Deninu KUE FIRST NATION P.O. BOX 1899 FORT RESOLUTION, NT X0E 0M0 (867) 394-4335 FAX (867) 394-5122 [email protected] Catherine Fairbairn Environmental Assessment Officer Mackenzie Valley Review Board 2nd floor, Scotia Building, 5102 50th Ave Yellowknife, NT X1A 2R3 Email: [email protected] July 4, 2019 Re: EA1819-01 – Diavik Diamond Mines Inc. – Depositing Processed Kimberlite into Pits and Underground. Review Board Information Requests to Parties. Dear Ms. Fairbairn, The Deninu Kue First Nation (DKFN) is pleased to provide the following response to the Mackenzie Valley Review Board’s information requests to parties regarding the proposal by Diavik Diamond Mine Inc. (Diavik) to put and store processed kimberlite in pits and underground mine workings and its potential adverse impact on people and the environment. Should you require any clarification on our response please contact our technical advisor, Dr. Marc d’Entremont, at [email protected] or 250-656-0127. Sincerely, Chief Louis Balsillie cc. Richard Simon, DKFN Resource Management Coordinator Dr. Marc d’Entremont, LGL Limited (DKFN Technical Advisor) DKFN Response to MVRB IRs (EA1819-01) Information Request No. 1 Source: Mackenzie Valley Review Board Subject: Potential impacts to cultural use of Lac de Gras Area Preamble: As described in the 1999 Comprehensive Study Report for the Diavik Mine, "(t)here is wide- spread concern that traditions and customs are not practiced as they once were, contributing to a lack of common understanding and connection, of shared beliefs and values" (PR#29)3. The Comprehensive Study Report also states "[t]he land gives a sense of place and identity, provides the context for expression, shapes values and beliefs, and influences customs and practices". The Review Board understands the importance of land and the continuation of cultural use to Indigenous wellbeing. The Review Board also heard during scoping that potential impacts of the project on cultural use should be carefully considered. The current closure plan for the Diavik Mine is to fill the empty pits and underground mine workings with freshwater and reconnect them to Lac de Gras once water quality is safe for aquatic life, fish, and fish habitat. The Review Board is assessing the impact of adding processed kimberlite to the pits and underground mine workings before they are filled with freshwater and reconnected to Lac de Gras. Questions: 1. Please describe how your group used the Lac de Gras area culturally (including the hunting, fishing, trapping, gathering, and travel) before mining started there. 2. Please describe how your group would use and feel about the Lac de Gras area under the following scenarios: a. reconnecting empty pits and underground mine workings with Lac de Gras at closure (that is, Diavik’s current closure plan for the mine), b. putting processed kimberlite into the pits and underground mine workings before reconnecting them to Lac de Gras (that is, the proposed activities for this environmental assessment), c. putting processed kimberlite into the pits and underground mine workings and not reconnecting them with Lac de Gras. DKFN Response: 1. The Deninu Kue First Nation use of the Lac de Gras area is presented in the Deninu K’ue Ethno-history Report1. A copy of this report was submitted to the public record during the environmental assessment review of the Gahcho Kue mine (De Beers) and the Jay Project (Dominion Diamond). A copy of this report is included in this information request response. 2. Fully understanding how the DKFN membership would use and feel about the Lac de Gras area under the various scenarios will require a consultation process that fully respects the Aboriginal and Treaty rights of our members. This would involve gathering information from members and seeking their opinion on the various scenarios. Sufficient time would be required for this to be a meaningful exercise; however, this time is not provided in the 1 Vanden Berg, L. 2012. Deninu K’ue Ethno-history Report. Vanden Berg and Associates, Sidney BC. 435 pp. 2 DKFN Response to MVRB IRs (EA1819-01) current version of the Review Board’s workplan for this project review. Therefore, we are not in a position to provide an accurate and reliable response to your request. In general terms, regardless of the closure scenario, the lands and waters within the Lac de Gras area will be directly impacted and forever changed. The DKFN know that lands within the Lac de Gras area are essential for the life-giving purposes of all living and non-living things (which includes the DKFN) in that area. We believe that every reasonable effort must be used to make the least amount of disturbances of the natural environment of Lac de Gras during the life of the mine and Diavik must make every reasonable effort to reclaim Lac de Gras to its natural state. We believe good working relationships, the use of best scientific and technological practises, Traditional Knowledge, and clear recommendations, direction, monitoring and inspections are essential for meeting a reclamation goal of having self-sustaining ecosystems that are compatible with a healthy environment and with human activities. Detailed reclamation monitoring with specific goals, objectives and thresholds must be identified, plus contingencies need to be in place if monitoring shows a trajectory towards unacceptable levels and potential risks to the environment and humans. Information Request No. 2 Source: Mackenzie Valley Review Board Subject: Closure options Preamble: The current closure plan requires Diavik to reconnect the flooded pits and underground mine workings to Lac de Gras once water quality is deemed to be acceptable. Once reconnected, the pits can function as fish habitat. Under the current proposal, some of the pits that would be reconnected with Lac de Gras to serve as fish habitat would contain processed kimberlite. Questions: 1. When determining if the pits should be reconnected to Lac de Gras at closure, is water quality in the pit lake the only criteria that should be considered? 2. If not, please describe what additional criteria for re-connection should be considered. DKFN Response: As mentioned in the response to IR#1, water quality is not the only criteria that should be considered. Water is directly and indirectly essential to the exercise of the Aboriginal rights of DKFN and Indigenous knowledge, values and perspectives can be addressed in the monitoring, regulation, compliance verification, and performance of the closure plan to minimize impacts to Indigenous rights and interests. Maintaining the integrity of ecological systems and protecting biological resources must be based on an understanding of the functioning of natural systems. A holistic approach should be taken when determining criteria that should be considered when determining reclamation is successful. However, the concept of holism is from the Aboriginal definition is challenging to address in the context of an environmental assessment. Where an environmental assessment is typically based on an empirical approach, examining each 3 DKFN Response to MVRB IRs (EA1819-01) component of the local and regional area separately for effects of the proposed project, Indigenous groups evaluate the social, cultural, and environmental impacts of a project as a whole, from their unique set of environmental values and perceptions of risk. We believe that acknowledging and working to understand the role of risk perception of the project in the context of Indigenous groups’ holistic definition will help Diavik, regulators and Indigenous groups develop and improve mitigation and reclamation measures. DKFN members have the aspirations and knowledge to protect and steward their land for future generations – but require additional support to do so. In this regard, it is imperative that Indigenous knowledge and values are incorporated into the oversight of project to minimize impacts on Aboriginal rights, heritage and interests. Indigenous oversight of the mine closure will support environmentally responsible development, while promoting good governance in the protection of natural resources within the Lac de Gras area. Plus, the information and knowledge attained can ultimately be incorporated into the traditional laws and guiding management practices of the DKFN and other Indigenous groups. However, the fundamental success of any closure and reclamation will be the development and fostering of strong partnerships and collaboration with Diavik, regulators and Indigenous groups. 4 Deninu K'ue Ethno-history Report Dated December 12, 2012 Indian Encampment (awaiting payment of treaty money) at Fort Resolution, 1924 (Retrieved from http://www.pwnhc.ca/databases/archives/Item_Display.asp?Accession_Number=G-1979- 001&Item_Number=0151) Table of Contents Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 7 Summary of Sources ........................................................................................................................ 8 Preface .................................................................................................................................................. 9 Place Names ....................................................................................................................................... 11 Chapter I: Introduction ............................................................................................................