NEED MORE INFORMATION?

Transcription

1

2 NEED MORE INFORMATION? Public Record Locations The public record for this environmental assessment can be reviewed during normal business hours at the following ministry office: Ministry of the Environment Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch 2 St.Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A Toronto, Ontario Voice: (416) / Fax: (416) The Review and Notice of Completion are also available at the following locations: Ministry of Natural Resources 2 Third Avenue Cochrane, ON P0L 1C Moosonee Municipal Office 5 First Street Moosonee, ON P0L 1Y Ministry of the Environment Timmins District Office, Hwy 101 East South Porcupine, ON P0N 1H / Ministry of the Environment Environmental Assessment & Approvals Branch 2 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A Toronto, ON M4V 1L / Min. of N. Dev., Mines and Forestry 33 Ambridge Drive Iroquois Falls, ON P0K 1G Smooth Rock Falls Municipal Office 142 First Avenue Smooth Rock Falls, ON P0L 1B Timmins Public Library 320 Second Avenue Timmins, ON P4N 8A Detour Gold Corporation Royal Bank Plaza, North Tower 200 Bay St, Suite 2040 Toronto, ON M5J 2J This Review is subject to the provisions of Ontario Regulation 616/98 which sets out a deadline for the completion of this document. The deadline for the completion of the Review was July 23, This paragraph and the giving of the Notice of Completion are the notices required by subsection 7(3) of the Environmental Assessment Act. The Review documents the ministry s evaluation of the EA and takes the comments of the government agencies, the public and Aboriginal communities into consideration. Cette publication hautement spécialisée n est disponible qu en anglais en vertu du règlement 441/97, qui en exempte l application de la Loi sur les services en français. Pour obtenir de l aide en français, veuillez communiquer avec le ministère de l Environnement au

3 Table of Contents Executive Summary Environmental Assessment Process Terms of Reference Environmental Assessment Ministry Review The Proposed Undertaking Results of the Ministry Review Conformance with ToR and EAA Ministry Analysis Consultation Conclusion EA Process Key Issues Conclusion Proposed Undertaking Key Issues Conclusion Summary of the Ministry Review What Happens Now? Additional Approvals Required Modifying or Amending the Proposed Undertaking List of Appendices Appendix A Environmental Assessment Act Requirements Appendix B Submissions Received During the Initial Comment Period List of Tables Table 1 Government Review Team Comment Summary Table Table 2 Public Comment Summary Table Table 3 Aboriginal Communities Comment Summary Table

4 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review Executive Summary WHO WHAT Detour Gold Corporation Ministry Review of an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the proposed undertaking which includes: The construction and development of a 180 kilometre, 230 kilovolt transmission line and related infrastructure to provide approximately 120 megawatts of power to the Detour Lake mine site from the Ontario electrical grid with connection at the Pinard Transformer Station. WHEN EA Submitted: April 30, EA Comment Period: April 30, 2010 to June 18, 2010 Ministry Review Comment Period: August 13, 2010 to September 17, WHERE WHY CONCLUSIONS The transmission line is proposed to run between the Pinard Transformer Station west of Fraserdale, Ontario and the Detour Lake mine site located approximately 185 kilometres northeast of Cochrane, Ontario. The proponent acquired the mine site in 2007 and is now moving forward with the planning of an open pit gold mine and related processing facilities. The proposed mining activities will require up to approximately 120 megawatts of available power for the construction and operation of the mine. The Ministry of the Environment s Review of the EA concluded that it was prepared in accordance with the approved Terms of Reference and contains sufficient information to assess the environmental effects of the proposed undertaking. August 6,

5 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review 1. Environmental Assessment Process Environmental Assessment (EA) is a proponent driven planning process designed to incorporate the consideration of the environment into decision-making by assessing the effects of an undertaking on the environment. In Ontario, the Environmental Assessment Act (EAA) sets out the general contents for the preparation of an EA, as well as the ministry s evaluation process. For those proponents and undertakings subject to the EAA, approval under the EAA is required before the undertaking can proceed. Proponents address a wide range of potential effects on the natural, social, cultural and economic environments to ensure the protection, conservation and wise management of the environment. An EA determines, on the basis of the environmental effects, if an undertaking should proceed, and if so, how environmental effects can be managed. EAs may identify a problem or opportunity, consider alternative ways of addressing the problem or opportunity, evaluate the environmental effects of the alternatives and select a preferred undertaking from the alternatives. The proponent must consider actions to avoid, reduce and mitigate potential environmental effects. In preparing the EA, the proponent completes various studies and consults with interested stakeholders including government agencies, the public and affected Aboriginal communities to evaluate the alternatives and determine the preferred undertaking. If the undertaking is approved, the proponent is required to monitor to demonstrate compliance with standards, regulations and the EAA approval. 1.1 Terms of Reference EA Process ToR Approval EA Preparation EA Submission EA Comment Period Ministry Review Review Comment Period Minister s Decision Preparing an EA is a two-step application to the Minister of the Environment (Minister). The first step requires the proponent to prepare and submit a Terms of Reference (ToR) to the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) for review and approval. The ToR is the work plan or framework for how the EA will be prepared. On March 4, 2010, the Minister approved the Detour Lake Power Project ToR. The ToR set out how Detour Gold would assess alternatives, assess environmental effects and consult with the public during the preparation of the EA. The ToR outlines that an individual EA was required pursuant to the Electricity Projects Regulation (Ontario Regulation 116/01 under the EAA (Reg. 116/01)), and that the EA would be completed in accordance with sections 6(2)(c) and 6.1(3) of the EAA. The ToR established the purpose of the undertaking and the preferred alternative to the undertaking, and outlined August 6,

6 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review the alternatives methods of carrying out the undertaking that would be assessed in the EA. The ToR also outlined a consultation plan for the EA process. 1.2 Environmental Assessment Once the ToR is approved by the Minister, the proponent can proceed to the second step of the EA process and carry out the EA. The EA must be prepared in accordance with the approved ToR and the requirements of the EAA. Once the proponent has carried out the EA, including consultation, the EA is submitted to the ministry for review and approval. On April 30, 2010, Detour Gold submitted the Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment (DLPP EA) to the ministry for approval for the proposed construction and development of a 180 kilometre (km), 230 kilovolt (kv) transmission line and related infrastructure to provide approximately 120 megawatts (MW) of power to the Detour Lake mine site from the Ontario electrical grid with connection at the Pinard Transformer Station. The DLPP EA comment period ended on June 18, Ministry Review The DLPP EA was circulated for review to a Government Review Team (GRT). The GRT, including federal, provincial and local agencies, reviewed the EA to ensure that the information and conclusions of the EA were valid, based on their agencies mandates. The public and Aboriginal communities also had an opportunity to review the EA and submit their comments to the ministry. All comments received by the ministry are considered by the Minister before a decision is made about the EA undertaking. The EAA requires the MOE to prepare a review of the EA, known simply as the Ministry Review (Review). The Review is the ministry s evaluation of the EA. The purpose of the Review is to determine if the EA has been prepared in accordance with the approved ToR and therefore meets the requirements of the EAA and whether the evaluation in the EA is sufficient to allow the Minister to make a decision about the proposed undertaking. The Review outlines whether the information contained in the EA supports the recommendations and conclusions for the selection of the proposed undertaking. Ministry staff, with input from the GRT, evaluate the technical merits of the proposed undertaking, including the anticipated environmental effects and the proposed mitigation measures. The Review also provides an overview and analysis of the public, agency and Aboriginal community comments on the EA and the proposed undertaking. The Minister of the Environment considers the conclusion of the Review along with other factors including the contents of the EA, the requirements of the ToR and the purpose of the EAA when making a decision; the Review itself is not the EA decision making mechanism. The Minister s decision will be made following the end of the five-week August 6,

7 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review Review comment period. The Minister s decision is subject to the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council. The Review comment period allows the GRT, the public and Aboriginal communities to see how their concerns with the EA and the proposed undertaking have been considered. During the comment period that follows the release of this Review, anyone can submit comments on the EA, the undertaking and the Review. In addition, anyone can request that the Minister refer the EA, or any matter relating to the EA, to the Environmental Review Tribunal for a hearing if they believe that there are significant outstanding environmental effects that the EA has not addressed. Requests for a hearing can only be made during this comment period. The Minister will consider all requests and determine if a hearing is necessary. A Notice of Completion of the Review has been published in local newspapers indicating that this Review has been completed and is available for a five-week comment period from August 13, 2010 to September 17, The publications where the Notice of Completion of the Review will be published are: The Timmins Daily Press; The Wawatay News; and The Cochrane Times Post. Copies of the Review have been placed in the same public record locations where the EA was available, and copies have been distributed to the GRT members and potentially interested Aboriginal communities. Those members of the public who submitted comments during the EA comment period have also received a copy of the Review. 2. The Proposed Undertaking Detour Gold is seeking EAA approval for the construction and development of a 180 km, 230 kv transmission line and related infrastructure to provide approximately 120 MW of power to the Detour Lake mine site from the Ontario electrical grid with connection at the Pinard Transformer Station. The Detour Lake mineral deposit is located approximately 185 km northeast of Cochrane, Ontario. The Detour Lake mine was actively mined by another company from 1983 to 1999 and subsequently decommissioned. The proponent acquired the property in 2007 and is now moving forward with the planning of an open pit gold mine and related processing facilities. The Detour Lake site is no longer connected to the electrical grid and activities are constrained by the availability of less than 1 MW of diesel generating power at the site. A dependable power supply is required to construct and operate the proposed open pit gold mine. August 6,

8 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review It is expected that the redevelopment of this mine, which would not be possible without the construction of the proposed transmission line, will provide approximately 1,200 temporary construction jobs and 500 permanent jobs. The regional economy of northeastern Ontario will benefit directly from this work in terms of increased wages and spending by workers, and the purchase of goods and services by Detour Gold and its contractors. Detour Gold determined that the proposed mining activities would require up to approximately 120 MW of available power and that a 230 kv transmission line would be required to provide a reliable energy source for the mining operations. If EAA approval is granted, the Detour Lake Power Project will be completed in accordance with the terms and provisions outlined in the EA and any proposed conditions of approval. In addition, Detour Gold must still obtain all other legislative approvals it may require for the undertaking. While an individual EA is required for the transmission line, an individual EA is not required for the mine itself. The mine must proceed through separate approvals, including a comprehensive study under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, the provincial one-window mining approval coordination process led by the Ministry of Northern Development, Mines and Forestry (MNDMF), a Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) Class EA for the disposition of crown resources and an Environmental Screening under Reg. 116/01 for a temporary power supply. The proponent developed a consultation framework to coordinate all processes and integrate project information where appropriate. August 6,

9 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review Figure 1: Detour Lake Power Project Individual EA August 6,

10 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review 3. Results of the Ministry Review The Review provides the analysis of the EA. The Review is not intended to summarize the EA, nor present the information found in the EA. For information on the decision making process, refer to the EA itself. The EA and supporting documentation outlines the EA planning process and demonstrates how the proponent has selected the preferred undertaking and made the final decision. 3.1 Conformance with ToR and EAA Ministry Analysis The MOE coordinated an analysis of the EA with the GRT that, in part, looked at whether the requirements of the ToR have been met. The MOE concludes that the EA followed the framework set out in the approved ToR, addressed the commitments made in the approved ToR, and demonstrated how the required components of the EAA have been met. The purpose of the Ministry Review is to determine whether: The EA has met the requirements of the ToR and the EAA. There are any outstanding issues with the EA. The proposed undertaking has technical merit. Must Haves in the EA: The EA must be prepared in accordance with the approved ToR. EA must include all the basic EAA information requirements. EA demonstrates where all the additional commitments in the ToR were met, including studies and the consultation process. Appendix A summarizes this analysis and identifies how the ToR requirements have been addressed in the EA Consultation One of the key requirements of the EAA is pre-submission consultation completed during the preparation of the EA. This consultation is the responsibility of the proponent and must be performed prior to the submission of the EA and in accordance with the consultation plan outlined in the ToR. The consultation outlined by Detour Gold in its EA included a series of public information sessions, meetings with local First Nation communities, radio and newspaper advertisements, public mailings, a plain-language summary of the EA, a project newsletter, a project web site, on-going compensation agreement negotiations and Section 5.1 of the EAA states: When preparing proposed terms of reference and an environmental assessment, the proponent shall consult with such persons as may be interested. technical review meetings with First Nation and Métis communities, and government and stakeholder organization meetings. Overall, the MOE is satisfied with the level of consultation that occurred during the preparation and review of this EA and determined that it was generally appropriate for the proposed undertaking. The EA clearly documents the consultation methods utilized August 6,

11 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review by Detour Gold to engage the GRT, the general public, stakeholders and Aboriginal communities in the EA process. Once the EA is submitted to the ministry, additional ministry driven consultation occurs during the EA comment period. The GRT, the public and affected Aboriginal communities are provided with the opportunity to review the EA and to submit comments to the MOE on whether the requirements of the ToR had been met, on the EA itself and on the proposed undertaking. All comments received by the ministry during the EA comment period were forwarded to Detour Gold for a response. Summaries of the comments received along with Detour Gold s responses are included in Tables 1-3. Copies of the submissions are also available in Appendix B. Government Review Team GRT members were directly circulated copies of the EA for their review during the seven week comment period. All comments received were forwarded by the ministry to Detour Gold for a response. In addition, Detour Gold held meetings with the primary approval authorities (including the MOE, MNDMF, MNR, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) and other federal representatives) during the preparation of the EA to coordinate the various approval processes. Comments were provided by the MOE, the MNR and the Ministry of Tourism and Culture (MTC). Comments from the federal agencies are being coordinated by CEAA. Federal comments on the EA have not been provided to date, however MOE staff have been in contact with CEAA and have confirmed that a response will be forthcoming. The MOE will accept comments from the federal agencies during the comment period for the Review, and will ensure that the agencies concerns are addressed appropriately before a decision is made on the EA. Comments from the MOE related to the need for an emergency response plan for potential spills, guidance on wood chipping during ROW clearing, and potential impacts from water taking on fisheries and aquatic resources. Detour Gold provided additional clarification on the assessment of potential impacts from water taking, and committed to providing an emergency response plan, considering wood chipping as the preferred option during ROW clearing and developing a water taking protocol to manage potential impacts on fisheries and aquatic resources. The MOE was satisfied with the responses. The MNR generally provided corrections to MNR data included in the DLPP EA and requested clarification on certain information, legislative requirements or potential impacts related to natural features such as watercourses, fish, wildlife and birds. Detour Gold provided responses to the satisfaction of the MNR addressing the issues raised. August 6,

12 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review Comments from the MTC noted that a stage 2 archaeological report is outstanding, and outlined requirements for a heritage impact assessment to evaluate all built heritage resources on the property. Detour Gold clarified the status of the already completed archaeological work, provided details on existing cultural heritage resources and committed to the protection of any heritage resources. The MTC indicated that it was satisfied with the response. A summary of the comments received and Detour Gold s responses can be found in Table 1. Public Consultation Public consultation during the preparation of the EA included a series of public information sessions in Timmins, Cochrane, Iroquois Falls, and Moosonee between March 1 and April 12, 2010 to provide a project update and discuss the proposed design alternatives. In addition, Detour Gold held a second set of information sessions after the formal submission of the EA, at the locations noted above and an additional location in Smooth Rock Falls, between May 10 and May 18, The public consultation program also consisted of: Radio and newspaper advertisements; Public mailings; A plain-language summary of the EA; A project newsletter; and A project web site. The public was also given the opportunity to review and comment on the final EA once it was submitted to the MOE. No comments were received from the public during the seven week comment period. Aboriginal Community Consultation In addition to the requirement in the EAA that interested persons be consulted, the Crown and the proponent must also turn their minds to consultation with Aboriginal communities who may have aboriginal or treaty rights that may be negatively impacted by the proposed undertaking. The Crown has a duty to consult where a contemplated action by the Crown may adversely affect Aboriginal or treaty rights. The Crown may delegate procedural aspects of the duty to the proponent. Aboriginal rights stem from practices, customs or traditions which are integral to the distinctive culture of the Aboriginal community claiming the right. Treaty rights stem from the signing of treaties by Aboriginal peoples with the Crown. Aboriginal rights and treaty rights are protected by section 35 of the Constitution Act, Detour Gold identified that the proposed transmission route overlaps with the traditional territories asserted by Moose Cree First Nation August 6,

13 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review (MCFN), Taykwa Tagamou Nation (TTN) and Wahgoshig First Nation (WFN). In addition, Detour Gold identified that the Métis living in northeastern Ontario have asserted aboriginal rights in the region in which the project is located. Detour Gold has been consulting with the above noted Aboriginal communities to document and determine any potential effects of the proposed undertaking on traditional uses. Detour Gold indicates that traditional land use studies are currently underway with the MCFN, TTN and the Métis Nation of Ontario (MNO). The WFN has already completed its assessment of traditional land uses in the study area. Detour Gold committed in the EA to continue to support the traditional land use studies, to engage the communities in discussion about traditional land uses and to determine appropriate mitigation measures to avoid or reduce any impacts. Detour Gold also committed in the EA to putting in place agreements with Aboriginal communities whose aboriginal or treaty rights may be negatively impacted by the undertaking to cover the impacted communities from loss (such as through direct compensation should there be direct harm during the construction of the transmission line). Meetings and negotiations with the above noted communities have been ongoing throughout the preparation of the EA, but have not yet been completed. The MOE is not involved in the negotiations between Detour Gold and the Aboriginal communities, however according to Detour Gold, the agreements between the proponent and the Aboriginal communities will cover a number of interests, including: Environmental protection; Employment, training and business opportunities; Social and cultural awareness and protection; Dispute resolution; and Other matters. Detour Gold also held community meetings on reserve with the WFN and TTN on March 3 and March 26, 2010 respectively. Detour Gold indicated that it offered to host community meetings with the MCFN, but the community was not willing to meet at that time. The EA did not provide details on the reasons why the MCFN was not willing to meet. Information sessions were held for the Métis community in Timmins, and Cochrane on March 1 and 2, Aboriginal community members were welcome to attend any of the public information sessions. Projects notices and copies of the EA were provided at the MCFN, TTN and WFN Band Offices and the Timmins Métis Council and Northern Lights Métis Council offices for review. In addition to those communities mentioned above, copies of the EA were also circulated to the following for review and comment: MoCreebec Council of the Cree Nation; Mushkegowuk Council; August 6,

14 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review Wabun Tribal Council; and Nishnawbe Aski Nation. Comments on the EA were submitted to the MOE by the TTN and the MNO. The WFN submitted comments directly to Detour Gold during the review period, and Detour Gold responded to their concerns directly. These comments were still considered as part of this Review. MCFN contacted the MOE near the end of the review period for the EA requesting additional time to prepare its comments. The MOE indicated that it would accept their comments within the requested extension of 20 days, and incorporate them into the review of the EA if possible. Comments were received on July 16, 2010 and forwarded to Detour Gold to respond, but due to regulated timelines for the publication of the Review, the comments could not be addressed in this Review. The MOE will ensure that the MCFN concerns are addressed appropriately before a decision is made on the EA. The TTN retained environmental consultant AECOM to conduct a technical review of the EA and submit comments to the MOE on their behalf. AECOM s comments highlighted concerns with the information provided in certain sections of the EA, including aquatic environment, terrestrial habitat, wildlife and birds, land use, heritage and cultural resources. In addition, TTN s comments highlighted concerns with the lack of consultation during the EA process and the documentation of consultation efforts. Specific recommendations were provided to address these issues, including finalizing a consultation protocol, holding an EA training workshop and revising the consultation record. A summary of TTN s detailed comments and recommendations can be found in Table 3 of this Review. Detour Gold provided responses to the questions raised by TTN and provided the additional information requested. In addition, Detour Gold agreed with TTN s recommendations regarding the consultation plan to ensure that meaningful engagement occurs about the proposed transmission line and other aspects of the mine development and operation. The MNO provided comments requesting clarification on certain issues, including the significance and nature of impacts to wildlife, vegetation and watercourses from construction activities, and the status of Métis traditional land use studies. In addition, the MNO provided recommendations for how the MNO, Detour Gold and the provincial and federal government can work to address these concerns, including forming a coordinating committee, developing a formal agreement to facilitate MNO participation in the project, providing capacity to hire a Project Coordinator and addressing species of interest through a traditional knowledge study. August 6,

15 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review Detour Gold provided responses to and additional information on the issues raised by the MNO and committed to engaging in discussions with the MNO regarding future engagement on the project. The WFN provided comments through the Wahgoshig Environmental Committee and requested additional information relating to fuel handling, the management of ice bridges and stream crossings, and Detour Gold s contractor management program. Detour Gold has committed to ensuring that the requested information is included in the program documentation and provided for review when available. A summary of the comments received and Detour Gold s responses can be found in Table Conclusion The EAA requires a proponent to consult with interested persons during the preparation of the EA and report on the results of those consultations. that Detour Gold appropriately followed the consultation plan outlined in the approved ToR. Overall, the MOE has determined that Detour Gold provided sufficient opportunities for the public, government, and Aboriginal communities to be consulted during the preparation of the EA. The MOE notes that issues are outstanding, including requests by the TTN and MNO for additional engagement tools and the results of a number of aboriginal traditional knowledge studies. In particular, the results of the traditional knowledge studies are needed to confirm and avoid potential impacts on cultural resources and aboriginal land uses. Detour Gold has acknowledged these concerns and committed to working with the Aboriginal communities to support their involvement in the project. Otherwise, the EA clearly documents the consultation methods utilized by Detour Gold to engage the public, the GRT and Aboriginal communities during the EA process. The EA clearly sets out the issues and concerns raised and how they were addressed or will be addressed in the future. 3.2 EA Process EA is a planning process that requires the proponent to identify an existing problem or opportunity, consider alternative ways of addressing the problem or opportunity, evaluate the potential environmental effects of the alternatives and select a preferred alternative. Detour Gold has been exploring the previously developed Detour Lake mineral property since The Detour Lake deposit was operated by another mining company from 1983 to 1999, but Detour Gold has now determined that future operation at the site would be viable. August 6,

16 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review Detour Gold determined that the proposed mining activities would require up to approximately 120 MW of available power and that a 230 kv transmission line would be required to provide a reliable energy source for the mining operations. Through preliminary planning work, the proponent assessed a range of potential alternatives to provide power to the mine site, including on-site diesel or natural gas generation and hydroelectric or other forms of renewable energy. While a number of these power supply alternatives were theoretically possible, all of the alternatives except for connection to the Ontario electrical grid were screened out during the preparation of the ToR due to comparatively greater costs or environmental impacts, or comparatively lower capacity, reliability or technical feasibility. Detour Gold also considered the feasibility of supplying the needed power through a 115 kv transmission line like the previous mining operation, but the proposed Detour Lake Project has greater power requirements than the previous mine. It was determined that insufficient reliable power would be provided by this means, and that a 230 kv transmission line would be required. The closest connection point for a 230 kv transmission line is at the Pinard TS near Fraserdale, Ontario. Other connection points are further away and offer no advantage, as sufficient capacity is available at the Pinard TS. For these reasons, connection to the Ontario electrical grid at the Pinard TS through a 180 km, 230 kv transmission line was considered in the EA as the only alternative to the undertaking. The Do Nothing alternative was also brought forward for further consideration to demonstrate the relative advantages and disadvantages of the proposed undertaking. In addition, Detour Gold undertook a preliminary evaluation of routing alternatives during the preparation of the ToR. This preliminary evaluation determined that although it is not the most direct route, using the previously disturbed right-of-way (ROW) from the previous mining operation to Island Falls, and then developing next to an existing ROW from Island Falls north to the new 230 kv connection at the Pinard TS would minimize potential environmental impacts. No other routes provided a comparative advantage over this route, and therefore no other routing alternatives were brought forward for evaluation in the EA. Refer to Figure 1 above for the general route of the proposed transmission line. The EA itself evaluated alternative methods of carrying out the undertaking. The methodology for evaluating the alternative methods consisted of the assessment of each alternative based on a number of performance objectives, including: Cost-effectiveness; Technical applicability and/or system integrity and reliability; Ability to service the site effectively; Effects to the biophysical environment; Effects to the human environment; and August 6,

17 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review Amenability to reclamation. Potential effects on the environment were determined based on a study area for the EA which included: The proposed development zone for the mine; One kilometre on either side of the proposed route to assess biophysical environment and land use components; and Five kilometres on either side of the proposed route to assess human environment components. The alternatives were rated preferred, acceptable or unacceptable based on the objectives, and then qualitatively compared to each other to determine the most acceptable alternative. The alternative methods that were evaluated included: Minor route refinements; Siting alternatives; Tower design alternatives; and ROW management alternatives. Minor Route Refinements A working corridor of 40 metres is the standard width required to construct a 230 kv transmission line. Since the existing ROW from the previous mine is only 30 metres in width, the EA considered minor refinements to the existing ROW route to avoid sensitive areas. The ROW is proposed to be widened either on the north or south side by 10 metres to preferentially avoid features such as access roads and water bodies. Siting Alternatives The EA also considered siting alternatives for the transmission line termini and substation at the mine site, but determined that the siting of these facilities will be dependent on the transmission line route, the position of other site infrastructure and the avoidance of sensitive features. As such, these facilities will be sited within the context of the overall transmission line routing and located to minimize potential impacts. Tower Design Alternatives Two potential tower designs were identified by Detour Gold as being potentially appropriate from a technical perspective, including a wooden pole H frame design and a steel V frame design. Although the steel V frame has advantages in certain technical situations, the wooden pole H frame was evaluated as the overall preferred tower design since it is generally preferred from a technical perspective and less costly and labour intensive than steel towers. It is anticipated that the majority of the line will consist of August 6,

18 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review wooden pole H frame towers, but the steel V frame towers may be applied in certain areas if warranted by local conditions. ROW Management Alternatives Two options for managing woody vegetation within the ROW were identified for evaluation in the EA, including mechanical or manual clearing, and the application of herbicide. Based on cost-effectiveness, the application of herbicide was identified as the preferred alternative, however, Detour Gold indicates that the most effective treatment will be determined based on site conditions and a number of vegetation management criteria, including efficiency, environmental impact, feasibility and cost-effectiveness. Once the preferred alternative was determined, the EA evaluated the potential environmental effects of the undertaking and identified mitigation measures to avoid or minimize environmental effects. Environmental effects were determined for the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of the undertaking and included a range of environmental components, including the atmospheric environment, aquatic environment, terrestrial environment and socio-cultural environment. Net effects were assessed based on the value of the environmental component, the magnitude, extent, duration, frequency, reversibility and likelihood of potential effects, and the application of available mitigation measures. In general, the EA concluded that there would be no significant net effects from the undertaking after mitigation measures are applied. The proposed mitigation measures include: Using or expanding existing ROWs instead of creating a new greenfield route; Minimizing disturbance to conservation reserves, watercourses and sensitive natural features; Constructing in winter and using existing infrastructure to minimize disturbance; Maintaining vegetated buffers adjacent to watercourses; Investigate areas of archaeological potential further and avoid disturbance to heritage sites; and Use industry best management practices for project design and construction management. In addition to the application of mitigation measures where appropriate, Detour Gold commits in the EA to undertaking environmental monitoring to ensure that all commitments made in the EA are fulfilled and that the undertaking will be compliant with all legislation, approvals and permits. The EA identifies specific components of the undertaking that will be monitored and it outlines a plan for weekly inspections during construction, post-construction inspections, ongoing discussions with stakeholders regarding socio-cultural impacts and mitigation, and a formal complaints procedure. August 6,

19 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review Key Issues Key issues regarding the EA process completed by Detour for the Detour Lake Power Project can be found in Appendix B of the Review. All comments, including Detour Gold s responses and the ministry s level of satisfaction can be found in Tables 1-3. Some concerns were raised by the GRT and Aboriginal communities regarding the assessment of impacts and net effects on the environment. The MOE, the MNR and the MNO identified that the impact ratings for certain environmental aspects, such as hydrology, aquatic resources, vegetation, wildlife and species at risk did not appropriately identify the significance of predicted impacts. The TTN raised a concern that the assessment of effects concludes that there will be no net effects, which does not account for measurable losses of habitat from the construction of the transmission line. that Detour Gold provided additional detail to address these concerns and clarify the ratings for potential impacts and the significance of net effects. In addition to requests for further information and clarification of potential impacts and cumulative effects, the TTN provided a number of specific recommendations on the EA, including developing best management practices for the use of ice bridges, providing additional information on specific employment and business commitments being offered to the TTN in the absence of a completed Impacts and Benefits Agreement, including any relevant information, contained in the TTN traditional knowledge studies under development and applying additional mitigation measures, environmental management practices and monitoring requirements. Detour Gold provided additional information related to these issues and commitments for addressing them as the project proceeds Conclusion Overall, the MOE is satisfied with the proponent s decision making process. The EA contains an explanation of the problems and opportunities that prompted the study and the decision making process documented in the EA was logical and transparent. The EA evaluates a reasonable range of alternatives, provides a description of the affected environment in the study area and identifies the components of the environment that may be affected by the proposed undertaking. The MOE concludes that the EA was prepared in accordance with the approved ToR and the requirements of the EAA. August 6,

20 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review 3.3 Proposed Undertaking The proposed undertaking is described in section 5.0 of the EA and was evaluated based on the potential advantages and disadvantages to the environment. The proposed undertaking consists of the construction of a 180 km, 230 kv transmission line and related facilities from the Detour Lake mine site to the Pinard TS in Fraserdale, Ontario. The proposed 180 km route for the transmission line would use and expand on the approximately 140 km routing of the former transmission line ROW from the Detour Lake site to Island Falls; and expand the existing transmission line ROW from Island Falls north to the Pinard TS for an additional approximately 40 km. An overhead transmission line will be constructed within the ROW, anticipated to be constructed using wooden H frame double pole structures, having up to 170 m spacing. The construction is proposed in two phases. The first phase would entail construction of a substation at the Detour Lake site and the portion of the transmission line from the Detour Lake site to the Island Falls, primarily during the first winter construction season. The line would be temporarily connected into an existing 115 kv circuit at Island Falls in order to provide the Detour Lake site with approximately 20 MW of power for mine construction and pumping activities. The second phase would include construction of the 230 kv transmission line between Island Falls and the Pinard TS and a new 230 kv line circuit facility at the Pinard TS. The second phase of construction would occur as conditions allow up to and including the subsequent winter Key Issues Key issues regarding the proposed undertaking can be found in Appendix B. All comments, including Detour Gold s responses and the MOE s level of satisfaction can be found in Tables 1-3. In general, the GRT and Aboriginal communities requested clarification and additional information on a number of components described in the EA. that Detour Gold provided additional detail to address the issues raised by the GRT and Aboriginal communities Conclusion that the provisions of the EA, the commitments made by Detour Gold in response to comments received, and the commitments made by Detour Gold to complete additional work will ensure that the technical concerns raised by the GRT and Aboriginal communities will be adequately addressed. August 6,

21 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review 4. Summary of the Ministry Review This Review concludes that the EA complies with the requirements of the approved ToR and has been prepared in accordance with the EAA. The EA has assessed the potential environmental effects of the proposed undertaking and evaluated a range of alternative methods based on a broad definition of the environment. that the consultation opportunities provided by Detour Gold enabled an acceptable level of participation by the public, Aboriginal communities and the GRT. Concerns raised by the GRT and Aboriginal communities have either been addressed by Detour Gold, can be addressed through commitments made by Detour Gold, or can be addressed as part of future planning and approval processes for the mine. With respect to the status of the traditional knowledge studies and future engagement of Aboriginal communities, Detour Gold has committed to working with the communities to pursue these issues as the project proceeds. August 6,

22 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review 5. What Happens Now? The Review will be made available for a five-week comment period. During this time, all interested parties, including the public, the GRT and Aboriginal communities can submit comments to the ministry about the proposed undertaking, the EA and/or the Review. At this time, anyone can request that the Minister refer either all or part of the EA to the Environmental Review Tribunal for a hearing if they believe that their concerns have not been addressed. At the end of the Review comment period, MOE staff will make a recommendation to the Minister concerning whether the EA has been prepared in accordance with the ToR and the requirements of the EAA and whether the proposed undertaking should be approved. When making a decision, the Minister will consider the purpose of the EAA, the ToR, the EA, the Review, the comments submitted during the EA and the Review comment periods and any other matters the Minister may consider relevant. The Minister will make one of the following decisions: Next Step in the EA Process ToR Approval EA Preparation EA Submission EA Comment Period Ministry Review Review Comment Period Minister s Decision Give approval to proceed with the undertaking; Give approval to proceed with the undertaking subject to conditions; or Refuse to give approval to proceed with the undertaking. Prior to making that decision, the Minister may also refer either part of or the entire EA to mediation or refer either part of or the entire EA to the Environmental Review Tribunal for a decision. If the Minister approves, approves with conditions or refuses to give approval to the undertaking, the Lieutenant Governor in Council must concur with the decision. 5.1 Additional Approvals Required If EAA approval is granted, Detour Gold will still require other legislative approvals to design, construct and operate this undertaking. Section 11.0 of the EA outlines additional approvals that may be required. Other legislative requirements may include compliance with the: If EAA approval is granted, the proponent must still obtain any other permits or approvals required to construct and operate this undertaking. August 6,

23 Detour Lake Power Project Individual Environmental Assessment Review Navigable Waters Protection Act; Fisheries Act; and Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. In addition, Detour Gold may require approval from: The Ministry of Natural Resources; The Ministry of Northern Development, Mines and Forestry; and The Ontario Energy Board. 5.2 Modifying or Amending the Proposed Undertaking The description of the undertaking provided in the EA is preliminary in that the equipment locations, including pole placement and laydown yard locations will be optimized during the engineering stage of the project. Exact pole placement and support anchor locations will also be confirmed during construction to avoid potential interference with sensitive terrain and with any heritage resources not already identified (such as though ongoing traditional knowledge studies). Minor modifications to the ROW may also be required to avoid more sensitive terrain such as water bodies. Detour Gold has committed to ensuring that proper oversight occurs with any minor modifications such as those noted above, in order to ensure that potential environmental effects are minimized. August 6,

24 APPENDIX A ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ACT REQUIREMENTS

25 Appendix A: Environmental Assessment Act and Terms of Reference Requirements of the Environmental Assessment EA Decision Making Process Problem/Opportunities EAA and ToR Requirements Identify an existing problem or opportunity Purpose of the Undertaking: s.6.1(2)(a) Description and Characteristics of the Requirements The EA should contain a brief explanation of the problem or opportunity that prompted the proposed activity. If a specific undertaking has been identified provide a brief description. Analysis of the EA The purpose of the undertaking is to construct a 180 km, 230 kv transmission line and related facilities from the Detour Lake mine site to the Pinard TS in Fraserdale, Ontario, to facilitate the development of the mine. Detour Gold has been exploring the previously developed Detour Lake mineral property since Detour Gold has determined that future operation at the site would be viable. Detour Gold anticipates that the mine will provide a peak construction workforce of approximately 1,200 persons and 500 permanent jobs. The mine will provide a strong economic boost to the region, which is currently suffering from a prolonged downturn in the economy. Detour Gold provided a detailed description of the opportunity that prompted the project and the EA adequately described the purpose of the undertaking. Alternatives Description and Statement of the Rationale for the Alternatives to: Alternative to s.6.1(2)(b)(iii) Alternatives to represent functionally different ways of addressing the problem or opportunity. A reasonable range of alternatives to should be identified and evaluated. The proponent should be able to justify that it has considered a reasonable range of alternatives. The EA focused on a single alternative to the undertaking and a range of alternative methods of carrying out the undertaking. Section 7.0 of the EA provides a description and rationale for the alternative methods that were considered. Detour Gold provided detailed rationale, based on work done prior to the submission of the approved ToR for focusing on one alternative to the undertaking and the range of alternative methods that were considered. Previous planning work - 1 -

26 EA Decision Making Process EAA and ToR Description and Characteristics Requirements of the Requirements Analysis of the EA The do nothing alternative to should be included in the evaluation and will represent the bench mark situation. Description and Statement of the Rationale for the Alternatives methods: Alternative Methods s.6.1(2)(b)(ii) Alternative methods include a description of different ways of implementing the preferred alternative to A reasonable range of alternative methods should be identified and outlined. screened out other alternatives to the undertaking and routing alternatives due to comparatively greater costs or environmental impacts, or comparatively lower capacity, reliability or technical feasibility. The do nothing alternative was brought forward for consideration in the EA to demonstrate the relative advantages and disadvantages of the proposed undertaking. The ministry is satisfied that the EA clearly explains how Detour Gold identified and evaluated the proposed alternative methods of carrying out the undertaking. Evaluation Description of the Environment s.6.1(2)(c)(i) Proponents must consider the broad definition of the environment including the natural, biophysical, social, economic, built and cultural conditions. The study area for the EA is based on the proposed route for the transmission line between the Detour Lake mine site and the terminus at the Pinard TS in Fraserdale, Ontario. The study area includes: The EA must provide a description of the existing environmental conditions in the study area. The EA must identify those elements of the environment that may be reasonably expected to be affected, either directly or indirectly, by the proposed undertaking and/or the alternatives. The proposed development zone for the mine; One kilometre on either side of the proposed route to assess biophysical environment and land use components; and Five kilometres on either side of the proposed route to assess human environment components. The EA provided a detailed description of the existing environment within the study area to establish baseline conditions and evaluate potential environmental effects. Detour Gold considered a broad definition of the - 2 -