No Thresholds for New Coal Mine Reviews

Summary#

This bill changes the federal Impact Assessment Act to say that regulations cannot use a minimum coal production capacity (a size threshold) when listing new coal mines as projects that need a federal impact assessment (Bill s.109(2)). It does not itself add or remove coal mines from the federal “Project List,” but it bans the use of size cut-offs for new coal mines if they are listed.

• Current federal regulations list coal mines using production thresholds; this bill would prohibit that approach for new coal mines (Physical Activities Regulations, SOR/2019-285, Schedule; Bill s.109(2)).
• If coal mines remain on the Project List, all new coal mines, regardless of size, would need a federal impact assessment; no threshold would be allowed (Bill s.109(2)).
• The change does not cover expansions of existing mines; it refers to “new coal mine” only (Bill s.109(2)).
• The minister’s separate power to designate specific projects case by case still exists (Impact Assessment Act s.9).
• The bill takes effect on Royal Assent; regulations that now use thresholds would need updating to comply.

What it means for you#

• Households near proposed coal mines:

  • More proposed coal mines could undergo federal impact assessment with public input, if coal mines stay on the Project List (Bill s.109(2); SOR/2019-285, Schedule).
  • Federal assessments include opportunities for public comments and look at health, environmental, and socio-economic effects (Impact Assessment Act s.22).

• Indigenous communities:

  • More new coal mines could trigger federal duty-to-consult processes tied to impact assessments, including consideration of Indigenous knowledge and impacts on rights (Impact Assessment Act s.22).
  • Engagement would occur earlier in planning if more mines are captured by the federal process (Impact Assessment Act, Part 1).

• Workers and job seekers:

  • Start dates for new coal projects may be later if more projects require a federal assessment with set timelines measured in months to years, depending on process stream (Time Limits Regulations, SOR/2019-283).

• Mining companies and investors:

  • If coal mines remain on the Project List, all new coal mines would face a federal assessment regardless of size; you could not rely on a production threshold to avoid the federal process (Bill s.109(2)).
  • You may face added studies, consultation duties, and timeline requirements set by the federal process (Impact Assessment Act; SOR/2019-283).
  • The minister can still designate non-listed projects, but this bill restricts only the use of thresholds in the regulations (Impact Assessment Act s.9; Bill s.109(2)).

• Provinces and local governments:

  • Provincial assessments would continue. Some projects may undergo both provincial and federal reviews, with coordination tools available under the Act (Impact Assessment Act ss.31–39).

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No appropriations or spending authorities are in the bill text (Bill s.109(2)).
• Administrative updates to federal regulations would be required; cost: Data unavailable.
• If more projects require federal assessment, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada could face higher workload; cost: Data unavailable.
• No official fiscal note identified. Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• Thresholds in the Project List let some new coal mines avoid federal review even if they may affect areas of federal interest (e.g., fish, migratory birds, federal lands, or Indigenous rights). Removing thresholds for new coal mines closes that gap (Bill s.109(2); Impact Assessment Act s.22).
• A clear rule—no size threshold—creates consistent treatment for all new coal mines if they remain listed, which improves predictability for communities and proponents (Bill s.109(2)).
• The minister’s case-by-case designation power is discretionary; relying on it alone can be uncertain for affected people. A blanket listing without thresholds provides upfront clarity (Impact Assessment Act s.9; Bill s.109(2)).
• The change targets only how regulations are written; it does not expand federal powers beyond the Act. It aligns the Project List with the Act’s focus on potential effects, not just project size (Bill s.109(2); Impact Assessment Act s.22).

Opponents' View#

• Banning thresholds removes a risk-based screen. Small, lower-output mines would face the same federal process as large mines, which can add months to years to timelines (e.g., 300–600 days depending on stream) (SOR/2019-283).
• Provinces already run environmental assessments for mines; making all new coal mines subject to federal review could increase duplication and compliance costs. Data unavailable.
• The bill singles out coal by restricting how only coal mine listings can be drafted, reducing regulatory flexibility compared to other sectors (Bill s.109(2)).
• The current regulations use capacity thresholds. Until amended, the mismatch between the Act and the regulations could create legal uncertainty and delay as authorities adjust the Project List (Bill s.109(2); SOR/2019-285, Schedule).