The Minister of Environment and Climate Change has established an Expert Panel to review federal environmental assessment (EA) processes. The Expert Panel is encouraging interesting parties and stakeholders to make written submissions by December 23, 2016. Given interest from its membership, NEIA will be making a submission to the Expert Panel. Interested environmental professionals are asked to consider the following questions as a guide for feedback, and to submit any ideas, concerns, or opinions directly to Kieran Hanley at kieran@neia.org. Comments are welcome on all aspects of federal EA. Your comments will be summarized (anonymously) by theme, and submitted to the Expert Panel. 1. To what degree do you think the federal EA process should consider… a. The environment (e.g., water, wildlife, plants); b. Social factors (e.g., culture, heritage, health, social justice); or c. The economy (e.g., jobs, investment, economic growth)? 2. When should federal EA apply? E.g. …
Any project that has the potential to cause significant environmental effects; Any project that has the potential to cause any environmental effects; Any project in the region where activities could have cumulative effects on the environment; Other…
3. Who should prepare the environmental impact statement? Background: Today, proponents provide the majority of information used to inform an EA when they produce an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which identifies the potential environmental effects of a project. In some other jurisdictions (e.g., such as the United States), proponents do not prepare the EIS. Rather, it is prepared for government directly or by consultants hired by government. Who do you think should prepare the environmental impact statement?
Project proponent? The agency conducting the EA? (e.g. CEAA, NEB, CNSC) Other?
4. Did the implementation of the CEAA 2012 create key procedural issues? What are they, and should these be addressed through…. a. Changes in the legislation and / or regulations; or b. Procedural matters and associated decisions and actions by regulatory authorities during the EA process
5. What are your views on the ability, introduced under CEAA 2012, to substitute the EA process with that of another jurisdiction, e.g. deferring federal EA for a project to a provincial process?
6. To what extent should federal EA processes be used to support address Canada’s climate change commitments?
7. Do you have other ideas, concerns, and feedback with respect to how federal EA can work better?
NEIA members are also encouraged to submit their ideas, concerns, and other feedback directly through the Expert Panel website found at http://eareview-examenee.ca/.