TWINNING OF HIGHWAY NO. 11 NORTH OF ROSTHERN TO SOUTH OF

PROJECT-SPECIFIC GUIDELINES FOR THE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TWINNING OF HIGHWAY NO. 11 NORTH OF ROSTHERN TO SOUTH OF MACDOWALL MINISTRY OF HIGHWAYS AND INFRASTRUCTURE These guidelines have been prepared by the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment to assist the Ministry of Highways and Infrastructure with the environmental impact assessment of their proposed highway twinning north of Rosthern to south of MacDowall, and associated ancillary activities.

Province of Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment December 2009

Project-Specific Guidelines -Twinning of Hwy.11 Rosthern to MacDowall - EAB Project EAB#2009-043

- i -

List of Acronyms.................................................................................................................................... iii 1.0 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................1 1.1 General Information on the Project-Specific Guidelines for the Environmental Impact

Statement ........................................................................................................................................1 2.0 Intergovernmental Cooperation on the Environmental Assessment .........................................2 3.0 The Federal Environmental Assessment Process.......................................................................2 3.1 Federal Participants........................................................................................................................2

3.1.1 Responsible Authorities ............................................................................................................2 3.1.2 Expert Federal Authorities ........................................................................................................3 3.1.3 Federal Environmental Assessment Coordinator .....................................................................3

3.2 Type of Federal Environmental Assessment ...............................................................................3 3.3 Proposed Scope of the Federal Environmental Assessment .....................................................3

3.3.1 Federal Scope of Project ..........................................................................................................3 3.3.2 Federal Scope of Assessment..................................................................................................4 3.3.3 Proposed Factors to be Considered .........................................................................................4 3.3.4 Proposed Scope of the Factors ................................................................................................5

4.0 The Provincial Environmental Impact Assessment Process ......................................................6 4.1 Proposed Scope of the Saskatchewan Environmental Impact Assessment.............................6

4.1.1 Saskatchewan Scope of Project ...............................................................................................6 4.1.2 Factors to be Considered in Saskatchewan EIA.......................................................................7 4.1.3 Proposed Scope of Factors to be Considered in Saskatchewan EIA .......................................7

5.0 Public Consultation for Provincial Environmental Impact Assessment and Federal Environmental Assessment Processes ........................................................................................8

6.0 Aboriginal Consultation for Provincial Environmental Impact Assessment and Federal Environmental Assessment Processes ........................................................................................9

7.0 EIS Guidelines.................................................................................................................................9 7.1 General Requirements....................................................................................................................9 7.2 EIS Executive Summary ...............................................................................................................10 7.3 Project Introduction......................................................................................................................11 7.4 Description of Existing Environment ..........................................................................................11

7.4.1 Biophysical Environment ........................................................................................................11 7.4.1.1. Air Quality and Climate...............................................................................................11 7.4.1.2. Background Noise ......................................................................................................12 7.4.1.3. Regional and Local Geology ......................................................................................12 7.4.1.4. Surficial Geology ........................................................................................................12 7.4.1.5. Soils............................................................................................................................12 7.4.1.6. Hydrogeology .............................................................................................................12 7.4.1.7. Hydrology and Surface Water Quality ........................................................................12

7.4.2 Aquatic Environment...............................................................................................................12 7.4.3 Terrestrial Environment ..........................................................................................................13

7.4.3.1. Vegetation ..................................................................................................................13 7.4.3.2. Wetlands ....................................................................................................................13 7.4.3.3. Wildlife........................................................................................................................14 7.4.3.4. Species at Risk...........................................................................................................15

7.4.4 Social Environment.................................................................................................................15 7.4.4.1. Socio-Economic Environment ....................................................................................15 7.4.4.2. Heritage Resources....................................................................................................15 7.4.4.3. Navigable Waterways.................................................................................................15

7.5 Provincial Environmental Impact Assessment and Federal Environmental Assessment .....16 7.5.1 Spatial and Temporal Boundaries: .........................................................................................16 7.5.2 Environmental Effects of the Project.......................................................................................17 7.5.3 Project Alternatives.................................................................................................................19


- ii -

7.5.4 Description of Preferred Approach..........................................................................................19 7.5.5 Accidents and Malfunctions: ...................................................................................................20 7.5.6 Effects of the Environment on the Project...............................................................................20 7.5.7 Regional/Cumulative Impact Assessment ..............................................................................20 7.5.8 Mitigation Measures................................................................................................................21 7.5.9 Commitments Register ...........................................................................................................27 7.5.10 Monitoring, Reporting and Follow-up......................................................................................27 7.5.11 Significance of Residual Adverse Environmental Effects........................................................27

8.0 Invitation for Public to Comment on Project Scope and Draft Guidelines ..............................28 Appendix A: Recommended Mapping Requirements........................................................................29


- iii -

List of Acronyms

BAEFT Best Available Economically Feasible Technologies

CEA Act The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act

CEAR The Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry

Cooperative Agreement The Canada-Saskatchewan Agreement on Environmental Assessment Cooperation (2005)

COSEWIC Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada

CWS Canada-Wide Standard

DFO Fisheries and Oceans Canada

EA Environmental Assessment (Federal)

EAB The Environmental Assessment Branch of the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment

EC Environment Canada

ECO Environmental Construction and Operation Plan

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment (Saskatchewan)

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

ESC Erosion and Sediment Control Plan

GPS Global Positioning System

IEE Initial Environmental Evaluation

INAC Indian and Northern Affairs Canada

LSA Local Study Area

NOC Notice of Commencement

NWPA Navigable Waters Protection Act

PSGs Project Specific Guidelines

RA Responsible Authority

SARA Species at Risk Act

SKCDC Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre

SMHI Saskatchewan Ministry of Highways and Infrastructure

TC Transport Canada

The Agency The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

The EA Act The Environmental Assessment Act (Saskatchewan)


- 1 -

1.0 Introduction

Saskatchewan Ministry of Highways and Infrastructure (SMHI) submitted a project proposal for twinning of a 37.9 km stretch of Highway No. 11 from 6 km north of the community of Rosthern to 2 km south of the community of MacDowall (approximate distances). The two communities are located between Prince Albert and Saskatoon. The project crosses a section of the Nisbet Forest and the Rural Municipalities of Duck Lake (No. 463) and Rosthern (No. 403).

The project involves the construction and operation of approximately 34.3 km of a new, two-lane roadway and the construction and operation of approximately 3.6 km of new sets of lanes east of the existing highway in the vicinity of Duck Lake. The project also includes the construction and operation of intersections and a service road adjacent to the highway. Ancillary activities of the project include the operation of aggregate pits and a temporary asphalt plant; the construction, operation, and decommissioning of borrow pits and temporary work camps; and the construction and operation of culverts and wildlife/cattle passes.

Highway 11 provides access to Saskatchewan’s north and is heavily used for recreation and resource-based industry. Traffic volumes increase in the summer months due to recreational traffic. Traffic volumes are projected to increase 35% from 2000 to 2015. The purpose of the project is to reduce accident rates along the highway and at all intersections.

The Environmental Assessment Branch (EAB) of the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment informed SMHI that the project will require an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) under The Environmental Assessment Act (Saskatchewan) (the EA Act). Pursuant to section 9 of the Act, SMHI is required to conduct an EIA and prepare and submit to the Minister of Environment an environmental impact statement (EIS) for technical and public review.

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency) also informed SMHI that two federal authorities, Transport Canada (TC) and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC), have responsibilities and must complete an Environmental Assessment (EA) pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEA Act)

These project-specific guidelines (PSGs) will assist SMHI in conducting the EIA and in preparing the EIS. The EIS will also form the basis of a federal screening report that is required for a federal EA.

1.1 General Information on the Project-Specific Guidelines for the Environmental Impact Statement

The guidelines reflect concerns and issues that have been identified by provincial and federal officials regarding the proposed development based on the information provided to date. The guidelines identify the information that should be included in the EIS.

The project proposal dated May 2009 provides a strong starting basis for conducting the provincial EIA. A good portion of the background information required in the EIA has already been well documented in the Initial Environmental Evaluation (IEE). References to the sections of the IEE that will satisfy the requirements of specific components of the EIA are provided in the guidelines.

These guidelines should not be regarded as either restrictive or exhaustive, as concerns other than those identified in the document could arise during the investigations associated with the EIA.


- 2 -

Should the proposed project be found environmentally acceptable, the proponent will be required to apply to the Ministry of Environment and other applicable ministries and agencies, and to applicable federal authorities for the necessary approvals, permits, and licences that regulate construction and operation and to comply with all applicable provincial and federal laws.

Reference to Ministry of Environment’s General Guidelines for Conducting an EIA, as well as The Agency guidance materials for the conduct of EAs (http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/012/newguidance_e.htm), is recommended.

2.0 Intergovernmental Cooperation on the Environmental Assessment

The Government of Canada and the Province of Saskatchewan have agreed to review the project cooperatively as per the Canada-Saskatchewan Agreement on Environmental Assessment Cooperation (2005) (Cooperative Agreement). Canada and Saskatchewan intend to cooperate throughout the process in a manner that meets the legislated environmental assessment requirements of both parties. Under the Cooperative Agreement, the provincial EIA and federal EA, directed respectively by the Act and the CEA Act, are coordinated for proposals subject to provincial and federal jurisdiction, where not limited by individual statutory or process requirements of the respective processes. Accordingly, information requirements of both provincial and federal agencies have been included in this document so that the EIS will be sufficient to address the requirements of the provincial EIA and federal EA.

Both governments will use the information generated through the cooperative environmental assessment as the basis for their respective decisions about the project. However, each government will retain its ability to make project-related decisions on matters within its own legislative authority.

Under the Cooperative Agreement, the EAB is the lead party and contact for the project.

3.0 The Federal Environmental Assessment Process

3.1 Federal Participants

3.1.1 Responsible Authorities

Transport Canada

TC has determined that it is a Responsible Authority (RA) and must conduct an EA for this project because it will provide financial assistance to enable the project to be carried out in whole or in part pursuant to paragraph 5(1)(b) of the CEA Act. TC may have additional EA responsibilities pursuant to paragraph 5(2) and or 5(3) of the Navigable Waters Protection Act (NWPA), which allows for interference to navigation. The issuance of authorizations or approvals is described in the Law List Regulations under the CEA Act. If TC issues approvals pursuant to the NWPA for this project, it would be required to conduct an EA relative to the regulatory decisions pursuant to paragraph 5(1)(d) of the Act.

Indian and Northern Affairs

INAC have indicated that the project, as proposed, occurs on First Nations Reserve lands. As such, approval under Section 35 of the Indian Act will be required, pursuant to paragraph 5(1)(c) of the CEA Act, an EA must be conducted before an approval can be issued.. Therefore INAC is an RA.


- 3 -

3.1.2 Expert Federal Authorities

Pursuant to the Federal Coordination Regulations under the CEA Act, Environment Canada (EC) and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) have an interest in the project related to their mandate and are participating in the review as expert federal authorities.

3.1.3 Federal Environmental Assessment Coordinator

The Agency is the federal EA coordinator for the proposed project and is responsible for coordinating the review activities of the RA(s) and expert federal authorities in accordance with section 12 of the CEA Act and in conjunction with the provincial EIA.

3.2 Type of Federal Environmental Assessment

The proposed construction and operation, modification, decommissioning, and abandonment of the “project” known as the Twinning of Highway No. 11 from North of Rosthern to South of MacDowall is an undertaking in relation to a physical work and, as such, is defined as a project under section 2(1)(a) of the CEA Act.

As described in section 3.1.1, CEAA “triggers” have been identified for this project, pursuant to subsection 5(1) of the CEA Act. There are no identified exclusions from EA for this project, pursuant to section 7 of the CEA Act and the corresponding Exclusion List Regulations. The project is not of a type identified in the Comprehensive Study List Regulations of the CEA Act, and at this time, TC and INAC are not aware of any potential environmental effects or public concerns associated with this project that would warrant referral to a mediator or review panel pursuant to section 25 of the CEA Act. As such, TC and INAC have determined that a screening-level EA must be conducted under the CEA Act.

3.3 Proposed Scope of the Federal Environmental Assessment

Scoping establishes the boundaries of the federal EA. The scope identifies what elements of the development proposal to consider and include and what environmental components are likely to be affected, and focuses the assessment on relevant issues and concerns.

3.3.1 Federal Scope of Project

Pursuant to section 15 of the CEA Act, TC and INAC as the RA(s), have defined the scope of the project for the purpose of the federal EA to include all aspects of the project related to the construction, operation, modification, decommissioning, and abandonment of the proposed highway and any related infrastructure. This will include, but is not limited to:

site preparation activities (e.g. clearing vegetation, utilities)

construction and operation of the additional lanes, frontage roads, and intersection;

construction of any temporary structures or construction roads, including the temporary work camp area;

construction, modification and operation of the associated infrastructure (e.g. water crossings, traffic control structures, culverts, stormwater management);

construction and operation of all ancillary works (e.g. aggregate and borrow pits);


- 4 -

decommissioning of the proposed project components (note: if decommissioning and abandonment of the proposed project is not foreseeable, the proponent may explain this in the documentation and no further assessment of this work will be required).

maintenance (e.g. vegetation management in ditches, erosion control measures on soil stockpiles, inspection and maintenance of road crossings, inspection and maintenance of water crossings and wildlife/cattle passes, summer and winter maintenance, de-icing methods, and periodic pavement rehabilitation);

establishment and operation of temporary asphalt plant; and

reclamation and revegetation of rights-of way, borrow pits, and temporary work camp sites;

The EIS should include a description of each component of the project and any associated physical works and activities.

3.3.2 Federal Scope of Assessment

The scope of assessment defines the factors proposed to be considered in the EA and the proposed scope of those factors.

The RA(s) are required to consider the factors specified in section 16 of CEA Act, taking into consideration the definitions of the environment, environmental effect, and project prior to making a decision regarding whether to take action (e.g. issue a permit or authorization) that would permit the project to proceed.

3.3.3 Proposed Factors to be Considered

As stated in the CEA Act: "Environment" means the components of the Earth, and includes: (a) land, water and air, including all layers of the atmosphere; (b) all organic and inorganic matter and living organisms; and (c) the interacting natural systems that include components referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b).

As stated in the CEA Act, “environmental effect” means, in respect of a project:

(a) any change that the project may cause in the environment, including any change it may cause to a listed wildlife species, its critical habitat or the residences of individuals of that species, as those terms are defined in subsection 2(1) of the Species at Risk Act,

(b) any effect of any change referred to in paragraph (a) on

(i) health and socio-economic conditions,

(ii) physical and cultural heritage,

(iii) the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by aboriginal persons, or

(iv) any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archaeological, paleontological or architectural significance, or

(c) any change to the project that may be caused by the environment.

The scope of the screening assessment under the CEA Act must include all the factors identified in paragraphs 16(l)(a) to (d) of the CEA Act and, as provided for under 16 (1)(e), any other matter that TC and INAC require to be considered.


- 5 -

Paragraphs 16(l) (a) to (e) require that the following factors be included in the screening:

the environmental effects of the project, including the environmental effects of malfunctions or accidents that may occur in connection with the project and any cumulative environmental effects that are likely to result from the project in combination with other projects or activities that have been or will be carried out;

the significance of the effects referred to in the previous paragraph;

comments from the public that are received in accordance with the cooperative environmental assessment process;

measures that are technically and economically feasible and that would mitigate any significant adverse environmental effects of the project; and

any other matter relevant to the screening that the RA may require to be considered;

With the discretion allowed for in paragraph 16(l)(e) of the CEA Act, the TC and INAC require that the following additional factor be included in the EA:

the need for and the requirements of any follow-up program in respect of the project.

Accordingly, the EIS shall include information for each of the above factors.

3.3.4 Proposed Scope of the Factors

The following provides details on the proposed scope of factors to be considered by the RA(s). The scope of factors to be considered in the assessment should include, but may not necessarily be limited to, potential effects (including cumulative effects) on the following environmental components (Additional information on these factors can be found in section 7.5.2 of this document and the IEE): air quality and climate (e.g. emissions of toxic substances, dust emissions, greenhouse gas emissions,

and contributions to smog);

surface water and aquatic habitat (e.g. quality and quantity; in particular, any streams, creeks, or lakes);

groundwater (e.g. quality, levels, flux, and movement);

subsurface geology and soils (e.g. soil erosion);

vegetation and vegetation communities;

fish and fish habitat;

wildlife and wildlife habitat (e.g. diversity, abundance, availability, movement, and habitat function);

migratory birds (e.g. diversity, abundance, and movement);

species of special concern (e.g. notably rare, threatened, or endangered species listed under the Species at Risk Act (SARA));

navigation;

noise;

effects of the project on federal lands (if applicable);

wetlands; and


- 6 -

contaminated sites (if applicable).

Taking into consideration the definition of “environmental effect”, the assessment should also address the effect of any environmental change that the project may have on: the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by aboriginal persons;

human health (residences are identified within 50m of the proposed alignment);

physical and cultural heritage, including First Nations’ interests;

socio-economic conditions (e.g. transportation, land use, population, safety issues, etc.); and

anything of historical, paleontological, or architectural significance.

4.0 The Provincial Environmental Impact Assessment Process

In Saskatchewan, a proponent that has a project that is considered to be a “development” pursuant to Section 2(d) of the EA Act is required to conduct an EIA of the proposed project and prepare and submit an EIS to the Minister of Environment.

In conducting a technical review of SMHI’s project proposal, EAB arranged for comments from provincial ministries and agencies. Based on the results of the technical review, the project met the definition of a “development”. As a consequence, SMHI is required to conduct an EIA of the project and submit an EIS to the Minister of Environment.

4.1 Proposed Scope of the Saskatchewan Environmental Impact Assessment

Scoping is the process used to identify the issues and impacts that are likely to be important in a Saskatchewan EIA and to establish the terms of reference for the EIA. The screening of the IEE by provincial reviewers established the basis for scoping.

4.1.1 Saskatchewan Scope of Project

Following from the provincial technical review of the IEE, the Saskatchewan EIA is to include all aspects of the project related to the construction, operation, modification, decommissioning, and abandonment of the proposed highway and any related infrastructure. This will include, but is not limited to:

rights-of-way clearing (vegetation clearing, topsoil stripping, and stockpiling);

construction and operation of the additional lanes, frontage roads, and intersection;

installation of culverts, flow equalization structures, cattle passes, and wildlife passes;

crushing and hauling operations;

construction of any temporary structures or construction roads, including the temporary work camp area;

construction, operation, and decommissioning of temporary work camps;

modification (if any) to an inactive landfill site;

construction and operation of all ancillary works (e.g. aggregate and borrow pits);’


- 7 -

operation, maintenance, and storage of machinery and equipment;

establishment and operation of a temporary asphalt plant;

maintenance (e.g. vegetation management in ditches, erosion control measures on soil stockpiles, inspection and maintenance of road crossings, inspection and maintenance of water crossings and wildlife/cattle passes, summer and winter maintenance, de-icing methods, periodic pavement rehabilitation);

reclamation and revegetation of rights-of way, borrow pits, and temporary work camp sites; and

decommissioning of proposed project components (note: if decommissioning and abandonment of the proposed project is not foreseeable, the proponent may explain this in the documentation and no further assessment of this work will be required).

The EIS should include a description of each component of the project and any associated physical works and activities.

4.1.2 Factors to be Considered in Saskatchewan EIA

As stated in the EA Act, a “development” means any project, operation, or activity, or any alteration or expansion of any project, operation, or activity, which is likely to:

(i) have an affect on any unique, rare or endangered feature of the environment;

(ii) substantially utilize any provincial resource and in so doing pre-empt the use, or potential use, of that resource for any other purpose;

(iii) cause the emission of any pollutants or create by-products, residual or waste products which require handling and disposal in a manner that is not regulated by any other Act or regulation;

(iv) cause widespread public concern because of potential environmental changes;

(v) involve a new technology that is concerned with resource utilization and that may induce significant environmental change; or

(vi) have a significant impact on the environment or necessitate a further development which is likely to have a significant impact on the environment;

and “environment”: means

(i) air, land and water;

(ii) plant and animal life, including man; and

(iii) the social, economic and cultural conditions that influence the life of man or a community insofar as they are related to the matters described in subclauses (i) and (ii);

4.1.3 Proposed Scope of Factors to be Considered in Saskatchewan EIA

Following from the factors described above and from the provincial technical review of the IEE, EAB recommends that the Saskatchewan EIA include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following environmental components. Additional information on these factors can be found in section 7.5.2 of this document and the IEE. air quality and climate (e.g. emissions of toxic substances, dust emissions, greenhouse gas emissions,

and contributions to smog);


- 8 -

aquatic habitat (alterations);

water quality (discharge of substances that may cause harmful effects);

water drainage patterns;

groundwater (e.g. quality, levels, flux, and movement);

subsurface geology and soils (e.g. soil erosion);

vegetation and vegetation communities;

wildlife and wildlife habitat (e.g. diversity, abundance, availability, movement, and habitat function);

migratory birds (e.g. diversity, abundance, and movement);

species of special concern (e.g. notably rare, threatened, or endangered species listed in Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre’s (SKCDC) web site;

noise;

wetlands;

contaminated sites (if applicable);

the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by aboriginal persons;

worker health and safety;

physical and cultural heritage, including First Nations’ interests;

socio-economic conditions (e.g. transportation, land use, population, safety issues, etc.); and

heritage property.

5.0 Public Consultation for Provincial Environmental Impact Assessment and Federal Environmental Assessment Processes

The public consultation documented in the IEE is sufficient for the purposes of the provincial EIA and federal EA process. Section 7.0 of the IEE (Public Consultation) and Table 7-1 of the IEE (Summary of Stakeholder Meetings) can be directly incorporated into the EIS.

It should be noted that before the draft PSGs are finalized, EAB will provide the public with a 30 day opportunity for review and comment. Comments received from the public may result in alterations to the PSGs.

TC will establish a Public Registry for the federal EA, as required by section 55 of the CEA Act. This will include the posting of the assessment in the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry (CEAR), which can be accessed on the Internet Web site of the Agency (www.ceaa.gc.ca). The Notice of Commencement (NOC) was posted on the CEAR on August 17, 2009. The NOC reference number is 09-01-49568.

Interested parties, including members of the public, will be able to obtain copies of documents related to the federal EA process by request through the registry information.


- 9 -

6.0 Aboriginal Consultation for Provincial Environmental Impact Assessment and Federal Environmental Assessment Processes

SMHI has the responsibility to determine if they have fulfilled their obligations to consult with aboriginal groups. Meetings have occurred with First Nation representatives. SMHI may also wish to contact the Métis Nation – Saskatchewan Western Region II. Where uncertainty about consultation arises, SMHI should contact their representative at the Ministry of Justice and Attorney General for a legal opinion. Questions on the Government of Saskatchewan Interim Guide for Consultation with First Nations and Métis People (January 2008) can be addressed to the Aboriginal Consultation Branch of the Ministry of First Nations and Métis Relations at (306) 787-5166.

In terms of the federal EA process, the assessment must consider the effect of any environmental change that the project may have on Aboriginal groups and their Aboriginal and/or treaty rights. SMHI will engage with potentially affected Aboriginal groups during the EA process to identify potential adverse impacts there may be on established or potential Aboriginal and treaty rights. If a potential adverse impact exists, SMHI will consult with the affected Aboriginal groups to determine the appropriate measures for mitigating the negative impact and/or effect to the established rights.

7.0 EIS Guidelines

The following sections outline the specific studies that should be undertaken and the information that should be obtained as part of the Saskatchewan EIA and federal EA, and how these should be presented and evaluated in the proponent’s EIS. These sections describe what would conventionally be understood as Draft PSGs under the Province of Saskatchewan’s environmental review process. They also provide further details about what the RA(s) propose to include in their scope of factors to consider in the conduct of the federal EA. This guideline portion of the Terms of Reference has been developed with input from provincial and federal expert advisors.

7.1 General Requirements

The EIS is a statement of the proponent’s environmental conclusions and commitments regarding the development and, as such, must be explicitly endorsed by the proponent.

The EIS will be made available for public review and should be written so that it can be understood by non-specialists. In particular, the executive summary must be easily understood and printed in black and white so that reproductions can be easily made. Acronyms as provided in the IEE are adequate for including in the EIS. A glossary of technical terms would also be useful.

The following sections describe the different topics to be addressed in the EIS. Sufficient information needs to be provided for each so that informed conclusions can be reached regarding the potential for impacts on the various components of the environment. However, the greatest time and effort should be applied to data collection and interpretation related to the most significant impacts as identified by the proponent and through these PSGs. SMHI must provide rationale as to why any issues identified in the guidelines were not addressed in the EIS and highlight key impacts that are identified for more intensive investigation.

Where external sources of information or data are used a brief reference for the source at the point at which the information is presented and a complete reference at the end of the EIS should be provided. Where conclusions that are critical to the assessment of environmental impact are cited from other reports, the proponent should provide sufficient detail of the originating data and analysis so as to enable the


- 10 -

critical review of that material. Such detailed reference material could be submitted as an appendix to the EIS. The EIS should be a stand-alone document upon which critical review can be undertaken.

When submitting the EIS, one digital copy (Word and/or PDF) and approximately 25 paper copies are required (confirm number with the EAB Project Development Administrator). The proponent may wish to print and bind the EIS in a way that is amenable to revision should changes to the EIS be required following technical and/or public review.

A suggested table of contents for the EIS is provided below:

Executive summary;

Application of the Provincial Environmental Impact Assessment and Federal Environmental Assessment Processes;

Project introduction;

Scope of the project;

Scope of the assessment;

Spatial and temporal boundaries of the assessment;

Description of the existing environment (description of environmental components and likely interactions with the project);

Assessment of the environmental effects (provincial and federal)

Project alternatives;

Description of the preferred approach;

Accidents and malfunctions;

Effects of the environment on the Project;

Assessment of the cumulative environmental effects;

Mitigation measures;

Summary of commitments;

Description of monitoring, reporting, and the follow-up process;

Magnitude and significance of residual effects;

Summary of stakeholder consultation;

Summary of First Nations/aboriginal groups consultation, and

Conclusions and recommendations for the decision.

7.2 EIS Executive Summary

An executive summary of the EIS is required. It should briefly summarize the EIS under the following topic areas:

purpose of carrying out the development;

description of the alternative means for development (if any) and the preferred option;


- 11 -

the benefits and costs of the preferred option and the alternatives (if any);

if no alternatives means for development are considered, the reasons why;

potential for short and/or long-term environmental effects of the development, including the potential for spills/malfunctions/accidents;

potential cumulative environmental effects that are likely to result from the development in combination with other local/adjacent projects (past, present, and future) and activities in the short and long term;

significance of the identified potential environmental impacts;

mitigation measures, including their environmental outcome and technical and economical feasibility;

decommissioning and reclamation;

monitoring programs for the development at all phases; and

public involvement activities and comments received, along with SMHI’s responses.

To enhance public involvement, the executive summary should be written in clear language, avoid the use of technical terms and jargon, and be available under a separate cover.

7.3 Project Introduction

Describe the objectives in twinning the highway north of Rosthern to south of MacDowall and provide an overview of the area that the project may impact, taking into account that more than just the area immediately adjacent to preferred route may be impacted. Consider the impacts on wildlife, vegetation, fish, water, air, land uses and values, and local communities and businesses when selecting the area to describe in the project. Provide a map describing the project area, without yet highlighting the preferred approach for the project (route selection, access road and intersection location, borrow pit locations, aggregate sources, and temporary work camp locations). Selection of the preferred approach for the project (which may or may not include the route identified in the proposal) and description of alternatives should only be identified after considering and describing the existing environment. Identify features that are important to SMHI in achieving the overall objective. Provide enough detail on the map that the reader can locate themselves within the province of Saskatchewan. As a suggestion, at a minimum, this map and other maps in the EIS should contain the information outlined in Appendix A.

7.4 Description of Existing Environment

Describe the existing environment of the planning area. The objective in describing the existing environment is to provide enough baseline information to understand how the current environmental conditions might be impacted by project alternatives, aiding in selection of the preferred approach and development of mitigation strategies to prevent or reduce the expected impacts.

No more data than is necessary should be collected and presented to meet these purposes.

7.4.1 Biophysical Environment

7.4.1.1. Air Quality and Climate

Information provided in the IEE, including methodology, is appropriate for an EIA and can be directly incorporated into the EIS.


- 12 -

7.4.1.2. Background Noise

Information provided in the IEE, including methodology, is appropriate for an EIA and can be directly incorporated into the EIS. The EIS should identify the location of and distance from residential communities and other sensitive receptors in the study area such as residences, hospitals, daycares, and seniors’ residences. Aerial photos or maps to support the text should be included.

7.4.1.3. Regional and Local Geology


7.4.1.4. Surficial Geology


7.4.1.5. Soils

Information provided in the IEE, including methodology, is appropriate for an EIA and can be directly incorporated into the EIS. Additional maps depicting soil capability for agriculture; salinity extent, degree, and position; wind erosion susceptibility; and water erosion susceptibility are advised. The reader of the IEE can interpolate the above soil physical characteristics from the soil maps, but direct observation without interpolation would provide easier understanding on the implication of these characteristics.

7.4.1.6. Hydrogeology


7.4.1.7. Hydrology and Surface Water Quality

Please include information on local drainage patterns. In particular, there is concern about surface drainage accumulating from highway runoff into Adamson Lake, leading to potential long-term contamination. Digital watershed information can be obtained from the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada website at http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1229003100989&lang=eng . The highway drainage catchment that possibly outlets to Lake Adamson or to the lake’s upgradient area should be identified. Historical and current water quality data should be collected for Adamson Lake, unless the project can be specifically designed to ensure that highway runoff does not drain into the lake. All additional hydrogeology information that is collected should be included in the section of the EIS that describes the existing environment.

7.4.2 Aquatic Environment

Information provided in the IEE, including methodology, is appropriate for an EIA in as far as the identification of potential fish-bearing streams can be directly incorporated into the EIS.

http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1229003100989&lang=eng�


- 13 -

7.4.3 Terrestrial Environment

7.4.3.1. Vegetation

Information provided in the IEE, including methodology, is a good start to describing vegetation in the Local Study Area (LSA). Initial vegetation surveys, including rare plant surveys, were concentrated in the northern part of the LSA. SMHI indicates that two additional vegetation surveys have since been completed in May and July of 2009.

The EIS must document all vegetation types encountered throughout the LSA. The EIS must also indicate how any plants listed by SKCDC as extremely rare, rare, and rare-uncommon are accounted for in the survey design and how methodologies employed for the surveys are in agreement with Standardized Methodology for Surveys of Rare Plants (SKCDC, 2009), which can be downloaded from the SKCDC website at http://www.biodiversity.sk.ca/ftp.htm .

The document entitled, Terrestrial Field Surveys: Permit Requirements, and Design & Methodology Guidelines (Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment, 2009) provides further guidance on general plant and rare plant surveys and can also be downloaded from the SKCDC website.

The two detailed and cursory vegetation inspection points established in wetlands, as document in the IEE, appear insufficient to document the number of rare plants that may be encountered in these vegetation communities. Many of the previously reported rare species in the area occurred in wetland environments. Further rare species surveys in wetland environments are recommended if not included in the additional vegetation surveys completed in May and June of 2009. A visual review of aerial photography for the project area indicates that wetlands occur throughout the LSA, including the southern portion.

Methodology used and results for additional rare plant surveys must be documented. All data recorded form rare plant surveys are to be submitted in digital form to the SKCDC, including GPS coordinates of rare plant discoveries.

If rare plants listed in the Wild Species at Risk Regulations (Saskatchewan) are to be collected during field surveys, a scientific research permit will be required from the Fish and Wildlife Branch of the Ministry of Environment.

In an appendix, please provide a list of the potential extremely rare, rare, and rare-uncommon plants that may occur in the LSD, as gathered through the information compilation for the IEE. This list should include species that may occur in the area but have not been reported as occurring. The importance of this list is demonstrated by Allium cernuum (nodding onion), a species not previously listed as occurring in the area but listed as potentially occurring in the Boreal Transition Ecoregion by the SKCDS. An occurrence of this plant was documented within the LSA in field surveys conducted by the Ministry of Environment between 1999 and 2003. Consulting a list of potentially occurring extremely rare, rare, and rare-uncommon plants will be important during construction activities, as such plants not previously documented may be discovered, and mitigation measures will be required. Also, by reviewing the list of potentially occurring extremely rare, rare, and rare-uncommon plants, the public may have some knowledge of the occurrence of these plants in the LSA and could bring this to the attention of SMHI.

7.4.3.2. Wetlands

Wetland vegetation types are broadly described in the vegetation type mapping. Wetlands have important significance as habitat for several extremely rare, rare, and rare-uncommon species of plants, wildlife, and amphibians, and other species with environmental and social significance. Ducks Unlimited have access to general delineation of wetlands in project area and are willing to share the information.

http://www.biodiversity.sk.ca/ftp.htm�


- 14 -

All additional vegetation information that is collected should be included in the section of the EIS that describes the existing environment.

Describe the location and size of wetlands, wetland type, condition, and flora and fauna;

describe the contribution of the wetland to the quantity and quality of surface water and groundwater;

describe the terrestrial and aquatic habitat functions;

describe the ecological function of the wetland in the surrounding ecosystem; and

describe the aboriginal uses of wetlands.

7.4.3.3. Wildlife

Information provided in the IEE, including methodology, is a good start to describing wildlife in the LSA, but additional work will be required

The IEE provided a list of rare wildlife species known to occur in the area. The SKCDC also provides a list of extremely rare, rare, and rare-uncommon species with potential to occur in the area. The proponent must consult the document entitled Expected Animal and Invertebrate Species by Ecoregion (SKCDC, 2009), which can be downloaded from the SKCDC website. As an example, Rana pipiens (Northern Leopard Frog) is identified as potentially occurring in the Boreal Transition Ecoregion and is listed as rare to uncommon (S3). This species in not included on the list of species targeted for wildlife surveys in 2009. Upon reviewing the list of potential species that may occur in the LSA, the proponent will need to assess the wildlife habitats of the LSA in which these species may occur and design the wildlife surveys accordingly. Please note that many of these species may frequent wetland habitats and there may be a need to refine the wetland classification for the LSA.

The document entitled, Terrestrial Field Surveys: Permit Requirements, and Design & Methodology Guidelines (Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment, 2009) provides guidance for identifying migratory staging area for birds, and for conducting breeding bird surveys and amphibian surveys. The document can be downloaded from the SKCDC website. Please note that for species at risk, estimates of the population size and if appropriate, territory size and critical habitats, are requested in addition to presence/absence data. SMHI must demonstrate that wildlife surveys were conducted at the appropriate time (day, year, and under suitable weather conditions) and location (relative to the ecological footprint of the development), and that sufficient effort was devoted to conducting thorough searches.

Methodology used and results for wildlife surveys must be documented. All data recorded from wildlife surveys is to be submitted in digital form to the SKCDC. If protected wildlife or wild species at risk are to be disturbed during the survey investigations, a Scientific Research Permit must be obtained from the Fish and Wildlife Branch of the Ministry of Environment.

Please note that the IEE identified two species, Phalacrocorax auritus and Sterna forsteri, in the rare wildlife species list that are not listed in the SKCDC as extremely rare, rare, and rare-uncommon. While there may be some consideration for mitigation where these species are encountered, discussion on these species should be separate from discussion of species listed as extremely rare, rare, and rare-uncommon. A separate subtitle, such as Species of Interest is suggested. Documentation of such species is also valuable for describing the general wildlife found in the area. The SKCDC would be interested in any survey information. All additional wildlife information that is collected should be included in the section of the EIS that describes the existing environment.


- 15 -

7.4.3.4. Species at Risk

In addition to species listed as extremely rare, rare, and rare-uncommon by SKCDC (as discussed in sections 7.4.3.1 and 7.4.3.2), identify all other species of concern present in the study area, including species listed on Schedule 1 of SARA and those recognized as “at risk” by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) that may occur at the site or adjacent lands within the zone of influence of the project. EC’s species at risk search tool (www.sararegistry.gc.ca ) should be consulted to assist in determining whether the ranges of any SARA Schedule 1 listed species at risk overlap with the site.

In addition to surveys required for extremely rare, rare, and rare-uncommon species listed by the SKCDC (as discussed in section 7.4.3.1 and 7.4.3.2), provide assessments of abundance and distribution using recognized survey protocols that optimize detection ability of all species listed on Schedule 1 of SARA and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC, and use sufficient survey effort to obtain comprehensive coverage.

Identify residences, seasonal movements, movement corridors, habitat requirements, key habitat areas, critical habitat, and general life history of all species listed on Schedule 1 of SARA and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC that may occur in the project area.

7.4.4 Social Environment

7.4.4.1. Socio-Economic Environment

Information provided in the IEE, including methodology, is a good start for the EIA and can be incorporated into the EIS. Additional information should be included on the section regarding traditional use of lands and resources by aboriginal persons. First Nation traditional activities also include conducting spiritual and ceremonial practices. Furthermore, Métis Western Region 2 may have some interest in the area, and if so, some discussion about their interests would be appropriate in the Socio-Economic Environment section. A description of the Eb’s cross-country ski trails should occur in the Non-Traditional Land Use section. The IEE discusses how these trails were considered in the Functional Planning Study. A description of the businesses that could be impacted by the project would also be appropriate in the Non-Traditional Land Use section (or perhaps under some other title). All additional socio-environment information that is collected should be included in the section of the EIS that describes the existing environment.

7.4.4.2. Heritage Resources

Information provided in the IEE, including methodology, is appropriate for an EIA and can be directly incorporated into the EIS. Further heritage screening and survey work on Site SH002 will be required prior to construction as documented on page 140 of the IEE. Heritage screening will also be required before borrow pits and work camps are established. All additional heritage information that is collected should be included in the section of the EIS that describes the existing environment.

7.4.4.3. Navigable Waterways

Any proposed works associated with the project that involve building in , on, over, through, or across any navigable waterway could result in interference with the public right to navigate.

The EIS should describe known waterway users, including known vessel use, on affected waterways. As well, all waterways affected by proposed works (new or changes to existing infrastructure) in, on, over,

http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/�


- 16 -

under, through, or across any waterway should be discussed in the EIS. This would also include any temporary works that may impede vessel passage and safety.

The EIS should include the following:

Appropriately scaled maps depicting where the existing waterways and in-water works are located (latitude and longitude);

Physical characteristics of the waterway (such as length, width, depth, seasonal flow, and fluctuations);

Photographs of the proposed work locations (crossings, and upstream and downstream views), if available, and to be shown in an appendix; and

conceptual drawings (plan and profile views) and proposed construction schedules and methods of the proposed in-water works, both permanent and temporary.

The submission of applications under the NWPA to the Regional Office of the Navigable Waters Protection Program would be required for all water crossings where the NWPA Minor Works and Waters Order were not applicable.

7.5 Provincial Environmental Impact Assessment and Federal Environmental Assessment

In conducting the provincial EIA and federal EA, the consideration of potential environmental effects should be done in a systematic and traceable manner and the methods used described. The results of the assessment process should be clearly documented using summary matrices and tabular summaries where appropriate. The assessment is to include an evaluation of alternatives in determining the preferred approach.

For the environmental effects (including cumulative effects) that are identified for the preferred approach, technically and economically feasible mitigation measures must be considered. Taking into consideration the mitigation measures identified, the report should also clearly identify the residual effects of the project (effects that that will exist after the implementation of mitigation) and make a determination regarding the importance of effects after mitigation measures.

7.5.1 Spatial and Temporal Boundaries:

The consideration of the environmental effects in the provincial EIA and federal EA needs to be conceptually bounded in both time and space. This is more commonly known as defining the study areas and time frames, or spatial and temporal boundaries of the screening assessment.

Study areas must encompass all relevant components of the environment, including the people, biota, land, water, air, and other aspects of the natural and human environment. Study boundaries should be defined taking into account ecological, technical, and social considerations. The spatial boundaries must reflect the geographic range over which the project’s environmental effects may occur, even if these effects extend beyond the project footprint.

The project footprint includes the area where new construction takes place, as well as areas or structures that are being decommissioned or abandoned.

The following geographic study areas are suggested as a reference point. It is expected that the spatial boundaries may vary for each environmental component, depending on the nature of the predicted effects. The specific spatial boundaries must be defined in the EIS.


- 17 -

Site Study Area The Site Study Area is the project footprint, as described above.

Local Study Area The Local Study Area is defined as that area existing outside the Site Study

Area boundary, where there is a reasonable potential for the occurrence of environmental effects from the project. The boundaries may change, as appropriate, following a preliminary assessment of the spatial extent of potential environmental effects.

Regional Study Area The Regional Study Area is defined as the area within which there is the potential for cumulative effects.

The temporal boundaries for the assessment must establish over what period of time the project-specific and cumulative effects are to be considered and should at a minimum address the planning horizon of the project.

7.5.2 Environmental Effects of the Project

The provincial EIA and federal EA must provide the information necessary to determine whether the benefits of the proposed development justify the environmental costs of the preferred approach.

Information provided in the EIS that is related to potential impacts (including beneficial impacts) for each alternative should be complete and detailed and include tables, figures, maps, and graphs where appropriate. Impacts are analyzed as the expected changes from the baseline conditions (the difference between environmental conditions expected if the development were not to proceed and those expected as a consequence of it). The potential impact should be described in terms of its probability, extent, frequency, and duration. The methods and assumptions used to estimate the impacts should be clearly documented and a rationale provided for the conclusions. Gaps in the quality of data that limit the analysis and conclusions should be explained and appropriate limitations placed on the reliability of predictions.

The provincial and federal government reviewers identified the potential impacts that should be considered when analyzing and explaining project alternatives. Some of these points have been discussed in the IEE and much of that information could be brought forward into the provincial EIA, the federal EA, and the EIS with any additional information as required. Following is the list of identified points that should be included in the provincial EIA, the federal EA, and the EIS:

Disturbance to rare plants.

Disturbance to rare wildlife (birds, insects, mammals, and amphibians) species and their habitats.

Disturbance to ecosystem functioning caused by fragmentation in the Nisbet Provincial Forest.

Disturbance and risk to wildlife during construction and operation of the highway.

Impacts to water and fish from fuel, chemical, or hazardous waste spills or leakages occurring during use, transportation, or storage of these materials.

Impacts from stream crossing construction on water (both quality and quantity), fish, and fish habitat (where present). Potential impacts should consider soil erosion (such as stream bank erosion, wind erosion, and erosion along road surfaces), direct soil or streambed disturbance (such as during construction), mass wasting (due to wash outs at road-related blockages or at failed stream crossing structures), or other processes.


- 18 -

Drainage impacts, including storm water run-off and spills, on water quality and quantity of receiving water bodies, during both the construction and operation phases.

Impacts to vegetation, including the removal of vegetation (particularly in sensitive habitats); potential adverse effects on biodiversity (such as the potential for the establishment of exotic invasive plant species and possible effects on genetic and species diversity); disturbance effects (such as edge effects); and (where relevant) the potential effects of vegetation control, road salt, and other operational considerations.

Impacts to agriculture due to changes in soil capability following rehabilitation of disturbed sites.

Impacts to wetland function and ecosystem functions that contribute to the integrity of the wetland will be affected by the project. Wetland functions include hydrological, biogeochemical, habitat, and ecological functions as well as social/cultural/commercial values, aesthetic/recreational values, and education and public awareness values.

Impacts on species listed under SARA and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC, as well as impacts to their critical habitat and to residences of individuals of those species.

Impacts on air quality during both the construction (such as diesel emissions from the operation of heavy equipment, and the generation of dust during construction activities) and operation phase (such as emissions associated with increased traffic levels). The air quality assessment should consider the potential adverse impacts to sensitive receptors. For example, the analysis should indicate the location of the nearest residences, and whether they are likely to be effected by emissions. The provincial EIA and the federal EA should also address any potential human health effects associated with negative impacts on air quality caused by the Project.

Impacts to affected public from increased noise and vibration levels. The environmental effects analysis should indicate, using quantitative information to the extent possible, what additional contribution the project may make during both the construction and operation phases (both daytime and nighttime scenarios). Specifically, the analysis should include the following: a land-use map identifying sensitive sites (e.g. residences, schools, day-cares, hospitals and nursing homes); ambient noise levels; predicted noise levels during construction and operation; an indication of any changes in noise levels; comparison of predicted levels with relevant guidelines; and noise abatement measures. The EIS should also address potential human health effects associated with negative impacts caused by the Project.

Impacts to heritage resources.

Local social and economic benefits associated with the local project related to jobs, business opportunities, or training opportunities, with emphasis on benefits to First Nation and Métis people.

Impacts to worker safety and health during construction activities.

Impacts to private landowners and businesses.

Disturbance of Wildlife Habitat Land designated through the Wildlife Habitat Protection Act.

Disturbance to lands currently indicated as a Treaty Land Entitlement in the IEE but now designated as the One Arrow Indian Reserve, and which is located in 45-01-W3 and borders the east side of the highway.

Disturbance to the Willow Cree Indian Reserve, which is located in 43-02-W3 and straddles the west and east side of the current highway. Discussion will be required with INAC to determine regulatory requirements.

Disturbance to the community of Duck Lake regarding rights-of-way construction within 2 km of the community.


- 19 -

Possible disturbance to lands currently set aside for potential selection as a Representative Area.

Disturbance to an inactive landfill site.

Possible impacts to a railroad right-of –way and possible impacts to a railroad if any railroad crossings are required.

Issues and concerns arising from public consultation to date.

The above list is not necessarily complete and any additional potential impacts identified by the proponent, regulators, technical reviewers, the public, and First Nations and Métis communities will need to be addressed.

7.5.3 Project Alternatives

Different alternatives for the project should be considered and the environmental impacts for each alternative analyzed and explained in the EIS in order to provide the justification for the preferred approach. The analysis of the alternatives should factor in the life-cycle of the development such as construction, operation, maintenance, decommissioning, and rehabilitation. Evaluation of alternatives may consider route selection, access road and intersection locations, borrow pit locations, and locations for sources of aggregate material.

The EIS shall include a discussion of the alternative means of carrying out the project that were considered technically and economically feasible. A discussion of the potential environmental effects that were considered relative to any such alternative means shall be included. As well, the site selection process for all significant components of the project shall be discussed in the EIS. The information presented will include the rational for selection of the proposed sites (routes) along with how the technical, geotechnical, and environmental criteria were considered in the decision making.

7.5.4 Description of Preferred Approach

A detailed description of the preferred approach must be provided describing all phases of the project, including construction, operation, maintenance, decommissioning, reclamation, and monitoring.

The description must provide the information necessary to determine whether the benefits of the proposed development to the province and its citizens justify the environmental costs of the preferred approach.

Provincial and Federal Government reviewers have provided some of the other detail and considerations that must be included in the description of the preferred approach as follows:

Exact locations (depicted on a map(s) and explained in text) of new highway routes and rights-of way, access roads and intersections at a scale appropriate to the effects and with identifiable geographic and environmental features, surface and ground water resources, current land use and nearby communities, residences, and industries.

Where possible, exact locations of borrow pits, aggregate sources, temporary asphalt plant, temporary work camps, maintenance facilities, and other activities associated with the project at a scale appropriate to the effects and with identifiable geographic and environmental features, surface and ground water resources, current land use and nearby communities, residences, and industries.

A detailed, large-scale map and a photomosaic showing the project area in relation to surrounding topographic and land-use features. Mapping should place the project in the context of current protected area reserves, Indian Reservations, recreational areas, wildlife protection lands, communities, heritage resource sites, etc.


- 20 -

The anticipated schedule of all phases of the project.

Detailed descriptions of timing and the methods proposed for the various undertakings related to stream crossing construction (bridge construction, culvert placement, coffer dams, dewatering, erosion control, etc.).

A summary of the potential environmental impacts of the preferred approach documented through the provincial EIA and federal EA must be provided. A table summarizing the potential environmental impacts for the preferred approach, similar to the format of Table 8-1 and Table 8-2 in the IEE, would be beneficial to technical and public reviewers. However, note that Table 8-1 and Table 8-2 will need adjusting to accommodate changes to the preferred approach after consideration of project alternatives.

All potential impacts and mitigation measures of the preferred approach must be described before highway construction begins.

7.5.5 Accidents and Malfunctions:

The EIS must identify the potential for environmental effects (including cumulative effects) resulting from accidents and malfunctions and unplanned events during any phase of the project and evaluate the likelihood and circumstances under which these events could occur. The implementation of any mitigation measures, contingency plans, and response mechanisms must also be detailed in this section.

7.5.6 Effects of the Environment on the Project

The provincial EIA and federal EA must also take into account how the environment could adversely affect the project. This should include consideration of the effects of severe weather events, such as extreme drought, abnormal precipitation, runoff/flooding, fire, earthquakes, rockfalls etc. The provincial EIA and federal EA must take into account any potential effects of climate change on the project, including an assessment of whether the project is sensitive to changes in climatic conditions during its lifespan.

7.5.7 Regional/Cumulative Impact Assessment

The EIS should discuss whether existing environmental conditions, including other developments in the area, might influence the development or its potential impacts. The discussion should address whether the project-specific effects of the development combined with the impacts from the existing and planned developments in the region will result in, or contribute to, any cumulative environmental effects or regional effects in the short or long term.

Cumulative effects are residual effects on the environment (i.e., that occur after mitigation measures have been put in place) combined with the environmental effects of past, present, and future projects or activities. Cumulative effects can also result from the combination of different individual environmental effects of the project acting on the same environmental component. As such, the effects of this project must be considered together with those of other projects and activities that have been, or will be carried out, and for which the effects are expected to overlap with those of the project (i.e., overlap in same geographic area and time).

In order to consider the potential cumulative environmental effects of the project, the EIS should identify other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects carried out in the study area. The emphasis in this section should be on “reasonably foreseeable” projects (e.g., projects that have been approved or that are currently advancing through the regulatory approvals process). Ongoing discussion with federal authorities is recommended in preparing a list of other projects and activities that should be addressed. At


- 21 -

a minimum, effort should be made to identify other projects planned by local and regional governments as well as provincial and federal agencies.

The projects should not be limited to other public transit/transportation infrastructure projects. All projects must be considered, especially those that may add cumulative effects to water quality, vegetation, wildlife habitat, air quality, and noise, as these environmental factors often experience the most impact from multiple projects/cumulative effects and should be a focus of a cumulative effects analysis.

Generally speaking, the information available to assess the environmental effects from other projects can be expected to be more conceptual and less detailed as those effects become more remote in distance and time to the project, or where information about another project or activity is not available. The consideration of cumulative environmental effects may, therefore, be at a more general level of detail than that considered in the assessment of the direct project-environment interactions.

Where potentially significant adverse cumulative effects are identified, additional mitigation measures may be necessary.

The Agency guidance documents, Operational Policy Statement OPS-EPO/3-1999 Addressing Cumulative Environmental Effects under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and Cumulative Effects Assessment Practitioners Guide should also be consulted regarding the scope of cumulative impacts to be evaluated in the EIS.

7.5.8 Mitigation Measures

Measures that will be implemented to minimize adverse impacts and enhance positive impacts of the preferred approach must be described. Any adverse impacts resulting from the project that cannot be mitigated must be explained. A table summarizing the environmental mitigation measures for the identified potential impacts for the preferred approach, similar to the format of Table 8-1 and Table 8-2 in the IEE, would be beneficial to technical and public reviewers. The environmental mitigation measures identified in Table 8-1 and Table 8-2 are suitable for bringing forward into the EIA and EIS after consideration for project alternatives and with additional considerations as identified in these PSGs.

All potential impacts and mitigation measures of the preferred approach must be described before highway construction begins.

Provincial and Federal Government reviewers have provided some of the other detail and considerations that must be included in addressing the mitigation measures as follows:

Stream crossing requirements – bridge construction, culvert placement (and related cross-sections).

The DFO note that the IEE identifies crossing 6 as supporting forage fish species. They have provided the following advice on in-stream work. DFO indicates that this advice is provided to satisfy the requirement of subsection 12(3) of the CEA Act and should not be taken to imply DFO’s approval of the project, or any part thereof, in accordance with the Fisheries Act or any other federal legislation.

o To protect spring spawning fish, their incubating eggs and the larval life stages, in-stream works associated with this project should take place during the open construction-timing window. For this area, the in-stream open work window is between July 1 and April 15.

o Every effort should be made by the Proponent to undertake the culvert reinstallation works in such a way as to minimize impacts to downstream areas during the proposed project. In particular:


- 22 -

– One hundred percent (100%) of downstream flows in the creek should be maintained at all times during the culvert installation project.

– The construction area should be effectively isolated using some form of coffer dams prior to culvert removal and reinstallation to prevent flows through the work site during the culvert works. The coffer dams should be lined with geotextile fabric or heavy gauge plastic to prevent erosion and leakage. Earthen berms are not to be used as coffer dams for this purpose. All materials associated with the coffer dams should be completely removed from the channel at the end of the project.

– If fish become trapped within the isolated/contained work area, no in-stream work within the contained area should proceed until all fish are salvaged and released unharmed into the channel outside of the isolated work site.

– For any dewatering activities from within the isolated work area, the water should be released into a well-vegetated area or settling basin and not directly back into the watercourse unless the water is clean. If necessary, the discharge area should be armoured with clean rock, geotextile fabric, or some other energy dissipating device to prevent erosion and scouring at the point of discharge.

o During construction every reasonable effort will be made to minimize the duration of any in-stream works. If re-contouring of the stream bed outside of the culvert footprint area (but still within the isolated work area) is required during the project, every effort should be made to minimize the size of the re-contoured area and the amount of sediment disturbance. Disturbed streambed outside of the work area should be returned to its pre-disturbed profile upon completion of the in-stream work. Alterations to the stream bed or banks should not occur outside of the work site isolation.

o Any vegetation clearing required to complete this project should be minimal in size and clearly marked (e.g., flagging tape, construction fencing, etc.) prior to clearing to minimize impacts to riparian vegetation during this project.

o Any stockpiled or excavated material should be located and stabilized above the high waterline where it will not erode into fish habitat. This includes any excavated material such as sediment, rocks, vegetation, and woody debris. This material should not be left on the edge of the stream bank or the road embankment where it can erode into fish habitat.

o Whenever possible, all machinery undertaking in-water work should do so from the existing road surface, the top of the banks, or within the isolated area. No heavy machinery should need to enter the water outside of the isolated area at any time during this project.

o All rock rip rap and fill materials (e.g., gravel, cobble, etc.) used for the project should be clean and free of oil, silt, dirt, and other contaminants. All rock rip rap and fill materials should be obtained from off site and not from below the average annual high water level of any waterbody or watercourse. The rip rap should be keyed into the substrate at the road slope/water interface to resist movement and, if necessary, be used in conjunction with a geotextile fabric to prevent undermining or erosion. The rip rap should be suitably sized to resist movement during predicted flow events.

o Any soils that are exposed and/or have significant potential for sediment delivery to the watercourse should be stabilized (i.e. re-seeded and/or revegetated) immediately following activities at the site to minimize potential erosion.

o The bottom of the new culverts should be installed at least 20% of their diameter below the thalweg (deepest part of the channel) of the watercourse.

o Appropriate precautions should be taken to ensure that deleterious substances do not enter the creek or any other watercourse:


- 23 -

– Equipment operating near any fish bearing waters should be properly maintained, in sound mechanical condition, and be free of any fuel, oil, hydraulic fluid, or coolant leaks. Cleaning, fueling and servicing of equipment should be conducted in an area from which spills or wash water will not enter fish habitat.

– Any spilled materials should be cleaned up as soon as possible and disposed of in an environmentally safe manner. Spilled material should not be left where it may enter any waterbody or watercourse.

– During construction and until revegetation is sufficient to control sediment erosion on exposed areas, SMHI should ensure that effective sediment and erosion control measures are in place, functioning properly, and maintained and/or upgraded as required to prevent sediment from entering fish habitat.

Estimated aggregate requirements and anticipated life of aggregate sources, including use in other projects (if applicable) and rehabilitation.

Erosion and sediment control measures and related locations.

In regard to reclamation and revegetation within the right-of-way, Section 9.1 of the IEE states that “Within 2 to 4 weeks of revegetation, a seedling establishment survey will be conducted.” Some of the species listed may take longer then 2 to 4 weeks to establish or they may not establish until the following season. Therefore, EC recommends that a seedling establishment survey be conducted one year after revegetation as well as in the proposed 2 to 4 weeks.

Provide an Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Plan in the EIS for review by EC.

Standards for overall construction.

The procedures and guidelines that will be utilized in construction, operation, and mitigation activities.

Provide an Environmental Construction and Operation (ECO) Plan in the EIS for review by EC.

Procedures for documenting the types, quantities, storage locations, and handling procedures for waste, fuel, hazardous substances, and waste dangerous goods.

Contingency plans for spills, including how operators plan to prevent and manage accidental spills of fuel, fluids, and transported material.

Occupational health and safety procedures.

Estimated manpower, skill requirements, and ongoing employment opportunities for local communities, First Nations, and Métis people.

Measures to mitigate impacts to rare plants.

Measures to prevent the spread of non-native vegetation.

Measures to mitigate impacts to rare wildlife and their habitats.

EC supports the mitigation measures provided for migratory birds provided in Table 8-1, page 118 of the IEE. However, if clearing must take place within the restricted timeframe, the proponent should ensure that a person with qualified bird expertise confirms that there are no active nests in the area before clearing begins.

Discuss measures taken to avoid or lessen any effects of the proposed project on species listed under SARA and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC, as well as measures taken to avoid or lessen any effects on critical habitats and residences of individuals of those species.

Discuss measures taken to monitor all adverse effects on listed wildlife species and their critical habitat.


- 24 -

Discuss how measures taken to monitor the adverse effects are consistent with any applicable recovery strategy, management plans, and action plans.

Discuss the cumulative environmental effects on all SARA listed species and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC, as well as cumulative effects to critical habitats and to the residences of individuals of those species. Also discuss measures to reduce cumulative effects on these species.

Discuss residual effects on species at risk and the degree of scientific uncertainty related to the information used.

Under the SARA, every person who is required by, or under an Act of Parliament to ensure that

an assessment of the environmental effects of a project is conducted must, without delay, notify the competent minister or ministers in writing of the project if it is likely to affect a listed species or its critical habitat. The person must identify the adverse effects of the project on the listed wildlife species and its critical habitat and, if the project is carried out, must ensure that measures are taken to avoid or lessen those effects and to monitor them. The measures must be taken in a way that is consistent with any applicable recovery strategy and action plans.

Also, under Section 79 of the SARA, TC and INAC have a responsibility to notify EC if the project “is likely to affect a listed wildlife species in its critical habitat”. Therefore, the RA’s should be made aware as soon as possible whether or not any known Species at Risk are to occur in the vicinity of the project. A strategy should be developed to protect any identified species at risk, with a primary focus on avoidance. The methods to be used to conduct the biological inventory as well as any measures to protect and identify species at risk should be provided for review and further guidance. This information should also be outlined in the EIS.

Measures to mitigate impacts to wetlands.

Discuss how the mitigation measures are expected to meet the Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation (1991) with the goal of achieving ‘no net loss’ of wetland function under the Policy.

EC supports the statement in Table 8-1 of the IEE that recommends the development of wetland compensation plans that meet the requirements of the Wetland and Upland Mitigation Guidelines for Road Construction (TEC, 2006). However, information is also required on how mitigation measures for all affected wetlands meet the objectives of the Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation (1991). The document can be ordered from the EC publications website http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/publications/index.cfm?lang=e .

Measures to mitigate impacts to water wells.

Note that if any disturbance is to occur within 1 km of a water well, owners should be consulted and the consultation and response to any issues should be documented in the EIS.

Measures to prevent disturbance to water and fish resulting from water runoff, soil erosion, soil disturbance, or mass wasting.

According to topographic maps, a catchment of approximately 1 km of highway could drain to outlets in the vicinity of Adamson Lake. Stormwater management measures for the control of runoff quality should be considered for the drainage catchment into Adamson Lake. With regional groundwater flow moving towards the east (page 56 of the IEE) and surficial deposits consisting of sandy deposits with high surface water infiltration, it is possible that pollutants associated with highway runoff will migrate into the lake over the long-term. Highway runoff is generally known to contain heavy metals, inorganic salts, aromatic hydrocarbons, and suspended solids that accumulate on the road surface as a result of regular highway operation and maintenance activities. Stormwater management measures for the control of runoff quality should be considered for this drainage catchment. The use of a wetland with impervious bottom should be considered. The provincial Stormwater Management Guidelines (Saskatchewan

http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/publications/index.cfm?lang=e�


- 25 -

2006) should be consulted. The document can be downloaded from the Ministry of Environment website at http://www.saskh2o.ca/DWBinder/EPB322StormwaterGuidelines.pdf. Failure to take reasonable measures to prevent deposit of deleterious substances into the lake would be in violation of the federal Fisheries Act. SMHI should undertake all reasonable measures to prevent highway runoff into the lake and should ensure that all measures are documented. Further clarity on the concern with Adamson Lake may be obtained by contacting Lynne Quinette-Abbott of EC at (306) 780-6401.

Measures to safeguard against chemical, fuel, and hazardous waste spills, or leakages

Measures to ensure that heritage resources are protected.

Measures to mitigate impacts to the Nisbet Forest.

Section 2.4.4 of the IEE, Temporary Work Camps, states “SMHI will encourage the contractor to develop the temporary work camps outside provincially designated lands (i.e. agricultural crown, Wildlife Habitat Protection Act lands, or provincial forested lands), or natural habitat such as native grasslands, wetlands or forested lands.” EC supports this statement and recommends that temporary work camps not be located within the Nisbet Provincial Forest.

Section 3.3 of the IEE, Ancillary Activities, states that “It is anticipated that approximately 6 borrow pits will be established in the Nisbet Provincial Forest (total disturbance area 6 – 18 ha).” Given that the Nisbet Forest is an island forest, further habitat fragmentation may have negative effects on this ecosystem. Therefore, EC recommends that the number and size of borrow pits through the forest be minimized wherever possible.

Measures to mitigate impacts to air quality and climate.

Emissions associated with asphalt plants include nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter (PM), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), volatile organic compounds (VOC), sulphur dioxide (SO2) and carbon monoxide (CO). Combinations of these emissions can result in odours.

The Canada-Wide Standards for Particulate Matter and Ozone (CWS) commits the signatories (provinces, territories, federal government) to the implementation of continuous improvement, pollution prevention, and keeping-clean-areas-clean programs in areas with ambient concentrations below the CWS levels.

Annex A of the CWS states:

o Continuous Improvement

– “Jurisdictions should take remedial and preventative actions to reduce emissions from anthropogenic sources to the extent practicable."

o Keeping Clean Areas Clean

– “Jurisdictions should work with their stakeholders and the public to establish programs that apply pollution prevention and best management practices, by, for example:

ensuring that new facilities and activities incorporate the best available economically feasible technologies (BAEFT) to reduce PM and ozone levels, and

requiring that upgrades carried out in the course of normal capital stock turnover incorporate the best available economically feasible technologies to reduce PM and ozone levels.”

In keeping with the CWS concept of “Keeping Clean Areas Clean” and “Continuous Improvement”, EC recommends that SMHI incorporate BAEFT to reduce emissions of pollutants from the asphalt plant used for the project. In this context, EC recommends that SMHI commit to BAEFT as characterized by the following emission output levels.

http://www.saskh2o.ca/DWBinder/EPB322StormwaterGuidelines.pdf�


- 26 -

Hot Mix Asphalt Plant Limits (B.C. Reg 217/97 [including amendments up to B.C. Reg. 199/2007, June 21, 2007], Environmental Management Act, Asphalt Plant Regulation)

Parameter The discharge of emissions should not exceed the concentration limits:

Particulatesa 90 mg/m3

Organicsa 60 mg/m3 (1 hr average)

Opacity 20%

Carbon Monoxidea

200 mg/m3

aconcentrations in mg/m3 dry, corrected to 16% O2, at 20° C and 101.325 kPa.

EC also recommends that stack monitoring be performed annually and that the location of a mobile asphalt plant be constrained by the same minimum requirements as detailed in the above regulation of:

a) 50 metres from a stream,

b) 300 metres from residences or businesses, and

c) 500 metres from a school in session, hospital, or facility used for continuing care

When drawing conclusions about the significance of impacts, reference should be made to the appropriate guidelines, such as the National Ambient Air Quality Objectives. Where positive or neutral impacts are expected, the report should provide rationale to support the conclusions, including quantitative data to the extent possible.

Measures to mitigate impacts to historical landfill site.

Explain what will be done with this site (i.e. remediation, removal, etc.)

Measures to mitigate noise levels during both construction and operation phases. Where positive or neutral impacts are expected, the report should provide rationale to support the conclusions, including quantitative data to the extent possible.

Measures to mitigate impacts to affected landowners and businesses.

Measures to take regarding disturbance to Wildlife Habitat Protection Lands. Agreements will be required with the Ministry of Environment, Fish and Wildlife Branch, to remove the designated lands to avoid contravention of the Wildlife Habitat Protection Act (Saskatchewan).

Measures to take regarding any potential disturbance to the One Arrow Indian Reserve and the Willow Cree Indian Reserve. Discussion may be required with INAC.

Measures to take for any right-of-way construction within 2 km of the community of Duck Lake. Subdivision approval will be required from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Community Planning Branch for the new right of way within 2.5 km of a community. Contact Len Kowalko at (306) 933-6118.

Measures to take regarding disturbance to any lands reserved for selection as a potential Representative Area. Discussion will be required with the Ministry of Environment, Lands Branch. Contact Todd Olexson at (306) 953-2586.

Measures to take regarding any disturbance to the railroad right-of-way or regarding construction of railroad crossings.


- 27 -

Measures to accommodate issues and concerns documented during public consultation. Discussion may be required with TC.

7.5.9 Commitments Register

Technical reviewers will expect a commitments register outlining each commitment made to mitigate the environmental impacts of the preferred approach and to meet any regulatory requirements. The register should provide a brief description of the commitment, indicate how the commitment is to be implemented, indicate how and when the implementation of the commitment is to be assessed, and describe any follow-up action items. Table 10-1 (Summary of Environmental Commitments) in the IEE provides a good starting basis for the commitments register. Other commitments may need adding after undertaking the EIA and working through the EIS.

7.5.10 Monitoring, Reporting and Follow-up

Technical reviewers will expect a monitoring and reporting strategy for the commitments outlined in the Register. The reporting should indicate how effectively the commitment has been or is being met, and indicate any preventive actions where a commitment may not be met, and any actions to correct non-conformances where a commitment has not or is not being met. The strategy should indicate which reviewing agency should be reported to for each commitment, and include a strategy on how the EAB will be kept informed of all monitoring and reporting to ensure that these actions are being undertaken. An annual report to the EAB, summarizing monitoring and reporting activities is a suggested approach.

A statement on inspection and compliance monitoring activities is necessary in the EIS to later ensure that proposed mitigation is implemented and functioning as expected (note: additional mitigation monitoring information may also be requested during project construction). It is preferred that an initial mitigation monitoring plan be submitted as part of the EIS, and that if necessary modification be made and submitted prior to construction.

TC and INAC have not currently identified a likely need for a formal federal follow-up program for the proposed project. A decision on the need for a follow-up program is typically made once the likely effects of the project and proposed mitigation measures are known.

7.5.11 Significance of Residual Adverse Environmental Effects

The criteria for evaluating and describing the significance of the residual (post-mitigation) effects (including cumulative effects) may include: magnitude; duration and frequency; ecological context; geographic extent; and degree of reversibility. Existing federal and provincial regulatory and industry standards and guidelines are relevant as points of reference for evaluating significance. Professional expertise and judgement may also be applied in evaluating the significance of an environmental effect. All applicable federal and provincial laws must be respected.

To satisfy CEA Act requirements, this statement must include conclusions specifically on whether the project is likely to cause significant adverse effects on the environment. The analysis must be documented in a manner that readily enables conclusions on the significance of the environmental effects to be drawn. The RA(s) will make the final decision on the significance of the environmental effects.


- 28 -

8.0 Invitation for Public to Comment on Project Scope and Draft Guidelines

Public consultation is a key component of the provincial EIA and federal EA. By policy, the Ministry of Environment makes Draft PSGs available to the public so that they can provide input into the Guidelines and outline any additional issues of interest to the public that should be included in the Guidelines.

Interested persons may submit their comments on the above issues to:

Howard DeLong, EA Development Project Administrator Ministry of Environment Environmental Assessment Branch 3211 Albert Street, 4th Floor REGINA SK S4S 5W6 Phone: (306) 787-6138 Fax: (306) 787-0930


- 29 -

Appendix A: Recommended Mapping Requirements

A description of the proposed work should include a map(s) identifying the proposed work with sufficient detail that the reader can understand the work and the location within the province of Saskatchewan. The following is a list of minimum recommended mapping requirements to display on every map: Title The Ministry of Highway and Infrastructures’ name Author of map Date of map Nearby place names, such as Rosthern and MacDowall Major lakes and names Major rivers and names Nearby major roads and names North arrow Scale bar Coordinates Standard used for map coordinates (the Ministry of Environment typically used NAD83(CSRS98) UTM Zone (if applicable) Map sheet number(s) for the given map coordinate system Legend Small reference key map showing the location of the proposed project in relation to whole province of

Saskatchewan Other information on the map(s) that would help in the evaluation of the proposal would include locations of other resources or values that could be impacted by the program(s). One map should also indicate the proposed work.

TWINNING OF HIGHWAY NO. 11 NORTH OF ROSTHERN TO SOUTH OF

Documents

Transcript of TWINNING OF HIGHWAY NO. 11 NORTH OF ROSTHERN TO SOUTH OF