Minister Julie Dabrusin's Transition Binder, May 2025
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

1. Ministerial Responsibilities

Attracting investment in major projects – that support energy security, access to export markets and create jobs – is more important than ever. The regulatory landscape is one piece of this. There is an imperative to ensure that the impact assessment process and federal permitting regimes are implemented in a manner that enables this investment by meeting the federal government’s responsibilities to protect the environment and Indigenous rights as efficiently as possible.

The Impact Assessment Act (IAA) provides for the assessment of the environmental, social, and economic impacts of major projects that are likely to have significant effects in areas of federal jurisdiction (e.g., interprovincial pipelines, mines, or marine terminals) and for the mitigation of adverse federal effects. Impact assessment is intended as a project planning tool to identify potential adverse effects in advance, through an open process, and to address those effects through project design and mitigation measures. Since the IAA was enacted in 2019, an average of eight major projects per year have met the threshold for entering the federal impact assessment system, and 40% of those have completed the process with early decisions, many within six months.

Assessments are conducted by the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) and involve extensive engagement with Indigenous Peoples and the public. Assessments may also be referred to an independent review panel or the process may be substituted with that of another jurisdiction.

Impact Assessment Act

The IAA sets out the following mandate and principles for the conduct of impact assessments:

foster sustainability, which means protecting the environment and contributing to the social and economic well-being of Canadians in a way that benefits present and future generations;
ensure respect for the rights of Indigenous Peoples;
promote cooperation among jurisdictions and with Indigenous Peoples of Canada; and,
provide a predictable and efficient assessment process that enhances Canada’s competitiveness and encourages investment.

The Minister of the Environment and Climate Change (the Minister) has various authorities under the IAA during and following assessments, including:

referring impact assessments to an independent review panel of experts;
approving a provincial process or that of another jurisdiction to substitute for the federal impact assessment process;
decision-making after an impact assessment process, including:
- determining whether any significant adverse effects within federal jurisdiction are justified in the public interest; or
- referring the decision to the Governor in Council; and,
- issuing a Decision Statement with enforceable conditions to mitigate adverse effects within federal jurisdiction;
designating a proposed project to undergo an assessment for projects that are not already identified by regulations as subject to assessment:
- this power is used in exceptional circumstances and has been delegated to IAAC President, pursuant to delegation authorities under the IAA, to improve efficiencies;
- designation requests may be submitted by anyone, and a response is required within 90 days.

The Minister also has the authority to issue certain regulations under the IAA, recommend that the Governor in Council enact certain regulations, and has overall policy responsibility for the IAA.

IAAC is responsible for the day-to-day administration of the IAA, conduct of assessments, and for advising and making recommendations to the Minister.

As of May 6, 2025, there are 32 designated projects being assessed under the IAA.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012)

Ongoing assessments of projects that began under previous assessment legislation (CEAA 2012) continue to be subject to that legislation as if it had not been repealed. Under that Act, the Minister must determine if the project is likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects. If so, the Minister must refer the final decision as to whether those significant adverse environmental effects are “justified in the circumstances” to the Governor in Council.

Following the Minister’s decision (when there are no significant effects) or Governor in Council’s decision (when there are significant effects), the Minister must issue a Decision Statement to inform the project’s proponent of the final decision. The Decision Statement will include appropriate and enforceable conditions to address effects within federal jurisdiction associated with the project.

There are currently 15 designated projects undergoing assessment under CEAA 2012, including five substituted project assessments with British Columbia.

2. IAAC: Corporate Information

a. Mandate

IAAC’s mandate is to conduct impact assessments in accordance with the Act, coordinate consultations with Indigenous communities, and promote harmonization on assessments with other orders of government. Environmental and impact assessments are planning tools that facilitate responsible project development insofar as they:

promote project design that mitigates potential adverse federal effects;
facilitate Indigenous, public, and stakeholder participation providing a forum for issue identification and management;
ensure appropriate measures are identified and implemented to meet the federal government’s responsibility to mitigate the adverse effects of designated projects; and,
inform and coordinate federal permits.

A red play button with white arrow Discover the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Through the delivery of impact assessments, IAAC considers both positive and negative environmental, economic, social, and health impacts of potential projects like mines, roads, and dams. In addition, IAAC:

ensures that mitigation measures are applied and working as intended;
develops permitting plans and coordinates federal permits for certain projects to reduce duplication and overall timelines so that projects can get built faster;
maintains a public registry and dashboards to ensure transparency and accountability on assessment and permitting process steps and timelines;
leads Crown Consultation and serves as the single point of contact for consultation and engagement with Indigenous Peoples;
provides opportunities and funding to support Indigenous Peoples’ engagement in impact assessments and to support public participation;
works with provinces on impact assessments to administer them cooperatively and reduce duplication;
promotes efficiency in impact assessment practices across Canada through research, guidance and ongoing discussion with provinces, stakeholders, and Indigenous Peoples; and,
works with a range of international jurisdictions and organizations to exchange best practices in impact assessment and to ensure that Canada’s international obligations are met.

IAAC works with other bodies like the Canada Energy Regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Energy Regulator and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Energy Regulator and other federal departments and agencies (e.g., Environment and Climate Change Canada, Fisheries and Oceans, Health Canada, Transport Canada) to carry out and inform assessments. IAAC also cooperates with provinces and territories, Indigenous communities, environmental organizations, and industry.

b. Organizational Structure

c. Senior Management Biographies

Terence Hubbard
President, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Terence Hubbard was appointed President of IAAC on November 28, 2021. In his role, he is responsible for leading all reviews of major projects under the IAA, in cooperation with other Government of Canada regulatory agencies, provinces and territories and Indigenous groups.

Prior to joining IAAC in 2018, Terence was Director General of the Petroleum Resources Branch with Natural Resources Canada. In this role, he was responsible for Canada’s oil and gas policy, including overseeing the development and implementation of Canada’s pipeline safety and offshore oil and gas regulatory regimes. He also served as Canada’s representative on the Governing Board of the International Energy Agency.

He is a graduate of the University of Saskatchewan where he obtained both his Bachelor and Master of Arts degrees in economics and now lives in Ottawa.

Joelle Raffoul
Vice-President, Corporate Services and Chief Financial Officer

Joelle Raffoul is a seasoned public service leader currently serving as the Vice President of Corporate Services and the Chief Financial Officer at IAAC since January 2023. With a career spanning nearly two decades in the public sector, Joelle has consistently demonstrated her commitment to driving organizational excellence and fostering inclusive work environments.

Before joining IAAC in 2020 as the Head of Human Resources, Joelle was the Director of Human Resources Operations at Infrastructure Canada. She has held various leadership positions throughout her public service career, gaining experience primarily at Correctional Service Canada, Canadian Heritage, Public Safety, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, and Infrastructure Canada.

Joelle holds a bachelor’s degree in commerce with Honors in Human Resources Management from the University of Ottawa. Committed to ongoing professional development, she is currently pursuing a Canadian Public Finance Accreditation (CPFA) through the Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy.

Patricia Brady
Vice-President, Strategic Policy, and Programs Sector

Patricia Brady was appointed Vice-President of the Strategic Policy and Programs Sector in January 2021.

Prior to joining IAAC, Patricia held various senior executive roles at Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED), including Director General of Telecommunications and Internet Policy and Director General of the Investment Review Division that led economic and national security reviews of foreign investments under the Investment Canada Act. She was previously responsible for intellectual property, corporate, insolvency and competition policies, leading statutory reviews and major legislative and regulatory initiatives. Patricia joined ISED from the Competition Bureau, having served in both enforcement and policy roles.

Before joining the Public Service, Patricia practiced law in the corporate group of a major Canadian law firm where she focused on federal regulatory matters. Patricia has a Bachelor of Arts from Queen’s University and a law degree from the University of Ottawa. She was called to the Bar in Ontario.

Éric Landry
Vice-President, Operations Sector

Éric Landry is Vice-President, Operations. He is responsible for overseeing impact assessments of designated projects. He joined IAAC in March 2021 as the Director General of Regional Operations in the Operations Sector.

Before joining IAAC, Éric was the Director General, Programs in the Emergency Management and Programs Branch at Public Safety Canada (PSC) where he was responsible for a suite of programs that supported the Department’s public safety and security mandate, covering National Emergency Management, Crime Prevention, and First Nations Policing. Prior to that, he worked as the Director General, Modernization of the Government Operations Centre at PSC.

From 2014 to 2018, Éric was Director General at Infrastructure Canada where he was responsible for the delivery of a range of public infrastructure funding programs. Before that, he was Director General with the Major Projects Management Office at Natural Resources Canada where he was responsible for driving the whole-of-government coordination of the review of major pipeline projects, including Aboriginal consultations, overseeing federal input to review panel processes, and managing related federal activities. Éric spent his earlier career at Natural Resources Canada working on energy policy, offshore oil and gas, and climate change issues, and at the Privy Council Office working on federal-provincial and Aboriginal issues.

Éric has a B.Sc., M.B.A., and M.A. in Economics from the Université de Moncton in New Brunswick.

Ian Ketcheson
Vice-President, Indigenous Relations Sector

Ian Ketcheson was appointed Vice-President of Indigenous Relations in November 2022 and is responsible for building and maintaining relationships and partnerships with Indigenous Peoples.

Prior to this appointment, Ian served as Director General of Crown Consultations at IAAC where he oversaw the consultation activities with Indigenous groups, ensuring that the Crown met its obligations while also advancing partnership and reconciliation with Indigenous partners.

Ian has worked in the world of Crown-Indigenous relations for close to fifteen years. Before joining IAAC, he was part of the team at Natural Resources Canada that undertook consultations on the Transmountain Expansion Project. From 2015 to 2018, he was a Director in the Reconciliation Secretariat at Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs and was responsible for advancing Canada’s relationships with national and regional First Nations and Métis organizations. He led the successful negotiations of the Canada-Métis Nation Accord in 2017 as well as the Memorandum of Understanding between the Assembly of First Nations and Canada in 2018. Prior to that, he served for more than a decade in roles in federal departments responsible for Indigenous Affairs.

Ian has a degree in Political Science from the University of Ottawa and is a graduate of the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs at Carleton University. He lives in Ottawa with his family.

d. Financial Overview

IAAC’s total funding (authorities) for 2025-2026 is $115.4 million, funded as follows:

$19.9 million in on-going funding; and
$95.5 million in temporary funding as part of a six-year funding package under Fall Economic Statement 2022 to implement the IAA.

This amount, as tabled in the 2025-2026 Main Estimates, includes:

$84.2 million in Operating Expenditures – Vote 1;
$21.0 million in Grants and Contributions – Vote 5; and
$10.2 million in Statutory Authorities (or Employee Benefit Programs).

Full Time Equivalents (FTEs)

IAAC anticipates for 2025-2026 600 funded FTEs at both headquarters in Ottawa and at its six regional offices (Vancouver, Edmonton, Toronto, Quebec City, Halifax, and a satellite office in St. John’s).

Fall Economic Statement 2022 provided:

IAAC with $527.3 million over six years, starting in 2022-2023 for implementation of the Impact Assessment Act (this funding includes $100.7 million in dedicated Grants and Contributions programming).
This temporary funding provided through the Fall Economic Statement 2022 represents approximately 80% of IAAC’s annual funding; and
IAAC’s temporary funding ends March 31, 2028. As such, IAAC will be required to renew its funding profile before 2028.

Expenditures for 2023-2024:

Expenditure for 2023-2024 were $97.5 million of the $107.3 million of authorities available.

Horizontal Implementation and Funding

In 2022, the Government of Canada allocated approximately $1.2 billion dollars over six years to thirteen departments and agencies, starting in 2022-2023, to focus specifically on the Impact Assessment Processes in support of the following objectives:

Canada’s impact assessment processes respect the rights and culture of Indigenous Peoples, and Canada’s commitment to partner with them;
Canada’s impact assessment processes foster social, economic, and environmental sustainability; and
Stakeholders and Indigenous communities have confidence in the transparency and certainty of Canada’s impact assessment processes.

IAAC funding for this horizontal initiative was allocated across all three of the following themes: Impact Assessment; Partnering with Indigenous Peoples/Reconciliation; and Cumulative Effects, Open Science, and Evidence.

Table 1 provides a breakdown of the federal funding allocated to each of the thirteen organizations across three themes and internal services.

Table 1 – Total Planned Spending for the Impact Assessment and Regulatory Processes Horizontal Initiative, 2023-24 to 2027-28
Organization	A: Impact Assessment	B: Partnering with Indigenous Peoples / Reconciliation	C: Cumulative Effects, Open Science and Evidence	Internal Services	Total
IAAC	$278,946,587	$92,278,333	$47,970,650	$92,467,881	$511,663,451
ECCC	$49,831,236	-	$116,866,807	$16,398,811	$183,096,854
PC	$14,365,167	$6,049,824	-	$1,995,289	$22,410,280
CIRNAC	-	$11,160,000	-	$1,690,000	$12,850,000
DFO	$45,456,099	$19,105,410	$12,994,201	$14,343,835	$91,899,545
HC	$45,132,041	$1,330,365	$2,071,395	$3,542,924	$52,076,725
PHAC	$1,427,403	-	-	$175,319	$1,602,722
ISC	$20,069,176	$14,332,944	$22,394,860	$4,842,003	$61,638,983
NRCan	$50,947,907	-	$61,043,930	$9,897,242	$121,888,079
CER	-	$70,789,346	$30,323,757	$2,829,446	$103,942,549
CNSC	-	$33,160,000	-	$2,450,000	$35,610,000
TC	$27,410,000	$10,570,000	$1,550,000	$3,700,000	$43,230,000
WAGE	$2,850,000	-	-	$390,000	$3,240,000
Total	$536,435,616	$258,776,222	$295,215,600	$154,722,750	$1,245,150,188
Note: The values presented in this table reflect the revised numbers as of Budget 2023’s Refocusing Government Spending Exercise. Source: 2023-24 Departmental Results Report – Horizontal Initiative Supplementary Information Table, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

3. Legislation and Regulations: Overviews and Types of Assessments

a. Background

The IAA, the Physical Activities Regulations (known as the Project List), and the Information and Management of Time Limits Regulations came into force on August 28, 2019, replacing the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012).

The introduction of the IAA followed a legislative review of CEAA 2012, which began in 2017. Among other changes, the IAA added a planning phase to the process, broadened the scope of assessment to include consideration of social and economic factors in addition to environmental effects, and consolidated assessments previously conducted solely by lifecycle regulators (Canada Energy Regulator and Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission) so that they are now conducted with IAAC through an integrated process that also supports those bodies’ licensing decisions at the same time. Assessment timelines were shortened and the ability to pause timelines was limited.

In October 2023, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) issued a Decision, in response to a reference question originally brought to the Alberta Court of Appeal by Alberta, that the IAA was partially unconstitutional in that it encroached into provincial jurisdiction. In particular, the SCC found that decision-making provisions needed to focus on effects in federal jurisdiction and that the definition of effects in federal jurisdiction needed to be narrowed. The IAA was amended in 2024 to address these issues. Decision-making now make it clear that decisions (designation decision, screening decision, and final decision at the end of the assessment) are based on effects in federal jurisdiction (rather than activities or projects writ large in provincial jurisdiction) and the definition of “effects within federal jurisdiction” corresponds to areas of federal jurisdiction under the Constitution (i.e., fish and aquatic species at risk, impacts on Indigenous rights and Indigenous Peoples, migratory birds, transboundary marine pollution, and effects on federal lands). The amendments also enhanced flexibilities and opportunities for increased efficiency and reliance on, and cooperation with, provinces.

b. Projects Subject to Assessment

Projects subject to assessment, known as “designated projects”, are described in the Physical Activities Regulations (Project List). Since 2019, approximately eight projects per year have entered the IAA process, 40% did not require a full impact assessment after the planning phase, and so have completed the process, many within six months.

The focus is on major projects – those with the most potential for significant adverse effects in areas of federal jurisdiction. Projects that meet or exceed established thresholds for the project type are required to enter the impact assessment process. Major projects in the following sectors or groups are found on the Project List:

National parks and Protected areas
Defence
Mines
Nuclear
Oil and gas
Renewable Energy
Electrical Transmission Lines and Pipelines
Transport
Hazardous waste
Water-related

As previously noted, the Minister has discretionary authority to designate a physical activity for assessment if not already on the Project List. This power is used in exceptional circumstances and has been delegated to the President of IAAC.

Proponents are prohibited from proceeding with designated projects, unless:

IAAC determines that an assessment is not required;
Proponent complies with conditions in a decision statement after an assessment; or
Activities are permitted by IAAC in preparation of an assessment pursuant to the authority in subsection 7(3)(c) of the IAA to carry out early works.

c. Projects on Federal Lands and Outside Canada

For projects on federal lands and outside Canada not on the Project List, responsible authorities (federal departments and agencies, port authorities and airport authorities) must determine that a project is not “likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects” before acting or making a decision that would enable the project to proceed.

IAAC provides support to authorities in implementing their IAA obligations but is not involved in decision-making by responsible authorities. Authorities must post notices of intent and determination on the Canadian Impact Assessment Registry. Authorities complete approximately 1,000 environmental effects determinations each year, with more than 4,700 determinations posted to date.

d. Regulatory Initiatives

Physical Activities Regulations (Project List)

The Project List is a Governor in Council regulation which came into force with the IAA in 2019. It identifies the physical activities that constitute the "designated projects" subject to the IAA.

The IAA required that IAAC review the Project List within five years after coming into force of the regulations. To inform this review, public engagement on a Discussion Paper was undertaken in summer/fall 2024. There was a high level of interest, with over 117 submissions received. Input was polarized with environmental non-government organizations and Indigenous communities generally seeking to have more projects subject to federal assessment, and industry and provinces generally seeking less.

The review aimed to ensure that the Project List is still meeting the intended objective of focusing assessments on those major projects that are most likely to cause significant adverse effects in federal jurisdiction and focusing resources where federal impact assessment adds value over other regulatory processes. The review also aimed to align the Project List with the 2024 IAA amendments, which were made in response to the October 13, 2023, decision by the Supreme Court of Canada.

Any specific regulatory amendments to the Project List in response to this review will need to follow the regulatory development process for Governor in Council regulations, including the publication of draft regulations in the Canada Gazette, Part I, for further public comment.

Order Designating Certain Excluded Classes of Projects (Ministerial Exclusion Order regarding federal lands provisions)

For projects on federal lands and outside Canada that are not on the Project List, responsible federal authorities must make an environmental effects determination (see section 3e. below). However, the IAA enables the Minister to designate by order classes of projects on federal lands that, if carried out, will cause only insignificant adverse environmental effects. Projects that meet the conditions in the Ministerial Exclusion Order are exempt from the environmental effects determination requirements.

An amended Ministerial Exclusion Order that repeals and replaces a 2019 version of the Order was registered on February 28, 2025 (coming into force date) and published in Canada Gazette, Part II on March 12, 2025, following extensive engagement with federal authorities and a public comment period on draft amendments in Canada Gazette, Part I, in summer/fall 2024. The updated Order excludes additional classes of non-designated projects on federal lands and outside Canada that would cause only insignificant adverse environmental effects and made small changes to existing classes.

Indigenous Impact Assessment Co-Administration Agreement Regulations

The IAA provides for Ministerial agreements under which Indigenous governing bodies may exercise certain powers, duties, and functions in relation to impact assessments. Regulations are required before co-administration agreements can be entered into. Such agreements would be one of many tools for the Government of Canada to work in partnership with Indigenous Peoples throughout the federal impact assessment process.

These long-term agreements would provide certainty for all parties about roles and responsibilities during future impact assessments of projects on lands specified in the agreements. Through these agreements, negotiated with the Minister, Indigenous governing bodies or co-management bodies would exercise certain powers, duties and functions under the IAA related to federal impact assessments on specified lands. They would be used in specific circumstances as territorial overlaps between Indigenous communities would limit uptake.

Before entering into these agreements, regulations must first be in place. A 90-day national engagement period on the Indigenous Impact Assessment Co-Administration Agreement Discussion Paper was held in summer/fall 2024. During the comment period, IAAC met and/or received submissions from 44 Indigenous groups and organizations, in addition to 14 industry and environmental stakeholders, and 7 provinces/territories, as well as a handful of individuals.

e. Regional and Strategic Assessments

Regional assessments can be directed by the Minister to assess the positive and adverse effects of multiple existing and future physical activities in a specific geographic region, including cumulative effects. Strategic assessments can be employed to examine the Government of Canada’s existing or proposed policies, plans, or programs relevant to impact assessment.

These types of assessments inform our understanding of the potential impacts of development and the establishment of standard mitigation measures for certain types of projects. They enable future project-specific assessments to be focused on what is unique and different to accelerate those processes and ensure time, energy, and resources are focused on appropriately mitigating key issues.

Regional Assessments

Under the IAA, the Minister can establish a committee or authorize IAAC to conduct a regional assessment of the effects of existing or future physical activities carried out in a region. The main objective of regional assessments is to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of future federal impact assessment processes and decisions.

One of the purposes of the IAA is to encourage the assessment of the cumulative effects of physical activities in a region. Regional assessments allow the Government of Canada, together with other jurisdictions, to go beyond the scope of project-specific impact assessments to understand the regional context where development occurs (or may occur), and to consider the management of effects, especially cumulative effects, from a regional perspective. The IAA also authorizes certain project types to be exempt from an impact assessment if they meet conditions established following a regional assessment.

Regional assessments analyze both the positive and adverse effects of multiple existing and future physical activities in a specific geographic region. Effects considered include environmental, health, social and economic effects, cumulative effects and impacts on Indigenous Peoples and their rights. While regional assessments are not limited to effects in federal jurisdiction, recommended actions arising from regional assessments are focused on areas of federal jurisdiction.

Strategic Assessments

The Minister can establish a committee or authorize IAAC to conduct strategic assessments of any Government of Canada policy, plan, or program, or of any issue, which is relevant to conducting impact assessments.

Completed Regional and Strategic Assessments:

The following regional and strategic assessments have been completed to date:

Regional Assessment of Offshore Oil and Gas Exploratory Drilling East of Newfoundland and Labrador. This resulted in regulations setting out standard conditions for future projects which, if met, exempts them from the requirement for an assessment.
Regional Assessment of Offshore Wind Development in Newfoundland and Labrador
Regional Assessment of Offshore Wind Development in Nova Scotia
Strategic Assessment of Climate Change

The following regional assessments are ongoing:

Regional Assessment in the Ring of Fire Area
Regional Assessment of the St. Lawrence River Area

f. CEAA 2012

The IAA includes transition provisions that allowed any environmental assessment commenced under CEAA 2012 to continue under that Act as if it had not been repealed. CEAA 2012 focuses on determining whether projects are likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects within areas of federal jurisdiction.

Indigenous participation under CEAA 2012 is driven by the Crown’s legal duty to consult, under s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. Similar to the IAA, assessments may be coordinated with, or substituted to, another jurisdiction. There are five ongoing substituted CEAA 2012 project assessments with British Columbia.

4. Implementation: Operations & Engagement

a. Assessment Process and Decision Making under the IAA

The impact assessment process consists of five main steps outlined below. Over the last year, IAAC has improved implementation practices at each phase of the process, doing things differently, to ensure assessments are more predictable and faster.

There are two types of impact assessments: IAAC-led assessments and review panel assessments. For IAAC-led assessments, IAAC leads the assessment, including collaboration with other jurisdictions, public engagement, and consulting Indigenous communities, and prepares a report to the Minister. For review panel assessments, an independent expert panel leads the assessment, engagement and provides a report to the Minister.

Before the impact assessment process begins, IAAC offers to review drafts of the proponent’s initial project description as it is being developed, to ensure they meet the requirements and focus on key issues to ensure an efficient and timely planning phase.

1. Planning

The planning phase starts with the provision, by the proponent, of an initial project description. This is subject to analysis by IAAC and federal authorities and consultation with the public and Indigenous communities. During this phase, which is up to six months, IAAC makes a determination as to whether a full impact assessment is required, having considered the likelihood of significant adverse federal effects and whether other federal or provincial processes could manage and mitigate any such effects. Approximately 40% of projects since 2019 have received an early decision at this stage, without requiring a full impact assessment. If an impact assessment is required, IAAC determines and notifies the proponent of the scope of the assessment providing them with details on the information and studies that will be required.

2. Impact Statement

The proponent gathers and provides the information and studies through an Impact Statement. The Impact Statement is a technical document, whose purpose is to identify and assess impacts of the project, measures proposed to mitigate those effects, issues that would make permitting the project challenging and any follow-up programs. Sound science and Indigenous knowledge inform the Impact Statement.

3. Impact Assessment

The potential environmental, health, social and economic impacts of proposed projects are assessed through the review of the Impact Statement and the input received from Indigenous Peoples, the public, federal experts, other jurisdictions, and other participants. IAAC or a review panel uses this information to develop a draft impact assessment report and conducts a comment period on the draft report. The final report is submitted to the Minister.

4. Decision-making

At the end of an impact assessment, the Minister or Governor in Council, must determine whether a project’s adverse effects in federal jurisdiction (i.e., changes related to fish and fish habitat, aquatic species, migratory birds; Indigenous Peoples’ culture or use of lands or health, social or economic conditions; interprovincial marine pollution; or change to the environment on federal lands), and direct or incidental adverse effects, are in the public interest. This decision is informed by Crown consultation outcomes and the impact assessment report provided to the Minister – either by IAAC, another jurisdiction in the case of a substituted assessment, or a review panel.

The decision requires consideration of first whether the adverse effects in federal jurisdiction are likely to be significant, and the extent of their significance, and if so, whether those effects are justified in the public interest.

If the Minister or Governor in Council determines that adverse effects in federal jurisdiction of a project are in the public interest, the Minister establishes conditions to mitigate those effects through a decision statement. Decision statements set out the rationale for the decision, providing transparency and accountability.

5. Post Decision

IAAC is active in promoting and verifying compliance with Decision Statements and correcting non-compliance.

b. Permitting Coordination

All designated projects under the IAA require development of a permitting plan at the outset of the assessment. Further to the Cabinet Directive on Regulatory Efficiency for Clean Growth Projects, IAAC also provides permitting coordination services to proponents of these projects and others that received a positive decision under CEAA 2012.Permitting coordination services include:

development of a detailed federal permitting plan with clear requirements and timelines;
transparency and accountability to requirements and timelines through public reporting on the progress of permitting on the Canadian Impact Assessment Registry;
a point of contact within IAAC and centralized support from the Privy Council Office’s Clean Growth Office for any permitting issues; and
oversight by the Deputy Ministers Regulatory Efficiency Action Council to proactively address any federal permitting issues.

With permitting coordination, Marathon Palladium mine received all federal permits within 15 months and all projects in the IA system now will have detailed permitting plans and transparent timeline commitments.

IAAC also offers federal permitting coordination support for projects that are not designated under the IAA, but where multiple federal permits are required prior to starting construction and which meet at least two of the following criteria:

are of significant economic scale to Canada or the region in which they will operate;
contribute significantly to the Government of Canada’s environment and climate change objectives;
use first-of-its-kind technology in Canada or involve highly complex permitting;
advance economic reconciliation; or
fall within a federal or provincial priority area.

Project proponents whose projects meet these criteria are invited to submit an expression of interest through the Clean Growth Permit Coordination Portal.

This permitting coordination initiative is led by the Clean Growth Office at the Privy Council Office and IAAC.

c. Efficiency Efforts

In addition to permitting coordination and new, shorter timelines^Footnote 1, work is underway to implement additional efficiency improvements throughout all phases of the impact assessment process. These include:

Planning Phase:

Proactively engaging with proponents, Indigenous communities, and other parties before a potential planning phase to navigate the assessment process, resolve issues, and ensure quality submissions, which helps accelerate timelines and reduce costs.
Focusing the planning phase Summary of Issues on necessary information for decision-making, supporting proponents in building positive relationships with participants, and incorporating Indigenous communities’ perspectives to minimize legal risks and enhance project certainty.

Impact Statement Phase:

Working closely with proponents during the impact statement phase to clarify requirements and review drafts of documents to ensure the final Impact Statement is not deficient, saving time for the proponent.

Impact Assessment Phase:

Scoping the assessment to focus on key issues, e.g., issues not addressed by provincial processes.
Preparing for a smooth decision-making phase by ensuring that any measures or conditions selected for inclusion in the decision statement are reasonable and appropriate in consideration of the proponent’s intent for the project.

Decision Making Phase:

Standardizing mitigation measures/conditions, which can replace costly and time-consuming baseline studies.

Throughout all Phases:

Enhancing cooperation with other jurisdictions to reduce duplication in assessments, applying the principle of “one project, one review.”
Permitting coordination during the impact assessment provides clarity on permitting requirements earlier in the process. Federal authorities review information provided by the proponent from a permitting perspective to identify project design issues that may make permitting difficult and/or information needed to inform permitting. Proponents may use this information to work on permitting alongside impact assessment if they choose. IAAC will facilitate permitting discussions between proponents and federal regulators, as needed, and will look for areas where information from the impact assessment can inform permitting to avoid duplication of effort. This approach will increase the efficiency and timeliness of the entire federal regulatory process.
Conducting regional and strategic assessments to enable future project assessments to focus on what is unique and different to accelerate project-specific assessments and ensure time, energy, and resources are focused on appropriately mitigating key issues/risks.
Using artificial intelligence to help staff quickly analyze information, identify key issues, streamline processes, and make the impact assessment process more efficient.

IAAC is doing things differently and will identify and implement additional reforms to support a faster process that facilitates investment and development through “one project, one review”.

d. Cooperation with Jurisdictions

The environment is an area of shared responsibility between federal, provincial, and territorial governments under Canada’s Constitution Act and confirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada in its October 2023 Decision on the IAA reference. The Decision underscored the need for federal and provincial governments to work together on impact assessment in the spirit of cooperative federalism.

The amended IAA ensures federal assessment decisions are focused squarely on the prevention of adverse effects within federal jurisdiction that could be caused by major projects.

Each province has its own assessment regime, resulting in some proposed projects requiring assessment by both federal and provincial governments. When there is both a provincial and federal assessment being conducted, IAAC is committed to working more closely with, relying on and deferring to the extent possible to provinces towards “one project, one review” and exploring how we can go further to streamline and coordinate assessments and integrate permitting requirements.

One of the means through which the federal government and the provinces or territories collaborate is through cooperation agreements. Cooperation agreements outline the approach that will be used when a project assessment is required by more than one jurisdiction. Cooperation agreements benefit both levels of government by:

providing transparency, predictability, and certainty on how IAAC and a province will work together on assessments, committed to the goal of “one project, one review” while meeting the requirements of each jurisdiction;
enabling greater flexibility in cooperation (e.g., easier substitution of provincial process in place of the federal one or joint assessments with greater deference to the provincial process);
demonstrating a shared commitment to effective and efficient assessments that avoid duplication, signaling that both orders of Government are working together to support responsible development; and,
responding to stakeholder concerns and requests for improved federal-provincial cooperation.

These cooperation agreements can articulate different types of cooperation with other jurisdictions and opportunities for greater efficiency and reliance on provincial processes, as provided for under the IAA:

Coordinated Assessments

Jurisdictions coordinate activities during the Planning phase and assessment process, and, where possible, timelines and documents
Each completes its respective assessment process
Most common approach to cooperation
Can reduce duplication but does not achieve a single process.

Substitution

The Minister can substitute a process, in whole or in part, to another jurisdiction
Two options
- Full: other jurisdiction responsible for all IAA requirements
- Harmonized: co-developed process; best placed jurisdiction takes specifi elements of assessment. Agreement required
Each jurisdiction makes its own decision based on a single assessment report
Creates a single process

Delegation

Any part of the assessment and/or preparation of the report can be undertaken by other jurisdiction
IAAC remains responsible for the overall process on IAA timelines
Potential to eliminate duplication
Single process possible

Joint Review Panels

Jurisdictions jointly appoint panel members and agree on terms of reference for an independent panel to conduct the impact assessment, hold public hearings and write report
Experience in several jurisdictions
Jurisdictions can participate in integrated review panels to assess nuclear and pipeline projects
Creates a single process

Canada and British Columbia (BC) have a Cooperation Agreement under the IAA and BC’s Environmental Assessment Act. As such, federal assessments can be substituted to BC’s provincial process, thereby avoiding duplication and fulfilling the goal of "one project, one review." Canada and BC have also concluded an agreement through a Commitment Statement to coordinate federal and provincial permitting requirements for critical mineral projects. IAAC continues to engage and invite other provinces to develop cooperation agreements and implement approaches to avoid duplication and overlap, including project-specific agreements.

Assessment processes in the territories and part of northern Quebec and Labrador are administered through regimes that have been established through constitutionally protected land claim agreements. The application of the federal legislation varies under each of the regimes.

e. Indigenous Consultation and Engagement

IAAC acts as the Crown Consultation Coordinator throughout the impact assessment process for projects designated by the IAA, leading Government of Canada consultations with Indigenous Peoples to meet the statutory requirements of the IAA, the Crown’s common law duty to consult, obligations flowing from provisions of modern treaties, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and the Government of Canada’s commitment to advance reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples. The IAA includes the following:

authority to create regulations to share federal assessment powers;
IAAC coordinates engagement and consultation for all federal authorities;
Indigenous-led assessments and Indigenous knowledge, rights and culture must be taken into account;
adverse impacts on rights must be considered in key decisions; and
rights of Indigenous Peoples are respected.

Through its implementation of the IAA, IAAC is working to enhance Indigenous participation and advance reconciliation. IAAC achieves this in several ways:

Advancing new and innovative partnerships with Indigenous Peoples by collaborating on the assessment of project impacts and the development of policies and guidance.
Using a model to consult with Indigenous Peoples that emphasizes collaboration and consensus-building.
Releasing guidance for proponents on early engagement with Indigenous Peoples under the IAA, which aims to improve regulatory efficiency and predictability by helping proponents build strong relationships with Indigenous Peoples and address issues early in the IA process.
Providing funding to support Indigenous participation in project assessments and to build capacity.

In addition:

IAAC negotiates impact assessment provisions for modern treaties, self-government agreements, and project-specific agreements with Indigenous groups and provides oversight on the implementation of these agreements, in alignment with Canada’s Collaborative Modern Treaty Implementation Policy.
IAAC is serving as the interim Crown Consultation Coordinator for permitting for projects that are not designated projects under the IAA.

As required by the IAA, an Indigenous Advisory Committee, made up of First Nations, Inuit and Métis individuals from across Canada, was established in 2019. The committee provides IAAC with information and expert advice for the development of key policies and guidance to help ensure the unique rights, interests and perspectives of Indigenous Peoples are acknowledged, affirmed, and implemented in environmental and impact assessment.

f. Public Engagement

The IAA requires that the public have meaningful opportunities to participate throughout the assessment process. IAAC implements a public participation approach for impact assessments of designated projects, regional assessments and strategic assessments that is inclusive and responsive to community needs. The public is offered opportunities to participate and provide feedback at varying stages of the assessment process and on key documents related to assessments. IAAC also provides training on impact assessment adapted to various audiences such as Indigenous communities, proponents, federal authorities, and members of the public.

Canadian Impact Assessment Registry

IAAC maintains the online Canadian Impact Assessment Registry (Registry), which provides information about the impact assessment of proposed projects, projects on federal lands and outside Canada, regional and strategic assessments, assessments under CEAA 2012 and federal permits and authorizations. The Registry provides users with an online engagement platform, making it easier to have a say in projects that could impact them. All documents and the public’s comments about a project are published on the Registry, including information submitted by project proponents, comments from the public, stakeholders and Indigenous groups, and the views of expert federal authorities.

Funding Programs

IAAC administers $21.4 million in grants and contributions consisting of four funding programs that support meaningful public participation and Indigenous consultation:

Participant Funding Program: Provides funding at key stages of the assessment process to individuals, non-profit organizations and Indigenous communities and organizations to support their participation in project-specific impact assessments, regional assessments, and strategic assessments.
Policy Dialogue Program: Supports effective engagement in the development of policies, guidance, regulations, and legislation related to impact assessment.
Indigenous Capacity Support Program: Supports the development of local and regional Indigenous capacity to meaningfully participate in or undertake project-specific impact assessments, regional assessments, strategic assessments and monitoring and follow-up activities.
Funding for Research on Assessments: Supports new and innovative research that furthers the practice of impact assessment, including regional and strategic assessments.

IAAC also provides yearly funding to the Province of Quebec for the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement to support the James Bay Advisory Committee on the Environment and the Kativik Environmental Advisory Committee.

g. Advisory Council

The IAA requires the Minister to establish a Minister’s Advisory Council (MINAC) to provide advice and recommendations on issues related to the implementation of the impact assessment, regional assessment, and strategic assessment regimes. Specifically, MINAC’s advice to the Minister focuses on the governance of the regime and the effectiveness and efficiency of the processes established under the IAA and implemented by IAAC. It also advises on whether Canada is achieving transparency and predictability for proponents and the public, helping to identify issues early, and creating efficiencies to best support decision-making in the public interest.

MINAC consists of up to 12 members, including the Chair, with varied experience from across groups engaged in the impact assessment regime, including but not limited to industry, environmental organizations, and academia. In addition, the IAA requires membership to include those recommended by Indigenous governing bodies to represent the interests of First Nations, the Inuit, and the Métis. The President of IAAC serves as an additional, ex-officio non-voting member.

h. International Obligations and Engagements

IAAC’s international activities aim to ensure that Canada meets its international obligations related to impact assessment and stays abreast and influences emerging international issues, trends, and best practices in impact assessment, and that any new multilateral or bilateral commitments are consistent with Canada’s domestic priorities.

Canada is a Party to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo Convention). Through the Espoo Convention, Canada has obligations to assess the potential transboundary impacts of certain activities at the early planning stage and allow the public and the authorities in affected party countries to participate in the impact assessment process.

IAAC has lead responsibility for Canada’s implementation and application of the Espoo Convention and provides advice to other federal departments and the impact assessment boards in the territories (Northern Boards) on the applicability of the Espoo Convention. IAAC also represents Canada as a member of the Implementation Committee under the Espoo Convention for the 2024-2029 period.

Canada is also a Party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which includes obligations related to environmental assessment and monitoring of activities that may cause harmful changes to the marine environment. IAAC works closely with Global Affairs Canada to provide advice and participate in the negotiation of implementing agreements under UNCLOS, including the International Seabed Authority Mining Code for commercial exploitation of deep-sea minerals and the recently adopted Treaty on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ Treaty).

5. Project Forecast

As of May 6, 2025, there are 32 projects undergoing an assessment under the IAA, and 15 undergoing an assessment under CEAA 2012. These projects are shown on the maps below:

a. IAA Assessments

b. CEAA 2012 Assessments

c. On-going Regional and Strategic Assessments

IAAC has two ongoing regional assessments, described below, and no on-going strategic assessment.

1. Regional Assessment in the Ring of Fire Area

Conduct Start Date: January 20, 2025

Expected Completion Date: July 20, 2028

Objective: Provide information on key priorities of importance to the First Nation Partners and the Government of Canada, in the assessment area, and provide an analysis of the potential positive and negative effects, including cumulative and interactive effects due to anticipated development activities throughout the assessment area. The Regional Assessment will also identify and provide recommendations on how the potential cumulative and other effects may best be managed to avoid adverse consequences and enhance positive ones and how (and by what governance body or bodies) the needed follow-up steps would be determined and initiated. The Regional Assessment will produce information that will be useful in streamlining subsequent project-specific assessments and supporting more effective and timely project decisions.

2. Regional Assessment of the St. Lawrence River Area

Conduct Start Date: Currently in the Planning Phase

Expected Completion Date: TBD

Objective: The goal of this Regional Assessment is to understand the state of the St. Lawrence River within the assessment area, focusing on the cumulative effects of physical activities and complementary activities on environmental and socioeconomic conditions. By integrating Indigenous knowledge and Western science, baseline and targeted conditions will be established to evaluate the impacts of future activities in an increasingly efficient manner.

d. IAAC Activity at a Glance

Below are some statistics for the third quarter of 2024-2025.

Table 1 - Breakdown by sector
Sector^{Footnote 4}	Number
Mining	22
Transportation^{Footnote 5}	9
Oil and gas	4
Other	4
Power generation^{Footnote 6}	3

Table 2 - Breakdown by phase or approach
Phase or approach	Number
Broad IAAC-led assessments (complex projects)	20
Planning Phase assessments	10
Substituted to a provincial process	8
Referred to Independent Review Panels (very complex projects)	4

Table 3 - Latest progress
Progress in assessments	Quarter 3 ending December 31	Quarter 2 ending September 30	Quarter 1 ending June 30	Total since August 2019
New requests for assessments ^{Footnote 7}	5	5	2	86
Projects in public planning phase	10	13	13	46
Broader public assessments launched for complex projects	15	15	14	15
Amended decisions with conditions after project changes or new developments occur	1	7	0	28

Table 4 - Participation
Participation and funding activities	Quarter 3 ending December 31	Quarter 2 ending September 30	Quarter 1 ending June 30	Total since August 2019
New registrants to the Canadian Impact Assessment Registry’s project notification system	110	163	589	862
Comments received from the public on all assessments	302	121	145	13,732
Stakeholder outreach and engagement activities led by IAAC	128	108	109	967
Funding we’ve allocated through grants and contributions to support public and Indigenous participation in assessments	$1.3M	$1M	$885K	$41.8M
Funding we’ve allocated through grants and contributions to support Indigenous capacity	$1.4M	$1.4M	$2.7M	$70.1M

Table 5 - Requests for assessment decisions to determine need for impact assessment (IA)
Requests for assessments (all types)	Quarter 3 ending December 31	Quarter 2 ending September 30	Quarter 1 ending June 30	Total since August 2019
Yes, assessment warranted	0	0	0	7
No, assessment not warranted	5	2	1	75

Table 6 - Early IA decisions in 180-day Planning Phase
Early IA decisions in 180-day Planning Phase	Quarter 3 ending December 31	Quarter 2 ending September 30	Quarter 1 ending June 30	Total since August 2019
Early assessments completed	2	2	2	14
Broad IA required (complex projects)	1	0	2	20

Table 7 - Decisions to substitute process to a province
Decisions to substitute	Quarter 3 ending December 31	Quarter 2 ending September 30	Quarter 1 ending June 30	Total since August 2019
Note: Currently, British Columbia is the only province with a cooperation agreement which facilitates substitution.	0	0	0	4

Table 8 - Environmental assessment decisions for Minister/Cabinet (*Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012)*
Environmental assessment decisions	Quarter 3 ending December 31	Quarter 2 ending September 30	Quarter 1 ending June 30	Total since August 2019
Allowed to proceed (with conditions)	0	0	1	17
Not allowed to proceed	0	0	0	4

Table 9 - IA decisions of complex projects for Minister/Cabinet (*Impact Assessment Act*)
IA decisions for complex projects	Quarter 3 ending December 31	Quarter 2 ending September 30	Quarter 1 ending June 30	Total since August 2019
Yes, in the public interest to proceed (with conditions)	0	0	0	1
No, not in the public interest	0	0	0	0

Table 10 - Inspections (on and offsite)
Inspections	Quarter 3 ending December 31	Quarter 2 ending September 30	Quarter 1 ending June 30	Total since August 2019
Inspections (on and offsite)	12	6	13	275

Page details

2025-10-01