![]() |
environmental & social impacts lessons learned Q & A references links Power Point Presentation |
Public
Participation and Aboriginal Engagement
Author:
Annetta Markussen-Brown
This
section consists of a review of the public participation and Aboriginal
engagement practices. Included is a discussion of the compliance of the Bruce
Power EIS with the Terms of Reference, a description of methodology, a
discussion of the results and issues raised, assessment of these issues,
mitigation measures, follow-up measures and a discussion of strengths,
weaknesses and lessons learned. The analysis in this section is supported by a
comparison with an EIS conducted on Hydro-QuebecUs Gentilly-2 refurbishment
project.
Terms
of Reference
Public participation is
central to the Environmental Assessment (EA) process as it allows for the
proponent to address concerns of the public regarding the proposed project. As
stated in Guidelines for the Preparation of the Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for Bruce PowerUs New Nuclear Power Plant Project
RIn preparing the EIS,
the proponent is required to engage residents and organizations in all affected
communities, other interested organizations, and relevant government agencies.S
Compliance
of EIS with Terms of Reference:
EIS Guideline Requirements |
Included in EIS? Yes/No |
EIS Section |
2.2 Public Participation and Aboriginal
Engagement - Highlights of public engagement
(sharing of information, gathering input); - Methods used to provide information,
obtain input and engage the public; - Types of support provided to
communities, organizations and individuals; - Results; - Proposed measures to address public
concerns; - Summary of issues raised; - Explanation of how the results of the
public engagement influenced the design of the project; - Continue to provide up-to-date
information describing the project to the public. Regarding Aboriginal engagement the
Bruce Power Ltd must: - Involve potentially affected Aboriginal
people and identify any changes that the project may have on the current use
of lands and resources for traditional purposes; - Include a summary of the history of the
proponentUs relationship with Aboriginal people with respect to the Bruce
Nuclear Site in general and the project in specific; - Ensure the Aboriginal people have the
information they require in order to determine possible impacts; - Describe how the concerns of the
Aboriginal people will be addressed including a summary of discussions,
issues and concerns; - Describe the potential impact on
asserted or established Aboriginal rights, title and treaty rights and
present mitigation measures and - Describe the objectives of and the methods
used for Aboriginal group engagement, issues or concerns raised through such
engagement and any details not otherwise subject to confidentiality
agreements, including a summary of the discussions, paper and electronic
correspondence and meetings held. -
Continue
to provide up-to-date information describing the project and involve the
Aboriginal people in determining how best to deliver that information e.g.,
the types of information required, translation needs, different formats, and
the possible need for community meetings. |
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y |
2.4, 3.0 |
2.3 Traditional Knowledge -
Incorporate
into the EIS the local knowledge to which it has access or that it may be
expected to acquire through appropriate means, in keeping with ethical
standards and without breaching obligations of confidentiality. |
N |
2.6 |
6.0 Public Participation |
Y |
2.4, 3.0 |
6.1 Aboriginal Peoples - Provide a summary of the history of the
proponentUs relationship with Aboriginal people with respect to the project; - Describe the objectives and methods used for Aboriginal group
engagement, issues or concerns raised; - Include a summary of the discussions,
correspondence and meetings held. |
Y Y Y |
3.3 |
6.2 Government Agencies - Describe the involvement of provincial and
federal government ministries, departments or agencies and local governments
including the municipalities of Kincardine, Saugeen Shores, Arran-Elderslie,
Brockton and Huron-Kinloss. This may also include the Ontario Ministry of
Energy and Infrastructure, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, and the
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Park Superintendents for McGregor Point
and Inverhuron Provincial Parks; - Describe the objectives of engagement,
methods used, issues raised and ways issues are addressed. |
Y Y |
3.4 |
6.3 Stakeholders - Describe involvement of local
businesses, neighbouring residences, cottagers, outdoor recreational
interests and NGOUs; - Describe the objectives of engagement,
methods used, issues raised and ways issues are addressed. |
Y Y |
3.5-3.6 |
6.4 Other Public Participation - Describe any other public engagement
undertaken by the proponent prior to submitting the EIS including public
located outside of Canada. |
Y |
3.0 |
9.3 Valued Ecosystem Components - Public input on VEC selection (including
comments during EIS final Guideline review period) |
Y* |
3.5.4.4 |
10.2.3 Aboriginal Land, Aquatic Area
and Resource Use |
Y |
8.12 |
10.2.7 Description of Aboriginal
peoples cultural heritage |
Y |
8.12 |
11.1 Effects Prediction - Consideration of views from the public
and Aboriginal groups in assessment method. |
Y |
2.4-2.6, 3.0 |
11.5.3 Aboriginal Traditional Land Use |
Y |
6.3, 6.5, 9.2.11, 9.3.11, 9.4.11,
10.1.11, 10.2.11, 10.3.11, 10.4.11, 10.5.11, 10.6.11 |
*see comment
regarding VECs in Weaknesses
Relevant
Public Participation Documents
Canadian
Environmental Assessment (EA) Act
Sections 21.1, 21.2 and 22 of the Canadian EA
Act require that the assessment include notification of, and consultation with,
potentially affected stakeholders, including the local public. Consultation
activities are expected to be monitored by CNSC and Agency staff throughout the
process. Public consultation is required under the Federal Joint EA process at
three stages. First, the public is asked to comment on the draft Joint Review
Panel Agreement and EIS Guidelines, including a public information session. Second, following the
submission of the EIS by the proponent to the Joint Review Panel the public is
asked to submit written comments on the EIS. Third, after the Joint Review
Panel has determined the adequacy of the EIS, public hearings are held,
resulting in the Joint Panel preparing its Panel Report on the Project for the
federal government.
Early
Aboriginal Engagement: A Guide for Proponents of Major Resource Projects
This guide
is produced by the Major Projects Management Office. The last issue from
December 2008 provides an outline that proponents can follow regarding
Aboriginal engagement. This outline includes:
-
Identify
Aboriginal Groups;
-
Engage
Aboriginal Groups: information sessions, written correspondence, meetings with
Aboriginal community leaders. Proponent may develop a formal agreement or
protocol as a means to incorporate traditional knowledge and optimize the
benefits;
-
Documenting
the Consultation Process: including list of Aboriginal groups, project info
that they were provided with, summary of issues raised, the proponentUs
responses.
UNEP EIA Training Manual – Review of
EIA Quality
The UNEP
Training Manual for EIA review states that one of the key objectives of EIA
review is to Ttake account of public commentU. It also tells the reader to pose
the following questions:
-
Does
the report address the Terms of Reference?
-
Have
the views and concerns of affected and interested parties been taken into
account?
-
Is
the information clearly presented and understandable by decision-makers and the
public?
The manual
provides guidelines and suggests that with regards to public participation a
set period for public review and a formal notification procedure should be
implemented. The notification should indicate where the EIA report is displayed
and how comments are to be received. It is mentioned that typically, public
comments are solicited in writing. However, this approach may exclude many
people, including those who are directly affected by the proposal.
With regards to using input from public
comment it is stated in the manual that the input from the public has proven to be
important in checking and evaluating the quality of the EIA report; for
example, with regard to the description of the affected environment and
community, the attribution of significance of residual impacts, the effectiveness of
mitigation measures and the selection of an alternative.
Overall Compliance
The overall compliance of the Bruce Power EIS
with the Terms of Reference and the other relevant EIS documents is very good.
The only area where they were not able to comply is concerning the section on
Traditional Knowledge in the Terms of Reference. Bruce Power was not able to
provide this information within the timeframe of the EIS. Their Aboriginal
Technical Study is still pending submission because of this issue.
Public
Participation Objectives
-
Identify
affected and interested community members, stakeholders and Aboriginal peoples;
-
Deliver
Project and EA info;
-
Provide
opportunities for community members, other stakeholders and Aboriginal peoples
to identify their concerns and issues and provide input;
-
Encourage
early information sharing by participants;
-
Improve
the EA process and the Project by incorporation community and traditional
knowledge as well as public ideas and opinions;
-
Address
issues and concerns;
-
Demonstrate
how issues and concerns have been addressed throughout the EA process.