ANNEX A:

SUMMARY OF BENEFITS AGREED UPON DURING RENEGOTIATION OF THE MARY RIVER IIBA.

1. QIA and BIM have an agreement in principle regarding a renegotiated IIBA with changes to Inuit
Benefits, Inuit Engagement, Governance, and Monitoring and Enforcement. Inuit Benefits includes a
focus upon direct project opportunities and benefits such Inuit training, employment and contracting.
This document is before the parties for final review. Approval was anticipated in October following the
2018 Production Increase Application. Notable inclusions in the renegotiated IIBA related to Inuit
training, employment:
a. A commitment of $10 Million toward the establishment of a Regional Training Centre in Pond
Inlet. Efforts are already underway to complete a feasibility design and study for this facility,
including locating the building on Inuit Owned Lands.
b. A commitment to spend $2.25 million on training Inuit between 2019-2021 and a commitment
to spend $1.5 million per annum until 2031.
c. A commitment to hiring and providing local counselling services in Pond Inlet, Arctic Bay,
Clyde River, Igloolik and Hall Beach.
d. A commitment to resourcing lunch programs in schools in Pond Inlet, Arctic Bay, Clyde River,
Igloolik and Hall Beach.
e. An expanded Inuit Human Resource Strategy,
i. Hiring of 5 additional staff to implement this strategy (Inuit Human Resource Advisors
and Recruiters).
ii. Permanent dedicated “Work Ready Program” to be delivered throughout the region
iii. Inuit Internship Program targeting employment outside trades and heavy equipment.
iv. An Inuit Employment Target of 50%.
f. Increased resources for a “Community Wellness Fund” which will provide up to $1.1M/annum
to the communities of Pond Inlet, Arctic Bay, Clyde River, Igloolik and Hall Beach.
2. Specific to the 2018 Production Increase Application, QIA and the proponent have also negotiated an
expanded Wildlife Compensation regime under the IIBA. This regime includes the following:
a. Wildlife Compensation Fund.
i. A life of mine commitment to provides direct compensation for specific incidents of
loss or damage for Inuit harvesters.
ii. Value $750,000.
b. Enabling Fund
i. A commitment to provide resources to enable improved hunting and Inuit enjoyment
of the project area through the establishment of a gas program. This will support
improved affordability of local travel by Inuit.
ii. Value $400,000/year for 10 years. Revisited thereafter.
c. Project Monitoring Fund
i. Dedicated resources to support independent community based monitoring of project
impacts, supplies communities with equipment to monitor and enjoy the marine
environment. Projects will be developed and run by the community.
ii. Value $200,000/year for 10 years. Revisited thereafter.
d. Marine Equipment Program
i. A program whereby every three years the proponent will purchase and subsequently
donate to communities a fully-equipped research vessel.
ii. Vessels will be given to Pond Inlet, Arctic Bay, Clyde River, Igloolik and Hall Beach.
iii. Value $300,000 per vessel.
 ANNEX B:
SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE NUNAVUT IMPACT REVIEW BOARD

Through formal representations filed with NIRB in response to the 2018 Production Increase Application
QIA made submissions to NIRB that addressed concerns related to the application and information about
BIM commitments.

QIA and the community of Pond Inlet jointly developed a table of topics that were raised during review of
the 2018 Production Increase Application. This table included the following topics: Shipping, Dust,
Management Plan Updates, Water Compensation Agreement, Inuit Owned Lands Commercial Lease,
Roads Management Plan, Current IIBA Implementation, IIBA Renegotiation. On July 11th, 2018 this list
was supplied to NIRB prior to the NIRB led community engagement session. 1

On July 16th, the proponent responded to the table of topics and confirmed its commitment to addressing
each of the topics listed. 2 This response was supplied to NIRB during the formal review of the 2018
Production Increase Application. This response included a pledge from the proponent to resource and
undertake bi-annual third-party performance audits of the commitments made by the proponent under both
the IIBA and the NIRB Certificate, including developing immediate action plans for any topics identified
through the audit process.

In addition to the table of commitments, on July 26th, 2018 QIA also presented final technical review
comments to NIRB. 3 In this submission submitted a list of 45 specific recommendations addressing the
following topics; Aquatic Wildlife and Habitat, Terrestrial Wildlife and Habitat, Regulatory Permitting and
Engineering, and, Socio-Economics.

On August 9th, 2018 the proponent responded to QIA’s final technical review with responses to each of
QIA’s 45 recommendations. address these commitments was submitted to NIRB. 4

1
Qikiqtani Inuit Association, Hamlet of Pond Inlet, Mittimatalik Hunters and Trappers Organization. Letter to
Nunavut Impact Review Board. NIRB Review Process, BIMC’s 2018 Production Increase Application. July 11th, 2018.
2
Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation. Letter to Nunavut Impact Review Board. July 16th, 2018.
3
Qikiqtani Inuit Association. Letter to Nunavut Impact Review Board. NIRB Review Process, BIMC’s 2018
Production Increase Application. July 26th, 2018.
4
Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation. Letter to Nunavut Impact Review Board. August 9, 2018.
 ANNEX C:
BAFFINLAND IRON MINES CORPORATION MONITORING, MITIGATION AND ADAPTIVE
MANAGEMENT COMMITMENTS. 2018 PRODUCTION INCREASE.
 MEMORANDUM

Baffinland Environmental Monitoring, Mitigations and Adaptive Management Overview

Approach to Adaptive Management

Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation (Baffinland) has invested significant efforts in 2018 to further enhance our understanding of the Qikiqtani Inuit
Association (QIA) and local community member’s concerns related to the current Project and their specific concerns with increasing production
and shipping rates to support economically sustainable growth of the Project.

Existing permits requires that Baffinland receives input from QIA, the community (namely Pond Inlet) and other regulators on the results of annual
monitoring conducted by Baffinland to confirm the predictions of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Project. In addition, Baffinland
solicits feedback directly from the communities and other concerned parties to inform operational planning. Feedback from these stakeholders is
provided by establishing several different avenues for two-way information sharing (see Table 1). Despite the above efforts, it is acknowledged
that there remains some ongoing concerns amongst community members and QIA about the Project and uncertainty in the results in the
monitoring programs. To address this Baffinland has implemented a process to develop adaptive management measures and additional
mitigations (Figure 1). The adaptive management process allows for Projects-effects monitoring to be assessed at two levels.

First, Project-effects monitoring is conducted and assessed by Baffinland’s technical experts and consultants. The results of the monitoring
programs are then shared with and assessed by external reviewers and technical specialists, the QIA and local community members.

1
 Table 1 – Project Review Process
Information Description Annual Key Organization
Sharing Schedule
Nunavut Nunavut QIA Regulatory Working Groups Technical MHTOs Hamlets
Activity
Impact Water Authorities (Government of Experts
Review Board Nunavut, Department of
Board (NWB) Fisheries and Oceans,
(NIRB) Parks Canda,
Environment and
Climate Change Canada,
Qikiqtani Inuit
Association, Mittimatalik
Hunter and Trappers
Organization)
Annual Draft report – Results from
Monitoring annual monitoring program
Program for terrestrial and marine February 15     
Reports - monitoring efforts
Draft
Final report – Results from
Annual annual monitoring program
Monitoring for terrestrial and marine
Program monitoring efforts. March 31        
Reports - Incorporates feedback
Final received from Working
Groups on the draft report
Summarizes annual
NIRB/NWB operational activities,
Annual monitoring programs and March 31        
Reports compliance with regulatory
permits

2
Information Description Annual Key Organization
Sharing Schedule
Nunavut Nunavut QIA Regulatory Working Groups Technical MHTOs Hamlets
Activity
Impact Water Authorities (Government of Experts
Review Board Nunavut, Department of
Board (NWB) Fisheries and Oceans,
(NIRB) Parks Canda,
Environment and
Climate Change Canada,
Qikiqtani Inuit
Association, Mittimatalik
Hunter and Trappers
Organization)
Face-to-face meetings held
with MHTO, Hamlets and End and
Topic Specific QIA Representatives to beginning of
Meetings – discuss specific issues and shipping   
Shipping etc. concerns and/or key season,
components of Project As needed
operations
Annual meetings held with
Inuit and QIA
General
representatives to update
Project Annually, As
interested parties on        
Update needed
ongoing operations or any
Meetings
proposed changes to the
Project
Visit to the Mary River and
As needed
Milne Port site to see live
Site Visits or   
operations and discuss
requested
issues on the ground

3
Information Description Annual Key Organization
Sharing Schedule
Nunavut Nunavut QIA Regulatory Working Groups Technical MHTOs Hamlets
Activity
Impact Water Authorities (Government of Experts
Review Board Nunavut, Department of
Board (NWB) Fisheries and Oceans,
(NIRB) Parks Canda,
Environment and
Climate Change Canada,
Qikiqtani Inuit
Association, Mittimatalik
Hunter and Trappers
Organization)
Regulatory audits or Typically
inspections to ensure during
Inspections/
compliance with existing summer    
Audits
permits and approvals (July to
September)
Contract employment 
Summer
Participation opportunity or joint-
Field Season
in Monitoring collaboration on  
(July to
Programs environmental monitoring
October)
programs
Submission of technical
Input into comments and responses
additional or face-to-face meetings to
As needed        
mitigation discuss proposed revisions
measures or additions to existing
mitigation measures

4
 Operation of Approved Project
with Mitigation Measures

Implementation of Additional
Measures or Continuation of Project Effects Monitoring
Existing Measures

Decision on Need for Community/Internal/Regulator

Additional Mitigation Feedback
Measures

Community/Internal/Regulator Results of Monitoring Data and

Feedback Feedback

Figure 1 – Baffinland’s Adaptive Management Process

5
Response to Community Concerns

As previously mentioned, while the monitoring results have indicated that the Project is not having a significant or harmful effect on the
environment, subsequent assessments conducted by community members and the QIA have identified a lack of certainty in the results of the
monitoring programs and concerns related to Project operations. Therefore, throughout 2017 and 2018, Baffinland in consultation with the QIA
and Mittamatalik Hunter and Trappers Organization (MHTO / Pond Inlet Hunter and Trappers Organization) determined that additional mitigation
measures should be developed and implemented, which ensure a precautionary approach is being applied in Project operations.

In 2018, prominent attention was given by Baffinland to develop additional mitigations and monitoring that meaningfully responds to QIA and
Pond Inlet community member’s concerns related to shipping operations, marine mammals and dust fall. An overview of the results of the
implementation of the adaptive management process executed by Baffinland is presented in Table 2.

6
Table 2 – Marine and Dust Effects, Monitoring and Mitigation
Pre-2018 Management Plan Mitigations
Topic Potential Effect and Commitments
Acoustic Disturbance
As listed in the Shipping and Marine
Wildlife Management Plan (2016):
Change in animal
1. Maintain constant course and speed
distribution in the region
when possible
2. Reduce vessel idling time at dock
3. Shipboard and Marine Wildlife
Observers to be on select vessels to
monitor interactions with marine
mammals
Change in abundance in
the region
Marine
Mammals
Alteration of migration
patterns
As listed in the Shipping and Marine
Wildlife Management Plan (2016):
1. Maintain constant course and speed
Availability of marine when possible
mammals for harvesting 2. Reduce vessel idling time at dock
3. Shipboard and Marine Wildlife
Observers to be on select vessels to
monitor interactions with marine
mammals
Reference to commitments made
Summary of Monitoring Results and
Monitoring Program Additional Mitigation Measures through the NIRB reconsideration
Community and QIA Feedback
process and public record
o Automated Information
System – Exact Earth
Notifications
o Bruce Head Vessel-Based
1. Reduce Vessel Speed to 9 knots within
Project
Milne Inlet
o Ship- Based Observer
2. Apply speed limit to all Project vessels
Program
3. Communicate speed limits to vessel
o Tremblay Sound Narwhal Marine mammals experience temporary
captains through Standing Instructions
Tagging Program /Aerial and localized disturbance as a result of
to Masters (not only ore carriers)
Survey Project shipping
4. Avoid deviation from nominal shipping Response to final written submissions on
o Automated Information
route the Mary River Modification Application –
System – Exact Earth Relative population levels (distribution
5. Monitor adherence to speed limit and Production Increase, Fuel Storage, and
Notifications and abundance) are not being affected by
deviation from nominal shipping route Milne Port Accommodations (Baffinland
o Bruce Head Vessel-Based the Project
through Community-Based Monitoring 2018a):
Project
(installation of Automated Information Response to DFO Comment No. 1
o Ship-Based Observer Marine mammals tend to avoid vessels
System at MHTO office) and Exact Earth Response to QIA Comment No. 3
Program
Notification Alert System Response to QIA Comment No. 4
o Automated Information No ship-strikes have been recorded to
6. Minimize multi-vessel transits within Response to WWF No. 6
System – Exact Earth date
the corridor Appendix A Community Fact Sheet
Notifications
7. Avoid sensitive areas that contain “Learn more about Baffinland’s shipping
o Bruce Head Vessel- Based Community members have expressed an
critical habitat and/or traditional and marine monitoring programs”
Project ongoing concern for how noise from
calving ground
o Ship-Based Observer vessels could be affecting marine
Nunavut Impact Review Board Process
Program mammals or driving them out of the
8. Work with the MHTO to establish Guidance – Production Increase Proposal
o Automated Information Project area
parameters for drifting areas to avoid – Additional Information Requirement
System – Exact Earth
interaction with important hunting (Baffinland 2018b)
Notifications
areas in the Inlet Response to Comment No. 7 a) and c) –
o Bruce Head Vessel-Based
Project
9. Provision of fuel in the amount of BIM / QIA Resolutions and Commitments
o Tremblay Sound Narwhal
$300,000 annually to enable hunting (Baffinland 2018c)
Tagging Program /Aerial
practices (up to 10 years) Response to Concern No. 4
Survey
Response to Concern No. 5
Relative population levels (distribution
10. Provision of $200,000 annually to Response to Concern No. 10
and abundance) are not being affected by
support community based monitoring
the Project
o Bruce Head Vessel- Based and research (up to 10 years)
Project
No ship-strikes have been recorded to
o Tremblay Sound Narwhal 11. Provision of research vessel to support
date
Tagging Program community initiatives (i.e.
o Ship-Based Observer monitoring/research etc.)
Local hunters have reported decreased
Program
numbers of marine mammals available for
harvesting
7
 Pre-2018 Management Plan Mitigations Reference to commitments made
Summary of Monitoring Results and
Topic Potential Effect and Commitments Monitoring Program Additional Mitigation Measures through the NIRB reconsideration
Community and QIA Feedback
process and public record
As listed in the Inuit Impact Benefit Local hunters have reported disturbances
Agreement (2013): to traditional hunting areas and practices
4. Wildlife Compensation Fund as a result of shipping operations
All vessels have demonstrated compliance
with ballast water exchange via salinity Response to final written submissions on
testing of ballast water tanks the Mary River Modification Application –
Production Increase, Fuel Storage, and
No Aquatic Invasive Species have been 1. Increased Quality Control and Quality Milne Port Accommodations (Baffinland
identified through Project monitoring Assurance procedures for salinity 2018a)
As listed in the Shipping and Marine o Salinity Testing of Ballast
testing Response to QIA Comment No. 2 -
Marine Introduction of Aquatic Wildlife Management Plan (2016): Water
Positive feedback for expanding Aquatic 2. Use of Remote Operative Vehicle
Environment Invasive Species 1. Ensure salinity of ballast water is o Aquatic Invasive Species
Invasive monitoring to include Ragged system for underwater video surveys Baffinland Responses to Reviewer
within standards Monitoring
Island and specimen collection for assessing Comments on 2017 NIRB Report
ship hull fouling (Baffinland, 2018d)
Community members have reported a Response to QIA Comment Number 37
concern that Aquatic Invasive are being Response to QIA Attachment 2 Comment
introduced to the Project area as a result 5
of shipping operations
Dust fall deposition is greater (higher
volume) than levels predicted in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement
As listed in the Terrestrial Environment
1. Six (6) additional dust fall samplers will Response to final written submissions on
Monitoring and Management Plan (2018):
Vegetation Abundance Higher level of dust fall is not affecting be installed in late summer/fall of 2018 the Mary River Modification Application –
and Diversity vegetation health and level of metals 2. Dust fall monitors will be placed at the Production Increase, Fuel Storage, and
1. Project activities will be planned and
detected in soil and vegetation are not 1 km distance, in three paired locations Milne Port Accommodations (Baffinland
conducted to minimize the Project o Dust Fall Deposition
exceeding regulatory guidelines (east/west of the road) 2018a)
footprint Monitoring Program
one pair will be located near Response to ECCC Comment No. 2
2. Where and when appropriate, dust o Vegetation Abundance
Dust Vegetation abundance and diversity is km 25 Response to QIA Comment No. 6
suppressants may be used on the Monitoring
consistent with baseline levels one pair around km 56
roads, particularly on heavy-use o Vegetation and Soil Base
one pair around km 75–80 BIM / QIA Resolutions and Commitments
sections during snow-free months Metals Monitoring
Ongoing concern from community 3. Continue increased calcium chloride (Baffinland 2018c)
Vegetation Health 3. Install shrouds on crushers
members about visual effects of dust fall and water dust suppression Response to Concern No. 11
(Metals Accumulation)
and geographic extent of deposition 4. Procured 50 additional covers for Response to Concern No. 12
Ongoing concern from community crushers Response to Concern No. 13
members about potential for uptake of
metals by mammals harvested by hunters
and bioaccumulation

References:

Baffinland 2018a. Mary River Modification Application – Production Increase, Fuel Storage and Milne Port Accommodations Modification Proposal (‘Production Increase Proposal’) (April 23, 2018) – Response to Comments. August 9 2018.
Baffinland 2018b. Nunavut Impact Review Board Process Guidance – Production Increase Proposal – Additional Information Requirement. June 20 2018. NIRB Public Registry ID: 318283
Baffinland 2018c. Baffinland/Qikiqtani Inuit Association Resolution and Commitments Excel Spreadsheet (180802-SR17-QIA-Baffinland2018IssueResolution-ENG). Agreed Upon August 2, 2018 as referenced in QIA’s August 3rd letter to NIRB.
Baffinland 2018d. Baffinland Response to Reviewer Comments on the 2017 NIRB Annual Report. July 12, 2018.

8
  

ᑎᑎᖅᑲᖅ ᑐᑭᓯᐅᒪᔾᔪᑎᒃᓴᖅ

ᐅᕗᖓ: ᓯᑏᕙ ᐅᐃᓕᐊᒻᓴᓐ ᐸᑐᐊᕆ, ᐅᖃᐅᔾᔨᒋᐊᖅᑎᒻᒪᕆᒃ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᒧᑦ, ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ

ᐅᕙᓐᖓᑦ: ᒪᐃᒐᓐ ᓗᐊᑦ−Hᐅᐃᐅᓪ, ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨ ᑎᒥᐅᔫᑉ ᒪᑭᒪᐅᑎᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ, ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ

ᐱᑦᔪᑎᖃᑦᑐᖅ: ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ, ᐱᓗᐊᖏᓂᖅᓴᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᑦᑑᔾᔨᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᒪᒋᔭᖃᓐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑕᖏᖅᑐᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᑯᓐᓈᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓ

ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ

ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᓇᓱᐊᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᕆᒻᒪᑕ 2018-ᒥ ᑐᓯᐅᒪᓂᖅᓴᐅᓕᖁᓪᓗᑕ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᖏᑕ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ
ᑐᕌᖓᔪᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᐅᔪᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᓗᐊᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖏᑦ ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓ ᐊᖏᓪᓕᕙᓪᓕᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᖑᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᑦ ᑎᑭᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ
ᐅᓄᖅᑑᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᑲᔫᑎᔪᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᐅᕋᓱᐊᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᔪᓐᓇᑐᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᕈᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᖁᓪᓗᒍ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᖑᔪᖅ.

ᐱᑕᖃᑉᐸᒌᖅᑐᑦ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᑦ ᐱᔭᕆᐊᖃᑦᑎᑎᒻᒪᑕ ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓂᑦ, ᓄᓇᓕᖓ ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ
ᒪᓕᒐᓕᖃᑦᑎᑦᑎᔨᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᖃᑦᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑎᕆᓇᓱᐊᖅᑐᑎᒃ ᓇᓚᐅᒃᑖᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖁᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥᒃ ᐊᕙᐅᑎᐅᑉ
ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᕆᔭᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᐅᔪᒧᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᒃᑕᐅᖅ, ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓴᕋᓱᐊᖏᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓇᓐᖓᓚᒃᑖᖅ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ
ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖃᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᓂᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᐸᕐᓇᒃᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᖁᓪᓗᒍ. ᑐᓴᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓇᓐᖓᑦ ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᑕᖃᑦᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑎᕆᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᑦᔨᒌᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ
ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᒫᕐᕉᓕᖓᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ (ᑕᑯᓗᒍ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ 1). ᐱᓕᕆᓇᓱᐊᕐᓂᐅᖃᑦᑕᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ, ᐃᓕᑕᕆᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᐳᖅ
ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᑕᖃᐃᓐᓇᐅᔭᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᒥᒃᓵᓄᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᖑᔫᑉ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓇᓗᓇᖅᑑᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᖑᕙᑦᑐᓂᒃ
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐱᑦᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᓯᒪᕗᑦ ᐊᑐᕐᓂᐊᓕᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ
ᑲᒪᒋᔭᕆᐊᖃᑦᑕᒥᓐᓂᒃ (ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ 1). ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐱᕕᖃᑦᑎᑎᒻᒪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᖑᔪᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐃᒻᒥᒃᑰᖓᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᐊᑦᔨᒌᖏᑦᑑᓐᓄᑦ ᖁᓕᕇᓐᓄᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᖑᓪᓗᓂ.

ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ, ᐱᓕᕆᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᖑᕙᑦᑐᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓪᓗᓂ ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓴᓇᔪᓕᕆᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᖃᔨᒪᓪᓚᕆᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔨᑕᓄᑦ. ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᕕᓃᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᓯᓚᑖᓃᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔨᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓴᓇᔪᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔪᒻᒪᕆᓐᓄᑦ, ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂᒃ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ
ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᓄᓇᖃᑦᑎᐅᔪᓄᑦ.

1 
 
  

ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ 1 – ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᒥᒃ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᖅ

ᑐᓴᕋᔅᓴᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᑦ ᐱᕕᒃᓴᖃᕝᕕᖓ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓪᓗᐊᑕᐃᑦ
ᑐᓴᖅᑕᐅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕ
ᕐᓂᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᑦᒥ ᓄᓇᕗᑦᒥ QIA ᒪᓕᒐᑎᒍᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᑦ (ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ, ᓴᓇᔪᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒃᑐ ᕼᐋᒻᓚᑦᖑᔪᑦ
ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᒪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ, ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒻᒪᕆᑦᑐᑦ ᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ
ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᒥᕐᖑᐃᓯᖅᕕᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ, ECCC,
QIA, ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒃᒥ
ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒃᑐᓕᕿᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ)
ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅᓯᐅᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖅ –
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᕕᓃᑦ ᓄᓇᒦᑦᑐᓄᑦ
ᕖᕝᕗᐊᓕ 15     
ᐅᓂᒃᑳᑦ - ᓂᕐᔪᑎᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᒫᓂ
ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅᓯᐅᑎᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕋᓱᐊᕐᓃᑦ
ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖅ −
ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᕕᓃᑦ
ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ
ᓄᓇᒦᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᓂᕐᔪᑎᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᐅᓂᒃᑳᑦ -
ᐃᒫᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᕕᓃᑦ. ᒫᑦᓯ 31        
ᐃᓚᓕᐅᔾᔨᔪᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ
ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖓ
ᐱᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅᓯᐅᑎ
ᐅᓂᒃᑳᒧᑦ
ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓖᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ
NIRB/NWB ᐊᐅᓚᓂᕆᔭᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᓂᒃ,
ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᖅᓯᐅᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒫᑦᓯ 31        
ᐅᓂᒃᑳᑦ ᒪᓕᑉᐸᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᑎᒍᑦ
ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑏᑦ
ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑎᒌᑦᑐᑎᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᓃᑦ ᐃᓱᐊ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓗ MHTO, Hᐋᒻᓚᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᕐᓂᖓ
ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᓪᓗᐊᑕᓄ
ᐊᒻᒪᓗ QIA ᑭᒡᒐᑐᖅᑎᖏᑦ ᐅᒥᐊᖅᔪᐊᖅᑕᖃᓐ
ᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓃᑦ –
ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᑦᑐᑎᒃ ᓇᐅᑉ,   
ᐅᓯᐊᕐᔪᐊᓕᕆᓂᖅ,
ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᓪᓗᐊᑕᓂᒃ ᐱᑕᖃᕆᐊᖃᑦᑎᓪ
ᐊᓯᖏᓪᓗ.
ᐊᒻᒪᓗ/ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᓚᖓᓄᑦ ᓗᒋᑦ
ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᖑᔫᑉ ᐊᐅᓚᓂᕆᔭᖓᓄᑦ

2 
 
ᑐᓴᕋᔅᓴᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᑦ ᐱᕕᒃᓴᖃᕝᕕᖓ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓪᓗᐊᑕᐃᑦ
ᑐᓴᖅᑕᐅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕ
ᕐᓂᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᑦᒥ ᓄᓇᕗᑦᒥ QIA ᒪᓕᒐᑎᒍᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᑦ (ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ, ᓴᓇᔪᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒃᑐ ᕼᐋᒻᓚᑦᖑᔪᑦ
ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᒪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ, ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒻᒪᕆᑦᑐᑦ ᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ
ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᒥᕐᖑᐃᓯᖅᕕᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ, ECCC,
QIA, ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒃᒥ
ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒃᑐᓕᕿᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ)
ᐊᕐᕌᒎᑕᒫᖅᓯᐅᑎᒥᒃ
ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑎᖃᑉᐸᑦᑐᑦ ᐃᓄᓐᓂᒃ
ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ QIA ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᖏᓐᓂᑦ
ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ,
ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒨᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒨᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ
ᑲᑎᒪᒋᐊᖃᕋᐃᒻᒪ        
ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑕᐅᔪᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓ
ᑕ
ᑲᑎᒪᓃᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᔪᒧᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᓂᕆᔭᐅᔪᓄᑦ
ᐅᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᔪᒪᔪᓄᑦ
ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᑎᒍᑦ
ᐳᓛᕆᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᓄᓘᔮᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᐳᓛᕆᐊᖅᑐᖃᕆ
ᕿᓐᖑᐊᓄᑦ ᑕᑯᔭᖅᑐᖅᑐᑎᒃ
ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᐊᖃᑉᐸᑦ
ᐊᐅᓚᓂᕆᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ   
ᐳᓚᕋᓐᓃᑦ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ
ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᑦᑐᑎᒃ ᐃᓱᒫᓗᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ
ᑐᒃᓯᕌᖑᓯᒪᑉᐸᑦ
ᓄᓇᒦᑦᑐᑎᒃ
ᒪᓕᒐᑎᒎᖓᔪᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓃᑦ
ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓂᒃ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓃᑦ ᐊᐅᔭᒃᑰᓲᖅ
ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓂᐅᔪᑦ
/ᑮᓇᐅᔭᐃᑦ (ᔪᓚᐃᒥᑦ    
ᒪᓕᒃᑎᐊᕋᓗᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᓯᑎᐱᕆᒧᑦ)
ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᓂᒃ
ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᑉᐸᑦᑐᓂᒃ
ᑳᑦᑐᓛᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᒃᑯᑦ 
ᐊᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᒥ
ᐃᓚᐅᖃᑕᐅᓂᖅ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ
(ᔪᓚᐃᒥᑦ  
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ
ᐊᒃᑑᕙᒧᑦ)
ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ
ᑐᓂᓯᓂᖅ ᓴᓇᔪᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᑐᓴᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᓂᒃ
ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑎᒌᓪᓗᑎᒃ
ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐱᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᐸᑦ        
ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᐅ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᔪᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ
ᔪᓄᑦ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᕈᑎᓂᒃ ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᖅ
ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑎᕆᔾᔪᑎᓄᑦ

3 
 
  

ᐊᐅᓚᓂᕆᕈᔭᖓ
ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᑦ
ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ

ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ
ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᓐᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑎᓂᒃ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ
ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑕᐅᓂᖓ ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᖅ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᕆᔭᐅᔪᑦ
ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᕙᑦᑐᓂᒃ

ᑐᑭᓕᐅᕆᓂᖅ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ/ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᑎᒍᑦ/ᐊᐅ
ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓚᑦᑎᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖓ
ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖁᑎᒃᓴᐅᔪᓄᑦ

ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᕕᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᓄᓇᓖᑦ/ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᑎᒍᑦ/ᐊᐅ
ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᓚᑦᑎᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖓ
ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖅ

ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ 1 – ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔾᔪᑎᖓ

 

4 
 
  

ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᑦ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖏᓐᓄᑦ

ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᔭᐅᓚᐅᕐᒥᑎᓪᓗᒍ, ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᕕᓃᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᐅᔪᖅ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᓱᕋᑦᑎᕆᔪᒥᒃ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᐊᕙᑎᒥᒃ,
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑭᖑᓕᕇᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂᒥᐅᑕᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᕐᓂᕆᔭᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖃᑦᑐᑎᒃ ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᖑᔪᒧᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒻᒪᑦ, ᐊᕐᕌᖏᓐᓂ 2017 ᐊᒻᒪᓗ 2018, ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᖃᑎᖃᑦᑐᑎᒃ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓂᑦ
ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒃ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒃᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᐊᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᔅᓴᓂᒃ ᐱᖏᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᖃᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ,
ᐅᑦᔨᑐᖅᑎᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᕋᓱᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᑎᐊᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᐅᔪᒃᑯᑦ.

2018−ᒥ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᒪᒋᔭᖃᓗᐊᓐᖑᐊᓚᐅᕐᒥᔪᑦ ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑎᕆᔾᔪᑎᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᐅᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ
ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒃᒥᐅᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᖃᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᒧᑦ, ᑕᕆᐅᕐᒥᐅᑕᐃᑦ ᓂᕐᔪᑎᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐳᔪᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ. ᐊᑕᖐᔪᒃᑯᑦ
ᑕᐅᑐᒃᑕᐅᓂᖓ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑎᔾᔪᑎᕕᓃᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑲᑦᑕᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐱᖃᓯᐅᑎᓯᒪᕗᖅ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ 2-ᒥ.

5 
 
  

 
 

ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ 2 –ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐳᔪᕐᓗᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᓃᑦ, ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᓗᐊᖏᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᐅᓇᓱᐊᕐᓂᖅ

ᓯᕗᓂᐊᒍᑦ-2018 ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎ
ᓇᐃᓈᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᕕᓃᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐱᑦᔪᑎᖃᑦᑐᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᖑᓂᐊᖅᓯᒪᔪᓄᑦ ᐅᑯᑎᒎᓇ
ᐱᓗᐊᖏᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᐅᓇᓱᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᑦ ᐱᓗᐊᖏᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᐅᓇᓱᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᐱᑦᔪᑎᐅᔪᖅ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖓ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒋᑦ NIRB−ᑯᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᔅᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᖃᕋᓱᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ
ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᕆᔭᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓇᓱᐊᖅᑐᑦ
ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑎᔾᔪᑎᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑭᒃᑯᑐᐃᓇᐃᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᖁᑎᖏᑦ

o ᓴᖅᑭᐸᓪᓕᐊᑦᑕᐅᑎᒋᔪᑦ ᑐᓴᕆᐊᕈᑎᑦ
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎ – ᓇᒦᓪᓚᑦᑖᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ
ᓄᓇᕐᔪᐊᑉ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᒃᑲᐃᔾᔪᑏᑦ
o ᐃᓗᕕᓕᒻᒥ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᖅ 1. ᓱᒃᑲᐃᓂᖅᓴᐅᖃᑦᑕᓕᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᑦ
ᓂᐹᕿᔪᓄᑦ ᐸᕝᕕᓴᐃᓂᖅ
o ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᕐᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᕿᓐᖑᐊᓂ
o ᑲᖏᖅᖢᐊᕐᒥ ᑑᒑᓕᓐᓂᒃ 2. ᓱᒃᑲᓕᔭᕆᐊᖃᓐᓂᖓ ᑭᓪᓕᖃᑦᑎᑕᐅᓗᓂ
ᓂᕕᖓᑖᓕᖅᓱᐃᓂᖅ /ᖃᖓᑕᓲᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓘᓐᓇᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᑦ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᖏᓐᓄᑦ
ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ 3. ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᓱᑲᓐᓂᕆᔭᕆᐊᖃᑦᑕᖓᑕ
ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᓂᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᒥ (2016): o ᓴᖅᑭᐸᓪᓕᐊᑦᑕᐅᑎᒋᔪᑦ ᑐᓴᕆᐊᕈᑎᑦ ᑕᕆᐅᕐᒥᐅᑕᐃᑦ ᓂᕐᔪᑏᑦ ᑭᓪᓕᖓ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᑦ ᑳᐱᑕᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᑎᒎᓇ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᑦ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒧᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᒃᑯᑦ
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎ – ᓇᒦᓪᓚᑦᑖᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐸᕝᕕᓴᒃᑕᐅᑲᐃᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒪᓕᒐᕆᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᓕᕆᔨᓄᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᓄᓘᔮᓂ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑎᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕐᓂᖓ ᐆᒪᔪᑦ
1. ᑕᒪᐅᓇᒃᓴᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᕙᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᕐᔪᐊᑉ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᒃᑲᐃᔾᔪᑏᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓃᖓᖅᑐᓂᑦ (ᐊᑕᐅᓯᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᖏᑦᑐᒧᑦ ᐅᓯᑲᑦᑕᐸᑦᑐᓄᑦ) ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎᑦ −ᐅᓄᖅᓯᒋᐊᖅᑎᕆᓂᖅ
ᓇᓃᓐᓂᕆᔭᖏᑕ ᑕᒫᓂ ᐃᒫᓂ
ᓱᒃᑲᓂᖃᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᔪᓐᓇᖏᑉᐸᑦ o ᐃᓗᕕᓕᒻᒥ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᐅᓄᕐᓂᖏᑦ (ᓇᓂᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ 4. ᕿᒪᐃᑦᑕᐃᓕᓗᓂ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᓄᑦ ᐅᔭᕋᖅᑕᖅᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ, ᐅᖅᓱᐊᓗᖃᕝᕕᓂᒃ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
2. ᐱᑕᖃᓗᐊᕌᓗᑦᑎᖏᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᑦ o ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᕐᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᐅᓄᖅᑑᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ) ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᓄᑦ ᐊᖅᑯᑎᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᕿᓐᖑᐊᓂ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᓄᑦ
ᓄᖅᑲᖔᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᑐᓚᒃᑕᖅᕕᒻᒥ o ᑕᕆᐅᕐᒥᐅᑕᐃᑦ ᓂᕐᔪᑏᑦ ᐃᑉᐱᒍᓱᓲᖑᖏᑦᑐᑦ 5. ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓗᓂ ᒪᓕᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ (ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ–2018a):
3. ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᒥ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑏᑦ o ᓴᖅᑭᐸᓪᓕᐊᑦᑕᐅᑎᒋᔪᑦ ᑐᓴᕆᐊᕈᑎᑦ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᓂᒃ ᓱᑲᓐᓂᕆᔭᕆᐊᖃᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᑦ ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅ ᓇᒻᒪ
ᐃᑭᒪᕕᒋᔭᕆᐊᖃᑦᑕᖏᓐᓃᑎᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎ – ᓇᒦᓪᓚᑦᑖᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᒧᑦ ᐊᐳᖅᑕᐅᔪᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᐊᓯᐊᒎᖅᑕᐃᓕᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᑦ 1
ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕐᓂᖓ ᐅᓄᖅᑐᓂᖏᑕ
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᓂᕐᔪᑏᑦ ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᕐᔪᐊᑉ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᒃᑲᐃᔾᔪᑏᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂᒥᐅᑕᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᕆᐊᖃᑦᑕᖓᒍᑦ ᐅᑯᑎᒎᓇ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ
ᑕᒫᓂ ᐃᒫᓂ
ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ o ᐃᓗᕕᓕᒻᒥ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒋᔭᐅᖏᓐᓇᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᖃᓄᖅ ᓂᐹᕿᓂᖓ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓃᓪᓗᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ (ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓂᖓ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᑦ ᓇᒻᒪ 3
o ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᕐᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᓂᒃ ᓴᖅᑭᐸᓪᓕᐊᑦᑕᐅᑎᒋᔪᑦ ᑐᓴᕆᐊᕈᑎᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ
o ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᕿᒫᑎᑕᐅᓕᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᐱᓕᕆᕕᐅᔪᒥᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᐅᑉ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓇᒦᓪᓛᑦᑖᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᑦ ᓇᒻᒪ 4
o AIS ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎ – ᓄᓇᕐᔪᐊᖅ ᖃᐅᔨᒃᑲᐃᔾᔪᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᐅᑯᓄᖓ WWF ᓇᒻᒪ 6
ᓇᒦᓪᓚᑦᑖᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕐᔪᐊᑉ 6. ᐅᓄᖅᑎᓗᐊᖏᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᒧᐊᑦ ᐃᓚᒍᑕᖅ A ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᕕᐅᔪᖅ
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᒃᑲᐃᔾᔪᑏᑦ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᒪᐅᓇ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑎᒍᑦ “ᖃᐅᔨᒃᑲᓐᓂᓚᐅᕆᑦ ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ
ᑕᕆᐅᕐᒥᐅᑕᐃᑦ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᕆᔭᖏᑕ
o ᐃᓗᕕᓕᒻᒥ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᖅ 7. ᐅᐸᑦᑕᐃᓕᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᑦᑎᐊᕐᕆᐊᖃᑦᑐᑦ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᓂᕐᔪᑎᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕐᓂᖏᑦ
o ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᕐᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᐱᑕᖃᑦᑐᑦ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᓇᔪᒐᖃᕝᕕᐅᔪᑦ ᑕᕆᐅᕐᒥᐅᑕᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ” ”
o ᑲᖏᖅᖢᐊᕐᔪᒃᒥ ᑑᒑᓕᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ/ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᕐᓂᐅᖅᕕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᕖᑦ
ᓂᕕᖓᑖᓕᖅᓱᐃᓂᖅ /ᖃᖓᑕᓲᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ 8. ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᓪᓗᓂ ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᐅᑉ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓇᓱᐊᖅᑐᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᐊᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᑦ –
ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒃᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᓗᑎᒃ ᐅᔭᕋᖅᑕᖅᑕᐅᔫᑉ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎ –
ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᓂᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᒥ ᑭᓪᓕᒋᔭᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓄᖅᑲᖔᖅᕕᐅᕙᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᐅᒪᔾᔪᑎᑦ ᐱᔪᒫᕆᔭᐅᔪᑦ
(2016): ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᖁᖏᑦᑐᒋᑦ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᔪᓂᒃ (ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ 2018b)
ᐅᓄᕐᓂᖏᑦ (ᓇᓂᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒃᕕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᑕᒫᓂ ᑲᖏᖅᑐᒥ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᓇᒻᒪ. 7 a) ᐊᒻᒪᓗ c) –
1. ᑕᒪᐅᓇᒃᓴᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᕙᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᓄᖅᑑᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ) ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᓄᑦ
ᓱᒃᑲᓂᖃᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᔪᓐᓇᖏᑉᐸᑦ 9. ᐅᖅᓱᐊᓗᖃᑦᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐃᒪᓐᓇᒧᑦ $300,000 BIM / QIA ᑐᑭᑖᕈᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
2. ᐱᑕᖃᓗᐊᕌᓗᑦᑎᖏᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᑦ ᐊᐳᖅᓯᔪᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ (ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓄᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᕆᔭᐅᔪᒫᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ (ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ
o ᐃᓗᕕᓕᒃᒥ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᒦᑦᑐᓂ
ᓄᖅᑲᖔᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᑐᓚᒃᑕᖅᕕᒻᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᐅᔪᒃᑯᓪᓕ ᖁᓕᓄᑦ) 2018c)
ᐱᓕᕆᓂᖅ
ᐱᑕᖃᓐᓂᕆᔭᖓ ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᓂᒃ 3. ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᒥ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒧᑦ ᓇᒻᒪ 4
o ᑲᖏᖅᖢᐊᕐᔪᒃᒥ ᑑᒑᓕᓐᓂᒃ
ᓂᕐᔪᑎᓂᒃ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᑭᒪᕕᒋᔭᕆᐊᖃᑦᑕᖏᓐᓃᑎᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒃᑎᖏᑦ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ 10. ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖃᑦᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ $200,000 ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒧᑦ ᓇᒻᒪ. 5
ᓂᕕᖓᑖᓕᖅᓱᐃᓂᖅ
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᓂᕐᔪᑏᑦ ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᐃᑦ ᒥᑭᓪᓕᕙᓪᓕᐊᒋᐊᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓂᕐᔪᑏᑦ ᑕᒫᓃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᕐᓗᒋᑦ ᓄᓇᔨᓕᓐᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓇᓱᓐᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒧᑦ ᓇᒻᒪ 10
o ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᕐᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ
ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒃᑕᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ (ᐊᕐᕌᒎᓄᑦ ᖁᓕᓄᑦ)
o
ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒃᑎᖏᑦ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ
ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐸᕝᕕᓴᐃᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ 11. ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᖃᑦᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᕐᓗᒋᑦ
ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᕆᔪᓐᓇᖅᑕᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᑲᔫᑎᒥ (2013): ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒃᕕᑐᖃᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᕆᓇᓱᐊᖅᑕᖏᑦ (ᓲᕐᓗ
4. ᓂᕐᔪᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᔾᔪᑎᓄᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᑦ ᐱᓇᓱᒃᕕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᖃᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᖓᓄᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓇᓱᓐᓂᖅ/ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᓯᖏᓪᓗ)

6 
 
  

ᓯᕗᓂᐊᒍᑦ-2018 ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎ

ᓇᐃᓈᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᕕᓃᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐱᑦᔪᑎᖃᑦᑐᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᖑᓂᐊᖅᓯᒪᔪᓄᑦ ᐅᑯᑎᒎᓇ
ᐱᓗᐊᖏᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᐅᓇᓱᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᑦ ᐱᓗᐊᖏᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᐅᓇᓱᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᐱᑦᔪᑎᐅᔪᖅ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖓ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒋᑦ NIRB−ᑯᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᔅᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᖃᕋᓱᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ
ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᕆᔭᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓇᓱᐊᖅᑐᑦ
ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑎᔾᔪᑎᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑭᒃᑯᑐᐃᓇᐃᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᖁᑎᖏᑦ

ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎᑦ

ᑕᒪᕐᒥᒃ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᓕᒫᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒃᑲᐃᓯᒪᕗᑦ ᓄᓘᔮᒥ ᐋᖅᑭᖏᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑏᑦ
ᒪᓕᒃᑎᐊᓂᕐᒥᓂᒃ ᐃᑦᑕᖅᑯᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᒥᕐᒥᒃ − ᐅᔭᕋᖅᑕᖅᑕᐅᔫᑉ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᖓ,
ᑕᐅᖅᓰᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᑎᒎᓇ ᑕᕆᐅᖓᒥᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᖅᓱᖃᐅᑏᑦ, ᕿᓐᖑᐊᓂ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᓄᑦ
ᐃᑦᑕᖅᑯᓯᐅᔾᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐴᖏᑎᒍᑦ (ᓄᓗᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ 2018a)
1. ᐃᓚᒋᐊᕐᓗᒍ ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ/ᐱᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ
ᐃᒫᓂ ᑕᒫᓂᒥᐅᑕᑐᖃᐅᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᐆᒪᔪᕋᓛᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᕿᑭᑦᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ
ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐊᑐᐊᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᑦ ᑕᕆᐅᒥᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ
o ᑕᕆᐅᖓᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᐃᒪᕐᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᔪᖃᖅᓯᒪᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᑎᒍᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅ ᓇᒻᒪ 2 -
ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎ ᐃᒫᓂ ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᓂᒃ 2. ᐊᑐᕐᓂᖅ ᐅᖓᓯᑦᑐᒥ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔾᔪᑎᐅᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ
ᐃᑦᑕᖅᑯᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓇᓱᐊᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ
ᑕᕆᐅᑉ ᐊᕙᑎᖓ ᑕᒫᓂᕐᒥᐅᑕᑐᖃᐅᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᒥ (2016): ᐃᒪᐅᑉ ᐊᑖᓂ ᐊᐅᓚᓲᓕᐅᕈᑎᒃᑯᑦ
o ᐃᒫᓂ ᑕᒫᓃᒥᐅᑕᑐᖃᐅᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᑎᐊᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᖏᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔩᑦ
ᐆᒪᔪᐃᑦ 1. ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓇᓱᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᓂ ᑕᕆᐅᖑᓂᖓ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐆᒪᔪᕋᓛᑦ
ᐆᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᖏᓪᓕᕚᓪᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᐃᒫᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖏᓐᓄᑦ 2017 NIRB−ᑯᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖓᓂ
ᓱᕐᕋᒃᓯᒪᖏᒃᑲᓗᐊᕐᒪᖔᑦ ᓄᐊᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖃᑦᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ
ᑕᒫᓂᒥᐅᑕᑐᖃᐅᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᐆᒪᔪᕋᓛᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ (ᓄᓘᔭᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ, 2018d)
ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᓄᑦ ᐅᒧᔭᐅᔪᓄᑦ
ᐱᖃᓯᐅᔾᔨᓗᓂ ᐃᒥᓖᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᖓ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ
ᓄᓇᓕᒥᐅᑕᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒥᓂᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓇᒻᒪ 37
AIS ᐃᓚᓕᐅᔾᔭᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᒻᒪᑕ ᐱᓕᕆᕕᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᖓ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ
ᐅᒥᐊᕐᔪᐊᑕᖃᖃᑦᑕᓕᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᑲᑐᓪᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐱᖃᓯᐅᑎᓯᒪᔪᖅ 2
ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅ
ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᓄᓇᒥ ᐆᒪᔪᐃᑦ
ᐳᔪᕈᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖓ ᐊᖏᓂᖅᓴᐅᕗᖅ 1. 6−ᖑᔪᑦ ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᑦ ᐳᔪᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑏᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᓄᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑏᑦ
ᐊᕙᑎᖓᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᒥᒃ ᐊᖅᑭᓱᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᒥᔪᑦ ᓄᓘᔮᓂ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᓄᑦ
ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᑦ (2018):
ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᓐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᐅᔭᑐᖃᐅᓕᖅᐸᑦ/ᐅᑭᐊᒃᓵᒥ 2018 ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑏᑦ − ᐅᔭᕋᖅᑕᖅᑕᐅᔫᑉ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓ,
ᖁᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᐅᓂᖓ ᐳᔪᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐅᑉ 2. ᐳᔪᖅᑖᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑏᑦ ᐃᓕᔭᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᐅᖅᓱᐊᓗᖃᐅᑎ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᕿᓐᖑᐊᓂ
ᐱᕈᖅᑐᖃᓐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ 1. ᐱᓕᕆᓂᐅᔪᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᐱᕈᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ 1 km ᐊᖏᓯᓐᓂᖃᓪᓗᑎᒃ, ᐱᖓᓱᓂ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᓄᑦ (ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ 2018a)
ᐊᑦᔨᒌᖏᑦᑑᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕐᖑᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎᒃ
ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓴᕕᕋᔭᒃᓴᖃᓐᓂᖏᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᑦᔪᒥ ᐃᓂᒃᓴᕆᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ (ᑲᓇᓐᓇᖅ/ᐱᖓᓐᓇᖅ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ECCC ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᓄᑦ ᓇᒻᒪ 2
ᒥᑭᓪᓕᕚᓪᓕᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᐊᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᒃᑯᑦ o ᐳᔪᑖᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ
ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᕈᖅᑐᓂ ᐅᖓᑖᓅᖓᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᐊᑐᕆᐊᒥ) ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ
ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ o ᐱᕈᖅᑐᖃᓐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ
ᐳᔪᖅ ᐊᑐᐊᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ ᐃᓕᔭᐅᓯᒪᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᓄᑦ 6
2. ᓇᐅᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᖓᒃᑯᑦ ᓈᒻᒪᑉᐸᑦ, o ᐱᕈᖅᑐᐃᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᑦᔪᖓᓂᒃ
ᐱᕈᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐅᓄᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᑦᔨᒌᖏᓐᓂᖏᑦ ᖃᓂᒋᔭᖓᓂ km 25
ᐳᔪᖃᓗᐊᔾᔭᐃᒃᑯᑎᒥᒃ ᐊᑐᖅᑐᖃᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᓴᕕᕋᔭᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅ
ᓱᕐᕋᒃᓯᒪᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᐱᕈᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᕆᔭᖏᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ ᑕᒫᓂ km 56 BIM / ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ
ᐱᕈᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐊᑐᕆᐊᓂ, ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ
ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒋᔭᐅᖏᓐᓇᖅᑐᖅ ᓄᓇᖃᑦᑎᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ ᑕᒫᓂ km 75–80 ᑐᑭᑖᕈᑎᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᕆᔭᖏᑦ QIA
ᖃᓄᐃᖏᑎᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓗᐊᓐᖑᐊᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓂ ᐊᐳᑎᐅᑎᓐᓇᒍ
ᑕᑯᒃᓴᐅᓂᖓ ᐳᔫᑉ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᒨᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᕆᔭᖓ 3. ᑲᔪᓯᔭᐅᓗᓂ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐲᖅᓴᐅᑎ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ (ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ 2018c)
(ᓴᕕᕋᔭᒃᓴᔭᐃᑦ 3. ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᓗᑎᒃ ᑕᓗᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᓯᖁᓪᓗᐃᔾᔪᑎᓄᑦ
ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᐅᖏᓐᓇᖅᑐᖅ ᓄᓇᖃᑦᑎᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐃᒥᕐᒧᑦ ᐳᔪᕈᔪᔾᔭᐃᒃᑯᑎ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒧᑦ ᓇᒻᒪ 11
ᓄᐊᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ)  
ᓴᕕᕋᔭᒃᓴᑖᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᓂᕐᔪᑎᑦ ᐊᖑᓇᓱᒃᑕᐅᕙᑦᑐᑦ 4. ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ 25-ᓂᒃ ᐅᓕᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒧᑦ ᓇᒻᒪ 12
 
ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐆᒪᔪᓄᐊᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓚᒃᓴᔭᐃᑦ ᓯᖁᓪᓗᐃᔾᔪᑎᓄᑦ ᐱᓗᑎᒃ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒧᑦ ᓇᒻᒪ 13

ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔾᔪᑏᑦ:

ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ 2018a. ᓄᓘᔮᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎ − ᐅᔭᕋᖅᑕᖅᑕᐅᔫᑉ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓ, ᐅᖅᓱᐊᓗᖃᐅᑎ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᕿᓐᖑᐊᓂ ᑐᓚᒃᑕᖅᕕᖓᓂ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎ (‘ᐅᔭᕋᖅᑕᖅᑕᐅᔫᑉ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑦ’) (ᐃᐳᕈ
23, 2018) − ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓄᑦ. ᐋᒌᓯ 9 2018.
ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ 2018b. ᓄᓇᕗᑦᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑕ ᐱᓕᕆᓇᓱᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᐊᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᖏᑦ − ᐅᔭᕋᖅᑕᖅᑕᐅᔫᑉ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎ − ᐊᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑐᑭᓯᐅᒪᔾᔪᑎᓂᒃ ᐱᔭᕆᐊᖃᓐᓂᖅ ᔫᓐ 20 2018. NIRB−ᑯᑦ ᑭᒃᑯᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓄᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᕕᒃ ID: 318283
ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ 2018c. ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ/ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᑐᑭᑖᕈᑎᖓ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᕆᔭᖏᑦ Excel ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᖓ (180802-SR17-QIA-Baffinland2018IssueResolution-ENG). ᐊᖏᕈᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᐋᒌᓯ 2, 2018 ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᕿᑭᖅᑕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ
ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᑦ ᐋᒌᓯ 3-ᒥ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᖓᓄᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ NIRB−ᑯᓐᓄᑦ..
ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ 2018d. ᓄᓘᔮᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᖓ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔨᐅᔪᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓯᒪᔭᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑖᒃᓱᒧᖓ 2017 NIRB−ᑯᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᖅᓯᐅᑎᖓᑕ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖓᓄᑦ. ᔪᓚᐃ 12, 2018.

7 
 
 ANNEX D:
PROPOSED REVISIONS TO NIRB PROJECT CERTIFICATE, CONDITION 179

Term and Condition No. 179 (a)

Category: Operational Variability/Flexibility
Responsible Parties: The Proponent
Project Phase: Operations
Objective: To ensure that there are appropriate limits on the Early Revenue Phase
Proposal marine shipping component in order to limit and manage likely
project effects, while balancing the need for operational flexibility.
Term or Condition: In any given calendar year, the total volume of ore shipped via Milne Inlet,
shall not exceed 4.2 6.0 million tonnes.
Reporting Requirements: For each year after the Proponent commences shipping ore via Milne Inlet
under the Early Revenue Phase Proposal, the Proponent shall include in the
Annual Report to the NIRB, a summary of the total amount of ore shipped via
Milne Inlet for the previous calendar year.

Term and Condition No. 179 (b)

Category: Operational Variability/Flexibility
Responsible Parties: The Proponent
Project Phase: Operations
Objective: To ensure that there are appropriate limits on the Early Revenue Phase
Proposal project land transportation component in order to limit and manage
likely project effects, while balancing the need for operational flexibility.
Term or Condition: In any given calendar year, the total volume of ore transported by truck on
the Milne Inlet Tote Road shall not exceed 4.2 6.0 million tonnes.
Reporting Requirements: For each year after the Proponent commences transportation of ore via the
Tote Road under the Early Revenue Phase Proposal, the Proponent shall
include in the Annual Report to the NIRB, a summary of the total amount of
ore shipped via the Tote Road for the previous calendar year.

Term and Condition No. 179 (c)

Category: Operational Variability/Flexibility
Responsible Parties: The Proponent
Project Phase: Operations
Objective: To ensure that commitments made by the proponent with respect to the
2018 Production Increase and delivery of benefits to Inuit are adhered to,
and, can be demonstrated through a body of evidence.
Term or Condition: In the calendar year 2019 and 2020, the proponent shall be required to
resource and support a third party to conduct performance audits of
commitments made by the proponent to affected communities and Inuit of
the Qikiqtaaluk region in relation to both the IIBA and the revised terms and
conditions of the Project Certificate as of the 2018 Production Increase.
Audits shall be overseen and directed by the Executive Committee of the IIBA.
Reporting Requirements: On a bi-annual basis, the proponent shall file a Performance Audit Report”
with NIRB. This report shall include the findings of the third-party auditor,
and, Baffinland’s commitment to addressing the findings the auditor.