Helen Cutts Vice-President,
Policy Development Sector, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Thank you very much.
My
name is Helen Cutts. I'm the vice-president of policy development at
the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. It's my pleasure to be
with you this
afternoon. My opening remarks will not take 10 minutes. That will give
us more time for questions.
Division
21 in part 4 of the budget implementation act makes a minor technical
amendment to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, or CEAA
2012,
as it's known in the short form.
In order to provide some context for members of the committee with respect to the amendments proposed by Bill C-45,
I will briefly describe the main features of the CEAA 2012.
This new act was brought into force in July shortly after Bill C-38 received
royal assent.
These
recent changes to federal environmental assessment are part of the
responsible resource development plan. The objectives of this plan are
to provide
for more predictable and timely reviews, to reduce duplication for
project reviews, to strengthen environmental protection, and to enhance
consultations with aboriginal groups.
CEAA
2012 focuses on major projects. “Designated projects” is the term used
in the legislation. Designated projects are identified in the project
list regulations.
The Minister of the Environment may also require the environmental
assessment of a project not on the list. This scheme replaces the “all
in unless excluded” approach of the former act.
Responsibility
for environmental assessment has also been consolidated with the
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, the Canadian Nuclear Safety
Commission
and the National Energy Board. This replaces an approach that saw the
act implemented by 40 to 50 federal authorities each year.
There
are additional mechanisms for federal-provincial cooperation. A
provincial environmental assessment may substitute for the federal
process. At the
end of the environmental assessment, the Minister of the Environment
makes a decision, informed by the provincial report. Before approving
substitution, the minister must be satisfied that the core requirements
of CEAA 2012 will be met.
The
Governor in Council may also declare a provincial environmental
assessment to be equivalent, exempting the designated project from
application of the
act. The conditions for substitution must be met in this case as well.
The
Governor in Council must also be satisfied that the province will make a
determination as to whether the designated project is likely to cause
significant
adverse environmental effects. It will ensure implementation of
mitigation measures and a follow-up program.
There
are now legislative timelines for environmental assessments: 365 days
for an assessment by our agency; 24 months for an assessment by a review
panel.
The
minister may extend timelines by three months. Additional extensions
may be granted by the Governor in Council. There is authority for
regional environmental
assessments that move beyond a project-specific focus. These are
intended to assist with the assessment of cumulative environmental
effects.
Finally, unlike the former act, CEAA 2012 includes enforcement provisions.
The amendments proposed by Bill C-45 are
intended to address minor inconsistencies in the text of CEAA 2012 that
have come to our attention over the past four months of implementation.
Clauses
425 to 427, as well as clauses 429 and 431, are intended to ensure
concordance between the French and English versions of the act.
Clause
428 corrects an oversight with respect to conditions that can be put in
a decision statement. At the end of an environmental assessment, a
decision
statement is provided to the proponent of a project. This statement
sets out the conclusion as to whether the project is likely to cause
significant adverse environmental effects. It also sets out conditions
that are binding on the proponent; these are mitigation
measures and requirements for a follow-up program.
The
amendment proposes broader language with respect to the conditions to
ensure that a decision statement can include administrative requirements
such
as reporting on the implementation of mitigation and follow-up.
Clause
430 clarifies that the obligation for federal authorities to ensure
their action with respect to projects on federal lands do not cause
significant
adverse environmental effects is limited to the environmental effects
caused by the components of the project that are situated on federal
lands.
Finally,
clause 432 proposes to close a loophole in the transition provisions.
Currently, there is potential for a project to be exempted under the
transition
provisions even though it would have required an environmental
assessment under the former act and would normally be subject to the new
act. Where a proponent of a project was advised under the former act
that an environmental assessment was not likely required,
the transition provisions in CEAA 2012 exempt it from application of
the new process.
This
exemption would hold, even though a trigger under the former act—that
is, a federal decision about a project—might subsequently be identified.
The
proposed amendment would subject a designated project, exempted under
current provisions, to the requirements of the act if it is determined
prior to January 1, 2014, that the project requires a federal decision
that would have resulted in an environmental
assessment under the former act. This amendment would ensure equitable
treatment of similar designated projects under two different legislative
schemes.
No comments:
Post a Comment