Interrogatory Round Two
EIS – Environmental Impact Review
Written Questions for
Project Administration Team
(Federal and Provincial Participating Authorities)
Wuskwatim Generation and Transmission Projects
(File #4724.00 & #4725.00)
Submitted by: Manitoba Wildlands – Canadian Nature Federation
November 21, 2003
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA)
Interrogatory Round Two
Manitoba Wildlands – Canadian Nature Federation
Wuskwatim Generation and Transmission Projects
(File #4724.00 & #4725.00)
I. EIS - Environmental Impact Review
Federal Departments / Authorities
· Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) Questions #1 – 15
· Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) Questions #16 - 56
· Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) Questions #57 - 112
· Environment Canada (ENV CAN) Questions #113 - 161
· Parks Canada (PARKS CAN) Questions #162 - 183
· Natural Resources Canada (NRCAN) Questions #184 - 213
· Health Canada (HEALTH CAN) Questions #214 - 224
Provincial Departments / Authorities
· Manitoba Conservation (MB CON)
o Part A. Environmental Approvals Branch Questions#225 - 255
o Part B. Northwest Region Integrated Resource Management Team Questions#256 - 274
o Part C. Sustainable Resource Management Branch Questions#275 - 287
o Part D. Manitoba Conservation – General Questions#288 - 408
· Manitoba Energy, Science & Technology (MB EST) Questions #409 - 452
· Manitoba Aboriginal and Northern Affairs (MB ANA) Questions #453 - 484
· Manitoba Crown Corporation Council (CCC) Questions #485 - 498
· Manitoba Historic Resources Branch (MB HRB) Questions #499 - 512
· Manitoba Intergovernmental Affairs (MB IGA) Questions #513 - 529
· Manitoba Health (MBHEALTH) Questions #530 - 535
Project Administration Team (PAT) Questions #536 - 547
Justification, needs for and alternatives to interrogatories are in a separate document.
Round 2 Wuskwatim Interrogatories – EIS
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA)
Regulatory Framework
CNF/CEAA II – EIS # 1
Provide a detailed schedule (preliminary or otherwise) for the completion of the Comprehensive Study report for both Wuskwatim Projects
CNF/CEAA II – EIS # 2
Comment on the relative pros and cons of having Comprehensive Study report available prior to the CEC public hearings.
CNF/CEAA II – EIS # 3
Re: Supplemental Filing 2 DFO-S-60 3 (3) Reply re: DFO-S-42 DFO-S-47
Transmission Line Crossings
As part of the MB Hydro/NCN S-2 response, it was stated that “Complete applications for crossings, pursuant to NWPA’s Section 5 (2) will be filed independently of the CEC hearing process, as quickly as the necessary design information is available”
As this EIS is a harmonized federal/provincial process, does this department/agency agree that information related to stream crossings should be included and reviewed as part of the EIS review / hearings process? If not, please explain.
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #4
Itemize and describe in sufficient detail the amount of money that has been invested and/or committed (both directly and/or indirectly) by this agency to any aspect of the proposed Wuskwatim project to date.
Project Design
CNF/CEAA II – EIS # 5
Comment on the sufficiency of Manitoba Hydro’s identified geographical scope in its EIS in relation to the assessment of system impacts (i.e. effects to the operation of the Churchill River Diversion/Lake Winnipeg Regulation and Nelson River works project)
CNF/CEAA II – EIS # 6
Comment on the sufficiency of Manitoba Hydro’s identified geographical scope in its EIS in relation to the assessment of system impacts which may be transferred elsewhere in the Churchill River Diversion/Lake Winnipeg Regulation and Nelson River works project as per testimony in the September 30, 2003 CEC hearing.
CNF/CEAA II – EIS # 7
Comment on Manitoba Hydro’s stated need to connect the proposed Wuskwatim Generation Project to the Herblet Lake station and the Rall’s Island station and identify options for developing the proposed Wuskwatim Generation Project without a transmission line connection to the Herblet Lake station.
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #8
Has CEAA been in any meetings or received information regarding the future development projects identified in the Wuskwatim EIS ?
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #9
Has CEAA been in any meetings or received any information about other future development projects of Manitoba Hydro not identified in the Wuskwatim EIS ?
Methods
CNF/CEAA – EIS #10
Does CEAA believe that the particular Valued Ecosystem Components chosen to measure ecosystem change in the Wuskwatim EIS are appropriate for the task?
CNF/CEAA– EIS #11
Does CEAA believe that the Habitat Suitability Index used in the analysis of impacts on the terrestrial environment is a useful model in this context given that it was not developed for this part of the province and that it has not been ground-truthed?
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #12a
Does CEAA offer any publications, guidelines or standards that specifically address the use or inclusion of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) or Traditional Knowledge (TK) in the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements?
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #12b
If so, did CEAA provide any guidance, standard or direction to the members of the TAC regarding TEK?
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #12c
If so, were these provided to Manitoba Hydro / NCN for the development of the Wuskwatim EIS?
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #12d
If not, are any such guidelines in the process of being developed? When will they be available? Which government entities or regulators are working on these?
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #12e
If not, why not?
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #12f
Does CEAA recognize or endorse any publications, guidelines, standards on the use of TEK in EIS?
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #12g
Does CEAA agree that the EIS guidelines (Section 2.3.1 Intent) regarding TEK has been fulfilled?
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #12h
Have standards or guidelines regarding TEK been applied to EIS review with federal responsibility elsewhere in Canada? Give examples, full citation.
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #12i
What are the sources of TEK standards referenced in recent EIS materials which included federal review and responsibility, and or included CEAA comprehensive studies
Cumulative Effects Assessment
CNF/CEAA– EIS #13a
Does CEAA believe that the Wuskwatim EIS adequately deals with cumulative effects?
CNF/CEAA– EIS #13b
Has the Wuskwatim EIS appropriately considered all of the potential cumulative effects that should be included?
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #14
Comment on the relative significance of system-wide impacts in relation to the proposed Wuskwatim Generation Project.
CNF/CEAA II – EIS #15
Identify, describe and evaluate past experiences with traditional knowledge (TK)in environmental assessment public hearing in Canada with respect to the issue of TK utilization and concerns over confidentiality and/or intellectual property rights.
Manitobawildlands, CNF November 2003
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC)
Round 2 Wuskwatim Interrogatories – EIS
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC)
Public Participation and Consultations
CNF/INAC II – EIS #16
What federal consultation, if any, has occurred with First Nations?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #17
What is Government of Canada policy, and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada policy regarding Section 35 consultations? Please make reference to specific policy documents and provide sources, copies.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #18
Please provide a report on the status of Section 35 consultations regarding the Wuskwatim Generation and Transmission Projects.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #19
Has INAC participated in any discussions with Manitoba Hydro regarding the potential transmission project south of Little Herblet Lake station?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #20
Has INAC received information regarding the above mentioned intended project from Manitoba Hydro or another party?
Public Policy Framework
CNF/INAC II – EIS #21a
Please provide a list of all Indian and Northern Affairs Canada legislation, policies, regulations, and standards/guidelines that must be met by the proponents for the Wuskwatim Generation and Transmission Projects.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #21b
For each, please explain how the proponents of the Wuskwatim Generation and Transmission Projects have met the standard/guideline, etc., with specific reference to Sections of the EIS, or other plans, proposals provided to INAC. Please provide copies of any Manitoba Hydro plans/proposals not included in the EIS materials or available in the Manitoba Conservation Public Registry.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #22
Under CEAA, a federal authority, or several federal authorities usually exist. It appears that DFO has deferred their interest as a responsible authority in the Wuskwatim Transmissionproject, so who is representing the interests and concerns of First Nations under CEAA?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #23
Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1982 and the Indian Act confer upon the federal government certain responsibilities when dealing with First Nation groups. How is INAC specifically addressing the concerns of First Nations in the review of the Wuskwatim Projects?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #24
Under the Northern Flood Agreement, several First Nation communities still await compensation from past hydro developments. Has INAC consider these outstanding communities claims part of any mitigation strategies to ensure the validity of the statements made within the EIS? How has it been considered? Please provide examples.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #25
What is the current status of the Treaty Land Entitlement process with respect to NCN land selections in and around the proposed Wuskwatim generation site?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #26
Are there outstanding land selections in the ‘region’ of the Wuskwatim Transmission project? Provide details, if so.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #27
Has INAC concluded that no impact on Aboriginal, and First Nation treaty, constitutional and NFA rights will result from the Wuskwatim projects?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #28a
How does this department/agency define renewable? Please apply the definition to renewable energy and renewable resources.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #28b
Who in this department/agency handles policy in respect to renewable energy, renewable resources? Please provide the name of the individual and the name of the individual to whom s/he is accountable.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #28c
What act, policy, statute or regulation guides this department/agency in defining renewable? Please provide the complete citation to relevant sources.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #29a
How does this department/agency define sustainable?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #29b
Who in this department/agency handles this policy area? Please provide the name of the individual and the name of the individual to whom s/he is accountable.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #29c
What act, policy, statute or regulation guides this department/agency in defining sustainable? Please provide the complete citation to relevant sources.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #30a
How does this department define mitigation?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #30b
Who in this department handles this issue? Please provide the name of the individual and the name of the individual to whom s/he is accountable.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #31
What act, policy, statute or regulation guides this department/agency in defining mitigation? Please provide the complete citation to relevant sources.
Methods
CNF/INAC II – EIS #32a
Does INAC offer any policy publications, guidelines or standards that specifically address the use or inclusion of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) or Traditional Knowledge (TK) in the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #32b
If so, did INAC provide any guidance, standard or direction to the members of the TAC regarding TEK?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #32c
If so, were these provided to Manitoba Hydro / NCN for the development of the Wuskwatim EIS?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #32d
If not, are any such guidelines in the process of being developed? When will they be available? Which government entities or regulators are working on these?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #32e
If not, why not?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #33f
Does INAC recognize or endorse any publications, guidelines, standards on the use of TEK in EIS?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #33g
Does INAC agree that the EIS guidelines (Section 2.3.1 Intent) regarding TEK has been fulfilled?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #33h
Have standards or guidelines regarding TEK been applied by INAC to EIS review with federal responsibility elsewhere in Canada? Give examples, full citation.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #33i
What are the sources of TEK standards referenced in recent EIS which included federal review and responsibility?
CNF/INAC II – EIS #34
Describe in sufficient detail the current status of Section 35 consultations in relation to the proposed Wuskwatim projects.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #35
Outline in sufficient detail the basic framework being used to guide implementation of Section 35 consultations in relation to the proposed Wuskwatim projects.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #36
Describe the role of the Government of Manitoba and the Government of Canada in Section 35 consultations in relation to the proposed Wuskwatim projects.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #37
Identify and describe the threshold(s) at which Section 35 consultations are to be assumed completed in relation to the proposed Wuskwatim projects.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #38
Describe in detail how each of the proposed Wuskwatim projects may impact Aboriginal and treaty rights.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #39
Describe in sufficient detail the process within government that determines whether there are impacts to Aboriginal and treaty rights and the degree to which these rights may be affected in relation to the proposed Wuskwatim projects.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #40
Describe in sufficient detail the government’s roles and responsibilities in dealing with potentially affected communities with respect to the provisions of the 1977 Northern Flood Agreement and the proposed Wuskwatim projects.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #41
Itemize and describe in sufficient detail the amount of money that has been invested and/or committed (both directly and/or indirectly) to any aspect of the proposed Wuskwatim project, including consultations, to date by INAC.
CNF/INAC II – EIS #42
Provide a list of the current status of each Treaty Land Entitlement (TLE) land selection that is potentially affected by the each of the proposed Wuskwatim projects
Describe in detail how the proposed Wuskwatim projects may impact each Treaty Land Entitlement (TLE) claims.
Ecosystems and Ecological Functions
The Supreme Court decision R. .v. Marshall, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 456, the court specifically states “that the honour of the Crown is always at stake in its dealings with Indian people.Interpretations of treaties and statutory provisions which have an impact upon treaty or aboriginal rights must be approached in a manner which maintains the integrity of the Crown.It is always assumed that the Crown intends to fulfil its promises.”