Environmental Assessment SummaryWATAYNIKANEYAP TRANSMISSION PROJECTSUMMER 2018

___WHAT ARE WE DOING TODAY?

Providing information and gathering feedback on:§ The findings of the Phase 2

environmental assessment (EA) including:§ Description of the preferred Project§ Existing environmental conditions

(baseline)§ Predicted effects§ Mitigation commitments, including

monitoring§ EA conclusions

2

___WATAYNIKANEYAP PROJECTS§ $1.6 billion estimated capital cost

Phase 1 – New Transmission Line to Pickle Lake§ Approximately 300 km of 230 kV line

§ Undergoing Individual EA

Phase 2 - Connecting 17 remote First Nation communities currently serviced by diesel generators§ 1,500 km of 115 kV, 44 kV and 25 kV transmission lines§ Potential first community grid connections in 2021; build out to 2023

Pikangikum Distribution Line§ 44 kV and 25 kV distribution line: Red Lake to Pikangikum First Nation

§ Under construction – potential connection in 2018 § Phase 2 – Change operation of 44 kV line to 115 kV transmission line

3

___PHASE 2 PROJECT

4

___WHAT IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA)?§ Requirement under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act and Canadian

Environmental Assessment Act

§ Identifies the potential effects and benefits of the Project on the natural and human environments

§ Identifies how to reduce or remove potential effects or enhance benefits (for example, through the Project design)

§ Contributes to responsible environmental decision-making § Provides opportunity to comment on how the Project may affect

individuals and their use of the land

§ Aboriginal and Stakeholder Engagement is key throughout the process

5

___PHASE 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA)

• For applicable 115 kV sections and associated infrastructure

• For disposition of resources for applicable sections within Provincial Parks• Category C process will be followed

• For applicable less than 115 kV sections and associated infrastructure, and disposition of resources

• Category C process will be followed.

• For sections of the transmission line on First Nation reserve lands

Section 67 Canadian EA Act (CEAA 2012)

Class EA for Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves (Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry 2004)

Class EA for Resource Stewardship and Facility Development(Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry 2003)

Class EA for Minor Transmission Facilities (Hydro One 1992)

One integrated Environmental Study Report6

___

Public and Government

Review

Baseline EA Studies

Ongoing Aboriginal and Stakeholder Engagement

Prepare ESR

2016 2017 2018

Anticipated Statement of Completion(Oct 2018)

Preliminary 2-km-wide study corridor

(Sep 2016)

Round 2 Engagement Meetings (Oct 2016 – Feb 2018)

Round 1 Engagement Meetings (Feb – Sep 2016)

Round 3 Engagement Meetings(Mar – Jul 2018)

Submit Draft ESR (Jul 2018)

Submit Final ESR (Sep 2018)

40-m-wide right-of-way

(Jul 2017)

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE

Public and Government

Review

We are here7

Update for OH

___CURRENT ENGAGEMENT Review of EA findings and the Draft ESR

n Draft Environmental Study Report (ESR) will soon be available for review

n July to August 2018 is the planned public review period

n An electronic and hard copy of the Draft ESR will be available in multiple locations (example: band office or library)

n A notice will be distributed listing the review period dates and locations on where to access the report

n Draft ESR will also be available on the website (www.wataypower.ca)

8

Update for OH

___Round Dates Objectives

1. Pre-EA Notification

2013-2014

Jan 2016 – Sept 2016

- Review preliminary 5-km-wide corridors and identify preferred corridor

- Seek input to revise 5-km-wide corridors to 2-km-wide study corridors

2. Scoping Oct 2016– Feb 2018 - Review 2-km-wide study corridors and alternatives, including preliminary locations of Project components (access roads, laydown areas, camps)

- Collect traditional land and resource use data- Review draft EA Workplan and Engagement Plans

2a. Update Jun 2017 - Provide newsletter including map of proposed 40-m-wide right of way (ROW) and preliminary Project component locations

3. Review EA findings including Draft ESR and later final ESR

MNRF review of Draft ESR: underwayCommunity Meetings:Mar - Jul 2018Draft ESR review:Jul-Aug 2018 (anticipated)

Review:- Baseline data- Effects assessment results - Recommended mitigation

PHASE 2: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

9

Update for OH

___ALTERNATIVE CORRIDORS

n Corridor routing focused on community input gathered since 2013 -including traditional knowledge and land use - to identify and compare alternatives

n Results of environmental studies and engineering input have also contributed

n Preliminary preferred locations have been identified for the following:n Corridor routes (including consideration of several alternatives)n Other Project components:

n Temporary construction campsn Temporary laydown areasn Temporary and permanent access roadsn Substations

n Provincial Park and protected area crossings (including consideration of alternative crossing locations)

10

___ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STEPS AND CONTENT

Baseline

Conclusion –Predicted Effects

Mitigation

n Vegetation and Wetlands

n Wildlifen Fish and Fish

Habitatn Surface Watern Ground Watern Air Qualityn Noisen Climate Change

n Archaeologyn Cultural Heritagen Socio-Economicsn Non-Aboriginal Land

and Resource Usen Visual Aestheticsn Human Healthn Aboriginal and

Treaty Rights and Interests

Potential Effects

11

___

VEGETATION AND WETLANDS – BASELINE AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS

Baseline Data Potential Effects

Communities identified locations of blueberries, wild rice, and medicinal plants.Data was also collected through field studies:

n 173 vegetation surveys plots (May-Sep. 2016) with 319 species of plants identified

n No Species at Risk (SAR) plants observed

n Seven rare plants identified (one fern, one herb, and five mosses)

n 23 upland ecosystem types, 20 wetland ecosystem types, and two disturbed ecosystem types identified.

n Removal of vegetation:

§ Upland, wetland and riparian ecosystems

§ Old forests (>111 years)

§ Rare (not at risk) vegetation

§ Candidate Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest

§ Critical Landform Vegetation Associations

n Introduction of invasive plant species

12

___VEGETATION AND WETLANDS – MITIGATION AND CONCLUSION (PREDICTED EFFECTS)

Mitigation Examples Conclusion (Predicted Effects)n Minimize clearing

§ Limit project footprint§ Use existing access roads to the

extent practical§ Only remove vegetation where

necessary to construct and operate the line

n Regenerate temporary sites after construction

n Develop rare plant management plan

n Implement measures to control the spread of invasive species

n Most of the vegetation types that will be cleared for the Project are common to the area.

n Almost all (99%) of important/unique vegetation types will remain unchanged.

13

___

n Species selected based on: presence, conservation, and engagement

WILDLIFE – BASELINE DATA COLLECTION METHODS

§ Woodland caribou§ Moose§ Wolverine§ Little brown myotis (bat)

§ Horned grebe§ Bald eagle§ Canada warbler§ Bank swallow

§ Common nighthawk§ Olive-sided flycatcher

n Field surveys in 2016 and 2017:§ Remote cameras § Helicopter surveys along Project corridor targeting:

§ areas used by waterbirds: low densities observed§ caribou (focused area): 19 individuals in four groups

§ potential bat habitat: wintering on Red Lake subsystem, abundant maternity § breeding birds: 58 species identified; Canada warbler and olive-sided flycatcher are

the only species at risk observed§ Nightjar acoustic surveys: whip-poor-will recorded near Red Lake only, common

nighthawk frequently observed§ Raptor nests: 19 bald eagle nests noted during various helicopter surveys

Remote camera

14

___WILDLIFE – POTENTIAL EFFECTS AND MITIGATION EXAMPLESPotential Effects Mitigation Examples

n Loss of habitatn Reduced quality of habitat because of

changes in vegetation, water, air, noisen Habitat fragmentationn Noise during construction and

operation

n Avoid working during sensitive times (e.g., nesting) where feasible

n Avoid sensitive habitats where feasiblen Conduct pre-construction surveys, if necessaryPlans:

n Wildlife Managementn Spill Prevention and Emergency Response n Timber Salvage n Clean-up and Reclamation n Liquid Waste Management n Hazardous Waste Management n Non-Hazardous Solid Waste Management n Blasting Management n Traffic/Road Management

n Dust/Air Quality Management

15

___WILDLIFE – CONCLUSIONS (Predicted Effects)

n May be small changes to populations and locations of wildlifen Animals may avoid areas during construction n During operation some animals may be attracted to

certain areas (e.g., cleared ROW)n Some habitat removal – small compared to what’s

available.n Changes to caribou predation risk are expected along

some areas of the Project footprint as a result of increased predator densities and improved predator mobility

n Significant effects already present for:n Bat (Little brown myotis) due to disease

n Woodland Caribou in the Sydney Range due to existing disturbance

n The Project will contribute no to few further effects to these species

16

___FISH AND FISH HABITAT

Baseline Data Potential Effects Mitigation ExamplesConclusion (Predicted Effects)

n Review of

existing

literature and mapping

n Aerial survey

Four criteria

species:

n Walleye

n Sturgeon

n Brook trout

n Lake trout

n Loss or

alteration of

habitat

n Decreased water quality

n Increased access

for anglers

n Avoid work in/near

water where

possible

n Implement timing restrictions during

construction

n Build waterbody crossing structures

using best

management practices and

consistent with

permit conditions

Effects mostly

minimized or

avoided.

17

___PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT EFFECTS ASSESSMENT (CONT.’D.)

Baseline Potential Effects Mitigation Examples Conclusion (Predicted Effects)

Existing data shows low levels of contaminants in surface water in the project area

n Quality (for example, increased sediments, accidental spills)

n Quantity (for example, water taking or diversion)

Avoid work in or near water where possible.Plans:n Spill Prevention and

Emergency Response

n Liquid Waste Management

n Hazardous Waste Management

n Blasting Management

Monitoring:n Sediment and

erosion controln Nearby wells

Any changes willbe temporary and within the range of conditions present before construction.

Existing data sources used to characterize groundwaterquality and quantity

n Quality (for example, blasting, accidental spills)

n Quantity (for example, dewatering during construction)

18

___Baseline Data Potential

EffectsMitigationExamples

Conclusion (Predicted Effects)

Existing regional air monitoring stations

(Pickle Lake, Kenora,

Thunder Bay and

Winnipeg) describe

generally low levels of

air contaminants

Change in air

quality from

emissions and

dust

n Maintain vehicles

and equipment

n Implement dust

control measures

Effects infrequent and during

construction only.

Current noise levels

were described using

noise standards for

remote areas

Increased

noise levels

n Maintain vehicles

and equipment

Highest noise levels closest

to area of construction.

Slight increase in noise at

substation during operation.

Existing GHG levels

described using

existing data

Emissions

from exhaust,

loss of carbon

uptake from

trees that are

cleared

n Maintain vehicles

and equipment

n Limit idling

n Carpool

Lower GHG emission due to

reduced reliance on diesel

generation.

PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

Benefits to air quality and climate change expected through

reduction in emissions from diesel generating stations 19

___ARCHAEOLOGY RESOURCES

Baseline Data PotentialEffects Mitigation Examples

Conclusion (Predicted Effects)

Stage 1 assessmentn background

research (for example, maps, historical documents)

n information from engagement

Loss or damage to archaeological resources

n Avoid known archaeological resources to the extent practical

n Complete additional field studies (Stage 2, 3 or 4 assessments) on areas of high potential

n Stop work if there is potential to damage or affect a feature

n Continue engagement with Aboriginal communities

Plans:n Archaeology Management

Plan

Effects avoided or minimized through mitigation and additional studies.

20

___CULTURAL HERITAGE

Baseline Data PotentialEffects Mitigation Examples Conclusion

(Predicted Effects)n Identified through

review of existing data (for example, inventories, archive documents, imagery)

n Types of heritage sites studied included: hunting and trapping sites, travel routes, habitation sites, river crossings, abandoned mines and churches

Heritagesites can be affected during construction activities (e.g., tree removal, vibration from heavy equipment)

n Avoid known sitesn Confirm presence

of additional sites prior to construction

n Use existing roads where possible

n Stop work if it has the potential to damage or affect a feature

Plans:n Built Heritage

Management Plan

Effects avoided or minimized through mitigation and additional studies.

21

___SOCIO-ECONOMIC

Baseline Data Potential Effects Mitigation Examples

Conclusion (Predicted Effects)

Includes existing data and communication with stakeholders and land users to describe:n Labour market

n Regional economyn Government

financesn Housing/

accommodationsn Servicesn Infrastructuren Community Well-

being

n Positive:training, employment, new businesses

n Negative: community well being -(example -nuisance noise)

n Health and Safety training and measures

n Worker codes of conduct

Plans:n Indigenous

Participation Plan

n Skills Development and Training Plan

n Benefits: Jobs and training opportunities during construction.

n Business opportunities and revenues through construction.

n Short term negative effects during construction.

Benefits expected through ability to connect additional homes to power

22

___NON-ABORIGINAL LAND AND RESOURCE USE

Baseline Data Potential Effects Mitigation Examples Conclusion (Predicted Effects)

Includes existing data and communication with stakeholders and land users todescribe:

n Parks and protected areas

n Outdoor tourism and recreational land and resource use

n Commercial industry land and resource use

n Access to and/or use of: natural/cultural/ recreational features of parks or protected area

n Land access and quality for hunters, anglers, trappers

n Remoteness and remote tourism outfitters

n Mining and aggregates, forestry and waterpower

n Align ROW with existing infrastructure

n Engage with land users

n Notify land users of activities

Plans:n Post-construction

Monitoring Plann Traffic/Access

Management Plan

n Minimal effects to parks and protected areas.

n Positive or negative effects to tourism/recreation depending on the land user.

n Minimal effects to commercial industry land and resource use.

23

___VISUAL AESTHETICS

Baseline Data

PotentialEffects Mitigation Examples

Conclusion (Predicted Effects)

A review of existing data and input from engagement identified locations of importance for visual quality

Visual effects of clearing and presence of transmission towers

n Use existing roads and disturbed areas

n Use existing screening from topography and vegetation

n Reclaim temporary construction areas

n Monitor and manage reclamation activities to address potential visual effects

A small change to existing viewing conditions is expected.

24

___HUMAN HEALTH

Baseline Data Potential Effects Mitigation Examples Conclusion (Predicted Effects)

Looked at the link between health and: noise, air, soil and water quality

n Changes to water quality

n Air and dust emissions

n Noise fromconstruction and/or operations

n Maintain vehicles and equipment

n Implement dust control measures

n Notify residents of work

Plans:n Spill Prevention

and Emergency Response Plan

n Blasting Management Plan

n Short term nuisance effects from changes to air quality andnoise during construction

n Changes to water are expected to be temporary and within the range of conditions present before construction.

n Changes to water are not expected to affect human health.

25

___ABORIGINAL AND TREATY RIGHTS AND INTERESTS - BASELINE

Baseline Data

Data gathered through: n Engagement n Sharing of existing traditional land and resource use (TLRU) data n New Project-specific TLRU data

Measures to represent Aboriginal and Treaty Rights:n Availability of wildlife, fish and plant species harvested by Aboriginal peoplen Location of, and access to areas used by Aboriginal communities for wildlife,

fish and plant harvestingn Location of, and access to spiritual, ceremonial and cultural use sitesn Quality of land used for traditional purposes

26

___ABORIGINAL AND TREATY RIGHTS AND INTERESTS -EFFECTS

Potential Effects Mitigation Examples Conclusion (Predicted Effects)

n Limits to ability to continue rights-based activities

n Temporary loss of access during construction

n Overall increase inaccess to land

n Project designed to avoid many of the shared TLRUvalues

n Mitigation measures recommended in the EA will be applied to protect air, water, plants, animals, fish and people

n No restrictions on access to the Project right of way during operations, except for safety reasons during maintenance

n Continue to engage with communities to improve understanding of possible effects and how they can be addressed

n All effects to Aboriginal Treaty Rights and are expected to be mitigated.

n Continue engagement with communities to reduce effects to rights.

27

___CONCLUSIONS

n Net adverse environmental effects of the Project have been predicted to be minor or not significant except for:n Woodland caribou (Sydney Range) and Little Brown bat species

n Both species not currently considered self-sustaining n Project contribution to effects to these species are predicted to be minor

28

___NEXT STEPS AND PROJECT PERMITTING

n Comments on the Draft ESR will be considered and changes will be made where needed

n A Final ESR will be released for public reviewn Notice will be provided and will include

how the Final ESR can be accessed

n Once the EA process is complete, Statement(s) of Completion will be issued

n Required permits will be confirmed and obtained from regulators

29

Update for OH

___

Regulator Examples of Permits

Provincial Ministries

Environment and Climate Change (MOECC)

• Permit to take water• Environmental Compliance Approval (air, noise, wastewater)

Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF)

• Endangered Species Act permit• Far North Act authorization• Public Lands Act – land use permit (tenure), work permit

(water crossings and other activities) • Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act - Scientific collectors permit • Crown Forest Sustainability Act - Forest Resource Licence• Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act permit (water crossings)• Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act – authorization

to conduct research, work permits• Aggregate Resources Act permit• Forest Fires Prevention Act burn permit

Transportation (MTO) • Land Use and Building, Entrance, Encroachment, and Sign permits

Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS)

• Ontario Heritage Act – compliance letter

Northern Development and Mines (MNDM)

• Mining Act - Withdrawal of lands from staking• Mining Act - consent from mining claim holders 30

Update for OH

___

Regulator Examples of Permits

Provincial - Other

Ontario Energy Board (OEB) • Leave to Construct

Technical Standards and Safety Authority (TSSA) • Fuel handling licence

Federal MinistriesEnvironment Canada (EC) • Species at Risk Act permit

Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) • Species at Risk Act permit• Other authorizations

Transport Canada (TC) • Navigation Protection Act approval• Canadian Aviation Regulation approval

Department of Indigenous Service Canada (DISC) • Indian Act authorization

Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) • Explosives Act permit

31

___

Regulator Examples of Permits

Other

First Nations • Land Sharing Protocols

• Other community-specific protocols

Hydro One Networks Inc. • Transmission System Code Agreement

Private land owners • Easement consent

Other utility companies • Consent to cross

Municipalities • Building Code Act permit

• By-law permits – tree removal, burning

• Planning Act – permits, amendments

32

___

Questions?

33

___WATAYNIKANEYAP EA AND ENGAGEMENT CONTACTSMargaret KenequanashWataynikaneyap Power L.P.(807) 577-5955 margaret.kenequanash@wataypower.ca

Nancy O’NeillEnvironmental Assessment LeadWataynikaneyap Power L.P.(807) 577-5955 nancy.oneill@wataypower.ca

John ReidEA Engagement CoordinatorNew Economy Development Group(613) 355-9205jhhreid@neweconomygroup.ca

Brett ThompsonProject Manager for EA Golder Associates Ltd.(905) 567 4444 ext 1294 brett_thompson@golder.com

Website: http://www.wataypower.ca

Tribal Council and Independent First Nation Contacts

Keewaytinook Okimakanak Andrea Habinski

Windigo First Nations Council Breann Morgan

Shibogama First Nations Council Laura SayersDonna Brunton

Independent First Nations Alliance Mary Bea Kenny

Sandy Lake First Nation Harry Meekis

34