Environmental Assessment for Mining Activities

Footnotes

  1. First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (West Vancouver: First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 11.
  2. Eva Liedholm Johnson, Mineral Rights: Legal Systems Regulatory Exploration and Exploitation (DCL Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, 2010) (Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology, 2010) at 36 note 183, online: http://kth.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:300248/FULLTEXT01; International Institute for Environment and Development, Breaking New Ground (London: Earthscan, 2002) at xxi. Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), according to this report, is perhaps the most widely used tool of environmental management in the minerals sector.
  3. Note that in the United States, an EA is used to assess the need to complete an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). For the purposes of this document, the US legal provisions regarding EISs are incorporated as legal provisions for EAs.
  4. Note: In BC, the legislation applies the terminology “EA Application” to refer to the information submitted for the EA by the proponent – however, for ease of comparison the “EA Application” is simply referred to as the EA in this Code.
  5. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43.
  6. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19.
  7. Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 12, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_User_Guide.pdf>.
  8. Patricia Fitzpatrick and A. John Sinclair, “Multi-jurisdictional environmental impact assessment: Canadian experiences” (2009) 29:4 Environmental Impact Assessment Review at 252; Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 58, online: http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf; “The Fish Lake assessment demonstrates well the challenges of harmonizing EA when two or more jurisdictions are involved. It raises significant questions about the Province’s commitment to harmonization and unified EA process to avoid duplication and bureaucracy. The differing outcomes make it clear that provincial EA process is procedurally and substantively very different from the federal, and undermines any argument that the federal government should rely on the provincial EA process as functionally equivalent”; Canada, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Report of the Federal Review Panel: Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project, Taseko Mines Ltd., British Columbia (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2010) at 30, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/documents/46911/46911E.pdf>.
  9. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, SC 1992, c 37, s 12(4).
  10. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c19, s52, s 34.
  11. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 29, 29.1.
  12. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 29.1(1).
  13. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 2, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>; British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Fairness and Service Code (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2009) at 5, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_FairnessAndServiceCode_Jan09.pdf>.
  14. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Guidelines for Preparing a Project Description for an Environmental Assessment in British Columbia (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2008) at 2-3, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/Project_Description_Guidelines.pdf>.
  15. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 6(1)(a).
  16. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 22, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_User_Guide.pdf>.
  17. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 11; Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 13. The EAO has the discretion to modify the s.11 order so as to: (a) take into account modifications proposed for the reviewable project by the proponent, including modifications proposed in relation to an application submitted under section 16; or (b) if necessary in his or her opinion to complete an effective and timely assessment of the reviewable project.
  18. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 23, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_User_Guide.pdf>.
  19. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 23, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_User_Guide.pdf>.
  20. Nlaka’pamux Nation Tribal Council v British Columbia (Environmental Assessment Office), 2011 BCCA 78 at para 98.
  21. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 22, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_User_Guide.pdf>.
  22. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 1, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>. The AIR was previously referred to as EA Terms of Reference.
  23. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Fairness and Service Code (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2009) at 5, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_FairnessAndServiceCode_Jan09.pdf>; British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 25-26, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_User_Guide.pdf>. This is the first formal stage in the EA process where the public provides input – the section 11 order requires a formal 30 to 45 day public comment period on the draft application information requirements. Regulation allows for a comment period up to 75 days.
  24. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 31, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_User_Guide.pdf>.
  25. Environmental Assessment Office, Fairness and Service Code (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2009) at 6, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_FairnessAndServiceCode_Jan09.pdf>.
  26. Environmental Assessment Office, Fairness and Service Code (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2009) at 6, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_FairnessAndServiceCode_Jan09.pdf>.
  27. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 16(3).
  28. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 2(2).
  29. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 11(1).
  30. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 10(1). Note that the practice of refering EA projects to the Minister, though rarely used, has been criticized by First Nations for allowing political interference and jeopardizing the neutral administration of an independent and transparent process: First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (West Vancouver: First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 26, online: <http://fnbc.info/sites/default/files/documents/New%20Approaches%20to%20EA%20in%20BC%2020aug09.pdf>.
  31. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 14(3).
  32. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002 c 43, s 16(3), (5), (6).
  33. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Fairness and Service Code (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2009) at 6, 32, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_FairnessAndServiceCode_Jan09.pdf>.
  34. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 31.
  35. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 34.
  36. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 34.
  37. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Fairness and Service Code (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2009) at 14, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_FairnessAndServiceCode_Jan09.pdf>.
  38. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 17(2).
  39. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 34; First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (Prince George: First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 30.
  40. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43 s 17.
  41. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 17(3).
  42. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 24(1).
  43. Prescribed Time Limits Regulation, BC Reg 372/2002, s 2.
  44. Prescribed Time Limits Regulation, BC Reg 372/2002, s 3.
  45. Prescribed Time Limits Regulation, BC Reg 372/2002, s 4.
  46. Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council, Critique of the BC Environmental Assessment Process from a First Nations Perspective (Prince George: Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council, 2007) at 9, online: < http://www.carriersekani.ca/images/docs/lup/EAO%20Critique%20-%20CSTC.pdf>.
  47. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, ss 24(2), (4).
  48. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 33.
  49. Elmar Plate, Malcolm Foy and Rick Krehbiel, Best Practices for First Nation Involvement in Environmental Assessment Reviews of Development Projects in British Columbia (West Vancouver: New Relationship Trust, 2009) at xi.
  50. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002 c 43, s 32. There are also regulation-making power for the imposition of fees associated with the EA process Environmental Assessment Act SBC 2002, c 43, s 50(2)(b). However no such regulations have yet been enacted.
  51. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, ss 59-61.
  52. Environmental Protection Act, SNL 2002, c E-14.2, s 74(1),(2).
  53. Environmental Protection Act, SNL 2002, c E-14.2, s 74(3).
  54. Environmental Protection Act, SNL 2002, c E-14.2, s 74(4).
  55. Mining Act 1992 (NSW), s 67(1).
  56. SAL & Caldeira, Advogados e Consultores, Limitada, Introduction to the Legal Framework for Mining in Mozambique (Maputo, Mozambique: Sal & Caldeira, 2010) at 33, online: <http://www.baeticamoz.com/7.html>.
  57. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 6.
  58. Joseph F Castrilli, Report on the Legislative, Regulatory, and Policy Framework Respecting Collaboration, Liability, and Funding Measures in relation to Orphaned/Abandoned, Contaminated, and Operating Mines in Canada (Toronto: National Orphaned/Abandoned Mines Initiative, 2007) at 70; Environmental Assessment Act, s 10(1)(b). Fortunately, this legal provision has not yet led to extensive exemptions: Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 12, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  59. In BC, mining activities that qualify as reviewable projects are listed under Part 3 of the Reviewable Projects Regulation, BC Reg 370/2002.
  60. Reviewable Projects Regulation, BC Reg 370/2002, s 3(1), Table 6.
  61. Reviewable Projects Regulation, BC Reg 370/2002, s 3(2), 8(1), Table 6.
  62. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 7.
  63. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 6(1).
  64. In the Matter of the Environmental Assessment Act SBC 2002, c43 and an Environmental Assessment of the Vancouver Airport Fuel Delivery Project (Proposed Project), Order Under Section 7(3) (10 February 2009).
  65. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 18, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>; Cheryl Sharvit and Lisa Sumi, Beneath the Surface – Aboriginal Rights and Mining Law in British Columbia (Surrey: Environmental-Aboriginal Guardianship through Law and Education, 2001) at 233, online: <http://www.miningwatch.ca/sites/www.miningwatch.ca/files/Beneath_the_Surface_0.pdf>. Joseph F Castrilli, “Environmental Regulation of the Mining Industry in Canada: An Update of Legal and Regulatory Requirements” (2000) 34 UBCLR 91 at 124, 126.
  66. Joseph F Castrilli, “Environmental Regulation of the Mining Industry in Canada: An Update of Legal and Regulatory Requirements” (2000) 34 UBCLR 91 at 124, 126.
  67. See e.g. Andrew Gage, “Gravel Pit court case reveals problems with Environmental Assessment laws” West Coast Environmental Law (30 May 2011), online: <http://wcel.org/resources/environmental-law-alert/gravel-pit-court-case-reveals-problems-environmental-assessment-la?utm_source=twt>.
  68. Rev Code Wash, § 78.56.050(1), § 43.21C.039 (2011).
  69. Eva Liedholm Johnson, Mineral Rights: Legal Systems Regulatory Exploration and Exploitation (DCL Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, 2010) (Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology, 2010) at 86, online: <http://kth.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:300248/FULLTEXT01>.
  70. Environmental Assessment Regulations, NS Reg 26/95, Schedule A, Part B.
  71. Teslin Tlingit Council, Mining Policy (Teslin, YK: Teslin Tlingit Council, 2008) at 13.
  72. Assessable Activities, Exceptions and Executive Committee Projects Regulations, SOR 2005-379, Schedule 1, s 1-2.
  73. Procedures for Citizen Participation (Law 99 of 1993) Colombia, art 49. See also: http://www.minambiente.gov.co/contenido/contenido.aspx?catID=1200&conID=7050.
  74. Colombia, Mines and Geosciences Program, Exploration Work Program form, MGB Form No 5-4, online: <http://www.mgb10.com/forms/exploration.html>. In the Philippines, proponents must submit a two-year “Exploration Work Program” in order to receive an exploration license. The Exploration Work Program requires, for example, details on the current state of the terrain, a description of the exploration surveys to be conducted, and the expected mineral information to be gleaned from each survey.
  75. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 49.
  76. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 21, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  77. Environmental Assessment Act, s 5(2)(a).
  78. Act on Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure, Ministry of the Environment, Finland, s 4(2).
  79. Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, 1993, ratified by Nunavut Land Claims Agreement Act SC 1993, c 29 at 12.4.1 and 12.4.2.
  80. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 6(1).
  81. Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 124(3).
  82. Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 126(2).
  83. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, RSA 2000, c E-12, s 44(3)(c).
  84. Cal P R C § 21091(b) (2011); California Environmental Quality Act, 14 Cal Code of Regulations, c 3, art 6, §15070-15075.
  85. California Environmental Protection Agency, “Public Notices”, online: State Water Resources Control Board < http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/public_notices/>.
  86. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 11(1). EA scoping was the subject of a recent Supreme Court of Canada decision on the proposed Red Chris Mine in north-western BC: MiningWatch Canada v Canada (Fisheries and Oceans), 2010 SCC 2.
  87. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 11(2); Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 27 online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>; United Nations University, RMIT University, and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Environmental Impact Assessment Course Module (2007), online: <http://eia.unu.edu/course/?page_id=140>.
  88. The Application Information Requirements Template, a “Guidance Document” which is discussed below, asks for certain information, however, this is policy, not law. See: British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010).
  89. 40 CFR § 1502.10.
  90. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, RSA 2000, c E-12, s 49.
  91. EC, Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, [2011] OJ, L 26, 28/01/2012 at art 5, annex IV. Note: this provision only applies to mining “where Member States consider that their characteristics so require” (Article 4(2)).
  92. Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England & Wales) Regulations 1999, SI 1999/293, Schedule 4.
  93. Qiaoling Chen, Yuanzhi Zhang and Ari Ekroos, “Comparison of China’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law with the European Union (EU) EIA Directive” (2007) 132 Environmental Monitoring Assessment 53 at 60.
  94. Environmental Impact Assessment EIA Regulations (Government Notice R.543 in Government Gazette 33306 of 18 June 2010) South Africa, ss 22(2), 31(2).
  95. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 11(2).
  96. 40 CFR §.1508.27.
  97. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 51.
  98. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 52.
  99. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, SC 1992, c 37, s 15(2); Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, s 16.
  100. Beverly Hobby, Risky Business: Environmental Assessment Mistakes (Vancouver: Continuing Legal Education Society of British Columbia, 2011) at 4.
  101. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at Preface.
  102. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 30-31.
  103. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 19, 23. The policy recommends that these studies and assessment analyses follow relevant provincial and federal standards.
  104. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 28, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  105. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 28, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  106. Mineral Rules and Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board for Hard Rock, Metal and Designated Mining Operations, s 6.4.23, online: <http://mining.state.co.us/rulesregs/HardRockRulesAdoptedAug%20122010actcites12032010correction.pdf>.
  107. John Lilley, “The CWRA Comments on Canada’s Hydrologic and Meteorologic Networks” (2004) 23(4) Water News 15 at 17.
  108. Cal PRC,§ 21003(d).
  109. Or Rev Stat § 516.135(2) (2011).
  110. David Brereton et al, Assessing the Cumulative Impacts of Mining on Regional Communities: An Exploratory Study of Coal Mining in the Muswellbrook Area of NSW (St Lucia, Australia: University of Queensland, 2008), online: <http://www.csrm.uq.edu.au/docs/C14047.pdf>.
  111. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 27, online at: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  112. The James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, Between the Grand Council of the Crees (of Quebec), the Northern Quebec Inuit Association, the Government of Quebec, the James Bay Energy Corporation, the James Bay Development Corporation, the Quebec Hydro-Electric Commission-Hydro-Quebec, and the Government of Canada, 11 November 1975, s 22, Schedule 3.
  113. Bram Noble and Jasmine Birk, “Comfort monitoring? Environmental assessment follow-up under community–industry negotiated environmental agreements” (2011) 31 Env Impact Ass Rev 17 at 18.
  114. S Dak Codified Laws § 45-6B-7 (2)(3)(4).
  115. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 42, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  116. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 12, 19, 50, Note that this differs from the requirement for qualified persons in the assessment of contaminated sites and riparian areas: Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 42, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.; Contaminated Sites Regulation, BC Reg 375/96, Schedule 1.1; Riparian Areas Regulation, BC Reg 376/2004, s. 1 definitions of qualified environmental professional” and “assessment report”.
  117. Mineral Rules and Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board for Hard Rock, Metal and Designated Mining Operations, s 1.4.3(2), online: <http://mining.state.co.us/rulesregs/HardRockRulesAdoptedAug%20122010actcites12032010correction.pdf>.
  118. Environmental Impact Assessment EIA Regulations (Government Notice R.543 in Government Gazette 33306 of 18 June 2010) South Africa, s 16(1), 17(a)(b)(c).
  119. Environmental Regulation for Mining Activities (Decree n° 26/2004 of 20 August) Mozambique, article 8, para 2.
  120. Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England & Wales) Regulations 1999, SI 1999/293, Schedule 4, Part I, s 7.
  121. Environmental Impact Assessment EIA Regulations (Government Notice R.543 in Government Gazette 33306 of 18 June 2010) South Africa, s. 31(2)(m).
  122. Environmental Management Act (No 239 of 2002) Netherlands, § 7.10.
  123. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002 c 43, ss 11, 14.
  124. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Frequently Asked Questions (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, undated). The provincial EAO’s approach to alternatives is also discussed on the EAO website, “The B.C. Environmental Assessment Act only requires the review of the project that is submitted. The EA process may examine alternative ways of implementing the proposed project during the application review stage. For example, the EAO may assess alternative locations for facilities, for housing the workforce, alternative processing methods for producing the end product, or alternative approaches to constructing or operating the project.”
  125. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 13, online:<http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  126. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 31, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  127. Eva Liedholm Johnson, Mineral Rights: Legal Systems Regulatory Exploration and Exploitation (DCL Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, 2010) (Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology, 2010) at 36, online: <http://kth.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:300248/FULLTEXT01>.
  128. 40 CFR § 1502.14.
  129. Environmental Assessment Regulations, NS Reg 26/95, s 19(1)(d).
  130. Environmental Assessment Act, SY 2003, c 2, s 12(2)(b).
  131. Environmental Assessment Act, RSO 1990, c E 18, s 6.1(2)(d).
  132. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, RSA 2000, c E-12, s 49(h).
  133. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19 s 19(1)(g).
  134. Environmental Impact Assessment EIA Regulations (Government Notice R.543 in Government Gazette 33306 of 18 June 2010) South Africa, s 1(1).
  135. Hussein Abaza et al, Environmental Impact Assessment, Course Module, (United Nations Environment Programme, 2007) at s 5, online: <http://eia.unu.edu/course/?page_id=173>.
  136. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, RSA 2000, c E-12, s 49(h).
  137. Environmental Assessment Act, RSO 1990, c E-18, s 6.1(2)(b), (d).
  138. Eva Liedholm Johnson, Mineral Rights: Legal Systems Regulatory Exploration and Exploitation (DCL Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, 2010) (Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology, 2010) at 79, online: <http://kth.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:300248/FULLTEXT01>.
  139. 40 CFR § 1502.14.
  140. The James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, Between the Grand Council of the Crees (of Quebec), the Northern Quebec Inuit Association, the Government of Quebec, the James Bay Energy Corporation, the James Bay Development Corporation, the Quebec Hydro-Electric Commission-Hydro-Quebec, and the Government of Canada, 11 November 1975, s 22, Schedule 3.
  141. Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 117(2).
  142. Environmental Assessment Act, RSO 1990, c E-18, s 6.1(2)(c).
  143. O Rev Stat § 517.979(3)(c).
  144. The James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, Between the Grand Council of the Crees (of Quebec), the Northern Quebec Inuit Association, the Government of Quebec, the James Bay Energy Corporation, the James Bay Development Corporation, the Quebec Hydro-Electric Commission-Hydro-Quebec, and the Government of Canada, 11 November 1975, s 22, Schedule 3.
  145. Environmental Impact Assessment EIA Regulations (Government Notice R.543 in Government Gazette 33306 of 18 June 2010) South Africa, s 31(2)(g).
  146. See also, “Taseko adding capacity at Gibraltar, Submits New Project Plan” Engineering and Mining Journal 212 (March 2011) 8, online: < http://www.e-mj.com/>. According to Taseko President and CEO Russell Hallbauer current high gold and copper prices is the reason that the new, more costly, design proposal is feasible.
  147. Minn Stat Ann § 116D.04, Subd 6 (2011).
  148. 40 CFR § 1502.2(g).
  149. 40 CFR § 1502.2(f).
  150. O Revi Stat § 517.979(3)(c) (2011).
  151. Environmental Assessment Act, RSO 1990, c E-18, s 6.1(2)(b); Environmental Management Act (No 239 of 2002) Netherlands, § 7.7(1)(b).
  152. Neil Craik, The International Law of Environmental Impact Assessment: Process, Substance and Integration (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008) at 36.
  153. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg. 373/2002, s 4(1).
  154. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, B.C. Reg. 373/2002, s 3.
  155. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, B.C. Reg. 373/2002, s 4(1)(a).
  156. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002, s 4(2).
  157. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002, s 4(3)(a).
  158. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002, s 4(3)(b),(c).
  159. The provincial government established a Community Advisory Group to participate in the EA of the Ajax mine near Kamloops. Members include Aberdeen Community Association, Aberdeen Highlands Development Corporation, B.C. Cattlemen’s Association, Coalition to Protect East Kamloops, Ducks Unlimited, Grasslands Conservation Council of British Columbia, Kamloops Area Preservation Association, Kamloops Astronomical Society, Kamloops & District Fish & Game Association, Kamloops Fly Fishers’ Association, Kamloops Naturalist Club, Kamloops Stockmen’s Association, Lac le Jeune Conservation Association, Pineview Community Group, Thompson Institute of Environmental Studies, and Thompson Watershed Coalition: Anne Neave, “Apathy on Ajax proposal? Hardly” Kamloops Daily News (1 August 2012), online at: <http://www.kamloopsnews.ca/article/20120801/KAMLOOPS0303/120739963/-1/kamloops/apathy-on-ajax-proposal-hardly>.
  160. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 22, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_User_Guide.pdf>.
  161. Environmental Assessment Act, RSBC 1996 c 119, s 11.
  162. Environmental Assessment Act, RSBC 1996 c 119, s 11(1).
  163. Environmental Assessment Act, RSBC 1996 c 119, s 11(2).
  164. Environmental Assessment Act, RSBC 1996 c 119, s 11(3).
  165. RSQ, c Q-2, ss 161, 199. See also, Regulation Respecting the Environmental Impact Assessment and Review Applicable to a Part of the Northeastern Quebec Region, RQ, c Q-2, r 10, ss 4, 5; Environmental Assessment Act, RSBC1996, c 119, ss 9,10.
  166. Environment Act, CCSM c E125, ss 13.2, 41(1)(bb).
  167. Participant Assistance Regulation, Man Reg 125/91, s 7(1).
  168. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, s 57; see also, Canada, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Guide to the Participant Funding Program under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2008), online: <http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/9772442E-9A6B-4302-968E-3946E19700D0/Guide_to_the_Participant_Funding_Program.pdf>.
  169. Government Organization Act, SS 1986-87-88, c G-5.1, ss 18, 19; Environmental Assessment Act, SS 1979-80, c E-10.1, s 9(2).
  170. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002, s 5(1).
  171. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002, s 5(2).
  172. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002, s 5(3).
  173. Environmental Impact Assessment EIA Regulations (Government Notice R.543 in Government Gazette 33306 of 18 June 2010) South Africa, ss 15(1), (2).
  174. Note that the project leads have discretion to design a process to meet public consultation needs, as was done for the proposed Ajax Mine at Kamloops.
  175. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002, s 6(1).
  176. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002, s 6(2)(b).
  177. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002, s 6(2)(a).
  178. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Public Comment Policy (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, undated) at 1, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/Public_Comment_Policy.pdf>.
  179. 40 CFR § 1502.8.
  180. 40 CFR § 1502.1.
  181. 40 CFR § 1502.2(c).
  182. 40 CFR § 1502.15.
  183. 40 CFR § 1502.7.
  184. Pat Larcombe, Determining Significance of Environmental Effects: An Aboriginal Perspective (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 2000) at s 4.1.2, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=072A8227-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  185. EC, Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, [2011] OJ, L 26, 28/01/2012 at art 5, annex III(6).  Note: This provision only applies to mining “where Member States consider that their characteristics so require” (Article 4(2).
  186. Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England & Wales) Regulations 1999, SI 1999/293, Schedule 4, Part I, s 6.
  187. 40 CFR § 1502.12.
  188. Annie Booth and Norm Skelton, “Industry and government perspectives on First Nations’ participation in the British Columbia environmental assessment process” (2011) 31 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 216 at 220.
  189. Environmental Assessment Act, SS 1979-80, c E-10 1, s 13.
  190. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002, s 7(1).
  191. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002, s 7(2).
  192. Environmental Assessment Office, Public Comment Policy (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, undated) at 1, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/Public_Comment_Policy.pdf>.
  193. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 26.
  194. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Public Comment Policy (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, undated), online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/Public_Comment_Policy.pdf>. As a result, some members of the public may unable to contribute in the public consultation process.
  195. Qiaoling Chen, Yuanzhi Zhang and Ari Ekroos, “Comparison of China’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law with the European Union (EU) EIA Directive” (2007) 132Environ Monit Assess 53at 63.
  196. Nlaka’pamux Nation Tribal Council v British Columbia (Environmental Assessment Office), 2011 BCCA 78 at para 97.
  197. The Nisga’a Nation ratified the Nisga’a Final Agreement on 9 November 1998. The British Columbia Government ratified the NFA on 22 April 1999, Nisga’a Final Agreement Act, RSBC 1999, c 2. The federal government ratified by Royal Assent on 13 April, 2000, Nisga’a Final Agreement Act, RSC 2000, c 7. The text of the Nisga’a Final Agreement is available online: http://www.gov.bc.ca/arr/firstnation/nisgaa/default.html. The 1998 Nisga’a Final Agreement recognized the Nisga’a Nation as owners of all mineral resources on or under Nisga’a lands.
  198. Tsawwassen First Nation Final Agreement, British Columbia Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, Victoria, 2007, online: <http://www.gov.bc.ca/arr/firstnation/tsawwassen/down/final/tfn_fa.pdf>. At page 57 the Final Agreement recognizes the First Nation as owners of subsurface resources except for the mines and minerals under English Bluff. The agreement provided $2-million dollars in compensation for those mineral rights, which were to be transferred by the federal government to the province of British Columbia
  199. The Maa-nulth First Nations Final Agreement states that each First Nation in the Maa-Nulth treaty group owns subsurface resources on or under its settlement lands, with the exception of one privately owned parcel of subsurface resources within the Uchucklesaht Tribe lands. The Maa-nulth First Nations have the right to set fees, rents, royalties and other charges, except for taxes, for exploration, development and production of mines and minerals and other subsurface resources Maa-nulth First Nations Final Agreement, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, Vancouver, 2009, online: <http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/DAM/DAM-INTER-BC/STAGING/texte-text/mna_fa_mnafa_1335899212893_eng.pdf>.
  200. Yale First Nation Final Agreement, Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, Victoria, 2011, online: <http://www.gov.bc.ca/arr/firstnation/yale/down/yale_final_agreement_english_unsigned_updated_2012_jan.pdf>.
  201. Tla’amin Final Agreement, Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, Sliammon, 2011, online: <http://www.gov.bc.ca/arr/firstnation/sliammon/down/tliammon_final_agreement_2011.pdf>.
  202. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 8.1.
  203. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 29.1(2).
  204. First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (West Vancouver: First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 54.
  205. First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (West Vancouver: First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 60.
  206.  i.e., Taku River Tlingit First Nation v. British Columbia (Project Assessment Director), 2004 SCC 74; Nlaka’pamux Nation Tribal Council v British Columbia (Environmental Assessment Office), 2011 BCCA 78; Upper Nicola Indian Band v. British Columbia (Environment), 2011 BCSC 388; Halalt First Nation v. British Columbia (Environment), 2012 BCCA 191.
  207. Annie Booth and Norm Skelton, “Industry and government perspectives on First Nations’ participation in the British Columbia environmental assessment process” (2011) 31 Environmental Impact Assessment Review  216 at 221.
  208. Annie Booth and Norm Skelton, “Industry and government perspectives on First Nations’ participation in the British Columbia environmental assessment process” (2011) 31 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 216 at 222.
  209. Joseph Castrilli, Report on the Legislative, Regulatory, and Policy Framework Respecting Collaboration, Liability, and Funding Measures in relation to Orphaned/Abandoned, Contaminated, and Operating Mines in Canada (Toronto: National Orphaned/Abandoned Mines Initiative, 2007) at 70; West Coast Environmental Law Association, Backgrounder: Bill 38- The Environmental Assessment Act (Vancouver: West Coast Environmental Law, 2004); Environmental Assessment Act, RSBC 1996 c 119,, c 35, ss 9(2)(d).
  210. Environmental Assessment Act, RSBC 1996 c 119, s 10.
  211. Taku River Tlingit First Nation v British Columbia (Project Assessment Director), 2004 SCC 74, para 8.
  212. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 11(2)(f); British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Fairness and Service Code (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2009) at 5, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_FairnessAndServiceCode_Jan09.pdf>; Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 33. “[T]he EAO will also engage in separate consultations with First Nations in cases where a First Nation declines to participate on a working group or where the EAO otherwise determines that such consultation should be undertaken”.
  213. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 17. Provincial policy states that consultation principles articulated by the courts “guide the EAO decision-makers and should be adopted where possible by proponents when consulting First Nations”. These include: start consultation as early as possible; share all relevant information with First Nations; clearly explain proposals and government decisions; ensure opportunities for First Nations to provide feedback; genuinely consider aboriginal concerns and attempt to find ways to address them; and, be respectful, open, reasonable, and responsive.
  214. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Proponent Guide for Providing First Nation Consultation Information (Non-Treaty First Nations) (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, undated) at 2, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/Guide_Proponents_Non_Treaty_FN.pdf>.
  215. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 1, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  216. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 33, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  217. Assembly of First Nations, Position and Recommendations for Amendments to The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (Ottawa: Assembly of First Nations, 2000).
  218. Annie Booth and Norm Skelton, “Industry and government perspectives on First Nations’ participation in the British Columbia environmental assessment process” (2011) 31 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 216 at 221.
  219. First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 24-25, 55 and 79: “It is inappropriate to ask the staff of the EAO, while undertaking an environmental assessment, to fulfill the Crown’s duty of consultation and accommodation”; Tony Pearse, “Mining in Aboriginal Communities”(Speaking Notes delivered at the Pacific Business & Law Institute, Vancouver March 11-12, 2009) at 1 and 4; Annie Booth and Norm Skelton, “Industry and government perspectives on First Nations’ participation in the British Columbia environmental assessment process” (2011) 31 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 216 at 220; Annie Booth & Norm Skelton, “Improving First Nations’ participation in environmental assessment processes: recommendations from the field” (2011) 29(1) Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 49 at 56.
  220. Tony Pearse, “Mining in Aboriginal Communities”(Speaking Notes delivered at the Pacific Business & Law Institute, Vancouver March 11-12, 2009) at 4.
  221. Meetings notes from Timothy Howard of Mandell Pinder from the Minutes of the Canadian Bar Association’s Aboriginal Law –Vancouver Section Environmental Law Section Joint Meeting (April 20, 2011) at 2, online: <http://www.cba.org/BC/s_abor_van/pdf/abor_van_04_20_11.pdf>.
  222. First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 79. The General Consultation Protocol should be enacted though legislation, and set out objectives, principles, standards, best practices and general guidelines for the conduct of talks between the parties and project-specific consultation processes that are consistent with the General Consultation Protocol guidelines and established through a negotiated ‘terms of engagement’ agreement before the EA process starts.
  223. Tony Pearse, “Mining in Aboriginal Communities” (Speaking Notes delivered at the Pacific Business & Law Institute, Vancouver March 11-12, 2009) at 15.
  224. First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 3-4.
  225. Michael Lewis and Sara-Jane Brocklehurst, Aboriginal Mining Guide: How to negotiate lasting benefits for your community (Port Alberni: Canadian Centre for Community Renewal, 2009) at 2-22 and 3-10, online: <www.miningguide.ca>; Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 50(3).
  226. Canadian Centre for Community Renewal, Aboriginal Mining Guide: How to negotiate lasting benefits for your community (Port Alberni: Canadian Centre for Community Renewal, 2009)at Intro-12, online: <www.miningguide.ca>; Annie Booth and Norm Skelton, “Industry and government perspectives on First Nations’ participation in the British Columbia environmental assessment process” (2011) 31 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 216 at 221.
  227. Annie Booth and Norm Skelton, “Industry and government perspectives on First Nations’ participation in the British Columbia environmental assessment process” (2011) 31 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 216 at 221.
  228. Decision Body Time Periods and Consultation Regulations, SOR/2005-380, s 6.
  229. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 3.
  230. Tony Pearse, “Mining in Aboriginal Communities” (Speaking Notes delivered at the Pacific Business & Law Institute, Vancouver March 11-12, 2009) at 11.
  231. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Fairness and Service Code (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2009) at 12, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_FairnessAndServiceCode_Jan09.pdf>.
  232. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 73
  233. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, s 57; see also Government of Canada, “Participant Funding Program”, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=E33AE9FB-1>.
  234. Taku River Tlingit First Nation, Teslin Tlingit Council Mining Policy, (Teslin, Yukon: Teslin Tlingit Council, 2008) at 11.
  235. Alberta, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, Best Practices for Traditional Use Studies, (Edmonton: Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, 2003) at 1, online: <http://www.assembly.ab.ca/lao/library/egovdocs/alaa/2003/138222.pdf>.
  236. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Proponent Guide for Providing First Nation Consultation Information (Non-Treaty First Nations) (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, undated) at 3; Annie Booth and Norm Skelton, “Industry and government perspectives on First Nations’ participation in the British Columbia environmental assessment process” (2011) 31 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 216 at 221.
  237. Pat Larcombe, Determining Significance of Environmental Effects: An Aboriginal Perspective (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 2000) at s 4.1.2, online: < http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=072A8227-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  238. Participant Assistance Regulation, Man Reg 125/91, s 7(1).
  239. BC First Nations Energy & Mining Council, BC First Nations Mineral Exploration and Mining: Action Plan (West Vancouver: BC First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2008) at 22. To adequately engage with proponents, it has been recommended that each community have access to a minimum of three full time equivalent staff persons (or more depending upon the level of exploration and mining activity.). See also, Mary Ellen MacCallum, Carol Murray, Pascale Mera, Susan Carlick, First Nations Environmental Assessment: Capacity Needs Assessment and Strategic Plan Elements – Final (Cranbrook: prepared for First Nations Environmental Assessment Technical Working Group, 2005) at 8, 14, 22. A recent study of Indigenous peoples’ EA needs in BC revealed that although a number of Indigenous peoples have staff working in environmental management – most of these are trained in a specific resource industry (ex. mining, forestry, oil and gas etc) but have almost no EA-specific training. Areas identified as requiring training included screenings, identification of impacts, community consultation, technical reviews, and technical field capacity. In addition, the study revealed that training was needed not only for technical staff, but should also be provided to councillors and office staff; Tony Pearse, “Mining in Aboriginal Communities” (Speaking Notes delivered at the Pacific Business & Law Institute, Vancouver March 11-12, 2009) at 10; Pat Larcombe, Determining Significance of Environmental Effects: An Aboriginal Perspective (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 2000) at s 6, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=072A8227-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  240. Annie Booth and Norm Skelton, “Industry and government perspectives on First Nations’ participation in the British Columbia environmental assessment process” (2011) 31 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 31 216 at 222.
  241. Annie Booth and Norm Skelton, “Industry and government perspectives on First Nations’ participation in the British Columbia environmental assessment process” (2011) 31 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 216 at 222.
  242. Elmar Plate, Malcolm Foy and Rick Krehbiel, Best Practices for First Nation Involvement in Environmental Assessment Reviews of Development Projects in British Columbia (West Vancouver: New Relationship Trust, 2009) at xiii.
  243. Annie Booth and Norm Skelton, “Industry and government perspectives on First Nations’ participation in the British Columbia environmental assessment process” (2011) 31 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 216 at 220, 223.
  244. Environmental Assessment Act, RSBC 1996, c 119, s 2.
  245. Taku River Tlingit et al v Ringstad et al, 2000 BCSC 1001 at 67; upheld on appeal in Taku River Tlingit First Nation v. Ringstad, 2002 BCCA 59; appeal allowed in Taku River Tlingit First Nation v. British Columbia (Project Assessment Director), 2004 SCC 74.
  246. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 53 and 56, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.; First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (Prince George: First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 14 -15.
  247. First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (West Vancouver, First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 17.
  248. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, SC 1992 c 37, s 4(1). Note: These provisions remain in the 2012 CEAA.
  249. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 5(2).
  250. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, RSA 2000, c E-12, s 40.
  251. Environmental Impact Assessment Law (Law No 81 of 1997) Japan, art 1.
  252. Qiaoling Chen, Yuanzhi Zhang and Ari Ekroos, “Comparison of China’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law with the European Union (EU) EIA Directive” (2007) 132 Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 53 at 57.
  253. Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 115; Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 117(3). Under this Act, the EA review shall include a consideration of: the purpose of the development; alternative means, if any, of carrying out the development that are technically and economically feasible, and the impact on the environment of such alternative means; the need for any follow-up program and the requirements of such a program; and, the capacity of any renewable resources that are likely to be significantly affected by the development to meet existing and future needs.
  254. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 42(1). Considerations that regulatory authorities must take into account include: the purpose of the project or existing project; all stages of the project or existing project; the significance of any environmental or socio-economic effects of the project or existing project that have occurred or might occur in or outside Yukon, including the effects of malfunctions or accidents; the significance of any adverse cumulative environmental or socio-economic effects that have occurred or might occur in connection with the project or existing project alternatives to the project or existing project, or alternative ways of undertaking or operating it, that would avoid or minimize any significant adverse environmental or socio-economic effects; mitigative measures and measures to compensate for any significant adverse environmental or socio-economic effects; the need to protect the rights of Yukon Indian persons under final agreements, the special relationship between Yukon Indian persons and the wilderness environment of Yukon, and the cultures, traditions, health and lifestyles of Yukon Indian persons and other residents of Yukon; the interests of residents of Yukon and of Canadian residents outside Yukon.
  255. EC, Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, [2011] OJ, L 26, 28/01/2012 at art 8. Note, this provision only applies to mining “where Member States consider that their characteristics so require” (Article 4(2))
  256. 42 USC § 4331.
  257. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, SC 1992 c 37, s 4(2).
  258. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, ss 44(1), (3).
  259. Environment Act, CCSM c E125, s 12.0.2.
  260. Eva Liedholm Johnson, Mineral Rights: Legal Systems Regulatory Exploration and Exploitation (DCL Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, 2010) (Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology, 2010) at 87, online: <http://kth.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:300248/FULLTEXT01>.
  261. Cal PRC, § 21061.1. “Feasible” is defined as: “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner in a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors.”
  262. David Lawrence, “Impact significance determination—Back to basics” (2007) 27 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 755 at 757.
  263. David Lawrence, Impact significance determination—Back to basics (2007) 27 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 755 at 757.
  264. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 50, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  265. 40 CFR § 1508.27
  266. Qiaoling Chen, Yuanzhi Zhang and Ari Ekroos, “Comparison of China’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law with the European Union (EU) EIA Directive” (2007) 132 Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 53 at 58.
  267. Cal PRC§ 21068.
  268. Cal PRC§ 21083(b).
  269. David Lawrence, The Significance of Social and Economic Impacts in Environmental Assessment (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2004) at 8.9, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=CD221BCC-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  270. Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, ‘Matters of National Environmental Significance’ – Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1., p.3, online at http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/publications/pubs/nes-guidelines.pdf.
  271. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 11.
  272. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 14(3)(a)(i).
  273. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 14(3)(a)(ii).
  274. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 14(3)(a)(iii).
  275. This lack of guidance was evident in the Prosperity Mine case, where after negotiations resulted in a decision to have a joint panel EA process, the proponent requested and was granted a different review process: First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (Prince George: First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 41.
  276. Environmental Impact Assessment Administrative Procedures 2012 (WA), section 10 (Levels of Assessment), online at http://edit.epa.wa.gov.au/EPADocLib/Environmental%20Impact%20Assessment%20Administrative%20Procedures%202012.pdf.
  277. Martin Haefele and Kimberley Cliffe-Phillips, “Environmental Impact Assessment Made in the North” (Paper delivered at International Association for Impact Assessment Annual Conference, Vancouver, April 2004) at 5-6, unpublished, available online: http://reviewboard.ca/upload/ref_library/pa390%20Cliffe-Philips%20and%20Haefele%20EIA%20Made%20in%20the%20North_1183674172.pdf. “Preliminary Screening (PS) is a cursory look at the potential environmental impacts and the potential for public concern of a proposed development. A Preliminary Screening only needs to establish that there might be significant adverse impacts on the environment or public concern. Preliminary Screenings can be conducted by various agencies or departments with regulatory authority; Environmental Assessment (EA) is a more in-depth examination of the potential impacts of a development. It is conducted by the MVEIRB, if a preliminary screener (or the MVEIRB itself) concludes that a development might have significant adverse impacts on the environment or be cause for public concern. It establishes whether or not significant adverse impacts or public concerns are likely; Environmental Impact Review (EIR) follows EA where the EA concludes that significant impacts or public concern are likely and cannot be mitigated with known technology. This step is comparable to a panel review under CEAA.”
  278. Qiaoling Chen, Yuanzhi Zhang and Ari Ekroos, “Comparison of China’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law with the European Union (EU) EIA Directive” (2007) 132 Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 53 at 58.
  279. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 33, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_User_Guide.pdf>.
  280. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Fairness and Service Code (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2009) at 9.
  281. Note that under the Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002, s 3, the EAO Executive Director “must take into account the general policies respecting public consultation set out in this regulation and ensure that they are reflected in the assessment”. However, this does not clearly indicate that the EAO Executive Director must take the public’s comment into account when reviewing an EA.
  282. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002 c 43, s 17(3)(b).
  283. Environmental Assessment Act, RSBC 1996 c 119, s 29(1). “In making a referral, under this section, of an application for a project approval certificate, the executive director must take into account the application, the project report and any comments received about them.” The current Act contains no such requirement.
  284. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, ss 7(1), 9(2); Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 117(2).
  285. 40 CFR § 1503.4(a).
  286. Environmental Impact Assessment EIA Regulations (Government Notice R 543 in Government Gazette 33306 of 18 June 2010) South Africa, s 6(7).
  287. BC First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Sharing the Wealth: First Nation Resource Participation Models (Prince George, BC First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2010) at 4, online: <http://fnbc.info/sharing-wealth-first-nation-resource-participation-models>.
  288. Pat Larcombe, Determining Significance of Environmental Effects: An Aboriginal Perspective (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 2000), s 6, Schedule 7, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=072A8227-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  289. Champagne & Aishihik First Nations, Best Practices Code for Mineral Interests on Non-Settlement Land (Whitehorse: Champagne & Aishihik First Nations, 2007) at 7, online: <http://www.cafn.ca/pdfs/bestprac.pdf>.
  290. Pat Larcombe, Determining Significance of Environmental Effects: An Aboriginal Perspective (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2000), online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=072A8227-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  291. David Lawrence, The Significance of Social and Economic Impacts in Environmental Assessment (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2004) at 8.6, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=CD221BCC-1&offset=2&toc=show>; First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (West Vancouver: First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 53. In regards to Redfern Resource’s proposed air cushion barge project to operate from the Tulsequah Chief Mine down the Taku River into Alaska to Juneau: “The traditional use study showed that the barge operation would diminish Tlingit fishing opportunity in the river by about 10%. The EAO concluded, without any consultation with the Tlingits or other visible analysis, that this loss was ‘insignificant’ and, therefore no mitigation or compensation was required—by either the Crown or the proponent. Further, the EAO would not impose any mitigation or monitoring to document whether the barge would interfere with fishing activity or destroy nets, etc. in the river.”
  292. Pat Larcombe, Determining Significance of Environmental Effects: An Aboriginal Perspective (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2000) at s 4.3.1, online: < http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=072A8227-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  293. Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council, Critique of the BC Environmental Assessment Process from a First Nations Perspective (Prince George: Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council, 2007) at 2-3, online: <http://www.carriersekani.ca/images/docs/lup/EAO%20Critique%20-%20CSTC.pdf >; Centre for Indigenous Environmental Resources, Meaningful Involvement of Aboriginal Peoples in Environmental Assessment (Winnipeg: Centre for Indigenous Environmental Resources, 2008) at 53.
  294. Elmar Plate, Malcolm Foy and Rick Krehbiel, Best Practices for First Nation Involvement in Environmental Assessment Reviews of Development Projects in British Columbia (West Vancouver: New Relationship Trust, 2009) at vi.
  295. Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 99; Martin Haefele and Kimberley Cliffe-Phillips, Environmental Impact Assessment Made in the North (delivered at the International Association for Impact Assessment annual conference, Vancouver, April 2004) at 2 [unpublished, available online: < http://reviewboard.ca/upload/ref_library/pa390%20Cliffe-Philips%20and%20Haefele%20EIA%20Made%20in%20the%20North_1183674172.pdf>.
  296. David Lawrence, The Significance of Social and Economic Impacts in Environmental Assessment (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2004) at 8.6, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=CD221BCC-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  297. David Lawrence, The Significance of Social and Economic Impacts in Environmental Assessment (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2004) at 8.4, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=CD221BCC-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  298. Finmark Act, (Act of 17 June 2005 No. 85) Norway, ss 4, 10.
  299. Stephen Ellis, “Meaningful Consideration? A Review of Traditional Knowledge in Environmental Decision Making” (2005) 58 Arctic 66 at 67.
  300. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 23, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>; Smyth, C.R. A Review of Environmental Impact Statements and their Utility for Coal Surface Mine Reclamation Planning in Alberta and British Columbia (Vancouver: Proceedings of the 29th Annual British Columbia Mine Reclamation Symposium, 2005), online: <https://circle.ubc.ca/bitstream/handle/2429/8857/17%20Clynt%20Smyth.pdf?sequence=1>.
  301. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 39.
  302. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 2(1).
  303. Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 115.1.
  304. Centre for Indigenous Environmental Resources, Meaningful Involvement of Aboriginal Peoples in Environmental Assessment (Winnipeg: Centre for Indigenous Environmental Resources, 2008) at 41.
  305. Elmar Plate, Malcolm Foy and Rick Krehbiel, Best Practices for First Nation Involvement in Environmental Assessment Reviews of Development Projects in British Columbia (West Vancouver: New Relationship Trust, 2009) at viii.
  306. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 10(1). As demonstrated by the EAO with its section 10 order, which, under the legislation, must be issued where the EAO Executive Director deems that a reviewable project “may have a significant adverse environmental, economic, social, heritage or health effect, taking into account practical means of preventing or reducing to an acceptable level any potential adverse effects of the project”.
  307. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, ss 11(2)(b),(3). In deciding what effects to consider, the EAO Executive Director must “take into account and reflect government policy” identified during the EA review by a government agency or organization responsible for that policy area. The requirement to adhere to government policy may allow for undue political interference in the EA process.
  308. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, ss 6(1), 10(1), 20(1).
  309. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 10(1).
  310. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 26, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  311. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 28, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  312. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, October 2010) at 29, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  313. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 26, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  314. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 20, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>. For example: fish and fish habitat, listed species, rare ecosystems, air quality, water quality.
  315. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 20-21, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  316. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 21, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  317. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 14, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  318. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 15, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  319. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 16, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  320. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 21-22, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  321. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 21, online: http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  322. Elmar Plate, Malcolm Foy and Rick Krehbiel, Best Practices for First Nation Involvement in Environmental Assessment Reviews of Development Projects in British Columbia (West Vancouver: New Relationship Trust, 2009) at iii.
  323. EC, Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, [2011] OJ, L 26, 28/01/2012 at art 3.
  324. Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England & Wales) Regulations 1999, SI 1999/293, Schedule 4, Part I, s 4.
  325. 40 CFR § 1502.16
  326. 42 USC 4332.
  327. O Rev Stat § 517.979(3)(a) (2011).
  328. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, RSA 2000, c E-12, s 49(j).
  329. Environmental Assessment Act, RSBC 1996, c 119, s 1; compare to Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, ss 6, 10, 20; see also Kwikwetlem First Nation v British Columbia (Utilities Commission), 2009 BCCA 68 (CanLII), para 53.
  330. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 26, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>: activities or sites of social and cultural importance including, but not limited to, land and resource use, First Nation community interests, and other features or indicators of community wellbeing and quality of life.
  331. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 54, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  332. EC, Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, [2011] OJ, L 26, 28/01/2012 at art 3.
  333. Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 111(1).
  334. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, RSA 2000, c E-12, s 49(d).
  335. Environmental Impact Assessment EIA Regulations (Government Notice R.543 in Government Gazette 33306 of 18 June 2010) South Africa, s 31(2)(d).
  336. Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 111(1).
  337. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, s 5(1)(c)(iii).
  338. Annie Booth & Norm Skelton, “Improving First Nations’ participation in environmental assessment processes: recommendations from the field” (2011) 29(1) Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 49 at 56.
  339. Pat Larcombe, Determining Significance of Environmental Effects: An Aboriginal Perspective (Winds and Voices Environmental Services Inc. for the Research and Development Monograph Series, 2000) at Appendix 5, online: < http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=072A8227-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  340. Environmental Protection Act, 1997, (Act No XXXIV OF 1997) Pakistan, s 2(i)(a).
  341. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, SC 1992, c 37, s 2.
  342. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, s 5(1)(a).
  343. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002 c 43, s 11(2)(b).
  344. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 26.
  345. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 27.
  346. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 33, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  347. Elmar Plate, Malcolm Foy and Rick Krehbiel, Best Practices for First Nation Involvement in Environmental Assessment Reviews of Development Projects in British Columbia (West Vancouver: New Relationship Trust, 2009) at i. This includes not only mining, but also logging, energy and hydro projects; Note: Although BC’s EA legislation does not mandate that these effects be assessed during an EA review, they may nevertheless trigger the government’s duty to consult affected First Nations. The British Columbia Court or Appeal recently found that the duty to consult includes a consideration of the cumulative effects of “past wrongs” and the impact of future developments: West Moberly First Nations v. British Columbia (Chief Inspector of Mines), 2011 BCCA 247 para 119.
  348. Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council, Critique of the BC Environmental Assessment Process from a First Nations Perspective (Prince George: Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council, 2007) at 8, online: <http://www.carriersekani.ca/images/docs/lup/EAO%20Critique%20-%20CSTC.pdf>.
  349. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, s 19(1)(a).
  350. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 42(1).
  351. Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 117(2).
  352. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, RSA 2000, c E-12, s 49.
  353. See, Dawber v Ontario 36 CELR (3d) 191, 2008 CarswellOnt 3658.
  354. Regulation Respecting Environmental Impact Assessment and Review, RQ, c Q-2, r 9, s 3.
  355. Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing NEPA, ss 1508.7 and 1508.25; See also, US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Federal Activities, Consideration Of Cumulative Impacts In EPA Review of NEPA Documents (Washington, DC: US EPA, 1999), online http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/nepa/cumulative.pdf.
  356. 43 CFR§ 46.115.
  357. O Rev Stat § 517.979(3)(b).
  358. Environmental Impact Assessment EIA Regulations (Government Notice R.543 in Government Gazette 33306 of 18 June 2010) South Africa, s 31(2)(l)(i).
  359. Environmental Impact Assessment EIA Regulations (Government Notice R.543 in Government Gazette 33306 of 18 June 2010) South Africa, s 1(1).
  360. First Nations Mining Summit, The State of Mineral Exploration and Mining in British Columbia 2008 (Prince George: First Nations Mining Summit, 2008) at 24.
  361. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 112(1).
  362. Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing NEPA, s 1508.8; See also, US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Federal Activities, Consideration Of Cumulative Impacts In EPA Review of NEPA Documents (Washington, DC: US EPA, 1999) at 2, online http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/nepa/cumulative.pdf.
  363. Elmar Plate, Malcolm Foy and Rick Krehbiel, Best Practices for First Nation Involvement in Environmental Assessment Reviews of Development Projects in British Columbia (West Vancouver: New Relationship Trust, 2009) at x.
  364. 40 CFR § 1508.27.
  365. Environmental Impact Assessment EIA Regulations (Government Notice R.543 in Government Gazette 33306 of 18 June 2010) South Africa, s 22(2)(i)(i).
  366. British Columbia, Office of the Auditor General, An Audit of the Environmental Assessment Office’s Oversight of Certified Projects, (Victoria: Office of the Auditor General, 2011,) at 17, online: <http://www.bcauditor.com/pubs/2011/report4/audit-bc-environmental-assessment-office-EAO>.
  367. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002 c 43, s 10(1).
  368. British Columbia, Ministry of Environment, Why develop this policy? (Victoria: Ministry of Environment, 2012), online: <http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/emop/development.html>.
  369. Pat Larcombe, Determining Significance of Environmental Effects: An Aboriginal Perspective (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2000) at s 4.2.2, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=072A8227-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  370. British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Policy for Mitigating Impacts on Environmental Values (Environmental Mitigation Policy): Final Working Draft (11 June 2012), online: <http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/emop/docs/EMPolicyFinalWorkingDraft.pdf>.
  371. Hussein Abaza et al, Environmental Impact Assessment, Course Module, (United Nations Environment Programme, 2007) at s 7, online: <http://eia.unu.edu/course/?page_id=173>.
  372. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 51, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  373. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 50, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  374. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, s 2(1).
  375. Robyn Hooper and Jessica Miles, Environmental Mitigation and Offsetting Policy – First Nations Workshops: Key Findings (Victoria: Ministry of Environment, 2011), online: <http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/emop/feedback/docs/EMOP-FirstNationsWorkshopKeyFindings.pdf>.
  376. Industrial Development Information and Siting Act, Wy Stat § 35-12-107(f).
  377. David Lawrence, The Significance of Social and Economic Impacts in Environmental Assessment (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2004) at 8.4, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=CD221BCC-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  378. Political Constitution of the United Mexican States, of 1917, art 27, s VII.
  379. The responsible ministers for EA’s on mines are the Minister of Environment, and the Minister of Energy, Mines and Natural Gas: British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Fairness and Service Code (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2009) at 8, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_FairnessAndServiceCode_Jan09.pdf>.
  380. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 17(3). Note: The ministers may also elect to require the proponent to provide more information.
  381. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 9: any approvals granted without meeting this requirement are of no force and effect.
  382. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 8(1).
  383. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, ss 8(2), 18(6); British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 39, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/EAO_User_Guide.pdf>. Projects must usually be substantially started within 5 years of the issuance of the EA certificate.
  384. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Information Bulletin Morrison Mine Project Denied Environmental Assessment Certificate, Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, Oct 1, 2012 at 1, online: <http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/html/deploy/epic_project_doc_list_224_b_waa.html>.
  385. As discussed above, the EAO may give recommendations and reasons when submitting its assessment to the minister, but this is a discretionary, rather than mandatory requirement.
  386. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 17(2).
  387. Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 121.
  388. Environment Act, CCSM c E125, s 11(13).
  389. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 8,101(3).
  390. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, SC 1992, c 37, s 53(2)(a)-(e);
  391. EC, Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, [2011] OJ, L 26, 28/01/2012 at art 2(2)(d).
  392. United Nations Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention), 25 June 1998, Economic Commission for Europe, 4th Ministerial Conference, UN Doc ECE/CEP/43, art 6(9), online: <http://www.un-documents.net/aarhus.htm>. This Convention applies to various metal production and processing activities including roasting of metal ore.
  393. Cal PRC § 21091(d)(2)(A) (2011).
  394. 40 CFR § 1503.4(a).
  395. West Moberly First Nations . British Columbia (Chief Inspector of Mines), 2011 BCCA 247 at para 144.
  396. Centre for Indigenous Environmental Resources, Meaningful Involvement of Aboriginal Peoples in Environmental Assessment (Winnipeg: Centre for Indigenous Environmental Resources, 2008) at 48.
  397. Pat Larcombe, Determining Significance of Environmental Effects: An Aboriginal Perspective (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 2000) at s 6, Schedule 7, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=072A8227-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  398. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 3.
  399. Ciaran O’Faircheallaigh, “Environmental agreements, EIA follow-up and aboriginal participation in environmental management: The Canadian experience” (2007) 27 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 319 at 329.
  400. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002 c 43, s 23.4. The sole reference to “appeals” in the BC Environmental Assessment Act provides that, despite other enactments, if the Minister issues concurrent approvals for other applications (such as mine permits – discussed below in Section 8 of this Phase), the minister’s decision is final and not subject to review or appeal under the legislation of which that enactment forms part; Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 64, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.; see also Do RAV Right Coalition v Hagen, 2006 BCCA 571.
  401. First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (Prince George: First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 17-18; Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 67, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  402. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 64-65, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  403. Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide, Guidebook for evaluating mining project EIAs (Eugene: Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide, 2010) at 21-23.
  404. Environment Act, CCSM c E125, ss 27, 28.
  405. Environment Quality Act, RSQ c Q-2, s 31.3, 96.
  406. Environmental Protection Act, SNL 2002, c E-14.2, s 107, 108.
  407. The Environmental Assessment Act, SS1979-80, c E.10.1, s 18.
  408. Karma El-Fadl and Mutasem El-Fadel, “Comparative assessment of EIA systems in MENA countries: challenges and prospects” (2004) 24 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 553 at 559.
  409. Karma El-Fadl and Mutasem El-Fadel, “Comparative assessment of EIA systems in MENA countries: challenges and prospects” (2004) 24 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 553 at 559.
  410. Karma El-Fadl and Mutasem El-Fadel, “Comparative assessment of EIA systems in MENA countries: challenges and prospects” (2004) 24 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 553 at 559.
  411. Karma El-Fadl and Mutasem El-Fadel, “Comparative assessment of EIA systems in MENA countries: challenges and prospects” (2004) 24 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 553 at 559.
  412. Obaidullah Nadeema and Thomas Fischer, “An evaluation framework for effective public participation in EIA in Pakistan” (2011) 31 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 36 at 37.
  413. Council on Environmental Quality Executive Office of the President, A Citizen’s Guide to the NEPA (Washington, DC: Department of Environment, 2007) at 30, online: < http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/Citizens_Guide_Dec07.pdf>. Some federal agencies, such as the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service, have an administrative appeals process.
  414. New Zealand Resource Management Act 1991 (NZ) 1991/69. Assessments for “resource consents” are required and these may be appealed by “affected persons” to the Environment Court.
  415. The National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997 (No 22 of 1997) India, s 11.
  416. Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act (Act No 8 of 1999) Kenya, s 129.
  417. Environmental Protection Act of 2002, (Act No 19 of 2002) Mauritius, part VIII.
  418. Environmental Protection Act 1996, (Act No 11 of 1996) Guyana, s 18, 28, 29, 51-57.
  419. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, ss 19, 37; British Columbia, Office of the Auditor General, An Audit of the Environmental Assessment Office’s Oversight of Certified Projects, (Victoria: Office of the Auditor General, 2011) at 8, online: <http://www.bcauditor.com/pubs/2011/report4/audit-bc-environmental-assessment-office-EAO>.
  420. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 19(1).
  421. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 19(2).
  422. Public Consultation Policy Regulation, BC Reg 373/2002; British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 37. Provincial policy states that “Where appropriate, the process will involve consulting with working group members and First Nations … In addition, the Executive Director may require some form of public consultation in relation to an amendment application, but again this will vary based on the nature of the proposed change and other relevant factors, such as the degree to which the public and interested parties have already been engaged regarding the amendment request.”
  423. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 19(3).
  424. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 31(1).
  425. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, ss 19, 37.
  426. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 68, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  427. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 51-52, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  428. Environment Act, CCSM c E125, s 14(3).
  429. Environmental Regulation for Mining Activities (Decree n.° 26/2004 of 20 August) Mozambique, art 13.
  430. Ciaran O’Faircheallaigh, Environmental agreements, EIA follow-up and aboriginal participation in environmental management: The Canadian experience (2007) 27 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 319 at 321.
  431. Joe Arts, Paula Caldwell and Angus Morrison-Saunders, “Environmental impact assessment follow-up: good practice and future directions — findings from a workshop at the IAIA 2000 conference”, (2001) 19(3) Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 175 at 175–185.
  432. 43 CFR § 46.145.
  433. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, RSA 2000, c E-12, s 70(3).
  434. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, SC 1992 c 37, s 38(5).
  435. Environmental Impact Assessment Law (Law No. 81 of 1997) Japan, art 51, online: <http://www.env.go.jp/en/laws/policy/assess/index.html>.
  436. British Columbia, Office of the Auditor General, An Audit of the Environmental Assessment Office’s Oversight of Certified Projects, (Victoria: Office of the Auditor General, 2011) at 6, online: <http://www.bcauditor.com/pubs/2011/report4/audit-bc-environmental-assessment-office-EAO>.
  437. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, ss 8(2), 18(6).
  438. British Columbia, Office of the Auditor General, An Audit of the Environmental Assessment Office’s Oversight of Certified Projects, (Victoria: Office of the Auditor General, 2011) at 15, online: <http://www.bcauditor.com/pubs/2011/report4/audit-bc-environmental-assessment-office-EAO>; British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Frequently Asked Questions (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, undated), online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/FAQ.html>. “The EA certificate may contain requirements for: Monitoring the effects of the project; Comparing the anticipated effects of the project, as set out in the EA application, with the actual effects; Evaluating the adequacy of measures implemented to prevent or mitigate adverse effects; and Periodically reporting the results of the above activities to the EAO or another agency.”
  439. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 62, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>; Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s.8; British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 47-48, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>; These commitments are initially drafted by the proponent and are reviewed and revised by the EAO during the course of the EA.
  440. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 62, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>; Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 8; British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Application Information Requirements Template (Victoria, Environmental Assessment Office, October 2010) at 47-48, online: <http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pdf/AIR_Template_oct2010.pdf>.
  441. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 63, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  442. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 62-63, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  443. Joe Arts, Paula Caldwell and Angus Morrison-Saunders, “Environmental impact assessment follow-up: good practice and future directions — findings from a workshop at the IAIA 2000 conference”, (2001) 19(3) Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 175 at 175–185; Angus Morrison-Saunders & Joe Arts , “Introduction to EIA follow-up”, in Angus Morrison-Saunders& Joe Arts, eds, Assessing Impact: Handbook of EIA and SEA Follow-up (London: Earthscan, 2004) 1 at 4-5.
  444. Ciaran O’Faircheallaigh, “Environmental agreements, EIA follow-up and aboriginal participation in environmental management: The Canadian experience” (2007) 27 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 319 at 320.
  445. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 34(1).
  446. Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c 43, s 37(2).
  447. British Columbia, Office of the Auditor General, An Audit of the Environmental Assessment Office’s Oversight of Certified Projects, (Victoria: Office of the Auditor General, 2011) at 6, online: <http://www.bcauditor.com/pubs/2011/report4/audit-bc-environmental-assessment-office-EAO>.
  448. First Nations Energy & Mining Council, Environmental Assessment and First Nations in BC: Proposals for Reform (Prince George: First Nations Energy & Mining Council, 2009) at 18-19.
  449. British Columbia, Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Assessment Office User Guide (Victoria: Environmental Assessment Office, 2010) at 35. Provincial states that: “The EAO may hold a post-environmental assessment process meeting with the proponent and permitting agencies to review the certificate’s conditions and commitments, the project status, and permitting requirements. A lead ministry may then assume responsibility to act as the proponent’s primary point of contact and coordinate permitting activities”; See also, British Columbia, Office of the Auditor General, An Audit of the Environmental Assessment Office’s Oversight of Certified Projects, (Victoria: Office of the Auditor General, 2011) at 22, online: <http://www.bcauditor.com/pubs/2011/report4/audit-bc-environmental-assessment-office-EAO>. Contains examples of EA projects that have incorporated good practice principles into monitoring activities.
  450. British Columbia, Office of the Auditor General, An Audit of the Environmental Assessment Office’s Oversight of Certified Projects (Victoria: Office of the Auditor General, 2011) at 7.
  451. Pat Larcombe, Determining Significance of Environmental Effects: An Aboriginal Perspective (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2000) at s 4.2.4, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=072A8227-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  452. Environmental Assessment Regulations, NS Reg 26/95, as am, s 19(1)(j).
  453. Licensing Procedures Regulation, Man Reg 163/88, s 1(1)(k).
  454. Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, 1993, ratified by Nunavut Land Claims Agreement Act SC 1993, c 29, s 12.5.5.
  455. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, RSA 2000, c E-12, s 49(i).
  456. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, s 19.
  457. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, s 19, 30, 31,37, 43; Canada, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Follow-up programs under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. Operational Policy Statement, (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2011), online: http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=499F0D58-1, According to federal government policy, follow-up programs are required for projects assessed by a comprehensive study, mediation, or review panel. Although CEAA 2012 allows for follow-up measures, critics claim that it is seldom done well or at all Jason Prno, Assessing the Effectiveness of Impact and Benefit Agreements from the Perspective of their Aboriginal Signatories (MA Thesis, University of Guelph, 2007) at 24, online: <http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/thesescanada/vol2/002/MR33902.PDF>, [unpublished].
  458. Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 111(1).
  459. Ciaran O’Faircheallaigh, “Environmental agreements, EIA follow-up and aboriginal participation in environmental management: The Canadian experience” (2007) 27 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 319 at 327; Government of Canada, Government of the North West Territories and BHP Diamonds Inc, Environmental Agreement (January 6, 1997) art I, online: <http://www.monitoringagency.net/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=%2bHCwiwiJm7E%3d&tabid=87>; Government of Canada, Government of the North West Territories, Diavik Diamond Mines Incorporated, Dogrib Treaty 11 Council, Lutsel K’e Dene Band, Yellowknives Dene First Nation, North Slave Metis Alliance and Kitikmeot Inuit Association, Environmental Agreement (March 8, 2000), art 1, online: <http://www.diavik.ca/documents/Diavik_Environmental_Agreement.pdf>;  Government of Canada, Government of the North West Territories, De Beers Canada Mining Inc, Dogrib Treaty 11 Council, Lutsel K’e Dene Band, Yellowknives Dene First Nation and North Slave Metis Alliance Environmental Agreement De Beers Snap Lake Diamond Project (May 31, 2004) art I, online: <http://www.slema.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/De-Beers-Final-Environmental-Agreement-PDF1.pdf>. Note – all these agreements contain explicit statements that the agreements are legally binding. Other responsibilities of these boards include: ongoing review of environmental management systems; monitoring to verify the accuracy of the EA and the effectiveness of mitigative measures; facilitating the effective involvement of Indigenous peoples; and, integrating traditional knowledge into environmental monitoring and management.
  460. Ciaran O’Faircheallaigh, “Environmental agreements, EIA follow-up and aboriginal participation in environmental management: The Canadian experience” (2007) 27 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 319 at 321; Environmental Management Act (No 239 of 2002) Netherlands, § 7.39.
  461. Mark Haddock, Environmental Assessment in BC (Victoria: University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre, 2010) at 68, online: <http://www.elc.uvic.ca/publications/documents/ELC_EA-IN-BC_Nov2010.pdf>.
  462. EC, Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 27 June 2001, on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment, [2001] OJ, L 197/30 at art 10.
  463. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, SC 1992 c 37, s 2(1); [Also present in CEAA 2012, s 2(1) of Bill C-38]
  464. Angus Morrison-Saunders & Jos Arts, “Exploring the Dimensions of EIA Follow-up” (Paper delivered at the 24th annual meeting of the International Association for Impact Assessment, Vancouver, 24-30 April 2004) at 8, online: <http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~angusms/Publications/conferences/ams-arts-iaia04.pdf> [unpublished].
  465. Qiaoling Chen, Yuanzhi Zhang and Ari Ekroos, “Comparison of China’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law with the European Union (EU) EIA Directive” (2007) 132 Environmental Monitoring & Assessment 53 at 62.
  466. Pat Larcombe, Determining Significance of Environmental Effects: An Aboriginal Perspective (Ottawa, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2000) at s 4.2.4, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=072A8227-1&offset=2&toc=show>.
  467. Canada, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Participant Funding Program (Ottawa, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2012), online: < http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=E33AE9FB-1>.
  468. Ciaran O’Faircheallaigh, “Environmental agreements, EIA follow-up and aboriginal participation in environmental management: The Canadian experience” (2007) 27 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 319 at 323.
  469. Robert B Gibson, Sustainability-based assessment criteria and associated frameworks for evaluations and decisions: theory, practice and implications for the Mackenzie Gas Project Review (A report prepared for the Joint Review Panel for the Mackenzie Gas Project) (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2006) at 4, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/155701CE-docs/Robert_B_Gibson-eng.pdf >. Sustainability assessments, one form of strategic EA, should include “socio-ecological system integrity; livelihood sufficiency and opportunity; intergenerational equity; intra-generational equity; resource maintenance and efficiency; socio-ecological civility and democratic governance; precaution and adaptation; and immediate and long term integration.”
  470. Robert B Gibson, Specification of sustainability-based environmental assessment decision criteria and implications for determining ‘significance’ in environmental assessment (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2000) at 7, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=086E7767-1&toc=show&offset=1gt> at 7.
  471. EcoJustice, Toward Sustainability: The Seven-year Review of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (Vancouver/Toronto: EcoJustice, 2011) at 6, online: <http://www.ecojustice.ca/media-centre/media-release-files/ceaa-review-submission>.
  472. Robert B Gibson, Sustainability-based assessment criteria and associated frameworks for evaluations and decisions: theory, practice and implications for the Mackenzie Gas Project Review (A report prepared for the Joint Review Panel for the Mackenzie Gas Project) (Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2006) at 4, online: <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/155701CE-docs/Robert_B_Gibson-eng.pdf>.
  473. Heather McLeod-Kilmurray and Gavin Smith, “Unsustainable Development in Canada: Environmental Assessment, Cost-Benefit Analysis, and Environmental Justice in the Tar Sands” (2010) 21 J E LP-CAN 65 at 73.
  474. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Foundation for a Sustainable Future, Report of the Joint Review Panel for the Mackenzie Pipeline Project, Executive Summary, (Ottawa, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2010) at 5, online <http://www.assembly.gov.nt.ca/_live/documents/content/10-03-02TD4-16(5).pdf>.
  475. Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, SC 2003, c 7, s 42(1)(h).
  476. Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, SC 1998, c 25, s 115.
  477. EC, Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 27 June 2001, on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment [2001] OL, J 197/30; Qiaoling Chen, Yuanzhi Zhang and Ari Ekroos, “Comparison of China’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law with the European Union (EU) EIA Directive” (2007) 132 Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 53 at 53. The Environmental Impact Assessment Law of the P. R. China was adopted on the 1st September 2003 (hereinafter China EIA law). China EIA law provides that Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is to complement the current project-oriented EIA process in regional and sector plans and programs.

Fair Mining Practices:

A New Mining Code for BC
  1. 1Negotiation of Agreements
  2. 2First Nations’ Resource Policies
  3. 3Indigenous Rights, Consultation and Consent
  4. 4The Surface Versus Subsurface Divide
  5. 5Mineral Prospecting and Exploration
  6. 6Environmental Assessment for Mining Activities
  7. 7Permits for Mine Development and Operation
  8. 8Compliance and Enforcement in the Mining Sector
  9. 9Mine Closure and Post Closure
  10. 10Securing the Cost of Mine Clean-up

Learn About Mining

Problems and Solutions

MINE MEDICINE MANUAL:

A Community Resource