Take a 360° approach to protecting your loved ones.
Engineers Canadasponsored Insurance Plans can help cover every angle.
There’s more than one way to help protect your and your family’s health and finances with Engineers Canada-sponsored Insurance Plans.
Take advantage of exclusive features, innovative benefits and some of the best rates in the industry.
Plus, if you’re a first-time Term Life Insurance applicant, you can get $50,000 of additional coverage at no extra cost for up to two years.*
$2,780 is the average out-of-pocket health and dental cost per year.¹ Health & Dental Insurance can help.
$281,880 is what it costs to raise a child to 18 in Canada.2 Term Life Insurance can help.
1 in 3 Canadians will be out of work due to a disability before age 65.3 Disability Income Protection can help.
2 in 5 Canadians will develop cancer in their lifetime.⁴ Critical Illness Insurance can help.**
1 Statistics Canada, “Survey of Household Spending in Canada,” 2022.
2 ctvnews.ca, “How much money does it take to raise a child in Canada?” July 2022.
3 clhia.ca, “A guide to disability insurance,” 2021.
⁴ Canadian Cancer Society, “Cancer Statistics at a Glance,” 2023.
* For complete details, see manulife.ca/newmember
** Limitations and exclusions apply.
Individual circumstances may vary. You may wish to contact one of Manulife’s Licensed Insurance Advisors or your licensed insurance agent if you need advice about your insurance needs. Conditions, limitations and exclusions apply. See policy for details.
Engineers Canada-sponsored Insurance Plans are underwritten by The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company (Manulife).
30 THE PUBLIC INTEREST: EXPLORING PEO’s CORE MANDATE
We explore how PEO ensures engineering in the province is done competently, professionally and safely.
By Adam Sidsworth
34 ENGINEERS SUPPORT THE TAKEOFF OF SUSTAINABLE AEROSPACE
Research and development projects are leveraging engineering expertise to chart a greener course for Canada’s aviation industry.
By Sharon Aschaiek
ASSOCIATION BUSINESS
5 Editor’s Note
6 President’s Message
7 CEO/Registrar’s Report
21 Gazette
29 PEAK: New Year, New PEAK Cycle
43 In Council: Council Commits to Reintroducing New Engineering Intern Program
NEWS AND COMMENTARY
9 News: PEO to Develop New Engineering Intern Program; PEO Symposium Recognizes Volunteer Contributions; PEO Celebrates 6 Order of Honour Recipients; PEO Publishes Updated Tower Cranes Practice Standard; More Support Needed for Women Engineers; PEO Conference Helps Students Prepare for the Workforce; Consulting Engineers Discuss Community, Inclusion
38 Bulletin Board
39 Innovation: Engineers Lead $1 Million Autonomous Vehicle Research Project
41 Profile: Sustainability, Diversity Top Priorities for Young Civil Engineer
ADVERTISING FEATURES
46 Ad Index
PUBLICATIONS STAFF
Editor Nicole Axworthy
editor@peo.on.ca
Associate editor
Adam Sidsworth
Contributing writer
Sharon Aschaiek
Senior graphic designer
Cindy Reichle
Director, communications
Katarina Praljak
Manager, communications Duff McCutcheon
Digital communications specialist
Michelle Yiu
ADVERTISING SALES
Vice president, media sales
Laura Maurice laura.maurice@finallycontent.com 647-394-5567
Engineering Dimensions (ISSN 0227-5147) is published quarterly by Professional Engineers Ontario and is distributed 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.
EXECUTIVE STAFF CEO/registrar
Jennifer Quaglietta, MBA, P.Eng., ICD.D
Vice president, regulatory operations and deputy registrar
Americo Viola, MBA, P.Eng.
Vice president, policy and governance
Dan Abrahams, LLB
Vice president, corporate operations and digital transformation
Arun Dixit, P.Eng.
Chief people officer
Deborah Sikkema
PEO COUNCIL Officers
President
Gregory P. Wowchuk, P.Eng., FEC president@peo.on.ca
Past president
Roydon Fraser, PhD, P.Eng., FEC
President-elect
Fred Saghezchi, MASc, P.Eng., FEC
Vice president (elected) Guy Boone, P.Eng.
Vice president (appointed) Nanda Layos Lwin, P.Eng., FEC
Executive Members
Shahandeh Hannah Ehtemam, P.Eng.
Ahmed Elshaer, PhD, P.Eng.
Vicki Hilborn, MASc, P.Eng.
Glen Schjerning, P.Eng.
Uditha Senaratne, P.Eng., FEC
Eastern Region councillors
Chantal Chiddle, P.Eng.
Michelle Liu, MASc, JD, P.Eng.
East Central Region councillors
Shahandeh Hannah Ehtemam, P.Eng.
Nanda Layos Lwin, P.Eng., FEC
Northern Region councillors
Ahmed Elshaer, PhD, P.Eng.
Luc Roberge, P.Eng., FEC
Western Region councillors
Vicki Hilborn, MASc, P.Eng.
Susan MacFarlane, MSc, PhD, P.Eng.
West Central Region councillors Pappur Shankar, P.Eng., FEC
Ravinder Panesar, P.Eng., FEC
Lieutenant governor-in-council appointees
Lorne Cutler, MBA, P.Eng.
Andrew Dryland, C.E.T.
Paul Mandel, MBA, CPA, CA
George Nikolov, P.Eng.
Rachel Prudhomme, BEng, MSc, P.Eng., BPHE
Scott Schelske, P.Eng., FEC
Uditha Senaratne, P.Eng., FEC
Sherlock Sung, BASc
Engineers Canada Directors
Arjan Arenja, MBA, P.Eng., ICD.D
Christian Bellini, P.Eng., FEC
Tim Kirkby, P.Eng., FEC
Marisa Sterling, P.Eng., FEC CONNECT
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.
Councillors
Councillors-at-large
Leila Notash, PhD, P.Eng., FEC
Glen Schjerning, P.Eng.
Randy Walker, P.Eng.
Nancy Hill, P.Eng., LLB, FEC, FCAE
The Quiet Guardians of Public Safety
By Nicole Axworthy
to travel, engineers design solutions that underpin modern society. While these marvels of human ingenuity often take centre stage, the critical role of regulating the engineering profession to protect the public remains largely behind the scenes.
This month, we take a closer look at PEO and its essential role in protecting the public while fostering trust in the profession. In “The Public Interest: Exploring PEO’s Core
Mandate” (p. 30), Associate Editor Adam Sidsworth highlights the notable ways in which PEO upholds its legislated duties. As stewards of public safety, PEO ensures that those who practise engineering possess the knowledge, skills and ethical commitment required to make decisions with potentially farreaching consequences. Among other activities, it sets and enforces the rules of practice, investigates complaints and upholds a rigorous discipline process to address allegations of professional misconduct or incompetence. By doing so, PEO acts as a vital safeguard, protecting Ontarians from risks associated with unqualified or unethical engineering practices.
At the heart of this system are engineering professionals themselves, who carry a profound duty to prioritize public safety in every decision they make. Guided by their expertise and a strict Code of Ethics, engineers are trusted to create solutions that are not only innovative but also safe, reliable and sustainable. In another feature article this issue, contributing writer Sharon Aschaiek speaks with engineers working to make Canada’s aviation industry more sustainable. Sustainable aerospace engineering represents a pivotal shift that focuses on reducing environmental impacts while maintaining innovation and performance. In “Engineers Support the Takeoff of Sustainable Aerospace” (p. 34), we explore the development of cleaner propulsion systems, such as electric and hybrid engines, alongside renewable fuels, lightweight materials and energy-efficient designs that minimize carbon emissions.
Also of note this issue is Council’s recent decision to develop a new Engineering Intern (EIT) program. Flip over to page 9 to find out how PEO is engaging with stakeholders to shape a new program that is compatible with the current licensing process, serves our regulatory mandate and brings value to licence applicants and engineering employers.
A new year also means a new elections cycle for PEO. In this issue’s insert, you’ll find candidate statements for all those running for a position on the 2025–2026 Council. Head over to www.peovote.ca for more elections-related resources. Be sure to cast your vote before the February 24 deadline. e
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
Council’s Role in Protecting the Public Interest
By Gregory P. Wowchuk, P.Eng., FEC
enforcement mechanism ensures unqualified persons do not practise as professional engineers. Our discipline process reviews practice that falls short of our standards. Protecting the brand is just as important to professions as it is to businesses.
GOVERNING THE PROFESSION
The Professional Engineers Act (PEA), which gives PEO its authority to regulate the profession, specifies that we operate such that "the public interest may be served and protected." However, PEO Council does not interact with the public and consumers of engineering services directly; our members do. Council provides the overall direction and structure under which those engineering professionals operate. Council creates policy, our administration executes it, and our members practise under it.
Licensing arguably is the most important function performed by PEO. Currently, many of our applicants have been educated, and/or have practised, outside Canada. To ensure fair process, Ontario's Fair Access to Regulated Professions and Compulsory Trades Act (FARPACTA) compels us to accept international professional experience and issue a licensing decision within six months of application. PEO has performed superbly in pivoting to these requirements, which came into effect in 2023.
Enforcement is another vital function and can involve prosecuting individuals or companies who illegally describe themselves as engineers or perform engineering services without a licence or certificate of authorization. While virtually no one today practises medicine without a medical licence, many engineering graduates today are not licensed by PEO. For example, not many graduates of software engineering seek licensure with PEO, yet software is everywhere today, with critical importance in products and services. PEO is working to bring all engineers into the regulatory "tent" because the public interest is served by ensuring they are qualified and managed.
Our discipline process is designed to be fair and impartial. Anyone may file a complaint against a P.Eng. or a holder of a certificate of authorization. A review is performed by the Complaints Committee and, if justified, sent to the Discipline Committee and then to a discipline panel. Engineering practice that doesn’t meet our standards of competence, professionalism and ethics is reviewed and, if necessary, corrective action taken. In rare cases, a licence is suspended or revoked. Decisions by panels are published in the blue pages Engineering Dimensions, visible to the public, ensuring full transparency. Thus, the public is assured that the profession is policing itself, and those who fall short are held responsible.
COUNCIL’S RECENT WORK
In recent months, Council and its committees have worked hard to make the regulator more efficient, transparent and future-oriented. We have tightened our internal structure with governance reforms. Our CEO/registrar has pulled together a top-notch team of administrative professionals. We are developing standards for volunteer deportment and fitness to practise. We are reviewing the role of our chapters, to make them the "eyes, ears and voice" of PEO in all corners of the province. Last November, Council committed to restoring PEO's popular Engineering Intern Program, and our staff is now performing the research and analysis needed to design a new program that is compatible with our FARPACTA-compliant licensing process. Tower cranes are everywhere in our cities today; Council recently passed a new practice standard governing them.
I have reminded our Council of its obligation to consider our nearly 90,000 members as prime stakeholders in the organization. They are required to perform to high standards and should take an active interest in the governance of their profession. That interest must co-exist with the highest regard for the public interest.
Ultimately, Council understands the issues and its responsibilities. We are working hard on building a truly world-class professional regulator. e
Gratitude, Recognition and Maintaining Public Trust
By Jennifer Quaglietta, MBA, P.Eng., ICD.D
staff of approximately 150 employees who empower PEO to continue its crucial work ensuring Ontario’s licensed engineers and firms uphold a strict code of professional ethics and conduct to safeguard the lives of all Ontarians.
The vital work of PEO staff is enhanced by approximately 900 dedicated volunteers. This past November, we gathered at the Chelsea Hotel Toronto for the Order of Honour ceremony, which recognized the contributions of six notable PEO volunteers who have collectively donated decades of their time to PEO. They have served on Council, including as president; volunteered with their chapters to promote engineering in their communities; served on numerous committees; and worked on the Government Liaison Program. The same weekend, we also held our inaugural Volunteer Symposium, themed “Recognizing Our Volunteers’ Role in Regulation.” About 200 PEO volunteers and staff collaborated on a day of breakout sessions related to regulation and volunteerism. We also inducted over 140 volunteers into the PEO Hall of Fame for their long-term service to PEO.
At its heart, volunteering is a profound act of generosity, of selflessness. It is often defined as an individual giving their time and effort in pursuit of community service.
AT ITS HEART, VOLUNTEERING IS A PROFOUND ACT OF GENEROSITY, OF SELFLESSNESS.
This is a great definition, and I would make only one modification—to change the word “individual” to “leader.” We are currently in the middle of PEO’s election cycle for our 2025–2026 Council. If you are running, I thank you for making the commitment to be a PEO leader. If you are not running, I encourage you to vote. And consider volunteering, whether it be at your chapter or on a committee.
DEVELOPING A NEW STRATEGIC PLAN
The strategic roadmap guiding our transformational journey over the last two years has enabled the realization of several imperative and historical advancements for PEO. We have streamlined our licensing process, including the removal of the Canadian experience requirement and meeting licensing decision timeline obligations under the Fair Access to Regulated Professions and Compulsory Trades Act. We have developed and implemented a customer service model to provide direct support to applicants, licence holders and the public. We have laid the groundwork for enhanced communication and dialogue with our stakeholders through an audit of our communication practices and the development of a Strategic Stakeholder Advisory Group. And we have made a giant leap forward on our goal to build an inclusive engineering culture through the development of an EDI action plan, the first of its kind in PEO’s history.
Our progress and achievements put us in good stead as we begin to prepare for our next strategic plan. Throughout this year, we will have consultations with stakeholders—including licence holders, engineering advocacy organizations, engineering faculties and the attorney general. Together, we will create a clear, structured plan that guides our continued transformation toward regulatory excellence. This is crucial because it ensures the public is protected through high standards of safety, ethics and competence among Ontario’s engineering professionals. By aligning our goals with evolving regulatory standards and societal needs, the plan allows PEO to effectively address emerging challenges. It also fosters accountability, adaptability and efficiency, enabling PEO to maintain public trust, enhance compliance and support the profession’s continued growth. We are still in the initial planning phase, but please stay tuned to PEO’s communication channels—including our social media, email and Engineering Dimensions—for updates. e
DURA-HOLD®
STRONG. DURABLE. BOLD
Connect with a Unilock Representative for Samples, Information & CEU Seminars.
MANUFACTURED FOR STRENGTH & DURABILITY
Dura-Hold® is a great alternative to poured in place retaining walls. Its large-scale blocks are disguised by false joints which cast bold shadows, giving the illusion of several individual blocks in each unit. Build gravity walls up to 6ft (1.8m) or grid reinforced walls up to 40ft (12m). Notably, Dura-Hold® can be machine placed, significantly accelerating the installation process . For design and engineering support, Risi Stone® Inc. o ers expert assistance, from detailed product information to customized, site-specific solutions.
PROJECT
West London Dyke, London, ON DESIGN
Stantec London and Risi Stone® Inc
PRODUCT
Dura-Hold® in Natural
PEO to Develop New Engineering Intern Program
PEO is engaging with stakeholders to shape an EIT program that is compatible with the current licence application process.
By Nicole Axworthy
PEO is investigating alternatives for an updated Engineering Intern (EIT) Program to support engineering graduates on their path to licensure. At its meeting on November 29, 2024, PEO Council formally committed to bring back an EIT program, directing staff to engage with stakeholders and prepare a policy proposal for Council’s consideration (see In Council, p. 43).
THE TIMING OF THE ROLLOUT OF THE UPDATED EIT PROGRAM WILL DEPEND ON THE NATURE OF THE POLICY PROPOSAL TO BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL.
EIT PROGRAM SUSPENSION
PEO’s EIT program was originally created to support engineering graduates as they obtain the 48 months of work experience required for licensure. Prior to May 15, 2023, applicants for a P.Eng. licence who had already met academic requirements for licensure were eligible to participate voluntarily in the EIT program annually while they acquired their engineering work experience.
At the time, PEO’s EIT program was unique among Canadian regulatory bodies in that Ontario’s legislation limits the EIT designation to those who have already applied for a P.Eng. licence.
On May 15, 2023, the EIT program was suspended to new applicants following the launch of PEO’s updated licence application process to comply with new requirements under the Fair Access to Regulated Professions and Compulsory Trades Act (FARPACTA). Among other PEO programs and licence types, the EIT program became incompatible with the new, faster and more streamlined FARPACTA-compliant licensing regime, which now requires individuals to obtain both the academic and experience requirements prior to applying for licensure (see “PEO to Suspend its Engineering Intern Program,” Engineering Dimensions, Winter 2023, p. 8).
STAKEHOLDER SURVEYS
Following suspension of the program to new applicants, staff conducted four surveys in summer 2023 to assess the merits of the EIT program (see “PEO Seeks Feedback on Engineering Intern Program Suspension,” Engineering Dimensions, Fall 2023, p. 8). These surveys were directed to students, current EITs, licence holders and employers. The majority of respondents across all categories indicated that they would enroll in the EIT program, if available,
or recommend it to others. Additionally, “permission to use the EIT designation and increase marketability to potential employers” was the most cited reason for joining the program, noted by students, licence holders and current EITs. In fact, 68 per cent of current EITs said this was the main reason they chose to remain in the program after their first year.
Now that Council has committed to developing an updated program, PEO staff are actively engaging with a variety of targeted stakeholder groups. Their feedback will inform the policy proposal that will be presented to Council at its meeting on April 4, 2025. The timing of the rollout of the updated EIT program will depend on the nature of the policy proposal to be approved by Council and what type of act and/or regulation change, if any, is required.
PEO Symposium Recognizes Volunteer Contributions
The first Volunteer Symposium acknowledged the more than 900 volunteers who support PEO’s mandate to regulate the engineering profession in Ontario.
PEO organized its inaugural Volunteer Symposium at the Chelsea Hotel in Toronto, ON, on November 30, 2024, welcoming roughly 200 people for a full day of volunteer recognition and breakout sessions focusing on the role of volunteers, PEO’s public-interest mandate and equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI). The symposium followed two days of PEO events that included a joint meeting with PEO and the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers, a Council plenary session and meeting (see p. 43) and the Order of Honour (OOH) ceremony, which honoured six longtime volunteers (see p. 12).
“Over 900 people have chosen to volunteer their time with PEO,” noted CEO/Registrar Jennifer Quaglietta, MBA, P.Eng., ICD.D, in her opening remarks. “Volunteering is often defined as an individual giving their time and effort in pursuit of community service. This is a great definition, and I would make only one modification—to change the word ‘individual’ to ‘leader.’ Our volunteers are leaders in our profession and in their communities and, moreover, are ambassadors of PEO. Simply put, in many ways, your contributions help make things better.”
Quaglietta cited the contributions of specific volunteers, including Ross Judd, PhD, P.Eng., FEC, who has volunteered with PEO for 44 years—notably on the Academic Requirements Committee—and was inducted by PEO into the OOH; and fellow OOH inductee Lindsay Keats, P.Eng., FEC, who has been volunteering with the North Bay Chapter since 2009 and is currently helping PEO draft a chapter manual. “Although each of our volunteers has their own leadership journey and story, they share common qualities, including a personal commitment to give back to the profession and a desire to contribute to better communities,” Quaglietta observed.
In a nod to volunteers’ work and dedication, the symposium featured an inaugural “PEO Hall of Fame,” in which former PEO president Annette Bergeron, MBA, P.Eng., FEC, introduced over 140 long-time volunteers who have donated five, 10, 15, 20 and 25 years of service; those in attendance were presented with volunteer pins by Quaglietta and PEO President Gregory P. Wowchuk, P.Eng., FEC. The volunteer service pins recognize milestone years of service as part of PEO’s volunteer recognition program.
The morning session also included a keynote presentation by Janusz Kozinski, PhD, P.Eng., FCAE, FEC, dean of engineering at Lakehead University. Kozinski’s speech focused on taking a human-centred approach to engineering. “The engineering profession is made up of people, and our responsibility is to serve other people,” Kozinski
By Adam Sidsworth
said, sharing a story about how this approach was used in the creation of York University’s Lassonde School of Engineering, where he was the founding dean, and how it could translate into engaging more people in the profession and getting more people to volunteer. “I strongly believe that if we do more to focus on people in our profession, we do benefit—and the public as a whole will benefit,” Kozinski emphasized.
BREAKOUT SESSIONS CONTINUE CONVERSATION
The remainder of the day saw symposium attendees going to various breakout sessions that continued the conversation about the role of volunteers in helping PEO carry out its public-interest mandate and EDI principles. Breakout sessions included:
• “Clarifying the Path to Becoming a P.Eng.,” presented by Jose Vera, P.Eng., director, licensing at PEO; and Tracey Caruana, P.Eng., manager, EIT and student programs at PEO, focusing on PEO’s licensing process, which was amended in May 2023;
• “Regulating Professions: Governance Practices and the Public Interest,” presented by Rebecca Durcan, LLB, LLM, co-managing partner of Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, focusing on how regulators’ governance principles and their public-interest mandate intersect;
• “PEO’s Volunteer Lifecycle: Forging a Path for the Future of Regulatory Volunteering,” presented by James Schembri, director, volunteer engagement at PEO; and Vicki Hilborn P.Eng., Western Region councillor, focusing on the role of volunteers at PEO;
• “Risk-Based Regulation and How PEO Applies Risk to its Policymaking,” presented by Marina Solakhyan, director, governance at PEO, focusing on risk-based strategies and tools to regulate industries and professions;
• “Exploring Psychological Safety: Cultivating Belonging,” presented by Jennifer Galley, experiential learning specialist at the University of Toronto’s Troost Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering, who looked at practical strategies to cultivate an inclusive environment and culture where colleagues feel valued, respected and empowered;
• “Fundamentals of Regulatory Communications,” presented by Collette Deschenes and Daniel Roukema of MDR Strategy Group, who highlighted best practices and strategies to effectively communicate PEO’s publicprotection role;
• “Exploring the Public Interest in a Changing World,” a panel discussion on the evolving mandate of PEO to protect the public interest with former PEO president Nancy Hill, P.Eng., LLB, FEC; Jeanette Southwood, P.Eng., FEC, vice president, corporate affairs and strategic partnerships at Engineers Canada; Qadira Jackson Kouakou, LLB, principal lawyer at Jaxon Law; and Juda Strawczynski, JD, CEO and registrar of the College of Patent Agents and Trademark Agents;
• “The Role of Regulations in Avoiding Tragedies: Why Governments Need to Listen to Engineers,” presented by Kenneth Jull, LLB, LLM, partner at Gardiner Roberts, focusing on the knowledge gap between expert engineers and government policies and a framework that could reform the system to better protect the community; and
• “Leadership Development Through EDI,” presented by Vanessa Raponi, P.Eng., PMP, and Alexander Dow, P.Eng., co-founders of Engiqueers Canada, on how EDI can be used to change policies that broadly support all employees and volunteers, corporate leadership development and sustainability.
At the end of the symposium, Volunteer Engagement Director Schembri shared some closing thoughts: “Before we depart today, I want to reiterate what
Keynote speaker
Janusz Kozinski, PhD, P.Eng., FCAE, FEC, speaks about taking a humancentred approach to engineering.
our CEO/registrar said this morning: that as engineers we are collectively responsible for the future of regulating the profession. And we hope the sessions we brought you today will aid you on this journey in supporting our collective mandate.”
In her opening remarks, PEO CEO/ Registrar Jennifer Quaglietta, MBA, P.Eng., ICD.D, shares her thoughts on the importance of volunteers to PEO.
Juda Strawczynski, JD, CEO and registrar, College of Patent Agents and Trademark Agents, speaks about self-regulators’ role in protecting the public interest.
PEO staff (from left to right) Aaron Fleishman, office assistant, volunteer engagement; Polina Litvina, chapter coordinator; Rob Dmochewicz, lead, events management and volunteer recognition; Julie Hamiton, chapter coordinator; and James Schembri, director, volunteer engagement.
PEO Celebrates 6 Order of Honour Recipients
A black-tie ceremony honoured six long-time volunteers who have given back to the engineering profession.
By Adam Sidsworth
To recognize the contributions of six long-time volunteers, PEO hosted an Order of Honour (OOH) ceremony at the Chelsea Hotel in Toronto, ON, on November 29, 2024.
The OOH recognizes volunteers who possess exceptional engineering ethics and professionalism and offer their time to support PEO’s regulatory mandate. The OOH contains four classes:
1. Member, which recognizes licence holders who have served the profession for at least 10 years and have contributed substantially to the profession’s operation or status;
2. Officer, which recognizes licence holders who have volunteered for at least 15 years and have demonstrated additional leadership;
vice president. While on Council, Chan served on the Executive, Audit (as vice chair) and Finance (as chair) committees.
Additionally, Chan served on PEO’s Registration, Discipline and Government Liaison committees and Advisory Committee on Volunteers (ACV); and he was key to helping the ACV develop more insightful policy development and training needs. During his time as chair of the Finance Committee, he helped start the first finance-audit joint committees’ annual meeting, ultimately paving the way for the consolation of the Finance and Audit committees.
Member Haris Ahmadzai, P.Eng., CEM, CEA, FEC
3. Companion, which recognizes licence holders who have volunteered for at least 20 years and have profoundly influenced the profession; and
Delegates attended the Black Engineers of Canada annual AGM and fireside chat on August 24.
4. Honourary Member, which recognizes non-licence holders who have demonstrated extraordinary contributions to the profession.
All recipients are selected through a robust process that ensures fairness and transparency, as well as justice, equity, diversity and inclusion.
2024 INDUCTEES Officer
David Brown, P.Eng., BDS, C.E.T., IntPE, MCSCE, FEC
David Brown was first elected to PEO Council in 2013 as an Eastern Region councillor and went on to serve as appointed vice president, president-elect and president. His leadership while president for the 2018–2019 term saw the hiring of external regulatory experts who assessed PEO’s performance as a regulator and ultimately resulted in a new, transformational vision for PEO and Council as a modern self-regulator. Additionally, Brown served on the Human Resources, Executive and Central Election and Search committees and was involved with continuing professional development (CPD) task forces prior to the introduction of PEO’s voluntary (now mandatory) CPD program, PEAK, in 2017.
Outside PEO, Brown served on the Engineers Canada board from 2016 to 2019, during which he served on the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board. Brown also served on the Ontario Association of Certified Engineering Technicians and Technologist’s board from 2017 to 2019.
Michael (Kwok-Wai) Chan, P.Eng., FEC
Throughout his volunteer service with PEO, Michael Chan has been committed to teamwork and advancing the engineering profession. Since receiving an Ontario Professional Engineers Award for Citizenship in 2007 and being inducted into the OOH’s Member class in 2015, Chan has continued his volunteer efforts, notably on Council as councillor-at-large, lieutenant governor appointee and appointed
Haris Ahmadzai has volunteered with the Chatham-Kent Chapter since 2012, serving on the chapter executive—notably as chapter chair and vice chair—and spearheading and developing the chapter’s Government Liaison Program (GLP), where he has served as the main contact from the beginning. Early in the program, Ahmadzai organized the first GLP Academy, where GLP representatives from across the province came to Chatham, ON, for a weekend education session. The academy was a huge success and a cornerstone for the development of the GLP program.
Ahmadzai is deeply involved in creating educational opportunities for chapter members, including lunch-and-learn sessions and technical tours. Ahmadzai also participates in PEO’s Western Regional Congress meetings, acting as a liaison between members and PEO and keeping his fellow chapter executives up to date on PEO and chapter issues.
Keith Loucks, P.Eng., FEC
Keith Loucks has been a volunteer and leader at the Lake-of-theWoods/Atikokan Chapter for over two decades, serving in multiple executive positions, including chair, past chair, treasurer and secretary. Loucks was a driving force behind the chapter’s continued existence when, in 2004, the Lake-of-the-Woods/Atikokan Chapter was at risk of being absorbed into the Lakehead Chapter. He and four other chapter leaders committed to revitalizing the chapter. Loucks is a passionate advocate for diversity and inclusion within his chapter’s executive team and within his former company’s employment practices.
Additionally, Loucks has served on the organizing committee of PEO’s education conferences and was a regular attendee at Chapter Leaders and Northern Regional conferences and annual general meetings, often travelling more than 4000 kilometres to participate. His meeting contributions have been invaluable, offering thoughtful feedback on various processes and issues.
2024 Order of Honour recipients (from left to right) Haris Ahmadzai, P.Eng., CEM, CEA, FEC, Michael (Kwok-Wai) Chan, P.Eng., FEC, David Brown, P.Eng., BDS, C.E.T., IntPE, MCSCE, FEC, Keith Loucks, P.Eng., FEC, Serge Robert, P.Eng., FEC, and Harneet Panesar, MBA, P.Eng., FEC
Harneet Panesar, MBA, P.Eng., FEC
Since 2009, Harneet Panesar has committed to the growth and development of the engineering profession while volunteering at the Toronto-Humber and East Toronto chapters. Panesar began volunteering for Toronto-Humber’s GLP committee, which he eventually chaired. He also served as chapter chair in 2013 and vice chair in 2014. He subsequently joined the East Toronto Chapter, where he served on the GLP committee, including as chair; as well as served on the chapters’ executive team and with the Licensure Assistance Program. Panesar also encouraged and mentored fellow engineers to get involved as chapter volunteers. He is a leader in promoting diversity, equity and inclusion in engineering, demonstrating a commitment to equal opportunities for individuals from all backgrounds while acting as a role model. Outside PEO, Panesar is passionate about global decarbonization efforts and has made contributions to academia through his roles at both the University of Waterloo and Queen’s University, where he is involved in guiding research and promoting sustainable practices.
Serge Robert, P.Eng., FEC
Since 2009, Serge Robert has volunteered with PEO at both the chapter and provincial levels, advocating for members and working to create a more inclusive and equitable engineering community. Volunteering with the Porcupine-Kapuskasing Chapter, Robert has served on the chapter executive as chair and vice chair. Dedicated to promoting engineering locally, Robert is a regular volunteer at local student STEM events, such as National Engineering Month activities, science olympics, bridge-building competitions and science fairs.
As Northern Region councillor on PEO Council, Robert solicited feedback from all northern chapters, attending chapter events across northern Ontario. As chair of the Northern Regional Congress Committee, Robert was a regular participant at regional councillors’ conferences and kept chapters up to date. Robert is also known for providing guidance and mentorship to young chapter leaders. He is deeply committed to diversity and inclusion within the profession and actively supports underrepresented groups in engineering, such as women.
PEO Publishes Updated Tower Cranes Practice Standard
The updated practice standard reflects amendments to Ontario Regulation 213/91.
engineers are required to comply with PEO’s enforceable performance standards; those designing or inspecting tower cranes are also required to comply with other relevant sections of O.Reg. 213/91 that don’t reference PEO’s performance standards.
There are two substantial changes to the 2015 practice standard arising from the MLITSD’s regulation change. First, the expansion of tower crane components beyond structural means that multiple engineers representing mechanical, electrical and materials/metallurgical disciplines may be required to inspect various components, within their respective areas of competency. If, for example, mechanical or electrical engineering is outside their area of competency, the engineer must notify the crane owner; and the crane owner will need to find other engineer(s) with competency in those areas to conduct or direct their inspections of those components. This may result in a compilation of written inspection reports for each discipline to be provided to the tower
Another change now allows qualified personnel (qualified non-destructive testing technicians, qualified electricians, master electricians or “qualified technicians”) to continue to perform certain inspections and repairs, provided they are directed by an engineer. The competency qualification of a “qualified technician” is the responsibility of the tower crane owner hiring them. Where this work falls within an engineer’s area of competency, the engineer is required to validate their inspection reports and findings. Where that work falls outside an engineer’s area of competency, the engineer must only ensure inspections related to other disciplines are completed in accordance with the performance standards process but is not responsible for the content of those reports themselves.
Updated practice standard Engineering Inspection for Tower Cranes has been published under the Knowledge Centre of PEO’s website, www.peo.on.ca.
Working collaboratively with the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development (MLITSD), engineers and the tower crane industry over the last year, PEO updated and improved its 2015 practice standard to reflect the MLITSD’s recent regulation changes and common industry practices. In early 2024, the MLITSD amended Ontario Regulation 213/91 (Construction Projects) under the Occupational Health and Safety Act to improve tower crane safety by expanding the scope and role of engineers in tower crane inspections (see “Province Updates Regulatory Requirements for Cranes at Construction Projects,” Engineering Dimensions, Spring 2024, p. 10).
PEO Council approved the updated practice standard in September 2024. Effective December 14, 2024, the revised practice standard is referenced under O.Reg. 260/08 (Performance Standards) of the Professional Engineers Act
ENFORCEABLE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Five subsections of O.Reg. 260/08 detail how engineers are to perform the new, expanded scope and frequency of tower crane inspections to improve public safety. Licensed
PROMOTING REGULATORY CHANGES
In advance of the O.Reg. 260/08 regulation change, PEO staff worked with the MLITSD, professional engineers and the tower crane industry to increase awareness and education of the revised practice standard by giving presentations to ministry engineers, the Ontario Formwork and Infrastructure Health and Safety associations and engineering firms holding certificates of authorization to do tower crane inspections. The practice standard, along with a practice bulletin and FAQs, is available under the Knowledge Centre of PEO’s website.
Practitioners and members of the public are encouraged send questions or feedback to PEO’s practice advisory team at practice-standards@peo.on.ca.
Jordan Max is the former manager, policy, and Tom Granat, P.Eng., is a policy analyst at PEO.
ENGINEERING INSPECTION FOR TOWER CRANES
More Support Needed for Women Engineers
With the number of newly licensed women engineers down in 2023, researchers say mentorship and employer support are critical when obtaining work experience for licensure.
By Angela Frangos
At PEO’s annual 30 by 30 check-in in October 2024, the regulator provided an update on Ontario’s licensed women engineers. In 2023, women representation in Ontario dropped slightly from 2022, with women comprising 18.4 per cent of newly licensed engineers and only 13.6 per cent of all PEO-licensed engineers.
Comparatively, in 2022, women represented 20.5 per cent of newly licensed engineers in the province. There has been modest progress since 2018, when 17.8 per cent of newly licensed engineers were women.
The data was shared as part of Engineers Canada’s 30 by 30 initiative, which launched a decade ago to increase the number of newly licensed women engineers to 30 per cent nationally by 2030. PEO, along with all other provincial and territorial engineering regulators, report to Engineers Canada annually with gender metrics. This year’s check-in meeting was attended by PEO representatives, including 30 by 30 staff champion Tracey Caruana, P.Eng.; Engineers Canada; university faculty and PEO’s engineering partner employers.
As the initiative enters its final five years, Engineers Canada’s Jeanette Southwood, LLD, P.Eng., FEC, FCAE, and Kim Bouffard shared that the orga nization is exploring opportunities to accelerate outreach and reinvigorate stakeholders. A recent environmental scan and evaluation of the first decade of 30 by 30 show some of the barriers women continue to experience in the profession, including the challenge of career interruptions, insufficient men torship and an unwelcoming work culture. The research also suggests that meeting the 30 by 30 goal is unlikely, despite modest progress, and that there may be value in repositioning the initiative to better leverage interest holders.
PEO’s GENDER AUDIT CONTINUES
A SHARED GOAL
As part of PEO’s 30 by 30 Action Plan, the regulator is continuing work on a gender audit of its licensing process and operations, which Council voted to move forward in June 2021 to identify potential gender biases or unintentional barriers that may impede women from getting licensed. Joyce He, PhD, and Sonia Kang, PhD, from the University of California, Los Angeles, and the University of Toronto, respectively, have completed online surveys and interviews, and He shared that key interim findings largely replicate findings from compiled archival data. The researchers are now entering Phase 3 of their plan and are preparing a final report to share with PEO and Council.
“[PEO’s gender audit research] found no perceived differences between women and men in terms of the difficulty of meeting the academic requirements or in successfully writing the National Professional Practice Examination. At the end of the day, women are just not getting proper supports while getting licensed,” said PEO CEO/Registrar Jennifer Quaglietta, MBA, P.Eng., ICD.D.
Current findings show that younger women are more likely than their men counterparts to report challenges with the experience requirement for licensure and consider giving up on engineering licensure. Like Engineers Canada’s findings, the researchers found that mentorship and employer support are particularly important, with higher mentorship and support predicting lower intentions to quit and an overall better licensing experience. Additionally, applicants who hold a degree that isn’t accredited by the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board found challenges in meeting the academic requirement for licensure, which was exacerbated for women who faced opportunity costs for the required technical exams.
Quaglietta reiterated the importance of collaboration with peers and leaders to achieve the collective goal. “By having a shared goal, we are working together to achieve what would not be possible individually,” Quaglietta said. “Together, we can promote a professional culture where every engineer and aspiring engineer can see a place for themselves.” Engineers Canada echoed this sentiment, as their environmental scan showed that no one stakeholder has complete control over the profession achieving 30 per cent nationally.
To employers, Quaglietta encouraged their continued work to create a more gender diverse profession. “It starts by implementing supports to help women advance. Strive for 30 per cent of new recruits being women, develop an action plan, measure and report on metrics annually and connect with us at PEO for support,” Quaglietta said. “The 30 by 30 goal cannot be achieved in a vacuum, and our shared and sustained efforts can help make this goal attainable.”
Angela Frangos is a communications advisor at PEO.
PEO Conference Helps Students Prepare for the Workforce
The annual PEO Student Conference provided an opportunity to develop essential workplace skills.
By Vanessa Dinh
The University of Waterloo (U of W) hosted the annual PEO Student Conference (PEO-SC) during the weekend of October 4 to 6, 2024, welcoming approximately 100 delegates from engineering schools across Ontario.
The gathering, themed “From Classroom to Career: Tools for Transition,” is tailored toward undergraduate students in their final year of study by offering a blend of professional development and networking opportunities to help them prepare for a career and navigate the path to becoming a professional engineer.
PREPARING FOR AN ENGINEERING CAREER
Organized by the Engineering Student Societies’ Council of Ontario (ESSCO) representing engineering societies from 17 engineering schools, the PEO-SC offered two focused streams. The first stream, “Navigating the Job Market,” was aimed at developing essential skills for entering the workforce. One key session focused on resume development and interviewing, allowing delegates to refine their resumes through moderated questions and discussions.
An informative session by U of W career advisors centred on networking strategies, with delegates exploring how to build meaningful workplace relationships. This session emphasized the importance of networking as a tool for personal and professional growth, moving beyond superficial connections to foster genuine relationships. And cloud consultant Prashanth Madhi, P.Eng., gave a presentation on crafting your career canvas.
The second stream, “Thriving in the Workplace,” helped delegates prepare for successful careers by developing their interpersonal skills. This was evident during a session involving delegates taking the 16Personalities test, which enabled them to reflect on their personality types and discuss how these traits influence workplace dynamics. This fostered self-awareness and highlighted the diverse ways individuals can contribute to team environments. And, notably, Mina Dezyanian, P.Eng., partner, project management at Hazelview Investments, took delegates through her work history and advised them on how to find the ideal job and navigate work cultures.
Other notable sessions included a panel discussion by Melanie Pastorius, quality assurance manager at Sleeman Breweries; Sudeepta Chakravarti, P.Eng., electrical engineer at Thales; Kiah Rolle, EIT, air quality scientist at RWDI; and Eugene Li, P.Eng., design engineer and ETS manager at U of W, who talked about their career paths and advised delegates about preparing for a professional career.
PEO-SC co-chairs Priyanka Chakravarti (far left) and Sheyda Shams (far right), both students at the University of Waterloo, with PEO representatives Sami Lamrad, P.Eng. (second from left), and Tracey Caruana, P.Eng.
The conference also included a presentation by Tracey Caruana, P.Eng., PEO’s manager, EIT and student programs; and Sami Lamrad, P.Eng., PEO’s EIT and SMP coordinator, who engaged delegates in a presentation on PEO’s licensing process and role as the provincial engineering regulator. Caruana and Lamrad regularly make presentations to undergraduate engineering students on PEO’s regulatory mandate and licensing process.
Their presentation was followed by a gala at the Delta Hotel, where delegates had the chance to celebrate their achievements and network in a more formal setting. David Smith, PEO’s director of external relations, spoke about PEO’s enterprise-wide transformation project. Smith also reiterated the recent changes to PEO’s licensing process, which necessitated the pausing of PEO’s Engineering Intern Program (see “PEO to Suspend its Engineering Intern Program,” Engineering Dimensions, Winter 2023, p. 8). “[We aim] to ensure that decisions of our committees and Council are informed by the input of all our stakeholders,” Smith said. “We do want to hear from you.”
Also speaking was Kassidy Hammond, ESSCO president and fourth-year student of aerospace engineering at Carleton University. Hammond recounted her journey through engineering and illustrated how PEO plays a vital role in supporting young engineers beginning their engineering journey. Delegates left the conference with new knowledge and skills and valuable connections that will support their future endeavors in the engineering field.
Vanessa Dinh, ESSCO’s vice president of communications, is a fourth-year environmental engineering student at the University of Guelph.
From left to right: Brett Nelson, P.Eng., communications chair for PEO’s Grand River Chapter; Johanna Friend, P.Eng., 30 by 30 Committee chair for the Grand River Chapter; Tracey Caruana, P.Eng., PEO’s manager, EIT and student programs; Sami Lamrad, P.Eng., PEO’s EIT and SMP coordinator; and David Smith, PEO’s director, external relations, at the PEO Student Conference.
REMEMBERING A NUCLEAR PIONEER
Lorne McConnell, PhD, a luminary in the commissioning of nuclear power in Ontario, passed away on October 4, 2024, at the age of 100. McConnell helped pioneer the use of atomic energy in Canada, including streamlining the production of medical isotopes and being heavily involved in the establishment and operation of the first nuclear power plants. McConnell was licensed as a professional engineer for 65 years, from 1955 to 2020.
PEO recognized McConnell for his significant contributions to the engineering profession by awarding him with the Ontario Professional Engineers Awards (OPEA) Engineering Medal in 1978 and the OPEA Gold Medal in 1991.
REMEMBERING A FORMER PEO PRESIDENT
David Adams, P.Eng., FEC, passed away on December 24, 2024. He will be remembered for his volunteer contributions to PEO, including serving as president for three terms (2008–2009, 2011–2012 and 2014–2015) and as a regional councillor for two terms. Adams’ committee and task force service included chairing the Governance Task Force and the Audit, Finance and Regional Nominating committees and serving on the Building, OSPE-PEO Joint Relations and Discipline committees, among others. In 2009, he was recognized as a fellow of Engineers Canada for his noteworthy contributions to the profession.
Consulting Engineers Discuss Community, Inclusion
Ontario’s advocacy body for consulting engineering firms hosted a forum largely focused on equity, diversity and inclusion.
By Adam Sidsworth
The organization representing Ontario’s approximately 140 consulting engineering firms hosted a forum on September 7, 2024, that navigated conversations about equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in the engineering profession. The Association of Consulting Engineering Companies–Ontario’s (ACEC–Ontario) “Engineering Means Community Forum” took place at the McMichael Canadian Art Collection in Kleinburg, ON.
Among other sessions, one panel discussion shared firsthand opinions from Indigenous leaders and those who work with them, as well as the crucial steps and best practices for successful engagement on engineering projects. “There are specific obligations for every company within a territory to talk to the Indigenous organization on whose land they’re going to be doing any work. And that obligation has to be something that everybody participates in,” Chief Jason Gauthier of the Missanabie Cree First Nation told attendees.
Another panel focused on the challenges women face at construction sites, including concerns regarding hygiene, physical safety, cultural change and harassment. Panelist Valery Woloshyn, P.Eng., regional delivery leader, Stantec, noted that as she gained increasing leadership roles, she has experienced much less exposure to gender-based harassment—yet it still exists. “There has been some progress. But I know talking to other women on site right now, sometimes the progress isn’t as much as we think,” Woloshyn said. “But even now when I show up on site with the authority I have, I still do experience microaggression, exclusion and other things like that that are a symptom of culture and bias.”
Priya Shastri, director of programs, WomanAct, added that leadership buy-in will go a long way to levelling the playing field for women in construction, particularly because there needs to be zero tolerance for sexual harassment, a safe way to report incidents and a way for racialized women to have their voices heard. “Encouraging women to be the face of engineering at conferences, in networks and events will also encourage increased retention and a level of belonging for other women,” Shastri said.
EDI A PRIORITY
In recent years, EDI has become an increasingly important topic within the engineering profession. As the provincial engineering regulator, PEO has embraced its commitment to promoting EDI, particularly within its licensing process. Indeed, PEO’s 2023–2025 Strategic Plan includes goals to ensure licensing activities reflect PEO’s EDI values and to develop a governance culture that considers EDI principles.
Notably, PEO, along with all other provincial and territorial engineering regulators in Canada, participates in the Engineers Canada–led 30 by 30, an initiative that aims to have women represent 30 per cent of newly licensed engineers by 2030. As part of its 30 by 30 Action Plan, PEO has engaged experts in organizational decision-making and EDI to audit PEO’s licensing process for potential gender biases (see p. 15). Additionally, PEO is working to increase Indigenous representation among licence holders and has partnered with consulting firm Indigenous and Community Engagement, Inc., to see how PEO can address the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action as they relate to PEO’s Code of Ethics and Anti-Racism and Equity Code.
DID YOU KNOW?
PEO’ s CONSULTING ENGINEER DESIGNATION
PEO’s consulting engineer designation promotes recognition of engineers in independent practice. Only members designated by PEO as “consulting engineers” can use the restricted title. Likewise, the ability of an engineering firm in Ontario to incorporate “consulting engineer” in its corporate name is separate from holding a certificate of authorization and requires permission from PEO.
For more information on the consulting engineer title, visit www.peo.on.ca/apply/consulting-engineer-designation.
Top left: Panelists discuss increasing Indigenous representation in engineering. From left to right: Jeff Provost, leader, Indigenous relations, MCW Group of Engineering Companies; Chief Jason Gauthier, Missanabie Cree First Nation; Mark Tulloch, P.Eng., president and CEO, Tulloch, and current ACEC–Ontario chair; Michael Jacobs, CEO, Cambium Indigenous Professional Services; and Steve Dyck, vice president, Ontario government relations, AtkinsRéalis.
Top right: Larisse Nana Kouadjo, MBA, P.Eng., PMP, asks a question about attracting more Indigenous women to the engineering profession during a panel discussion on Indigenous representation.
Bottom left: Prior to the ACEC–Ontario conference, Anishinaabe cultural consultant and motivational public speaker Kim Wheatley performs smudging, a ceremony among Indigenous Peoples involving the burning of sweetgrass, sage or cedar to cleanse the physical and energetic space.
Bottom right: A panel discussion on empowering change for women engineers on construction sites. From left to right: Karen Freund, P.Eng., regional executive vice president, Ontario, CIMA+; John Savoia, director, health and safety, RSG International; Valery Woloshyn, P.Eng., regional delivery leader, Stantec; and Priya Shastri, director of programs, WomanAct.
WE BROUGHT BACK PRINT COPIES!
YOU NOW HAVE THE OPTION to receive a print or digital version of Engineering Dimensions.
Go to www.peo.on.ca and click on “Log In” at the top of the homepage. You will be directed to the PEO portal, where you can log in and choose the print or digital version of Engineering Dimensions under the Profile tab. If you don’t choose a preference, you will continue receiving the digital version. To ensure the magazine gets to you, please check that your email and mailing addresses are updated in the portal, too.
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 MOHAMED HAZEM GIDAMY, a former member of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario, and SSWA INC. O/A SS WILSON ASSOCIATES, a holder of a Certificate of Authorization.
The Panel of the Discipline Committee met to hear this matter on July 11, 2024 by means of an online video conference platform that was open to observers from the public. All participants in the proceeding attended via videoconference.
Mohamed Hazem Gidamy (“Mr. Gidamy” or the “Member”) and Omar Rahal, P.Eng., as a representative of SSWA Inc. o/a SS Wilson Associates (“SSWA” or the “Holder”) (collectively, the “Respondents”) were present and represented by the same counsel.
THE ALLEGATIONS
The Panel was provided with the Notice of Hearing dated May 17, 2024 and a copy of the Complaints Committee decision dated December 6, 2023, which contained the Statement of Allegations that was referred to the Discipline Committee. The Respondents were alleged to have engaged in acts of professional misconduct as defined in sections 72(1) and 72(2) (a), (d), (i), and (j) of Ontario Regulation 941 under the Professional Engineers Act.
AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS
Counsel for the Association advised the Panel that agreement had been reached on the facts and introduced an Agreed Statement of Facts, as follows:
1. Gidamy graduated from Alexandria University, Egypt, in 1968 with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Mechanical Engineering and from McMaster University in 1972 with a Masters of Engineering in Mechanical Engineering. He was licensed by PEO in January, 1974, and was designated a Consulting Engineer in 2002 or earlier. He remained continuously licensed until March 20, 2024, at which time he resigned his membership. Gidamy’s professional focus was acoustical engineering.
2. At all material times SSWA was the holder of a Certificate of Authorization (“C of A”), and Gidamy was the individual identified who took professional responsibility for the engineering services provided under the C of A.
3. In or around March 2018, DEL Property Management (“DEL”) contacted SSWA to obtain a quote and a proposal for a noise assessment study. The Complainant, Volodymyr Orlenko (“Orlenko”), was the owner of unit 1108 in the condominium. DEL had received complaints from Orlenko’s neighbour, the owner of unit 1206, about piano noise coming from Orlenko’s condo unit.
4. SSWA provided several proposals to DEL. Ultimately, it was decided that the testers would use “special keyboard procedures rather than [the piano player] playing specific songs or music” because their “noise testing requires more or less steady piano signals”.
5. On October 15, 2018, a representative of SSWA spoke on the phone with the neighbour who had made the noise complaints to DEL. The following day, the neighbour emailed SSWA to thank them for speaking with her. She also provided SSWA with additional information, including links to YouTube videos of Orlenko’s children playing piano.
6. On October 17, 2018, Gidamy advised DEL that it should launch an official complaint with the City of Toronto about the piano noise to see if DEL could enlist the City’s support. He provided DEL with the direct email of the City official he believed was the “head of that group” dealing with these types of complaints.
7. On October 31, 2018, Orlenko emailed SSWA with questions about the testing procedures and standards they would use. SSWA refused to respond directly to Orlenko and instead emailed DEL on November 1, 2018 with detailed answers to Orlenko’s questions. DEL sent these answers to Orlenko on November 2, 2018.
8. On November 5, 2018, Orlenko emailed SSWA with follow-up questions about their testing procedures and standards. Gidamy emailed DEL advising that SSWA would not address Orlenko’s questions unless DEL requested them to, and stating that it appeared “that the piano owner is trying to crack the system and create more confusion, distraction, and more cost to the condominium corporation.”
9. Ultimately, it was agreed between SSWA and DEL that SSWA would conduct sound testing between unit 1108 and 1206, and also between unit 1108 and two other neighbouring units (1107 and 1109). It appears Orlenko was not advised that testing would also take place in units 1107 and 1109. DEL instructed SSWA to copy Orlenko and DEL “at the same time” with all communications in relation to the sound test in units 1108 and 1206. DEL also advised SSWA by email dated March 14, 2019 that the “[i]nvoice for the sound test in units 1206 & 1108” was to be split between DEL and
Orlenko, while the invoice for 1107 and 1109 was to be charged to DEL alone. SSWA confirmed these instructions by email dated March 15, 2019.
10. On March 22, 2019, Orlenko emailed SSWA, noting that he was retaining SSWA “jointly” with DEL, and asked a number of questions about testing procedures and cost. SSWA did not respond to Orlenko. On March 25, 2019, Orlenko followed up requesting a response to his previous email.
11. By an email dated March 26, 2019, Gidamy told Orlenko that all correspondence should be going through DEL. In response to Orlenko’s questions, he asserted that “this matter will be left to us completely without any interference of any kind from all parties” and requesting that Orlenko “govern [him]self” during the test.
12. On March 26, 2019, three employees on behalf of SSWA attended the condominium to conduct the noise study. Gidamy did not attend as he was on vacation out of the country, but he spoke to his employees on the phone during the testing.
13. Orlenko video-recorded the testing, with the permission of the SSWA employees. The video recordings show SSWA employees being directed by Gidamy to play the piano in Orlenko’s unit as loudly as possible. SSWA employees also commented that it was difficult to hear the piano in unit 1206.
14. On or around May 3, 2019, SSWA delivered the report of the study covering units 1108 and 1206 (the “First Report”). It was signed and sealed by Gidamy. Orlenko paid for 50% of the First Report. On or around May 9, 2019, SSWA delivered to DEL a further report signed and sealed by Gidamy, covering the other two units (the “Second Report”). The Second Report was not provided to Orlenko until March 12, 2021, at which time it was disclosed by DEL as part of the materials in a Superior Court action.
15. The First Report concluded that the piano noise was “clearly audible” in the receiver suite (1206) and in excess of both qualitative and quantitative sound level criteria. The First Report asserted that the impression of the SSWA employees at the testing “also confirmed the ‘clear audibility’ of the piano signals… under most operational scenarios.” The First Report made no mention of the comments of the SSWA employees to the contrary, referred to in paragraph 13 above.
16. Orlenko obtained three separate peer reviews of the First Report. They were all critical of the First Report. SSWA was made aware of these peer reviews and of inconsistencies
between the video recording and statements made in the First Report. SSWA dismissed the criticism out of hand.
17. Orlenko filed a complaint with PEO on May 28, 2021. Attached as Schedule “A” is a copy of the complaint, without attachments.
18. On or around March 2, 2021, Gidamy emailed counsel for the condominium offering to complete additional testing for the nominal fee of $2 “with a single intent; being to help our clients case, and the helpless occupants enduring the unacceptable piano noise for the past several years.” Gidamy advised that SSWA would “consider this initiative to be a last ditch effort to implement justice to a victim of inconsiderate noise generators in such a situation.”
19. As part of its investigation of Orlenko’s complaint, PEO retained SLR Consulting (Canada) Ltd. (“SLR”) as an independent expert to review the work done by Gidamy and SSWA. SLR prepared a report dated June 30, 2023 (the “Expert Report”), signed and sealed by Darron ChinQuee, M.B.A., P.Eng., LEED AP. Attached as Schedule “B” is a copy of the Expert Report, exclusive of appendices.
20. The Expert Report identified that the First Report and the Second Report were deficient for several reasons, including that:
a. Gidamy and SSWA misinterpreted the governing Code, the City of Toronto Noise By-Law (Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 591, Noise) applying a “clearly audible” standard rather than the “likely to disturb” standard;
b. Gidamy and SSWA applied the “clearly audible” standard inconsistently and incorrectly;
c. Gidamy and SSWA incorrectly adapted and applied quantitative standards, including through use of a “tonal penalty”;
d. Gidamy and SSWA evaluated noise under staged absolute worst-case conditions instead of under normal reasonable worst-case conditions;
e. Gidamy and SSWA did not provide sufficient information to other reviewers so that the results and conclusions could be assessed reasonably; and
f. There are inconsistencies in the reporting of back ground values.
21. SLR concluded that the identified errors, omissions, and deficiencies by Gidamy and SSWA failed to meet the standards expected of a reasonable and prudent practitioner in the circumstances. For the purposes of these proceedings, the Respondents accept that the First Report and the Second Report were deficient, as outlined in
paragraph 20 hereof, and that they failed to meet the standards expected of a reasonable and prudent practitioner in the circumstances.
22. Gidamy and SSWA agree that their actions were not in compliance with the fairness, loyalty, professional integrity, and competence required by the Professional Engineers Act, including by:
a. Engaging directly with Orlenko’s neighbour about her noise complaints and using her information to inform testing procedures and results, while refusing to engage directly with Orlenko;
b. Not disclosing to Orlenko that they provided the Second Report to DEL;
c. Accusing Orlenko, in emails to the condominium, of “trying to crack the system” when Orlenko made reasonable requests for information from SSWA;
d. Describing Orlenko, in Gidamy’s response to the complaint, as a “manipulative liar” with a “despicable attitude” who was “trying to demoralize the undersigned and divert my attention from the upcoming court case”; and
e. Admitting to the PEO investigator that there were errors in the SSWA Report but not amending the report or issuing an addendum.
23. Gidamy and SSWA agree that they failed to promptly, voluntarily, and completely disclose an interest that may be, or may be construed as, prejudicial to their professional judgment by preferring or appearing to prefer the condominium’s interests over Orlenko’s interests, despite having been retained and/or paid by both Orlenko and the condominium, including by:
a. Not disclosing to Orlenko or in its reports that Gidamy and SSWA were aware of the condominium’s intention to use the reports in court proceedings against Orlenko;
b. Refusing to engage directly with Orlenko; and
c. Acting or offering to act against Orlenko’s interests in performing the testing, preparing the reports, and/or offering to conduct additional testing to help the condominium’s legal case against Orlenko.
24. Gidamy and SSWA admit that they were negligent; that they failed to make reasonable provision for complying with applicable standards and codes; that they failed to make prompt, voluntary and complete disclosure of an interest, direct or indirect, that might in any way be, or be construed as, prejudicial to the professional judgment of the practitioner; and that they engaged in conduct
relevant to the practice of professional engineering that would reasonably be regarded as unprofessional.
25. By reason of the foregoing, the parties agree that Gidamy and SSWA are guilty of professional misconduct under section 72(2) of R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 941 (“Regulation 941”), as follows:
a. They were negligent, amounting to professional misconduct as defined by sections 72(1) and 72(2) (a) of Regulation 941;
b. They failed to make responsible provision for complying with applicable statutes, regulations, standards, codes, by-laws and rules in connection with work being undertaken by or under the responsibility of the practitioner amounting to professional misconduct as defined by section 72(2)(d) of Regulation 941;
c. They failed to make prompt, voluntary and complete disclosure of an interest, direct or indirect, that might in any way be, or be construed as, prejudicial to the professional judgment of the practitioner in rendering service to the public, to an employer or to a client, and in particular, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, carrying out any of the following acts without making such a prior disclosure: 5. Expressing opinions or making statements concerning matters within the practice of professional engineering of public interest where the opinions or statements are inspired or paid for by other interests.
amounting to professional misconduct as defined by section 72(2)(i) of Regulation 941; and
d. They engaged in 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.
PLEA BY MEMBER AND/OR HOLDER
The Respondents admitted the allegations of professional misconduct set out in paragraph 25 of the Agreed Statement of Facts. A plea inquiry was conducted separately for Mr. Gidamy and the representative of the Holder. The Panel was satisfied that admissions made by Mr. Gidamy and the Holder were voluntary, informed, and unequivocal.
DECISION ON MISCONDUCT
The Panel considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and finds that the facts, as agreed, support a finding of professional misconduct. Of particular concern to the Panel is Mr. Gidamy’s
DECISIONS AND REASONS
failure to conduct himself in a manner that is honourable, professional, and becoming of a professional engineer, and the failure to abide by the laws, rules, guidelines, and requirements expected of a professional engineer.
The Panel accordingly finds that the Respondents committed acts of professional misconduct as defined by subsections 72(1), 72(2)(a), (d), (i), and (j) of Regulation 941 under the Professional Engineers Act as set out in paragraph 25 of the Agreed Statement of Facts.
($4,000) within thirty (30) days of pronouncement of the decision of the Discipline Committee, which requirement shall be a joint and several obligation on Gidamy and SSWA; and f. There shall be no order with respect to costs.
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 HOUSTON T. ENGIO, P.ENG., a member of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario, and HOUSTON ENGINEERING & DRAFTING INC., a holder of a Certificate of Authorization.
As per section 22.1(1) of the Professional Engineers Act, a “member who resigns or a holder of a […] certificate of authorization that is cancelled or revoked continues to be subject to the jurisdiction of the Association in respect of any professional misconduct or incompetence referable to a time when the person was a member or holder.” Although Mr. Gidamy is no longer a member of the PEO, he was a member when the conduct at issue occurred, and is therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the Discipline Committee.
PENALTY
Counsel for the Association advised the Panel that a Joint Submission as to Penalty and Costs (“JSP”) had been agreed upon, which provided, in part, as follows:
3. The PEO, Gidamy and SSWA make the following joint submissions on penalty and costs:
a. Pursuant to s. 28(4)(f) of the Professional Engineers Act, Gidamy and SSWA shall both be orally reprimanded, and the fact of the reprimand shall be recorded against SSWA’s listing on the Register for an unlimited period of time;
b. Pursuant to s. 28(4)(b) of the Professional Engineers Act, SSWA’s Certificate of Authorization shall be suspended for a period of two (2) months, commencing on the date of pronouncement of the Discipline Committee’s decision on penalty;
c. Pursuant to s. 28(4)(e) and (k) of the Professional Engineers Act, in the event that Gidamy’s licence is reinstated, he shall be required to practise under the supervision of a professional engineer acceptable to the Registrar, and further, he shall not be permitted to act as responsible engineer for SSWA or any other certificate of authorization holder;
d. Pursuant to s. 28(4)(i) and 28(5) of the Professional Engineers Act, the findings and order of the Discipline Committee shall be published, with reference to names;
e. Pursuant to s. 28(4)(h) of the Professional Engineers Act, Gidamy or SSWA shall be required to pay a fine in the amount of four thousand dollars
Counsel for the Association asked the panel to accept the JSP. Counsel advised that the test for rejecting a joint submission was stringent and that the JSP in this case was not so unhinged that its acceptance would bring the administration of justice into disrepute. After reviewing the aggravating and mitigating factors, counsel explained why the different components of the penalty achieved the principles of sanctioning, including deterrence, public protection, and maintenance of confidence in the profession. Counsel also took the Panel to several decisions, which were provided to show the penalties imposed in other cases (PEO v Ikpong; PEO v Karugu; PEO v Krupka).
Counsel for the Respondents also asked that the JSP be accepted. Counsel submitted that Mr. Gidamy had had a lengthy career with no issues and was involved in the profession, including PEO committees. Likewise, SSWA had not had any prior issues since receiving a certificate of authorization over 25 years ago.
PENALTY DECISION
After being presented by counsel for the parties with submissions regarding the aggravating and mitigating factors, the Panel is satisfied that the proposed penalty is not so unhinged that its acceptance would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
In the circumstances of this case, the Panel is of the view that a reprimand, the fact of which is to be recorded permanently on the Register; a suspension of the Holder’s Certificate of Authorization for two months; a requirement prohibiting Mr. Gidamy from practising professional engineering except under the direct supervision of another professional engineer who shall take professional responsibility for the work; a fine; and publication of the Panel’s findings and order with reference to the names of Mr. Gidamy and the Holder, is a reasonable outcome in this matter. A lesser penalty would fail to appropriately serve the aims of specific and general deterrence, protecting the public, and maintaining the public’s confidence in the regulation of the profession.
The Panel acknowledges the Respondents’ cooperation with the Association through the Agreed Statement of Facts and JSP. These considerations, combined with his lack of a prior disciplinary history, are mitigating factors in determining an appropriate penalty. It is the Panel’s view, however, that these mitigating factors do not completely detract from the aggravating factors, given the seriousness of the misconduct in question.
The Panel has been made aware of the significant and troubling shortcomings in Mr. Gidamy’s practice in this case. The Panel reiterates that Mr. Gidamy has been found guilty of negligence. Public trust is at the core of what it means to be a professional. Members of the public must have confidence that professionals are held to high standards of conduct and that serious breaches of those standards are dealt with appropriately. Failing to take a proportionate response to protect the public in the face of professional misconduct undermines that trust and harms both the reputation of the profession and the legitimacy of professional regulation.
More specifically, the Panel is of the view that a reprimand, the fact of which is to be recorded permanently on the Register, together with the requirements and licence restrictions specified above, will maintain public confidence in the regulation of the profession and adequately provide for protection of the public and general deterrence to the profession at large.
Additionally, the Panel notes that the fact of a reprimand to be permanently recorded on the Register and publication of the Panel’s findings and reasons with names serves to promote both specific and general deterrence and reinforce the public confidence in the regulation of the profession. Publication demonstrates, both to the profession and to the public, the seriousness with which the Discipline Committee regards lapses of professional standards, and the penalties for engaging in such misconduct.
The Panel also considered the fact that Mr. Gidamy has retired and is no longer a member of the profession, whereas the Holder will continue to provide engineering services under a Certificate of Authorization. The terms of the order adequately account for the licensing status of Mr. Gidamy and the Holder to ensure protection of the public going forward.
Accordingly, the Panel accepts the JSP and orders as follows:
1. Pursuant to s. 28(4)(f) of the Professional Engineers Act, Mr. Gidamy and SSWA shall be both be orally reprimanded, and the fact of the reprimand shall be recorded against SSWA’s listing on the Register for an unlimited period of time;
2. Pursuant to s. 28(4)(b) of the Professional Engineers Act, SSWA’s Certificate of Authorization shall be suspended for a period of two (2) months, commencing on the date of pronouncement of the Discipline Committee’s decision on penalty (July 11, 2024);
3. Pursuant to s. 28(4)(e) and (k) of the Professional Engineers Act, in the event that Mr. Gidamy’s licence is reinstated, he shall be required to practise under the supervision of a professional engineer acceptable to the Registrar, and further, he shall not be permitted to act as responsible engineer for SSWA or any other certificate of authorization holder;
4. Pursuant to subsections 28(4)(i) and 28(5) of the Professional Engineers Act, the findings and order of the Discipline Committee shall be published, with reference to names; and
5. Pursuant to subsection 28(4)(h) of the Professional Engineers Act, Mr. Gidamy or SSWA shall be required to pay a fine in the amount of four thousand dollars ($4,000) within thirty (30) days of pronouncement of the decision of the Discipline Committee, which requirement shall be a joint and several obligation on Gidamy and SSWA.
The order took effect on July 11, 2024 when it was pronounced orally during the hearing.
The Panel issued an oral reprimand to the Respondents at the end of the hearing.
Reena Goyal signed this Decision and Reasons for the decision as Chair of this Discipline Panel and on behalf of the members of the Discipline panel: Corrine Dimnik, P.Eng., and Margaret Judge, P.Eng.
Summary of Decision and Reasons
In the matter of a complaint regarding the conduct of VISVALINGAM JEGANMOHAN, P.ENG., a member of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario, and VENOTH ENGINEERING LTD., a holder of a Certificate of Authorization.
July 29, 2024
The Discipline Committee considered allegations of professional misconduct referred to in respect of Visvalingam Jeganmohan, P.Eng., a member of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario, and Venoth Engineering Ltd. (“VEL”), a holder of a Certificate of Authorization. Visvalingam Jeganmohan was the individual who took professional responsibility for the engineering services provided under the Certificate of Authorization.
The parties filed an Agreed Statement of Facts. In or around November 2020, the Complainant requested a quote from VEL for the provision of engineering services related to the removal and replacement of a structural wall (the “Project”). On or around November 11, 2020, Venoth Jeganmohan, an engineer-in-training at VEL, provided a quote to the Complainant. The quote identified Venoth Jeganmohan as an “Engineer.” At no relevant time was Venoth Jeganmohan a licensed Professional Engineer in Ontario.
On February 8, 2021, Venoth Jeganmohan provided the Permit Drawings for the Project signed and sealed by “V. Jeganmohan” to the Complainant and her contractor. On February 18, 2021, after the Permit Drawings had already been submitted to the City of Hamilton for permit, Venoth Jeganmohan emailed the Updated Drawings, also signed and sealed “V. Jeganmohan.” The seal applied belonged to Visvalingam Jeganmohan. In response to PEO’s investigator, on March 14, 2022, Visvalingam Jeganmohan provided a copy of the Updated Drawings and supporting calculations.
PEO retained an independent expert to review the actions and conduct of the Respondents. The Expert Report concluded that the Permit Drawings, Updated Drawings, and calculations were deficient for several reasons, failing to meet the standard of a reasonable and prudent practitioner in the circumstances. Additionally, they failed to make reasonable provision for complying with applicable standards and codes. Visvalingam Jeganmohan and VEL pled guilty on the agreed-on facts. The Discipline Committee found the parties committed acts of professional misconduct contrary to section 72(1), (2)(a), (b), (d), (h), and (j) of Regulation 941 of the Professional Engineers Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 28. An oral plea inquiry was conducted, and the Panel was satisfied the admission were voluntary, informed, and unequivocal. A Joint Submission on Penalty and Costs was agreed to in this matter.
Summary of Decision and Reasons
In the matter of a complaint regarding the conduct of LUDMILA (LUCY) SHAW, P.ENG., a member of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario, and LKS CONSULTING INC., a holder of a Certificate of Authorization.
October 7, 2024
The Discipline Committee considered allegations of professional misconduct referred to it in respect of Ludmila (Lucy) Shaw, P.Eng., a member of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario, and LKS Consulting Inc. (“LKS”), a holder of a Certificate of Authorization. Ms. Shaw was the individual who took professional responsibility for the engineering services provided under the Certificate of Authorization.
MS. SHAW AND LKS’s HISTORY WITH PEO’s DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE AND REGISTRATION COMMITTEE
During the hearing, counsel for the Association advised the Panel that Ms. Shaw and LKS have a history with PEO’s Discipline Committee and PEO’s Registration Committee. Ms. Shaw’s discipline history includes the following: (a) a decision of the Discipline Committee, pronounced orally on November 14, 2022, and released on December 2, 2022; and (b) a decision of the Discipline Committee, pronounced orally on June 12, 2023, and released on July 24, 2023. The Registration Committee made a decision on September 11, 2024, and released on September 20, 2024. The Registration Committee ordered on consent that Ms. Shaw’s licence and the Certificate of Appointment for LKS be suspended for a period of six (6) months or until Ms. Shaw passes the National Professional Practice Examination, whichever is later.
CURRENT MATTER
The parties filed an Agreed Statement of Facts. In or around July or August 2021, the Complainant contacted Ms. Shaw regarding preparation of as-built structural drawings required by the City of St. Catharines to verify the adequacy of a poured concrete patio built without a permit on the Complainant’s property. Ms. Shaw and LKS were verbally retained to complete the drawings. LKS did not notify the Complainant of its professional liability insurance status, nor did it receive written authority to provide engineering services to the Complainant without that insurance. Ms. Shaw and LKS issued three drawings in connection with the patio. The drawings were deficient for several reasons and failed to ensure that construction of the patio was in conformance with the minimum requirements of the Ontario Building Code.
PEO retained an independent expert to review the action and conduct of Ms. Shaw and LKS. The expert report concluded that Ms. Shaw and LKS failed to meet the standard
expected of a reasonable and prudent engineer in the circumstances. The Respondents pled guilty on the agreed-on facts. The Discipline Committee found the parties committed acts of professional misconduct contrary to section 72(1), (2)(a), (d), (j), and (g) of Regulation 941 of the Professional Engineers Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 28. A plea inquiry was conducted. The Panel was satisfied that the admission made by the parties were voluntary, informed, and unequivocal. A Joint Submission on Penalty was agreed to in this matter.
The Discipline Committee imposed the penalty as jointly submitted:
a) Ms. Shaw and LKS shall be reprimanded, and the fact of the reprimand shall be recorded on the Register permanently;
b) The finding of the order of the Discipline Committee shall be published in summary form with reference to names;
c) There shall be a term, condition or restriction on Ms. Shaw’s licence and LKS’s Certificate of Authorization that upon resuming practice following the suspension [referred to in the JSP], they shall be prohibited from practising professional engineering except under the direct supervision of another professional engineer approved by the Registrar who shall take responsibility for the work;
d) If Ms. Shaw demonstrates her competence in structural engineering by successfully passing the 07-Str-A4 (Advance Structural Analysis) and 07-Str-A5 (Advance Structural Design) examinations administered by PEO, the term, condition or restriction set out in subparagraph c) shall be lifted in connection with structural engineering;
e) If Ms. Shaw demonstrates her competence in environmental engineering by successfully passing the 18-Env-A4 examination administered by PEO, the term, condition or restriction set out in subparagraph c) shall be lifted in connection with environmental engineering;
f) If Ms. Shaw completes all the examinations listed in subparagraphs d) and e), the term, condition, and restriction set out in subparagraph c) shall be suspended indefinitely;
g) There shall be a condition imposed on Ms. Shaw’s licence and LKS’s Certificate of Authorization, requiring them to accept practice inspection as directed by the Registrar in respect of conduct which occurs after the conclusion of the suspension; and
h) There shall be no order as to costs.
PEO PUBLICATIONS AND RESOURCES
Professional Engineers Ontario has a number of resources, including practice bulletins, brochures, learning modules and fact sheets, available for free on its website at peo.on.ca/knowledge-centre . The following performance standards and practice guidelines are available in PDF form on PEO’s website.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
• Regulation 260/08: Performance Standards
• Practice Standard for Tower Cranes
• Revised Practice Standard: Engineering Inspection for Tower Cranes
PRACTICE GUIDELINES
General—Engineer
• Assuming Responsibility and Supervising Engineering Work Guideline (2018)
• Conducting a Practice Review (2014)
• Guideline for Engineers Conducting Performance Audits and Reserve Fund Studies (2021)
• Guideline on Human Rights in Professional Practice (2009)
• Preparing As-Built and Record Documents Guideline (2020)
• Professional Engineering Practice (2020)
• Professional Engineers Reviewing Work Prepared by Another Professional Engineer (2011)
Use of Seal
• Use of the Professional Engineer’s Seal (2022)
Legal/Discipline
• Guideline on Forensic Engineering Investigations (2016)
• Making a Complaint: A Public Information Guide (2011)
• The Professional Engineer as an Expert Witness (2011)
Construction/Building
• Design Evaluation & Field Review of Demountable Event & Related Structures Guideline (2020)
• Guideline for Professional Engineers Providing General Review of Construction (2021)
• Professional Engineers Providing Land Development/ Redevelopment Engineering Services (1994)
• Professional Engineers Providing Mechanical and Electrical Engineering Services In Buildings (1997)
• Professional Engineers Providing Services for Demolition of Buildings and Other Structures (2022)
• Structural Condition Assessments of Existing Buildings and Designated Structures (2016)
• Structural Engineering Design Services for Buildings Guideline (2017)
• Temporary Works for Construction Projects (2022)
Transport/Roads/Municipal
• Professional Engineers Providing Services for Municipalities (Rev. 1998)
• Professional Engineers Providing Services in Transportation and Traffic Engineering (1994)
• Professional Engineers Providing Services with Respect to Road, Bridges, and Associated Facilities (1995)
Software/Computers
• Developing Software for Safety Critical Engineering Applications (2013)
• Professional Engineers Using Software-Based Engineering Tools (2011)
Mechanical/Electrical/Industrial
• Pre-Start Health and Safety Review Guideline (2022)
Geotechnical/Environmental
• Engineering Evaluation Reports For Drinking Water Systems (2014)
• Environmental Site Assessment, Remediation and Management Guideline (2020)
• Guideline for Providing Engineering Services Under O.Reg. 1/17 and Part II.2 of the EPA (2021)
• Professional Engineers Providing Acoustical Engineering Services in Land-Use Planning (2024)
• Professional Engineers Providing Geotechnical Engineering Services (1993)
• Providing Reports on Mineral Projects (2020)
• Solid Waste Management (2017)
National Guidelines
• Principles of Climate Change Adaptation for Engineers
• Guideline on Sustainable Development and Environmental Stewardship for Professional Engineers (2016)
New Year, New PEAK Cycle
PEO has launched a new PEAK website for licence holders to complete their annual continuing professional development program requirements.
By Adam Sidsworth
It is another new year, and PEO licence holders are once again starting their annual requirements for PEAK, PEO’s mandatory continuing professional development (CPD) program. If you’ve already logged into the PEO portal and clicked on the PEAK tab link this month, you likely noticed the new PEAK website, which features a modern look and improved functionality.
“Licence holders are able to do all of the same things on the platform as before, such as complete their Practice Evaluation, Professional Practice Module and Continuing Professional Development Report, change their professional status and review past modules and edit their CPD entries,” notes Arden Heerah, P.Eng., PMP, PEO’s manager, professional development initiatives. “Licence holders can also now attach proof of activity to their CPD Report.”
The process for completing PEAK remains the same, but Heerah notes that the updated website was revamped to improve both functionality and licence holders’ experience. Notably, inquiries about PEAK requirements and technical support issues represented a large proportion of PEO’s customer service inquiries in 2024. “We are happy that the majority of PEO licence holders have embraced their PEAK requirements,” observes Heerah, adding that approximately 85 per cent of PEAK-eligible licence holders completed their first two elements for the 2024 cycle. “We know engineers already engage in CPD, but the mandatory PEAK requirement may be new for many of them. So, we laid out the new PEAK site to work for them,” Heerah says. “We listened and acted upon feedback we have received and will continue to do so. Plus, PEO’s stellar customer service team is here to help.”
A MANDATORY REQUIREMENT
As of January 2023, PEAK is a mandatory requirement for most licence holders (only licence holders on fee remission are exempt), meaning that licence holders who do not complete their PEAK requirements may face sanctions from PEO. Possible sanctions include an administrative licence suspension, whereby a licence holder loses their practice and title rights. However, the suspension will be lifted after the missing elements are completed.
PEAK consists of three elements. The first two elements must be completed by all licence holders who are required to participate in PEAK and take about an hour to complete. The third element must be completed by most participating licence holders and can require between zero and 30 hours to complete. The elements include:
1. Practice Evaluation, a practice declaration with a practice assessment, consisting of a Practice Evaluation Questionnaire for licence holders who are eligible to practise engineering in 2025 or a Non-practising Survey for licence holders who are declaring that they are not intending to practise engineering in 2025. This is due on January 31;
2. Professional Practice Module, a self-guided learning module where all engineers are reacquainted with topics such as engineering ethics and regulatory processes, professional practice and the responsibility of engineers to safeguard public welfare and the environment. In 2025, licence holders must complete the new module on the professional engineer’s seal. This element is due on January 31; and
3. Continuing Professional Development Report, which must be completed by all engineers who are eligible to practise in 2025. Engineers are required to complete between zero and 30 CPD hours and document their activities on the PEAK website. The exact number of hours you are required to complete is assigned during the Practice Evaluation and depends on the type of engineering you perform, your work environment, level of supervision and other factors. You have until December 31 to complete and document your CPD hours.
To complete your PEAK requirements, log into the PEO portal and click on the PEAK tab. For more information on PEAK, visit www.peopeak.ca or contact PEO at peopeak@peo.on.ca or 416-840-1117. e
The PUBLIC INTEREST:
Exploring PEO’s Core Mandate
For more than a century, PEO’s mandate has been to regulate the practice of engineering and govern the profession to serve and protect the public interest. We explore how PEO ensures engineering in the province is done competently, professionally and safely.
BY ADAM SIDSWORTH
IN HIGH SCHOOL,
practice guidelines and standards subscription service and is acutely aware that he could be subject to PEO’s complaints and discipline process.
By her last year of high school, Sara knew she would pursue a career as a structural engineer—no doubt inspired by her uncle. The P.Eng. would allow Sara to access title and practice rights and signal to her clients and employers that Sara meets PEO’s licensing requirements and is regulated by an organization that takes seriously its mandate to protect the public interest. But it wasn’t until Sara embarked on her undergraduate engineering studies that she began to appreciate the profession’s—and ultimately PEO’s—immense responsibility to safeguard Ontarians.
HOW DOES PEO SERVE AND PROTECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST?
HOW DOES PEO SERVE AND PROTECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST?
Each of Ontario’s 41 regulated professions has a unique mandate, and many of them, from the Ontario Association of Architects to the Law Society of Ontario—and, importantly, PEO—speak about their role in protecting the public interest. PEO’s mandate, as described in the Professional Engineers Act (PEA), is to serve and protect the public by regulating the practice of professional engineering and governing its members in accordance with the PEA and its regulations and bylaws. Among other approaches, PEO achieves this in seven notable ways.
1. ENSURING ALL LICENSED ENGINEERS ARE QUALIFIED AND LICENSING ALL WHO QUALIFY
A crucial role of PEO’s public-interest mandate may be its ability to license engineers and entities providing engineering services to the public. As of the end of 2023, just under 87,000 people were licensed to practise engineering in Ontario as a professional engineer, or P.Eng. The P.Eng. designation embodies high standards of knowledge, experience and professionalism and allows holders to practise professional engineering as defined in the PEA and take responsibility for engineering work that affects public health and welfare.
Likewise, the limited licence allows holders to practise within a specified scope of practice that matches their experience and education (see “The Limited Licence: An Alternate Path to PEO Licensure,” Engineering Dimensions, Spring 2024, p. 24). And a temporary licence allows a holder to work on a specific project in Ontario for up to one year in collaboration with a PEO licence holder. Additionally, any engineer or firm providing engineering services to the public is required by law to hold a certificate of authorization (C of A), meaning that a licensed engineer must take responsibility for the engineering work.
PEO’s licensing process ensures only those who meet the academic and experience requirements can work as engineers in Ontario. Regardless of the type of licence held, all licence holders are subject to the same professional ethics and standards.
“Licensure is the first step in professional accountability,” notes José Vera, P.Eng., PEO’s director, licensing. “PEO ensures all licensed professional engineers are qualified while licensing all those who qualify. Licensure is a key component of how PEO meets its public-interest mandate.”
2. THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATING ALL COMPLAINTS BROUGHT TO PEO ABOUT UNLICENSED, UNPROFESSIONAL OR INCOMPETENT ENGINEERS
Like other regulated professionals, PEO licence holders are potentially subject to a regulatory complaints process. Members of the public or the profession itself can make allegations of misconduct or incompetence involving a licensed engineer in Ontario. PEO has a dedicated section on its website where members of the public can file a complaint against licensed engineers or companies for reasons such as negligence, practising outside the licence holder’s area of competence, or harassment—all of which fall within the PEA’s definition of professional misconduct.
PEO’s complaints process begins with PEO receiving a complaint and potentially leads up to a formal hearing in front of the Discipline Committee (DIC). PEO takes all complaints against licence or C of A holders very seriously. During the first stage, PEO investigators initiate an investigation of the complaint. Their investigation typically includes requesting a response from the complained-against licence or C of A holder, interviewing the complainant, reviewing any relevant documentation and possibly relying on the services of independent consultants or experts.
The information and documents gathered by the investigator are considered by the Complaints Committee (COC), which can forward the case to the DIC for possible prosecution, dismiss the case outright or take other actions, such as having the licence or C of A holder undertake a voluntary undertaking (see “What’s in a Complaint?” Engineering Dimensions, July/August 2020, p. 26).
3. DISCIPLINING LICENSED ENGINEERS FOUND GUILTY OF PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT OR INCOMPETENCE
The possibility of professional discipline is arguably the most powerful tool PEO has to protect the public interest. Under the PEA and its regulations, holders of a licence or C of A can be subject to various penalties, up to and including revocation of their licence or C of A if they are found guilty by a discipline panel of professional misconduct or incompetence. “Professional regulation is geared towards prevention,” notes Leah Price, BA, JD, LLM (LSE), FEC (Hon.), PEO’s senior counsel, regulatory compliance. Price is regularly tasked with prosecuting cases referred to the DIC. “In other words, steps are taken against individual [licence holders], with a view to eliminating the risk they pose to the public.”
Penalties imposed by the DIC are carefully chosen to deal with the concerns raised by the conduct in question. “For example, the [practitioner’s] licence may be suspended or—in extreme cases—revoked,” Price explains. “Or they may be prohibited from practising in a particular engineering discipline or be required to pass specified technical examinations, failing which they would be required to practise under the supervision of a professional engineer acceptable to the registrar.”
Regular readers of Engineering Dimensions’ Gazette section, or blue pages, will be familiar with situations that have resulted in licence or C of A holders being brought before the DIC. In addition to being summarized in Gazette, DIC decisions are also referenced on PEO’s public directory and published on CanLII, an online database of judicial decisions from courts and tribunals from across Canada. “This high level of transparency ensures other engineers and the public are aware of the seriousness with which PEO takes professional misconduct,” reiterates Price. “This protects the reputation of the profession in the eyes of the public and also serves as a general deterrent to other engineers, thus discouraging conduct that could result in harm to the public.”
4. CONDUCTING DISPUTES RESOLUTION AND HEARINGS
PEO’s formal tribunals play an important role in fulfilling PEO’s mandate by conducting independent hearings to deal with issues ranging from allegations of professional misconduct against a licence holder to contract disputes between a licence holder and their client (see “Reaching a Verdict: The Rise and Relevance of PEO’s Tribunals,” Engineering Dimensions, Summer 2024, p. 30). PEO’s four tribunals, which follow court procedures and in accordance with the PEA and regulations, include the:
• DIC (see above), which hears cases of alleged professional misconduct or incompetence against holders of a licence or C of A;
• Complaints Review Councillor, who is appointed by Council to review the treatment of a complaint by the COC;
• Registration Committee, which typically conducts de novo hearings on behalf of applicants who have been denied a licence or C of A from PEO, along with cases where PEO’s registrar has suspended or revoked a licence or C of A; and
• Fees Mediation Committee, a seldomly convened PEO tribunal in which engineers and engineering firms and their clients can enter a voluntary hearing to mediate their fee or contract disputes.
“The tribunals’ entire purpose is to help protect the public interest by administering fair hearings that help PEO govern the profession in accordance with the PEA and the regulations made under the act,” notes Nedra Brown, LLB, PEO’s director, tribunals and legal counsel. “Under the PEA, PEO’s principal object is to regulate the practice of professional engineering and govern its members and holders.”
5. BRINGING ACTION AGAINST UNLICENSED INDIVIDUALS WHO PASS THEMSELVES OFF AS AN ENGINEER OR ORGANIZATIONS LACKING A CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION
Some people hold themselves out as engineers while circumventing PEO’s licensing process. This puts public safety at risk. PEO works to limit this risk by contacting and educating non-licensed members of the public and companies who may be unaware of PEO’s licensing requirements (see “Protecting the P.Eng.,” Engineering Dimensions, July/August 2019, p. 43). And when appropriate, PEO actively seeks Superior Court injunctions and/or prosecutes unlicensed practice cases in provincial offences court. “Education and outreach are employed to guide individuals and companies about their legal obligations under the PEA,” notes John Mania, PEO’s manager, unlicensed practice. “Our efforts protect the public by ensuring only qualified individuals and companies offer engineering services.”
Mania notes that the largest risk to the public involves unlicensed individuals and companies offering engineering services to the public without a C of A, individuals using the protected P.Eng. title to give the impression of being qualified, using a legitimate engineer’s seal without authorization or forging a seal to appear legitimate. “Unfortunately, unauthorized seal usage and seal forgery is not a rare event, although these matters receive our immediate attention,” observes Mania. “Thankfully, by working closely with building departments and other regulatory agencies the unlicensed practice team opens cases quickly for expedited investigation. Additionally, we have a critical depth of skills to effectively deal with cases, including investigative interviewing, open-source intelligence collection, paralegal and legal expertise and a legal precedent library.”
Guideline for Pr Engineers Providing General Review of Construc
PEO is responsible for establishing and developing practice guidelines and performance standards, which set out minimum requirements or benchmarks for engineering services.
6. PREPARING GUIDELINES AS A BENCHMARK FOR QUALITY ENGINEERING SERVICES
Under the PEA, PEO is responsible for establishing and developing practice guidelines and performance standards, including standards of professional ethics. Standards and guidelines set out minimum requirements or benchmarks for engineering services and educate practitioners and the public on best practices (see “How PEO is Enhancing its Practice Resources,” Engineering Dimensions, Summer 2023, p. 20). “The quality of engineers’ work includes an adherence to professional ethics, professional competency and delivering high-value engineering services,” notes Jane Mustac, P.Eng., PEO’s manager, practice advisory services.
PEO’s practice resources come in four forms:
• Performance standards are a minimum mandatory requirement that a licence holder must meet. PEO’s four standards are outlined in Ontario Regulation 260/08 and cover topics ranging from drinking water system evaluations to tower crane inspections;
• Guidelines provide suggestions for engineering benchmark practices. Some guidelines provide general-level engineering advice, while other guidelines are industry, sector, discipline or practice specific;
• Bulletins provide professional advice and interpretations on matters usually enforced by others or supplemental information to guidelines; and
• Practice advisory services, with PEO staff interacting with licence holders and the public via phone, email or the PEO website to help them better understand PEO’s standards, guidelines and bulletins.
“PEO’s practice advisory resources provide a resource for engineers to consult when faced with complex challenges. This helps them to avoid claims of negligence or allegations of unethical behaviour as well as real or perceived violations of professional codes that could cause harm to the public,” says Mustac. “Access to practice advisors provides engineers with guidance to help navigate these challenges. Additionally, engineers’ adherence to PEO’s non-mandatory guidelines and mandatory standards demonstrates engineers’ professionalism and commitment to excellence.”
7. REQUIRING LICENSED ENGINEERS TO COMPLETE
AN ANNUAL CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
PEO’s Practice Evaluation and Knowledge (PEAK) program is a mandatory annual program designed to improve the regulator’s data about its licence holders’ engineering practice and, importantly, provide individualized continuing knowledge development. Under the PEA and its regulations, most licence holders must annually complete the PEAK program to maintain their licence (see “Scaling PEAK: The Rise of PEO’s Mandatory CPD Program,” Engineering Dimensions, Winter 2023, p. 14).
The program supports PEO’s public-interest mandate by helping to ensure licence holders practise competently and ethically. In turn, individual licence holders improve their expertise in their area of practice, engineering firms employing them protect their reputations, and their clients enjoy increased confidence in the work at hand. Most importantly, practitioners demonstrate their commitment to public safety, health and welfare. As Arden Heerah, P.Eng., PMP, PEO’s manager, professional development initiatives, notes: “PEAK is not meant to operate in isolation; it complements PEO’s other public-protection activities—licensing, discipline, practice guidelines and advisory.” Indeed, all PEO activities are appropriately interconnected to make sure PEO both adheres to its mandate to protect the public interest and is seen to do so by the public it serves. e
Engineers Support the Takeoff of
SUSTAINABLE AEROSPACE
Diverse research and development projects are leveraging engineering expertise to chart a greener course for Canada’s aviation industry. BY SHARON ASCHAIEK
Electric airplanes, including the hybrid- electric ES-30, are being studied by Ontario engineers to better understand how they perform in Canada’s diverse weather conditions.
As the global aviation industry strives to become carbon neutral within a generation, engineers in Ontario and across Canada are playing a vital role in helping the country drive innovation in sustainable aerospace. Hailing from diverse disciplines within academia and business, engineers are helping to pioneer electric airplanes, biojet fuel facilities, more efficient aircraft and other technologies that could help Canada’s aviation industry operate more efficiently and emit far fewer greenhouse gasses.
Over 100,000 commercial flights take place daily, and annually, they burned one billion litres of CO2 into the atmosphere, which contribute to about 4 per cent of human-induced global warming. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) estimates that without radical and rapid innovation, these emissions could triple by 2050. With the climate crisis intensifying, it is vital for airlines, jet fuel producers and related enterprises to develop more environmentally friendly technologies and practices. In 2021, members of the International Air Transport Association responded to this challenge by resolving to be carbon neutral by 2050, a move the ICAO supported in 2022.
In Canada’s aerospace industry, research and development outpace all other manufacturing industries. To further catalyze sustainability innovation in the sector, the federal government is supporting four key strategies: electric, hybrid and hydrogen propulsion; improvement in ground and aircraft operations; sustainable aviation fuels (SAF); and carbon offsetting and capture. These efforts
are supported by the National Research Council’s Low-emission Aviation Program and a $350 million investment in Initiative for Sustainable Aviation Technology, an industry-government collaboration.
PRODUCING SUSTAINABLE FUEL
One such project is the front-end engineering and design (FEED) study of Calgary-based company Azure Sustainable Fuels. FEED is assessing and preparing plans to define the development of a renewable fuel facility focused on producing sustainable aviation fuel using canola and soybean oils grown in Canada. With funding from Natural Resources Canada’s Clean Fuels Fund, the Canada Infrastructure Bank and the Government of Manitoba, Azure is exploring the economic viability of Manitoba, Ontario and British Columbia as potential locations for the facility. The intention is to have a facility begin producing half a billion litres of SAF annually by 2030, which the company says would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 1.3 million metric tonnes per year.
“When you look at the carbon-intensity life cycles of canola and soy, they are very favourable as sources of sustainable fuel,” says chemical engineer Douglas Cole, P.Eng. (Alberta), vice chairman of Azure, noting the goal for the facility is to also produce other types of renewable clean fuels. The FEED project team includes Azure’s four other engineers—a mix of electrical and mechanical—along with Richard Design Services Engineering, an American firm Azure has engaged to support this work.
Converting these feedstocks into SAF occurs through hydrotreated esters and fatty acids, or HEFA, a process that involves
Photo: Heart Aerospace
2023, although it accounted for just 0.1 per cent of all fuel aviation consumed that year. This is partly because SAF is currently two to four times more expensive than petroleum fuel, which limits its appeal to the low-margin aviation industry. Also, SAF currently cannot fully replace conventional jet fuel because the latter contains chemicals needed for aircraft to function safely. The American Society of Testing and Materials has approved SAF to comprise 50 per cent of the ratio in blends with standard jet fuels. However, the International Coordinating Council of Aerospace Industries Associations is striving for all aircraft to be capable of operating with 100 per cent SAF by 2030.
Another major hurdle is ensuring a sufficient supply of the feedstocks. Canola is one of the most widely grown crops in Canada, with about 40,000 farmers producing about 20 million tonnes annually. However, about 90 per cent of all canola products are exported to the United States and other countries. The C-SAF Roadmap, a 2023 report developed by the industry driven non-profit Canadian Council for Sustainable Aviation Fuels, sees the viability of keeping this output in Canada to build a sustainable domestic SAF market. Azure is considering these economic and agricultural factors in tandem with the engineering challenges of constructing efficient SAF facilities, developing effective supply chains for both obtaining feedstocks to refine and then delivering the resulting biofuel to consumers, and dealing with the carbon outputs the SAF production process will generate. “We want to be able to minimize the emissions that arise from our production process to reduce carbon intensity, which will support a more economical and cleaner product,” Cole says. “We’re exploring options such as burning byproduct gasses to fuel the facility to replace the need for natural gas and capturing and storing carbon.”
structural design of aircraft to optimize their efficiency, which is the objective behind multiple research projects focused on developing blended-wing-body (BWB) aircraft. A BWB airplane has a more streamlined shape in which the fuselage section blends with curvedtip wings. This superior aerodynamic design increases a plane’s lift and decreases its drag, which enhances fuel efficiency and reduces carbon emissions. This design has the added efficiency benefit of increasing the amount of space inside an aircraft cabin, which can be used to carry more passengers or cargo.
One such BWB initiative is Bombardier’s EcoJet Research Project, which is being supported by the expertise of aerospace engineer Afzal Suleman, PhD, P.Eng. (BC), founding director of the University of Victoria Centre for Aerospace Research (CfAR). Established in 2012, CfAR is a leading research centre in Canada for accelerating aircraft innovation through design, development, manufacturing and flight-testing services. The premises of the EcoJet project took shape more than 15 years ago, and it has evolved into a multi-year flight-testing program that kicked off its first phase in 2017, when the R&D collaboration with CfAR began. In January 2024, Bombardier announced CfAR as the first formal academic partner on the project.
Together with his team of electrical, mechanical, aerospace and software engineering experts, Suleman has developed two smallscale, fully equipped models of the aircraft, one that is 2.5 metres wide and another that is 5.5 metres wide. The fruit of this tight collaboration between Bombardier and CfAR has been the flight campaigns on BWB scale test vehicles, which have been exploring the prototypes’ behaviour in free flight and perfecting their radically different flight control laws.
For this project, the CfAR team has used composite materials such as carbon fibre and glass fibre for the flying prototypes. These
The second test phase of Bombardier’s EcoJet Research Project was conducted with a 5.5-metre-wide demonstrator.
Photo: Guillaume Plisson for Bombardier
materials are lighter than metal and so reduce the overall weight of the scaled demonstrator aircraft, helping reduce their fuel consumption. “This could be an important contribution to the greening of aviation,” says Suleman, the Canada research chair in computational and experimental mechanics. “This is a completely new design that pushes the design envelope of aircraft, and we need to understand and quantify flightworthiness.”
Given the high technical complexity and costs of developing fully functioning BWB airplanes that also meet industry regulations, Suleman says it could be another two decades before they become a common fixture in the skies. But based on the progress his team has made so far, he is confident that BWBs will be a key contributor to the decarbonization of the aviation sector. Bombardier has stated that its EcoJet Research Project could reduce business jets emissions by up to 50 per cent, with the aerodynamic design improvements alone contributing to reductions of up to 20 per cent.
“I’m optimistic about the potential for this design to reduce aviation’s carbon footprint. That is what the data show,” Suleman says. “Efficiency has always been the goal from a business perspective, and this same goal is now a driver to mitigating environmental impact.”
TESTING ELECTRIC PLANES
The future of flying is also being propelled by growing innovation in electric airplanes. In September 2022, Israeli-founded American company Eviation Aircraft launched the nine-seat Alice, the world’s first zero-emission, battery-only plane that travelled for eight minutes at 3500 feet on its inaugural flight. June 2024 saw the takeoff of Canada’s first-ever electric commercial flight by British Columbia company Sealand Flight. A 2023 study out of Sweden found that an electric plane could have a 60 per cent lower climate impact than fossil fuel-burning planes—but the environmental trade-off is the increased use of scarce mineral resources in its battery. Meanwhile, as the World Economic Forum notes, the weight of today’s batteries in comparison to jet fuel limits how far an electric plane can fly.
Among those exploring the potential of electric planes as an eco-friendly aviation option is electrical engineer Claudio Adrián Cañizares, PhD, P.Eng., of the University of Waterloo. In an interdisciplinary study with another electrical engineer and scholars from the environment and management faculties, Cañizares engaged pilots to conduct hundreds of flight tests at a local airport of an ES-30, a 30-passenger hybrid-electric airplane; and a Regent Viceroy Seaglider, a 12-passenger electric plane. The objective was to evaluate how well an e-plane battery can perform in Canada’s diverse weather conditions, assessing the impact of temperature, precipitation, humidity and wind on the functions of taxiing, takeoff, flight, cruising and landing.
“We wanted to determine the health of the batteries during these flights, and one thing we noticed is that they seemed to degrade faster than we expected,” says Cañizares, executive director of the Waterloo Institute for Sustainable Energy. While the researchers are still evaluating the data, Cañizares says the results so far do suggest such planes could replace fossil fuel-burning jets for short regional flights.
Cañizares’ study was one of 39 projects supported by nearly $10 million in federal government funding to the university’s Waterloo Institute for Sustainable Aeronautics (WISA), a leading global research and education hub. His study also analyzed the
environmental benefits and financial feasibility of airport microgrids as a self-sustaining power supply. They looked at deploying such a localized energy grid at the Waterloo Regional Airport that would use solar, thermal and other sources of renewable energy as well as repurposed e-plane batteries to provide low-emission electricity to charge e-planes and to power hangars and other airport facilities. Their process involved analyzing energy microgrids at different airports worldwide to discern the key considerations to plan and implement such infrastructure at the Waterloo Regional Airport. Their analyses so far indicate that having a local supply of affordable clean electricity is key to determining whether this would be a costeffective option for airports.
EXPLORING NOVEL MATERIALS
For Cañizares’ Waterloo colleague Armaghan Salehian, PhD, P.Eng., advancing sustainability in aviation encompasses studying novel materials for use in airplanes that could yield economic and social benefits. The mechanical and mechatronics engineer led a study included in the cluster of WISA-funded projects that focused on ways to use additive manufacturing to produce insulation for aircraft mechanical systems to reduce noise and vibration. “For people who work in or near airplanes, being exposed to excessive noise over a long time period can cause hearing problems, and it can also affect their ability to learn and focus,” says Salehian, who leads the university’s Vibrations and Energy Harvesting Lab. “Also, excessive noise can impact the lifespan of a plane, because it causes vibrations that affect the integrity of its structure.”
Currently, the vibrational noises caused by a plane’s engine, cabin pressurization and air conditioning systems are mitigated with acoustic filters made of glass fibres or mineral wools, which is problematic because they are produced with extensive nonrenewable sources that emit carbon and because they release particles that are harmful to human health. Armaghan sees the potential to replace these filters with periodic metamaterials, specially engineered substances that have powerful soundattenuating properties. The relatively recent advent of additive manufacturing methods such as 3D printing means these materials can now be produced quickly and easily.
Salehian’s method involved using computer software to design panels of periodic metamaterials with different geometric shapes that were fabricated in the university’s Multi-Scale Additive Manufacturing Lab. They then engaged Honda Canada to provide support to record different mechanical sounds in a car manufacturing environment. Honda workers were then invited to listen to these sounds played in the university’s anechoic chamber, a space that completely absorbs sound waves. Each recording was muffled with a different-shaped panel to identify which geometric shape was effective at absorbing and minimizing noise in the frequency range of 20Hz to 20 kHz. Her findings are published in an August 2024 special issue of the journal Applied Sciences
“Within the next two years, we’ll explore many more of these geometries and different materials that could be used,” Salehian says. “I see a lot of potential for this research, and additive manufacturing creates many new possibilities to achieve greater sustainability in manufacturing.” e
READ LISTEN
Sustainable Manufacturing Processes: The Coaching Method
Enabling Companies to Innovate by Henk Akse, 2025: This book describes and analyzes technological, economical, psychological and organizational factors that prevent innovation in companies. Innovation-promoting and -inhibiting factors are identified and companies are coached to innovate their own process.
The Power of Nuclear:
The Rise, Fall and Return of Our Mightiest Energy Source by Marco Visscher, 2025: Providing a vivid account of the characters and events that have shaped the world’s most controversial energy source and our thinking around it, this book weaves politics, culture and technology to explore nuclear power’s past and future.
Urban Engineering for Sustainability by Sybil Derrible, 2024: This book introduces integrated, sustainable design of urban infrastructures, drawing on civil engineering, environmental engineering, urban planning, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering and computer science.
The following events may have an in-person and/or online component. See individual websites for details.
ATTEND
FEBRUARY 28–MARCH 1
International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems Engineering, Toronto, ON https://isit.org.in/event/index. php?id=2730905
MARCH 20–21
International Conference on Recent Challenges in Engineering and Technology, Vancouver, BC https://www.iierd.org/events/index. php?id=2772331
MARCH 21–22
International Conference on Chemical Engineering and Technology, Markham, ON https://sairap.org/conf/index. php?id=2776116
APRIL 1–2
International Conference on Aircraft and Aerospace Structural Design, Vancouver, BC https://scholarsforum.org/event/index. php?id=2825439
APRIL 3–4
International Conference on Mechanical and Biomedical Engineering, Montreal, QC https://after.org.in/event/index. php?id=2824137
APRIL 18–19
International Conference on Emerging Trends and Innovations in Mechanical Engineering, Toronto, ON https://worldacademics.net/event/index. php?id=2856789
Future Tech Podcast
Founder and host Richard Jacobs interviews companies about new technologies in the bioengineering space, such as artificial intelligence, 3D printing, stem cells, regenerative medicine, and more.
https://futuretech.findinggeniuspodcast.com
Aerospace Engineering Podcast
This podcast features conversations with engineers and researchers in industry and academia to reveal their real-world stories of innovation in aerospace. https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/ aerospace-engineering-podcast/ id1299428170
WATCH
Practical
Engineering
Hosted by Grady Hillhouse, this YouTube channel explores innovative structures and public works.
Mastering Presentation Skills for Engineers and Tech Professionals
A presentation coach and keynote speaker teaches engineers, tech professionals and introverted leaders how to communicate and present with executive confidence. https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=SP9ClS1gqRU
Engineers Lead $1 Million Autonomous Vehicle Research Project
The project aims to develop solutions for the challenges posed by autonomous and connected vehicle technology.
By Adam Sidsworth
$1 million grant from the Ontario Research Fund–Research Excellence to support its “Secure, Intelligent and Trustworthy Ecosystems for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles” project, led by Burak Kantarci, PhD, P.Eng., full professor of electrical engineering and computer science at uOttawa and director of the Smart Connected Vehicles Innovation Centre (SCVIC). The project will involve 59 people, including undergraduate and postgraduate students and researchers in engineering, computer science and law from uOttawa, the University of Toronto (U of T) and Western University, along with 10 industry partners.
The project is an example of Ontario engineers collaborating with other academic researchers and industry to develop solutions for the emerging AV sector to enhance public safety. “The project has multiple dimensions to address,” notes Kantarci. “We are aiming to integrate the building blocks of autonomous and connected vehicles by considering technological constraints, human constraints and, also, legal constraints because a combination of these three aspects is lacking in most of the existing solutions.”
Throughout the project, Kantarci and the uOttawa team will be joined by Abdallah Shami, PhD, P.Eng., and Xianbin Wang, PhD, P.Eng., both professors of electrical and computer engineering at Western, where Wang is a
Canada research chair in 5G and wireless IoT communications and Shami is head of Western’s Optimized Computing and Communications Lab, which explores artificial intelligence in AVs, network security and smart cities and communities. Also joining the research team is Birsen Donmez, PhD, P.Eng., professor of industrial engineering and Canada research chair in human factors and transportation and director of U of T’s Human Factors & Applied Statistics Lab.
COMBINING EXPERTISE
Kantarci notes that each of the four participating researchers bring their own focus and expertise, with Kantarci and the other uOttawa professors exploring cybersecurity, communication and artificial intelligence (AI) and explainability to bridge the communication gap of 5G and AVs; while the Western professors are exploring wireless communications and the physical layer; and Donmez is considering human-AI system interaction. Donmez’s work aims to understand and improve human behaviour and performance in multitask and complex situations (see “How Human Factors Engineering Drives Automotive Design,” Engineering Dimensions, January/February 2020, p. 46).
Other uOttawa non-engineering researchers will also explore the legal, regulatory and policy implications of allowing AVs on Ontario roads. “We have an investigator focusing on common law,” observes Kantarci, referring to Elizabeth Judge, JD, LLM, PhD, full professor of law at uOttawa. “Her team brings up so many issues I’ve never considered before…Just to name one example, if we have autonomous vehicles on the road, one of the issues they brought up is: What regulations will be in place regarding [unattended] children travelling in these vehicles?”
DRIVING TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE
The majority of AV testing will take place at uOttawa’s SCVIC, which is equipped with its own private, indoor test bed, where Kantarci and his colleagues can test AVs in action. “We have 10 industry partners in the project, the majority of which are in Ottawa and in the technology park,” Kantarci says. One of them is California-based TrustedMobi, which has experience developing AI solutions for secure and smart mobility. Since 2019, California has allowed AVs to operate on its roads, albeit with vehicle owners and operators required to be licensed to operate AVs.
However, Ontario’s embrace of AV technology is more cautious. In 2016, the province updated its regulations to allow for a 10-year pilot project, with AVs allowed in mixed traffic in only some exceptions. Notably, the University of Waterloo’s Mechatronic Vehicle Systems Lab in 2021 began offering its WATonoBus, a five-stop, 2.7-kilometre service on the school’s The Ring Road (see “University of Waterloo Introduces Autonomous Campus Shuttle Bus,” Engineering Dimensions, September/October 2021, p. 11).
Kantarci is optimistic that a multidisciplinary study like the one he is spearheading will ultimately move Ontario’s decisionmakers to eventually allow AVs as widely as California’s policymakers have. “At the end of the first year, we’ll have our first annual workshop, and we will present our advancements and gaps and discuss our immediate roadmap to bring these gaps together and implement the policy or regulatory issues,” says Kantarci. e
University of Ottawa Full Professor Burak Kantarci, PhD, P.Eng., aims to advance AV technology with the help of various researchers and industry experts.
Lake Ontario Chapter AGM
Saturday, February 1 at 6 p.m. EST, 67 Bistro at the W. Galen Weston Centre for Food, Durham College, Whitby campus, 1604 Champlain Avenue, Whitby, ON https://lakeontario.peo.on.ca
Brampton Chapter AGM and Certificate Presentation Ceremony
Friday, February 7 at 7 p.m. EST, Brampton Golf Club, 7700 Kennedy Road, Brampton, ON https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/1084504515199
Mississauga Chapter AGM
Monday, February 10 at 7 p.m. EST https://mississauga.peo.on.ca
Upper Canada Chapter AGM
Thursday, February 27 https://uppercanada.peo.on.ca
Windsor-Essex Chapter AGM
Tuesday, March 4 at 5:30 p.m. EST, Ciociaro Club, 3745 North Talbot Road, Oldcastle, ON https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/1033917012617
Willowdale-Thornhill Chapter AGM
Tuesday, March 11 at 6:30 p.m. EDT, Courtyard Toronto Markham, 65 Minthorn Boulevard, Markham, ON https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/1039097317047
Peterborough Chapter AGM and Certificate Presentation Ceremony
Saturday, March 29, Peterborough Golf & Country Club, 1030 Armour Road, Peterborough, ON https://peterborough.peo.on.ca
Thousand Islands Chapter AGM
Saturday, March 29 at 5 p.m. EDT, The Mill, 123 Water Street West, Brockville, ON https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/1084682276889
Oakville Chapter AGM
Wednesday, April 2 https://oakville.peo.on.ca
Simcoe-Muskoka Chapter AGM
Saturday, April 5 at 11 a.m. EDT, Best Western Plus Mariposa Inn & Conference Centre, 400 Memorial Avenue, Orillia, ON https://simcoe-muskoka.peo.on.ca
North Bay Chapter AGM
Thursday, April 10 at 5:30 p.m. EDT https://northbay.peo.on.ca
Sustainability, Diversity Top Priorities for Young Civil Engineer
Michelle Mbai aspires to advance sustainable practices and racial and gender inclusion in engineering.
Among other projects, Michelle Mbai, P.Eng., contributed to the Go Rail expansion project in the Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton, for which she led inspections into water drainage systems along railway corridors.
ings, jewelry and dollhouses. She also recalls accompanying her father to residential construction sites, including underground and aboveground water storage facilities, and being fascinated by the complexities of building various structures.
Those interests shaped the direction of her study-abroad dream, and she chose to pursue civil engineering at Western University. In her third year, Mbai specialized in the environmental engineering option, which focuses on developing technical solutions to preserve the natural environment and mitigate the effects of climate change and pollution. Since graduating in 2018, Mbai has applied this expertise at consulting firms AECOM, WSP and LEA Consulting before landing her current role.
When it comes to protecting the integrity of Ontario’s natural and built water systems, there is no such thing as business as usual for water resources engineer Michelle Mbai, P.Eng. (she/her).
Each proposed infrastructure project requires Mbai to conduct a customized analysis to determine its distinct impact on surrounding watercourses, wetlands and drainage systems. Given Ontario’s rapid population growth and the rising demand for new infrastructure, she must exercise innovative thinking and practices to ensure there is proper quality, sufficient availability and effective conveyance of water resources. “I enjoy the fact that the systems I’m designing are protecting not only communities but the environment, now and for future generations,” says Mbai.
As the only civil engineer with a specialty in water resources at engineering consulting firm EnVision Consultants Limited in Mississauga, ON, Mbai brings much-needed expertise to the company’s services. Working with other engineers, designers and project managers on residential, commercial and industrial development projects, Mbai conducts floodplain assessments of sites being considered for development and provides expert input on building in ways that are harmonious with the surrounding environment. She also conducts hydrologic and hydraulic modeling and designs surface drainage and stormwater management systems to accommodate new developments.
DESIGNING FOR RESILIENCE
Born and raised in Nairobi, Kenya, Mbai’s penchant for designing and building emerged in childhood, when she enjoyed creating paint-
Staying relevant in her area of expertise requires Mbai to engage in ongoing professional learning that extends beyond understanding Environment Ministry guidelines, city policies and practices for stormwater management and local and global urban development trends. She says it also means monitoring climate change patterns that are causing increasing floods and droughts and adapting the solutions she designs to be resilient well into the future. Mbai regularly consults with local conservation authorities to understand current and emerging threats to the stability and vitality of aquatic ecosystems. “The data we produce in our work show that future development policies and guidelines will need to be updated to respond to the risks of climate change,” Mbai says. “Things will need to change as the world changes…designs will need to be more sustainable.”
NAVIGATING PREJUDICE
Another area of needed change, Mbai says, is for engineering to be more welcoming to women and racialized minorities. As a Black woman in a profession where racial and gender inclusion are still a work in progress, Mbai has experienced microaggressions by colleagues, such as surprise at her English fluency, fascination with her afro and assumptions about Wi-Fi access in Kenya.
“[They] made me feel othered and undermined, as though my identity and abilities were reduced to misconceptions and prejudices,” Mbai says. This inequity first became apparent to Mbai at Western, where she was the only Black woman in her graduating class. As Mbai navigates these diverse challenges, what sustains her commitment is knowing that her work is serving the well-being of both citizens and the natural world.
Mbai’s experience also led her to volunteer with several community organizations, including acting as a liaison with Black engineering students for non-profit organization Black Engineers of Canada and as a mentor for Elevate Youth Toronto, which supports career goals of socially disadvantaged Black youth. Currently, Mbai does industry outreach for the Society of Women Engineers Toronto. “In the workplace, it’s always better when you see people who look like you,” Mbai says. “Change is slow, but progress is happening—I am seeing more women and BIPOC in engineering.” e
Find the 2025 Council Elections candidate statements in this issue’s insert. Go to peovote.ca for all election-related resources, including video recordings of this month’s All Candidates Meetings. Voting closes February 24. Count yours in. Your profession matters. So does your vote.
Council Commits to Reintroducing New Engineering Intern Program
Decisions made by Council at its 566th meeting on November 29, 2024
By Nicole Axworthy
At its November meeting, Council committed to reintroducing an Engineering Intern (EIT) program. As part of the motion, Council directed the CEO/registrar to undergo targeted engagement with relevant stakeholders to ensure inclusive and comprehensive input into the development of a new program. Council also directed the Regulatory Policy and Legislation Committee to provide a policy proposal to be presented to Council at its meeting on April 4.
PEO’s EIT program was originally created to support applicants as they gained the 48 months of engineering work experience required for licensure. However, the program was suspended to new applicants following the May 2023 launch of PEO’s updated licence application process that complies with new requirements under the Fair Access to Regulated Professions and Compulsory Trades Act (FARPACTA). The EIT program became incompatible with the new, faster and more streamlined FARPACTA-compliant licensing regime, which now requires individuals to obtain both the academic and experience requirements prior to applying for licensure (see “PEO to Suspend its Engineering Intern Program,” Engineering Dimensions, Winter 2023, p. 8).
OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGETS
Council approved the draft 2025 budgets, as presented at the meeting. The 2025 budgets include PEO’s operating, capital, Council special projects and strategic plan budgets, encompassing all expenses necessary to fulfill PEO’s regulatory objectives. Council previously reviewed a draft at its September 24, 2024, meeting, when it explored factors influencing the budget and potential management strategies.
Total revenues in 2025 are projected to be $37.7 million, and total expenses to sustain operations, including Council and strategic project spending, are budgeted at $38.2 million, resulting in an anticipated deficit of approximately $445,000. The spending on Council and strategic plan projects are $1.08 million and $1.09 million, respectively.
The estimated 2025 revenue is expected to be $37.7 million. This represents an increase of $1 million, or 2.8 per cent, over the 2024 forecasted revenue. The main factors contributing to this increase are a $828,000 rise in P.Eng. revenue and a $670,000 increase in funds collected from application, registration, exam and other fees. This
projected revenue increase is partially offset by a $647,000 expected decrease in investment income and $70,000 decrease in revenue from 40 Sheppard due to the likelihood that two tenants occupying approximately 5104 square feet will not renew their leases, which were due for renewal in Q4 2024.
The forecasted 2025 expenses for operations, Council and strategic projects are expected to be $38.2 million versus $35.9 million in 2024. This represents an increase of $2.3 million, or 6.4 per cent, as compared to 2024 forecasted expenses. In addition to compounded inflationary pressures, key reasons for the increase are:
• A net increase in employee salaries and benefits and retiree and staff future benefits of $1.5 million, or 9 per cent, over the 2024 forecast. This increase reflects transfers of contract staff to full-time positions in alignment with the Employment Standards Act (ESA), a global merit increase of 4 per cent, and salary adjustments in 2025 to apply the recommendations of an external consultant to ensure PEO continues to remain viable in the employment marketplace. The full-time headcount in 2025 is expected to be 149 versus a budgeted headcount of 142 in FY 2024;
• An increase of $792,000, or 44 per cent, in spending for computers and telephones, driven by critical service contracts for essential security support and monitoring activities, software applications, backup and failover processes, server maintenance, etc.;
• An increase of $315,000, or 28 per cent, in legal corporate, prosecution and tribunal expenses, largely due to an expected increase in costs for independent legal counsel for discipline, and complaints investigations; and
• An increase of $265,000 in chapter activities, driven by higher spending on various chapter events and initiatives. This spend is partially offset by cost recoveries of $205,000 for chapter events by way of ticket sales and is recorded as chapter revenues in the income statement.
The above increases are partially offset by:
• A reduction of $443,000, or 41 per cent, in spending on contract staff. In 2025, PEO plans to transfer seven of its contract staff to permanent roles in alignment with the ESA, as noted above;
• An expected decrease in combined spending on Council and strategic projects of $693,000 in 2025, as compared to 2024; and
• A projected reduction of $118,000, or 17 per cent, of spending on consultants for various initiatives.
An amount of $275,000 has been budgeted for capital improvements that are part of common area maintenance (CAM) costs, which are recoverable from tenants and recommended by Avison & Young, PEO’s property manager. Planned improvements in 2025 include:
• $165,000 for a new access card system; and
• $110,000 for replacing heat pumps.
The expenditures for 2025 consist of $50,000 for replacing old office furniture and for miscellaneous contingencies. The spend on a proposed renovation project is not included as part of these materials and will be presented to the Audit and Finance Committee and Council as a separate item when further information is available.
BORROWING RESOLUTION
Council passed a motion to renew PEO’s existing operating line of credit with Scotiabank until January 31, 2026, in compliance with PEO’s Internal Control Banking Policy. This includes an operating overdraft up to an amount not to exceed $250,000, and the use of corporate credit cards with an aggregate limit not to exceed $120,000.
SAFE DISCLOSURE POLICY
At its November meeting, Council approved a revised Safe Disclosure (Whistleblower) Policy.
It aims to ensure staff members, volunteers and councillors can safely report misconduct or suspected misconduct, without retaliation. The motion background notes that a strong whistleblower program can support corporate accountability, result in the preservation or recovery of funds, prevent lawsuits, maintain public trust and minimize reputational damage to the organization and profession.
After concerns were raised regarding the previous policy, which was approved by Council in November 2022, external legal counsel provided advice regarding policy revisions. Council considered this advice and passed a motion during the in-camera portion of its February 2024 meeting tasking the Governance and Nominating Committee with considering possible improvements to the policy and returning with recommendations before the end of 2024.
The revised policy improves on the previous policy, particularly in terms of clarity of definitions and coherence of process:
• The procedures have been simplified, the protection of anonymity in reports to Council has been clarified and the appeal procedure has been removed per the advice of external legal counsel;
• The Outcomes section now sets out next steps in the process for each category of workplace participant (staff, CEO/registrar, Council-appointed volunteer, non-Council appointed volunteer, councillor);
• Changes have been made to account for the new Councillor Code of Conduct and the new Anti-Workplace Violence, Harassment and Discrimination Policy (AWVHD Policy);
• The procedures now provide greater clarity regarding who is responsible for reports and complaints, particularly where the CEO/registrar would be in a conflict of interest, as well as their ability to delegate;
• A definition of “retaliation” has been added in the definition section, along with clarification to what constitutes not “acting in good faith”;
• The “duty” to report has been replaced with strong encouragement to report in order to ensure consistency with policies such as the AWVHD Policy; and
• Confidentiality has been highlighted as a key element of the policy.
PEO VISION STATEMENT UPDATE
Council defeated a motion asking it to receive four shortlisted vision statements and an interpretive document, have the vision statements presented to members to determine their favourite through a non-binding referendum, and have one vision statement to be brought back to Council at its April 2025 meeting for approval. Because the motion was defeated, it is expected that a new motion will be brought back to Council at its February meeting.
A component of PEO’s current strategic plan includes the goal to develop and bring forward a new and revised vision statement(s) for Council’s consideration (see “PEO to Develop a New Vision Statement,” Engineering Dimensions, Fall 2023, p. 15). An initiative led by Past President Roydon Fraser, PhD, P.Eng., FEC, with support from public relations firm Crestview Strategy, the creation of an updated vision statement aims to reflect the long-term aspirations of how PEO will protect and serve the public through its governance of the profession.
The draft vision statements and accompanying interpretive document is the result of thorough grassroots engagement with licensees, students and PEO’s stakeholder network over 14 months. Utilizing an interpretive userbased design process, hundreds of possible vision statements were tested through the engagement process, resulting in the four shortlisted vision statements presented to Council.
The motion background notes that between 1993 and 2022, PEO’s vision statement changed four times, about every seven years. In 2023, Council decided that no vision statement would be included in PEO’s 2023–2025 Strategic Plan, but instead adopted the strategic goal to develop a 2050oriented vision statement that seeks relevance and value for PEO and the P.Eng. and maximizes longevity. This was the first grassroots development of a PEO vision statement and interpretive document.
MINIMUM ACADEMIC REQUIREMENTS
Council passed a motion asking that PEO request that the Futures of Engineering Accreditation (FEA) next steps include an explicit commitment to the licensure academic standard of a “minimum academic depth and breadth requirement for individuals.”
The motion background expressed the need for minimum academic requirements in order for the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) to maintain its value to PEO and other engineering regulators. The academic standard for licensure is one of the four requirements for licensure specified in the Professional Engineers Act (PEA) and regulations. The motion background also indicated that there is high risk to not including a minimum academic requirement, including that it would affect PEO’s licensure requirements and universities would no longer be willing to engage in CEAB accreditation.
The FEA is an Engineers Canada–led initiative that is investigating and validating the purpose and scope of engineering accreditation by the CEAB, which accredits undergraduate engineering programs that meet the academic requirements for licensure. The FEA aims to gather diverse perspectives and consider how these insights can chart a new path for the future of accreditation. The Engineers Canada board received the FEA final report— which includes 18 recommendations that reflect the project’s efforts over three years—at its board meeting on December 9, 2024.
GUIDELINE DISCONTINUATION
At its November meeting, Council approved the discontinuation of the 1998 Services of the Engineer Acting Under the Drainage Act practice guideline.
Following a recent review of the guideline, along with a policy impact analysis, staff determined that potential risks associated with professional engineers providing services under the Drainage Act are adequately mitigated by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Agribusiness
Mandatory continuing professional development for licensed engineers
PEO’s mandatory Practice Evaluation and Knowledge (PEAK) program is designed to help licence holders maintain their professional knowledge, skills and competence as engineers and is in keeping with PEO’s regulatory, public protection mandate as set out in the Professional Engineers Act
Licence holders must comply with the annual program unless they are automatically exempt (those enrolled in PEO fee remission, like retirees). N PEAK obligations could lead to an administrative suspension. For more details, visit
and Ministry of Rural Affairs, the ministry responsible for the administration of the act. In 2018, the ministry developed and published A Guide for Engineers Working under the Drainage Act In Ontario, Publication 852 to provide specific guidance to engineers operating under the Drainage Act in Ontario. Subsequently, the ministry issued two fact sheets that provide updates pertaining to O. Reg. 500/21 under the act. These offer the necessary updated guidance to professional engineers working under the act and its associated regulations.
Reviews of PEO guidelines such as this one engage PEO’s policy development process, and a policy impact analysis tool is used to examine the issues the guideline seeks to address. Risks of harm to the public interest are identified and PEO’s regulatory and non-regulatory approaches are analyzed as to whether they effectively address risk, whether the guideline has a useful function and what improvements can be made to the guideline. In this case, no unmitigated risks were identified. e
SUBSCRIBE!
Sign up for a free subscription service to receive specific practice guidelines, standards and advisory bulletins related to your practice and interests.
Subscribers will receive updates via email when practice resources are updated or published, along with new supporting materials and tools. Sign up at www.peo.on.ca/knowledge-centre/practice-advice-resources-and-guidelines
AD INQUIRIES
Contact: Finally Content, Laura Maurice, laura.maurice@finallycontent.com, 647-394-5567
Deadline for the Spring 2025 issue is March 10, 2025.
Mandatory continuing professional development for licensed engineers
PEO’s mandatory Practice Evaluation and Knowledge (PEAK) program is designed to help licence holders maintain their professional knowledge, skills and competence as engineers and is in keeping with PEO’s regulatory, public protection mandate as set out in the Professional Engineers Act.
Licence holders must comply with the annual program unless they are automatically exempt (those enrolled in PEO fee remission, like retirees). Not complying with PEAK obligations could lead to an administrative licence suspension. For more details, visit www.peopeak.ca
