Vol. 151, No. 14 — July 12, 2017

Registration

SOR/2017-128 June 20, 2017

FISHERIES ACT

Regulations Amending the Metal Mining Effluent Regulations

P.C. 2017-780 June 20, 2017

His Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of the Environment, pursuant to subsection 36(5) of the Fisheries Act (see footnote a), makes the annexed Regulations Amending the Metal Mining Effluent Regulations.

Regulations Amending the Metal Mining Effluent Regulations

Amendment

1 Schedule 2 to the Metal Mining Effluent Regulations (see footnote 1) is amended by adding the following in numerical order:

Item	Column 1 Water or Place	Column 2 Description
28	A portion of South Teigen Creek, British Columbia	A portion of South Teigen Creek, located approximately 65 km northwest of Stewart, British Columbia. More precisely, an 8.1-km portion of the creek extending northwestwards and downstream from the point located at 56°37′53″ north latitude and 129°54′44″ west longitude to the centre of a dam located at 56°40′11.57″ north latitude and 129°58′20.92″ west longitude.
29	A portion of North Treaty Creek, British Columbia	A portion of North Treaty Creek, located approximately 65 km northwest of Stewart, British Columbia. More precisely, a 3.3-km portion of the creek extending southwards and downstream from the headwaters of the creek located at 56°37′34″ north latitude and 129°54′50″ west longitude to the centre of a dam located at 56°35′54.24″ north latitude and 129°51′25.31″ west longitude.

Coming into Force

2 These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Executive summary

Background

Metal Mining Effluent Regulations

The Metal Mining Effluent Regulations (MMER) came into force on December 6, 2002, under the Fisheries Act (the Act). The Act prohibits the deposit of deleterious substances in waters frequented by fish. The use of a water body frequented by fish for mine tailings disposal can only be authorized through an amendment to the MMER, which adds that water body to Schedule 2 of the Regulations.

When a fish-frequented water body is added to Schedule 2, section 27.1 of the MMER requires the development and implementation of a fish habitat compensation plan to offset the loss of fish habitat that occurs as a result of the use of fish-frequented water bodies for mine tailings disposal. Mine owners or operators are required to submit an irrevocable letter of credit ensuring that funds are in place should the owner or operator fail to address all elements of the fish habitat compensation plan.

The MMER also prescribe the maximum authorized limits for deleterious substances in mine effluent, listed in Schedule 4 (e.g. copper, cyanide, and total suspended solids), and require that mine effluent not be acutely lethal to fish. (see footnote 4) Furthermore, the MMER require that mine owners or operators sample and test effluent to ensure compliance with the authorized limits. The Department of the Environment publishes annual performance summaries of metal mines with respect to selected standards prescribed by the MMER.

The Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell Mine Project

Seabridge is proposing to construct and operate the Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell (KSM) Mine Project, a combined open pit and underground gold, copper, silver, and molybdenum mine in northwest British Columbia. The KSM Mine Project will be located in the coastal mountains of northwestern British Columbia, about 65 km northwest of Stewart and approximately 35 km east of the British Columbia border with Alaska.

The KSM Mine Project is designed to process approximately 130 000 tonnes of ore per day over an anticipated operational life of 52 years. Ore will be mined by a combination of open pits and underground mining methods from four mineral deposits: the Mitchell, Sulphurets, Kerr, and Iron Cap deposits. Crushed ore will be transported via an approximately 23-km tunnel and conveyor to the plant site. The concentrate will then be trucked to port facilities in Stewart for shipping to overseas markets. According to Seabridge, the construction of the mine is expected to begin in 2017.

The KSM Mine Project encompasses two main working areas, the mine site area and the processing and tailings management area, which are connected by two parallel tunnels (see Figure 1). The mine site area includes three separate open-pit mines, two underground block cave mines, rock storage facilities, an ore preparation complex, diversion structures, and water storage and treatment facilities. The processing and tailings management area includes a milling facility and a tailings impoundment area (TIA) into which tailings will be deposited during the operation of the mine.

The KSM Mine Project is expected to produce approximately 9.9 billion pounds of copper, 38.2 million ounces of gold, 191 million ounces of silver, and 213 million pounds of molybdenum. (see footnote 5) A financial analysis, as reported and estimated by Seabridge, forecasted a net present value of $4.5 billion for the KSM Mine Project. (see footnote 6)

In discussions with the federal government’s Major Projects Management Office in August 2016, Seabridge indicated that the mine will provide annual onsite employment for 1 800 people over the five-year construction period, with direct and indirect jobs across Canada for more than 7 200 people per year. During, the operation, Seabridge estimates that the mine will employ more than 1 000 people per year, with annual indirect jobs across Canada of more than 5 600 people.

Tailings management for the KSM Mine Project

The KSM Mine Project is expected to produce at least 2.3 billion tonnes of tailings over the project life. To manage these mine tailings on a long-term basis, Seabridge plans to construct and operate a TIA located east of, and almost 1 km downslope from the milling facility.

The TIA will be located within a U-shaped glacial valley containing the fish-frequented upper tributaries of Teigen and Treaty creeks in the Bell-Irving River watershed, which flows into the Nass River and eventually to the Pacific Ocean, southeast of the Canada–United States border.

All water from the mine will be managed within this facility, and most of the water will be recycled for use in the ore milling process. Excess water will be treated as necessary to meet the MMER and provincial permit requirements, and will be released into South Teigen Creek via a spillway.

Figure 1: The KSM Mine Project illustrating the location of the TIA

The TIA will be divided into three cells. The north cell of the TIA will be in operation from year 1 to year 25. The south cell of the TIA will be in operation from year 25 until year 52, while the centre cell (CIL) will be in operation throughout years 1 to 52. Tailings from ore processing are expected to contain elevated concentrations of cyanide and dissolved metals, notably copper. In order to mitigate contamination and seepage issues, Seabridge will separate these high-sulphide tailings and store them in the lined centre cell.

Environmental assessment and technical reviews

The KSM Mine Project was subject to environmental assessments (EAs) under both federal and provincial legislation. The provincial EA, completed on July 30, 2014, considered the full scope of the mine, as proposed by Seabridge. The provincial and federal EAs were coordinated through a single cooperative EA process. A Federal Transitional Comprehensive Study level EA (Federal EA) of the project was undertaken under the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA, 1992) by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency). The EA was conducted in a manner that also met the EA requirement of the Nisga’a Final Agreement. The Agency prepared the Comprehensive Study Report (see footnote 7) in consultation with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of the Environment, the Department of Transport, the Department of Health, the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, the Department of Canadian Heritage, and Statistics Canada. On December 19, 2014, the Federal EA concluded that “the KSM Project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects taking into account the implementation of the mitigation measures described in this report.”

Seabridge also voluntarily convened an independent Geotechnical Review Board to provide guidance and recommendations to help Seabridge enhance structural safety and integrity of the project’s TIA and water storage dam. The Review Board completed its first review on April 11, 2016, and concluded that the dams and structures of the TIA have been appropriately designed, and will be safe to operate. (see footnote 8) Seabridge indicates that it is committed to addressing the recommendations of the Review Board as the project advances, and is committed to transparency: the results of the Review Board’s first report have been shared with the federal government, the government of British Columbia, the State of Alaska, local Indigenous communities, and other stakeholders who participated in the EA phase of the project. The Review Board is expected to meet at least once per year during the entire project life to ensure ongoing dam safety.

In addition, on August 2, 2016, Seabridge released a Best Available Technology (BAT) study for the TIA (see footnote 9) by Klohn Crippen Berger, an engineering design firm. The BAT study confirmed that the KSM TIA is the best available technology for tailings deposition and the most environmentally responsible design to minimize long-term risks associated with the TIA. The study also concluded that the North Treaty-South Teigen site for the TIA is the preferred location. To further validate the conclusion of this study, Seabridge also commissioned an independent review of the study by Dr. Dirk van Zyl (see footnote 10), who was a member of the Review Panel investigating the tailings dam failure at the Mount Polley mine. Dr. van Zyl concluded that the North Treaty-South Teigen site for the TIA, as proposed by Seabridge, is the preferred option, and that he supports the overall conclusions of the KSM BAT study.

During the EA, concern was expressed that seepage from the TIA may escape beyond the footprint of the proposed seepage collection ponds and dams. To ensure that the anticipated seepage from the TIA would be collected, Seabridge proposed to move the dam infrastructure approximately 500 metres downstream, both on the North Treaty and South Teigen creeks. The shift of location resulted in an increase of the impacted stream length by 1.1 km. This design update has been reviewed and confirmed by the BAT study. Department of the Environment officials have confirmed that the fish habitat compensation plan submitted by Seabridge adequately compensates for the loss of fish habitat resulting from these changes.

Issues

Seabridge proposes to use fish-frequented portions of North Treaty and South Teigen creeks for the disposal of mine tailings from the KSM Mine Project. However, a fish-frequented water body can only be used for the disposal of mine tailings if the MMER are amended to add those water bodies to Schedule 2 of the Regulations, as tailings impoundment areas.

Objectives

The objective of the Amendments is to allow Seabridge to use two fish-frequented water bodies (portions of North Treaty Creek and South Teigen Creek) for the disposal of tailings from the KSM Mine Project.

Description

The Amendments

The Amendments add two water bodies, portions of North Treaty Creek and South Teigen Creek, to Schedule 2 of the MMER. (see footnote 11) As required under section 27.1 of the MMER, Seabridge has developed and will implement a fish habitat compensation plan to offset the resultant loss of fish habitat. Seabridge (and any future owner or operator) is also required to submit an irrevocable letter of credit to ensure that funds are in place to cover all costs associated with the implementation of all elements of the fish habitat compensation plan.

Fish habitat compensation plan

Seabridge prepared a fish habitat compensation plan that proposes to create two compensation sites within the Treaty Creek and Bell-Irving River watersheds: the Treaty Creek and the Taft Creek sites. These projects will target both Dolly Varden and Coho Salmon habitats, which represent valuable commercial, recreational, and Indigenous fisheries.

The Treaty Creek site will be located at the junction of North Treaty Creek and Treaty Creek, approximately 8 km southeast of the TIA and approximately 20 km upstream of the confluence of Treaty Creek and the Bell-Irving River. The site is 2 km long and approximately 500 m wide, and includes a large alluvial fan at the mouth of North Treaty Creek and a flat floodplain of Treaty Creek east of the fan. The existing fish habitat at this site is of poor quality with obstructed fish access and low overall fish productivity.

The Treaty Creek site will provide a large amount of permanent, good quality habitat for rearing, overwintering and spawning. It will also support all life stages of the two target species, Dolly Varden and Coho Salmon. The plan entails the construction of a surface water intake from North Treaty Creek to supply reliable flow into a protected side channel and through a series of ponds, the construction of an area of 15 ha of good quality overwintering and rearing habitat in ponds, and the construction of 2 118 m of channels to create an area of 0.4 ha of habitat with complex features. The plan will also enhance functional aspects of wetland ecosystems, provide spawning habitat for Coho Salmon and Dolly Varden and maintain fish access to the site. The fish habitat gains for this compensation site are estimated to be 15.4 ha.

The Taft Creek site is a large, fourth-order tributary to the Bell-Irving River, comparable in size to Teigen Creek and Treaty Creek, located approximately 25 km southeast of the TIA and 40 km southeast of Bell II Lodge, on Highway 37. This site is 1 km long and approximately 300 m wide including low and high bench floodplain terraces on the southeast bank of Taft Creek. At this site, Seabridge proposes to construct 2.6 ha of good quality, off-channel overwintering and rearing habitat in ponds. Seabridge also proposes to construct 968 m of stream channels to create 0.2 ha of rearing habitat with complex habitat features and to maintain fish access. The fish habitat that will be created will include components that enhance habitat value for fish, stabilize slopes and shoreline areas, and create ancillary habitat for wildlife. The plan will consist of re-vegetating riparian areas, planting aquatic vegetation, adding large woody debris and other cover features, and adding spawning substrates. It will support the two target species, Dolly Varden and Coho Salmon. The fish habitat gains for the Taft Creek site are approximately 2.8 ha.

The area of fish habitat gain resulting from both Taft Creek and Treaty Creek sites is approximately 18.2 ha. Given that a total area of 10.6 ha of fish habitat will be lost due to the Amendments, the fish habitat compensation plan will yield a net gain of 7.6 ha of fish habitat.

Regulatory and non-regulatory options considered

Seabridge prepared an assessment of alternatives for the disposal of tailings for the KSM Mine Project. (see footnote 12) This assessment was considered during the federal EA of the KSM Mine Project to mitigate potential impacts on fish habitat.

Seabridge evaluated 14 regulatory and non-regulatory alternatives for managing tailings, of which four were selected as potentially feasible alternatives to be assessed in detail from environmental, technical and socio-economic perspectives.

Alternative technologies for tailings management and disposal

In addition to distinct locations for the establishment of a TIA, Seabridge also considered a number of alternative technologies for tailings management and disposal that would not result in a loss of fish habitat, and would therefore not require amendments to the MMER (i.e. non-regulatory options). These include three main alternatives to tailings slurry including thickened tailings, paste tailings and dry stack tailings as well as other tailings disposal technologies, including conventional impoundment, subaqueous or saturated storage, submarine storage, in-pit tailings storage, and co-disposal. Given the large quantity of tailings to be produced, the topography of the KSM Mine Project site, the accessibility associated with the mountainous topography, and the presence of numerous fish-frequented water bodies, Seabridge determined it is unlikely that a feasible and viable TIA could be developed as a non-regulatory option, regardless of the technology used for tailings management and disposal.

Regulatory options for tailings disposal

Regulatory options involve the disposal of tailings in a manner that would result in direct impacts (see footnote 13) on one or more fish-frequented water bodies, and would therefore require that the water bodies be added to Schedule 2 of the MMER for the option to be implemented.

As stated above, Seabridge identified 14 potential tailings storage sites for a detailed assessment, of which four met the pre-screening criteria. All four alternative sites identified for further consideration are considered regulatory options, given that they would directly impact fishfrequented water bodies. The four regulatory options and their characteristics are listed below, in Table 1. The remainder of the alternatives were not further considered due to limitations such as large dam requirements, poor dam foundations, water management issues, insufficient tailings capacity, and distance from the mine site.

The preferred single-site alternative (Option 1) will be located in a U-shaped valley between North Treaty Creek and South Teigen Creek, approximately 24 km east of the mine site. The elevation of the valley base ranges from 840 m to 900 m, and valley slopes rise up to a maximum of 1 900 m. The site configuration is favurrable for tailings storage due to gentle slopes and greater tailings storage capacity. The preferred TIA will require the construction of four containment dams: a north dam, a southeast dam, a saddle dam, and a splitter dam. The north, saddle and splitter dams will allow staging the TIA into the north and centre cells in the first 25 years of the project. The south cell will be in operation from year 25 to year 52. The total dam volume of 190 million cubic merers will allow storage of 2.67 billion tonnes of tailings, which are expected to provide 100% of the required tailings storage for the life of the KSM Mine Project. Two seepage collection dams will be constructed downstream of the TIA.

Option 1 has been identified as the preferred option as it will provide more than sufficient storage capacity at one site, favurrable conditions for dam construction, optimal water management and good natural groundwater containment from ridges on each side of the TIA. This option will be the only site capable of storing the total anticipated mine tailings tonnage, with 240 m high dams, and will also have the lowest risks associated with water management. The topography and low geohazards at the site present favourable conditions for construction and operation of perimeter diversions. Some disadvantages of this option will consist of the need to discharge, and therefore treat effluent to the South Teigen Tributary, and the need for construction of a 23-km long tunnel to link the mine site to the TIA. Seabridge estimates the cost for this option will be $2.20 billion, including construction, operation, and closure of the TIA.

The three other regulatory options assessed in-depth by Seabridge consisted of the combined sites West Teigen Lake and Unuk Valley (Option 2), West Teigen Lake and Upper Treaty Creek (Option 3), and West Teigen Lake and Scott Creek Valley (Option 4). As part of these three options, the West Teigen Lake site would provide solid foundations, low pond areas and optimal water management, but it would not possess adequate storage capacity (only 64% of capacity), would result in direct impacts on a lake, and would require a 16-km tunnel from the mine site. The second site of Option 2, the Unuk Valley site, would store over half of the mine tailings (61%), but water control issues and poor geological conditions would introduce very significant water management risks during operations and upon closure.

Option 3 consisted of a combination of the above described West Teigen Lake site and the Upper Treaty Creek. The Upper Treaty site would store approximately 70% of tailings, but it also has significant water management issues as a result of deficient geological conditions, complex water controls, and high water treatment requirements.

As part of the combined Option 4, the Scott Creek Valley site would require three tailing dams. The main dam would be up to 253 m high, with the remaining two dams being much smaller (27 m and 8 m above centerline). The estimated total capacity of the Scott Creek Valley site for a 253 m high main dam is 0.89 billion tonnes of tailings, which would be only 36% of the tailings capacity.

On the basis of the information provided as part of the federal EA process, the Department of the Environment concluded that the establishment of a TIA in portions of North Treaty and South Teigen creeks (Option 1) is the preferred option.

Table 1: Summary of regulatory options considered for tailings disposal (see footnote 14)

Regulatory Options
Characterization Criteria	Option 1 (preferred)	Option 2	Option 3	Option 4
	North Treaty and South Teigen Creeks	Unuk Valley and West Teigen Lake Combined	Upper Treaty Creek and West Teigen Lake Combined	Scott Creek Valley and West Teigen Lake Combined
Number of fish species impacted	1 fish species (Dolly Varden)	1 fish species (Dolly Varden)	1 fish species (Dolly Varden)	3 fish species (Dolly Varden, bull trout, and mountain whitefish)
Fish habitat losses	Dolly Varden spawning and migration	Riverine and littoral zone habitat for Dolly Varden and access to upstream habitat for Dolly Varden	Littoral zone habitat and rearing habitat for Dolly Varden	Access to sockeye salmon spawning grounds and littoral zone habitat for Dolly Varden
Lake area directly affected (ha)	0.7	36.3	42.8	37.5
TIA capacity (billion tonnes)	2.67	Combined, 3.12 (Unuk 1.52) and West Teigen (1.6)	Combined, 3.33 (Upper Treaty 1.73) and West Teigen (1.6)	Combined, 2.49 (Scott 0.89) and West Teigen (1.6)
TIA footprint (km2)	13.9	20.3	78.0	22.1
Stream length affected (km)	42.7 (see footnote 15)	84.3	84.3	92.7
Number of dams required	3 dams	3 dams	3 dams	5 dams
Maximum dam height (m)	240	215	250	253
Total dam volume (Mm3)	190	105.9	106.8	74.1
Number of seepage dams required	2 seepage dams	3 seepage dams	3 seepage dams	3 seepage dams
Number of diversion dams required	1 diversion dam	8 lateral diversion dams	1 significant lateral channel diversion dam	2 lateral diversion dams
Ease of construction	Good constructability	Fair constructability (West Teigen) and poor constructability (Unuk)	Fair constructability (West Teigen) and poor constructability (Upper Treaty)	Fair constructability at both sides
Ease of operations	Good operational characteristics	Fair to poor operational characteristics	Poor operational characteristics	Fair operational characteristics
Total TIA costs	$2.20 billion for the construction/operation and closure of the TIA	$2.42 billion for the construction/operation and closure of the TIA	$2.57 billion for the construction/operation and closure of the TIA	$2.77 billion for the construction/operation and closure of the TIA

Benefits and costs

Analytical framework

The proposed KSM Mine Project, including the proposed TIA, was evaluated via federal and provincial EA processes. The federal EA for the KSM Mine Project was completed on December 19, 2014, following which Seabridge advanced the project to the regulatory and permitting phase.

The Amendments will add two fish-frequented water bodies, portions of North Treaty Creek and South Teigen Creek, to Schedule 2 of the MMER, to allow these water bodies to be used for the disposal of tailings from the KSM Mine Project.

Given the absence of a non-regulatory option for tailings disposal that is technically feasible, a meaningful baseline scenario could not be constructed, and in turn no cost-benefit analysis could be performed. Instead, the analysis below examines the impacts of the Amendments on the environment, government, business, health, society and culture.

Environmental impacts

The environmental impacts associated with the proposed Amendments will be limited to the loss of fish and fish habitat, and the offsetting gains associated with the implementation of the fish habitat compensation plan.

The loss of 10.6 ha of fish habitat associated with the use of portions of North Treaty and South Teigen creeks for tailings disposal will be compensated through the development and implementation of a fish habitat compensation plan. The Treaty Creek and Taft Creek sites will result in the creation of 15.4 ha and 2.8 ha, respectively, of fish habitat.

As part of the construction of the TIA, Seabridge will facilitate the removal and relocation of an estimated 30 000 Dolly Varden from South Teigen and North Treaty creeks. As a result, Seabridge has developed a fish salvage strategy to ensure that the fish are relocated to suitable water bodies within the Teigen and Treaty creeks watersheds as well as other mitigation measures to monitor the plan. The relocation plan will salvage and relocate the fish in two phases under the supervision of a professional biologist. The first phase will relocate 5 000 fish from South Teigen Creek into the Teigen Creek watershed and the second phase (20 years later) will relocate 25 000 fish from the North Treaty Creek into the Treaty Creek watershed. Fish will be captured and handled following established protocols designed to minimize injury and stress to captured fish. The Department of the Environment, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the British Columbia Ministry of Environment, and local communities will remain engaged on the relocation plan and the fish habitat compensation plan as a whole.

The federal EA for the KSM Mine Project, completed on December 19, 2014, concluded that “the KSM Project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects taking into account the implementation of the mitigation measures described in this report.”

Costs to Government

Government of Canada enforcement activities include inspections to monitor the implementation of the fish habitat compensation plan, which may incur incremental costs. Specifically, there may be incremental site visits, monitoring and review costs incurred by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, including monitoring of habitat quality, overwintering, and spawning for Dolly Varden and Coho Salmon. These incremental costs will be low given that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans is planning to conduct site visits and monitoring in the context of other authorizations under the Fisheries Act. (see footnote 16) Furthermore, these incremental monitoring activities, and associated costs, will only occur during fish habitat compensation plan implementation, and will not continue throughout the life of the TIA.

Incremental compliance promotion costs may also be incurred, but are expected to be low, given that compliance promotion activities occurred throughout the federal EA process.

Therefore, the total incremental costs to the Government, associated with the fish habitat compensation plan, will be low.

Costs to business

The Amendments will result in Seabridge incurring costs associated with the implementation of the fish habitat compensation plan. The construction and monitoring costs that are required in the plan are $4.7 million for the Treaty Creek site and $2.2 million for the Taft Creek site, for a total cost of $6.9 million. (see footnote 17)

Health impacts

The addition of fish-frequented water bodies to Schedule 2 of the MMER are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts on human health, given that the KSM Mine Project is located in an isolated area with no road access, resulting in limited hunting, fishing, trapping and recreational activities, including by Indigenous peoples. Furthermore, there are no permanent residents in the vicinity of the KSM Mine Project and no known drinking water sources will be affected by the KSM Mine Project.

The Department of Health, as the expert federal health authority for the federal EA of the KSM Mine Project, examined the potential health impacts of the mine project as a whole. These potential health impacts included potential effects on human health from the consumption of fish, wildlife, birds, plants and berries (including medicinal plants), and water containing potentially elevated concentrations of contaminants from the mine. The Federal EA Comprehensive Study Report concluded that “the Project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects on human health when the implementation of mitigation measures is taken into account.” Seabridge has also committed to a human health monitoring plan and Health Canada has provided details on country foods considerations for this plan.

Society and culture impacts of the mine project

The addition of fish-frequented water bodies to Schedule 2 of the MMER will not result in significant social or cultural impacts. Design changes were undertaken for the KSM Mine Project at the request of Indigenous communities to minimize sensory disturbances in wildlife and wildlife corridors, including moving the processing plant to a remote area and building sections of the conveyor system underground. Additional design changes included the installation of gates to restrict public (e.g. hunters, trappers, and fishers) access along newly constructed access roads.

The federal EA considered relevant analysis within the provincial EA undertaken by the Government of British Columbia and concluded that “the Project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects on physical and cultural heritage.” The federal EA also concluded that “based on the available information, the Project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects on current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by Indigenous peoples when implementation of the mitigation measures is taken into account.”

Table 2: Impacts statement (qualitative)

Qualitative and non-monetized impacts
A. Industry	The Amendments will allow the destruction of fish and fish habitat in portions of North Treaty Creek and South Teigen Creek to allow the construction and operation of the TIA as proposed by Seabridge. The KSM Mine Project will generate economic opportunities in the region.
	Incremental costs attributable to the development and implementation of the fish habitat compensation plan will be $6.9 million in construction and monitoring costs.
B. Government	Incremental costs to the Government of Canada, associated with the fish habitat compensation plan, will be low.
C. Environment	Net gains in fish habitat are anticipated due to the development and implementation of the fish habitat compensation plan.
D. Society and culture	The Amendments will not likely cause significant adverse environmental effects on current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by Indigenous peoples.

“One-for-One” Rule

The “One-for-One” Rule does not apply to the Amendments, as they will not impose new administrative requirements on business.

Small business lens

The Amendments will not trigger the small business lens as Seabridge, the owner and operator of the KSM Mine Project, is not considered a small business. (see footnote 18)

Consultation

The TIA for the KSM Mine Project will be located within the Nass Area, as defined in the Nisga’a Final Agreement (see footnote 19) and the Project is therefore subject to the Nisga’a Treaty. The process and tailings management area will also be situated within the southern boundary of the Tahltan Nation’s asserted traditional territory, and components of the project will be located in the vicinity of the asserted traditional territories of the Gitanyow, Gitxsan, and Skii km Lax Ha First Nations.

All of these First Nations have been engaged in consultations on the federal EA and in subsequent regulatory consultations. On September 4, 2013, representatives of the Gitxsan First Nation wrote a letter to the Agency expressing support for the KSM project. In a letter addressed to the former Minister of the Environment, dated September 26, 2014, the Nisga’a Nation, confirmed that it had no objection to the KSM Mine Project and agreed with the positive recommendation that the KSM Mine Project should proceed as contemplated in the Agency’s Comprehensive Study Report. The Nisga’a Nation reaffirmed its position in a letter to the Department of the Environment, dated July 28, 2016. In both letters, the Nisga’a Nation confirmed that the Nisga’a Nation and Seabridge have entered into a benefits agreement in respect of the KSM Project and that the benefits agreement, together with the mitigation measures recommended in the Agency’s Comprehensive Study Report, sufficiently and appropriately prevent or mitigate effects of the KSM Project on Nisga’a Treaty Rights, including for greater certainty the Nisga’a Treaty Rights referred to in Chapter 10 Environmental Assessment and Protection of the Nisga’a Final Agreement.

Seabridge continues the negotiation of an Impact Benefit Agreement with the Tahltan and the agreement is anticipated to be completed in 2017. Seabridge has also entered into a Sustainability Agreement with the Gitanyow Hereditary Chief Office, in which Seabridge agrees to provide funding for certain programs relating to wildlife, fish and water quality monitoring. (see footnote 20)

Consultation prior to publication of the proposed amendments in the Canada Gazette, Part I

In mid-2014, the Department of the Environment initiated planning for consultations on the proposed Amendments. On the basis of discussions with First Nations, the Department of the Environment undertook 10 local consultation sessions on the proposed Amendments with the Nisga’a Nation, Tahltan, Gitanyow, Gitxsan, Skii km Lax Ha and the public. Representatives of the Department of the Environment, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the Agency, and Seabridge participated in these sessions to address comments and concerns. A national consultation session was also held in Gatineau, Quebec, on September 17, 2014.

The consultation sessions provided participants with an opportunity to provide comments on the proposed Amendments and the associated fish habitat compensation plan. Participants were also invited to submit comments in writing following the consultation sessions.

A wide range of opinions and concerns were expressed during the consultation sessions. Since the TIA was considered and consulted during the EA, the vast majority of the comments received during the consultations sessions and in writing were similar to those raised during the EA. A total of three written submissions were received: one from the Tahltan Central Council, one from a member of a First Nation and one joint submission from two environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs).

In a letter dated September 26, 2014, the Tahltan reiterated the comments provided during the EA on the proposed processing facility and tailings management area. The Tahltan also acknowledged the commitments made by Seabridge to address a number of concerns that have been raised and expressed that they would like to be engaged in the ongoing environmental management practice for the KSM project.

The proposed Amendments are generally supported by most members of local First Nations. However, some First Nations and environmental organizations raised concerns about the Amendments. A summary of comments received during the consultations regarding the proposed amendments is provided below.

Comments on the KSM Mine Project

• • Comment: In addition to comments specific to the proposed Amendments and the fish habitat compensation plan, local Indigenous groups also asked questions and raised concerns regarding aspects of the KSM Mine Project as a whole, which had been considered during the EA. In particular potential impacts on water quality, the size of the mine and production rate, the design of the TIA, contamination from historical mines in the area, impacts on wildlife and country food, and the risk of tailings dam failure and impacts on the Nass River system.
• The United States (U.S.) and Alaska governments also raised concerns during the EA about potential transboundary impacts of the mine on Alaskan fisheries, as well as the potential impacts that may arise in the event of a tailings dam breach similar to that which occurred at the Mount Polley Mine in August 2014. Representatives of the U.S. federal and Alaska state agencies participated in the working groups established as part of the provincial and federal cooperative EA process.
• Response: The Department of the Environment recognizes the range of stakeholder comments, including concerns regarding the KSM Mine Project as a whole. The proposed Amendments, however, relate only to the destruction of fish habitat in the two water bodies to enable their use as a TIA. Matters dealing with the KSM Mine Project as a whole, including the risk of tailings dam failure, are beyond the scope of the proposed Amendments and fall broadly under provincial jurisdiction. These matters were considered as part of provincial and federal EAs, which concluded that the KSM Mine Project as a whole, including the proposed TIA, is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects, taking into account the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures. Impacts of the mine on the Nass River system, downstream of the mine, would be mitigated by the MMER, which set strict release standards, and monitoring and reporting requirements for substances of concern.

Comments on the proposed Amendments and the assessment of alternatives for tailings disposal

• • Comment: One First Nation member and two ENGOs are opposed to the proposed Amendments and are of the view that fish-frequented water bodies should not be destroyed for the disposal of mine tailings.
• Response: The Department of the Environment recognizes these concerns. Nonetheless, the proposed Amendments proceeded in the context of an existing legislative framework under the Act and the MMER, given the key results of the EA, the economic benefits of the project, and the anticipated net increase in fish habitat due to the fish habitat compensation plan.
  
• • Comment: Members of some First Nations and one ENGO questioned the location and design of the TIA, the TIA dam safety and what contingency plans there were in case of dam failure.
• Response: The Department of the Environment responded that Seabridge considered alternative locations for tailings disposal including locations that would not impact any fish-frequented water bodies. However, due to the large volume of tailings expected to be produced, local topography, and drainage patterns, no suitable location could be identified with sufficient capacity to contain all of the tailings that would not impact a fish-frequented water body.
• The Province of British Columbia is responsible for permitting and regulating the proposed dams, including contingency plans in the event of dam failure. The Amendments pertain only to the proposed destruction of fish habitat, given the location of the preferred and proposed TIA. Seabridge did, however, note that it was convening a fully independent, experienced and technically qualified Third-Party Review Board to ensure that the dams proposed for this project have been designed, and will be constructed and operated, within the standards of the Canadian Dam Association. It was noted that the Review Board’s findings will be shared with the British Columbia Ministry of Energy and Mines and local Indigenous groups for information purposes. More information about the review board and associated technical reports can be found in the Environmental Assessment and Technical Reviews section of this Regulatory Impact Assessment Statement (RIAS).
• Seabridge also indicated that they would design key project components to meet the highest Canadian Dam Safety Guidelines, to mitigate risks associated with earth tremors from seismic activity, and to minimize the chances of a catastrophic failure of the dams at the TIA.
• With respect to contingency plans, the Department of the Environment responded that, as an outcome of the provincial EA, Seabridge is committed to developing and maintaining a spill prevention and emergency response plan, and to implementing that plan as necessary. In addition, it was noted that all mines subject to the MMER are required to prepare, update, and test an emergency response plan related to a deposit of mine tailings outside the normal course of events.
• • Comment: An ENGO representative questioned the selection of the preferred TIA site and commented that his organization did not believe that dry stacking, paste and in-pit tailings storage options were adequately considered.
• Response: As shown in the assessment of alternatives for the disposal of tailings for the KSM Mine Project, the preferred site was selected based on the overall performance from the environmental, technical and socio-economic perspectives.
• The Department of the Environment acknowledged that tailings management and disposal using either thickened, paste or dry stack tailings offer advantages and disadvantages. However, regardless of the tailings management and disposal technology used, Seabridge will still need to find an appropriate location for the disposal of at least 2.3 billion tonnes of tailings.
• Given this volume of tailings, the topography of the KSM Mine site and the presence of fish-frequented water bodies, the Department of the Environment is of the view that it is unlikely a viable TIA could be developed in a location that would not directly impact any fish-frequented water bodies, regardless of the technology used for tailings management and disposal.
  

Comments on the proposed fish habitat compensation plan

• • Comment: Some First Nations members expressed specific concerns about some components of the proposed fish habitat compensation plan such as the development of detailed monitoring plan on groundwater dissolved oxygen level, beaver activity, quantitative assessment of limiting habitat, and post monitoring plans to quantitatively track stock productivity over time to ensure the success of the compensation.
• Response: The Department of Fisheries and Oceans noted that they will continue to engage with First Nations, as the fish habitat compensation plan is finalized, particularly with respect to the need for monitoring the implementation of the plan to ensure that the objectives of the plan are being met.
• • Comment: Some ENGOs raised concerns about the viability and effectiveness of Seabridge’s plan to remove and relocate an estimated 30 000 Dolly Varden from the North Treaty and South Teigen creeks.
• Response: The Department of Fisheries and Oceans responded that the relocation would be done in stages, and the intention is to protect and save the fish. Prior to starting construction of the north and centre cells of the TIA, Seabridge plans to capture and relocate 5 000 Dolly Varden from South Teigen Creek into the Teigen Creek watershed. The additional 25 000 Dolly Varden will be captured and relocated prior to construction of the south cell in year 25. Seabridge has developed a fish salvage program to ensure that the fish are relocated to suitable water bodies within the Teigen and Treaty creeks watersheds. Monitoring measures will be in place to assess the plan. The Department of the Environment, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the British Columbia Ministry of Environment and local communities will remain engaged on the relocation plan and the fish habitat compensation plan as a whole.
• • Comment: Some First Nations and ENGOs questioned how the beaver activity will be managed related to the fish habitat compensation plan, as there are several beaver dams in the compensation site.
• Response: The Department of Fisheries and Oceans responded that the performance of the fish habitat compensation plan will be monitored and that if there are issues related to beaver activity, Seabridge will factor it into the plan. Seabridge added that large debris will be used to deter beavers accessing the site and that monitoring and maintenance measures will be implemented to prevent the construction of beaver dams. In addition, Seabridge is proposing several techniques to prevent beavers from damaging, blocking, or altering the proposed sites, including beaver fencing, beaver baffles, large wood debris structures and wire screens.

Consultations on the proposed Amendments following publication in the Canada Gazette, Part I

The proposed Amendments were published in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on July 2, 2016, for a 30-day public consultation period, during which two written submissions were received. In the first submission, the Nisga’a Nation reiterated that they have no opposition to this project, but commented on the depiction of the Nisga’a treaty in the text of the RIAS. This submission highlighted text in the RIAS which required amendment. These revisions have been considered and incorporated into this RIAS.

In the second written submission, an ENGO indicated that it does not support the proposed Amendments due to concerns regarding the loss of fish habitat and that the KSM Mine Project is not in line with recent recommendations by the Government of British Columbia associated with the Mount Polley investigation. The ENGO further raised concerns regarding potential effects of mine effluent on the aquatic environment, and recommended that a decision on the regulatory amendment be delayed until Government of Canada completes its review of the Fisheries Act.

An overview of the comments in these submissions, with the Department of the Environment responses, is presented below.

Fish habitat compensation plan

• • Comment: An ENGO expressed concern that the KSM Mine Project will destroy important fish habitat, and that restoration goals may not be met.
• Response: As required by section 27.1 of the MMER, Seabridge has developed and will implement a fish habitat compensation plan to offset the loss of fish habitat caused by the use of fish-frequented water bodies for mine waste disposal. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans provided advice to the Department of the Environment and considers that the proposed fish habitat compensation offers adequate compensation for the lost fish habitat. The plan will create a total of 18.2 ha, yielding a gain of 7.6 ha of fish habitat. The incremental gain in hectares of fish habitat is, in part, a safety factor to ensure that the fish habitat compensation plan will still achieve its objective in the case that the compensation does not function as well as anticipated. Seabridge will also submit an irrevocable letter of credit to cover the cost of the plan’s implementation. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans will administer a monitoring program to evaluate the effectiveness of the compensation plan and ensure the performance of the compensation.

Tailings disposal alternatives

• • Comment: An ENGO indicated that the KSM Mine Project is not in line with recent expert recommendations to the Government of British Columbia regarding appropriate means to address the problems identified following the Mount Polley dam breach. It states that the KSM Mine Project will result in the construction of one of the largest dams ever built, using similar earthen construction as that in place at Mount Polley. The ENGO further notes that such a design has been flagged by the aforementioned expert review panel as likely to fail.
• Response: As indicated in the Background section of this RIAS, Seabridge appointed an Independent Geotechnical Review Board to assess the design of the proposed tailings management facility. In April 2016, the Review Board concluded that the dams and structure of the TIA have been appropriately designed. Furthermore, Seabridge convened a Best Available Technology (BAT) review for the tailings facility, which confirmed that the proposed KSM tailings facility is the best available technology for tailings deposition and the most environmentally responsible design to minimize long-term risks associated with the tailings facility. A subsequent independent review of the report concluded that using dry tailings, a recommendation made by the Mount Polley Review Board, is not a feasible option for this project.

Impact on aquatic environments

• • Comment: An ENGO commented that in many cases, the effects of mine effluent on aquatic environments are greater than originally predicted, and that the assessment did not take into consideration sub-lethal (behavioural) effects on fish from mine effluent.
• Response: Effluent discharges to South Teigen and Treaty creeks must comply with the MMER limits and the British Columbia Water Quality Guidelines. Moreover, the Agency’s Comprehensive Study Report for the KSM Project concluded that Seabridge must meet water quality guidelines for the TIA 100 merers downstream of the operational discharge, and the likelihood of the water quality being degraded in Teigen, Treaty and Bell-Irving River is low. To further mitigate the potential impacts, Seabridge also proposed to time the discharge coinciding with high water flows in Treaty Creek to minimize the impacts of effluent on the receiving environment. The federal EA, completed on December 19, 2014, concluded that “the KSM Project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects taking into account the implementation of the mitigation measures described in this report.”
• Seabridge also committed to undertaking a human health monitoring program and aquatic effects monitoring program which include fish tissue sampling and effects monitoring on aquatic life to ensure the performance of the mitigation measures.

The MMER amendment process

• • Comment: An ENGO noted that a review of the Fisheries Act is currently underway, and, therefore, a decision on the amendments of Schedule 2 of the MMER, regulations under the Fisheries Act, should be delayed until the review process is complete.
• Response: The Department recognizes that the announced review of the Fisheries Act may, in the future, result in changes to that Act and consequential amendments to the MMER. However, the current Fisheries Act still applies, as do the MMER. The Fisheries Act prohibits the deposit of deleterious substances in water frequented by fish, unless authorized by regulations, and the use of water bodies frequented by fish, at the KSM Mine, can only be authorized through an amendment to Schedule 2 of the MMER.

Regulatory cooperation

The federal Department of the Environment and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans cooperated and collaborated in the preparation of the Amendments. The Government of British Columbia supports the Amendments, which are consistent with its policies and programs. The provincial EA was completed on July 30, 2014, including the approval of the TIA.

Rationale

Seabridge has identified fish-frequented portions of North Treaty Creek and South Teigen Creek in the area for disposal of mine tailings from the KSM Mine Project. However, the use of these water bodies for tailings disposal is only possible with their addition to Schedule 2 of the MMER.

The Amendments allow the destruction of fish-frequented portions of North Treaty Creek and South Teigen Creek, with an estimated loss of 10.6 ha of Dolly Varden habitat. Seabridge intends to implement a fish habitat compensation plan to create an estimated 18.2 ha of fish habitat for Dolly Varden and Coho Salmon in nearby Taft Creek and Treaty Creek, within the Bell-Irving watershed. A net increase of 7.6 ha in fish habitat will therefore be attributable to the Amendments. The total cost of the fish habitat compensation plan, carried by the mine operator, is estimated to be $6.9 million. (see footnote 21)

The Amendments enable Seabridge to proceed with the development of its preferred TIA (Option 1), following approval of the fish habitat compensation plan by the Minister of the Environment. The federal EA for the KSM Mine Project, including this preferred TIA and the fish habitat compensation plan, concluded that “the KSM Project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects taking into account the implementation of the mitigation measures described in this report.” The KSM Mine Project is estimated to have a positive net present value of $4.5 billion (see footnote 22) and to positively contribute employment and training opportunities to local and regional communities surrounding the KSM Mine Project.

Seabridge, local Indigenous communities, local residents, environmental non-governmental organizations, the Province of British Columbia, U.S. federal and State representatives, as well as implicated federal departments and agencies, have been actively engaged on the project over many years, with targeted consultations on the Amendments held in 2014 and prepublication of the Amendments in 2016. Several comments were received, including those relating to the KSM Mine Project as a whole, the destruction of fish habitat, and the fish habitat compensation plan. Although a number of stakeholders have expressed opposition to the KSM Mine Project and to the Amendments, there is general support from local communities, the Nisga’a Lisims Government and the Province of British Columbia.

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals, a strategic environmental assessment was not undertaken for the proposal, as it was previously assessed in relation to a project assessed under the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. (see footnote 23)

Implementation, enforcement and service standards

The Amendments enable Seabridge to utilize fish-frequented water bodies for construction of the TIA and disposal of tailings from the KSM Mine Project upon their listing in Schedule 2 of the MMER.

As the MMER are made pursuant to the Fisheries Act, enforcement personnel would, when verifying compliance, act in accordance with the Compliance and Enforcement Policy for the Habitat Protection and Pollution Prevention Provisions of the Fisheries Act (the Policy). Verification of compliance with the Regulations and the Fisheries Act will include, among other inspection activities, site visits, sample analysis, and review of fish habitat compensation plans and related reports associated with the Amendments.

If there is evidence of an alleged offence to the fisheries protection and pollution prevention provisions of the Fisheries Act and/or related regulations, enforcement personnel will decide on an appropriate enforcement action, in accordance with the following criteria, as set out in the Policy:

• Nature of the alleged violation;
• Effectiveness in achieving the desired result with the alleged violator; and
• Consistency in enforcement.
  

Given the circumstances and subject to the enforcement officer’s discretion, the following instruments are available to respond to alleged violations:

• warnings;
• directions;
• orders by the minister;
• injunctions; and
• prosecutions.

For more information on the Policy, please consult the Compliance and Enforcement Policy for the Habitat Protection and Pollution Prevention Provisions of the Fisheries Act. (see footnote 24)

Contact

Chris Doiron
Manager
Mining Section
Mining and Processing Division
Industrial Sectors, Chemicals and Waste Directorate
Department of the Environment
351 Saint-Joseph Boulevard
Gatineau, Quebec
K1A 0H3
Fax: 819-420-7381
Email: ec.mmer-remm.ec@canada.ca

• Footnote a
  R.S., c. F-14
• Footnote 1
  SOR/2002-222
• Footnote 2
  Construction and monitoring costs for the fish habitat compensation plan were estimated by Seabridge in 2014 Canadian dollars, then discounted at 3% over 12 years.
• Footnote 3
  Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat guidance for the small business lens defines a small business as “any business with fewer than 100 employees or between $30,000 and $5 million in annual gross revenues.” http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/hgw-cgf/priorities-priorites/rtrap-parfa/guides/faq-eng.asp (accessed February 19, 2017).
• Footnote 4
  “Acutely lethal effluent” is defined as an effluent at 100% concentration that kills more than 50% of the rainbow trout subjected to it over a 96-hour period when tested in accordance with the acute lethality test (Fisheries Act [1985]: Metal Mining Effluent Regulations, SOR/2002-222, section 1).
• Footnote 5
  Tetra Tech Wardrop. 2012. 2012 KSM (Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell) Prefeasibility Study (Executive Summary). Seabridge Gold Inc.
• Footnote 6
  In 2012 U.S. dollars, discounted at 5% over the estimated 55-year total mine life, and subject to the metal prices for copper, gold and silver as well as the exchange rate on the Canadian dollar.
• Footnote 7
  Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, July 2014, KSM (Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell) Project Comprehensive Study Report, https://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents/p49262/99565E.pdf (accessed February 19, 2017).
• Footnote 8
  Seabridge Gold Inc., April 2016. Review of Water Dam, Water Management and Tailings Storage Systems, KSM Project, Report-Meeting No. 1 Independent Geotechnical Review Board. http://ksmproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/KSM%20IGRB%20Report%202016.pdf (Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, July 2014, KSM [Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell] Project Comprehensive Study Report, https://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents/p49262/99565E.pdf) [accessed February 19, 2017].
• Footnote 9
  Seabridge Gold Inc., June 2016. Best Available Technology (BAT) Study for Tailing Management at the KSM Project. http://ksmproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/KSM_BAT_Summary_reduced_June2016.pdf (accessed Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, July 2014, KSM [Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell] Project Comprehensive Study Report, https://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents/p49262/99565E.pdf) (accessed February 19, 2017].
• Footnote 10
  Dirk J. A. van Zyl, August 1, 2016. Memorandum: Review Comments on Best Available Technology (BAT) Study for Tailings Management at the KSM Project, http://ksmproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/KSM-BAT-Review-Report-Final010816.pdf (accessed Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, July 2014, KSM [Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell] Project Comprehensive Study Report, https://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents/p49262/99565E.pdf) [accessed February 19, 2017].
• Footnote 11
  The geographic coordinates of the relevant portions of South Teigen Creek and North Treaty Creek were incorrectly specified when the proposed amendments were published in the Canada Gazette, Part I. The proposed coordinates were inconsistent with the coordinates considered at the conclusion of the EA, and with the correct portions identified in Figure 1 and those used to assess lost fish habitat. Minor changes to these coordinates have been made in the Amendments to reflect the actual coordinates of the affected water bodies.
• Footnote 12
  Seabridge Gold Inc. 2012. Assessment of Alternatives for KSM Project Tailings Management Facility, prepared by Rescan Environmental Services Ltd. Seabridge Gold Inc.
• Footnote 13
  “Direct impacts” refer to the infilling of a water body or a portion of a water body with mine tailings. In contrast, indirect impacts may occur downstream as a result of changes in water quality, reductions in flow or other causes.
• Footnote 14
  Seabridge Gold Inc., Revision of Stream Length Affected as a Result of the Change of the Tailings Dams’ Coordinates, December 8, 2016, Personal communication.
• Footnote 15
  Seabridge Gold Inc., Revision of Stream Length Affected as a Result of the Change of the Tailings Dams’ Coordinates, December 8, 2016, Personal communication.
• Footnote 16
  Government of Canada, 2015. Fisheries Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. F-14) http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-14/FullText.html (accessed February 19, 2017).
• Footnote 17
  Construction and monitoring costs estimated by Seabridge in 2014 Canadian dollars, then discounted at 3% over 12 years.
• Footnote 18
  Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat guidance for the small business lens defines a small business as “any business with fewer than 100 employees or between $30,000 and $5 million in annual gross revenues.” http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/hgw-cgf/priorities-priorites/rtrap-parfa/guides/faq-eng.asp (accessed February 19, 2017).
• Footnote 19
  Government of Canada. 2016. Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada Website. Nisga’a Final Agreement and Background Information http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100031292/1100100031293 (accessed February 19, 2017).
• Footnote 20
  Seabridge Gold and Gitanyow Wilps Enter Into Agreement Regarding KSM Project, June 23, 2014. http://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/seabridge-gold-and-gitanyow-wilps-enter-into-agreement-regarding-ksm-project-514484871.html.
• Footnote 21
  Construction and monitoring costs estimated by Seabridge in 2014 in Canadian dollars, then discounted at 3% over 12 years.
• Footnote 22
  In 2012 U.S. dollars, discounted at 5% over the estimated 55-year total mine life, and subject to the metal prices for copper, gold and silver, as well as the exchange rate on the Canadian dollar.
• Footnote 23
  Government of Canada. 2014. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency — Environmental Assessment Decision Statement — KSM (Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell) Project, British Columbia. http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/document-eng.cfm?document=100529 (accessed November 29, 2016).
• Footnote 24
  Environment and Climate Change Canada, Compliance and Enforcement Policy for the Habitat Protection and Pollution Prevention Provisions of the Fisheries Act, http://www.ec.gc.ca/alef-ewe/default.asp?lang=En&n=D6B74D58-1 (accessed February 19, 2017).