Proposing a Project Evaluation Policy that would replace the Class Environmental Assessment for Ministry of Natural Resources Resource Stewardship and Facility Development Projects

We are proposing to improve how environmental oversight is applied to Ministry of Natural Resources’ (MNR) projects. The goal of this proposal is to reduce delays for routine, lower-impact projects while maintaining oversight for projects that have a greater likelihood of affecting the environment, natural resource management and Indigenous values.

To do this, we are proposing a new Project Evaluation Policy (PEP) for MNR projects. The PEP would use a risk-based approach, focusing on projects with greater potential for impacts, improving efficiency, reducing duplication with other regulatory processes, and supporting meaningful engagement with Indigenous communities, stakeholders and the public.

The PEP would operate outside of the Environmental Assessment Act (EA Act) as an internal MNR policy to guide decision-making. To support this change, the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks is concurrently proposing regulatory changes under the EA Act to revoke the approval of the Class Environmental Assessment for MNR Resource Stewardship and Facility Development (Class EA-RSFD). A five-year transition period is also being proposed to allow continued use of the Class EA-RSFD for projects where the Class EA-RSFD process is already underway or the process is completed but the project not yet implemented (see ERO notice 026-0563). Visit Revoking the Class Environmental Assessment for Resource Stewardship and Facility Development Projects | Environmental Registry of Ontario for details on the changes proposed under the EA Act.

Project Evaluation Policy (PEP) – Policy Paper

We are seeking feedback on the proposal for a new PEP, as described in the policy paper.

We are asking for feedback to help inform the project evaluation process and ensure the PEP:

• Aligns the level of assessment with the level of potential impacts on the environment, natural resource management, and Indigenous values
• Removes duplication with other regulatory processes
• Provides a clear process for engagement with Indigenous communities, stakeholders and the public

The proposed approach would facilitate environmental oversight where it is needed most, engagement on these projects and set out a clear and streamlined evaluation process.

The proposed PEP would describe which projects would be evaluated and which would not. It would include:

• A list of projects that would be subject to evaluation under the PEP such as major dredging or excavation, introduction of species into new environments, and new roads.
• A list of projects that the PEP would not apply to, such as those that are urgently required to address a threat (i.e, emergency response), already subject to a similar environmental evaluation process, or on a list of projects that have been determined to have a lower potential for impacts (such as minor culverts, fish habitat enhancement, or administrative approvals).
• A preliminary review for projects with uncertain potential for impacts to determine if evaluation is needed.

The proposed project evaluation process for projects being assessed would include preparation of a Project Evaluation Report that:

• describes project details, rationale and alternatives
• assesses potential impacts on the environment, natural resource management and Indigenous values
• outlines measures to mitigate impacts

The evaluation process would include a 30-day engagement period to provide Indigenous communities, stakeholders and the public time to review and provide feedback on the Project Evaluation Report before it is finalized.

More detailed information on this proposal can be found by accessing the link to the policy paper titled “Proposal: Developing a Project Evaluation Policy (PEP) to Replace the Class Environmental Assessment for MNR Resource Stewardship and Facility Development Projects (Class EA-RSFD)”, listed below under the heading Supporting Materials.

Background – Class EA-RSFD

Ontario’s EA Act currently requires MNR to apply the Class EA-RSFD before certain projects can proceed.

This process applies to:

• resource stewardship activities (such as habitat restoration and fisheries management)
• facility development (such as building or upgrading ministry facilities)
• approvals or permissions granting rights to use public lands or natural resources (such as permits, licences)

The Class EA-RSFD establishes a process to assess potential environmental impacts, identify mitigation measures and facilitate dialogue with Indigenous communities, the public and other interested parties.

The Class EA-RSFD process can be time-consuming and administratively burdensome. Most projects require information submissions and screening that can delay approvals, even when the potential for environmental impacts is low.

Environmental Implications

We are committed to protecting Ontario’s environment and natural resources for present and future generations. Under this proposal, projects with higher potential to affect the environment, natural resource management, or Indigenous values would be subject to a structured evaluation process to confirm potential impacts and identify possible avoidance and mitigation measures. This approach is expected to result in a faster and clearer evaluation process and reduce duplication with other review frameworks.

Regulatory Impact Analysis

In developing this proposal, we considered potential impacts on the environment, natural resources, public health and safety, economic values, and social interests. Based on these considerations, we have determined that:

• No negative impacts on the environment are expected. The proposed Project Evaluation Policy (PEP) if implemented, would maintain oversight for projects with higher potential for impacts while streamlining requirements for lower-impact projects.
• The anticipated social impacts are minimal. The PEP if implemented would continue to provide meaningful engagement opportunities for Indigenous communities, stakeholders, and the public.
• The anticipated economic impacts are positive. The proposed changes would reduce administrative burden, shorten timelines for lower-impact projects, and eliminate duplication with other review processes. This would provide greater clarity and predictability for businesses and organizations seeking approvals for projects on public lands.