M A N I T 0 B A Room 200. 155 Carlton Street East Side Road ToIl-Free: 1—866-356-6355 A U 1 H 0 H I T y Fax: (204) 948—2462 October 72016 Ms. Janet Scott Project Manager, Prairie and Northern Region Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Suite I 145, 700 Jasper Avenue Edmonton, AB T5J 4C3 Dear Ms. Scott: Re: Registry File 80094 Response to Information Requests - Environmental Impact Statement for Project 4 All-season Road connecting Berens River and Poplar River First Nation The Environmental Impact Statement for Project 4 All—season Road Connecting Berens River and Poplar River First Nation (Project FIS) was submitted to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, on February 26, 2016 and resubmitted in response to requests thr clarification from the Agency on May 9, 2016. Subsequent to this we received an Information Request froni the Agency on July 14. 20(6 regarding the Project EIS. Please find attached our response to the July 14, 2016 lnlhrmation Request from the Agency. We note that the majority of the intbrniation requested was provided in the Project EMS, in correspondence with the Agency, or in infbrmation provided to federal authorities having interest in the Project. If you have any questions please contact myself or Jajme Clarke. Sincerely. <Original signed by> LEED Ar Manager, Special Projects and Environmental Services LS/sk Attachment cc: Mike Knight. Acting Director Lance Viglusson. Interim CEO and Deputy Minister. Manitoba Infrastructure Traecy Braun, Manitoba Sustainable Development Response to Information Requests – Round #1 Project 4 – All-Season Road Connecting Berens River to Poplar River First Nation Federal Environmental Assessment of Project 4 – All-Season Road Connecting Berens River to Poplar River First Nation Information Requests – Round #1 IR Reference Number Project Effects Reference to EIS Context and Rationale Specific Question / Request for Information Response (e.g. HC- Link to CEAA 2012 to EIS Guidelines IR-01) No Project Description CEAA-01 EIS Chapter 4 The EIS should include a consolidated A. Provide a consolidated summary of proponent A. With regard to summarizing the changes to the project and issues identified Guidelines summary of all changes that have been changes to the project, including proponent’s in on-going engagement, there are no changes subsequent to the , Part 1, made to the Project since originally responses to the issues identified in the proponent’s submitted EIS. The responses to the issues identified in its on-going Section proposed, including the benefits of these on-going engagement activities with Indigenous engagement activities with Indigenous groups can be found in Table 4.6 3.1 changes to the environment, Aboriginal groups (e.g. Poplar River First Nation, Berens River Summary of Key Comments Received, Response and Reference Location peoples, and the public. The EIS should First Nation, Manitoba Métis Federation) such as found in Chapter 4 of the EIS and Chapter 4 Appendices. document any additional issues and concerns related to project component siting, B. With regard to updated descriptions of the project’s potential effects and concerns raised by Indigenous groups in heritage and cultural sites, habitat compensation proposed mitigation, there are no changes subsequent to the submitted relation to the environmental effects plans such as a fisheries offsetting plan, and any EIS. No updates to the effects or residual effects are required. assessment and the potential adverse other issues raised in comments provided to the impacts of the project on potential or proponent by Indigenous groups. established rights. B. Update descriptions of project potential effects and proposed mitigations as a result of any changes. Re- The EIS (Chapter 4, p. 4-38) states “The assess residual effects to project valued APEP will continue throughout the components and update conclusions presented in development of the Project, and will the EIS. provide updated information and opportunities for all interested parties to continue commenting on the Project. Comments and input received will be reviewed to assess whether the information alters the effects assessment and/or warrants modifications to proposed mitigation measures”. Project changes are described throughout the EIS document but a consolidated summary is absent. CEAA-02 EIS EIS The proponent information in the EIS A. The Agency requests formal notification of the A. With regard to a formal name change of the proponent, there is no change Guidelines Summary, should identify the legal entity that would proponent name change for Project 4, updates to at this time. Manitoba Infrastructure is taking responsibility for the East , Part 2, Chapter 1. develop, manage, and operate the project the EIS to reflect any changes to corporate policies Side Transportation Initiative and associated projects as of November 25, Section Introducti as well as specify the mechanism used to resulting from this change and any updated contact 2016. 1.1 on and ensure that corporate policies will be 1 Last Updated : October 7, 2016 Response to Information Requests – Round #1 Project 4 – All-Season Road Connecting Berens River to Poplar River First Nation IR Reference Number Project Effects Reference to EIS Context and Rationale Specific Question / Request for Information Response (e.g. HC- Link to CEAA 2012 to EIS Guidelines IR-01) Overview implemented and respected for the project. information for the proponent. Manitoba issued a press release in May 2016 noting that ESRA is dissolved and its mandate is repatriated into Manitoba Infrastructure. The EIS references ESRA as the proponent throughout the document and in Environmental Protection Procedures describing mitigation commitments. CEAA-03 19(1)(g) – EIS Chapter 2, The EIS describes alternative means for the A. Potential quarry locations are noted in Appendix 3- A. With regard to potential quarry sites noted in Appendix 3-3 and the rational alternative means Guidelines Project project as a whole (EIS, Chapter 2, Project 3, Figure 3-3, where “distance to waterbody” is employed if alternatives have been eliminated, this information is and , Part 2, Justificatio Justification and Alternatives Considered) indicated. Describe whether any of the alternatives contained in the EIS. No additional information is required to be provided environmental Section n and but does not evaluate environmental have been eliminated and provide the rationale for at this time. effects of 2.2 Alternativ effects associated with the alternative this. Characterize for each remaining potential alternative means es means for project components, including quarry location: With respect to the request to characterize for each remaining potential Considere alternative siting and locations for potential i. proximity to fish-habitat; quarry location: d quarry and borrow areas, and temporary ii. proximity to wetlands; construction camps and staging areas. iii. terrestrial habitat loss (area) by vegetation cover i. Proximity to fish habitat is found on the maps outlined in Appendix 3-3 Chapter 5, Instead, the EIS states “potential quarry type; Potential Quarry Site Locations, Figure 3-3 P4 All-Season Road Proposed Appendice and borrow areas will be selected using a iv. proximity to human health receptors, e.g. Watercourse Crossings. See map in Annex 1 for further clarification. s, variety of factors…” (p. 2-9), and that traplines, residences, camps, First Nations Environme temporary camps and staging areas “…will reserve lands; Information on quarry selection, with regard to proximity to fish habitat, ntal be selected for the construction of the v. proximity to sites of cultural and heritage value; can be found in the EIS: Protection proposed road and crossings based on and Chapter 4 Aboriginal and Public Engagement: Procedure consideration of factors…” (p. 2-9). vi. potential impact to rights, proposed Section 4.4 Additional Engagement Information; s accommodate measures, and views of groups Section 4.7 Future Engagement Activities; listed Section 5 of Part 1 of the EIS guidelines on Chapter 5 Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development: proposed accommodations. Section 5.4.1 Contract Specifications; B. For proposed quarries (290 ha), temporary staging Appendix 5-3 Environmental Protection Procedures: areas (57 ha), and construction camps (64 ha), . EPP14.0.12 Wildlife; describe the environmental effects to be considered . EPP6.4.1 Working Within or Near Fish Bearing Waters; as factors in site selection and the ranking process . EPP20 5.2 Quarry Site Selection and Requirements; to be used in selecting preferred sites. List and Appendix 5-4 GR130s Environmental Protection Specifications: describe the environmental protection measures . GR130.8.5 Designated Areas and Access; that will be applied to quarries, temporary staging . GR130.9.2.5.9 Petroleum Handling and Storage; area and construction camps. Describe how . GR130.15.1.1 Working Within or Near Water – General; potential sites will be confirmed to meet these . GR130.15.1.2 Working Within or Near Water – General; protection criteria. GR130.15.1.3 Working Within or Near Water – General; 2 Last Updated : October 7, 2016 Response to Information Requests – Round #1 Project 4 – All-Season Road Connecting Berens River to Poplar River First Nation IR Reference Number Project Effects Reference to EIS Context and Rationale Specific Question / Request for Information Response (e.g. HC- Link to CEAA 2012 to EIS Guidelines IR-01) C. Appendix 5-3 describes the mitigation