See Attached. We generally…

See Attached.

We generally support the government's overarching objective to streamline the Renewable Energy Approval (REA) process. However, understanding the technical criteria and procedural guidance to complete natural heritage related assessments and reports required by Ontario Regulation 359/09: Renewable Energy Approvals under Part V.0.1 of the Environmental Protection Act (REA Regulation) is critical to providing regulatory certainty to industry and ensuring meaningful consultation and engagement with the impacted stakeholders.

Concurrent with this Proposal, the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) have proposed updates to Natural Heritage Assessment Guide for Renewable Energy Projects (NHA Guide) which sets out evaluation technical criteria and procedural guidance to address natural heritage protections required by the REA Regulation (ERO proposal posting # 025-1146). The MECP proposes that amendments to the REA Regulation will remove the requirement for the MNR to review Natural Heritage Assessments and Bird/Bat Environmental Effects Monitoring Plans (EEMPs) meeting the NHA Guide, and that proponents would be required to attest that reports have been completed by qualified persons. As updates to the NHA Guide are pending, this Proposal lacks information.

The Proposal contemplates the use of a “qualified person” to conduct studies, evaluations, or prepare reports who possess the expertise, knowledge, or experience that will be defined in the updated NHA Guide. As proposed, an attestation must be submitted by a proponent indicating that the necessary studies were completed by qualified persons that are yet to be defined. We support the development of and reliance on a definition for a “qualified person”; however, we note that the required studies, evaluations and reports are often multi-disciplinary (e.g. flora and fauna, water quality assessment, hydrogeology, habitat assessment, etc.). As such, it is likely that multiple qualified persons will need to be engaged; and therefore, the definition of a “qualified person” will need to be broad.
Furthermore, the MECP should consider a common and broad definition for a “qualified person” that is consistent between the REA Regulation and other legislation such as the pending definition of “qualified professionals” proposed by the new regulations under the Species Conservation Act.

Currently, the MNR is responsible for issuing a variety of other permits and approvals under additional legislation including the Public Lands Act, Endangered Species Act, Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, and Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act and in some instances, meeting the requirements of the NHA Guide and submission of related assessments and reports had provided the MNR with adequate information to issue these permits or approvals. We understand that concurrent with this Proposal, the MNR have also proposed a Permit Reform Initiative (ERO proposal posting # 025-1141) that aims to streamline statutory and regulatory processes, update policies, improve service delivery, and enhance transparency by transitioning to a code of practice model and permit-by-rule approach for routine and low-risk activities. To the extent the MNR is considering requiring particular activities or industries to meet specific conditions detailed in codes of practice to allow proponents to self-register, such developed and updated codes of practice or guidelines or policy are yet to be defined. This Proposal aims to replace the requirement for MNR review and confirmation but did not mention specifically how the REA process will be updated to capture the above coordination in a manner that will reduce regulatory duplication and administrative delays.

The Proposal indicates that the Technical Guide for Renewable Energy Approvals will also be updated to reflect any other changes to requirements. This statement is somewhat vague because it does not specify what types of changes are anticipated, the scope of updates, or the timeline for implementation. Clarifying which requirements are likely to change and how these updates will be communicated would make the statement more actionable and transparent.

Regarding this and related government proposals to streamline and improve regulatory administration and approvals, time is of the essence given that concurrent energy procurement programs are underway by Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO), as well as considerations associated with repowering existing renewable energy assets and the opportunity for direct clean energy supply arrangements with industrial users. For example, it is anticipated that the IESO will award numerous energy procurement contracts in April 2026 via the first round of its Long Term 2 RFP.

Given the significance of the REA Regulation to the future clean energy projects, we respectfully encourage the MECP to provide further opportunities for engagement prior to the REA Regulation being amended. It would also be ideal to involve MNR staff in this engagement given their concurrent proposals and continued role related to natural heritage studies and protections.