating regulatory priorities into action
OPERATIONAL DELIVERY • Processes • Systems • Services • User Experience
The regulatory transformation office bridges policy direction and operational delivery, helping turn Council decisions, research and legislative change into practical improvements for applicants and licence holders.
From Concept to Launch The forthcoming EIT program illustrates how the regulatory transformation office supports major initiatives from Council direction through implementation. STEP 1: DEVELOPING THE POLICY When Council directed staff to revisit the EIT program, the goal was to develop a new program that fit within PEO’s current licensing process (see “Supporting Early Steps to Licensure,” Engineering Dimensions, Summer 2026, p. 37). While the policy team designs the program and works with the Ministry of the Attorney General (MAG) on legislative changes, regulatory transformation helps identify the operational considerations that will need to be addressed if the program moves forward. STEP 2: PLANNING AHEAD Implementation planning begins long before policy work is complete. As program requirements and applicant supports are developed, regulatory transformation works with licensing and other teams to understand how those elements could be delivered in practice. For example, while policy staff consider what resources may help EIT applicants complete their competency-based assessment work examples, regulatory transformation explores how those supports could ultimately be integrated into PEO’s operations. “That gap has now been bridged by regulatory transformation,” says Ribeiro.
These components are already being developed while PEO awaits the required legislative approval. STEP 4: COORDINATING THE WORK The EIT program involves contributions from multiple departments, including licensing, IT solutions delivery and communications. Regulatory transformation provides project oversight, helping teams understand dependencies, coordinate activities and keep the initiative moving forward. “The experts in all these areas know what to do best, but regulatory transformation makes sure all the interdependencies behind the scenes are flowing, so the project can progress seamlessly,” Ribeiro says. STEP 5: READYING FOR LAUNCH The EIT program cannot be implemented until the necessary legislative changes receive approval from the MAG. The goal is to ensure that once approval is received, the program can move quickly from planning to delivery. “Once the ministry says, ‘Okay, your legislation draft looks good. You have the thumbs up to implement and go ahead with this,’ we are operationally ready to push the button,” Ribeiro explains.
STEP 3: BUILDING OPERATIONAL READINESS As policy development continues, the operational foundation is built alongside it. For the EIT program, that includes developing processes, digital resources and portions of the licence holder portal experience that applicants would eventually use.
www.peo.on.ca
Engineering Dimensions
39
GOVERNANCE
A New Approach to Council Nominations PEO’s new competency-based nominations process will support a broad mix of expertise and perspectives on future Councils. By Leslie Sinclair
The changes were developed through a Council-led governance review and approved by Council in June. PEO staff involved in implementing the changes spoke with Engineering Dimensions about how the new process will work and the rationale behind it. “The new model reflects the role Council plays and the expectations associated with effective governance. They have an important job in advancing the organization’s public interest mandate,” explains Sheetal Rawal, PEO’s senior policy counsel. Because the new framework requires changes to Regulation 941 under the Professional Engineers Act, the transition will occur in two phases. Several core elements will be introduced for the 2027 election, which will be a hybrid of the old and new processes (see “How the 2027 Election Will Work,” p. 41). Full implementation of the new process will occur with the 2028 election.
PEO Council is moving forward with a competencybased nominations process for future Council elections, marking one of the most significant governance changes in the regulator’s recent history. The new approach is intended to support effective oversight and decision-making as the profession continues to evolve. Key changes include the use of a competency matrix to assess candidates’ skills and experience and the introduction of self-nomination for Council positions. Traditional election campaigning will also be eliminated. Election communications will instead focus on introducing a candidate and highlighting the qualifications they would bring to Council’s regulatory and strategic responsibilities. Reviewing the election system to strengthen board effectiveness, transparency and accountability is a key priority of PEO’s 2026–2030 Strategic Plan. Competency-based nominations, increasingly used by peer regulators, is intended to support Council renewal and maintain a broad mix of expertise and perspectives over time. It is not an assessment of the performance or qualifications of individual councillors or of those elected under the existing process.
40
Engineering Dimensions
A NEW WAY TO BE NOMINATED Under the new model, prospective candidates will be able to nominate themselves for Council roles, eliminating the need to be put forward by other licence holders and collect supporting signatures. For the 2027 election, prospective candidates must still collect supporting signatures. “Prior feedback from licence holders indicated that a lot of that is based on your network, your connections and your ability to leverage them,” Rawal explains, noting that the procedure has been described as a barrier for early career engineers and newcomers to Canada who wish to participate. Prospective candidates will complete a new competency-based nomination application, comprising nomination forms (for 2027) and a nomination acceptance form, which will include a declaration regarding election eligibility criteria and the completion of mandatory PEO training. Along with submitting a resume, prospective candidates will complete a self-assessment to explain how their skills, experience and strengths would contribute to Council and align with the role. A BALANCED MIX OF EXPERTISE Prospective candidates will now review a competency matrix that identifies the skills and experience considered valuable for effective governance and oversight. Each year, Council will use the matrix to identify areas of expertise that would strengthen the overall composition of the next Council. This will help inform the candidate profile for the upcoming election and efforts to encourage qualified licence holders with a range of backgrounds and experience to run. “It’s not about individual members; it’s about the collective capabilities of Council as a whole,” Rawal says. “Using the competency matrix helps ensure Council includes some people who have governance skills, some who have the ability to read financial statements [and] others who understand human resources issues, for example, so that Council encompasses a wide range of competencies.”
Fall 2026
engineeringdimensions.ca
A NEW APPROACH TO COMMUNICATIONS Election communications will shift away from traditional campaigning and place greater emphasis on candidate competencies. Candidates may introduce themselves and highlight their skills, experience and ability to contribute to Council’s work. Electoral promises and individual policy platforms will no longer be permitted, including on personal platforms and PEO channels. All candidate materials must be factual, accurately represent the candidate and avoid misleading content, including AI-generated content that could affect election integrity. PEO will provide a standard template focused on each candidate’s qualifications and ability to serve on Council, and only materials submitted in that format will be published. The change is intended to help candidates present their qualifications more clearly while making it easier for voters to consider the collective
PROFILE
mix of skills and experience that candidates could bring to Council. As Rawal puts it, it “helps voters focus on candidates’ skills and experience and what they can bring to the table.” CANDIDATE DISQUALIFICATION Another update will give PEO’s Central Election and Search Committee the authority to invalidate a nomination and disqualify a candidate in cases of serious breaches of election rules or procedures, where doing so is necessary to protect the public interest. e
HOW THE 2027 ELECTION WILL WORK The new competency-based nomination process will roll out over the next two election cycles. The 2027 election will bridge the old and new procedures (see 2027 Nomination and Voting Procedures and Election Communication Procedures starting on p. 42). Notably, this year: • Prospective candidates will still need to be nominated by other licence holders (self-nomination will be introduced in the 2028 election); • As part of their nomination application, prospective candidates will declare their eligibility and completion of mandatory PEO training, submit a resume and complete a self-assessment outlining how their skills, experience and competencies align with the role; • Election communications may only introduce a candidate and outline the qualifications that would contribute to Council’s regulatory and strategic responsibilities; and • The Central Election and Search Committee may invalidate a candidate’s nomination in cases where election rules have been violated.
www.peo.on.ca
Engineering Dimensions
41
PEO ELECTIONS
2027 PEO Council Elections Call for Candidates All PEO members are invited to become candidates for the positions of president-elect, vice president, councillor-at-large and regional councillor (one for each of PEO’s five regions) on PEO Council. 1. Any eligible member may be nominated for election to Council as president-elect, vice president or councillor-at-large, by at least 15 other members. The nomination must include at least one member resident in each region. [Regulation 941/90, s. 14(1)] a. The position of president-elect is for a one-year term, after which the incumbent will serve a one-year term as president and a one-year term as past president. b. The position of vice president is for a one-year term. c. The councillor-at-large position is for a two-year term. Two councillors-at-large are to be elected in 2027.
2.
Any member residing in a region may be nominated for election to Council as a regional councillor for that region by at least 15 other members who reside in the region. [Regulation 941/90, s. 14(2)] a. The position of regional councillor is for a two-year term.
A member nominated for election to Council must complete a nomination application in which they accept the nomination, confirm eligibility, submit a resume and complete a self-assessment questionnaire focused on the strengths, skills and competencies they would bring to Council. Nomination forms for collection of nominators’ signatures and nomination acceptance forms may be obtained from the PEO website at www.peo.on.ca or the Chief Elections Officer via email at elections@peo.on.ca, or by phone at 416-224-1100; 1-800-339-3716. Completed nomination forms and nomination acceptance forms are to be sent only electronically and only to the Chief Elections Officer at elections@peo.on.ca, by 10 a.m. on Monday, January 11, 2027. No personal delivery of forms will be accepted. For further information on becoming a candidate, please refer to the 2027 Council Elections Guide posted on PEO’s website.
2027 Nomination and Voting Procedures The 2027 Nomination and Voting and Election Communications Procedures were approved by the Council of PEO on June 19, 2026. The Election Communications Procedures form part of these Nomination and Voting Procedures. Candidates and prospective candidates are responsible for familiarizing themselves with these procedures. Failure to follow these rules or procedures could result in a nomination being considered invalid. Council is required to appoint an independent Chief Elections Officer to “oversee the nomination of Members for election to the Council and the election of and voting for members to the Council” per 11.1 of Regulation 941 made under the Professional Engineers Act. The Chief Elections Officer ensures that nominations, the election, and voting are conducted in accordance with the procedures established by Council. Candidates and prospective candidates1 are urged to submit nominations and election material well in advance of published deadlines so that any irregularities may be corrected before the established deadlines. Nominees’ names are made available on PEO’s website as reviewed.
All licence holders, including prospective candidates and candidates, are prohibited from interfering with the integrity of the election in any way. Election interference involves interference with the legitimacy of the election and can include cyber-attacks, the spreading of disinformation about a candidate or the election, intimidating or threatening individuals involved in the election including candidates or voters or election officials, vote buying or bribery, or voter impersonation, among other activities. Election interference could result in a nomination being invalidated and the disqualification of a candidate from the election.
A “prospective candidate” is someone seeking nomination and a “candidate” is someone whose nomination has been validated.
1
42
Engineering Dimensions
Fall 2026
PEO ELECTIONS
engineeringdimensions.ca
1.
The schedule for the elections to the 2027-2028 Council is as follows:
Nomination period
Monday, December 7, 2026 – Monday, January 11, 2027
Deadline for submission of candidate’s election communications material (website, Engineering Dimensions, etc.)
Tuesday, January 19, 2027
Deadline for Completion of Council Orientation Course
Friday, February 12, 2027
Voting Period
Tuesday, February 16, 2027 – Tuesday, March 16, 2027
All times noted in these procedures are Eastern Time.
2.
Candidates’ names will be listed in alphabetical sequence by position on the list of candidates sent to members and on PEO’s website. However, the order of their names will be randomized when voters sign into the voting site to vote.
3.
A person may be nominated for only one position.
4.
A nomination, once withdrawn, may not be re-instated.
5.
Only nomination applications (including nomination acceptance and nomination forms) completed in all respects, without amendment in any way whatsoever, will be accepted. Please note that the Chief Elections Officer may validate nominations by contacting nominators.
6.
Signatures on nomination forms may be hand-signed or electronic.
7.
Signatures on nomination forms do not serve as confirmation that a member is formally endorsing a candidate or prospective candidate.
8.
9.
In the event a candidate or prospective candidate changes their mind on a position and decides to run for a different position after submitting a nomination application, a newly-completed nomination application (including nomination and nomination acceptance forms), will be required to be submitted by the deadline for nomination applications. Nomination papers are to be submitted only by email (elections@peo.on.ca) for tracking purposes. Applications will not be accepted by any other format (e.g. personal delivery, courier, fax). If you have a need for accommodation because of a disability that limits your ability to
www.peo.on.ca
access electronic communications tools, please contact us via email: elections@peo.on.ca or by telephone: 416-2241100 or toll-free at 1-800-339-3716 between the hours of 8:30am and 4:30pm. 10. Prospective candidates should allow sufficient time for their emails to go through the system to ensure that the completed papers are, in fact, received by the Chief Elections Officer by 10:00 am on Monday, January 11, 2027. In the event of a dispute as to when the application was sent vs received, a prospective candidate can provide the Chief Elections Officer with a copy of their email to PEO that would indicate the time the nomination application was sent from their computer. Material must be received by the deadline unless there are exceptional circumstances which warrant an extension. The Chief Elections Officer should consider on a case-by-case basis whether undue hardship or exceptional circumstances exist and how they should be addressed. Where the Chief Elections Officer has authority to exercise discretion in administering the election, including with respect to the nomination deadline, that discretion shall be exercised in a fair and reasonable manner, within the parameters of their statutory authority and Councilapproved procedures, and with a view to maintaining electoral integrity. 11. A candidate must declare in their nomination application that they will complete the PEO mandatory compliance training for volunteers if elected. This compliance training is free and online. This training helps ensure PEO compliance with the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act and the Workplace Violence and Harassment requirements of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. It also minimizes the risk of interruption to
Engineering Dimensions
43
PEO ELECTIONS
Council’s work by ensuring those elected for office have completed the requisite training. Those who have already completed PEO’s mandatory compliance training for volunteers in previous roles will be considered to have completed the training and will not be required to do them again.
b) 12. A candidate must meet the election eligibility criteria, as set out in Regulation 941. They will be required to complete a declaration page regarding the election eligibility criteria as part of the nomination application. 13. A candidate must have completed an orientation course approved by Council in order to be eligible for election to Council. They must have completed the course by Friday, February 12, 2027. This orientation is free and online. The orientation must be completed by the deadline unless there are exceptional circumstances which warrant an extension. The Chief Elections Officer should consider on a case-by-case basis whether undue hardship or exceptional circumstances exist and how they should be addressed. 14. In order for their nomination to be considered valid, a candidate must successfully complete this competencybased nomination procedure as set out by Council for the 2027 Council Election: a) A prospective candidate must submit a nomination application for a position. As part of this application, a prospective candidate will: i. Complete the required Nomination Forms and Nomination Acceptance Form available on the PEO election website. The Nomination Acceptance Form will include a declaration regarding election eligibility criteria and the completion of mandatory PEO training. ii. Submit a resume/curriculum vitae (no more than 3 pages long) and complete a self-assessment questionnaire available on the PEO election website. This questionnaire will provide prospective candidates with an opportunity to identify the strengths, skills, and competencies that they would bring to Council. In completing the questionnaire, prospective candidates will be required to: • Review the Role Description for the position for which they intend to run. The Role Description will describe the position’s governance responsibilities, its required competencies and attributes, its time commitment, and its accountability expectations.
44
Engineering Dimensions
• Review the Council-approved Council Competency Matrix, which outlines individual competencies that support Council’s collective competency profile and Council’s ability to fulfil its strategic and regulatory responsibilities. Following receipt of a completed nomination application, the Chief Elections Officer will confirm a prospective candidate’s eligibility and determine if the nomination is valid.
15. Council has appointed a Central Election and Search Committee to: • encourage members to seek nomination for election to the Council as President-Elect, Vice President or a Councillor-at-Large; • assist the Chief Elections Officer as may be required; • receive and respond to complaints regarding the procedures for nominating, electing and voting for members to the Council; • conduct an annual review of the elections process and report to Council. 16. Candidates will be advised when a member of the Central Election and Search Committee has declared a conflict of interest should an issue arise that requires the consideration of the committee. 17. Council has appointed a Regional Election and Search Committee for each region to encourage members residing in each region to seek nomination for election to the Council as a Regional Councillor. 18. Council has appointed an independent Chief Elections Officer to oversee the election process and to ensure that nomination, election, and voting are conducted in accordance with the procedures approved by Council. 19. The Chief Elections Officer will be available to answer questions and complaints regarding the procedures for nominating, electing, and voting for members to the Council. Any such complaints or matters that the Chief Elections Officer cannot resolve will be forwarded by the Chief Elections Officer to the Central Election and Search Committee for final resolution. Staff is explicitly prohibited from handling and resolving complaints and questions, other than for administrative purposes (e.g. forwarding a received complaint or question to the Chief Elections Officer).
Fall 2026
engineeringdimensions.ca
20. Through a fair process, the Central Election and Search Committee will consider concerns or complaints that a candidate has violated election rules or procedures, following the Chief Elections Officer’s initial assessment. Where the committee finds a candidate has violated election rules or procedures with a level of seriousness that makes it necessary to invalidate their nomination in order to serve and protect the public interest, the Central Election and Search Committee may invalidate the candidate’s nomination and cause their disqualification from the election. 21. The Chief Elections Officer will offer an optional candidate onboarding session for all candidates after the nomination application deadline. The session will outline expectations, necessary documentation, and timelines, and will include an opportunity for candidates to ask questions. 22. The Chief Elections Officer must send reminders to candidates for all key deadlines throughout the election process to ensure they are fully aware of their responsibilities and timelines. These reminders must be sent to candidates seven days and one day before each deadline. 23. Voting will be by electronic means only (internet and telephone). Voting by electronic means will be open at the same time the electronic election packages are sent out. 24. An independent agency has been designated by Council to receive, control, process and report on all cast ballots. This “Official Elections Agent” will be identified to the members with the voting material. 25. If a candidate withdraws their nomination for election to PEO Council prior to the preparation of the voting site, the Chief Elections Officer shall not place the candidate’s name on the voting site of the Official Elections Agent or on the list of candidates sent to members and shall communicate to members that the candidate has withdrawn from the election. If the candidate withdraws from the election after the electronic voting site has been prepared, the Chief Elections Officer will instruct the Official Elections Agent to adjust the voting site to reflect the candidate’s withdrawal. 26. All voting instructions, a list of candidates and their election publicity material will be sent to members by the Official Elections Agent. All voters will be provided with detailed voting instructions on how to vote electronically. Control numbers or other access control systems will be sent to members by email after the election package has been sent out. The Official Elections Agent will send out an eblast with the control numbers (PINs) every Monday during the election period.
www.peo.on.ca
PEO ELECTIONS
27. If the Official Elections Agent is notified that a voter has not received a complete election information package, the Official Elections Agent shall verify the identity of the voter and may either provide a complete duplicate election information package to the voter, which is to be marked “duplicate,” by email or provide the voter’s unique control number to the voter and offer assistance via telephone. In order to receive such information via email, the voter must provide prior written consent to the use of their email address for this purpose. 28. The Chief Elections Officer shall respond to any requests for new packages as usual - i.e., if the member advises that they have moved and have not received a package, the member is to be directed to the appropriate section on the PEO website where the member may update their information with Document Management Centre (DMC). 29. As soon as the Chief Elections Officer is notified that the member information has been updated, they will request the Official Elections Agent to issue a replacement package with the same control number. 30. Verification of eligibility, validity or entitlement of all votes received will be required by the Official Elections Agent. Verification by the Official Elections Agent will be by unique control number to be provided to voters with detailed instructions on how to vote by internet and by telephone. 31. Voters need not vote in each category to make the vote valid. 32. PEO will post total votes cast in the election on the PEO website on each Friday of the voting period and will post final vote totals by candidate after voting has closed. No other information related to vote totals will be made available. 33. The Official Elections Agent shall not disclose individual voter preferences. 34. The Official Elections Agent shall keep a running total of the electronic ballot count and shall report the unofficial results to the Chief Elections Officer. 35. The Chief Elections Officer shall proceed with a recount of the ballots for a given candidate category for election to Council (or bylaw confirmation) where the vote total on any candidate category for election to Council between the candidate receiving the highest number of votes cast and the candidate receiving the next highest number of votes cast is 25 votes or less for that candidate category (or where the votes cast between confirming the bylaw and rejecting the bylaw is 25 votes or less).
Engineering Dimensions
45
PEO ELECTIONS
36. Certification of all data will be done by the Official Elections Agent. 37. On or before the close of nominations on Monday, January 11, 2027, the President will appoint three members or Councillors, who are not running in the election, as returning officers to: • approve the final count of ballots; • make any investigation and inquiry as they consider necessary or desirable for the purpose of ensuring the integrity of the counting of the vote and report the results of the vote to the Registrar not later than three weeks following the date set by the Council for the receipt of the ballots. 38. Returning Officers will receive a per diem of $250, plus reasonable expenses to exercise the duties outlined above. 39. On the day the election closes, the Returning Officers will meet with the Chief Elections Officer to report the final vote counts to the Registrar, including ballots cast for candidates who may have withdrawn their candidacy after voting opened. The Registrar will advise the candidates and Council of the official results in writing on election day. 40. A request for a recount may be made by a candidate to the Chief Elections Officer within two days of the reporting of the election results to the Council and persons nominated for the election. Where the Chief Elections Officer determines, through a fair and impartial application of their discretion, that there is a reasonable and genuine possibility that the result of an election may be incorrect, or where the accuracy of an election is reasonably called into question, the Chief Elections Officer shall proceed with the recount.
46
Engineering Dimensions
41. Upon the direction of the Council following receipt of the election results, the Official Elections Agent will be instructed to remove the electronic voting sites from its records. 42. In the event a chapter holds an All-Candidates Meeting, the chapter must invite to the meeting all candidates for whom voters in that region are eligible to vote. 43. Candidates for PEO Council may submit expense claims. The travel allowance to enable candidates to travel to chapter events during the period from the close of nominations to the close of voting will be based on the distance between chapters and the number of chapters in each region. Such travel expenses are reimbursed only in accordance with PEO’s expense policy. 44. These procedures may only be amended if approved by Council. 45. All questions from, and replies to, candidates are to be addressed to the Chief Elections Officer at elections@peo.on.ca. The Chief Elections Officer must acknowledge receipt of all email correspondence within two (2) business days. A substantive response must be provided as soon as practicable, based on the nature and complexity of the inquiry.
Fall 2026
PEO ELECTIONS
engineeringdimensions.ca
2027 Election Communications Procedures Important dates to remember
Nomination period
Monday, December 7, 2026 – Monday, January 11, 2027
Deadline for submission of candidate’s election communications material (website, Engineering Dimensions, etc.)
Tuesday, January 19, 2027
Deadline for Completion of Council Orientation Course
Friday, February 12, 2027
Voting Period
Tuesday, February 16, 2027 – Tuesday, March 16, 2027
All times noted in these procedures are Eastern Time.
These Election Communications Procedures form part of the Nomination and Voting Procedures. Candidates are responsible for familiarizing themselves with these procedures. Failure to follow these rules or procedures could result in a nomination being considered invalid. Election communications are only permitted to be used to introduce a candidate and outline their competencies, experience, and ability to contribute to Council’s regulatory and strategic responsibilities. Campaigning, such as making electoral promises or promoting individual policy agendas, is not permitted in election communications, including candidate materials published on personal platforms as well as PEO’s communications channels. Election communications must be factual and may not contain misrepresentations. Candidate material must be a realistic representation of the candidate. Misleading representations, including those utilizing AI technologies, may be considered disinformation that negatively affects the integrity of the election. 1.
Names of nominated candidates will be published on PEO’s website once their nomination is reviewed.
2.
Should a candidate wish to withdraw from the election, their name will remain on the website and the word “withdrawn” will appear beside their name on the PEO website.
3.
Candidate material is subject to the procedures outlined in this document, the 2027 Nomination and Voting Procedures, as well as to any applicable legal requirements. Candidate material includes material for publication in Engineering Dimensions, additional material on PEO’s website, and material published on their own websites, platforms, and communications channels.
www.peo.on.ca
4.
Candidates will be provided with a template that focuses on their competencies, skills, and ability to serve as a member of Council. Candidates will be required to use this template for materials published on PEO’s communications channels. PEO will not publish candidate materials that do not use the template.
5.
Candidate material is readily available to the public and should be in keeping with the dignity of the profession at all times.
6.
Candidate material may contain personal endorsements provided there is a clear disclaimer indicating that the endorsements are personal and do not reflect or represent the endorsement of PEO or any organization with which an individual providing an endorsement is affiliated. Endorsements are only permitted to speak to the candidate’s competencies, experience, and ability to contribute to Council’s regulatory and strategic responsibilities. Endorsements must not be based on or promote electoral promises or individual policy agendas or contain other forms of campaigning.
7.
In order to be published by PEO, candidate material must comply with these procedures and with any applicable legal requirements. Prior to candidate material being published by PEO, the Chief Elections Officer must assess the material to determine whether it is compliant. Where the Chief Elections Officer determines candidate material does not comply, the amendment process set out in section 8 should be followed.
Engineering Dimensions
47
PEO ELECTIONS
Where the Chief Elections Officer is of the opinion that candidate material may present a legal risk to PEO, the Chief Elections Officer should seek legal advice from, or in consultation with, the Chief Legal Officer to assist in determining whether the material should be published. For example, if the Chief Elections Officer is concerned that a post may be libelous or in violation of PEO’s human rights obligations, the Chief Elections Officer should consult with the Chief Legal Officer. Depending on the issue, or to avoid any perception of conflict or bias, the Chief Legal Officer may retain external legal counsel on the Chief Election Officer’s behalf. The Chief Elections Officer should provide the candidate an opportunity to amend the materials as set out in section 8. Following the advice of legal counsel, the Chief Elections Officer has the authority to reject the campaign material if the candidate does not amend the non-compliant portion. The Chief Elections Officer should provide reasons to the candidate for the rejection of their material. 8.
The Chief Elections Officer is responsible for ensuring that all candidate material published by PEO (whether for Engineering Dimensions, PEO’s website or eblast) complies with these procedures and any applicable legal requirements. Where it is deemed the material does not satisfy these procedures or any applicable legal requirements, the Chief Elections Officer will, within three full business days from receipt of the material by the Chief Elections Officer, notify the candidate, who is expected to be available during this period by telephone or email. The candidate will have a further two full business days to amend the material to bring it into compliance and advise the Chief Elections Officer of the amendment. Candidates are responsible for meeting this deadline. Should a candidate fail to re-submit material that is compliant within the two-business-day period, the candidate’s material will be published with a notation explaining any necessary amendments or, following legal advice, the Chief Elections Officer may reject it. Where the Chief Elections Officer rejects material, they should provide reasons for the rejection to the candidate.
9.
The Chief Elections Officer will also review candidate materials for non-procedural issues, such as formatting inconsistencies, broken
48
Engineering Dimensions
links, typographical errors, or appropriate photo resolution. Candidates will be informed of any such issues and given the opportunity to resolve them before the materials are made public, in accordance with the dates set out in the procedures. 10. The Chief Elections Officer must provide candidates with a final version of their materials, formatted as they will appear publicly, for review prior to publication. At this stage, candidates may request only minor stylistic or grammatical changes. No changes to the content will be accepted. 11. Candidate material for publication in Engineering Dimensions and any additional material they wish to publish on the website, must be in the form of the template available at Schedule A, and must be forwarded to the Chief Elections Officer via email at elections@peo.on.ca no later than 11:59 p.m. on Tuesday, January 19, 2027, and must be in accordance with these procedures and Schedule A attached. 12. Material must be received by the deadline unless there are exceptional circumstances which warrant an extension. The Chief Elections Officer shall consider on a case-by-case basis whether undue hardship or exceptional circumstances exist and how they should be addressed. 13. Where the Chief Elections Officer has authority to exercise discretion in administering the election, including with respect to election publication deadlines, that discretion shall be exercised in a fair and reasonable manner, within the parameters of their statutory authority and Council-approved procedures, and with a view to maintaining electoral integrity. 14. Candidates are required to use a template to present their election material in Engineering Dimensions. The template is included in Schedule A of these procedures. Candidates must provide responses to the questions provided in the allotted space. The presentation of the fillable template is fixed and no modifications will be permitted. If candidates wish for their portrait to be included, they must submit their portrait separately for insertion into the designated location by PEO staff.
Fall 2026
PEO ELECTIONS
engineeringdimensions.ca
15. Candidates shall not use the PEO logo in their election material. 16. Candidates may include URL links to PEO publications but not a URL link to a third party in their material on PEO’s website. For clarity, besides links to PEO publications, the only URL link that may be included in a candidate’s material on PEO’s website is a URL link to the candidate’s own website. URL links to other websites are not permitted. 17. Fundraising requests are not permitted in a candidate’s material. 18. If campaign material is submitted by a candidate without identifying information, PEO staff are authorized to contact the candidate and ask if they wish to resubmit material. 19. Candidate material will be published as a separate insert in the Winter 2027 issue of Engineering Dimensions and to PEO’s website on on Friday, February 12, 2027. Links to candidate material on PEO’s website will be included in any electronic mailing to eligible voters. 20. Candidate material for PEO publication will be considered confidential by PEO staff and access to it will be restricted to only the staff members required to arrange for publication until published on PEO’s website. All candidates’ material will be published to PEO’s website at the same time. 21. Candidates may submit updates to their material on PEO’s website once during the posting period. Any amendments to a candidate’s name/designations are to be considered part of the one-time update permitted to their material during the posting period. 22. Candidates may post more comprehensive material on their own websites, which will be linked from PEO’s website during the posting period. Candidates may include active links to their social media accounts (Facebook, X, LinkedIn, etc.) in material appearing in Engineering Dimensions, published on PEO’s election site, or included in an eblast of candidate material. Active links to social media accounts other than the candidate’s are not permitted. All candidate material, including on candidates’ personal platforms, is subject to the prohibition against campaigning, and are not permitted to contain electoral promises or promote individual policy agendas or other
www.peo.on.ca
forms of electioneering. Candidate materials are only permitted to be used to introduce the candidate and provide information about the candidate’s competencies, experience, and ability to contribute to Council’s responsibilities. 23. PEO will provide one group email distribution (i.e. “eblast”) to members of candidate material. Material to be included in an eblast must be submitted to the Chief Elections Officer at elections@peo.on.ca in accordance with Schedule A. In the event of a dispute as to when the material was sent vs received, the material will be accepted only if a candidate can provide the Chief Elections Officer with a copy of their email to PEO sent from their computer indicating a sent time before the deadline. 24. All candidate material for PEO publication for the eblast must be submitted in the format specified at Schedule A. 25. All candidates will be invited to submit an optional video, no longer than five minutes, to be posted on PEO’s website. The video must address the candidate’s reasons for seeking Council membership, avoid campaigning, and outline their governance experience, as well as any other relevant qualifications, professional experience, and skills applicable to serving on the board of directors. While video submissions are optional, they are strongly encouraged. 26. Candidate materials from previous elections will remain on PEO’s database as part of the record of the election. 27. PEO’s regulatory activities and the reasonable communication of them must continue during an election. However, PEO’s resources, including chapter resources, (financial, human, communications, technological, etc.) must not be used to favour or prejudice any candidate. This rule does not apply to the use of the election travel allowance by candidates. 28. Chapters may not endorse candidates, or expressly not endorse candidates, in print, on their websites or through their list servers, or at their membership meetings or activities during the voting period. Where published material does not comply with these procedures, the Chief Elections Officer will cause the offending material to be removed.
Engineering Dimensions
49
PEO ELECTIONS
29. Candidates may attend PEO chapter annual general meetings and network during the informal portion of the meeting. Candidates are permitted to attend PEO chapter functions in their current official capacity but are prohibited from communicating about their candidacy while operating in their official capacity. When communicating about the election or their candidacy at PEO chapter events, candidates are not permitted to campaign, for example by making electoral promises or promoting an individual policy agenda. Instead, candidates may only use the event or platform to introduce themselves and communicate their competencies, experience, and ability to contribute to Council’s responsibilities.
Election and Search Committee is authorized to interpret the election procedures and to rule on candidates’ questions and concerns relating to them. Any such complaints or matters that the Chief Elections Officer cannot resolve will be forwarded to the Central Election and Search Committee for final resolution. A nomination may be invalidated by the Central Elections Search Committee where it determines that a candidate has violated election rules or procedures with a level of seriousness that necessitates invalidating the nomination in order to serve and protect the public interest. A licence holder whose nomination is invalidated is disqualified as a candidate from the election.
30. Where there are concerns that a candidate’s communications on non-PEO platforms or communications channels are in violation of these procedures, the Chief Elections Officer has the authority to assess the communications and, where the Chief Elections Officer is of the opinion that they violate these procedures, require the offending communications to be revised or removed. The Central
Schedule A: 2027 Election Publicity Procedures The specifications and template for candidate materials will be available on PEO’s website following the November 27 meeting of Council.
50
Engineering Dimensions
Fall 2026
IN COUNCIL
engineeringdimensions.ca
Council Approves Three-Phase Licence Fee Update Decisions of the 579th meeting of Council on October 2, 2026 By Nicole Axworthy
At its October meeting, Council reviewed and approved a proposal to update licence fees in three phases over the next five years. The proposal was developed to address the inflationary and regulatory cost pressures PEO has faced since its last licence fee update in 2019. During that time, PEO has implemented significant regulatory and legislative changes to strengthen public protection, including continuing professional development requirements, professional mobility legislation and a licensing process that is compliant with the Fair Access to Regulated Professions and Compulsory Trades Act. At the same time, PEO has experienced growth in the profession, with increased volumes of applications, examinations, complaints and investigations. To continue effectively supporting these regulatory responsibilities, Council approved the fee update plan to begin in 2027 (see p.10). Council directed staff to prepare the bylaw amendments required to implement these changes and bring them forward for Council approval. Staff will also incorporate the licence fee update into the final operating, capital and strategic plan budget for consideration by the Audit and Finance Committee and Council in November. 2027 COUNCIL ELECTION DATES Council approved the 2027 Council election dates, including a nomination period running from December 7, 2026, to January 11, 2027, and a voting period from February 16 to March 16, 2027. Council also approved the Council competencies and attributes profile, which provides a framework to identify the skills, experience, knowledge and personal attributes required on Council. It is intended to help inform candidate nominations and succession planning so the board has the collective capabilities needed to govern PEO effectively and in the public interest. Council initially endorsed a competency-based nomination and remuneration framework at its March 2026 meeting. This framework is being phased in over the 2027 and 2028 Council elections. At its June 2026 meeting, Council approved rules for the 2027 Council election that reflect the first phase of the framework (see p. 40). PRESIDENT AND CHAIR ROLES Council approved a responsibilities framework for the PEO president and the Council chair. Providing a more encompassing description of Council roles was directed by Council as part of its adoption of the competency-based nomination and remuneration framework recommendations. Role descriptions provide transparency regarding responsibilities and performance expectations.
www.peo.on.ca
In 2011, Council decided to separate the role of the Council chair from that of the president. Under the governance framework, the same individual can hold both positions, and the positions can also be held by different individuals, as has been the case for the current and previous Council terms. Council directed staff to update the Governance Manual to describe the defined roles of the president and the chair. Council also directed staff to update any related policies and bring them to Council’s November meeting for approval. AGM FORMATS Council directed staff to transition to a fully virtual annual general meeting (AGM) format starting in 2027, ensuring equitable participation for all licence holders. This online approach aligns with licence holder AGM participation preferences, reduces geographic and logistical barriers, eliminates in-person event costs and allows staff to focus resources on delivering a shared virtual experience for all licence holders. ENGINEERS CANADA GOVERNANCE PROJECT Council directed PEO’s member representative at the October 2026 Engineers Canada (EC) special meeting of members to vote in favour of the proposed motion to approve amendments to the EC bylaws to reduce the size of its board based on a “one-regulator, one-seat” model, with the change to take effect at the May 2027 annual meeting of members. Council also directed PEO’s member representative to vote in favour of the proposed motion to approve amendments to the EC bylaws to provide for a minimum of one, and up to three, independent directors, with the provisions to take effect at the May 2028 annual meeting of members. If the PEO president is not available to exercise PEO’s vote as its members representative, Council appointed PEO President-elect Sardar Asif Khan, PhD, MBA, P.Eng., as a proxy for the meeting. e
Engineering Dimensions
51
IN MEMORIAM
PEO has received with regret notification of the deaths of the following licence holders (as of August 2026). ABOLINS, Aldis Demorestville, ON
DODD, David John Russell Picton, ON
JAMES, Clifford Stanley Vineland, ON
ADAMKO, Robert George Thunder Bay, ON
EICHLER, Richard Douglas Scarborough, ON
JONES, Dennis Oswald Kanata, ON
ADAMS, Christopher Edward Roderick Carleton Place, ON
EINOLA, Jaak Peeter Toronto, ON
KERR, Robert Douglas Cayuga, ON
ELLIOTT, James Peter Cardinal, ON
KHOURI, Suheil Tawfiq Oakville, ON
ERVEN, Clifford Charles Kimberley, BC
KRAEMER, Ronald Gordon Mitchell, ON
ESPLEY, George Herbert Pickering, ON
LEE, Wing-Ming North York, ON
FUNG, Sung Sum Waterdown, ON
LEVY, Edward Jacob Toronto, ON
FUNSTON, Douglas Everett Cobourg, ON
LIGHTFOOT, Herbert Douglas Baie D’Urfe, QC
AMOR, Ernest Frederick Mississauga, ON ANDERSEN, Mark Marenus Barrie, ON ANTONIK, Valentin Markham, ON BOCKING, Kenneth Arthur Oakville, ON BOJSIC, Hrvoje Mississauga, ON BORGDORFF, Hendrik Barrie, ON BROWN, Richard Douglas Etobicoke, ON BRUETON, Stephen John Aurora, ON CARLSON, Brian Jay Whitby, ON CARROLL, Kieran Denis Mississauga, ON CHAPMAN, Greig Calgary, AB CHOI, Eric Tseng-Fai Markham, ON
GAMBINO, Giuseppe Etobicoke, ON GODKIN, Bruce Lavern Walton, ON GRIFFIN, Robert William Spring, TX GURVITS, Ilnessa Toronto, ON HALVORSON, Bruce Gordon Thunder Bay, ON HAMBLIN, Thomas Munro Port Hope, ON HARTLEY, Christopher Markham, ON
LONG, Robert James Orangeville, ON LOWDEN, James Reid Wellington, ON MACLEOD, Charles Andrew Mississauga, ON MANNING, Ronald Paul Mississauga, ON MARJERRISON, Ewen Earl Manotick, ON MARTIN, William Rea Ottawa, ON MASON, John Herbert London, ON
CLYDE, Thomas James Trenton, ON
HERRNSDORF, Steffen Eberhard Richmond Hill, ON
CORSE, Brian Jerome Cumberland, ON
HOGG, Henry Hugh Cloyne, ON
MATHIAS, Archie Louis Scarborough, ON
CRAIG, James Arthur Peterborough, ON
IAKOVLEV, Pavel Alekseevitch Woodbridge, ON
MATHUR, Naresh Chand Scarborough, ON
CROSBIE, John Herbert Oshawa, ON
52
Engineering Dimensions
INNES, Jayson Alexander Malcolm Kitchener, ON
MATHEWSON, John Wilson Ottawa, ON
MEDER, Daniel Stefan Toronto, ON
Fall 2026
IN MEMORIAM
engineeringdimensions.ca
MERRITT, Richard Clare Huntsville, ON MORTON, William Earl Kanata, ON PASANEN, Arthur Alvin Brantford, ON PATON, Brent Charles Ottawa, ON PIRIE, Paul Leslie Palm Desert, CA
“Being recognized by the Foundation lifted financial stress and inspired me to keep challenging myself, now I’m pursuing a PhD in Electrical and Computer Engineering.”
RAPCHAK, Leslie Frank Bangkok, Thailand ROTELLA, John Dundas, ON RUEL, Michael Barrington Etobicoke, ON
Vanessa Hoang Toronto Metropolitan University Undergraduate Scholarship Recipient & Gold Medalist
RUGGIERO, Mary Ann Toronto, ON STEWART, Ian Ross Ottawa, ON THOMPSON, Philip Rand Toronto, ON VAIDYANATHAN, Hariharasankar Greely, ON VELEZ, Robertson Jao North York, ON VERARDI, Francesco Liuigi Tottenham, ON
Invest in the next generation of engineers. Every donation to the Ontario Professional Engineers Foundation for Education funds scholarships that transform students’ lives.
A scholarship can change a life. Help us change more.
Scan to learn more:
www.engineersfoundation.ca
www.peo.on.ca
Engineering Dimensions
53
AGM MINUTES
Minutes of the 104th Annual Business Meeting SATURDAY, APRIL 25, 2026 VICE PRESIDENT (ELECTED): SARDAR ASIF KHAN, PHD, MBA, P.ENG., FEC, PMP CHAIR: GREGORY P. WOWCHUK, P.ENG., FEC These minutes are prepared to align with PEO’s ByLaw No. 1, section 15(7): “The record of all Council and committee meetings shall include only enough detail to summarize discussions and record motions and decisions made as a result of those discussions.” The 104th Annual General Meeting (AGM) of Professional Engineers Ontario (PEO) was held on Saturday, April 25, 2026, in a hybrid setting with both in-person and videoconference participation. Karen MacInnes, Algonquin elder and knowledge keeper, delivered the land acknowledgement, recognizing Ottawa as being situated on the unceded territory of the Anishinaabe People and reflecting on the importance of reconciliation through respect for Indigenous history, teachings and stewardship of the land. Elder MacInnes encouraged engineers to pair technical expertise with compassion and ethical leadership, emphasizing the responsibility to consider the long-term impacts of engineering decisions on people, communities and the environment; and to apply innovation in ways that advance the well-being of present and future generations. CALL TO ORDER Vice President Khan called the meeting to order and welcomed PEO licence holders with a special welcome to the over 5500 new licensees joining PEO over the past year; engineering interns, students and employers; stakeholders; members of the public; colleagues in the engineering community; PEO staff; distinguished guests; and friends. IN MEMORIAM Vice President Khan asked that all those present observe a moment of silence in remembrance of those PEO licence holders who passed away in 2025. GREETINGS FROM THE PREMIER OF ONTARIO AND ONTARIO’S ATTORNEY GENERAL Vice President Khan welcomed video greetings from the Premier of Ontario, The Hon. Doug Ford, and Ontario’s Attorney General, The Hon. Doug Downey. In their message, Premier Ford and Attorney General Downey conveyed their appreciation for Ontario’s professional engineers and their critical role in delivering the province’s historic infrastructure agenda. They highlighted the profession’s contributions to innovation, public safety, economic growth and community development, while reaffirming the government’s commitment to collaboration, modern
54
Engineering Dimensions
regulatory frameworks, labour mobility and infrastructure investment. They also recognized PEO’s leadership in upholding public trust and professional standards and thanked engineers for their lasting contributions to Ontario’s future. Attorney General Downey highlighted recent government initiatives to strengthen Ontario’s workforce and infrastructure sector, including legislation that streamlines labour mobility by enabling qualified professionals from other Canadian jurisdictions to begin working in Ontario more quickly. He also noted recent amendments to the Construction Act, effective January 1, 2026, which enhance adjudication processes, support faster payments, reduce disputes and improve clarity within the construction industry to help keep projects on schedule and businesses paid fairly. On behalf of PEO and Council, Vice President Khan thanked Premier Ford and Attorney General Downey for joining PEO’s AGM. 2025–2026 COUNCIL TERM REPORT Vice President Khan welcomed Council Chair Gregory P. Wowchuk to present his report for the 2025–2026 Council term. Chair Wowchuk provided an overview of Council’s accomplishments under the 2023–2025 Strategic Plan, highlighting governance improvements, the adoption of an optional Engineering Intern (EIT) program, guidance on the use of artificial intelligence in professional practice, the development of a fitness-to-practise program and approval of the 2026–2030 Strategic Plan. He emphasized the importance of self-regulation, member engagement and evidence-based governance, while recognizing the contributions of volunteers, staff and PEO’s 92,000 licence holders. In his concluding remarks, he reaffirmed the vital role of engineers in advancing Ontario’s prosperity, economic resilience and public protection. Vice President Khan thanked Chair Wowchuk for his 29 years of dedicated service and leadership to PEO. INSTALLATION OF NEW PRESIDENT Leila Notash, PhD, P.Eng., FEC, took the oath of office as the 107th president for the 2026–2027 term. Chair Wowchuk and Vice President Khan presented her with the chain of office. PRESENTATION TO OUTGOING COUNCILLORS President Notash congratulated the councillors who have completed their terms and worked diligently to move the profession forward and expressed her personal appreciation for their collaboration, support and encouragement throughout the 2025–2026 Council year. President Notash advised that the outgoing councillors had received a token of appreciation in recognition of their service to the profession and thanked and recognized the following outgoing members of Council: Chantal Chiddle, P.Eng., FEC, Eastern Region councillor; Randy Walker, P.Eng., FEC, councillor-at-large and vice president (appointed); and Gregory P. Wowchuk, past president.
Fall 2026
NEWS
engineeringdimensions.ca
INTRODUCTION OF COUNCIL President Notash introduced the members of the 2026–2027 PEO Council: • President Leila Notash, PhD, P.Eng., FEC; • Past President Fred Saghezchi, MASc, P.Eng., FEC; • President-elect Sardar Asif Khan, PhD, MBA, P.Eng., FEC, PMP; • Councillors-at-Large Sean Decloux, MEng, MBA, P.Eng., PMP, Shahandeh Hannah Ehtemam, P.Eng., and Paula R. Klink, PhD, P.Eng., FEC; • Eastern Region Councillors Susan Jingmiao Shi, MEng, P.Eng., IRP, and Tim Kirkby, P.Eng., FEC; • East Central Region Councillors Nanda Layos Lwin, P.Eng., FEC, and Tom Granat, MBA, P.Eng., P.E.; • Northern Region Councillors Luc Roberge, P.Eng., FEC, and Ahmed Elshaer, PhD, P.Eng.; • Western Region Councillors Susan MacFarlane, MSc, PhD, P.Eng., and Vicki Hilborn, MASc, P.Eng.; • West Central Region Councillors Ravinder Panesar, P.Eng., FEC, and Pappur Shankar, P.Eng., FEC; and • Lieutenant Governor-in-Council Appointees Cosimo Casale, P.Eng., RPP, MCIP, PLE, Lorne Cutler, MBA, P.Eng., W. Andrew Dryland, C.E.T., Lorraine Fraser, PhD, MBA, MEng, P.Eng., FEC, Paul Mandel, MBA, CPA, CA, CBV, CFF, Shelly Markel, JD, MBA, ICD.D, Andrew Naassan, P.Eng., Rachel Prudhomme, BEng, MSc, P.Eng., BPHE, Scott Schelske, P.Eng., FEC, Uditha Senaratne, P.Eng., FEC, and Sherlock Sung, BASc. ORDER OF BUSINESS President Notash reviewed the order of business and housekeeping items. ADOPTION OF MINUTES President Notash referred licence holders to the minutes of the 2025 AGM. It was moved by Councillor Chantal Chiddle and seconded by Councillor Randy Walker that the minutes of the 2025 AGM, as published in the Fall 2025 issue of Engineering Dimensions and as distributed at the meeting, be adopted as presented.
A slide was presented showing the key financial highlights as of December 31, 2025: • Revenues of $38.9 million (vs $37.1 million in 2024); • Expenses of $38 million (vs $35.8 million in 2024); • A surplus or net excess of revenues over expenses of $0.9 million (vs $1.3 million in 2024); • $42.6 million in cash and marketable securities (vs $40.6 million in 2024); and • The lowest P.Eng. fees in Canada. Cutler stated that PEO has been able to avoid fee increases since 2019 and the organization has been able to build up a significant level of reserves, which gives PEO the ability to easily absorb most shortterm deficits. It was further noted that, absent of any changes in PEO fees, it is foreseen that deficits will likely occur in the coming years for increased staffing to respond to operational and program delivery, office modernization, the implementation of the strategic plan and the growing costs of cybersecurity. APPOINTMENT OF AUDITOR A question was asked about Deloitte LLP’s current contract, noting it is in the final year. It was noted by Councillor Cutler that PEO will be undertaking a Request for Proposal procurement process for audit services beginning with the 2027 fiscal year. It was moved by Councillor Lorne Cutler and seconded by Councillor Susan Jingmiao Shi that the firm of Deloitte LLP, chartered accountants, be appointed as PEO’s auditors for the association for the 2026 fiscal year or until their successor is appointed. Motion carried
Motion carried
FINANCIAL REPORT President Notash invited Councillor Lorne Cutler, chair of the 2025– 2026 Audit and Finance Committee, to provide a report on PEO’s audited financial statements. Cutler reviewed the financial information, noting that the 2025 audited financial statements were approved by Council at the March 27, 2026, meeting. It was stated that these statements are on the PEO AGM webpage and would be published in the Spring issue of Engineering Dimensions. Cutler presented a graph showing a five-year trend of revenues, expenses and net income. In 2025, PEO had higher revenues and an increase of $1.8 million or 5 per cent due to monies from investments; the insurance affinity program with Engineers Canada; and higher revenues from membership dues, applications, registration and exam revenues. This is contrasted with the 2025 expenses, which had an increase of $2.2 million or 6 per cent because of higher operating expenses for supporting various organizational initiatives.
www.peo.on.ca
CEO/REGISTRAR’S REPORT CEO/Registrar Jennifer Quaglietta, P.Eng., MBA, ICD.D, extended a warm welcome to everyone attending both virtually and in person. She opened her speech by acknowledging the hard work of the entire 2025–2026 Council and its commitment to the engineering profession and the public interest; and thanking Chair Wowchuk on their collaboration over the past year in the evolution of PEO as a regulator. Quaglietta provided an update on the conclusion of the annual operational plan as part of the 2023– 2025 Strategic Plan, noting that the plan was fully achieved at its conclusion and included significant accomplishments of moving PEO forward as a regulator.
Engineering Dimensions
55
AGM MINUTES
Modernizing the Regulatory Framework and Licensing Process Quaglietta highlighted that modernization of the regulatory framework, including amendments to Regulation 941 and operational enhancements, has strengthened alignment with current legislation and best practices. Key improvements include streamlined licensing application processes and greater flexibility for candidates seeking licensure. These changes support compliance with the Fair Access to Regulated Professions and Compulsory Trades Act (FARPACTA) requirements while making the engineering profession more accessible through reduced barriers, increased efficiency and enhanced support for a diverse range of applicants. Quaglietta noted that PEO continues to enhance the inclusivity and accessibility of its licensing process through regulatory modernization and a competency-based assessment framework. Proposed legislative changes would reduce the engineering experience minimum requirement from four years to two years while maintaining competency standards. Quaglietta also noted new obligations for licence holders during investigations and PEO’s ongoing commitment to human-centred regulation and organizational culture. Greater Toronto Area’s Top 100 Employers Quaglietta further highlighted that PEO was recognized as one of the Greater Toronto Area’s Top 100 Employers, reflecting its commitment to fostering an innovative, inclusive and engaging workplace culture. New Vision Statement Quaglietta also highlighted that Council approved a new vision statement, “Leading regulation. Inspiring excellence. Thriving communities.,” to guide the organization’s future direction, support its regulatory mandate and ensure responsiveness to the evolving needs of the profession and the public. Closing Statements Quaglietta provided closing remarks recognizing the contributions of Council, staff and volunteers in advancing PEO’s strategic objectives, regulatory mandate and culture of collaboration. It was noted that PEO’s 2026–2030 Strategic Plan will focus on regulatory excellence, evidence-informed decisionmaking, operational effectiveness and a continued commitment to equity, diversity and inclusion, while ensuring the organization remains futureready and responsive to change.
engineering profession. She began by expressing gratitude for the land acknowledgement made earlier in the meeting, recognizing the enduring contributions of Indigenous Peoples and the shared responsibility to move forward with respect. President Notash thanked licence holders, volunteers, Council members and staff for their leadership and dedication to PEO’s mandate of protecting the public interest. President Notash emphasized that self-regulation is a privilege, and public trust must continually be earned through competence, integrity and accountability. She noted that engineers not only build infrastructure and innovation but also help public confidence in the profession through strong regulatory oversight, sound judgment and ethical decision-making. She highlighted accountability as a cornerstone of public trust, noting that licence holders, volunteers and councillors all have a role in ensuring decisions are transparent, evidence-informed and aligned with the public interest. She further emphasized the importance of asking difficult questions, challenging assumptions and exercising professional judgment in support of effective governance. President Notash also spoke to the value of diversity of thought within the profession, noting that differing perspectives, experiences, backgrounds and disciplines strengthen engineering regulation and decision-making. She highlighted the contributions of internationally trained engineers and emphasized that diversity leads to stronger governance, more effective regulation and improved outcomes for the public. Looking ahead, President Notash identified the rapid advancement of technology, particularly artificial intelligence (AI), as a significant opportunity and challenge for the profession. While acknowledging AI’s potential to improve efficiency, analysis and innovation, she stressed that professional responsibility and accountability must remain with licensed engineers. She noted that public protection extends beyond the use of AI systems to their design, development, validation and deployment. President Notash reaffirmed her commitment to working collaboratively with Council, volunteers, licence holders and staff to strengthen professionalism, integrity, accountability and public trust. She encouraged all members of the profession to uphold the privilege of selfregulation and ensure the engineering profession remains worthy of the confidence placed in it by the public. MEMBER SUBMISSION #1—CODE OF ETHICS UPDATE The AGM floor was opened to questions and comments. Members emphasized the importance of a modernized Code of Ethics, particularly in relation to emerging technologies such as AI. The mover spoke in support of the motion to advance a review of PEO’s Code of Ethics, noting that a similar proposal was raised at the 2024 AGM and revisited in 2025 with limited progress to date. He urged Council to establish a committee to review and recommend updates to the code, stressing its importance in guiding professional conduct and protecting engineers in ethical decision-making. The president called for a vote on the motion. Moved by Prakash Bansod, P.Eng., and seconded by Zeljko Sikic, P.Eng. That the member submission entitled “Code of Ethics Update,” made at the 2026 Annual General Meeting, be endorsed. Motion carried
PRESIDENT’S REPORT President Notash delivered remarks reflecting on the responsibilities of self-regulation, the importance of accountability and the future of the
56
Engineering Dimensions
Fall 2026
NEWS
engineeringdimensions.ca
MEMBER SUBMISSION #2—PRIORITIZING DIGITAL ENGINEERING LICENSURE A pre-recorded message from the mover, Raimund Laqua, P.Eng., was played, including a call to prioritize digital engineering licensure by assessing participation in digital disciplines, identifying barriers to licensure and reporting recommendations within 12 months. Members spoke in support, highlighting public protection risks associated with unregulated work in software, cybersecurity, AI and digital infrastructure. Members emphasized the growing demand for digital engineering, the need for proactive regulatory oversight and the role of licensure in safeguarding the public interest. The president called for a vote on the motion. Moved by Raymond Lacqua, P.Eng., and seconded by Roydon Fraser, P.Eng. That the member submission entitled “Prioritizing Digital Engineering Licensure,” made at the 2026 Annual General Meeting, be endorsed.
The president called for a vote on the motion. Moved by Darla Campbell, P.Eng., and seconded by Jeffrey Lee, P.Eng. That the member submission entitled “GLP Task Force,” made at the 2026 Annual General Meeting, be endorsed. Motion carried
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS Licence holders were invited to submit written questions virtually or speak in person. The president, CEO/registrar, Audit and Finance Committee chair and senior finance director responded to several questions related to topics such as member submissions, revenues, PEO’s stance on potential fee increases, clarification on PEO’s leadership structure and the reduction of the engineering experience minimum requirement from four years to two years. CONCLUSION President Notash declared the 104th AGM of the Association of Professional Engineers Ontario concluded and reminded in-person attendees to take note of the information displayed outlining the events scheduled for the rest of the day. e
Motion carried
MEMBER SUBMISSION #3—GLP TASK FORCE A pre-recorded message from the mover, Darla Campbell, P.Eng., was played. The mover spoke on reviewing recent changes to the Government Liaison Program (GLP), emphasizing the importance of maintaining meaningful volunteer and member involvement in PEO’s government relations activities. Speakers raised concerns about replacing volunteer engagement with consultants and highlighted the need for engineers and chapters to help identify public interest and regulatory issues. In closing remarks, the mover clarified that the motion was not intended to replace existing advocacy efforts but to strengthen the GLP by creating a more effective framework for gathering member input and informing regulatory messaging.
www.peo.on.ca
Engineering Dimensions
57
PROFESSIONAL DIRECTORY
HELP BUILD A MORE INCLUSIVE ENGINEERING PROFESSION PEO is collecting voluntary demographic information from our licence holders and applicants to better understand our community and advance equity, diversity and inclusion. SHARE YOUR INFORMATION TODAY: Log in to the PEO portal at secure.peo.on.ca, go to the Profile tab and click on Demographic Data Collection. By sharing your demographic data, you help PEO: • Identify barriers and disparities that might exist • Track progress toward a more inclusive profession • Inform initiatives that better support licence holders and applicants All responses are voluntary, secure and reported in summary form only. Sharing will not affect licensure or regulatory decisions. Make a small effort today for a more equitable tomorrow.
AD INDEX
AD INQUIRIES Your business card here will reach over 98,000 licence and certificate of authorization holders. Contact: Finally Content, Laura Maurice, laura.maurice@finallycontent.com, 647-394-5567
City of Mississauga mississauga.ca/treepermits
p. 13
TD Insurance tdinsurance.com/peo
p. 6
Deadline for the Winter 2027 issue is January 11, 2027.
58
Engineering Dimensions
LET US KNOW To protect the public, PEO investigates all complaints about unlicensed individuals or companies, and unprofessional, inadequate or incompetent engineers. If you have concerns about the work of an engineer, fill out a Complaint Form found on PEO’s website and email it to complaints@peo.on.ca. If you suspect a person or company is practising engineering without a licence, contact PEO’s enforcement hotline at 800-339-3716, ext. 1444, or by email at enforcement@peo.on.ca.
Fall 2026
BRING YOUR EXPERTISE to COUNCIL PEO is modernizing its nominations process and encouraging licence holders with a wide range of skills, experience and perspectives to consider serving as elected representatives. Those elected help advance PEO’s public interest mandate and guide the future of engineering regulation in Ontario. Learn about eligibility requirements, nomination procedures and key election dates starting on page 42.