Operational Policy Statement

Follow-up Programs under the
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act

October 2002     OPS/EPO-6-2002

Purpose

This Operational Policy Statement provides guidance for federal authorities (FAs) and proponents in identifying the need for follow-up programs for environmental assessments (EAs) conducted under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (the Act). Key considerations in the design and implementation of such follow-up programs are also presented.

Given that an EA may involve a certain degree of uncertainty with respect to the nature and extent of effects resulting from a project, including cumulative effects, follow-up can be an important tool to verify the accuracy of predictions and to address anticipated environmental effects.

Definition

The Act defines follow-up as:

"a program for verifying the accuracy of the environmental assessment of a project, and determining the effectiveness of any measures taken to mitigate the adverse environmental effects of the project."

Why a Follow-up Program?

• To facilitate better overall project management by considering follow-up program framework at the earliest stages of project planning.
• To provide information on environmental effects and mitigation resulting from project implementation that can be used to improve and/or support future EAs including cumulative effects assessments.
• To aid in the detection of unanticipated environmental effects.
• To support or verify predictions made concerning the likelihood of "no significant environmental effects".

Environmental management systems, based on principles of compliance, reporting, analysis and continual improvement, are increasingly being used to manage environmental effects of projects. Such systems inherently recognize the need for follow-up.

Compliance Monitoring vs. Follow-up

With respect to mitigation measures, a compliance monitoring program verifies the proper implementation of all such measures whereas a follow-up program is used to determine the accuracy of EA conclusions and the efficacy of the required mitigation measures. Compliance monitoring on its own does not satisfy the requirements of a follow-up program.

Compliance monitoring responds to: Were the mitigation measures implemented?

A follow-up program responds to: Were the mitigation measures effective?

Legislation

Sections 16 and 38

Sections 16 and 38 of the Act specifically address follow-up programs:

1. The need for and the requirements of a follow-up program must be considered during a comprehensive study, mediation or panel review.
2. Where a responsible authority (RA) takes a course of action to permit a project to be carried out after the completion of a comprehensive study, mediation or panel review the RA must design and arrange for the implementation of any follow-up program that was deemed necessary during the EA.
3. Where an RA takes a course of action to permit a project to be carried out after the completion of a screening the RA shall, where circumstances warrant a follow-up program, design and arrange for the implementation of a follow-up program that it considers appropriate for the project.
4. The RA shall advise the public of any follow-up program and the results of any follow-up program.

Section 55

Section 55 of the Act establishes the requirements for a public registry for the purpose of facilitating public access to records relating to EAs. Specific requirements for follow-up programs are:

1. For screenings or comprehensive studies, the RA must maintain the public registry for the duration of a project (until any follow-up program is completed). Any records pertaining to the follow-up program and its implementation must be available on the public registry.
2. For mediations and panel reviews, the Agency is required to maintain the public registry as described above from the appointment of a mediator or panel to the submission of the respective report. After the submission of the reports the responsibility for maintaining the public registry (including any follow-up documents), reverts to the RA.

Roles and Responsibilities

Proponent
An RA may require the proponent to plan for a follow-up program early in the planning stages of a project and to ensure its implementation.

Responsible Authority
For screenings, where an RA takes a course of action that would allow the project to proceed, the RA can choose to undertake a follow-up program, if appropriate. If the RA chooses to undertake a follow-up program, the RA must design the program and ensure its implementation.

For comprehensive studies, mediations and review panels, where an RA takes a course of action that would allow the project to proceed, it must design and implement any follow-up program that was deemed necessary during the EA.

An RA may request assistance from appropriate FAs or from other jurisdictions to identify predictions of environmental effects requiring follow-up, especially for areas outside an RA's expertise.

In cases of projects with multiple RAs, RAs should agree between themselves on the design and implementation of a follow-up program with respect to issues of mutual interest should one be required or appropriate.

An RA can also include conditions in authorizations, permits, contracts, leases or other binding documents which may include specific mitigation and follow-up measures, environmental thresholds, or reporting and compliance monitoring schedules, the implementation of which can be ensured through financial assurances. In many cases, conditions from other FAs may also be included in binding documents. It is, however, the RAs responsibility to enforce those conditions.

Financial assurances may also be a valuable tool in ensuring the implementation of the follow-up program and of any additional mitigation measures, the necessity of which is identified during the follow-up program.

Federal Authority
An FA that is in possession of specialist or expert information or knowledge, with respect to a project, can make available that information or knowledge to the RA , mediator, or review panel. Where requested, an FA can assist in the design of a follow-up program and the analysis of generated information.

Other Jurisdictions
Aboriginal Groups and other levels of government including territories, provinces, municipalities and their agencies may have a role to play in the design and implementation of a follow-up program.

Cooperative agreements between the federal government and provincial governments require close coordination to maximize efficiency and minimize duplication of effort. These obligations extend to the design and implementation of any follow-up program.

Considerations for Developing a Follow-up Program

Determining Need for a Follow-up Program

The following are examples of circumstances in which a follow-up program would typically be warranted:

Environmentally Sensitive Area / Valued Ecosystem Components.

• The site of a proposed project or its potential area of influence is considered to be environmentally sensitive if:
  • it is known to contain critical ecosystem components, or
  • is known to contain ecosystem components highly valued by society.

Public Concerns

• There is a need to address relevant project-related issues of public concern.

Accuracy of Predictions

• The residual adverse environmental effects of the project have the potential to be different than predicted in the EA.

Effectiveness of Mitigation Measures

• There is a need to verify that mitigation measures were effective or successful; or
• The mitigation measures may not fully address the predicted environmental effects.

New or Unproven Techniques and Technology

• The environmental effects of a project were assessed using new or unproven analytical or modeling techniques; or
• The proposed project involves technology or mitigation measures that are new or unproven.

Cumulative Environmental Effects

• Cumulative effects assessment was an important or contentious component of the EA.

Nature of Project

• There is limited experience implementing the type of project being proposed in the specific type of environmental setting under consideration.
• The nature or scale of a project is such that specific types of environmental effects warrant careful monitoring (e.g., air emissions, wastewater discharges, erosion).

Limited Scientific Knowledge

• Scientific knowledge used to predict the environmental effects of the proposed project is limited.

Key Considerations in Designing the Elements of a Follow-up Program

The nature and complexity of a follow-up program should be appropriate to the scale of the project to which it relates, and to the sensitivity and complexity of the associated issues.

To maximize the value of follow-up, the design of a follow-up program should be undertaken during the EA phase of a project. In many cases, early initiation of the design of a follow-up program and the establishment of pre-project scientific baselines is important to reassure both the public and decision-makers that the key environmental issues are, and will continue to be, well managed. In designing a follow-up program, linkages should be made to other sources of information, including regional data collection, effects monitoring and other follow-up programs, as applicable.

Scope of a Follow-up Program
In some cases a complete follow-up program for a project can be relatively simple. For example, when verifying the effectiveness of mitigation measures, a follow-up program could include evaluating the success of re-vegetation of a site.

In the case where a project is associated with large-scale environmental change or if it affects a sensitive environment, a follow-up program could be quite complex, involving elements that address a number of environmental components over extended periods of time.

Baseline Conditions
Since it is usually necessary to establish a scientific baseline against which follow-up results can be compared, it is necessary to start the systematic collection of appropriate data well in advance of project implementation. If it is likely that project implementation will commence shortly after approval, the follow-up program should be fully designed and a reliable baseline established during the EA phase of the project.

Public Involvement
Interested and affected members of the public should be involved in the design and implementation of a follow-up program, as appropriate. Results of the follow-up program should be conveyed to them. This is particularly important for large and potentially controversial projects.

Other Considerations
In developing a follow-up program, the following questions should be asked:

1. What is the primary purpose of the program? Is it to verify the accuracy of the predictions on the type and extent, and severity of environmental effects that may occur? Is it to verify that mitigation measures are effective and adequate?
2. Based on the purpose of the program, what should be measured? How? When? Where? How often?
3. Will the proposed measurement techniques be able to distinguish between changes resulting from the project and changes resulting from other factors?
4. Will the proposed measurement techniques provide answers that are within the accuracy required for the primary purpose for which the information is being collected?
5. How long should the program continue?
6. Is the information being collected in the most efficient manner possible?
7. Are the relative roles of the proponent, RA, expert FAs and other agencies clear in relation to the program?
8. How will the results be disseminated?

Taking Action as a Result of a Follow-up Program

Ultimately, the RA should be prepared to take actions based on follow-up results that will allow EA conclusions and commitments to be respected throughout the life cycle of a project.

As an example, when the follow-up program indicates that environmental performance is below a pre-determined threshold or when new issues arise, corrective action should be undertaken to prevent further impacts. Such action may be as simple as repairing a failed piece of equipment or as complex as implementing a major modification or redesign of an existing system to improve its environmental performance. Where a follow-up program is required as part of a regulatory approval, failure to properly implement the program could result in non-compliance with the regulatory approval.

When an action or change has been implemented, it is important to continue the follow-up program to ensure that the anticipated response has been achieved. An ideal follow-up program will be designed so that if unanticipated adverse environmental effects are discovered they can be mitigated. This will normally require the insertion of conditions (regarding follow-up programs and the implementation of mitigative measures deemed necessary during follow-up programs) in the relevant permit, licence, contract or other binding legal document.

For more information

For more information on this Operational Policy Statement or on the requirements of the Act, please contact the Agency office nearest you.

Head Office

Ottawa, Ontario
(613) 957-0700
(613) 957-0862 (Fax)
E-mail: info@ceaa-acee.gc.ca

Regional Offices

Vancouver, Pacific and Northern Region
(604) 666-2431
(604) 666-6990 (Fax)
E-mail: ceaa.pacific@ceaa-acee.gc.ca

Edmonton, Alberta Region
(780) 422-1410
(780) 422-6202 (Fax)
E-mail: ceaa.alberta@ceaa-acee.gc.ca

Winnipeg, Prairie Region
(204) 983-5127
(204) 983-7174 (Fax)
E-mail: ceaa.prairies@ceaa-acee.gc.ca

Toronto, Ontario Region
(416) 952-1575
(416) 952-1573 (Fax)
E-mail: ceaa.ontario@ceaa-acee.gc.ca

Quebec, Quebec Region
(418) 649-6444
(418) 649-6443 (Fax)
E-mail: ceaa.quebec@ceaa-acee.gc.ca

Halifax, Atlantic Region
(902) 426-0564
(902) 426-6550 (Fax)
E-mail: ceaa.atlantic@ceaa-acee.gc.ca

Availability of Documents

Documents can be consulted on the Agency's Web.

Documents are also available by contacting:

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Information Services
(819) 994-2578
(819) 953-2891 (Fax)