2016-2017 Departmental Results Report

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

___________________________________________________
The Honourable Catherine McKenna, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Environment and Climate Change and
Minister Responsible for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, 2017.

This publication may be reproduced for personal or internal use without permission, provided the source is fully acknowledged. However, multiple copy reproduction of this publication in whole or in part for purposes of redistribution requires the prior written permission from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3, or info@ceaa-acee.gc.ca.

Catalogue No.: En104-16E-PDF

ISSN: 2560-9564

This document has been issued in French under the title: Agence canadienne d’évaluation environnementale: Rapport sur les résultats ministériels 2016-2017.

Alternative formats may be requested by contacting: info@ceaa-acee.gc.ca.

Table of contents

Minister’s message

The Hon. Catherine McKenna, Minister of Environment and Climate Change and Minister Responsible for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

As the Minister responsible for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, I am pleased to present the Agency’s Departmental Results Report for 2016–17.

Further to our commitment to provide simpler and more transparent reports to parliamentarians and Canadians, we made changes to the format and content of the Departmental Results Report (formerly known as the Departmental Performance Report). This new, user-friendly report allows us to articulate our progress in a way that is clear, strategic and balanced, while continuing to be transparent about how resources are used.

Canadians support the government’s commitment to a healthy environment, sustainable economy, and sound environmental stewardship. A clean-growth approach will not only have a positive impact on the middle class and all sectors of the Canadian economy, but it will ensure a healthy environment for the present and future generations.

The Agency conducts high-quality environmental assessments, taking into consideration the contribution of Indigenous Peoples and Canadians, and provides evidence-based information to enable our government to make informed decisions about major projects.

In 2016, the Government of Canada committed to reviewing and modernizing environmental assessment and regulatory processes. This commitment to regain public trust, protect the environment and introduce modern safeguards was made in support of reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples, and ensuring that resources continue to get to market responsibly.

Last year, an Expert Panel was established with the mandate to review federal environmental assessment processes. As part of its review, there was extensive consultation across Canada and in over ten months, the Expert Panel met with more than 1,000 people in over 21 cities across the country. The involvement of Indigenous groups, environmental organizations, industry associations and the public was key to the success of this engagement process. These consultations informed the recommendation report that was submitted to me by the Expert Panel in April 2017. Since that time, I had the chance to meet with Canadians from across the country to hear their views and perspectives. Our government released a discussion paper in June and we remain committed to continued engagement with Indigenous groups and stakeholders to develop a process that has the trust of Canadians.

For the prosperity and benefit of our country, the environment and economy must and do go together. The goal of our Government is to provide regulatory certainty to businesses, respect the rights of Indigenous peoples, engage communities and protect our environment for generations to come. The Agency has successfully delivered on its mandate to produce high-quality environmental assessments and serve as the centre of expertise for environmental assessment within the Government of Canada.

I encourage parliamentarians and Canadians to read the Departmental Results Report for 2016–17 and learn more about the Agency.

___________________________________________________
The Honourable Catherine McKenna, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Environment and Climate Change and
Minister Responsible for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency


Institutional Head’s message

Ron Hallman, President, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

As President of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency), I am pleased to present the Departmental Results Report, which outlines our achievements and results against the expectations outlined in the Report on Plans and Priorities for 2016–17.

In 2016−17, the Agency successfully conducted high-quality environmental assessments (EA) for designated projects in accordance with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012. Over the year there were 61 environmental assessments that took place across the country. During this time, the Agency also continued to implement the interim approach and principles that were established in 2015−16. This includes assessing the direct and upstream greenhouse gas emissions of all projects under review.

Last year, the Agency supported the Minister of Environment and Climate Change in the review of federal environmental assessment processes. A Secretariat was put in place to support the Expert Panel with its work, including the public consultations held across Canada. In addition to advising and supporting the Expert Panel, the Agency led the establishment of a Multi-Interest Advisory Committee that saw industry, indigenous and environmental groups come together to discuss issues surrounding the EA Review. The Agency also provided funding to individuals, non-profit organizations and Indigenous groups to enable them to participate in the review and the many engagement opportunities. This work will continue in 2017−18 through consultations on a federal discussion paper. It is also expected that the government will make a decision in 2017−18 regarding potential legislative, regulatory and policy changes resulting from the review that took place in 2016−17.

This year our team tackled many priorities and I am proud of the professionalism of our highly-dedicated employees. On a day-to-day basis, the Agency plays a key role in considering the environmental effects of designated projects and identifying measures to mitigate them based on scientific evidence, Indigenous knowledge and the input of Indigenous peoples and the public. Through our Participant Funding Program, over 240 recipients received financial support to participate in, and contribute to federal environmental assessment activities and the review of environmental assessment processes.

We are proud of the work done at the Agency to protect the environment and contribute to sustainable development across our country. I invite you to read this report and learn more about the important work that the Agency undertakes on behalf of Canadians.

___________________________________________________
Ron Hallman
President
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency


Results at a glance

  • Actual spending for 2016–17: $38,688,000
  • Actual full-time equivalents for 2016–17: 265

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency) is a federal body accountable to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change. The Agency delivers environmental assessments (EAs) that inform government decision making, in support of sustainable development. The Agency is the responsible authority for most federal EAs.

During 2016–17 the Agency:

  • Supported the Minister of Environment and Climate Change in the review of environmental assessment processes, providing analysis and advice, supporting the establishment of the Expert Panel and the Multi-Interest Advisory Committee, as well as supporting the Expert Panel through a Secretariat consisting of Agency employees;
  • Contributed to shaping the future of EA by leading interdepartmental and intergovernmental dialogue and by participating in international workshops and conferences;
  • Delivered high-quality EAs of major projects by considering the environmental effects of designated projects and identifying mitigation measures. Engaged with Canadians, including the public, Indigenous groups, and stakeholders in order to gather evidence and seek the views of potentially affected communities by projects;
  • Applied an efficient and effective whole-of-government approach to consultation with Indigenous groups potentially affected by projects under review;
  • Disbursed a total of $2,002,922 in contribution funds to assist Indigenous groups, stakeholders and the public to participate in the EA process for projects under review and disbursed a further $2,329,760 to support participation in the Review of EA Processes;
  • Integrated the assessment of direct and upstream greenhouse gas emissions of projects into the conduct of environmental assessments where applicable;
  • Provided guidance, information and training to EA practitioners, stakeholders, Indigenous Peoples, and the public;
  • Conducted on-site inspections for projects assessed under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012) and carried out enforcement actions, including written warnings, formal notices and an order under s.94 of CEAA 2012;
  • Delivered a number of learning activities to Agency employees including: sessions Mental Health Workshop: The Telltale Signs of Burnout, and Mental Health in the Workplace; and
  • The Agency has taken a strategic “digital by default” approach to the way it communicates with Canadians regarding the government’s priority to review the federal environmental assessment system.

This report outlines the results achieved for the Agency’s three program areas: EA Policy, EA Delivery and Internal Services. For more information on the department’s plans, priorities and results achieved, see the “Results: what we achieved” section of this report.

Raison d’être, mandate and role: who we are and what we do

Raison d’être

Environmental assessment (EA) contributes to informed decision-making in support of sustainable development.

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency) delivers high-quality EAs in support of government decisions about major projects.

Mandate and role

EA informs government decision making and supports sustainable development by identifying opportunities to eliminate, reduce or control a project’s potential adverse impact on the environment before the project is undertaken, and by ensuring that mitigation measures are applied if a project is allowed to proceed.

The CEAA 2012 and its accompanying regulations provide the legislative framework for EAs. EAs consider whether “designated projects” are likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects that fall within federal legislative authority. Assessments are conducted by one of three responsible authorities: the Agency, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission or the National Energy Board. CEAA 2012 requires that opportunities for public participation be provided during EAs and that participant funding and a public registry, including an Internet site, be established. CEAA 2012 also defines the roles and responsibilities of the Agency, the other responsible authorities, decision makers and project proponents Footnote 1.

When the Agency is the responsible authority, it determines whether an EA is required for a designated project and conducts or manages the EA in accordance with the procedures and timelines set out in CEAA 2012. The Agency is also responsible for managing the EAs of most projects that continue to be assessed under the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, in accordance with the transitional provisions of CEAA 2012.

The Agency advises the Minister of Environment and Climate Change in fulfilling her responsibilities under CEAA 2012, including establishing review panels to conduct EAs of certain projects, determining the significance of the effects of projects, and issuing EA decision statements at the conclusion of the EA process.

For designated projects for which it is the responsible authority, the Agency promotes compliance with CEAA 2012, and takes action as required to ensure proponents comply with the legislation’s requirements. The Agency coordinates with provinces and territories to deliver timely and efficient EAs and avoid duplication, and advises the Minister of Environment and Climate Change on requests to substitute the CEAA 2012 process with the EA process of another jurisdiction. Additionally, the Agency—on its own and in collaboration with partners—conducts research to support high-quality EAs and develops effective EA policies and practices.

The Government of Canada takes a whole-of-government approach to Indigenous consultation in the context of EAs, to ensure that Indigenous groups are adequately consulted and, where appropriate, accommodated when the Crown (federal government) contemplates actions that may adversely impact potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights. The Agency serves as the Crown consultation coordinator to integrate the Government of Canada’s Indigenous consultation activities into the EA process, for review panels and for EAs for which the Agency is responsible.

The Agency leads federal project review activities under the environmental and social protection regimes set out in sections 22 and 23 of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement and in the Northeastern Quebec Agreement. The James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement and the Northeastern Quebec Agreement are constitutionally protected comprehensive land claim agreements. The Agency supports its President who, as the Federal Administrator, must review and determine whether projects of a federal nature proposed under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement or Northeastern Quebec Agreement should proceed and, if so, under which conditions.

The Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals establishes a self-assessment process for departments and agencies to conduct a strategic EA of a policy, plan, or program proposal. The Agency supports the Minister of Environment and Climate Change in promoting the application of the Directive, and provides federal authorities with advice, training and guidance upon request.

For more general information about the Agency, see the “Supplementary information” section of this report. For more information on the Agency’s organizational mandate letter commitments, see the Minister’s mandate letter. Endnote i

Operating context and key risks

Operating context

The Agency operates in a continuously changing setting impacted by government priorities and outside factors. Protecting the environment, while supporting strong economic growth and improving the quality of life of Canadians, is a priority of the Government of Canada. EA, including strategic EA, supports these priorities by ensuring that opportunities to eliminate, reduce or control potential adverse impacts on the environment, as well as mitigation measures, are identified to assist in the decision-making process.

Following commitments made in the Minister’s mandate letter Endnote ii, the Speech from the Throne Endnote iii and Budget 2016 Endnote iv, a comprehensive review of EA processes is being undertaken. The Final Report of the Expert Panel for the Review of Environmental Assessment Processes, ongoing subsequent consultation on the Report, and engagement with stakeholders will inform the government’s future approach of the EA process. In the interim, as the recommendations are being considered and analyzed, the Agency continues to carry out EAs in accordance with the Act and the government’s Interim Approach and Principles Endnote v announced in January 2016.

The federal Crown has a legal duty to consult and, where appropriate, accommodate Indigenous groups when it contemplates conduct that may adversely affect potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights. Indigenous consultation considerations are integrated into all EAs conducted by the Agency and by review panels which are key opportunities to enhance relationships and reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples. The EA process established under CEAA 2012 coexists with other impact assessment requirements established under some land claims agreements, such as the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, the Nisga’a Final Agreement, and the Inuvialuit Final Agreement. This requires close collaboration to ensure efficient coordination of these processes.

Key risks

Key risks
Risks Mitigating strategy and effectiveness Link to the department’s Programs Link to mandate letter commitments or to government-wide and departmental priorities

Impacts of economic activity

The Agency operates in a continuously changing environment influenced by outside factors. In particular, the economic climate of a region affects the type, timing, volume and distribution of projects requiring EAs.

The Agency maintains proactive relationships with proponents to forecast and plan its work to the extent possible.

The Agency reallocates resources, where possible, to address fluctuating workload distribution and develops strategies in collaboration with central agencies to meet its legislative responsibilities.

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Take the lead in implementing the government’s plan for a clean environment and a sustainable economy.

Managing engagement challenges

The Agency manages Indigenous consultation activities with potentially affected Indigenous Peoples during the EAs of designated projects for which it is responsible, to fulfill the federal Crown's legal duty to consult. A lack of adequate consultation makes it difficult to ensure appropriate accommodation can be identified and implemented. A lack of adequate consultation may also be a source of regulatory uncertainty.

Each EA may give rise to the legal duty to consult. As such, the Agency integrates Indigenous consultation activities into the EA process to the extent possible, and identifies measures that can be included in a decision statement to address concerns, thereby supporting the federal Crown in meeting its legal duty to consult for the government actions associated with a project, and for the Minister of Environment and Climate Change or Government of Canada in exercising their decision making EA related responsibilities.

When cooperative mechanisms such as substitution are undertaken with other jurisdictions, the Agency maintains responsibilities for the substantive aspects of consultation, but may delegate the procedural aspects of Indigenous consultation to the other jurisdiction, the proponent or both.

The Indigenous component of the Participant Funding Program provides up to $3 million annually in financial assistance specifically for Indigenous groups to prepare for and participate in consultation activities associated with EAs undertaken by the Agency or by review panels.

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

Improve relationship with, and outcomes for Indigenous Peoples.

Managing non-compliance

Proponent non-compliance with CEAA 2012, including non-compliance with conditions identified in decision statements could harm the environment and/or undermine public confidence.

Decision statements contain clear and measurable conditions, including mitigation measures and follow-up program requirements.

The Agency's Compliance and Enforcement Program promotes and verifies compliance and determines an appropriate response to situations involving non-compliance.

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

Review Canada’s environmental assessment processes to regain public trust and help get resources to market and introduce new, fair processes that will, among other things, require project advocates to choose the best technologies available to reduce environmental impacts.

Managing shared responsibility

Shared federal and provincial responsibility for environmental management leads to risks of duplication between federal and provincial EA processes.

This is an ongoing risk, as environmental management is an area of shared responsibility between the federal and provincial governments under the Constitution Act, 1982. As a result, some projects may require both a federal and a provincial EA.

The Agency seeks opportunities with other jurisdictions to coordinate EA processes, to reduce duplication and to streamline the process for stakeholders in project-specific EAs.

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Improved partnerships with provincial, territorial, and municipal governments are essential to deliver the real, positive change that we promised Canadians.

Restore robust oversight and thorough environmental assessments of areas under federal jurisdiction, while also working with provinces and territories to avoid duplication.

Managing IT priorities

The Agency is part of Shared Services Canada’s mandatory client base. The Agency shares the risks associated with the transformation of the IT infrastructure of the government of Canada to a single consolidated infrastructure.

Ongoing active engagement with Shared Services Canada’s service delivery executives.

Inclusion of escalation process in all memoranda of understanding, service agreements and recovery agreements with Shared Services Canada.

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

Internal services

n.a.

Environmental assessment informs decision making in support of protecting our environment while supporting a strong economy and improving the quality of life of Canadians. The process ensures that potential adverse impacts on the environment are identified and eliminated, reduced or controlled before project decisions are made.

The Agency operates in a continuously changing environment influenced by outside factors, including the economy, which can significantly affect the type, timing, volume, and distribution of projects requiring an EA. Accurately forecasting where and when resources will be most needed is an ongoing operational challenge.

While the Agency’s organizational design has been stable, the Agency saw an increase of responsibilities in 2016–17. Examples of this increased output included supporting the Government’s priority of reconciliation, resulting in increased consultation activities with Indigenous communities; as well as increased oversight and promotion of legislative compliance with proponents, resulting in instances of enforcement sanctions. It is important that the Agency is able to quickly adapt to changing demands and resource requirements.

During 2016–17, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change initiated a review of federal environmental assessment processes, led by an Expert Panel established by the Minister. Over the course of eight months, the Panel conducted broad stakeholder consultations across Canada with Indigenous, industry and environmental groups. They also met and engaged with the broader public through online and in person consultation sessions. In April 2017, the Expert Panel released a report with several recommendations for changes to the current federal EA process. The review of the EA processes may result in changes to the Agency’s responsibilities requiring further adaptation to changing demands and resource requirements; these potential changes however are currently unknown. The Agency continues to support the Minister of Environment and Climate Change during the review while continuing to deliver on its current responsibilities in an efficient and effective manner.

Results: what we achieved

Programs

Program 1.1: Environment Assessment Policy Program

Description

The Environmental Assessment Policy program develops and promotes robust policies and practices for high-quality environmental assessment (EA) in accordance with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012. This is achieved by building and reinforcing policies, procedures, and criteria for the conduct of federal EA, by promoting cooperation and coordinated action between the federal government and other jurisdictions, by promoting communication and cooperation with Indigenous Peoples, and by developing instruments and training for EA practitioners. EA Policy enables continuous improvement through research, monitoring, analysis, and advice. Recommendations inform the development of new regulatory and policy approaches, as well as the revision of guidance, training and knowledge-based instruments. The program also provides support for the conduct of EA through various means, such as federal-provincial agreements and policy criteria.

Results

The EA Policy Program is responsible for the legislative and policy frameworks that promote high-quality federal EA.

The EA Policy Program has played a key role in ensuring the Agency is seen as a leader in shaping the future of EA, both domestically and internationally, by leading the way to bring change to the EA process based on the outcomes and recommendations from the Final Report of the Expert Panel for the Review of Environmental Assessment Processes.

The Agency’s results for 2016–17, detailed below, support the Minister’s mandate letter commitments to review Canada’s EA processes to ensure public trust, protect the environment, ensure resources get to market, while also introducing new evidence-based and inclusive processes. The Agency supported the Minister in the review of environmental assessment processes by establishing the Expert Panel and the Multi-Interest Advisory Committee. The Expert Panel and Secretariat traveled to 21 cities, engaging more than one thousand participants, and received more than 500 written submissions. In addition, during 2016–17, the Agency continued interdepartmental work under the Major Projects Management Office Initiative.

The Agency worked in partnership with Indigenous Peoples to develop processes and approaches which reflect the objectives of reconciliation and Canada’s commitment to the principles of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Specifically, the Agency actively engaged on policy issues raised by Indigenous groups, including working with Indigenous groups and provincial governments to implement the EA provisions of formal agreements (the Nisga'a Final Agreement, the Tsawwassen First Nation Final Agreement, the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, and the Northeastern Quebec Agreement), and harmonizing their implementation with CEAA 2012. The Agency has engaged in dialogue with national Indigenous organizations throughout the review of environmental and regulatory processes, and is committed to building a system where project decisions respect the rights and input of Indigenous Peoples, and include consideration of Indigenous Knowledge.

The Agency established the Multi-Interest Advisory Committee which is comprised of equal representation from national Indigenous organizations, industry associations and environmental groups, and acted as Chair and Secretariat to the Committee. The Agency facilitated an inter-departmental working group on the legislative provisions related to federal lands and lands outside Canada, including holding a workshop on these provisions to inform the review of environmental assessment processes. The Agency continued to provide support and advice to federal authorities with responsibilities under CEAA 2012, and coordinated annual reporting to Parliament of federal authorities' activities on federal lands with respect to CEAA 2012. The Agency also led other interdepartmental and intergovernmental committees with the aim of facilitating the exchange of best practices in federal, provincial and territorial EAs.

The Agency supported the Minister in promoting the application of the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals, including chairing the Strategic Environmental Assessment Community of Practice, providing advice and training federal departments.

The Agency delivered targeted training on introductory and advanced EA topics to over 100 external individuals from other federal departments, provincial governments, Indigenous organizations, environmental groups, proponents and the public, as well as to Agency staff.

The Agency continued to engage the public, stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples in the development of policy and guidance. In addition, the Agency conducted five research projects, four in partnership with expert consulting firms and one conducted internally by employees. These research projects addressed current gaps in the scientific understanding of project EAs related to issues such as climate change and the significance of environmental effects.

The Agency maintained a dialogue with the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the Council on Environmental Quality on topics related to environmental assessment policy, and provided them with updates and opportunities to comment on the federal review of environmental assessment processes. In addition, the Agency participated in international workshops and capacity building initiatives with foreign officials from China, Chile, Argentina and Hong Kong.

The Agency has been actively involved in discussions on fostering the inclusion of environmental assessment provisions in international treaties. The Agency supported Global Affairs Canada in the development of recommendations to the United Nations General Assembly on elements of an international legally binding instrument on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction. In addition, the Agency worked collaboratively with Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada on the Arctic Council initiative to advance environmental impact assessment implementation and public participation in the Arctic.

Finally, the Agency contributed to the advancement of environmental assessment by contributing best practices and lessons learned, regarding climate change and compliance and enforcement, through presentations to and participation at the International Association of Impact Assessment’s 2016 annual conference held in Aichi-Nagoya Japan, in May 2016.

Results achieved
Expected results Performance indicators Target Date to achieve target 2016 –17 Actual results 2015 –16 Actual results 2014 –15 Actual results

High-quality EAs enabled through research, analysis and monitoring to produce effective policy instruments

Percentage of users of Agency policy instruments who indicated moderate to high satisfaction with these instruments

75 %

2016 –17 and ongoing

Insufficient information available to support a reliable and representative quantitative assessment of user satisfaction for 2016-17.

Insufficient information available to support a reliable and representative quantitative assessment of user satisfaction for 2015-16.

N/A Footnote 2

Budgetary financial resources (dollars)
2016 –17 Main Estimates 2016 –17 Planned spending 2016 –17 Total authorities available for use 2016 –17 Actual spending (authorities used) 2016 –17 Difference (actual minus planned)

3,932,432

3,932,432

8,603,881

7,957,786

4,025,354

Human resources (full-time equivalents)
2016 –17 Planned 2016 –17 Actual 2016 –17 Difference (actual minus planned)

42

59

17

Supporting information on results, financial and human resources related to the Agency’s Program Inventory is available in the TBS InfoBase. Endnote vi

Program 1.2: Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Description

This program ensures that high-quality environmental assessments of major projects are conducted and completed in a timely and predictable way, thereby supporting economic growth while preventing or reducing adverse environmental effects. The most appropriate means of avoiding duplication of assessment activities with other jurisdictions is applied, thereby increasing efficiency and providing certainty for all participants in the process. The Agency will promote, monitor, and facilitate compliance with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012. The environmental assessment process provides for the meaningful participation of the public and Indigenous groups. Indigenous consultation obligations are integrated to the greatest extent possible with the federal environmental assessment process. As such, the Agency consults with Indigenous groups during the environmental assessment process to assess how the proposed project may adversely impact potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights and related interests, and find ways to avoid or minimize these adverse impacts. This program uses funding from the following transfer payments: the Participant Funding Program, and the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement.

Results

The EA Delivery Program conducts high-quality EAs in a timely and predictable way in accordance with CEAA 2012. Agency results for 2016–17, as detailed below, support the Minister’s mandate letter commitments as well as the interim approach and principles for the conduct of EAs while the review of EA processes is underway.

In 2016–17, the Agency played a central role in ensuring a robust and evidence-based federal review process that protects the environment, supports the resource industries and respects the rights of Indigenous Peoples. The Agency ensured that the EA process was administered in accordance with legislated time limits under CEAA 2012. The Agency also ensured that environmental assessments were informed by public participation and consultation with Indigenous Peoples, with thorough consideration of the environmental effects of designated projects. The Agency ensured that, for projects that were allowed to proceed, the EA process lead to clear, measurable and enforceable conditions with which project proponents must comply, including mitigation measures and follow-up program requirements that were based on science, traditional knowledge of Indigenous peoples and other relevant evidence. Decision statements that have been issued, combined with compliance promotion, compliance verification and enforcement activities in relation to CEAA 2012 and its regulations are contributing to environmental protection and clean growth.

During 2016–17, the Agency conducted or managed environmental assessment processes for 61 projects subject to CEAA 2012. The Agency also managed 16 comprehensive studies and oversaw five screenings initiated under the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, as per the transitional provisions of CEAA 2012. With regard to new assessments initiated:

  • the legislated 10-day review time limit was met for all project descriptions received (the final review of the project description took place for 14 projects); and,
  • the legislated time limit of 45 days to determine whether an environmental assessment is required was met for all projects (the determination was made for 14 projects, with 8 requiring an environmental assessment).

Supported by the Agency, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change made EA decisions on four projects within established legislated timelines. Decision statements along with enforceable conditions were issued for Côté Gold mine in Ontario, Black Point Quarry in Nova-Scotia, and Pacific NorthWest Natural Liquefied Gas and Kemess Underground Mine in British Columbia.

CEAA 2012 provides a range of tools to enable efficient and effective management of the EA process within the federal government and with provincial, territorial and Indigenous government partners. It also supports the delivery of high-quality EAs, including coordination, delegation and substitution of EA processes and joint reviews.

In 2016–17, in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the Agency and the British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office on Substitution of Environmental Assessments (2013), an EA decision for one substituted project was announced (Kemess Underground Mine in British Columbia). No new substitution agreements were established during 2016–17. In addition, the Agency led interdepartmental and intergovernmental committees to facilitate the exchange of best practices, and to develop and implement strategies to improve consistency and timeliness in federal EAs.

The Agency integrated consideration of the five principles, including assessing the direct and upstream greenhouse gas emissions of projects into the conduct of environmental assessments, as part of the implementation of the interim approach and principles for environmental assessments currently underway as announced by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change on January 27, 2016. In particular, conditions in the Decision Statement for the Pacific NorthWest Liquefied Natural Gas Project include specific measures to minimize adverse environmental effects related to greenhouse gases. For the first time in an environmental assessment decision statement, the Pacific NorthWest Liquefied Natural Gas Project’s annual greenhouse gas emissions were limited at a maximum level that is substantially lower than what was initially predicted.

As the federal Crown consultation coordinator, the Agency worked with federal authorities, for federal EAs conducted by the Agency or by a review panel, to apply an efficient and effective whole-of-government approach to consultation with Indigenous groups potentially affected by those projects. The Agency has committed to consulting Indigenous peoples and to take into consideration of impacts on their rights. Where appropriate, accommodations will also be made.

In 2016–17 the Agency explored mechanisms to allow for greater participation of Indigenous groups in the conduct of follow-up and monitoring programs. In addition, it has put in place – for the first time – a project-specific collaborative environmental monitoring committee to allow Indigenous Peoples and other levels of government to play an ongoing role in environmental monitoring and protection.

To support the public, Indigenous Peoples and stakeholders’ participation in the EA process, the Agency's Participant Funding Program disbursed a total of $2,002,922 , including:

  • $231,114 provided to 38 recipients (disbursed through 38 contribution agreements) to facilitate public participation in the EAs of 13 projects; and,
  • $1,771,808 provided to 59 recipients (disbursed through 79 contribution agreements) to enable Indigenous consultation and participation in the EAs of 20 projects.

In addition, the Participant Funding Program disbursed a total of $2,329,760 to support public and Indigenous participation in the Review of EA Processes with a total of 146 recipients. It also administered contribution funds on behalf of Natural Resources Canada for Indigenous participation in EAs led by other responsible authorities such as the National Energy Board, and funds allocated through Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada's Strategic Partnerships Initiative to conduct EA research and develop methodologies for conducting social, cultural and spiritual impact assessments in relation to Indigenous communities.

During 2016–17, the Agency obtained new authorities for its Participant Funding Program which provide for more options on the spending of contribution funding. This allowed the Agency to fund participation in the Review of federal EA processes as well as in the review of changes made to the Woodfibre LNG Project by the proponent after the EA Decision was made. The Agency did not previously have the authority to fund such activities.

The Agency promoted compliance with CEAA 2012, including compliance with enforceable conditions contained in decision statements. This was achieved through a variety of touchpoints, including meetings with proponents, industry groups and associations, the delivery of training on CEAA 2012 to EA stakeholders, and the dissemination of information through various channels, including the Agency's website.

In addition to compliance verification of information submitted by proponents, the Agency conducted on-site inspections for eight projects assessed under CEAA 2012. As a result of these inspections, five enforcement actions were taken against two proponents, including the issuance of two written warnings, two notices of intent to issue an order under s.94 of CEAA 2012, and one order under s.94. The Agency also revised its Compliance and Enforcement Policy, and implemented a Directive and three Standard Operating Procedures regulating the conduct of compliance and enforcement activities.

The Agency continued to increase document availability on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry Internet Site. For a number of EAs, the Agency has provided comprehensive online access to records. In addition, the Agency increased online access to records related to the review of Environmental Impact Statements submitted by proponents and any subsequent information requested from the proponent for EAs conducted by the Agency.

The Agency developed internal procedures, guidance and templates to assist Agency employees in the conduct of EAs and to improve the efficiency of the review process, namely with respect to the Environmental Impact Statement review process.

The Agency’s various communities of practice regularly carry out information sharing, learning and development sessions for staff to discuss common issues, share best practices and lessons learned, and develop recommendations to address issues requiring further direction or guidance to support effective implementation of CEAA 2012. EA practitioners participated in sessions to train new hires and transfer knowledge as part of the Agency’s succession planning, as well as sessions on conducting effective hiring processes.

Statistical Summary of Environmental Assessments

The table below provides a statistical summary of EAs and outlines the total number of projects that underwent transitional EAs conducted under the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act or that were assessed under CEAA 2012 between April 1, 2016 and March 31, 2017 Footnote 3.

Type and Number of EA between April 1, 2016 and March 31, 2017 EA Decisions Taken between April 1, 2016 and March 31, 2017 EAs on March 31, 2017
EA Type Ongoing on April 1, 2016 Initiated Completed Terminated Ongoing

Transitional Screening

5

0

0

1

4

Transitional Comprehensive Study

16

0

0

3 Endnote vii

13

Conducted by the Agency

33

8

3

1

37

Conducted by Review Panel

7

2

0

0

9

Substituted

11

0

1

0

10

Note: In accordance with the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, the Agency fulfilled the duties of federal departments and agencies that were responsible authorities for comprehensive studies. The Agency was responsible for 16 transitional comprehensive studies, one of which was terminated after being designated by Ministerial Order as requiring an EA under CEAA 2012, and two of which were terminated in 2016–17 following withdrawal from the process by the proponent.

Further information about the federal environmental assessment process can be found on the Agency’s website. Endnote viii

Results achieved
Expected results Performance indicators Target Date to achieve target 2016 –17 Actual results 2015 –16 Actual results 2014 –15 Actual results

Deliver high-quality EAs

Percentage of projects undergoing follow-up and monitoring for which the Agency received a report during the reporting period that indicated that the mitigation measures set out in the EA decision statement would effectively address the environmental effects of the project

90 %

2016 –17 and ongoing

80 % Footnote 4

100 % Footnote 5

N/A Footnote 6

Deliver high-quality EAs

Where adaptive management measures set out in the EA decision statement were required as a result of a follow-up and monitoring report and a report was received by the Agency on the implementation of those measures during the reporting period, the percentage of projects where the adaptive management measures led to effectively addressing the environmental effects of the project

90 %

2016 –17 and ongoing

N/A Footnote 7

N/A Footnote 8

N/A Footnote 9

EA process provides meaningful participation of Indigenous groups and integrates Crown consultation to the greatest extent possible

Percentage of Indigenous groups with high or moderate potential for being affected by a project that provided comments on EA documents to the Agency

90 %

2016 –17 and ongoing

78 %

79 %

76 %

Deliver EAs within timelines established under CEAA 2012

Percentage of EAs conducted by the Agency that adhere to CEAA 2012 timelines

100 %

2016 –17 and ongoing

100 %

100 %

100 %

Budgetary financial resources (dollars)
2016 –17 Main Estimates 2016 –17 Planned spending 2016 –17 Total authorities available for use 2016 –17 Actual spending (authorities used) 2016 –17 Difference (actual minus planned)

21,729,743

21,729,743

26,158,017

24,260,587

2,530,844

Human resources (full-time equivalents)
2016 –17 Planned 2016 –17 Actual 2016 –17 Difference (actual minus planned)

142

164

22

Supporting information on results, financial and human resources related to the Agency’s Program Inventory is available in the TBS InfoBase. Endnote ix

Internal Services

Description

Internal Services are those groups of related activities and resources that the federal government considers to be services in support of programs and/or required to meet corporate obligations of an organization. Internal Services refers to the activities and resources of the 10 distinct service categories that support Program delivery in the organization, regardless of the Internal Services delivery model in a department. The 10 service categories are: Management and Oversight Services, Communications Services, Legal Services, Human Resources Management Services, Financial Management Services, Information Management Services, Information Technology Services, Real Property Services, Materiel Services, and Acquisition Services.

Results

Internal Services provide enabling services in a cost-effective, efficient and timely manner to meet the Agency’s requirements in compliance with the Government of Canada policy framework. In 2016–17 the Agency focused on the following initiatives as outlined below.

As part of the Agency’s approach to modernizing information management, Phase I of the new Environmental Assessment Management System (EAMS) was successfully rolled out to users in October 2016. EAMS is an innovative project management tracking and repository system that consolidates EA data and documents into a single repository. As a result, the Agency is able to deliver better information on the EA process to colleagues and Canadians. The EAMS project received an Honourable Mention as part of the 2017 Government of Canada Chief Information Officer Council Community Awards.

To better engage with Canadians, including the public, Indigenous Peoples, and stakeholders in project EAs in 2016–17, the Agency purposefully increased the amount of communication with audiences via social media, by posting more frequent project specific as well as generic tweets on Twitter regarding Agency business. The Agency introduced colourful video and digital tools regarding public comment periods and funding availability which were advertised on Twitter as well as from the Agency’s homepage. As a result of these initiatives, the Agency saw an increase in its number of twitter followers to @ceaa_acee from 382 in March 2016 to 2,295 in March 2017. On the Agency’s French Twitter account, followers to @acee_ceaa increased from 57 in March 2016 to 259 in March 2017.

In support of delivering professional support, the Agency successfully implemented its internal control work plan. The Agency also implemented a Business Continuity Plan, made progress in reviewing its Security Plan, and complied with all of the requirements of the Policy on Government Security.

In addition, a number of internal business processes were reviewed for efficiency and effectiveness and updated where appropriate. The Agency made progress in implementing Information Technology Security by formalizing the monitoring of alerts and requests for action.

The Agency renewed its Headquarters office lease and re-designed the floor space based on Workplace 2.0 standards, which allowed for the creation of 50 new workstations. The Agency also worked closely with Public Services and Procurement Canada in order to find new cost-effective office space for its regional office in Toronto Ontario.

The migration to the government wide e-mail system ‘YES’ (Your E-mail System) is currently suspended and the Agency has not been provided with a new date for on-boarding. Shared Services Canada launched an interim risk-reduction measure, the Mid-term Email Enhancement Project, in order to refresh the end-of-life email infrastructure. The Agency, in collaboration with Environment and Climate Change Canada, Public Service and Procurement Canada and the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, successfully on-boarded to my GCHR, the Government of Canada Human Resources Account (effective August 2016), as well as completed the transfer to Phoenix, the new Government of Canada pay system.

The Agency put in place various communications, training and guidance materials in order to better support employees and provide service desk support with partners. The Agency continues to work through some of the system and pay challenges with its partners, including the implementation of additional modules within My GCHR.

The Agency revised its staffing practices and framework to align with the Public Service Commission’s new direction in staffing. Efforts continue to be made to support the culture change within the organization required to fully benefit from the new flexibilities.

The Agency continued to harness the power of Blueprint 2020 by successfully implementing initiatives across several areas. For example, knowledge transfer is at the heart of the Agency’s collaborative approach to operational readiness and enables the best use of available talent. One way of sharing information is through the Environmental Assessment Practitioners Portal. This portal makes key knowledge and information available to Agency employees in a convenient and easy to find way. The Portal includes research reports, tools, guidance documents and training material, and is updated on an ongoing basis. This resource keeps Agency employees up-to-date and also facilitates the on-boarding of new project managers and analysts.

Agency employees were encouraged to adopt practices that foster engagement, openness and collaboration within the public service and with external stakeholders in all locations across the country. This is exemplified in a yearly practice by the Ontario Regional Office in Toronto, to hold an open house. Outside of regular business activities, the Regional Office invites industry stakeholders and government colleagues to meet their team, ask questions and learn about their work. This initiative, known as the CEAA Ontario Region Open House, promotes positive relationship-building between stakeholders and Agency staff while raising awareness about the Agency’s mandate.

Since its inauguration in 2015, the Agency Learning Series continues to be a valuable tool in providing employees with a number of learning opportunities and professional development sessions. During 2016–17, a number of learning activities were delivered, including: sessions on Understanding the Collective Agreement; Time and Stress Management; Duty to Accommodate: Building an Inclusive Workplace and Harassment Prevention; Mental Health Workshop: The Telltale Signs of Burnout; Mental Health in the Workplace. Over the last year, the Agency has taken a strategic “digital by default” approach to the way it communicates with Canadians regarding the government’s priority to review the federal environmental assessment system. The Agency has used call to action video clips to promote awareness of the review in a plain-language, digital format. These call to action video clips support the Minister of Environment and Climate Change who is leading the review.

The Agency supported the Expert Panel during the federal review of EA processes. The Expert Panel committed to transparently communicate every step and component of the review process, as it travelled from coast to coast to coast for public engagement sessions. The Panel’s website, EAreview.ca, provided a summary of every Panel engagement session and made available all of the written submissions and feedback the Panel received. The Panel made extensive use of social media, e-bulletins and digital outreach to raise awareness about not only how to get involved in the review of EA processes, but also about federal EA in general.

As part of its public and Indigenous engagement plan, the Agency supported the Expert Panel with the design of an online Choicebook. This Choicebook provided Canadians with a digital, on-demand engagement tool to learn about federal EA and the review of EA processes. Over 2,500 Canadians completed the Choicebook to provide their input.

The Agency also leveraged other digital tools, such as infographics, to synthesize complex information into a plain-language, visually appealing format. These infographics have been used by the Minister at in-person meetings to engage with Indigenous groups, industry, and other expert stakeholders. These tools were also shared via the corporate twitter account, which allowed Canadians to better understand potential legislative, policy or regulatory changes as a result of the review of EA processes including shareable graphics for social media and gifs.

The Agency successfully migrated to Canada.ca in December 2016. The Agency also successfully implemented ‘GCDOCS’, the government’s shared information management system.

As for the Agency’s Intranet site Atrium, several changes were made aiming to increase employee engagement. This included the introduction of a new landing page and banner photos, and the addition of tabs to categorize content. More general interest articles have been written to help educate and inform employees about Agency activities and programs. A new weekly e-bulletin called News@CEAA was launched, replacing the previous practice of sending information e-mail to employees.

Budgetary financial resources (dollars)
2016 –17 Main Estimates 2016 –17 Planned spending 2016 –17 Total authorities available for use 2016 –17 Actual spending (authorities used) 2016 –17 Difference (actual minus planned)

5,248,860

5,248,860

6,912,735

6,469,627

1,220,767

Human resources (full-time equivalents)
2016 –17 Planned 2016 –17 Actual 2016 –17 Difference (actual minus planned)

50

42

(8)

Analysis of trends in spending and human resources

Actual expenditures

Departmental spending trend graph

Departmental Spending Trend Graph

Budgetary performance summary for Programs and Internal Services (dollars)
Programs and Internal Services 2016 –17 Main Estimates 2016 –17 Planned spending 2017 –18 Planned spending 2018 –19 Planned spending 2016 –17 Total authorities available for use 2016 –17 Actual spending (authorities used) 2015 –16 Actual spending (authorities used) 2014 –15 Actual spending (authorities used)

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

3,932,432

3,932,432

4,500,940

4,348,793

8,603,881

7,957,786

5,134,147

4,141,055

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

21,729,743

21,729,743

24,159,057

23,342,401

26,158,017

24,260,587

17,913,607

13,552,979

Subtotal

25,662,175

25,662,175

28,659,997

27,691,195

34,761,898

32,218,373

23,047,754

17,694,034

Internal Services

5,248,860

5,248,860

5,433,237

5,249,576

6,912,735

6,469,627

6,168,548

12,063,055

Total

30,911,035

30,911,035

34,093,234

32,940,770

41,674,633

38,688,000

29,216,302

29,757,089

The 2016–17 variances between Main Estimates, Planned Spending, Total Authorities and Actual Spending are largely attributable to the timing of key elements of the fiscal cycle. The Main Estimates, as approved in the spring by Parliament in the initial appropriations, are the first step in the fiscal cycle.

The expenditures indicated for 2014–15, 2015–16 and 2016–17 represent the actual expenditures as reported in the 2015, 2016 and 2017 Public Accounts, respectively.

For the period between 2017–18 and 2018–19, the planned spending reflects funding approved by the Treasury Board.

The 2016–17 Total Authorities ($41.67 million) represent Main Estimates, plus in-year Supplementary Estimates, plus adjustments to authorities approved by the Treasury Board, such as Operational Budget Carry-Forward.

The difference between 2016–17 Total Authorities ($41.67 million) available for use and 2016–17 Planned Spending ($30.91 million) is primarily attributable to Budget 2016, restoring robust EAs, and the review of EA processes. These funds were approved through supplementary estimates A and B, respectively.

2016 –17 Actual Spending reflects spending activity during the fiscal year. The $2.99 million difference between Actual Spending ($38.69 million) and Total Authorities ($41.67 million) is primarily due to the following lower-than-expected payments for the Participant Funding Program, review panels and legal costs.

The number of projects subject to CEAA 2012 and the pace at which EAs proceed has been affected by recent varying economic conditions. Accordingly, the timing of requests under the Participant Funding Program also varies and is unpredictable. For example, participants may be approved for funding in a given fiscal year, but may not ultimately be reimbursed for the funding until a subsequent fiscal year depending on the pace at which an EA proceeds.

Commencing in fiscal year 2015–16, the Agency allocated internal services costs of approximately $5 million which were directly attributable to Programs (for legal services, communications, translation costs and information management and information technology). This explains the large decrease in internal services costs from 2014–15 ($12.06 million) to 2015–16 ($6.17 million). In 2016–17 the Agency spent $6.47 million on internal services.

The planned spending figures for the Environmental Assessment Delivery Program listed in the table above do not include cost-recoverable expenditures. The Agency has the authority to recover up to $8.0 million in costs annually, which is netted against the voted authority.

Actual human resources

Human resources summary for Programs and Internal Services (full-time equivalents)
Programs and Internal Services 2014 –15 Actual 2015 –16 Actual 2016 –17 Planned 2016 –17 Actual 2017 –18 Planned 2018 –19 Planned

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

40

41

42

59

43

42

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

129

125

142

164

180

180

Subtotal

169

166

184

223

223

222

Internal Services

64

70

50

42

39

39

Total

233

236

234

265

262

261

The human resources required to sustain an average level of employment over 12 months are based on a 37.5-hour work week. One full-time equivalent (FTE) equals one person working full-time on a 37.5-hour work week for the year, or any number of part-time employees whose combined hours of work equal one FTE.

The increase in staffing in 2016–17 from both 2015–16 actual levels and 2016–17 planned levels is primarily a result of Budget 2016, restoring robust EAs, and the review of EA processes. The gradual decrease in the staffing for 2017–18 and future years is mainly attributed to the reduction in funding for the review of EA processes as the initiative winds down. The Agency used 265 FTEs in 2016–17.

Expenditures by vote

For information on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s organizational voted and statutory expenditures, consult the Public Accounts of Canada 2017. Endnote x

Alignment of spending with the whole-of-government framework

Alignment of 2016-17 actual spending with the whole-of-government framework Endnote xi (dollars)
Program Spending area Government of Canada activity 2016 –17 Actual spending

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

Economic affairs

Economic Development

7,957,786

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Economic affairs

Economic Development

24,260,587

Total spending by spending area (dollars)
Spending area Total planned spending Total actual spending

Economic affairs

25,662,175

32,218,373

Social affairs

   

International affairs

   

Government affairs

   

Financial statements and financial statements highlights

Financial statements

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s financial statements [unaudited] for the year ended March 31, 2017, are available on the Agency’s website. Endnote xii

Financial statements highlights

Condensed Statement of Operations (unaudited) for the year ended March 31, 2017 (dollars)
Financial information 2016 –17 Planned results 2016 –17 Actual 2015 –16 Actual Difference (2016–17 actual minus 2016–17 planned) Difference (2016–17 actual minus 2015–16 actual)

Total expenses

40,115,043

44,602,092

33,959,184

4,487,049

10,642,908

Total revenues

4,500,000

1,183,193

814,431

(3,316,807)

368,762

Net cost of operations before government funding and transfers

35,615,043

43,418,899

33,144,753

(7,803,856)

10,274,146

The Agency's actual net financial position for 2016–17 was affected by an increase in total revenues and expenses in comparison to 2015–16.

The increase in the total expenses and revenues between 2015–16 and 2016–17 is primarily attributable to Budget 2016, restoring robust EAs, and the review of EA processes.

The approximate $7.8 million difference in net cost of operations between 2016–17 actual and planned results was largely attributable to the review of EA processes as well as fewer environmental assessments by review panels than planned.

The Agency's workload is constantly affected by outside factors, such as the economy, that can vary the number, types and locations of projects requiring EAs. This limits the accuracy of predicting the pace and levels of expenditures for EAs by the Agency and by review panels.

Condensed Statement of Financial Position (unaudited) as at March 31, 2017 (dollars)
Financial Information 2016 –17 2015 –16 Difference (2016–17 minus 2015–16)

Total net liabilities

7,328,470

5,375,772

1,952,698

Total net financial assets

7,418,004

4,712,467

2,705,537

Departmental net debt

(89,534)

663,305

(752,839)

Total non-financial assets

20,685

41,370

(20,685)

Departmental net financial position

110,219

(621,935)

732,154

The Agency's total net liabilities are comprised primarily of accounts payable and accruals for employee future benefits, vacation and compensatory leave. Liabilities increased by approximately $1.95 million from fiscal year 2015–16 to 2016–17, primarily due to an increase in accounts payable at year end due to the review of environmental assessment processes.

The increase in net financial assets from fiscal year 2015–16 to 2016–17 was due to an increase in amounts from the Consolidated Revenue Fund. The Consolidated Revenue Fund is the account into which the government deposits taxes and revenue, and from which it withdraws in order to defray the costs of public services.

Supplementary information

Corporate information

Organizational profile

Appropriate minister: The Honourable Catherine McKenna, P.C., M.P., Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Institutional head: Ron Hallman, President

Ministerial portfolio: Environment

Enabling instrument: Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 Endnote xiii

Year of incorporation / commencement: 1994

Other: The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 is supported by three regulations: the Regulations Designating Physical Activities, the Prescribed Information for the Description of a Designated Project Regulations, and the Cost Recovery Regulations. The Agency supports its President who is the Federal Administrator under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement and the Northeastern Quebec Agreement.

Reporting framework

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s Strategic Outcome and Program Alignment Architecture of record for 2016–17 are shown below.

  • 1. Strategic Outcome: High-quality and timely environmental assessments of major projects to protect the environment and support economic growth
    • 1.1 Program: Environmental Assessment Policy
    • 1.2 Program: Environmental Assessment Delivery
    • Internal Services

Supporting information on lower-level programs

Supporting information on results, financial and human resources related to the Agency’s Program Inventory is available in the TBS InfoBase. Endnote xiv

Supplementary information tables

The following supplementary information tables are available on the Agency’s website. Endnote xv

  • Departmental Sustainable Development Strategy
  • Internal audits and evaluations
  • Response to parliamentary committees and external audits
  • User fees, regulatory charges and external fees

Federal tax expenditures

The tax system can be used to achieve public policy objectives through the application of special measures such as low tax rates, exemptions, deductions, deferrals and credits. The Department of Finance Canada publishes cost estimates and projections for these measures each year in the Report on Federal Tax Expenditures. Endnote xvi This report also provides detailed background information on tax expenditures, including descriptions, objectives, historical information and references to related federal spending programs. The tax measures presented in this report are the responsibility of the Minister of Finance.

Organizational contact information

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

Place Bell Canada, 160 Elgin Street, 22nd Floor

Ottawa ON K1A 0H3

Canada

Telephone: 613-957-0700

Fax: 613-957-0946

E-mail: info@ceaa-acee.gc.ca

Website: https://www.canada.ca/ceaa

Appendix: definitions

appropriation (crédit)
Any authority of Parliament to pay money out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
budgetary expenditures (dépenses budgétaires)
Operating and capital expenditures; transfer payments to other levels of government, organizations or individuals; and payments to Crown corporations.
Core Responsibility (responsabilité essentielle)
An enduring function or role performed by a department. The intentions of the department with respect to a Core Responsibility are reflected in one or more related Departmental Results that the department seeks to contribute to or influence.
Departmental Plan (Plan ministériel)
Provides information on the plans and expected performance of appropriated departments over a three-year period. Departmental Plans are tabled in Parliament each spring.
Departmental Result (résultat ministériel)
A Departmental Result represents the change or changes that the department seeks to influence. A Departmental Result is often outside departments’ immediate control, but it should be influenced by program-level outcomes.
Departmental Result Indicator (indicateur de résultat ministériel)
A factor or variable that provides a valid and reliable means to measure or describe progress on a Departmental Result.
Departmental Results Framework (cadre ministériel des résultats)
Consists of the department’s Core Responsibilities, Departmental Results and Departmental Result Indicators.
Departmental Results Report (Rapport sur les résultats ministériels)
Provides information on the actual accomplishments against the plans, priorities and expected results set out in the corresponding Departmental Plan.
Evaluation (évaluation)
In the Government of Canada, the systematic and neutral collection and analysis of evidence to judge merit, worth or value. Evaluation informs decision making, improvements, innovation and accountability. Evaluations typically focus on programs, policies and priorities and examine questions related to relevance, effectiveness and efficiency. Depending on user needs, however, evaluations can also examine other units, themes and issues, including alternatives to existing interventions. Evaluations generally employ social science research methods.
full-time equivalent (équivalent temps plein)
A measure of the extent to which an employee represents a full person-year charge against a departmental budget. Full-time equivalents are calculated as a ratio of assigned hours of work to scheduled hours of work. Scheduled hours of work are set out in collective agreements.
government-wide priorities (priorités pangouvernementales)
For the purpose of the 2016–17 Departmental Results Report, government-wide priorities refers to those high-level themes outlining the government’s agenda in the 2015 Speech from the Throne, namely: Growth for the Middle Class; Open and Transparent Government; A Clean Environment and a Strong Economy; Diversity is Canada's Strength; and Security and Opportunity.
horizontal initiatives (initiative horizontale)
An initiative where two or more federal organizations, through an approved funding agreement, work toward achieving clearly defined shared outcomes, and which has been designated (for example, by Cabinet or a central agency) as a horizontal initiative for managing and reporting purposes.
Management, Resources and Results Structure (Structure de la gestion, des ressources et des résultats)
A comprehensive framework that consists of an organization’s inventory of programs, resources, results, performance indicators and governance information. Programs and results are depicted in their hierarchical relationship to each other and to the Strategic Outcome(s) to which they contribute. The Management, Resources and Results Structure is developed from the Program Alignment Architecture.
non-budgetary expenditures (dépenses non budgétaires)
Net outlays and receipts related to loans, investments and advances, which change the composition of the financial assets of the Government of Canada.
performance (rendement)
What an organization did with its resources to achieve its results, how well those results compare to what the organization intended to achieve, and how well lessons learned have been identified.
performance indicator (indicateur de rendement)
A qualitative or quantitative means of measuring an output or outcome, with the intention of gauging the performance of an organization, program, policy or initiative respecting expected results.
performance reporting (production de rapports sur le rendement)
The process of communicating evidence-based performance information. Performance reporting supports decision making, accountability and transparency.
planned spending (dépenses prévues)

For Departmental Plans and Departmental Results Reports, planned spending refers to those amounts that receive Treasury Board approval by February 1. Therefore, planned spending may include amounts incremental to planned expenditures presented in the Main Estimates.

A department is expected to be aware of the authorities that it has sought and received. The determination of planned spending is a departmental responsibility, and departments must be able to defend the expenditure and accrual numbers presented in their Departmental Plans and Departmental Results Reports.

plans (plans)
The articulation of strategic choices, which provides information on how an organization intends to achieve its priorities and associated results. Generally a plan will explain the logic behind the strategies chosen and tend to focus on actions that lead up to the expected result.
priorities (priorité)
Plans or projects that an organization has chosen to focus and report on during the planning period. Priorities represent the things that are most important or what must be done first to support the achievement of the desired Strategic Outcome(s).
program (programme)
A group of related resource inputs and activities that are managed to meet specific needs and to achieve intended results and that are treated as a budgetary unit.
Program Alignment Architecture (architecture d’alignement des programmes)
A structured inventory of an organization’s programs depicting the hierarchical relationship between programs and the Strategic Outcome(s) to which they contribute.
results (résultat)
An external consequence attributed, in part, to an organization, policy, program or initiative. Results are not within the control of a single organization, policy, program or initiative; instead they are within the area of the organization’s influence.
statutory expenditures (dépenses législatives)
Expenditures that Parliament has approved through legislation other than appropriation acts. The legislation sets out the purpose of the expenditures and the terms and conditions under which they may be made.
Strategic Outcome (résultat stratégique)
A long-term and enduring benefit to Canadians that is linked to the organization’s mandate, vision and core functions.
sunset program (programme temporisé)
A time-limited program that does not have an ongoing funding and policy authority. When the program is set to expire, a decision must be made whether to continue the program. In the case of a renewal, the decision specifies the scope, funding level and duration.
target (cible)
A measurable performance or success level that an organization, program or initiative plans to achieve within a specified time period. Targets can be either quantitative or qualitative.
voted expenditures (dépenses votées)
Expenditures that Parliament approves annually through an Appropriation Act. The Vote wording becomes the governing conditions under which these expenditures may be made.
Report a problem or mistake on this page
Please select all that apply:

Thank you for your help!

You will not receive a reply. For enquiries, contact us.

Date modified: