Joint Environmental Review Panel Recommendations

By 250 News

The Joint Review Panel which conducted the Environmental Assessment on the Kemess North  mine project   says the project should not go ahead.

The news release says "In the Panel’s view, the economic and social benefits provided by the Project, on balance, are outweighed by the risks of significant adverse environmental, social and cultural effects, some of which may not emerge until many years after mining operations cease. The Panel recommends to the Government of Canada and the Government of British Columbia, that the Project not be approved as proposed."

Prince George North MLA Pat Bell says that doesn’t necessarily mean the project will be shelved.  “This is a set of recommendations made to the Ministries of Environment for consideration, ultimately, Minister Penner will make a decision, together with the Minister of Mines, and this set of recommendations will be considered.”    Is it likely  that Provincial Minister of the Environment  Barry Penner would approve such a project when a Joint Panel Review says the project should not proceed?  "It wouldn't be appropriate for me to say what Minister Penner might or might not do" says Bell, “Clearly the Joint Review Panel has sent a strong message, but it has also included a set of recommendations should the ministries decide to go ahead with the project.” 

It would take Penner’s approval, as well as the approval of the Federal Government for this project to proceed. 

The full report can be downloaded  by clicking here.

Here  are the  full 33 recommendations as  set out in the report:

Recommendation #1: The Panel recommends that, if this Project is approved, the Proponent make effective use of the time available before construction start-up to collect additional local baseline hydrological, hydrogeological and climatic information prior to Project construction, in order to address concerns raised by federal and provincial agencies during the environmental assessment. The additional baseline data to be collected should be  determined through discussions with the B.C. Ministry of Environment and Environment Canada (p.58).

Recommendation #2: The Panel recommends that, if the Project is approved, the Proponent, at the permitting stage, develop detailed measures to address operations-stage icing concerns in downstream drainages, and to ensure that any downstream sedimentation and stream morphology effects are reversible at closure. This work should be conducted in conjunction with, and to the satisfaction of, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Environment Canada and the B.C. Ministry of Environment (p.68).

Recommendation #3: The Proponent has predicted that Impoundment water levels would fluctuate by ±0.5 m over the long term. The Panel notes doubts about the completeness of the Proponent’s hydrological baseline information, as well as the importance of maintaining an adequate depth of water cover over potentially reactive mined wastes. The Panel recommends that, if the Project is approved, the proponent work the B.C. Ministry of Environment and Environment Canada at the permitting stage to ensure, to their satisfaction, that long-term Impoundment water level fluctuations have been reliably determined (p.74).

Recommendation #4: Given that the quality of dam seepage escaping the Impoundment could remain poor for an indefinite period after closure, the Panel recommends that the Proponent’s contingency proposal to collect and pump poor-quality seepage back into the Impoundment or the North Pit for as long as is necessary be made a firm condition of approval (p.75).

Recommendation #5: The Panel recommends that, if the Project is approved, the general scheme for long-term maintenance of a water balance which would keep reactive wastes permanently flooded be defined in greater detail at the permitting stage, through discussions with agencies. These discussions should involve potentially affected Aboriginal groups, if they are willing to participate (p.76).

Recommendation #6: If the Project is approved, the Panel recommends that additional baseline water quality information be collected pre-construction and that data collection be continued during construction and operations, to monitor actual effects on water quality, and degree of compliance with impact management objectives (p.83).

Recommendation #7: The Proponent argued that the appropriate depth of water cover to suppress ML/ARD and particle re-suspension process would vary at different points in the Impoundment, and should be determined in detail during the permitting stage. If the Project is approved, the Panel recommends, as part of addressing Recommendation #5, that the Proponent work with key agencies at the permitting stage to establish water cover depth criteria which are protective of both near-term and very-long-term water quality in the Impoundment and downstream (p.112).

Recommendation #8: The Panel recommends that, if the Project is approved, the Proponent should be required, at the permitting stage, to prepare a detailed strategy for biological recovery of the Impoundment to support fully developed aquatic systems. The strategy should be protective of Impoundment water quality, and should incorporate triggers for specific actions which are clearly linked to specific thresholds in the improvement of water quality at and after closure (p.112).

Recommendation #9: Given the potentially negative water quality and fisheries effects of sub-aerial exposure of flooded reactive wastes in the Duncan Impoundment, the Panel  recommends, if the Project is approved, that the measures proposed by the Proponent for preventing depression of the phreatic surface in tailings, beaches and dams be designed in more detail at the permitting stage. This work should form part of a broader detailed assessment of all mechanisms which could potentially lead to re-exposure of reactive wastes, with detailed adaptive management measures developed to address all identified risk factors (p.115).

Recommendation #10: The Panel acknowledges the Proponent’s expectation that total suspended solids (TSS) levels in the Impoundment at or shortly after closure would fall below the mandatory Metal Mines Effluent Regulations limit of 15 mg/L, but notes that this was not supported by detailed modeling. The Panel recommends that, if the Project is approved, TSS levels be modeled in detail at the permitting stage (p.128).

Recommendation #11: Unresolved uncertainties remain with respect to the effects of escaped North Dam seepage on water quality in Duncan Creek and further downstream, despite the Proponent’s commitment to recover poor quality seepage during operations and for as long as is necessary after closure. The Panel recommends that, if the Project is approved, Commitments #36, #38, #39 and #57, which address updating of seepage quality predictions, compliance with water quality objectives, design of the seepage recovery system, and ongoing seepage monitoring, and any other necessary strategies for minimizing water quality effects, be implemented in close cooperation with, and to the satisfaction of, the B.C. Ministry of Environment (p.140).

Recommendation #12: The Panel notes that Northgate has committed to all measures that were recommended by both the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) and the B.C. Ministry of Environment (MOE) for mitigating and compensating for potential effects on fish and fish habitat, and recommends, should the Project proceed, that these commitments be integrated as conditions in any permits that may be issued by DFO or MOE (p.158).

Recommendation #13: The Panel notes that there is uncertainty about the likelihood of success of some of the proposed fish habitat compensation initiatives. The Panel recommends that, if the Project is approved, DFO consider whether it might not serve the larger public interest better to accept financial compensation in place of compensation measures in some cases. Such financial compensation would provide DFO with more flexibility in investing in fishery protection and enhancement measures. For example, some efforts could be refocused on initiatives that would provide some benefits to the Aboriginal groups who are most affected by the Project (p.158).

Recommendation #14: The Panel recommends that, if the Project is approved, Aboriginal groups be consulted in the final design of the fisheries compensation program (p.158). 

Recommendation #15: Should the Project proceed, the Panel recommends that the Proponent monitor downstream hydrological conditions and how any detected changes may affect downstream wetland habitats. If effects are noted, they should be mitigated to the satisfaction of the B.C. Ministry of Environment and Environment Canada (p.160).

Recommendation #16: The Panel recommends that wetland replacement planning for the Impoundment be based on replacing the same types of wetlands (in terms of function and form) that would be lost when Duncan (Amazay) Lake is converted to a mined waste disposal facility (p.160).

Recommendation #17: The Panel endorses the B.C. Ministry of Environment recommendation (and acknowledges the Proponent commitment) that, if the Project is approved, the Proponent should complete a thorough Woodland caribou population survey during the permitting stage, and prior to construction. This study should be designed to allow follow-up monitoring to accurately assess any effects of mine development on local populations and herd structure (p.164).

Recommendation #18: The Panel recommends that, if the Project is approved, further studies should be undertaken of the effects of trace metal uptake on Woodland caribou (and other potentially affected species, notably moose and Grizzly bears). The Proponent should be responsible for local studies, in the vicinity of the minesite, and these local studies should be conducted at the permitting stage. The Panel also believes that a regional assessment of trace metal uptake is warranted, and recommends that government agencies and the Proponent (and Aboriginal groups, if they are willing to participate) develop a collaborative approach to a regional assessment (p.164).

Recommendation #19: The Panel recommends that, if the Project is approved, the measures proposed by both the Proponent and the B.C. Ministry of Environment to reduce the effects of the mine operation on the more critical caribou winter feeding habitats (including careful redesign of disturbance areas, limiting ground traffic and helicopter over flights and restricting access to the mined wastes deposited in the Impoundment, should be made conditions of approval, and developed into a caribou Management Program for the mine area. This program should evaluate caribou movements and habitat use to ensure that Project effects are minimized with the findings used to adjust management strategies and mitigation measures if monitoring indicates that effects are greater than predicted (p.165).

Recommendation #20: If the Project is approved, the Panel recommends that the conditions of approval include a requirement for the Proponent to engage in reclamation research on restoring disturbed caribou habitat, prticularly lichen habitat (p.165).

Recommendation #21: The Panel recommends (as the Proponent has suggested) that, if the Project is approved, a Mountain goat population study designed by the B.C. Ministry of Environment, should be initiated prior to any construction disturbance in the Project area to determine whether mining and associated activities are causing a long-term decline in populations in and around the Kemess area. This study should be a collaborative effort involving the Proponent, the Ministry of Environment and Aboriginal groups (if they are willing to participate). The study should make further efforts to establish historical population trends, and should be designed to allow follow-up monitoring to accurately assess the effects of mine development on local populations (p.168).

Recommendation #22: The Panel recommends that, if the Project proceeds, the Proponent’s environmental management plan for wildlife include a moose management plan to evaluate moose movements and habitat use, and to ensure that Project effects are minimized by adjusting management strategies and mitigation measures (p.170).

Recommendation #23: The Panel recommends that, if the Project is approved, reclamation research be initiated with the involvement of Aboriginal groups (if they are willing to participate) to develop methods for restoring habitat values for marmots in higher-elevation mine disturbances that can be implemented at closure (p.173).

Recommendation #24: The Panel recommends that the Proponent work in close cooperation with the B.C. Ministry of Environment and the B.C. Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources to develop a mutually agreeable mitigation strategy for Draba plants that would adequately compensate for the loss of approximately 100 Alpine draba plants (p.176).

Recommendation #25: The Panel recommends further investigation of the potential for a conflict for food between fish transplanted to Mulvaney Lake and Long-tailed ducks which are known to breed there. If a significant conflict is demonstrated, it is possible that the proposed fish transplant would not be acceptable, and that an alternative plan may be needed (p.176).

Recommendation #26: The Panel recommends that, at the permitting stage, the Proponent, in conjunction with the B.C. Ministry of Environment, should assess the implications and potential effects of possible malfunctions of the water treatment plant during the longer-term post-closure period, and remedial options (p.185).

Recommendation #27: The Panel recommends that assessments proposed by Natural Resource Canada with respect to the definition of dam life and maintenance requirements, stability assessments of the valley walls above the Impoundment and the slopes above the spillways, and means of addressing any major piping problems, be implemented at the permitting stage, should the Project proceed. These assessments should be completed to the satisfaction of the relevant regulatory agencies (p.185).

Recommendation #28: The Panel recommends that, should the Project proceed, environmental impact and public safety issues related to any ongoing post-closure pitwall instability should be further investigated during the permitting stage, leading to appropriate conditions to minimize post-closure stability problems. Pitwall stability issues should fall within the mandate of the proposed independent geotechnical review panel, and that panel’s work should continue into the post-closure period (p.185).

Recommendation #29: The Panel recommends that, if the Project is approved, the financial security (reclamation bond) required should be highly protective of the public interest. For all long-term liabilities, security should be required before start-up (p.197).

Recommendation #30: The Panel believes that there is a possibility of locating more archaeological evidence through further survey, including possibly human burial sites. If the Project is approved, the Panel recommends that additional archaeological survey work be implemented prior to Project construction (p.229).

Recommendation #31: The Panel recommends to the federal and provincial Ministers of the Environment that the Project not be approved as proposed (p.245).

Recommendation #32: If the Project does proceed, substantive efforts should be made to foster a working relationship between the Proponent, government and potentially affected Aboriginal groups. The Panel believes that this approach would increase opportunities for the Project to provide considerably more benefits to Aboriginal people than they are likely to realize without such a working relationship (p.246).

Recommendation #33: The Panel believes that, should the Project be approved, a detailed and integrated long-term monitoring plan, with built-in adaptive management measures, would best meet the long-term post-closure management needs of the Project site. The Panel agrees with the commitments made by Northgate with respect to the monitoring and adaptive management proposed for fish and fish habitat, but believes that long-term fisheries monitoring should be just one component of a larger initiative. The Panel envisages an integrated longterm monitoring and maintenance initiative which addresses: 1) water quality; 2) hydrology and hydrogeology, including seepage under the dam; 3) dam and pit slope stability; 4) fisheries compensation, including fish transplants; 5), the new post-closure Impoundment ecosystem; and 6) terrestrial wildlife monitoring (p.246).

Email | Print | Facebook | Twitter | Digg | Del.icio.us