TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMENTS on the Environmental Impact Statement. Rio Tinto Uranium Corp. Roughrider Advanced Exploration Project

Transcription

1 TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMENTS on the Environmental Impact Statement Rio Tinto Uranium Corp. Roughrider Advanced Exploration Project Prepared by Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment Environmental Assessment Branch

2 TABLE OF CONTENT Acronyms.. ii Preface... iii 1. Environmental Assessment and Review Process... 1 Introduction 1 Submission of the Environmental Impact Statement. 1 Technical Review... 2 Public Review. 3 Ministerial Decision Summary of Proposed Project.3 Alternatives Considered... 4 Public, First Nations and Metis Engagement Feedback and Response Technical Review Comments... 6 Introduction 6 Biophysical Impacts... 6 Terrestrial Environment...7 Aquatic Environment...7 Atmospheric and Acoustic Environment.. 9 Effects of the Environment Socio-Economic Considerations 10 Decommissioning, Reclamation and Abandonment Plan Conclusions 11 Invitation to comment 11 Contact 11 i

3 Acronyms ADEX COPC EAB EIS EQC LEL the ministry Rio Tinto SEARP the Act TRCs TOR Advanced Exploration Program/Project Contaminants of Potential Concern Environmental Assessment Branch Environmental Impact Statement Northern Saskatchewan Environmental Quality Committee Lowest Effects Level Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment Rio Tinto Canada Uranium Corporation Saskatchewan Environmental Assessment Review Panel (technical reviewers) The Environmental Assessment Act (Saskatchewan) Technical Review Comments Terms of Reference ii

4 Preface This document is provided by the Environmental Assessment Branch (EAB) of Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment (the ministry) as supporting information for the public review of the Rio Tinto Canada Uranium Corporation (Rio Tinto) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed Roughrider Project (the Project). The Project is located approximately 7 kilometers north of Points North Landing and 440 kilometers north of La Ronge, Saskatchewan. The proponent is proposing to construct, operate and decommission an advanced exploration project in the Athabasca Basin to determine the technical, environmental and commercial viability of developing the uranium deposits within the boundaries of the Roughrider mineral claims. This document has four major parts: The first part provides an overview of the provincial environmental assessment and review process. It outlines the events and activities that led to the EIS being released for public review and describes how the public can provide comments to the Minister of the Environment (the Minister) on the proposed Project. The second part provides a brief summary of the Project. This summary is intended to provide information to assist the reader in deciding whether they are interested in finding out more about the Project. It is not intended to be a full representation of the Project. Interested readers should visit a review centre to read the EIS for the Project (locations are listed in section 4). The third section of the document provides the ministry s evaluation of the proponent s conclusions regarding the predicted impacts of the proposed Project, the effectiveness of any identified mitigative measures and any follow-up requirements that would be placed on the proponent by the Minister, should the Project be approved. Section 4 presents the conclusions reached by the ministry and invites the public to comment. The Minister, when making the final decision regarding the environmental acceptability of the proposed Project considers both the public s comments and Technical Review Comments (TRCs). iii

5 1. Environmental Assessment and Review Process Introduction The Environmental Assessment Act (the Act) in Saskatchewan requires the proponent of a development to conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The EIA provides information needed by the Minister responsible for the Act (Minister of Environment) to determine whether, from an environmental perspective, a proposed development should be allowed to proceed and, if so, under what conditions. As part of the environmental assessment process, the proponent is required to prepare an EIS that documents the proponent s assessment and conclusions on the potential environmental effects of the proposed Project. The EIS also describes the measures the proponent plans to take to reduce negative effects and enhance positive environmental impacts. Once completed, the EIS undergoes both a technical and public review prior to a decision being made by the Minister regarding the Project. The EAB review process provides a broad understanding of the potential impacts and ways to minimize the impacts of a Project. The purpose of the environmental assessment and review process is to ensure that adequate environmental safeguards are in place before a development is allowed to proceed and that a development proceeds in a manner understood and broadly accepted by the public. These safeguards may arise out of the actual design and nature of the proposed development or, should the development receive approval under the Act, as a result of ongoing regulatory involvement by government agencies. In addition to the Act, this Project may be subject to the following acts, regulations and guidelines: The Environmental Management and Protection Act, 2002 The Water Regulations, 2002 The Mineral Industry Environmental Protection Regulations, 1996 The Mineral Disposition Regulations, 1986 The Clean Air Act and Regulations, 1989 The Hazardous Substances and Waste Dangerous Goods Regulations, 1989 Other provincial and federal agencies also have legislation and regulations which may be applicable to the Project. Submission of the Environmental Impact Statement In July 2013, the EAB received a proposal and Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Rio Tinto Advanced Exploration program (the Project). The application also included a letter indicating Rio Tinto wished to self-declare the proposed project 1

6 a development as defined in the Act and proceed through the EIA process in order to meet their corporate environmental performance and stewardship principles. The proposal and TOR were sent to the Saskatchewan Environmental Assessment Review Panel (SEARP) for technical review. Following the technical review of the application documents, the proponent was asked to submit an EIS for the Project. The EAB pre-consultation assessment concluded that the proposed Project will lead to restricted access to the working area where First Nations/Métis communities will not be able to practice traditional uses, resulting in triggering the Crown s duty to consult. In September 2013, Rio Tinto was notified the Project did trigger the Crown s duty to consult with potentially affected First Nations and Métis communities. Subsequent to public notification of the EIA during the week of September 16, 2013, the proponent submitted a revised TOR to outline specific studies which would be conducted to obtain information on the potential impacts of the Project and outline the information required in the EIS by provincial reviewers and regulatory agencies. The TOR was finalized in October Technical Review Technical review provides the government perspective on the proposed development. The EIS was received in January 2014 and was reviewed by provincial reviewers and regulators to ensure that potential environmental issues (including biophysical, social and economic) had been identified and adequately addressed. The technical review identified several environmental and technical issues that required revisions and additional clarification before the EIA process could proceed to the public review of the EIS. Following revisions of the draft EIS, a revised EIS was prepared by Rio Tinto in April 2014 to address deficiencies identified. This revised EIS containing responses to all requested information was provided to the ministry and upon further review was judged to contain adequate information to proceed with public review. This TRC document has been prepared pursuant to Section 11 of the Act and is meant to assist the public and government decision-makers in their review of the EIS. The comments represent a summary evaluation of the proponent s EIS. In preparing TRCs, the ministry focuses on those factors that are considered to be of primary significance with respect to the proposed Project and the environment in the area of the Project. 2

7 Public Review Public is invited to comment on the Rio Tinto ADEX Project EIS for a 30 day period ending Friday, July 28, Pursuant to Section 12 of the Act, both the EIS and TRC are made available for public inspection for a period of not less than thirty (30) days. During the 30 day review period, members of the public may make written submissions to the ministry regarding the EIA and information provided in the EIS and associated documents. Interested readers should visit a review centre or the ministry website (saskatchewan.ca/environmentalassessment) to review the EIS for the project (locations are listed in Section 4). Ministerial Decision The Minister considers both the public and technical review comments when making a decision. Information generated during the public and technical reviews of the EIS will be submitted to the Minister of Environment for consideration. The Minister, under Section 15 of the Act, may give Ministerial Approval to proceed with the development, with any terms and conditions that the Minister considers necessary or advisable, or the Minister may refuse to approve the development as proposed and will provide reasons for the decision. 2. Summary of Proposed Project Information in this section is taken from the Project s EIS and is neither comprehensive nor inclusive of the information contained in that document. Please refer to the Executive Summary and the EIS main document and annexes for complete information. Section 3.0 of the EIS provides detailed information regarding the proposed Project with additional details regarding the environmental baseline studies, atmospheric dispersion modeling assessments and aquatic environmental effects and risk assessments in Appendices C, E and F respectively. Rio Tinto is proposing to construct, operate and decommission an advanced exploration project in the Athabasca Basin to determine the technical, environmental and commercial viability of developing the uranium deposits within the boundaries of the Roughrider mineral claims. The proposed project is located approximately 7 km north of Points North Landing and 440 km north of La Ronge. The project is an exploratory drilling program, which would involve removal of mineralized uranium material from ore bodies by core sampling with no mining or milling proposed as part of the project. The activities associated with the project include upgrading a portion of the existing exploration trail; the development and operation of an exploration shaft and drifts, operation of underground and surface water management infrastructure and a water treatment facility. Rio Tinto proposes to establish a 100m buffer zone along the shoreline of all water bodies for all major facilities to further reduce the project 3

8 risk to water bodies and organism residing within them. The project duration from site preparation to completion of exploration drilling is anticipated to be approximately 5 years at which point a development decision will be made. Should Rio Tinto decide not to pursue development of the site, decommissioning and reclamation of the site would occur which is anticipated to take approximately 2 years to complete. Water management at the site during construction and operation would ensure protection of water resources by employing a diversion water collection system. In addition, all potentially contaminated water will be collected, recycled and treated in appropriate facilities before it is discharged into North McMahon Lake within the Smith Creek watershed. The potential impacts associated with discharge of treated contaminated water and effluent into the North McMahon Lake within the Smith Creek watershed were assessed as part of the EIS for this Project. Alternatives Considered Alternatives considered for the Project are presented in Section 3.2 of the EIS. This section discusses the consideration of alternatives related to several Project components including exploration drilling methodology, methods to access the exploration drift and water withdrawal, management and discharge options. In determining these alternatives, consideration was given to both the economic and technical factors as well as expected short-term (during operations) and long-term (after decommissioning) effects of the activity. Based on the alternatives considered, Rio Tinto opted for underground exploration drilling instead of surface exploration drilling in order to better delineate the ore body with minimal surface disturbance. Additionally, underground exploration drilling will provide improved understanding of a variety of issues including mining conditions, radiation, costs, development rates, water inflows, etc. Rio Tinto also considered the construction of either a decline or shaft as the two options to facilitate underground exploration drilling. Based on experience from other operations within the Athabasca Basin and current understanding of geological, technical, safety, environmental and economic factors, Rio Tinto identified the development of a shaft as the preferred method for the underground access. The additional advantage with this option is that it would serve either as mine ventilation or mine access leading to decreasing the overall mine development cost and surface disturbance should Rio Tinto decide to proceed with mining in the future. In considering the preferred alternative for discharge of treated effluent, two major criteria were used for the selection: a technologically and economically viable discharge option and the capacity of the receiving environment to 4

9 assimilate the treated discharge without adverse impacts on people and the environment. Two locations that could reasonably be used to receive the effluent discharged from the water treatment facility were identified and are discussed in Section 3.2 with the results of the discharge location ranking matrix presented in Table 3. The identification of potential alternative discharge locations was also the subject of consultation with each of the primary stakeholder communities and the Northern Saskatchewan Environmental Quality Committee (NSEQC) (Section 6.7). Based on the criteria considered, the discharge of treated effluent into North McMahon Lake within the Smith Creek watershed was identified as the preferred alternative for the discharge of treated effluent from the advanced exploration project. Public, First Nations and Métis Engagement Feedback and Response Section 6.0 provides details on Rio Tinto s engagement with the public and First Nations and Métis communities. Rio Tinto initiated engagement activities in March 2012 to inform potential stakeholders about the Project through various meetings and workshops. Table 18 outlines the various community engagement and consultation activities conducted by Rio Tinto, while samples of exploration program questionnaire, presentations and transcripts are presented in Appendices G, H, and I respectively. The project will lead to restricted access to the working area where First Nations and Métis communities will not be able to practice traditional uses, therefore the Crown s duty to consult has been triggered for this project. Tables 19 and 20 in Section 6 of the EIS provides a record of engagement activities undertaken by Rio Tinto with a local trapper active in the project area, First Nations and Métis communities, and NSEQC which included workshops, public open houses, and community-based environmental workshops. Primary concerns expressed during engagement activities related to: potential impacts of the project on food and water resources; potential risks to human health associated with the project; and selection of the preferred discharge location for treated effluent. All project-specific concerns raised during engagement and consultation activities were addressed by Rio Tinto in the EIS and during the meetings as documented in the tables listed above. Further opportunities for participation in the environmental assessment process will be provided during the review period of the EIA. The Crown is committed to fulfilling its duty to consult obligations with potentially affected First Nations and Métis communities as described in the province s Consultation Policy Framework dated June Consultation activities will continue as required through the subsequent licensing and 5

10 permitting phase by the responsible branch/agency, should the Project proceed to that stage. 3. Technical Review Comments Introduction The intent of the technical review phase of the environmental assessment and review process is to give provincial specialists at a variety of agencies an opportunity to examine the EIS to: Develop their opinions about how adequately the environmental issues related to the development have been characterized and addressed; and, Determine whether the information provided is sufficiently complete and technically accurate enough to support the public review phase of the process. The technical review of the EIS for the proposed Project identified issues related to potential environmental impacts and environmental management that required clarification. These issues were addressed with additional information and the results were presented in the final EIS submission. Upon further review, the final EIS was considered to contain adequate information to proceed with public review. Release of the EIS for public review should not be interpreted as absolute agreement with all items within the EIS, but simply that the issues remaining can be handled through ongoing regulatory relationships or terms and conditions that might flow from a decision made pursuant to the Act that would modify the development to make it acceptable to the technical reviewers. In general, the proponent has addressed the issues raised during review of the initial EIS submissions. Additional project details will be developed at the time of licensing should the development receive ministerial approval. Biophysical Impacts Rio Tinto has evaluated the possible impacts of the Project on the biophysical environment, the possible mitigation measures that could be employed to eliminate or mitigate (reduce) the impacts and any residual effects that might remain after the mitigation is in place. In undertaking the EIS, a number of valued ecosystem components (VECS) were identified to facilitate the assessment and interpretation of potential effects associated with the proposed project. Traditional valued ecosystem components (TVECs) identified through 6

11 northern consultation were also considered in the environmental assessment. A list of the VECs and TVECs can be found in section 4.2 of the EIS. The description of the existing environment is presented in section 5.1, while the assessment methodology and result of the baseline investigation of the VECs and TVECs are outlined in section 5.2. Terrestrial Environment The exploration project will require clearing of vegetation for construction activities and conversion of the existing access trail to a more permanent road capable of handling the necessary traffic. However, the Roughrider property is located in a mineralized area that has been previously disturbed by the removal of vegetation to allow for various surveys, access trails, exploration drilling and operation of a core storage camp since the late 1970s. Moreover, since 2007, the previous owners of the property (Hathor Exploration Limited) conducted significant surface drilling activities on the property that resulted in additional disturbance. In order to limit the project s footprint, Rio Tinto has committed to maximizing the use of existing disturbed area and minimizing the amount of new surface disturbances to the extent possible during this exploration work. As a result, no significant adverse impacts to vegetation communities are expected to result from the project. Minor impacts to wildlife may be anticipated to result from the project although wildlife habitat in the area has been previously impacted by exploration at the project location. Impacts associated with the project will largely be due to sensory disturbance during construction and operation of the project. These impacts will be limited in duration and are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts to wildlife populations or wildlife health. The project area falls within the northern range for woodland caribou, but north of commercial logging activities in an area with less developmental pressure on caribou populations. Rio Tinto has developed a caribou protection/management plan to help offset any negative effects associated with linear features and road/trail development. Aquatic Environment As proposed, the Project would utilize South McMahon Lake, one of the largest lakes in the Roughrider Area, as the fresh water source and North McMahon Lake within the Smith Creek Watershed as the discharge point for the treated effluent from its waste water treatment plant (WTP). The Project s water usage is expected to be well below the long-term sustainable yield of the South McMahon Lake basin due to low water usage rates, short duration and onsite water recycling program. As a result, withdrawal of water for the project is anticipated to have no discernable or measurable effect on the lake or aquatic 7

12 habitat within the lake. The predicted water quality of the discharge water is also not expected to negatively impact aquatic biota in the receiving environment (North McMahon Lake). Technical reviewers requested clarification on the rationale for selecting to discharge treated effluent into the previously unimpacted Smith Creek Watershed instead discharging into the already impacted Collins Creek system. Rio Tinto outlined the factors that informed their choice of Smith Creek as the discharge environment as follows. First, the cumulative impacts on Collins Creeks due to the combined discharge from the neighbouring McClean Lake Operations, the proposed Midwest Project and the current project could lead to potential restrictions in the discharge of treated effluent from the Roughrider project, further restriction to the already restricted McClean operations and anticipated restrictions on the additional volume of effluent from the proposed Midwest Project. Second, the receiving environment for the discharge of treated effluent was preferred by the local land user /trapper and the majority of the members of the NSEQC. Finally, Rio Tinto s assessments of the relative carrying capacities of the Collins Creek and Smith Creek systems for five key Contaminants of Potential Concern (COPC) namely copper, molybdenum, selenium, uranium and radium-226, using the national and provincial guidance on mixing zone restrictions, identified the Smith Creek system as the preferred option. Rio Tinto s sediment quality predictions presented in Section 7.2 of their Aquatic Environmental Effects Assessment (Appendix F of the EIS) showed that concentrations of some metals and other chemical constituents may exceed the lowest effects level (LEL). However, LEL benchmarks are used for general reference only because contaminant levels above the LELs do not necessarily translate into effects in the environment. This is evident by the arsenic concentrations in the baseline sediment chemistry presented in Table within Appendix C of the EIS. Further, it is not uncommon for metal levels to exceed LELs in mineralized areas resulting in concentrations of metals in sediment within a reference lake (a selected unimpacted lake for baseline investigation) exceeding the applicable LEL. Rio Tinto has acknowledged the importance of minimizing effects on all components of the environment and stated that they will ensure that appropriate mitigative measures are incorporated into all project components as the design of the project evolves. Technical reviewers were also concerned about the potential for spatial and temporal cumulative impacts on the aquatic environment including regional water quality and biota due to the proposed activity. Rio Tinto indicated that the Smith Creek watershed does not receive any treated industrial effluent from any other current or proposed sources and as a result there is no potential for spatial cumulative effects to result in that watershed. Also regarding the potential of 8

13 temporal cumulative effects, Appendix F of the EIS shows results of an Aquatic Environmental Effects Assessment and an Ecological Risk Assessment for the life of the proposed project (i.e. during construction operation, decommissioning and for a five year post-closure timeframe). The conclusion from the assessment was that during the advanced exploration program, the discharge of treated effluent is not predicted to result in exceedances of water quality guidelines. The effects of the treated effluent discharge under routine inflow conditions during the exploration period are evident for some COPCs up to month 60 (year 2019). However, after the exploration period, the concentrations of COPCs are predicted to decline to baseline levels within 5 years. Other industry best management practices that Rio Tinto has proposed include the use of a double-liner with leak-detection system under all ponds with contaminated water to prevent seepage and impacts to groundwater. Unlined ponds with a compacted base will be used to store uncontaminated (clean) water, while single-lined monitoring ponds with capacity to handle approximately two days of outflow from the waste treatment plant will be utilized to minimize liquid loss and impacts to the environment. Technical reviewers are satisfied by the assessment of the projects potential impacts on water quality and aquatic habitat and the mitigations proposed are expected to prevent or minimize impacts. Atmospheric and Acoustic Environment Airborne emissions will be generated during construction, operation and decommissioning of the project. The anticipated level and concentration of air emissions from the exploration project are discussed in Appendix E of the EIS. Technical reviewers did note that the results presented in the EIS show exceedances of total suspended particulate (TSP), particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM 10 ) and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM 2.5 ) compared to relevant ambient air quality standards for 24-hour and annual periods. Also, the frequency analysis results for TSP, PM 10 and PM 2.5 showed exceedances of the standards for 48, 33 and 4 days per year, respectively. This implies that dust emissions may have environmental impacts if no mitigation actions are taken. Rio Tinto has committed to implementing appropriate dust suppression measures to maintain air quality within the standards specified in The Clean Air Regulations and will also comply with requirements specified in the Occupational Health and Safety Regulations, 1996 and the Mines Regulations, 2003 related to emissions. The reviewers are satisfied with the proposed dust control measures and the associated air monitoring plans outlined in the EIS. However, the Proponent is required to supply the air monitoring results to the ministry to demonstrate 9

14 compliance with the relevant air quality standards. Rio Tinto has committed to conduct air quality monitoring to determine how the actual particulate levels compare with those predicted by the model, and supply the baseline data to the ministry. Where concentrations of contaminants approach the prescribed limits, Rio Tinto will explore options to reduce air emissions in accordance with industry best practices and Rio Tinto's Air Quality Control Standards and Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards. Effects of the Environment Rio Tinto considered how the environment could potentially adversely affect the proposed project. The environmental events that were considered under this section were forest fires, drought conditions, major precipitation events, seismic events and climate change. The assessment results indicate that the project as proposed is not likely to be adversely affected by natural disaster or predicted changes to climatic conditions in the project area. A discussion of these environmental influences and how they may affect the proposed project are presented in section 5.2 of the EIS. Socio-Economic Considerations RioTinto anticipates the proposed project would have a number of socioeconomic benefits. The Project has the potential to provide employment and business opportunities to residents of Saskatchewan s north. Rio Tinto would establish policies and practices for employment, contracting and local purchasing in addition to development programs to maximize opportunities in a sustainable manner. Rio Tinto has compensated the local trapper active in the Roughrider project area after reaching a compensation agreement for loss of commercial trapping income because of restrictions of access to the working area where he would have been able to carry out trapping practices. Decommissioning, Reclamation and Abandonment Plan Section 3.15 of the EIS includes a conceptual decommissioning and reclamation plan for the Project site. Rio Tinto intends to reclaim all components related to the Roughrider project should the decision be made not to proceed with the development of a mine at the end of the exploration program. A detailed plan for decommissioning, reclamation and abandonment and appropriate financial assurance would be developed in consultation with Environmental Protection Branch during licensing if the proposed Project receives Ministerial Approval under the Act. 10

15 4. Conclusion The Saskatchewan Environmental Assessment Review Panel (technical reviewers) and the ministry conclude that Rio Tinto has undertaken sufficient studies and provided adequate information about the proposed Project such that the EIS can be made available for public review. Invitation to Comment Public is invited to comment on the Project EIS for a 30 day period ending July 28, The public is invited to review Rio Tinto s EIS and the TRCs and provide their comments no later than Friday July 28, The EIS and Final TRCs are being made available for review at the offices of Métis Nation of Saskatchewan - Northern Region 3(MNS-NR3) Local #19; MNS-NR3 Local #80; Hatchett Lake Denesuline First Nation; Northern Hamlet of Stony Rapids; Northern Settlement of Southend; Métis Nation of Saskatchewan Northern Region 1; Town of La Ronge; Northern Settlement of Wollaston Lake; Prince Albert Grand Council; the Legislative Library in Regina; and at: Saskatchewan.ca/environmentalassessment Written comments received during the public review of the EIS and TRCs will be considered by the Minister of Environment when he makes his decision under section 15(1) of The Environmental Assessment Act to either: (a) (b) give ministerial approval to proceed with the development and impose any terms and conditions that he considers necessary or advisable; or refuse to approve the development. Contact For more information, please contact: Aimann Sadik Senior Environmental Assessment Administrator Environmental Assessment Branch Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment 3211 Albert Street Regina SK S4S 5W6 Phone: Fax: environmetal.assessment@gov.sk.ca 11