Route 389 Improvement Project Between Fire Lake and Fermont Comprehensive Study Report September 2018 © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of the Environment, (September, 4th, 2018). Catalogue No: En106-211/2018F-PDF ISBN : 978-0-660-27155-2 This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part for non-commercial purposes, and in any format, without charge or further permission. Unless otherwise specified, you may not reproduce materials, in whole or in part, for the purpose of commercial redistribution without prior written permission from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3 or [email protected] This document has been issued in French under the title: Projet d’amélioration de la route 389 entre Fire Lake et Fermont - Rapport d’étude approfondie préliminaire Executive Summary The Quebec Ministère des Transports, de la Mobilité durable et de l’Électrification des transports (the proponent) is proposing a road improvement project (the project) on Route 389 between Fire Lake and Fermont to improve traffic flow and safety, enhance the link with Newfoundland and Labrador, and facilitate access to natural resources. The work includes 55.8 km of alignment on new rights-of-way and the upgrading of the existing road, for a total length of 68.9 km. Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (S.C. 1992, c. 37) (the former Act), a federal environmental assessment is required since Fisheries and Oceans Canada will likely need to issue an authorization as part of the project, in accordance with the Fisheries Act, to allow for activities that result in serious harm to fish. Infrastructure Canada could also provide funding to the proponent for this project. The project is subject to a comprehensive study–type environmental assessment because it involves an activity described in section 29(b)1 of the Schedule of the Comprehensive Study List Regulations. The Canadian Environmental Assessment, 2012 (the Act), came into force on July 6, 2012, replacing the former Act. In accordance with the transition provisions of the Act, the comprehensive study for the project was completed under the former Act. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency) prepared the comprehensive study in collaboration with the Federal Environmental Assessment Committee composed of representatives of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Infrastructure Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada, and Health Canada. In this comprehensive study report, the Agency describes the project’s effects on the following valued components: the atmospheric environment, wetlands and plant species with special status, fish and fish habitat, birds and bird habitat, terrestrial wildlife and wildlife habitat, and the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes. The Agency assessed the significance of the effects of the project based on information provided by the proponent in its environmental impact statement and supplementary documents, opinions provided by federal and provincial experts, and comments received from the public and First Nations. The First Nations raised concerns about maintaining traditional activities, access to their traditional territory and its availability to non-Indigenous people, the preservation of the Innu archaeological and cultural heritage, the effects on the sacred Moisie River, the economic opportunities related to the project, and the effects on wildlife, particularly boreal caribou. The summary of concerns raised by First Nations can be found in Appendix G. The proponent committed to implementing mitigation measures deemed necessary by the Federal Environmental Assessment Committee and that are expected to reduce the potential environmental effects of the project. The measures include a dust management plan, work restrictions during sensitive periods for wildlife and fish habitat compensation measures. The proponent also committed to implementing a follow-up program for a number of valued components and an emergency response plan for accidents and malfunctions. 1 29(b) The proposed construction of an all-season public highway that will be more than 50 km in length and either will be located on a new right-of-way or will lead to a community that lacks all-season public highway access. ii Comprehensive Study Report – Route 389 Improvement Project Between Fire Lake and Fermont A follow-up program is required to verify the accuracy of the environmental assessment and to determine the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures. Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Infrastructure Canada, as responsible authorities for the project, will be responsible for ensuring the development and implementation of the federal follow-up program. Taking into account the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and follow-up program, the Agency finds that the project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects. The Minister of Environment and Climate Change will consider this report and the comments from the public and First Nations before issuing an environmental assessment decision statement. The minister will then send the project to Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Infrastructure Canada as the responsible authorities to render their decision, in accordance with section 37 of the former Act. iii Comprehensive Study Report – Route 389 Improvement Project Between Fire Lake and Fermont Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ii Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................... viii List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................ ix List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ................................................................................................................ x 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Purpose of the Comprehensive Study Report ...................................................................................... 1 1.3 Scope of Environmental Assessment .................................................................................................... 2 1.3.1 Requirements of environmental assessment .......................................................................................... 2 1.3.2 Factors considered in the assessment .................................................................................................... 3 1.3.3 Selection of valued components ............................................................................................................. 3 1.4 Methodology and Approach ................................................................................................................. 5 1.4.1 Spatial boundaries .................................................................................................................................. 5 1.4.2 Temporal boundaries .............................................................................................................................. 5 1.4.3 Impact assessment ................................................................................................................................. 5 2 Project Overview ................................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Project Location .................................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Project Components ............................................................................................................................. 9 2.3 Project Activities ................................................................................................................................. 10 3 Purpose of and Need for the Project, Project Alternatives, and Alternative Means Analysis .................. 11 3.1 Purpose of and Need for the Project .................................................................................................. 11 3.2 Project Alternatives ............................................................................................................................. 12 3.2.1 Option 1: Status quo ............................................................................................................................. 15 3.2.2 Option 2: Upgrade of the existing Route 389 ....................................................................................... 15 3.2.3 Option 3: New highway ........................................................................................................................ 16 3.2.4 Choosing an option ............................................................................................................................... 17 3.3 Alternative Means Assessment ..........................................................................................................