NIRB Regulatory Improvement Initiatives - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

NIRB Regulatory Improvement Initiatives

ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐅᔭᕋᖕᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᖅ, ᐃᖃᓗᐃᑦ, ᐊᐃᕐᕆᓕ 1-4, 4, 20 2019 ᕋᐃᔭᓐ ᐱᐊᕆ, ᐃᓱᒻᒥᖅᑐᐃᔨ, ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ

ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᓄᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᑦ

Nunavut Mining Symposium, Iqaluit, April 3, 2019 Ryan Barry, Executive Director, Nunavut Impact Review Board

Regulatory Improvement Initiatives

Constantly updating tools to communicate

• ur processes and engage with the public:
• Rules of Procedure
• Public Guides
• Technical Guides
• Website and Public Registry
• Social Media Accounts
• Public Reports
• Newsletters
• Correspondence
• Advertisements

ᓄᑖᙳᕆᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓐᓇᐅᔭᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᑲᔫᑎᒃᓴᓂᑦ ᑐᓴᐅᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᕆᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓄᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ:

• ᒪᓕᒐᐃᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ (ROP)
• ᐃᓄᓕᒫᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ
• ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᐃᑦ
• ᐃᑭᐊᖅᑭᕕᖓ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓄᓐᓄᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᕐᕕᒃ
• ᖃᕋᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᒐᑦ
• ᐃᓄᓕᒫᓄᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᖑᓯᒪᔪᑦ
• ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᑦ ᑐᓴᕋᒃᓴᑦ
• ᑎᑎᖅᑲᐃᑦ
• ᓴᖅᑭᔮᖅᑎᑦᑎᓃᑦ

ᒪᓕᒐᑎᒍᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᓄᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᑦ

What is being updated?

• Draft Rules of Procedure: detail

how proceedings will be conducted by the NIRB for assessments and project monitoring, and how further direction and guidance is provided when required

• Draft Standard Impact Statement

Guidelines: instructions to Proponents on how to prepare the information required (i.e. an impact statement) to support a NIRB Review

• f a project proposal
• ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᕐᖓᕈᑦ ᒪᓕᒋᐊᓖᑦ

ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᓂᕐᒧᑦ: :

ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᖅᓯᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓇᓱᐊᖅᓯᓂᐅᔪᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᓂᒃ ᓇᐅᑦᑎᖅᓱᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑐᑭᒧᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᓂᖅ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᑎᑕᐅᕙᖕᒪᖔᖅ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒋᐊᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ

• ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᕐᖓᕈᑦ ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ

ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᒧᑦ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ

ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ: ᒪᓕᒋᐊᓖᑦ ᑲᒪᓂᐊᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐱᕙᒌᔭᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᐅᒪᔾᔪᑎᒃᓴᓂᑦ ᐱᓯᒪᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ, (ᓲᕐᓗ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᖑᔪᑦ) ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓂᖓᓂ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑕᐅᔪᒥᒃ

ᑭᓱ ᓄᑖᙳᕆᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᖕᒪᑦ?

Objectives

• 1. Discuss our ongoing efforts to

update NIRB Rules of Procedure and create Standard Impact Statement Guidelines

• 2. Highlight the importance of the

documents to the NIRB processes

• 3. Demonstrate our consideration for

feedback received to date

• 4. Encourage you all to get involved!

1. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᑲᔪᓰᓐᓇᖅᑐᒥᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᐃᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓴᖅᑮᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᖑᔪᑦ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ 2. ᓴᖅᑮᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᓂᖓᓂ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖏᓐᓄᑦ 3. ᓴᖅᑭᔮᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᔅᓴᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕆᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ 4. ᑲᔪᖏᖅᓴᐃᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᔅᓯᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᐃᓚᐅᖁᔨᓪᓗᑎᒃ!

ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒪᔪᑦ

ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᖏᕈᑎ

ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐸᕐᓇᐃᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᑦ

ᒪᓕᒐᐃᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ (ROP)

ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᑎᓕᓯᔾᔪᑎᖏᑦ

ᖃᐃᖅᑯᔨᓂᖅ

ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᓐᓄᑦ ᑐᑭᒧᐊᕈᑎᖓ

ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᑭᒧᐊᕈᑎ

ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᐊᓂᖃᕐᑐᕕᓂᕐᓂᒃ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᒥᑦ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ

ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᐃᑦ

ᑐᕌᖓᔪᑦ ᐃᓗᓕᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎᐅᑉ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑑᓂᖓᓄᑦ

ᖁᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᒥᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᖅᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᑎ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑐᑭᒧᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑭᒡᓕᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᓄᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᓄᑦ

Nunavut Agreement

Rights to make rules, language requirement, hearings procedure

NuPPAA

Rule-making consultation

• bligations, hearings procedures

Rules of Procedure

General procedural requirements for various types of Board proceedings

Board Orders

Proceeding-specific Board direction (e.g. Hearing orders, site visit)

Summons

Board ordered, court-approved summons for witnesses/evidence in a proceeding

Procedural Direction

Proceeding-specific ED Direction (Agenda, submission timelines, etc.)

Administrative Direction

Proceeding-specific staff direction (e.g. meeting logistics, filing requirements, etc.)

Standard IS Guidelines

Specific information requirements for impact statements

Technical Guides

Specific contents and process guidance by type of application

Increasing level of detail and direction limited to specific Proceedings

Why update now?

• Reflect coming-into-force of NuPPAA

and the amended Nunavut Agreement

• Capitalize on implementation

experience to date

• Increase certainty for project

proponents and participants

• Improve our ability to consistently

meet timelines

• ᐃᖅᑲᐅᒪᔭᐅᓗᓂ ᐊᑐᓕᕈᒫᖅᑐᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ

ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐸᕐᓇᐃᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᖏᕈᑎ

• ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓗᓂ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ

ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖓᓂᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ

• ᖁᕝᕙᓯᒃᓯᓗᓂ ᐊᔪᙱᓐᓂᐅᔪᓂᒃ

ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᓄᑦ ᑲᒪᓂᐊᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᔪᓄᑦ

• ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᓯᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐊᔪᙱᓐᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ

ᑎᑭᐅᒪᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑭᒡᓕᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ

ᓲᒻᒪ ᓄᑖᙳᕆᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᐸ ᒫᓐᓇ?

Rules of Procedure

2009 Version:

• Address Nunavut

Agreement requirements

• nly
• Focus on conduct of public

hearings

• Some items no longer

reflect current practices

2009 09-ᒥ ᐊᑐᕐᓂᑰᔪᖅ:

• ᑲᒪᒋᔭᖃᕐᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᖏᕈᑎᒥᑦ

ᐊᑐᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ

• ᑐᕌᒐᖃᕐᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᒪᓕᒋᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ

ᐃᓄᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᓈᓚᖕᓂᐅᔪᓄᑦ

• ᐃᓚᖏᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᖃᓯᐅᑎᔪᓐᓃᖅᑐᑦ

ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᑦ ᐱᐅᓯᐅᔪᓂᒃ

ᒪᓕᒐᐃᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ (ROP)

Rules of Procedure

2018 Draft:

• Address requirements of

Nunavut Agreement and NuPPAA

• Expanded focus on all NIRB

proceedings

• Reflect updated processes

(e.g. community roundtables)

• Clarify what direction can

come from Board vs. Staff

201 2018 ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᕐᖓᕈᑦ:

• ᑲᒪᒋᔭᖃᕐᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐊᑐᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ

ᑕᐃᑲᙵᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᖏᕈᑎᒥ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐸᕐᓇᐃᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᑦ

• ᐊᖏᒡᓕᒋᐊᕐᓗᑎ ᑐᕌᒐᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ

ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓄᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᓕᒫᖏᓐᓄᑦ

• ᑕᑯᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓗᒋᑦ

ᓄᑖᙳᕆᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ (ᓲᕐᓗ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ)

• ᑐᑭᓯᑦᑎᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᓇᒧᑦ

ᑐᑭᒧᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᒍᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᑕᐅᑐᖃᓯᐅᑎᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ

ᒪᓕᒐᐃᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ (ROP)

Rules of Procedure

Updates intended to reflect:

• NIRB’s increasing experience with

different types of assessments and the resulting need for greater procedural flexibility and “scalability”

• NIRB’s emerging best practices with

respect to community involvement;

• Broadening the scope to apply to a

range of Board “proceedings” rather than being limited to NIRB Public Hearings only

• The NIRB’s electronic registry and

moving away from exchange of hard copy documents

ᓄᑖᙳᕆᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᑎᑕᐅᒋᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ:

• ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑕ

ᐊᔪᙱᓐᓂᖃᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᙱᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᑕᖃᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓ ᒪᓕᒋᐊᓖᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᕈᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ “ᐊᖏᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ”

• ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑕ

ᓴᖅᑭᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᓯᑦᑎᐊᕙᐅᓛᓂᒃ ᐃᒃᐱᒍᓱᑦᑎᐊᓯᓐᓈᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᒥ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᑦ

• ᐊᖏᒡᓕᒋᐊᖅᑎᕆᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒥᑦ

ᑐᕌᖓᖃᓯᐅᑎᓗᓂ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᙱᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ “ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖏᓐᓄᑦ” ᑭᒡᓕᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᖏᓪᓗᑎᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐃᓄᓕᒫᓄᑦ ᓈᓚᖕᓂᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ

• ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑕ ᖃᕆᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ

ᐊᑎᓕᐅᕐᕕᐊ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᖏᑦ ᐸᐃᑉᐹᑎᒍᑦ ᑐᓐᓂᖅᓴᐅᙱᖔᓐᓂᕐᒥᑦ

ᒪᓕᒐᐃᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ (ROP)

Impact Statement Guidelines

Project-specific Guidelines

• NIRB is required to issue project-specific

guidelines to Proponent during the Review of a proposal

• Unless project proposal can, in the
• pinion of NIRB, be accepted as an

impact statement Standard Guidelines

• Allow Proponents to develop an impact

statement before a Screening commences

• Reduce time required for developing

project-specific guidelines during NIRB Reviews

ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒧᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᖅ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ

• ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒋᐊᖃᖅᑐᑦ

ᑐᓂᓯᓗᑎᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒧᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᖅ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ ᑲᒪᓂᐊᖅᑐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎᓕᐊᖑᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᓂᖓᓂ.

• ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᓄᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒍᓐᓇᖅᐸᑕ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ,

ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᖏᓐᓂᓪᓕ ᑖᒃᑯᓇᙵᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ, ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᖅ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᓗᓂ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᖑᔪᒥᑦ

ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ

• ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᑲᒪᓂᐅᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᔪᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎ

ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᖑᔪᒥᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐅᔪᖅ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᙱᓐᓂᖓᓂ

• ᐱᕕᒃᓴᑭᓐᓂᖅᓴᐅᓕᕐᓗᑎ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒧᑦ

ᑐᕌᖓᔪᖅ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓂᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ

ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᖑᔪᑦ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ

Standard Impact Statement Guidelines

New guidelines introduced to:

• Clarify for all participants in the

assessment process what information is expected to be included in an Impact Statement

• Focus public engagement when

developing project-specific guidelines

• Ensure that translation and public

engagement requirements of IS Guidelines under NuPPAA can be met;

• Allow more focused project/industry-

specific guidance to supplement Standard IS Guidelines.

ᓄᑖᖑᔪᑦ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᕐᖓᖅᑐᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ:

• ᑐᑭᓯᑦᑎᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐃᓚᐅᔪᓕᒫᓄᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐅᔪᒥᑦ ᑭᓱᓂᑦ

ᑐᓴᐅᒪᔾᔪᑎᒃᓴᓂᑦ ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᖃᕐᒪᖔᑦ ᐱᖃᓯᐅᑎᒋᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ ᑕᐃᑲᓂ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᖑᔪᓂᒃ

• ᑐᕌᒐᕆᔭᐅᔪᒥᒃ ᐃᓄᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᑦ

ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᓂᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒧᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᖅ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ

• ᖃᐅᔨᒪᑦᑎᐊᕆᐊᕐᓗᑎᑦ ᑐᑭᓕᐅᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓄᓕᒫᓂᒃ

ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒋᐊᓖᑦ ᑕᐃᑲᙵᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᐊᓂᖃᕐᑐᕕᓂᕐᓂᒃ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᒥᑦ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᑕᒡᕘᓇ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐸᕐᓇᐃᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᑦ ᑎᑭᐅᒪᔭᐅᒍᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑦ

• ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᐅᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᑐᕌᒐᕆᔭᐅᔪᒥᒃ

ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒧᑦ/ᓴᓇᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᓄᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᐊᓂᖃᕐᑐᕕᓂᕐᓂᒃ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᒥᑦ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᖕᓄᑦ

ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᖑᔪᑦ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ

Process so far

• Dec. 6 2018: Draft documents

circulated with invitation for feedback

• All documents provided in English,

Inuktitut, French & Inuinnaqtun

• Notice published in Nunatsiaq News
• Documents posted online at NIRB’s

website

• Letters circulated to required parties
• Offer of directed engagement sessions

provided

• ᑎᓯᐱᕆ 6 2018:

ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᕐᖓᕈᑦ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᐃᑦ ᑐᓐᓂᖅᓴᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᑐᙵᓴᐃᓪᓗᑎ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᒪᓪᓗᑎᒃ

• ᑎᑎᖅᑲᓕᒫᑦ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᑎᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ,

ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ, ᐅᐃᕖᑎᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓄᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᓐᑎᑐᑦ

• ᑐᓴᐅᒪᔾᔪᑎᒃᓴᖅ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᔪᖅ ᓄᓇᑦᓯᐊᕐᒥᑦ

ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓂᒃ

• ᑎᑎᖅᑲᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᔮᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᖃᕆᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ

ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑕ ᐃᑭᐊᖅᑭᕕᖓᓂ

• ᑎᑎᖅᑲᑦ ᑐᓐᓂᖅᓴᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᖕᓄᑦ
• ᒪᓂᒪᑎᑦᑎᔾᔪᑎᒃ ᑐᑭᒧᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ

ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᔭᐅᔪᑦ

ᐱᓕᕆᓂᐅᔪᖅ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ

Process so far

• Jan. 30 2019: Industry engagement

session

• Mar. 15 2019: Comment period

closed

• Request for extension to deadline and

additional engagement

• All comment submissions available
• nline from the NIRB website
• ᔮᓐᓄᐊᕆ 30

2019: ᓴᓇᔪᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ

• ᒫᔾᔨ 15

2019: ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᓄᑦ ᐱᕕᒃᓴᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᑐᔪᖅ

• ᑐᒃᓯᕋᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐅᖓᕙᕇᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑭᒡᓕᒋᔭᐅᔪᒧᑦ

ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖄᒃᑲᓐᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ

• ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᓕᒫᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᔪᑦ ᖃᕆᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ

ᑕᐃᑲᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑕ ᐃᑭᐊᖅᑭᕕᖓᓂ

ᐱᓕᕆᓂᐅᔪᖅ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ

Feedback received

• Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated
• Kivalliq Inuit Association
• Qikiqtani Inuit Association
• Government of Nunavut
• Government of Canada
• Government of the Northwest

Territories

• Agnico Eagle Mines Limited
• TMAC Resources Incorporated
• Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation
• ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᑐᖖᒐᕕᒃ
• ᑭᕙᓪᓕᖅ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦ
• ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ
• ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ
• ᑲᓇᑕᐅᑉ ᒐᕙᒪᖏᑦ
• ᓄᓇᑦᓯᐊᕐᒥ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ
• ᐋᒡᓃᑯ ᐄᒍ ᐅᔭᕋᖕᓂᐊᕐᕕᒃ ᓕᒥᑎᑦ
• TMAC

ᕇᓱᐊᓴᑦ ᐃᓐᑯᐊᐳᕇᑕᑦ

• ᐹᕙᓐᓛᓐ ᓴᕕᒃᓴᕐᓯᐅᕐᑏᑦ ᑯᐊᐸᕇᓴᖓ

ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᔪᑦ

Feedback received

All materials and comments received to date are available online

www.nirb.ca/rules-of-procedure

ᐱᖁᑎᓕᒫᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᓕᒫᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᐱᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᖃᕆᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᔪᑦ

ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᔪᑦ

What we’ve heard

• Support for the initiative
• Recommendations for specific

updates for additional clarity

• Explain factors considered when

Board exercises discretion

• Advice on treatment of Inuit

Qaujimajatuqangit and specific issues (e.g. food security, sustainable development)

• Clarify applicability for transboundary

participants

• ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᓂᖅ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕈᑎᒃᓴᒧᑦ
• ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᓄᑦ

ᓄᑖᙳᕆᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓄᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᑎᑦᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᓂᕐᒧᑦ

• ᓇᓗᓇᕐᓗᒋᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᓂᐅᔪᑦ

ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᓲᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ

• ᐅᖃᐅᓯᔾᔨᒋᐊᕐᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ

ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑏᑦ (ᓲᕐᓗ ᓂᕿᑦᓴᖃᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᖅ, ᒪᑭᒪᔾᔪᑎᒃᓴᑦ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᑦᑎᓂᒃᑯᑦ)

• ᑐᑭᓯᑦᑎᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐊᑐᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖓ

ᑭᒡᓕᖃᑎᒌᙱᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᔪᓄᑦ

ᑭᓱᒥᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᖔᑦᑕ

What we’ve heard

• Have documents reflect process

flexibility for different types of assessments

• Establish process for addressing

extension requests and consequences for missed deadlines

• Clarify factors influencing

coordination with Nunavut Water Board

• Clarify level of detail for various

information requirements

• ᑎᑎᖅᑲᐃᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᓗᑎᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᐅᔪᑦ

ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖓᓂ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᙱᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐅᔪᓄᑦ

• ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᓗᑎ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᓯᐅᔪᒥᑦ

ᑲᒪᒋᔭᖃᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐅᖓᕙᕆᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᓕᕈᑕᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᑭᒡᓕᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᑎᑭᐅᒪᔪᖃᙱᑉᐸᑦ

• ᑐᑭᓯᑦᑎᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᑭᓱᑦ

ᑐᕌᖓᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᖕᒪᖔᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᒋᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᒪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ

• ᑐᑭᓯᑦᑎᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᖓ

ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑏᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᙱᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᑐᓴᐅᒪᔾᔪᑎᒃᓴᓄᑦ ᐱᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ

ᑭᓱᒥᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᖔᑦᑕ

Process to come

• April-May 2019: conduct directed

engagement sessions with parties who have requested further

• pportunities for discussion or have

not provided feedback yet

• June 2019: revise the draft

documents to reflect the input received to date and the direction from the Board.

• July 2019: issue final drafts for

comment, with a table outlining the feedback received and the Board’s responses

• ᐊᐃᕐᕆᓕ-ᒪᐃ 2019:

ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑦᑎᓗᑎ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᖄᒃᑲᓐᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᐱᕕᒃᓴᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᖏᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᓱᓕ

• ᔫᓂ 2019:

ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕐᓗᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᕐᖓᕈᑦ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᓗᑎᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑐᑭᒧᐊᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓂᑦ

• ᔪᓚᐃ 2019:

ᑐᓂᓯᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᓂᒃ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᓄᑦ, ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑯᑕᖃᕐᓗᓂ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᖏᑦ

ᐱᓕᕆᓂᐅᔪᒫᖅᑐᖅ

Process to come

• July-September 2019: 60 days for

interested parties to submit comments

• n the revised drafts
• October 2019 finalize documents with

consideration for feedback received

• November 2019: “Gazette” final ROP

and IS Guidelines, issue table outlining the feedback received and the Board’s responses

• January 2020: new Rules Of Procedure

and Standard Impact Statement Guidelines come into effect

• ᔪᓚᐃ-ᓯᑎᐱᕆ 2019:

60 ᐅᓪᓗᐃᑦ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᔪᒪᔪᓄᑦ ᑐᓂᓯᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᓂᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᓯᒪᔪᒧᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᕐᖓᕈᓐᓂᒃ

• ᐅᑐᐱᕆ 2019: ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅᓯᐅᖅᑕᐅᓗᑎ

ᑎᑎᖅᑲᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᖃᖅᓯᓐᓈᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ

• ᓄᕕᐱᕆ 2019:

“ᒐᔭᑦ” ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ ROP ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᒃᑐᐊᓂᖃᕐᑐᕕᓂᕐᓂᒃ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᒥᑦ, ᑐᓂᓯᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᒥᒃ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ

• ᔮᓐᓄᐊᕆ 2020:

ᓄᑖᖑᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᐃᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᖑᔪᑦ ᑐᙵᕖᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᑦ

ᐱᓕᕆᓂᐅᔪᒫᖅᑐᖅ

How to get involved

• NIRB is encouraging feedback from all

interested groups or individuals

• Open to requests for directed

engagement session (in person or teleconference)

• Send comments in by email, fax or

regular mail

Attn: Ryan Barry, Executive Director Nunavut Impact Review Board P.O. Box 1360, 29 Mitik St. Cambridge Bay, NU X0B 0C0 Fax: 1-867-983-2594 Email: info@nirb.ca

• ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ

ᑲᔪᖏᖅᓴᐃᕗᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᒪᓪᓗᑎ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᒍᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᙵᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᓛᒃᑰᖓᔪᓂᒃ

• ᒪᑐᐃᖓᔪᖅ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎᓄᑦ ᑐᑭᒧᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ

ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᕐᒧᑦ (ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᓗᑎᒃ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐅᖄᓚᐅᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓗᑎᒃ)

• ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᑦ ᓇᒃᓯᐅᑎᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᕐᖐᓐᓈᖅᑕᐅᑎᒃᑯᑦ,

ᓱᒃᑲᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᓂᐊᕐᕕᑎᒍᑦ

ᑐᕌᖅᑐᖅ: ᕋᐃᔭᓐ ᐱᐊᕆ, ᐃᓱᒻᒥᖅᑐᐃᔨ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ 29 ᒥᑎᖅ ᐊᑐᕆᐊᖅ, ᑎᑎᖅᑲᒃᑯᕕᖓ 1360 ᐃᖃᓗᒃᑑᑦᑎᐊᖅ, ᓄᓇᕗᑦ X0B 0C0 ᓱᒃᑲᔪᒃᑯᑦ: 1-867-983-2594 ᖃᕋᓴᐅᔭᑎᒍᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᕐᓗᓂ: info@nirb.ca

ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓚᐅᖃᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᖅᐱᑦ

Questions? ᐊᐱᖁᓯᒃᓴᑦ?