Environnement et Changement climatique Canada

Transcription

1 1+1 Environment and Climate Change Canada Environnement et Changement climatique Canada Environmental Protection Operations Directorate (EPOD) Prairie & rthern Region (PNR) th Street NW Edmonton, AB T6B 1 K5 October 3, 2016 Via tracy.uttmg@ceaa-acee gc ca Tracy Utting, Project Manager Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Suite 1145, 9700 Jasper Avenue Edmonton, Alberta T5J 4C3 ECCC File: /6188 CEAA File: Dear Ms. Utting: RE: Benga Mining Limited - Grassy Mountain Coal Mine - Information Required for the Environmental Impact Statement Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) has completed the pre-panel review of the revised Environmental Impact Statement and responses to Round 1 supplemental information requests (August submitted to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency regarding the Grassy Mountain Coal Mine Project. ECCC's comments, attached, are based on the departmental mandate in context of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, the pollution prevention provisions of the Fisheries Act, the Migratory Birds Convention Act, and the Species at Risk Act. Should you require further information, please do not hesitate to contact Shelly Boss at or shelly.boss@canada.ca. Sincerely, <Original signed by> <contact information removed> Susanne Forbrich Regional Director Attachment: ECCC's IR comments cc: Frant;:ois Huppe, Acting Manager, Environmental Assessment and Marine Programs, PNR-EPOD Corinna Watt, Acting Head, Environmental Assessment South, PNR-EPOD Shelly Boss, Acting Senior Environmental Assessment Coordinator, PNR-EPOD ECCC Review Team Canada

2 Grassy Mountain Coal Project Environment and Climate Change Canada October 3, 2016 Round 1 Information Request (Spring Title of Question that was asked and number (Federal Department reviewing in addition to Panel secretariat review) SIR 11. Air Quality Model (ECCC) Provide all input and control files used in the CALPUFF model to generate the air quality predictions presented in the EIA. All input and control files should be in a format that can be used directly into the CALPUFF model. Provide all output files in the raw CALPUFF format. Attachment 1 Federal Pre-Panel Review of the SIRs (Round 1) Grassy Mountain Coal Project Joint Review Panel Provide an explanation of the outstanding issue of concern or deficiency and provide a rationale for why the stated deficiency/issue is important for environmental assessment purpose. 1. Reference: EIS Guidelines, Section & 4.2; Consultant Report #1a Appendix B Section 4.3 Preamble: The Guidelines require that the assessment consider the predicted changes in air quality as a result of the Project. The Guidelines also specify that all data, models, and studies will be documented such that the analyses are transparent and reproducible. The quality of model predictions is dependent on the quality of the input data used in the model. The selection of model options and the configuration of model domains and grids can also affect the quality of predictions. To provide confidence in the air quality model predictions provided in the EIS, all input data, including meteorological fields, and selected model options and configurations, may need to be reviewed. Tabulated CALPUFF parameters were provided in Section 4.3 of Appendix B. However, actual input files were not provided. Tabulated parameters are insufficient in allowing reviewers to evaluate the model predictions used in the EIS. Clearly and concisely state the information being requested from the proponent. a. Provide input and control files in a format that can be directly used in the CALPUFF model. Provide all output files in the raw CALPUFF format.

3 SIR 12. Atmospheric Environment (ECCC) a. Provide rationale for the assumed dust control efficiency of 80% for the haul roads. b. Describe the planned watering frequency of the haul roads and the decrease in dust control efficiency as the haul roads dry. 2. Reference: EIS Guidelines, Section 6.2.1; Consultant Report #1, Appendix A, Section 4.7 Preamble: The Guidelines state that the assessment should include a consideration of the predicted changes in air quality as a result of the Project. The Guidelines also specify that the EIS should provide a rationale for the information included or excluded in the assessment of Project effects on air quality. In Section A4.7, it is assumed that a dust control efficiency of 80% can be achieved through frequent watering of the haul roads. The revised EIS still does not address how the assumed dust control efficiency will be achieved. a. Provide information to demonstrate that a minimum 80% control efficiency is achievable at all times throughout the mine life. b. Provide details of the mitigation measures (e.g., frequency of road watering or application of chemical dust suppressants) that would be necessary to achieve this control efficiency. A control efficiency of 80% assumes that 80% of road dust is mitigated at a minimum and achieved continuously throughout the life of the mine. Page 2 of 10

4 SIR 23. Use of Existing Information (ECCC) a. Describe how historical water quality data with detection limits above existing guidelines were used within the dataset. b. Describe any QA/QC procedures that were applied to the historical dataset to ensure the data are applicable. c. Describe whether, and if so, how the current baseline conditions and the historical dataset were combined into one dataset for comparison to modelled predictions. 3. Reference: EIS Guidelines, Section 4.3.3; Consultant Report #5, Section Preamble: The Guidelines encourage Benga Mining to make use of existing information relevant to the Project, comment on how the data was applied to the Project and state any limitations on the inferences or conclusions that can be drawn from existing information. Historical data for the LSA and RSA were used in establishing baseline conditions. This historical data set includes water quality data collected between 1974 and For several parameters (e.g., cadmium, mercury), the detection limits for the historical dataset are sometimes higher than existing water quality guidelines. There is no mention of how these historical water quality values were incorporated into the dataset given the detection limits are above existing guidelines. a. Describe how historical water quality data with detection limits above existing guidelines were used within the dataset. b. Describe any QA/QC procedures that were applied to the historical dataset to ensure the data are applicable. c. Describe whether, and if so how, the current baseline conditions and the historical dataset were combined into one dataset to compare with modelled predictions. Although quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) measures were provided for the current baseline results, there is no mention of any QA/QC on the historical data to determine the applicability and accuracy to establishing the baseline conditions for the LSA and RSA. Page 3 of 10

5 SIR 37. Whitebark Pine (ECCC) a. Provide a detailed assessment showing the abundance and distribution of whitebark pine and limber pine on the mine disturbance footprint area. b. Provide the estimated number of trees and estimated area affected for each species. c. Based upon the above information, provide the number of trees to be replaced/planted and area to be enhanced for each species. Numbers should be conservative to account for: the sensitivity of the species; limitations/challenges in success; and delay/lag before trees and habitat are restored. d. Describe how Benga Mining will avoid, minimize and/or compensate for the destruction of candidate critical habitat for the whitebark pine. 4. Reference: EIS Guidelines, Section & 6.3.3; Appendix D, Section Preamble: The Guidelines require Benga Mining to describe the abundance and distribution of species at risk, including habitat requirements, key habitat areas, identified critical habitat and/or recovery habitat, and the general life history of species at risk that will occur in the project area or be affected by the Project. The EIS Guidelines also specify that the EIS include direct and indirect effects of the Project on federally listed species at risk and their critical habitat, direct and indirect effects on the survival or recovery of federal listed species, impacts to existing Recovery Strategy and Action Plans, and a discussion of how population and distribution objectives set out in those documents would be affected. Limber Pine is COSEWIC Listed as Endangered and is pending a Species At Risk Act (SARA) assessment. Benga Mining has indicated that less than 1000 Limber Pine trees will be affected by the project. Benga Mining has indicated there will be seed collection of rust resistant trees which will be stored and used for their reclamation program, and that the success of all limber and whitebark pine planted seedlings on reclaimed or offset areas will be monitored. The number of Limber Pine seedlings Benga Mining will replant remains unclear. a. Provide details of the options explored to avoid and/or reduce the killing of individuals of the species and why the proposed approach was adopted. b. Provide precise detail on the number and distribution of proposed killing of individuals of the species, in relation to the overall species ecology, population and distribution, based upon best available information. c. Provide details and rationale for how the mitigation measures proposed will eliminate the adverse effect on the species. As a part of this information, provide the number of Limber Pine seedlings that will be planted and the rationale for the selected number. If this species becomes listed under SARA, the general SARA prohibitions will become applicable. As this could happen during the Project timeframe, Benga Mining is being asked for information on the effects and mitigation for this species. Page 4 of 10

6 SIR 38. Little Brown Bat (ECCC) a. Provide the number and locations of bat hibernacula in the Project Development Area (footprint plus disturbance buffer), and whether little brown bats are using these hibernacula. b. Estimate the number of little brown bats that will be affected for each hibernacula disturbed/destroyed due to the Project. c. Identify hibernacula near, but unaffected by, the Project to which Project-impacted little brown bats could relocate. d. Identify mitigation measures for the destruction of little brown bat hibernacula. 5. Reference: EIS Guidelines, Sections 6.1.7, 6.3.3& 6.4; Consultant Report #9, Section Preamble: The Guidelines require Benga Mining to include a description of the abundance and distribution of species at risk including habitat requirements, key habitat areas, identified critical habitat and/or recovery habitat, and the general life history of species at risk that will occur in the Project area or be affected by the Project. Hibernacula are limited in distribution and are critical to little brown myotis survival. The little brown myotis was emergency-listed as Endangered under the Species at Risk Act in vember Benga Mining states In December 2015, critical habitat for little brown myotis was partially identified for hibernacula (Environment Canada, 2015). Potential hibernacula in the WLSA include abandoned mines, which are too unsafe to enter to verify suitability based on temperature (2 C - 10 C) and relative humidity (>80%). Where access to (not in) abandoned mines was safe, Benga surveyed the immediate area for bat guano and found none. Critical habitat was not considered further in the assessment of little brown myotis. This will be further validated by the 2016 Bat Survey. a. Provide the number and locations of myotis hibernacula in the Project Development Area (footprint plus disturbance buffer), and whether little brown myotis are using these hibernacula. b. Estimate the number of little brown myotis that will be affected for each hibernacula disturbed/destroyed due to the Project. c. Identify hibernacula near, but unaffected by, the Project to which Project-impacted little brown myotis could relocate. Yes ECCC understands that myotis surveys cannot be completed until the fall of 2016 when myotis are swarming, which offers an opportunity to identify potential hibernacula. Page 5 of 10

7 SIR 39. Wildlife Risk Assessment (ECCC) a. Update the screening-level wildlife risk assessment to include other relevant routes of exposure, including waterbourne, for valued wildlife components. b. Update the wildlife risk assessment to include additional waterbourne and other COCs such as PAHs, not previously considered, when assessing the aquatic exposure and other pathways. c. Include COCs previously identified in water (nitrite, selenium, cobalt, cadmium, mercury and zinc) in the updated WRA. d. Complete Table H-7 for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon compounds using all available sources of information. e. Update the wildlife risk assessment with updated TRVs. 6. Reference: EIS Guidelines, Sections 6.1.6, 6.1.7, and 6.3.3; Consultant Report #12, Appendix G, Appendix G- 1 and Appendix H, Table H.3 Preamble: The Guidelines require a discussion of the risks of exposure to the relevant contaminants of potential concern (COCs) based on data from existing sources as well the predicted direct and indirect effects of the Project on federally listed species at risk and migratory birds. A screening level risk assessment is the initial tier in an ecological assessment and employs conservative assumptions regarding chemical exposure and toxicity to receptors. Benga Mining expanded the breadth of their wildlife risk assessment to include other relevant pathways of wildlife exposure to COCs, other than the Project s predicted air emissions. The exposure routes evaluated are summarized in Table H.3 (Appendix H, Page 7). However, certain toxicologically relevant routes of exposure would benefit from additional information or were not evaluated at all. For instance, Benga Mining states that primary consumers are likely to be exposed to the highest concentrations of COCs given that these project-related compounds are not expected to biomagnify. a. Update the wildlife risk assessment to incorporate the ingestion of plants and berries and assess the risk of exposure to primary consumers, including migratory birds. Link data from the Baseline Monitoring Program (Appendix G, and Appendix G-1) completed as part of the human health risk assessment and include in the wildlife risk assessment. b. Update the wildlife risk assessment to include exposure of wildlife to COCs through dietary pathways, such as the ingestion of fish and prey. c. Update the wildlife risk assessment to assess exposure to waterborne nitrite and nitrate. Page 6 of 10

8 SIR 40.Species at Risk and Migratory Birds (ECCC) a. Update the list of COCs identified in the wildlife risk assessment and describe which compounds have potential to bioaccumulate and biomagnify up the food chain. Include a description of the bioaccoumlation and biomangnifcation pathways. b. For compounds identified in a), update the wildlife risk assessment to include a determination of the impacts of exposure through diet to valued wildlife components. 7. Reference: EIS Guidelines, Sections 6.1.6, 6.1.7, and 6.3.3; Consultant Report #12, Appendix H, Section 2.3, Table H.3 Preamble: The Guidelines require a discussion of the risks of exposure to the relevant contaminants of potential concern (COCs) based on data from existing sources as well the predicted direct and indirect effects of the project on federally listed species at risk and migratory birds. In the screening-level wildlife risk assessment, Benga Mining identified a number of COCs to wildlife based on Project activities including a suite of metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Benga Mining indicates in Table H.3 (CR #12, Appedix H, Section 2.3.) that no COCs are expected to bioaccumulate or biomagnify. ECCC notes that mercury and selenium are capable of accumulating in biota and can bioaccumulate and biomagnify through the food web. Additional information is required on compounds with the potential to bioaccumulate and biomagnify to determine the impacts to wildlife species. a. Update the list of COCs identified in the wildlife risk assessment by describing which compounds have potential to bioaccumulate and biomagnify up the food chain. Include a description of the bioaccumulation and biomagnification pathways. b. For compounds identified in a), update the wildlife risk assessment to include a determination of the impacts of exposure through diet to valued wildlife components. SIR 42. Contaminants of Concern (ECCC) Evaluate the potential effects of the Project on migratory birds and species at risk that are expected to inhabit, or pass through, the WLSA and the wildlife regional study area. Include a determination of significance of Project effects on migratory birds and species at risk. Include a summary of research conducted or considered, the COCs associated with coal mining activities, and the impact to wildlife from exposure to those COCs, with appropriate reference. 8. Reference: EIS Guidelines, Section & 6.1.7; Consultant Report #12, Appendix H Preamble: The Guidelines require a discussion of the risks of exposure to the relevant COCs based on data from existing sources as well the predicted direct and indirect effects of the Project on federally listed species at risk and migratory birds. A thorough summary of research discussing the potential impacts of COCs associated with coal mining on wildlife was not provided by Benga Mining. a. Provide a summary of research conducted or considered, the COCs associated with coal mining activities, and the impact to wildlife from exposure to those COCs, with appropriate references. Page 7 of 10

9 SIR 48.Greenhouse Gases (ECCC) a. Provide an estimate of the direct greenhouse gas emissions associated with all phases of the Project, as well as any mitigation measures proposed to minimize greenhouse gas emissions. This information is to be presented by individual pollutant and summarized in carbon dioxide equivalent units (CO2 e) per year. b. Provide an estimate of the Project's contribution to provincial and national greenhouse gas emissions. 9. Consultant Report #1, Section 4.3, Appendix A Section A8.0 Preamble: In Section 4.3., the direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions considered are fugitive methane, diesel combustion and electricity combustion. However, mitigation measures for these emissions were not evaluated. In addition, other sources of GHGs were not provided, including GHG emissions from i) stationary equipment and ii) carbon sink losses. a. Account for the following additional emissions sources in the GHG assessment: 1. stationary equipment (e.g., boilers, heaters); 2. the carbon sink loss following deforestation, marsh destruction and overburden stripping. b. Provide an evaluation of the mitigation measures associated with the following: 1. fugitive methane, diesel combustion, and electricity combustion; 2. the GHG sources identified in a. c. Provide an analysis of the predicted greenhouse gas emissions of the proposed Project in combination with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects should also be included in the cumulative effects assessment. Page 8 of 10

10 CEAA 15.0 Extreme Weather Events and Climate Change (CEAA, NRCan) SIR 15.1 Identify the potential impacts of climate change on the Project, from the standpoint of effects on project components and on VCs, using the Agency procedural guidance on Incorporating Climate Change Considerations in Environmental Assessment: General Guidance for Practitioners. For Project components and VCs that are identified as not being sensitive to climate change, a rationale should be provided for their exemption. SIR 15.2 For each Project phase, assess the effects of the environment on the Project, including climate change, extreme weather conditions and natural hazards, and indicate the probability of such events occurring. The assessment should include details on planning, design, and construction strategies to minimize the potential environmental effects of the environment on the Project. 10. Reference: EIS Guidelines, Section 6.6.2; Section C.10; Consultant Report #1, Section 5.14; Section E Preamble: The Guidelines require Benga Mining to account for changes in the environment, stemming from extreme weather events and long-term climate change implications, and the effect of those weather parameters on the Project. An assessment of climate change impacts on a project is a component of standard environmental assessment practices in considering possible changes to a project caused by the environment. Projects may be affected by a change, over time, in climate parameters, or in the frequency and/or severity of extreme events. Benga Mining has provided projections of changes in the number of warm and cold days (i.e., temperature extremes), annual and seasonal precipitation totals and the number of frost free days to 2050 for Pincher Creek. These climate changes are discussed over the different phases of the project and for the various project components. However, there is no information given on how future climate change may alter the frequency (i.e., return period) or intensity of precipitation extremes (not just seasonal or annual totals). Projections of potential changes in mean annual and seasonal temperature are also not provided. a. Provide projections of the range of possible changes in annual and seasonal temperature over the projected lifetime of the mine and the period of active management following closure. The projections should come from a range of climate models for a range of future emission scenarios. b. Provide information on potential future changes in precipitation extremes over the projected lifetime of the mine and the period of active management following closure. Projections from a range of climate models for a range of future emission scenarios should be considered. c. If the post-closure period of active management is expected to extend beyond 2050, a range of extended projections should also be given for the climate parameters already provided in the EIS. The projections should come from a range of climate models for a range of future emission scenarios. Benga Mining identified possible sensitivity of some of the water management components of the project to heavy rainfall extremes (e.g., Section C: Project Description Part 1, Section C.10, pg. C-170). The scientific literature (e.g. IPCC, 2012, 2013; Kharin et al., 2013) points to an increased probability and intensity of extreme precipitation events in the future with continued climate change. Projected temperature increases by the end of the century could potentially alter conditions at the site. IPCC, 2012: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, 582 pp. IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Page 9 of 10

11 Information Request (Spring Rationale Information Being Requested Is additional 11. Reference: EIS Guidelines, Section 6.2.2; Consultant Report #5 Preamble: The EIS Guidelines require that Benga Mining include a consideration of the predicted changes to groundwater and surface water quality as a result of the Project, including impacts associated with any mine effluent, releases, or surface runoff. Measured and modelled selenium (Se) concentrations reported in the EIS are compared against a unique (sitespecific) Se objective calculated using the proposed sulphate adjustment. This might underestimate the true environmental impacts of Se on biota. Sulphate adjustments are not considered in any current approved Se guidelines and should not be the primary basis of comparison in the EIS. a. Measured and modelled Se concentrations at stations in the natural watercourses should be compared to established water quality guidelines, such as provincial guidelines or those of CCME. Page 10 of 10