2021-2022 Departmental Results Report: Departmental Results Report - Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

© His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, 2022.

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 Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3, or information@iaac-aeic.gc.ca.

Catalogue No.: En104-20E-PDF
ISSN: 2563-3589

This document has been issued in French under the title: Agence d’évaluation d’impact du Canada: Rapport sur les résultats ministériels 2021-2022.

Table of contents

• From the Minister
• From the President
• Results at a glance
• Results: what we achieved
  • Core responsibilities
  • Internal services
• Spending and human resources
  • Spending
  • Human resources
  • Expenditures by vote
  • Government of Canada spending and activities
  • Financial statements and financial statements highlights
• Corporate information
  • Organizational profile
  • Raison d’être, mandate and role: who we are and what we do
  • Operating context
  • Reporting framework
• Supporting information on the program inventory
• Supplementary information tables
• Federal tax expenditures
• Organizational contact information
• Appendix: definitions
• Endnotes

From the Minister

As the Minister responsible for the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (the Agency), I am pleased to share the Agency’s 2021–22 Departmental Results Report, which outlines the Agency’s achievements in delivering its plans, priorities, and mandate.

While COVID-19 variants brought new challenges this year, Agency employees continued to demonstrate resilience and dedication to supporting the Government of Canada’s commitment to a cleaner environment and sustainable economy. The Agency delivered transparent and effective environmental and impact assessments, which enabled the Government to make solid, evidence-based decisions about major natural resource and infrastructure projects.

To advance reconciliation, equity, diversity, and inclusion, the Agency engaged Indigenous peoples, the public, the provinces and territories, and other stakeholders in all assessments under the Impact Assessment Act (IAA). To ensure that Indigenous considerations were fundamental in decision-making, the Agency invested in strengthening its relationships with Indigenous peoples by providing essential funding and support for their communities to participate meaningfully in assessments. To evaluate how diverse groups of women, men, and people of all genders may experience policies, programs, and initiatives, the Agency incorporated Gender-based Analysis Plus into the assessment process. Underpinning all its activities was the recognition that a fortified future requires decision-making based on robust science, Indigenous knowledge, and other reliable evidence, as well as broad, sustained engagement and collaboration.

Canadians want their government to acknowledge the enormity of climate change, reduce pollution, protect nature, and invest in clean technology. The Agency continues to support resource projects based on our environmental and social values in a responsible, transparent, and timely way to keep Canada at the forefront of climate action and secure a low-carbon future for generations to come.

I invite you to read the Departmental Results Report to learn more about the Agency’s achievements this past year. The Government of Canada is an ardent advocate for ambitious environmental action and remains committed to creating a cleaner environment and sustainable future.

_____________________________________
The Honourable Steven Guilbeault, P.C., M.P. (he/him/il)
Minister of Environment and Climate Change, and
Minister responsible for the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

From the President

The Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (the Agency) proudly presents its 2021–22 Departmental Results Report, which outlines the results and achievements it attained over the past year.

Despite many challenges, the Agency’s highly qualified team displayed expertise, professionalism, and dedication to supporting the mandate of the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and the provisions of the Impact Assessment Act (IAA).

Agency-led assessments incorporated input from many diverse contributors and addressed multiple complex technical issues. By strengthening stakeholder relations, bolstering engagement practices, and fostering cutting-edge research, the Agency continued to create foundational evidence upon which the Government of Canada could confidently make decisions.

Within the broader context of critical issues such as addressing climate change, advancing reconciliation, and developing resources responsibly, we remained committed to uninterrupted service delivery by implementing flexible approaches to engagement, consultation, compliance and enforcement activities. The Agency worked collaboratively with Indigenous groups, provinces and territories, the public, and other stakeholders in conducting assessments and developing supporting policies and guidance documents. In line with our "one project, one assessment" objective, we engaged with expert federal departments and federal lifecycle regulators to ensure the assessment process met the needs and standards of decision-makers. The Canadian Impact Assessment Registry provided Canadians with direct access to information on project assessments, decision-making processes, and enforcement and compliance activities.

The Agency appreciates the importance of Indigenous knowledge and shared decision-making when conducting assessments. We remain committed to working with, learning from, and sharing leadership with Indigenous peoples. To help staff better understand the value and importance of Indigenous engagement, the Agency invested in learning opportunities on the history, culture, and traditions of Indigenous peoples. It also advanced its commitment to cultivating an inclusive and diverse workplace by creating safe spaces, offering training, and providing mentorship for equity-seeking groups.

In the ongoing transition from environmental assessments to impact assessments, the Agency is taking bold, concrete actions to protect the environment while promoting reconciliation and the social and economic well-being of all Canadians.

_____________________________________
Terence Hubbard (he/him/il)
President
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Results at a glance

The Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (the Agency) is a federal body that reports to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change. Under the Impact Assessment Act (IAA), the Agency is the lead federal organization responsible for conducting and administering environmental and impact assessments. The Agency is also the Crown coordinator for Indigenous consultations on designated projects. In leading these assessments, the Agency is responsible for assessing the positive and negative environmental, economic, social, health, and gender effects of designated projects.

An assessment (environmental or impact) is a planning and decision-making tool intended to assist project design, facilitate Indigenous, public, and stakeholder participation, and ensure that appropriate measures are identified and implemented to mitigate the adverse impacts of designated projects.

In 2021–22, the Agency:

• conducted high-quality environmental and impact assessments of 57 projects (including assessments by review panel and substituted assessments) and supported the issuance of five decision statements by the Minister;
• ensured timely, credible, and predictable assessment processes with seven new projects entering the Planning phase and four projects entering the Impact Statement phase;
• contributed to the improved understanding and management of cumulative effects by sharing information through the Open Science and Data Platform (OSDP)^{Endnote i};
• supported the Government of Canada’s commitment to reconciliation with Indigenous peoples by advancing a framework for Indigenous cooperation agreements and funding the national conference on Indigenous Capacity-Building in Impact Assessment;
• improved the meaningful participation of Indigenous peoples, the public, and other stakeholders by enhancing the participation of marginalized groups and expanding the use of social media, e-vite cards for virtual sessions, and QR codes for public notices;
• collaborated with provincial and territorial governments, Indigenous jurisdictions, other federal departments and agencies, and international partners;
• coordinated Environmental Assessment Administrators Committee meetings to discuss best practices and the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on assessment-related work;
• supported federal authorities in fulfilling their obligations under the IAA on more than 365 assessments of projects on federal lands and outside of Canada; and
• expended $72.0 million and managed 434 full-time equivalents (FTEs).

For more information on the Agency’s plans, priorities and results achieved, see the "Results: what we achieved" section of this report.

Results: what we achieved

Core responsibilities

Impact Assessment

Description

The Agency provides high-quality assessments of environmental, economic, social, health and gender effects to support government decision-making in the public interest. Assessments are evidence-based and ensure that positive and negative effects and impacts on Indigenous groups and their rights are considered in order to foster sustainability.

Results

Over the past year, the Agency administered a robust, evidence-based and high-quality assessment process as part of the ongoing transition from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012) to the IAA. The Agency ensured that assessments conformed to legislated timelines, encouraged sustainability, and respected the rights of Indigenous peoples.

In 2021–22, the Agency executed environmental assessments for various projects, including marine terminals, mines, liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities, and water management. At the same time, it coordinated efforts to ensure continuous service delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Through collaboration with Indigenous groups, other jurisdictions, federal departments and agencies, and other stakeholders, the Agency worked to improve the understanding and management of cumulative effects and harmonized impact assessment provisions. Furthermore, the Agency continued to offer flexible consultation and engagement activities to ensure the meaningful participation of Indigenous peoples, the public, and other key stakeholders.

Departmental Result: Science, evidence and Indigenous knowledge is available to inform decisions in the public interest

As presented in the table below, in 2021–22, the Agency continued to conduct environmental assessments on the 35 remaining projects under CEAA 2012. The Minister issued decision statements for five projects – Springbank Off-Stream Reservoir, Rose Lithium-Tantalum Mine, Laurentia Project (Port of Quebec Deep-Water Wharf), Énergie Saguenay (LNG facility), and Grassy Mountain Coal Mine.

In 2021–22, the Minister received 12 requests to designate a project under the IAA. To support decision-making, the Agency reviewed three projects: Tent Mountain Mine Redevelopment, Highway 413, and the Vista Coal Underground Mine and Vista Mine Phase II Expansion. In June 2021, the Minister issued a letter to the proponent of the Vista Coal Underground Mine and Vista Mine Phase II Expansion project stating that, pursuant to Section 17 of the IAA, he believed that the project would cause unacceptable environmental effects within federal jurisdiction.

Seven new projects entered the IAA Planning phase, joining the seven projects already in this phase. For projects in the Planning phase, the Agency held 10 public engagement sessions inviting comments from Indigenous peoples and the public. The Agency issued Notices of Commencements, Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines (TISG)^{Endnote ii}, and associated plans for two projects – the Suncor Base Mine Extension and Value Chain Solutions Heartland Complex Expansion, which completed the Planning phase. The Minister also substituted the Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion project for assessment under the British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office. In addition, the Agency determined a federal impact assessment was not required for the Waterloo Airport Runway, Horsefly Regional Emergency Spillway, and ATCO Salt Cavern Storage Expansion projects.

In 2021–22, six projects were in the Impact Statement phase, at which point the Agency supports proponents in developing their impact statements in preparation for the Impact Assessment phase. For example, the Agency and federal authorities worked closely with the proponent of the Wasamac Gold Mine project to develop draft study plans to meet the requirements of the TISG. For the Suncor Base Mine Extension project, the Agency worked with Indigenous groups ahead of receiving the impact statement.

In June 2021, the Agency provided secretariat support to an independent review panel assessing the Grassy Mountain Coal Mine project under CEAA 2012. This assessment was conducted jointly with the Alberta Energy Regulator and submitted to the Minister. In addition, the joint review panel for the Marathon Palladium Mine project (under CEAA 2012) held a comment period on the proponent’s environmental impact statement. Following the issuance of, and response to information requests, the panel determined the information received was sufficient to proceed to a public hearing, which was held in March 2022. The Minister also referred the impact assessment of the GCT Deltaport Expansion - Berth Four project, which was still in the Planning phase, to an independent review panel. Two other projects have been referred to independent review panels under the IAA – the Gazoduq Project and Suncor Base Mine Extension, which entered the Impact Statement phase in July 2020 and May 2021, respectively.

In 2021–22, the Agency continued planning two Regional Assessments under the IAA. Responding to a request from an Indigenous group, the Agency held an engagement session to inform the Minister’s decision on whether to conduct a regional assessment of the St. Lawrence River in Quebec. Subsequent discussions were held with the Government of Quebec on the potential joint conduct of that regional assessment. The Agency also continued negotiations with the Government of Ontario on a draft agreement and terms of reference for the regional assessment in the Ring of Fire Area, as well as engagements with Indigenous groups, government agencies, and non-governmental organizations. In addition, the Agency led an Indigenous and stakeholder engagement session and workshop related to infilling activities in Halifax Harbour.

Although there were no Strategic Assessments in 2021–22, the Agency published a Policy Framework for Strategic Assessment under the Impact Assessment Act^{Endnote iii} and an accompanying fact sheet. These documents provide information to the public, stakeholders, federal departments, and Indigenous groups about the key principles and standards for conducting strategic assessments under the IAA.

The following table summarizes the information presented in this section.

To ensure public access to scientific and impact assessment information, the Agency continued to manage the Canadian Impact Assessment Registry^{Endnote iv} (the Registry), increasing the transparency of information received and generated during the assessment process. The Agency actively posted information submitted by proponents and maintained a web-based mapping interface to enable users to examine assessment data visually. Additionally, the Agency published documents outlining consultation records and reasons for decisions. The information on impact assessments and the assessment of cumulative effects activities are available on OSDP.^{Endnote v}

Designed to support research related to impact assessments, the Research Program^{Endnote vi} issued funding to four research initiatives in 2021–22. In addition, the Agency continued its partnership with the Network for Expertise and Dialogue on Impact Assessment and launched a new partnership with the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

In 2021–22, the Agency developed and refined tools and guidance for implementing the IAA, including:

• updates to policy on designating a physical activity under the IAA and new guidance on developing TISGs;
• a new webpage to provide an overview of the Agency’s implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and to promote Agency guidance related to Indigenous Policy; and
• tools and templates to support the effective implementation of Indigenous knowledge provisions in the IAA and existing guidance.

Over the past year, the Agency collaborated with provinces and territories through the Environmental Assessment Administrators’ Committee. Comprised of senior representatives from each province and territory responsible for environmental and impact assessments. The Committee is a mechanism to facilitate communication between governments, encourage best practices, and identify opportunities to coordinate addressing assessment-related issues.

Additionally, the Agency participated in quarterly meetings with various northern regulatory boards involved in environmental impact assessment to exchange best practices related to impact assessment and post-decision activities. These boards included the Nunavut Impact Review Board, the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board, the Mackenzie Valley Environmental Review Board, and the Inuvialuit Environmental Impact Screening Committee.

To ensure efficient, credible, and predictable assessment and decision-making processes, the Agency met periodically with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and the Canada Energy Regulator. The Agency discussed cooperation measures subject to the respective Memoranda of Understanding with the federal lifecycle regulators concerning proposed and anticipated projects requiring integrated review panel assessments.

To identify potential project impacts on Indigenous peoples and ensure appropriate mitigation measures are implemented to address them, the Agency collaborated with Indigenous communities throughout the impact assessment process. For instance, the Agency and British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office orchestrated an innovative and collaborative approach with Indigenous groups to develop the TISG and plans for the GCT Deltaport Expansion - Berth Four project.

Over the past year, the Agency engaged with international partners to build capacity, enhance international cooperation, and support the development of agreements to meet its international obligations related to impact assessment. For example, the Agency:

• facilitated two capacity-building sessions with Argentina and expert federal departments to inform its exploration program and develop Argentina’s federal legislation, regulations, and new impact assessment agency;
• engaged with the Council on Environmental Quality, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of State to discuss impact assessment policy issues and projects with potential transboundary impacts;
• held discussions with the governments of Greenland and Denmark about their participation in the environmental assessment of the Phase 2 Development Proposal of the Mary River iron ore mine project;
• represented Canada in the Working Group on Environmental Impact Assessments and Strategic Environmental Assessments at the Espoo Convention and coordinated Canada’s financial and in-kind contributions to the 2021–23 work plan;
• participated in the 2021 conference of the International Association for Impact Assessment and provided financial and organizational support (e.g., developing Strategic Environmental Assessments guidelines on renewable energy) for its 2022 conference;
• worked collaboratively with other federal departments and agencies and provided input on various international documents (e.g., Advancing Canada’s Feminist Approach to Natural Resources Governance and Management); and
• took part in Canada’s delegation to the fourth negotiation session of the United Nations Intergovernmental Conference on the development of an international agreement regarding the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction.

The Agency continued to lead an interdepartmental working group of 100 representatives from 75 federal authorities to share best practices for projects on federal lands or outside Canada. The Agency worked with federal authorities in the working group and the proponent of the Robert Banks Terminal 2 project to inform the Minister about the project. In addition, the Agency’s regional offices established interdepartmental working groups and committees to discuss best practices and advance the identification and resolution of assessment issues in their respective regions.

To advise on various policy issues and guidance documents related to the implementation of the IAA, the Agency received advice from two committees: the Indigenous Advisory Committee (IAC)^{Endnote vii} and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) on Science and Knowledge^{Endnote viii}. The Agency also coordinated and received interdepartmental input through the Deputy Minister Impact Assessment Committee (DM IA). To that end:

• IAC held seven virtual meetings to offer advice on Indigenous knowledge tools in impact assessment, the final Indigenous Knowledge Policy Framework, and principles to inform proponents on early engagement;
• the Agency supported the TAC in conducting six virtual meetings and delivering advice to the Agency’s President in priority areas, including pre-planning and TISGs; and
• the DM IA, with members from 19 departments and agencies, provided oversight and strategic direction on issues pertaining to the implementation of the IAA, such as inter-jurisdictional agreements and Indigenous accommodation approaches.

The Agency also supports the Minister’s Advisory Council (MINAC)^{Endnote ix}, whose first report was submitted to the Minister in May 2021, which the Minister tabled in Parliament in June 2021. The Agency worked with MINAC in developing and circulating meeting materials, coordinating meeting logistics, managing contribution and contractual agreements, and posting MINAC reports and summaries on its website and the Open Government Portal.^{Endnote x}

The Agency continued to support the James Bay Advisory Committee on the Environment and the Kativik Environmental Advisory Committee in their work, in addition to other committees that evaluate projects on the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement territory. It also supported the negotiation and implementation of nine modern treaties in British Columbia. To bolster treaty commitments in assessments across British Columbia, the Agency collaborated with the Nisga’a Lisims Government, Tsawwassen First Nation, and Maa-nulth First Nation. The Agency also participated in discussions regarding the harmonization of treaty processes and the IAA with the Grand Council of the Crees, as well as the Inuvialuit, Nunavik Inuit, and Naskapi peoples.

Departmental Result: Indigenous groups, the public and stakeholders have opportunities to meaningfully participate in assessments

In 2021–22, Canada reflected on the truths of its past and determined that serious work remains to be done to advance reconciliation with Indigenous peoples. Over the past year, several Indigenous groups that were engaged in consultations expressed their experiences with the discovery of unmarked graves at former residential schools. The Agency endeavoured to advance reconciliation and strengthen its relationship with Indigenous peoples to ensure they benefit directly from project development. Recognizing that designated projects often have disproportionate effects and compound risks among certain groups, the Agency remained committed to creating more opportunities for Indigenous peoples, the public, and stakeholders to participate meaningfully throughout the assessment process.

Among many initiatives, the Agency delivered funding programs to support the participation of Indigenous peoples, the public, and stakeholders in federal assessment processes. In 2021–22, through the Participant Funding Program^{Endnote xi}, the Agency created 416 funding agreements, which consisted of 134 contributions and 282 grants to Indigenous communities, organizations, and individuals.

The Indigenous Capacity Support Program^{Endnote xii} created 52 funding agreements to increase recipients’ ability to participate and collaborate meaningfully in assessment consultation activities. The program supported the development of governance structures, generic tools and studies, and in-house training and raised awareness of the impact assessment process. Three new partnerships were established in 2021–22 to deliver capacity-building programming to communities and increase participation in the assessment process. Program funds also supported the national conference on Indigenous Capacity-Building in Impact Assessment to share knowledge, tools, and best practices.

The Policy Dialogue Program^{Endnote xiii} is designed to help individuals, Indigenous communities and organizations, and not-for-profit organizations review and comment on the Agency’s policy and guidance documents. It also provides funding to other advisory committees and stakeholders. In 2021–22, 129 recipients received funding to support their collaboration with the Agency.

Amid the challenges created by the COVID-19 pandemic and the related pressures it placed on Indigenous groups, the Agency adopted a flexible approach to consultations and considered the unique circumstances of each Indigenous group engaging in meaningful consultations in assessment processes. When possible, the Agency facilitated virtual meetings, used electronic forms, and provided additional time to review documents. At the request of several Indigenous groups, the Agency resumed in-person consultation meetings. To facilitate these meetings, the Agency collaborated with Indigenous groups to develop safety protocols and guiding principles for ensuring a safe meeting environment.

To assist with virtual engagement sessions, the Agency designed online mapping tools. These tools included interactive features that present project components visually and allow participants to identify additional areas a project may affect, such as traditional hunting grounds. Examples of engagement approaches carried out by the Agency in 2021–22 include:

• virtual hearings for the Marathon Palladium Mine project;
• virtual workshops with Indigenous groups in the development of TISG and Plans for the GCT Deltaport Expansion - Berth Four project; and
• collaboration with the Government of British Columbia and the Tahltan Central Government to provide tailored community information sessions for Tahltan peoples on the Eskay Creek Revitalization project.

As part of its commitment to new collaborative approaches and partnerships with Indigenous communities, the Agency worked with the Government of British Columbia, the Tsawwassen First Nation, and Musqueam Indian Band to develop terms of reference for a Stewardship Committee for the Roberts Bank Terminal 2 project. The purpose of the Committee is to provide advice, knowledge, and recommendations to project proponents and the governments of Canada and British Columbia concerning compliance and implementation of project conditions, including conditions related to follow-up programs where projects have been authorized to proceed. In addition, a Joint Assessment Committee composed of representatives appointed by the Agency and the Cree Nation Government conducted assessments under CEAA 2012 on the Rose Lithium-Tantalum Mine and James Bay Lithium Mine projects.

In 2021–22, the Agency meaningfully collaborated with Indigenous groups in developing policy, regulations, and guidance documents. For instance, the Agency shared the Draft Indigenous Knowledge Policy Framework with Indigenous groups for comments to support the review of the Framework. In addition to the 79 comments received from Indigenous groups, the Agency also incorporated feedback from the Assembly of First Nations and the Agency’s IAC into the Framework.

The Agency also provided funding to the Assembly of First Nations to work closely with the Agency in developing policy, guidance, engagement, and regulatory frameworks that ensure First Nation perspectives are considered throughout the assessment process. Moreover, IAC provided advice to the Agency on policy and guidance related to Indigenous knowledge, impacts on Indigenous rights, and collaboration agreements.

In January 2022, the Agency published a technical guidance document that provides direction and encourages federal authorities to adopt best practices in meeting their obligations involving projects on federal lands and outside of Canada. The Agency also continued to advance the development of regulatory initiatives under the IAA in partnership with Indigenous groups and released its Forward Regulatory Plan^{Endnote xiv} – a publicly available list of planned or anticipated regulatory changes over the next two fiscal years.

The Agency supports Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC) in negotiating the assessment provisions for agreements with Indigenous peoples. In 2021–22, the Agency provided advice to CIRNAC and participated in the ongoing negotiation with Akwesasne First Nation, Whitecap Dakota First Nation, Petapan First Nation, Atikamekw First Nation, and Labrador Innu Nation. The Agency also participated in nine of 36 active treaty negotiations with First Nations in British Columbia.

Finally, the Agency’s Training Program launched a new approach for engaging Indigenous peoples, the public, and stakeholders in assessment processes. The training is aimed at stakeholders directly involved in an impact assessment process. The new approach includes the creation of online, instructor-led, and self-paced training materials to address the specific learning needs of a target audience.

Departmental Result: Assessments result in mitigation measures that minimize the adverse effects of projects

At the end of an assessment, a decision statement is issued affirming whether a project may proceed and, if so, under what enforceable conditions. The conditions consist of mitigation measures and a follow-up program that the project proponent must fulfil. Mitigation measures are required to minimize the potential adverse impacts of a project, and follow-up programs determine the effectiveness of the mitigation measures and verify the accuracy of assessment predictions.

In 2021–22, decision statements authorized the Springbank Off-Stream Reservoir and the Rose Lithium-Tantalum Mine projects to proceed. In addition, an amended decision statement was issued to the proponent of LNG Canada containing modified conditions to the detection requirements and the response plan during all construction activities that pose a risk to marine mammals. These conditions differentiate the detection requirements for pinnipeds as compared to other marine mammals.

To track and report on follow-up programs and establish adaptive management plans, the Agency developed a framework to verify the accuracy of predictions made during project assessments and determine the effectiveness of mitigation measures. The Agency also began drafting a guidance document for proponents to ensure greater consistency when developing and reporting on follow-up programs.

Along with other federal partners, the Agency collaborated with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to prepare the annual report on the Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Oil and Gas Regional Assessment follow-up program. This annual report outlines the progress achieved on commitments made in the Ministerial Response to the Regional Assessment Committee’s report.

Agency enforcement officers conducted nine on-site and 20 off-site inspections in 2021–22. Inspections served to verify compliance with the IAA and decision statements issued by the Minister. When necessary, enforcement officers took enforcement action in response to non-compliance.

As part of the assessment process, project proponents, Indigenous groups, the public, and other stakeholders have an opportunity to comment on draft potential conditions. To the extent possible, these comments are integrated into the recommended potential conditions prepared for the Minister to incorporate into decision statements. In 2021–22, the Agency conducted consultations on draft potential conditions, including holding public comment periods through the Registry for the Rose Lithium-Tantalum Mine, Énergie Saguenay, Tilbury Marine Jetty, Roberts Bank Terminal 2, and Bay Du Nord Offshore Oil and Gas Development projects.

The Agency reviewed all project changes to ensure they do not result in effects that differ from the completed assessments. In 2021–22, the Agency considered project changes for nine projects, which resulted in one amended decision statement. The remaining eight projects considered for project changes are still under analysis.

Gender-based analysis plus

For assessments under CEAA 2012, the Agency applied Gender-based Analysis Plus (GBA Plus)^{Endnote xv} to projects requiring a Governor-in-Council decision as to whether a project’s significant adverse environmental effects were justified in their given circumstances. As such, the Agency conducted GBA Plus analysis to inform all Governor-in-Council decisions.

Under the IAA, the intersection of sex, gender, and other identity factors must be considered in all impact assessments. In 2021–22, the Agency ensured the integration of GBA Plus throughout the impact assessment process to support all future project decisions. To this end, the Agency set out requirements in the TISG issued to the proponents of projects under the IAA and made the application of GBA Plus mandatory for all project description and impact statement submissions. The application of GBA Plus is supported by published guidance on GBA Plus in Impact Assessment.^{Endnote xvi} The Agency’s obligation under the IAA to apply GBA Plus to the impact assessment aligns with one of the Calls to Justice (13.2) in the Final Report on Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls.

In 2021–22, the Agency continued to support the government’s priority to integrate GBA Plus considerations across its programs and policies by developing tools and guidance to help program leads promote inclusive participation in the assessment process. They continue to be promoted in senior management committees and information sessions for staff.

Experimentation

In 2021–22, the Agency administered DeepL Pro Translator, which employs artificial intelligence to improve the speed and quality of translations. The goal of the DeepL Pro experiment is to determine whether the translation tool can precisely represent the meaning of the text and adapt to its context. Over the past year, the results have been positive. This multi-year experiment is ongoing to evaluate the extent to which DeepL Pro can correctly translate entire documents and maintain all original fonts, images, and formatting.

The Agency has also administered NVivo software in 2021–22, which extracts information from a subset of comments. The NVivo experiment aimed to assess natural language processing, which simulates the human ability to understand language. With NVivo, the Agency:

• processed public comments by encoding and classifying different information within a single document. The software allowed staff to group information on a subject in several documents. Similarly, different paragraphs in the same document can quickly be classified into different categories or topics;
• conducted quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods data analysis. Staff used NVivo to collect and import quantitative and qualitative information into the platform from a subset of comments the Agency received; and
• researched assessment documents. Staff used NVivo to find information in various assessment documents rather than searching through a document word by word. For example, staff efficiently gathered information on air quality and species at risk from impact studies, requests for information, opinions of expert ministries, and documents from Indigenous consultations.

Based on early positive results, the Agency has acquired more NVivo licences. The experiment has been extended to 2022–23 and expanded to include more business units.

Results achieved

The following table shows, for Impact Assessment, the results achieved, the performance indicators, the targets and the target dates for 2021–22, and the actual results for the three most recent fiscal years for which actual results are available.

Financial, human resources and performance information for the Agency’s Program Inventory is available in GC InfoBase.^{Endnote xvii}

Budgetary financial resources (dollars)

The following table shows, for Impact Assessment, budgetary spending for 2021–22, as well as actual spending for that year.

Financial, human resources and performance information for the Agency’s Program Inventory is available in GC InfoBase.^{Endnote xviii}

Human resources (full-time equivalents)

The following table shows, in full-time equivalents, the human resources the department needed to fulfill this core responsibility for 2021–22.

Financial, human resources and performance information for the Agency’s Program Inventory is available in GC InfoBase.^{Endnote xix}

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:

• acquisition management services
• communication services
• financial management services
• human resources management services
• information management services
• information technology services
• legal services
• material management services
• management and oversight services
• real property management services

Internal Services strengthen the Agency’s capacity to implement the IAA, deliver its commitments, and contribute to its core responsibility in a cost-effective and timely manner. In 2021–22, several job opportunities were posted to contribute to the delivery of high-quality assessments. The Agency also launched a Student Experience Office, which assisted management in recruiting students to fit their needs and ensure that students gained meaningful experiences. Additionally, the Agency extended the Non-EX Talent Management Strategy to consider all talent placements.

In 2021–22, the Agency supported and collaborated effectively with members of equity-seeking groups through the Employment Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Committee and organized many events to raise awareness of diversity and inclusion issues. Aiming to foster allyship in the workplace, the Agency facilitated conversations concerning diversity and inclusion at the Senior Management Committee and held unconscious bias training and fireside chats. Moreover, the Agency reduced employment equity gaps and increased the representation of persons with disabilities, Indigenous peoples, and visible minorities.

Ensuring that employees have suitable accommodations to succeed in their work, the Agency provided employees requiring adaptive technology or specialized equipment with the tools they need. Staff were also supported under two ergonomic guides for obtaining ergonomic assessments and equipment and were appropriately equipped to work remotely. In addition, the Agency signed a service level agreement with the Accessibility, Accommodations and Adaptive Computer Technology^{Endnote xx} program for three years to ensure accessible digital content is available for all our employees.

To reinforce a safe environment for employees, the Agency maintained a Values and Ethics committee and developed a Values and Ethics Action Plan. The Plan cultivates a deeper awareness of values and ethics and provides feedback to Human Resources on key documents. In addition, the Agency successfully implemented the new legislation on workplace harassment and violence prevention after approving the Work Place Harassment and Violence Prevention^{Endnote xxi} policy in January 2021.

Working diligently to prepare its offices for proper reintegration into the workplace, the Agency focused on constructive change management practices while facilitating various conversations on transitioning to a hybrid workplace. To support the transition, the Agency:

• reviewed the Letter of Offer template;
• digitized forms involving Human Resources;
• enhanced tracking of staffing actions; and
• developed onboarding and off-boarding processes.

In the context of the evolving work environment, the Agency continued to update and modernize its digital environment. For instance, it expanded the use of Microsoft Teams to existing videoconference systems in meeting rooms and adapted infrastructure to support virtual review panel public hearings. The Agency also implemented Microsoft 365, a complete cloud environment, and maintained other collaboration and communications tools such as SharePoint, closed captions, and headsets. The Agency ensured that security and accommodation plans and services were in place by improving the security profile of the Microsoft 365 security platform, monitoring devices connected to the infrastructure, and performing various risk assessments.

Financial resources were prudently allocated across the Agency to ensure sound stewardship of public funds. Additionally, Shared Human Resources Services established a service-level agreement to address compensation transfers and backlog. Between efforts deployed within the Agency and its partners, the following results were achieved:

• pay transfers are up to date (for employee files within the Agency’s control);
• backlog cases have decreased by 23%; and
• low or no pay received by staff was monitored every pay week to ensure timely action.

Supporting ongoing environmental and impact assessments, the Agency developed 32 media plans and issued 47 public notices to advertise various assessment milestones. The Agency also issued 11 news releases to announce project decisions and responded to 182 media calls. Internal translation services translated over 650 pages of text for assessments and associated policies, which were also edited to meet plain language requirements. With the goal of improving public participation, the Agency produced a factsheet, a webpage, and two videos explaining the impact assessment process.

To strengthen its online engagement and public access to assessment information, the Agency created search tips and updated its Frequently Asked Questions to help users navigate the Registry. In addition, the Agency developed custom maps and online mapping applications to summarize and analyze scientific data to support ongoing assessments.

In 2021–22, the Agency continued to lead the Horizontal Initiative Framework to deliver the impact assessment regime with eight other federal departments and agencies. In addition to ongoing performance monitoring in 2021–22, the Agency continued the horizontal evaluation of the initiative in collaboration with partner departments and agencies. It expects the review to be completed in 2022–23.

Budgetary financial resources (dollars)

The following table shows, for internal services, budgetary spending for 2021–22, as well as spending for that year.

Human resources (full-time equivalents)

The following table shows, in full-time equivalents, the human resources the department needed to carry out its internal services for 2021–22.

Spending and human resources

Spending

Spending 2019–20 to 2024–25

The following graph presents planned (voted and statutory) spending over time.

Departmental spending trend graph - Text version

This stacked bar chart presents the planned (voted and statutory) spending for each of the six fiscal years from 2019–20 to 2024–25. In 2019–20, the Agency’s planned statutory spending was $6.253 million and the planned voted spending was $57.194 million for a total planned spending of $63.447 million. In 2020–21, the Agency’s planned statutory spending was $6.241 million and the planned voted spending was $70.642 million for a total planned spending of $76.883 million. In 2021–22, the Agency’s planned statutory spending was $6.154 million and the planned voted spending was $65.847 million for a total planned spending of $72.001 million. In 2022–23, the Agency’s planned statutory spending is $6.029 million and the planned voted spending is $74.041 million for a total planned spending of $80.070 million. In 2023–24, the Agency’s planned statutory spending is $2.318 million and the planned voted spending is $17.241 million for a total planned spending of $19.559 million. In 2024–25, the Agency’s planned statutory spending was $2.318 million and the planned voted spending is $17.241 million for a total planned spending of $19.559 million.

Definitions for Voted expenditures and Statutory Expenditures are available in Appendix: Definition.

Budget 2018 announced new funding for the Agency of $258.6 million over five fiscal years to deliver the new impact assessment process. This funding will end on March 31, 2023, which accounts for the significant decrease in planned spending for 2023–24 and future years.

The Agency is actively working on a funding renewal proposal for 2023–24 and beyond. Renewal of these funds is subject to government decisions as part of the budget process. Outcomes of such decisions will be reflected in the Agency’s future budget exercises and Estimates documents.

Budgetary performance summary for core responsibilities and internal services (dollars)

The "Budgetary performance summary for core responsibilities and internal services" table presents the budgetary financial resources allocated for the Agency’s core responsibilities and for internal services.

The total authorities available for use include all items approved through the Estimates processes for the fiscal year 2021–22. The variances between Main Estimates, planned spending, Total authorities, and Actual spending are primarily attributable to the timing of critical elements in the fiscal cycle. The Main Estimates, approved in the spring by Parliament in the initial appropriations, is the first step in the fiscal cycle.

As noted above, Budget 2018 announced new funding for the Agency of $258.6 million over five fiscal years to implement a new impact assessment process. Funding to implement the new impact assessment regime ends on March 31, 2023, which explains the decrease in planned spending in 2023–24. The Agency is actively working on a funding renewal proposal for future years.

The $11.1 million variance between 2021–22 Total authorities available ($83.1 million) and Actual spending ($72.0 million) is primarily due to delays caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. A portion of this variance ($5.0 million) can be attributed to the lower spending in the Agency’s transfer payment program due to impacts from the pandemic. Similarly, the pandemic’s impact on employee movement and staff turnover led to slower project activity, contributing to lower than anticipated spending.

Human resources

The "Human resources summary for core responsibilities and internal services" table presents the full-time equivalents (FTEs) allocated to each of the Agency’s core responsibilities and to internal services.

FTEs measure the extent to which an employee represents a full person-year relative to the Agency’s budget. An FTE is calculated as a ratio of assigned work hours to scheduled work hours, which are instituted in collective agreements.

In 2021–22, the Agency operated with 434 FTEs, a decrease of 12 FTEs (2.7%) from 2020–21 levels. The decrease is primarily due to routine staff turnover. There is less than a 2% decrease in planned and actual staffing levels for the fiscal year that ended on March 31, 2022. Since funding to implement the new impact assessment regime ends on March 31, 2023, this table shows a decrease in FTEs in 2023–24. The Agency is actively working on a funding renewal proposal for future years.

The minor increase in FTEs for Internal Services and the corresponding minor decrease in FTEs for the Core Responsibility between 2020–21 and 2021–22 is the result of an adjustment in staffing allocation methodology. The Agency assigned slightly fewer FTEs to the Core Responsibility than previous years.

Expenditures by vote

For information on the Agency’s organizational voted and statutory expenditures, consult the Public Accounts of Canada.^{Endnote xxii}

Government of Canada spending and activities

Information on the alignment of the Agency’s spending with Government of Canada’s spending and activities is available in GC InfoBase.^{Endnote xxiii}

Financial statements and financial statements highlights

Financial statements

The Agency’s financial statements (unaudited) for the year ended March 31, 2022, are available on the departmental website.^{Endnote xxiv}

Financial statement highlights

The decrease in total expenses reflects lower than anticipated spending for the Agency’s transfer payment program and operating budget. As with the decrease in actual spending from the previous year, total expenses and the net cost of operations also decreased. Planned revenues were forecasted to be $3.1 million for cost recoverable activities associated with assessments by a review panel. The actual revenue collected was $3.4 million and represented both respendable and non-respendable amounts.

The Agency’s total net liabilities are comprised primarily of accounts payable and accruals for employee future benefits, vacation, and compensatory leave. From 2020–21 to 2021–22, net liabilities increased by $2.1 million, primarily due to an increase in accounts payable at year-end from the Agency’s transfer payment program. Net financial assets also increased by $2.5 million, primarily due to an increase in amounts received from the Consolidated Revenue Fund. The latter is the account to which the government deposits taxes and revenue and from which it withdraws funds to defray the cost of public services.

The 2021–22 planned results information is provided in the Agency’s Future-Oriented Statement of Operations and Notes 2021–22.^{Endnote xxv}

Corporate information

Organizational profile

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

Institutional head: Terence Hubbard, President

Ministerial portfolio: Environment

Enabling instruments: Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012^{Endnote xxvi} and the Impact Assessment Act^{Endnote xxvii}

Year of incorporation / commencement: 1994

Other: The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012) was 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 Impact Assessment Act is supported by four regulations and a Ministerial order: the Physical Activities Regulations, the Information and Management of Time Limits Regulations, the Cost Recovery Regulations (continued from CEAA 2012), the Regulations Respecting Excluded Physical Activities (Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Exploratory Wells), and the Designated Classes of Projects Order. The Agency supports its President who is also the Federal Administrator under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement and the Northeastern Quebec Agreement.

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

"Raison d’être, mandate and role: who we are and what we do" is available on the Agency’s website.^{Endnote xxviii}

For more information on the department’s organizational mandate letter commitments, see the Minister’s mandate letter.^{Endnote xxix}

Operating context

Information on the operating context is available on the Agency’s website.^{Endnote xxx}

Reporting framework

The Agency’s Departmental Results Framework and Program Inventory of record for 2021–22 are shown below.

Reporting framework - Text version

These block list diagrams represent visually the Departmental Results Framework, in one, and the Program Inventory of record for 2021–22 in another. The Departmental Results Framework is tied to the Agency’s Core Responsibility: Impact Assessment. There are three departmental results supporting the core responsibility each of which are measured with at least one indicator. The first Departmental Result is Science, evidence and Indigenous knowledge is available to inform decisions in the public interest. The indicator measuring it is the Percentage of assessment reports provided to decision-makers that include a science-based assessment of the project, and a summary of public comments and how Indigenous knowledge and perspectives were considered. The second Departmental Result is Indigenous groups, the public and stakeholders have opportunities to meaningfully participate in assessments. There are two indicators measuring this Departmental Result. The first indicator is the Percentage of Indigenous groups participating in assessment-related engagement/consultation activities that indicate IAAC’s engagement was meaningful. The second indicator is the Percentage of public and stakeholder participants in assessment-related engagement/consultation activities that indicate IAAC’s engagement was meaningful. The last Departmental Result is Assessments result in mitigation measures that minimize the adverse effects of projects. Its indicator is the Percentage of projects for which reporting indicates that mitigation measures set out in the decision statement effectively address adverse effects of the project. The Core Responsibility and all three departmental results are supported by the Agency’s Internal Services.

The Program Inventory of record for 2021–22 is made of two programs: Assessment Administration, Conduct and Monitoring and Indigenous Relations and Engagement.

The definitions for Core Responsibility, Departmental Result, Departmental Result Indicator, Departmental Result Framework, program, and program inventory are all available in Appendix: Definition.

Supporting information on the program inventory

Financial, human resources and performance information for the Agency’s Program Inventory is available in GC InfoBase.^{Endnote xxxi}

Supplementary information tables

The following supplementary information tables are available on the Agency’s website^{Endnote xxxii}:

• Departmental Sustainable Development Strategy/Reporting on Green Procurement
• Details on transfer payment programs
• Gender-based analysis plus
• Response to parliamentary committees and external audits
• Horizontal initiatives

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 xxxiii} This report also provides detailed background information on tax expenditures, including descriptions, objectives, historical information and references to related federal spending programs as well as evaluations and GBA Plus of tax expenditures.

Organizational contact information

Mailing address:
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada
Place Bell Canada, 160 Elgin Street, 22nd Floor
Ottawa ON K1A 0H3 Canada

Telephone: 613-957-0700

TTY: 1-866-582-1884

Fax: 613-957-0862

Email: information@iaac-aeic.gc.ca

Website: www.canada.ca/en/impact-assessment-agency.html^{Endnote xxxiv}

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)

A report on the plans and expected performance of an appropriated department over a 3-year period. Departmental Plans are usually tabled in Parliament each spring.

departmental priority (priorité)

A plan or project that a department 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 departmental results.

departmental result (résultat ministériel)

A consequence or outcome that a department seeks to achieve. 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 quantitative measure of progress on a departmental result.

departmental results framework (cadre ministériel des résultats)

A framework that connects the department's core responsibilities to its departmental results and departmental result indicators.

Departmental Results Report (rapport sur les résultats ministériels)

A report on a department's actual accomplishments against the plans, priorities and expected results set out in the corresponding Departmental Plan.

experimentation (expérimentation)

The conducting of activities that seek to first explore, then test and compare the effects and impacts of policies and interventions in order to inform evidence-based decision-making, and improve outcomes for Canadians, by learning what works, for whom and in what circumstances. Experimentation is related to, but distinct from innovation (the trying of new things), because it involves a rigorous comparison of results. For example, using a new website to communicate with Canadians can be an innovation; systematically testing the new website against existing outreach tools or an old website to see which one leads to more engagement, is experimentation.

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. For a particular position, the full-time equivalent figure is the ratio of number of hours the person actually works divided by the standard number of hours set out in the person's collective agreement.

gender-based analysis plus (GBA Plus) (analyse comparative entre les sexes plus [ACS Plus])

An analytical tool used to support the development of responsive and inclusive policies, programs and other initiatives; and understand how factors such as sex, race, national and ethnic origin, Indigenous origin or identity, age, sexual orientation, socio-economic conditions, geography, culture and disability, impact experiences and outcomes, and can affect access to and experience of government programs.

government-wide priorities (priorités pangouvernementales)

For the purpose of the 2021–22 Departmental Results Report, government-wide priorities refers to those high-level themes outlining the government's agenda in the 2020 Speech from the Throne, namely: Protecting Canadians from COVID-19; Helping Canadians through the pandemic; Building back better – a resiliency agenda for the middle class; The Canada we're fighting for.

horizontal initiative (initiative horizontale)

An initiative where two or more federal organizations are given funding to pursue a shared outcome, often linked to a government priority.

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.

plan (plan)

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 to the expected result.

planned spending (dépenses prévues)

For Departmental Plans and Departmental Results Reports, planned spending refers to those amounts presented in 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.

program (programme)

Individual or groups of services, activities or combinations thereof that are managed together within the department and focus on a specific set of outputs, outcomes or service levels.

program inventory (répertoire des programmes)

Identifies all the department's programs and describes how resources are organized to contribute to the department's core responsibilities and results.

result (résultat)

A 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.

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.