Chapter 1: Overview of the Renewable Energy Approval (REA) application process and the requirements for submitting a complete application

1. Purpose of this Technical Guide

This guide has been developed to provide detailed information on the requirements for submitting a complete application for a Renewable Energy Approval (REA) under O. Reg. 359/09 of the Environmental Protection Act. This introductory chapter will provide an overview of the application process and general requirements of the REA regulation. Chapter 2 provides a detailed explanation of all the consultation requirements under O. Reg. 359/09 as well as how to prepare the Consultation Report. Chapter 3 provides greater detail on wind turbine setback distances and related regulatory requirements that apply to most wind energy facilities. The subsequent chapters (4 to 9) detail the specific information needed to prepare the reports that may be required for a complete submission for an REA. Chapter 10 describes requirements for making changes to a project. The final chapter, Chapter 11, provides advice to applicants on how to be a good neighbour in their local community by going beyond the minimum requirements of O. Reg. 359/09.

1.1. A Note about Regulatory Amendments and Transition Provisions

It should be noted that certain provisions of O. Reg. 359/09 have been amended as of January 1, 2011, July 1, 2012, November 2, 2012 and May 1, 2016. For clarity, this technical guide reflects the current regulation as amended. However, for applicants that have issued notices with respect to an REA prior to January 1, 2011 July 1, 2012, or May 1, 2016 transition provisions apply that may allow for applicants to submit applications that comply with certain requirements that existed prior to the amendments coming into force. Where applicants decide to use a previous version of the regulation, applicants must identify which version of the regulation they are following in their draft reports and REA application submission.

O. Reg. 359/09 has been amended to provide transition rules to take into account projects that are already significantly underway.

Sound Power Level

Except in the case of certain changes described below the pre-May 1, 2016 rules for calculating a wind turbine’s sound power level continues to apply to proponents that before May 1, 2016 had:

• applied for an approval for the wind turbine(s) or
• been issued an approval in respect of the wind turbine(s).

The pre-May 1, 2016 sound power level rules continue to apply to any changes to a wind turbine(s) for which an application was made before May 1, 2016 that are proposed before the approval is issued.

The pre-May 1, 2016 sound power level rules also continue to apply in respect of future changes to these wind turbines once they are approved unless the change would result in :

• a change to the location(s) of a wind turbine(s).
• an increase to the wind turbine’s overall sound power levels, which results in an increase to noise at a noise receptor within 1.5 kilometres of the turbine.

Any of these changes to a wind turbine or adding one or more new wind turbines to the facility are required to be assessed in accordance with the new 2016 sound power level requirements.

For proponents of projects who submit a Renewable Energy Approval application or an Environmental Compliance Approval application to MOECC on or after May 1, 2016, in respect of a turbine that had not been previously approved, the new 2016 sound power level requirements apply.

A transition rule has been added with respect to LRP I projects. LRP I projects have the option not to include the positive uncertainty value for the purpose of the regulation or when conducting noise assessments. Once a REA is issued, LRP I projects that chose to not include the positive uncertainty value will not have to use a positive uncertainty value when conducting modeling for future changes to wind turbines, unless the change would result in :

• a change to the location(s) of a wind turbine(s).
• an increase to the wind turbine’s overall sound power levels, which results in an increase to noise at a noise receptor within 1.5 kilometres of the turbine.

Class 3 wind facilities with a hub height of 70 metres or more (excluding blade length) that were granted a REA prior to May 1, 2016, are not subject to the 550 setback requirements unless changes are made to those turbines that increase the wind turbine’s overall sound power levels, which results in an increase to noise at a noise receptor within 1.5 kilometres of the turbine.

In respect of the amendment to the definition of woodland, the pre-May 1, 2016 definition continues to apply to in respect of projects for which a REA application is made on or before April 30, 2016. The current rules that apply to projects for which a project notice was issued before December 31, 2010 continue to apply.

For all other regulatory amendments, no transition provisions apply and all associated rules came into effect as of May 1, 2016.

Applicants are advised to consult Part VIII – Transition of O. Reg. 359/09 to determine how the transition provisions apply to their projects.

1.2. A Note about Offshore Wind Facilities

On February 11, 2011, a decision notice was posted to the Environmental Registry with respect to policy direction for offshore wind facilities (Class 5 under O. Reg. 359/09). In light of the comments received through public consultation and in particular the identified need for further study, Ontario has decided not to proceed with proposed offshore wind projects while further scientific research is conducted on the specific issues that come with developing wind projects in a lake environment. While land based wind turbine development has been around for many years and has a body of reliable science to draw from, lake based wind development is relatively new and is lacking information in some key areas. No REAs for offshore wind projects have been issued at this time. For this reason, this technical guide does not provide guidance for completing an application for an REA in respect of an offshore wind facility.

1.3. Documents Referenced in this Guide

A number of publications are referenced in this guide as sources of additional guidance. For Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) publications, the full title and publication number are provided to assist readers in locating the documents. To find ministry publications, readers can visit the resources section of the ministry’s website.

This website includes a search function where the publication number can be inserted to locate a digital copy of the document. Many of the documents can also be found at the renewable energy approvals section of the ministry’s website.

Guidance documents from other ministries (e.g. the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry) have been cited by providing the full title. Readers seeking these documents should contact the respective ministry to determine how they can be accessed. Appendix 2 contains key contact information.

2. Key Definitions and Interpretations

This section provides definitions for important terms used in this guide as well as key definitions provided in O. Reg.359/09. For definitions that are explicitly defined in regulation, readers are advised to consult the latest version of all pertinent statutes and regulations to obtain current legal definitions. All referenced statutes and regulations can be found at e-Laws section of the ministry’s website.

Applicant

While not defined in regulation, an “applicant” in this guide means a person who proposes to engage in a renewable energy project and apply for an REA. Where a renewable energy project is proposed by a company or organization, “applicant” can reflect the company.

Application

While not defined in regulation, application in this guide means an application for an REA under O. Reg. 359/09.

Aboriginal Consultation List

For brevity, the term Aboriginal Consultation List is used in this guide to mean the list of Aboriginal communities provided by the Director to the applicant for the purposes of Aboriginal consultation as described in clause 14 (1)(b) of O. Reg. 359/09.

Renewable Energy Generation Facility

Under subsection 2 (1) of the Electricity Act, 1998, a “renewable energy generation facility” is a generation facility that generates electricity from a renewable energy source and must meet criteria prescribed by regulation. It includes associated or ancillary equipment, systems and technologies as may also be prescribed by regulation, but does not include an associated waste disposal site, unless the site is prescribed by regulation for the purposes of this definition.

Under O. Reg. 160/99 (Definitions and Exemptions) made under the Electricity Act, 1998, this definition is expanded in subsections 1 (4) to 1 (6) to stipulate that:

(4) For the purposes of the definition of “renewable energy generation facility” in the Electricity Act, 1998, the following associated or ancillary equipment, systems and technologies are prescribed:

1. Transmission or distribution lines of less than 50 kilometres in length that are associated with or ancillary to a renewable energy generation facility.
2. Transformer stations or distribution stations that are associated with or ancillary to a renewable energy generation facility.
3. Any transportation systems that are associated with or ancillary to the provision of access to a renewable energy generation facility, during the construction, installation, use, operation, changing or retiring of a renewable energy generation facility.

(5) For the purposes of subsection (4), the following apply:

1. A distribution line is associated with or ancillary to a renewable energy generation facility if the line is used to distribute electricity within the facility or from the facility to the distribution system of the distributor in whose distribution service area the renewable energy generation facility is located.
2. A transmission line is associated with or ancillary to a renewable energy generation facility if the line is used to transmit electricity within the facility or from the facility to the IESO-controlled grid.
3. A transformer station or distribution station is associated with or ancillary to a renewable energy generation facility if the station is used to transform the voltage of electricity at the facility, on a transmission line or on a distributor’s distribution system which is associated with or ancillary to the facility.
4. A transportation system includes all transportation systems constructed solely to provide access to the renewable energy generation facility, including transportation systems on Crown land, but does not include a highway which is intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles.

(6) For the purposes of the definition of “renewable energy generation facility” in the Electricity Act, 1998, the following classes of waste disposal sites are prescribed:

1. A waste disposal site where biomass, source separated organics, or organic matter (other than biomass that is derived from a plant or animal and that is available at a farm operation) is subject to anaerobic digestion.
2. A waste disposal site where biomass is thermally treated.

Thus, the waste disposal sites listed in (6) above will be considered part of the renewable energy generation facility.

A renewable energy generation facility includes any permanent and temporary structures, equipment or other things required to generate electricity as well as the associated or ancillary equipment, systems and technologies prescribed in O. Reg. 160/99 above.

Renewable Energy Project

A “renewable energy project” is defined in the Green Energy Act, 2009 and means the activities related to “the construction, installation, use, operation, changing or retiring of a renewable energy generation facility”.

Project Location

The “project location” is defined in O. Reg. 359/09 to mean, when used in relation to a renewable energy project, “a part of land and all or part of any building or structure in, on or over which a person is engaging in or proposes to engage in the project and any air space in which a person is engaging in or proposes to engage in the project”.

It is important to note that the definition references the “project” which relates to the definition of “renewable energy project”. This means that activities for all project phases (i.e. the construction, installation, operation and use, changing or retiring of the facility), must be considered in defining the project location.

While site plans often focus on the ground-level project footprint, the project location definition also includes any air space in which a person is engaging in or proposes to engage in a project. This detail can be significant for certain components of renewable energy project. For instance, a wind turbine has blades which extend in the air to create a broader project location than the base of the turbine alone.

Figure 1. Project location boundary where construction area is furthest

Project location boundary = point of measurement for site investigation, certain setback distances to natural features and water bodies.

Figure 2. Project location boundary where turbine blade tip is furthest

Figure 3. Project location boundary for a solar facility

The project location boundary must be determined for the purposes of defining setback and site investigation distances to meet a number of requirements under O. Reg. 359/09. To do this, the outer extent of all project activities and structures must be considered. As an example, if a wind turbine represents an outer boundary, the actual limit of the project location could be the extent of any staging area used for constructing or installing the turbine. Alternatively, if construction of the turbine is constrained to a small area around the turbine base then the project location boundary could be the turbine blade. This decision would be based on whatever activity or structure extends the project location the furthest. Figures 1 and 2 demonstrate these scenarios. Figure 3 depicts the project location boundary for a solar facility. Applications for bio-energy projects should be based on similar interpretations to define the project location in respect of the components of the facility.

The project location boundary should be considered from the ground level or to a projected point at ground level if boundary is above or below ground. This interpretation is shown in Figure 2 for the wind turbine blade example where the boundary point is projected to the ground level.

Environment

Under O. Reg. 359/09, “environment” has the same meaning as in Part V.0.1 of the EPA, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.19 and this is the same definition as under the Environmental Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.18. The “environment” means:

1. air, land or water,
2. plant and animal life, including human life,
3. the social, economic and cultural conditions that influence the life of humans or a community,
4. any building, structure, machine or other device or thing made by humans,
5. any solid, liquid, gas, odour, heat, sound, vibration or radiation resulting directly or indirectly from human activities, or
6. any part or combination of the foregoing and the interrelationships between any two or more of them, in or of Ontario.

3. REA Process Overview

The diagram depicted in Figure 4 shows the principal process steps required to obtain an REA. It is important to emphasize that Figure 4 is an overview of the main steps and should not be construed as depicting a rigid timeline or sequence of events. The REA application is an applicant-driven process and it is up to the applicant to plan pre-submission activities. Furthermore, Figure 4 does not capture the regulated timelines such as those governing consultation activities and the provision of draft reports. These details are provided in subsequent sections of this guide that describe the key process steps. Applicants are advised to use this overview diagram in conjunction with the sections of text that follow and those in chapter 2 to better understand the process steps and to plan the timing of their application activities.

4. Scoping the Project Concept

To begin the REA process, an applicant should have a clear vision of the project concept. Determining exactly what activities and facilities are included in the project for a renewable energy generation facility is of critical importance to an application, since improperly including or omitting activities or facilities could lead to the determination that an application does not meet the requirements of O. Reg. 359/09.

The scope of the project is principally governed by the definitions for “renewable energy generation facility” and “renewable energy project” given in section 2 above. The key questions an applicant must ask in determining what is in or out of scope are:

1. What is included in the generation facility? This includes the equipment, systems and technologies used for the purpose of generating electricity and those specified as ancillary to the generation facility (e.g. roads, transmission/distribution lines, electrical conversion equipment, specified as per definitions above).
2. What are all the project activities that relate to the construction, installation, operation and use, changing or retiring of the facility?

By answering these questions in light of the definitions of “renewable energy generation facility” and “renewable energy project”, all structures, equipment, and project activities that are subject to the REA can be determined.

A detailed project concept is important for completing the pre-application work for the REA and to determine what other permits may be required from federal, provincial, and other agencies.

Figure 4: Overview of the principle elements of the REA application process. See sections 4 – 11 for more detailed information on requirements of each element.

4.1. Determining the Class of Project

As a starting point, an applicant should first determine if the project requires an REA and define the technology and Class of project, if a Class applies. The following tables summarize the types and Classes of renewable energy technologies:

Solar

Class	Location of PV Modules	Name plate Capacity (kW)	Overview of REA Requirements1
Class 1	Any location	≤ 10	No REA required
Class 2	Mounted on a roof or wall of a building	< 10	No REA required
Class 3	Any location other than a wall or roof of a building	> 10	REA requirements

For the purposes of solar facilities, name plate capacity means the lesser of the total of the design electricity generating capacities of all the panels that are part of the facility, and the maximum power output of all of the inverters units that are part of the facility.

Wind

Class1	Name plate Capacity (kW)	Greatest Sound Power Level (dBA)	Other Specifications	Overview of REA Requirements2
Class 1	≤ 3	Any	None	No REA required
Class 2	> 3 and < 50	Any	None	REA required. Fewer study, reporting, setback, and consultation requirements
Class 3	≥ 50	< 102	Greatest sound power level (expressed in dBA) is < 102; greatest height (expressed in metres) of any wind turbine that forms part of the facility, excluding length of any blades, is < 70.	REA required. Fewer setback requirements
Class 4	≥ 50	≥ 102	One of the following: Greatest sound power level (expressed in dBA) is ≥ 102. Greatest sound power level (expressed in dBA) is < 102; greatest height (expressed in metres) of any wind turbine that forms part of the facility, excluding length of any blades, is ≥ 70.	REA required

Bio-energy

Anaerobic Digestion Facilities

Class	Location of Facility	Organic Matter Digested	Overview of REA Requirements1
Class 1	At a farm operation	One or more of the following: Biomass that is grown or harvested for the purpose of being used to generate electricity Biomass that is agricultural waste within the meaning of Regulation 347 of the Revised Regulations of Ontario, 1990 (General — Waste Management) made under the Environmental Protection Act. Farm material	REA required. Fewer study, reporting and consultation requirements
Class 2	At a farm operation	One or more of the following: Organic matter consisting of any biomass and farm material, other than organic matter specified for Class 1 above Source separated organics	REA required. Fewer study, reporting and consultation requirements
Class 3	At a location other than a farm operation	One or more of the following: Biomass Source separated organics Farm material	REA required

It is important to note, as per paragraph 9 (1) 9 of O. Reg. 359/09, Class 1 and 2 anaerobic digestion facilities do not require an REA if they are located on a farm and are considered to be a “regulated mixed anaerobic digestion facility” as defined in O. Reg. 276/03 under the Nutrient Management Act, 2002 and would not have required a waste certificate of approval before September 24, 2009.

Thermal Treatment Facilities

Class	Location of Facility	Organic Matter Digested	Overview of REA Requirements1
Class 1	Any location	Biomass consisting solely of woodwaste	REA required. Fewer study, reporting and consultation requirements if on a farm
Class 2	At a farm operation	Any type of biomass (not solely woodwaste)	REA required. Fewer study, reporting and consultation requirements
Class 3	At a location other than a farm operation	Any type of biomass (not solely woodwaste)	REA required

Biogas and Biofuel Facilities

Other bio-energy facilities such as those defined as biogas or biofuel facilities also require a renewable energy approval. The summary table of requirements in Appendix 1 outlines the REA requirements for these projects.

To assist applicants in interpreting the difference between an anaerobic digestion facility and a biogas facility, the following clarifying points are made:

• Anaerobic digestion facilities are those where both the anaerobic digester and the electrical generation equipment are integrated on the project location for the purpose of generating energy.
• Biogas facilities are those where an electrical generator is proposed to be connected to an existing source of biogas such as a landfill or an existing anaerobic digester.
• A biogas source can either be gas collected at a landfill site due to the decomposition of a landfill (landfill gas) or gas derived from anaerobic digestion of biomass, source separated organics or other organic matter at another type of existing anaerobic digestion facility.
  • An example of a biogas facility related to existing anaerobic digestion is the installation of a generator to combust biogas derived from the anaerobic digestion of activated sludge at a waste water treatment plant.

Applicants seeking further clarity on the difference between biogas and anaerobic digestion facilities should refer to definitions in O. Reg. 359/09 under the Environmental Protection Act and O. Reg. 160/99 under the Electricity Act, 1998 for relevant terms.

Water Power Facilities

Water power projects do not require an REA but instead are subject to the Environmental Assessment Act through either an individual EA (facilities over 200 MW) or through the Class EA for Water Power Projects (facilities 200 MW and under). Additional permits will also be required, such as a Permit to Take Water (PTTW) issued by MOECC under the Ontario Water Resources Act and approvals by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act. Depending on the project specifics, a federal environmental assessment and/or the requirement for a permit under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and the Conservation Authorities Act, respectively, may be triggered.

4.2. Defining the Project Location and Preparing a Draft Project Description Report

Prior to initiating the REA approval process, details about facility components and proposed activities (i.e. construction, operation, decommissioning) are needed. One of the earliest milestones in the application process is the preparation of a draft Project Description Report (PDR). This draft document is required to be submitted to MOECC in order to provide the applicant with an Aboriginal Consultation List, a step that precedes other consultation activities (more information on consultation requirements is presented in Chapter 2). The project details needed to prepare a draft PDR serve as a useful guide for how refined the project concept must be to initiate the REA process. Chapter 4 of this guide gives further information on how to write the PDR.

One key component of the project scope that requires definition early on is the project location. Applicants are recommended to carefully read the definition of project location in section 2 above so that the boundary of the project location can be defined. This is an important step because the project location boundary is needed in order to proceed with assessments of cultural heritage, natural heritage, and water bodies.

4.3. Additional Guidance for Determining the Project Scope

The following sections provide specific guidance on determining what facility components are within the scope of a project.

4.3.1. Scope of Transmission or Distribution Lines Ancillary to the Project

Subject to the qualifications discussed below, transmission or distribution lines ancillary to the renewable energy generation facilities are included as part of the facility and thus must be considered in an application for an REA. These facility components will contribute to the size and dimensions of the project location for the purposes of setbacks and will require assessment for negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur from their installation, operation or decommissioning in the REA application.

Since transmission and distribution lines are interconnected with the broader electrical grid, it is important to describe what is meant by an “ancillary line” so that REA requirements are applied appropriately. Ancillary equipment for renewable energy generation facilities are defined in O. Reg. 160/99 under the Electricity Act, 1998. Transmission and distribution lines are defined as lines 50 km in length or less ancillary to the renewable energy generation facility.

For distribution lines this is further clarified to only include lines:

…used to distribute electricity within the facility or from the facility to the distribution system of the distributor in whose distribution service area the renewable energy generation facility is located.

(O.Reg.160/99, s. 1 (5)3)

For transmission lines this is further clarified to only include lines:

…used to transmit electricity within the facility or from the facility to the IESO-controlled grid

(O.Reg.160/99, s. 1 (5)4)

In some cases connection of the project facility to distribution lines in the local distribution system will require the distributor to enhance existing distribution lines or build new ones. Distribution system planning is conducted in a process separate from the REA process and can involve an assessment of impacts to the grid from new generation. For the purposes of the REA, the lines built by the local distribution company in their distribution service area will not be considered part of the facility or project and an REA is not required to be obtained in respect of them.

Similarly, in some cases connection of the facility to transmission lines that form part of the Independent Electrical System Operator (IESO) controlled grid will require a transmitter to enhance or extend that grid. Transmission system planning is conducted in a process separate from the REA process and can be subject to the Environmental Assessment Act. For the purposes of the REA, changes made to the IESO controlled grid transmitters will not be considered part of the facility and an REA is not required to be obtained in respect of them.

An REA is required for all distribution and transmission lines built by the applicant or a contracted third party up to the point of common coupling with the distribution system or the IESO controlled grid. This applies even if the IESO controlled grid or distribution system is expanded following the construction of the renewable generation facility. Figure 5 below depicts four connection scenarios to illustrate interpretation of project scope.

Figure 5. Diagram of electrical line scenarios for determining project scope

In situations where connection of the facility will require the distributor or transmitter to enhance or construct new distribution or transmission facilities respectively, it may be in the proponent’s interest to consider these connection facilities when conducting environmental studies and assessments as part of the REA process. Doing so can support the distributor or transmitter in subsequent assessment and approval processes (e.g. under the Environmental Assessment Act), and avoid risks of delays in connecting a project. Proponents are strongly encouraged to engage with distributors and transmitters early in the REA process to discuss the location and siting of connection facilities, as well as any studies or assessments that may be required in respect of those facilities.

4.3.2. Scope Related to Distribution of Gas to Biogas Facilities

Biogas facilities are those that combust biogas but are not anaerobic digestion facilities as defined in O. Reg. 359/09. Biogas facilities are related to the generation of electricity through the combustion of biogas derived from sources at existing non-generating facilities. Such facilities can include landfills as well as facilities where biogas is already being generated from anaerobic digestion such as the anaerobic digestion of activated sludge at wastewater treatment plants.

For biogas facilities, the REA covers all equipment, systems and technology used for generating electricity (and those specifically defined as ancillary to the facility). This is not interpreted to include equipment related to the conveyance of biogas from the existing source to the generation site, such as through piping. While any piping or conveyance equipment is not considered part of the facility for the purpose of defining the boundaries of the project location, applicants are still recommended to identify this equipment in REA reports such as in the site plan of the Design and Operations Report.

4.3.3. Scope when Two or More Projects may be Integrated or Aggregated

Due to the modular nature of solar and wind technologies, a renewable energy project employing these technologies will often include multiple generators (e.g. multiple turbines or multiple solar modules). This results in a need for clarity on the appropriate scope of the facility to ensure that larger projects are not fragmented conceptually for the purpose of applying for an REA. Subsections 4 (3) and 6 (3) of O. Reg. 359/09 for solar and wind, respectively, state that two or more facilities shall be considered a single facility if they are “to function as an integrated or aggregated system for generating electricity”. It is important for applicants to consider if their project could be viewed to function in an integrated or aggregated manner with a neighbouring project to ensure the appropriate application is submitted.

In determining the potential for facilities to be considered integrated or aggregated, applicants should first consider whether they are physically interconnected. For example, if two or more facilities are electrically interconnected through the sharing of transmission/distribution lines or an electrical conversion station somewhere prior to connection to the distribution or transmission system, they may be considered integrated or aggregated. However, in some cases, a single project may have two or more electrically independent clusters of generators that are geographically separated such that it may be technically preferable to connect to a transmission or distribution system at more than one point. Thus, a determination of “integrated or aggregated” can also apply to other physical and operational aspects of the project. For instance, adjacent projects may share use of project roads, or be controlled, owned, operated and maintained by the same entity in a coordinated manner. These factors may lead to the conclusion that adjacent project proposals should be considered a single project for the purpose of applying for an REA. Combining projects that are truly integrated or aggregated beneFITs the REA process by minimizing duplication of effort, combining the assessment of environmental effects, reducing the amount of application fees payable and facilitating more clear and streamlined consultation.

Applicants who are proposing a project that may be considered to be integrated or aggregated with an adjacent project are strongly encouraged to discuss the specifics of their proposal at a meeting with the Service Integration Unit of MOECC's Environmental Approvals Access and Service Integration Branch at a very early stage in the process. Any changes to project scope may impact a number of REA requirements.

It should be noted that the guidance in this section only pertains to how O. Reg. 359/09 can be interpreted with respect to project integration for the purpose of obtaining an REA. Ground-mounted solar microFIT or Feed-in-Tariff (FIT) projects that are aggregated for the purposes of calculating Feed-in Tariff FIT contract pricing as well as earlier Combined Projects composed of relocated constrained microFIT projects may be required to obtain an REA. Applicants who are seeking or have obtained a contract offer under the FIT program of the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO), formerly the Ontario Power Authority, should consult rules for integration of projects under that program.

4.3.4. Meteorological Towers related to Wind Facilities

Meteorological towers are often installed to test wind conditions to determine feasibility for the development of a wind facility. This is typically done some time in advance of applying for an REA. If the wind facility ultimately does get developed, a meteorological tower may also continue to be used while the wind facility is in operation.

The MOECC does not consider meteorological towers to be part of a renewable energy generation facility when they are constructed or installed for the purposes of project planning before the construction or installation of any wind turbines. However, where meteorological towers are proposed as part of the ongoing operation of the wind turbines, (e.g. when required by the IESO for provision of telemetric data) they will be considered to be part of the facility.

Applicants should also note that meteorological towers may be subject to other government approvals depending on the nature of the tower and where it is located. For instance, in order to install a meteorological tower on Crown Land, applicants must ensure that land use plans or legislation do not prohibit wind power development at the proposed site and must complete the renewable energy testing requirements of the Approval and Permitting Requirements Document (APRD) in order to obtain the necessary permissions from the MNRF. Applicants should contact key agencies and ministries at an early stage to determine if other approvals may be required for a meteorological tower.

5. Meeting with Key Agencies and Commencing Additional Approvals

It is recommended that applicants who have received a power purchase agreement and are seeking an REA meet with the Service Integration Unit of MOECC's Environmental Approvals Access and Service Integration Branch, as well as the appropriate government ministries, agencies and project host municipalities, at an early stage in project planning to discuss how the requirements of O. Reg. 359/09 will apply to their project. The principal point of contact for the REA at the MOECC is the MOECC's Environmental Approvals Access and Service Integration Branch. Contact information can be found in Appendix 2.

Other participants in the Meetings with Key Agencies may include MNRF, MTCS, ENERGY – REFO, IESO, local distribution companies, local municipalities, MOECC District/Regional offices, Ministry of Transportation (MTO), Local Conservation Authority, Federal Agencies such as, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA), Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), NAV Canada, Transport Canada, and others agencies as determined by the applicant.

MOECC has created a Location/Site Considerations Checklist for Renewable Energy Projects to provide information that proponents should consider when selecting a suitable site for their renewable energy projects.

Location and Siting Considerations Checklist:

Before a project proposal is submitted forunder the Request for Proposals (RFP) theprocess of the Large Renewable Procurement (LRP) , proponents must complete a set of mandatory requirements, including engagement requirements to facilitate early relationship-building between the developer and local community, and to collect feedback on local needs and considerations. Proponents must also conduct a preliminary site investigation to ensure developers consider the viability of the proposed site and investigate some of its environmental features before submitting an LRP proposal.

The LRP mandatory requirements are supplemental to and were not designed to replace any of the REA requirements. Successful LRP projects must still obtain all required licences, permits, and approvals prior to construction. The mandatory requirements of the LRP process may be subject to change in subsequent procurements. For full details on the LRP pro, please consult the LRP documents, available on the IESO website.

5.1. Determining if Additional Permits are Required

Having a clear project concept will allow the applicant to determine what other approvals may be needed to fully authorize all aspects of the project. While the REA is a streamlined approval that takes the place of a number of permits previously issued for such facilities, there are additional permits separate from the REA process that could apply depending on the unique features of each proposal. To assist applicants with making this determination, the table below has been prepared as a guide to additional approvals. Note that while every attempt has been made to make this a complete list current of this guide’s publication date, applicants are responsible for determining their legal obligations. Contact information for most agencies cited can be found in Appendix 2.

Agency	Potential Permits
Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO)	Road User Safety Policy Permit may be obtained by equipment suppliers or by applicants on behalf of suppliers. Change of Access and Heavy/Oversize Load Transportation Permit to ensure compliance with provincial highway traffic and road safety regulations for transport of project components (equipment, material) to site. Corridor Management Permits MTO has the authority to issue permits under the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act (sections 31, 34 and 38). A Building and Land Use Permit must be obtained to carry out work adjacent to a provincial highway and within MTO permit control area. An MTO Building and Land Use permit must be obtained before a municipal building permit can be issued. An Encroachment Permit would be required for working within a provincial highway. An Entrance Permit would be required for constructing a new entrance or upgrading an existing entrance onto a provincial highway. See Appendix 2 for MTO contact information.
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF)	Further information about the following permits and approvals are outlined in MNRF's Approval and Permitting Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects (APRD). See Appendix 2 for MNRF contact information. Crown Land Application For projects proposed on Crown land, approval for the use or occupation of Crown land under the Public Lands Act is required. Approvals under the Endangered Species Act, 2007 The Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA) prohibits the killing, harming, harassing, capturing, taking, possessing, transporting, collecting and damaging or destroying the habitat of a species listed as extirpated, endangered or threatened on the Species at Risk in Ontario List. Various components of a project or project activities may have the potential to contravene the ESA. The ESA enables certain activities to occur that may otherwise be prohibited as long as specific conditions to protect species at risk and their habitat are met. A permit (section 17 of the ESA) or a regulatory exemption (sections 23.6, 23.13 or 23.20) of O.Reg 242/08 (where applicable) may be required if a project or project activities are likely to contravene the ESA. More information on how to obtain a permit or seek a regulatory exemption under the ESA, can be found here: Endangered Species Act Permit or Authorization Approval under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997 Approval is required if the project involves the destruction of nests or eggs of birds regulated under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997, where these activities are not provided for under an REA Approval is required if the project involves the destruction of a beaver dam or the den of a fur bearing mammal (other than a fox or skunk). Approval is required if the project involves the destruction of the den of a black bear or interference with a black bear in its den. Aggregate Resources Act Licences and Permits A licence (on private land in an area designated under the Aggregate Resources Act) or permit (on Crown land) may be required when a project requires the removal and use of mineral aggregates from the project location. Approval under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act Location Approval and Plans and Specifications Approval may be required for some water crossings. Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994 Licences and Approvals Forest Resource Licence is required when a project
Conservation Authorities (CAs)	Conservation Authorities Act Permit When a renewable energy project is located within the jurisdiction of a CA and there is a possibility that the project is within regulatory limits set out in regulations under the Conservation Authorities Act the local CA should be contacted early in the process about a requirement for a CA permit. Permit decisions consider the impacts of development on the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches and/or pollution. A permit is also required for altering or interfering with a watercourse or a wetland. (Conservation authorities may also request an Environmental Impact Study to address potential hydrological impacts where a permit is required for interfering with a wetland). Contact the local CA office for more information. Contact information for local offices is given in Appendix 2.
Niagara Escarpment Commission	Development Permit If a project is planned within the Niagara Escarpment Plan area, a development permit may be required. If a development permit is required, this must be obtained prior to submitting an application for a REA. Contact the Niagara Escarpment Commission for more information.
Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA)	Approval of Nutrient Management Plans (NMP) and Nutrient Management Strategies (NMS) under the Nutrient Management Act, 2002 Land application of anaerobic digester digestate material may require an NMS, NMP or Non-Agricultural Source Materials (NASM) plan. Contact OMAFRA for more information.
Municipalities	Building Code Act, 1992 Permit A structure that supports a wind turbine generator having a rated output of more than 3 kW is designated for the purposes of clause (d) of the definition of building in subsection 1 (1) of the Building Code Act, 1992. Other structures that are part of renewable energy facilities may also require building permits. Local municipal authority should be contacted for further information. Drainage Act Assessment If a renewable energy project impacts the flow of a drainage works regulated under the Drainage Act, a drainage reassessment or engineering study may be required. The local municipal authority and/or OMAFRA should be contacted for further information. Road Use Agreement/Permit May be required for use of roads to construct/operate facility. New transmission or distribution lines in existing municipal right of ways may also require a road use agreement. Local municipal authority should be contacted for further information.
Electricity System Operators / Energy Agencies	Electrical Safety Code Certification Electrical systems and connections may require inspection / authorization by the Electrical Safety Authority (ESA). Approval to Connect to a Distribution System / IESO-controlled Grid Authorization (through impact assessment(s) and connection agreement) from the local distribution company and (where applicable) upstream distributors and/or transmitters to connect a distribution line from the project to the a distribution system. Authorization (through impact assessment(s) and connection agreement) from a transmitter and the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) if connecting directly to the IESO- controlled Grid ( transmission system). Generator License A licence may be needed from the Ontario Energy Board (OEB) in order to generate electricity. Leave to Construct Construction of an ancillary transmission lines may require an authorization from the OEB. Technical Standards and Safety Authority Certification Gas pipelines used in bio-energy facilities require certification by a licensed professional.
Federal Government/ Agencies	Applicants are advised to contact the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEA Agency) for further information related to the need for a federal environmental assessment. Additional permits may be required from the following departments/agencies: CEA Agency – Federal environmental assessment Environment Canada – migratory birds, others may apply Transport Canada, Aerodromes and Air Navigation Ontario Region – potential navigation lighting and marking requirements. Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) – Authorizations may be required under various federal acts (i.e. Fisheries Act, Migratory Birds Act, and Species at Risk Act). Parks Canada – if project may impact a national park Applicants are also encouraged to contact the following federal agencies early in the process to discuss the details of their project: Radio Advisory Board of Canada – potential signal disruptions for wind farms Royal Canadian Mounted Police Mobile Communications Services – potential signal disruptions for wind farms NAV Canada – potential disturbance to air navigation and radar systems for wind farms. NAV Canada may request a wind proponent to move turbines a certain distance from the navigation and radar systems, or require the airport to alter instrument approaches.

In addition to this list, applicants should note that MNRF and conservation authorities have a role in managing development in areas prone to or associated with natural hazards such as floodplains. Applicants should consult with the local conservation authority (if one has been established) or MNRF at an early stage in project planning to determine if there are areas prone to or associated with natural hazards in the vicinity of the project location and, if so, determine any changes to the project that may be required.

5.1.1. Timing of Multiple Permits

The goal of the REA is to streamline and coordinate the issuance of multiple permits, particularly amongst provincial approvals, where they are required. To enhance coordination, applicants should discuss with relevant agencies how the timing of application submission for different permits can be optimized. Coordination of applicable permits should be discussed with all relevant regulatory agencies to enhance project approval timing. Ultimately, managing the submission of permit applications rests with the applicant.

In particular, a proactive approach should be taken when assessing the presence of species and/or habitat protected under the Endangered Species Act, 2007 to determine the potential need for an approval. Applicants are strongly advised to initiate discussion with the local MNRF Regional or District office during the preliminary stages of project planning, as it is recommended that REA and potential Endangered Species Act, 2007 requirements be addressed concurrently.

For a complete outline of the assessment and analysis requirements associated with determining whether an authorization is required under the Endangered Species Act, 2007, as well as the information required to be provided in an application for authorization, applicants may refer to the MNRF's Approval and Permitting Requirements Document and the local MNRF Regional or District office. A summary of the rules and requirements under O.Reg 242/08 can be found at the Ontario website.

5.2. Additional Authorization from MOECC for Unique Circumstances

There are two circumstances that may require applicants to seek additional authorization from MOECC in advance of submitting an REA application. These are:

• Where a project proposal includes a discharge of wastewater that will further contaminate a water body that does not meet provincial water quality objectives (Policy 2 Deviation, MOECC Water Resources Management)
• Where a project is proposed on a closed landfill site that was closed within the past 25 years. (EPA section 46 Approval)

For most projects, these circumstances will not apply. For applicants who believe their project may require consideration of these unique circumstances, the following sections provide additional guidance. Applicants are also recommended to contact the MOECC's Environmental Approvals Access and Service Integration Branch at an early stage to discuss these unique circumstances.

5.2.1. Projects Requiring a Deviation from Policy 2

For certain renewable energy projects, a discharge of wastewater may be proposed in contravention of MOECC's Policy 2 for Water Resources Management. Policy 2, defined in the MOECC publication “Water Management: Policies, Guidelines, and Provincial Water Quality Objectives of the Ministry Of Environment And Energy” (1994, Publication #3303e), states:

Water quality which presently does not meet the Provincial Water Quality Objectives shall not be degraded further and all practical measures shall be taken to upgrade the water quality to the Objectives.

(section 3.2.2)

Where new discharges are proposed to waters that do not meet Provincial Water Quality Objectives, no further degradation of the water body will be permitted and all practical measures shall be undertaken to upgrade water quality. However, it is recognized that in some circumstances it may not be technically feasible, physically possible or socially desirable to improve water quality toward the Provincial Water Quality Objectives.

If an applicant believes that a discharge in contravention of Policy 2 is justified they must seek approval to deviate from Policy 2 from the MOECC. It is expected that applicants will seek a decision on a Policy 2 deviation in advance of submitting an application for a REA. If the discharge can not be adequately justified, the ministry is unlikely to approve the discharge and it is advantageous for this to be identified early so the applicant can make appropriate changes to the project.

It is important to note that this situation will only apply to projects proposing a discharge to surface water (such as for larger bio-energy projects). To help applicants identify if a deviation from Policy 2 may be required, applicants proposing discharges to surface water are advised to contact the MOECC Regional or District office to determine what information may be needed to 1) classify the receiving water as meeting or not meeting Provincial Water Quality Objectives and 2) characterize the proposed discharge to determine its impact on the water body.

A description of the application process and required information for a Policy 2 deviation is contained in the MOECC publication “Procedure B-1-5: Deriving Receiving-Water Based, Point-Source Effluent Requirements for Ontario Waters” (1994, Publication # 3302e).

5.2.2. EPA Section 46 Approval for Former Disposal Sites

An application proposing a renewable energy facility that is to be located entirely or in part on land that was formerly a waste disposal site within the last 25 years requires an approval in accordance with section 46 of the EPA. The purpose of this approval is to ensure all environmental risks related to development of these sensitive sites are addressed through appropriate project planning. The process for applying for a section 46 approval is described in the MOECC publication “Operational Guidance for Obtaining Environmental Protection Act Section 46 Approval for the Use of Lands Previously Used for Disposal of Waste” (2005, Publication #5136e).

6. Conducting Site Assessments and Other Studies

After defining the project concept, applicants can begin to conduct the required assessments of the project location and vicinity by evaluating the negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur from engaging in the project. The principal types of assessments required by O. Reg. 359/09 are assessments of Cultural Heritage, Natural Heritage, and Water Bodies. Most projects requiring an REA must perform these assessments. Refer to sections 6.1 to 6.3 for more detail on Cultural Heritage, Natural Heritage, and Water assessments.

Depending on the project specifics, additional studies and investigations may be required. For instance some bio-energy facilities may require assessments of hydrogeology and surface water; wind projects may require noise studies; for all renewable technologies, applicants may determine that other investigations examining impacts on local traffic or stormwater runoff may be required to describe the negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur. A starting point for determining additional studies that are required by O. Reg. 359/09 is Chapter 9 of this guide which discusses additional reports that may be required due to specific regulatory triggers within the REA regulation.

Timing for the initiation and completion of assessments and studies should be determined by the applicant. There are a number of factors that applicants need to be aware of, with respect to having these studies completed. Certain fieldwork techniques employed in archaeological assessments have the potential to disturb natural features protected under the REA regulation, thereby altering the results of the Natural Heritage Assessment (NHA). However, there is opportunity within the archaeological assessment process to use alternative techniques (e.g., Stage 2 test pitting versus ploughing), or to schedule fieldwork in a way that avoids potential impacts to natural features, while ensuring studies are completed in an efficient and timely manner. It is advised that proponents discuss the alignment of archaeological fieldwork and the NHA with the appropriate consultants at an early stage in project planning. Proponents should have their consultant archaeologist contact the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS) to confirm the appropriateness of using alternative fieldwork techniques.

In addition to potential impacts to natural features assessed through the NHA, archaeological assessments may also have the potential to have adverse effects on species at risk or their habitat, and may require an approval under the Endangered Species Act, 2007. Applicants are strongly advised to initiate discussions with the local MNRF Regional or District office during the preliminary stages of project planning, and prior to any archaeological assessment (including all fieldwork associated with Stages 2 to 4), to determine whether adverse effects to species at risk or habitat is likely and to discuss possible avoidance measures.

Furthermore, all assessments of cultural heritage and natural heritage must be completed sufficiently early in the process to allow MTCS and MNRF to review them. Following review of cultural heritage and NHA reports by MTCS and MNRF, respectively, these ministries will provide letters with respect to the reports that must be submitted as part of a complete application to the MOECC. Since drafts of these reports must be made available to the public at least 60 days in advance of the final public meeting (see Chapter 2 for detailed information on consultation requirements) it is advantageous for the applicant to start assessments and studies as early in the process as possible.

6.1. Cultural Heritage Requirements

In accordance with sections 19 to 23 of O. Reg. 359/09 applicants must meet a number of cultural heritage requirements related to protected properties, archaeological and heritage resources. All applicants are advised to contact the MTCS at an early stage of project planning to ensure they understand the cultural heritage requirements and to obtain additional guidance on meeting them.

Further information on how to address the cultural heritage requirements can also be found in the MTCS's guidance document: Cultural Heritage Resources: An Information Bulletin for Projects Subject to Ontario Regulation 359/09 Renewable Energy Approvals. This document, which for the remainder of this section will be referred to the MTCS - REA Information Bulletin, can be found on MTCS's website.

As an overview of the requirements, applicants must do the following:

6.1.1. Project Located on a Protected Property

For all facilities that require an REA, applicants must determine if the facility will be located on a property protected under the Ontario Heritage Act and, if so, whether an authorization is needed in respect of the project. The table in section 19 of O. Reg. 359/09 provides a list of the types of properties that are considered protected as well as the type of authorization needed / authorizing body. The MTCS - REA Information Bulletin provides guidance on identifying protected properties at the project location.

Depending on this determination, the following steps must be taken:

1. If the project location is on a protected property and an authorization is required:
   • The applicant must obtain this authorization from the relevant agency and include a copy of it in their REA application submission.
2. If the project location is on a protected property but an authorization is not required:
   • The applicant must obtain written confirmation that an authorization is not needed from the relevant agency and include a copy of it in their REA application submission.
3. The project location is not on a protected property:
   • The applicant must prepare and include a written summary of the matters considered in making this determination within the appropriate section of the Design and Operations Report. For instance, this summary should indicate the agencies contacted and summarize what information was provided. Note: Class 2 wind facilities must include this summary in the PDR.

Applicants should note that the project location may be on more than one type of protected property and the appropriate steps must be taken as they apply to each property and type of protection.

6.1.2. Identification and Assessment of Archaeological and Heritage Resources

For all facilities that require an REA, applicants must undertake archaeological and heritage assessments, unless they determine there is a low potential for archaeological and heritage resources at the project location. Applicants can make this determination, by considering criteria included in the following checklists issued by the MTCS:

• REA Checklist: Consideration of Potential for Archaeological Resources; and
• REA Checklist: Consideration of Potential for Heritage Resources.

The checklists are available on the MTCS website.

Depending on the outcome of these checklists, heritage or archaeological assessments may still be necessary. Applicants looking to minimize risk and to achieve a higher level of certainty may choose to undertake heritage and archaeological assessments without filling out the checklists.

All Ontario government ministries and public bodies that are prescribed under Ontario Regulation 157/10 must comply with the Standards and Guidelines for Conservation of Provincial Heritage Properties. The Standards and Guidelines apply to property that is owned or controlled by the Crown in right of Ontario or by a prescribed public body. For projects proposed on land to which these Standards and Guidelines apply, if cultural heritage resources are identified, there may be implications for applicants. Ministries and prescribed public bodies must use best efforts (to the extent possible in law) to ensure the ongoing, long-term protection of identified cultural heritage resources. This could result in, for example, conservation requirements being included as a condition of any legal agreement or instrument that transfers property from provincial control to an applicant.

For facilities other than those prescribed in the inset panel above applicants must also address the following cultural heritage resources:

Archaeological Resources

Applicants looking to minimize risk and to achieve a higher level of certainty can hire a consultant archaeologist to undertake an archaeological assessment without first screening to determine the potential for archaeological resources to be present.

Otherwise, applicants must determine if there is the potential for archaeological resources to be present at the project location using the ministry issued REA Checklist: Consideration of Potential for Archaeological Resources, as per subsection 21 (3) of O. Reg. 359/09.

If an archaeological assessment is undertaken, as required by clause 21 (2)(a) of O. Reg. 359/09, the archaeological assessment must be conducted by a licensed consultant archaeologist as defined in O. Reg. 8/06 under the Ontario Heritage Act. The archaeological assessment process can include between 1 and 4 stages, beginning with a professional determination of the potential for archaeological resources (Stage 1), followed by a resource inventory (Stage 2), archaeological site assessment (Stage 3) and mitigation (Stage 4), if necessary. If an archaeological assessment is required, either a Stage 2 archaeological assessment or a Stage 1 archaeological assessment (where it is determined that a Stage 2 is not required) must be completed before moving forward with an application to MOECC.

The consultant archaeologist must submit a report or reports on the archaeological assessment to MTCS as a requirement under the REA and as a condition of his or her license. MTCS issues letters to consultant archaeologists as part of the licensing process under the Ontario Heritage Act, and may correspond directly with consultant archaeologists where revisions or further assessment is required. Once MTCS is satisfied with the report, MTCS will copy the proponent on the appropriate letter to be submitted to MOECC as part of a complete REA application. The letter will clearly state that it constitutes written comments for the purpose of O. Reg. 359/09.

Where more than one report has been prepared for a project as a result of either a requirement for Stage 2 or additional lands requiring assessment, the proponent and MOECC will be copied on each of the final letters. The final report(s) as well as the final letter(s) (one for each report) must be included in the REA application to MOECC. If archaeological resources are identified, further stages of work may be required during project development.

All archaeological assessments must be conducted in accordance with the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (2011) issued by the MTCS.

If an applicant determines that there is low potential for archaeological resources to be present at the project location, they must include a written summary of the matters that were considered in completing the checklist within the appropriate section of the Design and Operations Report. The written summary must make reference to the criteria included in the checklist.

Applicants should consult the MTCS - REA Information Bulletin for more information on completing the checklist and preparing a written summary.

It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that determination of low potential for archaeological resources is completed and documented appropriately within the Design and Operations Report in order to minimize the risk of having to do a full assessment at a late stage in project planning.

Heritage Resources and Abutting Protected Properties

Applicants looking to minimize risk and achieve a higher level of certainty can hire a heritage consultant to undertake a heritage assessment without first determining if there are any abutting protected properties and if there is the potential for heritage resources to be present.

Otherwise, applicants must determine if:

• there are any protected properties that abut the parcel of land on which the project location is situated; and
• there is the potential for heritage resources to be present at the project location

This determination can be made by using the ministry-issued REA Checklist: Consideration of Potential for Heritage Resources, as per clause 23 (2) (a) of O. Reg. 359/09. The MTCS - REA Information Bulletin provides guidance on completing the checklist in order to help make this determination.

If a heritage assessment is undertaken, the person undertaking the assessment must follow and report on the heritage assessment requirements outlined in subsections 23 (1) and 23 (2.1) of O. Reg. 359/09. Heritage assessment includes the following:

1. Investigation, including historical research and visual inspection, to determine whether:
   • there is potential for the presence of a heritage resource (other than the protected property types table in section 19) at the project location
   • protected properties abut the parcel of land on which the project location is situated.
2. If the determination is that there is potential for the presence of a heritage resource, confirm the presence or absence of a heritage resource by applying the criteria set out in Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest) made under the Ontario Heritage Act.
3. Evaluation of the impact of the renewable energy project on the heritage attributes of any heritage resources at the project location and on any abutting protected properties and provide recommendations for measures to avoid, eliminate or mitigate the impact.

Heritage assessments are conducted by heritage consultants or other qualified persons who have the appropriate expertise in the identification, evaluation and conservation of built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes. The heritage assessment report must outline the expertise and experience of the person who conducted the assessment.

All heritage assessments must be submitted to MTCS for review. MTCS will determine whether assessments were conducted in accordance with the regulatory requirements. MTCS will correspond directly with the heritage consultant where revisions or further assessment is required. Once the review is complete and the report finalized, MTCS will copy the proponent on the appropriate letter to be submitted to MOECC as part of a complete REA application. The letter will clearly state that it constitutes written comments for the purpose of O. Reg. 359/09.

If an applicant determines that there are no abutting protected properties and that there is low potential for heritage resources, it must include a written summary of the matters that were considered in completing the checklist in the Design and Operations Report. The written summary must make reference to the criteria included in the checklist. Applicants should consult the MTCS - REA Information Bulletin for more information on completing a written summary.

It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that a confirmation of no abutting protected properties and a determination of low potential for heritage resources at the project location is completed and documented appropriately within the Design and Operations Report in order to minimize the risk of having to do a full assessment at a late stage in project planning.

6.1.3. Revisions to reports and further assessment

As a review and commenting ministry, MTCS may correspond with consultant archaeologists and heritage consultants preparing archaeological or heritage assessments throughout the review process. MTCS may request revisions to the reports or additional fieldwork to ensure that the archaeological assessments have met provincial standards, or in the case of heritage assessments, to ensure they have met the requirements of O. Reg. 359/09. Since a technical review may result in multiple letters between the ministry and the consultant archaeologist or heritage consultant, MTCS will indicate the appropriate letter(s) to be submitted by the applicant to MOECC as part of a complete REA application.

It should be noted that there is potential for new information to come to light in respect of a cultural heritage assessment following the issuance of the confirmation letter from MTCS. Changes to the project layout could also result in changes to potential impacts to cultural heritage resources. Under such circumstances applicants should discuss this new information with their archaeologist and heritage consultants to determine if additional assessment or reporting will be required. If changes are made to reports as a result, applicants should have their archaeologist or heritage consultant discuss these changes with MTCS prior to submitting an application for an REA. In this case, further MTCS review will likely be required and revised or additional letter(s) may need to be submitted to the MOECC.

6.2. Natural Heritage Assessment

For the purposes of complying with O. Reg. 359/09, NHA has been described in detail in guidance provided by MNRF. “Natural Heritage Assessment Guide for Renewable Energy Projects.” This guidance should be consulted for a complete description of natural heritage requirements in the REA and for direction on conducting assessments and preparing reports. All applicants preparing a NHA should refer to this detailed guidance, however some overview information follows to orientate the reader to the general requirements.

While the negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur on natural heritage may be considered for all renewable energy projects, O. Reg. 359/09 has specific requirements for assessing natural heritage for facilities provided in the table below:

Requirements for Assessing Natural Heritage for Facilities

Facility Type	Facility Class(es) Requiring a NHA	Description
Wind Facility	Class 3 and Class 4	Name plate capacity of 50 kW or greater
Solar Facility	Class 3	Name plate capacity greater than 10 kW
Bio-energy Facility	All classes	Includes anaerobic digestion, biogas, biofuel and thermal treatment facilities

NHA requirements include assessment requirements (subsection 23 (1) and sections 24 – 28 of O. Reg. 359/09) and prohibition/setback provisions (sections 37, 38, 41, and 43 of O. Reg. 359/09).

The assessment provisions require a staged analysis of natural features in the vicinity of the project, which includes:

1. Records review to determine if natural features may exist in the vicinity of the project location. The Table in section 25 of O. Reg. 359/09 provides detail on the nature of the records that must be reviewed and the distances from the project location to particular features that should be considered.
2. Site investigation of all air, land and water within 50 m or 120 m of the project location, as defined by the regulation, to determine if additional features exist and to confirm the presence and location of features identified in the records review.

3. Evaluation of significance of any identified natural features.

The prohibition/setback requirements stipulate restrictions on engaging in a project through either:

1. Strict prohibitions (i.e. those without exception) on engaging in a renewable energy project.
   • For example, subsection 37 (2) of O. Reg. 359/09 prohibits the construction, installation or expansion of most project components within a provincially significant southern or coastal wetland
2. Prohibitions for which an exception exists (i.e. only permitting development if an Environmental Impact Study is prepared which identifies mitigation measures to address the negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur).
   • For example, a renewable energy generation facility is prohibited from being engaged in within a setback distance of 120 meters from a significant woodland (subsection 38 (1) of O. Reg. 359/09) unless an Environmental Impact Study and Report is prepared in accordance with the Natural Heritage Assessment Guide, provided by MNRF.

An Environmental Impact Study is a report that evaluates the potential impacts of developing within specified features or within a setback distance to a specified feature. The key components of this report (as given in subsection 38 (2) of O. Reg. 359/09) are:

1. Identify and assess the negative environmental effects of the project that will or are likely to occur on a natural feature referred to in subsection 38 (1) of O. Reg. 359/09, provincial park, or conservation reserve, if applicable.
2. Identify mitigation measures to address the negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur.
3. Describe how potential effects will be monitored during operation in the Environmental Effects Monitoring Plan (EEMP).
4. Describe how potential effects will be mitigated during construction.

In accordance with Section 28(2) and 38(2)(b) of O. Reg. 359/09), MNRF is responsible for reviewing and providing written confirmation that the NHA and EIS was prepared in accordance with MNRF's Natural Heritage Assessment Guide. To assist confirmation of the EIS, it is recommended that applicants include final versions of the sections of the EEMP which reference natural features. The confirmations(s) from MNRF are submitted as part of a complete REA application submission.

Applicants proposing a project requiring a NHA should contact MNRF at an early stage in the project planning process to discuss how natural heritage requirements apply to their project.

6.2.1. Bird and Bat Monitoring Plans for Wind Facilities

For applicants proposing a Class 3 or 4 wind facility, an EEMP is required in respect of birds and bats (as required by section 23.1 of O. Reg. 359/09). These monitoring plans must be in accordance with the following guidance documents published by the MNRF:

For Bird Habitat:
“Birds and Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects” dated December 2011 as amended from time to time.

For Bat Habitat:
“Bats and Bat Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects” dated July 2011 as amended from time to time.

Applicants should note that the EEMP for birds and bats can either be a separate document or included within the general EEMP in the Design and Operations Report. However, the portion of the EEMP that relates to birds and bats must be submitted to MNRF for review prior to submission of a complete REA application. MNRF will provide a comment letter to be included in the complete REA application. For this reason it is important for applicants to consider bird and bat monitoring at an early stage of project planning.

6.2.2. Obtaining a Letter of Confirmation and Comments from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry

If an applicant, through the provisions described in the sections above, prepares reports associated with an NHA, an Environmental Impact Study, or an EEMP in respect of birds and bats, they must be provided to MNRF for review prior to applying for an REA. The purpose of this review is to ensure that applicants have followed MNRF guidance with respect to the assessments and to allow MNRF to raise any additional considerations in the interest of preserving natural heritage. Where the review finds that the assessments have been completed following MNRF guidance, the applicant will be provided with a letter of confirmation, as well as comments on the EEMP in respect of birds and bats. The reports, letters of confirmation, and the comments received from MNRF must be included in the application for an REA. Drafts of the reports must also be made available to the public 60 days in advance of the final public meeting. Further information on consultation activities is provided in Chapter 2 of this guide.

It should be noted that there is potential for new information to come to light in respect of a NHA (or a bird or bat EEMP) following the issuance of the confirmation letter from MNRF. Where new information is discovered after the confirmation letter is issued, applicants should discuss this information with MNRF to determine if further work is required by the applicant, prior to submitting an application for an REA.

6.3. Water Assessment

The assessment of water bodies for the purpose of submitting an application for an REA is described in further detail in Chapter 8 of this guide. While Chapter 8 provides a more complete explanation of the requirements of a water assessment, this section outlines the general requirements for the purpose of an overview.

While the negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur on water bodies may be considered for all renewable energy projects, O. Reg. 359/09 has specific requirements for assessing water bodies for facilities provided in the table below:

Requirements for Assessing Water Bodies for Facilities

Facility Type	Facility Class(es) Requiring a Water Assessment	Description
Wind Facility	Class 3 and Class 4	Name plate capacity of 50 kW or greater
Solar Facility	Class 3	Name plate capacity greater than 10 kW
Bio-energy Facility	All classes	Includes anaerobic digestion, biogas, biofuel and thermal treatment facilities

Water assessment requirements include assessment requirements (sections 29 - 31 of O. Reg. 359/09) and prohibition/setback provisions (sections 39, 40, 44, and 45 of O. Reg. 359/09).

The assessment provisions generally require a staged analysis of natural features in the vicinity of the project that includes:

1. Records review to determine if water bodies may exist in the vicinity of the project location. The Table in section 30 of O. Reg. 359/09 provides detail on the nature of the records that must be reviewed and the distances from the project location to particular water bodies that should be considered.
2. Site investigation of all land within 120 m of the project location to determine if additional water bodies exist and to confirm the presence and location of water bodies identified in records review. Site investigation may include an additional investigated area if a lake trout lake at or above development capacity is identified within 300 m of the project location. In this case land between the project location and the lake trout lake must also be investigated for the purpose of confirming the boundary of the lake trout lake and its distance to the project location.

The prohibition/setback requirements stipulate restrictions on engaging in a project through either:

• Strict prohibitions (i.e. those without exception) on engaging in a renewable energy project.
  • For example, section 39 strictly prohibits the construction, installation or expansion of a class 3 or 4 wind facility within 30 m of the average annual high water mark of a lake, or stream, or 30 m of a seepage area.
• Prohibitions for which an exception exists (i.e. only permitting development if a supplementary report documenting any additional mitigation measures is prepared).
  • For example, a renewable energy generation facility is prohibited from being engaged in within a setback distance of 120 m of the average annual high water mark of a permanent or intermittent stream (section 40 of O. Reg. 359/09) unless a supplementary report documenting any additional mitigation measures is prepared.

A supplementary report documenting any additional mitigation measures is required to evaluate the impact of developing a renewable energy generation facility within specified setback distances to water bodies. The key components of this report are:

1. Identification and assessment of the negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur on the water body and on the land within 30 m of the water body nearest to the project location (to capture any impacts on the riparian zone).
2. Identification of measures to mitigate the negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur.
3. Description of how the negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur will be addressed in the EEMP.
4. Describe how the negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur will be mitigated during construction.

As noted above, further detail on the water assessment and the supplementary report documenting any additional mitigation measures, can be found in Chapter 8 of this guide.

6.4. Additional Requirements for Land Use Planning Areas

Applicants proposing a project that is in any part located within the area designated by a key provincial plan (Greenbelt, Lake Simcoe Watershed, Niagara Escarpment, Oak Ridges Moraine) should contact the ministry at an early stage in the project planning process to discuss whether any additional studies and/or documentation (e.g., hydrogeological assessment) apply to their project.

Projects located on land protected by key provincial plans may have additional approval, setback and reporting requirements under O. Reg. 359/09. Examples of these requirements are provided below:

These requirements must be taken into account in the NHA, water assessment, and the additional REA reports that must be prepared as part of an application for an REA.

In addition to the specific requirements related to provincial plans in O. Reg. 359/09, applicants are encouraged to broadly consider the policy intent of the relevant plan when designing their project in a protected area.

Applicants proposing a project that is in any part located within the area designated as Oak Ridge Moraine should contact the ministry at an early stage in the project planning process to discuss whether any additional studies and/or documentation (e.g., hydrogeological assessment) apply to their project.

7. Completing REA Reports

To submit a complete application for an REA, many reports are required. Several sources of information exist for identifying the reports that are required for each renewable energy technology type and class of facility. Table 1 of O. Reg. 359/09 describes the required content of all the principal REA reports that must be submitted as part of a complete application. Applicants should note that some sections of the regulation outside of Table 1 require additional reports and are advised to become familiar with the regulation as a whole. To assist with determining what reporting requirements may apply, applicants can also refer to Appendix 1 which includes a matrix of REA requirements by technology type and class. Finally, Chapters 2 to 8 of this guide cover the content of the principal REA reports while Chapter 9 describes other reports that may be required depending on the specific details of the project.

7.1. Report Content

The purpose of REA reports is to provide a detailed account of the project proposal, describing the negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur and demonstrating how facility design measures have been included to mitigate these effects. Reports also provide details on the studies and investigations conducted to evaluate negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur, as well as discuss plans for ongoing monitoring activities and plans for decommissioning the facility at the end of the project life. One key report, the Consultation Report, provides information on all of the consultation activities undertaken in advance of submitting an application, including comments received from various stakeholders and how the project plans were modified to address comments. The following chapters further describe the content that should be included in the principal REA reports. These are:

• Chapter 2, Part II: The Consultation Report
• Chapter 4: The Project Description Report (PDR)
• Chapter 5: The Construction Plan Report
• Chapter 6: The Design and Operations Report
• Chapter 7: The Decommissioning Plan Report (DPR)
• Chapter 8: The Water Assessment Report and the supplementary report documenting any additional mitigation measures.

Chapter 9 provides an overview of content (and links to additional guidance) for all additional reports that may be required under the REA.

7.2. Report Timing

The timing of the generation of reports spans the pre-application phase of the REA process. For instance, a draft PDR may be completed at a very early stage in project planning so that Aboriginal consultation can commence. On the other hand, the Consultation Report can only be finalized following the final public meeting, near the end of the pre-application phase. It is the applicant’s responsibility to determine the optimal timing for completion of reports for their project. However, O. Reg. 359/09 does have some requirements for making such reports available to the public, Aboriginal communities, and municipalities for the purposes of consultations. Applicants are required to meet these timing requirements in order to be able to submit a complete application. These timelines are outlined in the following sections, 7.2.1 and 7.2.2.

7.2.1. The Project Description Report

The table below shows all regulated timing constraints for sharing the PDR. This table applies for all REA applications, except those in respect of the following facility types, which do not require public meetings:

• Class 2 wind facilities
• Class 1 or 2 anaerobic digestion facilities
• Class 1 thermal treatment facilities, if the generating unit of the facility is located at a farm operation
• Class 2 thermal treatment facilities

Regulated Timing Constraints for Sharing the PDR

Regulated Action for the Project Description Report (not for Class 2 wind, Class 1 or 2 anaerobic digestion, Class 1 thermal treatment, if on a farm, and Class 2 thermal treatment)	Timing Constraints
Submitted to MOECC (Director) so the ministry can generate an Aboriginal Consultation List	Prior to all other consultation activities
Prior to all other consultation activities	At least 30 days in advance of the first public meeting
Sent to all municipalities in which the project is located (upper and lower tier) for municipal consultation as well as to all local roads boards and service boards	At least 30 days in advance of the first public meeting
A later draft PDR sent to all municipalities* (in conjunction with other draft REA reports) for municipal consultation as well as all local roads and service boards	At least 90 days in advance of the final public meeting
Circulated to all Aboriginal communities on the Aboriginal Consultation List	Prior to making all draft reports available to the public as below
Made publicly available (along with remainder of required reports) for consultation in advance of the final public meeting	At least 60 days in advance of the final public meeting
A final version submitted as part of a complete application for an REA	At the time of submitting a complete application
A final version published on the applicant’s website (if one exists) following the submission of a complete application. See Chapter 2 for more information on this requirement	Within 10 days of the notice of proposal being posted on the Environmental Registry by the MOECC

For Class 1 or 2 anaerobic digestion facilities, Class 1 thermal treatment facilities (if the generating unit of the facility is located at a farm operation) and Class 2 thermal treatment facilities, public meetings are not required, however municipal and Aboriginal consultation requirements must still be met. For this reason, a revised schedule of requirements for providing the PDR for these types of facilities is as follows:

Regulated Action for the Project Description Report (for Class 1 or 2 anaerobic digestion, Class 1 thermal treatment, if on a farm, and Class 2 thermal treatment only)	Timing Constraints
Submitted to the MOECC (Director) so the ministry can generate an Aboriginal Consultation List	Prior to all other consultation activities
Circulated to all Aboriginal communities on the Aboriginal Consultation List	At least 30 days in advance of submitting a complete application
Sent to all municipalities in which the project is located (upper and lower tier) for municipal consultation as well as to all local roads and service boards	At least 30 days in advance of submitting a complete application
A final version submitted as part of a complete application for an REA	At the time of submitting a complete application
A final version published on the applicant’s website (if one exists) following the submission of a complete application See Chapter 2 for more information on this requirement	Within 10 days of the notice of proposal being posted on the Environmental Registry by the MOECC

For Class 2 wind projects, a draft PDR must be sent to all municipalities in which the project is located as well as any local roads boards and local service boards at least 30 days prior to submitting an application for a renewable energy approval.

7.2.2. All Other REA Documentation

Drafts of all required reports must be made available to the public, Aboriginal communities and municipalities according to the timelines in the table below:

Regulated Action for Other Required Reports (not for Class 1 or 2 anaerobic digestion, Class 1 thermal treatment, if on a farm, and Class 2 thermal treatment)	Timing Constraints
Drafts sent to all municipalities* for municipal consultation as well as all local roads and service boards.	At least 90 days in advance of the final public meeting
Drafts made publicly available for public consultation in advance of the final public meeting*	At least 60 days in advance of the final public meeting
Drafts sent and made available to Aboriginal communities for consultation in advance of the final public meeting*	At least 60 days in advance of the final public meeting
A final version submitted as part of a complete application for an REA	At the time of submitting a complete application
A final version published on the applicant’s website (if one exists) following the submission of a complete application. See Chapter 2 for more information on this requirement.	Within 10 days of the notice of proposal being posted on the Environmental Registry by the MOECC

As indicated in the table, the table does not apply to:

• Class 1 or 2 anaerobic digestion facilities
• Class 1 thermal treatment facilities, if the generating unit of the facility is located at a farm operation
• Class 2 thermal treatment facilities

For these types of facilities final reports must be submitted to MOECC as part of a complete application. When an application is deemed complete and accepted for review, the final reports must then also be published on the applicant’s website (if one exists). Chapter 2 contains further information on this requirement.

Note that in addition to making draft REA reports available to all Aboriginal communities on the Aboriginal Consultation List, summaries of these reports and additional information on Aboriginal rights or interests that may be impacted by the project must also be provided in advance to each Aboriginal community. More information on this requirement (including minimum timelines) is given in Chapter 2, section 2 which describes Aboriginal consultation.

7.3 REA reports and MNRF Approval and Permitting Requirements Document

Applicants are advised to consider that much of the information provided to MOECC through the REA reports is also required for review by MNRF as part of decision making on approvals or permits under various legislation, including use or occupation of Crown land under the Public Lands Act.

In some cases the information requested of applicants through a REA report is sufficient to inform MNRF's decision making process; however, in other cases applicants are required to provide MNRF with additional information to supplement a REA report. The full scope of MNRF's requirements, including information which must be prepared to supplement REA reports, is outlined in the Approval and Permitting Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects (APRD).

MNRF makes decisions regarding permits, approvals, and the use or occupation of Crown land for renewable energy projects based on the review of all relevant REA reports, information prepared to supplement REA reports, and standalone information requirements found in the APRD.

Applicants are advised to refer to the APRD prior to beginning the preparation of REA reports, in order to gain an understanding of MNRF's requirements, including where supplemental information may need to be provided.

With regard to consultation and preparation of the Consultation Report, applicants must ensure that information and draft reports provided for municipal, public and Aboriginal consultation, as well as public meetings, includes all APRD information used to supplement REA reports and any standalone APRD information where required. Where this information is absent, applicants may be required to conduct further consultation on those aspects before MNRF can issue permits or approvals.

7.3.1 Petroleum Setbacks

The proponent must ensure that the 75-metre setback from any petroleum wells or facilities is met. If an unplugged petroleum well is located within 75 m of the development, the proponent must apply to MNRF for a licence to plug the well in accordance with the Oil, Gas and Salt Resource Act.

If the petroleum well or facility is active, and the proponent wishes to construct within the 75 m setback, the proponent is required to have a Professional Engineer prepare a report demonstrating that the petroleum wells or facilities identified within the setback will not have a negative effect on the renewable energy generation facility and vice versa.

8. Consultation

Consultation is a critical component of the REA process. The REA regulation contains numerous regulated minimum consultation requirements to ensure that the public, municipalities, Aboriginal communities and other stakeholders are notified about projects and provided an opportunity to provide feedback and information to the applicant.

To emphasize the importance of consultation and to group information in an easily accessible manner, consultation requirements and guidance for preparing the Consultation Report are addressed in a separate chapter of this guide. Chapter 2 provides detailed information about the consultation process and all applicants should make themselves familiar with this chapter in conjunction with reading the regulation itself.

Applicants should also refer to Chapter 11 which provides tips for applicants on how to be a good neighbour in the local community by going beyond the minimum regulatory requirements.

While Chapter 2 is the location for the comprehensive discussion of consultation requirements, to assist with the overview of the REA process, the section that follows provides a brief overview of these requirements.

8.1. Consultation Overview

Chapter 2, Figure 6 depicts the key steps in the REA consultation process including the minimum timelines related to particular requirements. This diagram only applies to projects that require public meetings. Class 2 wind facilities, Class 1 or 2 anaerobic digestion facilities, Class 1 thermal treatment facilities (if the generating unit of the facility is located at a farm operation) and Class 2 thermal treatment facilities do not have mandatory public meeting requirements. However, there are additional notification, document dissemination and other consultation requirements for these projects and Chapter 2 provides more information. Chapter 2 also conveys requirements related to how notices must be published and provided, how the municipal consultation form must be provided, as well as requirements related to where meetings must be held, among others. Chapter 2, Figure 6 does not capture all the requirements that must be met and should be considered as an overview only.

O. Reg. 359/09 sets out specific requirements for each type of renewable energy project that must be met prior to submitting an REA application. Where applicants have not adequately described the negative environmental effects or consultation was not satisfactory, the Director has the discretion to require additional notifications, consultations or studies.

Applicants must meet or exceed the minimum regulated consultation requirements, in order for an application to be deemed complete. Providing a detailed account and including evidence of how consultation was undertaken in the Consultation Report is critical for the MOECC to determine that the requirements were met.

9. Operational Flexibility

Operational flexibility allows applicants to make some modification to their facility’s operations or works without having to return to the ministry to seek an amendment to their REA. Operational flexibility refers to changes that may be pre-approved as part of an applicant’s renewable energy project when the REA was first issued. These pre-approved changes are intended to apply to routine maintenance adjustments and other environmentally insignificant operational changes.

Many types of minor changes to renewable energy projects for which an REA has been issued can avoid triggering the need for amendments, and the consequent fees, by ensuring that a sufficient degree of operational flexibility is described and assessed in the original application. Proponents are therefore encouraged to carefully consider and plan in advance the degree of operational flexibility they will require, before submitting an application to the MOECC.

Examples of operational changes that may be permitted as part of an REA include:

• Routine modifications to the facility with predictable effects that are environmentally insignificant and do not extend the project location, such as replacing a fence or resurfacing an existing parking lot;
• Seasonal changes to facility hours of operation;
• Decrease in the project location size;
• Decrease in the number of project components or infrastructure, including:
  • Transformer substation(s)
  • Wind turbines
  • Solar inverter/transformer cluster(s)
  • Generating unit(s)
• Decrease in the amount of waste to be processed daily and/or annually.

By contrast, examples of changes that would not be allowed within the terms and conditions of an REA are:

• Changing facility classification (e.g. from a Class 2 to a Class 3 Anaerobic Digestion facility or replacing a Class 2 wind facility with a Class 3 wind facility);
• Proposing the movement of a project to a completely new location.

The approval of operational flexibility is assessed on a project specific basis by the Director as part of the initial REA application review for the project. Proponents must describe any desired operational flexibility parameters for their project in their REA application for consideration.

9.1. Specific Activities Exempt from REA Amendments

Developers making specific changes to a project may be exempt from having to obtain an amendment to a REA.

Eligible changes:

1. A change to the size or location of an area used for temporary storage of equipment or supplies.
2. A reduction in the size of the project location, as long as there are no changes to the infrastructure or equipment that forms part, or is proposed to form part, of the renewable energy generation facility.
3. A change to the location where the renewable energy generation facility connects, or is proposed to connect, to,
   1. a transmission system with respect to which, pursuant to agreements, the Independent Electricity System Operator has authority to direct operations, or
   2. the distribution system of the distributor in whose distribution service area the renewable energy generation facility is located.
4. A change in respect of a communications tower.
5. A change in the location of fencing.
6. A change to the make, model, arrangement, tracking system, number or name plate capacity of solar photovoltaic collector panels used, or proposed to be used, at the renewable energy generation facility, as long as there is no increase in the noise emissions from the facility.
7. A change in respect of a fiber optic communications line.

In addition, the following conditions apply:

• The specified changes cannot be within any of the setbacks in Part V of O. Reg. 359/09 or rely on any exemptions that may be contained within those sections.
• Changes must take place on the same parcel of land where the project was approved to be engaged in.
• For changes made, any required authorizations for properties protected from a heritage perspective must have been obtained.
• The proposed change must take place at a location at which a natural heritage assessment was conducted and a confirmation was issued by MNRF.
• The person must obtain, where an archeological assessment report was required, the opinion of a consultant archeologist that the proposed change would not alter the conclusion of the report that was prepared and would not result in any additional archaeological concerns.
• Where an archeological assessment report was not required based on the determination of low potential for the presence of an archeological resource, the person must be of the opinion that proposed change does not alter that determination.
• Where a heritage assessment report was not required based on the determination of low potential for the presence of a heritage resource and no abutting protect properties, the person must be of the opinion that proposed change does not alter that determination.

Developers are required to provide written notification of the change to the Director and the ministry’s District Manager in each district in which the project is situated for record-keeping and monitoring purposes within 30 days after making the change. Developers are also required to post the notification of the change on their website to ensure public awareness. As a best practice, developers should also post the Modification Document on their website for at least 60 days.

10. Application Submission and Review

When all consultation and report requirements have been completed and the applicant has determined that the project will meet all the setback and prohibition requirements of O. Reg. 359/09, the applicant may submit an application to MOECC for an REA. To submit an application, applicants must download and complete an application form. This form is entitled “Application for Approval of a Renewable Energy Project” and it is available from the renewable energy section of the MOECC's website as a print only document (Publication #7216e01) and an electronic smart form (Publication #7216e). The application form should be accompanied by copies of all project documentation required for a complete submission. This submission should be made by sending three paper copies of the application package as follows:

• Two (2) paper copies and one (1) electronic (unlocked) copy to the Director, Environmental Approvals Access and Service Integration Branch
• One (1) electronic or paper copy to the nearest MOECC Regional or District Office.

The ministry also requests that applicants submit a digital copy of all application documents to the MOECC's Environmental Approvals Access and Service Integration Branch. If applicants have questions about the logistics of submitting applications they should contact the Environmental Approvals Access and Service Integration Branch.

10.1. Application Fees

As with other environmental approvals, an application for an REA requires the submission of an application fee to cover costs associated with the review of the application. More information on application fees for REAs can be found in the following MOECC publications:

“Renewable Energy Approval (REA) Fees & Refunds,” 2011 Publication #8139e
“FAQs on REA Fees and Refunds,” 2011 Publication #8141e

These publications can be obtained from the renewable energy section of the MOECC's website.

10.2. Completeness Check

Upon receiving a submitted application, the ministry will determine if the application can be accepted for review through a completeness check. The completeness check simply reviews the submitted reports to determine if all the required content (for instance in Table 1 of O. Reg. 359/09) has been included. The completeness check will also examine the Consultation Report in detail to ensure that all the consultation requirements and timelines were adhered to during the pre-application phase. To make this completeness check more transparent to applicants and to assist them in preparing complete applications, the ministry has published the “Checklist for Requirements under O. Reg. 359/09” that itemizes all required content. The checklist will be used by ministry staff to confirm completeness and is available in Appendix 5 and under the renewable energy section of the ministry’s website as Publication #7746e.

If an application is determined to be complete the applicant will be notified and the review phase will commence. If the application is determined to be incomplete, the applicant will be notified and the deficiencies that led to the not-complete determination will be identified to the applicant. If an application is not accepted, the applicant must address all deficiencies identified prior to resubmitting a complete application.

10.3. Application Review

The acceptance of a complete application for review starts the clock on the ministry’s six month service standard for reaching a decision on the application. Screenings and reviews of applications with complex, contentious and/or unresolved issues may take longer. The start of the review phase also places some additional regulated requirements related to consultation. Early and meaningful consultation; high quality applications; and going above and beyond minimum requirements may help in speeding up the screening/review process for some applications.

10.3.1. Environmental Registry Posting and Public Notification

Consultation is a critical component of the REA process, and the review phase includes a final mechanism for public consultation. In most cases, REA applications are subject to a minimum 30 day public comment period on the Environmental Registry. However, in practice for most large or complex renewable energy projects, the Director has posted for a comment period of 45 days or longer. This online Environmental Registry will present proposal notices for all accepted REA applications that are undergoing a decision. When an application has been accepted, the ministry will prepare a proposal notice based on information in the REA application. This notice will then be posted with an active comment period for a minimum of 30 days. In some cases, the comment period may be greater than the 30 day minimum, particularly for most large or complex renewable energy projects. During this time the public can review the proposal notice and provide comments directly to the MOECC about the application. All comments submitted during the comment period must be considered by the MOECC when evaluating an REA application.

It should be noted that there are limited exceptions where section 22 of the Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993 (EBR) does not apply to a project and a minimum 30 day comment period is not required for the proposal. However, in these cases the MOECC's policy will be to post an information notice of the proposal to the Environmental Registry.

To maximize the potential of this final opportunity for consultation, subsections 15 (1) and 15 (2) of O. Reg. 359/09 require applicants to notify the public that the application is under review and to post all final submitted documents to their website (if one exists) within 10 days of the proposal being posted to the Environmental Registry.

For notification, applicants are required to publish a notice in similar locations to those required for other project notices:

• If the project location is situated in a local municipality, the notice must be published in a newspaper with general circulation in the local municipality.
  • If the project is located in more than one local municipality the notice should be posted in a newspaper or newspapers with circulation in each local municipality.
• If the project location is in unorganized territory, the notice must be published in a newspaper with general circulation within 25 kilometres (km) of the project location.
  • If no newspaper exists, the notice must be posted in at least six conspicuous locations within 25 km of the project location.

Notice content is defined in subsection 15 (2) of O. Reg. 359/09 to include the following:

1. The name of the person proposing to engage in the renewable energy project.
2. A brief description of the renewable energy project.
3. A map identifying the project location.
4. If the person has posted documents on their website, the address of their website
5. A statement that a proposal for an REA in respect of the renewable energy project has been posted on the environmental registry and that comments in respect of the proposal may be submitted to the Director.

By requiring these actions, the regulation ensures that the public and all stakeholders are aware that the application is under review, that they have an additional opportunity to comment, and that they can review the final project documents. One key document that can be reviewed at this stage is the Consultation Report. In this report, described further in Chapter 2 – Part 2, the applicant will detail how consultation was conducted, what comments were received, and how the project was modified to address comments, if applicable. By making this report publicly available at the start of the Environmental Registry comment period, interested people and organizations can evaluate for themselves whether concerns raised at earlier stages of project planning were adequately considered. Should an interested person or organization, upon reading the final documents, wish to comment directly to the ministry about the project, there is still an opportunity to do so.

10.3.2. Director May Request More Information

By specifying upfront requirements for such items as setback distances, cultural and NHA, content of reports, and consultation activities, the REA has been designed to allow for a streamlined review of a complete application. While the intent of O. Reg. 359/09 is to provide clear expectations, circumstances may arise that cause the Director to put the review on hold and request that an applicant provide more information related to the project. Under subsection 47.4 (2) of the EPA, the Director has the power to require an applicant:

to submit any plans, specifications, engineers’ reports or other information and to carry out and report on any tests or experiments relating to the renewable energy project.

The MOECC expects that such requests will be made rarely, but some circumstances that could lead to a request for more information include:

• Where the Director believes that further information is needed to understand the potential for combined environmental effects from other projects to change the applicant’s assessment of the negative environmental effects that will or are likely to occur.
• Where a significant negative environmental effect that will or is likely to occur is identified during the review phase (e.g. during the Environmental Registry posting) that requires a technical investigation to resolve.

If such a circumstance arises, the REA review time may be extended by the time it takes for the requested information to be submitted.

10.4. Director Issues a Decision

When the ministry completes the review of the REA application and all comments received during the EBR posting have been considered, the Director will issue a decision on the application. This decision will be to approve the project, likely subject to terms and conditions, or to refuse to approve the project. At the same time that an applicant is notified of the decision, a decision notice will be posted on the Environmental Registry to notify the public about the decision.

For applications that receive an REA, the Director may attach conditions to the approval. Conditions can include timelines for starting construction, revising decommissioning plans, implementing procedures for recording complaints about adverse effects from the facility, and/or building the facility according to plans in the application documents, among others. Conditions of approval are legally binding and can be enforced through the ministry’s compliance policies.

11. Hearing by the Environmental Review Tribunal

The REA process features a unique third-party hearing provision. When a decision is made to approve an REA, any Ontario resident may require a hearing in respect of the Director’s decision to the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT). In order to initiate the hearing process, the notice must be served on the ERT within 15 days of the decision to grant the REA being posted on the Environmental Registry. As per subsection 142 .1 (3) of the EPA, the person requiring the hearing has the onus of establishing that the decision to issue an REA for the project will cause:

• Serious harm to human health; or
• Serious and irreversible harm to plant life, animal life or the natural environment.

Subject to some qualifications, the ERT has six months from the date an appeal is filed to issue a decision.

The ERT publication “A Guide to Appeals regarding Renewable Energy Approvals under section 142.1 of the Environmental Protection Act” available at the ERT's website provides additional information on the appeals process.