July 23, 2012

Draft documents for billion dollar mine missing key info

RICHARD GILBERT

staff writer

Taseko Mines' draft environmental document for the construction of a proposed billion dollar gold-copper mine in central B.C. is missing critical information and full of errors and inaccuracies, which is no surprise to Aboriginal groups.

“We have said all along that there was no way this plan could work,” said Tsilhqot’in Nation Tribal Chair Chief Joe Alphonse. “They should be embarrassed that they handed in a document like this – they are making a mockery out of the entire Environmental Assessment process as well as all other mining companies. They should be penalized for such flippant actions.”

The draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was submitted for the New Prosperity Copper-Gold project.

It was recently reviewed by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) in consultation with six federal departments.

The 40 page review said the draft EIS failed to provide adequate information relating to the project’s impact on the local environment and Aboriginal rights.

It also said the document contained numerous errors, inaccuracies and misleading statements.

“The reviewers identified sections in the draft EIS where information specified in the EIS Guidelines is missing, presented in insufficient detail to enable a determination of the potential environmental effects of the project and/or presented using methodologies that would also preclude such a determination,” said Lisa Walls, director with the CEAA Pacific and Yukon Region in a letter to Taseko Mines dated July 6.

For example, many sub-sections of the draft EIS, which are central to the environmental assessment, such as water quality and fish habitat were left blank.

“As a result, the reviewers were unable to provide any comments on the completeness or adequacy of information and analyses pertaining to those aspects,” said Walls.

In response to the CEAA’s harsh criticism of the draft EIS, a spokesperson for Taseko Mines said the omissions are part of the environmental assessment process.

“As you are aware, the draft we provided you was, by definition, not intended to be complete nor final but rather a preliminary version,” said Brian Battison, vice president of corporate affairs in a letter dated July 12.

“We appreciate having the benefit of your comments and analysis in this regard and as per the Panel Terms of Reference we will be submitting a fully complete and final EIS in due course.”

According to the review, there is substantial information missing from this draft EIS.

For example, the quality of all figures provided in the draft EIS is poor.

Key tables are referred to in the text, but are not included in the table of contents and were not located in the document.

One of the questionable statements made in the draft EIS was the Taskeo’s claim that the mine is in a “seismically stable region” of Canada.

“This is a misleading statement,” said the CEAA review.

The seismic hazard level at this location is moderate-high.

Earthquake hazards at this location are dominated by more distant, large events. Those events generate long-period ground motions that affect large structures.”

Other deficiencies include the failure to address critical First Nations’ concerns and failture to consider the impacts of the destruction of Little Fish Lake and the Nabas region on First Nations

In addition, it does not include information on impacts to potential and established Aboriginal rights.

“It is an insult to all involved that the company would present such a poorly developed and researched partial document,” said Xeni Gwet’in Chief Marilyn Baptiste.

The requirement to consider community and Aboriginal traditional knowledge in conducting the environmental assessment does not appear to have been considered.

Taseko is proposing the construction of a large open pit gold-copper mine 125-km south west of Williams Lake.

The project involves the construction of an onsite mill and support infrastructure, a tailings storage facility, a 125-km long electrical transmission line, explosives factory and magazine, and an access road.

The federal government rejected the original proposal for the construction of the mine in October 2010, because the project would have significant adverse environmental impacts. However, the CEAA took the unprecedented step in November 2011 of deciding the mine project will undergo a new environmental assessment.

Print | Comment