Phase 2 Hope Bay Belt Project Presentation to the Nunavut Impact Review Board Pre-Hearing Cambridge Bay, NU June 15-16, 2017

Overview Fisheries Protection Program (FPP) What we do and our responsibilities Review Comments and Recommendations

DFO’s Fisheries Protection Program – Mandate and Responsibilities To ensure that commercial, recreational, and Aboriginal fisheries are productive and sustainable J. Stewart DFO

Fisheries Protection Program Legislation Fisheries Act Section 35: Prohibits serious harm to fish Allows impacts with conditions Sections 20 & 21: Requirement for enough water, fish to pass Species at Risk Act Sections 32, 33, 58 Prohibits killing, harming, harassing, capturing or taking of listed species, destruction of habitat Nunavut Land Claims Agreement (Article 12)

Fisheries Protection Program Policy Fisheries Protection Policy Statement (2013) Provides guidance to implement the fisheries protection provisions of the Fisheries Act Fisheries Productivity Investment Policy: A Proponent’s Guide to Offsetting (2013) Guiding measures to offset serious harm to fish

Technical Comments and Recommendations Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s comments are focused on the following areas: Freshwater Environment Blasting, Water Crossings, Water and Load Balance, Conceptual Freshwater Fisheries Offsetting Approach Marine Environment Marine and Environmental Effects Monitoring, Conceptual Marine Fisheries Offsetting Approach, and Significant Adverse Effects to Marine Mammals

Blasting Use of blasting may result in serious harm to fish http://nunalogistics.com/services/contract_mining.html Use of blasting may result in serious harm to fish Testing and monitoring indicate a threshold limit of 50 kPa is more appropriate to mitigate the effects of blasting on fish vs. the proposed 100kPa threshold Blasting operations has the potential to cause negative impacts on fish if adequate blasting thresholds and setback distances are not appropriately calculated and implemented. The proponent specified that shore blasting is planned during the construction of infrastructure. TMAC stated it’s intent to apply Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s ‘Guidelines for the Use of Explosives in or near Canadian Waters’ (1998) in setting a blasting threshold limit of 100 kPa for the purposes of mitigating effects of blasting. These guidelines were developed in 1998 and further studies were conducted in the Northwest Territories (2005) which indicate that the threshold limit of 100 kPa is not protective to fish and that using a lower blasting limit of 50 kPa is more effective to mitigate the impacts of blasting on fish. Next slide, please.

Blasting Recommendations Engagement to determine appropriate threshold limit Measures to avoid causing harm to fish and fish habitat Recalculation of required setback distances and revisions to blasting mitigation measures

Water Crossings Water crossings that are not designed, sized, installed, and monitored properly may result in impacts to fish, habitat, and passage Unclear timing windows for construction and decommissioning of water crossings Absence of detailed engineering designs to understand mitigation measures to prevent harm to fish The next topic is Water Crossings. If Water Crossings are not designed, sized, installed, and monitored properly there is potential for negative impacts to fish, their habitat, and passage. The proponent states that: “Wherever possible winter construction of the air strip, pads, and roads will ensure foundation materials stay frozen but that construction may be required in the summer to meet constructions schedules.” The proponent has not highlighted the timing windows for construction and decommissioning of water crossings. It is unclear in the absence of detailed engineering designs, the measures that the proponent intends to implement in order to avoid, mitigate or offset serious harm to fish as defined in the Fisheries Act for water crossings if construction is to be done outside frozen conditions. Next slide, please.

Water Crossing Recommendations Implement best management practices to avoid/mitigate serious harm to fish Develop and administer maintenance and monitoring plan Provide detailed engineering plans supported by stream flow data prior to construction

Water and Load Balance Changes in water level and flow have the potential to negatively affect fish and fish habitat Wolverine, Patch, Doris and Little Roberts will all be impacted over 10%

Water and Load Balance Recommendations Further information on potential impacts of water levels and flow Clarification of the predicted volume decrease for Doris Lake Further information on the impact of groundwater use on surface water Clarify the interpretation of “offsetting”

Conceptual Freshwater Fisheries Offsetting Approach Offsetting Serious Harm to fish is required when it cannot be avoided or mitigated Offsetting measures support productivity and sustainability of fish that are part of or support a commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fishery. The development of an appropriate Offsetting Plan is required to address residual serious harm to fish

Conceptual Offsetting and Fish out Plans– Recommendations Proponent work with DFO to develop an offsetting plan Proponent further explore the identification of offsetting options through engagement Fisheries and Oceans Canada recommends that the proponent work with the Fisheries Protection Program to develop the offsetting plan to ensure adverse impacts of the project are sufficiently counterbalanced in accordance with regulations and requirements. Fisheries and Oceans Canada recommends that the proponent further explore the identification of offsetting options with the engagement of local Inuit communities and interest groups. Next slide please.

Marine and Environment Effects Monitoring Program Project activities in the marine environment, such as shipping and infrastructure, have the potential to negatively impact fish and fish habitat, including marine animals as defined in the Fisheries Act. Aquatic effects monitoring of the marine environment is not addressed in the AEMP

Marine and Environment Effects Monitoring Recommendations The Marine Environmental Effects Monitoring Program address marine animals monitoring, including marine mammals, for all aspects of the project Fisheries and Oceans Canada recommends the Marine Environmental Effects Monitoring Program addresses monitoring for marine animals, including marine mammals for all aspects of the project, and not only for the discharge of metal mining-related effluents. Next slide please.

Conceptual Marine Fisheries Offsetting Approach Offsetting Serious Harm to fish is required when it cannot be avoided or mitigated Offsetting measures support productivity and sustainability of fish that are part of /support a commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fishery Fisheries Act Authorization and Offsetting Plan are required to address serious harm to fish

Conceptual Marine Fisheries Offsetting Approach Recommendations The proponent work with the department to develop the offsetting plan The proponent further explore the identification of offsetting options through engagement Fisheries and Oceans Canada recommends the following: The proponent work with the department to develop the offsetting plan to ensure adverse impacts of the project are sufficiently counterbalanced in accordance with regulations and requirements. The proponent further explore the identification of offsetting options with the engagement of local Inuit communities and interest groups. Next slide please.

Significant Adverse Affects of Marine Mammals Shipping has the potential for significant adverse effects on marine mammals Suggested that marine mammals could suffer mortality or injury resulting from the project however; highly unlikely The Proponent does not believe that a Shipping Management Plan is required for the Project

Significant Adverse Affects of Marine Mammals – Recommendations The proponent is responsible to address the impacts from shipping on marine mammals Require additional information that outlines marine shipping potential impacts and monitoring of marine mammals. Fisheries and Oceans Canada has the following recommendations: In addition to the shipping companies’ responsibility to address impacts from shipping on marine mammals, the proponent is also responsible, through their proposed project. While the proponent suggests that a shipping management plan is not required, Fisheries and Oceans Canada requires additional information that outlines marine shipping potential impacts and monitoring of marine mammals. This information should not be limited to ringed seals.

Summary Reviewed Mandate and Responsibilities Offered technical review comments and recommendations for consideration Intend to continue working with the Proponent, communities, and stakeholders

Thank You Questions? 24