1. WHALE TAIL EXPANSION PROJECT PROPOSAL ᐱᖁᖓᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓱᐊᓂ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᓯᔪᒪᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎ
KIA – NTI
FINAL TECHNICAL REVIEW
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ - ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᑐᙵᕕᒃᑯᑦ
26-29 August 2019
Baker Lake, NU
ᐊᒐᓯ 26-ᒥ 29-ᒧᑦ, 2019
ᖃᒪᓂ’ᑐᐊᖅ, ᓄᓇᕗᑦ

2. KivIA ROLE ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᖏᑦ
KivIA represents Inuit, administers and monitors certain provisions of the Nunavut Final Agreement in the Kivalliq Region.
KivIA’s mission is to represent Inuit in a fair and democratic manner in the development, protection, administration and advancement of their rights and benefits; and to promote economic, social, political and cultural well-being.
The aim of Inuit Owned Land management is to administer IOL’s so as to promote self- reliance and the cultural and social well- being of Inuit now and in the future.
Inuit Owned Lands must be managed in such a way as to sustain and enhance the value of the lands.
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᐅᔪᑦ ᐃᓄᖕᓂᒃ, ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᐃᔨᐅᔪᑦ ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒥ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᖏᕈᑎᓕᐊᖑᓯᒪᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ.
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᕌᒐᖃᖅᑐᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓄᖕᓂᒃ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᒃᑎᑦᑎᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᓇᖕᒥᓂᕐᓗ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ, ᓴᐳᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ, ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᕝᕙᖅᑎᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᑲᔫᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᕝᕙᖅᑎᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔾᔭᒃᓴᕈᑎᒃᓴᓂᒃ, ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᓂᒃ, ᒐᕙᒪᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᖅᑯᓯᑐᖃᑎᒍᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᙱᑦᑎᐊᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ.
ᑐᕌᒐᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᖁᑎᖏᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᖁᑉᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᖁᑎᖏᑦ ᖁᕝᕙᖅᑎᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᖕᒥᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᓐᓇᖅᓯᖁᑉᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓕᖅᑯᓯᑐᖃᕐᓗ ᐃᒃᐱᒋᔭᐅᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᓂ ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᖅᓴᐅᓗᑎᒡᓗ ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓯᕗᓂᒃᓴᒥ.
ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᖁᑎᖏᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐸᐸᑐᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᖁᕝᕙᖅᑎᕆᓂᒃᑯᓪᓗ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᑎᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᒥ. ᒌᒃ

3. PROJECT PROPOSAL REVIEW ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒪᔪᖅ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑑᖕᒪᖔᑦ
The purpose of our technical review was to ensure that the potential impacts and benefits were comprehensively assessed through scientific, socio- economic and impact assessment best practices; and
To ensure Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ) values and Traditional Knowledge (TK) were incorporated into impact determination, mitigation, project design and monitoring.
ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓂᖃᓚᐅᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᐅᓇᔭᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᕚᓪᓕᕈᑎᒃᓴᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᖁᑉᓗᒋᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑕᐅᕙᒃᑐᒃᑯᑦ, ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ - ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᑦᑎᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᖃᕐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᐃᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᐅᓂᖅᐹᒃᑯᑦ; ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᑎᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᖁᑉᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐅᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ, ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ, ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑑᑉ ᐋᖅᑭᐅᒪᓂᕆᓂᐊᖅᑕᖓᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ.

4. Submission to NIRB ᑐᓂᕐᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ
A Technical Review of the EIS was submitted to NIRB on May 14th, 2019.
This review outlined sixty-four (64) areas that required clarification.
By the technical hearing June 11-13, six (6) issues remained, which were:
Four (4) issues related to caribou.
Two (2) issues related to mercury concentrations in fish and the alternative discharge locations.
Nine (9) terrestrial commitments were provided by the end of the technical hearing.
ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᖃᕐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᐅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᑐᓂᕐᕈᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᒪᐃ 14, 2019-ᒥ.
ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐃᓯᒪᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ 64-ᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ.
ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑕᐅᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᔫᓐ 11-ᒥ 13-ᒧᑦ, ᒥ ᐊᕐᕕᓂᓖᑦ ᓱᓕ ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ, ᐅᑯᐊᖑᑉᓗᑎᒃ:
ᓯᑕᒪᑦ (4) ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑕᐅᔫᒃ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᓖᒃ ᑐᒃᑐᓂᒃ.
ᒪᕐᕉᒃ (2) ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑕᐅᔫᒃ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᖅᑐᑦ mercury-ᒥᒃ ᐃᖃᓗᖕᓃᓐᓇᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕈᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᒃ ᐃᓂᒋᔭᐅᓇᔭᖅᑐᒃᑯᑦ.
ᖁᓕᖏᓗᐊᖅᑐᑦ (9) ᓄᓇᒥ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐱᐊᓂᒃᐸᓪᓕᐊᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ.

5. Caribou and the upgraded Whale Tail Haul Road ᑐᒃᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᑖᖑᖅᑎᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐱᖁᖓᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓱᐊᓄᑦ ᐊᔾᔭᖅᑐᕐᕕᒃ ᐊᑉᖁᑎ
KivIA was concerned about possible effects of the steep and high slopes along the road and the proposed high frequency of haul trucks (a vehicle every 6-8 minutes).
KivIA has reviewed additional information (commitments) provided by AEM and GN about caribou crossing the roads. a
The additional information was helpful but not yet enough to reduce uncertainties about the impacts of the haul road on caribou.
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖃᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᓯᑐᖅᑲᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᖁᑦᑎᒃᑐᓂᒡᓗ ᓯᑐᒋᐊᕐᕕᖕᓂᒃ ᐊᑉᖁᑕᐅᑉ ᓴᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᒃᑰᕈᑎᑦ ᑕᐅᕗᙵᐅᒐᔪᖕᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ (ᓄᓇᒃᑰᕈᑎᑦ ᑕᐅᕘᓈᖅᐸᒡᓗᑎᒃ 6-8 ᒥᓂᑦ ᐱᐊᓂᑐᐊᕌᖓᑦ).
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᓂᒃ (ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᓂᐊᕐᓂᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ) ᖃᐃᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑐᒃᑐᑦ ᐃᑳᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᑉᓗᒋᑦ. a
ᐊᓯᖏᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᑦ ᐃᑲᔫᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᓈᒻᒫᓂᙱᑦᑐᑦ ᓱᓕ ᐱᑕᖃᙱᓐᓂᖅᓴᐅᓕᖁᑉᓗᒋᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᕈᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᖃᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᑐᒃᑐᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᖅᑐᕐᕕᐅᕙᒃᑐᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᒃᑯᑦ.

6. Caribou – design of the upgraded Whale Tail Haul Road (KivIA-Terrestrial-01) ᑐᒃᑐᑦ - ᖃᓄᖅ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᖕᒪᖔᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎ ᐱᖁᖓᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓱᐊᓄᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎ (ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᖓᒍᑦ -01)
The physical design of the expanded road will influence caribou response to the haul traffic.
Only about 7% of the haul road was proposed to have 4:1 slopes to help caribou crossing
AEM has provided more information on crossing locations and has proposed sections of the road that will be made more caribou friendly. A road construction plan is still required (Commitment 8B)
KivIA needs to see an analysis to determine the effects of physical aspects of the road on caribou movement (Commitment 13)
ᐋᖅᑭᐅᒪᓂᖓ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔫᑉ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᐅᑉ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᖃᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᑐᒃᑐᓄᑦ ᓄᓇᒃᑰᕈᑎᑦ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᔭᖃᑦᑕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᒃᑯᑦ.
7%-ᑐᐃᓐᓇᖓ ᐊᑉᖁᑕᐅᔫᑉ 4:1 ᓯᑐᖅᑲᖃᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕋᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᑐᒃᑐᑦ ᐃᑳᕈᓐᓇᖁᑉᓗᒋᑦ
ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᖅᑎᑦᑎᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᒃ ᐃᑳᕐᕕᐅᕙᒃᑐᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐃᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᒃᑐᓄᑦ ᐃᑳᕐᕕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖅᓴᐅᔪᓂᒃ. ᐊᑉᖁᑎᓕᐅᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎ ᐱᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᖅ ᓱᓕ (ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒪᔪᓂᒃ 8B)
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᑯᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᒥᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐃᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᑉᖁᑎ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᖃᕋᔭᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᑐᒃᑐᑦ ᓅᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ (ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒪᔪᓂᒃ 13)

7. Caribou – crossing behavior and the upgraded Whale Tail Haul Road (KivIA-Terrestrial-02) ᑐᒃᑐᑦ - ᐃᑳᕐᓂᐊᕐᓗᓂ ᐃᓕᖅᑯᓯᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᑖᙳᖅᑎᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐱᖁᖓᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓱᐊᓄᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎ (ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᖓᒍᑦ 02)
KivIA thanks the Parties for the work towards reducing the uncertainties about caribou responses to the road.
AEM and GN have provided additional information (Commitments 8A, 12 and 15) with information from haul road interactions, collared caribou and alternatives for traffic management (convoys).
More details on alternatives to traffic management are required
KivIA remains concerned about the high frequency of haul trucks and the extent that caribou responses to AWAR are applicable to the haul road.
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᖅᑐᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᒃᑐᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᑦᑎᐊᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ ᓇᓗᓇᕈᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᑐᒃᑐᑦ ᒥᒃᓵᓄᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᒥ.
ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᖏᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᒃ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᓯᒪᔪᑦ (ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒪᔪᒃᑯᑦ 8A-ᑯᑦ, 12-ᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ 15-ᑯᑦ) ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕈᑎᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ, ᖁᖓᓯᕈᓯᖅᑐᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓪᓗ ᑐᒃᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕈᑎᒃᑲᓐᓃᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ (ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᒃᑐᑦ).
ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᒃᑲᓐᓃᑦ ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕈᑕᐅᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᒥᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖃᖅᑐᑦ ᓱᓕ ᐊᒥᓱᑦ ᓄᓇᒃᑰᕈᑏᑦ ᑕᐅᕘᓈᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᐃᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑐᒃᑐᑦ ᐅᑭᐅᓗᒃᑖᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᒋᔭᐅᕙᖕᓂᐊᖅᑐᒥ ᐊᔾᔭᖅᑐᕐᕕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᑦ.

8. Caribou – Disturbance to Caribou during the upgrading of the Whale Tail Haul road (KivIA-Terrestrial-03) ᑐᒃᑐᑦ - ᐸᒡᕕᓵᕆᓂᖅ ᑐᒃᑐᓂᒃ ᓄᑖᙳᖅᑎᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐱᖁᖓᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓱᐊᓄᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎ ᐊᔾᔭᖅᑐᕐᕕᒃ (ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᖁᑎᖓᓂ - 03)
AEM states that they will comply with the Terrestrial Ecosystem Management Plan with regard to monitoring and mitigation of caribou approaching during the construction activities related to the Whale Tail haul road.
Widening of the haul road must be avoided when caribou are migrating through the area.
Specific mitigation is required to ensure that road widening construction is halted when the first caribou are approaching to let the lead caribou cross the road.
ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕋᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᓄᓇᒥ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑕᐅᔪᒥᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᐃᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐋᖅᑭᐅᒪᑎᑦᑎᔪᒪᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᑐᑦ ᑎᑭᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᓕᐅᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐱᖁᖓᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓱᐊᓄᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᒃᓴᒧᑦ ᐊᔾᔭᖅᑐᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ.
ᐊᑉᖁᑎ ᓯᓕᒃᓯᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᔭᕆᐊᖃᙱᑦᑐᖅ ᐊᔾᔭᖅᑐᕐᕕᒃ ᑐᒃᑐᑦ ᓅᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᐅᕘᓇ.
ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᑉᖁᑎᐅᑉ ᓯᓕᒃᓯᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓ ᓄᖅᑲᖓᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖁᑉᓗᒍ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᑦ ᑐᒃᑐᑦ ᑎᑭᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᓕᕌᖓᑕ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐸᐅᑎᔪᑦ ᑐᒃᑐᑦ ᐃᑳᕈᓐᓇᖁᑉᓗᒋᑦ.

9. Caribou – Uncertainty in cumulative effects and climate change (KivIA-Terrestrial-04) ᑐᒃᑐᑦ - ᓇᓗᓇᕈᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᑲᑎᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᐅᕙᒃᑐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓯᓚᐅᑉ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖓᒍᑦ (ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᖁᑎᖓ - 04)
The cumulative effects are highly uncertain. This influences KivIA’s ability to properly assess the cumulative impacts of the Expansion Project.
The Expansion Project will increase the duration of effects on caribou.
AEM should propose how it could reduce uncertainties in the cumulative effects assessment of the Expansion Project on caribou
ᑲᑎᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᐅᓇᔭᖅᑐᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᕈᑕᐅᓪᓚᕆᒃᑐᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᕆᓇᔭᖅᑕᖓᓄᑦ ᑲᑎᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᐅᓇᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᖅ.
ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᓯᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᖅ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᓯᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᑐᒃᑐᓄᑦ.
ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔨᓇᔭᕐᒪᑕ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐱᑕᖃᙱᓐᓂᖅᓴᐅᓕᕋᔭᕐᒪᖔᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᕈᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᐅᓇᔭᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓚᓯᒋᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑕᐅᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᒃᑐᓄᑦ

10. Caribou – commitments and conclusions ᑐᒃᑐᑦ - ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᔭᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ
KivIA acknowledges the efforts of AEM and GN for the 4 of 9 commitments received since the Technical Session in June.
While the information has been useful, KivIA has provided comments on remaining issues in reviewing the Commitments.
KivIA concludes that uncertainty remains about the impact of the expanded haul road on caribou.
Better monitoring of short and medium distances from the project and greater frequencies of surveys are required.
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᑕᖅᓯᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᖏᓐᓄᓪᓗ ᓯᑕᒪᐅᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᖁᓕᖏᓗᐊᖅᑑᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᔭᖏᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᖃᐃᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓕᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᔫᓐᒥ ᐅᑉᓗᒥᒧᑦ.
ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᑦ ᐊᑑᑎᖃᑦᑎᐊᖅᓯᒪᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ, ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᓂᑉᓕᐅᑎᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐱᖃᑎᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᖢᐊᖏᓕᐅᕈᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓄᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓂᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒪᔪᓂᒃ.
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᓇᓗᓕᐅᖅᑲᐅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᒡᒎᖅ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐊᔾᔭᖅᑐᕐᕕᒃ ᐊᑉᖁᑎ ᑕᐃᒪᐅᔪᑦ ᓱᓕ.
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᖃᓂᑦᑐᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᖓᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᐊᕐᔪᒃᑐᒃᑯᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒥ ᐱᑕᖃᕆᐊᓖᑦ.

11. Caribou – condition ᑐᒃᑐᑦ - ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ
Thus KivIA suggests a condition is necessary to ensure adaptive management of the expanded haul road.
AEM shall work through the Terrestrial Advisory Group to update the Terrestrial Ecosystem Management Plan to integrate information from all the Commitments. The revised Terrestrial Ecosystem Management Plan shall be submitted to Nunavut Impact Review Board within 6 months of issuance of a Project Certificate.
ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᖕᒥᒃ ᐱᑕᖃᕆᐊᖃᕋᓱᒋᔪᑦ ᓱᖏᐅᑎᔪᓐᓇᖁᑉᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᐊᔾᔭᖅᑐᕐᕕᒃ ᐊᑉᖁᑎ.
ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᓄᓇᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᔾᔨᒋᐊᖅᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᑉᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᖕᓂᖅᓴᐅᓕᖁᑉᓗᒍ ᓄᓇᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎ ᐃᓚᐅᖃᑕᐅᖁᑉᓗᒋᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᑦ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒪᔪᓂᙶᖅᑐᑦ. ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᓄᓇᓂᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎ ᑐᓂᕐᕈᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᕐᕕᓂᓖᑦ ᑕᖅᑮᑦ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᖅᑳᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᒋᐊᕈᓐᓇᖅᓯᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑯᑕᒥᒃ.

12. Aquatic Environment – Mercury concentrations in fish (KivIA-Aquatic-01) ᐃᒪᒃᑯᑦ - Mercury-ᑕᖃᕋᔭᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᐃᖃᓗᖕᓂᒃ (ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᒪᖓᓂᒃ - 01)
The Proponent has committed to revisit the predictions for mercury concentrations in the project area and update these predictions as needed to account for the additional time that Whale Tail Lake will be flooded due to the Whale Tail Expansion.
This issue may be resolved pending review of the updated mercury predictions submitted to the KivIA August 20, 2019.s
ᐅᔭᕋᖕᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᑯᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐱᑕᖃᕋᓱᒋᔭᐅᓂᖓ mercury-ᒥᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᐅᔪᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᑉᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᓕᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᓗᑎᒃ ᐱᖁᖓᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓱᐊ ᐃᒻᒥᖅᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ.
ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᖅᑳᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐅᑉᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᓕᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ mercury- ᖃᕐᓂᕋᖅᑕᐅᓇᓱᒋᔪᖅ ᑐᓂᕐᕈᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒐᓯ 20, ᒥ. s

13. Aquatic Environment – Alternative Discharge Locations (KivIA-Aquatic-02) ᐃᒪᖅ - ᓇᒧᑦ ᑯᕕᖅᑕᒃᑲᓐᓂᖔᕋᔭᕐᓂᖏᑦ (ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᒪᖁᑎᖓ - 02)
The KivIA had recommended that the Proponent commit to collecting at least two years of data both under ice and in open water season in the water bodies with the discharge locations.
The proponent has committed to sampling the alternative discharge locations following the KivIA’s recommendations.
This issue may be resolved pending AEM’s completion of the planned sampling in 2019, collection of additional water quality and phytoplankton taxonomy in March, May and July of 2020 and the KivIA’s review of the resulting technical memorandum.
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔨᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᐅᔭᕋᖕᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᑦᑎᖁᑉᓗᒋᑦ ᒪᕐᕉᖕᓄᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐅᑭᐅᓄᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᓯᑯᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᒪᑐᐃᓐᓇᒃᑯᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑯᕕᖅᑕᕐᕕᐅᔪᓂᒃ.
ᐅᔭᕋᖕᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᐃᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᓯᐊᒍᑦ ᑯᕕᖅᑕᕐᕖᑦ ᒪᓕᒃᖢᑎᒃ ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ.
ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᖢᐊᖏᓕᐅᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᐊᓂᒃᓯᒃᐸᑕ ᐸᕐᓇᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᒥᒃ ᐆᒃᑑᑎᓂᒃ ᒥ, ᑲᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᒪᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᑎᓂᖓᒍᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑕᐅᓇᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓇᑎᖓᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᒫᑦᓯᒥ, ᒪᐃᒥ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᔪᓚᐃᒥ ᒥ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓂᖓᒍᑦ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᒍᑎᒃᑯᑦ.

14. Aquatic Environment – Updated River Baseline Data (KivIA-Aquatic-03) ᐃᒪᖅ - ᐅᑉᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᑰᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ (ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᒪᖁᑎᖓᒍᑦ - 03)
AEM has committed to collecting additional water quality and quantity samples from the stream sites in the project area (i.e. tributaries to Mammoth, Whale Tail and Nemo Lakes). AEM has further committed to provide the KivIA with the proposed field program for aquatic environment data collection for KivIA approval on September 2, 2019.
The field program has yet to be provided, but this issue is resolved pending AEM’s fulfillment of their comments and review of the proposed 2020 field program.
ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᒪᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑲᑎᑦᑎᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᒪᐅᑉ ᖃᓄᐃᓐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐅᑎᒃᓴᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᑎᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐅᑎᓂᒃ ᑰᒐᓛᖕᓂ ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᐅᔪᒃᑯᑦ (ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᓗᒍ ᑰᒐᓚᐃᑦ ᐊᖏᓂᖅᓴᐃᑦ, ᐱᖁᖓᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓱᐊᓂ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ Nemo Lake-ᒥ). ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᒪᓯᒪᔪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᒪᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒪᔪᒃᑯᑦ 2020-ᒥ ᓄᓇᒥ ᑲᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᒪᖁᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᐅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖁᑉᓗᒋᑦ ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓯᑎᐱᕆ 2, 2019-ᒥ.
ᓄᓇᒥ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕈᑎᒃᓴᖅ ᖃᐃᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᓱᓕ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐋᖅᑭᒐᔭᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᐊᓂᒃᓯᒃᐸᑕ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᓂᒃᐸᑕᓗ 2020-ᒥ ᓄᓇᒥ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᔪᒪᔭᒥᓂᒃ.

15. Aquatic Environment – Water Quality Model Accuracy and Sensitivity (KivIA-Aquatic-07) ᐃᒪᖅ - ᐃᒪᐅᑉ ᖃᓄᐃᓐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᓈᒻᒪᑦᑎᐊᕈᓐᓇᖁᑉᓗᒍ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᒃᐱᒍᓱᒃᓴᕋᐃᓐᓂᖓ (ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᒪᖓ - 07)
The Proponent has committed to update the water quality model, refining predicted concentrations of phosphorus, arsenic and other parameters of concern in the receiving environment. The proponent further committed to update the water quality model to include cryoconcentration.
The refined water quality model has been provided as part of the water licence application and will be reviewed as part of the licencing process.
However, the water quality model has not yet been updated to include cryoconcentration.
We request AEM provide the updated water quality model by August 30 such that it can be reviewed during the water licence technical review period.
ᐅᔭᕋᖕᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᒪᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐅᑉᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᓕᖁᑉᓗᒍ ᐃᒪᐅᑉ ᖃᓄᐃᓐᓂᕆᔭᖓᒍᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᐅᒪᓂᕆᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑕᖓ, ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᓯᔪᒪᓂᕐᒧᓪᓗ ᐃᓗᓕᕆᓇᔭᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ, ᓴᕕᕋᔭᖕᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑕᐅᓇᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᕙᑎᑉᑎᓐᓂᒃ. ᐅᔭᕋᖕᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᑉᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᓯᔪᒪᖕᒥᔪᑦ ᐃᒪᐅᑉ ᖃᓄᐃᓐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐱᑕᖃᓕᖁᑉᓗᒍ ᖁᐊᖑᓂᐅᔪᓂᒃ.
ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐃᒪᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᖅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐃᓚᐅᖃᑕᐅᑉᓗᒍ ᐃᒪᕐᒧᑦ ᓚᐃᓴᓐᓯᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑕᐅᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᓚᐃᓴᓐᓯᑖᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᐅᕙᒃᑐᒃᑯᑦ.
ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ, ᐃᒪᐅᑉ ᖃᓄᐃᓐᓂᖓ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᙱᑦᑐᖅ ᖁᐊᖑᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᑕᖃᓕᖁᑉᓗᒍ.
ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓂᓯᖁᑉᓗᒋᑦ ᐅᑉᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᐃᒪᐅᑉ ᖃᓄᐃᓐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐅᑎᒥᒃ ᐊᒐᓯ 30- ᖑᖅᑳᖅᑎᓐᓇᒍ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ ᐃᒪᒃᑯᑦ ᓚᐃᓴᓐᓯᑖᕈᑎ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ.

16. Socio-Economic Impacts ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ - ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᒃᑯᓪᓗ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᐅᕙᒃᑐᑦ
The KivIA has reviewed the Government of Nunavut’s (GN) comments and supports their concerns regarding the socio-economic impacts of the proposed Project.
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᖏᑦᑕ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓯᒪᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᐃᔪᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᑉᓗᒍ ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᕐᒧᑦ - ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᓪᓗ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᓯᓂᐅᓇᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒪᔪᒃᑯᑦ.

17. Inuit Impact and Benefits Agreement (IIBA) ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐱᕚᓪᓕᕈᑎᒃᓴᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᖏᕈᑎᓕᐊᖅ
KivIA has an IIBA with the Proponent (Agnico Eagle Mines Ltd.) for the Whale Tail Project.
The proposed expansion has been found by the Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) to include circumstances relating to the proposed Project that are significantly different from those anticipated when the original Project Certificate was issued.
Therefore, a material change will occur and a review of the Inuit Impact and Benefits Agreement (IIBA) will be triggered if the extension application is granted.
ᑭᕙᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐱᕚᓪᓕᕈᑎᒃᓴᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᖏᕈᑎᓕᐊᕐᒥᒃ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᒡᓂᒍ ᐃᒍ ᐅᔭᕋᖕᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓪᓗ ᐱᖁᖓᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓱᐊᓄᑦ.
ᐃᓚᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᒪᔪᖅ ᖃᐅᔨᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᓚᐅᖃᑕᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᐊᓂᓕᖕᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒪᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᐅᙱᑦᑐᓪᓚᕇᑦ ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᒋᐊᕈᓐᓇᖅᓯᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐅᑎ ᑐᓂᕐᕈᑕᐅᒃᐸᑦ.
ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒻᒪᑦ, ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑑᓂᖓ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᓗᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐱᕚᓪᓕᕈᑎᒃᓴᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᖏᕈᑎᓕᐊᖅ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᓯᔪᒪᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎ ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᒃᐸᑦ.