CLASSIFIEDS ADVERTISING SPECIAL ISSUES SPORTS CARTOONS OBITUARIES NORTHERN JOBS TENDERS

business pages

NNSL Photo/Graphic

Subscriber pages
buttonspacer News Desk
buttonspacer Columnists
buttonspacer Editorial
buttonspacer Readers comment
buttonspacer Tenders

Demo pages
Here's a sample of what only subscribers see

Subscribe now
Subscribe to both hardcopy or internet editions of NNSL publications

Advertising
Our print and online advertising information, including contact detail.
SSIMicro

Home page text size buttonsbigger textsmall textText size Email this articleE-mail this page

Canadian Zinc questioned closely during hearings
Water quality of top concern among presenters

Roxanna Thompson
Northern News Services
Published Thursday, June 30, 2011

LIIDLII KUE/FORT SIMPSON - Concerns about water quality dominated Prairie Creek Mine's environmental assessment hearings last week.

NNSL photo/graphic

Members of the Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board Danny Bayha, left, Richard Mercredi and chairperson Richard Edjericon follow along with Environment Canada's presentation during the second day of the public hearing in Fort Simpson on the environmental assessment of Prairie Creek Mine. - Roxanna Thompson/NNSL photo

The Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board held a community hearing in Nahanni Butte on June 22 followed by a public hearing in Fort Simpson from June 23 to 24. The final public hearings are designed to give developers, in this case the Canadian Zinc Corporation, as well as other interested parties an opportunity to present their final arguments to the review board.

The board heard from three parties in Nahanni Butte – the Nahanni Butte Dene Band, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, and Parks Canada – and an additional five parties made presentation in Fort Simpson.

In their concluding remarks, representatives with Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) said, as proposed, the mine development brings with it a high level of risk for significant adverse impacts to the water. AANDC recommended Canadian Zinc develop site-specific water quality objectives for the mine. A committee composed of Canadian Zinc and parties interested in the environmental assessment could then evaluate the objectives and make recommendations to the review board.

The objectives, determined using existing contaminant levels in Prairie Creek, would be measured.

During its earlier presentation, Canadian Zinc outlined its water quality objective for a variety of elements including mercury, arsenic, copper and zinc that would be released with the mine's effluent. The company's plan takes into account water-flow into Prairie Creek so the amount of effluent can be changed based on water levels to make sure contaminant levels aren't exceeded.

During her presentation, Katherine Cumming, an environmental assessment scientist with Parks Canada, said her department agrees with AANDC's recommendation for an approach based on background levels.

Parks Canada also raised questions about the mine's access road.

"We believe there is a lot of uncertainty about the road," Cumming said.

There are still unanswered questions about how the road will be operated and designed and the effects it will have on permafrost as well as wildlife. Because it runs through a national park, there needs to be certainty that protection measures will be effective, especially in the case of a spill, she said.

In his response, David Harpley, vice-president of environment and permitting affairs for Canadian Zinc, said building a road with the lowest possible grade and avoiding tight turns will be the first steps to preventing a spill.

"It starts with a good road, built properly and built well," he said.

During the presentations, Canadian Zinc's plan to backfill the mine with float tailings and waste rock sparked concern.

AANDC questioned whether all the tailings will fit back in the mine and recommended any temporary float tailings on the surface be stored in pre-designed and approved lined containment areas.

Canadian Zinc defended its backfill plans.

"We are extremely confident they will all fit," said Harpley.

While federal government departments questioned all aspects of the mine, local groups, for the most part, expressed confidence in the recommendations.

"For us here in Fort Simpson, we continue to be very concerned about the water," said Chief Jim Antoine of Liidlii Kue First Nation.

Antoine said he was hearing lots of detailed questions about water quality at the hearing and the volume of questions was appropriate considering this would be the first mine in the Deh Cho. AANDC and Parks Canada are doing lots of work to get the answers about water that are needed, Antoine said.

He added the band council has a mandate to facilitate responsible development in the region to create economic opportunities in the Deh Cho.

"We're here to express our support for the Canadian Zinc Prairie Creek mine project," he said.

In its submitted presentation, the Nahanni Butte Dene Band also outlined its concerns about the mine.

The conclusion of the presentation stated, if recommendations made by the band and government departments are carried out, particularly with respect to water quality management, spill contingency and planning and wildlife management, the band feels its short-term and long-term environmental interests will be protected.

The Prairie Creek Mine was submitted for an environmental assessment after it applied to the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board in June 2008 for four permits.

The permits, including a type A water licence and a type A land use permit, in conjunction with other sub-permits, would allow the company to start production at the mine.

Once the Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board has received the outstanding evidence it requested at the hearings it will begin the decision-making phase.

The board is tasked with deciding if the mine is likely to cause significant adverse impacts or significant public concern.

The board can decide whether the project can proceed to regulatory permitting and licensing as is or that it can proceed as long as mitigation measures recommended by the board are in place.

The board can also decide whether the project should be rejected or it could order a more detailed environmental impact review by an independent panel.

E-mailWe welcome your opinions. Click here to e-mail a letter to the editor.