I don't think the details have yet been sorted out - but I would hazard a guess responding with: "unlikely" on the removal option.
Personally, I would be happy if they removed open net pens from the areas of high interaction & risk with outmigrating & rearing juvies - along with public and immediate release of specific sites where there are sea lice AND disease outbreaks so those effects could be assessed on the adjacent wild stocks.
But DFO aquaculture STILL denies that juvies have areas of early marine nearshore rearing (they don't want to know), as well as STILL denying the public real-time information w geographic coordinates on disease outbreaks (they don't want you to know), as they don't want those potential effects to be assessed and the industry to be held accountable and for change to happen (IMHO).
And they STILL won't use Foreman's (or anyone else's) defensible science-based methodology (e.g. agent-based modelling or other siting methodologies) instead of the really idiotic & scientifically indefensible siting criteria they inherited from the Province - because they don't want to rock the boat w the industry and the upper echelon of DFO that have what I would call an incestuous & corrupt relationship w the industry. Cohen noted the same.
Other than the upper echelon of DFO (esp. the aquaculture bunch & Timothy Sargent) retiring - or like Mark Sheppard and Bernie Taekema - instead getting jobs with the industry where they and their potential biases are better suited (IMHO) - I don't see any change unless it is forced.