DOCSLIB.ORG

Mary River Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mary River Project Espoo Report Phase 2 Proposal – Mary River Project Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation Mary River Project NIRB File No. 08MN053 Mary River Project Espoo Report Phase 2 Proposal TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................... i List of Tables ..................................................................................................................................................ii List of Figures .................................................................................................................................................ii Abbreviations and Acronyms ......................................................................................................................... iii Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... iv 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Project Overview and Background ....................................................................................................1 1.2 Regulatory Context ...........................................................................................................................2 2 Project Description ..................................................................................................................................4 2.1 Project Setting and Location .............................................................................................................4 2.2 Purpose and Need for Phase 2 Proposal ............................................................................................6 2.3 Phase Two Components and Activities ..............................................................................................6 2.3.1 Mine Site ...............................................................................................................................................6 2.3.2 Transportation ......................................................................................................................................8 2.3.3 Milne Port .............................................................................................................................................8 2.3.4 Shipping ............................................................................................................................................. 10 2.4 Schedule ........................................................................................................................................12 3 Alternatives Considered ........................................................................................................................ 13 4 Environmental Assessment Approach and Methods ............................................................................... 15 4.1 Environmental Impact Assessment Methods ................................................................................... 15 4.2 Valued Ecosystem Components and Valued Socio-economic Components ....................................... 15 4.3 Assessment Boundaries .................................................................................................................. 16 4.4 Scoping of Transboundary Impact Assessment ................................................................................ 19 5 Identification of Environmental Impacts ................................................................................................ 22 5.1 Climate Change .............................................................................................................................. 22 5.1.1 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................. 22 5.1.2 Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................... 23 5.1.3 Transboundary Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 23 5.2 Migratory Birds and Habitat (including Seabirds) ............................................................................. 24 i January 2021 Mary River Project Espoo Report Phase 2 Proposal 5.2.1 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................. 24 5.2.2 Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................... 24 5.2.3 Transboundary Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 25 5.3 Marine Habitat and Biota (Unplanned introduction of aquatic invasive species) ............................... 25 5.3.1 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................. 25 5.3.2 Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................... 26 5.3.3 Transboundary Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 27 5.4 Marine Mammals ........................................................................................................................... 27 5.4.1 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................. 27 5.4.2 Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................... 29 5.4.3 Transboundary Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 31 5.5 Knowledge Gaps and Uncertainties ................................................................................................. 32 6 Accidents and Malfunctions ................................................................................................................... 33 7 Environmental Health and Safety Management ..................................................................................... 36 7.1 Mitigation and Monitoring Programs .............................................................................................. 36 7.2 Follow-up and Adaptive Management ............................................................................................. 38 8 Overall Transboundary Impact ............................................................................................................... 39 9 References ............................................................................................................................................40 LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1 VEC/VSECs Assessed for the Phase 2 Proposal ....................................................................................... 16 Table 4.2 Overview of Spatial Assessment Boundaries .......................................................................................... 17 Table 4.3 Scoping of Transboundary Impact Assessment ...................................................................................... 20 Table 5.1 Marine Mammal Species with Potential to Occur in the MRSA ............................................................. 28 Table 7.1 Overview of Key Environmental Management Documents Relevant to Management of Transboundary Effects ...................................................................................................................................................... 37 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1 Project Location .........................................................................................................................................5 Figure 2-2 Phase 2 Proposal – Mine Site Infrastructure .............................................................................................7 Figure 2-3 Phase 2 Proposal – Milne Port Infrastructure ...........................................................................................9 Figure 2-4 Store Hellefiskebank Anchorage ............................................................................................................ 11 Figure 4-1 Spatial Boundaries .................................................................................................................................. 18 ii January 2021 Mary River Project Espoo Report Phase 2 Proposal ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS Approved Project .................. Mary River Project (as approved in 2012 and amended in 2014) Baffinland ............................................................................. Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation CAC ........................................................................................................ criteria air contaminant CO2 ....................................................................................................................... carbon dioxide CO2e ................................................................................................. carbon dioxide equivalents CH4................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Figure 5: Arctic Bay and Clyde River Site-Specific Marine Hunting Values Reported in the Study Area
    FINAL REPORT: QIA’S TUSAQTAVUT STUDY SPECIFIC TO BAFFINLAND’S PROPOSED PHASE 2 OF THE MARY RIVER PROJECT FOR THE COMMUNITIES OF ARCTIC BAY AND CLYDE RIVER Figure 5: Arctic Bay and Clyde River site-specific Marine Hunting values reported in the Study Area 37 FINAL REPORT: QIA’S TUSAQTAVUT STUDY SPECIFIC TO BAFFINLAND’S PROPOSED PHASE 2 OF THE MARY RIVER PROJECT FOR THE COMMUNITIES OF ARCTIC BAY AND CLYDE RIVER 4.2.2 Importance Marine Hunting encompasses a variety of species, bodies of knowledge, modes of travel, animal processing and food storage techniques (e.g., food caches), and harvesting locations and habitation sites. Study participants have used and continue to use the Study Area for Marine Hunting. The quotes below highlight some of their experiences hunting narwhal, walrus, and seal species in and around Milne Inlet, Eclipse Sound, Pond Inlet, and Baffin Bay. So, his family would also go narwhal hunting around Milne Inlet. … Yeah, that was a prime narwhal hunting area all that along here. … Yeah, that whole area. (C15 2020a, interpreted from Inuktitut) There was so much narwhal that you could hear them as soon as you wake up and they’d be there all day … They’re migrating but there’s so many of them that they would – it could take all day into the night, that’s how much narwhal there was … So they … would do all their narwhal hunting around that area [in Eclipse Sound]. (A01 2020, interpreted from Inuktitut) Plenty of seal hunting around Mount Herodier area. … And then, you know, he would also remember people catching narwhal really close to Pond Inlet when he was a child, but he can’t quite pinpoint what the year was.
    [Show full text]
  • RECLAMATION PILOT STUDY Mary River Mine Project
    RECLAMATION PILOT STUDY Mary River Mine Project Revegetaon Survey & Preliminary Reclamaon Trial REV.1 Prepared For Baffinland Iron Mines Corporaon 300 - 2275 Upper Middle Road East Oakville, ON L6H 0C3 Prepared By EDI Environmental Dynamics Inc. 220 - 736, 8 Ave. Southwest Calgary, AB T2P 1H4 EDI Contact Patrick Audet, PhD, RPBio Mike Seerington, MSc, RPBio EDI Project 19Y0005:2008 March 2020 Down to Earth Biology This page is intentionally blank. RECLAMATION PILOT STUDY Mary River Mine Project | Revegetation Survey & Preliminary Reclamation Trial TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 POST-DISTURBANCE REVEGETATION SURVEY............................................................................................ 2 2.1 SURVEY DESIGN ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 METHODS & ANALYSES ............................................................................................................................................................ 4 2.3 RESULTS SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6 2.3.1 KM52 — 1-Year Post-Disturbance ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Arctic Tide Measurement Techniques and Results
    International Hydrographie Review, Monaco, LXIII (2), July 1986 CANADIAN ARCTIC TIDE MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES AND RESULTS by B.J. TAIT, S.T. GRANT, D. St.-JACQUES and F. STEPHENSON (*) ABSTRACT About 10 years ago the Canadian Hydrographic Service recognized the need for a planned approach to completing tide and current surveys of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago in order to meet the requirements of marine shipping and construction industries as well as the needs of environmental studies related to resource development. Therefore, a program of tidal surveys was begun which has resulted in a data base of tidal records covering most of the Archipelago. In this paper the problems faced by tidal surveyors and others working in the harsh Arctic environment are described and the variety of equipment and techniques developed for short, medium and long-term deployments are reported. The tidal characteris­ tics throughout the Archipelago, determined primarily from these surveys, are briefly summarized. It was also recognized that there would be a need for real time tidal data by engineers, surveyors and mariners. Since the existing permanent tide gauges in the Arctic do not have this capability, a project was started in the early 1980’s to develop and construct a new permanent gauging system. The first of these gauges was constructed during the summer of 1985 and is described. INTRODUCTION The Canadian Arctic Archipelago shown in Figure 1 is a large group of islands north of the mainland of Canada bounded on the west by the Beaufort Sea, on the north by the Arctic Ocean and on the east by Davis Strait, Baffin Bay and Greenland and split through the middle by Parry Channel which constitutes most of the famous North West Passage.
    [Show full text]
  • Gjoa Haven © Nunavut Tourism
    NUNAVUT COASTAL RESOURCE INVENTORY ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ Department of Environment Avatiliqiyikkut Ministère de l’Environnement Gjoa Haven © Nunavut Tourism ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ Department of Environment Avatiliqiyikkut NUNAVUT COASTAL RESOURCE INVENTORY • Gjoa Haven INVENTORY RESOURCE COASTAL NUNAVUT Ministère de l’Environnement Nunavut Coastal Resource Inventory – Gjoa Haven 2011 Department of Environment Fisheries and Sealing Division Box 1000 Station 1310 Iqaluit, Nunavut, X0A 0H0 GJOA HAVEN Inventory deliverables include: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • A final report summarizing all of the activities This report is derived from the Hamlet of Gjoa Haven undertaken as part of this project; and represents one component of the Nunavut Coastal Resource Inventory (NCRI). “Coastal inventory”, as used • Provision of the coastal resource inventory in a GIS here, refers to the collection of information on coastal database; resources and activities gained from community interviews, research, reports, maps, and other resources. This data is • Large-format resource inventory maps for the Hamlet presented in a series of maps. of Gjoa Haven, Nunavut; and Coastal resource inventories have been conducted in • Key recommendations on both the use of this study as many jurisdictions throughout Canada, notably along the well as future initiatives. Atlantic and Pacific coasts. These inventories have been used as a means of gathering reliable information on During the course of this project, Gjoa Haven was visited on coastal resources to facilitate their strategic assessment, two occasions:
    [Show full text]
  • Grade 5 Module 3B, Unit 3, Lesson 3
    Grade 5: Module 3B: Unit 3: Lesson 3 Conducting Research: Analyzing Expert Texts about the Mary River Project This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Exempt third-party content is indicated by the footer: © (name of copyright holder). Used by permission and not subject to Creative Commons license. GRADE 5: MODULE 3B: UNIT 3: LESSON 3 Conducting Research: Analyzing Expert Texts about the Mary River Project Long-Term Targets Addressed (Based on NYSP12 ELA CCLS) I can analyze multiple accounts of the same topic, noting important similarities and differences in the point of view they represent. (RI.5.6) I can explain how the author uses reasons and evidence to support particular points in a text. (RI.5.8) I can draw evidence from informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. (W.5.9b) I can determine the meaning of unknown words and phrases, choosing flexibly from a range of strategies. (L.5.4) Supporting Learning Targets Ongoing Assessment • I can analyze the meaning of key words and phrases, using a variety of strategies. • Vocabulary terms defined on index cards and Frayer • I can support my research, analysis, and reflection on the Mary River project by drawing upon evidence Models from expert texts. • Point of View Graphic Organizer: Expert Texts • I can explain the reasons and evidence given to support two different points of view about the Mary River project on Baffin Island. Copyright © 2013 by Expeditionary Learning, New York, NY. All Rights Reserved. NYS Common Core ELA Curriculum • G5:M3B:U3:L3 • June 2014 • 1 GRADE 5: MODULE 3B: UNIT 3: LESSON 3 Conducting Research: Analyzing Expert Texts about the Mary River Project Agenda Teaching Notes 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Tab 6 Estimating the Abundance Of
    SUBMISSION TO THE NUNAVUT WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR Information: X Decision: Issue: South Baffin Island Caribou Abundance Survey, 2012 and Proposed Management Recommendations Background: Caribou are a critical component of the boreal and arctic ecosystems. They are culturally significant to local communities and provide an important source of food. In some areas, there is still uncertainty on population trends because of the lack of scientific information due to difficult logistics and remoteness. This is particularly true for Baffin Island, where three sub-populations of Barrenground caribou (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus) are hypothesized, though little is known about their abundance and trends over time (Ferguson and Gauthier 1992). In the past 60 years, only discrete portions of their range have been surveyed and no robust quantitative estimates at the sub-population level were ever derived. For over a decade Inuit from communities on northern Baffin Island, and more recently from across the entire island, have reported declines in caribou numbers, although no quantitative estimates are available. In total 10 communities, representing half of all Nunavummiut, traditionally or currently harvest Baffin Island caribou. At the same time, climate change, including increased arctic temperatures and precipitation, and anthropogenic activities connected to mineral exploration and mining are potentially negatively impacting caribou and their range. Due to the risk of these cumulative negative effects, and the importance of these caribou to communities, the Department of Environment undertook, in 2012, a quantitative caribou abundance aerial survey of South Baffin Island with the support of the NWMB and co- management partners. This area represents the most abundant area of caribou on Baffin Island.
    [Show full text]
  • Mining, Mineral Exploration and Geoscience Contents
    Overview 2020 Nunavut Mining, Mineral Exploration and Geoscience Contents 3 Land Tenure in Nunavut 30 Base Metals 6 Government of Canada 31 Diamonds 10 Government of Nunavut 3 2 Gold 16 Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated 4 4 Iron 2 0 Canada-Nunavut Geoscience Office 4 6 Inactive projects 2 4 Kitikmeot Region 4 9 Glossary 2 6 Kivalliq Region 50 Guide to Abbreviations 2 8 Qikiqtani Region 51 Index About Nunavut: Mining, Mineral Exploration and by the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA), the regulatory Geoscience Overview 2020 body which oversees stock market and investment practices, and is intended to ensure that misleading, erroneous, or This publication is a combined effort of four partners: fraudulent information relating to mineral properties is not Crown‑Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada published and promoted to investors on the stock exchanges (CIRNAC), Government of Nunavut (GN), Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated (NTI), and Canada‑Nunavut Geoscience Office overseen by the CSA. Resource estimates reported by mineral (CNGO). The intent is to capture information on exploration and exploration companies that are listed on Canadian stock mining activities in 2020 and to make this information available exchanges must be NI 43‑101 compliant. to the public and industry stakeholders. We thank the many contributors who submitted data and Acknowledgements photos for this edition. Prospectors and mining companies are This publication was written by the Mineral Resources Division welcome to submit information on their programs and photos at CIRNAC’s Nunavut Regional Office (Matthew Senkow, for inclusion in next year’s publication. Feedback and comments Alia Bigio, Samuel de Beer, Yann Bureau, Cedric Mayer, and are always appreciated.
    [Show full text]
  • Phase 2 Passive Dustfall Monitoring August 14, 2019
    Phase 2 Passive Dustfall Monitoring August 14, 2019 Project No: 19Y0006 EDI ENVIRONMENTAL DYNAMICS INC. 11 Mary River Project Phase 2 Proposal ECCC-FC1 ATTACHMENT 2: HUMAN HEALTH BASED DUSTFALL THRESHOLDS FOR MINE AND PORT SITE Date: October 15, 2019 To: Lou Kamermans, BIM From: Christine Moore, Intrinsik cc : Mike Setterington, EDI; Mike Lepage, RWDI, Richard Cook, KP; Sara Wallace and Dan Jarratt, Stantec Re: Human Health Based Dustfall Thresholds for Mine and Port Site – DRAFT V 3 While dustfall guidelines exist in several jurisdictions (such as Ontario and Alberta), they are generally based on soiling, as opposed to human health considerations. The Government of Nunavut is requesting that Project-specific dustfall guidelines protective of human health be developed for use within the Air Quality and Noise Abatement Management Plan (AQNAMP) to define rates which would be associated with management actions. Project-specific dustfall guidelines developed for consideration of human health within the Project area need to consider the model predictions for dustfall, in addition to the size of affected areas and potential exposure that could occur based on consumption rates for resources harvested within the area. These factors were used to define potential exposure scenarios. An additional consideration when developing dustfall rates protective of human health is the different geochemistry at the mine and port areas based on the existing site-specific geochemistry of the dustfall samples previously collected. As all rock and soil contain naturally occurring metals and metalloids (which will be referred to as metals), the dustfall generated from Project activities also contains metals. Iron is the most common metal in the dustfall, representing 4.43% of total dustfall at the Mine site, and 3.03% at the Port site.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Baffinland: Digital Indigenous Democracy
    ECONOMY Our Baffinland: Digital Indigenous Democracy Norman Cohn & Zacharias Kunuk s an upsurge of development due to global gency for Baffin Island Inuit facing one of the largest warming threatens to overwhelm communities mining developments in Canadian history. Baffinland iAn the resource-rich Canadian Arctic, how can Inuit Iron Mines Corporation’s (BIM) Mary River project in those communities be more fully involved and consulted is a $6 billion open-pit extraction of extremely high- in their own language? What tools are needed to grade iron ore that, if fully exploited, could continue make knowledgeable decisions? Communicating in for 100 years. The mining site, in the centre of North writing with oral cultures makes ‘consulting’ one- Baffin Island about half-way between the Inuit com- sided: giving people thousands of pages they can’t munities of Pond Inlet and Igloolik, requires a 150 read is unlikely to produce an informed, meaningful km railroad built across frozen tundra to transport response. Now for the first time Internet audiovisual ore to a deep-water port where the world’s largest su- tools enable community-based decision-making in pertankers will carry it to European and Asian mar- oral Inuktitut that meets higher standards of consti- kets. Operating the past several years under a tutional and international law, and offers a new temporary exploratory permit, BIM filed its Final En- model for development in Indigenous homelands. To vironmental Impact Statement (FEIS) with the Nunavut meet these standards, Inuit must get
    [Show full text]
  • Problems with the Environmental Working Groups for the Mary River
    Problems with the environmental working groups for the Mary River mine Report to the Hamlet of Clyde River and Nangmautaq Hunters and Trappers Association January 5, 2021 Dr. Warren Bernauer (Department of Environment and Geography, University of Manitoba) Dr. Glen Hostetler (Natural Resources Institute, University of Manitoba) Rowan Harris (BSc, University of British Columbia) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Baffinland’s Mary River mine uses a flexible approach to mitigating environmental effects. The mitigation measures are not set in stone in the NIRB project certificate. Instead, Baffinland is required to regularly update its management plans, based on advice from working groups. The members of these working groups include Baffinland, government authorities, Inuit organizations, and the Miitimatalik HTO. In some cases, non-government organizations participate as observers. For example, the Marine Environment Working Group (MEWG) includes Baffinland, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Parks Canada, the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, and the Mittimatalik HTO. World Wildlife Fund and Oceans North are observers to the MEWG. The Terrestrial Environment Working Group (TEWG) includes the Government of Nunavut, QIA, and Mittimatalik HTO. When these groups were proposed, they were presented as a way to minimize the negative effects of the Mary River mine. Communities were told they could use the working groups to impose stricter mitigation measures if the mine ended up having more serious environmental impacts than expected. In other words, these working groups were supposed to provide the opportunity for adaptive management. Adaptive management is useful in situations where there is uncertainty about a project’s environmental impacts and the effectiveness of mitigation measures. It requires careful monitoring so participants can learn about the environmental impacts that are actually happening and if environmental management plans are successful in avoiding significant effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix D: Workshop Notes
    APPENDIX D: WORKSHOP NOTES 151 Results of Community Workshops Conducted for Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation’s Phase 2 Proposal Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation Mary River Project, Phase 2 Workshop #1: Contemporary Inuit Land Use in the Eclipse Sound and Navy Board Inlet Areas -Invited Persons Workshop Notes- Participants: Joshua Arreak (Hamlet of Pond Inlet nominee) Jennifer St Paul Butler (Baffinland) Ludy Pudluk (Hamlet of Pond Inlet nominee) Jason Prno (Jason Prno Consulting Services Ltd.) Jimmy Pitseolak (Pond Inlet HTO nominee) Jason Lewis (Avati) Elijah Panikpakoochoo (Pond Inlet HTO nominee) Justin Buller (QIA) Joanasie Mucpa (Pond Inlet HTO nominee) Jeff Higdon (Consultant to QIA) Michael Inuarak (Nasivvik High School nominee) Kunnuk Qamaniq (Nasivvik High School nominee) Timothy Aksarjuk (QIA nominee) Paniloo Sangoya (QIA nominee) Dates: March 3-4, 2015 Other Information: At the beginning of the workshop, Baffinland spent time presenting details of the Phase 2 proposal and describing the purpose and objectives of the workshop. Much of the remaining time was then spent discussing and documenting contemporary seasonal land use activities in the Eclipse Sound and Navy Board Inlet areas. The workshop was facilitated by Jason Prno. Workshop notes were recorded by Jennifer St Paul Butler and Jason Lewis, and were compiled by Jason Lewis. The workshop was observed by Justin Buller and Jeff Hidgon of the QIA. Information provided in the workshop (included below) is attributed to individual participants or to group discussion where appropriate. Where an attribution is not listed, the information provider(s) were unrecorded. Notes: Workshop participants indicated that the Inuit calendar in this part of the Arctic (the Pond Inlet – Eclipse Sound area) is divided into five seasons, not six as presented in the North Baffin Land Use Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Data Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 2262
    Scientific Excellence • Resource Protection & Conservation • Benefits for Canadians Excellence scientifique • Protection et conservation des ressources • Bénéfices aux Canadiens DFO Lib ary MPO B bhotheque Ill 11 11 11 12022686 11 A Review of the Status and Harvests of Fish, Invertebrate, and Marine Mammal Stocks in the Nunavut Settlement Area D.B. Stewart Central and Arctic Region Department of Fisheries and Oceans Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N6 1994 Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 2262 . 51( P_ .3 AS-5 -- I__2,7 Fisheries Pêches 1+1 1+1and Oceans et Océans CanaclUi ILIIM Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Manuscript reports contain scientific and technical information that contributes to existing knowledge but which deals with national or regional problems. Distribu- tion is restricted to institutions or individuals located in particular regions of Canada. However, no restriction is placed on subject matter, and the series reflects the broad interests and policies of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, namely, fisheries and aquatic sciences. Manuscript reports may be cited as full-publications. The correct citation appears above the abstract of each report. Each report is abstracted in Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts and,indexed in the Department's annual index to scientific and technical publications. Numbers 1-900 in this series were issued as Manuscript Reports (Biological Series) of the Biological Board of Canada, and subsequent to 1937 when the name of the Board was changed by Act of Parliament, as Manuscript Reports (Biological Series) of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada. Numbers 901-1425 were issued as Manuscript Reports of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.
    [Show full text]