L~.~ `. i ~"C~ ~r~tr~ ~~~~ T`~~r~~ ~"~r~n~.~f ~~ ~'I~ 1~ ~~ ~~~~~~°s.~~~ DEL~V~F~~D BY EMAIL A~VD FA~SIMIL~ November ~, ~~~ 7 Reply Ta: Jack D. Copp DEr~ct Dial: 4~ 5.8~4.7~ ~ ~ ~cn~p~a fog~ers.com E-mail: fur Fide No. Wes Kotyk Asp stand Deputy Minister Ministry of Environment Environmental Asse~~men~ and Stewardship Qranch 4th floor, 3~ ~ ~ A[bert Street Regina, Saskatchewan 54S ~W~ Dear Mr. K~~yl~: Rey Ministerial decision ~Decisi~n} to not require an Enrrironmental ~mp~ct A~~essm~nt tEIA} fir the proposal by ~ui1C Lakes ll~latershed Asso~~ation ~QL~11~'A}, for the Cammor~ Ground Drainage Dirrersian Project ~Proj~ct~; EAR B Fi 1e #: 2~'I 7-~'~4 This law f~rn~, a Ong wifih Maurice Law, has been regained by the Pasqua First Nation ~Pa~qua} ~o requ~s~ your i~m~dia~e retraction, or at the very leas, your suspension and reGonsid~ra~ion, of the ab~ve~cap~ioned Decision un~~r the Fnvir~nmerr~aC Assessm~n~ Act ~Ac~}. This letter responds nod only ~o your De~isi~n, but also your leer dated ~~pfiem~er ~, ~U~ ~ ~o C~LVIIA ~ Lefi~er}. Ba h the De~isian and Let~~r are a~fia~h~d. nt~rest ~f th~ Pasqua. Thy Pasqua, as a First Nation oc~upy~ng a reserve Io~a~ed along the Qu'Appelle River, fihe downstream w~~er body that will re~eiv~ ~h~ polluted drainage from this diversion Project, wild b~ directly in~pac ed by the Pra ect and the Dec s~~r~. Thy propas~d drainage div~r~~on Channel con~empla ed ~y this Project will redirect surFace wader fr~~ Kut~w~gan Lake and Pei Lake info the Last Mounfiain Lake and Qu~Appelle F~ v~r sysfiems. As ~ result, i~ has ~romp~~d wide-spread concern by environmen a graup~ and downstream resid~n s ~ha~ tie re~u~~an passing of high lev~~s of a~ricu~~ural chemicals as well as salinity downstream, into and fihr~ughaut the ~u'Appel ~ River systerr~, wild have significant ec~(~gical imparts permanently altering fine grater quality, aquatic ~fe, agra ~gy, end environmenfi in the downs~rean~ arias. The Pasqua share ~hes~ concerns, park cularly in ferrr~s of how fihese environmental impacts will adversely aff~c~ their Aboriginal rights and ~c~ivi ies. Pale ~ of ~ Duty t~ ~c~nsu t and accommodate. The duly t~ consult and acc~rnmoda e pays an essential rake in fas erin~ recanGiliat~on between lndi~en~us peoples and the Crown. As you should ~e aware, section 3~ of ~h~ ~~rrs~i~u~i~rr Act, 198 , ~n~hr~nes the principle ~f fih~ honour of the Crown and Pasqua First Nation mush be consu fed ~o ensure the pr~~ec ion of ~~s Aboriginal and treaty rights which ids peep e exercise throughout the Qu'Appelle R~~~r sys~en~ and h~ Treaty 4 t~rri~~ry. Tne duty ~o ~onsuCt derives from the need fio prat~G~ Ab~rig~nal ~n er~~ts when a proposed action may impinge on an A~~riginal or treaty right ~F~ia ?~inf~ Alc~rr ~ Carrier S~kania ~riba! Council, ~~~ ~ S~~ 43 at pars 33}. The duty is fir~ggered whin fihe drawn hay knowledge of an Abori~~nal or treafiy ri~h~ and con~~mplates actin ~ha~ impacts i~ ~f-lalda 1Vation v Brr'~rs~r ~~lumbia ~Mlrri~~er of Faresfs), 2~~4 SCE 73 at pars 3~}. The duly crates an ~nf~rcea~~e oblig~ti~n ~~ ~vn~ult with First Nations trough ir~forn~ed and m~an~ngful dialogue before ~nfring~ng ~n any I~~ori~in~l or treaty rights. Any dec~sian ~ffe~ ing ~h~se righfis made on the bads of inadequate consul~a~ian wii~ r~~fi ~e in comp ian~e with these ~~n~ i u~ional ob ~ga~ions, and where such a sec ~i~n i~ ~halleng~d, it can be quashed an udi~~a review ~C1yde Rrver (Hamlet} ~ P~froleum Leo-Services Inc, ~~ ~ 7 S~~ 44}. Failure to consult and a~c~n~m~date. C~ goes w~~hout saying th~fi the Pasqua have a un~qu~ envir~nr~enta knowledge of ~rad~t~ana~ land uses, fine hisfiary of nose uses, and the environn~~n~al cl~ang~~ that have taken pace due tv i~pac~s ~f man and agricultural act ~~t es. ~n this cage, hers way no cansul~~fiion with the Pasqua. A~ a result, the Minister's D~ci~~~n has failed to comply w ~h the abarig~nal c~n~u ~atian and acc~mm~dation r~qu~r~menfis ~e~ out above. The Decision ~~ f~erefore ~~legal and Contrary to law. Failure to afFord f~irr~ess and natural ~ustiGe. [n additi~r~, by failing ~a n~t~fy the Pasqua of ~~e app ~cafi~~n fir fih~ ~raject, the numerous application da~um~n ~ end dis~u~s ins ref~ren~ed ~n your Letter, and the Minister's consideration of a poss~~le D~ci~i~n under ~. 7.3 of the Environmental Assessment Act, and further by failing to afford ~h~ Pasqua with an ap~~rtuni~y ~~ res~on~ ~o same, you have depr~ve~ ~h~ Pasqua of fairness end natural justice, contrary ~❑ prin~ip~es of adn~ini~trative law. For finis add~t~anal reason, the Decision s illegal and contrary to law. Dec~~~on is il~~gical, unreas~na~le, contrary to the facts and the Act. Fur~herm~r~, an its fare, tie D~cis~o~ ~s illog~~al, unreasonable, ~on~rary ~a the facts and ill~ga as c~n~rary to fine Act. Among other things, i s~a~e~ ghat ~n ESA is not required under s. ~~d} ~f the A~~ because the Project wild nab, lrr~er alga: a} ~~ve an affect ~si~~ on any unique, rare or endangered feature ~f fih~ environment; ~} subsfianfiially u~iliz~ any p~q~incia! ~es~urce and in sa doing pre-empt the use, ~r p~tentia! use, o~ ghat r~s~urce for any o~h~r purpose; ~ ~~ Page3of~ c} cause the emi~Sion a~ any pollutants ~~ cr~a~e by~produ~ts, residual or was~~ p~oduc~s which require handling and disposal in a manner that is nod regula~~d by any ofih~r Act or ~~guiation; d} pause widespread pubf~c ~once~n because of potential environmental changes; ~} have a significant impact on the environment or necessita~~ a further development which is iik~ly ~~ have a sign~~ican~ ~mpa~t on the environment. Vlle note ghat the above requ~r~ments of s. ~~d} of ~h~ Act are in h~ al~ernafiive. Thai is, a~ly one of fh~ six f~c~~rs reed to be ~re~ent for a project to q ual~fy as a "de~~(opmenfi'~ hand ~e su~~ec~ t~ the CIA re~u'rrem~nts of the Act}. how the Minister his co~~~uded that all six factory are absent, is a carnpfe~~ mystery. F~v~ ~f the six facfior~ are clearly pr~sen~. Pr~jec~ ~uv~11 cause r"mp~cts fo ~h~ ~n~ironmen~ -- a} and f} Gonfirary ~o the canclusion~ of fihe Decision under a} end f}, the Minister canny reas~na~ly or r~ ianally det~r~mine ~ha~ t~~re wild be no s~~nifican~ envir~nmen~a~ impac~~ frorr~ the F'r~jec~, wi~haut first ~ansult~ng with ~mpacfed stakeholders, such as fhe Pasqua. ~]ur c yen , the pa~qua, believe ~ha there may ~e very serious environmental impa~~s from h~ Project, and would like to be ~onsu[ted and accommodated on phis issue before a final defierminat~on i~ made. ~'ur~h~rmare, the Minis~~r cannot reasonably or rationally make phis defi~rminat~on without firs requiring an EIA. It is well known and wi~hau~ con~ent~~n fihat the C~ui![ Lakes, which drain into ~h~ Ku~awagan ar~d Pel Lakes, are man-made wader bod~e~ crated by ranchers and farmers ~~ receive the drainage of agr~cul~ural [ar~d~ in the area. As a result, tie Quill Lakes, as well as the Ku~awagan and PSI fakes, are contaminated with agricul~ura chemicals and ~alin~. Many envirnnmen~al groups have already expressed concern about ~h~ proposed Pra ect introducing those agricultural che~i~al~ aid saline into the Lash Mountain Lake end C~u'Appel e River sy~~e~s. The Pasqua share phis concern. The Minister cannot rati~na ly conclude fihat there "w~ ~ nod" ~e any such ~kely ~nviranmen~a impacts unto the praponen~ has c~nduc~ed a ~hor~ugh and car~fu[ ElA that ruches such a ~on~ union, and th~~ EIA has been properly peer re~~ewed by independent end impartial ~xper s, and by government experts. Your conclus~an under phis head~n~ is made w~fhout consu(fiation, w~th~ut evidence, and i~ ~her~fore con~r~ry ~o the Act, without jur~sdi~~i~n, and illegal. Project wild u~ilrze a pr~~ir~~~al resource — ~} ~on~rary to the conclusion ~n the Derision under b}, the Mini~~~r c~nn~t rea~~nably or rat~o~a~ y d~~ermine ~ha~ there w~l be n~ utili~a~ion of a prov~nc al resource by the Projecfi. Thy Lash Mountain Lake and Qu'Appell~ R~v~r systerr~~ are provincial res~ur~e~. The e~sen~e of phis Pr~je~~ is ~~ ut~li~~ hose pr~vincia re~~urce~ in a manner ~n ~rvhich they have nod previously been ut~~i~~d - as r~~ep~a~ es far diverted, con~am~n~ted water thafi to be ~ ~ P~g~ 4 of ~ ransferr~d t~ them from pre~~ously uncon~~cted water b~~ es -- the Quill, Ku awagan and Pei Lal~es. Your Decision is clearly contrary to the facts, and ~s ~h~r~far~ contrary t~ the Apt, wi~hou~ ~uri~d~c~~n end l egal. f~roject has already cau~ea~ wr"~'es,~re~d ,~u~l~~ corrcerrr ~- d} M~r~over, the cony union under d} that ~her~ is n~ widespread public concern, is direct y contrary to the facts. A recent ABC news art~cle~ states:~ .,. some groups have voca~iy appa~ed fihe pro~ec~. ~.ast Mountain Lake Stewardshi ~r~u has expressed fears the diWers'ron will bring chemicals from a~ricultu~al land plus saline info Last Mountain Lake. Another group worried about the salinity a~ fhe diverged wader, the Ca~~in Lakes E~~museum, said ~n a press release Thursday that "fih~ removal ofi the ~nv~ronment~l impact as~essm~n~ ~~~ecfively ~emov~d ~hos~ o~ us [giving downstream from the conversation." Da~r~ll ~ra~be, the exe~ut~ve director of the ~ask~~ch~wan WlJildlife Federa~i~n, says the sa~in~ty level in a dot ~f ~oufihern Saska~ch~wan lak~~ is fai~~y high as i~ is. "Sa id's about I~~els, it's about how much salinity ~s being ~dd~d to [La~~ Maunta~n Lake," which is one of the province's ma~~r ~ishe~~es, said ~rabbe. "We're just ~~t sure ~rvna~ the quality of water wifl be going in and whether that can b~ mitigated." A work~n rou made u of ~v I~ from Last Moun~a~n Lake Pas ua Lake Echo Lake Vlissian Lake Kite wa Lake ~ro~k~d Like and Round Lake is hosfing an ~nl~ne discuss~~n with candidates running for the Saskatchewan Pa y ~r~d provincial NDP leadership vn a Face~ook page coiled Calling Fvr a ~us~ainabl~ Quil! Lakes Solution staring Friday at ~0 a.m. ~ST.3 The N DP ~pp~sed a pre~i~us aeration o~ the pr~~ect, which was scrapped by the Water Security Agency, two years ago. ~aska~ch~wan NDP MLA Trent Wo~hers o~n "a reckless plan to dived con~am~nafi~d, fish-killing sa~in~lsa~~ wader into aworld-lass spawning grounds at L~~~ Mountain Lake and the C~u'Appel~~ river basin." [und~riining added ~iv~n four major en~ironmenta gr~up~, including a working group of resid~n~s from seven fakes, are already opp~s~d ~a the Pro~ec~ on environmental ground$, as is the Saskatcherrvan ~ h~~~:llwww,cb~.c~ln~wslc~ nadalsaskafo~nl~ u i I l~~a ke~~waterwd iv_e_rs~an-env___i ranme__ntal-impact asses~m~nf-~.4374149 2The concerns of the Lash Maun~ain Like Stewardship Group are au~lin~d here: for e.g., ht~ :11fakes.heav ~ ice.cal~m~ esl~l~alL,M L~~ d i~ uses facfi~ from the V~fSA. d~ 3 htt s:llwww.facebook.caml~ua ~I~~Vafle SKI Page 5 of ~ '~" ~~ ~~ NDP hand the Pasqua, as set out in this fetter}, it c~nnv~ be said that the Project will nvt "cause widespread public concern because of potential er~v~rvnmen~al changes". It already has caused such concern, end that concern has been reported in the newspapers. Your D~~ision has pimply ignored the existence of tf~a~ widespread pu~li~ concern. ~n adminis~ra~ive taw terms, your D~cis~nn has corr~plete~y failed to cvnsid~r relevar~~ cansidera~ions, end is therefore ct~n~rary tv the Apt, without. jurisdiction aid illegal. Project wi!! cause ~~e emission ~f pv«ufar~~~ -- c} ~vr the very r+~asons ~v~ced by these enviranmenta~ groups, the conclusion under c} is, quite frankly, bizarre and contrary to the fads. Chemicals from agricultural use, and saline, are pollutants. M~revv~er, their proposed new ~~versivn from the Quill, ~utawag~n and Pe! Lakes system to the Last Mountain Lake and Qu'Appelle River systems, will be an er~iss~an from one vva~er sys~~m tv ar~ather. ~n addition, the prvpos~d emis~~vn of these pollutants by the Project will nat be mitigated or disposed of pursuant to any v~h~er le~i~latic~n, The aeci~ian, again, completely fa~~s to consider these relevant considerations, and is therefore contrary to the Act, without ~ur~sdicti~n ar~d il~~ga1. Conclus~vrt, To c+~ncEude, the Ministeria# ~ec~s~on tv ex~err~pt this ~rojec~ from the requir~m~n# of EIA has been made w}th~ut any or adequate ab~r~g~nal cvn~ul~ativn with our c~~ent. !~ hay further deprived our client of ail fairness and natural jus~ic~. Therefore, the Decision is t~~egal and contrary tv law ~r~ these grounds afone. Moreover, for all the reasons detailed aba~re, the D~cis~an is dearly ill~agical, unr~easvnabl~, made wi~~oufi evidence, and contrary to the facts. The c~~~ci~ivn ~ls~ willfully tur~~ a blind eye to ~I~arly relevant ~ans~derafivns. As a ~esulf, the Decision clearly via~afies the re~qu~rement~ of the Act, is without juris~dictivn a~ad illegal. Fc~r ael of these reasons, the ~7~cisivn should be ~mme~dia~ely retracted by you, Qr ~t the very leapt suspended and reconsidered fc~r the purposes ~f making a new decision after proper cansul~ation and acct~mm~dation hay occurred, so that a legal decisive can be rendered which is fu1~y pra~tectiv+~ of the +downstream public, inclining the Pasqua. Pease c~nta~~ u~ immediately to discuss Y~vurs truly, F~]~~.ER, RUBINt]FF LLP . % ,~ .~ ---- Jack D. v~p~'~ *5ervic~s provided thrvu~h a professional corporation ~~ ~ En~v~~~~s D~LlVERE❑ BY ~l'1~All. ONLY ~. ch of and ~ounc~ ,Pasqua First Nat o Ryan Lake, 1111aur ~~ ~.aw Honour~bl~ Dusfir~ Duncan, Minister of the Environment Susan Rosy, President and CEC], Saskafichewan Water SeG~ri y Agency Mar ~r'~e ~im~ng~~n, Genera counsel, Saskatchewan Vlla ~r ~~curi~y Agency ~vvern~nen~ ~ffi~ia ~ VIlorkin~ group Me~berslA~t~~nat~s; ~harla h~ord~nc~uk, Ministry of Environrr~ent ~ra~y Pollock, nliin~s~ry of Envr~nment ~lintor~ ~Ilold~, W~fi~r Se~uri~y Ag~n~y Dwayne Rawlefif, 11Va~~r security Agency K~i~h Comstock, Ministry of Government Fie anions Jared C~unitz, ~1f~inistry o~ ~overnm~~t R~lat~nns Kareen Hol~by, Ministry of Agricul urn Ran ley, Niir~is~ry of Agriculture Ron ~erbrand~, Min~s~ry of Highways and Infras~rucure Rib Bushman, Ministry of Highways and Infras~ruc~ur~ ~ar~ McN~cho y IIIC~ ~~lalr, ~u ~l Likes 1Nat~rs~ed Associ~~~on Page ~ ~~ 6 ~ ~ ~` ~~~~~~ Ministry of En~iranment En~ir~nmental Asse~smen~ and Stewardship Branch 4~" flaar, 3211 Albert S~re~t Regina, Saskatchewan 545 5W6 Phone: {3~6} 787-6132 Fax: ~346~ 787wD934 Sept~n~b~r S, 2017 EAS B File #: Z~17-414 M r. Kerry Holderness, Chair C~ui l Lakes Watershed Association No. 14 mail.c~m~ ~hodern~s~ker Dear Mr. Halderness: Re: ~LWA W Common ground Drainage Di►rers~on Project The Envirvnm~ntal Assessr~~nt and Stewardship branch ~EASB}, Saskatchewan Ministry ~f ~nv~rar~ment the m~n~stry~ has received your ~r~pvsal seeking a Ministerial Detern~inatian far the C~m~on ground Project €thy Pr~j~ct~. The EASB is of the understanding the C~uil Lakes Watershed Association ~C~LWA~ is proposing to construct a drainage di~ersiflr~ channel to redirect surface water from Kutawagan Lake and Pei Lake towards Last M~unta~n Lake. The total channel length as pr~p~sed would b~ approximately ~5 km and constructed with a bottom width of 1m and 3:1 side s~apeS. QLWA, the proponent, estimates the chann~ would di~~rt approximately 7,~3~~,~~D m3 ~f surface water towards Lake Mountain Lake and lower the lake ~y ~.~ metres. A review of the prop~~a1 included the fol owing information, cal e~ti~ely termed the "Applicat~vn": • * • Qui~1 Likes Fla~d 1111r~rgat~on Assessment -- January ~~.~5; Kutawagan Diversion Praj~ct~ Envrrorrmer~tal Assessmerr~ -~ Sep~em~er Z~.15 Cornm~n Grnund Drainage Diver~ron Design Report ~IIlay ~~.~ 7 --submitted o n J une 29, L V~I ~ Corrrmon ~raund Drainage ~pera~ional Parr submitted on June ~9, 2D~.7; A do c um ent e ntit ~d ~IIiCdli~fe Cnnsrdera~ions for tf~e Quill L ake Flo~~ Mr'~igatian submitted on July ~.~, ~D17; Project discussions held between C~LWA and the G~ver~m~nt ~f Saskatchewan Working group at meetings hi d in the Rural Municipality ❑f Mount ~ap~ Caunci! ~hamb~rs April -~.~uly 217}; • A r~~ord of engagement activities and letters ~f support for the project provided by t~LINA; and, ~ Water qua ity monitoring data ~alle~ted in ZU17. * * ...2 Kerry Haiderness Pale ~ September 8, ~D17 Based on the infor~natian presented in the Application, it is our ~~termination that the project d~~s not meet the criteria of se~t~on Zed} of Tf~e Er~virvnmenta~ Assessment Act the Act} and, therefore, is not a "de~el~p~nent" that is requr~d t~ undergo an En~ir~nm~~ta1 Impact Assessment ~E1A~, This determination is provided under the authority of section 7.3 of the Act and grants the proponent authorization to proceed with the su~se~uent regulatory approvals for this project. The pro~~ct is deemed nflt to ~e a deve ~pme~t as per the attached Reasons fir Deter~~natior~. I n addition to ad~~sing of our det~rminati~n, this fetter also inc~u~les the f~l~owing terms and condtians. Thy decision to not require an EIA pursuant to the Act is c~ntin~ent an compfianc~ with the fo!Iowing terms and ~~nd ~ti~ns: 1. The project must be undertaken and environmental protection measures implem~nt~d in the manner described in tie Application, except where alterations are required far ~ampl~ance with ether regulatory r~qu~re~ents. ~. The pra~ct must be undertaken tv ensure any water quality and quantity limits and requirements for timing of releases, as may ~e ~dent~fied when the Drainage Approval ~s issued ~y Water Security Agency, are adhered to and si~n~ficant downstream imparts are avoided. 3. EASB must be advised if you plan to after the prflject significantly from that d~scr~bed ~n the Application. 4. EASE must be advised if work is not corr~menced within two years ~f the date ~f this fetter. The App i~ati~n's environmental acceptability would be r~-examined in light of the circumstances of the day. 5. Channel excavation act~~ities must ~niy occur between Vov~m~~r 1~~ and April 1~~ outside ~f restricted a~ti~~ty per~ads to avid impacts tv sensitive wildlife spec~~s potentially util~zin~ the pr~je~t area. 6. QLWA must ~nsur~ measures are implemented t~ avoid or minimize new disturbance ar impacts to sensitive ha bitat such as native ~ra~sfa nd. 7, Areas disturbed ~y project acti~~ties rust ~e reclaimed f~llow~ng disturbance and ~~~etated using an appropriate seed mix. Please nat~ that a!I native grassland areas disturbed ~y project activities are to ~~ rec a~m~d using native species appropriate ~o the sits. 8. QL1NA must install apprapriat~ erosion and sediment ~~ntro measures as outl~n~d in Erosion and Sediment Contras Best Management PraCtic~s e.g. MHI ESQ BMP Manua!}. ~~ .Kerry Hofde~n~ss Page 3 Sep~~rnber 8, ~D17 9. Within 6 m~ntns ~f the completion of construction acti~it~~s, t~LWA wi(I su~n~it a report t~ the ministry pr~par~d by a qualified environmental monitor summarizing constructior~ ~f the di~~rsion project, results of m~n~tari~g a~t~vities and documenting irr~ple~entation of measures d~scri~~d abase. 1D. Thy C~L1NA will continue engagement activities with interested parties to communicate project status, outcvm~s of construction acti~~ties and results from the ~ng~ing monitoring and operation of the drainage project. A summary of this engagen~~nt w~l( be included in the report requ~r~d by condition 9 of this a~termir~ati~n. 11. Yvu must comply with all ether fedora ,provincial and n~uni~i~al regulatory requirements including those from the ministry. 1~. You must comply with all r~asonab e follow up Min~st~rial requests to rr~onitor compl~an~~ with these ~anditians. Pease a Isa be ad~~~~d that: 1. This [ett~r is NDT an approval t~ proceed with construction activities, it is simply provided to inform you that you may prflceed t~ ~~tain other permits and approvals that may be required. Additi~naf approvals fr~rr~ tie ministry and ath~r agencies n ay ~e required. 2. As noted above, the ministry has made a determinat'ran that the proposed undertaking is got a de~~lopmen~. Thy purpose ~f pr~vid~n~ a determination is t❑ provide s~n~e certainty that the ministry wi~~ not initiate any action to require an EIA pursuant to the Act. 3. The province re~agnizes its c~nstitutivnal ~bligat~on to consult with potentially aff~~ted First Nations and Metis c~mmun~ties when making decisiv~s that may ad~ers~ly impact the exercise ~f Treaty and Abor~gir~al rights. f the pro~e~t may ha~~ an ~r~pact an ~freaty ~r A~vriginal rights, decisions by ether ga~~rnment agencies during permitting n ay trigger the Crown's duty to consult. Should you have any questions regarding the content of this letter, please fey free t~ contact Sharla H~rdenchuk, Director --Environmental Assessment and Stewardship Branch at ~~o~~ ~~~-1oz~. S~ncere~y, Dr~gir~al signed by Assistant Deputy Minister Wes K~tyk Assistant Deputy Minster Acting for and on behalf of the M~n~ster of Environment Phone: ~3~~~ 7S7w5415 ...4 Kerry Holde~n~ss Page 4 September S, ~U17 Encl~~ure: Reasor~s fir I~eterm~nati~n cc: Ian Mc~~chol, Vise Chair, C~uil~ fakes Wat~rsh~d Association ~im~nicho~D815 G~~ernment Uffic~als Working ~rou~ Merr~bers~Aternates: Sharla ~ordenchuk, ~Ilinistry ~f En~irar~ment Brady Pollack, Ministry ~f En~ir~r~ment ~I~nton Molde, 11Vater Security Agency Dwayne Rowlett, Water Security Agency K~~th Comstock, Ministry of ~flvernment Relations ~ar~d ~unitz, Ministry of Government Relations Kar~~n HflCtby, M~nist~y of Agriculture Ron Eley, M inistry of Agriculture Ron Ger~randt, Ni~istry of Highways and lr~frastructure Rod Bushman, N~inistry of Highways and Infrastructure m~il.com} ~~~sar~s fir Qeterrr~ r~ati~n Date: September $, ~~17 File: 27.7-~14 Prvj~~t Title: ~omman Ground drainage Diversion Praj~~t Proponent: C~ui~~ Lakes 1Nater~hed Association ~CZLINA} Proposal: The Q~llVA is proposing to construct a drainage diversion channel to redirect surface water from Kutawagan Lake and Pei Lake towards Last Mountain Lake. Thy total channel length as pro~~~ed would b~ approximately 25 km and constructed with a batt~m width of 1 m ar~d 3:1 side sloes. The proponent estimates the channel would di~~rt approximately 7,~~D,4D~ m3 of surface water towards ~ak~ Mountain fake and Iower the lakes by 4.~ metres. The information provided in the review of the documents has led to the determination that the des~r~~~d pro~e~t does not tr~gg~r criteria of section ~~d} of The Environmental Assessment Act the Act} and therefore is nvt ~ons~der~d a "de~~lopment" that is r~quir~d t~ und~rg~ an Environmental Impact Assessment ~EfA}. The abase det~rminatior~ is ~as~d on an era uat~on of the ro`ect a ainst the ~rit~ria of section ~ d of the Act as de~~r bed blow: a} have an affect sic on any unique, rare or endangered feature ~f the environment; • Previous ~as~~ine assessments conducted in the project area provided ~nformati~n regard'rn~ the potential accurr~nce of rare species in the project area. This information was obtained through desktop surveys of historical occurren~~s of rare or sensitiWe spe~i~s ~n~ through fie~~ o~ser~ation and sur~~ys in .duly and August of 2 15. INS dlife surveys were not cvnducte~ us~r~g accepted protocols ~r during appr~~riat~ timeframes and utilized primarily 'rncid~ntal observations. A~ditiana~ site inspections were conducted fr~m.luly4to 7, ~~17 and did notdetect anysensiti~especies. ~ Historical 'rnfarmati~n and pre~i~us bas~~in~ assessment identified multiple sensitive species identified in the Saskatchewan a~~iv~ty Restriction Gurde<