Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act (S.C. 2013, c. 14, s. 2)

Act current to 2018-11-08 and last amended on 2017-12-12. Previous Versions

PART 3Assessment of Projects to Be Carried Out in the Designated Area (continued)

Review by Commission (continued)

Land Use Plan in Effect (continued)

Project Not in Conformity with Land Use Plan

Marginal note:Minor variance

  •  (1) If the Commission determines that the project is not in conformity with an applicable land use plan, it must verify whether that land use plan authorizes it to grant a minor variance with respect to such a project and whether the conditions set out under subsection 48(3), if any, are met.

  • Marginal note:Minor variance authorized

    (2) If the land use plan authorizes the granting of minor variances and if the conditions, if any, are met, the Commission may, within 20 days after its determination that the project is not in conformity with the plan,

    • (a) grant a minor variance, in which case it must verify whether the project is exempt from screening and comply with the requirements of section 79 or 80, as the case may be; or

    • (b) refuse to grant a minor variance.

  • Marginal note:Publication

    (3) Before granting a minor variance under paragraph (2)(a), the Commission must make the proposed minor variance public and must do so in a manner designed to promote participation in its examination by the public.

  • Marginal note:Objection

    (4) Any interested person may, within 10 days after the proposed minor variance is made public, indicate to the Commission in writing that the proposed minor variance should not be granted because

    • (a) the land use plan does not authorize the granting of the minor variance;

    • (b) the conditions subject to which a minor variance may be granted are not met; or

    • (c) the minor variance is not appropriate, in their opinion, for any other reason that they specify.

  • Marginal note:Reasons taken into account and public review

    (5) The Commission may only grant a minor variance under paragraph (2)(a) after taking into account any reasons for which an interested person has indicated, under subsection (4), that it should not be granted and, if it considers it appropriate to do so, conducting a public review in accordance with the by-laws and rules made under section 17 and taking into account any submissions made during that review.

  • Marginal note:Extension of time limit

    (6) If the Commission is of the opinion that more time is needed to make a decision under subsection (2), it may extend the period referred to in that subsection by up to 10 days and must notify the proponent of the extension in writing.

Marginal note:Request for ministerial exemption

  •  (1) If the Commission determines that the project is not in conformity with an applicable land use plan, the proponent may request an exemption from the federal Minister or the territorial Minister, or both, taking into account their respective jurisdictions, within 60 days after

    • (a) that determination, if the land use plan does not authorize the granting of a minor variance or if it does and the conditions are not met; or

    • (b) the Commission’s decision to refuse to grant a minor variance.

  • Marginal note:Ministerial decision

    (2) The Minister or Ministers, as the case may be, must, within 120 days after receiving a request under subsection (1) either

    • (a) grant the exemption, in which case the Commission must make the decision public, verify whether the project is exempt from screening and comply with the requirements of section 79 or 80, as the case may be; or

    • (b) refuse the exemption.

  • Marginal note:Consultation

    (3) An exemption may only be granted after consultation with the Commission and the relevant regulatory authorities and relevant departments or agencies that are not regulatory authorities.

  • Marginal note:Extension of time limit

    (4) If a Minister who has received a request is of the opinion that more time is needed to make a decision, that Minister may extend the period referred to in subsection (2) by up to 60 days and must notify the proponent and the Commission of the extension in writing.

  • Marginal note:Limitation

    (5) For greater certainty, the Commission is not authorized to send the project proposal to the Board under section 79 or subsection 80(1) if it has determined, under section 77, that the project is not in conformity with any applicable land use plan and no minor variance or ministerial exemption has been granted in respect of the project under paragraph 81(2)(a) or 82(2)(a), as the case may be.

Time Limit

Marginal note:Performance of certain functions

  •  (1) The Commission must exercise its powers and perform its duties and functions under sections 77 to 80 within 45 days after receiving the project proposal.

  • Marginal note:Time not counted

    (2) If the Commission determines that a project is not in conformity with an applicable land use plan, any time required for the exercise of powers or the performance of duties or functions relating to minor variances and ministerial exemptions does not count as part of the period referred to in subsection (1).

  • Marginal note:Time not counted — public review

    (3) If the Commission conducts a public review under subsection 81(5), any time required to conduct it does not count as part of the period referred to in subsection 81(2).

Marginal note:Time not counted — additional information

 Any time required for the proponent to provide information required under subsection 144(1) does not count as part of the periods referred to in subsections 81(2) and (4) and 83(1).

No Land Use Plan

Marginal note:Verification — screening

  •  (1) If there is no applicable land use plan, the Commission must, within 45 days after receiving the project proposal, verify whether the project is exempt from screening under subsection 78(2) and must comply with the requirements of section 79 or 80, as the case may be.

  • Marginal note:Request for opinion

    (2) The Commission may request the Board’s opinion as to whether a particular project is exempt from screening.

  • Marginal note:Time not counted — additional information

    (3) Any time required for the proponent to provide information required under subsection 144(1) does not count as part of the period referred to in subsection (1).

Screening by Board

Marginal note:Scope of project

  •  (1) The Board must determine the scope of a project in relation to which a project proposal is received under section 79 or subsection 80(1) and must

    • (a) include within the scope of the project, in addition to any work or activity identified in the project proposal, any other work or activity that it considers sufficiently related to the project to form part of it; and

    • (b) exclude from the scope of the project any work or activity identified in the project proposal that it considers insufficiently related to the project to form part of it.

  • Marginal note:Consultation

    (2) The Board may only make an inclusion under paragraph (1)(a) or an exclusion under paragraph (1)(b) after consulting with the proponent in respect of the contemplated changes and taking into account any comments the proponent may make in respect of them.

  • Marginal note:Process suspended

    (3) If the Board makes an inclusion under paragraph (1)(a), it must not proceed with the screening and the Commission and the federal Minister or the territorial Minister, or both, must exercise their powers and perform their duties and functions under sections 77, 81 and 82 in relation to the entire project.

Marginal note:Screening

  •  (1) The Board must screen the project if it makes no inclusion under paragraph 86(1)(a) or if it makes an inclusion under that paragraph and the Commission, after exercising its powers and performing its duties and functions in relation to the entire project, comes to the conclusion referred to in section 79 or subsection 80(1).

  • Marginal note:Limitation

    (2) For greater certainty, the Board is not authorized to screen a project if the Commission has determined, under section 77, that the project is not in conformity with any applicable land use plan and no minor variance or ministerial exemption has been granted in respect of the project under paragraph 81(2)(a) or 82(2)(a), as the case may be.

Marginal note:Purpose of screening

 The purpose of screening a project is to determine whether the project has the potential to result in significant ecosystemic or socio-economic impacts and, accordingly, whether it requires a review by the Board or by a federal environmental assessment panel, as the case may be.

Marginal note:Project to be reviewed

  •  (1) The Board must be guided by the following considerations when it is called on to determine, on the completion of a screening, whether a review of the project is required:

    • (a) a review is required if, in the Board’s opinion,

      • (i) the project may have significant adverse ecosystemic or socio-economic impacts or significant adverse impacts on wildlife habitat or Inuit harvest activities,

      • (ii) the project will cause significant public concern, or

      • (iii) the project involves technological innovations, the effects of which are unknown; and

    • (b) a review is not required if, in the Board’s opinion,

      • (i) the project is unlikely to cause significant public concern, and

      • (ii) its adverse ecosystemic and socio-economic impacts are unlikely to be significant, or are highly predictable and can be adequately mitigated by known technologies.

  • Marginal note:Prevailing considerations

    (2) The considerations set out in paragraph (1)(a) prevail over those set out in paragraph (1)(b).

  • Definition of harvest

    (3) In subparagraph (1)(a)(i), harvest has the same meaning as in section 1.1.1 of the Agreement.

 
Date modified: