Page 1 Presentation for Final Hearing on Baffinland's proposed
Presentation for Final Hearing on Baffinland’s proposed Mary River Iron Ore Project ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ ᑐᓴᕋᓱᐊᕐᓂᕐᒥ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ ᐹᕕᓐᓛᓐᑯᑦ ᓄᓘᔮᓐᓂ ᓴᕕᕋᔭᒃᓴᑕᕐᓂᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᔪᒪᔭᖓᑦ Iqaluit, July 17, 2012 Igloolik, July 23, 2012 Pond Inlet, July 26, 2012
ᐃᖃᓗᐃᑦ, ᔪᓚᐃ 17, 2012 ᐃᒡᓗᓕᒃ, ᔪᓚᐃ 23, 2012 ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒃ, ᔪᓚᐃ 26, 2012
AANDC’s Role in the Nunavut Impact Review Board’s Environmental Assessment Review
ᓄᓇᖃᖄᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ (ᐃᓄᓕᕆᔨᑐᖃᒃᑯᑦ) ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖅᑎᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᕙᑎᒥᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓂᒃ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᕐᒥᒃ
• Responsible Minister • ᑲᒪᒋᔭᖃᖅᑐᖅ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ
• Intervener – Provide expert advice
• ᓄᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᐊᕈᒪᔪᖅ − ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔨᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᔾᔨᒋᐊᖅᑎᐅᓲᑦ • Regulator – Administer federal public land and water licence inspections/enforcement
• ᐱᖁᔭᓕᐅᕈᔾᔨᔨ – ᐊᐅᓚᑎᑦᑎᓲᖅ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᖁᑎᖓᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᒪᕐᒧᑦ ᓚᐃᓴᓐᓯ ᓱᖅᑯᐃᖅᓯᓇᓱᐊᕈᑎᓂᒃ/ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᑎᑦᑎᔾᔪᑎᓂᒃ
2
Inle
82°W
81°W
80°W
Miln e
79°W
78°W
77°W
76°W
75°W
Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation Mary River Project 71°30'N
83°W
te To ing
72°N
ist Ex 71°N
ad Ro
R ed os
71°30'N
op Pr
Mine Site
ailr
10
y wa
10 5 0
20
70°30'N
Kilometres
Tenure data as of July 3, 2012 Proposed Railway Milne Inlet Tote Road
71°N
Baffinland Mineral Lease Active Mineral Lease Baffinland Mineral Claim Active Mineral Claim Active Prospecting Permit
ee ns b
Potential Development Area Inuit Owned Lands - Fee Simple Title
70°30'N
Surface Only
yI
70°N
St
Mine Site Airstrip
nl et
Surface and Subsurface Created by: T. Ma, Nunavut Regional Office, Iqaluit
Projection: Canada Lambert Conformal Conic, NAD 83
84°W
83°W
July 4, 2012
3 82°W
81°W
80°W
79°W
78°W
77°W
Summary of AANDC’s review of the project ᓇᐃᓈᖅᓯᔾᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᕐᓂᖓᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒥᒃ AANDC participated in every step of NIRB’s Part 5 review of this project. In Baffinland’s Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements we reviewed: ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓯᒪᕗᑦ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᓕᒫᖓᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᑦᓯᔪᒪᔪᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑎᐅᔪᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐃᓚᖓᓂᒃ 5-ᒥᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑖᒃᓱᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔫᑉ. ᐹᕕᓐᓛᓐᑯᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᓐᖓᖅᑕᖓᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᐅᑉ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᖏᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᓚᐅᖅᐸᕗᑦ: • Impacts to fresh water; ᐊᑦᑐᖅᓯᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᒥᕐᓂᒃ;
• Design, construction, and operation considerations for mine components; • ᐋᖅᑭᓱᖅᓯᒪᓂᖓᒍᑦ, ᓴᓇᔭᐅᓂᖓᒍᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᐅᓚᑎᑦᑎᑕᐅᓂᖓᒍᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐅᔭᕋᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓚᖏᑦ; • Socio-economic considerations; ᐃᓅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᐅᕈᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᖓᔪᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ; • Impacts on the terrestrial environment; ᐊᑦᑐᖅᓯᓂᖏᖏᑦ ᓄᓇᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᒥᒃ • Waste and hazardous materials management; and • ᐊᑦᑕᑯᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᓗᕆᐊᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓱᓇᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ; ᐊᒻᒪ • Closure and reclamation planning. ᒪᑐᔭᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑎᖅᑎᑕᐅᒋᐊᕐᓂᖓᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᒍᑎᓕᐅᕐᓂᖅ.
4
Summary of AANDC’s participation in the review of the project ᓇᐃᓈᖅᓯᔾᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓂᖓᓐᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᖅ Baffinland made some improvements and provided additional information, requested by AANDC during the DEIS review stage, in their Final Environmental Impact Statement. Examples include: ᐹᕕᓐᓛᓐᑯᑦ ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᐹᓪᓕᖅᓯᓚᐅᖅᐳᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᑕᖃᖅᑎᑎᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᓂᒃ, ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑐᑎᓪᓗ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᓐᖓᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᕙᑎᐅᑉ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ, ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᐅᑉ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᒥᓐᓂ. ᐆᑦᑐᕋᐅᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᕗᑦ ᒪᑯᐊ: • Socio-economic baseline data • ᐃᓅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᐅᕈᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᖓᔪᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᑲᑎᖅᓱᒐᐃᑦ • Improved information on Inuit harvesting; and • ᐋᖅᑭᐹᓪᓕᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖓᑦ; ᐊᒻᒪ • A more detailed closure plan. • ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᖅᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᓂᖅᓴᖅ ᒪᑐᔭᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᒍᑎ.
Summary of AANDC’s technical review comments on Baffinland’s Final Environmental Impact Statement ᓇᐃᓈᖅᓯᔾᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᓴᓇᑐᔭᕆᐊᑐᔪᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᕐᓂᕐᒥ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ ᐹᕕᓐᓛᓐᑯᑦ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᐊᕙᑎᐅᑉ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᖓᑦ AANDC commented on: ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᖃᓚᐅᖅᐳᑦ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ: • Water management ᐃᒪᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ
• Vegetation ᐱᕈᖅᑐᑦ • Acid rock drainage/metal leaching management
• ᐆᑖᕐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐅᕋᔭᓐᓄᑦ ᑭᓂᕆᔪᑦ/ᓴᕕᕋᔭᓐᓂᒃ ᑭᓂᕆᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ • Hazardous materials and waste management
• ᐅᓗᕆᐊᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓱᓇᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᑦᑕᑯᓂᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ • Alternatives assessment ᑕᐅᖅᓯᐅᑎᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᕐᓂᖅ
• Collaborative socio-economic monitoring and adaptive management • ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᓪᓗᓂ ᐃᓅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᐅᕈᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ ᒪᓕᒃᑎᑦᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᓗᓂ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ 6
On-going discussions ᑲᔪᓯᔪᑦ ᐅᖃᒪᖃᑎᒌᖃᑦᑕᕐᓃᑦ
• Water quality in pit lake post-closure requires further study. • ᐃᒪᐅᑉ ᐱᐅᑎᒋᓂᖓ ᐃᓯᖅᓴᒥ ᑕᓯᕐᒥ ᒪᑐᓯᒪᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᖅᐳᖅ. • Collaborative socio-economic monitoring and adaptive management required.
• ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᓪᓗᓂ ᐃᓅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᐅᕈᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ ᒪᓕᒃᑎᑦᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᓗᓂ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐱᑕᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᐳᒃ.
7
Conclusion - ᐃᓱᓕᔾᔪᑎᑦ
• Most of the issues found in the areas reviewed by AANDC are minor and can be resolved through licensing/permitting and monitoring. • ᑕᒪᐃᑕᑲᓴᒃ ᓴᖅᑭᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᖅᑕᐅᔪᓂ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᓐᖏᓚᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᓱᑎᒃ ᓚᐃᓴᓐᓯᓕᕆᓂᒃᑯᑦ/ᐱᓕᕆᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᓕᕆᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᒃᑯᑦ. • Monitoring and adaptive management are important.
• ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ ᒪᓕᒃᑎᑦᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᓗᓂ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᕗᒃ.
8
ᐃᖃᓗᐃᑦ, ᔪᓚᐃ 17, 2012 ᐃᒡᓗᓕᒃ, ᔪᓚᐃ 23, 2012 ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒃ, ᔪᓚᐃ 26, 2012
AANDC’s Role in the Nunavut Impact Review Board’s Environmental Assessment Review
ᓄᓇᖃᖄᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ (ᐃᓄᓕᕆᔨᑐᖃᒃᑯᑦ) ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖅᑎᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᕙᑎᒥᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓂᒃ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᕐᒥᒃ
• Responsible Minister • ᑲᒪᒋᔭᖃᖅᑐᖅ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ
• Intervener – Provide expert advice
• ᓄᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᐊᕈᒪᔪᖅ − ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔨᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᔾᔨᒋᐊᖅᑎᐅᓲᑦ • Regulator – Administer federal public land and water licence inspections/enforcement
• ᐱᖁᔭᓕᐅᕈᔾᔨᔨ – ᐊᐅᓚᑎᑦᑎᓲᖅ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᖁᑎᖓᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᒪᕐᒧᑦ ᓚᐃᓴᓐᓯ ᓱᖅᑯᐃᖅᓯᓇᓱᐊᕈᑎᓂᒃ/ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᑎᑦᑎᔾᔪᑎᓂᒃ
2
Inle
82°W
81°W
80°W
Miln e
79°W
78°W
77°W
76°W
75°W
Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation Mary River Project 71°30'N
83°W
te To ing
72°N
ist Ex 71°N
ad Ro
R ed os
71°30'N
op Pr
Mine Site
ailr
10
y wa
10 5 0
20
70°30'N
Kilometres
Tenure data as of July 3, 2012 Proposed Railway Milne Inlet Tote Road
71°N
Baffinland Mineral Lease Active Mineral Lease Baffinland Mineral Claim Active Mineral Claim Active Prospecting Permit
ee ns b
Potential Development Area Inuit Owned Lands - Fee Simple Title
70°30'N
Surface Only
yI
70°N
St
Mine Site Airstrip
nl et
Surface and Subsurface Created by: T. Ma, Nunavut Regional Office, Iqaluit
Projection: Canada Lambert Conformal Conic, NAD 83
84°W
83°W
July 4, 2012
3 82°W
81°W
80°W
79°W
78°W
77°W
Summary of AANDC’s review of the project ᓇᐃᓈᖅᓯᔾᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᕐᓂᖓᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒥᒃ AANDC participated in every step of NIRB’s Part 5 review of this project. In Baffinland’s Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements we reviewed: ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓯᒪᕗᑦ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᓕᒫᖓᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᑦᓯᔪᒪᔪᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑎᐅᔪᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐃᓚᖓᓂᒃ 5-ᒥᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑖᒃᓱᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔫᑉ. ᐹᕕᓐᓛᓐᑯᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᓐᖓᖅᑕᖓᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᐅᑉ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᖏᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᓚᐅᖅᐸᕗᑦ: • Impacts to fresh water; ᐊᑦᑐᖅᓯᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᒥᕐᓂᒃ;
• Design, construction, and operation considerations for mine components; • ᐋᖅᑭᓱᖅᓯᒪᓂᖓᒍᑦ, ᓴᓇᔭᐅᓂᖓᒍᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᐅᓚᑎᑦᑎᑕᐅᓂᖓᒍᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐅᔭᕋᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓚᖏᑦ; • Socio-economic considerations; ᐃᓅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᐅᕈᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᖓᔪᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ; • Impacts on the terrestrial environment; ᐊᑦᑐᖅᓯᓂᖏᖏᑦ ᓄᓇᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᒥᒃ • Waste and hazardous materials management; and • ᐊᑦᑕᑯᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᓗᕆᐊᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓱᓇᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ; ᐊᒻᒪ • Closure and reclamation planning. ᒪᑐᔭᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑎᖅᑎᑕᐅᒋᐊᕐᓂᖓᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᒍᑎᓕᐅᕐᓂᖅ.
4
Summary of AANDC’s participation in the review of the project ᓇᐃᓈᖅᓯᔾᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓂᖓᓐᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᖅ Baffinland made some improvements and provided additional information, requested by AANDC during the DEIS review stage, in their Final Environmental Impact Statement. Examples include: ᐹᕕᓐᓛᓐᑯᑦ ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᐹᓪᓕᖅᓯᓚᐅᖅᐳᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᑕᖃᖅᑎᑎᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᓂᒃ, ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑐᑎᓪᓗ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᓐᖓᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᕙᑎᐅᑉ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ, ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᐅᑉ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᒥᓐᓂ. ᐆᑦᑐᕋᐅᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᕗᑦ ᒪᑯᐊ: • Socio-economic baseline data • ᐃᓅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᐅᕈᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᖓᔪᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᑲᑎᖅᓱᒐᐃᑦ • Improved information on Inuit harvesting; and • ᐋᖅᑭᐹᓪᓕᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖓᑦ; ᐊᒻᒪ • A more detailed closure plan. • ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᖅᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᓂᖅᓴᖅ ᒪᑐᔭᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᒍᑎ.
Summary of AANDC’s technical review comments on Baffinland’s Final Environmental Impact Statement ᓇᐃᓈᖅᓯᔾᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᓴᓇᑐᔭᕆᐊᑐᔪᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᕐᓂᕐᒥ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ ᐹᕕᓐᓛᓐᑯᑦ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᐊᕙᑎᐅᑉ ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᖓᑦ AANDC commented on: ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᖃᓚᐅᖅᐳᑦ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ: • Water management ᐃᒪᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ
• Vegetation ᐱᕈᖅᑐᑦ • Acid rock drainage/metal leaching management
• ᐆᑖᕐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐅᕋᔭᓐᓄᑦ ᑭᓂᕆᔪᑦ/ᓴᕕᕋᔭᓐᓂᒃ ᑭᓂᕆᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ • Hazardous materials and waste management
• ᐅᓗᕆᐊᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓱᓇᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᑦᑕᑯᓂᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ • Alternatives assessment ᑕᐅᖅᓯᐅᑎᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᕐᓂᖅ
• Collaborative socio-economic monitoring and adaptive management • ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᓪᓗᓂ ᐃᓅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᐅᕈᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ ᒪᓕᒃᑎᑦᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᓗᓂ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ 6
On-going discussions ᑲᔪᓯᔪᑦ ᐅᖃᒪᖃᑎᒌᖃᑦᑕᕐᓃᑦ
• Water quality in pit lake post-closure requires further study. • ᐃᒪᐅᑉ ᐱᐅᑎᒋᓂᖓ ᐃᓯᖅᓴᒥ ᑕᓯᕐᒥ ᒪᑐᓯᒪᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᖅᐳᖅ. • Collaborative socio-economic monitoring and adaptive management required.
• ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᓪᓗᓂ ᐃᓅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᐅᕈᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ ᒪᓕᒃᑎᑦᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᓗᓂ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐱᑕᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᐳᒃ.
7
Conclusion - ᐃᓱᓕᔾᔪᑎᑦ
• Most of the issues found in the areas reviewed by AANDC are minor and can be resolved through licensing/permitting and monitoring. • ᑕᒪᐃᑕᑲᓴᒃ ᓴᖅᑭᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᖅᑕᐅᔪᓂ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᓐᖏᓚᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᓱᑎᒃ ᓚᐃᓴᓐᓯᓕᕆᓂᒃᑯᑦ/ᐱᓕᕆᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᓕᕆᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᒃᑯᑦ. • Monitoring and adaptive management are important.
• ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ ᒪᓕᒃᑎᑦᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᓗᓂ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᕗᒃ.
8
