Environmental Impact Assessment
Stages of EA
Determination of Need Preparation of EA Report Technical Review Completeness Decision
STEP 3 - Technical Review & purpose
EA Report reviewed by Alberta Environment and associated public agencies. Completed through an integrated TEAM of experts for each discipline (e.g., Review Team or Technical Working Group) Purpose of review is to ensure: Requirements of the TOR and EPEA have been met Nature and setting of project is adequately described Environmental effects have been identified using sound methods and science including identification of mitigation measures. Proponent has identified monitoring programs to manage residual effects. "Baseline Case" "Application Case" as well as... Cumulative Effects have been addressed Public consultation has occurred as required under EPEA.
Two Regulations Provide Direction Related to EA in AB
Environmental Assessment Regulation and.... Environmental Assessment (Mandatory and Exempted Activities) Regulation
Legislation EPEA
Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act
Other Environmental Processes
Federal Municipal
Purpose of Alberta EA
Gather information required by regulatory agencies and resource management decision-makers Provide an opportunity for public involvement Support Sustainable Development
Supplemental Information
If the information provided is either unclear or insufficient,... the Review Team through the REM may request.... Supplemental Information.
Step 1 - Determination of Need
Initial Review by Alberta Environment Mandatory vs Non-Mandatory IF more information is required Proponent Must Prepare Screening Report Including Public Disclosure Document Purpose of Screening Report is to determine the most appropriate environmental review process...which may include a formal EA Report.
Step 4 - Decision
Once Review Team is satisfied EA report is complete sent to REM. REM will advise proponent, appropriate Board or Minister that the EA report is complete and formally refer them to the report. Board or Minister will make the project-decision regarding whether or not it will proceed. If application referred to EUB or NRCB, the Board will proceed with its normal application review process which may include PUBLIC HEARINGS.
Who is Responsible for EA in Alberta?
Project Proponent is responsible for preparing EA Report Alberta Environment is responsible for administering Alberta's laws governing EA Other departments may also be consulted (e.g., Alberta Sustainable Resource Development)
Step 2 - Preparation of EA Report
Proponent prepares draft Terms of Reference (TOR) and provides them to public and Alberta Environment for review. Procedures for preparing TOR are outlined in EPEA and regulations. After input from all stakeholders, Regional Environmental Manager issues Final TOR.
Other Regulatory Agencies : EUB
The Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) is an independent, quasi-judicial agency of the Government of Alberta. Regulates the safe, responsible, and efficient development of Alberta's energy resources: ...oil, natural gas, oil sands, coal, and electrical energy; and the pipelines and transmission lines to move the resources to market. EUB: Under the umbrella of the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board Act, the EUB is governed by more than 30 pieces of legislation that regulate Alberta's energy resource and utility sectors. e.g., Coal Conservation Act Electric Utilities Act Oil Sands Conservation Act Pipeline Act
Other Regulatory Agencies : NRCB
The Natural Resources Conservation Board (NRCB) is a regulatory agency of the Government of Alberta. It reviews proposals for projects that affect Alberta's non-energy natural resources, and regulates Alberta's confined feeding operations. Natural Resources Conservation Board Act Agricultural Operation Practices Act
Federal/Provincial Cooperation
The governments of Canada and Alberta signed an agreement in 1999 that outlines how they cooperate on environmental assessments. The agreement establishes a process for a single, cooperative environmental assessment to avoid duplication and ensure the environmental assessment is conducted as efficiently and effectively as possible. Harmonization Agreements are in place for other provinces as well.
Number of Species at Risk in Canada?
- Federal Species at Risk ~612
Species at Risk Act (SARA) & Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA): (3)
-> COSEWIC (Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada) -> Federal Cabinet -> Recovery Plan
Wetlands are VECs:
-If there are wetlands located in the area affected by the project -they should always be included in the list of VECs - it is good EA practice to do so
Stewart and Kantrud - Zone Types (7)
-Presence or Absence and distributional pattern of VEGETATION ZONES distinguish the major classes of wetlands ZONES: 1) Wetland Low-prairie 2) Wet meadow 3) Shallow marsh 4) Deep Marsh 5) Permanent Open Water 6) Intermittent Alkali 7) Fen (alkaline bog)
The Listing Process:
-Species are designated 'at risk' by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) -The Federal CABINET then decides whether those species should be listed under the SPECIES AT RISK ACT (SARA) -Once the decision is made to list a species, SARA requires RECOVERY STRATEGIES and ACTION PLANS to be developed. -These strategies must identify threats to CRITICAL HABITAT and outline approaches to addressing those threats.
END OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
...EA Decision
1) The project is NOT LIKELY to cause significant adverse environmental effects
...MAY PROVIDE FEDERAL SUPPORT that would permit the project to be carried out, in whole or in part. most common result
2) the project is LIKELY to cause significant adverse environmental effects that CANNOT BE JUSTIFIED
...SHALL NOT PROVIDE FEDERAL SUPPORT that would permit the project to be carried out, in whole or in part.
3) it is UNCERTAIN
...shall require that the project be referred to be MEDIATOR (never been done) OR REVIEW PANEL (more common)
4) the project is LIKELY to cause significant adverse environmental effects that MIGHT BE JUSTIFIED in the circumstances
...shall require that the project be referred to be MEDIATOR (never been done) OR REVIEW PANEL (more common)
5) PUBLIC CONCERNS warrants a reference to a mediator or a review panel
...shall require that the project be referred to be MEDIATOR (never been done) OR REVIEW PANEL (more common)
Why be concerned about wetlands and EA? (3)
1 -One of the most threatened ecosystems 2 -over 1/2 of all global wetlands have been destroyed 3 -wetlands cover around 50% of the natural landscape in the oil sands region
Designing the FUP: (6)
1) ASK THE RIGHT QUESTION - what is the main* objective? -Verify accuracy of predictions OR the effectiveness of mitigation measures? 2)WHAT SHOULD BE MEASURED? - what is it that you're actually going to measure? 3) WHEN, HOW OFTEN? 4) Will the FUP provide answers that are within the ACCURACY required for the study? 5) ***Will the data collected differentiate between PROJECT EFFECTS and other factors? 6) What will you DO WITH THE RESULTS? - who needs to see them? What is the purpose?
Purpose of the Follow-up Program: (3)
1) Find out WHAT actually HAPPENS ON THE GROUND (ex. during construction and operation) 2) CORRECT PROBLEMS as they arise 3) Obtain information/data to IMPROVE FUTURE related EAs
When do SARA Provisions Apply? (General Prohibitions) ext/end/thr species.
1) Listed on Schedule 1, which occur on FEDERAL lands *note: but not species of special concern 2) Aquatic species. regardless of land tenure 3) Migratory Birds, regardless of land tenure
Purpose of SARA: (3)
1) Preventing wildlife species from becoming Extinct or Extirpated 2) Help Recover extirpated, Endangered or Threatened species 3) Ensure that species of SPECIAL concern do not become Endangered
Implications of Federal Lands? ISSUES
1) Relatively limited application ...~5% of Canada (outside of YK/NWT/NUN) is federal lands This gets a lot of people upset, assuming species at risk will be protected. 2) Aquatic species and migratory birds already have some protection under FISHERIES ACT and MIGRATORY BIRDS CONVENTION ACT (MBCA) respectively 3) So, SARA prohibitions would not apply to (ex.) Swift fox or burrowing owl on provincial or private lands. 4) Issue? maybe - maybe not - depends on degree of protection provided by province. AND whether the critical habitat has been identified this leads to legal debates - everyone needs to agree on where and what is critical. Have to be able to map it. Overlaps all land tenures (federal, provincial, private)
Wetland Information Needs for EA ()
1) Single Wetland or Wetland Complex? -Class or Type of wetland -provide maps showing these features 2) Treat the wetland as a 3D system -contours, depth of water and organic layers, volume of waters stored 3) Consider the wetlands hydrological regime -sources of INFLOW and OUTFLOW. 4) Treat wetlands as DYNAMIC system -what is the range of water level fluctuations over time 5) Look at the wetland in a LANDSCAPE context -surrounding land use and land cover -wildlife habitats -proximity and linkages to OTHER wetlands (scoping and setting your spatial boundaries)
More Considerations for FUP: (4)
1) TIME and COST - provide for FUP early in planning phase (include in budget) 2) ROLES and RESPONSIBILITY - who will do the monitoring and who will pay? Typically the proponent. Who has the authority to modify project if issues/concerns arise? 3)REPORTING REQUIREMENTS - deal with the cost and what the proponents expect from the project. Weekly, monthly, quarterly? 4) RELEASE OF FINDINGS - should be clear
Using FUP Results - CEAA states that a FUP may be used for: (2)
1) implementing adaptive management measures 2) improving the quality of future EAs
Wetland Guideline Promotes Best Practices/Should be followed when: (2)
1)a proposed project is expected to have an effect on a wetland under FEDERAL jurisdiction 2) effect on a NONFEDERAL wetland while at the same time triggering an environmental assessment under CEAA
When to Involve Public? (6 stages)
1: PLANNING Stage - identify alternatives 2: SCOPING Stage - identify issues and VECs 3: ANALYSIS Stage - identify potential effects however this stage should probably be left for the experts 4: MITIGATION Stage - Propose mitigation measures 5: SIGNIFICANCE Stage - Input significance determination 6: FOLLOW UP - Participate in follow-up monitoring program
Factors considered under Project Decision
1: Socio-economic issues 2: Political Will - will you be supported? 3: Public concerns 4: Feasibility studies - how easy? 5: Project costs - how much money is there? 6: Other approvals
Wetland Compensation Ratio
3:1 disturb 1 hectare, have to be 3 back
EA Decision under CEAA
5 possible conclusions 3 possible course of action by the government
Aboriginal Interests and Rights
Aboriginal people have strong desire and right meaningfully participate in Federal EAs Where a project has the potential to infringe upon or adversely impact their rights and interests and/or the environment, lands and resources they rely on
Mitigation
Adherence to strict sequence of mitigation measures - consistent with NO NET LOSS policy 1) Avoid 2) Minimize 3) Compensate
Wetland Functions & Values (7)
B iogeochemical A esthetic/recreational values S ocial/Cultural/Commercial Values H abitat H ydrological E cological E ducation/Public Awareness
Exclusion Lists and Exempt EA Activities
CEAA exclusion List identifies projects that are excluded ONLY if they are NOT CLOSE TO A WATER BODY, the definition of which includes wetlands
TEK Recognized in EA:
CEAA formally recognized the importance of TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE in the federal EA process "community knowledge and aboriginal traditional knowledge may be considered in conducting an EA"
What are the Benefits of involving the Public? (4) - Credibility
CREDIBILITY ~Ensure public understands the Project ~Potential environmental effects ~Costs and benefits ~Accounting for stakeholder/governmental views may result in better support for project
SARA "Safety Net" - different levels of protection
Discretionary federal action if Environment Canada feels province or territory is not doing enough to protect the species.
EA Decision VS Project Decision
EA decision is serparate from (but related to ) a project decision What's the difference? ~EA DECISION: determine whether the RA will provide federal SUPPORT that would permit project to go ahead. ~PROJECT DECISION determine whether the project will PROCEED. This is more political.
Environmental Effects
EA should focus potential effects on any of the FUNCTIONS, COMPONENTS, and LINKAGES of the wetland ecosystems The extent, both spatial and temporal and the degree of the effects should be outline The landscape/ecosystem context - emphasis in federal guidelines
Federal and Provincial Classification Systems: Federal VS Provincial
Federal: -The Canadian Wetland Classification System Provincial: (AB) -Stewart and Kantrud Wetland Classification (1971) [depended on vegetation zones - relies on plant types] -Used for prairie-pothole region
Why include TEK?
Fills knowledge gaps: -in ecological information that western science alone cannot fill -true for North Canada
Alberta EA and Wetland Conservation
Follow whatever provincial/municipal wetland guides are available (often in development) = the use federal wetland guide as default Exempt activities such as drilling oil, gas wells -follow ERCB Guide 56 -Checklist for operators to provide necessary information for their application-include any affect water bodies -setback distances > 100 m from a wetland
Alberta Oil Sands Region
Guideline for Wetland Establishement on Reclaimed Oil Sand Leases (2007) There is guidelines out there
Meaningful Public Participation KEY ELEMENTS (7)
Guidelines from CEA: 1: Early Notification about meetings 2: Easy Access to Information - Able to participate effectively and timely manner 3: Information Sharing - All information technical/societal needs 4: Respect for Community and Cultural Values 5: Opportunity to Evaluate Information and Respond - Adequate time to respond to proposals and decisions 6: Interacting Participation - PP Program should provide for levels of public involvement consistent with the level of public interest 7: Flexibility -Be able to adapt PP program as issues arise
Wetlands and EA
Information wetlands should allow for determination of BASELINE CONDITIONS FUNCTIONS and VALUES and the EFFECTIVENESS of MITIGATION strategies
What should a PP have? CLEAR OBJECTIVES
Interested parties/stakeholders need to know WHY they are being consulted WHAT information will be considering HOW will that information be USED in the EA process
The Decision
It is where the RA must finally conclude whether there is a LIKELIHOOD OF SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS. RA determines what course of action must be taken (ex. will it proved FEDERAL SUPPORT for the project to go ahead or not)
What are the Benefits of involving the Public? (6) - Local Knowledge
LOCAL Knowledge ~past history of the site ~knowledge of local environment ~natural cycles of key species or VECs ~Effects of similar projects in area or elsewhere ~Values of community ~Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK*)
Wetland defined:
Land that is saturated with water long enough to promote wetland or aquatic processes as indicated by: 1) poorly drained soils 2) hydrophytic vegetation eg Carex spp Typha spp Scirpus spp.
What are Mitigation Monitoring Plans?
MMP are plans prepared by the proponent to ensure mitigation measures are IMPLEMENTED effectively and on schedule MMPs are often referred to as ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN (EPP) or ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (EMP)
When is a FUP Appropriate?
May be warranted if Project is: 1) Environmentally sensitive 2) High Public Concern 3) Mitigation measures require verification 4) Cumulative effects (contentious - who's responsible?) 5)UNCERTAINTY regarding effects!
Monitoring VS FUP: next two cards
Monitoring on its own DOES NOT = FUP Must verify or report on accuracy of predictions or mitigation
What are Federal Lands?
National Parks Airports Native Reserves Military Bases
Wetland Guideline Overriding Principle
No Net Loss
Defining Levels of Public Involvement - CONSULT
Obtain PUBLIC INPUT on analysis/interpretation/decisions
Defining Levels of Public Involvement - COLLABORATE
PARTNER with public to find solutions/alternatives during process
Defining Levels of Public Involvement - INFORM
PROVIDE INFORMATION so public understands issues and options
Maintaining the Registry
PUBLIC NOTICES to participate in an EA process must be posted on the Registry's Web Page.
RA Considerations - what should be asked?
Prior to making the EA decision the RA should ask: -Have all requirements under CEAA been addressed? -Has all relevant information been considered? (ex. Public Comments, First nations) And, is there a need to COORDINATE the decision-making process ~(ex. Federal Coordination) ~Federal-Provinicial Process ( harmonization agreements, need only to do one environmental assessment)
What should a PP have? ADEQUATE REVIEW TIME
Public needs appropriate time to READ AND EVALUATE the information provided ~ the larger the project - the more time Adequate notification and time to respond
What should a PP have? APPROPRIATE INFORMATION
Public response will vary according to HOW the information is PRESENTED. Try to provide information PRIOR to participation opportunity Ensure it is UNDERSTANDABLE and provided in an APPROPRIATE FORMAT and LANGUAGE
Who makes the EA Decision?
RA - RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY The EA decision cannot be delegated - can't give it off to anyone.
Registry Vs Public Participation (PP)
REGISTRY provides ACCESS to EA information, but is NOT considered PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
3 Schedules - What do they mean?
Schedule 1: OFFICIAL LIST of species at Risk, this is the one you should pay the most attention to. Schedule 2: Backlog - previously assessed by COSEWIC, and ALL STATUS. Basically this is the waiting list for Cabinet Schedule 3: Backlog - previous assed by COSEWIC, SPECIAL CONCERN. Schedule 2 and 3 will be eliminated - governments are slow.
General Prohibitions under SARA - 32 & 33
Sections 32 and 33 prohibits: -KILLING and HARASSMENT/disturb of individual -POSSESSION and COLLECTION of individuals -DAMAGE or DESTRUCTION residences
Species to look out for:
Sprague Pipit Swift Fox Woodland Caribou West-slope Cutthroat Trout Sage Grouse Western Blue Fall
When did SARA become a Law?
Stand alone legislation, became LAW in JUNE 2003 and enforceable in JUNE 2004 Species that are federally listed as threatened, endangered or extirpated and their critical habitat receive protection.
Gaps in Baseline Information
TEK can provide valuable information where historical data are lacking EX herring pop crash in 1993 following 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound Alaska -was it a human or artificial impact Bowhead whale census and migration patterns in 1970s, affecting first nations communities - too few #'s according to FEDS, but aboriginal knew where to count that there were more
Planning Approach - What should a PP have?
The PP Program needs to have: 1: Clear objectives 2: Appropriate Information 3: Adequate Review Time 4: Feedback on how input was used
Property Rights and Wetlands
The WATER in a wetland is owned by the provincial Crown as define in the Water Act The SURROUNDING LAND may be privately owned or held by another jurisdiction Creates some uncertainties regarding responsibilities
Objectives of Wetland Guideline
The federal policy's objective is to promote the conservation of Canada's wetlands to sustain their ecological and socio-economic functions, now and in the future
What should a PP have? FEEDBACK
The public deserves meaningful feedback from the Proponent/RA regarding HOW THEIR INPUT was used in DETERMINING THE EA DECISION ~ how much weight does the public have
Managing Time and Cost
There always are cost and time constraints associated with EA projects PARTICIPANT FUNDING is usually available for most large EA projects -money to compensate people for traveling to workshops -money to cover costs of meetings (food, accommodation, etc.)
RA Responsibility
To ensure an adequate follow-up program is implemented (if required) Not all programs are required for follow up - ex. small projects
Reclamation Certificate
Under EPEA and provincial Water Act Wetlands must be reclaimed However, criteria that may be used to evaluate reclamation success are not yet defined for wetlands
Potential Adverse Effects
Vegetation Removal Sedimentation Soil Compaction Contamination Nutrient Loading Salinization Acidification Fragmentation
Defining Levels of Public Involvement - INVOLVE
WORK WITH THE PUBLIC DURING PROCESS to ensure concerns are considered
FUP repsonds to:
Were the mitigation measures effective?
Compliance Monitoring responds to:
Were the mitigation measures implemented?
Responsibility
Wetland conservation is a shared Responsibility: Federal - international conventions Provincial Territorial Municipal Example of Federal plans: -Ramsar Convention -N American Waterfowl Plan -Federal jurisdiction (eg. migratory birds and DFO)
Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) FEDERAL Guidelines:
Wetlands Environmental ASsessment Guideline wetkit.net (tools for working with wetlands in Canada)
Wetland types:
Wetlands include: Bogs Fens Marshes Swamps Shallow waters (<2 m deep) as defined by the Canadian Wetland Classification System
TEK defined:
a cumulative body of knowledge and beliefs, handed down through generations by CULTURAL TRANSMISSION about the relationships of living beings (including humans) with one another and with their environment
Components of FUP: AUDITING
comparison of observations with pre-determine criteria.
Components of FUP: MONITORING
data collection over time designed to detect change, relative to baseline conditions
WHAT is a Follow up program? (2)
defined by CEAA as a means for: 1: VERIFYING THE ACCURACY of the predictions made in the EA 2: determining the EFFECTIVENESS OF ANY MITIGATION MEASURES
Levels of Public Involvement (4)
increased level of public involvement results in less RA control Lower - Inform Low - Consult Med - Involve High - Collaborate partnerships
TEK features
knowledge of ecological ecological principles: -ecological succession and interrelatedness of all components of the environment? Sustainable harvesting of resources, esp. plants -EG ethnobotany
Registry has timelines
maintained for a period of NO LESS THAN 14 DAYS before an EA decision is made ~notice of commencement ~Description of scope of Project ~description of factors to be considered (ex. issues) ~public comments ~Won't give enough time for the public to respond to the report
If the RA concludes that....
then the Ra...
EA DECISION...
to FOLLOW UP program
