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

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

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

4. 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)

5. 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

6. 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

7. Blasting Use of blasting may result in serious harm to fish
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.

8. 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

9. 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.

10. 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

11. 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%

12. 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”

13. 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

14. 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.

15. 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

16. 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.

17. 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

18. 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.

19. 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

20. 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.

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

22. Thank You
Questions? 24