Lynn Lake Gold Project

Comment Search Mobile

Comment Search

Report comment

Are you sure you want to report this comment for review?
Skip to filters
Sort by: Best match Most recent Reference number

94 results

Attachment Transport Canada's comments on the draft EA Report for the Lynn Lake Gold Project

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Transport Canada
  • Reference number: 120
  • Submitted: 2022-12-16 - 10:40 AM
  • Participation notice: Public Notice: Public Comments Invited on the Draft Environmental Assessment Report and Potential Conditions
  • Please see the attached submission
  • Attachment included
  • Transport Canada December 15, 2022 1 UNCLASSIFIED / NON CLASSIFIÉ LYNN LAKE GOLD PROJECT: Transport Canada comments on the November 2022 Draft Environmental Assessment Report Chapter /Section Title, Section #, Page # Original text from the Agency ECCC’s input/comments Rationale Executive Summary p. ii-iii “The Agency also considered … effects related to changes to the environment that are directly linked or necessarily incidental to federal decisions that may be required for the Project, including: … and permit(s) under the Canadian Navigable Waters Act by Transport Canada.” Transport Canada recommends the sentence be changed to the following: “The Agency also considered … effects related to changes to the environment that are directly linked or necessarily incidental to federal decisions that may be required for the Project, including: … and permit(s) approval(s) under the Canadian Navigable Waters Act by Transport Canada.” “Approval” is the preferred term as under section 7 of the Canadian Navigable Waters Act, the Minister of Transport issues an “approval” for a work, rather than a permit. Changing “permit(s)” to “approvals” would also bring the sentence into alignment with the “approvals” discussed on pp. 181-182 of the Draft Environmental Assessment Report. 9 Impacts to Aboriginal or Treaty Rights 9.3 Issues to be Addressed During the Regulatory Approval Phase pp. 181-182 “Should the Project proceed, federal authorities with a regulatory role will continue consultation with Indigenous nations after the environmental assessment decision is issued. Specifically, relevant federal authorities will consult ...
Report

Attachment RE: Lynn Lake Gold Project - Comments Requested on the Draft Environmental Assessment and Draft Potential EA Conditions - Due December 7

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Environment and Climate Change Canada
  • Reference number: 115
  • Submitted: 2022-12-09 - 3:19 PM
  • Participation notice: Public Notice: Public Comments Invited on the Draft Environmental Assessment Report and Potential Conditions
  • Please see the attached submission. 
  • Attachment included
  • 1 LYNN LAKE GOLD PROJECT: ECCC input into the Draft EA Report Chapter /Section Title, Section #, Page # Original text from the Agency ECCC’s input/comments Rationale 2.2.2 MacLellan Site Tailings Management Facility p.28 “The use of a full liner beneath the Tailings Management Facility was not proposed as the current design was considered more economically feasible and would allow tailings consolidation over time.” ECCC recommends that the Agency consider expanding the Agency’s text to reflect the following additional rationale provided by the Proponent, in their response to Information Request IAAC-R2-75: In response to IAAC-R2-75 the Proponent noted: With a fully lined TMF, the lack of foundation drainage would prolong the tailings consolidation process, reducing long-term stability and increasing the risk of embankment failure. To include additional relevant information and rationale provided by the Proponent. 3.2.1 Proponent’s Alternatives Assessment Mine Waste Disposal p.39 “Use of a full liner beneath the Tailings Management Facility was not selected as this option was not considered economically feasible.” As in the previous recommendation (for 2.2.2), ECCC recommends that the Agency consider expanding the Agency’s text to reflect additional rationale provided by the Proponent. To include additional relevant information and rationale provided by the proponent 6.2 Groundwater Decommissionin g/Closure p.62 “Seepage collection systems around the mine rock storage areas, and ore and overburden stockpiles at the Gordon and MacLellan sites, and around the Tailings Management Facility at the MacLellan site ...
  • Attachment included
  • Environmental Protection Operations Directorate Prairie & Northern Region ECCC File: 4194-10-5/3295 9250 49 Street Edmonton, AB T6B1K5 CIAR Reference: 80140 December 09, 2022 via email at: Wajeeha.Siddiqui@iaac-aeic.gc.ca Wajeeha Siddiqui Impact Assessment Agency of Canada 1145-9700 Jasper Avenue Edmonton, AB. T5J 4C3 Dear Wajeeha Siddiqui, Re: Lynn Lake Gold Project - Comments Requested on the Draft Environmental Assessment and Draft Potential EA Conditions Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) has reviewed the Draft Environmental Assessment and Draft Potential EA Conditions for the above-noted Project as requested by the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada’s November 7, 2022 letter. Our input attached is based on ECCC’s mandate in the context of the Species at Risk Act (SARA), the Migratory Birds Convention Act 1994 (MBCA), the Canadian Environmental Protection Act 1999 (CEPA) and the pollution prevention provisions s.36(3) the Fisheries Act (FA). Please contact Marcus Edino at or if you need more information. Sincerely, Margaret Fairbairn A/Regional Director, Environmental Protection and Operations Directorate Prairie Northern Region Attachment #1: 2022_12_09_LLGP-ECCC_Comments_on_EA_Report Attachment #2: 2022_12_09_LLGP-ECCC_Comments_Potential_Conditions cc: Gayle Hatchard, A/Head, EA South, EPOD, ECCC Marcus Edino Environmental Assessment Officer, EA South, EPOD, ECCC <Original signed by> <Email address removed><Personal information removed>
  • Attachment included
  • 1 LYNN LAKE GOLD PROJECT: ECCC input into the Draft Potential Conditions Section title, Section #, Page # Original text from the Agency ECCC’s input/comments ECCC’s recommended edits from original text are outlined in red and text to be removed in strikethrough. Rationale 8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS GHG Emissions 8.1.2, p.20 “for each source of emissions identified pursuant to condition 8.1.1, identify the best available technologies and best environmental practices (BAT/BEP) , including emerging technologies and practices at a sufficiently advanced stage of technological development to become technically and economically feasible over the life of the Designated Project, taking into account the BAT/BEP determination process as ECCC recommends the Agency revise the text as follows: “for each source of emissions identified pursuant to condition 8.1.1, identify the best available technologies and best environmental practices (BAT/BEP) , including emerging technologies and practices at a sufficiently advanced stage of technological development to become technically and economically feasible over the life of the Designated Project, taking into account the BAT/BEP determination process as described in the Government of Canada’s Strategic Assessment of Climate Change and the latest version of its relevant technical guide;” The technical guide is currently in draft and the proponent should refer to the latest versions of the documents. 2 described in the Government of Canada’s Strategic Assessment of Climate Change and its relevant technical guide;” GHG Emissions 8.1.4, p.20 “establish declining greenhouse gas emission targets at ...
Report

Attachment FW: Lynn Lake Gold Project - Posting of the Draft Environmental Assessment Report - MCFN comments [BLG-DOCUMENTS.FID8057974]

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Marcel Colomb First Nation
  • Reference number: 118
  • Submitted: 2022-12-09 - 10:16 AM
  • Participation notice: Public Notice: Public Comments Invited on the Draft Environmental Assessment Report and Potential Conditions
  • Please see the attached submission. 
  • Attachment included
  • Pro jec t Lo c a tio n SA SK AT CH EW AN MA NI TO BA M a rc el Co lo m b First Na tio n (Bla c k Sturgeo n Reserve) ¬«398 ¬«638 ¬«394 ¬«391 ¬«396 LYNN LAKE GORDON SITEMACLENNAN SITE 30 31 98 29 122 36 YOUTH LINE 32 144 35 37 34 156 40 166 168 SOUTHERN INDIAN LAKE Pa th: S: \G eo ma tic s\P roj ec ts\ 10 64 61 \01 \m xd \Fi g2 __ 10 64 61 _0 1_ Tra pli ne _L an dR es ou rce s_ 22 03 08 .m xd Pro d uctio n Da te: M a r 8, 2022 Pa ge Size: 11" x 17" 106461-01 Figure 2 NAD 1983 UTM Z o ne 14N ± City o r To wn Ind ivid ua l Tra p line Bo und a ry Current Use o f La nd s a nd Reso urc es fo r Tra d itio na l Purp o ses Tra p line Bo und a ry Externa l Tra p line Bo und a ry First Na tio n Reserve Highwa y Study Area Lo c a l Assessm ent Area Regio na l Assessm ent Area Project Infrastructure Pro p o sed O p en Pit Pro ject Develo p m ent Area DRAFT Fo r Disc ussio n Purp o ses O nly 1:200,000 Legend 0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 Kilo m etres Overlapping Traplines and RAAs for Current Use of Lands & Resources for Traditional Resources No rthern M a nito b a - Co nta ins info rm a tio n lic ensed und er the O p en Go vernm ent Lic enc e(s) - M a nito b a - Stud y Area ; Pro ject Infra structure; Surfa c e W a ter a nd Fish Ha b ita t: Sta ntec, 2020/22 - Aeria l Im a ge:ESRI W o rld Im a gery So urc es 1. All m a p p ed fea tures a re a p p ro xim a te a nd sho uld b e used fo r d isc ussio n p urp o ses o nly. 2. This m a p is no t intend ed to b e a “sta nd -a lo ne” d o c um ent, but a visua l a id o f the info rm a tio n c o nta ined within the referenc ed Rep o rt. It is intend ed to b e used in c o njunctio n with the sc o p e o f servic es a nd lim ita tio ns ...
  • Attachment included
  • 1 Potential conditions under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 The Impact Assessment Agency of Canada is contemplating the following potential conditions in relation to the Lynn Lake Gold Project (the Designated Project) located in Manitoba for recommendation to the Minister of the Environment (the Minister) for inclusion in a Decision Statement issued under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012. If the Minister decides that the carrying out of the Designated Project is unlikely to cause significant adverse environmental effects as defined under subsections 5(1) and 5(2), or if the Minister decides that the Designated Project is likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects and the Governor in Council decides such effects are justified in the circumstances, the Designated Project would be allowed to proceed, and any conditions established by the Minister under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 would become legally binding. Pursuant to section 184 of the Impact Assessment Act, a Decision Statement issued by the Minister under subsection 54(1) of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 is deemed to be a Decision Statement issued under subsection 65(1) of the Impact Assessment Act, other than for the purposes of section 70. 1 Definitions Agency means the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. Baseline means the environmental conditions prior to initiating construction of the Designated Project. Construction means the phase of the Designated Project during which the Proponent undertakes the site preparation, building or installation of any components of the Designated Project, ...
  • Attachment included
  • December 9, 2022 VIA EMAIL: stephen.mccarthy@iaac-aeic.gc.ca Stephen McCarthy Senior Consultation Analyst Impact Assessment Agency of Canada Dear Mr. McCarthy: Re: Alamos Gold Inc.’s Lynn Lake Gold Project (the “Project”) – Response to Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (the “Agency”) draft report dated November 2022 (the “draft EA Report”) and draft Conditions for Approval (the “draft EA Conditions”) We are deeply disappointed in the draft EA Report and draft EA Conditions. The Agency appears to have under-stated or misunderstood the scope, nature and implications of the potential impacts of the Project on our community. It will take significant work by the Agency to re-write these documents to fulfil the Agency’s obligations under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (“CEAA 2012”) and the Crown’s obligations to consult and accommodate Marcel Colomb First Nation (“MCFN”) and to adequately ensure the protection of our constitutionally protected rights. The Crown’s decision whether to approve the Project, and on what basis, will be the most significant Crown decision for MCFN in over a generation. Without major improvements to both the draft EA Report and draft EA Conditions, MCFN will suffer a range of significant adverse effects from the Project on the factors identified in section 5(1)(c) of CEAA 2012 and on our Aboriginal and treaty rights. I. The Draft EA Report There are several major flaws with the draft EA Report. The Agency appears to have ignored, or at very least inadequately considered, information about MCFN’s interests and concerns in each of the Project Development Area (“PDA”), Local Assessment Area (“LAA”) and Regional Assessment Area (“RAA”). This appears ...
  • Attachment included
  • 1 .s• ‘ .',„ i'z-„,,I -) , A ' 4 4,. , • ' • • )0 4 4 • r% i . , 4, ed. ' ' ( 1 t.. . e ‘: el ' "i? 4.• • 4 1 ' •••• . ,., 7 •- 11,* > '-.4-. ' t• . • -• ' e 'oC• • ' ,' ' ....31'1'' e .4. • ..;:' 'el > ' ' . - .. j ''' .: ' ') &-• •;4<",?«.f- '1.461 /,/r i I- .- ' ''.;,`.. i. ,:,t•-., .,„*.,'• 1.7 , 'le: 1:i..- :e ./iip s ...r., 0; I ' ,•• - I , . • . ' ä • .., 14 . , d 11 1 / 'V ,' • ',( j ji" d _ ."'-./- J ' ,- ... t re '4 . • • " ,) /21. / ' e ',. . ,t 1 lit 7,4' .1 ./- •77 r . . d . 4 d ' . 0 ,.i4,.. )7 '_Y 70 i 7,, er, 4' A , fr f j...„ '0" • / , 4re ' " e. - 2.- 4 , / - f r"fr - • • ier "f„. . • sr. • ▪ • 7, • .4 I I • /4 /./ :ed.' •▪ •, • • ? ••• ".• - - • • . - - - , /if ,- • .. • , -. f /". . 7'4 - • , . j ' 7 - f••-c '1 - • If • 7,et. , .„ / If .• I , _-_,r j,, s / \ • 4 "'.çfJ,55•„; •••• e2- 44. 4 j• esri'l . ^ - f' r. sir 1 ( • jig: •••• , jet( ) " /1L..e ▪ ' • • % A ' -/ . - • if • . f • P .17" .., ..." ..I••• , • ., r 9fg Y ' ...' ...je • .' 4; f 9 air 9. fr.? .1 -„ . i • / .‘ ' „Z- ..-.e.r;:- ) / -FAi ' . r I • .. 7 •L'er ,e I4'7* A ie e r „I I,. . -, , .. - .- • , 2/4‘,..-,, 0 tit. t it ,.,..)f.„, 47171 ,1.2 , t,/ ' .-:--, ei -• . „ d'. 1 e•2" • "( ;- j;,-Iii_si .,,(4. '',-_-_.;1/1,,-:,/,‘ .j. •7 '4,4 %,of / '' ';1 7- ;', ‘ ;>//, ; 94 `11$• -' _,'j'' •,:.' r-\ i•'\ if , ) e , 1 '' l''' 1 ' ' > k '-' , sr . o 50 100 km ' Í 4 - ', ..r` 7 • _ ele-- 59 6 ,07 4" /et / , s 1, 1° • ' y•'} iä+5 í • 0 ? 0', - ,$4 ) I 1 0,2 4 e. eir tA A .42\ g T -44 e e • .4:444 t ./ • de. 4- - .4 agrrrt. 'Flin Flon 1 4. ki 1 ÄV. f'; e• I ...
  • Attachment included
  • Lynn Lake Gold Project Environmental Impact Statement Federal IR Responses Round 2, Package 2 Extract of response to IAAC-R2-57 Marcel Colomb First Nation Baseline and Mitigation Table Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. June 3, 2022 LYNN LAKE GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Report on Baseline Conditions and Potential Project Effects for Indigenous Nations in Support of Response to Information Request IAAC-R2-57 12 Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-1 Marcel Colomb First Nation Baseline and Mitigation Table Consultation/Engagement Input Species/Locations Identified Relevant Regulatory Filings1 Potential Project Effects Proposed Mitigation Measures Monitoring and Follow Up Additional Alamos Response Marcel Colomb First Nation – information obtained through Alamos Indigenous engagement program current to May 9, 2022 Atmospheric Environment Issues and Concerns MCFN expressed concern about potential atmospheric environment effects, including potential project effects on air quality, which may affect hunting and fishing habitats. MCFN expressed concerns that mine pollution (including mining dust, chemicals, and contaminants) may contaminate the air and enter the food chain. MCFN identified historic or future air contamination pathways affecting MCFN health and livelihood as a central concern. MCFN stated that the atmospheric environment assessment was focused on mine infrastructure and air quality guidelines within the LAA and RAA; from MCFN’s perspective the assessment lacked the Project’s contribution of additional metals or contaminants (however small the contribution may be) to the further degradation of the environment and the ...
Report

Attachment 17-HCAA-01029- Lynn Lake Draft EA report and Draft EA conditions - DFO comments and edits for consideration

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Fisheries and Oceans Canada
  • Reference number: 122
  • Submitted: 2022-12-07 - 6:02 PM
  • Participation notice: Public Notice: Public Comments Invited on the Draft Environmental Assessment Report and Potential Conditions
  • Please see the attached submissions
  • Attachment included
  • Table 1. EA conditions and EA draft report_DFOCommentsedits Section Chapter Pg Number Text/Edit Comment 6.3.1 Surface Water pg. 70 "The Proponent did not anticipate that the new diversion channel would alter surface water quantity and flow to adjacent waterbodies as effects to groundwater and surface water patterns would be similar to the existing diversion channel between Gordon and Farley Lakes. " contradicts "The diversion channel would remain in place permanently to maintain connectivity between Gordon and Farley Lakes, therefore resulting in permanent changes to groundwater flow patterns and discharge, and associated changes to surface water quantity and flow." The two statements contradict each other. Additional details are requested here to describe the diversion channel's anticipated impacts to groundwater and surface water flow during decommissioning, while impacts are not anticipated to occur during construction. 6.3.3 Surface Water pg.80 "The rate of discharge of water to Gordon and Farley Lakes from dewatering the existing Wendy and East pit lakes and the interceptor wells will be adjusted to match the background flow rates of Farley Creek, as identified in the Environmental Impact Statement" DFO is requesting that the Agency confirm with the proponent if this mitigation measure is now technically feasible. See edit 10 below. 7.1.1 Fish and Fish Habitat Table 12 pg. 91; pg. 96 Check square footage. The square footage areas for the effluent pipe footprints should be the same. Table 12 cites 110 m2; pg. 96 cites 108 m2. ‘108’ is the correct value based on Table IAAC-R2-46- 14. 7.1.1 Fish and Fish Habitat Pg. 94 "As this change As this 2°C ...
  • Attachment included
  • Fisheries and Oceans Canada Pêches et Océans Canada Fish and Fish Habitat Protection Program Fisheries and Oceans Canada Ontario and Prairie Region 1028 Parsons Rd SW Edmonton, Alberta T6X 0J4 Programme de Protection du poisson et de son habitat Pêches et Océans Canada Région de l'Ontario et des Prairies 1028 rue Parsons Sud-Ouest Edmonton, Alberta T6X 0J4 Your file Votre référence December 7, 2022 Our file Notre référence 17-HCAA-01029 Wajeeha Siddiqui Lynn Lake Gold Project c/o Impact Assessment Agency of Canada Subject: Lynn Lake Gold Project – DFO final comments/edits requested on draft EA Report and draft EA conditions. Dear Wajeeha Siddiqui: Thank you for your letter dated November 7, 2022, requesting Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) provide our final comments on the draft EA report and draft condition for the proposed Lynn Lake Gold Project (the Project). Overall, it is our opinion that the Agency has accurately and adequately characterized the potential environmental effects and key mitigations and follow-up program measures; and, summarized the analysis by Alamos Gold Inc. and the comments and views of DFO. Attached you will find a table collating our Department’s final comments and edits for your consideration. Should there be any questions or concerns regarding this submission, please contact Amelia Corrigan ( ) and Eddie Noton ( ). Yours sincerely, Brandi Mogge Team Leader – Mining, Oil & Gas – South Fish and Fish Habitat Protection Program Ontario and Prairie Region Fisheries and Oceans Canada <contact information ...
Report

Attachment FW: Sayisi Dene First Nation Review of the Alamos Gold Inc. Lynn Lake Gold Project - Environmental Assessment Report and Potential Conditions

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Sayisi Dene First Nation
  • Reference number: 117
  • Submitted: 2022-12-07 - 3:01 PM
  • Participation notice: Public Notice: Public Comments Invited on the Draft Environmental Assessment Report and Potential Conditions
  • Please see the attached submission. 
  • Attachment included
  • 1 | P a g e December 7, 2022 Minister Steven Guilbeault House of Commons Ottawa, ON, K1A 0A6 Email: steven.guilbeault@parl.gc.ca Stephen McCarthy Senior Consultation Analyst, Prairie and Northern Region Email: Stephen.mccarthy@iaac-aeic.gc.ca Dear Mr. Guilbeault and Mr. McCarthy, RE: Sayisi Dene First Nation Review of the Alamos Gold Inc. Lynn Lake Gold Project - Environmental Assessment Report and Potential Conditions I am submitting this review letter, as the elected Chief, on behalf of the Council and Nation members of the Sayisi Dene First Nation (“SDFN”). Throughout the regulatory phases of this Project, Sayisi Dene First Nation has worked diligently to describe the impacts, issues and concerns which our Nation members have in relation to the Alamos Gold Inc. Project. Our spirituality and identities are rooted in our territory and we continue to strive to protect the air, land, water and wildlife to ensure future generations can continue to enjoy and practice our culture unimpeded. We have reviewed the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada’s (“IAAC”) Environmental Assessment Report (the “Assessment Report”) for the Alamos Gold Inc. (“Alamos”) Lynn Lake Gold Project (“the Project”).In the development of the Assessment Report the IAAC relied on Indigenous Nation’s comments submitted on the record, while consulting with other government agencies, such as Environment and Climate Change, and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. As listed in the IAAC’s Practitioner’s Guide to the Impact Assessment Act (“Practitioner’s Guide”) Guidance: Assessment of Potential Impacts on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, “consulting and collaborating with Indigenous peoples is a key component of ...
Report

Attachment Health Canada - Review of Lynn Lake Gold Project Draft Environmental Assessment and Draft Potential EA Conditions

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Health Canada
  • Reference number: 123
  • Submitted: 2022-12-07 - 11:30 AM
  • Participation notice: Public Notice: Public Comments Invited on the Draft Environmental Assessment Report and Potential Conditions
  • Please see the attached submissions
  • Attachment included
  • 6 Predicted Changes to the Environment 6.1 Atmospheric Environment The Agency summarized the Proponent’s assessment of changes to the atmospheric environment with input from federal authorities and Indigenous nations. This summary supports the analysis of effects on fish and fish habitat (Chapter 7.1), migratory birds (Chapter 7.2), species at risk (Chapter 7.3), Indigenous Peoples’ current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes, physical and cultural heritage, and sites of significance (Chapter 7.4), Indigenous Peoples’ health and socio-economic conditions (Chapter 7.5), and federal lands (Chapter 7.6), included in this EA Report. The Agency is of the view that the Proponent adequately considered potential effects of the Project on the atmospheric environment and that the Proponent’s proposed mitigation measures, monitoring, and follow- up programs (Appendix D) are appropriate to address potential project effects to the atmospheric environment. The Agency’s conclusions are based on an analysis of the Proponent’s assessment , including the Proponent’s proposed mitigation, monitoring, and follow-up measures, and the views expressed by federal authorities and Indigenous nations. 6.1.1 Proponent’s Assessment of Environmental Effects Air Quality and Odour Emissions During construction, operation, and decommissioning/closure at the Gordon and MacLellan sites, sources of atmospheric contaminant emissions that could affect air quality include: diesel combustion emissions; emissions from explosives detonation (i.e. nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), and sulphur dioxide (SO2)); fugitive dust emissions from mining equipment, haul trucks, light personnel vehicles, ...
  • Attachment included
  • 6.4 The Proponent shall develop, prior to construction and in consultation with Indigenous groups, Health Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada and any other relevant authorities, a follow-up program to verify the accuracy of the environmental assessment as it pertains to adverse environmental effects of changes to the quality of air and country foods on the health of Indigenous Peoples, taking into account available traditional knowledge provided by Indigenous groups related to current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes. The Proponent shall implement the follow-up program during all phases of the Designated Project. As part of the implementation of the follow-up program, the Proponent shall: 6.4.1 identify, in consultation with Indigenous groups, the species of fish, vegetation and wildlife used as country foods and determine the locations where these species shall be monitored; 6.4.2 monitor, beginning prior to construction and continuing through post-closure, contaminants of potential concern, including mercury, methylmercury, arsenic and copper, in species at locations identified in condition 6.4.1; 6.4.3 monitor ambient air concentrations of TSP, PM10, PM2.5, NO2 and dustfall on Marcel Colomb First Nation’s Black Sturgeon Reserve, and upwind and downwind from the Project development areas during all project phases, taking into account 24-hour and 1-hour thresholds of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment’s Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standards during all project phases on Marcel Colomb First Nation’s Black Sturgeon Reserve, and upwind and downwind from the Project development areas; 6.4.4 monitor meteorological conditions ...
  • Attachment included
  • 7.5 Indigenous Peoples – Health and Socio- Economic Conditions The Project could cause residual adverse effects on the health and socio-economic conditions of Indigenous Peoples, including the physical health of individuals and communities and community well- being, through changes to the availability, quality, and access to country foods; access to resources and sites of traditional and cultural importance; surface water and groundwater quality; the atmospheric environment; and the availability and access to community services and infrastructure. The Agency is of the view that the Project is not likely to cause significant adverse effects on Indigenous Peoples’ health and socio-economic conditions after taking into account the proposed key mitigation measures. The Agency’s conclusions are based on an analysis of the Proponent’s assessment, including the Proponent’s proposed mitigation, monitoring, and follow-up measures, and the views expressed by federal authorities and Indigenous nations. 7.5.1 Effects on Indigenous Peoples’ Health 7.5.1.1 Proponent’s Assessment of Effects The Project may result in adverse effects to the health of Indigenous Peoples during all project phases through changes to the atmospheric environment, surface water and groundwater quality, the acoustic environment, and country foods. Atmospheric Environment During construction, operation, and decommissioning/closure, vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust emissions from project-related transportation and operation of heavy equipment could result in the release of atmospheric contaminants, such as total suspended particulates, PM 2.5, PM10, NO2, CO, and SO2, as discussed in Chapter 6.1 (Atmospheric ...
Report

Attachment Lynn Lake Gold Project - Comments Requested on the Draft Environmental Assessment and Draft Potential EA Conditions - Due December 7

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Natural Resources Canada
  • Reference number: 121
  • Submitted: 2022-12-07 - 10:02 AM
  • Participation notice: Public Notice: Public Comments Invited on the Draft Environmental Assessment Report and Potential Conditions
  • Please see the attached submissions
  • Attachment included
  • December 07, 2022 CIAR File No.: 80140 Wajeeha Siddiqui Project Manager, Prairie and Northern Region Impact Assessment Agency of Canada Subject: Lynn Lake Gold Project - Comments Requested on the Draft Environmental Assessment and Draft Potential EA Conditions - Due December 7 On November 07, 2022 the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (the Agency) requested Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) to conduct a review and comment on the Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) and Draft Potential EA Conditions for the Lynn Lake Gold Project. NRCan is participating in the environmental assessment process pursuant to section 20 of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 as a department in possession of specialist or expert information or knowledge related to the Project. NRCan has conducted its review of the Proponent’s responses to IRs based on the department’s expertise in hydrogeology, acid rock drainage and metal leaching, as well as our role as administrators of the Explosives Act. NRCan is providing comments intended to clarify and add precision to descriptions of NRCan’s expertise in the Draft EA report and there is no change in NRCan’s technical review or associated recommendations. Details of NRCan’s comments can be found in the attached appendix (Natural Resources Canada's comments on the Draft EA Report for the Lynn Lake Project). If you have any questions. Please contact me via e-email at . Thank you, Vikash Narine Environmental Assessment Officer Office of the Chief Scientist cc: Peter Unger – A/Director, Impact Assessment Division <email address removed> <email address removed>
  • Attachment included
  • Natural Resources Canada Comments on Draft Lynn Lake EA Report December 07, 2022 Page: Section: Draft EA Report Text: NRCan Comment: 65 6.2.2 Natural Resources Canada noted concerns that, as groundwater flows through bedrock slowly, residual project effects on groundwater quantity and quality may not be observable at groundwater monitoring wells during operation. Natural Resources Canada recommended that the Proponent be required to monitor groundwater seepage intercepted by the seepage collection systems throughout operation to assist in the timely identification of residual effects to groundwater and to inform whether contingency measures are required. To validate and transiently calibrate the groundwater model for the Gordon site, Natural Resources Canada also recommended that the Proponent use the results of ongoing monitoring, including long term pumping tests, to support the design of the interceptor well system. To validate and transiently calibrate the groundwater model for the MacLellan site, the quantity of groundwater inflow to the open pit should be monitored and monitoring data used to update the groundwater model if differences between the monitoring data and the conceptual model are observed. Natural Resources Canada noted concerns that the interceptor wells may not be able to collect sufficient groundwater volumes to offset lake level drawdown in Gordon and Farley Lakes after the first two years of operation or during the summer months. As such, supplementary mitigation measures Natural Resources Canada noted ...
Report

Attachment Alamos Gold Inc.'s comments on IAAC EA Report & Potential Terms & Conditions

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Alamos Gold Inc.
  • Reference number: 114
  • Submitted: 2022-12-07 - 9:48 AM
  • Participation notice: Public Notice: Public Comments Invited on the Draft Environmental Assessment Report and Potential Conditions
  • Please see the attached submission
  • Attachment included
  • Memo To: Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) From: Alamos Gold Inc. (the Proponent) Project/File: 111473033 Date: December 6, 2022 Reference: Proponent Review of the Lynn Lake Gold Project Draft Environmental Assessment and Potential Terms and Conditions The Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) has completed their Environmental Assessment (EA) report1 and potential terms and conditions2 (T&Cs) of the EA for the Alamos Gold Lynn Lake Gold Project (LLGP or the Project). The draft EA report and the T&Cs were reviewed with respect to the assessment of potential effects of the LLGP. The following provides the Proponent’s comments and recommendations on the draft EA report and potential T&Cs. The comments and recommendations are ranked as follows: • “Recommendation” – a suggestion made to the EA report and/or T&C authors. • “Deviation” – a noted error or discrepancy between either the draft EA report and Alamos Gold Inc. (Alamos; the Proponent) submitted materials (specifically the Environmental Impact Statement or Information Request responses) or between the draft EA report and the potential T&Cs. • “Key Issue” – a recommendation or requirement that as currently written is a challenge to meet and if unchanged has the potential to be a Project showstopper. • “Showstopper” – a recommendation or requirement that as written is not technically and/or economically feasible and if remains, ends the potential for the LLGP to proceed (“poison pill”). Alamos appreciates the opportunity to provide IAAC with comments and recommendations and is open to discussing any of the following to reach agreement and continue to advance the Project successfully. Regards, Alamos Gold Inc. 1 Impact ...
Report

Attachment FW: Chemawawin Cree Nation Review of the Environmental Assessment Report in relation to the Alamos Gold Inc. Lynn Lake Gold Project

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Chemawawin Cree Nation
  • Reference number: 116
  • Submitted: 2022-12-07 - 9:17 AM
  • Participation notice: Public Notice: Public Comments Invited on the Draft Environmental Assessment Report and Potential Conditions
  • Please see the attached submission. 
  • Attachment included
  • Box 9 Easterville, Manitoba R0C 0V0 Tel. No: 204-329-2161 * Toll Free Line: 1-877-442-1727 * Fax No: 204-329-2017 Minister Steven Guilbeault House of Commons Ottawa, ON, K1A 0A6 Email: steven.guilbeault@parl.gc.ca Stephen McCarthy Federal Consultation Coordinator for Alamos Gold Inc. Lynn Lake Gold Project Prairie and Northern Region Impact Assessment Agency of Canada Email: Stephen.McCarthy@canada.ca December 7, 2022 Dear Mr. Guilbeault and Mr. McCarthy, RE: Chemawawin Cree Nation Review of the Environmental Assessment Report in relation to the Alamos Gold Inc. Lynn Lake Gold Project This letter is sent on behalf of the Chief and Council of the Chemawawin Cree Nation. Chemawawin Cree Nation is a member of Swampy Cree Tribal Council and a Treaty 5 signatory Nation with rights and interests affirmed by Treaty 5 and the Natural Resources Transfer Act, 1930, and protected under Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 (“Section 35 Rights”). As Chief and Council of the Chemawawin Cree Nation (“CCN” or “Chemawawin”), it is our responsibility to ensure that our Nation’s Section 35 Rights and interests are being maintained and respected in all things that affect our Nation and our members. Chemawawin Cree Nation has evaluated the Alamos Gold Inc. (“Alamos”) Lynn Lake Gold Project (“Project” or “the Project”) Draft Environmental Assessment Report (“Report”). It is our view that CCN has not been properly engaged on this Project by Alamos and therefore, the Report is deficient. This lack of engagement has resulted in an incomplete assessment of potential project effects and will result in project approval without discharge of the Duty to Consult; this letter outlines those notable ...
Report

Attachment DUE: September 6, 2021 - Lynn Lake Gold Project - Request for Technical Review of Round 1, Package 3 Information Request Responses

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Environment and Climate Change Canada
  • Reference number: 79
  • Submitted: 2021-09-14
  • Project phase: Environmental Assessment Report
  • Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comments Invited on a Summary of the Environmental Impact Statement
  • Please see attached. 
  • Attachment included
  • 1 Environmental Protection Operations Directorate Prairie & Northern Region 150-123 Main Street Winnipeg, MB R3C 4W2 September 13, 2021 ECCC File: 4194-10-5/3295 CIAR Reference: 80140 Chelsea Fedrau Impact Assessment Agency of Canada 1145-9700 Jasper Avenue Edmonton, AB T5J 4C3 Dear Chelsea Fedrau, RE: Round 2 Technical Review of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Alamos Gold (The Proponent) Lynn Lake Gold Project (The Project) Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) has reviewed Alamos Gold Inc. (the Proponent) submitted responses to Round 1, Package 3 Information Requests for the above noted Project, and is providing expert advice based on ECCC’s mandate in the context of the Species at Risk Act (SARA), the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 (MBCA), and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act 1999 (CEPA). ECCC’s technical comments have been prepared in response to the Agency’s August 23, 2021 request that ECCC provide specialist or expert knowledge or information to enable the review of the Project and its predicted environmental effects, focusing on areas of ECCC’s mandate. In particular, ECCC has considered the following in preparing our information requests:  The sufficiency of baseline data and appropriateness of methodologies to predict effects;  The mitigation measures proposed by the proponent;  The level of certainty in the conclusions reached by the proponent on the effects;  The manner in which significance of the environmental effects, as they pertain to ECCC’s mandate, have been determined (i.e., the scientific merit of the information presented and the validity of the proponent’s methodologies and conclusions);  ...
  • Attachment included
  • Technical review of the Lynn Lake Gold Project Environmental Impact Statement Federal Department: Environment and Climate Change Canada – Submitted to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada on: September 13, 2021 1 Attachment 1 Lynn Lake Gold Project Information Requirements for Environmental Impact Statement Technical Review On August 23, 2021 the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada commenced Round 2 technical review of the Environmental Impact Statement and responses to Round 1, Package 3 Information Requests for the Lynn Lake Gold Project. The table below is to assist in the preparation of Information Requests that support full understanding of the Project’s potential for significant adverse environmental effects and potential impacts to rights. Reference IR# Expert Dept. or group EIS Guideline Reference EIS Reference Context and Rationale The Proponent is Required to … Topic or Valued Component (e.g. Project Overview; Environmental Assessment Methodology; Fish Habitat; etc.) Nation or department name – IR number (Ro e.g. IAAC-01 Nation or department Name e.g. IAAC Reference the section(s) of the EIS Guidelines that relate to your comment, concern, or information request. e.g. Part 2, Section 7.1.5 Fish and Fish Habitat Reference the section(s) of the EIS that speak to your comment, concern, or information request. Identify what the EIS Guidelines require and/or the link to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (section 5 or section 19). Briefly identify what the EIS presents and the information gap, inconsistency, or challenge. Explain why filling that information gap is necessary to understanding potential ...
Report

Attachment MCCN Review of responses to IR 1 Package 3

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Mathias Colomb Cree Nation
  • Reference number: 81
  • Submitted: 2021-09-14
  • Project phase: Environmental Assessment Report
  • Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comments Invited on a Summary of the Environmental Impact Statement
  • Hello Stephen,   Apologies for the delay in getting this to you.   The responses from Alamos are largely inadequate, and MCCN submits that they should be sent back to Alamos for further response, as set out in the chart.   Our main concerns are summarized below. Please let me know if you have any ...
  • Attachment included
  • 1 Mathias Colomb Cree Nation – Review of Alamos’ Aug 4, 2021 Responses to IAAC’s January 22, 2021 Technical Review Information Requests Round 1, Package 3 -- September 13, 2021 Reference IAAC Information Request MCCN Evaluation of Response Adequacy Additional MCCN Request IAAC-146 MCCN-51 a. Describe the spatial extent of the direct and indirect effects to vegetation and wetlands and how spatial boundaries account for the full potential scope of effects. i. Clarify how a 1 km buffer area was selected for the LAA, considering that indirect effects to vegetation and wetlands are anticipated to extend beyond this area. b. Clarify and describe how the selection of the spatial boundaries for vegetation and wetlands considered Indigenous knowledge and community knowledge, and how potential impacts to rights were considered in the selection of the spatial boundaries. c. Describe whether any boundaries need to be updated based on the information provided in parts a and b. If boundaries are updated, provided an updated effects assessment and identify any changes to the conclusions. Describe any mitigation measures, monitoring, and follow- up as necessary. Partially adequate. The Proponent has clarified that the LAA includes a 100 m buffer around the furthest groundwater drawdown contours. The Proponent maintains that the LAA represents the maximum area within which Project environmental effects can be predicted or measured with a reasonable degree of accuracy and confidence. The Proponent notes that Project-specific Traditional Land and Resource Use (TLRU) studies completed by Indigenous Nations included boundaries that differ from the environmental assessment. The Proponent ...
Report

Attachment Health Canada Comments -Technical Review of Lynn Lake Gold Project Round 1 Package 3 IR responses

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Health Canada
  • Reference number: 78
  • Submitted: 2021-09-10
  • Project phase: Environmental Assessment Report
  • Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comments Invited on a Summary of the Environmental Impact Statement
  • Please see attached. 
  • Attachment included
  • Environmental Health Program (EHP) Regulatory Operations and Regions Branch (ROEB) Health Canada 391 York Avenue Winnipeg, MB R3C 0P4 September 10, 2021 Chelsea Fedrau Impact Assessment Agency of Canada Suite 1145, 9700 Jasper Avenue Edmonton, AB T5J 4C3 Sent by email to: Chelsea.Fedrau@iaac-aeic.gc.ca Subject: Health Canada’s advice on the Technical Review of the Lynn Lake Gold Project – Information Request Round 1 Package 3 Dear Chelsea Fedrau: Health Canada has completed a review of Alamos Gold Inc.’s (Proponent) responses to Information Request Package 3 for the proposed Lynn Lake Gold Project (the Project), which is currently undergoing Technical Review. Health Canada is participating in the environmental assessment review of the Project as a Federal Authority under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (the Act). Health Canada’s comments are included in Attachment 1 for your consideration. In general, they pertain to the human health risk assessment of potential Project-related impacts. Please feel free to contact me at julie.c.anderson@hc-sc.gc.ca if you have any questions regarding Health Canada’s comments. Sincerely, Julie Anderson Regional Impact Assessment Specialist Environmental Health Program Regulatory Operations & Enforcement Branch Health Canada cc: Heather Jones-Otazo, A/Manager, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch (HECSB), Health Canada Paul Partridge, A/Regional Manager, Manitoba/Saskatchewan region, EHP, ROEB, Health Canada Aurelia Thevenot, A/Senior Environmental Health Specialist, HECSB, Health Canada <Original signed by> mailto:Chelsea.Fedrau@iaac-aeic.gc.ca mailto:julie.c.anderson@hc-sc.gc.ca ...
  • Attachment included
  • Technical review of the Lynn Lake Gold Project Environmental Impact Statement Federal Department: Health Canada – Submitted to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada on: September 10, 2021 1 Attachment 1 Lynn Lake Gold Project Information Requirements from Environmental Impact Statement Technical Review On August 23, 2021, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada commenced Round 2 technical review of the Environmental Impact Statement and responses to Round 1, Package 3 Information Requests for the Lynn Lake Gold Project. The table below is to assist in the preparation of Information Requests that support full understanding of the Project’s potential for significant adverse environmental effects and potential impacts to rights. Reference IR# Expert Dept. or group EIS Guideline Reference EIS Reference Context and Rationale The Proponent is Required to … Human Health IAAC-174a and c Health Canada MCCN 6.1 Project setting and baseline conditions 6.1.1 Atmospheric environment 6.1.11 Human environment 6.3.4 Indigenous peoples Volume 2, 18.4.1 Analytical assessment techniques Volume 5, Appendix H, Lynn Lake Gold Project Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Technical Modelling Report 4.1 Air 5.4.1 Non- carcinogenic chemicals 5.4.3 Human Health Risk via Inhalation It is unclear why exposure to metals and other contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) due to dust resuspension was not considered in the human health risk assessment (HHRA). i) The Proponent’s response to IAAC-174 refers to “Deposition of fugitive dusts [that] could have resulted in metal accumulation in soil and terrestrial country foods and backyard garden ...
Report

Attachment Lynn Lake (17-HCAA-01029) EA, Round 2, Package 3 Review submission by DFO to IAAC

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Fisheries and Oceans Canada
  • Reference number: 83
  • Submitted: 2021-09-07
  • Project phase: Environmental Assessment Report
  • Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comments Invited on a Summary of the Environmental Impact Statement
  • Please see the attached submission.
  • Attachment included
  • Technical review of the Lynn Lake Gold Project Environmental Impact Statement Federal Department: Fisheries and Oceans Canada– Submitted to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada on: September 7th, 2021 1 Attachment 1 Lynn Lake Gold Project Information Requirements for Environmental Impact Statement Technical Review On August 23, 2021 the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada commenced Round 2 technical review of the Environmental Impact Statement and responses to Round 1, Package 3 Information Requests for the Lynn Lake Gold Project. The table below is to assist in the preparation of Information Requests that support full understanding of the Project’s potential for significant adverse environmental effects and potential impacts to rights. Reference IR# Expert Dept. or group EIS Guideline Reference EIS Reference Context and Rationale The Proponent is Required to … Topic or Valued Component (e.g. Project Overview; Environmental Assessment Methodology; Fish Habitat; etc.) Nation or department name – IR number (Ro e.g. IAAC-01 Nation or department Name e.g. IAAC Reference the section(s) of the EIS Guidelines that relate to your comment, concern, or information request. e.g. Part 2, Section 7.1.5 Fish and Fish Habitat Reference the section(s) of the EIS that speak to your comment, concern, or information request. Identify what the EIS Guidelines require and/or the link to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (section 5 or section 19). Briefly identify what the EIS presents and the information gap, inconsistency, or challenge. Explain why fi l l ing that information gap is necessary to understanding potential ...
  • Attachment included
  • Technical review of the Lynn Lake Gold Project Environmental Impact Statement Federal Department: Fisheries and Oceans Canada – Submitted to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada on: September 7th, 2021 Page 1/1 Attachment 2 Advice to the Proponent Departmental number Reference to EIS Context and Rationale Advice to the Proponent (e.g. HC-01) Identify which section(s) of the EIS report and appendices are related to the comment (Volume, section, page number). Provide the context of why you are providing the advice to the proponent. Provide specific advice to the Proponent that would not be considered an information request to help determine the sufficiency of the EIS. This may include the guidance or standard advice related to your departmental mandate. Make clear whether this information pertains to the environmental assessment or the regulatory phase. IAAC-148 6.1.6 Fish and fish habitat; 6.2.3 Changes to riparian, wetland and terrestrial environments; 6.3.1 Fish and fish habitat See ‘Context and Rationale’ provided by DFO in Attachment 1, of the Round 1, Package 3 EIS technical review template, regarding IAAC -148. Based on the results of the fisheries data set requested for additional wetlands located within the MRSA and TMF, the proponent should be aware that any areas identified as fish-frequented within the footprint of the MSRA and TMF should be accounted for in the offsetting/compensation plan. Pending the outcome of the EA and if fish- frequented, the proponent would be required to compensate for these impacts as part of a Metal and Diamond Mining Effluent Regulation Schedule 2 amendment.

Report

Attachment MMF Lynn Lake Gold Project IR Review Round 1 - Package 3

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Manitoba Métis Federation
  • Reference number: 84
  • Submitted: 2021-09-03
  • Project phase: Environmental Assessment Report
  • Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comments Invited on a Summary of the Environmental Impact Statement
  • Please see the attached submission.
  • Attachment included
  • w w w . m m f . m b . c a Lynn Lake Gold Project Environmental Impact Statement IR Review: Round 1, Package 3 Manitoba Métis Federation September 3, 2021 MMF – LYNN LAKE GOLD PROJECT EIS IR REVIEW: ROUND 1, PACKAGE 3| i Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 2 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 4 1.2 Regulatory Process ........................................................................................................................ 5 2.0 Manitoba Métis Community ............................................................................................................. 9 2.1 History and Identity ...................................................................................................................... 9 2.2 Manitoba Métis Federation ........................................................................................................ 12 2.3 MMF Resolution No. 8 ................................................................................................................ 15 2.4 Manitoba Métis Rights, Claims, and Interests ............................................................................ 15 3.0 Review Findings............................................................................................................................... 19 ...
Report

Attachment Lynn Lake Gold Project - Technical Review of Round 1, Package 3 IR Responses - Sayisi Dene First Nation

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Sayisi Dene First Nation
  • Reference number: 76
  • Submitted: 2021-09-02
  • Project phase: Environmental Assessment Report
  • Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comments Invited on a Summary of the Environmental Impact Statement
  • Please see attached. 
  • Attachment included
  • 1 | P a g e September 2, 2021 Stephen McCarthy Senior Consultation Analyst, Prairie and Northern Region Email: Stephen.mccarthy@iaac-aeic.gc.ca Dear Mr. McCarthy, RE: Sayisi Dene First Nation Review of the Round 1, Package 3 Information Request Response for the Alamos Gold Inc. Lynn Lake Project. I am writing as the elected Chief, on behalf of the Council and Nation members of the Sayisi Dene First Nation (“SDFN”) in response to your email dated August 23, 2021. As part of our ongoing commitment to the environment within our Treaty area, we have reviewed the Alamos Gold Inc. (“Alamos”) Lynn Lake Project (the “Project”) Round 1, Package 3 Information Request (“IR”) responses. On August 5, 2021, Alamos submitted responses to the Round 1, Package 3 IRs. The Agency reviewed the responses and found the information sufficient for moving forward with a technical review. On August 23, 2021, the responses were provided to Sayisi Dene First Nation (“SDFN”) for review and comment. The below themes can be used to in furthering discussion with the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (“IAAC”) on potential impacts to Sayisi Dene First Nation rights and interests. While Alamos indicates that the 59 IRs within Round 1 Package 3 have been fully addressed and answered as clearly and succinctly as possible, we do not feel that there is sufficient information contained within this IR package in relation to Indigenous rights, interests, issues, and concerns and further information gathering/engagement must be undertaken by Alamos and the IAAC to address these instances. As with the EIS, Alamos relies on current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes as the only mechanism ...
Report

Attachment RE: Lynn Lake Gold Project - Technical Review of Round 1, Package 3 IR Responses - Sayisi Dene First Nation

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Sayisi Dene First Nation
  • Reference number: 82
  • Submitted: 2021-09-02
  • Project phase: Environmental Assessment Report
  • Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comments Invited on a Summary of the Environmental Impact Statement
  • Please see the attached submission.
  • Attachment included
  • 1 | P a g e September 2, 2021 Stephen McCarthy Senior Consultation Analyst, Prairie and Northern Region Email: Stephen.mccarthy@iaac-aeic.gc.ca Dear Mr. McCarthy, RE: Sayisi Dene First Nation Review of the Round 1, Package 3 Information Request Response for the Alamos Gold Inc. Lynn Lake Project. I am writing as the elected Chief, on behalf of the Council and Nation members of the Sayisi Dene First Nation (“SDFN”) in response to your email dated August 23, 2021. As part of our ongoing commitment to the environment within our Treaty area, we have reviewed the Alamos Gold Inc. (“Alamos”) Lynn Lake Project (the “Project”) Round 1, Package 3 Information Request (“IR”) responses. On August 5, 2021, Alamos submitted responses to the Round 1, Package 3 IRs. The Agency reviewed the responses and found the information sufficient for moving forward with a technical review. On August 23, 2021, the responses were provided to Sayisi Dene First Nation (“SDFN”) for review and comment. The below themes can be used to in furthering discussion with the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (“IAAC”) on potential impacts to Sayisi Dene First Nation rights and interests. While Alamos indicates that the 59 IRs within Round 1 Package 3 have been fully addressed and answered as clearly and succinctly as possible, we do not feel that there is sufficient information contained within this IR package in relation to Indigenous rights, interests, issues, and concerns and further information gathering/engagement must be undertaken by Alamos and the IAAC to address these instances. As with the EIS, Alamos relies on current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes as the only mechanism ...
Report

Attachment Lynn Lake Gold Project - Technical Review of Round 1, Package 2 Information Request Responses

  • Lynn Lake Gold Project
  • Author: Administrator on behalf of Natural Resources Canada
  • Reference number: 73
  • Submitted: 2021-08-24
  • Project phase: Environmental Assessment Report
  • Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comments Invited on a Summary of the Environmental Impact Statement
  • Please see attachment. 
  • Attachment included
  • Lynn Lake Gold: Review of the supplemental filing P. 2.3. The upper case water quality predictions are based on average precipitation and 95th percentile values for the source term and background water quality. NRCan requests that the Proponent provide a sensitivity analysis of the impact of dry and wet periods on the water quality predictions. p.2.6. With the addition of 5 meters of waste rock on the MRSA, the complete wetting of the pile is expected to take an additional 3 years, which would delay seepage. However, considering that the pile is built gradually, it is possible that weather allows for complete wetting of different layers of the waste rock pile as it is being built and as a result, seepage at the toe of the pile may breakthrough earlier than predicted. NRCan requests that the Proponent please provide a sensitivity analysis of complete wetting times on water quality predictions. Tables 3-14 to 3-20 and section on assessment of effects on water quality. The updated upper case water quality predictions report an increase in all metals and nutrients, above water quality criteria particularly at closure and during post-closure in Keewatin River Tributary (KEE3- B1). Considering that an average precipitation is used, what are the implication to the upper case water predictions? While the updated water quality predictions indicate that the spatial extent would be limited to Keewatin River and part of Minton Lake (i.e. especially cadmium), questions arise. For instance, what is the proportion of metals released to the Keewatin River that will partition to suspended matter and settle in the sediments? NRCan requests a discussion be provided on how this process is ...
  • Attachment included
  • August 24, 2021 Agency File No: 80140 NRCan File No: MA-564 Chelsea Fedrau Project Manager Impact Assessment Agency of Canada – Prairie and Northern Region SENT BY EMAIL to: chelsea.fedrau@canada.ca Subject: NRCan Technical Review – Proponent responses to Round 1 IRs– Lynn Lake Gold Project On July 26, 2021 Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) received a request from the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (the Agency) to provide a technical review of the Proponent’s responses to the first round of Information Requests (IRs) for the Lynn Lake Gold Project. NRCan has met this request by reviewing the information in the responses that is relevant to NRCan’s areas of expertise. For this project, NRCan is providing expertise in hydrogeology, acid rock drainage and metal leaching as well as in our role as administrators of the Explosives Act. NRCan’s comments for this review can be found in attachment 1. This table only includes comments on IRs that NRCan has outstanding questions and/or concerns with. All of NRCan’s other IRs have been sufficiently addressed by the Proponent. In addition, on May 11, 2021 NRCan received a request from the Agency to review the supplemental filing submitted by Alamos on May 11, 2021. After discussion with the Agency, it was decided that NRCan would provide this review at the same time as the review of the Proponent’s responses to the first round of IRs. NRCan’s review of the supplemental filing can be found in attachment 2. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me via email at Maximilien.Genest@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca or by phone at 613-447-2597. Sincerely, Maximilien Genest Environmental Assessment ...
  • Attachment included
  • Technical review of the Lynn Lake Gold Project Environmental Impact Statement Federal Department: Natural Resources Canada – Submitted to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada on: [August 23, 2021] 1 Attachment 1 Lynn Lake Gold Project Information Requirements for Environmental Impact Statement Technical Review On July 23, 2021 the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada commenced Round 2 technical review of the Environmental Impact Statement and responses to Round 1, Package 2 Information Requests for the Lynn Lake Gold Project. The table below is to assist in the preparation of Information Requests that support full understanding of the Project’s potential for significant adverse environmental effects and potential impacts to rights. Reference IR# Expert Dept. or group EIS Guideline Reference EIS Reference Context and Rationale The Proponent is Required to … Groundwater IAAC-57(2) NRCan Section 8 Follow-up and Monitoring Programs Volume 1, Chapter 8, Section 8.1.4.1 Temporal Boundaries, Volume 5 Appendix F Section 5.4.1, and Appendix G, Section 5.4.1 As stated in the guidelines, the follow-up program should be designed to verify the accuracy of the effects assessment. For groundwater this verification should include the assessment of seepage flow pathways and seepage quantities from mine facilities. The response to IAAC-57 states that groundwater monitoring will continue for a period of 6 years following pit flooding. The response goes on to state that monitoring will cease when sites are restored to satisfactory conditions, and water chemistry is stable and below discharge criteria. It is not clear from the response but it appears that the stable ...
Report
Report a problem on this page
Date modified: