Re: AREVA's Response to Opportunity to Comment on the CEAA Expert Panel Report

May 5, 2017 Honourable Catherine McKenna. P.C., MP. Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada 200. Sacré-Coeur Blvd Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3 via e-mail: ec.ministre-minister.ec@canada.ca CEAA.EAReview-FxarnenEE.ACEEceaa-acce.gc.ca Dear Minister McKenna: Re: AREVA's Response to Opportunity to Comment on the CEAA Expert Panel Report Headquartered in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. AREVA Resources Canada is a leading producer of uranium, accounting for the processing of 17.3 million pounds or nearly half of the uranium concentrate produced in Canada in 2016. AREVA Resources Canada Inc. has been exploring for uranium, developing uranium mines and producing uranium concentrate in Canada for more than 50 years. AREVA Resources is the operator of the McClean Lake uranium mill and a major partner in the Cigar Lake, McArthur River and Key Lake operations. The company employs over 480 people in Saskatchewan, including about 130 in Saskatoon. In 2016, AREVA Resources contributed over $59.8 M in taxes and royalties and incurred $102.5 M of expenditures for goods and services purchased from Saskatchewan based businesses. with $63.6 M of these expenditures purchased from northern Saskatchewan and Aboriginal owned businesses. As of March 2017, AREVA Resources Canada had 329 employees at its McClean Lake Operation including 50% residents of Saskatchewan's North and 45% selfdeclared Aboriginal. As you are aware, the Government of Canada recently made available to stakeholders the Expert Panel's final report entitled BUILDING COMMON GROUND - A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada'. While we acknowledge the extensive work of the Expert Panel to listen to Canadians and to formulate their recommendations of a future vision of the federal Environmental Assessment process, the Panel has recommended an array of fundamental changes to how this process would be structured. AREVA Resources canada Inc. P,O Box 9204-817 -45"' Street West - Saskatoor, SK S7K 3X5 - CANADA Tel 1 (306) 343.4500 - Fax: 1 (306) 653-3883 - Web S,te WWa(eva ca

Honourable Catherine McKenna Re: AREVA's Response to Opportunity to Comment on the CEAA Expert Panel Report May 5,2017 Page 2 of 5 We find that the Expert Panel's view that they are "not proposing the creation of something entirely new"1 is contrary to what is provided in their recommendations. We also find the Expert Panel's recommendations did not provide adequate consideration or weighing to proponent experience with the federal environmental assessment process and its evolution (EARPGO (1984); CEAA (1992. 2012). Environmental assessment practitioners are best positioned to share their experience with the challenges with respect to the intent of CEAA as a planning tool, and the concomitant, ever increasing information expectations of federal authorities in areas of federal interest. In our significant experience with environmental assessment (see highlights in Attachment A), the fundamental challenges to the environmental assessment process do not reside in CEAA legislation, but rather in the lack of effective coordination, clarity of policy, and meaningful and effective guidance on how to meet many of the areas of federal interest that have been identified by the Expert Panel. For example, based on our 7 years of experience with the Midwest Project Comprehensive Study environmental assessment, in our view two of the primary determinants of the extended decision-making timeline were: the lack of clear and effective national guidance on how to meet the no net loss provisions as outlined in the Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat in Canada (1986), and the transfer of the management of the responsibilities for the Navigable Waters Protection Act from the Canadian Coast Guard to Transport Canada. and the resultant change in policy decision-making to remove the option to apply for an exemption from the requirements of the Navigable Waters Protection Act for the temporary impingement on the public's right to navigate for small. often intermittent streams in remote areas. Based on our experience, we see a need for the federal government to identify opportunities within the broader review of federal environmental legislation currently being undertaken to support improvement in the federal environmental assessment process. For example. various aspects of the Fisheries Act are currently under review including the Metal Mining Effluent Regulations (MMER). We have long sought for the MMER to work in harmony with, and recognize the outcomes of environmental assessment processes, to evolve to align with the evaluation of environmental assessment predictions, to support follow-up monitoring, and to Building Common Ground page 12.

ARE VA Honourable Catherine McKenna May 5, 2017 Re: AREVA's Response to Opportunity to Comment on the CEAA Expert Panel Report Page 3of5 work within an iterative process of continual improvement and adaptive management2. Similarly, whether the federal Fisheries Act and policy revolves around the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction (HADD) of fish habitat, or serious harm, the absence of practical guidance and an effective framework to meet federal Fisheries Act policy in an efficient and timely manner, is clearly an impediment to an effective environmental assessment process. Such potential opportunities to identify efficiencies, clarify policy and provide meaningful and effective guidance also exist in other areas of federal interest such as species at risk, and navigation. In uranium mining, environmental assessment has also evolved in parallel with the evolution of the CNSC's broadened mandate for environmental protection as reflected in the Canadian Nuclear Safety Control Act3, which further strengthened an evidence-based lifecycle assessment approach. This holistic lifecycle approach, combined with the CNSC's strong technical expertise, clarity of policy and environmental protection principles, assessment methodologies and protection measures4, are supported by a suite of consensus-based environmental protection standards developed through the Canadian Standards Association Nuclear Program5, and provide for an evidence-based iterative approach to ecological and human health risk evaluation, monitoring against environmental assessment predictions and follow-up program requirements, learning, continual improvement, adaptation and the incorporation of new science to address the lifecycle of nuclear facilities in Canada. We therefore strongly support that the CNSC is maintained as the federal responsible authority and environmental assessment lead agency for uranium mining projects in Canada. We acknowledge that some specific recommendations of the Expert Panel Report have sound intent, in particular, the recommendations supporting the greater use of regional assessments. Federal support for regional environmental assessments, if done in cooperation with provincial and territorial governments, could provide an effective means to communicate federal interests, clarify policy within a regional-specific context, and provide meaningful and effective guidance on how to address many of the areas of federal interest, and thereby facilitate project-specific environmental assessment decision making. Priority regions within Canada would however need to be identified to initiate such a process, with the recognition that such processes will 2 See also: Metal Mining Environmental Effects Monitoring Review Team Report. 2007. Nuclear Safety Control Act. 1997. Environmental Protection: Environmental Principles, Assessments and Protection Measures. REGDOC 2.9.1. Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. 2016. See: Canadian Standards Association Nuclear Program Suite of Environmental Protection Standards.

Honourable Catherine McKenna Re AREVAs Response to Opportunity to Comment on the CEAA Expert Panel Report May 5,2017 Page 4 of 5 likely take many years to complete, will be costly and will be difficult to maintain and that in the interim, environmental assessment decisions will need to be made. Our Saskatchewan uranium mining operations have undergone rigorous environmental assessment processes and we have a long history of engaging with stakeholders. Indigenous Peoples and federal and provincial governments early in the planning and assessment phases. Saskatchewan uranium mining operations also work within comprehensive, and cooperative regulatory and licensing regimes which provide for an iterative approach to environmental assessment, monitoring against environmental assessment predictions and follow-up programs. Our operations are supported by comprehensive decommissioning and reclamation plans and financial assurance funds are in place to ensure that our operations are properly decommissioned. These cooperative processes began prior to the implementation of a federal environmental assessment regime, and many best practices have evolved in parallel with changes in federal assessment requirements. Mining is an important industry in Saskatchewan and across Canada and through both direct and indirect benefits, our industry provides significant opportunities for Indigenous Peoples and working families: careful consideration of proposed changes to the federal environmental assessment process is needed to maintain international competitiveness in Canada's resource sector, and investment in exploration and mining activity. Taken as a whole. the recommendations raise fundamental reservations of the future of the federal environmental assessment process in Canada. and have the potential to create, rather than reduce uncertainty in resource development decisions, erode the international competitiveness of Canada's resource sector. and ultimately. impede getting Canada's natural resources to market. Further, the primary concerns related to environmental assessment and management exist outside of the CEAA process and changes to CEAA may appeal to voters but will not reconcile fundamental policy issues within related regulation. We note that the 30-day review period has provided little time to contemplate and evaluate the Expert Panel report and recommendations. To respond within this limited time period, we have worked collaboratively with The Saskatchewan Mining Association (SMA), and its members to provide an overview of the broad range of issues and concerns identified during an initial review of the CEAA Expert Panel report and its recommendations.

ARE VA Honourable Catherine McKenna May 5,2017 Re: AREVA's Response to Opportunity to Comment on the CEAA Expert Panel Report Page 5 of 5 We echo the issues and concerns raised in the submission of the Saskatchewan Mining Association. We request that in considering the recommendations of the Expert Panel, Senior officials from ECCC and CEAA consider our concerns and suggestions, and those raised by the Saskatchewan Mining Association. Furthermore, we request that a minimum 90-day review period be provided to review the government response to the Expert Panel recommendations, so that we can continue to contribute to the successful evolution of environmental assessment in Canada. In conclusion, I would stress that changes to CEAA to the degree suggested in the Expert Panel Report have greater potential to create rather than reduce uncertainty in resource management and are not expected to improve decision making beyond the existing system. AREVA representatives would be pleased to meet with you and your officials at your earliest convenience to share our experience and clarify the opportunities and concerns we have raised. Sincerely, <Signature removed> Vincent Martin President and CEO Attachment cc: Honourable Jim Carr Minister (NRCan) Honourable Dominic LeBlanc Minister (FOC) Konourable Ralph Goodale Minister (PSEP) Honourable Scott Moe Minister (SMoE) Honourable Jeremy Harrison Minister (SMECON) Ron Haliman President (CEAA) Jonathan Wilkinson Parliamentary Secretary Minister ECCC Kim Rudd - Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of NRCan Stephen Lucas Deputy Minister (ECCC) Christine Loth-Bown Vice President (CE.AA) Christyne Tremblay Deputy Minister (NRCan) Catherine Blewett Deputy minister (FOC) Lin Gallagher Deputy Minister (SMoE) Laurie Pushor Deputy Minister (SMECON) Pierre Gratton President & CEO (MAC) Justyna Laurie-Lean Vice President (MAC) Brad Sigurdson Vice President (SMA) minister nrcan-rncan.gc.ca mindfo-mpo.gc.ca ralph.goodale parl.gc.ca env.ministergov.sk.ca minister.econgov.sk.ca Ron.Hallmanceaa-acee.gc.ca Jonathan.Wilkinson.A2 parlgc.ca kim.ruddparl.gc.ca stephen.lucas@canada.ca Christine.Loth-Bownceaa-aceegc.ca christyne.tremblaycanada.ca Catherine.Blewettdfo-mpo.gcca lin.gallaghergov.sk.ca laurie.pushor gov.sk.ca pgratton mining.ca jlaurie-lean mining.ca bsigurdsonsaskmining.ca

Attachment A Highlights of ARE VA's Environmental Assessment Experiences As outlined, AREVA Resources has been a successful participant in uranium exploration and mine development in Saskatchewan for over 50 years. Over this period of time, the Saskatchewan uranium mining industry has grown to be the largest industrial employer of Indigenous people in Canada. Much of this Saskatchewan-made Canadian success has its origins in the recommendations of the Cluff Lake Board of Inquiry, Chaired by Justice E.D. Bayda (the Bayda Commission) which led a 1.5-year public inquiry into the probable environmental, health, safety, social, economic and other implications of the expansion of the uranium industry in Saskatchewan'. Established at the request of the Saskatchewan Minister of the Environment by an Order-in-Council. The Bayda Commission Inquiry pre-dates the establishment of a federal environmental assessment regime in Canada. The recommendations of the Bayda Commission established a framework for Indigenous and northern employment and business development opportunity in Saskatchewan's uranium mining industry: this was accomplished within a context that supports both northern employment and socio-economic development, while providing for Indigenous and northern people to maintain and enhance their inherent connectedness to the land, their traditions and their cultural practices. Based on the solid foundation established by the Bayda Commission, this Saskatchewan-based framework further evolved through the cooperative environmental assessment efforts of the Joint Federal-Provincial Panel on Uranium Developments in Northern Saskatchewan2; a joint process which recognized the needs of both the provincial environmental assessment process and the federal Environmental Assessment and Review Process Guidelines Order (EARPGO). and considered the environmental, health, safety and socio-economic impacts of uranium mine developments in northern Saskatchewan. The Joint Panel reviewed 5 Saskatchewan uranium mining projects over a 6-year period. Our federal environmental assessment experience also includes the legal exploration of the transitional provisions of the original Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). and a 7- year federal-provincial environmental assessment of the Midwest Project. where federal 'The Cluff Lake Board of Inquiry Final Report 1978 2 Report of the Joint Federal-Provincial Panel on uranium Mining Developments in Northern Saskatchewan 1993, 1997.

ARE VA Attachment A - Highlights of AREVA's Environmental Assessment Experiences Page 2 of2 authorities were coordinated by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency3. We have also contributed to, and made recommendations to improve the effectiveness of CEAA during the statutory 5-year review process and to the changes incorporated into CEAA 2012. We have also gained substantial impact assessment experience through our participation in the 8-year Nunavut Impact Review Board process of the proposed Kiggavik Project, where federal authority participation was coordinated by the Northern Major Projects Office. Draft Comprehensive Study Report for the Midwest Mining and Milling Project, AREVA Resources Canada Incorporated. 2011, Authored by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Transport Canada, Natural Resources Canada and Saskatchewan Ministry of the Environment.