1. Phase 2 Hope Bay Belt Project
Presentation to the
Nunavut Impact Review Board
Technical Meeting
Cambridge Bay, NU
June 12-14, 2017

2. Overview
Fisheries Protection Program (FPP) Mandate Overview and Responsibilities
Technical 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 for authorization of impacts with conditions
Sections 20 & 21:
Requirement for sufficient water, fish passage
Species at Risk Act
Sections 32, 33, 58
Prohibits killing, harming, harassing, capturing or taking of listed species, destruction of residence, critical 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

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

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

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 include monitoring of marine animals, including marine mammals, for all aspects of the project

17. Conceptual Marine Fisheries Offsetting Approach
Offsetting Serious Harm to fish is required when it cannot be avoided or mitigated
Offsetting measures need to 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

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

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