Summary of proposed amendment to the Class EA for MNRF Resource Stewardship and Facility Development Projects

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Summary of proposed amendment to the Class EA for MNRF Resource Stewardship and Facility Development Projects"

Transcription

1 Summary of proposed amendment to the Class EA for MNRF Resource Stewardship and Facility Development Projects Background: MNRF is requesting amendments to the Class EA for MNRF Resource Stewardship and Facility Development Projects (Class EA) for the consideration of the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC). The amendments are intended to ensure the document continues to comply with legislative requirements and planning practices, and continues to satisfy the purposes of the Environmental Assessment Act (EAA). The amendments are a result of a required five-year review cycle for the Class EA-RSFD and reflect 10 years of ministry experience using the Class EA. This summary table is intended to explain the nature of the key amendments MNRF intends to propose, and the associated rationale for the requested change. Current Class EA All Sections Topic: Administrative Changes Updates and housekeeping changes (reflect new legislation, re-ordering, Ministry name changes etc.). Improve readability and provide clarity. Reflect legislative, policy or practice changes that have occurred since the Class EA was approved. Ensure consistency with MOECC s Codes of Practice for Class EAs. Section 2.2 Topic: Class of Undertakings Add a paragraph providing more detail describing dispositions as a subset of resource stewardship undertakings. Update language describing range of projects. Update list of examples of dispositions. Provide clarity on class of undertakings. Better represent current MNRF programs, activities and range of projects. Sections , 2.5, and 3.2 Topic: Approach to Dispositions of Crown Resources Changes to how the Class is applied to dispositions of Crown resources for private projects, to focus MNRF review on the potential effects of the granting of a Crown resource under consideration. Adjusts the scope of Class EA evaluation to match the scope of the EAA and the Class of undertakings; clarifies that MNRF s granting of a disposition is the activity subject to the Class EA, not the private project for which the disposition is requested. MNRF would still consider potential impacts of applicants projects outside of the Class EA process, such as under the legislation used to grant the disposition. 1

2 Section Section 3.1 Topic: Coordination with EAA Processes Used by Other EAA Proponents Add Dispositions in respect of undertakings by another EAA proponent to the list of pre-assigned Category A projects. Topic: Project Categories Update the descriptions of project categories and project examples. Removed reference to Category D and replaced with Beyond the scope of this Class EA in section 3 and throughout document Avoids duplication and is consistent with current approach of not applying the Class EA to dispositions for projects subject to another EAA approval. Effects of granting the disposition are closely linked to the project and are contemplated as part of the EAA proponent s EAA process. Provide better distinction between range of negative effects and public concern associated with each category. Project examples for each category better reflect current practice. Clarify there are only three project categories (A, B and C) in this Class EA. Clarifies that some projects (i.e. the category previously referred to as Category D - projects with very high net negative environmental effects and/or level of concern) are beyond the scope of this Class EA. Section and Schedule A (new) Topic: Pre-assigned Category A Projects New schedule listing pre-assigned Category A projects that may proceed to implementation; this list is removed from the text of section Easier to use. Section and Schedule A (new) Topic: Additions to list of Pre-assigned Category A Projects Expand the list of pre-assigned Category A projects. Examples: Dispositions requested by another EAA proponent to carry out its undertaking Emergency activities Minor administrative procedures: depatent land, change in type of tenure excluding sale. Low intensity facility development: temporary wood storage area, sale of Projects proposed for addition are consistent with the definition of Category A by having low net negative environmental effects, and/or public or agency concern. Many have a history of routinely screening to Category A. The addition of projects to the pre-assigned Category A list does not affect MNRF s ability to screen individual projects or to place them in a higher risk category if they present unusual risk. 2

3 Crown land less than 1 ha in respect of shoreline reserves/road allowances, road on Crown land under 250m in length to access private land (e.g. driveway). Routine resource stewardship projects: control invasive species, prescribed burning. Table 3.1 Topic: Screening Criteria Improvements to screening criteria. Provide clarity and reduce duplication. Mitigation is added to the heading of the right column to improve documentation during implementation. Section 3.2 and Table 3.2 Topic: Screening Process Provide direction on projects with multiple components. Delete table 3.2: Considerations for assigning projects to categories. Ensure entire project is evaluated, rather than separate components. Improve ease of use by consolidating guidance on project categories in one place (content of table is captured in text of section 3.1). Section 4.1 (new subsection) Topic: Aboriginal Consultation Provide updated language on the Crown s duty to consult. Reflect current understanding of the Crown s duty to consult. Sections 4.2 and 4.3 Topic: Consultation Requirements Update consultation requirements to allow use of new communication technology. New approaches to notification and communication through electronic means play a larger role in consultation. Providing notice by has become a normal practice since the approval of the Class EA. Section 5.4 (new subsection) Topic: Recurring projects Include provision to address recurring projects. Avoid duplication in applying Class EA for projects implemented periodically. Recurring projects generally conform to the same project description and project area which is implemented periodically over an identified timeframe (e.g., prescribed burning, managing vegetation) for up to 10 years. 3

4 Section 5.5 Topic: Part II Orders Provide clarity and ensure consistency with MOECC s Code of Practice. Provide additional direction on making a Part II Order request and process for considering the request. Appendices 1-7 Topic: Appendices Appendix 1: Separate list of acronyms will provide faster reference for users of the Class EA. Update glossary to reflect current terminology (e.g., invasive species, alien species). Appendices 2 and 3: Updates to the list of guidelines and manuals that support planning and implementation of projects (Appendix 2) and updates to notification and consultation methods (Appendix 3). Updated to reflect changes since the Class EA was originally approved. Less detail (Appendix 5) to accommodate future changes in legislation and approaches. Many of these resources referenced are available on the internet. Range of templates and sample notices (Appendix 6) will be maintained on MNRF intranet to ensure only current versions are used by staff. Provide more detail on typical environmental effects (Appendix 7), and standard mitigation measures of the undertakings included in the Class EA. Appendix 4: New appendix describing the contents of a record of Aboriginal consultation undertaken when the legal duty to consult is engaged. Appendix 5: Update to reflect changes in legislation since Remove summaries of federal legislation to focus details on provincial legislation. Appendix 6: Update sample notices, including shift in approach to evaluating dispositions. Entire range of templates will be maintained on MNRF intranet to ensure only current versions are used by staff. Appendix 7: 4

5 New appendix that provides generic examples of typical mitigation measures. 5