Ministry Review of the Class Environmental Assessment for Minor … · 2014-11-25 · Ministry Review of the Class Environmental Assessment for Minor Transmission Facilities . Review

Ministry Review of the Class Environmental Assessment for Minor Transmission Facilities Review prepared pursuant to subsection 7(1) of the Environmental Assessment Act, R.S.O 1990 Province of Ontario by the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, Environmental Approvals Branch

NEED MORE INFORMATION?

Public Record Locations

The public record for the Class Environmental Assessment for Minor Transmission Facilities (Class EA) can be reviewed during normal business hours at the following Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change office:

Environmental Approvals Branch 2 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A

Toronto, ON M4V 1L5 Tel: 416-314-8001/1-800-461-6290

Fax: 416-314-8452 The Ministry Review, Class EA and Notice of Completion are also available at the following locations: Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Central Region 5775 Yonge Street, 8th Floor Toronto, ON M2M 4J1 416-326-6700/1-800-810-8048

Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Eastern Region 1259 Gardiners Road, Unit 3 Kingston, ON K7P 3J6 613-549-4000/1-800-267-0974

Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Northern Region 435 James Street South, Suite 331 Thunder Bay, ON P7E 6S7 807-475-1205/1-800-875-7772

Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Southwestern Region 733 Exeter Road, 2nd Floor London, ON N6E 1L3 519-873-5000/1-800-265-7672

Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change West Central Region 119 King Street West, 12th Floor Hamilton, ON L8P 4Y7 905-521-7640/1-800-668-4557

Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Barrie District Office 54 Cedar Pointe Drive, Unit 1203 Barrie, ON L4N 5R7 705-739-6441/1-800-890-8511

Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Ottawa District Office 2430 Don Reid Drive Ottawa, ON K1H 1E1 613-521-3450/1-800-860-2195

Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Peterborough District Office 300 Water Street, 2nd Floor Peterborough, ON K9J 8M5 705-755-4300/1-800-558-0595

Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Sudbury District Office 199 Larch Street, Suite 1101 Sudbury, ON P3E 5P9 705-564-3237/1-800-890-8516

This Review is subject to the provisions of Ontario Regulation 616/98 which sets out a deadline for the completion of this document. The deadline for the completion of the Ministry Review was August 15, 2014. This paragraph and the giving of the Notice of Completion are the notices required by subsection 7(3) of the Environmental Assessment Act. The Ministry Review documents the ministry’s evaluation of the Class EA and takes the comments of the government agencies, the public and Aboriginal communities into consideration. Cette publication est disponible en français. © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2014 PIBS 9771e

Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................ 1 1. Class Environmental Assessment Process ........................................... 2

1.1 Terms of Reference ......................................................................... 3 1.2 Class Environmental Assessment ................................................... 4 1.3 Ministry Review ............................................................................... 4

2. The Proposed Class Environmental Assessment ................................. 5 2.1 Description ...................................................................................... 5 2.2 Evaluation of the Class Environmental Assessment........................ 8

2.2.1 The Class of Undertakings .................................................. 8 2.2.2 Reasons for Using a Class Environmental Assessment ...... 9 2.2.3 Similarities and Differences among Undertakings ............... 9 2.2.4 Environmental Effects of Activities in the Class EA ........... 10 2.2.5 Consultation Process for Class EA Projects ...................... 10 2.2.6 Methods for Evaluating and Implementing Activities.......... 12

3. Results of the Ministry Review ............................................................. 13 3.1 Conformance with ToR and EAA ................................................... 13 3.2 Consultation .................................................................................. 14 3.3 Key Issues ..................................................................................... 20

4. Summary of the Ministry Review .......................................................... 24 5. What Happens Now? ............................................................................. 25

5.1 Modifying or Amending the Class EA ............................................ 26 List of Appendices Appendix A Environmental Assessment Act Requirements Appendix B Submissions Received During the Initial Comment Period List of Tables Table 1 Government Review Team Comment Summary Table Table 2 Aboriginal Communities Comment Summary Table

Review of the Class Environmental Assessment for Minor Transmission Facilities

August 2014 1

Executive Summary WHO Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One)

WHAT Ministry Review of the proposed Class Environmental

Assessment for Minor Transmission Facilities.

WHEN Class EA Submitted: December 13, 2013 First Inspection Period: December 13, 2013 to February 7, 2014 Amended Class EA Submitted: June 30, 2014 Ministry Review Comment Period: September 15, 2014 to October 24, 2014

WHERE The Class EA will apply to minor transmission facility activities across the province.

WHY To update the Class EA to comply with the 2014 Code of Practice for Preparing, Reviewing and Using Class Environmental Assessments in Ontario, Ontario Regulation 116/01 (Electricity Projects), and to include references to private sector transmission proponents due to the opening of the electricity market to competition.

CONCLUSIONS The Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change has concluded that the applicant has prepared the Class EA in accordance with the approved Terms of Reference and the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act.


August 2014 2

1. Class Environmental Assessment Process A Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) is a proponent driven planning process designed to incorporate the consideration of the environment into decision-making by assessing the effects of an undertaking on the environment. In Ontario, the Environmental Assessment Act (EAA) sets out the general contents for the preparation of a Class EA, as well as the ministry’s evaluation process. For those proponents and undertakings subject to the EAA, approval under the EAA is required before the undertaking can proceed.

Applicants preparing a Class EA are required to identify specific categories and sub-categories of undertakings to which the Class EA would apply, and provide a planning process for evaluating the environmental effects of each individual undertaking. The Class EA may require proponents to consider actions to prevent, change, mitigate or remedy potential environmental effects. When preparing a Class EA, the applicant must consult with interested stakeholders including government agencies, public, non-governmental organisations as well as Aboriginal communities and organisations.

A Class EA submitted for approval under the EAA differs from a project-specific environmental assessment (EA). The Class EA is unique because it receives approval for a planning process for an entire class of projects. This allows each project in the class to be carried out in accordance with the requirements and planning process set out in the Class EA.

Once the Class EA is approved, proponents do not need to apply for approval under the EAA for each individual project provided they follow the procedures in the Class EA. However, proponents are required to monitor implementation and effectiveness of the Class EA and compliance with the EAA approval.

When following an approved Class EA, proponents of individual projects within the class of undertakings address a wide range of potential effects on the natural, social, cultural and economic environments to ensure the protection, conservation and wise management of the environment. A Class EA provides the framework for a proponent to determine, on the basis of the environmental effects, if an undertaking should proceed, and if so, how any environmental effects can be managed.

Class EA Process

ToR Approval ↓

Class EA Preparation ↓

Class EA Submission ↓

Class EA Comment Period ↓

MMiinniissttrryy RReevviieeww ↓

Review Comment Period ↓

Minister’s Decision


August 2014 3

1.1 Terms of Reference

The first version of the Class EA was approved under the EAA on December 27, 1980. It has been subsequently revised six times, with the previous version having been approved on April 23, 1992. In 1996, Hydro One submitted an amended Class EA to the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC, previously the Ministry of the Environment) for review and approval. The MOECC review of Hydro One’s 1996 submission was put on hold due to the opening of the electricity market to competition and the new Ontario Regulation 116/01 (Electricity Projects Regulation). Hydro One determined that the existing Class EA would need to be replaced and significant amendments to the existing Class EA would be required for the following reasons:

• To ensure consistency with the Electricity Projects Regulation; • To comply with the MOECC’s Code of Practice for Preparing, Reviewing

and Using Class Environmental Assessments in Ontario (Code of Practice); and

• The most recent version of the Class EA refers to “Ontario Hydro” (now Hydro One Networks Inc.) as the sole proponent. As a result of the Electricity Projects Regulation, all applicable private and public transmission projects are subject to this Class EA. The Class EA therefore needs to be amended to reflect its applicability to all transmission project proponents.

Because of the extensive nature of the amendments required for the Class EA to meet the three above requirements, Hydro One opted to treat the amendments to the Class EA as a new Class EA that was being prepared—instead of following the process for making amendments to the existing Class EA.

Preparing a new Class EA is a two-step application to the MOECC. The first step requires the applicant to prepare and submit a Terms of Reference (ToR) for review and decision. The ToR is the work plan or framework for how the Class EA will be prepared.

In May 2003, Hydro One submitted a ToR to amend its Class EA. On February 17, 2004, the Minister approved the ToR. The ToR sets out the issues and opportunities to be considered in amending the Class EA, and a range of proposed amendments. The ToR established the scope and purpose for the Class EA and it outlined the content of the Class EA using the requirements of the EAA and the MOECC’s standards for all Class EAs as the starting point. The ToR also outlined a consultation plan for developing the Class EA.


August 2014 4

1.2 Class Environmental Assessment

Once the ToR is approved by the Minister, the applicant can proceed to the second step of the Class EA process and prepare the Class EA. The Class EA must be prepared in accordance with the approved ToR and the requirements of the EAA. Once the applicant has prepared the proposed Class EA, including consultation, the proposed Class EA is submitted to the MOECC for review and approval.

On December 13, 2013, Hydro One submitted the Class EA to the MOECC for decision. The Class EA was made available for public inspection and comment for a seven-week period which ended on February 7, 2014. The Government Review Team (GRT), including federal, provincial and local agencies reviewed the Class EA to ensure that the information and conclusions of the Class EA were valid, based on their agencies’ mandates. The public, Aboriginal communities and interested organizations also had an opportunity to review the Class EA and submit their comments to the MOECC. All comments received by the MOECC are considered by the Minister before a decision is made about the Class EA, including comments and concerns related to implementing projects using the Class EA.

During this inspection period, comments were submitted by the GRT and Aboriginal communities. No comments were received from the public or other stakeholders. The comments were for the most part suggestions for improvement in the following areas: clarifications and minor editorial comments; categorizing emergency rehabilitation activities; consultation and documentation requirements; the appropriateness of screening criteria for identifying potential impacts on cultural heritage resources; and planning process steps. Additional time was provided to Hydro One in order to hold discussions and respond to the comments received by making revisions to the Class EA. Hydro One provided the MOECC with a revised Class EA on June 30, 2014.

1.3 Ministry Review

The EAA requires the MOECC to prepare a review of the Class EA, known simply as the Ministry Review. The Ministry Review is the MOECC’s evaluation of the Class EA. The purpose of the Ministry Review is to determine if the Class EA has been prepared in accordance with the approved ToR and therefore meets the requirements of the EAA and whether the evaluation process in the Class EA is sufficient to allow the Minister to make a decision about the Class EA.

The Ministry Review outlines whether the information contained in the Class EA supports the recommendations and conclusions for the proposed class of undertakings. MOECC staff, with input from the GRT, evaluates how well the


August 2014 5

proponent has consulted with others and ensures that the proponent has provided clear and complete documentation of such consultations. The Ministry Review also provides an overview and analysis of the public, GRT and Aboriginal community comments on the Class EA.

The MOECC considers the conclusions of the Ministry Review when making a decision; the Ministry Review itself is not the decision making mechanism. The Minister’s decision will be made following the end of the five-week Review comment period. The Minister’s decision is subject to the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council.

The Ministry Review comment period allows the GRT, the public and Aboriginal communities to see how their comments on the Class EA have been considered. During the Ministry Review comment period, anyone can submit comments on the Class EA, and the Ministry Review. In addition, anyone can request that the Minister refer the Class EA, or any matter relating to the Class EA, to the Environmental Review Tribunal for a hearing if they believe that there are significant outstanding environmental effects that the Class EA has not addressed. Requests for a hearing can only be made during this comment period. The Minister will consider any requests and determine if a hearing is necessary.

On December 13, 2013, a Notice of Completion of the Class EA was posted on the MOECC’s EA activities website and was published in the Globe and Mail. An information notice was also published by the MOECC on the Environmental Bill of Rights Environmental Registry. The Ministry Review and Class EA will also be made available for viewing at the offices of the MOECC. The Notice of Completion indicates that this Review has been completed and is available for a five-week comment period from September 15, 2014 to October 24, 2014. Copies of the Ministry Review have been placed in the same public record locations where the Class EA was available during the initial comment period, and copies have been distributed to the GRT members and potentially affected or interested Aboriginal communities. A copy of the Class EA will also be made available on the MOECC’s EA Activities website and at the public record locations.

2. The Proposed Class Environmental Assessment

2.1 Description

The largest subsidiary of Hydro One Incorporated, Hydro One Networks Inc. is a crown corporation that operates 97% of the high voltage transmission grid throughout Ontario and serves 1.3 million customers in rural areas across the province in its capacity as Ontario's largest distribution utility. Since before the


August 2014 6

original Class EA was approved in 1980, Hydro One (then Ontario Hydro) had been the only proponent for minor transmission projects subject to the Class EA. It was not until the opening of the electricity market and the enactment of the Electricity Projects Regulation in 2001-2002 that this situation changed, with other companies being able to undertake transmission projects in the Province of Ontario.

The Class EA has been written to be consistent with the Electricity Projects Regulation, the Code of Practice, and to be applicable to all transmission project proponents. The Class EA would replace the previous version, which was approved on April 23, 1992.

A Class EA sets out a standardized planning process which must be approved by the Minister and the Lieutenant Governor in Council for a group or class of undertakings. The class of activities is routinely carried out and has predictable environmental effects which can be readily managed. The activities that Hydro One is proposing to be covered by the Class EA fall within this description. Projects defined within a Class EA require no further approval under Section 5 of the EAA, conditional upon being planned according to the procedures set out in the Class EA document and not being subject to a Part II Order request (or “bump up”). All Class EAs include a Part II Order provision whereby any interested stakeholder or member of the public may request that the Minister order that an individual EA be carried out for a particular project. The Class EA includes a description of different project categories that are based upon the potential for effects on all aspects as described in the EAA. The categories are defined in the Electricity Projects Regulation and include: • Category A: Transmission projects not subject to the EAA; • Category B: Transmission projects subject to the Class EA that are not

associated with Category B generation facilities; and • Category C: Transmission projects requiring an individual EA. Only Category B projects are subject to the Class EA. Category B projects are defined as: • Minor transmission lines greater than 2 kilometres in length and:

o Having a nominal capacity of 115 kilovolts (kV); or, o Having a nominal capacity higher than 115 kV and less than 500 kV.

• Replacement of poles/towers and/or changes in the right-of-way of existing transmission lines having a nominal capacity of equal to or greater than 115 kV and less than 500 kV;

• Upgrading or modifying transmission lines such that the transmission line has a nominal capacity of equal to or greater than 115 kV and less than 500 kV;


August 2014 7

• Transmission stations (including telecommunication stations) equal to or greater than 115 kV and less than 500 kV; or

• Modifying or expanding a transmission station such that the modified station has a nominal capacity of equal to or greater than 115 kV and less than 500 kV.

The Class EA includes a screening process that does not require the Class EA process to be followed for Category B projects that will have negligible net environmental effects and have not had any issues raised by interested or potentially affected parties. The screening process involves sixteen screening criteria, all of which must be met for a project to qualify for being screened out of the Class EA process. The Class EA also describes the consultation and documentation requirements for projects subject to the Class EA process and those eligible for the screening process. The Class EA also states that if during the screening process (which requires consultation with the public and Aboriginal communities) an interested or affected party identifies potential direct or indirect effects that cannot be addressed, then the proponent will subject the project to the Class EA process. The Class EA includes a description of administrative processes for monitoring environmental effects and the effectiveness of the Class EA in delivering an efficient planning process and protecting the environment, for amending the document, and a process for Part II Order requests. The Class EA includes a compliance monitoring and reporting program to be undertaken: by proponents regarding the status of projects that they have carried out under the Class EA; and by the applicant (Hydro One) regarding the effectiveness of the Class EA in being an efficient planning process and in remaining compliant with the EAA and other applicable legislation. The goals of the monitoring program include evaluating compliance with the provisions of the Class EA and identifying opportunities for continuous improvement. The compliance monitoring program includes the development of annual compliance reports that will be prepared and submitted to the MOECC for review.

The Class EA describes a process for making both major and minor amendments to the document, and requires a rationale for why an amendment to the document is being requested and identifies who can bring amendments forward to the Director of the Environmental Approvals Branch (Director) of the MOECC. The Class EA also requires that Hydro One undertake a review of its document and submit it to the Director every five years to evaluate the effectiveness of the environmental protection planning of the Class EA and compliance with the EAA approval.

Where an activity undertaken by a proponent and subject to the EAA may potentially affect the environment, such activity can be elevated to an individual EA by way of a Part II Order request made by the Minister. The Class EA


August 2014 8

describes the process to make a request to the Minister for an activity and how it will be considered by the MOECC and the Minister when making his/her decision.

2.2 Evaluation of the Class Environmental Assessment

2.2.1 The Class of Undertakings

The projects subject to the Class EA are the same as those included in the Electricity Projects Regulation which, by definition are expected to have known and mitigable environmental effects (Category B), as outlined in Section 2.1. The project list is also consistent with the previous versions of the Class EA and accurately captures the range of projects undertaken by the industry on a regular basis. The Class EA also allows for a strict process to screen out Category B projects which would have negligible net environmental effects. These screened-out projects would not be subject to the Class EA process unless an interested or affected party raises an issue that cannot be addressed, in which case the project would be subject to the full Class EA process. Hydro One provides examples of undertakings that would generally be screened out, including: • Replacement, relocation and/or addition of wood pole structures or steel

transmission structures along existing right-of-ways; • Construction of overhead transmission lines between 2 and 4 km in length; • Underground transmission lines in urban areas; • Construction of a 115 kV transmission station; • Land acquisition of no more than four hectares for the modification of an

existing transmission station; and • Construction of telecommunication stations for the purpose of security and

monitoring of the electricity transmission system. Projects requiring an individual EA are identified in the Electricity Projects Regulation as Category C projects—those subject to the EAA that are not Category B projects. Conclusion: Hydro One has provided a clear description of the class of undertakings.


August 2014 9

2.2.2 Reasons for Using a Class Environmental Assessment

The Class EA has been in place since 1980 and applies to a range of undertakings that are regularly implemented across the province. The Class EA provides a standardized and effective assessment process to meet the planning needs of proponents and the requirements of the EAA. Hydro One determined that the existing Class EA would need to be replaced and significant amendments to the Class EA would be required to be consistent with the Electricity Projects Regulation and to be applicable to all transmission project proponents. Because of the extensive nature of the amendments required for the Class EA to meet the above requirements, Hydro One opted to treat the amendments to the Class EA as a new Class EA that was being prepared—instead of following the process for making amendments to the existing Class EA. Preparing a new Class EA is a two-step application to the MOECC. The first step requires the applicant to prepare and submit a Terms of Reference (ToR) for review and decision. The ToR is the work plan or framework for how the Class EA will be prepared. In May 2003, Hydro One submitted a ToR to amend its Class EA. On February 17, 2004, the Minister approved the ToR. Conclusion: The MOECC is satisfied with Hydro One’s rationale for the use of and amendments to the Class EA.

2.2.3 Similarities and Differences among Undertakings

The similarities among undertakings are that all of the projects in the class involve environmental effects that are mitigable, predictable and that tend to be related to construction (because these projects involve minimal operational impacts); high-voltage facilities in the class all have similar safety and security risks that are known and mitigable; the projects are often routine in nature that relate to existing infrastructure (e.g., replacing wood pole structures or transmission tower structures, upgrading or modifying transmission lines, and modifying or expanding transmission stations), and all undertakings in the class share a common purpose—the provision of reliable power and/or connecting generation sources with customers through the transmission network. The differences among undertakings in the class will vary from each other depending on a variety of factors including: setting (rural or urban), new infrastructure or modifications to existing infrastructure, project length and


August 2014 10

footprint (e.g., length of transmission line or size of transmission station), operating voltage, and scope of impacts (e.g., proximity to natural features, impact on local flora and fauna, species at risk, local water table depth, etc.). Conclusion: Hydro One has provided a sufficient description of the nature of similarities and differences to be expected in activities in the Class EA.

2.2.4 Environmental Effects of Activities in the Class EA

The Class EA identifies in general terms that the environmental effects of activities in the class will vary from project to project based on the environmental setting and location. The proposed activities may occur within an undisturbed setting or they may occur within a previously disturbed site. The Class EA outlines the expected range of environmental effects, recognizing that a wide variety of agricultural, societal, and natural environmental elements may be affected by the projects covered under the Class EA. Forty-six environmental effects are presented in the Class EA to illustrate the range of potential impacts and environmental considerations, and include the following: impacts to agriculture, noise and vibration, archaeological resources, electric and magnetic fields, disturbance to traditional land used by First Nations and Métis communities, emissions, changes in natural physiography, impacts to surface water and groundwater features, impact on intake protection zones, soil contamination, loss of forested land, loss or fragmentation of habitat, and impacts on species at risk. These impacts will be assessed in accordance with the guidance provided by the Class EA. Mitigation measures for the expected range of environmental effects are presented in Appendix E of the Class EA. Conclusion: The Class EA identifies the general range of potential environmental effects of its proposed activities and recognizes the importance of mitigating the potential environmental effects.

2.2.5 Consultation Process for Class EA Projects

The Class EA provides guidance on how proponents are to consult with those who may be interested in or affected by an undertaking, including the public, municipalities, government agencies, and First Nations and Métis communities. The Class EA provides a flexible framework which can be adjusted based on interest in the undertaking and specifies minimum consultation and documentation requirements including the preparation of an Environmental Study Report for all projects that are not screened out. While class projects that are screened out do not require an Environmental Study Report, the proponent is


August 2014 11

required to advise the MOECC’s Director of the Environmental Approvals Branch and applicable Regional EA Coordinator of all projects that have been successfully screened out. The Class EA also describes the specific approach to consulting with Aboriginal communities and how it will be documented. Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 recognizes and affirms the existing Aboriginal and treaty rights of Aboriginal peoples. This requires the Crown to consult, and where appropriate accommodate, Aboriginal communities when it has knowledge of an existing or asserted Aboriginal or treaty right, and contemplates conduct that may adversely affect the right in question. For projects planned under the Class EA that have the potential to adversely impact Aboriginal or treaty rights, the Crown may use the Class EA as a vehicle to fulfill its consultation obligations with Aboriginal communities. The Class EA identifies that if the duty to consult arises, the Ministry of Energy, on behalf of the Crown, will identify the communities to consult and delegate to the proponent the procedural aspects of consultation, and may provide additional direction on consultation requirements. Key consultation principles are presented to guide the proponent’s approach to communication and consultation during the Class EA process and they include elements such as timeliness, transparency, clarity, respectful dialogue, ongoing opportunities for all interested parties to provide meaningful input, and full and fair consideration of all input received. In addition, the Class EA states that communications with interested or affected parties do not end upon completion of the Class EA process; provisions for subsequent communications with interested parties are also provided. A range of consultation activities are specified in the Class EA including mandatory notification points (at both commencement and completion of the Class EA process), as well as opportunities for the public, Aboriginal communities and government agencies to review project documentation. Consultation methods such as Public Information Centres and workshops are discussed, as are notification techniques such as newspaper advertisements, press releases, flyer delivery, direct mail, maintaining a project website, and social media. Conclusion: The Class EA provides an appropriate framework for proponents to use to ensure that adequate consultation occurs with the public, Aboriginal communities and government agencies.


August 2014 12

2.2.6 Methods for Evaluating and Implementing Activities

The Class EA provides a clear planning process and framework for the identification and evaluation of the proposed activity. The Class EA provides a clear definition of projects in the class (Category B transmission projects that are not associated with Category B generation facilities, as classified by the Electricity Projects Regulation) that allows for the identification of projects subject to the class. The Class EA provides a logical and detailed evaluation methodology which includes consideration of a range of environmental effects, and consultation requirements to engage interested parties and those potentially affected by the proposed undertaking by providing information and providing opportunities for input and comments. The Class EA also includes clear requirements on the content and format of reports and notices, as well as guidance for project implementation including adherence to commitments made in the Environmental Study Report, effects monitoring and implementation of mitigation measures. Conclusion: The Class EA provides a clear description of the process to be used to evaluate a proposed undertaking along with a discussion of project implementation.


August 2014 13

3. Results of the Ministry Review The Ministry Review provides the analysis of the Class EA. The Ministry Review is not intended to summarize the Class EA, nor present the information found in the Class EA. For information on the planning process, refer to the Class EA as it outlines how proponents will proceed through the planning process to address the requirements of the EAA.

As noted earlier, the Ministry Review does not make a decision about the Class EA. That is the decision of the Minister.

3.1 Conformance with ToR and EAA

The MOECC coordinated an analysis of the Class EA with the GRT that, in part, looked at whether the requirements of the ToR and EAA have been met.

Section 14(2) of the EAA outlines the required contents for a class environmental assessment, including: a description of the class of undertakings to which the class applies; the reasons for using a class environmental assessment; the similarities and differences to be expected among the undertakings in the class; the expected range of environmental effects that may result from proceeding with undertakings in the class, and their corresponding mitigation measures; the process for consulting with the public and persons who may be affected by the undertaking; and the evaluation method(s) for identifying the preferred and final design of an undertaking. Section 2.2 of this Ministry Review discusses how EAA these requirements have been satisfied by the Class EA.

In addition to the standard required contents of all Class EAs, the ToR identified that the Class EA would address additional matters including consideration of cultural heritage resources. Regarding requirements identified in the ToR, the Class EA: includes a screening criterion and environmental effects relating to impacts on cultural heritage resources; is consistent with the Electricity Projects Regulation regarding the categories of electricity projects; and is now applicable to all potential proponents.

The purpose of the Ministry Review is to determine whether:

• The proposed Class EA has met the requirements of the ToR and the EAA.

• There are any outstanding issues with the Class EA.

• The proposed Class EA will provide for a clear and transparent planning process.

Must haves in the proposed Class EA:

• The proposed Class EA must be prepared in accordance with the approved ToR.

• The proposed Class EA must include all the basic EAA information requirements.

• The proposed Class EA must demonstrate all the additional commitments in the ToR were met, including studies and the consultation process.


August 2014 14

Appendix A of this Ministry Review summarizes this analysis and identifies how the EAA and ToR requirements have been addressed in the Class EA.

Conclusion: The Class EA followed the framework set out in the ToR and demonstrated how the required components of the EAA have been met.

3.2 Consultation

One of the key requirements of the EAA is consultation completed during the preparation of the Class EA. This consultation is the responsibility of the proponent and must be undertaken prior to the submission of the proposed Class EA to the MOECC and in accordance with the consultation plan outlined in the ToR. The consultation plan included engaging with government agencies, members of the public, Aboriginal communities and organizations, local distribution companies, and other interested groups or individuals, each of which were provided information and granted opportunity for providing input at key stages during the preparation of the Class EA. Included with the submission of the Class EA was documentation of consultation undertaken by Hydro One with the public, GRT and Aboriginal communities and organizations. Hydro One provided a review and comment period on the draft Class EA from July 12, 2013 to August 26, 2013. This comment period on the draft Class EA was provided to the GRT, Aboriginal communities, local distribution companies and municipalities. Hydro One revised the document in an effort to address comments provided on the draft Class EA. The Class EA was submitted to the MOECC on December 13, 2013. This triggered the commencement of the First Inspection Period, a seven-week period during which the public and other interested parties are granted the opportunity to review and comment on the Class EA. Once the Class EA was submitted to the MOECC, additional MOECC-driven consultation was undertaken during and after the December 13, 2013 to February 7, 2014 comment period. This included direct notification to the GRT and Aboriginal communities, documentation made available at numerous MOECC offices, as well as posting on the Environmental Bill of Rights website and the MOECC’s EA Activities website. Interested parties were provided with the opportunity to review the Class EA and to submit comments to the MOECC on whether the requirements of the ToR had been met, and on the Class EA itself. All comments received by the MOECC during the Class EA comment

Section 5.1 of the EAA states: “When preparing proposed terms of reference and an

environmental assessment, the proponent shall consult with such persons as may be interested.”


August 2014 15

period were forwarded to Hydro One for a response. Hydro One provided a response to all parties that provided comments during the review period, and amended the Class EA to address a number of comments more directly. Unless otherwise indicated, no further comments were submitted to the MOECC after the response from Hydro One was provided. Summaries of all comments received along with Hydro One’s responses are included in Tables 1 and 2 of Appendix B of this Ministry Review. Government Review Team Hydro One employed the following efforts to solicit advice and input from government agencies, municipalities, local distribution companies, and other agencies:

• Direct notification of approval of the ToR and the Class EA; • Direct notification of opportunity to comment on the draft Class EA; • Posting notices on the Hydro One website; • Documentation available for viewing at the MOECC offices; • Meetings and discussions with government agencies; and • Posting notice in the Globe and Mail on December 13, 2013 for the First

Inspection Period

Conservation Ontario, the MOECC and the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS) provided comments on the draft Class EA. Hydro One made efforts to address all of these comments before submitting the Class EA to the MOECC. The comments and responses are provided in the Class EA Record of Consultation. During the First Inspection Period (December 13, 2013 to February 7, 2014), a number of municipalities and agencies stated that they were satisfied with the Class EA and had no comments, as listed in Appendix B of this Ministry Review. Comments were provided by the following government agencies:

• MOECC; • MTCS; • Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF); • Infrastructure Ontario; • Ministry of Energy; • Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs; • Ministry of Research and Innovation; • Conservation Ontario; and • MNDM.


August 2014 16

In general, municipalities and government agencies did not have significant concerns with the Class EA. Many comments asked that the Class EA provide additional information about certain topics (e.g., consultation requirements, Part II Order request submissions, and the screening process) or requested minor text revisions. Infrastructure Ontario and the MOECC’s Northern Region EA Coordinators asked for clarification regarding the Crown contact for the duty to consult with interested and potentially affected Aboriginal communities. The Class EA now identifies the Ministry of Energy as the Crown contact for this matter. MOECC’s Northern Region EA Coordinators noted that references to potential environmental effects seemed to be confined to effects to the natural environment, rather than the other aspects of “environment” as defined in the EAA (social, economic, cultural and built). The Class EA was revised such that Appendix A of the Class EA includes a definition of “environmental effects” that agrees with the definition of “environment” per the EAA, and the varied and extensive list of potential environmental effects and associated mitigation measures in Appendix E of the Class EA reflect the broader definition of “environment” to include natural, social, economic, built and cultural impacts. The MTCS requested additional text and edits largely relating to cultural heritage resources. Hydro One made the suggested changes to the Class EA. Government comments that required additional discussions and action following the First Inspection Period are discussed in Section 3.3 of this Ministry Review. The MTCS Culture Division and the MOECC also worked directly with Hydro One to provide detailed recommendations and identify specific modifications to the Class EA. A summary of the GRT’s comments, Hydro One’s responses, and the MOECC’s evaluation is provided in Table 1 of this Ministry Review. Some comments made by the GRT were addressed through responses, and in some cases Hydro One also revised the Class EA to further address concerns. The amended Class EA was submitted to the MOECC on June 30, 2014. Some comments raised by the MTCS Culture Division may require ongoing discussions with Hydro One to address more thoroughly. Key issues are discussed in more detail in Section 3.3 of this Ministry Review. Public Consultation

Hydro One used a variety of consultation methods to consult with the public which included:

• Opportunity to comment on the draft Class EA; • Posting notices on the Hydro One website; • Documentation available for viewing at the MOECC offices; and


August 2014 17

• Posting notice in the Globe and Mail on December 13, 2013 for the First Inspection Period.

No public comments were received during the draft Class EA comment period or the First Inspection Period.

Aboriginal Community Consultation Hydro One sought input from all Aboriginal communities and Métis organizations across Ontario.

Hydro One employed the following efforts to solicit advice and input:

• Direct notification of approval of the ToR; • Direct notification of opportunity to

comment on the draft Class EA; • Hydro One held five information sessions

with interested Aboriginal communities: o Sault Ste. Marie – August 24, 2012

(19th Annual Assembly of the Métis Nation of Ontario, with 66 people who attended the Hydro One Class EA workshop);

o Toronto – October 23, 2012 (attended by representatives from seven Aboriginal communities);

o Thunder Bay – November 21, 2012 (attended by representatives from eight Aboriginal communities);

o Timmins – December 5, 2012 (attended by representatives from six Aboriginal communities); and

o Sudbury – January 16, 2013 (attended by representatives from five Aboriginal communities).

Comments on the draft Class EA were provided by one community, and Hydro One responded directly to address these concerns. The comments and responses are provided in the Record of Consultation. Hydro One took into account the input provided by written submission and in the five Aboriginal community information sessions when finalizing the Class EA prior to submission to the MOECC. On August 21, 2013, Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation provided comments on the draft Class EA, expressing its concerns that the Class EA will infringe upon its rights title and interests. On September 30, 2013, Hydro One replied to the new Chief of Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation, clarifying that Class EA does not change consultation requirements as they pertain to Aboriginal and treaty rights and that it is not related to the provision of land and legal instruments over territory, but rather that its purpose is to provide direction to transmission utilities on conducting environmental assessments for specific small-scale projects under

Aboriginal rights stem from practices, customs or traditions which are integral to the distinctive culture of the Aboriginal community claiming the right. Treaty rights stem from the signing of treaties by Aboriginal peoples with the Crown. Aboriginal rights and treaty rights are protected by Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.


August 2014 18

the EAA. The comments and response are provided in the Record of Consultation. No further comments have been provided by Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation to Hydro One or to the MOECC regarding the Class EA. During the seven-week First Inspection Period, the following communities provided comments on the Class EA:

• Chippewas of Georgina Island; • Historic Saugeen Métis; • Red Sky Métis Independent Nation; and • Sand Point First Nation.

The Chippewas of Georgina Island stated their support for any other First Nation that has concerns with the Class EA, and asked for an extension to the comment period. MOECC granted the Chippewas of Georgina Island an extension for comments until February 21, 2014. The MOECC contacted the community on February 12, 2014 to remind them of the opportunity for them to provide comments, but no comments were submitted. The Historic Saugeen Métis submitted several comments on the Class EA which included: affirming the importance of addressing cultural heritage resources and recognizing Métis communities; recognizing the importance of Crown consultation early in the screening process; to consider adding proponent accountability for consultation to the consultation principles listed in Section 4.1 of the Class EA; and to consider adding to the reporting requirements other accountability mechanisms such as service delivery priorities, participatory assessments, certification systems, participation agreements and memoranda of understanding. Hydro One responded to the requests for additional details on proponent accountability, stating that the manner(s) in which consultation is conducted and the adequacy of consultation are best defined on a case by case basis rather than through the Class EA document. No subsequent comments have been submitted by the Historic Saugeen Métis. The MOECC agrees on the importance of proponent accountability regarding consultation on undertakings subject to the class. While the Class EA does not list accountability as one of the consultation principles, the Class EA includes a number of requirements to ensure proponent accountability in the consultation process. These include: the consultation principles that include early and ongoing consultation; fair consideration by the proponent of all input received during the consultation process; and the incorporation of these comments into decision-making and project documentation. Additionally, the proponent is accountable for consulting and working with interested persons to satisfy their concerns. If a concern cannot be resolved by the proponent, the concerned party may request the proponent or Minister of the Environment and Climate Change to elevate the project to an individual EA (referred to as a Part II Order).


August 2014 19

The Red Sky Métis Independent Nation suggested minor edits to make the language in the document more inclusive of Métis communities and asked that the consultation protocols of all available and established First Nation and Métis communities be included in the Class EA. Hydro One revised the Class EA to ensure the language was more inclusive of Métis communities but did not include protocols in the document. The Class EA does support following specific communities’ consultation protocols by requiring proponents to directly engage all interested and potentially affected Aboriginal communities, which would involve due consideration of established and available consultation protocols for First Nation and Métis communities. Sand Point First Nation asked for edits relating to more specifically identifying First Nation governments for notification, First Nations and harvesting sites and traditional areas as part of the environmental inventory and screening criteria; adding reference to First Nations Land Use Plans as typical data sources in Appendix C of the Class EA; identifying that consultation with First Nations and municipalities be included in Appendix E of the Class EA for drinking water threats; and inquired if there is a process to appeal or re-propose amendments to the Class EA. Hydro One responded to these concerns by clarifying how the document addresses these concerns, and Sand Point First Nation has not provided any additional comments. The MOECC is satisfied that the current wording in the Class EA adequately captures the concerns at an adequate level of detail. The Class EA outlines consultation methods, notification techniques, a section specific to consultation with First Nations and Métis communities, and states that the proponent is to consult with interested and potentially affected parties (this would include those parties who may be impacted by activities related to the proposed undertaking which may also be considered to be drinking water threats, according to the applicable Source Protection Plan(s) for the project area). In Appendix C (Environmental Inventory) of the Class EA, First Nations and Métis lands, land use records, treaties and land claims are listed as typical data sources, as are Source Protection Plans—all of which are used by the proponent to help inform the Class EA process for a proposed undertaking. Section 5.1 of this Ministry Review states that that requests for amendments may be brought forward by First Nations and Métis communities, as well as by Hydro One, government ministries or agencies, members of the public, and other interested persons. Long Lake #58 First Nation indicated that it would provide comments and also indicated its interest in meeting with MOECC or Hydro One to discuss the Class EA. Hydro One met with Long Lake #58 First Nation on February 6, 2014 and sent a letter to the community as a follow-up to the meeting, thanking them for the opportunity to meet and discuss the Class EA, and granting the community until February 21, 2014 to submit comments. Long Lake #58 First Nation did not provide comments to MOECC.


August 2014 20

Biinjitiwaabik Zaaging Anishinaabek, Caldwell First Nation, and Northern Lights Métis Council indicated satisfaction with the Class EA and indicated that they had no further comments. The following communities indicated (by way of signed Acknowledgment of Receipt forms) that they would provide comments: Brunswick House First Nation, Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation, Sagamok Anishnawbek, Shawanaga First Nation, and Six Nations of the Grand River. The MOECC contacted these communities in January 2014 to remind them of the opportunity to provide comments, but no comments were submitted. The MOECC is satisfied that the comments raised by the Aboriginal communities during the comment period have been adequately addressed by Hydro One. The MOECC is satisfied that Hydro One recognizes that Aboriginal peoples have an important role in the planning process. All Aboriginal community comments, including Hydro One’s responses and the MOECC’s evaluation are provided in Table 2 of Appendix B of this Ministry Review. Conclusion: The Class EA has satisfied the consultation requirements of the ToR and is consistent with the MOECC’s expectations for Class EA documents and followed the guidance outlined in the Code of Practice for consultation. The documentation provided in support of the Class EA documents the consultation methods used by Hydro One to engage the GRT, the general public, interested stakeholders and Aboriginal communities during the development of the Class EA, setting out the issues and concerns raised and how they were addressed. The MOECC is satisfied with the level and type of consultation that occurred during the preparation of the Class EA and that Hydro One was responsive to addressing concerns and incorporated suggestions for improving the document.

3.3 Key Issues

There were some issues raised by the GRT that could not be quickly resolved by Hydro One to the commenting agency’s satisfaction. In an effort to work to resolving these issues, additional discussion (through correspondence and/or meetings) and action was required. These issues are discussed below. Cultural Heritage Resources The MTCS Culture Division provided comments on the Class EA related to potential impacts to cultural heritage resources. The key concerns raised by the MTCS that will be described in further detail are as follows:

• A request for a Heritage Management Process to develop a framework for developing a process to evaluate and assess potential impacts to cultural heritage resources; and


August 2014 21

• A request for a more detailed description of all environmental effects and mitigation for specific activities (counter-poise installations, conductor stringing and decommissioning).

Heritage Management Process The MTCS asked that a condition of approval be placed on the Class EA requiring that Hydro One complete a Heritage Management Process within one year. After further discussions with Hydro One and the MTCS, the MOECC is satisfied that the information provided in Appendix E of the Class EA offers sufficient guidance to proponents regarding mitigation of potential effects on cultural heritage resources to a reasonable level of detail for the purpose of the EAA. Nevertheless, the MOECC encouraged Hydro One to continue discussions with the MTCS to investigate the viability developing a more specific Heritage Management Process for the Class EA that would provide a more comprehensive framework to address project-specific construction and operational impacts to heritage features. Description of Environmental Effects and Mitigation for Specific Activities The MTCS asked for details to be provided in the Class EA about how evaluations of archaeological potential would be assessed and how cultural effects will be considered by all proponents for the following three types of projects in the class: counter-poise installations, conductor stringing, and decommissioning. Hydro One responded by stating that the Class EA presents a framework that is to be applicable to all projects in the class and that the three types of projects referenced above by the MTCS are matters that are defined during the planning stage for a proposed undertaking. The MOECC is satisfied that the Class EA provides a general framework that includes a requirement for proponents to adequately identify and assess a full range of environmental effects and mitigation, including those related to cultural and archaeological resources. In addition, this process can be refined on a case-by-case basis by the proponent in consultation with the MTCS to ensure that any effects are properly considered. Hydro One’s Construction Guidelines MOECC’s Northern Region EA Coordinators and MTCS noted that Hydro One’s Environmental Guidelines for the Construction and Maintenance of Transmission Facilities (Construction Guidelines) are referenced in the Class EA and commonly in initial notices for recent projects, and requested that these be publicly available. Since Hydro One considers the Construction Guidelines to be proprietary, it has instead revised the Class EA to more generally identify mitigation measures to meet the same intent of the Construction Guidelines but to be applicable to all proponents. Hydro One removed all reference to the


August 2014 22

Construction Guidelines and listed mitigation measures for typical environmental effects for projects in the class (Appendix E of the Class EA). Consistency with other Class EAs Some of the comments received by members of the GRT related to seeking to make amendments to the Class EA so that the process was more consistent with that of other Class EAs in Ontario. Amendment Process MOECC’s Environmental Assessment Services Section (EASS) requested that the consultation period for major amendments to the Class EA be changed from 30 days to 45 days—a time period that is in agreement with other Class EAs and that grants additional time for public consideration. Hydro One revised the Class EA to require a 45-day consultation period for major amendments. Delay in Project Implementation In accordance with other Class EAs and the Environmental Screening Process of the Electricity Projects Regulation, the EASS requested Hydro One revise the Class EA to state that if construction is not initiated within five years of the filing of the Statement of Completion, the Environmental Study Report will be reviewed by the proponent to determine if any changes are required. Hydro One agreed and the change is reflected in the Class EA. Review Period for Addendum to an Environmental Study Report In accordance with other Class EAs, MTCS asked that the review period for an Addendum to an Environmental Study Report be extended to 30 days (from the 15-day comment period in the previous Class EA). Hydro One agreed and the change is reflected in the Class EA. Part II Order Requests and Issues Resolution MOECC’s Northern Region EA Coordinators requested that the Class EA clarify that if a Part II Order request is submitted, the proponent and requester(s) can work together to resolve the issues prior to the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change making a decision on the Part II Order request. Additionally, MOECC’s Northern Region EA Coordinators asked that the document state that proponents have the option to voluntarily elevate a project to the individual EA process if there remain outstanding issues (of a significant enough nature to warrant this approach). Although the response provided by Hydro One does not address the issue, the issue is adequately addressed because Section 4.0 of the Class EA encourages proponents to seek to resolve issues that arise, the Class


August 2014 23

EA references the Code of Practice as guidance for issues management, and Section 3.4.4 of the Class EA states that the proponent may choose to voluntarily elevate the project to an individual EA. A number of Aboriginal communities provided comments on the Class EA and identified some key issues, including those regarding:

• The importance of cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and land use; • Proponent accountability in consultation; and • Effectively engaging with Aboriginal communities.

These issues are discussed based on each community’s specific concerns in Section 3.2 of this Ministry Review, including the actions taken by Hydro One to address the comments, to the satisfaction of the MOECC.

Conclusion Overall, the MOECC is satisfied that Hydro One has adequately responded to all Aboriginal communities’ and GRT comments through its responses and revisions to the Class EA.


August 2014 24

4. Summary of the Ministry Review The Ministry Review has explained the MOECC’s analysis of the Class EA. The Class EA clearly defines the class of projects, provides a framework for proponents to assess the potential environmental effects of minor transmission facility activities, and seek ways of reducing potential impacts to the extent possible. The Class EA also provides proponents with guidance on how to engage and address the concerns of the public, interested stakeholders, agencies and Aboriginal communities.

The MOECC is satisfied that Hydro One provided sufficient time and opportunities for the GRT, the general public, stakeholders and Aboriginal communities to comment on the Class EA prior to submitting it for review and approval. During the first inspection period, concerns were raised by the GRT and Aboriginal communities, but these have been addressed through subsequent revisions to the Class EA and/or responses made by Hydro One. The MOECC is satisfied that there are no outstanding public, GRT and Aboriginal community concerns.

This Review concludes that the Class EA complies with the requirements of the ToR and that it meets EAA requirements by adequately identifying: the class of undertakings; the reasons for using a class EA; the similarities and differences among undertakings in the class; environmental effects of activities in the class; a process for consulting during the Class EA planning; and a framework for evaluating and implementing activities.


August 2014 25

5. What Happens Now? The Ministry Review will be made available for a five-week comment period. The Ministry Review along with a copy of the Class EA will be posted on the MOECC’s website, and will be made available at public viewing locations of the offices of the MOECC. Notice of the publication of the Ministry Review, and public viewing locations will be posted on the Environmental Registry. During the five-week comment period, all interested parties, including the public, interested stakeholders, the GRT and Aboriginal communities can submit comments to the MOECC about the Class EA and the Ministry Review. At this time, anyone can request that the Minister refer either all or part of the Class EA to the Environmental Review Tribunal for a hearing if they believe that their concerns have not been addressed.

At the end of the Ministry Review comment period, MOECC staff will make a recommendation to the Minister concerning whether the Class EA has been prepared in accordance with the ToR and the requirements of the EAA and whether the proposed undertaking should be approved. When making a decision, the Minister will consider the purpose of the EAA, the ToR, the Class EA, the Ministry Review, the comments submitted during the Class EA and the Ministry Review comment periods and any other matters the Minister may consider relevant.

The Minister will make one of the following decisions:

• Give approval of the Class EA; • Give approval of the Class EA subject to conditions; or • Refuse to give approval of the Class EA.

Prior to making that decision, the Minister may also refer either part of or the entire Class EA to mediation or refer either part of or the entire Class EA to the Environmental Review Tribunal for a hearing.

If the Minister approves, approves with conditions or refuses to give approval to the Class EA, the Lieutenant Governor in Council must concur with the decision.

Next Step in the Class EA Process

ToR Approval ↓

Class EA Preparation ↓

Class EA Submission ↓

EA Comment Period ↓

Ministry Review ↓

RReevviieeww CCoommmmeenntt PPeerriioodd

↓ Minister’s Decision


August 2014 26

5.1 Modifying or Amending the Class EA

Should the Class EA receive approval, further modifications or amendments to the Class EA are possible. The process is described in Section 5.1 of the Class EA, whereby Hydro One or any other party may submit written requests for amendments to the Class EA to the Director of the Environmental Approvals Branch (for minor amendments), or the Minister (for major amendments). The Class EA recommends that any outside party consult with Hydro One before submitting a proposed amendment, addressing the specific concern or issue being addressed, the reason for the proposal and the proposed amendment itself.

Section 5.6 of the Class EA states that every five years, Hydro One must review the Class EA to ensure it remains compliant with the EAA and other applicable legislation, regulations and policies. The MOECC may require that consideration of a minor or major amendment be deferred for consideration as part of the five-year Class EA review or may require that the Class EA be updated in the interim.

APPENDIX A

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ACT

REQUIREMENTS

1

Appendix A: Environmental Assessment Act and Terms of Reference Requirements (ToR) of the Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA)

EA Decision Making Process

EAA and ToR Requirements

Description and Characteristics of the Requirements Analysis of the EA

Problem/ Opportunities

Description of the class of undertakings to which it applies. s.14(2)(1)

The Class EA must describe the undertakings for which approval is being sought. The ToR identifies that the class of undertakings will include the activities subject to the screening requirements of Ontario Regulation 116/01 (the Electricity Projects Regulation) for transmission facilities, transformer stations, telecommunication facilities, and protection and control equipment.

The Class EA clearly identifies the class of undertakings for which approval is being sought (including transmission facilities, transformer stations, and telecommunication facilities), consistent with the approved ToR and the Electricity Projects Regulation. The MOECC is satisfied that the class of undertakings has been adequately described.

Reasons for using a Class EA

A description of the reasons for using a Class EA with respect to undertakings in the class. s.14(2)(2)

The Class EA must clearly identify the reasons for developing a Class EA for the class of undertakings.

The activities covered by the Class EA are routinely carried out and have predictable environmental effects which can be readily managed. The proposed Class EA will ensure impacts and benefits of minor transmission facilities are considered in a consistent matter, and provides a framework to address and respond to input from the public, Aboriginal communities and government. Hydro One determined that the existing Class EA would need to be replaced and significant amendments to the Class EA would be required for the following reasons:

• To ensure consistency with the Ontario Regulation 116/01 (Electricity Projects);

• To comply with the 2014 Code of Practice for Preparing, Reviewing and Using Class Environmental Assessments in Ontario (Code of Practice); and

• The most recent version of the Class EA refers to “Ontario Hydro” (now Hydro One Networks Inc.) as the sole proponent. As a result of Ontario Regulation 116/01, all applicable private and public transmission projects are subject to this Class EA. The Class EA therefore needs to be amended to reflect its applicability to all transmission project proponents.

The MOECC is satisfied with the reasons for the development of the Class EA.

2




A description of the similarities and differences to be expected among the undertakings in the class. s.14(2)(3)

The Class EA must outline the similarities and differences to be expected among the undertakings in the class.

The Class EA outlines the similarities shared by all of the undertakings in the Class: they involve environmental effects that are mitigable, predictable and that tend to be related to construction; high-voltage facilities have similar safety and security risks; and the sharing of a common purpose (the provision of reliable power and/or connecting generation sources with customers through the transmission network). The Class EA outlines the differences among the undertakings in the class, which will vary from one another depending on a variety of factors including: geographic conditions (rural/urban settings, proximity to natural features, etc.), new infrastructure or modifications to existing infrastructure, length/capacity/ location of transmission line, size of tower/station, operating voltage. The MOECC is satisfied with the outline of similarities and differences to be expected among the undertakings in the class.

Environmental considerations related to undertakings to which the Class applies.

A description of the expected range of environmental effects that may result from proceeding with undertakings in the class. s.14(2)(4)

The Class EA must outline the potential environmental effects from undertakings within the class.

The Class EA outlines the expected range of environmental effects, recognizing that a wide variety of agricultural, societal, and natural environmental elements may be affected by the projects covered under the Class EA. These impacts will be assessed in accordance with the guidance provided by the Class EA. The MOECC is satisfied with the list of potential environmental effects from undertakings in the class.

A description of measures that could be taken to mitigate against adverse environmental effects that may result from proceeding with undertakings in the class. s.14(2)(5)

The Class EA must provide reference to the types of mitigation measures which can reduce or mitigate adverse environmental effects from undertakings within the class.

A range of potential impact management (mitigation) measures are provided as an appendix in the Class EA for environmental effects typical for projects of this class. Potential negative effects will be identified early in the Class EA screening and planning process in order to develop specific mitigation measures. The MOECC is satisfied with the mitigation measures presented to reduce environmental effects that may arise from undertakings in the class.

3




Evaluation A description of the process to be used by a proponent of a proposed undertaking to consult with the public and with persons who may be affected by the undertaking. s.14(2)(6)

The Class EA must provide guidance on public consultation processes which proponents can use when planning projects under the class.

The Class EA provides guidance on how proponents are to consult with the public and those who may be affected by an undertaking. The Class EA provides a flexible framework which can be adjusted based on the public and stakeholder interest in the undertaking and specifies minimum documentation requirements including the preparation of an Environmental Study Report for all projects that are not screened out. Class projects that are screened out require consultation with potentially affected persons but do not require an Environmental Study Report. Instead, the proponent is required to advise the MOECC’s Director of the Environmental Approvals Branch and applicable Regional EA Coordinator of all projects that have been successfully screened. The MOECC is satisfied with the public consultation guidance provided in the Class EA.

A description of the method to be used to evaluate a proposed undertaking with respect to the matters described in paragraphs 4 to 6. s.14(2)(7)

The Class EA must provide direction on how proponents are to evaluate the impacts of proposed undertakings including assessing potential environmental impacts, mitigation measures which can be utilized and methods to consult with the public.

The Class EA outlines the process for evaluating alternatives based on the natural environmental, socio-economic environment, technical and cost factors, assessing net effects in both a qualitative and quantitative manner to identify the relative differences among the potential effects for each alternative in order to select the preferred alternative. In addition, advice is provided on the coordination of the EA process with other Class EAs and key federal and provincial legislation. Further, the Class EA provides direction on how to determine appropriate mitigation measures for a proposed undertaking, and outlines methods for determining the public consultation methods which are appropriate based on the circumstances of the undertaking. The MOECC is satisfied with the methodology presented to evaluate a proposed undertaking, including consideration of potential environmental effects, mitigation measures and public consultation.

A description of the method to be used to determine the final design of a proposed

The Class EA must provide a framework which allows proponents to identify and describe the proposed undertaking in a level of detail that is appropriate to the setting.

The Class EA requires that an Environmental Study Report be prepared for each Category B project, including information relating to the consultation efforts made to engage interested and potentially affected parties, and documentation presenting

4




undertaking based upon the evaluation described in paragraph 7. s.14(2)(8)

the decision-making process in a transparent manner. The proposed undertaking must be described in a manner that is sufficient for the decision-making process to be clearly understood. The MOECC is satisfied with the method to be used to determine the final design of a proposed undertaking based upon the evaluation of alternatives.

Additional Commitments

Additional ToR commitment

Consider dropping the term “Minor” in the title due to the irrelevance of the term in the context it is currently used.

Hydro One considered dropping the term “minor” from the title but decided to instead keep it, to avoid confusion because the number and type of projects subject to the class remain largely unchanged. The MOECC is satisfied with Hydro One’s decision to maintain the term “minor” in the title of the Class EA.


The amended Class EA will address any applicable effects of the new open market on the Class EA process.

Other than making the Class EA available to private sector companies, the new open market did not have any specific effect on the Class EA process. The MOECC is satisfied that Hydro One has addressed effects of the open market on the Class EA process.


All potential proponents will be asked for their comments and input throughout the amendment process.

Hydro One has consulted with 73 local distribution companies on the Class EA, with opportunities for providing comments. The MOECC is satisfied with the consultation efforts by Hydro One to involve potential proponents during the amendment process.


Review current (1992 version) classification activities, develop applicable activity categories for amended Class EA and include an applicable definition of transmission and telecommunication facilities as well a provision for new technologies.

Projects are classified into three activity categories within the Class EA: Category A projects are those with no EAA requirements; Category B projects refer to Category B transmission projects (as defined in the Electricity Projects Regulation) that are not associated with electricity generation facilities, and Category C projects are those requiring an individual EA. The Class EA applies only to Category B projects. Definitions for “transmission station” and “telecommunications tower” are provided in the Class EA. A provision for new technologies is included in Section 2.3. The MOECC is satisfied that the activities classification was

5




reviewed and that definitions were included regarding transmission and telecommunication facilities, as required by the ToR.


The process steps to undertake a Class EA will be listed and a graphic of process included in Class EA documentation.

The Class EA process steps are provided in Section 3.3 and presented in Figure 6. The MOECC is satisfied that the Class EA process steps are presented graphically and in the text.


The amended Class EA will explore opportunities to coordinate with the requirements of the MOECC’s Guide to Environmental Assessment Requirements for Electricity Projects (Electricity Projects Guide), the Class EA for Waterpower projects and this Class EA with the aim to increase efficiency and reduce duplication. Within the Class EA process, Hydro One will make a commitment that when individual project approvals are sought under the Class EA, the transmission proponent will work with other affected proponents to ensure that all other relevant EAA requirements are met.

Section 5.7 of the Class EA addresses the potential opportunities to coordinate this Class EA with other EA requirements for a project, including other Class EAs and federal EA requirements under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. The Class EA requires that proponents identify EA and other approvals that are required for the project, as well as the timing of those approvals. The MOECC is satisfied that the Class EA speaks to the benefits of coordinating this Class EA with other EA requirements for projects under this class, and that it encourages proponents to do so.


Potential environmental effects and the associated mitigation approaches currently outlined in the Class EA will be reviewed.

The list of potential environmental effects and associated mitigation measures was reviewed and additional effects have been added as a result of new information and comments from review agencies and potentially affected parties. These include: contamination of organic or identity preserved crops; and effects on archaeological resources, built heritage resources, land used by First Nations and Métis communities, tourism and recreation resources, and electric and magnetic fields. The MOECC is satisfied that environmental effects and mitigation measures have been reviewed for the Class EA.


Numerous opportunities will be provided for open consultation for First Nations and Aboriginal organizations to enable full participation in the development of the amended Class EA. This consultation will recognize and respect their distinct legal, historical and cultural status within the Province of Ontario and the role of traditional

Since 2012, Hydro One has notified all Aboriginal communities and Métis organizations regarding the proposed amendments to the Class EA. This consultation has included five information sessions (in Sault Ste. Marie, Toronto, Thunder Bay, Timmins and Sudbury), a Hydro One review period from July 12, 2013 to August 26, 2013 and an MOECC review period from December 13, 2013 to February 7, 2014, and

6




ecological knowledge in environmental assessment.

efforts of Hydro One to satisfactorily resolve any issues or concerns raised by Aboriginal communities and Métis organizations during this time. Additionally, Section 4 of the Class EA outlines principles and practices to proponents for consultation, including with First Nations communities and Métis organizations. The MOECC is satisfied that Hydro One has made reasonable efforts to engage Aboriginal communities and Métis organizations across the province to participate in the development of the amended Class EA.


The Class EA will provide an overview of federal EA triggers and the requirements of the CEAA, other applicable federal legislation and key contact information.

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) has changed substantially since the writing of the ToR. CEAA 2012 no longer includes triggers for a federal EA; instead, there are Regulations Designating Physical Activities identifying the physical activities that may require an environmental assessment by the Canadian EA Agency. The Class EA includes a list of federal agencies, including the criteria for when they should be added to a project mailing list. The MOECC is satisfied that the CEAA and federal agencies are considered in the Class EA, with direction provided to proponents regarding when to contact the federal departments.


Three types of monitoring will be considered in the Class EA. Effectiveness monitoring which relates to the Class EA process itself. Effects monitoring which relates to actual environmental impacts as well as the effectiveness of mitigation measures. Compliance monitoring, which relates to whether projects are planned in accordance with the Class EA process. Requirements, responsibility for and timing of each type of monitoring will be outlined in the amended Class EA. The development of an adaptive management process to assess monitoring results will also be considered.

The definition for ‘monitoring’ is included in Appendix A of the Class EA and is the same as that from the Code of Practice for Preparing, Reviewing and Using Class Environmental Assessments in Ontario. The Class EA describes the requirements and timing of effectiveness monitoring, as well as the requirement for proponents to submit to Hydro One an annual summary report for Class EAs. The annual summary reports include all projects that have been carried out under the Class EA as well as the status (if completed or not), and the status of any Part II Order requests submitted for a project. This assists with compliance monitoring by tracking the number of projects that may not have been planned in accordance with the Class EA process (and therefore have not been completed, possibly due to the submission of a Part II Order request). Effects monitoring requirements are

7




provided in Section 3.7 of the Class EA. The MOECC is satisfied that monitoring requirements are adequately addressed in the Class EA.


Delays in project implementation and the process for amending the Class EA will be reviewed and included in the amended Class EA. Amendments to the Class EA will be reviewed for the purposes of: · Clarifying any portion of the document or process; · Improving the efficiency or the effectiveness of the process described in the document; and/or · Extending the Class EA to projects that may not have been previously included in the class definition.

The Class EA states that if construction is not initiated within five years of the filing of the Statement of Completion, the Environmental Study Report must be reviewed to determine if any changes are required. The Class EA document is to be reviewed by Hydro One every five years to ensure it remains compliant with applicable legislation, regulations, policies, and the EAA, and the results of the review are to be submitted to the Director of the Environmental Approvals Branch. Section 5.1 of the Class EA details the process for amending the Class EA. The wording has been updated to reflect additional proponents other than Hydro One, reference to the Electricity Projects Regulation, and separate amendment processes for making minor or major amendments. MOECC is satisfied that commitments in the ToR regarding delays in project implementation and Class EA amendment process have been fulfilled.


A list of pertinent Ontario and federal government acts and guidelines to assist project proponents in planning and designing their projects will be included in the Class EA.

Hydro One included in the Class EA a list of pertinent Ontario and federal government legislation. The MOECC is satisfied that this commitment has been satisfied.

APPENDIX B

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED DURING INITIAL COMMENT PERIOD

TABLES

1

Table 1. Government Review Team Comment Summary Table Proposal: Class Environmental Assessment for Minor Transmission Facilities (Class EA) Proponent: Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One) NOTE: for the “Proponent’s Response” column, strikeout text indicates deletion and underlined text indicates addition to the final Class EA

Submitter Summary of Comments Proponent’s Response Status Provincial Agencies Ministry of the Environment and Climate

Change (MOECC,

previously the Ministry of the Environment) Environmental Assessment

Services Section (EASS)

1. Class Environmental Assessment Hi

Documents

Ministry Review of the Class Environmental Assessment for Minor … · 2014-11-25 · Ministry Review of the Class Environmental Assessment for Minor Transmission Facilities . Review