Environment Canada’s Presentation to the Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) Regarding AREVA Resources Canada Inc.’s Kiggavik Uranium Mine Project NIRB Technical Meeting and Final Hearing Baker Lake, Nunavut March, 2015

Page 2 EC’s Mandate Department of the Environment Act  General responsibility for environmental management and protection.  Preserve and enhance water, air and soil quality.  Conserve Canada's renewable resources. ▪Migratory birds, Species at Risk, flora and fauna.  Conserve and protect Canada's water resources.  Provide meteorological information.  Coordinate environmental policies and programs.

Page 3 How EC Fulfills its Mandate Relevant acts and regulations: Department of the Environment Act Canadian Environmental Protection Act  Air quality  Spill contingency planning  Waste management Fisheries Act – Pollution prevention provisions  Water quality  Metal Mining Effluent Regulations (MMER) Migratory Birds Convention Act Species at Risk Act (SARA)

Page 4 EC’s Role in Nunavut Review development and remediation proposals for environmental impacts falling within its mandate. Provide recommendations and expert advice to the Nunavut Impact Review Board and Nunavut Water Board. Enforce compliance with legislation that falls within EC’s mandate.

Page 5 EC’s Recommendations for the Kiggavik Uranium Mine EC’s recommendations are divided as follows: Air quality; Tailings and waste rock management; Water quality; Environmental emergency preparedness and response; planning; Wildlife, migratory birds, and Species at Risk.

Page 6 Air Quality EC made recommendations related to: Incineration of waste & sewage; Deposition of contaminants and radionuclides into the environment (land, water air); Further development of the air quality monitoring plan.

Page 7 Tailings and Waste Rock Management EC made recommendations related to: Tailings management (solids content, water cover); Acid rock drainage potential at quarry sites; Landfarming of hydrocarbon-contaminated waste rock; Consolidation of tailings.

Page 8 Water Quality EC made recommendations related to: Reducing total dissolved solids in effluent; Impacts of nutrients and the potential for lake eutrophication; Identifying and filling in baseline data gaps; Concentrations of various chemical species (ammonia, sulphate, chloride); Diversion channel’s water quality; Reviewing different water treatment options to improve effluent quality; Developing aquatic management plans to address water quality concerns.

Page 9 Environmental Emergency Planning EC made recommendations related to: Basing spill planning and response planning on worst case scenarios; Clarifying the role of government agencies and other development companies in the event of a spill; Fate and dispersion modeling; Environmental sensitivity mapping for nearby water bodies and watercourses; Updates to the Spill Plans and use of modeling techniques to improve spill response time.

Page 10 Migratory Birds and Species at Risk EC made recommendations related to: Species at Risk interactions with project components; Potential of disturbing, colliding and spills affecting marine birds along the shipping route; Destruction and disturbance of bird nests during clearing activities; Contamination risk to waterbirds at water management ponds; Waterbird by-catch during fish-out operations;

Page 11 Conclusions EC has made several recommendations that are intended to mitigate negative effects that relate to EC’s mandate. A number of outstanding water quality issues remain:  There is a need to identify and fill in any gaps in the baseline dataset;  Sulphate and chloride levels likely would cause mortality in invertebrate bioassays;  High TDS is a difficult issue, as treatment options are expensive, and may require the revision of water management plans.  EC expects that TDS and chloride would be regulated in the Water Licencing phase. EC looks forward to continuing to work with the Proponent. Additional information can be found in EC’s Technical Review.