Pêches et Océans Canada. Your file Votre référence March 20, Our file Notre référence 14-HCAA-00788

Transcription

1 Fisheries and Oceans Canada Pêches et Océans Canada 501 University Crescent Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N6 Your file Votre référence March 20, Our file Notre référence 14-HCAA Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Attention: Brett Maracle - Panel Manager Place Bell Canada 160 Elgin Street, 22 nd Floor Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3 Dear Mr. Maracle: Subject: Grassy Mountain Coal Project, Federal Pre-panel Review of Responses to Supplemental Information Requests Round 1 Fisheries and Oceans Canada s (DFO) Fisheries Protection and Species at Risk Programs have conducted a coordinated review of the addendum to the environmental impact statement (EIS) for the proposed Grassy Mountain Coal Project. DFO has provided comments within the conformity review template as a part of the pre-panel non-technical review. <contact information removed> If you have any questions, please contact Jason Shpeley at or by at Jason.Shpeley@dfo-mpo.gc.ca. Please refer to the DFO file number referenced above when corresponding with the Fisheries Protection Program. Yours sincerely, <Original signed by> Martyn Curtis Regional Manager, Regulatory Reviews Fisheries Protection Program cc: Tracy Utting Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Ernest Watson Fisheries and Oceans, Species at Risk Ray Ratynski Fisheries and Oceans, Species at Risk Jason Shpeley Fisheries and Oceans, FPP Attachment: 14-HCAA Template-FRT Review of Grassy January addendum Mar20-17 Page 1 of 1

2 Grassy Mountain Coal Project Joint Review Panel Attachment 1 Federal Pre-Panel Review of the SIRs (Round 1) Grassy Mountain Coal Project [Fisheries and Oceans Canada] [March 20, 2017] Title of Question that was asked and number (Federal Department reviewing in addition to Panel secretariat review) SIR1. Baseline Information (DFO) Describe the current state of fish populations in the project area, including the distribution of pure strain westslope cutthroat trout. Does the response respond to the information gap identified? Are the requirements of the EIS Guidelines fulfilled? Is Agency guidance considered? Is there enough information to allow the Panel to begin a technical review? If response is satisfactory for conformity, please clearly indicate this. Fulfilled. CR#6 Addendum, App. A1, Section Fish Population, p.72[173]: Provides information on fish populations as per surveys conducted in August of Data focuses on westslope cutthroat trout and brook trout captured in Gold and Blairmore creeks. Figure 4.11, p.74[175]: identifies spawning habitats in the local study area. Distribution of mature westslope cutthroat trout is identified on the figure. Table 4.12: Total number of fish (sub-adults and adults) in upper Gold Creek and Blairmore Creek based on mark recapture surveys, August CR#6 Addendum, App. A4, Section 3.0, p.9[696]: Results from a mark-recapture survey estimated total subadult/adult fish populations in Gold and Blairmore creeks at 1,625 and 3,210, respectively. If there is an outstanding issue or concern, explain the outstanding issue of concern or deficiency and provide a rationale for why the stated deficiency/issue is important for environmental assessment purpose. Clearly and concisely state the information being requested from the proponent and draft a request for information, including appropriate references.

3 SIR 2. Regional Study Area (DFO) Include Daisy Creek in the aquatic assessment or provide a rationale why Daisy Creek was not included in the assessment. Outstanding information Daisy Creek is referenced in CR#6, Effects Assessment, Section , p.67[68]. A separate assessment was completed for specific changes to the groundwater flow regime (CR #3:Appendix C). Table 17 within CR#3 summarizes predicted changes to base flow in Blairmore Creek, Gold Creek and Daisy Creek. DFO could not locate a discussion or rationale within the EIS or addendum on why Daisy Creek was not included in the aquatic effects assessment considering information in Consultant Report #3 identifies that there will be some effect on the watercourse. A determination has been made stating that impacts to Daisy Creek are not expected to be significant. Since there is a predicted impact, it should be included in the Regional Study Area and monitoring should be proposed to validate predictions. The Regional Study Area in the Aquatic Ecology Effects Assessment (Figure 1.1, p.3) does not include Daisy. The Surface Hydrology Baseline and Effects Assessment (CR#3) does indicate a change to the baseline. There should be a statement in the environmental assessment that addresses the potential effects to Daisy, and why it was not considered in the regional study area. Since there is a predicted impact, it should be included in the Regional Study Area and monitoring proposed to ensure that the impacts are as predicted. Unlikely Page 2 of 10

4 SIR 3. Mapping Fish Habitat (DFO) a. Discuss how Benga Mining has arrived at an understanding of habitat potential for the entire watercourse of Blairmore Creek based on two survey points. b. Determine and map where spawning, nursery, rearing, food supply and migration habitats and over-wintering areas are in the local study area. (a) Additional discussion required CR#6 Addendum, App. A3, A3.0: Blairmore Creek Habitat Data, p.a3-1[259]. BC01 and BC02. (b) Fulfilled. CR#6 Addendum, Appendix D, Reach morphologies: Figure D-1: Reach Morphologies on Blairmore Creek; Figure D-2: Reach Morphologies on Gold Creek. CR#6 Addendum, App. A1, Section , Figure 1 Habitat Assessment: p.40[150]: Gold Creek and Blairmore Creek Macrohabitat Reach Delineation. p.42[152] Figure 4.3a: Mesohabitat Characterization on A) Upper Gold Creek; p.43[153] Figure 4.3b Mesohabitat Characterization on B) Lower Gold Creek; p.45[155] Figure 4.5a Mesohabitat Characterization on A) Upper Blairmore Creek; p.46[156] Figure 4.5b Mesohabitat Characterization on B) Lower Blairmore Creek; CR#6 Addendum, App. A1, Section 4.1.4, Figure 4.11, p.70[172] Spawning Habitat in the local Study Area. CR#6 Addendum, App. A4, Figure 5.4, p.28[712]: Candidate Sites for Overwintering Habitat Enhancement. CR#6 Addendum, App A2, p.a2-1[232] Gold Creek Habitat Mapping; i.e., biophysical habitat survey results. DFO could not locate a discussion on how Benga Mining has arrived at an understanding of habitat potential Blairmore Creek based on two survey points; i.e., BC01 and BC02. Has Benga arrived at an understanding of fish habitat potential for Blairmore Creek based on the two survey points outlined in: CR#6 Addendum, App. A3, A3.0: Blairmore Creek Habitat Data, p.a3-1? If so, is this a reasonable baseline for effects determination as it relates to future monitoring of potential project effects if the mine is developed? Discuss. Unsure Page 3 of 10

5 SIR 4. Geomorphological Changes (DFO) a. Provide an assessment of any potential physical impacts to aquatic environments and water quality as a result of increased discharges to Blairmore Creek and other surface waters. b. Describe how any potential impacts will be mitigated. (a) fulfilled. CR#6 Addendum, Appendix A2, Fluvial Geomorphology Assessment of Blairmore Creek and Gold Creek [329] Executive Summary, p.i[332]: We therefore conclude that the physical habitat within Blairmore and Gold creeks are not anticipated to change due to water management throughout the mine life (construction, operations, reclamation, closure phases). P.41[376] Peak discharges are generally expected to decrease through the project lifecycle (SRK, 2016a). The decrease in peak discharges through time is the primary driver of the analysis of sediment mobility. Channel beds are expected to become more stable through time due to decreases in peak flows. Gravel deposition will likely be enhanced in some locations but channel aggradation is not expected due to the nature of the steep channels. We therefore conclude that the physical habitat within Blairmore and Gold creeks are not anticipated to change due to water management throughout the mine life (construction, operations, reclamation, closure phases). DFO could not locate a discussion with the Fluvial Geomorphology Assessment of Blairmore Creek and Gold Creek: Appendix A2, with respect to mitigations. As per SIR 4(b). Is this discussion located elsewhere or absent based on the conclusions reached in the fluvial geomorphology assessment? SIR 5. Gold Creek and Blairmore Creek Tributaries (DFO) Identify the contribution that the tributaries have (i.e. habitat, water quality and quantity) with respect to fish populations in Gold and Blairmore Creeks. (b) clarification requested. Fulfilled. CR#6 Addendum, App. A1, Section 4.1.2, Figure 4.8 Fish Inventory, p.60[164]: Fish Distribution Throughout the Local Study Area. Identifies fish bearing and non-bearing watercourses in the LSA. CR#6 Addendum, App. A2, Table A2.2 to A2.7., p.a2-13[245] to A2-23[255] Biophysical habitat survey results for Gold Creek tributaries. CR#6 Addendum, App. A3, Figure A3.3 to A3.19, p.a3-3[261] to A3-19[277]: Contribution of Blairmore Creek tributaries. Page 4 of 10

6 SIR 6. In-stream Flow Needs Model (DFO) Conduct, if necessary, to make the IFN model specific to the fish species in Gold and Blairmore Creek. Using these results, model how changes in water quantity in watercourses could impact the availability of fish habitat. Fulfilled CR#6 Addendum, Appendix A3, p.xii[441]: IFA model predictions indicated that, without mitigation, Project-related flow changes would cause changes of less than 10% in habitat area (AWS) relative to long-term baseline conditions in all study reaches and all stanzas for WSCT rearing, spawning, fry or overwintering, when averaged across each Project phase. Results exceeding the 10% significance threshold indicating the potential for limitations to WSCT habitat only were predicted on Gold Creek when using a more stringent (single-month) timeframe, a more conservative flow scenario (continuous 1- in-10 and 1-in-20 year low flow conditions), or both. CR#6 Addendum, Appendix A3, Section p.73[511]: Flow habitat relationships discussion. CR#6 Addendum, Appendix A3, Summary, p.101[537]: Short-term mitigation measures have been proposed for supplementing flows during dry years. Predicted Project-related alterations to fish habitat under average conditions will be counterbalanced through the implementation of a Habitat Offsetting Plan that aims to create a net gain of WSCT habitat in Gold Creek. After implementing these measures, the residual effects predicted from changes in hydrology from the Project on the WSCT populations are expected to be mitigated. Note: net gain is not the current policy objective. The 2013 policy focuses on maintaining or increasing fisheries productivity. No Page 5 of 10

7 SIR 7. Westslope Cutthroat Trout (DFO) Provide an analysis of the effects of the Project, describing mitigation including offsets, on the survival and recovery of WSCT, its residences and critical habitat. Include a discussion of how population and distribution objectives set out in Recovery Strategy and Action Plans would be affected. Outstanding information CR#6 Addendum, Table 4.11, P.89[88]: Classification of application case residual adverse effects on Westslope Cutthroat Trout. CR#6 Addendum, Section 4.5, p.91[89]: For the WSCT relative abundance and distribution measurement indicator, no net change in the abundance of WSCT has been predicted based on ongoing productivity of offsetting options aimed to counterbalance or exceed any predicted loss of WSCT tributary habitat (currently not included as part of the Critical Habitat designation) or habitat altered as a result of changes in hydrology in Gold Creek. CR#6 Addendum, App. A4, Section 2.0, Table 2.1, p.5[693]: Summary of quantified residual effects on fish habitat for the Project from Hatfield CR#6 Addendum, App. A4, Section 5.0, p.14,[701]: [From the offset plan] Support fisheries management objectives or local restoration priorities e.g., Recovery Plan for WSCT; An analysis is provided in the document entitled Preliminary Habitat Offsetting Plan (Appendix A4). The DFO Population and Distribution Objectives contained in the WSCT Recovery Strategy are to Protect and maintain the existing 0.99 pure populations (currently believed to be approximately 51) at self-sustaining levels, and re-establish pure populations to self-sustaining levels, within the species original distribution in Alberta. The analysis provided does not include a discussion of how the above objectives will be met in light of the proposed measures to offset the predicted residual impacts to aquatic habitats over the lifespan of the project. The strategies proposed to address the identified threats, and to guide management activities to meet the recovery goal and objectives include the following general categories: 1. Research; 2. Monitoring; 3. Management and regulation; and 4. Education and outreach. The strategies contained in the above categories is designed to assess, mitigate, or eliminate specific threats to the species; to address information deficiencies that might otherwise inhibit species recovery; or to contribute to the species recovery in general. The offsetting plan should include a detailed discussion regarding what specific strategies contained in the recovery plan will be employed to ensure the population and distribution objectives will be maintained in light of the projected impacts. The analysis provided does not include a discussion on how the population and distribution objectives contained in the Recovery Strategy will be achieved considering the proposed measures to offset the predicted residual impacts to aquatic habitats over the lifespan of the project. Discuss. Include a detailed discussion focusing on how strategies contained in the Alberta Westslope Cutthroat Trout Recovery Plan will be employed to ensure that the species population and distribution objectives are achieved as it relates to potential projected impacts. publications-web-resources/fish/documents/sar-westslopecutthroattrout- RecoveryPlan-A-Mar2013.pdf No Page 6 of 10

8 SIR 8. Conceptual Offsetting Plan (DFO) Identify a conceptual offsetting plan that is economically and technically feasible that would mitigate predicted impacts to fish and fish habitat, including WSCT. Outstanding information. CR#6 Addendum, App. A4[681]: Preliminary Habitat Offsetting Plan The following potential offsetting measures have been described at a conceptual level in this report: 1. Reconnection of isolated high-quality fish habitat on Gold Creek: Re-establish flow and enhance habitat in a portion of mainstem Gold Creek that is seasonally dry; 2. Habitat enhancement on Morin Creek: Mitigate existing (non-project) anthropogenic effects on fish and fish habitat in Morin Creek, including the area currently identified as critical habitat for WSCT; 3. Overwintering habitat enhancement: Increase overwintering habitat for WSCT in Gold Creek and Blairmore Creek watersheds to improve survival, fish recruitment and production; 4. Enhancement of riparian processes: Restore riparian habitat that has been identified as degraded in the LSA; and 5. Data collection and scientific research: Provision of collected data associated with WSCTknowledge gaps and research needs identified in the Recovery Plan. CR#6 Addendum, App A4, Figure 5.1 p.17[703]: Potential Offsetting Options in the local Study Area. An analysis is provided in the document entitled Preliminary Habitat Offsetting Plan (Appendix A4). The DFO Population and Distribution Objectives contained in the WSCT Recovery Strategy are to Protect and maintain the existing 0.99 pure populations (currently believed to be approximately 51) at self-sustaining levels, and re-establish pure populations to self-sustaining levels, within the species original distribution in Alberta. The analysis provided does not include a discussion of how the above objectives will be met in light of the proposed measures to offset the predicted residual impacts to aquatic habitats over the lifespan of the project. The strategies proposed to address the identified threats, and to guide management activities to meet the recovery goal and objectives, include the following general categories: 1. Research; 2. Monitoring; 3. Management and regulation; and 4. Education and outreach. The strategies contained in the above categories is designed to assess, mitigate, or eliminate specific threats to the species; to address information deficiencies that might otherwise inhibit species recovery; or to contribute to the species recovery in general. The offsetting plan should include a detailed discussion regarding what specific strategies contained in the recovery plan will be employed to ensure the population and distribution objectives will be maintained in light of the projected impacts. In the context of the offsetting plan, include a detailed discussion focusing on how strategies contained in the Alberta Westslope Cutthroat Trout Recovery Plan will be employed to ensure that the species population and distribution objectives are achieved as it relates to potential projected impacts. Discuss as it relates to DFO s population and distribution objectives contained in the recovery plan. publications-web-resources/fish/documents/sar-westslopecutthroattrout- RecoveryPlan-A-Mar2013.pdf No Page 7 of 10

9 CEAA 8.0 Fish and Fish Habitat (CEAA, DFO) Fulfilled. SIR 8.1 Provide an assessment of the effects of changes to the aquatic environment and based on those predicted effects, discuss the impact to the fish resources identified by Benga Mining and its habitat in the LSA and RSA. In providing its analysis and conclusions Benga Mining will make it clear what project activity or project component is causing the effect. CR#6 Addendum, Section 4.3.1, p.70[71] Changes to Tributary and Mainstem Aquatic and/or Riparian Habitat - Local Study Area. CR#6 Addendum, Section Table 4.6, p,72[73] WSCT habitat that will be permanently changed within the local study area. CR#6 Addendum, Section 4.5, Table4.11,p.89[88] Classification of application case residual adverse effects on [WSCT]. CR#6 Addendum, Section 4.5.1, p.92[90] The residual effects from the Project, once the Habitat Offsetting Plan is finalized and implemented for the Project, are not predicted to be large enough to influence the maintenance of self-sustaining, or overall productivity of, WSCT populations in the LSA. The residual effects from the Project are not expected to cause irreversible changes at the population level or decrease resilience of WSCT populations within the LSA or RSA. Overall, the residual effects from the Project (as a whole) on the maintenance of self-sustaining, and overall productivity of, WSCT populations in Gold and Blairmore Creek watersheds are predicted to be not significant. Page 8 of 10

10 CEAA 9.0 Fish and Fish Habitat Mitigation Measures (CEAA, DFO) SIR 9.1. For all impacts to fish and fish habitat Benga Mining is required to: a. identify the technically and economically feasible mitigation measures that will be undertaken to mitigate the significant adverse effects predicted on the biological conditions of Blairmore Creek and Gold Creek and their tributaries in the LSA; b. explain how the mitigation measures are meant to reduce significance; and c. discuss the anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation measures; and if there is some question as to the effectiveness of the mitigation measure or if mitigation of the effect is not feasible, provide a rational and discuss the potential risks and effects to the environment including to the fish species identified as VCs before and after contingency measures, such as offsetting and/or compensation, will be applied. A) CR#6 Addendum, Section 4.2, Table 4.2, p.43/44/45[48/49/50]: Pathways of effects and mitigations. CR#6 Addendum, Appendix A3, p.101[537]: Short-term mitigation measures have been proposed for supplementing flows during dry years. Predicted Project-related alterations to fish habitat under average conditions will be counterbalanced through the implementation of a Habitat Offsetting Plan that aims to create a net gain of WSCT habitat in Gold Creek. After implementing these measures, the residual effects predicted from changes in hydrology from the Project on the WCST populations are expected to be mitigated. Offsetting as per CR#6 Addendum, App. A4[681]: Preliminary Habitat Offsetting Plan, is proposed to mitigate project effects. B) CR#6 Addendum, p.62[64] riparian buffer zones have been applied to the watercourses in the LSA: 50 m on the mainstem of Gold and Blairmore creeks; 30 m on the fish-bearing tributaries; and 20 m on the non-fish bearing tributaries. CR#6 Addendum, Section (mitigation measures) p.71[72] Mitigations: timing windows, DFO authorization and offsetting, fish rescue. CR#6 Addendum, Section 4.3.2,p.75[76] Significance is discussed in relation to thresholds; i.e., flow changes and the influence that has on physical fish habitat features is within the acceptable range of variability. This is consistent with recent DFO research (Framework for Assessing the Ecological Flow Requirements to Support Fisheries in Canada). C) CR#6 Addendum, App. 4: Preliminary offset plan. Contains discussion on monitoring to determine the effectiveness of the offset plan. Offsetting is a key mitigation. Page 9 of 10

11 CEAA 11.0 Species at Risk Westslope Cutthroat Trout (CEAA, DFO) SIR 11.1 Given the requirements of the CEAA 2012 and the Guidelines, as well as the known occurrence of westslope cutthroat trout in the project area, it is important for Benga Mining to provide: a. a detailed discussion on the potential for the Project to impact westslope cutthroat trout as a species at risk, cumulative impacts of the project in combination with threats to the species as identified in the recovery plan, as well as the potential recovery of the species, as required by the Guidelines. CR#6 Addendum, Table 4.2, p.43[48] Potential pathway for effects on Westslope Cutthroat Trout CR#6 Addendum, Section 4.2.1, p.48[51] Discussion on impact pathways CR#6 Addendum, Section 4.3.2, p.73[74] Changes to hydrology in Gold and Blairmore Creeks Potentially Affecting Westslope Cutthroat Trout Habitat. CR#6 Addendum, Section 4.5.1, p.92[90] The residual effects from the Project, once the Habitat Offsetting Plan is finalized and implemented for the Project, are not predicted to be large enough to influence the maintenance of self-sustaining, or overall productivity of, WSCT populations in the LSA. The residual effects from the Project are not expected to cause irreversible changes at the population level or decrease resilience of WSCT populations within the LSA or RSA. Overall, the residual effects from the Project (as a whole) on the maintenance of self-sustaining, and overall productivity of, WSCT populations in Gold and Blairmore Creek watersheds are predicted to be not significant. An analysis is provided in the document entitled Preliminary Habitat Offsetting Plan (Appendix A4). The DFO Population and Distribution Objectives contained in the WSCT Recovery Strategy are to Protect and maintain the existing 0.99 pure populations (currently believed to be approximately 51) at self-sustaining levels, and re-establish pure populations to self-sustaining levels, within the species original distribution in Alberta. The analysis provided does not include a discussion of how the above objectives will be met in light of the proposed measures to offset the predicted residual impacts to aquatic habitats over the lifespan of the project. The strategies proposed to address the identified threats, and to guide management activities to meet the recovery goal and objectives, include the following general categories: 1. Research; 2. Monitoring; 3. Management and regulation; and 4. Education and outreach. The strategies contained in the above categories is designed to assess, mitigate, or eliminate specific threats to the species; to address information deficiencies that might otherwise inhibit species recovery; or to contribute to the species recovery in general. The offsetting plan should include a detailed discussion regarding what specific strategies contained in the recovery plan will be employed to ensure the population and distribution objectives will be maintained in light of the projected impacts. Page 10 of 10