Review of Canadian Federal Environmental Assessment Processes Presentation to Expert Panel Fredericton, NB – October 11, 2016 Scott Kidd
Introduction Talk about: 1. Briefly, why we need a new federal EA process. 2. Endorsement of principles to move forward. 3. Discuss EA of Sisson tungsten and molybdenum mine. • How things could have been done differently.
Why a new EA process is needed • Present process not working, e.g.: – Polarization – No wins for decision-makers – Court challenges
• Project EAs have become forums for policy debate. • Focus has become choosing least-worst option (nominally) vs. choosing best option.
Path forward • Canadian EA processes should be about operationalizing sustainability. – Learning, discussing, and choosing best option
• Roots of reformed EA process should be:
– WCEL. 2016. Twelve Pillars of a Next-Generation Environmental Assessment Regime. http://wcel.org/resources/environmental-law-
alert/twelve-pillars-%E2%80%9Cnext-generation%E2%80%9Dcanadian-environmental-assessment.
– Gibson, Doelle, Sinclair. 2016. Fulfilling the promise: Basic components of next generation environmental assessment. JELP 29: 251.
• Measure decisions against legislated sustainability criteria.
– For example of criteria, see: Joint Review Panel. 2011. Lower Churchill Hydroelectric Generation Project. CEAA Reference No. 07-05-26178 at Appendix 8. http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2011/ec/En106-101-2011eng.pdf.
WCEL’s Twelve Pillars of NextGeneration EA 1. Sustainability as a core objective 2. Integrated, tiered assessments starting at the strategic and regional levels 3. Cumulative effects done regionally 4. Collaboration and harmonization 5. Co-governance with Indigenous nations 6. Climate assessments to achieve Canada’s climate goals 7. Credibility, transparency and accountability throughout 8. Participation for the people 9. Transparent and accessible information flows 10. Ensuring sustainability after the assessment 11. Consideration of the best option from among a range of alternatives 12. Emphasis on learning
Sisson Mine Project, New Brunswick • Open pit, 30,000 tonnes/day tungsten and molybdenum mine. • Located 60 km NW of Fredericton. • Located in headwaters of Nashwaak River (tributary of Saint John River). – Nashwaak River is major spawning waterbody for remaining SJR Atlantic salmon.
• Needs 751 ha tailings pond with 8.8 km long, 80 metre high dam. • Needs water treatment “in perpetuity”.
Sisson Mine Project, New Brunswick • Comp Study (CS) under old CEAA. – CS started July 25, 2011 – CS report released April 15, 2016 – No cabinet decision yet – http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/detailseng.cfm?evaluation=63169
• Provincial EA (comprehensive = full EA). – Registered September 5, 2008 – EA approval December 3, 2015 (40 conditions)
• Joint terms of reference, one EIA report.
Sisson Mine Project, New Brunswick Several big problems with federal EA of project: 1. No assessment of project’s contribution to sustainability. 2. True impacts of project still unknown. 3. Poor public participation opportunities. 4. Federal reliance on provincial conditions. 5. CS Report completed prior to accommodation for “significant impacts” to Maliseet land use.
No assessment of Sisson Mine project’s contribution to sustainability EA of project using CEAA No broad discussion about whether potential loss of Atlantic salmon is acceptable.
Other tailings disposable options summarily dismissed as too expensive; unknown.
WCEL #1: Sustainability as a core objective Sustainability criteria would be established prior to assessment, e.g., no loss of Atlantic salmon. All project options that promote sustainability would be fully explored.
True impacts of Sisson Mine project still unknown EA of project using CEAA EIS still incomplete. • Leading to flawed CS Report. Missing information includes: • potential acid mine drainage • design of tailings pond/dam • hydrogeology/seepage rates • downstream water quality • how wastewater will be treated in perpetuity • Incomplete assessment of impacts of failure of tailings pond/dam
WCEL #1: Sustainability as a core objective Assessing sustainability of a project requires complete information. [How under any EA process an incomplete EIS can be permitted is a mystery.]
Poor public participation opportunities for Sisson Mine project 45 days to review 30,000 page EIS.
WCEL #8: Participation for the people Meaningful public participation is not rushed.
Whether public comments addressed unclear (including from NB public hearing).
How public comments received/considered is clear.
Govt. information requests not on CEAA website.
Important information is readily available.
No amended EIS with trackable changes.
Public participation is demonstrably valued.
EA of project using CEAA
Federal reliance on provincial conditions for Sisson Mine project EA of project using CEAA
NB provincial government supported mine during election. • Bias
WCEL #7: Credibility, transparency and accountability throughout Assessments are conducted by an independent, impartial body.
Indigenous rights not accommodated for Sisson Mine project EA of project using CEAA “The Agency concludes that the Sisson Project is likely to result in significant adverse environmental effects on the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by Maliseet First Nations.” (CS Report p. 121) • Accommodations negotiations not complete • Rest of project okay to Agency
WCEL #6: Co-governance with Indigenous Nations Free, prior and informed consent. Reconciliation would be furthered. • Non-indigenous people would not be required to choose between supporting project and Indigenous rights.
Conclusion • One last concern: Let’s not lose sight of assessing small projects and their cumulative impacts. • Let’s take this opportunity to be bold with environmental assessment in Canada! • Thank you for your time this afternoon.
